1 / 19

Reducing the funding gap of universities in EU and financial management of universities

Reducing the funding gap of universities in EU and financial management of universities. A Norwegian Case by Professor Torbjørn Digernes Rector – Norwegian University of Science and Technology. Expenditure level on research and higher education.

chidi
Télécharger la présentation

Reducing the funding gap of universities in EU and financial management of universities

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Reducing the funding gap of universities in EU and financial management of universities A Norwegian Case by Professor Torbjørn Digernes Rector – Norwegian University of Science and Technology 20th CESAER General assembly and seminar - Aalborg - 29-31 October 2009

  2. Expenditure level on research and higher education • EU-statistics from 2002 shows that EU spent 1.1 % of GDP on higher education, compared to 2.6% in the US • The OECD of spending 3 % of GNP on research is met by some countires, but many countries are lagging behind • We see an enormous growth rate in the BRIC economies, particularly China and India. • Measured in this way, there is a considerable gap that needs closing 20th CESAER General assembly and seminar - Aalborg - 29-31 October 2009

  3. Situation in Norway • Norway seems to be in line with the EU-level on educational spending • The recently proposed budget places us at about 1 % of GDP, and if we include the second money stream through the Norwegian research council, we are at about 1.1 %. • We are far behind on research, where the figure is below 2 % - mainly because the private sector is lagging behind • When university and research people meet we tend to preach the gospel to the congregation, but it is difficult the get the politicians into the congregation 20th CESAER General assembly and seminar - Aalborg - 29-31 October 2009

  4. The situation in Norway – funding system (I) • Components in the governments’s funding model (first funding channel) • Basic funding • given independently of production indicators • makes out about 60% of the budget • Production in education • 40 % of the education funding is calculated based on the student credits produced by the institution • There is a differentiation of rates between different studies, with medicine at the high end and bachelor level theoretical disciplines in humanities and social sciences at the low end • It is an open model, so that increase in production results in a proportional increase in budgets • The government controls the total number of students that can be enrolled at a university • But money follows the student when education capacity is increased 20th CESAER General assembly and seminar - Aalborg - 29-31 October 2009

  5. The situation in Norway – funding system (II) • Research Production • A result based redistribution of a budget allocation for the entire sector has been implemented • The redistribution is based on four weighted indicators • Scientific publications – points calculated based differentiation of journals on two impact levels • Number of doctorate candidates graduated • Amount of funding from EU-framework programs and ERC • Amount of funding from the Norwegian research council and public research funds (private funding not included) • A significant growth in the production indicators have taken place over the last years • The budget allocation has not been increased beyond index adjustment since it was introduced • Zero-sum game which does not give significant growth impulses to those who succeed in research production 20th CESAER General assembly and seminar - Aalborg - 29-31 October 2009

  6. The situation in Norway – funding system (III) • Earmarked funding from government • Strategic tasks • Doctorate scholarships • Other special tasks • Funding for new facilities • Second funding channel • Norwegian Research Council • Regional research funds • Third funding channel • Private sources – industry • NGOs – private research foundations • The importance of the second and third channel varies between the institutions • NTNU fetches about 25 % of our total budget through these channels, more than 80% of that is research funding 20th CESAER General assembly and seminar - Aalborg - 29-31 October 2009

  7. NTNU data 20th CESAER General assembly and seminar - Aalborg - 29-31 October 2009

  8. Government funding NTNU data 20th CESAER General assembly and seminar - Aalborg - 29-31 October 2009

  9. NTNU data 20th CESAER General assembly and seminar - Aalborg - 29-31 October 2009

  10. Positions for PhD-education directly from government funding NTNU data 20th CESAER General assembly and seminar - Aalborg - 29-31 October 2009

  11. NTNU data 20th CESAER General assembly and seminar - Aalborg - 29-31 October 2009

  12. NTNU data 20th CESAER General assembly and seminar - Aalborg - 29-31 October 2009

  13. Floor space - development 2002-2013 Increase about 57.000 m2 since 2002. NTNU data 20th CESAER General assembly and seminar - Aalborg - 29-31 October 2009

  14. Situation assessment • How is it, that we even though we have increased our budgets like this, many faculties and departments have problems to maintain staff and quality levels? • Answer: The basic funding is under pressure through several mechanisms • The basic funding funds the bulk of • The permanent scientific staff • Building operation and maintenance • Technical and administrative support staff • Renewal of scientific equipment • Operation of laboratories 20th CESAER General assembly and seminar - Aalborg - 29-31 October 2009

  15. Mechanisms eroding the basic funding • New facilities added without adding the funds to operate and maintain them • amounts to about 40 MNOK for NTNU • The new positions for doctorate educations both from the ministry and the reseach council are underfunded – particularly for support of experimental research • amounts to 300-400 MNOK for NTNU • Less than full compensation for price- and wage increase • about 60 MNOK for NTNU 2008-2010 • Large long term research contracts from the research council requires contribution from the host institution – particularly for research equipment and technical support personnel • About 60 MNOK for NTNU (net effect is less, maybe 20 MNOK) • Other externally funded research is only partly funded and requires contribution from the host institution 20th CESAER General assembly and seminar - Aalborg - 29-31 October 2009

  16. What is the effect of this development? • General squeeze on the permanent scientific staff, both in terms of number and work load • A research infrastructure which is not well maintained and renewed to be up to date • Less than required access to hands-on experimental work by students at all levels • Weakening of the long term basic research that should be the hallmark of universities • General threat to keeping up quality standards in research and education, but research is often hardest hit • Strategic power to develop strength is weakened • Particularly hard hit are the areas where student recruitment has been weakened over later years • Science and technology are among these – development of student numbers has in some areas been negative • Since money follows the student in the funding model, we have several cases where the permanent scientific staff has been going down, amidst a significant growth of overall budgets for the university 20th CESAER General assembly and seminar - Aalborg - 29-31 October 2009

  17. What can we do ourselves? • First we need to ”sweep in front of our own door” • We have to show that we manage our finances in a responsible way, and take measures to improve our efficiency • Do not accept external funding when internal matching resources are not present – and argue for full funding • Contribute to realignment in the internal budget structure with other means under the university’s control • Do not accept external funding when internal matching resources are not present • Reduce the resources spent in teaching • We can do that keeping up quality in a more narrow program of specialization • And we should discontinue study programs that are undercritical 20th CESAER General assembly and seminar - Aalborg - 29-31 October 2009

  18. What can we expect others to do? • Government must give us the freedom to manage our own budget structure so that there is a balance between the different needs • This means reducing earmarking and expectations of own funding contribution • Establish a policy to fully fund projects through the second and third money channels for the universities • This requires acceptance from public and private external funding sources 20th CESAER General assembly and seminar - Aalborg - 29-31 October 2009

  19. But above all! • Never tire of telling the politicians that the our future prosperity depends upon our competitiveness • In the knowledge society, the primary source of competiviteness is a strong education and research sector • Challenge the sector to deliver in response to society’s needs • Measure its success to do so • And reward success – give growth impulses to those who deliver 20th CESAER General assembly and seminar - Aalborg - 29-31 October 2009

More Related