STEM in Europe: why are PhDs leaving research when the market has never needed them more?

STEM_article_ABG

Europe needs 2 million STEM professionals, yet more than 4 out of 10 postdocs leave research. How can we explain this waste of talent at the very moment when the green and digital transitions require these skills the most? Here, ABG proposes an analytical perspective...

 


A market under pressure, yet still unclear for doctoral candidates

The real functioning of the doctorate: highly selective, highly demanding, and not very transparent

Bridges do exist, but remain too abstract for many

Industry seeks versatile profiles — and PhDs embody them perfectly

Yet the blockage persists: where does it really come from?

What role for ABG today? Translator, connector, catalyst

Going further: how can we better connect PhDs with European needs?

Conclusion 


The European Union is missing more than two million STEM professionals (Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics). Scientific and technical services are expected to create 2.6 million jobs by 2030 across Europe. The green transition, digital sovereignty, reindustrialisation and the rise of AI all rely heavily on these scientific skills. And yet, a significant share of early-career researchers leave academia before or after their defense: more than 40% of postdoctoral researchers eventually exit academia, often due to a lack of stable prospects, even as non-academic STEM sectors struggle to recruit. Many do so after career paths marked by precarity, exhaustion and limited visibility regarding their scientific future.

This paradox is far from anecdotal: Europe needs STEM talent precisely at a time when some of its strongest profiles struggle to envision their place within it.

A market under pressure, yet still unclear for doctoral candidates

To understand the scale of this paradox, we must observe how the market evolves much faster than doctoral trajectories. The demand is clear: AI, cybersecurity, biotechnology, robotics, clean technologies and Industry 4.0 are recruiting at a rapid pace. A large majority of SMEs, which represent most of the European economic fabric, report difficulties in finding the scientific skills required to innovate, structure R&D teams or meet their own digital and environmental transition obligations.

On paper, PhDs should be the primary beneficiaries of this momentum. Their level of expertise, their ability to solve complex problems, manage projects, analyze data and conceptualize technological systems place them exactly where demand lies. Yet a disconnect remains: market dynamics are not visible from within laboratories. Hence the central question: why do we observe so many leaving the scientific track?

The real functioning of the doctorate: highly selective, highly demanding, and not very transparent

To understand this disengagement, we must face the structural reality of the academic system. The doctoral pipeline is demanding, but above all narrow. Very few permanent positions are available, career paths are unpredictable, competition is constant, and early-career precarity is no longer acceptable for a generation seeking both stability and meaning. In France, around 9 out of 10 PhDs are employed one year after graduation, but stability varies significantly across disciplines.

Added to this is a persistent gap between academia and industry, which still tend to observe each other from a distance. Doctoral candidates are still primarily trained to project themselves as researchers… while the market seeks experts capable of operating beyond the laboratory. ABG has observed this gap for over 40 years: the issue is not a lack of talent, but a lack of information, translation and visibility.

Bridges do exist, but remain too abstract for many

We often speak of "innovation hubs." The expression is appealing, yet remains vague for a doctoral candidate who does not concretely know what role they could play within them. And yet, these ecosystems are currently among the most dynamic environments for STEM PhDs. It is precisely because these mechanisms are perceived as distant that they do not yet fully fulfill their role.

Consider a few concrete examples:

In other words, bridges already exist. They are operational, funded and often attractive. Yet they remain insufficiently known, insufficiently explained and insufficiently integrated into doctoral pathways.

Industry seeks versatile profiles — and PhDs embody them perfectly

Over the past five years, surveys have converged: companies no longer seek only "technical experts." They want profiles capable of reasoning, explaining, convincing, structuring, managing complex projects and navigating across disciplines. In other words, they want exactly what a doctorate produces.

This cultural shift was anticipated in France through a now central tool: DocPro. Co-designed by ABG, France Universités and MEDEF, this framework was conceived as a translation tool between how PhDs describe their skills and how companies formulate them.

DocPro’s objective is simple: enable PhDs to speak a language employers understand, without renouncing their scientific identity. It helps identify the fine-grained competencies developed during the doctorate (project management, analysis, writing, coordination…), translate them into recognized professional competencies, and build stronger CVs, pitches, cover letters, LinkedIn profiles and interviews. Each time ABG supports a PhD or a doctoral school, DocPro facilitates this dialogue.

Yet the blockage persists: where does it really come from?

We might wish to identify a single responsible actor. Reality is more complex, and operates at three levels.

1. A mismatch between funded topics and real market needs

Funding programs prioritize strategic themes (AI, energy, health), but laboratories must also support exploratory or fundamental research. As a result, some doctoral candidates become highly specialized in niche topics whose translation into career opportunities is challenging.

2. Cross-sector mobility is progressing, but remains recent

The past five years have seen major efforts toward decompartmentalization. These efforts work… but they are not yet sufficient to transform a professional culture shaped over decades.

3. Doctoral training does not yet sufficiently prepare for professional transition

Training offers exist. Some institutions have modernized transversal training. But realities remain heterogeneous, and many doctoral candidates begin their PhD without solid preparation in professional communication, competency mapping, market analysis or career strategy beyond academia.

What role for ABG today? Translator, connector, catalyst

Rather than listing all its actions, three elements suffice:

ABG’s role is not to solve the STEM shortage alone. Its role is to help PhDs connect to a market that awaits them — and to help companies realize that the talent they lack is already there.

Going further: how can we better connect PhDs with European needs?

Conclusion

The STEM shortage is not inevitable. Talent exists. Training exists. Bridges exist. What is still missing is lasting alignment between how we train, how the market evolves and how PhDs are supported.

Today, STEM PhDs are not “out of the market”: they are waiting for a market that is more readable, more open and more explicit. And ABG, alongside its academic and industrial partners, plays a decisive role in this alignment. Europe needs them — perhaps more than ever. The challenge now is to help them not only see it, but project themselves into it and build careers commensurate with their expertise.