Enriqueta Velarde

Global-scope scientific journals have played an important role in upholding a colonial legacy of north-south inequities in ornithology, and they now have a key role to play in increasing equity in scientific publishing. We explore common barriers faced by ornithologists in the Neotropics (Latin America and the Caribbean) and suggest priority actions that Ornithological Applications, Ornithology, and other global-scope ornithological journals can take to increase equity in publication and research uptake. Among the most important problems, we identified (1) restrictive (and north-biased) criteria for assessing research “importance” and “novelty,” (2) the high publication costs of the Author Pay (Gold) Open Access model, (3) language hegemony, (4) under-representation of ornithologists from the Neotropics on editorial boards and as lead authors on invited articles, and (5) lack of attention to ethics of collaboration and citation. We recommend that Ornithological Applications, Ornithology, and other global-scope ornithological journals (1) adjust their criteria for publication with the aim to publish all scientifically robust and ethically rigorous ornithology research submitted by first authors based in the Neotropics, including negative results and articles on basic biology; (2) maintain or create options for free or low-cost publication; (3) offer the option of a submission and review process in Spanish (and possibly other languages in the future); (4) increase the representation of ornithologists based in the Neotropics (especially women and those belonging to other marginalized groups) in core editorial teams and on editorial boards; and (5) introduce structured reflexivity statements, in which authors declare how local scientists were involved in the research and how equity was promoted in the collaboration that resulted in the manuscript. For these changes to be broadly effective in the long term, ornithologists across the Global South, and Indigenous, Brown, and Black ornithologists globally, should play lead roles in designing, implementing, and assessing the effectiveness of journal policies and programs. Spanish and Portuguese translations are available in the supplementary material. • For ornithologists based in the Neotropics, the most important barriers to publication are restrictive and north-biased criteria regarding the “importance” and “novelty” of research, the high cost of publication, and English language hegemony. • We recommend that Ornithological Applications,Ornithology, and other ornithological journals aim to publish all scientifically robust and ethically rigorous ornithology research from first authors based in the Neotropics. • Journals should maintain or create options for free or low-cost publication. • We encourage journals to offer the option of a submission and review process in Spanish. • Journals should introduce structured reflexivity statements to encourage authors and reviewers to reflect on the ethics of collaboration and citation. • Journals should increase participation of Global South ornithologists on editorial boards and in core editorial teams.

A major barrier to advancing ornithology is the systemic exclusion of professionals from the Global South. A recent special feature, Advances in Neotropical Ornithology, and a shortfalls analysis therein, unintentionally followed a long-standing pattern of highlighting individuals, knowledge, and views from the Global North, while largely omitting the perspectives of people based within the Neotropics. Here, we review current strengths and opportunities in the practice of Neotropical ornithology. Further, we discuss problems with assessing the state of Neotropical ornithology through a northern lens, including discovery narratives, incomplete (and biased) understanding of history and advances, and the promotion of agendas that, while currently popular in the north, may not fit the needs and realities of Neotropical research. We argue that future advances in Neotropical ornithology will critically depend on identifying and addressing the systemic barriers that hold back ornithologists who live and work in the Neotropics: unreliable and limited funding, exclusion from international research leadership, restricted dissemination of knowledge (e.g., through language hegemony and citation bias), and logistical barriers. Moving forward, we must examine and acknowledge the colonial roots of our discipline, and explicitly promote anti-colonial agendas for research, training, and conservation. We invite our colleagues within and beyond the Neotropics to join us in creating new models of governance that establish research priorities with vigorous participation of ornithologists and communities within the Neotropical region. To include a diversity of perspectives, we must systemically address discrimination and bias rooted in the socioeconomic class system, anti-Blackness, anti-Brownness, anti-Indigeneity, misogyny, homophobia, tokenism, and ableism. Instead of seeking individual excellence and rewarding top-down leadership, institutions in the North and South can promote collective leadership. In adopting these approaches, we, ornithologists, will join a community of researchers across academia building new paradigms that can reconcile our relationships and transform science. Spanish and Portuguese translations are available in the Supplementary Material . • Research conducted by ornithologists living and working in Latin America and the Caribbean has been historically and systemically excluded from global scientific paradigms, ultimately holding back ornithology as a discipline. • To avoid replicating systems of exclusion in ornithology, authors, editors, reviewers, journals, scientific societies, and research institutions need to interrupt long-held assumptions, improve research practices, and change policies around funding and publication. • To advance Neotropical ornithology and conserve birds across the Americas, institutions should invest directly in basic field biology research, reward collective leadership, and strengthen funding and professional development opportunities for people affected by current research policies.

Sampling seabirds: The vastness of the worlds' oceans makes them difficult to monitor. Seabirds that forage and breed across oceans globally have been recognized as sentinels of ocean health. Sydeman et al. looked across seabird species of both the Northern and Southern Hemispheres and found varying patterns. Northern Hemisphere species exhibited greater signs of stress and reduced breeding success, indicative of low fish resources. Southern Hemisphere species showed less impact on reproductive output, suggesting that the fish populations there have thus far been less disturbed. The differences across hemispheres indicate different strategies for conservation, with active recovery needed in the north and enhanced protection in the south. Science , abf1772, this issue p. 980