The unheard voices of academia: overcoming systemic barriers and fostering inclusive spaces for knowledge exchange

Abstract

Our paper aims to consider how hybrid academic conferences can create inclusive spaces for knowledge exchange. The paper begins by considering the purpose of academic conferences and identifying the groups of people excluded when conferences are run in an in-person-only format. Reasons for exclusion include being disabled, being a carer, being unable to travel (e.g. in the final trimester of pregnancy), being unable to secure a VISA, or being unable to access funds to cover travel and accommodation costs. Next, we consider the existing challenges that individuals and event organizers face concerning academic conferences. Then, pragmatic opportunities for event organizers are presented, making the case for running conferences in a hybrid format. The paper concludes with a call to action for promoting care democracy in the workplace by addressing the humanity deficit and the unheard voice of academics currently excluded from in-person-only academic conferences.

Keywords:

• Hybrid conferences
• inclusion
• sustainable career
• academia
• disability

Setting the scene

Academic conferences provide opportunities to learn from one another by acting as valuable spaces for knowledge exchange and networking. McKenzie and Khan (2023) argue that the social exclusion of people with disabilities ‘is inevitable under systematic neoliberal priorities of individualism, efficiency, and productivity’ (1). Donald (2022) shares the same perspective, acknowledging additional individuals disadvantaged by in-person-only conferences. These include being a carer, being unable to travel (e.g. in the final trimester of pregnancy), being unable to secure a VISA, or being unable to access funds to cover travel and accommodation costs.

The authors of this paper represent members of these various groups and have been asking for virtual access to conferences long before the pandemic but were told it was simply not feasible. The pandemic proved otherwise, temporarily removing (or at least significantly reducing) some of these barriers to access. Unfortunately, returning to an in-person-only format represents a missed opportunity for the academic community to show it is an inclusive space, welcoming everyone regardless of circumstance. Not only does this (re)create barriers to access (see De Picker 2019), but it also reduces the diversity of views represented at panel events, in personal development workshops, and opportunities to establish future work or collaboration opportunities.

Consequently, this paper aims to consider how hybrid academic conferences can create inclusive spaces for knowledge exchange.

Existing challenges

Academic conferences are often organized and conducted with a strong emphasis on profit generation. Unfortunately, this focus on profitability frequently results in the exclusion of various individuals from these valuable spaces of knowledge exchange. Typically, conference organizers are volunteers responsible for ensuring financial success or at least breaking even. At the same time, sponsors seek assurances of high attendance rates at the conference venue. As a consequence, venue selection is often based primarily on capacity, neglecting the consideration of whether the chosen location can adequately support a hybrid conference in terms of technology provision.

In addition, technical issues can pose a significant risk to both the schedule and reputation of the conference. Moreover, delegates may express concerns about privacy if all conference sessions are recorded, and virtual attendees may be allocated presentation slots at inconvenient hours due to time zone differences. The expenses associated with technology can also impact the conference’s profit margins. Furthermore, charging the same fee for virtual participation as for in-person attendees may be perceived as unfair unless the online experience can fully replicate the in-person experience.

According to Donald (2022), individuals who possess the means to physically attend conferences often voice objections to the concept of hybrid conferences. This perspective aligns with a longstanding ableist and dominant belief that hybrid conferences are only seen as preferable to no conference at all (Tremain 2022). A prominent criticism of hybrid or virtual events is the perceived lack of networking opportunities. While this complaint holds some validity, the issue is further exacerbated by in-person attendees frequently choosing to exclusively engage in in-person activities, neglecting interactions with virtual attendees.

Author two, an academic who is disabled and housebound, faces obstacles when seeking permission to attend conferences virtually as a reasonable adjustment. To navigate this process, the author must undertake the following steps for each conference: (i) contact the conference chair, (ii) provide comprehensive medical information and outline associated limitations, (iii) explain the necessity of virtual attendance from home as a reasonable adjustment, and (iv) present a persuasive argument for why this adjustment is reasonable. De Picker (2019) shares similar experiences whereby ‘these preparations are an extra workload, although it has almost become routine’ (164).

In each case, requesting reasonable adjustments becomes a strenuous process, requiring careful consideration of risks and rewards. Simply put, individuals must weigh the personal benefits of attending a conference virtually against the potential risks of academics in positions of power rejecting the requests or exacerbating feelings of exclusion through ableist language driven by ulterior motives. Even when the author has followed up an initial decline decision by providing legal evidence of the requirements for the reasonable adjustment, there have been occasions where organizers have responded by accusing the author of making threats of legal action.

Notably, three prominent United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goals are ‘gender equality,’ ‘reduced inequalities,’ and ‘climate action.’ Yet, in-person-only conferences exacerbate rather than address these three issues. Ironically, conferences often feature sessions addressing these very issues.

Our focus now shifts to considering pragmatic opportunities to address these challenges.

Pragmatic opportunities

From an organizer perspective, Puccinelli et al. (2022) offer some opportunities to maximize the inclusivity of hybrid events:

‘(i) reach out to numerous sponsors to lower registration fees; (ii) differentiate registration fees by attendance type (online; onsite), career stage (student; post-doc; established researcher), nation income category (low, medium and high-income country), if it is a society meeting (member; non-member), time of registration (early bird; regular; late registration), (iii) provide additional travel and registration awards’ (10).

Organizers have a key role in educating participants about the needs of their colleagues. For instance, some individuals prefer in-person events and oppose running events in a hybrid format (Donald 2022). In theory, the most cost-effective way to maximize accessibility would be to conduct the entire event online. However, a hybrid format allows those who wish and can attend in person to continue doing so while still ensuring that others have access to these valuable spaces for knowledge exchange (Donald 2022). Similarly, in-person attendees should recognize that virtual-only conferences are significantly cheaper to organize compared to hybrid conferences. Therefore, the in-person registration fee should be higher to reflect this (Puccinelli et al. 2022). Consequently, the ability to host hybrid conferences should be a mandatory criterion for institutions or venues seeking to act as hosts.

In addition, it is crucial to provide transparent information about the event format and virtual attendees’ capabilities. It is desirable to minimize the use of multiple platforms and strive for a single platform that can encompass all aspects of the event (Puccinelli et al. 2022). Organizers should inform attendees in advance about which parts of the event will be recorded. There should also be a deliberate focus on improving opportunities for spontaneous and informal networking, both among virtual attendees and between virtual and in-person attendees.

Furthermore, even if virtual fees are lower than in-person attendance, providing fee waiver grants for virtual attendees is still essential, as any fee can present a barrier to some of our academic colleagues. Collecting time zone information during registration and scheduling sessions accordingly can also help enhance inclusivity. Hybrid conferences have the potential to foster diversity and inclusion by incorporating features, such as text captions and real-time translation into different languages. However, organizers must ensure that the division between in-person and virtual attendees does not create new barriers to knowledge exchange (Donald 2022).

Individuals facing barriers to attending conferences should communicate these challenges to the organizers. It is not the responsibility of these individuals to eliminate the barriers they face. However, they need to raise the issue so that conference organizers and researchers specializing in these areas can address them. Conference organizers must create a supportive environment where fellow academics feel comfortable speaking up about these concerns without fearing negative consequences for their careers or reputations.

If relying solely on the inclusivity aspect is not enough to convince conference attendees of the need for hybrid conferences, organizers should also emphasize other benefits. For instance, facilitating access to a diverse range of ideas can enrich the teaching of students and create new research collaboration opportunities, ultimately benefiting society as a whole. Hybrid conferences can reduce the carbon footprint. Additionally, there may be an opportunity to hold regional events alongside the option of virtual attendance at regional hubs, as intercontinental travel has a significant environmental impact. It could be helpful to provide examples of initial resistance to technological shifts that eventually became widely accepted, such as libraries transitioning from print to digital formats for new acquisitions well before the pandemic. The fixed base cost of hybrid conferences also makes it a logical strategy to scale up hybrid attendance to increase profit margins and maximize exposure for sponsors. It is crucial to provide training for session chairs on how to run hybrid conference sessions effectively and ensure that virtual attendees can also serve as session chairs.

Call to action

Our paper aimed to consider how hybrid academic conferences can create inclusive spaces for knowledge exchange. Having considered the existing challenges and pragmatic opportunities, we conclude with a call to action for promoting care democracy in the workplaces during post-COVID times by addressing the humanity deficit and the unheard voice of academics currently excluded from in-person-only academic conferences.

Conference organizers need to reframe their thinking, whereby every decision is taken with an inclusive mindset when designing a conference. If unwilling to do so, they should consider stepping aside and allowing others with more progressive attitudes to take their place (Donald 2023). Conference sponsors should acknowledge that hybrid conferences are beneficial because there is the potential to access more people leading to increased exposure and visibility.

Academics attending conferences should be vocal about the need for hybrid formats, even if that is not their preference. What many academics fail to understand is that an in-person format does leave no alternative for so many of our colleagues. Similarly, when looking at conference feedback, a 95% satisfaction rating may mask the fact that underrepresented groups heavily overrepresented the 5% who are unsatisfied (Donald 2022). Equally, if individuals cannot access conferences, their views are unlikely to be captured by surveying conference attendees.

Finally, those individuals who are excluded from these spaces need to speak out on such issues and do so in public forums where they feel comfortable to do so. They should explain the issues and the benefits of hybrid to them as well as offer some pragmatic solutions to conference organizers. Let us make 2024 the year we come together as an academic community to deliver meaningful and inclusive change.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Data availability statement

No dataset is associated with this manuscript.

Additional information

Funding

No funding to report.