` Gender and Science in Developing Areas*

Why do women have more difficulty pursuing research careers than men? Although this topic has been extensively investigated in industrialized countries, prior studies provide little comparative evidence from less developed areas. Based on a survey of 293 scientists in Ghana, Kenya, and the Indian state of Kerala, we examine gender differences on a variety of individual, social, and organizational dimensions. The results show small or nonexistent differences between women and men in individual characteristics, professional resources, and the organizational conditions under which research is conducted. But if gender makes little difference in these factors, why do women experience more difficulties in pursuit of a scientific career? We argue that a combination of educational and research localism increases the likelihood of restricted professional networks for women. Gender inequality in the research systems of the developing world may be based on systemic deficits in the acquisition of social rather than material resources. The most important implication is that educational policy for development should focus on international opportunities for women in the near future. How extensive are gender differences in scientific and technical careers? A great deal of effort has been devoted both to answering this question and to examining trends over time. This interest has been driven partly by functionalist concerns with the operation of universalism and particularism in science (Cole 1979; Fox 2000; Long 1990; Reskin 1978; Zuckerman and Cole 1975). It has also been guided by a liberal feminist concern with the issue of opportunities for advancement in careers that have exhibited serious barriers to entry for women (Eisenhart and Finkel 1998; Fox 1999; McIlwee and Robinson 1992; Schiebinger 1999). Functionalist and feminist scholars alike have examined science and technology as an institutional sector unique in its dual role of providing both careers for individuals and the organizational foundation for much of the knowledge on which modernity depends. 1 Both functionalist and feminist questions are much broader than the career concerns of this essay. Issues of the selection of research problems, the nature of objectivity, the use of metaphors, the interpretation of data, and differences in approach are not addressed in the present study (see Fox 1999 for a review). 2 The substantial work on gender and scientific careers reveals two broad themes. First, studies of women in science through the 1980s showed an increase both in absolute terms and relative to men (Rossiter 1982; Zuckerman, Cole, and Bruer 1991). But as Fox argues, "numbers may constitute presence, but not necessarily significant participation" (1995, p. 206). Research questions centered on the degree to which gender is associated with stratified outcomes such as employment location, rank, salary, research productivity, and other aspects of career attainment. Gender differences are evident in employment sector, academic rank, salary, and productivity, and often vary by discipline (Fox 1999). Differences between men and women scientists seem to be small or insignificant in location of training, financial support for graduate work, and the effects of individual characteristics (such as marriage and parenting) on productivity. A second broad theme that emerges from this literature is that women are not a homogeneous group. Studies of women in science have been conducted almost entirely in the highly industrialized countries of the North, while science in what was once called the Third World has been ignored. National research systems have replaced colonial systems in Africa, 2 Recent initiatives to improve conditions for women in science faculties underscore the fact that discrimination continues to be a problem at major research universities (Kate Zernike, "Nine Universities Will Address Sex Inequities," New York Times 31/1/01, p.A11). 3 The most comprehensive recent reviews are by Mary Frank Fox in the Handbook of Science and Technology Studies (1995) and the Handbook of the Sociology of Gender (1999). Until recently, much of the information on gender and science was based on relatively old information. Growth in this area is revealed by the age of references in these two reviews. In the first, more than half of the studies are from the period before 1980, while fewer than one quarter were conducted less than ten years prior to publication. In the more recent review over one third of the work was published in the 1990s. Period effects are especially important when women are entering the labor force at rapid rates, but they can be complex, owing to fluctuations in scientific labor markets, field differences in employment sector, and gender differences in career preferences (Fox and Stephan 2001). 3 Asia, and Latin America during the past half century. Until recently women scientists were so rare as to be nearly invisible. Thus, most samples of scientists did not offer enough variation in the gender of the respondents to assess the role of gender. In developing areas gender studies have typically focused on women as users of technology for socio-economic development (Everts 1998; Stamp 1989). What has gone largely unnoticed is that the participation of women in research careers is increasing in developing as well as developed areas (Schiebinger 1999, pp. 40-41). This paper represents a preliminary, descriptive attempt to answer the following questions: how extensive are gender differences in the research systems of developing areas and why do women have more difficulty pursuing research careers than men? We address these issues through a survey of agricultural and environmental scientists in Ghana, Kenya, and India, administered through face-to-face interviews. Even though we sought to oversample women in order to draw a broad range of comparisons, only 25% of our respondents were women. It is important to state at the outset that this study did not focus exclusively on gender, but on the general conditions in which researchers conduct their work in LDCs. For the examination of gender, it began without strong notions of what to expect, beyond the obvious idea that women in developing countries generally experience a wide range of structural and interactional disadvantages. An attempt was made to include indicators for most of the primary gender 4 differences that have been examined in studies of highly developed research systems. 4 Our approach was to administer a survey, but also to keep our eyes and ears open. While a survey is not an ethnography, personal interviewing in the developing world necessarily involves a great deal of observation that goes beyond the survey instrument itself. Qualitative observations helped to interpret the results below, many of which revealed small or nonexistent variation between women and men for the individual characteristics, professional resources, and organizational conditions that we suspected would display marked gender differences. Yet if gender makes little difference in these factors, this leaves hanging the question of why women experience more difficulties in pursuit of research careers, as the small number of women scientists in the three locations indicates. We argue that a combination of educational and travel limitations restricts the professional networks of women in important respects. In the following section, the methodology of the study is described. The results are organized in terms of five themes. First, we ask who these women are: do they differ from their male counterparts in terms of educational and personal background? Second, we consider their professional lives in terms of the work they do, their participation in professional activities, and research productivity. Third, we ask what kinds of organizational resources they possess. In most of these areas gender differences are not large. Fourth, we compare the professional networks of women to those of their male counterparts. Finally, we address the consequences of 5 the observed differences between women and men. We argue that gender inequality in the research systems of the developing world may be based on systemic deficits in the acquisition of social rather than material resources.