IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/agecon/v54y2023i2p274-288.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Does research performance explain the “leaky pipeline” in Indian academia? A study of agricultural and applied economics

Author

Listed:
  • Sangeeta Bansal
  • Brinda Viswanathan
  • J. V. Meenakshi

Abstract

This article documents the existence of a leaky pipeline based on complete enumeration of faculty in two large public academic networks: state agricultural universities and institutions of the Indian Council of Social Science Research. We then examine if there are gender differences in the quantity and quality of research publications of women relative to men that can explain this. As proxies for quality and visibility, we use several metrics, including the number of citations, h‐index, i10 index, and Scimago rank of the journal in which the research is featured. A novel aspect of the analysis is the comparison of time paths of cumulative publications over career paths of men and women professors. Our analysis of research performance is based on scraping publicly‐available data sources, including faculty and institutional websites, and google scholar pages, and represents one‐third (and likely positively selected) of all faculty in these institutions. Our results suggest that women are disadvantaged in terms of number of publications during early career years, however, the disadvantage is mitigated with seniority and women perform equally well or even surpass men later in their careers. Women are more likely to write single‐authored articles and have fewer collaborators than men, indicating that they do not access collaborative spaces as much, and are less networked than men. In spite of this, there is suggestive evidence that women are more quality conscious than men. This nuanced look at research productivity suggests the source of the leaky pipeline does not arise from differences in performance.

Suggested Citation

  • Sangeeta Bansal & Brinda Viswanathan & J. V. Meenakshi, 2023. "Does research performance explain the “leaky pipeline” in Indian academia? A study of agricultural and applied economics," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 54(2), pages 274-288, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:bla:agecon:v:54:y:2023:i:2:p:274-288
    DOI: 10.1111/agec.12744
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/agec.12744
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/agec.12744?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Manuel Bagues & Mauro Sylos-Labini & Natalia Zinovyeva, 2017. "Does the Gender Composition of Scientific Committees Matter?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 107(4), pages 1207-1238, April.
    2. Donna K. Ginther & Janet M. Currie & Francine D. Blau & Rachel T. A. Croson, 2020. "Can Mentoring Help Female Assistant Professors in Economics? An Evaluation by Randomized Trial," AEA Papers and Proceedings, American Economic Association, vol. 110, pages 205-209, May.
    3. Laurian Unnevehr & Julie Caswell & Jean Kinsey, 2022. "How women in agricultural economics expanded the profession's role in food safety and nutrition," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 44(1), pages 23-37, March.
    4. Abdelghani Maddi & Yves Gingras, 2021. "Gender Diversity In Research Teams And Citation Impact In Economics And Management," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 35(5), pages 1381-1404, December.
    5. Daniel S. Hamermesh, 2018. "Citations in Economics: Measurement, Uses, and Impacts," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 56(1), pages 115-156, March.
    6. Shelly Lundberg & Jenna Stearns, 2019. "Women in Economics: Stalled Progress," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 33(1), pages 3-22, Winter.
    7. Anne Boschini & Anna Sjögren, 2007. "Is Team Formation Gender Neutral? Evidence from Coauthorship Patterns," Journal of Labor Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 25(2), pages 325-365.
    8. Kathleen Segerson & Catherine L. Kling & Nancy E. Bockstael, 2022. "Contributions of women at the intersection of agricultural economics and environmental and natural resource economics," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 44(1), pages 38-53, March.
    9. Erin Hengel, 2022. "Publishing While Female: are Women Held to Higher Standards? Evidence from Peer Review," The Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 132(648), pages 2951-2991.
    10. Jaya Krishnakumar & Brinda Viswanathan, 2021. "Role of social and institutional factors in Indian women’s labour force participation and hours worked," Journal of the Asia Pacific Economy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 26(2), pages 230-251, April.
    11. Linda Babcock & Maria P. Recalde & Lise Vesterlund & Laurie Weingart, 2017. "Gender Differences in Accepting and Receiving Requests for Tasks with Low Promotability," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 107(3), pages 714-747, March.
    12. John M. McDowell & Larry D. Singell & Mark Stater, 2006. "Two to Tango? Gender Differences in the Decisions to Publish and Coauthor," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 44(1), pages 153-168, January.
    13. Donna K. Ginther & Shulamit Kahn, 2004. "Women in Economics: Moving Up or Falling Off the Academic Career Ladder?," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 18(3), pages 193-214, Summer.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Verónica Amarante & Marisa Bucheli & María Inés Moraes & Tatiana Pérez, 2021. "Women in Research in Economics in Uruguay," Revista Cuadernos de Economia, Universidad Nacional de Colombia, FCE, CID, vol. 40(84), pages 763-790, October.
    2. Bransch, Felix & Kvasnicka, Michael, 2022. "Male Gatekeepers: Gender Bias in the Publishing Process?," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 202(C), pages 714-732.
    3. Andrew Hussey & Sheena Murray & Wendy Stock, 2022. "Gender, coauthorship, and academic outcomes in economics," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 60(2), pages 465-484, April.
    4. Rebecca Cassells & Leonora Risse & Danielle Wood & Duygu Yengin, 2023. "Lifting Diversity and Inclusion in Economics: How the Australian Women in Economics Network Put the Evidence into Action," Economic Papers, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 42(1), pages 1-29, March.
    5. Biermann, Marcus, 2024. "Remote talks: Changes to economics seminars during COVID-19," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 163(C).
    6. Mila Getmansky Sherman & Heather E. Tookes, 2022. "Female Representation in the Academic Finance Profession," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 77(1), pages 317-365, February.
    7. Jenny Bourne & Nathan D. Grawe & Michael Hemesath & Prathi Seneviratne & Maya Jensen, 2024. "The Disappearing Gender Gap in Scholarly Publication of Economists at Liberal Arts Colleges," Eastern Economic Journal, Palgrave Macmillan;Eastern Economic Association, vol. 50(1), pages 117-134, January.
    8. Joanna Tyrowicz & Lucas Augusto van der Velde & Magdalena Smyk, 2024. "Gender-neutral hiring of junior scholars," GRAPE Working Papers 94, GRAPE Group for Research in Applied Economics.
    9. Auriol, Emmanuelle & Friebel, Guido & Weinberger, Alisa & ,, 2021. "Women in Economics: Europe and the World," CEPR Discussion Papers 16686, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    10. Fulya Y. Ersoy & Jennifer Pate, 2023. "Invisible hurdles: Gender and institutional differences in the evaluation of economics papers," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 61(4), pages 777-797, October.
    11. Smith, Sarah & Sevilla, Almudena, 2020. "Women in economics: A UK Perspective," CEPR Discussion Papers 15034, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    12. Filandri, Marianna & Pasqua, Silvia & Priori, Eleonora, 2023. "Breaking through the glass ceiling. Simulating policies to close the gender gap in the Italian academia," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 88(C).
    13. Lorenzo Ductor & Sanjeev Goyal & Anja Prummer, 2018. "Gender & Collaboration," Working Papers 856, Queen Mary University of London, School of Economics and Finance.
    14. Laura Hospido & Carlos Sanz, 2021. "Gender Gaps in the Evaluation of Research: Evidence from Submissions to Economics Conferences," Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Department of Economics, University of Oxford, vol. 83(3), pages 590-618, June.
    15. Sierminska, Eva & Oaxaca, Ronald L., 2022. "Gender differences in economics PhD field specializations with correlated choices," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 79(C).
    16. Donna K. Ginther & Rina Na, 2021. "Does Mentoring Increase the Collaboration Networks of Female Economists? An Evaluation of the CeMENT Randomized Trial," AEA Papers and Proceedings, American Economic Association, vol. 111, pages 80-85, May.
    17. Stéphanie Combes & Pauline Givord, 2018. "Selective matching: gender gap and network formation in research," Working Papers 2018-07, Center for Research in Economics and Statistics.
    18. Lorenzo Ductor & Sanjeev Goyal & Anja Prummer, 2023. "Gender and Collaboration," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 105(6), pages 1366-1378, November.
    19. Anne Boring, 2015. "Gender Biases in student evaluations of teachers," Documents de Travail de l'OFCE 2015-13, Observatoire Francais des Conjonctures Economiques (OFCE).
    20. repec:spo:wpmain:info:hdl:2441/1seuirq4ak9b9bouu1j29ebui7 is not listed on IDEAS
    21. Baltrunaite, Audinga & Casarico, Alessandra & Rizzica, Lucia, 2022. "Women in economics: the role of gendered references at entry in the profession," CEPR Discussion Papers 17474, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:bla:agecon:v:54:y:2023:i:2:p:274-288. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/iaaeeea.html .

    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.