Quelle: Nat Hum Behav (Nature Human Behaviour), (2022)
Inhalt: Zahlreiche aktuelle Förderprogramme der Wissenschaftslandschaft sind für die Beantragenden mit hohem Ressourcenaufwand bei geringen Erfolgsaussichten verbunden und haben dadurch einen oft überraschend geringen Nutzen für die Wissenschaft als Ganzes. Zu diesem Ergebnis kommen aktive und ehemalige Mitglieder der Jungen Akademie im Rahmen eines Projekts der Arbeitsgruppe Wissenschaftspolitik. Ihre Ergebnisse sind am 31.01.2022 im wissenschaftlichen Journal Nature Human Behaviour erschienen (https://www.nature.com/nathumbehav/).
Die Autor*innen zeigen in ihrer Publikation, dass viele Förderprogramme aufgrund einer Kombination aus hohem Aufwand und geringer Erfolgsquote oft ähnlich viele Ressourcen der wissenschaftlichen Gemeinschaft in Form von Arbeitsstunden abziehen wie sie durch die Vergabe von Fördergeldern wieder ausschütten. Der Aufwand für detaillierte Anträge und Begutachtungen wird dabei nur sehr eingeschränkt dem Anspruch gerecht, die vorgeschlagenen Forschungsprojekte zuverlässig in eine Rangfolge ihrer Forschungsqualität zu stellen.
„Das derzeitige Drittmittelsystem kommt in vielen Fällen einer Lotterie nahe – allerdings einer sehr ineffizienten Lotterie“, so Martin Dresler, Neurowissenschaftler am Radboud University Medical Center und Mitglied der Jungen Akademie.
In vielen Ländern werden Forschungsprojekte zunehmend durch einen Wettbewerb von Forschungsanträgen statt über die Grundausstattung der Universitäten finanziert. Die hohen Kosten dieser Form der Mittelvergabe in Form zahlreicher Arbeitsstunden entgehen häufig dem Blick sowohl der Mittelgeber wie der Forschenden. Neben dem Appell an die Forschungsförderer, die eigenen Förderinstrumente hinsichtlich ihrer Effizienz zu überprüfen, schlagen die aktiven und ehemaligen Mitglieder der Jungen Akademie einen transparenten Umgang mit dem durchschnittlichen Aufwand und den Erfolgsaussichten einzelner Förderprogramme vor. Mit dem im Rahmen des Projekts der Jungen Akademie entwickelten Online-Tool http://f.unding.com können potenzielle Antragstellende den Förderbetrag mit dem zu erwartenden Zeitaufwand abgleichen und abwägen, ob eine Antragstellung sinnvoll ist. Möglichkeiten der Optimierung des Drittmittelsystems sehen die Autor*innen außerdem in der Etablierung alternativer Antragsverfahren oder in der grundsätzlichen Verlagerung der Fördergeld-Verteilung weg von aufwändigen Wettbewerben hin zu einer verstärkten Basisfinanzierung der Universitäten.
Maßnahmenpaket zum Wandel der wissenschaftlichen Bewertungskultur
Autor/in:
Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG)
Quelle: Bonn (Information für die Wissenschaft, 61), 2022.
Inhalt: DFG ändert Antragsformulare und führt verbindliche Lebenslaufvorlage ein / Kulturwandel in der Wissenschaftsbewertung soll unterstützt werden / Verbesserte Chancengerechtigkeit
‘The goal is not necessarily to sit at the table’—Resisting autocratic legalism in Hungarian academia
Autor/in:
Labanino, Rafael; Dobbins, Michael
Quelle: Higher Education Quarterly, 76 (2022) 3, S 521–536
Inhalt: The article analyses the strategies of Hungarian higher education interest organisations against the encroachments on academic freedom by Viktor Orbán's governments. We contrast the 2012–2013 and 2017–2019 protest waves and find that innovations in strategy came from new organisations in both periods, whereas established ones were rather passive or opted for the status quo. However, in the second period, new actors consciously declined to pursue wider systemic goals and aimed at building up formal organisations instead of loose, movement-like networks. The focus on keeping a unified front and interest representation on the workplace level did not change the overall outcome. Just like during the first period, the government was able to reach its goals without major concessions. Nevertheless, during the second protest wave the government was unable to divide and pacify its opponents, which stripped it of its legalistic strategy and revealed its authoritarianism
Schlagwörter:academia; academic freedom; Forschungsfreiheit; higher education and state; higher education governance; higher education policy; protest; Protestbewegung; Ungarn; Universität
Quelle: Aus Politik und Zeitgeschichte, (2021) 3-4
Inhalt: Ob Corona-Krise oder Klimawandel: Politik ist auf wissenschaftliche Beratung angewiesen. Welche allgemeinen Regeln und Prinzipien gelten dafür? Wer berät mit welchem Wissen? Wer findet warum Gehör? Und welchen Einfluss hat öffentliche Kommunikation?
Inhalt: “This book investigates the gendered dimensions of academic life in the contemporary Australian university. It examines key discourses – most notably academic performativity and identity – through a feminist lens, and scrutinises how discourses of neoliberalism and feminism are entangled in the structure, systems, operations and cultures of the university. Drawing on in-depth qualitative interviews with academic women in Australia, the author uses a mix of experimental methods to emphasise the performative and discursive decisions women make with regard to their academic careers. In doing so, this book reveals how women themselves generate neoliberal and feminist shifts, how they manage the contradictions they produce, and how they carve spaces of influence and authority. Moving towards a re-evaluation of existing discourses, this book offers new insights into gender inequality in the Australian university in neoliberal times.”
Schlagwörter:academia; Australia; neoliberal university
CEWS Kategorie:Wissenschaftspolitik, Wissenschaft als Beruf
Dokumenttyp:Monographie
Lässt sich "Cancel Culture" empirisch belegen? : Impulse für eine pluralistische Fachdebatte
The gender gap in highly prestigious international research awards, 2001–2020
Autor/in:
Meho, Lokman I.
Quelle: Quantitative Science Studies, 2 (2021) 3, S 976–989
Inhalt: This study examines gender disparities in the world’s 141 most prestigious international research awards. I find that (a) from 2001 to 2020 these awards were received 3,445 times by 2,011 men and 262 women; (b) women’s share increased from an annual average of 6% during 2001–2005 to an annual average of 19% during 2016–2020; (c) 49 of the 141 awards were not received by women during 2016–2020; and (d) when the numbers of female full professors are taken into consideration, the gender gap remains highly disproportionate in biological and life sciences, computer science, and mathematics. Overall, women would be expected to increase their share of awards by nearly 50% to achieve parity with men today. The study shows great similarities between men and women award recipients in journal articles per author, the average number of authors per article, the proportion of articles in top journals, citations per article, and participation in large research groups and international collaborations. I conclude that the gender gap in highly prestigious research awards is largely a result of demographic inertia and other factors that deserve further investigation.
Schlagwörter:Awards and Prizes; Forschung; Forschungsförderung; gender gap; Preis (Forschungs-/Lehr-); woman in science
Ljubljana Declaration Gender Equality in Research and Innovation
Autor/in:
Slovenian Presidency of the Council of the European Union
Quelle: , 2021.
Inhalt: The Ljubljana Declaration refers to shared European values and calls on Member States and other countries to fully acknowledge gender mainstreaming as a horizontal principle and jointly work on improvement in six priority areas of gender equality:
Ensure fair, open, inclusive and gender equal career paths in research, and consider intersectional perspectives on gender inequalities;
Facilitate mutual learning opportunities through form-follows-function robust governance;
Employ existing and newly developed tools, such as Gender Equality Plans, to facilitate systemic institutional change and remove institutional barriers;
Address and counteract gender-based violence;
Support active monitoring and evaluation to ensure continuous improvement; and
Leverage synergies to enhance gender equality achievements within the European Research Area, but also within complementary fields such as the European Higher Education Area, Cohesion policy funds, innovation ecosystems, as well as in international cooperation.
The Declaration was drafted ”bottom up”, with the support of the current and upcoming Trio Presidencies European Research Area and Innovation Committee (ERAC) Standing Working Group on Gender in Research and Innovation (SWG GRI) representatives.
Schlagwörter:EU; Europäische Gemeinschaft; european research area; gender equality; gender equality plan; Innovation; intersectionality; intersektionale Perspektive; research
CEWS Kategorie:Europa und Internationales, Wissenschaftspolitik, Gleichstellungspolitik
Quelle: Verlag der Technischen Universität Graz, 2021.
Inhalt: In academic, non-profit and business research, project funding and grants are important elements to promote science, boost innovation and support researchers on their career paths. However, they are also powerful instruments to materialize and prioritize major principles of science policy and social values such as gender equality and equity. An analysis of research funding processes and organisations in the scope of the EU project CHANGE1 could illuminate gender policies and practices, aiming at a more diverse and gender equitable research and innovation landscape, but could also reveal inherent gender biases. This paper particularly focuses on the results of 41 expert interviews on research budgets, gender policies and practices in research funding in the three “strong innovator”-countries Austria, Germany and Israel, and explores the hidden potential of gender in science and research funding in all sectors.
Schlagwörter:Austria; Auswahlverfahren; Deutschland; Forschungsförderung; gender bias; gender policy; Germany; grant application; Israel; Österreich; research funding
CEWS Kategorie:Wissenschaftspolitik, Wissenschaft als Beruf, Geschlechterverhältnis
Policy framing and resistance : Gender mainstreaming in Horizon 2020
Autor/in:
Vida, Bianka
Quelle: European Journal of Women's Studies, 28 (2021) 1, S 26–41
Inhalt: Scholarship on gender mainstreaming (GM) in the European Union (EU) consistently highlights the disappointing implementation of gender mainstreaming. This article contributes to that discussion through the analysis of the first policy frame on gender equality in the work programmes of the EU’s Framework Programme for Research and Development, Horizon 2020, from 2014 until 2016. This article analyses how GM as a transformative strategy is contextualised by advisory group experts, and what is being achieved within Horizon 2020 work programmes. In opposition to the Commission’s rhetorical commitment to GM, this article demonstrates that Horizon 2020 work programmes exemplify a failure of implementing GM, further depoliticising gender equality in the Commission’s neoliberal context.