Page 10 - FNRS.news 121

Myth Are several attempts ERC and

IEF Buster necessary before gender
receiving funding from
the ERC?
C IN BR No, not necessarily. The diagram below equality

shows that out of the 7,514 grantees
receiving an ERC grant between 2007 and
2017, the majority (4,755) were awarded

ER Is it better to wait Are you more likely on their first attempt. Five researchers
(but there are probably more today) have
to succeed when you
been funded three times by the ERC, from
for the end of the apply in one field just three applications (see the extreme
right of the diagram). On the other hand,
eligibility period to rather than another? some researchers have had to apply The promotion of gender equality in
apply for a Grant? No! In the early days, it’s true that there several times before receiving funding. research and innovation is one of the
was an indicative distribution key to Two particularly persistent researchers
Not necessarily. Lots of applicants for the ERC’s budget between the three (shown at the bottom on the extreme commitments of Horizon 2020 and
Starting and Consolidator Grants wait main scientific fields (Human and Social left of the diagram) only succeeded in Horizon Europe. For its part, the ERC’s aim
until the end of their eligibility period Sciences, Life Sciences and Physical and obtaining funding from the ERC on their is to promote the search for excellence,
before applying, hoping to boost their Engineering Sciences). But this key has seventh attempt. So there are lots of
chances of success. However, apart not been used since the 2015 calls for re-submissions. regardless of age, nationality or gender Work still to be done
from young post-doctorate graduates projects. The budget is now distributed An analysis of the ERC shows that 30% of and to offer equal opportunities to men
1
(who apply two to three years after their solely based on demand, depending on unlucky applicants improved their score However, in the Wallonia-Brussels
thesis), the actual success rate is virtually the number of applications received by when submitting a new application. The and women. Federation, all grants combined, only 32
unchanged within the window of eligibility the judging panels. higher the score on the first application, projects were achieved by women, while
(see the relatively even orange line in the This means that the success rate the higher the score is also for the 81 projects were obtained by men . This
2
diagram below). makes 29% of projects brought in by female
really does not vary from one panel to re-submission. This analysis also shows he ERC introduced a Gender A process that has
The assessors take account of the another. Applicants need to choose their that some winners (6%) changed field Equality Plan 2014 – 2020 to meet researchers. This situation emphasises that
1
while the initiatives taken by the ERC to
scientific seniority of candidates when panel carefully, based not on strategic between two applications before being Tthe following targets: borne fruit achieve greater gender equality have borne
they evaluate their profile, so they do funding considerations, but based on funded. In the end, excellent projects have fruit, there is still work to be done; despite
not expect to see the same track- record the question: “Who will best appreciate a strong chance of being funded. • make applicants aware of the issue of In the Horizon 2020 framework the encouraging results, the trend remains
(curriculum vitae) of candidates who the innovative nature of my project?” equality between men and women, programme (2014-2020), the success rate fragile. These developments need to be
apply at the beginning or at the end of Looking at the list of projects funded by • improve the gender balance between for the 3 main types of funding (Starting, monitored closely, particularly in a time
their period of eligibility. This means that this particular panel in previous years, or applicants and within the research Advanced and Consolidator Grants) of crisis such as the one we are currently
an unsuccessful initial application made the composition of the panel for previous teams, as well as among the assessors was close to an equal balance between experiencing. For example, some indicators
during the first half of the candidate’s calls may help (while bearing in mind that History of applications before and in the decision-making bodies, women and men. show that lockdown has had a greater
eligibility window leaves more of a margin the scopes of the panels are not set in and after the funding of the ERC • remove any potential sexist prejudice in negative impact of the scientific productivity
for submitting a new proposal to the stone). grantees (2007-2017) the assessment procedures, of women than of men .
3
same body a little later. This is all the By way of indication, the proportion of
more true because this new submission Human Sciences projects funded has 7514 • monitor any disparities in university Success rates of calls for StG-CoG-
posts between men and women who
would benefit from the comments increased since the allocation of funding AdG 2007-2013 and 2014-2018.
made by the assessors about the first per field disappeared. 2759 4755 have benefited from ERC grants.
application. 895 1864 780 400 To meet these targets, the ERC has 16%
implemented initiatives such as 14%
277 618 278 101 195 87 4 5 highlighting the recipients of grants 12%
Grantees in 2019 to the StG-CoG-AdG calls by 82 195 54 23 53 25 1 45 21 1 1 from both genders in the activities of 10%
8%
communication, long-term statistical
year since obtaining their thesis 22 60 11 1 8 1 4 2 7 2 tracking and publication of the success 6%
180 50% 2 20 2 Applications not selected 1 rates and the amounts granted to men 4% StG CoG AdG Total StG CoG AdG Total
5
1
- FNRS.NEWS 121 - FEBRUARY 2021 StG 80 0 CoG AdG SR total 20% Success rate The diagram reads from top to bottom. 1. A new plan is being prepared for the period 2021 – 2027. Average success rates of ERC calls 2007-2013 (7th framework programme, on the left) and 2014-2018 (Horizon - FNRS.NEWS 121 - FEBRUARY 2021
45%
160
2%
and women or monitoring the gender
140
35%
1
2
0%
balance among the members of each ERC
# grantees
120
30%
panel.
100
25%
FP7 ERC calls 2007-2013
Horizon2020 ERC calls 2014-2018
Applications selected
Women
Men

60
15%
40
10%
- LThe grey box represents all applicants who have
5%
20
obtained one or more funding grants from the ERC,
2020, on the right), by instrument and by gender.
0%
- The colour of the boxes indicates the outcome of the
Source: ERC, “Participation of female researchers to ERC competitions”, Annual report on the ERC activities
2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42 44
applications (green = grant, red = rejection).
and achievements in 2019, 2020.
The number shown in each box indicates the number of
grantees. Each stage of the tree represents the outcome
Number of grantees and success rate (SR – Success Rate) for calls for Starting (StG), Consolidator (CoG) and
occupied by women in universities.
So a distinction needs to be made between the appli-
3. “COVID-19 has not affected all scientists equally. A survey of principal investigators indicates that female scientists, those in the ‘bench sciences’ and, especially, scien-
cants and the applications: 8,184 applications have been
Source : ERCEA
tists with young children experienced a substantial decline in time devoted to research. This could have important short- and longer-term effects on their careers, which
accepted (total of the green boxes) with 7,514 grantees.
institution leaders and funders need to address carefully.” In Kyle R. Myers, Wei Yang Tham, Yian Yin, et al., “Unequal effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on scientists”,
1. ERC, “Analysis of re-application patterns for ERC funding”, Annual report on the ERC activities and achieve-
8 Advanced Grants (AdG) in 2019, by scientific seniority (number of years post-thesis). of a new application. 2. Proportion to be put in perspective with that of the academic body in the Wallonia-Brussels Federation where, for example, only 16% of ordinary posts of Professor are 9
Nature Human Behavior, 15th July 2020.
ments in 2019, 2020.
Source: ERCEA Scientific Department - Unit B2, 2018.