Today is the International Day of Women and Girls in Science. Established by the United Nations in 2015, this initiative aims to promote full and equal access to and participation in science for women and girls at all levels – from education to careers and leadership positions.

If you read my columns on C2W International and follow me on social media, you probably know that diversity, equity and inclusion is a topic close to my heart. For me, every human has the same rights, and everyone should have access to education and feel included in the workplace – whatever their gender, geographical roots, ethnicity, sexual orientation, or physical and mental abilities.

Unfortunately, there is still a significant gap between this ideal and reality. This is particularly true in academia, where despite many measures and progress, we’re still far from achieving true diversity and inclusion.

Over the past few months, I’ve experienced situations where this became painfully visible. Even in a relatively progressive country such as the Netherlands, I keep seeing symposia organizers comfortable publishing programs with all-male speaker lineups. I keep seeing career events organized for students with only male alumni on stage sharing their experiences. And most troubling, strategic decisions at universities and faculties made by leadership teams that are far from diverse.

The 2025 LNVH Monitor shows that in the Netherlands, women represent 52% of students, 46% of PhD candidates, and 48% of assistant professors [1]. Even at senior levels, women make up 37% of associate professors and 30% of full professors [1]. Women are present throughout the academic system. So why do all-male panels and leadership teams still feel acceptable? When we normalize all-male symposia and career events, we signal that all-male decision-making bodies are equally acceptable.

As an international woman in the Netherlands, this makes me both angry and frustrated. How can highly educated policymakers think this represents adequate academic leadership? How can decisions shaping the present and future of academia be made by teams composed predominantly of men – often specifically Dutch male professors – without recognizing how this perpetuates exclusion?

When I ask for the reasons behind this poor diversity, what I often hear is that these positions are filled on a voluntary basis through open calls. I do value the work and motivation of those who accept additional responsibilities on top of already busy agendas. But this argument reveals its own form of bias. By unconsciously favoring those who accept overtime work, we exclude people who maintain healthy boundaries – not because they lack commitment to academia, but because they have other priorities: hobbies, children, caring for relatives, health issues, or simply the belief that sustainable work-life balance matters.

This particularly affects women and international people, who already face additional challenges in Dutch universities, including higher work-related stress and more barriers to career advancement [2]. When voluntary systems consistently yield unrepresentative candidate pools, that should prompt institutions to reconsider their approach – not serve as justification for the outcome. Some will argue this is about merit, not gender or origin. But when women comprise 48% of assistant professors and 37% of associate professors, all-male events and committees reveal not a lack of qualified women, but a lack of effort in including them.

That is why I’m calling on universities and policymakers to move beyond passive good intentions to active accountability:

For symposia and events: refuse to publish programs without diverse representation. If organizers claim they “couldn’t find” qualified speakers, postpone the event until they do.

For strategic teams and committees: establish clear diversity requirements before positions open. Make participation part of formal workload allocation with appropriate compensation, and ensure selection committees themselves are diverse.

For institutional leadership: publicly report on diversity metrics and hold leadership accountable, just as universities track research output and student satisfaction.

On this International Day of Women and Girls in Science, the question isn’t whether women belong in science - we’re already here. The question is whether institutions and leaders will take deliberate action to include us in shaping science’s future, or continue hiding behind systems that maintain the current biases.

References:

[1] Landelijk Netwerk Vrouwelijke Hoogleraren, Women Professors Monitor 2025 (accessed 26-01-2026)

[2] Netherlands Labour Authority, Research Report on Psychosocial Workload at Dutch Universities (accessed 26-01-2026)