IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/rseval/v28y2019i4p370-382..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

European Research Council: excellence and leadership over time from a gender perspective

Author

Listed:
  • Núria Bautista-Puig
  • Carlos García-Zorita
  • Elba Mauleón

Abstract

European Research Council Grants (ERC) have become the most important vehicle for funding scientific research in the EU. Since their creation in 2007, they have provided funding for around 7,000 of the nearly 70,000 proposals for research projects submitted. With a success rate of about 11%, these Grants are highly competitive. Despite major advancement of women’s participation in research activity, women overall remain the minority in Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM disciplines). Against that backdrop, this article analyses men’s and women’s presence in ERC Grants. The gender balance in the ERC Grant, have been examined in three dimensions: Excellence Awarded; Scientific Leadership Position; and Time Series Evolution. The results show that female presence is lower than men as submitted (26% vs 74%), granted (22% vs 78%), expert panel members (28% vs 72%), and as a panel chair (26% vs 74%). State-space prediction of the future pattern of these grants shows that time has no clearly beneficial effect on women’s participation as applicants, granted, expert panel members or panel chairs, particularly in the area of Physics and Engineering.

Suggested Citation

  • Núria Bautista-Puig & Carlos García-Zorita & Elba Mauleón, 2019. "European Research Council: excellence and leadership over time from a gender perspective," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 28(4), pages 370-382.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:rseval:v:28:y:2019:i:4:p:370-382.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/reseval/rvz023
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Paul Siu Fai Yip & Yunyu Xiao & Clifford Long Hin Wong & Terry Kit Fong Au, 2020. "Is there gender bias in research grant success in social sciences?: Hong Kong as a case study," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 7(1), pages 1-10, December.
    2. repec:oup:rseval:v:32:y:2024:i:2:p:321-331. is not listed on IDEAS
    3. Abbas Abdul, 2023. "Policy seduction and governance resistance? Examining public funding agencies and academic institutions on decarbonisation research," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 50(1), pages 87-101.
    4. Sanaa Zebakh & Ali Rhouma & Fabrice Dentressangle & Maurice Héral & Sadiki Mohammed & Florence Jacquet, 2024. "To What Extent the ARIMNet Transnational Programme Has Contributed to the Implementation of the Euro-Mediterranean Research and Innovation Area?," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 15(2), pages 7044-7068, June.
    5. Fiorentin, Florencia & Pereira, Mariano & Suárez, Diana, 2022. "The Gender Gap in Public S&T Funding: The Matilda Effect in STEM Disciplines in Argentina," IDB Publications (Working Papers) 11990, Inter-American Development Bank.
    6. Antonio Perianes‐Rodríguez & Carlos Olmeda-Gómez, 2021. "Effect of policies promoting open access in the scientific ecosystem: case study of ERC grantee publication practice," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(8), pages 6825-6836, August.

    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:oup:rseval:v:28:y:2019:i:4:p:370-382.. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/rev .

    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.