This is a sel -a chi ed e sion o an o iginal a icle. This e sion
may di e om he o iginal in pagina ion and ypog aphic de ails.
Au ho (s):
Ti le:
Yea :
Ve sion:
Copy igh :
Righ s:
Righ s u l:
Please ci e he o iginal e sion:
CC BY 4.0
h ps://c ea i ecommons.o g/licenses/by/4.0/
Policy p oposals o p omo e inclusion o ca egi e s in he esea ch unding sys em
© 2024 To es, Collins, He z and Liukkonen.
Published e sion
To es, Isabel L.; Collins, Ray en-Nikki a; He z, Anaelle; Liukkonen, Ma a
To es, I. L., Collins, R.-N., He z, A., & Liukkonen, M. (2024). Policy p oposals o p omo e
inclusion o ca egi e s in he esea ch unding sys em. F on ie s in Educa ion, 9, A icle
1472517. h ps://doi.o g/10.3389/ educ.2024.1472517
2024
F on ie s in Educa ion 01 on ie sin.o g
Policy p oposals o p omo e
inclusion o ca egi e s in he
esea ch unding sys em
IsabelL.To es
1*, Ray en-Nikki aCollins
2, AnaelleHe z 3 and
Ma aLiukkonen
4
1 Mo he s in Science, Mon pellie , F ance, 2 Depa men o Ana omy and Neu obiology, Bos on
Uni e si y School o Medicine, Bos on, MA, Uni ed S a es, 3 Depa men o Physics, Uni e si y o
To on o, To on o, ON, Canada, 4 Depa men o Biological and En i onmen al Sciences, Uni e si y o
Jy äskylä, Jy äskylä, Finland
Resea ch unding is c i ical o scien i ic p oduc ion and ca ee ad ancemen
in science, echnology, enginee ing, ma hema ics, and medicine (STEMM). The
COVID-19 pandemic has unmasked a deeply lawed esea ch unding sys em
iddled by inequi able policies, biased e alua ions, and a lack o anspa ency
and accoun abili y. While mos scien is s we e a ec ed by he pandemic o
some ex en , e idence shows ha women wi h ca egi ing esponsibili ies we e
disp opo iona ely impac ed, wi h long- e m e ec s on hei ca ee s. Howe e ,
despi e calls o change by scien is s globally, whose ca ee s depend la gely on
unding success, decision-make s ha e made li le o no e o o e o m a unding
sys em ha ma ginalises a la ge p opo ion o esea che s, including women,
and especially mo he s. He e, we e iew he cu en li e a u e on gende bias in
he STEMM unding p ocess and p opose a se o speci ic, ac ionable policies
o p omo e ca egi e inclusion and close he gende gap in esea ch unding.
KEYWORDS
science policy, mo he hood, ca egi ing, gende bias, esea ch unding, ma e nal wall,
mo he hood penal y, wo k-li e balance
In oduc ion
Resea ch unding is c i ical o scien i ic p oduc ion and ca ee ad ancemen in science,
echnology, enginee ing, ma hema ics, and medicine (STEMM) academia. Secu ing esea ch
g an s no only p o ides essen ial esou ces o conduc scien i ic esea ch, bu also imp o es
chances o p omo ion o senio academic and esea ch posi ions (Jebsen e al., 2020). Funding
success is shown o inc ease he impac and numbe o pee - e iewed publica ions (Heya d
and Ho en o , 2021; Hussinge and Ca alho, 2021), p omo e collabo a ion (Pina e al., 2019;
Da ies e al., 2022), and boos scien i ic epu a ion and isibili y (Bloch e al., 2014). In
addi ion, being awa ded a esea ch g an inc eases he p obabili y o ob aining u u e unding,
o en e e ed o as he Ma hew e ec o accumula ed ad an age (Bloch e al., 2014; Jebsen
e al., 2022). Ex e nal esea ch g an s awa ded in compe i i e unding schemes such as he
Eu opean Resea ch Council (ERC) ha e become an indispensable unding sou ce o public
esea ch ins i u ions o e he pas decades (Lepo i e al., 2007), u he emphasising he
impo ance o unding success o a esea che ’s hi ing, p omo ion, and enu e po en ial.
This eliance on g an unding o ca ee p og ession pu s emendous p essu e on
esea che s o in es mos o hei ime on w i ing and applying o g an s and o dis ega d
o he impo an aspec s o hei jobs, as well as hei pe sonal wellbeing (Ha ch and Cu y,
2020). The excessi e adminis a i e wo kload o g an applica ions, combined wi h hei low
success a es (e.g., ERC S a ing G an success a e was 14.2% in 2024, o o he examples see
OPEN ACCESS
EDITED BY
Ad iana Banks on,
AAAS STPF/AGCT Cong essional Policy
Fellow, Uni edS a es
REVIEWED BY
Mis y Heggeness,
Uni e si y o Kansas, Uni edS a es
B iana Mohan,
Uni e si y o Texas MD Ande son Cance
Cen e , Uni edS a es
*CORRESPONDENCE
Isabel L. To es
[email p o ec ed]
RECEIVED 29 July 2024
ACCEPTED 07 No embe 2024
PUBLISHED 16 Decembe 2024
CITATION
To es IL, Collins R-N, He z A and
Liukkonen M (2024) Policy p oposals o
p omo e inclusion o ca egi e s in he
esea ch unding sys em.
F on . Educ. 9:1472517.
doi: 10.3389/ educ.2024.1472517
COPYRIGHT
© 2024 To es, Collins, He z and Liukkonen.
This is an open-access a icle dis ibu ed
unde he e ms o he C ea i e Commons
A ibu ion License (CC BY). The use,
dis ibu ion o ep oduc ion in o he o ums is
pe mi ed, p o ided he o iginal au ho (s) and
he copy igh owne (s) a e c edi ed and ha
he o iginal publica ion in his jou nal is ci ed,
in acco dance wi h accep ed academic
p ac ice. No use, dis ibu ion o ep oduc ion
is pe mi ed which does no comply wi h
hese e ms.
TYPE Re iew
PUBLISHED 16 Decembe 2024
DOI 10.3389/ educ.2024.1472517
To es e al. 10.3389/ educ.2024.1472517
F on ie s in Educa ion 02 on ie sin.o g
S adma k e al., 2020) and a leng hy pee - e iew e alua ion p ocess
ha lacks anspa ency and objec i i y (Recio-Saucedo e al., 2022),
add up o an ex emely ine icien and inequi able unding sys em ha
penalises a la ge p opo ion o scien is s wi h subs an ial p oduc i i y
and pe sonal cos s. These endu ing p oblems ha e led o ou c ies by
esea che s globally denouncing unding sys em laws and asking
unding agencies o imp o e hei p ac ices and e o m he g an
selec ion p ocess, o example, in ini ia i es such as he San F ancisco
Decla a ion on Resea ch Assessmen (Bladek, 2014, see Box 1).
Impo an ly, ele an s a is ics ac oss coun ies and disciplines
e eal a pe sis en gende gap in esea ch unding, bo h in awa d
success a es and in he amoun o unding alloca ed (Husu and de
Che eigné, 2010; Ranga e al., 2012; an de Lee and Elleme s, 2015;
Jebsen e al., 2020; Wi eman e al., 2019; Schmaling and Gallo, 2023).
Gende di e ences in esea ch unding a e ypically explained by he
lowe numbe o women applying o he awa ds, pa icula ly o mid-
and ad anced-ca ee g an s (Jebsen e al., 2020). Howe e , as unding
agencies began disclosing gende disagg ega ed s a is ics o hei
awa d success a es due o g owing p essu es o p omo e di e si y,
equali y and inclusion (DEI), a clea pic u e s a ed o eme ge
e ealing pe asi e unding inequi ies ha hold back emale scien is s
globally (Husu and de Che eigné, 2010; Ranga e al., 2012; an de Lee
and Elleme s, 2015; Wi eman e al., 2019), and pa icula ly women
o colou (Chen e al., 2022), ul ima ely con ibu ing o he leade ship
and sala y gende gap in STEMM academia.
Gende bias in esea ch unding
A su ge o esea ch in e es in he opic o gende inequi y in
esea ch unding was igge ed in he ea ly 2000s by he publica ion
o da a showing ha women we e e alua ed mo e ha shly–and male
achie emen s we e o e es ima ed–in g an pee - e iew e alua ions o
he Swedish Medical Resea ch Council (Wenne ås and Wold, 1997).
In he ollowing decades, se e al s udies con olling o esea ch
p oposal quali y and applican calib e p o ided u he e idence o
gende bias in he g an e alua ion p ocess ac oss se e al Eu opean
(Husu and de Che eigné, 2010; Ranga e al., 2012; an de Lee and
Elleme s, 2015; Bianchini e al., 2022), No h Ame ican (Ley and
Hamil on, 2008; Tamblyn e al., 2018; Rope , 2019; Wi eman e al.,
2019) and Aus alian na ional unding agencies (Bo ge and Pu on,
2022). Fo emale and male applican s wi h equi alen ack eco ds
and esea ch p ojec quali y, women we e less likely o be unded and
ecei ed lowe sco es om ex e nal e iewe s and selec ion panels.
Fo example, a na u al expe imen a he Canadian Ins i u es o Heal h
Resea ch showed ha p oposals e alua ed based on he esea ch
p ojec we e unded oughly in equal p opo ions be ween gende s,
bu when he e iew was ocused on assessing he applican , men we e
1.4 imes mo e likely o ecei e unding han hei emale coun e pa s
(Tamblyn e al., 2018). In a esea ch conso ia pan-Eu opean unding
scheme, applica ions om conso ia wi h a highe p opo ion o
emale leade s we e mo e likely o ecei e un a ou able e alua ions
bo h om ex e nal e iewe s and expe selec ion panels (Bianchini
e al., 2022).
In ligh o hese indings, se e al unding agencies such as he
ERC and he Swedish Resea ch Council (Ve enskaps åde ) ha e
a emp ed o co ec hese inequi ies and made some p og ess in
achie ing gende -equal awa d success a es ( a io o applican numbe
s. awa d numbe ). Howe e , hese e o s may conceal pe sis en
unequal pee - e iew e alua ions, ins ead o e lec ing a e i able
imp o emen in elimina ing gende bias in he g an alloca ion
p ocess. Indeed, a ecen analysis o unded and un unded g an
applica ions o a unding scheme o he Du ch Resea ch Council
(NWO) showed ha selec ion panels awa ded unding o women who
had ecei ed un ai un a ou able sco es om ex e nal e iewe s o
“co ec ” hei biased e alua ions (Bol e al., 2022). These indings
aise wo impo an poin s: (1) unding agencies a e aking insu icien
measu es o e adica e gende bias in he g an e alua ion p ocess; and
(2) some unding bodies a e e ec i ely applying implici gende
quo as o ec i y hese gende biases. While gende quo as a e an
e ec i e and necessa y ool o co ec gende biases and inc ease
women’s ep esen a ion in STEMM, esea ch unde s mus
simul aneously add ess he unde lying issues and commi o
abolishing unconscious bias a e e y s age o he unding p ocess.
The ma e nal wall d i es he STEMM
leaky pipeline
Ma e ni y bias is he s onges o m o gende bias (Pain e e al.,
2012). G owing e idence shows ha sys emic ba ie s ela ed o
mo he hood, collec i ely known as ‘ma e nal wall’ o ‘mo he hood
penal y’, a e widesp ead in STEMM (Villablanca e al., 2011; Mason
e al., 2013; Cech and Blai -Loy, 2019; Moo s e al., 2022). These
ba ie s con ibu e o he STEMM ‘leaky pipeline’ phenomenon,
which desc ibes he g adual decline in women’s wo k o ce
pa icipa ion a a ious ca ee s ages (Di Ba olo and To es, 2024).
The pic u e is clea e han e e : he STEMM sec o , and academia
in pa icula , is incompa ible wi h ca egi ing. A ecen s udy showed
ha 42% o mo he s and 15% o a he s in he Uni edS a es lea e
ull- ime STEMM employmen wi hin 3 yea s o ha ing child en
(Cech and Blai -Loy, 2019), and ou own da a collec ed in a global
su ey u he e ealed ha hese ends a e global (commen ed in
Powell, 2021). These ala ming s a is ics p o ide e idence ha
scien is s wi h ca egi ing esponsibili ies ace signi ican
ma ginalisa ion in he STEMM sec o , and mo he s a e
disp opo iona ely a ec ed. Howe e , he acknowledgmen o he
ma e nal wall by he scien i ic communi y is e y ecen , and he
BOX 1 Ini ia i es o call o a e o m o he unding sys em.
To es e al. 10.3389/ educ.2024.1472517
F on ie s in Educa ion 03 on ie sin.o g
de elopmen and implemen a ion o e ec i e ca egi ing policies is
sca ce (UK Resea ch and Inno a ion, 2020).
Why a e mo he s lea ing he STEMM wo k o ce? STEMM is a
adi ionally male-domina ed sec o and ma e ni y bias is i e and
no malised in he academic communi y. Academic mo he s a e less
likely o ge enu e han a he s o hei childless pee s (Wol inge
e al., 2008; Mason e al., 2013) and su e a sala y penal y a e
becoming pa en s, while men ecei e a “ a he hood p emium”
(Kelly and G an , 2012; Beu el and Schlei e , 2021). Mo e sub le
ma e ni y biases may come in he o m o assump ions. Employe s
may exclude mo he s om ca ee -ad ancemen oppo uni ies
because hey assume hey a e no a ailable, o en wi h bene olen
in en ions (Williams, 2005; S aniscuaski e al., 2023). Fo academic
mo he s, his ypically means no being in i ed o pa icipa e in
esea ch p ojec s, con e ences, o mee ings/e en s a e s anda d
wo king hou s o which in ol e a elling. Mo he hood has also
been associa ed wi h a educ ion in scien i ic p oduc i i y in a
hand ul o in a-na ional and ield-speci ic s udies (Sidhu e al.,
2009), bu he unde lying mechanisms emain elusi e (Mo gan
e al., 2021; Zheng e al., 2022). As a esul o hese a i ions, emale
schola s a e mo e likely o delay o enounce pa en hood and ha e
ewe child en han hei male coun e pa s (Mason e al., 2013;
Mo gan e al., 2021).
S udies ha e pe sis en ly ound s ong amily–wo k con lic in
academia (Fox e al., 2011; Mille and Riley, 2021). Childca e is a ask
p edominan ly pe o med by women, including among academics
(Jolly e  al., 2014; McCu cheon and Mo ison, 2016). Due o he
addi ional wo kload a home, o en e e ed o as he “second shi ”
(He z, 1990), mo he s ypically ha e less ime o esea ch han hei
pee s. As a esul , hey may o e compensa e by inc easing hei
e iciency and ex ending hei (unpaid) wo king hou s (Kmec, 2013;
Sallee e al., 2015). These a emp s o ‘ca ch up’ inc ease s ess le els and
a igue, e en ually pushing mo he s o make he inexo able choice
be ween amily and ca ee o a oid bu nou (Nicholls e al., 2022).
Being he p ima y ca egi e means ha wi hou adequa e childca e
suppo , mo he s ha e o becon inuously a ailable o ca e o hei
child en, a he expense o hei ca ee and pe sonal wellbeing
(Ruppanne e  al., 2018). The COVID-19 pandemic exposed and
magni ied hese longs anding inequi ies ha un ai ly disad an age
emale scien is s who a e ca egi e s (Blowe s e al., 2022). As schools
and dayca e p o ide s closed du ing lockdowns, women s uggled o
balance hei esea ch and eaching oles wi h homeschooling,
childca e, household cho es and/o ca ing o an elde ly o ch onically
ill amily membe , because hei male pa ne s we e no doing hei ai
sha e o ca egi ing and domes ic labou (Heo e al., 2022; K ukowski
e al., 2022). Compounding his si ua ion, an inc ease in adminis a i e
and eaching wo kloads caused by he shi om in-pe son o emo e/
hyb id eaching disp opo iona ely impac ed emale academics, as hey
ypically ake on mo e eaching, men o ing, and adminis a i e
un emune a ed labou han hei male pee s (Babcock e al., 2017;
O’Mea a e al., 2017; Collins e al., 2021). These p essu es caused a
well- epo ed decline in manusc ip and g an applica ion submissions
o women, while men inc eased hei scien i ic p oduc i i y (Ande sen
e al., 2020; Vincen -Lama e e al., 2020; Mu ic e al., 2021; Squazzoni
e al., 2021; Blowe s e al., 2022). Mo he s o colou abso bed he mos
ex ao dina y pandemic cos s (S aniscuaski e al., 2021). As delaying
publica ions and missing g an ounds lowe s he chances o being
awa ded a esea ch g an in subsequen unding oppo uni ies (Jebsen
e al., 2022), he pandemic has u he damaged women’s compe i i e
ad an age and widened he gende gap in STEMM academia.
Gende and ca egi ing in esea ch
unding policy
The COVID-19 pandemic showed ha mo he s a e p ima y
ca egi e s by de aul , no by choice. Women a e o ced by socie al,
cul u al, and s uc u al cons ain s (e.g., lack o a o dable childca e
p o ide s) o be he p ima y ca egi e and sel -sac i ice o hei amily
(Ruppanne e al., 2021; Docka-Filipek and S one, 2021). Ye , his is
only he ip o he icebe g. The ma e nal wall is complex and
mul i ace ed, and i s impac on women’s ca ee ad ancemen is
unde es ima ed in STEMM academia. Fo example, he e is a as body
o li e a u e add essing gende bias and he ‘glass ceiling’ e ec in
academia, while much less esea ch a en ion has been paid o he
ma e nal wall (Williams, 2005; Jackson e  al., 2014). The las wo
decades ha e seen an inc easing demand o unding agencies o
commission mo e esea ch in o imp o ing e iciency and ai ness in
he g an selec ion p ocess (Wallon e al., 2015; Recio-Saucedo e al.,
2022). As e idence accumula es indica ing ha he ma e nal wall is a
c i ical d i e o he gende gap in STEMM, hose esea ch e o s
should examine he expe iences o mo he s wi hou discoun ing hei
in e sec ional iden i ies, such as ace/e hnici y (Bhopal and Hende son,
2019; McFa land e al., 2019; Kozlowski and Mon oe-Whi e, 2022),
gende iden i y and sexual o ien a ion (Cech and Waidzunas, 2021),
and (dis)abili y (Pe e son, 2021). Equally, esea ch unde s should
begin enac ing policies o imp o e hei p ac ices and elimina e gende
inequi ies and in e sec ional bias. Weha e de eloped an ac ion plan
o unding agencies ha ou lines speci ic, ac ionable s a egies o close
he gende gap in esea ch unding and p omo e inclusion o ca egi e s,
pa icula ly mo he s (To es e al., 2023). Nea ly all ecommenda ions
in his ac ion plan a e e e enced o simila p ac ices cu en ly being
implemen ed in agencies wo ldwide, showing ha hey a e achie able.
Below wediscuss he majo ca ee obs acles acing mo he s in STEMM
and explain some o he s a egies wep opose in he ac ion plan o
emo e hose ba ie s (To es e al., 2023) (see Table1).
Ma e ni y bias: accoun abili y and ac ion o
c ea e a e i able me i oc a ic sys em
Despi e g owing awa eness, modes e o s ha e been made o
ackle gende bias in he g an selec ion p ocess and he e icacy o
cu en in e en ions emains unclea . Mo eo e , o ou knowledge,
only one s udy has (indi ec ly) analysed ma e ni y bias in esea ch
unding (Al a ez e al., 2019), inding ha language ela ed o amily,
gende , and age was p edominan ly used in women’s e alua ions in he
Clinical Scien is De elopmen Awa d scheme o he Do is Duke
Founda ion (Uni ed S a es). A subconscious awa eness o ma e ni y
bias may cause women o a oid men ioning hei ma e ni y lea es and
pa en al s a us in job and unding applica ions o ea o ca ee
penal ies (Co ell e al., 2007), hus c ea ing an un ai disad an age,
as publica ion gaps a e le unexplained. The e has been a shi in hese
p ac ices in ecen yea s, howe e , as mo e unding agencies now
allow applican s o add pa en al lea e b eaks o hei CVs and explain
p oduc i i y gaps. I is unclea hough whe he e iewe s ake hese
To es e al. 10.3389/ educ.2024.1472517
F on ie s in Educa ion 04 on ie sin.o g
ca ee in e up ions in o conside a ion and wha e ec , i any, hey
p oduce on he applican ’s e alua ion.
Resea ch unde s need o beaccoun able, emb ace anspa ency,
and ake meaning ul ac ion o add ess gende biases, including
ma e ni y bias. Fo example, speci ic ac ions o p e en gende and
ma e ni y bias in applican e alua ions should beexplici ly men ioned
in e iewe guidelines using clea and s ong language [e.g., by ci ing
speci ic examples o ma e ni y biases and ele an laws agains ma e ni y
TABLE1 Sys emic ba ie s hinde ing he ca ee ad ancemen o esea che s wi h ca egi ing esponsibili ies and p oposed ac ionable solu ions o
unding agencies o add ess hese challenges.

To es e al. 10.3389/ educ.2024.1472517
F on ie s in Educa ion 05 on ie sin.o g
disc imina ion (Albis on and Co ell, 2023)]. Funding agencies should
also en o ce equal gende a ios among ex e nal e iewe s and awa d
selec ion panels, and p o ide gende /ma e ni y bias aining wi h
p o en e icacy, such as gende bias habi -b eaking in e en ions
(De ine e al., 2017). Awa eness and accoun abili y a e c i ical o b eak
icious ci cles o sel -pe pe ua ing bias and disc imina ion. Simila o
sexual and psychological ha assmen (bullying), gende /ma e ni y bias
and disc imina ion a e no malised and widesp ead in academia.
Vic ims a e discou aged om epo ing inciden s o ea o e alia ions
and ca ee penal ies, and because pe pe a o s a e seldom made
accoun able. Funding agencies a e no excep ion o his cul u e o
impuni y. Un il e y ecen ly, only a hand ul o agencies collec ed
gende disagg ega ed s a is ics o hei awa d compe i ions, and e en
ewe moni o ed awa d success a es, which a e undamen al o de ec
po en ial biases. To elimina e bias in he e alua ion p ocess, i is
pa amoun ha unde s commi o moni o ing and egula ly publishing
gende , ace/e hnici y, (dis)abili y, and pa en al/ca egi ing s a us da a
o g an success a es and unding amoun s. Finally, gende quo as
should bein oduced o co ec gende /ma e ni y biases in he g an
selec ion p ocess and o inc ease women’s ep esen a ion (see below).
Funding agencies also play an impo an ole in e adica ing bias
and p omo ing di e si y and inclusion mo e b oadly in he scien i ic
communi y. Gi en ha esea ch ins i u ions ely on public and ex e nal
unding alloca ed in la ge pa ia compe i i e esea ch g an schemes,
unde s ha e he powe o in luence policy and cul i a e a cul u e o
accoun abili y a he ins i u ional le el h ough hei g an s’ eligibili y
c i e ia (Wallon e al., 2015; Jebsen e al., 2022). The implica ions o such
app oaches a e a - eaching, as na ional public agencies as well as
p i a e ounda ions ollow he example o majo unde s such as he
ERC in Eu ope o he Na ional Science Founda ion (NSF) in he
Uni edS a es, and a e he e o e likely o employ simila p ac ices.
Recen examples include se e al unding agencies joining Plan S,
suppo ed by he ERC, o manda e ha all hei unded esea ch
be published in open-access jou nals and, mo e ecen ly, he ERC
equi es ha applican ins i u ions ha e a Gende Equali y Plan (GEP)
in place as a g an eligibili y c i e ion. Funding agencies could go
u he and demand ha GEPs include speci ic ca egi ing policies and
in e en ions o add ess gende /ma e ni y bias, such as equal paid
pa en al lea e policies, de aul lexible/ emo e wo k, moni o ing and
publishing o gende iden i y, sexual o ien a ion, ace/e hnici y, (dis)
abili y, and pa en al/ca egi ing da a o hi ing and p omo ions,
compulso y gende /ma e ni y bias aining o leade s and s a , nu sing
acili ies, and childca e suppo . Funde s can also ewa d applica ions
om esea ch ins i u ions ha demons a e conc e e policies aimed a
inc easing women’s ep esen a ion in senio academic posi ions, such
as implemen ing gende quo as o hi ing and p omo ion. Mo eo e ,
ollowing he example o he Wellcome T us (Uni ed Kingdom),
unde s should adop a ‘ze o ole ance’ policy and disquali y applica ions
om esea che s (including co-applican s) who ecei ed a disciplina y
wa ning o ac i e sanc ions o an allega ion o disc imina ion o
ha assmen , and unding should beimmedia ely emo ed om g an
ecipien s con ic ed o such allega ions du ing he pe iod o he awa d.
An anonymous online epo ing sys em, simila o ha es ablished by
he Uni e si y o Camb idge (Uni ed Kingdom) a e he #MeToo
mo emen should beimplemen ed o allow awa d ecipien s o epo
any ype o misconduc , bias/disc imina ion o ha assmen pe pe a ed
by hei supe iso (s), colleague(s) o esea ch ins i u ion(s).
Complain s should bequickly in es iga ed by an independen commi ee.
Ca ee gaps: unding o suppo esea ch
con inui y
In he as majo i y o indus ialised coun ies, wi h he excep ion
o he Uni edS a es, women a e legally manda ed o ake se e al weeks
o mon hs o paid pa en al lea e (and a e en i led o addi ional
op ional mon hs o paid and/o unpaid lea e), while men need o ake
only a ew days o no lea e a all. These unequal policies no only
con ibu e o gende inequi ies in income and wo k o ce pa icipa ion,
bu also pe pe ua e gende s e eo ypes and p omo e imbalanced
amily dynamics (Go schall and Bi d, 2003; E e sson and Du ande ,
2010; Rocha, 2020). Mo eo e , gende ed pa en al lea e policies o en
dis ega d same-sex couples and non- adi ional amilies. While he e
is no doub ha women need ime o eco e om he physical and
emo ional oll o p egnancy and bi h, men can and should sha e he
pos na al ca egi ing bu den and suppo he mo he a his c i ical
ime. Ex ended ma e ni y lea e policies a e no based on esea ch da a
o biological cons ain s (In e na ional Labou O ganiza ion, 2014;
Eu opean Ins i u e o Gende Equali y, 2019), hey a e a simple
panacea de ised by poli icians o a oid dealing wi h he lack o public
childca e in as uc u e. The e is no eason o jus i y unequal pa en al
lea e policies o he han obsole e gende s e eo ypes ha ca egi ing
is p ima ily (o solely) a woman’s esponsibili y. Funding agencies can
play an impo an ole in challenging hese un ounded belie s and
p omo ing equal ca ee -ad ancemen oppo uni ies o emale and
male academics by p o iding paid ma e ni y and pa e ni y (o
seconda y pa en ) lea es wi h a minimum o 16 weeks in awa d
packages o opping up inadequa e public and/o ins i u ional pa en al
lea es (Ambe g e al., 2022).
In STEMM academia, ca ee b eaks o pa en al lea e may
a ec scien i ic p oduc ion in a ious ways: pa en s may miss g an
calls, delay manusc ip submissions, and lose p ecious ime o da a
collec ion, which di ec ly o indi ec ly impac on esea ch unding
success (Jebsen e  al., 2020). Mo eo e , pa en al lea e s igma
magni ies gende and ma e ni y biases (Bonache e  al., 2020;
Thébaud and Pedulla, 2022). As science is a as -paced sec o , e en
a ca ee gap o a ew mon hs may ha e an impo an impac on
ca ee ad ancemen . Un il manda ed equal ma e ni y and
pa e ni y (o seconda y pa en ) lea e policies become he no m—a
change ha may ake decades— unding agencies can implemen
measu es o mi iga e he gende ed impac o cu en unequal
pa en al lea es on esea che s’ ca ee s. Al hough some agencies
al eady p o ide ex ensions o g an eligibili y c i e ia o each
bi h, he du a ion o hese ex ensions may beinsu icien , as
p oduc i i y slowdowns may ex end well beyond he du a ion o
he pa en al lea e (Williams, 2005). Mo eo e , hese policies a e
o en gende neu al, which may u he inc ease gende
inequali ies (An ecol e al., 2018). Ex ensions o g an eligibili y
c i e ia (including age limi equi emen s) and o ack- eco d
pe iod assessmen should becalcula ed p opo iona ely o he
du a ion o he lea e, wi h a minimum o 18 mon hs pe bi h o
mo he s. To ensu e esea ch con inui y, unde s should also
p o ide lexible unding by de aul o hi ing echnical suppo o
conduc ield o lab wo k du ing p egnancy, pa en al, ca egi ing
o medical lea e (including o misca iage o e ili y ea men ).
Fo example, he Swiss Na ional Science Founda ion (SNSF) o e s
a Flexibili y G an o suppo ea ly ca ee esea che s du ing
ma e ni y lea e ha can beused o childca e expenses and/o o
To es e al. 10.3389/ educ.2024.1472517
F on ie s in Educa ion 06 on ie sin.o g
employ a suppo scien is (Joyce e al., 2024). In addi ion, as paid
ma e ni y lea e leng hs a e ex emely a iable (e.g., in he
Uni ed S a es hey can a y om ze o o se e al weeks), his
c i ical unding o esea ch suppo should bep o ided o a
minimum o 6 mon hs o new mo he s, o ensu e hey main ain
scien i ic p oduc i i y du ing he physically axing pos na al
pe iod (Ai ken e al., 2015; And es e al., 2016). De e men s o
awa d s a da es, g an ex ensions, and ca ee e-en y unding
should also bep o ided o esea che s aking p olonged ca ee
b eaks o ca egi ing (o medical) easons.
Gende oles: lexibili y and childca e
suppo o inc ease e en ion
Mo he s a e no only he p ima y ca egi e bu a e also he de aul
pa en when childca e suppo sys ems a e inaccessible o simply ail,
as he COVID-19 pandemic e ealed (Cala co e  al., 2021;
CohenMille and Izekeno a, 2022). Shoulde ing he childca e bu den
alone pu s mo he schola s a disad an age in he academic ace, as
hey ha e less ime (and men al bandwid h) o de o e o esea ch
(Minello e  al., 2020; Lan sogh e  al., 2021; CohenMille and
Izekeno a, 2022). Al hough hese in e nalised gende oles a e
admi edly a socie al issue, he sca ci y o eliable and a o dable
childca e op ions is a s uc u al p oblem, and unding agencies can
enac equi able policies o le el he playing ield and ensu e ha
scien is mo he s can ul il hei ull po en ial despi e hese challenges.
Flexibili y and childca e suppo a e key (Chung and an de Ho s ,
2018; Ma ija Siki ić, 2021; Fe agina, 2020). Flexible childca e
subsidies allow pa en s o employ childca e p o ide s, including
holiday/a e -school clubs and nannies/babysi e s o ea ly school
pickups, unexpec ed school closu es, when he child en a e sick, o
when dayca e cen es (c èches) ha e no acancies. Flexible/ emo e
wo k, including pa - ime wo k, should beallowed by de aul in e e y
g an and hese policies should beclea ly communica ed o hos
ins i u ions and awa d ecipien s, including a he s, who a e less likely
o eques using such policies. Ano he majo p oblem acing pa en s,
bu especially mo he s, is con e ence a endance. Female scien is s a e
mo e likely han hei male coun e pa s o decline oppo uni ies o
speak a and/o a end con e ences due o amily esponsibili ies,
which has impo an implica ions o ca ee p og ession (Sch oede
e al., 2013). Single pa en s wi hou a suppo ne wo k–a common
scena io in academia due o he mobili y equi emen s o many
g an s–do no e en ha e he choice. Funde s should p o ide lexible
supplemen s o con e ence a el g an s o pa en s, and such inancial
suppo should be doubled o single pa en s. Finally, olling o
ecu ing deadlines should eplace annual g an calls wi h a single
deadline (no a ely a an incon enien ime o pa en s, such as jus
be o e o du ing school holidays, o example), and unding
applica ions should be simpli ied and sho ened conside ably o
educe he applican s’ adminis a i e bu den and he ime spen
p epa ing he applica ion (Jebsen e al., 2020). These p ac ices would
likely d i e a signi ican inc ease in he numbe o emale applican s,
and pa icula ly mo he s. Fo example, in 2011 he Aus alian Cen e
o Heal h Se ices Inno a ion launched a esea ch g an scheme wi h
s eamlined 1,200-wo d p oposals ha ook app oxima ely 7 days o
p epa e (Ba ne e al., 2015), ins ead o he a e age ou o 6 weeks
equi ed o a ypical g an applica ion (He be e al., 2013; on
Hippel and on Hippel, 2015). Impo an ly, any p o ision o suppo
pa en s, such as childca e subsidies and g an ex ensions, should
bemen ioned explici ly and clea ly on he agency’s websi e and should
no equi e leng hy applica ion p ocedu es, which would u he
bu den he applican s.
COVID-19: in e en ions o eco e om
pandemic impac
Despi e many calls o change and he indispu able e idence
showing ha emale esea che s wi h ca egi ing esponsibili ies we e
g a ely a ec ed by he COVID-19 pandemic, unding agencies ha e
emained mos ly passi e. A ew agencies ex ended g an eligibili y
c i e ia and/o deadlines o g an applica ions du ing he pandemic,
bu hese measu es we e gende neu al and la gely insu icien .
Con inued inac ion will widen he esea ch unding gende gap and
e e se decades o p og ess o inc ease women’s ep esen a ion in
STEMM academia. Calls o suppo o academic mo he s ha e been
igno ed because e ec i e solu ions equi e a inancial commi men
ha indi ec ly a ec esea che s less impac ed by he pandemic [ o
pu i simply, whi e, able-bodied, he e osexual men (Jebsen e al.,
2022)]. Ne e heless, go e nmen s can open hei pu ses when he e
is enough p essu e, as e idenced by he conside able boos in
esea ch unding p omp ed by he pandemic. Resea ch unde s
should seize his unique oppo uni y o call on go e nmen s and
s akeholde s o suppo o inance COVID-19 long- e m eco e y
and p omo e DEI (Cebula e al., 2020; Fulweile e al., 2021; Jebsen
e al., 2022). Fo example, in addi ion o ex ending g an eligibili y
c i e ia and ack- eco d assessmen pe iod, unding agencies should
p o ide unded ex ensions o schola ships, ellowships, and esea ch
g an s (including sala ies o s uden s and/o echnical s a hi ed on
g an ) o mo he s, single pa en s, and ca egi e s a ec ed by he
pandemic. Mo eo e , as women and mino i ised g oups a e mo e
likely o be employed on p eca ious sho - e m con ac s, and
pa icula ly ea ly ca ee esea che s (Cebula e al., 2020), scien is
mo he s may ha e been o ced o in e up hei ca ee o ca egi ing
du ing o ollowing he COVID-19 pandemic. Funding agencies
should he e o e open esea ch unding p og ams exclusi e o emale
applican s, including ca ee e-en y g an s. Such equi able measu es
would help emale esea che s wi h ca egi ing esponsibili ies s ay
compe i i e and coun e ac he pandemic’s nega i e impac on hei
p oduc i i y, hus ensu ing u u e unding success and
inc easing e en ion.
The case o gende quo as
Gende quo as a e highly con o e sial and widely unpopula in
academia, including among women (Wallon e al., 2015). Funde s ea
ha gende quo as in g an alloca ion will h ea en me i oc acy and
jeopa dise esea ch excellence. Men ea hey will un ai ly lose he
unding hey dese e. And women ea being used as okens and
losing p o essional c edibili y. I onically, hese ea s all s em om he
same assump ion: ha gende quo as may gi e emale applican s an
un ai ad an age o e hei male pee s, which misses he poin
en i ely– he aim o gende quo as is o emo e he un ai ad an age
ha men cu en ly ha e o e women. A ecen s udy on gende quo as
To es e al. 10.3389/ educ.2024.1472517
F on ie s in Educa ion 07 on ie sin.o g
in academia pe ec ly illus a es his widesp ead pe cep ion ha
suppo o women is un ai , while suppo o men– o example,
gende quo as in academic ields whe e women ou numbe men, such
as social sciences–would be“na u al and legi ima e” (Zehn e and
Ki chle , 2020). The au ho s ound ha nega i e e bal associa ions
ela ed o “un ai ,” “coun e p oduc i e” and “de oga o y” we e
signi ican ly associa ed wi h gende quo as ha a ou ed women, and
posi i e o neu al exp essions such as “ ai ” and “bene icial” we e
associa ed wi h quo as o suppo men (Zehn e and Ki chle , 2020).
Me i oc acy in esea ch unding is a my h. Gende quo as co ec
unconscious biases and p omo e eal me i oc acy (Pa k, 2020).
Manda ed o olun a y gende quo a policies ha e been widely
explo ed in na ional pa liamen s and co po a e boa ds wi h p o en
esul s in apidly boos ing women’s ep esen a ion in leade ship
posi ions ( e iewed in Wallon e al., 2015). Mo eo e , he e a e o he
addi ional bene i s. Gende quo as would encou age mo e women o
apply o g an s, which unding agencies ecognise is a majo obs acle
o achie ing gende balance in g an alloca ion ( an de Lee and
Elleme s, 2015; Bu ns e al., 2019). An inc ease in emale applica ions
would likely ha e a snowball e ec and signi ican ly (and apidly)
inc ease women’s ep esen a ion in STEMM leade ship posi ions, as
unding success imp o es he chances o p omo ion and hi ing (Bloch
e al., 2014; Heya d and Ho en o , 2021; Hussinge and Ca alho,
2021; Jebsen e al., 2022). The ad an ages o gende quo as hus la gely
ou weigh po en ial d awbacks, such as oken e ec s. In addi ion, gi en
he low success a e o mos esea ch unding schemes, he e is a la ge
pool o equally me i o ious emale and male applica ions ha as ly
ou numbe he a ailable g an s ( on Hippel and on Hippel, 2015).
The isk o unding an undese ing emale applican is he e o e
negligible, and conce ns ha gende quo as h ea en academic
me i oc a ic sys ems a e un ounded ( an den B ink and Benschop,
2011). Ul ima ely, gende quo as should be iewed as a empo a y
measu e un il gende pa i y is achie ed and gende bias in he g an
selec ion p ocess is elimina ed h ough o he complemen a y
app oaches (see abo e).
Gende quo as ha e al eady been adop ed by a hand ul o
unding agencies. Fo example, he Swedish Resea ch Council
(Swedish Resea ch Council, 2022) and he Helmhol z Associa ion in
Ge many (The Helmhol z Associa ion o Ge man Resea ch Cen e s,
2013) eques ha women and men ha e equal awa d success a es in
some o hei unding schemes. O he agencies, such as he ERC and
he Na ional Resea ch Council o Canada, ha e no se public o icial
a ge s bu ha e equalised hei success a es be ween gende s in
ecen yea s, sugges ing hey a e applying implici gende quo as.
Equal success a e quo as ensu e ha he gende a io among g an
ecipien s e lec s he numbe o applican s, he eby ec i ying
po en ial gende biases. Howe e , his model o gende quo as is
unlikely o inc ease women’s ep esen a ion (see Table2) and hus
pe pe ua es gende imbalances, especially i no o he measu es a e
aken o elimina e unconscious bias in he g an selec ion p ocess.
Among o he ini ia i es, he Na ional Heal h Medical Resea ch
Council (NHMRC) in Aus alia has ecen ly in oduced 50:50 gende
quo as o some o i s g an s o ensu e ha an equal numbe o awa ds
is alloca ed be ween men and women/non-bina y people (NHMRC,
2022). This equi able policy is he culmina ion o a la ge consul a ion
among esea che s and independen o ganisa ions, ollowing he
publica ion o e idence o gende bias in he NHMRC unding
sys em (Nog ady, 2022). The agency also aims o educe gende
dispa i ies in applica ion a es; while emale and male esea che s
applied oughly a equal a es o ea ly-ca ee g an s in ecen yea s,
only 20% o applican s o ad ance-ca ee g an s we e women, a
common end obse ed among o he unde s (Nog ady, 2022).
F om he examples in o he sec o s, 50:50 gende quo as p esen
many bene i s, such as co ec ing gende bias, encou aging mo e
women o apply, and apidly inc easing women’s ep esen a ion. A
majo downside o his gende quo a model is ha i canno
beapplied o academic ields wi h e y low ep esen a ion o women
(e.g., ma hema ics, physics, and economics), as he e would bea
conside able isk o unding wi hou me i and he numbe o emale
applican s would beinsu icien o achie e quo a a ge s. Cascading
gende quo as–whe e quo a a ge s a e based on he ep esen a ion
o women (i.e., pe cen age o emale applican s) in he ca ee le el
immedia ely below–may ep esen a iable comp omise solu ion (see
Table2; Wallon e al., 2015). This is a mo e lexible model, applicable
o any ield, wi h quo a a ge s se speci ically o each unding
agency and g an ype–and wi h he impo an ad an age o
inc easing women’s ep esen a ion, albei no as apidly as
50:50 quo as.
Funding agencies play a c i ical ole in
p omo ing gende equi y and
e aining women in STEMM academia
The COVID-19 pandemic exace ba ed long-s anding gende
inequi ies in STEMM academia, wi h a de as a ing impac on he
ca ee o women scien is s, especially hose wi h ca egi ing
esponsibili ies (Minello e al., 2020; Cala co e al., 2021; S aniscuaski
e al., 2021; CohenMille and Izekeno a, 2022). E idence is moun ing
sugges ing ha he gende gap in STEMM is essen ially a pa en hood
gap (Cech and Blai -Loy, 2019; Mo gan e al., 2021). Despi e coun less
calls on STEMM leade s and policymake s o suppo mo he s in
STEMM and e o m he unding sys em, esea ch unde s ha e no
aken any meaning ul ac ion and con inue o uphold a sys em ha
ma ginalises mo he s and o he ca egi e s. Why? One explana ion is
a widesp ead cul u e o in e en ions o ‘ ix women’, a he han ixing
he sys em, because i is easie o blame women han ecognising and
epai ing sys emic laws (Na ional Academies o Sciences,
Enginee ing, and Medicine, 2020; Ca alyze Tech Wo king G oup,
2021; Na ional Academies o Sciences, Enginee ing, and Medicine,
2024). Funde s and STEMM leade s equen ly dismiss he
expe iences o women, pa icula ly mo he s, and consciously o
unconsciously e ame he leade ship gende gap as an una oidable
consequence o women’s pe cei ed (in)compe ence and pe sonal
choices. These gende s e eo ypes a e ounded on deeply ing ained
belie s ha women canno beas compe en o as ambi ious as men
because hey a e dis ac ed by mo he hood (Co ell e al., 2007). A
shi away om he ‘ ixing women” mindse is c ucial o e ain women
in he STEMM sec o and o build a uly ai and me i oc a ic
unding sys em. Funding agencies should s op asking: wha should
women bedoing o achie e unding success? And ins ead need o
examine why he sys em un ai ly a ou s men and discou ages women
om applying o g an s. S a is ically, mos women applying o mid-
and ad anced-ca ee esea ch g an s a e mo he s (Mo gan e al.,
2021). Funde s mus ake immedia e ac ion o emo e he sys emic
ba ie s ha s ymie women’s success in esea ch unding, while
To es e al. 10.3389/ educ.2024.1472517
F on ie s in Educa ion 08 on ie sin.o g
simul aneously using hei in luence o p omo e equi y and inclusion
o ca egi e s mo e b oadly in he scien i ic communi y. DEI p og ams
and ini ia i es should beexpanded o ca egi e s, wi h an emphasis on
mo he s, wi hou dis ega ding in e sec ionali y issues, as mo he s may
also expe ience ma ginalisa ion om o he iden i ies, including ace/
e hnici y, gende iden i y, sexual o ien a ion, (dis)abili y o socio-
economic s a us (Wang and Degol, 2016).
Bes p ac ices o esea ch ins i u ions
While unding agencies a e i al o p omo ing ca egi e inclusion
and inc easing he e en ion o women in STEMM academia,
coo dina ed e o s among all s akeholde s— esea ch ins i u ions,
science socie ies, and go e nmen s—a e essen ial. Ins i u ional leade s
play a c i ical ole in enac ing and en o cing policies o p omo e DEI
and ha monising hese p ac ices ac oss depa men s, as op-down
app oaches a e o en mo e e ec i e in d i ing sys emic change (Jebsen
e al., 2022). Leade s a e also ins umen al o ensu ing sys ema ic and
igo ous da a collec ion o ca egi e policy up ake and e icacy, which
is essen ial o imp o e policies and maximise he impac o DEI e o s
o p omo e an equi able and inclusi e wo kplace. C i ically, leade s
need o se he example, p omo ing accoun abili y and ac i ely d i ing
cul u al change in hei ins i u ion (Na ional Academies o Sciences,
Enginee ing, and Medicine, 2024). Mo ing away om wo kplace
cul u es based on “ideal wo ke ” no ms and expec a ions is c ucial o
encou age ca egi e s o use a ailable policies, hus elimina ing gende
inequali ies in ca egi ing policy up ake (Sallee, 2012; Ecklund e al.,
2017), which c ea e un ai disad an ages o women and pe pe ua e
he gende gap in STEMM (Cech and Blai -Loy, 2019). Addi ionally,
DEI ini ia i es may all sho by ailing o conside indi idual needs
and in e sec ional iden i ies (Cas añeda e al., 2015; Yo k Uni e si y,
2020). Fo example, ca ing o an elde ly adul is mo e p e alen in
Hispanic, Asian and Black communi ies, including ca ing o ex ended
amily membe s o iends (McCann e al., 2000; Miyawaki, 2016).
Leade s mus ensu e ha all indi iduals and communi ies a e hea d
TABLE2 O e iew o gende quo a models highligh ing hei ad an ages, disad an ages, and examples o unding agencies and esea ch ins i u ions
ha ha e implemen ed hem.