Content uploaded by Dorceta E. Taylor
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Dorceta E. Taylor on Mar 02, 2018
Content may be subject to copyright.
A preview of the PDF is not available
The State of Diversity in Environmental Organizations Mainstream NGOs Foundations Government Agencies
Abstract
Environmental institutions have been working on diversity efforts for the better part of five decades. This report discusses the findings of a study of three types of environmental institutions: 191 conservation and preservation organizations, 74 government environmental agencies, and 28 environmental grantmaking foundations. It also reports the findings of interviews conducted with 21 environmental professionals who were asked to reflect on the state of diversity in environmental institutions. The study focuses primarily on gender, racial, and class diversity in these institutions as it pertains to the demographic characteristics of their boards and staff. It examines the recruitment and hiring of new workers as well as the types of diversity initiatives undertaken by the organizations. The report also discusses other kinds of diversities such as cultural, sexual orientation, inter-generational, and rural-urban.
... The paucity of race-conscious grantmaking within philanthropy may also be related to the lack of racial diversity inside foundations. Foundations have come under scrutiny for the demographic composition of their executive leadership team and boards, often comprised of wealthy, White individuals (Ramirez et al., 2022;Taylor, 2014;2009). Environmental foundations are trying to enhance staff diversity, but People of Color are underrepresented on their staff and boards (Roberts, 2018). ...
... Despite the buzz created by the release of The State of Diversity in Environmental Institutions report (Taylor, 2014), foundations have not fully embraced the idea of putting substantial financial support behind diversity efforts (Biemesderfer, 2021). Many foundations lack diversity in their staff and board (Ramirez et al., 2022;Taylor, 2014;2009;Roberts, 2018;D5 Coalition, 2016) and are reluctant to reveal the demographic characteristics of their grantees (Taylor, 2021). ...
... Despite the buzz created by the release of The State of Diversity in Environmental Institutions report (Taylor, 2014), foundations have not fully embraced the idea of putting substantial financial support behind diversity efforts (Biemesderfer, 2021). Many foundations lack diversity in their staff and board (Ramirez et al., 2022;Taylor, 2014;2009;Roberts, 2018;D5 Coalition, 2016) and are reluctant to reveal the demographic characteristics of their grantees (Taylor, 2021). ...
This report examines the environmental grantmaking practices of 220 foundations that distributed more than 30,000 grants totaling $4.9 billion that were distributed over three years. It reveals disparities in environmental grantmaking that are related to region, the size of the grantees' revenues, the sex and race/ethnicity of the grantees' cheif executive, and the type of organization being funded. The study also found that environmental justice organizations and those focused on people of color were at a disadvantage in the number of grants received and the grant dollars they were awarded.
... In economic terms, it could refer to individuals or communities with limited financial resources and employment opportunities, making them more susceptible to economic downturns and job losses [5]. Vulnerability in a health context might include populations with pre-existing medical conditions who have less access to healthcare facilities, thus being more exposed to adverse health outcomes during a pandemic [8]. By providing these examples, the multifaceted nature of vulnerability becomes clearer, encompassing environmental, economic, and health dimensions. ...
This study addresses energy poverty, a situation where households are unable to afford the minimum energy services required to meet their basic needs, a problem with profound implications for the well-being of vulnerable populations. To identify the most affected areas, a geospatial analysis of energy poverty distribution in the Valencian Community (Spain) was conducted using a correlation study between the global vulnerability index and the energy poverty index, calculated from residential energy certificates. The results highlight areas of significant social, economic, demographic, and residential vulnerability, as well as regions with very high or very low energy consumption. Specifically, regions with high energy poverty and vulnerability indices were identified, enabling targeted interventions. The study concludes that interventions in these identified areas are essential to mitigate the adverse effects of energy poverty and improve living conditions for affected populations. This research offers a novel methodology for mapping regional energy poverty, surpassing previous studies in precision for identifying and addressing vulnerable areas.
... As awareness of these biases and injustices gradually increases, there has been a fieldwide reckoning in science and environmental education, calling out the pervasive ways in which in the field has historically uplifted Western ways of knowing, thus perpetuating the exclusion of communities of color (Atwater 2010;Bratman and DeLince 2022;McLean 2013;Tuck, McKenzie, and McCoy 2014). Within the OEE field, researchers have illustrated the pervasive marginalization, erasure, and exclusion of women and people of color in OEE organizations, calling for the need to center equity in organizational work environments and learner experiences (McGee and Bentley 2017;Mitten et al. 2017;Romero et al. 2022a;Rowland-Shea et al. 2020;Taylor 2014Taylor , 2018. These efforts are grounded in the underlying assumption that outdoor learning has profound positive impacts on individuals' dispositions toward science and the environment (e.g. ...
Outdoor environmental education (OEE) programs can provide a valuable entry point for youth of color and
girls who may have felt excluded and/or marginalized from traditional science learning experiences. This study
investigated: (1) Can OEE programs contribute to the development of positive dispositions toward science and
the environment?, and (2) Are there differences in effects by racial/ethnic and gender identity, or interactions
thereof? Youth (n = 457; grades 4-6, approximate ages 9-12) reported their dispositions toward science and the
environment along 5 scales before and after participating in OEE programs. Results found growth across all
subscales for youth overall. Girls showed stronger effects than boys, and youth of color showed stronger
effects than White youth. Girls of color showed particularly strong growth in Comfort in Nature. The
implications of these results, particularly as a challenge to long-standing biases and inequities in the field, are discussed.
... Coase's counter was to acknowledge the reciprocal nature of externalities across polluters and pollutees, assign property rights, and allow for bargaining for mitigation. With exchange, marginal willingness-to-pay is 13 See suggestive information in Smith (1994), Kahn (2002), Andrews et al (2010), Taylor (2014), and Coley and Mai (2022). Fishing communities are likely characterized by low income and education. ...
There is demand to protect at-risk fish species and ecosystems. Property rights regimes can be superior to spatial controls via Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) for doing so. Empirical cases from Australia and the US indicate that MPAs are inequitable, too large and restrictive, and controversial. These conditions lead to resistance and political pushback, threatening long-term budgets and conservation goals. A critique of MPAs is presented along with a range of property rights arrangements–common, community, private—and Coasean bargaining as alternatives. Outlined benefits are a.) Rights holders have a stake in conservation and are central in its design. They are more than respondents. b). Costs/benefits can be more equally distributed, including direct payments that include both costs of transition and contribution to public goods provision. c.) Spatial set-asides confront tradeoffs and hence, are more apt to be economically sited and designed. d.) Modifications can occur more smoothly through market exchange than through the political process. Durable global conservation efforts can be enhanced.
... Racism and discrimination permeate the recruitment, retention, and funding of historically underrepresented groups in the marine and environmental geosciences, one of the least diverse science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) fields in the United States. With no measurable increase in earth and ocean doctorates awarded to Black, Indigenous, and People of Color (BIPOC) (Bernard and Cooperdock 2018) and consistently lower National Science Foundation funding for most non-White principal investigators, academic and research organizations are reckoning with their role in perpetuating systemic barriers and compounding harm for individuals belonging to intersecting underrepresented groups (Steinpreis et al. 1999;Ginther et al. 2011;Maltese and Tai 2011;Chang et al. 2014;Taylor 2014;Garza 2016;Laurison and Friedman 2016;Bingham et al. 2018). In this period of reckoning, diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives are revealing the responsibilities institutions need to assume in shaping an inclusive and equitable geoscience community (Ali et al. 2021;Behl et al. 2021;Acosta et al. 2022;Lewis et al. 2022). ...
The onset of the COVID‐19 pandemic and the Black Lives Matter movement urged institutions to redress shortcomings in their diversity, equity, and inclusion goals and initiatives. The School for the Environment (SFE) at the University of Massachusetts Boston (UMass Boston), a public research minority serving university in the United States of America, responded to this call through launching the Online Conversations for Equity, Action, and Networking (OCEAN) program. This pilot project funded by Woods Hole Sea Grant aimed to amplify the voices of Black, Indigenous, and People of Color (BIPOC) in the marine sciences. A collective of SFE undergraduate and graduate students hosted virtual department seminars, undergraduate meet and greets, and podcast interviews for invited BIPOC speakers. Pre‐ and post‐surveys were developed to evaluate the efficacy and reach of the OCEAN programming and the results indicate that the program had an overall positive effect on the UMass Boston community. Ultimately, the OCEAN program provides an example for launching and evaluating virtual BIPOC science engagement and outreach initiatives.
Urbanization is simultaneously one of the most creative and destructive processes our planet has ever experienced. Developing rural areas into cities and suburbs results in dramatic habitat transformation, leading to significant biodiversity loss and modification. Yet, urban areas also have tremendous conservation value. Biodiversity is in crisis and, rather than considering urbanization solely as a threat, there is an urgent need to transform urbanization into a tool for conservation. This work moves beyond a basic scientific understanding of urban ecosystems to detail how scientists, decision makers, and practitioners develop solutions to effectively manage urban biodiversity. Such efforts necessitate unraveling the complex components that bolster or constrain biodiversity including human–wildlife interactions, resource availability, novel species relationships, and environmental heterogeneity. However, key to an understanding of these processes is also recognizing the tremendous social variation within urban areas. The diversity of urban human communities fundamentally shapes how society designs, builds, and manages urban landscapes. This means that urban environmental management unavoidably must account for human social variation. Unfortunately, urban systems have a history and continued legacy of social inequality (e.g., systemic racism and classism) that govern how cities are both built and managed. This work not only highlights these connections, but also illustrates the interdisciplinary approaches needed for advancing a justice-centered approach to conserving biodiversity. Urban conservation is an imperative for reaching our regional and global conservation goals. Equity and justice are central to successful urban conservation and, by extension, conservation more broadly.
Urbanization is simultaneously one of the most creative and destructive processes our planet has ever experienced. Developing rural areas into cities and suburbs results in dramatic habitat transformation, leading to significant biodiversity loss and modification. Yet, urban areas also have tremendous conservation value. Biodiversity is in crisis and, rather than considering urbanization solely as a threat, there is an urgent need to transform urbanization into a tool for conservation. This work moves beyond a basic scientific understanding of urban ecosystems to detail how scientists, decision makers, and practitioners develop solutions to effectively manage urban biodiversity. Such efforts necessitate unraveling the complex components that bolster or constrain biodiversity including human–wildlife interactions, resource availability, novel species relationships, and environmental heterogeneity. However, key to an understanding of these processes is also recognizing the tremendous social variation within urban areas. The diversity of urban human communities fundamentally shapes how society designs, builds, and manages urban landscapes. This means that urban environmental management unavoidably must account for human social variation. Unfortunately, urban systems have a history and continued legacy of social inequality (e.g., systemic racism and classism) that govern how cities are both built and managed. This work not only highlights these connections, but also illustrates the interdisciplinary approaches needed for advancing a justice-centered approach to conserving biodiversity. Urban conservation is an imperative for reaching our regional and global conservation goals. Equity and justice are central to successful urban conservation and, by extension, conservation more broadly.
Climate sustainability prioritizes meeting the 1.5°C Paris Agreement limit by 2030 and challenging anthropogenic links to carbon emissions. This chapter examines the future of work (FOW) impacted by disparate factors like poverty, climate impacts, digital technology access, inequitable policies, capital access, and that “sustainability is interdisciplinary.” FOW upskilling, the 17 sustainable development goals (SDGs), and related inequities in emerging and established economies have singular and cumulative effects on Black, Brown, and Indigenous populations. This analysis uses data and case examples from the UN 17SDGs, the Brundtland Report concept of sustainability, industry surveys, and current grey literature. Climate affects every sector. Further acknowledgement and research are needed for 1.5°C hurdles and human-centered disparities and tradeoffs to shape meaningful public policy, impacts of rapidly adjusting to new automated and algorithm-based industry occupations, and minimizing systemic impediments to future of work for Black, Brown, and Indigenous around the world.
By examining environmental change through the lens of conflicting social agendas, Andrew Hurley uncovers the historical roots of environmental inequality in contemporary urban America. Hurley's study focuses on the steel mill community of Gary, Indiana, a city that was sacrificed, like a thousand other American places, to industrial priorities in the decades following World War II. Although this period witnessed the emergence of a powerful environmental crusade and a resilient quest for equality and social justice among blue-collar workers and African Americans, such efforts often conflicted with the needs of industry. To secure their own interests, manufacturers and affluent white suburbanites exploited divisions of race and class, and the poor frequently found themselves trapped in deteriorating neighborhoods and exposed to dangerous levels of industrial pollution. In telling the story of Gary, Hurley reveals liberal capitalism's difficulties in reconciling concerns about social justice and quality of life with the imperatives of economic growth. He also shows that the power to mold the urban landscape was intertwined with the ability to govern social relations. © 1995 The University of North Carolina Press. All rights reserved.
PART ONE: THE NATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS STUDY Organizational Properties and Practices - Arne L Kalleberg et al Design of the National Organizations Study - Joe L Spaeth and Diane P O'Rourke American Organizations and Their Environments - Peter V Marsden, Cynthia R Cook, and David Knoke PART TWO: ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURES Bureaucratic Structures for Coordination and Control - Peter V Marsden, Cynthia R Cook, and Arne L Kalleberg Formalizing the Employment Relation - Arne L Kalleberg et al Human Resource Management and Organizational Performance - Arne L Kalleberg and James W Moody PART THREE: ORGANIZATIONS' HUMAN RESOURCE PRACTICES The Staffing Process - Peter V Marsden Recruitment and Selection Methods Job Training in US Organizations - David Knoke and Arne L Kalleberg Training, Unions, and Internal Labor Markets - David Knoke and Yoshito Ishio Organizational Differences in Earnings - Arne L Kalleberg and Mark E Van Buren The Structure of Organizational Earnings Inequality - Arne L Kalleberg and Mark E Van Buren Cui Bono? Employee Benefit Packages - David Knoke PART FOUR: ORGANIZATIONS AND THE CHANGING WORKFORCE Contingent Employment in Organizations - Arne L Kalleberg and Kathryn Schmidt Organizational Patterns of Gender Segregation - Donald Tomaskovic-Devey, Arne L Kalleberg, and Peter V Marsden Gender Differences in Organizational Commitment - Peter V Marsden, Arne L Kalleberg, and Cynthia R Cook Influences of Work Positions and Family Roles Conclusions and Prospects - Arne L Kalleberg et al
We compared representation, career backgrounds, recruitment, job skill requirements, job advocacy, and opinions on natural resource careers and strategies of majority- and minority-group natural resource professionals to improve minority representation in the profession. We sent a mark-sense questionnaire to 938 majority-group and 955 minority-group natural resource professionals employed by the member state and federal agencies in the Southeastern Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies. Response rate for the minority group was 52%, compared to 71% for the majority group. Sampling error was ± 4% at the 0.95 confidence level for both groups. Differences (P ≤ 0.05) existed between groups in all of the categories of comparison. We provide several strategies for expanding cultural and ethnic diversity in the natural resources workforce.