For decades, researchers and policymakers have been trying to address the underrepresentation of women in Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) fields. To what extent is this phenomenon rooted in gender norms that stem from historical kinship patterns, ask Matija Kovacic and Cristina Elisa Orso?

According to recent research by McKinsey, the best way to resolve Europe’s talent shortage lies in recruiting and retaining women in the fastest-growing tech fields. Addressing this shortfall is about much more than doing the right thing; it’s an economic necessity, the authors state.

Globally, nations are working to dismantle the socio-cultural and institutional obstacles that deter women from pursuing STEM careers. The UK government, for instance, oversees the STEM Ambassador programme, which has 25,000 volunteers – over 40% of whom are women – serving as role models to demonstrate that STEM careers are accessible to all, while the CREST Awards programme focuses on encouraging participation and developing research skills in STEM subject areas among underrepresented groups​​. Along similar lines, programmes such as Million Women Mentors, Girls Who Can Code or Black Girls Code have been quite successful in inspiring women to pursue STEM education.

Despite all these initiatives, however, statistics from 2023 show that women comprise only 28% of the global STEM workforce. Women represent just 18% of the STEM workforce in the United States, 17% in the European Union, 16% in Japan and 14% in India. Additionally, women continue to face vertical discrimination within firms – the “glass ceiling” – resulting in fewer women in decision-making positions compared to men.

Looking back to pre-industrial times for answers

Several factors may influence women’s participation in STEM fields, including economic considerations, access to education, family and caregiving responsibilities, and gender norms.

Gender norms, in particular, may prescribe certain roles as more suitable for women, thereby affecting their educational and career choices. Many people still associate STEM fields with masculine qualities, perpetuating stereotypes that discourage girls and women from pursuing STEM subjects. Moreover, to the extent that STEM careers can be more demanding than those in other sectors, some women may opt for occupations that offer a better work-life balance to manage family responsibilities.

Many people still associate STEM fields with masculine qualities, perpetuating stereotypes that discourage girls and women from entering 

Gender norms are challenging to measure. They are subjective, dynamic and complex in nature, and compounded by difficulties in data collection. What we can say, however, is that they are intricately related to family organisational characteristics. In traditional family structures, distinct gender roles are prominent: men typically serve as the primary earners and decision-makers, while women are tasked with domestic responsibilities and caregiving. These traditional families are marked by strong bonds among members, which help perpetrate these gender roles.

So far, so familiar, perhaps: we know that changing norms is a tough job. But could looking back to the historical origins of gender norms help us to understand their nature and quantify their effect on women’s choices in contemporary societies?

This is the approach we take in our latest research. Inspired by the findings of Schulz et al (2019), we travel back five centuries in history to find indicators of the intensity of family and kinship ties in pre-industrial societies. We then use these as proxies for the perpetuation of unequal gender norms across time and space. Projecting these specific traits to the modern world, we are able to quantify the effect of historically-rooted (and intergenerationally transmitted) gender roles on women’s choices in contemporary societies. 

The key indicator of historical gender norms is the Kinship Index, which captures the five dimensions of historical kin-based forms of organisation identified in the Ethnographic Atlas. These include the prevalence of cousin marriage, polygamy, extended families, unilateral rules of descent, and clan-based community organisation. In particular, preferences for cousin marriage (ie, familial practices where individuals are encouraged to marry their cousins) and the presence of extended families (where multiple generations or relatives such as aunts, uncles and cousins all live together or maintain close, regular contact) are two key indicators that emphasise the value placed on maintaining family ties, adhering to cultural traditions and perpetuating gender roles.

As well as reinforcing traditional roles for what women do, societies with strong kinship ties also shape individuals’ psychology, such that they adapt to the collectivist demands of traditional social networks. Hence tight kinship encourages traits like “conformity”, “obedience”, and “loyalty”, while discouraging traits like “individualism” and “analytical thinking” – traits we might expect to be especially suited to careers in STEM subjects.

As well as reinforcing traditional roles for what women do, societies with strong kinship ties also shape individuals’ psychology, such that they adapt to the collectivist demands of traditional social networks. 

Our empirical analysis supports this hypothesis. We find that countries which score higher on the kinship index, indicating more intense historical kinship structures, tend to have significantly lower proportions of women in STEM today. Likewise, there is a negative correlation between the intensity of historical kinships and countries’ performance in maths and science. By contrast, performance in those subjects is positively correlated with a measure of individualism, as shown in Figure 1.

Figure 1. Individualism and PISA scores in science and mathematics across countries

Narrowing the focus to individuals’ choices, Figure 2 shows that women whose ancestors come from countries with higher kinship index scores are less likely than other women to pursue a STEM career. The historical prevalence of extended families and cousin marriages, both of which reinforce traditional gender roles, decreases the likelihood of women opting for STEM jobs. By contrast, there are no significant results for the male subsample, suggesting that the perpetuation of traditional gender roles specifically affects women’s participation in STEM fields.

Figure 2: Kinship measures and women’s probability of pursuing STEM careers

Finally, we show that historical-cultural factors related to gender roles influence women’s likelihood of pursuing STEM careers through contemporary psychological traits inherited from their parents. Women from more individualistic cultures, characterised by weaker ancestral kinship structures, looser family ties, and greater predisposition to critical thinking, are more likely to enter STEM fields. In contrast, cultures emphasising values such as obedience, tradition, and restraint see fewer women in STEM. These findings are particularly noteworthy as they emphasise the influence of inter-generationally transmitted cultural values in shaping women’s occupational choices.

Bringing historical/cultural factors into efforts to promote gender equality in STEM

To reduce the influence of unequal gender roles on women’s choices in STEM fields and create a more inclusive and diverse STEM workforce, policymakers should continue to implement educational programmes that challenge traditional gender stereotypes and promote gender equality in STEM from an early age. The numbers, however, show that a comprehensive solution to the problem remains far away.

What our research suggests is that policymakers should look to ancestral characteristics of ethnic origins as a way to target specific sub-groups of women that are more reluctant to deviate from the inherited norms. For instance, targeted interventions such as mentorship programs, where women in STEM mentor and support young girls and women interested in these fields, could be especially effective. This may be particularly important for immigrants, who are often ethnically segregated. This awareness may help to create targeted interventions that are sensitive to these backgrounds and more effective in promoting gender equality in STEM.

Sign up here to receive a monthly summary of blog posts from LSE Inequalities delivered direct to your inbox.

All articles posted on this blog give the views of the author(s). They do not represent the position of LSE Inequalities, nor of the London School of Economics and Political Science.

Image credits: Roman Samborskyi via Shutterstock.