The Government of Canada, defines GBA+ 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. The “plus” in GBA+ acknowledges that GBA+ is not just about differences between biological (sexes) and socio-cultural (genders). We all have multiple characteristics that intersect and contribute to who we are. GBA+ considers many other identity factors such as race, ethnicity, religion, age, and mental or physical disability, and how the interaction between these factors influences the way we might experience government policies and initiatives.”
At the Live Work Well Research Centre, we use the term intersectional to capture the “plus” in GBA+. The term comes from critical black feminist scholarship and considers how systems of power and peoples’ diverse identities interact to create experiences of privilege and exclusion. Intersectional scholarship interrogates inequality, relationality, power, social context, complexity and social justice (Collins & Bilge, 2016).
The links below provide guidance for gender-based analysis (GBA), applying a feminist and intersectional lens of resource extraction in resource-based communities.
1. Gendered & Intersectional Implications of Energy & Resource Extraction in Resource-Based Communities
2. (a) Strengthening Impact Assessments for Indigenous Women
(b) Impacts of Resource Extraction for Indigenous Women
3. More Promise than Practice: GBA+, Intersectionality and Impact Assessment
Other publications
Levac, L., J. Stinson, S.M. Manning and D. Stienstra. “Expanding evidence and expertise in impact assessment: Informing Canadian public policy with the knowledge of invisible communities” Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal. (in press 2021).
Stienstra, D., S. Manning, L. Levac and G. Baikie. “Generating Prosperity, Creating Crisis: Impacts of Resource Development on Diverse Groups in Northern Communities” Community Development Journal, 54, 2 (April 2019): 215-232, doi:10.1093/cdj/bsx022.