Persistent gender bias in marine science and conservation calls for action to achieve equity

Giakoumi, Sylvaine; Pita, Cristina; Coll, Marta; Fraschetti, Simonetta; Gissi, Elena; Katara, Isidora; Lloret-Lloret, Elena; Rossi, Francesca; Portman, Michelle Ε.; Stelzenmüller, Vanessa; Micheli, Fiorenza

doi:10.1016/j.biocon.2021.109134

Cited by 42 publications

(39 citation statements)

References 27 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Bias in the tenure process within academia has been found in many previous studies, with respect to race (in particular, anti‐Black bias) (Perna et al., 2007) and gender (Box‐Steffensmeier et al., 2015), amongst other identities, in many disciplines of STEM. Although this study focuses exclusively on the US, under‐representation of women is an issue in other countries as well including throughout much, but not all, of Europe (Piccoli & Guidobaldi, 2021; Giakoumi et al., 2021). In the next section of the discussion, we apply simple models of hiring to further explore the potential for bias in hiring.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Trends in the Representation of Women Among US Geoscience Faculty From 1999 to 2020: The Long Road Toward Gender Parity

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Inequalities persist in the geosciences. White women and people of color remain under‐represented at all levels of academic faculty, including positions of power such as departmental and institutional leadership. While the proportion of women among geoscience faculty has been cataloged previously, new programs and initiatives aimed at improving diversity, focused on institutional factors that affect equity in the geosciences, necessitate an updated study and a new metric for quantifying the biases that result in under‐representation. We compile a data set of 2,531 tenured and tenure‐track geoscience faculty from 62 universities in the United States to evaluate the proportion of women by rank and discipline. We find that 27% of faculty are women. The fraction of women in the faculty pool decreases with rank, as women comprise 46% of assistant professors, 34% of associate professors, and 19% of full professors. We quantify the attrition of women in terms of a fractionation factor, which describes the rate of loss of women along the tenure track and allows us to move away from the metaphor of the “leaky pipeline.” Efforts to address inequities in institutional culture and biases in promotion and hiring practices over the past few years may provide insight into the recent positive shifts in fractionation factor. Our results suggest a need for 1:1 hiring between men and women to reach gender parity. Due to significant disparities in race, this work is most applicable to white women, and our use of the gender binary does not represent gender diversity in the geosciences.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Trends in the Representation of Women Among US Geoscience Faculty From 1999 to 2020: The Long Road Toward Gender Parity

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Women were also the predominant respondent group in our studywhich can reflect either a changing composition of the field (i.e., female-dominated in the first career stages) or a biased reach of the survey (e.g., women being more motivated to report the issues they experience). Even so, women continue to be less likely to be retained in a tenure track or other permanent positions (Thompson et al, 2011;O'Connell and Holmes, 2015;Cook et al, 2016;Potvin et al, 2018;Gillanders and Heupel, 2019;Giakoumi et al, 2021), or have their work represented and funded equally compared to their male colleagues (e.g., Oreskes, 1996;Leta and Lewison, 2003;Witteman et al, 2019;Bellotti et al, 2022.). Gender minorities are still virtually excluded from any such comparisons and were also severely underrepresented in our study.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 88%

“…Ensuring sustainable and fair access to ocean resources while conserving marine ecosystems for the future is both politically and environmentally complex, and must acknowledge the interests and perspectives of the oceans' diverse users in an equitable and balanced way (Barbier et al, 2018;Bax et al, 2021). Yet, access to both marine resources and different roles in marine science and conservation are still unevenly distributed (Österblum et al, 2020), with severe racial, geographic, and gender biases (e.g., Thompson et al, 2011;Srinivasan, 2018;Giakoumi et al, 2021). To remove these barriers, equitable, just, and welcoming study and work environments are needed, which improve representation and increase the diversity of voices (Green et al, 2015;Bailey et al, 2020;Alexander et al, 2021;Worm et al, 2021).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Being ECR in marine science: Results of a survey among early-career marine scientists and conservationists

Osiecka

Wróbel

Hendricks³

et al. 2022

Front. Mar. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Ocean research and conservation are still largely exclusive fields, with ongoing issues of racial, gender, class, and geographic underrepresentation. To improve accessibility and retention within these fields, we need to create equitable, just, and welcoming study and work environments. It is therefore crucial to listen to the voices of students and early career ocean professionals (ECOP). We conducted an online survey on the study- and workplace experiences of ECOP, focusing on social obstacles, such as economic strain, unpaid work, and workplace discrimination and abuse. Strong economic barriers to education access were evident in certain geographic areas. Almost half of the reported work time in the field was uncompensated, yet unpaid work rarely translated into career advancement and was often associated with workplace abuse. Dissatisfaction and burn-out rates at the earliest career stages were alarming, and experienced hardship and mental health issues were particularly dire for women and non-binary persons. While most respondents were white and from the global north, meaning the results may not reflect experiences of ECOP in other regions, this study highlights some of the barriers to equity as well as work ethics issues that should be urgently addressed within the field.

show abstract

“…Action : We all must be aware of implicit bias and avoid verbiage that perpetuates bias in letters of recommendation. Letters of recommendation play a critical role in our professional and academic careers and because of their unstructured nature, they can suffer from implicit and unconscious bias. This column focused on bias affecting women, recognizing that these issues extend beyond gender (e.g., age, race, sexual orientation, and physical disability), and may be more pronounced for individuals that intersect multiple aspects of human diversity (Giakoumi et al 2021). It is worth noting that we may not be aware of these biases.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Gender Bias in Letters of Recommendation

Hargrove

2022

Fisheries

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Persistent gender bias in marine science and conservation calls for action to achieve equity

Cited by 42 publications

References 27 publications

Trends in the Representation of Women Among US Geoscience Faculty From 1999 to 2020: The Long Road Toward Gender Parity

Trends in the Representation of Women Among US Geoscience Faculty From 1999 to 2020: The Long Road Toward Gender Parity

Being ECR in marine science: Results of a survey among early-career marine scientists and conservationists

Gender Bias in Letters of Recommendation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About