Haan et al: What Does Integration Mean in a Multicultural Country like Canada?

2024/08/12 2 Comments

Interesting discussion on integration definitions. But I think this relationship model, while important, neglects socioeconomic outcomes (income, employment, scolarity etc). Valid to question whether integration into the “mainstream” remains valid but looking at the data indicates still is relevant.

And there is a risk of dismissing pre-existing norms as it suggests an approach of “anything goes” rather than conforming with Canadian laws and regulations, which of course evolve and change as the population and social norms change:

…Although there is evidence to support both segmented and new assimilation theories, it is also becoming obvious that researchers should pay more attention to the demographic realities in immigrant-receiving countries such as Canada. As some native-born populations shrink in proportion to the whole, it becomes increasingly difficult to pinpoint where exactly the process of integration might occur. The sociologist Richard Alba recommends expanding the definition of the mainstream to include more groups. While this is obviously an important step, it maintains an underlying assumption that there exists a core population group. What happens when a city increasingly does not have a majority group? 

To this end, sociologist Maurice Crul recommends moving beyond thinking about integration as a minority group’s merging into a majority population and having little to no effect on the mainstream itself. His “integration into diversity” theory posits that the notion of a mainstream is becoming less useful and should be replaced with one of a population marked by diversity.

Drawing on results from the Becoming a Minority project, which collected data from several European cities, he provides a matrix to describe nine outcomes of individuals, each focused on different integration attitudes (see Figure 2). The most integrated individuals will exist in a diverse social network that believes immigration-related diversity is enriching, while the least integrated will be at the opposite end of the spectrum, feeling threatened by immigration and favoring a homogenous social circle.

Figure 2. Integration into Diversity Theory Matrix

Source: Maurice Crul, “Integration into Diversity Theory Renewing–Once Again–Assimilation Theory,” Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies 50, no. 1 (2024): 257-71, available online.

The strength of this approach is that it does not take into consideration individual characteristics such as skin color or first language spoken. According to this theory, these factors do not really matter because there is no expectation of comparing individual characteristics to that of a mainstream population; neither the characteristics of the community nor the person matter. What matters instead is individual actions and attitudes towards diversity. The more tolerant a person is, the more integrated they are into their heterogenous society.    

This approach is still rather new and, as such, does not yet explain which identity position a person will take. It is, in fact, only beginning to be used to predict characteristics such as feelings of belonging and perceptions of neighborhood security. Crul is clear in that he does not want his theory to replace new or segmented assimilation theory as an explanation of the integration process (he instead refers to it as an update), but the idea shifts the focus away from that of an individual melding into the mainstream. By positing the existence of nine subgroups, it becomes possible to envision multiple mainstreams with multiple attitudes towards integration. In a country such as Canada, this approach seems rather prescient.

Nonetheless, the utility of a new theoretical framework is best assessed empirically. Canada’s General Social Survey asks individuals how many of their friends are of the same immigrant group, although not about attitudes towards diversity. It would be interesting to add this question and find other ways to analyze integration into diversity theory.

Moving forward, immigration to Canada is only increasing. With extensive efforts to bring in more new arrivals every year, immigrants’ influence on the Canadian population is growing—and appears on course to continue doing so even as public disquiet has caused the government to seek to trim some immigration. Traditional notions of integration are becoming increasingly irrelevant in a country where nearly all population growth stems from immigration. New arrivals find their place in society not by assuming pre-existing norms, but by finding their people and their place and creating their own norms. In this way, Canada’s diversity will only continue to grow over time.

Source: What Does Integration Mean in a Multicultural Country like Canada?

Filed under Multiculturalism Tagged with , , ,

Census 2021: Canadians are talking about race. But the census hasn’t caught up.

2021/05/05 Leave a comment

A good, nuanced discussion regarding nomenclature and methodology issues.

Census data, which links birthplace, generation, ethnic origin, visible minority status, citizenship to socioeconomic data provides a wealth of data that are used to highlight how outcomes vary between groups and cohorts, as well as providing a more quantitative assessment of systemic differences.

With more disaggregated data available (e.g., labour force survey, public service employment equity reports), the gaps are less significant than before.

Discussions around nomenclature can sometimes be easier than addressing the issues that the existing data sheds light on:

This May, Canadians will again be asked if they identify as a visible minority when filling out the long-form census. But it’s a concept and term increasingly out of step with the times.

The pandemic has laid bare racial inequalities, and racial justice activist groups, like Black Lives Matter, have put anti-Black racism high on the public agenda. Systemic racism, rather than visible minority status, is at the centre of debate. While Canadians are now talking more explicitly about race, the census has yet to catch up. 

“We’re going to have to ask ourselves, what do we want to do with that category now?” says Michael Haan, a demographer and member of a committee that advises Statistics Canada on ethnocultural diversity. According to him, the committee has had many internal debates about terminology. 

Indirectly asking questions

Canada’s anti-racism strategy, which draws on decades’ worth of research, states that race is a social construct. There is no basis for classifying people according to race, but racial bias and discrimination have very real effects. 

The question is: How do we get relevant data from the census and other surveys on the impact of systemic racism?

Statistics Canada tries to gather this information without directly asking about race. Race-based data is needed, says Jean-Pierre Corbeil, a diversity specialist at Statistics Canada. But he wonders whether that actually requires referring to race on the census.

Historically, the government has been reluctant to ask directly about race, which has led to a lack of disaggregated data. After the Second World War, the census used indirect methods of estimating the non-white, non-Indigenous population through racial proxies like language or ethnocultural origin.

That changed in 1996, says political scientist Debra Thompson, when Statistics Canada began asking Canadians whether they identified as a visible minority. The term, Thompson notes, makes it seem “that things are not about race when of course they absolutely are.”https://www.youtube.com/embed/YnGOR_W7Ca0?wmode=transparent&start=0Statistics Canada advertisement explaining the 2021 census.

Identifying as a visible minority

The question on visible minorities was added to the census because of the Employment Equity Act. In order to measure how the white versus the non-white population fares in the labour market as required by this law, the government needed to know who is a visible minority.

For the purposes of the Employment Equity Act, says Haan, the question works. But he acknowledges the drawbacks: “Is it a perfect facsimile of race or racialization? No, it’s not.”

Many criticized, and still criticize the government’s approach. The United Nations has repeatedly pointed out that the term “visible minority” lumps together diverse communities and threatens to erase differences among them. Corbeil says Statistics Canada is well aware of the criticism.

Not easily done

However, changing the terminology is politically sensitive. Moving away from it would likely require changing the Employment Equity Act, says Fo Niemi, head of Montreal-based Center for Research-Action on Race Relations.

Instead, Statistics Canada is trying to respond to the demand for more race-disaggregated data through special crowdsourced surveys and increasing sample sizes of marginalized people to allow for enhanced analysis. 

For example, with support from the federal Anti-Racism Secretariat, it has produced a socio-economic analysis on the Black population.

During the pandemic, census data has also been combined with other statistics to show that mortality rates are higher in neighbourhoods where visible minorities live.

“What people want is really to have information on Black Canadians, to have information on South Asians or Latin American Canadians,” says Corbeil. But those categories are controversial too. White, South Asian, Chinese, Black, Filipino, Latin American, Arab, Southeast Asian, West Asian, Korean or Japanese are options non-Indigenous Canadians can choose from on the census. “Other” is also an option, but many feel unrepresented by the list. 

Expand or shorten the list?

The population groups, as Statistics Canada calls them, have remained largely unchanged since 1996. The agency uses the list, which was developed through an inter-departmental process in the 1980s — according to Thompson, how the groups were chosen is “a bit of a mystery.”

They are now part of Canada’s national statistical standards and are widely used by the federal government, including in the monthly labour force survey, which began recording visible minority status as of July 2020. 

Statistics Canada has considered changing the list. One alternative was to expand it, but that risked making the answers too similar to the separate ethnocultural origin question. Another was to shorten the list and provide broader categories. Statistics Canada even tested this approach in a 2019 trial run of the census. Respondents had to choose their “descent” from seven options: North American; Latin American; European; North African; African, Afro-Caribbean or African-Canadian; Middle Eastern or West Asian; and Other Asian. 

But according to Corbeil, the problem there was that Statistics Canada couldn’t identify who was Black because Black Canadians are highly diverse and come from all over the world. That’s important, because the agency’s consultations indicate that “many people want to identify as Black Canadians,” says Corbeil. Because the test was inconclusive, the options have not been changed for the 2021 census.

Changing the census isn’t so simple

Dr. Andrew Pinto, a public health and preventive medicine specialist and family physician, is a researcher with The Upstream Lab, which has studied the collection of racial data by health-care providers, says that if patients understand that disclosing their race will be used to address systemic racism, they are willing to provide the information.

For now, Statistics Canada is reluctant to refer directly to race anywhere on the census. The agency is cautious and for good reasons, says Haan. In order to compare data over time, the questions and the answers need to stay the same. “The census is the gold standard,” he says, “so any modification is carefully considered.”

Thompson also cautions that simply having the data won’t solve the problem of systemic racism.

“Yes, we need disaggregated racial data. [But] we also need governments that are brave enough to create targeted policies.”

Source: https://theconversationcanada.cmail19.com/t/r-l-tltiqlt-kyldjlthkt-c/

Filed under Multiculturalism Tagged with , , , ,

Data linking race and health predicts new COVID-19 hotspots

2020/05/22 Leave a comment

While more of the same in terms of argumentation, some better data analysis than other commentary although the researchers should have made more explicit the correlation with lower socioeconomic outcomes which is largely the main driver:

Anecdotal stories about the COVID-19 pandemic suggest that Black, racialized and immigrant people in Canada have been disproportionately affected by COVID-19. This narrative tells the story of immigrants and racialized people pushed to the front lines of the economy, working in settings with greater exposure to the COVID-19 virus.

It tells the story of immigrant groups clustered in city neighbourhoods with high population densities who cannot practise physical distancing. It tells the story of temporary migrants who live in tightly packed communal quarters.

Reports have shown that Black and immigrant communities in the U.S. have been disproportionately affected by COVID-19. But many believe that Canada is different.

After all, Canada has universal health insurance coverage; the U.S. does not. Canada adopted a multiculturalism policy decades ago and racial discrimination is frequently — though wrongly — believed to be absent in Canada.

Under this narrative, many government officials in Canada have not seen a need to collect COVID-19 data on race. They have also excluded racial minorities and immigrants from their list of populations vulnerable to COVID-19.

Which of the two narratives reflect the realities of racial minorities and immigrants in Canada during the COVID-19 pandemic?

Until recently, there was no data to address this question. By making creative use of health and census data, we now know that Black and immigrant communities in Canada are disproportionately affected by COVID-19.

Combining COVID-19 and census data

Our research team based at the department of sociology at Western University tested these competing narratives by creatively combining existing data. We used COVID-19 data released by the Public Health Agency of Canada and census data about the racial and socioeconomic composition of health regions, units set up by provinces in Canada to administer health care.

Using these data, we assessed how racial and socioeconomic factors have shaped COVID-19 infection and death rates. Our findings paint a picture closer to the anecdotal stories

The COVID-19 pandemic is not the “great equalizer.” Black and immigrant communities in Canada are disproportionately affected by COVID-19.

Our findings showed COVID-19 infection rates are significantly higher in health regions with a higher percentage of Black residents. A one percentage point increase in the share of Black residents in a health region is associated with the doubling of coronavirus infection rates. We also found that a one percentage point increase in the share of foreign-born residents is associated with a three-per-cent rise in COVID-19 infection rates.

This may explain why Montréal, where Black residents make up 6.8 per cent of the population, has emerged as one of Canada’s COVID-19 epicentres. The same is also true of other cities with high immigrant and Black populations, like Toronto and Vancouver.

We also found the number of COVID-19 deaths tend to be higher in communities with higher shares of residents who are 65 and older. Many studies have shown COVID-19 is more lethal in older adults and we have seen the tragically high COVID-19 death rates in long-term care facilities.

COVID-19 hotspots

Health regions are large administrative units responsible for the health care of roughly 420,000 residents. They are too large geographically and too socially heterogeneous to adequately tell a story about local communities. So for our study, we subdivided health regions into smaller areas and predicted the spread of COVID-19 in local communities based on their racial, demographic and economic profile. This approach helped us identify several potential COVID-19 hot spots.

Black and immigrant communities like Hamilton, Vancouver and Montréal were particularly vulnerable. Also, other localized communities may be more vulnerable than originally thought.

For example, the oilsands in northeast Alberta, where the petroleum industry hired large numbers of temporary migrant workers who reside in crowded living quarters, may be a potential COVID-19 hotspot. Similarly, another potential COVID-19 hotspot may be found in western Québec, which includes mining sites that employ large numbers of temporary migrant workers.

Public health workers may have overlooked the higher infection rates in Ontario’s towns bordering Michigan, partly reflecting their geographic proximity to U.S. cities like Detroit.

Who is the most vulnerable?

Communities are home to different types of people. With the existing data, we cannot address questions like: are white residents who live in Black communities less vulnerable to COVID-19 than their Black neighbours?

Our study highlights the importance of collecting individual data about COVID-19 patients as well as for smaller geographic units. Having individual data is essential for determining how to direct scarce resources and how to contain the spread of the virus.

With our study, we underscore the importance of acknowledging the challenges of Black and immigrant communities in Canada, including their vulnerability to COVID-19. Without this acknowledgement, we risk exacerbating inequality between them and other groups.

For example, Blacks and immigrant groups were not classified as “vulnerable populations” in the Ontario government’s COVID-19 Action Plan for Vulnerable People. They were excluded even though their risks of infection and death are significantly higher than those of some groups identified as vulnerable under this plan.

Policies aimed at mitigating the consequences of COVID-19 target individuals as well as communities. If we do not address this oversight, the future health disadvantages of Black and immigrants groups may become more pronounced.

Closing one’s eyes to inequality along racial lines will not eliminate disparities. It just eliminates ways to address it.

Source: New COVID-19 hotspots predicted by data linking race and health

Filed under Multiculturalism Tagged with , , ,