Different strands of science studies, including scientometrics and sociology of science, have produced a large body of works focused on specific dimensions of inequality manifesting at macro-, meso- and micro-levels of academia. However, the persistent divide between these works prevents a more holistic understanding of how social inequalities in a given field are interlinked and shape the knowledge it generates. Our multi-method study on inequality and its epistemic effects in forest research addresses this gap. Drawing on Bourdieusian sociology of science as a meta-theoretical frame, our project links bibliometrics, ethnography and content analysis to examine how gender- and geography-related inequalities affect scientific practices, the distribution of capital and knowledge outcomes in the field. In the first part of our presentation, we explain how we operationalise Bourdieusian theory for empirical study, and present selected bibliometric analyses of global forest science, and selected findings from a comparative database representation study and comparative content analysis focused on Tanzanian forest science. In the second part, we move from the macro- to the micro-level, sharing qualitative insights from the ethnographic research carried out in the context of our multi-method project. We specifically zoom into African-European research projects on forests and show how and why inequalities are reproduced in international collaborations, regardless of formal project constellations and contrary to individual intentions. The analysis highlights collaboration habitus as a concept explaining discrepancies between desired forms of collaboration and actual collaboration practice.