Mona Lisa Bourque Bearskin, Liquaa Wazni, Nikki Rose Hunter-Porter St'uxwtsews, Leanne Kelly, Christina Chakanyuka, Michelle Padley, Nelson Martell, Tara Sampalli, Gail Tomblin Murphy, Arezoo Mojbafan
Canada would benefit from an Indigenous-led, distinctions-based workforce framework with measurable targets, transparent accountability, and renewable Indigenous-governed financing aligned with cultural safety and anti-racism requirements.
BACKGROUND: Indigenous health workforce reform in Canada remains shaped by colonial jurisdictional fragmentation, Indigenous-specific racism, and underinvestment. Although cultural safety initiatives and recruitment supports have expanded, reforms remain uneven and poorly coordinated.
OBJECTIVE: To compare recent Indigenous health workforce policy instruments in Canada and identify persistent gaps and policy directions for distinctions-based, culturally rooted reform.
METHODS: We conducted a structured narrative policy review of publicly available legislation, strategies, and professional/regulatory standards. Three cases were selected for their emphasis on Indigenous governance and cultural safety: British Columbia's Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples Act (DRIPA) Action Plan (2022-2027), Québec's Bill 32 establishing a cultural safety approach (2024), and Nunavut's Inuit Employment Plan (2024-2034). Analysis was organized across five dimensions of Indigenous governance and self-determination; cultural safety and anti-racism expectations; recruitment, retention, and mentorship; sustainable financing; and education/regulatory redesign.
RESULTS: Across cases, workforce-related instruments show emerging policy attention to Indigenous authority and cultural safety expectations, including co-development requirements and system-wide standards. However, implementation and accountability mechanisms remain inconsistent, financing is commonly short-term and fragmented, and accountability for measurable workforce equity varies across jurisdictions. These gaps constrain recruitment, retention, and leadership progression and limit sustained workforce infrastructure. Comparative insights from Aotearoa New Zealand, Australia, and the United States highlight the value of national coordination, measurable targets, and sustained investment.
CONCLUSION: Canada would benefit from an Indigenous-led, distinctions-based workforce framework with measurable targets, transparent accountability, and renewable Indigenous-governed financing aligned with cultural safety and anti-racism requirements.