The divisiveness of fairness, representation and belonging
A recent conversation has occupied my mind regarding whether equity, diversity, and inclusion (EDI) initiatives are inherently divisive.
Many individuals express frustration as EDI principles increasingly guide strategic priorities in higher education. For those accustomed to succeeding within existing systems — systems they may not have critically examined — this shift can feel destabilizing. However, peer-reviewed research underscores how structural advantages, accumulated over generations, systematically disadvantage those outside institutional monocultures. Studies reveal that these inequities persist not only through interpersonal biases but also through entrenched reward systems that conflate conformity with excellence.
In academia, these dynamics manifest in subtle yet pervasive ways: informal networks that consolidate power among “those in the know,” homogeneous distributions of prestigious awards, and editorial boards that replicate narrow demographic profiles. Such patterns are neither accidental nor incidental; they originate in colonial frameworks that equate whiteness, able-bodiedness, and Eurocentric epistemologies with intellectual legitimacy.
Some readers may feel confronted by this analysis. If naming these realities seems divisive, consider reframing the issue: What does it mean that entire domains of academia remain inaccessible to individuals for reasons beyond their control?
Confronting Structural Legacies of Exclusion
Academic systems have historically privileged proximity to dominant cultural norms, creating self-perpetuating cycles of advantage.
Quantitative analyses of “esteem markers” — editorial board appointments, citation networks, and major awards — reveal consistent biases favoring individuals whose identities align with institutional monocultures. These disparities are particularly stark for marginalized groups: Indigenous scholars hold fewer than 2% of Canadian faculty positions despite comprising 5% of the population [1], while in the US Underrepresented minority (e.g. Black and Hispanic) faculty face 7% more negative votes and 44% less likely to receive unanimous votes in promotion and tenure discussions [2].
Such inequities are rooted in colonial ideologies that conflate Eurocentric knowledge systems with rigor. To disrupt these patterns, we must move beyond surface-level diversity initiatives and address systemic foundations.
Pathways for Transformative Change
Little Steps Matter — Pay attention to who you are working with, and try to understand how mentorship and informal networks may impact “clusters of those in the know.”
Engage in Discussions — Learn from others, especially through conversations outside your traditional comfort zone. EDI offices often host focused talks and provide materials that offer diverse viewpoints. These can help you understand and empathize with the challenges others may face.
Redefine Merit — Evaluate merit through an equity-focused lens. Consider how different approaches and traditional methods may be systematically biased, limiting participation from a wide range of people. Proactively learn about barriers people face and how to overcome them, especially when considering access to senior roles and responsibilities in any organization.
Embrace Discomfort as a Catalyst for Change — We are all complicit in systems that promote the status quo. This is especially true for those of us who have succeeded and thrived in our current system. Sit and embrace the discomfort that comes with this knowledge, acknowledge complicity in the status quo, center lived experiences, and invest in accountability for our actions.
Final Note: Collective Responsibility
It is worth to consider how we discuss and think about these issues, and as bell hooks has said:
“When we only name the problem, when we state complaint without a constructive focus or resolution, we take hope away. In this way, critique can become merely an expression of profound cynicism, which then works to sustain dominator culture.”
Overall, equity, diversity, and inclusion remain important areas of work within STEM disciplines. This focus is not about penalizing individual success but recognizing that academia’s vitality depends on dismantling systemic barriers. When we equitably value diverse modes of scholarship, all knowledge production thrives.
—
Dr Ben Britton is a Professor of Materials Engineering at the Unviersity of British Columbia. He’s often caught up thinking about equity, diversity and inclusion in addition to his more ‘technical work’ looking at very small things with very big pieces of equipment in an effort to try to understand and engineer a better world. You can find more of his musings over at Bluesky.
Medium is a social network, please do ‘clap’ for this article if you find it useful or interesting.
—
References:
[1] https://ubyssey.ca/news/the-gold-rush-canadian-academia-rush-indigenous-faculty/
[2] Masters-Waage et al. Nature Human Behaviour (2024) https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-024-01977-7
For some further literature in this area:
Erin A. Cech wrote “The intersectional privilege of white able-bodied heterosexual men in STEM” which highlights “Decomposition analyses illustrate that these advantages operate in part as premiums — benefits attached to WAHM status that cannot be attributed to variation in human capital, work effort, and other factors” in Science Advances (2022) https://www.science.org/doi/full/10.1126/sciadv.abo1558
Oma Dewidar “Improving equity, diversity, and inclusion in academia” shares approaches of the Royal Society of Chemistry to improve EDI in scholarly publishing with Research Integrity and Peer Review (2022) https://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s41073-022-00123-z
Helga Van Miegroet and Christy Glass wrote “Recognition through awards: a source of gender inequality in science?” which provides a helpful discussion and analysis of the lack of parity about award winning by men and women in STEM, and this includes some really helpful discussions about the structures and approaches that are found within University (and related awards processes, in International Journal of Gender, Science and Technology (2020) https://genderandset.open.ac.uk/index.php/genderandset/article/view/597
In 2022 — Engineers Canada provided specific “Guideline for Engineers and Engineering Firms on Workplace Equity for Women”, with a careful analysis of the current state of play in Canadian Engineering. https://engineerscanada.ca/guidelines-and-papers/guideline-for-engineers-and-engineering-firms-on-workplace-equity-for-women
In 2023 — Engineers Canada provided an update on the state of the procession “Equity, Diversity and Inclusion: Fostering A Welcoming and Representative Engineering Profession” https://engineerscanada.ca/sites/default/files/2023-09/Equity-Diversity-and-Inclusion-EN-2023_0.pdf
