IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ico/wpaper/148.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Gendered Competitive Practices in Economics. A Multi-Layer Model of Womens Underrepresentation

Author

Listed:
  • Stephan Puehringer

    (Institute for Comprehensive Analysis of the Economy, Johannes Kepler University Linz, Austria)

  • Theresa Hager

    (Institute for Comprehensive Analysis of the Economy, Johannes Kepler University Linz, Austria)

Abstract

Economics holds a unique position in terms of the severity and persistence of gender imbalances and the underrepresentation of female researchers within the social sciences. There exist various reasons for this fact, as well as a variety of channels through which these imbalances are perpetuated. To this end, there has not been a comprehensive review of the existing and well-researched levels of this underrepre-sentation. By systematically reviewing the literature on the facts and reasons for the low proportion of women in the profession and structuring them in our multi-level model, we not only make the multitude of channels visible but can also analyze their interplay. Moreover, we argue that efforts to address women's underrepresentation are impeded because economics as a discipline is particularly susceptible to competitive evaluation and selection practices. Men and women perceive, perform in, and make sense of competitive processes in their own ways, so that men, through their socialization as competitive selves, are more likely to succeed in an academic system heavily based on competition and rankings; women, in this case, are endowed with an inappropriate set of competitive strategies and interpretations that, nevertheless, ultimately inform their academic practices. Enriching our multi-level model with this perspective on gendered competitive practices in academia, allows us to offer a novel contribution to the debate on the causes of the persistent gender imbalance in the field. Drawing from feminist stand-point theory, we argue that such an endeavor is not only important, and interesting in its own right, but also highly relevant to the reproduction of gender imbalances and gender discrimination in society at large; if a diversity of views and opinions is not represented within its halls, economics runs the risk to inform policy lopsided. More precisely, we argue that our result has some nontrivial implications given the rise of competitive formats in academia and thus is particularly alarming for science policies aiming at gender balances in academia.

Suggested Citation

  • Stephan Puehringer & Theresa Hager, 2023. "Gendered Competitive Practices in Economics. A Multi-Layer Model of Womens Underrepresentation," ICAE Working Papers 148, Johannes Kepler University, Institute for Comprehensive Analysis of the Economy.
  • Handle: RePEc:ico:wpaper:148
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.jku.at/fileadmin/gruppen/108/ICAE_Working_Papers/wp148_revised.pdf
    File Function: Second version, 2023
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. M. Fourcade & E. Ollion & Y. Algan, 2015. "The Superiority of Economists," Voprosy Ekonomiki, NP Voprosy Ekonomiki, issue 7.
    2. Carpenter, Jeffrey & Frank, Rachel & Huet-Vaughn, Emiliano, 2018. "Gender differences in interpersonal and intrapersonal competitive behavior," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 170-176.
    3. Donna K. Ginther & Shulamit Kahn, 2021. "Women in Academic Economics: Have We Made Progress?," AEA Papers and Proceedings, American Economic Association, vol. 111, pages 138-142, May.
    4. Jeffrey A. Flory & Andreas Leibbrandt & John A. List, 2015. "Do Competitive Workplaces Deter Female Workers? A Large-Scale Natural Field Experiment on Job Entry Decisions," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 82(1), pages 122-155.
    5. Donna K. Ginther & Shulamit Kahn, 2009. "Does Science Promote Women? Evidence from Academia 1973-2001," NBER Chapters, in: Science and Engineering Careers in the United States: An Analysis of Markets and Employment, pages 163-194, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    6. Alice Wu, 2017. "Gender Stereotype in Academia: Evidence from Economics Job Market Rumors Forum," Working Papers 2017-09, Princeton University, Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs, Center for Health and Wellbeing..
    7. Marion Fourcade & Etienne Ollion & Yann Algan, 2015. "The Superiority of Economists," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 29(1), pages 89-114, Winter.
    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. Lorenzo Ductor & Bauke Visser, 2021. "When a coauthor joins an editorial board," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 21-043/VII, Tinbergen Institute.
    2. Ductor, Lorenzo & Visser, Bauke, 2022. "When a coauthor joins an editorial board," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 200(C), pages 576-595.
    3. Corsi, Marcella & D’Ippoliti, Carlo & Zacchia, Giulia, 2019. "Diversity of backgrounds and ideas: The case of research evaluation in economics," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(9), pages 1-1.
    4. Della Giusta, Marina & Vukadinovic-Greetham, Danica & Jaworska, Sylvia, 2018. "Tweeting Economists: Antisocial in the socials?," MPRA Paper 89527, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    5. Andrew Mearman & Sebastian Berger & Danielle Guizzo, 2016. "Curriculum reform in UK economics: a critique," Working Papers 20161611, Department of Accounting, Economics and Finance, Bristol Business School, University of the West of England, Bristol.
    6. Goddard, Jessica J. & Kallis, Giorgos & Norgaard, Richard B., 2019. "Keeping multiple antennae up: Coevolutionary foundations for methodological pluralism," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 165(C), pages 1-1.
    7. Thoma, Johanna, 2018. "Book review: economics rules," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 84173, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    8. Karl Beyer & Stephan Puehringer, 2019. "Divided we stand? Professional consensus and political conflict in academic economics," ICAE Working Papers 94, Johannes Kepler University, Institute for Comprehensive Analysis of the Economy.
    9. Jishnu Das & Quy-Toan Do, 2020. "US and them - The geography of academic research," Vox eBook Chapters, in: Sebastian Galliani & Ugo Panizza (ed.), Publishing and Measuring Success in Economics, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 1, pages 111-114, Centre for Economic Policy Research.
    10. Joshua Aizenman & Kenneth Kletzer, 2020. "Networking, citations of academic research, and premature death," Vox eBook Chapters, in: Sebastian Galliani & Ugo Panizza (ed.), Publishing and Measuring Success in Economics, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 1, pages 51-55, Centre for Economic Policy Research.
    11. Michael E. Rose, 2022. "Small world: Narrow, wide, and long replication of Goyal, van der Leij and Moraga‐Gonzélez (JPE 2006) and a comparison of EconLit and Scopus," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 37(4), pages 820-828, June.
    12. Ilan Noy & Shunsuke Managi, 2020. "It’s Awful, Why Did Nobody See it Coming?," Economics of Disasters and Climate Change, Springer, vol. 4(3), pages 429-430, October.
    13. Desbureaux, Sébastien & Brimont, Laura, 2015. "Between economic loss and social identity: The multi-dimensional cost of avoiding deforestation in Eastern Madagascar," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 10-20.
    14. Hendrik P. van Dalen, 2019. "Values of Economists Matter in the Art and Science of Economics," Kyklos, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 72(3), pages 472-499, August.
    15. Stan Liebowitz, 2020. "Our uneconomic methods of measuring economic research," Vox eBook Chapters, in: Sebastian Galliani & Ugo Panizza (ed.), Publishing and Measuring Success in Economics, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 1, pages 99-104, Centre for Economic Policy Research.
    16. Ambrosino, Angela & Cedrini, Mario & B. Davis, John, 2022. "Today’s economics: One, No One and One Hundred Thousand," Department of Economics and Statistics Cognetti de Martiis. Working Papers 202215, University of Turin.
    17. Brown, Craig O., 2020. "Economic leadership and growth," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 116(C), pages 298-333.
    18. Florentin Gloetzl & Ernest Aigner, 2015. "Pluralism in the Market of Science? A citation network analysis of economic research at universities in Vienna," Ecological Economics Papers ieep5, Institute of Ecological Economics.
    19. John O’Hagan & Lukas Kuld, 2020. "Multi-authored journal articles in economics - Why the spiralling upward trend?," Vox eBook Chapters, in: Sebastian Galliani & Ugo Panizza (ed.), Publishing and Measuring Success in Economics, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 1, pages 93-98, Centre for Economic Policy Research.
    20. Ben Rosamond, 2020. "European Integration and the Politics of Economic Ideas: Economics, Economists and Market Contestation in the Brexit Debate," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 58(5), pages 1085-1106, September.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:ico:wpaper:148. 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: Teresa Griesebner (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/igjkuat.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.