Breaking barriers: ten essential steps to achieve gender equality in academia through scientific societies – Nature

 

Executive Summary

This report addresses the persistent gender gap in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM), a critical barrier to achieving the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), particularly SDG 5 (Gender Equality). It posits that scientific societies are pivotal institutions capable of driving gender equity through targeted collaboration, advocacy, and leadership. An analysis of gender representation on executive boards and the presence of dedicated gender equity groups within freshwater scientific societies reveals significant disparities, highlighting male-dominated leadership and a lack of institutional focus on inclusion. Drawing on a decade of experience from the Iberian Society of Limnology’s Gender & Science group, this report proposes a ten-step strategic framework to guide scientific societies in actively fostering gender equity. The framework outlines actionable steps, identifies potential obstacles, and calls upon these institutions to champion gender equality, thereby strengthening their contribution to SDG 4 (Quality Education), SDG 10 (Reduced Inequalities), and SDG 16 (Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions).

Introduction: Aligning Academic Equity with Sustainable Development Goals

The underrepresentation of women in STEM disciplines is a global issue that directly contravenes the principles of several Sustainable Development Goals. While women constitute only 32% of researchers worldwide, this disparity becomes more pronounced at senior academic levels, a phenomenon often described as the “Leaky Pipeline.” This trend undermines SDG 5 (Gender Equality) by limiting women’s participation and leadership in scientific innovation. Furthermore, it impacts SDG 4 (Quality Education) by failing to provide diverse role models and perpetuating systemic barriers within higher education.

The exclusion is not limited to women but extends to other marginalized groups, creating intersecting forms of discrimination that conflict with SDG 10 (Reduced Inequalities). The concept of a “Hostile Obstacle Course” more accurately describes the active, systemic barriers—from microaggressions to patriarchal violence—that push individuals from minoritized groups out of academia. Addressing these challenges requires the application of Justice, Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion (JEDI) principles to transform academic environments.

Scientific societies, as key platforms for knowledge transfer and community building, are uniquely positioned to act as agents of change. By adopting inclusive practices, they can strengthen their institutional integrity, aligning with SDG 16 (Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions), and catalyze the transformative changes needed to build a more equitable and sustainable scientific community.

Analysis of Gender Disparities in Freshwater Scientific Societies

A review of 34 international freshwater scientific societies was conducted to assess gender representation in leadership and the existence of institutional mechanisms for promoting equity, providing a sector-specific snapshot relevant to SDG 6 (Clean Water and Sanitation) and SDG 5 (Gender Equality).

Key Findings

• Leadership Imbalance: While women constituted over 50% of board members in 46% of the societies for which data was available, presidencies remained overwhelmingly male-dominated, with men holding the position in 73% of cases. This disparity in top-level leadership hinders progress towards Target 5.5 of SDG 5, which calls for women’s full and effective participation and equal opportunities for leadership.
• Lack of Institutional Structures: Only four of the 34 societies (12%) were found to have an active gender or JEDI (Justice, Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion) committee. This absence of formal structures indicates that gender equality is not a strategic priority for most societies, weakening their capacity as inclusive institutions under SDG 16.
• Geographical Disparities: The majority of societies were identified in Europe (45%), with only one society found in Africa. This highlights a broader inequality in the global scientific infrastructure, which can perpetuate scientific colonialism and limit diverse contributions to global challenges like water security (SDG 6).

The analysis concludes that despite their potential, freshwater scientific societies are not prioritizing gender equality. The lack of accessible information on their websites, the absence of dedicated JEDI committees, and the continued male dominance in presidencies underscore an urgent need for institutional reform to align with the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development.

A Strategic Framework for Achieving Gender Equality (SDG 5) in Scientific Societies

Based on a decade of practical experience, a ten-step “Theory of Change” is proposed to guide scientific societies toward becoming leaders in gender equality and inclusion. The framework is organized into four iterative phases designed to build sustainable institutional capacity.

Phase 1: Kick Off – Foundational Assessment

1. Mind the Gap: Conduct a thorough assessment of gender representation and biases within the society. This involves collecting demographic data on membership, leadership roles, and conference participation. This data-driven approach is essential for monitoring progress on SDG 5 and SDG 10.
2. Team Up: Establish a dedicated gender or JEDI committee. This formalizes the society’s commitment and creates an accountable body to advocate for JEDI principles, thereby strengthening the institution in line with SDG 16 and fostering partnerships as per SDG 17.

Phase 2: Empower – Building Capacity and Awareness

3. Raise Awareness: Engage the scientific community through seminars, reports, and mentorship programs that highlight gender disparities. This educational effort directly supports SDG 4 (Quality Education) by promoting learning about sustainable development and human rights.
4. Increase Visibility: Actively promote the achievements of women and other minoritized groups. Actions include creating expert directories, establishing awards named after influential women, and showcasing historical contributions to provide role models and combat historical exclusion, contributing to SDG 5.
5. Provide Training: Develop and disseminate educational resources on gender bias, peer review, and inclusive leadership. Such training builds the capacity of members to create equitable environments, advancing both SDG 4 and SDG 5.

Phase 3: Build Up – Implementing Practical Measures

6. Embrace Inclusive Language: Develop and enforce guidelines for inclusive communication in all society publications and events. This fosters a respectful environment and supports the goals of SDG 10.
7. Incorporate Gender Equity Criteria for Resource Allocation: Integrate equity criteria into the evaluation of grants, awards, and scholarships. This ensures fair distribution of resources and opportunities, directly addressing targets within SDG 5 and SDG 10.
8. Promote Gender-Balanced Events: Ensure diverse representation among speakers and scientific committees at conferences. Implementing family-friendly policies and a clear code of conduct makes events more accessible and safer, advancing SDG 5.
9. Develop Protection Measures: Establish confidential reporting channels and clear protocols for addressing misconduct, harassment, and discrimination. This is fundamental to ensuring access to justice and building accountable institutions as outlined in SDG 16.

Phase 4: Sustain – Ensuring Long-Term Impact

10. Foster Actions’ Continuity: Institutionalize JEDI principles through formal policies, regular progress evaluations, and dedicated funding. Building alliances with other societies strengthens these efforts (SDG 17) and ensures that the commitment to equality becomes a permanent feature of the institution (SDG 16). Progress should be tracked using clear indicators on representation, advancement, and funding distribution.

Case Study: The Iberian Society of Limnology’s Contribution to SDG 5 and SDG 16

The Gender & Science group of the Iberian Society of Limnology (G&S-AIL), established in 2014, serves as a practical example of implementing the proposed framework. The group’s work is structured around four key objectives that align with the SDGs:

• Observation and Research: The group functions as an observer of gender bias, conducting and publishing research on barriers faced by women in freshwater sciences. This work provides the evidence base needed to drive policy change, supporting the development of effective institutions (SDG 16).
• Visibility and Action: Through initiatives like the ‘Women in Limnology’ exhibition and the development of educational materials, the group increases the visibility of women scientists, contributing to SDG 4 and SDG 5.
• Institutional Impact: The group’s advocacy has led to tangible outcomes, including improved gender balance in plenary talks at AIL conferences (from 0% women in 2006 to 57% in 2020) and the integration of gender equity criteria into AIL’s grants and scholarships.
• Ethical Governance: An internal self-evaluation confirmed the group’s strong alignment with JEDI principles, demonstrating a commitment to building a collaborative, empathetic, and equitable work environment. This focus on internal governance models the principles of inclusive and accountable institutions (SDG 16).

Conclusion: Advancing the 2030 Agenda through Inclusive Scientific Institutions

Gender bias in academia remains a significant obstacle to sustainable development. Scientific societies have a critical responsibility to dismantle these barriers and foster inclusive environments that empower all members to thrive. This report demonstrates that while significant gender disparities persist in leadership and institutional priorities, a clear path forward exists. The proposed ten-step framework provides a replicable model for societies to become proactive agents of change, moving beyond rhetoric to implement concrete actions.

By establishing dedicated JEDI committees and systematically integrating equity into their governance, societies can catalyze transformative change. This bottom-up approach not only advances SDG 5 (Gender Equality) but also strengthens institutions (SDG 16), promotes quality education (SDG 4), and reduces systemic inequalities (SDG 10). In an era where fundamental rights are under threat, the creation of inclusive and just academic communities is more urgent than ever. It is through such disciplined and collaborative efforts that scientific societies can help build the equitable and sustainable future envisioned by the SDGs.

Analysis of Sustainable Development Goals in the Article

1. Which SDGs are addressed or connected to the issues highlighted in the article?

The article primarily addresses issues related to gender equality and the empowerment of women in the scientific community, particularly within STEM fields. It also touches upon broader themes of quality education, reducing inequalities for all marginalized groups, and the role of institutions and partnerships in achieving these goals. Based on this, the following SDGs are relevant:

• SDG 5: Gender Equality – This is the central theme of the article. It directly discusses the gender gap in STEM, the underrepresentation of women in leadership positions within scientific societies, and proposes concrete actions to achieve gender equity and equality.
• SDG 4: Quality Education – The article connects gender disparity to the academic career pipeline, starting from higher education. It notes that while women achieve parity at the doctoral level, they face significant barriers to career advancement. The proposed actions include developing educational resources and training programs to combat gender bias in academia, which aligns with ensuring inclusive and equitable quality education.
• SDG 10: Reduced Inequalities – While the focus is on gender, the article explicitly extends its analysis and recommendations to other “minoritised” and “marginalized groups,” referencing intersectionality and the need to address discrimination based on race, ethnicity, sexual orientation, and disability. It advocates for Justice, Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion (JEDI) principles to reduce inequalities for all.
• SDG 17: Partnerships for the Goals – The article emphasizes the role of scientific societies as “agents of change” that can foster collaboration and build alliances to promote gender equity. It highlights the importance of both bottom-up initiatives (like the G&S-AIL group) and top-down institutional support, embodying the spirit of multi-stakeholder partnerships to achieve sustainable development.

2. What specific targets under those SDGs can be identified based on the article’s content?

Based on the article’s detailed discussion, several specific SDG targets can be identified:

1. Under SDG 5 (Gender Equality):
   • Target 5.1: End all forms of discrimination against all women and girls everywhere. The article describes the “Hostile Obstacle Course” women face in academia, which includes “microaggressions, patriarchal behaviors,” “assault and sexual harassment,” and other forms of discrimination that actively push them out of their careers.
   • Target 5.5: Ensure women’s full and effective participation and equal opportunities for leadership at all levels of decision-making in political, economic and public life. The article directly analyzes this by examining “gender representation on executive boards” of freshwater scientific societies. It finds that while board membership is approaching balance, “the presidency remained male-dominated (73% of the cases),” highlighting a lack of equal opportunity for top leadership roles.
   • Target 5.c: Adopt and strengthen sound policies and enforceable legislation for the promotion of gender equality and the empowerment of all women and girls at all levels. The core of the article is the proposal of a “Theory of Change” with ten actionable steps for scientific societies. These steps, such as developing codes of conduct, incorporating equity criteria for resource allocation, and creating protection measures, represent the adoption of sound policies to promote gender equality within these institutions.
2. Under SDG 4 (Quality Education):
   • Target 4.5: By 2030, eliminate gender disparities in education and ensure equal access to all levels of education and vocational training… The article discusses the “Leaky Pipeline” phenomenon, where women, despite achieving near-parity at the “doctoral level (48% of doctoral graduates are women),” are progressively lost at higher stages of the academic career path. The proposed solutions, like creating teaching packages to increase women role models, directly address eliminating disparities in higher education and scientific training environments.
3. Under SDG 10 (Reduced Inequalities):
   • Target 10.2: By 2030, empower and promote the social, economic and political inclusion of all, irrespective of age, sex, disability, race, ethnicity, origin, religion or economic or other status. The article consistently broadens its scope beyond a binary gender analysis, stating that inequalities also exist for “people marginalized by age, race, ethnicity, gender identity, sexual orientation, religion, and physical or mental disabilities.” It champions the implementation of JEDI (Justice, Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion) principles to foster the inclusion of all.
   • Target 10.3: Ensure equal opportunity and reduce inequalities of outcome… by eliminating discriminatory… policies and practices… The ten steps proposed in the article are a direct roadmap for eliminating discriminatory practices within scientific societies. Actions like promoting inclusive language, ensuring gender-balanced events, and equitable resource allocation are designed to reduce inequalities of outcome for women and other marginalized groups in academia.
4. Under SDG 17 (Partnerships for the Goals):
   • Target 17.17: Encourage and promote effective public, public-private and civil society partnerships… The article positions scientific societies (civil society organizations) as key platforms for change. The case study of the G&S-AIL group collaborating with other societies like SIBECOL and AEET, and the call for building “alliances with other scientific societies,” are direct examples of promoting effective partnerships to advance a common goal.

3. Are there any indicators mentioned or implied in the article that can be used to measure progress towards the identified targets?

Yes, the article mentions and implies several quantitative and qualitative indicators that can be used to measure progress. Step 10, “Foster actions’ continuity,” explicitly lists several indicators:

• Gender representation in leadership: The article provides a direct metric by analyzing the “percentage of men and women representation across president and board members” in scientific societies. This can be tracked over time to measure progress towards Target 5.5.
• Career advancement and retention: The article suggests tracking the “percentage of women and minoritised groups, as well as their retention rates within the society over time” and monitoring “the career progression of these groups, including promotions and tenure rate.” This serves as an indicator for Targets 4.5 and 10.3.
• Equitable funding distribution: An indicator mentioned is to “assess the allocation of research grants and funding awarded to women and underrepresented researchers compared to men.” This measures progress in reducing inequalities of outcome (Target 10.3).
• Representation in scientific output and events: The article suggests examining “authorship patterns in research publications” and monitoring “the gender distribution in various aspects of scientific conferences, including presentations, plenary sessions, and the scientific committee.” This provides a measure of participation and visibility (Target 5.5).
• Policy and institutional change: The presence of “gender or JEDI committees” is used as an indicator of institutional commitment. The article reports that “only four out of 34 societies have established” such committees, providing a baseline for measurement (Target 5.c).
• Safety and accountability: The article suggests an “incident assessment” by comparing “the frequency and nature of reported incidents before and after implementing the previous steps” to evaluate the effectiveness of protection measures like codes of conduct and “Violet spots” (Target 5.1).

4. Summary Table of SDGs, Targets, and Indicators

SDGs	Targets	Indicators Identified in the Article
SDG 5: Gender Equality	5.1: End all forms of discrimination against women. 5.5: Ensure women’s full participation and equal opportunities for leadership. 5.c: Adopt and strengthen policies for gender equality.	– Frequency and nature of reported incidents of harassment and discrimination. – Percentage of women in leadership positions (presidents, board members) in scientific societies. – Proportion of women as plenary speakers and on scientific committees at conferences. – Number of scientific societies with established gender/JEDI committees. – Adoption of formal codes of conduct and gender equity criteria for awards/grants.
SDG 4: Quality Education	4.5: Eliminate gender disparities and ensure equal access to all levels of education and vocational training.	– Retention rates of women at different academic career stages (post-doctorate). – Rate of promotion and tenure for women in academia. – Development and implementation of educational materials addressing gender bias in teaching.
SDG 10: Reduced Inequalities	10.2: Empower and promote the inclusion of all. 10.3: Ensure equal opportunity and reduce inequalities of outcome.	– Data collection on representation of other marginalized groups (beyond gender). – Allocation of research grants and funding to women and underrepresented researchers. – Analysis of authorship patterns in publications to ensure equitable representation. – Survey feedback on perceptions of equity and inclusion within the society.
SDG 17: Partnerships for the Goals	17.17: Encourage and promote effective civil society partnerships.	– Number of alliances and collaborations formed between scientific societies to promote JEDI principles. – Existence and activity level of internal committees (e.g., G&S-AIL group) dedicated to gender equity.

Source: nature.com