Towards gender equality in scientific organization: assessment and recommendations

Academies of science, medicine and engineering, along with international scientific unions, play an important role in shaping scientific agendas, recognizing excellence, and advising policy-makers. In doing so, they influence whose expertise is visible and whose voices are heard in science. Persistent gender gaps within these organizations — relative to the share of women in the scientific workforce — raise questions about whether women scientists can participate, lead, and be recognized on equal terms. 

This report presents the most comprehensive global assessment to date of gender equality in scientific organizations. It reports the findings of a 2025 global study conducted jointly by the International Science Council (ISC), the InterAcademy Partnership (IAP), and the Standing Committee for Gender Equality in Science (SCGES). 

The analysis draws on institutional data from 136 organizations, survey responses from nearly 600 scientists, and a dozen interviews with representatives of scientific organizations. Together, these sources support a multi-level assessment of women’s representation, participation, leadership, and recognition, combining structural analysis with lived experience. 

Building on global online surveys carried out in 2015 and 2020, the study provides a ten-year perspective on progress and persistent gaps. It identifies structural barriers to gender equality and highlights areas where institutional policies and practices have contributed to measurable change. 

To cite this report: International Science Council, InterAcademy Partnership and Standing Committee for Gender Equality in Science (February 2026) Towards gender equality in scientific Organizations: assessment and recommendations. DOI: 10.24948/2026.03 

KEY FINDINGS 

1. Progress is real but uneven. Despite overall gains since 2015, women remain underrepresented in scientific organizations compared with their share of the global scientific workforce (31.1% of researchers worldwide in 2022). 
2. In national academies, women represent on average 19% of members in 2025, up from 12% in 2015 and 16% in 2020, with proportions ranging from 2% to nearly 40%. The share of academies with very low representation (fewer than 10% women members) has fallen by around half since 2015. 
3. In international scientific unions, women’s representation varies primarily by field, reflecting differences in disciplinary pipelines rather than national or institutional contexts. While aggregate figures are not directly comparable to those of academies, unions, particularly those that are SCGES partners, generally report higher levels of women’s participation in committees and governing bodies, while facing many of the same challenges as academies, including persistent gaps in senior leadership and recognition. 
4. Formal openness coexists with informal gatekeeping. Gender gaps in representation do not stem from explicit restrictions on women’s eligibility. Most scientific organizations report formally open and merit-based procedures. Yet nomination processes driven by existing members, along with reliance on informal networks, continue to shape who is identified, encouraged, and put forward. In most cases, women remain underrepresented in nomination pools relative to their presence in the scientific community. Once nominated, however, women are elected or awarded at rates slightly higher than their share of the nomination pool, indicating that the main constraints operate upstream of formal selection decisions. 
5. Representation does not equate influence. Although women’s representation has increased in many organizations, this has not consistently translated into leadership and decision-making roles. Women remain underrepresented in presidential positions and senior governing bodies, indicating that influence within organizations remains unevenly distributed. 
6. Participation is comparable; experiences and opportunities are not. Women who join scientific organizations participate at levels similar to men, but this does not lead to comparable progression or recognition. Women are more than three times as likely to report barriers to advancement, and 4.5 times more likely to miss opportunities due to care responsibilities. Across disciplines and organizational types, women are also 2.5 times more likely than men to report experiences of harassment and, at the same time, express lower levels of trust in the transparency of selection processes and in the mechanisms for reporting and addressing misconduct. 
7. Gender equality policies and practices are increasingly present, but weakly institutionalized. More than 60% of academies and international unions now report having introduced gender-related policy documents or initiatives aimed at advancing gender equality. However, these efforts are most often limited to awareness-raising or encouragement, and are rarely backed by dedicated structures, financial or human resources, or evaluation mechanisms. As a result, gender equality efforts tend to remain marginal to core governance processes and often rely on the commitment of individual actors rather than sustained institutional engagement.