Search for: All records

Synopsis Field work is essential to the career of many biologists; however, when working in the field while black (FWB), everyday tasks conducted while in the field can be life-threatening. As a Black individual or as the principal investigator supervising Black individuals, safety in the field requires you to not only navigate weather and wildlife but also your fellow humans. In this article, I address some of the challenges faced by Black scientists in the field, as well as within conservation agencies, universities, and neighboring towns of field sites. I will also discuss how PIs, universities, and employers can ensure a safer, more inclusive experience for their Black friends, colleagues, and students while conducting fieldwork. 

Synopsis Recent strides toward improving diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) in field biology present a unique opportunity for transdisciplinary exploration of the impacts and state of a topic that has remained hereto largely underexplored and under-discussed in the academic setting. Within current literature, themes of racial and gender inequity, power imbalances, unsafe environments, and underdeveloped infrastructure and resources are widespread. Thus, we organized a symposium that addressed these compelling issues in field biology DEI through a multitude of experiential and academic lenses. This article will orient the reader to the special issue and offer summative goals and outcomes of the symposium that can provide tangible steps toward creating meaningful improvements in the state of DEI and safety in field settings. 

Synopsis Interventions are necessary to address the ongoing epidemic of sexual harassment and assault in field settings. An evidence-based approach to identifying specific interventions will be most effective at promoting the safety of scientists. We present the results of a workshop conducted by experts in field biology and the study of sexual harassment and assault that identified a comprehensive set of best practices for individuals and organizations. These recommendations are grounded in peer-reviewed scholarship and are separated into four topics: culture change, accountability, policy development, and reporting. The resulting report of the workshop recommends 44 practices, categorized by the resources required for implementation, the time frame of implementation, and the level of organization responsible for implementation. The best practices that we present are designed to support individuals and organizations in the development of field safety plans. 

Synopsis Professional societies play a unique role in our personal and professional lives as spaces for connection and as regulatory entities. Often composed of volunteers from a variety of backgrounds, professional societies can guide the cultural norms and expectations of an industry by acting as critical leaders for supporting diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives. The present manuscript explains how professional societies, like the Organization of Biological Field Stations (OBFS), can embrace transdisciplinary approaches to create more inclusive (in)tangible spaces to address serious problems facing industries today. Climate change, sexism, and racism, are examples of “wicked” problems that cannot be solved using existing modes of inquiry and decision making because of their complex and interrelated nature. As members of OBFS, a professional society dedicated to the advancement of field-based research, we explain how transdisciplinarity can and has been used to begin addressing serious issues like racism and sexism in field-based research and provide steps for future professional societies to engage in transdisciplinary thinking. We close with examples of our own transdisciplinary work developed through our membership within OBFS. 

Synopsis Efforts to make ecological sciences more diverse, equitable, and inclusive require us to identify who is being left out and take action to rectify harmful situations. Recruitment of trainees from underrepresented groups alone is insufficient without ensuring a safe and supportive environment where we can flourish. Fieldwork is a critical component and often a requirement for career advancement in ecological sciences, but for transgender and gender non-conforming (TGnC) individuals, it can be disproportionately harmful. TGnC individuals face barriers and gendered violence before, during, and after fieldwork, and our experiences are often lost in current discussions of underrepresented groups in the field. In this article, I discuss the importance of an intersectional framework that focuses on planning, open communication, and trust, to address both the barriers TGnC trainees’ experience with travel, accommodations, and access to medical care, along with their experiences of perceived and actual violence by colleagues and strangers. Additionally, I propose direct actions that those in power, such as Principal Investigators, field station managers, and mentors, can take to ensure a safe and welcoming fieldwork environment that supports TGnC trainees’ physical, emotional, and professional well-being. 

Synopsis Fieldwork is considered an integral component of research within conservation biology and ecology. Oftentimes, institutions and researchers share resources on general safety when collecting data in field settings. Despite an increasing awareness, there has been a lack of transparency and communication in terms of the hazards associated with fieldwork. These include but are not limited to an increased risk of sexual harassment and assault. These risks are compounded particularly for those from marginalized racial, sexual, and gender identities. In addition to this lack of acknowledgment, the added risks to those who identify as lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender (trans), and/or queer or members of other marginalized sexualities and gender identities (to reflect the “+” in LGBTQ+) are often overlooked. We have found that there is not only a lack of data on sexual orientation and gender identities of researchers and the barriers they may face as field-based scientists, but also a lack of awareness of how we can support those from these marginalized groups within our disciplines. Creating a SAFE and INCLUSIVE community for those with marginalized identities is key to sustaining the diversity within our discipline. Here, we outline a series of recommendations that can be utilized to address the harassment, homophobia, and transphobia that our LGBTQ+ colleagues face. These recommendations range from what can be applied at the local level (within a lab group), at the department level, at the institutional level as well at specific field sites. 

Abstract Undergraduate field experiences (UFEs) are key components of many biology, ecology, and geoscience programs and important steps to successful recruitment into careers. Through semistructured interviews of diverse field program leaders, we seek to understand how field program leaders conceptualize both their scientific disciplines and the intentional design factors they implemented within the UFE itself. Additionally, this study explores critical considerations these program leaders use to approach designing inclusive UFEs as well as the institutional and practical challenges of designing and implementing their UFEs. We acknowledge the limitations of the small sample of respondents, and our intent with this article is to explore these responses as a way to share critical design factors for designing and implementing inclusive UFEs with the broader geoscience community. Building an early understanding of these factors will help new field program leaders address multiple, simultaneous challenges that currently foment the underrepresentation of students from marginalized backgrounds in biology, ecology, and the geosciences. Through these explicit conversations, we hope to support the professional development of a scientific community that values the creation of safe, encouraging field experiences in which students can enhance their self-identity in the sciences, build peer and professional networks, and develop memorable field experiences that support their trajectories toward successful careers. 

Synopsis Public health researchers have long been aware of the importance of defining the human community associated with research on environmental health initiatives. However, the field community’s human components where applied ecology research is conducted, e.g. diverse participants and perspectives, are often overlooked in environmental problem solving. We outline a framework for elevating the human dimension in defining the field community in applied ecology research and for teaching diverse undergraduate students the skills needed to address Anthropocene environmental concerns. We promote broadening participation and incorporating cultural and racial perspectives in ecology research planning, implementation, and teaching. We use the environmental research problem of concern to identify the diverse human community groups potentially connected to the problem and guide the strategies for incorporating their perspectives in the proposed research project. Which human community, whether local, ethnic, or visiting public community, affects the resource management strategy, i.e. people protect what they love, can change the outcomes of applied ecological research, as well as promote development of a diverse environmental workforce. Broadening participation and perspectives means that the people asking the research questions are also part of the social ecological community processes who choose which questions to pursue to manage the natural resources of the community. Here, we promote research and teaching practices that consider the long-standing multicultural connections to nature to allow all students to pursue their love of nature and its beauty in a safe, comfortable, and mentoring setting. We integrate current human diversity, equity, and inclusion-focused pedagogical knowledge into the Ecological Society of America-endorsed 4DEE multidimensional curricular framework. We provide a faculty action guide to engage and train diverse students in ecological practices that meet the needs of today’s environmental problem-solving workforce. 

Synopsis Equity and inclusivity in STEM research has become a larger topic of discussion in recent years; however, researchers and scientists with disabilities and/or chronic illnesses are often missing from these conversations. Further, while field research is a major research component for some STEM disciplines, it is unclear what accessibility barriers or accommodations exist across the field sciences. Field research can sometimes involve harsh environments, topography, and weather that present challenges to those with disabilities and/or chronic illnesses. A large and coinciding obstacle standing in the way of field research accessibility is the ableism present across science and academia, resulting in and from a lack of prioritization of attention and funding from universities and institutions. Biological field stations have been shown to be valuable not only as infrastructure for field-based research, but also as providing resources toward the scientific education of students and scientific outreach initiatives for the general public. As such, biological field stations are perfectly positioned to reduce barriers in research inclusion and accessibility for students and scientists with disabilities and/or chronic illnesses. The current work presents the results of a survey meant to inventory the presence or absence of accessible infrastructure across field stations, with responses spanning six countries and 24 US states. Our results highlight a number of accessibility deficits in areas such as accessible entrances, kitchens, and bathrooms. Our results suggest that (1) biological field stations have significant variability in accessibility with significant deficits, especially in non-public-facing buildings used primarily by staff and researchers, and (2) field stations would benefit from an increase in federal funding opportunities to expedite their progress toward compliance with Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) standards. We propose potential solutions to field work infrastructure spanning a range of financial costs, with emphasis on the point that efforts toward accessibility do not require an “all-or-nothing” approach, and that any step toward accessibility will make field stations more inclusive. Additionally, we further suggest that federal funding sources, such as the NSF and NIH, as well as university leadership, should consider broadening diversity initiatives to promote the continuation of, and increased accessibility of, university-affiliated field stations.