Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Correspondence
  • Published:

Meeting frameworks must be even more inclusive

Nature Ecology & Evolution volume 5, page 552 (2021)Cite this article

Subjects

An Author Correction to this article was published on 13 October 2021

This article has been updated

Access through your institution
Buy or subscribe

To the Editor — Inclusivity in science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) is paramount and must include scientists with disabilities. One critical element to ensure inclusivity is accessibility at conferences, meetings and workshops. At these gatherings, scientists of all career stages present, listen and network in order to advance science. A recent article set out a new framework and guidance for inclusive and sustainable science, but it did not consider the needs of scientists with disabilities1. Diversity is not only defined as gender and cultural diversity, and many forget that it also includes disability. Any framework and guidance for conferences, meetings and workshops must consider and include accessibility and disability and their efforts to diversify science2. For instance, several STEM professional societies, including the Ecological Society of America, Association for the Sciences of Limnology and Oceanography3 and Mathematics Association of America, are currently taking the lead in including scientists with disabilities in conversations through organizing chat and panel events and publishing blogs and bulletins.

Moreover, sustainable conference planning must include intersectionality. For instance, two dimensions of diversity — race and disability — cannot be separated. Ableism (oppression based on disability status) is inherently anti-Black, as ideas about disability and normalcy are rooted in racism4. Black people and other people of colour are more likely to be disabled or perceived as disabled, and in turn experience oppression, ableism and exclusion. Inclusion in STEM cannot be addressed without also addressing racial equity and inclusion. Simply aiming for conference attendees from all continents does not account for the intersectional oppression of Black and disabled people globally. As the editors of this journal themselves wrote, collaborations and choices in science must not ignore race and must fight structural racism5.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Relevant articles

Open Access articles citing this article.

Access options

Access through your institution

Buy this article

  • Purchase on SpringerLink
  • Instant access to full article PDF
Buy now

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Change history

References

  1. Blackman, R. C. et al. Nat. Ecol. Evol. 4, 668–671 (2020).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Goring, S. J., Stack Whitney, K. & Jacob, A. L. Front. Ecol. Environ. 16, 63 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Solomon, C. Limnol. Oceanogr. Bull. 30, 20–21 (2021).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Lewis, T. A. Ableism 2020: an updated definition (25 January 2020); http://go.nature.com/3bDcFoO

  5. Nat. Ecol. Evol. 4, 893–894 (2020).

  6. Vogler, C. Accessibility tips for a better Zoom/virtual meeting experience. Gallaudet University Technology Access Program (23 March 2020); http://go.nature.com/3bDcR7w

  7. Leary, A. How to make your virtual meetings and events accessible to the disability community. Rooted in Rights (13 April 2020); http://go.nature.com/3bCnGXg

  8. Serrato Marks, G. How to make professional conferences more accessible for disabled people: guidance from actual disabled scientists. Union of Concerned Scientists Blog (8 November 2018); https://go.nature.com/3qFFV2i

  9. Woodcock, K., Rohan, M. J. & Campbell, L. High. Educ. 53, 359–379 (2007).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Braun, D. C. et al. CBE: Life Sci. Educ. 17, es10 (2018).

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Earth, Atmospheric, and Planetary Sciences Department, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA, USA

    Gabriela Serrato Marks

  2. School of Science, Technology, Accessibility, Mathematics and Public Health, Gallaudet University, Washington DC, USA

    Caroline Solomon

  3. Science, Technology & Society Department, Rochester Institute of Technology, Rochester, NY, USA

    Kaitlin Stack Whitney

Authors
  1. Gabriela Serrato Marks
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Caroline Solomon
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Kaitlin Stack Whitney
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Gabriela Serrato Marks, Caroline Solomon or Kaitlin Stack Whitney.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Serrato Marks, G., Solomon, C. & Stack Whitney, K. Meeting frameworks must be even more inclusive. Nat Ecol Evol 5, 552 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41559-021-01437-9

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41559-021-01437-9

This article is cited by

Search

Advanced search

Quick links

Nature Briefing Anthropocene

Sign up for the Nature Briefing: Anthropocene newsletter — what matters in anthropocene research, free to your inbox weekly.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing: Anthropocene