Academic inequality through the lens of community ecology: a meta-analysis

Perspective: sustainability challenges, opportunities and solutions for long-term ecosystem observations

As interest in natural capital grows and society increasingly recognizes the value of biodiversity, we must discuss how ecosystem observations to detect changes in biodiversity can be sustained through collaboration across regions and sectors. However, there are many barriers to establishing and sustaining large-scale, fine-resolution ecosystem observations. First, comprehensive monitoring data on both biodiversity and possible anthropogenic factors are lacking. Second, some in situ ecosystem observations cannot be systematically established and maintained across locations. Third, equitable solutions across sectors and countries are needed to build a global network. Here, by examining individual cases and emerging frameworks, mainly from (but not limited to) Japan, we illustrate how ecological science relies on long-term data and how neglecting basic monitoring of our home planet further reduces our chances of overcoming the environmental crisis. We also discuss emerging techniques and opportunities, such as environmental DNA and citizen science as well as using the existing and forgotten sites of monitoring, that can help overcome some of the difficulties in establishing and sustaining ecosystem observations at a large scale with fine resolution. Overall, this paper presents a call to action for joint monitoring of biodiversity and anthropogenic factors, the systematic establishment and maintenance of in situ observations, and equitable solutions across sectors and countries to build a global network, beyond cultures, languages, and economic status. We hope that our proposed framework and the examples from Japan can serve as a starting point for further discussions and collaborations among stakeholders across multiple sectors of society. It is time to take the next step in detecting changes in socio-ecological systems, and if monitoring and observation can be made more equitable and feasible, they will play an even more important role in ensuring global sustainability for future generations. This article is part of the theme issue 'Detecting and attributing the causes of biodiversity change: needs, gaps and solutions'.

Diversity, equity, and inclusion in academia to guide society

Many barriers exist in academia. Shedding light on scholars from marginalized groups is important for scientific publishing and policy-science dialogs to ensure equity, beyond merely aiming to increase the numbers to achieve equality. Achieving diversity, inclusiveness, and equality in academia is not the goal, but an essential means of realizing a sustainable future.

A persistent lack of international representation on editorial boards in environmental biology

The scholars comprising journal editorial boards play a critical role in defining the trajectory of knowledge in their field. Nevertheless, studies of editorial board composition remain rare, especially those focusing on journals publishing research in the increasingly globalized fields of science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM). Using metrics for quantifying the diversity of ecological communities, we quantified international representation on the 1985–2014 editorial boards of 24 environmental biology journals. Over the course of 3 decades, there were 3,827 unique scientists based in 70 countries who served as editors. The size of the editorial community increased over time—the number of editors serving in 2014 was 4-fold greater than in 1985—as did the number of countries in which editors were based. Nevertheless, editors based outside the “Global North” (the group of economically developed countries with high per capita gross domestic product [GDP] that collectively concentrate most global wealth) were extremely rare. Furthermore, 67.18% of all editors were based in either the United States or the United Kingdom. Consequently, geographic diversity—already low in 1985—remained unchanged through 2014. We argue that this limited geographic diversity can detrimentally affect the creativity of scholarship published in journals, the progress and direction of research, the composition of the STEM workforce, and the development of science in Latin America, Africa, the Middle East, and much of Asia (i.e., the “Global South”).