Search

The deposits of Plinian and subplinian eruptions provide critical insights into past volcanic events and inform numerical models that aim to mitigate against future hazards. However, pyroclastic deposits are often considered from either a fallout or pyroclastic density current (PDC) perspective, with little attention given to facies exhibiting characteristics of both processes. Such hybrid units may be created where fallout and PDCs act simultaneously, where a transitional phase between the two occurs, and/or due to reworking. This study presents analysis of a novel hybrid pyroclastic lithofacies found on Tenerife (Canary Islands) and Pantelleria (Italy). The coarse pumice block facies has an openwork texture and correlates with distal Plinian units, but it is cross-stratified and relatively poorly sorted with an erosional base. The facies is proposed to record the simultaneous interaction of very proximal fallout and turbulent PDCs, and it reveals a fuller spectrum of hybrid deposition than previously reported. This work highlights the importance of recognizing hybrid deposition both in the rock record and in hazard modeling.

Pyroclastic density currents (PDCs) are density-driven flows of gas, ash and rock generated during explosive volcanic eruptions, or by the collapse of volcanic lava domes. They can reach temperatures of >500 °C and are highly mobile, with the ability to travel at speeds of >200 m/s and to scale obstacles hundreds of metres high. PDCs are a devastating volcanic hazard and have killed >90 000 people since 1600 AD1; understanding their behaviour is an important aspect of volcanic disaster risk reduction. Because of their extreme nature, PDCs are difficult to observe and quantify in real time. Volcanologists therefore use field studies and modelling techniques to investigate their dynamics.As PDCs travel they progressively deposit ignimbrite, a poorly sorted volcanic rock typically rich in pumice and ash. Ignimbrites commonly display a variety of bedforms and stratigraphic architecture; such architecture can be interpreted to unpick the behaviour of the original PDC, and of the evolution of the eruption that created it. However, there is considerable uncertainty involved in ignimbrite bedform interpretation, due to the potential for complexity (such as cryptic bypass, erosion, and hybrid processes) and also due to fundamental gaps in our knowledge of the physical properties of PDCs.Our work uses analogue modelling of gas-fluidised, dense, granular currents in a laboratory flume together with examples from the field to explore what the dynamics of experimental PDCs (and their resultant bedforms) can tell us about our interpretations of real-world volcanic stratigraphy. The examples presented examine a range of bedforms and processes, including the impact of fluidisation and grainsize on PDC mobility and bedform morphology, the influence of moisture on cohesivity and bedform preservation, and the implications of grading in volcanic stratigraphy. The significant challenges in quantifying the sedimentation of ignimbrites are discussed. This work seeks to improve field interpretations of volcanic bedforms and contribute to the development of volcano risk models. 1: Auker et al. (2013) J Appl. Volcanol. https://doi.org/10.1186/2191-5040-2-2

The foundations of a discipline shape the way in which knowledge is created, by whom, for what, and dictates who is allowed to generate knowledge. The historical roots of modern Earth Science lie in early colonial principles, when geological exploration for resource extraction was a powerful tool in colonial expansion. The legacy is that dominance of western institutions in Earth Science disciplines reinforces imperial and colonial power relations, where ‘powerful knowledge’ continues to ignore, belittle and erase other systems of knowledge. The founding and growth of these institutions during colonialism dictated who was allowed to practise geology. Those whose class, gender, race, or disability did not fit were excluded. There is a documented diversity crisis in UK Higher Education Earth Science. However, Earth scientists of various underrepresented and intersecting identities have always existed; their histories have just been hidden. Marín-Spiotta et al., (2020) argue that any action to “increase diversity, equity, and inclusion needs to start with an examination of the historical roots of contemporary experiences of exclusion”. Dowey et al., (2021) argue that “fundamental lack of acknowledgement that geoscience is deeply rooted in, and built on, colonialism, white power, violence, exploitation and slavery pervades relationships in the present” and is a barrier to participation in the geosciences. However, at present, Earth Science curricula in the UK typically do not confront the subject’s colonial past, and are taught through a Western-centric lens. The UK ‘Fathers of Geology’ feature almost exclusively in historical accounts of the subject while non-western and indigenous scholars and ways of knowing are largely excluded. Geology in Society courses are often framed as how geoscience can help society, without due regard for ethics. Thus, the legacy of colonialism is perpetuated through current UK Earth Science practise and education. Decolonising the Curriculum is a philosophical and pedagogical initiative exploring the origin, development and use of knowledge that calls for academics to create “spaces and resources for a dialogue among all members of the university on how to imagine and envision all cultures and knowledge systems in the curriculum, and with respect to what is being taught and how it frames the world” (Keele University’s Decolonising the Curriculum Manifesto, 2018). Rogers et al., (2021) argue that Earth Scientists may lack the academic training, knowledge and interdisciplinary approaches needed to decolonise the Earth Science curriculum. In this project we have identified three needs in UK HE Earth Science: (1) to make explicit the exclusionary and unethical practices that were common in geological education and practice and how they manifest today; (2) to reveal the hidden histories of other historically excluded and minoritised Earth Scientists, making their contributions explicitly visible and (3) to train Earth Science professionals and researchers to be more aware of geology’s imperial/colonial past and ongoing extension of colonial practices to halt the perpetuation of this legacy. We present a package of open access pedagogical tools and resources we hope will enable sector-wide recognition, learning, and conversations around the historical legacy of Earth Science and modern inequities.

Geography, Earth and Environmental Science (GEES) research will play a vital role in addressing the grand challenges of the 21st century, contributing to many of the UN sustainable development goals and the global energy transition. However, geoscience knowledge can only be successfully applied to global problems that impact people from all walks of life if the discipline itself is equitable.There is a well-documented racial and ethnic diversity crisis in GEES subjects in the Global North1 that leads to inequities in who does environmental research. The Equator project2 set out to increase participation and retention of UK-domiciled Black, Asian and minority ethnic postgraduate research (PGR) students in GEES topics. Our goal was to improve equity and diversity in a research area critical to a more sustainable future; not because of a business case, or for diversity as a resource- but for social justice.Equator was a six-month project, funded by the Natural Environment Research Council (NERC), that developed three evidence-based interventions targeting different barriers to racial and ethnic diversity in GEES research. To remove barriers to access, a doctoral training working group was formed to share best practices and develop recommendations to make PhD recruitment more equitable. To improve access and participation, a ring-fenced research school for ethnic minority undergraduate, masters and doctoral students was delivered. To increase retention and improve student experience, a targeted mentoring network pairing students with mentors from both industry and academia was created.Evaluation of interventions took the form of action research with a Theory of Change approach, with surveys used to capture feedback and reflections in each of the three work packages. This occurred alongside collaborative, self-reflective inquiry within the project team and steering committee. The steering committee included grassroots organisations, higher education institutions, professional bodies and an equity, diversity and inclusion (EDI) consultant.The Equator doctoral training working group developed recommendations to remove barriers to ethnic minority students applying for and being accepted on to PhD programs. These transferable and practical suggestions are designed to be implemented by academics and professional service staff working in doctoral training recruitment, and are broken down into student-facing, procedural and interview/evaluation categories. Themes covered include pre-application support, data collection and reporting, website materials, and standardisation of recruitment materials.Evaluation of the Equator Research School and Mentoring Network led to the development of recommendations for successful interventions to improve participation and retention in research. Participants in the Equator Research School and Mentoring Network provided very positive feedback both during and following the interventions. The majority of those involved felt a stronger sense of belonging and inclusion in GEES research and were more likely to consider a research career after participating. The evaluation process showed unequivocally that the ring-fenced, discipline-specific, fully-funded nature of the interventions was a critical factor in participants applying to be involved. 1Dowey et al. 2021 Nature Geoscience https://doi.org/10.1038/s41561-021-00737-w2Dowey et al. 2022 The Equator Project https://doi.org/10.31223/X5793T

Meeting the targets of the 17 United Nations (UN) Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) requires contributions from geoscientists. Like most countries, Kenya is faced with the triple dimensional challenge of balancing economic, social and environmental sustainability. Through implementation of its ‘Vision 2030’ strategy, Kenya aims to transform into a high-functioning, industrialised middle-income country, providing a high quality of life to all its citizens by 2030. The country’s constitution harmonises with Vision 2030 and entitles every Kenyan to a clean and secure environment. This background provides an integrated roadmap entrenched in the SDGs. Kenya has also committed to implementing the African Union Agenda 2063 and the East African Community (EAC) Vision 2050, both aiming to build a more prosperous Africa. Eradicating extreme poverty, waste management, disaster preparedness, ensuring affordable, clean and sustainable energy, improving access to clean water, promoting sustainable consumption and production, environmental sustainability, building resilience to climate change impacts and managing Kenya's natural resources are some of the key elements of these policies. Here, we highlight the importance of geoscience education in accelerating the critical goals of Kenya’s Vision 2030 and the SDGs. We synthesise key policy documents to explore sustainable development priorities at the national and county level in the context of geoscience in Kenya and explore the relevant geoscience training and skills needed to help address these priorities. We demonstrate that geoscience will continue to be instrumental for achievement of the SDGs and overall performance on socio-economic development in Kenya. Baseline assessments of the geoscience courses available, including training and description of modules offered in Kenya's higher institutions, were compiled and analysed. The extent of the existing geoscience workforce and future workforce required to deliver on Kenya's Vision 2030 and the SDGs was identified through online surveys, focus group discussions, and interviews. We mapped the future needs against the training available and existing current workforce capacity to conduct a skills gap analysis. We identify a number of needs, including (1) to embed sustainability concepts into geoscience curriculum; (2) to expand provision of specialist postgraduate courses (e.g. MSc); (3) to strengthen access to field-based training in both undergraduate and postgraduate degrees; (4) to increase the number of trained geoscientists; (5) improved communication between geoscientists and policymakers. We conclude with a roadmap to address these gaps, embedding good practice from the UN Technology Facilitation Mechanism, and include transferable insights for other national settings.

At the height of colonial Europe, during the late 18th century, many of the principles, theories, laws and practices that shape the (Western) academic discipline of Earth Science were established. However, during this imperial production of knowledge, there was little reference to or acknowledgement of any pre-existing geological knowledge. The legacy of colonialism is perpetuated through many modern Earth Science practices and education activities, and the influence of this legacy adds to the perception of Earth Science as a white, western-dominated subject and the erasure and dismissal of other geological knowledge. This project explores the unacknowledged local geological knowledge and labour upon which the foundational institutions of Earth Science are built and how this legacy creates modern-day exploitation, unethical behaviour and inequity in our discipline. We uncover some of the hidden histories of colonial mineral exploitation, including the role of British geologists and geological institutions in expanding colonial rule in Africa and how local geological knowledge and local guides underpinned the activities of the colonial geological surveys. British mineral exploitation in Africa started in the seventeenth century with a series of expeditions by pioneer British geologists and prospectors into South Africa's interior to make preliminary observations and geological surveys for minerals. More expeditions to other parts of Africa followed in the eighteenth century. During the late eighteenth century, many of the principles, theories, laws and practices that shaped the academic discipline of Earth Science were established in parallel to colonial expansion. The British Empire sustained a programme of exploratory geological surveys and activities directly linked with mapping the geological features to locate and discover economic mineral resources to fuel the British economy and industrialise the British Empire. Exploitable deposits of coal, copper, iron and limestone's essential smelting flux were vital for the long-term development of steamship lines, railways, and industry. At the end of the First World War, the British government promoted and intensified geological surveys in several British Empire territories – Uganda, Sierra Leone and Nigeria in 1918, Tanzania in 1925 and Kenya in 1933. Some pioneer British geologists were heralded for their pioneering work and credited with the discovery of economically significant minerals in Africa. Our archival investigation reveals many of these mineral resources were already used and mined locally and that local knowledge underpinned these resource 'discoveries' and local people were used as field assistants, guides, carriers, labourers, and camp guides. These pioneer geologists relied on the colonial structure to obtain information from natives central to fieldwork, mineral investigation, and discoveries. Still, history has omitted the contributions of the natives involved in these mineral discoveries and the acknowledgement of any local geological knowledge. Perhaps it is time to change the narrative from one of discovery to one of exploitation. As a discipline, by reckoning with the colonial legacy of our past, we can seek to normalise working with local knowledge and knowledge outside the boundaries of (western) Earth Science, leading to ethical, equitable, interdisciplinary work, better preparing the discipline for current global challenges.

In the last few decades, Geology courses, particularly in the Global North have seen a decline in student enrolment. Geologists have linked this downturn to a lack of exposure to the subject at school and college level. This work seeks to understand the public’s relationship with Geology and draws on over 5000 open-ended question responses to a survey disseminated in 2021. The survey asked both those who had, and had not, studied geology as a subject a series of questions in order to explore their perceptions of the discipline. Our findings indicate that individuals ‘outside’ of geology see the subject as old fashioned, boring, and environmentally damaging; simply the study of rock samples with nothing new to be discovered from; and with poor job prospects outside of the oil and gas industry. Geologists who responded to the survey paint a picture of a broad, interdisciplinary subject, with vibrant employability opportunities – yet struggle to coherently and collectively describe this when asked, ‘what is geology?’. In addition to the identified perception of geology as boring, and notions of poor employability being a barrier to prospective students, diversity and inclusivity issues are highlighted as significant barriers by those who study geology. Our findings indicate that both geologists and the geology curriculum need to coherently describe what geology is more effectively. We need to develop and better communicate the subject's interdisciplinary nature and links to critical societal issues, such as the role of responsible mineral extraction in the energy transition and the importance of geology in vital areas such as climate change science, water resource management, environmental conservation, and sustainable urban/built development. Finding new ways to show that, far from being boring, geology is a subject that can fundamentally change the way you see and interact with the world around you is of central importance to achieving this. Efforts to make the subject more equitable are also highlighted as being critical in creating a more inclusive and accessible discipline.

Doctoral study is a crucial part of the academic pipeline, but discriminatory admissions procedures disproportionately impact students from ethnic minority backgrounds. We examine how doctoral recruitment policies contribute to inequity in the geosciences and propose improvements for change.

Geography, Earth and Environmental Science (GEES) research will play a vital role in addressing the grand challenges of the 21st century, contributing to many of the UN sustainable development goals and the global energy transition. However, geoscience knowledge cannot be successfully applied to global problems that impact people from all walks of life unless the discipline itself is equitable. There is a well-documented racial and ethnic diversity crisis in GEES subjects in the Global North1 that leads to inequities in who does environmental research. The Equator project set out to increase participation and retention of UK-domiciled Black, Asian and minority ethnic postgraduate research (PGR) students in GEES topics. Our goal was to improve equity and diversity in a research area critical to a more sustainable future; not because of a business case, or for diversity as resource- but for social justice.Equator was a six-month project, funded by the Natural Environment Research Council (NERC), that developed three evidence-based interventions targeting different barriers to racial and ethnic diversity in GEES research. To remove barriers to access, a doctoral training working group was formed to share best practice and develop recommendations to make PhD recruitment more equitable. To improve access and participation, a ring-fenced research school for ethnic minority undergraduate, masters and doctoral students was delivered. To increase retention and improve student experience, a targeted mentoring network pairing students with mentors from both industry and academia was created.Evaluation of interventions took the form of action research with a Theory of Change approach, with surveys used to capture thoughts and reflections in each of the three work packages. This occurred alongside collaborative, self-reflective inquiry within the project team and steering committee. The steering committee included grassroots organisations, higher education institutions, professional bodies and an equity, diversity and inclusion (EDI) consultant.The Equator doctoral training working group developed recommendations to remove barriers to ethnic minority students applying for and being accepted onto PhD programs. The practical suggestions are designed to be implemented by academics and professional service staff working in doctoral training recruitment, and are broken down into student-facing, procedural and interview/evaluation categories. Themes covered include pre-application support, data collection and reporting, website materials, and standardisation of application and interview materials. The Equator Research School and Mentoring Network led to development of a “how to” guide of recommendations for creating successful interventions for improving participation and retention in research. Participants in the Equator Research School and Mentoring Network provided very positive feedback both during and following the interventions. The majority of those involved felt a stronger sense of belonging and inclusion in GEES research and were more likely to consider a research career after taking part. The evaluation process showed unequivocally that the ring-fenced, discipline-specific, fully-funded nature of the interventions was a critical factor in participants applying to be involved. Equator project recommendations are provided as a graphic guide for educators and university leaders at the end of this report (Appendix 1, to be added Autumn 2022).

Methods and imagery.

Geoscientists will play key roles in the grand challenges of the twenty-first century, but this requires our field to address its past when it comes to diversity and inclusion. Considering the bleak picture of racial diversity in the UK, we put forward steps institutions can take to break down barriers and make the geosciences equitable.

During the early stages of exploration, uncertainties regarding the nature and presence of a petroleum system are significant. The potential risk on charge conditions is typically a key factor in frontier exploration; charge has been a common cause of wildcat well failure in recent years (e.g., Rabat Deep, Morocco and Maria-1, Black Sea). The ability to assess charge risk when even basic geological conditions are poorly understood is therefore a crucial first step in increasing exploration success. Basin modelling is an essential tool for evaluating and quantifying charge timing, phase and volume, and allows the impact of uncertainty to be investigated through sensitivity analysis. However, during the early stages of frontier exploration, there is typically little data available to unequivocally constrain stratigraphic predictions and thermal conditions in subsurface models. This article describes how regional geological and tectonic context provides a fundamental and primary framework for developing predictions and understanding critical factors on charge risk in frontier basin models. The work addresses three key challenges: First, how can we predict input parameters to build basin models in areas of little data? Second, how can we assess uncertainty on inputs and identify critical factors? Third, how can we test critical factors to better understand exploration charge risk and uncertainty? The workflow presented here demonstrates the use of aregional geological and tectonic framework to identify appropriate analogues, constrain lithostratigraphy and thermal boundary conditions, assess input uncertainty, and finally to test plausible scenarios to evaluate charge risk (Figure 1). The work discusses best practices using case studies and illustrates that, even where uncertainty is high, basin modelling can be used to quantify a plausible range of outcomes to help make meaningful predictions.

Fieldwork is a defining aspect of Physical Geography, Earth and Environmental Science (GEES) programme curricula. At its best, fieldwork offers students valuable opportunities to develop independent research skills in real-world situations, examine analogues for a range of scientific concepts, and socialise with peers. It offers experiences that are challenging to replicate using virtual/remote learning. However, at its worst, traditional fieldwork practice and culture can present barriers to access and hostile environments that epitomise the broader equity, diversity, and inclusivity problems faced by GEES disciplines. With the role of fieldwork increasingly being called into question, here we promote simple adaptations that can make fieldwork more accessible and enjoyable for all.

During a volcanic crisis, effective communication between volcano observatories, local government, civil defence authorities, the media and the public is crucial in ensuring the safe management of the situation. A breakdown in this chain of communication may lead to unsafe behaviours, mistrust of authorities, economic impacts, anxiety, or at worst, fatalities (see Williams and Krippner, 2019). Over the past 100 years, various stakeholders have made progress in volcanic crisis communication, but the 21st century presents significant challenges (Fearnley et al. 2017). The world in which we communicate has changed rapidly in recent years; information from official bodies can be posted, shared, translated, re-interpreted and disseminated rapidly via online news outlets and social media. Widespread use of the internet means crises communications must now be fast paced and sustained, pushing the limits of those working in internal communication (Driedger et al., 2008). The modern drive of journalism to create different angles and interesting ‘stories’ can lead to conflicting comments from multiple sources, which could cause public doubt about how well a hazard is being monitored and managed (McGuire et al, 2009). This project aims to better understand how the ‘translation’ of press releases by the mainstream media impacts the behaviours and perceptions of the local and global community during a volcanic crisis. To achieve this aim, the project will focus on two research questions:1. How is the language used in volcanic crisis press releases variably ‘translated’ into mainstream media?2. How is this language viewed and interpreted by the general public, and what impact does it have on perceptions of volcanic hazards, risk and uncertainty?This project will use two methodologies. Firstly, press releases and their associated media be analysed to assess how information becomes translated and adapted. The communication of volcanic crisis information will be categorised and compared across different countries, languages, types of volcanism, and types of media, using recent case studies (e.g. Hawaii 2018 and Agung 2017). The second stage will investigate the impact of the translation/adaption of press releases by various media channels on public perceptions. Two focus groups will be carried out to provide a comparison; one group will read materials from the original press release and the other from social media/news articles. Both groups will then answer the same set of questions, allowing for critical comparison. This research will develop understanding of the power of modern communication to influence the public during volcanic crises. It will provide insights into how press releases are translated, with the potential to provide important learnings for the organisations that create and distribute them.References Bird et al. (2012) Australian Journal of Emergency Management. (1) Driedger et al. (2008) USGS Professional Paper 1750. Fearnley et al. (2017) https://doi.org/10.1007/11157_2017_28 McGuire et al. (2009) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvolgeores.2009.02.019 Williams and Krippner (2019) https://doi.org/10.30909/vol.01.02.i-viii

Pyroclastic density currents (PDCs) are hot, density-driven flows of gas, rock and ash generated during explosive volcanic eruptions, or from the collapse of lava domes (e.g. Fisher, 1979; Branney and Kokelaar, 2002; Cas et al. 2011). They pose a catastrophic geological hazard and have caused >90 000 deaths since 1600AD (Auker et al. 2013). Improved understanding of PDCs will enable us to better understand the explosive eruptions that generate them, improving our preparedness for future volcanic events. However, these deadly hazards are rarely observed up close and are difficult to analyse in real-time. To understand the flow dynamics of density currents we must use models and interpretations of their deposits (e.g. Smith N and Kokelaar, 2013; Rowley et al. 2014, Williams et al. 2014, Sulpizio et al. 2014; Lube et al. 2019, Smith G 2018, 2020).The deposits of pyroclastic density currents, known as ‘ignimbrites’ can reveal important clues about how these deadly volcanic hazards behave in time and space Reverse grading in an ignimbrite can be interpreted in different ways (Branney & Kokelaar, 2002). It could record a growing eruption intensity through time - where increasingly larger clasts are introduced into the pyroclastic density current. Alternatively, it could record Kinematic sorting (the ‘muesli effect’) and transport processes within the current where larger particles became increasingly likely to be deposited as the current wanes (Palladino & Valentine,1995). The link between current dynamics and reverse grading is currently untested in aerated granular currents.This project seeks to investigate the relationship between current dynamics and deposit architecture, specifically by considering granular sorting mechanisms in unidirectional flow. We will use an analogue flume (following methods in Rowley et. al., 2014, and Smith G et al., 2018, 2020) to explore how reverse grading and lateral grading may be related to changes in grain sizes at source versus kinematic sorting processes. A mix of grain sizes will be incorporated into the current via a hopper which allows for the starting composition of the current to be varied e.g. homogenous mix versus layered. Photographs of the deposit will be taken through the transparent sidewall of the flume and analysed using image analysis software. These experiments will be complimented by static tests of kinematic sorting, where a Perspex column will be sliced to reveal internal 3d architecture. This project will contribute to our understanding of lithofacies architecture in the field, and help to quantity how we interpret the sedimentation of ignimbrites.ReferencesAuker et al. (2013) https://doi.org/10.1186/2191-5040-2-2Branney and Kokelaar (2002) https://doi.org/10.1144/GSL.MEM.2003.027Cas et al. (2011) Bulletin of Volcanology 731583 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00445-011-0564-yFisher (1979) https://doi.org/10.1016/0377- 0273(79)90008-8 Lube et al. (2019) https://doi.org/10.1038/s41561-019-0338-2Palladino & Valentine (1995). https://doi.org/10.1016/0377-0273(95)00036-4Rowley et al. (2014) https://doi.org/10.1007/s00445-014-0855-1Smith N. and Kokelaar (2013) https://doi.org/10.1007/s00445-013-0768-4Smith G. et al. (2018) https://doi.org/10.1007/s00445-018-1241-1Smith, G. et al. (2020). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-020-16657-z

The roots of modern geoscience lie in early colonial principles that land could belong to those willing to use its products, regardless of indigenous territories and practices. The production of geoscience knowledge has therefore been historically tied to a desire to explain the distribution and extractability of resources, largely for the benefit of the colonising force. This knowledge now has an essential role to play in equitable and sustainable development, but it cannot be successfully applied without diverse representation amongst geoscientists. However, Geoscience in the Global North is disproportionately white. Following on from the work of Bernard and Cooperdock in the USA, we highlight dismal representation data from Geography, Earth and Environmental Science (GEES) disciplines in UK HE and make recommendations for positive action based on evidenced effective practice.Geography, Earth and Environmental Sciences are the three worst Physical Science subjects for Black, Asian and Minority Ethnic student undergraduate participation in UK HE, and are very poor for retention of these students into postgraduate research (PGR). Physical Geography had just 5.2% PGR students who identified as Black, Asian, Mixed or Other (HESA data categories) in 2018/19. On average, over the past 5 years just 1.4% of postgraduate Geology PGR students were Black (HESA, 2020). By comparison, in the 2011 Census, 18.5% of UK 18-24 year olds were from Black, Asian or Minority Ethnic backgrounds, and 3.8% were Black. In two years out of the last five, no Black women have started PGR study in Geology or Physical Geography. Retention of Black, Asian and Minority Ethnic Physical Geography and Environmental Science students into PGR was worse in 2018/2019 than over the five years from 2014 to 2019; the situation is not improving with time (HESA, 2020)We summarise well-documented factors involved in inequity in research training across UK HE, and review subject-specific structural and cultural barriers to ethnic diversityin GEES subjects. These include early pipeline issues around access to nature, a scarcity of diverse role models, careers perceptions, and a lack of acknowledgement that the geosciences are deeply rooted in colonialism and white power.Our recommendations are wide-reaching, and build upon effective practice elsewhere. We take a whole-pipeline approach, making proposals that include both advocacy to remove barriers to entry (for example by combatting structural bias in application processes and accreditation requirements), and action to broaden participation (for example, by creating paid ambassador and internship schemes, and through decolonisation and inclusive pedagogic redesign).We must acknowledge the hostile environments that deter ethnic minority students from applying to, and continuing with, our discipline. We must address bias and be actively anti-racist. We must act now, to create a modern geoscience research culture that reflects the diverse nature of the planet we study.