The impact of the economic crisis on higher education in Europe

The impact of the economic crisis on
higher education in Europe
EUA Funding Forum
11-12 June 2012
Salzburg
Enora Bennetot Pruvot
Programme Manager
Governance, Autonomy and Funding Unit
European University Association
Overview
Methodology
Overall picture (2008-2012)
Impact on the universities’ activities
Tuition fees & student support
Key messages
To tweet, please use: #FundingForum
Methodology
Monitoring carried out by EUA Secretariat in
cooperation with National Rectors’ Conferences
Since 2008 – regular updates
Year-on-year evolution of public funding for
universities (research and teaching)
Expectations and outlook
Trends in terms of tuition fees
Identifying the impact of the crisis
on the universities’ activities:
Infrastructures / investments
Staff
Student support
Student services
Academic offer
Overall picture 2008-2012
Cuts > 10 %
• Czech Republic, Greece, Hungary, Iceland,
Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Netherlands,
Portugal, Spain
Cuts up to 10 %
• Croatia, Estonia
Stable budget
• Belgium (nl & fr)
• Finland
Funding increased
• Austria, France, Germany, Switzerland
• Poland, Slovakia
• Denmark, Norway, Sweden
The “red” cases
Cuts > 10 %
• Czech Republic, Greece, Hungary, Iceland,
Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Netherlands,
Portugal, Spain
Different situations:
Latvia: affected early and hard (08-10: 57% cut) – now
stabilising
Lithuania with a record -26.20% in 2012
Portugal: downward trend from 2011, with 22% cut in
2012 compared to 2011
Netherlands and Ireland have higher HE expenditure but
continue to struggle with cuts in the range of 5-10%
The “orange” cases
Cuts up to 10 %
• Croatia, Estonia
Croatia: “descending staircase” with cuts up to 5%
between 2008 and 2010, then stable in 2011, further 5%
cuts in 2012, and stable outlook. Cuts mainly linked to
salaries & benefits, hiring freeze and infrastructure.
Estonia: on its way to recovery? After substantial cuts in
the initial period, the budget has stabilised and even
increased in 2012. However research funds have not
returned to pre-crisis levels.
The “yellow” cases
Stable budget
• Belgium (nl & fr)
• Finland
Belgium: variations in HE budget remain small, with an
insufficient adjustement to inflation (BE-nl). The ongoing
reform of the state involves the transfer of competences in
the field to the regions and communities, hence uncertainty
as to what to expect.
Finland: The major university reform of 2010 hampers
comparisons over the period. Minor increases do not
compensate inflation.
The “green” cases
Increased funding
• Austria, France, Germany, Switzerland
• Poland, Slovakia
• Denmark, Norway, Sweden
Austria, Germany: expectations of further increases, although
more in terms of competitive funding in Germany. In Austria, the
“billion for higher education” spreads from 2013 to 2015.
France: increases between 2007 and 2010 as part of the general
university reform, but much of the commitments are made under
the form of endowments.
Denmark, Sweden: some increases but situation varies among
teaching, research, staff, infrastructures.
Poland, Slovakia: positive trends but inflation cancels out part of
the increase in Poland; in 2011 Slovakia cut significantly in capital
expenditure.
Impact per area
Teaching funding
 Increases in funding for education in absolute figures are often due to
rising numbers of students. However funding per student is often
stagnating or decreasing (example: DK, DE, IS, IE, NO).
Research funding
 Increase in BE (nl), DE (through targeted and competitive funding),
SE
 Decrease in HR, DK, EE (partially offset via EU research/structural
funds), IE (indicative 10% cut announced for 2013), NL (abolition of
the fund for economic structural reinforcement)
Infrastructures / capital spending
 Notable cuts in Croatia, Ireland; in Slovakia, this is the main area that
suffered cuts. Capital spending for research in England has been
substantially cut.
Impact per area
Staffing policy
 Hiring, salary freezes and redundancies, for instance in Croatia and
Ireland
 Limited entry to new academic staff (Spain)
 May affect salaries as well as benefits
 May result in increased workloads with more teaching hours (example:
Spain)
Academic offer and teaching
 Generally, worse staff/student ratio as a result of higher student
numbers and limited/stagnant staff intake
 Rationalisation of academic offer: closure of degree programmes for
which demand is considered too low (Spain)
 Reduced library and contact hours
Tuition fees & student support
Towards more differentiation among students
 Fees closer to real cost of degrees for student repeaters or students
exceeding a prescribed average length of studies (NL, ES)
 More often fees for international, non-EU students; increasingly based
on the real costs of the degree (Scandinavia, Spain)
Hesitation to charge the main student population
 Specific case of England where fees become the heart of the system,
in combination with income-contigent loan support system for
students
 Fees were abolished in most German Länder
 Complex situation in Austria
Varying degrees of student support
 NL transformed grants into loans
Key messages
Divergent trends in funding could lead to major divisions across
Europe in terms of levels of public investment in HE
Worrying signs that many countries in eastern and southern
Europe more affected than many in northern and western Europe
(although there are notable exceptions).
Threat of increased brain drain as staff & students leave these
systems
European funding programmes need to cover costs on a full cost
basis to avoid decrease in participation of these universities.
Impact on European Research and Higher Education Areas and
international scientific collaboration
Investment in higher education and research needs to be
maintained and increased in order to help European countries out
of the economic crisis.
THANK YOU!
For more information please contact:
[email protected]
Follow on twitter
@EUAtweets
@EnoraPruvot
Tweet during the event:
#FundingForum