Structural conditions in the Berlin research area
In the Berlin research area, the framework conditions are designed on two levels – on the one hand by the respective institution and on the other by the Berlin University Alliance as a kind of umbrella organisation. The aim of the BUA is to create an integrated research area in Berlin and to develop it “to turn Berlin into an integrated research environment and one of Europe’s leading science hubs” (Berlin University Alliance 2024).
In the following, the assessments of the Berlin research area as a whole are presented first, and then specific framework conditions at the institutional level are evaluated. Respondents from the Berlin Science Survey 2024 have been working in the Berlin research area for an average of 9.8 years and thus have very good insights into this research area. The assessments of the scientists at the BUA institutions are also compared with those of scientists at the 50 non-university research institutions and at the universities of excellence outside Berlin.
First, the scientists working in Berlin were asked whether they perceive Berlin as a cohesive research area (see Figure 6). Almost one-third answered affirmatively (answers = “fairly” or “very”). And another third at least see the beginnings of a cohesive research area (answer = somewhat).
Another question relates to how the development of the Berlin research area is assessed. The assessments could be given on a scale from “very negative” (-5) to “very positive” (+5). The mean value was 0.54 (Figure 7). The development of the Berlin research area is thus assessed as slightly positive.
In addition, detailed assessments of the Berlin research area were collected with regard to various aspects, including important target dimensions of the BUA. This differentiated assessment of the Berlin research area yielded the following picture (see Figure 8): internationality and research quality, two important goals of the BUA, received the best ratings. Almost 85% gave “somewhat good” or “very good” ratings here. The Berlin location as such is also convincing: over 80% of respondents rate the attractiveness of Berlin positively. The innovation potential and the associated ability to cooperate are also rated as predominantly good, as is research autonomy. There is more potential for improvement in other areas of the BUA's work, such as knowledge exchange. However, the implementation of open science is also rated (somewhat/very) bad by 22% of respondents. However, it is striking that a particularly large number of respondents (almost 30%) do not dare to give an opinion on this topic. According to the scientists, the situation is worst in the promotion of young talent and the material and institutional framework conditions. The latter are rated as (somewhat/very) good by only just under 40% of respondents, while 53% rate them as (somewhat/very) bad.
With the exception of assessments for material and institutional framework conditions and for knowledge transfer, the assessments of the Berlin research area in 2024 are more positive than they were two years ago (see Figure 9). This is surprising, because two years is not a long period for changes in trend studies. While it is not possible to make a blanket assumption that these changes are (exclusively) due to the positive effects of the BUA, there is nevertheless an overall more positive mood in the Berlin research area. The role of the Berlin University Alliance in the Berlin research area is examined in more detail in Chapter 2.3.
The 2,471 scientists from the comparison sample of the universities of excellence outside Berlin were also asked to evaluate their respective research environments. The comparison reveals that, in almost all target dimensions, the assessments from both the scientists at the non-university research institutions in Berlin and those at the external universities of excellence are more positive than those from the scientists at the Berlin universities (see Figure 10). In particular, the assessment of the material and institutional conditions is significantly worse within the BUA than at the other institutions. Here, only 36% give good ratings compared to 62% (NRI) and 64% (external universities of excellence). When it comes to the topic of promoting young talent, the BUA institutions with 51.3% positive ratings fall significantly behind the external universities of excellence in particular, where an average of 66.5% positive ratings were given. On the other hand, researchers at non-university research institutions rate the innovation potential somewhat less favorably and researchers from universities of excellence rate the internationality somewhat less favorably compared to the BUA institutions.
The item “attractiveness of the city” was intended to show the extent to which a “non-scientific” aspect could influence the competition for locations, e.g. in recruitment processes. It turns out that Berlin has no advantage here over the locations of other universities of excellence (see Figure 10).
The general satisfaction with the structural conditions under which the respondents conduct research is slightly positive, with a mean value of 0.3 (see Figure 11), although this has decreased slightly since the last survey; in 2022, the mean value was still 0.5 (not shown).
When looking at the data differentiated by subject groups, there are almost no differences (see Figure 11). Social and natural scientists are slightly more satisfied than scientists from humanities and life sciences.
In comparison with institutions within the BUA, scientists at non-university research institutions are significantly more satisfied with their research conditions (see Figure 12). Scientists at the universities of excellence in the comparison sample are also slightly more satisfied with their research conditions than their colleagues at Berlin universities (see Figure 12).
In addition to the German framework conditions in the science system, the respondents were also asked about the specific framework conditions at their own institution. Figure 13 provides insights into exactly where the problems lie: it is primarily the administrative processes that are rated extremely poorly. Of the respondents from the institutions of the Berlin University Alliance, 45% rate the administrative processes as very bad, and a further 38% as somewhat bad, so taken together, 83% see a clear need for improvement here. By comparison, only 44.8% of the respondents from non-university research institutions rate the administrative processes at their institution as “somewhat bad” or “very bad” (see Figure 14), which nevertheless also indicates difficulties here.
The situation appears to be somewhat better for the research-supporting infrastructure, but here too, the BUA has some catching up to do: almost 60% rate the research-supporting infrastructure as (somewhat or very) bad (see Figure 13). By contrast, only 26.3% of respondents from the non-university research institutions rate it as bad (see Figure 14). Regarding teaching capacities, the picture is more mixed. 50.8% also see a (rather) poor situation, while the rest of 49.2% rate the teaching capacities as (somewhat or very) good. There seem to be different contexts in which teaching capacities have different effects.
Especially in comparison to the non-university research institutions, it is clear that there are structural problems at the universities. These problems cannot be avoided if the state governments are not brought on board when it becomes clear that the problems are due to a lack of basic funding.
In view of the results, it is not surprising that 71.8% of respondents from Berlin universities would like more support from their institution in administrative processes (see Figure 15). However, more support is also desired in other areas. For all activities surveyed, at least a quarter of respondents would like more support. For the acquisition of funds and third-party funding, the proportion is almost 50% (see Figure 15).
The results are comparable in many respects with those from the non-university research institutions. There are differences in the need for support in third-party funding and especially in administrative processes. Although 46.8% of respondents from the non-university research institutions also indicate a need for support here, this is far less than the 71% at the BUA institutions.
The proportion of scientists who do not feel they need any support is slightly higher at 12% at the non-university research institutions than at the BUA, at 4% (see Figure 15). This is consistent with the generally different assessments of the material and institutional conditions (see Fig. 10 above). Overall, these results clearly show the need for action in the BUA. The urgency with which the problems in the area of research-supporting structures should be addressed was also emphasised in many of the open comments that we received from the respondents at the end of the survey.
Figure 16 shows that the need for support for many of the activities surveyed has decreased over the last two years in the BUA. In particular, a decline in the need for support can be seen in knowledge transfer activities: from 42% in 2022, to only 29.5% in 2024. However, slightly fewer dimensions were surveyed in 2022 than in 2024. Therefore, the differences within the two years should not be over-interpreted, as these could also be explained by the survey method differences (extended battery of items in 2024).
