A review of causes for the relative unequal participation of women in science, engineering,and technology and initiatives

Current literature reveals that men and women do not participate in the science, engineering and
technology (SET) sector on equal grounds – not qualitatively (access) or qualitatively (ease of
participation). It is important that women have access to and actively participate in science; they make
up more than half of the world’s population and gender equality enhances a country’s economic
growth and competitiveness. Furthermore, the focus should extend further than advocating for equal
access to SET to actively promoting increased participation by women. Women bring a distinctive
quality to SET precisely because of their gender. They are able to increase overall SET participation
numbers and positively contribute to the quality and agenda of science. This study used the pipeline
theory and lifecycle approach as theoretical bases to investigate the causes for unequal participation
and reviewed initiatives aimed at increasing and facilitating the participation of women in SET.
Identified causes include unequal access, male-dominated nature of science, tensions of reconciling
professional and private life, differences in recognition and reward, and lack of female representation
in leadership. The primary methodology used was a documentary analysis study design, consisting
primarily of desktop literature searches and categorization. An initiative summary framework was
used to summarise and code 123 identified initiatives into an initiatives summary database. Findings
were both positive and negative. The study found that women in many cases are on equal footage
with their male counterparts and can manage a healthy work-life balance if provided with the
necessary support but many women still describe a male-dominated work environment that is
exclusionary. Findings indicate that, although decreasing, there is still gender bias in recognition and
reward and that female scientists underutilise financial rewards. Women in SET do not receive equal
pay for equal work and there is a distinct lack of female representation in SET leadership bodies such
as academies of sciences, scientific boards and publication boards of academic journals. The most common modes of intervention are policy interventions, gender mainstreaming, advocacy and interest
groups, and provision of training and support. The majority of initiatives are aimed at bringing about
change at a national/policy level and are driven primarily by government and academia with academia
playing an important middleman role – assisting and guiding government in the design and roll-out of
policies on the one hand and meeting the human resource needs of industry on the other. Although
government and academia have done well in driving initiatives that increase the participation of
women in SET at both school and tertiary level, more needs to be done by industry to drive the
facilitation of participation. There are very few initiatives addressing the retention of women in SET;
this is linked to the lack of attention to returners as a specific target group. The study concludes that
the majority of countries are succeeding in closing the participation gap in terms of access or
horizontal gender equality, but that vertical segregation (focusing on recognition, reward and
advancement), although acknowledged, remains a mostly unaddressed challenge.

Publisher: Stellenbosch University
Year of Publication: 2012