30.04.2026 It still works – publishing, patenting, developing technologies used across Europe. But it is increasingly clear that Polish science is operating at the limits of its capacity. Adam Kubas, Director of the Institute of Physical Chemistry PAS, says it plainly: a system that was meant to support science is now beginning to hold it back.
Polish science has long proven that it can compete at the highest level. Research institutes publish hundreds of papers each year, develop technologies that reach clinics and industry, and build international teams. The problem is that maintaining this level is becoming increasingly difficult under conditions that, instead of enabling growth, are starting to constrain it. Speaking in a podcast by Candela Foundation, Adam Kubas – a theoretical chemist and director of the Institute of Physical Chemistry PAS – leaves little room for doubt: the key issue today is funding, but not in terms of abstract GDP percentages. It is about the very tangible, day-to-day consequences for how institutions function.
“The most important problem is, in fact, funding. We could sum up this entire conversation in one sentence: 3% of GDP for science. But that doesn’t come out of nowhere. If we look at our institute – 410 employees, an annual budget of around PLN 90 million, less than half of which is stable funding – and compare it with a partner institute in Germany with similar publication and patent output, it turns out they operate with nearly twice the budget,” Kubas explains.
This comparison is not merely statistical. It translates directly into capabilities – or the lack of them. Higher funding does not only mean better equipment; it also determines whether institutions can attract talent, build strong teams, and take on more ambitious projects. From this perspective, Polish science is not less efficient – it is simply far more constrained.
Salaries – the issue that keeps coming back
The most fundamental problem Kubas points to, however, is not equipment or grants, but people – and how much they are paid.
“The key problem of Polish science is salaries. You cannot build a strong scientific system or attract top talent – whether from abroad or from within the local market – without offering a reasonable base salary, one that allows people to support themselves and their families. Of course, it can be supplemented with grant funding, but that base must be stable,” he says.
This statement carries particular weight in the context of the internationalization of Polish research institutes. At the Institute of Physical Chemistry PAS, nearly 40% of employees come from abroad, and more than half of PhD students are international as well. This means the competition for talent is global – and so the conditions must be comparable. Without that, even the best research teams will gradually erode.
A system that creates its own inequalities
Funding, however, is not only about its overall level, but also about how it is distributed. And here, according to Kubas, the system operates in a way that is difficult to justify. In recent years, institutes of the Polish Academy of Sciences have effectively lost funding in real terms, while universities have seen increases.
Even more problematic is the way PhD students are financed. Institutes that actually conduct research and train young scientists often receive no systemic funding for them.
“At the Institute of Physical Chemistry, we have over 95 PhD students and receive exactly zero funding per PhD student in our base subsidy. This means I cannot plan any long-term investments with them in mind, even though they are actively contributing to research and the institute’s future,” Kubas explains.
This is a clear example of a mechanism that, in practice, strengthens some institutions at the expense of others – regardless of their actual contribution to science.
“Should we work under a leaking roof?”
One of the most striking moments in the conversation concerns infrastructure. Institutes need not only grants, but also functional buildings and well-maintained equipment. Yet funding mechanisms often overlook these basic needs.
“For years we submitted applications to repair our roofs – investments essential for the institute’s functioning – and every time they were rejected because they were not considered ‘scientific activity.’ So I ask: should water be dripping on our heads while we are expected to conduct world-class research?”
This remark encapsulates the disconnect between expectations placed on scientists and the actual conditions in which they are expected to work. The system demands excellence, but does not provide the foundations required to sustain it.
Commercialization: between science and business
Kubas also goes beyond diagnosis, proposing solutions – particularly in the area of commercialization. He notes that in Poland, the public debate is dominated by a business perspective, where science is often reduced to a source of “cheap ideas”.
“If business wants to maximize profit and minimize costs, then the taxpayer first pays for the innovation to be developed in a public institution, and then pays again for the final product. We do not agree with that,” he says.
As a response, the Institute of Physical Chemistry PAS is developing a model in which it actively participates in creating spin-off companies and retains greater control over emerging technologies. This approach is meant not only to increase the chances of commercial success, but also to ensure that value created with public funds returns to the scientific system.
The ceiling has been reached
The most important conclusion from this conversation is not about any single issue, but about their cumulative effect. For years, Polish science has functioned thanks to the efficiency and dedication of its people, who managed to deliver strong results despite systemic limitations. Today, however, that model is reaching its limits.
“We have hit the ceiling. We are no longer able to build the infrastructure and support systems needed to secure more funding and continue growing,” Kubas says.
This marks a turning point. Further development no longer depends primarily on the determination of scientists, but on systemic decisions. Without them, Polish science may remain effective for some time – but increasingly at the expense of the people and institutions that sustain it.
The full conversation with Adam Kubas is available in the podcast by the Candela Foundation online.
