S3 Ep9: Women in Economics

Episode Summary

Executive Summary: The episode examines persistent gender bias in economics, why progress has stalled, and what helps women succeed. Drawing on a CEPR book edited by Shelley Lundberg, it covers the profession’s history of exclusion, evidence of bias in tenure and peer review, the mixed effects of “gender-neutral” policies, and the strong career benefits of mentoring and more inclusive departmental cultures.

Main Topics: Historical roots of bias in economics: The discussion traces women’s underrepresentation to long-running professional norms and assumptions about labor markets, including early AEA debates over whether women needed special support at all. Stalled progress in representation: While women’s participation rose sharply in the 1970s and 1980s, gains have slowed over the last 15–20 years, and many economists failed to notice the plateau. Mentoring as an effective intervention: A randomized workshop-based mentoring program (CEMLA/CEM workshop) is presented as one of the most successful supports for women’s careers, improving publishing, grants, and tenure outcomes. Unintended consequences of tenure-clock stopping: Policies intended to help parents on the tenure track can backfire because motherhood and fatherhood affect productivity differently, and institutions often fail to account for that asymmetry. Bias in peer review and publication: Research shows women’s papers face stricter readability expectations, with a substantial share of the readability gap emerging during peer review. Pipeline, culture, and broader profession-wide reform: Speakers argue that economics needs more women undergraduates, less harassment and toxic behavior, more inclusive seminars and conferences, and more diverse role models to improve the field and its output.

Key Arguments: Economics has a distinctive and unusually unwelcoming culture for women, even relative to other STEM fields. Implicit bias persists because many economists assume markets are fair and therefore misread women’s underrepresentation as merit-based. The profession’s gender gap is not just historical; empirical evidence shows women are still treated differently even conditional on productivity. Mentoring can materially change careers: intensive advice, feedback, and networking can increase publication, grants, and tenure success. Gender-neutral policies may produce gendered effects when they ignore differences in caregiving burdens and productivity shocks. Women in economics face higher publication standards in peer review, suggesting women must be clearer to receive the same evaluation. Improving representation is not only a fairness issue; it changes the questions asked, the policy advice produced, and the diversity of role models for students.

Data Points: Rise in women’s representation: Very sharp increase in the 1970s and 1980s - Representation of women in economics graduate programs and faculty during the earlier expansion period Stalled progress period: Last 15–20 years - Growth in women’s representation has flattened over this period Workshop capacity: 50 places per workshop - Cement mentoring workshop size Mentoring cohorts: 6 cohorts - Used alongside applicants who could not attend as part of a randomized evaluation Evaluation sample size: about 650 people - Participants followed from 2004 to 2018 Analysis sample: a little over 300 people - Subset used in the main outcome analysis Publication outcome: women who received treatment published more papers - Cement workshop participants had stronger publication outcomes Top journals mentioned: Econometrica, QJE, AER, Review of Economic Studies - Treatment group published more in these journals Readability gender gap: between 1% and 6% - Gap in readability of abstracts in top four economics journals since 1950 Peer review contribution to gap: 40% - Share of the readability gap formed during peer review Tenure clock extension: 1 extra year per child, usually up to 2 - Description of tenure-clock-stopping policies for new parents Tenure effect on women: tenure rates declined - Outcome after universities adopted tenure-clock-stopping policies Tenure effect on men: tenure rates increased - Outcome after universities adopted tenure-clock-stopping policies

Pivotal Quotes: "Economists fundamentally don't understand implicit bias." — Tim Phillips: Framing the discussion of why women remain underrepresented in economics "There is stalled progress." — Shelley Lundberg and Jenna Stearns: Title/result of their chapter assessing indicators of women’s advancement in economics "I want them to publish more women. It's that easy." — Erin Hengel: Her direct prescription for changing journal publication practices

Implications: The episode argues economics must reform hiring, tenure, peer review, and culture to retain women and diversify viewpoints. Better inclusion would improve research quality, policy advice, and the profession’s relevance to students and society.