Women Still Underrepresented in Scientific Leadership Despite Gradual Progress 2026 Report
Gender inequality continues to shape the global scientific landscape, with women significantly underrepresented in leadership roles despite steady gains in overall participation.
A 2026 report by the International Science Council, InterAcademy Partnership, and the Standing Committee for Gender Equality in Science reveals that while women now make up nearly a third of the global research workforce, their presence in decision-making spaces remains disproportionately low.
Slow Progress in Representation
According to UNESCO data cited in the report, women accounted for 31.1% of researchers globally in 2022, up from 29.4% in 2012.
However, representation varies significantly across disciplines, with women still occupying a quarter or less of roles in engineering and technology, while nearing parity in social sciences and humanities.
Despite this progress, the transition from participation to leadership remains limited.
Leadership Gap in Scientific Institutions
The report, based on data from over 130 scientific academies and international unions and a survey of nearly 600 scientists, highlights persistent disparities in governance structures.
In 2025, women made up an average of 19% of members in national science academies, an improvement from 12% in 2015 and 16% in 2020 but still far below their representation in the broader research community.
In some academies, female membership remains below 5%, while others approach 40%, revealing stark global inconsistencies.
International scientific unions present a slightly more balanced picture, with women holding around 40% of leadership positions. However, inequalities persist, particularly in access to prestigious awards and recognition.
Institutional Barriers Beyond the ‘Pipeline’
While gender disparities are often attributed to historical imbalances fewer women entering certain scientific fields in the past the report argues that this explanation is incomplete.
Instead, it points to institutional practices and structural biases as key drivers. In about 90% of academies surveyed, nominations depend on existing members.
In male-dominated environments, this reinforces existing inequalities, as informal networks and visibility often determine who gets nominated.
Even where systems appear merit-based, lack of transparency, reliance on informal sponsorship, and unclear selection criteria continue to disadvantage women.
Participation Without Equal Advancement
The findings also show a disconnect between participation and progression.
Women are actively engaged in scientific organisations serving on committees and contributing to activities at similar levels as men but face greater barriers to advancement.
The report reveals that:
Women are three times more likely to report barriers to career progression
4.5 times more likely to miss key opportunities due to care responsibilities
Six times more likely to feel unable to participate fully in professional settings
2.5 times more likely to experience harassment or microaggressions
These challenges contribute to lower trust in institutional processes and limited access to leadership roles.
Scientific academies and unions play a crucial role in shaping research agendas, advising governments, and defining scientific excellence.
The report warns that persistent gender imbalance threatens both the legitimacy and effectiveness of these institutions, especially at a time when public trust in science is under pressure.
Pathways to Change
The report emphasizes that incremental awareness efforts are not enough. Meaningful progress requires structural reforms, including:
More transparent nomination and selection processes
Dedicated gender equality frameworks with funding and oversight
Broader nomination pools beyond existing members
Institutional support for inclusive participation
Encouragingly, organisations that have implemented formal reforms are seeing more sustained improvements in gender representation.
A Structural Issue, Not a Talent Gap
The report concludes that the underrepresentation of women in scientific leadership is not due to a lack of qualified candidates, but rather the result of long-standing institutional cultures shaped within male-dominated systems.
As global challenges from climate change to pandemics demand inclusive and credible scientific leadership, the call is clear: scientific institutions must evolve to reflect the diversity of the communities they serve.
TNAM
Edited By Egwu Patience Nnennaya
