thematic priorities in the social sciences a survey of public funding in east and west 2004-2008 by...

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

2004-2008

by

Hans-Dieter KlingemannSocial Science Research Center Berlin

andOlivier Ruchet

Sciences Po Paris

ESF Forward Look Consensus ConferenceCentral and Eastern Europe beyond Transition:

Convergence and Divergence in EuropeSocial Science Research Center Berlin

16-17 February 20111

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?

2

3

Four questions:

3 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?

4 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 ofEurope 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 262FWO Research Foundation Flanders, Belgium 163AF Academy of Finland 252DFG German Research Foundation 767FCT Foundation for Science and Technology, 133

PortugalESRC 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 38GACR Czech Science Foundation 252ETF Estonian Science Foundation 35OTKA Hungarian Scientific Research Fund 284LZA Latvian Academy of Sciences 60LMT Research Council of Lithuania 43MNSW Polish Ministry of Science and Higher Education 648UEFISCSU Executive Agency for Higher Education 447

and Research, RomaniaSAV Slovak Academy of Sciences 80ARRS Slovenian Research Agency 41

Total 1928

European science foundations: N projects

EUFP EU Framework Programmes 6&7 245ERC European Research Council 85ESF European Science Foundation 51

Total 381

8

Regional distribution of research projects N projects

West European national science foundations 2385

Central and East European national science 1928foundations

European science foundations 381

Total 4694

9

10

Regional distribution of research projects classified as typicalCEE

N projects

West European national science foundations 78

Central and East European national science 456foundations

European science foundations 53

Total 587

11

Methodological issues

12

Quantitative content analysis is used to specify themodal research topics of all 4694 projects by 21categories of an inductively derived classificationscheme.

13

The modal research topic

summarizes the substantive theme of a project andis 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 growth2 Employment3 Competition4 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 society10 Regions, urban-rural issues, regional development11 External relations

16

The Classification Scheme

Sociology

12 Demography, ageing; family13 Education, socialization14 Knowledge, innovation15 Health16 Migration; ethnic minorities17 Social cohesion, social inequality, exclusion18 Environment; energy; sustainability19 Media

17

The Classification Scheme

General Research Issues

20 Methodology21 Infrastructure and data bases22 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-ruralissues; development (CEE)” point to differences.

Taking into account all values of the two distributionsDuncan’s coefficient of dissimilarity between WE and CEEis 18.2. This means that similarity beats dissimilarity by82 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 thewithin 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 betweenfoundations 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 .03Issues; 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 significantlymore 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 distributionsDuncan’s coefficient of dissimilarity between WE and CEEis 40.8. This means that similarity beats dissimilarity only by59 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 betweenfoundations 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, socialization 0.0% 2.8% 5.1 .04

Governance 10.5% 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 significantlymore 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 institutionsand 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 characteristicof the general picture. This is in support of the expectation of similar research agendas.