Communication from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament - Researchers in the European Research Area: one profession, multiple careers
Date: 2003-07-18
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: equal treatment, industry-research relations, manpower needs, professional career, recruitment, remuneration of work, research staff, school-industry relations, vocational training, working conditions

COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES

Brussels, 18.7.2003
COM(2003) 436 final

COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE COUNCIL AND THE
EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT

RESEARCHERS IN THE EUROPEAN RESEARCH AREA: ONE PROFESSION,
MULTIPLE CAREERS

   
TABLE OF CONTENTS

COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE COUNCIL AND THE
EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT RESEARCHERS IN THE EUROPEAN RESEARCH AREA:
ONE PROFESSION, MULTIPLE CAREERS.......................................................................... 2

Introduction ................................................................................................................................ 3

1.

2.

3.

3.1.

3.2.

3.3.

3.4.

3.5.

4.

Policy Context for Human Resources in R&D ............................................................ 4

Definition of a Researcher ........................................................................................... 6

Prospects for careers in R&D....................................................................................... 7

Prospective workforce needs in R&D.......................................................................... 7

The public recognition of careers in R&D................................................................... 8

Pathways between academia – industry..................................................................... 10

The European dimension of careers in R&D ............................................................. 11

Gender differences in careers in R&D ....................................................................... 12

Factors shaping careers in R&D ................................................................................ 13

4.1.

Research training........................................................................................................ 14

4.1.1. A changing environment ............................................................................................ 14

4.1.2. Consequences for doctoral programmes .................................................................... 15

4.2.

4.3.

Various recruitment methods ..................................................................................... 16

Employment and working conditions ........................................................................ 18

4.3.1. A tendency towards deregulation in the academic career system.............................. 18

4.3.2. Remuneration as career incentives............................................................................. 19

4.3.3. A growing need for alternative tenure opportunities ................................................. 20

4.3.4. Career evaluation systems.......................................................................................... 21

5.

Proposed actions and initiatives ................................................................................. 23

2

INTRODUCTION

Human  resources  are  to  a  large  extent  the  key  of  research  efforts,  excellence  and
performances.  The  number  of  researchers,  as  well  as  their  mobility,  are  two  important
aspects  of  this  issue.  A  third  one,  directly  linked,  less  often  addressed,  and  never  at
European level, is the question of the researcher profession and researchers careers.

This question is crucial, because this aspect of the research system has a deep impact on
the  way  research  works.  It  is  especially  the  case  in  Europe,  because  the  way,  in  which
research careers  are structured and organised in  Europe, does  not  allow Europe to  fully
exploit its potential in this field.

The present Communication is deeply embedded in the implementation of the European
Research  Area  and  of  its  requirement  to  develop  and  enhance  the  human  resource
potential  of  European  research.  It  aims  to  analyse  the  different  elements  which
characterise  the  profession  and  defines  the  various  factors  which  condition  the
development  of  researchers’  careers  at  European  level,  namely:  the  role  and  nature  of
research training, the  differences in recruitment methods, the contractual  and  budgetary
dimension, and, finally, the evaluation mechanisms and the progress perspectives within
the career.

The  Communication  reveals  structural  weaknesses  as  well  as  marked  differences
concerning each of these elements, according to the sectors in which researchers operate
or the geographical, legal, administrative and cultural environments in which they work.
These differences and the lack of openness of researchers careers in Europe, prevent the
development of proper career perspectives at European level as well as the emergence of
a  real  employment  market  for  researchers  in  Europe,  whether  considered  from  a
geographical,  sectoral,  or  gender  perspective.  These  differences  also  have  significant
repercussions on the attractiveness of young people for careers in R&D, as well as on the
overall public recognition of researchers.

All these considerations are at odds with the priorities defined on several occasions by the
Heads of State and Governments concerning the emergence of the knowledge economy,
the implementation of the European Research Area and the “3 % objective”.

At the same time, the Communication draws attention to a number of examples of good
practice at national level and demonstrates that initiatives are  being  launched in several
countries in order to alleviate the effects of the above-mentioned differences.

In this  respect,  this Communication proposes  a  series of  practical  initiatives  in  order  to
foster  dialogue  between  the  different  stakeholders  at  European  level,  namely  the
European Community, the national governments and the scientific communities.

Likewise,  this  Communication  proposes  to  deepen,  wherever  necessary  the  analysis  of
the  causes  and  effects  of  the  above-mentioned  differences.  It  also  aims  to  launch  on  a
voluntary  basis,  a  series  of  specific  actions  aimed  at  providing  a  better  overall  co-

3

ordination of efforts in favour of the recognition of the researcher’s profession, as well as
to establish a real European labour market based on the potential capacities of all actors,
independently  of  their  geographical  location,  the  sector  their  are  working  in  or  their
gender  and  it  recognises  the  need  for  an  overall  view  of  Human  Resources  for  R&D
throughout the careers as well as for a set of sufficiently detailed, reliable and harmonised
indicators for measuring it1.

1.

POLICY CONTEXT FOR HUMAN RESOURCES IN R&D

In January 2000, the Commission adopted a Communication proposing the creation of a
European  Research  Area  (ERA)2  which  emphasised,  inter  alia,  the  need  to  introduce  a
European  dimension  into  careers  in  R&D,  and  appealed  for  more  abundant  and  more
mobile human resources. The latter concern became the subject of the Communication “A
mobility strategy for the ERA” 3, which aims at establishing the dynamics required to set
up and develop a favourable environment for mobile researchers throughout their careers.
A  series  of  concrete  actions4  mark  the  implementation  of  this  strategy  such  as  the
development  of  the  Researcher’s  Mobility  Portal5,  the  setting  up  of  the  European
Network of Mobility Centres as well as legislative initiatives in the areas of conditions of
admission of third country researchers.

The  subsequent  Spring  European  Councils  (Lisbon  2000,  Stockholm  2001,  Barcelona
2002 and Brussels in 2003) have endorsed the ERA and set a series of objectives inviting
the Commission and the Member States to take due account of the possible shortage of
human  resources  in  R&D  as  well  as  of  the  importance  of  enhancing  the  training  and
mobility  of  researchers.  The  issue  of  human  resources  in  R&D  was  also  raised  in  the
context  of  the  3%  objective6,  particularly  in  the  Communication  “More  Research  for
Europe – towards  3%  of  GDP”7  which  underlined  the  fact  that  Member  States  and  the
research community need to be aware of the risk that a lack of sufficient human resources
in  R&D  constitutes  a  bottleneck  to  the  attainment  of  the  3%  objective.  This  is  further
developed in the recently adopted Communication “Investing in research: an action plan
for Europe”8.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

Compiling  harmonised  statistical  data  of  Human  Resources  in  RTD,  keeping  track  with  the
developments  and  regularly  measuring  the  success  of  proposed  actions  should  all  be  -  as  far  as
possible - set up within the European Statistical System.
COM(2000)6 final of 18.01.2000.
COM(2001)331 final of 20.06.2001 and SEC(2003)146 final of 04.02.2003.
See also SEC(2003)146 of 04.02.2003.
Available on http//:europa.eu.int/eracareers.
At the March 2002 Barcelona European Council, the EU agreed that overall spending on R&D in
the Union should be increased with the aim of approaching 3% of GDP by 2010.
COM(2002)499 final of 11.09.2002.
COM(2003)226 
http://europa.eu.int/comm/research/era/3pct/index_en.html

final  of  30.04.2003  and  SEC(2003)489 

final  of  30.04.2003, 

see

4

                                                
Capacity generation, however, needs also to be linked to other factors, such as an ageing
workforce  in  R&D9.  This  particular  aspect  has  been  addressed  in  the  report
“Benchmarking Human Resources in RTD”10, which highlights that “there is a growing
tendency  to  dispose  of  mid-career  researchers  through  early  or  forced  retirement
schemes  or  transfer  to  non  scientific  posts…leading  to  a  waste  of  talents  and
experience”.

Specific  measures  concerning  the  gender  dimension  in  European  research  policy  were
presented in 1999 through the Communication “Women and Science”11 and consequently
implemented through the “Science and Society action plan”12.

In addition, recommendations put forward by EURAB, the European Research Advisory
Body13 to the European Commission have been taken into account in the preparation of
this Communication.

The  reflection  on  the  role  of  human  resources  in  R&D  is  also  linked  to  a  broader
perspective resulting from the various initiatives carried out at EU level in order to take
into  account  developments  of  the  labour  market  and  the  changing  working  conditions.
Within  this  context,  the  present  Communication  complements  the  actions  recently  put
forward within the proposal for a Council Decision on “Guidelines for  the  Employment
Policies  of  the  Member  States”14,  particularly  those  related  to  “Addressing  change  and
promoting adaptability and mobility in the labour market”, and “Promoting development
of human capital and lifelong learning” with its focus on increasing investment in human
resources.

Finally, the Communication builds on the work undertaken within the framework of “The
Action  Plan  on  Skills  and  Mobility”  15  and  is  in  line  with  the  implementation  of  the
Commission’s  Communication  “Making  a  European  Area  of  Lifelong  Learning  a
Reality”16. It is also consistent with the activities launched for Enhanced Co-operation in
Vocational Education and Training: the “Copenhagen process”17; as well as with issues

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

in 

the  European  Union:  promoting  excellence 

See also SN100/1/02REV1 of 16.03.2002, page 12.
Final report of 28.06. 2002.
COM(1999)76 final of 17.02.1999; see also the “Women and Science initiative”: ETAN working
through
group  report  “Science  policies 
mainstreaming  gender  equality”,  1999;  Resolution  of  the  European  Parliament  on  Women  and
Science  of  03.02.2000  (EP  284.656);  Commission  working  document  “Women  and  science:  the
gender  dimension  as  a  leverage  for  reforming  science”  SEC(2001)771  of  15.05.2001;  Council
Resolution  on  science  and  society  and  on  women  in  science  of  26.06.2001;  OJ  C  199,  p.1  of
14.07.2001; Report by the Helsinki Group on Women and Science “National policies on women
and science in Europe” – March 2002.
COM(2001)714 final of 04.12.2001.
See http://europa.eu.int/comm/researc/eurab/index_en.html.
COM(2003)176/4 of 07.04.2003.
COM(2002)72 final of 13.02.2002.
COM(2001)678 final of 11.11.2001.
“The aim of this process is to promote transparency and mutual trust as a means of enhancing the
transferability of vocational qualifications and competencies throughout Europe and at all levels,
as  well  as  to  improve  the  quality  and  standing  of  vocational  education  and  training”,  Council

5

                                                
put forward in  the Communication  “Investing  efficiently  in Education and Training: an
imperative  for  Europe”18  and  in  the  Communication  “European  Benchmarks  in
education and training: follow-up to the Lisbon European Council19.

2.

DEFINITION OF A RESEARCHER

In order to have a clearer understanding of the factors conditioning a career structure of
researchers  it  is  necessary  to  include  a  large  number  of  variables  that  make  up  a
“typology”  of  researchers  in  their  different  professional  contexts.  Such  a  “typology”  of
researchers builds upon the internationally recognised Frascati definition of research20:

“Research  and  experimental  development  (R&D)  comprise  creative  work
undertaken  on  a  systematic  basis  in  order  to  increase  the  stock  of  knowledge,
including  knowledge  of  man,  culture  and  society,  and  the  use  of  this  stock  of
knowledge to devise new applications”.

As a consequence, researchers are described as:

“Professionals  engaged  in  the  conception  or  creation  of  new  knowledge,
products,  processes,  methods  and  systems,  and  in  the  management  of  the
projects concerned”.

The  above  mentioned  definition  covers  professional  activities  related  equally  to  “basic
research”,  “strategic  research”,  “applied  research”,  experimental  development  and
“transfer  of  knowledge”  including  innovation  and  advisory  capacities,  depending  upon
whether  the  discovery  or  acquisition  of  knowledge  is  aimed  at  a  particular  application
(either in industry of for social purposes) or not.

These  different  research  activities  are  to  be  found  in  a  variety  of  research  settings,
namely:

(cid:1)  Universities, which normally are more oriented towards long-term basic and strategic
research projects and are recognised as essential to the knowledge-based economy.

(cid:1)  Public  or  private  research  organisations  or  academies  of  science,  which  differ  from
country  to  country  and  from  one  type  of  research  activity  to  another  with  a
combination of strategic and applied (market oriented) research.

18

19

20

Resolution  on  the  Promotion  of  Enhanced  European  Co-operation  in  Vocational  Education  and
Training” 14343/02 of 06.12.2002.
COM(2003)779 of 10.01. 2003.
COM(2002)629 of 20.11.2002.
In: Proposed Standard Practice for Surveys on Research and Experimental Development, Frascati
Manuel, OECD, 2002.

6

                                                                                                                                                
(cid:1)  Certain  large  scale  industrial  actors  which  are  usually  less  focussed  on  strategic
research and most large scale industrial actors and technologically based SMEs, which
engage in market oriented research and technology transfer.21

It  is  observed  that  the  status  of  researchers  is  appreciated  differently  by  the  scientific
community  depending  on  the  sector,  the  research  setting  or  the  type  of  research
undertaken. Given, however, that all contributions are essential to the development of the
knowledge society it is necessary to consider any activity directly or indirectly related to
R&D  including  the  management  of  knowledge  and  intellectual  property  rights,  the
exploitation of research results or scientific journalism as an integral part  of  a  career in
R&D. The policy lesson is that any of those careers will have to be treated and valued on
equal footing  without maintaining  the preponderance of an  academic  research  career  as
the  only  benchmark  for  attracting  young  people  into  such  a  career  track22.  In  addition,
lifelong  professional  development  opportunities  in  different  research  settings  should  be
made more relevant for a wider variety of careers than in the past.

3.

PROSPECTS FOR CAREERS IN R&D

3.1.

Prospective workforce needs in R&D

The  recent  Commission  Communication  “Investing  in  research:  an  action  plan  for
Europe”23 stresses that “More and more adequately skilled researchers will be needed in
Europe  in  order  to  fulfil  the  targeted  increase  of  investment  in  research  by  2010.
Increased investment in research will raise the demand for researchers: about 1.2 million
additional  research  personnel,  including  700.000  additional  researchers,  are  deemed
necessary  to  attain  the  objective24,  on  top  of  the  expected  replacement  of  the  ageing
workforce in research”.

In 200125 some 1.8 million full-time equivalent (FTE) R&D personnel were employed in
Community  R&D,  of  whom  less  than  one  million  are  considered  as  researchers26.  The
last  available  figures  show  a  slight  increase  (2%)  in  the  total  number  of  researchers  in
EU-15  between  2000  and  2001.  These  developments  are  broadly  in  line  with  those
related to the volume of R&D expenditure.

21

22

23

24

25

26

Moreover  many  small  SMEs  are  involved  above  all  in  research  into  process  and/or  product
innovation.
See  also  document  " Towards  a  paradigm  for  education,  training  and  career  paths  in  the  natural
sciences" presented by HFSP/ESF, available on www.esf.org.
COM(2003)226 final and SEC(2003)489 of 30.04.03.
In  head  count.  These  are  orders  of  magnitude,  the  precise  results  depending  on  hypotheses
retained.  There  were  about  1.6  million  researchers  in  Member  States  and  acceding  countries  in
2000.
R&D  Expenditure  and  Personnel  in  Europe:  1999-2001,  Statistics  in  Focus,  Science  and
Technology Theme 9 – 3/2003, EUROSTAT, European Communities, 2003
Figures  vary  from  40  to  75  %  according  to  different  EU-15  Member  States  and  to  industry  or
academic research activity.

7

                                                
Generally  speaking  there  is  a  risk  that  the  supply  of  human  resources  in  R&D  and  of
teachers  to  train  this  resources  may  become  inadequate  for  future  needs,  at  least
inadequate  to  achieve  the  3  %  objective27  as  was  shown  by  the  first  results  of  the
benchmarking  exercise  for  national  RTD  policies28.  Moreover  there  is  a  gap  between
seemingly  favourable  prospects,  as  established  by  recent  macro-economic  analysis  (job
opportunities  for  thousand  of  researchers)  and  less  favourable  anticipations,  as  most  of
the  research  organisations  experience  slow  increases  or  even  decreases  in  private  and
public investments and less commitment to sustainable positions for researchers.

In  order  to  obtain  consolidated  career  prospects  for  researchers  making  it  possible  to
attain  the  3%  objective,  it  is  therefore  of  utmost  importance  to  reduce  this  apparent
divergence between global needs and microeconomic behaviour.

While recognising that teaching, learning and R&D comprise the potential wellspring of
economic growth in the knowledge-based society this will only be achieved in reality if
demand  conditions  for  successful  innovation,  investment  and  diffusion  are  greatly
enhanced in the EU compared to that enjoyed by our major international competitors.

Achieving  the  challenging  objectives  set  at  Lisbon  and  Barcelona  must  involve  a
dramatic  increase  of  capacity  in  the  education  system  and  care  must  be  taken  that  this
increase of quantity is not achieved at the price of lowering quality standards.
The  success  of  efforts  to  build  sufficient  capacity  to  satisfy  the  2010  objectives  29  will
also be affected by perceptions of young students of career prospects and employability
in the research sector. Should they fear that the demand for such qualifications will not be
forthcoming from the research institutes and innovative enterprises then they may not opt
for such studies or, if they do so, may emigrate on graduation.

3.2.

The public recognition of careers in R&D

The  issue  of  public  support  for  researchers  is  clearly  linked  to  the  ways  science  is
perceived as a means to contribute to the development of society. The  general public is
aware of the impact of technological innovation on the quality of life30, but impacts can
be  perceived  as  both  positive  and  negative.  The  general  public  generally  does  not

27

28

29

30

COM(2003)226 final of 30.04.03.
SEC(2002)929  final  of  11.09.2002,  see  figure  point  5.23.  R&D  intensity  and  human  resources
intensity in S&T by country.
On the 5th May 2003 the Council (Education Ministers) adopted conclusions on Reference Levels
of  Average  European  Performance  in  Education  and  Training  (Benchmarks).  Among  the  five
adopted  Reference  Levels  of  Average  European  Performance  one  is  in  the  area  of  mathematics,
science  and  technology.  The  Council  called  for  an  increase  of  15%  in  the  total  number  of
graduates  in  these  three  subjects  in  the  European  Union  by  2010,  while  at  the  same  time
decreasing the level of gender imbalance (Council Conclusions of 5 may 2003 – official Journal of
the EU C 134/4 of 07.06.2003).
See Eurobarometer from both the Member States (EUROSTAT report number 55.2 “Europeans,
Science & Technology”, December 2001) and Candidate Countries (EUROSTAT report number
2002.2.  “Public  opinion  in  the  Countries  applying  for  EU  membership”,  Gallup  org.  Hungary,
March 2003).

8

                                                
understand  what  researchers  do,  why  they  do  it  and  what  the  benefits  for  society  are.
Public recognition is usually linked to the status of employment of researchers and often
limited  to  titles  such  as  “professor”  in  academia  and  “doctor”  within  the  medical
profession.

In  order  to  raise  the  political  significance  of  research  as  crucial  to  the  development  of
society, the link  between  the  content  of  research  and  the  net  benefit  to  society  must  be
clearly  highlighted.  Likewise,  society  should  be  better  placed  to  recognise  the  role  of
research,  the  relevance  of  doing  research  and  the  value  of  careers  in  R&D.  From  this
point  of  view  the  commitment  from  politicians  in  recognising  the  importance  of
researchers for society is fundamental.

On the one hand, the development of the  ERA provides a  framework  for raising  public
awareness  of  the  value  of  research  and  researchers  to  society  and  initiatives  have
successfully  been  developed  in  some  European  countries31.  However,  there  has  never
been  a  co-ordinated  European  strategy  to  improve  and  promote  a  better  public
recognition  of  careers in  R&D.  A  good way  to  overcome  this  gap,  to  take  the  message
down  to  the  general  public  would  be  to  organise  a  “European  Year  of  Researchers”
which  would  place  new  emphasis  on  the  human  factor  and  would  therefore  be  a  core
element in such a strategy32.

On  the  other  hand,  the  Commission  is  establishing  within  the  implementation  of  the
Science  and  Society  action  plan  a  pan-European  initiative  aiming  at  supporting  science
education  in  schools.  Science  taught  at  schools  plays  a  pivotal  role.  Young  people  are
from the earliest age interested in science and related issues but this interest fades during
formal  education33.  At  the  time  when  choices  are  being  made  on  study  courses  that
determine future career paths, often pupils consider science studies uninteresting and too
hard. The focus is on teachers but the participants in this initiative are expected to come
from a wider community of actors with an interest in the use and development of science
skills among young people (teachers, educationalists, scientists and researchers, including
industrial researchers). The initiative will provide advice on best practice and techniques
for demonstrating science in real settings. The involvement of professional scientists will
bridge  the  gap  between  how  science  is  taught  and  how  science  is  used.  A  High  Level

31

32

33

Awareness  raising  events  of  the  Engineering  and  Physical  Science  Research  Council  or  the
“Dialogue with the public initiative” in the UK; the various “Money for Cancer Research Funding
Events”  in  the  different  countries;  best  professors  open  their  doors  to  a  wide  public  for  lectures
which  has  generated  an  enormous  media  coverage  and  consequently  the  public  attitude  towards
research and science has changed within a very short time  span in  Hungary or in Finland  where
students  in  engineering  have  created  a  particular  slang  and  it  is  “cool”  to  be  an  insider  of  that
discipline. Other examples can be found by looking at foundations and how they attract money for
research (e.g. cancer research in Italy): they promote the idea that science is important for society,
and  this  idea  is  widely  supported  by  the  public.  In  Germany,  the  Alexander  von  Humboldt
Foundation used a marketing strategy to improve the attractiveness of research fellowships; etc.
An example of  good  practice  exists  in  Finland  where  the  Academy  of  Finland  has  launched  the
initiative "What about a career in science", see: www.aka.fi/eng.
EUROSTAT report number 55.2. “Europeans, Science & Technology”, December 2001.

9

                                                
Group has been  set  up  to  look  at  other  measures  for  increasing  participation  in  science
among young people.

But whereas the value of research to society can be encapsulated in a mission or vision,
individual  choice  as  to  career  options  is  linked  more  closely  with  issues  such  as
satisfaction, stability, level of remuneration, paths to career progression, and status rather
than to arguments based on societal needs.

3.3.

Pathways between academia – industry

Collaborative partnerships  between  academia  and industry  or private and  public  funded
research organisations have emerged as a critical imperative necessary to sustain transfer
of knowledge and innovation but it is still unclear how to structure such relationships, let
alone how to exchange personnel or to promote common training programmes.

One of the reasons can be found in the concept of academic freedom which researchers
are keen to preserve. In recent years, social, political and financial pressures have grown
to  justify  the  practical  relevance  of  research  carried  out  in  academia.  Despite  these
changes,  in  many  fields  applied  research  projects  are  still  granted  a  lower  status,  and
academics  involved  in  industry  are  not  seen  as  serious  candidates  for  academic
promotion. In such a context, a job in industry may be regarded as a second-class option
and, equally, the formal requirement (a doctoral degree) for academic positions makes it
difficult  for  industrial  researchers  to  move  to  academia.  Issues,  such  as  the  transfer  of
pensions and social security rights34, the loss of acquired benefits and professional status,
the totally different cultures regarding on the one side confidentiality of research results
and intellectual property protection and on the other publishing also make it difficult to
move from one sector to another

In short, there is a very limited culture  of  movement from academia  to industry  (or  the
public and private sector) and vice-versa. It is important to stress that both sectors have to
evolve  and  jointly  foster  an  adequate  supply  of  labour  in  all  sectors  of  R&D  thus
allowing for more structured exchange of personnel35.

Some examples of good practice36 do exist in most of the European countries and in this
context  the  report  from  the  European  Science  Foundation  on  “Agents  for  Change:
bringing  industry  and  academia  together  to  develop  career  opportunities  for  young
researchers”  is  worth  mentioning  as  it  proposes  an  agenda  for  change  via  fourteen
practical actions37.

34

35

36

37

The  modernisation  and  simplification  of  the  Council  regulation  1409/71  on  the  co-ordination  of
social  security  systems  (COM(1998)779  final  of  21.12.1998)  will  play  a  significant  role  in
facilitating such moves from one sector to another.
See also the new Marie Curie Action in the 6th Framework Programme.
See final Report of the HLG on Mobility, in particular paragraph 2.5.2. Good Practice Examples.
The report is available on www.esf.org.

10

                                                
The  European  Commission  will  continue 
the
implementation of the “Mobility Strategy for the ERA”38 and the “Action Plan on Skills
and Mobility”39 and will also launch a series of targeted initiatives to exchange examples
of  good  practice  from  all  European  countries  and  to  disseminate  them  widely  to  the
research community.

the  efforts  undertaken  within 

3.4.

The European dimension of careers in R&D

Prospects for careers in R&D are linked to the size of national labour markets. A recent
study40  highlighted  the  fact  that,  as  in  Europe  each  national  market  for  R&D  human
resources is limited, “a given individual does not have a large number of alternative job
opportunities which increases the value of establishing oneself in a more efficient labour
market  (…)  Better  integration  of  the  labour  markets  for  scientists  and  top  engineers
across Europe will go a long way in reducing its thinness”.

It  is  often  said  that  geographical  and  intersectoral  mobility  constitutes  one  of  the
instruments  that  make  a  career  in  R&D  more  effective.  However,  this  will  only  be  the
case  if the  professional  experience  gained  at  all  the  stages  of  a  career  in  R&D,  is  fully
valued and consequently taken into account for career advancement purposes.

Mechanisms  and  instruments41  are  needed  which  enable  the  recording  of  the  different
professional  achievements and the  added value of such  mobility. They should  be  based
on  quality  requirements  regardless  of  employment  conditions  of  researchers,  on
comparative guidelines and comparable criteria, which include the impact of mobility on
both the professional development of researchers as well as their knowledge production.

The  development  of  a  “Framework  for  the  recognition  of  professional  experience  of
researchers”  would  constitute  the  basis  for  a  dynamic  professional  development,  and
would  contribute  to  introduce  changes  in  the  perception  of  uncertainty  regarding  the
employment  situation  of  researchers,  who  are  often  faced  with  many  different  and
precarious employment contracts.

By  developing  such  a  framework,  synergies  should  be  sought  with  the  experience  and
ongoing work for the development of both the European Higher Education Area and the
European  Area  of  Lifelong  Learning42.  In  the  wake  of  the  recent  introduction  of  “EU
Masters” (as the core building block of the ERASMUS-Mundus programme) and in view
of the increased emphasis placed by the Bologna Process43 on the third (doctoral) level of
the emerging European framework of reference for qualifications, the time may be right
to take a fresh look at the notion of “European” doctorates and the recognition of doctoral

38

39

40

41

42

43

COM(2001)331 final of 20.06.2001.
COM(2002)176/4 of 07.04.2003.
Second report of the European Economic  Advisory  Group  (EEAG,  Chapter  5:  Should  we  worry
about the brain drain?), February 2003.
The already existing Euro PhD could be taken as an example of good practise for this.
COM(2001)678 final of 21.11. 2001.
For more information about the “Bologna Process” see:
http://europa.eu.int/comm/education/policies/educ/bologna/bologna_en.html

11

                                                
degrees in Europe for the purpose of careers in R&D. This could take the form both of a
challenge put to universities themselves, i.e., that they cross-recognise their highest level
of academic degrees for the purpose of professional activities in academia and industry,
and of a call to Member States to adjust the legislative framework so that joint doctorates
become  easier  to  implement.  Synergies  should  also  be  sought  with  the  initiatives  to
implement  the  “Enhanced  Co-operation  in  Vocational  Education  and  Training:  the
“Copenhagen process”44, and the “Action Plan for Skills and Mobility”45 as well as other
initiatives at Commission and Member State level such as the intergovernmental working
group established by the Member States’ Directorates General for Public Administration.
Moreover, work will build on the achievements as outlined in the Communication “Free
movement of workers – achieving the full benefits and potential” 46.

Finally, the promotion of the European dimension in R&D careers needs to be embedded
in  a  structured  and  co-ordinated  legal  framework  at  European  level  which  should
guarantee  researchers  and  their  families  a  high  level  of  social  security  thus  minimising
the risk of loosing already acquired social security rights. Within this context researchers
should  be  able  to  benefit  from  the  ongoing  work  at  EU  level  aiming  to  modernise  and
simplify  the  co-ordination  of  the  social  security  systems47,  (including  the  extension  of
these  provision  to  third  country  nationals48)  and  to  introduce  the  European  Health
Insurance  Card.  In  this  framework  the  specific  needs  of  researchers  and  their  families
should be taken fully into account.

3.5.

Gender differences in careers in R&D

As already mentioned in the policy context outlined above, the EU and Member States49,
as well as associated countries, are well aware that the under-representation of women in
R&D  must  be  tackled  if  optimal  use  is  to  be  made  of  human  resources  devoted  to
research. Increasing the talent pool of women researchers will thus be critical in reaching
the 3% objective.

Women  account  for  approximately  30  %  of  the  research  population  in  the  public
sectors50,  but  for  only  15  %  in  industrial  research51.  These  percentages  regarding  the

44

45

46

47

48

49

50

Council  Resolution  on  the  Promotion  of  Enhanced  European  Co-operation  in  Vocational
Education  and  Training,  14343/02  of  06.12.2002.  “The  aim  of  this  process  is  to  promote
transparency  and  mutual  trust  as  a  means  of  enhancing  the  transferability  of  vocational
qualifications  and  competencies  throughout  Europe  and  at  all  levels,  as  well  as  to  improve  the
quality and standing of vocational education and training”.
COM(2002)72 final of 13.02.2002
See COM(2002)694 final of 11.12.2002, in particular paragraph 5.3. Recognition of professional
experience and seniority and paragraph 5.4. Recognition of qualifications and diplomas.
COM(1998)779 final of 21.12.1998.
Council  Regulation  859/2003  of  14.05.2003  extending  the  provisions  of  Regulation  (EEC)
1408/71 and Regulation (EEC) 574/72 to nationals of third countries who are not already covered
by those provisions solely on the ground of their nationality.
This awareness is also underlined by the Council (Ministers of Education) Conclusions of 5th May
2003 – official Journal of the EU C 134/4 of 07.06.2003.
National Policies on Women and Science in Europe – a report of the Helsinki Group on Women
and Science – June 2002 – ISBN 92-894-3579-8.

12

                                                
overall participation of women should not mask the now well-known phenomenon of the
“leaky pipeline”, by which women tend to decrease in disproportionate numbers as they
approach the top of the ladder: they represent indeed less than 10 % of the full professors
in the EU.

Latest  data  for  2001  have  revealed  that  women  now  account  for  some  40  %  of  the
doctoral degrees awarded in the European Union, showing that there is a growing pool of
highly educated women researchers. This trend should, however, not be considered as the
solution to greater gender equality. As has been evidenced in the Third European Report
on  Science  and  Technology  Indicators  200252,  the  under-representation  of  women  in
R&D is the result of different complex factors, which combine as subtle, but cumulative,
forms of discrimination, and as such call for different types of action.

Recruiting, retaining  and promoting women in  research  requires  innovative  practices  in
terms  of  performance  evaluation  and  rewarding  systems.  In  order  to  be  attractive  to
women  researchers,  careers  in  R&D  should  cease  to  appear  as  being  in  conflict  with
having  a  family,  a  conflict  that  continues  to  apply  almost  exclusively  to  women53.
Similarly,  women  need  to  be  recognised  for  their  achievements  and  not  be  put  under
excessive  pressure  to  outperform  male  colleagues.  Networking  and  mentoring  are  also
important  mechanisms  to  support  women  researchers  in  their  careers.  Business
enterprises  and  research  organisations  should  promote  good  practices,  such  as  flexible
working time, dual track careers, “girls days”, etc.

Beyond specific measures, it is of utmost importance that “gender lenses” be applied in
analysing  research  careers. This  implies  recognising  and  taking account  of the different
impacts that the structuring  characteristics  of careers  in R&D  have on  male and  female
researchers. This is also true when considering how to make science attractive to  young
people  at  an  early  stage:  maximising  the  attractiveness  requires  a  wide  spectrum  of
approaches  to  trigger  the  interests  of  both  boys  and  girls.  This  is  what  mainstreaming
calls for, and this is why the gender dimension has the potential to produce not only true
gender equality, but also to open up new perspectives.

4.

FACTORS SHAPING CAREERS IN R&D

In order to overcome  the  mechanisms  that  hinder  a  dynamic  development  of  careers  in
R&D it is necessary to analyse the different factors and current trends, which shape such
careers at European level.

51

52

53

Women in Industrial Research - A wake up call for European Industry – January 2003 – ISBN 92-
894-4400-2.
“Third European Report on Science & Technology Indicators” EUR 20025 (2003), page 249.
See in particular section 2: “Are women more affected by the family double standard?”

13

                                                                                                                                                
4.1.

Research training

4.1.1. A changing environment

The  development  of  adequate  research  training  will  become  increasingly  important  if
Europe  is  going  to  meet  the  estimated  need  of  700.000  researchers,  as  outlined  in  the
recently adopted Communication “Investing in research: an action plan for Europe54.

Despite  their  heterogeneity55,  universities  have  a  central  role  to  play  as  regards  the
training  of  researchers,  as  was  already  stressed  in  the  Communication  “The  role  of  the
Universities  in  the  Europe  of  Knowledge56.  However,  doubts  have  arisen  about  the
capacity of universities to satisfy all the demands made on them as industry seems eager
to  employ  researchers  without  doctoral  degrees,  considering  that  those  with  a  doctoral
degree are too specialised57.

Policy  advisers  to  the  research  community  have  called  for  making  the  training  of
researchers more relevant for a wider variety of careers than in the past. As pointed out in
the  report:  “Developing  foresight  for  the  development  of  higher  education/research
relations in the perspective of the European Research Area”58 more and more research is
currently being  conducted by “non-academic” institutions (companies, non-profit public
or  private  organisations,  private  and  public  independent  research  centres,  etc.).
Consequently,  “the  perspective  of  preparing  research  students  to  enter  the  “non-
academic”  market 
in  most  European  Higher
true  challenge.  Currently, 
Education/Research  institutions,  graduate  students  are  trained  in  an  “endogenous”
perspective,  that  is,  on  the  assumption  that  most  of  their  career  as  professional
researcher would take place in an academic research setting” 59.

is  a 

Therefore, postgraduates should be trained and prepared to enter not only the endogenous
academic  market  but  also  a  broader  exogenous  market.  Preparing  postgraduates,
however, for a research profession in other types  of contexts  constitutes  a  fairly radical
shift  from  current  practice  and  attitudes,  as  “it  could  imply  more  involvement  of  the
research  apprentice  in  collaborative  projects  with  “non-academic”  partners  and  also
more direct involvement of “non-academic” partners in the training of researchers (for
example,  they  could  be  involved  in  the  design  and/or  management  of  some  university
second or third degree programmes, certainly in more applied areas)”60.

54

55

56

57

58

59

60

COM(2003)226 final of 30.04.2003 and SEC(2003)489 final of 30.04.2003
Differences  exist  between  institutions  as  regards  the  position  of  university  research  in  scientific
systems  as  referred  to  in  OECD/DSTI  University  research  financing  DSTI/STP  (99)18.  Paris
OECD.
COM(2003)58 final of 05.02.2003, in particular paragraph 5.2.3. Excellence in human resources.
The US is the only country in the world, which has a tradition in which industry actively seek out
PhDs in science for employment (OECD, 1998).
STRATA  ETAN 
the  development  of  higher
report  on  “Developing 
education/research relations  in  the  perspective  of  the  European  Research  Area  (ERA)”,  by  Prof.
Etienne Bourgeois, Rapporteur, 2002.
See above mentioned STRATA ETAN report.
See above mentioned STRATA ETAN report.

foresight 

for 

14

                                                
4.1.2. Consequences for doctoral programmes

The most recent doctoral programmes contain initiatives to enhance the employability of
researchers  by  including  in  the  training  both  core  skills  (e.g.  training  in  research  skills
and  techniques)  and  wider  employment  related  skills  (e.g.  research  management,
communication skills, networking and teamworking) in order to respond to the changing
demands put upon them in an uncertain and open employment market61. In other words
research  trainees  are  given  the  opportunity  to  learn  by  doing.  It  implies  that  training
through research be part of the actual research activity being conducted by the laboratory
to which a doctoral candidate is attached 62.

Such developments will have an impact on the structure of training for researchers and on
the ways in which such training might be reviewed within the discussion governing the
Bologna Process and the development of the European Higher Education Area. When the
Ministers  of  Higher  Education  look  into  the  next  phase63  they  may  integrate  doctoral
programmes  in  a  more  proactive  way  into  the  Bologna  Process.  This  is  particularly
relevant as the establishment of the European Research Area has set ambitious deadlines
for 2010, and it is essential to see these two processes together.

Doctoral programmes are organised differently in different countries throughout Europe,
from  individually  organised  training  to  standard  training  programmes  for  groups  of
doctoral  candidates  in  related  fields.  The  idea  of  organised  training  (e.g.  in  research
schools, graduate schools, or doctoral schools) is developing in some European countries,
particularly  in  the  Nordic  countries64,  in  the  Netherlands  and  the  UK,  and  on  an
experimental basis in other countries such as Germany or Spain65.

Another important element within such structured training is related to the existence and
the quality of  a supervisor. The quality of  the supervisor may be  variable,  and  in  some
countries  doctoral  candidates  have  no  real  possibility  to  change  supervisor  without
discontinuing  their  ongoing  research  project.  Consequently,  doctoral  candidates  should
have  better  access  to  a  supervisor  at  all  levels,  and,  if  necessary,  each  institution
delivering  doctoral  programmes  should  appoint  an  “independent  ombudsman”  or  a
specific committee to support and assist a doctoral candidate if there is a need to change
supervisor.

As  pointed  out  by  a  number  of  professional  organisations  of  doctoral  candidates,
experienced researchers should be personally involved in mentoring doctoral candidates,

61

62

63

64

65

See,  for  example,  the  “Joint  Statement  of  the  Research  Councils'/AHRB'S  Skills  Training
Requirements for Research Students in the UK”..
This is also the  main objective of the  Marie  Curie  Host  Fellowships  for  Early  Stage  Researcher
Training action. See http://europa.eu.int/mariecurie-actions.
The European summit of Higher Education Ministers is scheduled  for  18-19  September  2003  in
Berlin.
See  report  from  Nordic  Academy  for  Advanced  Study  (NorFA):  The  Nordic  research  training:
common objectives for international quality, 2003, available on www.norfa.no.
In  Germany  the  Graduiertenkollegs,  in  Spain  the  International  Graduate  School  of  Catatonia
(IGSOC)

15

                                                
thus integrating them fully into the research environment, highlighting alternative careers,
when  appropriate,  and  introducing  the  doctoral  candidate  to  as  many  new  contacts  as
possible. Even though the nature of mentoring varies, it should “share a commitment to
nurture  on-going,  in  depth  relationships  through  dialogue,  decision-making,  and
reflection  that  has  often  been  absent  in  traditional  university-field  site  settings”.66
Mentoring should thus become an integral part of any doctoral programme.

Funding doctoral programmes still represents a problem, as doctoral candidates may have
to guarantee funding for the whole period of study in order to be admitted and sources of
funding can be very diverse even within one single country67. This issue is linked to the
above  mentioned  ambiguous  recognition  of  a  doctoral  degree  in  a  broad  employment
context.  Moreover,  the  category  of  doctoral  candidates  forms  a  highly  heterogeneous
group  in  the  different  European  countries.  Doctoral  candidates  are  considered  to  be
students,  staff  members,  workers  or  even  researchers.  Thus,  the  financial  situation  and
social security rights of many doctoral candidates are still precarious. Even in countries
providing  extensive  social  benefit  measures  to  doctoral  candidates,  maternity  rights
during doctoral studies remain largely unsatisfactory.

In principle, doctoral candidates should benefit from adequate funding either in form of a
grant,  a  loan  or  a  salary  and,  whatever  the  source  of  funding,  minimum  social  security
benefits, including parental leave should be provided.68

It  will  be  necessary  to  analyse  the  different  status  of  the  heterogeneous  community  of
doctoral  candidates  so  as  to  initiate  a  systematic  inventory  on  how  research  training  is
structured and  organised  in the different  European  countries  and  what  the  requirements
for accessing it are in order to gain a more complete overview about the characteristics of
research training opportunities in Europe.

4.2.

Various recruitment methods

The question of recruitment is linked to the level at which it takes place and the types of
organisation  in  which  positions  are  available.  Positions  may  be  open  at  the  national,
European or international level for early stage or experienced researchers within a public
sector  organisation  or  in  a  teaching  position  in  universities  that  includes  research
capabilities.  As  regards  the  private  sector,  industry  recruits  researchers  at  any  stage  of
their career through national, European or international labour markets.

66

67

68

Quote from “Bring context to mentoring”, Dean Cristol, Ph.D., Old Dominion University.
For  example,  figures  from  2001  on  the  financing  of  doctoral  programmes  in  France  reveal  that
36% of doctoral candidates rely on personal sources of funding; 33% have a grant from ministries,
regions, associations; 7% are financed by  sources  from  a  foreign  country  or  by  EU  fellowships;
20% are already working and 4% are funded under an industrial agreement (CIFRE contract). JJ.
Paul, Research Institute on the Economic of Education, Dijon, France.
The contractual conditions developed to implement the Marie Curie Actions in the context of the
6th  Framework  Programme  impose  to  the  host  institution  to  offer  adequate  social  security
coverage.

16

                                                
Systems of recruitment differ from country to country, from discipline to discipline, and
from public to private organisations. Long established recruitment procedures within the
public system are in place in all European countries69. The organisation of recruitment is
most often based on advertisements in the press, through Internet, or through national or
international competitions. In most cases, in the public sector, selection committees exist,
and the Commission has already highlighted the necessity to remove remaining barriers
that  prevent  foreign  researchers  from  participating  in  such  selection  and  evaluation
committees70.  In  reality  however,  recruitment  still  depends  to  a  large  extent  on  factors
such as the  influence  of  the  supervisor,  agreements  based  on  local  cultures,  the  lack  of
external  panel  members  or  the  fact  that  open  competitions  become  local  competitions,
reflecting somehow the limited openness of academic or public research structures.

Another  issue  that  needs  to  be  tackled  is  related  to  recruitment  integrity  based  on
scientific standards. Selection methods  are  either entirely based  on  paper  selection  (CV
and publications), written tests, interviews or a mixture of these. The recruitment criteria
are  essentially  based  on  the  level  of  education  officially  required,  as  well  as  on  other
requirements more specifically linked to the structure of needs of the organisation. In the
case  of  posts  in  academia,  a  doctoral  degree  or  to  have  published  already  in  scientific
journals of international repute is normally required.

By  contrast,  in  the  private  sector  recruitment  of  researchers  often  operates  in  a  more
global context and is linked to the culture and the needs of each company, particularly as
regards the value attributed to a doctoral degree.

One of the elements for the establishment of an European open market for researchers is
linked to the real and effective opening up of national public sector positions to EU and
third  country  researchers  which  has  already  been  made  explicit  by  the  European
Commission71:  “All  (…)  recruitment  procedures  have  to  be  open72  (…)  Furthermore,
Member States are not allowed to refuse migrant workers the status of civil servants, if
relevant,  once  they  have  been  integrated  in  the  public  sector.  On  all  these  points  the
Commission intends to monitor  closely the  relevant national  rules and  practices and  to
take  the  necessary  steps  to  ensure  effective  compliance  with  Community  law,  including
starting infringement procedures if necessary”.

As regards the presentation of the professional experience, current practice shows that a
in
researcher’s  CV  normally  requires 
chronological order with precise references to education and work experiences, additional
skills, proficiency in foreign languages etc. One of the most important factors however,

the  different  experiences 

listing  of 

the 

69

70

71

72

See  “Employment  and  Working  conditions  of  Academic  Staff  in  Europe”,  J.  Enders  (ed.),
Gewerkschaft,  Erziehung  und  Wissenschaft,  Materialien  und  Dokumente  Hochschule  und
Forschung, Oktober 2000.
See COM(2001)331 final of 21.06.2001, point 4.1. Actions aimed at establishing the dynamics to
improve the environment for mobile researchers.
See COM(2002)694 final of 11.12.2002, in particular paragraph 5.2.
The only exception is for cases where “nationals who are not working in the same service of the
public sector would also not be allowed to apply to these kind of posts or competitions”.

17

                                                
seems to be that professional experience is based on a “linear” career path, similar to the
structure of a “ladder” with no chronological gap.

Many researchers perceive this as a “penalising” factor particularly in the case when they
move from one discipline to another, which is considered as an important feature in the
whole innovation process but often not recognised as such, or in the case of a temporary
interruption for personal or family reasons. It has been suggested that researchers should
have the possibility to remove a certain number of years from their CV, if they consider it
necessary  and  appropriate,  when  applying  for  a  post.  This  would  imply  a  change  of
attitude on the part of the different actors of the research community who would need to
be more open towards  “non-linear” career  paths and  base their judgement on merit and
not necessarily on chronological order.

A “code of conduct for the recruitment of researchers” based on best practice ought to be
developed  so  as  to  improve  recruitment  methods  which  reflect  the  needed  openness  at
European level and different ways of judging merit and excellence.

4.3.

Employment and working conditions

4.3.1. A tendency towards deregulation in the academic career system

The  career  system  of  researchers  is  characterised  by  various  types  of  scholarships  or
fellowships, a series of contract  tracks,  periods of tenure tracks or regular  employment.
Hence,  the  development  of  such  a  research  career  structure  is  dependent  upon  formal
employment  and  working  conditions  regulated  by  legal  and  contractual  rules,  which
differ  from  country  to  country,  from  public  to  private  research  institutions  and  from
discipline to discipline.

As regards the employment relationships of staff in R&D there are, generally speaking,
three  basic  ways  of  regulations:  by  state  law,  by  collective  bargaining  between
representatives  of  employers  and  employees  or,  in  the  case  of  academic  staff  by
employment regulations of the higher education institution.

Furthermore, according to the study “Employment and Working Conditions of Academic
Staff  in  Europe73:  A  Comparative  Study  in  the  European  Community”  various  higher
education  systems  have  traditional  mechanisms  of  individual  bargaining  between
members  of  academic  staff  on  the  one  hand  and  representatives  of  the  employer  (state
authority  or  institutional  leaders)  on  the  other  hand.  The  regulations  and  rules  might,
therefore,  be  laid  down  in  legal  documents,  employment  contracts,  depending  on  the
principle ways they have  been determined:  either unilaterally by  state  law  or  employer
regulations or bilaterally by national, local or individual bargaining or a composite mix
of elements of both types. Typically, these rules cover regulations for salary and working
load, job security and tenure, procedures for recruitment and promotion, fringe benefits,
sabbatical, pension arrangements, and so on.

73

J.  Enders  (ed.),  Gewerkschaft,  Erziehung  und  Wissenschaft,  Materialien  und  Dokumente
Hochschule und Forschung, Oktober 2000

18

                                                
Higher  education  systems  are  undergoing  many  changes, 
towards  a  growing
decentralisation  as  regards  the  regulation  of  academics  employment  and  working
conditions. Such shifts of responsibility and decision making processes vary according to
each country74 and could lead to an increased complexity in the system if not integrated
in a more co-ordinated framework.

As regards working conditions for researchers several issues should be further expanded
and investigated. These include  flexibility  at  work  (teleworking,  flexitime),  the  right  of
access to lifelong training, the possibility to ask for a sabbatical period and, last but not
least,  the  quality  of  infrastructures  and  equipment,  including  the  development  of
eResearch or Cyberinfrastructures75.

Within  this  context  it  is  worthwhile  noting  that  the  future  of  fixed  term  contracts,
including research contracts is also related to the implementation of the “EU Directive on
Fixed  Term  Work”76.  The  Directive  aims  to  prevent  fixed-term  employees  from  being
less favourably treated than similar permanent employees; to prevent abuse arising from
the use of successive fixed terms contracts; to improve access to training for fixed terms
employees; and to ensure fixed-terms employees are informed about available permanent
jobs.

It will be worth analysing how the associated developing legislation in the different EU
Member  States  fits  into  the  above  outlined  working  environment.  This  implies  a  major
rethink of the structure and future of postdoctoral fellowships and contract research in the
different European countries.

Researchers and their employers should discuss the development of researcher’s working
conditions within a framework of social dialogue to achieve this more easily.

4.3.2. Remuneration as career incentives

Salaries  constitute  one  of  the  most  visible  issues  of  career  recognition.  Salaries  of
researchers  seem  to  have  fallen  behind,  for  example  in  comparison  with  those  who  are
engaged in management positions. This is perceived as a reason for career shifts that can
imply a loss of public capital invested in the training of researchers. Increased mobility,
the need for more transparency and comparability in order to assess the attractiveness of
researchers’ careers requires comparative studies on researchers' financial conditions and
salaries.

74

75

76

To this end see e.g. the text of the new Act in Austria posted at: www.bmbwk.gv.at.
See  also  the  eLearning  Action  Plan  (COM  385  of  18  July  2001  as  well  as  the  Report  of  the
National Science Foundation Blue-Ribbon Advisory Panel on Cyberinfrastructure, January 2003,
available at: http://www.cise.nsf.gov/evnt/reports/tocs.htm.
Council  Directive  1999/70/EC  concerning  the  “Framework  agreement  on  fixed  term  work”
concluded by ETUC, UNICE, and CEEP adopted on 28 June 1999.

19

                                                
So  far,  such  studies77  have  not  been  carried  out  in  a  systematic  way.  This  is  due  to
difficulties related to: the different status or the definition of staff, the lack of comparable
international  statistics,  the  difference  between  gross  and  net  income  (which  is  very
different  from  country  to  country  because  of  heterogeneous  tax  and  social  security
systems)  and  lastly  the  researcher’s  financial  contribution  to  the  scientific  results
obtained  or  the  capacity  to  lead  research  contracts  for  which  it  is  possible  to  negotiate
individual  benefits.  In  order  to  gain  a  complete  picture,  comparison  of  the  earnings  of
staff employed in a scientific capacity in the private sector and financial benefits resulting
from  licensing  or  other  exploitation  activities  should  also  be  carried  out  and  made
available to researchers.

This  will  be  a  great  challenge  in  the  sense  that  it  covers  a  wide  range  of  issues  and
because  the  supporting  data  are  complex  and  controversial78.  Therefore  a  study  at
European level should be carried out; such work is essential for establishing conditions of
work and career development possibilities as well as for identifying possible salary level
adjustments in order to facilitate comparison between supply and demand.

4.3.3. A growing need for alternative tenure opportunities

The need to establish a career structure  for researchers has only been realised relatively
recently,  by  taking  into  account  two  factors  which  hinder  long-term  perspectives:  the
awareness  of  the  career  structure  and  the  consciousness  of  the  lack  of  long-term
employment perspectives particularly for a career in academia79.

On  the  one  hand,  career  structures,  especially  for  contract  researcher  staff  has  been
analysed80, discussed and further strengthened in some European countries, and examples
for  such  initiatives  can  be  found  in  the  UK  through  the  “Research  Career  Initiative
(RCI)”81  or  in  Ireland  through  the  initiative  “Attracting  &  retaining  researchers  in
Ireland”82.  On  the  other  hand,  the  issue  of  the  “US  tenure  track  model”  is  under
discussion  in  several  European  countries,  particularly  in  the  light  of  the  reform  of  the
higher education systems, e.g. the “Junior-Professorship” model in Germany83.

77

78

79

80

81

82

83

See  F.  Thys-Clement:  “Changes  in  research  management:  The  new  working  conditions  of
researchers”, June 2001.
Some studies and reports have looked into these issues and can be taken as the starting point for
this  initiative  such  as:  UK  Roberts  Report  “The  supply  of  People  with  Science  Technology  and
Mathematics Skills”, April 2002, OECD: Education at a glance 2001, “Employment and Working
conditions  of  Academic  Staff  in  Europe”,  J.  Enders  (ed.),  Gewerkschaft,  Erziehung  und
Wissenschaft, Materialien und Dokumente Hochschule und Forschung, Oktober 2000.
This  is  partly  linked  to  the  changing  role  of  universities  and  the  way  research  is  funded.
Consequently  there  will  be  more  and  more  project  based  contracts,  which  provide  little  or  no
opportunity for planning a career in R&D. See also COM(2003)58 of 05.02.2003.
See  study  “Academic  Research  Careers  in  Scotland:  a  longitudinal  study  of  academic  contract
research  staff,  their  jobs  and  career  patterns”,  Institute  for  Employment  Research  –  Scottish
Higher Education Funding Council.
For more information see: www.universitiesuk.ac.uk/activities/rci/asp.
See www.sfi.ie.
The  introduction  of  the  “Junior  Professorship”  was  adopted  in  the  service  law  reform
[Dienstrechtsreform] of 23 February 2002, for more information see: www.bmbf.de.

20

                                                
INSERM,  the  French  National  and  Public  Institute  has  launched  a  new  tenure  track
model in 2002 for biomedical  research, in collaboration with  hospitals and  universities.
The new system offers tenure with, depending on professional experience, a fixed yearly
salary  (including  family  medical  insurance  and  pension  scheme)  and  a  five-year
renewable contract with complementary salary paid by the hospital or university.

Such  changing  tenure  patterns  may  also  foster  new  opportunities  for  developing
pathways  between  “academic”  and  “industrial”  careers  in  research.  This  is  particularly
relevant as long as rigidities in the academic employment conditions still constitute one
of the main obstacles to intersectoral mobility, as pointed out in the  Final Report of the
High  Level  Group  on  Mobility84.  If  such  rigidities  are  softened,  paving  the  way  for  a
combined approach of employment and remuneration, new partnerships can develop and
lead to an ‘industry/academia’ tenure track for researchers85.

education 

In  order  to  include  researchers  into  regular  and  sustainable  staff  structures,  such
alternative tenure tracks need to be developed e.g. through more structured partnerships
between  higher 
research
centres/laboratories, or through industry/academic partnerships. The advantages of such a
new  career  track  are  manifold,  from  better  organising  links  between  applied  and  basic
research  to  stimulating  motivation  through  more  flexibility,  thus  including  the  three
dimensions:  teaching,  research  and  industry/enterprise  related  issues  such  as  transfer  of
knowledge and innovation.

and  national  or 

institutions 

regional 

4.3.4. Career evaluation systems

The  more  an  alternative  tenure  track  includes  diversified  working  experience  the  more
importance will be attributed to adequate evaluation/appraisal systems.

Publications  in  the  form  of  articles  in  high  impact  journals,  international  publications,
books  and  chapters  are  considered  as  a  fundamental  factor  for  the  appraisal  and
productivity of a researcher. However, “other indicators” such as computer programmes,
scientific  prizes,  conference  speeches,  participation  in  exhibition,  seminars  and
workshops,  organisation  of  such  events,  professional  appointments,  teaching  activities,
national and international collaboration, management of research, research income, and to
a lesser extent patenting, licensing and spin off  creation activities are becoming equally
as  important,  as  highlighted  by  a  study  “Researchers’  Appraisal  at  European
Universities” 86.

Some  organisations  responsible  for  evaluation  are  in  favour  of  using  those  “other
indicators”  to  identify  and  reward  excellent  researchers,  while  others  see  them  as  only
complementary  information  confirming  an  opinion  of  a  researcher.  According  to  this

84

85

86

Final Report, in particular paragraphs 2.5.2. Good Practice Examples.
Such a specific tenure track may also include a launching phase for spin-offs. See also the French
law on innovation available on http://www.recherche.gouv.fr/technologie/mesur/loi/inovloi.htm
The study was commissioned by DG RTD Directorate K and is not yet published; it was realised
by Eurotech Data Luxembourg.

21

                                                
study, evaluation  of researchers may  take  place  at  different  stages  of  a  career:  before  a
promotion;  during  the  evaluation  of  projects  for  funding;  in  the  form  of  a  regular
appraisal (e.g. yearly appraisal); when preparing for a discussion on salaries or involving
employment conditions.

This study also provides an overview of procedures for the  evaluation  of researchers  in
academia  in  the  different  Member  States.  Depending  on  the  type  of  evaluation  and  the
country,  the  organisations  responsible  for  evaluation  may  vary  from  research  councils
and  ministries  to  university  deans  and  research  groups.  In  the  UK  and  elsewhere  in
Europe  (Germany,  Ireland,  the  Netherlands,  Norway  etc),  researchers  are  evaluated
according  to  the  national  frameworks  relating  to  generic  human  resources  policies
including  individual  performance  and  targets.  Most  universities,  however,  will  have  a
human  resources  protocol  dealing  with  researcher  evaluation,  which  will  list  key
performance dimensions. France, Denmark, Portugal and Spain list indicators to be used
in  the  evaluation  of  researcher  activity  other  than  publication  records  and  teaching
activities.  In  some  countries  (Germany,  Portugal)  new  evaluation  approaches  are  being
developed and implemented.

Given the fact that different careers in R&D ought to be treated on equal footing it will be
necessary to develop procedures and indicators for evaluating researchers with respect to
the  type  of  research  activities  they  are  involved  in.  This  implies  also  that  the  above
mentioned  “other  indicators”  are  incorporated  into  any  evaluation  process  and  that
evaluation of achievements and outputs is not focusing primarily on citation frequencies
and  journal  impact  factor  calculations.  If  these  “other  indicators”  are  not  taken  into
account  this  could  discourage  researchers  from  carrying  out  activities  such  as  the
exploitation of research results which in socio-economic terms means that the benefits of
research are not brought back to society.

This  leads  to  the  need  for  greater  understanding  of  these  different  approaches,  which
embrace  peer  review,  performance  related  systems,  and  individual  appraisal  systems
based on local, national or international standards. This ought to be done by means of a
series of workshops at European level dealing with best practice as regards these issues.

Within this context, it is also important to investigate how geographical and intersectoral
mobility is evaluated as part of career advancement. The High  Level Expert Group87 in
their  final  report  identified  some  disadvantages  related  to  working  or  training  periods
abroad or in another sector for researchers who had not yet secured a permanent position
before leaving and for researchers with permanent positions.

87

See  final  report  of  the  High-Level  Expert  Group  on  Improving  Mobility  of  Researchers  and
consequently  the  Communication  “A  mobility  strategy  for  the  ERA”,  COM  (2001)  331final  of
20.06.2001 and Commission Staff Working Paper on “First implementation report on A Mobility
Strategy for the ERA” SEC (2003) 146 of 4.02.2003

22

                                                
5.

PROPOSED ACTIONS AND INITIATIVES

The aforementioned issues and considerations demonstrate the need to undertake actions
along the following lines:

– 

– 

– 

Improve data collection and analysis so as to draw more in-depth conclusions;

Create more structured dialogue mechanisms between the different stakeholders
of the research community in order to improve career prospects for researchers
overall in Europe;

Launch,  whenever  possible,  specific  initiatives  and  actions  in  certain  areas.
These  initiatives  and  actions  will  contribute  to  the  Barcelona  objective  of
investing 3% of GDP in R&D.

To  this  end,  based  on  the  work  carried  out  so  far  and  relying  on  the  exchange  of  best
practice, benchmarking and voluntary co-operation, the following is proposed:

The Commission will:

(cid:1)  Continue  to  implement  the  actions  foreseen  in  the  Communication  “A  Mobility
Strategy  for the  ERA”88  as  well  as  continue  to  implement  the  Science  and  Society
action plan89 and the Women and Science Action Plan90.

(cid:1)  Set  up  a  High  Level  Group  in  order  to  identify  more  examples  of  good  practice
related to different employment opportunities, such as intersectoral mobility or new
tenure track models, and disseminate them widely to the research community.

(cid:1)  Launch the development of the “European Researcher’s Charter”, a framework for
the  career  management  for  human  resources  in  R&D,  based  on  voluntary
regulation.

(cid:1)  Launch  impact  studies  to  assess  and  benchmark  the  multiple  career  paths  of

researchers.

(cid:1)  Outline  a  “Code  of  conduct  for  the  recruitment  of  researchers”  based  on  best

practise, to improve recruitment methods.

(cid:1)  Develop the means to enable the research community to compare salaries, including
social  security  benefits  and  taxes,  between  countries,  between  disciplines,  between
sectors and between male and female researchers.

88

89

90

COM(2001)331 final of 20.06.2001 and SEC(2003)146 of 04.02.2003
COM(2001)714 final of 04.12.2001
COM(1999)76 final of 17.02.1999.

23

                                                
The Commission in co-operation with the Member States intends to:

(cid:1)  Take  the  necessary  steps  to  develop  a  Framework  for  recording  and  recognising
different professional achievements throughout the career of researchers, including
reference to “common quality criteria” for career development and tools enabling to
increase  the  transparency  of qualifications and  competencies  acquired  in  different
settings.

(cid:1)  Set  up  a  series  of  workshops  on  the  exchange  of  best  practice  as  regards  career
evaluation systems, in order to make them more visible, transparent and comparable
with international standards.

(cid:1)  Initiate a systematic inventory of the status of doctoral candidates, of how doctoral
programmes are structured and organised in the different European countries and
what  the  requirements  for  gaining  access  to  them  are  in  order  to  provide  the
research  community  with  a  more  complete  overview  about  the  characteristics  of
training opportunities in Europe. The inventory would include the characteristics of
training  delivered  in  a  transnational  collaborative  framework,  supported  through
programmes such as Socrates-Erasmus and notably the human resources actions of
the Framework Programme.

The  Commission  proposes  to  the  Member  States  and  to  the  stakeholders  of  the
research community to:

(cid:1)  Launch  a  European  Year  of  Researchers  to  strengthen  the  public  recognition  of

careers in R&D.

(cid:1)  Develop a European platform for the social dialogue of researchers.

(cid:1)  Take into account broader needs of the labour market and the necessary evolution
of  the  content  of  research  training  within  the  context  of  integration  of  doctoral
programmes into the Bologna Process.

(cid:1)  Integrate structured mentoring as an integral part into doctoral programmes.

(cid:1)  Offer doctoral candidates better access to a supervisor at all levels and, if necessary
appoint  an  “independent  ombudsman”  (or  a  specific  committee)  to  support  and
assist a doctoral candidate if there is a need to change supervisor.

(cid:1)  Ensure  that,  in  principle,  doctoral  candidates  have  access  to  adequate  funding
either in form of a grant, a loan or a salary, and to include, whatever the source of
funding, minimum social security benefits, including parental leave.

(cid:1)  Encourage  –  in  line  with  the  Barcelona  objectives  –  a  significant  increase  in

investment in higher education and in R&D in the European Union.

24

(cid:1)  Devote  specific  attention  to  the  growing  role  of  ICT  in  the  research  environment,
especially its ability to enhance training and support services and the need of high
quality level infrastructures for eResearch (such as Geant and Grids).

(cid:1)  Develop all these actions in seeking equal benefit for men and women researchers
by paying attention to the different impact they may have on men and women’s lives.

(cid:1)  Set-up  -  in  close  co-operation  with  the  Researcher’s  Mobility  Portal  and  the
European  network  of  mobility  centres  -  specific  researchers’  guidance  centres  at
local,  regional  and  national  level  in  all  European  countries  in  order  to  advise  on
new opportunities for multiple careers in R&D and on the necessary requirements
to engage in them.

25