Sussex Chemistry Escapes Threatened Cuts

Following a flurry of protests, the University of Sussex has revised the plan for the future of its chemistry department.

In March, the university had proposed changing the name of the department to chemical biology, limiting its work to chemical biology and organic chemistry, cutting academic staff from 14 to seven, and dropping the chemistry degree program. The proposal was part of a university-wide restructuring plan intended to concentrate the institution???s investment in areas of strength.

The plan for the chemistry department drew protests from numerous chemists, including Florida State University's Sir Harold W. Kroto, who was a member of the Sussex chemistry department when he won the Nobel Prize in Chemistry in 1996. Last month, members of the chemistry department began soliciting donations from companies to save the department (C&EN, May 1, page 6).

Sussex has now revised its plans for the department. The current proposal, which will be examined by the university in greater detail in June, would merge the chemistry and biochemistry departments. The new department would continue to offer chemistry degrees for undergraduates.

Chemistry department head Gerry A. Lawless said he welcomes the new plan. "We can now go forward with confidence to build on our excellence in chemistry at Sussex," he said.

Not all of Britain's chemistry departments have fared this well. Exeter University and Kings College London are just two of a number of British universities that have closed their departments in recent years.

Richard Pike, chief executive of the Royal Society of Chemistry, warned that "chemistry must not be further weakened at our universities because it is the keystone of science upon which all others rest." He noted that chemistry departments are vulnerable because they cost more than arts, humanities, and business departments. "But it is a price worth paying. Without a flourishing chemistry community at the country's universities, Britain will fail to remain competitive economically and will not meet the environmental and energy demands that this century is already making."