such as science and engineering, as well as a commissioned qualitative study on the experiences of PIs with the current mission proposal process (see Appendix C).
In the social ecological framework depicted above, there are four nested and mutually reinforcing contextual layers (i.e., structural, institutional/organizational, interpersonal, and intrapersonal) that represent the environment in which a potential mission PI is embedded. The structural layer of the framework encompasses the systemic factors that originate from sociohistorical and sociocultural conditions and act to constrain access to power, resources, and opportunity on the basis of identity, resulting in advantages for some groups and disadvantages for others. These factors operate across all societal domains (e.g., education, economic, labor, health), and have implications for who has access to leadership opportunities on competed space missions. These encompass large-scale societal factors like public policy, ideology, lore, culture, history, systems of oppression, and deeply entrenched, widely shared gendered and racialized beliefs about which groups are capable of doing science and deserving of the opportunity to be educated and participate in STEM. Barriers that operate at the structural level shape the demographics of the pool of prospective PIs of competed space missions by constraining the pathways to and through STEM higher education and by shaping career opportunities (see Chapters 2 and 4).
The institutional/organizational layer of the framework includes the professional or academic environment in which a potential mission PI is embedded. Institutional and organizational factors comprise the individual workplace conditions which includes the resources and opportunities available to an individual in that workplace environment, implicit and explicit disciplinary norms, values and institutional culture, as well as institutional and agency practices and policies. These factors may have a disparate impact on prospective competed mission leaders from populations that have been historically excluded from and are underrepresented in the NASA SMD fields, and continue to be minoritized and experience marginalization (e.g., women, racially minoritized populations, people with disabilities, and members of the LGBTQ+ community). Institutional/organizational barriers often interact with structural, interpersonal, and intrapersonal factors to result in inequitable experiences for these individuals within their scientific field, the institutions in which they work, and the academic/institutional processes in which they engage. The differences in experiences within the field and within the discipline can also lead to inequities in the resources (e.g., money, staff, information, etc.) to which prospective PIs from historically excluded populations have access (see Chapter 2).
The interpersonal layer of the framework includes relational factors such as interactions (i.e., acts, words, and behaviors) between individuals and groups that can have a differential impact on historically underrepresented groups and erect barriers on the path to becoming a PI of a competed space mission. Identity—both social and personal—shapes relationships between individuals and among groups. Thus, prospective PIs with marginalized or minoritized identities will experience interpersonal interactions within the field differently. Additionally, identity can also shape access to collaborative networks and play a role in the degree to which an individual feels included or integrated within their discipline, department, or science team.
The final layer of the organizing framework comprises the intrapersonal factors that can act as a barrier to diversity in the leadership of competed space missions. Intrapersonal factors include the beliefs, biases, and thought processes that shape decision-making, the judgments we make about others, and how we view ourselves. For example, individual beliefs and biases can inform decisions and behaviors related to team formation, proposal development, and proposal evaluation, as well as those of women-identifying prospective PIs, racially minoritized groups or other historically underrepresented populations. Additionally, due to the interactions between the structural, organizational, and interpersonal factors mentioned above, identity can shape how individuals of different backgrounds think about their work, their likelihood of success, their tolerance for risk as well as how they prioritize specific experiences and goals over the course of their career.
STRUCTURAL BARRIERS TO DIVERSITY
As with other STEM fields, women, racially minoritized populations, people with disabilities, members of the LGBTQ+ community and other groups that have faced systemic marginalization have been historically excluded