Latest Data: 2020
This page examines the genders of UK archaeologists.
Highlights
Share this Research
Employers reported that 47% of archaeologists working for them in 2019-20 were women and 53% men. Over time, since 1997-98, the proportion of women in the archaeological workforce has been steadily increasing, and in 2019-20 the gender balance in the profession matched that of the entire UK workforce.
Note: Individuals vs Organisations – There were two sources of data for the gender of archaeologists – those provided by employers (includes some self-employed archaeologists) and individuals responding to the survey. While not tracked in pre- 2019-20 surveys, only a handful of staff in 2020 were reported by employers as being of other genders, not enough to be appear in the graphs. Slightly more individuals than employers reported ‘other’ genders and this slightly affects totals for that dataset, but all results (employer and individual) are within 1% of each other.
Note: Other genders – while individuals were able to indicate what their other genders were in the survey, due to the low numbers they will not be listed to avoid making any respondent identifiable or lead to possible mis-identification.
Table 2.4.1: Gender of respondent organisation’s archaeologists and UK workforce, 1997-2020, includes individual responses for 2019-20. UK Workforce data from the Office of National Statistics: “EMP01 SA: Full-time, part-time and temporary workers (seasonally adjusted)“.
| Full-time equivalent | 1997-98 | 2002-03 | 2007-08 | 2012-13 | 2019-20 | 2019-20 Individuals | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Count | Percentage | Count | Percentage | Count | Percentage | Count | Percentage | Count | Percentage | Count | Percentage | |
| Archaeologists – Female | 747 | 35% | 717 | 36% | 1,013 | 41% | 400 | 46% | 1,266 | 47% | 480 | 48% |
| Archaeologists – Male | 1,359 | 65% | 1,268 | 64% | 1,432 | 59% | 471 | 54% | 1,409 | 53% | 496 | 50% |
| Archaeologists – prefer not to say | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 7 | 1% | |||||
| Archaeologists – other | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 4 | 0% | 7 | 1% | ||||
| UK Workforce – Female | 45% | 46% | 46% | 46% | 47% | 0% | ||||||
| UK Workforce – Male | 55% | 54% | 54% | 53% | 53% | 0% | ||||||
| Archaeologists – Total | 2,106 | 1,985 | 2,445 | 871 | 2,679 | 990 | ||||||
Download this table:
Analysis
Results with an r < .001 are discussed for each subject presented in this report – see methodology section for more details on this.
Gender and Age
As in past years, the 2020 data shows a division in gender by age groups with older archaeologists being more likely to be male and younger archaeologists more likely to be female.
Table 2.4.2: Breakdown of ages by gender for those who were employed or self-employed as an archaeologist.
| Age | Female | Male | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Count | % | Count | % | |
| Under 20 | 0% | 0% | ||
| 20-24 | 21 | 75% | 7 | 25% |
| 24-29 | 53 | 60% | 35 | 40% |
| 30-34 | 60 | 51% | 57 | 49% |
| 35 – 39 | 78 | 58% | 57 | 42% |
| 40 – 44 | 77 | 52% | 72 | 48% |
| 45 – 49 | 55 | 49% | 58 | 51% |
| 50 – 54 | 37 | 37% | 63 | 63% |
| 55 – 59 | 47 | 44% | 59 | 56% |
| 60+ | 39 | 33% | 79 | 67% |
| Total | 467 | 48% | 487 | 50% |
Download this table:
Glass Ceiling
In the 2012-13 Profiling the Profession report it was speculated that there could be a gender based phenomenon pushing women out of archaeology in their 30s, before they reach their 40s (potentially, family duties, which studies have found disproportionately affect women). As the present iteration of Profiling the Profession was seven years later than the predecessor, rather than recurring on a five-year cycle as had been undertaken previously, this makes analysis of generational and gender trends harder as the age cohorts from past PP do not aligned exactly. However, even with those difficulties, the data indicate that there is no such ceiling. Examining the different age cohorts in 2007-08 and 2012-13 and then comparing the gender distribution against those in 2019-20 (cohorts that are 12 and 7 years older), the data indicate that the cohorts have aged up without changing gender distribution significantly. Figure 2.4.3 demonstrates this with the current data and then 2012-13 data all shifted one age cohort higher e.g. the percentage of women in the 20-29 age group has been moved to the 30-39 age group. Given these surveys will have error ranges, it could not be expected they would line up exactly.
There could be an issue with the transition between the 20s and 30s but the 20s are the smallest age group in all the surveys so this could be ‘noise’ in the data. With the low response rate we are not confident in drawing conclusions, either way, about the 20s and 30s transition for women.
The surveys in 2007-08 and 2012-13 used different age groupings, of 5 and 10 year bands. The data for 2019-20 were collected as exact numbers so it is possible to re-categories this data to any degree. As such, table 2.4.3 has both categories for 2019-20 to allow comparison.
Important Note – this does not mean no one leaves professional archaeology because of gender related issues. These data mean that any effect is not at sufficient enough scale to affect the gender and age distribution of UK archaeologists. These data also do not capture those who might have left the profession for several years and then returned, if their period away was between survey dates.
Table 2.4.3: Breakdown of ages by gender for those who were employed or self-employed as an archaeologist in 2007-08, 2012-13 and 2019-20.
| Age | 2020 | 2007 | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Female | Male | Female | Male | |||||
| Count | % | Count | % | Count | % | Count | % | |
| 20-24 | 21 | 75% | 7 | 25% | 121 | 52% | 110 | 48% |
| 24-29 | 53 | 60% | 35 | 40% | 249 | 54% | 212 | 46% |
| 30-34 | 60 | 51% | 57 | 49% | 182 | 43% | 237 | 57% |
| 35 – 39 | 78 | 58% | 57 | 42% | 126 | 36% | 228 | 64% |
| 40 – 44 | 77 | 52% | 72 | 48% | 102 | 34% | 198 | 66% |
| 45 – 49 | 55 | 49% | 58 | 51% | 106 | 37% | 180 | 63% |
| 50 – 54 | 37 | 37% | 63 | 63% | 58 | 30% | 135 | 70% |
| 55 – 59 | 47 | 44% | 59 | 56% | 45 | 36% | 79 | 64% |
| 60+ | 39 | 33% | 79 | 67% | 23 | 32% | 48 | 68% |
| 2020 | 2012 | |||||||
| 20-29 | 74 | 64% | 42 | 36% | 74 | 65% | 40 | 35% |
| 30-39 | 138 | 55% | 114 | 45% | 149 | 53% | 130 | 47% |
| 40-49 | 132 | 50% | 130 | 50% | 97 | 38% | 155 | 62% |
| 50-59 | 84 | 41% | 122 | 59% | 61 | 36% | 109 | 64% |
| 60+ | 39 | 33% | 79 | 67% | 19 | 35% | 35 | 65% |
Download this table:
Image Credit
Working shot- excavating cremation in urn 1 by Oxford Archaeology CC BY 4.0. Oxford Archaeology (South) (2021) Site and Post-Excavation Data from an Evaluation at New Barn Farm, Cholsey, Oxfordshire 2016 [data-set]. York: Archaeology Data Service [distributor] https://doi.org/10.5284/1085010
Version control and change log
As a digital document we may update parts of this page in the future to account for corrections or the need for clarification. Please use the version when citing:
Version: 1.0
Change log: no changes
CREDITS
Title: Profiling the Profession
2020 Authors: Kenneth Aitchison, Poppy German and Doug Rocks-Macqueen
Published by: Landward Research Ltd
Version Date: 2021
ISBN: 978-0-9572452-8-0
DOI: https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.14333387
License: CC BY SA 4.0 for all text and figures. Header images are from different sources check image credits for their specific licensing.
2020 funders: Historic England, with support from Historic Environment Scotland, CIfA and FAME.
Questions about Profiling the Profession: enquiries@landward.eu