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 Canada
Importance of civic* identity
2.
(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 group
Importance of ethnic identity
Importance of ethnic ancestry
Importance of ethnic customs and traditions
2.
3.
4.
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
1.0
0.9
0.8
Rest of Canada
0.82
Quebec
0.74
0.84
0.75
0.76
Probability
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.18
0.1
0.0
strong sense of high importance strong sense of high importance high importance high importance
belonging to
of Canadian
belonging to
of ethnic
of customs and of ethnic identity
Canada
identity
ethnic group
ancestry
traditions
Indicators of Attachment
Patterns of attachment: Mainstream
"Mainstream" Attachment Pattern for Quebec and the Rest of Canada
1.0
Rest of Canada
0.8
Quebec
0.7
Probability
0.91
0.9
0.66
0.6
0.49
0.5
0.4
0.28
0.3
0.30
0.2
0.1
0.00
0.00
0.0
strong sense of
belonging to
Canada
high importance of strong sense of high importance of high importance of high importance of
Canadian identity belonging to ethnic ethnic ancestry
customs and
ethnic identity
group
traditions
Indicators of Attachment
Patterns of attachment: Pluralist
"Pluralist" Attachment Pattern for Quebec and the Rest of Canada
1.0
Rest of Canada
0.9
0.8
0.75
0.71
0.75
Quebec
Probability
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0.00
0.0
strong sense of
belonging to
Canada
high importance of
Canadian identity
strong sense of
belonging to ethnic
group
high importance of
ethnic ancestry
Indicators of Attachment
high importance of
customs and
traditions
high importance of
ethnic identity
Patterns of attachment: Marginalized
"Marginalized" Attachment Pattern for Quebec and the Rest of Canada
1.0
Rest of Canada
0.9
0.8
Probability
0.7
Quebec
0.69
0.6
0.5
0.48
0.37
0.4
0.27
0.3
0.2
0.1
0.11
0.22
0.15
0.15
0.09
0.00
0.0
strong sense of high importance strong sense of high importance high importance high importance
belonging to
of Canadian
belonging to
of ethnic
of customs and of ethnic identity
Canada
identity
ethnic group
ancestry
traditions
Indicators of Attachment
Comparing the regional distribution of
attachment types
Probabilities of Attachment Types by Region
0.45
Rest of Canada
0.4
Quebec
0.39
Probability
0.35
0.3
0.25
0.2
0.28
0.26
0.24
0.24
0.21
0.21
0.15
0.16
0.1
Ethnic
Mainstream
Pluralist
Attachment Types
Marginalized
For white groups, the assimilation model is
supported, with rapid decrease in ‘ethnic’
attachments
Whites: Prevalence of Attachment Types by Cohort
70%
Recent immigrants (1991-2001)
60%
Earlier Immigrants (before 1991)
51%
50%
50%
2nd Generation
48%
Percent
3rd/4th Generation
40%
37%
34%
30%
30%
24%
21%
20%
18%
17% 16%
12%
15%
12%
11%
10%
4%
0%
Ethnic
Mainstream
Pluralist
Marginalized
For visible minorities, there is stronger ethnic
retention and less integration into the mainstream
Visible Minorities: Prevalence of Attachment Types by Cohort
70%
Recent immigrants (1991-2001)
62%
60%
Earlier Immigrants (before 1991)
55%
2nd Generation
50%
3rd/4th Generation
Percent
40%
40%
35%
30%
30%
26%
25%
23%
20%
23%
17%
15%
10%
7%
20%
6%
8%
9%
0%
Ethnic
Mainstream
Pluralist
Marginalized
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)
Chinese (shown relative to their proportion in the population)
0.06
0.09
0.08
0.06
0.05
0.04
0.03
0.02
0.02
0.01
0.01
0
Ethnic
Mainstream
Proportion to the Population
Proportion to the Population
0.07
0.08
0.07
0.06
0.05
0.05
0.04
0.03
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.01
0.01
0
Pluralist
Ethnic
Marginalized
South Asian (shown relative to their proportion in the population)
Mainstream
Pluralist
Marginalized
Latin American (shown relative to their proportion in the
population)
0.09
0.08
0.03
0.03
0.07
0.06
0.05
0.04
0.03
0.03
0.02
0.02
0.01
Prportion to the Population
Proportion to the Population
0.08
0.03
0.02
0.02
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.00
0.01
0.00
Ethnic
Mainstream
Pluralist
Marginalized
0.00
0.00
Ethnic
Mainstream
Pluralist
Marginalized
“Charter” Groups show different propensities to
attachments
English (shown relative to their proportion in the population)
French (shown relative to their proportion in the population)
0.3
0.23
0.21
0.19
0.27
0.28
0.24
0.20
0.18
0.17
0.17
Proportion to the Population
Proportion to the Population
0.25
0.26
0.24
0.22
0.2
0.18
0.16
0.14
0.15
0.18
0.17
0.15
0.12
Ethnic
Mainstream
Pluralist
Marginalized
Ethnic
Mainstream
Pluralist
Marginalized
•English are over-represented in the “mainstream” attachment group
•French are over-represented in the “pluralist” attachment group
National majorities and minorities
Predicted Probability of 'mainstream' over 'marginalized'
0.6
Rest of Canada White
Rest of Canada Visible Minority
Quebec White
Quebec Visible Minority
0.5
0.46
0.49
0.42
0.4
0.32
0.3
0.258
0.27
0.2
0.22
0.21
0.14
0.1
0.10
0.07
0.08
0.10
0.02
0
Recent Immigrants (1991 or
later)
Early Immigrants (before 1991)
2nd Generation
Immigrant and Generational Cohort
3rd/4th Generation
The probability of ‘pluralist’ social attachments is
higher in Quebec than in the rest of Canada
0.6
Rest of Canada White
Rest of Canada Visible Minority
Quebec White
Quebec Visible Minority
Predicted Probability of 'pluralist' over
'marginalized'
0.5
0.4
0.29
0.3
0.22
0.2
0.24
0.16
0.12
0.1
0.14
0.07
0.05
0
0.03
Recent Immigrants
(1991 or later)
0.09
0.09
0.05
Early Immigrants
(before 1991)
2nd Generation
Immigrant and Generational Cohort
3rd/4th Generation
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
0.7
0.60
0.61
0.6
0.58
0.53
0.55
Predicted Probability of 'ethnic' over 'marginalized'
0.5
0.43
0.50
0.41
0.4
0.41
0.34
0.36
0.3
0.23
0.2
0.1
Rest of Canada White
Rest of Canada Visible Minority
Quebec White
Quebec Visible Minority
0.22
0.17
0.07
0
Recent Immigrants (1991 or later)
Early Immigrants (before 1991)
2nd Generation
Im m igrant and Generational Cohort
3rd/4th Generation
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 Frenchspeaking 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