1 Introduction

Given the demand for qualified professionals and considering the growing economic transformations, Professional Doctorates (PD) have gradually become part of the portfolio of courses offered by many Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) around the world (^{Patiño Salceda, 2019}).

According to the Australian Council of Deans and Directors of Graduate Studies, PD can be defined as:

A program of research and advanced study, which enables the candidate to make a significant contribution to practice and knowledge in their professional context [...], scholarship within a discipline or field of study (^{McWilliam et al., 2002}, p.11).

The Council identifies that the main purpose of a PD is to provide the graduate student with opportunities for advanced and applied development, within a particular field of professional knowledge (^{McWilliam et al., 2002}).

In 1990, 38 Australian universities developed a PD course, starting their academic activities in 1991, with their first students graduating in 1994. In 1996, also in Australia, PDs were already available in several fields, such as Education, business, law, psychology, health sciences, humanities, design and architecture (Bourner; Bowden; Laing, 2001).

^{Maxwell and Shanahan (1997)} suggest that the growing interest and successive expansion of PD programs are phenomena with similarities in different parts of the Anglo-Saxon world and northern Europe. As seen herein, this trend is now being reproduced in Ibero-American countries.

According to ^{Patiño Salceda (2020)}, we are witnessing the transformation of the traditional conception of university, which would no longer be an Institution that produces and disseminates academic knowledge, but rather an Organization that is part of national innovation systems, capable of generating competitive advantages and transferring knowledge between different actors and sectors of society.

In this context, it can be said that a “new paradigm of excellent doctorates” is emerging, internationalized and as a result of collaborative synergies between universities and research, development and innovation agents (C. Horgué Baena, 2012, p. 400, apud^{Ramon, 2016}). Where we once had a single type of doctoral training, now the Academic Doctorate (ACD) and the PD coexist (^{Ramon, 2016}).

When researching the reality of PD in Ibero-America in the main databases, such as Scopus, SciELO and Google Scholar, we found studies that reference only two national Higher Education systems in this modality: Mexico (^{Patiño Salceda, 2019}; ^{De La Fare; Rovelli, 2021}) and Brazil (Calderón et al., 2019; Serva; Calderón; Dias, 2017). This bibliographical review shows that only in these two countries are there state regulations that allow the coexistence of two types of doctoral training: academic and professional (^{De La Fare; Rovelli, 2021}), which have specific and distinct degrees.

It is worth highlighting that in academic literature there are also articles on the so-called Industrial Doctorates (ID), existing in Portugal (Cardoso; Orlanda; Sin, 2019) and Spain (^{Ramon, 2016}; ^{Jimenéz-Ramírez, 2017}), promoted as part of the programs of the European Union to bring industries closer to universities, which cannot be confused with PDs, since IDs do not generate an academic degree but rather a mention or specialization within the ACD diploma.

In relation to Spain and Portugal, countries that did not create PDs, it is important to highlight that the European Union, respecting the specificities adopted by each member country in terms of doctoral training, does not impose a common policy on its member countries. However, as Ramón (2016, p. 72) states, it exists not as an auxiliary policy, but as “a complete system that tries to penetrate state regulations”. For the author, European Union institutions have promoted significant changes, both within the scope of doctorates and in other important aspects of the European Higher Education Area, without having competences in this matter (^{Ramon, 2016}, p. 72).

As a sample of this vision, we can highlight the financing for the implementation of ID in European universities, programs offered by some universities in Spain and Portugal, through which, while on the one hand the creation of PD is not imposed on member countries, on the other hand, it indirectly encourages traditional ACDs to change and get closer to companies and industries, opening up space for the creation of a culture of research, development and innovation, as part of doctoral training.

Another example is the work of the European University Association (USA), an organization that brings together more than 800 European universities and rectors’ conferences in 48 European countries, which stands out for the “stimulus given to doctoral schools inspired by the experiences of some prestigious Anglo-Saxon universities”, at the heart of the “insistent idea that a research doctorate is no longer the only modality”, also recognizing “the viability of a professional doctorate” (^{Ramon, 2016}, p. 72).

In this scenario, this article aims to carry out a comparative study between PD in Brazil and Mexico, the only Ibero-American countries that have specific legislation for this type of doctoral training, aiming to analyze their convergences, divergences and specificities.

This is a study of an exploratory, analytical-descriptive nature, which falls within the field of comparative Education of educational programs and systems (Ferreira, 2008), inserted in the context of, in Latin America and Ibero-America as a whole, “works beginning to be published that address the topic of offering professional doctorates” (^{De La Fare; Rovelli, 2021}, p. 4).

This article not only produces original knowledge in the field of doctoral training, but it also presents itself as a potential contribution to the design of more consistent Higher Education policies in Ibero-American countries, using strategies such as benchmarking, that is, “the process of comparing and evaluating quality and performance in peer countries and institutions”, which is generally “carried out as part of a strategic or political approach to improvement” (^{Hazelkorn, 2019}, p. 30).

The comparison of the Mexican and Brazilian realities was carried out using the following analytical indicators as reference: creation, objectives, subject areas and requirements for obtaining the degree, number of courses, regional distribution and main universities.

We analyzed data resulting from an exhaustive bibliographical review, both of books and scientific articles, gathered from the main databases through the following descriptors as search references: Doctorate, ACD, PD, PD Mexico and PD Brazil. Careful documentary research was also carried out, using legislation, documents and official information from the aforementioned governments as references.

For the analysis of the main Brazilian and Mexican universities offering PD, we referenced the research carried out by Hazelkorn, Loukkola and Zhang (2014), who consider the following classification tables to be most influential: Academic Ranking of World Universities (ARWU), World University Rankings (THE) and QS – World University Rankings¹.

2 From ACD to PD

The ACD is the highest degree that a university can award to a student who has successfully completed a work program, and it is the only recognized form of doctorate in many countries.

The ACD has a long history. Studies claim that it was born in medieval Europe as a license to teach at universities, having its revival as a research degree offered in Germany in the early 1800s. The redefinition as we know it today occurred in the USA from 1860, having its subsequent diffusion to Europe and the rest of the world (^{PARK, 2007}; ^{SIMPSON, 1983}).

Depending on the country, the ACD takes different forms, depending on the area and curriculum offered (^{Noble, 1994}). In the US, for example, a doctoral program typically includes students taking advanced-level courses and carrying out academic research, with access to a variety of advisors and supervisors along the way. In Europe (including the UK) and Australia, the doctorate is typically based largely or exclusively on research, with the student actually completing an internship under the guidance of a main supervisor (^{Park, 2007}).

In a review of international literature carried out by ^{Calderón et al. (2019)}, it is highlighted, among other aspects, that the distinctions between ACD and PD are not clearly defined, as ACD, traditionally focused on research, began to incorporate components from the business world.

Despite this, as a common aspect between ACD and PD, the defense of original work as a result of research stands out. The difference would be rooted in the relationship between theory and practice, a mandatory aspect in PD, with a view to improving the professional field.

^{Tennant (2004)} describes PD as a link between doctoral Education and the challenges of the business world, suggesting that this situation goes beyond putting knowledge into practice, to the generation of knowledge from the professional environment itself. In relation to PD, ^{Lee (2009)} makes its connection with professional practice explicit, defining it as:

A programme of advanced study which, whilst satisfying the University criteria for the award of a doctorate, is designed to meet the specific needs of a professional group external to the University, and which develops the capability of individuals to work within a professional context (^{Lee, 2009}, p. 6).

The distinction between the two types of doctoral training led authors such as Bourner, Bowden and Laing (2001) to pointing out the existence of two types of researchers: professional researchers, linked to traditional ACD, and researching professionals, linked to the PD. For these authors, the doctoral candidate in an ACD would be interested in pursuing an academic career and carrying out basic research, while the doctoral candidate in a professional program would aspire to carry out useful research to improve their practice in working life, orienting themselves towards the development of applied research.

As is shown, both the ACD and PD courses consist of offering more in-depth knowledge than in a master’s degree, providing the student with the opportunity, in an ACD, to seek real and relevant advances in their subject area, and in a PD, increase their professional performance.

From this perspective, Sousa Junior and Verhine (2020) highlight that professional programs, due to their innovative, interventionist character, generate expectations in terms of public interest in improving quality, not only in private sector organizations, but also of the public sector.

3 Creation, objectives, subject areas and requirements for obtaining the degree

The effective possibility of creating PDs in Brazil, concomitantly with Professional Master’s, emerged with Ordinance No. 389, of March 23, 2017 (Brasil, 2017a). Subsequently, the Brazilian Coordination for the Improvement of Higher Education Personnel (Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior, Capes) approved Ordinance No. 131, of June 28, 2017 (Brasil, 2017b), which regulated the submission of proposals for new stricto sensu graduate courses in the professional modality, at master’s and doctoral levels. Such guidelines were revoked and deepened by Ordinance No. 60, of March 20, 2019 (^{Brasil, 2019}). In this sense, within the scope of Stricto Sensu Graduate Studies, in addition to the Professional Master’s Degree (PM) existing since the implementation of Ordinance No. 47, on October 17, 1995 (^{Brasil, 2005}), the PD was established in Brazil. This Capes Ordinance No. 60 paved the way to give concreteness to the guidelines of Ministerial Opinion No. 977/65, of December 3, 1965 (Almeida Júnior et al., 2005), the so-called Sucupira Opinion, which, for 58 years, established the foundations of Graduate Studies in Brazil, by contemplating the need to create PM and PD courses.

In Mexico, on the other hand, PDs were incorporated into the Programa Nacional de Posgrados de Calidad (PNPC) of the Consejo Nacional de Ciencia y Tecnología (Conacyt) in 2014, three years before the creation of PDs in Brazil (^{Conacyt, 2022}; ^{Patiño Salceda, 2020}).

In Table 1, it is possible to observe the comparative data of PD objectives in Brazil and Mexico and see a visible difference in the guidelines between both countries.

While in Mexico the legislation is limited to mentioning that PD training is carried out to “improve professional practice” with the aim of professional development, in Brazil, the emphasis is on the development of “advanced”, “innovative” and “transformative” practices.

In Mexico, emphasis is placed on acquiring knowledge through training practices to solve problems specific to the workplace. In Brazil, the focus is on meeting the demands of different sectors of the economy. In this sense, in Brazil, PDs are inserted in a logic focused on the “transfer of technology and innovative knowledge”, which is not addressed in Mexico’s guidelines.

In the Mexican guidelines, increased productivity, innovation and technology transfer are not mentioned, as in the Brazilian case, where PDs aim to explicitly boost productivity, not only of companies, but also of public and private organizations nationally, regionally and locally.

In relation to the types of research carried out in PDs (Table 2), the legislation of the countries analyzed converge, covering research projects focused on professional environments, practices and activities.

There was no difference with regard to the part-time regime of the PD student between Brazil and Mexico (Table 2). We can infer that the part-time modality meets the objective of the course modality, which is to improve business processes, since, supposedly, these are working students.

In relation to the requirements for obtaining the degree, there is a significant difference between the countries studied. In Brazil, final papers are flexible, allowing different formats, in addition to the traditional thesis typical of ACD. Its purpose is to ensure innovation and the applicability of studies to the segment of society in which the graduate will be able to work.

In the case of Mexico, as the PNPC regulations point out, PD programs culminate in the defense of a thesis focused on a problem in the doctoral candidate’s profession or occupation. Unlike Brazil, there are no other types of final papers or assignments to obtain a PD degree besides the thesis.

Although it is assumed that applied rather than basic research is developed in PD, as in ACDs in Mexico, the rules do not contemplate the possibility of diversifying final papers. This indicates that the PNPC guidelines still maintain the characteristics of the so-called first generation PD, treated by Seddon (2000, apud^{Maxwell, 2003}, p. 279-280). In other words, these are PDs with very similar characteristics to ACD, since they are linked to this traditional teaching model where the defense of a thesis is the main means of obtaining an academic degree. From this perspective, PDs in Brazil fall into what Seddon (2000, apud^{Maxwell, 2003}, p. 279-280) calls second-generation PD, in which the assessment of doctoral students’ performance is not restricted to just a thesis, being more flexible in relation to ACD, validating other products or results of the research project, always related to the professional field and the development of solutions to problems in the work environment. To exemplify the second-generation PD, ^{Maxwell (2003}, p. 284) points to the case of the University of Western Sydney, in which his PD in Education broke “the straitjacket” of the requirement to defend a thesis to obtain the doctorate degree, insofar as academic authorities accepted, for the granting of said degree, the preparation of portfolios and their evaluation to check whether they meet the requirements for obtaining a Doctorate.

When addressing subject areas and number of PD courses offered in Brazil and Mexico, Table 3 shows that 58 PDs were created in Brazil and 11 PDs in Mexico.

In the case of Mexico, the PNPC has 11 PDs out of a total of 721 existing doctorates, which represents 1.5%. As for master’s degrees, there are 438 PMs out of a total of 1,295, which represents 34.0% of the total recognized programs (^{México, 2022}).

In the case of Brazil, there are 58 PDs out of a total of 2,496 doctorates, which is equivalent to 2.3%. In the case of PMs, there are 860 out of 4,531 master’s degrees, a number equivalent to 19.0% (^{Brasil, 2022}).

These data lead us to some questions, such as: a) why is there a higher percentage of PDs in Brazil compared to Mexico, considering that in Mexico the first programs appeared earlier?; b) Why were a greater number of courses created in Brazil than in Mexico in three years?; c) Why has Brazil, despite its smaller number of PMs compared to Mexico, managed to have a significant increase in PDs in such a short space of time? Our assumption is that, in Brazil, there is less resistance on the part of universities in relation to PDs as an emerging doctoral training modality, when compared to the Mexican reality. This hypothesis is further explored throughout this article.

Still in Table 3, it is possible to observe the convergence between Brazil and Mexico in courses related to business administration and Education and technologies. In Mexico, there are PDs in specific fields of business administration (strategic administration, economics and administrative sciences, organizational management and administration and senior management), which are included in the PDs in Business Administration that exist in Brazil. However, Brazil offers PDs in specific fields of business administration not offered in Mexico, such as: controllership, finance, project management, business, accounting sciences and administration, and micro and small business administration.

It appears that Mexico offers PDs that do not yet exist in Brazil, such as: maritime and port administration, national security and defense, mechatronics engineering, applied psychology and tourism.

In turn, in Brazil, there are courses that have not yet been created in Mexico, such as: ecology, biotechnology, computer science, political science, environmental sciences, sciences of religion and theology, economics, school Education, physical Education, nursing, production engineering, mechanical engineering, pharmacy, history, interdisciplinary, materials, veterinary medicine, dentistry, urban and regional planning, public health, technological teaching and health Education in the Amazon.

It is observed that both in Brazil and Mexico, engineering courses have PD programs in different subject areas, whereas in Brazil, the courses are focused on the areas of production engineering and mechanical engineering, and in Mexico, they are focused on mechatronics engineering.

4 Number of courses, regional distribution and main universities

Until the date of completion of this article, in Brazil, there were a total of 58 graduate courses in the PD modality recognized by the Ministry of Education (MEC) (Table 4), of which 5.17% (3 courses) are found in the central-west region, 20,68% (12 courses) in the northeast region, 10.34% (6 courses) in the north region, 41.37% (24 courses) in the southeast region and 22,44% (13 courses) in the southern region.

As can be seen, the majority of PD courses are concentrated in the southeast and south of the country, representing 63.81% of the total, a fact that reflects regional asymmetries, as well as the way in which stricto sensu graduate courses have historically been distributed in Brazil, concentrated in regions with greater economic development, such as the southeast region, considered as the most economically evolved and where large part of the national industry resides (^{Brasil, 2012}).

It is worth highlighting that this situation persists, despite the efforts of graduate public policies aimed at alleviating these regional asymmetries (^{Nazareno; Herbetta, 2019}), and “we must not forget that the federative principle requires more balance and regional development is a constitutional principle” (^{Cury, 2004}, p. 871).

In a relationship somewhat similar to Brazil, data from Mexico reveal that, despite there being only 11 PD courses recognized by the PNPC (Table 5), there is a greater concentration of courses in the central, central-south and northern regions, with 72.73% of the total number of courses, as opposed to regions with fewer courses, such as the south, southeast and west, each with 1 course (9.09%).

These data reaffirm the reality of graduate studies in Mexico which, similarly in Brazil, presents marked regional asymmetries. In the case of Mexico, graduate courses have been concentrated in states with greater economic development (^{Hernández Licona, 2019})² and a lower percentage of the population in poverty (^{México, 2020})³.

Table 3 shows that, in Brazil, despite PD courses being created a few years later than in Mexico, this doctoral modality had a greater expansion in the number of recognized courses in different subject areas, surpassing Mexico.

Another observation concerns institutions in Brazil offering more than one course and a greater diversity of PD courses (Table 6).

In Brazil, the institutions offering the highest number of courses were: Fundação Oswaldo Cruz - Fiocruz (Fiocruz), Fundação Getúlio Vargas - São Paulo (FGV/SP), Universidade Estadual Paulista Júlio de Mesquita Filho (Unesp - Botucatu) and Universidade Tecnológica Federal do Paraná (UTFPR). The main thematic axes were: public health and management, research and development in the pharmaceutical industry, administration, economics, cultural goods and social projects, nursing, research and development (medical biotechnology), Education, and technology, society and environment (CTSA).

Table 7 reveals not only the reduced number of PDs in Mexico, but also the fact that none of the Mexican universities that appear in the main world rankings⁴ have this type of doctoral training, although they have PM programs in their list of courses offered, for example, the renowned National Autonomous University of Mexico (Unam), which has 13 types of PM registered with the PNPC, 8 of them recognized for their high degree of excellence, other examples being the National Polytechnic Institute, with 17 PMs, and the Universidad Autónoma Metropolitana, with 4 PMs (^{México, 2022}). The question that arises is: for what reasons have these excellent universities, having already implemented PMs, not yet created PDs?

Taking Mexican literature as reference, this could be explained based on the hypothesis that, in Mexico, as in other countries, PD courses are seen as of inferior quality, compared to traditional ACD (^{Díaz-Barriga, 2009}; ^{Fresán Orozco, 2013}; ^{Patiño Salceda, 2020}). As also highlighted by ^{Maxwell and Shanahan (1997}, p. 3-4), in relation to PDs and ACDs, there is a feeling that they are equal but different, indicating a concern with the academic status of PDs. For the authors, PDs may be viewed negatively by some, and it is possible that the term professional carries a pejorative meaning, since the academic-scientific environment could conceive basic research as being of greater prestige than applied research.

If, on the one hand, this hypothesis seems to apply to the Mexican reality, on the other, it does not apply so categorically to the Brazilian context. Although it is a fact that the main Brazilian universities highlighted in world rankings⁵ do not have PDs, it is worth highlighting three issues: a) the process of creating PDs in Brazil is very recent; b) the expansion of PDs is currently being regulated very carefully by accreditation agencies of the Brazilian State, to the point that few PD proposals presented by Brazilian universities were approved; c) just as in Mexico, the main Brazilian universities also offer PMs. State University of Campinas (Unicamp), for example, has 26 PM courses, while USP maintains 82; one could argue that the creation of PDs in these universities is just a matter of time. PMs in these institutions will mature, whereby the creation of PDs will be a natural consequence. Furthermore, specifically in terms of the Brazilian reality, it should be mentioned that this high number of PMs offered by the main Brazilian universities could mean that the initial resistance to the creation of PMs and PDs in Brazil, coming from organizations representing researchers from different subject areas, have gradually been diluted and overcome, as highlighted in the literature (^{Calderón et al. 2019}).

5 Final considerations

This study allows us to verify some elements and findings that can help reflect on the reality of PDs in both countries researched.

Firstly, it was evident that only Brazil and Mexico, in the Ibero-American context, have specific regulations that recognize PDs in their territories apart from ACD programs. However, we must highlight the changes currently taking place in Mexican Higher Education. Although the PNPC recognized PDs in 2014, with the new Mexican government elected in 2018, the new Mexican legislation for Higher Education, that is, the Ley General de Educación Superior (^{México, 2021}), limited itself to mentioning the existence of ACDs, without mentioning anything about PDs, which will lead the PNPC to stop evaluating and recognizing the quality of PDs in Mexican territory.

Moreover, PDs in Mexico are limited to establishing the link between this modality and the student’s work space and their professional development, becoming a way for the university to “consolidate its links with sectors of society” (^{México, 2015}, p. 8). In Brazil, normative legislation goes further, highlighting the strong link between PDs and increased productivity in companies and public and private organizations, denoting that it is more involved with a policy of economic development, technology transfer and innovation.

On a third level, it is observed that, despite the recognition of PDs by the Mexican PNPC being older than the Brazilian procedure, the number of programs offered in Brazil (58) is five times greater than the number of programs offered in Mexico (11), suggesting that this divergence would be due to the fact that in Mexico, PDs would be seen, in an ingrained way, as educational programs of inferior quality, a concept believed to have been diluted in Brazil.

A fourth aspect evidenced is the courses that exist in Mexico and that are not available in Brazil: maritime and port administration, national security and defense, mechatronics engineering, applied psychology and tourism. In turn, in Brazil, there is a variety of courses that are not offered in Mexico, of which we highlight: biotechnology, environmental sciences, production engineering, mechanical engineering, pharmacy, urban and regional planning, public health, science and mathematics, technological teaching, among others.

A fifth observation is that, in both countries, the geographical distribution of courses is arranged in greater concentration in regions with greater economic development and lower poverty rates, highlighting similarities rooted in regional asymmetries.

Finally, with regard to the structuring of PD programs, there is a significant difference between Mexico and Brazil. While in the former, PDs fall into what the literature calls first-generation PDs, insofar as the traditional thesis is required, similarly to ACDs to obtain the degree, in Brazil, PDs fall into the so-called second-generation PDs, as there is room for innovation and the creation of new grading possibilities, since universities have the autonomy to define other products equivalent to the thesis to obtain an academic degree.