Evaluation Report Publications of the Academy of Finland 1/11

C.  Terms of reference for the panel ..................................................................................128
D. The evaluation form ......................................................................................................129

---

7
Publisher
Academy of Finland
Date
January 2011
Author(s)
Evaluation panel, Dr Mikko Lensu (ed.).
Title
Chemistry Research in Finland. Evaluation Report
Abstract
This report presents the findings of an international panel convened to evaluate 
chemistry research in Finland. The panel consisted of Professors Kenneth Ruud 
(chair), Claudine Buess-Herman, Jennifer Green, Helena Grennberg, Søren Rud 
Keiding and Torsten Linker and Directeur de Recherche Gabriel Wild.
  The evaluation includes 41 chemistry units and covers the years 2005–2009. The 
evaluation is based on interviews and unit self-evaluations. Of the units, 35 were 
interviewed by the panel and six were assessed based on the evaluation form only. The 
report includes the panel’s observations and recommendations and is divided into three 
main sections. The first section provides an overall look at the chemistry field and deals 
with research quality, funding, personnel resources, infrastructure, education, 
internationality and societal impact. The second section focuses on the different 
chemistry subdisciplines: analytical chemistry, chemical engineering, industrial 
chemistry, materials chemistry, organic chemistry, polymer chemistry, physical 
chemistry and theoretical chemistry. The third section contains the unit evaluations. 
The report also includes statistics with key figures on chemistry research in Finland. 
  According to the evaluation panel, chemistry research in Finland is at a very good 
international level overall, with some research units placed at the international 
cutting edge. However, there are a number of units – often single-professor units – 
that are of subcritical size and that are not conducting research at an international 
level. Another weakness is that some units do not actively engage in collaborations  
at the national or international level. Finnish chemistry research would benefit from 
a stronger international focus and the recruitment of personnel and students from 
outside Finland. The research infrastructures within Finnish chemistry research are 
very high-quality, but maintaining them at their current level would require a na-
tional investment and upgrade plan. The overall funding of chemistry research is at  
a satisfactory level, but the panel is concerned that the competition-driven funding 
does not encourage research groups to take new initiatives. Nevertheless, the 
research by the units covers all significant aspects of chemistry and caters well to  
the Finnish chemical industry. The panel is somewhat concerned that the focus on 
industry-related research may put basic chemistry research in jeopardy. 
  The panel notes that the graduate school system has made PhD training in Finnish 
chemistry research more effective. However, more efforts are needed. For instance, 
the average PhD completion time should be four years. This will require longer-term 
and more secure funding schemes and improved project planning.
Key words
Chemistry, research policy, research funding, evaluation, analytical chemistry, 
chemical engineering, industrial chemistry, materials chemistry, organic chemistry, 
polymer chemistry, physical chemistry, theoretical chemistry