The popular adage, “What gets measured, gets done,” holds particular relevance when it comes to quantifying the impacts of Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion (EDI). Since the biases that perpetuate inequality are largely unconscious and automatic, they can be difficult to quantify. Therefore, it is essential to establish rigorous metrics to assess and understand the current state of diversity and inclusion, identify disparities, and facilitate driving change in the right direction. In this review, we will examine various representation statistics crucial for quantifying current trends of EDI in academia and the Geosciences. While we recognize that very little in the EDI space is 'averageable' or 'generalizable,' we will endeavour to understand how data in the EDI space can be quantified through averageable statistics, qualified in more specialized language, or described in generalized terms. In addition, we’ll review current policies into actions that may provide positive EDI impact, as well as identify actions that may only serve one community (‘mono-categorical’), not have the intended impact (‘weak’), or simply not effective across the EDI space (‘performative’).