DFG-funded Research Training Group SusGel on Sustainable Hydrogels

In 2025, the DFG (German Research Foundation) approved the new Research Training Group SusGel – short for Sustainable Hydrogels. Here, researchers from KIT and the University of Stuttgart work together interdisciplinary to study biopolymers from renewable sources, from their chemical structures to their practical applications. One of the main applicants is Ulrike van der Schaaf, junior research group leader at KIT and currently acting professor. In this interview, she talks about the unique aspects of the funding format and her motivation to participate.

What are the advantages of getting involved in a Research Training Group as an early-career scientist?
First of all, having a successful DFG grant is always good for your portfolio. In my field, it's not easy to get a DFG proposal approved because food process engineering doesn't have its own subject group in the DFG's classification system. We're too engineering-focused for food chemistry and often not biological enough for bioprocess engineering. A Research Training Group, however, has an interdisciplinary approach, so we fit in well. The funding format offers a great opportunity for exchange. I think it really helps you progress by giving you better insight into neighboring disciplines like chemistry, physics, and bio- and chemical engineering. You broaden your horizon by working with others on shared research topics and learn new ways of thinking and methods.

Had your group of applicants already worked together beforehand?
No, we came together specifically for this proposal. The two spokespersons of the Research Training Group approached scientists whose work matched the theme, and then we had a large exploratory meeting where everyone presented what they could contribute. After that, there were individual discussions with the spokespersons, who then developed a coherent overall concept. The entire process up to the funding decision took about a year and a half.

Does the DFG set specific requirements?
Yes, all participants must be based at the same location to ensure close and regular exchange. In addition to KIT, we have a partner at the University of Stuttgart, which was feasible due to the geographical proximity. We originally wanted to include someone from farther away, but that wasn’t allowed. The DFG also wants early-career researchers to be involved. It’s explicitly desired that young scientists are among the applicants. However, they must be able to prove that they have already supervised doctoral candidates. The DFG asks for the names of those supervised and where they are now. Ideally, your own contract should at least cover the duration of the first funding phase. The DFG checks this and it’s advantageous if a permanent position is in sight or if there is a tenure track. And of course, women should be included. In our proposal, the DFG noted negatively that there were so few women, but they then realized that there simply aren’t many women in this field, and that was acceptable. In general, the group of applicants should consist of 5-10 people.

What exactly is being funded?
The first funding phase lasts five years and includes two doctoral positions per research group. There will be three cohorts of doctoral candidates in total. The first two are directly funded, and for the third, a new application must be submitted. This is done together with the continuation proposal for the second funding phase of the Research Training Group, which lasts another four years. In addition to the doctoral salaries, you can apply for material costs for lab supplies, publication costs, and funds for equal opportunity measures. We also received funding for a half-time secretarial position. We had also applied for travel funds for strategy meetings and a postdoc position in a coordinating role, but those were denied.

How does the effort-benefit ratio compare to other funding formats?
If you're not the spokesperson or coordinator of the proposal, the effort-benefit ratio is very good. Besides the material value, you also benefit from networking and the prestige of the funding. For the proposal sketch, I submitted about five pages on my subproject and the work packages for the two doctoral positions. If the proposal makes it to the second round, there is an on-site review with presentations, a Q&A session, and a poster session. Both the research topics and general topics like internationalization and equal opportunity are presented. The on-site review was actually a very pleasant experience, and it was really nice to talk with the DFG representatives.

In addition to the research program, a qualification and supervision concept must be submitted for a Research Training Group application. What does that require?
Since the training of doctoral candidates is the main focus of a Research Training Group, the qualification concept plays a very important role. Fort this, you may and have to include KIT structures like the Karlsruhe House of Young Scientists (KHYS) or the personnel development department. Without these, the proposal wouldn’t have been as successful. Equal opportunity measures are also highly valued. Moreover, we had to specify how many large group meetings for exchange we have planned as well as which workshops and guest lectures. Especially industry contacts are important as potential cooperation partners or future employers. It wasn’t enough to say we’d invite someone – we had to provide a list of names. The same applied to potential partner institutions for international visits. Additionally, for every funded doctoral candidate, another must be co-financed from other sources. They should work in related fields and go through the same qualification program. Each cohort of doctoral candidates starts on the same day and forms close-knit group. Each doctoral candidate also has a team of two supervisors with complementary expertise.

How important is collaboration between the different research groups within the Training Group?
The DFG explicitly looks at the interaction between the individual research groups. We had many discussions beforehand to figure out how we could best collaborate. So, it’s not that everyone just does their own thing – we had to clearly show how we benefit from each other’s work and create synergies. For example: I can use the raw material from Group A and further process it, and I need the data from Group B1 to explain my structure. At the same time, it’s important that I’m not dependent on the results of others. If the dependency is so great that I can’t work without their contributions, that’s also a problem. Ideally, there’s a huge added value when everything works and the results interlock, but if something doesn’t work out, all doctoral candidates should still be able to successfully complete their projects.