University KE Data and Metrics for Regional Growth

Yliopistorankingien ongelmat (2) Statement on Global University Rankings (laatinut: Independent Expert Group (IEG) convened by the United Nations University International Institute for Global Health) kertoo yliopistorankingien ongelmista. Tässä toinen seitsemästä esiin nostetusta: "2. Global university rankings are based on flawed and insufficiently transparent data and methods The data and methods used in the major global university rankings are flawed. Of particular note is that these rankings heavily rely on subjective judgements of quality made by non-representative grab samples of survey respondents. There are also well-established data quality issues with citation counts and their use as a measure of research quality. Moreover, while the major rankers provide some information about their methods, they do not publish details explaining how they calculate rankings (e.g., their weighting schemes are only partially disclosed). They also do not make their datasets publicly accessible. The lack of transparency regarding the quality of the data used to produce the rankings raises concerns about bias, objectivity, and credibility, and prevents anyone from being able to verify or critically evaluate how these rankings are produced. Lastly, as improving position in rankings becomes increasingly important to many universities, rankings become less a measure of actual performance and more an indicator of a university's ability to 'play the game' of competing in rankings." Pointti: rankingit perustuvat metodologisesti kyseenalaiseen ja läpinäkymättömään dataan (mm. subjektiivisiin arvioihin ja ongelmallisiin viittausmittareihin ja biasoituneeseen otokseen), mikä tekee niistä puolueellisia ja vaikeasti todennettavia sekä ohjaa yliopistoja parantamaan sijoitustaan todellisen laadun sijaan.

Which university spends the most on research in the world? The Johns Hopkins University. Johns Hopkins University (JHU) spent $4.13 billion on research and development (R&D) during fiscal year 2024, according to the most recent report from the National Science Foundation (NSF). To get an idea, compare that budget with the total research budget of all universities in Spain (around 90). Spanish universities spend around €5.6 billion annually on research and development (R&D) activities. According to the most recent data from the National Statistics Institute (INE) for 2024, total R&D spending in Spain reached a historic high of €23.931 billion, representing 1.50% of GDP. Of this overall figure, the higher education sector (which includes universities) usually accounts for approximately 23-26% of total expenditure in the country. Key breakdown of expenditure: Public vs. Private Sector: University research in Spain continues to be led mainly by public universities. Funding: Universities raise funds through competitive calls for proposals, such as the €667 million recently allocated by the Ministry of Science, Innovation, and Universities (MICIU) for pre-doctoral projects and contracts. Investment per student: Although total spending is increasing, the CYD Foundation warns that investment per student in Spain (around $18,369) remains 19.5% below the OECD average. Public universities: These account for the vast majority of investment, executing more than 94% of total research spending in the university sector. This equates to approximately €5.3 billion per year. Private universities: Their weight in research is significantly lower, contributing around 5-6% of the total executed, which is around €300 million. https://lnkd.in/erNtMRk8

#TooMany Great #Universities? Not Enough #Demand? #AI is also changing Everything. I think universities globally are heading into a tougher decade, not just because of local funding issues, but because the entire higher education market has changed. My core view is simple: we now have “too much supply” of quality higher education. Across the world (especially in developing countries) we’ve seen a rapid rise in the number of good universities and good researchers. That’s a success story in one sense. But at the same time, global demand for university degrees is not growing at the same pace (and in some places it’s flat). The consequence is unavoidable: - Recruiting students becomes brutally competitive (and more expensive). - Winning research grants becomes harder even for strong teams. - Excellent researchers face lower success rates and more career uncertainty. And then there’s a second, structural pressure: #AI. AI is not just a tool; it’s a substitute for part of the traditional university value proposition. People can already gain high-quality knowledge, explanations, and guidance at low cost and on-demand. If universities continue operating mainly as “content delivery + exams,” they will lose relevance. This is why I believe all universities will face a difficult future if they continue the same way as today. The strategic question is no longer “How do we defend the old model?” but “What is the new model that remains essential?” The UK is a concrete example of what happens when pressures hit hard and fast. A recent Universities UK release describes a financial crisis where institutions are cutting and consolidating: course closures, fewer module options, and reduced investment in research (with many expecting further reductions in the next few years). To me, the warning is clear: when finances tighten, universities start shrinking the very things that create long-term value (breadth of education and research capacity). If universities don’t redefine their role, the market will redefine it for them. https://lnkd.in/dansaUEG

Online education is driving real financial impact, an impact that is more important now than ever before for the higher education space. The 2025 BOnES Report by UPCEA shows: 💰 Average online enterprise budgets rose to $8.1M, with gross revenues averaging $23.8M. 📈 Efficiency gains mean some enterprises are generating nearly $1M in revenue per FTE. 🎓 Undergraduate online degree offerings grew sharply (up 10% year-over-year), while graduate programs and microcredentials remain core pillars. The takeaway? Online education is no longer just about access (even though that is still a crucial component to the online space), it’s also a strategic growth engine. According to the BOnES Report, institutions that invest in scalable structures, innovative credentials, and strong governance models will be best positioned for the future. This is why Santa Clara University continues to believe and invest in Santa Clara Online. Learn more about our extensive portfolio of online graduate programs here: https://lnkd.in/eaUkfVmN Download the study to read more: https://lnkd.in/e9HG_tM2 #SantaClaraOnline #SantaClaraUniversity #LifelongLearners #HigherEducation #Online Education

I am happy to share my latest research, "Intellectual Property and Regional Growth in Türkiye: A Spatial Analysis of Education, Trade, and Population Dynamics," recently published in the ESCI-indexed Journal of Economic Policy Researches (2026, Vol. 13, Issue 1). By analyzing data from all 81 provinces of Türkiye (NUTS-3) over a 15-year period (2008–2023), this study explores how regional growth is driven by interconnected spatial dynamics and various types of intellectual property rights using spatial panel data analysis (SAR, SDM, and SEM). Key Findings: - Neighboring Influence: Economic performance is deeply interconnected; growth in one province significantly impacts its neighbors, confirming the importance of regional spatial dynamics. - The Value of Incremental Innovation: While high-tech patents often involve long development cycles and high costs, my findings show that utility models and industrial designs provide a more immediate and consistent boost to regional economic growth in Türkiye. - The Education Paradox: Interestingly, a high share of university graduates showed a negative correlation with regional GDP in some models. This potentially reflects a "brain drain" to major metropolitan hubs or a mismatch between the technical needs of the local labor market and graduate skills. - Primary Drivers: Population density and past economic performance (GDP persistence) remain the most reliable positive predictors of future regional growth. This research highlights that for emerging economies, fostering "small-scale" incremental innovation through utility models is just as vital as pursuing high-tech breakthroughs for sustainable regional development. You can read the full paper here: https://lnkd.in/dY8zN4hw

Universities are still one of the most important “upstream” inputs to the innovation ecosystem—training talent, generating foundational IP, and seeding the discoveries that later become partnerships, startups, and industrial R&D.

It is hard not to agree that the wrong metrics are being used to measure Polish universities, and it's killing the very thing that could make us competitive—research excellence. The problem isn't that universities don't want to collaborate with business. It's when you're forced to optimize for evaluation scores that you stop building for impact. You patent things that won't be commercialized. You publish in domestic journals to boost counts. You average out your best researchers because the system rewards volume over brilliance. Jagiellonian University stopped chasing patent numbers because patents without market demand are just paperwork. They doubled down on ERC grants, global visibility, and infrastructure that attracts world-class researchers. The result? 15 ERC grants in six years. That's not luck—that's strategy. But here's the harder truth: this approach only works if your entire institution believes in it. You can't half-measure excellence. You either commit to identifying and supporting breakthrough research, or you don't. You either build for the next decade, or you optimize for next year's evaluation. The missing piece in Polish higher education isn't willingness—it's permission. Permission to invest in basic research without immediate ROI. Permission to let researchers pursue unconventional questions. Permission to measure success by global influence, not domestic metrics. Science and business can create powerful synergy. But only when universities are free to do the one thing they do best: create knowledge that matters. How do we shift the conversation from evaluation metrics to research vision? More in Prof. Piotr Jedynak interview once again by katarzyna mokrzycka in XYZ. Link in the comment.

The Suspension of New Grant Funding by UK Research Councils is going to hit Universities, but who? Much more the Russell Group than any others. This is generated by Ai but is not anything I didn't suspect myself. "In January 2026, UKRI initiated a temporary pause on major funding calls across three key research councils: the MRC, the BBSRC, and the EPSRC.  The universities most at risk are those with heavy reliance on these specific councils and those already facing severe financial deficits.  1. Research-Intensive "Tier One" Institutions  Universities that secure the highest volume of funding from the affected councils are most exposed to the "destabilising" uncertainty of these pauses.  Imperial College London: Heavily reliant on EPSRC and MRC funding; recently warned of "irreversible decline" due to broader sector pressures. University of Cambridge and University of Oxford: Large-scale research labs and fixed-term staff (PDRAs) at these institutions are highly sensitive to pauses in "responsive-mode" funding. University College London (UCL) and The University of Manchester: Both are major recipients of MRC and EPSRC grants and are classified as "Tier One" partners by UKRI.  2. Mid-Sized Research Universities Experts warn that mid-sized, research-intensive universities are "particularly exposed" because they lack the massive financial buffers of the largest institutions while still carrying high research overheads.  Durham University: Already facing a £20m savings target and redundancy measures, with several existing grants recently "scrapped or paused". University of East Anglia (UEA) and University of Kent: Both are undergoing significant staff cuts (over 750 combined) due to existing deficits that funding suspensions will likely exacerbate.  3. Institutions with Large Financial Deficits Universities already in a precarious financial state will find it harder to bridge the gap left by suspended UKRI grants, which are often the only source that covers nearly full economic costs.  Cardiff University: Planning to cut 400 academic staff (10% of total) and eliminate key subjects amid a £30m deficit. The University of Edinburgh: Facing a projected £140m deficit, making it highly vulnerable to any disruption in the £38bn annual economic contribution typically generated by Russell Group research. Newcastle University: Has announced plans to cut 300 positions, including 65 academic roles, citing general funding pressures.  Specific Impact Areas Medical and Life Sciences: The pause at the MRC affects "experimental medicine" and "translational funding," hitting medical schools and health-focused research hubs the hardest. Early and Mid-Career Researchers: Regardless of the institution, individuals on fixed-term contracts or those seeking "New Investigator" awards are disproportionately affected by the suspension of responsive-mode schemes.' #HigherEducation, #Universityworldranking #valueofadegree

India cannot expand higher education without private universities. The public system lacks the capacity and flexibility to meet demand. Private institutions therefore carry structural responsibility for the country’s technological and research ambitions. Unfortunately, that responsibility is not being matched by intellectual depth. Across much of the sector, energy is directed toward rankings, accreditations, certifications and international affiliations. These are accumulated as markers of legitimacy. But academic legitimacy is not assembled through enumeration. It is earned through sustained research, strong doctoral ecosystems and faculty who contribute to serious scholarship. The contrast with China is not rhetorical. Chinese universities built research capacity first: funded laboratories, recruited global scholars, scaled doctoral output and published in high-impact venues. Visibility is usually followed by capability. In India, the sequence is often reversed. Programs in advanced fields are launched before a critical mass of research-active faculty exists. Output is counted rather than interrogated. The recent AI summit fiasco exposed this imbalance. A public claim of expertise in a mathematically demanding domain broke down under scrutiny. That was not a communication lapse. It reflected institutional overreach relative to academic preparation. Revenue-driven admissions, thin research cultures and compliance oriented publication strategies compound the problem. Standards adjust while narratives of excellence remain hollow. Private universities are indispensable to India’s future. But if they continue to prioritize visibility over verifiable depth, the country will produce degrees at scale without building technological authority. Comparisons with China will remain aspirational, not competitive.