Situating the Scientist: Creating Inclusive Science Communication Through Equity Framing and Environmental Justice

Abstract

This article draws on environmental justice (EJ) scholarship to develop a novel concept of equity framing that can be used to achieve more inclusive science communication. We argue that centering equity in our communications framing can provide an essential point of access for marginalized communities to engage with scientific communication, and also an important opportunity for scientific researchers and writers to become more accountable to disadvantaged communities. Viewing science communication through an equity lens asks communicators to not only frame science in ways that are salient to particular audiences, but it also asks communicators to attend to particular discriminatory historical practices that have targeted marginalized communities, and continue to do so through current scientific discourse. EJ strategies for equity framing include asking science communicators to (1) become aware of their own positionality and partial perspectives, (2) name sources of inequity that arise from uneven power relations, and (3) find intersections with initiatives that are rooted in the experiences of disadvantaged communities. To ground our approach to equity framing, we also present our experiences teaching Stanford University's first comprehensive class on environmental justice as a case study. Key outcomes included: adding missing perspectives to scientific knowledge production by inviting representatives from diverse and marginalized communities to teach us; increasing the social relevance of scientific findings by asking our students to center the concerns and insights of marginalized communities in their communication; and encouraging collective action to address equity concerns and achieve a healthier society for all.

Equity in science education and disseminations: lessons learned during COVID-19 pandemics

“…Equity in science communication encompasses inclusive activities reaching to a wide range of participants with different cultural identities and life experiences (Canfield et al, 2020). Current practices require critical evaluation to move towards inclusive science communication practices (Amaro & Mulholland, 2020;Cosgriff, Ebner, & Celi, 2020;Dawson, 2014;Polk & Diver, 2020). Traditionally, seminars and conferences are localised to institutions and the publications are behind pay walls significantly diminishing accessibility.…”

Meaning‐Making in Science Communication: A Case for Precision in Word Choice

“…In this context, the need for an intersectional approach to science communication is clear. Incorporating environmental justice practices into science communication requires us to become aware of how our perspectives are shaped by our social position: “what [this positionality] allows us to see and what it prevents us from seeing, and how this affects our understanding of environmental policy impacts on marginalized communities” (Polk and Diver 2020, p. 4).…”

“…As a collaborative process, meaning-making takes into account all of the ways groups of people explain the world, including but not limited to scientific ways of knowing (Davies et al 2019). Centering community leaders and collaborating with them in meaning-making helps to empower the knowledge, authority, and agency of marginalized communities (Polk and Diver 2020). As can be seen from case studies (e.g., Pulido and Peña 1998), expanding scientific discourse to include the insights and concerns of marginalized communities leads to increased social relevance of scientific findings, greater trust in scientific knowledge production, and a more complete understanding of the world (Polk and Diver 2020).…”

Broadening Perspectives on Broadening Participation: Professional Learning Tools for More Expansive and Equitable Science Communication

“…There are notable exceptions to this scenario in the many promising efforts that deeply engage socially, racially, and economically diverse communities [see Dawson (2014), Canfield et al (2020), Polk and Diver (2020)]. These communication efforts move beyond the walls of universities and museums to adopt culturally relevant and responsive "asset-based" modes of interaction or pedagogy, and they seek to co-design and collaborate with communities.…”