The scholars comprising journal editorial boards play a critical role in defining the trajectory of knowledge in their field. Nevertheless, studies of editorial board composition remain rare, especially those focusing on journals publishing research in the increasingly globalized fields of science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM). Using metrics for quantifying the diversity of ecological communities, we quantified international representation on the 1985–2014 editorial boards of 24 environmental biology journals. Over the course of 3 decades, there were 3,827 unique scientists based in 70 countries who served as editors. The size of the editorial community increased over time—the number of editors serving in 2014 was 4-fold greater than in 1985—as did the number of countries in which editors were based. Nevertheless, editors based outside the “Global North” (the group of economically developed countries with high per capita gross domestic product [GDP] that collectively concentrate most global wealth) were extremely rare. Furthermore, 67.18% of all editors were based in either the United States or the United Kingdom. Consequently, geographic diversity—already low in 1985—remained unchanged through 2014. We argue that this limited geographic diversity can detrimentally affect the creativity of scholarship published in journals, the progress and direction of research, the composition of the STEM workforce, and the development of science in Latin America, Africa, the Middle East, and much of Asia (i.e., the “Global South”).

El número importa: dilemas y desafíos de la política criminal en la crisis penitenciaria en Ecuador

Environmental and resource sociology has long featured political economy perspectives among its diverse theoretical retinue. Whether based on treadmills, modernization or other frameworks, political economy perspectives have influenced a growing body of environmental and resource sociology research. Recent reviews of environmental and resource sociology offer broad evaluations of the evolving state of the field, highlighting political economy theories and research needs. In this paper, we complement those reviews by suggesting a selection of specific topics informed in various ways by political economy perspectives as future directions in environmental and resource sociology. We prioritize research questions as applications of political economy perspectives to additional issues, sometimes via cross-fertilizations with other theoretical approaches, and thereby offer innovative directions for future research. The four topics are (1) food justice, critical animal studies and the industrial food system; (2) green criminology; (3) social media, social movements and environmental change; and (4) performativity. For each topic, we overview foundational arguments, noting relationships to political economy thought and briefly reviewing recent empirical work, before proposing specific research questions to inform future inquiry. While other topics are indeed valuable, we suggest that the assets of those we feature offer particularly innovative and fruitful directions. We conclude by discussing other research topics that also present intriguing opportunities.

Este artículo contiene los resultados de una investigación enfocada en examinar sentencias condenatorias en casos de femicidio, en donde niños, niñas y/o adolescentes hayan quedado en condición de orfandad. Se buscaba determinar ¿qué reflejan las sentencias condenatorias por femicidio respecto al derecho de la reparación integral para sus víctimas directas e indirectas en Ecuador? A partir de una revisión exhaustiva de todas las sentencias condenatorias emitidas en seis provincias de Ecuador por casos de muerte contra mujeres, en el periodo 2014-2021, nuestros resultados evidencian que el derecho a la reparación integral casi no se incorpora en la práctica. Así, no solo que el Estado no está reparando a las víctimas, sino que además las re-victimiza e ignora, ya que tampoco se adoptan medidas de protección y reparación a lo largo del proceso penal. Concluimos que las instituciones responsables por la aplicación de la ley estarían actuando bajo un enfoque que privilegia lo punitivo antes que la atención y reparación a la víctima.