In recent years, Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) frameworks have gained prominence across academia, policymaking, and commercial organisations. The application of these frameworks aims to ensure fair treatment, equal opportunities, and access to resources for all individuals, regardless of age, race, gender, or other identities. Yet amid political and cultural pushback, a growing number of institutions and large organisations are scaling back their DEI commitments (particularly in the United States but a ripple effect is being felt in the UK and beyond).
DEI initiatives, a driving force for inclusive research agendas and social accountability, are now subject to retrenchment, defunding, and reframing as politically contentious rather than structurally necessary. This retrenchment is not theoretical. It directly impacts how ageing, ageing workforces and retirement are studied and supported.
So, what specific impacts does cutting back on DEI have on ageing research, and why is it crucial to keep DEI at its core as the global population continues to age?
Why DEI cuts matter for research on the ageing workforce
Older workers – typically defined as those aged 50 and above – face specific challenges in the labour market that are deeply rooted in systemic ageist bias and discrimination. Ageism, both overt and subtle, can limit older adults’ access to later life employment opportunities, training, and career progression. DEI-centred research has been pivotal in highlighting ageism issues, pushing for age-inclusive and age-friendly practices in organisations, and identifying structural and policy barriers that hinder older people’s full participation in the workforce in later life. More importantly, a DEI oriented lens is critical for exploring overlapping forms of bias and discrimination, rethinking retirement planning that addresses existing inequalities across groups, and the design and use of technology which are free from hidden algorithmic biases.
Eroding ‘intersectionality’ in ageing research
Ageism is rarely experienced in isolation – it is often overlaid with sexism, racism, ableism, or homophobia. DEI research critically emphasises intersectionality, that is, how various forms of discrimination based on people’s socio-biological identities overlap which can act to increase their marginalisation in both society and workplaces. Research on older workers that integrates DEI principles addresses such discrimination by not solely focussing on age. For example, it explores how older women, older non-binary or non-conforming individuals, and older adults from ethnic minority groups may experience compounded disadvantages, thereby providing a more nuanced understanding of people’s lived experiences.
One of the most damaging effects of sidelining DEI is, therefore, the collapse of intersectional approaches in social ageing research. Without an intersectional lens, the category and phenomenon of ageing risks being treated as a stand-alone demographic variable rather than one part of a web of complex identities that shape people’s later working lives.
Technology, work, and the invisible edge of Algorithmic Ageism
Mainstream approaches to applying technology in organisations tend to frame it as progressive, often celebrating automation and AI as drivers of efficiency and productivity. But without the critical scrutiny that a DEI lens provides, these tools may end up encoding existing ageist norms and practices – only faster and with less accountability.
A withdrawal from DEI would mean abandoning the interrogation of digital exclusion and algorithmic bias. DEI-informed studies have revealed how workplace cultures often privilege youth, associating innovation and adaptability with younger employees while marginalising older ones. AI and automation are increasingly embedded in recruitment, performance management, and workforce planning; with ageism being encoded into systems that appear neutral but are anything but. These types of analyses would be far less visible without a DEI framework that recognises age as a crucial axis of identity and inequality.
Reinventing retirement without DEI
The erosion of DEI frameworks may also jeopardise one of the most urgent challenges in ageing societies: the reinvention of retirement. As populations live longer and remain healthier for longer, and as economic pressures force many to work beyond traditional retirement ages, the binary model of employment versus retirement has become increasingly obsolete. Without a DEI-informed approach, policy responses risk being both reductive and exclusionary. This is because retirement is neither experienced equally nor in a linear, uniform manner. Older workers’ ability to exit the labour market is shaped by cumulative advantage or disadvantage – across gender, ethnicity, disability, and class-based lines. A middle-class professional may have access to phased retirement or consultancy work, while a working-class manual labourer may be trapped in physically unsustainable employment with no realistic exit strategy. DEI-centred research foregrounds these issues and advocates for retirement models that are flexible, inclusive, and responsive to the diversity of people’s life trajectories.
Reframing the narrative
Even in popular media narratives, DEI tends to privilege race, gender and only recently disability. While these are undoubtedly critical issues, age – as a protected characteristic – is consistently underrepresented in popular discourse. It is simply a form of institutional neglect.
We must recognise that DEI is not a standalone, one-off recommendation or a ‘nice to have’ framework for research on ageing – it functions as an interlinking mechanism that connects critical research areas including ageing intersectionality, technological justice, and workforce age equity – into a coherent agenda. When funding bodies prioritise intersectional age research, institutions are incentivised to develop age-inclusive policies. When researchers use DEI lenses to examine AI, organisations are pressured to question how their designs work and for whom. In essence, cutting back on DEI does not merely reduce the scope of research; it actively erases the nuanced perspectives necessary for creating inclusive policies and technologies that serve an ageing population.
About the Author
Dr Sajia Ferdous is a Lecturer in Organisational Behaviour at Queen’s Management School, Queen’s University Belfast. Before joining Queen’s, Sajia held teaching positions at The University of Manchester. She completed her PhD in Business and Management from Alliance Manchester Business School, The University of Manchester.
Opinions of the blogger is their own and not endorsed by the Institute
Comments Welcome: We welcome your comments on this or any of the Institute's blog posts. Please feel free to email comments to be posted on your behalf to administrator@ageing.ox.ac.uk or use the Disqus facility linked below.
