6. ANNEXES
ANNEX 1 TERMS OF REFERENCE FOR THE 2009 DANISH UNIVERSITY EVALUATION
Preamble
With the changes of the university law in 2003 a comprehensive reform of the university management structure and a new status as self governing institutions for universities were implemented.
In 2007 this was followed by the merging of 12 universities and 13 government research institutions into 8 universities and 4 government research institutions.
The aim of the reforms in the university area was to provide universities with an enhanced capacity for strategic prioritization across their core areas of activity: education, research, and knowledge transfer, as well as with an enhanced ability to meet demands of society.
The purpose of the evaluation is to investigate the issues described in the Danish Parliament’s resolution V9, as well as issues concerning the development of degrees of freedom for the universities, cf. below.
The creation, through the reform of 2003, of a clear and transparent management structure including appointed leaders and government boards with a majority of members from outside the university, forms the basis for the evaluation.
The content of the evaluation
The Danish Parliament’s resolution V9 (Denmark’s Liberal Party, The Conservative People’s Party, and The Danish Social Democrats) of November 16, 2006 sets out the framework for the evaluation:
“The Danish Parliament accepts the answer from the Minister of Science, in that it:
>Notes that the purpose of the mergers are more education, greater international impact of research, more innovation and collaboration with industry, the attraction of more research funding from the EU, as well as a continued competent service in the area of government commissioned research.
> Notes that the institutions’ self-determination has been the core principle in the mergers of the universities and the government research institutions, which are to come into effect on January 1, 2007.
> Underlines the importance of the university law’s provisions concerning research freedom and employees’ freedom to participate in the public debate.
> Notes that the Minister of Science in 2009 will conduct an evaluation of the extent to which the purpose of the university mergers has been achieved.
> Notes that the Minister of Science in 2009 furthermore will conduct an evaluation of the state of codetermination for employees and students at the universities, the free academic debate, and research freedom, under the current university law.”
In addition the development of degrees of freedom for the universities will be included in the evaluation. This will entail an investigation of the development and effect of both the regulatory framework for universities and the regulation of universities through financial instruments.
Relevant stakeholders within the different subject areas of the evaluation, including employees, students, and management representatives from different levels of the university organizations, will be consulted as part of the evaluation process.
Evaluation panel
The evaluation will be conducted independently, cf. the explanatory notes for The Draft Bill to Changing the University Act (L140) of 31 January 2007.
The evaluation will be organized and undertaken by an independent panel of experts appointed by the minister of science. The panel can request analysis and studies from the Ministry of Science, Technology and Innovation or private consultants. Private consultants will be chosen on the basis of a public tender. The panel will be given secretary assistance independently of the Ministry of Science, Technology and Innovation.
ANNEX 2 PROPOSAL FOR MINIMUM CONTENTS OF THE 2009 EVALUATION OF 18 NOVEMBER 2008
Based on the Danish Parliament’s resolution V9 (Denmark’s Liberal Party, Conservatives, The Social Democrats) of November 16, 2006 as well as the wish to examine the status of the development of degrees of freedom for the universities, the independent evaluation in the university area, which the minister of science must undertake in 2009, will focus on five main areas.
A. Fulfillment of the purpose of university mergers
1. More education
2. Greater international impact of research
3. More innovation and collaboration with industry
4. Attraction of more EU-funding
5. Continued competence in commissioned services to government
B. Codetermination for employees and students
C. The free academic debate
D. Research freedom
E. Degrees of freedom
Expected surveys and analysis
The evaluation will be based on a number of surveys and analysis. Where requested data is already available, as is the case for most statistical data, UBST will be responsible for the analysis. Where new material needs to be produced, e.g. in interviews and surveys, private consultants will be responsible.
In addition to the following analysis and surveys, the evaluation panel will also be provided with statements from the universities concerned with substantial issues related to the evaluation’s subject areas.
Area A
1. The effect of the mergers on university education will be examined. This will include data on the establishment of new education programs, student recruitment, and the development of new subject areas.
2. The effect of the mergers on the international impact of research will be examined. This will include data on university publication activities, the attraction of foreign research funding, university ranking, the international recruitment of students, as well as statements from the universities.
3. The effect of the mergers on universities’ performance within innovation and collaboration with industry will be examined. This will include statistical material on university- industry links as well as on patenting.
4. The attraction of EU-funding will be examined based on the success-rate of Danish universities in EU-applications.
5. The state of Danish universities activities in the area of government commissioned services will be examined through the analysis of statistics on the number and size of contracts between government ministries and universities.
Area B
The status of codetermination for employees and students at the Danish universities will be examined. This will be done through a survey of the actual organization of codetermination at all levels of the different universities. Included in this will be an overview over the internal organization of each university, an analysis of the content of the different committees’ work based on agendas and minutes, and interviews with leaders from all levels of the universities, as well as student and employees, and including members of study councils and academic councils.
Area C
The state of the free academic debate at Danish universities will be examined. This will be done through an examination of the legal and organizational framework for the academic debate, through the analysis of statistics on the participation of researchers in the public debate, and through conducting a survey among researchers.
Area D
The state of research freedom at the Danish universities will be examined both in relation to government commissioned research and university research in general. Both the overall academic freedom of the universities as described in articke 2.2 of the university law, and the research freedom of the individual researcher as described in article 16a.7 and article 17.2. The analysis will include statistics on university financing and a survey among researchers.
Area E
The development of degrees of freedom for the universities will be examined. The analysis will include analysis of the development of the regulatory framework for universities - including the regulation of university education - as well as financial incentives, which universities respond to. Further more, leaders at all level of the university will be interviewed.
Universities, which were not part of the merger process, will be included in all areas of the evaluation. Government research institutions that were not part of the merger process will be included when relevant.
Evaluation panel
The evaluation will be organized and carried out by an international panel of experts.
The panel can request further studies and analysis to use in the evaluation. The evaluation panel will have secretary assistance independently of the Ministry of Science, Technology and Innovation. The secretary assistance will include practical and organizational tasks, as well as help in producing the panel’s final report.
| Appendix 1 Draft list of expected analysis for the 2009-evaluation | ||||
| Analysis | Subject area | Quantitative data | Qualitative data | conducted by |
| A1 | Education | Number of new education programs Number of enrolled students Development of new subjects |
Danish University and Property Agency (UBST) |
|
| A2 | International impact of research |
Bibliometrics / citations Publications Ranking International research funding Ph.D.-school enrollment |
UBST | |
| A2 | International reputation of institutions |
Statement from universities | ||
| A3 | Innovation and collaboration with industry |
Collaboration with industry FI ’s entrepreneurship barometer DEA ’s industry-research barometer Statistics on innovation Patents |
UBST | |
| A4 | Attraction of EU funding |
Application success rate | UBST | |
| A5 | Competence in the area of government commissioned research |
Number and size of reports delivered to state agencies |
Statement from universities | |
| A5 | Competence in the area of government commissioned research |
Interviews with researchers Interviews with ”costumers” |
Consultant | |
| B | Co-determination | Organizational framework at particular universities |
Statement from universities | |
| B | Co-determination | Interviews with students and employees, including members of study councils and academic councils. Analysis of meeting agendas and minutes. |
Consultant | |
| C | Free academic debate - framework and statistics |
Description of framework. Statistics on researchers’ media appearances. |
Statement from universities | UBST Consultant |
| C | Free academic debate - perceived experience |
Survey among researchers | Consultant | |
| D | Research freedom for universities |
The relative proportions of basic funding and competitive funding. |
Statement from universities | |
| D | Research freedom for researchers |
Survey among researchers Interviews with researchers regarding perceived experience |
Consultant | |
| E | Degrees of freedom | Overview of financial instruments regulating universities, the use of development contracts in regulating universities, and the regulatory framework of university education. The development in each of above areas in recent years. |
UBST | |
| E | Degrees of freedom | Interviews with rectors, deans and heads of department. |
Consultant | |
ANNEX 3 BRIEF PRESENTATION OF THE EVALUATION
PANEL MEMBERS
Brief presentations of the Panel Members are indicated in the following:
Agneta Bladh (Panel Chair)
Agneta Bladh holds a PhD in Political Science. She has been rector at University of Kalmar since 2004. She has a background as Director General at the Swedish National Agency for Higher Education 1995-1998 and as State Secretary at the Swedish Ministry of Education and Science 1998-2004. Agneta Bladh was a member of the recent Norwegian government commission on higher education (Stjernö-utvalget). Agneta Bladh has also been member of the OECD review teams on tertiary education in Denmark (1997) and China (2000). She was a member of the Nordic Science Policy Council 1995-98. Since 2008, Agneta Bladh is a member of the Administrative Board of the International Association of Universities (IAU).
Elaine El-Khawas
Elaine El-Khawas is a professor of education policy at George Washington University. She has been a consultant and advisor for UNESCO and OECD. She participated in the evaluation of the Danish university policies in 2003 and in the evaluation of research and development in the field of education in Denmark in 2004.
Abrar Hasan
Abrar Hasan holds a PhD in Economics. Currently a policy consultant to governments and international organisations, Dr Hasan is a Consultant Fellow at International Institute for Educational Planning at UNESCO in Paris. In 2007 he retired from the OECD after serving as Head of Education and Training Policy Division since 1992. Dr Hasan has conducted comparative education and labour market policy studies for over thirty years, focusing primarily on the OECD countries but also covering many developing countries. He is currently writing a book for Springer on comparative education policy in OECD countries, covering the period 1990 - 2007.
Peter Maassen
Peter Maassen is professor in Higher Education Studies, and member of the Department Board with responsibility for research, at the Institute for Educational Research, Faculty of Education, University of Oslo. He is currently a member of the Board of University College Oslo (Høyskole i Oslo), and of the Board of the Centrum für Hochschulentwicklung (CHE). Previously he has been the director of the Center for Higher Education Policy Studies (CHEPS), University of Twente, the Netherlands. He has been a member of the recent Norwegian governmental commission on higher education (Stjernö-utvalget), as well as of OECD review teams of Japan and Finland. He has produced over 100 international publications on higher education policy issues.
Georg Wincklers
Prof. Georg Winckler studied economics at Princeton University and at the University of Vienna, PhD 1968. Since 1978 he has been Professor of Economics and since 1999 Rector of the University of Vienna (reelected 2003 and 2007). From 2000 to 2005 he was President of the Austrian Rectors’ Conference. From 2004 to 2007 he was a member of EURAB (European Union Research Advisory Board). Prof. Winckler was Vice President of the EUA (European University Association) from 2001-2005 and President of the EUA from 2005- 2009. Since April 2008 he has been a member of ERAB (European Research Area Board) and, since February 2009, Member of the PEOPLE Advisory Group, European Commission, Brussels.
ANNEX 4 REFERENCE LIST OF BACKGROUND DOCUMENTS FOR THE EVALUATION
| Encl. nos | Overview of enclosures |
| A1 | DUPA: Fulfilment of the purpose of the mergers |
| A2 | DUPA: The merger process |
| A3 | DUPA: Fact sheet on the Danish universities |
| A4 | DUPA: Fact sheet on present and former government research institutions |
| A5 | DUPA: The process regarding The Kennedy Centre |
| A6 | DUPA: International tendencies regarding university mergers |
| A7 | DUPA: The Danish quality assurance system |
| A8 | ACE-Denmark: The development of the Danish quality assurance system |
| A9 | DUPA: Trend and background note on the educational area |
| A10 | DUPA: Trend and background note on the research area |
| A11 | DUPA: Trend and background note on the innovation area |
| A12 | DASTI: Trend and background note on the EU-funding area |
| A13 | DUPA: Trend and background note of the research-based public-sector services |
| A14 | DUPA: The National Food Forum |
| B1 | DUPA: Codetermination for employees and students |
| B2 | DUPA: The existing institutional and legal framework for codetermination |
| B3 | DUPA: Participation in elections at the universities |
| C1 | DUPA: Free academic debate |
| C2 | DUPA: The existing institutional and legal framework for the academic debate |
| C3 | DUPA: Researchers participation in public and academic debate |
| D1 | DUPA: Research freedom |
| D2 | DUPA: The existing institutional and legal framework for the research freedom |
| D3 | DUPA: Research financing analysis |
| D4 | DASTI: Description of the Danish public research financing system |
| D5 | DUPA: Development in the taximeter for education |
| E1 | DUPA: Autonomy |
| E2 | DUPA: Theme paper on levels of autonomy |
| E3 | DUPA’s reply to universities’ response regarding levels of autonomy |
| E4 | DUPA: International debate on autonomy |
| E5 | DUPA: The financial regulation of the Danish Universities |
| E6 | DUPA: The legal regulation of the Danish Universities |
| E7 | DUPA: Development contracts |
| E8 | DUPA: Academic Staff at the universities |
| E9 | DUPA: Factual changes to the theme paper on autonomy |
| F1 | Previous evaluations (not available on the Evaluation web site) |
| F2 | DUPA: Independent institutions in the public sector administration |
| F3 | DUPA: Equity and liquidity |
| F4 | DUPA: Analyses of the universities’ and the Government Research Institutions’ financing and organisation |
| F5 | DUPA: Overview of legal acts on the universities (Danish) |
| F6 | DASTI: Research evaluation guidelines |
| F7 | DASTI: Action plan for research evaluation |
| G1a | Aalborg University – Statement |
| G1b | Aalborg University - Statement regarding autonomy |
| G1c | Aalborg University - Reply regarding autonomy |
| G2a | University of Aarhus - Statement |
| Encl. no | Overview of enclosures |
| G2b | University of Aarhus - Statement regarding autonomy |
| G2c | University of Aarhus - Statement reply regarding autonomy |
| G2d | University of Aarhus - Strategy 2008-2012 |
| G3a | Copenhagen Business School – Statement |
| G3b | Copenhagen Business School - Statement regarding autonomy |
| G3c | Copenhagen Business School - Statement reply regarding autonomy |
| G4a | IT-University – Statement |
| G4b | IT-University - Statement regarding autonomy |
| G5a | Roskilde University - Statement |
| G5b | Roskilde University - Statement regarding autonomy |
| G6a | Technical University of Denmark (DTU) - Statement |
| G6b | DTU - Statement regarding autonomy |
| G6c | DTU - Strategy 2008-2013 |
| G6d | DTU – from the DTU newspaper (in Danish) |
| G6e | DTU – new master programs (in Danish) |
| G6f | DTU – new further education degrees (in Danish) |
| G6g | DTU – statutes (in Danish) |
| G6h | DTU – rector’s speeches (in Danish) |
| G7a | University of Copenhagen (KU) - Statement |
| G7b | University of Copenhagen (KU) - Statement regarding autonomy |
| G7c | University of Copenhagen (KU) - Statement reply regarding autonomy |
| G7d | KU - Appendix 1 – method and process |
| G7e | KU - Appendix 2 – Strategy for University of Copenhagen |
| G7f | KU – Appendix 3 – merger basis 2006 (in Danish) |
| G7g | KU – Appendix 4 – merger finances (in Danish) |
| G7h | KU – Appendix 5 – interdisciplinary research |
| G7i | KU – Appendix 8 – organisation chart |
| G7j | KU - Appendix 7 – Aeport on Academic Councils (in Danish) |
| G7k | KU – Appendix 8 – organisation of faculties (in Danish) |
| G7l | KU – Appendix 9 – section 17.2 in the university law (in Danish) |
| G8a | University of Southern Denmark (SDU) – Statement |
| G8b | University of Southern Denmark (SDU) - Statement regarding autonomy |
| G8c | SDU – Attachment 1 – slide with presentation of merger |
| G8d | SDU – outcome of consultation at Faculty of Engineering |
| G8e | SDU – outcome of consultation at Faculty of Health Science |
| G8f | SDU – outcome of consultation at Faculty of Humanities |
| G8g | SDU – outcome of consultation at the University Library |
| H1 | Universities Denmark: Autonomy |
| H2 | Universities Denmark: Position papers on autonomy |
| H3 | Universities Denmark: Report: Research-based public-sector services |
| H4 | Universities Denmark: Autonomy –reply |
| H5 | Universities Denmark: Forum for Research-based public-sector services 090809 |
| I1a | Statement from EUS - The Geological Survey of Denmark and Greenland |
| I1b | Statement from GEUS |
| I1c | GEUS publication catalogue 2008 |
| I1d | GEUS: Evaluation report - Water resources - 2007 |
| I1f | GEUS: Evaluation of Oil and Gas related Research - 2001 |
| I1g | GEUS: Evaluation report - programme area 4 |
| I1h | GEUS: Evaluation report - programme area 5 |
| I1i | GEUS: Act 536 on GEUS. |
| I1j | GEUS: Bill for GEUS act with comments as introduced |
| I1k | GEUS: Statutes for Geocenter Danmark |
| Encl. no | Overview of enclosures |
| I1l | GEUS: Executive order on evaluation of research at GEUS |
| I1m | GEUS: List of members of the GEUS board of directors |
| I2a | NFA– The National Centre for Working Environment - cover letter |
| I2b | NFA - Statement |
| I3a | SFI– The Danish National Centre for Social Research – Statement |
| I3b | SFI evaluation cover letter to panel |
| I3c | SFI: Evaluation report |
| I4 | The Kennedy Centre - Statement |
| J1a | Ministry of Climate and Energy - Statement |
| J1b | Ministry of Climate and Energy – Danish Energy Agency-statement |
| J1c | Ministry of Climate and Energy – Danish North Sea Partner-statement |
| J1d | Ministry of Climate and Energy – Ministry of Environment – statement |
| J1e | Ministry of Climate and Energy – Ministry of Science etc. – statement |
| J1f | Ministry of Climate and Energy – Bureau of Minerals etc. – statement |
| J1g | Ministry of Climate and Energy – GEUS science evaluation |
| J1h | Ministry of Climate and Energy – Minister’s letter to GEUS |
| J2 | Ministry of Economic and Business Affairs – Statement |
| J3a | Ministry of Employment – Statement |
| J3b | Ministry of Employment – cover letter |
| J3c | Ministry of Employment – international evaluation of NFA |
| J4a | Ministry of Environment – Statement |
| J4b | Ministry of Environment – toxicology statement |
| J4c | Ministry of Environment – geodesy and mapping statement |
| J5a | Ministry of Food, Agriculture and Fisheries - Statement |
| J5b | Contract between Aarhus University and the Ministry of Food etc. |
| J5c | Appendix 1a to the contract between Aarhus University and the Ministry of Food etc. |
| J5d | Appendix 1b to the contract between Aarhus University and the Ministry of Food etc. |
| J5e | Appendix 2 to the contract between Aarhus University and the Ministry of Food etc. |
| J5f | Appendix 3 to the contract between Aarhus University and the Ministry of Food etc. |
| J5g | Appendix 4 to the contract between Aarhus University and the Ministry of Food etc. |
| J5h | Framework agreement between Ministry of Food etc. and Technical University of DK |
| J5i | Performance agreement between Ministry of Food etc. and DTU |
| J5j | Performance Agreement - Danish Veterinary and Food Adm. and DTU Food |
| J5k | Performance Agreement - Danish Veterinary and Food Adm. and DTU Veterinary Inst. |
| J6a | Ministry of Health and Prevention |
| J6b | Ministry of Health and Prevention – framework agreement between Ministry of Health etc. and University of Southern Denmark |
| J6c | Publications 2003 Statens Institut for Folkesundhed (Danish) |
| J6d | Publications 2004 Statens Institut for Folkesundhed (Danish) |
| J6e | Publications 2005 Statens Institut for Folkesundhed (Danish) |
| J6f | Publications 2006-2008 Statens Institut for Folkesundhed (Danish) |
| J6g | Ministry of Health and Prevension - statement of Kennedy Centre |
| J6h | The Kennedy Centre Annual Report (in Danish) 2008 |
| J7 | Ministry of Social Welfare – Statement |
| J8 | Ministry of Transport – Statement |
| K1 | Danish Association of the Pharmaceutical Industry |
| K2 | Danish Consumer Council |
| K3 | DI– Confederation of Danish Industry |
| K4 | The Agricultural Council of Denmark |
| L1 | Consultancy Report: Research-based public-sector services |
| L2 | Consultancy Report: Co-determination |
| L3 | Consultancy Report: Academic freedom |
| Encl. no | Overview of enclosures |
| L4 | Consultancy Report: Freedom of research |
| L5 | Consultancy Report: Levels of Autonomy |
| L6 | Consultancy Report: Joint appendix to all reports |
| M1 | AC - Danish Confederation of Professional Associations |
| M2 | Representatives of students and university teachers |
| M3 | Confederation of Danish Industry |
| M4 | Danish Chamber of Commerce |
| M5a | Petition for a new University Act |
| M5b | Petition – press release (Danish) |
| M5c | Petition – all signatures (Danish – not public) |
| M5d | Petition – article (Danish) |
| M5e | Petition – distribution of signatures |
| M5f | Petition (Danish) |
| M6 | DJOEF– Danish Association of Lawyers and Economists |
| M7 | Academic Council of the Faculty of Social Sciences, Aarhus University – statement |
References
Aho, E. et al. (2006) Creating an Innovative Europe. Report of the Independent Expert Group on R&D and Innovation appointed following the Hampton Court Summit. (http://Europe. eu.int/invest-in-research/)
Amaral, A., Jones, G.A., and Karseth, B. (2202), “Governing Higher Education: Comparing National Perspectives” in Amaral, A., Jones, G.A., and Karseth, B. (Eds.), Governing Higher Education: National Perspectives on Institutional Governance, pp. 279-298, Dordrecht: Kluwer.
Chesbrough, H. (2006) Open Innovation. Researching a New Paradigm. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Harman, G. (1992), Governance, Administration and Finance, Oxford: Pergamon. Kelleher, Michael F (2006), ‘The Effectiveness of Governing Bodies”, IMHE Seminar on Governing Bodies of Higher Education Institutions: Roles and Responsibilities, OECD-IMHE Website.
King, Roger (2005), “Higher Educational and other Charities in England”, Seminar on Higher Education, 28-30 October, Novi Sad, Serbia, mimeo. OECD (2003), Education Policy Analysis, Chapter 3, “Changing Patterns of Governance in Higher Education”, Paris.
Olsen, J.P. (2007) Europe in Search of Political Order. An Institutional Perspective on Unity/ Diversity, Citizen/their Helpers, Democratic Design/Historical Drift, and the Co-Existence of orders. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Salmi, J. 2009. The Challenge of Establishing World-Class Universities. (Washington, DC: World Bank).
Science (2004), Reinventing Europe’s universities. Science vol. 304, 14 May 2004.
Walters, Colin (2006), “University Governance”, IMHE Seminar on Governing Bodies of Higher Education Institutions: Roles and Responsibilities, OECD-IMHE Website.
ANNEX 5 LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS USED IN THE EVALUATION REPORT
| Abbreviation | |
| AAU | Aalborg University |
| AC | Danish Confederation of Professional Associations |
| Ace Denmark | Accreditation Agency for Higher Education |
| ASB | Aarhus School of Business |
| AU | Aarhus University |
| BRIC | Brazil, Russia, India, and China |
| CBS | Copenhagen Business School |
| CERN | European Organization for Nuclear Research |
| CHE | Centrum für Hochschulentwicklung |
| DFF | Danish Food Forum |
| DTU | Technical University of Denmark |
| DUPA | Danish University and Property Agency |
| ECTS | European Credit Transfer and Accumulation System |
| EHEA | European Higher Education Area |
| ERA | European Research Area |
| ERC | European Research Council |
| EU | European Union |
| FP | Framework Programme |
| FP7 | Seventh Framework Programme |
| GDP | Gross Domestic Product |
| GEUS | Geological Survey of Denmark and Greenland |
| GOVRD | Government Research and Development |
| GRI | Government Research Institute |
| HERD | Higher Education Research and Development |
| ITU | IT University of Copenhagen |
| KBBE (FP70 | Knowledge Based Bio-Economy (food, agriculture and fisheries, biotechnology) |
| KU | University of Copenhagen |
| LMC | Centre for Advanced Food Studies |
| NFA | National Research Centre for the Working Environment |
| NIFU-STEP | Norsk institutt for studier av innovasjon, forskning og utdanning |
| NIH | National Institutes of Health |
| NSF | National Science Foundation |
| OECD | Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development |
| OSH | Occupational Safety and Health |
| R&D | Research and Development |
| RUC | Roskilde University |
| SBI | Danish Building Research Institute |
| SDU | University of Southern Denmark |
| SFI | Danish National Centre for Social Research |
| SMEs | Small and Medium sized Enterprises |
| UK | United Kingdom |
| US | United States of America |
| WPA | Workplace Assessments |
ANNEX 6 MEETING SCHEDULE FOR THE EVALUATION, INCLUDING PROGRAMME FOR THE EVALUATION PANEL ’S SITE VISITS IN AUGUST.
Panel’s Meeting schedule
All Panel meetings have taken take place in Copenhagen, except the 4th meeting. The tour was to all Danish Universities.
| 1st Panel meeting 10th December 2008 (Copenhagen) | 10th December 2008 (Copenhagen) |
| 2nd Panel meeting 30th April 2009 (Copenhagen) | 30th April 2009 (Copenhagen) |
| Meeting with 12th May 2009 (Copenhagen) stakeholders |
12th May 2009 (Copenhagen) |
| 3rd Panel meeting 14th-15th June 2009 (Copenhagen) | 14th-15th June 2009 (Copenhagen) |
| Tour at universities 20th-28th August 2009 (Copenhagen, Aalborg, Aarhus, Odense) and meetings with stakeholders. | 20th-28th August 2009 (Copenhagen, Aalborg, Aarhus, Odense) |
| 4th Panel meeting 4th-5th October 2009 (Vienna) | 4th-5th October 2009 (Vienna) |
| 5th Panel meeting 1st-2nd November 2009 (Copenhagen) | 1st-2nd November 2009 (Copenhagen) |
Programme for the Evaluation Panel’s Tour at the Danish Universities and meetings with other stakeholders 20th-28th August 2009
Version 19th August 2009
Thursday 20th August 2009
| 10.00 - 10.30 | Panel meeting with the DUPA secretariat Meeting room B Ministry of Science, Technology and Innovation, Bredgade 43 |
| 10.30 - 13.15 | Panel meeting Meeting room B |
| 13.15 - 14.00 | Lunch - panel and internal secretariat Meeting room A |
|
|
|
Friday 21st August 2009
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Monday 24th August 2009
|
|
Tuesday 25th August 2009
8.15 Departure hotel
|
|
|
| 19.00 - | Dinner with Universities Denmark internal secretariat and Pernille Meyn Milthers |
|
Wednesday 26th August 2009
|
|
|
Thursday 27th August 2009
|
|
|
Friday 28th August 2009
|
|
|
|
| 13.15.-.15.30 | Summing up |
| 15.30.-.16.30 | Summing up and adjourn (with the secretariat) |
ANNEX 7 THE DANISH UNIVERSITY SECTOR – A FACTUAL OVERVIEW
1. Organisational structure of the university sector
Denmark has eight universities – University of Copenhagen, Aarhus University, Technical University of Denmark, University of Southern Denmark, Aalborg University, Roskilde University, Copenhagen Business School, and the IT University. The universities varies in size but are all regulated by the University Act.
To the institutional structure for research and education belong also five government research institutions (GRIs) which are placed under four different government ministries. The five institutions are: The National Research Centre for the Working Environment (NFA), The Geological Survey of Denmark and Greenland (GEUS), the Kennedy Center, The Danish National Centre for Social Research (SFI) and Statens Serum Institut.
The present “map of universities and research” was implemented in the Danish university sector with effect from 1 January 2007. New universities were established on basis of mergers between some universities and GRIs. Before the merger there existed a total of 25 institutions – 12 universities and 13 GRIs.
Figure 1 shows the present “map of universities and research”. For each of the eight universities, the figure also lists the institutions with which the university merged.
Before the mergers there were twelve universities, two of which merged with University of Copenhagen (the Danish University of Pharmaceutical Sciences and the Royal Veterinary and Agricultural University). Two universities merged with Aarhus University (the Aarhus School of Business and the Danish University of Education).
A total of nine GRIs merged with universities. Five GRIs were merged with the Technical University of Denmark, namely Risoe National Laboratory, the Danish Institute for Food and Veterinary Research, the Danish Institute for Fisheries Research, the Danish National Space Centre and the Danish Transport Research Institute.
Aarhus University merged with two GRIs – the Danish Institute of Agricultural Sciences and the National Environmental Research Institute – while the National Institute of Public Health was integrated into the University of Southern Denmark and The Danish Building Research Institute was integrated into Aalborg University..
The GRIs were integrated into the universities in the form of faculties, departments or professional units. The mergers resulted in significant alterations in profiles or task structures, which were mirrored in the new university boards appointed. At several universities new management structures were introduced concurrently with the mergers.
2. Activities of the university sector
The main functions of the eight universities are education and research as well as exchange and dissemination of knowledge. Following the mergers with GRIs the university sector moreover has competence in the area of research-based public-sector services as the sector now delivers research-based public-sector services to some of the ministries.
The aim of this broadened university competence is to conduct research and related services directed at aiding the decision making of the authorities. The universities thereby, like the remaining GRIs contribute to development of knowledge to be used by public authorities in the political and administrative decision process and public debate, in innovation in private enterprises and for research based education. In addition, the universities conduct a range of services related to statistics, to supervisory and advisory functions, and to authorities that are important to society. Moreover, the universities train researchers and graduates.
Table 1 shows the respective turnovers and numbers of bachelor, master and PhD students at the eight universities. Table 2 shows the numbers of researchers (divided over different positions) at the universities. In section 3.5 and 3.6, further key figures on the activities and financing of the universities as well as of the GRIs are presented.
| Table 1: Turnovers (2009)* and numbers (2007)** of bachelor, master and PhD students | |||||
| University | Turnover MDKK |
BA |
MA |
PhD |
Total number of students |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aalborg University | 1,813 |
7,159 |
3,813 |
629 |
10,972 |
| Aarhus University | 5,140 |
14,564 |
14,758 |
1,194 |
29,550 |
| Copenhagen Business School | 1,040 |
6,670 |
6,194 |
168 |
12,866 |
| Technical University of Denmark |
3,527 |
3,748 |
2,422 |
798 |
6,170 |
| IT-University | 189 |
42 |
997 |
43 |
1,039 |
| University of Copenhagen | 6,291 |
21,152 |
16,470 |
2,168 |
37,796 |
| Roskilde University | 682 |
4,003 |
3,337 |
246 |
7,340 |
| University of Southern Denmark |
2,102 |
8,146 |
6,075 |
544 |
14,252 |
| Total | 20,784 |
65,484 |
54,066 |
5,790 |
119,983 |
|
*Figures from the Appropriations Act 2009. **Source: Rektorkollegiet: Universiteternes statistiske beredskab 2007 |
|||||
| Table 2: Numbers of researchers at the universities, 2nd quarter 2008 | ||||
| University | Professors |
Associate Professors |
Assistant Professors/ Post docs |
Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| University of Copenhagen | 578 |
1,765 |
950 |
3,293 |
| Aarhus University | 446 |
1,602 |
771 |
2,819 |
| University of Southern Denmark | 210 |
750 |
256 |
1,216 |
| Roskilde University | 72 |
235 |
74 |
381 |
| Aalborg University | 172 |
524 |
256 |
952 |
| Technical University of Denmark |
180 |
738 |
610 |
1,528 |
| Copenhagen Business School | 144 |
194 |
102 |
440 |
| IT-University | 4 |
29 |
22 |
55 |
| Total | 1,806 |
5,837 |
3,041 |
10,684 |
| Source: Negotiating-Database of Ministry of Finance, 2nd quarter 2008 | ||||
3. The legal/regulatory framework for the sector
The eight universities operate within the framework of the 2003 University Act (Act no 403 of 28.05.2003) with amendments (Act no.538 of 12.06.2009). The aim of the 2003 Act was to strengthen university research, education and knowledge exchange based on a strengthening of the institutional framework of the universities. The Act entailed changes in the institutional area, with the aim to increase the universities’ prioritisation and decisionmaking capacity within a framework in which the academic self-government was maintained and where the universities could remain independent from special interests.
With the 2003 University Act, the status of the universities changed from government institutions into “independent institutions under the public-sector administration”. The universities thus perform their activities within the framework set out in the University Act. The extent and scope of the self-government can be changed pursuant to amendments implemented in the University Act. The Minister for Science, Technology and Innovation is under a duty to supervise the activities of the universities.
The self-governing status entails that the universities are institutions within the public law domain. They are, however, entities with legal and procedural capacity, i.e. they can have rights and obligations and can institute proceedings before the courts – e.g. against the Danish state – to settle disputes.
The universities are to a wide extent subject to the rules applying to government institutions (certain staff issues, financial rules of disposal, accounting regulations etc.). Furthermore, in a number of areas, a set of rules has been laid down governing issues pertaining to the academic activities of the universities.
The universities are furthermore covered by the Danish Public Administration Act (Forvaltningsloven), the Danish Access to Public Administration Files Act (Lov om offentlighed i forvaltningen), the Danish Ombudsman Act (Ombudsmandsloven) etc.
The universities can abolish themselves or merge with other institutions subject to approval by the Minister for Science, Technology and Innovation. If the Danish state wishes to abolish a university, and it is not possible to obtain the Board’s endorsement of this, such an abolishment requires adoption by the Danish Parliament.
The eight universities are protected against competition for state funding from foreign and non-public Danish universities. There is no prohibition against such institutions establishing themselves, but they will not, for example, be able to offer study programmes with educational taximeter funding.
GRIs generally function within the framework of the “Act on Government research institutions” (Act 326 of 5 May 2004), which states that a GRI conducts research of the highest international standard with the following purposes:
> Offer counselling within its area
> Carry out research-based public-sector services
> Carry out development work with a clear societal focus
> Disseminate research results to relevant private and public stakeholders
> Maintain an operational capacity related to the activities mentioned
The development contracts
Besides the legal instruments, the individual universities are regulated via dialogue between the university and the Ministry of Science. The most important of the dialoguebased instruments are the development contracts.e.most.important.of.the.dialoguebased. instruments.are.the.development.contracts.
The universities draft proposals for their development contract. The contract is finalised following negotiations with the Ministry of Science, Technology and Innovation. The Ministry does not have the authority to impose specific targets on the university, nor does it have the instruments to sanction any underperformance, since this would demand a change of the 2003 University Act.
The development contracts were first introduced in connection with a revision of the University Act in spring 1999, where each university was offered a development contract. There was no obligation on the universities to enter into contracts. Each university that wished to participate had to prepare a framework and formulate a proposal in which it stated its values and targets and what it intended to achieve in a four year period.
The second-generation university development contracts were introduced in 2004 aiming at a stronger focus on quantitative targets and indicators. Like the first generation the second-generation contracts were not legally binding documents. The contracts were supposed to serve as the university board’s tool to monitor overall qualitative targets and simple quantitative targets.
In 2007, the third generation of development contracts – for the period 2008-2010 – was introduced. The change was mainly reasoned by the mergers in 2007, since they resulted in significant changes to the map of the research and university area. In the 2008-2010 development contracts, targets for the activities of the university must be set regarding research, education, dissemination of knowledge and – where appropriate – researchbased public-sector services. All development contracts include targets for 16 activities which were considered relevant in establishing the basic targets for the performance of the universities.
4. University management
The University Board
The Board is the highest authority of the university. The tasks of the Board comprise, among others: approving the university’s budget, approving the accounts, entering into a development contract with the Minister and employing and dismissing the rector. The Board has no authority in individual cases regarding other employees of the university or students.
The Board comprises a majority of external members, i.e. persons who are not employed within the university. The Board elects a chair from among its external members. The internal members of the Board are elected by and from the academic staff of the university, including PhD students, the technical and administrative staff and the students. Students must be represented by a minimum of two members.
The external members are selected on the merit of their personal qualifications. The board members are appointed for a period of four years (students one year term). The members may be re-appointed to serve an additional four-year period.
The University Act stipulates that, together, the members of the Board must contribute to the promotion of the university’s strategic aims to ensure a composition of the Board which is so broad-based as to avoid a one-sided representation of specific competencies, interests and experience.
Executive management
The Rector is employed by the Board. The Rector’s overall tasks are set out in the University Act. The Rector has the overall responsibility of the management of the university and makes recommendations to the Board regarding the appointment and dismissal of the other members of the university’s executive management.
The Rector employs and dismisses deans at universities which have a structure with several academic areas.
Pursuant to the Act, the dean manages a main academic area and ensures the interaction between research, study programmes and research-based public-sector consultancy services within the main academic area. The dean (or the rector at universities without a main academic area structure) employs and dismisses heads of department, appoints and removes heads of studies and appoints and dismisses heads of PhD schools.
Research and teaching are normally the responsibility – as prescribed by the Act – of the departments. The head of department undertakes the day-to-day management of the department. In consultancy with the study board and the head of studies, the head of department must follow up on evaluations of study programmes and teaching.
Employee and student co-determination
The basis for decision-making at the universities is the university Board and the appointed leaders, from rector to other leaders for parts of the institutions. The influence from staff and students follows two tracks. One is outlined in the University Act, the other is the same as for other public institutions having a minimum of 25 employees.
The University Act does not have a general paragraph on the importance of co-determination for staff and students, but it points out three special bodies, the Academy Council, the Study Board and the PhD-committee. The remarks to the bill for the University Act say that Academy Council is empowered to safeguard academic freedom and that study boards are empowered to safeguard student’s influence (sections 15 and 16).
The Academy Council consists of academic staff members, including PhD students, students, and a chairman representing Rector or Dean, depending on the level at which the council is established. The Academy Council has decision-making authority with respect to the award of PhD and doctoral degrees, and otherwise an advisory function on research and educational issues.
The dean sets up “the necessary number” of study boards with equal representation of academic staff and students. The study board selects from among its members a chairperson from the representatives of the academic staff and a vice-chairperson from the student representatives. The study board must ensure the organisation, realisation and development of the study programme and teaching.
In order to guarantee students’ influence on the PhD process, the deans must set up PhD committees. The PhD committee issues pronouncements within its area on all issues of importance for the PhD programme and PhD supervision. The PhD committee consists of representatives of the academic staff and of the PhD students.
The other track of influence is based on the general rules in the Danish labour market. Each university is required to set up a number of collaboration committees and an overall collaboration committee in the institution. The framework for the joint collaboration committees is determined in agreements set up between the Danish state and the trade unions. The tasks of the joint collaboration committees concern general matters which belong under the employer’s managerial rights.
5. The financial framework for the sector
As a main principle, the financing basis of the universities is based on two sources: 1. State funding earmarked for the universities in the annual Danish Appropriations Act (Finansloven) under Section 19(2) – the so-called basic funding 2. Other income from public research councils, the EU, private donors etc.
State funding is generally distributed through four channels:
1. Funding for education (taximeter funding)
2. Basic grants for research
3. Competitive research funding from the State, foundations etc.
4. Research-based public-sector services funding
The Ministry of Science, Technology and Innovation provides grants for the universities’ general activities through three of the four channels (1, 2 and 3) within the areas listed under the individual universities’ account under the Danish Appropriations Act. According to the University Act the university has at its free disposal – within its scope – subsidies, income and capital as a whole. The third channel differs significantly in this respect, since universities grant conditions relating to competitive funds will typically be described in detail in terms of both purpose and disposition. The fourth type of funding – for research bases public sector services – is provided by the different commissioning ministries.
The total turnover of the universities increased from DKK 16.7 billion in 2003 to DKK 20.8 billion in 2009, which corresponds to an increase of 24 per cent, cf. figure 2.
Figure 2: development in university turnover 2003-2009 (dkk billion in 2009 prices)
University basic funding is allocated to the main objectives – education, research and other purposes. Table 3 (below) shows the development in university basic funding since 2006.
The two GRIs Danish Space Research Centre and Risø are included in table 3, whereas the financing of the other GRIs is not included. The latter is due to that the financing for these GRIs is not basic funding but government commissioned services financing.
| Table 3: development in the financial basis of the universities 2006-2010 | |||||
| million DKK, 2010 prices | 2006 |
2007 |
2008 |
2009 |
2010*** |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Education | 4,806 |
5,130 |
5,180 |
5,391 |
5,355 |
| - taximeter (ordinary) | 4,420 |
4,639 |
4,580 |
4,678 |
4,668 |
| - completion bonus | 263 |
296 |
401 |
471 |
532 |
| - other* | 123 |
195 |
199 |
242 |
155 |
| Research | 6,010 |
6,349 |
6,692 |
7,043 |
6,871 |
| Other purposes etc. | 1,473 |
1,320 |
1,235 |
1,163 |
1,119 |
| Total basic funding** | 12,289 |
12,799 |
13,107 |
13,597 |
13,345 |
| Restructuring fund | 96 |
215 |
|||
|
Source: Suggestion for Appropriations Act 2010. * Concerns funds granted to the universities on the basis of the number of international exchange students as well as a development grant for education allocated under the globalisation agreement in 2006. ** Basic funds earmarked for the universities in the annual Appropriations Act. *** Suggestion 2010 |
|||||
In the last 20 years, university education funding has been based on output control, and this principle has partly been introduced for the allocation of research funding also, during the past ten years. The main tendency is that university basic funding is to be increasingly subject to incentive administration focusing on university output.
Table 4 shows that the share of basic funding related to the total financing of the universities has decreased.
| Table 4: Distribution 2003-2006 between basic funding for university research and competitive funding for the universities. | |||||
| Research Resources | 2003 |
2006 |
2007 |
2008 |
2009 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Basic funding | 64 % |
62 % |
58 % |
55 % |
56 % |
| Research income from competitive tendering (public and private sources) |
36 % |
38 % |
42 % |
45 % |
44 % |
| Public R &D of GDP | 0.78 % |
0.77 % |
0.83 % |
0.89 % |
0.94 % |
| Private R&D of GDP | 1.78 % |
1.65 % |
|||
| Source: VTU key Figures, March 2009 | |||||
Table 5 shows that the shares of basic funding for research, as well as performance based funding for research for each university, varies significantly amongst the universities.
| Table 5: Distribution (2009) between basic funding and performance based funding for research as percentage of total turnovers at the individual universities. | |||
| University | Performance based funding for research, percent of turnover |
Basic funding, percent of turnover |
Turnover MDKK* |
|---|---|---|---|
| University of Copenhagen | 20 | 47 | 6.291 |
| Aarhus University | 29 | 31 | 5.140 |
| Technical University of Denmark |
27 | 39 | 3.527 |
| University of Southern Denmark | 18 | 37 | 2.102 |
| Aalborg University | 17 | 36 | 1.813 |
| Copenhagen Business School | 8 | 29 | 1.040 |
| Roskilde University | 12 | 38 | 682 |
| IT University of Copenhagen | 11 | 47 | 189 |
| *Figures from the Appropriations Act 2009. | |||
Table 6 and 7 show the funding of numbers of staff, turnovers and financing of the GRIs.
| Table 6: Government Research Institutions funding (million DKK), 2009 | |||
| National Research Institution | |||
Core funding mio DKK |
|||
2008 |
2009 |
2010 |
|
|---|---|---|---|
| Statens Serum Institut | 98,7 |
104,7 |
103,8 |
| NFA - The National Research Centre for the Working Environment | 79,6 |
80,2 |
76,9 |
| SFI - The National Centre for Social Research | 36 |
48,3 |
46,3 |
| The Kennedy Centre | 45,8 |
48,4 |
44 |
GEUS - The National Geological Surveys of Denmark and Greenland |
128,3 |
139,6 |
138,5 |
| Total | 388,4 |
421,2 |
409,5 |
| Source: Suggestion for Appropriations Act 2010. | |||
| Table 7: Research-based public-sector services funding (million DKK), 2009 | |||
University |
Research-based public-sector services |
||
2008 |
2009 |
2010 |
|
|---|---|---|---|
| University of Copenhagen | 8,0 |
8,0 |
8,0 |
| Aarhus University | 479,0 |
486,0 |
522,0 |
| Technical University of Denmark | 361,0 |
356,0 |
347,0 |
| University of Southern Denmark | 20,0 |
17,0 |
16,0 |
| Aalborg University | 47,0 |
35,0 |
29,0 |
| Copenhagen Business School | - |
- |
- |
| Roskilde University | - |
- |
- |
| IT University of Copenhagen | - |
- |
- |
| Total | 915,0 |
902,0 |
922,0 |
| Source: Suggestion for Appropriations Act 2010. | |||
6. Key data regarding university education
Table 8 shows the development in total number of students and the average taximeter financing over the later years. The number of students has increased over the years except for a drop in 2008. This drop is due to change of admission rules (eg. stricter demands for the mathematic merits achieved in the pre-university education (in the “gymnasium”).
The taximeter financing per student has decreased from 2004 to 2006, followed by a significant increase from 2006 to 2007. The increase from 2007 to 2009 is less significant.
| Table 8: development in number of university students and taximeter financing per full time equivalent student | ||||||
| University education | 2004 |
2005 |
2006 |
2007 |
2008 |
2009 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Intake* | 17,255 |
17,971 |
18,244 |
18,997 |
16,718 |
19,183 |
| # Students* | 106,242 |
106,765 |
109,073 |
111,361 |
111,529 |
- |
| Student full time equivalents | 66,242 |
68,175 |
70,028 |
70,881 |
73,926 |
73,495 |
| DKK per student full time equivalents | 67,100 |
66,500 |
65,700 |
69,300 |
69,300 |
69,700 |
* Data calculated per Oct. 1st the relevant year Source: Denmark’s Statistics, numbers calculated by the Danish University and Property Agency, September 2009 and VTU Key Figures, March 2009 |
||||||
Table 9 shows that the number of Danish students abroad has stayed at an almost unchanged level from 2002 to 2007, whereas the number of foreign students in Danish universities has increased significantly.
| Table 9: development in student internationalisation | ||||||
| Internationalisation | 2002 |
2003 |
2004 |
2005 |
2006 |
2007 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Danish students abroad | 3,399 |
3,455 |
3,506 |
3,436 |
3,504 |
- |
| Foreign students in DK | 3,629 |
3,913 |
4,357 |
4,442 |
4,541 |
- |
| Source: VTU Key Figures, March 2009 | ||||||
Table 10 shows the number of bachelor and master intake and completion at the individual universities in 2007.
| Table 10: Bachelor and master intake and completion, 2008 | ||||
| University | Intake BA |
Intake MA |
Completion BA |
Completion MA |
| AAU | 1,763 |
1,458 |
1,345 |
1,489 |
| AU | 4,869 |
3,748 |
2,764 |
3,089 |
| CBS | 2,384 |
2,424 |
1,621 |
1,216 |
| DTU | 1,224 |
771 |
391 |
755 |
| ITU | 46 |
268 |
0 |
237 |
| KU | 5,175 |
4,153 |
3,461 |
3,590 |
| RUC | 1,356 |
1,074 |
892 |
680 |
| SDU | 2,519 |
1,377 |
1,901 |
1,192 |
| Total | 19,336 |
15,273 |
12,375 |
12,246 |
| Source: Rektorkollegiet: Universiteternes statistiske beredskab 2008 | ||||
7. Danish performance in the EU’s 7th Framework Programme (Cooperation and Ideas programmes)
Table 11 shows the participation of the individual Danish universities in projects that are funded under the Cooperation Programme of the the 7th Framework Programme.
| Table 11: The total participation of the Danish universities* in FP7 cooperation projects (per 15 November 2009) | |||
| Universities | Number of FP7 Cooperation projects in which a Danish university is coordinator |
Number of FP7 Cooperation projects in which one or more Danish universities is partner |
Total number of FP7 Cooperation projects in which one or more Danish universities participates |
|---|---|---|---|
| DTU | 4 |
72 |
76 |
| KU | 4 |
45 |
49 |
| AU | 2 |
31 |
33 |
| AAU | 6 |
22 |
28 |
| SDU | 2 |
12 |
14 |
| CBS | 1 |
05 |
06 |
| RUC | 0 |
03 |
03 |
| ITU | 0 |
00 |
00 |
| Total | 19 |
190 |
209 |
| Share of total number of FP7 Cooperation projects | 1% |
10.2% |
11.3% |
The total number of FP7 Cooperation projects with one or more Danish partners is 324, which constitutes 17.5% of the total number of FP7 Cooperation projects. Besides universities, institutions such as university hospitals, GRIs (i.e. GEUS and State Serum Institute) and private companies participate in the Cooperation programme.
Table 12 shows the total Danish participation in the Cooperation programme in comparison with other Nordic countries.
| Table 12: Overview of participation in FP7 cooperation per Nordic country | ||
| Countries | Number of FP7 Cooperation projects coordinated per country |
Total number of FP7 Cooperation projects with one or more participants from selected countries (incl. coordinating institutions) |
|---|---|---|
| Denmark | 37 |
324 |
| Finland | 57 |
310 |
| Norway | 35 |
213 |
| Sweden | 80 |
550 |
Table 13 shows Grants awarded to Danish institutions, as well as to institutions of selected countries, from the European Research Council (ERC) in EU’s FP7 Ideas Programme.
| Table 13: The total number of ERC grants awarded to researchers working in Denmark and a number of selected countries (FP7 ideas programme) | ||||
Number of Starting Researcher Grants 2007 |
Number of Advanced Researcher Grants 2008 |
Number of Starting Researchers Grants 2009 |
Total number of ERC Grants awarded in period 2007-2009 (total = 819 Grants) |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Denmark | 4 |
4 |
7 |
15 |
| KU | 1 |
2 |
3 |
6 |
| AU | 3 |
2 |
2* |
7 |
| DTU | 0 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
| Staten Serum Institute | 0 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
| Finland | 7 |
8 |
6 |
21 |
| Sweden | 11 |
18 |
5 |
34 |
| The Netherlands | 28 |
19 |
15 |
62 |
| Switzerland | 15 |
28 |
17 |
60 |
| United Kingdom | 59 |
58 |
41 |
158 |
| *=One researcher working jointly at AU and a specialised hospital | ||||