1932

Abstract

Gender equity, providing for full participation of people of all genders in the oceanographic workforce, is an important goal for the continued success of the oceanographic enterprise. Here, we describe historical obstructions to gender equity; assess recent progress and the current status of gender equity in oceanography by examining quantitative measures of participation, achievement, and recognition; and review activities to improve gender equity. We find that women receive approximately half the oceanography PhDs in many parts of the world and are increasing in parity in earlier levels of academic employment. However, continued progress toward gender parity is needed, as reflected by metrics such as first-authored publications, funded grants, honors, and conference speaker invitations. Finally we make recommendations for the whole oceanographic community to continue to work together to create a culture where oceanographers of all genders can thrive, including eliminating harassment, reexamining selection and evaluation procedures, and removing structural inequities.

Keyword(s): equitygenderoceanography
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-marine-032322-100357
2023-01-16
2024-07-13
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/marine/15/1/annurev-marine-032322-100357.html?itemId=/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-marine-032322-100357&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

Literature Cited

  1. AGU (Am. Geophys. Union) 2022. Past presidents and secretaries. AGU https://connect.agu.org/oceansciences/about/leadership/past-leaders
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Baltic Gend. (Baltic Consort. Promot. Gend. Equal. Mar. Res. Organ.) 2019. Updated handbook of gender-sensitive indicators in the Baltic Gender project Handb., Baltic Gend. Kiel, Ger.: https://www.baltic-gender.eu/documents/1199638/1385310/MS23-Indicators.pdf
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Baltic Gend. (Baltic Consort. Promot. Gend. Equal. Mar. Res. Organ.) 2020. Report on mentoring program Rep. Baltic Gend. Kiel, Ger.: https://oceanrep.geomar.de/50254/1/BG_D5-2_synthesis_Report_on_Mentoring_Program.pdf
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Baltic Gend. (Baltic Consort. Promot. Gend. Equal. Mar. Res. Organ.) 2012. Outcomes /publications. Baltic Gender https://www.baltic-gender.eu/outcomes
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Beal L. 2016. Women scientists at sea. MPOWIR June 6. https://mpowir.org/women-scientists-at-sea
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Behl M, Cooper S, Garza C, Kolesar SE, Legg S et al. 2021. Changing the culture of coastal, ocean, and marine sciences: strategies for individual and collective actions. Oceanography 34:353–60 https://doi.org/10.5670/oceanog.2021.307
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  7. Bell R, Laird J, Pfirman S, Mutter J, Balstad R, Cane M. 2005. An experiment in institutional transformation: the NSF ADVANCE Program for Women at the Earth Institute at Columbia University. Oceanography 18125–34 https://doi.org/10.5670/oceanog.2005.67
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  8. Beniest A. 2020. Maria Vasilyavna Klenova (12 August 1989 – 6 August 1976): the polar scientist who was known as the mother of marine geology. EGU Blogs Dec. 21. https://blogs.egu.eu/divisions/ts/2020/12/21/maria-vasilyevna-klenova-12-august-1898-6-august-1976-the-mother-of-marine-geology
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Berhe AA, Barnes RT, Hastings MG, Mattheis A, Schneider B et al. 2022. Scientists from historically excluded groups face a hostile obstacle course. Nat. Geosci. 15:2–4 https://doi.org/10.1038/s41561-021-00868-0
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  10. Bernard RE, Cooperdock EHG. 2018. No progress on diversity in 40 years. Nat. Geosci. 11:292–95 https://doi.org/10.1038/s41561-018-0116-6
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  11. Black CA. 2020. Gender equity in ocean science: amplifying voices, increasing impact Rep. Fish. Oceans Can. Ottawa, Can: https://publications.gc.ca/collections/collection_2021/mpo-dfo/Fs23-631-2020-eng.pdf
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Bonatti E, Crane K. 2012. Oceanography and women: early challenges. Oceanography 25:432–39 https://doi.org/10.5670/oceanog.2012.103
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  13. Clem S, Legg S, Lozier S, Mouw C. 2014. The impact of MPOWIR: a decade of investing in mentoring women in physical oceanography. Oceanography 31:4, Suppl.39–48 https://doi.org/10.5670/oceanog.2014.113
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  14. Commonw. Blue Chart 2021. Ocean Womxn: supporting black women to earn postgraduate degrees in oceanography at the University of Cape Town, South Africa Case Study, Commonw. Blue Chart. London, UK: https://thecommonwealth.org/case-study/case-study-ocean-womxn-supporting-black-women-earn-postgraduate-degrees-oceanography
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Consort. Ocean Leadersh 2020. 2020 Ocean Science Educators' Retreat: survey data Rep. Consort. Ocean Leadersh. Washington, DC: https://oceanleadership.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/08/OSER-Data-Report-2020.pdf
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Consort. Ocean Leadersh., Calif. State Univ. Desert Stud 2021. Report of the Workshop to Promote Safety in Field Sciences Rep. Consort. Ocean Leadersh. Washington, DC, and Calif. State Univ. Desert Stud. Zzyzx, CA: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5604956
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  17. Craig SE, Bhatt E. 2021. A short glossary of inclusive language. Oceanography 34:26–9 https://doi.org/10.5670/oceanog.2021.207
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  18. Day D. 1999. Overview of the history of women at Scripps Institution of Oceanography Paper presented at the Women's Center Panel, Univ. Calif. San Diego: Oct. 14. https://escholarship.org/uc/item/85t1s746
    [Google Scholar]
  19. DeHority R, Baez RR, Burnett T, Howell L. 2021. Nonbinary scientists want funding agencies to change how they collect gender data. Scientific American Aug. 30. https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/nonbinary-scientists-want-funding-agencies-to-change-how-they-collect-gender-data
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Diaz-Vallejo EJ, Miller TK, Terry CL, Magley VJ, Mattheis A et al. 2021. Identifying hostile workplace conditions associated with negative experiences that disproportionately affect minoritized groups in ecological, earth and spaces sciences Poster presented at the American Geophysical Union Fall Meeting New Orleans, LA: Dec. 13–17. https://agu.confex.com/agu/fm21/meetingapp.cgi/Paper/984741
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Drake H. 2019. Eight ways to support women in science. Eos June 7. https://doi.org/10.1029/2019EO126093
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  22. Eur. Comm. Dir.-Gen. Res. Innov 2021. She Figures 2021: gender in research and innovation; statistics and indicators Rep. Eur. Comm. Brussels, Belg: https://doi.org/10.2777/06090
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  23. Fine R, Beardsley R, Bontempi P, Campbell J, Chotiros N et al. 2010. Committee of Visitors advises NSF Division of Ocean Sciences. Eos Trans. AGU 91:73–74 https://doi.org/10.1029/2010EO080001
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  24. Ford HL, Brick C, Azmitia M, Blaufuss K, Dekens P. 2018. Gender inequity in speaking opportunities at the American Geophysical Union Fall Meeting. Nat. Commun. 9:1358 https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-018-03809-5
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  25. Ford HL, Brick C, Blaufuss K, Dekens P. 2019. Women from some under-represented minorities are given too few talks at world's largest earth-science conference. Nature 576:32–35 https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-019-03688-w
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  26. Freiburger B. 2020. Roberta Eike: the stowaway who made waves for women scientists today. Woods Hole Oceanographic Women's Committee Mar. 31. https://web.whoi.edu/womens-comm/roberta-eike
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Gaskins LC, McClain CR. 2021. Visible name changes promote inequity for transgender researchers. PLOS Biol. 19:e3001104 https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.3001104
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  28. Giakoumi S, Pita C, Coll M, Fraschetti S, Gissi E et al. 2021. Persistent gender bias in marine science and conservation calls for action to achieve equity. Biol. Conserv. 257:109134 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2021.109134
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  29. Gissi E, Portman M, Hornidge AK. 2018. Un-gendering the ocean: why women matter in ocean governance for sustainability. Mar. Policy 94:215–19 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2018.05.020
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  30. Glüder A. 2020. Equity and safety in polar oceanography? Let's start with equal chances of survival. Literally. Oceanography 33:38–9 https://doi.org/10.5670/oceanog.2020.303
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  31. Gonzales L, Keane C. 2020. Diversity in the geosciences Geosci. Curr. Data Brief 2020-023 Am. Geosci. Inst. Alexandria, VA: https://www.americangeosciences.org/sites/default/files/DB_2020-023-DiversityInTheGeosciences.pdf
    [Google Scholar]
  32. Haacker R, Burt M, Vara M. 2022. Moving beyond the business case for diversity. Eos Feb. 9. https://doi.org/10.1029/2022EO220080
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  33. Hendry KR, Annett A, Bhatia R, Damerell GM, Fielding S et al. 2020. Equity at sea: gender and inclusivity in UK sea-going science. Ocean Chall. 24:219–30 https://challenger-society.org.uk/oceanchallenge/2020_24_2.pdf
    [Google Scholar]
  34. IOC-UNESCO (Intergov. Oceanogr. Comm.–UN Educ. Sci. Cult. Organ.) 2017. Global ocean science report 2017: the current status of ocean science around the world Rep. UNESCO Paris: https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000250428
    [Google Scholar]
  35. IOC-UNESCO (Intergov. Oceanogr. Comm.–UN Educ. Sci. Cult. Organ.) 2020. Global ocean science report 2020: charting capacity for ocean sustainability Rep. UNESCO Paris: https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000375147
    [Google Scholar]
  36. Kalemeneva E, Lajus J 2018. Soviet female experts in the polar regions. The Palgrave Handbook of Women and Gender in Twentieth-Century Russia and the Soviet Union M Ilic 267–83 London: Palgrave Macmillan https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-54905-1_18
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  37. Kappel ES, Thompson L. 2014. Invited scientific papers and speakers and fellow awardees: little progress for women oceanographers in the last decade. Oceanography 27:4, Suppl.24–28 https://doi.org/10.5670/oceanog.2014.110
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  38. Koppers AAP, Klaus A, Given H 2019. Spotlight 14. Gender balance in scientific ocean drilling. Oceanography 32:1217 https://doi.org/10.5670/oceanog.2019.149
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  39. Leta J, Lewison G. 2003. The contribution of women in Brazilian science: a case study in astronomy, immunology and oceanography. Scientometrics 57:339–53 https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1025000600840
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  40. Lewandowski K 2018. Taboos, stowaways, and chief scientists: a brief history of women in oceanography. Women and Geology: Who Are We, Where Have We Come From, and Where Are We Going? BA Johnson 23–35 Boulder, CO: Geol. Soc. Am https://doi.org/10.1130/2018.1214(03)
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  41. Lima ID, Rheuban JE. 2021. Gender differences in NSF Ocean Sciences awards. Oceanography 34:4 https://doi.org/10.5670/oceanog.2021.401
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  42. Liquete C. 2005. Oceanography in Spain: gender issues. Oceanography 18:118–19
    [Google Scholar]
  43. Lozier MS. 2005. A community effort toward the retention of women in physical oceanography. Oceanography 18:135–38 https://doi.org/10.5670/oceanog.2005.68
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  44. Marcus N. 2005. Oceanography, science, and academia: women making a difference. Oceanography 18:151–55 https://doi.org/10.5670/oceanog.2005.71
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  45. Marin-Spiotta E, Barnes RT, Berhe AA, Hastings MG, Mattheis A et al. 2020. Hostile climates are barriers to diversitying the geosciences. Adv. Geosci. 53:117–27 https://doi.org/10.5194/adgeo-53-117-2020
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  46. Marins RV, da Costa JB. 2015. Are women contributing equally to the oceanography science in Brazil?. Maritime Women: Global Leadership M Kitada, E Williams, L Froholdt 155–65 Berlin: Springer https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-45385-8_12
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  47. Marshall AM, Thatcher S. 2019. Creating spaces for geoscientists with disabilities to thrive. Eos Dec. 2. https://doi.org/10.1029/2019EO136434
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  48. MIT (Mass. Inst. Technol.) 1999. A study on the status of women faculty in science at MIT. MIT Faculty Newsletter 11:44–12 http://web.mit.edu/fnl/women/women.html
    [Google Scholar]
  49. Michalena E, Straza TRA, Singh P, Morris CW, Hills JM. 2020. Promoting sustainable and inclusive oceans management in Pacific Islands through women and science. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 150:110711 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2019.110711
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  50. Mouw CB, Clem S, Legg S, Stockard J. 2018. Meeting mentoring needs in physical oceanography: an evaluation of the impact of MPOWIR. Oceanography 31:4171–79 https://doi.org/10.5670/oceanog.2018.405
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  51. Natl. Acad. Sci. Eng. Med 2018. Sexual Harassment of Women: Climate, Culture, and Consequences in Academic Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine Washington, DC: Natl. Acad. Press https://doi.org/10.17226/24994
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  52. Natl. Acad. Sci. Eng. Med 2021. The Impact of COVID-19 on the Careers of Women in Academic Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine Washington, DC: Natl. Acad. Press https://doi.org/10.17226/26061
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  53. Natl. Sci. Board 2007. Report to the National Science Board on the National Science Foundation's merit review process, fiscal year 2006 Rep. NSB-07-22 Natl. Sci. Board Alexandria, VA: https://www.nsf.gov/nsb/documents/2007/2006_merit_review.pdf
    [Google Scholar]
  54. Natl. Sci. Board 2020. National Science Foundation's merit review process: fiscal year 2019 digest Rep. NSB-2020-38 Natl. Sci. Board Alexandria, VA: https://www.nsf.gov/nsb/publications/2020/nsb202038.pdf
    [Google Scholar]
  55. Nowell AR, Hollister CD. 1988. Graduate students in oceanography: recruitment, success, and career prospects. Eos Trans. AGU 69:834–43 https://doi.org/10.1029/88EO01100
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  56. NSF (Natl. Sci. Found.) 2021. Survey of Earned Doctorates. NSF https://www.nsf.gov/statistics/srvydoctorates
    [Google Scholar]
  57. O'Connell S. 2014. Women of the academy and the sea: 2000–2014. Oceanography 27:4, Suppl.15–22 http://doi.org/10.5670/oceanog.2014.108
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  58. O'Connell S, Holmes MA. 2005. Women of the academy and the sea. Oceanography 18:112–24 http://doi.org/10.5670/oceanog.2005.66
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  59. O'Hern J. 2015. I've faced sexual assault, harassment and discrimination as a female scientist. My complaints were dismissed. Washington Post Sept. 11. https://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2015/09/11/ive-faced-outrageous-discrimination-as-a-female-oceanographer-i-want-better-for-the-next-generation
    [Google Scholar]
  60. Orcutt BN, Cetinić I 2014. Women in oceanography: continuing challenges. Oceanography 27:4 Suppl 5–13 http://doi.org/10.5670/oceanog.2014.106
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  61. Oreskes N. 1996. Objectivity or heroism? On the invisibility of women in science. Osiris 11:87–113 https://doi.org/10.1086/368756
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  62. Oreskes N. 2000.. “Laissez-tomber”: military patronage and women's work in mid-20th-century oceanography. Hist. Stud. Phys. Biol. Sci. 30:373–92 https://doi.org/10.2307/27757836
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  63. Patton EW, Griffith KA, Jones RD, Stewart A, Ubel PA, Jagsi R. 2017. Differences in mentor-mentee sponsorship in male vs female recipients of National Institutes of Health Grants. JAMA Intern. Med. 177:580–82 https://doi.org/doi:10.1001/jamainternmed.2016.9391
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  64. Pico T. 2021. Linking past to present in a postcolonial field science: how scientific training and practice in US geology perpetuates marginalization. Earth Space Sci. Open Arch. 10506337.1. https://doi.org/10.1002/essoar.10506337.1
    [Crossref]
  65. Picq ML, Tikuna J 2019. Indigenous sexualities: resisting conquest and translation. Sexuality and Translation in World Politics C Cottet, ML Picq 57–71 Bristol, UK: E-Int. Relat https://www.e-ir.info/2019/08/20/indigenous-sexualities-resisting-conquest-and-translation
    [Google Scholar]
  66. Ranganathan M, Lalk E, Freese LM, Freilich MA, Wilcots J et al. 2021. Trends in the representation of women among US geoscience faculty from 1999 to 2020: the long road toward gender parity. AGU Adv 2:e2021AV000436 https://doi.org/10.1029/2021AV000436
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  67. Sheltzer JM, Smith JC. 2014. Elite male faculty in the life sciences employ fewer women. PNAS 111:10107–12 https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1403334111
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  68. Silver MW. 2005. Mary Wilcox Silver: a woman pioneer in oceanography. Oceanography 18:157–64 https://doi.org/10.5670/oceanog.2005.72
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  69. Strauss BE, Borges SR, Faridani T, Grier JA, Kiihne A et al. 2020. Nonbinary systems: looking towards the future of gender equity in planetary science. arXiv:2009.08247 [astro-ph.IM]. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2009.08247
    [Crossref]
  70. Sullivan KD. 1998. The women of FAMOUS: remembrance of time past. Oceanus Mar. 1. https://www.whoi.edu/oceanus/feature/the-women-of-famous
    [Google Scholar]
  71. Thompson L, Perez RC, Shevenell AE. 2011. Closed ranks in oceanography. Nat. Geosci. 4:211–12 https://doi.org/10.1038/ngeo1113
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  72. TOS (The Oceanogr. Soc.) 2022. TOS council. TOS https://tos.org/tos-council
    [Google Scholar]
  73. [Google Scholar]
  74. UK Res. Innov 2021b. Diversity results for UKRI funding data, 2014–15 to 2019–20 Rep. UK Res. Innov. Swindon, UK: https://www.ukri.org/publications/diversity-results-analysis-for-ukri-funding-data-financial-years-2014-15-to-2019-20
    [Google Scholar]
  75. UNOLS (Univ.-Natl. Oceanogr. Lab. Syst.) 2022a. Shipboard civility. UNOLS https://www.unols.org/shipboard-civility
    [Google Scholar]
  76. UNOLS (Univ.-Natl. Oceanogr. Lab. Syst.) 2022b. Shipboard civility. UNOLS https://www.unols.org/shipboard-civility
    [Google Scholar]
  77. Valve H. 2020. GenderWave: a digitool to support incorporation of gender perspectives into marine research and innovation Rep. Baltic Gend. Kiel, Ger.: https://oceanrep.geomar.de/id/eprint/50308
    [Google Scholar]
  78. Vila-Concejo A, Gallop SL, Hamylton SM, Esteves LS, Bryan KR et al. 2018. Steps to improve gender diversity in coastal geoscience and engineering. Palgrave Commun. 4:103 https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-018-0154-0
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  79. Wilson C. 2013. U.S. female geoscience degree rates in atmospheric science, geography, geoscience and ocean science, 2000–2012 Geosci. Curr. 71 Am. Geosci. Inst. Alexandria, VA: https://www.americangeosciences.org/sites/default/files/currents/Currents-71-GenderByGeoscienceFields.pdf
    [Google Scholar]
  80. Wolfinger NH, Mason MA, Goulden M. 2008. Problems in the pipeline: gender, marriage, and fertility in the ivory tower. J. High. Educ. 79:388–405 https://doi.org/10.1353/jhe.0.0015
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  81. Wooden P, Hanson B. 2022. Effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on authors and reviewers of American Geophysical Union journals. Earth Space Sci. Open Arch. 10508114.1. https://doi.org/10.1002/essoar.10508114.1
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  82. WHO (World Health Organ.) 2022. Gender and health. WHO https://www.who.int/health-topics/gender
    [Google Scholar]
  83. WHOI (Woods Hole Oceanogr. Inst.) 2000. Report of the Gender Equity Review Committee Rep. WHOI Woods Hole, MA: https://web.whoi.edu/gepac/wp-content/uploads/sites/87/2017/01/2000Gender_Equity_Report.pdf
    [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-marine-032322-100357
Loading
/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-marine-032322-100357
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Review Article
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error