Abstract
The lack of diversity in physics remains a worldwide problem. Despite being a quantitative discipline relying on measurements, there is a paucity of data on the demographic characteristics of underrepresented groups. We present findings from Canadian Physics Counts: the first national survey of equity, diversity, and inclusion in the Canadian physics community. Our intersectional approach provides a wealth of information on gender identity, sexual orientation, race, disability, and more. Analyses revealed key findings, including the first comprehensive Canadian data on nonbinary or gender diverse physicists, and the first data on Black (1.2%) and Indigenous (0.3%) physicists, who were least represented. Assessing representation across roles and career stages, BIPOC (Black, Indigenous, and People of Colour), representation fell precipitously (by one-half) between under/graduate to professional roles, while White women’s representation remained relatively stable, and White men’s representation steadily increased. One in four BIPOC respondents from gender diverse backgrounds identified as disabled, and the proportion of sexually diverse students with disabilities was more than three times higher than the proportion of heterosexual students with disabilities, underscoring the necessity of intersectional analyses. Students were more demographically diverse than professionals, highlighting the importance of acting today to retain the diverse physicists of tomorrow.
Introduction
Participation of diverse groups in physics in Canada has been persistently low (Science Secretariat 1967; Robertson and Steintz 1997; Perreault et al. 2018). Demographic information is crucial to understand gaps in representation, and to inform development, implementation, and evaluation of polices and interventions to improve access and participation in physics. Demographic data for physicists has been collected in the United States (e.g., Porter and Ivie 2019; American Institute of Physics 2020), the United Kingdom (The Royal Society 2025), and Australia (Maasoumi et al. 2023), however, data collected in Canada is limited and only exists for binary gender (Science Secretariat 1967; Robertson and Steintz 1997; CAUT 2014; Strickland 2017), making it difficult to understand how diverse identities intersect in the North American context. The purpose of this work was to collect data from the Canadian physics community, applying an intersectional analysis to better understand who is and who is not represented.
Previous research from social and organizational psychology has demonstrated the relevance of race, gender, and 2SLGBTQIA+ identity in determining who studies, works, and succeeds in science. Such factors range from aspects of individual experience, such as identification with science (Robinson et al. 2019), confidence (Sterling et al. 2020), access to resources (Ivie et al. 2014; Porter and Ivie 2019), and racism (American Institute of Physics 2020; Clark and Hurd 2020), to societal factors such as socialization (Tenenbaum and Leaper 2003), stereotypes about scientists (Reuben et al. 2014; Banchefsky and Park 2018), the predominance of Whiteness in the academy (Johnson and Howsam 2020), and the culture and climate of classrooms and labs (Settles et al. 2006; Walton et al. 2015). Research shows that racialized or BIPOC (Black, Indigenous, and People of Colour) experience bias and discrimination such as being underestimated and unrecognized as physicists (Hyater-Adams et al. 2019). Members of the 2SLGBTQIA + community in physics face exclusionary behaviour, discomfort in the workplace, mockery, and harassment (Barthelemy 2020; Barthelemy et al. 2022; Gutzwa et al. 2024), and this may be exacerbated for transgender physicists (Barthelemy et al. 2022).
Social justice (i.e., efforts to create a society wherein all people can access rights, opportunities, and resources, inclusive of demographic identities or circumstances) must be better integrated into science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) to attract those who have faced social injustice. Gibbs and Griffin (2013) found that among post-doctoral scholars, non-URM (underrepresented minority) scientists often cited freedom to choose their own research topics as a main reason to pursue a faculty career, whereas URM post-doctoral scholars were more often driven by goals such as mentoring students like themselves and addressing problems in their communities. Garibay (2015), in a study comprising 6100 undergraduates found that equity, social justice, helping others through their work and working for social change, were more important to URM STEM students than their non-URM peers. McGee (2021) concluded from these studies that “justice-oriented STEM” (i.e., STEM that acknowledges historical and contemporary inequities), can be a critical factor in attracting and retaining diverse people in science.
To more fully understand experiences and representation in science, some research has drawn on intersectional theory (i.e., recognition that marginalized identities such as gender, race, ability, interact to create greater oppression; Crenshaw 2017). For example, the “double bind”, articulates how racism and sexism combine to create significant barriers to the participation of women of colour in science (Malcom et al. 1976; Malcom and Malcom 2011; Ong et al. 2011). Johnson and colleagues (2017) conducted interviews with women of colour in physics who described experiences of isolation, stereotyping, and microaggressions. Similarly, Rosa and Mensah (2016) found that Black women studying physics experienced isolation and exclusion from important resources (e.g., study groups), encountering barriers to participation.
