Norsk deltakelse i utdanningssamarbeid i EØS-ordningen

Undersøkelsen kartlegger de norske deltakernes erfaringer fra søknadsprosessen og samarbeidet og deres vurderinger av utdanningsprogrammet i EØS-ordningen. Formålet er å gi et grunnlag for å komme med forslag til endringer i utformingen av programmet som kan bidra til økt norsk deltakelse og styrke samarbeidsrelasjonene mellom de norske institusjonene og partnerinstitusjonene i de europeiske mottakerlandene.

Deltakerne er stort sett tilfreds med de fleste sidene ved hvordan utlysningene er utformet. Det samme gjelder i betydelig grad selve søknadsprosessen, selv om vi her observerer marginalt mindre tilfredshet. Det er likevel noen få områder som avviker fra det generelle bildet, og hvor det tydelig foreligger et forbedringspotensial.

Det gjelder for det første de økonomiske rammene for de norske deltakerne. Disse er, til tross for intensjonene i programmet, lagt på samme nivå som Erasmus+ og oppleves av mange deltakere som en utfordring, og som et hinder for å nå de faglige målene for samarbeidet.

Det andre forholdet som peker seg ut, er nivået av byråkrati hos programoperatøren. Dette ser ut til å representere en utfordring for samarbeidet i prosjektene og oppleves som uvant og unødig av de norske deltakerne.

Det tredje forholdet, som det er verdt å trekke fram, gjelder samordning, både mellom ulike utlysninger innenfor EØS-midlene og muligheter for tettere koblinger til, og synergier med, andre programmer og finansieringskilder, blant annet Erasmus+. Dette er et omfattende område som griper inn i mange sider ved utformingen av EØS-midlene. Mangelen på standardisering og en mer overgripende organisering av mottakerlandenes programmer er trolig kjernen i dette problemet. Undersøkelsen avdekker at bare ett av fire prosjekt kombinerer EØS-midler med andre finansieringskilder.

Et fjerde forhold, hvor det trolig foreligger et forbedringspotensial, gjelder tydeligheten av den faglige profilen til utlysningene. Flertallet av respondentene er sterkt opptatt av at utlysningene har en tydelig tematisk profil.

The EEA Grants are financial contributions made by Norway, Iceland and Liechtenstein (donor countries) to the EU, as compensation for the EFTA states’ access to the EU Single Market through the EEA Agreement. This report presents the findings from a survey of Norwegian participation in educational collaboration funded under this scheme during the period 2014–2021. This concerns collaborative projects with four recipient countries: the Czech Republic, Estonia, Poland and Romania. The survey has been carried out by ideas2evidence on assignment for the Norwegian Directorate for Higher Education and Skills (HK-dir).

The survey maps the Norwegian participants’ experience of the application process and collaboration, and their assessment of the education programme under the EEA scheme. The object is to provide a basis for proposing amendments to the design of the programme to increase Norwegian participation and enhance collaborative relationships between the Norwegian institutions and partner institutions in the European recipient countries.

The survey results paint a picture of relative satisfaction with the funding scheme. The respondents are generally positive to the part of the scheme they have participated in and to different aspects of its design and implementation. The large majority would also recommend other institutions to participate. The respondents place particular emphasis on the funding facilitating networking and international collaboration, and on gaining international experience and beneficial academic outcomes.

We found that the majority of respondents have previous experience of project collaboration through the EEA Grants. They give multiple reasons for deciding to participate in the scheme, but the potential it presents for enabling the institutions to achieve their academic goals and strategies is highlighted as particularly important. Capacity building and developing democracy are also important, but come second to the more academic reasons.

The participants are largely satisfied with most aspects of the design of the calls for proposals. This also applies, to a significant extent, to the application process itself, although we observe marginally less satisfaction here. However, a few areas deviate from the general picture, with a clear potential for improvement.

This firstly concerns the budgetary framework for the Norwegian participants. Despite the intentions of the programme, the budgetary framework is at the same level as Erasmus+, which many participants perceive as a challenge and an obstacle to achieving the goals of the collaboration.

The second factor that stands out is the level of bureaucracy associated with the programme operator. This appears to represent a challenge to collaboration in the projects, and the Norwegian participants find this both unfamiliar and unnecessary.

The third factor worth highlighting is coordination, both between different EEA Grant calls and the possibilities for closer links to, and synergies between, other programmes and sources of funding, including Erasmus+. This is a comprehensive area that affects many aspects of the design of the EEA Grants, but the lack of standardisation and more overriding organisation of the recipient countries’ programmes is probably the crux of this problem. The survey reveals that only one out of four projects combine EEA Grants with other sources of funding.

A fourth factor, where there is likely potential for improvement, concerns the clarity of the calls’ academic profile. The majority of the respondents express a keen interest in the calls having a clear thematic profile.

The individual recipient country has considerable control of the programmes’ design and implementation. It is thus natural that the Norwegian participants’ experience and assessments vary depending on which country they have collaborated with. Generally speaking, the participants are most satisfied with collaboration with Estonia and, in part, the Czech Republic, while collaboration with Romania appears to have presented slightly greater challenges.

It is important when interpreting these results to take into account that the respondents are neither representatives of the sector as a whole nor of the entire target group of potential Norwegian participants. The survey is geared towards the population of actual Norwegian participants in the current programme period. Institutions that have decided not to prioritise calls under the EEA Grants or whose applications have been rejected, or who have participated in previous programme periods but have decided not to submit applications in the current period, are not included. It is not unreasonable to assume that these groups’ views of the scheme may differ from those of the respondents in our survey.