How groundbreaking research should increase in Sweden
NEWS
Stop routine promotions, increase the requirements for mobility amongst researchers and have the courage to promote elitism. How breakthrough research should increase in Sweden This is according to Gunnar Öquist, who has been involved in investigating why Sweden has fallen behind as a European research nation.
“Something must be wrong – after all, we’re good at research here in Sweden, aren’t we?” That was the commonest reaction when the Swedish Research Council showed that Swedish research has fallen behind over the past 20 years, and that it no longer achieves the level at which scientific breakthroughs occur.
Since 2005 the Swedish Research Council has carried out bibliometric analyses, i.e. studies of researchers’ involvement in the international front-line discussion concerning scientific development on the basis of publication statistics. Gunnar Öquist, Emeritus Professor of plant physiology at Umeå University and a former permanent secretary at the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences, is someone who has followed developments.
He thinks the reaction to the results was partially justified. There is, admittedly, successful research in Sweden, but not to a sufficient extent, and much of what is good could be better. Swedish research is still doing well in international comparisons, but it is only within limited areas that it gets to the top internationally. Countries such as Denmark, Holland and Switzerland – which are the European leaders – are at the top internationally in two to three times as many areas.
“If we look at areas in which Sweden is underperforming, we have more such areas than the top countries do. You could quite simply say that we are good at maintaining weak areas. The research we are good at is already top-level, but if we are to improve we must also raise the quality level within the weak areas,” says Gunnar Öquist.
The Swedish Research Council’s analysis was the upbeat to the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences deciding to carry out its own more detailed study during 2011 and 2012, to seek the reasons for Sweden’s foundering research situation (Fostering breakthrough research: a comparative study; www.kva.se).
So why has Swedish breakthrough research fallen behind? The report from Gunnar Öquist and his co-author Mats Benner, Professor of Research Policy in Lund, points out three main causes:
Universities’ lack of organisation and prioritisation with regard to specifically supporting top-level research, increasingly neglected recruitment with an unclear careers system for young researchers, and weak recruitment of academic leaders at various levels.
Why is the organisation opposing the rise of more ground-breaking research?
“The higher-education system has an extremely broad remit within both teaching and research. The research ranges from an objective regarding international breakthroughs and research in order to meet national requirements for solutions, through to regional development. Everything is important, but the splintered picture means that our faculties can no longer meet the requirements of international top research. Reorganise and prioritise resources in order to create better conditions for research with ground-breaking ambitions. With such prioritisation regarding high quality in international comparisons, I think the universities should be entrusted with having greater resources at their disposal and should thus be less dependent on external funding.
“The current system is actually pretty dreadful. We are greatly dependent on external funding. When researchers are completely dependent on external funding they must constantly save money in order to keep their research group going and focus on whatever the funder is willing to pay for. A short-term approach creates a production frenzy that means you don’t have the courage to ask over-tricky questions. This holds back the development of quality.”
What defects in the recruitmentsystem have you detected?
“Over the past 20–25 years we have mismanaged the opportunities to give young researchers good career conditions. We have put far too many resources into jobs and made researchers entirely dependent on external funding – regardless of the source – for their research. We also have far too little mobility in the Swedish research system, and international recruitment is too weak at various levels. People usually pursue their career at the same university as the one where they do their doctorate. University management promotes whoever is available, instead of actively seeking complementary personnel in order to create creative research environ-ments with the potential for renewal. Sweden operates an in-breeding system with regard to science, and we lack an overall strategy for coming to terms with this.”
What might such a strategy include?
“We must better promote elitism by improving the recruitment system. University management bodies are responsible in this regard — they must establish far clearer rules on recruitment and ensure that this recruitment attains a high international level. -Mobility requirements must also be introduced so you do not just passively promote whoever you already have, or you must at least ensure that competition for jobs involves international candidates. All of this calls for academic leadership at all levels, with the kind of legitimacy that comes with excellent academic qualifications.”
Why is it important for Sweden to resume its place as a research nation?
“So that science becomes more and more global. Sweden is a knowledge-based nation and has a high standard of living. We must be at the cutting edge in terms of research and innovation in order to safeguard our standard of living. We also have a responsibility to actively contribute towards finding solutions to today’s current global problems. If we fail, then we are not assuming the -responsibility required of us internationally.”
How do you see Umeå University’s position with regard to research success?
“Within Sweden, Stockholm University is the university that best holds its own in bibliometric analyses, but I am hopeful. The management of our university has taken heed of the warning bells. The prerequisites are in place, but the right measures to improve the situation must be undertaken. The awareness that things are not right is greater than at many other universities. You have to take the alarm bells seriously and ask what can be done to change the way things are going. If we are prepared to make the right prioritisations on distribution of resources, and to systematically seek to strengthen the research environments through recruitment, then Umeå University can become one of Europe’s top universities. Utopia or a possibility? We will decide on that.”
