EU Context : Consultation themes around the modernisation of HE

1. The civic university and the future of higher
education in Europe
John Goddard OBE
Emeritus Professor of Regional Development Studies
Formerly Deputy Vice Chancellor

2. EU Context : Consultation themes around
the modernisation of HE
• “Enhancing ‘relevance’ to society of learning and teaching”
• “Helping HEIs become strong regional innovators”
• “Ensuring education and research activities are mutually
reinforcing”
Policy Implications
• Linking domains of different DGs : Education and Culture,
Cities and Regions and Research and Innovation (and their
national equivalents)

3. Dutch context
• Ministry of Education, Culture and Science : The Value of
Knowledge : Strategic Agenda for Higher Education and
Research 2015-2025
• “ This strategic agenda addresses a fundamental question. It
asks what significance changes in the world and in our society
hold for day to day life in our institutes of higher education.
This question is of relevance because universities and
universities of applied science do not operate in a vacuum,
but rather in open connection with their surroundings”

4. The drivers behind civic engagement
• The impact of the post 2008 economic crisis on public
finances
• Public funding for higher education is under scrutiny,
compelling universities to demonstrate their value and
contribution to society and the economy nationally and locally
• Politicians representing particular places are asking the
question especially in less prosperous areas are asking : ‘ we
have a university in our community but what is it doing for us?’
• The refugee and migration crisis has exacerbated the
challenge : what contributions are universities making to the
assimilation process in their communities?

5. The H.E. response
• In response, some university leaders are rethinking their university’s
responsibilities to society : engaging in learning beyond the campus walls;
participating in discovery which is useful beyond the academic community;
and service that directly benefits the public.
• Higher education policy makers are also coming out of their silos within
national governments and working with other agencies with specific, direct
and sometimes conflicting expectations of “what universities are for “
(e.g. contributions to: innovation, skills, the arts, cities and regions)
• All of this requires institutional transformation from the inside and new ways
of steering ‘at a distance’ university systems composed of autonomous
universities with different profiles
• The ‘Civic University’ as a model to capture the mutually beneficial
engagement between the community, region or wider world and the
university.

6. Deepening levels of engagement and complexity
(after Hazelkorn)
• Volunteering
• Outreach/extension
• Service learning
• Knowledge and Technology Transfer (linear)
• Knowledge exchange ( co-production)
• Holistic civic engagement embracing teaching and research
and requiring active institution leadership and management

7. The potential: The University and the Knowledge
Society
• “The university is the institution in society most capable of
linking the requirements of industry, technology and market
forces with demands of citizenship. Given the enormous
dependence of these forces on university based experts the
university is in fact in a position of strength not weakness”
• “The great significance of the university is that it can be the
most important site of connectivity in the Knowledge society…
(and)… a key institution for formation of cultural and
technological citizenship … (and)… for reviving the decline of
the public sphere”.
Gerard Delanty (2002)

8. The reality
• “We treat our opportunities to do research not as a
public trust but as a reward for success in past studies”
• “Rewards for research are deeply tied up with the
production of academic hierarchy and the relative
standing of institutions” BUT
• “Public support for universities is based on the effort to
educate citizens in general, to share knowledge, to
distribute it as widely as possible in accord with
publically articulated purposes”
Calhoun , “The University and the Public Good” Thesis 11
(2006)

9. Public value
“ Use of the adjective ‘public’ not only implies fundamental
questions about accountability but also poses additional queries
about to whom we as social scientists should feel
accountable…Public social science has both a research and
teaching agenda and involves a commitment to promote the
public good through civic engagement”
John Brewer : The Public Value of the Social Sciences (2013)

10. University Governance, Management and
Performance Models

11. Some management and performance models for
engagement
• The entrepreneurial university model with a strengthened steering core,
enhanced development periphery, a diversified funding base and
stimulated academic heartland (Burton Clark 1998)
• The triple helix model of universities, business and government with
semi-autonomous centres that interface with the external environment
supported by specialist internal units (e.g technology transfer offices)
and external intermediaries (e.g technology and innovation centres)
(Etzkowitz et. al . 2000)
• Performance Metrics – business income, patents, licenses and spin
outs
• Each of these models underplays the role of teaching and learning, the
arts and humanities, place based communities and civil society. This
requires a new model of the civic university
• BUT the performance metrics for civic engagement remain challenging
• All this matters because the way innovation takes place is
changing

12. TEACHING RESEARCH
The non-civic university
‘THIRD MISSION’
ACTIVITIES
Funding targets
THE ‘CORE’
THE ‘PERIPHERY’
Hard Boundary between enabling
and non enabling environments

13. No boundary spanners
Focus on supply side, transactional
interventions
Ineffective or non existent
partnership
Lack of a shared understanding
about the challenges
Entrepreneurs ‘locked out’ of
regional planning
The regional dimension: EU Guide
Connecting Universities to Regional Growth
PUBLIC SECTOR
Lack of coherence between national
and regional/local policies
Lack of political leadership
Lack of a shared voice and vision at
the regional/local level
PRIVATE SECTOR
No coordination or representative
voice with which to engage
Motivated by narrow self interest
and short term goals
Dominated by firms with low
demand or absorptive capacity
for innovation
HIGHER EDUCATION SECTOR
Seen as ‘in’ the region but
not ‘of’ the region
Policies and practices
discourage engagement
Focus on rewards for
academic research and
teaching

14. The Civic University
Enhancement
TEACHING RESEARCH
TRANSFORMATIVE,
RESPONSIVE,
DEMAND-LED ACTION
ENGAGEMENT
Socio-
economic
impact
Widening
participation,
community work
Soft
Boundary
THE ACADEMY
SOCIETY

15. Generating intellectual and
human capital assets for the
region
HIGHER EDUCATION SECTOR
Developing coherent policies
that link territorial
development to innovation and
higher education
PUBLIC SECTOR
Investing in people and
ideas that will create growth
PRIVATE SECTOR
Evidence based
policies that
support ‘smart’
innovation
and growth
The triple helix ‘connected’ region

16. • Universities must “ act as strategic institutions pulling together all their know-
how to create bigger economic and social impacts. Smart specialisation
calls on universities to do more”.
Commissioner Geoghegan-Quinn
• “The key to universities becoming strategic institutions is to take a holistic
view of their activities, rather than treating them in isolation. By integrating
research, teaching and external engagement, the knowledge created can
have a much greater impact”
• “University management as well as academic staff need to become pro-
active and move beyond mono-disciplinary and mono functional actions.
However, EU and national incentive structures also need to change because
they are overly biased towards research output and can hinder universities
in playing this strategic role”
Robert Jan Smits, Director General for Research and Innovation
• http://s3platform.jrc.ec.europa.eu/universities
Conclusion of the EU conference on mobilising
universities for Smart Specialisation(2014)

17. Cities require holistic engagement from
universities as ‘anchor institutions’

18. Universities as urban ‘anchor’ institutions
• ‘Anchor institutions’ are large locally embedded institutions, typically non-
governmental public sector, cultural or other civic institutions that are of
significant importance to the economy and the wider community life of the
cities in which they are based.
• They generate positive externalities and relationships that can support or
‘anchor’ wider economic activity in the locality
• ‘Anchor institutions do not have a democratic mandate and their primary
missions do not involve regeneration or local economic development.
Nonetheless their scale, local rootedness and community links are such that
they can play a key role in local development and economic growth
representing the ‘sticky capital’ around which economic growth strategies
can be built’ (Work Foundation)
• Institutions that are of the city not just in the city

19. What does anchoring imply for universities?
• Relationships with other institutions that inhabit the city
• Normative questions about the need for academic practise to be of
relevance to the place in which practitioners live and work as
citizens
• Exploration of a more broadly conceived territorial development
process than just economic growth and competitiveness
• Interrelated physical, social and cultural dimensions

20. The changing nature of innovation and the
civic university

21. 21
BUT the triple helix is not enough as the way we innovate is changing
Elberfelder Farbenfabriken vorm.
Friedrich Bayer & Co
Open innovation
Social innovation
Innovation in services
User innovation
Bell Labs, Holmdel, NJ

22. Open Innovation
• “Open Innovation 2.0 (OI2) is a new paradigm based on
a Quadruple Helix Model where government, industry,
academia and civil participants work together to co-
create the future and drive structural changes far beyond
the scope of what any one organization or person could
do alone. This model encompasses also user-oriented
innovation models to take full advantage of ideas' cross-
fertilisation leading to experimentation and prototyping in
real world setting”
• European Commission .

23. Social innovation as processes and outcomes
• “Social innovations are innovations that are social in both
their ends and their means…new ideas (products,
services and models) that simultaneously meet social
needs (more effectively than alternatives) and create
new social relationships or collaborations.
• The process of social interactions between individuals
undertaken to reach certain outcomes is participative,
involves a number of actors and stakeholders who have
a vested interest in solving a social problem, and
empowers the beneficiaries. It is in itself an outcome as
it produces social capital” (Board of European Policy
Advisors, BEPA, 2010: 9-10)

24. The quadruple helix
• “Quadruple Helix (QH), with its emphasis on broad cooperation in
innovation, represents a shift towards systemic, open and user-centric
innovation policy. An era of linear, top-down, expert driven development,
production and services is giving way to different forms and levels of
coproduction with consumers, customers and citizens.” (Arnkil, et al, 2010)
• “The shift towards social innovation also implies that the dynamics of ICT-
innovation has changed. Innovation has shifted downstream and is
becoming increasingly distributed; new stakeholder groups are joining the
party, and combinatorial innovation is becoming an important source for
rapid growth and commercial success. Continuous learning, exploration, co-
creation, experimentation, collaborative demand articulation, and user
contexts are becoming critical sources of knowledge for all actors in R&D &
Innovation” (ISTAG 2010)

25. The triple helix + users model (Arnkill et.al)

26. The citizen centred quadruple helix model
(Arnkill et.al)

27. Research: responding to societal
challenges

28. SmartSpec
EU focus on ‘societal challenge’ (SC)
Why focus on societal
challenges?
• Global policy buy-in to ‘challenge’
approach – OECD, WEF, etc.
• €30bn Horizon 2020 themes
many with an implicit or explicit
urban dimension
• Regional and urban smart
specialisation strategies can be a
powerful instrument to tackle
(societal) challenges (CEC, 2013)
EU Grand Challenges
• Health, demographic change and
wellbeing
• Food security, sustainable
agriculture, marine and maritime
research, and the bio-economy
• Secure, clean and efficient energy
• Smart, green and integrated
transport
• Inclusive, innovative and secure
societies
• Climate action, resource efficiency
and raw materials

29. 29
H2020 Cross cutting theme:
Science With and For Society

30. Responsible Research and Innovation?
RRI is a process where all societal actors (researchers,
citizens, policy makers, business) work together during
the whole R&I process in order to align R&I outcomes
to the values, needs and expectations of European
society
30
need not
always be
harmonious

31. A guiding vision for RRI
• “In tomorrow’s Europe, science institutions and scientists
engage with society, while citizens and civil society
organisations engage with science; thereby contributing to a
European society which is smart, sustainable and inclusive”
• Horizon 2020 Advisory Group

32. SWAFFS Advisory Group
• “While the European Research Area has been somewhat
successful in creating spaces for European science, it is now
time to become more pro-active, and not just in relation to the
Grand Challenges.
• There is a need for a new narrative drawing on a broad-based
innovation strategy encompassing both technological and
non-technological innovation at all levels of European society,
and with a stronger focus on the citizen and responsible and
sustainable business - a quadruple helix and place-based
approach to science, research and innovation.
• This goes further than the procedural challenge how each part
of Horizon 2020 can engage citizens and civil society in its
activities.”

33. The Rome Declaration 2014 and the civic university
• “We call on public and private Research and Innovation Performing
Organisations to:
• Implement institutional changes that foster Responsible
Research and Innovation (RRI) by:
• Reviewing their own procedures and practices in order to identify
possible RRI barriers and opportunities at organisation level;
• Creating experimental spaces to engage civil society actors in the
research process as sources of knowledge and partners in
innovation;
• Developing and implementing strategies and guidelines for the
acknowledgment and promotion of RRI;
• Adapting curricula and developing training to foster awareness,
know-how, expertise and competence of RRI;
• Including RRI criteria in the evaluation and assessment of research
staff “

34. What do academics do?

35. The Practise: How engaged is the academy?
UK Innovation Research Centre Survey of 22,000 UK academics -
External interaction and commercialisation activity (% of respondents)
http://www.cbr.cam.ac.uk/pdf/AcademicSurveyReport.pdf

36. A case study
Newcastle University

37. Mission : A world class civic university
“ The combination of being globally competitive and
regionally rooted underpins our vision for the future. We
see ourselves not only as doing high quality academic
work … but also choosing to work in areas responsive to
large scale societal needs and demands, particularly
those manifested in our own city and region”
Chris Brink, Vice-Chancellor

38. Newcastle University- mission
• ‘Paying attention to not just what it is good at but what it
is good for
• Delivering benefits not just to individuals and
organisations but society as a whole
• Putting academic knowledge creativity and expertise to
work to come forward with innovations and solutions that
will make a difference
• Combining academic excellence on the supply side with
a range of regional and global challenges on the demand
side
• Operating on a national scale but also recognising the
extent to which location in the City of Newcastle forms
the unique identity of the institution’

39. Societal challenge themes
•Ageing
•Sustainability
•Social Renewal

40. Newcastle initiative on changing age
• Brings together basic, clinical, social and
computer scientists and engineers to address:
• How and why we age
• The treatment of associated disease and
disability
• The support of through-life health, wellbeing and
independence
• Research, training, public engagement,
commercialisation

41. Newcastle Institute for Research on Sustainability
• To bring people together from throughout the
University AND the wider community to develop
sustainable responses to the great challenge of
our age: ensuring everyone has access to a fair
share of the world’s resources in perpetuity
• Urban living; low carbon energy and transport;
food security; water management; clean
manufacturing

42. Living Labs: the academic perspective
• “The notion of treating our city and its region as a seedbed for
sustainability initiatives is a potent one… the vision is of
academics out in the community, working with local groups
and businesses on practical initiatives to solve problems and
promote sustainable development and growth’
• “This necessitates that we proceed in a very open manner,
seeking to overcome barriers to thought, action and
engagement; barriers between researchers and citizens,
between the urban and the rural, between the social and
natural sciences, between teaching research and enterprise”
Director of NiRES

43. Newcastle Institute for Social Renewal
• The Newcastle Institute for Social Renewal as a
hub for research and teaching which is focused
on asking the big questions facing our society
• How individuals, communities and organisations
adapt and thrive in a rapidly changing and
challenging environment

45. People, Place and Community:
Universities and the leadership of place (Hambleton)
Political
Leadership
Community
Leadership
Managerial
Leadership
Intellectual
Leadership

47. Overview of Newcastle city Futures
• Applying national Foresight methodology locally
• Lead Expert Group drawn from the three partners and includes
representatives from Northumbria University
• Stakeholder Group – a wide range of interests from private and
public sector, academia and the third sector (Quadruple helix)
• Using 7 methods to achieve a comprehensive picture:
 Baseline evidence – the current picture
 Newcastle City region research and literature database
 Stakeholder Workshops
 Delphi Survey of key actors
 Newcastle City Futures Exhibition – an Urban Room
 Scenario building

48. City future themes
1. Relationships between an ageing society, housing needs, and the
use of digital technology in an age friendly city
2. Relationships between transport and highway design, digital
technology and public health benefits in a sustainable city
3. Relationships between enhancing local democracy and
engagement, visualisation of the urban realm, and cultural and
creative arts to generate public interest in a creative city .
.

49. Place Based
Leadership
Development
Knowledge
Networks
Skills
Impact
Civic leadership development programme
(Leadership Foundation in H.E)
Place Context
National Context
International Context
Place Commitment
Boundary spanners
Partnership workers
Qualities (influencing,
networking, resilience, etc.)
Relationship Builders
Secondments
Exchanges
Immersion events
Research projects
Joint Projects
Case Studies
Good Practice Guides
New Ways of Operating

50. An international learning network
The leadership and management of civic
universities

51. The participants
• University College London and Newcastle (UK)
• Amsterdam & Groningen (Netherlands)
• Aalto (Helsinki) & Tampere (Finland)
• Trinity College Dublin & Dublin Institute of Technology (Ireland)
• Testing a conceptual model through baseline data collection, online survey
of academic staff, senior management workshops and collective roundtable
• Findings to be published by Edward Elgar in book to supersede Burton
Clark’s Leading and Managing the Entrepreneurial University:
Organisational pathways to institutional transformation which underpins the
triple helix model of university/business and government
• Contributing to a dialogue around future models of European Universities
initiated by the European Economic and Social Committee

52. Seven Dimensions of the ‘Civic University’
1. It is actively engaged with the wider world as well as the local community of the
place in which it is located.
2. It takes a holistic approach to engagement, seeing it as institution wide activity and
not confined to specific individuals or teams.
3. It has a strong sense of place – it recognises the extent to which is location helps to
form its unique identity as an institution.
4. It has a sense of purpose – understanding not just what it is good at, but what it is
good for.
5. It is willing to invest in order to have impact beyond the academy.
6. It is transparent and accountable to its stakeholders and the wider public.
7. It uses innovative methodologies such as social media and team building in its
engagement activities with the world at large.

53. The ‘Civic University’ Development Spectrum
Embryonic Emerging Evolving Embedded
Dimension X
The spectrum describes the ‘journey’ of the institution against each
of the 7 dimensions of the civic university towards the idealised
model. It accepts that a university may be at a different stage of
development on the different dimensions. This is intended to provide
guidance in building a deeper understanding of where the university
is currently positioned and help in future planning, and is NOT
intended to be used as an assessment or ranking tool.

54. The civic university as a social innovator
•a multi-level actor linking the global, national and local domains
• working across the silos of the disciplines and of the public
sector and linking with both business and the community
• developing the boundary spanning and social
entrepreneurship skills of its staff and graduates
• co-producing knowledge in ‘living labs’
• shaping the future through action as well as analysis