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