1 / 37

Thematic Priorities in the Social Sciences A Survey of Public Funding in East and West 2004-2008

Thematic Priorities in the Social Sciences A Survey of Public Funding in East and West 2004-2008 by Hans-Dieter Klingemann Social Science Research Center Berlin and Olivier Ruchet Sciences Po Paris ESF Forward Look Consensus Conference Central and Eastern Europe beyond Transition:

yates
Download Presentation

Thematic Priorities in the Social Sciences A Survey of Public Funding in East and West 2004-2008

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Thematic Priorities in the Social Sciences A Survey of Public Funding in East and West 2004-2008 by Hans-Dieter Klingemann Social Science Research Center Berlin and Olivier Ruchet Sciences Po Paris ESF Forward Look Consensus Conference Central and Eastern Europe beyond Transition: Convergence and Divergence in Europe Social Science Research Center Berlin 16-17 February 2011

  2. Four questions: 1 What are the thematic priorities in the Social Sciences of the projects funded by national European science foundations in the period of 2004 to 2008? 2 Are there significant differences in thematic emphases between science foundations located in Western Europe on the one hand and in Central & Eastern Europe on the other?

  3. Four questions: What are the thematic priorities in the Social Sciences of the projects funded by national European science foundations in the period of 2004 to 2008 classified as typical CEE? Are there significant differences in thematic emphases of projects classified as typical CEE between science foundations located in Western Europe on the one hand and in Central & Eastern Europe on the other?

  4. Two expectations: 1 Thematic priorities of national foundations differ in the two parts of Europe because social science research is still confronted with a specific problem agenda caused by societal and political transformation in Central & Eastern Europe. 2 Thematic priorities of national foundations do not differ systematically between foundations in East and West because the problem agenda facing academic research has become increasingly similar. A growing European and global professional discourse as well as incentives provided by transnational European funding contribute to this development.

  5. The ESF Survey as the data base

  6. National science foundations covered in Western Europe: • N projects • FWF Austrian Science Fund 262 • FWO Research Foundation Flanders, Belgium 163 • AF Academy of Finland 252 • DFG German Research Foundation 767 • FCT Foundation for Science and Technology, 133 • Portugal • ESRC Economic and Social Research Council, UK 808 • Total 2385

  7. National science foundations covered in Central and Eastern Europe: N projects ASCR Academy of Sciences of the Czech Republic 38 GACR Czech Science Foundation 252 ETF Estonian Science Foundation 35 OTKA Hungarian Scientific Research Fund 284 LZA Latvian Academy of Sciences 60 LMT Research Council of Lithuania 43 MNSW Polish Ministry of Science and Higher Education 648 UEFISCSU Executive Agency for Higher Education 447 and Research, Romania SAV Slovak Academy of Sciences 80 ARRS Slovenian Research Agency 41 Total 1928

  8. European science foundations: N projects EUFP EU Framework Programmes 6&7 245 ERC European Research Council 85 ESF European Science Foundation 51 Total 381

  9. Regional distribution of research projects N projects West European national science foundations 2385 Central and East European national science 1928 foundations European science foundations 381 Total 4694

  10. Regional distribution of research projects classified as typical CEE N projects West European national science foundations 78 Central and East European national science 456 foundations European science foundations 53 Total 587

  11. Methodological issues

  12. Quantitative content analysis is used to specify the modal research topics of all 4694 projects by 21 categories of an inductively derived classification scheme.

  13. The modal research topic summarizes the substantive theme of a project and is derived from its title and from the project’s synopsis.

  14. The Classification Scheme For the mapping of project themes into a limited number of modal research topics we use the following classification scheme: Economics 1 Economic growth 2 Employment 3 Competition 4 Economic policies

  15. The Classification Scheme • Political Science • 5 Governance • 6 Rule of law, security issues • 7 Democratic institutions and processes • 8 Political and social identity • 9 Civic society • 10 Regions, urban-rural issues, regional development • 11 External relations

  16. The Classification Scheme • Sociology • 12 Demography, ageing; family • 13 Education, socialization • 14 Knowledge, innovation • 15 Health • 16 Migration; ethnic minorities • 17 Social cohesion, social inequality, exclusion • 18 Environment; energy; sustainability • 19 Media

  17. The Classification Scheme General Research Issues 20Methodology 21 Infrastructure and data bases 22 Research policies

  18. Answering the first question: What are the thematic priorities in the Social Sciences of the projects funded by national European science foundations in the period of 2004 to 2008? (Results based on all projects of national research foundations)

  19. Mode of calculation of priorities: Average of the standardized distribution (percentages) of modal research topics of each of the six foundations located in Western Europe, each of the ten foundations located in Central & Eastern Europe and of the 16 national European foundations.

  20. First three thematic priorities (16 foundations) Competition (10%) Methodology (8%) Economic policies (8%)

  21. First three thematic priorities for: Foundations located in Western Europe Central & Eastern Europe (6 foundations) (10 foundations) Methodology (10%) Competition (11%) Economic policies (8%) Regions … (9%) Competition (7%) Economic policies (8%)

  22. Results show more similarities than differences in thematic priorities between the two groups of foundations. “Economic policies” and “Competition” point to similarities while “Methodology” (WE) and “Regions; urban-rural issues; development (CEE)” point to differences. Taking into account all values of the two distributions Duncan’s coefficient of dissimilarity between WE and CEE is 18.2. This means that similarity beats dissimilarity by 82 to 18 percent.

  23. Answering the second question: Are there significant differences in thematic emphases between science foundations located in Western Europe on the one hand and in Central & Eastern Europe on the other? (Results based on all projects of national research foundations)

  24. Determining significant differences The F-test is used to determine significant differences. The between group variability is compared to the within group variability of the data. The larger the between group variability and the smaller the within group variability, the higher the probability of a significant difference.

  25. Significant differences in the distribution of modal research topics between foundations located in Western Europe and in Central & Eastern Europe: Foundations located in WE (6) CEE (10) F sign. Regions; urban-rural 3.6% 8.7% 5.8 .03 Issues; development Economic growth 2.4% 6.2% 5.5 .03 Health 6.0% 2.4% 12.2 .00 Differences regarding the remaining 18 modal research topics of the classification scheme are not significant at the .05 level.

  26. Again, results show more similarities than differences Foundations located in Western Europe fund significantly more projects in the area of “Health”, while foundations located in Central and Eastern Europe fund significantly more projects in the areas of “Regions; urban-rural issues; development” and “Economic growth”. Three modal research topics signal differences, 18 modal research topics point towards similarity.

  27. Answering the third question: What are the thematic priorities in the Social Sciences of the projects classified as typical CEE funded by national European science foundations in the period of 2004 to 2008? (Results based on all projects of national research foundations classified as typical CEE)

  28. First three thematic priorities (16 foundations) Democratic institutions and processes (14%) Economic policies (11%) Migration; ethnic minorities (7%)

  29. First three thematic priorities for: Foundations located in Western Europe Central & Eastern Europe (6 foundations) (10 foundations) Democratic Economic policies (13%) Institutions … (21%) Migration … (13%) Democratic institutions … (10%) Governance (11%) Competition (10%)

  30. Results show more differences than similarities in thematic priorities between the two groups of foundations. “Democratic institutions and processes” point to similarities while “Migration: ethnic minorities”, “Governance” (WE) and “Economic policies” and “Competition” (CEE) point to differences. Taking into account all values of the two distributions Duncan’s coefficient of dissimilarity between WE and CEE is 40.8. This means that similarity beats dissimilarity only by 59 to 41 percent.

  31. Answer to the fourth question: Are there significant differences in thematic emphases of projects classified as typical CEE between science foundations located in Western Europe on the one hand and in Central & Eastern Europe on the other? (Results based on all projects of national research foundations classified as typical CEE)

  32. Significant differences in the distribution of modal research topics between foundations located in Western Europe and in Central & Eastern Europe of projects classified as typical CEE: Foundations located in WE (6) CEE (10) F sign. Competition 2.0%9.6%10.2 .01 Social cohesion … 2.3% 8.2% 4.7 .05 Education, socialization0.0%2.8%5.1 .04 Governance10.5%0.9% 8.1 .01 Differences of the remaining 17 modal research topics of the classification scheme are not significant at the .05 level.

  33. Again, results show more similarities than differences Foundations located in Western Europe fund significantly more typical CEE projects in the area of “Governance”, while foundations located in Central and Eastern Europe fund significantly more typical CEE projects in the areas of “Competition”, “Social cohesion, social inequality, exclusion” and “Education, socialization”. Four modal research topics signal differences, 17 modal research topics point towards similarity.

  34. Summary: Similar priorities All projects CEE related projects Competition Democratic institutions and processes Economic policies

  35. Summary: Different priorities All projects Typical CEE projects Methodology (WE)Migration; ethnic minorities (WE) Governance (WE) Regions; urban-rural Economic policies (CEE) issues; development (CEE) Competition (CEE)

  36. Summary: Significant differences between WE and CEE All projects Typical CEE projects Regions; urban-rural issues; Competition (CEE) development (CEE) Social cohesion … (CEE) Economic growth (CEE) Education, Health (WE) socialization (CEE) Governance (WE)

  37. Conclusion There are some differences in research priorities of national foundations that support the expectation of different research agendas. However, similarities are much more characteristic of the general picture. This is in support of the expectation of similar research agendas.

More Related