Dr Charikleia Charoula Tzanakou

By deciding to condition the access of research organizations to its €95.5 billion Horizon Europe funding programme (2021–7) on providing evidence of a gender equality plan, the European Commission has made the challenge of certifying the gender equality performance of research organizations extremely urgent, not least to avoid the risk that such plans become a mere formality (‘box-ticking’). This challenge should not be underestimated, considering the extremely complex nature of the dynamics surrounding gender equality. In this article, we analyse the feasibility of establishing a European certification scheme that would assess gender equality policies and outcomes of research organizations, and present four alternative scenarios for its set-up, co-created with a wide range of stakeholders in a participatory step-by-step process. The results of the two-stage validation process of the four scenarios are also presented, providing policy implications and recommendations to support the effective roll-out of the certification schemes.

In the past 2 decades, many Certification and Award schemes (CAS) related to gender equality, diversity and inclusion have emerged in the higher education, research and industry sectors. According to a recent report, there are as many as 113 CAS which have been identified across Europe and beyond. These CAS aim at addressing inequalities in relation to the grounds of sex, gender, race, sexual orientation, and disability among others. The high number of CAS, and their continued growth, has taken place in parallel to the shift of policies and efforts from “fixing individuals” to “fixing the system.” In these schemes, gender equality is often understood as a structural, systemic challenge, with a recognition that advancing gender equality is complex and requires drivers and interventions at micro, meso and macro level. Studies focused on analysing and evaluating gender equality initiatives in higher education have been scarce, and often limited to specific schemes. This paper aims to fill this gap by providing a better understanding of the CAS landscape through comparing two of the main gender equality schemes used by research-performing organisations in Europe Athena SWAN (in the UK) and Total E-Quality Award (in Germany). Based on qualitative interviews with stakeholders across Europe and document analysis, this paper focuses on strengths, challenges faced by and the impact of these CAS. This comparative exercise highlights particular learning points that can inform potential reviews of existing schemes and/or the development of new schemes such as a Europe-wide scheme. The latter is the focus of a Horizon 2020 project entitled CASPER (Certification-Award Systems to Promote Gender Equality in Research), which aims at making recommendations to the European Commission as to the feasibility of a Europe-wide CAS for gender equality in research organisations.

This thematic issue of Social Inclusion focuses on universities as inclusive organisations in a variety of different countries and higher education (HE) systems. It explores how these institutions aim, succeed or fail to become inclusive organisations, what policies and processes help achieve these goals and how academics and students can become agents of change through inclusive teaching and research cultures. The contributions in this thematic issue point to the multi‐level as well as multi‐faceted challenges and characteristics of inclusion in HE in general and in universities in particular, based on both student and academic points of view. They offer innovative conceptual ways of thinking as well as measuring inclusion. Further, they point out the importance of context in understanding the challenges of achieving equality and inclusion in universities through country‐specific as well as cross‐country comparisons of various aspects of diversity and inclusivity. We hope this thematic issue will inspire theoretical thinking, support practitioners and encourage policy‐making about more responsible ways of defining and fostering inclusive universities in a globalised world.

Academic and policy discourse has idealised academic mobility despite studies showing that it can have adverse effects on individuals ‘experiences and contribute towards exacerbating existing inequalities. Contrary to this idealisation, this paper shows how that long term (more than a year) academic mobility at the early career paths of STEM researchers entails challenges, frictions and emotional tensions as part of the decision making irrespective if they decide to move or remain within their home country. The concept of stickiness is used highlight the often-understated tensions of academic career (im)mobilities. Moreover, it emphasises the complexity, the affective considerations and the tensions in how (im)mobilities are determined and experienced in early career researchers’ accounts and allows investigating the intersection
and co-construction of individual and contextual considerations in academic mobilities and careers. This paper is based on a qualitative analysis of 15 in-depth interviews with a subsample of survey respondents, as part of a mixed methods study of Greek researchers in Science, Technology, Engineering and Maths (STEM). It thus focuses on a largely underexamined population and context, Greek STEM early career researchers and compares individuals with international mobility experience and those who remained in Greece during their early career.

This article argues that gender equality programmes in universities and colleges may operate as a form of ‘moderate feminism’, producing contradictions through simultaneously providing a site of resistance and complicity for feminists. Our argument draws on a critical and empirical analysis of the Athena SWAN (Scientific Women's Academic Network) charter mark, which originated in the UK. We argue that Athena SWAN is a product of neoliberalization within the UK's academic environments, reflecting the tendency towards accountability, metrics and the performative ‘doing’ of equality work within this context. We problematize the operationalization and implementation of Athena SWAN processes in departments and universities, describing contradictions and caveats. Athena SWAN can lead to benefits and (limited) achievements in terms of culture change and institutional initiatives. However, the burden of undertaking this work predominantly falls upon women and other marginalized groups, such as people of colour and lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) people. Equality programmes such as Athena SWAN are often poorly designed to address complex issues, such as intersectional identities and discrimination experienced by self‐assessment team members. Nevertheless, we identify potential in utilizing Athena SWAN as a site of resistance and means to foster collective solidarity to work against neoliberal practices.

Mobility has been seen as the hallmark of the European Higher Education Area with student and graduate mobility being promoted and facilitated through the Bologna process. This paper follows the experiences of 12 U.K.-educated mobile graduates of British and other European Union (EU) nationality and analyses both their skills gained by studying at a U.K. higher education institution and the obstacles they experienced to transfer their U.K. qualification to a different country. We demonstrate that graduates not only developed – as part of their course and within the opportunities that the U.K. higher education environment offers – but also used various skills ranging from subject-specific to language and generic skills in their current activities. While a U.K. degree is reputable and well known in other European countries, there seem to be limitations in relation to its transferability and recognition for studying and working beyond the U.K., which contribute to unequal treatment in the local labour market between domestic- and foreign-educated graduates. More than a decade after the inception of the Bologna process and the introduction of tools to facilitate mobility, structural barriers still exist which prevent the smooth recognition of skills and qualifications of mobile students and graduates within the EU. This has implications for further study and employment outcomes for mobile graduates but also for mobility decisions before and after higher education.

The number of dual career couples in academia is growing due to the increasing proportion of women with a doctoral degree and the greater propensity of women to choose another academic as their partner. At the same time, international mobility is required for career advancement in academia, creating challenges for dual career couples where both partners pursue careers. This paper has two objectives: (a) to raise the increasingly important issue of dual career couples in academia and the gendered effect that the pressure for mobility has on career advancement and work–life interference; and (b) to present examples of recently established dual career services of higher education institutions in Germany, Denmark and Switzerland, responding to the needs of the growing population of dual career couples. Due to long established practices of dual career services in the USA, the European examples will be compared with US practices. This paper raises the significance of considering dual career couples in institutional policies that aim for an internationally excellent and diversified academic workforce. It will appraise dual career services according to whether they reinforce or address gender inequalities and provide recommendations to higher education institutions interested in developing services and programmes for dual career couples.