News

Postimees:  Europe's incapability to use it's research results for improving it's business and social welfare is called the European Paradox

The world knows many technological discoveries which have been made Europe or by Europeans but have been taken into business use in America. The electromagnetic waves (Maxwell) were discovered and the radar was developed in Europe, but the microwave oven was built and commercialized in the United States. Similarly, Tim Berners-Lee's idea of the the world wide web was developed in CERN, Switzerland whereas one of the first internet-companies, Netscape, was founded in the United States.

Nevertheless, in Estonia we are sincerely speaking about having to reach Europe's education and science levels and see Europe as our role model. See someone who paradoxically is unable to use its scientific achievements for improving economy and solve social issues? What is really behind the European Paradox? I will hereby present my theory but at the same time I will not go further into the fact that in reality the level of European science and investments to research are smaller than in the United States.

My thoughts on the subject.

Traditionally, science has based on clear mono-disciplines, be it physics, mathematics, chemistry, geology, history or theology. Based on my experience from England I claim that the older the university the more orthodox it is - hundreds of years of narrow scientific fields, history and Nobel prizes make them authoritative but also not very flexible. The universities of newer times cannot boast with Nobel prize winners but they put much more emphasis on interdisciplinarity. This, by the way, has helped them to acquire money from companies both for teaching and research and it is interesting to point out that these types of universities are also more popular with foreign students.

The society and economics are by nature complicated and based on problems which are linked with different sciences both in everyday life and also, for example, in governing a country. The companies are looking for possibilities to do business and make money by solving these problems by using clever solutions. The shortage of fossil fuels leads to bringing new energy types, sources and equipment to the market To do so, the companies mix together the achievements from different scientific and technological fields. As the rich world is growing old, it's creating new challenges for the social and healthcare systems but by doing so it creates possibilities for companies to create clever but at the same time multifaceted products, services or solutions.

As long as the scientist and the leader of the country, entrepreneur and citizen see the world with a different pair of glasses, it is extremely unlikely that the money and manpower invested in science and higher education will benefit the society in the best possible way.

Instead of a fiber glass cable, the European science and enterprises are connected by a curved leaky pipe which has knots in it, in some countries less( e.g. UK, Finland, Sweden, Denmark ), in others more (mainly in Central and Eastern-European countries and in South-European countries).

The future of the higher education and science of Estonia and a more significant contribution to society depend on whether we are able to give a new understandable and problem-oriented face the mono-disciplinary and narrow science and education. Exactly because of this, research and teaching should be done by using the interdisciplinary methods. This does not exclude the continuation of the traditional science disciplines, but we must find a way to link them with specific challenges which need solving and are understood by the society. As an example, we can use the water problem about which I have already written about in Postimees. The availability, quality, transport etc. will pose big scientific, technological and ecological problems in the near future. These problems are connected with political and economical challenges which will then lead to philosophical, religious, and ethical problems. These problems should be researched and taught in cooperation of scientists and professors of different fields. This would mean bigger closeness between different faculties and schools, or their unfication.

I propose we take a new look at the old idea of the Estonian University. Not for making a decision immediately and not for choosing the administration and the principal university city, but for meaningful discussions and analyses.

The main goal of the discussion should be finding an answer to the question what the Estonian science and higher education environment should be like to offer effective solutions to complex challenges posed by the society (not just for increasing the efficiency!).

At first, discussion about whether the form of the university should be physical or virtual, it's administrative structure and financing models should be left on the background. Same applies for the name, even though a cleverly chosen name might catch the attenion of the world even before the university is opened. This happened to Aalto University which was created by uniting three universities of Helsinki and which was well-known in the world already before it was opened in early 2010!

Meditating on the subject, I think that the Estonian University (why not named after von Baer, an important figure in the history and the person on the 2-Kroon note) could consist of a small number of multi-disciplinary institutes which would help us sell the Estonian higher education better on an international level. An attempt should be made, ignoring the ownership form, to cluster all existing chairs and faculties, centres, institutes and universities of Estonia under multi-polar institutes at least at the post graduate level.

It is important to ensure that the successful centres of today, e.g. the Viljandi Culture Academy would keep their personal identity as a part of the Estonian University and keep expanding and linking it with other areas, at the same time avoiding overlapping each other. The Estonian University must be a sum of different identities and fields, not a mixture of students and scientists who all have more or less the same qualities. Emphasis must be put on creativity, openness to the world and on ambitions of being the best. In addition, there should be a considerable amount of world class scientists and at least 10 per cent of foreign students instead of the current 1.4 per cent.

Ideally, the institutes created on the basis problem-solving should match with the country's strategical areas in expansion. This way a basis uniting higher education, science and enterprise could be formed and this would help us lead the Estonian economy to the future. Monitoring done by the Development Fund show that the possible central fields could be sustainable energy and environment, health and well-being products and services, international sales and management, challenges and possibilities of multiculturalism, cyber-applications and digital media.

If we find an a wise solution to the European Paradox - doing so is so characteristic to Estonians - and put it into use, then I dare to bet that the society, economy and higher education and science will co-exist in sync. This way Estonia will transform from an exporting donor country to an appealing and popular country for talented people.

Nevertheless, the discussion about the future of the higher education should be expanded and made more ambitious. If the  National University of Singapur (NUS) managed to become one of the top 50universities of the world in 30 years, our goal should be set to reach top 100. But this is only a formal goal. The real task of higher education is training talented people who are capable of moulding the future and solving problems posed by society and economy.

The article is based on the presentation given at the conference "Estonia in the European Higher Education environment - what next?".

ott.parna[A]arengufond.ee, CEO of the Estonian Development Fund.