Enhancing disciplinary diversity and inclusion in conservation science and practice based on a case study of the Society for Conservation Biology

IF 5.2 1区 环境科学与生态学 Q1 BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION
Sophia Winkler-Schor, Harold N. Eyster, Diele Lobo, Lauren Redmore, Andrew J. Wright, Victoria M. Lukasik, Wendy Chávez-Páez, Brooke Tully, Sarah Beard, Kwan-Lamar Blount-Hill, Catherine Christen, Zoe Nyssa
{"title":"Enhancing disciplinary diversity and inclusion in conservation science and practice based on a case study of the Society for Conservation Biology","authors":"Sophia Winkler-Schor,&nbsp;Harold N. Eyster,&nbsp;Diele Lobo,&nbsp;Lauren Redmore,&nbsp;Andrew J. Wright,&nbsp;Victoria M. Lukasik,&nbsp;Wendy Chávez-Páez,&nbsp;Brooke Tully,&nbsp;Sarah Beard,&nbsp;Kwan-Lamar Blount-Hill,&nbsp;Catherine Christen,&nbsp;Zoe Nyssa","doi":"10.1111/cobi.14395","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Effective conservation requires a variety of perspectives that center on different ways of knowing. Disciplinary diversity and inclusion (DDI) offers an important means of integrating different ways of knowing into pressing conservation challenges. However, DDI means more than multiple disciplinary approaches to conservation; cognitive diversity and epistemic justice are key. In 2020, the Disciplinary Inclusion Task Force was formed via a grassroots movement of the Society for Conservation Biology (SCB) to assess the extent of DDI and to chart a path to increase DDI. First, we assessed past and present SCB governance documents. Next, we surveyed current SCB members (<i>n</i> = 577). Finally, we surveyed nonmember conservationists (<i>n</i> = 213). Members who were not biological scientists perceived SCB as less diverse (21.4% vs. 16%) and not equitable (21.8% vs. 161%), and, although the majority (44) of nonmembers reported that their work aligned reasonably well with the mission of the SCB, they thought the organization focused on biological sciences. Despite SCB's mission to be diverse and inclusive, realizing this mission will likely require diverse epistemological perspectives and shifting from top-down models of knowledge transfer. In centering on DDI, SCB can achieve its aspirations of connecting members across disciplines and ways of knowing to foster diverse perspectives and practices. We recommend that SCB and other organizations develop mechanisms to increase recruitment and retention of diverse members and leadership as well as expand strategic partnerships to flatten disciplinary hierarchies and promote inclusivity.</p>","PeriodicalId":10689,"journal":{"name":"Conservation Biology","volume":"38 6","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/cobi.14395","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Conservation Biology","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/cobi.14395","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Effective conservation requires a variety of perspectives that center on different ways of knowing. Disciplinary diversity and inclusion (DDI) offers an important means of integrating different ways of knowing into pressing conservation challenges. However, DDI means more than multiple disciplinary approaches to conservation; cognitive diversity and epistemic justice are key. In 2020, the Disciplinary Inclusion Task Force was formed via a grassroots movement of the Society for Conservation Biology (SCB) to assess the extent of DDI and to chart a path to increase DDI. First, we assessed past and present SCB governance documents. Next, we surveyed current SCB members (n = 577). Finally, we surveyed nonmember conservationists (n = 213). Members who were not biological scientists perceived SCB as less diverse (21.4% vs. 16%) and not equitable (21.8% vs. 161%), and, although the majority (44) of nonmembers reported that their work aligned reasonably well with the mission of the SCB, they thought the organization focused on biological sciences. Despite SCB's mission to be diverse and inclusive, realizing this mission will likely require diverse epistemological perspectives and shifting from top-down models of knowledge transfer. In centering on DDI, SCB can achieve its aspirations of connecting members across disciplines and ways of knowing to foster diverse perspectives and practices. We recommend that SCB and other organizations develop mechanisms to increase recruitment and retention of diverse members and leadership as well as expand strategic partnerships to flatten disciplinary hierarchies and promote inclusivity.

Abstract Image

基于保护生物学会的案例研究,加强保护科学与实践中的学科多样性和包容性
有效的保护需要以不同的认知方式为中心的各种观点。学科多样性和包容性(DDI)为将不同的认知方式纳入紧迫的保护挑战提供了重要手段。然而,DDI 不仅意味着以多种学科方法开展保护工作,认知多样性和认识公正也是关键所在。2020 年,通过保护生物学会(SCB)的基层运动,成立了学科包容特别工作组,以评估 DDI 的程度,并规划增加 DDI 的路径。首先,我们评估了过去和现在的 SCB 管理文件。然后,我们调查了目前的 SCB 会员(n = 577)。最后,我们调查了非成员的自然保护主义者(n = 213)。非生物科学家的成员认为 SCB 的多样性较少(21.4% 对 16%),而且不公平(21.8% 对 161%),尽管大多数(44 名)非成员表示他们的工作与 SCB 的使命相当吻合,但他们认为该组织专注于生物科学。尽管 SCB 的使命是多元化和包容性,但要实现这一使命,可能需要不同的认识论观点, 并改变自上而下的知识转让模式。通过以 DDI 为中心,SCB 可以实现其愿望,即连接跨学科和跨认知方式的成员,促进多元化的观点和实践。我们建议,自然科学理事会和其他组织应建立各种机制,以增加和留住多元化成员和领导层,并扩大战略合作伙伴关系,以扁平化学科等级制度和促进包容性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Conservation Biology
Conservation Biology 环境科学-环境科学
CiteScore
12.70
自引率
3.20%
发文量
175
审稿时长
2 months
期刊介绍: Conservation Biology welcomes submissions that address the science and practice of conserving Earth's biological diversity. We encourage submissions that emphasize issues germane to any of Earth''s ecosystems or geographic regions and that apply diverse approaches to analyses and problem solving. Nevertheless, manuscripts with relevance to conservation that transcend the particular ecosystem, species, or situation described will be prioritized for publication.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信