Inclusion and Exclusion: A Framework of Analysis for Understanding Political
Participation by Members of Racialized and Newcomer Communities.
Anver Saloojee, Department of Politics and School of Public Administration, Ryerson
University
I would like to thank John Biles and the entire team at Metropolis for organizing this very
important seminar that brings together researchers, policymakers and other actors interested
in the participation of women, newcomers and members of racialized communities in
Canadian political processes. The diversity of presenters as well as the diversity of
participants at this seminar underscores for me, John Biles’ commitment to being highly
proactive on the critical issue of representation. And I for one would like to take this moment
to publicly commend John for making this happen. This seminar is timely and reflects
extremely well on the extent to which Metropolis remains vital to the ongoing health and
political well-being of our society. I am very honoured to be asked to be a part of this
important initiative. My presentation will focus on ways of understanding the political
participation of members of racialized communities and of newcomer communities in
Canadian political life.
As social scientists we are aware that there are principally two mechanisms by which citizens
seek to effect social and political change. One is through formal political participation and
the other, as they seek to bridge the growing gap between them and their political processes
and institutions, is through what I will call substantive political participation. This
presentation is structured in three parts. The first suggests that a useful lens through which to
view and analyse both forms of political participation is the discourse of social inclusion and
exclusion. In this section I will detail some of the barriers and challenges faced by members
of racialized and newcomer communities as they seek to participate in and engage with the
political processes. Second, the presentation will identify four sets of factors that determine
the extent of political participation by members of newcomer communities. Third the paper
will conclude by very briefly looking at three interrelated spheres in which transformation to
inclusive political process and participation is required.
34 Bringing Worlds Together Seminar Proceedings
Inclusion and Exclusion - Anver Saloojee
Social Exclusion and Inclusion:
The concept of social exclusion is highly compelling because it speaks the language of
oppression and enables the marginalized and the victimized to give voice and expression to
the way in which they experience globalization, the way in which they experience market
forces and the way in which they experience politics in a liberal democratic society. The
concept of social exclusion resonates with many including those who (i) are denied access to
the valued goods and services in society because of their race, gender, religion, disability etc;
(ii) lack adequate resources to be effective, contributing members to the political and
economic life of society; and (iii) those who are not recognized as full and equal citizens and
participants in society.
John Veit-Wilson distinguishes between weak versions of the social exclusion discourse
which focus on changing the excluded and integrating them into society, and stronger
versions of the discourse which focus on power relations between the excluded and those
doing the excluding. (Viet-Wilson 1998: 45). Within these two versions one can insert an
important discussion of political participation. The weak versions of the social exclusion
discourse would focus simply on the exercise of the franchise as an indicator of political
participation. Strong versions of the discourse would begin to assess the structural barriers to
political participation by members of racialized and newcomer communities. Similarly it is
important to distinguish between weak and strong versions of the social inclusion discourse.
The former focus simply on political integration of the excluded (via the franchise), while
strong approaches to the social inclusion discourse are intimately concerned with rights,
citizenship and restructuring relations between racialized communities and the institutions of
political life. In this version, the focus is on valued recognition and valued participation by
those excluded from full participation in political life, excluded in the debates around public
policy and excluded from enjoying the benefits of society. Madanipour et al, speak of social
exclusion as a complex multi-dimensional process that combines a number of different forms
of exclusion to create "acute" forms of exclusion that result in residential segregation. The
forms they identify are exclusion "from decision making and political processes, access to
employment and material resources, and integration into common cultural processes"
Bringing Worlds Together Seminar Proceedings
35
Inclusion and Exclusion - Anver Saloojee
(Madanipour et al, 1998: 22). To this list, must of necessity be added integration into
common political processes as well.
The origin of social exclusion terminology can be traced back to France in the early 1970s
and was redefined in the 1980s as a response to the problems of sustaining adequate living
conditions for those left behind by technological change, economic growth, and economic
restructuring (Gore, 1995: 1; Ebersold 1998). As Gore notes, social exclusion came to refer
to the "process of social disintegration", a "rupture" in the relationship between the individual
and society which resulted from structural changes in the economy and seriously impeded the
mobility and integration into the labour market of younger workers and created long term
unemployment for unskilled workers and immigrant workers. This in turn resulted in
increased social problems and a tearing of the social fabric: increased homelessness,
increased tensions, and periodic violence. Social exclusion as rupture is linked to Silver's
solidarity paradigm - one of three paradigms she uses to link exclusion, citizenship and social
integration (Silver, 1995: 62).
The French focus on adequate living standards sought to link social exclusion to poverty.
Levitas notes that the term originates with a concern with poverty, inequality and restricted
citizenship rights (Levitas, 1996: 7). Like Levitas, Walker and Walker are cognizant of the
need to go beyond a uni-dimensional construct of social exclusion: "we have retained the
distinction regarding poverty as a lack of the material resources, especially income, necessary
to participate in British society and social exclusion as a comprehensive formulation, which
refers to the dynamic process of being shut out, fully or partially, from any of the social,
economic, political or cultural systems which determine the social integration of a person in a
society. Social exclusion may therefore be seen as the denial (non-realization) of the civil,
political and social rights of citizenship" (Walker and Walker, 1997: 8).
For many including Walker and Walker the opposite of exclusion is integration - into the
labour market or more generally into a broader conception of citizenship with an interlocking
set of reciprocal rights and obligations (see Bryne, 1999: 2; Gore, 1995: 2). The opposite of
political exclusion then could well refer to integration into the political process (through
36 Bringing Worlds Together Seminar Proceedings
Inclusion and Exclusion - Anver Saloojee
voting, through the political party system or more generally through active engagement with
the policy process). Exclusion therefore is very much a lived experience and can be
quantified. By 1989 European Economic Community (EEC) began to link social exclusion
with inadequate realization of social rights. In 1990 the European Observatory on National
Policies for Combating Social Exclusion was established to look at "the basic rights of
citizenship to a basic standard of living and to participation in major social and economic
opportunities in society" (Room as cited in Gore, 1995: 2). To this we must also add the
importance of linking exclusion with the inadequate realization of political rights – including
participation in the minor and major political opportunities in society. The link between
social exclusion, citizenship and political participation hinges on the degree to which groups
of individuals are denied or restricted from participating in the political life of society. The
European Foundation sees social exclusion as the "process through which individuals or
groups are wholly or partially excluded from full participation in the society in which they
live" (European Foundation, 1995: 4). Duffy similarly notes that social exclusion refers to
"the inability to participate effectively in economic social, political and cultural life, and, in
some characterizations, alienation and distance from the mainstream society" (Duffy, cited
by Barry, 1998: 2).
In Western Europe interest in social exclusion has grown in the face of rising unemployment,
increasing migration, increasing social tensions, structural adjustments resulting from the
impositions of neo-liberalism. Walker is correct when he observes: "It is ironic that European
discourse should have alighted on the concept of social exclusion at a time when market
trends, including the creation of a single European market and currency, are generalizing
more inequality and insecurity and there is an apparent loss of support for social protection"
(Walker, 1997: 49). The problem is not with capitalism as an economic system that
engenders significant income disparities and poverty and reproduces multiple forms of
oppression and discrimination, rather the problem is the current conjuncture that tends "to
exclude some groups from the cycle of opportunities" (Levitas, 1996: 8). The current
preoccupation by the European Union with social exclusion is linked to the post industrial
social order crisis affecting developed nations (Byrne, 1999: 3). Freiler has identified
multiple and varied sources of exclusion including:
Bringing Worlds Together Seminar Proceedings
37
Inclusion and Exclusion - Anver Saloojee






Structural/economic (iniquitous economic conditions; low wages, dual and
segregated labour markets etc);
Historical oppression (colonialism);
Discrimination
The absence of legal/political recognition
Institutional/civic non acceptance;
Self-exclusion (Freiler, 2001: 13).
Without undertaking an analysis of the "political economy of exclusion", the attraction of the
current discourse is that it focuses attention on social exclusion as failure to integrate into the
labour market. But the contemporary discourse on social exclusion is too narrowly focused
on poverty and integration into the paid labour market, and it potentially obscures a bigger
debate about the relationship between social exclusion and political participation. Peter
Mandelson, the Minister without Portfolio in the New Labour government elected in the UK
in 1997 suggested that social exclusion is "the biggest challenge we face: the growing
number of our fellow citizens who lack the means, material or otherwise, to participate in
economic, social, cultural and political life in Britain today: it is about more than poverty
and unemployment" (cited by Barry, 1998: 4). This dynamic process of being shut out can be
diagnosed and measured as patterns of exclusion which affect individuals and groups in
Exclusion from goods and services; labour market exclusions; exclusion from land; exclusion
from security; exclusion from human rights; exclusion from macro-economic development
strategy and exclusion from participating in all facets of political and policy life in
contemporary society.
Racism, Social Exclusion and Political Participation.
For our purposes then, social exclusion relates intimately to processes which intentionally or
unintentionally restrict people's participation in the political life and in the political activities
of society. As a description of a state of affairs social exclusion applied to political
participation corresponds to diminished states of citizenship (broadly conceived), and
diminished states of political participation and diminished access to valued political goods
38 Bringing Worlds Together Seminar Proceedings
Inclusion and Exclusion - Anver Saloojee
(representation, access to policy makers, etc). The discourse of social inclusion and exclusion
applied to political participation forces us to consider a range of issues including:







The relationship between formal citizenship and formal, or what some call passive
political participation (voting);
The relationship between democratic citizenship and substantive political
participation (active engagement with political parties, engaging with the policy
process as part of the policy community; ensuring that all have a voice in political
decision making; advocating for electoral equity etc).
Untangling the challenges associated with equitable representation;
Assessing the relationship between the civic culture of newcomer groups and the
workings of democracy in a multicultural multiracial society (Fennema and Tillie,
1999).
Identifying the systemic barriers to political participation by members of
racialized and newcomer communities.
Assessing whether our institutions of political life equitably reflect the diversity
of our societies.
Learning more about patterns of diverse community participation in building
social capital through volunteerism, social movements and advocacy.
The political participation of immigrants in society can be seen as part of the process of
social and political integration in the new society. Studies of newcomers have dealt
extensively with different aspects of their integration in the new society including labour
market inclusion and exclusion (Bailey and Waldinger, 1991; Portes and Jensen, 1987;
Sanders and Nee, 1987), language proficiency (Espenshade and Fu, 1997) and social
exclusion and social integration (Zhou and Logan, 1989). Mesch notes that the extensive
literature has been dominated by the “assimilation approach” that emphasizes the role of
“socio-economic status attainment and acculturation in the integration of immigrants.
According to this model, the improvement in the immigrant socio-economic status allows to
him/her to feel part of the mainstream of society and to attain housing and social status in the
new society” (Mesch, 2002). Significantly less research has been done on the issue of the
political integration of newcomers.
Studies from Europe, Great Britain, the United States, Israel and Canada, suggest that in
general political participation by newcomers appears to be low in most immigrant countries
(Togeby, 1999, Fennema and Tillie, 1999). A number of factors account this:
Bringing Worlds Together Seminar Proceedings
39
Inclusion and Exclusion - Anver Saloojee





Their marginal political status;
Alienation from institutions in the host country (Diel and Blohm, 2001).
Discrimination and barriers to political participation;
The lack of a political opportunity structure that actively encourages the participation
of immigrants in politics (Bousetta, 2000); and
Political parties do not do much to encourage the incorporation of new immigrants
into their ranks (Anwar, 2001).
Factors that determine the extent of political participation by members of racialized
and newcomer communities.
I suggest to you that there are four sets of factors that determine the extent of political
participation by members of newcomer communities. The first set is related to individual
resources, such as age, marital status, education and income. (Junn, 1999). The second set of
factors that influence the political participation of immigrants is related to the trajectory of
settlement and integration (Back and Soininen, 1998). These include: length of residence and
language proficiency, acquisition of knowledge of the political system, the different political
parties and the different tactics being used in the country for political influence (Junn, 1999).
This learning process requires the knowledge of the language as a central tool for the
understanding of documents, speeches and local laws. A study on immigrants’ participation
in Danish local elections indicated that voting was positively related to length of stay: the
longer the immigrant has been in the country, the greater the likelihood of participation in
local politics (Togeby, 1999).
A third set of factors relate to the relationship between formal political participation and
participation in ethno-specific organizations. The research of Fennema and Tillie in Holland
points to the positive correlation between formal political participation and the number of
ethnic organizations (Fennema and Tillie, 1999, 2000). This network of ethnic organizations
represents a form of social capital as groups that were highly organized and interrelated also
reported a high degree of trust in the local government and a high level of political interest.
Fennema and Tillie found a strong correlation between the number of immigrants’
organization and the level of political participation and political trust (Fennema and Tillie
40 Bringing Worlds Together Seminar Proceedings
Inclusion and Exclusion - Anver Saloojee
1999). Social capital, information flows and political knowledge which derives from social
and organizational networks play an important role in enhancing political participation and
political mobilization (Rosenstone and Hansen, 1995).
Another lengthy study on political participation by newcomer communities in Holland found
that voting patterns by members of immigrant communities was “ideologically driven”, and
that there was a strong relationship between participating in elections (as voters and as
candidates) and the “civicness” (in Putnam’s sense of the term) of ethno-racial organizations.
In analyzing the relationship between voter turn out, number of candidates per ethnic group
and the number of organizations per ethnic group the researchers concluded that the “The
voting turnout of Turks and the high number of Turkish councillors [compared to other
newcomer communities] corresponds with a high density of organizations in Amsterdam and
a strong network between organizations in the Turkish community. This finding is repeated
at the national level. Our results show that … the general idea that civic community and
political participation are interrelated is thus supported” (van Heesum, 2002, forthcoming).
This finding was consistent with Putnam’s conclusion that a strong and vibrant civic
community enhances the functioning of democracy.
A fourth set of factors that either inhibit or enhance political participation by members of
racialized and newcomer communities has to do with the complex interplay between social
identity and the persistence and reproduction of racial oppression and discrimination. The
social exclusion literature has focussed primarily on poverty and labour market exclusion.
Racial discrimination is undoubtedly a form of social exclusion, albeit one that has race as a
social construct, at the heart of exclusion. Its roots and manifestations however are different
when compared to other forms of exclusion. Racism is unequal access to rights, it is unequal
assess to the valued goods and services in society, it is about unequal access to the labour
market and it extends to all fields of public life. It is about incomplete citizenship,
undervalued rights, undervalued recognition and undervalued participation. Racial inequality
and discrimination in Canada are historically derived, have persisted over the centuries and
have been constantly reproduced in old as well as new ways. The persistence of racial
inequality and racial discrimination over the centuries points to the abject failure of public
Bringing Worlds Together Seminar Proceedings
41
Inclusion and Exclusion - Anver Saloojee
policy and state initiatives in these areas. Patterns of inequality and discrimination generally
have proved to be highly resistant to change because of the powerful socio-economic,
political and ideological forces which maintain and reproduce the patterns. Inequality has
become structured inequality in Canadian society and racial inequality is leading to racialized
poverty.
The study of structured racial inequality, discrimination, rights and privileges hinges on a
recognition that in Canadian society, women, racialized individuals and communities,
persons with disabilities and First Nations Aboriginal people who enter the labour market,
enter the educational system, and seek goods and services (among other things) and who seek
to enter the political arena, will face a structure of opportunities that are mediated by their
race, gender, disability etc. Precisely because of the existence of discrimination and barriers
all people in Canadian society do not start from the same spot, and do not compete on an
equal footing with each other.
The study of racial inequality and racial discrimination is a study of how these
“consequential human differences” are structured, continually reproduced, and are used to
deny people access to the valued goods and services in society. Structured racial exclusion
then is the process by which individuals and groups with certain socially valued attributes are
better positioned than racialized individuals and groups who do not possess or are denied the
attributes, to secure a greater share of society’s valued goods, services, rewards and
privileges; and to use these benefits to reinforce their control over rights opportunities and
privileges in society. In so doing racial inequality and unequal access to the valued goods and
services in society are structured and continually reproduced. Advantages and a
disproportionate share of society’s resources are conferred on those who possess the valued
attributes. In the context of formal political participation this means that the significant
demographic changes in Canadian society and its urban areas, has not translated into “new
political realities” nor has it altered the “balance of power holding [in political parties]
between ‘insiders’ and ‘outsiders’ (Black, 2000: 8). Despite an increase in the available pool
of potential candidates from racialized communities, political parties in Canada have been
slow to recruit them to stand for office. Jerome Black identifies a number of structural
42 Bringing Worlds Together Seminar Proceedings
Inclusion and Exclusion - Anver Saloojee
barriers faced by members of racialized communities as they seek to enter the federal
political arena:





The recruitment process works to confer advantages on established groups. This is
accomplished in two distinct ways – because they dominate among the gatekeepers
and because they tend to recruit in their own images;
Those who currently dominate the higher echelons of established political parties are
“reluctant to share power, they do not yield their monopoly to new social groups”
(Black, 2000: 8);
Racial discrimination that subtly acts to exclude members of racialized communities;
The continual reliance by recruiters on established networks in the British and French
communities to recruit prospective candidates; and
Incumbency that “works to preserve the status quo” (Black, 2000: 8-10).
In recent times political parties have come to recognize the value of numbers as many of
them in the midst of, or soon to be in the midst of leadership campaigns rush to sign up new
members and a vast untapped pool of potential party members are to be found among the
historically neglected members of racialized communities. This recognition needs to be
extended. Political parties have to recognize the symbolic importance of increased
representation, as Black points out, “since party allegiances are more likely to be cemented
by ethnic candidates rather than overridden by them – it may help at the margins” (Black,
2000: 13). This will be particularly true in those ridings where significant residential
concentration is evident. Further the party that seeks to remake itself and seeks to ensure
greater diversity in its candidate pool can make greater inroads into racialized communities.
At another level, one of the consequences of dealing with the effects of oppression and
discrimination is that members of racialized communities and their organizations find other
avenues to engage in political activity. A study by Junn found that members of historically
disadvantaged racialized communities are more likely to be involved in protest and less in
voting. On the other side, members of non-disadvantaged communities are more likely to be
involved in electoral voting (Junn, 1999).
Certainly, social identity has a direct bearing on both the form and the extent of political
participation. This is the substantive dimension of political participation. Racial
Bringing Worlds Together Seminar Proceedings
43
Inclusion and Exclusion - Anver Saloojee
discrimination leads to incomplete citizenship and undervalued participation and undervalued
recognition. The recognition of the absence of social inclusion, coupled with the reality of
exclusion and discrimination then prompted a reflexive or what Castells calls a “defensive”
assertion of identity (Castells, 1997). The assertion of an identity against discrimination and
exclusion in turn creates a politics of inclusion and social cohesion that is no longer rooted
simply in the desire to hold on to that which is unique. Rather the politics of inclusion and
social cohesion cut across inter-group identity and intra-group solidarity to challenge the
dominant discourse. Castells also notes that project identity that accompanies a
transformative project. This occurs when social actors build a new identity that redefines
their position in society and seek the transformation of overall social structure (Castells,
1997). This is what Giddens is referring to when he talks of “dialogic democracy” based on
a mutual respect, a shared understanding of the effects of exclusion and marginalization and
the emergence of solidarity: “Dialogic democracy…concerns furthering of cultural
cosmopolitanism and is a prime building block of that connection of autonomy and
solidarity…dialogic democracy encourages the democratization of democracy within the
sphere of the liberal-democratic polity.” (Giddens, 112). The growth of the multicultural
society therefore is producing the conditions for the emergence of a new sense of social
inclusion, what David Held calls a “cosmopolitan democracy” (Held, 1995: 226-231) that
recognizes differences, respects differences and that argues for substantive equality and not
just formal equality.
Anti-Racism, Social Inclusion and Political Participation.
Social inclusion forces the discourse beyond the realm of formal political participation and
into the realm of substantive political participation where the very institutions of democracy
need to be democratized in response to the challenges to discrimination, exclusion and
inequality. Social inclusion begins from the premise that it is democratic citizenship that is at
risk when a society fails to develop the talents and capacities of all its members. The move to
social inclusion is eroded when the rights of members of racialized communities are not
respected and accommodated and minorities feel “Othered”. For social inclusion there is no
contradiction between democratic citizenship and differentiated citizenship (where people
44 Bringing Worlds Together Seminar Proceedings
Inclusion and Exclusion - Anver Saloojee
can hold dual and even multiple loyalties). Democratic citizenship is about valued
participation, valued recognition and belonging. At a minimum, it is characterized by:







All the political rights associated with formal equality;
A right to equality and a right to be free from discrimination;
An intimate relationship between the individual and the community;
Reciprocal relationship of rights and obligations;
Barrier free access to political parties a sense of belonging and not being “othered”
and marginalized;
A commitment on the part of the political parties to ensure that all members of
society have equal access to running for office; and
Providing all members of society with the resources to exercise democratic
citizenship.
Advancing minority rights, it is argued by some, will have a corrosive effect on
“citizenship”. It will be detrimental to the political process and the policy process. It will
politicize ethnicity and race and detract from the emergence of a national identity. Further it
will lead to hyphenation and ultimately only reinforce the very exclusion that minority rights
advocates were fighting against.
1
In response to this argument, the Supreme Court of
Canada noted that minority rights do not erode democratic citizenship, rather “The
accommodation of differences is the essence of true equality” (cited by Kymlicka and
Norman 1999: 33).
Conclusion
We share the fundamental premise, on which this seminar is built; that “In a diverse society
nothing is more important than ensuring that all citizens have the opportunity to participate in
the discussions that set the rules by which we agree to live. This principle was recognized in
the Multiculturalism Policy in 1971 and enshrined into legislation with the passage of the
Canadian Multiculturalism Act in 1988”. As this paper suggests, the realization of this goal
is complex. Not only must we democratize the very institutions of Canadian democracy, we
must also work strenuously to eradicate racial and other forms of discrimination and the
1
Two articles are interesting in this regard as they detail the challenges associated with what I call electoral
equity in relation to political participation and group representation - Mansbridge (2000) and Williams (2000).
Bringing Worlds Together Seminar Proceedings
45
Inclusion and Exclusion - Anver Saloojee
attendant barriers to respected and valued political participation by members of racialized
and newcomer communities. We must engage in a respectful debate about what I call
electoral equity (which is the subject of another paper). There are three spheres to which our
attention ought to turn. First we need to turn our attention to the sphere of formal political
participation. Second we should turn to the sphere of civil society and third the sphere of
political parties.
In the first sphere of formal political participation, the government has a responsibility to
actively encourage the widest possible political participation by members of racialized and
newcomer communities. The government should work with community based organizations
to reverse the trends towards voter apathy and declining voter turnouts. In this sphere
political parties have a responsibility to field candidates from a wide diversity of
backgrounds and ensure that they are not confined solely to the “throw away ridings”. In the
second sphere the government has a responsibility to ensure the viability of organizations
representing the interests of newcomer and racialized communities. If as the data suggest
there is a mutually reinforcing relationship between formal political participation and the
strength of community organizations, the financial and organizational well-being of the latter
are essential prerequisites for a healthy democracy. In this sphere federal, provincial and
municipal bureaucrats also have a responsibility to engage in meaningful consultation with
civic organizations. The latter is essential to viable substantive political participation. In the
third sphere political parties have a responsibility to undertake the process of organizational
change. They have to take a serious look at the way in which they interact with marginalized
communities; the way they recruit candidates, where they field candidates, how they recruit
members etc. Politicians, gatekeepers in political parties, the leadership of political parties
and senior bureaucrats all have a responsibility to begin to remedy the situation of under
representation of members of racialized and newcomer communities. Failure to do so can
only lead to a growing sense of frustration. Discrimination, prejudice, exclusion,
marginalization in an ostensibly multicultural, multiracial society forms the context in which
the search for identity and social cohesion is experienced. Representation and participation
in political institutions, political processes and civic life are critical indicators of political
inclusion.
46 Bringing Worlds Together Seminar Proceedings
Inclusion and Exclusion - Anver Saloojee
Political inclusion is precisely about the democratization of democracy. By developing a new
way of approaching old problems, by positing a radically different conception of citizenship
and community, by arguing for new measures of accountability, by providing the impetus for
the emergences of new modes of evaluations of public policies, by arguing for increased
representation and participation by marginalized groups and above all by encouraging the
development and utilization of skills talents and capacities of all a commitment to political
inclusion will democratize democracy.
Members of racialized and newcomer communities are the latest in a long line of equity
seeking groups who are tapping into the broader liberal commitment to equality and social
justice. The greatest challenges posed by diversity are to build on the traditions of equality
espoused in liberalism and to move from an official policy of multiculturalism to building
and nurturing inclusive political processes and institutions that exemplifying our national
values.
Bringing Worlds Together Seminar Proceedings
47
Inclusion and Exclusion - Anver Saloojee
Bibliography
Abella, Rosalie Silberman, (1987), “Employment Equity-Implications for Industrial
Relations", Industrial Relations Centre, Queen's University, 1987.
Agocs, C., et al, (1992), Employment Equity, Toronto, Prentice Hall Canada.
Alba, R., and Nee V. (1997). Rethinking assimilation theory for a new era of immigration.
International Migration Review. 31(4),826-874.
Anderson, a., and J. Freideres, Ethnicity in Canada: Theoretical Perspectives, Toronto,
Butterworths.
Anwar M. (2001). The participation of ethnic minorities in British politics. Journal of Ethnic
and Migration Studies. 27 (3),533-549.
Back, H. and Soininen M. (1998). Immigrants in the political process. Scandinavian Political
Studies. 21:29-50.
Bailey, T. and Waldinger R. (1991). Primary, secondary and enclave labour markets: a
training systems approach. American Sociological Review. 56,432-445
Banton, M., The Idea of Race, London, Tavistock Publications.
Barata, P., (2000), Social Exclusion: A Review of the Literature. Background Paper prepared
for Laidlaw Foundation, Toronto.
Barry, M., (1998), ‘Social Exclusion and Social Work: An Introduction’, in M. Barry and C.
Hallett (eds.) Social Exclusion and Social Work, Dorset, Russel, House Publishing
Ltd.
Benick, G., and A. Saloojee, “Introduction” in G. Benick and A. Saloojee (1996), Creating
Inclusive Post-Secondary Learning Environment, Toronto.
Bhinder v. Canadian National Railways (1981), 2 C.H.R.R.D.\546 at D\S 9991.
Bibby, R., Mosaic Madness, The Potential and Poverty of Canadian Life, Toronto, Stoddard.
Billingingsley, B., and L Musynzski, (!985), No Discrimination Here, Toronto, Urban
Alliance on Race Relation.
Black, J., (2000), “Minority Representation in the Canadian Parliament Following the 1997
Election: Patterns of Continuity and Change”. Presented at the Fourth National
Metropolis Conference, Toronto, March, 2000.
Bonacich, E., (1972), “A Theory of Ethnic Antagonism: The Split Labour Market”,
American Sociological Review, 37: 547-559.
48 Bringing Worlds Together Seminar Proceedings
Inclusion and Exclusion - Anver Saloojee
Bousetta, H. (2000). “Institutional theories of immigrant ethnic mobilization: relevance and
limitations”, Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies. 26(2), 229-245.
Byrne, D., (1999), Social Exclusion, Buckingham, Open University Press.
Canadian Council of Christians and Jews, Attitudes Towards Race and Ethnic Relations,
1993.
Canadian Race Relation Foundation (2000), Unequal Access: A Canadian Profile of Racial
Differences in Education, Employment and Income, Canada, Canadian Race
Relations Foundation.
Carey, E., (2002), “Jobs Tougher to find for recent immigrants”, Toronto Star, February 26,
2002.
Castells, M., (1978), City Class and Power, London, The Macmillan Press.
Castells, M., (1979), The Urban Question: a Marxist Approach, Cambridge, MIT Press.
Castells., M., (1996) The Rise of the Network Society, Oxford: Blackwell.
Castells, M., (1997), The Power of Identity, Oxford, Blackwell Publishers.
C.N.R. v. Canada (Human Rights Commission) ,[1987] 1 S.C.R.1114.
Cox, O. (1948), Caste, Class and Race, New York, Doubleday and Co. Inc.
Diehl, C. and Blohm, M. (2001). “Apathy, adaptation or ethnic mobilization? On the
attitudes of a politically excluded group”, Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies
27(3),401-420.
Dreidger, L., (1989), The Ethnic Factor: Identity in Diversity, Toronto, McGraw Hill
Ryerson.
Ebersold, S., (1998), Exclusion and Disability, Organization for Economic Co-operation and
Development: Centre for Educational Research and Innovation, on the OECD web
site: http//www.oecd.org/els/edu/ceri/conf220299.html.
Employment and Immigration Canada, Immigration to Canada: Issues for Discussion, 1989.
Espenshade, T. and Fu H. (1997). “An analysis of English language proficiency among U.S.
immigrants”, American Sociological Review 62(2),288-305.
European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions (1995), Public
Welfare services and Social Exclusion: The Development of Consumer Oriented
Bringing Worlds Together Seminar Proceedings
49
Inclusion and Exclusion - Anver Saloojee
Initiatives in the European Union, Dublin, The Foundation.
Fenema, M. and Tillie, J. (1999). “Political participation and political trust in Amsterdam:
civic communities and ethnic networks”, Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies.
25(4), 703-726.
Fenema, M. and Tillie, J. (2001) “Civic community, political participation and political trust
of ethnic groups”, Connection, 23 (2) 44-59.
Fleras, A., and L.J. Elliott, (1992), Muticulturalism in Canada: The challenge of Diversity,
Toronto: Oxford.
Frank, J., (1997), “Indicators of Social Inequality in Canada: Women, Aboriginal People and
Visible Minorities, in A. Frizzell and J. Pammett (eds.), Social Inequality in Canada,
Ottawa, Carleton University Press.
Freideres, J., (1999), Unequal Relations: An Introduction to Race, Ethnic, and Aboriginal
Dynamics in Canada. Scarborough: Prentice Hall Allynand Bacon Canada.
Fraser, N., (1996), “Rethinking the Public Sphere: A contribution to the Critique of Actually
Existing Democracies” in C. Calhoun, (ed)., Habermas and the Public Sphere,
Cambridge Mass.: MIT Press.
Freiler, C., (2001), “What Needs to Change?: Social Inclusion as a Focus of Well Being for
Children, Families and Communities – A Draft Paper Concept”, Laidlaw Foundation,
Toronto.
Galabuzi, Grace –Edward, (2000), Canada’s Creeping Economic Apartheid, Canada,
Canadian Race Relations Foundation.
Giddens, A., Beyond Left and Right, Cambridge: Polity Press.
Gore, C., (1995), “Introduction, Markets and Citizenship” in G. Rodgers et al, Social
Exclusion: Rhetoric, Reality Responses, Geneva, ILO Publications.
Harvey, D., (1976), Social Justice and the City, London, Edwin Arnold.
Harvey, D., (1989) The Conditions of Post Modernism, Oxford, Blackwell.
Harvey, D., (1996), Justice, Nature and the Geography of Difference, Oxford: Blackwell.
Held, D., (1995), Democracy and the Global Order: From the Modern State to Cosmopolitan
Governance, Cambridge: Polity
Henry, F., et al, (1995) The Colour of Democracy, Toronto, Harcourt, Brace and Company.
50 Bringing Worlds Together Seminar Proceedings
Inclusion and Exclusion - Anver Saloojee
Henry, F., and E. Ginsberg (1985), Who Gets the Work? A Test of Racial Discrimination in
Employment, Toronto, The Social Planning Council of Toronto.
Holston, J., (1995), “Spaces of Insurgent Citizenship”, in Planning Theory, (Special Issue),
35-52.
Hou, F., and T. R. Balakrishnan (1996), “The Integration of Visible Minorities in
Contemporary Canadian Society”, Canadian Journal of Sociology, 21(3): 307-326.
Jackson, A., (2001), “Poverty and Racism” in Perception, 24(4), 6-7.
Junn, J. (1999). “Participation in liberal democracy: the political assimilation of immigrants
and ethnic minorities in the U.S”, American Behavioral Scientist 42(9),1417-1438.
Kymlicka, W., and W. Norman, (2000), “Citizenship in Culturally Diverse Societies: Issues,
Contexts and Concepts” in Kymlicka, W., and W. Norman, Citizenship in Divided
Societies, Oxford, Oxford University Press.
Li, P., (1998), “The Market Value and Social Value of Race” in V. Satzewich, (ed.), Racism
and Social Inequality in Canada: Concepts, Controversies and Strategies of
Resistance, Toronto, Thompson Educational Publishing, Inc.
Levitas, R., (1996), ‘The Concept of Social Exclusion and the New Durkheimian
Hegemony’, in Critical Social Policy, No 16 (1), pp. 5-20.
Mansbridge, J., (2000), “What does a Representative Do? Descriptive Representation in
Communicative settings of Distrust, Uncrystallized Interests, and Historically
Denigrated Status” in Kymlicka and Norman, op. cit.
Mesch, G., (2002), “Residential Concentration and Participation in Local Politics: The case
of Immigrants of the FSU in Israel” n.p.
Ministry of Citizenship, 1989, A Theoretical Context for Employment Equity, Toronto.
Novick, M., (2001), Social Inclusion: The Foundation of a National Policy Agenda. The
Laidlaw and Canadian Council on Social Development Conference: “A New Way Of
Thinking? Towards A Vision of Social Inclusion”, Ottawa, November 2001.
Office of the Employment Equity Commissioner, (1991), Working Towards Equality,
Ministry of Citizenship, Toronto, Government of Ontario.
Ontario Human Rights Commission (1983), The Experience of Visible Minorities in the Work
World: the Case of MBA Graduates, Ontario, Ontario Human Rights Commission.
Ornstein, M., (2000), Ethno-Racial Inequality in Toronto: Analysis of the 1996 Census,
Toronto, City of Toronto.
Bringing Worlds Together Seminar Proceedings
51
Inclusion and Exclusion - Anver Saloojee
Phillips, A., (1999), Which Equalities Matter? Cambridge, Polity Press.
Portes, A. and Jensen L. (1987). “Limits of ethnic solidarity in the enclave economy”,
American Sociological Review. 52 (6),745-767.
Ramakrishnan, S. K. and Espenshade, T.J. 2001. “Immigrant incorporation and political
participation in the U.S”, International Migration Review, 35, 3,870-909.
Rodgers, G., (1995), “What is special about a “Social Exclusion” Approach?” in Rodgers, et
al, op. cit.
Room, G., (1995), ‘Poverty and Social Exclusion: The European Agenda for Policy and
Research’ in G. Room, Beyond the Threshold: the Measurement and Analysis of
Social Exclusion, Bristol, The Policy Press.
Rosenstone, S.J. and Hansen, M. 1993. Mobilization, Participation and Democracy in
America. New York: Macmillian Publishing Co.
Saloojee, A., (1996) Issues in Equity and Human Rights: A Distance Education Workbook,
Toronto, Ryerson University.
Saloojee, A., “Social Inclusion, Citizenship and Diversity: Moving Beyond the Limits of
Multiculturalism”. Presented at the CCSD-Laidlaw Foundation Conference, A New
Way of Thinking? Towards, A Vision of Social Inclusion, Ottawa, November, 2001.
Sandercock, L., (1998), Towards Cosmopolis, West Sussex, John Wiley & Son.
Sanders, J.M. and Nee V. (1987). Limits of ethnic solidarity in the enclave economy.
American Sociological Review. 52,745-767.
Saunders, P., (1981), Social Theory and the Urban Question, London: Hutchinson
Siemiatycki M., A. Saloojee (2001), Ethno-Racial Political Representation in Toronto:
Patterns and Problems. Presented at the Metropolis International Conference,
Rotterdam, November, 2001.
Smith, E., Andrew Jackson, (2002), Does a Rising Tide Lift All Boats?The Labour Market
Experiences and Incomes of Recent Immigrants ,1995 to 1998, CCSD, OTTAWA.
Statement by the Prime Minister in the House of Commons, October 8, 1971
Togeby, L. (1999). “Migrants at the polls: an analysis of immigrants and refugee
participation in Danish local politics”, Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies.
25(4),665-685.
52 Bringing Worlds Together Seminar Proceedings
Inclusion and Exclusion - Anver Saloojee
Toronto Star, 24/2/93; 21/3/94; 22/3/94; 7/6/99.
United Nations, (1965), International Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Racial
Discrimination, New York, United Nations.
van Heesum, A., (2001), “The Relatioship Between Political Participation and Civic
Community of Migrants in the Netherlands”. Presented at the Metropolis
International Conference, Rotterdam, November 2001.
Veit-Wilson, J., (1998), Setting Adequacy Standards, Bristol, Policy Press.
Walker, A., and C. Walker (eds.), (1997), Britain Divided: The Growth of Social Exclusion
in the 1980s and 1990s, London, Child Poverty Action Group.
Walker, R., “Poverty and Social Exclusion in Europe” in ibid.
Weinfeld, M., (1981)., “Canada”, in R. G. Wirsing (ed.), Protection of Ethnic Minorities,
New York: Pergamon Press. 41-78.
Williams, M. S., (2000), “The Uneasy Alliance of Group Representation and Deliberative
Democracy” in Kymlicka and Normand, op. cit.
Zhou, M. and Logan, J.R. (1989). “Returns to human capital in ethnic enclaves: New York
City's Chinatown”, American Sociological Review, 54,809-820.
Bringing Worlds Together Seminar Proceedings
53