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, viestinta@aka.fi
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
Do'stlaringiz bilan baham: |