Shaping Tomorrow’s Chemistry: Reflections and Goals from IUPAC’s Vice President

A New Governance Structure

Following extensive and thought-provoking discussion, the 2021 Council meeting voted for a new governance model to replace the long-established Bureau/Executive Committee structure. The proposal for two smaller Boards, namely the Executive Board (EB) and the Science Board (SB), was recognised as a key organisational change that would provide greater flexibility to IUPAC processes and enhance decision-making. Central to this outcome was the desire to prioritise the scientific aspects of IUPAC as well as to reduce costs and improve efficiency of operations. The transitional period leading up to this governance change coincided with the retirement of long-serving Executive Director, Lynn Soby, and the arrival of Greta Heydenrych as her replacement.

The EB oversees the administration of IUPAC, including Secretariat operations and financial matters, while the SB has carriage of the scientific work and activities. Both Boards have been “finding their feet” during the first six months of the biennium; each meets bimonthly with minutes regularly posted on the website for the benefit of volunteers, NAOs, and other stakeholders [4].

The Science Board

As Vice President, I have the honour to chair the SB, which is a thought-provoking challenge. The SB membership consists of five “internal” members elected from the current group of Division Presidents/Standing Committee chairs together with five “external” members elected from candidates nominated by their NAOs. Ex officio members are the President, Secretary-General, and Executive Director of IUPAC. In this way, the membership combines the experience and insider knowledge of IUPAC processes and operations together with the wisdom and fresh insight of discipline leaders from across the breadth of chemistry. Although the current membership of the SB does not include any representation from the Standing Committees, the five internal members are expected to seek out the views of other Division Presidents and Standing Committee chairs.

As far as I can ascertain, the current Divisional structure was initiated in 1949 with the establishment of Divisions I-III and V, while Division IV was set up in 1967. Division VI was launched in its present form in 1996 at the same time as Division VII, while Division VIII is the most recent (2002) [5]. Standing Committees fall into two categories: (a) technical committees that span all aspects of chemistry, which include those on chemistry education (CCE), industry (COCI), green chemistry and sustainable development (ICGCSD), world needs (CHEMRAWN), publications and digital standards (CPCDS), and the critically-important interdivisional committee on terminology, nomenclature and symbols (ICTNS) whose role is to evaluate any IUPAC document concerned with terminology, nomenclature, symbols and other conventions prior to publication (for example in Pure and Applied Chemistry); and (b) committees linked to the mission, values, and operations of IUPAC, including those on finance, projects and their evaluation, ethics, diversity and inclusion (EDEI), as well as editorial boards for Pure and Applied Chemistry and Chemistry International. An exciting addition to this set of IUPAC bodies has been the inclusion in 2024 of the International Younger Chemists Network within the IUPAC structure. This was an excellent outcome smoothly guided through the Den Haag 2023 Council meeting by our then President Javier Garcia Martinez.

In line with the terms of reference of the newly established SB, the complex scientific structure of IUPAC came under scrutiny at the first meeting held in 2024. Although the Divisional structure reflects the way in which chemistry is still taught in many academic institutions, it no longer represents the way in which modern chemistry research is undertaken. Pick up any major chemistry scientific journal and the research themes that predominate are topics in energy and materials, biotechnology, chemical biology, green and sustainable chemistry, the environment, catalysis, and molecular synthesis. Even within the field of chemistry education, recent trends encompass systems thinking and planetary boundaries, both of which describe a holistic view of chemistry intimately linked to other sciences, and both contributing to better awareness of global challenges such as climate change. The critical work of IUPAC on data standards is being transformed by digitisation; and, right now, the entire digital world of science is being challenged by the emergence of artificial intelligence.

It will be up to the IUPAC community to decide whether the current scientific structure of IUPAC, which has served our community well for over seventy years, is fit-for-purpose for the next decade and beyond. There is a belief that our structure needs to be flexible and responsive, to reduce “silos” of scientific activity by encouraging meaningful collaboration across the full breadth of our discipline and beyond. An added current complication is the secondary layer of sub-committee structure, compartmentalising further the scientific activity; e.g., one division has five sub-committees: are they all necessary?

The SB has concluded that it would be useful to clearly define IUPAC’s scientific priorities before attempting to explore wide-ranging organisational change. The currently recommended set of priorities that were approved by the SB at its May 2024 meeting, are shown in Box 1 [6]. Two working groups, one based in the Pacific and the other in Europe for ease of online discussions at user-friendly times, have since been established and have drafted some early ideas on reshaping IUPAC scientific activity.

Suggestions include merging some Divisions and amalgamating some Standing Committees; for example, many feel that there is duplication between CHEMRAWN and ICGCSD, and these two bodies should merge. Questions that have been raised include: Whether our links to industry would be better served by direct industry representation within Divisions and Committees rather than a standalone COCI? Does establishment of the SB suggest that the Project Committee should be disestablished?

Although outside of the direct remit of the SB, but worth mentioning at this stage, is if there is scope for streamlining some of the other committee operations? More controversially, and in view of the current financial picture, at some point the IUPAC community must consider the current membership structure and numbers. How many Titular Members (TMs) do we actually need? It should be a given that anyone appointed to a Division/Standing Committee TM or executive role needs to be an active participant in IUPAC business. Importantly, we should pay attention to succession planning and to member and NAO expectations during these sensitive discussions.

Ideas for reshaping the scientific structure of IUPAC will be incorporated into a White Paper that is currently under preparation. The next phase of the review process requires comment and feedback from IUPAC volunteers, NAOs, and other stakeholders, and also will make use of the still relevant information obtained by a survey on the impact, scope, and activities of IUPAC undertaken in 2019 during preparation for the Organizational Structure Review led by Mark Cesa [7, 8, 9]. After receiving that report in 2020, Council agreed to make changes that would help to keep IUPAC relevant in the constantly changing scientific landscape.

At the time of writing, the General Assembly/Council meeting to be held in Kuala Lumpur in July 2025 is the most suitable time and venue for a Town Hall meeting of all those interested in the scientific future and contributions of IUPAC. It is important to ensure that everyone who wishes to comment has a voice. Note that the preparations for the elections for Divisional positions for 2026-2027 have already begun; this, together with the need for Bylaw changes, potentially also Statute changes, associated with a scientific restructure, limit our capacity to make changes for the 2026 biennium. Irrespective of whether any Statute or Bylaw changes are required, the final decision(s) on reshaping our scientific structure will be made by our NAO members at a future Council meeting.

The Importance of Diversity and Inclusiveness within IUPAC

I cannot finish my inaugural column for Chemistry International without a quick comment about a topic dear to my heart—the Committee on Ethics, Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (CEDEI) was launched at the start of the 2022 biennium and I was privileged to be the inaugural chair; this leadership role has now passed into the excellent hands of Mark Cesa (USA). At the Montreal Council in 2021, some NAOs expressed doubts about the need for CEDEI, viewing it as yet another body requiring financial and operational commitments. It is generally recognised that access to education and training in chemistry should be accessible to all those that wish to be involved in the discipline. Consequently, IUPAC should show leadership in the DEI space, particularly given the variation in attitudes to gender, cultural, and minority issues that still limits participation across the globe. It is often articulated that we live in an age of winners and losers; success or failure should clearly depend on quality, but also requires good fortune, and fairness (equity). Educational environments should provide everyone with the opportunity to demonstrate their skills, aptitude, and value.

IUPAC now has some policy guidelines linked to behaviour and respect, specifically to privacy, conflict of interest, harassment, and use of social media [10].In 2023, CEDEI was awarded project funding from the IUPAC Executive to prepare Guidelines for the Responsible Practice of Chemistry; [11] the task group has drafted a set of eight Principles and is currently working on explanatory text and visual icons as an aid to their understanding.

Each year, IUPAC has hosted a Global Women’s Breakfast (GWB) on a specified date during the month of February. This event is now in its seventh year, and close to 2000 events have been held in >100 different countries. Likely over 30,000 individuals leap out of bed on the day to join in, thereby making this one of the largest virtual global networking events for women and their allies [12]. The GWB will next be held on 11 February 2025, coincidentally the UNESCO International Day for Women and Girls in Science. Since 2025 is also the International Year for Quantum Science and Technology, the likely theme to be chosen will be “Accelerating Equity in Science.” Please take a look at the GWB website (www.iupac.org./gwb) and consider registering an event in your local community. All genders are encouraged to participate, and you are welcome to design your own program or to share ideas with other breakfast events.

Concluding remarks

I still have much to learn about IUPAC, starting with the Periodic Table to extend my horizons beyond the molecules composed of carbon, hydrogen, oxygen, nitrogen, and the halogens in whose company I have spent my entire professional career while researching natural products chemistry! As I begin to comprehend the amazing privilege that I will soon have of leading the IUPAC community, may I let you know that my e-office door is always open to IUPAC volunteers. If you have questions or feedback, please feel free to contact me.