Liz Hoffman:“从科学中的性别公平方面解决的根本问题是什么？”

Pavel Ovseiko:根本的问题是对妇女的才能和研究潜力的利用不足。在英国，在美国国家卫生研究所（NIHR）生物医学研究资金竞争期间，在2011年解决这一问题的进展不足。英格兰首席医疗官萨利·戴维斯教授（Dame Sally Davies）教授感到担忧，许多医学院和教学医院都在支持女性临床医生科学家，以便他们可以晋升为高级领导职务。她鼓励并激励医学院通过将未来的NIHR生物医学研究资金与至少获得至少获得《银色的银奖》，以加速妇女的进步和领导雅典娜天鹅妇女科学宪章. The Athena SWAN Charter has also been adopted in Ireland and is currently being successfully piloted in Australia as part of theScience in Australia Gender Equity (SAGE) programmerun by the Australian Academy of Science in partnership with the Academy of Technology and Engineering .

LH:“我们为什么要关心健康研究中的性别平等？”

PO:There are several reasons why gender equality in health research is of paramount importance. First, gender equality in health research is imperative for continued public support for health research because equality is one of the fundamental values of our society. Second, gender equality in health research helps achieve better science by addressing possible gender biases in the selection of research topics, methods, and participants. Often, women have more inclusive and collaborative leadership styles. Finally, gender equality in health research helps ensure that women and men equally benefit from scientific breakthroughs and innovations. As the recent“Global call for action to include gender in research impact assessment”表明，如果在研究中不考虑生物学和社会文化性别和性别差异，则在其健康，社会和经济方面，妇女可能会处于研究的受益人。

LH:“What are you doing – what’s the big project plan?”

PO:I am leading a multi-disciplinary group of researchers conducting research and undertaking policy advocacy. We work across medical and social sciences in the university, but also across the university and theNIHRBiomedical Research Centre at the Oxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust. We are building an evidence base to accelerate women’s advancement and leadership throughsystematic reviews[1]; developing markers of achievement, metrics, and indicators for assessing andmonitoring gender equity[2]; conducting multi-centre international comparisons of thegender leadership gap[3]; examining the gender dimension of responsible research and innovation policies as part of the European Union’s Horizon 2020 funded consortium Structural Transformation to Attain Responsible Biosciences (STARBIOS2)[4]; and exploring ways of creating a more supportive and inclusive university culture in collaboration with the US National Initiative on Gender, Culture and Leadership in Medicine:C-Change[5]. In our own institution, Oxford University, Athena SWAN has been by far the most important intervention to advance gender equality and improve organisational culture and climate. In our latestresearchpublished in健康Research Policy and Systemswe explore women’s and men’s perceptions of the Athena SWAN process and its impact.

LH:“What are the results of the Athena SWAN project so far”

PO:雅典娜天鹅是一个强大的干预性别平等, possibly, the best national programme of this kind in the world. It allows institutions to be really ambitious in setting objectives and developing action plans for gender equality. My colleagues and I found that the implementation of Athena SWAN in our institution had brought about important structural and cultural changes, such as increased support for women’s careers, greater appreciation of caring responsibilities, and efforts to challenge discrimination and bias. Yet, we also found concerns that the implementation of Athena SWAN had limited ability to address longstanding and entrenched power and pay imbalances, lack of work-life balance, and sustainability of positive changes without further financial incentives, resentment about perceived positive discrimination. Thus, higher education and research institutions need to be realistic about what could be achieved within the limits of the current organisations, society, and culture over a relatively short period of time. Fundamentally, gender inequality is about the unequal division of paid work outside the family and unpaid work in the family. To increase men’s participation in unpaid work in the family would require cultural change and welfare state policies, which is beyond the scope of higher education and research policy.

LH:“What next for this research?”

PO:Our study was exploratory in nature, and so we are now setting up a project to test themes and hypotheses from this study and working with other UK centres to develop multi-centre comparative research into convergence and divergence of Athena SWAN implementation across different institutions. As part of the International School on Research Impact Assessment thematic group on gender, we are working on recommendations to strengthen analysis of gender equity inresearch impact assessment.[6] The fifth edition of the School will be hosted by The Novo Nordisk Foundation in Denmark in October 2017. We are also keen to share our experience with and learn lessons from other countries such as the United States, where the National Science Foundation ADVANCE program supports initiatives to increase the representation and advancement of women in science; Australia, where Science in Australia Gender Equity (SAGE) program[7] is making great advances; and India, where there is growing interest in involving institutions to advance women’s careers and participation in science, technology, engineering, mathematics and medicinemore actively. I particularly look forward to visiting Australia’s University of Newcastle, known for its cutting-edge research and innovative teaching, as a President’s Visiting Fellow later this year to give public lectures, engage with senior leaders, and develop new exciting research collaborations.

1. https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(15)01091-0/fulltext
2. https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/6/1/e009022
3. https://human-resources-health.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12960-016-0175-y
4. https://starbios2.eu/
5. https://www.medsci.ox.ac.uk/news/creating-a-more-supportive-and-inclusive-university-culture
6. https://theinternationalschoolonria.com/themes.php
7. https://www.sciencegenderequity.org.au/