Report 2010:13 R Swedish universities & university colleges Short version of annual report 2010 In English www.hsv.se Report 2010:13 R Swedish universities & university colleges Short version of annual report 2010 Högskoleverket (Swedish National Agency for Higher Education) • Luntmakargatan 13 Box 7851, SE-103 99 Stockholm • phone +46 8 563 085 00 • fax +46 8 563 085 50 e-mail [email protected] • www.hsv.see Swedish universities & university colleges Short version of annual report 2010 Published by Högskoleverket 2010 Högskoleverkets rapportserie 2010:13 R ISSN 1400-948X EDITOR Lena Eriksson GRAPHIC DESIGN AND GRAPHICS Lena Ernstson ILLUSTRATIONS Students from Umeå Institute of Design, Umeå University PRINT Åtta.45 Tryckeri AB, Solna, August 2010 PRINTED ON ENVIRONMENTALLY-FRIENDLY PAPER CONTENTS Introduction 5 An international perspective 9 Facts about higher education in Sweden 15 Trends and developments 23 Education at first and second-cycle levels 24 Third-cycle education 31 International mobility 32 Education and employment 35 Teachers and researchers 36 Financing 38 Key figures for higher education institutions 43 First and second-cycle 44 Third-cycle 44 Teaching and research staff 44 Funding 44 Universities and university colleges in Sweden 51 ”How do I design a bicycle that solves the problems of service and maintenance? What are the requirements and needs to meet my target group?” Daniel Gunnarsson Sweden Industrial Design Project: ”Ett enkelt cykelägande” (An easy way of owning a bike) In collaboration with Nishiki. INTRODUCTION THIS SUMMARY OF the Swedish universities es. The subsequent section presents key data and university colleges annual report 2010 about students, staff and finance for each uni- gives an outline picture of higher educa- versity and university college. Analysis in the tion activities in Sweden. Initially, the report Annual Report is mainly based on statistical presents some indicators for Swedish higher information supplied by Statistics Sweden education in an international perspective and, and the Swedish National Agency for Higher under the heading Facts about higher educa- Education (Högskoleverket). tion in Sweden, provides a basic description of the structure of higher education in Swe- den and the regulatory framework. The re- port then summarises developments prior to and including the fiscal year 2009 for state Anders Flodström and private universities and university colleg- University Chancellor 6 INTRODUCTION ”Almost 2 billion passengers travel by commercial aviation annually. Every day there are 22 to 33 medical incidents, and the frequency of these incidents is increasing due to an ageing population. Conducting emergency treatment in- flight is hard because of the limitations of space and equipment. This is a concept for an emergency medical kit that meets the needs to operate in these incidents and therefore improves the prerequisites in life and death situations.” Nils-Johan Eriksson Finland Industrial Design Project: ”A design approach to medical equipment in commercial aviation” Winner of ”Idesignpriset" 2009. In collaboration with SAS and Umbilical Design. AN INTERNATIONAL PERSPECTIVE Per cent HIGHER EDUCATION IS a key factor in nation- 0 10 20 30 40 50 al development and in the ability to compete Canada Japan with other countries. From a Swedish view- New Zealand United States point, it is important to look at higher educa- Finland tion from an international perspective. Sever- South Korea Norway al factors can be compared by using statistics Australia Denmark from a number of other countries. This chap- Ireland ter presents statistics of this nature taken from United Kingdom Belgium the OECD publication Education at a Glance. Netherlands Switzwerland Sweden THE EDUCATION LEVEL OF Iceland Spain THE POPULATION OECD average France The education level of the inhabitants of a Luxembourg Germany country is often used as a measure of the skills Greece and competence available, which is a signifi- Poland Hungary cant factor in national growth. This indicator Austria Mexico is commonly used in international compari- Slovak Republic sons as a measure of development potential. Portugal Italy Figure 1 shows the proportion of the popu- Czech Republic Turkey lation in the 25–64 age range with higher ed- 0 10 20 30 40 50 ucation qualifications in 2007 in the various Figure 1. Proportion (per cent) of people with OECD countries. The proportion was highest higher education in 2007 in comparison with the total population in the 25–64 age range. in Canada (49 per cent), Japan (41 per cent) and New Zealand (41 per cent), while Turkey (11 per cent) had the lowest proportion. Swe- den, which had 31 per cent, was slightly above The median age for university entrants in the OECD average of 27 per cent. Both the Sweden was slightly more than 22. This means proportion for Sweden and the OECD aver- that university entrants in Sweden were older age were unchanged compared with the pre- than in other countries, with the exception of vious year. Iceland. Countries like Sweden that receive many students from other countries tend to AGE OF UNIVERSITY ENTRANTS have a higher entrant median age. In many OECD countries, the tendency is Swedish higher education prepares partici- for students to commence their higher edu- pants for lifelong learning, for example in the cation studies immediately after completing form of distance education. This has an im- their upper-secondary school education. The pact on the age of students since many of them average median age for university entrants – particularly women – commence their stud- was 20.3 in 2007, and 18–19 in countries with ies as adults, and 20 per cent of the students the lowest median age for university entrants. are 29 or more when they embark on higher 10 INTERNATIONAL PERSPECTIVES Years Per cent 0 5 10 15 20 25 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 Iceland United States Sweden Canada Denmark South Korea Switzwerland Finland Finland Denmark Germany Australia New Zealand Sweden Portugal New Zealand Australia Japan Austria Netherlands Slovak Republic OECD average Hungary Switzwerland Czech Republic Portugal OECD average Poland Norway France Poland Austria United Kingdom Turkey Belgium Italy Norway Netherlands Czech Republic Mexico Ireland United States Mexico United Kingdom Iceland Ireland Hungary Spain Spain Greece Germany South Korea Slovak Republic Belgium Italy Japan Turkey 0 5 10 15 20 25 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 Figure 2. Median age for university entrants Figure 3. Higher education costs, percentage in 2007. of GDP in 2006. These costs include research at universities and university colleges, but do not in- clude student aid costs. education. Most of the OECD countries also (GDP). It should be noted that these figures have an age-spread among their university en- refer to 2006. trants. On the other hand, in some countries On average, the OECD countries allocated (Belgium, Japan and South Korea) the entrant 1.44 per cent of GDP to higher education in group has a very even age distribution: 80 per 2006, which represented a slight decrease in cent of the students are 20 or younger when comparison with the preceding year, although they commence higher education. the countries with the highest allocations – the United States and Canada – allocated COSTS FOR HIGHER EDUCATION roughly twice this figure, and South Korea There is considerable variation in the resourc- was not far behind. In the Nordic region, es that different countries allocate to higher Denmark, Finland and Sweden were rather education, including research. The costs of similar in this respect, with 1.6–1.7 per cent higher education are depicted in Figure 3 of GDP allocated to higher education, but the as a percentage of Gross Domestic Product figures for Norway and Iceland were lower. INTERNATIONAL PERSPECTIVES 11 Research and development represented a US-dollar 0 5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000 25,000 30,000 substantial proportion of higher education United States costs – on average 26 per cent – although Canada this figure varied from country to country. Switzwerland Sweden In countries such as Sweden and Switzerland, Norway the percentage devoted to research and devel- United Kingdom opment was considerably higher – 40–50 per Netherlands Austria cent. One explanation may be that research in Australia Sweden is conducted at higher education in- Belgium Germany stitutions rather than at independent entities. Finland In countries which devoted a high percentage OECD average of their GDP to higher education (the United Ireland France States, Canada, South Korea), core costs of Spain education programmes tended to account for Portugal a major proportion of the country's total ex- New Zealand Italy penditure on education and, as a result, the South Korea funds expended on support functions and re- Czech Republic Mexico Education search and development were relatively lim- Hungary Support functions Slovak Republic ited. research and development Poland 0 5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000 25,000 30,000 COSTS PER STUDENT Figure 4. Costs per student in higher educa- The amounts the various OECD countries de- tion in 2006. The costs for support functions are vote to higher education, including university not reported for all countries. Costs are reported in USD, taking into account differences in the various research from public and private sources in re- countries’ cost levels. lation to the number of students, is indicated in Figure 4. This Figure also shows the alloca- tion of costs between core education, support functions and research and development. INTERNATIONAL STUDENT MOBILITY The cost per student averaged slightly more In 2007, three million students were study- than USD 12,000 in the OECD countries in ing in another country, all over the world. 2006. The United States, Canada and Switzer- This represented an increase of more than 3 land had the highest costs – more than USD per cent compared with the preceding year, 20,000 – and the figure for Sweden was al- and an increase of almost 60 per cent since most USD 17,000 per student.