Sexual orientation and gender identity in human rights impact assessment

Abstract

Responding to violations against lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, intersex and queer people worldwide, in the light of the universality of human rights, this paper demonstrates the need, benefits and opportunities for including sexual orientation and gender identity (SOGI) in human rights impact assessment (HRIA) and related impact assessments. The United Nations legal framework (including the 2011 Resolution on Human Rights, Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity) and supporting international legal documents such as the Yogyakarta Principles provide the mandate and basis for this paper. The paper develops a typology of documents related to SOGI aspects in HRIA and provides examples of SOGI-centred HRIA approaches, specifically the Uganda Anti-Homosexuality Bill and post-earthquake disaster relief in Haiti. Our findings identify research-practice gaps in modes and technicalities of the pioneer SOGI-centred HRIA cases, and attest to an absence of methodologies, tools and indicators. We call upon impact assessment practitioners to develop and use tools that are inclusive of gays, lesbians and bisexuals as well as transgender and intersex people.

Social licence to operate through a gender lens: The challenges of including women's interests in development assistance projects

“…Despite some critiques (Cooke & Kothari 2001;Benjamin 2012;Cooksy & Mark 2012), it is generally considered that the shift towards greater involvement of target communities in project development and implementation is beneficial (Cavill & Sohail 2007). However, simple participation is not enough, and a specific gender and sexual orientation assessment is required (Thierry 2007;Sauer & Podhora 2013). Participation is fundamental to SLO, because without participation how could a project or organization know it was meeting stakeholder needs.…”

Advancing disaster geographies: From marginalisation to inclusion of gender and sexual minorities

“…These vulnerabilities are linked to social marginalisation, discrimination, and stigma (Alessi et al, 2018;Gorman-Murray et al, 2017;McKinnon et al, 2017b). They are exacerbated by various factors, including the lack of inclusion of LGBTQIA+ people and needs in disaster, emergency management, and/or development policies (Dominey-Howes et al, 2014;Sauer & Podhora, 2013;Yamashita et al, 2017); conflict with dominant religious beliefs and value systems (Dominey-Howes et al, 2016;Urbatsch, 2016); and Western heteronormative framings of disaster management and disaster experiences (Dominey-Howes et al, 2014;Gaillard, Sanz, et al, 2017;Gorman-Murray et al, 2014;McKinnon, 2017). This vulnerability is most often described in the context of disaster response and recovery, reflecting methodological focus on giving visibility to survivor experiences through post-disaster interviews and surveys.…”

“…Informed by academic work, better integration and advocacy is needed of sexuality, gender diversity, and non‐heteronormative perspectives into disaster and humanitarian policies and procedures. This includes recognition of the intended and unintended impacts of disaster and humanitarian programmes that do, or do not, account for gender and sexual diversity (Alessi et al., 2018; Dominey‐Howes et al., 2014; Gaillard et al., 2017a, 2017b; Gorman‐Murray et al., 2014, 2018; Hilhorst et al., 2018; McSherry et al., 2015; Sauer & Podhora, 2013).…”

“…Second, increased policy integration, awareness, and better planning can be achieved through increased participation of LGBTQIA+ people and their representative organisations in planning processes, whereby they can define their own needs and experiences (Cassal & Haworth, 2021; Dominey‐Howes et al., 2016; Gaillard, Sanz, et al., 2017; Haworth, 2021; Sauer & Podhora, 2013). This could include awareness training for disaster/humanitarian agencies, stakeholders, and broader populations into LGBTQIA+ marginality and related issues (Alessi et al., 2018; Gorman‐Murray et al., 2018).…”

The growing presence of LGBTQIs at the UN: Arguments and counter-arguments

“…A wide-ranging understanding of human rights provides an expanded awareness, sensitivity, and legitimization of LGBTQI people, particularly when undertaken from an intersectional lens, not limited to reproductive rights, well-being, health, sexuality, gender expression and identity, cultural identity and rights, and self-determination (Human Rights Watch, 2009; Saiz, 2005; Sauer and Podhora, 2013; Teifer, 2002). Additionally, an intersectional lens refers to the ways in which socially constructed identity categories interact and overlap to afford varying levels of privilege and discrimination based on societal norms (Puar, 2007).…”