Abstract
BackgroundThe article aims to analyze the representativeness of women in ethnobiological publications within the Brazilian context, as well as to relate the difficulties faced by women in their scientific careers in terms of gender bias. Biases found in publications are relevant themes to different areas of knowledge, considering the historical persistence of male privilege in these activities. We analyzed the role of women in ethnobiological scientific publications and sought to reflect on gender issues in academic practices and fieldwork.MethodsWe conducted a 28-year survey of academic publications in Brazil, through the Scopus and Web of Science databases, in order to infer the female representation in ethnobiological literature. We also sent 77 questionnaires to ethnobiologists associated with the Brazilian society of ethnobiology and ethnoecology or indicted by associates through snowball sampling.ResultsWe observed that there are more articles where the senior author is male (p < 0.05). However, there are no differences in the number of publications led by men and women (p > 0.05), which shows a positive trend in terms of representation. Within subareas, ethnozoology had more male authors than other subareas of ethnobiology. Articles whose senior authors are men tend to be published in journals with a higher impact (p < 0.05). The interviews with Brazilian ethnobiologists showed that 53.2% of the interviewees reported feeling discriminated against in the academic environment because they were women. Moreover, 61.0% said they had disadvantages in collecting data because they were women. Additionally, most of the researchers reported having witnessed cases of sexism in the studied communities.ConclusionIn the current scenarios of female participation, it is possible to reflect and identify advances and challenges associated with gender bias in ethnobiological studies conducted by Brazilian, both in the emic and etic spheres of research and in our scientific practice. As researchers in the area, we deal directly with social problems in the studied communities, such as violence against women, sexism, and prejudice, as well as the many problems faced in the academic universe itself.
Highlights
Modern science is permeated by sociocultural bias, but it is effectively made by people, for people, and it reproduces a symbolic apparatus of its society, which is made up of power relations
In regards to the subareas, ethnozoology had a higher concentration of male authors (p < 0.05)
Conclusions ethnobiology approaches research with cognitive, perceptual, and cosmological understanding about natural resources between genders, it is necessary to go further, since these aspects range from methodological aspects to those that permeate the practices of researchers in this area of study
Summary
Modern science is permeated by sociocultural bias, but it is effectively made by people, for people, and it reproduces a symbolic apparatus of its society, which is made up of power relations. There is a historical persistence that privileges the male gender; the role of women in science and gender bias can influence several steps of research, from data collection to scientific publication, with relevant topics in all areas of knowledge. Caring for the home and children was a unique and exclusive role assigned to women for a long period in history in some societies [4], especially in Western societies where the mainstream academic science originated [5]. These role differences are the result of social constructions. We analyzed the role of women in ethnobiological scientific publications and sought to reflect on gender issues in academic practices and fieldwork
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
