Search the repository

Abstract: The European Union aims to foster research excellence, among others, by increasing gender equality (GE) in the European research area. The mandatory introduction of gender equality plans (GEP) mobilised universities to assess, target, and monitor GE in different fields of science. A wide range of barriers have been explored in STEM fields (science, technology, engineering, and mathematics), characterised by the low participation of women. However, significant obstacles to GE can emerge in relatively more gender‐balanced and, therefore, rarely studied fields, such as agriculture and life sciences (ALS). Experiences can differ in Central and Eastern European countries, characterised by rather traditional gender and family norms. This study explores different stakeholders’ perceptions of the main barriers of GE, with particular attention to ALS. We conducted nine focus groups (82 participants in total) with middle management, academic staff, and students from Czech, Hungarian, and Slovenian universities, aiming to contribute to the revision of their first GEP. Discussions were centred on recruitment, leadership positions, work–life balance, gender‐based violence, sexual harassment, organisational culture, integrating the gender dimension into research and teaching, and institutionalisation of GEPs. Findings revealed that women in ALS face partly similar gender‐based obstacles to their counterparts in less gender‐balanced fields—perceptions of education and career choices, work–life imbalance, and exclusion by recruitment and promotion practices—and also additional ALS‐related challenges of laboratory and fieldwork. Findings highlight the need for institutions to carefully address these areas in their state‐of‐the‐art assessments and develop sector‐specific, tailor‐made GEPs.
Keywords: academia and higher education, agriculture and life sciences, barriers, Central and Eastern Europe, gender equality, gender equality plans, inclusion of women, stakeholders
Published in RUP: 18.08.2025; Views: 411; Downloads: 8
Full text (382,69 KB)

Abstract: Namen dela: Z raziskavo smo želeli ugotoviti, kakšno mnenje o vplivu in pomembnosti posameznih ukrepov alkoholne politike pri zmanjševanju škodljivih posledic zaradi alkohola imajo različni akterji alkoholne politike v Sloveniji, in prepoznati njihove interese. Osnovne metode: Izvedli smo kvantitativno raziskavo, in sicer z vprašalnikom, ki je vseboval 25 trditev v okviru 9 področij alkoholne politike. Vprašalnik smo poslali 320 akterjem alkoholne politike v Sloveniji, razdeljenim v 4 glavne skupine: vladne organizacije, javnozdravstvene organizacije, nevladne organizacije ter alkoholna industrija. Zbrane podatke smo obdelali s programom SPSS. Razlike v pogledih na posamezno področje alkoholne politike med različnimi akterji smo ugotavljali s testom ANOVA in t-testom. Glavni izsledki: Faktorska analiza mnenj posameznih akterjev alkoholne politike v Sloveniji je razkrila tri glavne dejavnike: izobraževanje in ozaveščanje, regulacijske ukrepe in cenovneukrepe. Vsi akterji so kot najpomembnejše ukrepe in ukrepe z največjim učinkom izpostavili ukrepe, povezane z izobraževanjem, komuniciranjem in ozaveščanjem. Ukrepe s področja regulative alkoholna industrija zaznava kot občutno manj pomembne in z manjšim vplivom na zmanjševanje škodljivih posledic alkohola kot ostali akterji. Enako je z oceno ukrepov s področja cenovne politike. Poglavitni sklepi: Tako kot podobna raziskava o razumevanju alkoholne politike na evropski ravni tudi z našo ugotavljamo, da posamezne akterje alkoholne politike vodijo različni interesi v povezavi s posameznimi ukrepi alkoholne politike, vendar pa v Sloveniji te razlike niso tako izrazite kot na evropski ravni.Čeprav imajo akterji različne poglede in interese glede alkoholne politike in njenih posameznih ukrepov, smo z raziskavo prepoznali tista področja, na katerih lahko akterji sodelujejo pri pripravi boljših in učinkovitejših ukrepov alkoholne politike za preventivo škodljivih učinkov alkohola v Sloveniji.
Keywords: interests, alcohol policy, stakeholders, alcohol policy measures
Published in RUP: 10.07.2015; Views: 3978; Downloads: 142
Link to full text