Evaluation Report Publications of the Academy of Finland 1/11

Recommendations:
1.  Ensure sufficient funding opportunities for fundamental chemistry research in  
a wide range of topics.
2.  Create larger research units to reduce the dependency on individual professors 
and improve administrative support.

---

17
2.2  Funding
Considering the overall average amount of external funding, chemistry research in 
Finland appears at first well-funded, and the highly competition-based funding 
scheme has allowed some research groups to reach an internationally leading level. At 
the same time, at many institutions, little or no support for research is provided by 
the universities in terms of time spent on research. For the groups with the largest 
amount of external funding, a large fraction of the funding is obtained from Tekes, 
giving a strong bias towards industry needs. This industry-oriented funding threatens 
to weaken the international impact of some parts of Finnish chemistry research due to 
the very short time horizons and narrow focuses of these research projects. It could 
also potentially undermine the long-term need to develop a strong methodological 
and scientific foundation for the activity in the research groups. The funding of basic 
research in the core disciplines of chemistry is thus at an adequate to good level.
The panel supports the highly competition-based research-funding scheme that has 
led to world-class Finnish chemistry research. However, as little or no time for research 
or consumable support is provided through the universities, in some cases, the panel is 
concerned that Finnish chemistry research is at risk of missing opportunities. The less 
high-performing research groups, in particular those experiencing changes of generation 
or topic, may be unable to muster up the necessary resources to develop to their full 
potential and to a level where they could secure external funding. The difference 
between research groups that are able to attract external funding and those that are not 
(either from the Academy, Tekes or other sources) may therefore be further accentuated 
over time, potentially leading to missed opportunities and an overall lowering of the 
level for both research and researcher training. In the long term, this will impact 
negatively on the quality of Finnish chemical research.
While the panel supports competition-driven research funding, it would 
recommend that the different universities and the Ministry of Education, Science and 
Culture, through its university funding, consider the possibility of providing a 
minimum amount of research time (both as a right and as an obligation) and financial 
support to faculty members in order to ensure the competitiveness of the academic 
staff when applying for external funding. This will also ensure that the teaching is 
research-based. Such an expansion in funding should not involve an increase in total 
staff, but rather provide the necessary framework to allow existing personnel to 
perform high-quality research. It is also important that university departments 
prioritise within their own budgets a minimum funding to cover day-to-day expenses 
for consumables needed as part of the research activities of the units.
The Academy of Finland is the only larger funding organisation that supports 
basic chemistry research in Finland. It is therefore important that the Academy is 
provided with a research budget that allows core chemistry competencies to be 
supported and maintained without forcing research groups too strongly to meet the 
needs of Finnish industry. This is important in order to secure the future 
competitiveness of the Finnish chemical industry.
Tekes is an important source of external funding for many research groups. 
Recent changes in Tekes’ funding requirements make it more challenging to establish 
effective research consortia, and the timeline of funded research projects seems in 
many cases too short.

---

18
The Strategic Centres for Science, Technology and Innovation are a fairly new 
instrument and one that has been going through recent revisions in its profile. As 
such, it is difficult to evaluate the importance and impact of the strategic centres on 
Finnish chemistry research at this time. However, it is important that this instrument 
consolidates its form and function to ensure its success.
The Finland Distinguished Professor (FiDiPro) programme has been used, with 
great success, by one of the evaluated units to attract leading international researchers 
to Finland. Considering the panel’s concerns regarding the general lack of recruitment 
of faculty members from outside the units, the FiDiPro programme should be used 
more actively by the research units in order to improve international recruitment and 
collaboration. 
There does not seem to be a unified practice for handling overheads on external 
projects within the different universities and departments. Some universities pass a 
proportion of grant overheads to the fundraising groups. This has been beneficial in 
increasing the diversity of research and enabling development and replacement of 
essential equipment. The panel supports such arrangements whenever possible in 
relation to the financial situation of the local department.
Although current funding levels appear adequate, there was widespread anxiety as 
to the threat of reduced funding in the future, arising from the at times very large 
degree of external funding in unit budgets.