Abstract:

Women now make up around half of university enrolments in most regions, yet they remain scarce in senior academic posts and in leadership. (Correa et al., 2025). This review asks what governments and universities did about that between 2010 and 2025, and what the evidence shows worked. It uses a systematised review design with narrative and integrative synthesis, guided by the conceptual framework set out below, and analyses 21 documents: one systematic review that itself screened 37 primary studies, 12 primary empirical studies, and 8 institutional, national, or supranational policy documents drawn from Scopus, Web of Science, ERIC, and targeted institutional and grey-literature sources. The evidence covers Europe, sub-Saharan Africa, and North America. It is grouped by four policy instruments: statutory and quasi-statutory gender quotas, charter schemes such as Athena SWAN, incentive-linked funding, and mentorship and sponsorship programmes. Quotas and funding incentives shift the numbers most. European systems with quotas show women's representation on academic boards running some 23 percentage points above systems without them, and the effect is strongest where money is at stake, such as eligibility for research funding. But numbers are not culture. Gains in representation do not convert automatically into structural or cultural change. Charter schemes prompt useful internal reflection and gradual improvement in the leadership pipeline, yet they struggle with entrenched pay and power gaps unless wider society shifts too. Sub-Saharan Africa presents a different problem: formal gender policies are multiplying while enforcement stays thin, so progress in access rarely reaches the leadership tier. No single instrument is sufficient. Reform works when binding rules, real financial stakes, and sustained cultural effort are layered together and matched to local implementation capacity. The review closes with a research and policy agenda for the period beyond 2025.