Equity, Diversity and Inclusion
Our Commitment to Equity, Diversity and Inclusion at Research & Innovation Advancement
Research & Innovation Advancement values inclusive discovery in the pursuit of health equity for women, transgender and gender diverse people, children and families. We believe in research excellence through the meaningful inclusion of diverse perspectives and lived experiences at every stage of the research process.
We are committed to promoting equity, diversity and inclusion in research at IWK Health through our grant-making policies and by providing IWK researchers with the tools to systematically assess and remove barriers in their research environment and to consider equity, diversity and inclusion in research design.
IWK Health's position statement on EDI care can be accessed online at: IWK Health Centre - IWK Position Statement on Diversity, Inclusion and Culturally Competent Care (nshealth.ca)
EDI in Research Practice
What is Equity, Diversity and Inclusion?
From CIHR:
Equity is defined as the removal of systemic barriers and biases enabling all individuals to have equal opportunity to access and benefit from the program.
Diversity is defined as differences in race, colour, place of origin, religion, immigrant and newcomer status, ethnic origin, ability, sexual orientation, gender identity gender expression and age.
Inclusion is defined as the practice of ensuring that all individuals are valued and respected for their contributions and are equally supported.
Accessibility is the process of identifying and removing barriers to social participation.
The Accessible Canada Act defines a barrier as:
"anything — including anything physical, architectural, technological or attitudinal, anything that is based on information or communications or anything that is the result of a policy or a practice — that hinders the full and equal participation in society of persons with an impairment, including a physical, mental, intellectual, cognitive, learning, communication or sensory impairment or a functional limitation."
Accessed online at:
Steps in the EDI process
1. Identify inequities in your field of research
Consider current participation disparities in research in your field. Identify groups who are impacted, and common barriers that impede participation in the research enterprise. Describe these inequities using both statistics and qualitative evidence.
2. Identify systemic barriers* to participation in your own research environment.
Team Composition
Consider what diversity means in the context of your field. Consider the current diversity of your team, of the broader institution. Is the environment accessible? Is it welcoming and supportive to underrepresented groups?
Recruitment
To identify current barriers and opportunities to improve your own recruitment strategy, consider whether or not you have incorporated EDI into the recruitment process, the language used to advertise positions, metrics of success, the diversity of your own research team and the broader institutional environment.
Trainee Program
Consider whether there are barriers to participation in training and social and professional development opportunities in your trainee program. Is the program accessible to people with financial constraints, time constraints, personal responsibilities, health considerations and diverse identities?
Lab and Research Environment
Consider how accommodations to address disability, care giving and other cultural needs are assessed and provided. Are there currently policies in place that address inclusive language, EDI training, and ensure the safety of the entire team?
3. Describe concrete actions to remove barriers to participation in the research environment. (Resource pages are available for specific considerations in links at the bottom of this page)
Actions that address common barriers include: offering flexible work and training arrangements, providing a mechanism to elicit feedback from employees and trainees, directly asking employees and trainees what accommodations they require, providing and engaging in EDI training, and identifying unconscious biases and implementing policies to combat them.
*CIHR defines systemic barriers as:
"attitudes, policies practices or systems that result in individuals from certain population groups receiving unequal access to or being excluded from participation in employment, services or programs. These barriers are systemic nature, meaning they result from indivirual, societal or institutional practices, policies, traditions and/or values that may be 'unintended' or 'unsseen' to those who do not experience them."
Accessed online at: https://www.sshrc-crsh.gc.ca/funding-financement/nfrf-fnfr/edi-eng.aspx#5
EDI in Research Design
Why is EDI considered in Health Research?
Wider social forces shape individual health outcomes. The World Health Organization defines the social determinants of health as:
“the conditions in which people are born, grow, work, live, and age, and the wider set of forces and systems shaping the conditions of daily life. These forces and systems include economic policies and systems, development agendas, social norms, social policies and political systems.”
In the Canadian context, economic inequality, colonialism and hetero-normativity are few examples of ongoing social determinants of health. Social determinants of health operate through multiple pathways including access to material resources, exposure to stressors, and access to healthcare.
Which categories of difference and resource inequalities should I consider in my research design?
Questions to Consider
Do current disparities exclude groups of people from healthcare access in your field of research?
Are there disparities in healthcare outcomes that affect some groups more than others in your field of research?
Are there important intersections across group memberships and/or access to resources that reinforce each other to affect access to care, or healthcare outcomes in your field of research?
Where can I incorporate these considerations?
Resource pages are available for specific considerations in links at the bottom of this page.
Literature Review
Are there inequities across populations that warrant consideration?
Measurement
Will data be collected at a level of detail sufficient to conduct informative sub-group analyses to ascertain whether causal mechanisms differ by group?
Data Collection
Have all stakeholders who will be affected by this research been consulted?
Is the inclusion criteria clearly defined and described, and are all relevant groups eligible to participate?
Have common barriers to participation among sub-groups been removed?
Have consent forms and data collection instruments been designed with accessible and respectful language?
Analysis
Have analyses been conducted at the sub-group level?
Have important intersections been examined?
Reporting
Do the disseminated materials challenge, or reinforce stereotypes?
Have relevant stakeholders been consulted about the likely effects the research may have on their communities?
Intersectionality
Intersectionality is a term coined by Kimberle Crenshaw in 1990. It provides a lens to understand the structure of power in society. The approach recognizes that there are many different sources of power and oppression, and that they can intersect in ways that reinforce, or contradict each other. Patricia Hill Collins termed this structure the 'matrix of domination'. Every person stands at the intersection of multiple sources of power and oppression and their experiences are derived from that location.
The approach emphasizes the limitations of traditional approaches to inequality that focus on a single dimension, like gender, race or class.
Where does my research fit?
Why intersectionality in research?
An intersectional approach recognizes that the experience of patriarchy, racism and limited resources accumulate into a qualitatively different experience than the experience of any one alone. The experience of patriarchy is experienced differently by women with fewer resources, and women who are not also experiencing racism. It is necessary to consider the intersection of all relevant distinctions to understand how another person experiences the world, the resources they can access and the barriers they face to conduct inclusive, participatory and meaningful research.
How to take an intersectional approach in research design?
Gender Based Analysis +
The Government of Canada defines GBA Plus as:
"an analytical process that provides a rigorous method for the assessment of systemic inequalities, as well as a means to assess how diverse groups of women, men, and gender diverse people may experience policies, programs and initiatives."
Steps in conducting GBA+
From Module 3 - What is Gender-based Analysis Plus (GBA Plus)? offered as part of the Introduction to GBA Plus training modules developed by the Government of Canada.
Identify connections
Between your research and broader social, economic, cultural, and political environment.
2. Challenge assumptions
By becoming aware of implicit biases, informal processes and the internal division of labour within your research team.
Embrace complexity and reject simplistic, binary categories
3. Research & Consult
Conduct research and consult stakeholders, including people with lived experiences to identify barriers and provide supports.
4. Develop the strategy
Use the recommendations from consultations to use appropriate language, remove barriers to participation.
5. Monitor & Evaluate
Design the evaluation framework with EDI goals in mind. Consider and record the impacts of your research on all groups.
6. Communicate & Document
Use appropriate language
Do not reproduce stereotypes
Share results with all stakeholders
Resource pages
Best practices in EDI and to conduct GBA plus for significant categories of difference in the Canadian context
