ReseaRch Quality assuRance foR the futuRe a ... - Lund University

Panel 1 – law
experience and knowledge of the situation in other Nordic law faculties,
although larger international settings have also been duly considered.
A true problem for the Faculty is its small size, as will be elaborated more
in detail below. Most of the individual disciplines have a staff of only
a few persons. Quality research only thrives amidst sufficient critical
masses: the fewer researchers, the greater the threat that quality drops.
Small units have difficulties also in establishing international networks
and in enticing researchers from abroad.
The problem of size is even further accentuated in disciplines which at
present do not have a tenured, full professor. At present this category
includes, among others, jurisprudence and legal theory, as well as legal
history, which may be said to represent basic research in relation to
positive-law disciplines. This inevitably affects their ability to fulfil the
specific role they have in both legal education and legal research. The fact
that the Department of Legal Sociology is located outside the Faculty
further aggravates the situation.
The many vacancies at the level of tenured professors are related to
choices in personnel policy. In many cases, the Faculty has chosen to wait
for current associate professors to achieve the level at which they can be
promoted to professors. However, it can be argued that only appointments
after open competition can ensure the recruitment of the best
national and international candidates. The policy of promotions may lead
to long vacancies and closed academic careers.
The Panel’s main task has been the evaluation of the quality of research.
The evaluation has been undertaken under considerable time pressure.
The panel held one meeting outside Lund, which not all members were
able to attend, in addition to which the chair and the vice-chair took part
in the site visit at Lund 9–13 June. During this visit, they held discussions
with the dean, as well as with representatives of both senior and junior
researchers.
Below, detailed evaluations, following the division into “teaching
teams” (lärarlag), are presented. On the basis of the detailed motivations
and the grades given to the teaching teams, the Panel has come to the
conclusion that the grade very good describes the average level of the
research. How ever, the panel wants to stress that, as is shown by the
55