By the book: measuring inclusive practices in book publishing

Author: Charlotte Hollingworth, Tamsine O'Riordan and Sowmya Swaminathan

Springer Nature

This opinion piece first appeared in Book Brunch during the Frankfurt Book Fair 2025 and has been republished here with permission.

Books are a fundamental part of the academic landscape. They’re also the first point of interaction that many customers, readers and learners have with the research publishing industry. Books shape disciplines, conversations and knowledge, so they should reflect the world we live in.  

For so many of us attending the Fair this year, who we publish matters just as much as what we publish. For Springer Nature, the world’s largest publisher of scholarly books, we take that responsibility seriously. Data helps us to do so; it helps us to understand where we are, so we can get to where we want to be.  

A few days ago, we published a new report using inferred gender analysis to understand gender representation in book publishing, using data from across our business. It’s the first of its kind, spearheaded by a cross-business taskforce focused on our books publishing activity and we’re sharing it exclusively with Book Brunch readers at Frankfurt Book Fair.  

It includes data on lead authors, volume editors, and series editors and shows women are underrepresented across all roles. 29% of lead authors and editors are women, and only 24% of book series editors—those with long-term influence over publishing direction—are women. 

The report also reveals disparities across disciplines. In the humanities and social sciences, women are well represented, comprising over 70% of authors and editors. But in medicine and life sciences, only 26% of lead authors and editors are women, despite women making up nearly half of researchers in those fields. In computer science, the figure is just 30%.  

Even more telling is the breakdown by book type. While contributed volumes are often edited by women (33%), only 18–19% of textbooks (typically authored by senior academics) are led by women.   

The data might be from our books business, but it reflects what most of us already know to be true more broadly - author and editor demographics don’t yet reflect the global research community. This is something that all of us in the academic publishing space in particular can work towards, together.  

It is important in the first instance that we have a baseline view of gender representation, so we can properly assess our current situation – and how to address it. What gets measured; gets managed. This is something our reporting has consistently shown us – data collection can propel you forward, it gives you a clear view of what is going on so you can design publishing strategies and action plans that are bespoke, targeted and effective. 

It’s also shown us that data collection across a large, multidisciplinary publisher is a complex and challenging exercise. Our recommendation to those looking to do the same is to break the challenge down into manageable parts, focusing your data collection efforts first on what is practical, and where you might be able to make a crucial difference.  

Looking ahead, we will continue our data-driven approach to support inclusion. Data collection is a necessary tool, not an end in itself. We need to understand where we are in order to assess progress and the effect of measures taken. Having this information not only informs our data-driven approach to measuring change, but inspires action – among our colleagues, our peers and our communities.