Can Europe bridge gaps in higher education? As countries move toward deeper cooperation, challenges in harmonising quality, mobility, and recognition remain.
The European Higher Education Area (EHEA) enables deeper transnational cooperation in higher education, as countries have recognised the benefits of a more interconnected academic landscape. Since 2022, the Council Recommendation on building bridges for effective European cooperation in higher education set forth more ambitious goals for the EHEA, by proposing the harmonisation of national frameworks through several key initiatives. The recently published results of a 2023 survey evaluating the implementation of these recommendations across Member States (MS) and Norway highlight both progress and ongoing challenges.
The Council Recommendation is one of the key pieces of legislation proposed in the European Commission’s (EC) 2022 European strategy for universities, which foresees, among other initiatives, the launch of the European Degree (ED) (label). The idea of an ED has since gained traction as a symbolic and functional step toward broader recognition of joint degrees (see SwissCore article). In the EU, joint degrees should entail the award of a single degree on behalf of several participating higher education (HE) institutions. Importantly, an earlier survey showed that less than 5% of HE institutions in the EHEA already award such joint degrees, pointing to the fact that substantial hurdles persist for HE systems to collaborate in such a close manner. Much of the present survey is therefore concerned with assessing the implementation of joint degrees in the EU, as well as understanding the ecosystem for a potential ED.
In line with the recommendation, several MS, including Austria, Croatia, and Romania, have already amended national legislation to facilitate the creation of joint degrees. Nevertheless, the survey results show that national differences in external quality assurance, degree structures, and applications of the European Credit Transfer and Accumulation System (ECTS), together with limited automatic mutual recognition, hinder the creation of more joint degrees at a larger scale. Importantly, these tools already exist as part of the Bologna process, but their adoption and application seem to be fragmented across Europe. For instance, two out of three countries are not applying the European Approach for Quality Assurance of Joint Programmes in its current form. This is despite quality assurance being an important tool to build mutual trust, and, by extension, foster collaboration across borders.
As testbeds for closer transnational cooperation in higher education, the European Universities alliances are also identified by some MS as a vehicle for joint degrees and potentially the ED. A significant milestone in this regard is the establishment of a legal status for the alliances. The survey reveals that more than half of the responding systems allow some form of legal status testing, either through existing frameworks or recent legislative amendments. This legal recognition is expected to facilitate resource-sharing, strategic decision-making, and easier credit recognition and transfer. Beyond a legal framework, the smooth functioning of the alliances as enablers for the ED is further dependent on financial support mechanisms. Around two-thirds of HE systems provide some form of state funding targeted at alliance members, but a significant number still lack dedicated support. This patchy financial landscape underscores the need for sustained investment to ensure long-term viability.
For student mobility – an essential criterion of the European Degree – approximately two-thirds of MS report no existing barriers. This number stands in stark contrast to a recent survey by the Erasmus Student Network (see SwissCore article). In particular, different perceptions concerning the ease of credit transfer and recognition after a mobility stay are striking: Whereas 23 out of 28 surveyed countries report no problems in this regard, this concern was frequently mentioned by surveyed students. Some of the challenges, which are however acknowledged by countries in the survey, include remaining barriers regarding teaching language, and different national regulations for online learning. Particularly with the increasing interest in so-called blended intensive programmes (BIPs), the latter limits opportunities for joint teaching between HE institutions.
The recognition of prior learning, a crucial factor in flexible learning pathways, is another area where progress is noted. Many countries indicate to have embraced micro-credentials and modular learning approaches. However, implementation remains fragmented, with some systems still analysing how to integrate micro-credentials into national qualification frameworks. An important reflection, which is absent from the survey, consists in how far the implementation of micro-credentials should be coordinated at the international level, to ensure that skills are portable, recognised, and stackable across country borders. As part of the Union of Skills, the EC has announced to put forth a Skills Portability Initiative, which may reflect some of these considerations.
Overall, the survey results affirm that while European HE institutions are committed to transnational cooperation, implementation is uneven across MS. The European Universities Initiative has been a driving force behind many reforms, but additional efforts are needed to harmonise quality assurance, accreditation processes, and degree recognition. As the discussion around a European Degree progresses, it will be essential to balance national autonomy with the broader goal of creating a unified, high-quality EHEA. Continued engagement among stakeholders, along with close attention to the experiences of HE institutions – and their students – , will be crucial in shaping policies that support flexible, innovative, and inclusive education across borders.