Opening the door to sustainability in higher education. What does gender have to do with it?

The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, adopted by all UN member states at the UN Sustainable Development Summit in New York in September 2015 (United Nations, 2015), is a landmark in the context of sustainable development. The 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) aim to achieve peace and prosperity for people and the planet. As such, ending poverty and other deprivations in both developed and developing countries must go hand in hand with strategies to improve health and education, reduce inequalities and boost economic growth, while tackling climate change and working to ensure the sustainability of oceans and forests (United Nations, 2022a).

Sustainable Development Goals 5 of the 2030 Agenda aims to achieve gender equality and empower all women and girls. Despite efforts in recent years, the UN Economic and Social Council’s Progress towards the Sustainable Development Goals report, published at the beginning of 2022, is compelling about the distance from the goals of the 2030 Agenda: “The world is not on track to achieve gender equality by 2030″ (United Nations, 2022b, p. 11).

The United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation (UNESCO) advocates for educational institutions to play a key role in achieving the Sustainable Development Goals and promoting gender quality (UNESCO, 2017). Universities have a critical role to play in achieving the SDGs. Due to their important role in knowledge creation and dissemination, research, education and outreach, universities should actively contribute to the critical discussion of the current situation, call for action and help establish sustainable development pathways (Berchin, Dutra, & Guerra, 2021).

Getting started with the SDGs in universities (SDSN Australia/Pacific, 2017) provides an operational guide for universities, higher education institutions and the academic sector. The guide recognises that “through their ‘business-as-usual’ activities in education, research, and operations universities already make many important contributions to the achievement of the SDGs.” (SDSN Australia/Pacific, 2017, p. 31). However, to be a truly SDG-engaged university, institutions need to “need to become champions of sustainable development and play a leading role in the implementation of the SDGs.” (SDSN Australia/Pacific, 2017, p. 31). As this is a challenging task, recommendations for future action include following a step-by-step SDG integration process that universities can take to strengthen their commitment to sustainable development.

Research and higher education institutions are gendered settings in which women and men play different roles, e.g. in conducting research, teaching, managing staff and structures, or implementing procedures. According to the EIGE, the European Institute for Gender Equality, as in many other areas of society, these institutions reproduce societal values that lead to gender bias/discrimination. In particular, women and men tend to be concentrated in certain scientific fields (horizontal segregation), while top hierarchical positions are more often occupied by men (vertical segregation). In addition, research and higher education institutions face unconscious or implicit gender bias, as it is often applied in the assessment and evaluation of people, preventing objective and fair judgement (EIGE, 2016).

Looking through the keyhole of gender in higher education institutions

Equality between men and women is a principle of citizenship enshrined in the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Gender equality is also a core value of the EU under the European Treaties, in particular the EU Gender Equality Strategy 2020-2025, which implements the commitment of the von der Leyen Commission to achieve a Union of Equality (European Union 2024).

Despite this normative recognition and political commitment, evidence shows that barriers persist in research organizations and higher education institutions, making it difficult for women and men to have equal access to categories, resources and working conditions (EIGE, 2016). Following the publication She Figures – the main source of comparable pan-European statistics on the state of gender equality in research and innovation – the evolution in this respect has been uneven. In terms of the graduate talent pool, the EU has almost achieved gender parity among doctoral graduates, yet, as far as career advancement and participation in decision-making, the data looks less encouraging and “the under-representation of women in senior academic and decision-making positions in the EU remains a significant problem” (European Commission, 2021, p. 7). Indeed, when it comes to leadership positions, “the proportion of women as heads of institutions in the higher education sector in 2019 stood at only 23.6%. Also at European level in 2019, just over 3 in 10 board members were women (31.1%) and under one-quarter of board leaders (24.5%) were women.” (European Comission, 2021, p. 7).

In addressing this important issue, higher education institutions are called to action through the development of Gender Equality Plans (GEPs). GEPs are based on an accurate diagnosis, empirical and scientific, and the actions are designed to promote a culture focused on equality, equity and diversity in academia, contributing to the deconstruction of gender stereotypes and promoting a working, research, teaching and learning environment that is inclusive and dynamic, while being responsible, fair and supportive in protecting the rights of women and men, promoting a culture of parity and encouraging active policies that respect differences and promote equality (EIGE, 2016).

A gender equality plan differs from a mere set of initiatives precisely because it is well thought out and based on an accurate diagnosis with an integrated action. A gender equality plan “is a strategic management tool that seeks to disseminate an equality policy in the organisation at all levels” (Oliveira & Villas-Boas, 2012, p. 122). Thus, the decision to develop and implement a gender equality plan is a unique opportunity to learn about and transform the structures and unequal social and institutional organisations, proposing concrete corrective measures that will allow the present to move towards a more socially just situation. As the European Institute for Gender Equality points out, a GEP is “a tool for structural change” (EIGE, 2016, p. 8).

Aware of the importance of addressing gender equality issues, the University of Évora (Portugal) created the Office for Gender Equality in 2020. Under the responsibility of the Dean of Society and Culture, the creation of this office was accompanied by the creation of a working group, whose tasks included: (1) preparing a diagnosis of the gender equality situation at the University of Évora, based on gender equality indicators; (2) laying the foundations for the construction of a gender equality plan at the University of Évora; (3) contributing to the definition of an institutional strategy to promote gender equality at the University of Évora and allow the monitoring of the plan.

Until 2020, the University of Évora had not explicitly integrated the gender perspective into its management model and institutional strategy, although it was possible to identify a number of diverse practices that demonstrated a transversal concern with the issue of gender equality in everyday academic life. The elaboration of a GEP was seen as a strategy to transform and promote egalitarian and fair structures for men and women.

The development of a GEP at the University of Évora closely followed international guidelines on the subject, particularly those developed by the EIGE in the “Gender Equality in Academia and Research – GEAR tool” (EIGE, 2016). Accordingly, between October 2020 and October 2021, the Office for Gender Equality carried out an exhaustive and rigorous diagnosis of the gender equality situation at the University of Évora (Costa et al., 2022a). This work was developed using a mixed methodology, i.e. combining different methods and tools to collect and analyse information: data collection and analysis of internal administrative and academic staff, disaggregated by gender; creation of a quiz aimed at the academic community to assess perceptions of gender equality at the University of Évora; dissemination of an electronic self-administered questionnaire to teaching and research staff; and thematic focus groups.

Room 242 and the portraits that (do not) speak

As mentioned above, focus groups were used to collect data on experiences and perceptions towards gender at the university. Focus groups are thematic discussion groups that bring together a small number of people around a set of questions related to the topic under study (Flick, 2014). The purpose of conducting focus groups was twofold: to deepen the ongoing diagnosis of the situation of gender equality at the University of Évora; and to provide guidance for the construction of the Gender Equality Plan.

A total of five focus groups were held over the course of one week (5-9 July 2021). The sessions brought together teachers and researchers (Monday and Tuesday), non-teaching and non-research staff (Wednesday), students (Thursday) and top university managers (Friday). All sessions took place in the same room, a horizontal room in the main university building with seats arranged around a large conference table and equipped with an audio and video recording system. In addition, observational notes were taken by the observer and a map of the room (floor plan) was drawn up, making it possible, for each focus group, to point out the disposition of the participants and the aspects considered relevant to the interaction developed, both in terms of the sequence of interventions and in terms of the forms and content of the same intervention.

The physical space where the focus groups took place – Room 242 of the Colégio do Espírito Santo – is a type of room that can be found in replicas in universities around the world. On its walls is a portrait gallery of the university’s former rectors, five men and one woman.

When participating in the focus group, the characteristics of this room often triggered the identification of a gender issue that went beyond the obvious. The awareness of the difference in the number of mandates held by men and women as rectors, visible in the number of men portrayed (5) and only one woman portrayed, was highlighted as “a sign of something” that “needs to be discussed” and “a reason” that needs to be understood.

Feeling challenged by the paintings around, one of the participants in the focus group with teachers and researchers drew attention to the numerical imbalance between men and women in the position of rector. In addition, this participant took the opportunity to question whether the appointment of a woman as rector really meant progress in terms of gender equality. The speaker reflected on the fact that despite the presence of a female rector, most of the rectors depicted in the room were men. This raises the question of whether the promotion of a woman to such a position really represents significant progress, or whether it is merely symbolic, suggesting a continuity of male dominance, with the female portrait potentially seen as an exception rather than evidence of real change, and that more needs to be done to achieve true gender equality.

“We have one woman rector, and I don’t know how many men here [referring to the portraits in the room where the focus group takes place]. Is this a sign of something, did the promotion, for example of a woman rector, really meant a step forward?”

Another participant in the focus group session with the students observed the gender representation on the wall and the difference in the portrayal of a female rector in a university. The participant notes that the university was one of the few in Portugal with a female rector and points out how her portrait stands out in a room full of portraits of male rectors. The speaker highlights differences in the way she is portrayed – such as a lighter background, frame and facial expression – and suggests that these differences may reflect broader narratives or perceptions about gender. This suggests a discussion about how women in leadership roles are portrayed and perceived differently from their male counterparts.

“We are at a university that is one of the few Portuguese universities that has a woman as rector. If we look here in this room [referring to the portraits in the room where the focus group takes place] she is only one, one portrait. And just by looking at this painting, we can even see her painting, like the way she is painted, is different from other rectors. As she is painted on a light background. How her frame is lighter. How her facial expression is different from other deans. But okay, that’s a narrative we can discuss.”

The two excerpts here highlight the silent but powerful messages that visual representations of leadership can convey, particularly in the context of gender. In the first excerpt, the speaker questions whether the presence of a single female rector among many male rectors really represents progress towards gender equality. Here, the ‘silent’ nature of the portraits – their mere presence or absence – speaks volumes about historical gender imbalances. The differences highlighted in the second excerpt may reflect underlying prejudices or different expectations of women in leadership positions, suggesting that even when women do appear in these portraits, the way they are visually represented may reinforce or challenge traditional gender roles.

Taken together, these quotes suggest that portraits in institutional settings are not simply neutral representations, but carry implicit messages about power, gender and progress. While the images themselves are silent, they convey powerful narratives about who holds power, who is remembered, and how they are perceived. In this case, the rectors’ portraits reflect and perhaps perpetuate gender dynamics within the university, raising questions about the true extent of gender equality.

Keeping the door open: Gender Equality Plans as instruments for sustainability

The GEP of the University of Évora (Costa et al., 2022b) was developed jointly by the technical team and is based on an adaptation of the 5W2H methodology, which focuses on the key questions that need to be asked and answered in order to plan effectively and efficiently: Who?, What?, Where?, When?, Why?, How?, How much?.

In accordance with this methodology and taking into account the diagnosis made and the objectives set, eight areas of intervention were considered, of which three were horizontal and five specific.

Cross-cutting areas:

– Awareness raising, training and capacity building
– Organizational culture, communication and language
– Follow-up and monitoring

Thematic areas:

– Work/study balance, personal and family life
– Leadership and decision-making
– Recruitment, selection, career and academic development
– Integrating the gender dimension into research and teaching
– Action against discrimination and gender-based violence, including sexual harassment

Having these areas as background, 8 general objectives, 30 specific objectives and 40 actions (concrete activities in measurable form) were defined, including target group, implementation period, indicators and responsible persons.

As mentioned above, GEPs are important tools for research organizations and higher education institutions to demonstrate their commitment to promoting, strengthening and implementing gender equality within their environments. However, GEPs cannot remain closed within institutions; they need to reach out beyond the doors and walls to the wider society.

To illustrate this, the University of Évora’s Equality Plan proposes a medium-term action plan that includes measures aimed at both the academic community and society at large. Specifically, in the thematic area of awareness, training and capacity building, objective 1 aims to contribute to the elimination of all forms of gender discrimination and the promotion of gender equality through awareness, training and capacity building. In this context, specific objective 4 is to contribute, through scientific knowledge, to informed reflection and debate with a view to raising awareness, eliminating discrimination based on sex and defining solutions and policies that take account of the gender dimension. In pursuing this objective, action 4 provides for “cooperation with national, regional and local authorities, NGOs, civil society and local communities in the reflection, debate and definition of solutions and policies, including the production of scientific knowledge on gender issues”.

Taking action to achieve SDG5 means going beyond the obvious and immediate. Just as the portraits in Room 242 doesn’t speak but conveys important messages, there are many silences and invisibilities around gender issues that prevent a balanced and fair participation of men and women in the context of research organizations and higher education institutions. It is only by overcoming these silences and invisibilities that GEP can truly be instruments of sustainable development, not only in the present, but especially in the future.

Acknowledgments

The author wishes to thank all those who participated directly or indirectly in the preparation of the Institutional Diagnosis of Perceptions and Realities of Gender (In)Visibility at the University of Évora and the University of Évora’s Gender Equality Plan, especially the members of the research team set up for this purpose: Fernanda Henriques, André do Carmo, Clarinda Pomar, Leonel Alegre, Luís de Sousa, Teresa Furtado, together with Sara Carvalho and Célia Peralta. Part of this text was presented as an oral communication at the Lumivero Virtual Conference 2023 – Better Together for Better Insights, Research, and Outcomes, 27-28 September 2023 (Virtual).

References

Berchin, I. I., Dutra, A. R. A., & Guerra, J. B. S. O. A. (2021). How do higher education institutions promote sustainable development? A literature review. Sustainable Development, 29(6), 1204–1222. doi: https://doi.org/10.1002/sd.2219

Costa, R. P. (Coord.), Henriques, F., Carmo, A., Pomar, C., Alegre, L., Sousa, L., Furtado, T., & Peralta, C. (2022a). Plano para a igualdade de género da Universidade de Évora [Gender Equality Plan of the University of Évora]. Universidade de Évora. http://hdl.handle.net/10174/34333

Costa, R. P. (Coord.), Henriques, F., Carmo, A., Pomar, C., Alegre, L., Sousa, L., Furtado, T., & Carvalho, S. (2022b). Perceções e realidades sobre a (in)visibilidade de género na Universidade de Évora: Relatório de diagnóstico institucional [Perceptions and Realities of Gender (In)Visibility at the University of Évora: Institutional Diagnostic Report]. Universidade de Évora. http://hdl.handle.net/10174/33273

European Commission. (2021). She figures 2021. Publications Office of the European Union. https://doi.org/10.2777/06090

European Institute for Gender Equality. (2016). Gender Equality in Academia and Research – GEAR tool. European Institute for Gender Equality. https://eige.europa.eu/gender-mainstreaming/toolkits/gear

European Union. (2024). 2024 report on gender equality in the EU. Publications Office of the European Union. https://commission.europa.eu/document/download/965ed6c9-3983-4299-8581-046bf0735702_en?filename=2024%20Report%20on%20Gender%20Equality%20in%20the%20EU_coming%20soon.pdf

Flick, U. (2014). An introduction to qualitative research (5th ed.). Sage Publications.

Oliveira, C., & Villas-Boas, S. (2012). Igualdade de género na Universidade da Beira Interior. Ex aequo, (25), 119-136.

SDSN Australia/Pacific. (2017). Getting started with the SDGs in universities: A guide for universities, higher education institutions, and the academic sector. Sustainable Development Solutions Network –Australia/Pacific. https://ap-unsdsn.org/wp-content/uploads/University-SDG-Guide_web.pdf

United Nations. (2015). Transforming our world: the 2030 Agenda for sustainable development. Resolution adopted by the General Assembly on 25 September 2015. https://sdgs.un.org/2030agenda

United Nations. (2022a). Do you know all 17 SDGs? Sustainable Development Goals. https://sdgs.un.org/goals

United Nations. (2022b). Progress towards the Sustainable Development Goals – Report of the Secretary-General. https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/content/documents/29858SG_SDG_Progress_Report_2022.pdf