1. Institutional autonomy, regulatory frameworks and incentives Enora Bennetot Pruvot Programme Manager Governance, Autonomy & Funding “Governance and Diversification of Funding in Higher Education” University of Cyprus 09.03.2011

2. Key questions What exactly do we mean by autonomy? What is the link between autonomy and income diversification? How does Cyprus compare to the rest of Europe? What do universities want public authorities to do? Recommendations for improved frameworks An example of smart funding incentive

3. Four dimensions of autonomy …3… Organisational autonomy Academic and administrative structures Governing bodies Executive leadership Financial autonomy Funding framework Public funding Intermediary funding bodies Financial reporting Financial capacity Reserves & surpluses Students’ contributions Real estate Staffing autonomy Recruitment of staff Civil servant status Salaries Academic autonomy Institutional strategy Academic profile Degree programmes Student admission

4. Autonomy, a pre-requisite for income diversificaton Positive correlation between autonomy and diversification: Financial autonomy is key to allow university to develop partnerships, borrow money, keep surpluses Staffing autonomy is key to recruit the adequate staff profiles BUT: Holistic reforms needed, accompanied with appropriate support for skills and structure development

5. Autonomy Scorecard overall autonomy Austria Denmark Estonia Finland Ireland Latvia United Kingdom Czech Republic Hessen Lithuania Luxembourg Netherlands North-Rhine Westphalia Poland Portugal Sweden Switzerland Brandenburg Hungary Iceland Italy Norway Cyprus France Greece Slovakia Spain 1 3 2 4

6. Financial autonomy indicators Financial autonomy indicatorCyprus Funding cycle Funding modalities  Yearly cycle  Line-item budget Ability to keep surplus on main public funding  No ability to keep surplus Ability to borrow money on financial market  Yes, with approval on amount & terms Ability to own buildings  Yes but sale only on approval Ability to charge tuition fees  Level set by external authority

7. What can public authorities do?

9. Recommendations Improve framework conditions Governance structures: universities need to be able to modify the organisation of their governing bodies The inclusion of external stakeholders may foster the development of long-term partnerships Appropriate skills and representation on Governing Bodies: possiblity to decide on selection of members, especially when external? Inadequate or inflexible governance structures are a reason for creating separate legal entities

10. Recommendations Improve funding modalities: Simplification of funding schemes Funding on a full cost basis Implement smart funding incentives: Matched funding schemes: instrument with much potential, under- used in Europe Support the development of full costing in universities

11. Recommendations Support leadership development and professionalisation of management HR: support functions (research support and administration; fundraising experts; knowledge transfer officers, etc) Leadership: exchange programmes, professionalisation schemes, professional events

12. An example of smart funding incentive

13. The Norwegian Donation Reinforcement Programme Matching government funds (25%) for donations for basic research Adopted by Norwegian Parliament in June 2005; effective in National Budget of 2006 Guidelines altered June 2008 For: Norwegian universities Norwegian university colleges that award doctorates The Norwegian Academy of Science and Letters The Research Council of Norway

14. Conditions of the Donation Reinforcement Programme Who can donate? Foundations and charities (from 2007) Enterprises (from 2006) Private individuals (from 2006) Which donations qualify? Donations for long-term basic research Cannot fund research directly benefiting donor’s business activities Must be at least NOK 3 million (€ 0,35 million)