Biological anthropology's critical engagement with genomics, evolution, race/racism, and ourselves: Opportunities and challenges to making a difference in the academy and the world

Abstract

Biological anthropology can, and should, matter in the Anthropocene. Biological anthropologists are interested in human biology and the human experience in a broader ecological, evolutionary, and phylogenetic context. We are interested in the material of the body, the history of the body, and interactions of diverse bodies, communities, ecologies, and evolutionary processes. However, the cultural realities of bodies, histories, communities, livelihoods, perceptions, and experiences are as central to the endeavor and inquiry of biological anthropology as are their material aspects. Biological anthropology is a constant dialectic between the cultural and the biological. In this essay, I argue that Biological Anthropology has much to offer, a history to contend with, and a future that matters. To illustrate this, I highlight theoretical and methodological issues in genomics, evolutionary theory and connect them to the study of Race and Racism to emphasize specific arenas where Biological Anthropology has a great capacity, and a strong obligation, to play a central role. However, Biological Anthropology also has substantive internal issues that hinder our ability to do the best possible science. If we are to live up to our potential and make a difference in the 21st century we need to ameliorate our structural shortcomings and expand our voice, and impact, in academic and public discourse. The goal of this perspective is to offer suggestions for moving us toward this goal.

Scanning the human genome for “signatures” of positive selection: Transformative opportunities and ethical obligations

“…Moreover, the racist history of our scholarly discipline still echoes within—and influences—the anthropological studies of today 88 . Within genomics, both explicit notions of biology and race and more covert racist interpretations of genomic data cause direct harm to individuals from diverse communities 89 . These harms can be limited by including individuals from diverse backgrounds in genomic studies simultaneous with their participation as scientific leaders of these projects.…”

More voices are always better: Tackling power differentials in knowledge production and access in human biology

“…Let us start with defining and situating the idea of “ power gradients ” within human biology's main theoretical and methodological frameworks. Human biology comprises a field of research straddling evolutionary biology and anthropology and which applies generalizable evolutionary and ecological insights to understanding human population dynamics and biocultural adaptations (Hoke & Schell, 2020; Stinson et al, 2012; see also Fuentes, 2021). Given these foci, thinking about power is not necessarily intuitive for many of us in this discipline.…”

“…Specifically, there are material inequities, which mean that those countries and populations excluded from power by ongoing colonialism have few resources to invest directly in basic research, including human biology research. As such, people from the geographic regions from which much of human biology's disciplinary knowledge has been generated (and extracted) are massively under‐represented as knowledge producers (Fuentes, 2021). At the same time, multiple barriers prevent knowledge producers based in states with colonialism‐derived wealth and power from using material resources to build capacity for or to support knowledge‐producer colleagues in subjugated or marginalized geopolitical regions.…”

“…Meanwhile, people on the lower end of these same power gradients tend to be under‐represented among academic human biologists (Antón et al, 2018; Fuentes, 2021), and those who are, are often at a disadvantage in relation to their research capacity and/or language proficiency, ultimately limiting their participation in the knowledge flow (Krotz, 1993).…”

“…Therefore, there are clearly power, representation, and knowledge production imbalances related to coloniality in need of interrogation in our field. While an anticolonial interrogation process is underway and is revealing itself to be challenging, it is likely a worthwhile undertaking (de Carvalho & Flórez Flórez, 2014; Fuentes, 2021; McGranahan & Rizvi, n.d.; Restrepo, 2018). Taking anticolonial approaches on board offers potential benefits not only to participants, partners, students, and stakeholders from the lower end of the power gradient, but also to researchers and educators, regardless of their (our) positionality.…”