In the realm of higher education, the imperative of advancing Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) cannot be overstated. Universities serve as crucial engines for progress, offering both knowledge and innovative solutions while equipping generations to navigate the complexities of the future. Integral to this mission is the integration of equity, diversity, and inclusion (EDI) across all facets of university life—teaching, research, service, and leadership. In today’s diverse and globally interconnected society, institutions that meaningfully embed EDI principles stand to enhance their impact on pressing social, economic, and environmental challenges.
Throughout the past two decades, the landscape of Canadian public universities has witnessed the tenure of senior equity leaders who have spearheaded initiatives aimed at fostering EDI. However, despite efforts, two key concerns persist: ensuring these leaders possess the requisite authority to effectuate change and transitioning away from a reactive “diversity crisis mode” of planning towards a proactive approach.
The pace and impact of progress in EDI initiatives within universities have faced scrutiny. While legislative interventions, such as the 2016 Canadian Human Rights Settlement Agreement and subsequent addenda, have catalyzed advancements in equitable faculty hiring—particularly within programs like the Canada Research Chair program—they often focus on compliance rather than fostering cultural and systemic shifts necessary for eliminating biases and barriers.
The cyclical nature of diversity planning, often triggered by incidents of hate-motivated violence or other watershed events, perpetuates a reactive approach. Moments like the global outcry against anti-Black racism following the killing of George Floyd in 2020 or local incidents on campuses prompt hastily developed institutional responses, often symbolic in nature. These reactive measures, though well-intentioned, often lack sustainability and fail to address underlying systemic issues, leading to disillusionment within campus communities.
Recognizing the need for a more proactive stance, a framework outlined in “Building a Race-Conscious Institution: A Guide for University Leaders Enacting Anti-Racist Educational Change” emphasizes the importance of empowering senior equity leaders with specialized knowledge and authority. The guide underscores the significance of these leaders’ span of control to foster a culture of accountability and ownership across the university.
Recent surveys conducted by Universities Canada reveal a growing trend in the establishment of senior equity roles within Canadian universities. While diverse organizational models exist, the portfolio divisional model emerges as the most robust, offering greater authority, resources, and opportunities for collaboration with other administrative units. The proliferation of these roles, including cabinet-level positions, underscores a promising shift towards granting senior equity leaders increased influence and oversight.
Moving forward, it is imperative that senior equity leaders are positioned strategically within university hierarchies, reporting to both provosts and presidents to ensure their influence spans across academic and administrative domains. Moreover, a departure from crisis-driven planning towards mission-driven EDI initiatives is essential for sustained progress.
In conclusion, universities must invest in dedicated senior equity leaders and provide them with the resources and authority necessary to drive meaningful change. By adopting a proactive approach rooted in EDI principles, institutions can foster inclusive environments conducive to achieving broader societal goals of sustainability and social justice.
