Residential Segregation and Socio-Economic Integration of Asians in Canadian Cities
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
ABSTRACT/RESUME Recent immigration trends have made Canada more ethnically diverse than ever before. The fastest growing groups are the Chinese and South Asians. Using recent Canadian census data, the paper examines whether this has resulted in greater concentration of these groups in selected Canadian cities. Differences among the cities are investigated. It is found that while these minority groups have distinct preferences for particular cities, concentration within cities has not increased. It is speculated that Canada's multiculturalism policies may have prevented greater segregation from the dominant groups, both in terms of residential location and in the labour market. Les tendances recentes en matiere d'immigration font que la population du Canada est ethniquement diversifiee comme elle ne l'a jamais ete. Les groupes dont les effectifs augmentent le plus rapidement sont les Chinois et les Asiatiques de l'Asie du Sud. A partir de donnees de recensement, cet article etudie si ces tendances recentes font que la ont retrouve une plus grande concentration d'immigrants dans certaines grandes villes canadicnnes. Nous etudions les differences entre les villes. Les resultats montrent que les immigrants preferent 5' etablir dans certaines villes plutot que dans d'autres, mais que la concentration au sein meme des villes n'a pas augmente. Nous suggerons que les politiques de multiculturalisme ont empeche une augmentation de la segregation residentielle et sur le marche du travail de la part des groupes majoritaires. One of the effects of recent immigration trends in Canada is to make Canada more ethnically diverse than ever before. The proportions of the charter groups of British and French have decreased while the proportions of other groups have increased in varying degrees. In the country as a whole, the proportion of British in either single or multiple origins in 1996 was, at 37 percent, well below half of the total. That proportion is expected to decline even further in the future. The French amounted to about a fifth of the total population in 1996 and are also expected to decline. The fastest growing groups are the who in 1996 formed about 11.2 percent of the total, a proportion expected to increase substantially in the coming years. Statistics Canada medium-growth projections show that the proportion of visible minorities will increase to 14.1 percent by 2001 and to 19.7 percent by 2016 (Statistics Canada 1996). Among the visible minorities, Asians make up 77 percent, the rest being primaril y Blacks. Though Asians come from a large number of countries and ethnic backgrounds, the two groups' that make up the bulk of the Asians are the Chinese and South Asians. There were 860,150 Chinese and 670,585 South Asians counted in the 1996 Canadian census, forming about 5.4 percent of the total Canadian population, a proportion that is rising significantly. In contrast, the Canadian aboriginal population, those who gave a response of North American Indian, Meti, or Innuit, amounted to only 2.8 percent of the Canadian population. In this paper we will focus on the assimilation and integration of the former groups into Canadian society. The rapid rise of minority groups in Canada raises concerns about their integration into the wider Canadian society. While there are various ways of conceptualizing and measuring integration, the one with which we will be most concerned with in this paper is that of spatial integration. Apart from understanding the settlement patterns of specific ethnic or racial groups, the reasons for studying residential segregation have a broader sociological significance. Residential segregation can be seen as a measure of how well or how poorly a group has integrated into the society at large. A group isolated in a particular area may not be fully participating in the housing and labour markets (Reitz 1990; Olsen and Kobayashi 1993). It is further argued that living in close proximity to others of the same ethnic or racial background, while increasing interaction within the group, tends to reduce interaction outside the group (Balakrishnan 2000). …
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».