Understanding Inclusive Infrastructure Investment in Canada
Sonja Macdonald and Paul Shaker, MCIP, RPP
I sb N 978-1-77125-599-8
This report is available free of charge at www.policyalternatives.ca.
Ple A se m A ke A do NAt Io N
Help us to continue to offer our publications free online.
With your support we can continue to produce high quality research and make sure it gets into the hands of citizens, journalists, policy makers and progressive organizations. Visit www.policyalternatives.ca or call 613-563-1341 for more information.
The CCPA is an independent policy research organization.
The opinions and recommendations in this report, and any errors, are those of the authors, and do not necessarily reflect the views of the publishers or funders of this report.
About the Authors
Sonja Macdonald and Paul Shaker are Principals with Civicplan, a firm specializing in participatory planning, public engagement, and community strategies. For more information visit civicplan.ca.
Introduction
The Governmen T of Canada’s long-term investment in infrastructure is an opportunity to reshape the country through many direct and collaborative projects with the provinces, territories, municipalities, Indigenous partners, and the private sector. The federal government’s Investing in Canada: Canada’s Long-Term Infrastructure Plan, released in 2016, proposes a “Bold Vision for an Inclusive Country.”1 In outlining key challenges and opportunities, the Plan identifies regional differences, such as large versus small communities, as well as rural, northern and Indigenous communities that face particular infrastructure challenges. While this focus is not new for the national government, what is different in this plan is the expansion of the definition of infrastructure to include “social development”, meaning that “infrastructure is essential to the delivery of services required to build inclusive communities where all people can participate and contribute to society.”2
This report explores how the lens of inclusion is applied currently in infrastructure spending in the Canadian context. Inclusive infrastructure is understood as “any infrastructure development that enhances positive outcomes in social inclusivity and ensures no individual, community, or social group is left behind or prevented from benefiting from improved infrastructure.”3 The report begins by setting out a framework to understand inclusive infrastructure investments and projects. This is followed by a review of Canadian infrastructure projects and investment examples that highlight metrics and strategies employed to deliver inclusive infrastructure. The report concludes with a section highlighting next steps for further study and research around creating an inclusive infrastructure lens to help guide future investments.
An Inclusive Infrastructure Framework
To be TT er unders T and how inclusive practices can be employed in infrastructure development, it is useful to view infrastructure as a holistic process. This process begins with identifying priorities for investment, followed by the design, procurement and implementation of projects, ending with the short- and long-term outcomes or benefits for communities from the investment. There are opportunities to apply an inclusion lens throughout the different stages of this process, which ensures that infrastructure investments meet the needs of and benefit the maximum number of people.
This view of infrastructure is well captured in the Global Infrastructure Hub’s (GIH) Framework for Inclusive Infrastructure. The GIH is a notfor-profit organization, formed by the G20, that advances the delivery of sustainable, resilient, and inclusive infrastructure. The Framework sets out six actions areas, each of which include specific practices that can be employed to ensure inclusivity in infrastructure development. Real life examples are used to better understand the practices leading to the benefits of inclusive infrastructure. Figure 1 offers a summary of the framework, including the six action areas and practices. In the context of this report, Canada-specific examples of infrastructure projects will be used to demonstrate how the action areas and practices can be employed
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
fIgure 1 Framework for Inclusive Infrastructure
THE FRAMEWORK FOR INCLUSIVE INFRASTRUCTURE
The Framework for Inclusive Infrastructure summarises the following six Actions Areas and related practices that ought to be considered for the systematic implementation of inclusivity in infrastructure at the policy and project levels:
ACTION AREAS
Stakeholder Identification, Engagement and Empowerment
Governance and Capacity Building
Policy, Regulation and Standards
Project Planning, Development and Delivery
Private Sector Roles and Participation
Affordability and Optimising Finance
SUMMARY OF PRACTICES
Data Collection and Stakeholder Identification
Inclusive Governance and Transparency
Inclusive Stakeholder Engagement
Inclusive Policy Development and Implementation
Inclusive Project Lifecycle
Incentives and Legal/ Regulatory Controls
Business Case
Stakeholder Empowerment
Capacity Building
Inclusive Standards and Universal Design
Project Management and Supervision
Inclusive Opportunities for Businesses
Willingness and Ability to Pay
ILLUSTRATIVE EXAMPLES
Inclusive Urban Development
Innovation and Technology
Financial Assistance and Subsidy Instruments
Practices are illustrated on real projects and are backed by data and evidence
Reducing poverty and income inequality
Technical literacy and knowledge sharing
BENEFITS
Social equity and social stability
Reducing geographic divide
Increasing affordability and accessibility
Job creation and equal access to labour market opportunity
Source: Global Infrastructure Hub. n/d. Inclusive Infrastructure and Social Equity. Retrieved from: https://inclusiveinfra.gihub.org/
1: Framework for Inclusive Infrastructure
Increasing gender equity
Integration of small business opportunities
Inclusive Infrastructure and Social Equity | 13
Figure
in a real-world setting, also showing metrics or strategies to measure the benefits of the project examples.
The following section of this report provides more detail about the six action areas and practices, as well as Canadian examples of infrastructure projects, investments or plans that exemplify the strategies and metrics outlined in the framework.
Global Infrastructure Hub Inclusive Infrastructure Framework 4
The six ac T ion areas outlined in the framework are summarized below, including a review of the practices for inclusion. This is followed by a selection of Canadian examples of infrastructure projects, investments and plans that illustrate the practices. In some cases, the examples offered are relevant to more than one action area.
Stakeholder Identification, Engagement and Empowerment5
Stakeholder engagement is crucial to the successful delivery of any policy, program or project, and it is particularly important to inclusive infrastructure because it can ensure those groups that are at risk of being excluded can participate in the planning, design and implementation of infrastructure projects, as well as benefit from the assets once they are built/developed. With this in mind, it is essential that stakeholder engagement is included
throughout the lifecycle of infrastructure programs.6 The GIH model highlights three practices to ensure stakeholder engagement, as follows:
• Data Collection and Stakeholder Identification: Effective identification of stakeholders is key to ensuring that all relevant stakeholders are included in the process. Additionally, data collection is an important tool throughout the infrastructure lifecycle, allowing for evaluation of outcomes against baseline data and informing future projects.
• Inclusive Stakeholder Engagement: Proactive engagement employed throughout the lifecycle of project can build trust and public support, as well as improve project design and lead to relationships needed to address challenges as they may arise.
• Stakeholder Empowerment: Empowering stakeholders leads to increased community capacity building. This can be enabled only if the engagement process is designed with a spectrum of involvement in mind, ranging from information, consultation and cooperation to delegation, is key to ensuring opportunities for more people to be involved in different phases of a project.7
Canadian Active Transportation Strategy and Fund
In July 2021, the Government of Canada announced the country’s first-ever federal strategy and fund dedicated to building active transportation trails and pathways. As part of developing the strategy, the government sought input from the public and key stakeholders to explore options to deliver more transportation and recreation options such as trails, cycling paths and other forms of active mobility in rural, urban and Indigenous communities. The strategy’s vision is “For Canadians of all ages, ethnicities, abilities, genders, and backgrounds to be able to safely and conveniently access active transportation in their communities and to significantly increase the ‘modal share’ of active transportation.”8
The strategy embraces targets and indicators beyond mode share, including greater diversity and inclusion, health and wellness, benefits on the environment, and business and tourism. The strategy supports the adoption of targets and data by:
• Establishing funding opportunities for research that will grow the data and knowledge foundations for active transportation in Canada.
• Working with Statistics Canada to collect disaggregated data that will ensure the adequate and appropriate monitoring and reporting.
• Supporting the development and use of data collection tools.
• Leveraging data for the continuous improvements of planning and infrastructure.9
The Active Transportation Fund will invest $400 million over five years. Eligible recipients are municipal, local, and regional governments, provincial and territorial governments, public sector bodies, not-for-profit organizations and various Indigenous Governing Bodies. As part of the application process, some projects are evaluated based on determined “Need” defined as, “There is a high need for the project, to help vulnerable communities and address structural inequities, given the demographics and/or current state of active transportation.”10
The project is an example of early stakeholder engagement to identify projects for investment across the country. Additionally, the fund emphasizes the importance of data collection to deliver inclusive infrastructure.
ForWard 1 – Participatory Budgeting
ForWard 1 was a participatory budgeting process used in the City of Hamilton to involve residents in the planning, prioritization and budgeting of local infrastructure spending. The process began with the establishment of a Participatory Budgeting Advisory Committee (PBAC), which was responsible to establish the terms of the process, oversee its implementation, lead outreach in the community, as well as evaluate the budgeting process for future improvements. The PBAC was made of up residents drawn from each of the participating neighbourhoods, as well as a selection of representatives from underrepresented groups, namely women, youth and seniors. The process involved collecting project ideas from residents, followed by streamlining a list of projects on the advice of city staff, which led to a short list of feasible projects. The short list was then voted on by residents, who chose their top five projects. The results of the vote led to a final list of projects that was included in the following year’s city budget. Methods of ongoing monitoring and evaluation were included in the process, such as tracking the location of idea submissions, as well as the location of voters to better understand where additional efforts in engagement were required during the process, and in future years.11
The ForWard 1 process is a model of stakeholder engagement for inclusive infrastructure, and exemplified stakeholder engagement in many ways. It used data collection throughout the process, first to identify key groups to participate in the Advisory Committee, followed by tracking engagement throughout the process to better inform future outreach efforts to improve involvement of specific groups. The process employed a spectrum approach to engagement in that there were varying levels of involvement for residents from simply voting on preferred projects, to proposing project ideas and being their champion throughout the process, to acting as a member of the PBAC. This ensured there were few barriers to entry for residents to become engaged. Additionally, the process was a model of empowerment by ensuring that residents were centred in municipal decision making, first through the design and implementation of the process itself, as well as through the prioritizing of infrastructure ideas for investment.
Gordie Howe Bridge
The Windsor-Detroit Bridge Authority was created in 2012 to construct and operate the Gordie Howe Bridge, a 2.5 km long bridge that connects Detroit in the U.S. and Windsor in Canada. The authority is required by the bilateral agreement between the U.S. and Canada to consider community benefits as part of the project. During the pre-construction phase, a community benefits scheme was developed to gauge public opinion and improve inclusivity during procurement and delivery. The identified focus groups were Michigan and Ontario residents, Indigenous peoples, business owners and community leaders.12
Public engagement was conducted with stakeholders to define community benefits (e.g., though public meetings, focus groups, website, email, mail) and the inputs received were shared with prospective bidders.
Bidders developed a community benefits plan as part of their proposal to design, build, finance, operate and maintain the Gordie Howe Bridge. Proposals included how stakeholders would continue to be involved throughout the process, how community needs were factored into the proposal, and how employment benefits would be achieved.13
The benefits plans were part of the Request for Proposal submission and part of the contractual obligation of service delivery. The Bridge Authority had oversight of the community benefits plan during construction and operation of the bridge.
Governance and Capacity Building
Governance refers to the structures, processes and systems that define decision-making, economic and social interactions within a community or country.14 Two practices that are highlighted in the framework to ensure inclusivity in governance are:
• Inclusive Governance and Transparency: Effective and inclusive governance begins with leadership that directs the need for inclusion through its policies and regulation. This includes ensuring there is collective will that acknowledges the benefits of improved inclusiveness and establishing ways for underrepresented groups to be a part of collaboration through the infrastructure process. Two key means to account for inclusive governance are through transparency, including the sharing of information about a project with the public, for example, through open data, and accountability by establishing evaluative measures to monitor and report on stages of infrastructure projects, including those related to inclusion.
• Capacity Building: The GIH model highlights two forms of capacity building. The first creates opportunities to elevate previously excluded groups to positions of power through training and education. The second focuses on training of government staff and officials to address conscious or unconscious attitudes. In both cases the GIH model emphasizes a sustained and structured approach to capacity building, “so that the knowledge is retained at an institutional level, rather than at the individual level, retaining capacity in spite of the turnover of officials.”15
First Nation Infrastructure Fund
The Government of Canada administers the First Nation Infrastructure Fund (FNIF) to help First Nations communities upgrade and increase public infrastructure to improve the quality of life and the environment in First Nations communities. The fund supports infrastructure projects on reserves, crown land or land set aside for the use and benefit of First Nations. Potential projects for funding are identified in First Nations Infrastructure Investment Plans (FNIIP).16
Each year, First Nations communities develop infrastructure investment plans and share them with the Government of Canada. In their FNIIPs, First
fIgure 2 Map of First Nations Infrastructure Fund Projects
Source: Indigenous Services Canada. 2021. Interactive Map : Investing in First Nations community infrastructure. Retrieved from: https://geo.sac-isc.gc.ca/ciir-riim/ciir_riim_en.html
Nations provide a detailed list of their 5-year community infrastructure plans, including information about projects that have been completed, multi-year projects that are underway and future infrastructure investment needs proposals. Projects must be supported by a Band Council Resolution, Tribal Council Resolution or other documentation indicating support from the governing body of a self-governing First Nation. Priority is given to projects that meet additional criteria, including:
• Targeting high-needs communities.
• Having a regional impact by providing a benefit for more than one First Nations community or across regional boundaries.
• Are cost-shared with, for example, a nearby municipality or the private sector, and are supplemented with a funding contribution from a First Nation’s own-source revenue.17
To provide transparency, data is published via an interactive map that shows ongoing and completed infrastructure projects in First Nations communities across Canada. The map includes feasibility studies, new construction and renovation, and capacity development projects. Map information is exportable in an Open Data format for use by anyone to better understand and plan for future infrastructure needs.18
FNIF is an example of community capacity building through the design and development of FNIIPs. Additionally, these plans and the mapping provide for greater transparency and accountability.
High-Speed Access for All: Canada’s Connectivity Strategy
Canada faces a national connectivity gap. Overwhelmingly, rural and remote communities have identified challenges accessing affordable, high-speed Internet as the number one issue impeding their economic growth.
In response, the Canada Connectivity Strategy was developed to connect every Canadian to affordable, high-speed Internet no matter where they live, and to improve mobile cellular access from coast to coast to coast. As part of the strategy development, extensive consultation was conducted with rural stakeholders from every province and territory.
Money is allocated in the federal budget to help implement the strategy, with the specific goal of working with partners to achieve universal 50 Mbps download and 10 Mbps upload speeds for all Canadians and improve access to the latest mobile wireless services where Canadians live and work, and
along highways and major roads. As Canada is a large country with varied geographic and topographical challenges, no single technology is appropriate in all circumstances. For example, money is allocated to support low-earth orbit satellite capacity in remote Northern areas. Additionally, understanding the problem is important and, therefore, two new Statistics Canada surveys will be funded to measure broadband usage. Overall, the focus is on:
• The scalability of investments toward increased speeds, e.g., up to one Gbps speeds where possible.
• Leveraging different technologies based on suitability and context.
• Considering the needs of different users including Indigenous communities, businesses and public institutions during planning, program design and project selection.
• Considering the affordability of service to the end user.
• Recognizing the importance of resiliency, reliability and low latency of network connections.19
The Connectivity Strategy illustrates leadership in setting a plan to close a longstanding infrastructure gap. Additionally, survey work conducted by Statistics Canada is an example of increasing transparency and accountability around the delivery of better broadband infrastructure.
Policy, Regulation and Standards
Non-discriminatory policies and legislation exist at all levels of governance from local and national governments to international bodies like the United Nations, yet more must be done to effectively implement these policies and enforce commitments to inclusion.
• Inclusive Policy Development and Implementation: Inclusive policies are a necessary way to ensure better inclusion in infrastructure development and other areas, but these policies need to be enacted through regulation or other binding mechanisms. Additionally, inclusive policies need to be developed with the groups targeted for inclusion at the table so that their challenges and concerns are heard and addressed directly.
• Inclusive Standards and Universal Design: Inclusive standards implemented through project agreements, detailed design codes, guidelines and enforced through governmental and professional standards bodies are effective to ensure inclusion. This can be accomplished in various ways, including through certification. One example of inclusive standards are Universal Design standards in the building of infrastructure to be truly accessible for those living with physical disabilities. In addition, GIH emphasizes that, beyond the standards for the building of infrastructure, is the need to address behavioural and attitudinal barriers to inclusion.20
Metrolinx
Metrolinx, the Ontario Provincial Agency that delivers transit infrastructure in the Greater Golden Horseshoe Region, recognizes that its major infrastructure investments should provide benefits for the communities in which they are built, including through employment, training, apprenticeship, local supplier and social procurement opportunities. Following on this, Metrolinx has adopted a policy to include a community benefits program for rapid transit projects. The program has four principles:
• Inclusive: The program offers a range of employment, training, and apprenticeship opportunities for historically disadvantaged communities and equity-seeking groups, as well as encouraging the provision of goods and services from local suppliers and social enterprises.
• Accessible: The program ensures that information about employment, training, apprenticeship, and procurement opportunities are made readily available to residents, businesses and social enterprises.
• Transparent: Metrolinx ensures that the community benefits plan is made public and publishes quarterly reports on progress.
• Collaborative: By working together with community, labour, business, government, and other stakeholders to share information, resources and learnings, and maximize the impact of the program.21
Consistent with this policy, Metrolinx and the Toronto Community Benefits Network (TCBN) signed a Community Benefits Framework agreement where they committed to include a community benefits program for major Toronto transit projects.
The Toronto Community Benefits Network (TCBN) represents a coalition of more than 120 community and labour organizations and social enterprises. TCBN cultivates and supports the implementation of community benefits agreements with infrastructure and urban development projects in the Greater Toronto Area to increase apprenticeships, training, and employment opportunities for communities, including newcomer communities, which are experiencing barriers to employment.22
British Columbia Infrastructure Benefits (CBIB) Inc.
British Columbia Infrastructure Benefits (CBIB) Inc. is a provincial crown corporation that provides qualified skilled trades workforce for the construction of public infrastructure projects operating under a single Community Benefits Agreement that covers a series of large provincially funded infrastructure projects. BCIB acts as the employer of all workers on these provincial projects.23 The mandate of the corporation includes principles related to Indigenous reconciliation, equity and anti-racism, as well as climate change and sustainable development.24
The target of BCIB is to ensure that B.C. residents get access to “goodpaying, career building jobs, skills development and apprenticeships. Priority hiring and rehiring underrepresented workers such as Indigenous people, women and people with disabilities”25 ensures labour force development in B.C. Examples of the projects that the BCIB is involved with include:
fIgure 3 BCIB Inclusive
Infrastructure Summary Graphic
PUTTING PEOPLE AT THE CENTRE OF PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE
WHO WE ARE SERVICE PLAN PRIORITIES
industry are women, Indigenous peoples, or other visible minorities
contractors report worker shortages
of apprentices aren’t completing their certification within 6 years of starting their trade of women face gender-based bullying, harassment, exclusion and exposure to a sexualized work environment are choosing the trades as a career option out of high school of the
PROJECTS
Highway 1 Four-Laning Program
Illecillewaet - 2019-2022
• Kicking Horse Canyon Phase 4 - 2020-2024
•
Source: BCIB . Who Is BCIB . Retrieved from: https://www.bcib.ca/home-2/about/#about-1
Partner in the successful delivery of public infrastructure projects and implement the Community Benefits Agreement.
Mobilize and grow a safe, diverse and skilled workforce. Honour the diversity and strength of community.
• Local Residents
• Indigenous peoples
• Women
• People with Disabilities
• Other underrepresented groups
Want to learn more? Visit bcib.ca
• The Pattullo Bridge Replacement Project connecting Surrey and New Westminster through a new four lane bridge scheduled to be opened in 2024.
• Highway 1 – Kamloops to Alberta Four Laning, which includes various phases currently underway.
• Cowichan District Hospital Replacement scheduled to begin in 2022 and open for patients in 2026.
• Broadway Subway Project, a 5.7 km expansion of the Skytrain scheduled to be completed in 2025.
Along with hiring for these projects, BCIB also works with key community partners to provide the “Respectful Onsite Initiative”, which is a comprehensive approach to supporting workers in an inclusive worksite through education
and training, as well as worksite culture. Partners include organizations representing women in the skilled trades, Indigenous women, Indigenous disability networks, accessibility networks, employment and settlement organizations, organizations representing the LGBTQ2+ communities among many others. The relationship is a two-way process, whereby partners assist with informing inclusivity training, while also bringing diverse workers opportunities for employment and training through the BCIB projects.
The BCIB is an example of community employment benefits policies and standards that are in place for the delivery of B.C. infrastructure projects.
Green and Inclusive Community Buildings Program
Infrastructure Canada administers a Green and Inclusive Community Buildings Program, with the objective of improving the availability and condition of community buildings in Canadian communities experiencing higher needs and who are currently underserved. The program supports retrofits, repairs or upgrades of existing publicly accessible community buildings and the construction of new publicly accessible community buildings that serve underserved and high-needs communities across Canada.26
Retrofit projects that intend to improve accessibility, as well as all new builds, must meet or exceed the highest published accessibility standard as defined by the requirements in the Canadian Standards Association’s Technical Standard Accessible Design for the Built Environment (CAN/CSA B651-18)27 or the most recent standard, in addition to provincial or territorial building codes, and relevant municipal by-laws.
The CSA Standard specifies technical requirements on how to make buildings and the exterior built environment accessible and safely usable by persons with physical, sensory, or cognitive disabilities. The standard also supports the principles of universal design (UD) as it applies to the built environment, i.e., designing environments so that they can be accessed, understood, and used to the greatest extent possible by all people, regardless of their age, size, ability, or disability.28
Project Planning, Development and Delivery
A project lifecycle approach to infrastructure ensures that inclusive practices are incorporated throughout the entire infrastructure process. Key practices to ensure this are as follows:
• Inclusive Project Lifecycle: Develop a detailed project strategy that incorporates specific targets, standards and mechanisms for design, implementation and compliance. This strategy includes terms set out for representatives of under-represented groups to participate in planning committees, as well as a dedicated team that undertakes ongoing communication and dialogue with these groups throughout the lifecycle. Also, emphasis is placed on setting measurable targets in procurement around inclusive hiring practices as well as design requirements.
• Project Management and Supervision: Inclusive project management and supervision consider all the inter-related aspect of projects, pertaining not only to the composition of the project team and the application of processes, but also the use of best practices that allow for an open system, effective implementation and monitoring of inclusivity targets of a project.
• Inclusive Urban Development: The overall approach to urban development needs to include an inclusive lens that may address various goals, such as improving social cohesion through ensuring various social groups live in the same neighbourhood or ensuring that residential areas are within proximity of employment nodes and well served by public infrastructure like green space, schools, transit and other amenities.
Macdonald Block
The Macdonald Block Complex is the administrative hub of the Ontario government operations and has a total gross building area of approximately 1.7 million square feet. The complex consists of five buildings with two floors of underground parking. The Government of Ontario initiated a reconstruction project that will update all core building systems. The project is being delivered through Infrastructure Ontario’s design, build, finance and maintain (DBFM) Public-Private Partnership (P3) model.29
As part of the project agreement with the chosen contractor, Fengate PCL Consortium, is a commitment to a Community Benefits Agreement. The main areas of focus for community benefits were:
Workforce Development, such as employment and training opportunities, including apprenticeships to members of disadvantaged communities and local residents.
• The agreement commits to an aspirational target percentage (%).
• PCL will include community benefits language in all subcontracts.
• Requirement for experiential learning and at minimum, ten on site educational opportunities.
Social Procurement, such as purchasing goods and services from local businesses and social enterprises.
• PCL is committed to collaborating with local businesses to gain understanding of the capabilities and capacity of local resources and use this information to help shape manageable scopes of work that can be executed safely.30
The project agreement identified local communities that are in close proximity to the project and may benefit from community benefits opportunities on the project. PCL will partner with local workforce development agencies and community organizations to support the Community Benefits Plan and establish tools, policies, and protocols to deliver on its objectives. Some specific commitments included:
• Community Benefits Plan – to be submitted within 150 days after financial close.
• Community Benefits Working Group – established within 45 days after financial close, meet monthly until CB plan and working group terms of reference complete, quarterly thereafter.
• Community Benefits Working Group Terms of Reference – submitted within 45 days after financial close, finalized within 90 days.
• Community Benefits Reporting – Quarterly with annual reports.31
Rexdale Casino Woodbine
Casino Woodbine, in the Rexdale area of Toronto, has a planned multi-year proposed development project that includes expansion at the casino, two hotels, several restaurants and retail stores, a 4,200-seat event venue, and a 5,000 square foot on-site training centre.
As part of a development project, the City of Toronto signed a community benefits agreement (CBA) with the proponent who operates the casino. The motivation for the CBA was driven by the concerns about the negative impact of expanded gaming in the community, and the opportunity to leverage the development to create benefits for the Rexdale neighbourhood and equityseeking groups in Toronto.32
The CBA includes specific requirements for the proponent, One Toronto Gaming, to achieve a range of social and economic outcomes, including:
Local and Social Hiring:
• Local hiring means employment opportunities for people who live in the Woodbine Local Area.
• Social hiring means employing people who self-identify with an equity-seeking group or people who face unique barriers to employment. Equity-seeking group means Aboriginal peoples, persons with disabilities, racialized groups and visible minorities, women, lesbian, gay, bisexual, trans, queer, two-spirit communities (LBGTQ2S), undocumented individuals, newcomers, immigrants and refugees, and persons with low income and youth.
• At least 40 per cent of new hiring will be through local or social hiring; at least 20 per cent will be through local hiring.
• At least 10 per cent of overall hours worked by trades or craftspeople will be apprentices or journeypersons hired through local or social hiring.
• Other hiring during the construction phase will include project technicians, project coordinators and administrative staff.
Local and Social Procurement:
• Develop a Supply Chain Diversity Policy and Procedures.
• At least 10 per cent of non-construction annual procurement through local or diverse suppliers.
fIgure 4 Rexdale Casino Woodbine CBA Summary
Rexdale - Casino Woodbine Community Benefits Agreement
The Rexdale - Casino Woodbine Community Benefits Agreement (CBA) includes specific requirements for One Toronto Gaming to achieve several social and economic benefits.
Full-Time Jobs
Responsible
Accountability and Monitoring Structure:
• Community Steering Committee (convened by City of Toronto).
• Employment & Labour Market Advisory Working Group (convened by One Toronto Gaming).
Public Reporting:
• Proponent to provide quarterly and annual progress reports to the public on all CBA commitments.
• Annual City staff reports to Toronto City Council.33
Private Sector Roles and Participation
Many large-scale infrastructure projects in Canada are designed to be delivered, in whole or in part, through a partnership with private sector partners. Often these projects involve multiple private sector partners who deliver specific parts of each project at different stages. While there may be positives and negatives to these arrangements, there are practices that can ensure that inclusion remains central to the process.
• Incentive and Legal/Regulatory Controls: One way to ensure inclusion through this process is for the government funder to tie its funds to explicit deliverables in terms of inclusion, for example, through employment practices, and these can reach into all the private sector firms’ participation in the project. The specifics of these deliverables may be different in different communities, but it is incumbent first on the funder to assess the potential groups within the community who need to be actively included in this process, and then for the terms related to these groups to then be a part of any funding agreement.
• Inclusive Opportunities for Business: One means of expanding inclusion in infrastructure is to ensure that there are firms owned and operated by underrepresented groups, for example women and racialized people, as part of the teams delivering a project. Additional efforts may need to be included in the procurement process to ensure this.
• Innovation and Technology: The private sector is often at the fore of developing new digital technologies that can improve infrastructure or are themselves solutions to infrastructure challenges. Collaborations between governments and the private sector are one way to harness
new technologies and innovation to address particular issues in inclusive infrastructure delivery.
The Eglinton Crosstown LRT
The Eglinton Crosstown LRT is a new midtown connection between east and west Toronto, with 25 stations along a dedicated route. As part of the Project Agreement with Metrolinx and Infrastructure Ontario, the proponent, CTS, was required to submit Community Benefits and Apprenticeship Plans, outlining their commitment to apprenticeship, employment, local procurement and social enterprises. The Eglinton Crosstown LRT is the first large scale infrastructure project in Ontario to include a Community Benefits Program.34
The guiding principles of the plans were to:
• Provide equitable economic opportunities that promote economic inclusion for all Toronto residents.
• Contribute to the integration of skilled newcomers into Professional, Administrative and Technical Jobs.
• Support social enterprises and other related vehicles to economic inclusion through commitments to social procurement.
• Contribute to neighbourhood and environmental improvements through building new transit infrastructure.
Ensure clear commitments and accountability from all parties to deliver.35
• The community benefits commitments include:
• 10% aspirational target of all trades and/craft working hours on a trade-by-trade basis to be performed by apprentices from historically disadvantaged community and/or equity seeking groups.
• Professional, administrative and technical (PAT) career opportunities for people from historically disadvantaged community and/or equity seeking groups.
• Specific outreach and programs for youth-at-risk, historically disadvantaged groups in local communities including low-income, racialized and immigrant populations, and military veterans.
• Maximize purchasing and procurement opportunities from local businesses, social enterprises and outreach to diverse owned businesses.
• Community Benefits Working Group, which meets quarterly, to monitor/ report on community benefits outcomes. Includes representation from TCBN, Metrolinx community, labour, government and selected general contract Crosslinx Transit Solutions.
• Environmental protections and preservation of the historic Kodak Building (1939).36
Telesat Canada
In the federal government’s Connectivity Strategy, affordable broadband access in northern, remote and Indigenous communities is a priority for increasing equitable access to the key infrastructure of the digital economy. In Budget 2019, the Government of Canada acknowledged that “advanced satellite technologies will play an important role in addressing connectivity needs in the hardest to reach rural and remote areas, and a commitment to secure advanced Low Earth Orbit (LEO) satellite capacity to help bring reliable high-speed Internet access to even the most challenging rural and remote homes and communities in Canada.”37 In order to provide this connection, Industry Canada entered into a Memorandum of Understanding with Telesat Canada, a private global satellite operator located in Ottawa, Canada. Telesat is one of a few satellite companies developing a LEO constellation that delivers reliable, secure, fibre-like broadband connections for remote regions via a network of satellites integrated with on-ground data networks.38
In November 2020, the government finalized a $600 million agreement with Telesat to provide this service. The agreement “enables Internet and mobility service providers to access Telesat LEO capacity at substantially reduced rates to bring universal broadband connectivity to rural, Northern and Indigenous communities across Canada.”39
This deal demonstrates an example of innovation and technology whereby through a private partnership, the federal government is looking to address a long-standing issue of inclusivity in accessing broadband access for rural, remote and Indigenous communities.
Affordability and Optimising Finance
Affordability is a key factor to consider in assessing infrastructure investments, in two ways. First is whether a project is affordable for the government, meaning can it fund the design, implementation and operation of the project? If not, how will or could it be sustained (i.e., tariffs or taxes). Second is whether or not the project will be affordable for end users. Will a fee for access or use be needed for ongoing operations and is this restricting certain groups from having access to the project? All of these factors need to be addressed in developing new infrastructure and each has the capacity to incorporate inclusive principles.
• Business Case: A business case for the costs and benefits of a project need to be clearly made early on in the process. A broader socioeconomic lens should be employed in building a business case to take into account groups that could potentially be excluded from the project.
• Willingness and Ability to Pay: In cases where projects (e.g., transit) require ongoing operating budgets, user fees or tariffs are often employed to account for this. The GIH Framework suggests that fees or tariffs should be determined using willingness and ability to pay in conjunction with analyses that account for different groups (e.g., income levels, gender, age etc.).
• Financial Assistance and Subsidy Instruments: Subsidies are another mechanism government may use to ensure that cost-recovery for infrastructure projects do not exclude certain groups. In determining subsidies, a social cost benefit analysis may assist in calculating impact on particular groups.
Valley Line West LRT
The Valley Line West is a 14 km light rail transit (LRT) project in the City of Edmonton. It is one part of a two-phase transit project. Overall, the project will be a 27-kilometre, low floor, urban style light rail transit line operating across the city to the western perimeter.
As part of the project, a business case analysis was produced to evaluate the benefits of the investment. Project benefits that consider the theme of inclusion include:
• Improving access around the city and providing greater transportation choice for the region’s population. The availability of affordable transportation will provide better opportunities for lower-income populations, the elderly, disabled groups and youth providing them with greater access to medical facilities, public amenities, education institutions, employment opportunities and recreational facilities.
• Prioritizing pedestrian movement and where possible, provide seamless integration to key cycling and pedestrian infrastructure to encourage greater use of the system and reduce the need for travel by automobile.
• Developing a walkable and safe experience is vital to the users’ experience in order to attract and promote spaces for people to work, live and interact.
• Creating opportunities for mixed-use developments that include affordable housing, encouraging a healthy labour market by attracting new workers to the city and providing opportunities for families to prosper and remain in neighbourhoods of their choice.40
The business case summary also outlines the city’s commitment to engagement as the project proceeds. This includes establishing five citizen working groups along the construction corridor. These working groups are a major method of engaging with neighbouring communities during the updating of preliminary design, procurement, detailed design and construction.
Consultation extends to Indigenous communities, as the Edmonton area resides within both Treaty 6 Territory and Region 4 of the Métis Nation of Alberta. The goal includes consultation, involvement, and ongoing communication through the design, procurement, construction, and operating and maintenance phases of the project.41
The Valley Line West LRT business case is an example of how a business case can attempt to include factors related to inclusion in an overall analysis.
Putman Family YWCA
In January 2019 the Canadian Housing and Mortgage Corporation announced a $10 million investment to rebuild the Putman Family YWCA in Hamilton to include 50 affordable housing units, 35 of which are serving women and women-led families and 15 reserved for women with disabilities. The funding was part of the National Housing Co-Investment Fund (NHCF),
in partnership with the Province of Ontario and the City of Hamilton. The project is an example of Passive House Design and gives priority to those in greatest need. The project was completed in Fall 2021.42 Along with the affordable housing units, a community hub was built on the ground floors of the building offering child care, seniors, and developmental services. Additionally, the hub houses the YWCA Hamilton Centre of Innovation, which targets training in non-traditional fields like advanced manufacturing and specialized technology, and mentorship services for women, girls and gender diverse people, as well as women entrepreneurs. Programming at the Centre of Innovation is accessible by the residents of the building, as well as women and business owners from across Southern Ontario, due to funding from Federal Economic Development Canada, Southern Ontario.43 Training through the Centre of Innovation is free to participants, and 35 of the units are affordable rental units at less that 75% of median market rent for women and women-led families. This project is an example of the use of government subsidies to ensure affordable housing and access to labour training for an underrepresented group.
Areas for Further Research
This repor T explores an approach to inclusive infrastructure, the GIH Framework for Inclusive Infrastructure, within a Canadian context, through the use of examples from infrastructure strategies, programs, spending and projects. As noted in the framework, infrastructure is best assessed through a holistic process approach, from setting priorities to final outcomes. As such, the examples shared here highlight ways in which steps are already being taken to be more inclusive in approaches to infrastructure development. However, these approaches are not universal across jurisdiction or types of infrastructure investment. Additionally, while some methods currently in use show promise, they are not as developed as they could be. With this in mind, the follow areas of further research will help create a more robust lens for inclusive infrastructure spending from the Government of Canada.
Community Benefits Agreements (CBA)
CBAs are a good mechanism to embed commitments to inclusion in infrastructure projects. CBAs can be employed to achieve or complement the GIH Framework practices in a number of action areas. For example, the creation of a CBA often involves underrepresented groups, thereby ensuring that they are part of establishing the goals intended to serve their groups. Additionally,
CBAs can create transparent and accountable metrics whereby commitments to inclusion can be measured throughout a process. However, the approach to CBAs is not uniform across the country. Specifically:
There is no uniformity in what areas should be included in CBAs across levels of government (municipal/provincial/federal), nor who is involved in their development.
There are no set standards on what metrics should be included, such as employment minimums or averages for particular groups.
There does not appear to be a standardized method of enforcement to ensure CBAs are being upheld.
Can there be a standard requirement that CBAs be included in crossborder or international agreements where infrastructure projects extending beyond Canadian territory?
Inclusive Business Case Analysis
The use of a business case analysis to evaluate infrastructure is already a common practice. For example, transit projects will look at the economic and environmental benefits of various construction choices as part of a costbenefit analysis to determine the best investment. However, factors that help increase inclusion are not as big a part of these analyses as they could be. More research into a better approach to business case analysis that includes inclusion as a factor in project cost benefit analyses should be conducted.
Higher Accessibility Design Standards
Increasing the accessibility of infrastructure to a higher standard, beyond legislative minimums, is another method to advance inclusion in infrastructure. One way to achieve this is through the incorporation of better accessibility design standards in infrastructure project language, including CBAs. While there are various standards published, including the CSA’s Technical Standard Accessible Design for the Built Environment, the addition of accessibility as a commitment to increase inclusion in infrastructure is not evenly applied. More research in this area is needed to determine to how advance this.
Participatory Budgeting for Infrastructure
National infrastructure spending tends to be an inter-governmental process that excludes the broader public. To be more inclusive the public needs to be more centred in the process. One way to achieve this is through participatory budgeting (PB). PB is typically used at community and local levels of government to help determine infrastructure spending priorities through increased participation, transparency and community capacity building. Using some of the same participatory budgeting techniques at the national level could be a way to inject these same advantages into the federal infrastructure spending process.
Measuring Inclusion
As part of a strategy to measure the effectiveness of infrastructure spending, some existing national funding programs and strategies such as the Active Transportation Fund and Connectivity Strategy, use surveys and data to help better define the infrastructure gap as well as measure progress towards closing the gap. Standard measures can help define aspects of inclusion, such as affordability of and access to infrastructure. For example, there are specific methods used to define what is considered affordable housing in different markets. Those measures are part of evaluating infrastructure funding that goes into expanding affordable housing stock in cities across Canada. However, these types of standardized measures are needed for other forms of infrastructure. For example, in transit or broadband projects, the measure of an affordable fare or fee needs to be determined: Does an affordable transit fare differ by city or province? What monthly charge is affordable for broadband? Further research can assist with answering these questions. If one principle of inclusion is that no community is left behind or prevented from benefiting from improved infrastructure, then a reasonable level of access to infrastructure needs to be established. For example, while the type of service will be different in various cities, the idea that a resident can have access to transit can be a goal that promotes inclusivity. Further research is required to develop methods to define reasonable levels of access to specific forms of infrastructure (e.g., percent of population within a certain distance of transit service).
3 Global Infrastructure Hub. n/d. Inclusive Infrastructure and Social Equity. Retrieved from: https://inclusiveinfra.gihub.org/
4 Global Infrastructure Hub. Inclusive Infrastructure. Retrieved from: https://inclusiveinfra. gihub.org/
5 Global Infrastructure Hub. Action Areas. Stakeholder Identification, Engagement and Empowerment. Retrieved from: https://inclusiveinfra.gihub.org/action-areas/stakeholder-identificationengagement-and-empowerment/
6 Ibib
7 Ibid
8 Infrastructure Canada. 2021. Government of Canada announces the country’s first-ever federal strategy and fund dedicated to building active transportation trails and pathways. July 28. Retrieved from: https://www.canada.ca/en/office-infrastructure/news/2021/07/governmentof-canada-announces-the-countrys-first-ever-federal-strategy-and-fund-dedicated-to-buildingactive-transportation-trails-and-pathways.html
9 Roach, N. 2021. Canada’s Active Transportation Strategy and Fund: What It Means for Communities. September 9. Retrieved from: https://greencommunitiescanada.org/canadas-activetransportation-strategy-and-fund-what-it-means-for-communities/
10 Infrastructure Canada. 2021. Active Transportation Fund : Application Guide. Retrieved from: https://www.infrastructure.gc.ca/alt-format/pdf/atf-fta/applicant-guide-demandeur-en.pdf
11 Ontario Professional Planners Institute. 2019. Citizens Shaping the Spaces Around Them: How a Carefully Layered Participatory Planning Process gave Hamilton’s Ward One Residents a Voice in Municipal Spending. May. Retrieved from: https://ontarioplanners.ca/inspiring-knowledge/
12 Global Infrastructure Hub. Stakeholder Identification, Engagement and Empowerment. Retrieved from: https://inclusiveinfra.gihub.org/action-areas/stakeholder-identification-engagement-andempowerment/#Box-2
13 Ibid.
14 Global Infrastructure Hub. Governance and Capacity Building. Retrieved from: https:// inclusiveinfra.gihub.org/action-areas/governance-and-capacity-building/
15 Ibid.
16 Indigenous Services Canada. 2022. First Nation Infrastructure Fund Program guide. February 3. Retrieved from: https://www.sac-isc.gc.ca/eng/1497275878022/1533645265362#sec1
17 Ibid.
18 Indigenous Services Canada. 2021. Interactive Map : Investing in First Nations community infrastructure. Retrieved from: https://geo.sac-isc.gc.ca/ciir-riim/ciir_riim_en.html
19 Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada. n/d. High-speed Internet for all of Canada. Retrieved from: https://ised-isde.canada.ca/site/high-speed-internet-canada/en
20 Global Infrastructure Hub. Policy, Regulation and Standards. Retrieved from: https:// inclusiveinfra.gihub.org/action-areas/policy-regulation-and-standards/
21 Metrolinx. n/d. Metrolinx Community Benefits. Retrieved from: https://www.metrolinx.com/ en/greaterregion/projects/community-benefits.aspx
23 British Columbia Infrastructure Benefits (bcib ) Inc.. n/d. Who is bcib . Retrieved from: https:// www.bcib.ca/home-2/about/#about-1
24 Robinson, S. Minister of Finance, Government of B.C. 2021. bcib Mandate Letter. Retrieved from: https://www.bcib.ca/documents/2021/07/bcib-mandate-letter-2021-2022.pdf/
25 bcib . Who Is bcib . Retrieved from: https://www.bcib.ca/home-2/about/#about-1
26 Infrastructure Canada. n/d. Green and Inclusive Community Buildings: Applicant Guide. Retrieved from: https://www.infrastructure.gc.ca/gicb-bcvi/applicant-guide-demandeur-eng.html
27 csa Group. 2020. Accessible design for the built environment. March. Retrieved from: https:// www.csagroup.org/wp-content/uploads/B651-18_EN_Errata_.pdf
28 Ibid.
29 Global Infrastructure Hub. Project Planning, Development and Delivery. Retrieved from: https://inclusiveinfra.gihub.org/action-areas/project-planning-development-and-delivery/
32 Powell, R. 2021. MacDonald Block Reconstruction. January 29. Retrieved from: https://www. communitybenefits.ca/macdonald_block_reconstruction
33 City of Toronto. n/d. Community Benefits Agreement: Rexdale-Casino Woodbine. Retrieved from: https://www.toronto.ca/city-government/accountability-operations-customer-service/long-termvision-plans-and-strategies/community-benefits-framework/community-benefits-agreements/ 34 Ibid.
35 Global Infrastructure Hub. Private Sector Roles and Participation. Retrieved from: https:// inclusiveinfra.gihub.org/action-areas/private-sector-roles-and-participation/
37 Crosslinx Transit Solutions. 2016. Community Benefits and Liaison Plan for Eglinton Crosstown lr T Project. Retrieved from: http://www.thecrosstown.ca/sites/default/files/cts_-_community_ benefits_and_liaison_plan_rev_01_-_february_26_2016_.pdf
38 Community Benefits.ca. n/d. cba s in Toronto: Eglinton Crosstown lr T. Retrieved from: https:// www.communitybenefits.ca/cba_programs
39 Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada. 2019. Memorandum of Understanding between Industry Canada and Telesat Canada. Retrieved from: https://www.ic.gc.ca/eic/site/ smt-gst.nsf/eng/sf11543.html
41 Telesat Canada. 2020. Press Release: Telesat and the Government of Canada finalize $600 million agreement to bridge Canada’s Digital Divide with Telesat’s Low Earth Orbit Satellite Constellation,” November 9. Retrieved from: https://www.telesat.com/press/press-releases/ telesat-and-the-government-of-canada-finalize-600m-agreement-to-bridge-canadas-digitaldivide-with-telesats-low-earth-orbit-satellite-constellation/
42 City of Edmonton. 2019. Valley Line West Light Rail Transit: Business Case Summary. March. Retrieved from: https://www.edmonton.ca/sites/default/files/public-files/assets/ VLW _Business_Case_Summary.pdf?cb=1625175124
43 Ibid.
44 cmhc . 2019. Government of Canada to Build Safe and Affordable Housing in Hamilton. January 22. Retrieved from: https://www.cmhc-schl.gc.ca/en/media-newsroom/news-releases/2019/ government-of-canada-to-build-safe-affordable-housing-hamilton
45 Macdonald, S. & P. Shaker. 2022. Building a Community Hub: From Concept Plan to Implementation. Y Magazine (Winter 2022: Issue 10). Retrieved from: https://civicplan.ca/wp-content/ uploads/2022/02/Civicplan-Building-a-community-hub-from-concept-plan-to-implementation.pdf
