IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jlands/v11y2022i11p1876-d950473.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Gender Gap in Land Sciences: A Review of Women’s Presence on the Editorial Boards of Peer-Reviewed Journals

Author

Listed:
  • Somayeh Mohammadi Hamidi

    (Department of Sustainable Landscape Development, Institute for Geosciences and Geography, Martin-Luther-Universität Halle-Wittenberg, 06120 Halle (Saale), Germany)

  • Mohammad Rezaei-Pandari

    (Laser and Plasma Research Institute, Shahid Beheshti University, Tehran 19839-69411, Iran)

  • Sima Fakheran

    (Department of Natural Resources, Isfahan University of Technology, Isfahan 84156-83111, Iran)

  • Christine Fürst

    (Department of Sustainable Landscape Development, Institute for Geosciences and Geography, Martin-Luther-Universität Halle-Wittenberg, 06120 Halle (Saale), Germany
    German Centre for Integrative Biodiversity Research (iDiv) Halle-Jena-Leipzig, 04103 Leipzig, Germany)

Abstract

Women are disadvantaged across all stages of academic publishing. In science, contribution to editorial boards of journals is evidence of a high reputation within a specialty or field. Therefore, the low presence of women on editorial boards can be considered a disadvantage indicator for women in academia. This study aims to highlight the gap in women’s contributions in land science journals. We assessed the gender composition of editorial boards in 60 peer-reviewed journals using systematic reviews and meta-analyses, and we obtained data on current and past editorial boards of these journals. The result shows that the current number of editorial board members is 5197 of which only 25.47 percent are women. Gender inequality is very evident in this group of journals to the extent that journals with a high impact factor indicate inequality that is even more than 75 percent. The results of the time series analysis have also shown that the presence of women on editorial boards has increased over the last decade, although this increase has been more in the Nordic countries. The geographical distribution of editorial board members is also quite unequal in the North and South, 83 percent of female editorial board members are from northern countries, while only 12 percent are from the global South. According to the results, there is still a long way to go to achieve gender equality, especially in the field of land science. Our results also support previous findings of a considerable gender difference in urban land science, geoscience community, biodiversity conservation, and veterinary sciences. Thus, the academic community, editors, and journals must take proactive measures to achieve gender balance.

Suggested Citation

  • Somayeh Mohammadi Hamidi & Mohammad Rezaei-Pandari & Sima Fakheran & Christine Fürst, 2022. "The Gender Gap in Land Sciences: A Review of Women’s Presence on the Editorial Boards of Peer-Reviewed Journals," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(11), pages 1-15, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:11:y:2022:i:11:p:1876-:d:950473
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/11/11/1876/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/11/11/1876/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Beaudry, Catherine & Larivière, Vincent, 2016. "Which gender gap? Factors affecting researchers’ scientific impact in science and medicine," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(9), pages 1790-1817.
    2. Vincent Larivière & Chaoqun Ni & Yves Gingras & Blaise Cronin & Cassidy R. Sugimoto, 2013. "Bibliometrics: Global gender disparities in science," Nature, Nature, vol. 504(7479), pages 211-213, December.
    3. Christina Boll & Julian Sebastian Leppin, 2016. "Differential Overeducation in East and West Germany: Extending Frank's Theory on Economic Returns Changes the Picture of Disadvantaged Women," LABOUR, CEIS, vol. 30(4), pages 455-504, December.
    4. Chad M Topaz & Shilad Sen, 2016. "Gender Representation on Journal Editorial Boards in the Mathematical Sciences," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(8), pages 1-21, August.
    5. Daly, Mary C. & Buchel, Felix & Duncan, Greg J., 2000. "Premiums and penalties for surplus and deficit education: Evidence from the United States and Germany," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 19(2), pages 169-178, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Wu, Jiang & Ou, Guiyan & Liu, Xiaohui & Dong, Ke, 2022. "How does academic education background affect top researchers’ performance? Evidence from the field of artificial intelligence," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 16(2).
    2. Kwiek, Marek & Roszka, Wojciech, 2021. "Gender-based homophily in research: A large-scale study of man-woman collaboration," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 15(3).
    3. Rossen Anja & Boll Christina & Wolf André, 2019. "Patterns of Overeducation in Europe: The Role of Field of Study," IZA Journal of Labor Policy, Sciendo & Forschungsinstitut zur Zukunft der Arbeit GmbH (IZA), vol. 9(1), pages 1-48, June.
    4. Fengyuan Liu & Petter Holme & Matteo Chiesa & Bedoor AlShebli & Talal Rahwan, 2023. "Gender inequality and self-publication are common among academic editors," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 7(3), pages 353-364, March.
    5. Lin Zhang & Gunnar Sivertsen & Huiying Du & Ying Huang & Wolfgang Glänzel, 2021. "Gender differences in the aims and impacts of research," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(11), pages 8861-8886, November.
    6. Abdelghani Maddi & Yves Gingras, 2021. "Gender Diversity In Research Teams And Citation Impact In Economics And Management," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 35(5), pages 1381-1404, December.
    7. Kim, Lanu & Smith, Daniel Scott & Hofstra, Bas & McFarland, Daniel A., 2022. "Gendered knowledge in fields and academic careers," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(1).
    8. Jyoti Paswan & Vivek Kumar Singh, 2020. "Gender and research publishing analyzed through the lenses of discipline, institution types, impact and international collaboration: a case study from India," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 123(1), pages 497-515, April.
    9. Luke Holman & Devi Stuart-Fox & Cindy E Hauser, 2018. "The gender gap in science: How long until women are equally represented?," PLOS Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(4), pages 1-20, April.
    10. Matthias Kuppler, 2022. "Predicting the future impact of Computer Science researchers: Is there a gender bias?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(11), pages 6695-6732, November.
    11. Lin Zhang & Yuanyuan Shang & Ying Huang & Gunnar Sivertsen, 2022. "Gender differences among active reviewers: an investigation based on publons," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(1), pages 145-179, January.
    12. repec:lan:wpaper:4841 is not listed on IDEAS
    13. Liliya Leopold & Thomas Leopold, 2016. "Education and Health across Lives and Cohorts: A Study of Cumulative Advantage in Germany," SOEPpapers on Multidisciplinary Panel Data Research 835, DIW Berlin, The German Socio-Economic Panel (SOEP).
    14. Léné, Alexandre, 2011. "Occupational downgrading and bumping down: The combined effects of education and experience," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 18(2), pages 257-269, April.
    15. Chaojiang Wu & Erjia Yan & Yongjun Zhu & Kai Li, 2021. "Gender imbalance in the productivity of funded projects: A study of the outputs of National Institutes of Health R01 grants," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 72(11), pages 1386-1399, November.
    16. Barros, Carlos P. & Guironnet, Jean-Pascal & Peypoch, Nicolas, 2011. "Productivity growth and biased technical change in French higher education," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 28(1-2), pages 641-646, January.
    17. Muysken, Joan & Hoppe, Mombert & Rieder, Hannah, 2002. "The Impact of education and mismatch on wages: Germany, 1984-2000," Research Memorandum 041, Maastricht University, Maastricht Economic Research Institute on Innovation and Technology (MERIT).
    18. Josh Yamamoto & Eitan Frachtenberg, 2022. "Gender Differences in Collaboration Patterns in Computer Science," Publications, MDPI, vol. 10(1), pages 1-21, February.
    19. Sorana-Alexandra Constantinescu & Maria-Henriete Pozsar, 2022. "Was This Supposed to Be on the Test? Academic Leadership, Gender and the COVID-19 Pandemic in Denmark, Hungary, Romania, and United Kingdom," Publications, MDPI, vol. 10(2), pages 1-13, April.
    20. repec:lan:wpaper:4488 is not listed on IDEAS
    21. Ann-Maree Vallence & Mark R Hinder & Hakuei Fujiyama, 2019. "Data-driven selection of conference speakers based on scientific impact to achieve gender parity," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(7), pages 1-10, July.
    22. Corey J A Bradshaw & Justin M Chalker & Stefani A Crabtree & Bart A Eijkelkamp & John A Long & Justine R Smith & Kate Trinajstic & Vera Weisbecker, 2021. "A fairer way to compare researchers at any career stage and in any discipline using open-access citation data," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(9), pages 1-15, September.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:11:y:2022:i:11:p:1876-:d:950473. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.