In the U.S. and throughout most of the world, university research is becoming increasingly bureaucratized. Remarkably, there is almost no scholarly attention devoted to answering the question of what explains the continual growth in rules and regulations surrounding publicly funded research. Many efforts have been made to document the growth of rules and administrative burden in research policy - blue ribbon panels have been convened and made recommendations about reducing rules and their costs - but the causes of this bureaucratization have generated much less systematic explanation. Bureaucratization in Academic Research Policy: What Causes It? explains the reasons of bureaucratization and, in doing so, relies on theory and research about red tape and bureaucratic pathology. The monograph is organized as follows: The first section provides a brief, necessary preamble to organizational analysis - a review and conceptual demarcation of bureaucratization, red tape and formalization. After clarifying closely related concepts, the authors review some of the studies documenting the bureaucratization of research policy and administration in the U.S. and the responses to the bureaucratization, both institutional responses and responses and attitudes of individual investigators. The next section introduces theory of rules and red tape, the theory-base is used as a lens to asking the study's key question concerning the growth of rules in research policy and administration. After providing a theory base, the authors turn to the core question of the paper: What explains the continual growth in rules and regulations surrounding publicly funded research? And provide a conceptual model to answer this question. Finally, the monograph examines key elements of the conceptual model in terms of a variety of government rules and procedures promulgated, ones that almost always have good intentions but, when taken together, vastly increase administrative burden while only rarely demonstrating the social value purchased by the administrative burden.

The advent of information technology ushered in new forms of political power. Machines play crucial roles in how states see, understand, and act, and scrutiny of these processes lies at the heart of Identify and Sort. It frames debates about IT in world politics, explaining how industrial sorting systems employed by political actors are renegotiating the social contract between individuals and the state. Ansorge takes the reader on a global expedition that tracks the historical antecedents of digital power, from Aztec and Inca rituals, to medieval filing systems, to a grandiose 1930s design for a German registry, to the databases used in US presidential campaigns and how IT is deployed in war and post-conflict reconstruction. Databases are also deployed virtually to record and act upon people who have no publicly visible identification or group consciousness; modern wars and election campaigns are fought on this individualised terrain. The uneven distribution of these technical capacities engenders inequality of access, while rights discourses and legal frameworks forged in an era of mass group discrimination, subjugation, and public resistance lag behind these micro-targeting practices. Rich in examples and ideas, Identify and Sort develops an analytical model and vocabulary to explain the functions and limits of digital power in world politics.

In fiscal year 2014, U.S. universities received nearly $25 billion in federal grant funding for Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) research. Studies show women are largely underrepresented in STEM fields. Federal agencies are required to enforce Title IXa law prohibiting discrimination on the basis of sex in education programs receiving any federal financial assistanceincluding at universities they fund. GAO was asked to provide information on federal grant-making to women in STEM. This book examines the extent to which differences exist in federal grant awards between women and men in STEM fields; the extent to which federal agencies enforce Title IX at universities they fund for STEM research; and possible actions federal agencies could take to address the representation of women in STEM research.