Webinar “Gender Equality (GE) and Open Science (OS) in Research(er) Assessment (RA)

• July 6, 2024

On 5 June 2024, the Vilinius University (VU), in cooperation with UNESCO, hosted an online workshop on Gender Equality (GE) and Open Science (OS) in Research(er) Assessment (RA). The session, held within the OPUS consortium, explored the relationship between GE and OS in RA, encouraging participants to reflect on the topic and agree on potential actions to be implemented during the second stage of the pilots’ work.

Ahead of the event, the five pilot organisations were invited to complete a survey outlining their policies, actions, and indicators for monitoring GE and OS implementation.

The aim was twofold:

1. To understand the current landscape across pilots regarding GE and OS in RA.
2. To explore how these two dimensions could be better integrated into pilot organisations’ ongoing and future action plans.

Setting the Scene: UNESCO Perspectives

The workshop began with an introduction from the UNESCO moderator, who provided an overview of the international frameworks shaping research assessment:

• UNESCO Recommendation on Science and Scientific Researchers (RSSR, 2017) — emphasising that gender equality is not a peripheral matter but central to research integrity, excellence, and fairness. Institutions are encouraged to embed these values into evaluation and promotion processes.
• UNESCO Recommendation on Open Science (2021) — pointing out that traditional indicators, such as journal impact factors, are insufficient. Research assessment should integrate OS criteria to promote a more collaborative, impactful, and equitable research culture.
• Gender mainstreaming in research policy and practice — calling on research-performing and funding organisations to foster inclusive organisational cultures by removing structural barriers that disadvantage women and socially marginalised groups. This includes ensuring equal opportunities through recruitment, promotion, and evaluation processes.

The introduction underlined that both GE and OS share a common aim: to make the research system more equitable, transparent, and accessible. OS encourages practices such as open peer review, collaborative research, and citizen science, which align with GE objectives, valuing often under-recognised forms of labour typically undertaken by women. Therefore, including OS indicators (e.g. data sharing, open access publishing, citizen engagement) in assessment systems can help better reflect diverse contributions and support gender equality.

Survey Findings: Where We Stand

The four key takeaways from the pre-workshop pilot survey were:

1. Existing GE policies, but limited integration with OS
   All pilots had GE plans supported by policies and tools such as harassment prevention mechanisms (e.g., Whistleblower Portals, Codes of Conduct), disability inclusion measures, and equal opportunity experts.
   However, OS dimensions were not incorporated into these GE plans. Only one OS policy across two pilots included a GE dimension, focusing on open access (OA) to publicly funded research as a means of removing barriers, increasing transparency, and enhancing knowledge sharing.
2. Support for women’s visibility and careers
   Policy documents frequently emphasised improving women’s visibility in public life and supporting their career prospects through measures promoting work–life balance.
3. Partial integration of GE into OS Action Plans
   As pilots developed Action Plans for OS in RA, the survey asked whether GE had been included.
   • Two pilots reported collecting and analysing gender-disaggregated data for relevant indicators.
   • Only one pilot confirmed applying the gender lens to OS outputs (e.g., publications, datasets, software). Others were hesitant, citing a lack of suitable indicators or the belief that they were already collecting gender-disaggregated data.
   • Data was generally collected in a binary gender format. Where non-binary individuals participated, they were often excluded from publication metrics. Potential OS-linked GE indicators could include gender breakdowns of:
     • OS staff members
     • Citizen science workshop participants
     • OS trainers
     • Publications or repositories accessed by researchers
4. Training gaps and needs
   Out of the four survey respondents, only one had received training on GE. Most expressed a strong interest in training, suggesting topics such as:
   • Basic GE concepts
   • Unconscious bias
   • Gender dimensions in social research
   • Guidelines for gender mainstreaming

Pilots also flagged missing institutional/national support, especially mentoring for early-career women and underrepresented groups, and called for measures for work–family balance, intersectional policies, and integration of gender perspectives in research funding.

Workshop Discussion: Recommendations for Action

The brainstorming session and critical discussion led to several key recommendations for pilots to consider in their second-stage Action Plans:

• Address power dynamics and bias in OS-related practices, for example, by analysing who benefits from Golden OA publishing in their institutions.
• Integrate more OS dimensions (such as datasets) into RA and link them clearly to career progression.
• Revise or create policies that actively promote GE in research, education, leadership, and/or valorisation — with an OS component.
• Assign dedicated staff or resources to support women in targeted activities (again, with an OS link).
• Collect GE-disaggregated data on OS-related activities in research, education, leadership, and/or valorisation.
• Raise awareness of GE issues within RA and OS, and in the conduct of related activities.
• Integrate GE considerations into OS training programmes.

Next Steps

Given the positive feedback from the pilots and their willingness to undergo further training, the consortium agreed to organise a public workshop on GE and OS in RA in the following year, offering a broader platform for capacity building and exchange.