Futures for Universities

1. Second International Seville Seminar on Future-Oriented Technology Analysis (FTA): Impacts on policy and decision making28th- 29th September 2006 Futures for Universities Attila Havas Institute of Economics, Hungarian Academy of Sciences

2. Futures for Universities Outline • 1) Introduction • 2) The role of universities in the knowledge production and research system • 3) Recent key trends • 4) Driving forces for change and future trends • 5) Visions (future states) for universities • 5.1) Visions for the EU and ERIA • 5.2) Visions for universities • 6) Policy conclusions

3. Futures for Universities 1) Introduction • No thorough, exhaustive academic treatment of the current situation of universities... • ... a prospective analysis (not foresight) • Diversity of universities  cannot be covered • teaching, research, and other activities • research agenda: reg’l, nat’l, EU or global issues • teaching: for what labour markets • governance structures, organisation, mgmt practices • performance (economic efficiency, teaching and research excellence – whatever metrics are used) • EU vs. Triad • intra-EU (across member states) • intra-country

4. Futures for Universities 1) Introduction • A strategy process should be participatory • Vision-building: bring together stakeholders with • diverse background • accumulated knowledge and experience • distinct viewpoints and approaches • to enrich the discussion and analysis • Shared ‘visions’  consensus  joint actions & reduced uncertainty • Ambition: spark lively dialogues with the ‘Futures’ developed in this paper • Universities in broader socio-economic systems • “Top-down” approach: EU, ERIA, NIS, universities • Time horizon: 2020 (not carved in stone!)

5. Futures for Universities 2) The role of universities... • The importance of other players in the RTDI systems • firms, public labs, users, patient groups, other NGOs • The changing roles of universities • elite vs. mass education • teaching & research vs. teaching only (mainly) and ‘research’ universities [more at the staff level: ‘teaching only’ vs. ‘research only’ positions] • The Humboldtian model is becoming an exception(at the post-graduate level) • The ‘third’ role of universities (is it new at all?)

6. Futures for Universities 2) The role of universities... • A new rationale for funding ‘basic’ science by public money? • the very notion of ‘basic’ science is questionable • higher education and ‘basic’ science are not that closely interconnected nowadays as they used to be • given the changing nature of higher education, and the crucial role played by other research actors

7. Futures for Universities 3) Recent key trends... • Changing roles/ responsibilities of universities: new roles emerge, and the balance of various roles is changing • teaching; academic research; consultancy for, and problem-solving for firms and other players (NGOs, policy-makers); other joint RTDI projects with businesses • An increasing share of the age group of 18-29 years old is registered for university courses • financial, infrastructural requirements; • number and/or workload of teachers; • quality of education/ degrees (“prestige”); • job-seekers’ aspirations, ambitions • The Bologna Process

8. Futures for Universities 4) Driving forces for change and future trends • Quest for excellence in research • improving academic recognition and raising funds • Technological changes • more sophisticated  more expensive equipment • Demographic changes • Tensions in government budgets • Quest for cost-efficiency of research • New societal demands, changing values • New methods, approaches, norms to organise, manage, validate, legitimate and evaluate HE/R • Ten trends are derived from these driving forces

9. Futures for Universities 5) Visions for universities • Visions vs. “fully-fledged” or “path scenarios” • No consideration of the degree of probability of specific visions • Underlying assumptions • A) Policies can modify the existing driving forces for change, and can trigger changes themselves • B) Universities cannot operate fully isolated from their socio-economic environment ( EU polices: Lisbon Process, ERIA) • C) Interrelations between competitiveness and cohesion:(i) as a ‘zero-sum game’ • (ii) as mutually reinforcing processes • the latter view is taken here

10. Futures for Universities 5) Visions for universities • Underlying assumptions (cont’d) • D) Cohesion is an issue for (a) large, advance member states, (b) for the ‘classic’ cohesion countries, and (c) for the 10 new member states. Thus, it is a major political and policy issue.The forthcoming enlargement(s) would add more countries and regions to this ‘list’. • E) Promoting RTDI efforts in cohesion regions via joint research projects (funded e.g. by RTD FP) does not mean that scientific excellence is compromised. (Sharp [1998]) • F) A pronounced policy emphasis on cohesion does – and should – not preclude competition among universities

11. Futures for Universities 5.1.1) Visions for the EU

12. Futures for Universities 5.1.2) Visions for the ERIA (two EU visions)

13. Futures for Universities 5.2) Visions for universities Separate tables for A) Double success, and B) Successful multi-speed EU

14. Futures for Universities 5.2) Visions for universities

15. Futures for Universities 6) Policy conclusions* • Support Foresight (prospective) activities of universities (methods, funds, dialogues, etc.) • Abolish national borders for researchers and for students • Strengthen the autonomy of universities • Promote further research regarding the functional division of labour amongst different research actors • * No 2-4) are produced collectively by the HLEG members