Facts and figures lead the way: addressing gender (in)equality in academia

According to EIGE’s gender equality index 2025, it will take more than 50 years to reach full equality in the European Union at the current pace of change. The research sector is included in this data and Elsevier’s report on gender and diversity in research sends a clear message: gender inequality in academia is a fact; not a feeling. If we want to address inequalities, pay gaps, uneven gender distribution in leadership positions and decision-making, actions need to rest on facts and figures.

One way to design and structure action is through gender equality plans, also known as “GEPs”. The Horizon 2020 MINDtheGEPs project collected qualitative and quantitative data from 7 different research organisations in Italy, Poland, Serbia, Spain and Ireland, and designed actions that have been formalized and sustained through such GEPs, which are now a formal requirement for receiving Horizon funding.

The efforts resulted in a book – Gender (in)equality in research and science – that offers a comparative analysis of gender inequalities in science and research across different organisational and European national contexts, based on this data. Together, the authors examine how organisational cultures and policies affect equality, and explore the logics that shape gendered careers, lived experiences and the way we do science. Inequality in the workplace is not just about advancing careers. There are organisational and professional structures, some specific to academia, encompassing cultures and traditions that can both help and hinder career development. Women are underrepresented in decision-making processes in research performing organisations.

Despite an increasing number of women entering research careers and earning PhD degrees, few of them end up in leadership roles or as full professors. MINDtheGEPs designed actions aiming to deconstruct the gendered bias that men make better leaders, and has worked to introduce gender equality targets in decision-making. Training initiatives have been designed to target these challenges, develop skills development and change organisational culture.

The book puts emphasis on data that in turn can drive the development of policy. It is divided into three parts. The first paints a quantitative portrait of the macro and meso contexts, and gendered policy perceptions in research organisations in Italy, Poland, Ireland, Spain and Serbia. The second part is based on qualitative data, focusing on the context where research careers are built. The book addresses the lived lived experiences of precarity, glass ceilings, the balance between work and raising a family, and how excellence is defined and experienced. The third part contextualises critical issues and trajectories, covering the experience of being a researcher, mentoring, and provides a proposal for gendering science and changing the system. This is where you can find my contribution – a chapter focusing on good practice for developing gender equality plans – which is written together with Claudia Colonnello and Federico Luigi Marta from the Rome-based social research institute Knowledge and Innovation (K&I), and Federica Turco from the Univeriity of Turin. The book is edited by MINDtheGEPs coordinator Cristina Solera and Manuela Naldini from the University of Turin’s Research Centre for Women’s and Gender Studies (Cirsde). They provide an introduction to how gender (in)equality can be studied in scientific and research contexts. 

There is another important reason to strive for gender equality in science and research: it leads to better science. Research teams with a mix of genders produce more novel and higher-impact scientific ideas. Through a train-the-trainers approach, MINDtheGEPs has educated colleagues on how to view research results through a gender lens, understanding how gender can have an influence on individuals, society, and science. By embedding gender analysis in research (and publication), we can mitigate at least some aspects of bias and discrimination. In short, incorporating different perspectives can enrich scientific inquiry.

Want to read more? Here is a link to the MINDtheGEPs book: Gender (in)equality in research and science.

Solera, C., & Naldini, M. (Eds.). (2026). Gender (in)equality in research and science. Edward Elgar Publishing. DOI: 10.4337/9781035345717

This post in Swedish