The study of gender equality in Italian universities reveals a history of ambition and ongoing challenges. In Italy, universities must adopt both a gender equality plan (GEP) and a gender equality budget in order to receive funding from the National Recovery and Resilience Plan (PNRR) - a requirement that aligns national priorities with European standards. At the University of Genoa, equality and inclusion have been part of the campus culture long before formal GEPs existed. Staff and students benefit from supportive policies such as subsidised childcare, summer camps, support funds for parents and even a dual student card for transgender students. Telecommuting policies, anti-harassment codes of conduct, and special offices such as the Committee on Uniformity Guarantee (CUG) and the Committee on Equal Opportunity (CPO) demonstrate a commitment to a fair and safe academic environment. These bodies, together with the Vice-Chancellor’s Equal Opportunities Officer, oversee the positive action plans and budget for equality issues and ensure that initiatives are strategic and effective. However, progress is not without its hurdles. Gender equality initiatives are often at the interface between general structural objectives and specific positive action measures. While targeted measures can bring about change, they alone cannot change entrenched norms and practices. Evidence from Italy and international programmes such as Athena Swan highlights a persistent problem: The extra work required to implement GEPs often comes at the expense of women, who receive little professional recognition despite their contribution. While work-life balance programmes are important, they are not enough to drive the systemic change needed for true equality. Italy’s strengths lie in its co-operative and integrated approach. Mandatory CUGs in all public institutions create strong local and sectoral networks that enable universities to share best practice, coordinate training, and harmonise Positive Action Plans. International networks that have emerged from EU projects provide further inspiration, although customisation to local circumstances, such as national recruitment regulations, is crucial. Innovative measures such as support for students undergoing gender transition show how Italian universities are driving inclusion beyond formal compliance. The way forward remains complex. Implementing GEPs requires resources, staff and careful planning. Training on unconscious bias needs to be tailored to the academic context, and workload distribution needs to be monitored to avoid inequality. The Italian experience may offer a compelling template: the combination of structured planning, proactive engagement, and networked collaboration can transform policy into meaningful, sustainable change.

1. Rita Bencivenga
Researcher & Lecturer in inclusive science
Tracing Italian GEPs: positive action
plans and other pathways
Gender Equality Plan

2. License / Licence / Licenza: creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
English
This material is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0
International License (CC BY 4.0).
You are free to share and adapt it, provided that clear attribution is given
to Rita Bencivenga and a link to the source is included.
Français
Ce matériel est mis à disposition sous Licence Creative Commons
Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0).
Vous êtes autorisé·et à le partager et l’adapter, à condition d’attribuer
clairement la paternité à Rita Bencivenga et d’inclure un lien vers la
source.
Italiano
Questo materiale è rilasciato con Licenza Creative Commons
Attribuzione 4.0 (CC BY 4.0).
È consentito condividerlo e adattarlo, a condizione di attribuirne
chiaramente la paternità a Rita Bencivenga e inserire un link alla fonte.
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

3. Tracing Italian gender
equality plans: positive
action plans and other
pathways
Rita Bencivenga, University of Genoa, Italy
March 2022

4. Italian specificities: GEPs and National
Recovery and Resilience Plan (PNRR) funding
• Access to PNRR funding is granted only to universities, research institutions, and
other public or private entities that have adopted, or commit to adopting within the
first year of the project, both a “Gender Budget” and a “Gender Equality Plan” (GEP),
in line with the prerequisite already required for all Horizon Europe projects.
• (Linee Guida MUR per le iniziative di Sistema della Missione 4 Componente 2. p. 13)
Rita Bencivenga 4

5. UniGE: the GEP starts from the Positive Action Plan
(PAP): a three years document existing since 2011 in all
Italian public bodies
Why? By Law, Public Administrations – including all
Public research organisations and Universities – must
have a Positive Action Plan.
UniGE starting point
PAP GEP
Rita Bencivenga 5

6. Gender equality, inclusion and respect of
diversity in UniGE before the GEP
• Work-life balance: subsidised agreements with infant schools, kindergartens,
summer centres since 2008.
• Since 2015, agreements have been in place with institutions to support
members of staff taking care of individuals who are not self-sufficient.
• All admin staff are offered subsidised access to summer camps and holiday
clubs;
• A parents’ fund has also been set up for specific categories of non-tenured
teaching staff (research scholarship holders, PhD students and ESRs).
• Since 2015, a double student university ID allows students transitioning
gender, upon their request, to obtain a temporary bureaucratic profile and a
student university ID bearing the student’s preferred name.
Rita Bencivenga 6

7. Gender equality, inclusion and respect of
diversity in UniGE before the GEP
• Since 2017, regulations in matters of Remote working for administrative staff
• The Consigliere/a di fiducia (Trusted advisor): since 2017, 3-year mandate. A professional
practitioner: specific support to anyone in the academic community seeking assistance
about harassment and/or mobbing.
• Since 2018, the code of conduct for the prevention of any form of
discrimination, harassment, mobbing in the workplace.
• Two statutory bodies (CUG and CPO) devoted to protecting gender equality
and contrasting discrimination and the periodic plans they provide: the
Positive Action Plan (PAP) 2021-2023 and the Gender Budget (Bilancio di
Genere) 2020.
• The Rector’s Delegate for equal opportunities and inclusion, since 2021.
• Since 2021: the procedure aiming at protecting whistle-blowers.
Rita Bencivenga 7

8. Crossroad between gender mainstreaming and
positive actions.
A key question is: who are GEPs actually addressing? The coexistence of Gender
Mainstreaming (GM) and Positive Action (PA) measures may reinforce the perception
that GEPs concern only part of the academic community.
In some cases there is no will to open decision-making and programmatic spaces to
new visions and to actors who are rarely or never included:
- Gender mainstreaming requires a preparatory phase phase which can ALSO be
constituted by Positive Actions
- But positive actions, alone, do not have the strength to restructure the dominant
ideas, values, practices.
Rita Bencivenga 8

9. Challenges
Analyses of institutional tools for promoting gender equality in academia—such as the Athena Swan Charter
and PAPs—have pointed out some recurring issues:
• the tendency to generate heavy workloads, particularly for female members of GEP working groups (1,2);
• an emphasis on work–life balance (3), which is important but, on its own, insufficient to bring about the
structural change required for effective gender mainstreaming.
1. Caffrey, L., Wyatt, D., Fudge, N., Mattingley, H., Williamson, C., & McKevitt, C. (2016), Gender equity
programmes in academic medicine: A realist evaluation approach to Athena SWAN processes, in BMJ Open,
vol. 6, n. 9, pp. 1-9. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2016-012090
2. Bencivenga, R. (2019), "Gender Equality in Academia: Comparative Perspectives From Feminist
Institutionalism", in P. Paoloni, M. Paoloni, & S. Arduini (eds. by), Proceedings of the 2nd International
Conference on Gender Research ICGR 2019, Roma, Università RomaTre, pp. 66-72.
3. Galizzi, G., & Siboni, B. (2016), Positive action plans in Italian universities: Does gender really matter?, in
Meditari Accountancy Research, vol. 24, n. 2, pp. 246-268. https://doi.org/10.1108/MEDAR-09-2015-0062
Rita Bencivenga 9

10. Italian Specificities and Strengths
• Integrated approach: CUG (Single guarantee committee) and CPO (Equal opportunities
committee) address gender equality, anti-discrimination, well-being, and prevention of
harassment/violence → alignment with Horizon Europe focus on diversity and intersectionality.
• Proactive practices: Some universities already broaden equality to inclusion (e.g., double
student card for transgender students).
• Mandatory CUGs in all public institutions (not only universities) → stronger territorial/sectoral
networking.
• Collaborative networks:
• National Forum of CUGs (Public Administrations).
• Local CUG networks (e.g., Turin, Genoa).
• Sectoral networks (e.g., environmental protection system SNPA).
• Benefits: sharing good practices, coordinated actions on PAPs, work–life balance, training →
greater consistency and stronger impact.
Rita Bencivenga 10

11. Obstacles and gains
COSTS
• Developing and implementing GEPs incurs costs, mainly personnel and operational
expenses.
• For EU-funded projects building GEPs, these costs are partially quantifiable; PAP
costs are mostly personnel-related, but public data are lacking.
• Creating new structures or working groups from scratch is unrealistic within
Commission timelines.
• Existing CUGs and CPOs cannot draft GEPs without additional staff and dedicated
funding for training activities.
• Horizon 2020 project data can provide a rough estimate for training-related costs.
Rita Bencivenga 11

12. Obstacles and gains
NETWORKS
• International networks from EU GEP projects provide a useful resource, though
activation may be challenging.
• Collaborations with research organizations and funders can support training and
knowledge sharing.
• Networking can accelerate GEP development and promote a uniform GEP model
adapted to Italian academia.
• Some EU strategies may be difficult to implement in Italy due to national hiring rules,
but corrective measures are possible.
Rita Bencivenga 12

13. Obstacles and gains
FOCUS ON PAPs
• Starting from PAPs requires careful monitoring across the five Commission-defined
GEP areas.
• Additional effort is needed to design new actions not previously included.
Rita Bencivenga 13

14. Obstacles and gains
UNCONSCIOUS BIAS TRAINING
• EU recommends training for staff on unconscious bias.
• Existing courses are often business-oriented; academic-specific trainers are
needed to adapt content to universities.
Rita Bencivenga 14

15. Obstacles and gains
UNEQUAL WORKLOAD
• Extra work for transforming PAPs into GEPs may fall disproportionately on women.
• Studies (Athena Swan) show practical GEP work often handled by women, risking
gender segregation.
• Italian experience confirms this imbalance, with limited career benefit for women
doing the work.
• Current mechanisms (Athena Swan, CUGs) do not ensure equal distribution of work
or positive career impact.
Rita Bencivenga 15

16. Learn more at:
www.ritabencivenga.it
Follow me on LinkedIn
https://www.linkedin.com/in/rita-bencivenga-147a1915/
QR Code
"Diversity drives innovation – in research, in tech, in society."