1. Science in Society KAGIDER EU DAYS 18 June 2009 Francesca Crippa
Science in Society
Francesca Crippa
European Commission
DG Research- Science, Economy and Society
Unit L.4 Scientific Culture and Gender Issues
Good morning everybody, I would like to first of all take the occasion to warmly thank the conference organisers for inviting me to take part in the KAGIDER EU days, and also I bring you the apologies of LP, my HoU who unfortunately could not take part in the conference due to a last minute obstacle.
I have prepared a presentation that consists of two main parts, the first one focusses on Science in Society and the second one on Gender and Research. As you know Science in Society is a programme within the 7th FP, that includes 3 action lines, one of which includes the Gender and Research activities. I have a slide in the ppt to show you this structure more in details. So I will first give you a general picture of Science in Society, and then enter into more details with Women in Science, as I think that this topic is particularly relevant for this conference.

2. Drugmakers rush to produce a swine flu vaccine
Role of Science in Society
Drugmakers rush to produce a swine flu vaccine
The rationale behind the existence of our Science in Society programme is very simple. Today more than ever, there is a general recognition of the important ROLE that SCIENCE plays in the SOCIETY.
The main CHALLENGES of our time – for example climate change, health, employment, and mobility of people and goods – are very COMPLEX. Scientific research and technological advancement play an essential role in the analysis of the problems and the elaboration of possible solutions. However, the perfect solution to the challenges illustrated in the slide simply cannot be found on the basis of scientific research only. There are plenty of possibilities that S&T make available. But the challenges of today require the integration of different disciplines, and the involvement of different players ie the PARTICIPATION OF SOCIETY and GOVERNANCE structure, in addition to the SCIENTIFIC COMMUNITY and the BUSINESS SECTOR.
The challenges of today require the integration of different disciplines, and the involvement of different players ie the PARTICIPATION OF SOCIETY and GOVERNANCE structure, in addition to the SCIENTIFIC COMMUNITY and the BUSINESS SECTOR.
Only through a broad understanding of the challenges we face and the scientific solutions available can we ensure that SCIENTIFIC CHOICES are made in a responsible and democratic way, and are EFFECTIVE to address the challenges we face.

3. …open effective and democratic European KB Society
Science in Society Vision
…open effective and democratic European KB Society
“to stimulate the harmonious integration of scientific and technological endeavour and associated research policies in the European social web, by encouraging reflection debate on S&T and their relationship with the whole spectrum of society and culture”
So what is the aim of our programme, what is our vision? We are clearly working towards an open, effective and democratic European KB society, and more particularly our aim is to… (READ VISION)
And how can we do it, essentially by:
Embedding SiS (to implant, to bring Science inside Society)
Matching S&T policies with Societal needs
Creating the necessary conditions for it to happen (promotion of scientific literacy, of SiS dialogue, etc.)

4. FP7 2007-2013 Cooperation Infrastructures mio € 1700 mio € 32,365
Ideas
mio € 7460
People
mio € 4728
Capacities
mio € 4217 FP
+ JRC (nuclear & non-nuclear) + Euratom
Infrastructures mio € 1700
SME mio € 1336
Regions mio € 126
Potential mio € 370
Science in Society
mio € 330
International mio € 185
Science in Society is a part of the FP7 programme. FP7 is a multiannual programme that funds scientific research in the European Union and its associated countries, and that covers Its overall budget is over 50 thousand million Euros. On the left part of the screen the 4 Specific Programmes, in addition to the nuclear research and training (Euratom).
Cooperation supports international cooperation projects on 10 thematic areas (examples); Ideas hosts activities to be implemented by the European Research Council and deals with so-called frontier research; People supports individual researchers and you will hear all about it in the presentation of Barbara Rhode later on today; and Capacities aims to optimise the use and development of research infrastructure, regions, SMEs, international cooperation and Science in Society themes, as you can see on the right side of the slide. I’m noticing just now a small mistake, there is a cluster of activities under “Coherent Development of Research Policies”, for 70 mio €, that is missing – I apologise for the mistake.
SiS is therefore a small part of FP7, but its budged increased in size and scope when compared to FP6 and reached approximately 330m € over 7 years. It is a relatively small budget as I said, but it has huge relevance for the EU and Associated countries, the citizen, and also for the other thematic programmes in the FP as it has an important horizontal nature. SiS is implemented through different kind of activities:
Research (collaborative and comparative), policy related actions and coordination;
Cooperation with MS, monitoring, assessment, networking;
Studies, EU codes, workshops, conferences, debates, science festivals, training tools, experimental actions etc.
Global context for FP7 is the one of Lisbon, ERA vision and governance (and evolution to ERA 2020), political priorities of the EU. The main concept behind SiS is the matching of research policy orientation and needs of the society-> need for an informed and open dialogue between scientific communities and citizens, for mobilization and engagement of all stakeholders.
The main approach of SiS is to firmly root the ERA in society and to fund research responsive to society’s needs; the idea is to have an inclusive and coherent approach to mobilise all key actors on SiS research themes, and to align the programme with other themes and EU policies.
The SiS programme has an history and an evolution that we will see in the following slide, a movement from Science AND Society as two separate entities to Science IN Society, Science firmly rooted and embedded in Society.
Budget FP7 - Science in Society by year
2007: € 29,9 million (21,8 for the call for proposals); 2008 : € 41 million (29,9 for the calls for proposals); 2009: € 34,5 million (31,8 for the call for proposals)
A total of 63 projects and 15 under negotiation
Building FP7 - Science in Society was built on FP6 foundations, extended and expanded to new themes and shaped towards new directions. In consultation with Member States, the EP, advise and support of Advisory group, ERAB, open consultations, surveys etc.

5. From Science and Society…
…to Science in Society
I have mentioned an evolution from Science and Society… to Science in Society. What does this mean? FP6 launched Science and Society with the aim of developing a dynamic relationship between two separate entities, science and society, as a key factor of the implementation of the Lisbon strategy.
With the conceptual shift towards science IN society, the programme takes a more inclusive perspective on research in its wider societal and policy context. The aim is to contribute to the implementation of the ERA and to build a democratic KB society by stimulating harmonious integration of scientific and technological activities, and by encouraging public engagement. This means taking a more inclusive and coherent approach (three Action lines in the Specific Programme). Also, SiS means mobilising the research community on SiS research themes, but also on issues that emerged over the last decades and are now on the agenda of the EU, whether they are part of the Fp7 or not (think of my first slide with the cover of the magazines). Finally, SiS now wants to align its approach with other research themes and other EU policies (cross-thematic…).
The policy background remain Lisbon and ERA, but ERA in the meanwhile has evolved too and now in its own definition the ERA “is firmly rooted in society and responsive to its needs and ambitions in pursuit of sustainable development”. But the success of these strategy depends on the ability to match research policy orientations with societal needs and requires the mobilization of key actors to ensure active participation in the research agendas, generation and sharing knowledge and results. This is translated in the approach and structure of the WP

6. SiS WP Structure – 3 Action Lines
Science system, professional codes, expertise
Civil Society’s engagement on science issues
More dynamic
GOVERNANCE
of the science and society
relationship
Place of S&T in Society
Role of the universities
Strengthening POTENTIAL
broadening HORIZONS
Young people and science education
Gender and research
I will go through the structure of the Science in Society work programme but will only give you a few examples of activities performed under the different action lines, essentially for time reasons. Of course should you wish to learn more on them, I’ve included all the relevant links at the end of the ppt.
LINE 1 More dynamic governance and S&S relationship
Focus on social needs and interest
Enrich the form of engagement of citizens and CSO in research and in Research based policies
Covers different activities and topics
Scientific culture – influence of science, culture and art, Image of the scientists
Society and Public engagement in Science (broad engagement of Public on Science related issues, debates, decisions – capacity building for CSO civil society organizations)
Research on Ethics on new emerging fields of science and technology. One example is Nanocience and Nano technology _ SINAPSE, Open access and Knowledge sharing
Evolving the role of universities
Supporting reforms that enable universities to play a full role in society, develop knowledge sharing, application together with industry and society at large: role of researchers
LINE 2 Strengthening potential and broadening horizons
It covers 2 aspects that are based on a long road of policy orientations, trying to address the challenge of shortage of skills, and scientific literacy. One is Education, mainly based on the Rocard Report and the IBSE; and the other one is Gender, that has a very strong coherent set of policy initiatives known as WiS.
Developing HR and skills, Respecting diversity
Data collections, statistics, Encouraging best practices, in particular with MS
Rocard report. To support science education there are three key objectives:
Supporting formal and informal science education in schools as well as through science centres and museums and other relevant means
Reinforcing links between science education and science careers in order to create and exploit knowledge and to innovate
Promoting research on science education to increase young people’s interest for science
Future activities will be devoted to training teachers in IBES
Regarding gender, this is about implementing gender equality in research. The rationale is that equality is the only way to achieve Quality Research, and the focus is evolving from women in science to structural changes in the organisation of universities and research bodies.
LINE 3 Science and Society Communicate :
“2 way communication”… from informing society to SiS dialogue
How scientists communicate and in a more wider sense how the society communicate : Impacts
New experimental ways of communicating. Creative thinking
Art and science activities (with education streak)
Science and Society
COMMUNICATE
Two-way communication of science and the public, and role of the media 6

7. The future of SiS – 2010 and beyond
Ensuring a strong SiS dimension in ERA
towards more focused and structured actions, with greater EU added value, wider impact and wider range of key actors (MML)
Give a better visibility a EU level, accessibility of the programme
Some examples: Pollen. It is 3-year project, started in 2006 up to June Coordinated by La main à la pates (ENS ecole normale superieure). Aim is to create seed cities for science. 12 partners in the project consortium – 12 seed city and 5 observer cities. Basic structure is a city with schools involved in IBSE and a local strategy to involve other science establishments and local authorities. Each city is working on a specific subject eg in Brussels this is “Science education in low income areas”. DE, theme: gender and science education, SP: science education and immigrants. Final conference just happened with charter on science education. Very successful project. Website in English and French.
Internet Based Information Platform on Science Education. Will build a community on the internet grouping FP6 and FP7 projects on science education. Purpose is dissemination of best practices in IBSE. Contract being currently assigned with the idea of having the platform by June All our science education and beyond will be available on the platform – but more than an archive, it will be a science education portal with forum, newsletter, chat (interactive nature). This will also be linked to a dissemination strategy offline (workshops and conference). The portal will all be available in 6 language + translation on demand service (up to the finish off of a dedicated budget).
HULDA – The European "Arts and Science" Sailing Festival. The Hulda Boat was taken as an occasion for a journey into art and science. The funding comes from SiS programme, FP7, under topic “Actions to encourage co-operation and networking between science museums, science centres and/or the organisers of national and regional events, e.g. by creating synergies to conceive and exchange ambitious and interactive exhibitions on European research topics”. HULDA is a travelling festival using HULDA, a centennial sailing boat (historical monument in Sweden) which will cruise along the European Union in 2009 and arrive during the Istanbul 2010 European Capital of culture festivities. The boat will carry onboard an exposition of the Swedish/Turkish artist/scientist Ilhan Koman who lived on the HULDA. Ilhan Koman is very well known artist in Sweden and Turkey. His artistic works can be used to explain scientific issues (physics, mathematics …). The Hulda boat will visits 10 cities in the European Union. In each port the general public and the schools will be able to visit the onboard exposition complemented in a tent next to the boat by local science centres and artists. Workshops for schools on scientific aspects of Ilhan Koman works and a student competition on scientific aspects of Ilhan Koman works will also be organized.
Duration: 32 months (01/05/ /12/2010). Estimated EU contribution: € Co-ordinator: Ilhan Koman Foundation for arts and cultures (TR) Partners from: Turkey, Sweden, France, Spain, Belgium, Italy, Malta, the Netherlands, Greece 7

8. SiS Key actors General Public Citizens
I keep repeating this word « Stakeholders » and perhaps it is worth to stop a second and visualise who are the stakeholders for Science in Society.
Regarding the CSO, this is maybe a relevant information given the agenda of tomorrow. You might already be aware that there is funding scheme BSG-CSO for the benefit of Specific Groups. This is dedicated to partnerships between research organisations and civil society organisations. It will be characterised by a problem-based approach and multiple outputs are to be expected, in the form of scientific knowledge and policy oriented results for a wider public. Attention to the definition of CSO: non governmental, no profit, not representing commercial interest!, pursuing a common purpose in the public interest. Regarding the admin, the actions will cover the costs of all partners engaged and participating CSOs will have free access to/use of research results. This funding scheme is used in the Cooperation programme for research on sustainable development and social science.
Citizens

9. SiS – Useful websites
SINAPSE
SCIENCE IN SOCIETY PORTAL
FORUM
FP6 SCIENCE AND SOCIETY on CORDIS
EURACCESS
SINAPSE is a web communication platform offering tools to promote a better use of expertise in EU policy making and governance (networking of advisory bodies, support to expert groups, ad-hoc/public consultations and e-debates, etc.). SINAPSE is a free public service of the European Commission.
SINAPSE in particular allows the creation of "e-Communities" which enables groups of members and organisations with a common interest to share and exchange information in a dedicated environment which can be graphically personalised and linked to the initiator website.
SiS Portal is what it is. Forum 2005 is a useful link to understand the history and evolution of SiS. In March 2005 the European Commission organised the Science in Society Forum to take stock of the developments and achievements in pursuing the Science and Society agenda, bringing together almost one thousand representatives of civil society, academia and politics. The debates revolved around such topics as innovation and competitiveness, communicating science, the relationship between science, technology and democracy, and diversity, inclusiveness and equality in science.
FP6 Science and Society is what it is. EURACCESS is a portal for researchers with sessions on jobs; rights; and services.

10. How to participate to FP7
Experts Needed - Databases
NCP Network of National Contact Points
Our Site -
Find previous projects and partners – useful for locating prospective partners
This is another slide with relevant links, very practical. Regarding the Experts, the EC involves independent experts for the evaluation of proposals and monitoring and reviewing of projects submitted to FP7. There is a particular need for women evaluators for FP7 proposals. The Commission's target for the participation of women in evaluation panels and committees is 40%. We are looking for:
Women scientists with expertise in all scientific disciplines in order to increase the number of women in all the evaluation panels for the different thematic priorities.
Women scientists whose main field of expertise is gender to evaluate the specific WiS activities that will be funded from the SiS budget. For evaluators wishing to highlight specific gender expertise there are a number of specialist keywords that are relevant to our activities, which can be used: Women and science, Gender mainstreaming, Equal opportunities, Gender studies, Women's studies, Feminist studies, History of women in science.
The lists of experts that have participated in FP6 evaluations are also available. Please send a link to this page to other excellent women in science!
As Commission officials cannot help you with proposal writing, the Commission provides a Network of National Contact Points (NCPs) for advice. The NCPs are national structures established and financed by governments of the 27 EU Member States and the states associated to the Framework Programme. They give personalised support ‘on the spot’ and in proposers' own languages. NCP systems in the different countries show a wide variety of architectures, from highly centralised to decentralised networks, and a number of very different actors, from ministries to universities, research centres and special agencies to private consulting companies. This reflects the different national traditions, working methodologies, research landscapes and funding schemes.
National Contact Points for Science in Society. You can search the CORDIS web service for National Contact Points in Science in Society and other specific EU Framework Programme areas. Since NCPs are appointed for each of the FP7 areas, when seeking support you should contact the NCP relevant to your area of interest. In some cases you might need assistance or advice on financial or legal matters regarding your proposal from a network of specialised "Legal and Financial" NCPs. Further information. Consult the Science in Society CORDIS web service or contact the research 'Enquiry Service'. There are also sections on EU Calls for proposals – Get funded; Programmes in the Member States; Experts needed; Science in Society in the EU Framework Programme

11. Gender and Research Science system, professional codes, expertise
Civil Society’s engagement on science issues
More dynamic
GOVERNANCE
of the science and society
relationship
Place of S&T in Society
Role of the universities
Strengthening POTENTIAL
broadening HORIZONS
Young people and science education
Gender and research
Science and Society
COMMUNICATE
Two-way communication of science and the public, and role of the media 11 11

12. Background Legal Basis: the Treaty
Equality between Men and Women ( Rome Treaty)
Equal Opportunities (Amsterdam Treaty, 1995 ) -> Art 2 and 3
Beijing Conference Mainstream strategy EC COM “Incorporating equal opportunities for Women and Men into all Community Policies and Activities “
...in Research, Science and Technology
1993 –Study DG XII “ The position of women in scientific research within EC” -> recommendations : data, positive action programmes, EU Structural funds. (in parallel with MS actions)
1998 ETAN working group on Women and Science, report and discussion with MS
1999 EC COM “Women and Science: mobilizing women to enrich European Research”
Gender equality and non-discrimination are principles embedded in the Treaties on the European Union (Art.2, 3, 13, 137, 141). 12

13. Policy documents Women in Science Communication (1999)
Sector/Unit Women and Science
Activities: Analysis and comparison of national policies, experts' advice, mentoring schemes, exchange of knowledge, promotion of sex-disaggregated data collection…
Political forum and Gender Watch System (40%)
Experts Groups (esp. Helsinki Group, WIRDEM, STAT…)
Excellence and innovation - Gender equality in science (2005)
Council Conclusions of 18 April 2005
Gender Pact (European Council 23/24 March 2006)
40%
Equality policy in research really started in 1999 with the first Communication from the EC. The Communication acknowledges that there is an underrepresentation of women in research, although data at the time were scarce. It was already clear that there were women in scientific universities, with variations between countries, but then that the so-called leaky pipeline effect determined a loss of workforce at the level of job market. So even in presence of equality in the number of science graduates, women tend to pursue scientific careers and to advance in seniority in much lower numbers than men.
The first Commission document addressing directly women in science is the Communication 1999, where different actions are proposed:
Experts Groups (esp. Helsinki Group, WIRDEM, STAT…) - Sector/Unit Women and Science - Activities: Analysis and comparison of national policies, experts' advice, mentoring schemes, exchange of knowledge, promotion of sex-disaggregated data collection…
First mention of 40% in some FP groups and panels
Main policy focus is given in the Science and Society Action Plan of 2000, in particular the 40% target women in evaluation panels and various Groups and Boards appointed by the Commission and the Member States for management of the FP RTD. Other actions foreseen by the Plan:
*Set up European Platform for Women Scientists (EPWS) - *Monitor progress towards gender equality in European Scientific Research
*Study position of women scientists in the private sector - *Promote gender equality in science in the wider Europe
Commission Working Document (2005) – Excellence and Innovation. The 2005 Working Document takes stock of achievements since 2000 and sets out priorities for the future. Achieved:
much better sex-disaggregated data in research and publication of She figures 2003 and 2006
Successful launch of various activities (Enwise report for the new Member States, working groups for the private sector, monitoring of Framework Programmes participation and Gender Watch System.
Priorities for the future:
Scientific excellence: awareness raising of evaluators / recruiters on potential gender bias in scientific excellence
Decision-making positions in research: 25% target of the Council, Member States to develop yearly statistics on recruitment (good practices available in DK and DE)
Gender research: newly part of the Science in Society work Programme for FP7
Innovation / engineering: target of 33% women in industrial research by 2010 (corresponds to the number of female researchers in the public sector currently)
Work-life balance: exchange on good practices, encouraging men to take up parental leave, parental leve issues for mobility researchers
Statistics: still some data missing on gender pay gap in research, dual careers, women and patenting, scientific boards and funding institutions
Gender watch System: improve IT tracking system and add the budgetary aspects. Target monitoring
The European Council in 2005 – focus on need for the ERA - encouraged MS to adopt a target of 25% women in public research leading positions. There is no deadline to reach this deadline. As for FP, the overall target is as I said 40%. The 2005 Council Conclusions also encourage MS to put in place mentoring mechanisms.
NO NEED TO MENTION- The European Pact on gender equality does not cover research per se, it is a commitment of Member States on several aspects of equality including equal treatment at work, violence against women, stereotypes, and the Barcelona targets. These (agreed in 2002) deal with childcare provision. There is a 33% target for 0-3 year old and a 90% target for 3-school age.
25%

14. WHAT is EQUALITY in RTD? Gender dimension-> Research Content WP
Number -> participation of women scientists in FP activities
Stereotypes-> in early stage, schools
Career development
Others.. 14 14

15. Women in Science FP6 FP6 2002-2006 (18 M€ in 4 years)
Increasing the NUMBER of women in science through:
Monitoring (She Figures and Gender Watch System)
Working conditions (WLB, Partnership for Researchers)
Reaching out to schools to combat early stereotypes
Network promotion (EPWS)
Women in Industrial Research
Ambassadors of science
Mentoring
MAINSTREAM gender in research:
Inter-service working group on gender implications in different research fields (transports, nanotechnologies, health …)
Gender Reporting in FP funded projects
GAPs for NoE and IP 15

16. Women in Science FP7 FP7 2007-2013 ( up to now 16 M€ in 3 years…) Towards organisational change
Meta-analysis on gender and research (horizontal / vertical segregation)
Survey on positive action schemes for women in decision-making (EU, USA, Australia, Canada):
Gender training / toolkit for FP7 (tender)
Expert group “Gender and Excellence” on grant and funding systems, transparency and accountability
2008
Gender management in organizations, best practices
2009
Mobilising and engaging other stakeholders in the debate ( S&T centres and museums)
Changes in the organisation 16 16

17. Recent Publications
On the left you see She Figures 2009 leaflet, that I am going to present you later. Then, in clockwise order, there is the Women in Science and Technology, WIST Report, that I will present later, the Gender Challenge in Research Funding, same as before, the blue one is a counting exercise on how many women take part in FP funded research, so-called Gender Equality Report, and then also the Getting Women to the Top in Decision-Making, and Benchmarking policy measures.
I’ll start with the report from the right, how much women take part in FP6. The data refers to 6 FP, running between (and some contracts/project are still running). 17

18. Women in the FP functioning
This graph shows the progress achieved since the end of the nineties with the participation of women in different panels and groups relating to the functioning of the FP.
Evaluation Panels – I know what it is
Experts Database – The same
Monitoring Panels – Established to focus and comment on the progress achieved in implementing the WP thematic priorities. 8 Members
Advisory Groups – Members selected by DG Research on basis of expertise Programme Committees – Members sent by MS, one per MS
EURAB – High level advisory group established for FP6. Included 45 people.
Our interpretation of these data is that fixing the objective of having minimum 40% of the minority sex in all FP panels and committees had a positive impact on the gender balance of these groups.
To be noted: there are proportionally more women in the evaluation panels than available in the experts database. This shows proactive selection of women by DG Research services. 18

19. Gender distribution of Scientific Coordinators and Scientists in Charge for each partner institution for FP6 funded projects (By funding instrument)
Scientific Coordinator
Scientist in Charge
Instrument F M
Total
% Women
Coordination Action 94
368
462
20%
1269
4741
6010
21%
Integrated Project
109
1037
1146
10%
2569
16587
19156
13%
Marie Curie Actions
775
3794
4569
17%
1066
5606
6672
16%
Network of Excellence 22
240
262 8%
777
4811
5588
14%
Other special actions 2 0%
Specific actions to promote research infrastructures 16
107
123
139
1266
1405
Specific Support Action
334
943
1277
26%
1633
4713
6346
Specific Targeted Project
408
2125
2533
2954
16043
18997
Special research projects for SMEs 39
342
381
328
2962
3290
TOTAL
1797
8958
10755
10735
56729
67464
Approximately submitted proposals were retained for funding in FP6. This figure represents the total number of funded projects for all thematic programmes using all available funding instruments. Approx 4400 were MCA actions.
Female researchers were scientific coordinators of 17% (1797) funded projects. Looking at the statistics for both scientific coordinators and scientists in charge, it is clear that female researchers were more likely to have responsibilities for the smaller instruments, such as, Specific Support Actions and Coordination Actions, than for the larger instruments like Integrated Projects and Networks of Excellence.
They have been scientific coordinators for 26% (334) funded SSA’s, 20% funded CA’s (94) and between 8% (NoE) and 16% (Strep) for the other instruments. 19

20. Mapping the Maze Getting More Women to the Top in Research
In EU scientific boards, women are less likely to be promoted /nominated + considerable pay-gap
Expert group > to identify positive actions to promote women into senior positions in public research. What is needed is a change!
Recommendations from WIRDEM (2008):
From inertia to awareness and commitment at national level, with appropriate policies (work life balance, childcare etc)
From imbalance to balance (40:60) in decision making bodies
From opacity to transparency in funding, promotion and nomination procedures
From inequality to ”quality”: equality as part of quality in RTD
From ignorance to knowledge: data availability improvement
From complacency to urgency: waste of talent cannot continue 20

21. Benchmarking of policy measures for gender equality in science
Updates previous Helsinki Group report on National Policies on Women and Science in Europe (2002)
Covers EU-27 + Iceland, Israel, Norway, Croatia, Switzerland, Turkey, in addition to five Western Balkans countries
Mapping of current gender equality measures
Identify and analyse the success of key women and science policies and actions
Produce national statistical profiles, Analyse success of identified policies and actions
Published in 2008 21

22. ACCESS to FUNDING Gender and Excellence
No very systematic pattern on success rate by sex was found
However there are gender patterns (e.g. women are less likely to apply for funding than men and they request smaller amounts of money)
Measures implemented in pro-active countries include targets or quotas; and integrated policies that increase university funding based on universities performances in terms of gender equity.
This is a sex-disaggregated analysis on access to research funding.
Final recommendations from the group:
Taking the gender challenge seriously (positive actions and political will)
Increasing funding applications from women researchers
Improving gender balance among “gatekeepers” of research funding
Gender monitoring and publishing of qualitative and quantitative indicators, broken down by discipline and research instruments
Improving accountability and transparency in allocation of research funding (publications of procedures and criteria, conflict of interest of evaluators, etc.) 22

23. Women in Science and Technology
Women in S&T Group created back in Mandate : creating sustainable careers
Participation of experts and HR managers from private companies (eg Bosch, Fraunhofer, SHELL, TOTAL, Xerox…)
What can companies and universities do to attract and retain women (and men) in S&T? Case studies in BES
Focus on WLB for women and men and on stereotypes in S&T careers
Published in 2009.

24. Running contract: Meta-analysis
Meta-analysis of gender in research (2M € - 30 months – contract
till 29/10/2010)
Consortium led by CIREM – Spain; production of a
database on European gender research of the last 25
years
Vertical segregation
Horizontal segregation
Causes and effects
Country group reports expected this summer; final
analysis in 2010

25. Contract: Gender toolkit & training
Gender toolkit and training activities (€700, months)
Consortium led by Yellow Window - Belgium
Preparation of a gender toolkit on 9 FP7 themes with case studies for each theme
4 information seminars in Brussels about the project
Training sessions to start in autimn 2009 for NCPs, researchers, project coordinators, any interested party.
DISSEMINATE THE INFORMATION (leaflet available)

26. to fix the women… to make them competitive… but this is not enough…
“ Programs aimed at increasing numbers of women in science generally attempt
to fix the women… to make them competitive… but this is not enough…
you also have to fix the administration…”
Londa Schiebinger
The way forward for the Women in Science activities is structural change.
Said Londa Schiebingerinberl in 2007
Political attention from the Commissioner and the upcoming Presidencies (SI, FR, CZ) 26

27. Fixing the administration
2005: Charter for Researchers and Code of conduct for RTD employers
2007: Comparative study on positive actions in Europe and third countries at institute and national level
2008: “better careers and more mobility: European Partnership for Researchers”
2008: Gender management in research organisation: identify and promote best practices
2009: Modernization of universities HR management
2009: Awareness raising among public and private institutions
2009: Involvement of public at large in the debate on gender in science
The main milestones for this work. 27

28. Stocktaking and way forward
New Impetus needed
Need to new focus : from research (by, for, on) women to gender RTD and organizations ( support structural changes)
Need for more women at top (in boards) – targets?
Need to reinforce data collection, harmonization, benchmarking and monitoring, new indicators etc
From education to careers, from WLB to LB, from scientifically informed to scientifically formed society
Learning from international experiences, business approaches
Member States role is key
Prague Conference 14/15 May 2009, Changing Research Landscapes.
INTEGRATED approach to policies ->reinforced coherence, interlinks and communication; GOVERNANCE ; MAINSTREAM Gender in all policies
MODERNISATION by ensuring gender EQUALITY -concrete ACTIONS and MOBILIZATION of key actors all levels
Larger actions with wider impact to encourage STRUCTURAL CHANGES ( from 2010 in FP7)
Strong FP8 …ERA 2.0
PARTNERSHIPS with Member States (National Action Plans)
ALLIANCES 28

29. Thank you for your attention! 
Coming up next:
SHE Figures 2009 Full booklet
General Commission website:
Women and science (part of Science in Society):
FP7:
Francesca Crippa: 29