brussels

Representatives of women in science groups across Europe and other bodies committed to improving the gender balance in scientific decision-making agreed last week to work together as a ‘network of networks’.

A meeting in Brussels of 70 organizations making up the ‘supernetwork’ issued a joint statement of common goals and objectives. This described the under-representation of women in science as “a serious obstacle for the development of the sciences and for European society”.

It called for all institutions that employ scientists to produce annual statistics on gender monitoring, and suggested increased lobbying and advocacy on the need for more women in science at national and European level.

Those attending the meeting — held under the auspices of the European Commission's research directorate, DGXII — also proposed that the commission should use the network to document best practice in member states of the European Union. Further support for their joint activities will be sought from the commission.

Nicole Dewandre, of DGXII's Women and Science sector, says that the joint declaration is intended to establish the identity of the ‘network of networks’ before it starts “knocking on doors”.

One of the goals of the Brussels meeting had been to bring those concerned about gender issues in science into the commission's fifth Framework programme of research (FP5). “But we also wanted to ask what, as the commission, we could bring to them,” says Dewandre.

The commission has undertaken to make “significant efforts” to increase women's participation in the union's research programmes. The overall objective is to achieve for women at least 40 per cent representation, on average, throughout FP5, including Marie Curie scholarships, advisory groups and assessment panels.

One hope for the meeting is that it will lead to an exchange of experience between the ‘network of networks’ and a separate network of government officials in member states involved in promoting women in scientific research. In the autumn both groups will consider a report on the challenges to women's participation in European research policy and put forward recommendations. This report is being produced by a group of experts set up last year by the commission. “There is a growth of awareness of the need for strategic action,” says Dewandre.

The new network has been set up as part of the commission's efforts to establish links with Europe's existing networks of women scientists. The commission is especially keen to see more female applicants for ‘expert positions’ in advisory groups and assessment panels within FP5. The current figure stands at around 15 per cent.

The representatives of networks told the commission that it should consider paying higher salaries to researchers with families to support. They suggested that the age limit for fellowships should be relaxed to take into account academic years completed, rather than age — a move that would help women who had taken time out to raise a family.

But Achilleas Mitsos, director of DGXII, gave little ground when fielding such suggestions in an open session. This was “not the time to change council decisions,” he said. “We should exert pressure, but this will come a little later.”

Although some were “not optimistic” about Mitsos's reaction, all were positive about the outcome of the meeting and what could be gained by forming the network.

In a keynote speech, Catherine Jay Didion, executive director of the US Association for Women in Science, showed how the lobbying of politicians can be carried out effectively. The association has been largely responsible for the creation of the Congress-mandated Commission on Women and Minorities in Science and Technology.

For some, the meeting itself was a revelation. “It has changed my life,” says Sue Black of the British Computing Society. “I didn't know all these women were out there.”