Race, Religion, And the Social Integration of Canada

8/15/2019 Race, Religion, And the Social Integration of Canada

1/49

Race, Religion, and the Social Integration of

New Immigrant Minorities in Canada

Jeffrey G. Reitz, Rupa Banerjee, Mai Phan, Jordan Thompson

University of Toronto

March 2009

Forthcoming in International Migration Review

________________________________________________________________________

Note: This research was supported by a grant from the Social Sciences and Humanities

Research Council – Canadian Heritages Joint Initiative on ‘Multiculturalism Issues.’

Analysis was conducted at the Toronto Region Statistics Canada Research Data Centre

(RDC) at the University of Toronto, and the assistance of its staff has been greatly

appreciated. The authors wish to thank Raymond Breton for his helpful comments on an

earlier draft.

Contact: Professor Jeffrey G. Reitz, Munk Centre for International Studies, University of

Toronto, 1 Devonshire Place, Toronto ON M5S 3K7. [email protected]


2/49



ABSTRACT:

The social integration of Canada’s new religious minorities is determined more

by their racial minority status than by their religious affiliation or degree of

religiosity, according to results from Statistics Canada’s 2002 Ethnic Diversity

Survey. Interview questions tap life satisfaction, affective ties to Canada, and

participation in the wider community. Muslims, Sikhs, Buddhists, and Hindus

are slower to integrate socially, mainly because they are mostly racial

minorities. Degree of religiosity affects social integration in the same ways as

ethnic community attachments in general, positively for some dimensions,

negatively for others, and similarly for different religious groups. Patterns are

similar in Quebec and the rest of Canada; results carry implications for the

debate over ‘reasonable accommodation’ of religious minorities in Quebec,

and parallel debates in other provinces and countries.


3/49



The racial minority status of most immigrants to Canada since the 1970s has been

considered as a major factor in their social integration, but questions are now being asked

also about the role that religion may play. Do religious beliefs and belief systems

prevalent in some of the new ‘visible minority’ groups, which include many Muslims,

Hindus, Buddhists and Sikhs, matter in affecting their social integration? Or is their

social integration affected mainly by racial differences, and the disadvantages that new

religious minority groups experience based on the fact that they are mostly Asian and

other ‘visible minorities’ in Canada?

The proportion of ‘visible minorities,’ including immigrants from the Caribbean,

Asia, Africa, and Latin America, has grown to over 16 percent of the total population in

2006 (Statistics Canada 2008), projected to over 20 percent by 2017, with substantially

higher proportions in key urban settlement areas (Statistics Canada 2005). The primary

question raised by this change has been whether new immigrant minorities, mainly blacks

and Asians, may face distinctive obstacles to their effective integration into society (Li

1999; Breton 2005, 289-324, Hier and Bolaria 2007), and whether as a result their

experiences pose a challenge to the viability of the policy and practice of Canadian

multiculturalism (e.g. Bissoondath 1994; Kymlicka 1995, 1998).

However, the same immigration shifts also have produced substantial increases in

the Muslim, Buddhist, Hindu and Sikh populations, which are mainly part of the visible


4/49

2

minority populations. Muslims now compose almost 2 per cent of the Canadian

population, and Buddhists, Hindus and Sikhs each compose about 1 per cent.1 These

groups are also increasing as a proportion of the population. Non-Christian minorities

are expected to grow between 60 and 110 per cent by 2017, while the Christian

population will grow between 5 and 13 per cent (Statistics Canada 2005). This raises the

further question of the role of religious diversity in the integration of the new minorities.

How well are religious groups such as Muslims, Sikhs and others being integrated into

Canadian society? Are their differences among groups related to religion, or is religion

relatively unimportant as a factor compared to race?

Since the primary focus of existing research on the integration of visible

minorities in Canada has been on racial issues, there is little systematic information on

whether or how their religious commitments may matter. Yet in many immigrant

receiving countries particularly in Europe, it has been the religious character of minority

groups rather than their racial origins which has been considered most problematic for

social integration (Foner and Alba 2008). Experiences with Muslim minorities in

particular, and problems of their social integration, are seen as prompting a

reconsideration of, or even a ‘retreat’ from policies of multiculturalism which had been

influenced by the Canadian lead (Madood et al. 2006, Joppke 2004). Increasingly in

Canada as well, the question of minority religions has begun to play a larger role in

public discussion of immigrant groups and multiculturalism (e.g. Banting, Courchene and

Seidle, 2007). The government response has been most dramatic in the case of Quebec,

where a commission chaired by Gérard Bouchard and Charles Taylor (2008) reported on

issues of what is ‘reasonable accommodation’ of cultural minorities in the province,


5/49

3

particularly Muslims.

The present study explores the extent to which the social integration of recent

immigrants to Canada and Quebec is affected by their religious diversity, as opposed to

traditional questions of racial difference. Because race and religion overlap, the

importance of one factor may be difficult to assess if it is not separated empirically from

the impact of the other. The present analysis seeks to separate the impact of religion and

race, using evidence from Statistics Canada’s Ethnic Diversity Survey, based on

interviews with a stratified sample of over 40,000 Canadians both immigrant and native-

born. Our analysis suggests that the racial status of recent immigrant groups has a much

greater impact on their social integration than does their religion, and that the degree of

their commitment to religious beliefs has significance mainly because of its relation to

ethnic community ties, and in a similar way for most religious groups. The specific

religious beliefs, such as among Muslims for example, themselves appear to be relatively

unimportant in determining social relations.

We begin by reviewing research on the integration of visible minorities in

Canada, and the emergence of religion as an issue in the integration of these groups. It is

suggested that to identify the role of religion as opposed to race requires systematic

evidence such as from a survey, and that not only religious affiliation but the degree of

religiosity and engagement with a religious group requires analysis. For the case of the

United States, a related study by Wuthnow and Hackett (2003) based on the survey by

Putnam (2007) provided useful information. The presentation here, based on the Ethnic

Diversity Survey, extends this effort not only by providing data on Canada including on

Quebec in particular as distinct settings for immigrant settlement, but also using much


6/49

4

larger samples allowing more effective analysis of ethnic and racial diversity within

religious groups, and permitting a focus on the strength of religious belief and the

significance of religion in the lives of immigrants as a key independent variable.

Race and Religion of Immigrants as Issues in Canada

Race has been considered more important than religion as a factor in the reception

and settlement of recent immigrants in Canada, for reasons which are both political and

empirical. Politically, the issue of discrimination based on race, particularly in the realm

of employment but also in housing and access to social services, emerged fairly quickly

following the beginning of large-scale non-European immigration. Government use of

the term ‘visible minorities’ was part of that political response (Canada 1984), which also

included legislation to address discriminatory barriers in employment (the Employment

Equity Act ). By contrast, although prohibition of discrimination based on religion was

also part of Canada’s established human rights framework, it simply was not raised as a

special concern during this period.

Empirically, a series of research studies launched partly as a response to this

political concern has documented considerable racial disadvantage in employment (e.g.

Pendakur and Pendakur 2002; see the review by Reitz 2007a, b). Although there is

considerable controversy about the extent to which these disadvantages have their origins

in discrimination, the fact that racial disadvantage is becoming more serious with the

progressive deterioration in the employment success of newly-arriving immigrants

(Frenette and Morrissette 2004) has underscored the salience of this issue. It has been


7/49

5

relatively rare to consider these disadvantages as related to religion, although Model and

Lin (2003) showed that religious minorities such as Hindus, Sikhs and Muslims are lower

in social status and do experience employment disadvantage in Canada.

Another fact underscoring the importance of race as opposed to religion in

Canada is that among visible minorities, it is the black group that seems to face the

greatest problems of integration, and yet blacks by religion are predominantly Christian.

In virtually every study of immigrant economic status, blacks have the lowest

occupational status and the lowest incomes. Using the conventional methods of analyses

to uncover discrimination, namely earnings disadvantages net of human capital such as

education, work experience and official language knowledge, studies have consistently

found that blacks, particularly black men, experience the greatest disadvantage (Hum and

Simpson 1999; Li 2000; Reitz 2001; Pendakur and Pendakur 2002; Swidinsky and

Swidinsky 2002). Among immigrant groups today, blacks are the focus for most public

discussion of social problems such as low school completion rates and high rates of youth

crime (James 1998). By contrast, although those visible minority groups which contain

non-Christian religious groups, such as South Asians and Chinese, also show

disadvantages and indications of social distress, it is significantly less so. As well, in the

Ethnic Diversity Survey (which will be the basis of the analysis below), although all

visible minority groups report experiences of discrimination including employment

discrimination more often than whites, the proportion is higher among blacks than among

any of the other visible minority groups containing more non-Christian religious

minorities (Reitz and Banerjee 2007; Reitz, Breton, Dion and Dion 2009).

Although in Canada as in other countries the significance of the religious


8/49

6

dimension of immigrant group culture as a potential threat to social cohesion has become

a topic of debate in recent years (Bramadat and Seljak 2005, Seljak 2007), the intensity

of this debate seems less. The Canadian debate as elsewhere has been sparked by

international terrorism, and the Al-Qaeda attacks on the United States on 11 September

2001 (cf. Stubbs 2003) which seemed to highlight Huntington’s (2003) question about a

‘clash of civilizations.’ Particularly in Europe this has produced an enormous interest

specifically in the Muslim group (cf. Abedin and Sardar 1995; Bujis and Rath 2006). But

many Canadians regard themselves as a rather unlikely target for a serious attack by

Islamic fundamentalists even after events such as the bombing of passenger trains in

Madrid and London, and the assassination of film-maker Theo Van Gogh in the

Netherlands. Canadians share concerns about Islamic extremism in the world generally,

but they are relatively less concerned about how it affects Canada specifically (Pew

Global Attitudes Project 2005, p. 3).2 The group of Canadian Muslim youths who were

arrested in June 2006 and accused of planning an attack on Canadian political targets

(The Economist 2006a, 2006b) tended to be dismissed by the public as fairly harmless.

Nevertheless, although the threat of terrorism is in the background, there has been

a significant and growing Canadian debate about the social integration of the new

religious minorities. The question – frequently articulated elsewhere as well – is whether

certain religious minorities have values, beliefs or practices that are difficult to integrate

into Canadian society because they clash with Canadian ideas about gender equality or

secularism in public institutions (Ramadan 2007; Madood 2003; Abu-Laban 1995;

Soysal 1997). There are political manifestations of this concern across the country. In

Ontario, concerns about the integration of Muslims have been voiced in the debate on the


9/49

7

inclusion of Sharia law in Ontario family tribunals. The government decision to reject the

inclusion of Sharia law (and, in an attempt to be consistent, revoking parallel privileges

previously available to Jews) was based on concerns about the threat such Islamic courts

pose to Muslim women (Boyd 2007; Khan 2007). Another example concerns the

question of extending public funding to all religious schools (a benefit currently enjoyed

only by Catholics). In a recent Ontario provincial election campaign, a proposal for such

funding was put forward by the Progressive Conservatives, but strongly rejected by

voters. Opinion polls prior to the election indicated that 71 per cent of the population

opposed extending funding to all religious schools (The Strategic Counsel 2007).

Opposition to the proposal was based largely on accusations of fostering segregation as

well as discomfort with the secular state encouraging religious attachment through public

policy.3

A recent controversy in Quebec over what constitutes ‘reasonable

accommodation’ for minorities was sparked by several events including most

dramatically the publication of standards guiding the behaviour of immigrants to the

small town of Hérouxville. These standards, while not addressing Muslims by name,

targeted perceived gender practices of Islam, stipulating that women are allowed to do

anything a man can do while specifically noting that ‘killing women in public beatings,

or burning them alive are not part of our standards’ (Hérouxville 2007; see also Aubin

and Gatehouse 2007). However, it is not clear how widespread these perceptions are in

the population. The government commission to investigate the issue of reasonable

accommodation, chaired by Gérard Bouchard and Charles Taylor, conducted hearings

around the province and concluded that the issue had been blown out of proportion by the


10/49

8

media (Bouchard and Taylor 2008). In effect, Bouchard and Taylor point to the

possibility that there may be problems for the integration of minorities based not on their

own cultural distinctiveness but rather on what some have called the ‘racialization’ of

religious status (Joshi 2006), that is to say the possibility that religious minorities are

stigmatized and experience discrimination based on religion, and on a perception of

religious minorities as a racialized ‘other.’

Research on Religious Diversity and Social Integration of Immigrants

This background points to the need for more systematic research assessing the

social integration of the new religious minorities in Canada, with attention to the

following issues. First, since public discussion is based largely on stereotypes and

individual cases which may or may not be typical, it is important to ask what are the

actual (as opposed to publicly perceived) patterns of social integration of the new

religious minorities. Second, since the religious minorities are mostly also racial

minorities, it should be asked to what extent are any differences related to non-European

origins and racial status as opposed to religion?

A third question probes the possible differences within religious groups. Does the

strength of religious attachment affect social or political ties to the mainstream

community, and what are patterns of social integration for those religious minorities most

who are most attached to their religious communities? Do the most highly religious

members of the newer religious groups, those most deeply committed to their faith and

the most strongly tied to their religious community, differ from those for whom religious

attachment is less central in their lives?


11/49

9

A fourth question concerns differences within Canada, in particular between

Quebec and the rest of Canada. The issue of language and the status of French in Quebec

has led to a number of differences potentially affecting the incorporation of newcomers.

Multiculturalism has been viewed with ambivalence by some in Quebec, if it would

reduce the status of French compared to English. Those immigrants to Canada who seek

to settle in Quebec are selected by the Quebec government, and efforts are made to

facilitate their integration into the French linguistic community. The intensity and

duration of the controversy over ‘reasonable accommodation’ has led some to wonder

whether Quebec, since its ‘Quiet Revolution,’ with the re-awakening of Quebec national

and cultural identity and growing secularization, may be particularly sensitive to cultural

and religious diversity, as opposed to racial diversity.

What may be expected in such an analysis cannot easily be prejudged.

Theoretically, ethno-religious diversity may affect the social integration of immigrant

groups in two ways. First, it may affect commonalities of values, commitments, and

social relations among individuals and groups of individuals. Such commonalities are

affected by religious commitments and organizations, as well as by other aspects of

group cultures. Cultural diversity can be a positive force in inter-group relations, of

course, by bringing new ideas and perspectives, and providing incentives for the rapid

integration of new groups. However, immigrant newcomers who bring values that depart

or appear to depart very substantially from those of the host society may lead to the

creation of social boundaries that are difficult to transcend.

Second, ethno-religious diversity also may affect the degree of disadvantage,

discrimination, and sense of fairness among individuals and groups. Such disadvantages


12/49

10

may arise from attitudes toward minority groups affected by religion, race, language,

nationality, or other group attributes. Where such disadvantages exist or are perceived to

exist, resentments over inequity may lead to conflict over resources or expectations for

such conflicts.

The extent to which any particular racial or religious minority actually vary from

the mainstream society in terms of particular cultural values, and the extent to which they

experience or perceive disadvantage, is an empirical question. Race and religion are

conceptually different aspects of ethno-racial diversity, and as such are likely to operate

quite differently in their impact on social relations. Religious identification may be

important to the extent it reflects strong divergence in culture or social values, or because

of organizational agency. Just as the relationship between Islam, violence, and terrorism

is challenged as representing a simplified and bipolar conception of Islam versus the

West (cf. Halliday 2003; Qureshi and Sells 2003), stereotypes about Muslims or other

religious minorities may be open to empirical challenge. Variations within minority

groups may be as important as variations within the mainstream society. Religious

minorities who have immigrated to Canada have likely been exposed to a great deal of

western secularized consumer culture, and have developed a certain comfort and perhaps

affinity with it. The secular aspect of public life could promote integration opportunities

in spite of personal religious views. By contrast, racial distinctiveness may be activated

in many social settings because of the visibility of group membership and the feelings

this may generate in others. Where there are obstacles to the social integration of a

particular group, they may arise from within, or from treatment by others.

Throughout the history of European immigration to the ‘New World,’ both


13/49

11

religion and ethnic or national identity were considered significant as factors in social

integration. An important theme has been that religious attachments persist despite a

broader cultural assimilation. The point of Will Herberg’s ‘triple melting pot’ thesis in

Protestant-Catholic-Jew (1955) was that while European ethnic identities faded, three

dominant religious affiliations remained; however, these affiliations were quite

compatible with the broader cohesion of American society. Baltzell (1964) argued that

the difficulties Catholics experienced arose mainly because of exclusion at the hands of a

‘Protestant establishment,’ barriers which likely have faded to insignificance.

Patterns of social integration for religious minorities cannot be judged based on

minority claims for recognition (de Wit and Koopmans 2005; Abbas 2005; Modood,

Triandafyllidous, and Zapata-Barrero 2006; Pffaf and Gill 2006; Kahn 2000), or state

efforts to accommodate religious preferences (Shadid 1991; Fetzer and Soper 2005).

These activities may have greater visibility than parallel activities regarding racial

groups, because of the organizational resources of religious groups.

Available data from census or census and polling sources do not indicate

distinctive integration problems for religious minorities in Canada. Model and Lin

(2002) compare non-Christian minorities in Canada and Britain (based on census and

survey data, respectively) in terms of the attitudes of the mainstream populations and

employment outcomes; they conclude that although minorities in Canada have higher

socio-economic status (based on immigration selection), there are inconsistent cross-

national differences only in terms of the extent of disadvantage. In both countries,

Muslims and Sikhs experience greater disadvantage, compared to Hindus and Buddhists

(see also Peach 2006). In the Canadian case, Beyer (2005) shows there is little difference


14/49

12

in educational achievements among the new religious minorities and the native-born

population.

Despite concerns about discrimination and increases in violent attacks against

Muslims and Muslim targets since the onset of the ‘war on terror’ (Commission on

British Muslims and Islamophobia 2004; Helly 2004; European Monitoring Centre on

Racism and Xenophobia 2006), attitude surveys make it clear that Muslims are fairly

satisfied with life in their adopted homelands. For example, in Canada, a CBC/Environics

poll shows that when asked if they feel that either some or most of their fellow citizens

are hostile to Muslims, 75 per cent of Canadian Muslims indicate ‘just some or very few,’

and only 17 per cent indicate ‘most or many.’ The proportion in the latter category is

higher in Britain (51 per cent), Germany (39 per cent), France (33 per cent), and Spain

(31 per cent), according to polls conducted by the PEW Research Centre. Canadian

Muslims also express higher levels of satisfaction with the way things are going in their

country, with 81 per cent satisfied compared to 51 per cent in Britain, 44 per cent in

Germany, and 33 per cent in France (CBC 2007). Overall, a full 55 per cent of Canadian

Muslims indicate they want to ‘fit in’ (CBC 2007). Such positive findings, argues

Michael Adams, head of Environics, the polling firm which produced data on Canadian

Muslims, is a central feature of the success of what he calls Canada’s ‘utopian’

multicultural society (Adams 2007).

However, to fully see the impact of any particular religions group or its beliefs, it

is necessary to compare religious groups. To this end, Wuthnow and Hackett (2003)

examine the social integration of non-Western religious minorities, by which they mean

Muslims, Hindus, and Buddhists,4 in the US using the 2000 Social Capital Benchmark


15/49

13

survey conducted by Putnam (2007). The samples for these religious groups were fairly

small (total N= 522), so the racial composition was examined only in a limited way. This

appeared to be quite distinctive to the United States: of 169 Muslims in the sample, 35.5

percent were black; of 231 Buddhists, only 29.0 percent were Asian; of 122 Hindus, 28.6

percent were not Asian. As for the Canadian case, educational levels for these minorities

are high.

In regression analyses controlling for a variety of personal characteristics, they

find little difference for any of the three minority religious group in social integration

(political knowledge, social trust, social networks, and isolation); in all three, there are

lower levels of political integration (voting, feelings of alienation, connections with

elites). They suggest, therefore, that the newer religious minorities have the potential for

integration, and that obstacles are not related to specific beliefs of particular groups (such

as Muslims compared to Hindus, for example); rather, they are related to social relations

and group resources. Finally, Wuthnow and Hackett stress that problems of integration

are a result of majority-minority relations, not simply the characteristics of the minorities

themselves. However, despite the fact that race was included in the analysis, there was

no attempt to determine whether the problems of integration arose specifically from

religious affiliation or activities, as opposed to racial background.

The Ethnic Diversity Survey


16/49

14

Survey Description and Previous Findings

The Ethnic Diversity Survey (EDS), conducted by Statistics Canada and the

Department of Canadian Heritage in 2002, makes it possible to look more closely at these

issues for the Canadian case. The Ethnic Diversity Survey is a post-censal telephone

survey of persons aged 15 and over conducted between April and August of 2002

(N=41,666).5 The sample is a two-phase stratified sample, designed to enhance

representation of ethnic minorities, including racial minority immigrants and the second

generation. Sampling and bootstrap weights were supplied to account for the complex

sampling and non-response rates, and are applied in the present study to produce

corrected standard errors.

Social integration was measured using the following survey items (identification

codes for each question are in parentheses):

Canadian identity (included in ID_Q100),

Canadian citizenship,

a sense of belonging in the larger society (AT_Q030, Q040, Q050),

life satisfaction (TS_Q010),

trust in people generally (TS_ Q020),

participation in voluntary activities (e.g. PC_Q060), and

voting in previous federal election (e.g. PC_Q110).

The study made use of subjective perceptions of experiences of discrimination and

vulnerability, including:

reported discrimination within past 5 years or since coming to Canada


17/49

15

(IS_Q100),

feelings of discomfort based on ethno-racial background, including language

and religion (IS_Q030), and

worry about the possibility of experiencing a hate crime due to ethno-racial

background (IS_Q230).

A previous analyses of the EDS examined the impact of inequalities on racial

minorities in Canada, and the impact of ethnic attachments and commitments on social

integration and attachments in the broader society (Reitz and Banerjee 2007; Reitz et al.

2009). This study found that racial minorities are slower to integrate than minorities of

European background, partly because of experiences of discrimination and inequality.

Although some indicators such as ‘sense of belonging’ are fairly positive for visible

minority immigrants, many are not, such as acquiring ‘Canadian’ identity, trust, and life

satisfaction. In any case, for those in Canada for longer periods and for the Canadian-

born second generation, the trend is for visible minorities to become integrated into

society more slowly compared to minorities of European origins. For most minority

groups (visible minorities and others) ties to minority communities weaken over time,

and minority groups become increasingly attached to the mainstream society. However,

although visible minorities retain ethnic affiliations longer than whites, these attachments

are not systematically associated with integration; rather some effects are positive, such

as on life satisfaction and sense of belonging, while others are negative, such as on trust

in others and acquisition of a ‘Canadian’ identity (Reitz et al. 2009, pp. 36-41).

Since most religious groups who are not either Christians or Jews are visible

minorities, and since religious attachments are closely linked to ethnic attachments, the


18/49

16

question arises as to whether these religious minorities also may be slower to integrate

into Canadian society. And if so, is this is a result of their status as members of a visible

minority? How is it related to their ethnic community attachments? To what extent is it a

result of religious affiliation and religious behaviour in itself? We are also interested in

determining whether there is anything distinctive about particular religious groups that

might be related to the content of their religious beliefs.

The close connection between ethno-racial background and religion in Canada is

shown in Table 1. Christians are primarily of European or white origins. The same is true

of Jews; about one-third of Canadian Jews describe themselves as whites of Jewish or

Israeli (ancestral) origin. Among the other religious groups, Muslims and Buddhists are

the most diverse in terms of specific origins. Among Buddhists, unlike in the US sample

of Wuthnow and Hackett where most were non-Asian, in the Canadian sample about half

are Chinese, nearly 30 per cent are Southeast Asian, and the rest are divided among other

origins. Muslims are divided into two major groups: about 38 per cent are South Asians

(including Pakistanis, Indians, Bangladeshis and Indians of East African background); 45

per cent are Arab and West Asian (with most self-classified as visible minorities but

some as ‘white’). Another 8 per cent are black, unlike the US sample in which over 35

percent of Muslims were black. Hindus and Sikhs are more homogeneous in terms of

origins; both groups are almost exclusively of South Asian origins. In the US sample, 29

percent of the Hindus were non-Asian.

[Table 1 about here]


19/49

17

Religion is closely connected to recent arrival in Canada, as Table 2 shows.

Among whites, most Christians are native-born in Canada, with about 1 in 10 being

immigrants arriving before 1991. Among visible minorities, all religious groups are more

recently arrived: 85 per cent are immigrants, and most of the rest are the children of

immigrants. Among the religious minorities, Muslims are somewhat more recently

arrived, about half arriving within 10 years prior to the survey. Hindus, Sikhs, and

Buddhists in Canada are also primarily immigrants.


Findings

Religion and disadvantage in Canada

Visible minorities, regardless of religious groups, experience disadvantage;

among whites there are greater differences by religion. Consistent with their membership

in visible minority groups, Muslims, Hindus, Sikhs, and Buddhists experience more

disadvantage both objectively in terms of household income and subjectively in terms of

reported discrimination and vulnerability (Table 3). Variations in income among the

groups appear to be a function of recent arrival in Canada and specific visible minority

origins. Among visible minorities, the lowest earnings are for Muslims, other Christians,

Protestants and Buddhists. The low earnings for visible minority ‘other Christians’ and

Protestants reflects the fact that blacks constitute large proportions of these two groups

(see Table 1), and blacks have the lowest incomes among the visible minority categories.


20/49

18


Perceptions of discrimination are even more clearly determined by visible

minority status rather than religious affiliation. Among visible minorities, there is little

variation by religion. The groups most likely to mention discrimination are Protestants

and other Christians. Among whites, the group with the highest proportion reporting

discrimination is Jewish; both white Jewish and Muslim respondents frequently report

vulnerability, in the sense of feeling uncomfortable or fearing attack.

White Muslims and Jews who report discrimination are more likely than other

white religious groups to attribute this discrimination to religion (results not shown).

Visible minority Muslims who report experiences of discrimination are also somewhat

more likely than other visible minorities to say that religion is the basis for the

discrimination. However, the proportion is low (only 11 percent), and the proportion is

nearly as high for Sikhs (8 per cent). For other visible minority religious groups the

proportion is even lower (between 1 and 3 per cent). Visible minority groups who report

discrimination rarely cite religion as the basis for that discrimination.

Interestingly, the regional differences in reports of discrimination and

vulnerability, especially the difference between Quebec and the rest of Canada, are small

and tend to favour Quebec (Table 4). That is, the religious minorities in Quebec are less

likely to report discrimination. Gender differences are small as well (results not shown).



21/49

19

Religion and social integration

Specific religious affiliation among visible minorities has relatively little impact

on social integration in Canada. Table 5 shows that the differences between visible

minorities and whites vary depending on the indicator examined. Visible minorities are

slightly less satisfied with life, are less likely to report a Canadian identity, and less often

vote or participate in volunteer activities. However, visible minorities are not

significantly less trusting, and they have a stronger sense of belonging. What is

noteworthy in Table 5 is that on most of these indicators, among visible minorities there

is relatively little variation among religious groups, and there are no systematic

differences. No group stands out.


To see the variations among visible minority religion groups, it is worth looking

at each column in Table 5 in turn. Among visible minorities, Protestants (half of whom

are black) are less trusting than Muslims, Hindus, Sikhs, and Buddhists; most trusting are

those with no religion at all. Muslims and Sikhs have high life satisfaction, while

Buddhists and those with no religion have less. Most of these religious groups have a

strong sense of belonging; those with no religion or a religion other than these major

groups have a lower sense of belonging. Recently arrived visible minorities are much less

likely to describe themselves as Canadian; this is even less likely for Hindus and Sikhs,

but other groups are similar to one another. Most visible minorities vote less than their


22/49

20

white counterparts. The variation is from a low of 63 to 65 per cent for Buddhists and

Muslims to a high of 78 per cent among Hindus and Sikhs. Finally, visible minorities are

less likely to engage in volunteer activity; least likely are Buddhists and Sikhs and those

with no religion; most likely are Protestants and Hindus; Muslims and Catholics are in

between.

An examination by region reveals some noteworthy differences in the relationship

between religious diversity and social integration, particularly between Quebec and the

rest of Canada (Table 6). For several indicators (trust, belonging, Canadian identity and

volunteering), and regardless of religious groups, whites in Quebec report lower levels of

integration than their counterparts in other provinces. For example, white Catholics are

far less likely to trust in Quebec (29 per cent) than in the rest of Canada (53 per cent).

White Muslims in Quebec (29 per cent) also report far lower levels of trust than their

counterparts in the rest of Canada (47 per cent). However, there are few systematic

differences in the social integration of visible minorities in Quebec compared to visible

minorities in other provinces, regardless of religious group. Visible minority Muslims in

Quebec and the rest of Canada report similar levels of integration on most measures, with

two exceptions. They are less likely to trust in Quebec (43 per cent) than in other

provinces (51 per cent), but are more likely to vote (77 per cent in Quebec versus 65 per

cent in the rest of Canada).


As Tables 7 and 8 show, when account is taken of visible minority status and


23/49

21

length of time in Canada or generation, there is virtually no effect of specific religious

affiliation on any of the seven indicators of social integration. Table 7 presents regression

coefficients for the impact of religious affiliation on social integration for immigrant

visible minorities, controlling for age and length of time in the country. The ‘Muslim’

category is the reference category. Only a minority of the coefficients (21 of 56, or 37.5

percent) are statistically significant, which indicates that most often religion does not

have a systematic effect on the social integration of these groups relative to Muslims. Of

the significant coefficients, most (17 of the 21) indicate that other groups are less

integrated than Muslims. Those who claim ‘no religion’ report lower levels of

satisfaction and belonging than Muslims. Catholics report lower levels of belonging, and

are less likely to trust or report a Canadian identity than Muslims. Protestants are also

less likely to trust or report Canadian citizenship, but are more likely than Muslims to

volunteer. ‘Other’ Christians report lower levels of satisfaction and belonging and are

less likely to become citizens. Similarly, Buddhists also report lower levels of satisfaction

and belonging than Muslims, but are more likely to report Canadian citizenship. Hindus

are less likely to report a Canadian identity, but are more likely to vote and volunteer.

Sikhs are less likely to report a Canadian identity, to trust or become Canadian citizens.

The only cases in which other religious groups are more integrated than Muslims are:

Buddhists are more likely to acquire citizenship, Hindus are more likely to vote, and

Protestants and Hindus are more likely to volunteer. Overall, Table 7 shows that

Muslims tend to be higher than the other religious groups on many of the measures of

social integration, and are significantly lower on only a very few.


24/49

22


Table 8 enables us to separate out the effect of specific visible minority origins on

these patterns. Because each religious group has a distinctive visible minority

composition, and because these specific visible minority groups have distinctive patterns

of social integration, it is useful to examine the impact of religion within key visible

minority groups. Table 8 focuses on South Asians, and on Arabs and West Asians. It

shows that few of the coefficients are statistically significant. Among South Asians, with

Muslims as the reference category, we find that Hindus are more slightly less likely to

feel that they belong, but more likely to volunteer. Both Hindus and Sikhs report lower

levels of Canadian identity than Muslims, but are more likely to vote. Sikhs also report

lower levels of trust than the Muslim reference group. Among Arabs and West Asians,

again where Muslims are the reference category, we find that they are not significantly

different from Christians on any of the indicators, though the trend is for them to be

perhaps more satisfied, with stronger Canadian identity, trust, and volunteering.

However, these results are not statistically significant.


Overall, it seems clear that religion, particularly Islam, is not a decisive factor in

affecting social integration when religious differences are examined among visible

minority groups. If anything, South Asian and Arab and West Asian Muslims report

somewhat higher levels of integration than co-ethnics in other religions. This supports


25/49

23

the conclusion that social integration of immigrants is affected more by visible minority

status than by religious affiliation.

Religiosity and social integration

If religious beliefs themselves affect the potential for social integration, one might

expect the strength of one’s religious conviction and the salience of religion in one’s life

to reflect such an affect. In the EDS interviews, respondents were asked about the

frequency of public and private religious devotions, and about the importance they

attached to religion in their lives. The results of these three indicators were combined into

an index of religiosity, from which it is possible to determine whether religiosity affects

social integration for any of these religious groups, both visible minorities and whites.

Table 9 presents the highly religious proportion of each group. Of those who

claim religious affiliation, there are some variations in the proportions that are highly

religious. Among whites and visible minorities, other Christians and Protestants are the

most religious. Among visible minorities, Muslims, Sikhs and Catholics also report high

levels of religiosity.


Table 10 presents simple correlations between religiosity and social integration

within religious groups separately for whites and visible minorities. Two patterns

emerge. First, the role of religion is similar to the impact of ethnic affiliation and

community involvement. As indicated above, a previous analysis showed that ethnic


26/49

24

affiliation has positive relations to life satisfaction, sense of belonging, and voting; it has

negative relations to Canadian identity and trust in others (Reitz et al. 2009). The same

results are achieved when religiosity is considered rather than ethnic attachment. Second,

the patterns hold for all religious groups. There is only one minor deviation: for most

religious groups, greater religiosity is associated with higher life satisfaction. This is not

the case for Muslims - religiosity and life satisfaction are not significantly related for this

group.


The most pervasive fact to emerge from the analysis is the lack of difference

between groups in the impact of religiosity on social integration.

Discussion and implications

In Canada, the Ethnic Diversity Survey data clearly show that the new religious

minorities – mainly of non-European origins – are slower to integrate into Canadian

society compared to immigrants of European primarily because of their racial minority

status. Moreover, the strength of religious commitments appear to have little impact on

the indicators of integration examined here, for any of the religious groups examined. If

religious beliefs in general or specific religious beliefs in particular (in groups such as

Muslims) impede social integration, one might expect a greater effect for the most


27/49

25

committed. We do not find such an effect. Of greater importance for the integration of

immigrants are visible minority status and inequality and the role of ethnic communities

generally for both visible minorities and whites. Their religious involvement affects

social integration mainly because it reflects ethnic attachment, and the effects are more or

less the same for all ethnic and religious groups. In short, the integration of these groups

is determined by ethno-racial characteristics, not specifically religious characteristics.

Although the racial composition of the new religious minorities is different in

Canada compared to the US, these Canadian findings are broadly similar to those of

Wuthnow and Hackett (2003) for the US. This leads to the speculation that the US

findings that religious minorities had lower levels of voting, stronger feelings of

alienation and less connection with community elites may have been a result of the racial

minority status of the religious groups, not their religious affiliation in itself.

The differences between Quebec and the rest of Canada in these patterns of

minority behaviour are not profound, and if anything seem to suggest that the religious

minorities are somewhat more effectively integrated in Quebec. In any case, if the

problems of integration of religious minorities relate to matters of inequality rather than

religious belief, it may be asked why the debate over religion and ‘reasonable

accommodation’ is so intense in Quebec, and why the concern about the integration of

Muslim minorities in Ontario has been expressed as strongly as it has. Of course, this

study has not evaluated the specific beliefs of any religious minority; rather, it has

focused on their apparent ability to blend into Canadian society and to feel a part of the

broader community. Based on the findings here, a debate based on the inability of certain

minority religious groups to accommodate themselves to the majority society is


28/49

26

inappropriate. Carens and Williams (1996) have argued that such discourses are rooted in

the dominant society’s own bias and hold minorities such as Muslims to different, often

stricter, standards. In fact, the debate over issues like ‘reasonable accommodation’ may

deflect attention away from the more significant issues of structural disadvantage and

inequity towards issues that are secondary or even irrelevant to the impact of

immigration. This implication is reinforced by the fact that patterns of integration and

perceptions of inter-group relations do not appear to differ greatly between Quebec and

the rest of Canada, while the controversy over ‘reasonable accommodation’ of religious

minorities seems far more heated in Quebec than elsewhere in Canada. This also

supports the conclusions of the Bouchard-Taylor commission that the media controversy

was to a significant extent media-generated.

There may be many reasons for the intensity of the media debate over Islam:

mounting fears of war and terrorism, reinforced by the ongoing problems in Iraq,

Afghanistan, and elsewhere; or fears among certain groups, such as women or French-

Canadians, that their struggle for recognition and equality will be set back by the arrival

of outsiders who tip the balance away from their concerns. While understandable, it is

important that fears be dealt with in a way that does not compound equity problems for

minority groups.

Public sensitivities, the ‘war on terror,’ the increase in the security state, and

debates such as those on ‘reasonable accommodation’ have affected the social integration

of Muslims in particular, but any such effects probably are not reflected in this study

conducted in 2002, and not at all in Wuthnow and Hackett’s 2000 US survey. What the


29/49

27

studies do show is that in the absence of the war on terror and related controversies,

Muslims look much like other religious minorities in terms of social relations. This raises

the question of whether a similar study repeated now would show similar results. We

suspect that differences would appear, and would relate to the greater feelings of

vulnerability and inequity that Muslims, and in some places, Jews, Sikhs and Hindus,

have experienced since the time of this study.


30/49

28

Notes

1 Specifically, the 2001 census shows 579,640 Muslims; 329,995 Jews; 300,345 Buddhists;

297,200 Hindus; and 278,410 Sikhs.

2Whereas Canadians were nearly as concerned about Islamic extremism in the world as

respondents in the US, Britain, France and the Netherlands (between 41 and 46 percent ‘very

concerned’ in each of these countries, and between 79 and 89 percent ‘somewhat concerned’ or

‘very concerned’), Canadians were less concerned about Islamic extremism in their own

country (only 22 percent ‘very concerned,’ compared to between 31 and 34 percent in the other

countries, and 56 percent ‘somewhat concerned’ or ‘very concerned’ compared to 70 to 76

percent in the other countries (Pew Global Attitudes Project 2005, p. 3).

3 The Toronto school board recently approved plans for an Afro-centric (Black focused) school

to open by September 2009. While special recognition on racial grounds appears palpable to

elected politicians, recognition on religious grounds is not.

4The term ‘Western’ here seems to refer to western Europe and North America, so that non-

Western religions would be those whose adherents mostly live in areas of the world other than

these places.

5The target population included those living in private households in the 10 Canadian

provinces. This target population did not include those living in collective dwellings, persons

living on Aboriginal reserves, persons of Aboriginal origin living off-reserve, or persons living

in Northern and remote areas. A separate post-censal survey was designed for Aboriginal

peoples, the Aboriginal Peoples’ Survey, conducted in 2001 and 2002. The survey was


31/49

29

administered via a 35 to 40 minute telephone interview, using Computer Assisted Telephone

Interviewing (CATI). Interviews were conducted in nine languages: English, French,

Cantonese, Mandarin, Italian, Portuguese, Punjabi, Spanish, and Vietnamese. The final EDS

sample of 41,666 respondents represented a response rate of approximately 73 per cent. In most

analyses the effective sample size is 39,473, the number of respondents for whom ethnic origins

are known. EDS respondents were chosen from among those who completed the 2001 long

census form, based on respondents’ answers to question about their ethnic origin, their place of

birth, and their parents’ place of birth. Using the national census as a sampling frame made it

more likely that the survey included individuals from many different ethnocultural

backgrounds, some of whom may otherwise have been difficult to locate. Data reported here

are based on sample weights to compensate for sampling disproportions, with bootstrap weights

used to assist in statistical assessment. The public file has a sample of 41,695, based on slightly

different selection criteria. See Statistics Canada, EDS Documentation for more details at:

http://www.statcan.ca/english/sdds/4508.htm.


32/49

30

REFERENCES

Abbas, Tahir

2005 Muslim Britain: Communities Under Pressure, New York: Zed Books.

Abedin, Syed Z., and Sardar, Ziauddin (Eds.)

1995 Muslim Minorities in The West, London: Grey Seal.

Abu-Laban, Baha

1995 ‘The Muslim Community Of Canada’, In Syed Z Abedin And Ziauddin Sardar (Eds),

Muslim Minorities in the West, London: Grey Seal, pp. 134-149.

Adams, Michael

2007 Unlikely Utopia: The Surprising Triumph Of Canadian Pluralism, Toronto: Viking

Canada.

Aubin, Benoit and Gatehouse, Jonathon

2007 Immigrants Need Rules? The Debate Rages On’, Maclean’s, 05 March 2007, Pp. 20-26

Baltzell, E. Digby

1964 The Protestant Establishment: Aristocracy and Caste in America. New Haven: Yale

University Press.

Banting, K, T.J. Courchene, and F.L. Seidle (Eds.)

2007 Belonging? Diversity, Recognition, and Shared Citizenship in Canada, Montreal, QC:

Institute For Research On Public Policy.

Beyer, Peter

2005 ‘Religious Identity And Educational Attainment Among Recent Immigrants To Canada:


33/49

31

Gender, Age, And 2nd

Generation’, Journal Of International Migration And Integration,

Vol. 6, No. 2, Pp. 177-199

Boyd, Marion

2007 ‘Religion-Based Alternative Dispute Resolution: A Challenge to Multiculturalism’, In K.

Banting, T.J. Courchene, and F.L. Seidle (Eds.), Belonging? Diversity, Recognition, and

Shared Citizenship in Canada, Montreal, QC: Institute For Research On Public Policy,

Pp. 465- 473

Bramadat, Paul and Seljak, David (Eds)

2005 Religion and Ethnicity in Canada, Toronto: Pearson Longman

Bujis, Frank J. and Rath, Jan

2006 Muslims in Europe: The State of Research (IMISCOE Working Paper),

http://users.fmg.uva.nl/jrath/downloads/@muslims_in_europe_imiscoe_2006.pdf

(Accessed 28 February 2008)

CBC (Canadian Broadcasting Corporation)

2007 ‘Canada’s Muslims, an International Comparison’,

http://www.cbc.ca/news/background/islam/muslim-survey.html (Accessed 28 February 2008)

Canada. Parliament. House of Commons. Special Committee on Participation of Visible

Minorities in Canadian Society.

1984. Equality Now! Participation of Visible Minorities in Canadian Society. Supply and

Services Canada.

Carens, Joseph and Williams Melissa

1996 ‘Muslim Minorities In Liberal Democracies: The Politics Of Misrecognition’, In R.

http://users.fmg.uva.nl/Jrath/Downloads/@Muslims_In_Europe_Imiscoe_2006.Pdfhttp://users.fmg.uva.nl/Jrath/Downloads/@Muslims_In_Europe_Imiscoe_2006.Pdfhttp://www.cbc.ca/News/Background/Islam/Muslim-Survey.Htmlhttp://www.cbc.ca/News/Background/Islam/Muslim-Survey.Htmlhttp://users.fmg.uva.nl/Jrath/Downloads/@Muslims_In_Europe_Imiscoe_2006.Pdf


34/49

32

Baubock, A. Heller, And Ar Zolberg (Eds) The Challenge of Diversity: Integration and

Pluralism in Societies of Immigration, Avebury: Aldershott, Pp. 157-186

Commission on British Muslims and Islamophbia

2004 Islamophobia: Issues, Challenges, And Action, Stoke on Trent, UK: Trentham Books.

de Wit, Thom Duyvene, and Koopmans, Ruud

2005 ‘The Integration of Ethnic Minorities Into Political Culture: The Netherlands, Germany,

and Great Britain Compared’, Acta Politica, Vol. 40, Pp. 50-73

Economist, The

2006a ‘The Plan to Behead the Prime Minister; The Toronto Terror Plot’, The Economist, Vol.

379, No. 8481, Pp. 33-34

2006b ‘One Nation or Many? Multiculturalism in Canada’, The Economist, Vol. 381, No. 8504,

Pp. 39-40

European Monitoring Center on Racism and Xenophobia

2006 The Impact of 7 July 2005 London Bomb Attacks on Muslim Communities in The EU,

Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of The European Communities

Fetzer, Joel S. and Soper, J. Christopher

2005 Muslims and the State in Britain, France, and Germany, New York: Cambridge

University Press.

Foner, Nancy, and Richard Alba

2008 ‘Immigrant Religion in the U.S. and Western Europe: Bridge or Barrier to Inclusion?’,

International Migration Review, Vol.42, No. 2, Pp. 360–92.

Halliday, Fred


35/49

33

2003 Islam and the Myth of Confrontation, New York: I.B. Tauris.

Helly, Denise

2004 ‘Are Muslims Discriminated Against in Canada Since September 2001?’, Canadian

Ethnic Studies, Vol. 36, No. 1, Pp. 24-47

Herberg, Will

1955 Protestant, Catholic, Jew: An Essay in American Religious Sociology, Garden City, Ny:

Doubleday and Co.

Herouxville, Town of

2007 The Standards. http://municipalite.herouxville.qc.ca/standards.pdf (Accessed 27 February

2008)

Hier, Sean P., and B. Singh Bolaria

2007 Race and Racism in 21st Century Canada: Continuity, Complexity and Change,

Peterborough, ON: Broadview Press.

Huntington, Samuel

1993 ‘The Clash of Civilizations?’, Foreign Affairs, Vol. 72, No. 3, Pp. 22-49.

James, Carl E.

1998 “Up to no good: Black on the Streets and Encountering Police,” in Racism & Social

Inequality in Canada; Concepts, Controversies & Strategies of Resistance, edited by Vic

Satzewich, Toronto: Thompson.

Joppke, Christian

2004 ‘The retreat from multiculturalism in the liberal state: theory and policy,’ British Journal

of Sociology vol. 55, no. 2, pp. 237-57.

http://municipalite.herouxville.qc.ca/Standards.Pdfhttp://www.thompsonbooks.com/55077100.htmlhttp://www.thompsonbooks.com/55077100.htmlhttp://www.thompsonbooks.com/55077100.htmlhttp://www.thompsonbooks.com/55077100.htmlhttp://www.thompsonbooks.com/55077100.htmlhttp://www.thompsonbooks.com/55077100.htmlhttp://municipalite.herouxville.qc.ca/Standards.Pdf


36/49

34

Joshi, Khyati Y.

2006 “The Racialization of Hinduism, Islam, and Sikhism in the United States,” Equity &

Excellence in Education, v. 39, n. 3 pp 211-226.

Khan, Zafar

2000 ‘Muslim Presence in Europe: The British Dimension, Identity, Integration and

Community Activism’, Current Sociology, Vol. 48, No. 1, Pp. 28-43

Khan, Shema

2007 ‘The Ontario Sharia Debate: Transformational Accommodation, Multiculturalism And

Muslim Identity’, In K. Banting, T. J. Courchene, and L. Seidle (Eds.), Belonging?

Diversity, Recognition, and Shared Citizenship in Canada, Montreal, QC: Institute for

Research on Public Policy, Pp. 475- 485

Model, Suzanne and Lin, Lang

2002 ‘The Cost of Not Being Christian: Hindus, Sikhs and Muslims in Britain and Canada’,

International Migration Review, Vol. 36, No. 4, Pp. 1061-1092

Modood, Tariq, Triandafyllidou, Anna and Zapata-Barrero, Ricard

2006 Multiculturalism, Muslims and Citizenship: A European Approach, New York:

Routledge.

Peach, Ceri

2006. ‘Muslims in the 2001 Census of England and Wales: Gender and Economic

Disadvantage’, Ethnic and Racial Studies, Vol. 29, No. 4, Pp. 629-655.

Pew Global Attitudes Project

2005 Islamic Extremism: Common Concern for Muslim and Western Publics. Washington,

http://eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/Home.portal?_nfpb=true&ERICExtSearch_SearchValue_0=%22Joshi+Khyati+Y.%22&ERICExtSearch_SearchType_0=au&_pageLabel=RecordDetails&objectId=0900019b80169c2a&accno=EJ740747&_nfls=falsehttp://eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/Home.portal?_nfpb=true&ERICExtSearch_SearchValue_0=%22Joshi+Khyati+Y.%22&ERICExtSearch_SearchType_0=au&_pageLabel=RecordDetails&objectId=0900019b80169c2a&accno=EJ740747&_nfls=false


37/49

35

DC: Pew Research Center.

Pffaf, Steven and Gill, Anthony J.

2006 ‘Will a Million Muslims March? Muslim Interest Organizations And Political Integration

In Europe’, Comparative Political Studies, Vol. 39, No. 7, Pp. 803-828

Putnam, Robert

2007 “E Pluribus Unum: Diversity and Community in the Twenty-first Century – The 2006

Johan Skytte Prize Lecture,” Scandinavian Political Studies, vol. 30., no. 2, pp. 137-74.

Qureshi, Emran and Sells, Michael

2003 The New Crusades: Constructing the Muslim Enemy, New York: Columbia University

Press.

Ramadan, Tariq

2007 ‘Religious Allegiance And Shared Citizenship’, In K. Banting, T. J. Courchene, and L.

Seidle (Eds.), Belonging? Diversity, Recognition, and Shared Citizenship In Canada,

Montreal, QC: Institute for Research on Public Policy

Reitz, Jeffrey G.

2001 ‘Immigrant Skill Utilization in the Canadian Labour Market: Implications of Human

Capital Research,’ Journal of International Migration and Integration, 2(3):347-378.

2007a Jeffrey G. Reitz, “Immigrant Employment Success in Canada, Part I: Individual and

Contextual Causes,” Journal of International Migration and Integration 8, 1 (2007) 11-

36.

2007b Jeffrey G. Reitz, “Immigrant Employment Success in Canada, Part II: Understanding the

Decline,” Journal of International Migration and Integration 8, 1 (2007) 37-62.


38/49

36

Reitz, J.G., and R. Banerjee

2007 ‘Racial Inequality, Social Cohesion, and Policy Issues in Canada.’ Pp. 489-545 in

Belonging? Diversity, Recognition and Shared Citizenship in Canada, edited by K.

Banting, T.J. Courchene, and F.L. Seidle. The Art of the State, vol. 3. Montreal: Institute

for Research on Public Policy.

Reitz, J.G., Raymond B., K.K. Dion, and K.L. Dion

2009 Multiculturalism and Social Cohesion: Potentials and Challenges of Diversity,

Amsterdam: Springer.

Seljak, David

2007 Religion and Multiculturalism in Canada: The Challenge of Religious Intolerance and

Discrimination, Waterloo, On: A Report Prepared for Canadian Heritage - Strategic

Policy, Research, and Planning [Obtained directly from author]

Shadid, W.A.

1991 ‘The Integration of Muslim Minorities in The Netherlands’, International Migration

Review, Vol. 25, No. 2, Pp. 355-374

Soysal, Yasemin

1997 ‘Changing Parameters of Citizenship and Claims-Making: Organized Islam in European

Public Spheres’, Theory and Society, Vol. 26, No. 4, Pp. 509-527

Statistics Canada

2008 ‘Ethnic Origin and Visible Minorities’ 2006 Census Release No. 7, April 2, 2008.

http://www12.statcan.ca/english/census06/release/ethnicorigin.cfm

Accessed September 12, 2008


39/49

37

Statistics Canada (Demography Division)

2005 Population Projections of Visible Minority Groups, Canada, Provinces, and Regions

(2001-2017), Ottawa, On: Minster Of Industry (Catalog 91-541-Xie).

http://www.statcan.ca/bsolc/english/bsolc?catno=91-541-x (Accessed 27 February 2008)

Strategic Counsel

2007 ‘The Race for Queen’s Park: Wave 2’, 17 September

http://www.thestrategiccounsel.com/our_news/polls/2007-09-17%20gmctv%20sep%2013-

16%20final2.pdf (Accessed 27 February 2008)

Stubbs, Jonathan K.

2003 ‘The Bottom Rung of America’s Race Ladder: After The September 11 Catastrophe are

American Muslims Becoming America’s New N….S?’, Journal of Law and Religion,

Vol. 19, No. 1, Pp. 115-151

Wuthnow, Robert and Hackett, Conrad

2003 ‘The Social Integration Of Practitioners of Non-Western Religions In The United States’,

Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, Vol. 42, No. 4, pp. 651-667

http://www.statcan.ca/bsolc/english/bsolc?catno=91-541-xhttp://www.thestrategiccounsel.com/Our_News/Polls/2007-09-17%20gmctv%20sep%2013-16%20final2.Pdfhttp://www.thestrategiccounsel.com/Our_News/Polls/2007-09-17%20gmctv%20sep%2013-16%20final2.Pdfhttp://www.thestrategiccounsel.com/Our_News/Polls/2007-09-17%20gmctv%20sep%2013-16%20final2.Pdfhttp://www.thestrategiccounsel.com/Our_News/Polls/2007-09-17%20gmctv%20sep%2013-16%20final2.Pdfhttp://www.statcan.ca/bsolc/english/bsolc?catno=91-541-x


40/49

38

Table 1: Percent in each ethnic origin group, by race and religionNo

ReligionCatholic

Prot-estant

OtherChristian

Muslim Jewish Buddhist Hindu SikhOther

Religion

Whites

Canadian 6.1 4.2 6.3 4.0 - 5.1 - - - -

French 8.8 38.5 3.1 11.4 - - - - - - Anglo 35.1 15.2 55.1 20.9 - 4.6 - - - 33.9

Northern and WesternEuropean

13.8 5.8 17.6 13.2 - - - - --

Russian and EasternEuropean

7.7 7.3 5.2 17.4 - 33.9 - - - -

Southern European 0.4 0.6 - - - - - - - -

Jewish and Israeli - - - - - 34.6 - - - -

Arab/West Asian/North African

0.4 0.4 - 2.2 9.4 - - - - -

Latin, Central and South American

- 0.2 - - - - - - - -

Greek - - - 6.9 - - - - - -Italian 1.9 7.8 0.6 1.3 - - - - - -

Portuguese - 2.4 - - - - - - - -Other European 1.1 0.5 0.4 - - 6.7 - - - -

Total Non-VisibleMinority

82.2 92.4 93.4 84.2 14.6 97.8 - - - 62.8

Visible Minorities

Chinese 12.0 1.1 1.4 4.7 - - 45.2 - - -

South Asian 0.8 0.6 0.4 1.3 37.6 - 2.9 88.6 100 -

Black 1.5 1.2 3.1 3.4 7.8 - - - - -

Filipino - 2.2 0.3 0.6 - - - - - -Latin American 0.5 1.3 0.3 0.9 - - - - - -

Southeast Asian 0.8 0.3 - 0.2 - - 28.0 - - -

Arab and West Asian 0.5 0.3 - 1.9 35.6 - - - - -

Korean - 0.2 0.3 1.5 - - - - - -

Japanese 0.7 - 0.2 0.4 - - 4.1 - - -

Visible minority, n.i.e. 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.6 2.5 - - 11.4 - -

Multiple Visible Minority 0.3 0.2 - 0.2 - - - - - -

Total Visible Minority 17.8 7.6 6.6 15.8 85.4 2.2 83.8 100 100 37.2

Total N 7850 14630 11700 3410 840 680 570 530 650 130

Note: All percentages are weighted using population weights created by Statistics Canada.

However, column N’s are unweighted and have been rounded. Some cells have been omitted

because of cell sizes less than 30.


41/49

39

Table 2: Percent in each immigrant cohort and generation, by race and religion

NoReligion

Catholic Protestant OtherChristian

Muslim Jewish Buddhist Hindu Sikh T

Whites

Recent 2 1.1 0.8 8.5 53.9 7.3 Immigrants

Earlier 11 12 11.3 15.4 34.5 32.3

Second Generation 22.3 13.1 22.2 20.8 11.6 33.6

Third Generation 64.7 73.9 65.7 55.3 * 26.8 6

Total 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 1

N 5800 12670 10440 2580 130 670 3

Visible Minorities

Recent 40.4 30.3 20.3 37 48.7 30.1 38.8 40.5 Immigrants

Earlier 40.4 55.5 57.9 41.8 41.7 59.7 50.2 45.4

Second Generation 16.4 12.9 15.7 19.2 9.7 9.7 10.9 14.1

Third Generation 2.8 - 6.1 - * - - -

Total 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

1

N 2040 1960 1250 830 700 510 530 650 8

Note: All percentages are weighted using population weights created by Statistics Canada. Row

N’s are unweighted and have been rounded. Some cells have been omitted because of cell sizes

less than 30.

* Second and third generation Muslims have been merged because of insufficient cell sizes.


42/49

40

Table 3: Objective and reported inequality by race and religion

IE HH Income Reported Reported N

Relative to CMA Discrimination Vulnerability

(mean) (%) (%)

Whites

No Religion $3,036 11.7 13.8 5800Catholic $214 9.2 17.1 12670

Protestant $1,977 9.4 14.7 10440

Other Christian -$206 14.4 18.0 2580

Muslim -$17,690 10.6 28.1 130

Jewish $14,004 22.9 35.0 670

Total $1,237 10.2 16.2 32290

Visible Minorities

No Religion -$6,669 35.9 34.7 2040

Catholic -$5,099 36.7 39.1 1960

Protestant -$8,757 38.6 39.9 1250

Other Christian -$10,061 40.6 33.6 830

Muslim -$15,320 34.1 38.0 700

Buddhist -$8,273 32.4 35.1 510

Hindu -$4,886 36.0 47.0 530

Sikh -$6,646 27.3 32.9 650

Total -$7,684 35.9 37.3 8470

Note: All percentages are weighted using population weights created by Statistics Canada.

Row N’s are unweighted and have been rounded. Within racial groups, only religious groups

with sufficient cell sizes are included in the table. Statistical tests of significance of

between-group differences are available from the authors.


43/49

41

Table 4: Percent reported inequality by race and religion, for Quebec and the rest

of Canada

Quebec Rest of Canada

Whites Discrimination Vulnerability Discrimination Vulnerability

% % N % % N

No Religion 17.8 20.7 520 11.0* 13.0* 5290

Catholic 6.8 19.2 4570 11.6* 15.1* 8110

Protestant 21.9 17.6 300 9.1* 14.6 10140

Other Christian 15.3 22.5 380 14.2 16.9 2210

Muslim - - - 11.2 32.2 100

Jewish 25.4 36.5 180 22.1 34.5 490

Total Whites 8.7 19.6 6020 10.8 14.9* 26640

Visible MinoritiesNo Religion 35.7 32.8 160 35.9 34.9 1890

Catholic 28.5 34.7 370 38.6* 40.1 1590

Protestant 38.9 38.7 140 38.6 40.0 1120

Other Christian 35.3 17.8 90 41.3 35.6 740

Muslim 24.4 27.4 90 36.0 40.0 620

Buddhist 24.6 36.3 70 33.6 34.9 440

Hindu - - - 36.0 46.6 500

Sikh - - - 27.5 33.4 640

Total Visible Minorities 30.7 33.3 970 36.6* 37.8 7650

Note: Percentages are weighted using population weights created by Statistics

Canada. Row N’s are unweighted and have been rounded; White Muslims, as well as

visible minority Hindus and Sikhs in Quebec are omitted due to cell sizes less than

30. * significant chi square test of independence.


44/49

42

Table 5: Percent high on seven indicators of social integration into Canadian society, by race

and religion

Indicator of Social Integration

Trust Satisfaction Belonging CanadianIdentity

Citizen-ship

Voted inFed.

Electiona

Volun-teering

N

Whites

No Religion 55.4 38.7 44.2 74.1 97.0 71.4 30.4 5800

Catholic 41.0 49.2 55.1 56.6 97.6 83.0 30.0 12670

Protestant 58.6 49.4 60.8 71.3 97.8 82.3 41.3 10440

Other Christian 56.1 44.2 51.9 63.6 94.8 77.1 33.6 2580

Muslim 39.8 36.5 66.2 32.1 70.2 76.3 15.5 130

Jewish 56.4 42.5 47.7 49.6 93.6 84.9 38.8 670

Total 49.9 47.2 54.8 64.3 97.3 80.6 33.8 32290

Visible Minorities

No Religion 56.5 29.9 47.2 39.4 79.7 62.6 19.7 2040

Catholic 43.9 46.6 62.7 29.7 80.7 72.1 27.4 1960

Protestant 39.5 46.9 63.9 36.5 83.7 71.8 33.9 1250

Other Christian 48.3 35.4 58.7 40.4 75.7 68.0 32.2 830

Muslim 51.9 49.3 67.1 33.1 73.6 65.3 25.0 700

Buddhist 50.5 34.4 48.1 36.1 89.0 62.8 21.9 510

Hindu 47.8 47.6 63.7 25.2 73.9 77.8 36.1 530

Sikh 43.6 52.1 66.1 22.5 68.5 78.5 21.4 650Total 47.9 41.7 58.6 33.6 79.0 69.1 26.6 8470

Note: Percentages are weighted using population weights created by Statistics Canada.

Row N’s are unweighted and have been rounded.aFor this indicator, the sample size is

reduced since only those who were eligible to vote in the last federal election (over the age

of 20 at the time of the survey) are included.


45/49


46/49

44

Table 7: Regression effect of religion on seven indicators of social integration, for visible minori

controlling for time-related factors

OLS Regressiona Logistic Regressionb

Coefficient Estimate Odds Ratio

Satisfaction Belonging

Canadian

Identity Trust Citizenship Vot

Muslim (reference)

No Religion-0.379*** -0.550*** 1.13 1.2 1.04 0.7

Catholic-0.013 -0.175*** 0.66*** 0.69*** 0.78 1.

Protestant-0.099 -0.126 0.73 0.53*** 0.53*** 0.9

Other Christian-0.275*** -0.164** 1.10 0.79 0.67** 1.4

Buddhist-0.314*** -0.612*** 0.97 0.92 1.76** 0.7

Hindu-0.057 -0.088 0.57*** 0.84 0.75 2.01

Sikh0.018 0.138 0.50*** 0.70** 0.50*** 1.7

Other religion -0.405 -0.748** 0.48 1.03 1.86 1.4

N 4510 4150 4470 4370 4700 32

Note: a OLS regression is applied because the dependent variables are z-scores and normally distributed b All variable

coded 0/1; for logistic regressions, odds ratios (OR) are shown to ease interpretability. Odds ratios are calculated as e

regression coefficient. An OR of less than 1 indicates a negative relationship with integration, while an OR of greater

relationship with integration; controlling for years since immigration.c Includes only those who were eligible to vote in the last federal election (over the age of 20 at the time of the survey)

Significance: *** p


47/49

Table 8: Regression effect of religion on seven indicators of social integration, for immigrants within sele

groups, controlling for time-related factorsOLS Regression Logistic Regression

Coefficient Estimate Odds Ratio

Satisfaction BelongingCanadianIdentity

Trust Citizenship Votinga

South Asian

Hindu-0.066 -0.187* 0.56** 0.83 1.08 2.17**

Sikh0.037 0.080 0.48*** 0.62** 0.71 2.00*

Muslim (reference)

N 1071 961 1074 1033 1140 719

West Asian and Arab

Catholic 0.080 -0.321 0.87 0.43 1.25 1.90

Other Christian -0.478 0.185 0.62 0.63 1.01 0.89

Muslim (reference)

N 323 299 310 320 335 217

Note: a Includes only those who were eligible to vote in the last federal election (over the age of 20 at the time of the survey). S p


48/49

46

Table 9: Per cent very religious, by race and religion

Whites Percent N No Religion -- 5800Catholic 14.8 12670

Protestant 18.1 10440

Other Christian 24.2 2580Muslim 8.1 130

Jewish 11.7 670

Total Whites 14.0 32290

Visible MinoritiesNo Religion -- 2040

Catholic 32.0 1960Protestant 46.2 1250

Other Christian 37.1 830Muslim 31.3 700

Buddhist 7.8 510

Hindu 17.8 530Sikh 31.4 650

Total VM 24.5 8470

Note: Percentages are weighted using population weights created by Statistics

Canada. Row N’s are unweighted and have been rounded.


49/49

Table 10: Correlation between religiosity and seven indicators of social integration, by

race and religion

TrustSatisfactio

nBelonging

'Canadian'Identity

Citizen-shipa

Voted inFed.

Election

Volunteer-ing N

WhitesNo Religion -0.002 -0.012 0.021 0.024 -0.013 0.016 0.020 5800

Catholic -0.001 0.076*** 0.282*** 0.057*** -0.028 0.137*** 0.141*** 12670

Protestant 0.014 0.101*** 0.151*** -0.059*** 0.058** 0.045*** 0.138*** 10440

Other Christian 0.056*** 0.060*** 0.151*** 0.105*** 0.103*** 0.119*** 0.148*** 2580

Muslim -0.118 0.128 0.127 -0.150* 0.021 0.324*** 0.052*** 130

Jewish 0.001 0.157*** 0.195*** -0.071* 0.096 -0.047 0.301*** 670

Total -0.016*** 0.106*** 0.229*** -0.038*** -0.010* 0.123*** 0.124*** 32290

Visible Minorities No Religion -0.064*** 0.014 0.031 0.013 0.004 0.047* -0.028 2040

Catholic 0.039* 0.108*** 0.200*** -0.085*** -0.114*** 0.115*** 0.129*** 1960

Protestant -0.113*** 0.077*** 0.110*** -0.123*** -0.119*** -0.039 0.143*** 1250

Other Christian 0.060* 0.058 0.119*** -0.045 -0.121*** 0.018 0.161*** 830

Muslim -0.034 0.013 -0.056 -0.111*** 0.000** 0.100** 0.217*** 700

Buddhist 0.088* 0.187 0.106 0.047 0.005 0.044 0.183*** 510

Hindu -0.068 0.218*** 0.323*** -0.163*** 0.063 -0.005 0.215*** 530

Sikh -0.039 0.066 0.133*** -0.145*** -0.060 -0.015 0.036 650Total -0.083*** 0.135*** 0.204*** -0.102*** -0.057*** 0.092*** 0.156*** 8470

a. Immigrants only; Significance: *** p

Documents

Race, Religion, And the Social Integration of Canada