genset consensus report recommendations for action on the gender dimension in science

June2010

June2010 ©genSET ISBN:978-0-9566292-1-0

PublishedbyPortia

Recommendations for Action on the Gender Dimension in Science

This report contains the recommendations of the undersigned Science Leaders Panel, addressed to policy makers and leaders of science institutions.

Prof Simone BuitendijkLeiden University Medical Centre; University of Amsterdam, Medical Centre; TNO Institute of Applied Science

Dr Concha Colomer RevueltaDeputy Director Quality Agency of the Spanish National Health System; Director of the Observatory of Women’s Health in the Ministry of Health and Social Policy

Dr Daniela CordaDirector of the Institute of Protein Biochemistry, National Research Council, Italy

Prof Anders FlodströmUniversity Chancellor of Sweden; President of the Swedish National Agency for Higher Education; member of the Executive Committee of EIT

June 2010

Dr Anita HoldcroftEmeritus Professor of Anaesthesia, Imperial College;ex co-chair of the Inter. Assoc. for the Study of Pain

Dr Jackie Hunterex Senior Vice President of Science Environment Development, GlaxoSmithKline; CEO Pharmivation Ltd

Dr Astrid JamesDeputy Editor, The Lancet

Prof Henrik Toft Jensenex Rector of Roskilde University; ex Chair of Danish Rector’s Conference

Dr Nick KitchenVice President HR Research and Development, Unilever

Prof Martina SchraudnerTechnical University Berlin and Fraunhofer Gesellschaft

Dr Karen SjørupAssociate Professor at the Institute for Society and Globalisation; ex Vice Rector of Roskilde University; ex director of Danish Technical University

Prof Curt RiceVice Rector for Research and Development at the University of Tromsø; ex Director of the Centre for Advanced Study in Theoretical Linguistics

EVP Hanne RønnebergExecutive Vice President at SINTEF

Prof Rolf TarrachRector of University of Luxemburg; President of the Academic Cooperation Association; ex President of CSIC; ex member of EURAB, EURO-HORCS; member of EUA Council

g e n S E T C o n s e n s u s S e m i n a r R e p o r t |4

ThisreportrepresentsoneoftheoutputsfromthegenSETprojectfundedbytheEuropeanCommission,undertheFP7ScienceinSocietyprogramme.

FormoreinformationaboutgenSETandforcopiesofthe120+researchreportslistedin

thereferencesectionsofthisdocumentpleaseconsulttheprojectwebsite,www.genderinscience.org.

JUNE2010


TableofContents

Introduction 6

ThegenSETproject 6

ExecutiveSummaryofConsensusSeminars&Recommendations 7

ParticipantsinConsensusSeminars 8

StructureoftheReport&NoteonResearchEvidence 10

RecommendationsoftheScienceLeadersPanel 12

ScienceKnowledge‐Making 13

HumanCapital 16

PracticesandProcesses 20

RegulationandCompliance 24

ConsensusSeminarOrganisationandProcedure 26

ConsensusConferencesversusgenSETConsensusSeminars 27

StructureofgenSETConsensusSeminars 27

DisseminationofgenSETConsensusSeminarReport 29

VisualOutlineofgenSETConsensusSeminarsProcess 30

ConsensusSeminarParticipants 31

ScienceLeadersPanel–DetailedBiographies 32

GenderExpertGroup–DetailedBiographies 36

StakeholderOrganisationsRepresentedintheConsensusSeminars 38

ProjectStaffandgenSETConsortiumPartners 40

Appendix1 41

ReferencesUsedinConsensusReport 42

Appendix2 44

BriefingNoteswithReferences–FirstSeminar

BriefingNotesSupplementwithReferences–SecondSeminar


Introduction

TheprojectgenSETisaprojectfundedbytheScienceinSocietyProgrammeoftheEuropeanCommission's7thFramework,in the area of Capacity Support Action. The duration is September 2009‐February 2012 and the budget is€1.03m.Through a series of seminars, workshops, and symposia, genSET creates a forum of sustainable dialoguebetween European science leaders, science stakeholder institutions, gender experts, and science strategydecision‐makers to agree on the gender dimension in science in order to produce practical guidelines forimplementinggenderactionplanswithinexistinginstitutionalmechanisms.ThegoalistodeveloppracticalwaysinwhichgenderknowledgeandgendermainstreamingexpertisecanbeincorporatedwithinEuropeanscienceinstitutionsinordertoimproveindividualandcollectivecapacityforactiontoincreasewomen’sparticipationinscience. genSET focuses on five key areas where gender inequalities and biases disadvantages women’sparticipationinscience:

1. scienceknowledge‐making;2. researchprocess;3. recruitmentandretention;4. assessmentofwomen’swork;and5. scienceexcellencevaluesystem

A key support action developed by genSETinvolveda seriesof threeConsensus Seminars(CS) where 14 science leaders, supported bygender experts, discussed issues surroundingthe gender dimension in science in order toarrive at a consensus view on institutionalactions for mainstreaming gender in theEuropean science system. Following thesemeetings,theresultsofwhicharecontainedinthis report, the genSET Consortium will hostthree Capacity Building Workshops acrossEurope, working closely with institutionalstakeholdersandgenderexpertstoimplementmoreeffective gender actionplans. Over100institutions, 20 gender experts, andnumerousstrategydecision‐makerswillbeinvolvedintheprocessleadingtogreaterinstitutionalcapacityofmainstreaminggenderinscience.TwovalorisationsymposiawillalsobeheldinIrelandandPolandin2010.ExtensivedisseminationactivitiesofthegenSETpatronsandpartnerswilltakeplaceacrossEuropethroughoutthecourseoftheproject,whichwilldistributetheConsensusReporttothewidestscientificandsciencepolicyaudience.


ExecutiveSummaryofConsensusSeminars&Recommendations

Between March and June 2010, three genSET Consensus Seminars brought together 14 European scienceleaderstoshareknowledgeandexperienceandarriveataconsensusviewonthegenderdimensioninscienceandontheprioritiesforgenderactioninscientificinstitutions.ThequestionHowEuropeanScienceCanBenefitfromIntegratedActiononGenderframedthedeliberationsonthegenderdimension,withaspecificfocuson:

1. bringing about greater equality of opportunity and treatment in recruitment and advancement ofwomenandmenscientists,andinassessmentoftheirperformanceandwork;and

2. Incorporatinggenderandsexintheresearchprocess,inscienceknowledgemaking,andinthesciencevaluesystemtoimprovequalityandexcellenceofscientificendeavours.

TheScienceLeadersConsensusPanelrepresentsextensiveknowledgeofdifferentscientific fieldsandsectors,withover500yearsof scientificand leadershipexperience; involvement inappointingover4000researchers;directionofover300majorresearchprogrammesandresearchfundingofover€500million;executivedecisionmaking through over 100 Executive Board positions; and research publication record exceeding 1000 peerreviewed research papers. They collaborated with a group of equally high‐ranking gender experts, whoprovidedexpertisethroughlecturesandresearchevidenceduringtheConsensusSeminars.

The genSET Consensus Seminars adapted the format of thetraditionalConsensusConferencemodel,puttingthescienceleadersintheroleofa'laypanel,'meanttoreachconsensuswiththehelpofgenderresearchersas'experts,'andsciencestakeholderinstitutionsastheir'public.'1 Creatingfirstalistoflooseprioritythemesrelatedtothegenderdimensiononscience, the Panel proceeded to specific recommendationsdesignated for science policy makers and scientificinstitutions. Thiswasdonewith thehelpof invited genderexperts during the second Seminar at the TechnicalUniversity in Berlin. In the final Paris Seminar, additionalgender experts and leaders and decision makers from thetarget science institutions assisted the panel in clarifyingdetailsofthefinalconsensusrecommendations.

Within thegenSETproject, these recommendations,matchedwithextensive researchevidencerelated to thegenderdimensioninscience,willformthebasisofincreasinginstitutionalcapacityforactionongenderintheEuropean science system. This will happen through genSET’s Capacity Building Workshops, country‐specificvalorisation symposia, final conference, and finally through the sustainabilitymeasures in place after genSETendsinFebruary2012.ThemembershipandnetworksofgenSETPatronandStakeholderorganisationswillhelpto further disseminate the Report to every country, sector and institution making up the European sciencesystem.ItwillbeawellinformedresourceforintegratedactionongenderthatwillbenefitEuropeanscience.

1ConsensusConferenceandgenSETSeminarproceduresareexplainedindetailinthefinalsectionofthisreport.

The consensus recommendations call for action in four priority areas of the gender dimension inscience: science knowledge making, deployment of human capital, institutional practices andprocesses,andregulationandcompliancewithgender‐relatedprocessesandpractices.Allof theserecommendationsaremeanttobeincludedwithinanoverallinstitutionalsciencestrategy.


ParticipantsinConsensusSeminars2

ScienceLeadersPanelMembers

1. ProfSimoneBuitendijk,HeadoftheChildHealthProgramme,TNO(Netherlands)

2. DrPhilipCampbell,Editor‐in‐Chief,Nature(UK)(actingasobserver)3. DrConchaColomer‐Revuelta,Director,ObservatoryonWomen’sHealth,MinistryofHealthand

ConsumerAffairs(Spain)

4. DrDanielaCorda,Director,InstituteofProteinBiochemistryNationalResearchCouncil(Italy)5. ProfAndersFlodström,UniversityChancellorandHeadofSwedishNationalAgencyforHigherEducation

(Sweden)

6. DrAnitaHoldcroft,MD,FRCA,EmeritusProfessorofAnaesthesia,ImperialCollegeLondon(UK)7. DrJackieHunter,pastSeniorVice‐President,GlaxoSmithKline,CEOofPharmivationLtd(International)8. DrAstridJames,DeputyEditorTheLancet(International)

9. ProfHenrikToftJensen,pastChairmanofTheDanishRectors’Conference,(Denmark)10. DrNickKitchen,VicePresidentHRR&D,Unilever(International)11. ProfCurtRice,Pro‐rectorofR&D,UniversityofTromso(Norway)

12. ProfMartinaSchraudner,UniversityProfessor,TechnicalUniversityBerlin(Germany)13. DrKarenSjørup,AssociateProfessor,InstituteforSocietyandGlobalization,RoskildeUniversity

(Denmark)

14. HanneRonneberg,ExecutiveVicePresident,SINTEF(Norway)15. ProfRolfTarrach,Rector,UniversityofLuxemburg(Luxemburg)

GenderExpertsGenderexpertsinvitedtoConsensusSeminars:

1. ProfTeresaRees,ProViceChancellorofResearch,UniversityofCardiff(UK)2. ProfLondaSchiebinger,ProfessorofHistoryofScienceandDirectorofMichelleR.ClaymanInstitutefor

GenderResearch,StanfordUniversity(USA)3. ProfAlisonWoodward,ResearchProfessorattheFreeUniversityofBrussels(VUB);co‐directorofRHEA,

theCenterforGenderStudiesandDiversityResearch(Belgium)4. ProfJudithGlover,ProfessorofEmploymentStudiesintheSchoolofBusinessandSocialSciences,

RoehamptonUniversity(UK)

GenderexpertsadvisingonthecontentoftheBriefingMaterials:5. DrAlexandraBitusikova,SeniorResearcheratResearchInstituteofMatejBelUniversity,BanskaBystrica

(Slovakia);andSeniorAdvisertoEuropeanUniversityAssociation‐CouncilforDoctoralEducation,Brussels(Belgium)

6. DrSuzannedeCheveigne,DirectorofResearch,Shadyc(CNRS‐EHESS),Marseille(France)

7. DrLindaRustad,SeniorAdvisortotheCommitteeforGenderBalanceinResearch,TheNorwegianAssociationofHigherEducationInstitutions(Norway)

8. DrMagdalenaSkipper,SeniorEditor,Biology,Nature(UK)2ForadditionalinformationabouttheScienceLeadersPanel,GenderExperts,andStakeholderInstitutions,pleaseseedetaileddescriptionsstartingonpage33


RepresentativesofScienceandStrategyStakeholderInstitutions

1. JenniferCampbell,L’OrealFoundation,WomenforScienceProgramme,DirectorforPartnershipsandPhilanthropy

2. ProfRichardGamauf,UniversityofVienna,ChairpersonoftheWorkingGroupforEqualOpportunity(ProfofRomanLaw)

3. ProfClaudineHermann,Vice‐PresidentoftheEuropeanPlatformofWomenScientists(retProfofPhysics,EcolePolytechnique)

4. DrLisbethJacobs,BekaertCorporateTechnologyManager,MaterialTransformationalTechnologiesR&DUnit

5. DrBrigitteKessler,SwissFederalInstituteofTechnology(ETH),Zurich,OfficeofFacultyAffairs6. DrMarisaAlonsoNunez,Eurodoc(EuropeanCouncilofDoctoralCandidatesandJuniorResearchers),

GeneralBoardMember7. DrMarionBoland,ScienceFoundationIreland,ScientificProgrammeManager8. ProfNickVonTunzelmann,UniversityofSussexScienceandTechnologyPolicyResearch(Profof

EconomicsofScienceandTechnology)9. UrsulaSchwarzenbart,DaimlerAG,HeadoftheGlobalDiversityOffice

RepresentativesofPatronsandEuropeanCommission

1. ViceAdmiral(ret)JanWillemKelder,TNOBoardofManagementMember,ChairmanofTNOBoardofDefenceResearch

2. DrHansM.Borchgrevink,ResearchCouncilofNorwaySpecialAdviser,InternationalUnit3. DrVanessaCampo‐Ruiz,EuropeanScienceFoundation,ScienceOfficertotheChiefExecutive4. GunillaJacobsson,SwedishNationalAgencyforHigherEducation,ProjectManager,University

Chancellor’sOffice5. DrRaymondSeltz,Euroscience,GeneralSecretary6. YannaWellander,Euroscience,ProjectCoordinator7. MarinaMarchetti,EuropeanCommission,ResearchDirectorate‐General,PolicyOfficer

Facilitators:Participantbvba,MarkHongenaert&StefSteyaert


StructureoftheReport&NoteonResearchEvidence

The Science Leaders Panel has identified 13 specific recommendations in four priority areas. All of theserecommendationsaremeanttobepartofanoverallgenderstrategyinscientificinstitutions.

ScienceKnowledgeMaking ‐ This category coversactions that can improve thequalityof researchprocessesandmethodsandthusthequalityofscientificknowledge.Thatis,therecommendationsaddressdesigningsexandgenderanalysisintobasicandappliedknowledgeproductionwithinscientificinstitutions.

Human Capital ‐ This category covers actions that can improve the use of social and intellectual capital ofindividualswithinscientificinstitutions.Therecommendationsaimtofacilitatethecapabilitiesandrelationsofthose involved intheknowledgeproductionprocessthrough improvingthewaytheyareorganised, lead,andpublicized.

ProcessandPractices–Thiscategorycoversactions that improvealreadyexistent institutionalprocessesandpractices.Specifically,therecommendationsinthissectionaimtorecogniseandimprovethegenderdimensionin assessment methods, recruitment procedures, and policies related to working conditions most affectingwomen.


RegulationandCompliance–Thiscategorycoversactions thatcan improveaccountability formainstreaminggenderat individual, institutional, science system levels. The recommendationsaddressenablingmonitoring,analysisandreportingofgender‐relatedoutcomes.

Whencomposing the recommendations that follow, theScience LeadersPanel consultedwith several genderexperts and had drew upon gender studies scholarship, using research on gender in science (120+ researchreports)andBriefingNotes thatextractedthekey findings in thesereportswiththeaidof theGenderExpertGroup(seeappendix). Thus,theargumentationbehindeachrecommendation isbasedonboththeextensivepersonal experience of the panelmembers and the available research evidence. As a reflection of this, therecommendationsthatfollowattimesciterelevantstudiesandexamplesthatfurtherjustifytheirreasoning,butthesecitationsshouldbeviewedasneitherexhaustivenordefinitive.

Notably, the work of the Science Leaders Panel has highlighted only the beginning of an importantdialoguebetweengenderexpertsandleadersofscientificinstitutions.TheresourcesusedbythePanelinthisreportreflectonlyasmallpartofthegenderexpertiseavailableacrossEurope.

RecommendationsoftheScienceLeadersPanel


SectionI:KnowledgeMaking

The following recommendations deal with the way research quality can beimmediately improvedbyaddressingsexandgenderanalysis inscientific research.These recommendationsaimtochangeresearchprocessesandmethods to impact

scientificknowledgeproduction.

Recommendation1:Leadersmustbeconvincedthatthere isaneedto incorporatemethodsofsexand

gender analysis into basic and applied research; they must “buy into” theimportanceofthegender‐dimensionwithinknowledgemaking.

The most effective way of doing this will be to illustrate how continuallyincorporatingsexandgenderanalysispromotesresearchexcellence.Suchexamplesshould be inventoried by European institutions (e.g. DG Research, ESF) andmade

available to institutional “change agents” (e.g. deans, provosts, opinion makers,departmentheads).3

ArgumentationforRecommendations1‐3isonthefinalpageofthisSection(15).

3TheseexamplesmayincludethosedetailedintheStanfordGenderedInnovationProjectandin(Schiebinger,2008);numerousexamplesrevealthatconceptualthinkingaboutgendercan

preventgenderbiasinclinicalwork–abiasthatcanskewresultsinallfieldsofscientificresearch(Wald&Wu,2010;Risberg,2009;Ruiz‐Cantero,2007;Greenspan,2007;Klinge,

2010;Holdcroft,2007).

SectionI:Knowledge‐Making

Thewayresearchqualitycanbe

immediatelyimproved

byaddressingsexandgenderanalysisinscientificresearch.

Theserecommendationsaimtochangeresearchprocessesandmethods

toimpactscientificknowledgeproduction.

ImpactsonKnowledge


Recommendation2:

Scientists should be trained in using methods of sex and gender analysis. Bothmanagerial levels and researchers should be educated in such sex and genderanalysis. Training inmethods insexandgenderanalysisshouldbe integrated into

allsubjectsacrossallbasicandappliedsciencecurricula.4

ArgumentationforRecommendations1‐3isonthefinalpageofthisSection(15).

4LondaSchiebingercreatedaworkinglistofmethodsofgenderanalysisfortheFinal

ConsensusSeminar(June2010).Theseincluded:formulatingresearchquestionsandenvisioningdesignrelatedtogender;analyzingresearchprioritiesandsocialoutcomes;

recognizingcovariatesofrace,ethnicity,age,socioeconomicclass,etc;sampling;analyzingreferencemodelsandmale/femalespecificexperience;rethinkinglanguage,iconographic

representation,andstereotypes;andrethinkingtheory.



immediatelyimproved




ImpactsonKnowledge


Recommendation3:

In all assessments – paper selection for journals, appointments andpromotionsofindividuals, grant reviews, etc. – the use and knowledge of methods for sex andgender analysis in researchmust be an explicit topic for consideration. Granting

agencies,journaleditors,policymakersatalllevels,leadersofscientificinstitutions,and agencies responsible for curricula accreditation, should be among thoseresponsibleforincorporatingthesemethodsintotheirassessmentprocedures.

ArgumentationforRecommendation1‐3:Sexandgendermethodologybenefitsthequalityandexcellenceofscientificproductionandneedstobeactivelyincorporatedintocurrentresearchprocesses.5

Italsopotentiallyopensnewfieldsofresearchandbringsinnovationthroughaskingnewquestions.Takingathree‐tieredapproachofconvincingleadership(1),engagingandenablingpractitioners(2),andensuringincorporationthrough

assessment(3)isnecessarytoachievethis.6Institutionalleadersneedtobespecificallytargetedbecausetheyarethebasicagentsofchangeintheirorganisations.

5Sciencehistorianshaveshowntheprocessofscienceknowledge‐makingtobeinfluencedbythe“sciencepersona”oftheresearcherandthesocio‐culturalcontextinwhichthe

researchprocesstakesplace(Daston&Galison,2007).Studiesalsorevealthatintegratingsocial‐scienceanalysisofgenderwithinso‐called“hard‐science”disciplinesimprovesthe

abilityandconfidenceofresearchersandstudents(Sible,Wilhelm&Lederman,2006).Examplesofhowthegenderdimensionbenefitsthequalityofscienceproductioncanbe

foundin(Schiebinger,2008).

6Higherlevelsofscienceandtechnologyarisingoutofgreatereconomicdevelopmentdonotcorrelatewithincreasedgenderequality–indeed,“marketforces”tendtoencourage

theopposite(EC,BenchmarkingPolicyMeasures,2008)



immediatelyimproved




ImpactsonKnowledge


SectionII:HumanCapital

The following recommendations deal with the way women andmen in scientificinstitutionsaremanaged,organisedandpublicised. These recommendationsaimtoimprovetheuseofthehumancapitalofindividualstocreateknowledgewithin

scientificinstitutions.

Recommendation4:Researchteamsshouldbegenderdiverse.

Institutionsshouldpromotegenderdiversityofresearchteamsthroughavarietyofincentives(e.g.qualityrecognitionandallocationofresources)andthrough

transparencyinhiring.

Argumentationforrecommendation4:

Increaseddiversityinresearchteamscorrelatespositivelywiththequalityofresearch.Differencesinexperiencesandperspectivesbetweenmenandwomenmaybringnewapproachesandquestionsintoresearch.Thatis,havingdiverse

teamsimprovesdecisionmakingbyensuringavarietyofperspectives.7Transparencyinhiringprocessesmakesiteasiertoeliminatebiasorambiguityin

selectioncriteriaandencouragesthosere‐enteringtheworkforceafterabreaktoapply,thusoftenincreasingtheamountofwomenwhoareapplyingandselected.8

Variousindirectincentivestoincreasethegenderdiversityofteamshavealsoproveneffective.Notably,increasingtheinternationalandinterdisciplinarynatureofresearchteamsoftencorrelatespositivelywiththeamountofgenderdiversity

achieved.9

7Inmanystudies,mixed‐genderteamshaveemergedasmoreefficient,eventhoughthedecision‐makingprocessmaytakelonger:ifwellmanaged,theyarealsomorecreative,containmorediversepointsofviewandshowanimprovedqualityofdecisionmaking.Notablestudiesandanalysesofthesubjectinclude:Palich&Livingstone,2003;Barjak&Robinson,2008;vandenBrink,2009;CiscoSystems,2009,Cahill,2006

8ThisdynamicisdiscussedinvandenBrink,2009andinEvans,etal.2007.

9ExamplescanbefoundintheinstitutionalworkofgenderexpertsTeresaReeseandAlisonWoodward.UnderlyingrelationshipsarediscussedinRothen,2007.

SectionII:

HumanCapital

Thewaywomenandmen

inscientificinstitutionsaremanaged,organised,

andarepublicised.

Theserecommendationsaimtoimprovetheuseof

thehumancapitalofindividualstocreate

knowledgewithinscientificinstitutions.

ImpactsonIndividuals


Recommendation5:

Genderbalancingeffortsshouldbemadeinallcommittees,withprioritygiventokeydecision‐makingcommittees.Panelsforselectionofgrantsandapplicantsmustbegenderdiverse.Thismustbethegoalformanagementteamsaswell.

ArgumentationforRecommendation5:

Theallocationofresearchfundingaffectsnotonlyscientificinstitutions,butthepopulationasawhole.Therefore,decision‐makingcommitteesthatallocatefundsinscientificinstitutionshaveanobligationtorepresentthediversityofthe

population,includingingender.Womenoftenrepresentminoritypopulationsinscientificinstitutions,meaning

genderbalancingeffortsareoftenhinderedbytheshortageofcandidatesandmayplaceexcessivecommitteeobligationsonthefewwomenavailable.10Inthiscase,genderbalancingismostimportantinkeydecision‐makingcommitteesin

ordertobemosteffective.Additionally,diversityofcommittees,likethatofresearchteams,improvesthe

qualityofdecisionmakingingeneral.11

10Womenareaclearminorityintheleadershipandseniormanagementpositionsofscience

institutions(SheFigures,2009;ETAN,2000).Atthesametime,severalEuropeancountriesalreadyimposerequirementsforsetpercentagesofwomentoparticipateinmanagerial

boardsandcommittees(EC,ConsultationontheFutureEU2020Strategy,2009)

11Forspecificreferences,pleaseconsultfootnote5underrecommendation4


Thewaywomenandmen


andarepublicised.


thehumancapitalofindividualstocreateknowledgewithin




Recommendation6:Institutionsshouldseektoimprovethequalityoftheirleadershipbycreatingawareness,understanding,andappreciationofdifferentmanagementstyles.Thiscanbeachievedthroughtraining,self‐reflection,andvariousfeedbackmechanisms.Diversitytraining,specifically,isessentialinthisprocess.

Argumentationforrecommendation6:Agreaterappreciationofavarietyofmanagementstylescreatesgreaterdiversitywithinscientificinstitutions.This,inturn,allowsforawiderrangeofworkingenvironmentsattractivetoawiderrangepeople.12Thevisibilityofanumberofdifferentmanagerialstylesmakesitmorelikelythatadiversityofindividuals(i.e.morewomen)wouldbeattractedtomanagerialpositions.13

12Stylesofleadership/managementandfollowers’perceptionsofthesestyles,alongwiththerelationsofwomenandleadershipwithinpatternsofgenderrelationsanddominance

areamongthemostimportantissuesinqualitativeassessmentofleadershipandmanagement(Eagly&Johannesen‐Schmidt,2001;MIT,1999).

13Therearesomedistinctionsbetweenmaleandfemalemanagementstyles.Thatis,men

andwomenmaytendtoputvaryingdegreesofemphasisonarangeof“leadershipbehaviors”(e.g.peopledevelopment,intellectualstimulation,efficientcommunication,role

modeling,andexpectationsandrewards)(McKinsey&Company,2008).


Thewaywomenandmen


andarepublicised.






Recommendation7:

Womenalreadywithinscientificinstitutionsmustbemademorevisible.Allpublicrelationsactivitiesfromscientificinstitutionsshouldbegender‐proofed

(representwomenappropriately),whileavoidingtokenism.Thiscouldbedonebyincludingwomeninallpromotionalcampaignsforscientificcareers,byleadersnominatingwomenforprizes,andbyrecognisingwomen’sachievements

appropriately.Decidingwhattohighlightshouldbeinformedbydatafromgender‐

mainstreamingtoolssuchasgender‐disaggregateddata,informationonresourceallocationbygender,achievementrecords,etc.


Makingwomenmorevisibleallowsforstudentsandstafftoseeanumberofpossibilitiesinachievementandtochoosefromavarietyofrolemodels.Makingwomen’sworkvisiblealsoencourageswomenalreadypresentinscientificinstitutionstoreachhigherpositions.14Doingthisinaninformedwaybasedoninstitutionaldatamakessuchpositiveoutcomesmorelikely.

14Women’schoicesofcareersinscienceseemheavilyinfluencedbyrolemodelrelationshipsandbothgendershavebeenshowntobenefitfromidentifyingwithsuccessful

examplesinvariousfields(Bonetta,2010;Carrelletal.,2009;Lubinski&Benbow,2006).Becausethereareavarietyofattitudestowardcareersandworkbalancewithingender

groups,femalerolemodelsarenotalwaysbestmatchedtootherfemales,thustheymustbeshowninawidercontextofinstitutionalsuccess(Chen,1998;Desrochers&Sargent,

2004).


Thewaywomenandmen


andarepublicised.






SectionIII:PracticesandProcessesThefollowingrecommendationsdealwiththewayassessment,recruitment,and

creationofworkingconditionscanbeimprovedtobetteraccommodatethegenderdimension.Theserecommendationsaimtoimprovealready‐existentinstitutionalprocessesandpractices.

Recommendation8:

Assessmentproceduresmustbere‐definedtofocusonthequality,ratherthanquantity,ofindividuals’publicationsandresearchoutput.Thismustbeconsistentlyappliedinindividual,departmental,andotherlevelsofassessment.

Forinstance,researchersshouldselectthemostimportantarticlesthattheyhave

producedinasetnumberofyears,ratherthanlistingallpublications.However,qualitativeassessmentmustalsoavoidgenderbias(e.g.relianceonrecommendationlettersinappointmentprocedures).

ArgumentationforRecommendation8:

Evidencesuggeststhatpresentacademicassessmentsystemsaredeeplyflawedbecausetheyignorefactorsparticularlyaffectingwomen.15Forinstance,mentendtoproducemorepublicationsandassessmentprotocolstendtovaluequantityoverquality.Thereasonsforpublicationdisparitybetweenmenandwomenmayincludewomentendingtoworkinnew,interdisciplinaryfields(thatmakeitmoredifficulttopublish)andwomenchoosingsmallerandless‐fundedinstitutionsforemployment(becauseoffamilialfactors).Additionally,researchhasshownthatqualitativeassessmentcanbeheavilygender‐biased.Forinstance,recommendationletterwriterstendtousestrongerlanguageofpraisewhendescribingmen,ratherthanwomen.16

15Theflawsofcurrentassessmentmethodsandthediscrepancybetweenmenandwomeninpublicationamountsarewidelydiscussed:Symonds,2006;Lawrence,2008;Whittington,

2009,Ding,2006;Marsh,2009.Individualsandinstitutionswithpre‐existenthigheracademicstatushavemoreaccesstoresourcesandpublicationopportunitiesthanthose

enteringorlessknowninthefield(Merton,1968;Rossiteretal.,2003).

16Thebiasesinrecommendationletterwritingarediscussedin(TrixandPsenka,2003)

SectionIII:

PracticesandProcesses

Thewayassessment,

recruitment,andcreationofworkingconditionscanbeimprovedtobetter

accommodatethegenderdimension.

Theserecommendationsaimtoimprovealready‐existentinstitutional

processesandpractices.

ImpactsonInstitutions


Recommendation9:

Personswithdisproportionatecommitteeandadministrativedutiesshouldbeprovidedwithadditionalsupportstafforreducedteachingassignmentstoensure

thattheirresearchdoesnotsuffer.


Balancingthegendercompositionofcommitteesimprovesthequalityofcommitteeworkandsymbolicallychangesinstitutionalcultures.17However,the

requirementsforgenderbalanceincommitteesresultsinadisproportionateloadofcommitteeobligationsonwomeninhigh‐levelscientificpositions.18Measurestoalleviatethetimepressuresinvolvedinlargeamountsofcommitteeobligations

willachievethebenefitsofgenderbalancewhilenottakingtimeawayfromwomen’sresearchactivities.

17Forspecificreferences,pleaseconsultfootnote5inrecommendation4

18Forspecificreferences,pleaseconsultfootnote9inrecommendation5

SectionIII:PracticesandProcesses

Thewayassessment,recruitment,andcreationofworkingconditionscan

beimprovedtobetteraccommodatethegender

dimension.

Theserecommendationsaimtoimprovealready‐

existentinstitutionalprocessesandpractices.



Recommendation10:

Policiesandproceduresspecificallyaffectingworkingconditionsthatdifferentiallyimpactmenandwomeninscientificinstitutionsmustbereviewedandrevised,

ensuringpositivebenefitsforpersonalandprofessionaldevelopmentforbothmenandwomen.Revisionsareneededin:‐ implementingmaternityandpaternityleavepoliciesattheinstitutionallevel;

‐ proceduresfordual‐careercouplesthatspecificallytargetincreasingmobilityofresearchersbysupportingpartnersinfindingsuitableemploymentinthesameregion(takingcaretoavoidnepotism);

‐ institutionalstrategiesforcareersdevelopedlaterinlife(e.g.maintainingcontactwithindividualstakingcareerbreaks;providinggrantopportunitiesforindividualsatcriticalcareer/lifemomentsandreturners);and

‐ awarenessregardingsalarynegotiationtactics(through,forinstance,targetedworkshopsandtrainingforwomen)

Argumentationforrecommendation10:Thisrecommendationaddressesfourpoliciesthat,ifundeveloped,seemtomostaffectwomenwithinscientificinstitutions:

‐ womentendtodevelopcareerslaterinlifeandaremoreaffectedthanmenbyinadequatematernityandpaternityleavepolicies;19

‐ optionsfordual‐careercouplesattractmorewomentoinstitutions;20‐ encouraginggrantsforreturnersandinstitutionalcontactwithindividuals

oncareerbreakshasproveneffectiveinretainingwomen;21and‐ therearedifferencesbetweenmenandwomeninstrategiestakenduring

salarynegotiation,withwomenbeinglessaggressivenegotiators.22

19ETAN,2000;EC,WomenandScience,2005;EC,WomeninScience&Technology,2006

20Schiebinger,Henderson&Gilmartin,2008

21Notable,forinstance,arethethesuccessfuleffortsoftheDaphneJacksonTrust,an

independentcharitywhichgivesreturnergrantstoscientists(www.daphnejackson.org).Fortheeffectivenessofmaintainingcontactwiththoseoncareerbreaks,seetheGuiding

PrinciplesoftheEqualitecproject(Evansetal.,2007).

22Researchrevealswomenoftenfeeluncomfortablenegotiationinordertoenhancetheirowninterests.(Bowlesetal.,2005;Bowles&McGinn,2008;Gonas,etal.,2009;Kolb,

2009)




dimension.





Recommendation11:

Specificstrategiesshouldbeemployedforattractingwomentoapplyforscientificpositions.Announcementsforrecruitmentshouldbeformulatedsothatthey

encouragewomentoapply.Thatis,announcementsshouldbebroad,ratherthannarrowlyfocused.Jobcriteriaforemploymentshouldbeobjectiveandtransparent.Additionally,leadersshouldnotjustrelyonself‐initiatedpromotion

butalsoencourageandpromoteapplications,notjustacceptthem.Finally,iftherearenowomenintheapplicantpool,thepositionsshouldbere‐advertised.


Broaderannouncementprotocolsopenrecruitmentintofieldswheretherearemorewomen,whichincreasesthelikelihoodofapplication.Inpromotionandrecruitment,whenonlyself‐promotionalproceduresareused,themajorityofapplicantsaremen.Conversely,encouragingandsolicitingapplicationsincreasestheamountofwomenwhoapply.23Womenalsotendtoapplymoretore‐advertisedpositions.24Importantly,eveniftheseproceduresdonotincreasetheproportionofwomenapplicantsintheselectionpool(becauseofageneralincreaseinapplications),theywillstillincreasetheabsolutenumberofwomenapplyingforpositions.

23Isaac,C.,LeeB.&Carnes,M.(2009).

24EvidenceforthisisavailableincasestudiesfromtheNetherlands,includinginvanden

Brink,2009.




dimension.





SectionIV:Regulation&ComplianceThefollowingrecommendationsdealwiththemeansofensuringthegender

dimensionisindeedrecognisedinprocesseswithinscientificinstitutions.Theserecommendationsaimtoestablishinstitutionalaccountabilityasregardstopracticessurroundinggender.

Recommendation12:

Explicittargetstoimprovegenderbalanceandactionplanstoreachthemmustbeincludedintheoverarchinggenderstrategyofscientificinstitutions.Theprogressmustsubsequentlyberegularlymonitoredandbemadepublic.


Settingexplicittargetstoimprovegenderbalanceisextremelyimportantforanumberofreasons:

‐ ExistingandfutureEuropeanandnationallegislationwillrequiredemonstrationofnon‐discriminatorypractices;

‐ Specificquantitativetargetsandtheactionplansareneededtoinitiateinstitutionalchange;and

‐ Clarityontargetscreatesaccountabilityforinstitutionsandindividuals.Additionally,morewomeninhigherpositionswithinscientificinstitutionsimmediatelybegintochangethecultureofthoseinstitutionsandprovidevisiblerolemodelsforfemalestudents.25

25Womenalsoapplysomeleadershipbehaviorsmorefrequentlythanmen,contributingto

strongerorganisationalperformance(McKinsey&Company,2008).Nordiccountries(Finland,Norway,Sweden)haveemployedagenderquotainpubliccommittees,suchas

nationalResearchCouncilsforalongperiodoftime,andaccordingtothenewestEUstatisticsthesecountriesalsohavehighestproportionofwomenasheadsofuniversitiesin

EU‐27(SheFigures2009).

SectionIV:

Regulation&Compliance

Themeansofensuring

thegenderdimensionisindeedrecognisedin

processeswithinscientific

institutions.Theserecommendations

aimtoestablish

institutionalaccountabilityasregardstopracticessurrounding

gender.



Recommendation13:

Genderissuesmustbeanintegralpartofinternalandexternalevaluationofinstitutions.Policiesatalllevelsmustrequirethisinclusion.Thisshouldbeginwith

acriticalreviewofgendermainstreamingprocesseswithineachinstitution,identifyingcurrentsuccessesandfailures.

Amemberoftheleadershipteamshouldberesponsibleforgender‐relatedissues,suchasfollowinguponthegenderactionstrategyfortheinstitution.


Evaluationproceduresaretheonlywaytoholdmanagementandleadershipwithininstitutionsaccountableandguaranteethatstafffollowsgender‐relatedprotocol.Evaluationswillhelpinstitutionstoacquirethenecessaryskillstoperformgendermainstreamingeffectively.26

26ThereisextensiveEUlegislationrelatedtoequalitypolicymeasuresandalsomuchadvice

availablerelatedtostrengtheningtheparticipationofwomenresearchers.However,muchofthesemeasureshavenotbeeneffective,partiallyduetothelackofinternalandexternal

evaluationmechanisms(EC,EuropeanCharterforResearchers,2005;Burri&Prechal,2008).

SectionIV:

Regulation&Compliance

Themeansofensuring

thegenderdimensionisindeedrecognisedin

processeswithinscientific

institutions.Theserecommendations

aimtoestablish

institutionalaccountabilityasregards

topracticessurroundinggender.


ConsensusSeminarOrganisationandProcedure


ConsensusConferencesversusgenSETConsensusSeminars

TraditionalConsensusConferences,or“laymen'sconferences”,bringtogetheragroupof“ordinarycitizens”toarriveatajointopiniononatopicthathasbeen,tothatpoint,leftchieflytoexpertsintheparticularfield.InDenmark, where such conferences were developed, this initially involved facilitating consensus opinions ontechnological developments or adaptations, usually related to biotechnology. The largest proportion ofConferences, held between 1987 (when theDanish Board of Technology organised the first Conference) and2002dealtwiththetopicofgenetechnology.27TheConsensusConferencehasthusbeenmostlyatypeof“bio‐ethicaltool”,fallingunderthebroadercategoryofparticipatorytechnologyassessment.InthetraditionalConsensusConference,theaimistobroadenandqualifypublicdebatebyalteringthetypicalpower balance between experts and lawmakers and so‐called “laymen”. In this format, lay perspectives onfactualexpertisetakepriorityoverthedominantpolicydiscourse.Usedworldwide,theConsensusConferencemodelopensadialoguebetween twoparties thathave littlecontactona regularbasis. Conferencesdealingwith technological developments not only give voice to public opinions, but also reveal the discrepanciesbetween the actual knowledgebase of the public and that assumed as universal by experts. TheConsensusConference recommendations are both practical advice on given topics by previously untapped humanresources,aswellasmarkersofgeneralattitudessurroundingthedebate.As is evident in the recommendations and introduction to this report, the genSET Consensus Seminars havealteredthetraditional formattingoftheConsensusConference,whilemaintainingthespiritof innovationandopendialoguethatcharacterisestheprocess.Thetwomaindifferencesareasfollows:1)the“laypanel”oftheConsensusConferencewasherecomprisedoftop‐levelleadersandexpertsinEuropeanscience;2)duetothenatureof the framingquestionof theSeminar, the factualevidenceandexpert testimonyduring theprocessrequiredagreatdealofadditionalindividualinterpretationbythePanelbeforeelicitingrecommendations.Thus,whilethemembersoftheScienceLeadersPanelactedasthe“laypanel”intheConsensusSeminars,theywere in factdrawingonanoverwhelming levelofexperienceandexpertisewithin their respective fieldsandscientific institutions. As became evident during the Seminars, the Panel was keenly aware of the genderdimensionofscientificresearch,although–asplanned–themajorityhadnotparticipatedinoutrightgender‐related research projects. This meant that the Gender Experts invited to the Seminars served primarily aclarifyingandenrichingroletothediscussionofthePanel,ratherthanprovidingtheentirefactualbasisofthediscussion. Thedivisionsofexpert/non‐expertpartiallyeroded,andthequestion‐answerformatoftraditionalconferenceswasreplacedbyplenarydiscussion.StructureofthegenSETConsensusSeminarsThefirstmeetingoftheScienceLeadersPaneloccurredattheRoyalAcademyofEngineeringinLondon,on24‐25March, 2010. Prior to this meeting, the Panel members received an extensive Briefing Notes documenthighlightingcurrentresearchonthegenderdimensioninscience. The60+reportscitedwithinthisdocument(whichwere selected and reviewedwith thehelpofmembersof theGender ExpertsGroup)were all readilyavailableforadditionalreviewbythePanelduringthefirstSeminar.28

27Nielson,A.P.etal.(2006).ConsensusConferenceManual.EthicalToolsEuropeanCommissionFP5Project,QualityofLifeProgramme.TheHague.http://www.ethicaltools.info/content/ET4%20Manual%20CC%20%28Binnenwerk%2040p%29.pdf28TheBriefingNotesandtheSupplementcanbefoundintheappendixtothisreport,startingonpage44


After two days of intense deliberations, the Panel developed six topics related to the gender dimension inscience,fromwhichitwouldbemostimperativetodrawrecommendations.Thesetopics(or“chapters”)were:‐ thelackofrolemodels;‐ benefitsofincludinggenderperspectivesinscienceandmedicine(lifesciences);‐ thechallengeofbeingoneofafew:under‐representationleadstoexcessivecommitments;‐ featuresofassessment,recruitmentandpromotionthatmayfavourmenoverwomen;‐ isthisanindividualorasystemproblem;and‐ makingasystemtocreateanewbalancewherewomenandmencanhaveequalcareers.DuringthisSeminar,thePanelalsonotedquestionsforexpertsongenderresearchthatwereemergingduringdiscussionand thatwouldenrich theunderstandingof thechosen“chapters.” Basedon thesequestionsandPanelconcerns,thegenSETstaff,withthecollaborationandadviceofmembers intheGenderExpertsGroup,producedaBriefingNotesSupplement,withnumerousadditionalresources(seeappendix).This,alongwithasummaryoftheresultsofCSIweresenttothepanelpriortothesecondSeminar.The Panel met a second time at Technical University, Berlin, on April 29‐30, 2010. Here, gender expertsProfessorLondaSchiebingerandProfessorTeresaReespresentedthePanelwithadditionalinformationoneachtheme. The Panel then began formulating specific recommendations related to the themes, assisted byfeedbackandadvicefromthegenderexpertsduringplenarydiscussions.27 recommendations emerged from CS II in Berlin,which moved the focus of the report from originaltopicsdebatedinCSItofourkeythemes:‐ scienceknowledgemaking:actionsthatimprove

thequalityofresearchprocessandmethods,andof knowledge production, application andcommunication

‐ human capital: actions that improve the use ofsocial and intellectual capital of individualalreadywithinscientificinstitutions

‐ practices & processes: actions that improvealready existent institutional processes andpractices in assessment, recruitment, andworkingconditions

‐ regulation & compliance: actions that establishinstitutionalaccountabilityforintegratinggenderinpracticesandprocesses

ThegenSETstaffconsolidatedanyoverlapsbetweenthe 27 recommendations and matched theargumentation behind each recommendation withappropriate referenceswith the result of narrowingtheoutput fromBerlin into11 recommendations tobe discussed at the final seminar. A copy of thisconsolidated document was sent to the Panel forreviewbeforeCSIIIinParis.

WorkinProgress(CSI,London)


DuringthethirdConsensusSeminar,June3‐4intheUniversityofLondonInstituteinParis,thePanelrevisedthe recommendations and themes thathademergedduring theBerlinproceedings. In addition toProfessorLondaSchiebingerandProfessorTeresaRees,ProfessorAlisonWoodwardandProfessor JudithGlover joinedthegenderexpertgroupthatworkedwiththePanelinrefiningtherecommendedpoints.

CS III in Paris was also opened to the“public”– in thiscase representativesofthe science stakeholder institutions thatwouldbeusing the recommendations totake integrated action on gender, asproposed in the framingquestionof theSeminars. These stakeholders providedadditional feedback about the feasibilityandpracticalityof the recommendationsduringplenarydiscussionswiththePanelandthegenderexperts.WhilethePanelworkedaloneonthefinalversionsoftherecommendations,therepresentativesofstakeholder organisations held separatediscussions on implementation plans tofollowtheConsensusSeminars.

ThemajorityoftheScienceLeadersPanelattended each of the three Consensus Seminars. However, the high level of professional commitment andunexpected personal responsibilities of the Panel members meant that attendance of all members at eachSeminar could not be guaranteed. Still, those Panel members who were not able to attend the final ParisSeminarwereconsultedandsentacopyofthefinalreportforreviewbeforesigningthedocument.Thus,thisreportrepresentsaconsensusofallthoselistedintheintroductionofthisdocument.

DisseminationofgenSETConsensusSeminarReport

ThereportwascompletedbytheScienceLeadersPanelinParis,andpresentedbytheminasymbolichandoverceremony to genSET’s Patrons – represented by Euroscience and ESF – as the first step in disseminating itsfindingstothesciencecommunityandinstitutionsatthepan‐Europeanlevel.

The work and ideas on the implementation of therecommendations of the stakeholder organisationrepresentatives present during the final ConsensusSeminarwillbefurtherdiscussedduringthethreeCapacityBuilding Workshops, during which scientific institutions,assisted by gender experts, will be able to consider thefeasible implementation of each of the recommendedactions.

Thus,theConsensusReportcontinuestobedisseminatedon two levels: 1) through the supporting actions of thegenSETproject itself,aspartof thebasis for theCapacityBuilding Workshops and Symposia; 2) through the

DeliberationsContinue(CSII,Berlin)

HandoverofReport(CSIII,Paris)


networksofstakeholdersandpatronscollaboratingwithingenSET.

ConsensusSeminarParticipants


BiographiesofScienceLeadersPanelMembers

SimoneBuitendijk is Professor ofMaternal andChildHealth at LeidenUniversityMedicalCenterandtheUniversityofAmsterdamMedicalCenter.SheisalsoHeadoftheChildHealthProgrammeatTNOInstituteforAppliedScienceintheNetherlands.ShereceivedherMDatUniversityofUtrecht,theNetherlands,MPHatYaleintheUS,andPhDatLeidenUniversity,theNetherlands.DrBuitendijk’sprimaryscholarship is inmaternalandchildhealth,withafocusonMidwiferyStudies,PerinatalEpidemiologyandPublicChildHealth.Sheisamemberof the National Health Council that advises the Dutch Government on national issues inhealth.Concha Colomer Revuelta MD is a specialist in Paediatrics and in Public Health. She iscurrentlyDeputyDirectoroftheQualityAgencyoftheSpanishNationalHealthSystemandDirectoroftheObservatoryofWomen’sHealthintheMinistryofHealthandSocialPolicy.Beforeholding thisofficeat theMinistry, sheworkedasa teacherofhealthprofessionalsandasaresearcher.Sheco‐foundedtheSpanishGenderandHealthResearchNetwork.Shehas participated in organisations and projects on women’s health and gender,mainstreaming inhealthpolicies, indifferentNGOsandfeminismactivity.She isauthorofmanyscientificarticlesandbooks.

Daniela Corda is a cell biologist, Director of the Institute of Protein Biochemistry of theNationalResearchCouncilinNaples,Italy.SheobtainedherdegreeinBiologicalSciencesatPerugiaUniversity,ItalyandherPh.D.inLifeSciencesattheWeizmannInstituteofScience,Rehovot, Israel. She has been working in the signal transduction and membrane lipiddynamics field formore than20years, first in Israel,and thenat theNational InstitutesofHealth, Bethesda, USA, for her post‐doctoral studies. She moved to the “Mario Negri”Pharmacological Research Institute in Milan in 1986, and in 1987 she was one of thefoundersoftheConsorzioMarioNegriSud,wheresheservedasHeadoftheDepartmentofCell Biology and Oncology from 1996 to 2003 and Director of Research and development

until2009.Since1998shehasbeenactiveinsciencepolicyfocussingoncareerdevelopmentinEuropeandongender‐relatedissueswithinEuropeanorganisationsuchastheEuropeanLifeScientistOrganisation(ELSO),theECMarieCurieProgrammeandtheFederationofEuropeanBiochemicalSocieties(FEBS)whereshenowchairstheWorkingGroupontheCareerofYoungScientists.

AndersFlodström is theUniversityChancellorofSwedenandthePresidentoftheSwedishNationalAgencyforHigherEducation.HeisamemberoftheExecutiveCommitteeofEIT,theEuropean Institute of Innovation and Technology and amember of theDirectors AdvisoryBoard. Prof Flodström startedhis career in PaloAlto,USA, asmemberof research staff inXerox Palo Alto Research Centre. In 1985 hewas appointed a professor of physics at theRoyal Institute of Technology (KTH) in Stockholm, Sweden. Prof Flodström has been theSecretaryGeneraloftheSwedishResearchCouncilforEngineeringSciencesandPresidentatLinköping University (LiU), Sweden. Hewas President of the Royal Institute of Technology

(KTH), Stockholmuntil July2007whenhewasappointedUniversityChancellor forSwedishuniversities.He ismember of the Swedish Academy for the Engineering Sciences (IVA). He is also honorary doctor at RigaTechnicalUniversityinLatvia,honorarydoctorofHelsinkiTechnicalUniversity(TKK)andhonoraryprofessorinDalianUniversityofTechnologyinChina.HeisamemberoftheadvisoryboardofKarlsruheTechnicalInstitute


(KIT)andaformerChairmanofCLUSTERandBaltechanetworkoftechnicaluniversitiesaroundtheBalticSea.He has also been guest researcher at HASYLAB/DESY in Hamburg, Germany aswell as in National Bureau ofStandards(NBS)inGaithersburg,USA.

Anita Holdcroft, the Emeritus Professor of Anaesthesia at Imperial College London, is aclinicianspecialisinginacutepainmedicineespeciallyinfemales.ShewastheSecretarythenCo‐ChairoftheInternationalAssociationfortheStudyofPainSpecialInterestGrouponSex,GenderandPainuntil2005.Nowshe isPastPresidentof theForumonMaternityandtheNewbornandPresidentoftheSectionofAnaesthesiaattheRoyalSocietyofMedicine.HerlaboratoryandclinicalpainresearchhasattractedMedicalResearchCouncilandcharitablegrants aswell as funded studentships andkeynote international lectures.As author/editorshe has written books such as ‘Principles and Practice of Obstetric Anaesthesia and

Analgesia’, ‘CoreTopics inPain’, ‘Crises inChildbirth’.Otherpublications includechapterson 'SexandGenderDifferencesinPain'inWallandMelzack’sTextbookofPainandpapersongendermedicineparticularlyrelatingtowomenandchildbirth.Asaspinofffromherresearchshechampionsacademicwomen’semploymentissuesandledtheWomeninAcademicMedicine(WAM)projectfundedbytheHigherEducationFundingCouncilforEngland,theBMAandtheMedicalWomen’sFederation(MWF).Shehasco‐chairedtheBMAMedicalAcademicStaffCommitteeandistheMWFTreasurer.

Jackie Hunter is ex Senior Vice President of Science Environment Development atGlaxoSmithKline and CEO of Pharmivation Ltd. Dr Jackie Hunter has worked in thepharmaceutical industry for over 20 years, and 2002 she was appointed Head of theNeurologyandGICentreofExcellenceforDrugDiscovery(CEDD). TheCEDDwasfocussedonthediscoveryanddevelopmentofnewtherapeuticsforneurodegenerativedisease,painandgastrointestinaldisorders.DrHunterhaspublishedover130scientificpapersandservedon a number of industrial and academic boards. In 2008 she became Head of ScienceEnvironmentDevelopmentwitharemittodevelopapre‐competitiveresearchagendaandnewwaysofworkingwithexternal sciencepartners. Examplesof this areher role in the

InnovativeMedicines Initiative in Europe and leadership of the establishment of the first biopharmaceuticalopeninnovationcampusatStevenage,UK.

Astrid James is the Deputy Editor of the medical journal The Lancet. She qualified inmedicinefromUniversityCollegeHospital,London,in1986andthenworkedintheNHSforfiveyearsingeneralmedicineandsurgery,cardiology,oncology,obstetricsandgynaecology,paediatrics,geriatrics,and ingeneralpractice.Shecompletedgeneralpracticetrainingandthendecidedtogointomedicalpublishing,workingfirstforMedicalTribuneintheUKandthenforMedicalActionCommunications.Astrid joinedTheLancetasanAssistantEditor in1993,becomingDeputyEditorin2001.Amongherinterestsisacommitmenttopromoting

theneedforwomeninmedicineandmorebroadlyinscience,andtoidentifyinganddiscussingbarrierstotheircareerdevelopment.


Henrik Toft Jensen is Lecturer at the Department of Environmental, Social and SpatialChangeatRoskildeUniversity,Denmark.HewasRectorofRoskildeUniversityfrom1989to2006andChairoftheDanishRectors’Conferencefrom2000to2002.DrToftJensenstartedhis career at the Department of Geography of the University of Copenhagen where heworked from 1968 to 1973. Until 1975 he was an adjunct professor at FalkonergårdensGymnasium, Denmark. He then joined the Department of Geography, Social Science andComputerScienceofRoskildeUniversity,whereheservedasHeadofDepartmentfrom1982to 1987. Dr Toft Jensen is involved in a variety of higher education projects and expert

committeeswithinandoutsideEurope.Amongstothers,hehasbeenmemberoftheCommitteeforResearchandTechnologicalDevelopmentof theEU’s 7th FrameworkProgramme since2007, theChair of the steeringcommittee of the E4 Group’s European Quality Assurance Forum since 2006 and a member of the IrishUniversitiesQuality Board (IUQB) since 2006. He is amember the External Review Panel of the SingaporeanuniversitiesandwasamemberofanadvisorypaneltotheSingaporeangovernmentfrom2003to2006.Hewasthe Chair of the Steering Committee of EUA’s Institutional Evaluation Programme (2001‐2007) and alsorepresentedEUAintheE4Groupuntil2007.DrToftJensenisandwasalsoinvolvedinseveralDanishbodies,bothinthefieldsofhighereducationandgeography.DrToftJensenstudiedpoliticalscienceandgeographyatCopenhagenUniversityandholdsseveralhonorarydegrees.Amongstothers,heisDoctorHonorisCausaoftheLinguisticUniversityofNizhniyNovgorod,Russia.

NickKitchenisVicePresidentHRResearchandDevelopmentatUnilever.NickhasaBAandDPhil in Chemistry and joined Unilever as a Research Scientist at Unilever Research,Colworth, in1984.AfteraveryshortperiodasascientistNickmoved intoHR in1985.HisfirstrolewasasaRecruitmentManagerforUKNationalManagementandafterthishehasheld a varietyof factory andHeadOfficeHR roles. Thesehave included LeverUK,Brooke

BondFoodsaswell asaperiodbackatColworth, this timeexploringhow tohelppeople change rather thanplayingwithtest‐tubes.HewasthenresponsibleforaglobalHRproject,Garuda,whichwasdesignedtochangethe way HR was structured and how processes were undertaken. Nick then moved to Unilever’s CorporateCentretobetheVP,HR‐FinanceandIT. Inthisrolehisprincipalresponsibilitieswereforthedevelopmentofthe future organisation of these functions and for future leaders. In 2004 Nick became HR Director forLeverFaberge, Unilever’s Home & Personal Care business within the UK. In this role he was responsible forleading the development of skills, capabilities and culture to deliver market success for this £1m+ turnoverbusiness.HethenreturnedtotheCorporateCentretakingresponsibilityfirstlyforHPCBrandDevelopmentandtheninlate2007NickbecameHRVP–R&D,responsibleinaHRsenseforUnilever’s6000+R&Dstaffglobally.As a member of the R&D Leadership Team this involves building capability for the future, identifying, anddeveloping, the future leaders of the profession and representing the needs of R&D within the global HRcommunity.

Curt Rice became the Vice Rector (prorektor)for Research and Development at theUniversityofTromsøonJanuary1stof2009.From2003‐2008,heworkedastheDirectoroftheCentreforAdvancedStudyinTheoreticalLinguistics(CASTL),whichwasthefirstCentreof Excellence at the University of Tromsø and in the first cohort of Centres of Excellencecreated inNorway.He also received funding fromNordForsk to start aNordicNetworkofExcellence,theNordicLanguageVariationNetwork,whichbringstogethersociolinguistsandgenerative linguists to study issues of linguistic variation. Rice is a co‐editor of Linguistic

Inquiryand isontheeditorialboardofLingua,NordicJournalofLinguistics,andNorsk lingvistisktidsskrift.Hehas written and spoken widely on various topics related to scientific leadership, including the connectionbetweenleadershipandgenderissuesintheacademy.


Martina Schraudner is Professor for Gender and Diversity in Organisations, Institute ofMachine Tools and Factory Management at the Technische Universität Berlin. She alsoworksforFraunhofer,whichisaspecialconstructattheUniversityofBerlin.DrSchraudnerstudiedbiologyandbiotechnologyattheTechnicalUniversityofMunich,wheresheearnedher doctorate. After several years of research visits to the Society for Environment and

HealthResearchandtheSwissFederalTechnicalUniversityinZurich,shebecameDeputyHeadofDepartmentat theResearchCentre Jülich. After completingherdoctorate at the Faculty ofAgriculture andHorticulture,Humboldt University, Berlin, Dr Schraudner moved to the Fraunhofer‐Gesellschaft. The focus of their workincludes the development of business health and life sciences as well as the establishment of gendermainstreaminginresearch,particularlytheintegrationofgenderissuesinresearch.Since2004shehasbeeninadvisorybodiesoftheFederalGovernmentandtheEU.ShehasbeenaboardmemberoftheTotalE‐QualityeVsince2007.

KarenSjørup isAssociateProfessorat the Institute for SocietyandGlobalisation,RoskildeUniversity.ShehasanMScinSociologyfromtheUniversityofCopenhagen.SheiscurrentlyamemberoftheLønkommissionenandoftheAssociationforGenderResearchinDenmark.DrSjørupwastheDirectoroftheKnowledgeCentreforGenderandthentheCentreDirectorofthe Centre for Gender Research, CELI, at Roskilde University until 2006. Karen Sjørup haswritten several scholarly articles and anthology contributions on women, professionalism

andsocialwelfareinDenmark.Shealsolecturesonsex,profession,organisation,development,genderpolicy,universitypolicyandresearch.From1996‐2000KarenwasthevicerectorforRoskildeUniversityandfrom2000‐2005shewasamemberoftheboardofdirectorsforTheDanishTechnicalUniversity(DTU).

HanneRønneberg is currentlyExecutiveVicePresidentat SINTEF, the largest independentresearchorganisationinScandinavia,responsiblefortheoperatingunitSINTEFBuildingandInfrastructure. She is also amember of the Senior Executive team in SINTEF.Until joiningSINTEF last September, Rønneberg has spent the past 11 years working for the globalconstruction company Skanska holding several senior management positions in thecompany,both inNorwayandglobally.Amongstotherpositions,Rønneberg is thedeputyleader of the Confederation of Norwegian Enterprises (NHO) committee for ethics andcorporatesocial responsibilityandmemberof theclimatepanel forNorwegianbusinesses,aswellastheStrategicCouncilforEnvironmentalTechnology,establishedbytheNorwegian

Government. Hanne Rønneberg has a Master of Science degree in organic chemistry from the NorwegianUniversityof Science andTechnology (NTH1983). She also spent two yearsworking as assistantprofessor inconcretetechnology1989‐1990.

Rolf Tarrach is Rector of the University of Luxemburg and President of the AcademicCooperationAssociation. Dr Tarrach is professor of theoretical physics, and has served inthatcapacityattheuniversitiesofValenciaandBarcelonaaswellastheUniversityofSaintPetersburg.Manyorganisationshavetakenadvantageofhisbreadthofknowledgeandhiscommandoflanguages.HeisaformerpresidentoftheSpanishScientificResearchCouncil

(CSIC),andaformermemberoftheEuropeanResearchAdvisoryBoard(EURAB),EuropeanHeadsofResearchCouncils (EUROHORCS), Euroscience Open Forum (ESOF2004). He regularly consults for the EuropeanCommissionandiscurrentlyontheEuropeanUniversityAssociation(EUA)Council.


ObserverPhilipCampbellistheEditor‐in‐ChiefofNatureandNaturePublications,basedinLondon.HehasaBSc inAeronauticalEngineering fromtheUniversityofBristol,andearnedanMSc inAstrophysicsatQueenMaryandWestfieldCollege,UniversityofLondon.DrCampbellalsopossessesaPhDandpostdoctoral fellowship inUpperAtmosphericPhysics fromUniversityofLeicester.HisareasofresponsibilityatNatureincludeeditorialcontentandmanagementofNatureandthelong‐termqualityofallNaturePublications.HeisalsoatrusteeofCancerResearchUK.

BiographiesofGenderExpertGroup

Teresa Rees is Pro Vice Chancellor (Research) at Cardiff University and a Professor in theSchoolofSocialSciences.She isanacademicanoftheAcademyofSocialSciencesandwasawardedaCBEforservicestoequalopportunitiesandhighereducation.She isaFellowofthe Sunningdale Institute and a member of the BBC's Audience Council Wales. She isparticularly interested in gender mainstreaming and analysing how policies and practicescan, inadvertently, reproduce patterns of inequality. Teresa has worked with a range ofbodies and governments in Europe and elsewhere to apply a gender mainstreamingapproachtothedevelopmentofgovernance,education,trainingandlabourmarketpolicies,regionaleconomicdevelopment,the'knowledgeeconomy'andsocialexclusion.Shehasalso

worked as an expert advisor to the Research Directorate‐General of the European Commission and wasrapporteurforaseriesofinternationalgroupscommissionedbytheECtoinformpoliciesonwomeninscience,engineeringandtechnology.SheiscurrentlyworkingonaEuropeanCommissionfundedprojectonknowledgeeconomies. She chaired two independent investigations on higher education funding for the Education andLifelongLearningMinisteroftheWelshAssemblyGovernment(the'ReesReviews').

LondaSchiebingeristheJohnL.HindsProfessorofHistoryofScienceatStanfordUniversityand Director of Stanford's Clayman Institute for Gender Research. Over the past twentyyears, Schiebinger'swork has been devoted to teasing apart three analytically distinct butinterlockingpiecesofthegenderandsciencepuzzle:thehistoryofwomen'sparticipationinscience;thestructureofscientificinstitutions;andthegenderingofhumanknowledge.Hercurrent work explores "Gendered Innovations in Science, Medicine, and Engineering".Gendered Innovations researchanddevelopstate‐of‐the‐artgendermethods forbasicandappliedresearch.Genderanalysis‐whenturnedtoscience,medicine,andengineering‐canspark creativity by openingnewperspectives, newquestions, andnewmissions for futureresearch. Her new volume is Gendered Innovations in Science and Engineering (Stanford

UniversityPress,2008).Andrecently,herstudyonhouseworkasanacademicissuewasprofiledonABCNews.LondaSchiebingerhasbeentherecipientofnumerousprizesandawards, includingtheprestigiousAlexandervonHumboldtResearchPrizeandJohnSimonGuggenheimFellowship.ShehasalsoservedasaSeniorResearchFellowattheMax‐Planck‐InstitutfürWissenschaftsgeschichteinBerlin,theJantineTammesChairintheFacultyofMathematics andNatural Sciences at theUniversity ofGroningen, a guest professor at theGeorg‐August‐Universität in Göttingen, and the Maria Goeppert‐Meyer Distinguished Visitor, Oldenburg University. Herresearch has been supported by the National Science Foundation, National Institutes of Health, NationalEndowment for the Humanities, Rockefeller Foundation, Fulbright‐Hays Commission, Woodrow WilsonFoundation, andDeutscher Akademischer Austauschdienst. She is the author of fourmajor books, six editedvolumes,twomajorreports,and60academicarticles.Herworkhasbeentranslatedintoover13languages.


AlisonE.Woodward (Ph.D.UniversityofCalifornia,Berkeley) isResearchProfessor at theFreeUniversityofBrussels(VUB)andco‐directorofRHEA,theCenterforGenderStudiesandDiversityResearch.Since2007shehasbeenaSeniorAssociateoftheInstituteforEuropeanStudies.HerresearchinterestsareinthefieldofcomparativeEuropeanUnionpublicpolicyandorganisation,especially in theareasof civil society transnationalmobilisation,gender,migration,andequality.Asprofessoror senior researcher shehasbeenaffiliatedwith the

UniversitiesofUppsala,AntwerpandBrussels,RuhrUniversity,WayneStateUniversity,RutgersUniversity,theWissenschaftszentrum Berlin, and the Royal Institute of Technology in Stockholm. Working as a policyconsultant she has assisted the European Commission, the Council of Europe, the United Nations and theFlemishgovernment,andisfrequentlyrelieduponforexpertcontributionsrelatingtosocialexclusion,genderandpolitics.Anactivememberof theEuropeanConsortiumforPoliticalResearchsectiononEuropeanUnionPolitics, she has convened the stream on Diversity, Gender and European Integration at the bi‐annualconferencesinBologna,IstanbulandRiga.SheistheBelgiancoordinatorfortheResearchNetworkGenderandthe State funded by the European Science Foundation and the National Science Foundation, BelgianrepresentativeintheCOSTA‐34networkonEuropeanGenderandWell‐Being,andintheATHENAEUTrainingandEducation3Bnetworkongenderandpublicpolicies. Shewasa scientific coordinatorof theCOSTActionConference European Social Movements and Well‐Being at the International Institute of Social History,AmsterdaminMarch2009.

JudithGloverisProfessorofEmploymentStudiesinRoehamptonUniversityBusinessSchoolandhasresearchinterestsinwomen'semployment,withparticularreferencetowomenandscientificemployment.SheisincludedintheEuropeanCommissionlistofexpertsonspecificscience and technology policy issues and herwork has been funded by the ESRC and theEuropean Commission. She has worked with the European Commission’s ResearchDirectorate General on the production of She Figures and was a member of theETAN/STRATAExpertGrouponthesituationofwomenscientistsinCentral&EasternEuropeand theBaltic States. She ison theeditorial committeeof the journalEqualOpportunitiesInternational and the International Journal of Gender, Science and Technology. Recent

researchincludesaresearchprojectforEqualitec,fundedbytheEuropeanSocialFundandtheDepartmentforTrade and Industry on the practices of organisations that are recruiting women in Information Technology,ElectronicsandCommunications.SheisauthorofWomenandScientificEmployment(Macmillan,2000)andco‐author(withGillKirton)ofWomen,EmploymentandOrganisations(Routledge,2006).

GenderExpertsAdvisingonBriefingNotes

Dr Alexandra Bitusikova graduated in social anthropology and received PhD fromComenius University in Bratislava. She is Senior Researcher at the Research Institute atMatejBelUniversity inBanskaBystrica(Slovakia). She isalsoSeniorAdvisertoEuropeanUniversitiesAssociation–CouncilforDoctoralEducation,Brussels(Belgium).Herresearchprojects include the EU funded projects: “Enlargement, Gender, Governance: Civic andPolitical Participation of Women in the EU Candidate Countries” (FP5), “SustainableDevelopmentinaDiverseWorld”(FP6NetworkofExcellence),andGenderDebateintheEuropean Research Area (FP7). She was member of the expert group of the EuropeanCommissionWIRDEM(WomeninResearchDecisionMaking).Sheisauthorofanumberof

publications on urban anthropology, gender, post‐socialist social and cultural change in Central Europe,identities,minoritiesanddiversity.


DrSuzannedeCheveigne isDirectorofResearchatSHADYC(Sociology,Anthropology,andHistoryofCulturalDynamics)inMarseille(France).SheisalsoanactiveresearcherintheFrenchCentreNationaldelaRechercheScientifique (CNRS) under the Institute for Humanities and Social Sciences (INSHS). She is fundamentallyinterested in the relationsbetween science, technology,mediaand society. Her current research focusesonmediacoverageofthepublicdebatesonsocialimplicationsofbiotechnology.Dr LindaMarie Rustad is Senior Advisor to the Committee for Gender Balance in Research in Norway. Thecommittee is appointedby theMinistryofEducationandResearch.DrRustad is aphilosopherwitha specialinteresttheoryofscience,researchpolicyandgender.Shehastaughtseveraluniversitycoursesonthesetopicsandhaswrittenseveralarticlesinaboutscienceandgender.SheisnowemployedbytheNorwegianAssociationofHigherEducationInstitutionsweresheisworkswithpolicymakersinordertoimprovegenderbalanceintheresearchsector.Shehasalsoeditedahandbookforresearchleaders.DrMagdalenaSkipperistheSeniorEditorofBiologyatNaturemagazine.ShehasaBScHonsinGeneticsfromtheUniversityofNottingham,andgainedherPhD,MRCLMB,at theUniversityofCambridge.DrSkipperalsocompleted a postdoctoral fellowship at the Imperial Cancer Research Fund in London.At Nature, her areas of responsibility include: genetics, genomics, gene therapy, biotechnology, molecularevolution.StakeholderOrganisationsRepresentedinFinalConsensusSeminarinParisBekaertisaglobalmarketleaderindrawnsteelwireproductsandapplicationsandatechnologicalleaderinitstwo core competence: advanced metal transformation and advanced materials and coatings. It is a globalcompanybasedinBelgiumthatemploysover23000peopleservingover120countries.DaimlerAG isbasedinGermany,andisoneoftheworld’slargestandmostsuccessfulcarcorporations.Withdivisions of Mercedes‐Benz Cars, Daimler Trucks, Mercedes‐Benz Vans, Daimler Buses and Daimler FinancialServices theDaimlerGroup is one of the biggest producers of premium cars and commercial vehicleswith aglobalreach.EPWS(EuropeanPlatformofWomenScientists)isaninternationalnon‐profitorganisationthatrepresentstheneeds,concerns,interests,andaspirationsofmorethan12000womenscientistsinEuropeandbeyond.Itisanumbrellaorganisationbringingtogethernetworksofwomenscientistsandorganisationscommittedtogenderqualityinresearchdisciplines.ETH(SwissFederalInstituteofTechnology,Zurich)isascienceandtechnologyuniversityrankedamongthetopuniversitiesintheworld.Withmorethan15000studentsinapproximately80countries,itorientsitsresearchstrategyaroundglobalchallengessuchasclimatechange,worldfoodsupplyandhumanhealthissues.Eurodoc (The European Council of Doctoral Candidates and Junior Researchers) is the European‐widefederationofnationalassociatesofPh.D.candidatesandyoungresearchers.Itsobjectivesincluderepresentingyoungresearchersat theEuropean level inmattersofeducation, researchandprofessionaldevelopmentandadvancingthequalityofdoctoralprogramsandstandardsofresearchactivityinEurope.L’Oreal istheworld’slargestcosmeticsandbeautycompanythat,inpartnershipwithUNESCO,grantsAwardsfor Women in Sciencewhich aim to improve the position of women in science by recognizing outstandingwomenresearcherswhohavecontributedtoscientificprogressaswellasyoungwomenscientistsengagedinexemplaryandpromisingresearchprojects.


ScienceFoundationIreland isastatutorybodyoftheRepublicof Irelandwiththeresponsibilityfordisbursingfunds for basic science researchwith strategic focus. It invests in academic researchers and research teamsmostlikelytogeneratenewknowledge, leadingedgetechnologiesandcompetitiveenterprisesinthefieldsofscienceandengineeringunderpinningtheareasofbiology,ICT,andsustainableenergy.SPRU (Science and Technology Research) is a world‐leading department at theUniversity of Sussex whereresearchandhigh‐levelpolicyarecombinedwithpostgraduateteachinginscience,technology,andinnovationpolicyandmanagement.Itisthecentreofaworldwidenetworkofinterdisciplinaryresearchersaddressingtheanalysisoftherateanddirectionofscientificchangeandinnovationandpathstoamoresustainablesociety.UniversityofViennaisoneofthelargestandoldestuniversitiesintheGermanspeakingarea.Since1365ithasgrowntoacomplexorganisationofmorethan76,000studentsand8,600employees.IthasaCentreforGenderEquality coordinatesand offers variousmeasures aiming at gender equality and the promotion ofwomen inacademia,particularlyinthesciences.


genSETConsortiumPartnersandStaff

PortiaLtd–London,UK(projectlead)

DrElizabethPollitzer,Director

HenriettaDale,OperationsManagerEmilyCrane,CommunicationsOfficerAlexandraBlaszczuk,ProjectOfficer

DepartmentofThematicStudies(GenderStudies),LinköpingUniversity,Sweden

ProfJeffHearn,ProfessorofGenderStudies,DepartmentofThematicStudies,andCo‐DirectorofGEXcelCentreofGenderExcellence,LinköpingUniversity,SwedenDrLiisaHusu,GuestProfessorofGenderStudies,DepartmentofThematicStudies,LinköpingUniversity,Sweden,andGuestProfessorofGenderStudies,ÖrebroUniversity,Sweden

InstituteforAppliedandComputationalMathematics(FORTH)‐GreeceDrKathyKikis‐Papadakis,SeniorScientist,HeadofEducationalResearch&EvaluationGroup

AthanasiaMargetousaki,ResearchFellow

WissenschaftsladenWien–ScienceShopVienna,Austria

ChristineUrban,SeniorResearcherandCo‐DirectoroftheScienceShopViennaReginaReimer,SeniorResearcherandCo‐DirectoroftheScienceShopVienna

MichaelSträhle,SeniorResearcherandCo‐DirectoroftheScienceShopVienna

Appendix1

ReferencesintheConsensusReport


ListofReferencesUsedintheConsensusReport

Barjak,F.&Robinson,S.(2008).Internationalcollaboration,mobilityandteamdiversityinthelifesciences:impactonresearchperformance.SocialGeography,3(1),23‐36.

Bonetta,L.(2010,February12).ReachingGenderEquityinScience:TheImportanceofRoleModelsandMentors.Science,889‐895

Bowles,H.R.&McGinn,K.L.(2008).Untappedpotentialinthestudyofnegotiationandgenderinequalityinorganisations.InJ.P.Walsh&A.P.Brief(Eds.),TheAcademyofManagementAnnalsVolume2(99‐132).NewYork:Routledge.

Bowles,H.R.,Babcock,L.C.,&McGinn,K.L.(2005).ConstraintsandTriggers:Situationalmechanicsofgenderinnegotiation.JournalofPersonalityandSocialPsychology,89,951‐965.

Burri,S.&Prechal,S.(2008).EUGenderEqualityLaw.Brussels:EuropeanCommissionDirector‐GeneralforEmployment,SocialAffairs,&EqualOpportunity.<http://ec.europa.eu/social/BlobServlet?docId=1771&langId=en>

Carrell,S.E.,Page,M.E.,&West,J.E.(2009).SexandScience:HowProfessorGenderPerpetuatestheGenderGap.NBERWorkingPaperSeries,w14959.<http://www.econ.ucdavis.edu/faculty/scarrell/gender.pdf>

Chen,C.(1998).UnderstandingCareerDevelopment:aconvergenceofperspectives.JournalofVocationalEducationandTraining,50(3),437‐461.

CiscoSystems.(2009).StyleoftheSexes:ExaminingtheWorkingStylesofMenandWomen.WhitePaper.SanJose,CA:CiscoSystems.<http://www.cisco.com/web/about/ac49/ac55/ExaminingTheWorkingStylesOfTheSexes.pdf>

Daston,L.&Galison,P.(2007).Objectivity.Cambridge,MA:ZoneBooks.Desrochers,S.&Sargent,L.D.(2004).Boundary/BorderTheoryandWork‐FamilyIntegration.Organisation

ManagementJournal,1(1),40‐48.Desvaux,G.&Devillard,S.(2008).WomenMatter2:Femaleleadership,acompetitiveedgeforthefuture.

McKinsey&Company:Paris,France.Eagly,A.H.&Johannesen‐Schmidt,M.C.(2001).Theleadershipstylesofwomenandmen.JournalofSocial

Issues.57(4),781‐797.doi:10.1111/0022‐4537.00241EuropeanCommission.(2005).TheEuropeanCharterforResearchers.TheCodeofConductforTheir

Recruitment.Brussels:Director‐GeneralforResearch.<http://ec.europa.eu/eracareers/pdf/am509774CEE_EN_E4.pdf>

EuropeanCommission.(2005).WomenandScience:ExcellenceandInnovation–GenderEqualityinScience.Brussels:Director‐GeneralforResearch.<http://ec.europa.eu/research/science‐society/pdf/sec_report_en.pdf>

EuropeanCommission.(2006).WomeninScience&Technology:TheBusinessPerspective.Brussels:Director‐GeneralforResearch.<http://ec.europa.eu/research/science‐society/pdf/wist_report_final_en.pdf>

EuropeanCommission.(2008).BenchmarkingPolicyMeasuresforGenderEqualityinScience.Brussels:Director‐GeneralforResearch.<http://ec.europa.eu/research/science‐society/document_library/pdf_06/benchmarking‐policy‐measures_en.pdf>

EuropeanCommission.(2009).ConsultationontheFuture"EU2020"Strategy.Bussles.CommissionWorkingDocument.COM(2009)647final<http://ec.europa.eu/eu2020/pdf/eu2020_en.pdf>

EuropeanCommission.(2009).SheFigures2009:StatisticsandIndicatorsonGenderEqualityinScience.Brussels:Director‐GeneralforResearch.<http://ec.europa.eu/research/science‐society/document_library/pdf_06/she_figures_2009_en.pdf>

EuropeanTechnologyAssessmentNetwork(ETAN).(2000).SciencePoliciesintheEU:Promotingexcellencethroughmainstreaminggenderequality.Brussels:Director‐GeneralforResearch.<ftp://ftp.cordis.europa.eu/pub/improving/docs/g_wo_etan_en_200101.pdf>


Evans,C.etal.(2007).ImplementingDiversityPolicies:GuidingPrinciples–AGuideforITECandotherengineeringbusinesseswhowanttobenefitfromemployingadiverseworkforce.ReportfundedbyTheRoyalAcademyofEngineeringinpartnershipwithEqualitec.

Gonäs,L.,Bergman,A.&Karlsson,J.C.(2009).EqualOpportunities,SegregationandGenderBasedWageDifferencesataSwedishUniversity.JournalofIndustrialRelations,51(5),669‐686.

Greenspan,J.,etal.(2007).Studyingsexandgenderdifferencesinpainandanalgesia:Aconsensusreport.Pain,132,S26–S45.doi:10.1016/j.pain.2007.10.014

Holdcroft,A.(2007).Genderbiasinresearch:howdoesitaffectevidencebasedmedicine?JournalofTheRoyalSocietyofMedicine,100,2‐3.doi:10.1258/jrsm.100.1.2

Isaac,C.,LeeB.&Carnes,M.(2009).InterventionsThatAffectGenderBiasinHiring:ASystematicReviewAcademicMedicine,84(10),1440‐1446.

Klinge,I.&Wiesemann,C.(Eds.).(2010).SexandGenderinBiomedicine:Theories,Methodologies,Results.Gottingen,Germany:UniversitätsverlagGöttingen.

Kolb,D.M.(2009).TooBadfortheWomenorDoesitHavetoBe?GenderandNegotiationResearchoverthePastTwenty‐FiveYears.NegotiationJournal,25(4),515‐531.

Lubinski,D.&Benbow,C.P.(2006).StudyofMathematicallyPrecociousYouthAfter35Years:UncoveringAntecedentsfortheDevelopmentofMath‐ScienceExpertise.PerspectivesofPsychologicalScience,1(4),316‐345.

Marsh,H.W.,etal.(2007).GenderEffectsinPeerReviewsofGrantProposals:AComprehensiveMeta‐AnalysisComparingTraditionalandMultilevelApproaches.ReviewofEducationalResearch79(3),1290‐1326.

MassachusettsInstituteofTechnology.(1999).AStudyontheStatusofWomenFacultyinScienceatMIT.Boston:MIT.<http://web.mit.edu/fnl/women/women.html>

Merton,R.K.(1968).TheMatthewEffectinScience.Science159(3810),56‐63<http://www.garfield.library.upenn.edu/merton/matthew1.pdf>

Palich,L.E.&Livingstone,L.A.(2003).ImprovingResearchPerformance:Teamworktrumpssoloendeavors.GraziadioBusinessReport,6(2).<http://gbr.pepperdine.edu/032/teamwork.html>

Paludi,A.M.&Bauer,W.D.(1983).Goldbergrevisited:What'sinanauthor'sname.SexRoles9(3),387‐390.Risberg,G.,Johansson,E.,&Hamberg,K.(2009).Atheoreticalmodelforanalysinggenderbiasinmedicine.

InternationalJournalforEquityinHealth.8(28).doi:10.1186/1475‐9276‐8‐28Rossiter,M.,Paranjape,B.&Pantano,V.(2006).Performancemeasurementsystems:successes,failuresand

future–areview.MeasuringBusinessExcellence,10(3),4‐14.Rothen,D&Pfirman,S.(2007).Womenininterdisciplinaryscience:Exploringpreferencesandconsequences.

ResearchPolicy36,56‐75Ruiz‐Cantero,M.T.(2007).AFrameworktoAnalyseGenderBiasinEpidemiologicalResearch.Journalof

EpidemioogyandCommunityHealth.61,ii46‐ii53.doi:10.1136/jech.2007.062034Schiebinger,L.,Henderson,A.D.&Gilmartin,S.K.(2008).Dual‐CareerAcademicCouples:WhatUniversities

NeedtoKnow.MichelleR.ClaymanInstituteforGenderResearch,StanfordUniversity:Stanford,CA.Schiebinger,L.(2008).GenderedInnovationsinScienceandEngineering.Stanford,CA:Stanford UniversityPress.Sible,J.C.,Wilhelm,D.E.&Lederman,M.(2006).TeachingCellandMolecularBiologyforGenderEquity.CBE–

LifeSciencesEducation,5,227‐238.Trix,F.&Psenka,C.(2003).Exploringthecolorofglass:lettersofrecommendationforfemaleandmale

medicalfaculty.Discourse&Society,14(2),191‐220.VandenBrink,M.(2009)BehindtheScenesofScience.Nijmegen:RadboudUniversityNijmegen.Wald,C.&Wu,C.(2010).OfMiceandWomen:TheBiasinAnimalModels.Science,327(5973),1571‐1572.doi:

10.1126/science.327.5973.1571


1.BriefingNoteswithReferences,preparedforthefirstConsensusSeminarinLondon2.BriefingNotesSupplementwithReferences,preparedforthesecondConsensusSeminarinBerlin

Appendix2