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.
Do'stlaringiz bilan baham: 
