Search

In much of the Western world, and particularly in Europe, there is a widespread perception of a wholesale 'retreat' from multiculturalism. Governments that once embraced a multicultural approach to diversity are said to be replacing it with a strong emphasis on civic integration. This assumption that new civic integration policies displace older multiculturalism policies (MCPs) has not properly been tested. Existing indices of immigrant integration policies (such as Migrant Integration Policy Index (MIPEX) or Civic Integration Policy Index (CIVIX)) have captured the rise of civic integration policies, but are not designed to measure the presence of MCPs. Drawing on an updated version of the Multiculturalism Policy Index introduced earlier, the article presents an index of the strength of multicultural policies for European countries and several traditional countries of immigration at three points in time (1980, 2000 and 2010). The results paint a different picture of contemporary experience in Europe. While a small number of countries, including most notably the Netherlands, have weakened established multicultural policies during the 2000s, such a shift is the exception. Most countries that adopted multicultural approaches in the later part of the twentieth century have maintained their programmes in the first decade of the new century, and a significant number of countries have added new ones. In much of Europe, multicultural policies are not in general retreat. As a result, the turn to civic integration is often being layered on top of existing multicultural programmes, leading to a blended approach to diversity. The article reflects on the compatibility of MCPs and civic integration, arguing that more liberal forms of civic integration can be combined with multiculturalism but that more illiberal or coercive forms are incompatible with a multicultural approach. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In much of the world, and particularly in Europe, there is a widespread perception that multiculturalism has failed, and Canada has not been immune to these rising global anxieties. A number of commentators have argued that smug complacency is blinding Canadians to growing evidence of stresses and failures in ethnic relations in their country. In this article, we explore this evolving debate. We briefly review the global backlash against multiculturalism, and why some commentators see warning signs in Canada as well. We then look at the evidence about how the multiculturalism policy in Canada operates, and about trends in immigrant integration and ethnic relations. We show that there are indeed stresses and strains within Canadian multiculturalism, with real issues that require serious attention. But we misdiagnose the problems, and their remedies, if we read the Canadian experience through the lens of the European debate. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article offers a look on immigration, multiculturalism and the welfare state in Canada. The increase in ethnic diversity due to immigration poses a threat to the welfare state due to ethnic diversity's difficulty to sustain expansive social programs. Multiculturalism policies promote greater social solidarity by combating the stereotypes and stigmatizations that erode feelings of solidarity across ethnic and racial lines.

Contemporary debates are increasingly pessimistic about the impact of ethnic diversity on support for the welfare state. A growing number of analysts argue that greater ethnic diversity in Western democracies is weakening public support for redistribution, and that this underlying tension is exacerbated by the adoption of robust multiculturalism policies. The purpose of this essay is to summarize early findings from several studies that bear on the questions at the heart of such debates. These studies analyse the implications of immigration and multiculturalism policies for the welfare state across OECD countries, and also focus more closely on the experience of two distinctively multicultural countries, the United States and Canada. The evidence points to more complex relationships than often assumed. OECD countries with large foreign-born populations have not had more difficulty in sustaining their welfare states than other countries. The extent of change does seem to matter, however, as countries in which immigrant communities grew rapidly between 1970 and the late 1990s did experience lower rates of growth in social spending. But despite the warnings of some critics, robust multiculturalism policies do not systematically exacerbate this tension. Moreover, the United States and Canada reflect different patterns. In the US racial diversity does weaken support for redistribution; but Canadian experience suggests that immigration, multiculturalism policies and redistribution can represent a stable political equilibrium. These contrasting narratives from North America stand as a warning against premature conclusions based on the US experience alone. There is no inevitability at work, and policy choices do seem to matter. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Lien Social et Politiques is the property of Institut National de Recherche Scientifique (INRS) 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.)

Focuses on changes observed since the 1970s in the way Western democracies deal with ethnic minorities. Revelation that ethnic diversity was often considered threat to political stability; Adoption of multiculturalist policies by various Western democracies to accommodate minorities; Examination whether multiculturalist policies of state leads to a crowding out effect; Assertion of critics that multiculturalist policies undermine the welfare state by eroding trust and solidarity among citizens.

This article focuses on the emergence of Canada as a counter-narrative about the relations among diversity, recognition and redistribution. It presents summaries of comparative evidence of heterogeneity and redistribution trade-off, drawing on cross-national quantitative analysis of Organisation of Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) countries. It analyzes two case studies involving the U.S. and Canada, multicultural countries that generate different narratives about the politics of the multicultural welfare state.