Technology, Faculty of Social and Educational Sciences
The Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU), was founded as a university in 1996 following a merger between six research and higher education institutions in the Trondheim area. In 2016, it merged with the university colleges in Gjøvik, Ålesund and Sør-Trøndelag, and became the largest university in Norway. NTNU is a comprehensive university with a technological emphasis, with research and training in nearly all disciplines and professions. The Faculty of Social and Educational Sciences has seven departments and covers most social science and education disciplines.
Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Faculty of Social and Educational Sciences
No. of PhD graduated at the institution per year
Male/Female -/1 - -/3
R&D expenditures and sources of funding (1000 NOK) Total per year 1 - 3 No. of positions announced / No. of qualified applicants per year
Source: The Research Council of Norway, Self-assessment report for the institution, 16/12960
101
12.1 Political Science at the institutional level
The university’s main profile is described as being in science and technology, but it appears to have substantial capacity in the social sciences and humanities. Political Science sits alongside other relevant disciplines. In particular, Political Science is based in the Department of Sociology and Political Science.
Each department is governed by a head of department, and each faculty by a dean, so a traditional management structure is in place.
The strategy for the department reflects wider university goals: to increase the number of research groups producing international level work and to provide knowledge for a better society. A specific new faculty plan is under development, but it is expected to largely follow these broad goals.
There appear to be appropriate general measures to support research development and collaboration that might be expected: sabbatical arrangements, conference attendance, support for grant applications, links to Brussels and so on.
The SWOT analysis in the self-assessment identifies a number of areas of concern, of which the majority, according to the SAMEVAL interviews, are still relevant, even though the self-assessment was written in the middle of the merger process. They include the need for more active research management, a low publication rate among some staff, and that new budget models may affect the faculty. The extent of publication in top journals needs to be improved, as does the PhD programme.
It is also suggested that the merger appears to be creating uncertainty about the relationship between the social science disciplines and areas of professional study at the new faculty, and that, compared to more centrally located universities, there appears to be a lack of attention, or capacity to attract attention, to research work. One effect of the merger mentioned in the SAMEVAL interviews is that innovation is being given more emphasis, with an assigned vice-rector, who calls for the social sciences to put social innovation and innovation in the public sector on the research agenda.
However, some of these identified issues appear to result in little in the way of analysis or measures that might address some of these concerns. This applies especially to the issue the research work undertaken having an impact.
Previous research evaluations appear to have led to the Department of Sociology and Political Science gaining two strategic research projects, but they relate more to the evaluation of sociology than to Political Science. There do not appear to be any significant issues that need following up in the political science context.
According to the self-assessment, total spending appears to be fairly flat and the number of PhD students graduating in Political Science is a rather modest four during the period 2014–16.The modest number of PhDs reported in the self-evaluation is of course also due to the selected period and short time span (3 years), since PhD production rates vary significantly from year to year.
The main infrastructure section in the self-assessment appears to be about investment in the Department of Geography. This might suggest that Political Science has been somewhat neglected.
However, NTNU recently awarded approx. EUR 600,000 to Political Science in support of the social science infrastructure in connection with the European Values Study.
102
As regards gender equality, a programme is in place to promote skills development and another that provides mentoring. The university’s recruitment activity is driven by upcoming retirements and teaching needs, but there is a programme to encourage internationalisation and attract new talent.
There appears to be some uncertainty, however, about how easy it will be recruit highly qualified research-oriented staff. Few details are given about career path development or other training or support, but the university does have a more research-oriented as well as a more teaching-oriented trajectory that staff can follow. The support offered to PhD students seems fairly standard and appears to attract a reasonable quality of staff.
No details are given about the research environment beyond the general infrastructure described in the self-assessment report, but there is evidence of support for research bids and conference attendance. It is difficult to be certain, but one interpretation of these observations is that the political science community survives quite effectively in the current environment, but would perhaps do even better if more specific support programmes were available: more seminars, more guest lectures etc.
According to the SAMEVAL interviews, seminars are organised at research group level, and the department has regular lunch meetings. It was also mentioned that both the faculty and the departments provide good administrative support for developing Research of Excellence proposals and finding young talents who can apply for funding. Some symbolic incentives are in place that acknowledge those who publish in the good journals. In addition, researchers can be granted a reduction in teaching duties to prepare applications and finalise publications, and researchers who write good applications but are not funded can be rewarded with a PhD position at the faculty. There is also an application process for sabbaticals at faculty level, and if successful, the support is on a par with that from the RCN, including spouse support.
The self-assessment is more positive and engaged when discussing the research output and activities of staff, and the impression given is of a group of staff who are generally performing at a higher level than might be expected given the institutional environment and history. Research groups are making valuable contributions across a range of fields. The list of 10 international contributions is impressive and includes several studies in very good journals that deal with topics of considerable importance.
This work shows a high degree of originality and the research makes a contribution that is very relevant to knowledge production internationally.
The university indicates that the total scientific production of political scientists is on a par with equivalent departments in Norway. The comparative data analysis produced by Damvad supports that argument. NTNU has 31 researchers, 5 of whom are non-publishing, and between 2014-16, both the number of publications and the points score per person stand comparison with other universities.
Assessment of scientific quality: 4 – very good
There appears to be scope for research to play significantly into teaching and some interesting opportunities to involve students in staff research. There are three study programmes within the field of Political Science and, in all cases, the unit’s research activities are reflected in teaching and many of the teachers are active researchers. In some cases, students, especially at master’s level, are involved in research activity, making use of the research infrastructure and data gathered by a research group.
One constraint that is noted in the self-assessment as regards encouraging a healthy exchange
103
between education and research is that some of the research is highly specialised, and that students do not have the requisite knowledge or insight into the research techniques or very advanced quantitative methods.
The university provides some good examples of dissemination and engagement activities. Its ten important knowledge exchange cases and two impact case studies, in addition to those provided by the research groups, provide evidence of a rich vein of work that is relevant and has impact. There are mechanisms in place to support such activity and strategies to support dissemination and the sharing of relevant research work.
The university appears to be well placed to continue to make a contribution to the issue of gender perspectives on research and societal concerns. Gender is a key factor in the ongoing research on political behaviour. This work will ensure the continuing social relevance of the work of the political scientists at this university. There are other themes in the research that will also form the basis for ongoing societal relevance.
The university does note that ‘one important obstacle’ to dissemination and impact activities is the geographical distance from national public and private institutions. Strategies on how to address these concerns were discussed at the panel interview and included more encouragement and the use of various ICT tools. After the panel interview was conducted, NTNU has also publicly stated that it will open an Oslo office to be closer to the larger, varied pool of stakeholders.
The impression is that this is a political science community that is performing rather better than its environment and support structure would seem to suggest. Research quality and a commitment to societal relevance are delivered, but almost despite rather than because of the circumstances at the university. If this is the case, it reflects well on the commitment of the current staff. This unit is producing work of international quality.
However, there is also a sense that this is a unit that needs to find ways to renew itself in order to sustain its performance in future. It is noteworthy that some problems are identified but not addressed. The SWOT analysis indicates issues relating to future funding, publication quality levels, some non-productive staff and PhD programmes. The discussion of societal relevance is positive but accompanied by a concern about geographical distance blocking more effective work.
As a group, this political science community needs to think harder about addressing the problems that it has identified. A strategy needs to be developed for how to address the concerns raised. In addition, resources and support may need to be identified to enable some of the challenges to be addressed.
Mixed with considerable congratulations for what has been achieved, there is a sense that there are underlying issues that need to be dealt with to sustain performance in future.
If societal impact is valued, then institutions further away from the centres of power need to find ways of overcoming the inherent inequalities created by geographical distance. Some UK universities beyond London have for example invested in public policy centres that are designed to facilitate a stronger connection between their research and policymakers. Again, there are resource implications that may need to be addressed.
104
12.2 Research group: International Conflict, Civil War and Climate
The research group International Conflict, Civil War and Climate (CCWC) goes back more than three decades. It consists of five permanent members, two PhD students, and two associated researchers with a main affiliation elsewhere. The self-assessment emphasises that the group has strong links to PRIO, in terms of research and academic affiliations.
The research group is headed by one of its senior members. It strives to be ambitious in its publication strategies. The group organises seminars every second week, where the group meets to discuss papers and projects. External collaborators and guest speakers are sometimes invited to these seminars. It is not specified in the self-assessment how the leadership seeks to achieve the overall goals, i.e. ‘to attract top quality students to pursue careers in conflict studies and to publish academic work in the highest quality journals’. These strategies could be more clearly specified.
The intellectual foci of the research group are the causes and consequences of political violence, civil war and terrorism. Particular emphasis is placed on how climate change affects political stability.
The research group seeks to fulfil the strategic goals of the institution by being internationally oriented, providing research-based education and disseminating the research results through engagement in public discussion.
The host institution has supported the research group by providing assistance in the preparation and implementation of externally funded projects. Furthermore, the research group receives standard support, such as access to scientific collections (but not databases and experimental facilities).
The research group attracts PhD students through external funding and institutional support. The self-assessment does not say much about career development, however, other than that scholars and PhD students are encouraged to participate in major international conferences and that senior scholars co-author papers with PhD students to teach them how to conduct research and get published.
Information is also sparse on recruitment practices for scholars above the PhD level.
The members of the research group are diverse in terms of age, gender, and national/international background. In terms of the gender balance, the group still encompasses more men than women and there seems to be (or least there has been) a tendency to employ candidates with a background from NTNU. However, the group has also been able to attract international researchers with PhDs from good universities in the UK.
Members of the research group have published widely in the leading conflict journals and some of the books and articles have been influential in international academic debates. Most of the studies are firmly rooted in Political Science (conflict studies) at the intersection between international relations (IR) and comparative politics. One of the articles is also related to climate studies, while another is co-authored with geographers. In general, the publications produced by the research group are of high scientific quality. However, they do not offer many novel theoretical perspectives, and not many papers are published in the flagship general political science journals or books published by the major university presses.
105
The group has contributed to advancing the state-of-the-art in conflict studies through publications on the relationship between natural resources, capitalism, social movements and the risk of conflict.
Through extensive collaboration with colleagues at PRIO, they have also, more generally, contributed to the development of new datasets and pushed the methodological frontiers of the research field.
There is a rather strong interdisciplinary touch to the new research agenda, which seeks to identify the impact of climate change on conflict risk. The collaboration also extends to historians and social scientists from other disciplines.
The members of the research group have a large national and international network, including some of the leading researchers and research institutions in the field, such as PRIO and the Department of Peace and Conflict at Uppsala University. This is used to improve the training of PhD students, to engage in joint efforts in connection with data collection and distribution, and to co-author publications.
The researchers in the group participate in the teaching of courses at all levels in connection with the department’s study programme in Political Science. Moreover, they are involved in supervising BA, MA and doctoral theses. Although the focus on conflict studies is rather narrow, the study programme at the host institution enables the research group’s teaching capacity to be used in several general and specialised courses.
The research carried out by the research group – with a strong empirical focus and obvious societal relevance – has high potential for dissemination, knowledge exchange, and policy recommendations that could be used by policymakers around the world. Some activities and efforts have been made to achieve this. However, the evidence provided, including the impact case on the impact of research on the capitalist peace, could be more extensive and detailed. More generally, knowledge exchange is not emphasised much (although dissemination is briefly mentioned) among the research goals.
The research group has contributed many high-quality publications in prestigious outlets. However, the quantity and quality of the publication output seems to have stagnated or even decreased in recent years. The members of the research group have strong national and international networks. They use their research expertise directly in teaching and knowledge exchange, but more could be done in the latter respect.
Assessment of research group: 4 – very good
• It is important to increase the focus on getting all researchers to publish high-quality work in the best outlets on a regular basis.
• The group should try to improve its performance in terms of attracting external research funds
• The institution should reconsider how to help the group by providing better incentives and facilities.
106
12.3 Research group Elections, Values and Political Communication
The research group Elections, Values and Political Communication (EVPOC) consists of a relatively small team based in the Department of Sociology and Political Science at NTNU that has been in effective operation since 2007.
The group has strong international connections, particularly with Goldsmith College London and Stanford University in the United States. It has also played a key role in European and World Value surveys which are long running comparative sources of data.
The research group is headed by Professor Toril Aalberg, but appears to be not overly formal in the way that it operates, relying on the self-starting and entrepreneurial skills of key participants. The group clearly has both a capacity for international collaboration and takes a leading role as chair of the COST action IS 1308: Populist Political Communication in Europe, which is supported by the EU framework programme of Horizon 2020. It is worth noting that, although the group does apply for and receive external funding, the self-assessment also mentions that capacity limitations mean that they have to be selective in what funds they apply for. Since the current research funding is extremely limited, the group seems to manage to find sufficient research time even without external funding.
However, the self-assessment mentions that the group prepares and encourages its postdoc fellows to apply for ECR Starting or Consolidator grants.
The strategy of the group comes across very clearly. Its goal is to achieve research of international standard. Most of its work is comparative in focus. The group plays an important role in several international collaborations. It aims to produce world-class work.
The recruitment practice of the group is largely driven by securing external funds or fellowship awards from the institution of which they are part. In both instances, it is the excellence of its research track record that drives decisions. Two of the ten core group members are female, with the two affiliated researchers also being male. Hence, the group is rather gender skewed. The time members allocate to the group varies between 20 and 75%, with the one PhD student devoting most of her time to it. It is
The recruitment practice of the group is largely driven by securing external funds or fellowship awards from the institution of which they are part. In both instances, it is the excellence of its research track record that drives decisions. Two of the ten core group members are female, with the two affiliated researchers also being male. Hence, the group is rather gender skewed. The time members allocate to the group varies between 20 and 75%, with the one PhD student devoting most of her time to it. It is