Search for: All records

The geosciences continue to grapple with the exclusion of Black, Indigenous, Latinx, and other students of Color. These patterns can be understood in the discipline’s roots in colonialism and extractivism. Furthermore, training of the scientific process as objective and race-neutral results in scientists who do not recognize how science can perpetuate inequities in society. Using a U.S. university biogeography course as a case study, we describe an innovative framework for teaching equity through a critical historical lens that interrogates: 1) biases in the processes and forms of knowledge production, legitimization, and exclusion; 2) the source of inequities in representation in the discipline; and 3) how societal benefits and harms of scientific practices are felt disproportionately demographically and geographically. Students were encouraged to critically analyze the historical context of scientific theories and their proponents and challenge assumptions about the representativeness of data supporting those theories into the present day. Engaging with these questions broadened students’ understanding of changing paradigms in the field and of links between colonialism and modern science. We provide recommendations for instructors seeking to use similar approaches to enhance student learning. 

Rampant gender-based harassment and discrimination are recognized problems that negatively impact efforts to diversify science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) fields. We explored the particularities of this phenomenon in the geosciences, via focus groups conducted at STEM professional society meetings, with the goal of informing interventions specific to the discipline. Using grounded theory analysis, two primary drivers for the persistence and perpetuation of gender-based harassment in the geosciences were identified: a particular history of power dynamics and maintenance of dominant stereotypes, and a pattern of ineffective responses to incidents of harassment and discrimination. Informed by intersectional feminist scholarship by women of color that illustrates how efforts to address the underrepresentation of women in STEM without attending to the overlapping impacts of racism, colonialism, ableism, and classism will not succeed, we view harassment and discrimination as structural problems that require collective solutions. Continuing to recruit individuals into a discipline without changing its fundamental nature can tokenize and isolate them or encourage assimilation and acceptance of deep-seated traditions no matter how damaging. It is the responsibility of those in power, and especially those who hold more privileged status due to their social identities, to contribute to the dismantling of current structures that reinforce inequity. By providing explanatory illustrative examples drawn from first-person accounts we aim to humanize the numbers reported in workplace climate surveys, address gaps in knowledge specific to the geosciences, and identify interventions aligned with an intersectional framework that aim to disrupt discriminatory practices endemic to the geosciences and larger STEM community. 

Soil science is one of the least diverse subdisciplines within the agricultural, earth, and natural sciences. Representation within soil science does not currently reflect demographic trends in the U.S. We synthesize available data on the representation of historically marginalized groups in soil science in the U.S. and identify historical mechanisms contributing to these trends. We review education and employment information within academic and the federal government, land-grant university participation, and available Soil Science Society of America (SSSA) membership data to gain insight into the current state of representation within soil sciences and implications for the future of this discipline. Across all domains of diversity, historically marginalized groups are underrepresented in soil science. We provide recommendations toward recognizing diversity within the field, improving and encouraging diversity within the SSSA, and suggested responses for both individuals and institutions toward improving diversity, equity, and inclusion. 

Old-growth tropical forests harbor an immense diversity of tree species but are rapidly being cleared, while secondary forests that regrow on abandoned agricultural lands increase in extent. We assess how tree species richness and composition recover during secondary succession across gradients in environmental conditions and anthropogenic disturbance in an unprecedented multisite analysis for the Neotropics. Secondary forests recover remarkably fast in species richness but slowly in species composition. Secondary forests take a median time of five decades to recover the species richness of old-growth forest (80% recovery after 20 years) based on rarefaction analysis. Full recovery of species composition takes centuries (only 34% recovery after 20 years). A dual strategy that maintains both old-growth forests and species-rich secondary forests is therefore crucial for biodiversity conservation in human-modified tropical landscapes.