4.5 Article

Representation justice as a research agenda for socio-hydrology and water governance

Journal

Publisher

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/02626667.2021.1945609

Keywords

socio-hydrology; representation justice; feminist political ecology; inequality regimes; gender; intersectionality; hydrosocial studies

Funding

  1. Institute of Sustainable Solutions at Portland State University
  2. National Science Foundation's Sustainability Research Network Grant [1444755]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Research shows that females in the water sector are more likely to experience gender discrimination, with macro- and microaggressions affecting their career advancement and leadership opportunities. Socio-hydrology can benefit from a representation justice lens by considering factors such as power dynamics, politics, lived experiences, and intersectionality.
We propose representation justice as a theoretical lens for socio-hydrology and water governance studies. An exploratory survey of 496 water sector employees in the United States revealed that self-identifying females felt more strongly discriminated against due to their gender and other social factors, compared to self-identifying males. Responses unveiled how macro- and microaggressions impede career pathways to leadership positions and, therefore, representation. We identify ways in which socio-hydrology can benefit from a representation justice lens by considering the following: (1) how power and politics shape the composition of the water sector and decision-making processes; (2) how available quantitative data do not account for lived experiences of individuals in the water sector; and (3) how intersectionality cannot easily be accounted for in current socio-hydrological models. We offer a representation justice research and water management agenda that goes beyond quota filling to include meaningful engagement with diverse groups, lenses, and knowledge.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available