IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/epplan/v104y2024ics014971892400034x.html

Gender biases in the evaluation of knowledge transfer: A meta-evaluative analysis of the Spanish “Knowledge Transfer and Innovation Sexennium”

Author

Listed:
  • Bustelo, María
  • Salido, Olga

Abstract

This paper analyses from a gender perspective a pilot call for evaluating academics and researcher transfer and innovation activities, launched by the Spanish Government in 2018, known as the “Knowledge Transfer & Innovation Sexennium” (KT&IS). Not only women’s participation was much lower than that of men (1 woman applicant for every 3 men applicants), but also, they showed lower success rates than men in all scientific fields, with an average gap of more than 13 points. The methodology combined an exploratory quantitative analysis of the almost 17,000 applications, with a meta-evaluative qualitative analysis through interviews to key actors of the evaluation program and focus groups with evaluators. Hidden biases operating throughout and in each of the different phases of the KT&IS evaluation process were identified. This article aims at contributing to how economic and social impact of research can be fairly and fully evaluated, as well as at facilitating the design of future evaluation calls that promote the effective advancement of gender equality in all science-related activities and transfer to society.

Suggested Citation

  • Bustelo, María & Salido, Olga, 2024. "Gender biases in the evaluation of knowledge transfer: A meta-evaluative analysis of the Spanish “Knowledge Transfer and Innovation Sexennium”," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 104(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:epplan:v:104:y:2024:i:c:s014971892400034x
    DOI: 10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2024.102432
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S014971892400034X
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2024.102432?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

    for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Pierre Azoulay & Waverly Ding & Toby Stuart, 2009. "The Impact Of Academic Patenting On The Rate, Quality And Direction Of (Public) Research Output," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 57(4), pages 637-676, December.
    2. Reetta Muhonen & Paul Benneworth & Julia Olmos-Peñuela, 2020. "From productive interactions to impact pathways: Understanding the key dimensions in developing SSH research societal impact," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 29(1), pages 34-47.
    3. Perkmann, Markus & Tartari, Valentina & McKelvey, Maureen & Autio, Erkko & Broström, Anders & D’Este, Pablo & Fini, Riccardo & Geuna, Aldo & Grimaldi, Rosa & Hughes, Alan & Krabel, Stefan & Kitson, Mi, 2013. "Academic engagement and commercialisation: A review of the literature on university–industry relations," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(2), pages 423-442.
    4. Fiona Murray & Leigh Graham, 2007. "Buying science and selling science: gender differences in the market for commercial science," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 16(4), pages 657-689, August.
    5. Joaquín M. Azagra-Caro & Pablo D'Este & David Barberá-Tomás (ed.), 2022. "University-Industry Knowledge Interactions," International Studies in Entrepreneurship, Springer, number 978-3-030-84669-5, June.
    6. Paula Burkinshaw & Kate White, 2017. "Fixing the Women or Fixing Universities: Women in HE Leadership," Administrative Sciences, MDPI, vol. 7(3), pages 1-14, August.
    7. Junming Huang & Alexander J. Gates & Roberta Sinatra & Albert-László Barabási, 2020. "Historical comparison of gender inequality in scientific careers across countries and disciplines," Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, vol. 117(9), pages 4609-4616, March.
    8. Cassidy R Sugimoto & Chaoqun Ni & Jevin D West & Vincent Larivière, 2015. "The Academic Advantage: Gender Disparities in Patenting," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(5), pages 1-10, May.
    9. Pablo D’Este & Irene Ramos-Vielba & Richard Woolley & Nabil Amara, 2018. "How do researchers generate scientific and societal impacts? Toward an analytical and operational framework," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 45(6), pages 752-763.
    10. Dotti, Nicola Francesco & Walczyk, Julia, 2022. "What is the societal impact of university research? A policy-oriented review to map approaches, identify monitoring methods and success factors," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 95(C).
    11. Marra, Mita, 2022. "Productive interactions in digital training partnerships: Lessons learned for regional development and university societal impact assessment," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 95(C).
    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. Muscio, Alessandro & Vallanti, Giovanna, 2024. "The gender gap in PhD entrepreneurship: Why balancing employment in academia really matters," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 53(1).
    2. John P. Nelson & Barry Bozeman & Stuart Bretschneider & Spencer L. Lindsay, 2024. "How do academic public administration and public policy researchers affect policymaking? Functional groupings from survey data," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 129(1), pages 65-93, January.
    3. Zhang, Lin & Sivertsen, Gunnar & Du, Huiying & HUANG, Ying & Glänzel, Wolfgang, 2021. "Gender differences in the aims and impacts of research," SocArXiv 9n347, Center for Open Science.
    4. Nifo, A. & Ruberto, S. & Vecchione, G., 2025. "The social role of peripheral universities and tax exemptions, the Italian case," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 113(C).
    5. Halilem, Norrin & De Silva, Muthu & Amara, Nabil, 2022. "Fairly assessing unfairness: An exploration of gender disparities in informal entrepreneurship amongst academics in business schools," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 174(C).
    6. Lin Zhang & Gunnar Sivertsen & Huiying Du & Ying Huang & Wolfgang Glänzel, 2021. "Gender differences in the aims and impacts of research," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(11), pages 8861-8886, November.
    7. Whittington, Kjersten Bunker, 2018. "“A tie is a tie? Gender and network positioning in life science inventor collaboration”," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(2), pages 511-526.
    8. Aurora A. C. Teixeira & João Nogueira, 2016. "Academic Entrepreneurship In Life Sciences: The Case Of A Moderate Innovator Country," Journal of Developmental Entrepreneurship (JDE), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 21(01), pages 1-21, March.
    9. Roberto Iorio & Sandrine Labory & Francesco Rentocchini, 2014. "Academics’ Motivations and Depth and Breadth of Knowledge Transfer Activities," Working Papers 1401, c.MET-05 - Centro Interuniversitario di Economia Applicata alle Politiche per L'industria, lo Sviluppo locale e l'Internazionalizzazione.
    10. Albert Banal-Estañol & Inés Macho-Stadler & David Pérez-Castrillo, 2013. "Endogeneous matching in university-industry collaboration: Theory and empirical evidence from the UK," Economics Working Papers 1379, Department of Economics and Business, Universitat Pompeu Fabra.
    11. Suominen, Arho & Kauppinen, Henni & Hyytinen, Kirsi, 2021. "‘Gold’, ‘Ribbon’ or ‘Puzzle’: What motivates researchers to work in Research and Technology Organizations," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 170(C).
    12. Shinya Suzuki & Hiroyuki Okamuro, 2016. "Determinants of Academic Startups’ Orientation toward International Business Expansion," Administrative Sciences, MDPI, vol. 7(1), pages 1-20, December.
    13. Véronique Schaeffer & Sıla Öcalan-Özel & Julien Pénin, 2020. "The complementarities between formal and informal channels of university–industry knowledge transfer: a longitudinal approach," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 45(1), pages 31-55, February.
    14. Stefan P L de Jong & Corina Balaban & Maria Nedeva, 2022. "From ‘productive interactions’ to ‘enabling conditions’: The role of organizations in generating societal impact of academic research [One Size Does Not Fit All! New Perspectives on the University in the Social Knowledge Economy]," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 49(4), pages 643-645.
    15. Michael Sheriff & Moreno Muffatto, 2019. "University Spin-Offs: A New Framework Integrating Enablers, Stakeholders and Results," International Journal of Innovation and Technology Management (IJITM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 16(02), pages 1-18, April.
    16. Uwe Cantner & Maximilian Goethner & Rainer K. Silbereisen, 2017. "Schumpeter’s entrepreneur – A rare case," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 27(1), pages 187-214, January.
    17. Llopis, Oscar & D'Este, Pablo & McKelvey, Maureen & Yegros, Alfredo, 2022. "Navigating multiple logics: Legitimacy and the quest for societal impact in science," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 110(C).
    18. Munari, Federico & Toschi, Laura, 2021. "The impact of public funding on science valorisation: an analysis of the ERC Proof-of-Concept Programme," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(6).
    19. Edoardo Ferrucci & Francesco Lissoni & Ernest Miguelez, 2020. "Coming from afar and picking a man’s job:Women immigrant inventors in the United States," Working Papers hal-03098102, HAL.
    20. Domingo Sifontes & Rosa Morales, 2020. "Gender differences and patenting in Latin America: understanding female participation in commercial science," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 124(3), pages 2009-2036, September.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    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:eee:epplan:v:104:y:2024:i:c:s014971892400034x. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/evalprogplan .

    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.