As part of the Open Call for Applications for participation at the 1st ASEF Higher Education Innovation Laboratory, ASEFEdu conducted the Perception Survey on ASEM Universities’ Role in AI Innovation Ecosystems. The survey had 295 respondents from 33 ASEM Countries.
To view the results and analysis of the Perception Survey on ASEM Universities’ Role in AI Innovation Ecosystem, click here.
Key findings
1. There is a lack of standalone AI strategies at universities.
Key findings reveal that there is a lack of AI Strategies in universities. Despite there being a consensus that AI innovation ecosystems are beneficial to students, teachers, universities, education, and society; there is a lack of comprehensive AI innovation strategies present in universities. A considerable majority of universities do not have any strategy related to AI innovation, or respondents were unaware that such a policy exists (41%). Amongst the existing strategies related to AI innovation, the majority are merely part of other strategic initiatives of the university (47%). Only a minority of universities have a standalone AI innovation strategy (12%) (Figure 6). It is noteworthy, that in case a university has a standalone or partial AI strategy in place, these are overwhelmingly related to the area of teaching (75%) instead or research or operations.
2. Universities’ main role in AI Innovation Ecosystems should be providing relevant skills for the future workforce.
According to the opinion of respondents, the main role of universities in AI innovation ecosystems should be to provide relevant skills for the future workforce (46%), followed by serving as a hub, that connects all stakeholders in the ecosystem (26%), and conduct applied research for technology transfer (21%). Only a slight minority thought that universities should advise policymakers on better governance of AI (5%) (Figure 5). In the qualitative responses, three themes emerged on why universities should foster AI innovation culture: Prepare graduates for the labour market; make an impact in society and future generations, to benefit the university itself and the education sector as a whole.
3. The main challenge to build an AI Innovation ecosystem in Asia is the lack of financial resources, whereas in Europe it is the lack of strategy.
Amongst the many challenges faced by universities, are three primary challenges have been identified to building and developing an AI innovation ecosystem on campus: the lack of skills of educators and researchers (59%), the lack of strategy (49%), and the lack of financial resources (44%) (Figure 8). Notably, between universities in Asia and Europe, there is a difference in what is perceived to be the most significant challenge. In Asia, the lack of financial resources is perceived as the main challenge (61%), whereas in Europe the lack of strategy is perceived as the main challenge (50%). (Figure 9).
4. Rectors and Vice-rectors are perceived to take the lead in developing AI innovation ecosystems in Europe, while academics and teachers are taking the lead in Asia.
Perception of leadership in developing AI Innovation Ecosystems in Universities is different in Asia and Europe. Regarding leadership in developing AI innovation culture and ecosystems at universities, Rectors and Vice-Rectors have been perceived to take the lead in Europe. In Asia, academics and teachers are perceived as primary leaders in developing AI innovation culture and ecosystems at universities. In terms of the most important stakeholders outside of campus, policymakers and regulators are perceived to be the most important stakeholder in an AI innovation ecosystem in both Asia and Europe. (Figure 9)
5. USA is perceived to be the global leader in AI Innovation Ecosystems, closely followed by China, Japan and Europe.
Respondents perceived the following countries and regions to be leaders in developing efficient AI Innovation Ecosystems: The United States of America (47%) was perceived by most to lead in the building and developing AI innovation ecosystems, closely followed by China (40%) and Japan (19%), and by Europe (14%), Singapore (9%), Germany (8%), South Korea (7%), United Kingdom (7%), India (6%), and Russia (3%). (Figure 10)