Kristin Clemet

The Norwegian Research & Technology Forum in theU.S./Canada

6 October 2003

The Potential and Need for Strengthening Trans-Atlantic Cooperation in Higher Education and Research

Ladies and Gentlemen, Forum members,

Last year I had the pleasure of opening the First Annual Research Conference of the Norwegian Research and Technology Forum in the United States and Canada. I am very happy to be back in this forum again. I wish to thank the Ambassador, Mr Vollebæk and our Science Counsellor, Mr Jostein Mykletun, for establishing this forum and organising this conference. I also wish to underline the importance I attach to the need for transatlantic co-operation in higher education and research, and to indicate - as the title of my intervention also indicates - where I see a potential for stronger co-operation in view of the recent developments in Norway.

Last night I had the honour of meeting the US President’s Science Advisor, Dr Marburger. His positive attitude towards even stronger interactions between American and Norwegian researchers is also manifested today by the presence of his associate director at the Office of Science and Technology Policy, Dr Kathie Olsen. I would also like to welcome Dr Rita Colwell, Director of the National Science Foundation. Dr Olsen also attended the international conference on Climate Research in the Arctic, hosted by Norway on Svalbard (Spitsbergen) in July this year. Polar research is definitely an area where American and Norwegian researchers share interests, but Kathie Olsen’s participation at the Svalbard meeting also gave us the opportunity to continue a fruitful dialogue on further strategies for bilateral research co-operation with the United States. I am extremely pleased by Dr Marburger and Dr Olsen’s support for further co-operation.

The American scientific community has given Norwegian students and researchers generous access to institutions, laboratories and research groups since the Second World War. The United States has been an endless source of knowledge and inspiration, and a key to the development of Norwegian research . Studies in the United States have been formative for a great number of young Norwegians and vital for the development of outstanding Norwegian scholars. It is therefore not surprising that four out of five Norwegian Nobel Prize winners (in economy, physics and chemistry) had studied in the United States 1T.o:<span style='mso-spacerun:yes'> </span>Ragnar Frisch og Trygve Haavelmo i økonomi hhv 1969 og 1989, Lars Onsager i kjemi 1968 og Ivar Giæver i fysikk 1973.. The Fulbright Agreement has been an important instrument for a well-organised collaboration in education and research for more than fifty years. On a different, but very useful level a bilateral “Tax Agreement” has been instrumental in promoting the mobility of researchers between our two countries.

Over the past years, however, we have seen a change in the pattern of mobility. The United States no longer has the hegemony as a partner for our students and researchers, at least in some areas.

Some people claim that the international contacts in Norwegian education and research have become “Europe-oriented”. True enough, we have joined the big European schemes and programmes within education and research, with the main emphasis on the programmes of the European Union. While we observe that students and researchers increasingly look to Europe and other parts of the world, we also see that the exchanges between Norway and North America, among researchers in particular, on the whole remain fairly stable. The main trend is that international contacts have increased and become more widespread geographically with a stronger focus on Europe than before. In short, Norwegian education and research have become more international. This is definitely a positive development.

The major changes in the exchange pattern regarding North America are seen in higher education. Over the last decade or so, the number of Norwegian students in the United States, in particular, has declined both in number and in relative importance. The most remarkable development is the close to fifty per cent decline over the last ten years in the number of students fromNorwaytaking a full degree in theUnited States. There were 1269 Norwegian such degree students in the US in 2002-2003. In comparison there were around 3900 Norwegian students in Australia that year. If we look at shorter studies the situation is somewhat more positive. There has been a slight increase in the number of Norwegian students opting for shorter study periods at American institutions of higher education over the past two—three years.

The general decline in the number of Norwegian students is explained by very high student fees at American institutions, stronger immigration regulations, and partly by the new exchange possibilities offered through the programmes of the European Union, such as Erasmus. The on-going efforts to create a European Higher Education Area through the so-called Bologna process will also play a role. I suppose that the next speaker will go into more detail on this point. We also note that universities and other institutions of higher education in other countries, especially Australia, are much more aggressive in marketing their institutions.

Within research the picture is somewhat different. The United States remains the world scientific leader and the major source of scientific knowledge and creativity for my country. The US is also the point of reference for European research and innovation. Developments over the past twenty years show a slight increase in study visits and guest lectures by Norwegian researchers to North America. The increase is somewhat stronger within the humanities and social sciences, whereas exchanges within the natural sciences, technology and medicine remain fairly stable. But statistics also show a shift from long-term exchanges towards so-called “quick-fix visits”. Furthermore, researchers from USA dominate as the co-authors of scientific articles where Norwegian researchers are involved. This proves that the United States is still an important arena for co-operation and networks. An area where we see a more negative trend over the last decade is personal co-operation between Norwegian and American researchers. While 38 per cent of Norwegian researchers in 1991 reported that they co-operated with American colleagues in specific projects, this percentage had declined to 33 in 2000. In comparison, such co-operation increased considerably at European and Nordic level in the same period.

We see that the picture is quite varied. But there is a clear trend towards organised and programme based co-operation within education and research on the European level. The European co-operation - which is international in nature - is important, but let me underline that bilateral co-operation is also important and of growing concern for my ministry. The United States is without comparison the most important single country for bilateral contacts in my area of responsibility. In view of the recent developments there is a need to revitalize and give renewed strength to our relations with North American research and higher education. The reasons are evident:

The United States is the world leading nation in science and technology. The US investments and output in research, including private investment and output in research and innovation, are impressive.

Our emphasis and focus is on quality, and we find superior quality in the best American institutions, research groups and laboratories.

American laboratories and research groups are of utmost importance for basic research and are in the forefront of new developments. They are often “melting-pots” of different nationalities and an excellent basis for creating synergies and valuable networks.

There is a need to commercialize and to promote innovation and technology transfer in Norwegian higher education and research communities, and we have much to learn from the United States in this respect.

The reforms in Norwegian higher education call for more dynamic international networks at institutional level. We need to facilitate increased research co-operation between our institutions and top quality partners in North America.

But co-operation must be based on mutual interests. Above all, Norwegian education and research must have international quality and be attractive, and we must become better at promoting opportunities and qualities of Norwegian education and research. This is at the heart of my ambition.

In order to produce excellent researchers, we need high-quality universities and colleges. First, let me therefore focus on higher education.

Since my last visit in this forum The Quality Reform of higher education inNorway has been implemented. A main objective of the reform is to enhance the quality of both teaching and research through internationalisation. I see the reform as a strong push towards high-quality international co-operation. Our system of academic degrees has been changed to make them comparable to international standards, thereby encouraging greater mobility. The reform is linked to The Bologna Process and Norway’s obligations in that respect.

International student exchange is one of the criteria in the result-based financing system introduced as part of the reform. Among other main features likely to improve quality I can also mention new forms of student guidance, evaluation and assessment and the establishment of NOKUT – The Norwegian Agency for Quality Assurance in Education, i.e. in higher education.

The overall aim is to ensure a competitive higher education sector through increased cross-boarder institutional co-operation as well as student and teacher mobility. The institutions are strongly encouraged to participate not only in European, but also in other international education and research programmes. As a result Norwegian higher education institutions are developing their international strategies and reviewing their co-operation agreements with partners abroad. Part of their strategy is to attract more foreign students by increasing the number of academic courses offered in English, and to develop a more international student environment.

Each student is entitled to a study period abroad as an integrated part of her/his Norwegian degree programme. In order to achieve quality in the exchange programmes the academic institutions would be encouraged to establish bilateral agreements that include mutual recognition of curricula. The Diploma Supplement, already implemented on a compulsory basis for all higher education institutions as of 2002, helps to facilitate transborder credit transfers between institutions

I am proud to say that all Norwegian universities and colleges now have accomplished the main elements of this reform. They have done an impressive effort within a very short time. I do not hesitate to characterize this as a revitalisation of the Norwegian universities as teaching institutions.

But, since I yesterday came from Paris and Unesco’s General Conference, let me add that trade in education is nothing new. But, increasing trade in education creates both new possibilities and causes new concerns. I had the pleasure to attend the first international conference organised by the US Government and the OECD here in Washington one and a half year ago discussing the negotiations in WTO/GATS on education and trade. A fruitful dialogue was created, and the next conference will be held in Norway in November this year. Yet, at the General Conference of Unesco in Paris Norway proposed a resolution on “higher education and globalisation” to provide Unesco with a mandate to deal with the quality issues in education on the global market. I am pleased to say that the resolution was approved and also got the support of the US.

In other words, Norway is focusing on promoting both quality and internationalization. I trust that the Norwegian higher education institutions on the basis of bilateral agreements and their institutional policy will take care of student exchanges within their study programmes at all levels. A quick survey performed by our science counsellor at the Norwegian Embassy here in Washington seems to indicate that Norwegian universities and university colleges have concluded a great number of such bilateral agreements with institutions in USA and Canada. Many of them are less than a year old, which I would like to refer to as a result of the quality reform. They involve exchanges on undergraduate and graduate level as well as semester programmes. This is promising.

Second, I will focus on enhancing quality as the underlying factor also of my research policy. The main focus is to develop the research base with emphasis on basic research and recruitment of researchers. We have also pointed out certain thematic priority areas. As many of you will know, the areas are: medical research, marine research, information- and communication technologies, research in the area of intersection between energy and the environment. Let me add functional genomics and nanotechnology as two main programme areas which currently are being given substantial funding.

A special research fund has been set up to finance basic research in general, and within the priority areas. Last year we also launched a new Centres of Excellence Scheme, based on rigorous international evaluations and financed through the research fund. The thirteen selected centres are given special funding for a period of five to ten years. They cover research areas such as ICT, mathematics, medical research, climate research, aquaculture, geology, peace research, medieval history and linguistics. The Centres of Excellence Scheme is the most important measure to enhance quality in Norwegian research. The scheme has been met with enthusiasm, and I dare say it has had a favourable impact. We have already decided to extend the scheme from 2007, based on a call for proposals in 2005.

We put strong emphasis on the international dimension of the Centres of Excellence. As expected, they have been linked to research groups and networks of excellence in Europe and other parts of the world. I am delighted that the centres also have caught the attention of researchers and scientists in USA and Canada. Two of the centres have American directors (i.e. the Study of Civil War, PRIO, and Theoretical linguistics, Tromsø univ). The centres within medical research have extensive relations with American researchers and laboratories, and others have links to institutions like Washington University and MIT. We were pleased that the world famous American linguist, Noam Chomsky, sent his congratulations to the Centre of Excellence on theoretical linguistics at Tromsø University underlining the uniqueness of their research activities. I could add other examples within a Nordic Centres of Excellence scheme and research groups that have been given excellent evaluations in the EU Framework Programme for research and technology and in other international evaluations.

As another quality measure we this year launched a special scheme for outstanding young scientists with a dual scope: to give young promising scientists a possibility to establish their own research, and to stimulate young people to start a scientific career.

Among our initiatives to raise quality let me finally mention the Abel Prize established by the Norwegian government as an international prize on the level of a Nobel Prize in mathematics. It has been named after the Norwegian mathematician Niels Henrik Abel. Laureates are appointed by an independent committee of international mathematicians. The first prize was awarded this year to the French mathematicien Jean Pierre Serre, and it will be awarded annually. Next year it might be to an American! This year we launched the Holberg-prize in social science and humanities, named after the Danish-Norwegian scientist and author Ludvig Holberg. The first Holberg-prize will be awarded in 2004.

The potential for increased co-operation in many areas and in unexpected settings was clearly illustrated by a recent headline in a Norwegian newspaper. We learnt that researchers from the SINTEF research group in Trondheim are linked to a Norwegian firm which is exploring the ground under Manhattan – actually under Ground Zero. The researchers are analysing the quality of the ground by testing the drilling possibilities as preparation of the extension of the New York underground. The Norwegian expertise has been developed from research related to ocean drilling. This is indeed an excellent example of co-operation between research and industry - and I could add: an example of the generic utility of basic research in industry.

There is obviously a potential for exploring new avenues of co-operation in various fields, and on the basis of mutual interest.

TheSvalbardconference this summer confirmed our common commitment to polar research—which again involves several of the areas I have mentioned. There is an agreement of co-operation between the National Science Foundation and the Research Council of Norway concerning polar research. I am pleased that the co-operation within this framework is progressing, and that joint projects are developing. I look forward to further co-operation in the use of infrastructures on Svalbard, such as Svalsat and the new Arctic Marine Laboratory in Ny-Ålesund to be inaugurated in 2005. The United States and Canada are also welcome to join the co-operation related to the atmospheric research of the EISCAT radar where a new international agreement will be negotiated during 2005. Finally, North American students and researchers are invited to the University Centre, UNIS, for arctic studies and in a truly international environment.

I understand that the possibilities for co-operation in the areas of climate change and new energy technologies will be further explored tomorrow. This could be a platform for further co-operation and networking in those areas.

The reforms in Norwegian education and research should be a good starting point for developing mutual initiatives for stronger co-operation at institutional level. The individual institutions will act according to their needs and expertise. All co-operative mechanisms, including agreements, should be anchored within the institutions, although personal contacts and networks will remain the basis of collaboration.

But, as we have seen in other contexts, there is a need to identify other instruments to promote increased two-way mobility of students and researchers between our countries.

My ministry has started a process with other Norwegian ministries to develop a strategy for bilateral co-operation with the United States and Canada. Recent experience from Europe shows that some kind of framework will stimulate increased co-operation and exchange activities. As a first step, we have indicated to the U.S. State Department our interest in negotiating a bilateral umbrella agreement with the United States in the area of science and technology. In co-operation with other ministries, the Norwegian Council for Higher Education, the Research Council of Norway and others we are starting a process to define areas that could be of mutual interest and a basis for dialogue with American counterparts. The Fulbright scheme having been a fruitful tool so far, could serve as a model or even be extended to foster stronger bonds and co-operation.

I believe that the focus on quality both through The Quality Reform with the development of more study programmes in English, and through the Centres of Excellence Scheme in research will help attract Americans to Norway. We should also seek to stimulate greater mobility between academic institutions and the research intensive industrial and business communities. Norway has a lot to learn from the Unites States in this area, and I believe it would be worth while to explore various models. Since the United States has a separate agreement with the EU to facilitate the participation of American researchers in the EU Framework Programme for Research and Technology, the possibilities of co-operation also within this international framework should be explored.

To conclude, I wish to reiterate my will to develop a stronger and more focused long-term approach for Norway’s relations to North America within research and education. My ministry is putting an increased emphasis on bilateral co-operation, and is increasing its funding for this purpose through the Research Council of Norway. If the U.S. State Department is positive to a bilateral agreement on research co-operation with Norway, as we have suggested, we intend to work systematically together with counterparts in the USA to make this agreement useful as an instrument for stronger co-operation in selected fields, and as a basis for exchanges and networks.

Thank you!