Cargando…
Inequality in science and the case for a new agenda
The history of the scientific enterprise demonstrates that it has supported gender, identity, and racial inequity. Further, its institutions have allowed discrimination, harassment, and personal harm of racialized persons and women. This has resulted in a suboptimal and demographically narrow resear...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
National Academy of Sciences
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8915968/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35210356 http://dx.doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2117831119 |
_version_ | 1784668178017681408 |
---|---|
author | Graves, Joseph L. Kearney, Maureen Barabino, Gilda Malcom, Shirley |
author_facet | Graves, Joseph L. Kearney, Maureen Barabino, Gilda Malcom, Shirley |
author_sort | Graves, Joseph L. |
collection | PubMed |
description | The history of the scientific enterprise demonstrates that it has supported gender, identity, and racial inequity. Further, its institutions have allowed discrimination, harassment, and personal harm of racialized persons and women. This has resulted in a suboptimal and demographically narrow research and innovation system, a concomitant limited lens on research agendas, and less effective knowledge translation between science and society. We argue that, to reverse this situation, the scientific community must reexamine its values and then collectively embark upon a moonshot-level new agenda for equity. This new agenda should be based upon the foundational value that scientific research and technological innovation should be prefaced upon progress toward a better world for all of society and that the process of how we conduct research is just as important as the results of research. Such an agenda will attract individuals who have been historically excluded from participation in science, but we will need to engage in substantial work to overcome the longstanding obstacles to their full participation. We highlight the need to implement this new agenda via a coordinated systems approach, recognizing the mutually reinforcing feedback dynamics among all science system components and aligning our equity efforts across them. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8915968 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | National Academy of Sciences |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-89159682022-03-12 Inequality in science and the case for a new agenda Graves, Joseph L. Kearney, Maureen Barabino, Gilda Malcom, Shirley Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Perspective The history of the scientific enterprise demonstrates that it has supported gender, identity, and racial inequity. Further, its institutions have allowed discrimination, harassment, and personal harm of racialized persons and women. This has resulted in a suboptimal and demographically narrow research and innovation system, a concomitant limited lens on research agendas, and less effective knowledge translation between science and society. We argue that, to reverse this situation, the scientific community must reexamine its values and then collectively embark upon a moonshot-level new agenda for equity. This new agenda should be based upon the foundational value that scientific research and technological innovation should be prefaced upon progress toward a better world for all of society and that the process of how we conduct research is just as important as the results of research. Such an agenda will attract individuals who have been historically excluded from participation in science, but we will need to engage in substantial work to overcome the longstanding obstacles to their full participation. We highlight the need to implement this new agenda via a coordinated systems approach, recognizing the mutually reinforcing feedback dynamics among all science system components and aligning our equity efforts across them. National Academy of Sciences 2022-02-24 2022-03-08 /pmc/articles/PMC8915968/ /pubmed/35210356 http://dx.doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2117831119 Text en Copyright © 2022 the Author(s). Published by PNAS. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This open access article is distributed under Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives License 4.0 (CC BY-NC-ND) (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) . |
spellingShingle | Perspective Graves, Joseph L. Kearney, Maureen Barabino, Gilda Malcom, Shirley Inequality in science and the case for a new agenda |
title | Inequality in science and the case for a new agenda |
title_full | Inequality in science and the case for a new agenda |
title_fullStr | Inequality in science and the case for a new agenda |
title_full_unstemmed | Inequality in science and the case for a new agenda |
title_short | Inequality in science and the case for a new agenda |
title_sort | inequality in science and the case for a new agenda |
topic | Perspective |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8915968/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35210356 http://dx.doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2117831119 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT gravesjosephl inequalityinscienceandthecaseforanewagenda AT kearneymaureen inequalityinscienceandthecaseforanewagenda AT barabinogilda inequalityinscienceandthecaseforanewagenda AT malcomshirley inequalityinscienceandthecaseforanewagenda |