L . BR IAN STAU F F ER /U IUC
EDUCATI ON
relative share of expenditures in each sector of science and engineering. Science accounted for 84.7% of total academic R&D spending in 2008. The sector benefited from a 4.6% increase to $44.0 billion in outlays. The life sciences continued to dominate science spending, absorbing 60.1% of the total R&D budget as a result of a 4.6% increase to $31.2 billion. The physical sciences, including chemistry, physics, and astronomy, didn’t fare as well. Spending rose a mere 1.9% to $3.9 billion in 2008, for a 7.6% share of the total. Investment in chemistry edged up 1.7% to $1.5 billion, far short of the 5.4% average annual increase over the previous decade. This slight increase preserved the central science’s share at 2.9% of the total R&D budget. On a constant-dollar basis, the picture for chemistry is even less encouraging: Spending shrank 0.6% from 2007 to 2008. And between 1998 and 2008, chemical R&D spending rose a total of just 33.9% in constant dollars, versus 69.4% in current dollars.
BIG SPENDER
At UIUC, the top investor in chemical R&D, chemists Tyler W. Wilson (front) and Scott E. Denmark synthesize a reagent for making pharmaceuticals.
ACADEMIC R&D SPENDING TRENDS Spending edged UP 1.7% FOR CHEMISTRY but grew 4.8% for science and engineering as a whole in 2008 SOPHIE L. ROVNER, C&EN WASHINGTON
OUTLAYS IN the engineering sector grew RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT in aca-
demia profited from a healthy expansion in investment during fiscal 2008, the most recent year for which data are available from the National Science Foundation. In fact, 2008 marked the first year since 2002 in which spending on science and engineering R&D grew at a faster rate than the prior year. As a result of the economic stimulus package enacted by Congress in February 2009 to lessen the impact of the recession—which started in December 2007 and ended in mid-2009, according to many observers—the sector might fare even better in subsequent years. Between 1998 and 2008, growth in university and college spending on science and engineering averaged 7.2% per year. Annual spending growth peaked at 10.9% in 2002, gradually slipping to 3.8% by 2007. But in 2008, academic R&D spending reversed that slide by rising 4.8% to $51.9 billion. Removing the effect of inflation reveals that R&D spending rose just 2.4% in terms of constant dollars between 2007 and MORE ONLINE
2008. Over the decade ending in 2008, spending grew a total of 58.5% in constant dollars and 100.7% in current dollars. As is typical, three-fourths of R&D spending in 2008 was funneled into basic research. The sector saw a 4.1% rise in current dollars to $39.4 billion, quite a bit smaller than the average annual increase of 7.5% between 1998 and 2008. The situation for applied R&D was considerably better, with growth of 6.7% to $12.5 billion in 2008 besting the 6.3% annual average growth of the prior decade. Much of academia’s R&D budget is provided by the federal government. In 2008, the federal sector’s $31.2 billion investment—which represents an increase of 2.5% over the prior year—accounted for 60.2% of the total. Institutions provided an additional $10.4 billion, or 20.1% of academia’s total R&D budget; state and local governments kicked in 6.6%; and industry contributed 5.5%. These shares remain fairly steady from year to year. The same holds true for the
5.7% in current dollars from 2007 to 2008. Engineering accounted for $8.0 billion, or 15.3%, of expenditures in 2008. Chemical engineers profited from a 9.5% hike in spending to $658 million, or a 1.3% share of the total. In contrast, materials engineers made do with a 1.4% increase to $643 million, which slightly depressed their share to 1.2%. Materials engineers actually lost ground in terms of federally financed spending in 2008, with a cut of 1.1% to $374 million compared with 2007. Federal support for chemical engineering, on the other hand, jumped 6.2% to $343 million. And federal investment in engineering as a whole grew 5.4% to $4.7 billion. Federal support for science R&D in academia rose just 2.0% in 2008 to reach $26.5 billion. Within the science sector, federally backed spending on the life sciences grew 1.7% to $18.7 billion. Chemistry spending reached $988 million following growth of just 1.2%. That increase was less than one-fourth the annual average for the prior decade.
For tables on postdoc and grad student appointments; funding sources; and spending on basic versus applied R&D, chemical engineering, and research equipment, click on this story at www.cen-online.org. WWW.CEN-ONLINE.ORG
40
OCTOBER 4, 2010
ACADEMIC R&D SPENDING, BY FIELD On average, annual growth in spending for chemistry has lagged that for life sciences since 1998 $ MILLIONS
1998
ALL SCIENCES Lifea Physicalb Physics Chemistry Psychology & social Environmental Computer Mathematical Other ALL ENGINEERING Chemical Materials TOTAL ANNUAL CHANGE
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
$21,797 $23,281 $25,527 $27,802 $30,880 $34,103 $36,943 $39,053 $40,658 $42,029 $43,952 14,599 15,632 17,471 19,230 21,439 23,757 25,949 27,605 28,804 29,838 31,215 2,484 2,606 2,713 2,806 3,017 3,277 3,547 3,704 3,813 3,859 3,933 1,079 1,149 1,208 1,241 1,287 1,418 1,522 1,597 1,611 1,616 1,604 877 920 962 1,009 1,129 1,226 1,318 1,372 1,414 1,461 1,486 1,577 1,717 1,816 2,027 2,270 2,445 2,458 2,511 2,581 2,670 2,869 1,625 1,692 1,766 1,829 2,018 2,195 2,353 2,555 2,602 2,724 2,800 747 861 877 956 1,126 1,305 1,404 1,406 1,438 1,421 1,468 311 314 342 360 388 428 448 495 533 573 621 455 459 543 594 623 697 782 778 888 943 1,046 $4,071 327 391
$4,263 349 384
$4,557 376 399
$5,022 414 453
$5,525 431 468
$5,997 453 548
$6,315 493 565
$6,746 506 612
$25,867 $27,544 $30,084 $32,824 $36,405 $40,100 $43,258 $45,799 6.1% 6.5% 9.2% 9.1% 10.9% 10.1% 7.9% 5.9%
ANNUAL CHANGE 2007–08 1998–2008
4.6% 4.6 1.9 -0.7 1.7 7.5 2.8 3.3 8.4 10.9
7.3% 7.9 4.7 4.0 5.4 6.2 5.6 7.0 7.2 8.7
$7,957 658 643
5.7% 9.5 1.4
6.9% 7.2 5.1
$47,751 $49,554 $51,909 4.3% 3.8% 4.8%
4.8%
7.2%
$7,093 560 643
$7,525 601 634
NOTE: Institutional fiscal years. Totals may not add because of rounding. a Includes agricultural, biological, medical, and other life sciences. b Includes astronomy, chemistry, physics, and other physical sciences. SOURCE: National Science Foundation, WebCASPAR Database System
FEDERALLY FINANCED ACADEMIC R&D SPENDING, BY FIELD Growth in federal backing for chemistry in 2008 was less than one-fourth the annual average during the prior decade $ MILLIONS
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
ALL SCIENCES $12,805 $13,663 $14,967 $16,390 $18,640 Lifea 8,335 8,959 10,070 11,202 12,857 Physicalb 1,762 1,864 1,916 1,974 2,132 Physics 818 869 902 927 975 Chemistry 587 618 632 661 737 Environmental 1,077 1,103 1,135 1,187 1,292 Psychology & social 725 782 842 947 1,094 Computer 514 583 584 644 770 Mathematical 214 210 230 242 269 Other 179 162 191 195 227 ALL ENGINEERING Materials Chemical
$2,355 222 169
$2,448 218 180
$2,581 227 196
$2,854 241 215
$3,233 263 230
TOTAL ANNUAL CHANGE
$15,159 5.9%
$16,112 $17,548 $19,244 6.3% 8.9% 9.7%
$21,873 13.7%
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
$21,156 $23,736 $25,076 $25,822 $25,996 $26,526 14,652 16,667 17,693 18,280 18,353 18,664 2,357 2,569 2,673 2,699 2,685 2,739 1,088 1,169 1,227 1,215 1,220 1,211 820 921 953 968 976 988 1,446 1,596 1,731 1,768 1,832 1,826 1,222 1,284 1,309 1,342 1,362 1,447 937 1,025 1,023 1,017 1,015 1,031 295 318 346 375 409 445 247 276 301 341 340 373 $3,614 314 248
$3,908 352 268
$4,133 369 295
$4,307 386 320
ANNUAL CHANGE 2007–08 1998–2008
2.0% 1.7 2.0 -0.7 1.2 -0.3 6.2 1.6 8.8 9.7
7.6% 8.4 4.5 4.0 5.3 5.4 7.2 7.2 7.6 7.6
$4,462 378 323
$4,705 374 343
5.4% -1.1 6.2
7.2% 5.4 7.3
$24,771 $27,644 $29,209 $30,129 $30,458 13.2% 11.6% 5.7% 3.1% 1.1%
$31,231 2.5%
2.5%
7.5%
NOTE: Institutional fiscal years. Totals may not add because of rounding. a Includes agricultural, biological, medical, and other life sciences. b Includes astronomy, chemistry, physics, and other physical sciences. SOURCE: National Science Foundation, WebCASPAR Database System
The school that spent the most on chemical R&D in 2008 was the University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign. UIUC had placed fourth in 2007, but its 0.7% increase to $28.2 million was sufficient to boost it into first place the following year. The University of California, Berkeley, edged up from third place to second despite a 5.4% decline in spending to $26.8 million. At the same time, a 24.6% plunge to $26.7 million sent California Institute of Technology to third place—after having held first place for each of the preceding three years.
Georgia Institute of Technology climbed two spots to fourth place as a result of an 11.1% increase to $25.9 million in chemical R&D spending, and Harvard University’s 16.4% slump to $24.3 million shifted it from second to fifth place. Rounding out the list of the 10 biggest spenders are Massachusetts Institute of Technology; the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill; the University of Texas, Austin; UC San Francisco; and UC Los Angeles. MIT and UNC Chapel Hill were the only newcomers to this top tier in 2008; they displaced UC WWW.CEN-ONLINE.ORG
41
OCTOBER 4, 2010
San Diego and Texas A&M University. For the second year in a row, Ohio State University took first place in terms of school spending on chemical engineering R&D, although its outlay shrank 8.1% to $23.5 million. That expenditure was enough to top North Carolina State University, which placed second despite a 45.3% surge to $22.5 million. MIT; the University of Massachusetts, Amherst; and Georgia Tech each spent nearly as much as NC State. As in 2007, Caltech enjoyed the greatest amount of federal support for chemical
EDUCATI ON
SCHOOL SPENDING ON CHEMICAL R&D Growth at top 50 schools was much slower in 2008 than the annual average for the prior decade RANK 2008 2007 $ THOUSANDS
1998
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
ANNUAL CHANGE 2007–08 1998–2008
% FEDERAL FUNDS, 2008a 2007A
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
4 3 1 6 2 12 14 10 7 9
U of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign U of California, Berkeley California Inst. of Technology Georgia Inst. of Technology Harvard U Massachusetts Inst. of Technology U of North Carolina, Chapel Hill U of Texas, Austin U of California, San Francisco U of California, Los Angeles Total, first 10 institutions
11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20
16 11 15 17 8 23 18 25 19 5
21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30
$18,038 20,638 17,760 10,869 11,185 11,050 8,368 11,397 na 11,769 $121,074
$28,181 26,758 26,706 25,938 24,255 24,047 23,793 22,964 22,195 21,681 $246,518
72.7% 68.2 83.4 47.8 87.3 89.6 82.6 65.9 67.5 73.9 73.8%
0.7% -5.4 -24.6 11.1 -16.4 16.6 18.0 5.4 -1.8 -2.9 -2.0%
4.6% 2.6 4.2 9.1 8.0 8.1 11.0 7.3 nm 6.3 7.4%
Pennsylvania State U Rutgers, State U of New Jersey Purdue U Cornell U U of California, San Diego Stanford U U of Washington, Seattle Johns Hopkins Ub U of Colorado Texas A&M U Total, first 20 institutions
16,075 22,330 20,711 22,652 18,796 21,629 9,622 16,416 21,049 23,629 21,128 21,207 12,548 12,776 13,070 13,723 19,605 20,751 12,031 20,600 20,770 21,090 18,380 20,108 10,297 19,638 23,028 21,789 22,599 19,538 12,306 18,863 16,781 16,283 17,056 19,377 7,097 19,354 18,154 18,716 17,843 19,330 18,541 11,890 12,038 12,693 16,376 19,154 12,948 14,960 18,251 19,274 17,672 18,802 9,560 19,475 21,739 22,448 23,651 18,585 $242,099 $394,462 $414,666 $443,462 $444,669 $444,999
58.0 79.9 72.6 61.0 79.8 81.0 87.7 93.9 84.5 43.3 73.9%
15.1 0.4 5.8 9.4 -13.5 13.6 8.3 17.0 6.4 -21.4 0.1%
3.0 8.2 5.2 5.3 6.6 4.6 10.5 0.3 3.8 6.9 6.3%
13 20 26 29 22 21 32 27 24 39
Northwestern U Indiana U U of Michigan State U of New York, Stony Brook U of Wisconsin, Madison U of California, Irvine U of Arizona Emory U Louisiana State U U of South Carolina Total, first 30 institutions
9,843 17,704 7,982 15,642 7,820 14,901 6,533 10,656 12,011 17,115 8,425 11,315 6,588 11,312 5,230 7,734 5,752 13,409 7,357 10,515 $319,640 $524,765
73.4 36.3 69.2 31.5 60.6 64.2 65.7 40.5 52.7 57.2 68.8%
-9.1 5.5 14.0 26.1 3.4 -3.2 15.0 -3.2 -9.9 16.2 1.2%
6.6 8.6 8.8 10.8 4.0 7.0 9.4 11.3 10.2 7.5 6.7%
31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39
33 41 31 38 30 44 35 47 34
40
43
U of Pennsylvania U of Pittsburgh U of Chicago State U of New York, Buffalo U of Utah Ohio State U U of Florida U of Southern California Virginia Polytechnic Inst. & State U Arizona State U, Tempe Total, first 40 institutions
41 42 43 44
36 48 42 49
45 46 47 48 49 50
45 52 40 53 37 46
11,669 6,097 8,189 7,426 7,398 9,679 11,675 7,900 7,037
$21,217 $22,603 25,984 25,666 22,968 29,563 14,528 17,930 22,135 26,572 20,926 17,984 16,186 18,521 24,154 25,818 29,609 26,041 20,453 18,377 $218,160 $229,075
$25,034 27,315 34,322 22,837 33,943 18,142 21,280 24,247 25,664 18,381 $251,165
$27,981 28,283 35,420 23,356 29,029 20,620 20,166 21,782 22,601 22,325 $251,563
17,825 17,258 20,435 18,579 11,734 19,684 17,253 18,207 16,435 18,472 15,939 18,168 10,191 9,388 14,383 18,140 15,710 18,348 17,122 17,703 14,192 16,186 17,129 16,576 13,046 13,734 14,094 16,211 8,223 9,290 15,700 15,195 20,426 16,610 16,820 15,160 8,801 12,627 13,008 15,115 $551,249 $595,059 $606,552 $614,053
12,435 13,025 10,083 11,898 13,477 14,423 13,011 9,418 11,332
14,751 14,031 12,108 11,158 14,251 16,378 16,153 8,615 11,382
16,459 12,524 13,261 11,625 15,136 12,574 12,828 7,432 10,828
13,998 11,793 14,187 13,148 14,312 11,168 13,417 10,520 13,685
14,546 14,528 14,362 14,285 14,139 13,027 12,537 12,339 12,247
9,583 11,376 14,196 12,840 11,300 12,177 $406,293 $645,243 $684,272 $720,566 $734,080 $748,240
Princeton U U of Maryland, College Park U of Minnesota U of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center U of Puerto Rico, Río Piedras Wayne State U U of Southern Mississippi U of California, Davis U of Akron Rice U Total, first 50 institutions
8,973 6,635 7,574 na
12,491 9,432 12,018 8,465
10,843 9,543 14,222 9,041
1,492 3,244 5,011 5,330 6,548 6,442 4,315 8,110 9,408 4,562 8,455 7,692 8,326 10,299 10,618 4,518 10,220 9,370 $458,018 $734,525 $776,462
TOTAL, ALL INSTITUTIONS
8,915 8,510 14,204 10,790
13,313 10,274 11,677 10,149
12,117 12,060 11,391 11,093
10,843 11,056 7,346 9,490 9,029 11,840 9,218 9,054 11,645 13,169 6,871 10,570 $817,937 $844,672
11,075 10,902 10,582 10,479 10,091 9,845 $857,875
$876,944 $1,318,226 $1,372,340 $1,413,887 $1,460,723 $1,485,567
89.6 79.5 63.4 45.6 71.4 72.7 64.3 52.3 49.6 63.9 68.2% 62.1 53.1 67.1 62.9
3.9 23.2 1.2 8.6 -1.2 16.6 -6.6 17.3 -10.5
2.2 9.1 5.8 6.8 6.7 3.0 0.7 4.6 5.7
7.8 1.9%
2.4 6.3%
-9.0 17.4 -2.4 9.3
3.0 6.2 4.2 nm
95.3 52.4 85.8 69.8 29.1 62.4 67.7%
0.2 14.9 -10.6 15.7 -23.4 -6.9 1.6%
22.2 7.4 9.4 8.7 1.9 8.1 6.5%
66.5%
1.7%
5.4%
NOTE: Institutional fiscal years. a Share of total expenditures funded by the federal government. b Includes funding for the Applied Physics Lab. na = not available. nm = not meaningful. SOURCE: National Science Foundation, WebCASPAR Database System
WWW.CEN-ONLINE.ORG
42
OCTOBER 4, 2010
SCHOOLS WITH MOST FEDERAL SUPPORT FOR CHEMICAL R&D Federal funding fell at 17 of the top 50 schools in 2008 RANK 2008 2007
$ THOUSANDS
1998
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
ANNUAL CHANGE 2007–08 1998–2008
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
1 6 2 4 9 5 11 12 8 7
California Inst. of Technology Massachusetts Inst. of Technology Harvard U U of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign U of North Carolina, Chapel Hill U of California, Berkeley Johns Hopkins Ua U of Washington, Seattle Rutgers, State U of New Jersey U of California, Los Angeles Total, first 10 institutions
$17,629 9,201 10,639 11,436 5,905 14,637 18,280 4,978 6,790 9,521 $109,016
$19,685 18,774 19,617 14,295 12,753 19,988 11,028 17,900 12,276 15,453 $161,769
$25,171 16,149 24,109 15,694 14,707 19,200 11,316 15,212 16,893 14,666 $173,117
$28,662 16,004 31,683 16,496 15,757 19,891 11,875 15,243 17,695 13,491 $186,797
$28,822 18,449 25,629 19,674 16,263 19,561 15,787 15,592 16,696 17,123 $193,596
$22,279 21,539 21,183 20,495 19,650 18,241 17,985 16,955 16,937 16,025 $191,289
-22.7% 16.7 -17.3 4.2 20.8 -6.7 13.9 8.7 1.4 -6.4 -1.2%
2.4% 8.9 7.1 6.0 12.8 2.2 -0.2 13.0 9.6 5.3 5.8%
11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20
13 16 3 15 17 10 14 18 20 28
U of Colorado Stanford U U of California, San Diego U of Texas, Austin Purdue U U of California, San Francisco Northwestern U U of Pennsylvania U of Michigan Pennsylvania State U Total, first 20 institutions
10,446 10,658 7,802 7,123 8,212 na 7,096 11,283 6,230 8,852 $186,718
12,843 16,668 14,648 16,136 8,419 22,215 13,631 10,852 11,701 14,573 $303,455
15,716 14,250 18,133 16,523 8,931 19,621 14,549 12,352 12,628 13,227 $319,047
16,842 12,970 17,451 15,163 9,604 19,962 13,767 14,892 12,962 12,082 $332,492
15,084 13,052 19,701 14,173 12,721 15,957 14,785 12,182 11,371 10,184 $332,806
15,892 15,695 15,582 15,124 15,069 14,982 13,645 13,026 12,573 12,547 $335,424
5.4 20.2 -20.9 6.7 18.5 -6.1 -7.7 6.9 10.6 23.2 0.8%
4.3 3.9 7.2 7.8 6.3 nm 6.8 1.4 7.3 3.5 6.0%
21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30
21 19 25 26 24 22 23 29 36 32
Georgia Inst. of Technology Cornell U U of Pittsburgh U of Wisconsin, Madison U of Arizona U of California, Irvine U of Puerto Rico, Río Piedras U of Utah Ohio State U U of Chicago Total, first 30 institutions
4,765 8,682 4,765 7,695 4,882 6,335 1,449 6,122 5,069 6,671 $243,153
8,500 15,350 11,283 10,830 8,758 6,931 3,117 9,164 9,461 7,315 $394,164
10,201 13,398 11,800 9,696 9,587 10,281 4,951 9,421 9,612 8,213 $416,207
10,360 14,528 10,037 11,624 10,235 10,901 10,779 10,130 7,916 7,792 $436,794
11,260 11,387 10,437 10,230 10,630 11,227 10,978 9,963 7,924 8,805 $435,647
12,387 12,256 11,547 10,733 10,646 10,638 10,554 10,095 9,465 9,107 $442,852
10.0 7.6 10.6 4.9 0.2 -5.2 -3.9 1.3 19.4 3.4 1.7%
10.0 3.5 9.3 3.4 8.1 5.3 22.0 5.1 6.4 3.2 6.2%
31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40
30 55 33 27 52 34 35 37 42 38
U of Southern Mississippi U of South Carolina U of Florida Texas A&M U Montana State U, Bozeman Louisiana State U Arizona State U, Tempe U of Minnesota Vanderbilt U Princeton U Total, first 40 institutions
3,245 4,679 5,309 5,211 2,596 3,297 4,287 6,446 2,506 5,727 $286,456
5,861 5,844 9,667 8,652 4,080 8,454 6,259 8,956 3,587 8,271 $463,795
7,741 4,383 10,427 11,642 4,982 10,848 8,430 11,026 4,835 7,065 $497,586
6,991 5,900 9,237 10,098 5,629 9,476 8,886 10,014 6,014 6,158 $515,197
9,376 5,901 8,580 10,219 6,006 8,580 8,303 7,643 6,940 7,576 $514,771
9,075 8,653 8,060 8,047 8,000 7,992 7,787 7,639 7,604 7,523 $523,232
-3.2 46.6 -6.1 -21.3 33.2 -6.9 -6.2 -0.1 9.6 -0.7 1.6%
10.8 6.3 4.3 4.4 11.9 9.3 6.2 1.7 11.7 2.8 6.2%
41 42 43
31 47 46
7,740 3,480 na
10,204 6,628 5,586
7,730 6,004 4,445
8,768 6,908 5,799
8,929 6,360 6,410
7,519 7,317 6,977
-15.8 15.0 8.8
-0.3 7.7 nm
44 45 46 47 48 49 50
50 58 53 59 51 56 74
U of Notre Dame U of California, Davis U of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center Yale U Indiana U State U of New York, Buffalo U of Southern California U of Maryland, College Park Washington U Boston U Total, first 50 institutions
5,921 6,047 4,110 6,089 4,269 3,376 1,729 $329,217
6,348 6,920 6,269 4,760 7,324 5,401 5,587 $528,822
6,534 6,766 6,350 4,902 6,634 5,625 4,291 $556,867
6,456 6,494 5,847 4,915 5,324 6,918 3,375 $576,001
6,193 5,642 5,993 5,566 6,074 5,822 3,843 $575,603
6,813 6,603 6,507 6,455 6,407 6,278 6,267 $590,375
10.0 17.0 8.6 16.0 5.5 7.8 63.1 2.6%
1.4 0.9 4.7 0.6 4.1 6.4 13.7 6.0%
TOTAL, ALL INSTITUTIONS
$587,342
$921,236
$952,748
$967,756
$975,638
$987,954
1.3%
5.3%
NOTE: Institutional fiscal years. a Includes funding for the Applied Physics Lab. na = not available. nm = not meaningful. SOURCE: National Science Foundation, WebCASPAR Database System
WWW.CEN-ONLINE.ORG
43
OCTOBER 4, 2010
EDUCATI ON
TOP 25 UNIVERSITIES IN 2008 R&D SPENDING List of big spenders is virtually identical in 2007 and 2008 RANK 2008 2007
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 5 4
6 7 8 9 10
6 7 8 12 9
11 12 13 14 15
LIFE SCIENCESa ENGINEERING
$ MILLIONS
Johns Hopkins Ud U of California, San Francisco U of Wisconsin, Madison U of Michigan U of California, Los Angeles
PHYSICAL SCIENCESb CHEMISTRYc
ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES
MATH & COMPUTER SCIENCES
OTHER SCIENCES
TOTAL
$739 863 568 507 650
$619 0 93 171 57
$128 22 61 40 65
$19 22 18 18 22
$47 0 67 11 11
$96 0 24 13 22
$52 0 69 135 66
$1,681 885 882 876 871
U of California, San Diego Duke U U of Washington, Seattle U of Pennsylvania Ohio State U
477 655 515 590 408
93 39 81 34 149
53 18 36 29 32
20 7 19 15 13
145 17 100 1 11
51 12 9 11 40
24 26 25 45 62
842 767 765 708 703
11 10 14 15 16
Pennsylvania State U Stanford U U of Minnesota Texas A&M U Massachusetts Inst. of Technology
220 410 499 262 218
259 149 72 184 219
55 57 27 35 104
22 19 11 19 24
56 21 15 129 29
60 26 24 18 51
52 25 45 34 38
701 688 683 662 660
16 17 18 19 20
13 17 20 21 18
Cornell U U of California, Davis U of Pittsburgh U of California, Berkeley U of Florida
411 472 523 184 419
81 72 22 162 90
89 24 21 97 28
20 10 15 27 13
16 29 2 11 9
25 12 7 7 10
32 33 20 131 27
654 643 596 592 584
21 22
19 26
507 492
16 2
16 11
9 11
5 0
7 23
15 31
564 559
23 24 25
22 23 24
Washington U U of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center Columbia U U of Arizona U of Colorado Total, listed institutions
371 270 299 $11,530
42 53 47 $2,804
33 174 74 $1,330
7 16 19 $413
56 17 81 $884
11 7 12 $578
35 24 23 $1,069
549 546 536 $18,195
TOTAL, ALL INSTITUTIONS
$31,215
$7,957
$3,933
$1,486
$2,800
$2,089
$3,915
$51,909
NOTE: Institutional fiscal years. Totals may not add because of rounding. a Includes agricultural, biological, medical, and other life sciences. b Includes astronomy, chemistry, physics, and other physical sciences. c Included in physical sciences. d Includes Applied Physics Lab expenditures. SOURCE: National Science Foundation, WebCASPAR Database System
R&D in 2008. Nevertheless, its $22.3 million allocation represented a decline of 22.7% over the prior year. MIT took second with a $21.5 million investment. The other top five schools were Harvard, UIUC, and UNC Chapel Hill. MIT also made out well in terms of federal support for chemical engineering R&D. It retained first place with a 5.7% hike to $14.4 million in federal backing. The government was also generous to the State University of New York, Buffalo, where a 44.6% boost to $13.0 million continued a long run of dramatic annual increases. Johns Hopkins University, Pennsylvania State University, and UMass Amherst rounded out the ranks of the top five. As a group, colleges and universities spent $113.4 million on chemical research equipment in 2008, up some 0.8% from the previous year. But the top 25 schools
found themselves in a position to raise spending on equipment by 30.7% to $40.4 million. Penn State’s $2.9 million investment in equipment put it at the top of the list of spenders, followed by the University of Pittsburgh; MIT; the University of Maryland, College Park; and UNC Chapel Hill. FEDERAL SUPPORT for chemical research equipment declined for the third year in a row in 2008, slipping 2.2% to $70.9 million. However, the top 25 schools benefited from a 57.1% surge in support to $29.7 million. The largest federal grants went to MIT; UNC Chapel Hill; the University of Maryland, Baltimore County; UT Austin; and the University of Southern Mississippi. After a one-year hiatus, the long-term slow growth in the number of students seeking graduate degrees in chemistry resumed WWW.CEN-ONLINE.ORG
44
OCTOBER 4, 2010
in 2008, rising 1.3% to 21,574. The population of chemical engineering grad students expanded 4.1% to 7,892. As usual, about half the chemical engineering students and more than one-third of the chemistry students were from outside the U.S. The number of postdoctoral appointments for chemists held almost steady in 2008, slipping a mere 0.2% to 3,943. Chemical engineering postdocs had a much better year: Their ranks grew 11.4% to 880. Data for this article were drawn primarily from NSF’s WebCASPAR database of academic science and engineering statistics, which can be accessed online at webcaspar.nsf.gov. Further information came from NSF’s annual “Academic R&D Expenditures” report, which can be viewed at nsf.gov/statistics/nsf10311. Note that numbers from different tables might not match because of rounding. ■
