This blog is hosted on Ideas on EuropeIdeas on Europe Avatar


Higher Education and Regional Development: Tales from Northern and Central Europe

What role do universities play in regional development? How university roles in ‘periphery’ differ from university roles in ‘the core’? What are similarities and differences between universities in Northern and Central Europe? These are some of the questions addressed in a new book Higher Education and Regional Development: Tales from Northern and Central Europe edited by Rómulo Pinheiro, Mitchell Young and Karel Šima. Learn more about their book in this Q&A with the editors.


Q1: What have been the rationales and origins of this book?

The book is the result of a 2-year comparative project ‘PERIF: Higher Education in the Socio-Economic Development of Peripheral Regions’ funded by the Norwegian Research Council under the Norway Grants program, focusing on the socio-economic impact of universities in peripheral regions in Norway and the Czech Republic.


Q2: In research policy and higher education studies there have been a long-standing focus on the socio-economic role of universities and their contribution to regional development. What is novel angle and contribution of your book to this area?

Most existing studies tend to adopt a single case research design and, in those cases where more than one case is used, they tend to focus on a specific national setting. We also found that the notion of ‘peripherality’ was ill developed and underexplored, both conceptually and empirically. Finally, a great number of studies approaches either the case ‘region’ or ‘the university’ as a black-box, thus taking for granted a series of determining variables.  The ambition of this study was to undertake a cross-national comparative analysis of the key factors – internal and external to universities and regions – that can account for the observed outcomes. That said, our remit was not to undertake an impact or assessment study – focusing on cause and effects – per se; but, rather, shed light on the interplay between important elements such as policy, university leadership, academic norms, regional culture, etc.


Q3: Your book compares Norway and Czech Republic. Why these two countries were chosen? What are similarities and differences between Norway and Czech Republic? What can they learn from each other?

They represent two distinct economies with different political and administrative traditions and historical trajectories and at first glance are something of a least-likely comparison. Norway represents the so-called ‘Nordic model’ and its long tradition of pluralistic political representation as well as large investments in education for all. Historically, regional development policy and higher education policy have tended to converge. As for the Czech Republic it represents what is called by some authors a dependent market economy, which is now highly tied to Europe, particularly Germany, but with a weaker social net and stronger neoliberal tendencies. Historically the country has transitioned out of communism, but it has also a legacy of ethnic tensions, especially in peripheral regions, during the 20th century.


Yet, at the same time, both countries are of similar population size and somewhat peripheral to both globalization and the European Union project, with Norway being a ‘quasi-EU member state’, and both face critical regional economic asymmetries. In the end, the number of similarities we found between the two countries was somewhat surprising. Certain ‘types’ of peripheral regions exist in both countries, and while there are significant differences of national context, we think that learning from them can go both ways.


Q4: Your book uses the concept of periphery. How do you define ‘periphery’? How the role of universities in ‘periphery’ differs from their role in ‘the center’?

There are a number of dimensions in this respect; a spatial dimension, a cultural dimension, a political/power dimension, an economic dimension, etc. (which is developed in some detail in the volume’s introduction). Simply stated, by ‘periphery’ one refers to locations that are outside the mainstream when it comes to attracting and retaining talented individuals and jobs, across the public and private sectors. Obviously, one can also find ‘centers’ within the periphery as well, and these tend to be the areas where universities are located and where its impacts are most immediately felt. To sum up, the ‘periphery’ is clearly relational concept and its definition depends on context.


We would argue that the role of universities in peripheral regions, as I think the book demonstrates, looks different from that of those in the center. It’s an important question, and we felt that there was a gap in the literature there. Much of what’s been written focuses on central regions, or successful regions, but the cases in this book look at regions that have struggled a bit. There’s a bit of a simplification in thinking that a university can just itself pull a region into the competitive knowledge economy. Success in that requires both regional and university initiatives to dovetail.


Q5: To highlight the role of universities in socio-economic development, some researchers and policy-makers use the concept of the third mission highlighting that in addition to two traditional missions of teaching and research universities also have broader social and economic roles. Does your research find the concept of the third mission relevant and how?

Indeed, the entire premise of the project was the notion that universities located in peripheral localities have an obligation, formally (mandate in policy) and/or morally (as good citizens), to contribute to the development of their surrounding regions. Traditionally, the third mission has been structurally decoupled from the core functions of teaching and research. Yet, in recent years several studies point to the importance of articulated strategic frameworks in which regional dimensions ought to be embedded into the core tasks of universities, rather than being seen as a ‘third leg’ or something that is nice to have. Our findings suggest that most case universities fulfill their regional mission through the provision of skills to the region (teaching function) rather than knowledge transfers (research) in the classic sense. This, however, creates significant limitations when it comes to fostering regional absorptive capacity and ensuring regional resilience in the long run. The lack of research capacity, a distinctive feature of most universities located in peripheral locations, implies that their ability to support the region is limited, particularly within the context of a globally competitive knowledge-based economy.


Q6: What are the main lessons from your book for practitioners and policy-makers?

Our findings confirm some of the existing findings in the literature but also provide a comparative dimension which addresses some of the knowledge gaps from previous studies. These include, but are not limited to, the following dimensions relevant to practitioners and policy makers alike:

  • Starting points matter; universities with a long tradition of teaching at the expense of their knowledge creation function face major challenges with respect to knowledge transfer beyond the training of graduates;
  • Incentives matter; most academics located in peripheral regions are keen on bridging their teaching and research agendas to regional aspects, but the lack of incentive structures, including promotion and advancement, are major barriers;
  • Actors and networks matter; dynamic regions are characterized by entrepreneurial agents, including policy makers and pro-active university leaders. These play a critically important role in forming regional coalitions which also include local academics and university leaders;
  • Institutions matter; the absorptive capacity of local government and other knowledge actors like firms determines the nature and scope of academic activities addressing regional dimensions (i.e. academics need knowledge partners in the outside to collaborate with; university graduates play a critical role in this respect)


Q7: What would be interesting avenues for future research?

There is a lack of longitudinal studies, following particular universities and regions over a considerable period of time, say a decade or more. We’d also say that a better understanding of how regional-university interfaces are established and how those policy processes work. Studies which integrate and attempt to articulate both the regional and higher education fields would be valuable; as we said earlier, both have for the most part treated the other as a black box.



Rómulo Pinheiro is Professor of Public Policy and Administration at the University of Agder (UiA), Norway, where he co-heads the research group on Public Governance and Leadership (GOLEP). Rómulo’s research interests are located at the intersection of public policy and administration, organisational theory, economic geography, innovation and higher education studies.


Mitchell Young is Assistant Professor of European Studies at Charles University. His research interests are in the public policy and institutional context of research, knowledge, and innovation, as well as the effects of policy tools on the micro-level behaviours of researchers and organizations. He is a co-convenor of the ECPR Standing Group Knowledge Politics and Policies.


Karel Šima is Assistant Professor at the Department of Ethnology, Charles University. He worked in higher education research at Centre for higher education studies in Prague for ten years and took part on numerous national and international projects. His main research interests are research-teaching nexus, Humboldtian model of university, Czech higher education and science policy in general and research evaluation specifically.



Recent Articles

Implementing the Triple Helix model in Ukraine: Means-ends decoupling at the state level

Published on by | No Comments

Myroslava Hladchenko During the last decades, the development of the knowledge economy in Western societies has significantly changed both the roles played by universities and the relationship between the university, industry and government, resulting in the emergence of the Triple Helix (Etzkowitz and Leydesdorff 2000) as one of the global models of world society (Meyer […]

ECPR 2018 – Politics of higher education, research and innovation

Published on by | 1 Comment

Martina Vukasovic This year’s ECPR (European Consortium of Political Research) General Conference took place at the University of Hamburg (Germany) August 22-25. The conference included 520 panels on a wide array of topics and representation from more than 2,000 academics from around the world. The ECPR Standing Group on the Politics of Higher Education, Research and Innovation, for […]

Making and Doing Technoscientific Futures Better

Published on by | Comments Off on Making and Doing Technoscientific Futures Better

‘Making & Doing Technoscientific Futures Better’ was the title of the sixth CPERI (The Changing Political Economy of Research and Innovation) workshop that took place on the 23rd and 24th July in Lancaster (UK), just before the European Association for the Study of Science and Technology EASST 2018 conference. CPERI presents itself as ‘a unique global […]

What we can learn about policy circulation by using non-western case studies

Published on by | Comments Off on What we can learn about policy circulation by using non-western case studies

Olivier Provini The main focus of the paper ‘Transnational circulations of university reforms: the policy-making of the LMD in Burundi’ is to question public policy processes in so-called “fragile” states. Indeed, my research deals with policy analysis in non-western contexts with a special focus on African case studies. Analysing public action in the majority of […]

Higher education: regional, global and international

Published on by | Comments Off on Higher education: regional, global and international

On 9 and 10 July 2018, Meng-Hsuan Chou (NTU Singapore) hosted three seminars on higher education issues at Nanyang Technological University, Singapore. Speaking on ‘What does comparative regionalism offer to higher education research?’, Pauline Ravinet (University of Lille) and Meng-Hsuan Chou introduced the concept of ‘higher education regionalism’, a heuristic framework to examine regional cooperation […]

Politics of big science, large-scale research facilities and international research collaboration

Published on by | Comments Off on Politics of big science, large-scale research facilities and international research collaboration

Isabel K. Bolliger, Katharina Cramer, David Eggleton, Olof Hallonsten, Maria Moskovko, Nicolas Rüffin[i] We are witnessing the emergence of ‘grand challenges’ impacting societies on a global scale. These include climate change, artificial intelligence, and access to resources. Large-scale research and internationally coordinated collaboration in science, technology and innovation (STI) policy are viewed as the means […]

Transnational actors: Gateway to exploring the multi-level and multi-actor aspects of higher education and research governance

Published on by | Comments Off on Transnational actors: Gateway to exploring the multi-level and multi-actor aspects of higher education and research governance

Martina Vukasovic   Embodying multi-level and multi-actor characteristics of governance That governance of higher education and research takes place across several governance levels – institutional, national, European – is, arguably, common knowledge. The beginning of the Bologna Process and the launching of the Lisbon Strategy almost 20 years ago greatly intensified European integration and Europeanization […]

Science diplomacy – a catch-all concept in public policy?

Published on by | Comments Off on Science diplomacy – a catch-all concept in public policy?

Nicolas Rüffin Science diplomacy has attracted a lot of attention during the last decade. Actors as different as the US State Department, the European Commission, the Royal Society, UNESCO and a great many of other intermediary organizations have adopted the term to rebrand their activities, programs, and agendas. The contexts in which the term science […]

Improved coordination of research infrastructures policies in Europe

Published on by | Comments Off on Improved coordination of research infrastructures policies in Europe

Isabel K. Bolliger, Alexandra Griffiths and Martin Müller In 2000 the European Commission (EC) launched the European Research Area (ERA) initiative, with the intention to improve coordination and collaboration in research and innovation in Europe. ERA became a key element of the ambitious Lisbon strategy in order for the EU “to become the most competitive […]

Shaping the idea of the world-class university from outside the global “core”

Published on by | Comments Off on Shaping the idea of the world-class university from outside the global “core”

  Emma Sabzalieva We live in an era of intense and growing international connections, but also in a world of significant positional differences between localities, states and regions. In this context, how can the idea of the world-class university be used by states to survive and succeed? What does this idea look like in states […]

  • wordpress com stats
  • Recent Posts

  • Tags

  • Categories

  • Archives

  • UACES and Ideas on Europe do not take responsibility for opinions expressed in articles on blogs hosted on Ideas on Europe. All opinions are those of the contributing authors.