RESEARCH FUNDING
Deep dive into 2015 chemistry spending National Science Foundation data show slight increases for academic chemistry research ANDREA WIDENER, C&EN WASHINGTON
R
esearch funding is constantly on the minds of academic chemists and chemical engineers. Data from the National Science Foundation give those scientists a chance to take a closer look at their universities, including how much their departments get and their funding sources. A look at 2015 (the most recent data available
More online For details on the top 100 ranked chemistry departments, visit our online feature at cenm. ag/2015funding. This year, C&EN added a graph showing the funding fluctuations at each school over the past decade and a breakdown of where that funding came from in 2015.
Big movers
School spending on chemistry R&D
Vanderbilt University moved up
Take a look at the top chemistry spenders for 2015, 2014, and 2005.
20
RANK
SPENDING, $ THOUSANDS
2015 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18
2014 6 1 2 3 5 7 9 28 4 13 10 8 32 16 21 14 27 12
2005 3 1 6 18 7 2 5 78 17 8 21 9 16 40 55 14 24 52
$ Billions
19
26
2.0
20
17
21
places in chemistry spending rankings University of Oklahoma moved up
15
places in chemical engineering spending rankings
Chemistry spending Ten-year funding peaked in 2011 and is gradually crawling back.
1.5
1.0 2005 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 Note: Institutional fiscal years. Spending figures are in current dollars and do not account for inflation. Source: National Science Foundation’s WebCASPAR database, 2015 data
22
from NSF) shows that spending on chemistry is slightly up from previous years but hasn’t returned to its 2011 peak. While total funding for chemistry remains fairly consistent overall, which schools spend the most vary widely from year to year. This year, C&EN included rankings from a decade ago as well, which gives a broader sense of how funding changes over time. ◾
C&EN | CEN.ACS.ORG | MAY 29, 2017
INSTITUTION U of California, San Francisco California Inst. of Technology U of California, San Diego Northwestern U
2015 $50,957 40,577 34,573 34,334
2014 $31,267 61,664 35,526 33,303
2005 $26,041 29,563 23,028 17,825
U of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign Harvard U U of California, Berkeley Vanderbilt U Georgia Tech Texas A&M U U of Michigan Rutgers U Massachusetts Inst. of Technology Princeton U Emory U U of Colorado U of Wisconsin, Madison U of Notre Dame
32,678 32,068 31,324 28,687 28,610 28,293 24,714 24,380 24,143 24,018 23,894 23,855 23,673 23,201
31,861 31,025 27,632 18,654 32,670 23,348 25,992 29,655 17,699 21,810 20,442 22,289 18,734 24,244
22,603 26,572 25,666 5,445 17,930 21,739 16,435 21,049 17,984 10,843 8,223 18,251 15,710 8,591
50
Yale U
29
U of California, Irvine
22,674 22,280
18,778 21,393
8,658 14,192
11
36
Johns Hopkins Ua
21,871
24,528
12,038
22
29
20
Stanford U
21,619
18,478
16,781
23
23
10
Cornell U
21,596
20,034
20,770
24
20
27
U of Minnesota
20,812
20,492
14,222
Ohio State U
20,443
14,192
16,378
$685,274
$645,710
$436,537
$1,758,127
$1,723,824
$1,371,984
25
42
22
Total, listed institutions TOTAL, ALL INSTITUTIONS
Note: Institutional fiscal years. a Includes funding for the Applied Physics Laboratory. National Science Foundation’s WebCASPAR database
Spending by field
Funding sources
The share of total funding for various disciplines has remained almost flat for years.
As federal funding for academic R&D has declined, institutions, industry, and nonprofits have largely picked up the slack.
Math & computer science 4.1% Geosciences Social sciencesc 5.1% 3.6% Chemistry Other sciences 2.8% 1.7% Other physical sciencesb 4.6% Chemical engineering Life sciencesa 1.4% 60.8% Materials engineering 1.4% Other engineering 14.5%
$ Billions 70 60 50
◾ Federal government ◾ State & local government ◾ Industry ◾ Institution ◾ Othera
40 30 20 10
Academic R&D spending, FY 2015 = $63.9 billion
0 1972 75
Note: Institutional fiscal years. Spending figures do not account for inflation. a Includes agricultural, biological, medical, and other life sciences. b Includes astronomy, physics, and other physical sciences. c Includes psychology. Source: National Science Foundation’s WebCASPAR database, 2015 data
80
85
90
95
00
05
10
15
Note: Institutional fiscal years beginning with 1972, the first year for which data are available. a Includes nonprofits. Source: National Science Foundation’s WebCASPAR database, 2015 data
School spending on chemical engineering R&D Take a look at the top chemical engineering spenders for 2015, 2014, and 2005. RANK
SPENDING, $ THOUSANDS
2015 2014 2005 INSTITUTION 1 1 3 U of Texas, Austin 2 6 6 Texas A&M U 3 2 5 Massachusetts Inst. of Technology 4 3 4 Georgia Tech 5 15 26 California Inst. of Technology 6 4 2 North Carolina State U 7 5 73 U at Buffalo 8 11 16 U of Minnesota 9 13 24 U of Colorado 10 7 18 U of Delaware 11 9 46 U of Tulsa 12 17 14 U of Michigan 13 21 1 Pennsylvania State U 14 14 27 Purdue U 15 30 38 U of Oklahoma 16 28 9 Johns Hopkins Ua 17 24 51 Iowa State U 18 32 21 U of California, Santa Barbara
2015 $51,920 38,056 33,225 32,687 27,701 24,744 23,771 20,823 17,613 14,951 14,328 13,386 12,878 12,208 11,835 11,741 11,602 11,473
2014 $48,858 21,490 32,844 31,128 14,260 29,521 24,423 16,590 14,614 17,814 17,112 13,565 12,400 14,555 10,360 10,819 11,330 9,820
2005 $14,049 12,089 13,737 13,808 5,932 15,231 1,957 8,718 6,294 7,162 3,790 8,891 17,375 5,535 4,356 9,675 3,598 7,129
19
25
15
Michigan State U
20
23
31
Cornell U
11,264 10,934
11,073 11,411
8,761 4,907
21
18
50
U of Akron
10,855
13,447
3,639
22
19
19
U of Wisconsin, Madison
10,821
13,400
7,154
23
8
12
New Mexico Inst. of Mining & Technology
10,798
17,504
9,039
24
31
93
Oregon State U
10,759
10,047
673
25
20
39
Ohio U
10,602
13,303
4,255
$460,975
$441,688
$197,754
$914,713
$907,028
$505,975
Total, listed institutions TOTAL, ALL INSTITUTIONS
BY THE NUMBERS
$3.6
billion
U.S. R&D spending in chemistry, chemical engineering, and materials engineering in 2015
$63.9 billion
U.S. academic R&D spending in 2015
Note: Institutional fiscal years. a Includes funding for the Applied Physics Laboratory. Source: National Science Foundation’s WebCASPAR database MAY 29, 2017 | CEN.ACS.ORG | C&EN
23
