Equality and diversity in science was the focus of last week’s Policy Lunchbox, run monthly at Charles Darwin House by the BES and the Biochemical Society.

Sarah Hawkes, Head of Scientific Engagement at the Royal Society, gave a presentation on her work under the Society’s new 4 year programme focusing on removing the barriers to increasing diversity in the scientific workforce.

The science sector in the UK, and the Royal Society itself, have been the subject of criticism for the notable lack of women amongst their ranks, particularly in more senior positions. In the UK, men are six times more likely than women to work in science, technology, engineering or maths (STEM) subjects, and of the 46 Fellows appointed at the Royal Society in 2012, only two were women.

The RS’s new programme, funded by the UK Department for Business, Innovation and Skills, aims to address this gender imbalance – as well as tackling other issues of diversity incorporating ethnicity, disability and socio-economic status – across both academia and industry. The idea is to learn from and build upon the number of equality initiatives which already exist to work towards three objectives:
1. Defining and understanding the scientific workforce;
2. Identifying barriers to entry and progression within the scientific work force, which a view to removing them, and;
3. In the long-term, increasing the diversity of the scientific workforce
The programme will involve data gathering and a large scale policy study, significant work to engage with the scientific community, organising diversity events and activities, and engaging with the ATHENA swan initiative and actors within education.

The scheme has strong backing from Sir Paul Nurse, President of the Royal Society, who made a statement recently saying that ‘we must have an environment in which all scientists, including those from previously underrepresented groups, have an equal chance to excel’.

Much of the work so far has been to establish the programme and begin to embed it within the Royal Society’s work. An initial scoping study has been carried out to identify existing data on the diversity of the scientific workforce and knowledge gaps that need to be filled. As part of this work, the programme is exploring the possibility of joining up existing datasets to generate long-term trends which may indicate whether the suggestion of some commentators – that it is ‘just a matter of time’ before equality will come about in science anyway – is true.

A consultation and engagement conference held at the end of March also provided vital feedback from the scientific community identifying the barriers and issues people working in the field experience. Areas including careers guidance, career trajectories, improving awareness of STEM careers, the importance of role models and widening Athena SWAN were suggested and will be adopted to shape the RS programme’s work. Further consultation and a large scale policy study this summer will also investigate whether the diversity issues in science are replicated in other sectors and help identify evidence to make a ‘business case’ for improving diversity, such as an MIT study in America which suggested greater team diversity led to better innovation.
Consideration will also be given to different measures of ‘excellence’ within science, as women in particular find it challenging to maintain a reputation through publications due to factors including taking time off for maternity leave and loss of association with their publication record if they change their name when they get married.

The programme will focus initially on the academic sector, but, building on Ms Hawke’s previous experience working on the Athena SWAN Charter, it is hope the RS programme will collaborate with the Charter to broaden its scope beyond universities to pilot work within research institutes and, perhaps in the future, industry.

Of course, in addition to reaching out to pursue diversity externally, the Royal Society must address the significant gender imbalance within its own Fellowship which in the last 10 years, has elected only 43 women as Fellows out of a total of 438. Although low, this is an improvement compared to recent decades, and now with the significant support of the President Paul Nurse, Ms Hawkes feels progress will move faster. A major barrier to overcome is the fact that Fellows are elected based on nominations by existing Fellows, which means the demographic is likely to perpetuate without interventions.

Ms Hawkes suggested that Learned Societies can help the RS programme, and more broadly make progress with addressing diversity issues, by participating in satellite expert groups which the programme is hoping to establish and informing Ms Hawkes of their own diversity initiatives, or providing examples of role models and case studies. There may also be the opportunity to work collaboratively, to run joint mentoring schemes for example, and the RS may provide some funding for this.

See the BES website for information on the BES’s own Mentoring Scheme for Women in Ecology. More details of the Royal Society’s work on equality and diversity are available on their website.

Dr Nathalie Pettorelli, a postdoctoral researcher at the Institute of Zoology, a member of the BES and Associate Editor of the Journal of Applied Ecology – is one of this year’s four winners of the L’Oreal-UNESCO UK and Ireland For Women in Science Fellowship awards. Dr Pettorelli won the award in recognition of her research into the effectiveness of terrestrial protected areas in conserving the world’s major ecosystems.

The Fellowships have been designed to provide practical help for the winners to undertake research in their chosen fields. In total, over 900 women in 90 countries have been recognized for their research and received funding to further their studies. Past awardees include Professor Ada Yonath and Professor Elizabeth Blackburn who recieved Nobel Prizes in 2009 for their work in Chemistry and Medicine respectively.

Professor Dame Athene Donald, FRS, 2009 For Women in Science Laureate for Europe, who was recently made a Dame for her services to Physics, commented: “It is vitally important for aspiring scientists to have visible role models in science…I strongly believe that acknowledging and highlighting the pioneering work of female scientists will help encourage more and more women into science, which is why programmes like the L’Oreal-UNESCO For Women in Science awards that celebrate inspirational women in science, are so important.”

Julie McManus, Head of Scientific and Technical-Regulatory Affairs, L’Oréal UK and Ireland and 2010 jury member continues: “With the For Women in Science programme we hope to draw attention to the excellent work being undertaken by female scientists across the UK and Ireland, while also providing the financial support necessary to support women’s careers in science. Past recipients of the awards have gone on to make important scientific discoveries and win Nobel Prizes; we hope that seeing the success of these truly inspirational women will provide motivation for the next generation of UK’s female scientists.”

Science policy professionals met on Wednesday 3 March for a ‘Policy Lunchbox’ Seminar organised by the Biochemical Society and British Ecological Society. This seminar in the Policy Lunchbox series was led by Jane Butcher, Deputy Director, UK Resource Centre (UKRC) for Women in SET, on the topic of ‘Women in science: a policy perspective’. Jane’s presentation stressed the importance of maintaining the presence of the issues facing women in science on the agenda of the next Government, and how working collaboratively this might be achieved.

The vision of UKRC is that “by 2030 we will have an environment in UK Science, Engineering and Technology (SET) employment, research and policy making, in which women contribute to, participate in and share the benefit equally to their male counterparts”. The UKRC has recently published its Annual Review summarising its work and achievements over the past 18 months, including responding to consultations, providing briefings to parliamentarians and contributing to numerous policy initiatives.

This policy environment is highly complex: stereotyping and unconscious bias is brought about and reinforced by the employment life cycle. This includes inputs from society, education and employment policies and environments and life styles. Given this complexity, it is important to UKRC that encouragement of women in science is not just done from an early careers perspective, but looking towards the long term sustainability of increased numbers of women in SET – which includes the retention of those already employed in the sector.

The UKRC has six messages to the Government that would be crucial for building on the current momentum for change:
1. Leadership and top level support for change
2. Attracting and retaining women and girls to study STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering and Maths)
3. Making the most of the talents of UK’s trained and qualified people to build the workforce.
4. Make SET learning and employment free from gender stereotyping
5. Take measures to make equality in SET happen
6. Support and fund the UKRC in its work, and strengthen its role in leading, providing services, influencing and innovating.

Jane led the discussion on how these goals might be achieved, sharing the ways in which the UKRC is working towards them. The advantages of targets for the numbers of women in SET versus quotas were considered: although rigid quotas have been seen to work in Norway, for the moment they are seen to be unpalatable and supported targets may be more pragmatic.

The role that professional bodies and learned societies might play in supporting the adult careers strategy was discussed: UKRC view professional bodies as key stakeholders, who act as influencers, leaders and champions for the equality agenda. Yet at the same time, Jane mentioned that it was tricky to get these organisations to look reflexively at their own working environment and to what extent they implement equality policies. Jane discussed the idea that some organisations don’t know how to implement these policies and shared some of the initiatives that UKRC are engaged with. This includes the SPIDER (STEM Professional Institutions Diversity and Equality Resources project) network and incentives such as the SET Fair Standard, which recognises good practice. The group discussed how their own organisations had engaged with these policies, discussing the values of initiatives such as job shares and the value of encouraging a wider working environment that valued flexibility to both men and women.

Integrating science, education, employment and gender policies is at times difficult to reconcile coherently. It was agreed that it is sometimes difficult or felt as inappropriate to raise gender concerns in wider policy areas. Jane gave the example of the Research Excellence Framework as an example of why it was important to push the gender issue: the proposed system pushes more emphasis to impact and mobility, which could inadvertently disadvantage women. At the same time, the UKRC felt that more emphasis on the work environment in the funding assessment criteria would provide an incentive for higher education institutions in incorporate equality policy into their employment practices. It was argued that with key policy papers such as higher ambitions and innovation nation largely ignoring gender equality issues, it was all the more important to proactively introduce these issues to the agenda, rather than waiting to respond.

Collaboration could be one way to achieve sustainable change. This would also solve the issue of reconciling gender policy in science with the wider agenda. Furthermore, the Government needs to encourage coherence between the legislation and stakeholders, as well as the disparate Government departments responsible for science and gender policies. The group agreed that a figurehead within Government might be useful to champion change, bringing together other interested individuals within Parliament e.g. All Party Parliamentary Group on Women in Science.

Policy Lunchbox is an informal network of individuals working in science policy. The next meeting, ‘Science Policy in Europe‘ is on Wednesday 27th April.

Join the Policy Lunchbox mailing list.

The BES believes that better retention of women in ecology will lead to the creation of a more diverse, stimulating and talented research community, in an inclusive and positive working environment. Find out more about the Society’s mentoring scheme for women in ecology.

A HEFCE report reviewing equality and diversity in relation to the latest Research Assessment Exercise (RAE) has revealed that men were 40% more likely than women to be entered in the assessment. Black researchers of both genders had a 40% chance of selection, compared to 60% plus for researchers from other ethnic groups.

The HEFCE analysis suggests that the gender and ethnicity gap persists even after taking into account subject area. The disparity in ethnicity is more pronounced than in 2001.

The HEFCE report states; “”As with RAE 2001, having accounted for other measurable factors, differences between selection of men and women continue to be observed over the age range 30 to 50, despite the changes between RAE 2001 and RAE 2008 to promote equal opportunities…While this behaviour may be linked to selection bias resulting from age and gender, it could equally be a result of deeply rooted inequalities in the research careers of men and women.”

Commenting on the findings in relation to gender, Annette Williams, Director of the UK Resource Centre for Women in Science, Engineering and Technology, said that the blame lay with the selection process for the RAE. A review just completed by the Equality Challenge Unit sets out recommendations for changes to the selection process for the new Research Excellence Framework, the RAE’s successor.

It is anticipated that the REF will mandate greater consistency in relation to panels and sub-panels’ application of equal opportunities guidance. The REF is also expected to provide clearer information to assessors regarding how career breaks should be entered into the assessment.

Original article by Zoe Corbyn, Times Higher Education, 17 September 2009: Unequal Opportunities in Final RAE