The 35-Year-Old 'European Doctorate' Now Used by About 18 Universities
Europe's first attempt to formally recognise the international dimension of a doctorate turns 35 this year — and, according to a prominent sector researcher, it is quietly disappearing from use. The Doctor Europaeus label, created in 1991 by the liaison committee of the European Union rectors' conferences, is awarded by universities on their own authority to candidates who meet four conditions: a research stay of at least three months in another European country, assessment of the thesis by at least two reviewers based in two different European countries, at least one foreign examiner on the defence committee, and part of the defence conducted in a European language other than that of the awarding country.
In a new opinion piece, Uwe Brandenburg, managing director of the Global Impact Institute (GII), argues that these principles remain “far from the norm” for most doctoral candidates across Europe. His own repeated searches found only around 18 universities — spread across no more than five countries and heavily concentrated in Italy and France — that currently award the label. Spain, an early adopter, replaced its “European Doctorate” mention with an “International” one in 2011. Crucially, there is no central, searchable register of awarding universities or holders, so the true number cannot be verified by anyone else either.
Brandenburg proposes a modernised version, Doctor Europaeus+, which would keep the four original criteria as a minimum and add indicators aligned with current European doctoral policy: documented training in open science and research integrity, participation in a European university alliance or comparable network where relevant, and research data management following FAIR principles. He positions the label as deliberately lighter than both joint doctoral degrees — binding bilateral agreements that produce two diplomas — and the European Commission's European Degree Label, which is still being piloted following its 2024 blueprint. Implementation would require only an internal university regulation and a verification procedure, with no external ratification. He also calls for a public register of awarding universities, suggesting the European University Association (EUA) as its natural host.
Why a 1991 'Gold Standard' Never Became the European Norm
Where the Doctor Europaeus Stands at 35
The label's design explains both its early promise and its subsequent drift. Because it was self-awarded by universities, carried no supranational approval and created no new degree, it was a light instrument by construction. But lightness cut both ways: with no authority to enforce uptake and no register to count it, the label could fade without anyone noticing. Brandenburg's central point — that even the number of awarding universities is unknown — is therefore more than an administrative detail; it is the mechanism by which a “gold standard” from 1991 never became standard practice.
Italy and France Carry the Label Today
The geography of the roughly 18 institutions he identified matters. With the label concentrated in Italian universities such as Ferrara, Udine, Trieste, Cagliari, Naples, Sapienza in Rome and Urbino, and French institutions including Paris-Saclay, Grenoble Alpes, Orléans and Aix-Marseille, plus Cologne in Germany and Coventry in the United Kingdom, adoption looks like inherited practice in two national systems rather than a continental standard. Spain's formal shift from a “European” to an “International” doctorate mention in 2011 shows how easily national systems can walk away from the label when it carries no external weight.
Why a 'Doctor Europaeus+' Now
The timing reflects how much doctoral education has changed since 1991. The Salzburg Principles marked their 20th anniversary under the EUA in 2025; 64 European Universities alliances connect more than 560 institutions, many running joint doctoral training; and the European Commission's 2024 blueprint for a European Degree Label is already in pilot. Against that backdrop, criteria fixed in 1991 no longer say much about what a well-prepared European doctorate involves. Brandenburg's added indicators — open science, research integrity, FAIR data management and alliance participation — map directly onto those policy priorities, and his insistence that the label stay lighter than a joint degree or the EU-level label is a deliberate attempt to keep it adoptable by a single university without new legal architecture.
Interpreting the Evidence
It is worth separating the verified elements from the argument. The four criteria, the 1991 establishment, Spain's 2011 change and the scale of current EU policy initiatives (the 64 alliances and the 2025 Salzburg anniversary) are facts presented by the author. The count of 18 institutions is his own research, repeated several times, and he concedes the true figure may be higher — which is exactly his point about the absence of data. Readers should also note Brandenburg's position: GII evaluates university internationalisation, so his community would be a direct beneficiary of the verifiable indicators and public register he proposes. That does not undermine the argument, but it explains the proposal's shape.
How the Doctor Europaeus+ Proposal Would Work in Practice
For university leaders. The author's implementation path needs no external approval: a university adopts an internal regulation, embeds the four criteria as minimums in doctoral rules, adds the modern indicators (open science and research-integrity training, FAIR data management, alliance participation where relevant), and issues a certificate once requirements are verified. Institutions with internationalisation ambitions could adopt the label ahead of any wider EU move.
For prospective doctoral candidates. Because no public register exists, candidates cannot currently search for European universities offering the label by country or discipline. Until that changes, the practical route is to contact the doctoral schools of the roughly 18 institutions Brandenburg identified — mainly in Italy and France, with Cologne and Coventry among the exceptions — and ask directly about the label and its four criteria.
For doctoral-policy bodies. The proposal names the EUA as the obvious host for a public register, since it brings together Europe's doctoral schools and defines the standards behind the label. Universities and doctoral associations that want better data on international doctoral mobility have a concrete, low-cost proposal to press for at EUA level.
Comments 0