Fact-checked by Grok 2 weeks ago

Athena SWAN

The Athena SWAN Charter is a framework and accreditation scheme established in the in 2005 to promote in and research institutions, with an original emphasis on advancing women's and career progression in science, technology, engineering, mathematics, and medicine (STEMM). Administered by (formerly the Equality Challenge Unit), it requires participating departments and institutions—eligible through Advance HE membership—to conduct self-assessments, develop action plans addressing identified inequalities, collect and analyze workforce data, and submit applications for bronze, silver, or gold awards that recognize varying levels of commitment and progress. Over time, the scheme expanded beyond its STEMM origins to encompass , , , , and disciplines, while evolving to address broader issues, including barriers faced by men in female-dominated fields and intersectional factors such as and . A major transformation in 2021 revised the criteria for greater inclusivity across all gender identities, streamlined application processes to reduce administrative burden by over 50%, introduced standardized surveys, and incorporated explicit commitments to and , following an independent review. By 2019, approximately 70% of higher education providers had engaged with the charter, which has also been adopted internationally in countries including , , and . Proponents argue that Athena SWAN has driven institutional cultural shifts toward inclusivity, with some quantitative analyses indicating modest positive effects on balance in certain roles through voluntary positive action measures. However, rigorous evaluations reveal limited of substantial impact on key outcomes like female retention or , with one finding award-holding institutions exhibited lower female presence in managerial positions compared to non-awardees, and broader reviews concluding insufficient data to confirm achievement of core objectives amid potential box-ticking behaviors. The initiative has faced criticism for imposing significant bureaucratic demands that divert resources from research and teaching, fostering policy-scoring dynamics prone to and superficial compliance rather than causal improvements in , and diluting its foundational focus on biological women through expansions into spectrum concepts that conflict with sex-based data collection and original aims. These concerns, raised in and analyses, highlight risks of institutional capture by unverified interventions like unconscious training, whose effectiveness lacks robust support.

Origins and Development

Founding and Initial Objectives (2005-2006)

The Athena SWAN Charter was launched in June 2005 by the Equality Challenge Unit (ECU), an organization established to advance equality and diversity in . The initiative drew support from the 's research councils and initially focused on ten founding member institutions, including universities such as , which committed to addressing gender imbalances in science, engineering, and technology (SET) fields. This launch responded to persistent data showing women's underrepresentation in SET academic and research roles, with women comprising less than 15% of professors in these disciplines at the time. The charter's initial objectives centered on recognizing and encouraging good employment practices to advance women's careers in SET within and research institutions. Signatories pledged to tackle barriers such as biases, lack of mentoring, and work-life imbalances that contributed to high rates among women in SET, aiming to foster institutional and action plans for . Unlike broader mandates, the scheme emphasized voluntary awards—starting with bronze-level recognition for basic commitments—to incentivize measurable improvements without immediate regulatory enforcement. In 2006, the began implementing the through pilot award processes, evaluating initial applications based on evidence of institutional efforts to support women's progression, such as equitable workload distribution and policies tailored to SET environments. These early objectives prioritized empirical tracking of metrics, like staff retention and rates, to verify commitments, though critics later noted the reliance on self-reported data from participating institutions. The focus remained narrowly on biological women in SET, predating later expansions to include or other disciplines.

Expansion and Charter Reforms (2007-2014)

Following its in with 10 initial member institutions, the Athena SWAN Charter experienced substantial expansion from 2007 to 2014, primarily within science, technology, engineering, mathematics, and medicine (STEMM) sectors of and . Participation grew steadily as departments and institutions submitted applications for , silver, and , which recognized commitments to addressing disparities through and action plans. By the mid-2010s, the number of member institutions had reached 128, indicating widespread adoption driven by voluntary efforts to improve , retention, and progression of women in academic and research roles. Award rounds occurred periodically, with renewals typically valid for three years, fostering iterative improvements and accountability among participants. Reforms during this era focused on refining the Charter's implementation rather than overhauling its core principles, which remained centered on advancing women's careers in STEMM. In May 2012, the Equality Challenge Unit published an updated Athena SWAN Charter Awards Handbook, which clarified application procedures, expanded guidance on evidence requirements, and emphasized quantitative metrics for evaluating institutional progress, such as staff gender data and policy impacts. These adjustments aimed to enhance consistency in peer-review processes and reduce variability in award decisions. Concurrently, from 2012 onward, UK research councils integrated Athena SWAN awards as conditions or incentives for funding allocations, with successful institutions receiving grants exceeding £100,000 in some cases, thereby transforming the scheme from advisory to a de facto requirement for resource access and spurring further uptake.

Transformed Charter and Recent Evolutions (2015-Present)

In May 2015, the Athena SWAN Charter underwent a significant , broadening its beyond , , , and (STEMM) to encompass , , sciences, , and , as well as professional and support roles. This transformation shifted the framework's focus from solely advancing women's careers in STEMM to addressing more comprehensively, including considerations for individuals and, to a lesser extent, men facing barriers. The changes aimed to recognize institutional efforts in creating inclusive environments across all disciplines and staff categories, with awards valid for three years under pre-2015 rules transitioning to four years thereafter. Following an independent review published in March 2020, the was further transformed and relaunched on 30 June 2021 by , incorporating sector feedback to reduce administrative burdens by over 50% through streamlined applications and a new scoring rubric. Key updates included revised principles published in November 2020, which emphasized intersectional inequalities, all identities, and a conceptual shift toward "gender as a spectrum," effectively removing explicit references to biological women in core documentation. Additional reforms abolished the requirement for departments to hold Silver or for institutional , extended award durations to five years, and introduced greater applicant flexibility in prioritizing actions, alongside new guidance on . These evolutions sought to enhance developmental support and transparency while maintaining linkage to funding bodies like the National Institute for Health and Care Research. Post-2021 adjustments included a 2022 revision to guidance, reinstating sex-disaggregated as a required metric in response to criticisms that the gender spectrum framing diluted focus on sex-based inequalities. By August , analyses highlighted ongoing concerns over the Charter's and evidence base, noting limited causal proof of on senior role or pay gaps despite self-reported institutional changes, with only modest correlations in some studies. Critics, including researchers examining policy capture, argued that expansions risked prioritizing advocacy over empirical disparities, potentially burdening institutions without proportional outcomes, though proponents maintained the framework's adaptability supports sustained progress. The scheme marked its 20th anniversary in June 2025, continuing to influence equality strategies amid debates on its evolving priorities.

Framework and Operational Mechanics

Award Tiers and Eligibility Criteria

The Athena SWAN awards are structured in three progressive tiers—, , and —applicable to both institutional and departmental levels within and research organizations. These tiers recognize escalating degrees of commitment and achievement in advancing , particularly in science, , , and (STEMM), as well as , , sciences, business, and law (AHSSBL) disciplines. The award serves as the entry-level recognition, requiring applicants to demonstrate a foundational commitment to the Athena SWAN principles through a process that identifies challenges and outlines an initial action plan. It focuses on establishing structures for ongoing monitoring and basic policy alignment, without necessitating evidence of substantial implementation outcomes. Eligibility for Bronze begins with the first application for new signatories, and it is available to departments, schools, or entire institutions upon Charter membership. The Silver award builds on Bronze by evidencing sustained progress, including measurable improvements in , retention, and progression for women, supported by data-driven analysis and targeted interventions that address identified issues. Applicants must show the impact of actions taken since prior awards, with criteria emphasizing cultural shifts and effectiveness across all staff levels. Departments or institutions typically apply for Silver after holding a Bronze award, though institutional Silver or Gold applications no longer mandate prior departmental awards in every case following reforms. The award denotes exemplary practice, requiring demonstration of transformative, institution-wide change that positions the applicant as a sector leader in . Criteria demand comprehensive evidence of long-term, significant outcomes, such as equitable representation, innovative support mechanisms, and influence on broader policy, often involving endorsement and embedding of equality into core operations. Gold applications are restricted to those with prior Silver status and are valid for up to six years, reflecting the highest standard of sustained excellence. Eligibility for all tiers is confined to signatories of the Athena SWAN Charter, which necessitates membership with and adherence to its transformed framework introduced in 2015 and updated thereafter. Eligible entities include universities, research institutes, and their subunits, provided they cover relevant academic and professional staff in eligible disciplines; non- or non-member applications are handled under separate international variants. Applications must align with specified criteria documents, with panels assessing submissions against principles of , , and action planning.

Application Process and Evaluation Standards

The Athena SWAN application process begins with the formation of a self-assessment team (SAT), comprising diverse representatives including staff, students, and sometimes external members, tasked with leading the review of gender equality practices within the institution or department. The SAT conducts a comprehensive self-assessment, gathering quantitative data—such as gender breakdowns in recruitment, retention, progression, and pay gaps—and qualitative evidence through surveys, interviews, and consultations to identify barriers to gender equality. This analysis informs an action plan with specific, measurable interventions, which must be submitted via standardized templates provided by Advance HE, including a narrative description, supporting evidence, and case studies. Applications are submitted electronically to Advance HE, with deadlines typically on the last working day of April or October, depending on the cycle, and must adhere to word limits (e.g., 10,500 words for departmental submissions pre-transformed charter). Under the transformed Athena SWAN Charter, implemented from onward, the process emphasizes flexibility, reducing administrative burden by over 50% through streamlined templates and a focus on priority areas rather than exhaustive coverage. Applicants must first submit a commitment letter endorsing updated charter principles, which include addressing and broader inequalities. For renewals or upgrades, evidence of progress against prior actions is required, often incorporating tools like standardized departmental surveys to gauge institutional culture. Evaluation is conducted by independent peer-review panels composed of academics and professionals experienced in , who assess submissions against level-specific criteria using a standardized scoring rubric to ensure consistency. Panels perform individual reviews, followed by discussions to calibrate scores, providing outcomes such as award granting, requests for minor or major revisions, or rejection, with detailed feedback on strengths and areas for improvement. Criteria are structured around key themes, including institutional , , implementation, and impact measurement, with expectations escalating by award level:
Award LevelKey Evaluation Standards
BronzeDemonstration of adherence to principles; thorough self-assessment identifying issues; baseline with monitoring mechanisms, but limited evidence of sustained impact required.
SilverEvidence of effective actions addressing identified issues; measurable progress in metrics like / balance and progression; integration of into core practices.
GoldTransformational leadership fostering cultural change; sustained, department-wide improvements with robust evaluation of outcomes; proactive addressing of intersectional factors and future challenges.
Awards are granted for three years, after which renewal applications must demonstrate ongoing advancement. Panel decisions prioritize verifiable evidence over aspirational statements, with transparency enhanced in the framework through defined underpinning expectations for each criterion.

Required Institutional Commitments and Metrics

Institutions applying for Athena SWAN awards must formally commit to the transformed Charter's principles, established in November 2020, which emphasize evidence-based approaches to across and sectors. These include adopting robust, transparent processes for embedding diversity in decision-making; addressing structural inequalities and harmful cultures such as ; tackling intersectional factors; supporting and individuals; mitigating impacts of caring responsibilities and precarious contracts; and fostering inclusive career progression. Senior leaders are required to provide a signed statement endorsing these principles, outlining institutional priorities informed by local data and broader issues, and ensuring accountability through continuous evaluation. Key operational commitments involve forming a diverse team (SAT) representative of staff, students, and to lead the process; conducting a comprehensive using provided templates; publishing baseline data and an on the institution's website; and integrating into , policies, and partnerships. For institutional awards, applicants must demonstrate coverage of the entire organization, including professional services, and either hold departmental awards or a strategy for their rollout. Bronze-level commitments focus on foundational setup and awareness, while Silver and Gold require evidenced progress, cultural transformation, and intersectional analysis, with awards valid for four years subject to renewal demonstrating sustained improvement. Metrics are central to applications, requiring quantitative data disaggregated by gender (including where applicable) on , progression, and attainment rates; headcounts by contract type, grade, , and demographics; recruitment, appointment, promotion, and appraisal success rates; turnover and length-of-service statistics; uptake of parental and other leave; and salary data to identify pay gaps. Qualitative metrics include and survey results on workplace culture, barriers to progression, and support mechanisms, alongside case studies of interventions. Action plans must set specific, time-bound targets aligned with these metrics, with progress tracked against baselines; for example, demand evidence of closing gender gaps in senior roles and addressing underrepresentation in segregated fields. Failure to provide complete, recent data (typically covering at least three years) results in application rejection.

Adoption and Implementation

Uptake in UK Higher Education and Research Institutions

The Athena SWAN Charter experienced modest initial uptake upon its launch in , primarily among departments in select universities, with membership reaching just 10 institutions by year's end. Expansion accelerated in the following decade through charter reforms broadening eligibility to non-STEM fields and all staff categories, alongside mandatory linkages to public research funding. From 2011, the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) conditioned biomedical training and research grants on departments holding at least Silver awards, while similar requirements from the and other councils further incentivized participation, resulting in a reported tenfold increase in action plan implementations among affected institutions. By 2019, charter membership had grown to 164 universities, research institutes, and departments, collectively holding 815 awards across institutional and subject-specific levels. This trend continued into the 2020s, driven by sustained funding conditions and institutional pressures to demonstrate compliance with equality mandates, leading to widespread adoption. As of March 2025, 132 members were recorded, encompassing the majority of providers. As of August 2025, listed 167 institutions and research institutes under the charter, with 985 total awards in force: 123 institutional and 862 departmental or subject-specific. Among institutional awards, Bronze level predominates (approximately 94 universities), followed by Silver (50 universities) and a small number of Gold (3 universities), reflecting tiered progression requirements renewed every three to six years. Given that the comprises around 130 degree-awarding institutions, Athena SWAN participation approaches universality, though primarily as a prerequisite for rather than purely voluntary initiative.

Integration with Funding and Policy Requirements

In the , Athena SWAN awards have been linked to research funding eligibility primarily through targeted incentives rather than universal mandates, with the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) serving as a key example. From , NIHR required biomedical research centers and clinical trials units applying for infrastructure support to hold at least a Silver departmental award, a extension of the 2011 directive by the UK Chief Medical Officer that tied funding to advancing women's careers in health and medical sciences. This linkage drove a tenfold increase in institutional action plans by incentivizing self-assessments and structural reforms. By September 2020, NIHR discontinued the Silver award prerequisite for such grants, shifting to a requirement for applicants to submit self-declarations of , , and (EDI) commitments, while retaining encouragement for Athena SWAN as evidence of robust practices. Similarly, (UKRI) and its constituent councils, such as the Medical Research Council and Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council, have issued statements endorsing Athena SWAN but confirmed in 2014 that awards would not be mandatory for eligibility, prioritizing voluntary adoption over enforcement. Beyond direct funding ties, Athena SWAN integrates with national policy via alignment with the , which mandates non-discrimination in employment and education, and UKRI's overarching EDI strategies, including plans that reference participation as a for institutional progress. institutions often embed awards into internal policies, conditioning departmental promotions, workload models, and resource distribution on bronze-level accreditation or higher, thereby operationalizing the within governance frameworks. This decentralized integration has sustained uptake, with over 180 UK institutions holding awards as of 2023, though critics note diminishing funder leverage has reduced its coercive impact.

Self-Reported Changes and Gender Metrics

Institutions participating in the Athena SWAN Charter conduct self-assessments requiring detailed gender-disaggregated metrics on workforce composition, including the proportions of women in by (e.g., to ), staff, professional and support roles, as well as , progression, and rates across undergraduate, postgraduate taught, and postgraduate levels. These metrics must cover at least three years of data to benchmark trends, with breakdowns for processes—such as splits in applications, shortlisting, offers, and acceptances by —and pipelines, including rates from to senior positions. Applications also mandate reporting on opportunities, allocation fairness, and pay progression by , enabling teams to identify imbalances and propose targeted actions. In renewal submissions and action plans, institutions self-report changes implemented to address identified gaps, such as mentoring schemes, gender-balanced appointment committees, enhanced maternity support, and networking events for women, alongside quantitative outcomes like increased applications or rises in women's representation in senior roles. For example, departmental champions in award-holding units have reported positive shifts in metrics, including higher flexible working uptake (mean score 4.26 in Silver departments versus 3.93 in non-award equivalents) and improved visibility and confidence in career progression. Over 65% of institutional champions self-assess Athena SWAN as contributing to women's career advancement, with qualitative accounts citing streamlined processes and return-to-work support as yielding measurable gains in retention and satisfaction among staff. Despite these self-reported advancements, institutional data often reveal persistent disparities; for instance, among Silver holders, promotions and pay continue to favor men, with only isolated cases like the achieving in the upper pay as of 2022/23. Self-assessments from universities such as indicate 48% female academic staff overall but merely 30% among professors, underscoring limited progress at senior levels even after . Women in departments consistently report lower workload fairness (3.43 versus 3.73 for men) and greater perceived barriers to senior positions (4.53 versus 2.88), highlighting gaps between claimed changes and experiential metrics.

Evidence of Impact and Effectiveness

Positive Outcomes and Supporting Studies

Studies examining the impact of Athena SWAN have identified associations between charter membership or awards and accelerated improvements in female representation in certain leadership positions within institutions (HEIs). A retrospective cohort analysis of 148 HEIs using Higher Education Statistics (HESA) data from 2012/2013 to 2016/2017 employed linear mixed effects models to assess gender diversity trends. It found that Silver award holders exhibited a 20.3% growth in the proportion of female managerial leaders, compared to 2.4% for non-awardees, with charter members overall displaying higher female leadership representation (p<0.05). Bronze awardees showed slower but positive growth relative to non-participants. Qualitative and has highlighted perceived cultural and policy shifts attributed to Athena SWAN participation. Interviews and surveys in medical and scientific departments reported increased of mentoring schemes, seminars, and policies accommodating caring responsibilities, such as core hours and enhanced maternity provisions. These changes were linked to greater in recruitment and efforts to address through , contributing to heightened institutional awareness of inequities. One study noted a 400% rise in medical department applications for Athena SWAN awards following the 2011 linkage to National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) funding incentives, suggesting motivational effects on equality initiatives. Independent evaluations commissioned by Equality Challenge Unit (now ) have documented self-reported benefits, including broader diversity discussions and for equality action plans. The 2017 assessment, drawing on case studies, interviews, and focus groups across HEIs, found evidence of positive influences on practices and staff retention perceptions, though primarily through institutional testimonies rather than longitudinal metrics. Similarly, the 2019 impact evaluation emphasized the charter's role in fostering sustainable processes, with participating departments enhanced data tracking on metrics as a foundation for targeted interventions. These findings, while correlational and reliant on participant feedback, indicate that Athena SWAN has prompted actionable commitments in some contexts.

Limitations and Empirical Shortcomings

Empirical evaluations of Athena SWAN have revealed significant challenges in establishing causal links between the scheme and improvements in gender representation or career progression in STEMM fields. For instance, a time-series found no statistical relationship between membership and increases in female staff proportions, with sector-wide trends occurring independently of status. Similarly, tied to requirements, such as those from the National Institute for Health Research, showed no increase in women's employment as professors or lecturers following implementation. These findings indicate that while self-reported metrics may suggest progress, broader data fail to isolate Athena SWAN as a driver of change, potentially conflating correlation with causation amid concurrent institutional efforts. Studies on promotions highlight further shortcomings, with accreditation showing no enhancement for women's advancement; in some cases, junior men exhibited higher rates post-. Analysis of award tiers revealed that Silver-holding departments often have fewer women in senior roles compared to holders or non-members, undermining claims of hierarchical efficacy. inconsistencies exacerbate these issues, as only a fraction of departmental records prove usable due to varying formats, limiting robust evaluation. Official assessments acknowledge unclear metrics for impact, particularly in small departments with infrequent promotions, rendering demonstrations of effectiveness difficult within typical award cycles. Qualitative evidence underscores persistent gaps in lived experiences, even in Gold-awarded departments, where subcultural norms—such as competitive isolation and masculine hierarchies—remain unaddressed, leading to exclusion and high attrition among early-career women researchers. Postdoctoral staff, comprising a critical stage, report limited awareness of initiatives and negligible improvements in support or retention, with flexibility often dependent on informal networks rather than scheme policies. Broader evaluations find no significant differences in career , work-life perceptions, or climate between accredited and non-accredited institutions, suggesting insufficient transformation beyond surface-level documentation. These empirical limitations are compounded by methodological hurdles, including reliance on without standardized outcomes and a historical discouragement of sex-disaggregated , which hindered targeted until recent revisions. The scheme's expansion to intersectional factors has diluted focus on disparities, with superficial analyses risking over substantive reform. Consequently, while Athena SWAN raises awareness, evidence remains limited for its role in reducing structural inequalities, prompting a 2020 independent review that identified administrative burdens and inconsistent assessments as barriers to verifiable progress. In higher education, female participation in STEMM undergraduate programs has shown gradual growth over the past two decades, with women comprising approximately 50% of STEM entrants by 2011 when including and life sciences, though core physical sciences and fields lagged at under 20-40% female acceptances. More recent data indicate 31% of core STEM students (excluding ) were women or in 2023, reflecting steady but uneven progress influenced by subject-specific preferences and prior educational choices. At , female uptake remains low in physics (around 17% in 2011) and , while approached at 40%, highlighting persistent discipline-based disparities predating targeted interventions. In the academic and professional pipeline, women's representation diminishes at senior levels despite entry gains, with the workforce at 26% female in 2024 and postgraduate fields showing similar leaks. Female professors in biosciences reached 23% following SWAN's implementation, up from lower baselines, while professional roles hovered at 39% female in 2010-2011 data. Retention challenges persist, as female graduates are less likely to enter or remain in sector-specific jobs compared to males, often citing work-life balance and progression barriers. Athena SWAN awardees have reported faster growth in leadership, such as one doubling female professors from 11% to 22% over a decade and increasing female heads of school from 1 in 21 to 5 in 20, alongside improved perceptions of representation. However, evaluations highlight limited causal linking the to these shifts, with changes often aligning with broader societal trends in female educational attainment rather than program-specific effects; student enrollment impacts remain negligible, and data rely heavily on self-reported metrics from participating institutions. Persistent gaps across STEMM subfields suggest that while incremental advances continue, Athena SWAN has not demonstrably accelerated macro-level representation beyond baseline trajectories observed since the early 2000s.

Criticisms and Debates

Bureaucratic and Resource Costs

Participation in the Athena SWAN Charter requires institutions to undertake extensive processes, involving , documentation, and action planning, which impose substantial administrative demands. Applications typically demand 6 to 12 months of preparation time, escalating with award level: approximately 6 months for , 9 months for Silver, and 12 months for submissions. One departmental equated the effort to three full-time equivalents (FTEs) over a year, highlighting the scale of needed for coordination, analysis, and drafting. Self-assessment teams, often comprising 15–20 members, convene regularly—averaging 6–7 meetings per application—with workloads concentrated on Athena SWAN champions and staff, who report 5–30+ hours weekly in departmental roles and up to 20+ hours in institutional ones, particularly intensifying pre-submission. Surveys indicate 77% of champions view the workload as excessive, with data collation cited as a barrier by 60% of respondents due to inconsistencies and acquisition challenges. This burden frequently falls disproportionately on female staff, including those in champion roles, exacerbating existing administrative loads and risking career impacts. Financial commitments include annual membership fees of £3,500 and submission fees of £500 as of recent records, alongside indirect costs from diverted staff time unaccounted in formal workload models. Critics, including institutional stakeholders, describe the process as a "burdensome beast" with "unreasonable demands" on application writers, prompting reviews to address bureaucratic overload in schemes. Despite efforts to streamline, such as handbook revisions, the resource intensity persists, with renewal cycles every four years sustaining ongoing demands.

Prioritization Failures and Unintended Consequences

Critics argue that Athena SWAN's emphasis on extensive and action planning diverts significant institutional resources away from core academic priorities such as research and teaching. The scheme's application process, which requires detailed submissions often exceeding 100 pages, imposes a substantial administrative burden, with frequently delegated to female academics already overburdened by existing duties. This has been linked to "policy fatigue," where efforts on metrics crowd out attention to other issues, such as racial disparities in . Unintended consequences include the promotion of tokenistic compliance over substantive change, fostering complacency among institutions that retain lower-tier awards without advancing to higher levels. As of 2024, 35 universities had held Bronze awards for over a decade, with 10 exceeding 15 years, potentially signaling a focus on minimal certification rather than measurable progress in female representation at senior levels. Empirical analyses indicate limited or null effects on women's career advancement; for instance, a 2019 study found that post-accreditation, junior male faculty experienced higher promotion rates to , while no equivalent gains occurred for women. Further critiques highlight adverse impacts on individual careers and institutional culture, such as increased administrative loads on women that hinder their research output and promotions. Surveys of Athena SWAN departments revealed that women in Silver-awarded units reported the lowest satisfaction with career support, contrasting with higher satisfaction in Gold departments but without corresponding evidence of broader efficacy. The scheme's evolution has also led to policy capture by ideological priorities, shifting from sex-based to frameworks, which obscures disparities and risks inaccurate metrics—exemplified by the omission of mandatory sex data in assessments from 2016 onward. Awards have been granted despite unresolved issues like scandals, as in the cases of Oxford's History Faculty and UCL's Bartlett School in 2022, suggesting a disconnect between and . This framework has been accused of encouraging and suppressing dissent on gender-related topics, potentially undermining merit-based decision-making by prioritizing conformity to contested narratives over empirical outcomes. In some instances, Silver holders exhibit lower proportions of women in senior roles compared to Bronze holders or non-participants, indicating that the scoring system may reward procedural plans over verifiable results.

Ideological and Merit-Based Objections

Critics of Athena SWAN have objected to its promotion of a specific ideological framework on gender, particularly one that emphasizes as a over biological sex-based distinctions. This perspective is viewed as contentious and influenced by activist-driven policy capture, where trans-rights advocacy groups have shaped criteria to prioritize policies, such as mandatory accommodations for individuals and reduced emphasis on sex-specific between 2016 and 2022. For instance, institutions like have integrated these elements into their submissions, embedding gender ideology into institutional practices. Such requirements are argued to foster groupthink by imposing a uniform, non-neutral conception of equality, diversity, and inclusion, thereby restricting intellectual diversity and academic freedom. Armstrong and Sullivan contend that the scheme enforces a single ideological lens on gender equality, sidelining alternative views and echoing concerns about compelled conformity in higher education. Evidence includes reports of harassment and professional repercussions for gender-critical academics at Athena SWAN-awarded universities, such as those at the University of Edinburgh, University of Sussex, and Open University, alongside curriculum interventions like the University of Oxford's History Faculty vetting reading lists for ideological alignment. Merit-based objections center on the scheme's structure, which awards based on prospective action plans rather than verifiable outcomes in or institutional performance, potentially incentivizing superficial compliance over substantive meritocratic advancement. For example, the of Oxford's Mathematical Institute received a Silver in 2020 despite female professors comprising only 12% of its staff, highlighting a disconnect between policy rhetoric and empirical results. Empirical analysis by Armstrong and Sullivan, examining departments from 2013 to 2022, found no statistically significant increase in the proportion of women in senior academic positions attributable to Athena SWAN awards. Critics argue this format risks in hiring, promotions, and , diverting focus from individual competence and excellence toward ideological targets without evidence of causal efficacy in addressing underrepresentation.

International Adaptations

Ireland and European Extensions

The Athena SWAN Charter extended to the in early 2015 as its first international expansion beyond the , with the framework adapted to support institutions, academic departments, and professional units in advancing in STEMM fields. This rollout was facilitated by funding from the Higher Education Authority () and aligned with recommendations from the HEA Expert Group on in Irish Institutions, emphasizing evidence-based action plans to address institutional barriers. Irish universities, such as and , began submitting applications under the charter, focusing on self-assessment, targeted interventions, and progress monitoring. By 2019, funding bodies including the Science Foundation Ireland (SFI) mandated that institutions achieve at least Bronze-level Athena SWAN accreditation to remain eligible for research grants, linking compliance directly to financial incentives and institutional accountability. The update for reinforced requirements for departments to implement tailored action plans, overseen by committees like those at the , with an emphasis on measurable outcomes in recruitment, retention, and leadership representation. This integration marked a pivotal shift in , embedding metrics into core operations, though implementation timelines were clarified by the to accommodate varying institutional readiness. Extensions of Athena SWAN to have been limited, with no formal adoption in EU member states beyond , despite the scheme's recognition as one of Europe's more systemic approaches to in research organizations. national certifications, such as Germany's Total E-Quality award, prevail in other countries, while EU-level initiatives under incorporate plans as grant conditions without mandating Athena SWAN specifically. Discussions on potential EU-wide certification schemes have referenced Athena SWAN's model for its focus on institutional transformation, but implementation remains confined to UK-Ireland contexts, with broader Area efforts relying on diverse, less centralized interventions.

Australia via SAGE and Similar Models

The Science in Australia Gender Equity (SAGE) initiative, established in 2015 as a partnership between the Australian Academy of Science and the Australian Academy of Technology and Engineering, serves as Australia's primary adaptation of the UK's Athena SWAN Charter. Launched on September 16, 2015, at Parliament House in , SAGE piloted the Athena SWAN framework to address gender imbalances in and sectors, particularly in , , engineering, mathematics, and (STEMM). The program requires participating institutions to conduct self-assessments, develop data-driven action plans targeting five key barriers to equity, and commit resources to governance-level changes, adapting the UK model to incorporate Australian-specific elements such as perspectives. SAGE's accreditation pathway mirrors Athena SWAN's tiered structure but includes intermediate steps tailored for progressive evaluation. Institutions begin with a , valid for seven years, which mandates an initial addressing the identified barriers within two years of joining. Progress is assessed through five , each corresponding to one barrier and evaluating the impact of specific, measurable actions. Achievement of all qualifies an institution for a , requiring a renewed and for sustained, institution-wide embedding of equity practices. As of recent reports, SAGE covers 42 universities—representing 87% of university employees—and nearly 60 institutions, employing over 220,000 people and generating $37.8 billion annually in economic value. While SAGE emphasizes evidence-led approaches similar to Athena SWAN, its implementation has expanded to include broader considerations beyond binary gender categories, though empirical evaluations of long-term outcomes remain limited to institutional self-reports and sector-wide participation metrics. No equivalent Gold-level awards have been widely issued, reflecting a focus on foundational and intermediate advancements rather than peak accreditation. Similar models in , such as sector-specific equity programs in defense research, have drawn from SAGE's framework but operate on smaller scales without national coordination.

Influences in North America and Beyond

In , the Dimensions: , and Inclusion in Research program, launched as a pilot in June 2019 by the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council (NSERC), Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council (SSHRC), and (CIHR), represents a direct adaptation of the Athena SWAN model tailored to Canadian postsecondary institutions. This "made-in-Canada Athena SWAN" expands beyond gender to encompass underrepresented groups, requiring institutions to conduct self-assessments, develop action plans, and demonstrate progress for charter recognition and funding eligibility. By 2023, over 100 institutions had participated, with evaluations noting its role in institutionalizing equity practices, though empirical data on long-term gender representation impacts remains preliminary. In the United States, the Athena SWAN framework has influenced initiatives like the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) SEA Change program, launched in 2018 to accelerate gender equity in academic STEM departments. SEA Change explicitly draws from Athena SWAN's charter structure, emphasizing self-assessment, action plans, and bronze/silver/gold ratings for institutional commitments to reducing barriers for . Over 50 departments and institutions had joined by 2021, with participating entities reporting enhanced and retention metrics, though independent verification of causal effects on hiring or promotion rates is limited. Additional influences appear in sector-specific efforts, such as the Stem Cell Foundation's gender equity working group, which adopted Athena SWAN-inspired reflective processes in 2020. Beyond , Athena SWAN's principles have informed accreditation-like models in regions like , where elements of self-evaluation and award tiers were referenced in Japan's 2021 guidelines for , though without formal adoption. In , select STEM-focused institutions cited Athena SWAN in 2022 equity plans under the Department of and , prioritizing workload and , but implementation remains fragmented without a centralized . These adaptations highlight Athena SWAN's exportable framework for institutional accountability, yet cross-national variations underscore challenges in translating UK-centric criteria to diverse cultural and regulatory contexts.33213-6/fulltext)

References

  1. [1]
    Athena Swan Charter | Advance HE
    The Athena Swan Charter is a framework which is used across the globe to support and transform gender equality within higher education (HE) and research.The transformed UK Athena... · Athena Swan Patrons · Find out more · Login
  2. [2]
    Understanding the Athena SWAN award scheme for gender equality ...
    Feb 14, 2020 · The Athena SWAN Charter was established in the United Kingdom in 2005 to encourage and recognise the commitment of higher education and research ...
  3. [3]
    Athena SWAN - Sanger Institute
    Athena SWAN is a Charter to advance women's careers in STEMM subjects (science, technology, engineering, maths and medicine).
  4. [4]
    The transformed UK Athena Swan Charter | Advance HE
    Jun 19, 2025 · The UK Athena Swan Charter was updated with the sector in 2021 to ensure it continues to meet the needs of the higher education and research ...Missing: scheme | Show results with:scheme
  5. [5]
    New report adds to the Athena SWAN review evidence base
    Aug 28, 2019 · New report adds to the Athena SWAN review evidence base · 70% of higher education providers in the UK have engaged with the Athena SWAN Charter.
  6. [6]
    [PDF] Positive action towards gender equality? Evidence from the Athena ...
    This paper provides evidence on the effectiveness of voluntary positive action in addressing inequality between female and male careers.
  7. [7]
    Athena SWAN and gender diversity: a UK-based retrospective ...
    Linear mixed effects models identified that Athena SWAN awardees had lower female representation than non-awardees in managerial leadership positions (p<0.05), ...
  8. [8]
    Report: 'Taking stock of Athena Swan: What value does it add and ...
    Aug 28, 2024 · Our analysis, undertaken in 2023, has concluded that there is insufficient evidence that it has delivered its key objectives, whilst the ...
  9. [9]
    [PDF] evaluating the effectiveness and impact of the Athena SWAN Charter
    There was no evidence as yet that Athena SWAN was impacting on work-life balance culture for academic/research staff with similar ratings for all Athena award ...
  10. [10]
    A critical analysis of Athena Swan as a policy‐scoring scheme
    Sep 16, 2024 · The Athena Swan Charter was established in the United Kingdom in 2005 as an initiative to advance the careers of women in STEMM (Science, ...<|separator|>
  11. [11]
    The subversion of Athena Swan | Alice Sullivan and John Armstrong
    Aug 11, 2022 · The subversion of Athena Swan ; legally dubious actions, including misrepresenting the Equality Act 2010, failing to collect equalities data, and ...
  12. [12]
    Women in science: has Athena Swan lost its way? | UCL IOE Blog
    Nov 30, 2021 · Athena Swan's embrace of 'gender as a spectrum' appears incompatible with its founding purpose. This raises uncomfortable questions about the ...
  13. [13]
    Lessons Learnt From Athena SWAN and Total E-Quality Award ...
    Nov 16, 2021 · In the case of Athena SWAN, some observed that the wider community did not recognise its impact because of a lack of “branding.” One ...
  14. [14]
    Athena Swan - University of Warwick
    Oct 7, 2024 · Athena Swan. What is Athena SWAN? The Athena SWAN Charter was ... Launched in June 2005, it recognised and celebrated good employment ...
  15. [15]
    LSTM joins Athena SWAN Charter | LSTM
    Launched in June 2005, the Athena SWAN Charter was created to encourage universities and research institutes to address the attrition of women working in ...
  16. [16]
    The Athena SWAN Charter: Promoting Commitment to Gender ...
    UCL was one of ten founder members of the Athena SWAN Charter when it was launched in June 2005 to celebrate excellence, and to share good practice in the ...
  17. [17]
    MPD0007 - Evidence on Maternity and pregnancy discrimination
    The Athena SWAN scheme is a charter set up by the Equality Challenge Unit (ECU). Launched in June 2005, the Athena SWAN charter recognises and celebrates ...<|separator|>
  18. [18]
    Athena SWAN at Birkbeck
    About Athena SWAN. The Athena SWAN Charter was established in 2005 to encourage and recognise commitment to advancing the careers of women in science ...Missing: objectives | Show results with:objectives
  19. [19]
    Athena SWAN Charter Awards (Research Institutes) - Royal Society
    The Athena SWAN Charter was launched in 2005, and recognises commitment to advancing and promoting women's careers in science, technology, engineering, maths ...
  20. [20]
    Athena Swan Awards - Psychology - Queen's University Belfast
    Athena Swan Awards. Athena-Swan-gold.jpg. Athena Swan Gold Award. PROMOTING ... The Charter was officially launched in June 2005 with the support of the ...
  21. [21]
    Athena SWAN and gender diversity: a UK-based retrospective ...
    Feb 12, 2020 · Athena Scientific Women's Academic Network (SWAN) gender equality scheme, which was launched in 2005 by the Equality Challenge Unit (ECU) in the ...
  22. [22]
    Gender | Equality Diversity and Inclusion - Newcastle University
    The Equality Challenge Unit established the Charter in 2005. Its aim was to combat the under representation of women working in science, technology, engineering ...Missing: original | Show results with:original
  23. [23]
    Moderate feminism within or against the neoliberal university? The ...
    Jan 13, 2019 · The first draft of the Athena SWAN charter emerged from a SWAN meeting; the charter was launched in 2005 with ten member institutions. Within a ...<|separator|>
  24. [24]
    [PDF] Athena SWAN Charter Awards Handbook
    May 2, 2012 · award in the April 2011 round will be valid until April 2014. ... 2010 is valid until November 2013. • If a renewal is submitted at the end ...
  25. [25]
    Advancing gender equality through the Athena SWAN Charter ... - NIH
    Feb 21, 2017 · An independent mixed-methods study commissioned by the Equality Challenge Unit found that “career satisfaction, opportunities for training and ...
  26. [26]
    The Athena Swan transformation journey | Advance HE
    On this page you will find the transformation journey of the UK Athena Swan Charter from its independent review in March 2020 to its official launch on 30 June ...
  27. [27]
    [PDF] Taking stock of Athena Swan: What value does it add and who ...
    Aug 14, 2024 · 'ECU's Athena SWAN charter will be expanding next year to include arts, humanities, social science, business and law departments alongside the ...
  28. [28]
    20 years of Athena Swan: transforming gender equality at UCL
    Oct 3, 2025 · We were London's first university, and the first in England to admit students of all faiths or none, admit women on equal terms with men, and to ...Missing: reforms | Show results with:reforms
  29. [29]
    Apply for an Athena Swan Charter award | Advance HE
    You can apply for institutional and departmental Athena Swan awards recognising gender equality efforts.
  30. [30]
    The requirement for institutions to hold departmental silver or gold ...
    Applicants seeking to apply for a Silver or Gold university-level award are no longer required to hold departmental Silver or Gold awards in order to be ...<|control11|><|separator|>
  31. [31]
    [PDF] The Self-Assessment Process - Advance HE
    A unit eligible to make an application to Athena SWAN. This includes institution of higher education and research such as universities, institutes of technology ...Missing: tiers criteria
  32. [32]
    Understanding the Athena SWAN award scheme for gender equality ...
    Feb 14, 2020 · The Athena SWAN process challenges departments to develop a fair and transparent workload allocation model, monitor it for gender bias, and use ...
  33. [33]
    Topic guide 2: collecting and analysing data - Advance HE
    The Athena Swan Ireland framework requires applicants to undertake transparent self-assessment processes to ensure priorities, interventions, and actions are ...Missing: process | Show results with:process<|separator|>
  34. [34]
    [PDF] Guidance for Project Juno Award holders applying for Athena SWAN
    Both schemes have additional requirements and applicants should read the full guidance carefully before applying for an award. Athena SWAN Submission Process.Missing: evaluation standards
  35. [35]
    After submission of your application | Equality and Diversity Unit
    Your Athena Swan application will be assessed by a peer-review panel made up of academics and professionals who have significant experience of gender equality ...
  36. [36]
    How your Athena Swan Ireland application is assessed - Advance HE
    Each panellist will undertake an independent assessment of your application, assessing it against the Athena Swan Ireland criteria and recommending scores from ...Missing: evaluation | Show results with:evaluation
  37. [37]
    Athena Swan UK: Draft award criteria and underpinning expectations
    Feb 16, 2021 · Working with the Athena Swan Governance Committee (ASGC) we have drafted high-level award criteria supported and underpinned by defined and ...
  38. [38]
    None
    ### Athena SWAN Charter Principles
  39. [39]
    [PDF] Athena Swan Toolkit - Queen Mary University of London
    The first application must be made at Bronze level, after this you are able to progress to Silver and Gold or choose to renew at the same award level. The ...
  40. [40]
    What role can Athena SWAN play in gender equality and science ...
    Sep 30, 2019 · In 2005, there were 10 members; by 2019 this had grown to 164, including 815 individual awards provided to universities, research institutes and ...<|separator|>
  41. [41]
    [PDF] Athena SWAN and the research funding links: case study
    NIHR's policy intervention provided sufficient incentives for universities to develop and implement gender equality action plans, leading to a tenfold increase ...
  42. [42]
    Celebrating our Charters' anniversaries - a shared journey
    Mar 3, 2025 · Today, there are 132 UK members of Athena Swan and 111 members of the REC, including 11 Small Specialist Institutions and Research Institutes ( ...
  43. [43]
    Athena Swan Charter Signatories | Advance HE
    There are currently 985 total awards held, 123 are held by institutions and 862 are held by departments. Athena Swan and Advance HE Membership. Advance HE ...
  44. [44]
    Equality and diversity efforts do not 'burden' research - Nature
    Oct 28, 2020 · Plans to downgrade university equality initiatives such as Athena SWAN risk being divisive and must be challenged.
  45. [45]
    No need to make Athena Swan mandatory, experts agree - Research
    May 14, 2014 · The government also confirmed that Athena Swan participation would not be mandatory for research council funding, although this will be ...
  46. [46]
    Gender equality plan 2022 to 2026 - UKRI
    Jul 11, 2022 · This gender equality plan (GEP), an eligibility requirement of Horizon Europe funding, enables us to focus in on gender inequalities, and set gender-specific ...
  47. [47]
    Advancing gender equality through the Athena SWAN Charter for ...
    Feb 21, 2017 · The findings from this study suggest that Athena SWAN has a positive impact in advancing gender equality, but there may be limits to how much it can improve ...
  48. [48]
    An Impact Evaluation of the Athena SWAN Charter (2019)
    Aug 28, 2019 · The impact of the Athena SWAN Charter across the higher education and research sector to determine its effectiveness as a vehicle for sustainable change.
  49. [49]
    [PDF] The Future of Athena SWAN
    Mar 3, 2020 · Its aim was to encourage and recognise commitment to advancing the careers of women academics in science, technology, engineering, maths and ...Missing: reforms | Show results with:reforms
  50. [50]
    [PDF] The impact of Athena Swan accreditation on the lived experiences of
    Thus, in the context of this thesis, it is argued that the Athena Swan has, essentially, failed as an instrument to improve gender equality in academia.
  51. [51]
    [PDF] Evidence on Women in STEM careers - UK Parliament Committees
    Data is presented on long term trends in the participation of men and women in post-compulsory science programmes. The datasets used for this analysis are ...
  52. [52]
    Women In STEM Statistics: Progress and Challenges
    Aug 30, 2023 · According to recent HESA data, 31% of core STEM students in Higher Education in the UK are women or non-binary. Core STEM subjects – Female and ...
  53. [53]
    STEM Women Releases 2024 Whitepaper Exploring Gender ...
    Jun 7, 2024 · Currently, women make up just 26% of the STEM workforce in the UK, a statistic that underscores the importance of this report. Key Findings.
  54. [54]
    How Athena SWAN has improved research culture | The Biochemist
    May 27, 2020 · The 10 principles of the Athena SWAN charter recognize that work undertaken must address gender equality more broadly and not just barriers to ...Missing: reforms | Show results with:reforms
  55. [55]
    From subject choice to career path: Female STEM graduates in the ...
    Dec 22, 2021 · They are less likely to enter STEM jobs, less likely to stay in the sector, and are likely to be paid less than their male peers. However, as ...
  56. [56]
    [PDF] An Impact Evaluation of the Athena SWAN Charter - Amazon S3
    Ortus Economic Research Ltd & Loughborough University. Page 4 people engaged with Athena SWAN in UK universities, departments and research institutes continues.
  57. [57]
    Reducing bureaucratic burden in research, innovation and higher ...
    Sep 10, 2020 · Reducing bureaucratic burden in research, innovation and higher education ... Athena SWAN charter for Women in Science. However, as a ...
  58. [58]
    A Critical Analysis of Athena Swan as a Policy-Scoring Scheme
    Aug 24, 2023 · This paper explains how Athena Swan operates as a policy-scoring scheme, requiring universities to submit plans for policy improvement in order ...
  59. [59]
    An Athena SWANsong | Colette Colfer | The Critic Magazine
    Oct 21, 2023 · It has questionable outcomes and negatively impacts spaces that allow for intellectual flourishing in HEI settings. At minimum, a review of the ...
  60. [60]
    Staff requirement to promote 'gender ideology' is threat to academic ...
    Feb 27, 2024 · Dr Crowley said Athena Swan “boasted” in its literature that the decision of funding bodies to tie eligibility for research grants to holding ...Missing: meritocracy | Show results with:meritocracy
  61. [61]
    A Time-Series Analysis of the Impact of Athena Swan on the ...
    May 26, 2023 · Objectives: Athena Swan awards are designed to recognize higher education institutions' (HEIs') commitment to advancing 'gender equality'.Missing: percentage | Show results with:percentage
  62. [62]
    International Charters - Advance HE
    The first expansion outside of the UK took place in 2015, when Athena SWAN launched in Ireland (Athena Swan Ireland). The framework has since been adapted for ...
  63. [63]
    Athena SWAN Ireland Charter - Equality, Diversity and Inclusion
    The Athena Swan charter launched in the Republic of Ireland in early 2015. The extension of the charter to Ireland was made possible through funding from ...
  64. [64]
    [PDF] HEA STATEMENT ON ATHENA SWAN CHARTER IN IRELAND
    HEIs shall attain an Institutional Bronze award within 4 years of a first failed ... attained an Athena SWAN Silver award by 2023 in order to be eligible for ...
  65. [65]
    [PDF] Athena Swan Ireland: 2021 charter framework
    The implementation of this tailored and evidence-based action plan will support the department to make progress on achieving their equality objectives.
  66. [66]
    Irish Funding Bodies to Require Athena SWAN Gender Equality ...
    Higher education institutions will be required to have secured the minimum Athena SWAN gender equality accreditation by end 2019 in order to be eligible to ...
  67. [67]
    Athena Swan Ireland | Advance HE
    The objective of the Athena Swan Ireland 2021 charter framework is to support higher education institutions, academic departments, and professional units.
  68. [68]
    Athena Swan and Equality Diversity & Inclusion - University of Limerick
    The implementation of the PESS Athena SWAN action plan 2021-2025 is overseen by the PESS EDI committee. Current committee members are: Antonio Calderón, ...
  69. [69]
    Embedding Gender Equality in Irish Universities Through the Athena ...
    Aug 29, 2025 · The introduction and implementation of the Athena SWAN (AS) Charter in Ireland in 2015 marked a key turning point in the drive for institutional ...
  70. [70]
    Athena SWAN the single most comprehensive gender equality ...
    Feb 20, 2020 · Athena SWAN does this more comprehensively than any other single scheme in Europe by focusing systemic interventions on all genders, career ...
  71. [71]
    As gender equality becomes a priority for EU research funding, does ...
    Mar 15, 2022 · Jörg Müller and Charoula Tzanakou assess what can be learnt from the international experience of implementing the Athena SWAN charter and awards scheme.Missing: mandatory | Show results with:mandatory
  72. [72]
    What can we expect from an EU certification scheme for gender ...
    Mar 30, 2022 · Moreover, Athena SWAN is already expanding internationally to Ireland in 2015, the USA in 2017, Australia in 2018 and Canada in 2019 and a pilot ...
  73. [73]
    About us | SAGE - Science in Australia Gender Equity
    SAGE began as an initiative of the Australian Academy of Technology and Engineering (ATSE) and the Australian Academy of Science. The two academies joined to ...
  74. [74]
    New program promotes gender equity in science
    The SAGE pilot was launched on 16 September 2015 at Parliament House. The event was hosted by the Parliamentary Friends of Science and the Parliamentary Friends ...Missing: founded | Show results with:founded
  75. [75]
    SAGE pathway to Athena Swan - Science in Australia Gender Equity
    Learn more about the SAGE accreditation and awards pathway. Athena Swan is an accreditation and awards program for gender equity, diversity and inclusion.
  76. [76]
    Science in Australia Gender Equity | SAGE
    SAGE is a transformational program that helps Australian institutions achieve systemic change for gender equity, diversity and inclusion.What we do · SAGE pathway to Athena Swan · The SAGE Awards · Join SAGE
  77. [77]
    Defence commitment to gender equity in STEM recognised | DST
    Feb 21, 2020 · The Athena SWAN Awards are an initiative under the SAGE program, a nationwide equity and diversity evaluation and accreditation program which ...
  78. [78]
    Canada launches its own version of the Athena SWAN charter
    The new Dimensions pilot program to advance equity, diversity and inclusion in Canada's postsecondary institutions to open on June 3.Missing: influences North
  79. [79]
    [PDF] Frequently Asked Questions “Made-in-Canada” Athena SWAN ...
    applying for an Athena SWAN award are similarly related to the costs involved in planning, designing and implementing practices to advance EDI at ...
  80. [80]
    A Made-in-Canada Athena SWAN | Science & Policy Exchange
    Aug 9, 2018 · Since its inception in the UK, the Athena SWAN model has been adapted and implemented in Ireland, Australia, and the United States. ... influence ...
  81. [81]
    SEA Change Program Aims to Transform Diversity Efforts in STEM
    Jan 24, 2018 · SEA Change draws heavily from the experience of the Athena SWAN gender equality charter, established in the United Kingdom in 2005 to ...Missing: influence | Show results with:influence
  82. [82]
    SEA Change Seeks Culture Shift for Diverse Scientific Enterprise
    Aug 3, 2018 · The voluntary program is inspired by Athena SWAN, a United Kingdom program set up in 2005 to address the underrepresentation of women in STEM ...
  83. [83]
    Three New Charter Members Join SEA Change - AAAS
    Dec 13, 2021 · That school had been involved with the Athena SWAN Charter, a UK-based framework that promotes gender equality within higher education.Missing: influence | Show results with:influence
  84. [84]
    Reducing gender bias in STEM - MIT Science Policy Review
    Aug 20, 2020 · Taking inspiration from the Athena SWAN award, the New York Stem Cell Foundation (NYSCF) convened a working group for the Initiative on Women in ...
  85. [85]
    [PDF] Lessons Learnt From Athena SWAN and Total E-Quality Award ...
    Nov 16, 2021 · In the past 2decades, many Certification and Award schemes (CAS) related to gender equality, diversity and inclusion have emerged in the ...