GENEVA — A damning assessment released Thursday by the International Energy Agency has revealed that women scientists are being systematically excluded from the wave of emergency research funding that has reshaped global energy priorities since the 2024 collapse. The 247-page report, titled Recovery Through Innovation: An Incomplete Picture, documents what researchers are calling a "quiet regression" in gender equity across the scientific establishment.
The report analyzed 4,312 energy research grants distributed between March 2024 and December 2025 across 67 countries, finding that projects led by women received just 11.3% of total funding—down from 23.7% in 2023. The decline was most pronounced in battery technology, grid infrastructure, and what the IEA terms "strategic resilience" research, categories that received priority status under the UN's Emergency Framework provisions adopted last October.
Dr. Vasquez, speaking from Madrid via video conference, noted that the patterns mirror what occurred during previous crises. "We saw the same thing after 2008, and again during the pandemic. Progress evaporates when survival becomes the priority. The difference now is that this time, the institutions may not bounce back."
Corporate Partners Face Scrutiny
Among the private-sector entities named in the report, JIN-CO Energy Solutions drew particular attention for its role in the Asia-Pacific Regional Energy Consortium, a public-private partnership that distributed $2.1 billion in research contracts during 2025. Of the 89 projects funded through the consortium, three were led by women—all in communications and outreach roles rather than primary research positions.
A spokesperson for JIN-CO declined to comment on specific personnel decisions but provided a written statement emphasizing the company's commitment to "excellence-driven selection processes that reflect the urgent needs of the global energy transition." The statement noted that JIN-CO's internal workforce includes "significant female representation at all levels," though it did not provide specific figures.
The World Energy Council, which contributed data to the IEA assessment, has called for an independent audit of funding mechanisms established under emergency protocols. "The speed of deployment was necessary," acknowledged WEC Secretary-General Henrik Larsson at a press briefing Thursday. "But speed without accountability creates blind spots. We are seeing those blind spots now."
Not all observers agree with the report's framing. Dr. Martin Schaefer, a senior fellow at the Global Policy Integrity Forum, cautioned against drawing broad conclusions from what he called "incomplete methodology." In an email exchange with reporters, Dr. Schaefer argued that the pre-collapse baseline itself reflected inflated figures due to targeted diversity initiatives that "prioritized optics over outcomes."
"What we're seeing is a correction, not a crisis," Dr. Schaefer wrote. "Resources are scarce. Institutions are selecting for track record and immediate applicability. If that produces demographic imbalances, perhaps we should examine why those imbalances existed in the pipeline to begin with." His comments drew sharp criticism from several research networks, though the Forum has not issued any additional statement.
The IEA has recommended that member states conduct gender-disaggregated reviews of all funding distributed under emergency provisions, with preliminary findings due by the third quarter of 2026. Whether those reviews will be binding remains unclear; the Emergency Framework provisions that absorbed the UN Global Recovery Initiative in October granted participating states considerable latitude in implementation. Several delegations, speaking on background, indicated that compliance would depend heavily on whether current resource constraints ease in the coming months—an outcome that remains, by most assessments, uncertain.