{"id":39,"date":"2026-10-05T12:56:58","date_gmt":"2026-10-05T16:56:58","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/pressbooks.library.torontomu.ca\/rethinkingfoodsecurity\/chapter\/rethinking-studies-on-gender-and-food-security-in-the-21st-century\/"},"modified":"2026-10-05T13:04:08","modified_gmt":"2026-10-05T17:04:08","slug":"rethinking-studies-on-gender-and-food-security-in-the-21st-century","status":"publish","type":"chapter","link":"https:\/\/pressbooks.library.torontomu.ca\/rethinkingfoodsecurity\/chapter\/rethinking-studies-on-gender-and-food-security-in-the-21st-century\/","title":{"raw":"7. Decolonial and Intersectional Dimensions of Food Security in the 21st Century","rendered":"7. Decolonial and Intersectional Dimensions of Food Security in the 21st Century"},"content":{"raw":"\n

Abstract<\/h2>\nAlthough the focus on women and gender relations remains important in food security, an intersectional and decolonial feminist perspective shows that gender does not operate in isolation. Alongside other structural axes in society, it shapes the norms and practices of the household, work, community, market, the state, and other social institutions, creating barriers to or enabling food security. This chapter reflects on the enduring value of using an intersectional and decolonial lens to examine food security in the 21st century, despite growing attacks on equity, diversity, and inclusion by authoritarian governments worldwide. This chapter examines agency through three dimensions of food security. First, it highlights the historical and contemporary agency of Black and Indigenous peoples and communities in promoting food security in Canada. Second, it questions how poverty and food insecurity are measured and what those measures mean for senior women in Canada. Finally, it explores the complexity of food insecurity among transgender sex workers in Canada.  By raising these discussions, we aim to highlight the need for more visibility of diverse voices and narratives through an intersectional approach to food security.\n

I - Introduction<\/h2>\nWomen have long been central to food system functioning at all levels, from farming to household food preparation, yet their contributions remain undervalued. Despite their essential role, persistent gender inequalities limit women\u2019s access to resources, infrastructure, and decision-making power (World Economic Forum, 2024). As a result, women are, on average,   more vulnerable to food insecurity than men (Food and Agriculture Organization [FAO], 2023), and account for approximately 60% of the food-insecure people worldwide, even when controlling for education level, poverty status, and residence (World Food Program, 2019).\n\nAlthough the focus on women and gender relations still matters in food security, an intersectional (Crenshaw, 1989) and decolonial (Mignolo & Walsh, 2018) feminist perspective reveals that gender does not operate in isolation. In conjunction with other structural axes in society \u2013 such as race, class, abilities\/disabilities, gender identity, sexual orientation, creed, immigration status, and age \u2013 gender determines the norms and practices of the household, work, community, market, the state and other social institutions that can create barriers or enablers to food security.\n\nThis chapter reflects on and expands the enduring value of applying an intersectional and decolonial lens to food security in the 21st century, particularly amid growing attacks on equity, diversity, and inclusion initiatives by authoritarian governments worldwide. An intersectional approach, first articulated by Crenshaw (1989) in her foundational work on discrimination law, demonstrated how employment discrimination experienced by Black women in the U.S. differed from that experienced by Black men or white women (Crenshaw, 1989). Crenshaw further expanded this critique of the single-axis framework through an intersectional analysis of violence against women, highlighting the compounded vulnerabilities faced especially by women of colour (Crenshaw, 1991). As Atrey & Dunne (2020, p. 6) note, \u201cit was the combination of the many positions of vulnerability that defined what was generically termed \u2018violence against women\u2019 when it came to women of colour\u201d.\n\nSince its emergence, intersectionality has been incorporated across multiple disciplines and practices (Cho et al., 2013), including food studies (Williams-Forson & Wilkerson, 2011). In Canada, intersectional food studies are \"concerned with the ways that various forms of oppression and privilege including, but not limited to, gender, race, class, sexuality, ability, religion and age are shaped and experienced in relation to food\u201d (Parker et al., 2019, p. 1). This chapter complements an intersectional gender lens with a decolonial approach (Mignolo & Walsh, 2018), which recognizes and challenges the dominance of Western hegemonic perspectives on food systems and their implications for food security.\n\nThe Center for Studies in Food Security (CSFS) at Toronto Metropolitan University (TMU) defines food security as dependent on five interrelated conditions, commonly referred to as the 5As: food availability, accessibility, adequacy, acceptability and agency (CSFS, n.d.). Additionally, courses taught through TMU\u2019s Chang School of Continuing Education, as part of the Certificate in Food Security, embrace an intersectional approach. The course Gender and Food Security (CFNY 409), for instance, an elective of the Certificate, underscore that an intersectional and decolonial gender lens on food security can reveal inequities in food availability, including production and processing, that can affect the livelihoods of women, girls, and gender-diverse people differently (see TMU, 2021a). Food accessibility can also be affected by gender norms, from the complexity of land tenure systems to inequities in water access (see TMU, 2021b), as well as inequitable access to education, work and income, demonstrated by issues such as the existence of the gender pay gap, the motherhood penalty, the double or triple day work, and challenges with childcare and single motherhood (see TMU, 2021c). An intersectional perspective on food adequacy can also shed light on how food is gendered, the different impacts of inadequate food and nutrition on women and girls, and the role of food and nutrition professionals in advocating for healthy food for all (see TMU, 2021d). Food acceptability can raise issues such as whether services are delivered equitably to all members of the public, including gender-nonconforming individuals; cultural factors that affect men\u2019s participation in food programs and services; and how attitudes toward motherhood and femininity influence breastfeeding rates (see TMU, 2021e). Finally, a gender lens on food agency examines social movements, community responses, and public policies addressing food security. It can examine the relationship between feminism, food studies, LGBT2SQ+ (two-spirited, lesbian, gay, bisexual, transsexual, queer, intersexual, asexual and other diverse sexual orientations and gender identities) movements, and the alternative food movement, including food justice and food sovereignty (see TMU, 2021f). It can also examine how community programs promote social inclusion and agency, and how policies affect men, women, and other gender-diverse people. These are just a few examples of the value and power of an intersectional and decolonial lens to food security through the 5As framework.\n\nThis chapter focuses on food agency, examined through three dimensions of food security that warrant particular attention in the 21st century. Section II highlights Black and Indigenous Peoples\u2019 agency in food security in Canada. It argues that despite experiencing disproportionately high rates of food insecurity due to structural racism, colonial legacies, and systemic socioeconomic exclusion, Black, Indigenous, and People of Colour (BIPOC) communities across the country have historically and continuously exercised agency by reclaiming food sovereignty and revitalizing traditional food systems to strengthen cultural identity, improve health, and ensure sustainable land stewardship (See also Chapters 8 & 9 in this volume).\n\nTurning to policy application, Section III questions the official measures of food security and poverty among senior women in Canada by examining the adequacy of the Household Food Security Survey Module (HFSSM) and Market-Based Measurement (MBM) tools for this population. While acknowledging the complex, multidimensional nature of seniors' food insecurity and poverty, this section highlights alternative measurement approaches.\n\nThrough an intersectional lens, Section IV explores the lived experiences of Transgender individuals involved in sex work in Canada, and how policies impact their food security. Trans individuals face systemic discrimination, resulting in disproportionately high food insecurity levels. Many turn to sex work as a survival strategy, which exposes them to punitive sex work policies, threatening their health, well-being, and food security. While these three dimensions represent only a small part of the broader discussion of intersectionality, decoloniality, and agency in food security, we argue that exploring them offers insight into how to highlight diverse voices and narratives in food security that deserve greater attention in the 21st century.\n

II - Recognizing Black and Indigenous Agency in Food Security<\/h2>\nBlack and Indigenous peoples in Canada, including First Nations, M\u00e9tis, and Inuit communities living on and off reserves, experience disproportionately high rates of food insecurity. In 2023, an estimated 40.2% of Black individuals and 36.8% of off-reserve Indigenous households were food insecure, compared to a national average of 22.9% (PROOF, 2024). These racial disparities are most evident among households living with children. Nationally, 46.3% of Black children and 40.1% of Indigenous children lived in food-insecure households, compared to just 19.3% of white children (Li et al., 2023). Food insecurity is particularly severe in remote and northern Indigenous communities, where it affects up to 78% of individuals over the age of 16 (Furgal et al., 2021). However, even these alarming figures undermine the true scale of the problem, as national surveys exclude First Nations people living on reserve and underrepresent Inuit and northern communities (Alabi & Robin, 2023; PROOF, 2025). The incompleteness of data itself reflects the colonial legacy, as these inequities in food security stem from a shared history of colonization, institutionalized racism, and struggles for land and autonomy. As such, statistics alone cannot fully reflect the lived experiences of Black and Indigenous peoples in Canada or the diverse strategies they use to address food security challenges within their communities.\n

Colonialism, Racism, and Food Insecurity: A Historical Overview<\/h3>\nThe roots of food insecurity among Indigenous peoples in Canada are deeply embedded in the nation\u2019s colonial history, which systematically disrupted their connection to land, culture, and traditional food systems (Inuit Tapiriit Kanatami, 2004; Loppie et al., 2014; Martens et al., 2022). Colonization weaponized food as a tool of control, beginning with the deliberate elimination of the buffalo\u2014a keystone species essential to the livelihoods of Plains Indigenous nations (Daschuk, 2013; Foster & Parrot, 2015). The reserve system further restricted Indigenous mobility and access to traditional hunting, fishing, and farming practices, forcing dependence on government-controlled food rations (Irwin, 2022). Reserves were created under the Indian Act of 1876 and were often located on small, agriculturally unsuitable parcels of land (Carter, 1990; Parrot, 2022). This system was designed to control Indigenous communities and limit their autonomy, severing their connection to traditional food systems and territories (Nestor, 2018; Parrot, 2022). The Indian Act also prohibited cultural practices such as the potlatch, which was not only a ceremonial feast but also a vital way to redistribute food and maintain social cohesion (Noakes, 2024).\n\nEven when Indigenous communities adapted to farming, policies such as the \"Peasant Farming Policy\", adopted in Canada in the late 1880s and early 1890s, actively undermined their success by restricting their access to modern agricultural tools and markets (Bateman, 1996; Cuthand, 2021). These systemic interventions were compounded by the devastating impacts of residential schools (1880s to 1996), where children were malnourished, denied traditional diets, and subjected to unethical nutritional experiments (Mosby, 2013). Together, these colonial policies dismantled Indigenous food sovereignty, severing ties to traditional food systems and leaving generations vulnerable to food insecurity.\n\nBlack Canadians have similarly endured systemic racism and displacement that have shaped their experiences of food insecurity. Dating back to the 17th century, Black individuals\u2014many of them enslaved\u2014were exploited for their labour, particularly in agricultural work to sustain colonial settlements in New France, later known as Canada (Henry-Dixon, 2022). This is exemplified in a statement by Ruette d\u2019Auteuil, the Attorney General of Quebec, in 1689:\n
Negroes are adaptable to all sorts of work, and as the cost of ownership is merely for them, their clothing, and nourishment, there is nothing to stop the success of an undertaking, because with them we can lose nothing except labour. (Canadian Mysteries, n.d.; CBC, 2023).<\/blockquote>\nAfter the American Revolutionary War in 1783, over 3,000 Black Loyalists immigrated to Nova Scotia, hoping to build new lives following promises of land and freedom (Oyeniran, 2021a). However, the land they received was often of poor quality and unsuitable for farming, leaving many unable to sustain themselves (Oyeniran, 2021a). In the face of these challenges, Black Loyalists worked to establish self-sustaining communities, including Africville. Located on the outskirts of Halifax, Africville became a vibrant Black community where residents built homes, cultivated gardens, raised livestock, and fostered a strong sense of solidarity and cultural identity, even as they were denied basic services like running water, electricity, and proper sewage infrastructure (Clairmont & Magill, 1999; McRae, 2017). Tragically, in the 1960s, the City of Halifax demolished Africville, claiming it would improve residents\u2019 poor living conditions (Clairmont & Magill, 1999; McRae, 2017). However, many saw the initiative as an act of systemic racism, targeting and erasing a thriving Black community. The destruction dismantled decades of self-sufficiency, disrupted economic progress, and perpetuated cycles of poverty and food insecurity that still impact Black communities in Canada today. This effort to undermine Black self-sufficiency was not an isolated incident, as similar patterns of systemic racism also affected Black farmers who sought refuge and opportunity in Canada (Government of Canada, 2025). More recently, Black communities have faced parallel forms of displacement in urban centres such as Toronto\u2019s Little Jamaica, where prolonged Eglinton Crosstown LRT construction has devastated one of the city\u2019s most significant Black cultural and economic corridors. The project, framed as necessary \u201cprogress,\u201d contributed to the closure of hundreds of small and predominantly Black-owned businesses, eroded community identity, and accelerated gentrification in a neighbourhood long recognized as a cultural anchor for Caribbean communities (Thayaparan, 2026).\n\nBetween 1905 and 1912, around 1,500 Black Americans, primarily from Oklahoma, immigrated to Canada and settled in Saskatchewan and Alberta in search of better opportunities (Addiscott & Vernon, 2020). Canadian advertisements promising fertile land and opportunities for a better life drew them, though these ads were originally intended for white settlers (Heritage Community Foundations, 2019; Vernon, 2024). Black settlers built self-sufficient farming communities with schools, churches, and social organizations, despite facing systemic racism (Kelly, 2021; Oyeniran, 2021b). Over time, many Black farmers were pushed out of farms due to a lack of economic opportunities, marginalization and exclusion from mainstream society, and continued discriminatory practices, such as being denied access to loans and credit essential for purchasing equipment, seeds, and other farming necessities (Melton, 1994).\n\nFollowing the abolition of slavery, systemic racism and exclusionary policies continued to shape the lives of Black Canadians (Government of Canada, 2023; McCullough & McRae, 2023). Racism towards Black people persisted well into the 20th century, with policies such as the 1910 Immigration Act explicitly designed to limit their entry into Canada (Heritage Community Foundations, 2019). Today, the enduring effects of anti\u2011Black racism are embedded in housing, employment, health, and planning systems and have resulted in stark inequities (Elsharkawy, 2023).\n\nThese historical injustices intersect with contemporary issues, such as the ongoing exploitation of Black and Indigenous labour in the agricultural sector through temporary foreign worker programs, where conditions are often described as modern-day slavery (Alberga, 2023; Amnesty International, 2025; Elsharkawy, 2023; Mooten, 2021). Viewed through an intersectional and decolonial lens, these histories demonstrate that contemporary food insecurity cannot be separated from racialized processes of dispossession, exclusion, and restricted access to land and economic resources. The collective experiences of Black and Indigenous communities reflect a shared history of systemic racism, displacement, and exploitation, which have contributed to the disproportionately high rates of food insecurity they face today.\n

Community-Driven Food Innovations and Ways Forward<\/h3>\nThe cultural identity, resilience, and survival of Black and Indigenous peoples in Canada are deeply tied to food, reflecting their profound connection to the land and natural resources. Indigenous communities across Canada have been actively working to reclaim food sovereignty and revitalize traditional food systems to strengthen cultural identity, improve health, and ensure sustainable land stewardship. Organizations such as the Assembly of First Nations (AFN, 2026) have collaborated with researchers and community members across eight AFN regions to support community-driven initiatives that empower First Nations to reclaim food sovereignty and strengthen cultural identity. This partnership has led to the development of the First Nations Food, Nutrition, and Environment Study (FNFNES), a comprehensive 10-year community-based participatory research project (FNFNES, 2023). The FNFNES provides essential recommendations to address food insecurity and promote food sovereignty, highlighting the need for policies that integrate traditional food systems and enhance access to culturally relevant foods (FNFNES, 2021). Through this collaborative effort, the AFN and participating communities are working to create sustainable solutions that honour Indigenous knowledge and practices while fostering resilience and well-being among First Nations populations.\n\nSimilarly, Inuit Tapiriit Kanatami (2021), the national representative organization that protects and advances the rights and interests of Inuit in Canada, has focused on securing access to culturally significant foods such as Arctic char, seal, and caribou. It also advocates for policies that address the impacts of climate change and food insecurity in Inuit Nunangat.[footnote] The term \u201cInuit Nunangat\u201d is a Canadian Inuit term that includes land, water, and ice. Inuit consider the land, water, and ice of our homeland to be integral to our culture and Arctic way of life (Inuit Tapiriit Kanatami, 2021).[\/footnote], which includes the four Inuit regions in Canada: the Northwest Territories, Labrador, Quebec and Nunavut. Other grassroots movements, such as Indigenous community freezers (NunatuKavut Community Council, 2025) and land-based education programs (Tr\u2019ond\u00ebk Hw\u00ebch\u2019in Farm, n.d.), further highlight community-driven efforts to resist colonial food systems and promote self-determination. Together, these initiatives aim to reclaim sovereignty over food, land, and resources for future generations. For Indigenous communities, traditional food practices\u2014such as hunting, fishing, foraging, and farming\u2014are not only a means of sustaining themselves but also a form of stewardship, rooted in respect and reciprocity with the earth.\n\nSimilarly, Black communities, particularly those with histories linked to migration, have cultivated food-sharing traditions that honour their ancestral knowledge and adapt to local environments (Addiscott & Vernon, 2020). During the COVID-19 pandemic, Black-led organizations, including churches, stepped up to address food insecurity by organizing food drives and distributing meals to thousands of families in need, filling gaps left by insufficient government support (Regnier-Davies et al., 2022). These efforts often draw on the tradition of church dinners, which have historically provided food and fellowship to Black communities and fostered a sense of belonging and care (Clairmont & Magill, 1999; McRae, 2017). By situating food distribution within these trusted community spaces, Black churches make food more accessible to those who might otherwise face systemic barriers, such as economic inequality or racial discrimination. Beyond the pandemic, Black churches and community groups have expanded their role by offering shelter, meals, and essential supplies to asylum seekers, addressing key social determinants of health\u2014such as housing and nutrition\u2014that intensify food insecurity. Through these efforts, they remain pillars of care and resilience for marginalized populations (Paradkar, 2023).\n\nBlack and Indigenous women have long led efforts to honour, protect, and sustain the land, acting as vital stewards of Earth\u2019s resources through traditional knowledge, community-driven initiatives, and advocacy. As custodians of significant portions of the world\u2019s biodiversity, Indigenous Peoples offer critical insights into sustainable living and food systems. Their traditional ecological knowledge, rooted in generations of stewardship, is increasingly recognized for its importance in documenting food biodiversity and contributing to human well-being. For example, Elder Shirley Williams, the first Indigenous woman in Canada to earn the designation of Professor based on traditional knowledge, has dedicated her life to preserving and sharing Anishinaabe cultural teachings (Maracle, 2024). Since 2010, alongside Elder Liz Osawamick, she has championed the Traditional Anishinaabe Water Teachings, which emphasize honouring Earth Mother and the sacred water, or Nibi, that sustains all life (Trent University, n.d.). Through their teachings, the women inspire communities to reconnect with the environment and adopt sustainable practices rooted in respect and reciprocity. Similarly, the Mno Aki Land Trust Inc. (Mno Aki), meaning \"Good Earth\" in Ojibwe, is a powerful example of Indigenous women leading land stewardship. Governed by Indigenous Grandmothers from across Turtle Island, this federally incorporated land trust and registered charity focuses on protecting and restoring the land while fostering intergenerational knowledge-sharing (Ecological Farmers Association of Ontario, 2023).\n\nBlack women have also made significant contributions. Adebola Adefioye, a Nigerian newcomer to Canada, founded the Afro Women and Youth Foundation (AWYF) Food Bank to address food insecurity and foster community resilience (AWYF, n.d.). Cheyenne Sundance, founder of Sundance Harvest, has established herself as a leader in urban agriculture, creating spaces for marginalized communities to learn sustainable farming practices and reclaim food sovereignty (Farmer\u2019s Footprint, n.d.). Together, these women exemplify the transformative power of traditional knowledge, community care, and a deep-rooted connection to the land.\n\nAs the effects of climate change intensify, addressing food insecurity has become a critical challenge at local, national, and international levels (FAO et al., 2024). In Canada, millions of households continue to experience food insecurity, exacerbated by recent global economic crises and rising food prices (Pagaduan et al., 2024; Polsky, 2024). While the commonly used household definition of food security emphasizes access, a broader understanding reflected in the 5A\u2019s of food security offers a more comprehensive lens (CSFS, n.d.). Framing food security through this model highlights how systemic inequities shape not only whether food is available or economically accessible, but also whether communities can access culturally appropriate foods, afford nutritious options, and have the agency to participate in, shape, and control their own food systems. This broader framework aligns closely with the principles of food sovereignty, which go beyond access and availability to emphasize communities' rights to govern the land, waters, and food systems they depend on. This perspective is particularly important for Indigenous and Black communities in Canada, whose agency to harvest, sustain, and use food from the land, water, and sky remains essential to combating food insecurity and must be recognized and supported. An intersectional perspective on food security, with a focus on agency, highlights the \u201ccomplexity of disadvantage associated with multiple identities\u201d (Atrey & Dunne, 2020, p. 6). Thus, the next section changes the focus from race to age and raises concerns over the increased vulnerability of senior women to food insecurity in Canada, as well as the complexity of understanding and addressing this issue.\n

III - Food Security and Senior Women in Canada: Are official Measures of Food Security and Poverty Telling the Whole Story?<\/h2>\nBy 2040, seniors in Canada are projected to number 10.2 million,  representing 25% of the population (Government of Canada, 2021). Often described as the \u201cfeminization of old age\u201d (Stuckelberger, 1997), the fastest-growing subgroup of Canadian seniors comprises women aged 85 or older (Statistics Canada, 2022). Food insecurity and poverty among seniors are interlinked, complex, and multidimensional issues (Leroux et al., 2020). According to the National Institute on Ageing (2024), women, single-person households, renters and those with lower education levels are at greater risk of poverty. However, official measures of food insecurity and poverty, such as the Household Food Security Survey Module (HFSSM) and the Market Basket Measurement (MBM), may not fully capture which senior households in Canada are, in fact, food insecure or living in poverty.\n\nLimitations in HFSSM and MBM measures raise concerns around agency \u2013 one of the 5A\u2019s of food security (CSFS, n.d.)- because what is measured determines who is recognized, who qualifies for support, and how governments design responses. In this section, we will explore the adequacy of the HFSSM and MBM measurement tools and policies in a senior female population and highlight complementary measurement approaches.\n

Shortcomings of the HFSSM and MBM<\/h3>\nThe HFSSM, Canada\u2019s primary validated measure of food security, may not provide a full picture of food insecurity among seniors for two key reasons:\n
    \n \t
  1. The HFSSM assesses food security at the household level, primarily among women and children. It does not reflect the lived experience of individual seniors in multi-person households who may underconsume because of reduced appetite or physical or mental health challenges (Lee, 2022).<\/li>\n \t
  2. HFSSM focuses on financial constraints as the primary reason for food insecurity.  Seniors face many non-financial barriers that affect food security, including limited mobility, chronic illness and social isolation (Lee, 2022).<\/li>\n<\/ol>\nThe HFSSM\u2019s household and financial focus may overlook key food security issues among seniors\u2014especially women aged 85 and above, the fastest-growing subgroup. To address this gap, supplementary tools designed specifically for seniors, such as the Seniors in the Community Risk Evaluation for Eating and Nutrition (SCREEN), are recommended (Keller & Trinca, 2025).\n\nMany consider the MBM the gold standard for measuring poverty in Canada, and it is tailored to a family of four, consisting of two adults and two children (Griffin & Tabbara, 2023). The MBM uses an equivalization approach to calculate poverty thresholds for families of varying sizes (Statistics Canada, 2024). However, critics argue that equivalization calculations underestimate poverty in smaller senior households (Griffin & Tabbara, 2023). This concern is especially pertinent for older women who may be widowed, separated, or divorced and living alone at retirement. Additionally, the MBM does not account for healthcare costs such as vision care, hearing care, home care, and medical equipment, which Canada\u2019s universal healthcare system does not cover. While provincial programs offer financial support for some of these out-of-pocket expenses, most require an income-based co-payment (Griffin & Tabbara, 2023; Manulife, n.d.). This is again particularly relevant to senior women, who often face higher health costs due to longer life expectancy, a progressive decline in health status with ageing, and lower retirement incomes.\n\nOfficial measures such as the HFSSM and the MBM systematically underrepresent hardship among Black, Indigenous, and racialized women because they emphasize income adequacy rather than lifelong gendered and racialized disadvantages such as education, wage gaps and precarious employment (Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives [CCPA], 2022; Li et al., 2023; Maytree, 2023). This further illustrates how these official measures fail to reflect the lived realities of senior women in Canada.\n

    Alternate Indicators and Ways Forward<\/h3>\nIn contrast to the MBM, the Canadian Elder Standard (CES) provides a more tailored benchmark for seniors by estimating the after-tax income required to meet basic needs, including food, shelter, medical care, transportation, miscellaneous expenses and home-based long-term care for a single senior or a couple living in five major Canadian cities (MacDonald et al., 2010). Unlike the MBM, the CES is senior-specific and recognizes that seniors are not a homogeneous group. It considers how factors such as gender, city of residence, homeowner or renter status, means of transportation and health status influence the cost of living. By incorporating these dimensions, the CES measures aspects of poverty that the MBM does not currently address and highlights the effects of gender disparity.\n\nAnother complementary measure of poverty is the Material Deprivation Index (MDI). The MDI assesses an individual\u2019s ability to afford items considered important to well-being, such as dental care and covering unexpected expenses (Mendelson et al., 2024). A recent survey by the National Institute of Ageing (2024) revealed that, according to the MDI, 14% of adults aged 65+ have a poverty-level standard of living, compared with 6% reported by the MBM in 2022. This suggests that poverty among older Canadians may be more prevalent than Canada\u2019s official measures indicate. Although not senior-specific, the MDI offers another lens to understand the extent of poverty among seniors and the trade-offs they may face to make ends meet. These findings emphasize that income-based measurement tools alone cannot fully capture the experience of poverty, particularly among senior women.\n\nAs Canada's senior population continues to grow, food insecurity among senior women is an increasing concern. Canadian policy is currently driven primarily by datasets derived from official measures of food security and poverty. A variety of socio-economic variables play a crucial role in determining poverty and food security status in senior women. A multidimensional measurement approach is recommended to better inform food policy in this population. Such an approach includes the development of a more holistic definition of poverty that better characterizes the lived experiences of seniors, including gender disparity; complementing the MBM with the CES and\/or MDI to obtain additional information beyond income-based dimensions; as well as complementing the use of quantitative measurement tools with qualitative and participatory research methods (i.e., storytelling) to assess poverty from a more holistic perspective.\n\nAs this section demonstrates, context matters when using an intersectional lens on food security. This is also important to understand the connections between \u201cindividual and group experiences of identity-based disadvantage to systemic mechanisms of \u2018privilege and dis-privilege\u2019\u201d (Ajele & McGill, 2020, p. 21). The following section explores a different policy context affecting the health and food security of trans individuals in Canada.\n

    IV - Transgender Experiences, Food Insecurity and Sex Work in Canada<\/h2>\nIn Canada, food insecurity disproportionately affects two-spirited, lesbian, gay, bisexual, transsexual, queer, intersexual, asexual and other diverse sexual orientations and gender identities (2SLGBTQIA+) who face stress, isolation and systemic discrimination across employment, housing, and social services (Gibb et al., 2024; Th\u00e9riault et al., 2025). Similar patterns are evident elsewhere, where discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender diversity undermines multiple dimensions of food security, including accessibility, adequacy, and agency (Patterson et al., 2020; Russomanno et al., 2019).\n\nTransgender and bisexual individuals are at especially high risk of food insecurity (Gibb et al., 2024; Nascimento et al., 2026), and many are pushed into survival strategies such as sex work to secure basic needs, highlighting deep structural barriers to acceptable and reliable food access and exposing them to additional stigma (Coronel-Villalobos & Saewyc, 2019; Masa et al., 2023).  With a focus on agency, this section discusses the impacts of systemic discrimination and harmful policies on the food security of transgender sex workers, as well as community responses and the need for more research.\n

    Systemic Discrimination and Food Insecurity<\/h3>\nTransgender and gender non-conforming (GNC) identities are underrepresented in research (Stenersen et al., 2025). Generally, 2SLGBTQIA+ identities are lacking in nationwide food insecurity data, with research including the Canadian Income Survey (CIS) often assuming a heteronormative nuclear family as the default (Right to Food, 2025). Even with a national knowledge gap concerning specifically Two-Spirit, trans, non-binary, queer, and intersex people, Right to Food (2025) concluded, based on existing evidence, that there existed distressingly high rates of Household Food Insecurity (HFI) because of poverty and employment discrimination, expressed particularly among trans and bisexual populations.\n\nFaith-based emergency food organizations, often perceived as discriminatory, further discourage 2SLGBTQIA+ individuals from seeking assistance, reflecting historical and systemic exclusion (Patterson et al., 2020; Russomanno et al., 2019). Financial precarity, marked by high unemployment, low incomes, and lack of family support, compounds these challenges, while a \u201cgreater prevalence of poor mental health\u2026, some chronic diseases, sexually transmitted and blood-borne infections, and alcohol abuse\u201d further exacerbates nutritional struggles (Hou et al., 2024; Kirby & Linde, 2020). These barriers are then magnified for individuals experiencing additional forms of marginalization, such as racism, sexism, ableism, or colonialism and further affect their ability to access adequate food (Hou et al., 2024; Rauh et al., 2025).\n\nTransgender individuals in Canada consistently face lower incomes compared to all sexual and gender minority groups (Kinit et al., 2023, as cited by Spiteri, 2024), disproportionately live in low-income neighbourhoods, and face \u201cprolific transphobia and bias in the labour market, resulting in harassment, exclusion and poverty\u201d (Spiteri, 2024). Additionally, transgender individuals in Canada face significant barriers to employment, such as employment discrimination and workplace harassment (Waite, 2021, as cited by Spiteri, 2024), in parallel to structural barriers such as \u201cthe presence of a dead (former) name on credential documentation and challenges accessing references for work experience before their transition\u201d (Kinit et al., 2023, as cited by Spiteri, 2024). Overall, transgender persons in Canada face poorer economic outcomes (Rauh et al., 2025), and therefore lower food security. Push factors such as low employability and experiences of discrimination result in a sex-work trap for trans individuals, especially youth (D\u2019Ippoliti & Botti, 2017). Interventions tailored to trans and GNC individuals must address these financial and systemic barriers while ensuring inclusivity and cultural sensitivity, or they risk perpetuating the circumstances that limit agency where it could be strengthened.\n

    Sex Work as a Survival Strategy<\/h3>\nSystemic discrimination and economic precarity create environments that limit accessibility, adequacy, and agency, as many trans individuals are made to rely on sex work as a survival strategy, where some exchange sex for basic resources like food (Coronel-Villalobos & Saewyc, 2019; Masa et al., 2023; Nascimento et al., 2026). Factors such as family rejection, homelessness, and welfare participation disproportionately impact those with intersecting marginalized identities, including Black, Gender Non-Conforming, and disabled individuals (Masa et al., 2023). While sex work can offer financial autonomy and empowerment for some, trans sex workers, particularly women of colour, face heightened risks of violence, transmisogyny, racism, and stigma because of their identities, with an increased likelihood for those who participated in street-based sex work (Masa et al., 2023). These vulnerabilities extend beyond the workplace to intimate and family relationships, where abuse and economic dependency often persist (Masa et al., 2023). Migration and asylum can offer an avenue of escape from sex work and sexual violence but may also introduce new forms of instability, victimization, and food insecurity due to the new environment\u2019s potentially restrictive immigration laws and precarious employment conditions, which are common in food-related sectors (Ussher et al., 2022).\n\nWhile stigma affects all sex workers, those who are trans experience compounded challenges due to intersecting oppressions and face a \u201cdisproportionate burden of violence, with significant variations across social, cultural, and economic contexts\u201d (Lyons et al., 2015). Considering the limited evidence on rates of food insecurity among cis and trans women sex workers, Barreto et al. (2018) researched 761 cisgender and trans women sex workers in Vancouver. Results demonstrated that a quarter of participants were \u201cself-identified gender\/sexual minority, and were more likely to be food insecure than heterosexual, cisgender sex workers\u201d (p. 608). Furthermore, a third of the study participants reported losing weight and having hunger pains over the previous six months because they could not afford food. Almost 10% reported they had exchanged sex for food in the previous six months (Barreto et al., 2018, p. 608). The study concluded that \u201cstructural barriers of criminalization and stigma, previously shown to create poor working conditions and isolated and exploitative housing for sex workers, may undermine sex workers\u2019 access to a basic human right to adequate and secure access to food\u201d (Barreto et al., 2018, p. 610). Overall, systemic reforms are urgently needed to protect the rights, dignity, and safety of trans sex workers while addressing the root causes of discrimination and economic precarity.\n

    The Impact of Canadian Sex Work Policies on Trans Health and Food Security<\/h3>\nA national study comparing transgender persons who were sex workers with those who were not concluded that transgender sex workers were more likely to live in poverty, have a disability, report poor health, and experience discrimination and violence in comparison to their counterparts (Navarro et al., 2021). Canada currently adopts the \u2018Nordic model\u2019 policy towards sex workers (Kingston & Thomas, 2019), with legislation that targets clients instead of sex workers. Although this appears as a protective policy, the reality is that sex work is still criminalized, and trans gender sex workers remain concerned about \u201cbeing stopped or harassed by police or security\u201d (Navarro et al., 2021). Indigenous, Black, racialized immigrants, non-binary and trans sex workers are especially vulnerable to such criminalization. The current policy focuses on the punishment of surrounding actors over supporting victims, leaving trans sex workers particularly vulnerable as their means of survival is forcibly removed from them (Government of Canada, 2015). Similarly, Canada\u2019s food policies offer only vague commitments to gender inclusivity, overlooking the specific needs of marginalized communities like trans individuals (Government of Canada, 2020).\n\nThe criminalization of sex work under current laws forces workers into unsafe environments, increasing risks to their health, safety, and capacity to influence their own lives and personal agency. These policies parallel broader global efforts, such as the U.S.-based Project 2025, which seeks to dismantle 2SLGBTQIA+ protections and vilify trans identities (Meisler, 2024). While Canadian policies may appear less overtly hostile, they perpetuate stigma and systemic inequalities. This disproportionately harms trans and GNC sex workers due to intersecting identities and exacerbates food insecurity by considering all sex workers as victims and all clients and third parties as criminals (Lam, 2022). Doing so can undermine sex workers' agency by framing them primarily as victims whose choices must be made for them. It can also reinforce stigma while diverting attention from the systemic conditions that may push marginalized populations into precarious work for survival. Effective reforms must affirm the autonomy and dignity of marginalized communities, addressing systemic barriers while ensuring full decriminalization of sex work, and inviting trans sex workers to discuss sex work law and policy.\n

    Community-Led Solutions and Ways Forward<\/h3>\nRegarding policy, public health solutions should implement employment non-discrimination measures to protect trans and GNC people in both the workplace and sectors like health care; for example, with sex workers in these groups reporting cases where providers were trans-affirming but not sex-work-affirming (Navarro et al., 2021). Policy reforms, however, tend to be long and arduous processes. Community-led alternative solutions have historically helped ensure the food security of minority populations by building relationships between local food pantries and 2SLGBTQIA+ organizations to create a safer, more local, and more empowering environment for all persons in need of food assistance (Hou et al., 2024; Russomanno et al., 2019). One example is Meal Trans in Toronto, which offers a weekly \u201caffirming drop-in program for lower-income, street-active, homeless and sex-working 2 Spirit, trans, non-binary, genderqueer, and questioning folks\u201d (The 519, 2022), enabling not only community connections but also access to referrals and supports. This reflects what occurs on the individual scale: support networks such as the \u201cchosen family,\u201d a set of friends and some family members, playing an important supporting role in providing \u201cemotional support, physical, food, and financial resources, as well as assistance in obtaining government benefits\u201d (Nascimento et al., 2026). Community-building efforts, such as community gardens, also play a critical role in addressing food insecurity by fostering empowerment and self-determination through representation (Lovell et al., 2014; Turner et al., 2011). These initiatives give transgender communities visibility and agency.\n\nSystemic discrimination, sex work, and punitive policies intersect to create substantial barriers to food security for trans people in Canada. Discrimination drives economic instability, pushing many trans individuals into survival-based sex work, which is further stigmatized and criminalized under Canadian law. This approach reinforces systemic hierarchies rooted in transmisogyny, racism, and inequality, exacerbating vulnerabilities that may arise in other socio-political contexts. Addressing these issues requires systemic change that prioritizes trans autonomy and wellbeing, in other words, agency. Community-led solutions, inclusive policy language, and equitable access to resources like food, housing, and employment are essential. Governments must shift from punitive frameworks to empowerment-based approaches, ensuring trans individuals can live authentically, with their health, safety, and dignity protected.\n

    V - Conclusion<\/h2>\nConventional approaches to food security can obscure how people's ability to access food and exercise agency is shaped by intersecting structures of colonialism, ableism, racism, gender, age, sexuality, income, and public policy. Using a decolonial and intersectional approach to understanding food insecurity highlights why these inequities persist, whose experiences dominant frameworks render invisible, and whose agency is recognized in designing solutions.\n\nThis chapter offered reflections on the enduring value of using an intersectional and decolonial lens to examine food security in the 21st century. This chapter shows that by centring the voices and contributions of Indigenous and Black communities, Canada can move beyond short-term solutions toward a more sustainable and equitable food system. Furthermore, recognizing and empowering these communities will be crucial for shaping the future of food security in Canada and beyond. This chapter also compares different methods for measuring poverty and food insecurity and proposes a multidimensional measurement approach that goes beyond income and accounts for differences among seniors in Canada. The chapter also argues that criminalization of sex work reinforces systemic hierarchies rooted in transmisogyny, racism, and inequality, exacerbating vulnerabilities and creating substantial barriers to food security for trans people in Canada.\n\nDespite differences, all three dimensions discussed the \u201ccomplexity of disadvantage associated with multiple identities\u201d (Ajele & McGill, 2020, p. 21), and how they relate to systemic mechanisms of \u201cprivilege and dis-privilege\u201d (Ajele & McGill, 2020, p. 21). Together, they demonstrate that food insecurity cannot be fully understood without attention to the intersecting structures that shape both vulnerability and agency. By bringing these dimensions to the surface, we argued that the diverse voices enabled by an intersectional lens deserve not only greater awareness and visibility but also more research and policy support.\n

    References<\/h2>\nAddiscott, S., & Vernon, K. (Eds.). (2020). The Black Prairie Archives: An Anthology.<\/em> Wilfrid Laurier University Press.\n\nAfro Women and Youth Foundation. (n.d.). Settlement services & food bank<\/em><\/a>.\n\nAjele, G., & McGill, J. (2020). Intersectionality in law and legal contexts [PDF]<\/em><\/a>. Women\u2019s Legal Education and Action Fund.\n\nAlabi, B. O., & Robin, T. (2023). Food insecurities and dependencies: Indigenous food responses to COVID-19<\/a>. AlterNative: An International Journal of Indigenous Peoples, 19<\/em>(1), 204\u2013210.\n\nAlberga, H. (2023). Jamaican migrant workers say they are treated like \u2018animals\u2019 in open letter under Canadian government review<\/a>. CTV News<\/em>.\n\nAmnesty International. (2025). \u201cCanada has destroyed me\u201d: Labour exploitation of migrant workers in Canada [PDF]<\/em><\/a>.\n\nAssembly of First Nations. (2026). About us<\/a>.<\/em>\n\nAtrey, S., & Dunne, P. (Eds.). (2020). Intersectionality and Human Rights Law.<\/em> Hart Publishing.\n\nBateman, R. B. (1996). Talking with the plow: Agricultural policy and Indian farming in the Canadian and US prairies [PDF]<\/a>. Canadian Journal of Native Studies, 16<\/em>(2), 211\u2013228.\n\nBarreto, D., Shoveller, J., Braschel, M., Duff, P., & Shannon, K. (2018). The effect of violence and intersecting structural inequities on high rates of food insecurity among marginalized sex workers in a Canadian setting<\/a>. Journal of Urban Health, 96<\/em>(4), 605\u2013615.\n\nCanadian Centre for Policy Alternatives. (2022). The gender dimensions of Canada\u2019s poverty crisis<\/a>.<\/em>\n\nCanadian Mysteries. (n.d.). Colonial correspondence: Ang\u00e9lique<\/em><\/a>.\n\nCarter, S. (1990). Two solitudes: Myth and reality of the Plains Indian and agriculture<\/a>. In Lost harvests: Prairie Indian reserve farmers and government policy<\/em> (pp. 15\u201349). McGill-Queen\u2019s University Press.\n\nCBC. (2023). Canada was not a safe haven from slavery <\/em><\/a>[Video]. YouTube.\n\nCentre for Studies in Food Security. (n.d.). About us<\/em><\/a>. Toronto Metropolitan University.\n\nCho, S., Crenshaw, K. W., & McCall, L. (2013). Toward a field of intersectionality studies: Theory, applications, and praxis.<\/a> Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society, 38<\/em>(4), 785\u2013810.\n\nClairmont, D. H., & Magill, D. W. (1999). Africville: The life and death of a Canadian Black community<\/em>. Canadian Scholars.\n\nCoronel-Villalobos, M., & Saewyc, E. M. (2019). Trading sex and sexual exploitation among transgender youth in Canada<\/a>. Journal of Adolescent Health, 64<\/em>(2, Suppl.).\n\nCrenshaw, K. (1989). Demarginalizing the intersection of race and sex: A Black feminist critique of antidiscrimination doctrine, feminist theory and antiracist politics<\/a>. University of Chicago Legal Forum, 1989,<\/em> Article 8.\n\nCrenshaw, K. (1991). Mapping the margins: Intersectionality, identity politics, and violence against women of color<\/a>. Stanford Law Review, 43<\/em>(6), 1241\u20131299.\n\nCuthand, D. (2021). Peasant farm policy<\/em><\/a>. The Canadian Encyclopedia.\n\nD\u2019Ippoliti, C., & Botti, F. (2017). Sex work among trans people: Evidence from Southern Italy<\/a>. Feminist Economics, 23<\/em>(3), 77\u2013109.\n\nDaschuk, J. W. (2013). Clearing the Plains: Disease, politics of starvation, and the loss of Aboriginal life<\/em>. University of Regina Press.\n\nEcological Farmers Association of Ontario. (2023). Mno Aki Land Trust: Redefining conservation on Indigenous terms [PDF]<\/em><\/a>.\n\nElsharkawy, O. (2023). Food sovereignty for Black communities in Toronto: Challenges and policy opportunities [PDF]<\/em><\/a>. Black Food Sovereignty Working Group.\n\nFarmer\u2019s Footprint. (n.d.). Meet Cheyenne Sundance<\/em>.<\/a>\n\nFirst Nations Food, Nutrition, and Environment Study. (2021). Final key findings and recommendations [PDF]<\/em><\/a>.\n\nFirst Nations Food, Nutrition, and Environment Study. (2023). First Nations Food, Nutrition, and Environment Study: National study report [PDF]<\/a>.<\/em>\n\nFood and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. (2023). The status of women in agrifood systems: Overview<\/a>.<\/em>\n\nFood and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, International Fund for Agricultural Development, UNICEF, World Food Programme, & World Health Organization. (2024). The state of food security and nutrition in the world 2024: Financing to end hunger, food insecurity and malnutrition in all its forms<\/em><\/a>. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations.\n\nFoster, J. E., & Parrott, Z. (2015). Buffalo hunt<\/em><\/a>. The Canadian Encyclopedia.\n\nFurgal, C., Pirkle, C. L., Lucas, M., & Martin, R. (2021). Food security: Nunavik Inuit Health Survey 2017 Qanuilirpitaa? How are we now? [PDF]<\/em><\/a> Nunavik Regional Board of Health and Social Services & Institut national de sant\u00e9 publique du Qu\u00e9bec.\n\nGibb, J. K., Williams, S., Mikelsteins, K., Charles, J., McKinnon, L., Beach, L., McKerracher, L., & Fields, J. (2024). Queering food security research: A critical analysis of 2SLGBTQ+ people\u2019s experiences of food insecurity in Toronto during the COVID-19 pandemic<\/a>. Social Science & Medicine<\/em>, 345, Article 116709.\n\nGovernment of Canada. (2015, March 11). Fact sheet\u2014Prostitution criminal law reform: Bill C-36, the Protection of Communities and Exploited Persons Act<\/em><\/a>. Department of Justice Canada.\n\nGovernment of Canada. (2020, November 17). The Food Policy for Canada<\/em><\/a>.\n\nGovernment of Canada. (2021). Seniors infographic\u20142021<\/em><\/a>.\n\nGovernment of Canada. (2023). Fact sheet: Key historical facts about anti-Black racism and discrimination in Canada<\/em><\/a>.\n\nGovernment of Canada. (2025, April 2). Fact sheet: Key historical facts about anti-Black racism and discrimination in Canada<\/em>.<\/a> Canada\u2019s Black Justice Strategy.\n\nGriffin, P., & Tabbara, M. (2023). A fine line: Finding the right seniors\u2019 poverty measure in Canada [PDF]<\/em><\/a>. Maytree.\n\nHenry-Dixon, N. (2022). Black enslavement in Canada<\/em><\/a>. The Canadian Encyclopedia.\n\nHeritage Community Foundations. (2019). Black settlers<\/em><\/a>.\n\nHou, S., White, M., Ng, E., Kelleher, S., Gao, M., & Joy, P. (2024). Intersectional analysis of food insecurity for 2S\/LGBTQIA+ communities in Canada and implications for dietetic practice<\/a>. Journal of Critical Dietetics, 7<\/em>(2), 186\u2013224.\n\nInuit Tapiriit Kanatami. (2004). 5000 years of Inuit history and heritage [PDF]<\/em><\/a>.\n\nInuit Tapiriit Kanatami. (2021). Inuit Nunangat food security strategy<\/em><\/a>.\n\nIrwin, R. (2022). Reserves in Canada<\/em><\/a>. The Canadian Encyclopedia.\n\nKeller, H. H., & Trinca, V. (2025). Baseline nutrition risk as measured by SCREEN-8 predicts self-reported 12-month healthcare service use of older adults 3 years later<\/a>. Applied Physiology, Nutrition, and Metabolism,<\/em> 50, 1\u201311.\n\nKelly, J. (2021). Alberta\u2019s early Black settlements<\/em><\/a>. Edmonton City as Museum Project.\n\nKingston, S., & Thomas, T. (2019). No model in practice: A \u2018Nordic model\u2019 to respond to prostitution?<\/a> Crime, Law and Social Change, 71<\/em>(4), 423\u2013439.\n\nKirby, S. R., & Linde, J. A. (2020). Understanding the nutritional needs of transgender and gender-nonconforming students at a large public Midwestern university<\/a>. Transgender Health, 5<\/em>(1), 33\u201341.\n\nLam, E. (2022, July 12). Sex work and the law in Canada<\/em><\/a>. CATIE.\n\nLee, J. S. (2022). Food insecurity in older adults<\/a>. The Journal of Nutrition, 152<\/em>(8), 1808\u20131809.\n\nLeroux, J., Cox, J., & Rosenberg, M. (2020). Food insecurity and aging: A scoping study of the literature<\/a>. Canadian Journal on Aging, 39<\/em>(4), 662\u2013696.\n\nLi, T., Fafard St-Germain, A.-A., & Tarasuk, V. (2023). Household food insecurity in Canada, 2022<\/a>.<\/em> PROOF.\n\nLoppie, S., Reading, C., & de Leeuw, S. (2014). Indigenous experiences with racism and its impacts [PDF]<\/em><\/a>. National Collaborating Centre for Aboriginal Health.\n\nLovell, R., Husk, K., Bethel, A., & Garside, R. (2014). What are the health and well-being impacts of community gardening for adults and children: A mixed-methods systematic review protocol<\/a>. Environmental Evidence<\/em>, 3, Article 20.\n\nLyons, T., Kr\u00fcsi, A., Pierre, L., Kerr, T., Small, W., & Shannon, K. (2015). Negotiating violence in the context of transphobia and criminalization: The experiences of trans sex workers in Vancouver, Canada<\/a>. Qualitative Health Research<\/em>.\n\nMacDonald, B. J., Andrews, D., & Brown, R. L. (2010). The Canadian Elder Standard\u2014Pricing the cost of basic needs for the Canadian elderly<\/a>. Canadian Journal on Aging, 29<\/em>(1), 39\u201356.\n\nManulife. (n.d.). What\u2019s covered and what\u2019s not covered by provincial government\u2019s health insurance plans<\/em>.<\/a>\n\nMaracle, C. (2024). How Shirley Williams\u2019s traditional knowledge helped her become a professor at Trent University<\/em><\/a>. CBC News.\n\nMartens, T. R., Dennis, M. K., & Hart, M. A. (2022). Feeding Indigenous people in Canada<\/a>. International Social Work, 65<\/em>(4), 652\u2013662.\n\nMasa, R., Baca-Atlas, S. N., Shangani, S., Forte, A. B., & Donerario. (2023). Family rejection, socioeconomic precarity, and exchanging sex for food among young transgender adults: Findings from the U.S. Transgender Survey<\/a>. Journal of Health Care for the Poor and Underserved, 34<\/em>(2), 549\u2013568.\n\nMaytree. (2023). Racialized poverty in Canada: Why we need a race-based poverty reduction strategy<\/a>.<\/em>\n\nMcCullough, S., & McRae, M. (2023). The story of Black slavery in Canadian history<\/em><\/a>. Canadian Museum for Human Rights.\n\nMcRae, M. (2017). The story of Africville<\/em><\/a>. Canadian Museum for Human Rights.\n\nMeisler, H. (2024, October 10). How Project 2025 tries to demonize LGBTQI+ people\u2014and why it\u2019ll fail<\/a>.<\/em> National Women\u2019s Law Center.\n\nMelton, J. R. (1994). Amber Valley: A Black enclave in northern Alberta, Canada<\/em> <\/a>[Master\u2019s thesis, California State University, San Bernardino]. CSUSB ScholarWorks.\n\nMendelson, M., Notten, G., Matern, R., & Seer, S. (2024). Poverty in Canada: Through a deprivation lens [PDF]<\/em><\/a>. Food Banks Canada.\n\nMignolo, W. D., & Walsh, C. E. (2018). On decoloniality: Concepts, analytics, praxis<\/em>. Duke University Press.\n\nMooten, N. (2021). Racism and discrimination: A review of the literature [PDF]<\/em><\/a> [Research report]. Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada.\n\nMosby, I. (2013). Administering colonial science: Nutrition research and human biomedical experimentation in Aboriginal communities and residential schools, 1942\u20131952<\/a>. Histoire Sociale\/Social History, 46<\/em>(1), 145\u2013172.\n\nNascimento, I. M. R., Reis, A. P. D., Andrade, R. T. S. de, & Pereira, M. (2026). Transgender and gender nonconforming people\u2019s vulnerability to food insecurity: Systematic review and meta-synthesis<\/a>. Cadernos de Sa\u00fade P\u00fablica, 41<\/em>(12), e00058825.\n\nNational Institute on Ageing. (2024). Perspectives on growing older in Canada: The 2024 NIA ageing in Canada survey<\/a>.<\/em>\n\nNavarro, J., Johnstone, F., Temple Newhook, J., Smith, M., Wallace Skelton, J., Prempeh, K., Lopez, L. S. C., Scheim, A., & Bauer, G. (2021, June 25). Health and well-being among trans and non-binary youth<\/a>. Trans PULSE Canada.<\/em>\n\nNestor, R. (2018). Pass system in Canada<\/em><\/a>. The Canadian Encyclopedia.\n\nNoakes, C. T. (2024). Potlatch ban<\/em><\/a>. The Canadian Encyclopedia.\n\nNunatuKavut Community Council. (2025). NunatuKavut Community Council community freezer program<\/em><\/a>.\n\nOyeniran, C. (2021a). Black Loyalists in British North America<\/em><\/a>. The Canadian Encyclopedia.\n\nOyeniran, C. (2021b). Amber Valley<\/em><\/a>. The Canadian Encyclopedia.\n\nPagaduan, J. E., Lazarescu, C., Vallieres, E., Skinner, K., Zuckermann, A. M. E., & Idzerda, L. (2024). The impacts of the Nutrition North Canada program on the accessibility and affordability of perishable, nutritious foods among eligible communities: A scoping review<\/a>. International Journal of Circumpolar Health, 83<\/em>(1), Article 2313255.\n\nParadkar, S. (2023). These Black churches came to the rescue amid Toronto\u2019s African refugee crisis. Now they say governments abandoned them<\/em><\/a>. Toronto Star.\n\nParker, B., Brady, J., Power, E. M., & Belyea, S. (2019). Introduction: This is what feminist food studies look like. In B. Parker, J. Brady, E. M. Power, & S. Belyea (Eds.), Feminist food studies: Intersectional perspectives<\/em>. Women\u2019s Press.\n\nParrot, Z. (2022). Indian Act.<\/em><\/a> The Canadian Encyclopedia.\n\nPatterson, J. G., Russomanno, J., & Jabson Tree, J. M. (2020). Sexual orientation disparities in food insecurity and food assistance use in U.S. adult women: National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, 2005\u20132014<\/a>. BMC Public Health<\/em>, 20, Article 1155.\n\nPolsky, J. Y. (2024). Trends in household food insecurity from the Canadian Community Health Survey, 2017 to 2022.<\/a> Health Reports, 35<\/em>(10), 1\u201328.\n\nPROOF. (2024, April 26). New data on household food insecurity in 2023<\/em><\/a>.\n\nPROOF. (2025). Indigenous food insecurity<\/em><\/a>.\n\nRauh, K., M\u00e9nard, F.-P., Roy, J.-F., & Beall, A. (2025, October 16). Socioeconomic outcomes of transgender and non-binary people in Canada [PDF]<\/em><\/a>. Statistics Canada.\n\nRegnier-Davies, J., Edge, S., & Austin, N. (2022). The intersection of structure and agency within charitable community food programs in Toronto, Canada, during the COVID-19 pandemic: Cultivating systemic change<\/a>. Critical Public Health, 33<\/em>(3), 355\u2013362.\n\nRight to Food. (2025). Food insecurity among 2SLGBTQI+ people<\/em><\/a>.\n\nRussomanno, J., Patterson, J. G., & Jabson, J. M. (2019). Food insecurity among transgender and gender nonconforming individuals in the Southeast United States: A qualitative study<\/a>. Transgender Health, 4<\/em>(1), 89\u201399.\n\nSpiteri, S. (2024, March 28). Transgender visibility in Canadian labour market information<\/em><\/a>. Labour Market Information Council.\n\nStatistics Canada. (2022). A portrait of Canada\u2019s growing population aged 85 and older from the 2021 Census<\/em><\/a>.\n\nStatistics Canada. (2024). Market Basket Measure research paper: An analysis of the equivalization method<\/em><\/a>.\n\nStenersen, M., Umrani, A., Fricke, I., & Zemlak, J. (2025). Sex work patterns among transgender and gender diverse people: A latent class analysis<\/a>. Journal of Homosexuality, 72<\/em>(11), 2134\u20132152.\n\nStuckelberger, A. (1997). Men and women age differently<\/em><\/a>. World Health Organization.\n\nThe 519. (2022, January 22). Meal Trans<\/em><\/a>.\n\nThayaparan, A. (2026). Toronto\u2019s Little Jamaica in \u2018state of emergency\u2019 due to Eglinton-Crosstown construction: BIA<\/em><\/a>. CBC News.\n\nTh\u00e9riault, J., Joy, P., Boudhra\u00e2, S., & Gao, M. (2025). Rethinking 2S\/LGBTQI+ food security with co-design: A study protocol.<\/a> Frontiers in Public Health<\/em>, 13, Article 1558700.\n\nToronto Metropolitan University. (2021a). Module 7\u2014Gender and food availability<\/em> [Online course module]. CFNY409 Gender and Food Security.\n\nToronto Metropolitan University. (2021b). Module 8\u2014Gender and accessibility to natural resources<\/em> [Online course module]. CFNY409 Gender and Food Security.\n\nToronto Metropolitan University. (2021c). Module 9\u2014Gender and accessibility to work and income<\/em> [Online course module]. CFNY409 Gender and Food Security.\n\nToronto Metropolitan University. (2021d). Module 10\u2014Gender and adequacy<\/em> [Online course module]. CFNY409 Gender and Food Security.\n\nToronto Metropolitan University. (2021e). Module 11\u2014Gender and acceptability<\/em> [Online course module]. CFNY409 Gender and Food Security.\n\nToronto Metropolitan University. (2021f). Module 12\u2014Gender and agency<\/em> [Online course module]. CFNY409 Gender and Food Security.\n\nTrent University. (n.d.). Nibi Emosaawdamajig<\/em><\/a>.\n\nTr\u2019ond\u00ebk Hw\u00ebch\u2019in Farm. (n.d.). Tr\u2019ond\u00ebk Hw\u00ebch\u2019in Farm<\/em><\/a>.\n\nTurner, B., Henryks, J., & Pearson, D. (2011). Community gardens: Sustainability, health and inclusion in the city<\/a>. Local Environment, 16<\/em>(6), 489\u2013492.\n\nUssher, J. M., Hawkey, A., Perz, J., Liamputtong, P., Sekar, J., Marjadi, B., Schmied, V., Dune, T., & Brook, E. (2022). Crossing boundaries and fetishization: Experiences of sexual violence for trans women of color<\/a>. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 37<\/em>(5\u20136), NP3552\u2013NP3584.\n\nVernon, K. (2024). In the early 1900s, Canada put out ads to attract white American farmers. Black Indigenous settlers came too<\/em><\/a>. CBC.\n\nWilliams-Forson, P., & Wilkerson, A. (2011). Intersectionality and food studies<\/a>. Food, Culture & Society, 14<\/em>(1), 7\u201328.\n\nWorld Economic Forum. (2024, March 8). Women are central to global food systems\u2014Men must recognize and act upon that<\/em><\/a>.\n\nWorld Food Program. (2019). Get the facts: Putting a gender lens on global food insecurity [PDF]<\/em>.<\/a> Women Deliver.\n","rendered":"

    Abstract<\/h2>\n

    Although the focus on women and gender relations remains important in food security, an intersectional and decolonial feminist perspective shows that gender does not operate in isolation. Alongside other structural axes in society, it shapes the norms and practices of the household, work, community, market, the state, and other social institutions, creating barriers to or enabling food security. This chapter reflects on the enduring value of using an intersectional and decolonial lens to examine food security in the 21st century, despite growing attacks on equity, diversity, and inclusion by authoritarian governments worldwide. This chapter examines agency through three dimensions of food security. First, it highlights the historical and contemporary agency of Black and Indigenous peoples and communities in promoting food security in Canada. Second, it questions how poverty and food insecurity are measured and what those measures mean for senior women in Canada. Finally, it explores the complexity of food insecurity among transgender sex workers in Canada.  By raising these discussions, we aim to highlight the need for more visibility of diverse voices and narratives through an intersectional approach to food security.<\/p>\n

    I – Introduction<\/h2>\n

    Women have long been central to food system functioning at all levels, from farming to household food preparation, yet their contributions remain undervalued. Despite their essential role, persistent gender inequalities limit women\u2019s access to resources, infrastructure, and decision-making power (World Economic Forum, 2024). As a result, women are, on average,   more vulnerable to food insecurity than men (Food and Agriculture Organization [FAO], 2023), and account for approximately 60% of the food-insecure people worldwide, even when controlling for education level, poverty status, and residence (World Food Program, 2019).<\/p>\n

    Although the focus on women and gender relations still matters in food security, an intersectional (Crenshaw, 1989) and decolonial (Mignolo & Walsh, 2018) feminist perspective reveals that gender does not operate in isolation. In conjunction with other structural axes in society \u2013 such as race, class, abilities\/disabilities, gender identity, sexual orientation, creed, immigration status, and age \u2013 gender determines the norms and practices of the household, work, community, market, the state and other social institutions that can create barriers or enablers to food security.<\/p>\n

    This chapter reflects on and expands the enduring value of applying an intersectional and decolonial lens to food security in the 21st century, particularly amid growing attacks on equity, diversity, and inclusion initiatives by authoritarian governments worldwide. An intersectional approach, first articulated by Crenshaw (1989) in her foundational work on discrimination law, demonstrated how employment discrimination experienced by Black women in the U.S. differed from that experienced by Black men or white women (Crenshaw, 1989). Crenshaw further expanded this critique of the single-axis framework through an intersectional analysis of violence against women, highlighting the compounded vulnerabilities faced especially by women of colour (Crenshaw, 1991). As Atrey & Dunne (2020, p. 6) note, \u201cit was the combination of the many positions of vulnerability that defined what was generically termed \u2018violence against women\u2019 when it came to women of colour\u201d.<\/p>\n

    Since its emergence, intersectionality has been incorporated across multiple disciplines and practices (Cho et al., 2013), including food studies (Williams-Forson & Wilkerson, 2011). In Canada, intersectional food studies are “concerned with the ways that various forms of oppression and privilege including, but not limited to, gender, race, class, sexuality, ability, religion and age are shaped and experienced in relation to food\u201d (Parker et al., 2019, p. 1). This chapter complements an intersectional gender lens with a decolonial approach (Mignolo & Walsh, 2018), which recognizes and challenges the dominance of Western hegemonic perspectives on food systems and their implications for food security.<\/p>\n

    The Center for Studies in Food Security (CSFS) at Toronto Metropolitan University (TMU) defines food security as dependent on five interrelated conditions, commonly referred to as the 5As: food availability, accessibility, adequacy, acceptability and agency (CSFS, n.d.). Additionally, courses taught through TMU\u2019s Chang School of Continuing Education, as part of the Certificate in Food Security, embrace an intersectional approach. The course Gender and Food Security (CFNY 409), for instance, an elective of the Certificate, underscore that an intersectional and decolonial gender lens on food security can reveal inequities in food availability, including production and processing, that can affect the livelihoods of women, girls, and gender-diverse people differently (see TMU, 2021a). Food accessibility can also be affected by gender norms, from the complexity of land tenure systems to inequities in water access (see TMU, 2021b), as well as inequitable access to education, work and income, demonstrated by issues such as the existence of the gender pay gap, the motherhood penalty, the double or triple day work, and challenges with childcare and single motherhood (see TMU, 2021c). An intersectional perspective on food adequacy can also shed light on how food is gendered, the different impacts of inadequate food and nutrition on women and girls, and the role of food and nutrition professionals in advocating for healthy food for all (see TMU, 2021d). Food acceptability can raise issues such as whether services are delivered equitably to all members of the public, including gender-nonconforming individuals; cultural factors that affect men\u2019s participation in food programs and services; and how attitudes toward motherhood and femininity influence breastfeeding rates (see TMU, 2021e). Finally, a gender lens on food agency examines social movements, community responses, and public policies addressing food security. It can examine the relationship between feminism, food studies, LGBT2SQ+ (two-spirited, lesbian, gay, bisexual, transsexual, queer, intersexual, asexual and other diverse sexual orientations and gender identities) movements, and the alternative food movement, including food justice and food sovereignty (see TMU, 2021f). It can also examine how community programs promote social inclusion and agency, and how policies affect men, women, and other gender-diverse people. These are just a few examples of the value and power of an intersectional and decolonial lens to food security through the 5As framework.<\/p>\n

    This chapter focuses on food agency, examined through three dimensions of food security that warrant particular attention in the 21st century. Section II highlights Black and Indigenous Peoples\u2019 agency in food security in Canada. It argues that despite experiencing disproportionately high rates of food insecurity due to structural racism, colonial legacies, and systemic socioeconomic exclusion, Black, Indigenous, and People of Colour (BIPOC) communities across the country have historically and continuously exercised agency by reclaiming food sovereignty and revitalizing traditional food systems to strengthen cultural identity, improve health, and ensure sustainable land stewardship (See also Chapters 8 & 9 in this volume).<\/p>\n

    Turning to policy application, Section III questions the official measures of food security and poverty among senior women in Canada by examining the adequacy of the Household Food Security Survey Module (HFSSM) and Market-Based Measurement (MBM) tools for this population. While acknowledging the complex, multidimensional nature of seniors’ food insecurity and poverty, this section highlights alternative measurement approaches.<\/p>\n

    Through an intersectional lens, Section IV explores the lived experiences of Transgender individuals involved in sex work in Canada, and how policies impact their food security. Trans individuals face systemic discrimination, resulting in disproportionately high food insecurity levels. Many turn to sex work as a survival strategy, which exposes them to punitive sex work policies, threatening their health, well-being, and food security. While these three dimensions represent only a small part of the broader discussion of intersectionality, decoloniality, and agency in food security, we argue that exploring them offers insight into how to highlight diverse voices and narratives in food security that deserve greater attention in the 21st century.<\/p>\n

    II – Recognizing Black and Indigenous Agency in Food Security<\/h2>\n

    Black and Indigenous peoples in Canada, including First Nations, M\u00e9tis, and Inuit communities living on and off reserves, experience disproportionately high rates of food insecurity. In 2023, an estimated 40.2% of Black individuals and 36.8% of off-reserve Indigenous households were food insecure, compared to a national average of 22.9% (PROOF, 2024). These racial disparities are most evident among households living with children. Nationally, 46.3% of Black children and 40.1% of Indigenous children lived in food-insecure households, compared to just 19.3% of white children (Li et al., 2023). Food insecurity is particularly severe in remote and northern Indigenous communities, where it affects up to 78% of individuals over the age of 16 (Furgal et al., 2021). However, even these alarming figures undermine the true scale of the problem, as national surveys exclude First Nations people living on reserve and underrepresent Inuit and northern communities (Alabi & Robin, 2023; PROOF, 2025). The incompleteness of data itself reflects the colonial legacy, as these inequities in food security stem from a shared history of colonization, institutionalized racism, and struggles for land and autonomy. As such, statistics alone cannot fully reflect the lived experiences of Black and Indigenous peoples in Canada or the diverse strategies they use to address food security challenges within their communities.<\/p>\n

    Colonialism, Racism, and Food Insecurity: A Historical Overview<\/h3>\n

    The roots of food insecurity among Indigenous peoples in Canada are deeply embedded in the nation\u2019s colonial history, which systematically disrupted their connection to land, culture, and traditional food systems (Inuit Tapiriit Kanatami, 2004; Loppie et al., 2014; Martens et al., 2022). Colonization weaponized food as a tool of control, beginning with the deliberate elimination of the buffalo\u2014a keystone species essential to the livelihoods of Plains Indigenous nations (Daschuk, 2013; Foster & Parrot, 2015). The reserve system further restricted Indigenous mobility and access to traditional hunting, fishing, and farming practices, forcing dependence on government-controlled food rations (Irwin, 2022). Reserves were created under the Indian Act of 1876 and were often located on small, agriculturally unsuitable parcels of land (Carter, 1990; Parrot, 2022). This system was designed to control Indigenous communities and limit their autonomy, severing their connection to traditional food systems and territories (Nestor, 2018; Parrot, 2022). The Indian Act also prohibited cultural practices such as the potlatch, which was not only a ceremonial feast but also a vital way to redistribute food and maintain social cohesion (Noakes, 2024).<\/p>\n

    Even when Indigenous communities adapted to farming, policies such as the “Peasant Farming Policy”, adopted in Canada in the late 1880s and early 1890s, actively undermined their success by restricting their access to modern agricultural tools and markets (Bateman, 1996; Cuthand, 2021). These systemic interventions were compounded by the devastating impacts of residential schools (1880s to 1996), where children were malnourished, denied traditional diets, and subjected to unethical nutritional experiments (Mosby, 2013). Together, these colonial policies dismantled Indigenous food sovereignty, severing ties to traditional food systems and leaving generations vulnerable to food insecurity.<\/p>\n

    Black Canadians have similarly endured systemic racism and displacement that have shaped their experiences of food insecurity. Dating back to the 17th century, Black individuals\u2014many of them enslaved\u2014were exploited for their labour, particularly in agricultural work to sustain colonial settlements in New France, later known as Canada (Henry-Dixon, 2022). This is exemplified in a statement by Ruette d\u2019Auteuil, the Attorney General of Quebec, in 1689:<\/p>\n

    Negroes are adaptable to all sorts of work, and as the cost of ownership is merely for them, their clothing, and nourishment, there is nothing to stop the success of an undertaking, because with them we can lose nothing except labour. (Canadian Mysteries, n.d.; CBC, 2023).<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

    After the American Revolutionary War in 1783, over 3,000 Black Loyalists immigrated to Nova Scotia, hoping to build new lives following promises of land and freedom (Oyeniran, 2021a). However, the land they received was often of poor quality and unsuitable for farming, leaving many unable to sustain themselves (Oyeniran, 2021a). In the face of these challenges, Black Loyalists worked to establish self-sustaining communities, including Africville. Located on the outskirts of Halifax, Africville became a vibrant Black community where residents built homes, cultivated gardens, raised livestock, and fostered a strong sense of solidarity and cultural identity, even as they were denied basic services like running water, electricity, and proper sewage infrastructure (Clairmont & Magill, 1999; McRae, 2017). Tragically, in the 1960s, the City of Halifax demolished Africville, claiming it would improve residents\u2019 poor living conditions (Clairmont & Magill, 1999; McRae, 2017). However, many saw the initiative as an act of systemic racism, targeting and erasing a thriving Black community. The destruction dismantled decades of self-sufficiency, disrupted economic progress, and perpetuated cycles of poverty and food insecurity that still impact Black communities in Canada today. This effort to undermine Black self-sufficiency was not an isolated incident, as similar patterns of systemic racism also affected Black farmers who sought refuge and opportunity in Canada (Government of Canada, 2025). More recently, Black communities have faced parallel forms of displacement in urban centres such as Toronto\u2019s Little Jamaica, where prolonged Eglinton Crosstown LRT construction has devastated one of the city\u2019s most significant Black cultural and economic corridors. The project, framed as necessary \u201cprogress,\u201d contributed to the closure of hundreds of small and predominantly Black-owned businesses, eroded community identity, and accelerated gentrification in a neighbourhood long recognized as a cultural anchor for Caribbean communities (Thayaparan, 2026).<\/p>\n

    Between 1905 and 1912, around 1,500 Black Americans, primarily from Oklahoma, immigrated to Canada and settled in Saskatchewan and Alberta in search of better opportunities (Addiscott & Vernon, 2020). Canadian advertisements promising fertile land and opportunities for a better life drew them, though these ads were originally intended for white settlers (Heritage Community Foundations, 2019; Vernon, 2024). Black settlers built self-sufficient farming communities with schools, churches, and social organizations, despite facing systemic racism (Kelly, 2021; Oyeniran, 2021b). Over time, many Black farmers were pushed out of farms due to a lack of economic opportunities, marginalization and exclusion from mainstream society, and continued discriminatory practices, such as being denied access to loans and credit essential for purchasing equipment, seeds, and other farming necessities (Melton, 1994).<\/p>\n

    Following the abolition of slavery, systemic racism and exclusionary policies continued to shape the lives of Black Canadians (Government of Canada, 2023; McCullough & McRae, 2023). Racism towards Black people persisted well into the 20th century, with policies such as the 1910 Immigration Act explicitly designed to limit their entry into Canada (Heritage Community Foundations, 2019). Today, the enduring effects of anti\u2011Black racism are embedded in housing, employment, health, and planning systems and have resulted in stark inequities (Elsharkawy, 2023).<\/p>\n

    These historical injustices intersect with contemporary issues, such as the ongoing exploitation of Black and Indigenous labour in the agricultural sector through temporary foreign worker programs, where conditions are often described as modern-day slavery (Alberga, 2023; Amnesty International, 2025; Elsharkawy, 2023; Mooten, 2021). Viewed through an intersectional and decolonial lens, these histories demonstrate that contemporary food insecurity cannot be separated from racialized processes of dispossession, exclusion, and restricted access to land and economic resources. The collective experiences of Black and Indigenous communities reflect a shared history of systemic racism, displacement, and exploitation, which have contributed to the disproportionately high rates of food insecurity they face today.<\/p>\n

    Community-Driven Food Innovations and Ways Forward<\/h3>\n

    The cultural identity, resilience, and survival of Black and Indigenous peoples in Canada are deeply tied to food, reflecting their profound connection to the land and natural resources. Indigenous communities across Canada have been actively working to reclaim food sovereignty and revitalize traditional food systems to strengthen cultural identity, improve health, and ensure sustainable land stewardship. Organizations such as the Assembly of First Nations (AFN, 2026) have collaborated with researchers and community members across eight AFN regions to support community-driven initiatives that empower First Nations to reclaim food sovereignty and strengthen cultural identity. This partnership has led to the development of the First Nations Food, Nutrition, and Environment Study (FNFNES), a comprehensive 10-year community-based participatory research project (FNFNES, 2023). The FNFNES provides essential recommendations to address food insecurity and promote food sovereignty, highlighting the need for policies that integrate traditional food systems and enhance access to culturally relevant foods (FNFNES, 2021). Through this collaborative effort, the AFN and participating communities are working to create sustainable solutions that honour Indigenous knowledge and practices while fostering resilience and well-being among First Nations populations.<\/p>\n

    Similarly, Inuit Tapiriit Kanatami (2021), the national representative organization that protects and advances the rights and interests of Inuit in Canada, has focused on securing access to culturally significant foods such as Arctic char, seal, and caribou. It also advocates for policies that address the impacts of climate change and food insecurity in Inuit Nunangat.[1]<\/sup><\/a>, which includes the four Inuit regions in Canada: the Northwest Territories, Labrador, Quebec and Nunavut. Other grassroots movements, such as Indigenous community freezers (NunatuKavut Community Council, 2025) and land-based education programs (Tr\u2019ond\u00ebk Hw\u00ebch\u2019in Farm, n.d.), further highlight community-driven efforts to resist colonial food systems and promote self-determination. Together, these initiatives aim to reclaim sovereignty over food, land, and resources for future generations. For Indigenous communities, traditional food practices\u2014such as hunting, fishing, foraging, and farming\u2014are not only a means of sustaining themselves but also a form of stewardship, rooted in respect and reciprocity with the earth.<\/p>\n

    Similarly, Black communities, particularly those with histories linked to migration, have cultivated food-sharing traditions that honour their ancestral knowledge and adapt to local environments (Addiscott & Vernon, 2020). During the COVID-19 pandemic, Black-led organizations, including churches, stepped up to address food insecurity by organizing food drives and distributing meals to thousands of families in need, filling gaps left by insufficient government support (Regnier-Davies et al., 2022). These efforts often draw on the tradition of church dinners, which have historically provided food and fellowship to Black communities and fostered a sense of belonging and care (Clairmont & Magill, 1999; McRae, 2017). By situating food distribution within these trusted community spaces, Black churches make food more accessible to those who might otherwise face systemic barriers, such as economic inequality or racial discrimination. Beyond the pandemic, Black churches and community groups have expanded their role by offering shelter, meals, and essential supplies to asylum seekers, addressing key social determinants of health\u2014such as housing and nutrition\u2014that intensify food insecurity. Through these efforts, they remain pillars of care and resilience for marginalized populations (Paradkar, 2023).<\/p>\n

    Black and Indigenous women have long led efforts to honour, protect, and sustain the land, acting as vital stewards of Earth\u2019s resources through traditional knowledge, community-driven initiatives, and advocacy. As custodians of significant portions of the world\u2019s biodiversity, Indigenous Peoples offer critical insights into sustainable living and food systems. Their traditional ecological knowledge, rooted in generations of stewardship, is increasingly recognized for its importance in documenting food biodiversity and contributing to human well-being. For example, Elder Shirley Williams, the first Indigenous woman in Canada to earn the designation of Professor based on traditional knowledge, has dedicated her life to preserving and sharing Anishinaabe cultural teachings (Maracle, 2024). Since 2010, alongside Elder Liz Osawamick, she has championed the Traditional Anishinaabe Water Teachings, which emphasize honouring Earth Mother and the sacred water, or Nibi, that sustains all life (Trent University, n.d.). Through their teachings, the women inspire communities to reconnect with the environment and adopt sustainable practices rooted in respect and reciprocity. Similarly, the Mno Aki Land Trust Inc. (Mno Aki), meaning “Good Earth” in Ojibwe, is a powerful example of Indigenous women leading land stewardship. Governed by Indigenous Grandmothers from across Turtle Island, this federally incorporated land trust and registered charity focuses on protecting and restoring the land while fostering intergenerational knowledge-sharing (Ecological Farmers Association of Ontario, 2023).<\/p>\n

    Black women have also made significant contributions. Adebola Adefioye, a Nigerian newcomer to Canada, founded the Afro Women and Youth Foundation (AWYF) Food Bank to address food insecurity and foster community resilience (AWYF, n.d.). Cheyenne Sundance, founder of Sundance Harvest, has established herself as a leader in urban agriculture, creating spaces for marginalized communities to learn sustainable farming practices and reclaim food sovereignty (Farmer\u2019s Footprint, n.d.). Together, these women exemplify the transformative power of traditional knowledge, community care, and a deep-rooted connection to the land.<\/p>\n

    As the effects of climate change intensify, addressing food insecurity has become a critical challenge at local, national, and international levels (FAO et al., 2024). In Canada, millions of households continue to experience food insecurity, exacerbated by recent global economic crises and rising food prices (Pagaduan et al., 2024; Polsky, 2024). While the commonly used household definition of food security emphasizes access, a broader understanding reflected in the 5A\u2019s of food security offers a more comprehensive lens (CSFS, n.d.). Framing food security through this model highlights how systemic inequities shape not only whether food is available or economically accessible, but also whether communities can access culturally appropriate foods, afford nutritious options, and have the agency to participate in, shape, and control their own food systems. This broader framework aligns closely with the principles of food sovereignty, which go beyond access and availability to emphasize communities’ rights to govern the land, waters, and food systems they depend on. This perspective is particularly important for Indigenous and Black communities in Canada, whose agency to harvest, sustain, and use food from the land, water, and sky remains essential to combating food insecurity and must be recognized and supported. An intersectional perspective on food security, with a focus on agency, highlights the \u201ccomplexity of disadvantage associated with multiple identities\u201d (Atrey & Dunne, 2020, p. 6). Thus, the next section changes the focus from race to age and raises concerns over the increased vulnerability of senior women to food insecurity in Canada, as well as the complexity of understanding and addressing this issue.<\/p>\n

    III – Food Security and Senior Women in Canada: Are official Measures of Food Security and Poverty Telling the Whole Story?<\/h2>\n

    By 2040, seniors in Canada are projected to number 10.2 million,  representing 25% of the population (Government of Canada, 2021). Often described as the \u201cfeminization of old age\u201d (Stuckelberger, 1997), the fastest-growing subgroup of Canadian seniors comprises women aged 85 or older (Statistics Canada, 2022). Food insecurity and poverty among seniors are interlinked, complex, and multidimensional issues (Leroux et al., 2020). According to the National Institute on Ageing (2024), women, single-person households, renters and those with lower education levels are at greater risk of poverty. However, official measures of food insecurity and poverty, such as the Household Food Security Survey Module (HFSSM) and the Market Basket Measurement (MBM), may not fully capture which senior households in Canada are, in fact, food insecure or living in poverty.<\/p>\n

    Limitations in HFSSM and MBM measures raise concerns around agency \u2013 one of the 5A\u2019s of food security (CSFS, n.d.)- because what is measured determines who is recognized, who qualifies for support, and how governments design responses. In this section, we will explore the adequacy of the HFSSM and MBM measurement tools and policies in a senior female population and highlight complementary measurement approaches.<\/p>\n

    Shortcomings of the HFSSM and MBM<\/h3>\n

    The HFSSM, Canada\u2019s primary validated measure of food security, may not provide a full picture of food insecurity among seniors for two key reasons:<\/p>\n

      \n
    1. The HFSSM assesses food security at the household level, primarily among women and children. It does not reflect the lived experience of individual seniors in multi-person households who may underconsume because of reduced appetite or physical or mental health challenges (Lee, 2022).<\/li>\n
    2. HFSSM focuses on financial constraints as the primary reason for food insecurity.  Seniors face many non-financial barriers that affect food security, including limited mobility, chronic illness and social isolation (Lee, 2022).<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

      The HFSSM\u2019s household and financial focus may overlook key food security issues among seniors\u2014especially women aged 85 and above, the fastest-growing subgroup. To address this gap, supplementary tools designed specifically for seniors, such as the Seniors in the Community Risk Evaluation for Eating and Nutrition (SCREEN), are recommended (Keller & Trinca, 2025).<\/p>\n

      Many consider the MBM the gold standard for measuring poverty in Canada, and it is tailored to a family of four, consisting of two adults and two children (Griffin & Tabbara, 2023). The MBM uses an equivalization approach to calculate poverty thresholds for families of varying sizes (Statistics Canada, 2024). However, critics argue that equivalization calculations underestimate poverty in smaller senior households (Griffin & Tabbara, 2023). This concern is especially pertinent for older women who may be widowed, separated, or divorced and living alone at retirement. Additionally, the MBM does not account for healthcare costs such as vision care, hearing care, home care, and medical equipment, which Canada\u2019s universal healthcare system does not cover. While provincial programs offer financial support for some of these out-of-pocket expenses, most require an income-based co-payment (Griffin & Tabbara, 2023; Manulife, n.d.). This is again particularly relevant to senior women, who often face higher health costs due to longer life expectancy, a progressive decline in health status with ageing, and lower retirement incomes.<\/p>\n

      Official measures such as the HFSSM and the MBM systematically underrepresent hardship among Black, Indigenous, and racialized women because they emphasize income adequacy rather than lifelong gendered and racialized disadvantages such as education, wage gaps and precarious employment (Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives [CCPA], 2022; Li et al., 2023; Maytree, 2023). This further illustrates how these official measures fail to reflect the lived realities of senior women in Canada.<\/p>\n

      Alternate Indicators and Ways Forward<\/h3>\n

      In contrast to the MBM, the Canadian Elder Standard (CES) provides a more tailored benchmark for seniors by estimating the after-tax income required to meet basic needs, including food, shelter, medical care, transportation, miscellaneous expenses and home-based long-term care for a single senior or a couple living in five major Canadian cities (MacDonald et al., 2010). Unlike the MBM, the CES is senior-specific and recognizes that seniors are not a homogeneous group. It considers how factors such as gender, city of residence, homeowner or renter status, means of transportation and health status influence the cost of living. By incorporating these dimensions, the CES measures aspects of poverty that the MBM does not currently address and highlights the effects of gender disparity.<\/p>\n

      Another complementary measure of poverty is the Material Deprivation Index (MDI). The MDI assesses an individual\u2019s ability to afford items considered important to well-being, such as dental care and covering unexpected expenses (Mendelson et al., 2024). A recent survey by the National Institute of Ageing (2024) revealed that, according to the MDI, 14% of adults aged 65+ have a poverty-level standard of living, compared with 6% reported by the MBM in 2022. This suggests that poverty among older Canadians may be more prevalent than Canada\u2019s official measures indicate. Although not senior-specific, the MDI offers another lens to understand the extent of poverty among seniors and the trade-offs they may face to make ends meet. These findings emphasize that income-based measurement tools alone cannot fully capture the experience of poverty, particularly among senior women.<\/p>\n

      As Canada’s senior population continues to grow, food insecurity among senior women is an increasing concern. Canadian policy is currently driven primarily by datasets derived from official measures of food security and poverty. A variety of socio-economic variables play a crucial role in determining poverty and food security status in senior women. A multidimensional measurement approach is recommended to better inform food policy in this population. Such an approach includes the development of a more holistic definition of poverty that better characterizes the lived experiences of seniors, including gender disparity; complementing the MBM with the CES and\/or MDI to obtain additional information beyond income-based dimensions; as well as complementing the use of quantitative measurement tools with qualitative and participatory research methods (i.e., storytelling) to assess poverty from a more holistic perspective.<\/p>\n

      As this section demonstrates, context matters when using an intersectional lens on food security. This is also important to understand the connections between \u201cindividual and group experiences of identity-based disadvantage to systemic mechanisms of \u2018privilege and dis-privilege\u2019\u201d (Ajele & McGill, 2020, p. 21). The following section explores a different policy context affecting the health and food security of trans individuals in Canada.<\/p>\n

      IV – Transgender Experiences, Food Insecurity and Sex Work in Canada<\/h2>\n

      In Canada, food insecurity disproportionately affects two-spirited, lesbian, gay, bisexual, transsexual, queer, intersexual, asexual and other diverse sexual orientations and gender identities (2SLGBTQIA+) who face stress, isolation and systemic discrimination across employment, housing, and social services (Gibb et al., 2024; Th\u00e9riault et al., 2025). Similar patterns are evident elsewhere, where discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender diversity undermines multiple dimensions of food security, including accessibility, adequacy, and agency (Patterson et al., 2020; Russomanno et al., 2019).<\/p>\n

      Transgender and bisexual individuals are at especially high risk of food insecurity (Gibb et al., 2024; Nascimento et al., 2026), and many are pushed into survival strategies such as sex work to secure basic needs, highlighting deep structural barriers to acceptable and reliable food access and exposing them to additional stigma (Coronel-Villalobos & Saewyc, 2019; Masa et al., 2023).  With a focus on agency, this section discusses the impacts of systemic discrimination and harmful policies on the food security of transgender sex workers, as well as community responses and the need for more research.<\/p>\n

      Systemic Discrimination and Food Insecurity<\/h3>\n

      Transgender and gender non-conforming (GNC) identities are underrepresented in research (Stenersen et al., 2025). Generally, 2SLGBTQIA+ identities are lacking in nationwide food insecurity data, with research including the Canadian Income Survey (CIS) often assuming a heteronormative nuclear family as the default (Right to Food, 2025). Even with a national knowledge gap concerning specifically Two-Spirit, trans, non-binary, queer, and intersex people, Right to Food (2025) concluded, based on existing evidence, that there existed distressingly high rates of Household Food Insecurity (HFI) because of poverty and employment discrimination, expressed particularly among trans and bisexual populations.<\/p>\n

      Faith-based emergency food organizations, often perceived as discriminatory, further discourage 2SLGBTQIA+ individuals from seeking assistance, reflecting historical and systemic exclusion (Patterson et al., 2020; Russomanno et al., 2019). Financial precarity, marked by high unemployment, low incomes, and lack of family support, compounds these challenges, while a \u201cgreater prevalence of poor mental health\u2026, some chronic diseases, sexually transmitted and blood-borne infections, and alcohol abuse\u201d further exacerbates nutritional struggles (Hou et al., 2024; Kirby & Linde, 2020). These barriers are then magnified for individuals experiencing additional forms of marginalization, such as racism, sexism, ableism, or colonialism and further affect their ability to access adequate food (Hou et al., 2024; Rauh et al., 2025).<\/p>\n

      Transgender individuals in Canada consistently face lower incomes compared to all sexual and gender minority groups (Kinit et al., 2023, as cited by Spiteri, 2024), disproportionately live in low-income neighbourhoods, and face \u201cprolific transphobia and bias in the labour market, resulting in harassment, exclusion and poverty\u201d (Spiteri, 2024). Additionally, transgender individuals in Canada face significant barriers to employment, such as employment discrimination and workplace harassment (Waite, 2021, as cited by Spiteri, 2024), in parallel to structural barriers such as \u201cthe presence of a dead (former) name on credential documentation and challenges accessing references for work experience before their transition\u201d (Kinit et al., 2023, as cited by Spiteri, 2024). Overall, transgender persons in Canada face poorer economic outcomes (Rauh et al., 2025), and therefore lower food security. Push factors such as low employability and experiences of discrimination result in a sex-work trap for trans individuals, especially youth (D\u2019Ippoliti & Botti, 2017). Interventions tailored to trans and GNC individuals must address these financial and systemic barriers while ensuring inclusivity and cultural sensitivity, or they risk perpetuating the circumstances that limit agency where it could be strengthened.<\/p>\n

      Sex Work as a Survival Strategy<\/h3>\n

      Systemic discrimination and economic precarity create environments that limit accessibility, adequacy, and agency, as many trans individuals are made to rely on sex work as a survival strategy, where some exchange sex for basic resources like food (Coronel-Villalobos & Saewyc, 2019; Masa et al., 2023; Nascimento et al., 2026). Factors such as family rejection, homelessness, and welfare participation disproportionately impact those with intersecting marginalized identities, including Black, Gender Non-Conforming, and disabled individuals (Masa et al., 2023). While sex work can offer financial autonomy and empowerment for some, trans sex workers, particularly women of colour, face heightened risks of violence, transmisogyny, racism, and stigma because of their identities, with an increased likelihood for those who participated in street-based sex work (Masa et al., 2023). These vulnerabilities extend beyond the workplace to intimate and family relationships, where abuse and economic dependency often persist (Masa et al., 2023). Migration and asylum can offer an avenue of escape from sex work and sexual violence but may also introduce new forms of instability, victimization, and food insecurity due to the new environment\u2019s potentially restrictive immigration laws and precarious employment conditions, which are common in food-related sectors (Ussher et al., 2022).<\/p>\n

      While stigma affects all sex workers, those who are trans experience compounded challenges due to intersecting oppressions and face a \u201cdisproportionate burden of violence, with significant variations across social, cultural, and economic contexts\u201d (Lyons et al., 2015). Considering the limited evidence on rates of food insecurity among cis and trans women sex workers, Barreto et al. (2018) researched 761 cisgender and trans women sex workers in Vancouver. Results demonstrated that a quarter of participants were \u201cself-identified gender\/sexual minority, and were more likely to be food insecure than heterosexual, cisgender sex workers\u201d (p. 608). Furthermore, a third of the study participants reported losing weight and having hunger pains over the previous six months because they could not afford food. Almost 10% reported they had exchanged sex for food in the previous six months (Barreto et al., 2018, p. 608). The study concluded that \u201cstructural barriers of criminalization and stigma, previously shown to create poor working conditions and isolated and exploitative housing for sex workers, may undermine sex workers\u2019 access to a basic human right to adequate and secure access to food\u201d (Barreto et al., 2018, p. 610). Overall, systemic reforms are urgently needed to protect the rights, dignity, and safety of trans sex workers while addressing the root causes of discrimination and economic precarity.<\/p>\n

      The Impact of Canadian Sex Work Policies on Trans Health and Food Security<\/h3>\n

      A national study comparing transgender persons who were sex workers with those who were not concluded that transgender sex workers were more likely to live in poverty, have a disability, report poor health, and experience discrimination and violence in comparison to their counterparts (Navarro et al., 2021). Canada currently adopts the \u2018Nordic model\u2019 policy towards sex workers (Kingston & Thomas, 2019), with legislation that targets clients instead of sex workers. Although this appears as a protective policy, the reality is that sex work is still criminalized, and trans gender sex workers remain concerned about \u201cbeing stopped or harassed by police or security\u201d (Navarro et al., 2021). Indigenous, Black, racialized immigrants, non-binary and trans sex workers are especially vulnerable to such criminalization. The current policy focuses on the punishment of surrounding actors over supporting victims, leaving trans sex workers particularly vulnerable as their means of survival is forcibly removed from them (Government of Canada, 2015). Similarly, Canada\u2019s food policies offer only vague commitments to gender inclusivity, overlooking the specific needs of marginalized communities like trans individuals (Government of Canada, 2020).<\/p>\n

      The criminalization of sex work under current laws forces workers into unsafe environments, increasing risks to their health, safety, and capacity to influence their own lives and personal agency. These policies parallel broader global efforts, such as the U.S.-based Project 2025, which seeks to dismantle 2SLGBTQIA+ protections and vilify trans identities (Meisler, 2024). While Canadian policies may appear less overtly hostile, they perpetuate stigma and systemic inequalities. This disproportionately harms trans and GNC sex workers due to intersecting identities and exacerbates food insecurity by considering all sex workers as victims and all clients and third parties as criminals (Lam, 2022). Doing so can undermine sex workers’ agency by framing them primarily as victims whose choices must be made for them. It can also reinforce stigma while diverting attention from the systemic conditions that may push marginalized populations into precarious work for survival. Effective reforms must affirm the autonomy and dignity of marginalized communities, addressing systemic barriers while ensuring full decriminalization of sex work, and inviting trans sex workers to discuss sex work law and policy.<\/p>\n

      Community-Led Solutions and Ways Forward<\/h3>\n

      Regarding policy, public health solutions should implement employment non-discrimination measures to protect trans and GNC people in both the workplace and sectors like health care; for example, with sex workers in these groups reporting cases where providers were trans-affirming but not sex-work-affirming (Navarro et al., 2021). Policy reforms, however, tend to be long and arduous processes. Community-led alternative solutions have historically helped ensure the food security of minority populations by building relationships between local food pantries and 2SLGBTQIA+ organizations to create a safer, more local, and more empowering environment for all persons in need of food assistance (Hou et al., 2024; Russomanno et al., 2019). One example is Meal Trans in Toronto, which offers a weekly \u201caffirming drop-in program for lower-income, street-active, homeless and sex-working 2 Spirit, trans, non-binary, genderqueer, and questioning folks\u201d (The 519, 2022), enabling not only community connections but also access to referrals and supports. This reflects what occurs on the individual scale: support networks such as the \u201cchosen family,\u201d a set of friends and some family members, playing an important supporting role in providing \u201cemotional support, physical, food, and financial resources, as well as assistance in obtaining government benefits\u201d (Nascimento et al., 2026). Community-building efforts, such as community gardens, also play a critical role in addressing food insecurity by fostering empowerment and self-determination through representation (Lovell et al., 2014; Turner et al., 2011). These initiatives give transgender communities visibility and agency.<\/p>\n

      Systemic discrimination, sex work, and punitive policies intersect to create substantial barriers to food security for trans people in Canada. Discrimination drives economic instability, pushing many trans individuals into survival-based sex work, which is further stigmatized and criminalized under Canadian law. This approach reinforces systemic hierarchies rooted in transmisogyny, racism, and inequality, exacerbating vulnerabilities that may arise in other socio-political contexts. Addressing these issues requires systemic change that prioritizes trans autonomy and wellbeing, in other words, agency. Community-led solutions, inclusive policy language, and equitable access to resources like food, housing, and employment are essential. Governments must shift from punitive frameworks to empowerment-based approaches, ensuring trans individuals can live authentically, with their health, safety, and dignity protected.<\/p>\n

      V – Conclusion<\/h2>\n

      Conventional approaches to food security can obscure how people’s ability to access food and exercise agency is shaped by intersecting structures of colonialism, ableism, racism, gender, age, sexuality, income, and public policy. Using a decolonial and intersectional approach to understanding food insecurity highlights why these inequities persist, whose experiences dominant frameworks render invisible, and whose agency is recognized in designing solutions.<\/p>\n

      This chapter offered reflections on the enduring value of using an intersectional and decolonial lens to examine food security in the 21st century. This chapter shows that by centring the voices and contributions of Indigenous and Black communities, Canada can move beyond short-term solutions toward a more sustainable and equitable food system. Furthermore, recognizing and empowering these communities will be crucial for shaping the future of food security in Canada and beyond. This chapter also compares different methods for measuring poverty and food insecurity and proposes a multidimensional measurement approach that goes beyond income and accounts for differences among seniors in Canada. The chapter also argues that criminalization of sex work reinforces systemic hierarchies rooted in transmisogyny, racism, and inequality, exacerbating vulnerabilities and creating substantial barriers to food security for trans people in Canada.<\/p>\n

      Despite differences, all three dimensions discussed the \u201ccomplexity of disadvantage associated with multiple identities\u201d (Ajele & McGill, 2020, p. 21), and how they relate to systemic mechanisms of \u201cprivilege and dis-privilege\u201d (Ajele & McGill, 2020, p. 21). Together, they demonstrate that food insecurity cannot be fully understood without attention to the intersecting structures that shape both vulnerability and agency. By bringing these dimensions to the surface, we argued that the diverse voices enabled by an intersectional lens deserve not only greater awareness and visibility but also more research and policy support.<\/p>\n

      References<\/h2>\n

      Addiscott, S., & Vernon, K. (Eds.). (2020). The Black Prairie Archives: An Anthology.<\/em> Wilfrid Laurier University Press.<\/p>\n

      Afro Women and Youth Foundation. (n.d.). Settlement services & food bank<\/em><\/a>.<\/p>\n

      Ajele, G., & McGill, J. (2020). Intersectionality in law and legal contexts [PDF]<\/em><\/a>. Women\u2019s Legal Education and Action Fund.<\/p>\n

      Alabi, B. O., & Robin, T. (2023). Food insecurities and dependencies: Indigenous food responses to COVID-19<\/a>. AlterNative: An International Journal of Indigenous Peoples, 19<\/em>(1), 204\u2013210.<\/p>\n

      Alberga, H. (2023). Jamaican migrant workers say they are treated like \u2018animals\u2019 in open letter under Canadian government review<\/a>. CTV News<\/em>.<\/p>\n

      Amnesty International. (2025). \u201cCanada has destroyed me\u201d: Labour exploitation of migrant workers in Canada [PDF]<\/em><\/a>.<\/p>\n

      Assembly of First Nations. (2026). About us<\/a>.<\/em><\/p>\n

      Atrey, S., & Dunne, P. (Eds.). (2020). Intersectionality and Human Rights Law.<\/em> Hart Publishing.<\/p>\n

      Bateman, R. B. (1996). Talking with the plow: Agricultural policy and Indian farming in the Canadian and US prairies [PDF]<\/a>. Canadian Journal of Native Studies, 16<\/em>(2), 211\u2013228.<\/p>\n

      Barreto, D., Shoveller, J., Braschel, M., Duff, P., & Shannon, K. (2018). The effect of violence and intersecting structural inequities on high rates of food insecurity among marginalized sex workers in a Canadian setting<\/a>. Journal of Urban Health, 96<\/em>(4), 605\u2013615.<\/p>\n

      Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives. (2022). The gender dimensions of Canada\u2019s poverty crisis<\/a>.<\/em><\/p>\n

      Canadian Mysteries. (n.d.). Colonial correspondence: Ang\u00e9lique<\/em><\/a>.<\/p>\n

      Carter, S. (1990). Two solitudes: Myth and reality of the Plains Indian and agriculture<\/a>. In Lost harvests: Prairie Indian reserve farmers and government policy<\/em> (pp. 15\u201349). McGill-Queen\u2019s University Press.<\/p>\n

      CBC. (2023). Canada was not a safe haven from slavery <\/em><\/a>[Video]. YouTube.<\/p>\n

      Centre for Studies in Food Security. (n.d.). About us<\/em><\/a>. Toronto Metropolitan University.<\/p>\n

      Cho, S., Crenshaw, K. W., & McCall, L. (2013). Toward a field of intersectionality studies: Theory, applications, and praxis.<\/a> Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society, 38<\/em>(4), 785\u2013810.<\/p>\n

      Clairmont, D. H., & Magill, D. W. (1999). Africville: The life and death of a Canadian Black community<\/em>. Canadian Scholars.<\/p>\n

      Coronel-Villalobos, M., & Saewyc, E. M. (2019). Trading sex and sexual exploitation among transgender youth in Canada<\/a>. Journal of Adolescent Health, 64<\/em>(2, Suppl.).<\/p>\n

      Crenshaw, K. (1989). Demarginalizing the intersection of race and sex: A Black feminist critique of antidiscrimination doctrine, feminist theory and antiracist politics<\/a>. University of Chicago Legal Forum, 1989,<\/em> Article 8.<\/p>\n

      Crenshaw, K. (1991). Mapping the margins: Intersectionality, identity politics, and violence against women of color<\/a>. Stanford Law Review, 43<\/em>(6), 1241\u20131299.<\/p>\n

      Cuthand, D. (2021). Peasant farm policy<\/em><\/a>. The Canadian Encyclopedia.<\/p>\n

      D\u2019Ippoliti, C., & Botti, F. (2017). Sex work among trans people: Evidence from Southern Italy<\/a>. Feminist Economics, 23<\/em>(3), 77\u2013109.<\/p>\n

      Daschuk, J. W. (2013). Clearing the Plains: Disease, politics of starvation, and the loss of Aboriginal life<\/em>. University of Regina Press.<\/p>\n

      Ecological Farmers Association of Ontario. (2023). Mno Aki Land Trust: Redefining conservation on Indigenous terms [PDF]<\/em><\/a>.<\/p>\n

      Elsharkawy, O. (2023). Food sovereignty for Black communities in Toronto: Challenges and policy opportunities [PDF]<\/em><\/a>. Black Food Sovereignty Working Group.<\/p>\n

      Farmer\u2019s Footprint. (n.d.). Meet Cheyenne Sundance<\/em>.<\/a><\/p>\n

      First Nations Food, Nutrition, and Environment Study. (2021). Final key findings and recommendations [PDF]<\/em><\/a>.<\/p>\n

      First Nations Food, Nutrition, and Environment Study. (2023). First Nations Food, Nutrition, and Environment Study: National study report [PDF]<\/a>.<\/em><\/p>\n

      Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. (2023). The status of women in agrifood systems: Overview<\/a>.<\/em><\/p>\n

      Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, International Fund for Agricultural Development, UNICEF, World Food Programme, & World Health Organization. (2024). The state of food security and nutrition in the world 2024: Financing to end hunger, food insecurity and malnutrition in all its forms<\/em><\/a>. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations.<\/p>\n

      Foster, J. E., & Parrott, Z. (2015). Buffalo hunt<\/em><\/a>. The Canadian Encyclopedia.<\/p>\n

      Furgal, C., Pirkle, C. L., Lucas, M., & Martin, R. (2021). Food security: Nunavik Inuit Health Survey 2017 Qanuilirpitaa? How are we now? [PDF]<\/em><\/a> Nunavik Regional Board of Health and Social Services & Institut national de sant\u00e9 publique du Qu\u00e9bec.<\/p>\n

      Gibb, J. K., Williams, S., Mikelsteins, K., Charles, J., McKinnon, L., Beach, L., McKerracher, L., & Fields, J. (2024). Queering food security research: A critical analysis of 2SLGBTQ+ people\u2019s experiences of food insecurity in Toronto during the COVID-19 pandemic<\/a>. Social Science & Medicine<\/em>, 345, Article 116709.<\/p>\n

      Government of Canada. (2015, March 11). Fact sheet\u2014Prostitution criminal law reform: Bill C-36, the Protection of Communities and Exploited Persons Act<\/em><\/a>. Department of Justice Canada.<\/p>\n

      Government of Canada. (2020, November 17). The Food Policy for Canada<\/em><\/a>.<\/p>\n

      Government of Canada. (2021). Seniors infographic\u20142021<\/em><\/a>.<\/p>\n

      Government of Canada. (2023). Fact sheet: Key historical facts about anti-Black racism and discrimination in Canada<\/em><\/a>.<\/p>\n

      Government of Canada. (2025, April 2). Fact sheet: Key historical facts about anti-Black racism and discrimination in Canada<\/em>.<\/a> Canada\u2019s Black Justice Strategy.<\/p>\n

      Griffin, P., & Tabbara, M. (2023). A fine line: Finding the right seniors\u2019 poverty measure in Canada [PDF]<\/em><\/a>. Maytree.<\/p>\n

      Henry-Dixon, N. (2022). Black enslavement in Canada<\/em><\/a>. The Canadian Encyclopedia.<\/p>\n

      Heritage Community Foundations. (2019). Black settlers<\/em><\/a>.<\/p>\n

      Hou, S., White, M., Ng, E., Kelleher, S., Gao, M., & Joy, P. (2024). Intersectional analysis of food insecurity for 2S\/LGBTQIA+ communities in Canada and implications for dietetic practice<\/a>. Journal of Critical Dietetics, 7<\/em>(2), 186\u2013224.<\/p>\n

      Inuit Tapiriit Kanatami. (2004). 5000 years of Inuit history and heritage [PDF]<\/em><\/a>.<\/p>\n

      Inuit Tapiriit Kanatami. (2021). Inuit Nunangat food security strategy<\/em><\/a>.<\/p>\n

      Irwin, R. (2022). Reserves in Canada<\/em><\/a>. The Canadian Encyclopedia.<\/p>\n

      Keller, H. H., & Trinca, V. (2025). Baseline nutrition risk as measured by SCREEN-8 predicts self-reported 12-month healthcare service use of older adults 3 years later<\/a>. Applied Physiology, Nutrition, and Metabolism,<\/em> 50, 1\u201311.<\/p>\n

      Kelly, J. (2021). Alberta\u2019s early Black settlements<\/em><\/a>. Edmonton City as Museum Project.<\/p>\n

      Kingston, S., & Thomas, T. (2019). No model in practice: A \u2018Nordic model\u2019 to respond to prostitution?<\/a> Crime, Law and Social Change, 71<\/em>(4), 423\u2013439.<\/p>\n

      Kirby, S. R., & Linde, J. A. (2020). Understanding the nutritional needs of transgender and gender-nonconforming students at a large public Midwestern university<\/a>. Transgender Health, 5<\/em>(1), 33\u201341.<\/p>\n

      Lam, E. (2022, July 12). Sex work and the law in Canada<\/em><\/a>. CATIE.<\/p>\n

      Lee, J. S. (2022). Food insecurity in older adults<\/a>. The Journal of Nutrition, 152<\/em>(8), 1808\u20131809.<\/p>\n

      Leroux, J., Cox, J., & Rosenberg, M. (2020). Food insecurity and aging: A scoping study of the literature<\/a>. Canadian Journal on Aging, 39<\/em>(4), 662\u2013696.<\/p>\n

      Li, T., Fafard St-Germain, A.-A., & Tarasuk, V. (2023). Household food insecurity in Canada, 2022<\/a>.<\/em> PROOF.<\/p>\n

      Loppie, S., Reading, C., & de Leeuw, S. (2014). Indigenous experiences with racism and its impacts [PDF]<\/em><\/a>. National Collaborating Centre for Aboriginal Health.<\/p>\n

      Lovell, R., Husk, K., Bethel, A., & Garside, R. (2014). What are the health and well-being impacts of community gardening for adults and children: A mixed-methods systematic review protocol<\/a>. Environmental Evidence<\/em>, 3, Article 20.<\/p>\n

      Lyons, T., Kr\u00fcsi, A., Pierre, L., Kerr, T., Small, W., & Shannon, K. (2015). Negotiating violence in the context of transphobia and criminalization: The experiences of trans sex workers in Vancouver, Canada<\/a>. Qualitative Health Research<\/em>.<\/p>\n

      MacDonald, B. J., Andrews, D., & Brown, R. L. (2010). The Canadian Elder Standard\u2014Pricing the cost of basic needs for the Canadian elderly<\/a>. Canadian Journal on Aging, 29<\/em>(1), 39\u201356.<\/p>\n

      Manulife. (n.d.). What\u2019s covered and what\u2019s not covered by provincial government\u2019s health insurance plans<\/em>.<\/a><\/p>\n

      Maracle, C. (2024). How Shirley Williams\u2019s traditional knowledge helped her become a professor at Trent University<\/em><\/a>. CBC News.<\/p>\n

      Martens, T. R., Dennis, M. K., & Hart, M. A. (2022). Feeding Indigenous people in Canada<\/a>. International Social Work, 65<\/em>(4), 652\u2013662.<\/p>\n

      Masa, R., Baca-Atlas, S. N., Shangani, S., Forte, A. B., & Donerario. (2023). Family rejection, socioeconomic precarity, and exchanging sex for food among young transgender adults: Findings from the U.S. Transgender Survey<\/a>. Journal of Health Care for the Poor and Underserved, 34<\/em>(2), 549\u2013568.<\/p>\n

      Maytree. (2023). Racialized poverty in Canada: Why we need a race-based poverty reduction strategy<\/a>.<\/em><\/p>\n

      McCullough, S., & McRae, M. (2023). The story of Black slavery in Canadian history<\/em><\/a>. Canadian Museum for Human Rights.<\/p>\n

      McRae, M. (2017). The story of Africville<\/em><\/a>. Canadian Museum for Human Rights.<\/p>\n

      Meisler, H. (2024, October 10). How Project 2025 tries to demonize LGBTQI+ people\u2014and why it\u2019ll fail<\/a>.<\/em> National Women\u2019s Law Center.<\/p>\n

      Melton, J. R. (1994). Amber Valley: A Black enclave in northern Alberta, Canada<\/em> <\/a>[Master\u2019s thesis, California State University, San Bernardino]. CSUSB ScholarWorks.<\/p>\n

      Mendelson, M., Notten, G., Matern, R., & Seer, S. (2024). Poverty in Canada: Through a deprivation lens [PDF]<\/em><\/a>. Food Banks Canada.<\/p>\n

      Mignolo, W. D., & Walsh, C. E. (2018). On decoloniality: Concepts, analytics, praxis<\/em>. Duke University Press.<\/p>\n

      Mooten, N. (2021). Racism and discrimination: A review of the literature [PDF]<\/em><\/a> [Research report]. Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada.<\/p>\n

      Mosby, I. (2013). Administering colonial science: Nutrition research and human biomedical experimentation in Aboriginal communities and residential schools, 1942\u20131952<\/a>. Histoire Sociale\/Social History, 46<\/em>(1), 145\u2013172.<\/p>\n

      Nascimento, I. M. R., Reis, A. P. D., Andrade, R. T. S. de, & Pereira, M. (2026). Transgender and gender nonconforming people\u2019s vulnerability to food insecurity: Systematic review and meta-synthesis<\/a>. Cadernos de Sa\u00fade P\u00fablica, 41<\/em>(12), e00058825.<\/p>\n

      National Institute on Ageing. (2024). Perspectives on growing older in Canada: The 2024 NIA ageing in Canada survey<\/a>.<\/em><\/p>\n

      Navarro, J., Johnstone, F., Temple Newhook, J., Smith, M., Wallace Skelton, J., Prempeh, K., Lopez, L. S. C., Scheim, A., & Bauer, G. (2021, June 25). Health and well-being among trans and non-binary youth<\/a>. Trans PULSE Canada.<\/em><\/p>\n

      Nestor, R. (2018). Pass system in Canada<\/em><\/a>. The Canadian Encyclopedia.<\/p>\n

      Noakes, C. T. (2024). Potlatch ban<\/em><\/a>. The Canadian Encyclopedia.<\/p>\n

      NunatuKavut Community Council. (2025). NunatuKavut Community Council community freezer program<\/em><\/a>.<\/p>\n

      Oyeniran, C. (2021a). Black Loyalists in British North America<\/em><\/a>. The Canadian Encyclopedia.<\/p>\n

      Oyeniran, C. (2021b). Amber Valley<\/em><\/a>. The Canadian Encyclopedia.<\/p>\n

      Pagaduan, J. E., Lazarescu, C., Vallieres, E., Skinner, K., Zuckermann, A. M. E., & Idzerda, L. (2024). The impacts of the Nutrition North Canada program on the accessibility and affordability of perishable, nutritious foods among eligible communities: A scoping review<\/a>. International Journal of Circumpolar Health, 83<\/em>(1), Article 2313255.<\/p>\n

      Paradkar, S. (2023). These Black churches came to the rescue amid Toronto\u2019s African refugee crisis. Now they say governments abandoned them<\/em><\/a>. Toronto Star.<\/p>\n

      Parker, B., Brady, J., Power, E. M., & Belyea, S. (2019). Introduction: This is what feminist food studies look like. In B. Parker, J. Brady, E. M. Power, & S. Belyea (Eds.), Feminist food studies: Intersectional perspectives<\/em>. Women\u2019s Press.<\/p>\n

      Parrot, Z. (2022). Indian Act.<\/em><\/a> The Canadian Encyclopedia.<\/p>\n

      Patterson, J. G., Russomanno, J., & Jabson Tree, J. M. (2020). Sexual orientation disparities in food insecurity and food assistance use in U.S. adult women: National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, 2005\u20132014<\/a>. BMC Public Health<\/em>, 20, Article 1155.<\/p>\n

      Polsky, J. Y. (2024). Trends in household food insecurity from the Canadian Community Health Survey, 2017 to 2022.<\/a> Health Reports, 35<\/em>(10), 1\u201328.<\/p>\n

      PROOF. (2024, April 26). New data on household food insecurity in 2023<\/em><\/a>.<\/p>\n

      PROOF. (2025). Indigenous food insecurity<\/em><\/a>.<\/p>\n

      Rauh, K., M\u00e9nard, F.-P., Roy, J.-F., & Beall, A. (2025, October 16). Socioeconomic outcomes of transgender and non-binary people in Canada [PDF]<\/em><\/a>. Statistics Canada.<\/p>\n

      Regnier-Davies, J., Edge, S., & Austin, N. (2022). The intersection of structure and agency within charitable community food programs in Toronto, Canada, during the COVID-19 pandemic: Cultivating systemic change<\/a>. Critical Public Health, 33<\/em>(3), 355\u2013362.<\/p>\n

      Right to Food. (2025). Food insecurity among 2SLGBTQI+ people<\/em><\/a>.<\/p>\n

      Russomanno, J., Patterson, J. G., & Jabson, J. M. (2019). Food insecurity among transgender and gender nonconforming individuals in the Southeast United States: A qualitative study<\/a>. Transgender Health, 4<\/em>(1), 89\u201399.<\/p>\n

      Spiteri, S. (2024, March 28). Transgender visibility in Canadian labour market information<\/em><\/a>. Labour Market Information Council.<\/p>\n

      Statistics Canada. (2022). A portrait of Canada\u2019s growing population aged 85 and older from the 2021 Census<\/em><\/a>.<\/p>\n

      Statistics Canada. (2024). Market Basket Measure research paper: An analysis of the equivalization method<\/em><\/a>.<\/p>\n

      Stenersen, M., Umrani, A., Fricke, I., & Zemlak, J. (2025). Sex work patterns among transgender and gender diverse people: A latent class analysis<\/a>. Journal of Homosexuality, 72<\/em>(11), 2134\u20132152.<\/p>\n

      Stuckelberger, A. (1997). Men and women age differently<\/em><\/a>. World Health Organization.<\/p>\n

      The 519. (2022, January 22). Meal Trans<\/em><\/a>.<\/p>\n

      Thayaparan, A. (2026). Toronto\u2019s Little Jamaica in \u2018state of emergency\u2019 due to Eglinton-Crosstown construction: BIA<\/em><\/a>. CBC News.<\/p>\n

      Th\u00e9riault, J., Joy, P., Boudhra\u00e2, S., & Gao, M. (2025). Rethinking 2S\/LGBTQI+ food security with co-design: A study protocol.<\/a> Frontiers in Public Health<\/em>, 13, Article 1558700.<\/p>\n

      Toronto Metropolitan University. (2021a). Module 7\u2014Gender and food availability<\/em> [Online course module]. CFNY409 Gender and Food Security.<\/p>\n

      Toronto Metropolitan University. (2021b). Module 8\u2014Gender and accessibility to natural resources<\/em> [Online course module]. CFNY409 Gender and Food Security.<\/p>\n

      Toronto Metropolitan University. (2021c). Module 9\u2014Gender and accessibility to work and income<\/em> [Online course module]. CFNY409 Gender and Food Security.<\/p>\n

      Toronto Metropolitan University. (2021d). Module 10\u2014Gender and adequacy<\/em> [Online course module]. CFNY409 Gender and Food Security.<\/p>\n

      Toronto Metropolitan University. (2021e). Module 11\u2014Gender and acceptability<\/em> [Online course module]. CFNY409 Gender and Food Security.<\/p>\n

      Toronto Metropolitan University. (2021f). Module 12\u2014Gender and agency<\/em> [Online course module]. CFNY409 Gender and Food Security.<\/p>\n

      Trent University. (n.d.). Nibi Emosaawdamajig<\/em><\/a>.<\/p>\n

      Tr\u2019ond\u00ebk Hw\u00ebch\u2019in Farm. (n.d.). Tr\u2019ond\u00ebk Hw\u00ebch\u2019in Farm<\/em><\/a>.<\/p>\n

      Turner, B., Henryks, J., & Pearson, D. (2011). Community gardens: Sustainability, health and inclusion in the city<\/a>. Local Environment, 16<\/em>(6), 489\u2013492.<\/p>\n

      Ussher, J. M., Hawkey, A., Perz, J., Liamputtong, P., Sekar, J., Marjadi, B., Schmied, V., Dune, T., & Brook, E. (2022). Crossing boundaries and fetishization: Experiences of sexual violence for trans women of color<\/a>. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 37<\/em>(5\u20136), NP3552\u2013NP3584.<\/p>\n

      Vernon, K. (2024). In the early 1900s, Canada put out ads to attract white American farmers. Black Indigenous settlers came too<\/em><\/a>. CBC.<\/p>\n

      Williams-Forson, P., & Wilkerson, A. (2011). Intersectionality and food studies<\/a>. Food, Culture & Society, 14<\/em>(1), 7\u201328.<\/p>\n

      World Economic Forum. (2024, March 8). Women are central to global food systems\u2014Men must recognize and act upon that<\/em><\/a>.<\/p>\n

      World Food Program. (2019). Get the facts: Putting a gender lens on global food insecurity [PDF]<\/em>.<\/a> Women Deliver.<\/p>\n

      1. The term \u201cInuit Nunangat\u201d is a Canadian Inuit term that includes land, water, and ice. Inuit consider the land, water, and ice of our homeland to be integral to our culture and Arctic way of life (Inuit Tapiriit Kanatami, 2021). ↵<\/a><\/li><\/ol><\/div>","protected":false},"author":605,"menu_order":1,"template":"","meta":{"pb_show_title":"on","pb_short_title":"","pb_subtitle":"","pb_authors":["ryan-antonio","louise-huneault","andrea-moraes","gertrude-omoro"],"pb_section_license":""},"chapter-type":[],"contributor":[72],"license":[],"class_list":["post-39","chapter","type-chapter","status-publish","hentry","contributor-gertrude-omoro"],"part":38,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/pressbooks.library.torontomu.ca\/rethinkingfoodsecurity\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/chapters\/39","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/pressbooks.library.torontomu.ca\/rethinkingfoodsecurity\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/chapters"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/pressbooks.library.torontomu.ca\/rethinkingfoodsecurity\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/chapter"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/pressbooks.library.torontomu.ca\/rethinkingfoodsecurity\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/605"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/pressbooks.library.torontomu.ca\/rethinkingfoodsecurity\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/chapters\/39\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":61,"href":"https:\/\/pressbooks.library.torontomu.ca\/rethinkingfoodsecurity\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/chapters\/39\/revisions\/61"}],"part":[{"href":"https:\/\/pressbooks.library.torontomu.ca\/rethinkingfoodsecurity\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/parts\/38"}],"metadata":[{"href":"https:\/\/pressbooks.library.torontomu.ca\/rethinkingfoodsecurity\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/chapters\/39\/metadata\/"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/pressbooks.library.torontomu.ca\/rethinkingfoodsecurity\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=39"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"chapter-type","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/pressbooks.library.torontomu.ca\/rethinkingfoodsecurity\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/chapter-type?post=39"},{"taxonomy":"contributor","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/pressbooks.library.torontomu.ca\/rethinkingfoodsecurity\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/contributor?post=39"},{"taxonomy":"license","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/pressbooks.library.torontomu.ca\/rethinkingfoodsecurity\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/license?post=39"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}