Biodiversity and Gender As Hypotheses

This study examines the scientific knowledge generated at the OHM-I Patagonia Bahía Exploradores, explicitly addressing the intersection between the climate crisis and gender. Here, gender is not merely understood as a social category or as the representation of women within research teams but rather as an epistemological approach. We argue that existing data related to climatic variations, ecological disturbances in rivers, biodiversity shifts, and changes in land use should be re-evaluated through the lens of gender as a hypothesis. This analytical shift enables us to challenge ingrained assumptions and avoid reinforcing inequalities within the research itself.

Our methodology is grounded in a critique of three fundamental aspects: sampling processes, instrument design, and data management. First, concerning sampling, we question the gendered assumptions embedded in the selection of samples. What presumptions about gender and sex guide these decisions, and how do they influence our understanding of ecosystems and environmental changes? We also explore whether interdisciplinary approaches inform sample collection and the prevailing discourses that underpin these practices.

Second, the role of instruments in shaping research outcomes is critically assessed. We analyze how measurement tools are designed and used, focusing on their assumptions about objectivity and their implications for knowledge production.

Finally, we scrutinize databases and data characterization and management. This involves interrogating the underlying logic that organizes environmental data and how it might be transformed when gender is treated as an analytical hypothesis rather than a neutral category. By addressing these dimensions, we aim to produce more inclusive, equitable scientific knowledge that is attentive to the nuanced intersections between environmental science and gender.