Unequal support: Women researchers at an Israeli lab

The better half of mankind is not well off as far as scientific and technological areas are concerned. Women are, no doubt, passing out with degrees in science and technology every year in good numbers. But that is when they start facing problems. Getting a good placement in the industry or academia is not easy. Even when women scientists secure a place for themselves in an institution, they are more often than not undervalued by their colleagues and remain unsupported in career. Many of those women drop out.

These are the observations made recently by the Athena Project and the Scientific Women’s Academic Network (SWAN) of the UK. Together they have launched a six-point charter that aims to stem the loss of women scientists. The UK Resource Center for Women in Science, Engineering and Technology (UKRC) recently estimated that about 50,000 women scientists are not using the sciences and engineering qualifications they gained, even though these skills are vital to the economy of the country.

The Athena-SWAN charter, supported by UKRC, has identified certain problem areas. One of the principles in the charter states, “The transition from PhD into a sustainable academic career in science can be particularly difficult for women and requires active consideration by the organisation.”

Are women scientists any better here in India? True, studies haven’t been conducted here, but if they had been done, findings would have revealed the same plight of women PhDs. Tackling of unequal representation of women in science requires changing cultures and attitudes across the society.

But that is a himalayan task; it can hardly be accomplished through a charter launched by a handful of organisations. The UK charter only aims at an achievable target, namely a change in the culture of organisations where women scientists are not treated at par with their men counterparts. For example, the latter are often found to be unhappy when asked to work under a woman boss. They also find nothing unusual in trivialising the achievements of their fellow women scientists. In spite of women being rewarded for achievements in science and technology , the general attitude towards them has not changed much.

That a developed country like UK is rethinking its strategy to address gender inequalities is a pointer to others. The UK charter can act as a lesson for us. We can find out what actions are needed to improve the working conditions of women scientists at departmental and organisational levels.

Critics no doubt will raise questions as to replication of the ideas here as the working conditions at the academia and industry are somewhat different from those prevailing there in the UK. But no one can deny the fact the differences are not so glaring that can reject them outright.

Will our department of science and technology take a look at the Athena-SWAN charter?