Louis Maheu


Three main arguments run through this text. The first one claims the European Union Higher Education (EU/HE) Area cannot be uncoupled from the EU Research Area, as both planning exercises and policies are corner stone components of the EU most recent Science, Technology and Innovation policy. This standpoint enables the emphasis be put on an often neglected dimension of the EU/HE Area: the utmost importance of graduate education and especially doctoral education. The second highlights nowadays most recent Science, Technology and Innovation policies’ specific foundational trends regarding highly qualified human resources bearing advanced research training for example of the doctoral level. Evidence-based trends do support that nation-building capacities are underlined by a direct interrelationship between countries’ research intensity and doctoral education graduates. These graduates are mainly if not exclusively trained by research intensive universities.

Finally, a last discussion looks at trends of Georgia Higher Education system in the light of current major characteristics of three modern university systems (USA, United Kingdom and Canada). It is argued the Georgian HE system, as for the country’s total population, consists of far too many institutions belonging to the college, university and comprehensive research university categories. None of the three mentioned rich developed countries does have the required high quality human and financial resources to run as many different HE institutions as Georgia currently does. Obviously, Georgia spreads thin and rare human and financial resources to too many different institutions. Relevant policies to correct this inefficient use of human and financial resources by Georgia HE system are also considered.

Full Text:



1. Aghion, P. and Cohen, E. Éducation et croissance, Paris: La documentation française, 2004.

2. Auriol, L. Careers of Doctorate Holders: Employment and Mobility Patterns. STI Working Paper, Paris: OECD, 2010.

3. Carnegie Classification Website:

4. Clark, B. R. Places of Inquiry; Research and Advanced Education in Modern Universities. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1995

5. Geiger, R. L. Knowledge and Money: Research Universities and the Paradox of the Marketplace, Stanford: Stanford University Press, 2004.

6. Hefei Statement 2013: The 10 Characteristics of Contemporary Research Universities, American Association of University, AAU/USA; C9/China; G8/Australia; League of European Research Universities, LERU/EU, see Website: Hefei Statement.

7. Kerr, C. The Uses of the Universtiy, Cambridge, MA., Harvard University Press, 1963.

8. Lacroix, R., Maheu, L. Leading Research Universities in a Competitive Academic World, McGill-Queen’ University Press, Montreal & Kingston, London, Ithaca, 2015.

9. Lombardi, J. V., Capaldi, E. D., Reeves K. R. and Gater, D. S. The Center; Measuring and Improving Research Universities: The Center at Five Years. Gainesville: The Center, 2004.

10. Maheu, L. « Doctoral Education and the Workings of Canadian Graduate Schools: A Differentiated Tier within Canadian Universities Facing the Challenges of Tension-Driven Functions », Higher Education in Europe, Vol. 33, No. 1, April, 2008.

11. Maheu, L. “Canadian PhD: Issues of a ‘Buiding’ Strategy”, to be published, 2015.

12. Maheu, L., Scholz,B., Balan, J., Graybill, J., Strugnell, R. “Doctoral Education as an Element of Cultural and Economic Prosperity; Nation Building in the Era of Globalization”, in M. Nerad, ed, Preparing PhDs for a Global Future: Forces and Form in Doctoral Education Worldwide, The Hague, Sense Publishers, 2014

13. Reich, R. B. The Work of Nations: Preparing Ourselves for 21st Century Capitalism. New York: Alfred. A. Knopf, Inc, 1991

14. Thurgood, L., Golladay, M. J. and Hill, S. T. U.S. Doctorates in the 20th Century: Special Report. Arlington, VA: National Science Foundation, Division of Science Resources Statistics, 2006.


  • There are currently no refbacks.