That's an important question, and I think good guidance for the committee to give the government in developing the national strategy. Place-based impacts are, as you say, very important and probably what comes to mind first, but certainly climate change has effects that fall in the same category of environmental racism.
There are other examples as well, and I know I don't have too much time, but briefly, for example, recent research looking at air quality in Canada's major cities finds consistently that the worst air quality is in racialized neighbourhoods. I think that is looking at the federal jurisdiction to solve some of these problems. In part, what the systematic collection of data and the strategy have to offer is to bring a focus onto these disproportionate impacts, so that decision-making goes beyond consideration of general population risks and really is able to understand the risks to specific populations that are most affected.