Faculty of Science braces for tough choices as budget gap widens

The Faculty of Science at the University of Copenhagen (UCPH) ended 2024 with an approximate DKK 100 million loss. And unless action is taken now, the faculty can expect similar annual losses in the years ahead.

This was the message shared to all-staff recently in a statement from Dean of the Faculty of Science Bo Jellesmark Thorsen.

The faculty’s structural deficit is primarily due to two factors: increased operating costs for new buildings and overspending from having drawn more from savings than new funding brought in, the dean explained.

In the same message, Bo Jellesmark Thorsen also stated that the faculty must manage »outstanding adjustments« linked to the administration reform. He noted that layoffs cannot be ruled out.

READ ALSO: University of Copenhagen law faculty faces deep cuts

The University Post has spoken with both the dean, Faculty of Science staff, and the University of Copenhagen director to better understand what the structural deficit involves, how the university’s reform to its administration plays into it, and why the faculty now faces an annual budget shortfall of around DKK 100 million.

A university is not supposed to accumulate assets

Bo Jellesmark Thorsen emphasises that the structural deficit comes as no surprise to the faculty. Management has known for many years that significant additional costs for operating new buildings would eventually materialise.

These costs are now due, with the new Niels Bohr Building coming into use, and the faculty taking over the complex for the new Natural History Museum of Denmark on the Sølvtorvet square in central Copenhagen.

The annual operating costs for the new buildings amount to a staggering DKK 89 million. This figure covers operations only — and does not include rent, which is paid centrally by UCPH, the dean notes.

The administration reform is a net loss for the departments at the Faculty of Science

Nynne Christensen, union representative for technical and administrative staff at the Faculty of Science

»The figure was calculated as follows: the number of square metres in the new buildings multiplied by the average cost of operating this type of experimental facility. It costs DKK 1,080 per square metre,« says Bo Jellesmark Thorsen, explaining that the costs include laboratories, technical rooms, specialised ventilation spaces, and salaries for technicians responsible for maintenance and repairs.

Several departments have already moved into the Niels Bohr Building, and the Faculty of Science has taken over the Sølvtorvet complex, where the Natural History Museum is currently setting up exhibitions. This means that, from 2025, UCPH faces an increase in operating costs of DKK 89 million.

The dean expects the Niels Bohr Building to be fully in use by 2027 — the same year the Faculty of Science plans to balance its budget.

Another, major, cause of the deficit is that the Faculty of Science deliberately has spent more than it earned for several years, and has drawn down its reserves.

»We’ve known for years that there would be costs related to getting the Niels Bohr Building up and running, so we set aside money for that purpose in the budget. But because construction was postponed and delayed so many times, we didn’t get to use those funds, and that’s one reason our reserves grew so large. We couldn’t just let them keep growing,« says Bo Jellesmark Thorsen, and explains:

»The purpose of a university is not to save up and become wealthy. The funds we have are meant to be used for research and education. So we began using our reserves, which has led to overspending in recent years.«

»The UCPH administration reform is a loss for us«

The DKK 100 million deficit is therefore a result of increased operating costs for new buildings, and the use of its reserves.

In his message to staff, the dean also named the UCPH administration reform as a factor that needs to be dealt with in addition to the structural deficit. Faculty of Science staff interviewed by the University Post took note of this — wasn’t the reform, after all, supposed to free up funds for core services like teaching and research?

Nynne Christensen is a special consultant at the Department of Biology and is union representative for technical and administrative staff at the Faculty of Staff. She is also an alternate member of the Academic Council and represents technical and administrative staff in the faculty’s staff cooperation committee, where she herself has participated in discussions about the loss.

»We’ve always known there would be a deficit, but we had hoped it could be managed without job cuts. So this is actually a new tone from the dean,« she says.

The idea was that the DKK 300 million saved on administration would be used for core services — but we’ve seen none of that

Peter Waaben Thulstrup, union representative for academic staff at the Faculty of Science

According to the staff rep, the administration reform is currently causing the deficit at the Faculty of Science, which must be addressed in addition to the structural shortfall — and this frustrates her.

The deficit from the administration reform is due to many departments losing more from their salary budgets than the actual payroll expenses they transferred to the new central administration, explains Nynne Christensen.

She also notes that the administrative reform is mentioned in the transparency analysis prepared in autumn 2024 as a contributing factor to the Faculty of Sciences’ overall deficit.

»The bottom line is that the administration reform is a net loss for Faculty of Science departments, and on top of the structural deficit, it could mean layoffs among academic staff. Somewhat ironic, when you consider that the reform was supposed to free up funds for research and teaching,« she says.

The same message comes from Peter Waaben Thulstrup, associate professor at the Department of Chemistry, union representative for academic staff at the Faculty of Staff, and member of the faculty cooperation committee.

»An average salary of approximately DKK 630,000 per administrative employee was used — that’s very high. We’ve asked many times why it was set so high, and it’s presumably because management salaries were included,« says Peter Waaben Thulstrup, and continues:

»But the salaries we actually transferred to the new central administration don’t match what was deducted from our budgets. For instance, if we moved a student assistant, we had DKK 630,000 deducted annually, even though that’s nowhere near what the assistant actually cost.«

If you ask Peter Waaben Thulstrup, implementing the new administration reform is »not going brilliantly«:

»The idea was that the DKK 300 million saved on administration would be used for core services — but we’ve seen none of that.«

»A question of timing«

Bo Jellesmark Thorsen stresses that the administration reform is not included in the structural deficit. But he acknowledges that it is »a question of timing«. The Faculty of Science is having to find an extra DKK 100 million annually, while also implementing the reform.

»The administration reform doesn’t mean we have to spend more money at UCPH in general. No costs are leaving UCPH. But both funding and costs are leaving the Faculty of Science. I know people are aware of that, and that’s why I mentioned it in my statement,« says Bo Jellesmark Thorsen, and continues:

»I want to acknowledge that the administration reform is a major restructuring that we have to manage on top of the structural deficit. We can’t deny that.«

The dean refers further questions about the reform to University Director Søren Skydsgaard.

Neither simple nor exact

University Director Søren Skydsgaard confirms that a budget reduction was calculated that corresponds to approximately DKK 630,000 per administrative employee at the Faculty of Science. This included managers covered by the reform.

He emphasises that the departments were made aware of the savings needed during the 2025 budget process, and that it was ultimately a local decision which staff they had to transfer.

»The managers at the Faculty of Science, like those at other faculties, had to decide how to organise themselves with the budget that was established by the administration reform. They may, for instance, have chosen to retain staff with higher-than-average salaries — and I’m sure there were many good reasons for that,« he says.

The reform also frees up funds meant for core services. It will be up to management to decide how these are later distributed

Søren Skydsgaard, University Director

But right now, isn’t the reality at the Faculty of Science that the reform is the cause of a deficit?

»You can’t put it like that. Decisions were made based on a budget that was already known. So you can’t say a deficit has suddenly arisen. But you can say that the expected full savings have yet to materialise,« says Søren Skydsgaard, and adds:

»I do acknowledge that it’s not easy — and it’s not precise to the exact millimetre.«

How big is that part of the shortfall at the Faculty of Science that is a result of the reform?

»It’s around DKK 44 million annually. But those savings include more than just salaries — they also involve other operational costs.«

Was the average salary used in the calculations set too high?

»No. It was calculated as the average salary of all the employees affected by the reform at the Faculty of Science. If we had used the average for all administrative staff at UCPH, it would have been higher.«

Faculty of Science staff feel that the reform — which was meant to free up funds for research and teaching — is now having the opposite effect. Are they right?

»The financial imbalance at the Faculty of Science existed before the reform, and I do not accept that the reform is now having the opposite effect. The reform makes it more complicated to restore the balance at the Faculty of Science because two rounds of savings are happening at once,« says Skydsgaard, and continues:

»But the reform also frees up funds that are to be used for core services. It will be a management decision how those funds are distributed later.«

What do we know about potential layoffs?

Bo Jellesmark Thorsen emphasises that it is not yet certain whether the financial situation at the Faculty of Science will require layoffs — and he is therefore not prepared at this stage to speculate on who or how many might be affected.

This is not the most pleasant process, no matter where we end up

Bo Jellesmark Thorsen, Dean of the Faculty of Science

»Right now, departments are fully engaged in exploring every other option for reducing costs. We’re looking, for example, at reducing various expenses or covering more costs through external funding in the future. We expect to have a full overview by the autumn,« says the dean.

In hindsight, is there anything you could have done differently to avoid this situation?

»That would imply we had information back then that we just didn’t have. The decisions made years ago made sense at the time,« he says, and continues:

»We are now in a preparatory phase where we’re communicating openly about what we’re working on. And no matter how gently we resolve this, it will impact research, teaching, and working conditions at the faculty. That’s why it’s important we do it thoroughly and get it right the first time. But this is not the most pleasant process, no matter where we end up.«