Citation politics: The gender gap in internet governance

IF 5.9 2区 管理学 Q1 COMMUNICATION
Fernanda R. Rosa , Kimberly Anastácio , Maria Vitoria Pereira de Jesus , Hemanuel Jhosé A. Veras
{"title":"Citation politics: The gender gap in internet governance","authors":"Fernanda R. Rosa ,&nbsp;Kimberly Anastácio ,&nbsp;Maria Vitoria Pereira de Jesus ,&nbsp;Hemanuel Jhosé A. Veras","doi":"10.1016/j.telpol.2024.102734","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>This article proposes an informed debate on the politics of citation in internet governance (IG), focusing on gender. To this end, we use the Bibliographic Reference Index (BRI) to examine the prominence of female and male names in the IG references. The BRI is based on an action research process (“pesquisa-ação”), in which authors fill out information about their citation practices. The aim is to promote self-reflection on authors’ selection of references whilst collecting bibliographic data. We applied the BRI to 1113 citations from 35 papers published in the Proceedings of the Brazilian Internet Governance Research Network (REDE) throughout 2017–2021. Results show that male-gendered names were cited more than double the number of times of female-gendered names (47% vs. 20%). To situate these results vis-à-vis global IG, we analyze the gender gap in the curriculum of IG schools and courses, by applying the index to an Internet Governance Forum compilation of 22 IG syllabi and course programs, comprising 96 references and the names of 217 IG experts worldwide. Results show that female names authored only 19% of the syllabi readings and materials featured vs. 29% by men. Also, the gender rate among experts is 63% vs. 37% in favor of men. Based on the structural gender inequalities that we have found in global and local IG contexts, we recommend interventions to increase the conscious engagement with bibliography and syllabus preparation on two fronts: 1) we recommend the application of the BRI to IG syllabi and course programs to monitor and reduce the gender gap; and 2) we provide a citation diversity statement that IG scholars can add to their publications in order to promote self-reflection about their knowledge production and add transparency to the politics of citation in IG.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":22290,"journal":{"name":"Telecommunications Policy","volume":"48 5","pages":"Article 102734"},"PeriodicalIF":5.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0308596124000314/pdfft?md5=ca3e75de1cbc28e12b442e251048931a&pid=1-s2.0-S0308596124000314-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Telecommunications Policy","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0308596124000314","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"COMMUNICATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This article proposes an informed debate on the politics of citation in internet governance (IG), focusing on gender. To this end, we use the Bibliographic Reference Index (BRI) to examine the prominence of female and male names in the IG references. The BRI is based on an action research process (“pesquisa-ação”), in which authors fill out information about their citation practices. The aim is to promote self-reflection on authors’ selection of references whilst collecting bibliographic data. We applied the BRI to 1113 citations from 35 papers published in the Proceedings of the Brazilian Internet Governance Research Network (REDE) throughout 2017–2021. Results show that male-gendered names were cited more than double the number of times of female-gendered names (47% vs. 20%). To situate these results vis-à-vis global IG, we analyze the gender gap in the curriculum of IG schools and courses, by applying the index to an Internet Governance Forum compilation of 22 IG syllabi and course programs, comprising 96 references and the names of 217 IG experts worldwide. Results show that female names authored only 19% of the syllabi readings and materials featured vs. 29% by men. Also, the gender rate among experts is 63% vs. 37% in favor of men. Based on the structural gender inequalities that we have found in global and local IG contexts, we recommend interventions to increase the conscious engagement with bibliography and syllabus preparation on two fronts: 1) we recommend the application of the BRI to IG syllabi and course programs to monitor and reduce the gender gap; and 2) we provide a citation diversity statement that IG scholars can add to their publications in order to promote self-reflection about their knowledge production and add transparency to the politics of citation in IG.

引用政治:互联网治理中的性别差距
本文以性别为重点,对互联网治理(IG)中的引文政治进行了知情辩论。为此,我们使用《书目参考索引》(BRI)来研究女性和男性姓名在互联网治理参考文献中的突出地位。书目参考索引基于行动研究过程("pesquisa-ação"),作者在其中填写有关其引文实践的信息。其目的是在收集书目数据的同时,促进作者对参考文献选择的自我反思。我们对 2017-2021 年间发表在《巴西互联网治理研究网络论文集》(REDE)上的 35 篇论文中的 1113 条引文应用了 BRI。结果显示,男性性别姓名被引用的次数是女性性别姓名的两倍多(47% 对 20%)。为了将这些结果与全球互联网治理相比较,我们分析了互联网治理学校和课程中的性别差距,将该指数应用于互联网治理论坛汇编的 22 个互联网治理教学大纲和课程计划,其中包括 96 篇参考文献和全球 217 名互联网治理专家的姓名。结果显示,在教学大纲和教材中,女性作者仅占 19%,而男性占 29%。此外,专家的性别比例为 63%,而男性为 37%。基于我们在全球和地方 IG 环境中发现的结构性性别不平等,我们建议从两个方面采取干预措施,以提高人们对书目和教学大纲准备工作的自觉参与:1)我们建议将 BRI 应用于 IG 教学大纲和课程计划,以监测和缩小性别差距;2)我们提供了一份引文多样性声明,IG 学者可将其添加到自己的出版物中,以促进对其知识生产的自我反思,并增加 IG 中引文政治的透明度。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Telecommunications Policy
Telecommunications Policy 工程技术-电信学
CiteScore
10.80
自引率
12.50%
发文量
122
审稿时长
38 days
期刊介绍: Telecommunications Policy is concerned with the impact of digitalization in the economy and society. The journal is multidisciplinary, encompassing conceptual, theoretical and empirical studies, quantitative as well as qualitative. The scope includes policy, regulation, and governance; big data, artificial intelligence and data science; new and traditional sectors encompassing new media and the platform economy; management, entrepreneurship, innovation and use. Contributions may explore these topics at national, regional and international levels, including issues confronting both developed and developing countries. The papers accepted by the journal meet high standards of analytical rigor and policy relevance.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信