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

The following guidelines complement the criteria for the selection of experts, as established by art.40 “Appointment of independent experts” of the Rules of Participation1 and as specified in chapter 3.1 “Appointing experts as evaluators” of the Section on Proposal Submission and Evaluation of the H2020 Vademecum2 . They have been agreed by the Advisory Group on Gender and they aim to help with the selection of evaluators with gender expertise.

Horizon 2020 considers gender as a cross-cutting issue3 and stipulates that “the gender dimension shall be adequately integrated in research and innovation content in strategies, programmes and projects and followed through at all stages of the research cycle” 4 . Depending on the calls and topics in question, individuals with gender expertise may be needed among the evaluation experts.

The mandate of the AG Gender is to provide advice to other AGs and to the Commission on the integration of the gender dimension in research content pertaining to all activities where it is relevant, as well as its possible interactions with other crosscutting issues. As part of our advice, we have prepared this paper for use during the preparation of the Horizon 2020 work programmes. 

This is a critical review of the feminist science scholarship that aims to differentiate various feminist approaches to using the concepts of sex, gender, race and/or ethnicity in biomedicine and public health research. With a focus on the conceptual and methodological contributions of various feminist science scholars, we identify three distinctly different feminist methodological frameworks that can be used in the practice of science. This is not an exhaustive review, but rather seeks to identify critical patterns in methodologies used by feminist science scholars to delineate the contribution of each framework and build the capacity of biomedicine and public health researchers and policy-makers seeking to integrate the concepts of sex, gender, race, and/or ethnicity into their work.

Currently, gender mainstreaming is presented as bringing new e´lan to gender equality policies. Gender mainstreaming is a gender equality strategy that aims to transform organizational processes and practices by eliminating gender biases in existing routines, involving the regular actors in this transformation process. In this article, we question the aspirations of gender mainstreaming. Can gender mainstreaming escape the genderedness of organizations; can it genuinely effect change, or does it inevitably become compromised? Our analysis of a case project within Human Resource Management in the Ministry of the Flemish Community in Belgium shows that gender mainstreaming does indeed bring about changes, but that it does not break down the genderedness of organizations substantially. While gender mainstreaming invokes an image of cooperation between equal parties that pursue a dual agenda of business needs and feminist goals, our analysis shows that crucial power differences between those parties determine the outcome. The complex social dynamics of gender mainstreaming entail compromises in the context of these power differences, which seriously hinder the transformative and innovative potential of gender mainstreaming.