Inclusion is Smart and Good But? Digital Technologies, Science and Gender
Krishna Ravi Srinivas,
PhD, Consultant & Senior Fellow , RIS
On the Occasion of International Day of Women and
Girls in Science (11th February) , UNESCO released a chapter from the forthcoming
World Science Report (WSR) , titled as ‘To be smart, the digital revolution
will need to be inclusive’[1]
focussing on the gender dimension and the case for inclusion in, inter alia,
digital technologies, innovation, and science. Given the emphasis on smart in
the title of WSR, the title of the chapter is not surprising. The chapter
highlights various issues in gender inclusion in Fourth Industrial Revolution
(4IR) , AI, STEM, diversity in technology sectors, patents and intellectual
property rights and the need to measure gender inclusion.
In the 4IR,
skills shortage that is expected can be addressed by educating and training
women. “For women to seize upon the
opportunities offered by the 4IR, there will need to be a level playing field
in terms of access to enablers such as education and information”[2]. Here
access to digital technologies including internet would be key as women lag men
in many countries in terms of this divide. The idea that skill shortage that is
expected in the 4IR can be met adequately by training women is an excellent
one. But the over all issue is that of job displacement and replacement on
account of 4IR. Today’s skill mighty become obsolete tomorrow or the job may be
displaced or made redundant. Hence the key question is that of jobs and
employment and whether increased digitization and automation will result in
more jobs or less jobs and if so at what cost and whose costs. Identifying and
addressing the gender dimension in this is important but that alone may not be
sufficient.
Today women lag behind in hi-tech
sector particularly in ICTs, AI and related fields. Similarly in terms of
patents and indicators related to innovation women have a long way to go. Knowing
how industry is responding to this imbalance and taking steps to enhance
women’s representation in leadership positions and board level at companies
will go a long way in bridging the gap. But whether these alone can bring in
transformational changes is a question worth pondering.
In higher education “Globally, women make up 33.3% of researchers
(in head counts), according to data from the UNESCO Institute for Statistics
for 107 countries covering the years 2015–2018 (Figure 3.4). This is a much
higher proportion than five years ago (28.4%) but large data gaps remain.”
(P11). The progress in achieving gender parity is good in some regions like
South Asia while Africa lags behind. At the same it is important to note that
this and other trends are not related to GDP or per capita income and some of
the countries that are doing well in education and gender indicators (if not in
all indicators) need not be equipped well to utilize 4IR or benefit from it. “Even OECD countries leading in gender equality
rankings (WEF, 2018b) have a share of women researchers that hovers around the
global average; such as Finland (33%), Norway (38%) and Sweden (33%)”[3].
One should also point out that many
countries that seem to be doing well in terms of gender parity and gender and
science indicators need not have a strong or a dynamic National Innovation
System (NIS), nor are the leading countries in global S&T in terms of
indicators such Gross Expenditure in R&D. However, it is obvious that
systematic efforts in achieving gender parity and making higher education and
S&T more inclusive are resulting in positive results. This per se is a
welcome trend. But whether gender parity results in increase in number of women
as researchers or increase in the share of women in researchers in S&T is
an important issue. Gender parity in higher education is necessary but not
sufficient to ensure equal/full/higher participation as researchers in S&T.
There are many factors that constrain women from using their higher education
and capacity and skills to enter research and pursue S&T careers, in
academia or in industry, resulting in a gap. This gap is explained by a concept
called ‘Leaky Pipe’, as shown in the figure below.
As Swarup and Dey point out even if there is no conscious effort to keep
women out or filter them the ‘leaky pipe’ is a grim reality and there many
factors responsible for it. Some of them have been described and discussed in
the literature and this ‘Leaky Pipe’ cannot be attributed to any single factor
and hence there is no one solution that would solve this or bring in drastic
and positive changes.[5]
One issue that has often been highlighted is the lack of comprehensive
data on gender and science. Lack of data and poor-quality data make evidence-based
policy making and measuring the impacts and outcomes of policies difficult.
More importantly there is a need for indicators, matrices and methodologies to
ensure that discussion and policies on gender and science are based on data and
robust interpretations, supplemented with holistic approaches and frameworks
that take a comprehensive and coherent perspective on gender and science. In
this regard, UNESCO’s STEM and Gender Advancement (SAGA) project, is
an important initiative. Adopting it and contextualizing it to develop
appropriate indicators for gender inclusivity is a challenge and is important
to assess the impacts of interventions and policies/programs [6]
Overall the chapter has mapped well
various issues and dimensions in gender exclusion in digital technologies and
science. It has a rich data and excellent analysis coupled with many
suggestions for policy makers. One hopes that this chapter will get the
attention it deserves and will be used by academics and other stakeholders to
further the cause of gender and inclusion in science. Since this addresses
gender exclusion and under-representation in digital technologies and discusses
jobs, employment, and gender in 4IR, it has much relevance for policy making.
It is a welcome sign that it takes such an approach instead of narrowly
focussing on gender and science per se.
RIS is sensitive to gender and STI, and is addressing it through inter alia, Access,
Equity, and Inclusion (AEI) framework. AEI approach goes beyond exclusion in
science in terms of gender and addresses AEI in Science, Technology, and
Innovation per se and strives to take a wholistic perspective, by paying
attention to inter alia, emerging technologies and gender, developing indicators
for gender inclusion, inclusive innovation and gender, gender and specific
technologies such as biotechnology, and measuring AEI in STI.[7] Similarly, we will be working on gender
dimension in Science Diplomacy and how Science Diplomacy can contribute to
gender equality by promoting SDGs. Obviously, we need to do more work in this,
and this is a challenge and an opportunity as well.
[1]
Bello, Alessandro; Blowers, Tonya; Schneegans, Susan and Tiffany Straza (2021)
To be smart, the digital
revolution will need to be inclusive.
In: UNESCO Science Report: the Race against Time for Smarter Development Paris
: UNESCO https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000375429
[2] Ibid p-3
[3] Ibid p-15
[4] Akanksha
Swarup and Tuli Dey (2020) Women in science and technology: an Indian
Scenario CURRENT SCIENCE, VOL. 119, NO. 5, 10 SEPTEMBER 2020 Pp 744-748
[5] There are
studies on ‘Leaky Pipe’ and in the literature there is much discussion on
various factors that contribute to exclusion and underrepresentation of women
in S&T. For example,
See https://www.msmu.edu/newsroom/articles/feminist-theory-and-stem.php
9/15
The Gender Gap in STEM Fields:
Theories, Movements, and Ideas to Engage Girls in STEM https://naerjournal.ua.es/article/view/271
2/18
[6] Nimita Pandey in her talk at Consultation on Access,
Equity and Inclusion (AEI) and Science, Technology and Innovation (STI) organized by RIS on 3rd September
2020 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p1WisURzECw&t=670s
[7] RIS Policy Brief 94 Access, Equity and
Inclusion and Science, Technology and Innovation Policy http://ris.org.in/sites/default/files/Policy%20brief-94%20Dr%20Ravi%20K%20Srinivas.pdf
Science, Technology, Innovation in India and
Access, Inclusion and Equity: Discourses, Measurement and Emerging Challenges
Sachin Chaturvedi, Krishna Ravi Srinivas, Rashmi Rastogi RIS Discussion Paper
202 December 2015
http://ris.org.in/sites/default/files/pdf/DP202-Prof_Sachin%20Chaturvedi_and_Dr_Ravi_Srinivas.pdf
I am a digital marketing professional and feel that it's high that we establish a gender-neutral digital world. To help gain more knowledge and skills for the same I recommend you pursue a PGCM Course in Digital marketing via distance learning school to bring the very needed change. Thanks for sharing your insights.
ReplyDelete