The Burden of Representation: Women in African Academia and the Politics of Visibility – African Arguments

Report on Gender Inequality in African Higher Education and its Implications for Sustainable Development Goals

Executive Summary

This report examines the persistent structural and cultural barriers faced by women scholars in African higher education. It analyses these challenges through the framework of the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), primarily focusing on SDG 5 (Gender Equality), SDG 4 (Quality Education), SDG 10 (Reduced Inequalities), and SDG 16 (Peace, Justice, and Strong Institutions). The findings indicate that while progress in female representation has been made, deep-rooted inequities in institutional culture, knowledge production, and career advancement hinder the achievement of these global goals. The report concludes by outlining strategic pathways to foster genuine inclusivity and epistemic justice.

Analysis of Barriers to SDG 5 (Gender Equality) in Academia

Structural and Cultural Impediments

The realisation of academic freedom and gender equality in African higher education is inconsistent, directly challenging the targets of SDG 5. Despite inclusivity policies, women scholars face significant obstacles rooted in entrenched patriarchal traditions.

• Dual Burden: Women are disproportionately affected by the need to balance professional responsibilities with family and domestic duties, often without institutional support. This limits time for research and conference participation, which are critical for career advancement and undermines progress towards SDG 5.2 (recognize and value unpaid care) and SDG 8 (Decent Work and Economic Growth).
• Symbolic Representation: Female academics are often viewed as representatives of collective progress rather than as individual intellectuals. This symbolic burden creates immense pressure and shifts focus from their unique scholarly contributions, failing to achieve the full and effective participation outlined in SDG 5.5.
• Perceptions of Inferiority: Persistent assumptions regarding women’s intellectual capabilities, sometimes exacerbated by affirmative action policies, perpetuate a culture where their achievements are undervalued.

Institutional Culture and its Impact on SDG 10 (Reduced Inequalities)

Institutional culture serves as a subtle yet powerful mechanism for sustaining gender inequality, thereby contravening the principles of SDG 10. These hidden barriers limit women’s access to opportunities and reinforce systemic disadvantages.

1. Exclusion from Informal Networks: Key professional opportunities are often gatekept through informal networks, such as social events or clubs, from which women are frequently excluded due to cultural norms. This exclusion restricts access to mentorship and decision-making processes.
2. Micro-inequities: Women scholars experience subtle, everyday acts of marginalisation, including being interrupted in meetings, having their ideas attributed to male colleagues, or having their work dismissed. These micro-inequities collectively create a culture of exclusion that undermines confidence and a sense of belonging.
3. Biased Evaluation Systems: Promotion systems that prioritise research output while undervaluing teaching and mentorship—areas where women often excel—perpetuate structural inequities and hinder their career progression, directly impacting targets related to equal opportunity under SDG 10.

The Politics of Knowledge and its Relation to SDG 4 (Quality Education)

Epistemic Injustice and Curriculum Deficiencies

The challenge extends beyond representation to the core of knowledge production, affecting the delivery of inclusive and equitable quality education as mandated by SDG 4. The continued dominance of Western, patriarchal epistemologies marginalises diverse perspectives.

• Curricular Bias: University curricula often perpetuate colonial and patriarchal viewpoints, erasing or diminishing the intellectual contributions of African women. This fails to provide the inclusive learning environment envisioned in SDG 4.7.
• Marginalisation of Feminist Perspectives: Feminist, indigenous, and gender-focused scholarship is frequently treated as supplementary rather than foundational. This “add-and-stir” approach does not challenge the underlying patriarchal structures of academic disciplines.
• Eurocentric Frameworks: The application of Eurocentric feminist theories often fails to capture the realities of African women, highlighting a need for culturally and historically contextualised knowledge to achieve true epistemic freedom.

The Role of Gender Studies in Fostering Sustainable Development

The establishment of Women’s and Gender Studies programmes is a critical step towards aligning higher education with the SDGs. These programmes serve as intellectual and political projects that directly support the achievement of SDG 4 and SDG 5.

• Creating Inclusive Spaces: They provide a platform for women to theorise their experiences and critically analyse the structures of inequality.
• Promoting Feminist Pedagogy: By emphasising collaboration, reflexivity, and social justice, these disciplines challenge the masculinist orientation of traditional academia and transform classroom dynamics to interrogate power relations.
• Building a Foundation for Inclusivity: These initiatives help establish inclusivity as a core intellectual principle, essential for building the knowledge and skills needed to promote sustainable development (SDG 4.7).

Strategic Pathways Towards Inclusive and Accountable Institutions (SDG 16)

Recommendations for Systemic Transformation

Transforming institutional cultures to be more inclusive, just, and accountable requires a multi-faceted approach that combines policy reform with practical interventions, directly contributing to the development of effective and inclusive institutions as per SDG 16.

1. Policy and Advocacy:
   • Implement gender-sensitive policies for hiring, promotion, and tenure that ensure transparent and equitable evaluation.
   • Launch visibility campaigns to showcase the achievements of women scholars and counter stereotypes.
   • Utilise research on gender disparities to provide an evidence base for institutional reform.
2. Mentorship and Support Networks:
   • Establish structured mentorship programmes connecting emerging female scholars with senior academics to help navigate institutional hierarchies.
   • Foster collaborations between universities, women’s organisations, and student groups to build effective coalitions for change.
3. Fostering a Culture of Collective Responsibility:
   • Engage male academics as allies to help dismantle patriarchal norms and frame gender equity as a collective goal.
   • Conduct awareness workshops and gender-sensitivity training to cultivate a supportive academic environment.
   • Promote “active bystander” initiatives to empower the community to challenge discriminatory behaviour.

Conclusion: Advancing the 2030 Agenda through Epistemic Freedom

The struggle for gender equality in African higher education is intrinsically linked to the broader 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. Achieving authentic representation requires moving beyond numerical targets to dismantle the systemic barriers that perpetuate both institutional and epistemic injustice. By transforming academic cultures through inclusive pedagogy, equitable policies, and collective accountability, higher education institutions can fulfil their role as catalysts for sustainable development. Ensuring women’s voices are heard, their knowledge is valued, and their presence redefines academic discourse is fundamental to achieving SDG 5 and, by extension, advancing quality education (SDG 4), reducing inequalities (SDG 10), and building strong, just institutions (SDG 16).

Analysis of SDGs, Targets, and Indicators

1. Which SDGs are addressed or connected to the issues highlighted in the article?

• SDG 4: Quality Education

  The article is set within the context of African higher education, directly addressing the quality, inclusivity, and cultural environment of universities. It critiques the content of education, such as curricula that “perpetuate patriarchal and colonial viewpoints,” and advocates for pedagogical transformation through “critical feminist pedagogy.”

• SDG 5: Gender Equality

  This is the central theme of the article. It extensively discusses the “structural and cultural barriers” women face in academia, the need to end discrimination, ensure “women’s full and effective participation,” and adopt policies that promote gender equity. The entire analysis revolves around achieving gender equality within the specific context of higher education institutions.

• SDG 10: Reduced Inequalities

  The article focuses on reducing inequality based on gender within academic institutions. It highlights how “entrenched patriarchal traditions,” “micro-inequities,” and exclusion from informal networks create and sustain inequality, preventing women from having the same opportunities as their male colleagues. It calls for addressing these “systemic origins of inequality.”

• SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions

  The article calls for institutional transformation to create more just, inclusive, and accountable academic environments. It advocates for “an institutional culture of accountability and awareness,” “anonymous reporting mechanisms,” and “gender-sensitive policies in hiring, promotion, and tenure” to build stronger, more equitable institutions.

2. What specific targets under those SDGs can be identified based on the article’s content?

1. Under SDG 4 (Quality Education):
   • Target 4.5: “eliminate gender disparities in education and ensure equal access to all levels of education.” The article moves beyond simple access, focusing on the disparities women face once inside universities, such as barriers to career progression and epistemic legitimacy, which are core aspects of eliminating disparities.
   • Target 4.7: “ensure that all learners acquire the knowledge and skills needed to promote… gender equality.” This is directly addressed through the discussion on the expansion of “Women’s and Gender Studies programmes” and the implementation of “feminist pedagogies that emphasise collaboration, reflexivity, and social justice.”
2. Under SDG 5 (Gender Equality):
   • Target 5.1: “End all forms of discrimination against all women and girls everywhere.” The article details numerous forms of discrimination, from overt “structural inequities” in promotion systems to subtle “micro-inequities” like being interrupted in meetings or having ideas attributed to male colleagues.
   • Target 5.5: “Ensure women’s full and effective participation and equal opportunities for leadership at all levels of decision-making.” The text highlights how women are excluded from “informal networks” where “decision-making takes place,” hindering their access to leadership and career advancement.
   • Target 5.c: “Adopt and strengthen sound policies and enforceable legislation for the promotion of gender equality.” The article explicitly calls for “policy changes,” “gender-sensitive policies in hiring, promotion, and tenure,” and integrating “inclusivity… into the institutional fabric.”
3. Under SDG 10 (Reduced Inequalities):
   • Target 10.3: “Ensure equal opportunity and reduce inequalities of outcome, including by eliminating discriminatory… policies and practices.” The analysis of how promotion systems “undervaluing teaching and mentorship” and informal networks create unequal outcomes for women directly relates to this target. The call to challenge discriminatory behavior and reform policies aims to ensure equal opportunity.
4. Under SDG 16 (Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions):
   • Target 16.7: “Ensure responsive, inclusive, participatory and representative decision-making at all levels.” The article’s critique of women’s exclusion from informal decision-making and its call for procedural reforms like “alternating genders in speaking opportunities” directly support the goal of inclusive and participatory decision-making.

3. Are there any indicators mentioned or implied in the article that can be used to measure progress towards the identified targets?

• Female Representation (Staffing Figures): The article mentions that “recruitment efforts have increased female representation” but argues that progress must move “beyond numerical inclusion.” The proportion of women in academic positions is a clear, though insufficient, indicator.
• Promotion and Tenure Rates: The text points to “promotion systems that prioritise research output while undervaluing teaching and mentorship” as a barrier. Therefore, tracking and comparing the promotion and tenure rates of women and men would be a key indicator of equity.
• Number of Women’s and Gender Studies Programs: The article provides a specific data point: “Mama identified 30 African universities that champion the cause of Gender Studies.” The number and growth of such programs serve as a direct indicator of institutional commitment to gender-focused education.
• Adoption of Gender-Sensitive Policies: The article states that “Many institutions have adopted inclusivity policies” and calls for more. The existence and content of policies on hiring, promotion, and anti-harassment are measurable indicators of institutional reform.
• Curriculum Content: The critique of curricula that “privilege Western epistemologies” and marginalize “feminist perspectives” implies that an analysis of curriculum content to measure the inclusion of diverse and gender-focused knowledge is a relevant indicator.
• Availability of Mentorship and Reporting Mechanisms: The call for “structured programmes that connect emerging scholars with senior mentors” and “anonymous reporting mechanisms” suggests that the establishment and utilization of these support systems are practical indicators of a changing institutional culture.

4. Table of SDGs, Targets, and Indicators

Source: africanarguments.org