Equitable Exchange: A Framework for Diversity and Inclusion in the Geosciences

Abstract

Despite growing demographic diversity in the United States population at large, in the 50 years that the National Science Foundation has been keeping demographic statistics, there has been a continuing lack of diversification in the Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) workforce, leading to growing frustration and a compelling need for both equity and inclusion (Bernard & Cooperdock, 2018).Within the geosciences (Earth, Atmosphere, Ocean, and Polar Sciences), there is a current wave of energy and attention to issues of equity and social justice in geoscience spaces that is long overdue. Calls to action (Ali et al., 2020;Morris et al., 2020), publications (e.g., Chen et al., 2020;Marín-Spiotta et al., 2020), personal stories (#BlackAndStem (#BlackAndStem was created by Stephanie Page, PhD; twitter: @ThePurplePage)), new centers (e.g., AGU Ethics and Equity Center), and emerging movements (URGE: https://urgeoscience. org/) are pushing the edges and reforming approaches to broadening participation. This is encouraging, as past strategies to accelerate demographic and ethnocultural representation have not succeeded as hoped. Many existing approaches portray the lack of diversity as a problem of unequal access (e.g., via affordability or as a consequence of structural racism), and/or one of unequal interest, with evidence existing for both perspectives (Dutt, 2020; Posselt, 2020). One mechanism to broaden participation in the geosciences is to

Cryosphere Sciences Perspectives on Integrated, Coordinated, Open, Networked (ICON) Science

“…However, we emphasize that alternatives to overcome such limitations should be prioritized (Settles et al, 2019). Indeed, researchers with diverse backgrounds could add more views on research gaps and thus increase chances for alternative out-of-the-box solutions (Harris et al, 2021).…”

“…The presented cases are a few of many examples in which ICON efforts are already common practices in observational and modeling data research and application among cryosphere studies. We identified that such integrated and interdisciplinary (I-integrated) approaches to research questions bring new and powerful results with direct impacts on society (Harris et al, 2021). However, challenges are to continue developing standardized field and lab protocols (C-coordinated) that allow comparison of data, benefit science of opportunities, and facilitate knowledge transfer (N-networked).…”

A GeoHealth Call to Action: Moving Beyond Identifying Environmental Injustices to Co‐Creating Solutions

“…Funding agencies, scientific organizations, and academic and research institutions are well positioned to create opportunities to connect communities with researchers. A successful example of this is the AGU Thriving Earth Exchange, which has created meaningful and productive collaborations through brokered research (Faust & Esposito, 2021 ; Goodwin, 2021 ; Hammock et al., 2021 ; Harris et al., 2021 ; Jones, 2021 ; Pandya et al., 2014 ). Individuals and practitioners can and should avail themselves to being matched in this way, though, particularly for early career researchers, imposter syndrome can limit their participation if community needs are not an “exact fit” for their research specialty.…”

Searching for Community in Community Science

“…That is, a specific geographic place; often with a shared culture, heritage or lived experience; occasionally with a shared knowledge and skill set (i.e., a community of practice); and almost always underrepresented in and underserved by academic science. Under this definition, community science is an inherently local endeavor often mediated by a boundary spanner with one foot in the world of mainstream science and the other in community (Harris et al, 2021); where discovery science may take a back seat to actionable science; and where the work is co-created by community members and science professionals willing to share the thought, work, and credit space.…”

“…That is, a specific geographic place; often with a shared culture, heritage or lived experience; occasionally with a shared knowledge and skill set (i.e., a community of practice); and almost always underrepresented in and underserved by academic science. Under this definition, community science is an inherently local endeavor often mediated by a boundary spanner with one foot in the world of mainstream science and the other in community (Harris et al, 2021); where discovery science may take a back seat to actionable science; and where the work is co-created by community members and science professionals willing to share the thought, work, and credit space.Of the 145 articles published in 2022 with "community science" somewhere in the topic fields, 62 were classifiable as primary research (i.e., generating new knowledge). Although all of these papers directly involved publics (i.e., people in general) in the work, only 10 involved specific named communities in co-created, co-produced ways, only three of those were situated within the natural sciences, and only one elevated community voice throughout the work.…”