REPORT on women and science

22.4.2008 - (2007/2206(INI))

Committee on Women's Rights and Gender Equality
Rapporteur: Britta Thomsen

MOTION FOR A EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT RESOLUTION

on women and science

(2007/2206(INI))

The European Parliament,

– having regard to the Council Resolution of 20 May 1999 on women and science[1],

– having regard to the Council Resolution of 26 June 2001 on science and society and on women in science[2],

– having regard to the Council Resolution of 27 November 2003 on equal access to and participation of women and men in the knowledge society for growth and innovation[3],

– having regard to the Council Conclusions of 18 April 2005 on reinforcing human resources in science and technology in the European Research Area,

– having regard to Decision No 1982/2006/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 December 2006 concerning the Seventh Framework Programme of the European Community for research, technological development and demonstration activities (2007-2013)[4] (FP7),

– having regard to Directive 2002/73/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 September 2002 amending Council Directive 76/207/EEC on the implementation of the principle of equal treatment for men and women as regards access to employment, vocational training and promotion, and working conditions[5],

– having regard to the Commission's Science and Society Action Plan (COM(2001)0714),

– having regard to the Commission staff working document entitled ‘Women and Science: Excellence and Innovation - Gender Equality in Science’ (SEC(2005)0370),

– having regard to the Commission Green Paper entitled ‘The European Research Area: New Perspectives’ (COM(2007)0161) and the Commission staff working document accompanying the above mentioned Green Paper (SEC(2007)0412),

– having regard to its resolution of 3 February 2000 on the communication from the Commission entitled: ‘Women and science - Mobilising women to enrich European research’[6],

– having regard to its resolution of 9 March 2004 on reconciling professional, family and private lives[7],

– having regard to the Commission communication of 1 March 2006 entitled ‘A Roadmap for equality between women and men 2006-2010’ (COM(2006)0092) and to its relevant resolution of 13 March 2007 [8],

– having regard to its resolution of 19 June 2007 on a regulatory framework for measures enabling young women in the European Union to combine family life with a period of studies[9],

– having regard to its resolution of 27 September 2007 on equality between women and men in the European Union - 2007[10],

–   having regard to Rule 45 of its Rules of Procedure,

–   having regard to the report of the Committee on Women's Rights and Gender Equality and the opinion of the Committee on Industry, Research and Energy (A6‑0165/2008),

A. whereas research represents a crucial sector for the economic development of the European Union, and whereas Europe needs to recruit 700 000 additional researchers as part of the fulfilment of the Lisbon strategy for growth and employment,

B.  whereas female researchers are in a minority within the EU, comprising an average of 35% of researchers working in the government and higher education sectors and comprising an average of only 18% of researchers working in the private sector,

C. whereas the percentage of women in the top grades of academia rarely exceeds 20%, and men are three times more likely than women to obtain professorships or their equivalent,

D. whereas sex-disaggregated data on researchers by qualification, field of science and age are still scarcely available even in Member States,

E.  whereas female researchers experience more difficulty in reconciling working and family life than male researchers,

F.  whereas the lack of women in scientific leadership positions remains significant,

G. whereas the representation of women in university decision-making bodies is not high enough for the implementation of a gender-balanced policy,

H. whereas in a majority of countries the share of women on scientific boards has not reached parity,

I.   whereas one of the priority areas for EU action in the above-mentioned Roadmap for equality between women and men 2006-2010 is equal representation in decision making, including a target of 25% of women in leading positions in public-sector research, to be met by 2010,

J.   whereas the European Research Council has not achieved a gender balance with only 5 women out of 22 in the Scientific Council,

K. whereas, even though women make up more than 50% of EU students and achieve 43% of EU doctoral degrees, they hold, on average, only 15% of senior academic posts and thereby have considerably less influence with regard to decision-making positions in research,

L.  whereas the current FP7 does not require mandatory gender action plans for project proposals,

M. whereas studies show that existing systems of evaluation and recruitment are not gender neutral,

1.  Draws the attention of the Member States to the fact that education systems in Europe continue to sustain gender stereotypes, in particular in areas of research such as the natural sciences;

2.  Believes that it is of the utmost importance to promote science as an interesting field for both sexes from early on; urges that this be taken into account when planning educational material and in teacher training; encourages universities and faculties to analyse their entrance selection systems in order to identify possible implicit gender discrimination and correct the selection system accordingly;

3.  Calls on the Commission and Member States to take appropriate measures to ensure that women’s contribution is not excluded in publications on the history of science and technology, not just because this is a clear case of discrimination but also because the absence of role models may harm efforts to increase the presence of women in such fields;

4.  Notes that an excessively high proportion of women scientists give up their careers at some point; considers that this pattern, which has often been described as the ‘leaking pipeline’ model, needs to be analysed on the basis of various models including the ‘push and pull factors’ model; calls on the competent authorities to take account of various factors such as working environment, occupational stereotypes, competition, mobility requirements and family responsibilities when formulating possible solutions;

5.  Notes that the conventional approach to evaluating 'excellence' and 'performance', inter alia as regards number of publications, may not be gender neutral, but is restrictive and fails to take account of the resources available, such as funds, space, equipment and staff, and of the qualities essential in any researcher, such as the ability to organise and hold together a research team or to train young members of the team;

6.  Calls on the Commission and the Member States to take due account, in the definitions of excellence and a 'good researcher', of the differences between male and female scientific careers; stresses that female researchers also contribute to the world of research with different perspectives and choices of research topics;

7.  Regrets that the breaks women take in scientific careers for family reasons have a negative impact on their career opportunities, as most male colleagues do not take breaks and thus can achieve comparative positions at a younger age and gain an advantage in their further careers; asks, therefore, that age be taken into account as a criterion for excellence together with family situation, including the number of the researcher's dependents; calls, furthermore, for all European research bodies and universities to set up grants for doctoral studies in accordance with national maternity leave provisions;

8.  Points out that age limits for the award of grants adversely affect young people looking after dependants, and that these are, for the most part, women; calls, therefore, on the Commission and the Member States to ensure that, in such circumstances, legislative measures are in place to correct this anomaly, such as adding one year to the deadline for applications for each year in which a dependant is looked after;

9.  Notes that mobility is one of the crucial ways of developing and assuring research career advancement and notes that this can be difficult to reconcile with family life and that appropriate policy measures should therefore be taken to make it more viable;

10. Stresses the role of infrastructure in facilitating a sustainable work-life balance, as well as the importance of enhancing the security of scientific careers;

11. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to improve the situation by means of integration of the family angle through possibilities for flexible working hours, improved child-care facilities and social security provision accessibility across the borders; calls for parental leave conditions that genuinely allow men and women freedom of choice; stresses that reconciling family life and work is a responsibility for both men and women;

12. Notes that, while current recruitment processes tend to maintain the status quo in terms of favouring the employment of male researchers, more open and transparent recruitment procedures would enhance the chances of the qualities that tend to be more prevalent in women scientists being equally recognised and valued;

13. Calls on the Member States to analyse the factors discouraging women’s presence in senior posts in universities and education authorities, seriously reducing their influence in decision-making in research within the European Union, and to propose appropriate solutions;

14. Encourages universities, research institutes and private businesses to adopt and enforce equality strategies in their organisations and to conduct gender impact evaluation in their decision-making processes;

15. Calls on the Commission for awareness-raising actions in the scientific community, as well as among policy makers on the issue of equal opportunities in science and research;

16. Calls on the Commission and the Member States for more transparent recruitment processes and for an obligation to ensure gender balance in evaluation panels, selection and all other committees, as well as nominated panels and committees with a non-binding target of at least 40% women and at least 40% men;

17. Calls on the Commission to ensure that attention is given to the participation of women in scientific research programmes by providing targeted gender-awareness training for those in decision-making positions, sitting on advisory boards and evaluation panels, drafting invitations to tender as well as tenders, and leading contract negotiations;

18. Calls on the Commission to ensure that in tenders submitted under FP7 a balanced representation of men and women is assessed positively; urges Member States to make the same arrangements in their national and regional programmes;

19. Considers Gender Action Plans within the proposal and evaluation stage of FP7 to be an essential part of the overall gender mainstreaming strategy and gender equality policy of the European Union; finds, therefore, that they should remain an integral part of European research funding;

20. Call on the Commission, as far as FP7 is concerned, to report to Parliament regularly on progress in the representation of women on assessment boards and selection committees; calls on the Commission to include the gender aspect in interim assessments and progress reports relating to FP7, and for a mid-term evaluation of the gender mainstreaming tools in FP7;

21. Firmly believes that specific recruitment, training and public relations measures need to be introduced in order to promote and encourage greater participation on the part of women in fields such as technologies, physics, engineering, computer science and other domains which are still, regrettably, dominated by men;

22. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to take positive action to encourage female researchers and for further development of support and mentoring schemes, as well as promotion policies with clear objectives; notes that the development of support structures for career guidance and the provision of advice addressed, inter alia, to female scientists would produce particularly positive results; also notes, however, that measures such as obligatory targets for female researchers and professors are essential to achieving gender balance in science;

23. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to introduce effective policies to eliminate the gender pay gap; notes that in the field of science the principle of equal pay should also apply to scholarships and stipends;

24. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to provide for research funds targeted at women to counter the underfunding of women in research;

25. Stresses the importance of encouraging girls to take up scientific careers and suggests that the Commission and the Member States do so by promoting female researchers as role models and adopting and implementing other measures conducive to achieving this aim;

26. Encourages Member States to promote awareness-raising actions to inform and encourage girls to pursue scientific and technological university studies and degrees; encourages Member States to improve knowledge-sharing processes, since very different patterns of education choices are available in the different Member States;

27. Draws attention to the need for special programmes at universities increasing young girls' and women's interest in starting scientific careers;

28. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to set up programmes for coaching and supporting young women scientists in participating in research programmes and grant applications in order to help them to stay in academia and research;

29. Welcomes the activities carried out by the European Platform of Women Scientists, which aim to enhance the participation of women in science and increase the number of women scientists in decision-making positions;

30. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to strengthen networking further among female scientists at national, regional and EU level, because networking has been identified as an essential tool by which to empower women, in order to attract more women to scientific careers, and encourage female scientists to participate in the policy debate and enhance their professional advancement;

31. Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council, the Commission, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions, and to the Governments and Parliaments of the Member States.

• [1]       OJ C 201, 16.7.1999, p 1.
• [2]       OJ C 199, 14.7.2001, p 1.
• [3]       OJ C 317, 30.12.2003, p 6.
• [4]       OJ L 412, 30.12.2006, p.1.
• [5]       OJ L 269, 5.10.2002, p 15.
• [6]       OJ C 309, 27.10.2000, p.57.
• [7]      OJ C 102 E, 28.4.2004, p. 492.
• [8]     OJ C 301 E, 13.12.2007, p 56.
• [9]     Texts adopted, P6_TA(2007)0265.
• [10]    Texts adopted, P6_TA(2007)0423.

EXPLANATORY STATEMENT

The report seeks to identify social, cultural and other kind of barriers that account for the under-representation of women in science. It will briefly introduce the context for the situation today, but the main focus of the report will be to look forward to point to possible solutions and best practices for solving the situation. The background for the report is the current European situation, where women are greatly underrepresented in the field of science.

Statistics tells us that more women than men engage in taking a higher education, yet when it comes to choosing the research career, women are still outnumbered by men. The huge increase in participation of women in higher education has neither led to a corresponding change in the ratio of women to men in particular fields of study or professions – that is, a change in horizontal gender segregation – nor has it eliminated the gender-specific wage gap.

Why should we be concerned with gender segregation in science? There are two main reasons. First, certain fields of science are of higher status than others; under representation of women in higher status fields (such as physics) means that, in aggregate, women scientists have lower status than men scientists. Second, we may face a shortage of scientific personnel in demanding fields. If talent for doing very demanding scientific work is unrelated to sex, the pool for these fields would be much larger with women fully participating in science.

Women researchers are still a minority in the government and higher education sectors, with both sectors having an EU average of 35% women. In all countries these sectors nevertheless have higher proportions of women researchers than the business enterprise sector with an EU average of 18% women according to latest data, but there are large cross-country variations. The countries with the fewest women in business research are Germany (11.8%), Austria (10.4%) and Netherlands (8.7%) whereas Latvia, Bulgaria and Romania all have over 40% women. The situation is improving very slowly. Women researchers only have higher growth rates than men in less than half of the countries, and for a few countries the percentage of women researchers has decreased.

The distribution of researchers by main fields of science shows different patterns for men and women. Among male researchers in the higher education sector, 54% work in natural science and engineering compared to 37% among women researchers. This distribution of researchers across the broad field of science of course reflects study choices made by men and women in higher education. In recent years various studies comparing countries and historical periods in light of horizontal gender segregation in higher education have been presented. They indicate that in the past twenty years the number of women in engineering has increased in most countries. This increase, however, is rather small and often lower than in alternate professions and fields of study. In other words: the increase in the number of women is occurring mostly in fields of study that already had a high percentage of females

A group of individual factors determining individual choices refers to gender stereotypes. Gender stereotypes are simplified but often deep-rooted perceptions of male and female characteristics. They support the continuity of specific gender roles and occupational gender segregation. Some approaches assume that gender stereotypes are formed during the socialisation process whereas others suggest a lifelong process of production and reproduction of gender roles. Typical male characteristics – according to gender stereotypes – include, among others, their interest in technical issues, analytical competences, talent for craftsmanship, career focus and professional ambition, ability to assert themselves, dominance, selfishness, and willingness to “impression management”. On the other hand, typical stereotypes of female characteristics include beliefs that they are child-friendly, have an interest in family, value harmony, and are empathetic, emotional, and altruistic. Engineering, obviously, is associated with male rather than female stereotypes – hence professions in engineering are considered to be typically male in nature and tend not to be a woman’s first choice.

Gender stereotypes are not only important to the choices men and women make regarding their fields of study, they can also influence the decision making process associated with job allocation or research funding. Hiring criteria with male gender stereotypes lead to a preference for hiring men whereas hiring criteria with female gender stereotypes lead to a preference for hiring women.

Family background, as well as inclusion and exclusion mechanisms among peer groups, are also factors at play on the interpersonal level. If a young girl plays with computers and technical toys during her childhood, she might be regarded as an outsider by her female friends. In this situation support and encouragement from the family turns out to be an important social resource. Thus, female students in engineering and other branches of science often have at least one parent with a profession in one of these disciplines. This also points to the importance of having a female role model working in a male-centred profession or field of study.

Despite the expanding access for women to higher education and the growing proportion of female graduates in engineering and other branches of technical sciences, horizontal gender segregation has declined surprisingly little in most countries. The existence of a “glass ceiling” or “sticky floor” for women trying to progress to senior positions is well documented and affects all occupational sectors, even those which are dominated by women. The absence of women in leadership positions is more acute in science and technology occupations than in other fields. At the highest positions in academia women make up 15% (2003) of full professors and equivalent and this is an increase of two percentage points compared to 1999. Data on the share of women on scientific boards show large difference between countries. The Nordic counties show levels close to 50%, but in a majority of countries parity has not been reached and the percentage is below 10% for several of the new member states.

The international trend in discussing gender gap and hierarchy at research institutions points to a “pipeline” structure from PhD student to professor. Most researchers start as PhD students, proceed as post-docs, researchers or assistant professors, and are then promoted to associate professor with some ultimately becoming full professors, as seen in Figure 3.1. If the share of women differs from one level to the next, it is assumed that the pipeline “leaks”, i.e. female researchers leave the pipeline because they are not promoted.

As scientists advance in their professional career, they are more likely to be promoted to the higher categories. The more years spent, the higher the probability of being promoted. However, promotion seems to be slower for women than for men: inter-gender differences are statistically significant.

The later entrance of women into science cannot by itself explain the low presence of women in the upper categories at CSIC, since for a similar length of scientific career, women show slower promotion than men. Data suggest that differences in productivity might contribute to explaining the lower promotion of women in some areas (materials science, biology/biomedicine, physics), but this is not the case in others. Differences in personal characteristics, social factors and access to resources have been arguments to explain differences in productivity and gender inequality in science.

Organizational and institutional factors of gender segregation include inequality mechanisms operating at the level of establishments such as firms, research institutes, or research funding institutions. Important institutional mechanisms affecting gender segregation are the recruitment processes, the promotion practices, the decision making and evaluation processes, and the presence of gendered workplace cultures.

Recruiting and hiring processes are still rarely studied, mainly due to difficulties in accessing the relevant institutional data. Gender segregation in recruitment and hiring processes play out in a number of consecutive stages: the way how potential applicants are informed and attracted to positions, then the interview, the receipt of a job offer, and the quality of the received offer, i.e. the starting salary and benefits offered. Each of these stages may be influenced by differential treatment of men and women, and hiring decisions can be affected by gender stereotypes or by same gender preferences. The role that promotion and evaluation practices play in generating gender segregation is even less documented than that of recruitment practices. As regards the funding success rates, there is no statistically significant difference, still as a rule men fare slightly better than women, and considerable gaps occur in particular fields in some counties. Instead, the very low number of applications submitted by women in, for example, engineering, is a much more limiting factor. Finally, to give an example of gendered workplace cultures: ‘To be taken as an engineer is to look like an engineer, talk like an engineer, and act as an engineer. In most workplaces this means looking, talking, and acting male’[1], — and that still holds true.

The results demand a number of recommendations to enhance the rate of women in science and technology throughout their careers, among others:

– intensification of activities to promote female scientific careers.

– assurance of implementing gender mainstreaming in the EU and national programmes.

– development of scientific career opportunities for female and male researchers across the academic and non-academic research field.

– installation of a cross-disciplinary human resource development programme for research centres.

– provision of advanced programmes for leading scientific positions, for instance: interdisciplinary and intercultural communication, gender competence, management skills in science and coaching/supervising, mentoring competence, etc.

• [1]  Robinson, J.G. and J.S. McIlwee (1991), ‘Men, Women, and the Culture of Engineering’,
  The Sociological Quarterly, 32: 406.

OPINION OF THE COMMITTEE ON INDUSTRY, RESEARCH AND ENERGY (9.4.2008)

for the Committee on Women's Rights and Gender Equality

on women and science
(2007/2206(INI))

Draftsman: Den Dover

SUGGESTIONS

The Committee on Industry, Research and Energy calls on the Committee on Women's Rights and Gender Equality, as the committee responsible, to incorporate the following suggestions in its motion for a resolution:

1.   Welcomes the policies introduced up to now, such as direct support measures, preferential recruitment policies and funding schemes supporting research carried out by women, which are aimed at achieving more equal participation on the part of women in the various fields and sectors of science.

2.   Points out that to comply with the Lisbon Strategy the EU needs 700 000 further researchers, and therefore calls on the Commission and the Member States to take specific measures, in accordance with the Roadmap for equality between women and men 2006-2010, to ensure that by 2010 the participation of women and men in science and technology is more balanced;

3.   Considers, however, that more efforts are needed in order to increase women’s participation in top positions (on scientific boards and evaluation committees, for example) and in all areas of science including research, recruitment, training, education, information technology, engineering, commerce, communications, public relations, advertising and industrial relations, by providing innovative forms of flexible working time for women that will allow them to continue working after becoming mothers;

4.   Is of the opinion that more action is needed in order to overcome the under-representation of women, particularly in scientific academic circles; to this end, recommends that direct support measures and grants be provided to encourage women to fill senior positions, as well as grants for programmes of coaching and mentoring, thereby helping young women to stay in scientific academic activities, carrying out research and participating in grant applications and projects and ensuring at the same time their own mobility and flexibility and that of their families;

5.   Considers that networks of women scientists are an essential instrument for attracting a larger number of women to scientific and technological fields and promoting them in posts of responsibility; to this end, calls on the Commission and the Member States to set up networks at European, national and regional level and to support those that already exist, such as the European Platform of Women Scientists;

6.   Considers that, in order to eliminate some of the barriers that women face in reaching senior positions in scientific careers, concrete measures need to be taken to promote a better understanding of the concepts of ‘good research’, ‘excellence’ and ‘innovation’, particularly as far as the criteria for the definition of a ‘good researcher’ are concerned, which should not be limited to the number of publications of the researchers;

7.   Calls on the Commission and the Member States to take appropriate measures to ensure that the contribution of women is not excluded from publications on the history of science and technology, not just because this would be a clear case of discrimination, but also because the absence of role models makes it hard to encourage a greater number of women to enter such fields;

8.   Calls on the Commission and the Member States to remove all financial and administrative obstacles faced by women in scientific fields and to create more attractive and flexible working conditions for women in order to make it easier for them to combine working and family life and to stimulate their interest in pursuing careers in all areas of science by means of forms of support specifically for working mothers that will not affect budgets for scientific research; in addition, calls on the Member States to ensure equal shares of parental responsibilities by promoting equal use of parental leave and flexible working conditions both for men and women;

9.   Points out that age limits for the award of grants adversely affect young people looking after dependants, and that these are for the most part women; therefore calls on the Commission and the Member States to ensure, when such circumstances apply, that they include in their legislation measures to correct this anomaly, such as adding one year to the deadline for applications for each year in which a dependant is looked after;

10. Firmly believes that specific recruitment, training and public relations measures need to be introduced in order to promote and encourage greater participation on the part of women in fields such as technologies, physics, engineering, computer science and other domains which are still regrettably dominated by men;

11. Calls on the Commission to ensure that, in projects submitted in response to calls for proposals under the Seventh Framework Programme for research, technical development and demonstration activities, balanced numbers of men and women in the applicant scientific group should be assessed positively; urges the Member States to make the same arrangements in their national and regional programmes;

12. Supports the aim of establishing and ensuring compliance with the principle of equal treatment for men and women with the same levels of education, skill and merit as far as identical scientific posts are concerned, in selection and recruitment procedures and throughout professional careers, this being a essential in order to enable women to pursue further training courses and obtain promotion in their professions based on their merit while, at the same time, contributing to balancing the participation of men and women in posts of responsibility; regrets that even though in the majority of the Member States the number of women with a university degree exceeds the number of men and women present a higher average level of academic qualification than their male counterparts, women are underrepresented in all academic and research establishments;

13. Believes that it is of the utmost importance to promote science as an interesting field for both sexes from early on; urges that this be taken into account when planning educational material and in teacher training; encourages universities and faculties to analyse their entrance selection systems in order to identify possible implicit gender discrimination and correct the selection system accordingly;

14. Calls on the Commission, as far as the Seventh Framework Programme for research, technological development and demonstration activities is concerned, to report to Parliament regularly on progress in the representation of women on assessment boards and selection committees; calls on the Commission to include the gender aspect in the Framework Programme interim assessments and progress reports;

15. Calls on the Member States to analyse the factors underlying the low proportion of women (15 % on average in the EU) in senior posts in universities and educational authorities, a state of affairs that seriously reduces their influence over decision-making in research, despite the fact that 43 % of the doctorates awarded in the EU were awarded to women.

16. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to introduce effective policies to eliminate the gender pay gap; notes that in the field of science the principle of equal pay should also apply to scholarships and stipends;

17. Encourages universities, research institutes and private businesses to adopt equality strategies in their organisations and in their decision-making processes.

RESULT OF FINAL VOTE IN COMMITTEE

Date adopted	8.4.2008
Result of final vote	+: –: 0:	48 0 0
Members present for the final vote	Šarūnas Birutis, Jan Březina, Jerzy Buzek, Giles Chichester, Dragoş Florin David, Pilar del Castillo Vera, Den Dover, Nicole Fontaine, Adam Gierek, András Gyürk, Fiona Hall, David Hammerstein, Rebecca Harms, Erna Hennicot-Schoepges, Mary Honeyball, Ján Hudacký, Romana Jordan Cizelj, Anne Laperrouze, Pia Elda Locatelli, Eugenijus Maldeikis, Eluned Morgan, Angelika Niebler, Reino Paasilinna, Atanas Paparizov, Francisca Pleguezuelos Aguilar, Anni Podimata, Miloslav Ransdorf, Vladimír Remek, Herbert Reul, Teresa Riera Madurell, Mechtild Rothe, Paul Rübig, Andres Tarand, Britta Thomsen, Catherine Trautmann, Nikolaos Vakalis, Adina-Ioana Vălean, Alejo Vidal-Quadras
Substitute(s) present for the final vote	Etelka Barsi-Pataky, Ivo Belet, Zdzisław Kazimierz Chmielewski, Robert Goebbels, Satu Hassi, Gunnar Hökmark, Pierre Pribetich, Vittorio Prodi, Esko Seppänen, Silvia-Adriana Ţicău

RESULT OF FINAL VOTE IN COMMITTEE

Date adopted	14.4.2008
Result of final vote	+: –: 0:	12 0 8
Members present for the final vote	Emine Bozkurt, Zita Gurmai, Lívia Járóka, Piia-Noora Kauppi, Astrid Lulling, Siiri Oviir, Doris Pack, Zita Pleštinská, Karin Resetarits, Teresa Riera Madurell, Eva-Britt Svensson, Anne Van Lancker, Anna Záborská
Substitute(s) present for the final vote	Gabriela Creţu, Lidia Joanna Geringer de Oedenberg, Donata Gottardi, Anna Hedh, Marusya Ivanova Lyubcheva
Substitute(s) under Rule 178(2) present for the final vote	Manolis Mavrommatis, Miroslav Mikolášik