Beiträge zur Hochschulforschung - European University Association

More documents

Recommendations

Info

22 Thomas Estermann, Enora Bennetot Pruvot fundraising activities, the study also found successful examples in other countries 3 . Foundations are the universities’ main partner in this context, but companies and alumni are also getting more involved. Income raised from the provision of services averages 4 per cent of a university’s income structure, but the ability to generate such funds is highly differentiated across Europe. Some British universities receive between 10 and 25 per cent of their total income from this type of activities. Financial and staffing autonomy experience and expertise to provide consultancy or facility-related services play an important role in the institution’s capacity to generate such income. Management of conference facilities, catering and accommodation (including student residences) represent the largest part of this income source, followed by consultancy services, educational services and commercialisation of research results. International public funding is almost exclusively made up of European funds, such as the Structural funds, the European research framework programme and the Lifelong Learning Programme. Figure 2: Average income distribution 9.1% 6.5% 4.5% 4.1% 3% 72.8% Public funding (national and regional) Student contributions Funding coming from contracts with business sector Philanthropic funding Service-related income ■ International public funding The EUDIS study also asked university leaders how they expect the institutions income streams to evolve in the near future. A clear majority expects public funding for teaching to decrease over the coming years. They also expect to receive more income from more sources and in particular anticipate that the smallest sources (European and philanthropic funding) will grow. 3 See J. Motion and A. Beney, “Income Diversification through philanthropy in UK Higher Education”, p. 58 Beiträge zur Hochschulforschung, 33. Jahrgang, 2/2011
5 Funding challenges Overview of the study The study highlights a number of challenges related to public funding that need to be overcome if Europe’s universities are to continue to provide high quality teaching and excellent research. Complex financial management Developing new funding streams often translates into complex financial management. Some universities have well over one hundred different income sources, which have, in many cases, very diverse accountability regimes. Nor does the higher education community expect this trend to slow down or reverse. A majority of the respondents in the project’s survey actually believe that the overall number of sources will increase. Universities therefore need to invest a lot both in time and resources if they want to obtain these funds, which application, contractual, reporting and reimbursement procedures often differ widely. In reality, “small income sources” can often generate a disproportionate amount of paperwork and administration which in turn raise the operational costs for universities. Increasing co-funding requirements The increasing trend to resort to co-funding requirements is probably the most under- estimated challenge to universities’ financial sustainability. Co-funding requires that a university raise a proportional amount of the full cost of the activity or project being funded, from its own budget or from another public or private source. Data from the EUDIS study showed that a majority of universities deal on a daily basis with co- funding requirements, whether for most or part of their public funding. Both European and national public funders increasingly use co-funding requirements by either funding only a certain percentage of the direct costs or just a part of the indirect costs of an activity (especially in competitive funding schemes). This is a threat to the universities’ financial sustainability, especially if it affects a sig- nificant part of their public funding. Indeed, co-funding does not necessarily lead to leveraging funds from other sources; in most cases, universities have to resort to using resources from their core budget. The EUDIS survey revealed that 65 per cent of the respondents co-funded these activities from core public funding, while 35 per cent resorted to a mix between public and private funds. The reason for this is clear – it is very difficult to raise funds from private funders to cover a part of the indirect costs of a project whose core activities are already funded. This, in turn, reduces the university’s capacity to invest in its future, diminishing the amount of “unconstrained” funds available to finance facilities, equipment or staff. Beiträge zur Hochschulforschung, 33. Jahrgang, 2/2011 23
Page 1: IHF Beiträge zur Bayerisches Staat
Page 4 and 5: Impressum Beiträge zur Hochschulfo
Page 6 and 7: 2 Orientation, themes and target au
Page 8 and 9: 4 Editorial Obwohl Hochschulen als
Page 10 and 11: 6 We would like to warmly thank the
Page 12 and 13: 8 Abstracts Partnerschaften und die
Page 14 and 15: 10 Abstracts Mark Lammerts: Challen
Page 16 and 17: 12 Jean-Marc Rapp An introduction t
Page 18 and 19: 14 Jean-Marc Rapp long-term financi
Page 20 and 21: 16 Jean-Marc Rapp The European Unio
Page 22 and 23: 18 Thomas Estermann, Enora Bennetot
Page 44 and 45: 40 Nigel Thrift Income diversificat
Page 46 and 47: 42 Nigel Thrift that, on average in
Page 48 and 49: 44 Nigel Thrift relationships with
Page 50 and 51: 46 Nigel Thrift South Africa and Ta
Page 52 and 53: 48 Mark Lammerts Challenges of univ
Page 54 and 55: 50 Mark Lammerts Graph 3: Increasin
Page 56 and 57: 52 Mark Lammerts Joining forces wit
Page 58 and 59: 54 Mark Lammerts strategy building,
Page 60 and 61: 56 Mark Lammerts When talking to me
Page 62 and 63: 58 Joanna Motion, Adrian Beney Inco
Page 64 and 65: 60 Joanna Motion, Adrian Beney 3 Lo
Page 66 and 67: 62 Joanna Motion, Adrian Beney Ther
Page 68 and 69: 64 Joanna Motion, Adrian Beney able
Page 70 and 71: 66 Joanna Motion, Adrian Beney a lo
Page 72 and 73: 68 Sheila Gupta Professionalisation
Page 74 and 75: 70 Sheila Gupta ment structures. Go
Page 76 and 77:
72 Sheila Gupta institutions are of
Page 78 and 79:
74 Sheila Gupta ■ Delivering new
Page 80 and 81:
76 Michael Jansen Funding condition
Page 82 and 83:
78 Michael Jansen This is in partic
Page 84 and 85:
80 Michael Jansen 2012. This notabl
Page 86 and 87:
82 Michael Jansen which can only be
Page 88 and 89:
84 Michael Jansen ing the strategy
Page 90 and 91:
86 Thomas Estermann, Monika Steinel
Page 92 and 93:
Page 94 and 95:
Page 96 and 97:
92 Bibliography Bibliography Aartse
Page 98 and 99:
94 Hinweise für Autoren Hinweise f
Page 100 and 101:
IHF Bayerisches Staatsinstitut für
show all

Beiträge zur Hochschulforschung - European University Association

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?