IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/scient/v125y2020i2d10.1007_s11192-020-03596-1.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Evaluating gender equality effects in research and innovation systems

Author

Listed:
  • Susanne Bührer

    (Fraunhofer ISI)

  • Evanthia Kalpazidou Schmidt

    (Aarhus University)

  • Rachel Palmén

    (Universitat Oberta de Catalunya)

  • Sybille Reidl

    (Joanneum Research)

Abstract

Despite the fact that the topic of “women in research and innovation” has been on the agenda for decades and numerous measures have been implemented at both national and supranational levels to improve gender equality in research and innovation systems, it is still unclear which measures and under which conditions these measures are most effective. Even less research has been carried out on the effects of better representation of women in terms of research and innovation. This paper is based on the application of an innovative evaluation framework, which encompasses complexity and theory of change approaches and aims at exploring the link between interventions and their subsequent effects to two case studies. We discuss two major German flagship programmes aiming at increasing the participation of female researchers in the science system, the “Women Professorship Programme” and the “Pact for Research and Innovation”. Through the two programmes, we tested and validated the evaluation framework and its indicators. As part of the validation process, a theory of change has been developed for each of the programmes. The theory-based evaluation approach helped not only to identify gender equality impacts but also broader effects on research and innovation that might have otherwise remained undetected. We studied the effects of the two programmes on the number of women in leadership positions and analysed whether an increase in the proportion of women leaders influences publication patterns. Although linear linkages are challenging to establish due to the complexity of the process, the findings suggest that the flagship programmes have contributed not only to higher shares of women researchers but also to improved female publication and citation rates. There are clear benefits for Germany in terms of scientific results from the increased proportion of female researchers in research and innovation.

Suggested Citation

  • Susanne Bührer & Evanthia Kalpazidou Schmidt & Rachel Palmén & Sybille Reidl, 2020. "Evaluating gender equality effects in research and innovation systems," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 125(2), pages 1459-1475, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:125:y:2020:i:2:d:10.1007_s11192-020-03596-1
    DOI: 10.1007/s11192-020-03596-1
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11192-020-03596-1
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11192-020-03596-1?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Abigail Powell & Tarek Hassan & Andrew Dainty & Chris Carter, 2009. "Note: Exploring gender differences in construction research: a European perspective," Construction Management and Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 27(9), pages 803-807.
    2. Bührer, Susanne & Frietsch, Rainer, 2020. "How do public investments in gender equality initiatives and publication patterns interrelate? The case of Germany," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 79(C).
    3. Bührer, Susanne & Frietsch, Rainer, 2020. "How do public investments in gender equality initiatives and publication patterns interrelate? The case of Germany," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 79(C).
    4. Jian Wang & Bart Thijs & Wolfgang Glänzel, 2015. "Interdisciplinarity and Impact: Distinct Effects of Variety, Balance, and Disparity," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(5), pages 1-18, May.
    5. Aaron R. Brough & James E. B. Wilkie & Jingjing Ma & Mathew S. Isaac & David Gal, 2016. "Is Eco-Friendly Unmanly? The Green-Feminine Stereotype and Its Effect on Sustainable Consumption," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 43(4), pages 567-582.
    6. Keisuke Okamura, 2019. "Interdisciplinarity revisited: evidence for research impact and dynamism," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 5(1), pages 1-9, December.
    7. Emanuela Reale & Dragana Avramov & Kubra Canhial & Claire Donovan & Ramon Flecha & Poul Holm & Charles Larkin & Benedetto Lepori & Judith Mosoni-Fried & Esther Oliver & Emilia Primeri & Lidia Puigvert, 2018. "A review of literature on evaluating the scientific, social and political impact of social sciences and humanities research," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 27(4), pages 298-308.
    8. Ben R Martin, 2011. "The Research Excellence Framework and the ‘impact agenda’: are we creating a Frankenstein monster?," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 20(3), pages 247-254, September.
    9. Horbach, Jens & Jacob, Jojo, 2017. "The relevance of personal characteristics and gender diversity for (eco)-innovation activities at the firm-level : Results from a linked employer-employee database in Germany," IAB-Discussion Paper 201711, Institut für Arbeitsmarkt- und Berufsforschung (IAB), Nürnberg [Institute for Employment Research, Nuremberg, Germany].
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Matricano, Diego, 2022. "The influence of gender on technology transfer processes managed in Italian Young Innovative Companies: A stochastic frontier analysis," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 111(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Meijun Liu & Sijie Yang & Yi Bu & Ning Zhang, 2023. "Female early-career scientists have conducted less interdisciplinary research in the past six decades: evidence from doctoral theses," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 10(1), pages 1-16, December.
    2. Xiaojing Cai & Xiaozan Lyu & Ping Zhou, 2023. "The relationship between interdisciplinarity and citation impact—a novel perspective on citation accumulation," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 10(1), pages 1-12, December.
    3. Andrea Bonaccorsi & Nicola Melluso & Francesco Alessandro Massucci, 2022. "Exploring the antecedents of interdisciplinarity at the European Research Council: a topic modeling approach," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(12), pages 6961-6991, December.
    4. Jingjing Ren & Fang Wang & Minglu Li, 2023. "Dynamics and characteristics of interdisciplinary research in scientific breakthroughs: case studies of Nobel-winning research in the past 120 years," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 128(8), pages 4383-4419, August.
    5. Sander Zwanenburg & Maryam Nakhoda & Peter Whigham, 2022. "Toward greater consistency and validity in measuring interdisciplinarity: a systematic and conceptual evaluation," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(12), pages 7769-7788, December.
    6. Luka Ursić & Godfrey Baldacchino & Željana Bašić & Ana Belén Sainz & Ivan Buljan & Miriam Hampel & Ivana Kružić & Mia Majić & Ana Marušić & Franck Thetiot & Ružica Tokalić & Leandra Vranješ Markić, 2022. "Factors Influencing Interdisciplinary Research and Industry-Academia Collaborations at Six European Universities: A Qualitative Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(15), pages 1-24, July.
    7. Andrea Bonaccorsi & Filippo Chiarello & Gualtiero Fantoni, 2021. "Impact for whom? Mapping the users of public research with lexicon-based text mining," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(2), pages 1745-1774, February.
    8. Meda Andrijauskiene & Daiva Dumciuviene & Jovita Vasauskaite, 2021. "Redeveloping the National Innovative Capacity Framework: European Union Perspective," Economies, MDPI, vol. 9(4), pages 1-30, December.
    9. Jonathan P. Doh & Lorraine Eden & Anne S. Tsui & Srilata Zaheer, 2023. "Developing international business scholarship for global societal impact," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 54(5), pages 757-767, July.
    10. Núria Bautista-Puig & Jorge Mañana-Rodríguez & Antonio Eleazar Serrano-López, 2021. "Role taxonomy of green and sustainable science and technology journals: exportation, importation, specialization and interdisciplinarity," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(5), pages 3871-3892, May.
    11. Gao, Qiang & Liang, Zhentao & Wang, Ping & Hou, Jingrui & Chen, Xiuxiu & Liu, Manman, 2021. "Potential index: Revealing the future impact of research topics based on current knowledge networks," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 15(3).
    12. Nils Grashof, 2020. "Sinking or swimming in the cluster labour pool? A firm-specific analysis of the effect of specialized labour," Jena Economics Research Papers 2020-006, Friedrich-Schiller-University Jena.
    13. Tetsuo Wada, 2018. "The choice of examiner patent citations for refusals: evidence from the trilateral offices," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 117(2), pages 825-843, November.
    14. Hackett, Edward J. & Leahey, Erin & Parker, John N. & Rafols, Ismael & Hampton, Stephanie E. & Corte, Ugo & Chavarro, Diego & Drake, John M. & Penders, Bart & Sheble, Laura & Vermeulen, Niki & Vision,, 2021. "Do synthesis centers synthesize? A semantic analysis of topical diversity in research," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(1).
    15. Zuo, Zhiya & Zhao, Kang, 2018. "The more multidisciplinary the better? – The prevalence and interdisciplinarity of research collaborations in multidisciplinary institutions," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 12(3), pages 736-756.
    16. Sándor Soós & Zsófia Vida & András Schubert, 2018. "Long-term trends in the multidisciplinarity of some typical natural and social sciences, and its implications on the SSH versus STM distinction," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 114(3), pages 795-822, March.
    17. Buckle, Robert A. & Creedy, John & Ball, Ashley, 2020. "A Schumpeterian Gale: Using Longitudinal Data to Evaluate Responses to Performance-Based Research Funding Systems," Working Paper Series 9447, Victoria University of Wellington, Chair in Public Finance.
    18. Lisette Ibanez & Sébastien Roussel, 2022. "The impact of nature video exposure on pro-environmental behavior: An experimental investigation," Post-Print hal-03847453, HAL.
    19. Lina Xu & Steven Dellaportas & Zhiqiang Yang & Jin Wang, 2023. "More on the relationship between interdisciplinary accounting research and citation impact," Accounting and Finance, Accounting and Finance Association of Australia and New Zealand, vol. 63(4), pages 4779-4803, December.
    20. Horbach, Jens & Rammer, Christian, 2018. "Energy transition in Germany and regional spill-overs: The diffusion of renewable energy in firms," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 121(C), pages 404-414.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:125:y:2020:i:2:d:10.1007_s11192-020-03596-1. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.