Intersectionality and Public Policy: Some Lessons from Existing Models

• DOI: 10.1177/1065912910376385
• Author: Renee Cormier,Olena Hankivsky
• Published date: 01 March 2011
• Date: 01 March 2011
• Subject Matter: Mini-Symposium

Political Research Quarterly

64(1) 217 –229

© 2011 University of Utah

Reprints and permission:

sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav

DOI: 10.1177/1065912910376385

http://prq.sagepub.com

Intersectionality and Public Policy:

Some Lessons from Existing Models

Olena Hankivsky1 and Renee Cormier1

Abstract

In comparison to research practices, intersectionality is an underdeveloped concept within policy discourse and

application. Because of the complexity and relative newness of this approach, policy analysis grounded within an

intersectionality framework remains largely undertheorized, and methods for integrating intersectionality into policy

processes are in the nascent stages. This article (1) defines intersectionality and demonstrates the need for this

approach in public policy, (2) outlines challenges in applying intersectionality to policy making, and (3) describes and

evaluates three innovative approaches to applying intersectionality to policy development and analysis.

Keywords

intersectionality, public policy, inequities, inequalities, multistrand approach

As is now well established, intersectionality has become

a primary analytic tool for theorizing identity and oppres-

sion (Nash 2008). Despite ongoing methodological chal-

lenges, this perspective is recognized as an important

research paradigm (Hancock 2007), and increasingly the

theoretical framework of intersectionality is being applied

to research practices across a variety of disciplines. In

comparison, less attention has been paid to applying inter-

sectionality to public policy (Bishwakarma, Hunt, and

Zajicek 2007; Manuel 2006; Patel 2001; Wilkinson 2003).

Because of the complexity and relative newness of this

approach, “the development of an intersectionality policy

analysis is still undertheorized” (Urbanek 2009, 3), and

methods for integrating intersectionality into policy

development, implementation, and evaluation are in their

very early stages of development.

The purpose of this article is to (1) define intersec-

tionality and demonstrate the need for an intersectional-

ity approach in public policy, (2) outline the challenges in

applying an intersectionality approach to policy making,

and (3) describe and evaluate three innovative approaches

to applying intersectionality to policy development and

analysis. The article fills an important void for policy

scholars and decision makers who have recognized the

importance of an intersectionality perspective but who are

grappling with fully understanding its transformational

promise and are seeking more concrete methods of incor-

porating this critical approach into policy development,

implementation, and evaluation. This discussion there-

fore provides a foundation and illustrative examples for

ongoing dialogue and future work for those who seek to

bring an effective interpretive framework of intersection-

ality to policy analysis across a variety of sectors.

The Public Policy Promises (and

Challenges) of Intersectionality

The goal of intersectionality policy analysis is to iden-

tify and address “the way specific acts and policies

address the inequalities experienced by various social

groups” (Bishwakarma, Hunt, and Zajicek 2007, 9), taking

into account that social identities such as race, class, gen-

der, ability, geography, and age interact to form unique

meanings and complex experiences within and between

groups in society. These are further affected by multiple

systems of power and oppression that Collins (1990)

refers to as “the matrix of domination” and that change

over time and place and in different institutional domains.

The need to focus on numerous differences and complex

realities using a multilevel analysis to uncover exclusions

and vulnerabilities can be considered both a strength and

1Simon Fraser University Vancouver–Harbour Centre Campus,

Vancouver, Canada

Corresponding Author:

Olena Hankivsky, Simon Fraser University Vancouver–Harbour

Centre Campus, 515 West Hastings Street, Suite 3271,

Vancouver, V6B 5K3, Canada

Email: oah@sfu.ca