Search

In this paper I critically discuss Helmes‐Hayes and Milne's institutional perspective, as well as Neil McLaughlin's emphasis on scientific intellectual movements and Coserian intellectual sects, in explaining the emergence and potential future of symbolic interactionist theory in Canada. I contest claims that the interactionism is on the verge of disappearing and instead offer an explanation grounded in insights about shared meaning. I conclude that it is ironic that debates over the presumed demise of symbolic interaction may well contribute to its continued existence within the canon of Canadian sociology. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Canadian Review of Sociology is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The article looks Canadian sociology. It responds to several articles within the issue by sociologists Karen Stanbridge, D. B. Tindall, and Neil McLaughlin commenting on the author's previously published essay "Committing Canadian Sociology". According to the author, most of the critiques leveled at him in these articles are based on issues of epistemology rather than substantive sociological explanation. Topics discussed include sociologist Harold Innis, sociological methodology, and the relationship between ideographic and nomothetic explanation.

Copyright of Canadian Review of Sociology is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

This article provides a detailed account of how surgeons perceived and used a device‐procedure that caused widespread patient harm: transvaginal mesh for the treatment of pelvic floor disorders in women. Drawing from interviews with 27 surgeons in Canada, the UK, the United States and France and observations of major international medical conferences in North America and Europe between 2015 and 2018, we describe the commercially driven array of operative variations in the use of transvaginal mesh and show that surgeons' understanding of their hands‐on, sensory experience with these variations is central to explaining patient harm. Surgeons often developed preferences for how to manage actual and anticipated dangers of transvaginal mesh procedures through embodied operative adjustments, but collectively the meaning of these preferences was fragmented, contested and deferred. We critically reflect on surgeons' understandings of their operative experience, including the view that such experience is not evidence. The harm in this case poses a challenge to some ways of thinking about uncertainty and errors in medical sociology, and calls for attention to a specific feature of surgical work: the extent and persistence of operative practices that elude classification as right or wrong but are still most certainly better and worse. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Collectively, current resource-development literature has given little attention to organizational features of ownership as important variables in community resilience. By drawing from six local buyout cases in Canada's forest sector, we reveal the complexity and numerous constraints on local ownership and expose a more nuanced context than most sociologists tend to consider. Our findings suggest that the meaning of local ownership and community resilience varies depending upon the composition (e.g., private vs. public; mill vs. forest license vs. coupled mill & forest license), type (social, cooperative, trust and/or direct-share ownership), extent of ownership (percentage of local versus extra-local shares), and the level of control (e.g., proportion of locally held seats on the Board of Directors) associated with ownership. Future research on local ownership should more carefully differentiate between the nature of local ownership and its associated outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The author considers the scholarly field of political sociology in Canada, arguing that its interdisciplinary features lead to ambiguity in its study. Topics considered include mass media and politics, rational choice in politics, scholarly judgement, history, and ethics. A historical overview of the field from the 1920s to the present is provided.

Copyright of Canadian Review of Sociology is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The article discusses the research and scholarship of feminist scholars on family sociology in Canada from the 1960s through the mid 2010s, including the feminist sociology of families. The relationship between neoliberalism and gender, including the alleged indifference of neoliberal government policies to gender of income earners, is discussed. An overview of Canada's national statistics agency Statistics Canada's data on labor, including on domestic labor, gender divisions in labor, women's employment and unpaid household work, is provided.

The article discusses the concept of a uniquely Canadian form of sociology (CS), with a particular focus on the relationship between CS and the sociology of Canada (SOC). It references the essay "Committing Canadian Sociology" by sociologist Ralph Matthews. The author critiques Matthews's arguments for a distinctive CS, claiming that his approach gives disproportionate weight to idiographic explanations, is not indisputably unique, and may have an adverse effect upon audiences. Topics discussed include the relationship between idiographic and nomothetic explanations, environmental sociology, and resource allocation.

The article looks issues of methodology and Canadian uniqueness in Canadian sociology. It references the essay "Committing Canadian Sociology: Developing a Canadian Sociology and Sociology of Canada" by sociologist Ralph Matthews. According to the author, Matthews overstates the importance of Canadian uniqueness while neglecting the significant role of theoretical pluralism in the field of sociology. It is suggested that Canadian sociology should remain globally oriented and should engage with both American and European intellectual traditions.

Copyright of Annals of Public & Cooperative Economics is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Canadian Review of Sociology is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Canadian Review of Sociology is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Canadian Review of Sociology is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Distinctions between rural and urban populations are well documented in environmental sociology literature. Rural and urban places may exert different influences on participation in environmentally supportive behavior (ESB) as well as on other forms of environmental concern (EC). The influence of these distinct geographies may be due to present circumstances or because of childhood socialization in these places. Using data from a national survey in Canada (n51 664), we use cognitive (basic values, environmental worldview, and environmental attitude) and behavioral indicators (public and private sphere) of EC to explore differences among rural and urban populations and we include analyses accounting for place of socialization. We extend the conventional private sphere category of ESB by including stewardship behaviors. Results showed few differences between rural and urban residents on indicators of EC. Rural residents, however, scored higher on altruistic values, placed a higher priority on the environment, and reported higher participation in recycling and stewardship behaviors. Analysis that included place of socialization showed differences on environmental worldview, basic values, and some ESB. In terms of ESB, we conclude that residence and place of socialization may be less of a factor than opportunity and highlight the importance of providing services and facilities. We recommend future research on residence and ESB include a variety of behaviors that reflect opportunities for both rural and urban residents. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article examines the use of a Participatory Action Research project in a Kahnawake Mohawk community in Montreal, Canada. The site of the research is a Mohawk community of approximately 8,000 just south of Montreal. It is a fairly high profile community, appearing in the media regularly over the last 20 years for protesting expropriation of their land, for taking internal control of their high school, and for creating an internal policing system— all initially disallowed by the Canadian government in 1990, a small group of Mohawks blocked a major highway into. Montreal that runs through the reserve. This threw the community into a state of siege for 56 days, surrounded by the Canadian and Quebec military, and seriously strained their relations with the Canadian government and nearby communities. The interviews revealed that there was considerable agreement on the ideals that should underlie community decision making, primarily the need to embody Mohawk culture, to treat everyone respectfully, and for all relevant information to be openly communicated. The goals of protecting Mohawk culture and land were also strongly and consistently emphasized by interviewees, interviews revealed considerable disagreement regarding the application of these ideals, such as the most appropriate way to consult the community and how decisions should be enforced.

Abstract. We present a new method for measuring inequality among subgroups of a population together with an application to the measurement of wage and salary inequality between the sexes in Canada and its provinces. In the conventional decomposition intergroup inequality is measured as inequality among subgroup means. Our indices are found by extending the usual procedure for deriving relative and per capita indices from social-evaluation functions. We measure intergroup inequality as the inequality which would be experienced by everyone if each person received his subgroup's 'equally-distributed-equivalent income,' that income which, if equally distributed, would prove socially indifferent to the original subgroup distribution. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]