Revista de economía mundial 69, 2025, 71-93

ISSN: 1576-0162

DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.33776/rem.v0i69.8282

Determinants of female ParticiPation in Patenting activity in

Brazil: the role of multinational corPorations

Determinantes De la participación feminina en las patentes en

Brasil: el rol De las corporaciones multinacionales

Marina Filgueiras Jorge

marina_ﬁlgueiras@hotmail.com

Fluminense Federal University

Recibido: mayo 2024; aceptado: febrero 2025

aBstract

This study examines female participation in patenting activity across

various institutions and the role of multinationals (MN) in this context,

exploring the origin of capital and the location of ﬁrms, by analyzing patents

ﬁled at INPI-Brazil from 2000 to 2019. Despite the increasing number of

female inventors, women remain underrepresented in engineering ﬁelds, with

greater participation in chemistry. MNs contribute to female participation

through chemical patents, while national ﬁrms and MN subsidiaries focus on

engineering, which shows lower female involvement. Public policies promoting

women in high-tech sectors and digital entrepreneurship are recommended to

address persistent gender disparities in innovation.

Keywords: Gender, Patents, Brazil, Multinationals.

resumen

Este estudio analiza la participación femenina en patentes entre las

instituciones y el papel de las Multinacionales (EM) en este contexto, explorando el

origen del capital y la ubicación de las empresas, mediante el análisis de patentes

presentadas en el INPI-Brasil entre 2000 y 2019. Hay una tendencia creciente

de inventoras, aunque las mujeres siguen su representadas en ingeniería y se

destacan en química. Las multinacionales contribuyen a participación femenina a

través de las patentes químicas, mientras que las empresas nacionales y ﬁliales se

centran en ingeniería, donde la participación femenina es menor. Se recomiendan

políticas públicas para promover la integración de mujeres en sectores tecnológicos

avanzados y emprendimientos digitales, reduciendo disparidades de género.

Palabras clave: Género, Patentes, Brasil, Multinacionales.

JEL Classiﬁcation/ Clasiﬁcación JEL: J16, L20, O31, O54.

Revista de economía mundial 69, 2025, 71-93

1. introDuction

Gender equity in science, technology, and innovation (STI) remains a

pressing global challenge. Addressing gender disparities has gained prominence

within international development agendas, as evidenced by the inclusion of

women’s empowerment in theSustainable Development Goals (SDGs) of the

United Nations’ 2030 Agenda (UN, 2015). Research highlights persistent

underrepresentation of women in certain technical areas and leadership

positions (Yáñez, 2016; ONU Mujeres, 2020), despite evidence showing that

gender diversity enhances creativity, broadens perspectives, and improves

problem-solving capabilities (Díaz-García et al. 2013). Moreover, while the

knowledge and digital economy —heavily reliant on STEM ﬁelds—offers

opportunities to advance gender equity, it also risks exacerbating existing

inequalities if systemic biases are not addressed (Yáñez, 2016; Urraca-Ruiz,

2024).

As a consequence of the second wave of feminism in the 1960s and 1970s,

women have gradually advanced in higher education and the labor market

(Hayashi et al., 2007). Despite these advances, the literature identiﬁes two

phenomena related to women’s careers: horizontal and vertical segregation.

The former refers to the unequal distribution of women and men across various

ﬁelds of knowledge and economic sectors, with women being particularly

underrepresented in STEM and the industrial sector. The latter pertains to the

decline in women’s participation as they advance to higher levels of power and

visibility (Yañez, 2016).

In Brazil, signiﬁcant advancements have been made in women’s education.

In 2021, women represented 60% of all bachelor’s degrees (INEP, 2023) but the

percentage of women decreases when they advance to the degrees obtained

at the master’s and doctoral levels: 57% and 56%, respectively (CGEE, 2024).

Additionally, women constituted half of the workforce in research groups under

the National Council for Scientiﬁc and Technological Development (CNPq) in

2016 (MCTI, 2023). However, disparities persist across disciplines and are

more pronounced in engineering (Schneegans et al. 2021). For instance, in

2021, women represented 35% of all doctoral degrees in engineering and

just 23% of the engineers with doctoral degrees who were employed (CGEE,

2024).

Despite their growing qualiﬁcations and presence in higher education,

women’s representation in leadership positions remains disproportionately

74 Marina Filgueiras Jorge

low. In the scientiﬁc career, the reduction in women’s representation is visible

when contrasting the percentage of female researchers of CNPq groups with

the percentage of female leaders (Machado et al, 2019). In the labor market

in general, women held only 39% of managerial positions, 24% of general

director roles (Feijó, 2023), and only 2% of presidencies among Brazil’s largest

ﬁrms (Goulart, 2017).

In this context, the need for patent indicators by gender has been claimed

and different approaches have been developed to solve this problem. Naldi

et al. (2004) were the ﬁrst to use a ﬁle of names in different languages to

associate the gender to each name. Following this, many studies were developed

(Mauleón and Bordons, 2010; Sugimoto et al. 2015; Martinez; Raffo and Saito,

2016; Carvalho; Bares and Silva, 2020; Sifontes and Morales, 2020; Medina

and Álvarez, 2022) and indicators were constructed by patent ofﬁces (UKIPO,

2016; USPTO, 2020; WIPO, 2024; INPI, 2024). The above-mentioned studies

share conclusions about the relevance of patent-based indicators to monitor

gender gaps and show important differences by countries, technological

ﬁelds, and institutional sectors. Another line of studies has analyzed gender

differences in patent productivity (Whittington and Smith-Doerr, 2008), impact

of patents (Sugimoto et al. 2015), and ﬁrm performance (Ferrary and Déo,

2023). Teruel and Segarra-Blasco (2022) analyzed gender diversity in fostering

the development of new, patent-protectable knowledge, but highlight that

occupationally diversiﬁed R&D teams may be more important.

Given the vast evidence of a gender gap across sectors, industries, countries,

and regions, its application to Brazil remains limited (Azevedo and Abrantes,

2021). While Sifontes and Morales (2020) aimed to explain the factors

inﬂuencing women participation in patenting activities in Latin America, they

relied on data from the USPTO, which represents a small sample of patenting

activity in Brazil. This study contributes to existing literature in three ways:

data, methodological analyses, and new focus. Using data from invention

patents ﬁled at the National Institute of Industrial Property (INPI) from 2000 to

2019 and focusing speciﬁcally on how the origin of capital and the location of

companies relate to female participation within inventor teams, a probabilistic

model is applied to estimate whether a patent has female participation or not.

The aim of this paper is to identify the factors inﬂuencing the evolution

of women’s participation in patenting activity, highlighting speciﬁcities among

multinational patent-ﬁling companies. The article contains ﬁve sections after

this introduction. Section 2 presents a review of the literature. Section 3

presents the database and the challenges overpassed to identify the gender

of inventors and the institutional sector of applicants in patents. Section 4

creates a frame of reference with the evolution of female participation in all

patents applied at the INPI. Section 5 presents an econometric model to

test the relation between the main determinants and female participation in

patents ﬁled by residents. The ﬁnal section summarizes the conclusions.

Determinants of female ParticiPation in Patenting activity in Brazil: the role of multinational corPorations

revista De economía munDial 69, 2025, 71-93

2. literature review

2.1. horizontal anD vertical segregation

Horizontal segregation refers to the unequal distribution of women and

men across different areas of knowledge and economic sectors (Yañez, 2016).

Empirical evidence shows that women tend to dominate disciplines related to

medicine and health sciences, social sciences, and the humanities. In contrast,

ﬁelds related to exact and natural sciences and engineering —including

computer and information sciences— are predominantly male-dominated.

Another manifestation of horizontal gender segregation is the extremely low

representation of women in industrial research.

Vertical segregation describes the unequal positioning of women and men

within occupational hierarchies in science and technology. Female researchers

face challenges in advancing to the highest levels of the professional hierarchy

and accessing positions of power (Yañez, 2016). This phenomenon is commonly

referred to as the “glass ceiling”, “leaky pipeline”, or “scissor effect” (Naldi et

al., 2004).

Despite the increasing number of women entering higher education

and pursuing professional careers in knowledge-intensive ﬁelds and new

technologies, horizontal and vertical gender segregation remains persistent in

STI, particularly in engineering and technology.

This kind of segregation is closely tied to gender stereotypes, which often

steer women towards certain activities based on societal perceptions of their

skills and preferences (Medina and Álvarez, 2022). Cultural stereotypes often

associate brilliance and aptitude with men rather than women in speciﬁc

domains, thereby discouraging women’s interest in these areas (Bian et al.,

2018). Additionally, cultural stereotypes often associate women with care,

biotechnology, pharmaceuticals, and chemistry (Naldi et al., 2004; Whittington

and Smith-Doerr, 2008; Morales-Valera and Sifontes-Fernandez, 2014). In

contrast, ﬁelds like mechanical and electrical engineering exhibit lower female

participation (Carvalho et al., 2020).

However, this study focuses solely on analyzing horizontal segregation;

vertical segregation, although very relevant, is not the central concern of this

paper.

2.2. Diversity anD co-invention

The second factor inﬂuencing female participation in patents is the diversity

within the teams. Technological knowledge and innovation have become

increasingly complex, requiring greater interaction across technological ﬁelds

(Avanci and Urraca-Ruiz, 2017). This heightened complexity underscores

the need for diversity and complementarity within inventor teams, which

surpasses the efﬁcacy of individual inventors working alone (Wuchty et al.,

2007). While individuals have unique learning histories, teams combine

diverse skills, competencies, and perspectives for problem-solving (Nelson

76 Marina Filgueiras Jorge

and Winter, 1982; Dosi, 1988). Moreover, interactions among team members

tend to inﬂuence both the creation and decision-making processes (Lundvall,

1992). Furthermore, a diversity of knowledge, experiences, and skills allows

ﬁrms to increase their available knowledge base and improve their capacity for

generating new ideas and assimilating new knowledge (Cohen and Levinthal,

1990).

The existence of co-invention and the higher number of inventors in teams

may promote female participation in patents. Given that women have to

balance their professional lives with numerous tasks in their private lives, being

part of a supportive team of co-inventors makes it easier for them to engage

in research and achieve major goals (Sifontes and Morales, 2020). As women

tend to develop smaller academic and commercial networks, they often

participate in inventions as co-inventors, with less responsibility (Murray and

Graham, 2007; Acosta, 2022). This fact is also consistent with the difﬁculty

women face in gaining adequate visibility for their research work (De Negri,

2020).

Gender diversity has gained attention in the corporate world because teams

and leadership structures with greater gender diversity have a positive impact

on certain forms of innovation (Fernández, 2015) and on ﬁrms’ competitiveness

(Oberﬁeld, 2014; Ferrary and Déo, 2023). Gender diversity within teams fosters

heightened creativity and provides diverse perspectives on product needs

and the consumer market. Additionally, diversity in leadership facilitates the

attraction of talent from human resources and enhances dialogue with other

institutions. However, despite the growing importance attributed to diversity,

the integration of mixed-gender groups within corporations has progressed at

a sluggish pace (Azmat and Boring, 2020).

2.3. organizational anD cultural characteristics

The existing literature indicates that cultural and organizational

characteristics signiﬁcantly impact female participation in scientiﬁc research

(Whittington and Smith-Doerr, 2008; Marques, 2017; Sifontes and Morales,

2020; Azevedo and Abrantes, 2021). Academic environments may be more

conducive to female patenting than business organizations. This difference

can be attributed to the varying proportions of women in the workforce within

these sectors and the less hierarchical structure of academic institutions, which

often foster collaborative research networks. Additionally, greater job stability

in universities and government research institutions, compared to the private

sector, may positively inﬂuence female participation in patenting.

Empirical studies in the United States reveal that female participation tends

to be more prevalent in universities than in ﬁrms or government institutions

across all technological domains (Sugimoto et al., 2015). In Ibero-American

countries, female participation was also higher in patents ﬁled by government

institutions and universities than in ﬁrms (Carvalho et al., 2020).

Determinants of female ParticiPation in Patenting activity in Brazil: the role of multinational corPorations

revista De economía munDial 69, 2025, 71-93

Cooperation between institutions serves as a viable solution for

organizations that may lack the necessary resources for successful innovation,

enabling them to navigate these challenges more effectively. When patents are

ﬁled collaboratively by different organizations, they often include agreements

regarding the control of rights over the resulting innovations and the roles of

the participating organizations and inventors. These arrangements provide a

level of stability and protection for all participants, thereby promoting greater

inclusion of women in the innovation process (Sifontes and Morales, 2020).

Moreover, as knowledge production and diffusion become increasingly

globalized, multinationals (MNs) play a critical role in shaping gender equity

in the countries where they operate (OECD, 2022). However, Ferner et al.

(2005) argue that the transfer of diversity practices across borders depends

on different conceptions of diversity in national and foreign contexts.

Fernández (2015) highlights that transfer of HR policies across borders is

contingent upon three key factors. First, the role of the subsidiary within the

multinational network determines its level of autonomy and strategic focus.

Since foreign subsidiaries generally prioritize technological adaptation to the

local market and provide technical support to offshore units, they tend to

engage in incremental innovation, whereas gender diversity is more closely

associated with radical innovations. This reduces the relevance of such policies

for subsidiaries that do not play a central role in generating new technologies.

Second, the nature of the knowledge involved directly affects the ease of

disseminating these practices. Gender diversity management relies on cultural

norms, social interactions, and behavioral changes, making it predominantly

tacit knowledge. The lack of codiﬁed guidelines hinders its standardization and

effective implementation in subsidiaries located in different cultural contexts.

Third, the strategic importance of HR policies for international competitive

advantage inﬂuences the priority given to their transfer. Since gender

diversity is not universally recognized as a key competitive differentiator,

parent companies may not invest in disseminating these practices. Moreover,

institutional differences between countries create barriers to the acceptance

of these policies, as they may conﬂict with local norms and impact the

subsidiary’s relationships within the host country’s institutional environment.

Thus, these three combined factors limit the effectiveness of gender diversity

policy transfer within multinational networks.

However, Yáñez (2016) points out that time and mobility limitations

associated with family responsibilities may have a more signiﬁcant impact

on women in science and technology careers in Latin America. Although

geographical mobility is very important in academic careers, in business, and

especially in multinationals, the availability for regular travels is an essential

requirement for career promotion, since it shows commitment to the company.

As such, women may face greater challenges working in MN subsidiaries.

Considering the ﬁndings in these three subsections, this study supports

the hypothesis that female participation in patents is more likely when patents

are related to chemistry and life sciences, involve larger inventor teams, and

78 Marina Filgueiras Jorge

are ﬁled by universities, research institutions and government agencies, rather

than by ﬁrms, regardless of their multinationality.

3. DataBase

To analyze female participation in patenting activities in Brazil, this

study gathers data from the INPI. Typically, patent databases for the

analysis of inventive activity consider ﬁled applications, as they represent

the initial step in the patent granting process and are closest to the date

of the inventive activity. The patent application process can be lengthy and

varies across different ofﬁcial ofﬁces. Additionally, not every application

ultimately receives a patent title.

Between 2000 and 2019, the INPI-Brazil received a total of 469,795

invention patent applications (INPI, 2015 and 2021). At the start of

processing, approximately 3.5% of applications were either assigned a new

number due to alterations in the nature of the application or were canceled

for reasons such as inconsistencies in the provided information or failure

to meet formal requirements. These applications often contain incomplete

data on inventors or technologies and are consequently excluded from the

study.

Patent documents include the names of all inventors, but the database

poses several challenges in processing and analyzing this data. First, the

primary data collected in application forms do not include an attribute

indicating the gender of inventors. Second, approximately 12% of inventors

with Brazilian nationality have missing data in the ﬁeld for their national

identiﬁcation number of individuals (known as “Cadastro de Pessoa Física”

— CPF), which complicates merging with external databases that rely on

this number to access gender information. Third, the ﬁeld for the inventor’s

name lacks standardization, requiring cleaning and standardization efforts.

Standardizing names proves particularly challenging for foreign inventors,

due to differing cultural conventions.

The inference of gender from the names of inventors conducted in this

study involved two primary tasks: standardization and matching with name

dictionaries. Two dictionaries were used to assign gender to names: data

from the 2010 IBGE Census and the global dictionary of names from the

World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO). This method was unable to

determine the gender of 9% of the inventors, and the highest percentages

of unidentiﬁed gender were found among non-resident inventors.

Regarding patent applicants, they were classiﬁed into four institutional

proﬁles: ﬁrms, educational/research/government institutions, individual

applicants, and cooperative efforts between two or more applicants,

indicating collaboration among different institutions, ﬁrms, or individuals.

Additionally, ﬁrms were further categorized into sub-groups: multinational

companies (residing abroad), multinational subsidiaries (residing in

Brazil), and national ﬁrms. Multinational companies and subsidiaries were

Determinants of female ParticiPation in Patenting activity in Brazil: the role of multinational corPorations

revista De economía munDial 69, 2025, 71-93

identiﬁed through multiple searches using free online databases such as the

Multinational Enterprise Information Platform from OECD and UNSD, US

Securities and Exchange Commission website, Fortune’s global ﬁrms, and

corporate websites.

4. evolution of female ParticiPation in Brazil

This section begins with an overview of patenting activity in Brazil from

2000 to 2019. Then, for the empirical analysis in Section 5, the probit

model will use a sample that includes only patents with applicants residing

in Brazil, with a subsample speciﬁcally focused on patents ﬁled by resident

ﬁrms.

The distribution of patents among foreign applicants in Brazil remained

stable, with ﬁrms accounting for over 90% of applications, and the United

States leading. However, among Brazilian residents, there was a signiﬁcant

shift in the composition of applicants. The participation of educational,

research, and government institutions, as well as cooperative efforts,

increased signiﬁcantly, while individual applicants declined. This change

can be attributed to the organization of Technology Transfer Ofﬁces in

universities and research institutes (Mueller and Perucchi, 2014). Patents

ﬁled by resident ﬁrms showed a slight increase. The sectors with the

highest activity at INPI-Brazil are as follows: chemistry (37%), mechanical

engineering (27%); electrical and electronic engineering (14%), and

instruments (13%).

Regarding female participation, there was a notable increase across

all technological sectors (Figure 1). Female participation was consistently

higher in chemistry, rising from 31% to 51%. In instruments, female

figure 1. evolution of Patents with female ParticiPation By technological sectors: 2000-2019

Source: Own elaboration based on data from BADEPI/INPI, extracted in March/2023.

80 Marina Filgueiras Jorge

participation grew from 19% to 30%, and in electrical and electronic

engineering, from 12% to 20%. In the mechanical engineering sector,

where female participation was the lowest, there was a signiﬁcant increase

from 8% to 16%.

Figure 2 shows that female participation (FP), as the percentage of patents

with at least one female inventor, increased from 19% to 33%. This growth

is primarily attributed to the rise in mixed-gender patents, which grew from

15.5% to 29%, as well as patents with two or more women, which increased

from 0.5% to 1.4%. Meanwhile, patents attributed solely to all-male teams

decreased from 81% to 67%, reﬂecting a shift towards greater gender

diversity in patenting teams. These ﬁndings are consistent with previous

literature (Azevedo and Abrantes, 2021). The data also show that women

are less likely to be in single-gender patents compared to men, and they

remain underrepresented as sole inventors. This may indicate that women

play a secondary role in research more often than men (Mauleon, Daraio and

Bordons, 2013). Regarding the increase in mixed-gender teams, this could be

linked to the perception that gender diversity can enhance group processes

and collective intelligence, which in turn may foster innovation and scientiﬁc

discovery (Mauleon, Daraio and Bordons, 2013).

Figure 3 presents the trends in female participation across institutional

sectors. Notably, universities, research, and government institutions show

the highest percentage of female participation, followed by patents within

cooperation between applicants, ﬁrms, and individual applicants. Speciﬁcally,

female participation in universities, research, and government institutions

increased from 34% in 2000 to 72% in 2019. Similarly, patents resulting

from cooperation saw an increase from 26% to 51% in female participation. In

patents ﬁled by ﬁrms, the percentage of female participation rose from 20% to

30%, while among individual applicants, it grew from 9% to 14%.

figure 2. evolution of Diversity anD co-invention, 2000-2019

Source: Own elaboration based on BADEPI/INPI, extracted in March/2023.

Determinants of female ParticiPation in Patenting activity in Brazil: the role of multinational corPorations

revista De economía munDial 69, 2025, 71-93

Figure 4 shows the female participation across different types of ﬁrms,

classiﬁed by their origin and location. Notably, among patents ﬁled by

multinationals headquartered abroad, female participation rose from 21% to

32%. Similarly, among MN subsidiaries based in Brazil, female involvement

increased from 5% to 10%. For national ﬁrms, female participation grew

from 7% in 2000 to 17% in 2019. Additionally, Figure 5 illustrates how the

distribution of patents varies across technological sectors among different

ﬁrms. While MNs are primarily focused on chemistry, a sector dominated by

women, MN subsidiaries and national ﬁrms are concentrated in mechanical

engineering, a male-dominated ﬁeld.

figure 3. evolution of female ParticiPation, By institutional Profile of aPPlicants, 2000-2019

Source: Own elaboration based on BADEPI/INPI, extracted in March/2023.

figure 4. evolution of female ParticiPation, By tyPe of firms, 2000-2019

Source: Own elaboration based on BADEPI/INPI, extracted in March/2023.

82 Marina Filgueiras Jorge

5. Determinants of female ParticiPation in Brazil

5.1. the moDel, variaBles, anD DescriPtive statistics

To assess the signiﬁcance of the factors determining female participation in

STI activities, the probit model in Sifontes and Morales (2020) will be applied

to estimate the probability of female inclusion in patents in selected years. The

empirical speciﬁcation of the equation is as follows:

Where F variable represents female participation in the patent, like in

Naldi et al. (2004), Mauleón and Bordons (2010) and Sifontes and Morales

(2020), and considers the value of one if there is at least one female among

inventors. The exogenous variable groups are as follows: (T) represents a

vector of dummy variables related to technological ﬁelds, with Electrical and

Electronic Engineering assumed as the reference (omitted); (I) represents

a vector of characteristics of inventor teams, including the existence of co-

inventors and the number of inventors in the team; (O) represents a vector of

institutional sector characteristics, distinguishing cases of cooperation1, ﬁrms,

universities, and individuals (assumed as the reference and therefore omitted);

(D) represents a vector of dummy variables for each of the 27 Federation Units

(Table 1).

The model is applied to two samples: one for all the resident applicants

and another focusing only on resident ﬁrms. This distinction enables us to

1 This study includes joint patent applications between two or more individual applicants in the

measure of cooperation.

figure 5. DistriBution of Patens of firms, By technologies, 2000-2019

Source: Own elaboration based on BADEPI/INPI, extracted in March/2023.

Determinants of female ParticiPation in Patenting activity in Brazil: the role of multinational corPorations

revista De economía munDial 69, 2025, 71-93

investigate whether female participation in patented inventions is more likely

when the patent is ﬁled by a multinational subsidiary or by resident ﬁrms. The

empirical speciﬁcation of this particular equation includes a dummy variable

that distinguishes between MN subsidiaries and resident ﬁrms.

A suitable model for analyzing the impacts on female participation in patents

is the probit regression model, where the dependent variable is dichotomous:

either at least one woman participates in the patent (Y = 1) or does not (Y =

0). Speciﬁcally, the functional form of the probit model is expressed as:

Where Φ is the cumulative distribution function of the standard normal

distribution, leading to the estimation:

Where ui is a random term with a distribution of N(0,σ2) and Y'i is a latent

variable, such that:

and otherwise

taBle 1. list of variaBles

Groups Variables Name Description

F F Female participation 1: If at least a woman participates as an inventor in the patent

0: No women are involved as inventors

T T Technological sectors



T_EE: Electrical and Electronic Engineering (assumed as reference)

T_I: Instruments

T: Chemistry

T_ME: Mechanical Eng.

T_O: Civil Engineering and Others

ICI Co-invention 1: If a team of inventors is listed in the patent document

0: otherwise

NI Number of inventors Number of inventors in the team

CO Cooperation

1: If there are two or more individuals or organizations holding

the patent rights in the patent document;

0: otherwise

URG Universities, research, or

governmental institutes

1: If the assignee is a university, research, or governmental

institute;

0: otherwise

RF Resident ﬁrms 1: If the assignee is a ﬁrm;

0: otherwise

MN_Sub Multinational subsidiary 1: If the assignee is a multinational ﬁrm;

0: otherwise

D D Federation units 

Source: Own elaboration.

84 Marina Filgueiras Jorge

Table 2 presents descriptive statistics for a sample of total resident applicants

across all groups of factors. Observing the average female participation, we

ﬁnd that in 2000, it was 0.1024, while in 2019, it increased to 0.3690. In

terms of technological sectors, chemistry shows considerably higher female

participation, whereas all engineering sectors have female participation below

the overall average. In instruments, the average female participation is quite

close to the overall average.

The data also shows that the average female participation in patents with

co-invention (0.1994) is higher than the overall average (0.1024), whereas

patents without co-invention exhibit female participation (0.0767) below the

average.

Regarding the institutional sectors, universities have higher female

participation compared to ﬁrms and individual patents.

taBle 2. DescriPtive statistics: female ParticiPation for selecteD grouPs in full samPle of resiDent

aPPlicants

Variables 2000 2005 2010 2015 2019

Number of patents 2,988 3,798 3,716 3,530 4,220

Average Female participation

Total 0.1024 0.1643 0.2096 0.3113 0.3690

Technological sectors

Electrical and Electronic Eng 0.0352 0.0984 0.1411 0.1810 0.1499

Instruments 0.1165 0.1902 0.2192 0.3106 0.3535

Chemistry 0.2473 0.3322 0.4311 0.6067 0.6486

Mechanical Eng 0.0500 0.0840 0.0826 0.1207 0.1622

Civil Engineering and Others 0.0889 0.1190 0.1141 0.1522 0.1770

Co-invention

No 0.0767 0.0886 0.0775 0.0952 0.1151

Yes 0.1994 0.3695 0.4466 0.5327 0.5793

Cooperation

No 0.0952 0.1473 0.1767 0.2823 0.3364

Yes 0.1584 0.2995 0.4181 0.4706 0.5254

Institutional sectors

Universities 0.4479 0.5297 0.6025 0.6980 0.7550

Firms 0.0662 0.1506 0.1488 0.1726 0.1679

Individuals 0.0885 0.1010 0.0940 0.1350 0.1417

Source: Own elaboration.

Table 3 presents descriptive statistics for a subsample that includes only

resident ﬁrms as applicants. Observing the average female participation, we

can see that in 2000 it was 0.0556, rising to 0.1233 in 2019. Among the

technological sectors, chemistry exhibits the highest female participation,

while mechanical engineering shows the lowest.

Again, the data shows that patents with co-invention show higher female

participation compared to the overall average, while patents without co-

Determinants of female ParticiPation in Patenting activity in Brazil: the role of multinational corPorations

revista De economía munDial 69, 2025, 71-93

invention show below-average female participation. In terms of ﬁrm types, the

average female participation in multinational subsidiaries is similar to that in

resident ﬁrms overall.

taBle 3. DescriPtive statistics: female ParticiPation for selecteD grouPs in suB-samPle of resiDent

firms

Variables 2000 2005 2010 2015 2019

Number of patents 755 1,109 1,176 1,188 1,215

Average Female participation

Total 0.0556 0.1401 0.1891 0.1504 0.1233

Technological sectors

Electrical and Electronic Eng 0.0200 0.1215 0.1410 0.1759 0.1140

Instruments 0.0482 0.1783 0.1892 0.1800 0.1824

Chemistry 0.1854 0.3012 0.3323 0.4041 0.3894

Mechanical Eng 0.0337 0.0640 0.0640 0.0829 0.1045

Civil Engineering and Others 0.0556 0.1069 0.0914 0.1478 0.1429

Co-invention

No 0.0367 0.0742 0.0615 0.0762 0.1025

Yes 0.1586 0.3064 0.3036 0.3256 0.2875

Type of ﬁrms

National Firms 0.0766 0.1611 0.1585 0.2017 0.1976

MN Subsidiaries 0.0552 0.1310 0.1923 0.1617 0.1491

Source: Own elaboration.

5.2. results

The empirical model tests the hypothesis regarding the role of the

determinants addressed by the empirical literature on the persistence of gender

gap in STI. These determinants include horizontal and vertical segregation,

gender diversity in research networks, the organizational environment in

private and public organization, and the cooperation between organizations.

The coefﬁcient estimates presented in Table 4 provide support for our

hypotheses. As expected, the technology sectors have different impacts on

the probability of female participation in patents, with electrical and electronic

engineering used as the reference sector. Technology related to the sectors of

instruments, chemistry, and others have a positive impact on the likelihood

of female participation. Technologies related to the mechanical engineering

sector exhibit a similar behavior to electrical and electronic engineering in

the annual samples. These results are consistent with previous literature on

horizontal segregation (Azevedo and Abrantes, 2021; Schneegans et al. 2021).

The diversity of inventor teams, measured by co-invention and the number

of inventors in a team, positively impacts the probability of female participation

in patents. This ﬁnding supports previous literature (Sifontes and Morales,

2020; Azevedo and Abrantes, 2021), which shows that women are more likely

to participate in patents when a group of inventors is involved.

86 Marina Filgueiras Jorge

Conversely, the pronounced coefﬁcient for larger teams aligns with earlier

arguments, namely, that women are more likely to participate in inventions

where they have less individual responsibility (Murray and Graham, 2007) and

lower visibility (De Negri, 2020). However, cooperation shows no signiﬁcant

effect. We attribute this lack of signiﬁcance to the nature of cooperation in

Brazil, where collaboration can involve companies, companies and universities,

individuals and their respective organizations, and individuals on behalf of their

organizations. Each type of cooperation might offer a distinct environment for

women.

Regarding the institutional proﬁle of the applicant, universities, research

institutes, and government agencies show a positive coefﬁcient, indicating an

increased probability of female participation in patents. In contrast, female

participation is less likely in patent ﬁled by ﬁrms. These results are consistent

with the ﬁndings from previous literature (Mauleón and Bordons, 2010;

Sugimoto et al. 2015; Sifontes and Morales, 2020).

taBle 4. estimateD coefficients (full samPle)

Variables Dependent Variable: Female participation

2000 2005 2010 2015 2019

T_I 0.534*** 0.328*** 0.320*** 0.236** 0.370***

(0.156) (0.121) (0.116) (0.105) (0.102)

T_C 0.986*** 0.742*** 0.780*** 0.933*** 1.072***

(0.144) (0.109) (0.099) (0.090) (0.091)

T_ME 0.132 0.086 -0.013 -0.022 0.162*

(0.147) (0.111) (0.107) (0.098) (0.097)

T_O 0.498*** 0.363*** 0.248** 0.305*** 0.496***

(0.149) (0.117) (0.114) (0.107) (0.111)

CI 0.128 0.321*** 0.375*** 0.392*** 0.063

(0.158) (0.100) (0.099) (0.090) (0.084)

NI 0.236*** 0.250*** 0.292*** 0.264*** 0.294***

(0.049) (0.031) (0.027) (0.022) (0.019)

CO -0.165 -0.051 0.077 -0.031 0.107

(0.149) (0.105) (0.103) (0.102) (0.091)

URG 0.541*** 0.389*** 0.441*** 0.448*** 0.737***

(0.185) (0.119) (0.107) (0.100) (0.091)

RF -0.482*** -0.184** -0.287*** -0.286*** -0.246***

(0.106) (0.075) (0.081) (0.082) (0.075)

D Included Included Included Included Included

Observations 2,918 3,798 3,716 3,530 4,220

Note: *p<0.1; **p<0.05; ***p<0.01

The results for the subsample that considers only resident ﬁrms as

applicants are reported in Table 5. These results indicate that the likelihood

of female involvement in patents decreases when the patents are assigned to

multinational subsidiary ﬁrms. This observation aligns with the expected sign

Determinants of female ParticiPation in Patenting activity in Brazil: the role of multinational corPorations

revista De economía munDial 69, 2025, 71-93

but show no signiﬁcant effect in most of the annual subsamples. This ﬁnding

is consistent with the work-family balance hypothesis, which suggests that

gender segregation in science and technology disciplines in Latin America is

inﬂuenced by time and mobility constraints related to family responsibilities

(Yáñez, 2016). This dynamic can be extended to the case of women working

in MN subsidiaries, who may face difﬁculties accepting positions that require

long and regular travel. The lack of signiﬁcance suggests that MN subsidiaries

do not differ from local companies in this respect. This implies that while

gender diversity has the potential to enhance innovation outcomes, its actual

impact may be constrained by organizational roles, types of knowledge, and

institutional disparities across countries.

taBle 5. estimateD coefficients (only firms)

Variables Dependent Variable: Female participation

2000 2005 2010 2015 2019

T_I 0.58 0.251 0.246 0.071 0.288

(0.472) (0.227) (0.205) (0.182) (0.214)

T_C 1.229*** 0.482** 0.740*** 0.817*** 1.080***

(0.422) (0.198) (0.175) (0.149) (0.175)

T_ME 0.574 -0.427** -0.292 -0.243 0.234

(0.435) (0.210) (0.190) (0.160) (0.179)

T_O 0.742* -0.047 0.01 0.198 0.501**

(0.444) (0.230) (0.209) (0.166) (0.209)

NI 0.177*** 0.369*** 0.388*** 0.300*** 0.281***

(0.048) (0.037) (0.038) (0.031) (0.028)

MN_Sub -0.058 -0.067 0.09 -0.141 -0.430**

(0.230) (0.157) (0.140) (0.135) (0.171)

D Included Included Included Included Yes

Observations 751 1,109 1,176 1,188 1,215

Note: *p<0.1; **p<0.05; ***p<0.01

6. conclusions

This study investigated factors that inﬂuence female participation in

patenting activity across various institutions, particularly focusing on the role of

multinationals, identiﬁed by the origin of capital and the location of ﬁrms. The

determinants examined included technological specialization (which conﬁgures

horizontal segregation), co-invention, cooperation, and organizational and

cultural characteristics. To conduct the investigation, we analyzed the invention

patents ﬁled with the INPI-Brazil from 2000 to 2019.

The results reveal an upward trend in female participation in patents in

Brazil. However, women remain underrepresented, a ﬁnding consistent with

empirical studies in other countries, and with the persistence of asymmetries

that vary depending on the ﬁeld of knowledge and institutional sector.

Our analysis reveals a pattern of gender discrimination: women are more

88 Marina Filgueiras Jorge

prominently involved in chemistry, mixed-gender and larger teams, and in

universities, research, and government institutions.

Regarding technological sector variables, the probability of female

participation in patents increases when the patent is linked to chemistry and

instruments ﬁelds, which are closer to areas of knowledge related to biological

and life sciences. Conversely, the likelihood of female involvement decreases in

engineering-related patents. These results are consistent with the persistence of

horizontal segregation in STEM knowledge subareas and reﬂect the signiﬁcant

participation of women in medical and health sciences, which have a large and

productive community as a result of the entry of women in higher education in

care-related careers in the 1970s.

Our ﬁndings also conﬁrm that technological knowledge production is

more commonly achieved through co-invention, as measured by collaboration

networks involving two or more inventors, rather than by individual inventors

working alone. Moreover, co-invention played a signiﬁcant role in both female

inclusion in STI and, in a sense, acted as a mitigating factor for the effects of

time dedicated to “domestic work” and “care work”.

Regarding cooperation, there has been a noticeable increase in female

involvement across the full patent dataset, suggesting that cooperation acts as

a mechanism for inclusion. This is consistent with prior literature, which shows

the growing importance of international cooperation networks as a potential

means of integrating women into inventive activities (Medina and Alvarez,

2021). However, when applying the probit model to the sample of residents

only, cooperation, as deﬁned in footnote number 1, showed no signiﬁcant

effect, warranting further research. This result could inform the design of public

policies aimed at improving cooperation between national institutions to foster

greater stability for female participation.

Among the institutions ﬁling patents in Brazil, universities, research, and

government institutions showed the highest rates of female participation.

Brazilian universities, in particular, were predominant in this category,

underscoring their critical role in investing in science, technology, and innovation

activities, particularly as a mechanism for fostering female participation in

inventive activities. In this case, public policies could focus on mitigating the

persistent gender segregation within the STI system and encouraging female

students to pursue areas of knowledge that are traditionally male-dominated.

While multinationals are ﬁling patents in chemical technologies, which

explains the higher rate of female participation in their patents, MN

subsidiaries in Brazil and national ﬁrms exhibit a relatively higher propensity

to patent in the mechanical engineering sector, which coincides with the lowest

rates of female involvement. Moreover, although the electrical and electronic

engineering sector has seen global growth in patents published in 2020, this

trend has not yet been reﬂected in Brazil. Considering this, public policies

could aim to integrate more women into digital entrepreneurship and high-

tech ﬁrms as a future avenue of inclusion. Additionally, in light of the signiﬁcant

role of technology- and knowledge-intensive sectors, such as export-oriented

Determinants of female ParticiPation in Patenting activity in Brazil: the role of multinational corPorations

revista De economía munDial 69, 2025, 71-93

services, in increasing female participation, public policies should encourage a

shift towards these activities (Valera et al., 2024).

When considering a sub-sample of only resident ﬁrms, our model found

no signiﬁcant differences in the probability of female participation in patents

between national ﬁrms and MN subsidiaries. However, it is noteworthy that

national ﬁrms exhibit a higher relative presence of patents developed by

individual inventors attributed to a single female inventor. Given the general

trend towards increased team-based knowledge production, this represents a

signiﬁcant opportunity for national ﬁrms to foster greater diversity.

In summary, this study provides an overview of women’s participation as

inventors in technological knowledge generation in Brazil. The ﬁndings shed

light on the situation of women researchers in technological activities, the role

of institutions in reducing gender inequality, and the persistent challenges

across various ﬁelds. By leveraging patent indicators disaggregated by

applicant proﬁle, inventor composition, and technological sectors, this research

offers valuable insights for informing public policies aimed at promoting

female inclusion. However, there is still a need for improved data treatment,

including the integration of external databases, to further explore the life cycle

characteristics of female inventors, such as career stage and the impact of

maternity.

acknowleDgements

The author would like to thank the CNPq funding agency and the INPI for

supporting this research.

Special thanks to Ana Urraca-Ruiz for her valuable discussions and for her

helpful comments and feedback on this study.

The author assumes full responsibility for the content and conclusions of

this paper.

references

Avanci, V. L., and Urraca-Ruiz, A. (2017). A Complexidade e a Estabilidade

da Estrutura do Conhecimento Tecnológico na Evolução dos Micro-

paradigmas. In: II Encontro Nacional de Economia Industrial e Inovação.

São Paulo: Blucher, 1306-1320.

Azevedo, N., and Abrantes, A. C. S. (2021). A presença de mulheres na

atividade de patenteamento no Brasil (1996-2017). Saúde Debate, 45(1),

98-111.

Azmat, G., and Boring, A. (2020). Gender diversity in ﬁrms. Oxford Review of

Economic Policy, 36(4), 760–782.

Barinaga, M. (1992). Proﬁle of a ﬁeld: neuroscience; the pipeline is

leaking.Science, 255(5050), 1366-1367.

90 Marina Filgueiras Jorge

Bertrand, M. (2017). The Glass Ceiling. Becker Friedman Institute for Research

in Economics Working Paper, 2018-38. http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/

ssrn.3191467.

Bian, L., Leslie, S. J., and Cimpian, A. (2018). Evidence of bias against girls

and women in contexts that emphasize intellectual ability. American

Psychologist, 73(9), 1139–1153.https://doi.org/10.1037/amp0000427

Blickenstaff, J. C. (2005). Women and science careers: leaky pipeline or gender

ﬁlter? Gender and Education, London, 17(4), 369-386.

Carvalho, D. S., Bares, L., and Silva, K. (2020). The gender patenting gap:

A study on the iberoamerican countries. Journal of Data and Information

Science, 5(3), 116–128. https://doi.org/10.2478/jdis-2020-0025

Centro de Gestão e Estudos Estratégicos. (2024).Brasil: Mestres e doutores

2024. Available at:https://mestresdoutores2024.cgee.org.br/

Cohen, W. M., and Levinthal, D. A. (1990). Absorptive capacity: A new

perspective of learning and innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly,

35(1), 128-152.

Davis, C. A., and Poole, J. P. (2020). Can multinational ﬁrms promote gender

equality? The role of labour mobility. Transnational Corporations, 27(3).

De Negri, F. (2020). Mulheres na ciência no Brasil: ainda invisíveis? Centro de

Pesquisa em Ciência, Tecnologia e Sociedade (IPEA). Available at: https://

www.ipea.gov.br/cts/pt/central-de-conteudo/artigos/artigos/177-mulheres-

na-ciencia-no-brasil-ainda-invisiveis

Díaz-García, C., González-Moreno, A., and Jose Sáez-Martínez, F. (2013)

Gender diversity within R&D teams: Its impact on radicalness of innovation.

Innovation, 15(2), 149–160.

Dosi, G. (1988). Sources, procedures, and microeconomic effects of innovation.

Journal of Economic Literature, 26(3), 1120–1171.

Duarte, M. G. P., Gonçalves, E., Chein, F., and Taveira, J. G. (2020) Drivers

of scientiﬁc-technological production in Brazilian higher education and

research institutions. Revista de Economia Contemporânea, (24)3, 1-41.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/198055272432

Etzkowitz, H., and Zhou, C. (2017). Hélice Tríplice: inovação e

empreendedorismo universidade-indústria-governo. Estudos Avançados,

[s.l.], 31(90), 23-48. FapUNIFESP (SciELO). http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/

s0103-40142017.3190003

Feijó, J. (2023). Diferenças de gênero no mercado de trabalho. Blog do IBRE.

Available at: Diferenças de gênero no mercado de trabalho | Blog do IBRE

(fgv.br).

Fernández, J. (2015) The impact of gender diversity in foreign subsidiaries’

innovation outputs. International Journal of Gender and Entrepreneurship,

7(2), 148-167.

Ferner, A., Almond, P., and Colling, T. (2005). Institutional theory and the cross-

national transfer of employment policy: the case of ‘workforce diversity’ in

US multinationals.J Int Bus Stud,36, 304–321. https://doi.org/10.1057/

palgrave.jibs.8400134.

Determinants of female ParticiPation in Patenting activity in Brazil: the role of multinational corPorations

revista De economía munDial 69, 2025, 71-93

Ferrary, M., and Déo, S. (2023) Gender diversity and ﬁrm performance: when

diversity at middle management and staff levels matter, The International

Journal of Human Resource Management, 34(14), 2797-2831. DOI:

10.1080/09585192.2022.2093121

Goulart, L. T. (2017). Igualdade de gênero no mundo do trabalho: por que

isso importa? DOM, 11(32), 30-37. https://www.fdc.org.br/conhecimento/

publicacoes/artigos-revista-dom-32113.

Hall, L. (2010). The problem that won’t go away: Femininity, motherhood and

science. Women’s Studies Journal, 24(1), 14-30. https://www.wsanz.org.nz/

journal/docs/WSJNZ241Hall14-30.pdf

Instituto Brasileiro de Geograﬁa e Estatística. (2021). Estatísticas de Gênero:

Indicadores sociais das mulheres no Brasil. Informação Demográﬁca e

Socioeconômica, 38.

Instituto Nacional de Estudos e Pesquisas Educacionais. (2023). Sinopse

estatística da educação superior – 2022.

Instituto Nacional da Propriedade Industrial. (2015). Indicadores de

Propriedade Industrial (2000-2012): O uso do sistema de Propriedade

Industrial no Brasil.

Instituto Nacional da Propriedade Industrial. (2021). Indicadores de

Propriedade Industrial 2020.

Instituto Nacional da Propriedade Industrial. (2024). Anuário Estatístico de

Propriedade Industrial. Suplemento Temático: PI & Gênero no Brasil.

Lundvall, B. (Ed.). National Systems of Innovation: Towards a theory of

Innovation and interactive learning. Londres: Pinter Publishers, 1992.

Marques, F. (2017). Em busca de equilíbrio. Pesquisa Fapesp, ed. 254, p.

40-43, 2017. Available at: https://revistapesquisa.fapesp.br/wp-content/

uploads/2017/04/040-043_Generos_254.pdf. Accessed on: January 2,

2025.

Martinez, G. L., Raffo, J., and Saito, K. (2016). Identifying the gender of

PCT inventors. Economic Research Working Paper No. 33.https://doi.

org/10.34667/tind.28963

Mauleón, E., and Bordons, M. (2010). Male and female involvement in

patenting activity in Spain. Scientometrics, 83(3), 605–621. https://doi.

org/10.1007/s11192-009-0131-x

Mauleón, E., Daraio, C., and Bordons, M. (2013). Exploring gender differences

in patenting in Spain. Research Evaluation, 23(1), 62–78

Medina, L., and Álvarez, I. (2022). WHO invents what? Women’s participation

in patenting activity in Spain. International Journal of Gender and

Entrepreneurship, 14(3), 397-416. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJGE-11-2021-

0185

Ministério da Ciência, Tecnologia e Inovação. (2023). Indicadores nacionais de

ciência, tecnologia e inovação – 2022.

Morales-Valera, R. M., and Sifontes-Fernandez, D. A. (2014). La Actividad

Innovadora por Género en América Latina: un estudio de patentes.

92 Marina Filgueiras Jorge

Revista Brasileira de Inovação, 13(1), 163–186. DOI: 10.20396/rbi.

v13i1.8649075.

Mueller, S. P. M., and Perucchi, V. (2014). Universidades e a produção de

patentes: tópicos de interesse para o estudioso da informação tecnológica.

Perspectivas em Ciência da Informação, 19(2), 15-36.

Murray, F., and Graham, L. (2007). Buying science and selling science: Gender

differences in the market for commercial science. Industrial and Corporate

Change, 16(4), 657–689.

Naldi, F., Luzi, D., Valente, A., and Parenti, I. V. (2004). Scientiﬁc and

technological Performance by gender. In: MOED, H. F. et al. (eds.),

Handbook of Quantitative Science and Technology Research. Netherlands:

Kluwer Academic Publishers, 299-314.

Nelson, R. R., and Winter, S. G. (1982). An evolutionary theory of Economic

Change. Cambridge, MA and London: Harvard University Press.

Oberﬁeld, Z. W. (2014) Accounting for Time: Comparing Temporal and

Atemporal Analyses of the Business Case for Diversity Management, Public

Administration Review, 74(6), 777–894.

Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development. (2022). FDI

Qualities Indicators 2022. www.oecd.org/fr/investissement/fdi-qualities-

indicators.htm

Organização das Nações Unidas. (2015). Agenda 2030 para o Desenvolvimento

Sustentável. Available at: Agenda 2030 para o Desenvolvimento Sustentável

| As Nações Unidas no Brasil.

ONU Mujeres. (2020). Las mujeres en ciencias, tecnología, ingeniería y

matemáticas en América Latina y el Caribe.

Schneegans, S., Lewis, J., and Straza, T. (Eds.). (2021). Relatório de Ciências

da UNESCO: A corrida contra o tempo por um desenvolvimento mais

inteligente – Resumo executivo. UNESCO Publishing.

Sifontes, D.; & Morales, R. (2020). Gender differences and patenting in Latin

America: understanding female participation in commercial science.

Scientometrics, 124, 2009–2036, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-020-

03567-6

Sugimoto, C. R., Ni, C., West, J. D., and Larivière, V. (2015). The Academic

Advantage: Gender Disparities in Patenting. PLOS ONE, 10(5). https://doi.

org/10.1371/journal.pone.0128000

Teruel, M., and Segarra-Blasco, A. (2022). Gender, occupational diversity of

R&D teams and patents generation: an application to Spanish ﬁrms. R&D

Management, 52(3), 517-529. https://doi.org/10.1111/radm.12496

UKIPO - United Kingdom Intellectual Property Ofﬁce. (2016). Gender Proﬁles

in Worldwide Patenting: An analysis of female inventorship.

USPTO – United States Patent and Trademark Ofﬁce. (2020). Progress and

Potential: 2020 update on U.S. women inventor-patentees, IP Data

Highlights, n. 4.

Urraca-Ruiz, A. (2024) Género e Innovación. Revista de Economía Mundial,

68. https://doi.org/10.33776/rem.vi68

Determinants of female ParticiPation in Patenting activity in Brazil: the role of multinational corPorations

revista De economía munDial 69, 2025, 71-93

Varela, B. B., Campos-Romero, H., and Amoedo, J. M. (2024). STEM and

International Trade in a Gender Perspective: The Cases of Brazil, Chile, and

Mexico. Revista de Economía Mundial, (68), 67-93. DOI: http://dx.doi.

org/10.33776/rem.v0i68.8236

Vongalis-Macrow, A. (2016). What It Will Take to Keep Women from Leaving

STEM? Harvard Business Review. https://hbr.org/2016/09/what-it-will-

take-to-keep- women-from-leaving-stem

WIPO – World Intellectual Property Ofﬁce. PCT Yearly Review 2024: The

International Patent System. Geneva: WIPO, 2024.

Whittington, K. B., and Smith-Doerr, L. (2008). Women Inventors in Context:

Disparities in Patenting across Academia and Industry. Gender & Society,

22(2), 194–218. https://doi.org/10.1177/0891243207313928

Wuchty, S.,Jones, B. F., andUzzi, B. (2007). The Increasing Dominance of Teams

in Production of Knowledge. Science, 316, 1036-1039. DOI:10.1126/

science.1136099

Yáñez, S. (2016). Trayectoriaslaborales de mujeresenciencia y tecnología.

Barreras y desafíos. Unestudioexploratorio. Flacso-Chile. Documento de

trabajo No, 2, Junio.