IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v10y2018i9p2980-d165037.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Gender Equality Indicators for Research and Innovation from a Responsible Perspective: The Case of Spain

Author

Listed:
  • Paula Otero-Hermida

    (INGENIO (CSIC-UPV), Universitat Politècnica de València, Camino de Vera s/n, València 46022, Spain)

  • Mónica García-Melón

    (INGENIO (CSIC-UPV), Universitat Politècnica de València, Camino de Vera s/n, València 46022, Spain)

Abstract

This article offers a Spanish national perspective that contributes to European Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI) monitoring initiatives. National experts involved in gender and science and technology issues, such as policymakers, gender experts, research institutions, and equality associations, among others, have proposed indicators based on participatory decision-making techniques. The results include a complete set of 52 indicators and a reduced panel of 23 indicators—the highest-ranked ones—to monitor relevant aspects that should be measured in gender dimension from an RRI perspective: differential and asymmetric socialization and education, organizational culture, substantive representation, vertical segregation, work relations, visibility of women researchers, gender perspective in research contents, gender expertise enhancement, and resources. The results offer new indicators that differ from previous indicator panels at the European and Spanish levels in relation to those aspects that should be measured and the typology of indicators preferred. Differences suggest the need for a more nuanced debate on the purpose of indicators, and the need for national contributions to RRI and to the debate on gender perspective in EU policy. Finally, the article suggests some specific traits observed in Spain that might add to the debate on the content of an RRI gender perspective in an already developed gender policy.

Suggested Citation

  • Paula Otero-Hermida & Mónica García-Melón, 2018. "Gender Equality Indicators for Research and Innovation from a Responsible Perspective: The Case of Spain," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(9), pages 1-20, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:10:y:2018:i:9:p:2980-:d:165037
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/10/9/2980/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/10/9/2980/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Weiner, Elaine and Heather MacRae, 2014. "The persistent invisibility of gender in EU policy: Introduction," European Integration online Papers (EIoP), European Community Studies Association Austria (ECSA-A), vol. 18, November.
    2. Irene Monsonís-Payá & Mónica García-Melón & José-Félix Lozano, 2017. "Indicators for Responsible Research and Innovation: A Methodological Proposal for Context-Based Weighting," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(12), pages 1-29, November.
    3. Jordi Molas-Gallart & Elena Castro-Martínez, 2007. "Ambiguity and conflict in the development of ‘Third Mission’ indicators," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 16(4), pages 321-330, December.
    4. Stilgoe, Jack & Owen, Richard & Macnaghten, Phil, 2013. "Developing a framework for responsible innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(9), pages 1568-1580.
    5. Richard Owen & Phil Macnaghten & Jack Stilgoe, 2012. "Responsible research and innovation: From science in society to science for society, with society," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 39(6), pages 751-760, December.
    6. Mergaert, Lut and Emanuela Lombardor, 2014. "Resistance to implementing gender mainstreaming in EU research policy," European Integration online Papers (EIoP), European Community Studies Association Austria (ECSA-A), vol. 18, November.
    7. repec:bla:revpol:v:20:y:2003:i:1:p:65-88 is not listed on IDEAS
    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. Cristina Drumea & Bogdan Băcanu & Carmen Elena Anton & Adriana Veronica Litra & Steliana Busuioceanu & Alexandra Doroș, 2020. "Gender Parity within the Gender—Sustainability Paradigm: A Case Study on Management Structures of the Romanian Academia," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(3), pages 1-36, January.
    2. Mónica García-Melón & Tomás Gómez-Navarro & Hannia Gonzalez-Urango & Carmen Corona-Sobrino, 2022. "Adapting RRI public engagement indicators to the Spanish scientific and innovation context: a participatory methodology based on AHP and content analysis," Central European Journal of Operations Research, Springer;Slovak Society for Operations Research;Hungarian Operational Research Society;Czech Society for Operations Research;Österr. Gesellschaft für Operations Research (ÖGOR);Slovenian Society Informatika - Section for Operational Research;Croatian Operational Research Society, vol. 30(4), pages 1483-1512, December.
    3. C. Cascella & J. Williams & M. Pampaka, 2022. "An Extended Regional Gender Gaps Index (eRGGI): Comparative Measurement of Gender Equality at Different Levels of Regionality," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 159(2), pages 757-800, January.
    4. Natalia Restrepo & Alfonso Unceta & Xabier Barandiaran, 2021. "Gender Diversity in Research and Innovation Projects: The Proportion of Women in the Context of Higher Education," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(9), pages 1-21, May.

    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. Paredes-Frigolett, Harold, 2016. "Modeling the effect of responsible research and innovation in quadruple helix innovation systems," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 110(C), pages 126-133.
    2. Reichelt, Nicole & Nettle, Ruth, 2023. "Practice insights for the responsible adoption of smart farming technologies using a participatory technology assessment approach: The case of virtual herding technology in Australia," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 206(C).
    3. Genus, Audley & Iskandarova, Marfuga, 2018. "Responsible innovation: its institutionalisation and a critique," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 128(C), pages 1-9.
    4. Timotijevic, Lada & Khan, Shumaisa S. & Raats, Monique & Braun, Susanne, 2019. "Research priority setting in food and health domain: European stakeholder beliefs about legitimacy criteria and processes," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 83(C), pages 116-124.
    5. Sophie Bacq & Ruth V. Aguilera, 2022. "Stakeholder Governance for Responsible Innovation: A Theory of Value Creation, Appropriation, and Distribution," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 59(1), pages 29-60, January.
    6. van Geenhuizen, Marina & Ye, Qing, 2014. "Responsible innovators: open networks on the way to sustainability transitions," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 28-40.
    7. Jakob Edler & Jan Fagerberg, 2017. "Innovation policy: what, why, and how," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press and Oxford Review of Economic Policy Limited, vol. 33(1), pages 2-23.
    8. Glover, Dominic & Poole, Nigel, 2019. "Principles of innovation to build nutrition-sensitive food systems in South Asia," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 63-73.
    9. Sara H. Wilford, 2018. "First Line Steps in Requirements Identification for Guidelines Development in Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI)," Systemic Practice and Action Research, Springer, vol. 31(5), pages 539-556, October.
    10. Kwon, Seokbeom & Liu, Xiaoyu & Porter, Alan L. & Youtie, Jan, 2019. "Research addressing emerging technological ideas has greater scientific impact," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(9), pages 1-1.
    11. Carbajo, Ruth & Cabeza, Luisa F., 2018. "Renewable energy research and technologies through responsible research and innovation looking glass: Reflexions, theoretical approaches and contemporary discourses," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 211(C), pages 792-808.
    12. Sophie Pellé & Bernard Reber, 2015. "Responsible Innovation in the Light of Moral Responsibility," Université Paris1 Panthéon-Sorbonne (Post-Print and Working Papers) hal-01418017, HAL.
    13. Buhmann, Alexander & Fieseler, Christian, 2021. "Towards a deliberative framework for responsible innovation in artificial intelligence," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 64(C).
    14. Fisher, Erik, 2019. "Governing with ambivalence: The tentative origins of socio-technical integration," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(5), pages 1138-1149.
    15. Miklós Lukovics & Beáta Udvari & Nikoletta Nádas & Erik Fisher, 2019. "Raising Awareness of Researchers-in-the-Making Toward Responsible Research and Innovation," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 10(4), pages 1558-1577, December.
    16. Buzás, Norbert & Lukovics, Miklós, 2015. "A felelősségteljes innovációról [On responsible innovation]," Közgazdasági Szemle (Economic Review - monthly of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences), Közgazdasági Szemle Alapítvány (Economic Review Foundation), vol. 0(4), pages 438-456.
    17. Yang, Kun & Wang, Wan & Xiong, Wan, 2021. "Promoting the sustainable development of infrastructure projects through responsible innovation: An evolutionary game analysis," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 70(C).
    18. Carbajo, Ruth & Cabeza, Luisa F., 2021. "Researchers perception regarding socio-technical approaches implementation in their own research. Thermal energy storage researchers as example," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 143(C).
    19. Vesnic-Alujevic, Lucia & Nascimento, Susana & Pólvora, Alexandre, 2020. "Societal and ethical impacts of artificial intelligence: Critical notes on European policy frameworks," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(6).
    20. Khan, Shumaisa S. & Timotijevic, Lada & Newton, Rachel & Coutinho, Daniela & Llerena, José Luis & Ortega, Santiago & Benighaus, Ludger & Hofmaier, Christian & Xhaferri, Zamira & de Boer, Alie & Urban,, 2016. "The framing of innovation among European research funding actors: Assessing the potential for ‘responsible research and innovation’ in the food and health domain," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 78-87.

    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:gam:jsusta:v:10:y:2018:i:9:p:2980-:d:165037. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.