A Review of Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Themes in Arboriculture Organizations’ Codes of Ethics

Abstract

Codes of ethics (COEs) play an important role in outlining an association’s ethical expectations of its membership. Diversity, equity, and inclusion issues in arboriculture have been long-standing, resulting in prevalent systemic inequality and discrimination within the industry. Codes of ethics may provide a means through which to address systemic barriers; however, unlike the forestry industry, there is limited understanding of how arboriculture organizations’ codes of ethics approach diversity, equity, and inclusion. This review of 9 national and international arboriculture organizations’ codes of ethics examines how equity, diversity, and inclusion are included within the expected ethical conduct of professional members. Through thematic and qualitative content analyses, we found that arboriculture organizations’ codes of ethics varied in length and depth, ranging from 7 to 47 statements in codes of ethics. Most ethical codes were positively framed, indicating what membersshoulddo, rather than the contrasting negative framing which indicates what membersshould notdo. Of the 9 arboriculture organizations, 7 included equity, diversity, and inclusion statements. Inclusion codes were the most common (n= 6 COEs), followed by equity (n= 5 COEs) and diversity (n= 3 COEs). In total, 8 codes of ethics referenced adherence to laws and regulations, 4 of which may provide a means for promoting ethical practice in the absence of explicit statements about equity, diversity, and inclusion.