The future of tertiary education in Europe : in-depth analysis.
Date: 2020-10-05
Institutions: Directorate-General for Parliamentary Research Services
Subjects: China, EU Member State, United States, digital technology, education budget, education policy, higher education, impact of information technology, new educational methods

The future of 
tertiary 
education in 
Europe 

IN-DEPTH ANALYSIS 

EPRS | European Parliamentary Research Service 

Authors: Denise Chircop, Cemal Karakas, Monika Kiss 
and Marcin Szczepanski, with Lea Schomaker  
Members' Research Service 
PE 652.095 – September 2020 

EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
This  analysis  focuses  on  six  challenges  facing  tertiary  education  in  the  EU:  the  need  to  maintain 
relevance to current and future aspirations, the impact of digital and disruptive technologies, the 
way it collaborates with business, global and intra-EU collaboration, quality assurance, financing and 
barriers to inclusion. It also looks at trends in two of the largest higher education systems outside 
the  European  Higher  Education  Area,  those  in  the  United  States  and  China.  This  provides  the 
backdrop  to  discuss  how  the  Multiannual  Financial  Framework,  which  is  currently  under 
negotiation, will put tools at the European Union's disposal to exert some influence on the future 
trajectory of tertiary education, as well as the European Parliament's role in these negotiations. 

AUTHORS 

Denise Chircop with Lea Schomaker, Cemal Karakas, Monika Kiss and Marcin Szczepanski, Members' Research 
Service 

The graphics were produced by Eulalia Claros and Samy Chahri, EPRS. 

This  paper  has  been  drawn  up  by  the  Members'  Research  Service,  within  the  Directorate-General  for 
Parliamentary Research Services (EPRS) of the Secretariat of the European Parliament. 

To contact the authors, please email: eprs@ep.europa.eu 

LINGUISTIC VERSIONS 

Original: EN 

Translations: DE, FR 

Manuscript completed in September 2020.  

DISCLAIMER AND COPYRIGHT 

This  document  is  prepared  for,  and  addressed  to,  the  Members  and  staff  of  the  European  Parliament  as 
background  material  to  assist  them  in  their  parliamentary  work.  The  content  of  the  document  is  the  sole 
responsibility of its author(s) and any opinions expressed herein should not be taken to represent an official 
position of the Parliament. 

Reproduction  and  translation  for  non-commercial  purposes  are  authorised,  provided  the  source  is 
acknowledged and the European Parliament is given prior notice and sent a copy. 

Brussels © European Union, 2020. 

Photo credits: © Monkey Business / Adobe Stock. 

PE 652.095 
ISBN: 978-92-846-7167-0 
DOI:10.2861/805265 
QA-02-20-770-EN-N 

eprs@ep.europa.eu  
http://www.eprs.ep.parl.union.eu (intranet) 
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/thinktank (internet) 
http://epthinktank.eu (blog) 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
The future of tertiary education in Europe 

Executive summary 

Universities have a long history in Europe, and as institutions they have evolved with the societies 
in  which  they  are  embedded.  Today,  the  scope  of  tertiary  education  covers  a  whole  range  of 
specialisations, from the strictly academic to the vocational. Other institutions such as colleges and 
universities of applied science complement the educational benefits provided by universities. 

With the rapid pace of change in contemporary societies, the question arises as to whether tertiary 
education  institutions  have  maintained  their  relevance  to  help  societies  respond  to  their  needs. 
Higher education institutions provide both teaching and research functions with a clear impact on 
economies and the future of generations of young people. However, different stakeholders attempt 
to influence what these institutions prioritise as useful knowledge in both areas of activity, as well 
as who develops this knowledge, to whom it is transmitted and what resources can be used in this 
exercise. 

Disruptive  technologies  may  radically  change  how  we  will  define  tertiary  education,  as  artificial 
intelligence and online platforms play an increasing role in research and teaching. The boundaries 
of  fixed  rooms  and  fixed  timetables  are  blurring,  which  could  significantly  change  curricula, 
pedagogies and subject matter, as well as research, teaching and learning roles.  

The  desire  to  be  ahead  of  the  competition  in  knowledge-based  economies  has  encouraged  an 
environment in which academic excellence is determined by rankings, with academic funding often 
being granted based on specific performance criteria. At the same time, the push for wider outreach 
and greater inclusivity within the enclaves of prestigious, international collaboration and the notion 
of  education  as  a  public  good  can  put  a  different  set  of  pressures  on  the  financing  of  tertiary 
institutions.  

Tertiary education in Europe is highly varied, reflecting the specificities of each state responsible for 
its  own  tertiary  education  provision.  Through  the  Bologna  process,  there  has  been  progress  in 
increasing  transparency  and  mutual  recognition,  allowing  institutions  from  across  the  Higher 
Education Area to work together. The European Union has assumed a supporting role through a 
combination  of  funding  and  coordination,  such  as  by  providing  a  permanent  secretariat  to  the 
Bologna  process,  as  well  as  through monitoring  and  analysis  in order to  help policy-makers  take 
evidence-based decisions.  

The  European  Commission  has  sought  to  encourage  modernisation  through  tools  such  as  the 
European Semester, yet its input has also been the subject of criticism for lacking coherence or for 
promoting  imported  models  rather  than  homegrown  ones.  Demographic,  ecological,  health, 
technological, economic and social issues all have a bearing on tertiary education in Europe, and 
policy decisions will determine its future course. 

I 

 
 
 
 
 
EPRS | European Parliamentary Research Service 

Table of contents 

1. The EU's tertiary education systems  ______________________________________________  1 

1.1. Introduction and research questions ___________________________________________  1 

1.2. The structure of tertiary education in the EU _____________________________________  3 

1.2.1. Organisation of studies  ___________________________________________________  3 

1.2.2. Academic staff  __________________________________________________________  5 

2. The EU's response to six major challenges facing tertiary education_____________________  5 

2.1. Maintaining relevance to current and future aspirations  ___________________________  5 

2.2. Impact of digital and disruptive technologies ____________________________________  8 

2.2.1. Impact on academic research  ______________________________________________  8 

2.2.2. Impact on teaching in tertiary education  _____________________________________  9 

2.2.3. The EU in the digitalisation of academic research and tertiary education ___________ 12 

2.3. Collaboration with business _________________________________________________ 14 

2.3.1. Knowledge application  __________________________________________________ 14 

2.3.2. Combining studies and work experience  ____________________________________ 16 

2.4. Improving global and intra-EU collaboration ____________________________________ 17 

2.4.1. Cooperation within the EU ________________________________________________ 18 

2.4.2. Cooperation beyond the EU _______________________________________________ 19 

2.5. Quality assurance__________________________________________________________ 20 

2.5.1. European tools _________________________________________________________ 20 

2.5.2. Effectiveness of quality assurance __________________________________________ 21 

2.6. Financing of tertiary education, fees and barriers to inclusion ______________________ 22 

2.6.1. Public contribution ______________________________________________________ 22 

2.6.2. Remuneration of academic staff  ___________________________________________ 23 

2.6.3. Private contribution _____________________________________________________ 24 

2.6.4. EU contribution _________________________________________________________ 25 

3. Comparison with the United States and China _____________________________________ 26 

3.1. Higher education in the United States _________________________________________ 26 

3.2. Higher education in China  __________________________________________________ 28 

4. European Parliament's positions on the future of higher education in the European Union _ 29 

4.1. Digital and disruptive technologies ___________________________________________ 30 

II 

 
 
 
 
The future of tertiary education in Europe 

4.2. Societal challenges  ________________________________________________________ 30 

4.3. Developing the right skills ___________________________________________________ 31 

5. Outlook ____________________________________________________________________ 32 

5.1. The Multiannual Financial Framework 2021-2027 ________________________________ 33 

5.1.1. Erasmus+ ______________________________________________________________ 33 

5.1.2. European Regional and Development Fund and the Cohesion Fund ______________ 34 

5.1.3. The European Social Fund Plus  ____________________________________________ 34 

5.1.4. Horizon Europe _________________________________________________________ 35 

5.1.5. Digital Europe __________________________________________________________ 35 

Table of figures 
Figure 1 – Digital education action plan _____________________________________________  2 

Figure 2 – Distribution of enrolments in tertiary education, 2017 _________________________  3 

Figure 3 – Students in Business, Administration, Law or Engineering, 2018* ________________  4 

Figure 4 – Positions on the skills index and skills mismatch rankings (EU-27) ________________  6 

Figure 5 – EU-28 employed ICT specialists (millions)  ___________________________________  7 

Figure 6 – The new digital learning ecology _________________________________________ 10 

Figure 7 – European Digital Competence Framework for Citizens (DigComp) ______________ 12 

Figure 8 – Expectations in industry and academia ____________________________________ 14 

Figure 9 – Top 3 nationalities of visiting students in tertiary education, 2017*  _____________ 19 

Figure 10 – Expenditure on tertiary education, 2016 __________________________________ 23 

Figure 11 – Tertiary education enrolement ratio in the United States and China ____________ 29 

Table of tables 
Table 1 – Degrees conferred in the United States by postsecondary institutions in 2016-2017  27 

Table 2 – Gross enrolment ratio (%) in tertiary education in China _______________________ 29 

III 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
The future of tertiary education in Europe 

1. The EU's tertiary education systems 

1.1. Introduction and research questions 

On 14 November 2017, the European Commission set out its vision for a European Education Area 
by  2025,  selecting  a  network  of  European  Universities  as  one  of  its  flagship  initiatives.1  The  new 
impetus  for  implementation  came  with  the  college  of  Commissioners  that  took  office  in 
December 2019 and the new Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF) for the period 2021-2027.2 The 
vision is for:  

' ... a Europe in which learning, studying and doing research would not be hampered by borders. 
A continent, where spending time in another Member State – to study, to learn, or to work – 
has become the standard and where, in addition to one's mother tongue, speaking two other 
languages  has  become  the  norm.  A  continent  in  which  people  have  a  strong  sense  of  their 
identity as Europeans, of Europe's cultural heritage and its diversity.' 3  

The political guidelines set by the president of the European Commission, Ursula von der Leyen, also 
mention an update to the digital education action plan.4 Both initiatives feature in the European 
Commission work programme 2020;5 the first under 'Promoting our European way of life' and the 
second  under  'Making  Europe  fit  for  the  digital  age'.  The  global  coronavirus  pandemic  has  also 
caused heavy disruptions in the tertiary education sector and forced the European Commission to 
reconsider  its  plans  by  reviewing  its  MFF  proposal.6  The  sudden  transfer  to  remote  and  online 
education due to confinement measures will probably also influence the European Commission's 
proposal for an update of the digital education action plan. 

A long process backs the European Universities initiative and the digital education action plan. The 
European Commission and the Member States are active members of the European Higher Education 
Area, which for the last twenty years has developed collaboration based on structural reforms and 
shared  tools,  known  as  the  Bologna  process,  to  make  higher  education  systems  more  compatible 
across Europe.7 For the past ten years, the European Union also had a strategy to widen participation 
in  higher  education  to  at  least  40 %  of  its  population.8  Tertiary  education  attainment  is  also  an 
indicator on Eurostat's social scoreboard linked to the European pillar of social rights and the social 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 
6 

7 

8 

For a presentation by the European Commission, see its pages Towards a European Education Area by 2025; European 
Education Area and European Universities Initiative.  
For a presentation by the European Commission, see its page The Commissioners College 2019-2024. For a discussion 
of the MFF see M. Sapala and G. Sabbati, The 2021-2027 Multiannual financial framework in figures, EPRS, European 
Parliament, January 2020 and R. Drachenberg, Outcome of the special European Council meeting of 17-21 July 2020, 
EPRS, European Parliament, August, 2020.  
The Commission set out its vision in Building a stronger Europe: the role of youth, education and culture policies, 
COM(2018) 268, 22 May 2018. 
For a complete presentation of the priorties identified by the President of the European Commission, see U. von der 
Leyen,  Political  guidelines  for  the  next  European  Commission  2019-2024.  For  a  presentation  by  the  European 
Commission, see its page Digital education action plan. 
See the relevant document of the 2020 Commission work programme. 
For a discussion on the impact of the coronavirus pandemic on education in the EU, see D. Chircop, Education in 
isolation in the pandemic, following the path of Isaac Newton, EPRS, European Parliament, June 2020. For an update 
of  the  European  Commission's  MFF  proposal  due  to  the  effects  of  the  Coronavirus  pandemic,  see  European 
Commission, The EU budget powering the recovery plan for Europe, COM(2020) 442, 27 May 2020. 
For a more detailed presentation of the European higher education area and the Bologna process see the website and 
the publication D. Chircop Implementing the Bologna Process: the follow-up, EPRS, European Parliament, July 2019. 
See  D.  Chircop  Follow-up  of  the  strategic  framework  for  European  cooperation  in  education  and  training,  EPRS 
European Parliament, June 2016. 

1 

 
 
 
 
EPRS | European Parliamentary Research Service 

dimension of the United Nations' Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).9 In 2016, the Commission 
published a new skills agenda for Europe with the aim of tackling the digital skills deficit in Europe, 
followed by a communication on the digital education action plan (see Figure 1), published in 2018.10 

The provision of tertiary education is the responsibility of Member States, whilst the European Union 

Figure 1 – Digital education action plan 

Data source: European Commission, Digital education action plan. 

coordinates and supports the cooperation between them. In many ways, tertiary education systems 
in the EU are very diverse, but longstanding cooperation in the European Higher Education Area is 
making them increasingly compatible. Despite the variety, they also share a number of dimensions 
where policy decisions will have an important impact on the sector's future. This analysis identifies 
six  areas:  (1)  meeting  environmental,  societal  and  ICT  challenges;  (2)  the  impact  of  digital  and 
disruptive  technologies;  (3)  collaboration  with  business;  (4)  improving  global  collaboration  and 
intra-EU mobility; (5) quality assurance; and (6) the financing of tertiary education, including fees 
and barriers to inclusion. This in-depth analysis raises the following research questions: What are the 
major challenges facing tertiary education in Europe? What are the European Union's margins of 
manoeuvre and what tools does it have at its disposal? How does the EU address these challenges? 

This analysis starts with a brief description of tertiary education systems in the EU, followed by the 
identification  and  analysis  of  six  major  challenges  to  tertiary  education.  Chapter  3  analyses  the 
tertiary  education  systems  of  the  United  States  (US)  and  China.  Both  countries  are  outside  the 
European Higher Education Area and have large higher education systems with which European 
higher  education  institutions  simultaneously  collaborate  and  compete.  Finally,  we  look  at  the 
European Parliament's stance on the future of higher education in the EU. 

See Social Sustainability: Concepts and Benchmarks on the links between Eurostat indicators and UN SDG Goal 4: 
Ensure inclusive and equitable quality education and promote lifelong learning opportunities for all.  
See the relevant European Commission page on New skills agenda for Europe and The digital education action plan 
SWD(2018) 12, 17 January 2018. 

9 

10 

2 

 
 
 
 
 
The future of tertiary education in Europe 

1.2. The structure of tertiary education in the EU 

Tertiary  education  in  the  EU  is  characterised  by  its  variety.  For  instance,  the  number  of  higher 
education  institutions  ranges  from  over  200  in  big  countries  such  as  France,  Italy,  Germany  and 
Poland to less than ten in much smaller countries such as Luxembourg and Malta.11 In 2017, at one 
end of the spectrum  the population of tertiary education students at ISCED levels12 5 to 8 totalled 
3.1 million  in  Germany,  whereas  at  the  other  end  it  totalled  just  7 000  in  Luxembourg.13  However, 
about 80 % of students from Luxembourg enrol abroad, particularly in neighbouring countries such 
as Germany, Belgium and France. Overall, the increase in enrolment rates is slowing down in Member 
States such as Denmark, Germany and Malta and actually decreasing in Poland, Hungary and Estonia. 
This could be due to changes in cohort size, in the labour market and enrolment policies.14  

1.2.1. Organisation of studies 
All  Member  States  now  have  university  programmes  with  three  consecutive  levels:  Bachelor's, 
Master's  and  Doctoral  degrees.15  However,  these  are  not  the  only  courses  European  universities 
offer. Many Member States also have shorter programmes (Short-cycle higher education or SCHE) 
which usually attract students who could be discouraged by a three-year Bachelor's course. Some 
Member  States  offer  long  programmes  that  are  not  part  of  the  three level  degree  system. These 

Figure 2 – Distribution of enrolments in tertiary education, 2017 

Data source: Eurostat, [educ_uoe_enrt01]. 

degrees lead directly to a qualification equivalent to a Master's degree. There are also programmes at 
levels that do not necessarily link to national qualification frameworks. Not all degree levels are equally 
widespread. As Figure 2 shows, Bachelor's degrees are by far the most popular. However, short cycle 
higher education is more common in Member States such as Latvia, Malta, Slovenia and Spain, whilst 

11 

12 

European  Commission/EACEA/Eurydice,  2018.  The  European  Higher  Education  Area  in  2018:  Bologna  Process 
Implementation Report. Publications Office of the European Union, p. 21. 
The International Standard Classification of Education (ISCED) is a statistical framework for organising information on 
education maintained by the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO). 
Eurostat [educ_uoe_enrt02]. 

13 
14  Bologna Process implementation report 2018, p. 26. 
15  Bologna Process implementation report 2018, pp. 93-126. 

3 

 
 
 
 
 
EPRS | European Parliamentary Research Service 

studies at Master's level attract more students in Croatia, Cyprus, Czechia, Germany, Italy, Luxembourg, 
Portugal, Slovakia and Sweden. Both course levels are popular in Austria and France. 

and 

From  1990  onwards,  various  forms  of  higher 
vocational education and training (VET) at post-
secondary  and  tertiary  level  have  grown  in 
importance, especially in Member States such as 
the 
Austria,  Denmark,  Germany 
Netherlands.16  According  to  the  European 
Centre  for  the  Development  of  Vocational 
Training (Cedefop), the changes in VET at upper 
secondary level reflect the expansion in tertiary 
education,  including  the  growing  number  of 
short  programmes  with  a  practical  orientation 
and the emergence of private higher education 
institutions.  As  a  trend,  programmes  such  as 
nursing  and  social  care  moved  from  upper 
secondary 
level.  An  array  of 
educational  institutions  at  post-secondary  and 
tertiary levels increasingly  mimic the academic 
model when it comes to programme titles and 
organisational  structures.  When  it  comes  to 
substance,  the  content  targets  the  specific 
regions  or  sectors.  Some  VET 
needs  of 
programmes  develop 
cooperation  with 
employers  and  provide  skills  through  work-
based  learning  that  supplements  an  academic 
education. 

tertiary 

to 

Figure 3 – Students in Business, Administration, 
Law or Engineering, 2018* 

* HR, IE, MT, SK, UK: 2017 

Data source: Eurostat, [educ_uoe_enrt03]. 

Engineering,  Business,  Administration  and  Law 
are consistently amongst the most popular courses in all Member States, accounting for 45 % of all male 
students and 29 % of all female students in the EU. Engineering alone attracts 25 % of all male students 
but only 7 % of female students. On the other hand, Business, Administration and Law attract 24 % of 
female students. Figure 3 shows that female students' choices are spread more evenly than those of male 
students, across areas such as Health and Welfare (18 %), Arts and Humanities (13 %), Education (11 %) 
and Social Sciences, encompassing Journalism and Information (11 %).  

Whatever  the  course  of  studies,  credits  defined  by  the  European  Credit  Transfer  System  (ECTS) 
quantify studies at tertiary level to facilitate recognition by other institutions. ECTS units or credits 
specify the required hours of study and learning outcomes.17 Most Bachelor's degree courses have 
a  workload  of  180  credits  spread  over  three  years  but  exceptions  exist.  In  Cyprus  and  Spain,  all 
Bachelor's degrees require 240 ECTS, whilst in Bulgaria and Latvia most courses require 240 ECTS. In 
the  Netherlands,  there  are  fewer  courses  requiring 240  ECTS,  however  they  tend  to  be  the most 
popular courses. Within some Member States, courses at the same level but in different fields have 
different workloads. 

16  Cedefop, 2020. Vocational education and training in Europe, 1995-2035. Scenarios for European vocational education 

and training in the 21st century. Cedefop reference series 114, Publications Office of the European Union. 
See the relevant European Commission page on the European credit transfer and accumulation system for more details. 

17 

4 

 
 
 
 
 
The future of tertiary education in Europe 

1.2.2. Academic staff 
In  most  Member  States,  the  number  of  academic  staff  increased  between  2000  and  2015,  most 
notably in Cyprus (171.4 %), Malta (176.5 %) and Slovenia (185.7 %). However, in the same period, 
staff numbers decreased in Bulgaria, Czechia, Estonia, Finland and Romania. Academic staff perform 
a number of functions, primarily research and teaching. These evolutions roughly follow changes in 
student  numbers.  Only  in  Belgium  are  there  fewer  than  five  main  categories  of  academic  staff  in 
higher education institutions. In six other Member States there are between six to nine categories and 
in the other twenty Member States there are ten categories or more.18 In most Member States, student-
to-staff ratios range from slightly below 10 % to above 20 %. However, these relatively homogeneous 
ratios  mask  the  complex  landscapes  of  teaching  at  tertiary  level.  In  many  Member  States,  staff  in 
professional education dedicate more time to teaching than their colleagues in academia. In academic 
higher education, junior and middle-ranking staff carry out most of the teaching.  

Doctoral candidates pursuing an academic career do not necessarily follow training to develop their 
teaching skills before they start teaching, nor do they do so later in their career. This aspect drew the 
attention of European ministers of higher education who declared that quality teaching deserves 
recognition in the progression of academic careers.19 Even within the academic milieu, the point is 
being  made  that  doctoral  candidates  are  not  just  early  stage  researchers  but  also  early  stage 
academics  and  as  such  need  training  and  peer  support  to  develop  their  teaching  capabilities. 
Instead,  some  candidates  reportedly  found  teaching  intrinsically  rewarding,  but  they  often 
perceived it as a lonely activity that was not even considered in their evaluation. 

From one academic's perspective,20 this seems to be a missed opportunity, as the roles of teaching 
and  research  can  mutually  enrich  each  other  when  combined.  As  doctoral  candidates  are  at  the 
forefront of research, they are in a good position to make teaching more research oriented. At the 
same time, teaching helps the candidate master a topic more quickly and broadly. The interaction 
with undergraduate students, who are interested in the topic, may also bring in willing participants. 
Teaching and supervision are also useful in assisting the development of presentation, teamwork 
and leadership skills. 

2. The  EU's  response  to  six  major  challenges  facing  tertiary 
education 

2.1. Maintaining relevance to current and future aspirations 

The European Commission points out that Europe has the most equal and inclusive societies in the 
world,  with  high  life  expectancy  and  strong  social  protection  systems.  Yet  the  situation  differs 
hugely between Member States and their regions. In 2018, 10.4 % of young people were neither in 
employment nor in education or training. Rates varied from 4.2 % in the Netherlands to 19.2 % in 
Italy.21 At the same time, European employers continue to have difficulty in finding people with the 
right skills. Europe's resilience, innovation and competitiveness require improvements due to rapid 

18 

19 
20 

21 

European  Commission/EACEA/Eurydice,  Modernisation  of  higher  education  in  Europe:  academic  staff,  Eurydice 
Report 2017. 
See European Higher Education Area, Paris Communiqué, 25 May 2018, p.3. 
S.  te  Pas,  Why  doctoral  candidates  should  develop  their  teaching  expertise,  6  March  2020,  European  University 
Association, Council for Doctoral Education. 
Eurostat [lfsi_neet_a]. 

5 

 
 
 
 
EPRS | European Parliamentary Research Service 

and  profound  changes  induced  by  technological  revolutions  and  globalisation.22  Figure  4  shows 
Member States' skills index rankings in 2020 on the y-axis. Czechia ranks number 1 whilst Italy ranks 
31, as the ranking includes four other countries. The index combines three pillars: skill development, 
skills activation and skills matching. Skills mismatch on the x-axis of the graphic is a component of 
the skills matching pillar.  

Figure 4 – Positions on the skills index and skills mismatch rankings (EU-27) 

Data source: European skills index 2020 technical report, p.19. 

The  European  Commission  also  indicates  that  there  is  a  need  for  new  skills  that  will  help  the 
economy  become  sustainable  and  green.  Forecasts  show  there  will  be  new  jobs  to  help  protect 
ecosystems and biodiversity; reduce the consumption of energy, materials, and water through high 
efficiency strategies; de-carbonise the economy; and avoid waste and pollution. These jobs would 
combine crosscutting competences with 'specific' skill sets. The main types of ‘green skills’ are in the 
domains  of  engineering,  technology,  science,  operations  management  (e.g.  cooperation  with 
regulators and customers) and monitoring (observance of technical criteria and compliance with 
environmental laws and standards).23 

22 

The Commission adopted an education action plan in order to address challenges related to digital compentences 
and technology. See also T.A. Madiega, Digital sovereignty for Europe, EPRS, European Parliament, July 2020. 

23  D. Consoli, G. Marin, D. Popp, F. Vona, Green skills, VOX CEPR Policy Portal, 22 May 2015. 

6 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
The future of tertiary education in Europe 

There  is  also  a  gap  between  on  the  one  hand  the  demand  for  a  digital  transformation  of  the 
economy, and on the other hand the level of digital knowledge, skills and competences within the 
workforce.24  According  to  the  Digital  Skills  and  Jobs  Coalition,25  in  the  near  future,  90 %  of  jobs 
(especially  in  engineering,  medicine,  art  and  architecture)  will  require  some  level  of  digital  skills. 
Figures  from  the  2018  Digital  Economy  and  Society  Index  (DESI)26  show  that  about  43 %  of 
Europeans today still do not have a sufficient level of digital skills, whilst 17 % have none at all.  

Figure 5 – EU-28 employed ICT specialists (millions) 

Data source: Eurostat, [isoc_sks_itspa]. 

Figure 5 shows the number of people employed as information and communication technologies 
(ICT) specialists in the EU. Figures from the ICT sector show that despite continued high levels of 
unemployment, due to skills gaps there will be 756 000 unfilled jobs for ICT professionals in Europe 
by  2020.  In  the  current  economic  climate,  a  successful  policy  to  foster  skills  for  a  digital 
transformation  could  secure  a  technological  advantage  and  resilience  in  the  face  of  global 
competition.27  The  EU  does  not  excel  in  delivering  high  quality  skills,  and  some  advanced  Asian 
countries outperform it. This is currently a challenge for tertiary education in Europe, and one that 
will remain a challenge in the future. 

EU  leaders  have  also  called  on  educators,  including  those  in  higher  education  institutions,  to 
strengthen media literacy, a European sense of identity and democratic values. These calls come in 
the wake of a rise in populism, xenophobia, violent radicalisation and phenomena exacerbated by 
social media, such as the increased prevelance of fake news.28  

As  well  as  this,  higher  education  needs  to  address  demographic  challenges  such  as  an  ageing 
workforce and an increasing old-age dependency ratio, given that the proportion of working age 
people compared to people over 65 years old continues to decline.29 Tertiary education can provide 

24 

25 
26 
27 
28 

29 

E-Skills  in  Europe.  Trends  and  Forecasts  for  the  European  ICT  Professional  and  Digital  Leadership  Labour  Markets 
(2015–2020), Empirica Working Paper 2015. 
For further details, see the dedicated European Commission page The Digital Skills and Job Coalition. 
See: European Commission, Human Capital Digital Inclusion and Skills, The 2018 Digital Economy and Society Index). 
See: M. Kiss, Digital skills in the EU labour market, EPRS, European Parliament, January 2017. 
European Commission/EACEA/Eurydice, 2016, Promoting citizenship and the common values of freedom, tolerance 
and non-discrimination through education: Overview of education policy developments in Europe following the Paris 
Declaration of 17 March 2015, Publications Office of the European Union.  
See: M. Kiss, Demographic outlook for the European Union 2020, EPRS, European Parliament, March 2020. 

7 

 
 
 
 
 
EPRS | European Parliamentary Research Service 

young people with the necessary skills to enable them to avoid delays in entering the labour market. 
There are also societal challenges, such as the social inclusion of groups such as migrant populations 
and other disadvantaged groups and the need to promote greater equality, including gender, racial 
and ethnic equality.  

To promote and enhance the skills required to tackle some of the environmental, societal and skills 
related challenges, the EU promotes a number of research and innovation framework programmes, 
such as Horizon 2020.30 For instance, the EU is co-funding investment of €3.1 billion in areas such as 
climate action, the environment, resource efficiency and raw materials. The idea is to invest now in 
innovation to support a green economy in which waste and water are particular priorities. Waste is 
currently responsible for 2 % of the EU's greenhouse gas emissions, whilst boosting growth in the 
water industry by just 1 % could create up to 20 000 new jobs.  

According to 2018 figures, some 112 million people (including the former Member State the United 
Kingdom) were at risk of poverty in Europe.31 Significant numbers of young people – on whom our 
future depends – are not in education, work or training. To this end, Horizon 2020 is co-funding an 
investment  of  €1.3  billion  for  research  on  new  strategies  and  governance  structures  to  overcome 
prevailing economic instability and ensure that Europe is resilient to future downturns, demographic 
changes  and  migration  patterns.  Funding  also  supports  new  forms  of  innovation  such  as  open 
innovation, business model innovation and public sector and social innovation to meet social needs.  

2.2. Impact of digital and disruptive technologies 

Added to the economic, ecological and demographic mutations, the digital transformation, which 
changes all aspects of the world around us with increasing force, has far-reaching consequences for 
the future of universities. In fact, due to their pivotal role in society, higher education institutions are 
placed  at  the  very  centre  of  this  profound  transition,  which  brings  with  it  both  extraordinary 
opportunities and risks. 

2.2.1. Impact on academic research  

Two of the concepts often mentioned in the context of this ongoing digital revolution are artificial 
intelligence (AI) and big data.32 Although the use of AI-powered applications in research is still in a 
nascent stage, it is growing throughout the scientific community, advancing research in fields as 
distinct as medicine, climate models and even the virtual unwrapping of ancient papyrus scrolls. 
Whilst  AI  and  data  analytics  can  shorten  research  time,  lead  to  new  discoveries  and  bring  down 
research costs, universities will need to nurture and maintain human talent, which is necessary to 
oversee the more automated research of the future. A diverse research community ensures wider 
perspectives,  but  few  girls  consider  careers  in  the  fields  of  science,  technology,  engineering  and 
maths (STEM). In the digital sector there are also very few women, especially in the fields of artificial 
intelligence  and  cybersecurity.  Racial  minorities  too  are  under-represented  in  the  scientific 
community.33 This skews academic debate by reducing the number of perspectives from which it is 

For further information see the dedicate European Commission page on Horizon 2020. 
See Europe 2020 indicators - poverty and social exclusion, Eurostat statistics explained, data extracted in August 2019. 
For more information refer to the following briefings: V. Reillon, Understanding artificial intelligence EPRS, European 
Parliament, January 2018 and R. Davies, Big data and data analytics - the potential for innovation and growth, EPRS, 
European Parliament, September 2016.  
See B. Hofstra and D.A. McFarland, The scientific community needs constant self-assessment on race and gender, THE 
World  University  Rankings,  14.6.2020  and  Education  and  employment  of  women  in  science,  technology  and  the 
digital  economy,  including  AI  and  its  influence  on  gender  equality,  Policy  Department  for  Citizens'  Rights  and 
Constitutional Affairs, Directorate-General for Internal Policies, April 2020. 

30 
31 
32 

33 

8 

 
 
 
 
The future of tertiary education in Europe 

approached,  whereas  a  wider  academic  debate  would  be  useful  in  addressing  one  of  the 
fundamental weaknesses of algorithms and AI – their bias, which is also related to the profile of their 
creators.34 It is well known that AI models can include human and societal biases and deploy them 
at scale, leading to substandard results.  

There are also other challenges for academic research stemming from the inherent characteristics 
of big data/AI based research. For example, to what extent can academics rely on analysis based on 
neural networks, which may be impossible to verify, as the AI system generates an answer without 
providing  a  clear  picture  of  how  it  arrived  to  it?35  While  results  based  on  algorithms  open  new 
possibilities,  there  is  also  a  risk  of  losing  the  element  of  creativity,  which  –  whilst  essential  for 
science – has so far not been programmable into machines. It is unclear how to lower AI's reliance 
on probability and to equip it with an ability to carry out causal reasoning, without which it will not 
deliver the expected revolutionary breakthrough in future scientific research. New technologies can 
also change what we perceive as research. For instance, will small-scale qualitative research still be 
valued if big-data based research becomes the new norm?  

2.2.2. Impact on teaching in tertiary education 
The other side of the coin is the impact that AI and big data will have on teaching processes and the 
functioning  of  tertiary  education  institutions  in  Europe.36  Figure  6  shows  how  contemporary 
classrooms can blur the boundaries of time and space by combining physical and virtual spaces.37 
Trends,  such  as  financial  pressures  created  by  the  combination  of  unprecedented  numbers  of 
students pursuing higher education and austerity measures, are likely to incentivise universities to 
take up AI solutions to lower costs.38 The higher education sector is already in a period of historic 
disruption, as colleges and universities adapt to new operating models and find innovative ways to 
deliver educational services and engage students.  

Those governing tertiary education institutions may be encouraged by the fact that AI systems can 
analyse large amounts of data and unveil patterns that are otherwise difficult to discover.39 Those 
selling  the  solutions  suggest  that  by  taking  data-driven  decisions,  the  educational  offer  can  be 
adapted  to  address  the  needs  of  particular  demographics,  fields  or  even  employers  who  will  be 
increasingly  interested  in  having  universities  designing  tailored  programmes  for  their  needs. 
However, all this raises questions related to the right of individuals to their personal data.40 There is 
also a debate on the balance between the utilitarian function of tertiary education and its role in 

34  McKinsey Global Institute, Tackling bias in artificial intelligence (and in humans), June 2019. For a discussion of the 
role of policy making in balancing the risks and reaping the advantages of artificial intelligence and machine learning, 
see A. van Wynsberghe, Artificial intelligence: From ethics to policy, STOA, EPRS, European Parliament, June 2020. 
35  Artifical neural network is made of a large number of units (artificial neurons) which, after being fed an input, interact 
with each other at many layers creating an output. It can be trained and has an ability to learn. The problem of lack of 
transparency and difficulties with replication in scientific academic research exist even with regards to coding see: S. 
Bakers, Pandemic response shines spotlight on coding in science, THE World University Rankings, 16 June 2020. 
36   For a discussion of data-driven AI and knowledge-based AI and their impact on education see I. Tuomi, Reseach for 
CULT  Committee,  The  use  of  Artificial  Intelligence  (AI)  in  education,  Concomitant  expertise  for  INI  report,  Policy 
Department  for  Structural  and  Cohesion  Policies,  Directorate-General  for  Internal  Policies,  European  Parliament, 
May2020. 

37  M. Brown, G. Conole and M. Beblavỳ, Education outcomes enhanced by the use of digital technology: Reimagining 
the school learning ecology, EENEE analytic report No. 38 prepared for the European Commission, March 2019. 
See for example UNESCO policy paper, Six ways to ensure higher education leaves no one behind, 2017.  

38 
39  However, this is subject to what privacy and data ownership laws allow.  
40 

This involves issues related to the right to privacy, free consent, transparency and the right not to be manipulated or 
to  be  subjected  to  automated  decisions,  see  for  instance,  S,  Voronova  with  A,  Nichols,  Understanding  EU  data 
protection  policy,  EPRS,  European  Parliament,  May  2020  and  Privacy  and  personal  data  protection  [European 
Parliament impact 2014-2019], blogpost, EPRS, European Parliament, 30 August 2019.  

9 

 
 
 
 
EPRS | European Parliamentary Research Service 

basic  research,  the  cultivation of  cultures  and in  promoting  human  agency. This  debate  became 
tangible  as  humanities  disciplines  that  seemed  of  little  practical  value  offered  insights  into  how 
narratives shape crises such as the one caused by coronavirus.41 

From a financial perspective, a continuous outlay is necessary in order to ensure that an adequate 
infrastructure is at the disposal of students and teachers. Teaching staff may need ongoing, relevant 
and up-to-date training to apply new technologies effectively. Commercially available solutions have 
the advantage of being ready made and easy to use, but they constrain users, are relatively expensive 
and  raise  serious  ownership  issues.  Open  source  solutions,  on  the  other  hand,  allow  for  the 
customisation of tools to fit a specific purpose, are cheaper and respect authors' ownership, but they 
require users to develop skills in collaboratively designing the tools that they use. Faculties and students 
would have the possibility to develop, use and share open source tools based on their research, teaching 
and learning needs. This, however, presupposes continuously updating the right skills.42  

Figure 6 – The new digital learning ecology  

Source: M. Brown, G. Conole and M. Beblavỳ (2019) p.21. 

There  is  a  pervasive  global  trend  in  higher  education  towards  the  personalisation  of  learning.43 
Algorithms can tailor a customised learning path that builds on the individuals' strengths, pace and 
interests. As an alternative to the personalisation shift, higher education institutions can choose to 
undertake a shift towards more student-centred practices, which instead create the conditions for 
students to influence and take responsibility for their learning pathways and environments. These 
practices  are  still  rather  scattered  and  teacher-centred  practices  are  still  by  far  more  common. 
Introducing new technologies holds the promise of an efficient, flexible, personalised and attractive 
educational offer. At the same time, an analytical report by NESET – a network of experts working 
on the social dimension of education and training – suggests that to contribute effectively towards 
student-centred  learning, technology  needs  to  reinforce  and  in  turn  be  reinforced  by  nine other 

41 

42 
43 

For perspectives on the contribution of humanities in the coronavirus crisis see: M. Reisz, What can the humanities 
offer in the Covid era?, THE World University Rankings, 2 July 2020 and D. Matthews, German humanities scholars 
enlisted to end coronavirus lockdown, THE World University Rankings, 22 April 2020. For another example of how the 
diversity  of  disciplines in  universities  is  threatened  with  consequences  to  universities  see  D.  Matthews,  Academic 
'solidarity' needed to save gender studies from populism, The World University Rankings, 26 June 2020. 
J. A. Poritz and J. Rees, Education is not an App, London: Routledge Ltd , 2016. 
See  for  instance,  European  Political  Strategy  Centre,  10  trends  transforming  education  as  we  know  it,  European 
Commission, 2017 and OECD, Envisioning the future of education and jobs. Trends data and drawings, 2019.  

10 

 
 
 
 
 
The future of tertiary education in Europe 

core  elements,  which  include  adequate  pedagogies,  curricula,  assessment  modes,  learner  and 
teacher support and quality assurance criteria to name but a few.44 

As humans are increasingly likely to be working alongside or be pitted against robots in the future job 
market, educational systems are encouraged to shift their focus on the very skills and competences 
that  for  the  time  being  cannot  be  entirely  automated:  creativity,  problem  solving,  negotiation, 
adaptability, critical thinking, working together, empathy, emotional intelligence and cross-cultural 
communication.  Solutions  offered  by  technology  may  be  able  to  contribute  to  new  ways  of 
developing these skills, strengthening student engagement. However, as the aforementioned skills 
are relational in nature, the question is whether they are more effectively fostered in personalised or 
group contexts. Another question is whether a highly individualistic view of education risks isolating 
learners  to  some  degree,  and  if  so,  whether  this  leaves  humans  in  a  weaker  position  compared  to 
technologies where interconnectivity is their main strength. 

There  is  also  the  issue  of  the  extent  to  which  automated  and  online  teaching  can  replace  human 
teachers. Educators have used the teacherbot concept as a helpful tool.45 Others predict that by 2027 
robots could replace human teachers.46 Digitally supported learning spaces are set-up with the goal 
of  supporting  new  teaching  methodologies,  yet  there  is  a  risk  that  artificial  intelligence  and  other 
smart  solutions  serve  to  scale  up  bad  pedagogical  ideas.47  For  the  moment,  human  judgment  still 
seems  best  placed  to  mitigate  the  risks  connected  with  technology-based  solutions  to  higher 
education. Without a clear vision of the purpose of using such technology, it can become a distraction. 

Technology can serve to meet an increasing demand for lifelong learning, due to its flexibility and 
relative accessibility. For instance, digital tools open up classrooms to wider audiences making it 
easier  to  respond  to  a  rising  demand  for  tertiary  education.  Already  for  some  time  now,  tertiary 
education  institutions  in  Europe  have  explored  the  possibilities  of  online  learning  offered  by 
Massive  Open  Online  Courses  (MOOCs).  However,  maintaining  the  quality  of  interaction  and 
feedback is more challenging than with face-to-face scenarios. Unaddressed, this could threaten the 
quality of education and lead to an increase in dropout rates. While MOOCs have been relatively 
successful  and  have  a  growing  number  of  users,  there  is  still  a  digital  divide  that  replicates  the 
educational divide. Certain categories of potential learners are blocked either because they do not 
have access to the tools or because they lack the necessary skills.48  

An OECD study also suggested that distance solutions might not necessarily offer universities the 
cost  saving  solution  they  are  looking  for.  It  quoted  the  example  of  University  of  North  Carolina, 
where it was discovered that developing distance courses is on average more expensive than on-
campus  courses,  because they  necessitated  smaller group  sizes.49  MOOCs  on  the  other  hand  are 
more likely to offer micro-credentials than full degrees, and the latter represent a very small fraction 
of  degrees  offered.  Online  courses  do  not  seem  to  have  a  profound  effect  on  the  structure  and 

44 

For  a  discusssion  on  student-centred  learning  in  higher  education  and  how  technology  can  contribute  towards 
achieving it see M. Klemenčič, M. Pupinis and G. Kirdulytė, Mapping and analysis of student-centred learning and 
teaching  practices:  usable  knowledge  to  support  more  inclusive,  high-quality  higher  education,  NESET  Analytical 
Report, 2020.  

 45  Bayne, S., Teacherbot: interventions in automated teaching, Teaching in Higher Education, April 2015.  
46  World Economic Forum, Why robots could replace teachers as soon as 2027, December 2017.  
47 

See  more  in  the  JRC  Science  for  Policy  Report,  The  Impact  of  Artificial  Intelligence  on  Learning,  Teaching,  and 
Education, European Commission, 2018. 
See for instance The inclusive internet index 2020, The Economist intelligence unit ranks 100 countries on indicators 
such as the available infrastructure and levels of usage, the cost of access relative to income, the existence of relevant 
content  in  the  local  language  and  the  capacity  to  access  the  Internet,  including  skills,  cultural  acceptance,  and 
supporting policy. 

48 

49  OECD, Resourcing Higher Education: challenges, choices and consequences, June 2020, p.45. 

11 

 
 
 
 
EPRS | European Parliamentary Research Service 

function of universities. On this basis, some claim that Open Education Resources (OERs) will not 
replace  university  education  with  online  solutions,  even  so  this  is  a  growing  sector  in  which  the 
European Union is investing through funding and coordination. 

2.2.3. The EU in the digitalisation of academic research and tertiary education 

Figure  7  –  European  Digital  Competence  Framework  for 
Citizens (DigComp) 

of 

the 

Funding 
In  2018,  the  EU  launched  a  digital 
education action plan (see Figure 7). 
The  plan  sets  out  three  main 
priorities:  to  improve  the  use  of 
digital technology for teaching and 
learning;  to  develop  competences 
and  skills  relevant  for  the  digital 
improve 
transformation  and 
to 
education 
through  better  data 
analysis  and  foresight.  Under  the 
plan,  the  EU  will  create  a  platform 
for  digital  higher  education  to 
enhance  cooperation  with 
the 
support 
Erasmus+ 
programme. The platform will bring 
together  relevant  platforms  and 
sites 
in  Member  States.  The 
European  Commission  will  also 
intelligence  and 
launch  artificial 
learning 
in 
pilots 
education  to  better  use  available 
in  Europe,  build  predictive 
data 
models for future skills and improve 
policymaking. 
European 
Universities Initiative, another pillar of the European Education Area,50 will also aim to address the 
profound  technological  and  structural  changes  affecting  teaching  and  learning.  It  will  seek  to 
transform  European  universities,  with  a  focus  on  spreading  high-level  digital  competences  and 
creating  a  much  deeper  level  of  cooperation  between  universities.  The  white  paper  on  artificial 
intelligence  launched  by  the  Commission  on  19 February  2020  offers  further  support  through 
drawing from the digital Europe programme and Horizon Europe to establish networks of leading 
educational institutes, professors and scientists to offer masters programmes in AI.51 

Source: European Commission. 

analytics 

The 

Erasmus+ will support digital learning from early childhood to tertiary education. It will continue to 
focus on supporting the acquisition of digital skills through cross-border experiences. In the field of 

50  According to the European Parliament's Committee on Culture and Education, the proposed cuts of the European 
Council to the European Commission's draft proposal to the financial envelope of the Erasmus+ funding programme 
for  education,  training,  youth  and  sport could  seriously  undermine  this initiative.  See  the  press  release,  Proposed 
Erasmus+ MFF budget — hopelessly short of citizens' expectations, say MEPs Verheyen and Zver, 18 February 2020. 
As  part  of  the  recovery  stimulus,  the  European  Commission  proposed  new  figures  for  the  Multiannual  Financial 
Framework on 27 May 2020. It proposes that Erasmus is allocated almost EUR 28 billion in current prices and €24.6 
billion in constant 2018 prices. This still constitutes a cut on the original proposal. 

51  M. Ciucci and F. Gouardères, The White Paper on Artificial Intelligence, Policy Department for Economic, Scientific and 

Quality of Life Policies Directorate-General for Internal Policies, European Parliament, April, 2020. 

12 

 
 
 
 
 
The future of tertiary education in Europe 

digital  skills,  the  digital  Europe  programme,  with  a  proposed  budget  by  the  European  Council  of 
€6.8 billion for the period of 2021-2027, will complement Erasmus+ by supporting the development 
and acquisition of advanced digital skills in higher education, skills that are necessary for the utilisation 
of breakthrough technologies such as artificial intelligence or high-performance computing. This will 
be done in cooperation with interested industries. The programme aims to widen the digital talent 
pool with around 256 000 beneficiaries who will be able to utilise the latest technology in businesses 
throughout the EU. It will also focus on developing Master's programmes and short-term specialised 
training courses in frontline and advanced digital technologies, as well as on offering job placements 
in  companies  or  research  centres  where  such  technologies  are  developed  or  used.  The  European 
MOOC Consortium, co-funded by the Erasmus+ programme, supports the development of MOOCs 
and  OERs  in  the  EU.  The  Commission  also  established  the  OpenEdu  framework,  which  aims  to 
modernise  and  innovate  the  tertiary  education  systems  in  Europe  through  the  use  of  digital 
technologies.  

The European Social Fund Plus, which also covers tertiary education, will support EU Member States 
to enhance the quality, effectiveness and labour market relevance of national education and training 
systems. This will include the acquisition of key competences and digital  skills. Digital skills will be 
fundamental in creating upskilling and reskilling opportunities. The European Social Fund Plus (ESF+) 
will have closer cooperation with Erasmus+ in order to create  synergies. ESF+  will also finance the 
training of researchers, networking activities and partnerships between higher education institutions.  

Horizon Europe will finance grants for Master's, doctorate and post-doctorate research activities in the 
digital field, through the Marie Skłodowska-Curie actions and the European Institute of Innovation & 
Technology (EIT). The EIT also set up ICT labs to foster entrepreneurial ICT talent, which helps to orient 
higher  education  towards  innovation  and  entrepreneurship.  For  the  same  purpose,  it  also  set  up 
innovation  communities,  together  with  co-location  centres  and  mobility 
knowledge  and 
programmes, to bring people from different countries, disciplines and organisations together. 

In a broader context relevant to the future of Europe, a profound digital transformation of the Union 
is  one  of  the  key  priorities  of  the  May  2020  proposals  for  the  revised  Multiannual  Financial 
Framework and the recovery plan.52 The MFF will be discussed further in a dedicated section. 

Coordination 
Policy change is supported by coordination as well as funding. The European Higher Education Area 
Ministerial  Conference  in  Paris  in  May  2018  provided  policy  direction  when  it  highlighted  the 
creation of a 'digital Bologna' by 2020 as part of the Bologna process. The aim is order to improve 
the  performance  of  higher  education  at  all  levels.  The  position  paper  provided  several 
recommendations such as increasing the number of online study programmes, wider recognition 
of digital learning and development of digitally enhanced learning environments. 

Cedefop  –  the  European  Centre  for  the  Development  of  Vocational  Training  –  supports  the 
implementation of such policies as it systematically analyses the drivers of automation, robotics, artificial 
intelligence and other digital technologies in employment and their impact on the type of skills required 
for certain jobs. This is done with the aim of informing the debate on the future of vocational training, 

52 

The main new tools, under the Next Generation EU plan, include the Recovery and Resilience Facility with a budget 
of €560 billion to finance investments and reforms which support digital transition (including in education), and a 
Strategic  Investment  Facility,  which  aims  to  generate  investments  of  up  to  €150  billion  in  the  economic  sectors 
fundamental  to  that  process.  Regarding  the  Digital  Europe  Programme,  the  Commission  proposes  to  allocate 
€2.2 billion for Artificial Intelligence and €1.8 billion for cybersecurity. 

13 

 
 
 
 
EPRS | European Parliamentary Research Service 

including at higher education levels.53 Eurydice, a network gathering national education systems across 
Europe,  prepared  a  report  on  digital  education  in  Europe  in  2019,  in  which  it  examined  how  higher 
education  institutions  approach  the  development  of  teacher-specific  digital  competences.54  It 
recognised that investment in digital infrastructure remains critical for many universities and underlined 
that digital competences need to form an important part of teacher training, with more harmonisation 
and mutual recognition at EU level being advantageous. 

2.3. Collaboration with business 

in 

between 

institutions 

industry  and 

Figure  8  –  Expectations 
academia 

The  European  Commission  claimes  that 
communities  need  to  see  that  higher 
education 
in  Europe  are 
beneficial  to  them.55  This  is  yet  another 
aspect in the quest to maintain relevance 
and  it  is  driving  closer  collaboration  and 
partnerships 
research 
institutions  and  business,  as  well  as  a 
debate  on  how  research  outputs  can  be 
shared and used. There are many examples 
of  collaboration  between  universities, 
industrial partners and start-ups. Academia 
industry  can  develop  symbiotic 
and 
relationships.56 
education 
Tertiary 
graduates  are  absorbed  by  industry,  and 
research  work  in  universities  is  used  by 
industry  and  transformed  into  products 
and services. Industry would like graduates 
whose  skill-sets  are  aligned  to  industries' 
fund 
requirements. 
focused 
this 
includes 
laboratories, 
designating  industry  chairs,  or  providing 
guest faculty and placement opportunities. 
This 
the 
identification of new research topics. While 
the European students' union agreed that links with industry are important, it warned that industry 
must cooperate with higher education institutions, respecting the value of freedom in teaching and 
research.57  

Source: adapted from World Economic Forum: 3 ways to 
nurture collaboration between universities and industry 

research 
setting 

interaction  also 

in  universities, 

therefore 

Firms 

leads 

up 

to 

2.3.1. Knowledge application 

In an ideal scenario, both the expectations of industry and those of academia are satisfied to a similar 
extent and an equal partnership develops. Surveys show that the most productive collaborations 

53  CEDEFOP,  The  changing  nature  and  role  of  vocational  education  and  training  in  Europe.  Volume  6:  vocationally 
oriented education and training at higher education level. Expansion and diversification in European countries, 2019.  
Eurydice, Digital education at school in Europe, 2019.  
See, A renewed EU agenda for higher education COM(2017) 247. 

54 
55 
56  World Economic Forum, 3 ways to nurture collaboration between universities and industry, 23 November 2018. 
57  BM 76: Statement on countering commodification in higher education, European Students Union, 24 May 2019. 

14 

 
 
 
 
The future of tertiary education in Europe 

are strategic and long-term.58 They are built around a shared research vision and may continue for 
a decade or beyond, establishing deep professional ties, trust and shared benefits, which can bridge 
the important cultural difference between academia and industry. Ideally, they are led by individuals 
who understand both the academic and business world. 

The European Commission mentions the Quadruple Helix as an emerging model of innovation and 
cooperation amongst higher education institutions that addresses this concern. This model involves 
higher education institutions, government, business and civil society.59 It distinguishes itself with 
greater  citizen  and  community  involvement  in  promoting  social  innovation,  environmental 
improvements and community cohesion, as well as more citizen and community involvment in the 
development of new products, services and processes in enterprises.  

4.0 

CHAlleNGE: 

Sector skills alliance 

Industry 
Empowering 
Metalworkers for Smart Factories of the Future 
EU Grant €1 176 258 

The  overall  goal  of  the  project  was  to  tackle  current 
and  future  skills  gaps  in  the  metalwork  sector.  A 
comparative analysis of qualification standards in the 
eleven partner organisations from Lithuania, Germany, 
Latvia and Estonia provided information about existing 
curricula  and  formed  the  basis  to  develop  a  model 
qualifications  standard 
together  with  a  model 
vocational  education  programme  and  coaching 
techniques.  Countries  used  these  models  as  a 
reference  to  create  their  own  national  qualification 
standards, 
training 
programmes  that  impart  the  development  of  digital 
and entrepreneurial skills, and include periods of work-
based learning. These programmes were approved by 
national employers’ organisations.  

Very  often  university  cooperation  to  promote  regional  economic  development  and  smart 
specialisation  strategies  depends  on  the 
initiative  of  individual  institutional  leaders 
and  academic  staff,  rather  than  being  an 
institution-wide strategy. Higher education 
institutions lack strong incentives and local 
businesses  can  have  limited  capacity  to 
cooperate 
academic 
effectively  with 
partners. However, at European Union level 
there  are  a  number  of  projects  working  to 
address this deficit. The three text boxes in 
the  'Collaboration  with  business'  section 
contain  examples  of  projects  funded  by 
at 
reinforcing 
Erasmus+ 
educational 
between 
collaboration 
institutions, 
public 
businesses 
administration. The first textbox exemplifies 
a sector skills alliance, the second a strategic 
partnership  in  higher  education  and  the 
third 
The 
Commission  developed  a  self-assessment 
tool  in  cooperation  with  the  OECD  for 
higher education institutions interested in exploring their innovative potential.61 Similarly, the Joint 
Research Centre's Hess project focuses on the way higher education can contribute towards smart 
specialisation strategies. The European Association of Institutions in Higher Education (EURASHE) 
has  launched  an  Erasmus+  project  which  will  map  and  support  further  regional  engagement 
activities, especially by Universities of Applied Science.62 Another Erasmus+ project is developing a 
European framework for community engagement in higher education.63 

Source: Project ID: 575813-EPP-1-2016-1-LT-EPPKA2-SSA 

knowledge 

alliance.60 

vocational 

education 

aimed 

and 

and 

a 

58 

59 
60 

61 
62 
63 

Science-business  innovation  board:  Making  Industry-University  partnerships  work.  Lessons  from  successful 
collaborations, Science/Business Innovation Board, 2012. 
See for instance A renewed EU agenda for higher education, COM(2017) 247 final. 
Sector skills alliances are geared towards vocational education and knowledge alliances towards academic education, 
strategic  partnerships  include  public  entities  among  the  partners.  For  more  details,  see  D.  Chircop  and  S.E. 
Jędrzejewska, Erasmus +, EPRS, European Parliament, November 2016. 
For further details see on the self-assessment tool see the relevant HEInnovate web page.  
For further details see the dedicated page to the UASiMap project on the Eurashe website. 
For further details see the TEFCE project page. 

15 

 
 
 
 
EPRS | European Parliamentary Research Service 

2.3.2. Combining studies and work experience 

to  work 

collaborative 

Strategic partnerships in higher education 

Greening  the  skills  of  architecture  students  via 
STEAM Education (ArchiSTEAM) 
EU Grant €176 876 

Some  97 %  of  Europeans  think  that  it  is  useful  for  students  to  work  on  innovative  projects  with 
researchers  and  companies 
from 
different  countries.64  EU  graduates 
who  underwent  some  work-based 
experiences  during  their  studies  also 
in  a 
reported  better  prospects 
graduate  tracking  survey  conducted 
by  the  European  Commission.65  The 
EU runs a number of actions that align 
with these perceptions by developing 
cooperation  between  education  or 
training  establishments  and  firms. 
One  strand  of  action  draws  on 
intergovernmental  agreements.  The 
process began with the Copenhagen 
Declaration,  which 
the 
emergence  of  an  EU  policy  on 
vocational  education  and  training 
includes  cooperation 
(VET) 
training 
between  education  and 
providers  and 
latest 
round,  the  Riga  conclusions,  made 
work-based  learning  a  top  priority.67  Following  in  this  direction  is  the  blueprint  for  sectorial 
cooperation on skills under the new skills agenda, collaboration between the European Commission 
and  the  European  Business  Network  for  Corporate  Social  Responsibility  (CSR  Europe)  on  the 
European pact for youth, the European alliance for apprenticeships and European vocational skills 
week,  which  is  an  awareness  raising  effort.  68  Erasmus+  develops  joint  qualifications  in  VET  with 
strong work-based learning and mobility components.69 

The  ArchiSTEAM  project  designed  a  module  to  enable 
students 
and 
in  proactive, 
interdisciplinary  ways.  This  provided  architecture  students 
with the opportunity to apply knowledge and skillsets derived 
from  science,  technology,  engineering,  art  and  math 
creatively.  This  approach  prepared  students  to  adopt  a 
lifelong learning perspective that enables them to cope with 
future challenges and to sustain their professional skills in the 
face of rapid environmental and technological changes. In the 
first phase, participants assessed the STEAM skills that already 
existed  in  the  curricula  of  their  architecture  schools.  This 
enabled them to create a generic STEAM module that can be 
adapted regardless of the discipline. Workshops conducted in 
Ankara (Turkey), Bologna (Italy) and Aalborg (Denmark) with 
25-30 students from each country validated the module.  

Source: 2016-1-TR01-KA203-034962 

firms.66  The 

that 

led 

to 

Other EU actions have been introduced on the basis of Article 166 of the Treaty on the Functioning 
of  the  European  Union  (TFEU).  These  include  the  creation  of  the  European  Centre  for  the 
Development of Vocational Training (Cedefop) and its projects: the skills panorama and skills and 
jobs  monitoring.70  The  Council  recommendation  of  March  2018  on  a  European  framework  for 
quality and effective apprenticeships and the Erasmus+ vocational education and training mobility 

64 
65 

66 

67 
68 

69 

70 

See Flash Eurobarometer 466. 
EUROGRADUATE Pilot Survey: Design and implementation of a pilot European graduate survey, Directorate-General 
for Education, Youth, Sport and Culture, European Commission, June 2020. 
The  full  title  is  Declaration  of  the  European  ministers  of  vocational  education  and  training,  and  the  European 
Commission on enhanced European cooperation in vocational education and training. 
For further information see the relevant European Commission page on developing skills for the labour market. 
For further details see the European Commission page on Blueprint for sectoral cooperation on skills and A new skills 
agenda for Europe: working together to strengthen human capital, employability and competitiveness COM(2016) 
381 final. See also the websites of the European pact for youth, the European vocational skills week and the Council 
declaration  on  the  European  alliance  for  apprenticeships  for  projects  that  have  resulted  from  the  collaboration 
between the European Commission and the business community. 
See the relevant European Commission pages on strategic partnerships, sector skills alliances, knowledge alliances 
and joint qualifications in vocational education and training. 
See 2016/0257(COD) for the position adopted by the European Parliament in establishing a new regulation for the 
Centre. See also the relevant pages for the Skills panorama and the European skills index. 

16 

 
 
 
 
The future of tertiary education in Europe 

The 

allows 

learners 

Erasmus+ 

Knowledge alliance 

Dynamic – Towards responsive engineering curricula 
through Europeanisation of dual higher education 
EU Grant €697 989 

charter together set out standards for 
mobility  for  work-based  learning.71 
The  European  Credit  system  for 
vocational  education  and  training 
to 
(ECVET) 
learning 
accumulate  and  transfer 
units.72  This 
the 
is  possible  as 
in 
European  Quality  Assurance 
Vocational  Education  and  Training 
(EQAVET)  builds  transparency  and 
trust.73 
funding 
programme  allows  VET  students  to 
carry 
or 
traineeships  abroad.74  Staff  working 
in a VET institution can also go to an 
enterprise abroad for job shadowing 
or a work placement. Staff from firms 
can,  meanwhile,  provide  training  in 
VET  institutions  in  another  Member 
State. Alongside learning mobility, Erasmus+ develops sector skills alliances (see textbox), strategic 
partnerships (see textbox), knowledge alliances (see text box) and joint qualifications in VET with 
strong  work-based  learning  and  mobility  components.75  The  textboxes  provide  examples  of  a 
project  chosen  in  higher  education  under  Erasmus+.  These  projects  help  tertiary  education 
institutions develop networks, in the following section the analysis will look at other interactions 
arising from internationalisation and intra-EU collaboration. 

The  DYNAMIC  project  involves  16  partners  from  Bulgaria, 
Romania,  Croatia,  Germany  and  Austria.  Together  they  are 
developing,  implementing,  testing  and  validating  country-
adapted models of dual education. Regular practical phases in 
enterprises are integrated into the academic curricula of three 
in  mechatronics  and 
undergraduate  programmes,  one 
in  shipbuilding  and 
robotics 
construction  (Varna,  Bulgaria)  and  another  in  mechanical 
engineering and production (Pula, Croatia).The project offers 
more flexible routes to acquiring current industry-related skills 
in  these  sectors.  The 
innovation 
to  boost  and  sustain 
knowledge  and  experience  gained  in  the  project  will  be 
synthesised in a report.  

Source: Project ID 588378-EPP-1-2017-1-DE-EPPKA2-KA 

(Sibiu,  Romania),  another 

apprenticeships 

out 

2.4. Improving global and intra-EU collaboration 

Global  university  rankings  are  a  worldwide  trend  that  emerged  with  the  internationalisation  of 
higher education. Universities worldwide are now striving to become 'world-class' institutions and 
constantly aim to improve their ranking position. Rankings have an impact on the prestige of both 
the institution and the higher education system more generally, allowing them to attract funds and 
talent.  This  has  pushed  some  countries  such  as  Germany,  China  and  Russia  to  develop  specific 
initiatives to promote excellence within certain institutions. Such initiatives can have positive knock-
on effects that raise the bar for the whole system, but they can also create growing disparities that 
ultimately become dysfunctional for the higher education ecosystem.76 Many see the global ranking 
of  universities  as  the  ultimate  tool  for  assessing  individual  higher  education  institutions.  Others 

71 

72 
73 

74 
75 

76 

See the text of the Council recommendation of 15 March 2018 on a European framework for quality and effective 
apprenticeships. For further details on the mobility charter, see the European Commission pages. 
See the recommendation on the establishment of a European credit system for vocational education and training. 
See the recommendation on the establishment of a European quality assurance reference framework for vocational 
education and training.  
See the regulation establishing 'Erasmus+': the Union programme for education, training, youth and sport. 
See the relevant European Commission pages on strategic partnerships, sector skills alliances, knowledge alliances 
and joint qualifications in vocational education and training. 
S. Baker, Do university excellence initiatives work?, THE World University Rankings, 11 June 2020. 

17 

 
 
 
 
EPRS | European Parliamentary Research Service 

indicate that given their limited and predominantly quantitative orientation, rankings should not be 
seen as a means to improve quality in higher education.77  

The European Commission partly funds U-Multirank, which ranks universities on five dimensions – 
teaching and learning, research, knowledge transfer, international orientation and regional activity. 
According to the 2019 U-Multirank rating – the European multidimensional, user-driven approach 
to international ranking of higher education institutions – EU universities dominate the top ranks 
for their level of collaboration.78 This includes student mobility (22 out of the top 25 universities), 
their  international  orientation  (20/27),  offer  of  continued  professional  development  (18/25), 
interdisciplinary  research  (17/26),  joint  publications  with  industrial  partners  (16/25)  and  contact 
with workplaces (15/25). On the other hand, US universities dominate in research and the number 
of  publications  they  produce.  This  includes  patents  awarded  (17/26)  and  top  cited  publications 
(14/25).  China  too  has  a  research  advantage  over  the  European  Union  in  the  number  of  top 
universities for research publications (5/25) and patent awards (2/26). In spite of an erosion in its 
global share, the United States alone still attracts 17 % of international students; in comparison, the 
United Kingdom attracts 13 %, while France and Germany account for 6 % of global students each. 

2.4.1. Cooperation within the EU 

In  this  context,  for  the  past  20  years,  European  tertiary  education  ministers  have  pursued  an 
ambition  to  reinvigorate  European  higher  education  to  make  it  more  competitive  and  attractive 
globally. The European Union supports this goal by facilitating student and staff mobility, to increase 
contacts  between  higher education  institutions.  In fact,  all  the  Member  States  and  the  European 
Commission itself are members of the European higher education area. In this area, 48 countries 
cooperate in an ongoing process that involves both political and institutional players. Together they 
undertake  structural  reforms  and  share  tools  that  ultimately  make  their  higher  educational 
intitutions increasingly compatible. This ongoing process is known as the Bologna process, named 
after the city where four European ministers met in 1991 and agreed on this endeavour. Since then, 
whilst learning mobility is on the increase, the issue of removing burdensome recognition procedures 
remains open. The 2018 Bologna process implementation report also indicates that improvements in 
the  implementation of degree  structures  and  the  quality  of  teaching  will  still require  efforts  in  the 
future.79  

for  over  4 million  people, 

Figure 9 indicates the nationalities of visiting students in the Member States. Mobility in the European 
Union is also synonymous with the programme Erasmus+, a programme that supports the aims of the 
Bologna  process.  The  European  Commission  estimates  that  Erasmus+  will  have  created  mobility 
opportunities 
including  2 million  higher  education  students, 
650 000 vocational education and training students, 800 000 lecturers, teachers and other staff and 
over 25 000 joint master's degree students from 2014 to 2020. The programme also dedicates 28 % of 
its  budget  to  promote  cooperation  for  innovation  and  the  exchange  of  best  practices.  By  2020, 
around  25 000  strategic  partnerships  will  have  linked  125 000  educational  institutions,  youth 
organisations  and  enterprises.  Projects  implement  innovative  practices  and  partners  learn  from 
each  other.  An  additional 3 500  institutions, organisations  and  enterprises  will  have  set  up  more 
than 300 sector skills alliances or knowledge alliances. Sector skills alliances address skills gaps by 
adapting  vocational  education  and  training  to  sector-specific  labour-market  needs.  Knowledge 

77  M. Hauptman Komotar, Global university rankings and their impact on the internationalisation of higher education, 

Eur J Educ. 2019, 54: 299-310. 
See the website U-Multirank. 

78 
79  Bologna Process implementation report 2018.  

18 

 
 
 
 
The future of tertiary education in Europe 

Figure 9 – Top 3 nationalities of visiting students in 
tertiary education, 2017*  

alliances  foster  the  capacity  for 
innovation and entrepreneurship in 
higher  education  institutions.  More 
recently,  the  Commission  decided 
to  prioritise  the  establishment  of 
networks  of  European  universities, 
as  mentioned  in  section  2.2.3,  as 
the  automatic  mutual 
well  as 
recognition  of  diplomas  and  a 
European  student  card.80  European 
universities  are  university  networks 
created 
for  quality, 
innovation  by 
excellence  and 
integrating 
fully 
embracing  mobility.  The  automatic 
recognition  of  higher 
mutual 
school-leaving 
education 
diplomas is intended to remove barriers to student mobility anywhere in the EU, while the European 
student card will facilitate the secure exchange of information and reduce administrative burdens. 

* Slovenia: 2015. Data source: Eurostat, [educ_uoe_mobs02]. 

curricula  and 

to  push 

and 

2.4.2. Cooperation beyond the EU 

Besides cooperation between Member States, the European Union values international cooperation 
in the field of higher education to advance its position as a centre of excellence81 and to support 
efforts in the internationalisation of systems in Member States and beyond. This cooperation also 
works to improve education quality in the EU and beyond through mutual learning, comparison and 
the exchange of best practices. Another 1.9 % of the Erasmus+ budget finances activities under the 
Jean Monnet sub-programme. These activities promote excellence in European integration studies 
in  higher  education  worldwide,  by  supporting  academic  institutions,  research  and  teaching 
activities. 

The EU has also established a number of opportunities for dialogue on higher education policy with 
other  countries  and  regions.  EU  programmes  which  are  open  to  worldwide  participation  and 
complementary  initiatives  support  cooperation with  countries  like  the  US  and  China.82  Examples 
include mobility between the EU and China, which reached over 4 000 students and staff between 
2015  and  2017.83  China  is  also  the  top  beneficiary  among  partner  countries  in  the  Erasmus+ 
programme for capacity building projects. With the United States, a bilateral branch of the Fulbright 
Programme for cooperation with the EU called the Fulbright-Schuman Programme, funds graduate 
and postgraduate studies, research and lecture proposals on topics related to US-EU relations, EU 
policy  or  EU  institutions.  It  is  open  for  interested  EU  and  US  citizens.  The  EU-US  young  leaders 
seminar is a platform that periodically brings together young leaders to discuss topical issues. In the 

80 

81 
82 
83 

See the relevant European Commission pages dedicated to the European universities initiative,the European student 
card  initiative  as  well  as  the  Council  recommendation  on  promoting  automatic  mutual  recognition  of  higher 
education and upper secondary education and training qualifications and the outcomes of learning periods abroad.  
See EU priorities for higher education. 
See the Commission's webpage dedicated to policy dialogue with specific regions and countries around the world. 
See the Commission press release EU and China strengthen cooperation on education, culture, youth, gender equality 
and sport 15 November 2017. 

19 

 
 
 
 
 
EPRS | European Parliamentary Research Service 

context of the modernisation of higher education, a comparative Tuning study84 for the EU and US, 
which is part of the Bologna process reform, develops instruments that improve the way students 
prepare  for  entry into the labour market. The Tuning initiative between  the EU and China aims to 
strengthen  compatibility  between  the  two  educational  systems  and  improve  outcome-based 
education. 

Horizon 2020 also strengthens international cooperation in research and innovation. It will invest over 
€550 million  in  2020  in  flagship  cooperation  projects  in  areas  of  mutual  benefit.  Examples  include 
working with Africa on global health, food and nutrition security, with the US, Canada and Japan on 
clean energy and with China on food production, biotech, energy, natural resources and urbanisation. 

2.5. Quality assurance 

International  rankings,  as  discussed  in  section  2.4,  identify  and  rank  excellent  higher  education 
institutions. Typically, they do so based on institutions' research activities and their publications in 
English language journals. In turn, higher education institutions implement bibliometric measures 
and  peer  review  techniques  to  verify  the  quality  of  research  outputs.  They  pay  less  attention  to 
measure education, outreach and engagement activities.85 Quality assurance, on the other hand, 
seeks to improve teaching in higher education institutions through external evaluation. However, 
supervisory  models  are  more  common  than  improvement-oriented  external  quality  assurance 
models. 

2.5.1. European tools 

assurance  mechanisms 

The European Quality Assurance Register for 
Higher Education (EQAR) 
Higher education institutions and programmes in the 
European Higher Education Area (EHEA) are subject to 
regular external review by quality assurance agencies. 
Agreed standards and guidelines for quality assurance 
provide  a  common  framework  for  this  exercise.  The 
European  Quality  Assurance  Register  for  Higher 
Education  (EQAR)  is  the  official  register  of  quality 
assurance agencies, listing the ones that substantially 
comply  with  these  standards  and  guidelines.  EQAR 
provides  a  register  of  agencies,  a  database of  higher 
education  institutions  and  programmes  that  have 
been  subject  to  external  quality  assurance  and 
information on external quality assurance systems and 
activities in Europe. 

Within the European Higher Education Area, 
quality 
are 
streamlined  to  improve  mobility  and  the 
recognition  of  qualifications, 
thereby 
promoting the internationalisation of higher 
education in Europe. The Bologna process is 
an  important  driver  of  quality  assurance  in 
Europe.  The  2018  implementation  report86 
indicates that there is room for improvement 
in  the  implementation  of  quality  assurance 
within the area. In some countries, students 
are not yet fully involved as equal partners in 
all  quality  assurance  processes.  Many 
countries  still  use  only  national  quality 
assurance  agencies  for  external  quality 
assurance  and  the  European  approach  is 
rare, even in the case of joint programmes. In 
some  countries,  there  are  errors  in  the  way  quality  assurance  processes  apply  guidelines  on  the 
European credit transfer and accumulation system (ECTS). 

Source: https://www.eqar.eu/ 

84 

85 
86 

Tuning educational structures in Europe started as a project in 2000 to link the political objectives of the Bologna 
process  and  the  Lisbon  strategy  to  higher education institutions.  This became  a  process  to  develop  and evaluate 
quality in degree programmes. As a term, tuning indicates that the end is not uniform programmes or prescribed 
curricula but that universities identify common points of reference and understanding. 
J. Weiler, On My Way Out IV - teaching, Blog of the European Journal of International Law, 25 January 2017. 
The European Higher Education Area in 2018 , pp. 127-151. 

20 

 
 
 
 
  
The future of tertiary education in Europe 

A  report  written  by  the  European  Quality  Assurance  Register  for  Higher  Education  (see  text  box) 
claims  that  cross-border  quality  assurance  is  useful  to  improve  the  match  between  compatible 
higher education institutions and quality assurance agencies.87 Cross-border quality assurance also 
strengthens the international profile of higher education institutions and improves the recognition 
of  their  qualifications.  It  also  benefits  the  agencies  by  widening  their  horizons  and  providing 
opportunities to improve their own methodologies. However, a set of recommendations drawn up 
on  cross-border  quality  assurance  also  suggest  that  higher  education  institutions  should  think 
carefully  about  their  reasons  for  taking  this  option.88  They  are  also  advised  to  consider  the  real 
compatibility  of  the  agency  chosen,  as  well  as  other  practicalities  such  as  legal  and  linguistic 
requirements  and  communication  amongst  all  parties  to  ensure  that  the  exercise  addresses  real 
needs and is sensitive to cultural and contextual differences. 

A study carried out on behalf of the European Parliament highlighted the difficulty in establishing 
the real impact of either rankings or quality assurance.89 Each, however, seem to have had both a 
negative  and  a  positive  influence.  Whilst  quality  insurance  aims  at  ensuring  compliance  with 
minimum standards, excessive bureaucracy hinders the development of a culture of quality. On the 
other hand, rankings may serve to buttress the reputation of some higher education institutions and 
boost their attractiveness to students. However, they also generate practices where the sole value 
is  to  improve  ranking  positions,  therefore  resulting  in  less  variety  within  the  sector  as  many 
institutions try to imitate the 'winning model'. The study made a long list of recommendations. It 
suggests, for instance, the promotion of a European dimension of quality assurance that supports a 
culture of quality in higher education institutions. It also suggests that quality assurance agencies 
should  be  encouraged  to  make  the  results  of  their  exercises  more  visible  and  understandable. 
Finally, it suggests modifications to U-Multirank to improve its viability and its visibility. 

2.5.2. Effectiveness of quality assurance 

The European Union supports the Bologna process, a key driver of quality assurance in the European 
Union,  by  providing  a  permanent  secretariat  that  ensures  continuity  alongside  the  rotating 
secretariats. In this capacity, it monitors the effectiveness of quality assurance through its agencies. 
Eurydice,  a  network  under  the  European  Commission's  Education,  Audiovisual  and  Culture 
Executive Agency (EACEA), provides information on how quality assurance is carried out in each of 
the countries participating in the European Higher Education Area.90  

Together  with  Cedefop,  it  keeps  a  mobility  scoreboard  with  indicators  such  as  the  provision  of 
information and guidance, the recognition of qualifications and the portability of grants and loans 
to monitor the extent to which European countries are removing obstacles to learning mobility. The 
second report of the mobility scoreboard (2020) noted that following its first report, several Member 
States  had  started  to  require  external  quality  assurance  agencies  to  monitor  the  use  of  ECTSs 

87  Recognising  international  quality  assurance  activity  in  the  European  Higher  Education  Area  (RIQAA),  final  project 

report, European Quality Assurance Register for Higher Education, 2014. 

88  Key  Considerations  for  Cross-Border  Quality  Assurance  in  the  European  Higher  Education  Area,  ENQA,  ESU,  EUA, 

EURASHE, EQAR, 2017. 

89  University Quality Indicators: a critical assessment, Directorate-General for internal policies, European Parliament, 2015. 
90 
See the official Eurydice website, the dedicated page of the Directorate-General Education, Youth, Sport and Culture 
and an example of a country report on quality assurance in higher education in one of the Member States (Austria). 

21 

 
 
 
 
EPRS | European Parliamentary Research Service 

systematically.91 The EU Erasmus+ programme supports projects aimed at improving transparency 
and recognition of skills and qualifications through quality assurance.92  

Another  aspect  of  quality  assurance  is  graduate  tracking  to  establish  the  relevance  and  value  of 
studies  undertaken  by  graduates.  A  report  published  by  the  Commission  indicates  that  while 
graduate  tracking  is  established  in  a  significant  number  of  Member  States,  there  are  still  some 
Member States that do not carry out graduate tracking and others that could extend the exercise to 
reach out to the entire graduate population. The lack of uniformity in graduate tracking exercises in 
different Member States limits their value in peer learning exercises for policy makers.93  

A study94 on quality assurance managers in higher education institutions in Germany identified a 
link  between  the motives for  carrying  out  quality  assurance  and  the  efficacy experienced  by  the 
managers who carry it out. Managers who thought that their work only served to satisfy the Bologna 
requirements also claimed to have little impact on improving the functioning of higher education 
institutions. On the other hand, those that claimed to have the backing of higher management, as 
well  as  those  who  said  that  quality  assurance  is  internally  driven  by  strategic  considerations,  did 
consider themselves effective.  

2.6. Financing of tertiary education, fees and barriers to inclusion 

2.6.1. Public contribution 

Financing backs quality research and quality teaching. Public sources provide around two thirds of the 
funding for tertiary education in the EU. Public expenditure on tertiary education covers payments from 
all  levels  of  government  and  finances  all  types  of  institutions  and  entities  that  provide  tertiary 
education  or  supporting  services.  It  also  includes  transfers  such  as  subsidies  to  households.  The 
European  Tertiary  Education  Registry,  the  first  comprehensive  database  on  European  higher 
education, identifies a growing trend to link the attribution of public funds with performance criteria.95 

Figure 10 shows the expenditure on tertiary education both as a percentage of gross domestic product 
(GDP) and as a percentage of the spend across education levels.96 The public expenditure on tertiary 
education as a proportion of GDP stood at 1.18 % for the European Union. This percentage indicates the 
level of public effort in support of both academic and professional tertiary education compared to the 
strength of the economy. Expenditure on tertiary education covers 28 % of expenditure in education 
taking all levels into account. Public expenditure on tertiary education also represents 2.5 % of the total 
public  expenditure.97  This  percentage  indicates  the  relative  priority  of  the  sector  as  a  policy  area.  In 
Portugal, research and development accounts for more than half of the tertiary education expenditure. 

91  Mobility  scoreboard,  Higher  education  background  report  2018/19,  Eurydice  (Education,  Audiovisual  and  Culture 

Executive Agency), February 2020. 
For an example, see the dedicated European Commission call notice and results page.  

92 
93  P. Vale, A. Zaidi, S. Beadle, C.Abdallah, A .Hannah, A. Kottmann, S. Mannsberger-Nindl, Mapping the state of graduate 
tracking  policies  and  practices  in  the  EU  Member  States  and  EEA  countries:  Final  report,  Directorate-General  for 
Education, Youth, Sport and Culture (European Commission) , ICF Consulting, June 2020 

94  M.  Seyfried  &  P.  Pohlenz  Assessing  quality  assurance  in  higher  education:  quality  managers'  perceptions  of 

effectiveness, European Journal of Higher Education, Volume 8, Issue 3, September 2018, pp. 258-271. 

95  How  are  European  higher  education  institutions  funded?  New  evidence  from  ETER  microdata,  Analytical  Report 

No.2/2019, European Tertiary Education Register. 
The latest data available for Member States is from 2016. However to obtain aggregate percentages for the EU, the 
calculations were made over 25 Member States as Denmark and Croatia do not provide any figures. The aggregate 
percentages are based on 2015, as data for 2016 is still incomplete. 
Eurostat [educ_uoe_fine08]. 

96 

97 

22 

 
 
 
 
The future of tertiary education in Europe 

In 2015, there were four Member States (Estonia, Finland, the Netherlands and Sweden) that dedicated 
more than or close to half of their tertiary education expenditure to research and development.98 

Figure 10 – Expenditure on tertiary education, 2016 

Data source: Eurostat[educ_uoe_fine01], [educ_uoe_fine06] 

2.6.2. Remuneration of academic staff 

In most Member States, top-level regulations or civil service scales define remuneration of academic 
staff.99  In  almost  all  Member  States,  remuneration  also  reflects  achievement,  but  with  scarce 
resources,  academics  are  experiencing  increasing  performance  pressures.  Higher  education 
institutions  have  created new  staff  categories  to  cope  with increasing  demands.  One  example  is 
postdoctoral fellows discussed in the textbox. Precarious working conditions have professionalised 
researchers  by  turning  their  attention  towards  funding,  fragmenting  academic  endeavours  with 
frequent  shifts  in  research  focus,  methods,  environment  and  priorities  depending  on  funding 
strands.100  The  standard  career  path,  which  starts  from  a  junior  position  and  moves  through  an 
intermediary stage and then onto a senior position, is not necessarily accessible to all academic staff. 

98   Germany  is  investing  very  heavily  in  research  and  development  but  not  all  of  this  investment  benefits  tertiary 
education institutions D. Matthews, Germany widens R&D lead over US and UK, Times Higher Education, 17 May 2020. 

99  Modernisation of higher education in Europe, Academic Staff 2017, European Commission/EACEA/Eurydice, 2019. 
100  For  an  insight  on  how  early  career  researchers  juggle  traditional  academic  values  with  new  requirements  see 
S. Djerasimovic and M. Villani, Constructing academic identity in the European higher education space: Experiences 
of early career educational researchers, European Educational Research Journal, Vol. 19, No. 3 May 2020, pp.225-246. 

23 

 
 
 
 
 
 
EPRS | European Parliamentary Research Service 

Fixed-term and part-time contracts are on the rise, especially amongst the junior grades. An OECD 
study indicated that this had negative consequences on the quality of teaching and learning and 
reduced the institutions' ability to attract and retain talented academics.101 Sabbaticals are usually 
restricted to medium and senior ranked academics. Men are more likely to occupy senior grades 
while women are more likely to work under precarious conditions. Academics from ethnic minorities 
are also less likely to achieve central roles. The proportion of academics under the age of 35 years is 
low and this could lead to difficulties in the future due to a lack of generational renewal. Crises such 
as  the  period  following  the  financial  fallout  of  2008  and  the  lockdown  due  to  the  coronavirus 
pandemic  have  led  to  job  losses  amongst  those  with  precarious  contracts.  However,  the  impact 
often varies, with universities that depend heavily on fees, especially on international student fees, 
seeing the most drastic job cuts.102 

Postdoctoral fellows - The case of highly qualified researchers with precarious contracts 
One phenomenon is the rise in 'Postdocs', professionals with a doctoral degree who mainly contribute to 
research  carried  out  in  higher  education  institutions  but  who  enjoy  very  low  prospects  of  achieving  a 
tenure contract. One study claimed that while 85 % of these professionals would like an academic career, 
fewer than 3 % are offered the opportunity. On average respondents were 34 years old and the average 
duration  of  their  contract  was  31  months.  While  they  were  all  keenly  aware  of  the  importance  of 
networking,  40 %  of  them  had  not  participated  in  any  training  and  only  13 %  had  participated  in  any 
management skills development experience. Lack of career prospects, publication and grant pressures, 
work-life imbalance and lack of support resulted in a significant number of these researchers reporting a 
negative impact on their mental health.  

On 31 March 2020, the European Commission announced that it expected to create around 1 800 new 
jobs for the duration of the grants for post-doctoral fellows, doctoral students and other research staff as 
the European Research Council (ERC) awarded grants to 185 researchers, who received €450 million. The 
ERC is part of the EU research and innovation programme, Horizon 2020, and the new research projects 
will enrich Europe's knowledge base but they do not offer postdoctoral fellows a way out of precarity. 

Sources: C. Teelken and I. van der Weijden point out in Precarious careers: post-doctoral researchers in the 
Netherlands, 18 March 2020 and the European Research Council. 

2.6.3. Private contribution 

Private  contributions,  such  as  the  sponsorship  of  research  projects  by  private  businesses, 
complement public spending. According to the European Tertiary Education Registry, the median 
share of total revenues from third parties is 7 % and despite efforts to increase private contributions, 
only 41 higher education institutions in the register made more than 10 % of their revenues from 
private-third  party  entities.  Exceptionally,  some  technical  universities,  medical  schools  and  top-
ranked international universities are able to raise up to 40 % of their total revenue in this way.  

Another source of contributions is fees, but the level of tuition fees and the categories of students that 
pay  them  vary  widely  among  Member  States.  Eurydice  identified  four  main  approaches  to  fees  for 
Bachelors' degree students.103 The first approach is not to charge any fees at all, the second is to charge 
only a minority of students for reasons such as under-performing, the third is to exempt some students 
on grounds such as low-income or disability, and the fourth is to charge all students. The levels of fees is 
also  very  variable  by  Member  State  and  in  some  cases,  fees  even  depend  on  the  study  field  or  the 

101  OECD, Resourcing Higher Education: challenges, choices and consequences, June 2020, p.116. 
102  For  a  comparison  on  the  impact  of  crisis  on  the  European  Higher  Education  model  and  the  Anglo  model,  see 

D. Matthews European Universities spared coronavirus cuts for now, Times Higher Education, 28 May 2020. 

103  National 

student 

fee  and 

support 

systems 

in  European  higher  education  2018/2019,  European 

Commission/EACEA/Eurydice, 2019. 

24 

 
 
 
 
The future of tertiary education in Europe 

language  of  study.  Part-time  students  are  more  likely  to  pay  fees  than  full-time  students.  It  is  also 
common for international students to pay different fees from national students. Some countries have 
bilateral and multilateral agreements to apply specific fees for in-coming international students. 

A  2018  survey  by  the  European  students'  union  (ESU)  indicated  that  in  many  of  the  participating 
countries,  students  in  tertiary  education  face  increasing  costs  but  grants  are  either  frozen  or 
dwindling.104  According  to  the  survey,  students  turn  to  their  families,  work  or  take  out  loans  to 
compensate. The report raised the contingent issue of 'commodification' in higher education, claiming 
that the shortage of public funds threatens inclusivity and undermines academic independence as 
academia becomes more dependent on business funding and business interests. ESU also issued a 
statement in which it pointed out that education is a human right and higher education is a common 
good.105 It expressed its disapproval of higher fees for international students as it argued that they 
jeopardised the real benefit of internationalisation, which lies in increased cooperation.  

2.6.4. EU contribution 

The  funding  of  tertiary  education  will  continue  to  provide  challenges  in  the  future  and  European 
policies  have  so  far  had  a  mixed impact.  On  the  one  hand,  following  the  financial  crisis,  European 
semester recommendations to cut public spending had adverse effects on public financial support of 
tertiary education institutions. On the other, European Structural and Investment Funds 2014-2020 
introduced ex ante conditionalities aimed at strengthening tertiary and vocational education.106 

The European Union supports tertiary education with its programme Erasmus+, which mainly funds 
learning mobility of both students and staff to improve internationalisation.107 A new pilot guarantee 
facility  will  make  it  possible  for  students  to  receive  loans,  deferred  payments  and  income-linked 
loans.108  Higher  education  institutions  also  access  cohesion  policy  funds  for  the  period  2014-2020 
under the thematic objective of education and training, the European Social fund and the European 
regional development fund to support modernisation efforts, including investments in infrastructure, 
to promote better access to good quality education for all and to enhance lifelong learning.109 The 
European Investment Bank finances projects to improve the quality and capacity of education facilities 
and to support student loan schemes or pan-European student mobility programmes.110 

Researchers  in  higher  education  institutions  turn  to  two  programmes.111  The  Marie  Sklodowska-
Curie  actions,  a  research  fellowship  programme  that  supports  researchers  working  across  all 
disciplines  irrespective  of  age,  nationality  or  stage  in  the  career  and  Horizon  2020,  another 
important fund for research projects.112 In the run up to the next multiannual financial framework, 
the  European  Universities  Association  (EUA)  called  for  a  significant  increase  in  the  funding  of 

104  Bologna with student eyes 2018, the final countdown, The European Students Union, May 2018. See the website for 

information on the European Students Union. 

105  BM 76: Statement on countering commodification in higher education, European Students Union, 24 May 2019. 
106  See Social Sustainability: concepts and benchmarks, Policy Department for Economic, Scientific and Quality of Life 
Policies, Directorate-General for Internal Policies, European Parliament, April 2020, p.55.Under the social objective of 
investing in education and training for skills and lifelong learning there is an ex ante conditionality for a national or 
regional strategic policy framework for increasing tertiary education attainment, quality and efficiency and another 
one for increasing the quality and efficiency of vocational education and training systems.  
107  See D. Chircop, Erasmus+: More than just mobility, EPRS, European Parliament, September 2019. 
108  European  Commission,  EU  launches  new  €50  million  pilot  to  develop  skills  and  education  across  Europe,  Press 

Release, 21 April 2020. 

109  See the dedicated Commission webpage on how the EU Cohesion policy contributes to education and training. 
110  See the dedicated page on how the European investment bank invests in education and training.  
111  See the Bologna Process implementation report 2018 p.33 and the Bologna Process implementation report 2015 p.38. 
112  See the dedicated pages on the Marie Skłodowska-Curie Actions and A. Zygierewicz, Horizon 2020 EU framework 
programme for research and innovation, European implementation study, EPRS, European Parliament, February 2017. 

25 

 
 
 
 
EPRS | European Parliamentary Research Service 

Horizon Europe, the upcoming generation of the Horizon programme that will run from 2021 to 
2027.113 The EUA claimed that the current situation is leading to low success rates. Some institutions 
are discouraged from even applying, as indirect costs are not sufficiently covered. The association 
also criticised gaps and inconsistencies between regimes that prevent synergies with other funds. It 
recommends  simplification  to  achieve  a  coherent  set  of  rules  that  are  mindful  of  the  variety  of 
actions, and the diversity of beneficiaries that use the programme.  

towards 

tertiary  education 

labour  market  skills.115 

Besides  financial  support,  the  European  Union  also  supports  policy  making  on  issues  related  to 
tertiary education thanks to a number of initiatives. In the context of the European Semester,114 the 
European  Commission  issues  a  number  of  country  specific  recommendations  related  to  the 
contribution  of 
these 
recommendations,  the  Commission  considers  the  advice  of  a  number  of  agencies  and  networks. 
Cedefop  develops  a  number  of  tools  such  as  the  skills  forecast  and  the  European  skills  index.116 
Eurydice keeps track of the mobility scoreboard.117 The European Expert Network on Economics of 
Education (EENEE) brings together European centres and experts on the economics of education 
and is coordinated by the Centre for European Policy Studies (CEPS) and the IFO institute.118 EENEE 
advises the Commission on the economic aspects of educational policies and reforms. The network 
of experts working on the social dimension of education and training (NESET) is an international 
advisory network focused on the potential of education and training systems in reducing poverty, 
as well as in enhancing equity and social inclusion.119  

In  drawing 

3. Comparison with the United States and China 

Tertiary education systems in the EU interact with other systems and this section will focus on the 
United States and China. Unlike Russia, neither is in the Higher Education Area. They comprise two 
of  the  biggest  higher  education  systems,  encompassing  enormous  student  populations  and 
investments  and  therefore,  both  are  highly  influential  players  in  global  higher  education 
developments.  The  challenges  mentioned  above  also  affect  tertiary  education  in  both  these 
counties. 

3.1. Higher education in the United States 

The  US  higher  education  system  is  defined  by  a  large  diversity  of  institutions,  a  high  level  of 
decentralisation and independence from federal government regulations.120 There are both public 

113  For a presentation of the future MFF see G. Sabbati and M. Sapala, The 2021-2027 Multiannual Financial Framework 
in figures, EPRS, European Parliament, January 2020. The European University Association presented its position on 
why the upcoming MFF should give a bigger envelope to the next generation of Horizon. For a presentation of the 
future Horizon Europe programme see C. Karakas, Horizon Europe framework programme for research and innovation 
2021-2027, EPRS, European Parliament, May 2019. 

114  The European Semester is a framework for the coordination of economic policies across the European Union that was 
established  after  the  European  sovereign  debt  crisis.  For  an  indepth  analysis  see  A.  Delivorias  and  C.  Scheinert, 
Introduction to the European Semester: Coordinating and monitoring economic and fiscal policies in the EU, EPRS, 
European Parliament, December 2019. 

115  As  background  information  for  this  process,  the  European  Commission  also  published  the  European  Semester 

thematic factsheet Tertiary education attainment. 

116  See the dedicated webpages on Cedefop and two of its activities, the skills forecast and the European skills index. 

Besides the EU Member States, the index includes the Iceland, Norway, Switzerland, and United, Kingdom. 

117  See the dedicated webpages on Eurydice and one of its activities the mobility scoreboard. 
118  See the website of the European Expert Network on Economics of Education. 
119  See the NESET website for further information.  
120  Understanding U.S. Higher Education, United States Department of State. 

26 

 
 
 
 
The future of tertiary education in Europe 

and  private  institutions,  some  of  which  are  private,  non-profit  or  private  for-profit  institutions. 
Prestigious  elite  universities  like  the  Ivy  League  colleges  regularly  score  high  in  international 
rankings  and  shape  the  image  of  US  higher  education  around  the  globe.121  At  the  same  time, 
criticism of the increasing tuition fees and sprawling student debt is growing louder.122 Overall, the US 
system is organised in undergraduate degrees (bachelor's), masters and doctoral degrees, with the 
peculiarity that undergraduate programmes are divided into two year and four-year programmes.123 
The two-year programmes are mostly taught at junior or community colleges and provide a broad 
base  in  general  education,  concentrating  in  a  specific  area.  The  two-year  programmes  prepare 
students to transfer to a four-year university to finish their bachelor’s degree in a certain field. 

Table 1 – Degrees conferred in the United States by postsecondary institutions in 2016-2017 

Total 

Female 

Male 

Bachelors 

Masters 

Doctorate 

1 956 032 

804 684 

181 352 

1 119 987 (57 %) 

477 792 (59 %) 

96 706 (53 %) 

836 045 (43 %) 

326 892 (41 %) 

84 648 (46 %) 

Table  1  reproduces  statistics  published  by  the  National  Centre  for  Education  Statistics  of  the  US 
department of education, which give the total number of graduates in 2016-2017 by degree level and 
by gender.124 On this basis, the ratio between female and male students was calculated. At all three levels, 
graduates are in their majority female but the narrowest gap is at the doctorate level. US scholars report 
that the student body is shrinking but it is also becoming more diverse.125 Low graduation rates, a drop 
in world rankings and cuts in state and federal financial support accompany these trends.126  

In  2012,  the  discourse  around  MOOCs  (Massive  Open  Online  Courses)  was  booming,  with  the 
hypothesis  that  online 
learning  platforms  might  disrupt  conventional  higher  education 
programmes.127 MOOCs promised to enable students to build on existing skills and competencies and 
to be awarded credits based on their individual profile. This seemed particularly interesting for adult 
learners who needed to upskill in their area of work. Some scholars predicted that a major share of 
universities  would  become  bankrupt  and  close  down  due  to  an  increase  of  online  learning 
platforms.128  According  to  the  US  department  of  education,  by  2018,  the  number  of  institutions 
nationwide had indeed dropped to its lowest level since 1998.129 However, opinions are split about 
the effect of online learning platforms on higher education institutions, especially as the institutions 
that closed down were mostly for-profit institutions, while established public and private non-profit 

121  2020 List of Ivy League Schools, Ranked and Reviewed, Niche, consulted on 17 March 2020. 
122  Fast facts: Tuition costs of colleges and universities, National Centre for Education Statistics. 
123  Higher  Education  in  the  United  States,  https://education.stateuniversity.com/pages/2043/Higher-Education-in-

United-States-SYSTEM.html. 

124  Digest of Education Statistics: 2018, National Centre for Education Statistics. 
125  See US College Leaders Worry About the Future, Learning English, Voice of America, 16 November 2019 and  N.D. 
Grawe, How Demographic Change Is Transforming the Higher Ed Landscape, Higher Ed Jobs, 18 February 2019. 
126  See Table 326.10 2018 Tables and figures, National Centre for Education Statistics, B. O'Malley, US loses one in five top 
spots in global subject ranking, University World News, 27 February 2019 and the blog post by J. Allaire, Five Issues 
Facing Higher Education in 2018, Cornerstone University, 15 January 2018. 

127  J. Daniel, Making Sense of MOOCs: Musings in a Maze of Myth, Paradox and Possibility, Journal of Interactive Media in 

Education, 2012(3), p.Art. 18. 

128  See D. Lederman, Clay Christensen, Doubling Down, Inside Higher Ed, 28 April 2017. 
129  See S. Anderson, New International Student Enrollment In U.S. Has Fallen 10% Since 2015, Forbes, 19 November 2019. 

27 

 
 
 
 
 
EPRS | European Parliamentary Research Service 

universities do not seem to be heavily affected.130 For the time being, it seems that MOOCs largely 
complement traditional higher education rather than replace it.131 

The debate focus has now shifted onto the impact of collaboration with businesses such as Amazon, 
Google and IBM, which already provide educational programmes tailored to meet their own needs. 132  
The emergence of these programmes addresses issues of skills mismatch and the rising costs of higher 
education. With programmes such as the Amazon Machine Learning University or many of the tech 
companies'  partnerships  with  US  colleges,  there  could  be  potential  to  create  competition  for  the 
traditional higher education sector.133 Another concern for US tertiary education institutions is how 
political  conditions  around  the  world  might  affect  international  students  coming  to  the  United 
States. This impact has been seen more recently, with the percentage of all international students 
enrolled in US colleges and universities decreasing slightly over the last few years.134 This trend is 
likely  to  continue,  especially  given  the  allegations  of  espionage  against  Chinese  students  by  the 
United States presidency, as well as due to reduced mobility post Covid-19.135  

in  China  is  divided 

3.2. Higher education in China 
The Chinese higher education sector evolved very differently compared to the US higher education 
sector.  Higher  education 
into  two  categories:  four-year  or  five-year 
undergraduate degrees that lead to academic colleges that offer three-year diplomas or certificate 
courses on academic and vocational subjects.136 Only universities offer postgraduate and doctoral 
degrees.  Even  though  China's  tertiary  education  sector  developed  in  compliance  with  Soviet 
standards and was highly centralised, there has been a strong shift towards privatisation in the past 
decades.137 Since the 1980s, China has made significant efforts to expand its higher education sector 
in response to the state's economic transition.138 Table 3 reproduces statistics published by UNESCO 
showing the growth in the gross enrolment ratio in tertiary education between 2010 and 2018.139 
Figure 11 compares enrolment trends in China with those in the US.  

In 2017, 11.2 % of all students from abroad studying in the EU were Chinese, making them the largest 
group of international students.140 China wanted  to improve the profile of excellent universities  to 
counter the enduring brain drain of young graduates and professionals. The government in Beijing 
increased its spending on higher education and research drastically and it is now only second to the 
US.141  This  development  reflects  China's  ambitious  agenda  for  academic  development  and  global 
competitiveness. However, some researchers state that China's heavy investments only benefit the 
top-performing universities, while the pressure of higher education massification mostly affects the 

130  See D. Newton, No, Half Of All Colleges Will Not Go Bankrupt, Forbes, 11 September 2018. 
131  See T.A Finkle and E. Masters, Do MOOCs pose a threat to higher education?, Research in Higher Education Journal, 

Ocober 2014. 

132  See P. Fain, Employers as Educators, Inside Higher Ed, 17 July 2019 and US College Leaders Worry About the Future, 

Learning English, Voice of America, 16 November 2019. 

133  See Amazon Pledges to Upskill 100,000 U.S. Employees for In-Demand Jobs by 2025, Press release, 11 July 2019.  
134  See E. Redden, Number of Enrolled International Students Drops, Inside Higher Ed, 18 November 2019. 
135  See P. Zengerle, M. Spetalnick, Exclusive: Fearing espionage, U.S. weighs tighter rules on Chinese students, Reuters, 
29 November 2018 and S. Baker, US publics face survival battle and reconnection with local mission, Times Higher 
Education, 21 May 2020. 

136  Q. Kan, A brief introduction to the Chinese education system, The Open University, Updated Friday 30 August 2019. 
137  L. Wang, The road to privatization of higher education in China: A new cultural revolution?, January, 2014. 
138  P.G. Altbach and H. de Wit, The closing of China will affect universities worldwide, University World News, 9 March 2018. 
139  China, Unesco Institute for Statistics, 2020. 
140  Learning mobility statistics, Eurostat statistics explained, Eurostat, data extracted in October 2019. 
141  China's spending on education in 2018 increases, Chinadaily.com.cn, Updated: 2 May 2019. 

28 

 
 
 
 
The future of tertiary education in Europe 

lower ends of the tertiary education system.142 This trend, in turn, leads to burgeoning numbers of 
unemployed graduates. 

80

60

US

100

Tertiary Education: enrolment ratio

Figure  11  –  Tertiary  education  enrolement 
ratio in the United States and China 

The  tense  political  atmosphere  between  the 
Chinese  and  the  US  governments  affects 
China's  tertiary  education  system.143  While 
fewer  Chinese  students  enter  the  US  due  to 
travel  bans  or  the  accusation  of  espionage, 
there is also a decline in incoming students to 
China, which might be due to a decreasingly 
liberal higher education system. Recently, the 
shift towards a more ideology-centered type of 
education  became  apparent  with  significant 
restrictions  on  academic 
freedom,  strict 
censorship of academic papers and a slowing 
down  of  international  collaborations.144  This 
development reflects the strongly intertwined 
relationship between the Chinese state and its 
universities,  a  relationship  that  would  be  considered  unusual  in  the  US  and  European  university 
environment.  

Data source: OurWorldinData.org, UNESCO 

2015

2005

2010

2000

CN

20

40

0

Table 2 – Gross enrolment ratio (%) in tertiary education in China 
2015 

2012 

2014 

2011 

2010 

2013 

Total  

Female  

Male  

24.2 

24.96 

23.49 

25.65 

26.78 

24.6 

28.73 

30.26 

27.32 

32.43 

34.56 

30.5 

42.43 

45.76 

39.43 

46.40 

50.18 

42.34 

2016 

48.02 

52.74 

43.81 

2017 

49.07 

53.98 

44.72 

2018 

50.6 

55.88 

45.93 

China  appears  to  be  in  the  forefront  in  responding  to  the  challenges  of  digital  and  disruptive 
technologies. The 'Made in China 2025' and 'Internet+' government programmes entail investments 
in  research  and  development  as  well  as  investments  to  encourage  the  modernisation  of  the 
educational  system.145  This  is  taking  place  alongside  investments  in  broadband  connectivity  to 
reach  98 %  of  the  population,  in  addition  to  high-speed  connections  for larger  cities. The  strong 
investment  in  the  digital  transformation  of  education  is  one  of  China's  key  responses  to  the 
challenges that its tertiary education sector is facing. However, it remains a balancing act for China 
to handle domestic demands whilst pushing forward its aspirations to be a global player.  

4. European  Parliament's  positions  on  the  future  of  higher 
education in the European Union 
The analysis looked at the structure of tertiary education in Europe and six challenges where policy 
is likely to shape its future. For each of the challenges, the analysis focused on the current state of 
affairs and the tools that the EU has at its disposal to support tertiary education, finding that there 
is more than one way to prepare for the future. The examples of the US and China highlight the 

142  S. Pan, J. Tin Yau Lo, Higher Education and China's Global Rise: A Neo-tributary Perspective, Routledge 1st ed., 2018. 
143  P.G. Altbach, The coming 'China crisis' in global higher education, University World News, 6 April 2019. 
144  P.G. Altbach, The coming 'China crisis' in global higher education and J. Lau, Chinese scholars pressured over criticism 

of state on Covid-19, Times Higher Education, 22 May 2020. 

145  See Evolving Made in China 2025: China's industrial policy in the quest for global tech leadership, Mercator Institute of China 
Studies, 2.7.2019 and Everything You Need to Know about China's “Internet Plus” Future, China Telecom Americas, 2020. 

29 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
EPRS | European Parliamentary Research Service 

extent to which the approaches policy makers adopt are integral to the cultural and political context. 
This insight applies to the European Union, which is obliged by the Treaties to respect the automony 
of its Member States and to support modernisation through greater contacts and exchanges. This 
came into greater focus when a new college of Commissioners outlined its priorities for the rest of 
its mandate, as well as during the negotiations for the new Multiannual Financial Framework for 
2021-2027.  The  European  Parliament  has  also  started  a  new  mandate  and,  at  this  point,  it  is 
interesting to note the positions that it has adoped and discern the similarities and differences that 
exist within Parliament in terms of shaping the future direction. 

4.1. Digital and disruptive technologies 
Regarding  the  impact of digital  and  disruptive  technologies on  higher  education  and  the  labour 
force,  Parliament  expressed  the  opinion  that  the  Digital  Education  Action  Plan,  as  part  of  the 
framework  to  establish  a  European  Education  Area,  represents  the  first  step  towards  a 
comprehensive  EU  strategy  on  digital  education  and  skills.146  This  strategy  is  to  provide  a  more 
coordinated  policy  framework  and,  at  the  same  time,  be  adaptable  to  changing  future  realities. 
Parliament  stressed  the  importance  of  neurological  research  to  investigate  the  effects  of  digital 
technologies  on  brain  development  and  education  and  called  for  investment  in  unbiased  and 
interdisciplinary research. Additionally, Parliament advocated a gender-balanced approach to the 
promotion  of  ICT  and  digital  careers  to  the  agenda.  Parliament  identified  the  preparation  and 
training  of  teachers  for  the  digital  transformation  as  another  priority.  While  this  is  not  stated,  it 
would also be useful for lecturers in tertiary education. Members welcomed the introduction of the 
Digital Opportunity Traineeships under Erasmus+ and Horizon 2020 and called for a fresh impulse 
in this direction. Following an evaluation of the measures included in the Digital Education Action 
Plan, Members pointed out that one of the major shortcomings of the programme was the lack of 
action to strengthen digital skills amongst the adult population. 

In 2017, Parliament adopted a resolution, which highlighted the potential of new information and 
communication  technologies  (ICT)  as  instruments  to  offer  new  opportunities  in  education.147 
Members pointed out that the digital transformation and the development of educational platforms 
could modernise our way of teaching and learning. In line with the New Skills Agenda, Parliament 
supported the Commission's proposal to urge Member States to set up national strategies for digital 
skills, with a special focus on closing the digital divide.148 

4.2. Societal challenges 
Concerning  societal  challenges,  Parliament  addressed  the  importance  of  measures  promoting 
inclusion in the Erasmus+ programme by creating a dedicated chapter on inclusion and asking the 
Commission  to  draw  up  a  framework  of 
inclusion  measures  and  guidelines  for  their 
implementation.149 Members pushed for a first draft of measures by 31 March 2021 at the latest and 
a multiannual national inclusion strategy by 30 June 2021. Parliament is also pressing for a budget 
increase and the creation of useful synergies with other European funding programmes for the same 
purpose. It further states that a simplification of the application procedures could enhance mobility 
and cooperation between Erasmus+ partners. In 2017, Parliament further urged Member States to 
begin  implementing  the  principles  of  the  European  Pillar  of  Social  Rights  in  order  to  decrease 

146  Education  in  the  digital  era:  challenges,  opportunities  and  lessons  for  EU  policy  design,  European  Parliament, 

(2018/2090(INI)). 

147  Modernisation of education in the EU, European Parliament, (2017/2224(INI)). 
148  New skills agenda for Europe, European Parliament, (2017/2002(INI)). 
149  Erasmus programme for education, training, youth and sport 2021–2027, European Parliament, (2018/0191(COD)). 

30 

 
 
 
 
The future of tertiary education in Europe 

inequalities in Europe through education, training and lifelong learning.150 Parliament also noted 
that the segmentation of the labour market along gendered lines should be addressed by investing 
in formal, non-formal and informal education for women to facilitate their access to high-quality 
employment.151 It wants to promote women's careers in STEM areas and digital education in order 
to counter existing educational stereotypes. 

Parliament strongly supported the establishment of a European Education Area.152 This initiative is 
the  next  step  towards  the  compatibility  of  academic  qualifications  and  mutual  cross-border 
recognition to uphold quality education for everyone. Therefore, Members called on Member States 
to invest at least 2 % of their respective GDPs in higher education. They further stressed cooperation 
between  higher  education  institutions,  the  labour  market,  industry,  research  communities  and 
society as a whole.  

In a resolution approving the Council's position on a draft budget amendment for the financial year 
2019, Parliament stressed the importance of mobility activities in the Erasmus+ and Horizon 2020 
programmes, in particular in the fields of higher education and vocational education and training. 
Parliament supported a strong European universities initiative to promote excellence, innovation 
and  inclusion  in  higher  education.  This  initiative  offers  a  response  to  several  of  the  challenges 
discussed  above,  such  as global  collaboration  and intra-EU  mobility, quality  assurance,  financing 
and barriers to inclusion. Parliament's Committee on Culture and Education (CULT) has tabled its 
position on the 'greening' of Erasmus+ for a vote in plenary.153 

4.3. Developing the right skills 
The European Parliament agreed with the assessment in the Commission's communication that the 
EU's  education  sectors  need  to  adapt  to  a  fast  changing  economic,  technological  and  societal 
environment.154 In discussing the New Skills Agenda, Members recommended close collaboration 
with the European Centre for the Development of Vocational Training (Cedefop) not just to assess 
skills  needs  but  also  to  develop  a  pan  European  skills  needs  forecasting  tool  and  measures  to 
respond to the needs identified. Parliament called on the Member States to implement a holistic 
approach  to  education  and  skills  development,  which  does  not  focus  narrowly  on  employability 
skills, but extends to other skills that are equally useful to society as a whole. 

On a practical level, Parliament significantly increased the appropriations allocated to Horizon 2020 
above the Commission proposal of €737.8 million in commitment appropriations for the financial year 
2020.155  For  Erasmus+,  Parliament  agreed  on  an  increase  of  €123.4  million  in  commitment 
appropriations, above the Commission proposal. It also recommended ensuring a smooth transition 
to the European Social Fund Plus (ESF+) in the next MFF. Moreover, Parliament proposed to reinforce 
budget lines relating to Parliament's priorities, in areas such as digitalisation and artificial intelligence. 

Overall, Parliament has supported the Commission's ambitions to strengthen the European higher 
education area as well as other initiatives that supported this project over previous terms. Moreover, 
Parliament often challenged the Commission as well as Member States to increase and expand their 
efforts  to  ensure  an  inclusive,  gender-balanced  and  accessible  education  area.  Parliament  also 

150  Modernisation of education in the EU, European Parliament, (2017/2224(INI)). 
151  Resolution on the gender pay gap, European Parliament, (2019/2870(RSP)). 
152  Modernisation of education in the EU, European Parliament, (2017/2224(INI)). 
153  Effective measures to 'green' Erasmus+, Creative Europe and the European Solidarity Corps, European Parliament, 

(2019/2195(INI)). 

154  New skills agenda for Europe, European Parliament, (2017/2002(INI)). 
155  2020 general budget: all sections, European Parliament, (2019/2028(BUD)). 

31 

 
 
 
 
EPRS | European Parliamentary Research Service 

relentlessly pushed for a higher budget for the programmes that respond to the future challenges 
identified in this analysis.  

5. Outlook 
This analysis has identified six different challenges and opportunities where policy decisions could 
potentially have an impact on the way in which tertiary education institutions evolve in the future. 
A  new  Multiannual  Financial  Framework  is  under  negotiation  and  the outcomes  will  provide  the 
tools and means that will enable the European Union to support Member States in this sector.  

Tertiary education institutions face questions about how to maintain their relevance to current and 
future needs and aspirations. As institutions that create and transmit knowledge, they can play a key 
role in developing knowledge that different players in European societies can use to achieve greater 
coherence,  redress  an  ecological  mess,  set  their  own  mark  on  technological  developments  and 
provide groups of citizens with opportunities to fully participate in society and the economy.  

One  of  the  factors  that  is  pushing  the  struggle  for  relevance  in  tertiary  education  to  the  fore  is 
digitalisation. It provides both the means to scale up the activities of tertiary education institutions to 
heights  that  were  previously  unimaginable,  as  well  as  challenging  old  and  trusted  methods  of 
researching,  teaching  and  learning.  Universities  are  often  labelled  as  ivory  towers,  completely 
disconnected with realities outside their environments. However, some tertiary institutions have very 
practical and vocational orientations, and even 'traditional' universities find that they need links with 
business  to  help  fund  research.  Outreach  to  local  communities  may  still  be  weak,  yet  this  too  could 
change as tertiary institutions reconsider their capacity to provide lifelong learning opportunities. 

Following the market logic of global trading, tertiary education institutions in the EU, as those in the 
US, Russia and China, seek to consolidate their relevance by aiming to obtain and maintain a strong 
international  reputation  that  can  boost  their  access  to  resources  such  as  funding  and  talent. 
Institutions  and  the  public  authorities  that  support  them  invest  time  and  money  to  achieve  and 
maintain  recognition  as  world-class  institutions.  This  can  have  both  positive  and  negative 
consequences,  as  the  excellence  achieved  by  some  institutions  may  be  a  drain  on  the  working 
conditions  and  consequently  the  quality  of  work  of  other  academic  institutions.  Policy  makers 
increasingly  use  funding  to  nudge  tertiary  education  institutions  in  certain  directions.  Funding 
models also determine whether tertiary education is closer to a public good or a commodity. The 
working conditions of academics are increasingly precarious due to certain institutions’ desire to cut 
costs. This leads to potential losses in institutional loyalty and autonomy. 

There is no single way to be a tertiary education institution. This is amply evident in the variety seen 
within the European Higher Education Area, and is even more evident when making the comparison 
to the systems in the US and China. In the US, tertiary education is characterised by a high level of 
decentralisation and independence from central government regulation, whereas in China there is 
an  increasingly  close  relationship  between  tertiary  education  and  central  government.  Policy 
choices reflect priorities and views regarding the place of tertiary education in a given society at a 
particular point in time.  

The  European  Commission  is  not  responsible  for  the  provision  of  tertiary  education  in  Member 
States,  but  it  is  expected  to  support  and  coordinate  policies in  the  area.  It  does  so  by  deploying 
funding to support tertiary education institutions in the creation, diffusion and practical application 
of knowledge. It supports the European Higher Education Area, which provides tertiary education 
institutions  in  the  EU  with  opportunities  to  affirm  their  position  on  the  international  scene.  The 
Commission  also  seeks  cohesion  by  promoting  policies  that  give  access  to  higher  education  to 
cohorts of young people who would otherwise be excluded. This is achieved through programmes 

32 

 
 
 
The future of tertiary education in Europe 

such as Erasmus+, the European Regional Development Fund and the Cohesion Fund, the European 
Social Fund+, Horizon Europe and Digital Europe. The funding of these programmes for the next 
seven years is currently the subject of interinstitutional negotiations. 
5.1. The Multiannual Financial Framework 2021-2027 
The  Commission  published  its  initial  MFF  proposals  in  May  2018,  standing  at  1.11 %  of  EU  gross 
national income (GNI). Subsequently, the European Parliament adopted its interim position on the 
single programmes and the MFF156 as a whole, which its negotiators used during the trilogues.157 
The  European  Council  President,  Charles  Michel,  also  formulated  a  proposal  in  February  2020,158 
which  represented  an  overall  level  of  1.07 %  of  EU's  GNI  taking  into  account  the  post-Brexit 
European Union of 27 Member States. He used this as a basis on which to negotiate a compromise 
position with the Member States. 159 However, no agreement was reached at the European Council 
convened on 20 February 2020. Due to the exceptional circumstances induced by the coronavirus 
pandemic  and  its  impact  on  European  societies  and  economies,  in  May  2020,  the  European 
Commission issued in May a second version of its proposals for the MFF integrating a new recovery 
instrument known as 'Next Generation EU' to take new realities into account. The European Council 
reached political agreement during its meeting of July 2020 but Parliament also needs to give its 
approval.160 There is no programme that supports tertiary education exclusively, though much of 
the  Erasmus+  budget  goes  to  tertiary  education.  This  section  contains  a  brief  description  of  the 
figures for  the  six  spending  programmes  already  quoted, which  play  a  crucial  role in  supporting 
tertiary education in Europe. 

5.1.1. Erasmus+ 
The  new  Erasmus+  programme  intends  to  contribute  towards  the  establishment  of  a  European 
Education Area by 2025, which would work to promote learning mobility in order to consolidate 
European identity and awareness of the Union's common values.161 The Commission also sees this 
as  an  opportunity  to  deliver  on  the  declarations  of  EU  leaders  and  the  wishes  of  the  European 
Parliament,  to  implement  fully  the  right  inscribed  in  the  European  Pillar  of  Social  Rights  that 
everyone  receives  inclusive,  quality  education.162  The  European  Parliament  wants  concrete 
measures to secure inclusion. It wants Erasmus+ to contain a chapter dedicated to it and it wants 
the European Commission to draw up a framework of inclusion measures and guidelines for their 
implementation by 31 March 2021.163 The Commission originally proposed a budget of €26.4 billion 
but  in  its  recovery  proposal  came  down  to  €24 billion.164  The  European  Parliament  proposes  an 
envelope of €41.1 billion to ensure better inclusion, with 83 % allocated to education and training. The 

156 

Interim  report  on  MFF  2021-2027  –  Parliament's  position  in  view  of  an  agreement,  2018/0166R(APP),  Legislative 
Observatory, European Parliament. 

157  Trilogues  are  the  negotiations between  the  institutions  on  legislative  proposals  which  generally  take  the  form  of 

tripartite meetings between Parliament, the Council and the Commission. 

158  Special meeting of the European Council, draft conclusions, Council of the European Union, 14 February 2020. 
159  Some  of  the  figures  for  individual  programmes  for  the  Council's  President  proposal  are  according  to  a  European 

Parliament simulation and refer to the February 2020 proposal. 

160  Financing the recovery must not burden the next generation, Press release, European Parliament, 30 June 2020. 
161  D.  Chircop,  Erasmus  2021-2027:  The  Union  programme  for  education,  training,  youth  and  sport,  EPRS,  European 

Parliament, November 2018. 

162  Proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing 'Erasmus': the Union programme 
for education, training, youth and sport and repealing Regulation (EU) No 1288/2013, COM(2018) 367, 30 May 2018. 
163  Erasmus programme for education, training, youth and sport 2021–2027, 2018/0191(COD), Legislative Observatory, 

European Parliament. 

164  All values are cited in 2018 constant prices unless stated differently, respecting the choice of the European Parliament 

as this allows for comparisons with figures from the last framework. 

33 

 
 
 
 
EPRS | European Parliamentary Research Service 

European Council agreed during its July summit on an allocation of €21.2 billion.165 This cuts Erasmus+ 
by  19.6 %  of  the  Commission's  proposal  and  48.4 %  of  the  European  Parliament's  proposal.  The 
European  Commission  has  communicated  that  such  a  cut  would  mean  that  the  number  of 
participants would have to be reduced.  

5.1.2. European Regional and Development Fund and the Cohesion Fund 
The  Commission  used  this  MFF  to  publish  a  single  proposal  for  the  regulation  of  the  European 
Regional Development Fund (ERDF) and the Cohesion Fund (CF). Previously, there had been two 
separate regulations.166 These programmes aim to reduce the gaps between different areas of the 
EU and will focus mostly on smart growth and a green economy. Education and training are still 
among the areas mentioned for possible funding. The Commission believes that the ERDF will work 
to complement the work of Horizon Europe. While the latter supports excellence in the generation 
and exploitation of new knowledge, the ERDF brings regional relevance by supporting structural 
reforms to education and disseminating existing knowledge and technology to places that need 
it.167 Funds go directly to Member States who establish their own priorities within the parameters of 
the  regulation.  The  initial  Commission  proposal  earmarked  €242.2 billion.  ERDF  was  allocated 
€200.6 billion  and  CF  €41.4 billion.  The  European  Parliament  proposed  a  total  amount  of 
€272.4 billion.  The  revised  Commission  proposal  amounted  to  €237.7 billion,  but  also  added 
€50 billion through the Next Generation EU instrument, in turn reaching €287.7 billion in total. The 
July European Council meeting reached a political agreement allocating a total of €242.9 billion of 
which, €200.4 billion are allocated to ERDF and €42.6 billion to CF and a further €47.5 billion through 
the Next Generation EU instrument. 
5.1.3. The European Social Fund Plus 
The European Social Fund Plus (ESF+) is the EU's main instrument for investing in people and for 
implementing the European Pillar of Social Rights.168 The proposed ESF+ is a merger of the existing 
European Social Fund (ESF), the Youth Employment Initiative (YEI), the Fund for European Aid to the 
most  Deprived  (FEAD)  and  the  Employment  and  Social  Innovation  Programme  (EaSI)  and  a  child 
guarantee. The European Commission intends for this fund to invest in people, including in their 
education and training so that the EU remains competitive in the global economy, with high levels 
of  employment,  health,  social  inclusion  and  active  participation.169  The  European  Parliament 
suggests concrete measures to fight child poverty, most notably it wants Member States to dedicate 
5 % of their ESF+ resources under shared management to the European child guarantee alongside 
other  measures  that  fight  poverty  and  lower  the  number  of  young  people  not  in  employment, 
education or training.170 This is significant as socio-economic disadvantage is an important barrier 
to  entry  in  tertiary  education.  For  the  coming  2021-2027  period,  the  Commission  originally 
proposed to allocate €89.7 billion. Parliament proposed a total amount of €106.8 billion. The new 

165   A. D’Alfonso and N. Kresnichka-Nikolchova, Future financing of the Union: MFF, Own Resources and Next Generation 

EU, EPRS, European Parliament, July 2020. 

166  See A. Widuto, European Regional Development Fund and Cohesion Fund 2021-2027, EPRS, European Parliament, 
January 2020 and V. Margaras, Common Provisions Regulation New rules for cohesion policy for 2021-2027, EPRS, 
European Parliament, March 2019. 

167  Proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on the European Regional Development Fund 

and on the Cohesion Fund, COM(2018) 37, Strasbourg, 29 May 2018. 

168  M. Lecerf, European Social Fund Plus (ESF+) 2021-2027, EPRS, European Parliament, March 2019. 
169  Proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on the European Social Fund Plus (ESF+), 

COM(2018) 382, 30 May 2018. 

170  European Social Fund Plus (ESF+) 2021–2027, 2018/0206(COD), Legislative Observatory, European Parliament. 

34 

 
 
 
 
The future of tertiary education in Europe 

Commission  proposal  provides  a  budget  of  €86.3 billion.  The  July  European  Council  meeting 
reached a political agreement allocating €88 billion.  
5.1.4. Horizon Europe 
On 7 June 2018, the European Commission presented its budgetary plan for Horizon Europe, which 
builds on the current programme Horizon 2020.171 This programme provides funding for researchers 
and the Commission intends to strengthen the Union's scientific and technological base to tackle 
major global challenges through this programme. It should also contribute to the achievement of 
the  Sustainable  Development  Goals.  The  Commission  claims  that  research  and  innovation  are 
needed  to  address  challenges  in  a  systemic  way  to  enable  solutions  that  sustain  the  EU's  socio-
economic model, its values, boost productivity and competitiveness and in this way deliver on what 
it interprets as being citizens' priorities.172 The European Parliament wants to dedicate 27.42 % of 
this  funding  to  Pillar  1,  which  is  dedicated  to  excellent  and  open  science  and  comprises  the 
European Research Council and the Marie Skłodowska-Curie Actions.173 The Commission proposed 
a  total  amount  of  €83.5 billion  for  the  2021-2027  period.  Parliament  proposed  a  much  higher 
financial package of €120 billion. The Commission adopted this latter figure in its second proposal 
but  allocated  an  additional  €13.5 billion  through  'Next  Generation  EU',  bringing  the  total  to 
€94.4 billion.  The  July  European  Council  meeting  reached  a  political  agreement  allocating 
€75.9 billion to Horizon Europe with a further allocation of €5 billion through the Next Generation 
EU instrument. 
5.1.5. Digital Europe 
As part of the next MFF, the European Commission proposed a new funding programme entitled 
'Digital Europe Programme', which is part of the 'Single Market, Innovation and Digital' chapter.174 
Its  main  objective  is  to  boost  Europe's  digital  transformation  to  the  benefit  of  citizens  and 
businesses. The Commission intends to focus on reinforcing Europe's capacity in high performance 
computing, artificial intelligence, cybersecurity and advanced digital skills, in order to enhance its 
digital  autonomy  and  to  protect  its  digital  sovereignty. 175  Additionally,  the  European  Parliament 
wants  the  programme  to  give  a  central  role  to  European  Digital  Innovation  Hubs,  which  should 
stimulate  a  broad  adoption  of  advanced  technologies  by  a  number  of  entities  and  stakeholders, 
including  academia.  These  hubs  should  have  substantial  overall  autonomy  to  define  their 
organisation,  composition  and  working  methods.176  The  Commission's  proposal  included  an 
amount of €8.2 billion, which was supported in the Parliament's interim position. The July European 
Council  meeting  reached  a  political  agreement  allocating  €6.8 billion,  representing  a  cut  of 
€1.4 billion from the initial proposal of the Commission and Parliament.  

A review of the positions the European Parliament adopted in a number of own-initiative reports 
and  in  its  interim  position  for  the  MFF  indicates  that  Parliament  believes  that  tertiary  education 
institutions  should  further  update  their  ability  to  foster  the  knowledge,  skills  and  capabilities 
required for active citizenship and market participation in the 21st century. It wants to see tertiary 
education  institutions  harnessing  digital  technologies,  in  order  to  improve  the  quality  of  their 

171  C. Karakas, Horizon Europe: Framework programme for research and innovation 2021–2027, EPRS, May 2019. 
172  Proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing Horizon Europe – the Framework 
Programme for Research and Innovation, laying down its rules for participation,, COM(2018) 435, B 7 June 2018. 
173  Horizon  Europe  framework  programme  for  research  and  innovation  2021–2027,  2018/0224(COD),  Legislative 

Observatory, European Parliament. 

174  M. Szczepanski, Digital Europe programme: Funding digital transformation beyond 2020, EPRS, February 2019. 
175  Proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing the Digital Europe programme 

for the period 2021-2027, COM(2018) 434 final, 6 June 2018. 

176  Digital Europe programme 2021–2027, 2018/0227(COD), Legislative Observatory, European Parliament. 

35 

 
 
 
 
EPRS | European Parliamentary Research Service 

research and of the education that they provide. It wants to see the closing of digital divides along 
gender, socio-economic and regional lines. In fact, it wants education, training and lifelong learning 
to work to decrease inequalities. It wants more girls and women engaged in science, technology, 
engineering  and  mathematics,  as  well  as  a  better  socio-economic  representation  in  learning 
mobility. Parliament supports the aims expressed by the Commission through its proposals for the 
MFF, but it also considers that such ambitions need a bigger financial backing, as well as refinement 
of some of the measures, to achieve a real impact on the future of tertiary education in Europe. 

Further reading 
Chircop D. and Claros E., Lifelong learning in the EU, Animated infographic, EPRS, European Parliament, 2018. 
Internationalisation of higher education, Policy Department for Structural and Cohesion Policies, Culture 
and Education, European Parliament, 2015.  
Katsarova I., Higher education in the EU: Approaches, issues and trends, EPRS, European Parliament, 2015. 

36 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
This  analysis  focuses  on  six  challenges  facing  tertiary 
education in the EU: the need to maintain relevance to 
current and future aspirations, the impact of digital and 
disruptive  technologies,  the  way  it  collaborates  with 
business,  global  and  intra-EU  collaboration,  quality 
assurance,  financing  and  barriers  to  inclusion.  It  also 
looks  at  trends  in  two  of  the  largest  higher  education 
systems  outside  the  European  Higher  Education  Area, 
those in the United States and China. This provides the 
backdrop to discuss how the next Multiannual Financial 
Framework,  which  is  currently  under  negotiation,  will 
put tools at the EU's disposal to exert some influence on 
the future trajectory of tertiary education, as well as the 
European Parliament's role in these negotiations. 

Q
A
-
0
2
-
2
0
-
7
7
0
-
E
N
N

-

This is a publication of the Members' Research Service 
EPRS | European Parliamentary Research Service 

This document is prepared for, and addressed to, the Members and staff of the European 
Parliament as background material to assist them in their parliamentary work. The content of 
the document is the sole responsibility of its author(s) and any opinions expressed herein should 
not be taken to represent an official position of the Parliament. 

PE 652.095 
ISBN 978-92-846-7167-0 
doi:10.2861/805265