IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/cdl/indrel/qt0m0877rr.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Commercial Science: A New Arena for Gender Differences in Scientific Careers?

Author

Listed:
  • Ding, Waverly W.
  • Murray, Fiona
  • Stuart, Toby E.

Abstract

This paper examines gender differences in the participation of university life science faculty in commercial science. In part based on interviews, we develop hypotheses regarding how scientists’ career achievements—their productivity, co-authorship networks, and institutional affiliations—have different effects on whether male and female faculty will become “academic entrepreneurs”. We then statistically examine this framework in a case cohort dataset containing the career histories of 6,000 life scientists. We find that participation in for-profit ventures, which we measure as the hazard of joining the scientific advisory board (SAB) of a biotechnology firm, is a new arena in which gender differences are sharp: compared to men, women life scientists are far less likely to receive compensated advisory roles at for-profit biotechnology companies. Moreover, the gap in participation rates persists after conditioning on numerous measures of human and social capital. We also find that this gender difference is contoured by a number of factors, such as co-authorship network structure and the level of institutional support for commercial science. Surprisingly, we find that the (conditional) gender gap is largest among scientists employed at high prestige institutions.

Suggested Citation

  • Ding, Waverly W. & Murray, Fiona & Stuart, Toby E., 2009. "Commercial Science: A New Arena for Gender Differences in Scientific Careers?," Institute for Research on Labor and Employment, Working Paper Series qt0m0877rr, Institute of Industrial Relations, UC Berkeley.
    • Handle: RePEc:cdl:indrel:qt0m0877rr
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.escholarship.org/uc/item/0m0877rr.pdf;origin=repeccitec
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Devine, Theresa J, 1994. "Changes in Wage-and-Salary Returns to Skill and the Recent Rise in Female Self-Employment," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 84(2), pages 108-113, May.
    2. Christine Wennerås & Agnes Wold, 1997. "Nepotism and sexism in peer-review," Nature, Nature, vol. 387(6631), pages 341-343, May.
    3. S. Redner, 1998. "How popular is your paper? An empirical study of the citation distribution," The European Physical Journal B: Condensed Matter and Complex Systems, Springer;EDP Sciences, vol. 4(2), pages 131-134, July.
    4. Scott Shane & Toby Stuart, 2002. "Organizational Endowments and the Performance of University Start-ups," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 48(1), pages 154-170, January.
    5. Preston, Anne E, 1994. "Why Have All the Women Gone? A Study of Exit of Women from the Science and Engineering Professions," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 84(5), pages 1446-1462, December.
    6. Etzkowitz, Henry, 1998. "The norms of entrepreneurial science: cognitive effects of the new university-industry linkages," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 27(8), pages 823-833, December.
    7. Owen-Smith, Jason, 2003. "From separate systems to a hybrid order: accumulative advantage across public and private science at Research One universities," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(6), pages 1081-1104, June.
    8. Farber, Stephen, 1977. "The Earnings and Promotion of Women Faculty: Comment," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 67(2), pages 199-206, March.
    9. Monica C. Higgins & Ranjay Gulati, 2003. "Getting Off to a Good Start: The Effects of Upper Echelon Affiliations on Underwriter Prestige," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 14(3), pages 244-263, June.
    10. Azoulay, Pierre & Ding, Waverly & Stuart, Toby, 2007. "The determinants of faculty patenting behavior: Demographics or opportunities?," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 63(4), pages 599-623, August.
    11. Fiona Murray & Scott Stern, 2005. "Do Formal Intellectual Property Rights Hinder the Free Flow of Scientific Knowledge? An Empirical Test of the Anti-Commons Hypothesis," NBER Working Papers 11465, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    12. Scott Shane & Rakesh Khurana, 2003. "Bringing individuals back in: the effects of career experience on new firm founding," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 12(3), pages 519-543, June.
    13. Zucker, Lynne G & Darby, Michael R & Brewer, Marilynn B, 1998. "Intellectual Human Capital and the Birth of U.S. Biotechnology Enterprises," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 88(1), pages 290-306, March.
    14. Audretsch, David B & Stephan, Paula E, 1996. "Company-Scientist Locational Links: The Case of Biotechnology," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 86(3), pages 641-652, June.
    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. Petra Moog & Arndt Werner & Stefan Houweling & Uschi Backes-Gellner, 2015. "The impact of skills, working time allocation and peer effects on the entrepreneurial intentions of scientists," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 40(3), pages 493-511, June.

    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. Foray, Dominique & Lissoni, Francesco, 2010. "University Research and Public–Private Interaction," Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, in: Bronwyn H. Hall & Nathan Rosenberg (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 0, pages 275-314, Elsevier.
    2. Stuart, Toby E. & Ozdemir, Salih Zeki & Ding, Waverly W., 2007. "Vertical alliance networks: The case of university-biotechnology-pharmaceutical alliance chains," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(4), pages 477-498, May.
    3. Ding, Waverly & Choi, Emily, 2011. "Divergent paths to commercial science: A comparison of scientists' founding and advising activities," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(1), pages 69-80, February.
    4. Krabel, Stefan & Mueller, Pamela, 2009. "What drives scientists to start their own company?: An empirical investigation of Max Planck Society scientists," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(6), pages 947-956, July.
    5. Michael Fritsch & Stefan Krabel, 2012. "Ready to leave the ivory tower?: Academic scientists’ appeal to work in the private sector," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 37(3), pages 271-296, June.
    6. Ding, Waverly & Choi, Emily, 2008. "Divergent Paths or Stepping Stones: A Comparison of Scientists’ Advising and Founding Activities," Institute for Research on Labor and Employment, Working Paper Series qt4907j25p, Institute of Industrial Relations, UC Berkeley.
    7. Agarwal, Rajshree & Shah, Sonali K., 2014. "Knowledge sources of entrepreneurship: Firm formation by academic, user and employee innovators," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(7), pages 1109-1133.
    8. Aurora A. C. Teixeira & Luisa Mota, 2012. "A bibliometric portrait of the evolution, scientific roots and influence of the literature on university–industry links," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 93(3), pages 719-743, December.
    9. Lam, Alice, 2011. "What motivates academic scientists to engage in research commercialization: ‘Gold’, ‘ribbon’ or ‘puzzle’?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(10), pages 1354-1368.
    10. Walsh, John P. & Huang, Hsini, 2014. "Local context, academic entrepreneurship and open science: Publication secrecy and commercial activity among Japanese and US scientists," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(2), pages 245-260.
    11. Gianluca Fabiano & Andrea Marcellusi & Giampiero Favato, 2020. "Public–private contribution to biopharmaceutical discoveries: a bibliometric analysis of biomedical research in UK," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 124(1), pages 153-168, July.
    12. Bodas Freitas, Isabel Maria & Marques, Rosane Argou & Silva, Evando Mirra de Paula e, 2013. "University–industry collaboration and innovation in emergent and mature industries in new industrialized countries," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(2), pages 443-453.
    13. Dirk Engel & Oliver Heneric, 2013. "Localization of knowledge and entrepreneurs’ mobility: the case of Germany’s biotechnology industry," Review of Regional Research: Jahrbuch für Regionalwissenschaft, Springer;Gesellschaft für Regionalforschung (GfR), vol. 33(2), pages 173-192, October.
    14. Meng, Yu, 2016. "Collaboration patterns and patenting: Exploring gender distinctions," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(1), pages 56-67.
    15. Anne Miner & Yan Gong & Michael Ciuchta & Anthony Sadler & John Surdyk, 2012. "Promoting university startups: international patterns, vicarious learning and policy implications," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 37(2), pages 213-233, April.
    16. Lee Branstetter & Yoshiaki Ogura, 2005. "Is Academic Science Driving a Surge in Industrial Innovation? Evidence from Patent Citations," NBER Working Papers 11561, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    17. Pablo D’Este & Puay Tang & Surya Mahdi & Andy Neely & Mabel Sánchez-Barrioluengo, 2013. "The pursuit of academic excellence and business engagement: is it irreconcilable?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 95(2), pages 481-502, May.
    18. Stuart, Toby & Sorenson, Olav, 2003. "The geography of opportunity: spatial heterogeneity in founding rates and the performance of biotechnology firms," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(2), pages 229-253, February.
    19. David Audretsch & Erik Lehmann, 2006. "Do locational spillovers pay? empirical evidence from German IPO data," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 15(1), pages 71-81.
    20. Murray, Fiona & Stern, Scott, 2007. "Do formal intellectual property rights hinder the free flow of scientific knowledge?: An empirical test of the anti-commons hypothesis," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 63(4), pages 648-687, August.

    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:cdl:indrel:qt0m0877rr. 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: Lisa Schiff (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/irucbus.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.