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

In theory, and even more in the practice of sustainability communications, the gender dimension of sustainability has been neglected relative to other fields of the science. The aim of this paper is to show the relevance of gender as an analytical category for research and the importance of gender competence as an indispensable skill for professional sustainability communicators. Understanding how gender norms have contributed to inhibiting sustainable development is key to well-targeted means to communicate visions of sustainable ways of life. Traditional norms of masculinity are clearly in tension with the ethical, ecological and social implications of Sustainable Development, whereas the norms of femininity work against empowerment and participation of women. Current changes in gender relations and gender identities in the western world do not automatically solve this conflict of norms. Therefore, sustainability communication must and can contribute to shaping the social construction of gender towards new “sustainable” norms and ideals for the various gender identities in western societies. In order to achieve this, gender mainstreaming (GM) needs to be implemented in the field of sustainability communication, from capacity building for communicators to project design and research. Gender and diversity competence is to become a professional requirement, assuring that traditional “doing gender” is avoided, cultural diversity respected and structural inequalities are made visible. Visions of sustainable societies should include changes in gender relations. The argument is based on sociological studies, gender theories, gender policies, and environmental and sustainability communication studies, empirically supported by biographical studies and media analyses over the last twenty years in Western Europe, mainly Germany. 

Background: Female physician-researchers do not achieve career success at the same rate as men. Differences in nonprofessional responsibilities may partially explain this gap.

Objective: To investigate the division of domestic labor by gender in a motivated group of early-career physician-researchers.

Design: Nationwide postal survey between 2010 and 2011.

Setting: United States.

Participants: Physician recipients of National Institutes of Health K08 or K23 awards between 2006 and 2009 with active academic affiliation at the time of the survey.

Measurements: Time spent on parenting and domestic tasks was determined through self-report. Among married or partnered re- spondents with children, a linear regression model of time spent on domestic activities was constructed considering age, gender, race, specialty, MD or MD/PhD status, age of youngest child, number of children, work hours, K award type, and spousal employment.

Results: A 74% response rate was achieved, and 1049 respon- dents were academic physicians. Women were more likely than men to have spouses or domestic partners who were employed full-time (85.6% [95% CI, 82.7% to 89.2%] vs. 44.9% [CI, 40.8% to 49.8%]). Among married or partnered respondents with children, after adjustment for work hours, spousal employment, and other factors, women spent 8.5 more hours per week on domestic activities. In the subgroup with spouses or domestic partners who were employed full-time, women were more likely to take time off during disruptions of usual child care arrangements than men (42.6% [CI, 36.6% to 49.0%] vs. 12.4% [CI, 5.4% to 19.5%]).

Limitations: Analyses relied on self-reported data. The study design did not enable investigation of the relationship between domestic activities and professional success.

Conclusion: In this sample of career-oriented professionals, gender differences in domestic activities existed among those with children. Most men’s spouses or domestic partners were not employed full- time, which contrasted sharply with the experiences of women. 

Purpose

There is a perception in urology that female urologists encounter gender based role assignments and are often pigeonholed into caring for more female patients and female specific urological issues than their male colleagues. We assessed the influence of surgeon gender on patient gender demographics by exploring the surgical case logs of American urologists.

Materials and Methods

Six-month case logs of certifying urologists from 2003 to 2012 were obtained from the ABU (American Board of Urology). We reviewed case logs based on CPT codes of common urological procedures, focusing on 6 index gender neutral and gender specific procedure groups, including treatment of nephrolithiasis, nephrectomy, resection of bladder tumors, treatment of stress urinary incontinence, elective sterilization and treatment of prostate cancer.

Results

Among a cohort of 6,166 urologists 1,011,800 cases were logged. Female surgeons operated on a significantly higher percent of female patients than their male peers (54.4% vs 32.5%, p <0.01). Female surgeons performed significantly more female specific procedures, such as slings, than their male counterparts (18 vs 10 per year, p <0.001). Male urologists performed significantly more male specific procedures than their female colleagues, including 3 times as many vasectomies (32 vs 12 per year, p <0.001) and more than twice as many prostatectomies (15 vs 6 per year, p <0.001). These trends were consistent across all subspecialties and geographic regions (p <0.01).

Conclusions

Female surgeon gender has a significant influence on patient gender demographics among index urological procedures. As the number of women in urology grows, increasing attention to gender biases is necessary to understand how these disparities will shape the clinical landscape.

The mandate of the Advisory Group for Gender is to provide advice pertaining to all activities under Horizon 2020 where gender equality and in particular the integration of a gender dimension in research and innovation content is relevant.

This position paper from the Horizon 2020 Advisory Group for Gender aims to contribute to the preparation of the 2018-2020 Work Programme, extending and updating the suggestions proposed in its previous position paper of 2015. It takes into account the new priorities of the different Horizon 2020 Advisory Groups and proposes new ways to further integrate the gender dimension into research and innovation (R&I) content, throughout all parts of Horizon 2020. 

The gender dimension is a dynamic concept that ensures that researchers question gender norms and stereotypes and address the evolving needs and social roles of women and men. Addressing the gender dimension in research and innovation entails taking into account sex and gender in the whole research process, when developing concepts and theories, formulating research questions, collecting and analysing data and using the analytical tools that are specific to each scientific area.

The quality and accountability of research is affected negatively when sex and gender is not taken into account. Therefore, the gender dimension is an essential aspect of research excellence. It increases the societal relevance of the knowledge produced, as well as technologies and innovations. It also contributes to the production of goods and services better suited to potential markets. It is therefore essential to devote resources to these aspects of research. Depending on the field of research, this entails an analysis of gender, sex or both. 

How to include the gender dimension in the Work Programme and topics: general recommendations

•   Explain why sex and/or gender matter in your area: think about and present the ways in which taking into account the gender dimension will provide added value in terms of creativity, excellence and return on investment, both from private and public perspectives. Addressing sex and/or gender aspects is an emerging and important dimension of research in many scientific and technological fields, representing a valuable source of innovation.

•   Make it explicit: indicate in the topic how exploring sex or gender aspects is relevant and must be taken into account. If it is not specifically mentioned in a topic, there is a risk that the gender dimension will not be considered at all in the proposals. If sex and gender aspects are referred to in vague terms in a topic, proposers often ignore them. Therefore, the way they need to be mobilised should be mentioned very explicitly in topics. Evaluators will then assess the gender dimension alongside other relevant aspects of the proposals.

•   Foster the production of new knowledge on gender: consider what is already known in your area in terms of the gender dimension and identify what is missing. In many areas, gender knowledge still needs to be generated. You should signal it and indicate which gender aspects should be explored. Calls specifically focusing on increasing and updating gender knowledge should be considered.

•   Addressing sex and gender aspects is often part of a multidisciplinary approach. Multidisciplinary approaches are encouraged in Horizon 2020. Reflecting on gender considerations in relation to health, transport, energy, security, etc. is a great opportunity to foster the cooperation between scientists with gender expertise and others. It helps concepts to cross the borders of scientific fields and encourages research methods to evolve.

•   Include gender in the impact statement: the statement on expected impacts is an important part of the topic description, which evaluators will assess under the impact criterion. Sex and gender related outcomes may be among the key aspects of the expected impacts. It can be expected that the funded action will have an impact for instance on boys or girls, women or men, gender relations, socio- economic positions and the status of men and women. It can also be expected that funded actions and funded research should contribute to advance gender equality.

•   Remember that specific studies on gender, as well as training on the gender dimension can be included by applicants in their proposals as eligible costs. This is a novelty of Horizon 2020. The aim is to help researchers develop and share gender expertise in relation to the funded projects.