Deficits in Accessibility across Field Research Stations for Scientists with Disabilities and/or Chronic Illness, and Proposed Solutions.

Abstract

Equity and inclusivity in STEM research has become a larger topic of discussion in recent years; however, researchers and scientists with disabilities and/or chronic illnesses are often missing from these conversations. Further, while field research is a major research component for some STEM disciplines, it is unclear what accessibility barriers or accommodations exist across the field sciences. Field research can sometimes involve harsh environments, topography, and weather that present challenges to those with disabilities and/or chronic illnesses. A large and coinciding obstacle standing in the way of field research accessibility is the ableism present across science and academia, resulting in and from a lack of prioritization of attention and funding from universities and institutions. Biological field stations have been shown to be valuable not only as infrastructure for field-based research, but also as providing resources toward the scientific education of students and scientific outreach initiatives for the general public. As such, biological field stations are perfectly positioned to reduce barriers in research inclusion and accessibility for students and scientists with disabilities and/or chronic illnesses. The current work presents the results of a survey meant to inventory the presence or absence of accessible infrastructure across field stations, with responses spanning six countries and 24 US states. Our results highlight a number of accessibility deficits in areas such as accessible entrances, kitchens, and bathrooms. Our results suggest that (1) biological field stations have significant variability in accessibility with significant deficits, especially in non-public-facing buildings used primarily by staff and researchers, and (2) field stations would benefit from an increase in federal funding opportunities to expedite their progress toward compliance with Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) standards. We propose potential solutions to field work infrastructure spanning a range of financial costs, with emphasis on the point that efforts toward accessibility do not require an "all-or-nothing" approach, and that any step toward accessibility will make field stations more inclusive. Additionally, we further suggest that federal funding sources, such as the NSF and NIH, as well as university leadership, should consider broadening diversity initiatives to promote the continuation of, and increased accessibility of, university-affiliated field stations.