top of page
Search

Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion: Reflections on Work and the Gaps We Still Haven’t Closed

  • Writer: Carlos Fonce
    Carlos Fonce
  • 3 days ago
  • 5 min read


In the workplace, talking about diversity, equity, and inclusion means recognizing that people do not face the same conditions when it comes to accessing, remaining in, and growing through work. Diversity makes differences visible; equity requires measures to address real disadvantages; and inclusion calls for transforming workplaces so that all people can participate on equal terms.


From that perspective, and in the context of May 1, International Workers’ Day, I want to bring forward some data to look at work beyond employment alone. Talking about the right to work means asking who is able to participate in the economy, who does so under unequal conditions, and who continues to face barriers that do not depend solely on individual will. Economic participation does not happen in a vacuum: it intersects with disability, Indigenous identity — observed through people who speak an Indigenous language — Afro-Mexican or Afro-descendant self-identification, sexual and gender diversity, education, and poverty.



La gráfica se titula: “Tasa de participación económica de la población de 15 años y más en México según grupo poblacional, sin escolaridad y pobreza multidimensional”. Compara 5 grupos poblacionales en México. Para cada grupo presenta 3 datos: la tasa de participación económica, el porcentaje de personas sin escolaridad y el porcentaje de personas en situación de pobreza multidimensional. Población total: La población total considerada es de 94 millones de personas. Su tasa de participación económica es de 65.4%. El porcentaje sin escolaridad es de 4.9%. El porcentaje en pobreza multidimensional es de 30.1%. Personas con discapacidad: La población considerada es de 5.5 millones de personas. Su tasa de participación económica es de 36.1%. El porcentaje sin escolaridad es de 21%. El porcentaje en pobreza multidimensional es de 32.9%. Personas que hablan alguna lengua indígena: La población considerada es de 6 millones de personas. Incluye a quienes sólo hablan lengua indígena y a quienes también hablan español. Su tasa de participación económica es de 65.4%, igual que la población total. El porcentaje sin escolaridad es de 18.8%. El porcentaje en pobreza multidimensional es de 66.3%, el más alto entre los grupos mostrados. Población con autoadscripción afromexicana o afrodescendiente: La población considerada es de 2 millones de personas. Su tasa de participación económica es de 69.5%, la más alta entre los grupos mostrados. El porcentaje sin escolaridad es de 5.4%. El porcentaje en pobreza multidimensional es de 32.3%. Población LGBTI+: La población considerada es de 5 millones de personas. Su tasa de participación económica es de 64.6%. El porcentaje sin escolaridad es de 0.1%, el más bajo entre los grupos mostrados. La gráfica no presenta dato de pobreza multidimensional para este grupo.

The chart accompanying this text brings together information on the population aged 15 and older, based on Mexico’s 2020 Population and Housing Census, the 2021 National Survey on Sexual and Gender Diversity, and INEGI’s 2024 multidimensional poverty estimates. Its purpose is not to compare different realities as if they were equivalent, but to show how data can help identify distinct gaps: lower economic participation in some groups, higher poverty in others, and conditions that require differentiated public policy responses.


Before going into the details, it is worth noting a central tension:

Participating in the economy does not always mean participating on equal terms.

Some groups have economic participation rates similar to, or even higher than, the overall population, yet they face higher levels of poverty. In other cases, such as for persons with disabilities, inequality begins at the point of access to work itself. For this reason, the data do more than describe a situation; they also point to the public responsibility to design affirmative actions, set institutional targets, and implement evidence-based policies.


Disability


Among persons with disabilities, there is a persistent gap in economic participation. The participation rate stands at just 36.1%, compared to 65.4% for the overall population. This gap widens further when looking at women with disabilities, whose participation rate is only 28%.


Moreover, the gap between people with and without disabilities has remained largely unchanged for nearly a decade, based on data from the National Survey of Demographic Dynamics (ENADID) for 2014, 2018, and 2023, as well as the 2020 Population and Housing Census.


In this context, the National Program for Work and Employment for Persons with Disabilities—established within the framework of the National Development Plan and the General Law for the Inclusion of Persons with Disabilities—must translate into effective, measurable, and sustained actions. Issuing a program is not enough; it must avoid becoming a weak implementation effort, as was the case with the 2021–2024 program.


La gráfica compara la tasa de participación económica en México entre distintos grupos de población, con énfasis en la condición de discapacidad. Presenta datos de 2014, 2018, 2020 y 2023. La línea superior representa a la población sin discapacidad. Se mantiene en niveles altos durante todo el periodo, cercanos a 65% o más. Aunque hay ligeras variaciones entre años, la tendencia general muestra estabilidad. La línea correspondiente a las personas con discapacidad se ubica claramente por debajo. Su participación económica se mantiene alrededor de 36%, con variaciones menores a lo largo del periodo. La gráfica también incluye desagregaciones por sexo dentro de la población con discapacidad. En ellas se observa que las mujeres con discapacidad presentan la menor participación económica, por debajo del promedio general de personas con discapacidad. Esto confirma que la brecha no sólo existe entre personas con y sin discapacidad, sino también al interior de la propia población con discapacidad. El mensaje central de la gráfica es que la brecha en la participación económica de las personas con discapacidad ha persistido durante casi una década. Los datos no muestran un cierre sustantivo de esa distancia entre 2014 y 2023.
The low economic participation of persons with disabilities, combined with the applicable human rights framework, highlights the need to strengthen affirmative actions.

These can be incorporated directly into legislation or established as specific institutional targets, as is the case in the Executive Branch of Guanajuato, where the goal is to achieve at least a 3% inclusion of persons with disabilities across its agencies and entities.


Indigenous and Afro-Mexican Communities


For the population that speaks an Indigenous language, the chart highlights a particularly relevant finding: although their economic participation rate is 65.4%, identical to that of the overall population, the share experiencing multidimensional poverty reaches 66.3%, approximately 120% higher than the national average. This contrast helps explain why the rights of Indigenous and Afro-Mexican communities have been incorporated into the National Development Plan as one of its cross-cutting priorities.


It is important to recognize that participating in the economy does not necessarily mean participating on equal terms.

In these groups, work may be present, but it does not always translate into sufficient income, social protection, effective access to rights, or upward mobility.


For the Afro-Mexican or Afro-descendant population, the economic participation rate even exceeds that of the overall population; however, their share of multidimensional poverty is also higher. This requires looking beyond access to work and examining job quality, territorial conditions, cultural recognition, structural discrimination, and the real capacity of public policies to transform these conditions.


LGBTI+ Population


Regarding the LGBTI+ population with diverse sexual orientations and gender identities, the most relevant point is that there is now a statistical baseline that makes it possible to better understand their situation and guide evidence-based government interventions.

For example, economic participation, together with low levels of no schooling, shows more favorable conditions than those of the overall population: an economic participation rate of 64.6%, very close to the general population and significantly higher than the other reference groups. The ENDISEG results also make it possible to identify specific areas for intervention. For instance, the LGBTI+ population reports higher satisfaction with their economic situation than the population with normative sexual orientations and gender identities, but the opposite occurs regarding family relationships.




Conclusion


Analyzing population groups is a useful statistical convention: it helps organize information, measure gaps, and guide public decision-making. But reality is more complex than any single category. In everyday life, disability, gender, age, geography, Indigenous identity, sexual orientation, gender identity, education, poverty, and support networks interact in different ways. Each person, in each situation, is unique.


For this reason, the challenge for those of us working around these populations—whether in public service, advocacy, or corporate social responsibility—is not only to produce accurate diagnoses. It is to turn evidence into decisions. It is not enough to name inclusion, measure inequality, or recognize rights in the abstract. The task is more demanding: to design policies with measurable targets, sustain affirmative actions, remove concrete barriers, and recognize that each data point represents a life that cannot continue waiting for equality to arrive on its own.


Bibliography


 
 
 

Comments

©2019 por carlosfonce.mx. Creada con Wix.com

bottom of page