EHRC code of practice for services, public functions and associations

The Society responding to the Equalities and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) consultation on their code of practice for services, public functions and associations. The consultation was to gather feedback on changes made to the code of practice following the UK Supreme Court ruling on 16 April 2025 in For Women Scotland Ltd v The Scottish Ministers (For Women Scotland).

The Society's response

As the learned society and professional body for geography, we identify a range of concerns in the proposed updates to the EHRC code of practice for services, public functions and associations. If implemented as currently proposed, the guidance in the code of practice would materially impact the ability for everyone to participate in, and contribute to, geography as a discipline. It would also make practical implementation of the content of the code of practice by institutions difficult.

Equity, diversity and inclusion are core values of the Society, and our strategic plan commits us to working towards greater equity, diversity and inclusion within our own practices and activities, and across the wider geographical community. The proposed updates to the EHRC code of practice, if implemented as written, would directly impact our ability to deliver on these priorities. This would limit the ability of our members and other geographers to be included in spaces of teaching, learning and research and thereby affect access to the discipline for researchers, lecturers, schoolteachers, students, and pupils. These impacts would also be felt in professional workplaces, public events and the wider activities of the Society. It would affect access to the discipline.

For example, the code of practice, if implemented as written, may lead to geography students being unable to attend research field trips because there is nowhere suitable for them to sleep, or because they don’t have access to certain sites in the field. The interim guidance has already led to some staff and students feeling less welcome and/or placed staff and students at greater risk (and fear) of threat of attack in some public spaces. 

We are also concerned about the impact these updates to the code of practice will have on those tasked with implementing it, and who may be expected to effectively regulate their colleagues’ access to spaces of research, teaching and practice. We note significant concerns about implementation and enforceability, particularly related to an individual’s right to privacy and how this will be protected for geography students and researchers; issues of GDPR and data collection; and the balance of competing protected characteristics. 

If the updates to the code of practice are adopted as proposed, geography as a discipline will be weakened by the loss of its trans, nonbinary, and gender-nonconforming constituents. The ability of all geographers to research in participatory ethnographic and embedded ways will also be limited.