女性在科技領域的偏低比例，大約從1970年代起就受到西方女性主義學者的關注，但是對於科技領域中的男女人數之統計與分析，目前國內少有相關文獻。為了填補此一基礎資料的缺漏，本文首先介紹性別與科技統計的相關定義與國際標準，以及目前架構相對最為完備的歐盟性別科技統計專書She Figures。接著，透過次級資料的蒐集與整理，本文呈現並比較臺灣與歐盟的女性在科技教育和就業方面的參與情形，並且從性別隔離、管漏效應等相關理論觀點，進行初步的描述分析。 　　經過比較可以發現，在教育方面，歐盟和臺灣都在碩士升博士階段出現女性流失的管漏現象，且工程學科的男多女少現象在進大學前就已經出現，臺灣程度又比歐盟嚴重。而在就業方面，則發現兩地科技人力就業部門的選擇均有「男企業、女高教」的分隔，而工程領域的就業女性比例過少、且層級愈高女性愈少的現象，顯然是目前台歐均面臨的最主要性別問題。另一方面，本文指出人文、社科領域的研發人力也有「女多於男」的水平隔離趨勢，只是因為女性人數較少，此問題較被忽視。但隨著管漏效應的改善，可以預見未來水平隔離會是性別與科技問題與政策的主要挑戰。

Western Feminists have been concerned about women's under-representation in Science and Technology (S&T) fields since the 1970s. Not much is known, however, about the men and women active in S&T in Taiwan. This article aims to make up for this gap by applying the international standard indicators for measuring gender and science development to S&T in Taiwan. Of particular importance is the framework of She Figures, which has been published by the European Commission every three years since 2003. It presents comprehensive gender-related indicators for S&T fields in the European Union (EU) that we used together with secondary governmental data for Taiwan to draw a comparison betweenof women’s participation in S&T careers and education in Taiwan and Europe. A preliminary descriptive analysis based on the concepts of gender segregation and leaking pipeline is also provided. 　　The comparison reveals that, in terms of higher education, female students leak out of the academic pipeline at a disproportionately higher rate after they get a Master’s degree. It also reveals that horizontal segregation in the Engineering field occurs even before students enter college. In terms of employment, moreover, there is a “men for business, women for education” sectoral segregation found in both EU and Taiwan, and men are found over-represented in high-ranking positions. The authors also point out that women are in fact over-represented in the top-ranking positions in some fields like Humanities and Social Sciences, which, however, must be understood in the overall context of there being far fewer women than men in S&T at present. The authors hence suggest that horizontal segregation will be a more challenging issue than vertical segregation for gender and technology studies and policy in the near future.