Abstract
There are many ways to determine the diversity of the nanotechnology workforce. None of them is perfect, but they can all be telling in some way. In this chapter Yu Meng and Philip Shapira delve into data in one of the areas Smith-Doerr highlights, namely, patenting. Using a comprehensive data set, these authors report the discouraging, but familiar, statistics: very few women are patenting in nanotechnology. Only 17% of the patents in their dataset had only female inventors; twice as many have only male inventors. But the gap between the two figures has gradually been closing over the period studied. Although women’s patents are broader in scope than those of male inventors, female patent applicants are concentrated in a few subfields of nanotechnology, especially those with life science connections.
This chapter was peer reviewed.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Allison, P.D., and S.J. Long. 1987. Inter-university mobility of academic scientists. American Sociological Review 52: 643–652.
Astin, H.S. 1969. The women doctorate in America. New York, NY: Russell Sage.
Baird, D., and A. Shew. 2004. Probing the history of scanning tunneling microscopy. In discovering the nanoscale, ed. D. Baird, A. Nordmann, and J. Schummer, 145–156. Amsterdam: IOS.
Barinaga, M. 1993. Is there a “female style” in Science? Science 260: 384–391.
Bayer, A.E., and J.C. Smart. 1991. Career publication patterns and collaborative “style” in American academic science. The Journal of Higher Education 62: 613–636.
Cameron, S.W. 1978. Women faculty in academia: Sponsorship, informal networks, and scholarly success. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.
Cameron, S.W., and R.T. Blackburn. 1981. Sponsorship and academic career success. The Journal of Higher Education 52: 369–377.
Chubin, D.E. 1974. Sociological manpower and womanpower: Sex differences in career patterns of two cohorts of American doctorate scientists. American Sociologist 9: 83–92.
Cole, J.R., and H. Zuckerman. 1984. The productivity puzzle: Persistence and change in patterns of publication of men and women scientists. Advances in Motivation and Achievement 2: 217–258.
Corley, E. 2005. How do career strategies, gender, and work environment affect faculty productivity in university-based science centers? Review of Policy Research 22: 637–655.
Creamer, E.G. 1998. Assessing faculty publication productivity: Issues of equity. ASCHE-ERIC Higher Education Report No.26. Washington, DC: ASHE-ERIC/Georgie Washington University.
Crewson, P.E. 1995. A comparative analysis of public and private sector entrant quality. American Journal of Political Science 39: 628–639.
Ding, W.W, F. Murrary, and T.E. Stuart. 2006. Gender differences in patenting in the academic life science. Science 313: 665–667.
Durden, G., and T. Perri. 1995. Coauthorship and publication efficiency. Atlantic Economic Journal 23: 69–76.
Evetts, J. 1996. Gender and career in science and engineering. London: Taylor and Francis.
Fox, M.F. 1983. Publication Productivity among Scientists: A Critical Review. Social Studies of Science 13: 285–305.
Fox, M.F. 1999. Gender, hierarchy, and science. In Handbook of the sociology of gender, ed. J.S. Chafetz, 441–457. New York, NY: Kluwer/Plenum.
Fox, M.F. 2001. Women, science, and academia: Graduate education and careers. Gender and Society 15: 654–666.
Fox, M.F., and P.E. Stephan. 2001. Careers of young scientists: Preferences, prospects and realities by gender field. Social Studies of Science 31: 109–122.
Frietsch, R, I. Haller, M. Vrohlings, and H. Grupp. 2009. Gender-specific patterns in patenting and publishing. Research Policy 38: 590–599.
Gordon, M. 1980. A critical reassessment of inferred relations between multiple authorship, scientific collaboration, the production of papers and their acceptance for publication. Scientometrics 2: 193–201
Haier, R.J., R.E. Jung, R.A. Yeo, K. Head, and M.T. Alkire. 2005. The neuroanatomy of general intelligence: Sex matters. NeuroImage 25: 320–327.
Hayes, E.R. 2001. A new look at women's learning. New Directions in Adult and Continuing Education 89: 35–42.
Hollis, A. 2001. Co-authorship and the output of academic economists. Labour Economics 8: 503–530.
Hunter, L., and E. Leahey. 2008. Collaborative research in sociology: Trends and contributing factors. The American Sociologist 39: 290–306.
Jaffe, A.B., and M. Trajtenberg. 2002. Patents, citations, and innovations: A window on the knowledge economy. Cambridge, MA: MIT.
Kaufman, D.R. 1995. Professional women: How real are the recent gains. In Women: A feminist perspective. ed. J. Freeman. Mountain View, CA: Mayfield.
Kay, L., and P. Shapira. 2009. Developing nanotechnology in Latin America. Journal of Nanoparticle Research 11: 259–278.
Khan, B.Z. 2000. “Not for ornament”: Patenting activity by nineteenth-century women inventors. Journal of Interdisciplinary History 16: 159–195.
Kyvik, S., and M. Teigen. 1996. Child care, research collaboration, and gender differences in scientific productivity. Science, Technology, and Human Values 21: 54–71.
Leahey, E. 2006. Gender differences in productivity: Research specialization as a missing link. Gender and Society 20: 754–780.
Lee, S., and B. Bozeman. 2005. The impact of research collaboration on scientific productivity. Social Studies of Science 35: 673–702.
Levin, S., and P.E. Stephan. 1991. Research productivity over the life cycle: Evidence for academic scientists. American Economic Review 81: 114–132.
Levin, S., and P.E. Stephan. 1998. Gender differences in the rewards to publishing in academe: Science in the 1970s. Sex Roles: A Journal of Research 38: 1049–1064.
Lindsey, L.L. 1997. Gender role: A sociological perspective. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Long, S.J. 1992. Measures of sex differences in scientific productivity. Social Forces 71: 159–178.
Long, S.J. 2001. From scarcity to visibility: Gender differences in the careers of doctoral scientists and engineers. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
Lux Research. 2007. The nanotechnology report, 5th ed. New York, NY: Lux Research.
Murray, F., and L. Graham. 2007. Buying science and selling science: Gender differences in the market for commercial science. Industrial and Corporate Change 16: 657–689.
Naldi, F., D. Luzi, A. Valente, and I.V. Parenti. 2004. Scientific and technological performance by gender. In Handbook of quantitative science and technology research , ed. H.F. Moed, W. Glanzel, and U. Schmoch, 299–314. Boston & London: Kluwer.
NSF. 2007. Women, minorities, and persons with disabilities in science and engineering. Arlington, VA: National Science Foundation.
NSF. 2008. Thirty-three years of women in S&E faculty positions. Arlington, VA: National Science Foundation, Directorate for Social, Behavioral, and Economic Sciences.
Pinker, S. 2005. The science of gender and science: A conversation with Steven Pinker and Elizabeth Spelke. Cambridge, MA: Havard University Press.
Porter, A.L., and J. Youtie. 2009. Where does nanotechnology belong in the map of science? Nature-Nanotechnology 4: 534–536.
Porter, A.L., J. Youtie, P. Shapira, and D.J. Schoeneck. 2008. Refining search terms for nanotechnology. Journal of Nanoparticle Research 10: 715–728.
Pravdic, N., and V. Oliuic-Vukovic. 1986. Dual approach to multiple authorship in the study of collaborator/scientific output relationship. Scientometrics 10: 259–280.
Presser, S. 1980. Collaboration and the quality of research. Social Studies of Science 10: 95–101.
Price, D. J., and D. Beaver. 1966. Collaboration in an invisible college. American Psychologist 21: 1011–1018.
Pripic, K. 2002. Gender and productivity differentials in science. Scientometrics 55: 27–58.
Reskin, B. 1978a. Scientific productivity, sex, and location in the institution of science. American Journal of Sociology 83: 1235–1243.
Reskin, B. 1978b. Sex differentiation and the social organization of science. Sociological Inquiry 48: 491–504.
Rhoten, D., and S. Pfirman 2007. Women in interdisciplinary science: Exploring preferences and consequences. Research Policy 36: 56–75.
Schmoch, U. 2006. Double-boom cycles and the comeback of science-push and market-pull. Research Policy 36: 1000–1015.
Schmookler, J. 1962. Changes in industry and in the state of knowledge as determinants of industrial innovation. In The rate and direction of inventive activity: Economic and social factors, ed. National Bureau of Economic Research, 195–232. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Science Daily. 2005. Intelligence in men and women is a gray and white matter (January 22).
Scott, J. 1990. Disadvantage of women by the ordinary processes of science: The case of informal collaboration. In Despite the odds: Essays on Canadian women and science. ed. M. Ainley. Montreal, QC: Vehicule.
Shapira, P., J. Wang, and J. Youtie. 2010. United States. In Encyclopedia of nanotechnology and society, ed. D. Guston, and J.G. Golson. New York, NY: Sage.
Sonnert, G., and G. Holton. 1995a. Gender differences in science careers. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.
Sonnert, G., and G. Holton. 1995b. Who succeeds in science? The gender dimension. New Brunswick, NJ: New Rutgers University Press.
Sorensen, K.H. 1992. Towards a feminized technology? Gendered values in the construction of technology. Social Studies of Science 22: 5–31.
U.S. Department of Commerce. 1999. Buttons to biotech. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Commerce.
Walsh, J,. and S. Nagaoka. 2009. Who invents? Evidence from the Japan-U.S. inventor survey. RIETI Discussion Paper Series 09-E-034. http://ideas.repec.org/p/eti/dpaper/09034.html. (accessed October 2009).
Whittington, K.B., and L. Smith-Doerr. 2005. Gender and commercial science: Women's patenting in the life sciences. Journal of Technology Transfer 30: 355–370.
Wood, S., R. Jones, and A. Geltard. 2003. The social and economic challenges of nanotechnology. Swindon: Economic and Social Research Council.
Xie, Y., and K.A. Shauman. 1998. Sex differences in research productivity: New evidence about an old puzzle. American Sociological Review 63: 847–870.
Youtie, J., P. Shapira, and A.L. Porter. 2008. Nanotechnology publications and citations by leading countries and blocs. Journal of Nanoparticle Research 10: 981–986.
Zucker, L.G., and M.R. Darby. 2005. Social-economic impact of nanoscale science: Initial results and nanobank. Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research.
Zuckerman, H. 1967. Nobel laureates in science: Patterns of productivity, collaboration, and authorship. American Sociological Review 32: 391–403.
Zuckerman, H., and R.K. Merton. 1971. Patterns of evaluation in science: Institutionalization, structure and functions of the referee system. Minerva 9: 66–100.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2010 Springer Science+Business Media B.V.
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Meng, Y., Shapira, P. (2010). Women and Patenting in Nanotechnology: Scale, Scope and Equity. In: Cozzens, S., Wetmore, J. (eds) Nanotechnology and the Challenges of Equity, Equality and Development. Yearbook of Nanotechnology in Society, vol 2. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-481-9615-9_2
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-481-9615-9_2
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-90-481-9614-2
Online ISBN: 978-90-481-9615-9
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawSocial Sciences (R0)