Search

Women underrepresentation in science has frequently been associated with women being less productive than men (i.e. the gender productivity gap), which may be explained by women having lower success rates, producing science of lower impact and/or suffering gender bias. By performing global meta-analyses, we show that there is a gender productivity gap mostly supported by a larger scientific production ascribed to men. However, women and men show similar success rates when the researchers´ work is directly evaluated (i.e. publishing articles). Men´s success rate is higher only in productivity proxies involving peer recognition (e.g. evaluation committees, academic positions). Men´s articles showed a tendency to have higher global impact but only if studies include self-citations. We detected gender bias against women in research fields where women are underrepresented (i.e. those different from Psychology). Historical numerical unbalance, socio-psychological aspects and cultural factors may influence differences in success rate, science impact and gender bias. Thus, the maintenance of a women-unfriendly academic and non-academic environment may perpetuate the gender productivity gap. New policies to build a more egalitarian and heterogeneous scientific community and society are needed to close the gender gap in science. Fil: Astegiano, Julia. Universidade de Sao Paulo; Brasil. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - Córdoba. Instituto Multidisciplinario de Biología Vegetal. Universidad Nacional de Córdoba. Facultad de Ciencias Exactas Físicas y Naturales. Instituto Multidisciplinario de Biología Vegetal; Argentina Fil: Sebastián-González, Esther. Universidade de Sao Paulo; Brasil. Universidad de Miguel Hernández; España Fil: Castanho, Camila De Toledo. Universidade de Sao Paulo; Brasil. Universidade Federal de Sao Paulo; Brasil

Worldwide demand for food will increase dramatically in the future as global human population grows. Increasing efficiency of crop production is unlikely to be sufficient to meet the demand, presenting a long-term threat to humanity’s ‘well-being’. Knowledge of the system-level behaviour of agroecosystems, however, remains surprisingly limited, reflecting the agricultural focus on particular species. This is starting to change towards an ecosystem and network-based approach, following the recent revolution in thinking about resource use and sustainability in our other global food production industry: commercial fisheries. Agroecosystems appear to retain plasticity of ecological processes that might be manipulated for productivity and sustainability. Network structure and dynamics have substantial impacts on ecosystem performance, but evidence from agroecosystems lags behind network theory. Here, we provide an introduction to network theory and application in agroecosystems, identify network metrics for management and environmental change, and, finally, we highlight gaps in our current knowledge and key research themes. These themes include: is the structure of agroecological networks affected by sampling; how do ecosystem services ‘emerge’ empirically from ecological organization, function and network properties; how do spatial and temporal scale and resolution influence system performance; and, can network agroecology be used to design systems that maximize ecosystem services?