mlw 1: systems thinking for foresight: the case of romanian higher education system susana...

MLW 1: Systems Thinking for Foresight: The Case of Romanian Higher Education System

Susana Elena-Pé[email protected]

Knowledge for Growth UnitInstitute for Prospective and Technological Studies

24 September 2009

Research Policy Measures for Universities in Europe: common trends and challenges


Based on

Two ERAWATCH Reports (http://cordis.europa.eu/erawatch/):

Research in Universities: Changes and challenges

Reform of the Public Research Base in Europe

Mutual learning exercise: CREST Working Group on “mutual learning on approaches to improve the excellence of research universities”


External drivers:

Policy drivers

Competition drivers

Drivers of the reform policy in universities

• Bologna process & European Research Area (ERA) development

• New public management principles

• Increasing competition in the global knowledge system

• Stagnation in student enrolment

Changes in universities mainly driven by external forces: reactive behaviour of universities


Common emerging trends in Europe

A. Increasing institutional autonomy and accountability

B. Changing funding models and using performance agreements

C. Promoting centres of excellence

D. Fostering collaboration with business

E. Making academic careers more attractive

Since 2000 there has been intensive reform activity across Europe. Although uneven, it is possible to identify common trends:


A. Increasing institutional autonomy and accountability

Common key element: provide universities more autonomy to allocate resources and define strategic plans.

Main instrument: national legislation to reform the Higher Education (HE) sector.

As a counterpart: more accountability is required.

Recent examples in: AT, DK, FI, FR and ES.


Most countries have a dual funding system:

B. Changing funding models & using performance agreements

Block grant (teaching & research; based on fixed criteria).

Competitive funding (only research; specific projects and programmes).

Increase of competitive funding is a clear policy trend. New performance agreements linking funding to research

outcomes (AT, ES). Creation of national and regional accreditation agencies (DK,

ES, PT).


C. Promoting centres of excellence

General agreement on the importance of promoting outstanding research (centres of excellence).

But how? Different countries, different approaches: Supporting teams of excellence in basic research and

collaboration between different linguistic communities (BE). Training young researchers (CZ, DE). Supporting scientific excellence in strategic areas (EE, FI, IT).


D. Fostering collaboration with business

Different measures: Funding for joint research projects (universities + firms). Creation of joint research laboratories and units. Promoting knowledge transfer and commercialisation of

research results. Legislative and financial support for creation of spin-offs. Incentives to increase business investment in university

research. Mobility of human resources between both sectors.


E. Making academic careers more attractive

Widespread acknowledgement of the importance of encouraging researchers’ careers.

But… Research careers are still shaped by national standards

(recruitment, salaries, tenure, promotion prospects). Only few EU countries have introduced changes in the

professional status of the researchers and other incentives (FR, DE, DK, NL, ES).

Performance-related pay only in few countries (DE, ES, IE).


Some issues to reflect on

More autonomous and accountable universities, new funding models, more incentives to do outstanding research, to better link with business and to make academic careers more attractive.

Although there is no a “European university system”, there are common key features in national policy reforms.



Key feature in most EU25 policy reforms: allow or encourage universities to elaborate strategies autonomously and to allocate resources.

Managerial instruments are increasingly used. But while strategic plans are widespread, research strategies are implemented only in some universities.



The process of reform appears to be uneven.

Reforms not at the same stage in all European countries.

Different countries, different “policy mixes”.

Changes in legislation are necessary but not sufficient to change the HE landscape in Europe.

Real autonomy and accountability cannot be effectively implemented without rethinking the university governance system and changing universities’ organisational culture.


Mutual Learning Exercise

CREST Working Group on “mutual learning on approaches to improve the excellence of research universities” (February 2009-March 2009)

Aim: mapping national strategies to improve quality/excellence in research and share good practices.

Two topics:

(1) General strategies, models and instruments

(2) Funding approaches and research assessment

There is a common ground regarding policies to promote quality in research.


Key findings: topic 1

Typology of national strategies to improve quality/excellence in research:

Capacity building, focusing on infrastructures, young researchers and career development.

Competition and autonomy, based on incentives, quality management systems, evaluation and peer review.

Prioritization of research groups and fields, concentrating funds

to specific universities, centres of excellences or areas or research.


Types of strategies /Target groups

TYPE A:Capacity Building

TYPE B: Competition &

Autonomy

TYPE C: Prioritisation of

research groups & fields

Individuals Human capacity building of young researchers

Systems of quality management, evaluation, peer review in research

Individual research grants from state research councils

Research Groups Funding programmes for linking research groups/researchers to industry

Promotion of internationally organised research

Policies to ensure application of research results

Institutions Set-up of “liaison commercialisation offices” at the universities

Legal framework: Autonomy of HEIs to decide their own priorities

Introduction of “Strategic Research Areas” of particular potential or importance



Funding has been stated as critical, if not the most important, instrument for the promotion of research excellence.

Related issues:• Financial autonomy• Balance between basic and competitive funds• Greater transparency• Diversity of source of funds

There is not a single financial instrument fulfilling all the requirements. A multi-instrument approach of public funding combining core institutional funding with competitive project-base funding is normally in place.



Research assessment is consider a key element for funding, accountability and transparency. It should support institutional decision making.

Great variety of assessment methods were identified with some common trends: • greater use of peer-review methods • output-oriented methods preferred to input or process

methods• indicators based assessment is growing importance



Main recommendations: topic 1

• The research strategy should be based on a mixture of top-down and bottom-up impulses.

• It should ensure the efficiency, consistency and co-ordination of top-down policies and incorporate more creative and decentralised initiatives (bottom-up) promoting a broader acceptance of the policies.

General Strategies and Instruments:



An advisable funding model for universities could combine:

i) stable, core institutional funding ensuring scientific autonomy and a broad coverage of disciplines;

ii) a performance-oriented formula, providing ex-post rewards for good performance based on agreed objectives; and

iii) an innovation-oriented component.

Funding Approaches:



• Peer review and indicator based assessment could be combined to avoid disadvantages associated with the use one single instrument.

• Development agreements could be considered a good practice. It

promotes dialogue and transparency of goals, strategy and results.

• The choice of indicators for research assessment should reflect the specific goals of the system and of the stakeholders. Indicator should be internationally recognised and reliable.

Research assessment:


Future avenues of research

It is necessary to provide analysis at institutional level. Future effort to collect information of an important number of

research-active universities across Europe.

This will allow to characterise, monitor and analyse the research activity of universities.


Thank you!

[email protected]

mlw 1: systems thinking for foresight: the case of romanian higher education system susana...

Documents