SOU 1991:101
Landskap, näring, kunskap : [betänkande]
LANDSCAPE AGP ICULTULL? & lTQläSTRY
_ lN SVUEDlSH
HlGHER EDUCAHQN
ENGLISH SUMMARY
Ministry of Agriculture Review of the Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences
LANDSCAPE AGRICULTURE & FORESTRY IN SWEDISH HIGHER EDUCATION
& Statens offentliga utredningar ww 1991:101 & Jordbruksdepartementet
Landscape
Agriculture & Forestry in Swedish Higher Education
English Summary
Ministry of Agriculture Review of the Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences
Sammanfattning av utredningen angående översyn av Sveriges lantbruksuniversitet, Del 5 Stockholm 1992
SOU och Ds kan köpas från Allmänna Förlaget, som också på uppdrag av regeringskansliets förvaltningskontor ombesörjer remissutsändningar av dessa publikationer.
Adress: Allmänna Förlaget Kundtjänst 106 47 Stockholm Tel 08/7 39 96 30 Telefax: 08/7 39 95 48
Publikationema kan också köpas i Informationsbokhandeln, Malmtorgsgatan 5, Stockholm.
NORSTEDTS TRYCKERI AB ISBN 91-38-10977—8 Stockholm 1992 ISSN O375—250X
The Swedish Ministry of Agriculture Review of the Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences (SOU 1991:101) English Summary
Contents Page 1 Assignment and Procedure 5 1. 1 Assignment 5 1.2 Evaluation Procedure 5
2. The Commission's Conclusions and Recommendations 9
2.1 The Role of the SUAS in Agricultural Research 9 2.2 Development since 1977 10 2. 3 Research and Experimental Work 12 2.4 Proposed Changes in the Overall Research Policy 19 2.5 Undergraduate and Postgraduate Education, Recurrent Education 22 2.6 Research Information and Extension 29 2.7 Activities for Developing Countries 30 2.8 Relations to Various Partners and Customers 31 2.9 Organisation and Governance 34
1. Assi gnment and Procedure
1.1. Assignment
In November 1989 the Swedish Minister of Agriculture assigned to Professor Ingvar Lindqvist to review the Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences (SUAS). It was a wide assignment, comprising teaching and research as well as extension and information activities, organisation, administration and management efficiency.
The review of the SUAS is the first of its kind in Sweden. Never before has an entire Swedish university been evaluated.
Important objectives of the review were to assess the standard of the Uni- versity's activities, to examine the development during the past ten years, and to indicate the University's ability to cope with the major changes and chal- lenges of the near future, mainly the new agriculture and food policy, the en— vironment protection aspects, and the prospect of Sweden's joining of the European communities.
As the merger of the earlier separate Colleges of Agriculture, Forestry and Veterinary Medicine into the SUAS took place in 1977 the review should also focus on the effects of the merger, such as cooperation between faculties and related fields of knowledge. Furthermore, the University 's cooperation with the outside world in terms of other universities, as well as various users and agencies within agriculture, forestry and veterinary medicine was to be cove— red in the review.
Part of the assignment concerned statistics on research expenditure and on educational'costs as compared to similar undergraduate programmes in other Swedish universities, and on the future supply and need of graduates from the SUAS.
Mainly, however, the objectives of the review were to evaluate.
1.2. Evaluation Procedure
The commission's assignment did not include the short undergraduate pro- grammes (the 1—2 year programmes) but the five MSc—level programmes in Agriculture, Horticulture, Landscape Architecture, Forestry, and Veterinary Medicine. In order to deal with the evaluation issues the commission decided to invite a number of qualified foreign teams to review undergraduate and postgraduate education and research within each SUAS faculty.
As the assignment of the commission as regards research was to make an overall assessment, i.e.not by department or discipline, it was decided to recruit each team from a single faculty - corresponding to the one to be eva-
luated — instead of composing mixed international teams, which was the mo- del introduced by Ingvar Lindqvist some ten years ago for the international evaluations of research funded by the Swedish Natural Science Research Council.
The commission also saw an advantage in letting the same team evaluate teaching as well as research within a faculty, as connections and common problems then might be identified.
For the Faculty of Agriculture the commission invited a team from the Wageningen Agricultural University and the Agricultural Research Depart— ment of the Dutch Ministry of Agriculture, Nature Management and Fishe- ries. The Faculty of Forestry was evaluated by a team from the University of Helsinki and the Finnish Research Institute, and the Faculty of Veterinary Medicine was reviewed by a team from the Faculty of Veterinary Medicine at the University of Utrecht. All the teams were chosen because of their stan- ding in the fields concerned, and after consultations with the faculties of the SUAS. Another reason for chosing the Dutch teams was that the Nether- lands, together with the United Kingdom, are more or less pioneers in eva- luation of higher education. The commission was very much attracted by the model used by the Dutch, that is a mixture of peer review and quantitative indicators.
The objectives of the evaluation the foreign expert teams were to make were discussed with the teams and formulated in accordance with the com— mission's interpretation of its assignment. In addition to the objectives men- tioned by the Swedish Minister of Agriculture - to indicate the standard of the teaching and research activites and the ability to cope with future changes - the commission emphasized the dynamic aspects of the evaluation process. The commission regarded evaluation as an important instrument for change and improvement, similar to what has been the case with the Swedish Natural Science Research Council's foreign expert teams. They have combined criti- cism with advice, which has been appreciated by the research teams as well as by the Research Council. The commission's interpretation of its assign- ment was approved of by the Minister of Agriculture.
Accordingly, the commission's teams were given the objectives to assess the standard of the teaching and research actvities of the faculty concerned at the SUAS, to stimulate the further development of those activities, and to indicate the faculty's capacity for change and its ability to meet new demands.
The plan with foreign expert teams could only be carried out provided that the SUAS faculties cooperated in making certain preparations. They were to inform about the study programmes and their own activities, they should make self-evaluations and they were to present their current problems, dis- cussions and plans for change and improvement.
This part of the evaluation served both as'an introduction for the evaluation teams and as a preparation for the SUAS faculties and committees for under— graduate studies for participating in the evaluation process. Some of the un- dergraduate programmes had recently been reviewed locally at the time when
the teams were appointed. It was therefore convenient to introduce the teams to the analyses of problems and needs that had been made in connection with these reviews. Furthermore - and most important - the teams were introduced to the views of the programme committees for undergraduate studies.
The material the faculties and committees for undergraduate studies at the SUAS presented as a background for the evaluation teams was quite compre- hensive. It comprised descriptions, surveys, analyses and statistics on each undergraduate programme together with descriptions of the development of each college or faculty. It also contained lists of publications during the peri— od 1988-90 within each department, as well as information on research pro— grammes and projects, participation in international scientific meetings, inter- national assignments etc.
All the evaluation teams received a common introduction about the SUAS, its background, its role and functions, and recent developments within the fields of agriculture, forestry and veterinary medicine in Sweden. Also, a short description of the Swedish higher education system was provided, as well as an overview of undergraduate and postgraduate education at the SUAS.
These introductory presentations, the self-evaluation reports and other SUAS material, and the reports from the foreign evaluation teams are pub- lished as a separate part of the commission's report under the title Evaluation Report.
.:iiir ltt-mann diff ': Lil» bmo—Jam ?.le bahnqm: tl .eviamrl
lit-r. 'znrnmng
_ä,piivmfze machen
. .» .» -- 'miinulfs'madi llA
,Äitiummga *to 2.be mh ner utan!» md:
mvg mr ur Ilan .EA'JZ
2 The Commission's Conclusions and Recommendations
2.1. The Role of the SUAS in Agricultural Research
Looking at research expenditure at universities in OECD member countries Sweden has during the 19803 had a top position as regards the role of agri- cultural research. About 10 % of the total university R&D expenditure in Sweden goes to agricultural research, whereas other countries spend less, in average 6-7 %, on agricultural research.
This is mainly due to the merger in Sweden of several small research insti— tutes into the former separate Colleges of Agriculture, Forestry andVeterinary Medicine, and after 1977 into the SUAS. Many other countries in Europe have a system with separate research institutes and extension activities outside the universities. In for instance the other Nordic countries and in the Nether— lands, 70-80 % of the public expenditure on agricultural research is channeled to such institutes. In Sweden, however, between 80 and 90 % of the public R&D expenditure on agriculture is concentrated to the SUAS, either as direct budget allocations or as grants from research councils and government agen- cies. In this respect, Sweden is more like the United States, where the univer- sities have a strong position within agricultural research.
The role of the SUAS in Swedish agricultural research has to be noted for two reasons. First, when the SUAS is being compared with foreign agricul- tural universities, or a SUAS faculty with a corresponding foreign faculty, one has to be aware of the fact that in many cases the foreign counterpart is not only a university but also part of the institute organisation. Secondly, the dominating position of the SUAS in Sweden means that the commission's assignment as to research expenditure of the University is equivalent to com- menling on the total public R&D expenditure on agriculture in Sweden.
The total - public and private - spending on agricultural research in propor- tion to the total national R&D effort is smaller in Sweden than in the other Nordic countries. The public spending on agricultural R&D in Sweden is about twice as high as in Denmark, Norway and Finland, respectively, which means that the national effort is roughly on the same level if the differences in population are taken into consideration.
Looking at public and private expenditure on agricultural R&D in relation to primary production within agricultural and food industry and forestry, the situation in Sweden is rather similar to the other Nordic countries. The com- pany spending on R&D is low compared to otiter branches, and in Sweden the public expenditure on R&D in forestry is on a lower level than in agri- culture.
2.2. Development since 1977
The commiszion has examined the long-term plans presented by the SUAS since 1981 a' preparation and basis for the Govemment's Research Policy Bills. Other naterial, such as proposals from various commissions and com- mittees, Goemment Bills, and decisions by Parliament, has also been re- viewed by tte commission. A special study has been carried out for the com- mission, on ne changes in funding since 1977 of each SUAS faculty and its research programme areas as well as its departments.
The comnission's conclusion is that the SUAS has been active in identi- fying and pcsenting important new areas for research, and it has also been engaged in teveloping these areas at the University. The R&D development in agricultun and forestry during the decade came to a large extent to focus on the long-crm objectives and areas of priority presented in the first five- year plan in198l. Among the SUAS priorities were biological production and productbn processes, natural resources and environment, raw materials for energy aid industry, food science, animal health, and forest yield. In the subsequent bng—term plans the SUAS developed the themes brought up in 1981 and alro gave high priority to undergraduate and postgraduate educa- tion.
According to the commission the SUAS has played an important role in emphasizinglong-term needs of knowledge as well as in interacting with the political levzl, mainly the Ministry of Agriculture, the research councils, various govzrnment agencies and the private companies and other users within agricrlture and forestry.
The SUAS has to a large extent been successful in getting support for its priorities. Nany of the proposals have been accepted and realized. It should be mentionel, however, that formal responsilility and government funds for many of theresearch programmes within the fields given priority to by the SUAS have teen entrusted to research councils and mission—oriented research agencies.
Many nev fields of research have been introduced at the SUAS since 1977, and retllocations of funds for various purposes have been made. In to- tal, the SUAS budget allocations have, according to the comission's special study, increased from 409 to 430 Million SEK (in 1989 currency) between 1977 and 190. By various decisions increases have been made by 81 Mil- lion SEK, mtinly for various research purposes. During this period cut backs on allocaticns have been made by the Government by 35 Million SEK. 26 Million EEK have disappeared since 1977 due to unsufficient adjustment of the SUAS budget allocations to the current price level, an operation perfor- med each yetr by the Government and Parliament.
The remzining net increase, 20 Million SEK, has to a large extent been reallocated o undergraduate teaching. New options in biotechnology and food science within the MSc programmes in Agriculture and Horticulture
have been developed and started, and the number of new entrants in the MSc programme in Forestry has been increased.
The consequence has been that the budget allocations for research have remained roughly the same from 1977 to 1990. That means that all the new research purposes, decided on by Government and Parliament during this period, and accompanied by increased budget allocations to the SUAS, have been realized within a constant budget scope, i e by reallocations. During the period, 29 % of the University's research budget has been reallocated
The commission finds such an overall pace of change in research funding normal and acceptable - between 2 and 3 % per year. As to the reallocation of funds from research to undergraduate education the University had, accor- ding to the commission, good reasons for the actions taken.
Within the Faculty of Agriculture a noticeable reallocation of funds from applied research and experiments to basic and strategic research has been made. At the same time the private funding of applied research and experi- mental work has increased. According to the commission this is a desirable development, which should continue. .
The Faculty of Forestry has passed a stage of dynamic change and deve- lopment since 1977. Interest has been increasingly directed towards bioener— gy studies, environment and nature protection, and biotechnology. At the same time production studies have been developed. In total, there has been a large expansion of forestry research, mainly by external funding from re- search councils and mission-oriented research agencies.
The commission is impressed by the dynamism shown by the Faculty of Forestry, and the development is very much in the direction desired by Government and Parliament. The commission is, however, worried about some of the consequences. In 1990 half the Faculty's budget allocations for research was being used for other purposes than in 1977, which has seri- ously affected the University funding of traditional forestry disciplines. External research grants have been awarded mainly to non-traditional forest research areas, such as environment and natural resources, and bioenergy. The establishment of a necessary base in the University for such new fields has brought about a drain from the funds available for the traditional fields. During the period the external funding has increased from 47 to 70 % of the total research expenditure of the Faculty. The reduction in University funding of traditional forest research amounts to about 33 %.
External funding of research has increased considerably at all the SUAS faculties sincel977, and its large share at the Faculty of Forestry raises the question if the present Swedish policy for funding and performance of re— search is adequate.
The Faculty of Veterinary Medicine has kept about the same pace of change in its research as has the Faculty of Agriculture, i e 25-30 % of the allocations are devoted to new purposes in 1990. The Faculty has given prio— rity to animal health, and to quality in food production, as well as to basic
research in amore general sense. The commission sees good reasons to ap- SOU 1991:101 prove of the levelopment of the Faculty. Del 5
2.3. Research and Experimental Work
Research and experimental work are the dominating activities of the SUAS. About 70 % )f its budget allocations are devoted to such activities.
Bibliometricstudy
The commis;ion has made a special study of the scientific publication activity of the SUAS during the 1980s. The study has been performed at the depart- ment of sociilogy at the University of Umeå.
According to this study the publication of the SUAS researchers in jour- nals covered by the Science Citation Index (SCI) has increased considerably during the 1980s. Looking at papers etc in journals within the fields of agri- culture, inclrding dairy, animal science and soil science, as well as veterinary medicine, f(od science and technology, and forestry, the number of publica- tions from tle SUAS has doubled between 1980 and 1989, whereas the total number of prblications - on the world level - has been more or less constant, with a smallincrease in 1989. The SUAS has taken a larger share of the total Swedish pualicarions in such journals during the 1980s, from half to two thirds of the total number. At the same time the SUAS publishing in more general scieitific journals, mainly in biology, biomedicine, clinical medicine and chemisty, has increased even more and is almost three times as large as in 1980. The share of general scientific papers was about half the total SUAS publication n 1977 and about 60 % in 1989.
This dev:lopment reflects the changes of research priorities within the SUAS descibed in the previous section of this summary, i e the priority given to base and strategic research in the faculties. It can also be noted that agriculture "ri wide sense, including veterinary medicine and forestry, is one of the fields where Sweden's share of the total number of papers in the SCI is the highest. It is only in biomedicine, clinical medicine and biology that the Swedish share of papers in journals covered by the SCI is higher than in agri- culture.
Research Priorities
The commirsion has studied the OECD reports on research priorities and changes in ;uch priorities in the member countries during the 1980s. It ap- pears that tfe areas of priority in most OECD member countries, i e environ— ment and protection of natural resources, biotechnology, product quality in agriculture, food technology, sustainable production, and development of
new products, are very much in focus at the SUAS. The University 's long- term plans are obviously very well coordinated with the priorities set by a majority of OECD member countries.
The SUAS is even more explicit in emphasizing basic research than is the majority of the OECD member countries. An exception is the United States, where research on the science base for agriculture is given very high priority. The National Academy of Sciences regards this field as being of utmost im- portance for the future. According to the President's of the United States ranking of national research priorities, basic research in agriculture is second only to research on the aids disease.
The commission has noticed that the foreign evaluation teams give high priority to basic research and therefore recommends, together with the teams and referring to the United States' setting of priorities, that basic research be given high priority also during the period ahead.
In their reports the foreign evaluation teams also make other significant comments on the research priorities of the SUAS faculties. In the Wage- ningen team 's opinion the change to a market-regulated agriculture will have profound consequences for Swedish agriculture and form an important chal- lenge for the SUAS. The change from the present primary physical-economic production into a resource-effective, market-regulated agricultural chain in— cluding production, processing and consumption needs to be supported scientifically. Beside the extension from production to processing and con- sumption, environmental studies and landscape planning will also be impor- tant issues in the future.
According to the commission the recommendations from the Wageningen team should be taken seriously by the Faculty of Agriculture and the SUAS. The reorientation of the Faculty research which has been initiated and presen- ted in the SUAS long-term plan in 1989 should be forcefully pursued. It has to be observed, however, that the present division of labour between the SUAS, the Faculty of Technology at the University of Lund (food techno- logy) and the Gothenburg Institute for Food Research should not be changed.
The Helsinki team considers the five major research programmes within the Faculty of Forestry to be sound. According to the team proper care has been taken in the strategic planning to allow for the necessary processes of change and renewal. In recent years the problems of the environment and nature protection have arisen to a par with more traditional work on growth, yield and their ecological basis. A greater share also has been given to bio- energy studies and, to & lesser extent, to economic aspects, especially marke- ting. The latest efforts concern biotechnology; the emphasis on strictly basic research should, however, in the team's opinion be avoided.
According to the Utrecht team the research within the Faculty of Veterinary Medicine is up-to-date and relevant for the advancement of veterinary medi- cine in Sweden. However, there is in the team 's opinion insufficient attention to research on infectious diseases at the more modern, molecular—biological level. Future-oriented research will also have to focus on preventive medi-
cine, includig "vaccinology" and epidemiology. Food quality and food safe- ty will also equire more attention as well as the relations between veterinary medicine ari the environment.
General S cintiflc Research
The researc and experimental work at the SUAS can be divided into general scientific reearch and specific research in agriculture, forestry and veterinary medicine. 'lre general scientific research is in most cases basic research and is of great iiportance to the more SUAS—specific research and experimental work. The eneral research is quite extensive within the Faculties of Agri- culture and leterinary Medicine, less so in the Faculty of Forestry.
Accordir; to the evaluations made by the Council of Forestry and Agricul- tural Reseach and by other research councils, using international expert teams, the general scientific research at the SUAS is of a high international standard am in general on the same level as Swedish natural science research within relatd areas. This impression is confirmed by the bibliometric study as well as b the foreign evaluation teams. The teams have based their judg- ments on iformation on publications, activities in international scientific associationsand international exchange activities as well as on observations and impressons in connection with the site visits.
Accordirg to the commission the university funding of the general scien— tific researc. at the SUAS is unsufficient in most cases.
Specific S UlS Research
The researc. specific to the SUAS areas of responsibility should be of a long— range natur and be based on available knowledge in fundamental science. There mustve links and cooperation between the SUAS-specific research and the more geteral scientific research both within and outside the SUAS. The university f nding of the specific SUAS research is, as well as the funding of the more geeral research, unsufficient in most cases.
The specfic SUAS research has also been evaluated by national and inter- national exert teams. Neither those evaluations nor the bibliometric study indicate anjweaknesses of the research. It should be noticed, however, that the specificSUAS research has not been evaluated to the same extent as has the more goeral scientific research at the SUAS. The commission recom- mends that he SUAS-specific research be more comprehensively and regu- larly evaluacd.
Severe citicism has, hovever, been brougt forward implying that more overall stuc'es, with a focus on synthesis, system analysis and interdiscipli- narity, haveJeen neglected in the SUAS-specific research. The teams evalua- ting the Faolty of Agriculture and the Faculty of Forestry have emphasized this deficiecy. Other sources have also conveyed the same opinion to the
commission. The criticism does not concern the Faculty of Veterinary Medi- cine and its research. According to available indicators and examinations it seems to be adequate.
Common for all the three SUAS faculties is, however, that they get criti- cism from the evaluation teams for lack of contact and cooperation between departments.
The commission agrees with the Wageningen and Helsinki teams as to the problems and circumstances which have caused the deficiencies of the SUAS-specific research. In the teams” analyses three factors are pointed out as primary causes: the geographical distribution of faculties and departments, the high proportion of external funding of research, and the present organi- sation of the SUAS.
The Geographical Distribution of Faculties and Departments
In the commission's opinion research on biological production in natural surroundings, on growth, breeding, yield and ecology, has to be distributed according to varying conditions in Sweden. Field stations and experiments in many places with varying biological and other environment conditions are therefore necessary. This should not, however, be implemented in a way that jeopardizes the quality of research and research-related undergraduate edu- cation.
According to the commission the Faculty of Forestry has been most seri- ously affected by the geographical distribution of its activities. Half the facul- ty is located in Uppsala, a large part in Umeå, a smaller part at Garpenberg, and there is also a research unit at Alnarp. The MSc programme in Forestry is divided among Umeå, Uppsala and Garpenberg.
There are three alternative ways to deal with the geographical division of the Faculty of Forestry. The Faculty could be concentrated to Uppsala or to Umeå, or there could be a combination of Uppsala and Umeå.
A concentration to Uppsala would be the best alternative for many rea- sons. It is, however, hardly realistic at present, as it was not chosen when the College of Forestry was moved from Stockholm in the 19705. A concentra— tion to Umeå has its advantages, among them a closer cooperation with the University of Umeå. The drawbacks are, however, considerable, as new premises have to be provided in Umeå and the links to the Faculty of Agricul- ture and to the University of Uppsala would be cut off. A concentration to Umeå should, according to the commission, implicate that the Faculty of Forestry be separated from the SUAS and become part of the University of Umeå.
The commission recommends that the Faculty of Forestry be concentrated to two centres, Uppsala and Umeå. In order to make such a construction work successfully a better balance has to be established between Uppsala and Umeå as to the role and function in undergraduate teaching as well as
research. The Helsinki team has emphasized this and also pointed out the SOU 1991:101 connection between undergraduate education, postgraduate education and De15 research in Forestry. The MSc in Forestry has a marked professional profile but has shortcomings as a preparation for doctoral training. The enrollment of graduates with a MSc degree in Forestry to postgraduate education is com- paratively low - less than 60 % of the total number of doctoral students.
According to the Helsinki team the proportion of postgraduate students without a forestry background in undergraduate studies has reached a level that must be regarded as alarming. Such persons usually lack the necessary versatile understanding of forestry as a whole. The team does consider some "new blood" as necessary to keep the scientific thinking in the departments alive and fruitful. However, as the team puts it, departments without any MSc in Forestry as postgraduate student will have a tendency to become estranged from other departments and from real forestry problems.
The team is also concerned about the almost complete lack in some Upp- sala departments of staff members with a basic training in forestry, and re- commends a better balance in order to avoid alienation from the problems of practical forestry. Long-term measures in staff development are regarded as necessary to remedy this shortcoming.
The commission shares the Helsinki team 's opinion and concern about the present situation at the Faculty of Forestry. If no measures are taken to change the imbalance and development there is an obvious risk that the Upp- sala part of the Faculty will become more of a Faculty of Natural Sciences. As a consequence, the Faculty of Forestry would lose much of its present qualities, in particular the broad mission to cover the whole concept of forest, as the Helsinki team puts it.
The analysis presented by the Helsinki team calls for a coordinated action. The large, at present not adequately utilized resource in Uppsala for teaching in basic sciences should be used for the first year of the MSc in Forestry programme.
The Helsinki team has pointed out that the splitting-up of forestry research into three units - Uppsala, Umeå and Garpenberg - has had several negative effects. According to the commission, forestry research at Garpenberg is much too isolated and would profit from being moved to Uppsala or Umeå and made part of larger research milieus.
Furthermore, the forest technology research at Garpenberg has been criti- cised by representatives of the Swedish forest industry and forest owners, among them the Swedish Pulp and Paper Association. Their point is that the SUAS forest technology research should have a more long-term orientation and not compete with the branch research institute (the Forest Operations Institute).
The commission recommends that the Faculty of Forestry decides where to move the research at Garpenberg and also makes a review of the research in forest technology.
The unit at Alnarp for forestry research in the south of Sweden has obvi- ously been successful from a scientific point of view as well as for the users and should therefore be further developed.
Also for the Faculty of Agriculture its geographical distribution has caused problems. There are two centres, one in Uppsala and one at Alnarp, which should be easier to handle than three or four which is the case for the Faculty of Forestry. According to the commission the present structure with two centres should be maintained. There are many good reasons for the location at Alnarp, among them the cooperation with the University of Lund.
It is, however, important to improve contacts and cooperation between related fields, and the commission would like to forward to the Faculty the proposals and recommendations by the Wageningen team.
According to the commission there is also a need to give Horticulture and Landscape Architecture more of a profile of their own, its research as well as the MSc programmes, within the SUAS. The Faculty of Agriculture is very large and heterogenous and tends to be dominated by the Agronomist per— spective. The commission recommends that the Faculty be divided into two, one for Agriculture and one for Horticulture and Landscape Planning.
Field Trials and Experiments
In section 2.1 above it was pointed out that the Swedish system for R&D in agriculture, with the merger of a number of separate research institutes into the higher education institutions, is different from the organisation in many other European countries. The commission's assignment included a critical examination of the Swedish system and other altematives.
Many countries have a model with two parallel R&D organisations in agri- culture, universities or colleges of agriculture and research institutes with public funding. The higher education institutions are often oriented towards basic and strategic research whereas the institutes focus on applied research, experiments and field trials.
The commission's impression is that both models seem to work. The com- parisons the commission has made between the models have not, however, convinced the commission that the model with two parallel organisations is superior to the integrated model practised in Sweden and in the United States.
The commission therefore recommends that the existing model be kept in Sweden, which in our case means that the building-up of basic research in a separate institute organisation can be avoided, something that may be of ad- vantage in large countries but hardly in Sweden.
In making this recommendation the commission also emphasizes that the applied research, experiments and field trials should be more integrated into the research activities of the departments, a development which is under way in for instance Animal Science.
l7
English Summary
It has bensaid already that the SUAS-specific research should be of a long-term rattre. According to the commission there should also be possi- bilities to tse the SUAS competence and facilities for short-term applied research ant p'oblem-solving relevant to users within the agricultural sector. In such cases,however, it would be commissioned R&D, paid for by the customer. Acmrding to the description in section 2.2 the development during the past ten yetrs has, in fact, been in that direction, i e with a reduction of the SUAS fudget allocations to applied research and development work and increased ftndng from private sources.
With an :xllicit policy declaration from the Government and Parliament it should be pissble for the SUAS to continue the development already started concerning ob'ectives and responsibility for applied research and experi- ments, and 'heintegration of such activites with basic and strategic research. In connection vith such a development the commission recommends that the experiment» aid field trials be reduced and concentrated to a couple of centres.
In presertirg this general outline for the future development the commis- sion is awae )f the need to find a good solution for the long-time experi- ments on growh and yield, including data collection during several decades. In forestry, forinstance, long-term experiments on growth and yield of forest stands in vaiors natural conditions and under different treatments have been going on sircethe beginning of this century, and great attention has been paid to the colle:tion and utilization of such material. The value of the collected data is regadtd as very high in forestry research, and according to the Hel— sinki team 'he Swedish material is unique even at a global level. The team recommencs nat the means be found to continue these studies. Also within the Faculty ongriculture there are some studies and experiments going on for a long tmr which in a similar way are used for research projects in seve- ral disciplires.
In the connissions's opinion such activities should not be included in the budget discusions each year on cut backs and reallocation of funds. They should be deal with separately, with respect to their long-term character and usefulness 'o nany disciplines. There is a resemblance between such long- terrn experinetts and the access for Swedish researchers to the advanced and expensive siettific equipment paid for by Sweden's membership fees to the CERN, the Eiropean Space Agency, the European Southern Observatory, etc. Such fcesare kept together as a separate budget entry and do not form part of the iutgets of the research councils concerned. A similar procedure is recommencedfor the long-term experiments and activities at the SUAS, in- cluding also : minimum of animal stock used by departments within the Faculties o" Agriculture and Veterinary Medicine. The commission recom— mends thata :areful examination of such activities at the SUAS be made together wi'h rn estimation of the cost.
2.4. Proposed Changes in the Overall Research SOU 1991:101 Policy De”
In total, the external funding of research at the SUAS equals the budget al- locations for research in all the faculties together. In the Faculties of Agricul- ture and Veterinary Medicine the external funding amounts to about 40 % of the total R&D expenditure, and in the Faculty of Forestry the corresponding share is 70 %. Private funding amounts to about 15 % of the total SUAS R&D expenditure. Most of the external research funding comes from public sources, research councils and mission-oriented research agencies.
In section 2.2 the connection between the present situation and the de- velopment during the past ten years has been described. The SUAS has in its long-term plans and budget requests presented many new research areas. The proposals have to a large extent been accepted, but formal responsibility and funds for research programmes have in most cases been given to research councils and agencies (food science, forestry research, sustainable produc- tion, environment research etc). In order to carry out research within the fields given priority to by the SUAS its researchers have had to apply for grants from the research councils or agencies.
This procedure is an application of the overall Swedish research policy decided on by the Government and Parliament. During the 1960s and parti- cularly during the 1970s there had been an impressive expansion of mission- oriented R&D in Sweden, and there was a wide-spread and firm support in the Swedish society for research. The usefulness of research activities, i e the instrumental value of knowledge, was the dominating perspective, and sec- torial research had its heyday.
The role of the higher education institutions in the R&D system was de- fined in 1979. They should have a leading part in the performance of all kinds of research. Soon afterwards it was decided that the research councils should have the major responsibility for the development of basic research, and vari- ous mission—oriented research agencies for sectorial research. As a result of proposals from a Government commission, the view that research could have either scientific qualities or relevance to the society got official support. Ac- cordingly, the research councils became the warrants of scientific quality and the agencies the warrants of relevance to society. Separate research institutes should be avoided because of the risk of isolation from the scientific commu- nity, and the universities were seen as principal performers of research. The Government's Research Policy Bills and the decisions by Parliament during the 19805 have been in strict accordance with this policy.
The development at the SUAS, and at the Faculty of Forestry in particular, illustrates the effects of this research policy. Within the Faculty of Forestry a number of new research programmes have been started, for instance on bio- energy, pollution and other environmental problems, and production. In order to provide a necessary base within the university for such programmes 22 Million SEK have been reallocated, and further, a number of posts have
been transferred to the new areas of priority. In total, half the Faculty 's part of the University's allocations for research was in 1990 devoted to other areas and purposes than in 1977. The traditional forestry disciplines have got their university allocations reduced by about one third. Part of the explanation to this severe cut is the unsufficient adjustment to the current price level, made by the Government and Parliament.
Between 1977 and 1990 the external funding of research at the Faculty of Forestry has increased from 45 to 125 Million SEK, which is an increase from 47 to 70 % of the research expenditure. The funding of environmental research in the Faculty by the Swedish National Board for Environment Protection now equals the private funding of production-oriented research, which is quite a dramatic change.
The Faculty of Forestry could have chosen to protect the traditional fores— try disciplines and maintain the previous level of funding of such areas. They should then have kept away from the environmental research and the new programmes of the research councils and agencies. In that case the Faculty would have been criticised for its lack of interest in fields given priority to by the political level (and by the SUAS, in the first place). If the Faculty wanted to take up the new fields the rule of the game, according to the present Swe- dish research policy, made it necessary to reduce the university allocations to the fields available, i e the traditional forestry disciplines.
The process of scientific development means that new fields of research emerge and some old ones lose their importance and should be closed down or changed. The decisive weakness in the Swedish research policy is that it imposes reductions on the faculties where new research areas should be de- veloped. This effect is produced by the model chosen for introducing new areas into the R&D system, i e by extemal funding.
The reduction of university allocations to traditional forestry fields is not the result of the setting of priorities on the political level, nor at the SUAS. The commission's reply to the critics from the forest industry and the forest owners is that the SUAS and the Faculty of Forestry have behaved according to the overall research policy and the rules established by the Government and Parliament. As the result is unfortunate the rules should be changed.
The major problem is the division of tasks and responsibility among the actors in the R&D system. The role of the higher education institutions as performers of research has been over—emphasized to a degree that has left them with very little influence on the research they perform. Influence and power of decision has gradually been transferred to the research councils and the mission-oriented agencies. The research policy is based on the assump- tion that such a division of tasks and responsibility leads to research of higher scientific quality and/or more relevance to society than if research funds are awarded directly to the universities.
The empirical evidence after ten years supports the assumption that re- search councils are good at selecting promising research projects. Intema- tional evaluations of research as well as bibliometric and other indications
show that the research councils have to a large extent supported research of good international standard in natural sciences, medicine, forestry and agri- culture. The mission-oriented agencies are, according to evaluations made, in some cases good at selecting research projects, and in other cases not at all successful. Furthermore, it is not very clear which authority is the expert on research which combines scientific quality with usefulness for a sector or branch.
The Council of Forestry and Agricultural Research has since a couple of years a large programme running on interdisciplinary research in forestry. According to the Helsinki team, however, the lack of interdisciplinary re- search within the Faculty of Forestry is a serious weakness. The criticism presented by the Helsinki team as well as by the Wageningen team concer- ning too much fragmented research indicates that the external funding bodies have not been successful in building up integrated and coherent research programmes. Looking more generally at the present system for funding of research it is obvious that it provides very few incentives to integrated and coherent research programmes and for interdisciplinary research.
In order to establish a better balance in the R&D system and to make it work better the dogmatism of the present research policy should be abando- ned.
The research councils, having proved their ability to support basic research in a competent way, should continue to play an important part in the R&D system. Their function should be to build up basic research within new fields and to transfer research activities, which they have established successfully and which should continue more or less permanently, to the universities. Mission-oriented research agencies should be given a similar function.
Furthermore, several alternative models to build up and run research pro- grammes should be allowed, i e a more pluralistic attitude should replace the present orthodox one. Funds and responsibility for developing new fields and for starting research programmes should be given to universities as well as to research councils and agencies. It could for instance be done in the same way as in Dutch universities, where "conditional research programmes" form an important part of the universities” budgets. These programmes are exa- mined carefully in advance and evaluated regularly. According to the commis- sion there should be a peer review of such programme proposals in Sweden, followed by an evaluation after a number of years. Depending on the nature of the programme, customers should be involved in the review and evaluation procedures.
At the SUAS the conditions are in many respects favourable for develop- ing and running such university programmes. There is a tradition of having research programmes at the University and there are also well established connections and cooperation with various users, organisations and agencies within the fields of agriculture and forestry. According to the commission the present more or less permanent programme committees should be replaced by ad hoc thematic committees, responsible for the development and running of
English Summary
well—defined nsearch programmes or projects. The introduction of such com- mittees world give better possibilities of making concentrated research efforts and of shifting from one area to another. Thematic research committees are, according to tle commission, appropriate places for cooperation with private and public parners and joint funding of research projects and programmes.
An obviou: starting-point for university—run research programmes at the SUAS would )e the future needs of knowledge, presented at the commis- sion 's initiativ: by the Federation of Swedish Partners and by representatives of the forest irdustry and the forest owners. These organisations have iden- tified importatt issues and research fields in a ten-year perspective, and simi- lar estimates lave been made also by public agencies. Other starting-points are the long-term research plans from the SUAS faculties, which will be revised in 1991.
In order to fund university—run research programmes at the SUAS some reallocatiors vithin the University should be made. Furthermore, funds for certain researth programmes should be transferred to the SUAS from the Council of Etrestry and Agricultural Research and the National Swedish Board for Envronment Protection.
In addition,the Council of Forestry and Agricultural Research should, like its fellow resetrch councils in Natural Sciences and Medicine, hand over its well-establzshed and successful customers and their grants to the SUAS, as well as to tthrr unversities, instead of keeping them over long periods. The Council of Foestry and Agricultural Research should together with the Fa- culties at the iUAS identify research groups and projects which meet the requirements "or being transferred to the University. Well-established re- search actitities funded by mission—oriented agencies should be dealt with in a similar way.
2.5. Undergraduate and Postgraduate Education, RecurrentEducation
The MS c prog'ammes in Agriculture, Horticulture and Landscape Architec- ture are less txpensive per student than the corresponding programmes in natural sciences and engineering at other universities. Examination rates are somewhat ligter at the SUAS. The number of applicants to the programmes in Agricultureand Horticulture has decreased considerably during the 19808, whereas the pngramme in Landscape Architecture is very popular at present. The MSc pngramme in Agriculture is the one most directly affected by the present and fuure changes of the Swedish agriculture and food policy. The situation is mtre or less the same in many other countries. In for instance the United States the number of applicants to colleges of agriculture has de— creased dranaically and brought about a re-orientation and restructuring of undergraduate education as well as of research in many universities. By emphasizing ervironmental aspects and natural resources, product quality and
22
English Summary
health issues, and by providing more of a science base for agricultural edu— cation, some universities in the United States have managed to turn the title. According to the commission, and to the Wageningen team, similar solutions should be sought in Sweden.
At the same time as the commission has been doing its work there has been much activity going on at the Faculty of Agriculture. A SUAS review of the MSc programmes within the Faculty was presented before the Wage— ningen team made its evaluation. Later on committees set up by the Faculty have started to work on new curricula for the next academic year.
According to the commission, the observations by the Wageningen team on the present MSc programmes of the Faculty of Agriculture, i e that they are more aimed at training good professionals than academic scientists, should be taken seriously by the Faculty committees. The commission shares the view of the team that the MSc programmes should have a better science base and more well-structured alternative specializations later on in the pro— grammes.
The commission is also in favour of the recommendations made by the team on better coordination of the various departments' input in the teaching programme and more social science contents in the programmes. As to the team 's recommendation to formalize the distinction between professional and academic training by creating different programmes or study-paths the com- mission 's opinion is that this should be done not only for the MSc program- mes but also for the shorter programmes. The shorter programmes are part of the total supply of agricultural education, and the objectives for the various educations should be looked at together.
Against the criticism presented by the Wageningen team it could be said that the employers in general are very satisfied with the graduates from the Faculty of Agriculture. The students, however, are more critical to the teaching and they get support from the Wageningen team. The commission wants to emphasize that the Swedish MSc programmes have to be good enough to stand comparison and competition with corresponding European programmes in a near future. There are many indications that a more solid science base will be needed, as well as a combination of fundamental and applied science and training in problem-solving.
According to the commission the observations and recommendations made by the Wageningen team provide good help for the SUAS to improve the standard of the MSc programmes in Agriculture, Horticulture and Landscape Architecture. The more detailed recommendations for each programme should be noted by the Faculty committees.
The introduction of & BSc degree, proposed in the SUAS review of the MSc programmes, may be a good idea if it is constructed as a part of the MSc programme. It could facilitate international exchange of students. A BSc degree independent of the MSc programmes should, according to the com— mission, include combination of SUAS courses and other university courses
23
English Summary
in natural sciences, social sciences etc, and should be planned together with other universities.
As to the geographic splitting-up of departments the commission agrees with the Wageningen team that a better and more coordinated planning of the courses and teaching programmes should be pursued and that more coopera- tion between departments is needed
Like the MSc programmes within the Faculty of Agriculture the MSc pro- gramme in Forestry is less expensive per student than the university program- mes in natural sciences and engineering, and the examination rate is higher. The Forestry programme is very popular and has had a great number of app- licants each year during the 19805.
Also the Faculty of Forestry had started a review of its MSc programme prior to the appointment of the evaluation team. According to a survey made to various employers the graduates are very much appreciated on the labour market. The Faculty was, however, aware of the imbalance between its Umeå and Uppsala parts and the unsufficient enrollment of graduates to the post- graduate programmes. The Faculty's proposed remedy was to introduce a BSc degree in Forestry, separate from the MSc programme. It should be of- fered in Uppsala with the purpose to recruit future doctoral students in Forestry.
The employers reject the idea of a BSc degree with preparation for post— graduate studies as sole purpose, and so does the commission. The commis- sion is in favour of a BSc degree allowing combinations of forestry subjects with courses in agriculture, natural sciences, social sciences or technology. Such a degree does not, however, solve the problem with the unsufficient enrollment of graduates from the Faculty of Forestry in postgraduate pro- grammes. According to the commission the MSc programme in Forestry should, like the MSc in engineering, be made an effective combination of professional and science—based education.
The commission 's recommendations on the MSc programme in Forestry, which is part of a proposed coordinated action for undergraduate and postgra- duate education as well as research, is presented in section 2.3. The distri- bution of departments and resources between Uppsala and Umeå should be decided on by the Faculty of Forestry.
The MSc programme in Veterinary Medicine is, with respect to the cost per student, the number of applicants per study place and the demand from the labour market, very similar to the university programme in Medicine. The cost as well as the minimum requirements for admission in terms of marks and other merits are among the highest in Swedish higher education, and the graduates are very much in demand on the labour market. The examination rate for the MSc programme in Veterinary Medicine is even higher than for graduates in Medicine and is hardly exceeded by any other university edu— cation.
The Utrecht team has no objections as to the contents of the MSc pro— gramme or its professional and scientific level. According to the team the
veterinary curriculum contains all the subjects required by the EC, and it is SOU 1991:101 also in all other respects compatible with EC guidelines. Weak points are, Del 5 however, according to the team, that the students study only one subject at a time (the block system), and that the students all follow one uniform pro- gramme, without elective subjects or optional programmes.
In the self-evaluation report by the Faculty committee for undergraduate studies these issues are discussed, and obviously the committee is aware of the problems. In the commission's opinion the Faculty should take the ana- lyses and recommendations made by the Utrecht team seriously.
The commission has noticed that in Europe as well as in the United States and Canada a certain specialization within the veterinary curriculum is being accepted by the national bodies which issue authorisation for veterinarians. According to the commission it is important that the Faculty of Veterinary Medicine follows the international development.
The commission also wants to emphasize the team 's recommendations on continuing education and its advice that the Faculty should keep itself infor— med about the on-going discussions and the proposed solutions concerning undergraduate veterinary education in Europe.
The Utrecht team 's recommendation to make the currirulum more flexible and include elective subjects, and bring about more integration of subjects, is congruent with the views presented by the students and should be paid atten- tion to in the review of the undergraduate teaching which the Faculty is about to make.
The commission has observed that the staff to student ratio at the Faculty is one of the highest in the European veterinary schools, according to the team, and that the total budget is high for a faculty of its size. The cost per student is about the same as for medical students, whereas other MSc pro- grammes at the SUAS are less expensive than the corresponding university programmes. In order to reduce the cost for veterinary education the Faculty should examine what could be saved by moving the education at Skara to Uppsala. Another reason to concentrate the education to Uppsala is that it would facilitate a certain specialization.
Teaching Methods
The foreign evaluation teams are satisfied with the high degree of motivation for teaching among staff members as well as students. They are, however, dissatisfied with the dominant role of fact-finding and fact-knowledge in the courses and the examination, and 'fhey recommend more problem-analysis, synthesis, understanding and integration of courses, together with a different manner of examination.
To some extent issues of teaching and examination are common to all higher education. Those more general pedagogic issues and methods are being dealt with by a commission under the Ministry of Education. It can be
expected that the more general pedagogic issues, also concerning the SUAS, will be discuzsed in connection with the report by that commission in the beginning of '_992.
The self-evaluations by the Committees for undergraduate studies at the SUAS as well as the opinions and proposals presented by the student repre- sentatives shtw that there is an awareness of how different ways of teaching and examination affect the process of learning and the competence of the gra— duates. Accorling to the commission more emphasis on basic science as well as on problem-solving, integration and synthesis is needed if the Swedish MSc programnes are to be up to a high European standard. In the commis- sion 's opinim, the evaluation teams' observations and advice are most valuable contributions to the committee work going on, or about to start, at the SUAS, aining at development and improvement of the undergraduate teaching. Locrl experiences and proposals from the various Committees for undergraduate studies and from student organisations should also be made use of.
Internationalisztion
With some aaonishment the commission has noticed that the international contacts and the international student exchange in undergraduate education at the SUAS has hardly been affected by the wave of European mobility that has hit the rest of the universities and colleges (under the Ministry of Education) during the last few years.
Undergradiate students at the SUAS may have some contacts with other Nordic countres and occasionally a student has spent a term at a university in the United Strtes, on his or her own initiative. The SUAS has hardly any agreements w_th universities abroad on student exchange, whereas even the small university colleges under the Ministry of Education have several such agreements.
Nordic cooperation is a tradition for universities and colleges of agriculture and is of great importance at the postgraduate level and in research. After the establishmenta couple of years ago of a regular Nordic programme for the exchange of faculty and students the situation for undergraduate education has improved.
'The commission recommends that the international contacts and exchange be developed at the SUAS, including participation in the ERASMUS pro- gramme. The SUAS Faculties should find partner faculties abroad, preferably in Europe, and make agreements with them on exchange of undergraduate and postgraduate students, and on cooperation in education and research.
According :o the commission the MSc programmes should be planned in such a way that the students can spend a term or a year at a foreign university and get credit for it at home. At the universities of technology, for instance, it has for quite some time been a custom to send engineering student abroad for
26
English Summary
their last year of study. The SUAS should also, like the other Swedish uni- versities, offer courses in English to foreign students.
The SUAS has given priority to international contacts and cooperation in its long-term plan of 1989. The commission recommends that the efforts be considerably increased.
With closer European and EC contacts, and adjustments to systems and practice in other countries, it can be expected that a grading system will be introduced at the SUAS. The foreign teams have recommended such a change.
Dimensioning of Undergraduate Education
On the request of the commission a study has been made on the occupations and the occupational mobility of SUAS graduates on the labour market, the long-term effects of the present educational capacity of the SUAS, and the labour market demand. According to this study the number of SUAS gra- duates in gainful employment will increase during the next 10-15 years, then level off and decrease.
The number of graduates in natural sciences will begin to decrease earlier, just after the year 2000, which means that the total number of graduates with a natural science or a SUAS degree, who are to a certain extent interchange- able on the labour market, will decrease from the year 2005. Engineers will, however, continue to increase considerably until 2020.
The commission recommends that a long-term strategy be formulated for the dimensioning of the SUAS undergraduate programmes toghether with the planning authorities for the natural science undergraduate programmes.
In a short-term perspective the number of new entrants to the MSc pro- gramme in Forestry should be increased. The number of graduates in Fores- try in gainful employment will remain unchanged for a long time - for each new graduate there will be a senior forester retiring. To ensure an increased enrollment of foresters in postgraduate education more graduates are needed. The intake to the MSc programme in Landscape Architecture should also be increased in the next few years.
A large surplus of people with a short SUAS education, the 1-2 year pro- grammes, is expected in the near future, which is a reason to reduce the pre- sent intake. A review of the shorter programmes is, however, going on at the SUAS.
Postgraduate Education
The foreign evaluation teams have made observations and recommendations on postgraduate education which are worth listening to. The commission has also made use of some recently presented enquiries to doctoral students and
27
English Summary
supervisors, and initiated a comparative statistical study including other facul- ties at Swedish universities.
The material available indicates that the quality if the theses does not seem to be very much of a problem, whereas the recruitment of doctoral students and the running of the postgraduate programmes call for actions of various kinds.
As regards time of study and examination rate the SUAS does not differ significantly from similar faculties at other universities. The time of study for a Doctoral Degree in Agriculture or Forestry is about the same as for a Doctor of Technology and somewhat shorter than for a Ph D in Natural Sciences. A Doctoral Degree in Veterinary Medicine takes abou: the same time as a Degree in Medicine. The net study time is in general close to four years, which is the official norm.
Even if the examination rates at the SUAS hardly are lower than at other comparable faculties they are too low in the conmission's opinion. Gene- rally, the examination rates in postgraduate education in Sweden are low, according to the commission. In the SUAS case the various enquiries and other material indicate that higher examination rater can be attained by a better financial support and by a more adequate organisation of the postgraduate studies. According to the commission the SUAS should continue to give priority to posts for doctoral students, which up to now has meant certain improvements.
A more even and well-balanced distribution of doctoral students among departments and fields should be aimed at, and the doctoral training should be made more effective. A more well—structured supervision is needed in many cases as well as a more organised postgraduate teaching. Doctoral training should to a larger extent be organised in research groups. In order to facilitate the formation of such research groups, and also to increase the offer of post- graduate courses, there should be increased cooperation within the SUAS and also with other universities in Sweden and abroad. The Nordic cooperation, which has long traditions, could be made more use of, particularly by depart- ments with very few doctoral students. Foreign partner faculties could in a similar way supplement the resources at the SUAS. Study visits to foreign universities or research institutes should be regarded as a regular part of a postgraduate education.
The commission also recommends that the overall responsibility for post- graduate teaching be transferred from the University level (the Council for Postgraduate Studies) to the faculty level. According to the Helsinki team it is probable that a more active management of postgraduate studies could be achieved at the faculty level. Postgraduate courses common to all SUAS stu- dents could be planned and implemented as a cooperative effort by the faculty level councils.
Within all the SUAS faculties recurrent education has to be given a more pro- minent role. In the commission”s opinion this is one of the most reliable pre- dictions that can be made today.
At the SUAS recurrent education is being arranged mainly as commis- sioned education, paid for by various customers. Most of it consists of short courses, lasting one or a couple of days. Some longer course have, however, recently been developed. According to the commission there should be a supply of single courses at the SUAS in the same way as at the other univer- sities, i e such courses should be part of the University ”s regular teaching and funded over the normal budget. The other universities offer single courses in various disciplines and fields, lasting from a couple of weeks to a term or a year. Such courses could be developed at the SUAS in connection with the planning of broad BSc programmes.
Distance education appears to be an appropriate mode to reach professio- nals within various fields, needing further education. The distance courses developed at the Faculty of Forestry, which are part-time, longer courses, starting this academic year, are good examples, according to the commission. So is the recently developed distance course in food science. They should be followed by similar further training courses within various fields.
In the commission ”s opinion the Faculties should have the major responsi- bility as to further training programmes and contents of courses. The course and conference unit within the University”s Research Information Centre could handle the practical arrangements and should continue to be in charge of the short courses and conference activities.
2.6. Research Information and Extension
Research information and extension are large and important activities at the SUAS, mainly due to the University”s leading role in Swedish agricultural research.
According to the commission research information is part of the depart- ments” normal tasks and activities. As the researchers create new knowledge they have a responsibility of making it available to the research community as well as to customers and users of various kinds. According to the Higher Education Act the Swedish higher education institutions are obliged to fumish information on research results. There should be a close connection between research and the supply of information about its results.
The commission recommends that each SUAS Faculty designates an infor- mation and extension coordinator, who under the dean is responsible for making the results of the Faculty”s research available to the practical sector. The task to maintain contacts with farmers” organisations, industry and soci- ety at large, to encourage researchers to write extension level material and to distribute it should lie upon the Faculties.
29
English Summary
The present Research Information Centre should be responsible for com- mon university functions within its field, for instance publishing but also other tasks that can benefit from being jointly organised
The commission recommends that the present staff category at the SUAS occupied only with research information and extension activities be better integrated into the university research. These people are in most cases very qualified, with a Ph D and research experience of their own. In the present system they have no career prospects at the SUAS. In the commission's opinion the system practised at some United States universities with part-time extension tasks and part-time research is a more appropriate way of dealing with research information and extension. Accordingly, the commission re- commends that a similar model be introduced at the SUAS, enabling the ex- tension staff to pursue their academic careers on a part-time basis.
A better integration of the extension activities into the research of the de- partments would also facilitate the participation of researchers in such acti- vities. Initiating and producing syntheses of research results, which is very much in demand by various users, should be a major responsibility of the research information coordinators. In this work cooperation between depart- ments within different faculties is sometimes needed, and it should be orga- nised by the deans and the coordinators.
2.7. Activities for Developing Countries
The SUAS has been deeply involved in the Swedish assistance programmes for developing countries and has played an important part in the building up of competence at the Swedish International Development Authority (SIDA). At the SUAS there is an International Rural Development Centre, established to coordinate the contribution and participation from the Unversity and to run programmes on a contract basis with the SIDA.
The responsibility and funds for the build-up of competence in Sweden and in developing countries lies, however, with another government agency, the Swedish Agency for Research Cooperation with Developing Countries (SAREC).
In the commission ”s opinion the cooperation between SIDA and SAREC should be developed in order to coordinate the building up of competence and long-term assistance programmes within important fields such as environ- ment and production issues, use of land and other natural resources. The two agencies could also make joint efforts in supporting assistance from the SUAS in building up agricultural universities or colleges in developing coun- tries. Funds for such purposes could of course be transferred directly to the SUAS, in that case as a reallocation of funds for international assistance.
According to the commission the SUAS should adapt to the present needs and demands from the SIDA, i e an increased involvement of the departments and experts in various fields and a more limited function of the International
Rural Development Centre. To bring the SUAS more in line with the actual demand the Faculties should take more responsibility for the participation in international assistance programmes. In the cases where two or more Facul— ties are involved they should coordinate their efforts, with or without the help of the Centre. The main function of the Centre should be to act as an interme- diary in contacts and practical issues, and its experience of work with deve- loping countries should be made use of. Its present size should be reduced.
2.8. Relations to Various Partners and Customers Other universities
The most extensive and well developed university cooperation in which the SUAS participates takes place at the Biomedical Centre (BMC) in Uppsala. The largest part of the BMC belongs to the University of Uppsala, where the Faculties of Medicine, Pharmacy and Natural Sciences are involved. The SUAS share of activities and cost is about 15 %.
When the College of Veterinary Medicine was moved from Stockholm during the 19705 to become a Faculty of the SUAS a long and well estab- lished cooperation with the Karolinska Institute was cut off. In Uppsala the Faculty of Veterinary Medicine has developed contacts and a close coopera- tion with the Faculty of Medicine, and also with the Faculty of Pharmacy, at the University of Uppsala, mainly at the BMC. Other faculties and depart- ments are also engaged in research cooperation at the BMC, and there are many indications that the standard of the research at the centre is very high.
At the University of Uppsala, which is by far the most important univer- sity partner to the SUAS, the attitude is in favour of increased cooperation. One example is ecology in connection with the transfer being made to the SUAS of some R&D units from the National Swedish Board for Environ— ment Protection. Technology is another field of common interest.
Due to the location of the SUAS Faculties and departments there is also cooperation with the Universities of Lund and Umeå. The Faculty of Techno- logy at the University of Lund is also an important partner to the Uppsala part of the SUAS, because of the present division of labour whithin food science, with food technology research in Lund.
According to the commission there are favourable conditions for a further development of the cooperation with the Universities of Uppsala, Lund and Umeå, and the SUAS should make use of them. The commission sees advan— tages also in increased cooperation with other Swedish as well as foreign universities.
According to the commission”s study based on the Science Citation Index material and international scientific co—publication it appears that the SUAS researchers are very much concentrated on cooperation with colleagues in the Nordic countries and the United States. Scientific cooperation with other European researchers is less frequent. Probably the increased activity of
SUAS researchers in various EC programmes will change the present net- works. In the commission's opinion the SUAS should not just wait for that to happen but statt developing contacts and cooperation. The SUAS should "get European". As already mentioned, European partner faculties is one way to build up cooperation in undergraduate and postgraduate education as well as in research.
Partners in the Private Sector
The foreign evaluation teams have commented on the close relationship be- tween the SUAS Faculties (and their predecessors) and the traditional agri- cultural society, the forest industry and others users, and the SUAS” impor- tance for the development of the sector. According to the Wageningen team there is a low threshold for informal contact, and the SUAS is easily acces- sible to interested people from the outside.
After having interviewed a number of representatives of associations, organisation etc within agriculture, and food industry, the commission's impression is that the SUAS is regarded as a most valuable asset. There is a strong wish to maintain and develop the SUAS competence on primary pro- duction. There is cooperation going on also with other universities, with food technology at Lund as an example. The Faculties of Agriculture and Veteri- nary Medicine have, however, a key position in generating relevant know- ledge and making it available to various users. There are extensive contacts and close cooperation of many kinds with the SUAS. The private agricultural sector has confidence in the University and wishes to continue to use it for commissioned research. There are no plans to start private R&D institutes.
The commission ”s impression is that the private agricultural sector accepts the reallocation of funds at the Faculty of Agriculture during the past ten years from applied research and development work to basic and strategic research. There is an understanding of the importance of basic and strategic research. Even if the applied research and development work is the users” first concern they are aware of the connection to basic research.
As mentioned in section 2.2 private funding of applied research and ex— periments has increased during the 1980s. In principle, the Association of Swedish Farmers is willing to continue to take on, successively, a greater responsibility for applied research and experimental work. A problem is, however, that the forthcoming change in Sweden from a regulated market- system with subsidies and administered internal prices to a market-regulated agriculture will entail a substantial loss of R&D funding. In the present sys- tern part of the income is channeled to R&D. Approximately 80 Million SEK will disappear in the next few years. According to the commission the change into a market-regulated system is not unique for Sweden and should not alter the division of labour between the SUAS and the private sector in funding of
32
English Summary
R&D. In the commission's opinion an appropriate technical solution should be sought, for instance in the models presently used in Denmark or Germany.
Also the private forestry sector considers the Faculty of Forestry an impor— tant source of knowledge and a valuable asset. Here, however, criticism is expressed as to the reduction of basic SUAS allocations to traditional forestry fields, described in section 2.2 As can be seen in section 2.4 the commission shares the view of the forest industry and the forest owners and recommends that the present Swedish research policy be changed in order to avoid the un— fortunate effects produced at the Faculty of Forestry, and probably at other university faculties as well.
According to the commission it is most important that the position of the SUAS and its Faculty of Forestry as a "sector university" for forestry be restored as a substantial support for development. The commission wants to emphasize that the present broad competence of the Faculty of Forestry, in- cluding environmental aspects, is an asset to the private forestry sector, which it also is aware of.
As to other aspects of SUAS research activities and to MSc programmes the views from the private sector of agriculture and forestry are in many re- spects similar to the observations and recommendations made by the foreign evaluation teams. The forestry sector regards, for instance, the geographical splitting up of the Faculty of Forestry as a great problem.
In agriculture, food science and forestry various associations and organi- sations within the private sector have, at the commission 's initiative, presen- ted their research priorities for the next ten-year period. As mentioned in sec- tion 2.4 this material should be paid attention to in the forthcoming revision of the Faculties' long-term plans for research and in identifying themes for university—run research programmes.
Government Agencies, Research Councils etc
The SUAS also has a network with various government agencies. According to the National Swedish Board for Environment Protection the SUAS respon- ded at an early stage to the demand for environmental research, and the Board considers the cooperation and activities satisfactory. Also with the Council of Forestry and Agricultural Research the SUAS relations appear to be all right, even if the Council would like a stronger scientific leadership at the SUAS.
The Royal Academy of Forestry and Agriculture emphasizes the impor— tance of dynamic development, broad competence and future-orientation for a "sector university" like the SUAS, views that the commission very much agrees on. In fact, they summarize the main intentions behind the commis- sion's recommendation on various changes at the SUAS.
The Board of Forestry and the former Board of Agriculture (now replaced by another agency) have to the commission presented their views on research and education at the SUAS as well as their opinion on the research infoma—
SOU19912101 DelS
33. English Summary
tion and extension activities. The Boards” part of the research information and SOU 1991 : 101 advice to farmers, forest owners etc has to operate in close connection with Del 5 the SUAS extension activities. The views presented by the Boards have been paid attention to in the commission 's recommendations (more emphasis on departments and researchers in research information, the role of the extension
staff, for instance).
2.9. Organisation and Governance The S UAS Merger
According to the commission, the motives for establishing in 1977 a joint higher education institution for Agriculture, Veterinary Medicine and Forestry are still valid.The increasing attention paid to environmental issues and to biological production and production processes during the 19805, and the connection between environmental aspects of agriculture and forestry, have reinforced rather than weakened the arguments brought forward some ten years ago. The same can be said about food science and the need for coope- ration between the Faculties of Agriculture and Veterinary Medicine.
In order to successfully pursue its mission the SUAS has to be an inte- grated institution and its research, education, and other activities have to be of good quality according to international standards and useful to the sector. The sector perspective is an integral part of the SUAS concept. Even if agriculture and forestry have been made more explicitly part of a wider context during the 19805, and many of the former objectives have been adapted to new overall priorities, there is still a sector orientation behind all the University's activities. An important advantage of a joint higher education institution for agriculture and forestry was to make better use of actual and potential com- mon ground and common competence and to benefit from cooperation be— tween related fields.
The commission's review shows that the SUAS has been successful in carrying out its mission in many respects. The long-term plans presented have been relevant as well as future-oriented, and they have covered the whole SUAS field of responsibility. The R&D development in agriculture and forestry during the 1980s came to a large extent to focus on the long-term objectives and areas of priority presented by the SUAS. The research activi— ties are in line with the international development and are, according to vari- ous indicators, of good quality and volume. A close cooperation has been developed in animal science between the Faculties of Agriculture and Veteri- nary Medicine, and cooperation between other fields and in different forms has also taken place.
A great deal remains to be done, however, in order to benefit from poten- tial joint efforts and fruitful cooperation. Examples are plant science and soil science, and there are many others as well. The merger in 1977 was intended to prepare the ground for increased cooperation among the faculties.
According to the evaluation teams, cooperation within each faculty is also unsufficient.
A number of factors and circumstances have complicated or obstructed the close cooperation and integration aimed at by the SUAS merger. The geogra- phic distribution and splitting up of faculties and departments is according to the evaluation teams a serious obstacle. The Faculty of Forestry is affected by this, in particular, with at present three locations of the MSc programme and four of research.
According to the commission, regional policy should not be the main con- sideration in decisions about the SUAS activities. Objectives and quality as to education and research should come first. As mentioned in section 2.3 the commission recommends that the Faculty of Forestry be concentrated to two centres, Uppsala and Umeå.
Compared to the Faculty of Forestry the Faculty of Agriculture has an easier situation with the present two centres. Also within the Faculty of Agri— culture it is, however, inportant to improve the contacts and the cooperation between Uppsala and Alnarp and to emphasize the common identity. In the commission's opinion the proposal sometimes discussed to locate the MSc in Horticulture entirely to Alnarp is not compatible with the SUAS basic concept of cooperation and joint use of resources. The importance of research on the science base of agriculture, and the high priority given to the development of this field in the United States and elsewhere, is a strong argument for joint efforts and not for splitting up basic research in Sweden.
In order to make better use of the cooperation potential created by the establishment of the SUAS the analyses and recommendations by the foreign evaluation teams, as well as the self-evaluations and other material from the Faculties, should be paid attention to by the SUAS at all levels.
The commission does not recommend that the SUAS be transferred from the Ministry of Agriculture to the Ministry of Education. The advantages of being kept together with the agriculture and forestry sector seem to outweigh the disadvantage of being separated from the other universities.
Organisation and Administration
There is a large number of committees, councils and other bodies at different levels at the SUAS. At the same time the expenditure on administration is lower than in most Swedish universities, according to a recent study. Obvi— ously the merger has led to rationalisation and reduction of cost. In particular, the cost at the central University level at the SUAS is low, compared with other universities.
The central University level has been active in initiating common activities and cooperation at the SUAS. Even if some satisfactory results and effects have been achieved that way it has probably meant less pressure, and less in- centives, at the levels more directly concerned. In the commission's opinon
there are good reasons to listen to the advice, unanimously given by the foreign evaluation teams, to give the Faculty level more responsibility and make it a more active and forceful interrnediary level. According to the teams the distribution of competencies between University, Faculties and Depart- ments should be changed in such a way that the faculty can operate as a strong and coherent unit.
The commission recommends that the present large number of committees, councils etc be replaced by three levels in the SUAS organisation: University level, Faculty level and Department level, all with the authority to set up the committees and advisory councils they find necessary.
On the University level overall decisions should be made on long-term planning, distribution of funds among the faculties, major issues and com- mon affairs.
The present University Board should be replaced by a smaller and more efficient Board. The majority should be external members, as is the case in Swedish universities. They should not, however, represent various organi- sations and interests but be of use to the SUAS. Together they should cover the important aspects of the SUAS field of responsibility. At the University level there should also be an Academic Council, acting as a support to the University Board and to the Vice-Chancellor in scientific matters. This Coun- cil should also be a forum for coordination and cooperation among the Facul- ties and with the University level. It should consist of the Vice-Chancellor, the University director, the deans and, in addition, a couple of researchers from the University.
The present Planning and Budgeting Committees should be replaced by Faculty Boards. The Boards should be made responsible for planning, imple- mentation and results in undergraduate education, postgraduate education and research as well as in research information and extension, further training programmes and participation in international assistance programmes.
In the same way as the University Board the Faculty Boards should be small and efficient. The contacts and cooperation with associations and orga— nisations within the sector of agriculture and forestry should, in connection with the reduction of the size of the University Board, be developed at the faculty level. lnspired by the Helsinki team the commission recommends that Advisory Councils be established by each Faculty Board, with a majority of representatives of external partners and interested parties.
According to the commission the present Faculty of Agriculture, which is large and heterogenous, should be divided into two, one for Agriculture and one for Horticulture and Landscape Planning. The teaching and research in Horticulture and Landscape Architecture need more of their own profile and identity in the SUAS structure.
As mentioned earlier the present programme committees should be re- placed by thematic programme committees.
The commission shares the view of the evaluation teams on the department level. The departments should be more actively involved in the planning of
undergraduate teaching and in research cooperation. Departments can have a large degree of autonomy, but they should submit to faculty decisions and policies when common tasks and goals are concerned, as the Utrecht team puts it.
The departments are affected by the proposed dividing up of the Faculty of Agriculture. Some departments should be common for the new faculties.
Direction and Governance
The model of management by objectives practised at the SUAS, with long- term plans for development as one instrument, is adequate in the commis- sion 's opinon. It should, however, be further developed. More involvement and en gagement by the departments is needed, mainly within the Faculties of Agriculture and Veterinary Medicine. Furthermore, the long—term plans need to be more of a setting of priorities than of an inventory.
As the commission has emphasized in section 2.4 a large share of external research funding means that the Universities and Faculties are left with very limited influence on the research they perform. The commission's recommen- dations on university-run programmes as an alternative to programmes run by research councils and mission-oriented agencies would increase the faculties' influence. Consequently, the Government and Parliament can to a larger extent direct the activities at the SUAS by policy and priority declarations. At the same time the unfortunate effects of the present system could be avoided.
The most important potential for change and development is, however, the staff members and the students at the University. The commission's recom- mendations aim at stimulating and activating the resources within the SUAS for renewal and progress. The advice from the evaluation teams is a good help, but it is also necessary to follow up and evaluate regularly what has been achieved. The recommendation to find partner faculties and to follow the international development within undergraduate teaching is also meant as an incentive to make comparisons and get inspiration. As part of a more inten- sified international cooperation it can bring out more of the dynamics in the SUAS and facilitate adaptation to changes in the surrounding world and in the SUAS role.
-.-. | 1932 — 0 5 - O 5 att. HPLM
0»!!le m ...—.. ...—...nu... uno—»..»- A..—w ...-...nu». ...a-.:.
r:! =»:
Statens offentliga utredningar 1991
Kronologisk förteckning
Flykting- och immigrationspolitiken. A. Finansiell tillsyn. Fi.
Statens roll vid främjande av export. UD. Miljölagstiftningen i framtiden. M. Miljölagstiftningen i framtiden. Bilagedel. Sekretariatets kartläggning och analys. M. Utvärdering av SBU. Statens Beredning för Ut- värdering av medicinsk metodik. S.
7. Sportslig och ekonomisk utveckling inom trav- och galoppsporten. Fi.
8. Beskattning av kraftföretag. Fi
9. Lokala sjukförsäkringsregister. S. 10. Affärstidema. C. 11.Affärstidema. Bilagedel. C. 12. Ungdom och makt. C. 13. Spelreglerna på arbetsmarknaden. A. 14. Den regionala bil- och körkortsadministrationen. K.
15.1nformationens roll som handlingsunderlag - styrning och ekonomi. S. 16. Gemensamma regler - lagstiftning, klassifikationer och informationsteknologi. S. 17.Forskning och utveckling - epidemiologi, kvalitets- säkring och Spris utvecklingsprojekt. S. 18.1nformationsstruktur för hälso- och sjukvården - en utvecklingsprocess. S.
19. Storstadens trafiksystem. Överenskommelser om trafik och miljö i Stockholms- Göteborgs- och Malmöregionema. K. 20. Kapitalkostnader inom försvaret. Nya former för finansiell styrning. Fö. 21.Personregistrering inom arbetslivs-, forsknings- och massmedieområdena, m.m. Ju. 22.Översyn av lagstiftningen om träfiberråvara. 1. 23.Ett nytt BFR - Byggforskningen på 90-talet. Bo. 24.Visst går det an! Del 1, 2 och 3. C. 25.Frikommunförsöket. Erfarenheter av försöken med en friare nämndorganisation. C. 26. Kommunala entreprenader. Vad är möjligt? En analys av rättsläget och det statliga regelverkets roll. C. 27. Kapitalavkastningen i bytesbalansen. Tre expertrapporter. Fi.
28. Konkurrensen iSverige - en kartläggning av konkur- rensförhållandena i 61 branscher. Del 1 och 2. C.
29.Periodiska hälsoundersökningar i vissa statliga, kommunala och landstingskommunala anställningar. C.
30. Särskolan -en prirnårkommunal skola. U. 31. Statens arkivdepåer. En utvecklingsplan till år 2000. U. 32. Naturvårdsverkets uppgifter och organisation. M.
MPV?):—
.a
33. Branden på Sally Albatross. Den 9-12 januari 1990. Fö. 34. HIV-smittade - ersätming för ideell skada. Ju. 35. Några frågor i anslutning till en arbetsgivarperiod inom sjukpenningförsäkringen. S. 36. Ny kunskap och förnyelse. C. 37. Räkna med miljön! Förslag till natur- och miljöräkenskaper. Fi. 38.Räkna med miljön! Förslag till natur- och miljöräkenskaper. Bilagedel. Fi. 39. Säkrare förare. K. 40. Marknadsanpassade service- och stabsfunktioner - ny organisation av stödet till myndigheter och rege- ringskansli. C. 41. Marknadsanpassade service- och stabsfunktioner - ny organisation av stödet till myndigheter och rege- ringskansli. Bilagedel. C. 42. Aborterade foster, m.m. S. 43. Den framtida länsbostadsnämnden. Bo. 44. Examination som kvalitetskontroll i högskolan. U. 45. Påföljdsfrågor. Frigivning från anstalt, m.m. Ju. 46. Handikapp, Välfärd, Rättvisa. S. 47. På väg - exempel på förändringsarbeten inom verksamheter för psykiskt störda. S. 48. Bistånd genom internationella organisationer. UD. 49. Bistånd genom internationella organisationer. Annex 1. Det multilaterala biståndets organisationer. UD. 50. Bistånd genom internationella organisationer. Annex 2. Sverige och u-ländema i FN - en återblick. UD. 51. Bistånd genom internationella organisationer. Annex 3. Särstudier. UD. 52. Alkoholbeskattningen. Fi. 53. Forskning och teknik för flyget. Fö.
54. Skola - skolbarnsomsorg - en helhet. U.
55. Sveriges nationalrapport till FNs konferens om miljö och utveckling - UNCED 1992. M. 56. Kompetensutveckling — en utmaning. A. 57. Arbetslöshetsförsäkringen — finansierings- systemet. A. 58. Ett nytt turistråd. I. 59. Konkurrens för ökad välfärd. Del 1. Konkurrens för ökad välfärd. Del 2. Konkurrens för ökad välfärd. Bilagor. C. 60. Olika men ändå lika. Om invandrarungdomar i det mångkulturella Sverige. C. 61. Statens bostadskreditnämnd - organisation och dimensionering. Bo. 62. Vissa särskilda frågor beträffande integritets- skyddet på ADB-området. Ju.
Statens offentliga utredningar 1991
Kronologisk förteckning
B.Tillsynen över hälso- och sjukvården. S. '>4. Att förvalta kulturmiljöer. U. LS. Ett samordnat vuxenstudiestöd. U.
6. Hemslöjd i samverkan. I. i7. Samhall i går, idag, i morgon. A. && Frikommunförsöket. Erfarenheter av försöksverk- samheten med avsteg från statlig reglering m.m. C. 19. Frikommunförsöket. Erfarenheter av försöksverk- samheten med avsteg från statlig reglering m.m. Särskild bilaga. C. 0.0mbudsman för barn och ungdom. S. 1.Teatems kostnadsutveckling 1975-1990 med särskilda studier av Operan, Dramaten och Riksteatern. U.
2. En kreativ studiemiljö - högskolebiblioteket som pedagogisk resurs. U.
3. Vänersjöfarten. K.
4. Krediter för utveckling. UD.
5. Organiserad rasism. A.
6. Miljön och förpackningarna. M.
7. Miljön och förpackningarna. Livscykelanalyser för förpackningsmaterial - beräkning av miljöbelastning. Bilaga. M.
8. Krav på förändring — synpunkter från psykiskt störda och anhöriga. S.
9. Det framtida trafiksäkerhetsarbetet. K.
0. Kommunalt partistöd. C. 1.Fastighetsleasing. Ju.
2. Drivkrafter för produktivitet och välstånd. I.
3. FoU för industriell utveckling. Svensk kollektiv- forskning 1991. I.
4. Smuggling och tullbedrägeri. Fi. S. Historiska arrenden — förslag till friköpslag. Ju.
5. Ny hyreslag. Bo.
7. Yrkesofficeramas pensionsålder och åldersstruktur. Fö.
3. Stöd och samordning kring psykiskt störda — ett kunskapsunderlag. S. ). Försäkringsrörelse i förändring 1. Fi. ). Konkurrensneutral energibeskatming. Fi. [. Forskning och utveckling för totalförsvaret. Kartläggning och probleminventering. Fö.
2. Rätt till bostad — om psykiskt stördas boende. S.
3. El från biobränslen. Det industriella utvecklings- arbetet. N.
1. ELSU 91. Förslag till omfattning, organisation och finansiering av det svenska elsäkerhetsarbetet. N. S. Översyn av lagstiftningen på kärnenergiområdet. M.
5. Lantmäteriutbildningar i Luleå och Lund. Bo.
97.
98.
99.
En väg till delaktighet och inflytande — tolk för döva, dövblinda, vuxendöva, hörselska- dade och talskadade. S. Kommunal ekonomi i samhällsekonomisk balans — statsbidrag för ökat handlingsutrymme och nya samarbetsformer. Fi. Statistiken inom livsmedelssektom — förslag till förändringar. Jo.
100. Neutral företagsbeskattning. Fi. 101. Landskap Näring Kunskap, del 1 —5. Jo.
Statens offentliga utredningar 1991
Systematisk förteckning
J ustitiedepartementet
Personregistrering inom arbetslivs-, forsknings- och massmedieområdena, m.m. [21]
HIV-smittade - ersättning för ideell skada. [34] Påföljdsfrågor. Frigivning från anstalt, m.m. [45] Vissa särskilda frågor beträffande integritetsskyddet på ADB-området. [62]
Fastighetsleasing. [81]
Historiska arrenden — förslag till friköpslag. [85]
Utrikesdepartementet
Statens roll vid främjande av export. [3] Bistånd genom internationella organisationer. [48] Bistånd genom internationella organisationer. Annex 1. Det multilaterala biståndets organisationer. [49] Bistånd genom internationella organisationer. Annex 2. Sverige och u-ländema i FN - en återblick. [50] Bistånd genom internationella organisationer. Annex 3. Särstudier. [51] Krediter för utveckling. [74]
Försvarsdepartementet
Kapitalkostnader inom försvaret. Nya former för finansiell styrning. [20] Branden på Sally Albatross. Den 9-12 januari 1990. [33] Forskning och teknik för flyget. [5 3] Yrkesofficerarnas pensionsålder och åldersstruktur. [87] Forskning och utveckling för totalförsvaret. Kartläggning och probleminventering. [91]
Socialdepartementet
Utvärdering av SBU. Statens Beredning för Ut-värde- ring av medicinsk metodik. [6] Lokala sjukförsäkringsregister [9] Inforrnationens roll som handlingsunderlag - styrning och ekonomi. [15]. Gemensamma regler - lagstiftning, klassifikationer och informationsteknologi. [16]. Forskning och utveckling - epidemiologi, kvalitetssä- kring och Spris utvecklingsprojekt. [17]. Informationsstruktur för hälso- och sjukvården - en utvecklingsprocess. [18]. Några frågor i anslutning till en arbetsgivarperiod inom sjukpenningförsäkringen. [35] Aborterade foster, m.m. [42] Handikapp, Välfärd, Rättvisa. [46]
På väg - exempel på förändringsarbeten inom verksamheter för psykiskt störda. [47] Tillsynen över hälso- och sjukvården. [63] Ombudsman för barn och ungdom. [70] Krav på förändring — synpunkter från psykiskt störda och anhöriga. [78] Stöd och samordning kring psykiskt störda
— ett kunskapsunderlag. [88] Rätt till bostad — om psykiskt stördas boende. [92] En väg till delaktighet och inflytande — tolk för döva, dövblinda, vuxendöva, hörselskadade och talskadade. [97]
Kommunikationsdepartementet
Den regionala bil- och körkortsadministrationen. [14] Storstadens trafiksystem. Överenskommelser om trafik och miljö i Stockholms- Göteborgs- och Malmö- regionema. [19] Säkrare förare [39] Vänersjöfarten [73] Det framtida trafiksäkerhetsarbetet. [79]
Finansdepartementet
Finansiell tillsyn. [2] Sportslig och ekonomisk utveckling inom trav- och galoppsporten. [7] Beskattning av kraftföretag. [8] Kapitalavkasmingen i bytesbalansen. Tre expertrapporter. [27] Räkna med miljön! Förslag till natur- och miljö- räkenskaper. [37] Räkna med miljön! Förslag till natur- och miljö- räkenskaper. Bilagedel. [38] Alkoholbeskattningen. [52] Smuggling och tullbedrägeri. [84] Försäkringsrörelse i förändring 1. [89] Konkurrensneutral energibeskattning. [90] Kommunal ekonomi i sarnhällsekonomisk balans — statsbidrag för ökat handlingsutrymme och nya samarbetsformer. [98] Neutral företagsbeskattning. [100]
Utbildningsdepartementet
Särskolan -en primärkommunal skola. [30] Statens arkivdepåer. En utvecklingsplan till år 2000. [311 Examination som kvalitetskontroll i högskolan. [44] Skola — skolbarnsomsorg - en helhet. [54] Att förvalta kulturmiljöer. [64]
Statens offentliga utredningar 1991
Systematisk förteckning
itt samordnat vuxenstudiestöd. [65] Teaterns kostnadsutveckling 1975-1990 ned särskilda studier av Operan, Dramaten
ch Riksteatern. [71]
in kreativ studiemiljö - högskolebiblioteket som edagogisk resurs. [72]
lordbruksdepartementet
ltatistiken inom livsmedelssektom — förslag till örändringar. [99] .andskap Näring Kunskap, del 1 — 5. [101]
trbetsmarknadsdepartementet
lykting- och immigrationspolitiken. [1] pelreglema på arbetsmarknaden. [13] :ompetensutveckling — en utmaning. [56] trbetslöshetsförsäld'ingen — finansieringssystemet. [57] amhall i går, i dag, i morgon. [67] )rganiserad rasism. [75]
iostadsdepartemntet
in nytt BFR - Byggforskningen på 90—talet. [23] )en framtida länsbostadsnämnden. [43] tatens bostadskreditnämnd - organisation och imensionering. [61]
ly hyreslag. [86]
antmäteriutbildningar i Luleå och Lund. [96]
ndustridepartementet
tversyn av lagstiftningen om träfiberrävara. [22] in nytt turistråd. [58] [emslöjd i samverkan [66] Drivkrafter för produktivitet och välstånd. [82] 'oU för industriell utveckling. Svensk kollektiv- )rskning 1991. [83]
Jåringsdepartementet
;] från biobränslen. Det industriella utvecklingsarbetet. 93] LSU 91. Förslag till omfattning, organisation och ,nansiering av det svenska elsäkerhetsarbetet. [94]
Zivildepartementet
rffärstidema. [10] rffärstiderna. Bilagedel. [1 1] [ngdom och makt.[12]
Visst går det an! Del 1, 2 och 3. [24] Frikommunförsöket. Erfarenheter av försöken med en friare nämndorganisation. [25] Kommunala entreprenader. Vad är möjligt? En analys av rättsläget och det statliga regelverkets roll. [26] Konkurrensen i Sverige - en kartläggning av konkur- rensförhållandena i 61 branscher. Del 1 och 2. [28] Periodiska hälsoundersökningar i vissa statliga, kom- munala och landstingskommunala anställningar. [29] Ny kunskap och förnyelse. [36] Marknadsanpassade service- och stabsfunktioner - ny organisation av stödet till myndigheter och rege- ringskansli. [40] Marknadsanpassade service- och stabsfunktioner - ny organisation av stödet till myndigheter och rege- ringskansli. Bilagedel. [41] Konkurrens för ökad välfärd. Del 1. Konkurrens för ökad välfärd. Del 2. Konkurrens för ökad välfärd. Bilagor. [59] Olika men ändå lika. Om invandrarungdomar i det mångkulturella Sverige. [60] Frikommunförsöket. Erfarenheter av försöksverk- samheten med avsteg från statlig reglering m.m. [68] Frikommunförsöket. Erfarenheter av försöksverk- samheten med avsteg från statlig reglering m.m. Särskild bilaga. [69] Kommunalt partistöd. [80]
Mil jödepartementet
Miljölagstiftningen i framtiden. [4] Miljölagstiftningen i framtiden. Bilagedel. Sekretariatets kartläggning och analys. [5] Naturvårdsverkets uppgifter och organisation. [32] Sveriges nationalrapport till FNs konferens om miljö och utveckling - UNCED 1992. [55] Miljön och förpackningarna. [76] Miljön och förpackningarna. Livscykelanalyser för förpackningsmaterial - beräkning av miljöbelastning. Bilaga. [77] Översyn av lagstiftningen på kärnenergiområdet.[95]
HI TUI " iiu'w'wt . ' ' - 1' ”&th ,'ll rutt :F! rn " lt_, ' ! '” 11" 5.3. i :m
ll . '. .] .»
lita-'.] '.
'.J . n' ""lll.
n t' . [html,- _1 ». . x . mål-jr .t” _ .”th ._I'H H
- ' itt—.t- ,.
.__1 t-t ] .. . -.*..1,. ]. " jul,-'.'; itil-lit,: ., , ___ _ ., ., [| 'i lit.,tcllf'vt, .,v ,”, | . I ! ”lli-M * I...” MPH" ' - ""l'! ., . 't 't ' .1 ' ll. ”"I—1.
_ ' I””!iyu
* |
.' ' -"."'|.J .'j. jla. .
|| ,_ | ' ' '.||'| * t'.'||'"'f" """ _V_|l_.l
_ _- . liv..,t ',. ' _....' , 'u. _,_|_,,t.t.]|__l
|:."I'_:|_I_ nl "'_'. '
. . _ , V . . . ] 'N] _I'. _T _ _ . . .__|' _ _ ., ||_t|tt| 'll ] | _ | -_ *» |. ll " . |" - J,". .'_ '|| -n "' " "| 7.4 | :_v. . , _, ' ' ' -. ”" ".""l ' ' "| ' _' . ' |; " l l" ' | [I] . .,__ .- . . " ' . ' .5' '.7_' - " '.t . ' ' - - —." "..L ..- " '.F. _ t' ' ., , | ; ..-'_- r. ___." . .t,,_t" J”, 1 [_ | . .|_, |». |||. |1'_ IH] _ .. __ (”_l _t ', _.. .] . , '_.,'_ _ ' . , I....» "'.-"" . ' ' ' ' I " .— "' "l"- .."' _ l [ " 'p'. | " l , '--L|,'t ', _ | ' |,_ _|, "'.. ” lll ! ' _ ' dh" ] , r' -* . . . . ' lYll - . . , . '. , .', '.'|-" ' " . ' . ' .- ' . . :. r.. , ' ,u', """'-h._- |. n' '» ' ' ..t '- . -. '.' " r .. _ *._' .. ' 't..,- . | flin ',' " ' . 'l . .. -' . - .). . ' 5". .nu" H I . ' . 4'l _ ' [ I'lll '”';] _| ll _L'l lh ' _ .. .- . ,. . '+'... ..... ]. =.; . - .” " :,"jv' -|'*. , .|'-
.:I-åulj-,_u .. |, ,. ' "4. 10.61
|- ru ml- '||1|:|.1rr.t'.|. ["-KJ '. '.'l.."" t'11-
, ' 't. 1 . "| __ _ __ D " .. .nu _.| L , ]_ __.r, .H.. 3.531 milt-t mun-.]
Hlll *'.""'"-'| ""'"'L"""'
|' 't'tn-'||"'-'Ii
_ nä" ".» .,
[ -___ ll .L,|_',_||__.tl .. . 'n i,, l "'
BESTÄLLNING/lk: ALLMÄNNA FÖRLAGET, KUNDTJÄNST, 106 47 STOCKHOLM, TEL: 08—739 96 30, FAX: 08—73995 48._ INFORMtTlONSBOKHANDl—ILN, MALMTORGSGATAN 5 (vm BRUNKEBERGSTORG), STOCKHOLM.
ISBN 91-38-10977—8 ISSN 0375-250X
'ueuwoN muunf) *sdcospurrl :srniatd rexog