Social inequalities, specifically racism and classism, are impacting the biodiversity, evolutionary shifts and ecological health of plants and animals in our cities.

That鈥檚 the main finding of a led by the 91探花, with co-authors at the University of California, Berkeley, and University of Michigan, which examined more than 170 published studies and analyzed the influence of systemic inequalities on ecology and evolution. Published Aug. 13 in Science, it calls on the scientific community to focus on environmental justice and anti-racism practices to transform biological research and conservation.

鈥淩acism is destroying our planet, and how we treat each other is essentially structural violence against our natural world,鈥� said lead author , an assistant professor of urban ecology at the 91探花 Tacoma. 鈥淩ather than just changing the conversation about how we treat each other, this paper will hopefully change the conversation about how we treat the natural world.鈥�

The paper cites other studies that have found racism and other inequalities are reducing biodiversity, increasing urban heat island effects and augmenting impacts of climate crises across the United States.

For example, several studies the authors included found fewer trees in low-income and racially minoritized neighborhoods in major cities across the U.S. Less tree cover means hotter temperatures and fewer plant and animal species. Additionally, these areas tend to be closer to industrial waste or dumping sites than wealthier, predominantly white areas 鈥� a reality that was put in place intentionally through policies like redlining, the authors explain.

Fewer trees, over decades, has led to pockets of neighborhoods that are hotter, more polluted, and have more disease-carrying pests such as rodents and mosquitoes that can survive in harsh environments. These ecological differences inevitably affect human health and well-being, the authors said.

The main purpose of the paper is to show the scientific community that fundamental practices in science are based on systems that support white supremacy and perpetuate systemic racism, the authors said. They hope their colleagues in science fields will begin to dig into the history of the various laws and practices that built present-day inequalities 鈥� such as and 鈥� and then start to reevaluate how they run their labs and conduct their research.

鈥淚 hope this paper will shine the light and create a paradigm shift in science,” Schell said. “That means fundamentally changing how researchers do their science, which questions they ask, and realizing that their usual set of questions might be incomplete.鈥�

For example, Schell said he has seen numerous papers comparing biodiversity in urban and rural areas. However, organisms in cities were often only measured in wealthier areas, negating the possibility for differences among urban neighborhoods of different income levels. That type of science, even if done unknowingly, is negligent, he said.

The authors also hope this paper paves the way for younger scientists entering the field, especially people of color, to have legitimacy in pushing for science that is centered around anti-racism and environmental justice.

鈥淚dentity matters, and creating space for researchers who aren鈥檛 straight white cis males to pursue questions that arise from their lived experiences can really strengthen science,鈥� said co-author , assistant professor and social scientist in the 91探花School of Marine and Environmental Affairs. 鈥淚 hope that scientists will read this paper and be inspired to think about representation in our labs and departments, and how that might matter for science going forward.鈥�

Ultimately, the authors said, environmental issues should be recast to encompass societal issues, which departs from what traditional, mostly white environmentalists advocate.

For example, creating affordable housing should be on every environmentalist鈥檚 agenda, they explained. More secure housing, with less turnover and fewer vacant lots or construction areas, promotes ecological stability for people, animals and plants. Additionally, more equitable access to parks and greenways within cities also promotes more animal and plant biodiversity. And better public transportation to and from well-paid jobs cuts carbon emissions and reduces animal-vehicle collisions.

Notably, each of these actions benefits humans as well as plants and animals 鈥� and all are not included in traditional definitions of environmentalism.

Schell also led a recent paper, in Nature Ecology and Evolution, that scientists can take to fight racism and white supremacy. For Schell, this includes paying everyone who works in his lab, making sure people of color are treated equitably, and advocating for women of color to hold leadership positions in professional societies and organizations. He encourages colleagues to do the same.

鈥淚鈥檓 hopeful things are going to happen, because I have to be,鈥� he said. 鈥淲e have the power to be activists in our own ways, in our own sectors, and we have the ability to motivate others to do the same.鈥�

Co-authors are , Tracy Fuentes and of the 91探花College of Built Environments; of 91探花Tacoma; of the University of Michigan; and of University of California, Berkeley.

This research was funded by the 91探花, the University of California, Berkeley, the David H. Smith Fellows program and the National Science Foundation.

For more information, contact Schell at 肠箩蝉肠丑别濒濒蔼耻飞.别诲耻,听Woelfle-Erskine at cleowe@uw.edu and Lambert at lambert.mrm@gmail.com.

A new published in June in the journal Biological Conservation finds that, as one might suspect, smaller buildings cause fewer bird deaths than do bigger buildings. But the research team of about 60 鈥� including three co-authors with the 91探花 鈥� also found that larger buildings in rural areas pose a greater threat to birds than if those same-sized buildings were located in an urban area.

Lead author of the paper is , professor of biology at Augustana College in Rock Island, Illinois. Co-author , an urban design and planning doctoral candidate in the 91探花College of Built Environments helped collect bird-collision data and assisted in editing the paper, along with 91探花alumni Anqi Chen and Carolyn Foster.

The research team monitored 300 buildings of varying size and environmental surroundings for bird mortality at 40 college and university campuses in North America in the autumn of 2014. This included six buildings on the UW’s Seattle campus. They designed a standardized monitoring protocol so that the field crews documented bird mortality uniformly. In all, they documented 324 bird carcasses of 41 species. At each site, somewhere between zero and 34 birds met their feathery demise.

“Consistent with previous studies, we found that building size had a strong positive effect on bird-window collision mortality,” Hager and team about the continent-wide research. “But the strength of the effect on mortality depended on regional urbanization.”

Why is that? The researchers think it might be related to how birds select habitats during migration, and differences in bird behavior between urban and rural populations. For example, they write, forest-adapted birds often select rural habitats with lots of open space and fairly few impervious surfaces over more urban areas.

Lighting patterns may also play a part, they reason. Lights from large, low-rise buildings in rural areas may act to attract migrating birds in what the team dubbed a “large-scale beacon effect,” where this effect may be “more diluted among large buildings in urban areas.”

Another theory is that urban birds may actually learn from “non-fatal” collisions and gain “new anti-collision behaviors” that help them avoid colliding with windows in urban areas. Previous research, they note, “suggests that the relatively large brain size in birds makes them primed for learning.”

The results suggest, the authors write, that measures taken to prevent bird collisions “should be prioritized at large buildings in regions of low urbanization throughout North America.”

The study was organized through the , or EREN for short.

###

For more information, contact Karen Dyson at karenldyson@gmail.com or lead author Stephen Hager at stevehager@augustana.edu.