ONE of the world鈥檚 bastions of science is under fire for appearing to exclude women. The Royal Society has only 4 per cent of women among its 1190 academic fellows, and Britain鈥檚 Equal Opportunities Commission, which monitors gender equality at work, wants to know why.
鈥淚t does seem worrying if so few fellows are women,鈥� says a spokeswoman for the commission. 鈥淭he system for electing fellows might be a barrier, and generally the domination of certain professions by men or by women is something we鈥檙e concerned about,鈥� she says.
鈥淎t this stage, I wouldn鈥檛 call it an inquiry,鈥� says the spokeswoman. 鈥淏ut we鈥檙e writing to the Royal Society, and if there is a problem, we can advise them on how they might improve the position.鈥� She ruled out legal action for the moment.
Advertisement
The society says it is trying to redress the imbalance. 鈥淭he problem is that not enough women scientists are nominated,鈥� says Stephen Cox, its executive secretary.
鈥淭oo few women occupy the senior positions in science, engineering and technology that allow them to achieve the level of scientific excellence required to become a fellow,鈥� says Cox. 鈥淲e鈥檙e working hard to support women in scientific careers.鈥�
Some critics say the system of electing fellows needs an overhaul. At present, new fellows have to be proposed by existing ones, a system which can favour cliques. 鈥淚 say let people nominate themselves rather than depending on someone to recommend them,鈥� says Susan Greenfield, president of the Royal Institution.
鈥淎s far as I understand it, selection depends on personal recommendations or personal vetoes,鈥� Greenfield says. 鈥淭his means people could be recommended by friends or blackballed.鈥�
All sides agree that the main problem is lack of women in science generally, especially in high positions. 鈥淲hy aren鈥檛 the women there to be elected?鈥� asks Julia Higgins, professor of polymer science at Imperial College, London, and the Royal Society鈥檚 foreign secretary elect. 鈥淚 think the commission would do better to look at universities and to ask why there are so few women professors,鈥� she says. 鈥淲hat鈥檚 happening at the Royal Society is a symptom not a cause.鈥�
A study last year by the Royal Society of Chemistry, for example, found that while 37 per cent of undergraduate chemists in 1997-98 were women, just 1 per cent of chemistry professors were women (see Chart). Not surprisingly, the burden of childcare was a major barrier. So too was the massive competition for lectureships and professorships, and the tendency for men to fight for these more aggressively.
The RSC鈥檚 efforts to attract more women, such as concessionary membership fees, saw a doubling in women members between 1988 and 1998, from 4000 to 8400.