European Universities Initiative is a ‘game-changer’ – Norway

The Norwegian government has officially welcomed the push by the European Commission for greater higher education cooperation, describing the European Universities Initiative (EUI) in particular as a ‘game-changer’ in relation to fostering closer collaboration between European higher education institutions, but some concerns still remain.

In a written response to the European Strategy for Universities and the European Council recommendation on building bridges for effective European higher education cooperation proposed by the European Commission on 18 January, Norway’s ministry of education and research said on 27 April that the initiatives, aimed at strengthening transnational cooperation, have been met with a positive response by Norwegian stakeholders.

Noting that the European Union and Norway enjoy a particularly close and longstanding cooperation in higher education, research and innovation, based on the European Economic Area (EEA) Agreement, the statement says that Norway takes “strong interest in contributing to further policy development and actions aimed at strengthening European higher education institutions and promoting transnational cooperation”.

Focusing on the EUI, the statement says Norway fully supports the current aim of the initiative to upscale the cross-border alliances from 41 to 60 by mid-2024 and describes the EUI as a potential “game-changer” for closer collaboration between higher education institutions in Europe.

Concerns

However, the statement also cautions against “overloading” the alliances with “too many tasks and purposes”.

“The alliances must have time to develop professionally. Quality should always be the main principle for future development,” the statement reads.

It also calls for the safeguarding of diversity in the sector and the need to protect the autonomy of higher education institutions, “including their ability to choose between a variety of modes of cooperation”.

The government notes that not all higher education institutions “will or can be part of the European Universities Initiative. Experiences and policies developed under the auspices of the European Universities Initiative could serve as a model for cooperation between higher education institutions that are not part of the initiative.”

The 27 April statement comes in the wake of consultations earlier this year between Norwegian Minister of Research and Higher Education Ola Borten Moe and the country’s higher education institutions, primarily over two relatively complex outstanding issues: the question of a legal statute to govern alliances and the concept of a joint European degree.

The 27 April statement returns to both these issues, urging further discussion and exploration.

“At the current stage, it is difficult to get the full picture of all the implications of introducing a legal statute for university alliances. It is clear to us, however, that the initiative raises a number of legal, financial and organisational questions.

“We therefore support further exploration and considerations at European level, with the aim of clarifying the implications of a potential legal statute, as well as ensuring the feasibility of and need for a possible legal statute.”

On the issue of a joint European degree, the statement says Norway “supports further exploration of a possible joint European degree as a means to strengthen transnational cooperation in higher education” but said such a degree should be flexible, reduce administrative burdens, offer added value and build on the tools and instruments already developed through the Bologna Process.

However, the statement notes that it is necessary to address the question of who would be responsible for issuing a joint European degree and adherence to quality assurance systems.

In addition, the Norwegian government said it was “highly important” not to establish parallel structures and tools to the ones already developed in the European Higher Education Area.

On the issue of a European student card, the statement said the government agrees that it will facilitate access to international student mobility at all levels but would need to be compatible with national IT systems.

Stakeholder views

Stakeholders canvassed by University World News held differing views about whether or not the EUI constituted a ‘game-changer’ for European higher education.

Anna-Lena Claeys-Kulik, deputy director for policy coordination and foresight at the European University Association, told University World News that the EUI was a game-changer to the extent that it had put universities higher up on the EU’s political agenda and had created new dynamics.

“It also puts the spotlight on many of the challenges that universities are still facing in transnational collaboration and that have not yet been solved, partially also because of insufficient implementation of Bologna tools and reforms.

“Whether this new political awareness will lead to tangible improvements is yet to be seen, but there is momentum. What we can see so far is that there is debate about it at EU level with the commission, member states and stakeholders, and in some countries, it starts triggering discussions also at national level,” she said.

Secretary-General of the League of European Research Universities (LERU) Kurt Deketelaere said the EUI could be a game-changer in European higher education collaboration only if there was sufficient money, time and member state support given to the initiative. Currently, none of these ingredients were in sufficient supply, he said.

“If time, money and support do not increase significantly and fast, I doubt that the EUI will be a game-changer. The outcome will be limited to being a cooperation tool for one out of 10 universities in Europe, at most and at best.

“[With respect to the] two initiatives where the EC [European Commission] would like to take action – the European degree and the European statute – the support of member states is limited, modest, and some countries are even against them. Both initiatives are seen as not really a priority or necessity.

“We can always add a label to a university degree, but we will never let that degree be replaced by a European Commission degree. (It is universities that will continue to deliver degrees.)

“And the EC can think about a European statute but vehicles in Belgian, Dutch and German law have proven to be efficient and effective for the needs of the alliances. The added value of a pilot with European Territorial Groupings will perhaps be limited because it is too burdensome compared to those national vehicles”.

Antonin Charret, a doctoral candidate in the department of education at the University of Oxford conducting research on the EUIs, told University World News that member states are “generally enthusiastic” about the initiative – “usually for the simple reason that their national higher education institutions have been selected and are actively participating in it”.

However, he said while there is a consensus between the member states to continue pushing the initiative forward, what member states do not want is for the alliances to mean the loss of a competence to the commission.

“What varies the most is the different degree of support that the different member states have given the alliances, or, more precisely, their national higher education institutions participating in alliances.

“Officially, 22 member states are supporting the initiative financially in some manner. What varies enormously are the amounts and form of this financial support. This can be by a financial complement to the EU funding, as is the case in France and Germany, but it can take less direct forms.

“For example, Portugal is supporting the initiative by attributing funding to PhD students in Portuguese institutions participating in alliances,” he said.

He said there are also “various degrees of support” in removing legal barriers to achieve more seamless cooperation.

“During my interviews it was revealed that countries like Denmark and even France (often considered one of the drivers of the initiative) remain rather rigid on this topic. On the contrary, countries like Spain and the Netherlands are usually pointed out as having been much more active in pushing forward the necessary reforms.”

Innovative potential

Professor Bjørn Stensaker, vice-rector for education at the University of Oslo in Norway and coordinator of CIRCLE U, one of the seven alliances with Norwegian partners and the only one coordinated from Norway, said: “University alliances could in principle have different purposes – ranking from branding to interest articulation.

“In Europe, we already have several alliances focusing on interest articulation such as the Guild and LERU. I think the interest demonstrated in the European Universities Initiative is related to its innovative potential.

“I think we can clearly see a genuine interest in experimenting with new approaches to internationalisation, bringing in academic staff and partnering up with students in new ways. A focus on innovation is not new; what is new with the EUI is the long-term perspective it brings to collaboration. We are leaving the previous project orientation and focusing more on lasting relationships,” he said.

Did Stensaker perceive there to be more enthusiasm for the EUI on the part of European stakeholders?

“This is the interesting question. On the one hand, some countries have demonstrated such enthusiasm by adding national funding to the money received from the EU. On the other hand, it might also be that some governments see the EUI as a development which might reduce national authority over higher education.

“For me, the potential for success is mostly related to the long-term engagement by the higher education institutions involved – and the added value the EUI brings. Academic collaboration is always dependent on the value added on the academic side,” he said.

Charret said the initiative had the potential to transform part of the higher education landscape in the European Union and participating countries.

Unprecedented levels of cooperation

“These alliances do have the potential to create unprecedented levels of cooperation between higher education institutions. Some alliances, like Eut+, even have the ambition of creating university mergers at an EU scale. Furthermore, the commission, mainly through its Directorate General for Education and Culture, is putting a lot of energy and resources into this initiative which it has deployed and scaled up rather quickly,” Charret said.

Like other commentators, Charret highlighted the fact that the initiative only represents a small proportion – 10% – of the overall higher education landscape in the European Union.

“It remains to be seen what impact the initiative will have on the remaining 90% of higher education institutions.”

He also pointed to the “many challenges” that still need to be overcome to create European Universities.

“Mainly, the research aspect of the initiative is still scarce. Through Erasmus+, what is being funded is closer links between the higher education institutions and mobility. Through Horizon 2020, the commission does not fund research projects but more so the possibility for alliances to set up practices linked to research.

“The aspect of research is tricky as it involves much stronger political will from member states, which still need to be convinced to give these alliances appropriate research funding to create this synergy between higher education, research and innovation.”

Acknowledging diversity

Professor Beatrix Busse, chief development officer at EUniWell, a university alliance uniting eight universities and 102 associate partners from eight regions in Europe, told University World News that EUniWell was in strong agreement with the notion that the EUI has the potential to be a game-changer.

“At EUniWell, we see this initiative as a long-term effort to learn from each other, and to exchange ideas, people and best practices. At the same time, we believe it important that the initiative acknowledges the diversity in the various alliances and encourages different realisations in what it means to be a European university.

“European universities should continue to evolve, adding partners from across Europe who can add value to furthering the respective mission statements.

“For EUniWell, the lessons learned and shared will ultimately foster deeper cooperation, enable faster coordinated responses to global challenges such as pandemics and war, and lead to a stronger higher education sector in Europe and beyond, premised on the values of increased well-being,” she said.

President of the Karolinska Institute in Sweden Professor Ole Petter Ottersen told University World News the EUI was a positive initiative because it offered “strength in numbers” and tapped “potential in complementarity and diversity”.

“Ideally, joining forces in Europe should amount to a ‘win-win’ as it could also help us contribute more on a global scale. It remains a challenge to work out how the EUI initiative should best be aligned with the ambitions embedded in the EU’s global approach.

“We should always remind ourselves that universities by their very nature are actors on the global scene and that regional initiatives should strengthen us in this role rather than divert us from it.”

He said if there is one thing to criticise about the initiative, it is the fact that it was too ambitious from the start.

“It should have been allowed to develop organically, adding layers of ambitions and complexity as experiences accrue and ideas mature,” he said.

Using the EUI focus on PhDs as an example, he said: “Our experience is that content and expectations of a PhD differ too much between universities for this ambition to be realistic and fruitful.

“Instead, EUI doctoral schools should be encouraged to incorporate a cohort of PhD students registered at their own university, and design collaborative educational and research activities for the cohort”.