Disrupted Mobilities, Disrupted Careers: Outro of the Blog Series on COVID-19 and Early Career Academics

In conclusion of the nccr – on the move blog series on the impact of COVID-19 on early-career academics, this post takes stock of the central issues raised. Based on additional insights from a satisfaction survey realized among the nccr – on the move-funded early-stage academics in February 2021 and studies conducted by nature and DeGruyter, a reflection of how the pandemic has both disclosed and perpetuated pre-existing inequalities in academia and how they could be redressed will follow.

The ongoing pandemic is having a far-reaching and varied impact around the world. It entails not only a public health crisis but also a large-scale de-mobilization, as governments have closed international borders and imposed different types of lockdowns to curb the spread of COVID-19. This blog series sheds light on the uneven impact of these measures on the different members of the academic system.

The Pandemic and Academia: COVID-19 as an Equalizer, a Catalyst and a Driver of Inequalities

Research is a creative and collaborative process of intellectual exchange with the outside world at large. As teaching, data collection, teamwork and conferences have been moved to on-line settings, academics are finding it difficult to uphold and extend their collaborations, find co-authors and exercise supervision duties properly. This multiplication of uncertainties, both of known and unknown ‘unknowns’ (Sidler and Gandenberger) is a challenging experience for all academics.

Some Are More Unequal than Others

The pandemic has therefore in some regards worked as an equalizer. As Althoff recalls, the restricted ability to move has disproportionately been felt by scholars from the “Global North” whereas their colleagues from the “Global South” have known this state for decades. Yet, Ammann and Richter rightly argue that the pandemic has foremost acted as a catalyst, disclosing and exacerbating pre-existing inequalities and strains within academia. Early career academics suffer more from the curtailed international mobility, which constitutes both an imperative (Ammann and Richter) and an identifying feature (Althoff; Martel, Hadi and Raupp) of their lives.

Explaining the Differential Impact of the Pandemic

Overall, the extent of the exposure to the pandemic seems to depend on four main factors: gender, country of residence, academic disciplines as well as the career stage.

Gender
The care needs of vulnerable relatives have increased during the pandemic, as lockdowns and home office regulations have increased the presence of family members in the household and added new tasks, such as homeschooling and extended childcare duties. Due to the still prevalent gendered distribution of tasks, women have borne the brunt of these additional care duties. A revealing finding of the most recent Career Tracker Cohorts Study, summarized by Zimmermann et al., is that many female academics have therefore shifted their working hours to early morning, evenings and weekends, which has led to a decrease in perceived work productivity and fewer article submissions by female academics (see also Nature 2020; De Gruyter 2020).

Country of Residence
While obstacles to international travel have become the new normal, the governmental measures adopted to limit domestic moves have varied greatly. In countries with strict curtailment measures, it has proven more difficult to uphold normal working routines than in countries with liberal approaches.  For instance, since June 2020 most public infrastructures such as schools or university facilities were accessible in Switzerland, albeit to a limited extent. This has had a less negative effect on work productivity for academics based in this country, as Zimmermann et al. show.

Academic Disciplines and Working Methods
Humanities scholars are currently more limited in their work than natural scientists (DeGruyter 2020). Our internal survey similarly shows that the NCCR junior researchers relying on ethnographic and other qualitative data have been more affected than those working with statistical data. The most frequently reported causes of delays are the cancellation and postponing of fieldwork. Two-thirds of those affected by COVID-19 delays estimate that their work is delayed by three to six months. An even longer delay is estimated by junior scholars, exemplified by Azevedo, who conduct their research in a transnational setting or work on the mobility of populations at higher risk from the new coronavirus. Most qualitative scholars have resorted to on-line research, which raises several methodological and ethical issues.

Stage in the Academic Career

Online teaching and supervision require more time and effort, which increases the workload of academics considerably. The report by DeGruyter (2020) shows that this leads to a “triple whammy of pressures” especially for female mid-career scholars, as they often struggle with the above-described increase and gendered division of care duties simultaneously. With the more senior members of the community grappling with the additional workload, many early-career researchers feel left alone with the numerous uncertainties related to their research endeavors (Sidler/Gandenberger). Faced with the further challenge of decreasing networking opportunities (see Hoffmeyer), this has led to an increase in the number of reported physical and mental health issues, as Ader has demonstrated. Adding to these anxieties is the fact that most junior academics are hired on short-term employment contracts, and subject to temporally limited funding. A further concern, as both the contributions by Martel et al. (for PhDs) and Zimmermann (for PostDocs) illustrate, is that of a darkened outlook on the career prospects.

What We Need to Do and Why it Really Matters

We therefore firstly concur with Stodulka and Nguyen that “future recruiters should recognize the disruption (…) as force majeure for the current cohort of PhDs and PostDocs in future recruitment and evaluations”. At the same time, academic institutions and funding bodies should acknowledge the unequal conditions that occurred over the last year and apply the existing PhD/PostDoc duration rules over this specific period flexibly. The affected researchers, and here we mainly refer to the results of our internal survey, concur in requesting contract prolongations in response to the pandemic. To offer such contract prolongations, additional funding is necessary, and transparent procedures need to be set up and communicated.

Secondly, the uneven effects of the pandemic call for targeted countermeasures. That many (mostly female) early- to mid-stage career researchers are taking on additional caring duties needs to be recognized and taken into account when their output is assessed. Moreover, support must be lent to young scholars who find themselves in a vulnerable mental health condition. They need access to psychological counseling and those in charge of promoting and supervising should consider their circumstances.

By ignoring the issues raised in this blog series, we finally risk undermining the much-needed measures adopted in the last decades to facilitate diversity in academia. At the same time, we are witnessing a further deterioration of the already precarious working conditions of early-career researchers in universities in many countries including Switzerland. As elsewhere, the problem has been acknowledged by stakeholders such as the Swiss Academies but few effective countermeasures have been taken so far. We conclude with a plea for caring about the current situation, as it has the potential to put the future of the academic system at stake. The longer the pandemic lasts, the weaker the response to existing and new inequalities and obstacles, the more we risk jeopardizing the career opportunities and mental well-being of a whole cohort of researchers.

---

We thank all the authors of this series for their contributions and express our gratitude for their willingness to grant us insights into the personal struggles and their reflections triggered by the current pandemic.

The internal satisfaction summary mentioned in the text was returned by 27 of the 42 researchers (PreDoc and PostDoc) funded by the nccr – on the move. 21 reported having been affected by delays in their research projects caused by COVID-19 and related measures. The cancellation and postponing of fieldwork were reported as the most frequent effects in 16 responses. 14 out of 21 respondents estimated the delay to be between three to six months.

Nicole Wichmann is the Administrative Director of the nccr – on the move. Aldina Camenisch is the Equal Opportunities Officer and future Scientific Officer of the nccr – on the move.