Evaluation Report Publications of the Academy of Finland 1/11

Julkaisusarjan 
nimi ja numero
Suomen Akatemian julkaisuja 1/2011
ISSN
0358-9153
ISBN
Painetulle kirjalle annettu tunnus
978-951-715-787-2
Pdf-versiolle annettu tunnus
978-951-715-787-9
Sivumäärä
137
Julkaisun jakaja
Suomen Akatemia, PL 99, 00501 Helsinki, [e-mail]
Julkaisun kustantaja
Suomen Akatemia
Painopaikka ja -aika
Kopio Niini Oy, 2011
Muut tiedot
www.aka.fi/julkaisut

---

9
Preface
This is the report of an ad hoc international panel convened by the Academy of 
Finland to conduct an evaluation of basic research in the field of chemistry in Finland. 
The report has been prepared specifically for the Academy, which reserves the right to 
use the contents as it sees fit. As the report is expected to reach a wide audience, the 
evaluation panel hopes its deliberations will promote a useful, constructive debate 
within the Finnish chemistry community. 
The evaluation panel would like to thank the Academy of Finland for entrusting 
it with such an interesting, important and challenging task, the evaluation steering 
group for providing a clear mandate for the evaluation and for providing valuable 
feedback during the panel’s work on the final evaluation report. Special thanks for 
organising the material and making all practical arrangements during the hearing week 
goes to Science Adviser Kati Lüthje, Project Officer Henriikka Kekäläinen and 
Director Susan Linko at the Academy of Finland. The panel would also like to thank 
the evaluation coordinator, Dr Mikko Lensu, for much assistance in all parts of the 
evaluation process.
While the hearings and meetings with staff at the units under evaluation took 
place in September 2010, the information-gathering process, including factual 
information, self-evaluation and bibliometric analysis, began in January 2010. The 
evaluation panel would like to use this opportunity to thank the research units 
involved for their dedication to the evaluation process, for the time they spent in 
preparing the necessary self-evaluations that provided the panel with much valuable 
insight into the units’ activities, and for their engaged presentations and lively 
discussions during the hearings.
The project has involved comprehensive assessments of research efforts at the 
research group level. The process of achieving insights into such a wide variety of 
research efforts and reaching a fair assessment of their strengths and weaknesses has 
required substantial efforts by all parties involved in the process. In spite of the 
substantial scope of the project, the panel feels that it was able to obtain sufficient 
information for balanced and fair assessments. The panel is confident that its analyses 
and recommendations are well founded and hopes that the report will be viewed as a 
constructive basis for improvement, development and change.

---

10
Executive summary
Chemistry research in Finland is at a very good international level overall, with some 
research units being at the international cutting edge within their fields. At the same 
time, there are a number of chemistry units that are of subcritical size and that are not 
conducting research at an international level, neither in terms of quality nor in terms 
of quantity. A characteristic feature of these units is that they do not actively engage 
in collaborations within their university, at the national level or internationally.
Many chemistry units in Finland are in effect single-professor units. This cannot 
be regarded as an efficient use of resources at the departmental level, and often leads 
to too strong dependence on the qualities of the professor. In many cases, these units 
have insufficient administrative support. The universities should therefore consider 
the organisation of these units. Clear research strategies should also be developed, as  
a number of units do not have a strategy or have not properly rooted their strategy  
in the research staff.
Finnish chemistry research would benefit from a stronger international focus in 
terms of international networking and the recruitment of PhD students, postdoctoral 
students and faculty members from outside Finland. Too many units have largely 
recruited their faculty members among their own alumni.
Overall, the research infrastructures within Finnish chemistry research are at a 
very high level, and all active research groups have access to the necessary 
infrastructures locally. The research infrastructures would benefit from a national 
coordinated plan for investment in and upgrading of large-scale infrastructures, 
including clear plans for collaborations. This would ease the general concern of the 
units about maintaining infrastructures at their current level.
The overall funding of chemistry research is at a satisfactory level. However, the 
balance between the different funding instruments does not seem optimal. The 
competition-driven funding has allowed active groups to reach an internationally 
leading level. At the same time, research funding at the universities is limited, and 
groups less successful in external fundraising are at risk of not having the means to 
develop a sufficient level of activity. This can potentially lead to missed opportunities 
for Finnish chemical research. The panel recommends the establishment of minimum 
support for small consumables and a minimum amount of research time for faculty 
members at the universities.
The research conducted by the evaluated units covers all significant aspects of 
modern chemistry and caters well to the needs of the Finnish chemical industry. The 
panel has not found any important directions missing or over-represented in the 
Finnish chemistry research ecosystem, although a certain concern is raised in relation 
to fundamental experimental physical chemistry. In this domain, much of the current 
research in Finland is focused on the use of physical chemistry rather than on the 
development of the physical chemistry methods themselves. 

---

11
Wood and pulp chemistry has a strong position in Finland, but the amount of this 
activity in relation to the scientific quality as documented in this report should be 
further analysed by national stakeholders; that is, by those in need of the research 
(relevant chemical industry), the funding agencies (Tekes and Academy of Finland) 
and the research-performing organisations (universities and VTT). Such a study 
should also consider to what extent the organisation and cooperation of the activities 
in this field are at a level that ensures an optimal use of the funding in this domain.
Industry-related research funding is essential to many research groups. The panel 
is concerned that the importance of this funding may lead to research with too 
narrow a focus and too short time horizons. Basic chemistry research is therefore in 
jeopardy. As a thorough and detailed understanding of different areas of chemistry is 
mandatory in order to maintain an internationally competitive level of research and to 
develop industry in new areas of chemistry, the amount of and time horizon for 
industry-related chemistry research needs to be carefully monitored and assessed by 
the stakeholders (universities and the chemical industry) so as not to jeopardise the 
long-term viability of Finnish chemistry research.
In general, PhD training in Finnish chemistry research has until recently not 
received sufficient attention. A PhD degree takes too long to complete and too many 
students fail to obtain a PhD degree altogether. The graduate schools have in this 
respect had an important structuring effect and increased the awareness of the PhD 
training process. However, more efforts are needed to reduce PhD completion times 
and improve PhD supervision. It must become a clearly stated goal that the average 
time to complete a PhD degree should be four years, including some limited time 
spent on teaching. The funding instruments that support PhD students must have 
project periods that allow the students to complete their degree within the duration of 
the project.

---

12
1  Introduction