Diversity in the research workforce fuels creativity, brings new perspectives to science, and accelerates innovation (Hofstra et al.,2020). Key breakthroughs have emerged when individuals from a variety of backgrounds have contributed to the underpinning research (Díaz-García et al., 2013). However, diversity in the research workforce needs nurturing. This presentation presents the findings of an OECD Expert Group, bringing together experts from 18 different countries to examine diversity and excellence. Studies of national research systems have provided evidence of disparities in opportunities across all stages of research careers, highlighting gaps in career entry, advancement, pay, support and funding. These studies indicate that gaps are not due to differences in the quality of the individual candidate but can be explained by a set of interconnected relational, structural and systemic barriers (Ginther et al. 2011, Kozlowski et al., 2022; 2024; Larivière et al.,2013). Policymakers are taking action; research‑performing organisations are pivotal, yet bridging top‑down mandates and bottom‑up initiatives remains challenging. Guidance is needed to design interventions so that researchers, regardless of starting point or personal circumstances, can contribute to scientific progress. To this end, we draw on the concept of inclusive excellence in research, which affirms the necessity of public policy intervention to actively promote a diversity of perspectives and the participation of individuals from different backgrounds to accelerate the advancement of science. Inclusive excellence requires working conditions that make success equally probable regardless of differences in starting points and circumstances, thereby embedding equity and ensuring equal opportunities in research, education and training, career advancement and promotion, as well as in the allocation of resources. While recognising that the notion of “excellence” is socially constructed, we developed a framework to implement inclusive excellence in research with four pillars, each pillar including findings from the analysis of current practices in participating countries: · Pillar 1. Leveraging evidence to systematically identify and address barriers · Pillar 2. Supporting accessibility to research careers by addressing cost-barriers in the entry to research careers and inclusive curricula for research training · Pillar 3. Reducing the uncertainty of research careers in the public sector · Pillar 4. Ensuring equitable access to funding opportunities The presentation will include experts from multiple countries and researchers’ union representatives who will examine key issues for each pillar and highlight good practices.

Díaz-García et al. (2013), “Gender diversity within R&D teams: Its impact on radicalness of innovation”, Vol. 15/2, pp. 149-160, https://www.tandfonline.com/action/showCitFormats?doi=10.5172/impp.2013.15.2.149. Ginther, D. et al. (2011), “Race, ethnicity, and NIH research awards”, Science, Vol. 333/6045, pp. 1015-1019, https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1196783 Hofstra, B. et al. (2020), “The Diversity–Innovation Paradox in Science”, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, Vol. 117/17, pp. 9284-9291, https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1915378117. Kozlowski, D. et al. (2022), “Intersectional inequalities in science”, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, Vol. 119/2, https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2113067119. Kozlowski, D. et al. (2024), “The Howard‐Harvard effect: Institutional reproduction of intersectional inequalities”, Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, Vol. 75/8, pp. 869-882, https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.24931. Larivière, V. et al. (2013), “Bibliometrics: Global gender disparities in science”, Nature, Vol. 504/7479, pp. 211-213, https://doi.org/10.1038/504211a. 5. country/national perspective(s) OECD countries, Belgium, Spain, Canada, South Africa, South Korea