University budget: Reform proposals from the Austrian Universities’ Conference

Austria has 77 higher education institutions across four different sectors. This is the result of deliberate (or a lack of) political steering. The fact that this differentiation – recently often referred to in discussions as ‘fragmentation’ or ‘uncontrolled growth’ – has come about has repeatedly been criticised by uniko, but has never been within the universities’ own sphere of influence. The fact that this fragmentation does not stem from the public university sector is demonstrated by the fact that the 22 universities account for 80 per cent of students, whilst the remaining 55 institutions account for only 20 per cent.

Looking back over the last 30 years, the massive growth did not occur within the university system either, but rather through the establishment of universities of applied sciences, the conversion of teacher training colleges into higher education institutions, and the authorisation to establish private universities – of which at least six are not privately funded but are instead funded by the federal states.

University graduates – particularly, though not exclusively, early-career researchers – form the backbone and the ‘supply system’ for the research output of non-university research institutions, as well as for key societal institutions such as schools, the healthcare system and the judiciary. Knowledge transfer and science communication are increasingly important tasks, as it is through these means that universities contribute insights to key societal discourses. Universities shape Austria as a country of art and culture; they have a major influence on the image of our country and, in particular, on that of their respective locations. Factors such as innovative strength and cultural standards are significantly shaped by universities.

University achievements in research and teaching form the basis for innovation. This capacity is one of the most important factors influencing the choice of location for international corporations. University (basic) research lays the groundwork for innovation. Inventions and other research findings often serve as the seeds for new businesses. Collaboration between businesses and universities leads to genuine innovations that are relevant not only to the business itself, but to the entire sector and thus to society as a whole. The number of patents is evidence of the universities’ innovative strength: Almost three-quarters (74 per cent) of academic patent applications between 2000 and 2025 were filed by universities (non-university institutions account for 23.4 per cent, and universities of applied sciences for 2.5 per cent of patent applications). Similarly, around three-quarters of scientific publications come from universities (three per cent are attributable to universities of applied sciences).

Austria’s research output is based on cooperation: 67 per cent of all publications result from international collaboration – significantly above the EU-27 average of 43 per cent. This openness enhances visibility, accelerates the exchange of knowledge and boosts competitiveness in European funding programmes. Patent-related indicators and strong co-authorship between academia and industry show that technical research is deeply embedded in industry and feeds into inventions and technological development, which is particularly relevant for engineering sciences. This close link between industrial companies and domestic research institutions is also evident in the fact that 8.8 per cent of Austrian publications are produced in collaboration with corporate partners (EU: 3.9 per cent, global: 2.6 per cent).

However, according to WIFO¹, universities’ funding – with average annual expenditure per student of EUR 14,358 – places them in the lower to middle range among the countries compared: Switzerland spends EUR 31,074 per student annually, the UK EUR 25,144, and Denmark and the Netherlands EUR 19,000. However, when looking at individual universities, the differences are even greater: Expenditure at the University of Vienna (comprehensive university) is around 22 per cent lower than at Ludwig Maximilian University of Munich, 31 per cent lower than at the University of Helsinki, 57 per cent lower than at the University of Copenhagen and as much as 122 per cent lower than at the University of Zurich. The differences are even greater for technical universities than for comprehensive universities: ETH Zurich and Imperial College London spend three times as much per student as the Vienna University of Technology, whilst the Technical University of Munich has 28% more funding.

In order to catch up with these innovation leaders, it has been the declared aim of successive federal governments since 2007 to allocate 2% of GDP to investment in tertiary education and research (EEK). According to the current strategy reports for 2027–2030 and 2028–2031, as well as the budget reports for 2027 and 2028, expenditure on science and research is now set to be reduced for the first time from 1.41% in 2025 to 1.19% by 2031. This runs counter to previous objectives, undermines long-term successful developments and also contradicts the latest recommendation from the National Audit Office: The Court recommended that the Federal Ministry for Women, Science and Research continue to implement measures to bring student-staff ratios in higher education into line with those of the leading OECD countries, in order to further improve the quality of higher education and contribute to the achievement of Sustainable Development Goal 4 of the 2030 Agenda.

In any case, uniko considers several structural reforms to be essential in order to strengthen the research system and make it fit for the future; the same applies to corresponding reforms at the universities themselves – and is always happy to engage in an open-ended yet goal-oriented dialogue with policymakers and all stakeholders.

Structural reforms at the level of the research system

uniko is committed to shaping a differentiated research system in which different sectors and stakeholders assume clearly distinct roles, and a blurring of roles is avoided. Meaningful forms of cooperation must be developed between the individual components and, where appropriate, requirements for cooperation must also be established. To date, higher education and research policy has relied on competition and rivalry in its governance and performance indicators. If greater cooperation is now to be achieved, this must be supported by appropriate framework conditions. Establishing a framework for cooperation and setting up appropriate forums for dialogue is a task for science policy that we are very keen to support, but which we cannot shape on our own. Even with suitable framework conditions, efficiency gains through cooperation do not materialise in the short term. International comparisons show that initial investment is required for effective models to emerge. The budgetary cut now planned strikes at the very heart of the university system and undermines its role within the innovation system.

The proposals put forward by uniko – which are by no means new – are:

• Integration of the entire teacher training programme into the universities.
• Integration of IT:U into JKU.
• Integration of the privately funded universities, financed by the federal states, into higher education planning.
• Closer integration of research-intensive non-university institutions with universities (keyword: ‘cooperation requirement’, as in Germany)

Structural reforms at the university system level

Framework conditions for successful study:

• Improving the ‘school–university’ transition and reducing ‘early dropouts’ (see also Targeted choice of degree programme: cross-institutional induction phase, joint bridging courses, compulsory online assessment)
• Introduction of a partially repayable, performance-based scholarship enabling students to complete their studies within the standard duration of study. This requirement, combined with reliable predictability of the course of study and improved study conditions, goes hand in hand with a higher level of commitment (raising the minimum academic performance requirement).
• No change to tuition fees for Austrian nationals and EU citizens.
• Coordinated admission arrangements and joint admission procedures.
• Right to study: Enabling part-time study 1.1. Management tools for third-country nationals Universities require a functional set of management tools for third-country nationals in order to enhance the attractiveness of the country as a study destination for the best talent in the face of international competition. At the same time, there must be scope for targeted management in order to make the best possible use of available resources (including in the national interest) (see the various options in the FORWIT recommendations ‘Successful Study in Austria’, p. 24 ff). This also includes an open-ended discussion on tuition fees for third-country nationals, taking into account both the social aspect (e.g. through appropriate scholarship schemes) and the sector-specific differences and particularities of the universities of the arts.

Student intake management

Capacity management is required to ensure good utilisation of all degree programmes. This should not restrict students’ freedom of choice, but rather direct student flows towards available capacity. This could be achieved through coordinated admission procedures, i.e. standardised entry requirements and joint subject-specific admission processes.

Focused choice of study: cross-institutional induction phase

Introductory phases spanning universities and degree programmes, organised by subject area – for example, STEM, humanities and social sciences – should support a focused choice of study, prevent early drop-outs and contribute to a better distribution of students according to their individual strengths. Should students not continue their studies after this introductory phase, they may receive a certificate as a micro-credential (provided they achieve a minimum number of ECTS credits, to be defined). In addition, a cross-sector orientation phase featuring a joint course portfolio from universities and universities of applied sciences, to be undertaken before the start of studies, is intended to support undecided students in their final choice of programme and sector. This opens up opportunities for mobility between the sectors whilst at the same time highlighting the different profiles of universities and universities of applied sciences, thereby strengthening the differentiation between the sectors.

Alliances

Establishment of thematic or regional cooperation networks modelled on TU Austria, which present a unified front to the outside world and may potentially appear as a single institution in rankings. The identity of the individual institutions is preserved, whilst visibility and international positioning are strengthened. Research-intensive non-university institutions must also be included here. A coordinated approach to appointments, infrastructure and degree programmes (see also NAWI Graz) to make the best possible use of the funds allocated.

Institutionalised collaborations

Areas will be identified in which highly specialised expertise is shared. Following the example of ACOmarket GmbH, a UNIservices GmbH could also be established to provide shared services.

To this end, policymakers must also create a framework that enables universities to cooperate more easily and share resources (e.g. VAT billing, state aid legislation, etc.).

Examples of in-depth collaboration: 

• Digitalisation (further integration: already underway with ACOmarket; e.g. CampusOnline: already used by 44 domestic and international universities)
• Research services
• Knowledge transfer departments, Third Mission and science communication
• Joint admissions offices (a concept for third-country nationals already exists and is at an advanced stage)
• Joint subject-specific admission procedures (see student place allocation)
• Joint centre for start-ups/entrepreneurship (organised decentrally across the various campuses)
• Joint IPR strategy combined with improved legal provisions for the exploitation of intellectual property rights Core areas of research and teaching
• Establishment of inter-university doctoral schools (see examples from TU Austria)
• Establishment and use of joint core facilities
• Establishment of further study partnerships, including cross-sectoral ones (see examples such as NAWI Graz, Human Medicine Linz-Graz, the Master’s in Personalised Technical Medicine at the University of Linz, University of Applied Sciences Upper Austria, University of Applied Sciences for Health Professions Upper Austria, etc.)
• Expansion of existing partnerships with universities of applied sciences regarding doctoral programmes (see also DocFund Connect)

Further development of career models

• Increasing mobility between the research sector (including non-university research institutions), industry, professional practice and public administration
• Diversification of performance profiles up to the level of professorship (taking into account not only research but also teaching, innovation partnerships and third-mission activities)
• Competitive tracks with evaluation and termination options
• Competence-based definition of hybrid posts at the interface between academic and administrative activities, with independent career paths → Abolition of the distinction between the categories ‘academic/artistic staff’ and ‘general staff’
• Creating flexibility and autonomy through Principal Investigator models rather than chair structures → Greater flexibility and less rigid hierarchies

System-level innovation and reduction of bureaucracy

Universities as innovation laboratories

Harnessing the potential of universities as technological pioneers and early adopters. Enabling innovative solutions to boost efficiency:

• AI sandbox in administration: enabling the use of AI in the universities’ public administration through appropriate legal sandbox definitions.
• Strengthening digital sovereignty: Establishing universities as pioneers in the field of digital sovereignty. Harnessing existing expertise and potential in future technologies.
• Sustainable universities: Profits and reserves generated by BIG from the universities’ accounting system should be reinvested directly into sustainable building refurbishments and construction projects. 

Reducing bureaucracy and creating the right conditions for synergies 

uniko has long been calling for the creation of appropriate framework conditions to harness synergies and improve efficiency in the university sector. The political authorities must create the necessary conditions for this. This will unlock considerable potential for savings. These areas include, amongst others:

• Streamlining performance agreements
• Streamlining reporting and harmonising the portfolio of key performance indicators
• Standardised and simplified accounting for research projects
• Abolishing the Planning Overview Regulation
• Reasonable exemptions and adjustments to various pieces of legislation (IFG, Media Transparency Act, Transparency Database, etc.)
• Create framework conditions that enable universities to cooperate more easily and share resources (e.g. VAT offsetting, state aid law, etc.).

Source: Austrian Universities Conference, 22 June 2026