Our study offers an effective model for diagnosing discriminatory behaviours in a medical professional setting. Knowledge of inequality's drivers could help national ID/CM societies in collaboration with major European stakeholders to further reduce such discrimination. The effect of discrimination on the quality of healthcare in Europe needs further exploration.
This article contributes to the debate about the role of affect in transformative change towards gender equality, by comparing the building of affect in two recently founded women’s networks in Italian and Dutch universities. By conceptualizing networking as a social and cultural practice that organizes a collective body through the building of affect between specific groups of organizational stakeholders, we reveal the emotional, dynamic and context-dependent character of transformative change. We found that similar women’s networks build affect with organizational stakeholders in different ways, shaping boundaries of different collective bodies through emotions and adapting to the cultural meaning attributed to earlier actions. By bridging bottom-up and top-down approaches to gender equality and tailoring the building of affect to the local context they potentially contribute to transformational change towards gender equality.
ObjectiveIn 2009, in a European survey, around a quarter of Europeans reported witnessing discrimination or harassment at their workplace. The parity committee from the European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases (ESCMID) designed a questionnaire survey to investigate forms of discrimination with respect to country, gender and ethnicity among medical professionals in hospitals and universities carrying out activities in the clinical microbiology (CM) and infectious diseases (ID) fields.DesignThe survey consisted of 61 questions divided into five areas (sociodemographic, professional census and environment, leadership and generic) and ran anonymously for nearly 3 months on the ESCMID website.SubjectsEuropean specialists in CM/ID.ResultsOverall, we included 1274 professionals. The majority of respondents (68%) stated that discrimination is present in medical science. A quarter of them reported personal experience with discrimination, mainly associated with gender and geographic region. Specialists from South-Western Europe experienced events at a much higher rate (37%) than other European regions. The proportion of women among full professor was on average 46% in CM and 26% in ID. Participation in high-level decision-making committees was significantly (>10 percentage points) different by gender and geographic origin. Yearly gross salary among CM/ID professionals was significantly different among European countries and by gender, within the same country. More than one-third of respondents (38%) stated that international societies in CM/ID have an imbalance as for committee member distribution and speakers at international conferences.ConclusionsA quarter of CM/ID specialists experienced career and research discrimination in European hospitals and universities, mainly related to gender and geographic origin. Implementing proactive policies to tackle discrimination and improve representativeness and balance in career among CM/ID professionals in Europe is urgently needed.
The analysis of the reasons behind the persistent underrepresentation of women in senior positions in science is well-developed. In contrast, the assessment of the impact of policies addressing the problem suffers from a lack of evidence and an oversimplification of approaches. Based on the assessment of 125 programs for gender equality implemented in research organisations in Europe, North America and Australia, we argue that holistic approaches and multidimensional frames of reference are needed for impact assessment, also to improve program design and policy. Our analysis shows that the problem of gender inequality is rooted in so many and interrelated factors that program impact assessment has to be multidimensional and complex. Having a conceptual approach grounded in the notion of complexity as a point of departure, the paper presents an innovative impact assessment tool, pointing to effective ways to assess the impact of gender equality programs.
The need to redress persistent gender inequality in senior and decision-making positions in science through structural measures is increasingly recognized both in academic literature and policy-making.Based on the experience of a Danish university implementing a structural gender equality action plan, we present a dynamic framework to activate structural change and argue that for such interventions to be effective, it is necessary that they acknowledge and operationalize the notion of complexity as their frame of reference. The notion of complexity proposes a non-linear relationship between inputs and outputs of policy measures, where impact depends on the interaction of a multitude of variables strongly related to context. Following this approach, the framework tested and discussed herein is characterized by a holistic view of structural change, encompassing multiple targets and areas of intervention, a multidimensional notion of power, and a strong focus on local change dynamics, i.e. activation processes, agency mobilization, structural resistances, and impact-producing factors.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.