Mujeres en la ornitología colombiana: Perspectivas históricas y tendencias de participación en dos contextos académicos

Autores/as

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.59517/oc.e574

Palabras clave:

equidad de género, mujeres en la ciencia, Latinoamérica, sesgos, tubería con fugas

Resumen

Globalmente existe un movimiento para fomentar la equidad en los entornos académicos debido a la baja representación de mujeres. Este estudio se enfoca en la participación femenina en la ornitología colombiana. Exploramos tanto la situación actual, como la participación histórica de mujeres en este campo, resaltando su escasa visibilidad en los registros históricos. Para abordar estas desigualdades, proponemos una revisión interna para identificar sesgos y sugerir acciones que fortalezcan la equidad en este campo. En nuestro análisis de la revista Ornitología Colombiana (OC) y el Congreso Colombiano de Ornitología (CCO) entre 2003 y 2023, evaluamos la participación de mujeres en diversos roles como autoras, editoras, revisoras, tesistas y asesoras de tesis, así como su presencia como ponentes magistrales y en presentaciones orales y pósteres. Los resultados muestran que, en promedio, las mujeres representan el 29,2% de los autores en la revista, con el 21,1% y 18,3% siendo primeras y últimas autoras, respectivamente. Esta baja representación se extiende al cuerpo editorial y a los revisores (una mujer editora en jefe, 28% de editoras asociadas, y 15,6% de revisoras). El CCO muestra tendencias similares, con sólo el 37,2% de resúmenes que tienen a una mujer como coautora. De manera preocupante, la participación femenina no muestra una tendencia en aumento. Como posible evidencia de la “tubería con fugas” en la ornitología colombiana, observamos que más del 50% de los tesistas son mujeres, pero esta proporción disminuye al avanzar en las etapas de la carrera académica. Con el ánimo de cambiar estas tendencias y fortalecer la disciplina, presentamos recomendaciones específicas que buscan fomentar la diversidad y equidad en la ornitología colombiana.

Descargas

Los datos de descarga aún no están disponibles.

Referencias

Bendels, M.H., R. Müller, D. Brueggmann & D.A. Groneberg. 2018. Gender disparities in high-quality research revealed by Nature Index Journals. PloS One 13 (1):e0189136. Doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0189136

Birkhead, T.R. & I. Charmantier. 2009. History of Ornithology. En: Encyclopedia of Life Sciences (ELS). John Wiley & Sons, Ltd: Chichester. DOI: 10.1002/9780470015902.a0003096

Budden, A.E., T. Tregenza., L.W. Aarssen., J. Koricheva., R. Leimu & C.J. Lortie. 2008. Double-blind review favours increased representation of female authors. Trends in ecology & evolution 23(1): 4-6. DOI: 10.1016/j.tree.2007.07.008

Caldarulo, M., J. Olsen, A. Frandell, S. Islam, T.P. Johnson, M.K. Feeney, L. Michalegro & E.W. Welch. 2022. COVID-19 and gender inequity in science: Consistent harm over time. PloS one 17(7):e0271089. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0271089

Cech, E.A. & M. Blair-Loy. 2019. The Changing Career Trajectories of New Parents in STEM. PNAS 116(10): 4182– 4187. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1810862116

Cho, A.H., S.A. Johnson, C.E. Shuman, J.M. Adler, O. Gonzalez, S.J. Graves, J.R. Huebner, D.B. Marchant, S.W. Rifai, I. Skinner, & E.M. Bruna. 2014. Women are underrepresented on the editorial boards of journals in environmental biology and natural resource management. PeerJ 2:e542. DOI: 10.7717/peerj.542

Córdoba-córdoba, S. 2009. Historia de la ornitología colombiana: sus colecciones científicas, investigadores y asociaciones. Boletín SAO 19:1-26. http://www.sao.org.co/publicaciones/boletinsao/Boletin%20sao.htm

Cossairt, B.M., J.L. Dempsey, & E.R. Young. 2019. The Chemistry Women Mentorship Network (CHEMWMN): A tool for creating critical mass in academic chemistry. Chemistry of Materials 31(20):8239-8242

Chrousos., G.P, & A-F.A. Mentis. 2020. Imposter syndrome threatens diversity. Science 367(6479): 749-750. DOI: 10.1126/science.aba8039

De kleijn, M., B. Jayabalasingham, H.J. Falk-krzesinski, T. Collins, L. Kuiper-hoyng, I. Cingolani & S. Tobin. 2020. The researcher journey through a gender lens: an examination of research participation, career progression and perceptions across the globe. Elsevier. 179 pp.

Demery, A.J.C. & M.A. Pipkin. 2021. Safe fieldwork strategies for at-risk individuals, their supervisors and institutions. Nature Ecology & Evolution 5(1):5-9. DOI: 10.1038/s41559-020-01328-5

Dizney, L.J., J. Karr & R.J. Rowe. 2019. The contribution and recognition of women in the field of mammalogy. Journal of Mammalogy 100(3): 678-689. DOI: 10.1093/jmammal/gyy170

Dubois-shaik, F., B. Fusulier & C. Vincke. 2018. A gendered pipeline typology in academia. In Gender and Precarious Research Careers (pp. 178-205). Routledge.

Farr, C.M., S.P. Bombaci, A.M. Mangan, H.L. Riedl, L.T. Stinson, K. Wilkins & L. Pejchar. 2017. Addressing the gender gap in distinguished speakers at professional ecology conferences. BioScience 67(5): 464–468. DOI: 10.1093/biosci/bix013

Feeney, M. & M. Bernal. 2010. Women in STEM networks: who seeks advice and support from women scientists?. Scientometrics 85(3):767-790. DOI: 10.1007/s11192-010-0256-y

Fox, C.W. & C.T. Paine. 2019a. Gender differences in peer review outcomes and manuscript impact at six journals of ecology and evolution. Ecology and Evolution 9(6):3599-36-19. DOI: 10.1002/ece3.4993

Fox, C.W., M.A. Duffy., D.J. Fairbairn & J.A. Meyer. 2019. Gender diversity of editorial boards and gender differences in the peer review process at six journals of ecology and evolution. Ecology and Evolution 9(6):13636–13649. DOI: 10.1002/ece3.5794

Fox, C.W., C.S. Burns & J.A. Meyer. 2016. Editor and reviewer gender influence the peer review process but not peer review outcomes at an ecology journal. Functional Ecology 30:140–153. DOI: 10.1111/1365-2435.12529

García-holgado, A., A. Camacho Díaz, & F.J., Garcíapeñalvo. 2019. Engaging women into STEM in Latin America: W-STEM project. En Conde-González, M. Á., F. J. Rodríguez-Sedano, C. Fernández-Llamas, & F. J. García-Peñalvo (EDS.). TEEM’19 Proceedings of the Seventh International Conference on Technological Ecosystems for Enhancing Multiculturality (Leon, Spain, October 16th-18th, 2019) (pp. 232-239). New York, NY, USA: ACM. DOI: 10.1145/3362789.3362902

Gloss, C. & K.L. Minnotte. 2010. Recruiting and hiring women in STEM fields. Journal of diversity in Higher Education 3(4): 218-229. DOI: 10.1037/a0020581

González-Pérez, S., R. Mateos de cabo & M. Sáinz. 2020. Girls in STEM: Is it a female role-model thing?. Frontiers in psychology 11:2204. DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2020.02204

Handelsman, J., N. Cantor, M. Carnes, D. Denton, E. Fine, B. Grosz, V. Heinshaw, C. Marrett, S. Rosser, D. Shalala & J. Sheridan. 2005. More women in science. Policy forum, Careers in science 309.

Hansen, D.S. 2020. Identifying barriers to career progression for women in science: Is COVID-19 creating new challenges?. Trends in parasitology 36(10): 799-802. DOI: 10.1016/j.pt.2020.07.016

Herrera, M.C. 2014. Educación femenina e inclusión social en Colombia a través del siglo XX. Educação e Filosofia Uberlândia 28:181-199. DOI: 10.14393/REVEDFIL.v28nn.% 20ESPa2014-24609

Hirsch, J.E. 2005. An index to quantify an individual's scientific research output. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 102(46):16569-16572. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.050765510

Howe-walsh, L. & Turnbull, S. 2016. Barriers to women leaders in academia: tales from science and technology. Studies in Higher Education 41(3): 415-428. DOI:10.1080/03075079.2014.929102

Huang, J., A.J. Gates, R. Sinatra & A.L. Barabási. 2020. Historical comparison of gender inequality in scientific careers across countries and disciplines. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 117(9):4609-4616. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1914221117

Jones, T.M., K.V. Fanson, R. Lanfear, M.R. Symonds & M. Higgie. 2014. Gender differences in conference presentations: A consequence of self-selection? PeerJ 2:e627. DOI: 10.7717/peerj.627

Kalpazidou Schmidt, E. & S.T. Faber. 2016. Benefits of peer mentoring to mentors, female mentees and higher education institutions. Mentoring & Tutoring: Partnership in Learning 24(2):137-157. DOI: 10.1080/13611267.2016.1170560

Kong, S., K. Carroll, D. Lundberg, P. Omura & B. Lepe. 2020. Reducing gender bias in STEM. MIT Science Policy Review 1:55-63. DOI: 10.38105/spr.11kp6lqr0a

Leal, A. 2020. Historia de la ornitología: Pioneras de la ornitología. Aves y naturaleza 31:20-25.

Lerman, S.B., L. Pejchar, L. Benedict, K.M. Covino, J.L. Dickinson, J. Fantle-lepczyk & C. Vleck. 2021. Juggling parenthood and ornithology: A full lifecycle approach to supporting mothers through the American Ornithological Society. The Condor 123(2):1-9. DOI: 10.1093/ornithapp/duab001

Liévano-Latorre, L.F., R.A. Da silva, R.R.S. Vieira, F.M. Resende, B.R. Ribeiro, F.J.A. Borges, L. Sales & R. Loyola. 2020. Pervasive gender bias in editorial boards of biodiversity conservation journals. Biological Conservation 251, 108767. DOI: 10.1016/j.biocon.2020.108767

Llorens, A., A. Tzovara, L. Bellier, I. Bhaya-Grossman, A. Bidet-Caulet, W.K. Chang & N.F. Dronkers. 2021. Gender bias in academia: A lifetime problem that needs solutions. Neuron 109(13):2047-2074. DOI: 10.1016/j.neuron.2021.06.002

López, C. & D. Farías. 2022. The mirage of scientific productivity and how women are left behind: the Colombian case. Tepuya: Latin American Science, Technology, and Society 5: 2037819. DOI: 10.1080/25729861.2022.2037819

lundine, J., I.L. Bourgeault, J. Clark, S. Heidari, & D. Balabanova. 2018. The gendered system of academic publishing. The Lancet 391(10132):1754-1756

Maas, B., R.J. Pakeman, L. Godet, L. Smith, V. Devictor & R. Primarck. 2021. Women and Global South strikingly underrepresented among top-publishing ecologist. Conservation Letters. DOI:10.1111/conl.12797

Manning, R., M. Levine & A. Collins. 2007. The Kitty Genovese murder and the social psychology of helping: The parable of the 38 witnesses. American Psychologist 62(6): 555. DOI: 10.1037/0003-066X.62.6.555

Meho, L.I. 2021. The gender gap in highly prestigious international research awards, 2001-2020. Quantitative Science Studies 2 (3):976-989. DOI: 10.1162/qss_a_00148

National Academy of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2018. Sexual Harassment of Women: Climate, Culture, and Consequences in Academic Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. DOI: 10.17226/24994.

Naranjo, L.G. 2008. El arcano de la ornitología colombiana: The arcanum of Colombian ornithology. Ornitología Colombiana 7:5-16. https://asociacioncolombianadeornitologia.org/revistaornitologia-colombiana/

Nielsen, M.W., S. Alegria, L. Börjeson, H. Etzkowitz, H.J. Falk-krzesinski, A. Joshi, E. Leahey, L. Smith-doerr, A. Williams & L. Shiebinger. 2017. Gender diversity leads to better science. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 114 (8):1740-1742. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1700616114

Nielsen, M.W., C.W. Bloch & L. Schiebinger. 2018. Making gender diversity work for scientific discovery and innovation. Nature human behavior 2 (10):726-734. DOI:10.1038/s41562-018-0433-1

Olivares, A.O. 1966. Introducción a la historia de la ornitología colombiana. Revista de la Academia Colombiana de Ciencias 12:367-375.

Parra, L. 2008. Breve recuento histórico de las mujeres colombianas en la ciencia y la ingeniería. Revista de Antropología y Sociología: Virajes 10:155-166.

Patiño, L. 2020. En datos: así son las diferencias de género entre los graduados. El Tiempo. https://www.eltiempo.com/tecnosfera/novedades-tecnologia/

cifras-de-mujeres-en-ciencia-y-tecnologia-en-educacion-en-colombia-412200

Polcuch, E., L. Brooks, A. Bello & K. Deslandes. 2018. Measuring gender equality in science and engineering: the SAGA survey of drivers and barriers to careers in science and engineering, SAGA (STEM and Gender Advancement) working papers no. 4. UNESCO, Paris. http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0026/002661/266146e.pdf.

Potvin, D.A., E. Burdfield-steel, J.M. Potvin & S.M. Heap. 2018. Diversity begets diversity: A global perspective on gender equality in scientific society leadership. PLoS ONE 13(5): e0197280. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0197280

Purvis, A. 2006. The h index: playing the numbers game. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 21(8):422. DOI:10.1016/j.tree.2006.05.014

Ramírez-Castañeda, V., E.P. Westeen, J. Frederick, S. Amini, D. Wait, A.S. Achmadi & R.D. Tarvin. 2022. A set of principles and practical suggestions for equitable fieldwork in biology. EcoEvoRxiv. DOI: 10.32942/osf.io/uszd7

Resmini, M. 2016. The “Leaky pipeline”. Chemistry a European Journal Editorial 22: 3533-3534. DOI: 10.1002/chem.201600292

Rinkus, M.A., J.R. Kelly, W. Wright, L. Medina & T. Dobson. 2018. Gendered considerations for safety in conservation fieldwork. Society & Natural Resources 31(12):1419-1426. DOI: 10.1080/08941920.2018.1471177

Ross, M.B., B.M. Glennon., R. Murciano-Goroff., E.G. Berkes., B.A. Weinberg, & J.I. Lane. 2022. Women are credited less in science than men. Nature 608(7921): 135-145. DOI: 10.1038/s41586-022-04966-w

Ross-hellauer, T., S. Reichmann, N.L. Cole, A. Fessl, T. Klebel & N. Pontika. 2022. Dynamics of cumulative advantage and threats to equity in open science: a scoping review. Royal Society open science 9(1):211032. DOI: 10.1098/rsos.211032

Rossi, A.S. 1965. Women in science: Why so few? Social and psychological influences restrict women’s choice and pursuit of careers in science. Science 148(3674):1196–1202. DOI: 10.1126/science.148.3674.1196

Rossiter, M.W. 1993. The Matthew Matilda effect in science. Social studies of science 23(2):325-341. https://www.jstor.org/stable/i212628

Salerno, P.E., M. Paez-Vacas, J.M. Guayasamin, & J.L. Stynoski. 2019. Male principal investigators (almost) don't publish with women in ecology and zoology. PLoS One 14:1–14. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0218598.

Sánchez-Montoya, M., A. Pastor, I. Aristi, A.I. Del Arco, M. Antón-Pardo, M. Bartrons & N. Catalan. 2016. Women in limnology in the Iberian Peninsula: biases, barriers and recommendations. Limnetica 35(1):61-72. DOI: 10.23818/limn.35.05

Sarseke, G. 2018. Under-representation of women in science: From educational, feminist and scientific views. NASPA Journal About Women in Higher Education 11 (1):89-101. DOI: 10.1080/19407882.2017.1380049

Schiebinger, L. 1987. The history and philosophy of women in science: A review essay. Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society 12(2):305-332. https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/abs/10.1086/494323?journalCode=signs

Schroeder, J., H.L. Dugdale, R. Radersma, M. Hinsch, D. M. Buehler, J. Saul & C. Horrocks. 2013. Fewer invited talks by women in evolutionary biology symposia. Journal of Evolutionary Biology. 26: 2063–2069. DOI: 10.1111/jeb.12198

Sharma, J. & D.N. Poole. 2018. Gender bias in publishing. The Lancet 392(10157):1515-1516. DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(18)31998-6

Shen, H. 2013. Inequality quantified: Mind the gender gap. Nature News 495(7439):22. DOI: 10.1038/495022ª

Simmonds, A. 2014. Women scientists sexually harassed while doing fieldwork. Nature. DOI: 10.1038/nature.2014.15571

Soares, L., K. Cockle, E. Ruelas inzunza, J.T. Ibarra, C.I. Miño, S. Zuluaga, E. Bonaccoroso & P.V. Ribeiro martins. 2022. Neotropical Ornithology: Reckoning with Historical Assumptions, Removing Systemic Barriers, and Reimagining the Future. EcoEvoRxiv. DOI: 10.32942/osf.io/yu2fx.

Soto-Patiño, J., K. Certuche-Cubillos, J. Diaz-Cárdenas, D. Garzón-Lozano, E. Guzmán-Moreno, N. Niño-Rodríguez, N. Pérez-Amaya, & N. Ocampo-Peñuela. 2023. The once-invisible legacy of Elizabeth L. Kerr, a naturalist in the early 20th century and her contributions to Colombian ornithology. Ornithological applications Volume 125, Issue 2, 1 May 2023, duad006.https://doi.org/10.1093/ornithapp/duad006

Stinson, S. 2003. Participation of women in human biology, 1975–2001. American Journal of Human Biology 15 (3):440-445. DOI: 10.1002/ajhb.10160

Vaughan, K., H., van Miegroet, A. Pennino, Y. Pressler, C. Duball, E.C. Brevik & C. Olson. 2019. Women in soil science: Growing participation, emerging gaps, and the opportunities for advancement in the USA. Soil Science Society of America Journal 83(5):1278-1289. DOI:10.2136/sssaj2019.03.0085

Velásquez, M. 1998. La condición de las mujeres colombianas a fines del siglo XX. En Nueva Historia de Colombia 51-78. Santa fé de Bogotá: Planeta.

Walters, M. 2004. A concise history of ornithology. Journal of the History of Biology, 37(2):412-414. Werner Washburne, M., J. Trejo, R.E. Zambrana, M.E. Zavala, A. Martinic, A. Riestra, T. Delgado & R.L. Rodriguez. 2023. Early career Latinas in STEM: Challenges and solutions. Cell 186(23): 4985-4991. DOI: 10.1016/j.cell.2023.10.016

Woolley, A.W., C.F. Chabris, A. Pentland, N. hashmi & T.W. Malone. 2010. Evidence for a collective factor in the performance of human groups. Science 330(6004):686-688. DOI: 10.1126/science.1193147

Yang, Y., T.Y. Tian, T.K. Woodruff, B.F. Jones, & B. Uzzi. 2022. Gender-diverse teams produce more novel and higher-impact scientific ideas. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 119(36):e200841119. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.2200841119.

Zavala Guillen, A.L. 2020. Gender based violence during fieldwork: exploring experiences and coping strategies of women researchers. Universidad de Birmingham. Birmingham, Inglaterra.

Descargas

Publicado

2023-12-31

Número

Sección

Artículos de Revisión

Cómo citar

Mujeres en la ornitología colombiana: Perspectivas históricas y tendencias de participación en dos contextos académicos. (2023). Ornitología Colombiana, 24, 59-74. https://doi.org/10.59517/oc.e574