Redefining underrepresentation in global neuroscience

This article is part of a report titled "State of Neuroscience in Latin America," which explores how shifting the focus of equity initiatives from identity categories to structural barriers can unveil overlooked challenges and increase support and participation worldwide. Traditionally, underrepresentation in neuroscience has been defined by standard demographic categories such as gender, race and ethnicity, disability, and socioeconomic background.

However, this narrow approach overlooks the actual infrastructure and systemic challenges that make progress harder for researchers. Researchers presenting their work in a second language, first-generation graduate students with limited knowledge of academic careers, and scientists navigating visa applications to attend conferences are examples of overlooked challenges that cannot be easily tracked using demographic categories alone.

Historically, definitions of underrepresentation in neuroscience have been based on national equality legislation and census data. While some forms of underrepresentation are unique to specific regions, many diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives overlook the intersecting marginalized identities of individuals. Common proxies like World Bank income classifications or the "Global South" can be misleading as they fail to capture regional disparities in research funding and political instability's impact on research capacity.

The ALBA Network, a global community committed to fostering DEI in the brain sciences, has examined these gaps closely and proposes a more holistic approach to defining underrepresentation in global neuroscience.

This new definition incorporates barriers such as the compounding disadvantages faced by LGBTQIA+ professionals, visa and mobility constraints limiting international collaboration, caregiving duties disproportionately affecting women, forced displacement, first-generation university status, non-native English fluency, and working in countries with underfunded research infrastructure.

By applying this definition since 2024, the ALBA Network has identified insights into the applicant population that standard definitions might have missed. Women, first-generation university attendees, non-native English speakers, and those from lower socioeconomic backgrounds consistently appeared as barriers. Additionally, researchers from countries with chronically low investment in research and development saw an increase in representation, challenging the notion that research excellence is only found in well-resourced environments.

Furthermore, the definition has highlighted the need to disaggregate categories to better understand the unique challenges faced by different groups. For instance, when LGBTQIA+ applicants were disaggregated in subsequent cycles, the identification dropped significantly, suggesting that prior aggregation had hidden differences within the category.

However, the holistic approach also faces challenges, such as researchers' reluctance to self-identify as underrepresented due to cultural stigma, privacy concerns, and language barriers. The category of "non-native English speaker" exemplifies this complexity, as it captures a concrete barrier in some regions but may not reflect bias in others.

To address these limitations, the ALBA Network advocates for a shift in how the field evaluates achievement alongside eligibility. Initiatives like the Australian NHMRC’s Relative to Opportunity policy and the ALBA-Roche Prize for Excellence in Neuroscience Research already take into account career disruptions and structural constraints.

The BNA Scholars Programme also uses broad eligibility criteria beyond conventional academic indicators. By adopting a more holistic definition and evaluating achievements relative to the unique challenges faced by researchers, the global neuroscience community can better support and participate in the field.