Category: Analysis

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Triveni Srikaran, PhD Candidate, Department of History, McMaster University

In our age of digital influencers, it could be easy to believe that building a professional network is a modern phenomenon.

However, long before the dawn of social media, women artists in late Victorian and Edwardian London mastered this art.

Although they weren’t the first in history to do so, they crafted a revolutionary style of social networking — not for the sake of fame, but as a means to break down systemic barriers and challenge the gender norms that dominated the English art world.

A historical framework for success

Historians David Doughan and Peter Gordon have documented the rise of women’s clubs in Britain, and feminist art historians Maria Quirk and Zoë Thomas have emphasized how these networks enabled women artists to professionalize and promote their work.

This article explores how the frameworks of authenticity, trust and mutual support established by these women laid a strong foundation for their professional success — a strategy that remains strikingly relevant today.

Exclusion and the art world

During the Victorian era, the art world operated like an exclusive “old boys’ club” that kept female talent at bay. Prestigious institutions like the Royal Academy largely excluded women, denying them entry for many years.

It wasn’t until 1860 that the first female member, Laura Herford, gained acceptance by submitting her application under the ambiguous name “L. Herford.” Once her true identity was revealed, the embarrassed academicians had no choice but to reconsider their policies.

Despite this landmark achievement, crucial training opportunities, such as life drawing, remained inaccessible to female students. Women were sidelined from major exhibitions organized by their male counterparts and excluded from influential social clubs where valuable connections and potential patronage were often made.

The few artworks they managed to sell were generally limited to themes like flowers or still lifes, which fetched much lower prices compared to the grand historical paintings that propelled their male colleagues to stardom.

Members of the press and art critics, predominantly male, dismissed their efforts as mere “amateur” pursuits — a label that served to undermine their professional credibility. In this stifling environment, the system was designed to ensure women artists were never given a fair chance.

The rise of women’s art clubs

Confronted with a system that marginalized them, determined women artists formed their own women’s clubs aimed at overcoming institutional barriers.

In late 19th and early 20th-century London, several prominent women’s art organizations emerged, including the Society of Women Artists, the Women’s Guild of Arts, the Women’s International Art Club, the Pioneer Club and the Lyceum Club.

Each of these groups was founded on a commitment to professional development, mutual support and the essential need for a united voice.

My emerging research explores the dynamics of women’s networks by closely analyzing letters, documents, exhibition catalogues and contemporary newspapers related to these organizations, and so far has identified three vital functions:

1. Fostering artistic development

At a time when formal networking opportunities were scarce for women, organizations like the Pioneer Club (1892) and the Lyceum Club (1903) emerged as crucial, supportive environments. These clubs began with the ambitious vision of creating a space for personal and artistic growth and also provided venues for connection and collaboration.

They also offered the rare chance for members to stay overnight, giving women the freedom to travel for their work without a chaperone.

Founded in 1907, the Women’s Guild of Arts became a dynamic hub where members could learn, showcase their art, receive constructive criticism and hone their skills. These networks fostered mentorship and empowered women artists to refine their craft within a supportive community.

2. Creating independent exhibition opportunities

In the face of exclusion from male-only exhibitions, women artists established their own platforms. They launched their own venues to bypass the gatekeepers of the art world and connect directly with their audiences.

A striking example is the Society of Women Artists, founded in 1855, which has hosted annual “women-only” exhibitions that not only sparked public conversation but also created a lasting space for visibility.

The Women’s International Art Club, established in 1898, broadened this mission, forming a transnational network that enabled its members to exhibit and sell their works across Europe, America and Australia.

3. Building community and professional identity

Women’s clubs emerged as the original networking hubs, similar to modern meetups. For those often labelled “amateurs,” joining organizations like the Society of Women Artists, Women’s International Art Club or Women’s Guild of Art offered a pathway to professional development and recognition.

These social networks fostered a supportive environment where members could share advice and provide emotional backing as they navigated careers filled with systemic challenges. This ecosystem highlighted how working together was crucial in driving individual successes.

Their enduring legacy

The story of early women’s art clubs highlights a crucial chapter in the history of creative entrepreneurship. These women both created their own professional opportunities and worked to change societal perceptions of women in the arts.

The strategies they used to navigate a restrictive environment still resonate today.

---

Read more:
When it comes to social networks, bigger isn’t always better

---

In a digital landscape filled with fleeting followers and superficial likes, their legacy prompts us to reflect on the fundamental need for human connection, and the extent to which true success still hinges on building a community rather than simply amassing a following.

Triveni Srikaran’s research is funded by McMaster University, the Ontario Graduate Scholarship, and the Paul Mellon Centre for Studies in British Art at Yale University.

– ref. Influencers of a bygone era: How late Victorian women artists mastered the art of networking – https://theconversation.com/influencers-of-a-bygone-era-how-late-victorian-women-artists-mastered-the-art-of-networking-262659

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Alexandra Flynn, Associate Professor, Peter A. Allard School of Law, University of British Columbia

Imagine if every time a hospital was built, it came with an expiry date. Twenty-five years later, it would be sold to the highest bidder and patients would be told to find care elsewhere.

This is unthinkable in health care, yet this is precisely how we treat affordable housing in Canada. Government programs provide funding for the construction of affordable housing, but without long-term commitments to ensure those same housing units remain affordable.

As the federal government puts the finishing touches on planning its new housing programs, we must ensure that affordable housing stays affordable for generations.

Governments pour billions into new housing programs, but the homes that are built aren’t required to remain affordable over the long term, meaning they often slip back into the speculative market after just a few decades.

Government programs subsidize the capital costs of housing construction, with rent affordability guaranteed for a limited period (usually 10-20 years). A recent study found that Canada lost 10 affordable housing units for every new one built over a decade.

The implication is that land is a tradeable asset as governments forget it’s also the foundation for homes, communities and stability. If governments are serious about solving the housing crisis, they must change that.

Canada has done it before. In the 1970s and ’80s, governments invested heavily in co-operative housing, creating tens of thousands of permanently affordable homes that continue to serve communities today. Those investments prove what’s possible when land and housing are treated as long-term public goods rather than short-term commodities.

---

Read more:
‘Home sweet home’ is a dying dream: Federal election promises won’t solve affordable housing crisis

---

Holding land in perpetuity

Community land trusts (CLTs) are the next generation of that vision. They extend the principle of permanence to a wider range of housing types, neighbourhoods and community uses, ensuring that affordability and stability are not just won but protected for generations.

A new report by my UBC colleague, Kuni Kamizaki, entitled A Case for Community Land Trusts in Canada: Promising Community Practices and Public Policy Options, shows how CLTs can reframe the housing conversation in creating a long-term, affordable housing stock. It’s not simply about how many homes we build, but who controls the land beneath them.

CLTs are membership-based, non-profit organizations that acquire and hold land in perpetuity for community benefit. People then purchase long-term leases in individual units.

This means that the land is removed from speculative markets, stewarded democratically and the housing is locked in as affordable, often for 99 years or more. Unlike situations where properties are sold and affordability disappears after 10 to 25 years, CLTs preserve it permanently.

This is not a distant dream. Kamizaki identifies roughly 45 CLTs operating or forming across Canada, more than 60 per cent of them launched in the last five years. They range from the Community Land Trust Foundation of BC to Toronto’s Parkdale Neighbourhood Land Trust, each committed to collective ownership, community governance and significant affordability.

Meeting local needs

CLTs flip the switch on the usual policy logic. Too often, publicly owned land is sold to private developers, representing — as Kamizaki puts it — “a long-term loss of public good and a lost opportunity to build non-market housing with deep affordability.”

Once sold, the land is gone, along with the chance to secure permanent affordability. CLTs keep that land in community hands, using it to meet local needs rather than feed speculative demand.

The benefits go beyond economics. CLTs can advance reconciliation and racial justice by challenging the real estate practices that have displaced racialized communities for decades. This treats land as a relationship rather than a commodity, an understanding rooted in stewardship, responsibility and belonging. In other words: turning housing into homes.

Vancouver’s Hogan’s Alley Society shows this potential in action. Once home to a thriving Black community, the neighbourhood was demolished in the 1970s in the name of urban renewal. The organization is now working to reclaim that land through a CLT, rebuilding a Black cultural hub grounded in long-term stewardship and land-back principles. This is housing justice intertwined with cultural restoration.

But CLTs cannot expand on good will alone. The National Housing Strategy Act recognizes housing as a human right, yet Canadian policies still treat it as a market commodity first and a necessity second.

Market-based “solutions” inevitably recreate the same conditions — speculation, gentrification, displacement — that produced the crisis.

---

Read more:
Housing co-ops could solve Canada’s housing affordability crisis

---

How to advance CLTs

Kamizaki’s report outlines several steps governments can take to make CLTs a central part of Canada’s housing strategy, including the following:

1. Prioritize permanent affordability over short-term targets;
2. Support CLTs led by racialized and marginalized communities as acts of reparation;
3. Transfer public land into community hands;
4. Create legal frameworks tailored to CLTs;
5. Provide stable funding and technical support through a national CLT hub.

These are structural commitments that address the core questions: Who owns land? Who decides how it’s used? Who benefits from public investment?

CLTs answer these questions by matching the permanence of the right to housing with the permanence of land stewardship. They take the volatility of the market out of the equation and put democratic decision-making into the hands of the people who live in and care for their communities.

---

Read more:
Canada’s housing crisis will not be solved by building more of the same

---

Many studies reinforce the conclusion that CLTs deliver lasting affordability, protect against displacement, and strengthen community ties. The real question is whether Canada has the political will to embrace them.

The housing crisis is urgent, and so is the opportunity. We can keep funding market Band-aids that expire in a generation, or we can take land off the speculative market, put it in community hands and make houses into homes. For good.

Alexandra Flynn receives funding from SSHRC and CMHC.

– ref. Turning houses into homes: Community land trusts offer a fix to Canada’s housing crisis – https://theconversation.com/turning-houses-into-homes-community-land-trusts-offer-a-fix-to-canadas-housing-crisis-264757

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By David J Finch, Professor and Senior Fellow, Institute for Community Prosperity, Mount Royal University, University of Calgary

Canada is facing a productivity crisis that threatens wages, competitiveness and long-term prosperity. Canadian productivity lags behind the United States by 28 per cent and ranks 18th among Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) countries.

Productivity is the economic value of the goods or services produced compared to the amount of work it took to produce them. Productivity should matter to every Canadian, because it directly influences inflation and income, and its effects are felt by all.

---

Read more:
Canada is falling behind its peers in terms of living standards — can it catch up?

---

Productivity emerges from the interplay of three forces: robust capital investment, a supportive business environment and, most critically, people with the competencies the economy demands.

People play a disproportionate role, as they not only drive investment decisions but also shape the business climate. Collectively, people are known as human capital: the knowledge, skills and capabilities embedded in the workforce.

Building this capital is a shared responsibility of families, educators, employers and policymakers. It begins early in life and continues throughout both formal and informal learning experiences. The question is whether Canada’s current approach to building that capital is fit for the challenges ahead.

We are researchers in management and economics who collaborated with a team of researchers and industry experts on The Productivity Project, concerned with how Canada develops its human capital. Partners in this project include the Alberta Centre for Labour Market Research, the Canada West Foundation, Mount Royal University’s Institute for Community Prosperity and the LearningCITY Lab.

Post-secondary education and its limits

In Canada, post-secondary education plays an oversized role in developing human capital. The percentage of the population that has completed post-secondary education in Canada is 63 per cent — 22 per cent higher than the OECD average.

Today, 15 per cent of the working-age population have graduate degrees, the same share that held bachelor’s degrees in 1997.

Canada also invests 20 per cent more in post-secondary education than the OECD average. Yet despite this, it’s also a global leader in graduate underemployment. The number of unemployed degree holders now exceeds the number of jobs requiring such qualifications by a factor of five.

Compounding this is a persistent mismatch between the competencies Canadian workers have and those the economy needs. Research indicates Canada’s most pressing shortfall lies in foundational competencies, not in job-specific expertise, as is commonly assumed. Chief among these is adaptability — the capacity to learn, unlearn and relearn.

Adaptability depends on literacy: the ability to comprehend, analyze and apply information to new problems. Canada scored above the OECD average in a recent international assessment, but the data shows that only slightly above half of the Canadian workforce can meet the increasing literacy demands of most jobs. Research suggests that a one per cent improvement in literacy can boost productivity by up to five per cent.

This gap between the competencies Canadian workers have and those the economy needs will only widen with the rapid rise of artificial intelligence and automation.

Canada’s demographic squeeze

Demographic shifts are heightening Canada’s productivity challenge. Like most developed countries, Canada’s education system has its roots in the Industrial Revolution, when life expectancy was just 40 years.

---

Read more:
In 2025 and beyond, schools need to teach more than just ‘the basics’

---

For individuals born in 2024, life expectancy is projected to be 83 years. Longer lives now mean longer working lives: 40-year careers are now the norm, and 60-year careers are fast approaching.

Yet Canada continues to spend $60 billion annually on a post-secondary education system optimized for a single stage of life — young adulthood — rather than a lifetime of learning. Eighty-three per cent of post-secondary students are 29 or younger, and 67 per cent under 25.

The human capital system that has sustained Canada’s social and economic prosperity over the past 150 years doesn’t possess the capacity to lead Canada into the future. The solution is not as simple as spending more money; the future demands a paradigm shift in how Canada develops its human capital.

The first step is to detach from the current model and ask a fundamental question: what is the most effective way to unlock the full productivity of all Canadians?

Rethinking the learning model

Over the past year, our multidisciplinary team of researchers and industry experts at The Productivity Project explored this question through a six-report series, Productivity and People. This series synthesizes interdisciplinary research, with new data to explore a new learning paradigm.

Two conclusions stand out. First, a true paradigm shift requires collaboration among policymakers, employers, credentialing bodies, learning providers and individuals.

Second, learning pathways are limitless and today, only a fraction of learning occurs in classrooms; the vast majority takes place in workplaces, community organizations, libraries, places of worship, on sports fields and stages, and through podcasts, blogs and books.

Accelerating this paradigm shift offers Canada a unique opportunity to improve its productivity by unlocking the value of existing learning assets.

From closed systems to open learning

Two decades ago, the technology sector faced challenges much like those confronting today’s post-secondary system. Its response was to embrace open innovation — harnessing ecosystem collaboration to accelerate innovation.

Open learning unlocks the full learning ecosystem, from the workplace to volunteering and self-directed learning. Open learning resembles a dynamic climbing wall, where learners are empowered to explore infinite learning pathways. The result is a far more inclusive and agile lifelong learning system, designed to drive innovation through collaboration and competition.

Open learning stands in contrast to the legacy higher education system. In Canada, public institutions control an estimated 90 per cent of the post-secondary marketplace, and often lack the incentives, culture and structures to deliver the dynamic and innovative learning the country needs. The result is a post-secondary experience resembling not a climbing wall of endless possibilities, but an inflexible ladder from a bygone era.

Unbundling learning and credentials

While post-secondary institutions don’t monopolize learning, they do monopolize recognition. As a result, at the centre of this paradigm shift is the unbundling of learning pathways from the recognition of learning.

Today, a bundled four-year degree composed of 40 courses costs about $75,000. Given this, it’s not surprising that almost one-third of students never complete their degree.

An unbundled system would allow individuals to select their own learning paths, with outcomes assessed and certified by an independent authority that has the support and legitimacy of the provincial government.

The importance of unbundling teaching from assessment is not new. In 2009, the European Higher Education Area released the Leuven Communiqué declaration that set priorities for the expansion of lifelong learning through the open recognition of all learning.

In Canada, governments applied the principle of unbundling when they introduced driver licensing more than a century ago. The driver’s license remains the country’s most extensive open learning system: individuals learn however they wish, and a standardized, independent assessment determines competence.

To confront Canada’s lagging productivity, the country needs to fundamentally change how human capital is developed. Canada’s future social and economic prosperity depends on leaders willing to champion a new human capital paradigm that aligns with today’s realities and anticipates tomorrow’s opportunities.

Janet Lane, a senior fellow at the Canada West Foundation, co-authored this article.

David J Finch receives funding from the Alberta Centre for Labour Market Research.

Joseph Marchand currently receives funding from the Government of Alberta to create and fund the Alberta Centre for Labour Market Research. He has previously received federal funding from the Canada First Research Excellence Fund and the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council.

– ref. To close its productivity gap, Canada needs to rethink its higher education system – https://theconversation.com/to-close-its-productivity-gap-canada-needs-to-rethink-its-higher-education-system-264663

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Lily Yumagulova, Research Associate, Indigenous Studies, University of Saskatchewan

Across Canada, massive fires and hazardous smoke have forced tens of thousands of people to evacuate from northern and remote communities to shelters and hotels in large cities. For many, their homes, businesses, trap lines and the ecosystems that nourish them are at risk of burning down, or already have.

With more than 7.6 million hectares burned across Canada in 2025 already, this is more than double the 10-year average of 3.6 million hectares. In August 2025, the Canadian Red Cross announced that the 2025 wildfires response operation was the largest in the organization’s recent history.

Indigenous Peoples are disproportionately affected by the negative impacts of climate change and disasters like wildfires and floods. First Nations in Saskatchewan, Alberta and Manitoba are those most often evacuated, with many facing long-term displacement from their home communities.

From 1980 to 2021, Indigenous communities made up 42 per cent of wildfire evacuations even though they are only five per cent of Canada’s population. The 2023 wildfire season was the most destructive recorded, and resulted in the evacuation of more than 95 Indigenous communities.

Our ongoing research on Indigenous evacuation experiences includes interviews with more than 100 First Nations and Métis evacuees, firefighters, emergency managers and community organizers, as well as non-Indigenous frontline evacuee workers, and provincial and federal employees.

We worked with an Indigenous Circle of Aunties and youth leaders in designing safe evacuation spaces and processes. We explored solutions for improving evacuation outcomes for First Nations and Métis communities by understanding inequitable impacts, distinct experiences and by focusing on supporting families throughout the displacement.

Family separation, overlapping disasters

We’ve learned from our previous research that wildfire is not the only disaster facing evacuees. Inadequate response and unsafe conditions during the evacuation and while sheltering have left long-lasting scars on individuals, families and communities.

A lack of self-determination in disaster response results in externally imposed and culturally unsafe practices, further deepening pre-existing marginalization and trauma within Indigenous communities. Not everyone can pay for food, transportation or shelter during an evacuation.

Community and family structure, and cultural and socio-economic realities, produce key distinctions between Indigenous and non-Indigenous evacuation experiences. These include family separation, racism, recurring evacuations and extended periods of displacement.

Following the devastating 2021 fires, floods and landslides in British Columbia, Indigenous evacuees were more likely to experience longer displacement. Indigenous communities had a higher percentage of peoples with disability experiencing disasters, and experienced greater challenges related to displacement.

Family members were separated and dispersed to different shelter sites, while many had difficulty accessing health care, accommodation, housing and healthy food.

This is because evacuations are often phased. The first phase includes pregnant women, the elderly and people with medical conditions, while subsequent phases include those with lower risk. This phasing can mean elderly grandparents are evacuated first to shelters hundreds of kilometres away from grandchildren in their care.

Such phased evacuations can leave youth alone in unfamiliar places. Shelters fill up quickly, and that can mean there is no room left for family members evacuated in subsequent phases to join relatives evacuated in the first phase. So, grandchildren end up in different shelters in different cities from their grandparents.

Compounding risks

There is evidence of increased child apprehensions during and after evacuations. Emergency management practices that result in family separation in evacuations amplify the ongoing trauma of residential schools and the ‘60s Scoop.

---

Read more:
I survived the ’60s Scoop. Here’s why the Pope’s apology isn’t an apology at all

---

Unsafe evacuation conditions and the length of displacement from their homes people experience (some over six years) have also led to increased substance use, addictions and domestic violence.

In the initial evacuation, evacuees are often housed in congregate shelters, such as large arenas or community centres. The Aunties and the youth we spoke with explained how the noise and chaos of congregated sheltering creates a stressful environment for families that make it impossible to feel safe, and sometimes, to sleep.

For residential school survivors, being forced from their homes and communities, sleeping in rows of cots in arenas with bright institutional lights, and standing in line for food was a triggering and traumatic experience.

Once the immediate chaos of early evacuation days pass, people need to be moved from congregate shelters into more family-friendly accommodations, such as hotel rooms. Providing accommodations for multi-generational families and spaces for ceremony can significantly reduce suffering and improve well-being during evacuation.

Additional supports for Elders, people with chronic medical needs, single mothers, children and youth are required. The Aunties and youth’s recommendations are depicted in the medicine wheel, and organized as spaces, supports, safety and services. At the centre of all the recommendations is a focus on displaced families.

Evacuations do not impact everyone the same way, and Indigenous evacuees can be re-traumatized and treated poorly. Indigenous emergency managers must be given control when and where possible, and a focus on self-determination is essential for ensuring that this trauma can be addressed by creating Indigenous-led spaces for healing and resilience.

Ultimately, Indigenous-built and operated evacuation centres are needed to acknowledge sovereignty. Emergency management in general, and evacuations in particular, are precisely the opportunities where Indigenous leadership, agency and sovereignty are most needed for their communities, with the greatest return on investment.

Lily Yumagulova received funding from the Banting Postdoctoral Fellowship and TD Bank’s Ready Challenge Fund to research wildfire and flood evacuations at the University of Saskatchewan. She is the Program Director for Preparing Our Home.

Simon Lambert received funding from TD Bank’s Ready Challenge Fund to research wildfire and flood evacuations. He is affiliated with Te Tira Whakamātaki, a Māori environmental not-for-profit organisation based in Aotearoa New Zealand.

Warrick Baijius received funding from TD Bank’s Ready Challenge Fund to research wildfire and flood evacuations at the University of Saskatchewan. He is a project manager in the Indigenous Studies department and lecturer in Geography and Planning at the University of Saskatchewan.

– ref. Evacuations of Indigenous communities during wildfires must prioritize keeping families together – https://theconversation.com/evacuations-of-indigenous-communities-during-wildfires-must-prioritize-keeping-families-together-263780