Workshop: Social Justice in Pal(a)eontology

This page contains the material associated with the workshop “Social Justice in Palaeontology: Case Studies & Future Actions” that was originally held in association with the PalAss annual meeting in December 2021. The aims of the workshop were to introduce participants to a diverse range of topics relating to current ethical and legal issues in the field of palaeontology, through hands-on research of fictional scenarios. Here you will find information on the structure of the workshop and the fictional scenarios assigned to focus groups, alongside guided questions and suggested reading. This document serves as the first part of our output from this workshop where we aim to make the content publicly available to encourage continuing action on matters relating to ethics, legality, and decolonisation in palaeontology.

Workshop Structure

Participants were able to get involved in two ways:

Joining a focus group to discuss a fictional scenario and brainstorm solutions
Tuning in to the series of talks from the focus groups and asking questions of the presenters in a Q&A session

Each focus group of 5–6 people was assigned a fictional scenario concerning an prominent ethical and/or legal issue in palaeontological research. Groups met virtually via Zoom to discuss their fictional scenario and brainstorm possible future avenues that centre ethics and principles of decolonisation.

Each group was guided by an established researcher(s) who has expertise on the assigned topic and supported by assigned reading material. Groups could also communicate through a dedicated Discord server for the duration of the event.

Each group then composed a short presentation (10–15 mins) on their findings and recommendations, which was presented by a designated group member at a larger virtual session. The presentations were followed by an open Q&A session with the audience (i.e. those participating via option 1 above).

Focus Group Guidelines

Each group will focus on a fictional scenario, based on real-life events, concerning an ethical or legal issue in palaeontology. Your primary task is to explore, discuss, and brainstorm solutions to this scenario, supported by recommended reading and input from an expert researcher. Your outcome should be a set of recommendations for how this scenario should proceed for each individual and stakeholder involved, in order to foster more equitable and ethical research in future.

When thinking about the fictional scenario you have been assigned, here are some questions to guide you, alongside your own experiences:
Can you identify any issues in the given scenario? What are the major red flags?
Who are the stakeholders in this situation (students, supervisors, funders, reviewers, editors, professional society, etc.)? Who is most vulnerable/powerful, and why?
What are the possibilities and limits of individual action? At what level does change need to happen to ensure that this scenario does not repeat itself in the future?
What recommendations would you make to the stakeholders? How should these recommendations be communicated?
Are there any other organisations/institutions/people currently not involved who could potentially help with implementing and driving change?

Your final task is to prepare a 10–15 minute presentation. You will need to designate one member of your group to deliver this presentation, which should include the following:

A brief description of your assigned fictional scenario
The issues and stakeholders you have identified
Your recommendations to the individual(s) in your scenario, highlighting what the possibilities and limits of their actions
Your recommendations to the different stakeholders
Who else should be involved to implement the policies that you came up with?

Fictional Scenarios

Studies on stolen fossils
(with Professor Juan Carlos Cisneros, Universidade Federal do Piauí, and Aura Fossati, independent researcher in science diplomacy)

Scenario:
You are the editor of a manuscript that was recently submitted and describes a new dinosaur specimen. There are no local authors from the country of origin of the fossil listed on the manuscript. The fossil is currently housed in a museum in the country where the researchers are based. During your usual daily Twitter scroll the day before, you read about previous cases of fossils from the same country of origin as this new dinosaur being illegally taken out of the country and stored in museums abroad, usually in richer countries. Some people have pointed out that the permanent export of this fossil is banned under the law, but you are unable to confirm this. The authors also make no mention of the legality of this new dinosaur specimen in their manuscript as this is not a requirement that your journal has. The new dinosaur specimen being described is scientifically important to dinosaur evolution and you would very much like to see this study published.

Guided questions:

Does this scenario fit in the definition of parachute science or scientific colonialism?
How can you determine that this specimen was legally exported?
Do you need additional information from the authors before sending it out to review?

Who do you send it out to review?
If it turns out that the specimen was illegally exported, What should be the next steps from the authors or the institution where the material is reposited?

Under what circumstance should this study be published?
Should there be any editorial policy changes at the journal level? How can these be implemented and who should be involved to ensure that such situations are prevented?

Recommended Reading:

Dalton, R. (2000). Fake bird fossil highlights the problem of illegal trading. Nature, 404(6779), 696–696. https://doi.org/10.1038/35008237
Fossilized ethics. (2021). Nature Ecology & Evolution, 5(6), 703–704. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41559-021-01493-1
Montanari, S. (2015, July). The (Potentially Illegal) Fantastic Four-Legged Snake And Ethics Of Fossil Collection. Forbes. https://www.forbes.com/sites/shaenamontanari/2015/07/24/the-potentially-illegal-fantastic-four-legged-snake-and-ethics-of-fossil-collection/. Accessed 8 November 2021
Ortega, R. P. (2021a). Retraction is ‘second extinction’ for rare dinosaur. Science (New York, N.Y.), 374(6563), 14–15. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.acx9215
Ortega, R. P. (2021b). Ethical controversy swirls around shark fossil from Mexico. Science, 372(6540), 332–333. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.372.6540.332
Pérez Ortega, R. (2021). This ancient shark fossil is exquisite. But some researchers wonder if they’ll be able to study it. Science. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.abj0292
Raja, N. B., & Dunne, E. M. (under review). Fossil trafficking, fraud, and fakery. [CONFIDENTIAL]

Working with fossils from conflict zones
(with Dr Donna Yates, Maastricht University)

Scenario:
More than a year ago, you were approached by someone who said that they have acquired a piece of Myanmar amber that contains what seems to resemble a dinosaur skull. You were very intrigued and started to work on the material at your institution, which resulted in some very interesting preliminary results. You wrote and submitted a grant that would provide you with funding to continue your research on this material. The process for acquiring funding has been quite slow over the pandemic, but you just received the news that your grant was accepted and you have received the funding that you requested. During this time, there has been increasing publicity of Myanmar amber, especially the ethical and legal concerns surrounding this material’s collection and export. In your opinion, this specimen is unique and provides important insights into the evolution of dinosaurs. Aware of the concerns around the material, you have spent some time investigating its provenance, which has led you to a trader on eBay based in China. They were very honest with you and stated that they had no paperwork to prove that it had been legally exported from Myanmar, because it was not. Several journals have already updated their policies to make sure that studies on unethical or illegal specimens do not get published. Given the time that you have already spent on this material, you would like to find a way to publish an article on this material.

Guided questions:

Why is it important to consider the human dimension of palaeontological research?
Can you identify the different stakeholders involved? Are they all within the academic sphere?
What role should funders, institutions or journals play to ensure that all research is in accordance with
ethical and legal standards? Who should decide on these standards and what should they be?
What are the consequences if the study on this material is not published?
Under what circumstance should these fossils be researched and the studies published?

Recommended Reading:

Barrett et al. (2021). Law, ethics, gems and fossils in Myanmar amber. Nat. Ecol. Evol. doi.org/10.1038/s41559-021-01478-0
Dunne & Raja (2020). Scientometric Trends in Myanmar Amber Research. Presented at the PalAss Annual Meeting (Virtual)
Fossilized ethics. (2021). Nat. Ecol. Evol. doi.org/10.1038/s41559-021-01493-1
Shi et al. (2021). Balance scientific and ethical concerns to achieve a nuanced perspective on ‘blood amber’. Nat. Ecol. Evol.. doi.org/10.1038/s41559-021-01479-z
Sokol (2019). Troubled treasure. Science
Zin-Maung-Maung-Thein & Khin Zaw. (2021). Parachute research is another ethical problem for Myanmar amber. Nat. Ecol. Evol. doi.org/10.1038/s41559-021-01472-6

Fieldwork in resource-poor countries
(with Professor Doris Schroeder, University of Central Lancaster)

Scenario:
You have just joined a new lab at a top tier university in the US as a postdoctoral researcher, where you are due to carry out fieldwork abroad in a lower income country you have never visited before. The department you have joined regularly conducts fieldwork there, but you are not yet familiar with the country’s laws, culture and language. The chair of your department has put you in contact with some students from the local university, telling you that they can assist you with driving, manual labour, and data/sample collection. The data that you collect will be processed and analysed at your university, because the local university lacks the resources. You have funding to fully cover your own travel, accommodation and equipment expenses. But, this funding does not allow you to pay for the services provided by the local students. Instead, you will do what your new department has always done, and sign a certificate of participation at the end of the fieldwork season. This fieldwork is critical to your upcoming manuscript, which will support your application to the next funding round.

Guided questions:

Is this fieldwork equitable and/or ethical? Why/why not?
How would the local students benefit from this fieldwork, if at all? Why might it be imperative to financially reimburse them for their labour?
What would be appropriate alternatives to a certificate of completion to properly compensate the local students for their input into the fieldwork?
To whom should you raise your concerns? Who is best placed to develop better research practices and ensure they are sustained?
What would this scenario look like if ethics and equity were centered?
What guidelines can departments and funders put in place to ensure research is ethical and equitable? What other stakeholders can ensure this?

Recommended Reading:

Schroeder et al. (2018). Global code of conduct for research in resource-poor settings.
Trios et al. (2021) Decoloniality and anti-oppressive practices for a more ethical ecology. Nat. Ecol. Evol. doi.org/10.1038/s41559-021-01460-w
Provenance matters (2021) Nat. Geosci. doi.org/10.1038/s41561-021-00814-0
Urassa et al. (2021) Cross-cultural research must prioritize equitable collaboration. Nat. Hum. doi.org/10.1038/s41562-021-01076-x
Elbein (2021) Decolonizing the Hunt for Dinosaurs and Other Fossils. The New York Times.

Parachute science and local communities
(with Dr June Rubis, Sydney Environment Institute, & Sibusio Biyela, ScienceLink South Africa)

Scenario:
You have just agreed to peer-review a manuscript which describes a new species of dinosaur from Australia. Upon reading the manuscript, you realise that this specimen was collected from land belonging to First Nations Peoples. The authors, who are all from western Europe, have not included a local co-author on the paper, but there is evidence that the fossil was legally exported from Australia. The manuscript also states that the new fossil is now housed in a museum where one of the authors is based. As you read further, it becomes clear that there are a number of errors in the manuscript that you think could have been avoided by including some ‘local expertise’. For example, the location is misspelt and local fossil collections were not visited for comparative purposes. In addition, the new genus name honours a European palaeontologist for their services to dinosaur palaeobiology, while the species name refers to the word for ‘monster’ in the local First Nations language, but has been mistranslated.

Guided questions:

Does this scenario fit within the definition of ‘parachute science’?
What do you understand by ‘local expertise’ in this situation?

Why should the authors connect with a local university department or should they engage with local indigenous communities?
Should they be including local researchers on the author list?

What kinds of outcomes should be expected from these kinds of collaborations (e.g. in relation to acknowledgements of work, expertise, etc.)?
As a reviewer, what recommendations would you make in your review to the authors of the study?
What recommendations do you make to the editor of the journal? What measures could the journal put in place to promote more equitable research collaborations in future?

Recommended Reading:

Ahmadia et al. (2021). Limited Progress in Improving Gender and Geographic Representation in Coral Reef Science. Frontiers in Marine Science doi.org/10.3389/fmars.2021.731037
Evans (2020). Change Species Names to Honor Indigenous Peoples Not Colonizers, Researchers Say. Scientific American.
Gillman & Wright (2020). Restoring indigenous names in taxonomy. Communications Biology doi.org/10.1038/s42003-020-01344-y
Popp (2021). Want to reach out to an Indigenous scholar? Awesome! But first, here are 10 things to consider. The Conversation.
Provenance matters (2021) Nat. Geosci. doi.org/10.1038/s41561-021-00814-0
Trisos (2021) Decoloniality and anti-oppressive practices for a more ethical ecology. Nat. Ecol. Evol. doi.org/10.1038/s41559-021-01460-w

Commercial fossils
(with Professor Paul Barrett, NHM London)

Scenario:
You are an early career researcher at a large conference and you are approached by a commercial fossil dealer, who has a fossil for sale that they think you will be interested in. You agree to take a look at this fossil and immediately recognise it as a truly unique specimen from a country that is well-known for its fossils and with strict fossil export laws. You are sure that this specimen is a new species, publishable in a high-impact journal, which would be fantastic for your career prospects, especially after a tough year and a half of travel and fieldwork restrictions on account of the Covid-19 pandemic. Your institution could definitely cover the costs, and the dealer assures you that everything is in order, but they cannot provide you with any paperwork to prove so. However, you believe that this specimen is genuine and fear that if it is not acquired, it will be a huge loss to science.

Guided questions:

Can commercial fossil dealing be ethical? Why/why not?
Who are the stakeholders here? Are any individuals/communities being exploited?
If this particular specimen was to be purchased from the dealer, where should it be housed?

Who should this decision be made in collaboration with?
How would you ensure that you centre the principles of decolonising science in deciding on the location?

How can journal editors best handle submissions of manuscripts describing specimens such as this one?

What kinds of documentation could editors request from the authors?
Should journal editors (and reviewers) have access to professional legal and ethical advice?

Recommended Reading:

Barrett et al. (2021). Law, ethics, gems and fossils in Myanmar amber. Nat. Ecol. Evol. doi.org/10.1038/s41559-021-01478-0
Science and Commerce Clash Over Selling Dinosaur Fossils for Profit (2020) Wall Street Journal. [video]
Pérez-Ortega (2021) ‘It’s like a second extinction’: Retraction deepens legal and ethical battle over rare dinosaur. Science
Provenance matters (2021) Nat. Geosci. doi.org/10.1038/s41561-021-00814-0
Raja, N. B., & Dunne, E. M. (under review). Fossil trafficking, fraud, and fakery.
Worrall (2018) Would you risk prison for a dinosaur fossil? This man did. National Geographic