Digital Document (pdf, doc, ppt, txt, etc.)

This report is an independent scientific review of the 17 Sustainable Development Goals  (SDGs) and 169 targets, as submitted to the UN General Assembly by the UN Open Work - ing Group (OWG). It is a unique tool designed primarily for negotiators, technical support  teams and other actors engaged in defining a universal, integrated and transformational  set of global goals and targets for sustainable development and the political declaration  on the post-2015 development Agenda. In particular it is a resource for technical review  of the targets carried out in preparation for their adoption and translation at the national  level. With more than 40 contributing authors from 21 countries, the report brings  together a wide range of scientific expertise across the natural and social sciences in an  accessible and concise manner. The report offers rigorous analysis of the proposed goals and targets, collectively and  individually, assessing whether they are backed up by scientific evidence, whether they  address the economic, social and environmental dimensions of sustainable development  in an integrated way, and whether they are sufficiently specific to be effectively imple - mented and monitored.  It clearly identifies how well defined each target is through a  “traffic light” colour scheme (green, amber, red), signaling where more technical work  may be needed. Concrete recommendations are put forward for consideration in refining  the goals and targets or in planning for their implementation.

Innovation ecosystems can be constructed around any subject matter. We choose here the topic of gender, which we examine as a component of innovation success. Most analyses of innovation systems tend to assume gender-neutral position with regard to identity and roles of participating actors and their activities. However, real-life innovations can often result in different quality of outcomes for women and men; the innovation potential of highly trained women remains unrealised; and the recent socioeconomic empowerment of women as driver of market needs continues to be ignored. Drawing on latest research evidence from studies of gender issues in science, we show how innovation systems can benefit from adopting more gender sensitive approaches, which recognise the role gender plays in shaping knowledge and market activities. We propose four scenarios for constructing gender sensitive innovation ecosystems based on different gender dynamics that combine scientific understanding of sex and gender differences with improved engagement of women in innovation process, enabled through participatory methods and open and inclusive innovation practices.

Bruno, I. (2009). The “Indefinite Discipline” of Competitiveness Benchmarking as a Neoliberal Technology of Government. Minerva, 47(3), 261–280.

Working on the assumption that ideas are embedded in socio-technical arrangements which actualize them, this essay sheds light on the way the Open Method of Co-ordination (OMC) achieves the Lisbon strategic goal: “to become the most competitive and dynamic knowledge-based economy in the world”. Rather than framing the issue in utilitarian terms, it focuses attention on quantified indicators, comparable statistics and common targets resulting from the increasing practice of intergovernmental benchmarking, in order to tackle the following questions: how does the OMC go about co-ordinating Member States through the benchmarking of national policies? And to what extent does this managerial device impact the path of European construction? Beyond the ideological and discursive construction of the competitive imperative, this technology of government transforms it into an “indefinite discipline” (Foucault) which constantly urges decision-makers to hit the top of the charts. This contribution thus argues that the practice of intergovernmental benchmarking is far from being neutral in purpose and effect. On the contrary, it lays the foundation for building a “competitive Europe” which unites Member States through competition.

Westbrook, L., & Saperstein, A. (2015). New Categories Are Not Enough: Rethinking the Measurement of Sex and Gender in Social Surveys. Gender & Society, 29(4), 534–560.

Recently, scholars and activists have turned their attention toward improving the measurement of sex and gender in survey research. The focus of this effort has been on including answer options beyond “male” and “female” to questions about the respondent’s gender. This is an important step toward both reflecting the diversity of gendered lives and better aligning survey measurement practice with contemporary gender theory. However, our systematic examination of questionnaires, manuals, and other technical materials from four of the largest and longest-running surveys in the United States indicates that there are a number of other issues with how gender is conceptualized and measured in social surveys that also deserve attention, including essentialist practices that treat sex and gender as synonymous, easily determined by others, obvious, and unchanging over the life course. We find that these understandings extend well beyond direct questions about the respondent’s gender, permeating the surveys. A hyper-gendered world of “males” and “females,” “brothers” and “sisters,” and “husbands” and “wives” shapes what we can see in survey data. If not altered, surveys will continue to reproduce statistical representations that erase important dimensions of variation and likely limit understanding of the processes that perpetuate social inequality.