The browser you are using is not supported by this website. All versions of Internet Explorer are no longer supported, either by us or Microsoft (read more here:

Please use a modern browser to fully experience our website, such as the newest versions of Edge, Chrome, Firefox or Safari etc.

Dean's bulletin, March 2020

Work on establishing Lund University activities in the Brunnshög area is now entering a more active phase and a large number of working groups are addressing issues at different levels. It could be a good idea at this point to identify what they all do, what decisions we can expect and when things are intended to happen.

At the central LU level, some of the work is being carried out by an analysis group led by Olle Söderman from our faculty. This group is tasked with calculating the costs for a specific transfer scenario. The group is to deliver a preliminary report on first and second cycle education to the University Board’s June meeting and a final report to the December meeting this year.

The University Board can be expected to decide on first and second cycle education at its June meeting, i.e. whether or not the buildings planned for LU at Brunnshög are to be customised for teaching first and second cycle education. At the December meeting, the University Board can be expected to decide on initiating procurement of buildings for the transfer or to request additional material for the analysis group’s proposal if they find that the proposal is too expansive and thereby too expensive, or too defensive.

Another group at the central LU level is led by deputy vice-chancellor Sylvia Schwaag Serger. Its assignment is to develop a vision for how establishing activities at Brunnshög can be an opportunity for the entire University. In order to obtain a sound basis for their work, the group has had a couple of vision workshops with representatives from all the faculties. Of course, setting up activities at Brunnshög is most important for those units with direct connections to the major research facilities, but we must also identify what opportunities for change this provides for all units when our University campus expands towards the north east.

Locally at our faculty, a working group has just been formed with an assignment to deliver clear supporting material for Olle Söderman’s work. We must have our own picture of what is best for our faculty and, within the frameworks provided by previous University Board decisions, recommend which activities we want to establish at Brunnshög. The working group, led by Joachim Schnadt, Physics, is to deliver its view to the vice-chancellor’s management council in early May regarding the transfer of parts of our first and second cycle education, in order for us to be able to influence the University Board’s decision in June.

By the start of the summer, the group must also deliver a specification of suitable activities we want to establish at Brunnshög. This specification is a precondition for Olle Söderman’s group to be able to deliver supporting material to the University Board. If we are not clear about our wishes, the specification will be done by someone else. The working group will also be asked to develop a vision of how we view being established at Brunnshög from a long-term perspective and how this affects all activities throughout our faculty.

Finally, there is a working group at the faculty led by Per Persson, Biology, which is investigating how we can best utilise the major research facilities. This work has nothing to do with setting up activities at Brunnshög, but rather about how we can benefit in terms of research and education from our proximity to MAX IV and ESS.
There are a lot of groups to keep track of and I hope that this dean’s bulletin has helped to make things clearer.
Sven Lidin, dean