The Persistence of Gender Inequality in e-Science: The Case of eSec

IF 3.2 2区 哲学 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH
Minerva Pub Date : 2024-06-01 DOI:10.1007/s11024-024-09530-6
Öznur Karakaş
{"title":"The Persistence of Gender Inequality in e-Science: The Case of eSec","authors":"Öznur Karakaş","doi":"10.1007/s11024-024-09530-6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>E-science, or networked, collaborative and multidisciplinary scientific research on a shared e-infrastructure using computational tools, methods and applications, has also brought about new networked organizational forms in the transition of higher education towards the entrepreneurial academy. While the under-representation of women in ICTs is well-recorded, it is also known that the potential of new organizational forms such as networked structures to promote gender equality remains ambiguous, as they tend to perpetuate already existing inequalities due to their embeddedness in larger and longer-term structural or institutional gender effects. Based on a year-long ethnographic study in a networked academic e-science collaboration in Sweden and 45 in-depth, semi-structured interviews with its affiliated researchers, this article analyzes the multi-level obstacles to achieving gender equality in e-science to highlight the ways in which gendered disparities persist in this new, project-based academic networked organization in Sweden, hereafter called eSec. At the <i>organizational level</i> eSec remains deeply embedded in the traditional disciplinary and institutional academic setting, inadvertently reproducing existing gender imbalances across sciences. Furthermore, as a project-based organization, it is also embedded in the shift towards an entrepreneurial university model driven by new managerialism, the latter having a well-documented adverse effect in gender equality. This represents <i>a structural-level</i> obstacle which leads to especially female junior faculty leaving academy for industry. An <i>individual level</i> obstacle is observed alongside these as disavowal (<i>Verleugnung</i>) of gender disparities, an affect identified as a key mechanism of subjectivation in neoliberalism.</p>","PeriodicalId":47427,"journal":{"name":"Minerva","volume":"7 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Minerva","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11024-024-09530-6","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

E-science, or networked, collaborative and multidisciplinary scientific research on a shared e-infrastructure using computational tools, methods and applications, has also brought about new networked organizational forms in the transition of higher education towards the entrepreneurial academy. While the under-representation of women in ICTs is well-recorded, it is also known that the potential of new organizational forms such as networked structures to promote gender equality remains ambiguous, as they tend to perpetuate already existing inequalities due to their embeddedness in larger and longer-term structural or institutional gender effects. Based on a year-long ethnographic study in a networked academic e-science collaboration in Sweden and 45 in-depth, semi-structured interviews with its affiliated researchers, this article analyzes the multi-level obstacles to achieving gender equality in e-science to highlight the ways in which gendered disparities persist in this new, project-based academic networked organization in Sweden, hereafter called eSec. At the organizational level eSec remains deeply embedded in the traditional disciplinary and institutional academic setting, inadvertently reproducing existing gender imbalances across sciences. Furthermore, as a project-based organization, it is also embedded in the shift towards an entrepreneurial university model driven by new managerialism, the latter having a well-documented adverse effect in gender equality. This represents a structural-level obstacle which leads to especially female junior faculty leaving academy for industry. An individual level obstacle is observed alongside these as disavowal (Verleugnung) of gender disparities, an affect identified as a key mechanism of subjectivation in neoliberalism.

电子科学中持续存在的性别不平等:电子安全案例
电子科学,即利用计算工具、方法和应用程序在共享的电子基础设施上开展的网络化、协作性和多学科科学研究,也在高等教育向创业型学院过渡的过程中带来了新的网络化组织形式。妇女在信息和通信技术领域的代表性不足已是有目共睹的事实,但众所周知,网络化结构等新组织形式在促进性别平等方面的潜力仍然模糊不清,因为它们往往会使已经存在的不平等现象永久化,因为它们嵌入了更大和更长期的结构性或制度性性别影响之中。本文基于对瑞典一个网络化电子科学学术合作组织进行的为期一年的人种学研究,以及对其附属研究人员进行的 45 次深入的半结构式访谈,分析了在电子科学领域实现性别平等的多层次障碍,以强调在瑞典这个新的、以项目为基础的学术网络化组织(以下称为 eSec)中性别差异持续存在的方式。此外,作为一个以项目为基础的组织,它也被嵌入到由新管理主义驱动的大学创业模式的转变中,而后者对性别平等的不利影响是有据可查的。这是一个结构层面的障碍,导致特别是女性初级教师离开学术界转投产业界。与此同时,我们还发现了个人层面的障碍,即对性别差异的否认(Verleugnung),这种情绪被认为是新自由主义主观化的一个关键机制。
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
Minerva
Minerva Multiple-
CiteScore
5.20
自引率
4.30%
发文量
26
期刊介绍: Minerva is devoted to the study of ideas, traditions, cultures and institutions in science, higher education and research. It is concerned no less with history than with present practice, and with the local as well as the global. It speaks to the scholar, the teacher, the policy-maker and the administrator. It features articles, essay reviews and ''special'' issues on themes of topical importance. It represents no single school of thought, but welcomes diversity, within the rules of rational discourse. Its contributions are peer-reviewed. Its audience is world-wide.
×
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