|
Europe's Agenda on Global Competition
Marijk van der Wende
Marijk van der Wende is professor at the Center for Higher Education Policy Studies (CHEPS) at the University of Twente and professor at the Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam. Address: CHEPS , University of Twente. P.O. Box 217, 7500 AE Enschede, Netherlands. E-mail: m.c.vanderwende@utwente.nl.
Globalization and growing worldwide competitiveness are increasingly shaping policies and setting the agenda for the future of European higher education. These responses are formulated and implemented at European, national, regional, and institutional levels. Examining policies and efforts undertaken at the European level reveals the need for a greater political commitment to achieve the intended 3 percent gross domestic product (GDP) target for R&D expenditure and the 2 percent GDP target for higher education expenditure, mainly by stimulating private investments in these areas.
Complementary Engines for Action
In the late 1990s, awareness of global competition rose, leading to various initiatives. In 1998, the ministers of 4 countries (the United Kingdom, Germany, France, and Italy) called for the harmonization of degree structures, triggering the Bologna process, eventually joined by more than 45 countries. This important bottom-up and voluntary initiative engaged in system convergence with a view to enhancing employability in Europe and the international competitiveness and attractiveness of European higher education. While the European Commission (EC) served as a partner in the Bologna process, its role became more prominent after 2000 when the heads of state and government declared in Lisbon that by 2010 the European Union (EU) should become the most competitive and dynamic knowledge economy in the world. Shortly thereafter education was defined as one of the key sectors for achieving this goal, providing the EC with an important political mandate in education policy (though this mandate was not supported by any extended legal power). The EC quickly developed a wide range of initiatives known as the Lisbon strategy.
The Bologna process and the Lisbon strategy are the main frameworks guiding the European response to globalization in higher education. While the two initiatives hold some different patterns and could be characterized as intergovernmental (Bologna) versus supranational (Lisbon), they seem to be gradually forming one umbrella approach.
Convergence and Divergence
The first phase of the Bologna process focused strongly on convergence and transparency agenda among European countries (i.e., reform of curriculum and degree structures). The second phase has centered more on the "external dimension" in terms of enhancing international competitiveness and attractiveness and connections to other regions. This was paralleled by the development of the European higher education area (EHEA) and the European research area (ERA), as part of the wider Lisbon strategy, and by the creation of ERASMUS MUNDUS program.
The Bologna process is implemented quite differently across countries, weakening its harmonizing or convergence effects. Divergent trends can also be observed, especially within countries. This indicates that the current dynamics in European higher education are at times characterized by harmonization and transparency as well as searching for greater diversity. Both trends are considered important to enhance competitiveness in the global context. Increased participation rates among domestic students, fostered by diversified provision, are seen as enhancing each country's potential as a knowledge economy. Rising cross-border mobility within Europe and attracting more students from other regions, objectives fostered by harmonization and convergence, are seen to enhance the performance of the European knowledge economy as a whole.
Mixed Performance
The progress in the Lisbon strategy has led to optimism with respect to the objectives of economic growth, employment, and productivity. The proportion of employees with tertiary education is steadily rising. In 2006, 29 percent of the workforce in the EU-15 countries had tertiary education, up from 25 percent in 2000. As for research, however, progress is still unsatisfactory; throughout the EU-15 the share of GDP spent on R&D remains firmly stuck at 1.9 percent, far below the prominent Lisbon target of 3 percent of GDP by 2010. Considerable differences between countries can be observed: Italy and Spain demonstrating very low scores, while in contrast Sweden is way out front. Also for the share of private investment in R&D, the Lisbon objectives have not yet been met.
Ranking and Classification
Policy initiatives at European and national levels often relate to the position of universities in the worldwide rankings. Politicians set targets as to how many institutions should rank among the top 20 or 50 institutions as symbols of achievement and prestige and as engines of economic growth in a global knowledge economy. This approach illustrates the role that international rankings of universities play regarding global competitiveness.
Conclusion
Europe demonstrates impressive progress, but it also faces the complexity of policies and strategies at national and/or European levels. Deeply rooted differences in performance exist between countries and systems. The EU includes some of the top higher education systems in the world, performing on par or even higher than the United States and Japan, as well as a range of new member states at a different overall level than that of the EU-15 group. Accommodating this diversity and the lack of cohesive supranational decision making will require major institutional reforms at the EU level, which have yet to be established.
This article is based on a longer paper presented on 23 March 2007 at the Center for Studies in Higher Education, University of California at Berkeley (http://cshe.berkeley.edu/events/crisis/).
[Online] Available:
http://www.bc.edu/bc_org/avp/soe/cihe/newsletter/Number49/p11_derWende.htm
|
