Immigration, langues et performance economique: le Quebec et l'Ontario entre 1970 et 1995
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study contributes to two relatively distinct streams of literature: the economic integration of immigrants and the links between language attributes and earnings in Canada. The analysis is done with two Canadian provinces, Québec and Ontario, and uses micro-data from the five Canadian censuses of 1971, 1981, 1986, 1991 and 1996. The sample is divided between the non-immigrants and the immigrants (and among the latter between those originating from Europe and the United States and those originating from the rest of the world) and between the individuals speaking French, English or another language at home. In a first stage of the analysis, comparisons of mean wages and salaries are done in relation to immigration and language attributes. It is observed that the relative wages of immigrants have decreased over time. Francophones have improved their economic position, both among immigrants and non-immigrants, but without catching up completely with Anglophones. People who speak at home another language than French or English have in general relatively low incomes. In a second stage of the analysis, earnings regressions are estimated to see the net effects of immigration and language attributes. Earnings gaps between Anglophones and Francophones are lower when only net effects are considered, and in Ontario they are even null or in favour of Francophones. An interesting question concerns the economic performance of immigrants in Québec in relation to their language choices. The results show that immigrants who speak French do as well as those who speak English. In spite of that, not enough immigrants assimilate to the Francophone community to maintain the demographic weight of the French language. The author suggests that the Canadian immigration policy take into account the linguistic balance between French and English. Cette étude contribue à deux courants de littérature relativement distincts : l’intégration économique des immigrants et les liens entre les attributs linguistiques et les revenus au Canada. L’analyse porte sur deux provinces canadiennes, le Québec et l’Ontario, et utilise les microdonnées des cinq recensements canadiens de 1971, 1981, 1986, 1991 et 1996. L’échantillon est divisé entre les non-immigrants et les immigrants (et parmi ces derniers entre ceux originaires de l’Europe et des États-Unis et ceux originaires du reste du monde) et entre les personnes parlant le français, l’anglais ou une autre langue à la maison. Dans un premier temps, on fait des comparaisons de traitements et salaires moyens en fonction des attributs de langue et d’immigration. On constate que les revenus relatifs des immigrants ont diminué dans le temps. Par ailleurs, les francophones ont amélioré leur situation économique, à la fois chez les immigrants et les non-immigrants, mais sans rattraper totalement les anglophones. Les personnes parlant des langues autres que l’anglais ou le français ont en général des revenus assez faibles. Dans un deuxième temps, on estime des régressions de gains pour voir les effets nets des attributs d’immigration et de langue. Les écarts entre francophones et anglophones sont plus faibles quand on ne considère que les effets nets, et en Ontario, ils sont même nuls ou en faveur des francophones. Une question intéressante concerne la performance économique des immigrants au Québec en fonction de leurs choix linguistiques. Les résultats montrent que les immigrants qui parlent français s’intègrent aussi bien que ceux qui parlent anglais. Malgré cela, il n’y a pas suffisamment d’immigrants qui s’intègrent à la communauté francophone pour assurer le maintien du poids démographique du français. L’auteur suggère que la politique canadienne d’immigration tienne compte de l’équilibre linguistique entre le français et l’anglais.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.009 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".