When an agriculture organization does not prioritize intersectionality, it often lacks a holistic and inclusive approach to addressing the needs of its diverse workforce, stakeholders, and communities. Here are some signs and consequences of such an environment:
- Narrow DEI focus: The organization may focus on a single aspect of diversity, like gender or race, without acknowledging how multiple identities (e.g., race, gender, socioeconomic status, sexuality, disability) intersect and create unique challenges. Efforts toward diversity may be surface-level or symbolic without addressing the deeper systemic barriers that affect people with overlapping marginalized identities.
- Lack of diverse representation in leadership: Leadership and decision-making positions may lack representation from diverse groups, particularly those at the intersections of multiple marginalized identities. This can result in policies and programs that fail to address the complexities of lived experiences across the workforce.
- One-size-fits-all solutions: Programs and initiatives may be designed with the assumption that the experiences of one marginalized group are the same for all. For example, women of color or LGBTQ+ individuals may face unique barriers that aren’t addressed by gender-only or race-only diversity efforts.
- Tokenism and stereotyping: Individuals from underrepresented groups may be included in only superficial ways without meaningful inclusion in decision-making or leadership roles. There may be a reliance on stereotypes about certain groups, leading to a failure to appreciate the diversity within those groups.
- Limited support for underrepresented groups: Employee resource groups or support systems may be fragmented, catering only to single aspects of identity without providing spaces for those who embody multiple intersecting identities. Intersectional experiences, such as being a Black woman or a disabled veteran, might be ignored or misunderstood.
- Inequitable opportunities: Career advancement, mentorship, and sponsorship opportunities may be more accessible to individuals who fit a dominant, singular identity model, leaving those with intersectional identities behind. Pay gaps and disparities in professional development may go unchecked, particularly for those who face compounded discrimination.
- Missed perspectives on issues: Agricultural organizations that fail to prioritize intersectionality may overlook the unique challenges faced by marginalized communities in rural and agricultural settings. Issues like land access, climate change impacts, and food security may be viewed through a narrow lens, ignoring how they disproportionately affect Indigenous populations, women, migrant workers, and low-income communities.
- Employee turnover and dissatisfaction: Without attention to intersectionality, employees from diverse backgrounds may feel unsupported, undervalued, or invisible, leading to higher turnover rates, dissatisfaction, and lower engagement. Mentorship and professional development opportunities may not meet the needs of individuals from intersectional backgrounds, further exacerbating retention issues.
- Gaps in community engagement: Agricultural organizations may struggle to build trust and engagement with diverse communities, particularly those who have historically been marginalized in rural and farming sectors. Outreach programs might not resonate with communities at the intersections of race, gender, and socioeconomic status, thus limiting the organization’s impact.
Overall, an agriculture organization that doesn’t prioritize intersectionality risks reinforcing existing inequalities and failing to create an inclusive, equitable environment where all individuals — especially those with multiple marginalized identities — can thrive. This lack of focus on intersectionality can diminish the organization’s effectiveness, innovation, and relevance in an increasingly diverse and global industry.