Intermediate Evaluation 2015of the ETH Domain

Self-Assessment ReportIntermediate Evaluation 2015of the ETH Domain

Self-Assessment Report

Adopted by the ETH Board on December 11, 2014

Eidg. Forschungsanstalt für Wald,
Schnee und Landschaft WSL

Table of Contents

Table of Contents
Foreword by the President of the ETH Board					

7Introduction
Evaluation Mandate and Structure of the Self-Assessment Report
11Perspectives of the ETH Domain12Strengths
12
Weaknesses
14
Opportunities
15
Challenges and Threats
16
A The ETH Domain as a Driving Force for Innovation
Introduction
21
Teaching
21
Research
22
Knowledge and Technology Transfer
22
A.1 Contribution to Innovation Performance
27
Assessment by the ETH Board
27
A.1.1 Background28
A.1.2 Collaboration with Industry
28
A.1.3 Knowledge Transfer to the Public Sector and In-house Innovation
33
A.1.4 Fostering of Entrepreneurship and the Foundation of Spin-offs
35
A.1.5 Exploitation of Research Results
37
A.2 Freedom and Incentives for Curiosity-Driven Research
41
Assessment by the ETH Board
41
A.2.1 Funding for Curiosity-Driven Research at the ETH Domain Institutions42
A.2.2 Funding Agencies
43
A.3 Contribution to the Creation of the Swiss Innovation Park
47
Assessment by the ETH Board
47
A.3.1 Background48
A.3.2 Involvement of the ETH Domain49

B National Position and International CompetitivenessIntroduction53
Core Prerequisites
53
Science Policy
54
B.1 Impact of Science Policy
57
Assessment by the ETH Board
57
B.1.1 Academic Autonomy
58
B.1.2 Openness and Diversity
58
B.2 Cost-Intensive Research Infrastructures
63
Assessment by the ETH Board
63
B.2.1 Examples64
B.2.2 Success Factors
66
B.3 Benefits for Switzerland
69
Assessment by the ETH Board
69
B.3.1 Social and Economic Benefit
70
B.3.2 Added Value of Existing ETH Domain Locations71

4Intermediate Evaluation 2015

Self-Assessment Report of the ETH Board

Table of Contents

C Federal and Higher Education Policy
Introduction75
C.1 Geographic Developments
79
Assessment by the ETH Board
79
C.1.1 Strengthening Existing Locations81
C.1.2 EPFL Antennae Strategy
83
C.2 Long-term Development
89
Assessment by the ETH Board89
C.2.1 Reasons for and Limits to Growth90
C.2.2 Requirements
91
C.2.3 Novelty 91
C.3 Contributions to the Improvement of the Swiss Higher Education System
95
Assessment by the ETH Board95
C.3.1 Core Contribution: World-class Research
96
C.3.2 Pioneering the Development of the Swiss Higher Education System
97
C.3.3 Other Contributions
97
C.4 Structure of Study Programs
101
Assessment by the ETH Board
101
C.4.1 Adequacy of Study Programs
102
C.4.2 Development and Evaluation of Curricula102
C.4.3 Stakeholder Involvement
103
C.4.4 Collaboration within Curricula
104
C.5 Cooperation
107
Assessment by the ETH Board
107
C.5.1 Individual Level
108
C.5.2 Institutional Level
108
C.5.3 Extent of Cooperation
109
D Medical Science and Medical Technology
Introduction113
D.1 Strategy in Medical Science and Technology
117
Assessment by the ETH Board
117
D.1.1 Translational Medical Research
118
D.1.2 Medical Technology
122
D.1.3 Cost-Intensive Research Infrastructures
123
D.2 Contribution to the Alleviation of Shortage of Medical Staff
127
Assessment by the ETH Board
127
D.2.1 Educational Efforts
128
D.2.2 Staff Shortage: The ETH Domain’s Possible Role
129
E Bibliometric Analysis
E.1 Background and methodology
133
E.2 Results
134
E.2.1 Results for ETH Zurich
136
E.2.2 Results for EPFL
138
E.2.3 Results for PSI
140
E.2.4 Results for WSL142
E.2.5 Results for Empa
144
E.2.6 Results for Eawag
146
E.3 Conclusions
148Intermediate Evaluation 2015

Self-Assessment Report of the ETH Board

5

Table of Contents

F Retrospective and Outlook
F.1 Implementation of the Experts’ Recommendations of the 2010 Intermediate Evaluation 151
F.2 Executive Summary of the Strategic Planning 2017-2020
153
Appendices
Appendix 1: Unique Features and Governance of the ETH DomainThe Unique Features of the ETH Domain (Alleinstellungsmerkmale)
Organisation and Governance of the ETH Domain
Appendix 2: Additional Material to Chapter A
Appendix 3: Additional Material to Chapter F.1Statement of the ETH Board on the Implementation of the Experts’ Recommendationsof the 2010 Intermediate Evaluation

6Intermediate Evaluation 2015

159
159
161
165
169
169

Self-Assessment Report of the ETH Board

Foreword

Foreword by the Presidentof the ETH Board“As a driving force for innovation, the ETH Domain wishes to strengthen Switzerland's longterm competitiveness through excellence in research, teaching and knowledge and technology
transfer, and to contribute to the development of society. Acting as a beacon, it will seek toassume its share of global responsibility for tackling urgent social challenges, for improving
quality of life and for the long-term preservation of the resources our lives depend on.”This is the Vision Statement of the ETH Domain, which has guided our two Federal Institutesof Technology and the four Research Institutes in the recent past and which has been redetermined by the ETH Board in the context of its Strategic Planning 2017-2020. It is precisely the key
elements of this vision which are at the core of the mandate attributed to the international
expert committee for the intermediate evaluation 2015 of the ETH Domain: its Terms of Reference
deal with the role played by the ETH Domain institutions in higher education policy as well as
in economic and innovation policy in Switzerland. They thus focus on the contributions of
the ETH Domain to several crucial areas with regard to Switzerland’s prosperity and its sustainable
development, namely their contributions to our country’s innovation capacity and to its worldclass higher education system.
In previous years, the intermediate evaluation focused primarily on scientific achievements.
Evaluating the ETH Domain’s academic performance means moving on safe grounds: it iscommonly recognized that the institutions of the ETH Domain have achieved a world-leadinglevel both in research and in teaching. With its adapted focus, however, we see the current
intermediate evaluation both as a challenge and as an opportunity. The challenge is to leave
the above-mentioned safe grounds of a scientific evaluation with its proven methodology andits well-established criteria, and to take position, for instance, on various topics which are
subject to discussions not only within the scientific community, but also in politics, the economy
and the society as a whole. At the same time, this evaluation offers the opportunity to reflect
on the manifold direct and indirect ways in which our institutions contribute to and strengthen
the Swiss economy, the country's (higher) education system and its attractiveness as a centerfor science, innovation and technology. This entails the opportunity to benefit from the expert
group’s recommendations upon which the ETH Domain will be able to further develop andto foster the leading role it intends to play.
Recognizing these opportunities, the ETH Board has tackled the challenge most seriously.
Together with the institutions of the ETH Domain and in a self-critical attitude, we identified andassessed for each of the Terms of Reference the relevant strengths and weaknesses, from which
we derived a comprehensive analysis of middle- and long-term perspectives of the ETH Domain.
Doing so, we are able to draw a differentiated picture of the ETH Domain’s successful workin the various fields addressed by the performance mandate of the Federal Council and of
the ETH Domain’s contributions to the sciences, the economy and the society as a whole. The
present Self-assessment report of the ETH Board has been established with this aim. In thename of the entire ETH Board I hope it will contribute to a thorough examination and criticalreview of the ETH Domain. We look forward to receiving the expert committee’s most valuable
recommendations.

Dr. iur. Fritz Schiesser

Intermediate Evaluation 2015

Self-Assessment Report of the ETH Board

7

Introduction

Evaluation Mandate and Structure of the Self-Assessment ReportPerspectives of the ETH Domain
Strengths
Weaknesses
Opportunities
Challenges and Threats

11
12
12
14
15
16

Introduction

Introduction

Evaluation Mandate and Structure of the Self-Assessment Report
Evaluation Mandate
The intermediate evaluation of the ETH Domain is part of the performance mandate of theFederal Council to the ETH Domain for the period 2013-2016. The performance mandate states:“The department will carry out an evaluation of the performance of the ETH Domain in
mid-2015 for which it will draw on external experts. The ETH Board will state its position on
the evaluation report. The evaluation report and the position of the ETH Board will form
the interim report, which will be forwarded to the Federal Assembly together with the proposal
for the next performance period (Art. 34a ETH Law).”
Unlike in previous years, the 2015 intermediate evaluation shall not focus on the scientificachievements of the ETH Domain institutions. Rather, the evaluation mandate attributed to theexpert group in charge states: “The expert report to be drawn up here should, in contrast,
focus in particular on the role played by the ETH Domain institutions in higher education policy
and economic and innovation policy in Switzerland. The experts are invited to assess performance in the current period (2013-2016) and, in addition, to consider how the ETH Domain can
position itself and develop in the context of the coming changes. They should take accountof the potential tension between the ETH Domain’s competitiveness on the international stage
and its position and role in Switzerland across the range of ETH Domain activities.”
Structure of the Self-Assessment Report
Correspondingly, the evaluation mandate contains 13 Terms of Reference to be addressed by theexpert group. As a first step, the ETH Board has elaborated a Self-Assessment Report, presenting
the ETH Board’s view on each of these Terms of Reference. As the performance mandate requires,the Self-Assessment Report shall also supply bibliometric data that it is not possible to collectannually. Therefore, the Self-Assessment Report of the ETH Board is structured as follows:–– The Introduction presents an analysis of current strengths as well as future opportunities
and challenges which aims at systematizing, on a comprehensive level, important aspects
regarding the mid- to longer-term development perspectives for the ETH Domain andthe individual institutions, as set out below with regard to the individual Terms of Reference of the evaluation mandate.
–– The main part of the present report (chapters A-D), answers each term of the Terms ofReference (ToR) separately (following the structure of the ToR, subdivided in sections A.1-D.2).
Each section is preceded by an assessment statement of the ETH Board, presenting assets
as well as challenges and opportunities with regard to the particular question(s) raised.
Following the assessment statement, the section discusses the position put forward in thestatement and presents the evidence for the view expressed by the ETH Board.
–– Chapter E summarizes the bibliometric analysis that has been executedin the context of the present intermediate evaluation. For the reporting on the fulfillmentof the performance mandate, the ETH Board suggests referring to the Annual Reports on
the ETH Domain, and in particular to the “insight” section of the 2013 Annual Report, whichis reproduced as an appendix to the present Self-Assessment Report, as well as to theIntermediate Evaluation 2015

Self-Assessment Report of the ETH Board

11

Introduction

corresponding section of the 2014 Annual Report, which will be submitted to the expert
committee after its adoption by the ETH Board on March 5, 2015.
–– Chapter F presents the statement of the ETH Board on the follow-up of the experts’recommendations of the 2010 intermediate evaluation and the Executive Summary of theETH Board’s Strategic Planning 2017-2020 for the ETH Domain. The Strategic Planning is being
elaborated simultaneously with the Self-Assessment Report and represents an important
additional source of information for the experts’ evaluation.

Perspectives of the ETH Domain
As mentioned above, the Terms of Reference (ToR) seek not only to evaluate the ETH Domain’s
role in higher education policy and economic and innovation policy in Switzerland. They
also raise the question as to how the ETH Domain can and will develop in light of the changes
to be implemented in the Swiss political framework, but also with regard to the developmentof the global environment.
In the present report, the ETH Board summarizes its answers to each of the ToR (chapters
A-D below). In the context of and with reference to these ToR, the following chapter provides
a comprehensive view of the issues most relevant for the development of the ETH Domain
and its institutions in the medium and longer term, by addressing the core current strengths
and weaknesses as well as the primary opportunities and challenges/threats for the futureof the ETH Domain.
The elaboration processes of the present Self-Assessment Report and the ETH Domain’s
Strategic Planning for 2017-2020 run concurrently. In the Strategic Planning, the ETH Board
presents its vision for the development of the ETH Domain. It addresses the framework conditions and the resources the ETH Domain requires if, within the framework of the mission
assigned to the ETH Domain by the Confederation, it is to fulfill the ambition laid down in thevision statement. The vision statement and the corresponding outlook formulated in theStrategic Planning are therefore part of the background upon which the following assessmentof strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and challenges/threats is produced.
In the Strategic Planning 2017-2020, the ETH Board has formulated the following visionstatement: “As a driving force for innovation, the ETH Domain wishes to strengthen Switzerland's long-term competitiveness through excellence in research, teaching and knowledge andtechnology transfer, and to contribute to the development of society. Acting as a beacon, it willseek to assume its share of global responsibility for tackling urgent social challenges, for improving quality of life and for the long-term preservation of the resources our lives depend on.”1

Strengths
The following characteristics represent particular strengths of the ETH Domain and its institutions:–– Unique features: The ETH Domain is characterized by powerful unique features (Alleinstellungsmerkmale), allowing a world-class positioning of all six institutions while maintaining
distinct profiles. The domain structure has had a positive impact on the institutions’ fundamental interdisciplinary orientation and allows the ETH Domain to perform fundamental
research at the highest possible level and application-oriented research driven by thedemands of industry and society, as well as to provide world-class teaching based on the
research performed. The unique features of the ETH Domain are the following:
1		See chapter F.2 below for the Executive Summary of the Strategic Planning 2017-2020.

12

Intermediate Evaluation 2015

Self-Assessment Report of the ETH Board

Introduction–– The combination of exact, natural and engineering sciences and their association
with social science and humanities (including economics): The ETH Domain is the only
actor in Switzerland capable of offering such a wide range of specialization with thecorresponding research and teaching activities. The resulting interdisciplinary networkof competencies is key for the ETH Domain’s capacity to provide solutions – in its areasof research – to the complex social, political and economic challenges of our time.
–– The complementary relationship between the two Federal Institutes of Technology andthe four Research Institutes: The complementary character of the ETH Domain institutions and their areas of specialization yields powerful internal synergies, these being animportant part of the ETH Domain’s strong current and future position. While the twoFederal Institutes of Technology, i.e. ETH Zurich and EPFL, are engaged in teaching basedon the world-class (and mostly fundamental) research they perform, as well as inintense Knowledge and Technology Transfer (KTT) activities, the four Research Institutes,
i.e. the PSI, WSL, Empa and Eawag, specialize in top-level thematic research as well
as applied research in their focal areas, and in technology development. Together, thesix institutions cover the entire value-added chain from basic research and teaching
to applications of new knowledge.
–– The internationally renowned research infrastructures of national importance hosted
by the ETH Domain institutions: The portfolio of the major research facilities in the
ETH Domain is of exceptional importance to the innovative, solution-related advancement of cutting-edge research. Many of its highest-standard and state-of-the-art(large-scale) research infrastructures are operated as user labs, allowing researchers from
Switzerland and abroad to use this unique infrastructure, which is made accessibleby the Confederation through the ETH Domain institutions (→ for further informationon these unique features, see Appendix 1).
–– Innovation ecosystem: Together, the six institutions of the ETH Domain are able to offer agenuine innovation ecosystem. This covers the entire range of activities from education andscience-based training of future specialists to intensive collaboration with industry partners,
political authorities and the public administration. It is by offering such an innovation
ecosystem that the ETH Domain delivers its most important contributions to the Swiss economy
and Swiss society (→ see parts A.1 and A.2 for details).
–– Attractiveness: Thanks to the high degree of autonomy the institutions enjoy, the attractive
work conditions they are able to offer and the general support for the globally oriented
scientific research and development that has characterized Switzerland up to now, theinstitutions of the ETH Domain are capable of attracting the best researchers and (young)academics worldwide, irrespective of their origin, gender or age. This has allowed theinstitutions of the ETH Domain and their researchers to develop an outstanding global competitiveness – as measured, for instance, by the ETH Domain’s success in obtaining alarge number of the prestigious grants of the European Research Council (ERC grants). The
institutions thereby contribute to the overall strengthening and development of the Swiss
higher education system (→ see parts B.1., B.3, and C.3 for details).
–– Trendsetter role: In many fields, the ETH Domain institutions have seized the opportunity toplay a trendsetter role. This applies to topics that are investigated before they become acentral focus of politics and society as well as within the scientific community (e.g. in energy
research). It holds also with regard to organizational or infrastructural aspects throughwhich the institutions of the ETH Domain contribute to shaping the academic landscape ofthe future within and outside Switzerland (e.g. in the development and training of young
academics, teaching, or large-scale research infrastructures). This applies also to theinstitutions’ activities in the field of KTT – as can be seen, for instance, in the best practices
developed by the ETH Domain institutions in the area of KTT (e.g. with regard to the successful

Intermediate Evaluation 2015

Self-Assessment Report of the ETH Board

13

Introduction

positioning of the ETH Domain spin-offs, their above-average survival rate, the many
prizes they are awarded, and their attractiveness as highly sought-after acquisition targets
for big corporates [→ see parts A.1, A.3, B.2 and C.2 for details]).
–– Sustainable growth: The growth of the ETH Domain institutions is a clear answer to theneeds of Switzerland in terms of graduates, professionals and leaders in science and technology. Access to both ETH Zurich and EPFL is granted to Swiss students – having obtained
the Matura school-leaving qualification – on the one hand, while on the other hand
the increase in the number of foreign candidates is controlled by the institutions throughthe current legal framework. In this sense, growth can represent a way of responding to thedemands of the dynamic and globally oriented environment within which the institutionsof the ETH Domain evolve. The ETH Board must therefore constantly pay attention to thegovernance of the ETH Domain so that it allows the institutions to grasp opportunities for
growth while also exerting an adequate degree of strategic control and effectively assessing
the risks of the institutions’ corresponding activities (→ see parts C.1 and C.2 for details).
–– Collaboration within academia: The ETH Domain institutions have engaged in intensive
collaboration with partners not only from industry but particularly from other academic
institutions within and outside the ETH Domain (in particular universities, but also Universities of Applied Sciences, in Switzerland and worldwide). The (large-scale) research
infrastructures hosted by the ETH Domain institutions, many of them unique in Switzerland,
represent a particular asset in this regard. These infrastructures, however, not only attractscientists from public and private research institutions but act also as a driver for innovation and the generation of specialized knowledge. The fact that the ETH Domain institutions
have acquired a strong reputation as attractive cooperation partners for excellent scholars
worldwide increases the benefit they can offer to collaboration partners in Switzerland(→ see parts B.2, C.3, C.4, C.5 and D.1 for details).
–– Collaboration with the private sector: The ETH Domain institutions have been able toengage in fruitful and trustful relationships with actors from the private sector. This has
not only enabled them to attract companies to the campus and to increase their outreachin terms of KTT. They also attract funding and in-kind contributions from these partners,
both with regard to scientific and to infrastructure projects (funding of research activities
and chairs, PPP arrangements in real estate projects). And, most importantly, they canmutually benefit from the exchange between industry and academia, which proves to bevery fruitful for both sides. Encouraged by the Confederation, these third-party funds
have become an important source of income for the ETH Domain and a valuable means ofenhancing the institutions’ capacity to flexibly set research priorities (→ see part B.1 forfurther development).

Weaknesses
The ETH Board identifies the following weaknesses:–– Internal acceptance of professionalization: The institutions of the ETH Domain benefit
from the great commitment of all employees to serving their strategic objectives. Increased
specialization and professionalization in all areas, including the administrative, supportive
and technical services enabling top-level research, also takes place within higher education
and research institutions. However, the value of such enabling work and, in particular,
the level of professionalization achieved are not always sufficiently acknowledged within
the institutions. All their affiliates must adequately value such professionalization and see
it as adding value to their core activities and interests.

14

Intermediate Evaluation 2015

Self-Assessment Report of the ETH Board

Introduction–– Communication: The ETH Board and the ETH Domain institutions are still failing to sufficiently
communicate the role they play for innovation and economy in Switzerland – as well as
their strategic objectives in serving society as a whole – to their stakeholders, the generalpublic and the political actors who determine the framework within which the ETH Domain
institutions operate. Instruments must be used – or, where relevant, developed – forproactively sensitizing public opinion to the importance of the ETH Domain’s role in ensuring
the prosperity of Switzerland and its economy. This will help to create additional awarenessfor the importance of success factors such as openness and international embedding
and will build trust toward the institutions that public funding, from which they benefit,
is effectively used.

Opportunities
The following aspects represent particular opportunities for the ETH Domain, resulting at leastin part from the above-mentioned strengths and the current successful positioning of theETH Domain institutions:–– Autonomy: Rooted in the Federal Act on Federal Institutes of Technolgy (FIT or ETH Act)2, theautonomy granted to the institutions of the ETH Domain – which entails the freedom toallocate their resources independently – is fundamental to the definition and implementationof new strategic projects which will be relevant tomorrow for the ETH Domain and for
Switzerland as an academic and economic focal point in Europe. Autonomy, in this regard,
entails the freedom to explore novel and innovative scientific fields. Their capacity to act
autonomously in a strategic and entrepreneurial spirit is clearly a strength of the ETH Domain’s
institutions and must be preserved for the future (→ see part B.1 for further development).
–– Framework conditions: Many of the ETH Domain’s opportunities, but also the challenges
with which the institutions will be confronted, are not specific to these institutions
but affect all higher education and research institutions in Switzerland. All actors in higher
education and research in Switzerland must therefore make a joint effort to defend andsecure the favorable framework conditions, such as the current extent of autonomy,
from which research, science, and innovation benefit. Thanks to these excellent framework
conditions, the institutions of the ETH Domain and the ETH Board are in a position tofurther grasp the competitive advantage these conditions confer, in particular in comparison
with both European and non-European countries. This competitive advantage results,
for instance, from Switzerland’s present economic situation and from its stable legal andpolitical environment (→ see part B.1 and C.3 for details).
–– Role of the ETH Domain in biomedical research and technology: Translational medical researchis set to represent an increasingly important part of medicine as a whole this century.
With their world-leading research infrastructures and the associated experience, and with
their powerful partnerships with (university) clinics both at Zurich (as well as Basel) and
Lausanne/Geneva, the institutions of the ETH Domain have the capacity to develop andsupport innovative medical technology and to educate and train research-oriented medical
scientists. They are thus justified in their ambition to play a major role in the future
development of medicine, biomedical research, medical technology and the healthcare
system in Switzerland. As many of these developments are determined by political decisions
on various levels, the ETH Board must continue to demonstrate the added value that is
generated by an increasing involvement of the ETH Domain institutions in the medical field(→ see parts D.1 and D.2 for details).

2		See SR 414.110, http://www.admin.ch/opc/de/classified-compilation/19910256/index.html.

Intermediate Evaluation 2015

Self-Assessment Report of the ETH Board

15

Introduction

Challenges and Threats
The following aspects represent particular challenges with which the ETH Board, as well as theindividual institutions of the ETH Domain, will be confronted in the near future.
–– HEdA governance: Under the new governance of the Higher Education Funding and
Coordination Act (HEdA)3, taking effect as of January 1, 2015, the working relationships with
the Federal Council and the Federal Administration will become all the more important.
It will be essential for the entire ETH Domain that the ETH Board interacts fruitfully with themember of the Federal Council that represents the Confederation – including the ETH Domain– in the Conference, as well as with the other full members of the Conference. The aim must
not only be to ensure that the ETH Domain’s interests are taken into account in the decisions
taken within the HEdA governing bodies, but also to offer the corresponding bodies theopportunity to benefit from insight and expertise available within the ETH Domain. Particularattention must also be paid, in the context of the new HEdA governance, to increasing
requirements for coordination among the institutions and to maintaining distinct profiles
between universities and Universities of Applied Science (→ see part B.1 and C.4 for further
development).
–– Access to international networks and openness: Internationality and openness represent
core success factors of the Swiss academic system and are realized prominently within the
ETH Domain. An important element of the world-class positioning achieved by the
ETH Domain institutions is that they are able to recruit the best researchers worldwide.
As a scientific location, Switzerland has always been characterized by a culture of openness
and accessibility, enabling scientists from Switzerland, in turn, to gain work experiences
abroad, to compete in the international academic environment, and to participate ininternational networks, which are of increasing academic importance. This is why there will
always be a tense relationship between the institutions’ fundamental international
orientation and the assignment of roles and tasks on the national level. At present, however,there are uncertainties as to whether this culture of openness – and hence the links tointernational (and especially European) research collaboration initiatives as well as the attractiveness of Switzerland for top-level scientists from around the globe – can be maintained at the current level. This seriously affects the outlook for the country and its scientificcommunity. Therefore, the ETH Board and the institutions must seek all the more to sensitize
the population and the authorities to the value of openness and, in particular, to the
crucial importance of Switzerland’s full participation in the Horizon 2020 framework programof the European Union. Again, this represents a field in which all actors involved mustjoin forces in order to defend Switzerland’s scientific and economic interests (→ see parts
B.1 and C.5 for further development).
–– Student numbers and quality of students: Although demographic trends currently point toslower growth in the ETH Domain institutions, in particular the two Federal Institutes ofTechnology, growth in student numbers and the quality of the students remain a challenge
to be carefully addressed. The recent decision of the Swiss High Court regarding the implementation of the Lisbon Agreement4 has raised the question as to whether the ETH Domain
institutions need additional legal instruments allowing them to control student numbers
at bachelor entry level. Having decided to propose a corresponding amendment of the ETH
Act to Parliament in the context of the next ERI Message, the ETH Board will have to prepare
for the necessary political debate and the potential implementation of the new legal
provisions. The main purpose of this measure will be to ensure that the two Federal Institutes

3		See SR 414.20, http://www.admin.ch/opc/fr/classified-compilation/20070429/index.html.
4		See the Convention on the Recognition of Qualifications concerning Higher Education in the European Region:

http://coventions.coe.int/Treaty/en/Treaties/Html/165.htm.

16Intermediate Evaluation 2015

Self-Assessment Report of the ETH Board

Introductionof Technology remain in a position to select the best foreign students, which represents
an important aspect of their ambition to be among the world’s leading universities. With
regard to the quality of the students, and in particular concerning their competencies in
the MINT disciplines (mainly mathematics) at bachelor entry level, attention must also
be directed towards Swiss students. The two Federal Institutes of Technology have set up
instruments helping prospective students to assess their level of competence on a voluntarybasis and to choose from a number of supportive offers (including online tools and MOOCs5)
before or during their first year of study. Nevertheless, further efforts will also need to be
deployed to ensure that the Matura school-leaving qualification will continue to guaranteethat students have a solid grounding in mathematics and other MINT disciplines, allowing
them to succeed in a competitive environment such as the two Federal Institutes ofTechnology. This is all the more important in the context of the current joint efforts, which
the ETH Domain fully endorses and supports, to tackle the lack of qualified MINT personnel(Fachkräftemangel) in Switzerland (→ see part C.2 for further development).
–– Maintaining favorable framework conditions: In order to sustain and defend the favorable
framework conditions from which the ETH Domain institutions and the Swiss higher education and research system benefit, the ETH Board will emphasize the crucial importance of
the institutions’ autonomy (academic and financial) as one of their key success factors
and will play an active role in the corresponding political debates. On the other hand, it mustensure that the institutions act upon solid principles of good governance. This will be of
key relevance in order to avoid increasing regulation of matters concerning the ETH Domain
and the scientific community as a whole. Similarly, the good working relationship that
the ETH Board and the ETH Domain institutions enjoy with their owner – the Federal Council,
Federal Parliament and Federal Administration – must be maintained and further
cultivated (→ see part B.1 and C.3 for further development).
–– Lack of predictability: The fast-moving dynamic of the sciences and of the (scientific)
environment in which higher education and research institutions evolve, as well as changing
demands from society and politics, make it inherently difficult to project and thus strategically orient the focal points of the institutions’ development on a mid-term view. The ETH
Board and the institutions must therefore ensure that their strategic planning and strategic
controlling instruments create the necessary freedom with regard to the unpredictability
by which science is inherently characterized (→ see part A.2 and C.2 for further development).
–– Geographic expansion: Concerning the geographic expansion of the ETH Domain, theETH Board estimates that the current processes of regional expansion at the national andinternational levels – which are limited both in scope and number – present opportunities
that clearly outweigh the risks. However, both the ETH Domain institutions and the ETH
Board must apply consistent strategic criteria for assessing and controlling expansion projects. This will balance the opportunities and risks in a way that ensures the sustainabilityof such expansion endeavors (→ see part C.1 for in-depth development).
–– Reliable basic funding: With regard to the size of the institutions, the ETH Board and theinstitutions will also have to insist on the crucial importance of the reliable and comprehensive basic funding which is granted to the ETH Domain and thereby ensure its continued
existence. This challenge is clearly important in the context of the HEdA governance andthe current efforts to further strengthen the dual education system in Switzerland – efforts
that are fully supported by the ETH Domain (→ see part C.4 for further development).

5		MOOCs = Massive Open Online Courses.

Intermediate Evaluation 2015

Self-Assessment Report of the ETH Board

17

Introduction–– Balance between funding sources: Attention must also be paid to the balance between
funding sources. The appropriate proportion of second- and third-party funding6 mayvary from one institution to the other and from one research field to the other. Boththe institutions and the ETH Board must make sure that a healthy and sustainable balance
between funding sources is maintained. Adverse effects of imbalances may on the one
hand mean that first-party funds are increasingly tied up by insufficient overheads allocatedin second-party funded projects (= indirect costs) or by the need to make up missing
funds in a matching funds scheme. This would clearly impair flexibility for curiosity-driven
fundamental research, which is of prime importance in the promotion of innovation.
On the other hand, such an imbalance would heighten the risk of external actors increasingly
determining the strategy of the institutions through the orientation of the research projects
they fund (→ see part A.2 for further development).
–– Funding from the private sector: Particular attention must be given to potential risks
associated with private funds, for instance with regard to a potential loss of autonomy.
However, both the ETH Board and the institutions are convinced that the existing internal
regulation as well as incentives inherently set by the academic system sufficiently govern
these matters within the ETH Domain. Over the last two decades or longer, the institutionsof the ETH Domain have shown that they can engage in strong interactions with the private
sector while at the same time maintaining true independence and sticking to their genuine
mission as public institutions. To be able to benefit from the opportunities associatedwith this kind of collaboration with private actors, the ETH Board must therefore insist on
maintaining, both internally and externally, the current culture of mutual trust and thecorresponding innovation-friendly regulation of these matters (→ see part B.1 for details).

6		As requested, the ETH Board will not continue to use the term “second-party funds” in the future. However, for the

purposes of the present report, this terminology (i.e. the distinction between “second-party funds” describing
competitively granted funds from governmental bodies, e.g. SNSF or ERC, and “third-party funds”) was maintained,as the corresponding explanations are mainly retrospective and as it allows to link the challenges described in thisreport more easily to the previous evaluation reports on the ETH Domain.

18

Intermediate Evaluation 2015

Self-Assessment Report of the ETH BoardAThe ETH Domain as a Driving Forcefor Innovation
Introduction21
Teaching
21
Research
22
Knowledge and Technology Transfer
22
A.1 Contribution to Innovation Performance
27
Assessment by the ETH Board
27
A.1.1 Background28
A.1.2 Collaboration with Industry
28
A.1.3 Knowledge Transfer to the Public Sector and In-house Innovation
33
A.1.4 Fostering of Entrepreneurship and the Foundation of Spin-offs
35
A.1.5 Exploitation of Research Results
37
A.2 Freedom and Incentives for Curiosity-Driven Research
41
Assessment by the ETH Board
41
A.2.1 Funding for Curiosity-Driven Research at the ETH Domain Institutions42
A.2.2 Funding Agencies
43
A.3 Contribution to the Creation of the Swiss Innovation Park
47
Assessment by the ETH Board
47
A.3.1 Background48
A.3.2 Involvement of the ETH Domain
49

The ETH Domain as a Driving Force for InnovationA
The ETH Domain as a Driving Forcefor Innovation
Introduction
Under the performance mandate assigned to them by the Federal Council, the institutions of
the ETH Domain play a key role in promoting Switzerland’s innovative capacity. The entire
ETH Domain is thoroughly committed to this role, as Switzerland’s innovative capacity is paramount for the country as a whole. The ETH Domain institutions have continuously increased
their KTT activities. Their ambition is to be a key player in strengthening and sustainably fostering
Switzerland’s innovative capacity. However, the institutions’ ability to develop successful KTT
activities depends on and derives immediately from the two additional main roles assigned to
the ETH Domain under its performance mandate, namely teaching and research. These tworoles, closely linked within the ETH Domain institutions, are therefore the most important components of their capacity to act as a driving force for innovation in Switzerland.

Teaching
As specified by the performance mandate, the institutions provide first-class teaching that isof the highest quality on an international comparison. In this way, knowledge and know-how
are transferred into the economy as well as into public administration by the highly qualified
students who leave the ETH Domain institutions every year (“KTT through people”).
–– In 2013, the institutions awarded 2,248 Bachelor’s, 2,663 Master’s and 993 Doctoral degrees.
The detailed figures are shown in the following table:
Figure 1: Degrees awarded according to academic level
2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

Bachelor's

1

118

1,039

1,452

1,656

1,835

1,900

1,988

2,216

2,249

33

1,5

ETH Zurich

1

118

381

838

1,086

1,283

4 527

1,283

1,447

1,447

0

0.0

658

614

570

632

686,7

617

769

802

33

4.3

EPFL

∆ 2012/2013
in %Master's/Diploma

1,723

1,783

1,807

1,949

1,978

1,988

1,898

2,159

2,320

2,663

343

14.8

ETH Zurich

11.9

1,167

1,144

1,203

1,309

1,306

1,317

1,270

1,506

1,650

1,847

197

EPFL

556

639

604

640

672

671

628

653

670

816

146

21.8

MAS/MBA*

435

461

332

471

336

400

283

301

256

346

90

35.2

ETH Zurich

237

233

226

213

213

239

174

203

184

228

44

23.9

EPFL

198

228

106

258

123

161

109

98

72

118

46

63.9

Doctorates

719

774

861

852

832

962

986

1,027

1,095

993**

-102

-9.3

ETH Zurich

471

506

569

572

566

651

650

696

747

579**

–168

–22.5

EPFL

248

268

292

280

266

311

336

331

348

414

66

19.0

*

Continuing education programmes MAS/MBA: Master of Advanced Studies/Master of Business Administration** In the context of the revision of ETH Zurich doctoral regulations, the last doctoral graduation deadline of 2013 was postponed from December 2013

to January 2014. This explains the reduction in completed doctorates to 993 resp. 579; without this change, 1,168 resp. 754 doctoral students
would have graduated in 2013.
Source: Annual Report of the ETH Board on the ETH Domain 2013, p 124.

Intermediate Evaluation 2015

Self-Assessment Report of the ETH Board

21

The ETH Domain as a Driving Force for Innovation–– ETH Domain graduates are able to find qualified employment within a few months.7
This coincides with the high demand in Swiss industry for specialists trained within the
ETH Domain.
–– Many of the top management positions in industry are occupied by alumni of ETH Zurich and
EPFL or by people closely linked to one of the ETH Domain institutions.8 For instance, inmany of the SMI companies (incl. ABB, Sika, Lonza, SwissRe, Nestlé, Clariant, Swisscom, Rocheand Novartis), one or more top executives or directors are associated with the ETH Domain.
–– All ETH Domain institutions offer a wide range of practice-oriented programs in the fieldof academic continuing education. Thus, they provide valuable opportunities for life-longlearning for practitioners in charge of promoting innovation within industry and societyor responsible for the commercialization of scientific findings.

Research
As shown by academic indicators (e.g. rankings, bibliometric analyses9) and by the regular
evaluations of individual institutions and departments, the ETH Domain institutions perform(fundamental) research on a world-class level. This capacity is essential for the ETH Domain’s
contribution to Switzerland’s innovativeness, as fundamental research has always been
the most powerful source of groundbreaking innovation and is therefore crucial for fostering
the country’s innovative capacity in the long term. This concerns at least three levels:–– Innovation can result directly from scientific findings and from the methods explored inresearch, which lead to applications inside and outside the scientific realm.
–– Innovation results also from the process of designing, planning and implementing researchendeavors. In particular, the realization of complex and/or large research infrastructures
fosters innovation, as it requires that solutions be developed that can be successfully installed
and operated.
–– The transfer of staff and graduates, experienced in research, from the ETH Domain into theprivate and public sector acts an important driver for innovation, too.

Knowledge and Technology Transfer
In order to present a comprehensive picture of the ETH Domain institutions’ contribution
to innovation in Switzerland, it is important to adopt a broad concept of KTT. Most institutions
produce knowledge about public goods. Such knowledge cannot be commercialized directly,
but represents important background information for public and private actors in Switzerland.
It thereby indirectly supports economic welfare and directly benefits society as a whole. The
avalanche forecasts by WSL are a typical example: In mountainous regions, it is essential thatavalanche hazard information reaches as many people as possible (both public and private

7		See, for instance, the graduate survey of the Federal Statistical Office (FSO), http://www.bfs.admin.ch/bfs/portal/de/index/

themen/15/06/data/blank/05.html#parsys_13494 (last accessed: November 24, 2014) or the brochure “MINT-Fachkräfte
auf dem Arbeitsmarkt”, Federal Statistical Office 2013 (http://www.bfs.admin.ch/bfs/portal/de/index/themen/15/22/publ.
html?publicationID=5018; last accessed: November 24, 2014). See also the article “Ist die Volluniversität überholt?”,
Neue Zürcher Zeitung, September 11, 2013 (http://www.nzz.ch/aktuell/startseite/ist-die-volluniversitaet-ueberholt-1.18147876: last accessed: November 24, 2014).
8		See, for instance, Umbach-Daniel, Anja (2008): Ingenieure im Top-Management der Schweizer Wirtschaft – Präsenz inGeschäftsleitungen und Verwaltungsräten. Karrieren und Karrierechancen, Rütter + Partner, im Auftrag von IngCH
Engineers Shape our Future und dem ETH-Rat.
9		See chapter E for the bibliometric analysis executed as part of the present intermediate evaluation.

22

Intermediate Evaluation 2015

Self-Assessment Report of the ETH Board

The ETH Domain as a Driving Force for Innovation

actors). Therefore, selling this information on a market is not appropriate. While traditional KTT
concepts may not include such aspects, it is suggested that the present evaluation should
work with an extended view of KTT, including knowledge transfer to public and private actors
about public goods as well as knowledge and technology transfer to companies.
In general terms, the ETH Domain institutions’ involvement in the promotion of KTT in thehigher education area can be summarized as follows:–– The institutions of the ETH Domain have been spearheading KTT at the Swiss universities
and are acting as role models and as a reference for best practice, both on a national andan international level.
–– Representatives of the ETH Domain institutions share their know-how and expertise ingovernmental bodies such as the “KTT-Support”10 section of the Commission for Technology
and Innovation (CTI) where, for instance, they are co-coaching National Thematic Networks.
–– Representatives of the ETH Domain are also frequently founders, initiators or key academic
partners in private initiatives such as the Venture Businessplan Competition, or are to befound in various committees and juries.
–– Representatives of the ETH Domain institutions were key drivers and founders of swiTT,
the Swiss Technology Transfer Association. SwiTT is the national platform for best practiceexchange (through courses, training events, conferences etc.) and maintains the only
national academic licensing opportunity list (swiTTlist)11.
–– Additionally, KTT representatives of the ETH Domain are frequently requested speakers,
experts and consultants to universities and governments around the globe.

10		See http://www.kti.admin.ch/netzwerke/00194/index.html?lang=de (last accessed: November 24, 2014).
11		See http://www.switt.ch/www/adminall2/index.php?id=89825 (last accessed: November 24, 2014).

Intermediate Evaluation 2015

Self-Assessment Report of the ETH Board

23

A.1
Contribution to Innovation
Performance“To what extent do the ETH Domain
institutions contribute to innovation
performance in Switzerland and toknowledge and technology transfer
to Swiss industry and society? Where
can improvements be made?”Contribution to Innovation Performance

A.1 Contribution to Innovation Performance
Assessment by the ETH Board
AssetsIn Switzerland, the ETH Domain offers a unique innovation ecosystem covering all
key stages, including education and science-based training of future specialists, high-level
fundamental research, continuing education, implementation of technologies anddiscoveries in new applications, research collaborations with industry partners, and thecreation of spin-offs.
As most groundbreaking innovations are rooted in discoveries generated throughfundamental research and as they often involve interacting disciplines, the ETH Board isconvinced that

“To what extent do the ETH
Domain institutions contributeto innovation performance in
Switzerland and to knowledge
and technology transfer to
Swiss industry and society?
Where can improvements be
made?”––the core contribution of the ETH Domain institutions to innovation in Switzerland, butalso worldwide, lies in their excellent performance in terms of research and teaching;––this performance track record forms the basis for any transfer of knowledge, know-how
and innovation into the economy (in particular industry) and society at large;––the institutions of the ETH Domain effectively promote innovation by internalizing andfostering a comprehensive entrepreneurial spirit in education and research;––the institutions of the ETH Domain have set up numerous instruments aimed at linking
research and innovation in an effective way.
Challenges and Opportunities
Fundamental research is the core driver of innovation. Accordingly, innovation is generated
through the advancement of knowledge and skills over longer time periods. Therefore,
it is inherently difficult to measure the direct impact of many knowledge and technology
transfer activities. This basic fact about the relationship between fundamental researchand innovation produces challenges on five levels:a) It makes it more difficult to assess and attribute the impact of contributions by individuals
or particular institutions. Nevertheless, the ETH Board acknowledges the necessity tofurther develop instruments for assessing the ETH Domain’s contributions to innovationin Switzerland, going beyond the instruments usually referred to.12b) The ETH Board must stress the overriding importance of the long-term orientation andthe continuity of research and innovation practiced within the ETH Domain. Currently,
however, application-oriented research often seems to be more highly rated by the public
for its more immediate results. As application- and short-term-oriented researchmostly favor incremental innovation, long-term orientation and continuity of fundamental research must thus be defended as necessary prerequisites for higher education andresearch institutions to be able to contribute effectively to innovation – and specificallyradical innovation – in the long run. This means that the institutions must be able
to allocate funds to research areas or research projects with substantial failure risks anduncertain prospects of success: such “high-risk” research often yields the most groundbreaking innovative results.

12		As shown below (see e.g. fig. 2), contributions to innovation are usually measured through the number of start-ups and		spin-offs (and corresponding jobs) created, intellectual property rights (related to inventions [patents], software, etc.)
and resulting licenses, as well as collaboration with industry or public actors.

Intermediate Evaluation 2015

Self-Assessment Report of the ETH-Board

27

Contribution to Innovation Performancec) Collaboration between the ETH Domain institutions and private companies can contributeto promoting Switzerland’s innovative capacity. However, such collaboration is increasingly
subject to critical scrutiny. The ETH Board must therefore proactively communicate therules and regulations governing such collaboration and the transparency that is achievedin the ETH Domain. It must aim to make the public take a more positive view of collaboration with private companies.
d) The ETH Domain institutions must be able to retain their lead in the future development
of best practices in the field of KTT.
e) Currently, the institutions of the ETH Domain experience a funding gap between the
Swiss National Science Foundation (SNSF) and the CTI. Thus, some projects in the
pre-competitive phase lack adequate funding from the funding agencies, although new
funding instruments (such as precoR, which was launched on the initiative of Empa,
among others) have been established.

A.1.1		 Background
With regard to the classic KTT activities, all ETH Domain institutions have set up local tech transfer
offices (TTO). Although they are organized differently according to the institutions’ specificrequirements, they all provide professional legal services regarding the setup of project-based
collaborations with industrial partners. Furthermore, they drive the process of exploiting theinstitutions’ intellectual property (technology assessment and protection, technology marketing,licensing and sale, support of spin-offs). They are well connected among each other andfrequently meet to exchange information.
It is important to note that the ETH Domain institutions’ overall KTT philosophy is that KTT
is not profit oriented, but aims at making as many technologies as possible available for the
Swiss economy and for society at large. Although commercial and financial aspects are considered,maximization of the socio-economic benefit, contributions to the strength of the economy
in Switzerland and worldwide, and continuous improvement in the quality of life are far more
important objectives. Therefore, the institutions have launched various initiatives to set up
a seamless innovation value chain which allows for an efficient and effective KTT, both from theindividual institutions and in collaboration with each other. Activities can be sub-divided in
the fields of collaboration with industry (A.1.2), knowledge transfer to the public sector and inhouse innovation (A.1.3), fostering of entrepreneurship and the foundation of spin-offs (A.1.4),
and the exploitation of research results (A.1.5). In what follows, each of these fields is addressed
separately. To give an overview of the activities and initiatives realized at the individual institutions, the most important examples have been assembled for each of these fields.

A.1.2		 Collaboration with Industry
Collaboration with business, and in particular with industry, represents an important aspectof KTT at all institutions of the ETH Domain. On the level of the individual institutions, theactivities and achievements described below are considered to be most relevant. Table 1a and 1bin Appendix 2 below present a success story from each institution, illustrating the particular
aspects of collaboration with industry mentioned in this chapter.

28

Intermediate Evaluation 2015

Self-Assessment Report of the ETH-Board

Contribution to Innovation Performance

As a general overview, the following figure shows that–– between 125 and 200 patents are filed every year thanks to the research performed within
the ETH Domain institutions. The corresponding know-how is thus transferred into economy;–– the Research Institutes play an important role with regard to the licenses granted every year
(in many cases spin-offs). These licenses contribute in large part to the commercializationof newly generated knowledge.
Figure 2: Knowledge and technology transfer activities of the ETH Domain institutions as reflected in patents (priority
applications only) and licenses (including technology transfer agreements as well as newly founded companies (spin-offs)
2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

Patents

166

154

159

142

125

155

128

147

195

193

ETH Zurich

85

77

84

79

64

78

63

72

87

103

EPFL

43

44

36

36

40

44

47

52

75

66

Research institutes

38

33

39

27

21

33

18

23

33

24

Licences

111

117

152

218

178

176

178

194

230

223

ETH Zurich

25

23

24

42

48

37

39

45

35

38

EPFL

42

46

56

64

29

47

45

50

31

41

Research institutes

44

48

72

112

101

92

94

99

164

144

Spin-offs

25

19

28

33

46

45

38

40

38

43

ETH Zurich

12

9

16

21

23

24

20

22

22

24

EPFL

8

5

8

12

18

20

14

15

12

12

Research institutes

5

5

4

0

5

1

4

3

4

7

Source: Annual Report 2013, p. 125.

–– In addition, representatives of the ETH Domain frequently participate in bodies such asadvisory boards, boards of directors, etc. both in the private and in the public sector, which
represents an important aspect of networking and know-how transfer.
On the level of their additional priorities and activities deployed in the field of KTT, the institutions highlight the following aspects and non-exhaustive examples:
ETH Zurich
ETH Zurich has established a seamless line of activities and platforms to interact with industry
on a frequent basis, to exchange views and ideas, to learn about latest trends and to eventuallyfind common interests to enter into seed projects, extensive research collaborations or strategic
partnerships. Central entities were put in place to help to make the wealth of know-how
and technologies produced within ETH Zurich available to its industrial partners in an efficientand effective way. In particular, this role is assumed by ETH transfer, the TTO of ETH Zurich,
the Industry Relations Group as the main entrance for industry, and the ETH Zurich Foundation.
They encourage exchange with individual companies and industry associations, and performor provide support in the activities mentioned below.
–– Every year, ETH Zurich invites the Swiss Industry to the ETH Industry Day to present anddiscuss research fields and newest technologies from the institution’s 16 departments. Morethan 300 persons attend this half-day event on campus, structured around short presentations
across ETH Zurich’s research activities, discussion panels, and informal meetings.
–– The university maintains strategic partnerships with industry in a large range of areas,
including world food supply, risk management, sustainable construction, integrative risk
research, information security, electrical energy or manufacturing across scales. Suchpartnerships quicken the process of establishing strategic research areas through endowed

Intermediate Evaluation 2015

Self-Assessment Report of the ETH-Board

29

Contribution to Innovation Performance

professorships and interdisciplinary research projects and allow for open discussion incommon Partnership Councils on new visions and approaches.
–– ETH Zurich also contributes to and maintains strong ties with the “younger” players of
the industry, i.e. its spin-offs. The institution has set up a community network with its morethan 350 spin-offs (of which more than 110 founded in the last 5 years), to meet andexchange experiences, to help the younger generation on their journey and keep a close
contact with ETH Zurich.
–– In the last two years (2012-2013), ETH Zurich has entered more than 1,400 new formal
research agreements with third parties – whereof more than 500 with Swiss companies –with a total volume of more than 300 MCHF.
–– In the same time, the tech transfer office has handled more than 4,400 new contracts
between ETH Zurich and third parties.
–– Interactions between ETH researchers and industry have increased by 40 % over the past
five years, or nearly quadrupled over the past ten years.
–– As ETH Zurich has an international outreach, the institution maintains collaborations withcompanies across the planet, making sure that it has access to latest developments andneeds in industry from around the globe.
While intensifying the interaction with industry, ETH Zurich has set up clear and transparent
regulations and processes to ensure independence and compliance. The institution and its
faculty make sure that projects are scientifically or technically relevant, the results can be freely
used afterwards for further research and educational purposes, publication rights are granted
to ETH Zurich, a reasonable agreement with regard to ownership of IP and rights for commercial
use can be found (including dequate financial compensation) and the freedom with regard to
future collaborations with other third parties is guaranteed.
Another prominent example of a collaborative partnership between ETH Zurich and industry
is the Binnig and Rohrer Nanotechnology Center (BRNC) in Rüschlikon. Through this joint investment with IBM, among the biggest public-private partnerships of their kind in Switzerland,a clean-room laboratory was built, enabling premier research at an international level.
As an example of successful collaboration with industry, ETH Zurich presents the “Lablet”
concept in Table 1a, Appendix 2, p. 165.

EPFL
Over the past five years (2009-2013), EPFL has collaborated primarily with Swiss companies,
many of which are small and medium enterprises (SME). For instance,–– 70 % of the contracts dealt with by the TTO of EPFL had a Swiss company as a principal partner(100 % = 817 contracts);–– 74 % of the monetary value represented by these contracts is raised in contracts with a
Swiss company as a principal partner (100 % = 162 MCHF);–– 41 % of these contracts with Swiss companies are concluded with SMEs and start-ups withfewer than 250 employees.
To foster collaboration with partners from industry, EPFL offers a variety of collaborationagreements, which range from research-specific contracts to general frameworks, up to theassociation of Research and Development (R&D) teams on the EPFL campus. In order to facilitate
the conclusion of cooperation agreements with industrial partners, standard agreements are
13		See http://tto.epfl.ch/collaboration_with_the_economy (last accessed: November 24, 2014).

30

Intermediate Evaluation 2015

Self-Assessment Report of the ETH Board

Contribution to Innovation Performance

published online (with summaries for non-legal persons).13 Representatives of EPFL, in particular
its Vice-president for Innovation and Technology Transfer (VIPV), proactively meet with oversixty national and international companies per year in order to identify their needs and thepotential for collaboration.
With regard to the licenses granted by EPFL to commercial companies between 2009 and2013, the involvement of Swiss companies was as follows:–– 73 % of the licenses were attributed to Swiss companies (100 % = 176);–– 80 % of the licenses attributed to Swiss companies were attributed to SMEs or start-ups
with fewer than 250 employees.
As an example of successful collaboration with industry, EPFL presents its “Innovation Park”
in Table 1a, Appendix 2, p. 165.

PSI
Thanks to its highly sought-after role as a user lab facilitator, the PSI engages in a particularly
intensive collaboration with industry.14 In order to support and promote such collaboration,
the PSI TTO acts as link between a potentially interested company with a particular technicalor scientific problem and the corresponding experts at the PSI. In the context of the creationand implementation of the PARK innovAARE concept15, the TTO’s strategic focus was shifted towards
an internal business development unit supporting the settlement of industrial partners in theimmediate vicinity of the PSI. Compared to former collaborations, this ongoing process generates
a new level of linkage between the PSI and industry, particularly if both partners share common
interests in selected innovation focal points and if the activities are highly complementary.
The following points summarize important aspects of cooperation between industrial partners
and the PSI:–– PSI has a proven record in attracting a large amount of direct industry use of its large-scale
research facilities (>10 % vs. an international average of 5-7 % in the case of synchrotrons).16–– Cooperation takes the form of licensing and technology transfer, R&D services, researchcontracts, or joint research cooperation projects.
–– A large number of highly trained scientific and technical staff leave the PSI for Swiss industry
every year.
–– The PSI strives to make new findings from in-house development of technologies ormeasurement methods at the large-scale research facilities accessible to industry, thereby
strengthening the competitiveness of Swiss industrial companies. About 40 patents are
filed every year at the PSI with typically 10-15 initial applications.
The PSI’s collaboration with industry also enables the kind of innovation that derives fromthe very fact that research infrastructures need to be designed, developed and realized:–– During the development phase of new research infrastructures, technological innovations
with considerable market potential are created.
–– A typical example of this kind of cooperation and technology transfer is the development
and production of key components for the PSI’s next large-scale research facility, SwissFEL,
by partnerships with companies in Switzerland such as TEL Mechatronics (Trübbach), MDC
Max Daetwyler AG (Bleienbach), and Ampegon (Turgi).

14		Examples of industry collaborations can be found under www.psi.ch/industry/companies (last accessed: November 24, 2014).
15		See chapter A.3 below.
16		According to the ERID-Watch project, project number 043004, final prospective report, 2009 (see http://cordis.europa.eu/

documents/documentlibrary/125670151EN6.pdf; last accessed: November 24, 2014).

Intermediate Evaluation 2015

Self-Assessment Report of the ETH Board

31

Contribution to Innovation Performance–– Based on in-house PSI developments, the industrial partner takes over responsibility for
manufacturing, assembly and qualification of the respective accelerator structures.
–– This cooperation enables the company to expand its skills in the field of ultra-precision
machining and metrology, to access and establish itself in highly complex markets and topresent its competencies to other research institutions as potential future partners.
As an example of successful collaboration with industry, the PSI presents the start-up story
of “Ampegon” in Table 1b, Appendix 2, p. 166.

Empa
Collaboration with industry has always been a high priority for Empa. This is demonstrated by
the following aspects:–– On average, more than 100 new joint research projects are launched every year.
–– Besides the intensive exchange with industrial partners within research projects, thedevelopment of joint platforms is a key focus for Empa: With NEST, for instance, Empa isdeveloping a research and technology platform for future building technologies supportedby the entire ETH Domain. The project involves leading partners from industry andseveral national and international universities. Construction of this multi-million projectis set to start in late 2014.
–– Switzerland is one of the world’s leading players in coating technology, with 80 % of hardcoatings being produced by Swiss companies. Empa is therefore teaming up with partners
from industry and academia to set up the Coating Competence Center (CCC) on its campus in
Dübendorf.
–– With about 100 events and seminars annually, the Empa Academy at Dübendorf provides
an appealing platform for knowledge dissemination and networking; nearly two thirds ofthe 5,000-plus attendees come from industry.
As an example of successful collaboration with industry, Empa presents the invention of“Clothing that doesn’t absorb odor” in Table 1b, Appendix 2, p. 166.

WSL and Eawag: Focus on public goods
Industry collaboration is at a lower level at WSL and Eawag, as these two institutions mainly
deal with public goods. By its very nature, this provides fewer opportunities for collaboratingclosely with the private sector.
Many collaboration activities of the ETH Domain institutions, in particular WSL and Eawag,
involve partners situated between industry and the public sector. In the case of Eawag, forexample, collaboration with operators of wastewater treatment plants, including the related
associations and planners involved, represents such a type of interaction at the interface
between industry and public authorities. It entails innovation with direct practical relevance,
although such innovation has limited potential for commercialization.
As the example of Eawag shows, foundations which, in a particular field, fund thedevelopment of new inventions from research to practical application are another important
type of private-sector collaboration partners.
As successful examples of collaboration with industry on public goods and involving afoundation, WSL and Eawag, respectively, present the “NESSy” project and the “toilet fordeveloping countries” case in Table 1b, Appendix 2, p. 166.

32

Intermediate Evaluation 2015

Self-Assessment Report of the ETH Board

Contribution to Innovation Performance

Competence Centers of the ETH Domain
Some of the competence centers of the ETH Domain (e.g. CCMX, CCEM) have the explicit mandate
to create closer connections between the ETH Domain and the needs of Swiss industry. This
aspect will also be important for the recently established Swiss Competence Centers for Energy
Research (SCCER; these competence centers are not part of the ETH Domain, but benefit froma high involvement of ETH Domain institutions). Involving different research institutions andindustrial partners, the competence centers should improve collaboration of academia withindustry. The funding schemes support (amongst others) pre-competitive research projects witha special emphasis on potential technology transfer to industry. Different forms of networking
events (e.g. CCMX Technology Aperitifs, Novatlantis forums) are conducted to create contacts
between stakeholders and to stimulate potential partnerships. One of the main challenges of
the competence centers is to establish longer-term research platforms rather than individual
projects of fixed duration, especially since start-up financing by the ETH Board will be phasedout by 2016.

A.1.3		 Knowledge Transfer to the Public Sector and In-house Innovation
Due to their particular role and their specific tasks, the institutions of the ETH Domain also
contribute significantly to knowledge transfer to the public sector (federal, cantonal and local
authorities) or to (professional) associations, which can again stimulate innovation, for instancewith regard to practical problems in environmental management. In these cases, innovation
often comes directly from the projects in which the ETH Domain institutions are involved andare thus examples of “in-house innovation”. Given their specific roles, some of the ResearchInstitutes contribute mostly in this way to innovation in Switzerland. They are important partners
for the Federal Offices (e.g. in energy, environment, transportation, public health, etc.), andalso for the cantons. The experienced research staff of the ETH Domain’s Research Institutes also act
as consistent partners for practitioners and stakeholders, providing independent expert opinions.
Examples from WSL and Eawag
In the areas of terrestrial and aquatic environmental research, WSL and Eawag are two of themost important research institutions in Switzerland. Both WSL and Eawag conduct knowledgetransfer activities with a primary focus on public actors. WSL and Eawag’s portfolios in appliedresearch are partly developed in cooperation with federal and cantonal authorities. Cooperation with industry and practice (e.g., municipal utilities) allows WSL and Eawag to develop andpromote innovative environmental technologies.
Examples from WSL include:–– A handbook for the preparation of ski slopes;–– in-house innovation of avalanche forecast procedures and their successful application in
Switzerland and abroad;–– the White Risk e-learning tool to disseminate advanced avalanche-specific knowledge
among all kinds of winter tourists;–– “Merkblätter für die Praxis” (practical factsheets, e.g. about invasive species or minimizing
damage to forest soils with modern harvesting machines);–– in-house improvement of forest inventory methods that are directly implemented in thenational forest inventory used by private and public actors;–– joint projects with the public sector to improve knowledge about the forest/climate changeinteraction.

Intermediate Evaluation 2015

Self-Assessment Report of the ETH Board

33

Contribution to Innovation Performance

The following are examples of Eawag’s key practice-oriented activities:–– A series of reports on micropollutants and assessments of wastewater quality issued by the
Swiss Center for Applied Ecotoxicology (a joint activity of Eawag and EPFL);–– a method for rapid detection of microbes in drinking water developed by Eawag researchers
in a project jointly funded by Eawag and the Federal Office of Public Health (included in the
Swiss Food Compendium in 2012);–– two platforms for stakeholder engagement and outreach hosted by Eawag, jointly fundedby agencies including federal and cantonal offices, professional societies, municipal utilities,
private foundations, and public interest groups: the fisheries advisory service FIBER17 provides information and advice through a variety of formats, including a website, newsletterand public presentations; the discussion platform Water Agenda 2118 provides a venue
for cooperation among various actors in the water sector and engages in projects to support
decision-making in areas such as hydropower and water resources management.
In addition, both institutions are strongly involved in courses offering continuing education forpractitioners. For instance, Eawag’s program of practice-oriented courses (PEAK) includes
courses offered by the Ecotox Center or offered in cooperation with Swiss professional associations for drinking water (SVGW) and wastewater and water protection (VSA).
Specific institutes
Further examples from other ETH Domain institutions for knowledge transfer to the public sector
in which in-house innovation comes into play include:–– KOF Swiss Economic Institute of ETH Zurich is one of Switzerland’s leading economic thinktanks. KOF acts as a mediator between a broader public (government, society) and theresearch community and as a leading platform for economists, especially within Switzerland.
Another major function of the KOF is scientific research for dissemination in academic
and related professional circles via publications and participation in international meetingsand conferences.
–– The Swiss Seismological Service (Schweizerischer Erdbebendienst SED) at ETH Zurich is thefederal agency responsible for monitoring earthquakes in Switzerland and its neighboring
countries and for assessing seismic hazards in Switzerland. When an earthquake occurs,
the SED informs the public, authorities, and the media about the earthquake’s location,
magnitude, and possible consequences. The activities of the SED are integrated in thefederal program for earthquake risk reduction.
–– The NABEL monitoring network (Nationales Beobachtungsnetz für Luftfremdstoffe) is operatedby Empa, mandated by the Federal Office for the Environment (FOEN), which is responsible
for the enforcement of the Ordinance on Air Pollution Control (OAPC). The NABEL databaseenables FOEN to observe trends and to evaluate the success of air pollution measures ona yearly basis. State-of-the-art analytical methods for newly discovered, potentially harmful
trace gases are being employed and developed by Empa experts. These include a quantum
cascade laser-based method for the isotope-specific detection of various species of carbon
dioxide (CO2) as well as other pollutants. Interestingly, the very same technology can also
be used for industrial (leak detection in aerosol cans) and medical purposes (early detectionof stomach cancer).
–– The PSI Bildungszentrum offers a broad selection of education and training courses,
for instance courses on radiation protection for professionals from medicine, industry andpublic authorities, as well as training in the operation of nuclear reactors for staff of the
Swiss nuclear power plants.
17		See www.fischereiberatung.ch (last accessed: November 24, 2014).
18		See www.wa21.ch (last accessed: November 24, 2014).

34

Intermediate Evaluation 2015

Self-Assessment Report of the ETH Board

Contribution to Innovation Performance–– Representatives of all ETH Domain institutions are frequently active as members of expert
groups at the cantonal or federal level.
–– The ETH Domain institutions contribute to the development of codes of practice, for instancein the construction area (SIA codes of practice, etc.)

A.1.4		 Fostering of Entrepreneurship and the Foundation of Spin-offs
The institutions of the ETH Domain have set up various programs to raise the awareness of theirfaculty and employees of the socio-economic value of research results and to stimulate thegeneration of inventions and business ideas. Due to the novel nature of technologies resulting
from fundamental research, the successful transfer of such technologies to existing industrial
players has proven to be particularly challenging.
Therefore, spin-offs represent an increasingly important vehicle for fostering innovation.
Such spin-off companies are founded and developed by scientific talents with an entrepreneurial mindset. In order to stimulate the creation of spin-offs and to support their entrepreneurs
from the very beginning, the ETH Domain institutions offer a comprehensive set of instruments
to identify, foster, promote and mature the entrepreneurial aptitudes of their students andcollaborators. These instruments include–– stimulation programs (e.g. the Spark Award for the best invention of the year at ETH Zurich);–– proof-of-concept funds (e.g. Innogrants at EPFL, Pioneer Fellowship at ETH Zurich, ENABLE
program at EPFL);–– dedicated office and lab space (e.g. ieLabs at ETH Zurich, La Forge at EPFL, glaTec at Empa);
and–– community building (e.g. at ETH Zurich, through the ETH Entrepreneurship Club, the ETHFounders Community, Alumni Homecoming Dinners, etc.).
In terms of examples, Table 2 (Appendix 2) presents the most important instruments thathave been implemented by ETH Domain institutions.

The success of the spin-offs from the ETH Domain institutions can be measured on various levels:–– In a recent study regarding spin-offs of ETH Zurich, it has been shown that 122 responding
companies have generated 2,500 new jobs and have aggregate annual sales of close to600 MCHF.19–– EPFL start-ups have been able to raise more than 800 MCHF in venture capital in recent
years. While the amount has been higher than 100 MCHF in 2012 and 2013, 2014 has been an
all-time record year with more than CHF 220 MCHF, i.e. twice the sum of the previous year,
having been invested in EPFL start-ups.20 EPFL spin-offs have attracted prestigious US funds
both in IT (TypeSafe, Kandou) and in Life Sciences (Anokion, Quartet, Mitokyne, Bicycle).
–– In general, ETH Domain spin-offs attract more than 200 MCHF in funding every year, bothfrom corporate and institutional venture capital funds and, not infrequently, as FDI (e.g. theTata Group’s investment in Flisom). Even US venture capital funds regularly invest in the
ETH Domain spin-offs.

19		These are conservative estimates: for confidentiality reasons, many companies did not disclose their results.
20		See, for instance, http://actu.epfl.ch/news/record-investment-in-epfl-start-ups-2/.

Intermediate Evaluation 2015

Self-Assessment Report of the ETH Board

35

Contribution to Innovation Performance–– Over a rolling five-year period, the ETH Domain spin-offs have close to a 90 % survival rate,
which is far higher than the average survival rate of spin-offs.
–– At an early stage, these spin-offs are frequently awarded prizes, feature in lists of thebest start-up companies, and are portrayed in news media such as the NZZ, Red Herring,
The European Wall Street Journal, CNN, etc. For instance, EPFL had three winners (LESS,
Samantree & Flyability) out of five at the Zurich-based Venture competition in 2014. Also,
the ETH Domain companies represent more than 50 % of the “venture kick” funding
with EPFL (4 MCHF) and ETH Zurich (3.5 MCHF).
–– The spin-offs are increasingly attracting the attention of big corporates as acquisition targets.
In August 2014, the ETH Zurich spin-off Covagen, for example, was acquired by Cilag International GmbH (Janssen/Johnson&Johnson) for more than 200 MCHF. Other recent examples
include, Kooaba (Qualcomm, Jan 2014), Time-Bandwidth Products (JDSU, Dec. ’13/Jan. ’14),
Phocone (Camlin Group, Dec.’13/Mar.’14) or Procedural (ESRI, 2011) for ETH Zurich and Jillion(by DailyMotion) and Aimago (by Noadaq) and Sensima (Monolithic Power) for EPFL.
–– The acquisition of ETH Domain spin-offs may also be seen by non-European corporates
as a means of entering the European market. For such companies, this additionally makes
Switzerland an attractive landing spot for setting up a European head office.
–– Not all the companies are acquired and, although they may grow slowly in some cases,
they reach maturity over time. Nexthink is such an example: it has more than 150 employees
10 years after its foundation. Similarly, Sensirion has grown, since its foundation in 1998,
to as many as almost 600 employees today. Some companies even make it to the stock
exchange or go IPO (e.g. mBlocs).
–– Whether acquired or independent, spin-offs from the ETH Domain usually keep Switzerlandas their home base, generating jobs and revenues, which in turn generate tax income as well.
–– The Research Institutes also have a proven track record of successfully created spin-off
companies. For instance, the companies SwissNeutronics and Dectris have developed frominitiatives at PSI into world market leaders in neutron optical devices and X-ray detectors.
In conclusion, the ETH Domain spin-offs have started to have a noticeable impact on the
Swiss economy and are an important vehicle for making novel technologies available to society.
Widespread spin-off support at the ETH Domain institutions has steadily increased awarenessamong students of the economic value of their research and created an entrepreneurial mindset. This represents an important contribution to innovation in Switzerland.

36Intermediate Evaluation 2015

Self-Assessment Report of the ETH Board

Contribution to Innovation Performance

A.1.5		 Exploitation of Research Results
Exploiting research findings for the creation of economic value is another mission of theETH Domain institutions. It contributes directly to enhancing Switzerland’s innovative capacity.
–– The ETH Domain institutions produce a wealth of know-how, software and technologies
in almost all fields of engineering, natural science and Life Sciences, as well as in the
MedTech domain.
–– The TTOs have set up efficient and effective processes and networks to assess, protect andmarket such intellectual property (IP).
–– As shown above, they handle several hundred invention disclosures and file almost 200
new patents every year21, tapping into a pool of several dozen highly specialized external
national and international patent attorneys to ensure cost efficiency and maximum protection.
–– They maintain professional technology management and CRM systems and use various
channels to market their IP, including direct mailings (TechAlert) and web postings offact sheets, presentations on national and international fairs, technology meetings, etc.
Although the IP statistics as such look impressive, the most important aspect as outlined
above is that the know-how and the technologies generated within the ETH Domain find their
way to industrial application. From the perspective of the ETH Domain, it is therefore of great
importance that the institutions’ scientific work should manifest itself in an impressive wealthof products on the market, both in number and in breadth of application. According to theabove-mentioned broad understanding of KTT, however, it is equally important for the impactof the ETH Domain institutions’ scientific work to be reflected in innovation and resulting
improvements in the public sector, e.g. by increasing the reliability of avalanche prediction.
In such fields, the institutions deal with topics relating to public goods, in which there is nomarket for intellectual property to be commercialized. When measuring the impact andthe success of the ETH Domain in exploiting its research results, such areas must also be taken
into account.

21		See figure 2 for numbers.

Intermediate Evaluation 2015

Self-Assessment Report of the ETH Board

37

A.2
Freedom and Incentives for
Curiosity-Driven Research“Do the ETH Domain institutions havesufficient freedom and incentives
to conduct curiosity-driven research,so that effective bases for future
innovation can be laid? Whichinstruments allow curiosity-driven
research to take place, and which
instruments are still required?”Freedom and Incentives for Curiosity-Driven Research

A.2 Freedom and Incentives for Curiosity-Driven Research
Assessment by the ETH Board
AssetsLong-term oriented fundamental research – curiosity- or discovery-driven by its very
nature – is of crucial importance for promoting and fostering Switzerland’s innovative
capacity. This kind of research is most effectively promoted through the allocationof adequate, stable and freely disposable basic funding. The ETH Board emphasizes that––the ETH Domain institutions generally take a positive view of their liberty to pursue
curiosity-driven research;––for realizing their research strategies, it is of crucial importance that they can autonomously
allocate their global budgets;“Do the ETH Domain institutions have sufficient freedom
and incentives to conduct
curiosity-driven research, sothat effective bases for future
innovation can be laid? Whichinstruments allow curiositydriven research to take place,and which instruments arestill required?”––the overall financing system (basic funding allocated by the owner, second-party
funding22 by the SNSF or EU, third-party funding) is well balanced;––the institutions have set up adequate internal instruments that generate incentives forfocusing on prospective research topics and engaging in long-term oriented and“high-risk” projects. Examples include internal competitive research grants, as well as
structures and incentives for research collaborations within institutions and between them.
Challenges and Opportunities
Despite this generally positive assessment, the ETH Board concludes that three current
challenges must be addressed:a) An increasing need for coordination among institutions can jeopardize quick andflexible implementation of innovative ideas. Researchers must be enabled to collaborate
with the best possible partners worldwide. Furthermore, coordination absorbs resources.
It should therefore be limited to cases in which its added value exceeds the costs.
b) Autonomy to engage in curiosity-driven research means that programmatic research mustnot be imposed on the institutions to the extent that their capacity to develop their freely
chosen and novel research priorities is impaired.
c) Incomplete coverage of overhead costs associated with project and program funds fromthe SNSF and the financial matching required by other funding partners remains problematicfor the institutions, as it forces them to attribute funds from other sources (typically basic
funding) to such projects. Raising the overhead rates in Swiss competitive research funding
would considerably expand the financial possibilities of the institutions when acquiring
competitively funded research projects that typically are inspired by innovative ideas. Suchan increase, however, should not compete with basic funding and impede a potential
increase in these funds.

22		See above, footnote 6.

Intermediate Evaluation 2015

Self-Assessment Report of the ETH-Board

41

Freedom and Incentives for Curiosity-Driven Research

A.2.1		 Funding for Curiosity-Driven Research		 at the ETH Domain Institutions
As groundbreaking discoveries – which lead to innovation – are difficult to project and predict,
it is vital for all research institutions to allow their researchers to freely define their research
topics. As will be outlined in more detail below23, program-oriented research, representing a
top-down approach to setting research priorities, can be a reasonable means to push forward
particular areas in which an urgent need for new solutions exists. However, such top-down
approaches can impair innovation if they absorb resources that would otherwise enable curiositydriven fundamental research, the key driver for groundbreaking innovation in the long term.
Therefore, if science policy intends to promote innovation through the mandate attributed to
the ETH Domain institutions, it is decisive that the three following factors are supported:–– a far-reaching autonomy of the institutions, i.e. the freedom to choose their research
topics independently of the question of whether an immediate impact can be realized –for instance through publications;–– stable and adequate basic funding through global budgets;–– an open-minded attitude supportive of fundamental research that is not only curiositydriven, but also long-term oriented.
In order to promote curiosity-driven research, the ETH Domain institutions have set up particularinternal funding instruments and practices which can be described as follows:
ETH Zurich–– Fundamental elements are stable basic funding as well as generous start-up packages
attributed to the chairs; besides the teaching activities, these also cover the setting-up of
entirely new research ideas which are not yet sufficiently elaborated for application incompetitive funding schemes.
–– Internal competitive programs for the promotion of research set incentives to engage incuriosity-driven research (such as the ETH Zurich Research Grants, ETH Zurich Postdoctoral
Fellowship Program and ETH Zurich Seed Projects).
–– Through its Scientific Equipment Program, ETH Zurich allocates, on a competitive basis,
funds for research infrastructures enabling curiosity-driven research. In addition ETH Zurichprovides an increasing number of state-of-the-art technology platforms which are open
to all ETH researchers.
–– ETH Zurich provides several programs to develop and train young academics which offer
them scientific freedom and responsibility at an early stage in their career (e.g. assistantprofessorships with and without tenure track, ETH Zurich Fellowship Program, Society
in Science – The Branco Weiss Fellowship). These programs are important tools for fostering
curiosity-driven research.
EPFL–– The EPFL strategy is based on giving the EPFL professors adequate equipment either for theirown lab or within user friendly platforms so that they can successfully compete for externalfunding.
–– A generous start-up package and basic funding are provided to give each lab sufficientresearch freedom.

23		See chapter B.1.

42

Intermediate Evaluation 2015

Self-Assessment Report of the ETH Board

Freedom and Incentives for Curiosity-Driven Research–– One engine of curiosity-driven research is EPFL’s tenure track program, which gives
researchers early individual responsibility (and the necessary means) to pursue their ideas.
Research Institutes–– The PSI has initiated a cross-departmental initiative supporting basic research projects
that could not be conducted by a single research department only. In general, the majorityof these multidisciplinary basic-research projects performed at PSI are curiosity-driven.
–– At WSL, innovative research projects in their early stages that cannot be supported throughother channels are selected for support via an internal Open Call once or twice every year.
–– Empa regularly launches internal Research Calls in pre-defined areas. In 2013 a total of
11 projects were funded in the areas of functional surfaces, metamaterials, and multiscalemodelling.
–– At Eawag, a key instrument in this regard is the Discretionary Funding program for internal
projects. Priority is given to projects that demonstrate Eawag’s capacity for transdisciplinary
research, bring its capacities together in a new way, or are directed toward emerging or
novel problems.

A.2.2		 Funding Agencies
A survey conducted in 2013 by the Nordic Institute for Studies in Innovation, Research and
Education (NIFU) on behalf of SNSF has addressed the views and experiences of researchers in
Switzerland concerning research funding.24 The report provides the following insight:–– In general, researchers in the ETH Domain are more satisfied than researchers at otherinstitutions, and give higher rating on the subject of internal funding, services andinfrastructure.
–– Benchmarking against similar data from other funding agencies shows that SNSF fundingis highly rated when it comes to offering opportunities for unique/original research.
–– However, the results are less positive for SNSF funding schemes addressing high-risk(“blue sky”) topics, flexible use of funds and support for new projects that do not requirepreliminary research.
–– The survey has also indicated that a substantial proportion of the researchers find thatnone of their funding alternatives is adequate for facilitating interdisciplinary research.

24		See Swiss Research Funding. Researcher Survey for the Swiss National Science Foundation (SNSF), NIFU Report 5/2014,

http://www.snf.ch/en/researchinFocus/newsroom/Pages/news-140520-researcher-survey.aspx (last accessed:
November 24, 2014).

Intermediate Evaluation 2015

Self-Assessment Report of the ETH Board

43

A.3
Contribution to the Creation of the
Swiss Innovation Park
“Do the ETH Domain institutions pursue
suitable strategies to contribute in thebest possible manner to the successful
creation of an innovation park?
Where can improvements be made?”Contribution to the Creation of the Swiss Innovation Park

A.3 Contribution to the Creation of the Swiss Innovation Park
Assessment by the ETH Board
AssetsGiven the politically determined distribution of responsibilities between the federal andthe cantonal levels, the ETH Board has so far refrained from taking up an independent rolein the process of creating a Swiss Innovation Park.
However, it follows and supports closely the activities of the ETH Domain institutions inthis regard. The ETH Board––has acknowledged with satisfaction that the ETH Domain institutions’ role has always
been defined as key for the entire project;“Do the ETH Domain institutions pursue suitable strategies
to contribute in the best possible
manner to the successful
creation of an innovation park?
Where can improvements be
made?”––is convinced that the ETH Domain institutions have contributed, so far, in a productive
manner to the ongoing establishment of the Innovation Park, having respected the
distribution of responsibilities among the political authorities involved;––was instrumental in promoting and fully endorses the concept with two regional hubs,
ensuring close involvement of ETH Zurich and Empa in Dübendorf, and EPFL in Lausanne;––is pleased by the successful candidature of the Canton Aargau to establish an additional
network location in the immediate vicinity of the PSI.
Challenges and Opportunities
Given the Swiss Innovation Park’s progress to date and taking account of its institutionalrole, the ETH Board currently identifies two main challenges:a) The question of whether the structure chosen for the project’s implementation at thevarious sites can satisfy the expectations of politics and economy must be carefully
monitored by all actors involved, in order to fully seize the opportunities associated with
the Swiss Innovation Park project.
b) All actors, including the ETH Board, must join forces to ensure that the necessary decisions
for the further development of the sites designated as Innovation Park locations are takenby the competent authorities within a suitable timeframe.

Intermediate Evaluation 2015

Self-Assessment Report of the ETH-Board

47

Contribution to the Creation of the Swiss Innovation Park

A.3.1		 Background
The Swiss Innovation Park is conceived as a nationwide network around two main hubs. The
aim is to foster Switzerland’s innovative capacity and to make more effective use of the existingregional expertise, initiatives and particular economic strengths for innovation in Switzerland.
The idea of a Swiss Innovation Park was launched in 2007 as a long-term project with a time
horizon of at least 30 to 40 years.
The organization and further promotion of the Swiss Innovation Park has been placed
under the authority of the cantons, where the Conference of the Cantonal Ministers of Economics(CCME) has been mandated by the Federal Department for Economic Affairs, Education andResearch to elaborate a more detailed concept for its implementation.25 The Conference decided
in June 2013 that the Swiss Innovation Park should be a nationwide network of competencies
with two centers of excellence (“hubs”) built up around ETH Zurich and EPFL. The two hubs
are to be complemented by network partners (“Netzwerkstandorte”), which will be specialized
and focused on particular professional areas.
In conceptualizing the Swiss Innovation Park, the CCME closely collaborates with the “Swiss
Innovation Park” association.26 The purpose of this association, founded in March 2012, is to
set up the Swiss Innovation Park as prescribed by law. It will secure the nationwide framework
for the project and coordinate the regional initiatives. Several cantons (represented throughtheir Ministers for Economic Affairs), institutions of the ETH Domain, Universities of Applied
Sciences, and local authorities are affiliated to the association. With representatives from ETH
Zurich, EPFL and Empa, the ETH Domain is prominently represented on the association’s board.
In November 2013, the CCME launched the selection procedure for the network partners.
The cantons were invited to submit concepts for the establishment of such networks based on
specific requirements, such as–– the need for the network to be self-supporting;–– the excellence of participating partner institutions (companies, higher education andresearch institutions);–– the existence of sufficient resources in terms of financial commitment and available space;–– the necessity to prove that regional planning allows for the establishment of the projected
innovation area.
By the end of March 2014, the cantons had submitted eight projects for network partner locations,each of which aimed to become a network location within the Swiss Innovation Park in addition to the two Hubs (around ETH Zurich and EPFL) already designated. Six of the eight projects
have acquired partners from the ETH Domain (entire institutions or particular departments)
through formal cooperation agreements or letters of intent. In the Canton of Aargau, the PSI isintended to serve as the location around which the entire network location will be developed.
The CCME decided at the end of June 2014 on the further implementation of the Swiss
Innovation Park. According to the CCME, the Swiss Innovation Park should initially comprise thetwo Hub locations plus two additional network locations selected for the quality of theirsubmission and the excellence they contribute to the entire Innovation Park network. These
two network location projects are “PARK innovAARE”, developed by the Canton of Aargau, andthe project submitted by the north-western cantons (Basel-Stadt, Basel-Landschaft and Jura),
which will be located in Basel. While the PSI plays a central role within PARK innovAARE,
both ETH Zurich and the PSI have formally declared their interest in supporting the Basel project,too. The CCME decision now takes the form of a recommendation to the Federal Department
25		On the level of the Confederation, the law for the promotion of research and innovation (Loi sur l’encouragement de larecherche et de l’innovation, LERI, SR 420.1 [no English translation available]), which was adopted by the national
parliament in 2013 and came into effect on January 1, 2014, provides the legal basis for the support of the Swiss Innovation Park by the federal government. This support, however, must not be financial (except for loans).
26		See www.swissinnovationpark.ch (last accessed: November 24, 2014).

48

Intermediate Evaluation 2015

Self-Assessment Report of the ETH Board

Contribution to the Creation of the Swiss Innovation Parkof Economic Affairs, Education and Research, which will be in charge of formulating a Message
addressed to Parliament on the concept of the Innovation Park to be implemented as of2016.27 According to the CCME directorate, the six other projects that were submitted in the firstround will stay in the running to become a part of the Swiss Innovation Park, but have to beprocessed further.

A.3.2		 Involvement of the ETH Domain
Although their role has always been defined as subsidiary, the ETH Domain institutions havebeen heavily involved in the creation of the Swiss Innovation Park right from the beginning.
From the outset, part of the idea has been to develop at least one location on the site of theformer military airfield at Dübendorf. So both Empa and Eawag, whose main campus is very
close to the Dübendorf airfield, as well as ETH Zurich already played a major role in the early
concepts. Similarly, EPFL played a leading role at an early stage in the development of theInnovation Park in Western Switzerland. In more detail, the main contributions are as follows:
ETH Zurich–– In view of the Zurich hub, planned at the Dübendorf airfield, the foundations and the
project organization are being further developed with participation of ETH Zurich. Studies
regarding urban development provide the basis for a cantonal Gestaltungsplan currently
being elaborated by the competent authorities. In September 2014, the Federal Council
decided that the Dübendorf airfield should in the future be used in three ways simultaneously:in addition to the Innovation Park, military aviation (helicopters) as well as civil (business)
aviation should continue to use the site as an airfield. The decision gave rise to widespreadpolitical opposition, which raises considerable uncertainties about the near future of the
project as well as the timeframe for realizing next steps. Even so, the formal establishmentof the Zurich hub is planned for 2016.
–– In addition, ETH Zurich is participating in the Basel network location with its Departmentof Biosystems Science and Engineering (D-BSSE).
EPFL–– EPFL and five cantons of Western Switzerland (Vaud, Genève, Neuchâtel, Valais, and Fribourg)
have decided to join forces in order to develop the “PNI Hub EPFL”28. This concept is being
developed in conjunction with EPFL’s antennae strategy and the corresponding specificacademic domains.29 The following dedicated PNI sites will be devoted to interactions withindustry: EPFL Innovation Park and Biopôle in Lausanne; Campus Biotech in Geneva: neuroengineering (Wyss Center), Human Brain Project; Microcity in Neuchâtel: microtechnology,
advanced manufacturing; Energypolis in Sion: energy, green chemistry; Blue Factory in
Fribourg: sustainable architecture, smart building. EPFL has full academic responsibility forthese hubs. One additional objective is to extend interactions between local academic
partners (universities, HES, Research Institutes) as well as with industry.
–– Within this delocalized concept, however, each of the cantons will provide the necessary infrastructure. Through its competencies in technology transfer, the EPFL will be in charge of thelink with the academic dimension as part of its federal mission and responsibility. Someconcrete and practical “démonstrateurs” will be developed locally in partnership with industry.

27		Status as of December 11, 2014: the Message will be transmitted to Parliament in spring 2015.
28		PNI = Parc National d’Innovation.
29		See chapter C.2.2 below for details.

Intermediate Evaluation 2015

Self-Assessment Report of the ETH Board

49

Contribution to the Creation of the Swiss Innovation Park–– The existing EPFL Innovation Park is the first stage and already a concrete example of what
is intended to be developed together with the academic, economic and political partners.
PSI–– PARK innovAARE has resulted from the submission made by the Canton of Aargau with thesupport of the PSI.
–– An innovation park is to be created in the immediate vicinity of the PSI. PARK innovAARE
is intended to be a world-leading center, where, thanks to the PSI’s expertise, innovationsin the fields of accelerator technologies, advanced materials and processes, energy, andhuman health can be made ready for the market.
–– With its complementary focus, PARK innovAARE integrates perfectly into the general conceptof the Swiss Innovation Park.
Empa–– Empa actively supported the concept of a main National Innovation Park (NIP) hub on the
Dübendorf airfield from a very early stage, and is now part of the consortium led by
ETH Zurich. The proximity to the site as well as its strong ties to national and international
companies make Empa a natural link to the hub of the Swiss Innovation Park at Dübendorf.
–– Empa is also involved in the NIP Ostschweiz, a planned NIP network location close to
Empa St. Gallen. Spearheaded by Empa’s technology center tebo, a technology park is to becreated in 2015 where companies that match Empa’s competency profile can settle andexplore new possibilities for collaborative projects.

50

Intermediate Evaluation 2015

Self-Assessment Report of the ETH-BoardB
National Position andInternational CompetitivenessIntroduction53
Core Prerequisites
53
Science Policy
54
B.1 Impact of Science Policy
57
Assessment by the ETH Board
57
B.1.1 Academic Autonomy
58
B.1.2 Openness and Diversity
58
B.2 Cost-Intensive Research Infrastructures
63
Assessment by the ETH Board
63
B.2.1 Examples64
B.2.2 Success Factors
66
B.3 Benefits for Switzerland
69
Assessment by the ETH Board
69
B.3.1 Social and Economic Benefit
70
B.3.2 Added Value of Existing ETH Domain Locations71National Position and International Competitiveness

B
National Position andInternational CompetitivenessIntroduction
Switzerland enjoys a worldwide reputation as a research and science location and is extremely
attractive at an international level. The institutions of the ETH Domain play a leading role here.
This is reflected, for instance in the fact that both ETH Zurich and EPFL have for many years
occupied top places in global university rankings. As is stipulated in the performance mandate
bestowed upon them, the institutions of the ETH Domain aspire to the best possible quality
in all their areas of research, in teaching, and in all other fields in which they are active. Onlyin this way can the ETH Domain fulfill its mandate in the Swiss context, by educating professionals, innovating, and performing tasks of national importance.

Core Prerequisites
Top-notch research, to which the ETH Domain is committed, has always had a global orientation.
Thus researchers in Switzerland and researchers from Switzerland are engaged in a worldwide
professional exchange but are also involved in a global competition – as are the institutions oftertiary education, for instance when it comes to attracting researchers and advanced students
or retaining them in the institution by offering an attractive environment.30
This global orientation must also be a point of reference for a science policy that is guided
by the national interest. In the ETH Board’s opinion, the three following core prerequisites
underpin the ETH Domain’s excellent international position, and they are essential if it is tocontribute to sustainable development globally and hence also in Switzerland.
–– Switzerland’s higher education and research institutions depend on being internationallyembedded and on acting in a high-level international exchange so that they can fulfill
their functions and generate maximum benefit for Switzerland’s economy and society andthus for the country as a whole.
–– So that they can operate flexibly and sustainably in this highly dynamic global environment,
the institutions depend, in turn, on a high degree of autonomy, which – as far as theETH Domain is concerned – they are granted by the currently applicable legislation, prevalent
governance and political control.
–– Such dynamic and independent action on the part of the institutions hinges on basic
funding that is stable, reliable and can be used with highest possible flexibility, as
it is stipulated for the ETH Domain by the performance mandate and the global budget
arrangements.

30		The bibliometric analysis of the ETH Domain confirms the importance of international collaboration in contemporary

research, as it shows that, for all ETH Domain institutions, publications resulting from international collaboration clearlyyield the highest impact (see chapter E below).

Intermediate Evaluation 2015

Self-Assessment Report of the ETH Board

53

National Position and International Competitiveness

Science Policy
In the ETH Board’s view, three aspects must be considered as a matter of priority:–– First, science policy is confronted with the fact that the above-mentioned prerequisites for
success can clash with the goal of generating measurable benefit for society. The ETH Domain
institutions (as well as the cantonal universities) are tasked to engage in long-term
research and to proactively identify and address relevant research topics. Ideally, therefore,such topics are addressed within the ETH Domain institutions before they are treated as
challenges for society at large. Thus, it can be difficult to measure the direct benefit to societyof such research.
–– Second, science policy must pay attention to increased regulation of research areas. Suchregulation, and – even more often – its enforcement, can sometimes differ from canton
to canton (for instance regarding the implementation of animal protection regulation).
Attention must also be given to the effects of intensified programmatic weighting of certain
fields of research (program-oriented research).
–– Third, science policy must be able to counteract certain political developments that do
not arise from science policy but, for instance, from migration policy, foreign trade policy,
or economic policy.

54

Intermediate Evaluation 2015

Self-Assessment Report of the ETH Board

B.1
Impact of Science Policy“What impact does science policy
have on the academic autonomy
of institutions in the ETH Domain?”Impact of Science Policy

B.1 Impact of Science Policy
Assessment by the ETH Board
AssetsThe ETH Board embraces the fact that science policy in Switzerland is characterized by along-standing tradition of supporting the three core prerequisites for the success of
Switzerland’s research and higher education institutions (internationality and openness,
autonomy, stable basic funding). Accordingly, the ETH Board holds that

“What impact does science
policy have on the academic
autonomy of institutions in
the ETH Domain?”––the autonomy of the ETH Domain institutions as granted by the ETH Act has beena key success factor for their evolution;––within this framework, the ETH Domain institutions currently have the necessary freedom
with regard to the allocation of resources, and adequate freedom and opportunities todetermine freely their research priorities;––today, the ETH Domain enjoys a high degree of trust both in government circles andin society.
Challenges and Opportunities
With regard to priorities in science policy, the ETH Board is convinced that six challenges
deserve adequate attention:a) It must be a core objective of all actors involved in science policy to maintain the current
degree of autonomy as a success factor of the ETH Domain and to foster the culture ofmutual trust that is associated with it.
b) With regard to research funding, the right balance between free (curiosity-driven) basic
research and programmatic or application-oriented research must be maintained.
The ETH Board has observed, with great concern, political attempts to shift this balanceaway from basic research.
c) Academic and financial autonomy are a core value in science policy, but they requirethat a better mutual understanding by both sides (political and academic) be achievedin order to avoid exaggerated or misplaced expectations and disappointment.
d) On the level of the institutions, the ETH Board, and the Confederation, autonomy requiresa strong emphasis on good governance principles: On the one hand, the ETH Board andthe institutions must ensure that such principles are followed and communicated internallyas well as externally. On the other hand, the ETH Board, together with the Confederation,
should strive to counteract the tendency to increasingly regulate matters that jeopardize
the dual autonomy of the ETH Domain and its institutions.
e) A major change will be introduced with the Higher Education Funding and Coordination
Act (HEdA), taking effect as of January 1, 2015.31 The ETH Board will need to effectively
defend its strong position within the Swiss academic systems and carefully monitor thechanges brought about by this Act in Swiss higher education.
f) All actors in the Swiss academic landscape, including the ETH Board and the ETH Domain
institutions, must be even better prepared to explain why internationality and openness
are crucial for the Swiss higher education and research institutions and how the country
as a whole benefits from their international competitiveness.

31		See the chapter “Perspectives of the ETH Domain” above p. 12ff.

Intermediate Evaluation 2015

Self-Assessment Report of the ETH-Board

57

Impact of Science Policy

B.1.1		 Academic Autonomy
The autonomy which is granted to the institutions of the ETH Domain is of decisive significanceto their operating framework.
–– It allows the institutions of the ETH Domain to invest heavily and primarily in fundamental,
disruptive and long-term research, which in turn makes them more attractive for cooperation
with private companies.
–– Science policy in Switzerland has, over the past decades, avoided excessive promotionof program-oriented research. Whenever the latter is challenged, science policy can indeed
directly affect the academic autonomy of the ETH Domain institutions. This is the casemost prominently if specific research topics are defined in the Education, Research, andInnovation (ERI) Message. Such “line item” funding decreases the flexibility to allocate
funding between different research fields.
–– Additionally, due to such funding, particular research areas – as it might be the case, forsome institutions, with regard to energy research – may end by occupying a disproportionate
place within the institution, which adversely affects their other areas of research.
–– At the same time, this type of funding often does not reward previous investments of theinstitutions in this particular research area, i.e. it does not honor those who have set trends
prior to the political agenda setting.
–– Finally, such funding is linked to high expectations from the actors in politics and in society,which are likely to be disappointed due to the inherent complexity of scientific research(uncertainty, explorative nature, etc.). This, in turn, generates adverse effects on politicalsupport for science and research in general.
–– As has been observed in the ETH Domain in recent times, science policy can also affectthe academic autonomy of the institutions by re-orienting the balance between autonomy
and coordination. It must be borne in mind that coordination always hinders quick andflexible reactions to changes in the academic environment and with regard to needs andopportunities of and for private and public actors. On the other hand, coordination canensure a more effective use of public funds. Therefore, it is crucial for the ETH Domain andfor all partners involved in innovation in Switzerland that the costs of lack of coordinationand of over-coordination are well balanced. From the perspective of the ETH Domain, thecurrent trend goes towards increasing coordination (including related costs32) and towards
decreasing autonomy and flexibility at the risk of reducing the innovation potential of
Switzerland as a whole.

B.1.2		 Openness and Diversity
Another condition of crucial importance is openness on a global level, and particularly withregard to Europe.
–– It enables the international nature of Switzerland as a center of tertiary education and thediverse experience backgrounds of scientists working in Switzerland to be used for trail-blazing
research, teaching and KTT. In an educational environment characterized by internationality,
Swiss students are effectively prepared for competition in business and industry as well asin academia in a global labor market.

32		Examples include procurement regulations [Beschaffungsrecht] or the coordination within the new Higher Education

Funding and Coordination Act (HEdA).

58

Intermediate Evaluation 2015

Self-Assessment Report of the ETH Board

Impact of Science Policy–– Openness is equally important for attracting the best professors, researchers and students
to the campus. The current crisis with the European Union has an impact on all institutionsof the ETH Domain, as they have all achieved a very high level of competitive European
funding. Even more important than the loss in terms of funding, however, is the fact that
exclusion from competitive European funding programs would deprive researchers from
Switzerland, in particular young academics, of the opportunity to engage in competition on
the European level. This would seriously impair their ability to advance their academic careersand, therefore, significantly reduce Switzerland’s attractiveness for world-class researchers
from abroad as well as from Switzerland itself.33–– If they are to contribute to a sustainable development of the economy and society in
Switzerland, the institutions of the ETH Domain must also be able to benefit from a concept
of autonomy that rewards entrepreneurial spirit. Technology transfer, partnerships between
the public and the private sector, and the institutions’ philanthropy-driven scientificactivities require responsible entrepreneurial working practices within the institutions.

33		See, for instance, the article “ETH-Forscher kündigt wegen SVP-Initiative” in Schweiz am Sonntag, October 5, 2014, p. 9.

Intermediate Evaluation 2015

Self-Assessment Report of the ETH Board

59

B.2
Cost-Intensive Research Infrastructures“Do the ETH Domain institutions
have the networks, competences andinstruments necessary to play aleading role, in collaboration withinternational partners, in thedevelopment and operation of futurecost-intensive (large-scale) research
infrastructures which will benefit
the Swiss higher education system?
What competences and instruments
are required and which should be
developed in future?”Cost-Intensive Research Infrastructures

B.2 Cost-Intensive Research Infrastructures
Assessment by the ETH Board
Assets
Large-scale research infrastructures are focal points where excellence in science acts asa driver for excellence in technology and education. Considering experiences with past andcurrent realizations of internationally competitive large-scale research infrastructures inthe ETH Domain, the ETH Board holds that––the institutions of the ETH Domain currently play a leading role with regard to theconceptualization, development and operation of world-class research infrastructures;––they not only host and develop large-scale research infrastructures in Switzerland,
but also contribute decisively to the development of such infrastructures at many places
in international consortia;––representatives of ETH Domain institutions are sought-after experts in such endeavors;––the ETH Domain institutions benefit from their privileged global networks, their outstandingknowledge, and the general reputation of the individual institutions;“Do the ETH Domain institutions
have the networks, competences
and instruments necessary toplay a leading role, in collaboration with international
partners, in the development
and operation of future costintensive (large-scale) research
infrastructures which will
benefit the Swiss higher education system? What competences
and instruments are required
and which should be developedin future?”––their embedding in international networks allows for an efficient distribution of tasks
and profiles among the international infrastructures, for instance in the field of high performance computing, which enhances their effective use;––Switzerland as an academic and an economic location benefits from the high level ofinvolvement of the ETH Domain institutions in such networks, both regarding increases
in scientific expertise and the specific innovations it promotes;––the development of large research infrastructures boosts technology transfer throughintensified collaboration with industry partners during the development and construction
phases and through spin-offs.
Challenges and Opportunities
The conceptualization, establishment, operation and exploitation of large-scale research
infrastructures are increasingly taking place in international networks. The ETH Board isconvinced that in an academic environment like the ETH Domain, in which internationality
is of eminent importance, the sustainable operation and the efficient and innovationfostering use of such research infrastructures is in the best possible hands. However, fivechallenges need to be considered in respect of future development:a) Protecting internationality and academic openness is also a core requirement with regard
to the ETH Domain’s role and contributions regarding large-scale research infrastructures.
b) Free and non-bureaucratic access for researchers worldwide should continue to be
granted, a principle which has always been applied in a reciprocal manner, benefitting
Swiss researchers at infrastructures abroad as well.
c) Coordination on the national level, including among ETH Domain institutions, needs toensure that existing strengths are most effectively used and are well balanced against theautonomy of the institutions to set their academic and infrastructural priorities.
d) The institutions must be enabled to guarantee continuous reinvestment to keep the existinglarge-scale facilities competitive at the international level and to allow trend-setting inselected areas.

Intermediate Evaluation 2015

Self-Assessment Report of the ETH-Board

63

Cost-Intensive Research Infrastructurese) Most large-scale infrastructures of the ETH Domain are open to international users thoughcompetitive access calls. In addition, several EU research institutes have funded andcurrently run beamlines at the national large-scale facilities of the PSI. These lean andefficient international collaborations should be preserved and could potentially serve asmodels for international collaborations at future Swiss national infrastructures.

According to the ETH Domain’s performance mandate as well as the “Swiss Roadmap for Research
Infrastructures”, the ETH Domain has a specific responsibility to develop new and improveexisting research infrastructures of national importance, ensuring open access for researchcommunities. It is through the ETH Domain institutions that the Confederation puts world-classresearch infrastructures at the disposal of the scientific community in Switzerland.

B.2.1		 Examples
The following infrastructures within the ETH Domain may be cited as examples:–– The Swiss National Supercomputing Center (CSCS) operates, under the auspices of ETH Zurich,
the world’s most energy-efficient petascale supercomputer and one of Europe’s two leading
systems (the other being at the Julich Supercomputing Center in Germany):–– The system at CSCS was co-developed with Cray and NVIDIA along with leading application
codes, and is one of three productive GPU accelerated high-end supercomputers in theworld.34–– These types of system architectures are one of the paths on the way to exascalecomputing, as they have far superior energy efficiency than other, more traditional
supercomputing systems.
–– CSCS’ petascale system is presently the most energy-efficient high-end systemworldwide.
–– CSCS is thus one of the leading players, and in this regard maintains a lead over othercenters in Europe. Furthermore, the Swiss high-performance computing and network(HPCN) program has consistently invested in application and algorithm development for
high-end computing systems.
–– The research community in Swiss academia that is associated with this program is thus
in a leading position to develop the simulation tools of the future.
–– The Centre de Recherches en Physique des Plasmas (CRPP) was developed over the years witha substantial contribution from EPFL and Euratom, and is considered one of the finest in
Europe.
–– The CRPP benefits from world-class facilities, including the tokamak TCV, a wide rangeof measurement devices, a millimeter wave high-power laboratory, and a laboratory forindustrial plasma processes.
–– This enables the CRPP to carry out high-level plasma physics and fusion energy research,which represents an important contribution to the enhanced national effort to develop
novel energy resources.

34		The two others are located at Oak Ridge National Laboratory and at the Tokyo Institute of Technology.

64

Intermediate Evaluation 2015

Self-Assessment Report of the ETH Board

Cost-Intensive Research Infrastructures–– The Blue Brain Project was initiated in 2002 by EPFL as a long-term, large-scale project
integrating simulation science, neuroscience, and supercomputing.
–– In 2011, the Blue Brain Project was recognized by the ETH Board and by SEFRI as national
infrastructure, and since then benefits from dedicated funding by the ETH Board.
–– In 2012, the Human Brain Project, of which the Blue Brain Project is the core simulation
platform, was selected by the European Union as one of two “FET Flagship Projects”.
–– The Human Brain Project can be seen as a model of a modern collaborative project inhigh-performance computing, simulation, neuromorphic technologies, and medicine.
–– Today, the HBP consortium comprises 112 partner institutions from all over Europe.
–– The PSI presently hosts three research infrastructures that are among the best of their kinds
on an international level (SLS, SINQ, SµS35) in addition to the facility currently under construction (SwissFEL). This gives the PSI a unique position worldwide by offering access to themost important and complementary probes for materials science: photons, neutrons, andmuons. Efforts to continuously upgrade the instrumentation guarantee state-of-the-art
research opportunities for the national and international research community and assure
the PSI a trendsetter position in the coming years.
–– The best example of the PSI’s competency and networking activities is the realization of
the next generation large-scale research infrastructure SwissFEL. The focus of the research
activities at the SwissFEL will be on structural biology and protein research (investigating
dynamic processes) and on the examination of innovative materials for catalytic processes
and information technology. The knowledge gained at the interface between fundamental
and applied science will also be beneficial to the Swiss economy. Findings from SwissFEL
could be applied by companies involved in drug research, chemical processes or in the useof new technologically relevant materials. The excellent quality of the measuring stations
has also made the PSI a sought-after partner for developing international large-scale
research facilities. Complementary to the in-house effort, the PSI supports the constructionof the European X-ray free electron laser (XFEL) in Hamburg, Germany, and the European
Spallation Source (ESS) in Lund, Sweden, through contributions in kind.
–– The large-scale research facilities are also of crucial importance for the education andtraining of young scientists. Countries with large-scale national research facilities are distinctly more successful in the competition to make use of international large-scale researchfacilities abroad. Swiss researchers have a proven track record of being extraordinarily
successful at international facilities, such as ILL and ESRF (both Grenoble, France). PSI cultivates an outstanding international network, as reflected in the user statistics for its
large-scale research facilities. Approximately half of the beamtime is allocated to scientists
from abroad, particularly from countries in the EU. Beamtime for these academic users
is granted solely on the basis of scientific excellence. Furthermore, PSI staff members are
involved in a number of advisory boards for national and international research infrastructure projects, testifying to the recognized competencies of PSI in this technological field.
–– Furthermore, the ERID Watch project36 has also shown that research infrastructures
have a direct market impact in several areas: as suppliers of cutting-edge research, asbuyers of high technology products and services, as providers of scientific advice, andas sellers of state-of-the-art services to both public and academic users of the facilities.
The Swiss Light Source at PSI has a significantly higher proportion of direct industry
use (>10 %) compared to other synchrotrons worldwide (5-7 % on average).

35		The three acronyms stand for the following three large infrastructures hosted by the PSI: SLS = Swiss Light Source; SINQ =Spalliation Neutron Source; SµS = Muon Source.
36		See chapter A.1.1 above, footnote 16.

Intermediate Evaluation 2015

Self-Assessment Report of the ETH Board

65

Cost-Intensive Research Infrastructures

B.2.2		 Success Factors
Special instruments that are needed in order to maintain the relevant competencies andthe proven excellence in the development and operation of large-scale research facilities are:–– Continuation of challenging projects at the national level in order to retain trend-setter
status (Example: SLS was one of the first national synchrotrons, and SwissFEL will be one of
the first national free electron X-ray lasers worldwide);–– possibility to contribute under international law to research infrastructure projects abroad(e.g. through in-kind contributions);–– possibility to join ERIC (European Research Infrastructure Consortia) as full partner;–– exchange of staff between research facilities.
These requirements again point to the crucial importance of Switzerland’s openness and international attractiveness.
Another important element in this context concerns the Swiss research infrastructure“culture”: in Switzerland, research infrastructure is generally of high quality and is constructedin an open manner, giving access to all national and international partners (e.g. Swiss Light
Source, CRPP, SwissFEL). Therefore, when big international projects are initiated, Swiss researchers
and infrastructure are “natural” partners (e.g. ESS, ITER, LHC, European XFEL). It is therefore
essential to continue investing in open-access infrastructure in the ETH Domain and on thenational level.

66

Intermediate Evaluation 2015

Self-Assessment Report of the ETH Board

B.3
Benefits for Switzerland“Are the ETH Domain institutions
managing to reap benefits from theirstrong position on the international
competitive stage, both for industry andtechnology in Switzerland and for
the Swiss higher education institutions?”

Benefits for Switzerland

B.3 Benefits for Switzerland
Assessment by the ETH Board
AssetsInternationality and openness of Switzerland as a center of education and research represents
the central prerequisite thanks to which the ETH Domain succeeds in creating social andeconomic benefit. The ETH Board is convinced that––the institutions of the ETH Domain use their excellent international position for the benefitof Switzerland, its national economy, its public administration and private enterprises,
its universities, and its educational system;“Are the ETH Domain institutions managing to reap benefits
from their strong position on
the international competitive
stage, both for industry andtechnology in Switzerland andfor the Swiss higher education
institutions?”––this benefit derives in the first place from the ETH Domain’s high-quality and internationally embedded research and teaching activities;––this embedding of the ETH Domain’s activities makes it possible to attract world-leading
scientists and students, with whom both academic and economic actors can collaborate
and who offer their knowledge and skills on the Swiss job market;––the excellent international position of the ETH Domain institutions fosters Switzerland’s
reputation in both academic and economic terms, and generates positive impact;––the institutions’ activities in the field of KTT37 represent a crucial element of fostering
Switzerland’s capacities with regard to innovation;––the institutions are aware of their important societal role and thus also use their resources
to ensure that such benefit is as sustainable and effective as possible. As particular
instruments, they have developed an intensive collaboration with the economy, a wide
range of KTT activities, and a growing life-long learning offering, plus individual andinstitutional cooperations with academic partners among the universities and Universities
of Applied Sciences.
Challenges and Opportunities
The excellent international position of the ETH Domain institutions is their most important
asset in global competition among higher education and research institutions. In the ETH
Board’s view it cannot be emphasized too strongly that the ETH Domain succeeds in creatingsocial and economic benefit primarily due to this strong international position. This raises
three specific challenges:a) Global competition among higher education and research institutions entails competition
for the best students, young academics, experienced researchers, and promising research
projects, but also for participation in research alliances, for promoting and deploying novel
educational technologies and for attracting research departments of large international
companies to Switzerland. Both the openness and the attractiveness of Switzerland and its
economy must therefore receive the utmost attention, while the internationality of higher
education and research must be established as a central guideline of science policy.
b) The ETH Domain institutions must be able to attract young academics worldwide –including those trained in Switzerland – and to offer them attractive development
opportunities both within and outside academia. This calls for a continuation of current
strategies for the promotion of young academics [Nachwuchsförderung]. As excellence
attracts excellence, Switzerland as a scientific and an economic location, as well as the
young Swiss academics themselves, benefit from this approach.

37		See chapter A.1 above for a detailed development.

Intermediate Evaluation 2015

Self-Assessment Report of the ETH-Board

69

Benefits for Switzerlandc) The ETH Domain institutions must remain empowered to constantly shape and develop
their curricula – including their offering in the area of continuing education – byaddressing the trends set by cutting-edge science as well as the needs put forward by the
economy (in particular industry) and society. This underlines the importance of granting
autonomy and flexibility to the institutions.

B.3.1		 Social and Economic Benefit
First and foremost, the institutions of the ETH Domain produce overall social benefit throughtheir fundamental mission. They provide research at the highest level as well as research-basedteaching to educate highly specialized professionals. Through their extensive activities in thefield of knowledge and technology transfer they guarantee that the results of the research
conducted in the ETH Domain can be harnessed for specific applications, and that innovative
solutions can be tested on the market and made available to society. In the ETH Board’s view,
direct or indirect social and economic benefit generated by the ETH Domain institutions canbe further illustrated by the points highlighted below. They contain elements from teaching,research, and/or KTT.38“Technologization of Industry”
The institutions of the ETH Domain consider that one of their tasks is to contribute to the“technologization” of our industry by training the future engineers who will work for Swissfirms both in Switzerland and abroad.
–– By welcoming foreign students, the ETH Domain institutions are training the young talents
who will one day work for these companies and represent Switzerland throughout theworld even after returning to their country of origin.
–– The same applies to students from the ETH Domain who in the future will work as engineers
for foreign companies that create jobs in Switzerland.
–– An important contribution is therefore constituted by Innovation or Technology Parks
in which the institutions are already involved. Thus ETH Zurich has spear-headed and has
been associated with Zurich’s Technopark – Switzerland’s first industry-academia park –ever since its establishment in 1993; various ETH Zurich institutes and more than 20 ETH Zurich
Spin-offs at any point in time are accommodated on approx. 7,000 m2, contributing to
the home of close to 300 companies (of which 140 start-ups) and 2,000 jobs that spread over
the total surface of ca. 50,000 m2, making the Technopark Zurich a truly intertwinedtransfer center.
–– Similarly, the EPFL Innovation Park (“Innovation Square”) and the 2,000 R&D jobs createdthere are the main bridge for technology transfer between EPFL cutting-edge scienceand the world of industry. The facility hosts more than 100 spin-off/start-up companies
and enables companies based nearby (such as Nestlé, Logitech, Credit Suisse, Debiopharm,
Cisco, and Axa), to place their R&D units close to the scientific heart of EPFL, with its
innovative atmosphere, laboratories, professors, and students. Likewise, it offers the latter
an opportunity to become familiar with the business world and to contribute to the
Swiss economy of tomorrow.

38		The following examples, however, do not specifically focus on benefit generated for higher education and research insti-

tutions, as this question will be addressed in part C.3 below, which specifically assesses contributions to the improvement of the Swiss higher education system as a whole.

70

Intermediate Evaluation 2015

Self-Assessment Report of the ETH Board

Benefits for Switzerland–– The ETH Domain institutions are able to exploit the excellent fit between research andtechnology developments in ETH Domain institutions and the specializations of the Swisseconomic actors – both with regard to current industry specializations and emerging or
future fields of industrial activity.
Political Decision-Making
Finally, all institutions of the ETH Domain cultivate excellent relations with public administration
at the federal, cantonal and municipal levels. Through their expertise, which benefits allthese levels in a wide variety of ways, the institutions make essential contributions to fact-based
political decisions and – in particular – to an implementation of laws and ordinances tostandards of state-of-the-art research (e.g. codes of practice in the field of civil engineering).

B.3.2		 Added Value of Existing ETH Domain Locations
Many companies explicitly state that proximity to an ETH campus was a reason for their choiceof location. At the EPFL Innovation Park, for instance, proximity to the campus was a key factor
for large companies to set up. For companies, being present on a campus is a good opportunity
to stimulate and accelerate innovation, as well as to scout new technologies and gain accessto top-notch researchers and talents.
–– Examples of firms close to ETH Zurich include IBM, the association of Disney Research labs,
Google, and Bruker.
–– At EPFL Innovation Park, companies such as PSA Peugeot Citroën, Nestlé, Logitech, Bühler,
and Nitto benefit from their proximity to the EPFL campus.
The direct economic significance that the institutions of the ETH Domain have in their respective regions must not be underestimated either. Evidence of positive direct or indirect economic
effects could be produced for each institution but can be shown most distinctly through theposition of the Federal Institutes of Technology.
–– Figures for ETH Zurich include:–– Annual turnover: approx. 1.5 billion CHF;–– over two thirds of ETH Zurich’s turnover remains in the Canton of Zurich: 80 % of
the wage bill paid to employees resident in the Canton of Zurich, i.e. about 740 MCHF;
additionally, about 44 % of ETH Zurich’s investment spending (approx. 240 MCHF);–– 2011 graduate survey (conducted by FSO): 91 % of all graduates of a degree course(Master’s degree or diploma) and 76 % of all graduates with doctoral degree work in
Switzerland 1 year after completion of studies;–– students generate value in excess of 350 MCHF per annum in the Canton of Zurich.39–– Figures for EPFL include:–– over 15,000 persons study or work at EPFL, a majority of them living in the Canton of Vaud;–– 816 master students and 414 PhD students graduated in 2013. A survey showed thatabout 75 % of the master graduates and 58 % of the doctoral graduates from 2012 wereresidents in Switzerland, and more than 92 % of those had an employment after one year.
39		According to calculations by ETH Zurich and the University of Zurich, students’ tuition and living costs in Zurich amount toabout CHF 24,000 per year. For the number mentioned above, the full amount was factored in for the 66 % of students
who live in the Canton of Zurich, whereas half this amount was used for the remaining 34 % of students who live outside
the Canton.

Intermediate Evaluation 2015

Self-Assessment Report of the ETH Board

71

Benefits for Switzerland–– 1,950 jobs were generated by companies that are located at the EPFL Innovation Park,
including the services companies.
–– The numerous spin-offs launched in close proximity to ETH Zurich and EPFL because of
these two institutions’ efforts in this respect and their entrepreneurial spirit, also generatesignificant benefits for their immediate location, not least with regard to the jobs and thetax income they generate.
–– In the global competition between knowledge locations, the respective home regions of theETH Domain institutions also profit from the impact and excellent reputation of these locations.
This applies to the two Institutes of Technology as much as to the Research Institutes, asinternational cooperation relates to scientific exchange and international research contacts(including value creation, which is generated by scientific congresses, for example) and tocooperation with actors from trade and industry both in Switzerland and abroad.

72

Intermediate Evaluation 2015

Self-Assessment Report of the ETH Board

C
Federal and Higher Education Policy

Introduction75
C.1 Geographic Developments
79
Assessment by the ETH Board
79
C.1.1 Strengthening Existing Locations81
C.1.2 EPFL Antennae Strategy
83
C.2 Long-term Development
89
Assessment by the ETH Board89
C.2.1 Reasons for and Limits to Growth90
C.2.2 Requirements
91
C.2.3 Novelty 91
C.3 Contributions to the Improvement of the Swiss Higher Education System
95
Assessment by the ETH Board95
C.3.1 Core Contribution: World-class Research
96
C.3.2 Pioneering the Development of the Swiss Higher Education System
97
C.3.3 Other Contributions
97
C.4 Structure of Study Programs
101
Assessment by the ETH Board
101
C.4.1 Adequacy of Study Programs
102
C.4.2 Development and Evaluation of Curricula102
C.4.3 Stakeholder Involvement
103
C.4.4 Collaboration within Curricula
104
C.5 Cooperation
107
Assessment by the ETH Board
107
C.5.1 Individual Level
108
C.5.2 Institutional Level
108
C.5.3 Extent of Cooperation
109

Federal and Higher Education Policy

C
Federal and Higher Education Policy

Introduction
Thanks to the unique features of the ETH Domain, to the outstanding performance of theindividual ETH Domain institutions and to the strong support it receives from the Confederation
as its owner and from Switzerland as a whole, the ETH Domain occupies a strong position in
the Swiss academic landscape. The unique features of the ETH Domain encompass the following
main aspects40:–– The combination of exact, natural and engineering sciences and their association with social
science and humanities (including economics): The ETH Domain is the only actor in Switzerland
capable of offering such a wide range of specialization and corresponding research andteaching activities.
–– The complementary relationship between the two Federal Institutes of Technology andthe four Research Institutes: While the two Federal Institutes are engaged in teaching basedon the world-class (and mostly fundamental) research they perform, as well as in intense
KTT activities, the four Research Institutes specialize in top-level thematic research as wellas in applied research in their focal areas and in technology development.
–– The research infrastructures of national importance hosted by the ETH Domain institutions:
Many of Switzerland’s highest-standard and state-of-the-art research infrastructures andlarge-scale facilities are operated within the ETH Domain as user labs, allowing researchers
from Switzerland and abroad to make use of this unique infrastructure.
Fig. 3: The current regional embedding of the ETH Domain institutions
ETH Zürich
EPFL

PSI
WSL

Empa
Eawag
Basel

VilligenSt. Gallen

ZürichBirmensdorf

Dübendorf

Neuenburg
Freiburg

Thun

Davos

Kastanienbaum LU

Lausanne

Genf

SittenBellinzona

Lugano40		See chapter “Perspectives of the ETH Domain” above and Appendix 1.

Intermediate Evaluation 2015

Self-Assessment Report of the ETH Board

75

Federal and Higher Education Policy

In addition, the institutions of the ETH Domain benefit from being very strongly rooted in Swiss
society and in the Swiss economy. The ETH Board is convinced that this represents an important
asset of the ETH Domain, and is key to its aim of contributing with high impact to innovationand economic development in Switzerland. One aspect, strengthening these roots and serving
the high reputation of the ETH Domain in all parts of Switzerland, is the fact that all regions of
the country host one of its institutions or one of their branches.
The fact that the ETH Domain has always been able to benefit from stable and long-term
basic funding by its owner, the federal government, and the long-standing roots and corresponding support of the ETH Domain within society, the economy and government is a further
core asset complementing the ETH Domain’s unique features and strong embedding.
For the ETH Board, these assets are key in terms of the sustainability of the ETH Domain andits institutions, their medium- and long-term development, and regional embedding andcooperation within the Swiss academic system. It is by developing these assets sustainably andexploiting their potential in cooperation with partners inside and outside academia, butalso by maintaining the ambition to compete with world-leading institutions in their respective
fields, that the ETH Domain institutions can best contribute to the development of the Swiss
higher education system and the ongoing quest to advance and foster innovative capacity
throughout Switzerland.

76

Intermediate Evaluation 2015

Self-Assessment Report of the ETH Board

C.1		
Geographic Developments“What assessment can be made of theincreasing regional expansion of theindividual ETH Domain institutions? What
impact will this have in terms of theirfunding, independent decision-making
and autonomy?”Geographic Developments

C.1 Geographic Developments
Assessment by the ETH Board
Assets
The historic and political reasons for the existing presence of ETH Domain institutions in the
different regions of Switzerland and outside the country vary. In this regard, the ETH Board
recalls that––all ETH Domain institutions except the PSI operate more than one site;––ETH Zurich and EPFL each are also present at one location outside of Switzerland;––the institutions of the ETH Domain operate in 13 cantons (including the new locations thatare in preparation);“What assessment can bemade of the increasing regional
expansion of the individual
ETH Domain institutions?
What impact will this have interms of their funding,
independent decision-making
and autonomy?”––in the recent past, most institutions have not developed additional sites, but havestrengthened their existing locations;––EPFL is implementing a strategy of fostering its presence in the French-speaking part of
Switzerland through its concept of creating regional antennae;––the ETH Domain’s regional embedding is an important element explaining the deeply
rooted support from which it benefits throughout Switzerland.
In the light of this state of affairs and of recent experience, the ETH Board considers that––geographic expansion (both national and international) can present opportunities
compatible with the strategic priorities and objectives set for the ETH Domain;––geographic expansion of the ETH Domain institutions in the recent past has followed clear
objectives and well-defined criteria: excellence, critical mass, taking advantage of unique
opportunities;––geographic expansion of ETH Domain institutions has in every case been decisively
supported by the willingness of political authorities (such as cantonal governments), otherhigher education partners, and private companies to substantially and sustainably contribute in terms of resources and investment to the realization of the respective projects.
Challenges and Opportunities
Approaches and attitudes to regional expansion vary among the institutions of theETH Domain. This is due, among other reasons, to differing perceptions of the opportunities
and risks such endeavors entail, not only with regard to the particular project but alsowith regard to the general trends shaping the academic landscape of the future. With regard
to the highly dynamic environment in which the ETH Domain performs, regional expansion
raises three main challenges:a) The institutions as well as the competent authorities, in particular the ETH Board, must beable to ensure that decisions regarding geographic expansion result from carefully evaluatedstrategic choices. To this end, decision criteria must be defined41 and re-evaluated inlight of experiences gained, and the governance structures in place must allow for fruitfullybalancing autonomy on the one hand and strategic controlling on the other.
b) Although the ETH Board estimates that at present, the opportunities of the current expansion
strategies, both regarding EFPL’s antennae in Western Switzerland and the two schools’
41		Currently, a task force mandated by the ETH Board (composed of representatives of the ETH Domain institutions and theETH Board) is preparing a proposal for a strategy for international subsidiaries of the ETH Domain.

Intermediate Evaluation 2015

Self-Assessment Report of the ETH-Board

79

Geographic Developmentsinternational commitments in Singapore and the United Arab Emirates (RAK),
clearly outweigh the strategies’ risks, the institutions and the ETH Board must be able toproceed to an in-depth risk-assessment of a given expansion strategy. Strategic risks must
be balanced against the benefits to be realized through the geographic expansion. Suchrisks are linked in particular to the long-term commitments the projects entail and to
the requirement that a critical mass needs to be reached and maintained in the long termin order to ensure the quality of research and teaching at the various sites. Under thesepremises, and taking into account the experiences ETH Zurich and EPFL have made throughtheir cooperation with Singapore and Ras-al-Khaimah (RAK) respectively, the ETH Board
will continue to monitor the geographic expansion of the ETH Domain institutions.
c) The institutions as well as the ETH Board must pay particular attention, in any geographic
expansion, that the internal balance of the institution is maintained. This regards issues
such as the capacity for internal cooperation, management resources required for new
locations, infrastructural needs (duplication of costly infrastructure) and corresponding
obligations, or mobility costs.

Criteria for Regional Cooperation
In order to ensure the sustainability of the regional branches and to minimize their strategicrisks, the ETH Board has noted the criteria the institutions want to follow when engaging inregional cooperation. While the first three criteria are considered mandatory, the latter two are
additional favorable elements. The following points summarize the most important aspects
the criteria addressed:–– Academic coherence: Each geographic development project must ensure that it is compatible
with the institution’s strategy. Developing a new focal area around particular topics at a
new location must generate added value that could not be generated if the corresponding
focus were developed at the institution’s main campus. Such added value can result fromthe peculiarities of the regional context (such as environmental, political, or cultural aspects)
as well as from particular opportunities related to the presence and the excellence of
academic or economic partners on site.
–– Academic responsibility: The institution must be granted full academic responsibility withregard to the projects it enables within the regional branch. This is of particular importancewhen chairs and other staff positions are financed by the canton and/or by private funders.
It entails full freedom with regard to recruiting scientific staff (professors, researchers)
and an assurance that they are granted full academic autonomy. It also means that theinstitution must be entitled to (re)integrate the corresponding scientific staff to its main
campus should the respective antenna project fail or be interrupted.
–– Critical mass and international competitiveness: The institution engages in collaboration
projects with the aim of increasing its capacity to deal with scientific issues where theETH Domain is in global competition with the world’s leading scientific institutions. Criticalmass at the regional locations must be guaranteed. Thus, a geographic expansion project
must contribute added value in terms of Switzerland’s competitiveness and innovative
capacity and thus meet the economic and political actors’ expectations of the ETH Domain.
–– Financial agreements: The financial aspects of the collaboration with a canton (or a country)
and the distribution of costs must be clearly defined from the outset (e.g. with regard to
the infrastructure investments a canton (or a country) is willing to contribute). If applicable,
this also entails possible schemes for the co-financing of operational costs. Not least,
financial agreements must also extend to the eventuality of the project failing.
–– Coherence with regional competencies and the regional industrial characteristics:
The scientific issues on which a regional branch focuses must be relevant with regard to the80

Intermediate Evaluation 2015

Self-Assessment Report of the ETH Board

Geographic Developments

region’s industrial and economic characteristics. Such proximity makes it possible to generate
additional benefit in terms of innovation as well as knowledge and technology transfer,contributing to the region and to the achievement of the ETH Domain’s strategic goals.
At the same time, it favors the establishment of additional networks or strategic partnerships
with economic actors from the respective region (e.g. through funding of professorships).
With regard to recent developments in the locations and branches of the ETH Domain institutions,two processes need to be distinguished. On the one hand, all institutions have strengthened
their main and their regional branches through site development and increased cooperation(C.1.1). On the other hand, in an initiative aimed among other things at deepening theETH Domain’s embedding and impact in French-speaking Switzerland, EPFL has developed astrategy of regional expansion through the creation of new regional antennae (C.1.2).

C.1.1		 Strengthening Existing Locations
Over the past decades, ETH Zurich and the Research Institutes have expanded gradually andcarefully. In terms of existing academic opportunities, they benefit mutually from their proximity
to each other in the Zurich area. They have thus rather followed a strategy of strengthening
and further developing their existing locations. In the recent past, they have undertaken thefollowing site development processes at various locations:

ETH Zurich
1)

Basel

–– The Department of Biosystems Science and Engineering (D-BSSE) of ETH Zurich in Baselwas established in 2007. It is dedicated to interdisciplinary research and development in
the area of life sciences.
–– Currently, D-BSSE hosts 17 professors with expertise in Experimental Biology, Theory,
Biotechnology, Biophysics, and Microelectronics. It will be expanded to 20 professorships,with a new building at Schällemätteli ready for occupation by 2020.
–– D-BSSE’s main academic partners are the University of Basel and the University of Zurich.
Cooperation with the University of Basel is characterized by three joint professorships(ETH Zurich and University of Basel), a joint Bachelor and Master program in Biotechnology,
and a jointly planned and operated infrastructure.
–– The creation of D-BSSE and the corresponding collaboration in the Basel area have been
driven by a political mandate. ETH Zurich expects this to yield benefit for the institution
in terms of opportunities and synergies at a location (Basel) renowned for its high standing
and great potential in the field of biomedical and biotechnological research.
2) Ticino–– In the Canton of Ticino, ETH Zurich operates the Swiss National Supercomputing Centre,
the Centro Svizzero di Calcolo Scientifico (CSCS).
–– This user lab supports all higher education and research institutions in Switzerland (including,very prominently, EPFL and the Research Institutes) and is at the heart of the institutional
collaboration between ETH Zurich and the Università della Svizzera Italiana (USI).

Intermediate Evaluation 2015

Self-Assessment Report of the ETH Board

81

Geographic Developments–– Located at Manno since 1991, the CSCS moved to a state-of-the art building at LuganoCornaredo in 2012. In scientific terms, the Ticino branch of ETH Zurich focuses consistently on
high-performance computing, but also on economics and architecture. To date, there are
two joint professorships with USI.
–– Furthermore, ETH Zurich has a strategic alliance with the Istituto di Ricerca in Biomedicina(IRB) at Bellinzona, one of the private institutions that are co-funded by the Swiss
Confederation under Art. 15 of the Act on Research and Innovation.
–– The CSCS was established in Ticino as part of ETH Zurich’s national mandate and as a consequence of a policy decision. ETH Zurich has seized the scientific opportunities deriving fromthe associated regional expansion: it has been able to engage in beneficial cooperation
with USI and has been granted the opportunity to develop a top-level facility for high-performance computing research in a supportive environment.
3) Singapore–– As an international strategic initiative, ETH Zurich has since 2010 been setting up theSingapore-ETH Center for Global Environmental Sustainability (SEC). In its launch phase, thisinitiative is being financed mainly by the National Research Foundation (NRF) of Singapore.
–– While the initial contract was signed for five years, the NRF has declared its interest incontinued collaboration. This is underscored by the long-term commitment it has expressed
through the construction of the “CREATE campus”, hosting not only ETH Zurich but the
local branches of several other world-leading universities (e.g. TU München, MIT, Cambridge
University) and the two universities of Singapore.
–– At SEC, more than 150 researchers and students participate in the Future Cities Laboratory
research focus program. This program provides the ETH researchers with unique opportunities
to study pressing issues relating to sustainable urban development in a geographicalenvironment and on a scale not found in Switzerland. FCL therefore includes activities inother fast-growing urban regions worldwide (e.g. Mumbai, Addis Ababa, and Sao Paolo).
In November 2014, a second project on “Future Resilient Systems” has started at SEC.
–– Most importantly, however, SEC also offers great opportunities to Swiss economic actors(including SMEs and ETH spin-offs), as it contributes to opening up new markets andwill potentially generate valuable findings for the Swiss economy. For instance, SEC ValueLab Asia facilitates a fruitful exchange between industry and business through workshops
and conventions held at the facility.
–– ETH Zurich’s activities at SEC not only help to strengthen its reputation and visibility in
the Asian context, but also generate interesting opportunities for science and economy in
Switzerland as a whole. While scientific benefits are the core motive for engaging inthis international collaboration, ETH Zurich has been convinced, from the outset, that it
will generate highly relevant added value for other Swiss actors too.

82

Intermediate Evaluation 2015

Self-Assessment Report of the ETH Board

Geographic Developments

Research Institutes
With the exception of the PSI, all Research Institutes operate two or more branches.
Their creation has been linked to historical developments and to the nature of their tasks:–– WSL has its main campus at Birmensdorf, close to Zurich. It has one branch at Davos(founded in 1931), focusing in particular on snow research and avalanche prediction. To takeaccount of the special characteristics of the environment south of the Alps, WSL set up athird location in 1991: a branch in Bellinzona in the Canton of Ticino. Here the cooperation
with Agroscope will be strengthened through the use of joint facilities in a new Agroscopebuilding. A fourth location in Lausanne (founded in 1991) mainly covers the special environmental characteristics of western Switzerland. Since 1995, WSL collaborators have also been
located in Sion, where they work on natural hazards in mountainous regions.
–– The head office of Empa is located at Dübendorf, where it shares a number of facilities(e.g. library, childcare center) with Eawag on a joint campus. However, Empa also has
important locations in St. Gallen (established in 1937) and Thun (1994). Furthermore, itwill be linked into the EPFL antenna projects in Sion and Fribourg.
–– Besides its main campus in Dübendorf, Eawag has a branch at Kastanienbaum (since 1960)
in the Canton of Lucerne, with aquatic research labs and direct access to one of Switzerland’s largest lakes.
While in some locations, major site development projects were undertaken (e.g. major renovationof the Eawag laboratory building at Kastanienbaum) or are projected (e.g. at the Empa sitein Thun) and strategic investments in research infrastructure are continuously being realized at
the main campuses (such as SwissFEL at PSI Villigen, NEST at Empa Dübendorf, the National
High Security Plant Protection Lab at WSL Birmensdorf and the experimental research ponds at
Eawag Dübendorf), the Research Institutes do not currently have any regional expansion plans.
At the same time, concentration processes that would include reducing the number of locations
in which the Research Institutes are active have been subject to strong political opposition,
both on the level of the cantons concerned and on the national level. The ETH Board sees thisas reflecting the great importance and added value of its institutions’ regional branches ineach of the corresponding local contexts. Therefore, despite potential synergies that might berealized through geographical concentration, no such processes are currently under way.

C.1.2		 EPFL Antennae Strategy
While both German-speaking and, to some degree, Italian-speaking Switzerland have benefitted
for many years from a strong presence of five ETH Domain institutions, the French-speaking
part of the country has solely hosted EPFL with its campus at Lausanne-Ecublens.42 In order,
among other things, to strengthen the ETH Domain’s presence in Western Switzerland andto further contribute to the region’s economic development, EPFL is implementing a strategy for
geographic development. It focuses on the creation of regional antennae in the Cantons of
Neuchâtel, Valais, Geneva and Fribourg.
By targeting existing collaborations and the specific economic and/or scientific strengths of
the respective locations, EPFL is aiming to increase the visibility of the ETH Domain and of
Switzerland as a scientific location in general. Furthermore, it seeks to encourage stronger longterm institutionalized collaboration with academic partners, in particular universities andUniversities of Applied Sciences that are already present at the respective cantonal locations.
Together with the fact that the antenna strategy is also destined to strengthen specific42		EPFL, however, has been the leading ETH Domain institution at the CSEM Competence Center (Neuchâtel) ever since thelatter’s foundation. Furthermore, two branches of WSL are located in Western Switzerland.

Intermediate Evaluation 2015

Self-Assessment Report of the ETH Board

83

Geographic Developments

academic domains and diversify EPFL’s income sources, the general objectives of the strategy
are coherent with the ETH Domain’s performance mandate for the period 2013-2016 and theETH Board’s strategic planning.
EPFL has developed four regional antenna projects in Western Switzerland and is running
one antenna in the Middle East. These projects are briefly presented below:
1)

Microcity Neuchâtel–– Since 2011, the Canton of Neuchâtel has invested 72 MCHF in the “Microcity” buildingin Neuchâtel. Since 2014, 600 EPFL researchers have been working at Microcity on an area
totaling 23,000 m2.
–– To date, 11 chairs have been installed at Neuchâtel, one of which is endowed by PX Groupand one by Patek Philippe.
–– The EPFL engagement at Microcity Neuchâtel not only serves to strengthen its ties withthe local watchmaking industry, but also permits closer collaboration with the CSEM
and helps to strengthen its Centre de technologie photovoltaïque, which is supportedby the Confederation.
–– For EPFL, Microcity Neuchâtel is also an ideal location for developing its research focus
on advanced manufacturing.
2) EPFL Valais Wallis–– The EPFL antenna Valais Wallis involves the setting-up of around 11 chairs, seven of which
will be financed by the Canton of Valais. As of 2015, a first building at Sion will host the first
EPFL teams.
–– The research priority at EPFL Valais Wallis is energy, focusing on issues such as hydropower,
water management, energy resources for industry, energy management (in collaboration
with CREM at Martigny), and green chemistry (energy storage, utilization of CO2). Technicalplatforms related to these areas of research will also be developed.
–– At the Sion campus, the University of Applied Sciences Valais (HES Valais) will be locatedin the immediate vicinity of EPFL Valais Wallis, facilitating collaboration and creatingsynergies as well as opportunities for joint development and use of technology platforms.
–– Finally, collaboration in the health sector with SUVA (the Swiss Accident Insurance Agency)
and the cantonal hospital at Sion is also being targeted. An EPFL team started working
in this field in November 2013.
3) Campus Biotech Geneva–– Campus Biotech Geneva will be realized at the former Merck/Serono premises in Geneva.
At this location (known as the Sécheron site and located close to the Geneva-based
branches of numerous international organizations, including WHO), EPFL and its partners
will realize the Wyss Center for Neuro- and Bio-Engineering.
–– Focusing on neurosciences and bio-engineering, Campus Biotech will be developed
by EPFL in close collaboration with the University of Geneva, present at Campus Biotech
with a research team since 2014, and the Geneva University Hospital (HUG – Hôpitaux
Universitaires Genevois). Two EPFL chairs at Campus Biotech Geneva will be endowed by
M. E. Bertarelli and one chair by Medtronic.

84

Intermediate Evaluation 2015

Self-Assessment Report of the ETH Board

Geographic Developments–– Campus Biotech will host EPFL’s prestigious Human Brain Project, its Center for Neuroprosthetics, and the planned Lemanic Center for Personalized Health.43
4) Smart Living Lab Fribourg–– In Fribourg, the Canton of Fribourg aims to implement the ambitious “Blue Factory”
development project on the former premises of the Cardinal brewery.
–– In this context, EPFL has engaged in a collaboration project with the University of Fribourg
and the Fribourg University of Applied Sciences. This collaboration will focus on sustainable
construction and civil engineering. Within the project, seven chairs will be installed,three of which are financed by the Canton of Fribourg, two by external partners, and twoby the University of Fribourg. Moreover, the Fribourg University of Applied Sciences willbase two research groups at Blue Factory.
–– The program will be built around three poles, namely
BUILD - Future “Smart Living Lab” Building
ACAD - Academic center of expertise
DEMO - Demonstrator, workshops and public outreach5) EPFL Middle East Ras-al-Kaimah–– The EPFL Middle East program at Ras-al-Kaimah (RAK) was launched in 2010 to seize
opportunities in the Gulf region for pursuing specific research activities in such fields asenergy, sustainable development, transport, and urban planning.
–– In 2011, the EPFL Energy Management and Sustainability master program was launchedwithin EFPL Middle East, and the first students graduated from this program in 2013.
–– Likewise, several EPFL labs have engaged in research projects with EPFL Middle East;
these comprise doctoral projects carried out at RAK, often in close collaboration withlocal and regional industry partners.
–– A second phase of EPFL Middle East (continuation until 2020) has been prepared by EPFL
and will be formally agreed upon in 2015.

43		See part D.1 below for further information on Campus Biotech’s role in the context of the EPFL strategy in the field oftranslational medical research.

Intermediate Evaluation 2015

Self-Assessment Report of the ETH Board

85

C.2		Long-term Development“How can the ETH Domain institutions
grow long-term and how can theirposition be strengthened within theoverall academic and economic system
in Switzerland?”Long-term Development

C.2 Long-term Development
Assessment by the ETH Board
AssetsThe ETH Board is convinced that strengthening the position of the ETH Domain institutions
within the overall academic and economic system in Switzerland does not per se require
the institutions to grow. In fact, some of the world’s leading universities are of similar sizeto ETH Zurich and EPFL (e.g. Harvard, MIT and Stanford). Rather, qualitative development,
driven by the autonomy of the six institutions, is key for maintaining their leading roles.
The ETH Board considers that

“How can the ETH Domain
institutions grow long-term andhow can their position bestrengthened within the overall
academic and economic system
in Switzerland?”––the ETH Domain institutions currently hold a very strong position within the academic
and economic system in Switzerland;––for academic institutions, growth does not represent an end in itself, but enables themto prospectively develop new areas of research and teaching, and to set trends in theseareas, while the existing offering remains in demand at the present level;––the ETH Domain institutions have engaged in continued efforts to join forces with otheracademic and political actors to tackle the lack of qualified MINT personnel, which still
represents a pressing need for Switzerland and its economy;––these efforts are the main drivers of growth in the ETH Domain institutions in the recent past.
Challenges and Opportunities
Besides the necessity to secure the general core prerequisites for any sustainable andsuccessful positioning of the ETH Domain institutions – i.e. openness and internationality,
autonomy, and stable funding –, strengthening the ETH Domain institutions’ position
within the overall academic and economic system in Switzerland has to meet four principal
challenges, both on the structural and the topical levels:a) The ETH Domain institutions must be enabled not only to continue to be flagship institutions of science and technology in Switzerland, but also to continue setting the longterm trends in research and teaching as well as with regard to the planning and development of new research infrastructures. Strengthening the institutions’ position therefore
means, among other things, strengthening and sustaining their representatives’ ability toassume leading roles in international (scientific) networks.
b) It is a unique asset of the ETH Domain that it not only provides an excellent environment
attracting the best researchers worldwide but also hosts world-leading user labs aroundlarge-scale research infrastructures, which serve the international scientific community as
well as industry and which prove to be key for the further development of innovation in
Switzerland. Strengthening this unique asset of the ETH Domain therefore means increasing
its capacity to contribute to economic development and strengthen existing and new
high-tech industries in Switzerland.
c) Together, the ETH Board institutions must strive at effectively implementing the strategic
focus areas set forth in the ETH Board’s Strategic Planning in order to continuously
provide contributions to the important societal challenges, e.g. in the fields of energy
and environment, sustainable resource use, or health in an ageing society, and thus
further strengthening the ETH Domain’s position within society at large.
d) Given the limited nature of resources (both human and financial), the ETH Domain
institutions must be enabled to set posteriorities and to engage in a continuous portfolio

Intermediate Evaluation 2015

Self-Assessment Report of the ETH-Board

89

Long-term Development

development. The standard practice – applied by all ETH Domain institutions and, inparticular, by the Research Institutes – to outsource routine procedures that no longer
constitute real research topics, or to hand over such activities to private actors (including
spin-offs), must be continued.

C.2.1		 Reasons for and Limits to Growth
For academic institutions, growth cannot represent an end in itself. In order to act successfully
in research, teaching and knowledge and technology transfer, an institution must reach a criticalmass of people involved. However, it should not exceed a size that allows thorough quality
control, providing the necessary excellent research infrastructure as well as the required spaceand capacities for high-level teaching. For all ETH Domain institutions, in their capacity as
world-leading universities and research institutes, these requirements define limits of growth,which interact – as a general precondition – with the financial resources attributed to theinstitutions.
Both the private and the public sector in Switzerland still face a lack of qualified persons
in the so-called MINT44 fields. Both ETH Zurich and EPFL therefore play an important role inmeeting the need to train more persons in these disciplines and hence to respond to an urgent
requirement of Swiss industry. The two institutions’ moderate to rapid (and in any case steady)growth over the past decade is at least partly responsible for the improvement of the situation
with regard to MINT personnel. The problem, however, is far from being resolved.
–– Between 2000 and 2012 the total number of students (including doctoral students) at EPFL
has increased by 90 %.
–– For ETH Zurich, the corresponding figure is 66 %.
–– In its current outlook, the Federal Office for Statistics is projecting an additional increaseof 10 % for both ETH Zurich and EPFL from 2013 to 2020. The two Federal Institutes ofTechnology therefore expect to reach, by 2020, a total number of 20,000 (ETH Zurich) and
11,000 (EPFL) students.
–– Both institutions consider that this represents the limit of size, which they cannot exceed
in a long-term perspective. Beyond this size, both institutions estimate that they would not
be able to provide the current quality of teaching, learning, and research, and would
not dispose of sufficient land reserves, in order to accommodate the teaching and researchfacilities on their existing campuses.45–– In addition, the two Federal Institutes of Technology must be able to control the balance
between Swiss and foreign students in order to remain as deeply rooted as today within
Swiss society and to maintain the excellent quality of the foreign students admitted to the
ETH Domain institutions.
Growth in student numbers is largely driven by the fact that admission to universities in
Switzerland is guaranteed for all students having successfully obtained the Matura school-leaving
qualification. In order to be able to react to capacity shortages, the ETH Board has been granted,
under a 2013 amendment of the ETH Act, the right, if requested by one of the schools, to limit
the number of foreign students entering higher-semester Bachelor or entire Master programs.
However, no regulation mechanism is in place for the first year of Bachelor programs.
44		MINT is the German acronym for Mathematics, Informatics, Natural sciences, and Technical sciences. The degrees offered

at ETH Zurich and EPFL are predominantly degrees in “MINT disciplines”.
45		Moreover, it is sometimes argued that in general terms the optimum size for a university is between 10,000 and

20,000 students (including doctoral students), which is confirmed by the fact that most top-ranked universities in theworld are within this range.

90

Intermediate Evaluation 2015

Self-Assessment Report of the ETH Board

Long-term Development

C.2.2 Requirements
As the institutions can be expected to grow until they meet these limits, they also require themeans to ensure a student-to-teacher ratio that remains internationally competitive.
–– Only if this requirement can be met can the ETH Domain remain attractive for the best
students and the best researchers and professors worldwide. As has been shown,
this represents a conditio sine qua non for the ETH Domain to exercise its leading role for
Switzerland as a science and technology hot spot.
–– It is therefore crucial that growth in student numbers is at least matched by an increasein the number of professors both at ETH Zurich and EPFL, and by an increase in the numberof senior scientists and teaching assistants.
–– This increase must go beyond the mere increase projected in terms of student numbers, as
an improvement of the student-to-teacher ratio at the two schools represents a longstanding objective that gains in importance as the expectations towards the institutions
rise with regard to both their academic standing and their contributions to the solution ofurgent societal needs (such as in the field of energy research).
–– At the same time, measures must also be taken to ensure adequate support for all teaching
personnel within the institutions.
These considerations apply equally to the increasing involvement of the Research Institutes
in teaching at ETH Zurich and EPFL as well as in cantonal universities and Universities of Applied
Sciences, and with regard to their increasingly prominent role in the education of doctoral
students. For these institutions, however, growth depends less on demographic and economic
trends in the number of students. Therefore, drivers of growth and limits to growth are notas clearly defined. The number of tasks assigned to the Research Institutes depends to aconsiderable extent on government policy and priority-setting, in particular with regard to theresearch infrastructures they host and operate and to the national tasks they are assigned with.
If these tasks, benefiting the scientific community or society as a whole, become more onerous
than at present, then it is crucial for policy-makers to ensure that the institutions are granted
sufficient resources to successfully handle such new or additional tasks.
In short, the sustainability of growth, as well as the limits to growth, are always going to
be shaped in large part by political decisions. Such decisions must ensure–– that adequate means and the necessary degree of freedom are granted to the institutions
that are expected to grow; and–– that corresponding measures undertaken by the institutions, e.g. in compliance with the
expectation to attract more third-party funds, receive political support.

C.2.3		 Novelty
While the institutions of the ETH Domain are convinced that growth must not represent an end
in itself, they will, however, encourage growth if this serves the continued effort to enhance
the quality and diversity of their work. In this sense, growth may be driven by the fact thatnew research areas – as was the case, for instance, in the Life Sciences – are developed, while
existing ones retain their relevance and cannot be substituted. It may also concern new orenhanced infrastructures and may relate to the geographical dimension and its potential for
deepened collaboration.

Intermediate Evaluation 2015

Self-Assessment Report of the ETH Board

91

C.3		Contributions to the Improvementof the Swiss Higher Education System“In what way do the ETH Domain
institutions contribute to improving
the Swiss higher education system
as a whole? In which areas can they
make a greater contribution?”

Contributions to the Improvement of the Swiss Higher Education System

C.3 Contributions to the Improvement of the Swiss Higher Education System
Assessment by the ETH Board
AssetsContributions to the improvement of higher education in Switzerland are provided by all
actors in the higher education system, as long as they enjoy sufficient autonomy to focus on
their respective scientific strengths. It is through such a focus that all higher education
institutions in Switzerland can represent attractive partners for each other and thus benefit
mutually – as experienced in manifold ways by the ETH Domain institutions. The ETH Boardis therefore convinced that

“In what way do the ETH
Domain institutions contributeto improving the Swiss higher
education system as a whole?
In which areas can they make agreater contribution?”––the major contribution of the ETH Domain for the Swiss higher education system consistsin the world-class positioning of its institutions and their academic networks;––an important contribution of the ETH Domain at the service of the scientific community in
Switzerland and worldwide consists in the fact that it hosts, operates and develops
world–leading, large-scale research infrastructures;––the ETH Domain institutions are pioneering the development of the Swiss higher education
system not least with regard to teaching and the development and training of young
academics;––the excellent positioning of the ETH Domain institutions opens up unique possibilities forcooperation, education, and teaching within the Swiss context;––cooperation among ETH Domain institutions and between ETH Domain institutions andacademic partners is thus already very strong;––the ETH Domain contributes to the higher education system through the high-level involvement of its representatives in the SNSF Research Council and similar scientific bodies;––such cooperation also comprises nationwide initiatives such as SystemsX.ch, Nano-Tera.ch,and other programs plus Cooperation and Innovation Projects of the Swiss University
Conference (SUC), as well as the contributions of ETH Domain institutions, often as leading
houses, to NCCRs and SCCERs.
Challenges and Opportunities
The ETH Domain institutions and the ETH Board have the ambition to contribute actively andconsistently to the improvement of the Swiss higher education system and thereby tostrengthen Switzerland’s innovative capacity, its leading role and its worldwide reputationin the academic field. Within the context of current developments in higher education policy,
the ETH Board highlights the three following challenges:a) Strategic focal points, nationwide initiatives and programs to be defined and implemented by Swiss higher education actors (for instance in the context of the upcoming ERI
Message) must be designed in a way that allows all involved partners to play to theirstrengths and to contribute their particular competencies in the best possible manner.
From the perspective of the ETH Domain, the Personalized Health initiative and thefollow-up of the current Cooperation and Innovation Projects of the Swiss University
Conference (SUC) are of particular relevance.

Intermediate Evaluation 2015

Self-Assessment Report of the ETH-Board

95

Contributions to the Improvement of the Swiss Higher Education Systemb) With its recent report on measures for the advancement of young academics in Switzerland46, the Federal Council provides an important basis for effectively strengthening the
Swiss academic promotion system so as to even better enable young academics to pursue
an academic career. However, the ETH Board is convinced that attention must be paid
to adequately adapting the intended measures to the individual situation of the respective
institutions. For instance, the institutions of the ETH Domain are acknowledged by thereport to be pioneers, as they have already implemented the main components ofthe system, which will now be extended to all Swiss universities – namely, the strategic
promotion of assistant professorships with tenure track. Hence the imposition of adverse
or ineffective measures on them must be avoided.
c) In light of the changes introduced by the new HEdA governance, the ETH Board andthe ETH Domain institutions will need to ensure that they can continue to contribute aseffectively as today to the priority-setting and the general decisions governing thedevelopment of the Swiss higher education system. In that way they can fully deploy
their strengths to the benefit of the Swiss academic landscape.

C.3.1		 Core Contribution: World-class Research
All ETH Domain institutions are characterized by the deeply rooted conviction that only teaching
and research which is competitive with other world-leading institutions may yield sustainable
benefit for the country (e.g. in terms of highly qualified graduates trained for private and public
actors in Switzerland, technological applications at the service of society, jobs created in R&D,
etc.). Accordingly, the ETH Board is convinced that their world-class positioning and the dynamic
to which this contributes within the Swiss academic community represent their core contribution to the Swiss higher education system. The benefit this generates can be illustrated by thefollowing aspects:–– Given that science and technology clearly represent one of the most important resourceson which Switzerland’s welfare depends, the fact that both ETH Zurich and EPFL rank among
the top universities worldwide and are even leaders in continental Europe47, is an evermore important element in strengthening Switzerland as a scientific location. Moreover, as
shown by the present evaluation, all institutions of the ETH Domain rank well above theworld average in terms of bibliometric data.48–– Universities and Universities of Applied Science in Switzerland have the opportunity toengage both in competition and in collaboration with world-leading universities within
their own country and sometimes even within one geographic area.
–– Students – undergraduates and graduates as well as those in continuing education – havethe opportunity to learn from the best researchers worldwide from the very beginningand are exposed to stimulating competition in terms of ideas and performance that trainsthem for their careers in private industry or in academia.

46		See “Massnahmen zur Förderung des wissenschaftlichen Nachwuchses in der Schweiz. Bericht in Erfüllung des Postulats

WBK-SR 12.3343” dated May 26, 2014, http://www.sbfi.admin.ch/themen/hochschulen/index.html?lang=de&download=NHzLpZeg7t,lnp6I0NTU042l2Z6ln1acy4Zn4Z2qZpnO2Yuq2Z6gpJCEdn15gGym162epYbg2c_JjKbNoKSn6A-(last accessed November 24, 2014).
47		The leading status of the ETH Domain institutions is not only evident in university rankings, which have always been
subject to controversy. It is also confirmed, for instance, by the fact that ETH Zurich and EPFL rank 3rd and 4th with regard
to the number of the prestigious ERC grants their researchers have been awarded. On the level of the Research Institutes,
several other indicators can be seen as demonstrating their world-leading role in their fields of activity (see the 2013
annual report of the ETH Domain for further details on international benchmarking of the ETH Domain institutions).
48		See chapter E below for the results of the bibliometric analysis.

96

Intermediate Evaluation 2015

Self-Assessment Report of the ETH Board

Contributions to the Improvement of the Swiss Higher Education System–– Researchers, both from higher education and research institutions and from the private
sector have access to knowledge and world-class infrastructure benefiting their own work;
this is evident, for instance, from the fact that during the past years several large andmulti-national companies have set up or entirely moved their R&D divisions as close as
possible to one of the ETH Domain’s institutions.

C.3.2		 Pioneering the Development of the Swiss Higher Education System
The general contributions of the ETH Domain institutions to the improvement of the Swiss higher
education system outlined above go in parallel with the input that comes from developments
in teaching and with regard to organizational issues pioneered by the institutions.
–– As, for instance, the recent report of the Federal Council on measures for the advancementof young academics in Switzerland49 shows, ETH Zurich and EPFL have been pioneers in
Switzerland in hiring young professors on assistant professorships with tenure track. In thereport, this way of recruiting promising young scholars is presented as one of the mostimportant measures to be more broadly implemented for advancing the position of young
academics in Switzerland and hence improving the chances of retaining the best students
from Switzerland interested in a scientific career inside or outside Switzerland.
–– Similarly, EPFL and ETH Zurich are committed and influential pioneers in the use of
online courses for advanced and improved forms of higher education teaching. MOOCs,
for instance, not only contribute to new approaches in teaching but also increase theETH Domain’s visibility worldwide.
–– ETH Zurich and EPFL have been pioneers in fully implementing the Bologna system within
their study programs.
–– Not least, all ETH Domain institutions are actively involved in continuing education,
where – owing to the outstanding quality of research they offer and to their strong linkages
with industry and public administration – they have been able to establish high standards
and a strong reputation.

C.3.3		 Other Contributions
Other contributions by the institutions include–– the numerous collaboration projects (including teaching at other universities or Universities
of Applied Sciences) they are engaged in50;–– the exchange of best practices with other higher education and research institutions in
Switzerland;–– the contributions by ETH Zurich and EPFL to the work of CRUS and swissuniversities;–– the many projects the institutions lead or contribute to in NCCRs, SCCERs and other nationwide initiatives such as cooperation projects of the SUC;–– the participation of affiliates from institutions of the ETH Domain in recruiting committees,
steering boards of academic initiatives and other bodies.

49		See the Federal Council’s report “Massnahmen zur Förderung des wissenschaftlichen Nachwuchses in der Schweiz”.
50		See C.5 below for details on cooperation.

Intermediate Evaluation 2015

Self-Assessment Report of the ETH Board

97

Contributions to the Improvement of the Swiss Higher Education System

Moreover, a valuable instrument for increasing the linkages and mutual benefit between theinstitutions of the ETH Domain (in particular the Research Institutes) and the Swiss academic
landscape are joint affiliations of professors. This sharing of resources and knowledge on the
one hand strengthens the academic profile of the Research Institutes involved while on
the other hand it enhances the scientific capacities within the partner institution(s), as they
benefit from the outstanding quality of research and teaching provided by the ETH Domain
staff. Similarly, mutual benefit is generated through the involvement of PhD students as wellas master’s students in research performed at the Research Institutes.

98Intermediate Evaluation 2015

Self-Assessment Report of the ETH Board

C.4		
Structure of Study Programs“Do the Federal Institutes of Technology
structure their study programs
appropriately for the Swiss higher
education system and for Switzerland
as an economic and academic
center in a globalized world? Do theFederal Institutes of Technology
respect the principle of subsidiarity interms of the training portfolio of
the Universities of Applied Sciences
and cantonal universities, concentratingon their core mandate?”

Structure of Study Programs

C.4 Structure of Study Programs
Assessment by the ETH Board
AssetsETH Zurich and EPFL develop their study programs to educate students for systemic andinterdisciplinary approaches that are rooted in a profound knowledge of fundamental
disciplines, and to foster an innovative and entrepreneurial spirit. As the ETH Board holds,
it can be shown that––the study programs at ETH Zurich and EPFL are very well suited to the requirements of
the job market in Switzerland;––they are highly appropriate to the needs of companies, NGOs and the public administrationin Switzerland as well as the Swiss economy as a whole;––they also allow a sufficient number of students to qualify for careers on the academic track;––the intense stakeholder involvement in curriculum development at both ETH Zurich and
EPFL as well as in the development of the Research Institutes’ continuing education offering is a crucial element in the successful positioning of the ETH Domain’s study programs;“Do the Federal Institutes ofTechnology structure their study
programs appropriately for the
Swiss higher education systemand for Switzerland as an
economic and academic centerin a globalized world? Do theFederal Institutes of Technology
respect the principle of subsidiarity in terms of the training
portfolio of the Universities
of Applied Sciences and cantonal
universities, concentrating on
their core mandate?”––the principle of subsidiarity vis-à-vis the partners in the higher education area
is respected; the teaching and research portfolios as well as their distribution acrossdifferent academic partners have been adequately reassessed over the past decade;––a properly functioning system allows outstanding students from the Universities ofApplied Sciences to enter study programs at the ETH and thus strengthens the permeabilityof the Swiss dual education system;––in general, good use is made of synergies.
Challenges and Opportunities
The ETH Board holds that two challenges need to be addressed with regard to the long-term
interaction between different actors in the Swiss higher education system:a) The ETH Board considers that the Swiss dual education system is crucial to the country’s
success. It is therefore committed to helping develop the Swiss academic landscape ina way that strengthens the dual education system, rather than jeopardizing the successful
distribution of roles currently in place among the various actors in the Swiss academic
system. The ETH Board will pay particular attention to this view in light of the new HEdA
governance.
b) In the ETH Board’s view, the principle of subsidiarity means in particular that theETH Domain institutions must retain a study program that is primarily based on theirfundamental and interdisciplinary research fields. Thus, their profiles must as suchremain clearly distinct from the profiles offered by Universities of Applied Sciences, which
educate students primarily based on their mission to cater to the needs of the market.
In the long run, this serves, and therefore strengthens, the distinct profiles of each of
the higher education institutions in Switzerland. This implies that the right to award PhD
degrees must continue to be granted to the ETH and the universities exclusively.

Intermediate Evaluation 2015

Self-Assessment Report of the ETH-Board

101

Structure of Study Programs

C.4.1		 Adequacy of Study Programs
Both Federal Institutes of Technology attach great importance to offering curricula and study
programs that serve the prime mission they have been assigned with since their foundation: totrain highly qualified experts in the fields of natural and technical sciences including engineering and – more recently – the Life Sciences, and to ensure that they acquire the relevant
skills to take up leading positions in industry, in society, or in science. All recent surveys among
graduates from ETH Zurich and EPFL confirm that this objective is met to a very high degree. For
instance, both MA and PhD graduates enjoy very good employability.51 Similarly, MINT graduates
occupy leading positions to a much larger degree than their peers from other disciplines.52
These figures prove the appropriateness of the skills and capacities taught in the ETH Domain
and show that the study programs offered successfully answer the needs of the job market.
Graduates from ETH Zurich and EPFL seem to be able to meet the requirements of the job market
and are well prepared for their careers as leading individuals in private companies or public
administration53. Both schools place great emphasis on offering an education that ensures
excellent employability on the one hand and, on the other hand, gives them the skills andknowledge required by the economic actors in Switzerland and worldwide. Accordingly, quality
control of their curricula plays an eminent role at both schools: these processes are regularly
evaluated externally (e.g. through audits of OAQ).

C.4.2		 Development and Evaluation of Curricula
With regard to curriculum design, the evaluation processes are the following:
At ETH Zurich there is a standard process for minor and major changes to curriculum design
as well as for the development of a new curriculum:–– The initiative for setting up a new curriculum or for the revision of an existing one cancome from the professors or the students.
–– It can be based on own ideas or on good practices of other departments and universities,
and on the recommendation of a peer review, of industrial partners or from politicalcircles.
–– The development of curricula lies within the responsibility of a department. Usually, a
departmental committee consisting of 1/3 professors, 1/3 senior scientists and assistants,
and 1/3 students acts as the driving force.
–– At the central level, the Pro-rector for Curriculum development is delegated by the
Rector for managing the process (this function has existed since October 1, 2012).
He is supported by the central unit Educational Development and Technology (LET).
–– The LET as well as the teaching specialists in the department support the process,whereas the rectorate is responsible for the legal aspects.
–– Finally, a new curriculum or a revision of an existing curriculum has to be approvedby the Executive Board (Schulleitung).
–– With respect to major changes of an existing curriculum or the development of a new
curriculum, core stakeholders from private industry and public administration as well as
the Executive Board are involved at an early stage
51		See the sources indicated in Footnote 7 (chapter A.1) above.
52		24 % for MINT disciplines compared to 16.6 % for other disciplines after one year; almost 50 % after five years for

MINT disciplines, compared to about 35 % for other disciplines at the same point in time.
53		See, e.g., Dyllick, Thomas/Torgler, Daniel (2007): “Bildungshintergrund von Führungskräften und Platzierungsstärke

von Universitäten in der Schweiz”, in: Die Unternehmung 61 (1), 69-94.

102

Intermediate Evaluation 2015

Self-Assessment Report of the ETH Board

Structure of Study Programs–– The Quality Management System of ETH Zurich as a whole has been evaluated by the Swiss
Center of Accreditation and Quality Assurance in Higher Education (OAQ) in 2008 and 2013.
At EPFL, the faculty must first present the idea for the introduction of a new curriculum to the
EPFL directorate.
–– In close collaboration with the Dean of the Bachelor and Master school, the chosen project
manager will prepare a detailed analysis according to the official guidelines on how tocreate a new curriculum.
–– The latter require a good knowledge and an overview of existing offers worldwide, ananalysis of the strengths of EPFL in the domain at stake, as well as a study of the needs ofindustry and the future job market, including a forecast of the required infrastructures.
–– The complete analysis is finally presented to the EPFL directorate for approval.
Evaluation of curricula is organized along the following lines:
At ETH Zurich curricula are evaluated on the occasion of a peer review by a department, i.e.
every 6 to 7 years.
–– The process is identical to that of peer review as a whole: The department first produces aself-evaluation report, followed by a site visit by an international review panel. The findingsof the other instruments for the evaluation of teaching and learning are considered in boththe self-evaluation report and the site visit. These instruments are the course evaluation by
the students and the biannual graduate surveys by the Swiss Federal Statistical Office.
–– The panel establishes the experts’ report, to which the respective department responds in
a comprehensive statement.
–– The Executive Board of ETH Zurich finally takes its decisions on the basis of the recommendations by the experts and the comments by the department, and submits the report to
the ETH Board.
At EPFL, existing curricula are regularly accredited by the Swiss OAQ and the French CTI.
–– The Dean of the Bachelor and Master school together with the Deputy to the Vice-president
for MQS manages this accreditation.
–– For each curriculum there is an advisory board composed of figures from industry as well as
external academics which helps the section responsible in reviewing and adapting thegeneral content.
–– In each section, an academic committee, including an external member, helps to review
the courses as well as examination content.
–– In addition, the career center organizes an annual job-ad analysis for every master’s title
to obtain an indication of the employability of EPFL students.

C.4.3		 Stakeholder Involvement–– In all curriculum development processes, it is important that advice from the core stakeholders, i.e. actors from private industry and public administration who represent theoccupational fields in which graduates from the corresponding programs may be employed,
is integrated in curriculum development. This applies not only to bachelor and masterprograms but also to the continuing education offering. More precisely, the involvement ofprivate companies is achieved as follows:

Intermediate Evaluation 2015

Self-Assessment Report of the ETH Board

103

Structure of Study Programs–– At ETH Zurich, professors are in close contact with industry, usually through research
projects. Some of them started their career in industry. At several departments, an advisoryboard with representatives from industry is assigned the task of ensuring a continuing
exchange with industry.
–– At EPFL, representatives of the main stakeholders sit on the advisory board of each curriculum.
Under the initiative of the Dean of the Bachelor and Master school, a three-monthinternship was introduced for all engineering students in order to strengthen relations withthe job market. Furthermore, EPFL faculty members have close ties with industry throughtheir research and development projects.
–– At the Research Institutes, the continuing education offering is being developed andassessed in continuous exchange with relevant stakeholders from the private sector, fromprofessional associations and from public authorities.

C.4.4		 Collaboration within Curricula
With regard to the training portfolios of the other higher education institutions, ETH Zurichand EPFL collaborate closely with partner institutions not only within the ETH Domain, but alsowith universities and Universities of Applied Sciences, mostly within a limited geographicalarea. Examples are:–– the entire educational offering of ETH Zurich is open to students from the University of
Zurich and vice versa (credit points being fully recognized mutually);–– the educational offering of ETH Zurich and the University of Basel in Life Sciences areopen to students from both universities;–– in Lausanne, EPFL offers courses in mathematics and in natural sciences for the studentsof the University of Lausanne;–– at the same time, courses in social sciences and humanities are taught to EPFL students
by lecturers from the University of Lausanne;–– the development of the EPFL regional antennae in Neuchâtel, Sion, Geneva and Fribourg
will provide new opportunities for collaboration in teaching with Universities of Applied
Sciences and academic partner institutions;–– numerous scientists of ETH Domain institutions teach at other higher education andresearch institutions54;–– joint master’s programs (leading to joint master’s degrees) as well as programs in thefield of continuing education have been developed and established together with partner
universities;–– collaboration with medical schools and (university) hospitals has been significantly
increased.

54		See C.5 below: about 1/3 of all teaching hours of staff of the Research Institutes are taught outside the ETH Domain.

104

Intermediate Evaluation 2015

Self-Assessment Report of the ETH Board

C.5		
Cooperation“How is cooperation between theFederal Institutes of Technology and the
Swiss Universities of Applied Sciences
and cantonal universities to be judged?”Cooperation

C.5 Cooperation
Assessment by the ETH Board
Assets
The institutions of the ETH Domain have a long-standing tradition of collaborating intensively with partners from cantonal universities and from Universities of Applied Sciences.
The ETH Board acknowledges and emphasizes that––cooperation by the ETH Domain institutions is far above the cooperation levels achievedby comparable European institutions;“How is cooperation between
the Federal Institutes ofTechnology and the Swiss
Universities of Applied Sciences
and cantonal universities tobe judged?”––cooperation by ETH Zurich and EPFL is particularly strong with their respective local partner
universities and covers a wide range of fields;––cooperation with Universities of Applied Sciences is frequently practiced by all institutions;this is a particular focus for the Research Institutes, given that their thematic mission
places particular emphasis on application-oriented research and continuing education;––the academic system sets inherent incentives to collaborate with academic partners
worldwide, as it ensures mutual benefit if collaboration is freely chosen according to thescientific added value it generates for the partners.
Challenges and Opportunities
Given the above-mentioned tendency to a programmatic orientation of research and teachingactivities55 and growing demands for coordination, three challenges must be addressed:a) The ETH Board is convinced that successful academic cooperation at the level of bothindividuals and institutions is sustainably fostered by encouraging bottom-up initiatives,
rather than by imposing cooperation in a top-down process or as a result of politicaldecisions.
b) Cooperation between the ETH Domain and the Universities of Applied Sciences can generateconsiderable added value for both sides. Accordingly, the ETH Board supports initiatives
for strengthening this cooperation, but holds that the distribution of tasks between the
ETH Domain and the Universities of Applied Sciences must be maintained and fostered inorder to maximize the mutual benefit of such cooperation.
c) Cost-intensive fields of research and teaching as well as costly infrastructures are areasin which political guidelines and the resulting cooperation are seen as vital to ensuringthat resources are efficiently used to the benefit of the entire scientific community in
Switzerland. The ETH Board acknowledges the need to ensure a suitable degree of coordination with regard to these cost-intensive fields. However, it feels that the resulting
political decisions must fulfill the criteria of scientific excellence and also emphasizes theneed to maintain the fragile balance between competition and cost-effectiveness.

55		See chapter B.1 above.

Intermediate Evaluation 2015

Self-Assessment Report of the ETH-Board

107

Cooperation

C.5.1		 Individual Level
Cooperation among researchers is an indispensable prerequisite for top-level research. Scientificcooperation with like-minded academics, but also with partners outside academia, is necessary
to complement existing competencies and, through cooperation, to generate additional
scientific knowledge or to find new solutions to practical problems. Hence the institutions of
the ETH Domain are all very highly involved in collaboration with other academic institutions,both nationally and internationally:–– For by far the most part, cooperation takes place at the level of individual researchers andresearch groups.
–– Such cooperation takes a wide variety of forms; it may for instance entail student as wellas co-worker mobility, the sharing of resources, or joint research and publications. It is therefore impossible to establish a comprehensive overview across the entire range of scientificcooperation.
–– Cooperation is not limited to the two ETH but is an equally important component of theresearch activities deployed by the four Research Institutes.56 For instance, the PSI currently
has more than 1,000 active contracts (collaboration agreements, memoranda of understanding, non-disclosure agreements), of which more than 550 concern Swiss partners.
More than two-thirds of the users of the PSI’s large-scale facilities are from outside theowner institution.
–– Scholars from the Research Institutes are at the same time also highly involved in teaching,
not only at ETH Zurich and EPFL, but also at cantonal universities and Universities of Applied
Sciences. The number of hours taught by staff members of the Research Institutes amounts
to more than 16,000 annually, having stabilized at this level in the recent past. 1/3 of their
total teaching hours are taught outside the ETH Domain.
Such cooperation at the individual level generally aims at bringing together the best partners
for dealing with a particular scientific issue. Accordingly, scientific added value, gained
from a consistent orientation to scientific excellence, is by far the most important und thus thedecisive driver for cooperation at this level. Given the global interconnection in all scientificfields, national or regional boundaries are not a prime criterion in the selection of partners.

C.5.2		 Institutional Level–– When it comes to inter-institutional cooperation, i.e. cooperation that is formalized by anagreement between institutions, the actors’ geographical proximity plays an eminent role.
As two recent studies on the Swiss situation regarding inter-institutional cooperation
between higher education institutions show,57 such cooperation cannot be successful if it isconceived as an end in itself. Rather, it is shown that there are three main motives for
an institution to engage in formal cooperation with one or several other institution(s) or,
not least of all, with private or public actors from industry or public administration:

56		Joint publications resulting from (individual) research collaborations are an important part of their outcome. The resultsof the bibliometric analysis conducted for the present evaluation indicate, for each institution of the ETH Domain, theextent to which its publications are the result of international and national collaboration. The analysis shows thatinternational collaboration increasingly represents the standard pattern for publications in (high-ranked) journals, butthat national collaboration retains an important role (see chapter E for details).
57		See Reichert, Sybille (2009): Inter-institutionelle Kooperationen zwischen Hochschulen in der Schweiz:
Motivationen, Rahmenbedingungen, Erfolgsfaktoren und Hindernisse. Abschlussbericht der Studie im Auftrag des SWTR,(http://archiv.swir.ch/wp-content/uploads/Abschlussbericht_Studie_SWTR-Kooperation_Hochschulen_Schweiz-2008.pdf[last accessed November 24, 2014]) and Obermayer, Susanne (2011): Kooperationsinititativen an Schweizer Hochschulen,
Cahier de l’IDHEAP 262, Lausanne: IDHEAP.

108

Intermediate Evaluation 2015

Self-Assessment Report of the ETH BoardCooperation

1)

The cooperation serves to generate scientific findings that require the specific competencies
or resources of the partners involved. In such cases, inter-institutional cooperation is driven
by explicit scientific interest and is often the result of bottom-up initiatives from within theinstitutions.

2) The cooperation is a means of implementing and achieving strategic focal points set by theinstitutions provided thata) specific competencies of the partners involved are indispensable, orb) the critical mass of people involved (e.g. researchers, students, infrastructure,patients) can only be achieved by collaborating with other institutions.
Often, such cooperation helps significantly to make for efficient and effective use ofresources and contributes to the national and international reputation of the institutions
involved.
3) The cooperation optimizes the educational offering for students, as it links the institutions’academic profiles, provides access to complementary infrastructure, or strengthens interdisciplinary competencies on each side.
Successful institutional cooperation often requires a large amount of coordination work,
particularly as rules and regulations (including the legal framework, which varies according to
the type and the ownership of the institution) and institutional cultures differ from one place
to another. The institutions of the ETH Domain therefore only engage in inter-institutional
cooperation if their benefit, serving at least one of the three major aims cited above, outweighs
the efforts required in terms of coordination and controlling.

C.5.3		 Extent of Cooperation
All these factors explain why cooperation within the boundaries of a particular type of higher
education institutions are much more frequent than cooperation across such boundaries.
This pattern applies both to cooperation among universities (including ETH Zurich and EPFL) andamong Universities of Applied Sciences.
Furthermore, the factors outlined above also explain why geographical proximity favors
the establishment of formal cooperation: not only does it increase the likelihood of mutual
knowledge (inspiring bottom-up initiatives), but it also provides intrinsic incentives to engage
in joint portfolio development, particularly in teaching, and to create joint institutes andcenters of excellence as well as dual professorships (Doppelprofessuren, of which there are 33
at ETH Zurich and 19 at EPFL). The latter are a particularly strong form of formalized cooperation
permitting an optimized use of resources and the pooling of particular strengths of the partners involved to generate mutual benefit.
It has been shown that, on an international comparison, Swiss academic institutions cooperate to a particularly high degree and that this cooperation is, to a very large extent, voluntary.
For example, the above-mentioned study on the Swiss situation regarding inter-institutional
cooperation between higher education institutions shows that, compared to other European
countries, Swiss institutions have engaged to a unique extent in processes of joint portfolio
development without external pressure.58 As the study argues, the density of corres-ponding
cooperation between ETH Zurich and the Universities of Zurich and (to a lesser extent) Baselin German-speaking Switzerland and between EPFL and the Universities of Lausanne (and, insome cases, Geneva) in the French-speaking region are outstanding examples of the particularlyhigh level of cooperation practiced by Swiss academic institutions.

58		See Reichert 2009, 10.

Intermediate Evaluation 2015

Self-Assessment Report of the ETH Board

109

Cooperation

In the meantime, the institutions of the ETH Domain have further increased their efforts inthe field of cooperation. Examples are:–– “Hochschulmedizin Zürich” involving ETH Zurich, the University of Zurich, and leading hospitals in Zurich59 (as just one example among many other cooperation initiatives in Zurich);–– ETH Zurich’s cooperation with the University of Basel, particularly in the field of Biosystems
Science (D-BSSE);–– ETH Zurich’s cooperation with the Università della Svizzera Italiana (USI) as well as with
the Institute for Biomedical Research (IRB) in Bellinzona;–– the Campus Biotech at Geneva with the University of Geneva and Hôpitaux Universitairesde Genève;–– EPFL Valais Wallis with the HES Valais and the EPFL antenna at Fribourg with the University
of Fribourg and HES Fribourg;–– the jointly financed professorships established between Research Institutes and ETH Zurich
or EPFL and between the Research Institutes and cantonal universities.
All these examples testify to the ETH Domain institutions’ close involvement in partnerships
and collaborations that benefit the respective regions and Switzerland as a whole andthat strengthen the institutions’ academic profiles and reputation on a national and an international scale.60 Further examples, some of which also lead to an increased exchangewith Universities of Applied Sciences are: the competence centers of the ETH Domain, the Swiss
Competence Centers in Energy Research (SCCER), which are in most cases led by ETH Domain
institutions (including Research Institutes in two cases), the National Competence Centers of
Research (NCCR), the cooperation projects funded by the Swiss University Conference (SUC);
another example is the central role assumed by the ETH Domain institutions in the creationof a Swiss Innovation Park61.

59		See part D.1.1 below on “Hochschulmedizin Zürich”.
60		See part C.1 above for further information on regional branches of ETH Domain institutions and the inter-institutional

cooperation resulting from the institutions’ presence in the different regions of Switzerland.
61		See part A.3 above for information about the ETH Domain institutions’ role in the creation of the Swiss Innovation Park.

110

Intermediate Evaluation 2015

Self-Assessment Report of the ETH Board

D
Medical Science and Medical
Technology
Introduction113
D.1 Strategy in Medical Science and Technology
117
Assessment by the ETH Board
117
D.1.1 Translational Medical Research
118
D.1.2 Medical Technology
122
D.1.3 Cost-Intensive Research Infrastructures
123
D.2 Contribution to the Alleviation of Shortage of Medical Staff
127
Assessment by the ETH Board
127
D.2.1 Educational Efforts
128
D.2.2 The ETH Domain’s Possible Role to Alleviate Medical Staff Shortage
129

Medical Science and Medical Technology

D
Medical Science and Medical
Technology
Introduction
The medical technology industry plays an ever more important role in Switzerland. Thus in 2011,
1,600 Swiss medical technology companies employed approx. 51,000 people. These companies
generate more than 2 % of Switzerland’s gross national product.62 Medtech companies are
responsible for more than 5 % of total Swiss exports. In certain parts of the country the growthof the medical technology industry has been particularly marked, for instance in the Lake
Geneva and Zurich areas; in both cases this can be attributed in large part to the strong university
presence, including that of the ETH Domain institutions.
The institutions of the ETH Domain and their researchers are involved in a wide range oftechnological developments which potentially facilitate or enhance prognosis, diagnosis andtreatment in various therapeutic fields:–– These include bioimplants, radiopharmacy, proton therapy, minimally invasive monitoringand surgical procedures, high-resolution MRI and other imaging technologies, the specifictargeting of cancer cells with nanoparticles, thought-controlled prosthetics, neuroprostheses
for loss of hearing, sight or motor function, the biotechnological production of vaccines,
and intelligent drug delivery systems.
–– What all these examples have in common is that they require close cooperation between
basic research, on the one hand, and clinics or clinical research, on the other hand, for real
breakthroughs to be achieved.
–– They thus demonstrate the importance of translational medical research and therefore also
basic research in natural sciences and technology for the advancement of knowledge andfor fostering the development of advanced (or high-tech) prognostic, diagnostic and therapeutic approaches of forward-looking medicine in Switzerland.
–– To be able to master healthcare challenges, Switzerland not only needs highly qualified
medical specialists but also researchers with specialist knowledge of specific fields suchas statistics, information technology, engineering sciences, imaging or genetics. With a viewto the future development of university medicine in Switzerland, the institutions of theETH Domain therefore see their priority role in this area. The integration of key technologies
such as microsystems and nanosystems, material sciences, communication and information
technology, mechanics, electronics and robotics in research and development is increasingly
becoming indispensable.
–– The ETH Board is convinced that, besides research, the integration of such technologies inexisting, research-related curricula, the creation of new facilities for teaching and training, anda linkage between curricula in natural and engineering sciences with medicine, constitutethe cornerstones for innovation in the health sector. Accordingly, the two Federal Institutes ofTechnology offer high-quality and future-oriented curricula at the interface between naturaland engineering sciences, on the one hand, and medicine, on the other hand, in order toeducate specialists for Swiss industry and for academic and industrial research.
62		Cf. Swiss Medtech Report 2012, medtech Switzerland, Berne, http://www.medtech-switzerland.com/en/index.

php?section=downloads&cmd=11_tree&download=1 (last accessed: November 24, 2014).

Intermediate Evaluation 2015

Self-Assessment Report of the ETH Board

113

D.1		Strategy in Medical Scienceand Technology“What assessment can be made of
the ETH Domain’s strategy of boostingtranslational research and teaching
and Switzerland’s innovative strength
in the areas of medical science andmedical technology?”

Strategy in Medical Science and Technology

D.1 Strategy in Medical Science and Technology
Assessment by the ETH Board
AssetsWith regard to (bio-)medical research and medical technology, the ETH Domain alreadyplays an important part in the Swiss university and healthcare systems and in theirreinforcement and development. In support of this claim, the ETH Board underlines that
the ETH Domain––provides excellence in research and education in the highly specialized fields of biotechnology, engineering sciences, and life and health sciences, both with regard to Switzerland
and worldwide;“What assessment can be madeof the ETH Domain’s strategy ofboosting translational researchand teaching and Switzerland’s
innovative strength in theareas of medical science andmedical technology?”––places a strong focus on the generation of knowledge and the promotion of innovationand entrepreneurship, with a particular impact on the field of medical technology;––educates and trains future experts for academic and industrial clinical research;––is a consistent driving force in the creation of new research and technology platforms andin the development of existing ones, notably in the field of translational medical research,where the Swiss TransMed program of the CUS has been initiated by the ETH Domain;––is engaged in an intensive exchange of scientific knowledge and cultivates sustainable
partnerships with researchers from other universities and with (university) hospitals
all over Switzerland, which, in turn, are able to benefit directly from the know-how theyreceive from the ETH Domain;––possesses, with the Center for Proton Therapy at PSI, a medical infrastructure - uniquein Switzerland – for the treatment of patients and for the further clinical and technologicaladvancement of these therapies, with a corresponding political mandate granted bythe ‘Beschlussorgan der Interkantonalen Vereinbarung über die hochspezialisierte Medizin’(decision-making body established under the intercantonal agreement on highly specialized medicine).
Challenges and Opportunities
The ETH Board, therefore, is convinced that the ETH Domain’s strategy in the field of translational (bio-)medical research will yield significant impact. However, two challenges need
to be addressed:a) The future settings in which translational medical research will be promoted in Switzerland
and the corresponding research priorities are currently being defined by the responsible
bodies, with the ETH Domain institutions and the ETH Board playing an active role.
The decisions to be taken include political decisions on the federal level and among thecantons. In the Personalized Health initiative, in which the ETH Domain plays an importantconceptual role, institutions of the ETH Domain will make major contributions andassume leadership in their areas of competence. The ETH Board confirms its willingness toattribute an active and important role to the ETH Domain institutions in this regard.
b) In view of the growing demand for technically skilled academic personnel in the increasingly
technology-driven environment of clinical medicine and translational research, the roleof the ETH Domain in educating medical scientists in the future needs to be redefined inorder to fully exploit its competencies in this area.

Intermediate Evaluation 2015

Self-Assessment Report of the ETH-Board

117

Strategy in Medical Science and Technology

The institutions of the ETH Domain, notably the two Federal Institutes of Technology and the
PSI, have long been engaged in the field of medical research and the development of medical
technology in a wide variety of ways. Translational medical research, in contrast, represents
a more recent focus. From a strategic point of view, the ETH Domain institutions accord particularimportance to the reinforcement of translational research in medicine and have set theirown priorities in this area. This is documented, for instance, by the fact that the ETH Domain
institutions (proposed by ETH Zurich, EPFL and the PSI jointly) will implement a Personalized
Medicine and Medical Technology strategic focus area formulated in the ETH Board’s Strategic
Planning 2017-2020 document. In view of their contribution to the development of university
medicine in Switzerland, ETH Zurich and EPFL noted in 2011: “Today, Switzerland lacks medical
doctors who are sufficiently proficient in research to develop translational research. The ETH
strategy intends to redress this deficiency by teaching medical doctors the necessary scientificfundamentals and by creating translational platforms on which the transfer of knowledge
can be carried to the actual patients.”63
To attain this objective, the ETH Domain institutions estimate that added value can be best
generated by intensifying formalized collaboration between the institutions of the ETH Domain,
cantonal universities and (university) hospitals. Therefore, they have actively contributed tothe conception of the planned national Personalized Health initiative. The actual focus of thisnationwide collaboration as well as the related priorities and distribution of tasks are currently
still under development. Therefore, the role which the ETH Domain institutions will occupy inthe corresponding networks is yet to be defined in detail and also hinges on policy decisions to
be taken among the actors involved. However, both the ETH Domain institutions and the ETH
Board have repeatedly declared that they are willing to assume a leading role in strengthening
translational medical research and medical technology in Switzerland.
This chapter (D.1) presents an overview of existing and upcoming initiatives, projects, infrastructure, curricula, and additional activities pursued by the ETH Domain institutions in thefields of translational medical research and in medical technology. They outline the experience
gained in the ETH Domain and the contributions the ETH Domain institutions can make tofurther develop these fields. The next chapter (D.2) will deal with the area of teaching andeducation, particularly with regard to the issue of the growing shortage of medical specialists.

D.1.1		 Translational Medical Research
In the future, the translation of innovative concepts from basic research into clinical practicewill increasingly be the responsibility of the universities. University centers for medical research
are privileged locations facilitating a transfer from research in the lab to the individual patient(“from bench to bedside”). In order to meet this challenge, the institutions of the ETH Domain
estimate that certain prerequisites for successful translational medical research and teachingmust be guaranteed. These are primarily the following:
1. enabling of interdisciplinary research and teaching within the school,
2. proximity of (university) hospitals, cutting-edge research and research-oriented, interdisciplinary study programs, and
3. intensification of collaboration with the medtech industry.
Both EPFL and ETH Zurich as well as PSI and Empa have created and can rely on a setting inwhich these conditions are met. They benefit from their proximity to excellent hospitals, notably

63		Aebischer, Patrick/Eichler, Ralph/Escher, Gérard/Leuthold, Margrit (2011): “Die Strategie der beiden ETHs im Bereich derMedizin”, in: SAMW-Bulletin 4/2011, p. 4 (http://www.samw.ch/dms/de/Publikationen/Bulletins/11-4_SAMWbulletin_D.
pdf, last accessed: November 24, 2014).

118

Intermediate Evaluation 2015

Self-Assessment Report of the ETH Board

Strategy in Medical Science and Technology

UniversitätsSpital Zurich, Universitätsklinik Balgrist, the Psychiatrische Universitätsklinik,
the Children’s Hospital Zurich as well as the Schulthess and Hirslanden clinics for ETH Zurich, CHUV
(Lausanne) and HUG (Geneva) for EPFL, and the Children’s Hospital Zurich, UniversitätsSpital
Zurich, CHUV (Lausanne) and Inselspital Berne for the PSI. At the same time, they have close ties
with the pharmaceutical industry and are linked in various ways with the MedTech and Biotech
industry.
Accordingly, for efficient translational research and transfer of knowledge and know-how,engineers and scientists must be in direct contact with the clinical setting (even during surgery).
These “under one roof” operations are still underdeveloped in Switzerland, but the ETH Domain
is investing considerably in creating them. The following projects and initiatives can be citedas examples:
Centers, Initiatives and Platforms: Existing and under Development–– Hochschulmedizin Zürich:–– Hochschulmedizin Zürich was set up in 2012 as a strategic initiative of the Universityof Zurich, Zurich University Hospital and ETH Zurich and was conceptualized as anumbrella organization that subsumes all research activities in biomedicine and medical
technology and in teaching, thus constituting a formal basis for the linkage between
medicine and basic research. The other four university hospitals in Zurich were admitted
in November 2014.
–– Among others, the “Zurich heart project”, the Zurich Neuroscience Center and theRegenerative Medicine and Infection and Immunity networks come under the Hochschulmedizin Zürich umbrella.
–– At present, ETH Zurich and Zurich University jointly run two institutes relevant to medical
fields of research: the Institute for Biomedical Engineering (since 1971) and the Instituteof Neuroinformatics (since 1995) which both are part of the Department of Information
Technology and Electrical Engineering at ETH Zurich. Currently, 17 joint professors inmedicine-related fields work at both ETH Zurich and the Medical Faculty or the Faculty of
Science of Zurich University.
–– The jointly run Competence Centers and technology platforms relevant to medicine –some of them with their own doctoral programs – are the Center for Imaging Scienceand Technology (CIMST) and its successor EXperimental & Clinical Imaging TEchnologies
Zürich (EXCITE Zürich, from 2014), the Functional Genomics Center Zurich (FGCZ), theZurich Neuroscience Center (ZNZ) and the Center for Personalized Medicine, which iscurrently in the launch phase. These initiatives will now be run under the umbrella of
Hochschulmedizin Zürich.
–– Geneva Biotech Campus:–– At its newly acquired Geneva Campus, EPFL has launched an initiative that will playa leading role in translational medical research. In 2013, EPFL – together with the
University of Geneva and the University Medical Hospital (HUG) – secured a long-term
rental agreement for the former Merck-Serono headquarters in Geneva. 40,000 m²
are thus at disposal for its new initiative. While this was still being established, EPFL
was able to secure a 100 MCHF gift from H.-J. Wyss, four chairs sponsored by E. Bertarelli
and one by Medtronics to develop new therapeutic approaches to neurological andpsychiatric diseases.

Intermediate Evaluation 2015

Self-Assessment Report of the ETH Board

119Strategy in Medical Science and Technology–– Campus Biotech will host the EPFL Center for Neuroprostheses, the Wyss Centre for
Neuroengineering, the Human Brain Project, and the Geneva University Institute for
Affective Diseases. Close to 800 researchers will work in the new campus in close interaction with start-ups and companies to develop novel approaches to brain disorders.
–– Geneva Biotech Campus will also host a translational research program in personalized
medicine, integrating big data and public health and clinical approaches within a
Lemanic Center for Personalized Health.
–– Wyss Translational Center Zurich:–– In December 2014, ETH Zurich and the University of Zurich have announced the foundingof a new translational research center at the interface of medicine, science andengineering: the Wyss Translational Center Zurich (WTZ). A USD 120 million donation from
H.-J. Wyss to the two Zurich universities will allow them to build up a new centre
that aims, through an interdisciplinary approach, to accelerate the development andapplication of innovative medical therapies and groundbreaking robotic systems.
–– The USD 120 million donation is a basic endowment to establish and operate the WTZ
for the first seven years. ETH Zurich and UZH will provide personnel and infrastructure in
the new center.
–– The WTZ will initially include two technology platforms – one for regenerative medicine
and the other for robotics. The centre will bridge disciplinary and institutional barriers
and unite researchers across various disciplines, ranging from technology and medicine
through to materials science, stem cell research and robotics.
–– On the basis of the two translational technology platforms – regenerative medicine androbotics – the WTZ will commence operations in 2015 with a starting portfolio of fourtranslational projects: Zurich Life Matrix, Zurich Heart/Ventricular Assist Devices, Zurich
Liver and Zurich Eye.
–– Swiss Cancer Center Lausanne:–– EPFL also plays a key role in the future Swiss Cancer Centre Lausanne, located at the
Lausanne University Hospital (CHUV) campus. This center is jointly operated by CHUV, theUniversity of Lausanne, EPFL, the Ludwig Center, and the ISREC Foundation. Its ambition
is to bring together scientists and practitioners under one roof as part of a communityof expertise to foster translational research in oncology. A new dedicated building locatednext to the CHUV, named Agora, will be able to accommodate 400 researchers and clinicians in premises occupying 11,500 m2 as early as 2016.
Further Focal Points–– Biomedical Engineering:–– At ETH Zurich, the Institute of Biomedical Engineering offers a specialized master’s
program in Biomedical Engineering. A specialization in Medical Technology will beestablished jointly at the Medical Faculty of the University of Zurich and the Department
of Health Sciences and Technology (D-HEST) of ETH Zurich; it will serve to educate
specialists at the interface between medicine, technology and natural sciences. The PSI
is actively involved in this program, especially in the Medical Physics track and in the
ETH Zurich Master of Advanced Studies in Medical Physics.

120

Intermediate Evaluation 2015

Self-Assessment Report of the ETH Board

Strategy in Medical Science and Technology–– Within EPFL’s School of Life Sciences, the Doctoral Program in Biotechnology andBio-engineering (EDBB) provides doctoral students with the education necessary to beleaders in the fast-growing industrial and academic biotechnology and bioengineering
sectors. EPFL also proposes an advanced course, the Certificate of Advanced Studies
in Management of Biotech, Medtech and Pharma Ventures.
–– Life Sciences:–– At both Federal Institutes of Technology, the units specifically located in the fields ofhealth and life sciences, as well as the curricula they teach, are of central significancefor the implementation of the strategy for translational research in medicine.
–– At ETH Zurich, the Department of Health Sciences and Technology (D-HEST) was established in early 2012. It supplements the Institute of Biomedical Engineering (founded in
1971, see above) as well as other areas of medical focus already in place, such as theMolecular Health Science Platform in the Biology Department. The purpose of D-HEST is
to unite the engineering sciences, life sciences and medical sciences, to promote interdisciplinary research projects at these interfaces, and to offer interdisciplinary curricula.
–– At EPFL, the School of Life Sciences was founded in 2002, and the Institute of Bioengineering (a joint operation of the School of Life Sciences and the School of Engineering)in 2003. The growth of the School and the Institute these past ten years reflects
the priority accorded by EPFL to biomedical research, but also reflects the ever-growinginterest in these disciplines with regard to both research and education.
National initiatives: ETH Domain contributions
At the national level, ETH Zurich and EPFL, as well as PSI and Empa are heavily involved in
two national programs aiming at developing translational interdisciplinary research, from fundamental basic research to the bedside:–– SystemsX.ch, active since 2004, is a Swiss flagship project in systems science. ETH Zurich(with its Department of Biosystems Science and Engineering in Basel) is leading the project,with extensive participation of EPFL and other ETH Domain institutions. This program will
evolve to become the leading research enterprise in personalized medicine, at the junctionof clinical practice, big data, e-health and the “omics revolution” led by individualized
genomic analysis and treatments. ETH Zurich and EPFL – notably thanks to their know-how
in mathematics, informatics and genomics – aspire to be designated as leaders in this newphase, together with participating university hospitals.
–– Nano-Tera, active since 2004 is another Swiss flagship project in nanotechnology. EPFL isleading the project, with extensive participation of ETH Zurich and other ETH Domain
institutions. Lately, Nano-Tera has made significant inroads in medical technology, withsmart implants for orthopedics surgery and the LiveSense cell-based sensing microsystem,a tiny, portable personal blood testing laboratory.
–– To strengthen clinical research and translation in Switzerland, ETH Zurich and EPFL, together
with the cantonal universities and the university hospitals, launched the SwissTransMed
project, which in the 2013-2016 planning period is being funded by the SUC and the ETH Board.
SwissTransMed funded six translational research platforms run in tandem by an ETH Domain
lab and a Medical Faculty/University Hospital lab.

Intermediate Evaluation 2015

Self-Assessment Report of the ETH Board

121

Strategy in Medical Science and Technology

D.1.2		 Medical Technology
In the field of medical science and technology, the significant number of medtech spin-offs
from the ETH Domain as well as the specific contributions of the PSI deserve particular attention.
MedTech Spin-offs
Many spin-off companies related to the ETH Domain are active in the field of medical technology.
This testifies to the ETH Domain’s strong position in the advancement of medical technology
in Switzerland (and in strengthening Switzerland as a prominent location for medtech innovation). Since 2008, for instance, 22 start-ups have been created in this field by ETH Zurich.
Likewise, the majority of the total of 18 EPFL medtech start-ups have been created since 2008.
These start-ups operate in diverse fields ranging from diagnostics and imaging (e.g. blood
analysis, cancer identification and allergy detection), to surgery and tools (precision robots,
deep brain stimulation, endoscopy, virtual reality), and therapy (new agents in immune system
stimulation, nanovectors to deliver drugs).
The Center for Proton Therapy at the PSIWith its specialized infrastructure and competencies in diagnostic and therapeutic technologies,
the PSI makes a significant contribution to research and KTT in medical technology. A strong
linkage between the PSI as a research institution, university hospitals and industry plays
an essential role here: whereas the large-scale research facilities improve the fundamental
understanding of structure-response relationships, subsequent developments (pharmaceuticalactive substances, new irradiation facilities etc.) are performed by industrial partners, andthese products are then tested in clinical trials together with university hospitals.
The PSI’s activities in diagnostics and therapy cover the entire range from fundamental research
to medical applications: Most notably, its Center for Proton Therapy (CPT) is the only place in
Switzerland where patients with specific types of cancer (e.g. eye tumors) are treated with protons:–– The PSI was the first facility worldwide to develop spot scanning for proton therapy andit currently operates two gantries for the treatment of deep-seated tumors.
–– Spot scanning technology is now widely recognized as the state-of-the-art technology
preferred both by industry and hospitals.
–– Due to a joint academic affiliation, the PSI’s links to the university Hospitals in Bern and
Zurich are being strengthened and clinical research at PSI will be intensified.
–– A third treatment room, Gantry 3, will be realized by 2016 in close collaboration between
the University Hospital in Zurich and the PSI together with Varian Medical Systems. It will
permit the treatment of moving targets.
–– In addition to the treatment of deep-seated tumors, almost 6,000 patients with eye tumors
have been treated at the PSI OPTIS facility since 1984 in close cooperation with the Hôpital
Ophtalmique Jules Gonin at the University of Lausanne.
–– The CPT provides an example of the benefit to society of top-notch research infrastructurethat is still under scientific development and of a treatment facility located directly ata research institution (translation). This would be impossible in a clinical setting.
Further PSI Involvement–– The PSI hosts the Biomolecular Research Laboratory (BMR), where proteins are investigatedfrom different perspectives. BMR is actively involved in the Cancer Network Zürich (CNZ)
under the umbrella of Hochschulmedizin Zürich (HMZ).
–– The Center of Radiopharmaceutical Sciences (CRS) is a joint endeavor between ETH Zurich,
the PSI and the University Hospital Zürich. It works on clinical applications of radiopharma-

122

Intermediate Evaluation 2015

Self-Assessment Report of the ETH Board

Strategy in Medical Science and Technology

ceuticals based on an interdisciplinary approach involving radiopharmaceutical chemistry,
biochemistry, molecular biology, pharmacy, and pharmacology. The main focus is on
the development of functional radiopharmaceuticals, which can serve both as diagnostic
agents in nuclear medicine and as therapeutic agents for use against tumor metastases,in particular of disseminated tumors that cannot be removed surgically or treated byexternal radiation therapy.

D.1.3		 Cost-Intensive Research Infrastructures
The role universities will increasingly play in the field of translational medical research also
involves making cost-intensive research infrastructures available to medical research.
This includes clean-room infrastructures, electron microscopy centers at ETH Zurich and EPFL,
and ETH Zurich’s Swiss National Supercomputing Center (CSCS) in Lugano, which also hosts
the computing infrastructure of the Human Brain Project.
With its Swiss Light Source (SLS), the PSI has a facility which provides unique possibilities
for structural biology, e.g. the investigation of proteins, DNA, and RNA, which is presently
performed in close collaboration with the pharmaceutical industry and which creates the basis
for structural-based drug development. In the near future these capabilities will be further
complemented and extended by the availability of the SwissFEL facility.

Intermediate Evaluation 2015

Self-Assessment Report of the ETH Board

123

D.2
Contribution to the Alleviationof Shortage of Medical Staff“How can the ETH Domain contributeto alleviating the shortage of medical
staff in Switzerland?”Contribution to the Alleviation of Shortage of Medical Staff

D.2 Contribution to the Alleviation of Shortage of Medical Staff
Assessment by the ETH Board
AssetsThe ETH Board attaches great importance to the discussion about its possible contribution
to the alleviation of the shortage of medical staff in Switzerland. In the Board’s opinion,––the primary focus of educational measures currently taken by the ETH Domain is the education of medical scientists64 and research personnel with a strong background in naturaland engineering science, which will have an impact on building up additional competencies
on the clinical side and on clinical studies in the medical technology field;“How can the ETH Domain
contribute to alleviating
the shortage of medical staff
in Switzerland?”––the ETH Domain’s possible contribution to the alleviation of the shortage of medical
staff would have to be the object of detailed discussions at the competent political anduniversity policy levels;––it must be borne in mind that the institutions of the ETH Domain offer and could expand
corresponding measures (for instance expanding crossover options between curricula innatural sciences and the master’s program in medicine).
Challenges and Opportunities
Given that measures taken against the shortage of medical staff need coordinated action on
all political levels, the ETH Board holds that two challenges must be carefully considered:a) The ETH Board pursues the strategic objective to strengthen existing collaborations of
ETH Domain institutions in the fields of biomedical research and medical technology andto further develop cooperation in these areas. In contrast, the ETH Board has no strategic
aims to strive towards the creation of a medical school within the ETH Domain.
b) Any possible contribution of the ETH Domain institutions to the alleviation of the staff
shortage must be viewed in the context of the general conditions with which personnel inthe health sector are confronted and will not help in solving certain systemic shortcomings.
In particular, this concerns the workload of medical staff, which also impacts on the time
medical doctors can spend for research and training of MD or PhD students. In addition,
it relates to the general conditions for medical doctors with families, which result in a large
number of highly educated personnel withdrawing from medical service. With regard toadapting any policy to address the shortage of medical personnel, the ETH Board suggeststhat this point of departure must be taken into consideration.

64		In what follows, the term “medical scientist” will be used to designate those medical doctors who will be trainedin a specifically research-oriented way in order to be able to act as key drivers for strengthening the clinical capacities
in translational medical research.

Intermediate Evaluation 2015

Self-Assessment Report of the ETH-Board

127

Contribution to the Alleviation of Shortage of Medical Staff

D.2.1		 Educational Efforts
In terms of the possible contributions that the institutions of the ETH Domain can make to alleviate the shortage of medical staff in Switzerland, the focus is on their activities with regard
to teaching and training medical personnel. In their “Strategy in the field of medicine” of 2011,
the institutions of the ETH Domain stipulated two objectives: for one thing, a sound scientificand technological basis should be safeguarded for such medical doctors who would want tospecialize in highly technologized supply areas such as radio-oncology, genetics or regenerative
medicine; for another, a number of research-oriented medical doctors should be educated
who should be in a position to develop translational research and thus bridge the gaps between
research and clinics.65 According to the strategy, this course of action aims to specifically educate a limited number of medical doctors for the purpose of translational medical research.
The ETH Domain institutions are of the opinion that in the overall context of the health sector,
these medical scientists would constitute an indispensable complement to their traditionallyeducated colleagues. The institutions emphasize in this context that this objective must notcompete with other high-priority goals in the health sector, for instance the necessary increasein the education of general medical practitioners.
“Passerelles”
One solution to ensure a solid technological knowledge for MDs specializing in high-techdomains is to give highly talented EPFL and ETH Zurich students the option of entering a
medical school.
–– Such “passerelles” are extensively addressed by the Medical Strategy of the ETH Domain.
The University of Lausanne, for instance, has set up a program since 2012 to accept – uponselection (i.e. on the basis of a personal dossier) – EPFL students with a bachelor’s degree
in life sciences, who directly enter the first year master’s course in medicine. These students
with a strong background in mathematics, informatics and genomics are intended toprovide the “high-tech MDs” necessary to our health system. A similar passerelle has now
been set up with the University of Geneva, where again students that are accepted canpass from the EPFL bachelor’s degree to a first-year master’s course in medicine.
–– In Zurich, students with a good bachelor’s degree in Health Sciences and Technology (HST)or biology and who have passed an aptitude test have for many years been able on
request to join the second year of medical studies at the University of Zurich. This crossover
involves a great deal of work and is only chosen by a few students. In turn, medical students are admitted to ETH Zurich sur dossier. In any case, the numbers of students making
use of the crossover systems at both Federal Institutes of Technology are small and do notcompete with other urgent needs, especially the need to educate more general practitioners
in Switzerland.
Further Initiatives
Likewise, both ETH Zurich and EPFL have been actively engaged in the education of MD-PhD
candidates since the creation of the program in 1992. The MD-PhD is a doctoral programin natural science that can be completed on the basis of medical studies in research. Manyof these candidates conduct their research work at either of the two Federal Institutes ofTechnology – mostly in biological sciences – and thus benefit from their excellent generalconditions and courses.
In the field of teaching, programs in the areas of health and life sciences are offered by
ETH Zurich and EPFL in which health sector specialists are trained. For instance, at ETH Zurich’s
D-HEST, a study program in Health Sciences and Technology (HST) was introduced in autumn

65		Cf. “Die Strategie der beiden ETHs im Bereich der Medizin”, p. 3.

128Intermediate Evaluation 2015

Self-Assessment Report of the ETH Board

Contribution to the Alleviation of Shortage of Medical Staff

2011. This program is very popular, attracting 230-260 new students every year. In addition toconveying natural and engineering science subject matter, the program introduces undergraduatesto specific core areas of medicine such as anatomy and physiology and brings them into
contact with patients and medical doctors. In ETH Zurich’s opinion, this degree would enable
students to cross over to a master’s program in medicine with only a few additional requirements to be satisfied.

D.2.2		 The ETH Domain’s Possible Role to Alleviate Staff Shortage
From the point of view of the ETH Domain institutions it must be underlined that the proprietary curricula of the two Federal Institutes of Technology, the MD-PhD program and thepasserelles must not and cannot be seen as ways of solving the shortage of medical staff in
Switzerland. Although the MD-PhD program and the ETH Domain’s intention to specificallyeducate some medical scientists in the activities of translational research for the purposeof reinforcing the latter do indeed aim to attract a few medical doctors to research, this is donewith a view to strengthening the whole of Switzerland’s healthcare system in the long term.
In the view of the ETH Domain institutions, one effective contribution could consist in
putting the crossover options between curricula in natural science and the master’s program in
medicine to better use. The institutions of the ETH Domain already stated their ideas in thisrespect in the above-mentioned strategy for the field of medicine by saying that the crossoverat the master’s level (i.e. students joining the master’s program in medicine after obtaining
their bachelor’s degree from ETH Zurich or EPFL) would be their preference. The institutionsof the ETH Domain feel that such improved crossover options would also make more effective
use of the existing educational capacities.
A prerequisite for this is, however, to diversify the Medical Education Track. This would
need to be done by consistently applying the “Bologna approach”, i.e. the division of medical
studies into bachelor’s and master’s degrees, as, for instance, already implemented by the
University of Zurich. Although Switzerland has officially adopted this system, the diversificationof medical bachelors and masters has not yet occurred. With their existing curricula, or withcurricula to be developed, the two Federal Institutes of Technology are able to educate students
who qualify for a crossover to the master’s program in medicine. In this way, they may help
directly to alleviate the shortage of medical staff, provided that the corresponding capacities inmedical master programs are available.

Intermediate Evaluation 2015

Self-Assessment Report of the ETH Board

129

E
Bibliometric Analysis

E.1 Background and methodology
E.2 Results
E.2.1 Results for ETH Zurich
E.2.2 Results for EPFL
E.2.3 Results for PSI
E.2.4 Results for WSLE.2.5 Results for Empa
E.2.6 Results for Eawag
E.3 ConclusionsE.3 Conclusions

133
134
136
138
140
142
144
146
148
XX

Bibliometric Analysis

E
Bibliometric Analysis

E.1 Background and methodology
As requested by the performance mandate, the ETH Board has commissioned a bibliometricanalysis on the ETH Domain in view of the present intermediate evaluation. As in the previous
cases and for the third time in a row, the analysis has been carried out by the Center for Scienceand Technology Studies (CWTS) at Leiden University, The Netherlands. While the first analysis,
linked to the intermediate evaluation of 2006, has covered the period 1994-2003, the second
bibliometric study, elaborated for the intermediate evaluation 2010, has analyzed publicationsof the years 2000-2009. The present analysis covers the years 2003-2012, with citations up to
2013. It seeks to present comprehensive and up-to-date results regarding the scientific output
and impact of the ETH Domain institutions, while allowing for comparison with the previous
report despite methodological changes and improved indicators.
CWTS’ methodology offers a variety of indicators, destined at measuring the scientific output of a particular institution as well as the impact of the publications it produces. The output
indicator shows the number of an institution’s publications, with only articles, reviews andletters (with a weighting of 0.25, given the smaller scientific contribution they represent) taken
into account for all the indicators used in the present study. Output is an important indicator
to evaluate an institution’s quantitative performance, but does not allow assessment of thescientific quality of the institution’s contributions. This is the function of impact indicators,
which are therefore of greatest interest in the context of the present evaluation. Impact indicators are all based on the concept of counting the number of times the publications of a unit
have been cited. For this bibliometric analysis, citations received up to 2013 have been counted.
Impact indicators, however, disregard self-citations, in order to reduce the potential for ‘manipulation’ of the indicator by the individual researchers. The four relevant impact indicators66
on which the current analysis focuses are the “Mean Citation Score (MCS)”67,

66		Source: Bibliometric Evaluation by CWTS on the ETH Domain institutions (2014).
67		The MCS is the most basic impact indicator used by CWTS. It shows the average number of citations a particular publication

has received. This indicator, however, does not allow for comparison between scientific fields, as these fields presentvery different citation characteristics. For instance, the average number of citations an article in mathematics receives
within a three-year period equals 2.0, whereas an article in cell biology will receive 19.6 citations on average within
the same time period.

Intermediate Evaluation 2015

Self-Assessment Report of the ETH Board

133

Bibliometric Analysis

the “Mean Normalized Citation Score (MNCS)”68, the “Mean Normalized Journal Score (MNJS)”69,
and the indicator referred to as “PP(top 10 %)”70.
Besides the output and impact indicators, CWTS also assesses scientific co-operation patterns.
The scientific co-operation indicators distinguish between publications produced by a single
institution (no collaboration), publications produced within the same country (national
collaboration) and publications produced by institutions from different countries (international
collaboration). These co-operation indicators underscore the growing importance of scientificco-operation, in particular in terms of international collaboration, as related to the impact ofa publication (whether or not this resulted from collaboration).

E.2 Results–– On the one hand, the bibliometric analysis performed by CWTS depicts the individual
research profile for every institution. On the other hand, it makes it possible to assess boththe institutions’ publication output as well as the impact of these publications. By using
the indicators described above, it also permits assessment of the evolution of both output
and impact over time.
–– Both with regard to the publication output of the institutions and to the impact of thesepublications, the comparison between the evaluation periods shows a continuous increase
for all ETH Domain institutions. All impact indicators show that the scientific importanceof research performed at the ETH Domain institutions remained above the world average inalmost all fields considered and has also even grown in fields in which it was shown
as being very high by the previous evaluation. As an overall statement, therefore, the CWTS
evaluation confirms the very high level of the scientific work produced by the ETH Domain
institutions and the steady increase in their performance as presented by the ETH Board andthe institutions in their annual reports.
–– Using the MNCS indicator, CWTS also presents a so-called knowledge user analysis for eachof the institutions. A knowledge user analysis can help to explore the subsequent impact
the publications of a unit have had on other fields and units (i.e. if the citing publications
have themselves a high impact level). The knowledge user analyses provided by the current
CWTS report strongly support the general picture regarding the quality of the ETH Domain
institutions’ work and their international standing: Publications produced by ETH Domain
institutions clearly have worldwide impact and in most cases contribute, among the partners

68		To better depict the quality of an institution’s scientific contributions, CWTS has developed two normalized impact indicators.

Among these two, the MNCS seeks to correct the MCS indicator for differences in citations characteristics between scientificfields. The normalized citation score of a publication presented by the MNCS indicator equals the ratio of the actual andthe expected number of citations of the publication, where the expected number of citations is defined as the average
number of citations of all publications belonging to the same field and having the same publication year and document
type. If, for instance, a unit’s MNCS score is 1, this means that its publications have been cited as often as would be
expected on average for a publication in this particular field. A MNCS score of 2 means that the unit’s publications havebeen cited twice as often as would be expected on average in this field.
69		MNJS is the second normalized impact indicator used by CWTS, designed to assess the value of the journals in which
researchers publish their work. The MNJS indicator uses the average number of citations of all publications published in aparticular journal, instead of the actual number of citations of a publication underlying the MNCS. If a unit has an MNJS
score of 1, this means that the group has published in journals that are cited as often as would be expected on averagefor the given field. A MNJS score of 2 means that the journal in which a unit has published its work is cited twice asoften as would be expected on average in this field, the underlying assumption being that more frequent citations ofa journal reflect the journal’s higher status within the scientific field for which it is relevant.
70		In addition to the normalized impact indicators MNCS and MNJS, CWTS uses the “PP(top 10 %)” indicator, correcting forsome shortcomings in particular MNCS presents. This indicator depicts the proportion of publications of a unit belonging
to the top 10 % most highly cited worldwide in a particular field. For each publication, it can be determined whether
it belongs to this top 10 % in its field. The PP(top 10 %) indicator of a research entity therefore equals the proportion of
its publications belonging to this top 10 %. In order to assess the impact of a unit’s publications, CWTS recommends
combining the MNCS and the PP(top 10 %) indicators, as the first can be influenced by publications with outstandingly
large numbers of citations, which is not the case for the PP(top 10 %) indicator.

134

Intermediate Evaluation 2015

Self-Assessment Report of the ETH Board

Bibliometric Analysis

making use of these publications, to research results of high quality and a corres-ponding
impact. While publications from ETH Zurich and EPFL are very well received among the world’s
leading universities, knowledge user analyses of the four research institutes additionallydemonstrate their relevance for peer research institutions as well as for the public sector.
–– In what follows, the individual results of the six institutions are presented by summarizing
the most important elements of the conclusions drawn by CWTS. In addition, a figure presents
the research profile of each institution, based on the current evaluation. The figures show
the share of output of an institution attributed to a particular subfield (in percent of the total
output of the institution). Per institution, only the 25 fields with the highest output are
represented in the figure (see Table 1 below for the total output share these 25 fields represent
at the respective institution). The bar shows the output share for the specific field, whereas
the number integrated to the bar shows the normalized impact (MNCS) the institution has
had in this field. It should be noted, however, that direct comparison is limited to a certain
extent by the fact that the classifications of some of the subfields are subject to modifications and refinement over time.
–– The impact values are presented as low, average and high (coloured bars), the worldwide
average being defined as the range from 0.8 to 1.2. A second figure shows the trend of thethree main impact indicators (i.e. MNCS, MNJS and PP (top 10 %)).
–– The share of the total output represented by the 25 fields considered in the figures is as follows:

Table 1: Share of total output represented by the 25 fields considered
ETH Zürich

EPFL

PSI

WSL

Empa

Eawag

56 %

62 %

82 %

90 %

76 %

87 %

Intermediate Evaluation 2015

Self-Assessment Report of the ETH Board

135

Bibliometric Analysis

E.2.1		 Results for ETH Zurich–– 35,719 publications have been attributed to ETH Zurich for the current evaluation period(2003-2012). These publications have been cited more than 618,000 times. Annual publication
output shows a constant pattern of considerable increase.
–– The impact indicators (MNCS and MNJS) show that ETH Zurich’s output has an impact
substantially higher than the worldwide average (MNCS = 1.75). In particular, the field normalized journal indicator, MNJS, shows a considerable increase over the years, from
1.38 in the first period to 1.51 in the last one. The fact that about 19 % of the publications
published by ETH Zurich are among the top 10 % most highly cited publications in theirfield supports this statement.
–– ETH Zurich’s most active research fields are ‘Chemistry, Multidisciplinary’, ‘Geochemistry &Geophysics’, ‘Physics, Condensed Matter’, ‘Physics, Multidisciplinary’, ‘Biochemistry &Molecular Biology’, ‘Chemistry, Physical’, ‘Astronomy & Astrophysics’, ‘Geosciences, Multidisciplinary’, and `Multidisciplinary Sciences’, each accounting for more than 2.5 % of
ETH Zurich’s research output. In the field of Multidisciplinary Sciences’ (MNCS = 5.05; PP(top10 %) = 49 %), and ‘Physics, Multidisciplinary’ ETH Zurich’s impact is very high (MNCS = 3.22;
PP(top 10 %) = 32 %), in the five fields ‘Chemistry, Multidisciplinary’, ‘Geochemistry &Geophysics’, ‘Chemistry, Physical’, ‘Geosciences, Multidisciplinary’, and ‘Astronomy & Astrophysics’, the impact is substantially above the world average (MNCS > 1.5; PP(top 10 %)> 16 %). Among the most active fields, the one with the lowest impact is ‘Physics, Condensed
Matter’, with an MNCS value of 1.13 and a PP(top 10 %) of 13 %.
–– While 72 % of ETH Zurich’s publications involve some degree of collaboration, 57 % of
all publications are elaborated with at least one international partner. Although the impact
score is above the world average for all collaboration types, international collaboration
yields the highest impact score (MNCS = 1.90; PP(top 10 %) = 21 %). Over the evaluation period,
the share of publications not resulting from any collaboration and the share of publications
resulting from national collaboration have diminished in favor of publications resulting
from international collaboration.
–– The knowledge user analysis indicates that international partners broadly cite the publications produced by ETH Zurich. In most cases, this itself leads to research of high quality.
With regard both to individual countries and to the institutions using ETH Zurich’s work, theanalysis underlines the school’s excellent worldwide reputation. In general, the fields that
benefit most from ETH Zurich’s work correspond to its fields of activity.

136

Intermediate Evaluation 2015

Self-Assessment Report of the ETH Board

Bibliometric Analysis

ETH Zurich: Output and normalized impact (MNCS) per field(chart represents 56 % of ETH Zurich’s output)
Research field MNCS

Output share in %Chemistry, Multidisciplinary 1,51
Geochemistry & Geophysics 1,55
Physics, Condensed Matter 1,13
Physics, Multidisciplinary 3,22
Biochem. & Molec. Biology 1,33
Chemistry, Physical 1,53
Astronomy & Astrophysics 1,88
Geosci., Multidisciplinary 1,60
Multidisciplinary Sciences 5,06
Physics, Applied 1,42
Environmental Sciences 1,73
Mat. Sci., Multidisciplinary 1,51
Meteorol. & Atmosph. Sci. 1,66
Eng., Electrical & Electronic 2,01
Comp. Sci., Theory & Meth. 1,89
Phys., Atom., Mol. & Chem. 1,60
Neurosciences 1,38
Physics, Particles & Fields 2,84
Ecology 1,63
Engineering, Chemical 1,47
Cell Biology 1,77
Mathematics 1,49
Plant Sciences 2,01
Biochem. Research Methods 2,12
Optics 1,65

1%0%Impact: high2%

Impact: average

3%

4%

5%

Impact: low

22 %

2,0

20 %

1,8

18 %

1,6

16 %

1,4

14%

1,2

12 %

1,0

10 %

0,8

8%

0,6

6%

0%

Intermediate Evaluation 2015

2009–
2012

2%

2008–
2011

PP(top 10 %)

2007–
2010

MNJS

2005–
2008

0,0

4%
MNCS

2004–
2007

0,2

2006–
2009

0,4

PP(top 10 %)

2,2

2003–
2006

MNCS and MNJSETH Zurich: indicator trends

Self-Assessment Report of the ETH Board

137

Bibliometric Analysis

E.2.2 Results for EPFL–– 19,120 publications have been attributed to the EPFL for the current evaluation period(2003-2012). These publications have been cited almost 350,000 times. Annual publication
output shows a constant pattern of considerable increase.
–– The impact indicators (MNCS and MNJS) show that EPFL’s output has an impact substantiallyhigher than the worldwide average (MNCS = 1.91). Both field normalized impact indicators,
particularly MNCS, show a considerable increase over the years. The fact that about 20 %of the publications published by EPFL are among the top 10 % most highly cited publicationsin their field supports this statement.
–– EPFL’s most active research fields are ‘Physics, Applied’, ‘Physics, Condensed Matter, ‘Chemistry,
Multidisciplinary’, ‘Engineering, Electrical & Electronic’, ‘Physics, Multidisciplinary’,‘Materials science, multidisciplinary’, and ‘Chemistry, physical’, each accounting for at least
2.5 % of EPFL’s research output. While the impact in the fields of ‘Physics, Multidisciplinary’,‘Chemistry, Multidisciplinary’, and ‘Chemistry, physical’ is very high (MNCS > 2.4; PP(top 10 %)>25 %), it is still substantially above the world average in the other four fields (MNCS > 1.5;
PP(top 10 %) >16 %).
–– While 72 % of EPFL’s publications involve some degree of collaboration, 60 % of all publications are elaborated with at least one international partner. Although the impact scoreis above the world average for all collaboration types, international collaboration yields thehighest impact score (MNCS = 2.07; PP(top 10 %) = 21 %). Over the evaluation period, theshare of publications not resulting from any collaboration and the share resulting fromnational collaboration have decreased in favor of publications resulting from international
collaboration.
–– The knowledge user analysis shows that the publications produced by the EPFL have avery high impact among international partners, again leading in most cases to high-quality
research above the world average. With regard both to individual countries and to theinstitutions using EPFL’s work, the analysis underlines the school’s excellent worldwide
reputation. In general, the fields that benefit most from EPFL’s work correspond to its fieldsof activity. However, the analysis has identified several fields, such as ‘Cell Biology’,‘Biotechnology & Applied Microbiology’, and ‘Biochemical Research Methods’, in which the
EPFL’s work has a very high impact although they are not among its main research areas.
This could indicate potential areas for development.

138

Intermediate Evaluation 2015

Self-Assessment Report of the ETH Board

Bibliometric Analysis

EPFL: Output and normalized impact (MNCS) per field(chart represents 62 % of EPFL’s output)
Research field MNCS

Output share in %Physics, Applied 1,58
Physics, Condensed Matter 1,58
Chemistry, Multidisciplinary 2,49
Eng., Electrical & Electronic 1,57
Physics, Multidisciplinary 2,45
Mat. Sci., Multidisciplinary 2,03
Chemistry, Physical 2,61
Optics 1,65
Comp. Sci., Theory & Meth. 1,37
Chemistry, Inorg. & Nuclear 2,45
Biochem. & Molec. Biology 2,26
Physics, Fluids & Plasmas 1,34
Neurosciences 1,73
Mathematics 0,84
Astronomy & Astrophysics 1,79
Multidisciplinary Sciences 5,87
Mathematics, Applied 1,30
Phys., Atom., Mol. & Chem. 1,41
Chemistry, Organic 1,45
Nanoscience & Nanotech. 2,16
Nucl. Sci. & Technol. 1,34
Environmental Sciences 1,65
Physics, Particles & Fields 4,35
Mechanics 1,76
Comp. Sci., Artif. Intell. 2,03

1%0%Impact: high2%

Impact: average

3%

4%

5%

6%

Impact: low

22 %

2,0

20 %

1,8

18 %

1,6

16 %

1,4

14%

1,2

12 %

1,0

10 %

0,8

8%

0,6

6%

0%

Intermediate Evaluation 2015

2009–
2012

2%

2008–
2011

PP(top 10 %)

2007–
2010

MNJS

2005–
2008

0,0

4%
MNCS

2004–
2007

0,2

2006–
2009

0,4

PP(top 10 %)

2,2

2003–
2006

MNCS and MNJS

EPFL: indicator trends

Self-Assessment Report of the ETH Board

139

Bibliometric Analysis

E.2.3 Results for PSI–– 7,717 publications have been attributed to the PSI for the current evaluation period(2003-2012). These publications have been cited more than 109,000 times. Annual publication
output shows a steady and considerable increase.
–– The impact indicators (MNCS and MNJS) show that the PSI’s output has an impact substantially higher than the worldwide average (MNCS = 1.67). With regard to the field normalized
impact indicators, the MNCS indicator in particular shows a considerable increase overthe entire period. The fact that about 16 % of the publications published by PSI are among
the top 10 % most highly cited publications in their field supports this statement.
–– PSI’s most active research fields are ‘Physics, Condensed Matter’, ‘Physics, Multidisciplinary’,‘Nuclear Science & Technology’, ‘Physics, Applied’, ‘Physics, Particles & Fields’, ’Materials
Science, Multidisciplinary’, and ‘Chemistry, Physical’. The impact indicators show thatwithin these fields, accounting each for at least 4 % of PSI’s research output, the scores differ
from field to field. While the impact is very high in the field of ‘Physics, Multidisciplinary’and high in the fields of ‘Physics, Applied’, ‘Physics, Particles & Fields’, ’Materials Science,
Multidisciplinary’, and ‘Chemistry, Physical’, it is average in the fields of ‘Physics, Condensed
Matter’, and ‘Nuclear Science & Technology’.
–– While 85 % of PSI’s publications involve some degree of collaboration, 70 % of all publications are elaborated with at least one international partner. Although the impact scoreis above the world average for all collaboration types, international collaboration clearly is
the type that results in the highest citation impact (MNCS > 1.80; PP(top 10 %) = 17 %).
The predominance of international collaboration underscores the PSI’s strong international
position and the high priority it accords to international collaboration.
–– The knowledge user analysis shows that the publications produced by the PSI have a very
high impact among international partners all over the world. With regard to individual
countries and to the institutions using the PSI’s work, the analysis underlines the Institute’s
excellent worldwide reputation, both among universities and public research organizations.

140

Intermediate Evaluation 2015

Self-Assessment Report of the ETH Board

Bibliometric Analysis

PSI: Output and normalized impact (MNCS) per field(chart represents 82 % of PSI’s output)
Research field MNCS

Output share in %Physics, Condensed Matter 1,04
Physics, Multidisciplinary 3,28
Nuclear Sci. & Technology 0,96
Physics, Applied 1,24
Physics, Particles & Fields 2,57
Mat. Sci., Multidisciplinary 1,42
Chemistry, Physical 1,31
Meteorol. & Atmosph. Sci. 1,82
Instruments & Instrument. 1,30
Chemistry, Multidisciplinary 1,56
Electrochemistry 1,40
Phys., Atom., Mol. & Chem. 1,03
Radio., Nucl. M./M. Imag.1 1,29
Spectroscopy 1,14
Environmental Sciences 1,44
Multidisciplinary Sciences 6,82
Engineering, Chemical 1,66
Biochem. & Molec. Biology 1,17
Astronomy & Astrophysics 2,55
Energy & Fuels 1,49
Geochemistry & Geophysics 1,16
Optics 1,94
Chemistry, Inorg. & Nuclear 0,91
Geosci., Multidisciplinary 1,86
Crystallography 1,150%Impact: highImpact: average

4%

8%

12 %

Impact: low

22 %

2,0

20 %

1,8

18 %

1,6

16 %

1,4

14%

1,2

12 %

1,0

10 %

0,8

8%

0,6

6%

0%

Intermediate Evaluation 2015

2009–
2012

2%

2008–
2011

PP(top 10 %)

2007–
2010

MNJS

2005–
2008

0,0

4%
MNCS

2004–
2007

0,2

2006–
2009

0,4

PP(top 10 %)

2,2

2003–
2006

MNCS and MNJSPSI: indicator trends

Self-Assessment Report of the ETH Board

141

Bibliometric Analysis

E.2.4 Results for WSL–– 2,068 publications have been attributed to WSL for the current evaluation period(2003-2012). These publications have been cited more than 30,700 times. Both with regard
to publication output and to its impact, the trend shows a steady and considerable increase.
–– The impact indicators (MNCS and MNJS) show that WSL’s output has an impact well in excessof the worldwide average (MNCS = 1.75). Both impact indicators, but in particular the MNJS,
show a constant increase over the evaluation period. The fact that 18 % of WSL’s publications
are among the top 10 % most highly cited publications in their field supports this statement.
–– WSL’s most active research fields are ‘Forestry’, ‘Ecology’, ‘Geosciences, Multidisciplinary’,‘Environmental Sciences’, ‘Plant Sciences’, ‘Geography, Physical’, and ‘Meteorology & Atmospheric Sciences’, all of them related to the research focus set by WSL. In all these fields,
WSL’s impact is very high, with the exception of ‘Plant Sciences’, where it is average (but only
slightly beneath the threshold to be considered as high).
–– While 81 % of WSL’s publications involve some degree of collaboration, 57 % of all publications are elaborated with at least one international partner. Although the impact scoreis above the world average for all collaboration types, international collaboration is thetype of collaboration with the highest citation impact. It has remarkably high impact values,
with a MNCS of around 2.16 and 21 % of these publications ranking among the top
10 % most cited in the world.
–– The knowledge user analysis shows that the publications produced by the WSL have ahigh impact among international partners all over the world. They again lead in most cases
to research of high quality. With regard to individual countries and to the institutions
using WSL’s work, the analysis underlines the institute’s excellent worldwide reputation,
both among universities and public research organizations.

142

Intermediate Evaluation 2015

Self-Assessment Report of the ETH Board

Bibliometric Analysis

WSL: Output and normalized impact (MNCS) per field(chart represents 90 % of WSL’s output)
Research field MNCS

Output share in %Ecology 1,87
Forestry 2,22
Geosci., Multidisciplinary 1,53
Environmental Sciences 1,41
Plant Sciences 1,18
Geography, Physical 1,90
Meteorol. & Atmosph. Sci. 1,66
Water Resources 1,70
Soil Science 1,57
Biodiversity Conversation 3,55
Geochemistry & Geophysics 6,39
Multidisciplinary Sciences 3,78
Engineering, Civil 0,80
Engineering, Environm. 0,74
Environmental Studies 1,36
Microbiology 1,15
Mycology 1,29
Agriculture, Multidiscipl. 0,87
Evolutionary Biology 1,51
Entomolgy 1,44
Agronomy 1,51
Genetics & Heredity 0,92
Biochem. & Molec. Biology 1,69
Geography 0,58
Zoology 1,240%Impact: highImpact: average

4%

8%

12 %

Impact: low

22 %

2,0

20 %

1,8

18 %

1,6

16 %

1,4

14%

1,2

12 %

1,0

10 %

0,8

8%

0,6

6%

0%

Intermediate Evaluation 2015

2009–
2012

2%

2008–
2011

PP(top 10 %)

2007–
2010

MNJS

2005–
2008

0,0

4%
MNCS

2004–
2007

0,2

2006–
2009

0,4

PP(top 10 %)

2,2

2003–
2006

MNCS and MNJS

WSL: indicator trends

Self-Assessment Report of the ETH Board

143

Bibliometric Analysis

E.2.5		 Results for Empa–– 3,452.571 publications have been attributed to Empa for the current evaluation period(2003-2012). These publications have been cited more than 42,000 times. Annual publication
output shows a constant pattern of considerable increase.
–– The impact indicators (MNCS and MNJS) show that Empa’s output has an impact well inexcess of the worldwide average (MNCS = 1.56). Both impact indicators, but in particular the
MNJS, show an increase over the evaluation period. The fact that 17 % of Empa publications
are among the top 10 % most highly cited publications in their field supports this statement.
–– Empa’s most active research fields are ‘Materials Science, Multidisciplinary’, ‘Physics, Applied’,‘Environmental Sciences’, and ‘Chemistry, Physical’. These fields, in combination with theless important fields, indicate that Empa is a multidisciplinary research institute, combining
physics, chemistry and a number of other scientific disciplines in its materials science
research. Apart from ‘Physics, Applied’, Empa’s impact in these fields is high or very high
(MNCS > 1.4 and even higher than 2.6 for one field, MNJS > 1.25 and PP(top 10 %) > 16 %).
–– While 78 % of Empa’s publications involve some degree of collaboration, more than half ofall publications are elaborated with at least one international partner. Although the impact
score is above the world average for all collaboration types, international collaboration is
the type of collaboration with the highest citation impact (MNCS = 1.64; PP(top 10 %) = 18 %).
The MNJS scores, in contrast, are evenly distributed over the different types of collaboration.
–– The knowledge user analysis shows that the publications produced by Empa have a very
high impact among international partners all over the world. They again lead in most cases
to research of high quality. From an institutional point of view, Swiss institutes from theETH Domain are very important users of Empa’s knowledge. Other important institutional
knowledge users are found in China, the USA and Europe. With regard to individual countries
and to the institutions using Empa’s work, the analysis underlines the latter’s excellent
worldwide reputation, both among universities and public research organizations.

71		The fraction number results from the fact that letters are given a weighting of 0.25 (see above, E.1).

144

Intermediate Evaluation 2015

Self-Assessment Report of the ETH Board

Bibliometric Analysis

Empa: Output and normalized impact (MNCS) per field(chart represents 76 % of Empa’s output)
Research field MNCS

Output share in %Mat. Sci., Multidisciplinary 1,56
Physics, Applied 1,16
Environmental Sciences 2,42
Chemistry, Physical 1,43
Meteorol. & Atmosph. Sci. 1,59
Physics, Condensed Matter 1,25
Chemistry, Multidisciplinary 1,84
Metallurgy & Metall. Eng. 1,80
Construction & Build. Tech. 2,10
Materials Science, Ceramics 1,63
Nanoscience & Nanotech. 1,57
Engineering, Environmental 2,60
Engineering, Civil 1,19
Polymer Science 1,26
Engineering, Mechanical 1,69
Energy & Fuels 1,78
Chemistry, Analytical 0,97
Engineering, Chemical 1,53
Materials Science, Compos. 1,55
Materials Sci., Coat. & Films 0,87
Electrochemistry 0,86
Instruments & Instrument. 1,50
Mechanics 1,68
Materials Sci., Charact. & Test. 1,10
Acoustics 0,420%Impact: highImpact: average

4%

8%

12 %

Impact: low

22 %

2,0

20 %

1,8

18 %

1,6

16 %

1,4

14%

1,2

12 %

1,0

10 %

0,8

8%

0,6

6%

0%

Intermediate Evaluation 2015

2009–
2012

2%

2008–
2011

PP(top 10 %)

2007–
2010

MNJS

2005–
2008

0,0

4%
MNCS

2004–
2007

0,2

2006–
2009

0,4

PP(top 10 %)

2,2

2003–
2006

MNCS and MNJS

Empa: indicator trends

Self-Assessment Report of the ETH Board

145

Bibliometric Analysis

E.2.6 Results for Eawag–– 2,459.7572 publications have been attributed to Eawag for the current evaluation period(2003-2012). These publications have been cited more than 45,000 times. Annual publication
output shows a constant pattern of considerable increase.
–– The impact indicators (MNCS and MNJS) show that Eawag’s output has an impact substantiallyhigher than the worldwide average (MNCS = 1.81). All impact indicators show an upward
trend over the evaluation period. The fact that more than 20 % of the Eawag’s publications
are among the top 10 % most highly cited publications in their field supports this statement and depicts Eawag’s important role worldwide.
–– Eawag’s most active research fields are ‘Environmental Sciences’, ‘Engineering, Environmental’, ‘Water Resources’, and ‘Ecology’, all of them fitting perfectly in the thematicorientation of an aquatic institute such as Eawag. The impact in all these fields is very high
(MNCS always > 1.60, MNJS > 1.20 and PP(top 10 %) > 20 %).
–– While 82 % of Eawag’s publications involve some degree of collaboration, more than half ofall publications are elaborated with at least one international partner. Although the impact
score is above the world average for all collaboration types, international collaboration is
the type of collaboration with the highest citation impact. This is reflected in the fact thatpublications with this type of collaboration have MNCS values of around 1.90, while 22 %of these publications are among the top 10 % most cited of the world. Remarkably, noncollaborative Eawag publications also exhibit a high impact level, with MNCS values around1.70 and around 20 % of the publications classified as among the top 10 % in the world.
Publications in collaboration only with other Swiss partners show a lower average impact
than internationally collaborative or even non-collaborative papers; but these publications
still present a very good overall impact performance level, with MNCS values around 1.60
and with 18 % of these publications among the top 10 % publications.
–– The knowledge user analysis shows that the publications produced by Eawag have a highimpact among international partners all over the world. They again lead in most cases toresearch of high quality. The partners are a mixture of institutes: public research institutes
and universities, and broad universities as well as universities with (partially) a life sciences
profile. With regard to individual countries and to the institutions using Eawag’s work,
the analysis underlines the latter’s excellent worldwide reputation, both among universities
and public research organizations.

72		The fraction number results from the fact that letters are given a weighting of 0.25 (see above, E.1).

146

Intermediate Evaluation 2015

Self-Assessment Report of the ETH Board

Bibliometric Analysis

Eawag: Output and normalized impact (MNCS) per field(chart represents 87 % of Eawag’s output)
Research field MNCS

Output share in %Environmental Sciences 1,84
Engineering, Environmental 2,32
Water Resources 1,80
Ecology 1,63
Marine & Freshwater Biology 1,51
Geosci., Multidisciplinary 1,94
Geochemistry & Geophysics 1,51
Microbiology 1,27
Limnology 1,44
Evolutionary Biology 1,42
Biotech. & Applied Microbio. 1,00
Genetics & Heredity 0,96
Oceanography 1,71
Toxicology 1,46
Multidisciplinary Sciences 7,18
Biochem. & Molec. Biology 1,06
Chemistry, Analytical 2,65
Geography, Physical 2,18
Meteorol. & Atmosph. Sci. 1,47
Biology 3,04
Chemistry, Multidisciplinary 0,68
Soil Science 1,87
Biochem. Research Methods 2,12
Zoology 1,23
Engineering, Civil 2,06

0%Impact: highImpact: average

5%

10 %

15 %

20 %

Impact: low

22 %

2,0

20 %

1,8

18 %

1,6

16 %

1,4

14%

1,2

12 %

1,0

10 %

0,8

8%

0,6

6%

0%

Intermediate Evaluation 2015

2009–
2012

2%

2008–
2011

PP(top 10 %)

2007–
2010

MNJS

2005–
2008

0,0

4%
MNCS

2004–
2007

0,2

2006–
2009

0,4

PP(top 10 %)

2,2

2003–
2006

MNCS and MNJS

Eawag: indicator trends

Self-Assessment Report of the ETH Board

147

Bibliometric Analysis

E.3 Conclusions
As stated above, the bibliometric analysis confirms the excellent performance of the ETH Domain
institutions and the assessment made by the ETH Board in its annual reports. The constantincrease in output and, most importantly, the impact of the institutions’ publications – achieved
despite the already very high performance depicted by the previous analyses – testify toappropriate strategic decisions and to the institutions’ good operating environment. The following
table summarizes the comparison between the previous evaluation period (2000-2009) andthe current evaluation period (2003-2012):

ETH Zürich

MNCS

EPFL

PSI

P1

P2

P1

P2

1.67

1.75

4.8 %

1,85

1,91

∆

∆
3,2 %

P1

P2

1,46

1,67

∆
14,4 %

MNJS

1.38

1.45

5.1 %

1,39

1,44

3,6 %

1,25

1,35

8%

PP
(top 10%)

18 %

19 %

5.5 %

19 %

20 %

5,3 %

14 %

16 %

14,3 %

WSL

MNCS

Empa

P1

P2

1,64

1,75

∆
6,7 %

Eawag

P1

P2

1,51

1,56

∆
3,3 %

P1

P2

∆

1,81

1,81

0%

MNJS

1,19

1,24

4,2 %

1,22

1,27

4,1 %

1,39

1,38

-0,7 %

PP(top 10%)

17%

18%

5,9 %

15%

17%

13,3 %

22%

21%-4,4 %

P1 = 2000-2009
P2 = 2003-2012

As the evaluation shows, all institutions exert the highest impact in their main fields of activity.
These are the fields in which they have been able to achieve the highest standards of researchand teaching and in which they operate with the greatest autonomy in terms of the allocationof resources. By pointing to these linkages, the bibliometric evaluation underlines the vital
importance that has been attributed in the first chapters of this report to academic autonomy
and stable basic funding. Both factors contribute to the ETH Domain institutions’ performance
as shown in the present bibliometric evaluation.
Most importantly, the evaluation also underlines the ETH Board’s insistence on openness
and a rigorous international orientation of the ETH Domain institutions. Not only is international
collaboration – in particular with regard to scientific publications – of growing importance(not least at the level of quantitative output) but, first and foremost, it is increasingly aprerequisite for high-impact research. This is supported by the fact that, for all ETH Domain
institutions, publications resulting from international collaboration are not only predominant
in terms of numbers but also have the greatest impact – much greater, in fact, than for publications arising from national collaboration or produced by single institutions.

148

Intermediate Evaluation 2015

Self-Assessment Report of the ETH Board

F
Retrospective and Outlook

F.1 Implementation of the Experts' Recommendations of the 2010 Intermediate Evaluation 151
F.2 Executive Summary of the Strategic Planning 2017-2020
153

Retrospective and Outlook

F
Retrospective and Outlook

F.1

Implementation of the Experts’ Recommendationsof the 2010 Intermediate Evaluation

As requested by the evaluation mandate, the ETH Board reports “on the extent to which
the experts’ recommendations made in the 2010 intermediate evaluation were implemented.
If a recommendation was disregarded, reasons for this should be given.” In its response to
the 2010 expert report, the ETH Board has identified 24 recommendations put forward by thecommittee, some of them, however, being identical in scope and content.
All recommendations have been carefully taken into account by the ETH Board as well as
by the ETH Domain institutions concerned, and have been thoroughly examined. Most
recommendations have been implemented. In six cases, however, examination of the recommendation and the first steps undertaken prompted the ETH Board to decide against further
implementation. Appendix 3 presents the relevant information on the follow-up and thestatus of implementation for each recommendation, including explanations in the case of therecommendations that have been disregarded.
Four recommendations that have not been implemented, however, will be addressed in
the present chapter. The numbers attributed to the individual recommendations both in
this chapter and in Appendix 3 refer to the numbers structuring the ETH Board’s Response to
the Peer Report on the 2010 Intermediate Evaluation.73
Branding (Recommendation 1c)
In the 2010 intermediate evaluation, the peers suggested that the ETH Domain should “strive
for a Domain branding for Switzerland while respecting the strong international brands ofthe partners.” As the ETH Board stated in its response to the Peer Report, a process destined atcreating a common brand for the entire ETH Domain had been launched in 2009. After intensive
work, including an internal consultation process within the ETH Domain institutions on a concrete
proposal of the ETH Board, it was decided to discontinue the branding project in December
2012. As the ETH Board’s final report on the performance period 2008-2011/12 states, the following
steps have been undertaken in the meantime:–– In summer 2009, the ETH Board decided to further develop a project that would allow theETH Domain institutions to maintain their strong individual brands, which will be
supplemented by a common by-line referring to the Domain (“endorsed brand model”).
–– Between 2009 and 2010, a “Communications Framework for the ETH Board and theETH Domain” analyzed and documented potential solutions, including the view of stakeholders, politicians and media, and drawing also on the international perception of theETH Domain.
–– As mentioned by the ETH Board in its response to the Peer Report of 2010, five fieldsof action for reinforced communication were designated, one of which focuses on thedevelopment of a common brand.

73		This document can be found, for instance, on the website of the State Secretariat for Education, Research and Innovation(SERI): http://www.sbfi.admin.ch/themen/hochschulen/01623/index.html?lang=de (last accessed: November 24, 2014).

Intermediate Evaluation 2015

Self-Assessment Report of the ETH Board

151

Retrospective and Outlook–– Subsequently, and despite the reservations expressed within some institutions, theETH Board together with representatives of the ETH Domain institutions has developed acommon brand. The brand has been protected internationally.
–– During 2012, a formal consultation (as requested by the ETH Act) was held within the
ETH Domain. This consultation was also addressed to internal bodies – such as the University
Assemblies of ETH Zurich and EPFL or the Internal Appeals Commission – who had not yet
been involved in the previously confidential process.
–– The consultation revealed that both Federal Institutes of Technology were – for different
reasons – opposed to the proposed brand. At its meeting in December 2012, the ETH Board
discussed the results of the consultation in detail. Based on the results of the consultation,
it acknowledged that no consensus between the diverging needs and positions of theETH Domain institutions could be reached.
–– On these premises, balancing the interests and chances of success, and in light of its
current priorities, the ETH Board decided to abandon the ETH Domain branding project.
Nomination of an International Advisory Board (Recommendation 2a)–– As announced in its response to the Peer Report, the ETH Board studied the options forestablishing an international advisory board. It considered the possibility of constituting asmall board comprising members of existing advisory boards at the individual institutions
who are familiar with the ETH Domain.
–– However, such international advisory boards and/or research commissions exist at
ETH Zurich and EPFL as well as at the Research Institutes and are considered most valuablefor the individual development of these institutions.
–– After examining this option, the ETH Board therefore came to the conclusion that anadvisory board additional to the ETH Board would result in unnecessary and potentiallyconflicting redundancies.
–– Furthermore, the periodic evaluations with international expert panels of entire institutionsor their units – as performed by the institutions on a regular basis – were considered to
be much better positioned for providing the intended international perspective.
–– The institutions are required to bring these evaluations to the attention of the ETH Board,which gives the ETH Board valuable insights into the appraisal of the institutions' activities
and strategies with regard to their international positioning.
–– Therefore, the nomination of an additional international advisory board has not been
pursued by the ETH Board.
Nominating the Chair of the International Advisory Board as a Regular ETH Board Member(Recommendation 4a)–– Closely linked to the considerations presented in recommendation 2a) above, the ETH Board
concluded that chairing an advisory board and at the same time acting as a member ofthe ETH Board would generate a workload that would make such a function unattractive forhigh-caliber individuals.
–– The members of the ETH Board spend at least ten days at regular meetings and six days in
the annual dialogs with the institutions of the ETH Domain.
–– A (national) Board member who would have to chair the international advisory board
would have to spend additional time for this function. If that member were to be an international member, the substantial amount of travel time would put an even larger burden
on him or her.

152

Intermediate Evaluation 2015

Self-Assessment Report of the ETH Board

Retrospective and Outlook–– This view has been confirmed by the experience of trying to appoint an international
regular member of the ETH Board. The search of such a regular board member had to beterminated as it became clear that potential candidates considered they would have tospend too much time travelling just in order to be able to attend the regular board meetings.
–– Given the conclusions drawn with regard to the nomination of an international advisoryboard and taking into account this experience, the ETH Board has deemed it inappropriate
to follow up on the appointment of an international board member (even if this member
were not to be considered as the chairman of an international advisory board).
Own and Manage Real Estate and Facilities (Recommendation 4b)–– As stated in its response to the Peer Report, the ETH Board welcomed this recommendationand took up “the issue of working towards the long-term goal of transferring real estate
into the ETH Domain in its Action Plan for 2011”. Hence the advantages and disadvantages ofa transfer of ownership of real estate were carefully assessed by the ETH Board. In parallel,
negotiations with the Swiss Confederation as the owner resulted in substantially improved
flexibility in the usage of the Confederation's real estate within the ETH Domain:–– The ETH Board’s competency has been extended, allowing the transfer of up to 20 % of thebudget for investments to the “Finanzierungsbeitrag”, i.e. the Confederation's financing
contribution covering operating expenses.
–– The ETH Board was further granted the option of transferring credit to the following year
if needed, plus the possibility of re-investing revenues from real estate sales and applying
alternative financing models involving private parties.
–– Considering these substantial improvements, the ETH Board decided in December 2011 to
put further attempts to transfer ownership of real estate to the ETH Domain on hold.
In doing so, it also sought to avoid the significant disadvantage of assuming liability andother potentially costly duties incumbent upon a real estate owner.

F.2

Executive Summary of the Strategic Planning 2017-2020 74

Through high-quality teaching and innovative research, knowledge and technology-based
foundations, the ETH Board’s strategic planning 2017-2020 for the ETH Domain seeks to provide
a basis for the sustainable development of society. A further aim is to strengthen the longterm competitiveness of the ETH Domain for the benefit of Switzerland as a centre of education,
research and innovation, and thus as a place to work. This requires not only adequate
resources for the basic mission of the six institutions and for long-term competitive working
conditions, but also targeted investment in research infrastructures of national importance,
as well as in four strategic focus areas. Specific efforts to maintain the quality of research-basedteaching are also called for. The ETH Board is therefore asking the Swiss Federal Council
and Parliament to approve a budget appropriation of CHF 11 billion. This overall requirementfor 2017-2020 assumes an annual increase in resources of 3.5 % based on government fundingof the ETH Domain for 2016. For the achievement of its objectives, the ETH Board also stresses
the importance of a number of key framework conditions for science policy.

74		Quoted and translated from the Strategic Planning 2017–2020 of the ETH Board.

Intermediate Evaluation 2015

Self-Assessment Report of the ETH Board

153

Retrospective and Outlook

VisionThe ETH Domain will be pursuing the following vision during the ERI period 2017-2020:"As a driving force for innovation, the ETH Domain wishes to strengthen Switzerland's longterm competitiveness through excellence in research, teaching and knowledge and technology
transfer, and to contribute to the development of society. Acting as a beacon, it will seek
to assume its share of global responsibility for tackling urgent social challenges, for improving
quality of life and for the long-term preservation of the resources our lives depend on."Current position of the ETH Domain
The ETH Domain excels through its combination of exact sciences, natural sciences andengineering sciences plus specific complementary expertise in social sciences and humanities.
The close networking of the two Federal Institutes of Technology in Zurich and Lausanne andthe four research institutions PSI, WSL, Empa and Eawag, and their responsibility for large-scale
research infrastructures and technology platforms, create a unique setting for high-quality
innovative research, teaching and training in the ETH Domain which permeates Switzerland asa centre of science and research.
The ETH Domain is excellently positioned: the courses taught at the two Federal Institutesof Technology enjoy strong demand; both nationally and internationally, their superlatively
trained graduates are sought-after specialists with excellent career prospects; teaching
and research are of the highest calibre worldwide and this is reflected in impressive successes
in competition for research funding, as well as in top positions in international rankings andprestigious awards. Through its alumni, through a needs-oriented range of continuing
education courses and through the practical application of scientific discoveries in the formof marketable developments and innovations, the ETH Domain makes a significant contribution
to Switzerland's international competitiveness.
Challenges
The ETH Board sees the following challenges:–– The growth in the number of students and doctoral candidates to date and in the futureneeds to be addressed if the quality of research-based education and training is to be
maintained and developed.
–– The current and planned research infrastructures of national importance based in the ETH
Domain need to be financed, operated and developed/implemented in a way that guarantees
access to these state-of-the-art research infrastructures for science and business.
–– The ETH Domain is eager to meet the urgent challenges facing society today and in the
future, notably in areas where science is expected to be make a key contribution.
–– Switzerland's internationality and openness, and its university system – which facilitates
the movement of scientists and academics, as well as national and international cooperation
with other research groups and institutions – must be secured for the future and beanchored more firmly in society.
Strategic success factors
In the present Strategic Plan for 2017-2020, the ETH Board sets out the strategic success factors
through which it intends to master these challenges and put its vision into practice:–– First-class, research-based teaching: First-class, research-based training with optimum
supervision is an absolute priority. It requires a targeted effort: up to 55 additional professorships will make it possible to guarantee strong links between training and current research,advances into new areas of research and a good student/teacher ratio. The growing numberof students, doctoral candidates and professorships, coupled with the diversification of
curricula and learning environments, have created a need for more investment in teaching,154

Intermediate Evaluation 2015

Self-Assessment Report of the ETH Board

Retrospective and Outlook

training and learning infrastructure at the six institutions. The two Federal Institutes ofTechnology will also aim at establishing the total number of their students and doctoral candidates around their target figures (ETH Zurich: 20,000; EPFL: 11,000) between now and 2020.
–– Research infrastructures of nationwide importance: State-of-the-art infrastructure is
crucial to ensuring Switzerland’s international competitiveness as a centre of research andinnovation. The following four research infrastructure projects are strategic priorities: theSustained scientific user lab for simulation based science (HPCN-20) attached to the
Swiss National Supercomputing Centre (CSCS) of ETH Zurich; the Blue Brain neuroinformatics
project at EPFL, which is part of the European FET flagship Human Brain Project; theexpansion of the SwissFEL facility at PSI (ATHOS/SwissFEL); and the upgrading of the CMS
detectors headed by ETH Zurich.
–– Strategic areas of focus in research: The four focus areas jointly defined by the ETH Boardand the institutions – “Energy”, “Personalized medicine and medical technologies”,“Big data and digital sciences” and “Advanced manufacturing” – address social challenges
and open up essential strategic areas of research for the development of the ETH Domain's
portfolio. To this end, existing expertise in the ETH Domain is being focused and new initiativesof the institutions are being supported in a coordinated manner.
–– Attractive employment conditions: Outstanding scientists, promising young talent andhighly qualified employees in the administrative and technical sectors are essential
requirements if the institutions of the ETH Domain are to fulfil their statutory mandate andachieve their ambitious strategic objectives. If they are to nurture potential and attract
new staff, the institutions depend on a favourable political and financial framework enablingthem to offer an inspiring working environment with attractive and internationally competitive working conditions. During its annual negotiations and pay rounds with the social
partners, the ETH Board for its part needs to have some financial room for manoeuvre sothat it can offer progressive working conditions with a pay policy that will remain competitive
with the private sector and the Federal administration over the longer term.
Funding requirements 2017-2020
The ETH Board allocates the lion's share of the annual Federal grant to the six institutions toenable them to fulfil their basic mandate. In this way, they ensure that they implement
their institutional substrategies for the development of the portfolio in teaching, training andresearch (including some of the additional professorships), Knowledge and Technology Transfer
and properties. If the basic mandate is to be fulfilled, funding needs to increase by 2.5 %per year (around CHF 10,191 million in total) as there is also a need to compensate for inflation.
A total of CHF 699 million is required for the successful and timely implementation of thefour strategic success factors:–– CHF 272 million for first-class research-based teaching (CHF 122 million for additional professorships, a further CHF 150 million required for investment in property).
–– CHF 237 million for the four major research infrastructures of national importance,–– CHF 110 million for the strategic areas of focus in research, and–– CHF 80 million for attractive working conditions.
In addition, CHF 115 million is required for reserves at Publica (CHF 80 million) and for thedismantling of the PSI's accelerator facilities (CHF 35 million). The present resource requirement
planning thus results in a total financial requirement of CHF 11,005 million. The ETH Boardis therefore asking the Swiss Federal Council and Parliament to approve this sum as the budget
appropriation for the ETH Domain for the ERI period 2017-2020. The overall requirement for
2017-2020 assumes an annual increase in funding of 3.5 % based on Federal government fundingof the ETH Domain for 2016.

Intermediate Evaluation 2015

Self-Assessment Report of the ETH Board

155

Retrospective and Outlook

Science policy framework as a foundation for success
The most important requirements for the continuing success of the ETH Domain are that the
Swiss Confederation as funding provider should ensure a top-quality operating environment(securing in particular the autonomy of the institutions of the ETH Domain, political stability
and stable core funding) and that the institutions of the ETH Domain should be firmly anchoredin Switzerland's society and economy. In the ETH Board's view it is crucially important that–– we continue to ensure that Swiss universities and research institutions are able to attract
and retain excellent scientists and the best students solely on the basis of their qualifications and potential;–– from 2017 onward we endeavour to restore Switzerland's full association with the European
Research Framework Programme Horizon 2020 instead of the current partial association;–– at national level we should only establish instruments for the promotion of young academic talent which do not undermine the autonomy of the universities and their strategic
development planning;–– restraint should be exercised at all levels before imposing excessive regulation and control
on academic institutions, particularly in the context of cooperation with business andefforts to obtain funding from third parties.

156

Intermediate Evaluation 2015

Self-Assessment Report of the ETH Board

Appendices

Appendix 1: Unique Features and Governance of the ETH DomainThe Unique Features of the ETH Domain (Alleinstellungsmerkmale)
Organisation and Governance of the ETH Domain
Appendix 2: Additional Material to Chapter A
Appendix 3: Additional Material to Chapter F.1Statement of the ETH Board on the Implementation of the Experts’ Recommendationsof the 2010 Intermediate Evaluation

159
159
161
165
169
169

Appendices

Appendices

For reporting on the fulfilment of the performance mandate, reference is made to the separate
appendix reproducing the “insight” section of the Annual Report 2013 (separate inlet brochure).

Appendix 1: Unique Features and Governance of the ETH Domain 75
The Unique Features of the ETH Domain (Alleinstellungsmerkmale)
The ETH Domain has three unique strategic features: its wide range of combinations encompassing
exact, natural and engineering sciences, management studies, social sciences and humanities;
the complementary nature of the two Federal Institutes of Technology and the ResearchInstitutes; and its development and operation of major research infrastructures. These features
enable the six institutions to maintain a high profile nationally and internationally andto create significant added value for the higher education and research sector in Switzerland.
Spectrum of disciplines permits unique combinations
In Switzerland, only the two Federal Institutes of Technology offer engineering programmes
at university level. Because of their spectrum of disciplines, only the ETH Domain institutions areable to combine exact, natural and engineering sciences (incl. architecture), as well as management studies, social sciences and humanities in a wide variety of ways, thus placing theirknowledge and new discoveries in a societal and economic context while also submitting themto expert scrutiny. This broad interdisciplinary networking within the ETH Domain is decisivewith a view to being able to tackle complex current and future challenges in society, businessand politics in a manner that focuses on solutions. With their targeted knowledge and technology
transfer work, the six institutions also help ensure that their new discoveries lead to successful
and marketable innovations.
Complementary nature of the Federal Institutes of Technology and Research Institutes
The two Federal Institutes of Technology and the four federal Research Institutes complement
each other in terms of content and structure:–– The two Federal Institutes of Technology conduct their teaching, research (primarily basic
research) and knowledge and technology transfer work to a standard which is on a par withthe best universities in the world. Their courses build on solid basic training in mathematics
and natural sciences. The two Federal Institutes of Technology maintain diversity byfocusing on selected topics and engaging in interdisciplinary networking. In addition, they
make a significant contribution to overcoming the global challenges of the 21st century
in such areas as energy, food, data volumes, data security and risk management. The twoFederal Institutes of Technology engage in intensive exchanges with business and public
institutions at both national and international level. Academic independence is safeguarded by ensuring that professorships and research units are properly funded and that
research agreements are drawn up in accordance with the relevant guidelines.
75		Quoted and translated from the Strategic Planning 2017–2020 of the ETH Board.

Intermediate Evaluation 2015

Self-Assessment Report of the ETH Board

159

Appendices–– The four Research Institutes pursue topic-oriented, cutting-edge research supplemented
with application-oriented research and technology development. Hence, they position
themselves at the interface between basic research and technical or social implementation,
thereby playing a key role in knowledge and technology transfer. Their working methods
are predominantly interdisciplinary and transdisciplinary because they bring together
expertise from various disciplines, and maintain a continuous dialogue with society,regulatory authorities, public administration and business. The diversity this entails andthe synergy-based collaboration within the ETH Domain will contribute substantially to
the ETH Domain’s strength in the future too.
Research infrastructures of nationwide importance
The ETH Domain’s portfolio of large-scale research facilities is especially important to ensuring
innovative, solution-focused advancement of cutting-edge research in Switzerland and beyond.
The institutions are equipped with state-of-the-art research infrastructures, many of which
they make available for research in Switzerland, including a substantial proportion in the formof user labs. The ETH Domain exercises its specific responsibility for operation and maintenance,
as well as for management tasks for the further development of such infrastructure and theassociated research.

160

Intermediate Evaluation 2015

Self-Assessment Report of the ETH Board

Appendices

Organisation and Governance of the ETH Domain
Excerpt of pp. 22-25 of the Annual Report 2013 of the ETH Board on the ETH Domain
OVERVIEW
Organisation and governance

Structure and leadershipof the etH Domain
As the law governing sponsorship of the ETH Domain,
the ETH Act clearly defines the constitutional mission tooperate the Swiss Federal Institutes of Technology.
This act also provides the legal basis for the research
institutes of the ETH Domain.

the eth domain and its environment
The Federal Act on the Federal Institutes of Technology (ETH Act) of
4 October 1991 defines the status, structure and mission of the ETH
Domain. According to the legislative provisions, the ETH Domain
is autonomous and the ETH Act stipulates that it is affiliated to the
responsible federal department. The ETH Act also defines the auton­
omy of both Federal Institutes of Technology and – indirectly – thefour research institutes. The ETH Board is the strategic leading andsupervision body of the ETH Domain.
mission and leadership
According to the principal mission set out in Art. 2 of the ETH Act,
both Federal Institutes of Technology and the four research insti­
tutes (institutions of the ETH Domain) are to do the following:­ Educate students and specialists in scientific andtechnical fields and provide ongoing continuing education,­ Expand scientific knowledge through research,­ Foster upcoming young scientists,­ Render scientific and technical services,­ Perform public relations activities,­ Exploit their research findings.
The institutions of the ETH Domain discharge their mission in
observance of internationally recognised standards. They takeaccount of Switzerland’s needs and promote international coop­eration.
performance mandate and budget appropriation
The ETH Domain is managed according to an effect­oriented lead­ership model. The political authorities specify performance stand­ards and key financial parameters, while the ETH Domain, as aservice provider, is responsible for implementing the specifications.
Political leadership is the responsibility of the Federal Parliament
and the Federal Council. The following elements serve as coreleadership tools: the Federal resolution approved by Parliament,

22

Annual Report 2013 on the ETH Domain

Intermediate Evaluation 2015

which includes a four­year budget appropriation; a performance
mandate for the ETH Domain from the Federal Council, which is
tailored to the budget; and the annual credit allocation from
Parliament. The Federal resolution regarding budget appropria­
tion over a four­year performance period is based on the Federal
Council’s dispatch on the promotion of education, research andinnovation. These political tools are supplemented by financial
controlling, which provides information on the accounts andmission fulfilment.
The ETH Board’s reporting system comprises three parts: in the
Annual Report, the ETH Board focuses on the achievement of theperformance goals and illustrates how the annual federal financ­
ing contribution has been used. In a self­evaluation report ineach half of the performance period, the ETH Board indicates theextent to which the goals of the performance mandate havealready been met. At the end of the performance period, the ETH
Board produces a final report showing how the performance
mandate was fulfilled during the performance period just ended.
The final report must be approved by the Swiss Federal Assembly.
The ETH Board is responsible for the strategic leadership of theETH Domain (see next section). Responsibility for the operational
leadership of the individual institutions of the ETH Domain lies
with the members of the Executive Boards of both Federal Insti­
tutes of Technology and the Directorates of the four research
institutes. In accordance with Art. 4 Paragraph 3 of the ETH Act,the institutions of the ETH Domain assume all responsibilities
which are not assigned to the ETH Board by the ETH Act.
eth Board: mission and operating principles
The ETH Board defines the strategy of the ETH Domain within theframework of the performance mandate, represents the ETH
Domain to the government and government authorities at fed­
eral level, issues controlling directives, carries out strategic con­trolling, approves the development plans of the institutions of
the ETH Domain, oversees their implementation and supervises

Self-Assessment Report of the ETH Board

161

Appendices

OVERVIEW
Organisation and governance

11 members

eth domain

As on 31 December 2013

eth Board
Federal Institutesof Technology

over 18,000 students and doctoral students
10,491 employment contracts

over 9,800 students and doctoral students
5,526 employment contracts

eth Zurich

epFl

Research institutes
11,899865 Arbeitsverhältnisse*
employment contracts

514 employment contracts

923 employment contracts

474 employment contracts

psi

wsl

empa

eawag

the ETH Domain. It agrees targets with the institutions andallocates Federal funding on the basis of the institutions’ budget
requests. It submits requests to the Federal Council for the selec­tion of the Presidents of both Federal Institutes of Technology
and of the Directors of the four research institutes, elects theother members of the Executive Boards of both Federal Institutesof Technology and appoints the other members of the directoratesof the four research institutes. Finally, the ETH Board appoints
professors at the request of the Presidents of both Federal Insti­
tutes of Technology.
The ETH Board performs its supervisory function through theuse of the following tools: periodic reporting from the institutions
on resources (finances, human resources, real estate), annual
reporting from the institutions on the status of mission fulfilment
with regard to agreed targets, annual strategic controlling talks
between the ETH Board and the institutions (known as dialogues)
and reports from the institutions within the framework of theirrisk management systems. Moreover, the ETH Board’s Internal
Audit staff evaluate the risk management processes, internal
control system and governance processes of the institutions andreport on them to the ETH Board, in particular the ETH Board’s
Audit Committee.
The rules of procedure of the ETH Board are published in thecompilation of Federal law. The ETH Board meets five times a year
for one or two days at a time. It met for ten days in 2013 andspent another seven days in dialogues with the institutions of
the ETH Domain. The ETH Board meetings focused on strategic
and budgetary discussions, the reporting of the institutions, theappointment of professors and the selection or appointment ofprominent figures for the vice­presidencies and directorates of
the institutions. Finally, it put forward a proposal to the Federal
Council for the election of the new President of ETH Zurich, whowill take up office on 1 January 2015.
Proprietor discussions are held twice a year between the
President of the ETH Board, the General Secretariat of the Fed­

eral Department of Economic Affairs, Education and Research(EAER), the State Secretariat for Education, Research and Inno­
vation (SERI) and the Director of the Federal Finance Adminis­
tration (FFA). The President of the ETH Board is responsible forholding periodic individual discussions with the Presidents ofthe two Federal Institutes of Technology and the Directors of
the research institutes, who present reports on the strategic
development of their institutions.
audit and executive committees
The Audit Committee assists the ETH Board in financial supervisionand in the monitoring of risk management, of the internal con­trol system and of financial auditing activities. It is generallycomposed of three ETH Board members who are independent of
the executive leadership, but may also involve additional people
in a consultative capacity. The head of the Internal Audit depart­
ment and the head of the Finance section of the ETH Board’s staff
attend the meetings.
The Executive Committee assists the ETH Board in preparing
for and following up on meetings and in fulfilling its duties as
an employer. It also liaises with social partners. It is composedof the President of the ETH Board (chair), the Presidents of bothFederal Institutes of Technology, the representative of theresearch institutes and the representative of the University
Assemblies. The Executive Director and, if necessary, the headof the Human Resources section of the ETH Board’s staff attend
the meetings.
remuneration of the eth Board
In 2013, the President of the ETH Board received a salary of CHF
359,983 (including CHF 82,992 social insurance contributions) for
his 80 % FTE position. In addition, he received an entertainment
allowance of CHF 5,000. The President is insured by the Swiss
Federal Pension Fund, the rules of which determine the employ­er’s contribution. The other six members of the ETH Board who

Annual Report 2013 on the ETH Domain

162Intermediate Evaluation 2015

Self-Assessment Report of the ETH Board

23

Appendices

OVERVIEW
Organisationand governance | management bodies
OVERVIEW
Organisation and governance | management bodies

President’s Office and members of the
ETH
Board (Updated
January
1, 2015)President’s
Office andmembersof theETH Board Office and members of the
President’s
The
Board of the current term of office
ETH ETH
Board(2012–2016)
is of
made
up of theThe ETH Board
the current
termfollowing
of officemembers:(2012–2016)
is
made
up
of
the
following
The ETH Board of the current term of officemembers:(2012–2016) is made up of the following-members:
Dr Fritz Schiesser1, President
Paul L. Herrling2,
Vice-President-­ Prof.
Dr Schiesser1,
Dr Fritz
President-­
Dr Schiesser1,
Ralph(untilDec. 2014)
Paul L.Eichler1
Herrling2,
Vice­President­ Prof.
Dr Fritz
President-­
Guzzella1(sinceJan. 2015)
Ralph
Paul
L.Eichler1
Herrling2,
Vice­President­ Prof.
Prof. DrDr Lino-­Aebischer1 ,3­ Prof.
Prof. DrDr Patrick
Ralph Eichler1-­
Mesot1­ Prof.
Prof. DrDr Joël
Patrick
Aebischer1,3-­
FasanaArnaboldi­ Beatrice
Prof. Dr JoëlMesot1-­
Dr h. c.
BarbaraHaering2­ Dr
Beatrice
FasanaArnaboldi-­­ BethDr Dr Krasna2
h. c. Barbara Haering2-­
Staiblin­ JasminBeth Krasna2-­
MarkusStauffacher1­ Dr
JasminStaiblin-­
Steimer­ Olivier
Dr Markus
Stauffacher1­ Olivier Steimer
ETH
eth Zürich-eth
Dr Ralph Eichler, President­ Prof.
Zürich
Dec.
2014)
­
Prof.
Lino
Guzzella,
Rector­ (untilProf. DrDr
Ralph
Eichler, President-­
Guzzella,
Rector­ Prof.
Roman
Boutellier,Vice­President
Prof. DrDr LinoLino
Guzzella,
Rector(untilDec.
2014);
Human
Resources
andInfrastructure­ Prof. Dr Roman Boutellier, Vice­President(sinceJan.
2015)­ PresidentDr
RobertPerich,Vice­President
Human
Resources
andInfrastructure-­ Prof.
Dr Sarah
Springmann,
RectorFinanceandControllingDr
RobertPerich,Vice­President
Jan.
2015)
­ (sinceProf.
Dr
RolandYves Siegwart,
FinanceandControlling-­ Prof.
Dr
Boutellier,Vice-President
Vice­President
and
Prof.
Dr RomanRoland Research
Yves Siegwart,
Human
Resourcesand Infrastructure
Corporate
RelationsnVice­President
Researchand- Prof.
Dr Detlef
Günter, Vice-President
Corporate
Relationsn
Research and Corporate Relations
epFl(since2015)Aebischer, President­
Prof. DrJan.
Patrick
epFl-­
RobertPerich,Vice-President
­ Dr
Prof.
Dr Patrick
Philippe
Gillet,Prof.
Dr
Aebischer,President
and Controlling
Vice­President
Academic­ Finance
Prof. Dr Philippe
Gillet, Affairs-­ Prof.
Dr Roland
Yves Siegwart,
Karl Aberer,
Vice­President
Academic
Affairs
ResearchandSystems
Vice­President
Information­ Vice-President
Prof. Dr Karl Aberer,
Corporate
Relations(until Dec.
2014)
Vice­President
Information
Systems

EPFL-­ Prof.
Dr Patrick
Aebischer,President
Dr Adrienne
Corboud
Fumagalli,-­ Prof.
Dr Philippe
Gillet,Vice­President
Innovation
Dr
Adrienne
Corboud
Fumagalli,
Vice-President
AcademicandValorisationVice­President
InnovationAffairs-­ Prof.
Dr Karl
Aberer, Perret,Francis­Luc
and Valorisation
InformationVice­President
Planning
andSystems
Logistics­ Vice-President
Prof. Dr Francis­Luc
Perret,- Dr
Adrienne
Corboud
Fumagalli,(until
31.7.2013)
Vice­President
Planningand Logistics
Innovation­ Vice-President
Dr AndréSchneider,Vice­President(until
31.7.2013)
Valorisation
Planningand Logistics(since 1.8.2013)­ and
Dr AndréSchneider,Vice­President- Dr
André Schneider,Vice-President
Planningand Logistics(since 1.8.2013)
psiPlanning and Logistics­
psiProf. Dr Joël Mesot, Director
PSI
­
Peter
Allenspach,
­ Dr
Prof.
Dr Joël
Mesot, Director-­ Prof.
Dr Joël
Mesot,
Director
Memberof theDirectorate
Dr PeterAllenspach,
-­ Dr
Peter
Allenspach,Jean­Marc
Memberof theCavedon,
Directorate
ofthe
theCavedon,
Directorateof
Directorate(until 31.8.2013)­ Member
Dr Jean­Marc-­ Dr
Kurt N.
Memberof Clausen,
the Directorate (until 31.8.2013)
the Directorate­ Member
Dr Kurt N.ofClausen,-­ Prof.
Dr Leonid
Memberof the Rivkin,
Directorateof the Directorate­ MemberProf. Dr Leonid
Rivkin,-­ Prof.
Dr Gebhard
F.X. Schertler,
Memberof the Directorateof the Directorate­ MemberProf. Dr Gebhard
F.X. Schertler,-­ Prof.
Dr Alexander
Wokaun,
Friso
Van
der
Veen,
Memberof theDirectorateof theDirectorate­ MemberProf. Dr Friso
Van
der Veen,­ Prof.
Dr Alexander
Wokaun,Memberof the Directorate
Memberof the Directorate­WSL
Prof. Dr Alexander
Wokaun,- Prof.
Dr Konrad
Steffen, Director
Memberof the Directorate-wsl
Dr Christoph Hegg, Deputy Director-­wsl
Prof. Dr Rolf
Holderegger,
KonradSteffen, Directorof theDirectorate­
Dr
Christoph
Hegg,
DeputyDirector­ MemberProf.
Dr Konrad
Steffen,Director-­Prof.
Dr RolfRigling,
Holderegger,­ Dr
Dr Andreas
Christoph
Hegg, Deputy Directorof theDirectorate­ MemberProf. Dr Rolf
Holderegger,
-­ Dr
Jürg
Schweizer,
AndreasMemberof Rigling,
the DirectorateofMemberof thetheDirectorate
Directorate­ MemberDr
AndreasRigling,-­ Prof.
DrSchweizer,
Niklaus
Zimmermann,
Dr
Jürg
Mitglied der Direktion
Memberof the Directorateof Zimmermann,
the Directorate­ Member
Dr Niklaus­Dr
Jürg Schweizer,
Mitglied der DirektionofZimmermann,
the Directorate­ Member
Dr Niklaus
Member of the Directorate

Empa
-empa
Prof. Dr Gian-Luca Bona, Director
-empa
Peter
Richner, Deputy
­ Dr
Prof.
Dr Gian­Luca
Bona,Director
Director-­
Brigitte
Buchmann,
Peter
Richner,
Deputy­ Dr
Prof.
Dr Gian­Luca
Bona, Director
Directorof Buchmann,
the Directorate­
Dr­ Member
Dr BrigittePeter Richner,
Deputy Director-­ Dr
MemberofBuchmann,theGröning,
Directorate
Dr Pierangelo
Brigitte­ MemberDr
Xaver of
Edelmann,
Memberof thethe Directorate
Directorate-­ Prof.
Dr Harald
Krug,
Memberofthe Directorate(until 31.7.2013)
Dr
Xaver
Edelmann,ofthetheGröning,
Directorate­ Member
Dr Pierangelo
Memberof
Directorate(until 31.7.2013)
April
Memberof 2014)
theGröning,
Directorate­ (untilDr
Pierangelo-­ Dr
UrsDrLeemann,
Member of theProf.
HaraldMemberof the Krug,
Directorate
Oct. 2014)
Memberof (since
the Krug,
Directorate­ Directorate
Prof. Dr Harald
Member of the Directorate
Eawag
eawag
-eawag­ Prof. Dr Janet Hering, Director
Direktorin-­
Eggen,
DeputyDirector­ Prof.
Prof. DrDr RikJanet
Hering,Direktorin-­
Jokela,­ Prof.
Prof. DrDr Jukka
Rik Eggen,
Deputy Directorof theJokela,
Directorate­ MemberProf. Dr Jukka
-­ Dr
Tove
Member of theProf.
Dr Larsen,
Peter
Memberof theReichert,
Directorate
Directorate(sinceOct. 2014)
Memberofthe
Directorate­ Prof. Dr Peter Reichert,-­ Prof.
Dr Peter
Hansruedi
Siegrist,
Memberof theReichert,
Directorateof the Directorate­ MemberProf. Dr Hansruedi
Siegrist,-­ Prof.
Dr Hansruedi
Siegrist, Member
Bernhard
Wehrli,Memberof the Directorate
theDrDirectorate(until Sept. 2014)
Memberof the Directorate
­ of
Prof.
Bernhard
Wehrli,- Prof.
Dr
Bernhard
Wehrli,Member of the DirectorateMember
ofLegend
the Directorate (until Feb. 2015)-1 Prof.
Dr Alfred
Johny Wüest,MemberMemberof the Executive
Committee
Legendthe Directorate(sinceMarch 2015)
21 ofMemberofCommittee
Memberof thethe Audit
Executive
Committee
32 Member
For the period
August 2013 to 31of the from
Audit1 Committee
January
2014, Prof.
Philippe
Gillet,3 Legend
For the period
fromDr
1 August
2013
to 31
of theProf.
Executive
Committee
1 MemberVice­President
for Academic
Affairs,
January 2014,
Dr Philippe
Gillet,2 Memberof the Audit
Committee
wasappointed
ActingPresidentadVice­President
forAcademic
Affairs,

interimof EPFL andMemberof thewas appointed
ActingPresidentadStatusasofofEPFL
31 December
2014 of(changes
ETH Board.
interimand Member
the that
havealready been decided in the year
ETH Board.
2014 and that take effect in the year 2015
are also mentioned)

As on 31 December 2013
As on 31 December 2013

are not employees of any of the institutions of the ETH Domain
eachreceived
a lumpin 2013.ofAdditionally,
they
are not
employees
ofsum
anyof
ofCHF
the20,000
institutions
the ETH Domain
were received
paid a totalof CHF45,000meeting
attendance
remuner­each
a lumpsumof CHFin
20,000in 2013.
Additionally,
they
ation
and reimbursed
for45,000
expenses
actually incurredin accordancewere paida total of CHF
in meeting
attendance
remuner­withrules.
Those membersof the ETH
Board who
ation theandexpenses
reimbursed
for expenses
actually incurredin accordance
are employeesof oneof theinstitutions
dowiththe expenses
rules.
Those
members ofof thethe ETHETH Domain
Board who
notreceive additional
fees
forinstitutions
their activities
on ETHthe Domain
ETH Board.
are employeesof one oftheof thedo
For thescopeof a 50 percent
position,
theon
ETH
Board
coversnotreceive
additional
fees forFTE
theiractivities
the
ETH Board.
thewage
and ofsocialincurredby ETH Zurich
the repre­
For thescope
a 50 costs
percent
FTE position,
the ETHfor
Board
coverssentative
thesocial
University
Assemblies
both
FederalInstitutes
the wage ofandcosts incurred
by of
ETH
Zurichfor therepre­ofTechnology,
order to guarantee
representative’s
inde­sentativeof theinUniversity
Assembliesthisof bothFederal Institutes
pendence
frominany
institution.
of Technology,order
to guarantee this representative’s inde­

eth internal appeals commission
Administratively,
the ETHInternal Appeals Commission is part ofethinternal appeals
commission
the ETH Board andon appeals
againstrulings ismadeAdministratively,
thedecides
ETH Internal
Appeals
Commission
part byofbodiesthe institutionsof theDomain.
Appeals
mainlyrelatethe ETHofBoardand decides
on ETHappealsagainstrulingsmadebytomatters
arisingfrom legislation
humanAppeals
resourcesand higher
bodiesof theinstitutionsof the ETHon
Domain.
mainlyrelateeducation.
Appealsagainstthe rulingsof the resources
ETH Internaltomatters arisingfromlegislation
on humanandAppeals
higherCommission
can be against
made tothe
therulings
Federaleducation. Appealsof Administrative
the ETH InternalCourt.
Appeals

pendence from any institution.

Art. 11 of the Federal Audit Office Act). This department reports

24

Annual Report 2013 on the ETH Domain

24

Annual Report 2013 on the ETH Domain

Intermediate Evaluation 2015

Commission can be made to the Federal Administrative Court.
internal audit
The
Internal
Audit department conducts internal audits for theinternal
audit
institutionsofthe ETH
Domain (Art.
35a Para.
1 of theETH Act
The Internal Audit
department
conducts
internal
auditsfor andtheArt.
11 of theofFederal
OfficeThis department
reports
institutions
the ETHAudit
Domain(Art.Act).
35a Para.
1 of the ETH Act
andSelf-Assessment Report of the ETH Board

163

Appendices

OVERVIEW
Organisation and governance | management bodies

Appeals authority

ETH Board support

eth internal appeals commission 2013
The ETH Internal Appeals Commission is an independent
judicial authority based in Bern and reports to the ETH Board.
­ Prof. Dr Hansjörg Peter, President­ Beatrice Susanne Vogt, Vice­President­ Astrid Forster, Member­ Consuelo Antille, Member­ Jannick Griner, Member­ Yolanda Schärli, Member­ Prof. em. Rodolphe Schlaepfer, Member

internal audit
The ETH Board employs Internal Audit staff (as per Art. 35a of the
ETH Act), who report directly to the President of the ETH Board.
­ Patrick Graber, Head

directly to the President of the ETH Board and its activities aresupervised by the Audit Committee. It provides independent,
objective auditing services and supports the ETH Domain inachieving its aims by assessing the effectiveness of the risk man­agement processes and of the internal control, monitoring andgovernance processes. It is also responsible for coordinating andsupporting the external audits of the ETH Domain. The Internal
Audit department reports on its own activities, in particular to
the Audit Committee.
auditors
The Swiss Federal Audit Office (SFAO) performs external auditing
duties for the ETH Domain (Art. 35a Para. 3 of the ETH Act). It is
responsible for auditing the accounts of the individual institutionsof the ETH Domain and the ETH Domain’s consolidated accounts.
In 2013, the SFAO audited the financial statements of both Federal
Institutes of Technology as well as the consolidated financial
statements of the ETH Domain. As in previous years, it delegated
the auditing of the financial statements of the four research
institutes to PricewaterhouseCoopers, Bern. The SFAO’s audit
report on the consolidated accounts comprises a confirmation
report and a management letter. The Audit Committee discusses
these reports annually with representatives of the SFAO. In 2013,
the SFAO invoiced CHF 268,144 for its 2012 annual review and the2013 mid­term review of the entire ETH Domain.
internal control system
The institutions of the ETH Domain have an internal control sys­tem, which was introduced in line with Federal regulations. The
SFAO can thus audit the accounting system and finance­related
business processes using the same methods as for other Federal
institutions or private­sector enterprises of comparable size.

staff of the eth Board
The ETH Board’s staff support it in fulfilling its legal mandate,particularly regarding strategic leadership, supervision, promo­tion of cooperation in the ETH Domain and liaising with theFederal authorities.
executive team­ Dr Michael Käppeli, Executive Director­ PD Dr Kurt Baltensperger, Science­ Markus Bernhard, Communication (until 31.10.2013)­ Dr Dieter Künzli, Finance­ Dr Urs Müller, Legal Services­ Michael Quetting, Real Estate­ Martin Sommer, Human Resources

information policy
Its statutory role makes the ETH Board an interface between
science, politics and society. Within its rules of procedure, theETH Board undertakes to ensure honest, appropriate and trans­parent communication for the benefit of society and aims to
explain its decisions and reinforce the role and reputation of theETH Domain. Responsibility for this resides with the President.
The key communication tools are the ETH Board’s annual reportto the Federal Government, the website www.ethboard.ch, tar­geted media relations work and the case­by­case illuminationof relevant facts and positions, particularly regarding policies on
education, research and innovation.
guidelines concerning secondary occupations
The ETH Board has adapted its guidelines regarding the procedure
for assessing secondary occupations exercised by members of the
Executive Boards of the two Federal Institutes of Technology andmembers of the directorates of the four research institutes of 15
October 2012 in line with the new statutory provisions on person­
nel set out in the ETH Domain Ordinance of 19 November 2003 (newArticle 7a) and the Personnel Ordinance for the ETH Domain of 15
March 2001 (new Article 56a).

Annual Report 2013 on the ETH Domain

164Intermediate Evaluation 2015

Self-Assessment Report of the ETH Board

25

Appendices

Appendix 2: Additional Material to Chapter A
Table 1a: Success stories for collaboration with industry: ETH Zurich and EPFL (referring to chapter A.1.2)
ETH Zurich

EPFL“As ETH Zurich is convinced, Technology transfer is no longer a one-way
street from academia to industry, but rather an equal exchange
whereby both parties are mutually inspired and new visions are jointly
materialized to face major societal and global challenges.

“With its Innovation Park, EPFL has set up a successful infrastructure for
attracting research centers of companies, their business units with
innovation cells or their R&D teams directly on the EPFL campus. Thishas created unique opportunities for mutual stimulation as well as
most valuable synergies, from which both the industry partners and EPFL
benefit greatly. Innovation Park clearly represents the most accomplished partnership with companies and enables further strengtheningof EPFL-industry links. It currently hosts 13 corporates and more than
110 start-ups, with about 2,000 high value added jobs. EPFL Innovation
Park has a 95 % occupancy and proves to be profitable for EPFL.

A perfect example for this are the so-called Lablets, small company
research units set up near the universities’ campus.
The Disney Research Center at Zurich is one such Lablet that was established in a small building on the ETH campus in 2009.
Research at the Disney Research Center in Zurich is carried out in close
collaboration with ETH Zurich in various research areas such as capture
technologies, postproduction video processing for the film industry,human and facial animation for films and computer games as well as
sensor technology and robotics.

Mutual benefit is created, among others, through the following advantages
the Innovation Park presents:

Collectively, the publication output has increased substantially, morethan 180 individual projects were launched and dozens of patents
have been registered.

–– students benefit from practice-oriented training opportunities;

The Disney Research Center in Zurich currently has more than
60 employees, many of them doctoral students from ETH Zurich.
And as a result of this growth a new facilty has been built next
to the ETH Zurich campus.”

Furthermore, in order to foster relations within the companies installedon campus, a specific offer has been developed. As an example, collaborators working for companies at Innovation Park have the opportunity to–– Companies can directly benefit from the proximity of EPFL researchers;–– EPFL enables them to make use of its research infrastructure, sothat they can explore new fields and engage in “open innovation”;–– start-ups can continue to benefit from strong links to EPFL from theoutset.

–– update their technical skills by following Master courses;–– think “out of the box” by organizing focus groups with students;–– or discover start-up activities through specific networking events.
In terms of examples of established industrial corporates, 2012 and2013 have seen the inauguration of the Nestlé Institute of Health Sciences
and the arrival of Nitto Merck Serono and ViaSat on EPFL campus, in
2014, Bühler and Axa.”

Intermediate Evaluation 2015

Self-Assessment Report of the ETH Board

165

Appendices

Table 1b: Success stories for collaboration with industry: ETH Zurich and EPFL (referring to chapter A.1.2)
PSI

WSL

Empa

Eawag

“Nowadays, Ampegon (locatedat Turgi) is one of the key players
worldwide as provider for RF
amplifier systems and high-voltage
power supplies for large-scale
research facilities.

“An example of industry collaboration, in which WSL has recently
been involved, is NESSy.

“In order to improve patient safety
against bacterial infections,bacteria-repellent surface coatings
are often used in medical engineering.

„Eawag has fruitfully cooperated
with the Bill and Melissa Gates
Foundation, after it had been
awarded a prize of the foundation
within the scope of their international competition called„Re-Invent the Toilet Challenge“.

NESSy is a new energy-efficientsnowgun system developed by the
Swiss company Bächler Top
Track in close collaboration withThis success story started due tothe SLF branch of WSL, as well as
the cooperation between PSI andwith the University of Applied
Ampegon during the design andSciences North-western Switzerland.
construction phase of the Swiss
Light Source (SLS) end of the 1990s. Through a three year research
Based on the gained competences, project supported by the CTI, it has
been possible to develop a system
the know-how transfer and thefor artificial snow production
world-class reference of the SLS,
the company was able to establish that sets new standards in termsof energy efficiency. Through field
itself in the highly specialized
market of accelerator research labs. tests in a climate controlled windtunnel with a detailed theoreticalmodel, the entire process could be
Meanwhile Ampegon sold morethan 40 supply units and modula- better understood and optimized.
tors worldwide. The company ispresently involved in the develop- As a result, artificial snow can now
be produced with no additional
ment of the modulator systemenergy input beside water presfor the European X-FEL project(Hamburg, Germany), the European sure. The newly developed system
also allows snow making at a 2°
Spallation Source ESS (Sweden)
and of the short pulse modulators C higher temperature than usual
and is less affected by higher water
for the PSI’s X-ray laser SwissFEL.
temperatures. In addition, throughThe latter project has again the
improved nozzle technology andpotential to position Ampegon
the reduced air pressure, NESSy
as a leading manufacturer of thisproduces very low noise emissions
technology in the international
and presents, therefore, additional
research community.”
advantages for users and the public at large.”

As body odors can also be caused
by bacteria, treating textiles ina similar way should prevent theunwanted development of odors,
which was the goal of a project
supported by the Commission forTechnology and Innovation (CTI),
in which Empa has collaborated
with SANITIZED AG and Swissatest
Testmaterialien AG.
The result has recently entered
the market: the Sanitized® Pluma
technology. The textile fibers arecoated with a special polymer that
holds a microscopically thin filmof water on the fiber’s surface. This
prevents bacteria from docking
onto the textile, and any bacteriathat are already present can simply
be washed away, either by handor by machine wash at low temperatures, which saves energy andwater and prolongs the service lifeof the textiles.
The innovation recently won the
Swiss Technology Award 2013.”

The objective of this initiative isto bring sustainable and affordable
sanitation services to urban slum
neighborhoods in low-income
countries with a toilet that has torecover all resources. In addition,
the toilet should operate grid-free(not be connected to an electricity
grid, piped water, or sewer), withtotal costs not exceeding 5 US cents
per person and day.
To this end, an Eawag team hasdeveloped a holistic sanitation
system (“Blue Diversion”), thatworks across the entire sanitation
value chain from capture, storage
and transport to reuse of resources.
Thanks to a new generation urinediverting toilet, undiluted urine,
faeces, and used flush-and-washwater can be separated. This
enables efficient resource recovery,as the used water can be treatedin a multi-barrier treatment
system and be reused on-site. The
resources of the urine and faeces
can be recovered off-site, where
fertilizers can be produced.
In order to ensure safe and reliabledisposal of the urine and faeces
at an affordable price, the teamhas also developed a profitablebusiness model that will be interesting for local entrepreneurs.”

166

Intermediate Evaluation 2015

Self-Assessment Report of the ETH Board

Appendices

Table 2: Activities for fostering entrepreneurship and the foundation of Spin-offs (referring to chapter A.1.4)
ETH Zurich

ETH Zurich aims at fostering the entrepreneurial spirit of its students
from a very early stage through their entire parcours at the school.
Various programs and projects are implemented to this end:–– Generally, ETH Zurich offers a broad range of teaching in the fieldof management, in particular with its Department of Management,
Technology and Economics (D-MTEC).
–– Furthermore, students are involved in so-called Focus Projects, wherea group of students from various engineering and science backgroundhave to solve a technical problem or develop a prototype within one year.
–– Every spring, the best invention of the previous year is elected andawarded with the Spark Award.
–– Students – usually at the Master, PhD or PostDoc level – with outstanding research results or promising technologies and an entrepreneurial mindset as well as a clever business idea, can, twice a year,
apply for a Pioneer Fellowship. If granted, the Pioneer Fellows will
receive 150,000 CHF which should take them through the next about
18 months to further develop the technology. In addition, the Pioneer
Fellows are also assisted by professional coaches from industry or by
serial entrepreneurs. 10-15 such fellowships are granted every year.
–– The Pioneer Fellows (as well as spin-offs in their very early phase forup to two years) are hosted in the Innovation & Entrepreneurship
Lab (ieLab). The ieLab is complementing the science-oriented institutesof ETH Zurich with a second, entrepreneurial home for like-mindedtalents. It provides an interactive, team-based working environment
for these Fellows, where they are supported in the developmentof their innovative ideas by their peers and by experienced professionals. The ieLab offers office space, meeting rooms, workshops andlaboratories. Two different “biotopes” are currently in operation, forengineering and ICT (micro/nano-electronics, robotics, automation,
photonics, information and communication technology etc.) and forlife sciences (biochemistry, pharmaceutics, biotechnology, etc.).

Intermediate Evaluation 2015

Self-Assessment Report of the ETH Board–– Continuous entrepreneurial education is achieved by three measures:
1) In the weekly ieLab Lunch Seminar series, experienced professionals
relate current problems and best business practices of all aspectsof today’s entrepreneurial life. 2) The Fellows are made aware of themany existing courses covering most aspects of entrepreneurship,
offered for example by D-MTEC, CTI, Technopark, VentureKick, VentureLeaders, etc. 3) Specialized training that cannot be found elsewhereis organized for the ieLab’s young talents (e.g. negotiation skills,
enhancement of legal knowledge, etc.).
–– The activities of the ieLab are effectively complemented by events such as:–– Regular networking and partnership events including the ETH
Industry Days,–– the Meet-the-Pioneer evening and Home-Coming Dinners including
all former ETH spin-off companies that have developed into
successful ventures,–– access to powerful networks of national organizations supporting
entrepreneurship (Venture Business Plan Competition, CTI Start-up,
Institut für Jungunternehmen, Venture Leaders, Venture Kick,
Venture Business Plan competition, US Entry Camp, etc.),–– access to potent financing networks (SECA, CTI-Invest, ZKB, businessangels and venture capital investors) as well as local incubator/
business-park type Infrastructure (BlueLion, Technopark, BioTechnopark, etc.) complementing the entrepreneurship ecosystem.
–– ETH Zürich’s effort has led to a continuous flow of new spin-offs –more than 20 every year for the last 8 years – that are frequently
awarded with prestigious prizes (e.g. Swiss Economic Award), rank
among the most promising ventures in Switzerland, attract on aconsolidated basis up to 100 million of national and international
investments in a year and become either highly sought-after
acquisition targets of big corporates or highly successful stand-alone
Swiss companies.

167

Appendices

Table 2 (continued): Activities for fostering entrepreneurship and the foundation of Spin-offs (referring to chapter A.1.4)
EPFL

Research Institutes76

EPFL attaches great importance to the fostering of entrepreneurship andhas developed a wide range of support initiatives and programs serving
this end:

PSI encourages its scientists to exploit inventions, which may develop
into spin-off companies:–– VPIV also recently launched a new co-working accelerator, La Forge,
where these new entrepreneurs can work on their projects, meetand learn from their peers and receive the support of this rich entrepreneurial ecosystem. At La Forge, bimonthly workshops are organized
there between entrepreneurs, investors and service providers.

latter closely tied to the STARTFELD initiative in Eastern Switzerland.
The majority of these start-ups are over-average successful, attested by
the various prizes they win and the financing they are able to secure.

–– Products with this potential are primarily invented, as “fruits” offundamental research, for proper needs and later adapted for other–– Students are encouraged to discover entrepreneurship through courses
markets (detector technology, proton therapy, transport systems
and conferences. The College of Management of Technology (CDM)
for particles, energy relevant devices, undulator technology, highis responsible for the courses offered as electives at the bachelor level,
frequency devices, etc.).
as well as for the Master in Technology and Entrepreneurship (MTE)
and the Executive MBA in Management of Technology (MOT).
–– As an example, Dectris, founded as a spin-off company of the PSI, wasthe first company worldwide to sell innovative hybrid-pixel X-ray–– The Vice-presidency for Innovation and Tech Transfer (VPIV) co-organizes
detector systems and is now the world market leader. This technology
the ventureideas cycle of conferences which invites twice a year
features a very high dynamic range, a short readout time and excelhigh-tech entrepreneurs who share their experience with the EPFL
lent signal-to-noise ratios improving quality and throughput of thecommunity.
measurements. The detectors can be used in various areas such–– VPIV also manages the Innogrants. Since 2005, 70 grants (of 100,000 CHF)
as synchrotron light sources, laboratory diffraction systems or indusout of more than 500 applications have helped in the creation
trial and medical applications. Before commercialization of the nextof more than 45 spin-offs.
generation pixel detectors developed at the PSI, the prototypes can–– VPIV’s TTO (Technology Transfer Office) further structures the licenses ofbe used exclusively on in-house large-scale research facilities, which
technology to its spin-offs and recently launched the Enable program
gives a significant competitive benefit for the PSI beamlines. The
to accelerate the proof of concepts of technologies. Master students
underlying technology evolved from basic research initially developed
are invited as interns for the program.
for particle physics.
–– VPIV finances a coaching program to help its staff and students interested in creating a start-up. The CTI coaches based at the Innovation
Empa fosters about two to three new start-ups each year through its
Park advice and mentor these future entrepreneurs.
two business incubators, i.e. glaTec Dübendorf and tebo in St. Gall, the–– In 2013, for instance, around 100 experts ranked the glaTec company
QualySense, which develops robots to quality inspect and sort grains,seeds, and beans, in tenth place out of the top 100 start-ups in
Switzerland.

–– VPIV heavily sponsors the ventureleaders program, which selects
20 promising young entrepreneurs to discover the Boston innovation
ecosystem. It also encourages and contributes to the BCV’s Silicon–– Another glaTec company, Compliant Concept (intelligent bed systems
Valley Camp. In August 2014, EPFL was awarded funding from Erasmus+
for the treatment and prevention of pressure ulcers), came in 34th.
together with the 3 other universities of the Eurotech consortium to–– The Empa spin-off Monolitix, finally, which specializes in compliant
build an equivalent European Venture Program. These efforts are partmechanisms, was shortlisted for the prestigious De Vigier Award 2013,of an ambition to expose entrepreneurs as early as possible to markets
made it to the final of the Heuberger Jungunternehmerpreis 2013
and in particular to its international angle, thanks to partnerships
and reached the final (top three) for the ZKB Pioneer Award 2014.
with the local Swissnex houses.
–– In collaboration with the EPFL Innovation Park, VPIV further supports
the 10-20 spin-offs created each year by helping them in their development through multiple support tools such as the FIT foundation,
Prix Vittoz and other entrepreneurial prizes. As a result, EPFL spinoffs have raised more than 600 MCHF from private investors in the last
10 years and enjoyed three trade sales in the first half of 2014.

76		Given the nature of their main focus (public goods), both WSL and Eawag do not dispose of particular activities or pro-grams to be enumerated in this table, as their areas of specialization due to their very nature do not yield inventions withcommercial potential. However, they fully endorse the entrepreneurial spirit cultivated within all ETH Domain institutions.

168

Intermediate Evaluation 2015

Self-Assessment Report of the ETH Board

Appendices

Appendix 3: Additional Material to Chapter F.1
Statement of the ETH Board on the Implementation of the Experts’ Recommendations of the 2010 Intermediate Evaluation
Recommendation

Status and explanation

1a)77 The ETH Domain is an increasingly
important asset to Switzerland andan excellent concept that should
be maintained and further developed.

Recommendation implemented
Implementation of this recommendation is not in the hands of the ETH Domain. But the ETH Board in its strategic controlling function - frequently emphasizes collaboration of the institutions tofurther strengthen this unique association of autonomous education and research institutes and to
make effective use of the financial means granted from the Swiss Confederation. The complementarycompetencies and offerings generate added value for researchers and students in the ETH Domain
and for the entire Swiss education and research landscape.

1b)Complementarity within the Domain
is paramount. Incentives forcollaboration among the partners
should be implemented andcontinued to drive the one Domain
to even higher levels of excellence.

Recommendation implemented
Collaboration among the ETH Domain institutions, including the Competence Centers, has been
fostered and strengthened over the past years. This applies also to the large research infrastructures
through their user facilities concept (e.g. hosting of the supercomputer at CSCS for EPFL's contribution
to HBP). Furthermore, joint professorships between ETHs and RIs represent important instruments
for strengthening cooperation. However, as stated in its Response to the Peer Report (2010, p. 6),
the ETH Board maintains that in strategic areas “a critical mass, including a healthy degree of overlaps
and competition are good drivers for excellence”.

1c)

The Domain should strive for a
Domain branding for Switzerland
while respecting the strong international brands of the partners.

Recommendation not implemented after intense preparations
In the 2010 intermediate evaluation, the peers suggested that the ETH Domain should “strive for a
Domain branding for Switzerland while respecting the strong international brands of the partners.”
As the ETH Board stated in its response to the Peer Report, a process destined at creating a common
brand for the entire ETH Domain had been launched in 2009. After intensive work, including
an internal consultation process within the ETH Domain institutions on a concrete proposal of theETH Board, it was decided to discontinue the branding project in December 2012. As the ETH
Board’s final report on the performance period 2008-2011/12 states, the following steps havebeen undertaken in the meantime:–– In summer 2009, the ETH Board decided to further develop a project that would allow theETH Domain institutions to maintain their strong individual brands, which will be supplemented
by a common by-line referring to the Domain (“endorsed brand model”).
–– Between 2009 and 2010, a “Communications Framework for the ETH Board and the ETH Domain”
analyzed and documented potential solutions, including the view of stakeholders, politicians
and media, and drawing also on the international perception of the ETH Domain.
–– As mentioned by the ETH Board in its response to the Peer Report of 2010, five fields of action
for reinforced communication were designated, one of which focuses on the development of
a common brand.
–– Subsequently, and despite the reservations expressed within some institutions, the ETH Board
together with representatives of the ETH Domain institutions has developed a common brand.
The brand has been protected internationally.
–– During 2012, a formal consultation (as requested by the ETH Act) was held within the ETH Domain.
This consultation was also addressed to internal bodies – such as the University Assemblies of
ETH Zurich and EPFL or the Internal Appeals Commission – who had not yet been involved in thepreviously confidential process.
–– The consultation revealed that both Federal Institutes of Technology were – for different reasons– opposed to the proposed brand. At its meeting in December 2012, the ETH Board discussed
the results of the consultation in detail. Based on the results of the consultation, it acknowledgedthat no consensus between the diverging needs and positions of the ETH Domain institutions
could be reached.
–– On these premises, balancing the interests and chances of success, and in light of its current
priorities, the ETH Board decided to abandon the ETH Domain branding project.

77		The numbers attributed to the individual recommendations refer to the numbers structuring the ETH Board’s Responseto the Peer Report on the 2010 Intermediate Evaluation.

Intermediate Evaluation 2015

Self-Assessment Report of the ETH Board

169

AppendicesStatement of the ETH Board on the Implementation of the Experts’ Recommendationsof the 2010 Intermediate Evaluation (continued)

2a)

Recommendation

Status and explanation

There has been a dramatic increasein performance of the Domain with avery strong scientific reputation,
and we commend the leadership of
the individual partners. However,to continue to monitor andincrease the Domain’s international
positioning, we highly recommend
the establishment of an international
advisory board to the ETH Board.

Recommendation not implemented after thorough examination
As announced in its response to the Peer Report, the ETH Board studied the options for establishingan international advisory board. It considered the possibility of constituting a small board comprising
members of existing advisory boards at the individual institutions who are familiar with theETH Domain.
–– However, such international advisory boards and/or research commissions exist at ETH Zurich and
EPFL as well as at the Research Institutes and are considered most valuable for the individual
development of these institutions.
–– After examining this option, the ETH Board therefore came to the conclusion that an advisory board
additional to the ETH Board would result in unnecessary and potentially conflicting redundancies.
–– Furthermore, the periodic evaluations with international expert panels of entire institutions or
their units – as performed by the institutions on a regular basis – were considered to be muchbetter positioned for providing the intended international perspective.
–– The institutions are required to bring these evaluations to the attention of the ETH Board, which
gives the ETH Board valuable insights into the appraisal of the institutions' activities and strategies
with regard to their international positioning.
–– Therefore, the nomination of an additional international advisory board has not been pursued by
the ETH Board.

2b)

170

Part i) To internationalize, the Domain
has recruited top-level international
faculty. In a competitive international
environment the Domain has successfully recruited a global student
body. However, selection criteria haveto be refined at entry and at the
Master’s level.

Recommendation implemented
The ETH Board has decided to suggest an amendment of the ETH Act allowing, with regard to students
with a foreign entry qualification, to restrict access to higher semesters of the Bachelor level or
the Master level in a particular area of studies for capacity reasons if quality of education would be
jeopardized. This amendment has been included in the ERI Message 2013-2016 and has taken
effect as of January 1, 2013. The ETH Board has decided at its meeting of September 17/18, 2014,
to request, together with the ERI Message 2017-2020, an amendment of this provision. With thisamendment, the ETH Board shall be enabled, upon request of the two schools, to restrict access toa particular area of studies also at the entry level to the Bachelor degree. Still, this restriction would
only apply to students with a foreign entry qualification. As stated in the ETH Board’s response to
the peer report, it is impossible to include Swiss students in this regulation, as the Swiss “Matura”
guarantees access to all fields of study.

Part ii) The ETH Board should monitor
the continuing internationalizationof the Domain and ensure that there
are policies and practices in place at
global standards to attract and retain
quality staff and students.

Both ETH Zurich and EPFL have continued to grow with regard to the number of foreign students
enrolled at one of the two schools. In particular with regard to the origin of the PhD students,a growing internationalization proves the high attractiveness of the ETH Domain institutions(the share of foreign PhD students exceeds 75 % both at ETH Zurich and at EPFL). Furthermore, theETH Board regularly discusses and monitors – both in regular meetings and in the yearly Dialog
meetings with the individual institutions – the strategies for internationalization and the respective
experiences of the ETH Domain institutions. In particular, this applies to the Singapore-ETH Centre
SEC (at Singapore) of ETH Zurich, and to EPFL Middle East at Ras-al-Kaimah (UAE), They were foundedin 2010 and 2009, respectively, and shall be further developed in the coming years, guided by
the International Strategy of the ETH Domain, which is currently under preparation by the ETH Board.

Intermediate Evaluation 2015

Self-Assessment Report of the ETH Board

AppendicesStatement of the ETH Board on the Implementation of the Experts’ Recommendationsof the 2010 Intermediate Evaluation (continued)
Recommendation

Status and explanation

CLOSE­UP
2c)
The key
institutions
Financialfiguresof the Domain haveexcellent, international-standard
research profiles. However, we recommend that the balance of researchincreasingly shift toward third-partyfunded research.

Recommendation implemented
All ETH Domain institutions have been able to increase their part in second- and third-party
funding for research over the past years. The following table, taken from the Annual Report 2013,
p. 138, shows the evolution since 2007 and in comparison to 2004:

Fig. 36: Project­oriented second­party resources, third­party funding, service revenue and financial result
In m CHF(figures rounded)

2004

2007

2008

2009

2010

etH Domain consolidated

2011

2012

2013

∆2012/2013
absolute
%

419.9

530.6

549.2

608.5

645.6

796.2

798.6

822.9

24.3

3.0

ETH Domain consolidation

­ 0.2

­ 6.7

­ 7.9

­ 6.7

­ 9.4

­ 14.7­ 14.3­ 13.90.5­ 3.2

Changes in second­party resources and third­party funding­ 34.0­ 21.4 ­ 149.3­ 95.0 ­ 108.6­ 52.3­ 99.4­ 37.062.4­ 62.8

454.2

558.7

706.4

710.2

763.6

863.2

912.3

873.8

- 38.5- 4.2

Second-party resources

241.6

279.0

323.8

372.5

408.5

445.2

477.3

453.6

- 23.7- 5.0

third-party funding

104.3

146.9

230.5

188.3

210.3

212.6

292.7

263.8

- 28.9- 9.9Service revenues

97.4

116.3

144.4

136.4

137.5

195.4

129.4

143.3

13.9

10.8

etH Domain

Financial result
etH Zurich

10.8

16.5

7.8

13.1

7.3

10.0

12.9

13.1

0.1

1.1

198.6

268.6

311.0

319.6

356.4

362.0

428.1

417.3

- 10.8- 2.5

Second­party resources

100.4

131.9

131.1

167.7

190.2

195.0

211.2

211.1

­ 0.1

­ 0.1

Third­party funding

46.7

70.3

112.2

80.4

93.9

83.7

141.2

124.3

­ 17.0­ 12.0Service revenues

46.0

57.7

67.0

64.0

66.6

76.7

68.6

73.9

5.3

7.7

Financial result

5.4

8.7

0.8

7.6

5.8

6.6

7.1

8.1

1.0

14.5

epFl

140.6

162.9

241.7

221.7

245.5

263.5

270.0

258.8

- 11.2- 4.1

Second­party resources

91.1

88.3

131.6

127.3

136.7

159.7

162.3

148.1

­ 14.2­ 8.7

Third­party funding

17.8

40.2

63.6

56.3

72.7

72.0

75.5

75.9

0.4

0.5

Service revenues

28.6

30.6

42.2

34.3

34.6

29.2

29.8

31.7

1.9

6.3

Financial result
pSI

3.1

3.8

4.3

3.9

1.4

2.6

2.5

3.2

0.7

29.4

49.6

55.6

74.9

80.9

73.1

137.0

109.6

89.8

- 19.8- 18.1

Second­party resources

14.7

22.2

18.0

23.7

28.4

33.2

38.7

28.1

­ 10.6­ 27.4

Third­party funding

26.7

19.9

36.2

35.6

23.9

36.1

55.6

42.6

­ 13.0­ 23.4Service revenues

6.5

11.9

19.1

20.7

20.2

67.3

12.1

17.7

5.6

46.4

Financial result

1.7

1.6

1.6

0.8

0.6

0.4

3.3

1.5

­ 1.8

­ 55.5
10.6

WSl

18.6

16.8

20.9

22.7

23.1

25.1

24.5

27.1

2.6

Second­party resources

14.0

10.7

13.9

16.7

16.8

18.1

17.6

20.9

3.3

19.0

Third­party funding

3.2

4.1

5.2

4.5

5.1

4.7

4.6

3.3

­ 1.3

­ 27.9Service revenues

1.4

1.5

1.5

1.5

1.5

2.3

2.3

2.8

0.4

19.2

Financial result

0.1

0.4

0.3

0.0

­ 0.4

0.0

0.0

0.1

0.1

288.3

36.7

40.9

43.3

51.4

49.4

56.7

62.0

63.5

1.6

2.6

14.6

17.8

20.4

27.3

26.0

26.8

35.5

34.8

­ 0.7

­ 2.0
13.3

empa
Second­party resources
Third­party funding

7.4

8.9

8.6

8.7

10.7

11.8

10.6

12.0

1.4

Service revenues

14.2

13.3

13.9

14.8

12.9

18.1

15.8

16.6

0.8

4.8

Financial result

0.5

0.9

0.3

0.5

­ 0.2

­ 0.0

0.0

0.1

0.1

409.7

eawag

10.0

13.2

14.6

13.9

16.1

18.7

18.1

16.5

- 1.6

- 8.7

Second­party resources

6.8

8.1

8.8

9.9

10.5

12.4

12.0

10.6

­ 1.4

­ 11.6

Third­party funding

2.5

3.5

4.8

2.8

3.9

4.2

5.3

5.1

­ 0.2

­ 3.6

Service revenues

0.6

1.0

0.6

0.9

1.6

1.8

0.7

0.7

0.0

0.0

Financial result

­

0.6

0.3

0.3

0.2

0.3

0.0

0.1

0.0

33.6

0.0

0.7

0.2

0.0

0.1

0.0

0.0

0.7

0.7

-

­

­

­

­

­

­

­

­

­

­

etH BoardService revenues
Financial result

­

­

­

­

­

­

­

0.7

0.7

­

Service revenues

0.0

0.3

0.1

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

-

0.0

Financial result

­

0.4

0.1

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

-

0.0

Intermediate Evaluation 2015

Self-Assessment Report of the ETH Board

171

AppendicesStatement of the ETH Board on the Implementation of the Experts’ Recommendationsof the 2010 Intermediate Evaluation (continued)

2c)

Recommendation

Status and explanation

continued

The share of second- and third-party funds (including service revenues) in the total income of theETH Domain has increased from approx. 20 % in 2004 to approx. 26 % as projected for 2015. On
the level of the individual institution, its share depends much on the institutions’ general orientationand its specific tasks. It therefore varies between approx. 20 % and approx. 35 % (source: Budget
Report 2015).
In its response to the Peer Recommendations 2010, the ETH Board has declared that it endorses thestrategy to increase second- and third-party funding, but that it advocates only a moderate growthrate in second-party funding. This is explained on the one hand by the problem of insufficient
coverage of indirect costs (see statement regarding recommendation 5c). On the other hand, theETH Board has also put forward “political and cultural” constraints to further increase second- andthird-party funding, i.e. the fact that any increase of the share of ETH Domain institutions in the
SNSF funds will diminish the proportion of funds allocated to cantonal universities and universities
of applied sciences if the SNSF budget is not increased accordingly. The ETH Domain institutions
however, have been very successful in attracting second party funding from European funding sources,
in particular through the ERC grants' scheme.

2b)Part i) To internationalize, the Domain
has recruited top-level international
faculty. In a competitive international
environment the Domain has successfully recruited a global student
body. However, selection criteria haveto be refined at entry and at the
Master’s level.

Recommendation implemented
The ETH Board refers to the chapter A of the present Self-Assessment report, developing on the
instruments and the successful positioning of the ETH Domain with regard to Knowledge and Technology Transfer and its contribution to innovation performance in Switzerland. In response to
the peer group’s recommendation, the ETH Board has mandated a working group to improve transparency on existing KTT activities, support exchange of best practice in the Domain, consolidationof specific competencies, mobilize industrial stakeholders, and to prepare coordinated action
according to need. The institutions have further professionalized their KTT agencies, have intensified
their collaboration with external KTT actors, and have developed new instruments for collaboration with private companies (cf. chapter A.1 above). This has contributed, among other things, toan increased collaboration and closer exchanges with facilitators from industry, namely Swissmem
or Swiss Biotech. The ETH Domain’s increased performance in the field of KTT is reflected in theincrease of patent applications, licenses and spin-offs (see figure 2 on p. 29). Furthermore, it isunderlined by the fact that income from third-party funds has doubled since 2007.
Given the evolution of KTT activities at the individual institutions, no particular action with regard
the policy or the regulation level was deemed necessary to be taken by the ETH Board. Rather,
the ETH Board is convinced that the good practices policy applied, with regard to the institutions’KTT activities, in the past has proved to be a successful approach and needs to be maintained.

3a)

172

The Domain is on its way to assume
world-wide leadership in the fieldof science-based technology andengineering, supported by the five key
focus areas as outlined in the strategicplanning 2012-2016. The increased
world-wide emphasis on researchat the interface of medical science andengineering will require the Domain
to establish strong relationships
with medical schools to allow thatcollaborative research and education
be effective.

Recommendation implemented
As stated in the chapter on the role and the activities of the ETH Domain in the field of medical
science and medical technology included in the present Self-Assessment report (cf. chapter D
above), the ETH Domain plays an increasingly important role in all these fields. It is implementing
a strategy that focuses on intensifying the existing collaboration with (academic) partners (universities and hospitals) in order to strengthen Switzerland’s capacities in the field of translational
medical research. Medical science and technology will continue to constitute a focus area of
the ETH Domain. It has been anchored in the Strategic Planning 2017-2020 of the ETH Board for
the ETH Domain (Strategic focus area “Personalized Medicine and medical technology”).

Intermediate Evaluation 2015

Self-Assessment Report of the ETH Board

AppendicesStatement of the ETH Board on the Implementation of the Experts’ Recommendationsof the 2010 Intermediate Evaluation (continued)

3b)

Recommendation

Status and explanation

Focus is critical to achieve global
excellence. Play to your strengths,
which include collaboration within the
Domain toward research excellence.
In this regard, the Competence Centers
have been a very good place to start.
We recommend allocating a portionof the budget in a competitive fashion,
to encourage collaborative research.

Recommendation examined but not implemented
As already stated in its response to the peer recommendations, the ETH Board continues to believethat it is not in a position nor would it intend to take up an active role in the competitive promotionof research. Therefore, it has stated in 2010, that the recommendation can only be partiallyconsistent with its strategy. The ETH Board still funds the four Competence Centers of the ETH Domain,which in turn grant funding to projects on a competitive basis. In these cases, however, funding
decisions are made by the Competence Centers, not by the ETH Board. With regard to competitive
funding in general, the statement of the ETH Board issued in 2010 remains entirely valid:“To a large extent, the ETH Domain is already focused on competition as a result of its previous
efforts to mobilize external funding and in future such efforts will continue to be limited to secondand third-party funding. In addition, the ETH Board as a body is unable to assume any role in
the promotion of research as it lacks the required legal competence and professional expertise toassess research applications. That role rests with the internal (institutions) research commissions
and external (e.g. Swiss National Science Foundation) competitive funding agencies.”
See additionnally the answer regarding recommendation 6a), developing the LEIOMIZU concept.

3c)

See answer regarding recommendation 2c)
The Committee was impressed andsupportive of the excellent fundingthat the Domain has received from thenation. Strong federal support must
continue, while at the same time theDomain must seek economic efficiencies and second- and third-party
funding.
While the Domain has made important improvements in third party
financing in recent years, it will be
critically important for the Domain toencourage continued improvementin this area. The difference between
good performance and great performance will come with increased
third party funding.

4a)

We were impressed with the qualityof the work of the existing ETH Boardand feel that it is imperative that thisemphasis on quality continue with
future appointments to the ETH Board.
However, a global University requires
a globally connected governancestructure. The chair of the international advisory board (recommended
in section 2a) should be a regularmember of the ETH Board.

Recommendation not implemented after thorough examination
Closely linked to the considerations presented in recommendation 2a) above, the ETH Board concluded
that chairing an advisory board and at the same time acting as a member of the ETH Board would
generate a workload that would make such a function unattractive for high-caliber individuals.
–– The members of the ETH Board spend at least ten days at regular meetings and six days in theannual dialogs with the institutions of the ETH Domain.
–– A (national) Board member who would have to chair the international advisory board would
have to spend additional time for this function. If that member were to be an international
member, the substantial amount of travel time would put an even larger burden on him or her.
–– This view has been confirmed by the experience of trying to appoint an international regularmember of the ETH Board. The search of such a regular board member had to be terminated as
it became clear that potential candidates considered they would have to spend too much time
travelling just in order to be able to attend the regular board meetings.
–– Given the conclusions drawn with regard to the nomination of an international advisory board
and taking into account this experience, the ETH Board has deemed it inappropriate to follow
up on the appointment of an international board member (even if this member were not to beconsidered as the chairman of an international advisory board).
See also answer regarding recommendation 2a)Intermediate Evaluation 2015

Self-Assessment Report of the ETH Board

173

AppendicesStatement of the ETH Board on the Implementation of the Experts’ Recommendationsof the 2010 Intermediate Evaluation (continued)

4b)

Recommendation

Status and explanation

In order to be responsive to theever-changing research and educationneeds of society the Domain needs
to own and manage its real estateand facilities.

Recommendation examined but not implemented
As stated in its response to the Peer Report, the ETH Board welcomed this recommendation andtook up “the issue of working towards the long-term goal of transferring real estate into the
ETH Domain in its Action Plan for 2011”. Hence the advantages and disadvantages of a transfer ofownership of real estate were carefully assessed by the ETH Board. In parallel, negotiations with
the Swiss Confederation as the owner resulted in substantially improved flexibility in the usage of
the Confederation's real estate within the ETH Domain:–– The ETH Board’s competency has been extended, allowing the transfer of up to 20 % of thebudget for investments to the “Finanzierungsbeitrag”, i.e. the Confederation's financing contribution covering operating expenses.
–– The ETH Board was further granted the option of transferring credit to the following year ifneeded, plus the possibility of re-investing revenues from real estate sales and applying alternative financing models involving private parties.
–– Considering these substantial improvements, the ETH Board decided in December 2011 to put
further attempts to transfer ownership of real estate to the ETH Domain on hold. In doing so,
it also sought to avoid the significant disadvantage of assuming liability and other potentiallycostly duties incumbent upon a real estate owner.

4c)

We have considered some of thealternative proposals for the ResearchInstitutes, including the questionof whether some or all of them shouldbe merged into the universities.
The committee feels that the present
organization is appropriate.

Recommendation implemented
The ETH Board shares the view expressed in the 2010 intermediate evaluation. The position of
the Research Institutes has been further strengthened over the past years. The Competence Centersof the ETH Domain strongly contributed to the interaction between the ETHs and the ResearchInstitutes, as well as additional joint professorships. In addition, each of the directors of the ResearchInstitutes hold full professorships with ETH Zurich and EPFL.

4d)

The Research Institutes appear tobe well led. Their performance is goodand getting better according to theevidence received, and their contribution in teaching is at an appropriate
level.

Recommendation implemented
The ETH Board shares the view expressed in the 2010 intermediate evaluation. The position of
the Research Institutes has been further strengthened over the past years. The number of teaching
hours of the Research Institutes has been stabilized at a high level.

5a)

See answer regarding recommendation 2c)
The financing of the Domain has
been comparatively stable comparedto the volatility experienced in othercountries. This is a significant strengthof the Domain and every effort should
be made to continue the stability withsignificant financial growth to drive
excellence. However, the committee
believes that for any global university
to reach the pinnacles of success, itwill be necessary for them to be effective at obtaining increased second andthird-party funding. There have been
important successes in this regard
and further progress will continue tobe important to future success.

174

Intermediate Evaluation 2015

Self-Assessment Report of the ETH Board

AppendicesStatement of the ETH Board on the Implementation of the Experts’ Recommendationsof the 2010 Intermediate Evaluation (continued)
Recommendation

Status and explanation

5b)

See answer regarding recommendation 3b)
The Domain should establish asystem of evaluation and benchmarking
to ensure adequate allocation offunding to the education and supportof students.

5c)

Indirect costs must be fully coveredin order to create an incentive foracquisition of second and third party
funding and to avoid creating asituation in which educational funds
are diminished in order to support
indirect cost of research.

Recommendation partially implemented
The ETH Board remains attentive to the fact that inadequate coverage of indirect costs in secondparty funding represents an important challenge for the institutions and may contribute to setting
adverse incentives, in particular with regard to curiosity-driven research (see, for instance, chapter
A.2 above).
In the context of the ERI Message 2013-2016, it has been possible, thanks to a joint effort of allactors involved, to implement a policy allowing the SNSF to allocate coverage of indirect costs up
to an extent of 20 %. Currently, the ETH Board sees little chances of increasing this proportion, butwill continue to raise awareness for the crucial importance of adequate coverage of indirect costs.
With regard to third-party funding, the policy of the ETH Domain institutions is to require fullcoverage of indirect costs from project partners.

6a)

A portion of the funds should be competitively allocated at the level of theDomain to encourage collaborationand entrepreneurship. Federal funding
to the six institutions should provide
a designated amount of funding thatwould be allocated on a performancebased, competitive basis and would
serve as an incentive to encourage
entrepreneurial efforts by the institutions of the Domain.

Recommendation implemented
The ETH Board has developed a performance-oriented model for the allocation of federal funds(“Erstmittel”) and applied it starting with the budget 2012. The model is based on a set of criteria
for ETH Zurich and EPFL and a different set of criteria for the Research Institutes, according to their
special missions. The model takes into account the results from the yearly Dialog meetings with theinstitutions, where collaboration and entrepreneurship frequently constitute part of the evaluation.
Collaboration between the ETHs and the Research Institutes is particularly honored in the context
of education (Bachelor-, Master-Theses, as well as PhD theses).
See as well answer regarding recommendation 3b)

6b)

See answer regarding recommendation 2c)
True global excellence will require
additional effort at obtaining secondand third-party funding.

A1)(from “Preamble”) One important
general recommendation, to which
we will return in the various sectionsof this report, is that the ETH Boardand the separate institutions of
the Domain increase international
benchmarking. […] Categories forassessment should be determinedby the units that would most benefit
from the data; that is, the institutions,
not the Board, should decide how
best to measure what they value. But
benchmarking is essential, especiallyin measuring educational achievement, and the Committee recommends
its increased use.

Intermediate Evaluation 2015

Recommendation implemented
Benchmarking serves quality insurance purposes and the communication about achievements andcontributions of the ETH Domain to science and society. Such activities were described in the Annual Report of the ETH Board on the ETH Domain 2013, which contains an entire chapter dedicatedto this issue. In this chapter, a comprehensive overview on activities has been given, including
procedures, as well as frequently or sporadically used instruments that are applied by the institutions to benchmark with other institutions in comparable fields. However, the ETH Board also
concluded that no single comprehensive instrument or standard can be applied to all institutions
and their activities.

Self-Assessment Report of the ETH Board

175

Appendiceshievement report | Benchmarking

Statement of the ETH Board on the Implementationof the Experts’
Recommendations
promoting scientificexcellence.
ETH Board, for its part, regularly
reports to the Federal Council and the Federal Parliament throughof the 2010 Intermediate Evaluation (continued)
the legally prescribed channels. By order of the Federal Council,
Recommendation
Statusexplanation
iversally applicabledefinition of bench­
the ETHand
Domainis assessed midway through each planning period
it is basically understood as a com­by an international team of experts assembled by the State Secre­
ncepts, tools or processes used by dif­tariat for Education, Research and Innovation (interim evaluation).
A1)
continued
Benchmarking in the ETH Domain is carried out through the following instruments and activities
ations or institutions, with the aim being(see Annual Report 2013, p. 127):
others. It is important to define theFig. 23: Benchmarking activities in the ETH Domain
tives and purposes of each benchmark­evaluations by external experts (peer reviews) of
the start to ensure that suitable com­
– ETH Zurich departments
ers and benchmarks can be selected. A– EPFL faculties
generally made between benchmarking– research institutes (or parts thereof)
onal development purposes and bench­– administrative units
erformance monitoring.
– the ETH Domain (and the ETH Board)Gg for organisational development
benchmarking for organisational devel­ocus is on reviewing and improving theorganisation concerned based on com­ween concepts, tools and processes usedtion/organisation itself and those useds type of benchmarking, which can beaim of either continuous or breakthrough, is not very standardised and should be
apted with the specific situation in mind.
nchmarking carried out in the ETH Domain
category, even if it is not necessarilyh, and is designed to help improve con­nd processes used by the institutions or
n. This benchmarking calls for institutions
omain to take an open approach to theirs and weaknesses and requires a confi­
public framework.

g for performance monitoring
g for performance monitoring involves
stitutions, or parts of institutions basede performance indicators or key figures.
t to ensure that the indicators are com­
hat they are based on commonly agreed
d standardised data collection methods.
benchmarking can be actively initiatedutions themselves and carried out inwith comparison partners – “fromwere. However, this benchmarking canded “from the outside” by external par­se the institutions have limited influencection and use of indicators, which aren publicly accessible data such as inter­
ersity rankings.

Audits by– the Internal Audit (as part of horizontal audits)– external auditors (e.g. audits of the institution’s quality management
system by the Swiss Center of Accreditation and Quality Assurance inHigher Education (OAQ) or the Swiss Federal Audit Office (SFAO))
Benchmarking in teaching
Curriculum development, programme administrationin collaboration with leading international universities(IDEA League, IARU, GULF, EuroTech Universities)
Surveysof graduates after completing their studies (carried out internally andexternally by the Federal Statistical Office (FSO)); to ascertain how
satisfied employees are with their working conditions
Recruitment and promotion procedures
Professorships, appointing research and administrative staff
Research infrastructurese.g. the performance of and demand for large­scale
research facilities at the Paul Scherrer Institute (PSI); CSCS
→ For selected benchmarking activities at PSI, see page 131
Acquisition of funding
for promoting research at national, European andinternational level (e.g. Swiss National Science Foundation (SNSF),
EU research framework programmes)→ For selected benchmarking activities at ETH Zurich and EPFL,
see page 128 ff., for Eawag see page 133
publications and citations
Subject­specific bibliometric analyses→ For selected benchmarking activities at WSL, see page 132
International university rankings
subdivided by region and specialist area
→ For selected benchmarking activities at ETH Zurich and EPFL, see page 129
Rankings of specific areas of researchat research institutes and/or universities→ For selected benchmarking activities at Empa, see page 133

The evaluations by international expert committees are the

The Annual Report 2014 will contain a chapter on the bibliometric analysis executed in the context
cornerstones of academic benchmarking activities and are carriedof the present intermediate evaluation. In the coming years, selected benchmarking aspects willout in accordancewith specified
principles.
The ETH Board com­continue
to be highlighted
in the ETH
Board’s reports.

missions evaluations of ETH Domain institutions as a whole, while
evaluations of the ETH Domain are ordered by the Federal Council.
Evaluations of individual units of an institution are commissioned

Annual Report 2013 on the ETH Domain

176

Intermediate Evaluation 2015

127

Self-Assessment Report of the ETH Board

AppendicesStatement of the ETH Board on the Implementation of the Experts’ Recommendationsof the 2010 Intermediate Evaluation (continued)
Recommendation

Status and explanation

A2)(from “Recommendations – Budget”)
A third area of potential movement
in relation to budget is in the areaof student fees. Low fees for international students could be seen to give
Switzerland a competitive advantage,
especially if international graduates remain in Switzerland, and theCommittee recognizes that this is anespecially controversial question in
relation to Swiss culture. Nevertheless,
the Committee again suggests thatthe Domain look to international
standards in relation to fees for students from non-EU countries.

Recommendation followed up, political discussion ongoing on the federal level
Upon proposal of the two ETH, the ETH Board has taken, in December 2012, the principled decision
to increase tuition fees for all students. It has been decided that these fees shall be gradually
increased over a four-years period, achieving the double level of today’s fees until 2017. Opposition
against these plans came from students and from actors on the federal political level. Several parliamentary interventions have questioned the ETH Board’s decision and asked the Federal Government
to take measures in order to prevent the decision from being implemented. In March and October
2013, two motions have been deposited at the National Council, aiming at introducing, in the
ETH Act, the option to distinguish between Swiss and foreign students and increase fees for the latter(i.e. “Bildungsausländer”), while imposing a maximum for the fees imposed on Swiss residents(i.e. “Bildungsinländer”). The ETH Board has announced to suspend discussion about the generalincrease of fees in favor of the steps undertaken by parliament. Although the two motions have been
rejected by the National Council (respectively retired by its author in one case), the Federal Council
has announced to examine the options and the legal framework conditions (international law) for
differentiating tuition fees between Swiss and foreign students in the process of the elaborationof the ERI Message 2017-2020. A corresponding amendment of the ETH Act shall be elaborated inclose collaboration with the ETH Board and included in the deliberation process regarding the
ERI Message.

A3)(from “Recommendations – Education”) Both schools would benefit if
assessment of individual courses andof program quality were standardized across the schools, using newer
models of measurement for student
learning and not just teaching performance. If the Domain places a priority
on educational outcomes, it mustfind more ways to measure student
learning and must share student
learning outcomes data with future
peer evaluation committees. […] In
addition, and most importantly, theCommittee recommends that the Board
investigate contemporary rubrics formeasuring teaching and learning andmove the institutions toward more
attention to data-gathering on student learning outcomes.

Recommendation followed up but not continued after in-depth discussion
The topic was addressed as a major issue in the context of the yearly Dialogs with ETH Zürich
and EPFL in 2011, followed by an update in 2012. An involvement of the ETH Board that would
go further than its strategic controlling role was not deemed appropriate, as it appeared thatthe responsible persons for academic affairs at ETH Zurich and EPFL are fully aware of the importance of assessing learning outcomes.

(from “Recommendations – Education”) The Committee recommends thecollection and presentation of moredetailed, descriptive, and useful datain such areas as faculty/student ratio,
average class size, faculty teachingload and contact hours.

See answer regarding recommendation A3)

A4)Intermediate Evaluation 2015

An important indicator for learning outcome is the employability of the students after graduation.
Alumni of ETH Zurich or EPFL enjoy highest occupation rates when measured after one year (higher
than 96 %).

Self-Assessment Report of the ETH Board

177

AppendicesStatement of the ETH Board on the Implementation of the Experts’ Recommendationsof the 2010 Intermediate Evaluation (continued)

A5)

Recommendation

Status and explanation(from “Additional considerations”)
The Committee applauds the Domain’s
initiatives in relation to improving
the conditions that would makeemployment at the institutions
desirable for both men and women.
International benchmarking, forexample against Sweden, will help inthis regard as well.

Recommendation implemented
The institutions of the ETH Domain have continued their efforts in promoting diversity and equal
opportunity on all levels. For instance, they participate in the “Fix the Leaky Pipeline”-Program foradvanced female researchers. In addition, they have further insisted in career planning and have
implemented specific regulations for female assistant professors with tenure track, allowing
them to suspend the tenure track procedure for up to one year in case of pregnancy. The ETH Board,
however, has refrained from defining quota but has formulated goals for the period until 2016:
the share of female professors shall be increased by 50 % compared to 2009 and the amountof resources in measures for the promotion of equal opportunity shall be doubled to 0.4 % of thetotal financial contribution attributed to the ETH Domain by the Confederation. The ETH Board
monitors progress with regard to these priorities.
ETH Zurich and EPFL have introduced gender monitorings that are targeted to the "leaky pipeline"
problem (see Annual Report 2013). They are intended to provide research area-specific informationthat will allow to define effective measures.

178

Intermediate Evaluation 2015

Self-Assessment Report of the ETH BoardPublication Data

Publisher: ETH Board, Häldeliweg 15, CH-8092 Zurich
Project management and editorial office:ETH Board Science team in collaboration with the institutionsof the ETH Domain and the ETH Board Communication and Translation teams
including BMP Translations AG, Basel
Design: atelier MUY, Zurich
Printing: Künzle Druck AG, Zurich© ETH Board, 2015

180

Intermediate Evaluation 2015

Self-Assessment Report of the ETH Board

ETH Board
Häldeliweg 15
CH-8092 Zurich
Phone +41 (0)44 632 23 67
Fax +41 (0)44 632 11 90
www.ethboard.ch
Board of the Swiss Federal Institutes of Technology

182

Intermediate Evaluation 2015

Self-Assessment Report of the ETH Board