Breaking barriers: Why more women in STEM requires more than just policy
We believe in the transformative power of science.
And that is why we advocate for inclusion.
On February 14, 2025, our roundtable on “Breaking high-school barriers: Empowering girls to envision themselves in STEM” gathered scientists, executives, and educators to confront an uncomfortable reality: despite decades of initiatives, women remain significantly underrepresented in STEM.
The early roots of gender gaps in STEM
In her opening remarks, Lidia Brito (UNESCO) laid out a stark reality: the gender gap in science doesn’t begin in the workforce it starts in childhood. “Biases take root at a very young age,” she explained. “From the toys they play with to the books they read, subtle messages reinforce gendered expectations.” A boy might receive a construction set or a science kit, encouraging problem-solving and experimentation. A girl, on the other hand, is more likely to be given a doll or toys focused on caregiving roles. These early experiences shape how children see themselves, and what they believe they are capable of achieving.
By high school, the effect is clear. Many girls have already internalized the idea that STEM is not “for them.” As Brito said, this is the critical moment when young women decide whether they see themselves belonging in science or whether they walk away.
Lidia Brito, Assistant Director-General for Natural Sciences at UNESCO
It’s not just about fairness. It’s about lost potential.
Science thrives on diversity. But today, women hold only one-third of STEM jobs worldwide. In some countries, that number drops below 10%. In France, the gender gap in math-heavy careers remains particularly stark. The French Court of Accounts recently criticized the inefficiency of €3.3 billion allocated to gender balance policies funding that has failed to reverse these trends.
So what are we missing?
The elephant in the room
We often discuss stereotypes, self-confidence, and lack of role models as barriers to women in STEM. But during our panel, Elisabeth Richard (Femmes@Numérique) introduced a sobering reality, one that rarely makes it into policy discussions.
Violence.
Richard shared an alarming statistic: one in seven children in France is a victim of sexual violence. How does this relate to STEM? Because survivors of sexual violence, particularly girls, are less likely to pursue male-dominated fields If their early experiences in mixed-gender environments were shaped by trauma, they may unconsciously steer away from careers that require navigating similar spaces. This is not a minor issue. It is a systemic failure, and it is shaping the career choices of young women long before they ever sit in a math classroom.
This is not to say that violence is the sole reason for the gender gap in STEM. But it is an undeniable “elephant in the room,” one that remains largely absent from mainstream debates about gender diversity in science. Addressing it means ensuring safe spaces in schools, universities, and workplaces. It means rethinking policies not just for recruitment but for the environments in which women must work and learn.
From left to right: Elisabeth Richard, Board Member of the Fondation Femmes@Numérique and Capital Filles, Director of Civil Society Relations at ENGIE, and Member of the Haut Conseil à l’Égalité; Anne-Laure Sellier, Professor of Behavioral Sciences at HEC Paris.
The impact of bias, and why we need to start younger
While Richard introduced the systemic impact of violence, Maud Tournoud (Schneider Electric) pointed to another key issue: gender stereotypes take root long before career choices are made.
Citing research on stereotype threat, Tournoud described a study where girls and boys performed equally on a math test, until they were told in advance that the test was “difficult.” The moment they were primed with the idea that they might struggle, the girls’ scores dropped.
This isn’t about ability. It’s about belief.
Karine Vasselin (Capgemini) built on this point, explaining that stereotypes are so deeply ingrained that many young women simply do not see themselves in tech careers. “For 25 years, I’ve been trying to explain to my own mother what I do at Capgemini, and she still doesn’t understand!” Vasselin joked. “If even adults struggle to understand these fields, how can we expect 15-year-olds to confidently choose them?” To address this, Capgemini launched a two-week internship program designed to expose high school students, particularly girls, to STEM careers. They set a minimum quota of 60% female students to ensure diverse participation and provide concrete, immersive experiences with technology.
From left to right: Karine Vasselin, Group Diversity & Inclusion Lead at Capgemini; Maud Tournoud, AI Hub Data Science Manager at Schneider Electric.
Imagining a new future for STEM
One of the most discussed topics in the panel was the importance of representation and role models.
Charlotte Laclau (Télécom Paris) emphasized that bias in STEM doesn’t just exist in hiring—it starts in education. She shared her experience working on algorithmic fairness, revealing that AI biases are not inherent to technology, but rather a reflection of the biases in human-generated data. “If we want to reduce bias in AI, we also need to address bias at the human level,” she noted. This realization led her to engage more directly with young students, working to introduce STEM to high schoolers in a way that feels inclusive, exciting, and accessible.
However, Laclau also identified another systemic flaw: young people are asked to specialize too early. At 15, they must make decisions that lock them into specific career paths, reinforcing gendered choices. Instead, she advocated for keeping options open longer, allowing students to develop their interests before making long-term academic commitments.
Ariane Thomas (L’Oréal) emphasized the power of storytelling. She reminded us of the impact of the L’Oréal-UNESCO For Women in Science program, which has highlighted over 4,400 female scientists and produced seven Nobel Prize winners.
Visibility matters.
Young girls need to see women thriving in STEM, not just in textbooks but in media, advertising, and everyday life. Anne-Laure Sellier (HEC Paris) posed a critical question: “If we want to multiply the frequency of young girls interacting with positive scientific role models, could AI help?” Could AI be used to create non-sexualized avatars, making STEM more accessible and engaging for young girls? Could virtual environments help combat bias before it even begins? These are big questions, but they reflect an emerging consensus: the tools we need to drive change may already be at our disposal.
From left to right: Anne-Laure Sellier, Professor of Behavioral Sciences at HEC Paris; Charlotte Laclau, Professor of Machine Learning at Télécom Paris.
Quotas, safe spaces, and systemic change
No discussion about gender in STEM is complete without addressing the controversial topic of quotas. Elisabeth Richard argued in favor, citing the success of corporate quotas in increasing female leadership.“If we don’t set measurable targets, we’ll be having this same discussion in 20 years.”
Ariane Thomas disagreed, emphasizing that diversity is broader than just gender and questioning whether forced quotas could unintentionally reinforce bias. Instead, she argued for structural changes that make STEM more attractive and accessible to all.
But beyond quotas, one proposal emerged as a potential game-changer: safe spaces.
Richard suggested that “elite institutions should publicly commit to creating environments where young women feel secure.” In industry, companies like L’Oréal and Schneider Electric have implemented robust anti-harassment policies. Could universities follow suit? Could we market STEM programs as places where women will not just succeed but feel safe doing so?
From left to right: Anne-Laure Sellier, Professor of Behavioral Sciences at HEC Paris; Ariane Thomas, Global Tech Director of Sustainability at L’Oréal; Maud Tournoud, AI Hub Data Science Manager at Schneider Electric.
A call to action
As the discussion came to a close, Sellier posed a final challenge: “If you had one minute to convince a 15-year-old girl to pursue STEM, what would you say?”
Maud highlighted flexibility. A technical background doesn’t lock you into one path, it opens doors to careers in management, entrepreneurship, research, and beyond. Karine reminded us that it’s never too late. With returnship programs and upskilling initiatives, women can transition into STEM even after career breaks. Ariane argued that confidence is key. “The earlier we expose girls to STEM, the more they will believe they belong.”
So where do we go from here?
This conversation made one thing clear: we don’t just need more initiatives. We need systemic change. We need to rethink early education, breaking gendered stereotypes before they take hold. We need safe environments that encourage women to pursue STEM careers without fear. We need more visibility for women in science, not just in academic circles but in public spaces, advertising, and the media.
And most importantly, we need to recognize the invisible barriers that have been holding women back for generations, the biases, the perceptions, and the unspoken realities that shape career choices long before they are made.
Science needs women. Not as a matter of diversity. But as a matter of excellence.
Because when we break barriers, we don’t just create more opportunities for women.
We create better science.