Growing opportunities for academic scientists to commercialize their science has led to a new commercial marketplace. Recent evidence suggests that "commercial science" participation is characterized by gender stratification. Using interviews with life science faculty at one high-status university we examine the mechanisms that instituted, reinforced, and reduced the gender gap in commercial science between 1975 and 2005. We find gender differences from processes on both the demand-(opportunity) and supply-(interest) sides; of deeper significance are the intersections between these sides of the market. Specifically, explicit early exclusion of women left them with fewer opportunities in the marketplace, weakening their socialization and skills in commercial science. This uneven opportunity structure left senior/mid-career women with fewer chances to confront the ambiguities of this new practice, resulting in their greater ambivalence. Gender differences remain significant among junior faculty but we find their decline prompted by greater gender-equality in advisor mentoring and the presence of institutional support which together have started to reshape the supply-side of commercial science. 1. The gender gap in commercial science 1.1 The rise of commercial science Many academic research projects are characterized by the production of dual-purpose knowledge-knowledge that is simultaneously valuable as a scientific discovery and as a useful, inventive construct (Stokes, 1997; Biagioli, 2000; Murray, 2002; Murray and Stern, 2006). Such knowledge offers opportunities in two distinct markets. The first is the traditional academic science marketplace in which individuals use their knowledge to garner priority and prestige through publication, peer-review and participation in scientific conferences (Merton, 1973; Dasgupta and David, 1994). The second is the pursuit of the practical and commercial aspects of their knowledge in the "commercial science" marketplace. While these dual options
A B S T R A C TWhile (urban) resilience has become an increasingly popular concept, especially in the areas of disaster risk reduction (DRR) and climate change adaptation (CCA), it is often still used as an abstract metaphor, with much debate centered on definitions, differences in approaches, and epistemological considerations. Empirical studies examining how community-based organizations (CBOs) "practice" resilience on the ground and what enables these CBOs to organize and mobilize around resilience are lacking. Moreover, in the growing context of competitive and entrepreneurial urbanism and conflicting priorities about urban (re)development, it is unclear how urban development dynamics influence communitybased resilience actions. Through empirical research conducted on the Lower East Side, a gentrifying neighborhood in Manhattan, and in Rockaway, a socio-spatially isolated neighborhood in Queens, we investigate community organizing of low-income residents for (climate) resilience in a post-disaster context. Results show that both the operationalization of resiliencehow resilience is "practiced"and the community capacity to organize for the improved resilience of low-income residents are strongly influenced by pre-existing urban development dynamics and civic infrastructurethe socio-spatial networks of community-based organizationsin each neighborhood. The Lower East Side, with its long history of community activism and awareness of gentrification threats, was better able to mobilize broadly and collectively around resilience needs while the more socio-spatially isolated neighborhoods on the Rockaway peninsula were more constrained.
Small businesses in Lower Manhattan after September 11, 2001, paint a telling portrait of vulnerability after disasters. This qualitative analysis of recovery for small retail and service firms with 50 or fewer employees is based on ethnographic fieldwork, interviews, and documentary research from September 2001 through 2005. A postdisaster emphasis on place-based assistance to firms conflicted with macro-level redevelopment plans for Lower Manhattan. Small business recovery was impeded as aid programs responded to a new sense of urgency, attachment to place, and prestorm conceptions of the neighborhood at the expense of addressing community-wide economic changes accelerated by the disaster. Ingredients for effective programmatic response to the shifting environment and recovery needs of small businesses include (a) long-range planning assistance and relocation options, (b) intelligence on all redevelopment initiatives that affect firms' recovery, and (c) a blend of grants and loans that acknowledges realistic disbursement schedules of private versus public monies. S mall businesses in Lower Manhattan after September 11, 2001 (9/11), provide a telling portrait of how the most vulnerable in communities experience the worst impact in a disaster. 1 Most were not well capitalized, and the disaster required an outpouring of cash to meet ongoing costs while profits fell off dramatically and immediately. Often uninsured or underinsured, small businesses were subject to rent increases at the whim of speculative landlords, consumed with equity and maximization of disaster aid, and faced with varying degrees of physical damage and social loss. They endured the emotional toll of surviving a disaster, a subsequent economic recession, transient support from various agencies, a changing customer base, construction obstacles, and the sheer uncertainty of how to navigate these challenges.Disaster recovery frequently revolves around victims' access to capital. The primary remedies aimed at small business stabilization and recovery were grants for lost revenues and loans toward continued operations. Nonprofits throughout New York administered the bulk of this assistance, using a mix of public and private funds to complement or fill the gaps of government aid programs. This article is a qualitative analysis of the business recovery process for a sample of small retail 299
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.