The R&D manpower in Finland consists of 13 000 staff (40% of them women) of which one third is in HEIs. As a result of the establishment of the graduate schools (and to some extent also the establishment of centres of excellence), the annual production of Ph.D.s has increased in both quantity and quality (as well as in equality) in recent years, from 765 (37% women) in 1995 to 1 422 (49% women) in 2005. Most of the Ph.D.s seek employment in the HEIs; even among engineering Ph.D.s, industry only employs a number comparable to that going to the HEIs. Still, the polytechnics only had 6% staff with Ph.D.s in 2003 (78% have Master degrees or licentiate degrees), but the percentage is growing fast with the increasing emphasis on R&D in the polytechnics.
The low mobility and low internationalisation profile of researchers in Finland is a problem in R&D since exchange of persons is one of the main mechanisms for renewal, both in industry, higher education and research. The low mobility and limited internationalisation are some of the most serious problems in Finnish R&D. Among other it may lead to in-breeding in a system that in most respects is very strong. The mobility problems are reinforced by the (otherwise commendable) specialisation in Finnish HEI research, which often makes it difficult for HEI researchers to find proper jobs within their specialised field elsewhere in the country. It is not uncommon that a (Master) graduate from a department proceeds to Ph.D. studies in the same department and finally obtains permanent employment there. The mobility of Finnish HEI staff is not only low within the country it is equally low internationally. Only about 7% of the Ph.D. students in Finland are foreigners and academic HEI staff members are rarely recruited abroad. In 1998 only 0.6% of R&D staff in Finland was foreigners; although this number has increased a little since then, it is still among the lowest in Europe. Also the number of exchanges with other countries is low, and the number of Finnish HEI researchers that spend longer study periods abroad has even declined in recent years.
Finland is experiencing a net brain drain of researchers that may be directly related to the weak internationalisation of Finnish higher education and research. In 1998 102 Ph.D.s left Finland permanently, while only 52 moved to Finland permanently. Among the latter the vast majority were Finns; only 15 were foreign-born researchers. Overall, the loss of people with tertiary education corresponds to almost 5% of the total work force in
5. RESEARCH – 43 Finland with these qualifications (see Chapter 7). This is a serious problem for a country that is dependent on R&D at the highest international level. Finland should aim for a brain gain of people trained at the highest level; trying to limit brain drain is not enough for the country.
We now turn to the employment of research trained graduates. The total number of Ph.D.s produced since 1990 is about 14 000. Well over half of them were in natural sciences, engineering, and medicine. Most of the Ph.D.s seek employment in the HEIs; even among engineering Ph.D.s industry only employs a number of Ph.D.s comparable to that going to the HEIs. A considerable growth in the number of staff with a Ph.D. takes place in the polytechnics, which in 2003 only had 6% staff with a Ph.D., while 78% had a Master or licentiate degree. This development in staff qualifications is consistent with the increasing emphasis on R&D in the polytechnics.
In the light of the above, the following recommendations are offered:
− There is a distinct relationship between core funding, HEI infrastructure and career opportunities and, as has been previously indicated, this may call for a re-appraisal of the relationship between core and competitive funding.
− The replacement of the large number of HEI researchers that will retire during the coming decade must be carefully planned, both nationally and in individual institutions. It is therefore important that the age profiles of both staff and equipment in HEIs are monitored continuously and that plans for renewal of research and educational equipment, as well as for recruitment of academic staff, are worked out.
− In order to secure better continuity in the replacement of retiring staff, and, in more general terms, for the country to benefit fully from the large and successful efforts within Ph.D. training, a more satisfactory system of post-doctoral opportunities should be developed. This may help attract a larger number of highly qualified foreigners to Finnish research. In this context, the review group welcomes the recent initiatives of the Academy of Finland in respect of:
new grants for post docs
the scheme for Senior Academic Researchers
− In order to improve international and national mobility, exchanges with foreign countries must be strengthened within research and education in universities and polytechnics. This process should be
44 – 5. RESEARCH
OECD REVIEWS OF TERTIARY EDUCATION – FINLAND – ISBN 978-92-64-04904-8 – © OECD 2009
part of the HEI planning and must be further supported by funding agencies and the Ministry of Education. The conditions and assistance provided for foreign researchers employed at Finnish HEIs must be improved in order to increase the intake of highly qualified foreign talent (see Chapter 7). In this regard, the review group welcomes the new Academy Scheme for Distinguished Foreign Professors, and the discussion on the priority which should be given to stimulate Ph.D. students over international students in Graduate Schools. Clearly a balance is necessary, but the international agenda is important in the long term.
− National mobility should be strengthened, for example by provision of economic support for relocation of researchers. In order to limit inbreeding it may also be worthwhile to provide incentives for young researchers to move between institutions, or not allowing them to obtain their Ph.D. and later employment at the same institution as the one they were originally trained at, at least, not without a period spent elsewhere.