Desafíos de Mujeres Científicas en Latinoamérica Las mujeres científicas en Latinoamérica enfrentan tres tipos de barreras: discriminación institucional y desigualdad en recursos, estereotipos socioculturales y dificultades de balance trabajo-familia, y obstáculos en el desarrollo profesional. Abstract Las científicas en Latinoamérica enfrentan tres tipos principales de desafíos para avanzar en sus carreras de investigación: barreras institucionales, dificultades socioculturales y obstáculos al desarrollo profesional. En el ámbito institucional se reporta discriminación de género y prácticas que devalúan sus aportaciones (Estébanez, 2007); se observa además un acceso limitado a cargos directivos –por ejemplo, Torrado Martín- Palomino y Ramos (2017) indican que las mujeres ocupan solo el 21% de las posiciones académicas de alto nivel– y desigualdades en el financiamiento y asignación de recursos (Mena Ordoñez y Arias-Santana, 2020), sumado a marcos normativos y sistemas de evaluación poco sensibles a la realidad de género (Peluffo, 2018; Carrillo Espadas y Flores Galaz, 2023). En el plano sociocultural se destacan estereotipos persistentes en áreas STEM, dificultades para equilibrar la vida laboral y familiar y expectativas culturales restrictivas (Sánchez Jasso et al., 2016; Carrillo Espadas y Flores Galaz, 2023; Peluffo, 2018). Paralelamente, obstáculos en el desarrollo profesional –incluyendo carencias en mentoría, redes de contacto y reconocimiento de logros– se agravan por problemas de gestión del tiempo y trámites burocráticos, reportados por un 62.9% y 48.4% de las participantes, respectivamente, y una barrera idiomática señalada por el 37.1% (Mena Ordoñez y Arias-Santana, 2020). Las observaciones, extraídas de estudios en México, Bolivia, Brasil, Perú y Costa Rica, muestran que la interacción de estas barreras limita el avance de las mujeres en la investigación, aunque se identifican algunos indicadores de progreso en contextos específicos. Paper search Using your research question ”¿Cuáles son los principales desafíos que enfrentan las mujeres científicas en Latinoamérica para avanzar en sus carreras de investigación?”, we searched across over 126 million academic papers from the Semantic Scholar corpus. We retrieved the 50 papers most relevant to the query. Screening We screened in papers that met these criteria: • Study Population Location: Does the study focus on women scientists/researchers working in Latin American institutions? • Career Focus: Does the study examine career progression, professional development, or career chal- lenges in scientific research? • Study Type: Is the study either a primary research study (qualitative, quantitative, or mixed meth- ods) OR a systematic review/meta-analysis? • Barrier Analysis: Does the study examine institutional, social, cultural, or structural barriers in scientific careers? • Institutional Setting: Does the study involve academic or research institutions? 1

• Career Stage: Does the study include participants beyond the undergraduate level AND address career progression (not just education)? • Empirical Evidence: Does the study present empirical data (not just opinions or editorial content)? • Geographic Scope: Does the study focus exclusively on Latin American contexts (not including other regions)? We considered all screening questions together and made a holistic judgement about whether to screen in each paper. Data extraction We asked a large language model to extract each data column below from each paper. We gave the model the extraction instructions shown below for each column. • Research Methodology: Identify and describe the specific research methodology used in the study: • Classify the type of methodology (e.g., qualitative, quantitative, mixed methods) • If qualitative, specify the approach (e.g., feminist qualitative, anthropological) • Describe any specific methodological frameworks or theoretical perspectives used • Note any unique methodological characteristics If multiple methodological approaches are used, list all of them. If the methodology is not clearly stated, write ”Not clearly specified” and provide any contextual details found in the text. • Data Collection Methods: Specify the primary methods used to collect data: • List all data collection techniques (e.g., interviews, surveys, statistical analysis) • For interviews, note: – Number of participants interviewed – Type of interview (e.g., in-depth, semi-structured) – Participant selection criteria • For surveys or statistical analyses, note: – Sample size – Sampling method – Key variables measured If multiple data collection methods were used, list them all. If details are incomplete, note what information is missing. • Participant Demographics: Extract detailed information about study participants: • Professional category (e.g., university researchers, academic staff) • Gender composition • Age range • Academic disciplines or areas of expertise • Institutional affliation 2

• Professional experience level Provide specific numbers or percentages where available. If demographic details are incomplete, specify what information is missing. • Institutional and Geographical Context: Describe the specific context of the study: • Name of the institution(s) • Geographical location (country, region) • Type of institution (public/private university) • Specific academic or research environment If multiple contexts are discussed, list them all. If context is not fully detailed, note any available contextual information. • Primary Challenges for Women Scientists: Systematically extract the main challenges identified in the study: • List specific barriers to career advancement • Categorize challenges (e.g., institutional, social, personal) • Note any quantitative or qualitative evidence supporting these challenges • Highlight any intersectional aspects of these challenges If challenges are not explicitly categorized, organize them based on the context provided in the study. If information is fragmented, synthesize the key themes. • Key Research Findings: Summarize the primary findings of the study: • Identify main conclusions about women's experiences in scientific careers • Extract any statistical or qualitative evidence supporting these conclusions • Note any recommendations or proposed solutions • Highlight any unique or unexpected insights If findings are complex, break them down into distinct themes or categories. If conclusions are not clearly stated, extract the most relevant interpretative statements from the study. Results Characteristics of Included Studies Study Study Location Institution Type Sample Size Research Focus Full text retrieved Balda Cabello, 2024 Bolivia Public research agency (ABEN) No mention found Gender representation in nuclear energy research Yes 3

Study Study Location Institution Type Sample Size Research Focus Full text retrieved Carrillo Espadas and Flores Galaz, 2023 Yucatán, Mexico Various (research centers, universities) 152 women Career trajectories and challenges of women scientists Yes Estébanez, 2007 Latin America (multiple countries) Regional universities No mention found Women's participation in university research systems No Lima, 2013 Brazil No mention found No mention found Challenges for women in physics careers No Mata Puente, 2023 Mexico (San Luis Potosí) Academic institutions, research centers 12 women Experiences of women researchers in leadership roles Yes Mena Ordoñez and Arias-Santana, 2020 Tacna, Peru Public and private universities 186 women Barriers and opportunities for women in scientific research Yes Peluffo, 2018 Costa Rica Public university (UCR) 14 women Academic career progression of women faculty No Pérez Robles et al., 2021 Mexico Public research institutions 195 women (15 interviews, 180 surveys) Social challenges for women in scientific careers No Sánchez Jasso et al., 2016 Mexico Public university (UAEMéx) 14 (8 women, 6 men) Gender inequalities in scientific careers Yes Torrado Martín- Palomino and Ramos, 2017 Spain Universities and research centers Over 700 Gender inequalities and cooperation networks in scientific careers Yes Analysis of the included studies: 4

• Study Locations : – 4 studies were conducted in Mexico – Other studies were distributed across Bolivia, Brazil, Peru, and Costa Rica – 1 study covered multiple Latin American countries – 1 study was conducted in Spain • Institution Types : – 4 studies focused on universities – 3 studies included various institutions (universities and research centers) – 2 studies focused on public research agencies/institutions – 1 study did not provide specific institution information in the available abstract or full text • Sample Sizes : – Sample size information was available for 7 out of 10 studies – 5 studies had women-only samples – 1 study had a mixed-gender sample – 1 study did not specify gender composition – Sample sizes ranged from 12 to over 700 participants – Sample size information was not found in the available abstracts or full texts for 3 studies • Research Focus : – 3 studies examined challenges for women in scientific careers – 2 studies focused on gender inequalities – 2 studies investigated career trajectories or progression – Other focuses included participation, gender representation, leadership, barriers and opportunities, and cooperation networks in scientific careers Thematic Analysis Institutional Barriers The reviewed studies consistently highlight significant institutional barriers that women scientists in Latin America face in advancing their research careers. These barriers manifest in various forms across different academic and research settings: 1. Gender discrimination in academia : Multiple studies report persistent gender discrimination within academic and research institutions. In the abstract of Estébanez (2007), we found mention of institu- tional practices that devalue women's contributions, despite increased participation in higher education and scientific careers. This discrimination is often subtle and embedded in institutional cultures, cre- ating what is commonly referred to as ”glass ceilings” or invisible barriers to advancement. 2. Limited access to leadership positions : Underrepresentation of women in high-level decision-making roles is a recurring theme across studies. Balda Cabello (2024) reports that women are underrepre- sented in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) fields and particularly in higher decision-making levels. Similarly, Torrado Martín-Palomino and Ramos (2017) find that women occupy only 21% of high-ranking academic positions in their study context. 5

3. Funding and resource disparities : Several studies point to inequities in access to funding and resources. Mena Ordoñez and Arias-Santana (2020) identify limited competitive funding as a significant barrier for women scientists. 4. Lack of gender-sensitive policies : The absence of institutional policies that account for the unique challenges faced by women is highlighted in multiple studies. In the abstract of Peluffo (2018), we found mention that academic regulations are often not gender-sensitive, which poses a significant barrier for women. 5. Evaluation and recognition systems : Biases in evaluation and recognition systems are noted as insti- tutional barriers. Carrillo Espadas and Flores Galaz (2023) report that women face challenges related to invisibility and lack of recognition for their contributions. It's important to note that while these institutional barriers are prevalent, some studies also report progress. Balda Cabello (2024) reports that the Agencia Boliviana de Energía Nuclear (ABEN) shows progress in gender balance in some leadership roles, though the extent and nature of this progress were not specified in the available information. This suggests that targeted institutional efforts can lead to positive changes, although broader systemic challenges remain. Sociocultural Challenges The studies reveal that women scientists in Latin America face significant sociocultural challenges that impact their career progression. These challenges are deeply rooted in cultural norms, societal expectations, and gender stereotypes prevalent in the region: 1. Gender stereotypes in STEM : Several studies highlight the persistence of gender stereotypes, particu- larly in STEM fields. Sánchez Jasso et al. (2016) emphasize that stereotypes and cultural expectations continue to hinder women's progress in scientific careers. 2. Work-life balance : The challenge of balancing professional and personal life emerges as a significant theme across multiple studies. Carrillo Espadas and Flores Galaz (2023) identify work-life balance as a major challenge for women scientists. 3. Family responsibilities : Closely related to work-life balance, the impact of family responsibilities on women's scientific careers is a recurring theme. In the abstract of Peluffo (2018), we found mention that caregiving responsibilities significantly hinder women's career progression. Mena Ordoñez and Arias-Santana (2020) report that household chores and family-related issues are major barriers for women scientists. 4. Cultural expectations : Broader cultural expectations regarding women's roles in society significantly influence their scientific careers. Mata Puente (2023) identifies cultural obstacles as a primary challenge affecting both professional and personal lives of women scientists. 5. Social perceptions of women in leadership : As women advance in their careers, they face unique sociocultural challenges in leadership positions. Mata Puente (2023) introduces the concept of ”élites discriminadas,” where women in leadership roles face distinct challenges due to gender biases. 6. Networking and professional relationships : Several studies highlight challenges related to networking and professional relationships. Torrado Martín-Palomino and Ramos (2017) note that women's partici- pation in professional networks is lower than men's, which may contribute to their underrepresentation in influential positions. 6

It's important to note that these sociocultural challenges are not uniform across all contexts. The studies re- veal variations based on factors such as specific disciplines, institutional settings, and individual experiences. Professional Development Obstacles The studies reveal several key obstacles to professional development that women scientists in Latin America face throughout their careers. These obstacles intersect with institutional and sociocultural challenges, creating complex barriers to career advancement: 1. Career advancement limitations : Multiple studies highlight the diffculties women face in advancing to higher academic ranks and leadership positions. In the abstract of Peluffo (2018), we found mention that only a small number of women reach the rank of full professor. In the abstract of Lima (2013), we found mention of challenges for women in physics in achieving prestigious and powerful positions. 2. Mentorship and networking gaps : The lack of adequate mentorship and networking opportunities emerges as a significant obstacle. Torrado Martín-Palomino and Ramos (2017) emphasize the impor- tance of cooperation networks and mentorship as tools to support women in science, noting that these are often lacking. 3. Recognition and visibility issues : Several studies point to challenges related to recognition and visi- bility of women's scientific contributions. Carrillo Espadas and Flores Galaz (2023) highlight issues of invisibility and lack of recognition as significant barriers. 4. Funding and resource allocation : Access to funding and resources is identified as a crucial obstacle. Mena Ordoñez and Arias-Santana (2020) report that low income and limited competitive funds are significant barriers for women scientists. 5. Time management and workload : The challenge of managing time and workload emerges as a signif- icant obstacle, often exacerbated by family responsibilities. Mena Ordoñez and Arias-Santana (2020) identify lack of time as a major barrier, with 62.9% of women in their study citing this issue. 6. Language and international engagement : Some studies highlight language barriers as an obstacle to professional development. Mena Ordoñez and Arias-Santana (2020) note that 37.1% of women in their study indicated a lack of proficiency in another language as a limitation. 7. Bureaucratic hurdles : Administrative and bureaucratic challenges are identified as obstacles to pro- fessional development. Mena Ordoñez and Arias-Santana (2020) report that 48.4% of women in their study cite bureaucratic hurdles as a significant barrier. 8. Self-perception and confidence : Some studies touch on the internal obstacles women face, such as self-doubt and lack of confidence. Mata Puente (2023) highlights the importance of personal drive and self-recognition in overcoming barriers, suggesting that internal factors play a role alongside external obstacles. It's important to note that these professional development obstacles are not isolated challenges but are often interconnected and compounded by institutional and sociocultural factors. The studies also reveal that these obstacles can vary in intensity and nature across different career stages, disciplines, and institutional contexts. Regional Patterns and Variations 7

Country/Region Primary Challenges Support Systems Progress Indicators Bolivia Underrepresentation in STEM and decision-making roles Active efforts to change institutional culture Gender balance in some leadership roles at ABEN Mexico (Yucatán) Invisibility, lack of recognition, work-life balance No mention found Women represent 34.9% of the scientific community Latin America (general) ”Glass ceilings” limiting access to prestigious positions No mention found 41% of people in science and technology are women Brazil Challenges in achieving prestigious positions in physics No mention found No mention found Mexico (San Luis Potosí) Cultural obstacles, balancing professional and personal roles Support networks, strategic negotiation Women in leadership roles, but facing unique challenges Peru (Tacna) Household responsibilities, lack of time, low income Institutional funding, inclusion of teaching hours Married women aged 40-59 more productive in research Costa Rica Caregiving responsibilities, lack of gender-sensitive policies No mention found Few women reach full professor rank Mexico (national) Gender stereotypes, family responsibilities creating ”glass ceiling” No mention found No mention found Mexico (Estado de México) Underrepresentation, gender stereotypes, work-life balance No mention found Women make up 36% of Sistema Nacional de Investigadores members Spain Underrepresentation in higher academic positions, networking challenges Cooperation networks and mentorship (recommended) Women occupy 21% of high-ranking academic positions Analysis of regional patterns and variations: • Primary Challenges : – Underrepresentation and work-life balance were the most common challenges, each mentioned in 3 studies – Glass ceiling and stereotypes were each mentioned in 2 studies – Other challenges, such as invisibility, lack of recognition, and networking diffculties, were each mentioned in 1 study • Support Systems : – Information on support systems was not found in the available abstracts or full texts for 6 out of 10 studies 8

– Networks were mentioned as a support system in 2 studies – Other support systems, such as institutional culture change, negotiation, funding, and mentorship, were each mentioned in 1 study • Progress Indicators : – Percentage of women in science or scientific institutions was the most common progress indicator, mentioned in 3 studies – Women in leadership roles was mentioned in 2 studies – Progress indicators were not found in the available abstracts or full texts for 2 studies – Other indicators, such as research productivity and percentage in high-ranking positions, were each mentioned in 1 study The data suggests that while women in STEM in Latin America and Spain face various challenges, par- ticularly underrepresentation and work-life balance issues, there are some support systems in place and progress being made in terms of representation in scientific communities and leadership roles. However, the lack of information on support systems in many studies indicates a potential area for further research or implementation of support structures. References Adriana Mata Puente. “LAS MUJERES CIENTÍFICAS Y ACADÉMICAS: UN CAMINO CON MÚLTI- PLES DESAFÍOS.” Tlatemoani: Revista Académica de Investigación, 2023. Ana Karen Sánchez Jasso, Elva Rivera Gómez, and J. J. Orozco. “Desigualdades de Género En Ciencia, El Caso de Las Científicas de La UAEMéx,” 2016. B. S. Lima. “O Labirinto de Cristal: As Trajetórias Das Cientistas Na Física,” 2013. Esther Torrado Martín-Palomino, and A. Ramos. “Redes de Cooperación: Una Herramienta Para Minimizar Las Desigualdades de Género En La Ciencia,” 2017. Karina Pérez Robles, Elizabeth Trujillo Ubaldo, Adriana Reynaud, and María del Refugio Navarro Hernán- dez. “MUJERES EN LA CIENCIA: ESTUDIO DE CASO EN INSTITUCIONES PÚBLICAS DE MÉX- ICO.” Textual, 2021. María Elina Estébanez. “Género e Investigación Científica En Las Universidades Latinoamericanas,” 2007. Nelly Balda Cabello. “Mujeres En La Política Científica Del Estado Plurinacional de Bolivia.” Journal de Comunicación Social, 2024. Paulina Isabel Carrillo Espadas, and Mirta Margarita Flores Galaz. “Mujeres Científicas En Yucatán: Ob- stáculos, Retos y Experiencias Durante Sus Trayectorias Educativas.” Revista Latinoamericana de Estu- dios Educativos, 2023. S. Peluffo. “Carreras Académicas de Mujeres En La Universidad de Costa Rica: Un Reto Para La Igualdad.” Actualidades Investigativas En Educación, 2018. Sissy Soledad Mena Ordoñez, and Victor Alfonso Arias-Santana. “Enfoque de Género.” REVISTA VERITAS ET SCIENTIA - UPT, 2020. 9