[Osmf-talk] Gender in OSM/OSMF

Nama Budhathoki namabudhathoki at gmail.com
Wed Nov 29 01:36:47 UTC 2017


My study showed about 96% male in OSM community. You can download it from
the below link and go to page 68. This was about 7 years ago. I would be
very interested to see if there has been any change on this. ​

https://www.ideals.illinois.edu/bitstream/handle/2142/16956/1_Budhathoki_Nama.pdf

Cheers,

Nama


On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 6:52 AM, Stefan Keller <sfkeller at gmail.com> wrote:

> Dear Tim
>
> Just some remarks on the three references you gave:
>
> [1] Concludes that "social motives as well as platform-specific
> contribution and communication mechanisms influence women’s
> participation behaviour."
> [3] "Possible answer of low female participants: Because they perhaps
> find other things more interesting than gadgets and sitting in front
> of a computer for hours..." (my own free tanslation).
> [2] Is a study of low scientific quality. Especially the example of
> brothels and childcare tags is superficial and gives no evidence. See
> earlier OSM talk threads for what I mean. (BTW it's an interesting
> example where science is not always self-correcting, since this study
> seems to be still being cited in an uncritical way).
>
> So; yes, all studies detect an (obvious) imbalance of female and male
> contributors in the field of VGI.
> And yes I'd personally like to see too more women participating,
> actually - not only in OSM but also in technical professions.
> But besides [2] I hardly read in the studies that the OSM
> "communication style" is more an issue than in other communities as
> you suggest.
> And again don't get me wrong: I of course are also in favour of a
> welcoming culture and community and there's room for improvement in
> OSM.
>
> I'm really looking forward for Muki's research about systematic biases
> in VGI 2018 [1].
>
> In the meantime let's DO something - like going out mapping,
> organizing parties, designing nice maps - or cleaning up and writing
> good documentation.
>
> :Stefan
>
> [1] https://povesham.wordpress.com/2017/07/11/phd-
> studentship-in-collaboration-with-the-ordnance-survey-
> identifying-systematic-biases-in-crowdsourced-geographic-information/
>
>
> 2017-11-29 0:45 GMT+01:00 Tim Elrick <osm at elrick.de>:
> > 'One would hope that we welcome all', indeed. However, the few scientific
> > studies that looked into gender and other social biases in OSM (e.g.
> study
> > by Steinmann, et al. [1], Stephens/Rondinone [2] or Uhlmann, et al. [3])
> > suggest that these biases prevail. The OSM community still is dominated
> by
> > young, white, middle-class males with a tecchy background (me included,
> > although the young doesn't hold anymore).
> >
> > Anyone who follows OSM discussions will notice a specific communication
> > style - I would describe it as open and pretty direct/blunt (which
> adheres
> > to specific cultural traits, that can be found in male-tecchy dominated
> > communication as well as e.g. 'German style' communication); the above
> > mentioned studies suggest that quite some people interested in
> participating
> > in OSM could be deterred by such a communication style (and I just want
> to
> > remind you about the discussion of Severin's contribution a couple of
> days
> > ago). Please note, that I do not say one cannot get accustomed to this
> style
> > and if you do, you find out that most communication is not intended to be
> > disrespectful or unfriendly at all, but more often e.g. protective of
> one's
> > work, annoyed-why-newbies-cannot-read-the-wiki-first,
> > surprised-that-someone-does-not-understand-the-priorities-in-OSM, etc.
> >
> > We can also find (gender) in the features mapped: while we have a quite
> > sophisticated use and differentiation of brothels, we still miss this use
> > and differentiation in childcare (yes, there are a lot of
> > amenity=kindergarten, but if you compare amenity=brothel to
> > amenity=preschool/nursery/creche ...). My point here is that the
> interests
> > of the persons mapping, of course, reflects in the features mapped; and
> I am
> > glad it does; however, apparently, we are still missing the caring
> fathers
> > and mothers who map the pre-schools.
> >
> > So, as much as I value the OSM eco system and its distinctive
> communication
> > style and dealings, if we want to broaden our contributor base and
> overcome
> > some of the social biases (of course, there are economic biases, too), I
> > guess, we have to think about our communication style and dealings with
> each
> > other, too.
> >
> > Tim
> >
> > [1] Renate Steinmann, Elisabeth Häusler, Silvia Klettner, Manuela Schmidt
> > and Yuwei Lin 2013: Gender Dimensions in UGC and VGI: A Desk-Based Study,
> > http://hw.oeaw.ac.at/0xc1aa500d_0x002e6e72.pdf
> > [2] Monica Stephens, Antonella Rondinone (2012): Presentation at the
> > Association of American Geographers' Annual Meeting in New York:
> Gendering
> > the GeoWeb, https://www.slideshare.net/geographiliac/gendering-the-
> geoweb
> > [3] J. Uhlmann, F. Tommasini, H.-J. Stark (2010): Presentation at the
> > FOSSGIS e.V. annual meeting in Osnabrück, Germany: Empirische
> Untersuchung
> > der Motivation von Teilnehmenden bei der freiwilligen Erfassung von
> > Geodaten, Fachhochschule Nordwestschweiz.
> >
> >
> >
> > Am 27.11.2017 um 08:28 schrieb john whelan:
> > One would hope that we welcome all no matter what gender they declare
> > themselves as or if they declare themselves at all.
> >
> > Having people declare their gender means leaving them open to "trolls"
> and
> > many feel safer not doing so.
> >
> > From my work validating and giving feedback its apparent that you cannot
> > assume the gender from the user name and I know of a number of people
> that
> > would rather be judged by their contributions than by their gender.
> >
> > Cheerio John
> >
> >
> >
> > On 27 November 2017 at 03:05, Heather Leson <heatherleson at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >>
> >> Dear OSMF members
> >>
> >> I'd like to re-open a discussion about gender in this community.  How
> can
> >> we improve the gender balance? I know there are some amazing leaders and
> >> best practices. It would be great to hear from women and other genders
> that
> >> are often rare voices. Kate posted about diversity this summer. Let's
> build
> >> on this.
> >>
> >> As much as I've been vocal during this period, I tend to read and not
> >> comment on this forum. The reason for that is partially due to the
> tone. OSM
> >> can only truly global if we keep working on this.
> >>
> >> Also, would the "actions" from this discussion flow to the membership
> >> working group? I notice that there are no women listed on the wiki for
> this
> >> group. Maybe we need a "gender chair" to really follow through. The
> >> "membership working group" does not appear to have the offical
> responsibilty
> >> to improve the community experience. If not the "membership working
> group"
> >> to take up this gap, then maybe we need a balanced "community working
> group"
> >> .
> >>
> >> Thank you and have a good day,
> >>
> >>
> >> Heather
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> osmf-talk mailing list
> >> osmf-talk at openstreetmap.org
> >> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/osmf-talk
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > osmf-talk mailing list
> > osmf-talk at openstreetmap.org
> > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/osmf-talk
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > osmf-talk mailing list
> > osmf-talk at openstreetmap.org
> > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/osmf-talk
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> osmf-talk mailing list
> osmf-talk at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/osmf-talk
>



-- 
________________________________________________________________________
Nama R. Budhathoki, Ph.D.
Executive Director, Kathmandu Living Labs *(www.kathmandulivinglabs.org
<http://www.kathmandulivinglabs.org>)*
Office: 977-6205000
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/osmf-talk/attachments/20171129/33873fed/attachment.html>


More information about the osmf-talk mailing list