Rapichan Phurisamban, Erika Luna, Harold N. Eyster, Stephen Chignell, Michele Koppes
{"title":"Shedding the cloak of neutrality: A guide for reflexive practices to make the sciences more inclusive and just","authors":"Rapichan Phurisamban, Erika Luna, Harold N. Eyster, Stephen Chignell, Michele Koppes","doi":"10.1002/ecs2.70168","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>The environmental sciences community cannot meaningfully address the compounding ecological and societal crises of our time without also addressing <i>epistemic</i> oppression—the persistent, systemic exclusion that dismisses or erases certain forms of expertise in knowledge production and scientific practices. Epistemic oppression is justified by the inaccurate assumption that scientific knowledge is neutral, value-free, and objective. This assumption persists because science practices omit information about who we are and how we come to know the world in our work. It operates through the construction of knowledge hierarchies at three levels: (1) privileging particular worldviews of individual scientists, (2) privileging certain academic disciplines, and (3) privileging Eurocentric knowledge systems. To limit epistemic harms, we need to acknowledge that the sciences are inherently <i>relational</i> (i.e., emerge out of relationships among scientists and what we study) and <i>situated</i> (i.e., dependent on the social context surrounding knowledge production). By recognizing and reflecting on assumptions of neutrality, we can transform the scientific community toward fostering greater inclusion and acceptance of diverse worldviews, theories of knowledge, and methodologies to simultaneously address today's wicked problems and advance true diversity, equity, and belonging. Moving from concepts to practice, we outline several reflexive strategies and offer examples and guiding questions to acknowledge our standpoints in scientific research. By embracing reflexivity in our practices, including making our positionality in our work explicit, the environmental sciences can become more inclusive and effective at addressing the compounding crises of this era.</p>","PeriodicalId":48930,"journal":{"name":"Ecosphere","volume":"16 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/ecs2.70168","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ecosphere","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ecs2.70168","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
The environmental sciences community cannot meaningfully address the compounding ecological and societal crises of our time without also addressing epistemic oppression—the persistent, systemic exclusion that dismisses or erases certain forms of expertise in knowledge production and scientific practices. Epistemic oppression is justified by the inaccurate assumption that scientific knowledge is neutral, value-free, and objective. This assumption persists because science practices omit information about who we are and how we come to know the world in our work. It operates through the construction of knowledge hierarchies at three levels: (1) privileging particular worldviews of individual scientists, (2) privileging certain academic disciplines, and (3) privileging Eurocentric knowledge systems. To limit epistemic harms, we need to acknowledge that the sciences are inherently relational (i.e., emerge out of relationships among scientists and what we study) and situated (i.e., dependent on the social context surrounding knowledge production). By recognizing and reflecting on assumptions of neutrality, we can transform the scientific community toward fostering greater inclusion and acceptance of diverse worldviews, theories of knowledge, and methodologies to simultaneously address today's wicked problems and advance true diversity, equity, and belonging. Moving from concepts to practice, we outline several reflexive strategies and offer examples and guiding questions to acknowledge our standpoints in scientific research. By embracing reflexivity in our practices, including making our positionality in our work explicit, the environmental sciences can become more inclusive and effective at addressing the compounding crises of this era.
期刊介绍:
The scope of Ecosphere is as broad as the science of ecology itself. The journal welcomes submissions from all sub-disciplines of ecological science, as well as interdisciplinary studies relating to ecology. The journal''s goal is to provide a rapid-publication, online-only, open-access alternative to ESA''s other journals, while maintaining the rigorous standards of peer review for which ESA publications are renowned.