Revista de Comunicación de la SEECI (2025).
ISSN: 1576-3420
|
Received: 02/04/2025 --- Accepted: 04/03/2025 --- Published: 06/16/2025 |
GENDER EQUALITY IN SUPPORT FOR FILM PROJECTS
Yolanda González Osuna: Complutense University. Spain.
Enrique Barrera Martínez: Monterrey University. Mexico.
How to cite this article:
González Osuna, Yolanda & Barrera Martínez, Enrique (2025). Gender equality in support for film projects. Revista de Comunicación de la SEECI, 58, 1-24. https://doi.org/10.15198/seeci.2025.58.e925
ABSTRACT
Introduction: The analysis explores gender inequality in the financing of film projects in Spain, evaluating whether films directed by women receive less financial support than those led by men. Between 2021 and 2023, 266 projects funded by the ICAA were studied: 119 directed by women and 147 by men. Production budgets and subsidies were analyzed using qualitative methods and statistical tests. Preliminary results show that projects led by women tend to have lower initial budgets, which affects the amount of subsidies they receive, despite achieving competitive scores. Historical factors, such as limited access to financial support networks, perpetuate this gap. The study highlights the need to reform ICAA policies to ensure real equity in financing and competitiveness within the Spanish film industry.
Keywords: Gender equality, Film financing, ICAA, Women directors, Budgets, Subsidies, Equity.
1. INTRODUCTION
In the current context of the film industry, women's representation in film directing has become significantly more prominent in recent years. However, on this path toward true gender equality, it is worth asking whether these projects have smaller budgets and less financial support than those directed by men. Despite the existence of policies to promote equality, such as selective grants from the Institute of Cinematography and Audiovisual Arts (ICAA, for its acronym in Spanish), it is pertinent to ask whether there is gender equality or, on the contrary, disparity in the financing of audiovisual projects. This analysis aims to determine if films directed by women in Spain have smaller budgets and, consequently, more limited supports.
Researches in Hollywood and Europe have shown that projects led by women receive less funding and are less likely to be financed than projects led by men (Smith et al., 2013; Lauzen, 2020).
Although there are studies that have analyzed women's representation in cinema and their participation in creative roles in the Spanish context (Cabeza, 2016; Castro García, 2009), there are fewer studies that focus specifically on the financing process and how public or private grant policies can perpetuate or mitigate gender inequalities. Reports by organizations such as the Association of Women Filmmakers and Audiovisual Media (CIMA, for its acronym in Spanish) have denounced the lack of transparency and equity in the selection and awarding of public grant for film projects. These reports point out that Spanish female directors and producers face additional difficulties in accessing these resources (CIMA, 2021).
However, to our knowledge, no comprehensive research has analyzed the process of selecting and awarding public grant in Spain from a gender perspective. Likewise, no research has evaluated how these mechanisms influence the perpetuation of inequalities in the film industry. This gap in the academic literature highlights the importance and originality of your work, which aims to address this issue with a fresh and necessary approach.
To investigate this issue, reference will be made to the selection and award process of the ICAA. The grant awarded to female directors are only distinguished since 2021, so this will be taken as the starting date. Moreover, the 2024 grant is not yet definitive and the data may therefore vary. The period to be used for the investigation will therefore be the one that covers precisely from 2021 to 2023, as these are the only years for which evidence is available. In total, 266 projects will be analyzed, of which 119 have been led by women and 147 by men. Both the amount of subsidies granted and the production budgets of the films will be analyzed. The study aims to identify if there is a correlation between the gender of the person who leads and the budget allocated to their projects, and if this possible difference influences the amount of grant conceded. Through a review of available data, the support granted in recent years will be examined to determine whether female-directed films receive, on average, the same funding as male-directed films or whether, on the contrary, a gender gap still exists, and whether this affects their competitiveness within industry. It will be explored whether films directed by women receive lower grants because their initial budgets are usually lower despite obtaining good scores in the selection processes. It will be sought to find out whether the amount of economic resources that are allocated to these projects is a factor that determines the granting of grants, since grants are usually linked to the size of the film budget.
This analysis is also supported by the study of historical and structural factors that could contribute to this possible inequality in access to finance. Traditionally, women have had less access to financial support networks, which could influence their-led projects to have tighter budgets. By looking at how these limitations impact the amount of grant received, it is expected to be able to determine whether female-directed films face a financial disadvantage compared to male-directed films. The methodologies will be both qualitative (analysis of studies on support for women-led productions) and quantitative. If the data obtained from the analysis are normal, we will do a Student's T test, and if they are not normal, we will do a Mann-Whitney test. The article will reflect on the need to review and reform funding policies in the film industry to ensure that support is fair, not only in terms of the number of projects, but also in terms of the amount of budgets.
2. OBJETIVES
To determine if there is a disparity in the budgets and the granting of grants from the Institute of Cinematography and Audiovisual Arts (ICAA) for films directed by women compared to those directed by men in Spain during the period 2021-2023.
Specific objectives:
- To quantify and compare the production budgets of films directed by women and men in the study period (2021-2023), identifying patterns of economic allocation.
- To assess the amount of grants awarded by the ICAA to films directed by women compared to those directed by men, to determine whether there is a significant difference in the support received.
- To investigate the relationship between the size of a film production’s budget and the amount of grant awarded, exploring how the director’s gender influences this relationship in the framework of policies promoting gender equality.
- To examine the impact of historical and structural factors on the financing of women-led productions, especially in relation to financial support networks, to understand the potential limitations women face in accessing economic resources.
- To determine the existence of a correlation between the gender of the director and the economic competitiveness of the projects, through the analysis of the funding results and the amount of grant obtained by productions with different levels of budget.
- To propose recommendations for the review of funding policies, based on findings on possible inequalities, with the aim of promoting an equitable distribution of funding in terms of budget and gender in the Spanish film industry.
These objectives allow us to structure the study in such a way that conclusions are obtained on the equity in the financing of the film industry according to the director's gender and the budget of the projects.
3. METHODOLOGY
3.1. Research Design
This study will adopt a mixed methodological approach that integrates quantitative and qualitative methods. Quantitative analysis will allow exploring the relationship between the director's gender and the funding received, while qualitative analysis will provide a context on the historical and cultural structures that can influence this relationship.
3.2. Sample and study period
The sample consists of 266 film projects selected under the grants granted by the Institute of Cinematography and Audiovisual Arts (ICAA) between 2021 and 2023. This selection includes 119 projects led by women and 147 projects led by men. The study period is limited to these three years, since 2021 the ICAA began to distinguish the grants according to the director’s gender, allowing a specific evaluation.
3.3. Data collection
Data will be collected from secondary sources, specifically from the ICAA official reports detailing both production budgets and grants awarded to each project. The information collected shall include:
- Project manager’s gender.
- Amount of the production budget for each film project.
- Amount of financial support granted by the ICAA to each project.
3.4. Quantitative analysis
The quantitative analysis will be divided into two main phases:
- Descriptive analysis: In this phase, descriptive statistics will be calculated for each variable, including the mean, median, and standard deviation of budgets and grants. Comparisons will be made between projects led by men and women to identify patterns of economic allocation and potential gender differences.
- Hypothesis testing: To assess whether there are statistically significant differences in the grants awarded and production budgets between projects led by men and women, the following procedure will be followed:
If the data are normally distributed, a Student's T-test for independent samples will be used to compare the grant amounts and budgets of the two groups (male and female directors). This test is a statistical tool used to determine whether there is a significant difference between the means of two groups. William Sealy Gosset developed it and published it under the pseudonym "Student" in 1908. This T-test is widely used in research to compare two sets of data and assess if the observed differences are statistically significant or due to chance.
If the data does not meet the normality assumption, a Mann-Whitney U test will be performed which is suitable for comparing two independent samples when the distributions are not normal. The Mann-Whitney test (also known as the Mann-Whitney U test or Wilcoxon rank-sum test) is a nonparametric statistical test used to compare two independent groups and determine whether there are significant differences between their distributions. Unlike the Student's t-test, the Mann-Whitney test does not assume that the data follow a normal distribution, making it ideal for analyzing data that does not meet the assumptions of normality or when working with small samples.
3.5. Data validation and reliability
To ensure data reliability and validity, the following measures will be taken:
- Data will be extracted solely from official, verified sources, reports, and ICAA records.
- Data will be analyzed for consistency and accuracy by evaluating possible anomalies or discrepancies in the reported information.
- Methodological triangulation will be carried out by combining quantitative and qualitative analyses to gain a comprehensive, contextualized understanding of the relationship between gender, budget, and funding.
3.6. Limitations
This study may have some limitations, such as:
- The lack of complete data on the specific criteria applied to each project in the issuing of grant.
- Possible variability in grant amounts and budgets due to external factors, such as the economic context and policies at the time, which could influence the data from one year to the next.
- The temporality of the study, which only analyzes the period 2021-2023, could limit the generalization of the findings to broader trends.
3.7. Ethical considerations
Since only publicly available data will be used, no ethical issues related to privacy or confidentiality are anticipated.
4. RESULTS
Women's participation in Spanish cinema has been marked by inequalities that affect not only their visibility as creators, but also their access to financial resources and production opportunities. These inequalities limit the potential of their proposals in an industry historically dominated by men (Arranz, 2010).
According to Meliveo and Cristófol (2022), although there has been a notable female presence among the winners in the Best New Director category in recent years, recognition of women in the general Best Director category is considerably lower. Between 2000 and 2010, only 9.09% of nominations in the Best Director category went to women, and this figure fell to 5% between 2011 and 2020. From 2000 to 2020, women accounted for just 7.14% of nominations, compared to 92.88% for men.
Additionally, the study reveals that 75% of award-winning female directors incorporate feminist messages into their films, addressing social criticism and gender discrimination. For example, Te doy mis ojos (Bollaín, 2003) deals with gender violence. However, the authors point out that this underrepresentation of women in the film industry during the first two decades of the 21st century could limit the visibility of these protest messages.
Organic Law 3/2007, dated March 22, on Effective Equality Between Women and Men establishes that all public entities must promote equal representation of women and men in social, cultural, and professional spheres by implementing measures that eliminate discrimination. This regulation provides a legal framework that supports policies promoting equal opportunities for women in the film industry in terms of funding and visibility.
Under Organic Law 3/2007, dated March 22, on Effective Equality Between Women and Men, and with the aim of evaluating how measures implemented to achieve equality, such as quotas for women, are impacting the film industry, we will analyze the grants awarded by the Institute of Cinematography and Audiovisual Arts (ICAA). This analysis will allow us to determine whether these policies are achieving tangible gender equality in society, particularly with regard to access to funding and representation in the cultural sector.
4.1. Analysis of the grant received in 2021
4.1.1. Analysis of the General Grants received in 2021
Comparative analysis of budgets and grants in 28 projects led by men and 17 projects led by women.
1. Descriptive analysis
To make an initial comparison of the budgets and the grants awarded to projects led by men and women, the average and median values of both variables were calculated. The results are shown in the following table:
Table 1.
Average and median values of budgets and grants awarded to projects led by men and women in 2021
|
Indicator |
Men directors |
Women directors |
|
Average budget (€) |
3,691,122 |
2,601,238 |
|
Medium budget (€) |
3,117,242 |
2,406,938 |
|
Average grant awarded (€) |
1,073,406 |
996,743 |
|
Medium grant awarded (€) |
1,000,000 |
1,000,000 |
Source: Own elaboration (2024).
These values suggest that projects led by men, on average, have higher budgets than those led by women. Similarly, the average amount of grant awarded is slightly higher for male directors.
2. Hypothesis testing
To determine whether these differences are statistically significant, hypothesis tests were applied, specifically the Mann-Whitney U test, given the possible non-normality of the data distribution.
Budget comparison:
Test statistic: 374.0
P - value: 0.0015
With a p - value of 0.0015, which is lower than the standard significance level (0.05), it can be concluded that there is a statistically significant difference in project budgets led by men and women. On average, this indicates that projects led by men tend to have higher budgets than those led by women.
Comparison of grant awarded:
Test statistic: 286.5
P - value: 0.1469
In this case, the p - value is 0.1469, higher than the 0.05 significance level. This suggests that there is no statistically significant difference in grants awarded to projects led by men and women. This implies that although budgets differ by gender, the amount of grants awarded to male and female directors does not vary significantly.
3. Interpretation of results based on objectives
Purpose of comparing budgets: The results show that projects led by women have significantly lower budgets than those led by men. This finding supports the hypothesis that there may be a gender disparity in the allocation of financial resources for film production.
Objective of comparing the grants awarded: No significant differences were found in the amount of grants awarded to men and women. This could suggest that the ICAA grant system attempts to be equitable in terms of the amounts awarded, although women's projects tend to have lower budgets overall.
Objective of exploring the relationship between budget and grant allocation: Although budgets for projects led by men are higher, this difference does not result in a significant difference in terms of grants received. This could indicate that the ICAA allocates grants based on criteria other than budget, or that there is an equality policy benefiting projects with smaller budgets, which are generally led by women.
4. Conclusion
The analyzed data confirms that budgets for projects differ depending on the gender of the management staff, with projects led by women tending to have lower budgets. However, no significant disparity was observed in the amount of grants awarded by the ICAA, which may indicate an effort to compensate for budgetary constraints by providing equitable grants.
This analysis highlights the importance of reviewing grant allocation criteria in the film industry, ensuring equitable grant awards and offering incentives to facilitate access to larger budgets for projects led by women.
4.1.2. Analysis of the Selective Grants received during 2021
Comparative Analysis of Selective Grants between Male and Female Directors.
1. Descriptive analysis of the grants awarded
In order to compare the amounts of selective grant awarded to projects led by men and women, the average and median values of this grant were calculated (see Table 2):
Table 2.
Average and median values of selective grant amounts awarded in 2021
|
Indicator |
Projects led by men |
Projects led by women |
Projects led by mixed team |
|
Average grant awarded (€) |
322,828.81 |
335,067.61 |
100,725.00 |
|
Median grant awarded (€) |
225,000.00 |
210,770.53 |
100,725.00 |
Source: Own elaboration (2024).
2. Hypothesis testing for grants awarded
To compare the grant awarded to men and women, we performed a Mann-Whitney U test:
Test statistic: 268.0
Interpretation: With a p - value of 0.7419, which is well above the significance threshold of 0.05, there is no statistically significant difference in grants awarded to projects led by men versus women in the 2021 selective grants.
3. General Conclusions:
Equity in Grants: The hypothesis test indicates that there is no significant difference in the allocation of grants between projects led by men and those led by women in 2021. This suggests that grants are distributed equitably across both genders.
Support for Mixed Teams: On average, projects led by mixed teams received less support than those led exclusively by men or women. However, given the small sample size of mixed teams, this data is more descriptive than inferential.
The data show that projects led by women, on average, receive slightly higher amounts of selective grants than those led by men. This difference is also reflected in the medians, suggesting that female directors generally receive higher amounts of grants with this type of funding.
4. Interpretation of results based on objectives
Objective of evaluating the amount of selective grants between men and women: On average, although female directors receive slightly higher amounts of selective grants, this difference is not statistically significant. This finding suggests that the ICAA applies equitable criteria in conceding selective grants, without showing preference based on the director's gender.
Objective of exploring the relationship between gender and the number of projects: The near parity in the number of projects led by men and women in selective grants reinforces the interpretation that grant awards are not influenced by gender. The balanced representation of projects allows for fair comparisons and adds credibility to the conclusion that grant amounts do not present a significant gender gap.
5. Conclusion
In the ICAA's selective grants, there are no significant differences in the amounts awarded to projects led by men and women. Although female directors receive a slightly higher average and median grant, these differences are not statistically significant. Furthermore, the similarity in the number of projects for each gender suggests that the grant distribution is equitable, with balanced gender representation.
6. Implications for future research and policy
These results suggest a policy of equality in the ICAA's selective grants, where the amounts awarded do not dependent on the director's gender. This trend toward equity could serve as a reference for other areas of funding within the film industry, promoting equal access to resources for all genders. For future research, it would be valuable to explore other factors in grant allocation and how these may influence on film project funding.
4.2. Analysis of grants received in 2022
4.2.1. Analysis of General Grants received in 2022
Comparative Analysis of General Grants for Male and Female Directors in 2022.
1. Descriptive analysis
To understand possible differences in grant and budget amounts awarded to projects led by men and women, the average and median values of both variables were analyzed (see Table 3):
Table 3.
Average and median values of budgets and grants awarded to projects led by men and women in 2022
|
Indicator |
Men directors |
Women directors |
|
Average budget (€) |
4,120,000 |
2,674,981 |
|
Median budget (€) |
3,950,000 |
2,558,068 |
|
Average grant awarded (€) |
1,190,000 |
972,814,5 |
|
Median grant awarded (€) |
1,200,000 |
1,000,000 |
Source: Own elaboration (2024).
The data shows that projects led by men not only tend to have a higher average and median budget, but also receive, on average, higher grants than those led by women. The difference is evident in both the average and median values of both categories.
2. Hypothesis testing:
Mann-Whitney U tests were applied to assess whether the differences in budgets and grants awarded are statistically significant.
Hypothesis test results for budgets:
Test statistic: 116.5
P - Value: 0.0070
With a p - value of 0.0070, which is less than the 0.05 significance level, it can be concluded that there is a statistically significant difference in project budgets led by men and women. This indicates that projects led by men tend to have significantly higher budgets than those led by women.
Hypothesis testing results for grant awarded:
Test statistic: 117.0
P - Value: 0.0029
Similarly, with a p - value of 0.0029 (also less than 0.05), there is a statistically significant difference in the amount of grants awarded. This suggests that projects led by men tend to receive significantly more grants than those led by women.
3. Interpretation of results based on objectives
Objective of comparing budgets: The results of the analysis show that projects led by women have, on average, significantly lower budgets than projects led by men. This supports the hypothesis of a gender disparity in the allocation of financial resources in the area of general grant in 2022.
Objective of comparing the grants awarded: It was found that the grants awarded to projects led by men are also significantly higher than those awarded to projects led by women. This indicates that, in addition to the difference in budgets, ICAA grants tend to favor projects with larger budgets, which in this case more often correspond to projects led by men.
Objective of exploring the relationship between budget and grant allocation: The observed correlation between larger budgets and larger grants awarded reinforces the idea that projects led by men, which have higher budgets, tend to receive higher grants. This result suggests that the grant award system may be linked to project budget size, which could put projects led by women, which tend to have smaller budgets, at a disadvantage.
4. Conclusion
An analysis of general grants awarded in 2022 reveals significant disparities in project budgets between projects led by men and women. Women's projects tend to have lower budgets and grants, suggesting structural inequality in access to resources in the area of general grants. These results imply that adjustments to the current grant award system are necessary to ensure an equitable distribution, enabling women-led projects to access resources comparable to those of their male counterparts.
5. Implications for future research and policy
These findings highlight the importance of revising the criteria for allocating grants in the film industry to provide equal funding opportunities for projects led by women. To close the gender gap in budgets and access to resources, it would be beneficial to explore mechanisms that provide grant equitably in terms of both number and amount.
4.2.2. Analysis of Selective Grants received in 2022
4.2.2.1. Selective Grants, first procedure, 2022
Comprehensive Analysis of the Selective Grants (First Procedure) between Men and Women Directors
1. Descriptive analysis of the grants awarded
To assess whether there is a difference in selective grant (first procedure) awarded to projects led by men and women in 2022, we analyze the descriptive measures of the amounts of grant awarded (see Table 4):
Table 4.
Average and median values of selective grant amounts awarded in 2022 (first procedure)
|
Indicator |
Projects led by men |
Projects led by women |
|
Average grant awarded: (€) |
379,912.71 |
304,813.45 |
|
Median grant awarded (€) |
221,637.50 |
152,290.00 |
Source: Own elaboration (2024).
On average, we observed that projects led by men received slightly more funding than those led by women. However, this average may be influenced by extreme values that raise the overall average.
The median, which is less sensitive to extreme values, reveals a consistent disparity in grant awarded to projects between the two genders. This suggests that, in terms of median grant, projects led by men tend to receive a slightly higher amount than those led by women.
2. Hypothesis testing for awarded grants
To determine whether these differences are statistically significant, we performed a Mann-Whitney U test (appropriate when normality cannot be assumed in the data):
Test statistic: 172.5
P - Value: 0.3431
With a p - value of 0.3431, higher than the typical 0.05 significance level, we can conclude that there is no statistically significant difference in grants awarded to projects led by men and women in the first 2022 selective grant procedure. This means that although the mean and median values differ, these differences are not large enough to be considered statistically relevant.
3. Interpretation of Results
Equity in selective grants: The lack of statistical significance in the test suggests that selective grants from the first procedure in 2022 is generally distributed equally between men and women. From a gender equality perspective, this is positive, as it indicates that the selective grant system does not clearly favor a specific gender in terms of the amount granted.
Differences in average and median values: Although the average and median grant values awarded are slightly higher for projects led by men, these differences are not statistically significant. This could suggest that the grant distribution remains fair in terms of gender. However, it might be useful to continue monitoring in future years to detect consistent patterns.
4. General Conclusions
In selective grants (first procedure) in 2022:
Projects led by men tend to receive slightly higher grant amounts than those led by women, both in terms of average and median. However, these differences are not large enough to be statistically significant.
The analysis shows no evidence of gender bias in the grant allocation, which is a positive indicator of equity in funding.
5. Recommendations for future studies
It is important to monitor the grant distribution in future years to confirm that this equity is maintained.
Distribution analysis: It would be useful to conduct a more in-depth analysis of the overall distribution of the amounts awarded, assessing whether certain types of projects (such as documentaries, fiction, or animation) could influence the grant amounts awarded according to genre.
Impact assessment: In addition to quantifying grants, exploring the impact of these funds on the success and sustainability of projects could provide a more comprehensive understanding of the effectiveness of grant policies.
While there are differences in the mean and median values, the selective grants for 2022 show an equitable distribution between men and women, with no evidence of significant gender bias. This represents a positive step toward equality in supporting film projects in the industry.
- Selective grants, second procedure, 2022
Second procedure for selective grants in 2022 between projects led by men and women, based on budgets and grants awarded.
1. Descriptive budget analysis (see Table 5.)
Table 5.
Average and median values of budgets and selective grant awarded in 2022 (second procedure)
|
Indicator |
Men directors |
Women directors |
|
Average budget (€) |
979,305.94 |
1,128,800.00 |
|
Median budget (€) |
584,350.74 |
1,085,903.00 |
|
Average grant awarded (€) |
334,093.04 |
470,158.60 |
|
Median grant awarded (€) |
213,750.00 |
534,276.00 |
Source: Own elaboration (2024).
Interpretation of budgets: Although projects led by women show higher average and median budgets than projects led by men, the Mann-Whitney U hypothesis test yielded a p - value of 0.4906. This indicates that this difference is not statistically significant. Therefore, in terms of budgets, we can conclude that there is no significant difference between projects led by men and women in this procedure.
Interpretation of the awarded grants: On average and in median terms, projects led by women received higher grants than those led by men. However, the hypothesis test yielded a p - value of 0.1462, indicating that this difference is not statistically significant.
General Conclusions
In the second round of selective grants for 2022, no statistically significant differences were found in the budgets allocated to projects led by men and women. This suggests that projects led by both genders receive comparable budget allocations.
Although the average and median grants were higher for projects led by women, these differences were not statistically significant. This indicates that the awarded grants do not show gender bias in this procedure.
In order to ensure fairness and transparency in the grant allocation, it would be useful to:
Conduct ongoing research to identify patterns in future years.
Analyze other factors that could influence grant amounts, such as project type.
Explore how allocated amounts impact the success and sustainability of projects.
Data from the second round of selective grants for 2022 suggests an equitable distribution between projects led by men and women, both in terms of budget and awarded grants.
4.3. Analysis of grants received in 2023
4.3.1. Analysis of General Grants received in 2023
Data statistical description
Average budget: €5,101,780
Budget standard deviation: €2,666,909
Minimum budget: €2,400,000
Maximum budget: €12,700,000
Average grant awarded: €1,209,152
Grant standard deviation: €70,560
Minimum grants: €1,040,000
Maximum grants: €1,400,000
Films directed by women
Average budget: €3,785,379
Budget standard deviation: €2,289,635
Minimum budget: €2,000,000
Maximum budget: €12,196,214
Average grant awarded: €1,163,053
Grant standard deviation: €138,738
Minimum grant: €598,000
Maximum grant: €1,200,000
Initial observations
The average budgets for films directed by men are significantly higher than those directed by women.
The average grant awarded is also slightly higher for films directed by men, although the difference is not as significant.
The grant variations are smaller for projects directed by men (with less standard deviation) than for those directed by women, which could indicate greater consistency in the amount of grant received by men's projects.
To confirm whether these differences are statistically significant, we will apply hypothesis tests. First, we will examine the normality of the data in order to determine whether to use a Student's t-test or a Mann-Whitney U test.
The results of the Shapiro-Wilk normality test indicate that the budget and grant data for both groups do not follow a normal distribution (very low p - values in all cases). Therefore, we will use the Mann-Whitney U test, which is suitable for comparing two independent groups without assuming normality.
We will compare both budgets and subsidies between films directed by men and women.
Results of the Mann-Whitney U test
Budget:
U statistic: 441.0
P - value: 0.0158
This indicates a statistically significant discrepancy in budgets between films directed by men and women, with a considerably higher average budget for projects directed by men.
Awarded grant:
U statistic: 344,5
P - Value: 0,356
In this case, there is no statistically significant difference in the subsidies granted to films directed by men versus to those directed by women.
There is evidence that production budgets are higher for films directed by men than for those directed by women.
However, the ICAA's grant does not show a significant difference between the two groups, suggesting that, at least in terms of grant, the ICAA appears to be equitable between projects directed by men and women.
4.3.2. Analysis of the Selective Grants received in 2023
Statistical description of selective grants (first and second procedure).
4.3.2.1. Results of the BudgetAnalysis
1. Descriptive analysis of budgets:
Average budget:
Men: €936,172.93
Women: €936,18125
Median budget:
Men: €500,000
Women: €498,498
2. Hypothesis testing for budgets:
Test statistic: 180.0
P - Value: 0.9204
Interpretation: With a p - value of 0.9204, which is much higher than 0.05, there is no statistically significant difference in the budgets of projects led by men and women. This suggests that the budgets were distributed equally between both genders in the selective grant of 2023.
4.3.2.2. Results of the Analysis of Awarded Grants
1. Descriptive Analysis of Awarded Grants:
Median grant awarded:
Men: €393,369.44
Women: €407,596.80
Median grant awarded:
Men: €300,000
Men: €243,409.95
2. Hypothesis testing for the grant awarded:
Testing statistic: 174.5
P - Value: 0.7970
Interpretation: With a p - value of 0.7970, which is well above the significance threshold of 0.05, there is no statistically significant difference in grants awarded to projects led by men versus women. This suggests that, in the selective grants of 2023, the grant amounts are distributed equally between both genders.
This analysis confirms that there is no gender bias in the distribution of economic resources.
Total Valuation of Selective Grants in 2023 for Male and Female Directors
1. Budget Analysis
Average budget:
Projects led by men: €936,173
Projects led by women: €936,181
Median budget:
Projects led by men: €500,000
Projects led by women: €498,498
Interpretation of Budgets: The average and median budgets for projects led by men and women are virtually identical. A Mann-Whitney U hypothesis test was performed on the budgets, yielding a p - value of 0.9204. This confirms that there is no statistically significant difference in budgets for projects led by both genders. This suggests equitable budget allocation in the 2023 selective grants.
Conclusion on Budgets: Projects led by both male and female directors receive comparable budgets, suggesting a fair and gender-neutral distribution of initial resources.
2. Analysis of Grants Awarded
Average of awarded grant:
Projects led by men: €393,369.44
Projects led by women: €407,596.80
Median of awarded grant:
Projects led by men: €300,000
Projects led by women: €243,409.95
Interpretation of Grant Awarded: In the case of awarded grant, the average and median values are similar, with women receiving slightly higher average amounts of grant but slightly lower median amounts. The Mann-Whitney U hypothesis test yielded a p - value of 0.7970 for grants awarded, indicating that there is no statistically significant difference in grant amounts by gender.
The grants awarded are equitable for projects led by men and women, with no significant differences suggesting bias in the allocation of these grants in the 2023 selective grants.
Data analyzed from selective grants in 2023 shows equitable distribution in two key aspects: budgets and grant awarded. On average, projects led by both men and women receive comparable resources, and there are no statistically significant differences suggesting gender bias in the allocation of funds.
Implications for the film industry: These results are positive in terms of gender equality in film project financing because they suggest that the allocation of selective grant resources appears to be fair and equitable for both genders. Maintaining this equality in future calls for proposals can contribute to a more inclusive and competitive environment in which directors' gender does not affect the allocation of resources.
Recommendations for Future Studies:
Periodic studies are advisable to ensure this equality in resource allocation is maintained over time.
In addition to quantitative data, a qualitative analysis of the impact of funds on project development and success could offer a more complete perspective.
It would be interesting to analyze whether additional factors, such as the gender of the producer or the type of project, influence the amounts allocated to ensure that other aspects do not generate unnoticed disparities.
Overall, this analysis suggests that the 2023 selective grant system has achieved fair distribution of resources between men and women, providing a solid foundation for advancing equal opportunities in the film industry.
5. CONCLUSIONS AND DISCUSSION
Conclusions of the Study on the Financing of Spanish Cinema from a Gender Perspective (2021-2023)
1. Budget Gap: Persistent Inequalities
General Analysis (2021 and 2022):
A significant disparity was observed in the budgets allocated to projects led by men and women. On average, projects led by men have substantially higher budgets. For instance, in 2022, the average budgets for projects led by men were €4,120,000, compared to €2,674,981 for projects led by women.
This finding reinforces the existence of a gender gap in the allocation of initial financial resources, which could reflect historical and social structures that make it difficult for female directors to access larger budgets.
Selective Grant: No significant differences were found in average budgets between genders in 2023, representing progress toward equity in this specific category.
2. Equity in Grants: Notable Progress
General Grants:
Although the grants awarded in the 2021 general grants did not show significant differences, a statistically significant gap was identified in 2022. Men's projects received higher grants, which is closely related to their higher budgets.
Selective Grants:
In statistical terms, selective grants showed an equitable distribution during 2021 and 2023. The observed differences in averages and medians were not statistically significant, suggesting that these calls are moving toward fairer distribution regardless of gender.
3. Impact of Equality Policies:
Organic Law 3/2007 provided a legal framework for implementing policies that promote equity in film financing. However, the results show that although grant tends to be equitable, disparities in budgets reflect persistent structural challenges.
Clearly, equality policies have begun to positively impact the distribution of grants, particularly selective grants, where no significant gender differences are observed.
4. Importance of a Structural Review
The correlation between higher budgets and greater overall grants in 2022 suggests that the grant system may favor projects with greater initial funding, which could put female directors at a disadvantage.
In order to avoid perpetuating historical inequalities, it is essential to review the criteria for allocating general grants.
Progress and Challenges:
Selective grant has proven to be an equitable and effective tool for gender-based resource distribution, setting an example of good practice within the ICAA.
Women-led projects continue to face significant barriers in obtaining larger initial budgets, which affects their opportunities for development and sustainability in the film industry.
5. Future lines of research.
It is recommended to implement policies that prioritize support for projects with less access to initial resources, thereby promoting real equity in terms of funding.
To conduct periodic studies to identify patterns of resource allocation, ensuring that progress toward equality is sustained over time.
To expand the analysis to other factors, such as the impact of funds received on the success of projects or the influence of the producer's gender, to better understand the dynamics of the industry.
To recognize and prioritize projects that address issues of social criticism and feminism as a way to promote inclusive representation in film narrative.
This comprehensive analysis highlights the achievements in terms of equity in ICAA grants but also underscores the need to continue working to close the persistent gaps in the initial budgets allocated to projects led by women.
6. REFERENCES
Arranz, F. (Dir.) (2010). Cine y género en España: una investigación empírica. Ediciones Cátedra.
Asociación de Mujeres Cineastas y de Medios Audiovisuales. (2021). Informe sobre la situación de las mujeres en la industria cinematográfica española.
Bollaín, I. (Directora). (2003). Te doy mis ojos [Película]. Producciones La Iguana S.L; Alta Producción.
Cabeza, A. (2016). Mujeres y cine en España: Discursos y prácticas. Editorial Síntesis.
Castro García, A. (2009). La representación de la mujer en el cine español de la Transición (1973-1982). KRK Ediciones.
Lauzen, M. M. (2020). The Celluloid Ceiling: Behind-the-Scenes Employment of Women on the Top 100, 250, and 500 Films of 2019. Center for the Study of Women in Television and Film.
Ley Orgánica 3/2007, de 22 de marzo, para la Igualdad efectiva de mujeres y hombres. 23 de marzo 2007. Boletín Oficial del Estado, No. 71. https://bit.ly/3WGfoBU
Meliveo Nogués, P., & Cristófol Rodríguez, C. (2022). Directoras de cine galardonadas en Premios Goya entre 2000 y 2020. Una aproximación de género a la situación de la mujer en la industria cinematográfica española. En L. Mañas, Mediaciones comunicativas (pp. 259-272). Thomson Reuters-Aranzadi.
Smith, S. L., Choueiti, M., & Pieper, K. (2013). Gender Inequality in 500 Popular Films: Examining On-Screen Portrayals and Behind-the-Scenes Employment Patterns in Motion Pictures Released between 2007-2012. Annenberg School for Communication & Journalism.
AUTHOR CONTRIBUTIONS, FUNDING AND ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
Conceptualization: González Osuna, Yolanda and Barrera Martínez, Enrique. Methodology: González Osuna, Yolanda and Barrera Martínez, Enrique. Software: González Osuna, Yolanda and Barrera Martínez, Enrique. Validation: González Osuna, Yolanda and Barrera Martínez, Enrique. Formal analysis: González Osuna, Yolanda and Barrera Martínez, Enrique. Data curation: González Osuna, Yolanda and Barrera Martínez, Enrique. Writing-Preparation of the original draft: González Osuna, Yolanda and Barrera Martínez, Enrique. Writing-Revision and Editing: González Osuna, Yolanda and Barrera Martínez, Enrique. Visualization: González Osuna, Yolanda and Barrera Martínez, Enrique. Supervision: González Osuna, Yolanda and Barrera Martínez, Enrique. Project management: González Osuna, Yolanda and Barrera Martínez, Enrique. All authors have read and accepted the published version of the manuscript: González Osuna, Yolanda and Barrera Martínez, Enrique.
AUTHOR/S:
Yolanda González Osuna
Profesor Asociado Complutense University
Yolanda González Osuna es Doctora en Comunicación Audiovisual por la Universidad Complutense de Madrid, Premio Extraordinario 2015 y Diplomada en Producción por la ECAM. Productora de Cine y Televisión, funda la productora Encanta Films S.L, con la que cosechan numerosos premios y nominaciones nacionales e internacionales, entre los que destacan trabajos como el cortometraje “Chatarra”, preseleccionado para los Oscar de Hollywood, y el Goya al mejor cortometraje Documental 2007 “Castañuela 70 el Teatro de lo prohibido”. Desde el 2020 es miembro de la Academia de Cine, ha sido Productora Ejecutiva y Directora de Producción de Largometrajes como “Un año en la Luna” y “El Idioma Imposible” y de Programas de Televisión como “Pesadilla en la Cocina” con Alberto Chicote.
Orcid ID: https://orcid.org/0009-0007-6693-4673
Enrique Barrera Martínez
Profesor Asociado UDEM Universidad de Monterrey
Enrique Barrera Martínez es arquitecto por la ETSAM UPM, director del grado de Diseño de Interiores de UDID desde los años 2012 a 2020. Desde el año 2022 hasta la actualidad es profesor asociado en la escuela de arquitectura y Ciencias del Hábitat de la UDEM de Monterrey. Ha diseñado las reformas de los restaurantes del programa de Televisión “Pesadilla en la Cocina” con Alberto Chicote durante las 5 primeras temporadas. También ha diseñado el restaurante del programa First Dates para cuatro. En 2021 crea la productora de cine In Cinema We Trust S.L.
Orcid ID: https://orcid.org/0009-0001-9134-1526