Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-lnqnp Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-28T06:46:24.822Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Immigrant Political Adaptation in Canada: Some Tentative Findings*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 November 2009

Jerome H. Black
Jerome H. Black
Affiliation:
McGill University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Research Article
Information
Canadian Journal of Political Science/Revue canadienne de science politique , Volume 15 , Issue 1 , March 1982 , pp. 3 - 28
Copyright
Copyright © Canadian Political Science Association (l' Association canadienne de science politique) and/et la Société québécoise de science politique 1982

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Of course, there is no shortage of historically oriented studies about particular ethnic and/or immigrant groups; some of these—essentially nonempirical—treatments do delve into political dimensions. See, for example, the references in the Report of the Royal Commission on Bilingualism and Biculturalism. Book IV: The Cultural Contribution of the Other Ethnic groups (Ottawa: Queen's Printer, 1970), chap. 3.Google Scholar See also Palmer's, Howard review essay, “History and Present State of Ethnic Studies in Canada,” in Isajiw, Wsevolod (ed.), Identities: The Impact of Ethnicity on Canadian Society (Toronto: Peter Martin Associates, 1977), 167–83.Google Scholar

2 It is symptomatic that two recent empirically oriented volumes, one on Canadian political participation, the other on voting and partisanship in Canada, do not do any analysis involving foreign-born versus native-born distinctions. These works are, respectively, Mishler, William, Political Participation in Canada (Toronto: Macmillan, 1979)Google Scholar and Clarke, Harold D. et al., Political Choice in Canada (Toronto: McGraw-Hill Ryerson, 1979)Google Scholar.

3 The preference for the term “adaptation” parallels and is, in part, inspired by the perspective in Goldlust, John and Richmond, Anthony H., “A Multivariate Model of Immigrant Adaptation,” International Migration Review 8 (1974), 193–225, esp., 195–97CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Adaptation is particularly preferred here to other terms such as assimilation and the like, and for at least two reasons. First of all, assimilation unrealistically implies a total discarding of previously acquired views. Adaptation, on the other hand, suggests that immigrants may seek, perhaps by simple trial and error (and with varying success), to check the appropriateness of their old system attitudes and learned procedures to the new context, eliminating some, retaining others, grafting or blending still others. Second, as will be seen, much of the ensuing analysis is concerned with comparing the foreign born to the native born along important political dimensions. In this regard, assimilation implies an upper limit on the results in that “successful” assimilation would be defined as immigrant levels matching those of the Canadian born, thus foreclosing the possibility that their levels may actually exceed those of the native born.

4 See, for example, Beck's, Paul review article, “The Role of Agents in Political Socialization,” in Renshon, Stanley A. (ed.), Handbook of Political Socialization (New York: The Free Press, 1977), 115–41Google Scholar.

5 Verba, Sidney et al., The Modes of Democratic Participation: A Cross-National Comparison (Beverly Hills: Sage, 1971)Google Scholar and Verba, and Nie, Norman, Participation in America (New York: Harper and Row, 1972), esp., chaps. 3 and 4Google Scholar.

6 Immigrants were categorized on the basis of country of birth. (A handful born outside Britain but claiming British ancestry were placed in the British immigrant category.) This procedure probably classified a few individuals from black Commonwealth countries as non-British, even though they held British subject status. However, apart from the fact that no other course of action was available, in terms of adaptation such individuals likely do have more in common with non-British immigrants than with white British ones. It was also not possible to further break down the non-British category on the basis of ethnicity or, indeed, by geographical area. In part, this is so because only a random half sample of respondents were queried about political participation, the main political dimension examined here. As well, altogether the foreign born accounted for about 17 per cent of the sample, a very large and significant figure in terms of demography, but a small one in terms of statistical manipulation.

7 The study was conducted by Harold Clarke, Jane Jenson, Lawrence LeDuc and Jon Pammett and was made available through the Inter-University Consortium for Political and Social Research. Of course, neither the original investigators nor the Consortium bear any responsibility for the analysis or interpretations presented here.

8 The relevant sociological literature is far too voluminous to list here. Besides references cited elsewhere in this article, the following constitutes a small sampling of efforts that employ survey data: Anderson, Grace M., Networks of Contact: The Portuguese in Toronto (Waterloo: Wilfrid Laurier University Press, 1974);Google ScholarBerry, John W. et al., Multiculturalism and Ethnic Attitudes in Canada (Ottawa: Information Canada, 1977)Google Scholar; Goldlust, John and Richmond, Anthony H., “Factors Associated with Commitment to and Identification with Canada,” in Isajiw, (ed.), Identities, 132–53Google Scholar; O'Bryan, K. G. et al., Non-Official Languages: A Study in Canadian Multiculturalism (Ottawa: Information Canada, 1976).Google Scholar

9 Only a few respondents in the present survey were interviewed in a language other than English or French, and, unfortunately, with no recorded variations in aptitude or difficulty.

11 Richmond, Anthony H., Post-War Immigrants in Canada (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1967), chap. 9.Google Scholar

11 Wilson, Paul R., Immigrants and Politics (Canberra: Australian National University Press, 1973), 92–94.Google Scholar

12 Neice, David C., Ethnicity and Canadian Citizenship: A Metropolitan Study (Ottawa: Information Canada, 1978), 110–13.Google Scholar

13 Wilson, , Immigrants and Politics, 49.Google Scholar

14 Kellstedt, Lyman A., “Ethnicity and Political Behavior: Inter-Group and Inter-Generational Differences,” Ethnicity 1 (1974), 393–415.Google Scholar

15 David, Henry P., “Involuntary International Migration: Adaptation of Refugees,” in Brody, E. B. (ed.), Behavior in New Environments (Beverly Hills: Sage, 1970), 73–95 at 80.Google Scholar

16 See the references in Behavior in New Environments.

17 Verba, and Nie, , Participation in America, 148.Google Scholar

18 Several social scientists seem to adhere to this perspective and almost on intuitive grounds; among others: Chimbos, Peter D., “A Comparison of the Social Adaptation of Dutch, Greek and Slovak Immigrants in a Canadian Community,” International Migration Review 6 (1972), 230–44, esp., 233;CrossRefGoogle ScholarDavid, , “Involuntary International Migration,” esp., 85, 88Google Scholar; Sigel, Roberta S. and Hoskin, Marilyn B., “Perspectives on Adult Socialization—Areas of Research,” in Renshon, (ed.), Handbook of Political Socialization, 259–93, esp., 287–88.Google Scholar

19 Wilson, , Immigrants and Politics, chaps. 3 and 4, esp., 21–34.Google Scholar

20 Neice, , Ethnicity and Canadian Citizenship, 109–10Google Scholar.

21 Wilson, , Immigrants and Politics, 14–24.Google Scholar

22 “Perspectives on Adult Socialization,” 287–88.Google Scholar

23 Richmond, , Post-War Immigrants in Canada, 228. (Emphasis in original.)Google Scholar

24 Post-War Immigrants in Canada, 225. (Emphasis added.)Google Scholar

25 On the differences in how “demanding” the various activities are, see Verba and Nie, Participation in America, chap. 3.Google Scholar

26 In the 1974 study except for the voting measures and contacting MPs, all the indicated items were asked in relation to four different contexts: the 1974 federal election specifically and federal, provincial and municipal politics in general. However, only the responses to the latter three are used here. This ensured maximum consistency in terms of the participation context or arena, since questions were not posed in connection with specific (in particular, the most recent) provincial and municipal elections. It also seemed preferable to catch activity across a time frame wider than one election and especially so since respondents were asked about the frequency of such behaviour. Certainly, it seemed difficult to visualize some acts, such as local problem solving, occurring within the confines of a single election campaign. Indices were then created by a simple addition process which varyingly (see below) combined the responses across the three governmental levels. (These items all had the same response set—often [coded 3], sometimes [2], seldom [1] and never [0].) That there did not appear to be a need to treat participation separately for each tier of government, at least in the 1974 survey, is apparent in view of the work of others. See, for example, Burke, Mike et al., “Federal and Provincial Political Participation in Canada: Some Methodological and Substantive Considerations,” Canadian Review of Sociology and Anthropology 15 (1978), 61–75, esp., 65–69CrossRefGoogle Scholar; and Carole J. Uhlaner, “Political Participation of French Québécois: The Relationship of Political Cleavages to Activity,” paper delivered at the annual meeting of the Canadian Political Science Association, London, 1978. For each of the four campaign measures, indices were created by simply summing the scores on the three relevant (level of government) items. However, for communal activity a distinction was made only between the federal level, on the one hand, and the provincial and municipal levels (combined additively). on the other; this was done to ensure that at least two variables tapping each mode would be available for the factor analysis. The same division was used for contacting which together with the contacting of MPs item (coded 1 for a contact, 0, otherwise) provided three measures. For the three voting variables, each was coded 1 for turnout and 0 for nonvoting.

27 This result can be compared to the one generated by Uhlaner, who used the same data set. In her case only three factors were extracted and, relatedly, the individual items did not load as distinctively as in the case here (ibid., 8–12). The differences may be attributable to her use of the items in four, as opposed to three, contexts and/or her inclusion of more items tapping the same mode. This may have created some overloading and ambiguity in the factor analysis results, in turn, due to high intercorrelations among some subsets of the variables. On this point, see Sharkansky, Ira and Hofferbert, Richard I., “Dimensions of State Politics, Economics and Public Policy,” in Kirkpatrick, Samuel A. (ed.), Quantitative Analysis of Political Data (Columbus: Charles E. Merril, 1974), 322–39, esp., 328Google Scholar. On the other hand, this author does suspect that the present results could have been improved upon had, as Uhlaner points out, the nonelectoral activities not been “posed in the midst of a battery of partisan and electoral questions. The context may have biased the responses; that is, respondents may have interpreted questions as inquiries about partisan or electoral versions of contacting and group work activity” (“Political Participation of French Québécois,” 10). It might also be noted that it was impossible to know the subject matter of the contacts made with the various officials and, therefore, to distinguish between “personalized” contacting and cooperative oriented contacting—an important dichotomy in the work of Verba and his associates; for example, Verba, and Nie, , Participation in America, 64–73.Google Scholar

28 The procedure used to reduce the amount of missing data was a conservative one. For each of the modes save communal activity, individuals were assigned the mean values on the relevant items but only if one item had originally been missing. Thus, for both voting and contacting, respondents had to have valid replies for two of the three items in order to have the third value, the overall mean, assigned; for campaign activity, they had to have three valid responses to have the fourth assigned. For communal work, individuals with only one of two valid replies were not brought back into the working data base.

29 One reviewer wondered about political adaptation being considerably different for British immigrants in Quebec, given the character of the province. An analysis taking this distinction into account was undertaken (and for both the British and non-British foreign born), but it did not lead to results significantly different from those reported above. Nevertheless, the general idea about the possible importance of provincial or regional variations in the process of immigrant adaptation might still be usefully explored in future work.

30 The particular order in which the variables have been entered is not at all meant to imply a certain causal sequence, but rather only to facilitate a demonstration of what are regarded as some interesting auxiliary findings.

31 On dummy variable regression analysis, see, for example, Namboodiri, N. K. et al., Applied Multivariate Analysis and Experimental Designs (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1975), chap. 3.Google Scholar

32 Two dummy variables for income were created (“high”: $15,000 or more; “medium”: $7,500 to $14,999, thus leaving those with less than $7,500 in the reference category). For sex, males were coded 1. Education was retained as an interval variable in the wake of tests demonstrating an essentially linear effect on participation.

33 Political efficacy was measured by the single question (yielding one dummy variable): “Sometimes government and politics seem so complicated that a person like me can't really understand what's going on.” Disagreement with the statement is taken as the efficacious response. A single question was used rather than the traditional “efficacy scale” because of some doubt about the latter's validity. On this point, see Balch, George I., “Multiple Indicators in Survey Research: The Concept of Political Efficacy,” Political Methodology 1 (1974), 1–43.Google Scholar Relatedly, see LeDuc, Lawrence, “Measuring the Sense of Political Efficacy in Canada: Problems of Measurement Equivalence,” Comparative Political Studies 8 (1976), 490–500.Google Scholar This particular item was chosen because it exhibited the highest average correlation with participation for all the groups concerned. For its part, partisanship, including intensity, was represented by two dummy variables, one measuring very strong (“high”) partisanship, the second tapping a fairly strong (“moderate”) attachment, thus relegating those with a weak adherence or none at all to the reference category.

34 For the measure of political interest used here, see Clark, et al., Political Choice in Canada, 400–01Google Scholar. It was then converted into two dummy variables—one tapping “high” political interest, the other “moderate” interest.

35 In fact, as one might guess viewing the data, the communal activity result is statistically significant because of differences among the Canadian born and, particularly, the lower levels exhibited by the French. This latter finding is similar to what Mishler discovered in his analysis of ethnicity (Political Participation in Canada, 99–100).

36 Another proposition concerning participation differences vis-à -vis particular modes did occur to this author. It involves turnout among immigrants. Given the ability of the British to develop the “habit” of voting without the acquisition of citizenship, at least in federal elections, it could be argued that they might maintain a lead in voting over their non-British counterparts, who have acquired citizenship after a necessary waiting period. The data do seem to support this notion but only mildly so.

37 Moreover, the Pearson r correlations between political interest and (overall) participation are higher for both immigrant groups relative to their respective Canadian-born counterparts (.42 versus .31 for the British, .24 versus .18 for the non-British), indicating that interest may be a more important “requisite” for participation among the foreign born.

38 See, for example, Chimbos, , “A Comparison of Social Adaptation,” 233n and Goldlust, and Richmond, , “Factors Associated with Commitment,” 146–50Google Scholar.

39 Converse, Philip E., “Of Time and Partisan Stability,” Comparative Political Studies 2(1969), 139–71, at 144CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

40 For some discussion about probit, including references to the literature and the particular probit package used here, see Black, Jerome H. and McGlen, Nancy E., “Male-Female Political Involvement Differentials in Canada, 1965–1974,” this JOURNAL 12 (1979), 471–97, esp., 481.Google Scholar

41 Most simply put, only a handful of individuals fell into particular categories such as length of residence under five years or age at time of immigration over fifty years.

42 It is likely that immigrants from southern Europe most closely approximate the type being discussed. However, the assumption is difficult to test because of small Ns.

43 This well-known perspective, stressing the importance of personal communications and face-to-face flows of information, is found most notably in Lazarsfeld, Paul F. et al., The People's Choice (New York: Columbia University Press, 1948)Google Scholar and in Katz, Elihu and Lazarsfeld, , Personal Influence (Glencoe, III.: The Free Press, 1955)Google Scholar. Interestingly, Anthony Downs, writing from an economic vantage point, reaches a similar conclusion. An Economic Theory of Democracy (New York: Harper and Row, 1957), chap. 12.

44 Breton, Raymond, “Institutional Completeness of Ethnic Communities and the Personal Relations of Immigrants,” American Journal of Sociology 70 (1964), 193–205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar