IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0209983.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

“Antarctica just has this hero factor…”: Gendered barriers to Australian Antarctic research and remote fieldwork

Author

Listed:
  • Meredith Nash
  • Hanne E F Nielsen
  • Justine Shaw
  • Matt King
  • Mary-Anne Lea
  • Narissa Bax

Abstract

Antarctica is often associated with images of masculine figures battling against the blizzard. The pervasiveness of heroic white masculine leadership and exploration in Antarctica and, more broadly, in Science, Technology, Engineering, Mathematics, and Medicine (STEMM) research cultures, has meant women have had lesser access to Antarctic research and fieldwork opportunities, with a marked increase since the 1980s. This article presents findings from an exploratory online survey examining how 95 women experienced research and remote Antarctic fieldwork with the Australian Antarctic Program. Although women are entering polar science in greater numbers, a key theme of the qualitative findings of this survey is that gendered barriers to participation in research and fieldwork persist. We discuss five key gendered barriers including: 1) Physical barriers, 2) Caring responsibilities/unpaid work, 3) Cultural sexism/gender bias, 4) Lack of opportunities/recognition, and 5) Unwanted male attention/sexual harassment. We argue that the lack of attention paid to gender and sexuality in polar fieldwork contributes to the invisibility and exclusion of women and other marginalized identities broadly. To conclude, we point to the importance of targeted inclusivity, diversity and equity initiatives through Antarctic research globally and specifically by National Antarctic Programs.

Suggested Citation

  • Meredith Nash & Hanne E F Nielsen & Justine Shaw & Matt King & Mary-Anne Lea & Narissa Bax, 2019. "“Antarctica just has this hero factor…”: Gendered barriers to Australian Antarctic research and remote fieldwork," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(1), pages 1-22, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0209983
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0209983
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0209983
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0209983&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0209983?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jan Strugnell, 2016. "Kudos for female Antarctic researchers," Nature, Nature, vol. 536(7615), pages 148-148, August.
    2. Meredith Nash & Amanda Davies & Robyn Moore, 2017. "What style of leadership do women in STEMM fields perform? Findings from an international survey," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(10), pages 1-16, October.
    3. Kathryn B H Clancy & Robin G Nelson & Julienne N Rutherford & Katie Hinde, 2014. "Survey of Academic Field Experiences (SAFE): Trainees Report Harassment and Assault," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(7), pages 1-9, July.
    4. Paul J. Boyle & Lucy K. Smith & Nicola J. Cooper & Kate S. Williams & Henrietta O'Connor, 2015. "Gender balance: Women are funded more fairly in social science," Nature, Nature, vol. 525(7568), pages 181-183, September.
    5. Elaine Howard Ecklund & Sarah A James & Anne E Lincoln, 2012. "How Academic Biologists and Physicists View Science Outreach," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 7(5), pages 1-5, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Amy Hinsley & William J Sutherland & Alison Johnston, 2017. "Men ask more questions than women at a scientific conference," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(10), pages 1-14, October.
    2. Hyungjo Hur & Maryam A Andalib & Julie A Maurer & Joshua D Hawley & Navid Ghaffarzadegan, 2017. "Recent trends in the U.S. Behavioral and Social Sciences Research (BSSR) workforce," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(2), pages 1-18, February.
    3. Huyen Thanh T. Nguyen & Minh-Hoang Nguyen & Tam-Tri Le & Manh-Toan Ho & Quan-Hoang Vuong, 2021. "Open Access Publishing Probabilities Based on Gender and Authorship Structures in Vietnam," Publications, MDPI, vol. 9(4), pages 1-16, October.
    4. Craig R McClain, 2017. "Practices and promises of Facebook for science outreach: Becoming a “Nerd of Trust”," PLOS Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(6), pages 1-9, June.
    5. Alana Kluczkovski & Joanne Cook & Helen F. Downie & Alison Fletcher & Lauryn McLoughlin & Andrew Markwick & Sarah L. Bridle & Christian J. Reynolds & Ximena Schmidt Rivera & Wayne Martindale & Angelin, 2020. "Interacting with Members of the Public to Discuss the Impact of Food Choices on Climate Change—Experiences from Two UK Public Engagement Events," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(6), pages 1-21, March.
    6. Hartshorn, Jessica A. & Brockerhoff, Eckehard G. & Klapwijk, Maartje J. & Marzano, Mariella & Ganley, Rebecca J. & Darr, Molly N., 2023. "Attracting and retaining women in forest entomology and forest pathology," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 154(C).
    7. Wei Fu & Shin-Yi Chou & Li-San Wang, 2022. "NIH Grant Expansion, Ancestral Diversity and Scientific Discovery in Genomics Research," NBER Working Papers 30155, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    8. Nigel Golden & Kadambari Devarajan & Cathleen Balantic & Joseph Drake & Michael T Hallworth & Toni Lyn Morelli, 2021. "Ten simple rules for productive lab meetings," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 17(5), pages 1-13, May.
    9. Janet L Fitzakerley & Michael L Michlin & John Paton & Janet M Dubinsky, 2013. "Neuroscientists’ Classroom Visits Positively Impact Student Attitudes," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(12), pages 1-1, December.
    10. Patricia E Salerno & Mónica Páez-Vacas & Juan M Guayasamin & Jennifer L Stynoski, 2019. "Male principal investigators (almost) don’t publish with women in ecology and zoology," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(6), pages 1-14, June.
    11. Abhay S. D. Rajput & Sangeeta Sharma, 2022. "Top Indian scientists as public communicators: a survey of their perceptions, attitudes and communication behaviors," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(6), pages 3167-3192, June.
    12. Eduardo B Araújo & Nuno A M Araújo & André A Moreira & Hans J Herrmann & José S Andrade Jr., 2017. "Gender differences in scientific collaborations: Women are more egalitarian than men," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(5), pages 1-10, May.
    13. Fernanda Staniscuaski & Arthur V. Machado & Rossana C. Soletti & Fernanda Reichert & Eugenia Zandonà & Pamela B. Mello-Carpes & Camila Infanger & Zelia M. C. Ludwig & Leticia Oliveira, 2023. "Bias against parents in science hits women harder," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 10(1), pages 1-9, December.
    14. Marvin Reuter & Morten Wahrendorf & Cristina Di Tecco & Tahira M Probst & Antonio Chirumbolo & Stefanie Ritz-Timme & Claudio Barbaranelli & Sergio Iavicoli & Nico Dragano, 2020. "Precarious employment and self-reported experiences of unwanted sexual attention and sexual harassment at work. An analysis of the European Working Conditions Survey," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(5), pages 1-19, May.
    15. Jarrett E K Byrnes & Jai Ranganathan & Barbara L E Walker & Zen Faulkes, 2014. "To Crowdfund Research, Scientists Must Build an Audience for Their Work," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(12), pages 1-29, December.
    16. Christopher D Lynn & Michaela E Howells & Max J Stein, 2018. "Family and the field: Expectations of a field-based research career affect researcher family planning decisions," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(9), pages 1-25, September.
    17. Stephen J Aguilar & Clare Baek, 2020. "Sexual harassment in academe is underreported, especially by students in the life and physical sciences," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(3), pages 1-18, March.
    18. Margaret C. Hardy, 2016. "Drafting an Effective Ethical Code of Conduct for Professional Societies: A Practical Guide," Administrative Sciences, MDPI, vol. 6(4), pages 1-11, November.
    19. Emily L Howell & Julia Nepper & Dominique Brossard & Michael A Xenos & Dietram A Scheufele, 2019. "Engagement present and future: Graduate student and faculty perceptions of social media and the role of the public in science engagement," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(5), pages 1-20, May.
    20. Colette Fagan & Nina Teasdale, 2021. "Women Professors across STEMM and Non-STEMM Disciplines: Navigating Gendered Spaces and Playing the Academic Game," Work, Employment & Society, British Sociological Association, vol. 35(4), pages 774-792, August.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0209983. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.