by Raiha Shareef
During the COVID-19 pandemic, my friends and I made monthly donations to a community fridge in my hometown of Regina, Saskatchewan, to support our community during a surge of food insecurity. We initially donated canned soups because they were filling and long-lasting. However, our perspective shifted during our third round, when someone who frequented the fridge chatted with us as we were unloading the donations. She explained how hard it had been to motivate her children to eat. Since there was no variety in the fridge, her and her children were forced to eat soup at every meal, every day.
The issue was that food donors like me were deciding what to donate without considering how those facing food insecurity really felt. Keeping in mind the lived experiences of the woman at the fridge and her family, we started sourcing hot sandwiches, ice cream, making our contributions more dignifying and fulfilling for those eating from the fridge. During my time as a summer law intern at the National Right to Housing Network (NRHN), I learned that the concept of uplifting lived experiences is not isolated to my community work at home. Much like the fridge donations, if you do not uplift lived experiences in systemic policy work, all you’re giving back to the community is stale canned soup.
Canada’s national housing strategy is our canned soup
The National Housing Strategy (NHS) began in 2017 and outlines specific goals and initiatives to address the housing crisis in Canada. Some of their most recent projects are aimed at increasing the supply of affordable housing and improving the quality of existing housing stock. While the NHS is a great step forward in prioritizing housing in Canada, there are also significant limitations in this strategy that perpetuate housing inequity. For instance, the NHS predominantly emphasizes the construction of new housing units as a primary solution to Canada’s housing crisis. This focus is reflected in initiatives like the Rapid Housing Initiative and the National Housing Co-Investment Fund, which are designed to accelerate the development of affordable housing projects across the country. This is where the analogy of the canned soup really comes in. Building more houses may be a solution for urban middle class communities who face a shortage of housing in a rapidly growing area. However, communities who face chronic homelessness need more than just new housing units. Many Canadians across the country face chronic homelessness because of a lack of available health services to stay healthy enough to work, and some immigrants and refugees face extreme barriers in securing housing or qualifying for shelter supports because of their status. So, to address the housing crisis by simply constructing more housing is not a one-size-fits-all solution. We cannot declare the construction of more housing units as an effective strategy for the entire nation, when there are diverse communities across Canada that need and deserve more socioeconomic support to really address homelessness. Much like my prior donations to the community fridge, this strategy takes on a middle-class urban lens, and needs to be more informed with people who have lived experiences in homelessness to find more effective solutions.
Using lived experiences in developing solutions makes for more effective advocacy
A few years later, Canada introduced the National Housing Strategy Act, legislating the right to housing in Canadian law. This pushes the needle forward in addressing the right to adequate housing as more than four walls and a roof – it is about peace, security, dignity, sustainability, and community. The team I interned with this summer, the NRHN, is dedicated to amplifying lived experiences and ensuring that the government uphold their promises to dignified housing for all. Over the summer, I researched and assisted in writing a report on youth evictions in Canada with the NRHN. What I enjoyed most about my time working on this project, was that the team ensured not to make assumptions about the evicted youth and what they needed. Instead, we based our research on the statements and solutions given by youth in housing precarity. Some youths expressed how they wanted more flexibility from their landlords when it comes to choosing their rent payment day and their form of payment. In a month when their rent falls short, some youth suggested alternative forms of payment like volunteering their time to clean or help with administrative tasks for the landlord. These are solutions I would not have thought of myself, nor have I seen in academia. But this is a solution that seems feasible and effective for youths, especially those living in unstable financial situations.
Conclusion
My journey of donating to the community fridge in Regina has illuminated a crucial lesson about the importance of uplifting lived experiences in both grassroots efforts and systemic policy work. Just as my initial donations of canned soup fell short of meeting the needs of those we aimed to help, Canada’s NHS, while well-intentioned, risks perpetuating inequities if it continues to prioritize the construction of housing units over the diverse needs of communities facing homelessness. True advocacy requires listening to those directly affected, understanding their challenges, and co-creating solutions that promote dignity and fulfillment. This is exactly the kind of work the NRHN seeks to do. By incorporating the voices of individuals with lived experiences, we can move beyond simplistic remedies and develop comprehensive strategies that genuinely address the complexities of inequity, whether that be in food insecurity, the housing crisis, or other systemic issues. As we strive for effective change, let us remember that meaningful solutions arise in collaboration with the rich insights and aspirations of the communities we serve. True transformative change begins when we go beyond giving canned soup.