Jana Dvořáčková: I believe that gender equality plans will improve working conditions for everyone in science

Grant providers have a major impact on research careers, yet their role in promoting gender equality remains largely overlooked. Jana Dvořáčková from the National Contact Centre – Gender and Science at the Institute of Sociology of the Academy of Sciences of the Czech Republic has prepared a new handbook that addresses this gap and places the issue in the context of European research and innovation policy.

Your new guide focuses on gender equality plans for targeted support providers, an area that has been rather neglected so far. Why was it important to address this topic?

The activities of grant providers have a significant impact on individual research careers and working conditions. Whether it is the specific parameters of the support, the definition of who can apply for a grant, the setting of evaluation criteria or the way the evaluation process actually takes place. All of these settings and processes can also have a gender aspect.

Through age limits or long-term mobility requirements in the postdoctoral phase, grant competitions may unintentionally exclude people who have been providing care for a longer period of time. However, caregiving tends to be a disadvantageous factor in evaluation in general. Career breaks or slowdowns are often perceived as a certain “negative signal”. Evaluation can also be marked by gender bias, as studies from Sweden, the Netherlands or Canada demonstrate.

The task of not only institutions but also providers

So, is the role of research project providers in ensuring gender equality essential? How is this topic addressed within the Horizon Europe programme?

Given the significant impact of participation in research projects, the role of providers in ensuring gender equality in research is truly essential. This is also why they are given attention by science policy and have been made a condition for them – as well as research and higher education institutions – to implement a gender equality plan if they wish to participate in projects funded by Horizon Europe.

However, the plans are not always ideally understood in these organisations, which to some extent reflects the fact that the formulation of the European Commission’s conditions and most of the supporting materials are aimed more at organisations carrying out research, i.e. universities and research institutions. The specific position of providers is not explicitly reflected in them. And this is precisely the gap that I have tried to fill with the handbook.

How does the role of providers differ from that of research and higher education institutions?

In research institutions and universities, gender equality plans usually focus on the internal environment of the organization, i.e. its own employees and students. However, providers are expected to primarily take measures with a positive impact on gender equality in the research environment as such, i.e. outside their own organization. They can do this both by ensuring equality in relation to persons applying for or handling grants, and through measures that stimulate equality in recipient organizations.

Attention can be paid, for example, to the fairness of the project evaluation process, to setting conditions for their solution that make it easier for those caring for children or other people to reconcile work and personal life, or to supporting research organizations in introducing favorable working conditions. In this respect, providers are understood as partners of states in implementing structural changes. For example, it is assumed that they will themselves demand gender equality plans from the organizations whose research they fund. 

At the same time, it is certainly desirable for providers to also promote equality in relation to their own employees. This can be an advantageous strategy in many respects, as it gives employees better insight into the measures implemented and their purpose, which facilitates the implementation process also in the case of externally oriented measures.

There is room to move in the Czech Republic

What is the situation in the Czech Republic today – how are research organizations doing?

According to our recent analysis, all public or state universities in the Czech Republic, as well as most public research institutions, have gender equality plans. The main motivation for their widespread adoption was undoubtedly the introduction of the requirement of a gender equality plan as an eligibility criterion for the possibility of drawing research funds through Horizon Europe calls. The quality of these plans varies from institution to institution, as does the quality of implementation and the extent of real changes that the plans bring.

In some places, the first measures are being implemented and the impact of the plan may be barely noticeable, while in others, the plans build on previous activities implemented, for example in connection with the HR Excellence in Research Awards, which they further develop and systematize. Here, the changes are usually already felt by employees, whether they are measures to reconcile personal and professional life, ensuring gender equality in recruitment and career advancement, or measures aimed at eliminating gender-based violence, to name the most common ones.

And what about Czech providers? 

Of these, only a minority have a gender equality plan, so the overall impact on the research environment is limited. At the same time, however, the activity of providers in the area of ​​supporting gender equality in research has been increasing in recent years. Various measures are implemented, for example, by the Ministry of Education, Youth and Sports, the Technology Agency of the Czech Republic, the Czech Science Foundation or the Agency for Health Research. It can be assumed that even where they do not yet have gender equality plans, these activities will eventually grow to the level of more systematic plans.    

How do providers even know if their processes are fair? 

Ideally, they should start by collecting data that will allow them to assess the state of gender equality or inclusiveness more generally in key areas of their work and monitor developments over time. For example, they should monitor whether the proportions of men and women applying for support in a particular grant scheme deviate significantly from their representation in specific fields, or whether any of the groups differ significantly in terms of success. This may indicate certain barriers in the conditions of participation or in the setting of the evaluation process. However, they should also focus on gender balance in evaluation processes.

Empty promises vs. following the rules

Providers certainly already have some of the data. What other information should they start collecting to assess the impacts of their decisions on gender equality?

It is generally recommended to focus on other forms of disadvantage and their possible intersection with gender, such as health disadvantage or minority ethnicity. Providers generally do not collect this type of information, with the exception of age or so-called academic age, i.e. the number of years since receiving a doctoral degree.

In foreign agencies where this type of information is collected, the data obtained is of course not included in the evaluation process. It is used only to identify barriers that different groups of researchers may face and to monitor the effects of follow-up measures.

However, in addition to their impact on the career paths and working conditions of researchers, the activities of providers also have a significant impact on whether the supported research takes gender differences and inequalities into account directly in its content. Whether it concerns relevant physical differences between women and men, or differences in their experiences, perspectives and needs.

In order for providers to evaluate how well they are supporting gender equality in research, they should monitor whether specific projects only promise this intention or actually adhere to it in the research itself.

But how to convince the providers themselves not to perceive the plans as just a bureaucratic requirement?

High-quality research is difficult to achieve in the long term in an environment that is not perceived as sufficiently fair, transparent or safe. Providers‘ practices have a significant impact on the conditions of researchers and, in the case of people with caring responsibilities, are often completely decisive in terms of their future career options. It is precisely by creating an environment that respects these values ​​that gender equality plans can significantly help.

Although many grant providers are now involved in activities to promote gender equality in the research ecosystem, these are usually loosely coupled activities that are not necessarily based on prior data analysis and priorities, and are not linked to indicators that allow for ongoing monitoring and evaluation. They are also often the agenda of individuals who are motivated by an interest in the topic of equality but do not have sufficient support in the organization to promote change.

This subsequently limits their ability to achieve real institutional and cultural change. Plans allow for greater systemicity in the activities carried out, better coherence of individual measures and their integration into existing organizational structures and procedures, as well as connections with other organizational strategies. They thus ensure fairness of conditions much more effectively.

Where in the Czech research environment do you see that the principles of gender equality plans have naturally been implemented into practice? 

As for universities and research institutions, I personally feel that due to the long-term support of activities to promote gender equality aimed at this type of organization, there is already a considerable awareness that quality research requires a fair and inclusive working environment that takes into account the principles of gender equality. I see this, for example, in the Operational Program Research, Development and Education, the Centralized Development Programs of the Ministry of Education, Youth and Sports, or the Operational Program Jan Amos Comenius. There is also solid expertise built up, as I have been happy to observe in recent years.

Of course, I do not deny that the concept of a gender equality plan continues to arouse resistance in many places, often because of the word gender itself. However, I believe that if institutional support for implementing participatory changes continues, the benefits for the working conditions of all employees will gradually emerge and at least some of this resistance will subside.

Author: Petra Roštínská