Two programmes regarding research funding are investigated with respect to their evaluation processes. One programme targets individuals and the other centers of excellence. The study attempts to disclose some of the features of the selection procedures and the aim is to contribute with further understanding of the mechanisms in such selection processes, which lead to disproportionate disapproval of female applicants. The use of intuitive or reasoning evaluation methods, together with quantitatively measureable or additive methods, is found to be critical for female applicants. When funding organizations try to advance their evaluation procedures and involve more of reasoning evaluation, there is a risk that other than established main stream projects fail, including applications by women. The paper ends by proposing a hypothesis which may serve as a starting point for further empirical studies.
Download Info
To download:
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the
proper application to
view it first. Information about this may be contained
in the File-Format links below. In case of further problems read
the IDEAS help
file. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS
site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
Length: 15 pages Date of creation: 06 Sep 2007 Date of revision: Handle: RePEc:hhs:cesisp:0097
Contact details of provider: Postal: CESIS - Centre of Excellence for Science and Innovation Studies, Royal Institute of Technology, SE-100 44 Stockholm, Sweden Phone: +46 8 790 95 63 Web page: http://www.infra.kth.se/cesis/ More information through EDIRC
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its listing, contact: (Martin Andersson).
Find related papers by JEL classification: Z13 - Other Special Topics - - Cultural Economics - - - Social Norms and Social Capital; Social Networks Economic Anthropology
This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports: