Science and engineering research space at the nation’s top research universities grew by 4 percent in 2008 and 2009, compared with the previous two-year period, reflecting a rebound in the expansion rate after a slowing trend that reached a low point in 2006 and 2007, according to a new report from the National Science Foundation.
A 12-percent expansion of space for biological and biomedical research accounted for the biggest share of the growth. Some other fields, like the social sciences and earth, atmospheric, and ocean sciences, saw declines in net assignable square footage. The report was based on a survey of 495 research universities.
Leslie Christovich, author of the report and director of the Academic Infrastructure Project, which is part of the National Center for Science and Engineering Statistics, said that the declining rate of growth in research construction seen over the past several two-year periods may have been caused by a number of factors, including institutions’ financial troubles in the early part of the decade and the high price of construction materials, like concrete and steel. The new growth in building is merely “a trend back to the way things were,” she says.
The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, the University of Pennsylvania, the University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center at Dallas, and the Johns Hopkins University were among the institutions that had built the most space for research in the most-recent period measured, the 2008 and 2009 fiscal years.
The report also tries to predict the research space that universities will construct in 2010 and 2011, and its predictions make it look as if the sector is poised for even more growth. Cornell University, the University of Massachusetts at Worcester, and the University of Pittsburgh all plan to spend hundreds of millions of dollars to build hundreds of thousands of square feet worth of space.
The University of Wisconsin at Madison is notable among research universities: It lands in the top 10 for institutions that constructed the most space and spent the most money in 2008 and 2009, as well as in the top 10 of institutions that are planning major expansions in 2010 and 2011.
Alan Fish, associate vice chancellor for facilities at Madison, said that the university is consistently in the top five in federal research grants and that the university has made it a strategic priority to stay there through building.
“Over the last five years, we have probably spent $600-million in new and expanded facilities,” he said, “and in the next five years, we will probably almost match that.” About 30 percent of the money has come from the State of Wisconsin, he said, while the other 70 percent has come from grants, philanthropy, and other campus sources of funds.
“The real driver for success is that we have not had to rely on the state,” he said.
Construction and architecture firms, which have had a major interest in the higher-education sector as other prospects dry up, would be eager to see more building and expansion at universities. However, the report notes that actual construction did not match up to planned construction over the past decade. The report says that 190 institutions had planned some 19 million square feet of space in fiscal years 2004 and 05, but only about half of that amount was started in that period.
Ms. Christovich says that she expects construction activity to remain stable in 2010 and 2011. She says that the effect of federal stimulus money is not reflected in the numbers before 2009, but it may be seen in years to come.
In terms of the source of funds for new construction, the trends in federal dollars are most interesting, Ms. Christovich says. In 2008 and 2009, the federal government provided 3 percent of the total funds. “That is the lowest percent of new construction funds since we started collecting data” in 1986, she said.
Institutions contributed $4.5-billion to new construction, an increase of $790-million since 2006-07. But the institutional share of construction funds fell from 62 percent to 60 percent. Meanwhile, state- and local-government support increased 43 percent, to $2.7-billion.
Colleges and Universities Spending the Most on New Research Space
Institution | Spending on construction, FY 2008 and 2009 |
Massachusetts Institute of Technology | $373,500,000 |
U. of Pennsylvania | $323,325,000 |
U. of North Carolina at Chapel Hill | $277,649,000 |
U. of California at San Francisco | $275,590,000 |
Mount Sinai School of Medicine | $267,840,000 |
U. of Wisconsin at Madison | $254,693,000 |
U. of Central Florida | $202,244,000 |
U. of Texas Southwestern Medical Center at Dallas | $195,700,000 |
Stanford U. | $189,185,000 |
U. of California at Berkeley | $178,506,000 |
Institution | Planned spending on construction, FY 2010 and 2011 |
Cornell U. | $679,270,000 |
U. of Pittsburgh | $433,000,000 |
U. of Massachusetts at Worcester | $330,000,000 |
Princeton U. | $320,000,000 |
U. of California at San Diego | $264,859,000 |
U. of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center | $254,000,000 |
U. of Wisconsin at Madison | $211,999,000 |
U. of California at Berkeley | $207,181,000 |
U. of California at San Francisco | $200,000,000 |
U. of Chicago | $200,000,000 |
Note: Survey was conducted in the 2009 fiscal year. |
Source: National Science Foundation |
Colleges and Universities Constructing the Most Space for Science and Engineering Research
Institutions | Square feet constructed in FY 2008 and 2009 |
U. of North Carolina at Chapel Hill | 355,000 |
U. of Pennsylvania | 308,000 |
U. of Texas Southwestern Medical Center at Dallas | 300,000 |
Johns Hopkins U. | 297,000 |
U. of Wisconsin at Madison | 265,000 |
Massachusetts Institute of Technology | 238,000 |
Mount Sinai School of Medicine | 234,000 |
U. of Central Florida | 234,000 |
U. of Oklahoma | 229,000 |
Florida State U. | 204,000 |
Institutions | Square feet planned for FY 2010 and 2011 |
U. of Massachusetts at Worcester | 500,000 |
U. of Pittsburgh | 464,000 |
U. of Alabama | 380,000 |
Cornell U. | 328,000 |
Arizona State U. | 317,000 |
Indiana U. | 309,000 |
U. of Wisconsin at Madison | 288,000 |
South Carolina State U. | 250,000 |
U. of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center | 250,000 |
U. of California at San Diego | 246,000 |
Note: Survey was conducted in the 2009 fiscal year. |
Source: National Science Foundation |