Diversity and inclusion in conservation: A proposal for a Marine Diversity Network

Frontiers in Marine Science

Volumn 4, Issue AUG, 2017, Pages

  Smith, Nicola S ^a   Côté, Isabelle M ^a   Martinez Estevez, Lourdes ^b   Hind Ozan, Edward J ^c   Quiros, Angela L ^b   Johnson, Nathan ^d   Green, Stephanie J ^e   Cornick, Leslie ^f   Shiffman, David ^a   Malpica Cruz, Luis ^a,g   Besch, Allison Gleason ^h   Shiel Rolle, Nikita ⁱ  

^a SIMON FRASER UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^c CARDIFF UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

^d Speak Up For Blue   (United States)

^e STANFORD UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^f ALASKA PACIFIC UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^g AC   (Mexico)

^h DUKE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

ⁱ Young Marine Explorers   (Bahamas)

Author keywords

Barriers to inclusion; Diversity in science; Marine conservation; Online communities; Online network

Indexed keywords

EID: 85027129961     PISSN: None     EISSN: 22967745     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3389/fmars.2017.00234     Document Type: Article

References (41)

1. Amano, T., and Sutherland, W. J. (2013). Four barriers to the global understanding of biodiversity conservation: wealth, language, geographical location and security. Proc. R. Soc. B 280:20122649. doi: 10.1098/rspb.2012.2649
2. Arismendi, I., and Penaluna, B. E. (2016). Examining diversity inequities in fisheries science: a call to action. Bioscience 66, 584-591. doi: 10.1093/biosci/biw041
3. Bonta, M., DeFalco, T., and Taylor Smith, C. (2015). Diversity and the Conservation Movement. New York, NY: National Audubon Society
4. Burgman, M., Jarrad, F., and Main, E. (2015). Decreasing geographic bias in conservation biology. Conserv. Biol. 29, 1255-1256 doi: 10.1111/cobi.12589
5. Ceci, S. J., and Williams, W. M. (2011). Understanding current causes of women's underrepresentation in science. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 108, 3157-3162. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1014871108
6. Cho, S. J., Na, S. W., Chung, H. Y., Kim, B. K., Kim, H. J., Hwang, J. I., et al. (2014). Analysis and Evaluation on Gender Budgeting in Korea (III). Seoul: Korean Women's Development Institute
7. Conti, A., and Visentin, F. (2015). A revealed preference analysis of PhD students' choices over employment outcomes. Res. Policy 44, 1931-1947. doi: 10.1016/j.respol.2015.06.009
8. Cooper, C. B., Dickinson, J., Phillips, T., and Bonney, R. (2007). Citizen science as a tool for conservation in residential ecosystems. Ecol. Soc. 12:11. doi: 10.5751/ES-02197-120211
9. Douglas, L. R., and Veríssimo, D. (2013). Flagships or battleships: deconstructing the relationship between social conflict and conservation flagship species. Environ. Soc. 4, 98-116. doi: 10.3167/ares.2013.040107
10. Evans, C., Abrams, E., Reitsma, R., Roux, K., Salmonsen, L., and Marra, P. (2005). The neighborhood nestwatch program: participant outcomes of a citizen-science ecological research project. Conserv. Biol. 19, 589-594. doi: 10.1111/j.1523-1739.2005.00s01.x
11. Favaro, B., Oester, S., Cigliano, J., Cornick, L. A., Hind, E. J., Parsons, E. C. M., et al. (2016). Your science conference should have a code of conduct. Front. Mar. Sci. 3:103. doi: 10.3389/fmars.2016.00103
12. Fournier, A., and Bond, A. (2015). Volunteer field technicians are bad for wildlife ecology. Wildl. Soc. Bull. 39, 819-821. doi: 10.1002/wsb.603
13. Freeman, R., and Huang, W. (2015). Collaborating with people like me: ethnic co-authorship within the United States. J. Labor Econ. 33, S289-S318. doi: 10.1086/678973
14. Fuller, R. A., Lee, J. R., and Watson, J. E. M. (2014). Achieving open access to conservation science. Conserv. Biol. 28, 1550-1557. doi: 10.1111/cobi.12346
15. Giehl, E. L. H., Moretti, M., Walsh, J. C., Batalha, M. A., and Cook, C. N. (2017). Scientific evidence and potential barriers in the managementof brazilian protected areas. PLoS ONE 12:e0169917. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0169917
16. Ginther, D. K., Schaffer, W. T., Schnell, J., Masimore, B., Liu, F., Haak, L. L., et al. (2011). Race, Ethnicity, and NIH research awards. Science 333, 1015-1019. doi: 10.1126/science.1196783
17. Green, S. J., Armstrong, J., Bogan, M., Darling, E., Kross, S., Rochman, C. M., et al. (2015). Conservation needs diverse values, approaches and practitioners. Conserv. Lett. 8, 385-387. doi: 10.1111/conl.12204
18. Heenehan, H. (2014). The Power of Skype to Inspire a New Generation of Stem. Huffington Post-The Blog. Available online at: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/heather-heenehan/the-power-of-skype-to-ins_b_4549678.html (Accessed February 05, 2017)
19. Hind, E., Alexander, S. M., Green, S. J., Kritzer, J. P., Sweet, M. J., Johnson, A. E., et al. (2015). Fostering effective international collaboration for marine science in small island states. Front. Mar. Sci. 2:86. doi: 10.3389/fmars.2015.00086
20. Kern, C. C., Kenefic, L. S., and Stout, S. L. (2015). Bridging the gender gap: the demographics of scientists in the USDA forest service and academia. Bioscience 65, 1165-1172. doi: 10.1093/biosci/biv144
21. Laurison, D., and Friedman, S. (2016). The class pay gap in higher professional and managerial occupations. Am. Sociol. Rev. 81, 668-695. doi: 10.1177/0003122416653602
22. Madera, J. M., Hebl, M. R., and Martin, R. C. (2009). Gender and letters of recommendation for academia: agentic and communal differences. J. Appl. Psychol. 94, 1591-1599. doi: 10.1037/a0016539
23. Martin, L. J. (2012). Where are the women in ecology? Front. Ecol. Environ. 10, 177-178. doi: 10.1890/12.WB.011
24. Meijaard, E., Cardillo, M., Meijaard, E. M., and Possingham, H. P. (2015). Geographical bias in citation rates of conservation research. Conserv. Biol. 29, 920-925. doi: 10.1111/cobi.12489
25. Moss-Racusin, C. A., Dovidio, J. F., Brescoll, V. L., Graham, M. J., and Handelsman, J. (2012). Science faculty's subtle gender biases favor male students. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 109, 16474-16479. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1211286109
26. Murphy, M. C., Steele, C. M., and Gross, J. J. (2007). Signaling threat: how situational cues affect women in math, science, and engineering settings. Psychol. Sci. 18, 879-885. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2007.01995.x
27. Notley, T. (2009). Young people, online networks, and social inclusion. J. Comput. Med. Commun. 14, 1208-1227. doi: 10.1111/j.1083-6101.2009.01487.x
28. Østergaard, C. R., Timmermans, B., and Kristinsson, K. (2011). Does a different view create something new? The effect of employee diversity on innovation. Res. Policy 40, 500-509. doi: 10.1016/j.respol.2010.11.004
29. Parsons, E. C. M., Shiffman, D. S., Darling, E. S., Spillman, N., and Wright, A. J. (2014). How twitter literacy can benefit conservation scientists. Conserv. Biol. 28, 299-301. doi: 10.1111/cobi.12226
30. Pearson, A. R., and Schuldt, J. P. (2014). Facing the diversity crisis in climate science. Nat. Clim. Chang. 4, 1039-1042. doi: 10.1038/nclimate2415
31. Pimentel, D., Wilson, C., McCullum, C., Huang, R., Dwen, P., Flack, J., et al. (1997). Economic and environmental benefits of biodiversity. Bioscience 47, 747-757. doi: 10.2307/1313097
32. Primack, R. B. (2001). Publish again in another language. Conserv. Biol. 15, 290-291. doi: 10.1111/j.1523-1739.2001.00201.x
33. Reuben, E., Sapienza, P., and Zingales, L. (2014). How stereotypes impair women's careers in science. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 111, 4403-4408. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1314788111
34. Romero, C., and Andrade, G. I. (2004). International conservation organizations and the fate oflocal tropical forest conservation initiatives. Conserv. Biol. 18, 578-580. doi: 10.1111/j.1523-1739.2004.00397.x
35. Sardelis, S., and Drew, J. A. (2016). Not "pulling up the ladder": women who organize conference symposia provide greater opportunities for women to speak at conservation conferences. PLoS ONE 11:e0160015. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.01600150160015
36. Steinpreis, R. E., Anders, K. A., and Ritzke, D. (1999). The impact of gender on the review of the curricula vitae of job applicants and tenure candidates: a national empirical study. Sex Roles 41, 509-528. doi: 10.1023/A:1018839203698
37. Stirling, A. (2007). A general framework for analysing diversity in science, technology and society. J. R. Soc. Interface 4, 707-719. doi: 10.1098/rsif.2007.0213
38. Tallis, H., and Lubchenco, J. (2014). Working together: a call for inclusive conservation. Nature 515, 27-28. doi: 10.1038/515027a
39. Taylor, D. (2014). The State of Diversity in Environmental Organizations. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan
40. Wilson, J., and Biggs, D. (2016). Innovation and Research Suffer When Visa Rules Keep Scientists At Home. Observer. Available online at: http://observer.com/2016/10/innovation-and-research-suffer-when-visa-rules-keep-scientists-at-home/ (Accessed February 05, 2017)
41. Wullum Nielsen, M., Alegria, S., Börjeson, L., Etzkowitz, Falk-Krzesinski, H. J., Joshi, A., et al. (2017). Gender diversity leads to better science. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 114, 1740-1742. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1f16114