Abstract Faced with complex policy challenges, policymakers increasingly rely on expert input, reinforcing technocratic tendencies within representative democracy. While public support for expert governance—especially involving female, politically unaffiliated academics—is well documented, less is known about (the mechanisms shaping) their actual presence in expert roles. This study examines the underrepresentation of female experts in Belgian parliamentary hearings (2012–2023), using logistic regression models to assess how temporal trends, policy domains, disciplinary background, and career stage influence their presence. We find that female academics are disproportionately consulted in soft policy domains and at earlier career stages compared to male academics. These patterns persist even after accounting for temporal change or disciplinary and seniority distributions, suggesting that gendered disparities in expert consultation are not merely reflective of the academic pool. Instead, structural selection biases likely limit female academics’ access to policy influence, raising critical questions about democratic inclusivity and the gendered nature of expert involvement.
Ingelbeen et al. (Mon,) studied this question.