Research teams with diverse compositions—such as an equal balance of men and women—tend to produce better results. Ideally, gender should also be considered as a parameter in research itself. But how can researchers practically implement gender equality? The lecture "Things You Can Start Today to Improve Gender Diversity", taking place on 4 March, promises to offer concrete solutions. Initiator Tania Van Loon explains: "I don’t just want to make a feminist argument—gender equality genuinely improves the quality of research."
You coordinate a team that supports VUB researchers in securing European funding. The European Commission has strict rules to ensure gender balance in research teams and to integrate gender as a research dimension. Is there a big gap between what the EU demands and the reality at VUB?
"Yes and no. Things are moving in the right direction, but there’s still room for improvement. Some researchers don’t take gender into account—not always out of reluctance, but because it’s just one of many factors they need to consider. Other aspects, such as age, cultural background, and income level, can also play a role."
Is Gender Always a Relevant Parameter?
"Not always, of course. If gender isn’t relevant, researchers can state this when submitting a project proposal to the EU—though they must justify it properly. Our key message is: at least think about it. Your research may not have an obvious gender dimension, but ask yourself whether there is truly no reason to consider gender differences. Sometimes, it’s too easy to dismiss it as irrelevant."
"Progress is far too slow, and the gap is too wide. Moreover, Belgium is lagging behind compared to the rest of Europe."
In medical research, it seems logical to consider gender differences, yet this isn’t always the case.
"Exactly. It’s well known that male mice are typically used in laboratory testing to avoid dealing with the female reproductive cycle. While this may simplify research, it’s not a valid excuse—we’re missing half the picture. Even more concerning is that in vitro studies also tend to use only male-derived cells. Does that still make sense? At a cellular level, hormonal fluctuations don’t play a role. So why are female cells being excluded?"
Can you give some examples of research areas where the gender dimension isn’t immediately obvious but could still be important?
"Certainly. Take urban mobility research, for example. Some studies don’t consider that mobility needs and habits can differ between genders. It may sound stereotypical, but in many households, women are the ones who interrupt their commute to pick up children from daycare or do the shopping. Some women in big cities also feel unsafe, which influences their transport choices. Similarly, in the field of renewable energy and its policies, gender can play a role. Women are generally more sceptical of high-risk energy technologies, such as nuclear power or carbon storage, often due to concerns about cost, health, and the safety of future generations. Of course, factors like age and income level also influence attitudes, but recognising the gender dimension isn't about making a feminist argument—it’s about improving the quality of research."
Let’s talk about the composition of research teams. There’s a historical imbalance, with fewer women the higher you go in the academic hierarchy. Isn’t it just a matter of time before this corrects itself?
"In 2013, only 15.6% of professors in Belgian research institutions were women. By 2022, that figure had risen to 23.2%. The numbers at VUB follow a similar trend. So yes, there’s a historical imbalance, but simply waiting for older professors to retire won’t fix it. Progress is far too slow, and the gap remains too wide. Belgium is also lagging behind compared to the rest of Europe. The EU average is 29.2%, so we have to do better."
"Diversity lifts research to a higher level"
How is it that Belgium is falling behind other countries in terms of gender equality?
"I think part of it is cultural. In some countries, gender equality is so deeply ingrained that they take active steps to make sure it happens. Norway, for example, introduced quotas when they realised progress was too slow. In just a few years, they made huge strides. Not everyone was happy with the quota system, but once the gender balance was restored, the quotas were phased out. Quotas are one way to correct imbalances, but other countries take different approaches. In Tunisia and Algeria, for instance, a striking number of women choose science and engineering because they see it as a path to emancipation. Even without quotas, gender balance has nearly been achieved there."
Could Belgium take inspiration from these examples? Should we introduce quotas as well?
"Belgium tends to favour softer measures. There’s a lot of reluctance when it comes to quotas—even from women. Women in natural sciences, for instance, often say they feel overburdened when every jury and governing body needs to have gender balance. Since they’re in the minority, the same women are repeatedly asked to serve in these roles. So there’s little support for quotas, but if we look at the numbers, softer measures haven’t been all that effective."
Some fields have more women than men. Does it matter if certain faculties or committees have fewer women?
"In some faculties and disciplines, women do outnumber men—and that’s a problem too. Diversity in all forms—whether gender, cultural background, or seniority—enhances research excellence. When you bring different perspectives together, you elevate your research to a higher level. That’s precisely why we aim for gender balance not just at all levels and across all faculties, but also within individual research teams. Ultimately, as researchers, we all have the power to make a difference."
Practical information
- The lecture ‘Things you can start today to improve gender diversity’ will take place on 4 March from 2pm to 3pm in Building M, M.0.5
- Participation is free, registration is required