Agricultural Research and Education System in Belarus A need for a decentralized and market-oriented approach

Dr. Oleg Nivievskyi and Prof. Dr. Dr. h.c. mult. Ulrich Koester

Consultant: BE Berlin Economics GmbH Schillerstr. 59 10627 Berlin Germany Tel: +49 30 206 134 640 Fax: +49 30 206 134 649 [email protected]

Client: Federal Ministry of Food, Agriculture and Consumer Protection, Germany

Mandatory: GFA Consulting Group, Germany

© 2012 BE Berlin Economics GmbH. All rights reserved.

1

Executive Summary At first glance, the performance of agriculture in Belarus seems to be outstanding in comparison with other CIS countries. However, a more detailed analysis that takes into consideration not only output development but also resource use, leads to a less favorable picture. The huge inflow of investment accompanied by new technology in recent years has not improved factor productivity as expected. Many farms could not keep up with the pace of technical change and could not improve their efficiency under the new technologies. In other words, despite better equipment, machines, animals, plant varieties and variable inputs at their disposal, the farmers produced a smaller percentage of the maximum output possible with these new machines than with old ones. On these farms, it seems that management ability, training and education are scarce factors that do not allow keeping pace with the rate of technical change. The report is based on the assumption that the performance of the agricultural sector and the agribusiness sector could be improved by improving the efficiency of the agricultural research and education system in the country. Indicators that hint at an inadequate research and education system are the following: a) declining relative productivity of capital in agriculture against the background of massive allocation of physical capital to the sector, b) agribusiness and farm managers complain about the qualification of young academics and graduates, c) research in agricultural economics is isolated from the international community and d) the application to join European higher education was turned down due to noncompliance with the principles and values of the Bologna process. Institutional economics served as the basis for the analysis in the study. Organizations (universities, ministries, academies, policy makers and others) are the players of the game, and the institutions (legal framework, informal rules, formal and informal incentive systems on the level of organizations and the individual level) are the rules of the game. This approach

identifies

the

effects

of

the

current

incentive

systems

and

presents

recommendations to align the interests of individual researchers and teachers with the interests of research users and the society as a whole. Lack of financing of the education system or lack of activities and engagement of those who work in the system are not the main shortcomings of the agricultural research and education system. Instead, shortcomings include the present state of the organization of the agricultural research and education system, as well as the prevailing incentive system governing the organizations and individual actors. Agricultural higher education is affiliated with the Ministry for Agriculture and Food of the Republic of Belarus (MinAg&Food) and includes two universities, two academies and 26 colleges, and different central and regional training and methodological cetres.

2

Higher agricultural education is oversized compared with western countries; agriculture’s share in the total number of students is more than six times larger in Belarus than in Germany. The individual organizations have incentives to increase the number of students, and students have incentives to get enrolled due to non-academic advantages, in particular related to military services. There seems to be no adequate quality control to secure highquality education of students in field of agricultural sciences. The content of the curricula is largely determined by the Ministry of Education and partly by the Ministry of Agriculture and Food. The individual organizations have little freedom in determining the content of the curricula and the content of the subjects. Consequently, there is significant inertia in the system. Adjustment of the content of subjects is needed as new research findings enter the teaching content. Universities should be granted more autonomy in shaping their academic content. In contrast to those in western countries, professors and lecturers at universities have a very high teaching load and with little time left for the research. Hence, it cannot be expected that the most recent research findings will be taken up in classes and that graduates will be well prepared for post-graduate research. Moreover, payment is related to teaching hours and exerts incentives to expand the teaching load at the expense of quality. Quality of teaching seems to be negatively affected by the strong incentives to continue teaching after retirement. Pensioners try to increase their low pensions. The quality of teaching in agricultural economics—among others—suffers from the lack of English of most teachers. English is the main professional language in international communication, and those who do not know the language are outside the international profession and cannot offer lectures of high standard. The quality of the education system also depends on the quality of students. It seems that the organizations of agricultural higher education are not attractive for the best high school graduates. Necessary changes include improving employment opportunities for students, raising the standard of education and research and intensifying the contacts to the agro-industrial complex. Students should know mathematics and English at an advanced high school level; furthermore they should have worked for four to six months on a farm or in agribusiness. The universities should accredit the farms or companies, monitor the internships and be in charge of accepting students’ reports on their internship. The connection between universities and agribusiness could be further strengthened if universities would offer an annual conference in which to present findings that might be of interest to the farm and agribusiness sector. New staff should have proven knowledge of English and should have at least one publication in English in an international journal or at least one presentation in English at an international conference. In order to increase the inflow of new qualified staff, retirement of

3

the teaching staff should generally be at the normal age of retirement in other fields of the economy. Exceptions can be in order if there is a genuine evaluation of teaching quality, including evaluation of students. The curricula should be changed drastically. The present degree of specialization seems to be too narrow, and the number of lectures in general economics is too small. According to the present curricula, students are trained inadequately in policy analysis, price formation and market analysis, quantitative methods and farm management. Moreover, even students in agronomy should have to take some mandatory subjects, such as introduction to general economics, farm management and agricultural policy and price and market analyses. Adjusting the method of teaching to an international style should also be considered. Instead of presentations or even dictations by teachers the latter should motivate students to ask questions and to discuss. The aim should be not to impart knowledge, but to teach students to acquire knowledge in a fast-changing world. Research in agricultural sciences and economics suffers greatly from the present organization of the universities, the Academy of Sciences and the interaction with the Ministry of Agriculture and Food. Research is about creation of knowledge and will be done most efficiently by creative researchers who identify new areas of research where new knowledge can be created and where they expect to be innovative. Hence, the individual researcher needs a lot of freedom to identify his own research topic and set his own research agenda. The present procedure in Belarus is not in line with these principles accepted as international standard in open societies. Instead, there prevails a highly hierarchal structure. Due to the legacy of the Soviet past, the main research used to be done by the Academy of Sciences, whereas the universities were involved mainly in teaching. There is an ongoing process to expand the research capacities of universities, in particular by introducing research component into educational universities through opening up research institutes. This change may eventually lead to a structure that is comparable to that of western universities. However, the implementation in one stroke would be costly because the upgraded universities would request more funding in order to enlarge their research capacity. Improving high-quality research is not just a matter of funding, but of qualified and motivated staff. The additional finances would not be used efficiently if they were not used for new, highly qualified staff. Hence, the research and educational universities should expand slowly, based on available new staff. It will take time to institute a new viable research system in agricultural economics that will be internationally competitive. It should be accepted that the new system has to be internationally opened and has to strongly welcome the inflow of new staff. As the flow of new promising staff might be small on an annual basis and, hence, the recovery of research universities could be slow, an alternative might be considered. The few excellent new researchers—most of them may have studied abroad or may be foreigners—could be concentrated in a new higher-education and research institute that could be partially financed by the government and by private sources. This institute could have an annual

4

enrolment of 25 to 30 students of the highest potential. A highly demanding two-year course would train agribusiness managers as well as market and policy analysts able to assess enterprises, technologies, markets and policies according to internationally recognized standards. To minimize costs, the permanent staff could be quite small in the first years, supplementing the capacity by visiting professors and researchers from other universities. Some other countries, such as Ukraine and Georgia, have set up an international school of economics and are including a specialization in agricultural economics.

5

Contents

1.

Introduction ...........................................................................................................8

2.

Agricultural Sector Performance and the Role of Agricultural Knowledge and Information System in Belarus ............................................9

3.

General Setup of Higher Education System in Belarus..............................12

4.

Organization of Agricultural Higher Education System in Belarus ........14 4.1.

Oversized agricultural higher education system in Belarus .................................14

4.2.

Academic and teaching dependency ........................................................................16

4.3.

Financial dependency .................................................................................................16

4.4.

Hierarchical structure and distorted performance incentives ...............................18

4.5.

Traditional teaching methods and studying............................................................19

4.6.

Dichotomy of research and education functions ....................................................20

4.7.

Adverse selection of students in agricultural sciences ...........................................20

4.8.

Vicious cycle in producing faculty staff at the HEIs ...............................................22

5.

Organization of Agricultural Research and Development in Belarus ..................................................................................................................22

6.

How to improve the performance of the Agricultural Education and R&D in Belarus ...........................................................................................23

Annex .............................................................................................................................27 References .....................................................................................................................40

6

List of figures and tables Figure 1: Gross agricultural output in Belarus and selected transition countries (1990=100)...10 Figure 2: Crop and milk yields in Belarus .......................................................................................10 Figure 3: Expenditures on education core services, R&D and ancillary services in HEIs, % of GDP (2009)....................................................................................................................................27 Figure 4: Public expenditures on higher education, % of total public expenditures (2009)......27 Figure 5: Structure of the Agricultural Education System in Belarus ..........................................36 Figure 6: Professional Development in the Agricultural Education System in Belarus ............37 Figure 7: Tempus Partner Countries and the Bologna Process, 2011 ...........................................38 Figure 8: Age Structure of the faculty staff at the HEIs in Belarus in 2011..................................38

Table 1: State expenditures on agricultural higher education and R&D in Germany and Belarus ..........................................................................................................................................12 Table 2: Statistics on population and higher education students in Belarus and Germany .....28 Table 3: Share of agriculture in GDP, employment, and capital in Belarus, and corresponding measures of labor and capital productivity .............................................................................29 Table 4: Model Curriculum in Agricultural Economics in Belarus (offered by an agricultural university in Belarus) ..................................................................................................................30 Table 5: Model Curriculum in Agronomy in Belarus.....................................................................32 Table 6: Curriculum in Agricultural Sciences at a German University, specialization in Agribusiness (Bachelors) ............................................................................................................34

7

1. Introduction Agriculture in Belarus has been considerably growing over the last decade, with an average annual gross agricultural growth rate of 5.1%. It has even surpassed in growth its CIS peers, like Ukraine and Russia. This has been the case despite the fact that agricultural policy in Belarus has been much less market-oriented and its farm sector has undergone much less restructuring (World Bank 2009). This phenomenon is sometimes referred to as the ‘Belarus Puzzle’. This result, however, was achieved at high cost to taxpayers and the economy overall as the government has been allocating significant shares of state funds for agriculture (World Bank 2009). For example, fiscal support to agriculture (budget outlays plus tax privileges) amounted to 29% of gross agricultural output, 73% of agricultural value added and 462% of net agricultural profits in 2007. Moreover, in recent years some insolvent farms have been integrated with processors or other entities and received significant capital inflow from the holding company. This massive allocation of capital to agriculture had a positive impact on the sector’s output growth. Farm level productivity analysis, however, casts doubts on healthiness and sustainability of this growth (see World Bank 2009). The analysis demonstrated that despite significant technical change (by means of better machines, animals, plant varieties and variable inputs) and despite overall growth of employment in agriculture, many farms could not keep up with the pace of this technical change. In other words, despite better equipment, machines, animals, plant varieties and variable inputs at their disposal the farmers have been producing a smaller percentage of the maximum output that is possible with these new machines than with old ones. It seems that management ability, training and education are not keeping pace with the rate of technical change. This leads to a conclusion that further improvements in physical capital would then lead to only limited, if any, improvements in farm and sector performance (World Bank 2009). Belarusian agricultural education and science system, however, produces significantly larger numbers of agricultural science specialists than those in the West. This suggests that the organizational structure and content of domestic agricultural education and knowledge system might not be instrumental enough in contributing to the development of Belarusian agriculture. In this study it is assumed that the agricultural knowledge and information system generally consists of three pillars: the higher education system (HES), the research and development system (R&D) and the farm extension system (FES) that has to transfer the newly created knowledge to the users, such as farmers or agribusiness companies. We mainly focus on the first pillar and to a less extent on the second one due to the following rationale. The HES is the most important pillar as it generates the key actors for the other two pillars – the researchers and extension workers. Therefore, a good HES is a necessary condition for the efficient R&D and FES. The focus on HES has also been chosen because Belarus is in the process of restructuring higher education and research. Moreover, we deliberately narrowed further the focus of the study on agricultural economics as the change from a socialist planned economy to a market economy has required a much more fundamental change in higher education and research in agricultural economics than in the other fields of agriculture. In the study we use an institutional approach in dealing with the topic. Organizations (universities, ministries, academies, policy makers and others) are the actors of the game and the institutions (legal framework, informal rules, formal and informal incentive systems on

8

the level of organizations and the individual level) are the rules of the game. This approach will allow identifying the effects of the present incentive systems and presenting recommendations in order to align interests of individual researchers and teachers with the interest of the users of the research and the society at large. In the following section we discuss the general pattern of Belarusian agricultural development and the role of agricultural knowledge and information system in it. We then discuss the general setup of the HES settings in Belarus in section 3 and continue in details with its agricultural arm in section 4. In section 5 we look at the organization of the R&D system. We wrap up the paper with recommendations that would ultimately lead to strengthening the agricultural development in Belarus.

2. Agricultural Sector Performance and the Role of Agricultural Knowledge and Information System in Belarus Agricultural yields and aggregate output have experienced considerable increase in Belarus (see Figures 1 and 2). As the Figure 1 shows, the initial reduction in production during the transformation crisis in the 90s was less severe than in its CIS peers and Belarus achieved much earlier its pre-transition level of agricultural output. Despite the fact that agricultural policy in Belarus has been much less market-oriented and its farm sector has undergone much less restructuring (World Bank 2009), Belarusian agriculture has surpassed in performance its CIS peers, like Ukraine and Russia. Over the last decade, Belarusian agricultural output has grown annually at average 5.1%, while ‘much more restructured’ agricultures in Ukraine and Russia has grown at the annual average of 4.4% and 4.2%, respectively. This phenomenon, often cited as the ‘Belarus Puzzle’, was mainly a result of significant allocation of state funds to agriculture. According to the World Bank (2009) study, for example, the total fiscal support to agriculture (budget outlays plus tax privileges) amounted to 5.4% of national GDP, 29% of gross agricultural output, 73% of agricultural value added and 462% of net agricultural profits in 2007. Such a massive allocation of capital to agriculture has contributed to the sector’s output growth. More detailed analysis, however, reveals some serious weaknesses in this production growth. A rigorous productivity analysis using farm-base accounting data reveals (see World Bank, 2009) that production growth was mainly driven by technical change, i.e. by purchase of better machines, animals, plant varieties and variable inputs. At the same time, many farms could not keep up with the pace of technical change and could not improve their efficiency under the new technologies. In other words, despite better equipment, machines, animals, plant varieties and variable inputs at their disposal the farmers produced a smaller percentage of the maximum output that is possible with these new machines than with old ones. On these farms, it seems that management ability, training and education are scares factors that do not allow taking much advantage from technical change.

9

Figure 1: Gross agricultural output in Belarus and selected transition countries (1990=100) 140.0

120.0

100.0

80.0

60.0

40.0

20.0

Russia

Poland

Romania

Belarus

Kazakhstan

Ukraine

0.0 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011

Source: EBRD (2012), Statistical Yearbook of Belarus 2011, authors’ calculations

Figure 2: Crop and milk yields in Belarus 5

50

4.5 4

wheat, t/ha (left axis)

barley, t/ha (left axis)

rapeseed, t/ha (left axis)

milk, t/cow (right axis)

sugar beet, t/ha (right axis)

potato, t/ha (right axis)

45 40

3.5

35

3

30

2.5

25

2

20

1.5

15

1

10

20 11

20 10

20 09

20 08

20 07

20 06

20 05

20 04

20 03

20 02

20 01

20 00

19 99

19 98

19 97

19 96

19 95

19 94

19 93

0 19 92

0 19 91

5

19 90

0.5

Source: Agriculture of the Republic of Belarus Yearbook, various issues

This micro- or farm-level productivity finding embeds well into a macro-level productivity picture in the sector. The calculations in Table 3 demonstrate the amount of labor or capital needed to produce one unit of GDP in Belarus, in its agriculture and in the rest of the economy in Belarus, with GDP measured in constant year 2000 BYR. One can easily observe in this table that the real productivity of labor in agriculture increased from 1.69 m

10

BYR/worker in 2000 to 3.07 m BYR/worker in 2010, i.e. by 81.3%. Over the same period, however, labor productivity in the rest of the Belarusian economy increased from 2.12 to 4.07 m BYR/worker, i.e. by 92%. As a result, the productivity of labor in agriculture as proportion of labor productivity in the rest of the economy has broadly remained at around 75 percent. The situation is a bit different with capital. Over the same period (2000/10), capital productivity in agriculture increased by 26.3%, whereas in the rest of the economy it increased by 78.5%. The combined effect of these changes is the reduction in the ratio of capital productivity in agriculture to the productivity of capital in the rest of the economy from 66% to 47%. The fact of stagnation of agricultural labor productivity at around 75% of its level in the rest of the economy witnesses about some persistent problems with ‘quality’ of labor in the sector. This might also be driven by the ‘quality’ of agricultural education and training in the country. Also the fact of declining productivity of capital in agriculture in comparison to the rest of the economy witnesses about limited or stagnating quality of labor (human capital) in the sector to respond to massive allocation of physical capital to the sector. Concern about ‘quality’ of labor in agriculture is supported by a number of other studies and observations in Belarus. For example, in interviews, the managers of agricultural enterprises and agribusiness firms in Belarus emphasize a glaring shortage of human capital in the sector and some specific problems with agricultural education system in Belarus (also see Meleschenia, 2011; Gusakov, 2011). They complain about the shortage of adequately trained young Belarusians at all levels of qualifications. In most cases the current farm managers adhere to agronomic practices that are far from optimal or rarely make the best possible use of the scarce capital that is at their disposal. Trying to respond to this challenge, some farms have their own on-the-job training and one farm is even planning to launch its own agrarian school (see Nivievskyi and von Cramon-Taubadel, 2011). Another fact is that the Belarusian agricultural economists are isolated from the international agricultural economists market. Von Cramon-Taubadel and Nivievskyi (2011) review all 244 papers on the topic of agricultural transition in Central and Eastern Europe that were published in the top international peer-review journals in agricultural economics between 1989 and 2008. They find not a single paper with Belarusian authors. At the most recent triennial meetings of the International Association of Agricultural Economists (IAAE) held in Beijing in 2009, Foz do Iguacu in 2012 and of the European Association of Agricultural Economists (EAAE) held in Zurich in 2011 there was not a single representative from Belarus. While the journals and conferences referred to here are largely academic, the fact that Belarusian scientists are entirely absent from them does suggest that the agricultural research and education system as a whole in Belarus has not managed to keep up with international standards. One has to admit, however, that in relative terms Belarus’ expenditures on agricultural education and science are quite comparable to those in the West. For example, Table 1 demonstrates that in relative terms Belarus’ expenditures on agricultural higher education system are comparable to the German ones, i.e. at 2% of its agricultural GDP. However, as empirical analysis demonstrates, per se this should not necessarily yield high returns (see Alston et al, 2010). There is a huge variance across countries in rate of return to agricultural research and education. It implies that the organizational structure and content of domestic agricultural education and knowledge system is of high importance, how researchers and

11

academics are motivated in the system, how domestic research community is integrated into the international research community etc. In the next chapters we will be analyzing the organizational structure of agricultural higher education and R&D system in Belarus. Table 1: State expenditures on agricultural higher education and R&D in Germany and Belarus Agricultural Higher Education (AgHE) Germany

Belarus

Belarus

2010

AgHE basic financing

m EUR

404.99

409.08

Ag GDP

bn EUR

15.92

17.83

AgHE, % Ag GDP

%

2.54

2.29

AgHE financing

m BYR

218,387.6

174,987.4

Ag GDP

bn BYR

10,583.1

12,222.3

AgHE, % Ag GDP

%

2.06

1.43

2009

2010

Agricultural R&D (AgRD) Germany

2009

AgRD basic financing

m EUR

407.483

410.005

Ag GDP

bn EUR

15.92

17.83

AgRD, % Ag GDP

%

2.56

2.30

AgRD basic financing

m BYR

49,303

59,225

Ag GDP

bn BYR

10,583.0494

12,222.27

AgRD, % Ag GDP

%

0.47

0.48

Source: Statistical Yearbook of Belarus 2011, Statistisches Bundesamt (Laufende Grundmittel und Drittmittel je wiss. Personal, je Professorin und Professor nach Fächergruppen); Statistisches Bundesamt (Ausgaben, Einnahmen und Personal der öffentlichen und öffentlich geförderten Einrichtungen für Wissenschaft, Forschung und Entwicklung); https://www.destatis.de; authors’ calculations

3. General Setup of Higher Education System in Belarus Agricultural Education has been an integral part of the general higher education system in Belarus and generally speaking it has been functioning according to the general higher education setup in the Republic. The Belarusian State policy in the field of higher education mainly draws on recently adopted Code on Education (Code in the following) that came into force on the 1st of September 2011. According to the Code, higher education in Belarus includes two levels: i) specialist’s diploma (4 or 5-year curriculum), and ii) Master diploma (1 or 2-year curriculum). Postgraduate education also combines two levels of the highest qualification in science, i.e. Candidate of Science (equivalent to a PhD; aspirantura, adjunktura for military) and Doctor of Science (doktorantura). Establishments providing postgraduate education include higher education establishments, scientific and other organizations entitled to engage in postgraduate education (e.g. Academy of Science and research institutes). Higher education is broken into: 15 educational profiles (e.g. agriculture and forestry, ecological sciences, humanitarian sciences, natural sciences etc), 387 areas of expertise at the first level of higher education, 179 areas of expertise at the second level of higher education

12

and more than 1000 specializations (see the State Classifier of the Republic of Belarus, 2009; EACEA, 2012). Belarusian higher education institutions (HEI) offer three forms of learning: i) full-time, ii) evening and by iii) correspondence. Full-time learning is the most widespread and in the greatest demand and accounts for 2/3 of students. Less than 1 % of students take up evening classes and over and over 35% of students learn by correspondence (EACEA, 2012, see also Annex Table 2). According to the Code, there are four types of HEIs in Belarus: i) Classical University, ii) Profile University (Academy), iii) Institute, and iv) Higher College. Both Classical and Profile Universities provide a two-level system of training, but educational profile of the later is limited to one or few fields. Institutes provide a two-level system of training in one or two areas of expertise and they carry out fundamental and applied research in these areas of expertise. Higher Colleges provides training on the first level in areas of expertise that are combined with specialized secondary education. The higher education system in Belarus is governed by the President of the Republic of Belarus, Government, Ministries and regional authorities. In total, there are 55 HEIs (45 state and 10 private institutions) in Belarus. Compared to its peers in the CIS, however, the number of HEI has not increased since independence. The number of HEI in Belarus in fact even decreased from 59 in 1995 to 55 in 2011. The Ministry of Education is the ‘umbrella’ Ministry for all 55 HEI that governs and setups the general framework in the field of higher education. It is actively engaged in developing and approving educational standards and curriculum for all 55 HEI. This leaves little room for innovations in curricula and teaching content. The Ministry of Education has also been forecasting national needs for specialists at all levels and fields of training, initiating international co-operation, licensing and accrediting HEI. It also approves the statutory documents of all higher education institutions (public as well as private) and monitors the implementation of state policy nationwide. The 55 HEI, however, are affiliated to the relevant 12 ministries and state bodies. The role of Ministries is crucial in ‘filling in’ the content of special disciplines and disciplines of specialization, which is about 50% of the curriculum. Corresponding Ministries are also decisive in deciding on the number of ‘state order’ students, on the selection of research topics and allocation of funds. This leaves HEI completely dependent academically and financially. As it was already mentioned above, the Ministry of Education defines (with the consultation of all stakeholders) and approves the model curriculum which is to be implemented by all HEIs in the Republic. HEIs define curriculum in areas of expertise on the basis of the model curricula. In general, the structure of the first level curriculum has the following components: 1) cycle of disciplines in human and social science: appr. 14% of hours load; 2) cycle of disciplines in natural sciences: appr. 12% of hours load; 3) cycle of general professional and special disciplines: appr. 40-50% of hours load; 4) cycle of disciplines of specialization: appr. 10% of hours load (see Table 4 and Table 5 in the Annex for examples of model curriculum). The curriculum also includes practical work and independent study. Practical work aims at teaching students how to apply the acquired knowledge in the chosen profession. According to the current curricula, first and second year students have 30-36 academic hours per week, third and fourth year students have 24-30 academic hours per week and fifth and sixth year students have 18-24 academic hours per week. The HEIs are managed and governed by the Rector/Director appointed under the state

13

regulation. No election of a Rector takes place so far, it is appointed by the President. The highest collective body of HEI management is the Council headed by the Rector. The Ministry of Finance and profile Ministries are responsible for financing public HEI and it is laid down in the state budget of Belarus for each given year. Additional external funds include tuition fees, income from research and business activities, founders and sponsors. Private HEIs are financed by founders and sponsors and receive no state budget subsidies. Financing of HEIs depends on the field of study and number of students. Each HEI establishes its tuition fees in the national or foreign (for overseas students) currency and submits this to the Ministry of Education for approval. The sample contract needs the approval of the Government. Fees paid to higher education institutions are exempt from taxation and are at the full disposal of those institutions (EACEA, 2012). So far Belarus is a non-Bologna-Signatory country (EACEA, 2012b) and expects to join the Bologna process only in 20151. Belarus’ application to join the European higher-education area was turned down in April 2012 because ‘…it does not yet observe the principles and values of the Bologna process, such as academic freedom, institutional autonomy and student participation in higher-education governance’ 2 . Nonetheless, the Bologna Process is being currently implemented on a voluntary basis by ad hoc groups under the supervision of the Ministry of Education (EACEA, 2012b).

4. Organization of Agricultural Higher Education System in Belarus As it has been already mentioned above, the higher education system in Belarus is sectororiented and the 55 HEIs are affiliated to the relevant 12 ministries and state bodies. Agricultural higher education has been under the Ministry for Agriculture and Food of the Republic of Belarus (MinAg&Food) and includes 2 universities, 2 academies and 26 colleges, Regional Center for agricultural reform consulting in Mogiliov, Belarusian Republican Training Centre, 6 training centers at regional units of the MinAg&Food, 72 training units at rayon units of the MinAg&Food, Teaching and Methodological Centre of the MinAg&Food (see the Figure 5 in the Annex for schematic presentation). At these 4 HEIs the students study 32 specializations3.

4.1.

Oversized agricultural higher education system

Table 2 in the Annex demonstrates some basic statistics on the number of total students as well as on the number of students in agriculture and forestry in Belarus. The table also compares this statistics with similar indicators in Germany. Germany has been chosen as a benchmark as its higher education system is among the most efficient and productive systems in the EU (Parteka and Wolszczak-Derlacz, 2012).

1

http://www.europeanvoice.com/article/imported/no-bologna-for-belarus/74079.aspx

2

http://n-europe.eu/article/2012/01/26/bolonskii_protsess_v_belarusi_mezhdu_ akademicheskimi_standartami_i_politikoi 3

Complete list of specializations in agricultural sciences is accessible at http://www.mshp.minsk.by/education/education/spec.htm

14

Table 2 in the Annex demonstrates that the number of students (including agricultural students) in Belarus is extraordinarily high in comparison to Germany. In absolute terms, Germany has almost two times more agricultural students than Belarus, i.e. about 54 000 (agriculture plus veterinary medicine) versus 28 000 agricultural students in 2011. In relative terms, however, the picture turns upside down. Usually, the number of students in agriculture of a particular country depends on the level of income in the country and on the value added produced in agriculture, i.e. on Agri GDP. Based on these criteria the number of agricultural students in Belarus by far exceeds that number in Germany. For example, Belarus generated about 0.13 bn EUR of value added in agriculture per 1000 of agricultural students in 2011. At the same time, Germany generated 3 times more in the same year, i.e. 0.4 bn EUR. In other words, Belarus prepares 3 times more agricultural students than it is necessary. Comparison of the same indicators for the whole economy (GDP per 1000 of all students) substantially worsens this conclusion. As one can infer from the Table 2 in the Annex, the total number of students in the higher education system in Belarus is 10 times higher than is actually needed. Comparing the number of agricultural students to the total number of students and to total population in both countries also confirms the above made conclusion. As the Table 2 in the Annex demonstrates, agricultural students in Belarus made up about 6% of all students in 2011, while in Germany agricultural students made up only 0.9% in the same year. In other words, agriculture’s share in the total number of students is more than 6 times larger in Belarus than in Germany. The same holds true in relation to the total population. As the Table 2 in the Annex demonstrates, agricultural students in Belarus made up about 0.29% of total population in 2011, while in Germany agricultural students made up only 0.07% in the same year, i.e. by 4 times more in relative terms. This observation has been also acknowledged in Belarusian professional literature on this topic. For example, Gusakov (2011) complains about inflated number of agricultural students as well as about the quality of their studies and qualification. The author explains his position on the example of students specializing in agricultural economics. Gusakov (2011) mentions that the number of agricultural economics students in the two key universities (in Belarusian State Agricultural Academy and Belarusian State Economic University) has significantly increased over the transition period. This happened despite the fact that the number of agricultural enterprises in the country decreased from 3000 to less than 1400 during the same period. On the one hand this is explained by ‘cloning’ economic departments in order to secure the revenues at the expense of contract-students. For example, the economics department at the Belarusian State Agricultural Academy has been split into two departments, and the second was named as the department of ‘Business and Law’. On the other hand, economic departments have been emerging in a number of agricultural and non-agricultural HEIs without due references towards their capacity and infrastructure to train the students in this specialization. For example, economic departments at the Grodno State Agricultural University and at the Belarusian State Agricultural Technical University are relatively young. This significantly increases the number of agricultural economists in the country. This significantly reduces the quality of agricultural economic graduates as this perse non-agri-economics HEIs were not supplied with sufficient number of adequately trained faculty. Gusakov (2011) complains also about the fact that agricultural and general economics students should study using the same curriculum (see Table 4) without due reference

15

towards the peculiarities of agricultural economics profession, e.g. crop and livestock production technologies etc. This questions the adequacy of qualification of graduates and makes clear why agribusiness complains so much about the qualification of graduates they employ.

4.2.

Academic and teaching dependency

As it was already mentioned above, the Ministry of Education defines (with the consultation of all stakeholders) and approves the model curriculum for a specific specialization (e.g. Agronomy) which is to be implemented by all the HEI in the Republic that teach the students in this specialization (see Table 4 and Table 5 in the Annex for examples of model curriculum). This leads to a severe rigidness of the system, lack of innovations in offering some new courses. One consequence of this was already mentioned above, when agricultural economics curriculum was unified with the general economics curriculum (Gusakov, 2011) and training of agricultural economics graduates in technologies, mechanization became to a large extent a formal exercise that did not provide much value to the students. Introducing a new specialization is quite a bureaucratic and time-consuming procedure. It involves multi-level consultations and approvals. Let us take, for example, economics. If a HEI decides to open up a new specialization in, for example, economics of tropical farming, it should do it via a corresponding Education and Methodological Association. For specialization in economics this would be Education and Methodological Association on Economic Education at the Belarusian State Economic University. After the concept of a curriculum (education standard) is developed, the Republic Institute of High School should confirm that this particular specialization does not yet exist in the State Classificatory of the Republic of Belarus on Specialization and Qualifications. If not, the Association then continues with an application to the Ministry of Economics with justification for opening of a new specialization. Application should provide enough evidence on sufficient infrastructure, faculty and need for opening of a new specialization. Although for HEI a list of disciplines and corresponding academic hours for studying a certain specialization is given, they and the MinAgro&Food, however, can decide on a distribution of hours with the disciplines. If, for example, the MinAgro&Food decides that no-till technology in farming should prevail, it can shift a distribution of academic hours in the course on farming towards no-till technologies. This type of hand-steering from the Ministry even worsens the situation with respect to academic freedom in the country.

4.3.

Financial dependency

Funding of Belarusian HEI generally implies a disincentive for improving the quality of education. As it was already mentioned above, public HEI are mostly financed from the budget. The government collects information on the expected demand in different specialists and distributes it among the existing individual universities and colleges via corresponding Ministries. This distribution does not involve any hints on competition. The ‘budget students’ (i.e. financed from the state budget) do not have to pay a tuition fee and receive a stipend/scholarship. Students have to sign a contract which commits them to work for 2 or 5 years according to the state order. In general the idea of predicting the number of students/graduates based on expected employment in the sector absolutely contradicts to the role of the government in a market

16

economy. Although Belarusian agriculture is more a quasi-planned economy rather than a market one (World Bank, 2009), still the global market forces have their repercussions on the domestic Belarusian market, including agriculture. Very often young graduates that had commitments to work a certain number of years in agriculture after graduation, leave it due to various reasons. Very few of agricultural science graduates expect to continue their work in agriculture; the majority wants to leave the villages and live in the cities. The turnover of staff in agriculture is very high and less labor is left in the sector (Gusakov, 2011b). According to the official statistics, the ratio of hired to discharged employees in agriculture is among the lowest across the sectors, i.e. about 92% in 2010 and in 20114. So the net outflow of labor in agriculture was 8% on average in 2010 and in 2011. Taking into account that the net outflow of high qualified labor was certainly higher than the average the decline of qualified labor in agriculture was much higher than 8%. Official figures, however, witness about higher expectations about labor demand in agriculture in the past. This demonstrates the meaninglessness of this exercise whatsoever. None of the governments in a market economy is able to predict the number of personnel demand in alternative jobs. Therefore, the idea of allocation of public funds to universities based on the number of state order students should be considered more as a relict of Soviet time rather than an efficient and pro-growth principle. Additional external financing of HEIs in Belarus includes tuition fees, income from research and business activities, founders and sponsors. Students that pay tuition fees are called the contract students. Private HEIs are financed by founders and sponsors and receive no state budget subsidies. Each HEI establishes its tuition fees in the national or foreign (for overseas students) currency and submits this to the Ministry of Education for approval. Every contract between a HEIs and a contract student must indicate the full amount of tuition fees paid for the course of studies or additional educational services. As the marginal costs of getting a new student declines but the amount of tuition fees remains the same, HEIs are interested in getting more contract students to improve equipment and facilities. On the one hand this introduces some kind of competition among universities for students. On the other hand, as it was already mentioned above, it involves inflating the number of students that generally speaking negatively affects the quality of educational process. There are also other significant benefits for young males to get enrolled to the HIEs. Studies at the HEIs provide an excuse for the delay of their mandatory service at the Belarusian army. Moreover, if a HEI contains a military chair, male students have an opportunity to get additional courses offered by this chair and take an exam afterwards to get the lowest military rank and completely escape the service in the army. Income from research and consulting activities for universities comes from project money. The Government, MinAgriFood, Agricultural Department at the Academy of Science of Belarus or the private sector finance research projects on a pre-specified topic. Hence, these projects mainly concern applied research.

4

17

See the Statistical book (2012) On Labor and Employment in the Republic of Belarus

4.4.

Hierarchical structure and distorted performance incentives

After more than 20 years of transition the higher education system in Belarus still remains unchanged to the Soviet one. Belarus expects to join the Bologna process only in 20155. As a result, Belarusian education system has a strong hierarchal structure. The dominant influence of the Ministry of Education in specifying the curriculum and in defining the teaching content slows down the introduction of innovations. The dominant influence of the MinAgri&Food in determining financing and the research topics undermines the creativity and discovery of research. Appointment of a Rector of a HEI by the President and present organizational structure within the universities contribute to the inertia of organizations. This leads to a situation where Belarusian universities have generally a highly inward looking incentive system – like that of a closed economy - not really prone to changes. The promotion system at universities is similar to any administration. Clear criteria are defined for progressing up the hierarchy. In contrast to most of other countries, it opens up a career for young researchers and staff at the same university where they had been enrolled as beginners. It is considered as normal when researchers get the degree of candidate and the doctorate diploma at the same university and get even promoted to a professor. Worldwide experience, however, indicates that inbreeding does not support academic excellence of a research and education organization. Many universities in Europe advertise worldwide vacancies in the academic staff and are willing to hire foreigners. The qualification of applicants, however, is carefully scrutinized. Hierarchal setup of the system organization contributes to international isolation of the Belarusian research community mentioned already in the introduction. This is especially fatal for agricultural economics where the move from a planned to market economy system requires a significant international experience in identification of research topics and the methods applied in research. Instead, the current rules de-facto impede internationalization of the staff. Performance of academic staff is only rated on the basis of publications in Russian/Belarusian. The journals considered as acceptable do not apply a double blind review system. Moreover, publications in other languages, in particular in English, are generally not included in the list of publications eligible for promotion6. Hence, PhD students in agricultural sciences do not have an incentive to publish internationally. Moreover, foreign degrees are not recognized automatically in Belarus, even those that required the degrees from the best world universities and publish in the best international journals. The process of recognition of foreign degrees is generally possible, but it is cumbersome and takes time. Translation of a long summary is needed and additionally some domestic publications may be required. Finally, his/her dissertation has to be scrutinized by Belarusian professors. Anyhow, the process might take long and is not at all encouraging for young Belarusians with foreign degrees to return. Thus, in spite of all the official international cooperation, the universities are fairly closed up against the rest of the world. The promotion of an individual staff member depends first of all on his performance as measured by the defined criteria. It is true that he will only be promoted if a new position has 5

http://neurope.eu/article/2012/01/26/bolonskii_protsess_v_belarusi_mezhdu_akademicheskimi_standartami_i_politikoi

6

18

http://vak.org.by/index.php?go=Pages&in=view&id=262

been created or has become vacant and that this new position has to be advertised and candidates from other universities may apply. However, in reality the candidates from the advertising university will get the promotion. Remuneration of the faculty staff at HEIs in Belarus depends on different criteria and differs from the funding in other countries. First, salaries at HEIs are based mainly on teaching hours. On average a lecturer/professor should have about 1536 academic hours per academic year to receive a full position. More than 70% of this time is teaching, i.e. lectures and seminars. Compared to faculty teaching load in the West, this is extremely high and leaves almost no time for research. Depending on the experience or length in services, the salary of a professor in agricultural sciences ranges in the interval 1.5-2.5 m BYR per month before taxes, or about 1-2 m BYR net per month (i.e. equivalent of 100-200 EUR)7. This salary is extremely low so a professor may have teaching positions at several universities to secure his/her living. Also as the salary of the faculty is essentially bounded to the amount of teaching hours, there is even a kind of a contest among the faculty members for the teaching hours. This is difficult to imagine among the professors in the West (see Umland, 2012). The salaries of a faculty are toped up for having organizational positions (e.g. dean of the faculty) at the HEI, for scientific degree or title. This centrally set topping up might increase the salary by 50-125%8. In particular, this topping up more than doubles the salary of the academics at the Academy of Science. These salaries, however, are poorly related to the actual performance of the teaching staff. Some of the universities have even internal ratings of teachers. These ratings, however, are not reflected in the salaries as they are rigidly bounded to the number of academic hours, to the formal academic recognition (to scientific degree or title) or to the position in the organizational hierarchy of the HEI.

4.5.

Traditional teaching methods and studying

As it has been already mentioned above, the students in Belarus spend a large number of hours in lecture and seminar rooms. They spend about 30 academic hours per week in class, together with their classmates. This is something that is not observed in the West. This heavy teaching load for a faculty leads to a rather heavy reliance on the traditional lecturing, without interacting much with students, so-called mono-communication or feeding-in. In this setup the students passively receive theoretical presentation of the lectures without challenging the relevance and applicability of the teaching material. This encourages students simply repeating lecturers’ arguments at the end-of-the-semester oral examination on the content of the lecture. There is no question about developing critical thinking in students in this context whatsoever. Another result of this heavy teaching workload is that it leaves little time for research and publishing (Umland, 2012). Overloaded and mainly under-paid faculty members may treat their obligations as a formality (i.e. because of lack of incentive), they start behaving accordingly and the whole educational process turns into an imitation. Plagiarism is rampant at the HEIs. Essays, thesis

7 8

19

http://mojazarplata.by/main/calculator See the Decree of the President of Belarus # 450 as of 25.09.2007

or term-papers are abound in the internet and market for these services seemed to be quite developed and demanded9.

4.6.

Dichotomy of research and education functions

In the West universities generally follow the advice of Wilhelm von Humboldt: universities should be organizations which offer both teaching and research. The main idea is that universities’ main task is not to teach the knowledge, but instead train the students in how the knowledge is created. Critical thinking is the key element for high standards universities. It should be the task of the university to train young people in innovative and critical academic work that is able to create new knowledge to overcome some practical problems using the up-to-date scientific methodologies (Koester et al, 2010). In Belarus, however, the HEIs mainly provide teaching whereas research is the obligation of the research institutes under the umbrella of the Academy of Science. Belarusian universities often understand themselves as channels of knowledge rather than trainers for innovative thinking. It is interesting, however, that Belarusian HEIs understand this problem and try to overcome it by establishing their own research institutes10. Representatives of the Agricultural Sciences Department at the National Academy of Sciences, however, criticize this new trend. Gusakov (2011a) claims that Belarus already has sufficient number of research institutes under the umbrella of the Academy; and these institutes are capable to cover essentially the whole specter of fields in agricultural sciences research. The new research institutes at the HEI, according to Gusakov (2011a), do not have sufficiently trained brainpower and resource base. Moreover, the National Academy of Science of Belarus was granted with functions of the ‘only legitimate state organization with a right not only in organization and implementation of research and development activities in different fields, but also in control of all other research organizations, including the effectiveness of using financial resources’ (Gusakov, 2011a).

4.7.

Adverse selection of students in agricultural sciences

Admission to agricultural HEIs also contains deficiencies from outsiders’ as well as from insiders’ point of view. Belarusian students leave high school after 11 years of studies, while German students pass the high school exam after at least 12 or 13 years, so Belarusian students are generally much younger. On average German students start with universities studies at about 21 years (as not all of them pass high school exam within the minimum number of years and some do some practical work or go to the army), whereas Belarusian normally graduate from high school at 17 and may get the Diploma of specialist at the age of 20 to 21. Seemingly attractiveness of younger entrance in Belarus has its negative side. Younger students tend to be less aware of what profession to choose and tend to rely on the advice of their parents. As the studies at the HEI pass by, they may realize a mismatch of their expectations/talent and profession they (or their parents) have chosen. To some extend this mismatch affects the willingness of students to study and turns only into a rally for a

9 See, e.g. http://dekanat.by/; http://aaxueod.wapamp.com/kursovyie-besplatno-belarus; http://704.at.tut.by/regions/regions.html

10

For example, Belarusian State Agricultural Technical University established its Research Institute for Mechanization and Electrification in Agriculture in 2011 (http://www.batu.edu.by/content/nii-meskh-bgatu).

20

diploma without a reference to its quality whatsoever. Normally, the higher age of new students at HEIs in the West implies better education and better understanding of his/her needs in (professional) life. Therefore, turning the current HEI system into the system with more years at high school and admission of older students could be as a good self-selection tool for HEIs in Belarus that ultimately could lead to more qualified graduates. Equally important is that older students are usually more critical and demanding with respect to the quality of teaching, so the older age of students could also contribute to improving the quality of teaching. Another issue is the mechanism of admission itself. At the moment it takes place on the basis of the results of the centralized tests. Agricultural HEIs, for example, require taking centralized testing in Russian/Belarusian languages, mathematics and foreign language when applying for specialization in agricultural economics. It looks like a necessary precondition is fulfilled for selecting a good student in agricultural economics. The problem, however, is that agricultural HEIs are not prestigious among potential and current students (Gusakov, 2011b). Therefore less successful students on the centralized tests end up in less prestigious HEIs, including the agricultural ones. So it is difficult to expect high performance from less academically successful students. Ultimately agriculture suffers from less qualified and bright graduates. This holds also true all the way up to teachers and scientific personnel at the agricultural HEIs, research institutes and at the Academy. Therefore it seems there is a need for another selection/admission procedure to the HEIs in Belarus. The selection of new students might not be bounded exclusively to the results of the centralized testing but rather depend on the type of university. Irrespective of where the students apply for in agricultural economics, they should have worked for at least 4 to 6 month in agribusiness (including the agricultural, food and farm inputs sectors). Precondition of taking an internship before the start of the study could help the students to match theoretical courses at the HEI with the real world. Moreover, some of the students would realize before their study that agricultural sciences do not match their preferences and talents. A positive side effect could be that enterprises get more interest in interns as they stay longer and investment in the first leaning period is relatively shorter; moreover, it allows managers to get to know the personal and technical qualifications of the interns and it thus reduces the risk of hiring graduates. In this direction, perhaps a good idea has been integration in associations of agricultural education of HEIs and Secondary Professional Education Establishments (SPEE, i.e. agri colleges), see Figure 4 for schematic description of this construct. The idea is that each of the 4 agricultural HEIs in Belarus integrates under its umbrella: i) SPEEs that are of similar educational profile, and ii) agricultural enterprises where the student can gain practical training and experience. For example, more technically oriented Belarusian State Agricultural Technical University organized the Republican Association ‘Agroengineer’ that included colleges of predominantly technical specializations in agriculture. This construct should have increased practical orientation of agricultural education. These students at the SPEEs usually graduated the school after nine years of schooling and the SPEEs are supposed to be more practically oriented than the agricultural HEIs. The graduates of these SPEEs may continue at the HEIs at the third year (5th semester). This group of students makes up about 20% of all students at the HEIs. Usually this group of students is separated from the rest in terms of the specifically tailor-made curriculum.

21

This educational construct probably increases the practical component in the educational process; some concerns, however, stand out pretty clear in this regard. Usually those who completed 9 years of school and continued education at the SPEEs, have worse school results than those who continued with 11 years of schooling and enrolled the HEIs after graduating the school. This is especially the case with mathematics and foreign languages (necessary fields of knowledge in agricultural sciences). Reconsidering of the curriculum and focusing it more in this deficiency areas could probably help out to some extent. Another or additional option is to keep more focused selection of the SPEEs graduates to the agricultural HEIs with regard to the proficiency level in mathematics and foreign languages.

4.8.

Vicious cycle in producing faculty staff at the HEIs

Faculty staff at the HEIs and scientific staff at the Academy of Sciences retire at the same age as the employees in most of the other sectors in Belarus. Still they are allowed to continue teaching at the HEIs and getting paid on top of the pension allowance. This led to a dominance of old professors and docents in the age structure of the faculty staff at the HEIs in Belarus (see Figure 8). More than 65% of doctors of sciences, 32% of candidates of sciences and about 17% of other scientific personal are beyond the retirement age (60 in Belarus). This is in particular high for the doctors and candidates of sciences that are allowed to lecture in Belarus (PhD candidates are mainly involved in teaching the seminars). No question that the age is not a reliable indicator of a teaching and research capacity. Nonetheless, on average the individual performance capacity in teaching and research declines beyond the pension age. It is not a secret that many old professors do not use even computer in their regular research and teaching work. Moreover, in the transition from plan to the market the need for a change of generations in teaching and research is especially pressing. Today a doctor (candidate) of sciences at the age of 60 now was 40 at the beginning of transition. That means that his/her education and mindset formation took place entirely in Soviet times. This soviet educational footprint is difficult to break up, especially as the time passes by. This is especially important in the agricultural economics faculty. What is more depressing is that this old generation of faculty staff has been breeding the scientific staff within the same paradigm in which they were educated. So essentially they produce academics of their own kind, i.e. we come up with a sort of a vicious cycle in breeding scientific and teaching staff in the country. Moreover, the closeness of the system exacerbates this problem. So in this particular educational system setup the delayed actual retirement of the faculty staff significantly reduces the chances for the young generation and constrains the adjustment of the HEIs in Belarus to international standards.

5. Organization of Agricultural Research and Development in Belarus Education and research are to a large extent separated between agricultural HEIs and research institutes at the Academy of Sciences. Teaching is mainly provided by the agricultural HEIs, while research is mainly done under the National Academy of Science of Belarus, more specifically under its Department for Agricultural Sciences (DAgS). Contrary to Ukraine (see Koester at al, 2010), for example, agricultural science in Belarus has been functioning as a structural unit at the National Academy of Sciences. Teaching obligations of the DAgS are limited to PhD students.

22

Currently the DAgS includes 12 academicians and 19 corresponding members of the Academy of Sciences; also there are more than 100 doctors of sciences and about 400 candidates of sciences working for the DAgS . 20 research institutes, 8 regional experimental farms, 6 agricultural enterprises, 3 processing enterprises, and 1 agricultural machinery factory belong to the DAgS. These organizations manage about 40 000 ha of agricultural land. In 2005-2006 all scientific and production organization (SPO) of the DAgS were restructured according to their profile activities into 5 research and applied centers, i.e. into the centers for i) crop farming, ii) livestock farming, iii) agricultural machinery, iv) potato and fruits farming, and v) food (Gusakov, 2012b). Agricultural R&D agenda in Belarus is formulated by the National Academy of Sciences (in particular by its DAgS) in the 5-years plans and almost by 90% is publicly financed via the National Academy of Sciences and via the MinAgro&Food. Only about 10% of the R&D financing is contract-based. Fist block of the agricultural R&D agenda is determined by the 5 year State Program of Sustainable Agricultural Development for 2011-2015. This block is mainly applied oriented in specific fields, and its financing is distributed among the SPOs of the DAgS for establishing of the pilot and innovation objects (app. 60% of the total public funds for agricultural R&D in Belarus). For example, within the Research and Applied Centre in Livestock Farming under the DAgS is will have about 18 m EUR for i) developing the genetic potential of cows in selection herds to receive at least 15 t per lactation, of pigs to give an average daily weight increase of at least 900 grams, of poultry to produce 330-340 eggs pre year; ii) establishing biotechnology complex with experimental goat farm and establishing the experimental module with experimental processing of a goat milk with a human lactoferrin. Second block of the agricultural R&D agenda is determined by a 5 year State Scientific and Technical Programs11 (app. 30% of the total public funds for agricultural R&D in Belarus). Public funds for this block of agricultural R&D is supposed to be allocated on a competitive basis, i.e. with the announcements of topics, corresponding applications of the interested parties, selection process and final decisions. In the end, however, the range of the selected proposals is predominantly limited to the institutions under the DAgS12 without involvement of the interested parties from abroad.

6. How to improve the performance of the Agricultural Education and R&D in Belarus Belarus is the only European country being excluded from the club of 47 nations that pledged to align their higher-education systems through the Bologna process. Moreover, as we discussed it in the section 2 above, there are signs that agricultural education and R&D do not adequately contribute to the productivity growth in Belarusian agriculture. In this section we will consider the steps that can approximate Belarusian education to the European higheducation area as well as increase its contribution to agricultural growth in the republic.

11 12

23

http://asio.basnet.by/programs/details.php?ELEMENT_ID=127 See the list of programs and institutions at http://aw.belal.by/russian/science/projects.html#econ

Before coming up with some specific recommendations, we should admit that the Belarusian government has been trying hard to improve its higher education system, including in agriculture. For example, Belarus had the Program for the Development of the Agricultural Education for 2005-201013, the State Program for the Development of Higher Education for 2011-201514, and the Program for Staffing of the Agricultural Complex of the Republic of Belarus for 2011-201515. Interesting enough that these documents mention to a great extend some of the problems we have listed above, e.g. significant turnover of the personnel in agriculture, aging of the HEIs faculty, decreasing quality of agricultural HEIs graduates etc. These Programs, however, do not offer some fundamental changes of the system. Programs’ measures are suggested in line with existing structures and organizational order with a set of expected indicators to be achieved. The steps suggested below, however, do not foresee particular indicators, but rather propose a fundamental change of how higher (agricultural) education and R&D should be organized. i) A new market-demand oriented educational model and its downsizing is needed. The experience of Belarus with producing the staff for agriculture according to some labor demand expectations or plan did prove to be misleading. Essentially this approach to the organization of the educational process has oversized the system and led to the mismatch of the qualification of the graduates with actual market demand. ii) Decentralization or more autonomy is needed. As it has been mentioned many times above, the current education management system in Belarus is very centralized. The HEIs are completely dependant from their corresponding Ministries in financial and academic planning, enrollment and staff recruitment strategies etc. As the Figure 5 demonstrated, the MinAg&Food and its two units shape the landscape and financing of agricultural education in Belarus. Moreover, the Ministry of Education has been dominating in defining the curriculum and teaching content. In other words the government has been the only stakeholder in the management of the system. The system, however, should be open up to all stakeholders, including private/state sector and enterprises. Together with granting autonomy to the HEIs, they might introduce such governance tools as Boards of Directors or International Advisory Board to follow a multi-stakeholders approach. Among other things, granting more autonomy to the HEIs would reduce financial and administrative burden for the government. iii) Internal faculty integration and hierarchical structures break-up is needed. As the above brief analysis indicated, the internal faculty structure has been much diversified and perhaps mechanically inflated (e.g. two economic departments at the Belarusian State Agricultural Academy). Generally speaking this ignores inter-disciplinary cooperation and combination and narrows employment opportunities of the graduates. Also due to substantial overlapping of internal faculty and courses, this implies inefficient use of teaching personnel and education facilities. Internal faculty integration could make the internal structures more efficient and market-demand oriented, as well as it can lead to reduction of the administrative and corresponding costs.

13 14 15

24

http://kadry.iks.batu.edu.by/documents/2005-2010 http://edu.gov.by/sm.aspx?guid=49323 http://mshp.minsk.by/programms/b06ab85ba6d2e92c.html

iv) Reform the curriculum. Following the principles of decentralization and more autonomy, curriculums should be more flexible and developed by the HEIs themselves. A tradition of the centralized model curriculums should be given up. In addition to the block of mandatory courses, the students should have at least 30% of optional courses that they could choose according to their own interests and needs (see e.g. Table 6, and Yonggong and Jingzun, 2004). A flexible credit system should be introduced. Also, since practical training is extremely important for agricultural sciences, it should be strengthened in the curriculum. Currently, practical training makes up about 8-16% of the curriculum (see Table 4 and Table 5). China in the process of reforming its agricultural education system increased this component to 20% in the curriculum (Yonggong and Jingzun, 2004). In this regards the work of the republican associations for education, science and production seems worth further developing. v) Introduce teaching quality evaluation and monitoring system. The HEIs should introduce an anonymous evaluation system for each course each semester. The evaluation results should be made public and linked to both salary and promotion. Extending the teaching position beyond retirement age should become rather an exception than normal praxis. vi) Reform the students’ admission and employment procedures. Current praxis of admissions to the HEIs based on the results of the centralized tests should be continued as it counteracts corruption and creates a level-playing ground for all the potential students. Additionally incoming students in the field of agricultural sciences might be requested to have a practical training in agribusiness (including the farm sector) prior to the beginning of the university education. The universities should be in charge for the provision of companies or administrations that are willing to offer an internship. Universities should offer annual conferences for an audience of people working in agribusiness. The topic of the conferences should be based on the research findings which might be of interest for agribusiness. Nonprestigious flavor of agricultural education should decline as the sector of agricultural HEIs will be downsizing and undergoing substantial restructuring. As it has been above mentioned, currently the government mainly allocates employment positions among the agricultural HEIs graduates. Coming to the market-demand oriented model, this function of the government becomes redundant. The HEIs might think of the graduate employment center within the HEIs. In this framework the student have to find the job themselves, with the assistance of these employment centers 16 . These Centres are supposed to instruct, advice the graduates on how to find the job; to facilitate the contacts with potential employers via different carrier-events etc. vii) Combine research and teaching at the HEIs. Continue with the current trend of establishing own Research Institutes at the HEIs. Probably it makes sense to merge with already existing Research Institutes (according to the profile of the HEIs) that are under the umbrella of the Academy of Sciences. Faculty staff at the HIEs and Research Institutes should command a working level of English language and publish in English or present papers in

16

See for a successful example of such an employment center ‘Job Center’ at the Kyiv-Mohyla Academy in Ukraine http://www.jcc.ukma.kiev.ua/

25

English at the international conferences. This should be an additional excellence criterion of the scientific staff. ix) Salary reform. As the Chinese experience in reforming its agricultural education system shows, internal organizational reform allows reducing the number of administrative staff by 30-40%. This shifts the priority towards the faculty and provides an opportunity to raise their salaries (Yonggong and Jingzun, 2004). The salaries, however, should be linked to the overall performance and results of students’ evaluation. x) Eliminate the barriers for the system’s entrance. Generally, degrees earned at wellrespected foreign universities should be recognized without any formal procedures, i.e. automatically. Applicant for university positions from other universities, whether abroad or domestic, should receive a preference against applicants from the advertising university. Exceptions should only be allowed in case of significant superiority on the side of the internal applicant. xi) Decentralized and more competitive approach to agricultural R&D. It is probably the time to rethink the role of the National Academy of Sciences and in particular of its Department in Agricultural Sciences in agricultural R&D. At the moment this institution essentially creates the agenda for agricultural R&D and influences its financing. Box 1 demonstrates sine details on how it was done in Hungary, but the main idea is to decentralize the whole process of creating the knowledge, making it more market-demand oriented as well as more competitively financed. Additionally it should be more exposed to the world competition and involve recognized international scholars in judging upon research proposals. x) An alternative and competing research and education establishment might be considered. It will take time to institute a new viable research system in agricultural economics that will be internationally competitive. The new system has to be internationally opened and has to strongly welcome the inflow of new staff. As the flow of new promising staff might be small on an annual basis and, hence, the recovery of research universities could be slow, an alternative might be considered. The few excellent new researchers—most of them may have studied abroad or may be foreigners—could be concentrated in a new higher-education and research institute that could be partially financed by the government and by private sources. This institute could have an annual enrolment of 25 to 30 students of the highest potential. A highly demanding two-year course would train agribusiness managers as well as market and policy analysts able to assess enterprises, technologies, markets and policies according to internationally recognized standards. To minimize costs, the permanent staff could be quite small in the first years, supplementing the capacity by visiting professors and researchers from other universities. Some other countries, such as Ukraine and Georgia, have set up an international school of economics and are including a specialization in agricultural economics.

26

Annex Figure 3: Expenditures on education core services, R&D and ancillary services in HEIs, % of GDP (2009)

Source: OECD (2012); Notes: 1. Some levels of education are included with others; 2. Total expenditures at the higher education level incl. on R&D;

Figure 4: Public expenditures on higher education, % of total public expenditures (2009) % of Total Public Expenditures 6.0 5.0 4.0 3.0 2.0 1.0

Source: Own presentation using the data from OECD (2012);

27

Israel

France

Poland

Spain

Korea

Brazil

Belgium

Germany

USA

Slovenia

Estonia

Austria

OECD

Iceland

Australia

Ireland

Netherlands

Sweden

Mexico

Finland

Denmark

Switzerland

Chile

Canada

Norway

N. Zealand

0.0

Table 2: Statistics on population and higher education students in Belarus and Germany Belarus, '000 1st level higher education Total # of students full-time (ochnaya forma) Evening (vecherniaya forma) Correspondence (zaochnaya forma) Total # of graduates full-time (ochnaya forma) Evening (vecherniaya forma) Correspondence (zaochnaya forma) In agriculture and forestry: # of student In agriculture and forestry: # of graduates In agriculture and forestry: # of student, % of total students In agriculture and forestry: # of student, % of population Total population Agri GDP, bn EUR GDP, bn EUR Agri GDP per 1000 of agricultural students, bn EUR GDP per 1000 of all students, bn EUR

2007 413.7 205.3 1 207.4 66.9 33 0.4 33.5 23.8 2 5.75% 0.25% 9630

2008 420.7 209.9 0.7 210.1 68.8 33.4 0.3 35.1 25.5 2.1 6.06% 0.27% 9579

2009 430.4 216.4 0.7 213.3 74 35.4 0.2 38.4 27.4 2.2 6.37% 0.29% 9542 2.94 35.38 0.107 0.082

2010 442.9 221.7 0.7 220.5 73.3 37 0.1 36.2 27.8 2.4 6.28% 0.29% 9514 3.83 41.64 0.138 0.094

Germany, '000 Total # of students in all higher education institutions (all) 1941.76 2002.73 2121.19 2217.6 incl. in universities 1338.55 1365.92 1416.37 1470.91 In agriculture and forestry, # of students 39.59 40.489 42.294 42.777 In veterinary medicine, # of students 7.691 8.021 8.13 8.2 In agriculture and forestry, # of graduates n/a n/a n/a n/a In agriculture, forestry and vet, # of students, % of total students 0.40% 0.40% 0.38% 0.37% In agriculture, forestry and vet, # of students, % of population 0.06% 0.06% 0.06% 0.06% Total population 82217.8 82002.4 81802.3 81751.6 Agri GDP, bn EUR 15.92 17.83 GDP, bn euro 2117.35 2236.63 Agri GDP per 1000 of agricultural students, bn EUR 0.316 0.350 GDP per 1000 of all students, bn EUR 0.998 1.009 Source: Statistical Yearbook of Belarus 2011, Statistical book (2011) On Science and Innovation Activity in Statistisches Bundesamt. https://www.destatis.de.

28

2011 445.6 221.7 0.8 223.1 75.8 37.4 0.1 38.2 28 2.4 6.28% 0.29% 9500 3.67 42.64 0.131 0.096

2380.9 1571.83 45.554 8.236 13.368 0.91% 0.07% 81843.7 21.57 2317.43 0.401 0.973 Belarus;

Table 3: Share of agriculture in GDP, employment, and capital in Belarus, and corresponding measures of labor and capital productivity 2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

a

GDP (bn 2000 BYR)

Calculation

9134

9563

10041

10744

11969

13094

14404

15585

17174.67

17209.019

18516.905

b

Labour force (‘000 workers)

4441

4417

4381

4339

4316

4350

4402

4445

4610.9

4643.9

4665.9

c

Fixed capital (tril. 2000 BYR)

86.6

86.3

87.2

88.8

90.1

91.2

93.2

95.2

97.5

98.8

100.8

d

Share of agriculture in GDP (%) Share of agriculture in total employment (%) Share of agriculture in fixed capital (%)

11.6

9.7

9.5

8

8.3

7.9

7.9

7.5

7.9

7.7

7.5

14.1

13.3

12.1

11.3

10.7

10.5

10.2

10.1

9.8

9.8

9.7

16.6

15.9

15

15.3

14.9

14.8

14.8

14.7

14.1

14.7

14.8

1.69

1.58

1.80

1.75

2.15

2.26

2.53

2.60

3.00

2.91

3.07

2.12

2.25

2.36

2.57

2.85

3.10

3.36

3.61

3.80

3.79

4.07

79.9

70.0

76.3

68.3

75.5

73.1

75.5

72.2

78.9

76.8

75.5

0.0737

0.0676

0.0729

0.0633

0.0740

0.0767

0.0825

0.0835

0.0987

0.0912

0.0931

0.1118

0.1190

0.1226

0.1314

0.1431

0.1552

0.1671

0.1775

0.1888

0.1885

0.1995

65.9

56.8

59.5

48.1

51.7

49.4

49.4

47.0

52.3

48.4

46.7

22.96

23.36

24.67

27.71

29.07

29.55

30.72

31.18

30.43

31.91

32.95

18.93

18.95

19.25

19.54

19.89

19.95

20.08

20.33

20.14

20.12

20.38

e f g h i j k l m n

Labor productivity in agriculture (m 2000 BYR/worker)

(a*d)/(b*e)

Labor productivity in rest of the economy (m 2000 BYR/worker) Relative labor productivity in agriculture (%)

[a*(100-d)]/ [b*(100-e)]

Fixed capital productivity in agriculture (BYR/BYR)

(a*d)/(c*f)

Fixed capital productivity in rest of the economy (BYR/BYR)

[a*(100-d)]/ [c*(100-f)]

Relative fixed capital productivity in agriculture (%)

j/k*100

Capital/labor ratio in agriculture (m 2000 BYR/ag worker)

(c*f)/(b*e)

Capital/labor ratio in rest of the economy (m 2000 BYR/worker)

[c*(100-f)]/ [b*(100-e)]

g/h*100

Source: World Bank (2009); Statistical Yearbook of Belarus 2011, authors’ calculations

29

Table 4: Model Curriculum in Agricultural Economics in Belarus (offered by an agricultural university in Belarus) Specialization: 1-25 01 07 Enterprise Economics and Management

Qualification: Economist-manager 1

cycle of disciplines in human and social science

including # of

class

self-

record

shares,

houres

training

training

score

%

1394

712

682

42

102

72

30

4

36

24

12

1

1.1

History of Belarus

1.2

Principles of Ideology of Republic of Belarus

1.3

Philosophy

102

76

26

5

1.4

Economic theory

102

76

26

5

1.5

Sociology

54

36

18

2

1.6

Politology

102

68

34

4

1.7

Principles of psychology and pedagogics

102

72

30

4

1.8

Foreign language

272

150

122

9

1.9

Physical culture

420

70

350

4

102

68

34

4

1054

670

384

39

13.7%

Optional disciplines for HEI (culturology, ethics, esthetics, logics, religion, human rights, Belarusian 1.10 2

language, other disciplines and modules) cycle of disciplines in natural sciences

2.1

Higher mathematics

390

206

184

12

2.2

Computer and information technologies

268

188

80

11

12.7%

Protection of population from emergency situations. 2.3

Radiation safety.

90

68

22

4

2.4

Principles of ecology and economics of nature use

94

52

42

3

2.5

Principles of energy safings

34

18

16

1

2.6

HEI component

108

84

24

5

2.7

Optional disciplines for the student

70

54

16

3

3438

2170

1268

128

3

30

cycle of general professional and special disciplines

3.1

Microeconomics

122

68

54

4

3.2

Macroeconomics

136

86

50

5

3.3

International economics

84

52

32

3

3.4

National economy of Belarus

122

68

54

4

3.5

Production technologies

122

68

54

4

3.6

Protection of labor

64

34

30

2

3.7

Marketing and pricing

98

52

46

3

3.8

Principle of law

148

86

62

5

3.9

Principles of intellectual rights management

68

36

32

2

41.8%

3.10

Statistics

192

102

90

6

3.11

Money and banking

98

52

46

3

3.12

Finance and financial markets

136

86

50

5

3.13

Accounting

192

102

90

6

46

3

Econometrics, economic and mathematics methods 3.14

and models

98

52

3.15

Introduction into specialization

12

12

3.16

Organizational economics

360

274

86

16

3.17

Management

340

214

126

13

3.18

Organization of production

136

86

50

5

3.19

Economics and management of innovations

136

86

50

5

3.20

HEI component

526

374

152

22

3.21

Optional disciplines for the student

248

180

68

11

4

cycle of disciplines of specialization

740

390

350

23

7.5%

5

Elective courses

6

Exams

1296

1296

35

11.4%

Total

7938

3996

267

7 7.1

16

-

-

1

16

3942

-

Practical training, 14 weeks

756

-

756

21

Study practical training, 2 weeks

108

-

108

3

6.9%

Organizational and economic (production) practical 7.2

training, 4 weeks

216

-

216

6

7.3

Pre-diploma practical training, 8 weeks

432

-

432

12

8

Preparation of thesis/diploma, 8 weeks

432

-

432

12

3.9%

9

Concluding state attestation, 4 weeks

216

-

216

6

2.0%

5400

306

1

Grand total Source: Educational Standard of Republic of Belarus 1-250107-2008

31

9342

3942

Table 5: Model Curriculum in Agronomy in Belarus Specialization: 1-74 02 01 Enterprise Economics and Management Qualification: Agronomist 1

cycle of disciplines in human and social science

1.1

History of Belarus

1.2

Principles of Ideology of Republic of Belarus

1.3

1478

class training 670/436

selftraining

record score

shares, %

808

45

14.2%

5

102

68

34

36

24

12

2

Philosophy

102

68

34

5

1.4

Economic theory

102

68

34

5

1.5

Sociology

54

34

20

2

1.6

Politology

102

68

34

5

1.7

Principles of psychology and pedagogics

102

68

34

4

1.8

Foreign language

272

136

136

9

1.9

Physical culture

504

436

4

1.10 2

Optional disciplines for HEI (culturology, ethics, esthetics, logics, religion, human rights, Belarusian language, other disciplines and modules) cycle of disciplines in natural sciences

68/436

102

68

34

4

1064

562

502

35

2.1

Higher mathematics

96

52

44

3

2.2

Physics with principles of agrometereology

160

86

74

5

2.3

Chemistry

358

186

172

13

2.4

Botany

258

136

122

9

2.5

Information technologies

130

68

62

3

2.6

HEI component

62

34

28

2

5092

2342

2750

159

3

32

including # of houres

cycle of general disciplines

professional

and

special

3.1

Principles of intellectual rights management

52

34

18

2

3.2

Genetics

152

68

84

5

3.3

Agricultural microbiology

152

68

84

5

3.4

Physiology and biochemistry of plants

298

136

162

9

3.5

Agricultural ecology

120

50

70

4

3.6

Soil science

298

136

162

9

3.7

Economics production

298

146

152

11

3.8

Protection of population situations. Radiology safety

194

102

92

6

3.9

Biotechnology

and

organization

of from

agricultural emergency 64

34

30

2

3.10

Labor protection

136

50

86

4

3.11

Plant protection

212

86

126

6

3.12

Agriculture

342

152

190

10

3.13

Crop farming

390

190

200

13

3.14

Selection and seed farming

250

102

148

6

3.15

Agrichemistry

298

136

162

9

3.16

Feed production

290

134

156

9

3.17

Fruits and Vegetables farming

296

124

172

9

72

40

32

3

3.18

Principles of energy saving

3.19

Storage technologies, standardization of crops

3.20

Crop diseases

processing

11.1%

and 282

120

162

8

288

136

152

10

50.2%

3.21

Land management

3.22

Mechanization agriculture

3.23

Marketing

3.24 3.25 4

96

50

46

3

322

152

170

10

74

34

40

2

HEI component

64

34

30

2

Optional courses for students

52

28

44

2

862

404

458

28

8496

3978

4518

267

of

technological

processes

in

cycle of disciplines of specialization Total (1+2+3+4)

5

Introductory practictical training, 2 weeks

108

108

3

6

Study practical training, 10 weeks

540

540

15

54

54

6.1

On Botany

6.2

On Soil Sciences

36

36

6.3

On Physiology and biochemistry of plants

18

18

6.4

On Mechanization of technological processes in agriculture

162

162

6.5

On Biotechnology

9

9

6.6

On Agriculture

36

36

6.7

On Crop Production

45

45

6.8

On Agrichemistry

27

27

6.9

On Feed Production

27

27

6.10

On Plant Protection

18

18

On Plant Diseases

27

27

27

27

6.1 6.1

On Selection and seeds production

6.1

On Storage technologies, standardization of plants

36

36

6.1

On Fruits and Vegetables Production

18

18

7

Applied practical training, 10 weeks

1134

1134 162

processing,

and

7.1

General agronomy practical training, 3 weeks

162

7.2

Technological training, 11 weeks

594

594

7.3

Pre-diploma practical training, 7 weeks

378

378

Practical training, total 33 weeks; 5+6+7

1782

1782

8

Preparation of thesis/diploma, 8 weeks

486

486

0.0%

9

Concluding state attestation, 3 weeks

162

162

0.0%

10

Elective courses (facultative)

Grand total Source: Educational Standard of Republic of Belarus 1-74 02 01-2007

33

8.8%

189 11115

189

49.5

15.6%

189 7137

316.5

1

Table 6: Curriculum in Agricultural Sciences at a German University, specialization in Agribusiness (Bachelors)

# credits

Specialization: Agribusiness 1

2

Mandatory General Modules/ Basic studies

90 6

WS

B.Agr.0003 Biologie der Tiere (Orientierungsmodul)

6

WS

B.Agr.0012 Einführung in die land-und forstwirtschaftliche Betriebslehre (Orientierungsmodul)

6

WS

B.Agr.0013 Mathematik und Statistik B.Agr.0015 Physik/ Chemie

6

WS

B.Agr.0004 Bodenkunde und Geoökologie

6

SS

B.Agr.0005 Grundlagen der Agrarökonomie

6

SS

B.Agr.0008 Grundlagen der Nutztierwissenschaften I

6

SS

B.Agr.0007 Grundlagen der Agrartechnik

6

SS

B.Agr.0010 Grundlagen der Phytomedizin und Pflanzenernährung

6

SS

B.Agr.0001 Agrarökologie und Umweltgüter im ländlichen Raum

6

WS

B.Agr.0006 Grundlagen der Agrarpolitik und Landwirtschaftlichen Marktlehre

6

WS

B.Agr.0009 Grundlagen der Nutztierwissenschaften II

6

WS

B.Agr.0014 Pflanzenbau

6

WS

SK.FS.E-FA-B2-2 Englisch Mittelstufe II für Agrarwissenschaftler

6

WS/SS

Elective Modules/ Main studies

6 30

16.7%

B.Agr.0321 Marketing und Marktforschung für Agrarprodukte und Lebensmittel

6

WS

B.Agr.0334 Qualität und Nacherntetechnologie pflanzlicher Produkte

6

WS

B.Agr.0333 Qualität tierischer Erzeugnisse

6

WS

6

WS

6

SS

B.Agr.0348 Strategisches Ernährungswirtschaft

Management

in

der

Agrar-

und

B.Agr.0336 Rechnungswesen und Controlling Block B: courses offered to collect the necessary # of credits

24

13.3%

B.Agr.0305 Agrarpreisbildung und Marktrisiko

6

SS

B.Agr.0344 Seminar Agrar- und Marktpolitik

6

SS

B.Agr.0335 Qualitätsmanagement Ernährungswirtschaft

in

der

Agrar-

und 6

SS

6

SS

B.Agr.0340 Ringvorlesung Agribusiness und WiSoLa

6

WS/SS

B.Agr.0307 Betriebswirtschaftslehre des Agrar- und Ernährungssektors

6

SS

B.Agr.0356 Verfahrenstechnik in der Nutztierhaltung

6

SS

6

SS

B.Agr.0353 Unternehmens- und Wirtschaftsrecht in der Agrarwirtschaft

B.Agr.0354 Unternehmensplanung B.Agr.0338 Regionale vermarktung

ökologische

shares, % 50.0%

B.Agr.0002 Biologie der Pflanze (Orientierungsmodul)

Block A: courses offered to collect the necessary # of credits

34

semester

Lebensmittelerzeugung

und

– 6

SS

B.Agr.0320 Introduction to tropical and international agriculture

6

SS

B.Agr.0322 Methodische Grundlagen für Agrarökonomen

6

SS

Block C (Schlüsselkompetenzen): courses offered to collect the necessary # of credits

12

6.7%

B.Agr.0332 Praxismodul (mandatory)

6

B.Agr.0304 Agrarrecht

6

WS

B.Agr.0305 Agrarpreisbildung und Marktrisiko

6

WS

B.Agr.0311 Emissionen und Immissionsschutz B.Agr.0319 Wissenschaftliches Pflanzenproduktion

Arbeiten

WS und

prof.

Präsentieren

in

der WS

B.Agr.0321 Marketing und Marktforschung für Agrarprodukte und Lebensmittel

WS

B.Agr.0343 Ringvorlesung: Method. Arbeiten: wissenschaftliches Schreiben und Präsentieren

WS

B.Agr.0344 Seminar Agrar- und Marktpolitik

6

WS

B.Agr.0353 Unternehmens- und Wirtschaftsrecht in der Agrarwirtschaft

6

WS

B.Agr.0335 Qualitätsmanagement Ernährungswirtschaft

6

WS

6

WS/SS

in

der

Agrar-

und

B.Agr.0340 Ringvorlesung Agribusiness und WiSoLa B.Agr.0341 Ringvorlesung Ressourcenmanagement

6

SS

B.Agr.0301 Agrar- und Umweltrecht

6

SS

B.Agr.0322 Methodische Grundlagen für Agrarökonomen

6

SS

B.Agr.0327 Ökologischer Landbau II:

6

SS

6

SS

6

SS

6

SS

B.Agr.0336 Rechnungswesen und Controlling B.Agr.0338 Regionale vermarktung

ökologische

Lebensmittelerzeugung

und

–

B.Agr.0354 Unternehmensplanung Block D: courses offered to collect the necessary # of credits

12

Other courses not offered within Blocks A-C in other agrispecializations, i.e.:

6

B.Agr.0348 Strategisches Ernährungswirtschaft

6

Management

in

der

Agrar-

und

B.Agr.0311 Emissionen und Immissionsschutz

6

B.Agr.0354 Unternehmensplanung

6

etc

6

Preparation of Bachelor thesis

12

Grand Total 180 Source: http://www.uni-goettingen.de/en/22446.html; WS/SS – winter and summer semesters, accordingly

35

6.7%

6.7 100

Figure 5: Structure of the Agricultural Education System in Belarus

Source: http://www.mshp.minsk.by/education/education/system.htm; ATC – agri-technical college; AEC – agri-economical college; AC – agricultural college; ATgC – agri-technological college

36

Figure 6: Professional Development in the Agricultural Education System in Belarus

Source: The Program of Agricultural Education Development for 2005-10; http://kadry.iks.batu.edu.by/sites/kadry.iks.batu.edu.by/files/prao_0.pdf; ATC – agri-technical college; AEC – agri-economical college; AC – agricultural college; ATgC – agri-technological college

37

Figure 7: Tempus Partner Countries and the Bologna Process, 2011

Source: EACEA (2012b)

Figure 8: Age Structure of the faculty staff at the HEIs in Belarus in 2011 a)

In %

b)

In absolute terms

Source: Statistical book (2012) On Labor and Employment in the Republic of Belarus

38

Box 1: Reform of the Academy of Sciences in Hungary Since the beginning of the 1990s, the Academy of Sciences was meant to be changed. The discussion resulted 1994 in a new law on the Academy of Sciences, in which it was reestablished as a self-organized independent public-law association that should support the government or parliament in preparing its legislation. As before, it establishes and maintains own research institutes, organizes their scientific work in cooperation with other higher education institutions and watches over scientific standards in the academic sphere. In the following years, the Hungarian Academy of Sciences contributed to modernizing the science. The legal framework has been changed in 2007 in order to sharpen the international profile of the Academy and its institutes. Central points of the reform of 2007 are: • •

• •

The institutions can rely on a basic support that is granted for 5-8 years on the base of a contract. In the contract, aims are formulated that must be fulfilled. Additionally to the basic support, financial support is only granted on the base of successful research activities (measured against international echo of publications and relevance in practice of Hungarian firms). Transparent criteria are fixed for the judgement upon research project applications within the Academy. International experts are invited into the juries. The research institutions form a network which is coordinate by an own general secretary.

Vacancies of directors in the research institutions of the Academy must be advertised internationally. All jobs are limited in duration. All institutions are systematically evaluated from a committee that includes foreign experts Training programs for scientific communication and project management have been introduced. The salary of the professors and directors was considerably raised with the obligation to work only for one research institution and not to collect positions in several institutions of the country. Source: Koester at al, 2010

39

References Alston, J. (2010). The Benefits from Agricultural Research and Development, Innovation, and Productivity Growth. OECD Food, Agriculture and Fisheries Working Papers, No. 31, OECD Publishing. http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/5km91nfsnkwg-en EACEA (2012a). Higher Education in Belarus (http://eacea.ec.europa.eu/tempus/participating_countries/overview/belarus_tempus_cou ntry_fiche_final.pdf) EACEA (2012b). State of Play of the Bologna Process in the Tempus Partner Countries (http://eacea.ec.europa.eu/tempus/tools/documents/study09_SoP_Bologna_0412_en_web. pdf) Gusakov V.G. (2011a). Personnel hunger despite the abundance of diplomas (in Russian). Belorusskaya Niva #95/2011 (http://www.belniva.by/news_full.php?id_news=20288) Gusakov V. (2011b). Improving the system of staffing policy and management. In Gusakov (2011): Mechanism of Market Organization of Agricultural Complex: Assessment and Perspectives. Minsk. – Belarusskaya Nauka, 2011. p. 296-336 (in Russian) Meleschenia A.V. (2011). Development trends and problems of the dairy industry (in Russian). In Meleschenia A.V. Actual issues of meat and dairy processing, Institute of meat and milk industry, Minsk, 2011 Parteka, A. and J. Wolszczak-Derlacz (2012). Dynamics of Productivity in Higher Education: Cross-European Evidence Based on Bootstrapped Malmquist Indices. Journal of Productivity Analysis, doi: 10.1007/s11123-012-0320-0 State Classifier of the Republic of Belarus (2009) “Specialties and Qualifications” OKRB 0112009. - Put into operation 02.06.09. – Minsk, NIHE, 2009. – 418p, (http://edubelarus.info/index.php?do=base&id=202&push=ok ) The Code of the Republic of Belarus On education as of 13 January 2011 (http://edubelarus.info/index.php?newsid=1178) The World Bank (2009). Belarus: Boosting agricultural productivity and competitiveness. Options and Impact of State Support. The World Bank Policy Note. Report No 48335-BY, 2009. Umland, A. (2012). Teaching social sciences at a post-Soviet university: challenges for visiting lectures in the former USSR. http://educationconferenceua2012.org.ua/doc/papers/Umland_EN_Paper.pdf Von Cramon – Taubadel S. and O. Nivievskyi (2011). Twenty Years of Transition in Agricultural Economic Journals’. European Review of Agricultural Economics 2011; doi: 10.1093/erae/jbr008. Yonggong, L. and Z. Jingzun (2004). The reform of higher agricultural education institutions in China: a case study. UNESCO. IIEP UNESCO. http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0013/001362/136270e.pdf

40