Voies vers la prospérité: Atlantique

Participants at the Canadian Political Science Association Conference, held in May at Wilfrid Laurier University in Waterloo, heard the results of a study examining the perceptions of community leaders with regard to immigration and diversity.

As the number of immigrants settling outside the Greater Toronto Area grows, it is increasingly important to understand how community leaders and the broader public in small and mid-sized communities feel about international migration. Equally, it is essential to understand the capacity of smaller communities to meet newcomer needs. WCI researchers Livianna Tossutti and Victoria Esses have been examining these issues in a year-long study of how opinion leader perceive immigration and cultural diversity in fifteen Ontario municipalities. The study, funded by CIC Ontario, looked at Barrie, Brantford, Durham Region, Guelph, Hamilton, Kingston, London, North Bay, Ottawa, Peterborough, St. Catharines-Niagara, Sudbury, Thunder Bay, Waterloo, and Windsor.

In each community, Donna Dasko of the Environics Research Group interviewed ten influential representatives, half from government and half from non-governmental sectors. The interviews explored perceptions of local government interest in immigration and how community leaders view immigration’s contribution to local economic growth, social/cultural and political/civic life, and civic identity.  Interviewees were also asked for their opinions of the advantages and disadvantages of immigration, whether the broader local public would support more immigration, and whether their communities welcomed newcomers and minorities. The interviews concluded by seeking suggestions for how to create meaningful employment for newcomers and how to make their communities more welcoming.

Strikingly, substantial inter-city differences were found in perceived levels of community interest in immigration, in the quality of welcome accorded visible minorities, and in local capacity to serve refugees.   Also noteworthy was the contrast in many communities between enthusiasm for immigration at the government and community leader level and perceived ambivalence or disinterest on the part of the broader public.

As expected, a strong majority (71 percent) of respondents felt that local government was interested in immigration for its potential economic contribution.  More surprising, was the perception among interviewees (87 percent) that community leaders saw immigration as contributing to the area’s social/cultural life, through such benefits as improved food and entertainment choices for consumers and increased intercultural understanding.

Results were less positive for intangible factors.  A plurality (48 percent) opined that community leaders would not see immigration as contributing to the area’s political and civic life.   The limited impact of small immigrant numbers and the perception that community leaders did not prioritize the political and civic participation of newcomers and minorities, drove these responses.  Barely half (53 percent) felt that community leaders would agree that immigration and diversity contributed to the community’s identity.

When asked about the disadvantages of immigration, the most common responses cited a lack of community resources and infrastructure to help newcomers; negative community attitudes about immigration; and fears that immigrants might compete for jobs with vulnerable resident populations. Understandably, the main strategies advanced for enhancing receptivity centred on better community resources/infrastructure and political-civic initiatives.  Proposals to help newcomers find work generally placed the onus on government rather than business or the public at large.

Roughly fifty percent of interviewees described community interest in immigration as “mixed”, a reflection of mixed opinions about benefits and costs. Further, just 49 percent felt that their communities were welcoming to visible minorities, with responses varying substantially between cities. Socio-demographic factors played a role. Younger, university-educated, urban and mobile residents were seen as having more favourable views than older, rural and long-established residents with less formal education.

Despite perceptions that the broader public was less enthusiastic than community leaders about immigration and diversity, strong majorities in most communities felt that immigrants would be warmly-received.  This was most frequently attributed to positive community attitudes and civic resources.