Digital Document (pdf, doc, ppt, txt, etc.)

ing recognition of the need to account for sex and gender in biology and medicine, in order to develop a more compre- hensive understanding of biological phenomena and to address gaps in medical knowledge that have arisen due to a generally masculine bias in research. We have noted that as basic experimental biomedical researchers, we face unique challenges to the incorporation of sex and gender in our work, and that these have remained largely unarticulated, misunderstood, and unaddressed in the literature. Here, we describe some of the specific challenges to the incorporation of sex and gender considerations in research involving cell cultures and laboratory animals. In our view, the main- streaming of sex and gender considerations in basic biomed- ical research depends on an approach that will allow scien- tists to address these issues in ways that do not undermine our ability to pursue our fundamental scientific interests. To that end, we suggest a number of strategies that allow basic experimental researchers to feasibly and meaningfully take sex and gender into account in their work. Compared to other fields, the experimental biomedical sciences have been slow to take up s/g considerations. Our objective in this article has been to articulate the challenges of addressing s/g issues in laboratory-based research, and to identify ways of acknowledging their relevance in the face of the realities of experimental science, which create real limitations on what we are able to do, both practically and conceptually. We believe the basic toolbox we have offered demonstrates that there are ways to meaningfully take s/g into account without diverting focus from our primary sci- entific interests, and without slipping into the traps of simplistic determinism or overemphasizing difference. We have deliberately taken this first-steps approach in order to be useful to a broad swath of researchers who otherwise might not consider s/g at all.  

There is widespread agreement that fostering diversity is integral to innovation in research, and gender equality is key to achieving this. Critical issues related to gender disparity and bias must be examined by sound studies to support a data-informed approach to implementing interventions and policy related to gender inequality.

The report Gender in the Global Research Landscape was produced by Elsevier in partnership with global experts to provide an analytical framework for better understanding the role of gender within the structure of the global research enterprise. Based on 20 years of data from Scopus and ScienceDirect – across 12 geographies and all 27 Scopus subject areas – the report is an evidence-based examination of global research performance through a gender lens.The report employs a unique gender disambiguation methodology and is based on analyses of Scopus and ScienceDirect data conducted by Elsevier’s. Scopus Author Profiles were combined with gender-name data from social media, applied onomastics, and Wikipedia. The disciplinary breadth of the Scopus database was used to assess changes across a wide range of subject areas over time.The aim of the report is to provide institutions, funders, governments and other stakeholders with data-driven insights and guidance on gender research and gender equality policy.

Key Findings

• The percentage of women among researchers and inventors has increased over the past 20 years.
• Although women tend to publish fewer research articles than men, their articles are cited or downloaded at similar rates.
• The proportion of patent applications with at least one woman among their inventors tends to be higher than the proportion of women among inventors.
• Women are slightly less likely than men to collaborate across academic and corporate sectors on research articles.
• Women are generally less internationally mobile than men; women are less likely to collaborate internationally on research papers.
• Health and Life Sciences fields of research are found to have the highest representation of women, while Physical Sciences are dominated by men.

A lack of diversity across the scientific community represents a large loss of talent to the UK.

As part of the Royal Society’s diversity programme we set out to analyse and understand the composition of the scientific workforce in terms of gender, disability, ethnicity and socio-economic status and background. We commissioned several data gathering exercises to explore these issues. 

This is the first time that such data have been analysed in relation to diversity characteristics across the whole of the scientific workforce, providing a new, useful and instructive insight into the present status of diversity in science.

Gender

• Women are not underrepresented in the overall scientific workforce but they are highly underrepresented at the most senior roles. 
• For a cohort of mid-career individuals, women working in science were less likely to take career breaks than women who work in other occupations.

Disability

• Disabled people are underrepresented in the workforce as a whole, but they are no more underrepresented in the scientific workforce than in other occupations. 

Ethnicity

• The pattern of ethnicity in the scientific workforce is extremely complex. 
• Overall in the scientific workforce, black and minority ethnic workers are relatively concentrated at the two ends of the spectrum – they are overrepresented in the most senior and most junior parts of the scientific workforce. 
• Black and minority ethnic students are less likely to progress to scientific jobs after graduating than white students.

The National Action Plan for Researchers is Austria's response to the Communication issued by the European Commission (EC) entitled "Better Careers and More Mobility: A European Partnership for Researchers" as well as the related conclusion by the European Council.