Education and Training in the Europe of Knowledge
Tessa Blackstone
I want to begin by congratulating my three former Ministerial colleagues Claude
Allegre, Luigi Berlinguer and Jurgen Ruttgers for their foresight and courage in
signing the Sorbonne Declaration. It was a riskier action for them than for me. They
were committing their own systems of higher education to much greater change than
I. The Anglo-Saxon model that was proposed that day in May 1998 was essentially
the one that prevailed in the United Kingdom as well as North America. We in Britain
had to make relatively few adaptations. In France, Germany and Italy more change
was required following the Declaration.
Special praise should be heaped on Claude Allegre whose idea it was to move our
systems closer together. He certainly deserves a place in history for thinking about
how Europe should make progress in higher education and for driving this reform
through with his characteristic enthusiasm and forcefulness !
None of the four of us, I suspect, imagined on that day in Paris six and a half years
ago that it would trigger so much change so quickly. Only a year later I, along with
Claude Allegre and 27 other European Ministers responsible for higher education
signed a Declaration on the establishment of the European Area of Higher Education
by 2010 and the promotion of the European system of higher education worldwide.
The declaration has six objectives; the adoption of a system of easily readable and
comparable degrees; the adoption of a system with two main cycles; undergraduate
and graduate; the establishment of a system of credits recognised across the EU; the
promotion of mobility between member states; the promotion of European cooperation in quality assurance and the promotion of the European dimensions in
higher education.
Since then a review of progress towards a European Area of Higher Education has
taken place every two years. The Bologna meeting was followed by a summit in
Prague in 2001 when a new objective on lifelong learning was added. The next
summit took place in Berlin last September where agreement was reached to include
1
doctoral level as well as undergraduate and graduate qualifications to bring the
European Higher Education Area and the European Research Areas closer together.
The Berlin summit also emphasised the need for European quality assurance
arrangements at institutional, national and European level and the need to pay greater
attention to the social dimension of the process for example through the portability of
grants and loans. The next summit is due to take place in Bergen, Norway in 2005. A
total of 40 countries are now signatories to the Bologna Declaration and another four
eastern European countries are set to join at the Bergen summit.
The purpose of European Higher Education Area is to make the EU competitive in the
global knowledge-based economy and to make it capable of sustainable economic
growth with more and better jobs and greater social cohesion. Making this happen has
needed a fundamental transformation of education and training throughout Europe.
This process of change is being carried out in each country according to national
contexts and traditions and is being driven forward by co-operation between Member
States at European level, through the sharing of experiences, working towards
common goals and learning from what works best elsewhere.
There are some 3,300 higher education establishments in the EU, approximately 4,000
in Europe as a whole. They take in an increasing number of students, over 12.5
million in 2000, compared with fewer than 9 million ten years earlier.
European university systems are primarily organised at national and regional levels
and are characterised by a high degree of heterogeneity which is reflected in
organisation, governance and operating conditions, including the status and conditions
of employment and recruitment of teaching staff and researchers. This heterogeneity
can be seen between countries because of cultural and legislative differences, but also
within each country, as not all universities have the same mission and do not react in
the same way and at the same pace to the changes which affect them. The structural
reforms which we began at the Sorbonne in 1998 and which the Bologna process
developed and extended constitute an effort to organise that diversity within a more
coherent and compatible European framework. This is a condition for the readability,
and hence the competitiveness, of European universities both within Europe and in
the whole world. Historically, European universities have had research at the heart of
2
all university activity, making it the basis of teaching. Today the trend is away from
this model and towards greater differentiation. This is resulting in the emergence of
more diverse institutions. Some concentrate on research in particular disciplines but
not in others. Some put a lot of effort into blue sky research, others focus more on
applied research and work with industry and commerce. Yet others undertake
continuing professional development providing many post-experience short courses.
Others focus on teaching. Some acquire high reputations for their activities e.g.
knowledge transfer and continuing professional development.
Given that the higher education sector is situated at the crossroads of research,
education and innovation, it is a central player in the knowledge economy and society
and key to the competitiveness of the European Union. The knowledge society
depends for its growth on the production of new knowledge, its transmission through
education and training, its dissemination through information and communication
technologies, and on its use in new industrial processes or services. Universities are
unique, in that they take part in all these processes, due to the key role they play in the
three fields of; research and exploitation of its results, through industrial co-operation
and spin-off; education and training; and regional and local development, to which
they can contribute significantly. The European Union therefore needs a healthy and
flourishing university world. Europe needs excellence in its universities, to optimise
the processes which underpin the knowledge society and meet the targets, set by
European Union in Lisbon, of becoming the most competitive and dynamic
knowledge-based economy in the world, capable of sustainable economic growth with
more and better jobs and greater social cohesion.
Universities in many respects hold the key to the knowledge economy and society.
Indeed, universities employ 34% of the total number of researchers in Europe and are
responsible for 80% of the fundamental research pursued in Europe. They educate
growing numbers of students with increasingly higher qualifications, and thus
contribute to strengthening the competitiveness of the European economy. One third
of Europeans today work in highly knowledge intensive sectors which accounted for
half of the jobs created between 1999 and 2000.
3
Universities also contribute to the other objectives of the Lisbon strategy, particularly
employment and social cohesion and to the improvement of the general level of
education in Europe. Many more young Europeans have a higher education
qualification today than in previous generations. While some 20% of Europeans aged
between 35 and 39 hold such qualifications, this figure is only 12.5% for the 55-59
age group. If we look at the total population aged 25-64, the rate of employment of
persons holding higher education qualifications stood at 84% in 2001 i.e. almost 15
points above the average taking all education levels together, and nearly 30 points
more than people who have only completed lower secondary levels. Finally, the rate
of unemployment amongst those holding higher education qualifications stood at
3.9% in 2001, one third of that of people with a low level of qualifications.
In spite of all this, universities face an imperative need to adapt and adjust to a whole
series of profound changes including increased demand, internationalisation and links
with business.
Increased demand for higher education, including new needs stemming from lifelong
learning, needs to be met in a market of limited human resources and limited financial
capacity. It is crucially important to maintain and strengthen the excellence of
teaching and research, without compromising the level of quality offered, while
ensuring broad, fair and democratic access.
The momentum of internationalisation has resulted in more competition. Competition
between universities and between countries, but also between universities and other
institutions such as public research laboratories or private teaching institutions.
European universities are attracting fewer students and in particular fewer researchers
from other countries than their American counterparts. In 2002, European universities
attracted 450,000 students from other countries, while the US attracted over 540,000,
mostly from Asia. More significantly, the USA in proportion, attracts many more
students from other countries at advanced levels in engineering, mathematics and
informatics. Moreover it is very successful in keeping people with PhDs; some 50%
of Europeans who obtain their qualifications in the USA stay there for several years
and many of them remain permanently.
4
European universities in fact offer researchers and students a less attractive
environment. This is partly due to the fact that they often do not have the necessary
critical mass but also due to other factors, outside the university, such as rigidities in
the labour market. This is reflected in lower performances in for example research
funding, patenting rates and links to industry than in the USA and Japan. The
European Higher Education Area is an attempt to address all these issues.
From a competitiveness perspective it is vital that knowledge flows from universities
into business and society. Co-operation between universities and industry needs to be
intensified at national and regional levels, as well as geared more effectively towards
innovation, the start-up of new companies and, more generally, the transfer and
dissemination of knowledge. The two mechanisms through which the knowledge and
expertise possessed and developed by universities can flow directly to industry are the
licensing of intellectual property and spin-off and start-up companies. According to
Eurostat, enterprises rank education-related and public research sources of
information for innovation as low. Less than 5% of innovative companies consider
information from universities to be a very important source of information.
Universities need to do more to work with businesses on knowledge transfer but also
on preparing people for jobs. This requires training and education not only in specific
technical/subject areas but also in generic work skills and the capacity for continued
learning throughout an employee’s working life. It is important for the EU economy
that students leave universities with skills that are relevant to employers. A recent
Government report1 in the UK on university and business collaboration identified that
companies are broadly satisfied with the quality of the graduates they recruit.
However there are some concerns. First, some businesses find it difficult to enter into
a strategic dialogue about their skill requirements, because there is often no
mechanism for them to engage with the university sector as a whole. Second, most
businesses that have links with universities for course development do so on an
individual basis, and although these links are often effective, they are limited to larger
companies and cover particular business needs. Finally, companies that specialise in
1
Lambert Review of Business – University Collaboration – December 2003
5
some areas of science, engineering and technology find it difficult to recruit graduates
of a suitable quality.
The report made a series of recommendations including the need to improve the
information available to students on the value that employers place on particular
courses. Employability data are only published at university level currently and not on
a departmental basis. Students would benefit from much clearer market signals that
include a better picture of where the graduates from a particular course find work and
how much they earn. The report also recommended that when funding courses the
funding bodies in higher education should take account of the views of employer-led
bodies in all sectors to make it more likely that the UK university system produces the
right balance of graduates in the disciplines that the economy needs. The report also
found that a large proportion of the initial skill-deficiencies reported by employers
relate to skills and knowledge that are best acquired on the job. So it is important to
increase opportunities for students to gain experience of working in business.
Another issue that is often raised by business is the difficulty they experience in
approaching universities and knowing who is the correct person to discuss training
and/or research needs with. The business and university report found that the
perception of the higher education sector by business is that it is slow moving,
bureaucratic and risk-averse. With over 165 higher education institutions in the UK,
there is inevitably a wide range of governance structures, as well as of management
qualities. Universities need to be more pro-active in reaching out to businesses and
providing the training and education they need within appropriate time scales.
Overall universities are doing a good job in meeting the needs of businesses for
skilled gradates and postgraduates in most areas. But more needs to be done by both
universities and businesses to work together to meet the continuing demands of the
economy. Government of Member States also need to ensure that the structures within
which universities operate are sufficiently responsive and flexible to encourage these
collaborations to occur.
6
The growth of the knowledge economy and society also leads universities to become
more closely involved in community life offering expertise in numerous areas
including regeneration and sustainability.
If they are to play their full role in the creation of a Europe of Knowledge, European
universities must, with the help of the Member States and in a European context, rise
to a number of challenges.
We must ensure that European universities have sufficient and sustainable resources
and use them efficiently. On average the Member States spend 5% of their GDP on
public expenditure for education in general. This figure is comparable to that of the
USA and higher than Japan’s. Total expenditure on higher education alone has not in
any member state increased in proportion to the growth in the number of students. A
substantial gap has opened up with the USA: 1.1% of GDP for the Union compared
with 2.3% for the USA. This gap stems primarily from the low level of private
funding of higher education in Europe which is 0.2% of European GDP compared
with 0.6% in Japan and 1.2% in the USA.
Given that it is unlikely that additional public funding can alone make up the growing
shortfall, ways have to be found of increasing and diversifying universities’ income.
As in the case of the USA, private donations can prove a substantial source of income
for universities. However there is an absence in Europe of a philanthropic tradition on
the scale of that to be found in the USA. In addition, there is a low fiscal
attractiveness of private donations. In the UK in May of this year, the Government
published a report 2 on the potential for increasing voluntary giving to higher
education institutions based on the experiences of the USA. As well as identifying the
structures that need to be in place in universities to support a fundraising function, the
report recommended that although significant improvements to the tax incentives that
are available for charitable giving have been made in the UK, more needs to be done
to simplify the system and to reform tax relief for gifts of assets and capital in order to
increase voluntary giving.
2
Increasing Voluntary Giving to Higher Education – May 2004
7
Another source of income available to universities is from selling services, including
research services and flexible lifelong learning possibilities, particularly to the
business sector, and from using research results. But these sources do not today
contribute in any substantial way to the funding of European universities partly
because of a regulatory framework which does not encourage them to do so, e.g.
because the royalties are paid to the state and not to the university or the researchers
themselves.
Income can also be generated from contributions from students, in the form of tuition
and enrolment fees. In Europe, these contributions are generally limited or even
prohibited, in order to allow democratic access to higher education. A recent
parliamentary bill passed in the UK will allow universities, from 2006, to charge up to
£3000 per year per student. These fees will be paid back by the student after they
graduate and start earning. The speed at which they repay is related to their income;
those on lower incomes are given more time. It is estimated that these fees will
generate £1.2 billion a year for UK universities by the end of the decade.
Universities must use the financial resources they have as efficiently as possible. They
have a duty to their stakeholders; the students they train, the public authorities that
provide the funding, the labour market which uses the qualifications and skills they
transmit and society as a whole. Their objective must be to maximise the social return
of the investment represented by this funding.
Universities must also consolidate their excellence in research and in teaching. They
are one of the primary sources of new knowledge and as such play an even stronger
part in the process of technological innovation. But this is not so in Europe to the
extent that it should be. Since the mid 1990s, the number of spin off companies
created by universities has been on the rise in Europe. Their average density
nevertheless is far smaller than it is around American campuses. Fewer companies are
set up in Europe by researchers or in association with them, and those created in
Europe tend to grow less quickly and not to last as long. A major obstacle to better
application of university research results is the way intellectual property issues are
handled in Europe. In the USA, the ‘Bayh-Dole’ Law has given organisations in
which research is conducted using federal funds, particularly the universities,
8
ownership of their results in order to encourage the application of academic research.
In recent years, in Europe, some countries have introduced legislation similar to the
Bayh-Dole Act. It is too early to evaluate the success of these measures. However, a
wide variety of systems in different Member States have, in Europe, complicated and
limited the transfer of technology and transnational co-operation.
European universities are functioning in an increasingly globalised international
market and find themselves competing with universities of other continents, when it
comes to attracting and keeping the best talent from all over the world. While
European universities host only slightly fewer foreign students than American
universities, in proportion they attract fewer top-level students and a smaller
proportion of researchers. This is partly due to the environment offered by the
European universities. Financial, material and working conditions are often not as
good; the financial benefits of the use of research results are smaller and career
prospects poorer; there is also the poorly harmonised nature of arrangements for visas
and residence permits for students, teachers and researchers from other countries – be
they from the Union or from other countries in the world. These are all areas that the
European Commission are looking into and trying to address under such programmes
as the Sixth Framework and Erasmus World.
The activities of universities often permeate the local economic, social and cultural
environment. This helps to make them an instrument of regional development and of
strengthening European cohesion. The development of technology centres and science
parks, the proliferation of regional cooperation structures between the business sector
and the universities, the expansion of university regional development strategies, the
regional networking of universities, are all illustrations of this dimension of university
activity. The regional dimension of what universities do is set to get stronger, given its
essential role in achieving the Europe of knowledge.
What we started in Paris at the Sorbonne was a small beginning. It was greatly
advanced by what took place in Bologna. There is still much work to be done in
creating a successful European Higher Education Area and to go to meet the Bologna
criteria by 2010 particularly in the areas of human resource mobility and academic
9
mobility. European universities need to work together to ensure that Europe is able to
compete in the global knowledge economy.
10