Book Offer
This will close in 10 seconds
Methodological Note: The figures presented below are estimates based on publicly available information and reasonable assumptions. As Irish universities do not publish audited DEI expenditure data, actual costs may be higher or lower than those reported here.
Equality, Diversity and Inclusion (DEI) has become an established feature of Irish higher education. Universities have created EDI offices, appointed senior equality leaders, established committees and action plans, introduced training programmes and incorporated equality considerations into recruitment, promotion and governance structures.
Athena SWAN, initially developed to advance gender equality in STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering and Maths) disciplines, has evolved into one of the most influential frameworks shaping institutional priorities.
Yet, despite the growth of this infrastructure, remarkably little is known about its cost. To our knowledge, neither the Higher Education Authority (HEA) nor Research Ireland publishes a national figure for DEI expenditure. Universities themselves rarely identify DEI as a distinct budget category in their financial statements. The public is therefore left with fragments: organisational charts, annual reports and equality strategies. Those fragments allow broad estimates, but they fall short of genuine transparency.
This absence of information is striking. In recent years, governments have placed increasing emphasis on transparency and reporting obligations for businesses and public institutions alike. Companies are expected to disclose information relating to governance, sustainability and equality practices. Yet when it comes to understanding how much public money is devoted to DEI initiatives within higher education, comprehensive figures are not readily available.
Another concern, and one that is rarely discussed openly within universities, relates to the evidential basis upon which specific DEI initiatives are designed and evaluated. In most areas of public policy, interventions are expected to identify a clearly defined problem, present evidence of its scale and assess whether the proposed solutions achieve their intended outcomes. Universities routinely apply these standards in research and teaching. It is therefore reasonable to ask whether DEI initiatives are subject to similar levels of scrutiny and evaluation.
Critics say that too often, assumptions about the prevalence of discrimination are accepted without rigorous examination, while alternative explanations for observed disparities receive comparatively little attention. For example, the relatively low proportion of women in engineering is often interpreted as evidence of structural barriers within those fields. Yet universities rarely apply the same reasoning to disciplines such as medicine or veterinary, where women now constitute a majority of students and, in some cases, graduates.
This is not to deny that discrimination exists. Rather, it is to argue that institutions should be expected to provide evidence proportionate to the interventions they propose. If universities devote substantial public resources to DEI programmes, they should be prepared to demonstrate, with robust data, both the nature of the problems they seek to address and the effectiveness of the measures adopted in response.
Whether one regards these developments as overdue progress or bureaucratic expansion, a simple question remains surprisingly difficult to answer: how much does it all cost?
Trinity College Dublin provides a useful illustration of how DEI has become embedded within university life. Trinity’s EDI Office oversees equality strategies, Athena SWAN activities, race equality initiatives and staff development programmes. Based on publicly available information and standard university employment costs, the following estimates provide an indication of the scale of investment involved.
| Position | Staff | Estimated annual cost per person | Estimated annual total |
| Vice-President for EDI (partial allocation) | 1 | €70,000–€120,000 | €70,000–€120,000 |
| Head of EDI | 1 | €100,000–€130,000 | €100,000–€130,000 |
| Senior Equality / EDI Officers | 2 | €80,000–€95,000 | €160,000–€190,000 |
| Equality / Project Officers | 2–3 | €65,000–€80,000 | €130,000–€240,000 |
| EDI Data Analyst and Athena SWAN Officer | 1 | €70,000–€85,000 | €70,000–€85,000 |
| Administrative Support | 1 | €50,000–€65,000 | €50,000–€65,000 |
| Estimated central staffing total | 8–9 | €580,000–€830,000 |
*Salary estimates were derived from publicly available Irish university and public-sector salary scales, using midpoint values where exact grades were unavailable.
These figures do not capture the full costs associated with DEI activities. Additional expenditure arises through staff participation in Athena SWAN committees, equality training, awareness events, implementation of action plans and institutional reporting requirements.
A cautious estimate suggests that these activities account for a further €300,000–€600,000 annually.
Based on the assumptions described above, Trinity College Dublin’s DEI-related expenditure could plausibly fall within the range of €900,000 to €1.4 million per annum.
The Trinity example raises a broader question: what does the national picture look like?
Ireland currently has seven traditional universities, five technological universities and several specialist higher education institutions participating in Athena SWAN. Most maintain dedicated EDI structures. Based on publicly available staffing information and standard employment costs, the following estimates emerge.
Estimated annual DEI expenditure by institution type
Note: The expenditure ranges presented below were deliberately chosen to reflect likely variation in institutional size, organisational structures and the extent of investment in DEI staffing and activities across the sector.
| Institution type | Institutions | Estimated expenditure per institution | Estimated total |
| Traditional universities (TCD, UCD, UCC, Galway, DCU, UL, Maynooth) | 7 | €0.8–€1.5 million | €5.6–€10.5 million |
| Technological universities (TU Dublin, MTU, TUS, SETU, ATU) | 5 | €0.4–€0.8 million | €2.0–€4.0 million |
| Specialist higher education institutions (RCSI, NCAD, IADT, MIC, etc.) | 9 | €0.1–€0.3 million | €0.9–€2.7 million |
| Total direct DEI expenditure | 21 | €8.5–€17.2 million |
Athena SWAN introduces another layer of expenditure. Although institutional participation is supported through national arrangements coordinated by the HEA, implementation depends heavily on staff time. Data collection, consultation exercises, committee meetings, report preparation and action-plan monitoring all require substantial institutional effort.
Across the sector, participation is extensive. A conservative estimate suggests that around 1,000–1,500 academic and professional staff are directly involved in Athena SWAN self-assessment teams, EDI committees and related working groups. This figure is derived from a bottom‑up approximation: in a typical institution, universities tend to involve roughly 80–150 staff across central and departmental teams, technological universities around 30–70, and smaller specialist institutions about 10–30. Aggregated across Ireland’s approximately 21 participating institutions, this produces a plausible range of 800–1,670 individuals, which can reasonably be expressed as an order‑of‑magnitude estimate of 1,000–1,500 participants.
Assuming an average contribution of 30–50 hours annually per participant, this represents approximately 30,000–75,000 hours each year. Using a cautious estimate of €60–€80 per hour in staff costs, the implied investment in staff time alone amounts to approximately €2–6 million annually.
Estimated national investment in DEI activities
| Category | Estimated annual expenditure |
| Institutional DEI offices and programmes | €8.5–€17.2 million |
| Staff time devoted to Athena SWAN and EDI committees | €2–6 million |
| HEA EDI Enhancement Fund and related initiatives | €0.5–€1 million |
| Estimated national total | €11–24 million |
These sums represent only a small proportion of overall university expenditure. Nevertheless, they are sufficiently substantial to merit scrutiny. At the midpoint estimate of approximately €17 million annually.
The issue, however, is not whether equality matters. Few would dispute that universities should strive to provide fair opportunities and welcoming environments. The more difficult question is whether the structures currently in place represent the most effective and efficient means of achieving those goals.
This need not become another front in the culture wars. Universities routinely publish detailed information about research income, student enrolment and capital expenditure. There is no obvious reason why DEI expenditure should remain opaque. Those who support these initiatives should welcome transparency. If the benefits are substantial, evidence of effectiveness will strengthen the case for continued investment. Conversely, if certain activities generate significant administrative burdens without delivering meaningful outcomes, resources can be redirected towards interventions that demonstrably work.
The most striking aspect of this debate is not necessarily the estimated €11–24 million invested annually across Irish higher education. Rather, it is that no national body currently publishes figures that would allow the public to determine whether this investment is too high, too low or exactly right.
In an era increasingly defined by evidence-based policymaking, that absence of transparency is difficult to justify.
Séamus Clarke is an Irish academic working in a third-level institution. He writes here under a pen name.
References:
This will close in 10 seconds