Critical ReviewOther Social Sciences
The STEM Gender Gap: Structural Barriers and Inclusion Strategies in the Global South
Women remain underrepresented in STEM worldwide, but the barriers vary significantly by context. Studies from South Africa, Pakistan, and Nigeria reveal how socio-cultural norms, institutional structures, and early educational experiences interact to sustain the gap—and where interventions show promise.
By Sean K.S. Shin
This blog summarizes research trends based on published paper abstracts. Specific numbers or findings may contain inaccuracies. For scholarly rigor, always consult the original papers cited in each post.
Women constitute roughly 28% of the global STEM workforce—a number that has improved only incrementally over decades of advocacy and intervention. In the Global South, the gap is often wider, shaped by the intersection of gender inequality with poverty, cultural norms, institutional constraints, and post-colonial educational structures. Understanding these context-specific barriers is essential for designing interventions that actually work.
The Research Landscape
South Africa
Sibisi and Lefalatsa (2025), with 1 citation, examine the STEM gender gap in South Africa, where persistent underrepresentation of women is influenced by overlapping factors:
- Socio-cultural norms: Traditional gender roles that associate STEM fields with masculinity persist despite progressive constitutional provisions on gender equality.
- Educational barriers: Girls in under-resourced schools (disproportionately serving Black communities) have less access to quality science and mathematics instruction, laboratory facilities, and digital resources.
- Workplace inequality: Women who enter STEM fields face discrimination in hiring, promotion, and research funding, with particularly acute barriers at senior levels.
- Intersectionality: The experience of Black women in South African STEM differs qualitatively from that of white women—compounding racial and gender disadvantage in ways that single-axis analysis misses.
The review identifies interventions that show evidence of effectiveness: mentorship programs connecting girls with women in STEM careers, scholarship programs that address financial barriers, and institutional policies that address workplace culture rather than only individual skills.
Pakistan
Bano and Yaseen (2025) examine structural and psychological barriers in Pakistan, where women's STEM participation is among the lowest in the region. Their analysis identifies barriers at multiple levels:
- Family: Families may discourage girls from STEM education, viewing it as unnecessary for their expected domestic roles or as incompatible with cultural expectations about female behavior.
- Educational institutions: Gender-segregated education (common in Pakistan) limits girls' access to STEM facilities and role models. Mixed-gender institutions that exist may have hostile environments for female students.
- Labor market: Even women who complete STEM education face limited employment opportunities due to employer discrimination, cultural constraints on mobility, and harassment in male-dominated workplaces.
- Psychological: Stereotype threat, imposter syndrome, and internalized gender norms reduce confidence and persistence among women in STEM, even when external barriers are reduced.
Nigeria
Madu (2024), with 2 citations, provides quantitative evidence of gender imbalance in Nigerian STEM programs, documenting enrollment and completion rates by gender across engineering, computer science, and basic science programs. The data reveals:
- Female enrollment in engineering programs is below 20% at most Nigerian universities.
- Completion rates for women who do enroll are higher than for men—suggesting that the primary barrier is entry, not capability.
- Regional variation is substantial: universities in southern Nigeria show higher female STEM participation than those in the north, reflecting differences in cultural norms and educational access.
Early Intervention
Cotino-Arbelo, Molina-Gil, and González-González (2025), with 1 citation, shift the focus to early childhood, examining computational thinking and AI literacy among preschoolers. Their gender-based analysis reveals that at age 4-5, girls and boys show similar interest and aptitude in computational activities—but teacher expectations and classroom interactions already begin to channel boys toward technology and girls toward other activities.
This finding supports the argument that gender disparities in STEM are constructed through early socialization rather than reflecting innate differences. If interest is equal in early childhood but diverges by school age, the divergence is produced by educational and social environments, not by biology.
Critical Analysis: Claims and Evidence
<
| Claim | Evidence | Verdict |
|---|
| Socio-cultural norms are a primary barrier to women's STEM participation in the Global South | Multiple studies from South Africa, Pakistan, Nigeria | ✅ Supported — consistent across contexts |
| Women who enter STEM have equal or higher completion rates than men | Madu's Nigerian enrollment data | ✅ Supported — barrier is entry, not persistence |
| Gender interest gaps in STEM are absent in early childhood | Cotino-Arbelo et al.'s preschool study | ✅ Supported — equal interest at age 4-5 |
| Mentorship programs improve girls' STEM participation | Sibisi et al.'s review of interventions | ⚠️ Uncertain — evidence is positive but most studies lack rigorous controls |
Open Questions
Scalable interventions: Mentorship and scholarship programs work but are resource-intensive. What interventions can reach millions of girls in under-resourced contexts?Cultural sensitivity: Interventions designed in Western contexts may not translate to societies with different gender norms. How should programs be adapted without imposing external values?Retention, not just entry: Getting women into STEM is necessary but insufficient if workplace cultures drive them out. What institutional changes improve retention?Intersectional approaches: How should interventions address the compound disadvantages faced by women who are also from marginalized racial, ethnic, or economic groups?What This Means for Your Research
For education policymakers, the finding that gender interest divergence begins in early childhood suggests that intervention before school age—not just at university entry—is critical.
For STEM education researchers, the Global South literature reveals barrier structures that differ from Northern contexts and require context-specific analysis.
Explore related work through ORAA ResearchBrain.
Women constitute roughly 28% of the global STEM workforce—a number that has improved only incrementally over decades of advocacy and intervention. In the Global South, the gap is often wider, shaped by the intersection of gender inequality with poverty, cultural norms, institutional constraints, and post-colonial educational structures. Understanding these context-specific barriers is essential for designing interventions that actually work.
The Research Landscape
South Africa
Sibisi and Lefalatsa (2025), with 1 citation, examine the STEM gender gap in South Africa, where persistent underrepresentation of women is influenced by overlapping factors:
- Socio-cultural norms: Traditional gender roles that associate STEM fields with masculinity persist despite progressive constitutional provisions on gender equality.
- Educational barriers: Girls in under-resourced schools (disproportionately serving Black communities) have less access to quality science and mathematics instruction, laboratory facilities, and digital resources.
- Workplace inequality: Women who enter STEM fields face discrimination in hiring, promotion, and research funding, with particularly acute barriers at senior levels.
- Intersectionality: The experience of Black women in South African STEM differs qualitatively from that of white women—compounding racial and gender disadvantage in ways that single-axis analysis misses.
The review identifies interventions that show evidence of effectiveness: mentorship programs connecting girls with women in STEM careers, scholarship programs that address financial barriers, and institutional policies that address workplace culture rather than only individual skills.
Pakistan
Bano and Yaseen (2025) examine structural and psychological barriers in Pakistan, where women's STEM participation is among the lowest in the region. Their analysis identifies barriers at multiple levels:
- Family: Families may discourage girls from STEM education, viewing it as unnecessary for their expected domestic roles or as incompatible with cultural expectations about female behavior.
- Educational institutions: Gender-segregated education (common in Pakistan) limits girls' access to STEM facilities and role models. Mixed-gender institutions that exist may have hostile environments for female students.
- Labor market: Even women who complete STEM education face limited employment opportunities due to employer discrimination, cultural constraints on mobility, and harassment in male-dominated workplaces.
- Psychological: Stereotype threat, imposter syndrome, and internalized gender norms reduce confidence and persistence among women in STEM, even when external barriers are reduced.
Nigeria
Madu (2024), with 2 citations, provides quantitative evidence of gender imbalance in Nigerian STEM programs, documenting enrollment and completion rates by gender across engineering, computer science, and basic science programs. The data reveals:
- Female enrollment in engineering programs is below 20% at most Nigerian universities.
- Completion rates for women who do enroll are higher than for men—suggesting that the primary barrier is entry, not capability.
- Regional variation is substantial: universities in southern Nigeria show higher female STEM participation than those in the north, reflecting differences in cultural norms and educational access.
Early Intervention
Cotino-Arbelo, Molina-Gil, and González-González (2025), with 1 citation, shift the focus to early childhood, examining computational thinking and AI literacy among preschoolers. Their gender-based analysis reveals that at age 4-5, girls and boys show similar interest and aptitude in computational activities—but teacher expectations and classroom interactions already begin to channel boys toward technology and girls toward other activities.
This finding supports the argument that gender disparities in STEM are constructed through early socialization rather than reflecting innate differences. If interest is equal in early childhood but diverges by school age, the divergence is produced by educational and social environments, not by biology.
Critical Analysis: Claims and Evidence
<
| Claim | Evidence | Verdict |
|---|
| Socio-cultural norms are a primary barrier to women's STEM participation in the Global South | Multiple studies from South Africa, Pakistan, Nigeria | ✅ Supported — consistent across contexts |
| Women who enter STEM have equal or higher completion rates than men | Madu's Nigerian enrollment data | ✅ Supported — barrier is entry, not persistence |
| Gender interest gaps in STEM are absent in early childhood | Cotino-Arbelo et al.'s preschool study | ✅ Supported — equal interest at age 4-5 |
| Mentorship programs improve girls' STEM participation | Sibisi et al.'s review of interventions | ⚠️ Uncertain — evidence is positive but most studies lack rigorous controls |
Open Questions
Scalable interventions: Mentorship and scholarship programs work but are resource-intensive. What interventions can reach millions of girls in under-resourced contexts?Cultural sensitivity: Interventions designed in Western contexts may not translate to societies with different gender norms. How should programs be adapted without imposing external values?Retention, not just entry: Getting women into STEM is necessary but insufficient if workplace cultures drive them out. What institutional changes improve retention?Intersectional approaches: How should interventions address the compound disadvantages faced by women who are also from marginalized racial, ethnic, or economic groups?What This Means for Your Research
For education policymakers, the finding that gender interest divergence begins in early childhood suggests that intervention before school age—not just at university entry—is critical.
For STEM education researchers, the Global South literature reveals barrier structures that differ from Northern contexts and require context-specific analysis.
Explore related work through ORAA ResearchBrain.
References (4)
[1] Sibisi, N., Jokazi, S., & Lefalatsa, L. (2025). Gender disparities in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM): A review of challenges and inclusion strategies in South Africa. Perspectives in Education, 43(4).
[2] Bano, S., Shah, H., & Yaseen, M. (2025). Structural and Psychological Barriers to Women's Engagement in STEM Fields: A Study in the Pakistani Context. Academic Journal.
[3] Madu, C.O. (2024). Gender Imbalance in STEM Programs in Nigeria. Path of Science, 109.
[4] Cotino-Arbelo, A.E., Molina-Gil, J., & González-González, C. (2025). Computational Thinking and AI Literacy: A Gender-Based Analysis Among Early Learners. Proc. IEEE EDUCON 2025.