Norway needs a strong research council
Debate ● Tor Grande
Rather than drastic changes, the research system needs predictability and stability, writes NTNU vice-chancellor Tor Grande.
This text is a debate post. The content of the text expresses the author’s own opinion.
I sin chronicle in Khrono 15.08.22, Minister Ola Borten Moe says that it is time for prioritisation, and that “we need less bureaucracy, more predictability and more time for actual research. The time is overdue to assess the entire research system.” It’s a dramatic message and it’s difficult to get hold of the target, you have to start. I would warn against letting go of the Norwegian research system with the aim of making major changes, without a very clear diagnosis of what is possibly wrong. Rather than drastic changes, the research system needs predictability and stability.
The Minister invites for debate on how we can best organize and finance research going forward. It is an important debate. At the same time, I will help to clarify the motive and premises for the debate. I hereby make a first attempt to participate.
Norwegian research is in good development. The quality is good and increasing, we compete increasingly better internationally, and Norwegian researchers “produce” more than ever.
Another reason The yardstick Moe uses to assess the entire research system is that the system has been like this since the 90s. It cannot be an argument in itself. The research system is regularly subjected to international evaluation, and comes out well from these. The ongoing case about the advancement of grants in the Research Council in order to avoid transfers is not in itself a good reason to throw up all the balls in the Norwegian research system.
I believe that a research council with responsibility for basic research, thematic and applied research, innovation and innovation offers better opportunities to finance projects with high quality and high relevance than alternatives.
Vice Chancellor Tor Grande, NTNU
Norway was in its element time a leading country when five research councils were combined into one. The reasons for this move still stand, and several countries have also followed suit and brought together several research councils in wider organizations that prevent fragmentation and ensure better coordination of research and innovation policy. The system of a research council means that Norway is well equipped for the turnaround in research and the innovation policy more towards a holistic societal mission – “mission”.
I mean that a research council with responsibility for basic research, thematic and applied research, innovation and innovation provides better opportunities for financing projects with high quality and high relevance than alternatives. We are a small country and it is efficient to manage this system in one organisation. It ensures more money for research and less for administration. I would also warn against thinking that the research system will benefit from the institutions themselves distributing the funds internally. Research quality is completely dependent on quality assessments. If this responsibility is pushed down the system, we will get more fragmentation and lower quality in Norwegian research. There is hardly a single example of a successful national research system without a powerful research council.
The Minister points to that there is more money to be had in the EU programs and that many researchers spend too much time writing applications. He is correct in both observations. At the same time, we are completely dependent on a strong national research council to be able to reach up in the EU context. Not least, it is important that Norwegian researchers are trained in writing good applications. Without FRIPRO and SFF in the Research Council, we will have major challenges in succeeding with ERC.
In reviews of the efficiency and quality of the system cannot be ruled out looking at the aggregate percentage. Application writing is very important strategic work. It is not at all a waste to clarify to yourself and others what you want to use research resources for.
Research Council of Norway must be strengthened, not weakened. The main problem for the Research Council today is the need for research funds from universities, colleges, research institutes, as well as the private and public sector, is higher than what the Research Council’s current budgets can satisfy. Then the right medicine is to strengthen the Research Council so that Research Norway can contribute to new knowledge that we now desperately need to solve the great challenges of the 21st century.
READ ON AFTER THE ADVERTISEMENT