This recipe is based on my own experiences as a scientist from a historically marginalised group, working in the UK. I hope it can provide food for thought to other scientists who are navigating the academy while trying to work for social justice.

Preparation

While movements such as feminism, critical race theory and subaltern studies have long been studied in many humanities or social science departments, this cannot be said of the natural sciences. Typically, scientists like to remove themselves from their work, arguing that science is “objective” and that the identity of the scientist is irrelevant to the science. Thus, while equality, diversity and inclusion (EDI) practices do exist, they are perceived as an extra ethical tick- box exercise, that is totally independent of, and irrelevant to, scientific research.

This perception of EDI practices is problematic for three reasons. Firstly, it places engaging with social justice as an optional extra to doing science. As such, the majority of scientists don’t feel like it is their work to do and the work falls disproportionately to those who are already disadvantaged by the system. Secondly, it preserves the current status quo of the scientific institution, and does not challenge how science is done, or imagine a world in which science could be done better. Finally, it ignores how social structures and norms can impact the knowledge produced by scientific research.

It is generally accepted that social priorities determine the scientific questions that are asked, and the research projects that are funded [1]. Yet, scientists are often resistant to the idea that social norms can affect       science itself. One example of this      is how cultural norms about gender influenced the way that the human reproductive system is represented in US textbooks [2]. The egg is described as a passive, waiting object, while sperm are envisioned as active, striving creatures.       This type of language has shaped the way many generations of biologists intuit this mechanism. Analogies and models are necessary in science, so that we can wrap our minds around otherwise inaccessible concepts, but they are inevitably informed by cultural practices [3].

Indeed, today’s scientific enterprise is a deeply social practice. The legitimacy of a scientific result comes from peer-review — the approval of experts in the field. If you have a theory on your own, it’s not science (yet). It becomes so, as it is validated and reproduced by others [4]. Often scientists say “let the data speak for itself”. But if you show a scientific plot to an untrained person, it does not speak to them! Scientific meaning requires interpretation, and this is defined by education and experience – both of which are socially determined. Even amongst trained scientists, data interpretation can be (and often is!) hotly debated. For example, finding a material that has no electrical resistance is something many physicists are working towards today. Yet, although there are published papers seemingly showing this data, there is ongoing discussion about whether this data can really be used to support all the claims in the papers.      Science is inextricably linked to the scientists who do it and it is the responsibility of scientists to challenge themselves and their institutional structures to address the historical and ongoing inequities that have led to the white, male dominated scientific community we have today. Martha-Elizabeth Baylor, a Black physics lecturer from the US has developed a framework to teach her students to become responsible members of the physics community. She writes “I want EDI to be a lens through which they do their work, rather than an issue that is only considered if someone brings it up” [5]. To build a better scientific community, we need to incorporate social justice into the everyday practice of doing science.

Methods

Much of the change needed to create an equitable and just scientific community must come on a systemic level, from institutions, journals and funding agencies. However, as an individual, there are things you can do to build a community and support network for yourself, as well as contributing towards broader cultural change. Here are some examples of methods by which scientists at different career stages can engage with social justice.

Part I: Find allies

If you are a scientist who cares about social justice, you may find your research group to be a lonely place. You may be the only person of colour or disabled person or woman or LGBTQ+ individual in your scientific circle, and you may feel like the only person who cares about social justice issues. Support networks are key to feeling empowered in doing science. Some networks exist to lobby and create change whereas others focus on support and mentorship.

Tap into networks. Look for any communities within the department or university – many places now have at least a “Women in Science” type network. Even if you’re not a woman, this could be a place to find allies. If you’re interested in the philosophy of science, such as in the debates about scientific objectivity mentioned above, a good place to find friends is the History and Philosophy of Science/ Science & Technology studies departments. These often include people who take a more critical view of the scientific establishment (some may have trained as scientists themselves), and they are open to discussions about the social nature of science. These departments may also have open lectures and seminars you can attend. I have learnt a lot from my interactions with historians and philosophers of science.

Outside your own institution or city, there are many networks of friendly, welcoming scientists to be inspired by. Some large scale networks include 500 queer scientists, or 500 women scientists, who feature profiles of scientists around the world. One UK based group working towards  equality, diversity, inclusion & accessibility in science is TIGERs in STEMM. Another UK group is the Blackett Lab Family, representing, connecting and inspiring Black physicists. Twitter is another way to connect with activist scientists on these issues. Following accounts like @PrideinSTEM, @TIGERSinSTEMM or @BlackintheIvory (or @BlackinPhysics etc) can be a good place to start finding individuals who are active on Twitter and leading discussions on social justice issues. Often people and networks are now organising online conferences or seminars, which are good for learning and making new connections.

Build a network. If there isn’t a formal network of like-minded people in your department, build one! It is likely that there are a few scattered individuals who do care about social justice issues. One way of bringing together these individuals is by organising events that appeal to them. This could be a seminar on a social justice issue, or a reading group, or even just a social event like tea and cake (free food always helps!).

It is easier to organise events and sustain networks with some source of funding. Often universities or student unions can fund student societies, and your network may fall under that remit. It can also be worth approaching the science department or faculty management. As I mentioned earlier, most departments now see EDI as a positive initiative they are willing to support. For example, in the UK, there is a program called Athena Swan, which gives awards to university departments for working towards gender equality.  If your department is keen to apply for this award, they are likely to provide some funding towards a network that can work towards this goal.

Receiving funding, especially from the department, can be a double-edged sword. On the one hand, it helps to have a positive working relationship with the department you are based in. And the money is useful. On the other hand, if your goal is to question the institutional structure of the department, you need to make sure that you maintain autonomy with your goals and principles. Negotiating with the department for their support in your work, while you challenge them to change their policies is tricky, but can be done.

Expand your network. Once you have a network and are regularly meeting members or organising events, you may find that it’s always the same few faces at your events. Probably mostly people from underrepresented minorities, and maybe a handful of others (usually students, or postdocs). It can be very hard to break out of that bubble and engage scientists who think of diversity as something not relevant to them.

Yet, the structure of academia, with its precarious, low paying contracts and “publish or perish” ethos, is relevant to all researchers. Marginalised groups are of course the most impacted, but the insecurity of the system affects (almost) everyone. Events that engage with topics such as insecure contracts or grant funding systems are useful to attract a wider range of people. They can be a way to signal to majority groups that social justice is not about “taking opportunities away from the majority” but rather, increasing opportunity for everyone. Once someone has come to one event, they can become more approachable in the corridor, or they might bring a friend to the next event.

Part II: Open the gates.

If you are reading this as a scientist, or someone working in science, you are privileged in some way to have got through the gates. Don’t be a gatekeeper – open the gates for others. Through some of the networks above, you can find support and allies to advocate for change on a structural level. In addition, here are a few tips to bear in mind during your everyday work as a scientist.

When writing papers. Be proactively inclusive in your citation practices. Often it is tempting to simply cite the papers that are cited by others. However, this simply perpetuates existing citation biases. Studies have shown that gender imbalance in citations has been growing over time, despite more women being involved in research in recent years [5].

When writing emails. Use inclusive language in emails (and in person!). Be mindful of using culturally specific jokes or idioms that won’t be accessible to everyone. Add pronouns to your email signature – even if you are unlikely to be misgendered yourself, this contributes to a culture of encouraging mindful pronoun use.

When scheduling meetings. Be thoughtful about timings when organising meetings or seminars, depending on the needs of your group members. Many people have responsibilities beyond their research. Schedule emails so that work/life boundaries are clear within the group and nobody receives work-related emails at 3am (even if that is when you work at your best!). Be flexible about the working hours/rhythms of others.

When hiring. Work to actively recruit people from marginalised groups. Using some of the networks mentioned above may help to spread the word. Think about the tone of your advert and how that may influence who applies, e.g. “to work in a highly-competitive research group”. Reflect on the type of candidate you are looking for and challenge yourself on how you are judging applicants and their backgrounds.

Be considerate with your deadlines, so that everyone has a chance to apply. For example, opening a job advert in mid December with an early January deadline will be challenging to apply to for anyone who has caring responsibilities over Christmas. Try to accommodate part-time contracts if you can.

When organising conferences. Think about who you invite to speak and who you collaborate with and actively engage with minoritised members of the community. Invited conference talks can particularly make a big difference to an early career researcher. Use the opportunity to raise the visibility of researchers who may be otherwise overlooked.

Make your conference accessible. For online talks, use software that enables closed captioning during talks. For in-person events, ensure that the venue is physically accessible to everyone. If possible, try to secure funding for travel reimbursement to attendees who would not otherwise be able to attend. Provide facilities for childcare so that parents are able to attend.

Tip:

Find the right balance of science and activism for you. During my years in a physics lab, I was an active member of a network of women and nonbinary people. I spent many hours finding speakers, organising logistics and setting up events for the network — hours that my labmates were spending on research, and at times that was frustrating. Yet ultimately, it was the support of my network and the friends I found within it that kept me inspired to do the science.

References:

1. Kaiser, D Discovery is always political. Nature 573, 487-490 (2019)
2. Martin, E. The Egg and the Sperm: How Science Has Constructed a Romance Based on Stereotypical Male- Female Roles, Signs, Vol. 16, No. 3 pp. 485-501 (1991).
3. Cooke, L. Bitch: A Revolutionary Guide to Sex, Evolution and the Female Animal Transworld (2022)
4. Longino, H. “4. Values and Objectivity” Science as social knowledge: Values and Objectivity in Scientific Inquiry, Princeton University Press (1990).
5. Baylor, ME. How positioning students in the professional physics community leads to a more inclusive community. Nat Rev Phys 3, 764–765 (2021).
6. Huang, J. et al. Historical comparison of gender inequality in scientific careers across countries and disciplines. PNAS 117 (9) 4609-4616 (2020).