european organisation for the safety of air navigation office of the senior scientific advisor, eec...

1European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation

Office of the Senior Scientific Advisor, EEC

BKTP.HCM

Trends in Academic Research -Which Options for Universities in Vietnam?

10th Conference on Science & Technology, Oct 22-26, 2007University of Technology, Vietnam National University HCM City

Prof. Dương Nguyên VũSenior Scientific Advisor - Chairman of the Scientific Board, EUROCONTROL EEC

Affiliate Professor of Computer Science & Engineering, HCMUTAcademic Advisor, Faculty of IT, UNS - VNU HCMC


Office of the Senior Scientific Advisor , EEC

BKTP.HCM

The Changing World …

Drivers:• Knowledge-based Economy

Know-how is a crucial element of competitiveness, Essential link between scientific discovery and capacity to imagine and to tune

imagination into concrete applications establishes the driving forces for innovation. Scientific investigations are backbone of industrial innovations,

• Globalization and Society Globalization imposes regional niches, and drives for scientific progress, However, society is not ready to foster: disaffectation of young people to science in

Western Europe and North America, Balance of demand and provision is one major concern.

Development of Scientific know-how and technologic capacity is basing more and more on international cooperation,

Changes in the organizational landscape of research institutions. Financing demands impose professionalization of academic professions,

Changes in the business landscape of higher education institutions.



BKTP.HCM

Understanding the Changes?

Key data:• What has changes in the past decades?• What is changing?• What might change in the coming ones?

Casting lights:• What changes there might be for the research mission of universities?• Which options for Universities in Vietnam to anticipate such changes?

Most data used in this presentation comes from OCDE Database, Primary analysis are courtesy of Stephan Vincent-Lancrin (OCDE-CERI)

OCDE - Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development has 30 member states: Australia, Austria, Belgium, Canada, Czech Republic, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Korea, Luxembourg, Mexico, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Slovak Republic, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey, United Kingdom, United States of America.



BKTP.HCM

Research in OCDE

All Sectors:• 80% of world R&D, • 1,9% GDP (1981) - 2,3% GDP (2003) [+200%]

Fact 1: Rise of R&D in Business Sector• 65,4% (1981) - 67,7% (2003) of total OCDE• Performance: 1,26% GDP (1981) - 1,53% GDP (2003) [+141%]• Expenditure: 1,00% GDP (1981) - 1,39% GDP (2003)

Explaining why OECD economies are often described as increasingly Knowledge-based Economy (Foray, 2004).

Fact 2: Decline of R&D in Government Sector• Total of R&D financed by government: 40,3% (1981) - 30,4% (2003)• Performance: 17,9% (1981) - 12,3% (2003)• Expenditure: 0,85% GDP (1981) - 0,68% GDP (2003) [+60%]• Shares of military research: 43% (81) - 28% (2001) - 33% (2004).

Source: OECD Science, Technology and Industry Scoreboard, OECD Publishing 2005, Paris. Foray, D. (2004) The Economics of Knowledge. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, USA.



BKTP.HCM

GERD as % GDP and % Civil GERD

QuickTime™ and aTIFF (LZW) decompressor

are needed to see this picture.



BKTP.HCM

Research in OCDE

Fact 3: Changing landscape of Academic Research:• Growth in funding and output, • Rise of private funding of higher education, • Rise of performance of basic research by non-academic sectors,• Growth of internationalization of academic research

While• New attitude of civil society towards scientific research, • New computing & networking opportunities offered by ICT are emerging as

new driving forces for the future of academic research.



BKTP.HCM

Trend 1: Growth of Academic Research

65,467,7

17,912,3 14,5

17,4

2,3 2,60

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

Industry Government Universities Private Non-Profit

Gross Domestic Expenditures on R&D (GERD) by Sector in OECD Area

19812003



BKTP.HCM

Industry GERD vs. Government as % GDP



Source : OECD, Main Science and Technology Indicators, May 2007.



BKTP.HCM

Growth of Academic Research

Some other facts:• Academic Research 0,28% GDP (1981) - 0,39% GDP (2003)• University Researchers:

Number of university researchers increased by 127% (7% annum) vs 118% in industry.

Percentage of university researchers: 24%(1981) - 26%(2003) of total in OECD. USA: 14,8% EU-15: 35%

• Growth in Academic Research is faster than in Industry Sector despite role of industry in knowledge-economy. 3-fold increase vs. 2-fold in industry sector.

• Role of Academic Research in knowledge-economy has become more and more crucial.

Source: OECD Database 2006.



BKTP.HCM

HERD vs GOVERD (in % GDP)






BKTP.HCM

Growth of Research Output

Publications: 466.000 articles (1981) - 650.000 (2003) [+39%]• USA:

University researchers authored 74% of total US articles in 2004, Books published by university press increased 21% (93-04), Books published increased 74% (93-04).

Recent trends:• Flattening of scientific articles output of USA since 1992; of the Netherlands,

Canada, UK since late 90’s. • Reasons are unknown & are under investigation:

Age structure of workforce? Change in professional practice? (a researcher in clinical medicine publishes

around 10 papers/year vs. 1 in engineering [EC, 2003]) Change of attitude towards the widespread practice of slicing research outputs?



BKTP.HCM

Why?

Massification of higher education:• USA: 8,5M students (1970) - 16M (2001), Japan: + 85% France: + 100%• OECD: 20M (1985) - 36M (2003) [+80%, average 4% per year]Explaining• Increase in academic workforce, hence research workforce (FTE) and outputs

“Professionalization” of academic profession:• Importance of quantitative research output in academic career paths, and • Strong external incentives to publish, and • Introduction of research assessment exercises.• “Publish or Perish” rule,• No information about the evolution of its quality over time.



BKTP.HCM

FTE of Researchers per thousand of Total Employments






BKTP.HCM

So, how about the future?

Massification of higher education has reached its peak in many OECD countries:• 45% in 15 OECD countries (Universal Higher Education reached),• 35% - 45% in 7 others, and <35% in only 4 countries. • Enrollments have been flat for years in many OECD countries; inclined in Korea and

Japan. Internationalization or “Brain Draining?”

EU objective to 3% GDP for R&D requires 700000 new researchers. Where do they come from?

OECD encourages foreign students to integrate their education and research, and eases immigration of high-quality professional in science & technology.

Principal flows observed between Asia (China, India) and OCDE countries. 25% of Science & technology PhD’s are foreigners.

Vietnam: must create the possibility for training and employment on science and technology research to avoid life-time immigration, for the sake of competitiveness in a knowledge-economy,

Shall even go beyond this by attracting “returns” (including overseas Vietnamese).



BKTP.HCM

Trend 2: Basic Research - Main Mission?

1015

1924

20 18

64 6459

2 36

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

Industry Government Universities Private non-profit

Distribution of Domestic Basic Research Expenditures Across Sectors

198119922003

Basic Research = 18% of Gross Domestic Expenditure on R&D (2003), up from 15% in 1991.



BKTP.HCM

Basic Research - a Mission?

4 6 5

2124

29

57

66 64

27

47 46

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

Industry Government University Private non-profit

% of Basic Research per Sector

198119922003

2025: Government and Higher Education sectors > 60% of Basic Research



BKTP.HCM


Observations:• Korea is the sole country in OECD where the business sector consistently

spends more on basic research than any other sectors (11% of budget on basic research, equivalent to 80% of university R&D budget).

Think about the position of Korea in the growing knowledge-economy in 2007!!• Eastern European states (Czech republic, Hungary, Poland, Slovak Republic)

prior to 1990’s followed the Soviet tripartite model: Universities focus on teaching, Academy of Science on basic research, Ministries (and Departments) on applied research. Structural changes have been difficult in some states and consequently on the

pace of growth. • Significant growth of basic research by academia in USA offsets the decline in

smaller countries like Iceland and Australia. What does it means? Migration of basic researchers? Financial and funding

issues?



BKTP.HCM


Assessment:• Basic Research in higher education institutions declines.• A possible respond could be for academic research to specialize even more in

basic research to keep its specialty (or competitive advantage), • Other forces might push academic research in other directions,

Questions:• Adapting the “traditional” Soviet’s Tripartite model and Western’s All-in-One

model to establish a hybrid model meeting the global societal needs? • Shall “we” foster specialization in basic research so as to complement the

distribution? • Which specialization for CSE of HCMUT?

ICT Infrastructure for Basic Research? Computational Mathematics? Advanced Computer Graphics (Virtual Reality, animation, special effects, etc)?



BKTP.HCM

Funding - A Debate

Strong social demand for better public management• The shift towards more autonomy & entrepreneurship is a common trend in

higher education management in most OECD countries. (Marginson & Considine, 2000; Martin, 2002; OECD, 2003)

• “Accountability, transparency, efficiency and effectiveness, responsiveness and forward vision are now considered as the principal components of good public governance which universities are being increasingly be asked to implement.” (Braun & Merrien, 1999)

Debates on National budget priority, efficiency of resource used, public policy objectives (eg, high quality education and research) leading to what government should provide and how costs should be shared among different groups in society (tax payers, students & families, companies, etc.)

Marginson, S., Considine, M. (2000) The Enterprise University: Power, Governance and Reinvention in Australia. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK

Martin, B.R. (2002) The Changing Social Contract for Science and the Evolution of the University. In Geuna, Salter and Steinmueller (Eds) Science and Innovation: Rethinking the Rationales for Funding and Governance. Edward Elgar, Aldershot.

OECD (2003) Changing Patterns of Governance in Higher Education. Education Policy Analysis. OECD Publishing, Paris.Braun, D. and Merrien, F.-X. (1999) Towards a New Model of Governance for Universities? A Comparative View. Jessica

Kingsley, London.



BKTP.HCM

Mode of Public Funding

2731

39

78

69

61

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

Direct Governement General Univeristy Funds

Percentage of Public Funding of Academic Research by mode

198119922003



BKTP.HCM

Effects of Changes in Public Funding

Observations:• UK: 9 universities representing 12% of all institutions, and 17% of post-grads receive

47% of public funding in 2002; top 4 got 29%.• USA: Top 200 universities among 3600 got 96% of all funding; top 100 got 51% of

public funding for academic research; top 20 got 20%. • In practice, as research funding becomes more concentrated in a few institutions, the

ability of some others to carry out academic research becomes limited. (Enders & Musselin, 2006)

Issues:• Academic research might just become concentrated in a relatively small share of the

system while the largest number of institutions will carry out only little research, if any. (Vincent-Lancrin, 2006)

• Creation of a more concentrated academic research (“Research University”)• Possible future disconnection between academic research and teaching,

Enders, J. & Musselin, C. (2006) The academic Profession of the 21st Century. In OECD Meeting on Demography and the Future of Higher Education. December 5-6, Paris

Vincent-Lancrin, S. (2006) What is Changing in Academic Research? European Journal of Education. Vol 41(2), June.



BKTP.HCM

Trend 3: Rise of Private Funding

3 6 6

817472

3 4 5131416

26 6

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

Business Governemnt Universities Private non-profit

Funds fromabroad

Percentage of Funding Source of University R&D

198119922003



BKTP.HCM

Rise of Private Funding

Rise of own private funds of higher education institutions:• Expansion of private university sector,• Increase in tuition fees,• New entrepreneurship activities of universities, e.g.

Commercial cross-border education, Commercial courses for adult learners or for industries, Commercial e-learning, Patenting & licensing.

Bayh-Dole act of 1980 (USA) giving incentive to universities to patent inventions, Revenues from IPR in USA 2003: $870M (NSB, 2004).

Gradual evolution of academic research and of university systems towards a more private system, most likely within a non-profit framework.

Again public governance and management transparency is essential.Larsen, K. and Vincent-Lancrin, S. (2002) International Trade in Educational Services: Good or Bad? Higher Educational Management and

Policy, Vol 14(3).pp 9-45. OECD Publications, Paris.Observatory on Borderless Higher Education (2004), Mapping Borderless Higher Education: Policy, Market and Competitions. OBHE, London.Newman, F., Couturier, L. and Scurrie, J. (2004) The Future of Higher Education, Rhetoric, Reality, and the Risks of the Market. Wiley & Sons,

San Francisco. OECD (2004) Internationalization and Trade in Higher Education. Opportunities and Challenges. OECD Publishing, Paris



BKTP.HCM

Trend 4: Internationalization of Academic Research

Globalization of economies and societies, leading to• Internationalization of higher education, • Internationalization of academic research

Observations of growth:• International mobility• International collaboration• International influence of science• Funding from abroad.

Consequences:• New poles of research are gradually emerging in the world.



BKTP.HCM

Growth of Mobility

Academics:• USA: inflows increased by 49% (94-05); 90.000 persons in 2005 (IIE, 2005)• EU: intra-European mobility under Socrates grew by 71% (97-00); 12.000 persons in 2000

(OECD, 2004)• Japan: increased by 66% (93-03) • Korea: increased by 300% (90-03)

Doctoral and Postdoctoral Students:• USA: 41% of all post-docs holding a US PhD are foreign-born; share of foreign academic

increased: 12% - 24% (94-05).• Growing cross-border mobility of academic researchers shows the internationalization of

the academic workforce and research, partly driven by an increasing competition between countries to attract foreign talents in their country. (OECD, 2005, OECD 2006)

Food for thought: Malaysia is trying to build capacity in universities by attracting foreign research institutions and by moving away from the import of foreign educational programs through financing. (Tremblay, 2005)

Institute for International Education (IIE) (2005) Open Doors 2005 - Report on International Educational Exchange. Sewickley, PA, USA.OECD (2005), Trends in International Migration - 2004 Edition. OECD Publishing, ParisOECD (2006), The Internationalization of Higher Education: Towards an Explicit Policy. Education Policy Analysis 2005. Paris. Tremblay, K. (2005). Academic Mobility and Immigration. Journal of Studies in International Education, Vol 2(2), pp 245-263.



BKTP.HCM

Growth of International Collaboration

Scientific articles co-authored by at least 1 international institutional affiliation increased from 8% (1988) to 18% (2001). • USA: 23,2% (2001): x2 from 1988,• EU-15: 17% (1988) - 33% (2001): nearly x2. • Asia: 11% (1988) - 21% (2001).

Average number of countries collaborating in scientific activities increased from 89 (1994) to 102 (2001). Foreign articles in scientific publication in US: 55% (1992) - 62% (2001)

Percentage of International Collaborative Scientific Articles by Region

54

42,8

42,8

40,7

35,9

32,7

13,2

21

24

8,1

28,6

28,9

18

17,4

10,3

11,3

0 10 20 30 40 50 60

Sub-Saharan Africa

Eastern Europe/Central Asia

Central/South America

Near East/North Africa

Pacific

Western Europe

USA

Asia

1988

2001



BKTP.HCM

Internationalization of academic research does indeed correspond to the emergences of new poles of science in the world.• China represents half of R&D expenditures of non-OECD countries (OECD, 2005)• Between 1988 and 2001, scientific article output has risen by:

North America: 13% Western Europe: 59% Asia: 119% South and Central America: 177% Near East & North Africa: 49% Pacific: 47% Eastern Europe and Sub-Saharan Africa: -20%.

Share of funding from abroad for the performance of academic research x3: 2% (1981) - 6% (2003)• Open to emergence and developing countries

EU funded FP’s US NSF, DoE, NIH

Inclusion of R&D in the General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS) of WTO. Future privatization of Academic and Higher Education Institutions?

World Order: New Poles of Research?



BKTP.HCM

New World Order in 2025?

Vicent-Lancrin scenarios (2006) Vincent-Lancrin, S. (2006) What is Changing in Academic Research? European Journal of Education. Vol 41(2), June.



BKTP.HCM

Scenario 1: Open Collaboration

• Mainly public funded,• Very internationalized,• Driven by Technology,• Free and Open Knowledge. Global networking is important & goes beyond universities, involving

industries as well as individuals and concerned groups, Governments across the world can easily share their large research

investments (remote operations, distributed research team). Technology driven networking induces much quicker spillover in the lower

ends of higher education systems (and in developing countries). Hierarchy between universities is more relevant for the recruitment of

academic researchers. Access to research tools & recent knowledge, new data sets, computing &

visualization tools, virtual “co-laboratories” open to everyone. Cutting edge research crosses borders.



BKTP.HCM

Scenario 2: National Interest Promotion

• Mainly public funded, • Academics keeping control over research,• Governments put strong emphasis on the national missions of universities,• Universities more embedded in local communities and regional economy.

Small number of elite universities & research institutions continue to be very internationalized, and

To keep their top rank nationally, the average university has research interests that are more related to their immediate neighboring cities & regions.

Academics continue to teach and to research, but teaching has become more clearly their 1st objectives and research is an arrangement that was found to match students’ and policy-makers’ expectation. (Vincent-Lancrin, 2006)



BKTP.HCM

Scenario 3: International Research Marketplace

• For-profit institutions,• Academic research becomes close to business sector:

Good share of basic research, Increased revenues from IPR, Growing involvement in business, Funded by public and private.

Research and teaching as distinct services, Universities orient towards “core business” - Research Universities. Fierce competition to attract research “super-stars” Basic research funded through tenders.

Outsourcing research for cost effectiveness, More “internationalization” of research teams.



BKTP.HCM

Scenario 4: New Public Management

• Mainly Public, • Public management makes intensive use of quasi-market forces,• Higher Education institutions are autonomous:

Still dependent on public financing but Manage to diversify funding sources:

Foreign education market, Deregulation of tuition fees, Patenting of research, Financial links with business sector.

Higher education private non-profit. Division of labor between institutions become stronger, most specializing into

different missions regarding teaching (with research) & research (with teaching). Funding budgeted research project through peer-reviewed selections.



BKTP.HCM

More competition nationally between universities; research money goes to some top.

Institutions are much more accountable to states & other financing sources (governance changed).

Best universities get best students with high tuition fees, Advances made by research institutions are democratized by

teaching institutions.



BKTP.HCM

Humble thoughts on an option for “us”

Assumptions:• EU area goes to scenario 2 (some go to 4 in lesser extend) and US to 3, • We goes to 4 (most likely to be).

Adapting a modern governance, Be commercial and professional, Proactive relationships with industries through “incubating” approach.

Proposal:• Be specialized into some research specialties as soon as possible to be ready

to provide “services” to scenario 2 and 3. • Services include:

Technology driven infrastructure serving highly collaborative research, Technology driven infrastructure and know-how ready for “outsourced” research,



BKTP.HCM

Some Random Thoughts

Specific proposal• Given the decline of basic research in Universities worldwide,• Given the growth of basic research in Government sector,• Given the strong demand for research and innovation in industry sector, • Given the continuous demand of researchers worldwide,

What if• Universities in Vietnam to focus more on applications domains to bridge the gap

between basic and applied research for industrial innovations?• Example for CSE could be for specific domains where we have strong potentials:

Petroleum exploration and production. Basic components: Modeling & Simulations, 4D Visualization, Complex information and signal processing, etc..

Game and movie industries. Basic components: advanced computer graphics, physically based modeling, computer animation, etc.

Air Transportation, Operational research, modeling and simulation, automatic control ICT Sourcing ?



BKTP.HCM

How to Make it Happened?

Strong and modern governance, a business-like approach? Invite personalities not necessarily academics to help transferring

knowledge about specific domains of applications to the faculty, Research topics must be relevant and concentrated to specific

problems with target output to innovative studies in industries,

Funding: research must be seen as investments, while teaching constitutes the assets.

Creation of a task-force to examine potential practical directions to anticipate changes to make the maximum benefits out of them.


Office of the Senior Scientific Advisor, EEC

BKTP.HCM

Thank You for Your Attention

european organisation for the safety of air navigation office of the senior scientific advisor, eec...

Documents