View
217
Download
1
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Hierarchical pluralism
Examining social attachments in Canada's two national contexts
Mai B. Phan and Raymond Breton
Presented at the CRONEM annual conference Nationalism and National Identities Today: Multidisciplinary Perspectives
University of Surrey, U.K.June 12-13, 2007
Models of Diversity revisited
The multiplicity of social connections in a modern context implies the possibility of multiple identifications or attachments and the possibility of choice.
Uni-dimensional perspectives like assimilation theories presume that strengthening attachment to one implies weakening in another, competing identity.
In the bi-dimensional perspective, identification with and attachment to the ancestral group and the larger community are both possible, and possibly desirable.
Social Dominance Theory
The assimilation and pluralism theories assume that all groups have the same opportunity to participate in institutions, to be accepted in social interaction and thus become integrated in the social fabric in the same ways.
However, this assumption of equality may not be warranted in all social contexts.
Sidanius and his colleagues argue that an additional model is required, that of “social dominance” which takes into account an ethnic hierarchy in the society.
Members of groups lower in the hierarchy would be more likely :
• to integrate in the ethnic community• to persist in assigning importance to their ethnicity and • to have a relatively weak sense of belonging to the larger
society. Members with higher standing would be more likely:• to integrate in the larger society• to show a decrease in the importance they attach to their
ethnicity and• to have a relatively strong sense of belonging to the
larger society.
Exploring the data: 2002 Ethnic Diversity Survey Measuring attitudinal attachments to Canada: 1. Sense of belonging to Canada2. Importance of civic* identity
(includes responses of Canadian/ Canadienne, Quebecois, Newfoundland, Acadian, French-Canadian or other regional identity)
Measuring attitudinal attachments to ethnic group: 1. Sense of belonging to ethnic ancestry group2. Importance of ethnic identity3. Importance of ethnic ancestry4. Importance of ethnic customs and traditions
All measures of attachment were dichotomized, with strong responses (4/5) scored “1” and weak/moderate responses scored “0”
Simultaneous Latent Class Analysis
Latent Class Analysis is analogous to factor analysis for categorical data, testing the underlying structure of relationships among variables
Unlike factor analysis, latent variables constructed from a set of observed, discrete variables may be characterized as multi-dimensional typologies
Categories are mutually exclusive, and latent classes can be tested for variability (or equivalence) of structures between different populations (Quebec and the Rest of Canada)
Patterns of attachment: Ethnic
"Ethnic" Attachment Pattern for Quebec and Rest of Canada
0.82
0.18
0.75 0.76
0.84
0.74
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1.0
strong sense ofbelonging to
Canada
high importanceof Canadian
identity
strong sense ofbelonging toethnic group
high importanceof ethnicancestry
high importanceof customs and
traditions
high importanceof ethnic identity
Indicators of Attachment
Pro
bab
ilit
y
Rest of Canada
Quebec
Patterns of attachment: Mainstream
"Mainstream" Attachment Pattern for Quebec and the Rest of Canada
0.91
0.28
0.00 0.00
0.66
0.49
0.30
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1.0
strong sense ofbelonging to
Canada
high importance ofCanadian identity
strong sense ofbelonging to ethnic
group
high importance ofethnic ancestry
high importance ofcustoms and
traditions
high importance ofethnic identity
Indicators of Attachment
Pro
bab
ilit
y
Rest of Canada
Quebec
Patterns of attachment: Pluralist
"Pluralist" Attachment Pattern for Quebec and the Rest of Canada
0.710.75 0.75
0.000.0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1.0
strong sense ofbelonging to
Canada
high importance ofCanadian identity
strong sense ofbelonging to ethnic
group
high importance ofethnic ancestry
high importance ofcustoms and
traditions
high importance ofethnic identity
Indicators of Attachment
Pro
ba
bili
ty
Rest of Canada
Quebec
Patterns of attachment: Marginalized
"Marginalized" Attachment Pattern for Quebec and the Rest of Canada
0.69
0.27
0.150.22
0.48
0.37
0.090.15
0.00
0.11
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1.0
strong sense ofbelonging to
Canada
high importanceof Canadian
identity
strong sense ofbelonging toethnic group
high importanceof ethnicancestry
high importanceof customs and
traditions
high importanceof ethnic identity
Indicators of Attachment
Pro
bab
ilit
y
Rest of Canada
Quebec
Comparing the regional distribution of attachment types
Probabilities of Attachment Types by Region
0.16
0.24
0.39
0.21
0.26
0.21
0.28
0.24
0.1
0.15
0.2
0.25
0.3
0.35
0.4
0.45
Ethnic Mainstream Pluralist Marginalized
Attachment Types
Pro
bab
ilit
y
Rest of Canada
Quebec
For white groups, the assimilation model is supported, with rapid decrease in ‘ethnic’ attachments
Whites: Prevalence of Attachment Types by Cohort
51%
11%
34%37%
12%
21%18%
50%
17%15%
12%
48%
16%
24%
4%
30%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
Ethnic Mainstream Pluralist Marginalized
Pe
rce
nt
Recent immigrants (1991-2001)
Earlier Immigrants (before 1991)
2nd Generation
3rd/4th Generation
For visible minorities, there is stronger ethnic retention and less integration into the mainstream
Visible Minorities: Prevalence of Attachment Types by Cohort
62%
7% 6%
25%
55%
8%
23%
40%
23%
17%
20%
30%
35%
9%
26%
15%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
Ethnic Mainstream Pluralist Marginalized
Per
cen
t
Recent immigrants (1991-2001)
Earlier Immigrants (before 1991)
2nd Generation
3rd/4th Generation
Hierarchical pluralism ? Visible minorities and whites have different patterns of
attachments across cohorts (even after controlling for income, education, sex, age, reported discrimination and friendship ties)
Few differences in distribution of attachment types among different visible minority groups
Southern European groups also show similar patterns of social attachment to visible minorities—racialization?
Visible minority groups are over-represented in the “ethnic” attachment group
Blacks (shown relative to their proportion in the population)
0.06
0.01
0.02
0.010
0.01
0.02
0.03
0.04
0.05
0.06
0.07
Ethnic Mainstream Pluralist Marginalized
Pro
po
rtio
n t
o t
he
Po
pu
lati
on
South Asian (shown relative to their proportion in the population)
0.08
0.01
0.02
0.03
0.00
0.01
0.02
0.03
0.04
0.05
0.06
0.07
0.08
0.09
Ethnic Mainstream Pluralist Marginalized
Pro
po
rtio
n t
o t
he P
op
ula
tio
n
Chinese (shown relative to their proportion in the population)
0.08
0.02
0.02
0.05
0
0.01
0.02
0.03
0.04
0.05
0.06
0.07
0.08
0.09
Ethnic Mainstream Pluralist Marginalized
Pro
po
rtio
n t
o t
he
Po
pu
lati
on
Latin American (shown relative to their proportion in the population)
0.03
0.00
0.01
0.000.00
0.01
0.01
0.02
0.02
0.03
0.03
Ethnic Mainstream Pluralist Marginalized
Prp
ort
ion
to
th
e P
op
ula
tio
n
“Charter” Groups show different propensities to attachments
•English are over-represented in the “mainstream” attachment group•French are over-represented in the “pluralist” attachment group
English (shown relative to their proportion in the population)
0.17
0.24
0.20
0.18
0.15
0.17
0.19
0.21
0.23
0.25
Ethnic Mainstream Pluralist Marginalized
Pro
po
rtio
n t
o t
he
Po
pu
lati
on
French (shown relative to their proportion in the population)
0.15
0.17
0.27
0.18
0.12
0.14
0.16
0.18
0.2
0.22
0.24
0.26
0.28
0.3
Ethnic Mainstream Pluralist Marginalized
Pro
po
rtio
n t
o t
he
Po
pu
lati
on
National majorities and minorities
0.49
0.32
0.42
0.08
0.258
0.46
0.07
0.14
0.22
0.10
0.21
0.27
0.02
0.10
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
Recent Immigrants (1991 orlater)
Early Immigrants (before 1991) 2nd Generation 3rd/4th Generation
Immigrant and Generational Cohort
Pre
dic
ted
Pro
ba
bili
ty o
f 'm
ain
str
ea
m' o
ve
r 'm
arg
ina
lize
d'
Rest of Canada WhiteRest of Canada Visible MinorityQuebec WhiteQuebec Visible Minority
The probability of ‘pluralist’ social attachments is higher in Quebec than in the rest of Canada
0.09
0.240.22
0.14
0.03
0.09
0.16
0.050.05
0.12
0.29
0.07
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
Recent Immigrants(1991 or later)
Early Immigrants(before 1991)
2nd Generation 3rd/4th Generation
Immigrant and Generational Cohort
Pre
dic
ted
Pro
ba
bili
ty o
f 'p
lura
list'
ov
er
'ma
rgin
aliz
ed
'
Rest of Canada WhiteRest of Canada Visible MinorityQuebec WhiteQuebec Visible Minority
Charter groups: the relationship between national identity and ethnic identity
“mainstream” for British-origin whites and “pluralist” for French-origin whites in Quebec: synonymous patterns?
The majority of whites in Quebec are native-born with French ancestry; Quebec as a French social context
Quebec’s claim as a distinct society and as a national minority heightens awareness of French culture in context of Anglo-hegemony
Retention of ‘ethnic’ attachments across cohorts is more pronounced for VM compared to whites
0.17
0.36
0.07
0.53
0.41
0.22
0.61
0.55
0.41
0.23
0.34
0.43
0.58
0.60
0.50
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
Recent Immigrants (1991 or later) Early Immigrants (before 1991) 2nd Generation 3rd/4th Generation
Immigrant and Generational Cohort
Pre
dic
ted
Pro
bab
ility
of
'eth
nic
' ove
r 'm
arg
inal
ized
'
Rest of Canada White
Rest of Canada Visible Minority
Quebec White
Quebec Visible Minority
Visible minorities in Quebec
face the most difficulties integrating in the labour market and are more dependent on ethnic networks.
As a result, visible minorities as a ‘devalued’ population may be encouraged towards ‘ethnic’ attachments to a greater extent than in the rest of Canada.
On the other hand, Quebec has given greater support for ethnic language retention than the rest of Canada, which may come some way to explaining the greater likelihood of visible minorities retaining ‘ethnic’ and ‘pluralist’ attachments across generations.
Defensive structuring on the part of French-speaking Québec:
Higher level of social and institutional segregation on the basis of language and religion.
The only province with its own Ministry of Immigration and separate immigration policy
Resistance to federal multiculturalism policy: interpreted as an attempted reduction of the cultural and political status of French in Canada
However, facing demographic, economic and political pressures to accept and integrate immigrants
Quebec’s policy of Inter-culturalism: more explicit conditions on multiculturalism
recognition of French as the language of public life;
respect for liberal democratic values, including civil and political rights and equality of opportunity; and
respect for pluralism, including openness to and tolerance of others' differences.
The rate of ‘pluralist’ attachment over successive generations is the same for visible minorities and whites in Quebec
Changing modes of belonging?
‘Quebecois’ and ‘Canadian’ identities losing their ethnic connotation (as exclusively French or British)
Quebec is undergoing the challenges of diversity, immigration, nationhood and identity as Canada has faced much earlier in its history