How To Be Successful In The Netherlands

Transcription

1 FLEXIBILITY AND BALANCE The Future of Higher Education, Research and Innovation [HERI] in the Netherlands and Finland JOENSUU SEMI NAR 1 0 DECEMBER JACK SPAAPEN

2 Topics 2 The context of Higher Education, Research & Innovation HERI Grand HERI challenges A short history of shifts in Dutch science policy Comparison of the two countries, socio-economic and higher education characteristics System issues and challenges Current Dutch solution Future options

3 Grand movements in the context of HERI 3 Shift from academic research to applied research / research in the context of application (Gibbons, Nowotny a.o.) Shift from national funding to EU funding, block grant external f. Shift from disciplinary research to MIT research Open access / open science /open innovation (publishers, IPR) Shift from pencil, books and classrooms to keyboards, and distant (online) reading and learning Shift from higher education / research policy to industry policy And now to policy for the knowledge society?

4 Grand HERI Challenges 4 Growing tension between basic and applied research, and between block grant and competitive financing strategic space changes Growing tension between specialization and generalization (in research and in education), a.o. broad bachelors, loss of knowledge / expertise? Growing tension between research and education (affecting the structure and function of the university) separation? ICT big data, MOOCs, etc., distributed knowledge aquisition Productive interactions between universities and environment: society, industry, UAS Ongoing struggle between ministries of education and science and economic affairs (top sectors, EZ ultimate power) Growing need for international collaboration (GSC, also disasters [nuclear, climate, water] ) Traditional institutional structures give way to networks with society, industry, EU, global

5 HERI characteristics change Education: different skills (21 st century skills), different attitude : open, oriented towards other disciplines, society Research: broader orientation, collaboration with other fields, other expertise, controversies, post normal science Innovation: focus not (only) on technological innovation but on social innovation Connection between the three more important

6 NL : Gradual shift in policy goals 1980s first major government attempt to reorganise the system, take away some autonomy of the universities TVC (task distribution and concentration) and CF (reallocation based on quality judgment) 1990s first attempt to organise research on a national level, attention for societal demand (national) research schools, PPPs (Wageningen food valley) 2000s policy of focus and mass key sectors (KIA), standard evaluation protocol (SEP I) 2010 Veerman Sharper profile for universities, differentiation and selection Top Sectors Science policy becomes industry policy

7 1980s : TVC and conditional financing TVC start of a national university policy, introducing 4 money flows and priority areas, disciplinary plans: raising efficiency and effectiveness, transparency, but also budget cuts ( fte) CF meant to reallocate nationally, on the basis of quality judgments, stimulating societal orientation, start national quality evaluation of research, no major reallocation happened Result: budget cuts yes, but not so much on the basis of quality judgments, political card game, winners chemistry, physics, astronomy losers H, SS, biology, earth sc.; 7

8 1990s : Research schools and PPPs Research schools aim at national coordination of the best researchers and PhD students First Public Private Partnerships in Wageningen Agricultural University, merger with DLO (applied) institutes food valley Concentration of research and training, market orientation slowly growing 8

9 2000s : SEP, Focus and mass, key areas SEP = standard evaluation protocol: 4 criteria for research evaluation, quality, productivity, societal relevance, vitality of management Focus and mass, stimulation of specific areas (genomics, nano, ict, some societal areas like urban development), FES, TTIs and MTIs Broad coalition for knowledge, Key innovation areas: Chemistry, Flowers & Food, High Tech Systems & Materials, Water, Creative industry, Pensions / social security 9

10 Major science policy goals 2007: academic values still prevail Ambitious climate for excellent research and breakthroughs Self governance of disciplines, main focus on basic, unbound research Room for young talent, go where the best research is done Priorities of those research areas that connect best to agenda s of government, industry and society Strengthening of demand orientation in professional schools and TNO and GTIs Attention for IPR, ICT/big data/ and S&T communication

11 2010s : Veerman and topsectors Veerman: major restructuring of higher education system: universities and professional schools are to choose a clearer profile in research and education (differentiation and selection) University of the Netherlands? Topsectors: 10 Sectors where Netherlands is economically strong become leading in research policy : Agro food, Flowers, High Tech, Energy, Logistics, Creative Industry, Life sciences, Chemistry, Water, and Head Offices Focus shifting to research and education serving Industry / Society economic affairs taking over 11

12 Major science policy goals 2010: economic values prevail Preparing the Netherlands for growing global competition Connection to the labor market weak in many areas / knowledge paradox The need for more output of people with higher education diplomas [50% in 2020] Higher education system needs more differentiation and flexibility, focus on talent and broad programs (generalization vs specialisation) 12

13 Most recent step: Governmental Vision 2014 Dutch science of world wide significance Science with maximum impact Dutch science as a breeding ground for talent Ministry of education and science fighting back

14 Summary s university policy focusing on raising quality of universities, and task distribution 1990s science policy focusing on PhDs and on national coordination of research 2000s science and economics, key areas 2010s horizontal and vertical profiling, universities, sector plans, top sectors

15 The countries 15 Finland : small, 5,5 million people, but a big land NL : not so small, 17 million people, but a small land Finland : GDP $257 (2013), $ per cap. [Worldbank] NL : GDP $800 (2013), $ per cap. [Worldbank] Economy Finland : service economy (2/3), manufacturing/refining (1/3) electronics, machinery, forest industry, ICT Economy NL : service economy (55%, logistics, banking); chemistry, agriculture and food, high tech, creative industry Geography /history Finland : Nordic country, Scandinavia, Baltics, Russia,.Europe, Asia, rest of the world Geography / history NL : centre between large economies, UK, GER, FR, big harbours, transit country Politics / society Finland : democratic, human values, international / EU orientation languages Fin, Swe, Rus, Eng, right wing party Politics / society NL : democratic, human values, international / EU orientation, languages NL, Fr, Ger, Eng, right wing party Main ambitions Finland : international orientation, quality Main ambitions NL : to belong to the top 5 world wide

16 What did the Netherlands export in 2012? Harvard Atlas Economic complexity 16

17 What did Finland export in 2012? Harvard Atlas Economic complexity 17

18 How we are called in Chinese 18

19 EU Innovation Union Scoreboard Note: Average performance is measured using a composite indicator building on data for 24 indicators going from a lowest possible performance of 0 to a maximum possible performance of 1.

20 20

21 FINLAND AND THE NETHERLANDS ARE DOING GREAT! today but will it do great tomorrow?

22 Current HERI systems 22 Finland : 14 Universities, 24 UAS, other institutions (academy, TEKES) NL : 13 (14, 15, 8) universities, 38 UAS, other institutes and institutions Interactions between different parts, and with the political system Ambitions: Excellent research and education, high societal impact, connectivity, international orientation Policy: efficiency, efficacy, accountability, control / autonomy, top down or bottom up Relatively modest budgets, Finland higher than NL

23 What HERI? What kind of universities (or UAS) do we want? What kind of research do we need? What kind of education do we want? What kind of innovation do we need? smart mix of scientific and societal values?

24 What do International Rankings tell us? The global competitive index : both top 10 EU innovation scoreboard : both in top 10 Times Higher Education index : NL universities mostly in top 200, Finland all in top 400 Leiden ranking, Shanghai ranking, etc. What does it mean to be in the top? Do we want to a Yale (1% admitted, places, $ per year) 24

25 THE world university ranking California Institute of Technology 2. Harvard University 3. University of Oxford 4. Stanford University 5. University of Cambridge 6. Massachusetts Institute of Technology 7. Princeton University 8. University of California, Berkeley =9. Imperial College London =9. Yale University

26 Yale facts 26 Undergraduate students* 5,379 Graduate and professional students* 6,501 International students* 2,135 Faculty* 4,140 Staff* 9,323 International scholars* 2,327 Living alumni 168,987 (as of April 2012) Library holdings 15 million volumes Varsity athletic teams* 35 Total number of buildings* 440 Endowment (market value)* Operating budget* $19.3 billion $2.82 billion

27 What are the challenges for a successful HERI policy [in a small country] 27 Public finances / private investments Relationship between education and research [publish/perish] Collaboration vs competititon, regional, national and international Excellence and relevance, or a smart combination Triple helix, research themes, finances RRI (gender eq., science ed., ethics, open access, public engagement, governance) Governance, top down vs bottom up Evaluation, new demands, new forms (Science in transition) the best way to grow sustainable is investing in human capital [economic literature]; resilience of people and institutes ever more important learning economy [WRR scientific advisory council]

28 What can governments do? 28 Decisions about allocation of national budget, Finland is investing more Decisions about quality control, accountability Research: quality and relevance Education: quality, student numbers, curricula, labor market, etc. Third mission / valorisation / collaboration (Swe): connection to societal demand Responsible research and innovation (gender equality, ethics, science education, open access, etc. Decisions about role in innovation: better society, global competition Helping industry, small and big Helping societal partners, social innovation Participation in European GSC Global cooperation (f.e. IPCC) Indicators / indications for the knowledge economy / society Comprehensive evaluation But not only governments, we live in a connected world, distributed governance

29 The wider context 29 Socio-economic development : what kind of country do you want to be? Service economy? Hight tech? manufacturing? Connectivity within the country, (de)centralisation, distributed control Local, regional, national Global competition, collaboration Relations with border countries Relations with the EU, see think piece, EU The future of Europe is Science (science, engineering and technology, SET) knowledge guided society Relations with the world, Asia, the rest, free education, attractive for 3 rd world students

30 System issues 30 The transformation of (new) knowledge into new societal concepts, organisational ideas, products and services (applications) Communication within the system and with government and society, common agenda, foresight activities, self reflection Education, foreign students, mobility Bama, phd s, labor market Research : quality and relevance, blue sky research, applied research, collaboration between Natural and SSH what kind of HERI system?

31 31 knowledge production: improving connections society industry Question, issue, problem research policy 31

32 32 CHANGING POLICY CONTEXT 32 Netherlands universities: sharper profiles, finances based on performance Top Sector Policy: Stimulating collaboration in the golden triangle between science, industry, policy/society: Energy, high tech, water, agriculture and food, creative industry, EU: Grand Societal Challenges: Health, demographic change and wellbeing; Food security, sustainable agriculture, marine and maritime research, and the bio-economy; Secure, clean and efficient energy; Smart, green and integrated transport; Inclusive, innovative and secure societies; Climate action, resource efficiency and raw materials EU: Joint Programming Initiatives: Agriculture, food security and climate change; Cultural Heritage and global change; Healthy diet for a healthy life; Urban Europe, Future of cities and transport ilippppp 32

33 33 new way of looking at knowledge production: as a long term team effort society industry Question, issue, problem research policy The system produces socially robust knowledge : scientifically reliable, socially valuable 33

34 Golden triangle? 34

35 National Research Agenda Open process, all major players included form science and society All major agenda s included, institutional profiling, top sectors, learning economy, employers, academy research agenda, etc. Ready in fall 2015 KNAW / Academy established a national platform for the research community No extra budget

36 (1) Dutch science of worldwide significance 36 Free rein for creativity and innovative ideas Towards a National Science Agenda, a unifying agenda for research in The Netherlands Working together in ground-breaking research Framework agreement with universities A new role for NWO / research council A more strategic approach to large-scale infrastructure A more responsive and dynamic system of institutes

37 (2) Science with maximum impact 37 Open Access as the catalyst of knowledge sharing, learning economy The participative public: Open Dialogue The societal partners: inspiration and responsibility The private sector: working to address the societal challenges Universities of applied sciences: an integral part of the knowledge system Students, pupils and teachers: Education based on the latest scientific insights Closer cooperation between government and science

38 (3) Dutch science as a breeding ground for talent 38 Opportunities for various forms of talent Involvement in research, education and valorisation The Netherlands as the preferred location for scientific talent A good inflow, throughflow and outflow on the labour market More opportunities for women in science The researcher at the centre of policy: less pressure to publish and acquire funding

39 Conclusions (for small countries) 39 Pull resources and strengths together, national and local profiling Establish a national plan / agenda, but not one that entails everything; Free space is important (25-35%) Focus on connectivity in the country, but also international collaboration Find right balance between specialization and comprehensive approaches Learning through education AND research learning economy Room for strategic component, flexibility

40 The way of the future 40 3 rd industrial revolution (Rifkin), most countries still live in a 20 th century s technology, we should go for a innovation fit for 21 st century, CO2 neutral, green, advanced internet / communication etc. [horizontal profiling] Focus on strong local/regional development in EU and global context [horizontal / vertical profiling] ERAwatch: most decisions made on national level More attention for social innovation, new ways of doing things, organizing things, connection 21 st century innovation Develop a strong evaluation culture, comprehensive nature, oriented towards the new production of knowledge / science 2.0 / science in transition

41 Map of the world split in equal sections of 1 billion inhabitants 41

42 42 END - FIN THANK YOU MERCI Jack.spaapen@knaw.nl