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. jefffrey.reitz@utoronto.ca

Race, Religion, and the Social Integration of

New Immigrant Minorities in Canada

ABSTRACT:

The social integration of Canadas 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 Canadas 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.

Race, Religion, and the Social Integration of

New Immigrant Minorities in Canada

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

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 Grard Bouchard and Charles Taylor (2008) reported on
issues of what is reasonable accommodation of cultural minorities in the province,
2

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 Canadas Ethnic Diversity Survey, based on
interviews with a stratified sample of over 40,000 Canadians both immigrant and nativeborn. 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
3

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 Canadas 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
4

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
5

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 Huntingtons (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
6

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 Hrouxville. 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 (Hrouxville 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 Grard Bouchard and Charles Taylor, conducted hearings
around the province and concluded that the issue had been blown out of proportion by the
7

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?
8

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
9

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
10

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 Herbergs 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 crossnational 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
11

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 Canadas 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
12

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

13

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

14

(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 Canadianborn 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
15

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]

16

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.

[Table 2 about here]

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.
17

[Table 3 about here]

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).

[Table 4 about here]

18

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.

[Table 5 about here]

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
19

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).

[Table 6 about here]

As Tables 7 and 8 show, when account is taken of visible minority status and
20

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.

21

[Table 7 about here]

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.

[Table 8 about here]

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
22

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 ones religious conviction and the salience of religion in ones 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 9 about here]

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
23

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.

[Table 10 about here]

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
24

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
25

inappropriate. Carens and Williams (1996) have argued that such discourses are rooted in
the dominant societys 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 FrenchCanadians, 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 Hacketts 2000 US survey. What the
26

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.

27

Notes

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

297,200 Hindus; and 278,410 Sikhs.

2

Whereas 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.
4

The 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.
5

The 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

28

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.

29

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, Macleans, 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:

30

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

Canadas 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.

31

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. 36092.

Halliday, Fred

32

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.
33

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,

34

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) 1136.
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.
35

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

36

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 Queens Park: Wave 2, 17 September

http://www.thestrategiccounsel.com/our_news/polls/2007-09-17%20gmctv%20sep%201316%20final2.pdf (Accessed 27 February 2008)

Stubbs, Jonathan K.
2003

The Bottom Rung of Americas Race Ladder: After The September 11 Catastrophe are
American Muslims Becoming Americas 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

37

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

No
Religion

Catholic

Protestant

Other
Christian

Muslim

Jewish

Buddhist

Hindu

Sikh

6.1
8.8
35.1

4.2
38.5
15.2

6.3
3.1
55.1

4.0
11.4
20.9

5.1
4.6

13.8

5.8

17.6

13.2

7.7

7.3

5.2

17.4

33.9

0.4
-

0.6
-

34.6

0.4

0.4

2.2

9.4

0.2

1.9
1.1

7.8
2.4
0.5

0.6
0.4

6.9
1.3
-

6.7

82.2

92.4

93.4

84.2

14.6

97.8

62.8

Latin American
Southeast Asian
Arab and West Asian
Korean
Japanese

12.0
0.8
1.5
0.5
0.8
0.5
0.7

1.1
0.6
1.2
2.2
1.3
0.3
0.3
0.2
-

1.4
0.4
3.1
0.3
0.3
0.3
0.2

4.7
1.3
3.4
0.6
0.9
0.2
1.9
1.5
0.4

37.6
7.8
35.6
-

45.2
2.9
28.0
4.1

88.6
-

100
-

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

Whites
Canadian
French
Anglo
Northern and Western
European
Russian and Eastern
European
Southern European
Jewish and Israeli
Arab/West Asian/North
African
Latin, Central and South
American
Greek
Italian
Portuguese
Other European
Total Non-Visible
Minority
Visible Minorities
Chinese
South Asian
Black
Filipino

Note: All percentages are weighted using population weights created by Statistics Canada.
However, column Ns are unweighted and have been rounded. Some cells have been omitted
because of cell sizes less than 30.

38

Other
Religion

33.9
-

Table 2: Percent in each immigrant cohort and generation, by race and religion
No
Religion

Catholic

Protestant

Other
Christian

Muslim

Jewish

Recent
Earlier
Second Generation
Third Generation
Total
N

2
11
22.3
64.7
100.0
5800

1.1
12
13.1
73.9
100.0
12670

0.8
11.3
22.2
65.7
100.0
10440

8.5
15.4
20.8
55.3
100.0
2580

53.9
34.5
11.6
*
100.0
130

7.3
32.3
33.6
26.8
100.0
670

Visible Minorities
Immigrants Recent
Earlier
Second Generation
Third Generation
Total

40.4
40.4
16.4
2.8
100.0

30.3
55.5
12.9
100.0

20.3
57.9
15.7
6.1
100.0

37
41.8
19.2
100.0

48.7
41.7
9.7
*
100.0

30.1
59.7
9.7
100.0

38.8
50.2
10.9
100.0

2040

1960

1250

830

700

510

530

Whites
Immigrants

Buddhist

Hindu

Total

1.9
12.2
18.1
67.8
100.0
32290

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

39

Sikh

40.5
45.4
14.1
100.
0
650

35
49
14
2
100.0
8470

Table 3: Objective and reported inequality by race and religion

IE HH Income
Reported
Reported
Relative to CMA Discrimination Vulnerability
(mean)
(%)
(%)

Whites
No Religion

$3,036

11.7

13.8

5800

$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

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

Catholic

Visible Minorities

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

40

Table 4: Percent reported inequality by race and religion, for Quebec and the rest
of Canada
Quebec
Whites
No Religion
Catholic
Protestant
Other Christian
Muslim
Jewish
Total Whites
Visible Minorities
No Religion
Catholic
Protestant
Other Christian
Muslim
Buddhist
Hindu
Sikh
Total Visible Minorities

Rest of Canada

Discrimination Vulnerability

Discrimination Vulnerability

%
17.8
6.8
21.9
15.3
25.4
8.7

%
20.7
19.2
17.6
22.5
36.5
19.6

N
520
4570
300
380
180

35.7
28.5
38.9
35.3
24.4
24.6
-

32.8
34.7
38.7
17.8
27.4
36.3
-

160
370
140
90
90
70
-

30.7

33.3

970

6020

%
11.0*
11.6*
9.1*
14.2
11.2
22.1
10.8

%
13.0*
15.1*
14.6
16.9
32.2
34.5
14.9*

N
5290
8110
10140
2210
100
490

35.9
38.6*
38.6
41.3
36.0
33.6
36.0
27.5
36.6*

34.9
40.1
40.0
35.6
40.0
34.9
46.6
33.4

1890
1590
1120
740
620
440
500
640

37.8

7650

Note: Percentages are weighted using population weights created by Statistics

Canada. Row Ns 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.

41

26640

Table 5: Percent high on seven indicators of social integration into Canadian society, by race
and religion
Indicator of Social Integration
Trust

Satisfaction Belonging

Canadian Citizen- Voted in

Identity
ship
Fed.
Electiona

Volunteering

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

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

650

Total

47.9

41.7

58.6

33.6

79.0

69.1

26.6

8470

Visible Minorities

Note: Percentages are weighted using population weights created by Statistics Canada.
Row Ns are unweighted and have been rounded. a For 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.

42

Table 6: Percent high on seven indicators of social integration into Canadian society, by race and religion
in Quebec and the rest of Canada (ROC)
Indicator of Social Integration
Trust

Satisfaction

'Canadian'
Identity

Belonging

Citizenship

Voted in Fed.
a
Elect.

Volunteering

Quebec

ROC

Quebec

ROC

Quebec

ROC

Quebec

ROC

Quebec

ROC

Quebec

ROC

Quebec

ROC

Whites
No Religion
Catholic
Protestant
Other Christian
Muslim
Jewish
Total

46.9
29.0
48.6
38.9
46.9
31.3

56.3
52.7
58.9
60.4
46.8
59.7
56.6

47.4
51.4
47.0
46.3
45.4
50.7

37.6
47.2
49.5
43.6
34.7
41.4
45.9

24.2
49.1
46.4
41.9
47.5
47.0

46.5
60.9
61.2
54.4
70.1
47.8
57.5

35.3
49.1
66.1
39.7
47.0
48.2

78.5
63.7
71.4
69.4
31.3
50.5
69.8

96.5
99.5
95.2
96.2
93.7
98.8

97.1
95.9
97.9
94.5
70.8
93.6
96.7

79.4
86.0
90.7
83.0
87.8
85.6

72.6
82.4
83.0
77.6
79.3
87.7
80.6

18.8
24.1
32.8
18.5
31.1
23.8

31.7
35.6
41.5
37.3
22.0
41.5
37.4

Visible Minorities
No Religion
Catholic
Protestant
Other Christian
Muslim
Buddhist
Hindu
Sikh
Total

40.4
38.5
23.9
37.3
53.7
57.2
41.5

57.9
45.1
41.9
49.8
51.5
49.5
46.5
43.1
48.8

32.7
46.9
47.6
40.1
42.9
38.7
43.2

29.6
46.5
46.8
34.8
50.5
33.8
47.9
51.8
41.5

42.1
58.2
56.8
58.8
66.9
54.6
56.5

47.6
63.8
64.9
58.7
67.2
47.1
64.1
65.9
58.9

32.8
29.2
28.1
51.1
32.9
21.5
30.5

39.9
29.8
37.6
38.9
33.1
38.3
25.6
23.1
34.0

83.8
81.0
83.5
83.3
72.2
98.0
80.6

79.4
80.6
83.7
74.7
73.8
87.6
74.4
69.9
78.7

60.9
89.7
84.3
61.7
76.6
70.0
78.6

65.0
70.0
71.0
73.4
64.7
63.1
78.8
80.2

18.3
19.3
32.4
22.4
22.1
23.1
22.4

19.8
29.3
34.1
33.5
25.5
21.8
36.0
21.9
27.2

Note: In Quebec, unweighted, rounded Ns are as follows: No religion whites-520; Catholic whites-4570; Protestant whites-300; other Christian whites-380;
Jewish whites-180; No religion visible minorities-160; Catholic visible minorities-370; Protestant visible minorities-140; other Christian visible minorities90; Muslim visible minorities-90; Buddhist visible minorities-70. In the rest of Canada, unweighted, rounded Ns are as follows: No religion whites-5290;
Catholic whites-8110; Protestant whites-10140; other Christian whites-2210; Muslim whites-100; Jewish whites-490; No religion visible minorities-1890;
Catholic visible minorities-1590; Protestant visible minorities-1120; other Christian visible minorities-740; Muslim visible minorities-620; Buddhist visible
a
minorities-440; Hindu-500; Sikh-640. Muslim whites and Hindu and Sikh visible minorities in Quebec are omitted because of insufficient cell sizes. For
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.

43

Table 7: Regression effect of religion on seven indicators of social integration, for visible minority immigrants,
controlling for time-related factors
OLS Regressiona

Logistic Regressionb

Coefficient Estimate

Odds Ratio

Satisfaction

Belonging

Canadian
Identity

Trust

Citizenship

Votingc

Volunteering

-0.379***

-0.550***

1.13

1.2

1.04

0.79

0.7

-0.013

-0.175***

0.66***

0.69***

0.78

1.2

1.09

-0.099

-0.126

0.73

0.53***

0.53***

0.92

1.44**

-0.275***

-0.164**

1.10

0.79

0.67**

1.42

1.35

-0.314***

-0.612***

0.97

0.92

1.76**

0.77

0.86

-0.057

-0.088

0.57***

0.84

0.75

2.01***

1.87***

0.018

0.138

0.50***

0.70**

0.50***

1.79

0.77

-0.405

-0.748**

0.48

1.03

1.86

1.44

1.2

4510

4150

4470

4370

4700

3230

4610

Muslim (reference)
No Religion
Catholic
Protestant
Other Christian
Buddhist
Hindu
Sikh
Other religion
N
a

Note: OLS regression is applied because the dependent variables are z-scores and normally distributed All variables in logistic regression are
coded 0/1; for logistic regressions, odds ratios (OR) are shown to ease interpretability. Odds ratios are calculated as exp(b), where b is the logistic
regression coefficient. An OR of less than 1 indicates a negative relationship with integration, while an OR of greater than 1 indicates a positive
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<.01; ** p<.05; * p<.10

44

Table 8: Regression effect of religion on seven indicators of social integration, for immigrants within selected visible minority
groups, controlling for time-related factors
OLS Regression

Logistic Regression

Coefficient Estimate

Odds Ratio

Satisfaction

Belonging

Canadian
Identity

Trust

Citizenship

Votinga

Volunteering

-0.066

-0.187*

0.56**

0.83

1.08

2.17**

1.67**

0.037

0.080

0.48***

0.62**

0.71

2.00*

0.66

1071

961

1074

1033

1140

719

1104

Catholic

0.080

-0.321

0.87

0.43

1.25

1.90

0.70

Other Christian

-0.478

0.185

0.62

0.63

1.01

0.89

0.37

323

299

310

320

335

217

328

South Asian
Hindu
Sikh
Muslim (reference)
N
West Asian and Arab

Muslim (reference)
N
a

Note: 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<.01; ** p<.05; * p<.10; for logistic regressions, odds ratios (OR) are shown to ease interpretability. Odds ratios are calculated as exp(b), where b
is the logistic regression coefficient. An OR of less than 1 indicates a negative relationship with integration, while an OR of greater than 1 indicates
a positive relationship with integration; controlling for years since immigration.

45

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

Whites
No Religion
Catholic
Protestant
Other Christian
Muslim
Jewish
Total Whites
Visible Minorities
No Religion
Catholic
Protestant
Other Christian
Muslim
Buddhist
Hindu
Sikh
Total VM

Percent
-14.8
18.1
24.2
8.1
11.7
14.0

N
5800
12670
10440
2580
130
670
32290

-32.0
46.2
37.1
31.3
7.8
17.8
31.4
24.5

2040
1960
1250
830
700
510
530
650
8470

Note: Percentages are weighted using population weights created by Statistics

Canada. Row Ns are unweighted and have been rounded.

46

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

Satisfactio
'Canadian'
Belonging
n
Identity

Citizenshipa

Voted in
Fed.
Election

Volunteering

Whites
No 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

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

-0.016***

0.106***

0.229***

-0.038***

-0.010*

0.123***

0.124***

32290

-0.064***

0.014

0.031

0.013

0.004

0.047*

-0.028

2040

0.039*

0.108***

0.200***

-0.085***

-0.114***

0.115***

0.129***

1960

-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

650

Total

-0.083***

0.135***

0.204***

-0.102***

-0.057***

0.092***

0.156***

8470

Other Christian

Total
Visible Minorities
No Religion
Catholic
Protestant

a.

Immigrants only; Significance: *** p<.01; ** p<.05; * p<.10

Note: Correlations are weighted using population weights created by Statistics

Canada. Row Ns are unweighted and have been rounded. a For this indicator, the
sample size is reduced since only immigrants are included; b For 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. Significance: ***
p<.01; ** p<.05; * p<.10

47