ILFA receives the highest international evaluation for the second time
The Institute of Literature, Folklore and Art of the University of Latvia (ILFA UL) has once again received the highest overall rating – 5 or “excellent” – in an international evaluation of scientific institutions.
“The evaluation received is clear evidence that a world-class centre for the humanities exists in Latvia. The next question is whether the state will be able not only to recognise this excellence, but also to sustain it,” says ILFA UL Director Eva Eglāja-Kristsone, emphasizing the need for a state-established mechanism to support excellence.
The Ministry of Education and Science (MES) notes that in the 2025 evaluation, only two research institutes received the highest score of 5. Meanwhile, the expert report in the field of humanities and arts describes ILFA UL as the only institution in Latvia demonstrating outstanding performance across almost all evaluation criteria, combining research excellence, international visibility, digital innovation, and societal impact at a level that positions ILFA UL as a “global leader in its field.”
Experts particularly highlight ILFA UL’s interdisciplinary research, internationally recognised monographs, and digital platforms—garamantas.lv, literatura.lv, humma.lv, and iesaisties.lv—which are also rated as excellent in a broader European context. The report further underscores ILFA UL’s contribution to cultural policy, education, the preservation of cultural heritage, and public engagement.
Director Eva Eglāja-Kristsone stresses: “The work of ILFA UL demonstrates that the humanities are an essential component of statehood. They strengthen the Latvian language, cultural memory, and historical awareness, foster critical thinking and social cohesion, and thus are also vital for national resilience in today’s geopolitical context. The international evaluation clearly confirms that ILFA UL is a world-class centre for the humanities. If the state takes the results of the international evaluation seriously, the next step is not merely a higher coefficient in the minimum or base funding formula, but stable multi-year support for the development of excellence, the retention of human resources, and the growth of a new generation of researchers.”
In its release, the MES clearly indicates that the international evaluation affects the allocation of base research funding and that the funding formula includes an “excellence coefficient” for institutions rated 4 and 5. This is an important signal that the state links funding to quality. However, this alone is not sufficient. The expert report itself shows that the main weaknesses of Latvia’s research system remain insufficient resources, low salaries, a high proportion of short-term competitive funding, and employment insecurity. Experts explicitly point out that increased funding—particularly for salaries, institutional stability, and support for early-career researchers—is necessary for continued progress. In other words, excellence in base funding results in a higher allocation, but not one that, on its own, ensures the development and sustainability of excellence. That is already a matter of policy, not formula.
For this reason, following this evaluation, the state should consider not only recognising excellence within the funding formula, but establishing a dedicated mechanism for developing and sustaining excellence. European practice shows that centres of excellence are built through long-term, targeted mechanisms: in Finland, centres of excellence are established for eight years; in Norway, funding is provided for up to ten years; while in Germany, clusters of excellence are funded for seven years, with the possibility of an additional seven-year period. Such models enable not only the achievement of excellence, but also the retention of human resources, succession planning, and the development of new research directions.
“ILFA UL’s international evaluation is a very clear signal for Latvia’s science policy: excellence already exists in Latvia. Now the state must take the next step—create a predictable, multi-year support mechanism for the development and sustainability of excellence. Otherwise, there is a risk that the state identifies excellence but fails to support its long-term continuity,” emphasises Eva Eglāja-Kristsone.