The Life Sciences Job Market in 2025: Trends, Opportunities, and Career Paths

The life sciences industry – spanning pharmaceuticals, biotechnology, environmental and agricultural science, genomics, and regulatory affairs – navigated a challenging 2025 marked by continued layoffs, funding constraints, and heightened competition for available roles. U.S. life sciences employment reached a record 2.1 million workers in March 2025 (^[1]), though this milestone proved fragile as employment pulled back by nearly 9,000 jobs in April amid ongoing sector pressures. The year saw biopharma layoffs rise 16% year-over-year, with major cuts at companies like Novo Nordisk (9,000 employees), CSL (3,000 employees), and Bayer (4,450 employees) (^[2]). Job postings dropped 20% year-over-year in Q1 2025 while applications surged over 90%, creating an intensely competitive environment (^[3]). For pharmaceutical professionals and other industry insiders, 2025 presented a complex picture: hiring remained suppressed and competition for roles was fierce, even as certain specialized skills commanded premium salaries and new opportunities emerged in AI-driven drug discovery and cell/gene therapy. As we enter 2026, industry experts anticipate a gradual recovery, though the market is expected to remain "cautious, concentrated, and competitive" (^[4]). In this in-depth analysis, we explore the state of the life sciences job market through 2025 and into 2026 – examining hiring trends across sub-sectors, the most sought-after qualifications, compensation benchmarks, emerging career paths, regional shifts, and the impact of technology and economic conditions on employment.

Biopharma and Biotechnology: After a decade of expansion, hiring in biotech and pharmaceutical companies experienced significant contraction through 2024 and 2025. Throughout 2025, many biotech firms remained in "survival mode," with hiring freezes, lean teams, and a shrinking pool of opportunities for job seekers (^[5]). The hoped-for post-pandemic rebound in biotech hiring did not materialize. Instead, employers remained cautious, often limiting recruitment to absolutely critical roles or specific niche skill sets. The volume of job postings through 2025 remained far below the peak seen in 2021-2022. BioSpace data showed job postings down 20% year-over-year in Q1 2025, while applications surged over 90% (^[3]). In Massachusetts alone, job postings dropped from 70,128 in 2022 to 47,996 in 2023 and 40,195 in 2024—a 16% year-over-year decrease—and continued declining 31% since January 2025 (^[6]). In practical terms, employers have had their pick of talent, and many candidates faced extended job searches lasting six months or longer.

Several factors underlie this tougher market. Biotech funding tightened significantly in 2022-2023, as rising interest rates and risk-averse investors led to fewer IPOs and venture rounds. Startups that once hired aggressively conserved cash, and even well-funded companies scaled cautiously. Many operated with skeleton crews, only adding headcount for essential expertise. The layoff trend intensified through 2025, with biopharma layoffs rising 16% year-over-year and affecting approximately 42,700 employees—a 47% increase from 2024 (^[2]). The number of companies conducting layoffs also rose 27.6%. May 2025 marked an all-time monthly high with 29 different companies reporting workforce reductions, correlating with the XBI biotech index bottoming out in early April following tariff announcements (^[7]).

High-profile 2025 layoffs included Novo Nordisk cutting approximately 9,000 employees (including 5,000 in Denmark) to save $1.3 billion annually by end of 2026, CSL eliminating 3,000 jobs in August, and Bayer cutting 4,450 positions in the first three quarters of 2025 (^[8]). California and Massachusetts—the two leading biotech hubs—bore the brunt of these cuts, with 58 and 56 companies respectively making or projecting reductions. These layoffs created a ripple effect: not only did they put highly qualified professionals into job search mode, but they also made remaining employers more selective, knowing a larger talent pool was available.

At the same time, it's important to note that overall employment levels in life sciences remain high by historical standards. U.S. life sciences employment reached a record 2.1 million workers in March 2025, though this proved fragile as employment pulled back by 0.4% (nearly 9,000 jobs) in April (^[1]). The biotechnology R&D subsector had grown by 3.7% (adding 10,700 jobs) in the first 10 months of 2024, reaching an all-time high of ~303,000 employees. How do we reconcile record employment with reports of hiring freezes and layoffs? Much of the growth through 2022 came from momentum and backfilling of critical roles, as well as expansion in certain areas like cell and gene therapy manufacturing. But by 2023-2024, growth slowed dramatically, and in 2025 the sector experienced a net decline in some months. Multiple factors hindered the sector including falloffs in venture capital funding, initial public offerings, and—in 2025—cuts in federal research spending (^[9]). Job postings are a forward-looking indicator, and their steep drops suggest companies paused broad hiring plans even as they held onto existing staff or made targeted hires. For candidates, this means the bar to land a new role remained significantly higher than during the candidate-friendly market of 2021-2022.

Environmental and Agricultural Science: Outside of biopharma, life science sectors in environmental science, ecology, and agriculture are also experiencing growth, albeit in a steadier fashion. Global challenges like climate change, sustainability, and food security are driving increased investment in these fields, and employment is projected to rise accordingly. In the United States, government data shows above-average growth for environmental and agricultural science roles this decade. For instance, the Bureau of Labor Statistics projects about 7–8% growth in jobs for environmental scientists and for agricultural and food scientists between 2023 and 2033 (^[10]) (^[11]). These roles include everything from environmental compliance specialists to crop research scientists. As companies and governments place a greater emphasis on sustainability and green innovation, demand is rising for experts who can, for example, run environmental impact studies, develop sustainable agricultural practices, or leverage biotechnology for conservation. While these sub-sectors did not see the same volatile hiring swings as biotech, they have been expanding consistently. Organizations in environmental science (consultancies, NGOs, climate-tech startups) are hiring people with skills in data analysis, field research, and regulatory knowledge – often competing with one another to attract talent in niche areas like environmental genomics or renewable bioenergy. Similarly, in agriculture and agtech, there's momentum in roles related to precision farming, crop genetics (e.g. CRISPR in plants), and food science. Overall, job availability in environmental and agricultural life sciences is on a gentle upswing, with growth driven by long-term societal needs rather than short-term market booms. The caveat is that these fields sometimes offer fewer total positions than healthcare or pharma, and entry-level roles can be competitive (a dynamic familiar to many recent graduates in environmental science).

Regulatory Affairs and Niche Sectors: One area across life sciences that has remained comparatively strong is regulatory affairs and quality assurance. The rapid pace of scientific innovation – from novel gene therapies to AI-driven diagnostics – means there's a constant need for professionals who can navigate the complex web of global regulations. Even during hiring slowdowns, companies have continued to recruit for critical regulatory roles. In early 2025, regulatory affairs specialists with experience in investigational new drug (IND) submissions were in particular demand (^[12]), as biotech and pharma firms prepared filings for advanced therapies. Similarly, experts in Chemistry, Manufacturing, and Controls (CMC) and biomanufacturing have been sought after, especially by companies moving from R&D into late-stage development or commercialization (^[13]). These roles are essential for getting products approved and produced at scale, so firms are less likely to cut or freeze these positions. In addition, clinical operations (for managing trials) and business development roles (for securing partnerships and funding) have seen some ongoing hiring, though openings are limited and tend to require very specific experience (^[14]). In short, roles tied directly to getting new products through trials, approved by regulators, and into production have been comparatively resilient.

It's worth noting that the overall sentiment among job seekers in biopharma has been grim since 2023, even as certain niches thrive. A mid-2024 survey found 77% of biopharma professionals planned to job hunt in the near term (over half actively), yet 43% of respondents were already unemployed (^[15]) – many having been out of work for months. Comments from those in the industry reveal deep frustration: "Far too many people have been laid off and very few job opportunities are open. Competition is very stiff for the job seeker," one respondent said (^[16]). Another noted, "It's never been more difficult to find a job in biopharma," and even seasoned professionals expressed fears that "no job or company seems ‘safe' at the moment" (^[17]). This somber mood reflects the collision of recent economic constraints with the still-high expectations of a cutting-edge industry.

Looking ahead to 2026, there are signs of stabilization and cautious optimism. The XBI biotech index recovered significantly in the second half of 2025, hitting a yearly high of $126.30 in late December—up over 30% from its April low (^[4]). Industry experts predict that 2026's layoffs will not continue at 2025's pace, with some forecasting not only a leveling off but also modest increases in headcount as interest rates stabilize and healthcare sentiment improves. Factors that could accelerate recovery include an economic upturn, a strong biotech IPO resurgence, increased M&A activity, and new public funding initiatives. Notably, investment in cell and gene therapies reached $15.2 billion in 2025—30% growth compared to 2023—driving demand for specialized talent (^[18]). The longevity biotech sector is also quietly leading the next cycle, with healthspan-focused startups attracting fresh capital and hiring translational scientists, clinical leads, and bioengineers. Massachusetts projects 11.6% job growth in life sciences by 2029 (adding 16,633 net new jobs), significantly outpacing the state's overall expected 3.4% economic growth (^[19]). In summary, while the current hiring trend across life sciences remains one of cautious restraint with select pockets of opportunity, the industry is expected to gradually recover through 2026 as economic conditions stabilize and innovation demands new talent.

Even as job openings have been harder to come by, employer expectations for skillsets have only increased. Life science companies today are especially hungry for talent at the intersection of biology and technology. A clear theme is the demand for data-driven and computational skills alongside traditional scientific expertise. For example, professionals who can apply artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning to drug discovery are at a premium. These individuals often have hybrid expertise in biology, chemistry, and computer science – enabling them to develop algorithms that can sift through vast datasets to find new drug targets or optimize lead compounds. In fact, among the few areas of hiring growth in early 2025 were roles requiring AI/ML and data science applied to pharma R&D (^[12]). Job titles like "Computational Biologist," "Bioinformatics Scientist," or "AI Engineer – Drug Discovery" are frequently seen in job postings, reflecting how digitization is reshaping the industry. Companies are keen on recruits who not only generate data in the lab, but can also analyze and interpret big data – whether it's genomic sequences, high-throughput screening results, or real-world evidence of drug outcomes.

Another skillset in high demand is regulatory knowledge and compliance expertise. As noted, regulatory affairs specialists with experience guiding a therapy through FDA or EMA processes are highly sought after (^[13]). This often means having advanced knowledge of the latest guidelines for novel modalities (e.g. cell and gene therapies, RNA-based drugs) and an understanding of global regulatory harmonization, since many companies aim for concurrent approvals in multiple regions. Certifications or training in regulatory affairs (such as RAC credentials) can be a big plus for candidates. Alongside regulatory savvy, quality assurance (QA) skills – ensuring that lab work and manufacturing meet stringent standards – continue to be fundamental, especially in biotech manufacturing and clinical trial management.

Cross-disciplinary qualifications are a recurring theme. The most attractive candidates to life science employers often wear multiple hats. For instance, a drug development project manager who also holds a Ph.D. in molecular biology and can liaise between research and business teams, or a laboratory scientist who is also proficient in programming statistical models in R/Python, will stand out. A recent industry commentary encapsulated this: the "convergence of biology, technology, and data science" is spawning new roles and transforming traditional ones (^[20]). Thus, candidates who demonstrate cross-disciplinary expertise – spanning wet lab and dry lab skills – are especially valued (^[21]). Companies have even started to tap talent from adjacent industries (like tech or data analytics) to fill life science roles that demand these capabilities (^[22]). For example, a software engineer from a tech firm might be hired to build digital health platforms for a biotech, or a statistician might transition into a clinical bioinformatics role. The ability to learn quickly and adapt is crucial, as many tools and techniques (from lab automation systems to AI software) are evolving rapidly.

Soft skills and higher education also remain important. Advanced degrees (M.S., Ph.D., or Pharm.D.) are often expected for research and scientific roles, and an MBA or relevant business experience can be key for strategy or BD (business development) positions. But beyond credentials, employers frequently mention the need for strong communication and collaboration skills. Life science breakthroughs increasingly happen via interdisciplinary teams – scientists working with data engineers, clinicians working with regulatory experts – so professionals who can communicate across domains and work in teams are in demand (^[23]). The pandemic's legacy also taught companies the value of agility and remote collaboration; thus, comfort with digital collaboration tools and virtual project management is a plus (even as in-person work is returning, as discussed later).

Specific technical skills and qualifications topping the wish-list of life science employers in 2025 include:

• Bioinformatics and Data Analysis: Ability to handle genomic and proteomic datasets, use bioinformatics pipelines, and derive insights from large-scale experiments. Coding skills in Python, R, or MATLAB are often asked for, as well as experience with databases and cloud computing for science.
• Cell/Gene Therapy Techniques: Hands-on skills in cell culture, CRISPR gene editing, viral vector design, and related methods are valued due to the boom in cell and gene therapy development. Experience in Good Manufacturing Practice (GMP) environments for cell/gene therapies is a big advantage for biomanufacturing roles.
• Machine Learning & AI Applications: Knowledge of machine learning frameworks (TensorFlow, PyTorch, etc.) and how to apply them to biological problems (e.g. predicting protein structures, analyzing medical images, or optimizing drug candidates). Even roles that are not purely AI-focused benefit from some AI literacy, given how prevalent the technology is in research tools.
• Regulatory Certifications & Documentation: Familiarity with regulatory submission processes (IND, NDA, BLA in the US; EMA filings in Europe) and documentation standards. Certifications like Regulatory Affairs Certification (RAC) or experience as an FDA liaison can set candidates apart.
• Project Management and Compliance: For roles that supervise research or trials, project management certifications (PMP) or training in GxP compliance (GLP for labs, GCP for clinical trials) are seen as valuable add-ons to scientific expertise.
• Emerging Tech & Automation: Experience with laboratory automation (robotic liquid handlers, high-throughput screening systems) and digital lab notebooks or LIMS (Laboratory Information Management Systems). As labs become smarter, people who can run and troubleshoot automated systems or interpret AI-generated results are needed.

In essence, the most in-demand life science professionals are "T-shaped" – they have deep expertise in one domain and broad familiarity across others. A 2025 LinkedIn analysis of biotech hiring echoed this, noting that the "most successful biotech professionals of tomorrow" will have a blend of biological knowledge, data literacy, regulatory awareness, teamwork, and adaptability (^[21]). This is driving both how universities train scientists (more interdisciplinary programs) and how companies evaluate applicants. Many organizations now use skill assessments or case studies in interviews to gauge a candidate's ability to integrate knowledge and solve real-world problems, rather than just looking at years of experience in a narrow field.

The evolving needs of the industry have given rise to entirely new roles that barely existed a decade ago. Companies are actively recruiting for positions that reflect the cutting-edge of science and tech integration. Here are some of the key emerging roles in the life sciences job market and what they entail:

These emerging roles highlight where the industry is heading. For instance, the rise of the Computational Biology Engineer underscores that purely wet-lab scientists are now working hand-in-hand with coders and data modelers. Likewise, the AI Drug Discovery Lead role shows that some companies are creating leadership positions specifically to drive the use of AI in research, rather than leaving it as a support tool. This integration of AI has been one of the big shifts in career paths – a medicinal chemist in 2025 might find themselves on a team with data scientists and AI specialists, collaborating to train models that predict which molecules to synthesize next. It's a melding of roles that previously would have been siloed.

The Digital Health Integration Specialist role reflects the blurring line between pharma/biotech and healthcare delivery. With more "digital therapeutics" (e.g. app-based treatments) and companion software for drugs, pharma companies are hiring people who can ensure their products fit into hospital IT systems, electronic health records, and telehealth platforms. This is an example of a career path that may attract individuals from a health IT background into the life sciences industry.

In addition to these roles, we're seeing new career tracks in areas like sustainability and ESG (Environmental, Social, Governance) within life science companies. Pharmaceutical firms are bringing on "sustainability coordinators" or "green bio-process engineers" to help reduce waste in R&D and manufacturing, in line with global sustainability goals. There's also growing attention to ethical and social implications of biotech, giving rise to roles like bioethics advisors, though those are still relatively niche.

For those already in traditional roles, there are opportunities to pivot into these emerging areas. Many companies offer reskilling or upskilling programs, recognizing that it can be easier to teach an experienced scientist new data skills (or vice versa) than to find the perfect candidate externally. Professionals might start in a classic role – say, as a bench biologist or a QA specialist – and then move into a hybrid role like "automation scientist" (managing robotic lab systems) or "clinical data liaison" (connecting trial data science with medical monitoring) as their career progresses. The career lattice is becoming as important as the career ladder; lateral moves into interdisciplinary roles are common stepping stones to leadership now.

Finally, it's worth noting which roles are less in demand or are being redefined. Routine laboratory positions that focus only on a narrow skill (for example, a technician who only runs one type of assay repeatedly) are vulnerable to automation. Many such roles are evolving to require more versatility – the technician of tomorrow might also be a data curator and an instrument technician who fixes the robot that runs the assay. Similarly, some traditional sales and marketing roles in pharma are changing with digital marketing and remote engagements; thus "digital marketing in life sciences" has become a career specialty of its own.

In summary, career paths in life sciences are diverging from the traditional R&D scientist vs. commercial staff dichotomy. There are now rich opportunities at the interfaces: science and data, biotech and healthcare, lab and manufacturing, product and patient. Professionals who position themselves at these interfaces – through education, networking, and practical experience – will find exciting new roles to pursue in 2025 and beyond.

One of the most intriguing aspects of the 2025 job market was that salaries in the life sciences continued to climb despite the tighter hiring environment. Average salaries for full-time life sciences employees jumped by about 9% from 2023 to 2024—a growth rate more than four times higher than the previous year's increase and the largest increase since 2021 (^[29]). According to BioSpace's 2025 Salary Report, senior scientists in R&D now earn over $150K base with $30K bonuses, while clinical directors exceed $285K in total compensation. Roles in regulatory affairs and manufacturing also top $230K at many companies (^[30]). Looking ahead to 2025-2026, BioSpace analysts expect continued salary growth, though likely not at the same 9% rate—with 47% of employers indicating their salary budgets will remain the same and 35% planning increases (^[29]).

What explains this paradox of rising pay in a cooler job market? There are several likely factors: First, life sciences companies are competing fiercely for certain high-value skills, and they are willing to pay a premium to attract or retain talent in those areas. If a company only has budget to hire one AI specialist or one regulatory lead, they will make a strong offer to secure the right person. Second, many companies focused on retaining their top performers during the lean times, sometimes giving outsize raises or counteroffers to prevent key staff from jumping ship. Those retention raises can boost average salary figures. Third, as layoffs disproportionately hit junior and mid-level staff in struggling firms, the pool of currently employed (and surveyed) professionals skews a bit more senior – meaning the average calculated salary may tilt higher because a greater share of lower-salary junior roles were eliminated. A commentary on the salary report indeed noted that fewer junior employees and more highly experienced workers in the dataset could have "skewed" the figures upward (^[31]) (^[32]). In other words, if many entry-level scientists can't find jobs, they aren't in the salary survey, and the survey instead reflects more of the well-paid senior specialists who kept theirs. Finally, inflation and cost of living increases (especially in biotech hub cities) likely pressured employers to raise wages more than in the early 2020s.

It's not all good news for compensation, however. The same analyses that showed salary growth found that average bonus payouts and equity (stock-based compensation) declined. The percentage of employees receiving bonuses dropped from 71% to 69%, with average bonus values declining 9% from 2023 to 2024. More significantly, the share of employees receiving equity compensation fell from 36% to just 30%, and the average value of equity dropped substantially from $86,376 to $60,776 (^[29]). Companies tightened their variable pay—perhaps to control costs in an uncertain year—even as they increased base salaries. For employees, that means a shift in how their total earnings are structured. A typical life sciences professional might have a higher base pay but a smaller bonus or lower-valued stock grant. From the employer perspective, emphasizing salary over bonuses could be a strategy to reward and retain staff when company-wide performance bonuses are thin. It might also reflect that some biotech companies (where stock options can be a big part of compensation) had depressed stock valuations, making equity less enticing. Notably, an emerging trend in 2025-2026 is the rise of fractional executive roles, with companies hiring C-level talent for 20-hour workweeks to save costs while maintaining leadership agility (^[29]).

Beyond the headline of "salaries up, bonuses down," the salary landscape in life sciences has other noteworthy aspects. There continue to be significant regional differences in pay. Major hubs like Boston/Cambridge and the San Francisco Bay Area tend to offer the highest salaries, commensurate with their high cost of living and competitive talent wars. According to the BioSpace 2025 report, Boston/Cambridge ("Genetown") ranked #6 out of nine biotech hotbeds with an average salary of $156,700 (^[29]). Other hubs such as San Diego, Seattle, and the New Jersey/Philadelphia corridor also offer strong salaries, particularly for specialized roles like immunotherapy researchers or pharmaceutical engineers. In Europe, Switzerland (home to Basel) remains one of the top-paying regions for life scientists, as global pharma giants headquartered there offer world-class compensation (often balanced by a high living cost and strong labor protections). Singapore, aiming to be the "Biopolis" of Asia, has also seen salary growth as it lures global pharma companies—a mid-level researcher in Singapore can earn a very competitive package, often supplemented by government-supported benefits, to encourage growth of the sector. While detailed salary benchmarking by region is beyond our scope here, it is clear that location can influence compensation by a significant margin. Many professionals factor this in by considering remote or relocation options if their field allows.

By discipline, the highest compensation in life sciences is often found in executive and director-level roles, or highly specialized technical roles. For instance, a Director of Clinical Operations or a Regulatory Affairs Director in a big pharma company can easily see total compensation well into six figures (USD) or even low seven figures if bonuses are included. Bench-level scientists with Ph.D. credentials (e.g., "Medical Scientists" in BLS terms) had a U.S. median pay around $101K in 2023 (^[33]), but those in biotech hubs or with in-demand specialties often earn more than that average. Meanwhile, biotech laboratory technicians and research associates, who typically have B.Sc./M.Sc. degrees, have more modest pay (median around $50–60K in the U.S.) (^[34]) (^[35]) – though even these roles saw some wage growth due to labor market pressures and minimum wage increases. Engineering roles (like bioprocess engineers, chemical engineers in pharma) and bioinformatics specialists usually fall somewhere in between, often in the high five-figures to low six-figures, depending on experience. Regulatory affairs professionals also command strong salaries; a regulatory affairs manager with a few years of experience might earn around $130K–$150K in the U.S. market, and higher if they move into senior director positions, reflecting the high responsibility of ensuring compliance and approvals.

It's important to highlight that pay equity issues persist in the life sciences. The 2025 BioSpace Salary Report indicated that the gender pay gap remained unchanged, with women's total earnings at 88% of what men earn in comparable roles. Racial wage gaps were also noted, though one positive development was that Black/African American earnings increased by 17% compared to 2024—though White/Non-Hispanic professionals on average still earned more than any other population (^[29]). These disparities remain an ongoing challenge, and many companies have pledged to review compensation practices to close these gaps. In practical terms, candidates (especially women and minority professionals) should be aware of their market worth and advocate for equitable pay, and employers risk losing talent if they don't address perceived inequities.

In addition to salaries and bonuses, benefits and perks remain a critical part of compensation in this industry. Life science companies, particularly large pharma and established biotechs, typically offer comprehensive health insurance, retirement savings matches, and substantial paid time off. According to BioSpace's 2025 survey, more than half of respondents indicated that health insurance, paid time off, and retirement accounts are essential for accepting a job offer. Notably, 93% of respondents reported their companies offered winter shutdowns, while 20% reported unlimited paid vacation days and 27% reported unlimited paid sick days (^[29]). Flexible work arrangements, as we'll discuss next, can also be seen as a form of benefit. Some firms also provide perks like tuition reimbursement (encouraging employees to pursue further education), stock purchasing plans, and wellness benefits (gym memberships, mental health support), which can make a significant difference in total compensation value.

To sum up, compensation in the life sciences as of 2025 is characterized by robust salary growth and evolving structures. Professionals in this sector have seen their paychecks grow and are benefiting from companies' need to retain key skills. However, they also face a landscape where bonuses are less predictable and where negotiation savvy is needed to ensure fair pay (especially across demographics). For employers, the challenge is balancing cost control with the need to reward and motivate talent; many are finding that cutting too deep on compensation isn't an option if they want to stay competitive in attracting skilled scientists and specialists.

The life sciences industry has long been geographically clustered in specific "hotbeds" or hubs, and this remains true through 2025 and into 2026—but there are notable shifts in regional dynamics and attitudes towards remote work.

Major Hubs Continue to Dominate: Regions like Boston/Cambridge (Massachusetts), the San Francisco Bay Area (California), San Diego (California), and Basel (Switzerland) continue to be powerhouses for life science activity. According to CBRE's 2025 Life Sciences Talent Trends report, Boston-Cambridge widened its lead as the top market for life sciences R&D talent, leading the nation with the most bioengineers, biomedical engineers, biochemists, biophysicists, medical scientists, and biological technicians (^[1]). Boston-Cambridge also surpassed New York-New Jersey for the top spot in life sciences manufacturing talent in 2025. Massachusetts hosts approximately 143,000 life science jobs as of 2024, though growth flattened to just 0.03% year-over-year—a stark contrast to the 6.7% average annual growth from 2013 to 2023 (^[6]). Despite the slowdown, the state projects 11.6% job growth by 2029 (adding 16,633 net new jobs), and the Healey-Driscoll Administration announced $17.3 million in tax incentive awards expected to create 806 life sciences jobs in 2025 (^[19]). The San Francisco Bay Area (including South San Francisco's "Biotech Bay") similarly hosts hundreds of biotech companies, from nimble startups to giants like Genentech, and continues to be a hub especially for oncology, immunotherapy, and tech-biotech convergence ventures. Basel and the surrounding BioValley region (spanning Switzerland, France, and Germany) remain Europe's prime pharma cluster – home to Roche, Novartis, Bayer's European operations, and many biotechs. Hiring in Basel has been steady; companies there are investing in cutting-edge R&D facilities and often draw talent from across the EU. Singapore has emerged as a key Asian hub, supported heavily by government initiatives. By 2025, Singapore's "Biopolis" campus and surrounding science parks have attracted numerous multinational pharma companies' Asia-Pac headquarters and research labs. Hiring in Singapore is robust, with thousands of life science job openings at any given time (JobStreet listed over 2,600 in April 2025 (^[36])), reflecting roles in clinical development, biologics manufacturing, and scientific consulting. Other hubs worth noting include Shanghai and Beijing in China (though Western firms like J&J and Merck trimmed some workforce in China in 2024 amid local market pressures (^[37])), Bengaluru/Hyderabad in India (growing in contract research and biopharma IT support), Cambridge/Oxford in the UK (strong in genomics and biotech, though navigating post-Brexit funding challenges), and Research Triangle Park (North Carolina, USA) which hosts a mix of pharma, agbiotech (e.g., crop science companies), and contract research organizations (CROs).

Rise of Secondary Hubs: In recent years, high costs and competition in the primary hubs have led some companies to expand in secondary regions. Austin, Texas and Miami, Florida have seen a trickle of biotech startups and investment – often focused on health tech or niche biotech – attracted by business-friendly environments. Seattle, Washington is notable for strengths in immunotherapy (home to the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center and several CAR-T companies) and is growing as well. Philadelphia and New Jersey, historically pharma manufacturing and corporate centers, have revitalized some of their life science presence with cell/gene therapy companies and incubators (helped by their proximity to universities and the legacy pharma talent base). In Europe, Ireland (especially around Dublin and Cork) has become a pharma manufacturing hub, and companies are hiring process engineers and bioproduction experts there thanks to favorable tax policies and a skilled workforce. Berlin and Munich in Germany are also nurturing biotech scenes, particularly in medical devices and digital health, complementing the traditional strength of German chemical/pharma companies like Bayer and Merck KGaA in other cities.

Remote Work: Pandemic Bump and Post-Pandemic Pullback: The COVID-19 pandemic forced an unprecedented experiment in remote work across industries, including life sciences. For a while, even roles that traditionally were on-site had elements done remotely (data analysis, writing, virtual meetings). This led to a brief decentralization of the life science job market, where being physically located in Boston or San Francisco was less critical to getting hired during 2020-2021. However, by 2025, that trend sharply reversed in much of the industry (^[5]).

The shift is dramatic: back in 2022, nearly half of surveyed companies told BioSpace they would recruit and hire remote employees regardless of location. By 2024, that number had dropped to just 20%. Additionally, 56% of employers in 2024 preferred local candidates but would consider remote roles for certain hires, up from 38% in 2022 (^[38]). The Flex Index report noted that 69% of healthcare and biotechnology companies offer work location flexibility, ranking those groups in the middle of the industries tracked. Laboratories, by nature, require hands-on work, and even for analytical roles, companies see value in having staff on-site for easier collaboration and a cohesive culture. Companies in 2025-2026 often favor candidates in close proximity to their headquarters or research sites, which puts those living outside major hubs at a disadvantage. For example, a biotech based in Cambridge, MA is more likely now to hire someone who is already in Boston or willing to relocate, rather than someone hoping to contribute from, say, the Midwest or abroad.

Future Implications: Industry observers note that once the life sciences job market picks up—and especially when it moves back to being a candidate's market—pharmas and biotechs could see employees leave for competitors that offer better flexibility. Companies that maintain workplace flexibility options may have a significant advantage in attracting talent when hiring accelerates (^[38]).

That said, flexibility has not vanished entirely. Many life science companies have adopted hybrid work models, even if they are not hiring fully remote employees. It's common for scientific and office staff to have 1–2 days a week where they can work from home to analyze data or write reports, while spending the majority of time on-site for lab work, meetings, and teamwork. Some roles that proved effective remotely, such as certain bioinformatics or software development positions, are still open to remote hires if the talent need is critical. Also, smaller startups that want to access niche experts (for example, a specialist consultant in regulatory strategy or an AI expert) might hire those individuals on a remote, contract, or part-time basis rather than forcing a move. Geography in hiring has become a bit more flexible at the margins, but by and large the pendulum in 2025 has swung back toward co-location in hubs.

For job seekers, this regional dynamic means considering relocation or travel if they wish to break into certain sectors. A few years ago, one might have landed a biotech job while residing far from any biotech cluster; today that is much less likely. We see this reflected in anecdotal reports of job seekers outside hub areas struggling. The Labiotech.eu job market analysis pointed out that candidates outside of key hubs like Boston, San Diego, and San Francisco are at a "distinct disadvantage" now (^[39]) because so many roles require proximity. It's not just a U.S. phenomenon – someone in Europe might find it much easier to get hired in Basel, London, or Paris than if they live in a smaller country with little pharma presence.

International mobility has also picked up again. During travel lockdowns, relocations slowed, but by 2025 companies are once more relocating scientists around the world for key roles. A scientist in India might be invited to move to a position in Singapore; a German regulatory expert might relocate to the UK for a big pharma job, etc. Visas and immigration remain an obstacle in some cases (for instance, tightened H-1B visa competition in the U.S. can make it challenging for foreign scientists to secure U.S. jobs), yet global firms are leveraging their international offices to work around such issues where possible.

One interesting regional hiring trend is the focus some governments and regions have placed on becoming life science "tech hubs." For example, the U.S. government's designation of regional technology hubs (through the CHIPS and Science Act) includes biohealth initiatives. States like Wisconsin have been highlighted for their efforts to attract biohealth companies and talent, blending strengths in manufacturing, research institutions, and new startups (^[40]). While Madison/Milwaukee isn't about to overtake Boston, these regional plays could create micro-clusters of jobs, especially in bio-manufacturing and medical devices. Similarly, Middle Eastern countries (like UAE and Saudi Arabia) are investing in biotechnology research centers as part of diversifying their economies, potentially creating new pockets of life science employment in the future.

In summary, location remains paramount in the life sciences job market, with the traditional hubs continuing to lead in job opportunities and new hotspots emerging slowly. Remote work, which briefly expanded geographic options, has retrenched for most roles that require lab or face-to-face collaboration. Professionals aspiring to build a career in this industry should consider spending time in one of the key clusters to maximize networking and job prospects, even if the long-term vision is for a more distributed workforce. Nonetheless, the industry's global nature means talented individuals often have a chance to move where the work is – whether that's moving to a biotech hub or finding a company willing to bring the work to them.

Technological change is a double-edged sword in the life sciences job market: it is creating new opportunities and roles (as discussed above with AI and computational biology), but it is also altering or even reducing the need for certain traditional jobs through automation. Understanding these impacts is key for professionals who want to future-proof their careers.

AI in Drug Discovery and Development: The infusion of artificial intelligence into drug R&D is one of the most profound tech shifts happening. Dozens of pharma and biotech companies have launched AI-driven projects – from using machine learning to identify new drug targets to employing predictive algorithms in clinical trial design. This has spurred demand for AI expertise, but it also promises to increase efficiency in a way that could streamline teams. For example, an AI platform might analyze chemical libraries faster than a large team of bench chemists could, potentially meaning companies might hire fewer bench scientists for early-stage screening and more data scientists to interpret AI outputs. However, rather than an outright replacement, what we see so far is a reprofiling of roles: bench scientists are learning to work alongside AI (curating data, validating AI-generated hypotheses in the lab), and some repetitive tasks they did are reduced, but their creative and experimental skills are still crucial. AI is also impacting clinical trial operations – algorithms can help identify patient recruitment pools or flag safety signals, reducing some manual data crunching roles but necessitating roles like "clinical data scientist." Overall, AI is not eliminating scientists, but augmenting them, and those who can harness AI tools are highly valued. A Deloitte report noted pharmaceutical organizations integrating generative AI and digital twins into R&D to speed up stages of development (^[41]) (^[42]), which suggests that companies will continue investing in tech-savvy talent.

Automation in Labs and Manufacturing: Automation is another significant trend. Laboratory automation has accelerated, with robots handling liquid transfers, sample prep, and even cell culture maintenance. This increases throughput and reproducibility but can reduce the need for as many hands-on lab technicians for routine tasks. As a result, some traditional lab tech roles are evolving into automation specialist roles (the person who programs and maintains the robot is now as important as the one who used to pipette samples). Those lab professionals who upskill in handling automated systems or analyzing the larger data output of automated experiments will find their roles secure, while those who only have skills in manual techniques might find fewer openings over time. Similarly, in pharmaceutical manufacturing, process automation and advanced robotics are taking on tasks in production lines and quality control. Facilities are adopting Industry 4.0 practices – sensors, IoT devices, real-time monitoring – which means the workforce needs more engineers and data analysts and comparatively fewer operators for menial tasks. But note: highly automated biotech plants still require humans to oversee processes, respond to anomalies, and perform complex interventions, so the net effect is often a shift in skill requirements rather than pure job cuts.

Digital Transformation and Data Management: The push for digital record-keeping (electronic lab notebooks, digital regulatory submissions, etc.) has created demand for IT and data management roles within life sciences that didn't exist at the same scale before. Companies need data stewards, cloud specialists, and cybersecurity experts to handle sensitive R&D data. This is another area where tech is creating jobs inside life science firms that historically might have been outsourced. At the same time, better software is reducing some administrative roles; for example, an automated regulatory information management system might reduce the number of coordinators needed to compile submissions, but increase the need for an IT system manager and a regulatory strategist who can ensure the software aligns with requirements.

Upskilling the Existing Workforce: Technological change has also prompted many companies to invest in training their current employees. Rather than lay off a lab scientist because a new software can do some of their analysis, a company might train that scientist in the software and repurpose their time for higher-level research questions. In 2025, it's common to find internal workshops on topics like "AI for biologists" or "coding for lab staff" being offered within big pharma companies. For employees, showing initiative in learning these tools is often rewarded. In contrast, those resistant to new technologies might find career growth difficult. A cultural divide is sometimes noted: younger professionals entering the field are often more natively comfortable with digital tools, whereas some veteran scientists have had to adapt later in their careers – but the pandemic somewhat equalized this, as everyone became more tech-proficient out of necessity.

Potential Job Displacement: It would be remiss not to acknowledge that some roles are at risk of displacement. For instance, consider regulatory affairs: if in the future AI systems become advanced enough to draft regulatory dossiers or predict regulators' questions, might we need fewer entry-level regulatory associates? Or in clinical trials, if decentralized trial technology (remote patient monitoring, telemedicine) reduces the need for on-site clinical research coordinators, those roles could diminish. Indeed, a Reddit discussion noted a downturn in medical device regulatory hiring with an uptick in layoffs in late 2023 (^[43]), suggesting some consolidation possibly due to tech efficiencies or market factors. However, any displacement tends to be gradual. The highly regulated nature of life sciences means human judgment and oversight remain paramount – an AI might draft a report, but a human must verify and sign off. Moreover, every new technology brings new concerns (ethical, quality, interpretation) that often create new human-centric roles to manage those concerns.

Technology Creating New Industries: On a positive note, technology is also spawning entirely new sub-industries within life sciences, each with its own job market. For example, synthetic biology – programming cells like we program computers – is a growing field merging engineering and biology. Synbio companies are hiring bioengineers, computational biologists, and fermentation experts to create everything from lab-grown meat to microbial biosensors (^[44]). Personalized medicine is another area: with the cost of gene sequencing so low, there's a burgeoning field of pharmacogenomics and personalized therapy design, which employs genetic counselors, computational modelers, and patient data analysts. Telehealth and digital therapeutics tie technology to life science by making software part of treatment; companies here hire clinical experts who also understand UX design and software development.

In conclusion, technology and automation are reshaping the life sciences workforce but not in a simplistic "robots replace humans" manner. Instead, we see a shift in the composition of jobs – fewer purely manual or routine roles, more hybrid and tech-focused roles. Adaptability is therefore one of the most important traits for life science professionals. Those who continuously learn (be it a new lab technique, a programming language, or an AI tool) will find that technology elevates their career rather than threatens it. The industry's human capital strategy is increasingly about augmenting human expertise with technology, allowing scientists and specialists to tackle more complex, creative, and value-added tasks with the grunt work automated or assisted by AI. As one survey indicated, nearly half of biopharma executives see rethinking R&D strategies (including integrating advanced tech) as vital in the coming year (^[41]), implying that talent strategies will co-evolve with these technological transformations. In the life sciences, the "machines" may be learning, but so are the people – and when both advance together, the result is a more innovative and productive industry.

The life sciences job market does not exist in a vacuum; it is strongly influenced by broader economic conditions, funding cycles, and industry-specific events. Throughout 2025 and into 2026, the sector has been navigating several key economic factors:

• Funding and Investment Climate: After the frenzy of biotech IPOs and venture funding in 2020-2021, the sector experienced a prolonged "biotech winter" through 2022-2024. Higher interest rates and risk-averse investors led to a dramatic pullback in biotech financing. Capital tightening primarily drove the increased layoffs, as after a wave of early-stage biotech failures, investors rotated out of the sector (^[2]). The instability peaked in April 2025 when the XBI biotech index bottomed out at $66 following tariff announcements. However, the second half of 2025 saw signs of recovery, with the XBI hitting a yearly high of $126.30 in late December—up over 30% (^[4]). Investment in cell and gene therapies reached $15.2 billion in 2025—30% growth compared to 2023—with over 2,000 active CGT clinical trials globally (^[18]). Major manufacturers like Novartis announced a $23 billion U.S. investment creating over 1,000 jobs, while Eli Lilly's $27 billion plan for four new American plants is expected to generate 3,000+ positions (^[45]).

• Pharma Pipelines and Patent Cliffs: Large pharmaceutical companies are influenced by the success or failure of their drug pipelines. A wave of patent expirations on blockbuster drugs (the "patent cliff") is hitting this mid-decade period (^[46]). Companies like Merck, Bristol Myers, and others face revenue loss as generics/biosimilars enter. To prepare, they resort to cost-cutting and look for growth through mergers and acquisitions (M&A). In 2025, 77% of life science executives surveyed anticipated more M&A this year (^[47]). Notable examples of M&A-related hiring shifts include EMD Serono (Merck KGaA's North American division) laying off research team employees following its acquisition of SpringWorks Therapeutics (^[48]).

FDA approvals remained robust in 2025, with 46 new drugs approved (or 55 including vaccines)—slightly down from 50 in 2024 but still a healthy pipeline (^[49]). Notable 2025 approvals included Vertex's Journavx (suzetrigine)—the first new drug for acute pain in 20+ years—and GSK's Blujepa (gepotidacin), the first new class of oral antibiotics for UTIs in nearly 30 years (^[50]). Oncology drugs dominated with 14 approvals. The FDA also underwent significant changes, with a 20% reduction in force on April 1, 2025, raising industry concerns about approval timelines, though drug, device, and food reviewers were excluded (^[51]). U.S. and European regulators anticipate a steady cadence of 10-20 new CGT approvals annually going forward.

• Macroeconomic Trends: Broader economic trends like inflation, currency exchange rates, and global trade policies also touch life sciences. Inflation in the past couple of years increased operational costs (materials, utilities for manufacturing, employee salaries as noted) – companies responded by seeking efficiencies, sometimes slowing hiring. However, moderate inflation can also push people to switch jobs seeking higher pay, which ironically increases hiring churn. Exchange rates affected companies like Roche (a Swiss firm) where a strong franc impacted sales (^[52]), potentially influencing local employment decisions. Additionally, global supply chain issues (lingering from pandemic disruptions) had some pharma companies invest in domestic production capabilities – the U.S., for example, has encouraged on-shoring of pharmaceutical manufacturing for supply security, which could create jobs in those facilities over time.

• Layoffs and Talent Redistribution: The layoff wave continued through 2025, with biopharma layoffs rising 16% year-over-year and affecting approximately 42,700 employees—a 47% increase from 2024 (^[2]). Major 2025 cuts included Novo Nordisk (9,000 employees), CSL (3,000), and Bayer (4,450). California and Massachusetts saw the most affected companies, with 58 and 56 respectively. This created a pool of experienced professionals in search of work. Economically, it's been a buyer's market for employers—they can hire talent often at or below the cost it would have taken when competition for hires was fierce. However, it's also driving entrepreneurial activity: some laid-off scientists and execs have launched new startups or moved into academia or consulting. The longevity biotech sector is quietly leading the next hiring cycle, with healthspan-focused startups attracting fresh capital and seeking translational scientists, clinical leads, and bioengineers. Layoffs are already starting in early 2026, with Tessera Therapeutics planning to lay off 90 employees and Lyra Therapeutics shuttering entirely (^[48]), though experts expect 2026 layoffs will not match 2025's pace.

• Government and Policy Impact: Legislation and policies have created significant ripple effects in 2025. Drug pricing pressure (including Medicare negotiating drug prices in the US) continues to squeeze pharma profit margins, influencing how much they invest in new hiring versus restructuring. A major development in 2025 was NIH funding cuts and staff reductions at the FDA under the new administration, raising concerns about research job funding and approval timelines (^[19]). The April 2025 tariff announcements also spooked markets, with the XBI biotech index bottoming out shortly thereafter. On the positive side, government investments in science (like ARPA-H in the US) continue to fund research jobs and collaborations, and state-level incentives remain strong—Massachusetts announced $17.3 million in tax incentives to create 806 life sciences jobs in 2025. Macro headwinds including NIH cuts and price controls are unlikely to abate fully in 2026, meaning companies may continue rationalization strategies.

Outlook for 2026: Taking all these conditions together, what is the outlook for the life sciences job market entering 2026? Industry experts do not expect 2026 layoffs to continue at 2025's pace. Some predict not only a leveling off but also modest increases in headcount, noting that interest rates are coming down and healthcare sentiment has improved with the XBI up over 30% from its April 2025 lows (^[4]). Factors supporting recovery include increased M&A volume, a potential biotech IPO resurgence, and sustained investment in CGT and longevity biotech sectors. Big pharmaceutical companies, armed with war chests for M&A, may become a safety net for the job market—acquired companies' projects usually continue in some form, absorbing staff, and big pharma often hires from the pool of biotech talent to staff new divisions or ventures.

Moreover, the long-term drivers for life sciences remain very strong. Global demographic trends (aging populations, chronic disease prevalence), scientific breakthroughs (in genomics, immunotherapy, etc.), and post-pandemic appreciation for biomedical innovation all point toward growth. A report from MassBioEd highlights that even with a short-term slowdown, Massachusetts expects one-third growth in life science jobs over the decade (^[53]), and nationally the BLS projects faster-than-average growth for science occupations (^[54]). These imply that demand for talent will outstrip supply in many specialties. Indeed, MassBioEd noted that even now, the demand for life sciences talent exceeds the supply of new graduates in the field (their state's schools supplied only ~61% of the needed graduates for certain science roles) (^[55]). This talent gap could become more acute as hiring picks up, leading to a more candidate-driven market in a few years.

One concern, however, is talent pipeline and retention. The tough job market of 2023-2024 may have dissuaded some students from entering doctoral programs or early-career professionals from staying in biotech. If the industry doesn't clearly rebound, there's a risk of losing potential future scientists to other careers. That's why industry groups and companies are ramping up outreach, internships, and training programs – to reassure and entice the next generation. The current moment might be compared to a compressed spring: there's pent-up innovation and hiring that was held back, and when released, it could lead to a surge in opportunities. But exactly when that spring uncoils (late 2025 vs. 2026) is the big question, hinging on economic cues.

For pharmaceutical professionals reading this, the key takeaway is to stay adaptable and informed. The state of the job market in April 2025 might feel challenging, but it is dynamic. Networking within your regional hub, continuously upskilling (especially in digital competencies), and being open to emerging roles can position you well for upcoming opportunities. While recent layoffs and hiring freezes have been disheartening, they have also driven home which skills and roles are truly indispensable – and that can guide your career development. The life sciences industry has always been somewhat cyclical, but its overall trajectory is one of growth because the world will always need new therapies, sustainable solutions, and scientific problem-solvers. As economic winds shift, the companies that positioned themselves well during the lean times will start accelerating their projects, and when they do, talented professionals will find doors opening once again. The outlook for the life sciences job market thus remains fundamentally strong, with 2025 acting as a bridge from a period of consolidation back towards one of expansion and innovation-driven hiring.

As we enter 2026, the life sciences job market (outside of frontline healthcare roles) presents a mixed but ultimately hopeful picture. The industry weathered a challenging 2025 marked by record layoffs affecting 42,700 employees (47% more than 2024), hiring freezes, and intense competition for available roles. Yet, it also stands at the forefront of remarkable scientific and technological progress. Hiring trends showed significant contraction through 2025—with job postings down 20% year-over-year and applications up 90%—even as total industry employment reached a record 2.1 million in March before pulling back (^[1]). Skills and qualifications in demand have never been more specialized: companies seek professionals who blend biology with data science, regulatory know-how, and technological savvy, indicating that the future belongs to those who are agile learners and interdisciplinary thinkers. We've seen salaries and compensation defy a weak job market, climbing at the fastest rate in years (a 9% jump from 2023 to 2024, the largest since 2021) (^[29]), which speaks to the premium on high-value talent and efforts by organizations to retain their workforce through challenging times. At the same time, bonus payouts declined 9% and equity compensation dropped from 36% to 30% of employees, painting a complex compensation landscape.

Emerging roles and career paths are a bright spot, showcasing how innovation is spawning new opportunities – from AI-focused drug discovery leads to specialists in gene therapy production – allowing scientists and professionals to pioneer new domains. These roles underscore a broader theme: technology (AI, automation, digital health) is transforming the field, and those transformations are opening new avenues for impact while also reshaping existing jobs. Regional insights reaffirm the importance of established hubs like Boston, Basel, and Singapore, but also hint at gradual diversification and the nuanced retreat of fully remote work in favor of hybrid models that balance flexibility with the benefits of onsite collaboration (^[39]). Finally, the impact of economic conditions and recent waves of layoffs has been sobering, yet the industry's inherent resilience and the persistent drivers of growth (such as global health needs and scientific breakthroughs) are reason for cautious optimism.

For pharmaceutical professionals, the key is to remain forward-looking and adaptable. Investing in one's skills – especially in digital and analytical competencies – and staying attuned to industry trends will be critical. Networking within the community, whether through regional industry groups or online professional forums, can provide an edge in learning about opportunities in real time. Companies, on their end, will need to continue balancing cost discipline with the recognition that future success hinges on attracting and retaining top talent. Those organizations that maintain their training programs, mentorship, and talent pipelines during the lean periods will be the first to leap ahead when growth returns.

In conclusion, the life sciences job market as we enter 2026 is one of evolving challenges and emerging opportunities. It reflects an industry in transition—integrating new technologies, adjusting to economic realities, and preparing for the next wave of innovation. Industry experts predict that 2026 layoffs will not continue at 2025's pace, with some forecasting modest headcount increases as the XBI has recovered over 30% from its April 2025 lows and interest rates stabilize (^[4]). Key growth areas include cell and gene therapy (with $15.2 billion invested in 2025), AI-driven drug discovery, and the emerging longevity biotech sector. Massachusetts projects 11.6% job growth by 2029, while major manufacturers' investments (Novartis $23B, Eli Lilly $27B) promise thousands of new positions. While the current climate requires perseverance from job seekers and strategic thinking from employers, the long-term trajectory remains one of expansion and impact. The quest for new medicines, greener technologies, and scientific understanding is undiminished. Thorough preparation, continuous learning, and adaptability will serve professionals well. The sector's recent hardships are real, but so is its capacity for reinvention. As history has shown, a slower period in biotech or pharma often precedes the next breakthrough-driven boom, and those who stay engaged and informed now will be best positioned to ride that wave when it comes.

Figure: U.S. Life Science Job Market Trends (2022–2025) – Job postings dropped dramatically from their 2022 peak through 2024-2025, with BioSpace data showing postings down 20% year-over-year in Q1 2025 while applications surged 90%. In Massachusetts alone, postings fell from 70,128 in 2022 to 40,195 in 2024 (^[6]). Meanwhile, the XBI biotech index bottomed at $66 in April 2025 before recovering to $126.30 by December—a sign of improved investor sentiment that could support hiring recovery in 2026 (^[4]).