As published on Tree Canada’s blog, March 3, 2026.
When I recently revisited Invisible Women: Exposing Data Bias in a World Designed for Men by Caroline Criado Perez, I expected a refresher. Instead, I found a mirror. The book’s central argument, that a gender data gap shapes society, felt less like a revelation than a validation of something I had experienced firsthand years earlier (Criado Perez, 2019).
In 2018, when I began my post-doctoral research on women in arboriculture and urban forestry in Canada, I assumed I would be building on an established body of work. Instead, I found a striking absence; there was virtually no documented evidence of women’s experiences in these fields. Women were present in crews, municipalities, and consulting roles, but in the literature, they were largely unseen.
Criado Perez explains how this happens. When systems are built around male defaults, whether in medicine, transportation, workplace equipment, or data collection, women’s realities become outliers and, eventually, omissions. Her case studies, from drug trials to car safety testing, reminded me that my earliest challenge wasn’t analysis but rather it was proving that the topic deserved attention.
Although Invisible Women does not specifically address urban forestry or environmental fields directly, its discussion of personal protective equipment (PPE) in labour-intensive industries resonated strongly. In arboriculture, safety is non-negotiable. Yet women frequently reported ill-fitting harnesses, oversized gloves, and protective clothing designed for male bodies. These were not merely inconveniences; they were safety risks. While many practitioners have long shared these concerns anecdotally, the absence of systematic data meant the issue rarely translated into procurement policies or industry standards.
One of the book’s most powerful insights is its explanation of the full research-to-application cycle. Decisions about what gets studied, what gets funded, and what gets implemented are shaped by who is at the table. When leadership groups are predominantly male, blind spots are not necessarily intentional, but they are predictable. Criado Perez highlights cases where the presence of even one woman in decision-making roles transformed product design, accessibility, and even profitability. The lesson is simple: representation changes outcomes.
In our 2019 survey of 515 women working in urban forestry and arboriculture, the numbers reinforced what many had long known informally: 60% reported unequal workplace treatment by gender, 74% had experienced sexist behavior or harassment, and 84% identified gender-based workplace barriers. The most reported challenges included discrimination, promotion bias, family responsibilities, and pay inequity (Bardekjian, et al, 2019).
Yet statistics tell only part of the story. Many participants described the cumulative weight of micro-aggressions, such as being mistaken for administrative staff, having their expertise questioned, or feeling the need to continually prove physical or technical competence. These experiences are difficult to quantify, but they shape workplace culture in powerful ways. As many women noted, you often feel the inequity before you can name it.
Progress has been made, but culture shifts slowly. Whether these behaviors are intentional or unconscious does not make their effects less real. As Invisible Women makes clear, systems built on incomplete data, will continue to reproduce inequality unless they are deliberately examined and challenged. Looking back over the past decade, however, there are reasons for optimism in urban forestry and related fields.
The evidence base is expanding. What began as isolated studies is evolving into a body of knowledge more keenly attune to gender equity. While peer-reviewed research remains limited, there has been a considerable increase in articles, conference presentations and panels, workshops, webinars, and informal professional dialogues, many aligned with International Women’s Day (e.g., Women in Forestry Virtual Summit, Wāhine in Forestry Conference in Christchurch, Women in Forest Management Conference in Washington State).
In addition, women’s networks have also emerged worldwide, connecting professionals across regions and career stages. These communities offer mentorship, visibility, and collective strength, making it easier for newcomers to see themselves in the field and for organizations to recognize long-standing talent (e.g., Women in Wood, Women in Trees, and the Women in Arboriculture Group). Citations are accumulating, and with them, legitimacy. And when data exists, it becomes harder to dismiss experiences as anecdotal.
Beyond the profession itself, women are increasingly visible as environmental leaders worldwide. In Freetown, Mayor Yvonne Aki-Sawyerr has advanced the Freetown the Treetown initiative, linking urban tree planting with climate resilience and community stewardship. In India, Vandana Shiva and her organization Navdanya have championed seed sovereignty and biodiversity through agroecological approaches. For Armenia, Jeanmarie Papelian, recently retired Executive Director of the Armenia Tree Project, expanded national reforestation through diaspora engagement and community-based tree planting. These examples reflect a broader shift, that women are not only participating in environmental work, but they are also helping shape its direction and impact.
Perhaps the most encouraging is generational change. Training programs and university cohorts are seeing more women enter forestry and related fields. Early-career professionals now encounter more role models, networks, and open conversations than existed even a decade ago (Bullard et al., 2024; Larasatie et al., 2024).
Still, visibility must continue to expand, not only in numbers, but in research, policy, equipment design, workplace culture, and leadership pathways. Representation alone does not reshape systems; intentional attention does.
Re-reading Invisible Women reminded me that progress often begins by noticing what is missing. I am hopeful that the growing research base, expanding networks, and women leading change across the sector will continue to make the profession more inclusive, innovative, and resilient. If this momentum continues, the next generation may enter a field where their presence is expected, their needs anticipated, and their contributions fully counted. Because as Criado Perez voices, visibility is more than recognition, it is evidence that you were considered when the world and the workplace were designed.
If you have not yet read Invisible women: Data bias in a world designed for men, it remains one of the most important books of our time for understanding how data shapes equity.
My next read is Women Changing Cities: Global Stories of Urban Transformation by Melissa and Chris Bruntlett.
References
Bardekjian, A., Nesbitt, L., Konijnendijk, C., & Lötter, B. (2019). Women in urban forestry and arboriculture: Experiences, barriers and strategies for leadership. Urban Forestry and Urban Greening, (46).
Bullard, S. H., Walker, T. J., & Burger, L. (2024). Enhancing diversity in undergraduate degree programs in forestry and related natural resources: A brief review of critical issues and promising actions. Journal of Forestry, 122(2), 107–122. https://doi.org/10.1093/jofore/fvad043
Criado Perez, C. (2019). Invisible women: Data bias in a world designed for men. Abrams Press.
Larasatie, P., Barnett, T., & Hansen, E. (2024). Mentoring and networking as the “silver lining” of being women leaders: An exploratory study in top world forestry schools. Trends in Higher Education, 3(1), 169–179. https://doi.org/10.3390/higheredu3010010
Adrina C. Bardekjian, MFC, PhD 