A Canada-Focused Annotated Summary and Reading Pack for IAP2 Canada Members

Prepared for the IAP2 Canada Research Committee  2026

Briefing Summary for IAP2 Practitioners

Why this matters

Language is not neutral in public participation — it is a core engagement method that shapes:

• Trust and credibility

• Inclusion and accessibility

• Power relationships and legitimacy

• The quality of participation outcomes

Across Canadian research and practice, outdated or inaccurate language can:

• Exclude, other or stigmatize participants

• Misrepresent legal and relational realities (particularly with Indigenous peoples)

• Reduce clarity and participation (through jargon or bureaucratic language)

What this means for practice

Effective engagement language in Canada should be:

✔Inclusive – reflects how people identify and avoids deficit framing
✔Plain – removes jargon and supports accessibility
✔Rights-based – accurately reflects Indigenous rights and relationships
✔Aligned to intent – consistent with the level of participation promised (IAP2 Spectrum)

Three current priority shifts for IAP2 practitioners

1. From “stakeholders” → “rights holders / communities / participants”
   Especially critical in Indigenous engagement contexts

2. From deficit framing → systems-aware language
   (“hard-to-reach” → “facing barriers to participation”)

3. From jargon → plain language
   Clarity is not simplification — it is accessibility and inclusion

Reading pack

This resource is designed to support:

• Engagement planning and strategy development

• Review of public-facing materials

• Facilitation and real-time language choices

• Justification of language decisions to clients, leadership, and partners

Purpose

This reading pack synthesizes Canadian peer-reviewed research, government guidance, and professional practice resources addressing outdated, exclusionary, or inaccurate language in public participation and stakeholder engagement. The focus is on inclusive, plain, and rights-based terminology, with particular attention to Indigenous engagement.

A. Canadian “Words Matter” and Inclusive Language Resources

BC Public Service. (n.d.). Words Matter: Guidelines on Using Inclusive Language in the Workplace.
Annotation: A foundational Canadian guide widely used across public-sector organizations. Provides concrete examples of outdated or exclusionary terms, explains why they cause harm or exclusion, and offers preferred alternatives. Particularly useful for engagement practitioners reviewing materials, facilitation scripts, and reports.

BC Public Service. (n.d.). Words Matter: Speaking Up for Inclusion.
Annotation: Companion guidance focused on how to respond when outdated or harmful language is used in meetings or written materials. Especially relevant for facilitators and engagement leads managing live public forums.

BC Government. (n.d.). Inclusive language and terms (web hub).
Annotation: Central hub linking inclusive language, Indigenous content guidance, and modernization resources. Useful as an authoritative reference point when justifying language changes in engagement practice.

BC Government. (n.d.). Modernizing Language.
Annotation: Provides practical ‘replace-this-with-that’ examples for modern public communication. Supports the argument that language modernization is an operational requirement, not merely a stylistic choice.

B. Indigenous Engagement Language and Terminology (Canada)

Natural Resources Canada. (n.d.). Summary of Engagement with Indigenous Partners.
Annotation: Explicitly distinguishes Indigenous peoples as rights holders rather than stakeholders. Provides a strong, quotable federal practice example for engagement teams revising terminology.

Engineers Canada. (2019). Guideline on Indigenous Consultation and Engagement.
Annotation: Defines stakeholders versus rights holders within a Section 35 constitutional context. Although sector-specific, the guidance is broadly applicable to public participation and engagement.

Crown-Indigenous Relations and Northern Affairs Canada. (n.d.). Updated Guidelines for Federal Officials to Fulfill the Duty to Consult.
Annotation: Authoritative federal guidance grounding consultation language in constitutional and legal obligations. Supports the shift from transactional engagement language to relationship-based terminology.

Impact Assessment Agency of Canada. (n.d.). Public Participation Framework.
Annotation: Positions plain language and accessible communication as core components of meaningful public participation, reinforcing language as engagement infrastructure.

Department of Justice Canada. (2021). United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples Act.
Annotation: Provides legislative context for rights-based engagement language and the evolving expectations placed on public institutions in Canada.

C. Peer-Reviewed and Scholarly Canadian Literature

Sullivan, R. (2001). The promise of plain language drafting. McGill Law Journal.
Annotation: Seminal Canadian legal scholarship linking plain language to democratic participation, accessibility, and legitimacy. Frequently cited to justify clarity as a public obligation.

Bowker, L. (2020). Plain language summaries: A case study. Canadian Journal of Information and Library Science.
Annotation: Empirical Canadian research demonstrating how plain-language approaches improve comprehension and accessibility, with clear transferability to public engagement contexts.

Seck, S. L. (2017). Impact assessment and responsible business conduct. Dalhousie Law Journal.
Annotation: Scholarly analysis emphasizing the distinction between stakeholders and rights holders in impact assessment and engagement processes.

Miroshnikova, G. (2018). An evaluation of public participation theory and practice in Canada. University of Waterloo.
Annotation: Canadian academic work examining gaps between participation theory and practice, including communication and language barriers.

Stallwood, L. et al. (2023). Plain-language versus standard-format information: A randomized trial. JAMA Pediatrics.
Annotation: Although health-focused, this study provides strong empirical evidence that plain language improves understanding—supporting claims about accessibility in public engagement materials.

D. One-Page Reference Table: Outdated Terms and Preferred Alternatives (IAP2 Practice)

Outdated / Problematic Term	Why It Is Problematic in Engagement	Preferred Alternative
Stakeholders (Indigenous contexts)	Misrepresents constitutional rights	Rights holders; Indigenous Nations
Hard-to-reach populations	Deficit framing	Communities facing barriers
The public	Homogenizes diverse groups	Residents; affected communities
Buy-in	Implies persuasion	Shared understanding; collaboration
Consultation (generic)	Obscures level of influence	Engagement; co-design
Educate the public	Top-down framing	Dialogue; shared learning
Vulnerable populations	Labels people	People experiencing vulnerability
Jargon-heavy language	Reduces accessibility	Plain-language communication

E. Suggested Reading List for IAP2 Practitioners

Essential (Start Here)

1. BC Public Service – Words Matter (Guidelines)

2. Engineers Canada – Indigenous Consultation and Engagement

3. NRCan – Indigenous Engagement Summary

Use these for immediate practice changes

Core Practice & Policy

1. Impact Assessment Agency of Canada – Public Participation Framework

2. CIRNAC – Duty to Consult Guidelines

3. BC Government – Modernizing Language

Use these for policy alignment and justification

Research & Evidence Base

1. Sullivan (2001) – Plain Language Drafting

2. Bowker (2020) – Plain Language Case Study

3. Seck (2017) – Rights Holders vs Stakeholders

Use these for reports, academic grounding, and credibility

Advanced / Reflective Practice

1. Miroshnikova (2018)

2. Stallwood et al. (2023)

Use these for deepening practice and research-informed engagement design

Final Note for IAP2 Members

Language choices signal intent, shape relationships, and influence outcomes.
In public participation, how we speak and communicate is part of how we engage.