In discussions about race and ethnicity, the language we use matters. Finding the right terminology to define people from minority ethnic backgrounds is a complex and evolving challenge. Last year, LARCH facilitated a workshop for our steering group to build consensus on this issue. We explored various terms, including BAME (Black, Asian, and Minority Ethnic), Black, Asian and minoritised ethnic, people of colour, and global majority.
However, while terminology is important, it should not overshadow the core issue: systemic racism, the policies and practices across institutions that further racial inequality. Ensuring that discussions remain focused on addressing real barriers, rather than becoming sidetracked by debates over labels, is crucial.
To explore these complexities further, we sat down with Janine La Rosa, Chief People Officer and Executive Director Organisation Strategy at Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust, and Adeola Agbebiyi, Assistant Director of Public Health at the London Borough of Newham.
Why this conversation matters
Janine highlighted a key challenge: ‘Focusing too much on terminology can be a distraction. If we get caught up in debates over language, we risk losing sight of the fundamental issue, racism and the barriers people face due to their skin colour.’
Adeola emphasised the need for terminology that minimises ‘othering’ while keeping racism at the centre of the conversation. As Janine pointed out, every term, whether BAME, Black, Asian, minoritised ethnic, global majority or people of colour, carries historical context. To have meaningful discussions, we must acknowledge this and adapt our language in ways that reflect the realities of 2025.
Ultimately, choosing the right terminology should be guided by those with lived experience. It’s about ensuring that the language we use serves the communities it describes rather than reinforcing outdated narratives.
Understanding different terms
In the workshop, we were clear that we were not searching for a perfect term, but a defendable one. In the health and care space, for an organisation to choose a term, they need to have gone through a process that helps them understand why they are recording ethnicity and what it is that they are recording. Adeola and Janine explored various terms which are used to group ethnicities together.
People of colour
Adeola noted that despite its broad usage, ‘people of colour’ carries historical baggage due to its ties to the term ‘coloured.’ While it is widely used, it remains problematic in some contexts. Janine questioned its logic: ‘White people have a colour too.’ Additionally, geography plays a role; what is meaningful in one country may not be in another.
Global majority
The term ‘global majority’ attempts to empower minority groups by emphasising that people of non-European descent make up most of the world’s population. However, Adeola stressed the need to clarify its specificity, as it risks excluding certain groups like Eastern Europeans or Traveller communities who also experience minoritisation and discrimination but who are not usually defined as being of the global majority.
Janine also noted that while the term can empower historically marginalised groups, it also hides the reality of power imbalances which remain unchanged in many contexts.
BAME (Black, Asian and Minority Ethnic)
BAME has been widely critiqued for grouping very different groups together. Adeola explained that while it is a convenient term, it often feels patronising. Janine added that grouping diverse communities under one label fails to capture the specific challenges they face. For example, NHS race pay gap data shows disparities within BAME groups with Indian men having better outcomes than White Britons, while Black African women and Filipino staff experience worse outcomes. When we use ‘BAME’, these nuances become lost.
Black, Asian and Minoritised Ethnic
Spelling out BAME into ‘Black, Asian and minoritised ethnic’ is more inclusive but clunky. Adeola found it more precise, though less practical in everyday conversation. Janine explains that based on where we are in 2025, this is probably the most pragmatic approach. It aligns with our current understanding of race in the UK and removes the othering and dehumanising impact of identity by acronym.
What’s the alternative?
Janine suggested a humanising approach: ‘Start by asking people how they want to be described.’
Organisational responses
Adeola shared that Newham Council has actively moved away from BAME. The Council focuses on what people want to be called, alongside adopting ‘Black, Asian and minoritised ethnicnities’ with the #BAMEOVER campaign is an example of their wider efforts under Tackling Racism, Inequality and Disproportionality. Meanwhile, Janine’s organisation has yet to agree on a single term but prioritises inclusive discussions.
The importance of language
Both Janine and Adeola stressed that language shapes systems and influences biases.Adeola emphasised, ‘Language reflects actions. It shapes minds. We need terminology that brings people together and empowers them.’
Janine pointed out that those in power tend to dictate who gets to decide how communities are labelled. The decision-making process must involve those with lived experience.
Key Takeaways from the workshop
No single definition was agreed upon, however this was not the aim and provided the space to have the discussion. Both speakers shared reflections on the process:
- Janine: ‘I wanted to be in the room where it happens in case a decision was made. I didn’t expect consensus, but I valued the conversation, it sparks creativity and new ideas.’
- Adeola: ‘I didn’t feel the meeting was set up to reach a solution, but rather to nudge us towards a process of consensus-building with experts.’
The London Anti-Racism Collaboration for Health’s (LARCH) decision
LARCH has decided to use Black, Asian and minoritised ethnic moving forward. While imperfect, it aligns with how statistics are gathered and reflects shared experiences of racial inequalities. However, we acknowledge this term has limitations and won’t be favoured by everyone.
We recognise that ultimately, language is a tool, it can either perpetuate inequality or drive meaningful change. The challenge is to ensure it does the latter.
In discussions about race and ethnicity, the language we use matters. Ethnicity is a social construct, an idea created by society that shapes how we see the world, even if not based on physical reality. With all social constructs, they are open to challenge, change and insight, as we have seen in many other areas of social action, such as learning disabilities or those who fall under the umbrella of ‘older people’.
Understanding and agreeing on terminology is part of stage one of LARCH’s Race Equity Maturity Index (REMI). The REMI is a powerful self-assessment tool to help London’s health and care organisations track, measure and enhance their commitment to race equity.
For more information on the REMI, click here.
Further reading
Leave a Reply