Communication from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament - Delivering on the modernisation agenda for universities - Education, research and innovation
Date: 2006-05-10
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: European Employment Strategy, competitiveness, economic growth, education policy, organisation of teaching, research and development, technology, university

COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES 

Brussels, 10.5.2006 
COM(2006) 208 final 

COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE COUNCIL AND THE 
EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT 

DELIVERING ON THE MODERNISATION AGENDA FOR UNIVERSITIES: 
EDUCATION, RESEARCH AND INNOVATION 

EN 

   EN 

 
 
 
  
COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE COUNCIL AND THE 
EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT1 

DELIVERING ON THE MODERNISATION AGENDA FOR UNIVERSITIES: 
EDUCATION, RESEARCH AND INNOVATION 

Introduction 

Modernisation  of  Europe’s  universities2,  involving  their  interlinked  roles  of  education, 
research and innovation, has been acknowledged not only as a core condition for the success 
of the broader Lisbon Strategy, but as part of the wider move towards an increasingly global 
and  knowledge-based  economy.  The  main  items  on  the  agenda  for  change  have  been 
identified3 and given added momentum by the European Council: at the informal meeting at 
Hampton Court in October 2005, R&D and universities were acknowledged as foundations of 
European  competitiveness;  the  2006  Spring  European  Council  agreed  on  stronger  action  at 
European  level  to  drive  forward  this  agenda  in  universities  and  research,  which  should  be 
implemented  by  the  end  of  2007  in  the  context  of  the  renewed  partnership  for  growth  and 
employment4.  In  the  National  Reform  Programmes  based  on  the  Integrated  Guidelines  for 
Growth and Jobs5, Member States refer generally to these issues, but few address them as a 
national priority. Yet these changes are necessary to regenerate Europe’s own approach, not to 
replicate any imported model. They are equally necessary in order to reinforce the societal 
roles of universities in a culturally and linguistically diverse Europe.  

For this purpose, alongside the fundamental local, regional and national roots of universities, 
the European framework is becoming increasingly important. The European dimension offers 
the  potential  benefits  of  larger  scale  operation  greater  diversity  and  intellectual  richness  of 
resources, plus opportunities for cooperation and competition between institutions. 

In  this  respect  the  Commission  has  already  proposed  the  establishment  of  the  European 
Institute of Technology (EIT)6 which was welcomed by the 2006 Spring European Council as 
a  new  initiative  specifically  to  address  these  challenges.  It  can  contribute  to  improving 
Europe’s  capacity  for  scientific  education,  research  and  innovation,  while  providing  an 
innovative  model  to  inspire  and  drive  change  in  existing  universities,  in  particular  by 
encouraging  multi-disciplinarity  and  developing  the  strong  partnerships  with  business  that 
will ensure its relevance. Of course, the EIT alone cannot be the only solution in the drive to 
modernise Europe’s universities. 

1 

2 

3 

4 
5 
6 

The Commission acknowledges with thanks the contributions of all the experts who were consulted and 
offered comments and suggestions in the course of preparation of this document. 
In this document “universities” is taken to mean all higher education institutions, irrespective of their 
name and status in the Member States. 
“Mobilising  the  brainpower  of  Europe:  enabling  universities  to  make  their  full  contribution  to  the 
Lisbon  Strategy”,  COM(2005)  152  of  20  April  2005  and  Council  Resolution  of  15 November  2005. 
Creating an Innovative Europe, Expert Group chaired by Mr Aho, European Commission, January 2006  
Conclusions 1 777/06 of 24 March 2006. 
COM(2005)141 final of 12.04.2005 
COM (2006) 77 final of 22.2.2006 

EN 

2 

   EN 

 
                                                 
The  present  Communication  stems  from  the  dialogue7  that  the  European  Commission  has 
initiated in recent years with the Member States and the academic and scientific communities. 
Its content has also been discussed with a number of experts (see annex 2), who have advised 
the Commission in a personal capacity. 

CHALLENGES AHEAD…. 

With  4 000  institutions,  over  17  million  students  and  some  1.5  million  staff  -  of  whom 
435 000  are  researchers8  -  European  universities  have  enormous  potential,  but  this 
potential  is  not  fully  harnessed  and  put  to  work  effectively  to  underpin  Europe’s  drive  for 
more growth and more jobs.  

Member  States  value  their  universities  highly  and  many  have  tried  to  “preserve”  them  at 
national  level  through  detailed  regulations  organising  them,  controlling  them,  micro-
managing them and, in the end, imposing an undesirable degree of uniformity on them.  

This pressure for uniformity has led to generally good average performance, but has increased 
fragmentation of the sector into mostly small national systems and sub-systems. These render 
cooperation  difficult  at  national,  let  alone  European  or  international,  level  and  impose 
conditions which prevent universities from diversifying and from focusing on quality.  

Furthermore,  most  universities  tend  to  offer  the  same  courses  to  the  same  group  of 
academically best-qualified young students and fail to open up to other types of learning and 
learners, e.g. non-degree retraining courses for adults or gap courses for students not coming 
through  the  traditional  routes.  This  has  not  only  impeded  access  for  disadvantaged  social 
groups and prevented higher enrolment rates but has also slowed down innovation in curricula 
and  teaching  methods  (e.g.  with  respect  to  entrepreneurship9),  hindered  the  provision  of 
training/retraining opportunities to increase skills and competency levels in the workforce and 
led  to  persistent  mismatches  between  graduate  qualifications  and  labour  market  needs. 
Graduate unemployment in many Member States is unacceptably high. 

Moreover,  administrative  regulations  still  hamper  academic  mobility  for  studying,  research 
training  or  working  in  another  country.  Procedures  for  recognition  of  qualifications  for 
academic  purposes  are  at  best  lengthy;  at  worst,  the  failure  to  recognise  and  the  limited 
portability  of  national  grants/loans  or  pension  rights  prevent  students,  researchers  and 
academics from fully appreciating opportunities in other Member States.  

Universities  also  have  to  accept  that  research  is  no  longer  an  isolated  activity  and  that  the 
emphasis  is  shifting  from  individual  researchers  to  teams  and  global  research  networks. 
Scientific  problems  tend  to  go  beyond  traditional  disciplinary  structures:  cutting-edge 
research is increasingly being conducted at the interface between academic disciplines or in 
multidisciplinary  settings.  Universities’  research  environments  are  more  competitive  and 
globalised and require greater interaction.  

7 

8 

9 

Communication “The role of universities in the Europe of knowledge” COM(2003)58, the 2004 Liège 
Conference  and  the  report  by  the  Forum  on  UBR  “European  Universities:  Enhancing  Europe’s 
Research Base” 
Statistical elements underpinning the analysis in this section are to be found in Annex 2. Data source for 
these figures: Eurostat 
Cf  Commission  Communication  of  13  February  2006  “Fostering  entrepreneurial  mindsets  through 
education and learning”. 

EN 

3 

   EN 

 
                                                 
Within  this  context,  however,  many  European  universities  still  underestimate  the  potential 
benefits  of  sharing  knowledge  with  the  economy  and  society,  while  industry  has  not 
developed sufficient absorption capacity to harness the potential of university-based research. 
Consequently,  the  cross-fertilisation  with  the  business  community  and  with  wider  society 
remains difficult. This lack of openness to the business community is also seen in the career 
choices of doctorate holders, who tend to pursue their whole careers in either academic circles 
or industry, and not as entrepreneurs.  

Structural and cultural problems like these are exacerbated by the huge  dual funding deficit 
which  affects  universities  on  both  the  education  and  research  sides.  While  there  has  been 
welcome  growth  in  student  enrolments,  this  has  not  been  matched  by  growth  in  public 
funding, and universities in Europe have not been able to make up the difference from private 
sources.  The  average  gap  in  resources  for  both  research  and  education  activities  compared 
with their US counterparts is some EUR 10 000 per student per year10. At the same time high-
quality education and research are becoming more expensive and, with public finances tight, 
public  authorities  are  attaching  increasingly  stringent  conditions  to  support  for  university-
based research. For the future, it seems likely that the bulk of resources needed to close the 
funding gap will have to come from non-public sources. 

In short, European universities are not currently in a position to achieve their potential 
in a number of important ways. As a result, they are behind in the increased international 
competition  for  talented  academics  and  students,  and  miss  out  on  fast  changing  research 
agendas and on generating the critical mass, excellence and flexibility necessary to succeed. 
These  failures  are  compounded  by  a  combination  of  excessive  public  control  coupled  with 
insufficient funding.  

Europe  needs  universities  able  to  build  on  their  own  strengths  and  differentiate  their 
activities on the basis of these strengths. While all institutions share certain common values 
and tasks, not all need the same balance between education and research, the same approach 
to  research  and  research  training,  or  the  same  mix  of  services  and  academic  disciplines. 
Research  should  remain  a  key  task  of  the  systems  as  a  whole,  but  not  necessarily  for  all 
institutions.  This  would  allow  the  emergence  of  an  articulated  system  comprising  world-
renowned research institutions, plus networks of  excellent  national  and regional universities 
and  colleges  which  also  provide  shorter  technical  education.  Such  a  system  would  mobilise 
the substantial pool of knowledge, talent and energy within universities and would merit – and 
be in a position to generate - the increased investment needed to make it comparable with the 
best in the world. 

….AND CHANGES REQUIRED 

If  Member  States  are  to  accomplish  all  this,  they need to create the necessary conditions to 
enable  universities  to  improve  their  performance,  to  modernise  themselves  and  to  become 
more competitive – in short, to become leaders in their own renaissance and to play their part 
in  the  creation  of  the  knowledge-based  society  envisaged  under  the  Lisbon  strategy. 
Discussions at European level show an increasing willingness to modernise systems, and the 
agenda maped out below is not, in essence, contested. Action is primarily for Member States 

10 

Commission  staff  working  paper  accompanying  the  Communication  “Mobilising  the  brainpower  of 
Europe”, paragraph 42.  

EN 

4 

   EN 

 
                                                 
and universities. Taking stock  of  the debate, and taking into account European specificities, 
the Commission suggests that the following changes will be key to success:  

1. 

BREAK DOWN THE BARRIERS AROUND UNIVERSITIES IN EUROPE 

Geographical and inter-sectoral mobility needs to increase substantially. The proportion 
of  graduates  who  have  spent  at  least  one  term  or  semester  abroad  or  with  experience  in 
industry should at least double. This is even more true for researchers.  

All  forms  of  mobility  should  be  explicitly  valued  as  a  factor  enriching  studies  at  all  levels 
(including  research  training  at  doctoral  level),  but  also  improving  the  career  progression  of 
university researchers and staff.  

National grants/loans should be fully portable within the EU. Full portability of pension rights 
coupled  with  the  removal  of  other  obstacles  to  professional,  international  or  inter-sectoral 
mobility is needed to foster staff and researcher mobility and hence innovation.  

Work in the context of the Bologna process is bringing about a convergence in the structure 
and  length  of  degree  programmes;  however,  this  in  itself  will  not  create  the  conditions  for 
increased  intra-university  mobility.  A  major  effort  should  be  made  to  achieve  the  core 
Bologna  reforms  by  2010  in  all  EU  countries:  comparable  qualifications  (short  cycle, 
Bachelor, Master, Doctorate); flexible, modernised curricula at all levels which correspond to 
the  needs  of  the  labour  market;  and  trustworthy  quality  assurance  systems.  This  requires 
targeted incentives from the national authorities responsible in order to ensure proper take-up 
of  the  reforms  rather  than  mere  superficial  compliance  with  the  standards.  Curricula  in 
specific  disciplines  or  professions  should  be  renovated,  drawing  on  comparisons  and  best 
practice at European level. 

The  recent  Directive  on  the  recognition  of  professional  qualifications11  has  made  it  simpler 
and  quicker  to  have  qualifications  for  professional  practice  recognised  across  national 
borders. Procedures for academic recognition should also be reviewed to ensure quicker and 
more predictable outcomes (in particular, by publishing universities’ recognition policies): as 
with  professional  recognition,  the  Commission  suggests  that  no  applicant  should  have  to 
wait longer than four months for a decision about academic recognition. 

2. 

ENSURE REAL AUTONOMY AND ACCOUNTABILITY FOR UNIVERSITIES 

Universities will not become innovative and responsive to change unless they are given real 
autonomy  and  accountability.  Member  States  should  guide  the  university  sector  as  a  whole 
through a framework of general rules, policy objectives, funding mechanisms and incentives 
for  education,  research  and  innovation  activities.  In  return  for  being  freed  from  over-
regulation and micro-management, universities should accept full institutional accountability 
to society at large for their results.  

This  requires  new  internal  governance  systems  based  on  strategic  priorities  and  on 
professional  management  of  human  resources,  investment  and  administrative  procedures.  It 
also  requires  universities  to  overcome  their  fragmentation  into  faculties,  departments, 

11 

Directive 2005/36/EC adopted on 7 September 2005; it will be implemented from October 2007. 

EN 

5 

   EN 

 
                                                 
laboratories  and  administrative  units  and  to  target  their  efforts  collectively  on  institutional 
priorities  for  research,  teaching  and  services.  Member  States  should  build  up  and  reward 
management  and  leadership  capacity  within  universities.  This  could  be  done  by  setting  up 
national  bodies  dedicated  to  university  management  and  leadership  training,  which  could 
learn from those already existing. 

3. 

PROVIDE  INCENTIVES  FOR  STRUCTURED  PARTNERSHIPS  WITH  THE  BUSINESS 
COMMUNITY  

While the public mission and overall social and cultural remit of European universities must 
be  preserved,  they  should  increasingly  become  significant  players  in  the  economy,  able  to 
respond  better  and  faster  to  the  demands  of  the  market  and  to  develop  partnerships  which 
harness  scientific  and  technological  knowledge.  This  implies  recognising  that  their 
relationship  with  the  business  community  is  of  strategic  importance  and  forms  part  of 
their commitment to serving the public interest. 

Structured  partnerships  with  the  business  community  (including  SMEs)  bring  opportunities 
for universities to improve the sharing of research results, intellectual property rights, patents 
and licences (for example through on-campus start-ups or the creation of science parks). They 
can also increase the relevance of education and training programmes through placements of 
students and researchers in business, and can improve the career prospects of researchers at all 
stages  of  their  career  by  adding  entrepreneurial  skills  to  scientific  expertise.  Links  with 
business can bring additional funding, for example to expand research capacity or to provide 
retraining  courses,  and  will  enhance  the  impact  of  university-based  research  on  SMEs  and 
regional innovation. 

To secure these benefits, most universities will need external support to make the necessary 
organisational changes and build up entrepreneurial attitudes and management skills. This can 
be  achieved  by  creating  local  “clusters  for  knowledge  creation  and  transfer”  or  business 
liaison, joint research or knowledge transfer offices serving as an interface with local/regional 
economic operators. This also implies that development of entrepreneurial, management and 
innovation skills should become an integral part of graduate education, research training and 
lifelong learning strategies for university staff. 

4. 

PROVIDE  THE  RIGHT  MIX  OF  SKILLS  AND  COMPETENCIES  FOR  THE  LABOUR 
MARKET 

Universities  have  the  potential  to  play  a  vital  role  in  the  Lisbon  objective  to  equip  Europe 
with  the  skills  and  competences  necessary  to  succeed  in  a  globalised,  knowledge-based 
economy. In order to overcome persistent mismatches between graduate qualifications and the 
needs of the labour market, university programmes should be structured to enhance directly 
the employability of graduates and to offer broad support to the workforce more generally. 
Universities  should  offer  innovative  curricula,  teaching  methods  and  training/retraining 
programmes which include broader employment-related skills along with the more discipline-
specific skills. Credit-bearing internships in industry should be integrated into curricula. This 
applies  to  all  levels  of  education,  i.e.  short  cycle,  Bachelor,  Master  and  Doctorate 
programmes. It also entails offering non-degree courses for adults, e.g. retraining and bridging 
courses for students not coming through the traditional routes. This should extend beyond the 

EN 

6 

   EN 

 
needs  of  the  labour  market  to  the  stimulation  of  an  entrepreneurial  mindset  amongst 
students and researchers. 

At  doctoral  level,  it  means  that  candidates  aiming  for  a  professional  research  career  should 
acquire skills in research and IPR management, communication, networking, entrepreneurship 
and team-working in addition to training in research techniques. 

More  generally,  universities  need  to  grasp  more  directly  the  challenges  and  opportunities 
presented by the lifelong learning agenda. Lifelong learning presents a challenge, in that it 
will require universities to be more open to providing courses for students at later stages in the 
life  cycle.  It  presents  an  opportunity  for  universities  which  might  otherwise  risk  to  see 
enrolments  of  students  directly  from  school  fall  over  coming  years  in  view  of  coming 
demographic change. 

In summary, while the integration of graduates in the labour market is a responsibility shared 
with employers, professional bodies and governments, labour market success should be used 
as one indicator (among others) of the quality of university performance, and acknowledged 
and rewarded in regulatory, funding and evaluation systems.  

5. 

REDUCE  THE  FUNDING  GAP  AND  MAKE  FUNDING  WORK  MORE  EFFECTIVELY  IN 
EDUCATION AND RESEARCH  

Given the important role of universities in European research, the EU’s goal of investing 3% 
of GDP in R&D by 2010 implies higher investment in university-based research12. As already 
put forward in its Annual Progress Report on the Lisbon Strategy13, the Commission proposes 
that  the  EU  should  also  aim,  within  a  decade,  to  devote  at  least  2%  of  GDP14  (including 
both public and private funding) to a modernised higher education sector. OECD studies, 
for example, show that money spent on obtaining university qualifications pays returns higher 
than real interest rates.15 

Student support schemes today tend to be insufficient to ensure equal access and chances of 
success for students from the least privileged backgrounds. This applies equally to free access, 
which does not necessarily guarantee social equity. Member States should therefore critically 
examine  their  current  mix  of  student  fees  and  support  schemes  in  the  light  of  their 
actual  efficiency  and  equity.  Excellence  in  teaching  and  research  cannot  be  achieved  if 
socio-economic origin is a barrier to access or to research careers. 

Universities  should  be  funded  more  for  what  they  do  than  for  what  they  are,  by  focusing 
funding on relevant outputs rather than on inputs, and by adapting funding to the diversity 

12 

13 
14 

See  “More  research  and  innovation  –  Investing  for  growth  and  employment:  A  common  approach”, 
COM(2005) 488 of 12 October 2005. 
COM (2006) 30 final of 25/01/06 
The 2002 EU average of direct expenditure in universities was 1.1% compared a US level of 2.6%.Less 
than  half  of  educational  expenditures  in  the  US  are  financed  by  public  sources  (direct  expenditure), 
whereas  it  is more  than 75%  in  the  majority  of  the EU  Member  States  (and  close  to  100%  in  some). 
Data source: EUROSTAT. 

15  “The  Economics  of  Knowledge:  why  education  is  key  for  Europe’s  success,  (Andreas  Schleicher,  2006) 

http://www.lisboncouncil.net/files/download/Policy_Brief_Economics_of_Knowledge_FINAL.pdf 

EN 

7 

   EN 

 
                                                 
of  institutional  profiles16.  Universities  should  take  greater  responsibility  for  their  own  long-
term  financial  sustainability,  particularly  for  research:  this  implies  pro-active  diversification 
of  their  research  funding  portfolios  through  collaboration  with  enterprises  (including  in  the 
form of cross-border consortia), foundations and other private sources.  

Each  country  should  therefore  strike  the  right  balance  between  core,  competitive  and 
outcome-based  funding  (underpinned  by  robust  quality  assurance)  for  higher  education  and 
university-based  research.  Competitive  funding  should  be  based  on  institutional  evaluation 
systems and on diversified performance indicators with clearly defined targets and indicators 
supported by international benchmarking for both inputs and economic and societal outputs. 

6. 

ENHANCE INTERDISCIPLINARITY AND TRANSDISCIPLINARITY  

Universities  should  be  able  to  reconfigure  their  teaching  and  research  agendas  to  seize  the 
opportunities  offered  by  new  developments  in  existing  fields  and  by  new  emerging  lines  of 
scientific inquiry. This requires focusing less on scientific disciplines and more on research 
domains (e.g. green energy, nanotechnology), associating them more closely with related or 
complementary fields (including humanities, social sciences, entrepreneurial and management 
skills)  and  fostering  interaction  between  students,  researchers  and  research  teams  through 
greater mobility between disciplines, sectors and research settings.  

All  this  necessitates  new  institutional  and  organisational  approaches  to  staff  management, 
evaluation and funding criteria, teaching and curricula and, above all, to research and research 
training.  

The  implications  of  inter-  and  trans-disciplinarity  need  to  be  acknowledged  and  taken  on 
board  not  only  by  universities  and  Member  States,  but  also  by  professional  bodies  and 
funding  councils,  which  still  rely  mostly  on  traditional,  single-discipline  evaluations, 
structures and funding mechanisms. 

7. 

ACTIVATE KNOWLEDGE THROUGH INTERACTION WITH SOCIETY 

Society  is  becoming  increasingly  knowledge-based  and  knowledge  is  replacing  physical 
resource as the main driver of economic growth. Universities therefore need to communicate 
the relevance of their activities, particularly those related to research, by sharing knowledge 
with  society  and  by  reinforcing  the  dialogue  with  all  stakeholders.  Communication 
between scientific specialists and non-specialists is much needed but often absent.  

This  requires  a  much  clearer  commitment  by  universities  to  lifelong  learning  opportunities, 
but  also  to  a  broad  communication  strategy  based  on  conferences,  open  door  operations, 
placements, discussion forums, structured dialogues with alumni and citizens in general and 
with  local/regional  players.  Working  together  with  earlier  formal  and  non-formal  education 

16 

Research-active universities should not be assessed and funded on the same basis as others weaker in 
research but stronger in integrating students from disadvantaged groups or in acting as driving forces 
for  local  industry  and  services.  Apart  from  completion  rates,  average  study  time  and  graduate 
employment rates, other criteria should be taken into account for research-active universities: research 
achievements, successful competitive funding applications, publications, citations, patents and licences, 
academic awards, industrial and/or international partnerships, etc. 

EN 

8 

   EN 

 
                                                 
and  with  business  (including  SMEs  and  other  small  entities)  will  also  play  a  role  in  this 
respect. 

Such interaction with the outside world will gradually make universities’ activities in general, 
and their education, training and research agendas in particular, more relevant to the needs of 
citizens and society at large. It will help universities to promote their different activities and to 
convince society, governments and the private sector that they are worth investing in. 

8. 

REWARD EXCELLENCE AT THE HIGHEST LEVEL 

Excellence emerges from competition and is developed mainly at faculty/department level – 
few universities achieve excellence across a wide spectrum of areas. Increased competition, 
combined  with  more  mobility  and  further  concentration  of  resources,  should  enable 
universities  and  their  partners  in  industry  to  offer  a  more  open  and  challenging  working 
environment  to  the  most  talented  students  and  researchers,  thereby  making  them  more 
attractive  to  Europeans  and  non-Europeans  alike.  Universities  need  to  be  in  a  position  to 
attract  the  best  academics  and  researchers,  to  recruit  them  by  flexible,  open  and 
transparent  procedures,  to  guarantee  principal  investigators/team-leaders  full  research 
independence and to provide staff with attractive career prospects17.  

Excellence also requires that Member States review the opportunities they provide at Master, 
Doctorate and post-doctorate levels, including the mix of disciplines and skills involved. Post-
doctoral opportunities still tend to be neglected or too narrowly focused. Far-reaching changes 
are  required  in  this  area.  Individual  universities  should  identify  the  particular  fields  where 
they can achieve excellence and concentrate there.  

At  European  level,  excellence  at  graduate/doctoral  schools  should  be  encouraged  by 
networking those which meet key criteria: critical mass, trans- and inter-disciplinarity, strong 
European  dimension,  backing  from  public  authorities  and  from  industry,  identified  and 
recognised  areas  of  excellence,  provision  of  post-doctoral  opportunities,  suitable  quality 
assurance, etc.  

In  this  context  two  initiatives  will  particularly  strengthen  competition  for  excellence:  the 
proposal for a European Institute of Technology and the European Research Council18. 

9. 

MAKE THE EUROPEAN HIGHER EDUCATION AREA AND THE EUROPEAN RESEARCH 
AREA MORE VISIBLE AND ATTRACTIVE IN THE WORLD 

the  past  decades  has  created 

The  development  of  extensive  cooperation,  mobility  and  networks  between  European 
the  right  conditions  for  broader 
universities  over 
internationalisation.  Most  universities  now  have  experience  with  multilateral  consortia  and 
many  are  involved  in  joint  courses  or  double  degree  arrangements.  The  Erasmus  Mundus 
Masters have demonstrated the relevance of these initiatives - which are unique to Europe - in 
the  global  arena.  Continuing  globalisation  means  that  the  European  Higher  Education 

17 

18 

Procedures  for  researchers  should  be  in  line  with  Commission  Recommendation  C(2005)  576  on  the 
European Charter for Researchers and the Code of Conduct for their Recruitment. 
COM(2005)441 final of 21.09.2005 

EN 

9 

   EN 

 
                                                 
Area  and  the  European  Research  Area  must  be  fully  open  to  the  world  and  become 
worldwide competitive players.  

This will, however, only be possible if Europe makes a serious effort to promote the quality of 
its universities, and to increase their attractiveness and visibility worldwide.  

One  possibility,  at  European  and  Member  State  level,  would  be  to  develop  more  structured 
international  cooperation,  supported  by  the  necessary  financial  means,  with  the  EU’s 
neighbouring  countries  and  worldwide,  through  bilateral/multilateral  agreements.  This  also 
entails  that  Member  States,  acting  within  the  EU’s  commitment  not  to  promote  brain  drain, 
should  open  up  their  funding  schemes  to  non-Europeans  and  provide  opportunities  for 
interuniversity  staff  exchanges  as  well  as  opportunities  for  non-European  researcher  and 
academic  staff  to  carry  out  professional  activities.  “Brain  circulation”  should  also  be 
promoted for European students, teachers and researchers who have decided to spend part of 
their working life outside Europe.  19. People undertaking a temporary assignment abroad are 
both  an  asset  for  the  sending  and/or  hosting  country  as  they  constitute  a  reserve  of 
professional contacts abroad, acting as bridgeheads for sharing knowledge. This in turn, will 
increase  Europe’s  visibility  in  education  and  research  and  as  a  reliable  partner  in  the 
development of third countries’ human capital. 

One fundamental point is to simplify and accelerate legal and  administrative  procedures  for 
the  entry  of  non-EU  students  and  researchers.  Concerning  admission  and  residence  of  third 
country researchers, the “researchers’  visa” package - a  directive and two recommendations 
on  the  admission  of  third-country  nationals  to  carry  out  scientific  research  in  the  European 
Community20  was  adopted  in  2005  and  will  have  to  be  transposed  into  national  law  during 
2007.  

Building  an  attractive  image  for  European  universities  in  the  world  also  calls  for  a  serious 
effort  to  make  European  degrees  more  easily  recognised  outside  Europe.  However,  first, 
cross-recognition  has  to  be  fully  achieved  within  the  EU  itself;  the  recent  Directive  on  the 
recognition  of  professional  qualifications  has  already  made  it  simpler  for  professional 
purposes. More effort is still necessary as far as academic recognition is concerned. The 
coherent  framework  of  qualifications  and  of  compatible  quality  assurance  systems  currently 
under  development21  will  contribute  to  this.  The  existence  of  more  “European”  courses, 
offered jointly by consortia of universities and leading to joint or double degrees at Master or 
Doctorate  level,  would  also  help  to  make  Europe  more  attractive  to  students,  teachers  and 
researchers from the rest of the world.  

19 

20 

21 

See European Researchers Abroad (ERA-Link) pilot initiative,  
http://www.eurunion.org/legislat/ste/eralink.htm 
The  three  instruments  were  published  on  3  November  2005  in  the  Official  Journal  O.J.  L  289  of  3 
November  2005  The  two  recommendations  immediately  entered  into  force,  while  the  Member  States 
will have two years (e.g. by November 2007) to implement the directive as well as Council Directive 
2004/114/EC of 13 December 2004 (OJ L 375, 23.12.2004). 
For  example,  through  the  recent  European  Parliament  and  Council  Recommendation  on  Quality 
Assurance  in  Higher  Education  (OJ  L64  of  4.3.2006)  and  through  the  consultations  on  a  European 
Qualifications Framework. 

EN 

10 

   EN 

 
                                                 
….AND WHAT THE COMMISSION CAN AND SHOULD DO 

The  Commission  is  not  a  direct  actor  in  the  modernisation  of  universities,  but  it  can  play  a 
catalytic  role,  providing  political  impetus  and  targeted  funding  in  support  of  reform  and 
modernisation.  

The  Commission  can  support  a  new  political  impetus  via  coordinated  interaction  with 
Member  States  through  the  open  method  of  coordination,  identifying  and  spreading  best 
practice and supporting Member States in their search for more effective university regimes. 
In particular, the peer learning clusters set up within the Education and Training 2010 work 
programme offer an effective means of exploring how the challenges facing EU universities 
can be met. By offering a forum for the exchange of best practice and for the identification of 
innovative solutions the EU level can offer genuine added value.22 The Commission can also 
facilitate  dialogue  between  universities,  social  partners  and  employers  in  order  to  promote 
structured partnerships with the business community. 

It  can  also  provide  funding  with  a  significant  impact  on  the  quality  and  performance  of 
universities.  This  includes  incentives  to  help  universities  meet  the  goals  outlined  in  this 
Communication. The mechanisms include not only the new programmes for 2007-2013 (the 
7th EU Framework Programme for R&D, Lifelong Learning Programme, Competitiveness and 
Innovation Programme), but also the Structural Funds and EIB loans23.  

The Structural Funds can provide funding for the improvement of universities’ facilities and 
resources, the fostering of partnerships between the academic and business communities and 
the  support  of  research  and  innovation  relevant  to  regional  or  Member  State  economic 
development objectives. The Structural Funds’ system of decentralised management enables 
regional  specificities  to  be  taken  into  account.  Member  States,  regional  authorities  and 
universities  should  take  full  advantage  of  these  opportunities  to  improve  synergies  between 
education,  research  and  innovation,  particularly  in  the  EU's  less  economically  developed 
Member States and regions.  

The  proposed  European  Institute  of  Technology  will  have  a  governance  structure  involving 
excellence,  interdisciplinarity,  networking  between  centres  and  between  academia  and 
business,  which  echoes  the  messages  of  this  Communication.  Thus  in  addition  to  its  direct 
contribution  to  strengthening  Europe’s  scientific  education,  research  and  innovation,  it  will 
act  as  a  flagship  showing  the  value  of  modernised  approach  and  mode  of  governance  and 
partnership with business. 

CONCLUSIONS 

Universities  are  key  players  in  Europe’s  future  and  for  the  successful  transition  to  a 
knowledge-based economy and society. However, this crucial sector of the economy and of 
society  needs  in-depth  restructuring  and  modernisation  if  Europe  is  not  to  lose  out  in  the 
global competition in education, research and innovation.  

22 

23 

Increasing management potential within universities, mentioned in section 2 above, might be a suitable 
example. 
The  support  described  in  this  section  is  conditional  on  the  adoption  of  the  programme  and  other 
legislation involved. 

EN 

11 

   EN 

 
                                                 
Implementing this necessary restructuring and modernisation requires coordinated action from 
all parties involved: 

•  Member  States  when  implementing  the  Integrated  Guidelines  for  growth  and  jobs24  and 
their  National  Reform  Programmes  need  to  take  the  necessary  measures  with  respect  to 
universities,  including  aspects  such  as  management,  granting  real  autonomy  and 
accountability  to  universities,  innovation  capacities,  access  to  higher  education  and 
adapting higher education systems to new competence requirements..  

•  Universities, for their part, need to make strategic choices and conduct internal reforms to 
extend their funding base, enhance their areas of excellence and develop their competitive 
position; structured partnerships with the business community and other potential partners 
will be indispensable for these transformations. 

•  The  Commission  can  contribute  through  implementation  of  the  Community  Lisbon 
Programme25,  through  policy  dialogue  and  mutual  learning,  in  particular  within  the 
Education and training 2010 Work Programme, and through financial support to Member 
States and to universities in their modernisation activities. 

The  Commission  invites  the  Council  and  the  European  Parliament  to  give  a  clear  message 
about  the  EU’s  determination  to  achieve  the  necessary  restructuring  and  modernisation  of 
universities, and to invite all concerned to take immediate steps to take this agenda forward. 

24  In  particular  guidelines  Nr  7  (R&D),  Nr  8  (innovation),  Nr  23  (investment  in  human  capital)  and  Nr  24 

(adaptation to new competence requirements). 

25 COM(2005) 330 final of 20.07.2005. 

EN 

12 

   EN 

 
                                                 
Annex 1 

Statistical tables 

Table 1:  

Funding  gap  in  research  investment  (for  research  performed  by  all  actors,  including 
universities) in 2003 

R&D intensity in % as of GDP 

EU 25 

USA 

Japan 

1.92 

2.59 

3.15 

Source: DG RTD and EAC estimates, based on EUROSTAT data 

Table 2:  

Gross  enrolment  rates  (all  students  irrespective  of  age  as  a  %  of  student-age  population)  in 
tertiary education in 2003 

All  students  as  %  of  population  in  age 
group 20-24 

Source: EUROSTAT   

EU 25 

57% 

USA 

81% 

Japan 

50% 

EN 

13 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Table 3:  

Enrolment rates in higher education for adults in 2003 

% of population 30-39 in higher education 

EU 25 

USA 

Japan 

30-34 old: 
4.1% 

30-34 old: 
7.0% 

35-39 old: 
1.8% 

35-39 old: 
4.9% 

: 

: 

Source: EUROSTAT   

Table 4:  

Production and employment of researchers in 2003   

EU 25 

USA 

Japan 

 All disciplines 

88 100* 

46 000 

14 500 

New PhDs  

Maths,  Science  and 
Technology 

37 000 

16 200 

5 500 

Total number 

1 167 000 

1 335 00026 

675 000 

Employment 
researchers (FTE) 

of 

Researchers 
1000  persons 
Labour Force 

per 
in 

5,5 

9,127 

10,1 

Source: EUROSTAT and OECD 

Note: Data for Greece are missing 

Table 5:  

World shares in total triadic patents families (patents filed simultaneously in EU,  

USA and Japan) in 2000, in % 

Shares in total triadic patent families 

31,5 

Source: DG RTD, Key Figures 2005 

EU 25 

USA 

34,3 

Japan 

26,9 

26 OECD estimate for 2002 
27 2002 figure  

EN 

14 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
Table 6: 

Graduate unemployment rates in 2003 

Unemployment rate of population aged 20-24 
with tertiary education attainment 

Unemployment rate of population aged 25-29 
with tertiary education attainment  

Source: EUROSTAT and OECD 

Table 7: 

EU 25 

12,3 

8,5 

USA 

1,6  

2,6 

Japan 

: 

: 

Foreign (according to citizenship) students as a percentage of students in higher education in 
2003 

Australia  Switzerland

New 
Zealand 

EU 25 Norway USA Japan  Russia  Korea

Foreign  students 
as a percentage of 
in 
students 
all 
higher education 

18.7 

17.7 

13.5 

6.2 

5.2 

3.5

2.2 

0.8 

0.2 

Source: EUROSTAT and OECD 

EN 

15 

   EN 

 
 
 
Acknowledgement 

Annex 2 

In  the  preparation  of  this  document,  the  Commission  has  consulted  ad  personam  the 
following persons:  

Vladimir Báleš (Slovak Technical University, Bratislava) 

Olivier Blanchard (Massachusetts Institute of Technology, USA);  

Ivor Crewe (Essex University, UK);  

Federico Mayor Zaragoza (Fundación Cultura de Paz, Madrid); 

Linda Nielsen (University of Copenhagen); 

Mario Monti (Bocconi University, Milan); 

Jan Sokol (Charles University, Prague); 

Georg Winckler (University of Vienna).  

They commented on a personal basis, and the sole responsibility for this document rests with 
the European Commission. 

The  Commission  would  also  like  to  thank  the  members  of  the  Forum  on  University-based 
Research  for  their  contribution  to  the  discussion  on  the  topics  mentioned  in  this 
Communication. 
http://europa.eu.int/comm/research/conferences/2004/univ/pdf/enhancing_europeresearchbase_en.pd
f 

EN 

16 

   EN