Pulp and paper technology
SWOT analysis and development proposals
The pulp and paper industry is a crucial component of the Finnish economy. Finnish raw wood
material production has to compete with foreign woods that are quicker to regenerate. The Finnish
forest industry and forest-related research can only reinvent itself through the discovery of new,
high-value-added applications and novel processing concepts. Finland has the potential to remain
at the international forefront of research in pulp and paper technology, or even to take the lead.
Overall, the international status of Finnish R&D in pulp and paper as well as the level of research at
universities and research institutes can be considered to be very high, although the performance
could be even further improved and focus areas sharpened. Finland can still be seen among the top
five countries in both product development and research in pulp and paper technology. The
publication tradition in the discipline is, however, changing. More and more research is being
published in general journals for fundamental research, particularly within the popular subjects of
nanocellulosics and biorefineries, where publishing in specific journals dedicated to pulp and paper
research is decreasing. This gives more academic visibility to the field, but dilutes the impact in
specific pulp and paper forums.
Finland should create a biomass research and innovation hub, which would be essential for
improving the country’s competitiveness as a biobased economy. There are many emerging topics
of research, such as biomaterials, novel processing concepts for next-generation biorefineries,
utilisation of Northern softwood for high-value-added products, and development of analysis
methods used in biomass characterisation.
Research into pulp and paper technology requires high-quality research infrastructures. The lack of
infrastructure funding seriously affects the level of research. Joining pilot-scale pulp and paper
infrastructures together could be one solution. Another solution could be to channel part of the
funds of the Strategic Centre for Science, Technology and Innovation FIBIC (previously
Forestcluster) to a pool for research infrastructures. Overall, both industry and public actors should
take a more active role in developing a national infrastructure system for the forest sector.
Strengths





Good reputation of Finnish pulp and paper research, attracts foreign researchers and students
Strong technological and industrial way of thinking
Very high-level applied research
Link to applications usually easy to draw even from fundamental research
Strong national tradition in the discipline
Weaknesses
 Innovation environment not supporting Finland’s aim to be the best in the discipline
(particularly in basic research)
 Lack of ambition in fundamental research
 Breakthrough character in current research not cutting-edge
 Blurry national research agenda, lacks profile
 Low overall image of the sector
Opportunities





The whole ecosystem in the field changing, leading to new opportunities
Utilising Finland’s specific resource, Northern softwood, for different value-added products
Raising the level of fundamental research
Possible focusing and sharpening of the discipline after scientific evaluation of Finnish research
Industry funding for research infrastructures
Threats





Too large a role for FIBIC (previously Forestcluster), limits bottom-up research and technology
Decline in research as industry moves out of the country
Continuing decline in the attraction of the field
Further weakening of the field due to changes in the global economy
Continued deterioration of research infrastructure
Development proposals
 More long-term research funding is needed for the sector. The Academy of Finland’s research
funding budget should be strengthened in order to ensure opportunities for bottom-up
breakthrough innovations.
 The Academy of Finland should have a large targeted, multidisciplinary call in bioeconomy.
 Finland needs more Centres of Excellence in applied disciplines and technology-driven research.
 Some of the funding for FIBIC’s (previously Forestcluster) research programmes should be made
available through open calls without predefined research targets.
 A scientific evaluation of the discipline is urgently needed.