EUROPEAN RESEARCH AREA Progress Report 2018 Country Profile DENMARK EUROPEAN COMMISSION Directorate-General for Research and Innovation Directorate A — Policy Development and Coordination Unit A2 — Research and Innovation Strategy Contact: Arie Van Der Zwan E-mail: [email protected] [email protected] European Commission B-1049 Brussels EUROPE DIRECT is a service to help you find answers to your questions about the European Union Freephone number (*): 00 800 6 7 8 9 10 11 (*) The information given is free, as are most calls (though some operators, phone boxes or hotels may charge you) LEGAL NOTICE Neither the European Commission nor any person acting on behalf of the Commission is responsible for the use which might be made of the following information. The views expressed in this publication are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of the European Commission. More information on the European Union is available on the internet (http://europa.eu). Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union, 2019. PDF ISBN 978-92-79-99765-5 doi:10.2777/022506 KI-02-19-109-EN-N © European Union, 2019. Reproduction is authorised provided the source is acknowledged. Country profile: Denmark COUNTRY SNAPSHOT Indicator Performance Progress since ERA monitoring 2016 Reference Lead/Gap Reference Lead/Gap Trend Name Score Cluster EU-28 CAGR EU-28 year (Δ %) Period (Δ % pt) (2007-18) Adjusted Research Excellence Indicator (AREI) 2016 78.6 1 75 45.0 2013-16 7.1% 3.9 3.2% GBARD as share of GDP 2016 0.92% 1 45 0.64% 2014-16 -4.0% -1.6 -2.4% Priority 1 EIS Summary Innovation Index (SII) 2017 0.668 1 32 0.504 2015-17 -1.2% -3.1 1.9% A - GBARD to transnatl coop (EUR/researcher) 2016 2 501 3 -33 3 739 2014-16 -7.1% -11.0 3.9% A - Collab papers w/ERA per 1 000 researchers 2016 117 2 66 71 2014-16 7.5% 4.2 3.3% A - Public-to-public partnerships (EUR/researcher) 2016 1 222 2 119 558 2014-16 -7.3% -8.0 0.7% B - Roadmap for ESFRI projects National roadmap implemented in 2015, ESFRI projects identified, investment needs identified Priority 2 B - Participation in ESFRI Projects and Landmarks (combined) 2018 35% 2 0 35% 2016-18 0.8% -14.2 15.0% B - Participation in developing ESFRI Projects 2018 22% 2 -24 29% 2016-18 8.0% -10.6 18.6% B - Participation in operational ESFRI Landmarks 2018 41% 2 9 37% 2016-18 -4.9% -16.2 11.3% EURAXESS job ads per 1 000 researchers 2016 21.6 3 -49 42.1 2014-16 13.3% 18.3 -5.0% Open, transparent, merit-based hiring process 2016 68% 2 4 65% 2012-16 7.0% -0.5 7.5% Priority 3 Share of doctoral students from EU countries 2016 17.1% 1 139 7.1% 2013-16 5.6% 1.8 3.9% Share of women among Grade A in HES 2016 21% 3 -12 24% 2014-16 6.9% 5.9 1.0% Gender dimension in research content 2014-17(R) 1.10 2 5 1.05 2011-14 to 2014-17(R) 0.7% -1.8 2.5% Priority 4 Share of female PhD graduates 2016 48% 3 1 48% 2013-16 2.4% 2.0 0.4% A - Firms coop with univ, gov, res inst 2014 16.3% 2 9 15.0% Not computed A - Firms coop with univ 2014Not computed 2012-14 1.9% 1.2 0.7% A - Firms coop with gov, res inst 2014Not computed 2012-14 -21.2% -25.3 4.0% A - Share of public R&D funded privately 2015 4.3% 3 -39 7.0% 2013-15 6.7% 7.9 -1.2% A - Public-private collab papers per capita 2017 162.8 1 298 40.9 2014-17 1.3% 0.9 0.4% Priority 5 B - Share of papers in Open Access (Total) 2016 51.5% 2 4 49.3% Not computed B - Share of papers in Open Access (Gold) 2016 46.4% 2 9 42.7% Not computed B - Share of papers in Open Access (Green) 2016 23.3% 2 -9 25.6% Not computed B - Share life science papers with OA dataset(s) 2017 2.8% 2 10 2.6% 2013-17 0.2% -2.4 2.6% Collab papers w/non-ERA per 1 000 researchers 2016 81 1 48 54 2014-16 8.5% 4.1 4.4% Share of doctoral students from outside EU 2016 16.6% 2 20 13.9% 2013-16 3.4% -0.4 3.8% Share med & high tech product export 2017 48% 2 -15 57% 2015-17 0.2% -0.3 0.4% Priority 6 Share Knowledge intensive service export 2016 72% 2 4 69% 2014-16 -3.9% -4.5 0.6% Note: (:) = missing data, more notes and flags can be found in the “Annex: Methodological notes”. (R) = rolling averages (e.g. average scores across 2007–2010, 2008–2011… 2014–2017) have been used to measure performance and growth due to pronounced short-term fluctuations. Refer to the “Annex: Guide to reading the quantitative results tables (country snapshots)” for guidance in interpreting the data presented above. Further information on the presented indicators is available in the 2018 ERA Monitoring Handbook. 1 Country profile: Denmark COUNTRY NARRATIVE Summary The Danish research system displayed its best performances on Priority 1 (More effective national research systems). The three scores calculated here put the country well above the ERA average (Cluster 1) and the EU-28 benchmarks for all indicators. Denmark has been slowly losing some of its lead on other EU-28 countries for two of these three indicators, however. In a second set of Priorities, Denmark’s performances were mostly above (Cluster 2) ERA average, with one indicator well above (Cluster 1) the ERA average. Three priorities fit this description for Denmark: Priority 2b (Make optimal use of public investments in research infrastructures); Priority 5b (Open access); Priority 6 (International collaboration). In Priority 2b, Denmark has lost ground to the Member States overall since the last ERA monitoring exercise, whereas in Priority 5b and Priority 6, Denmark’s trajectories in recent years have been more closely in line with trends at the EU-28 level. In the remaining four priorities, Denmark had at least one score that was just below the ERA average (Cluster 3), but also scores above or well above the ERA average. These included Priority 2a (Transnational cooperation); Priority 3 (An open labour market for researchers); Priority 4 (Gender equality and gender mainstreaming in research); and Priority 5a (Knowledge transfer). While Denmark showed progress on a number of indicators, there were also some specific spots where trajectories were less encouraging, which will be discussed in the individual priority sections below. Denmark had no performances that would have positioned among countries with scores well below ERA average (Cluster 4). To the extent that data was available, below the country profile also analyses progress with the implementation of the ERA National Action Plan. The overall assessment of Denmark’s implementation of its NAP is positive. It achieved progress under most of the priorities but some of the proposed actions and objectives lacked concrete indicators and timelines. The most substantial progress was achieved under sub priority 2a. Denmark took numerous actions to maintain its high level of participation in Horizon 2020. These actions include the establishment of a Strategic Reference Group, mapping the Danish participation in H2020, publishing report ‘Evaluations and evaluators in Horizon 2020’ and continuously providing support and advice on H2020. Another important development happened under Priority 1. RESEARCH 2025 catalogue was published by the Ministry of Higher Education and Science. It will guide the country’s strategic investments from the perspective of the private sectors, knowledge institutions and governmental bodies. Denmark has also taken some actions to further the objective set under sub priority 5b that include publishing of a new National Strategy for Open and monitoring the progress of open access. Opening of Sino-Danish Centre for Education and Research in Beijing, adoption of the Arctic and Cluster 2.0. strategies have marked the Danish progress under Priority 6. 1. More effective national research systems On Priority 1 (More effective national research systems), Denmark displayed its best performances. The three scores calculated here put the country well above the ERA average (Cluster 1) and the EU-28 benchmarks. This was particularly true for the headline indicator, the Adjusted Research Excellence Indicator (AREI). Here, the country’s score was almost 79, compared to 45 for the Member States overall. The country’s performance on the headline indicator has also increased at a yearly rate higher than that of the EU-28 trend, extending Denmark’s lead. Between 2013 and 2016, Denmark’s CAGR on this indicator was 7.1 %, compared to a trend of 3.2 % for the EU-28. Denmark has been slowly losing some of its lead on other EU-28 countries for the two complementary indicators (GBARD as a share of GDP, and the Summary Innovation Index), however. Denmark is a high performer with a strong research system, which produces high quality scientific outputs (Christensen J.L., Christensen, P., Knudsen, 2017). However, its performance could be further improved in terms of innovations. In 2014, Innovation Fund Denmark (IFD) was established with the aim to make R&D funding more efficient and effective while focusing on challenge-driven research and innovation. It is a result of a merger between the Danish National 2 Country profile: Denmark Advanced Technology Foundation, the Danish Council for Strategic Research, and parts of the Danish Council for Technology and Innovation.