UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

Ethnicity and residential location Hier, Marlene F. 1973

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Item Metadata

Download

Media
831-UBC_1973_A8 H53.pdf [ 7.65MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 831-1.0101535.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0101535-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0101535-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0101535-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0101535-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0101535-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0101535-source.json
Full Text
831-1.0101535-fulltext.txt
Citation
831-1.0101535.ris

Full Text

ETHNICITY AND RESIDENTIAL LOCATION by MARLENE F. HIER B.A. (Hon.)» Simon Fraser U n i v e r s i t y , 1970 A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS i n the School of Community and Regional Planning We accept t h i s t h e s i s as conforming to the required standard THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA MAY, 1973 I n p r e s e n t i n g t h i s t h e s i s i n p a r t i a l f u l f i l m e n t o f t h e r e q u i r e m e n t s f o r a n a d v a n c e d d e g r e e a t t h e U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a , I a g r e e t h a t t h e L i b r a r y s h a l l m a k e i t f r e e l y a v a i l a b l e f o r r e f e r e n c e a n d s t u d y . I f u r t h e r a g r e e t h a t p e r m i s s i o n f o r e x t e n s i v e c o p y i n g o f t h i s t h e s i s f o r s c h o l a r l y p u r p o s e s may b e g r a n t e d b y t h e H e a d o f my D e p a r t m e n t o r b y h i s r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s . I t i s u n d e r s t o o d t h a t c o p y i n g o r p u b l i c a t i o n o f t h i s t h e s i s f o r f i n a n c i a l g a i n s h a l l n o t b e a l l o w e d w i t h o u t my w r i t t e n p e r m i s s i o n . D e p a r t m e n t o f S c h o o l o f C o m m u n i t y a n d R e g i o n a l P l a n n i n g T h e U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a V a n c o u v e r 8, C a n a d a D a t e May 1 s t , 1 9 7 3 ABSTRACT A predominant feature of Canadian society i s the presence of a variety of ethnic minority groups vhich maintain distinctive values and patterns of behavior and which reside i n readily identifiable ethnic concentrations. Literature describing ethnic minority residential clustering and dis-persion stresses that because of the low socio-economic status of the members of these immigrant groups and because of their strong ethno-religious t i e s , they formed their own ethnic communities i n urban core areas. As members, and their children and grandchildren particularly, improved their economic status and as their ethno-religious ties weakened, they began to move from the urban core ethnic concentration to ethnically mixed suburban communities. . This study focused upon Jews and Italians, two ethnic minorities which concentrate i n ethnic clusters i n the City of Vancouver and vhich have a substantial number of their members l i v i n g i n the suburban communities of Richmond, Burnaby, North Vancouver and West Vancouver. The research primarily addressed i t s e l f to exploring the associations between residential location and the following variables: ethno-religious identification, socio-economic status, generation status, and the nature and extent of social networks based on kith and kin. Responses to 157 Questionnaires, which were administered to select groups of Jews, Italians, and Anglo-Saxons, were analyzed by multivariate s t a t i s t i c a l techniques. The results indicate that for both the Jewish and Italian groups, the intensity of ethno-religious identification i s strongest among cluster residents. Although suburban groups, in general, display a less intense ethno-religious identification than do the cluster groups, they are not homogeneous i n this respect. i i Residents of the Italian urban cluster belong mostly to the foreign-born generation. Second, third-, and subsequent - generations are more apt to locate i n suburbia. Such i s not the case for Jews. A sub-stantial proportion of Jewish urban cluster residents are third - and sub-sequent - generation Jews. Stronger f a m i l i a l ties and more extensive friendships with members of the same ethnic group are characteristic of Jews and Italians resident i n ethnic clusters compared to suburban ethnic members. For Italians, socio-economic status among cluster residents i s s i g n i -ficantly lower than that of most suburban Italians. For Jews, this i t not the case. Jewish cluster residents are significantly higher i n socio-economic status than most suburban Jews. Planners should be aware that ethnic minority groups are not homogeneous. They are internally differentiated by ethno-religious identification, socio-economic status, generation status, and the extent and intensity of social networks. These differences should be considered i n the formulation of plans. i i i TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter Page I. PATTERNS OF ETHNIC RESIDENTIAL SETTLEMENT 1 Ethnic Heterogenity 1 Ethnicity Defined 2 Immigration And Ethnic Clustering 3 Ethnic Dispersion, k * Suburban Movement 5 Ethno-Religious Identification And Community Planning 7 II. JEWISH AND ITALIAN ETHNIC MINORITIES 12 Jewish And Italian Concentrations In The City Of Vancouver • 12 Jewish And Italian Suburban Movement 15 Questions And Hypotheses l 6 III. METHODOLOGY 19 Sample Selection . . . . . . . . . 20 Sample Size And Response Rate 22 The Survey Questionnaire 22 S t a t i s t i c a l Techniques 28 IV. RESULTS Al© ANALYSIS 31 Description of Factors Extracted From Questionnaire Data 31 iv Chapter Page The Jewish Ethnic Group Ethno-Religious Identification • 3^ Generation Status . . . . 35 Familial Interaction and Friendship Ties 37 Residential Mobility 44 Socio-Economic Status 48 Correlations Between Travel Time to the Cluster and Two Factors, Ethno-Religious Identification .and .Socio-Econo:nic .Status 48 The Itali a n Ethnic Group 50 Ethno-ReIigious Identification 50 Generation Status 52 Familial Interaction and Friendship Ties 55 Socio-Economic Status 60 Correlations Between Travel Time to the Cluster • . and Two Factors, Ethno-Religicus Identification and Socio-Eccnoniic Status 62 Jews And Italians In Each Of The Five Residential Areas 62 Cluster Jews and Italians . . . . . . . . . . . 64 Richmond Jews and Italians 65 North Vancouver Jews and Italians 65 Burnaby Jews and Italians 66 West Vancouver Jews and Italians 68 Anglo-Saxons Compared With Jews and Italians In Each Of The Four Suburban Communities . . . 68 Anglo-Saxon Respondents In Four Suburban Communities 68 Richmond Anglo-Saxons; Jews,and Italians 69 Burnaby Anglo-Saxons, Jews, and Italians 70 North Vancouver Anglo-Saxons, Jews,_and Italians . 72 West Vancouver Anglo-Saxons. Jews, and Italians . 73 V. CONCLUSIONS AND PLANNING IMPLICATIONS 74 • - v • Chapter Page The Jewish Ethnic Group .Ethno-Religious Identification 3^ Generation Status . . . 35 Familial Interaction and Friendship Ties 37 Residential Mobility kk Socio-Economic Status k8 Correlations Between Travel Time to the Cluster and Two Factors, Ethno-Religious Identification and Socio-Economic Status k& The Italian Ethnic Group 50 Ethno-Religious Identification 50 Generation Status 52 Familial Interaction and Friendship Ties 55 Socio-Economic Status 60 Correlations Between Travel Time to the Cluster  and Two Factors, Ethno-Religious Identification and Socio-Economic Status 62 Jews And Italians In Each Of The Five Residential Areas 62 Cluster Jews and Italians 6k Richmond Jews and Italians 65 North Vancouver Jews and Italians 65 Burnaby Jews and Italians 66 West Vancouver Jews and Italians 68 Anglo-Saxons Compared With Jews and Italians In Each Of The Four Suburban Communities . . . 68 Anglo-Saxon Respondents In Four Suburban .Communities 68 Richmond Anglo-Saxons? Jews,and Italians 69 Burnaby Anglo-Saxons, Jews, and Italians . . . . . 70 North Vancouver Anglo-Saxons; Jews, and Italians . 72 West Vancouver Anglo-Saxons, Jews, and Italians . 73 V. CONCLUSIONS AND PLANNING IMPLICATIONS 74 Research Conclusions 7^ Planning Implications 78 v i LIST CF TABLES Table Page 1. Percentages of Populations i n Jewish and Italian Clusters . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 2. Population Change 1951-1961: "Control" Population, Italians, Jews • • » • 17 3. The Anglo-Saxon Ethnic Group: Four Suburban Municipalities- . . . 1 9 k. Numbers of Jewish and Italian Households i n Five Residential Areas 21 5. Response Rate of Italians Sampled 23 6. Response Rate of Jews Sampled 2k 7. Response Rate of Anglo-Saxons Sampled. 25 8. Variables Reordered According to Highest Correlation with Factor 32-33 9. Generation Status of Jewish Respondents 37 10. Generation Status of Italian Respondents 52 A. Chi-Square Test: Residential Distributions Between the City of Vancouver and the Rest of the Metro Area . . . . . 87 B. Chi-Square Test: Residential Distribution Between Four Census Tracts and the Rest of the City of Vancouver 88 C. Varimax Rotated Factor-Loadings Matrix 92 D. Chi-Square Test: Residential Distributions of Foreign-Born and North American-Born Jewish Respondents. . . . . . 93 E. Chi-Square Tests: Relatives Resident i n Respondent's Own Municipality: Jewish Respondents . . . . 9^-96 F. Chi-Square Test: Frequency of V i s i t s with Relatives Resident in Own Municipality - 97 G. Chi-Square Tests: Extent of Jewish Friendships Among Jewish Respondents 98-IOO v i i Table Page H. Chi-Square Tests: Intention To Move From Present Municipality: Jewish Respondents 101-103 I. Chi-Square Test: Residential Distributions of Foreign-Born and North American-Born Italian Respondents . . . . . . . . 10k J. Chi-Square Tests: Relatives Resident i n Respondent's Own Municipality: Italian Respondents 105-107 K. Chi-Square Tests: Frequency of V i s i t s with Relatives i n Own Municipality: Italian Respondents 108-110 L. Chi-Square Tests: Extent of Italian Friendships Among Italian Respondents . 111-114 c v i i i LIST OF FIGURES Figure Page 1. Proportions i n City of Vancouver and Remaining Metropolitan Area: "Control" Population, Jews, Italians • 12 2. Locations of Jewish and Itali a n Clusters. Ik 3. Ethno-Religious Identification Group Means by Area of Residence: Jewish Respondents . 36 k. Residential Distribution by Generation Groups: Jewish Respondents • 3°" 5. Proportion of Respondents With Relatives In Own Municipality by Area of Residence: Jewish Respondents . kO 6. Frequency of V i s i t s with Relatives Residing i n the Same Municipality by Area of Residence: Jewish Respondents . . . . . k2 7. Extent of Jewish Friendships by Area of Residence: Jewish Respondents 43 8. Residential Mobility Group Means by Area of Residence: Jewish Respondents 45 9- Intention To Move From Present Municipality by Area of Residence 46 10. Socio-Economic Status Group Means by Area, of Residence: Jewish Respondents 49 11. Travel Time Between Four Suburban Communities and the Jewish Cluster 51 12. Ethno-Religious Identification Group Means by Area of Residence: Italian Respondents . . 53 13. Residential Distribution By Generation Groups: Italian Respondents 5k Ik. Proportion of Respondents with Relatives i n Own Municipality by Area of Residence:Italian Respondents . . . . . . . . 56 ix Figure Page 15. Frequency of V i s i t s With Relatives Residing In The Same Municipality by Area of Residence; Italian Respondents 57 16. Extent of Italian Friendships by Area of Residence: Italian Respondents 59 17. Socio-Economic Status Group Means by Area of Residence Italian Respondents 6 l 18. Travel Time Between Four Suburban Communities and the Italian Cluster . . 63 19. Socio-Economic Status of Cluster Jews and Italians: Means and Variances 6k 20. Ethno-Religious Identification of Richmond Jews and Italians: Means and Variances 65 21. Ethno-Religious Identification of North Vancouver Jews and Italians: Means and Variances . 66 22. Ethno-Religious Identification of Burnaby Jews and Italians: Means and Variances 67 23. Residential Mobility of Burnaby Jews and Italians: Means and Variances 67 2k. Socio-Economic Status of Anglo-Saxon Respondents: Means and Variances . . . . . . . . 69 25. Ethno-Religious Identification of Richmond Jews and Andlo-Saxons: Means and Variances 70 26. Ethno-Religious Identification of Burnaby Jews and Anglo-Saxons: Means and Variances . . . . . . . . . . . . 71 27. Socio-Economic Status of Burnaby Italians and Anglo Saxons: Means and Variances 72 28. Ethno-Religious Identification of North Vancouver Jews, . Italians, and Anglo-Saxons: Means and Variances 73 x ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I wish to express my sincere gratitude to Professors Willian E. Rees and John B. Collins, my thesis advisors, for their constructive criticism and suggestions during the preparation of this thesis. In addition, I am deeply indebted to Professor Paul 0. Roer, whose guidance and encouragement played such a v i t a l role in the completion of this research. Finally, to Moish, Ari and Avi. x i CHAPTER I PATTERNS OF ETHNIC RESIDENTIAL SETTLEMENT ETHNIC HETEROGENTTY "Researchers have recently recognized, with a measure of surprise," states William Michelson (1970, p. 63), 'that ethnic identity seems every b i t as strong today as i t was i n the days when mass immigration was a regular phenomena..." The notion, more pronounced i n the United States than i t was i n Canada, that the mixture of ethnic and religious groups i n North American l i f e was to blend into a homogeneous end product has out-lived i t s usefulness and i t s c r e d i b i l i t y . The 'melting pot' so eagerly sought i n some other countries has been avoided i n Canada. With the i n -stitution of the Federal policy of multi-culturalism i n 1971 "Canada was declared to be o f f i c i a l l y , what i t has been implicitly for over half a century, a p l u r a l i s t society" (Berry and Wilde, 1972, p. 295)• "In Canada, ethnic segregation and intense ethnic loyalties had their origins i n French, Scottish and I r i s h separateness from the English. In time they became the pattern for a l l cultural groups" (J. Porter, 1970, p. Jl). Thus, a predominant feature of Canadian society "is the presence of a variety of ethnic groups who, in the face of increasing industrialization, have managed to maintain distinctive values and patterns of behaviour." (Blishen, Jones, et. a l . , 1970, p. x i i ) . * Canada's ethnic heterogeneity i s evidenced by the upsurge of foreign-language movies and radio programs directed to specific ethnic groups, and i n the variety and growth.of the "foreign-language press." Vallee, Schwartz, and Darkell (1970 p. 392) indicate that: Toronto now boasts eight movie houses that show only Italian films and three that show only German. Several Canadian radio stations devote many hours of broadcasts in foreign languages, a practice that i s on the increase. The number of newspapers published i n languages other than English and French has tr i p l e d since the 1930's and the languages of publication have doubled to twenty-six. In B r i t i s h Columbia, there are eighteen member newspapers of the Ethnic Press Association of B.C., "publishing i n twelve different languages with a combined circulation of 75>000" (Vancouver Sun, Saturday, August 12, 1972, p. 32). Ethnic heterogeneity on the Canadian scene i s evident i n the multiplicity of ethnic associations and ethnic cultural programs. It i s manifest on the Canadian urban landscape i n readily identifiable ethnic areas and highly v i s i b l e ethnic a c t i v i t i e s , commercial centers (restaurants, food stores, curio shops), and institutions (Simmons, 19°9> pp 139-142). ETHNICITY DEFINED "An ethnic group i s any group which i s defined or set off by race, religion, or national origin, or some combination of these categories" (M. Gordon, 1964, p. 27). While the above three concepts (race, religion, national origin) do not have the same meaning, they have a common soc i a l -psychological referent, i n that a l l of them serve to create, through h i s -t o r i c a l circumstances, a cohesive sense of,"peoplehood." This sense of "peoplehood" connotes a sense of both ancestral and future-oriented i d e n t i f i c a -tion with the particular group. "These are the 'people' of my ancestors, therefore they are my people, and they w i l l be the people of my children and their children" (Gordon, 1964, p. 29). "The common t r a i t s that they (ethnic members) share often forms the basis of an esprit de corps, an in-group feeling, 3 a sense of belonging to a distinct group from the dominant one" (Zanden, 1966, p. 11). Identification with an ethnic group can, thus, express the feeling of belonging, the commitment of a f f i l i a t i o n , the act of expression, the achievement of linkage with the l i f e , the practices, the thought, and the history of that particular group. IMMIGRATION AND ETHNIC CLUSTERING Immigrants to North America l e f t their homelands because of economic deprivation or victimization on religious, cultural or p o l i t i c a l grounds, or a combination of the above. Chain migration usually developed from the success of a few pioneers who encouraged families, relatives, and friends to join them i n the new land by sending back appealing information (and even money) from their new homeland. Those immigrants arriving i n the late nineteenth, early twentieth centuries were, for the most part, unskilled, poor i n financial resources, spoke a language which was different from that of the majority population, and had a different culture and religion from most others i n the new land. On a r r i v a l i n the new country they usually concentrated i n slum areas near the c i t y center because they could afford only that housing which was relatively inexpensive. Berger (1965, p. 332) notes that many of the immigrants "arrived on these shores with few, i f any resources. This meant that they could afford housing of only the most minimum standards." How-ever, this was not the only reason for the clustering of immigrants i n their own "urban v i l l a g e s . " They were also drawn together because they wished to continue, i n the new environment, their accustomed way of l i f e ; they desired to build, i n miniature, a society i n which they could communicate i n the familiar tongue; they were unfamiliar with American or Canadian ways; being poor, ignorant, and foreign, they were often regarded by older residents of the host community with contempt and h o s t i l i t y ; they wished to band together for mutual aid and mutual protection against the uncertain-t i e s of a strange and frequently hostile environment. ,vThus, the immigrants' concentration i n ethnic communities was partly economic, partly voluntary, and partly imposed upon them" (McEntire, i960, p. 68) . ETHNIC DISPERSION Social scientists, historians, and geographers have described the pattern of ethnic residential dispersion i n North America to be the follow-ing: In time as the members of each immigrant group, and especially their children and grandchildren, "improved their economic status, acquired education, learned English and adopted American ways of behaving... the forces holding the ethnic community together weakened and individuals began moving to non-ethnic neighbourhoods" (McEntire, i960, p. 68) . "Ethnic neighbourhoods served as way stations for migrant groups as they adjusted to urban l i f e , improved their status, and moved on to new surroundings." (Frieden and Morris, 1968, p. 315). G. Berger (1965, p. 314) contends that "as some members of the ethnic group gained greater wealth, they tended to move outward from the densely populated central c i t y " . "As members of an ethnic group advance socio-economically they tend to locate i n neighbourhoods i n which members of the native population, and other ethnic groups of the same socio-economic status reside" (Marston, 1962, p. 66) . Thus, social scientists propose that as individuals of ethnic extraction gained greater wealth and ceased to identify themselves as members of the particular ethnic community, they moved out of the urban core ethnic con-centration into ethnically heterogeneous neighbourhoods. The shift of residence for many of these individuals was to one of the many suburban 5 communities that were steadily growing i n the United States and Canada. SUBURBAN MOVEMENT The post World War II period saw, in North America, rapid migration of people to the suburbs, those residential areas surrounding and continguous to the large metropolitan ci t y . Especially after 1955, a rapid expansion of residential construction was i n i t i a t e d i n those areas. Two major factors accounted for this occurence: The r i s i n g cost of c i t y land deterred develop-ers from using i t for residential purposes, especially for the construction of single-family dwelling units, and the large-scale profits accrued from mass production of housing was unattainable i n the cit y where vacant land, though considerable i n the aggregate, was s p l i t into a multitude of small parcels. The large expanses of relatively cheap land outside the city, therefore, accounted for the rapid expansion of residential construction i n suburban areas. Because of the development of fast and ef f i c i e n t means of communication and private transportation such as the automobile, and because housing opportunities had shifted from the c i t y to the suburbs, the growing c i t y population flowed out into suburban communities. S. Clark (1966, pp. 48-50), writing about suburban growth i n the Toronto area, states: It was not a desire to escape the city, but a desire to secure a house i n which to li v e that led to the movement of people into suburban areas. It was the search for a house which forced them out of the c i t y into the suburbs. The great expanse of the suburbs did not attract people who already owned homes. In most cases people l e f t their former areas of residence voluntarily to move to the suburbs and "did so for reasons which were directly related to hous-ing" (P. Rossi, 1955, P' 133)« "The great house-hungry population of the ci t y could find space for i t s e l f only by spreading beyond the limits of 6 the urban community (Dobriner, 1963, P« 69). Although housing was a major factor i n suburban movement, i t was not the only one. Studies by W. Be l l (1968), L. Schnore (1958), H. Doug-las (1958), G. Berger (1968), and S. Clark (1966) demonstrate that some factors related to suburban movement were a desire for a spacious, less congested, clean environment; the abundance of children i n a similar age category to serve as playmates; better schooling because of more modern school fac-i l i t i e s and a smaller child-to-teacher ratio; nearness to place of work. Although that secion of the population which could not find i n the ci t y the kind of housing i t required nor the kind of physical environment i t desired was forced into the suburbs i n search of l i v i n g space, not everyone i n need of space turned to the suburbs. Housing costs, of course, played a large, and often a decisive role i n determining who was able to purchase a dwelling unit i n the outlying areas. Although single-family homes were less costly i n suburbia than they were i n most cit y areas, the costs were s t i l l prohibitive to lower socio-economic status groups. It was,therefore, individuals of the middle-and upper-socio-economic status groups who made . the move to the suburbs. This was, however, not the only characteristic of those who moved from cit y to suburb. It was those people "with no strong ethnic or social attachments who were the most l i k e l y to make the move" (Clark, 1966, p. 98) . It was those elements of the population "the least deeply rooted i n the social l i f e of the urban community, the least i d e n t i -f i e d with the class, ethnic religious, p o l i t i c a l and other such groupings of the urban society which were the most involved" (Clark, 1966, p. 83) . Johnston (1971, P- 282), too, found that suburbia was occupied by those families who had few strong community, ethnic, or kinship ties i n other parts of the city ; those who had strong ties with an ethnic community were less l i k e l y to leave the urban-core ethnic cluster for the suburbs. Y In his examination of the Italian ethnic group, for example, he discovered that "those Italians who remained i n the 'urban v i l l a g e ' were the ones who held most strongly to the concept of Italian community." While the kind of society which developed i n suburbia was a r e f l e c t -ion of the character of the population residing within i t , i t would be erroneous to consider suburbia a homogeneous entity. Sociologists and psychcLogists who have studied suburbia agree that significant differences exist among suburban communities. Dobriner (l9o3> p. 13) found, that "suburbs d i f f e r greatly i n the circumstances of their creation, i n the price and use of their real estate, their degree of transiency, their size and instit u t i o n a l complexity, and i n the income, l i f e style, occupa-tion and educational level of their residents." The character of suburban areas vary widely "in terms of the social make-up of i t s residents, and the personal and group dispositions that led them to move to suburbs i n the f i r s t place" (Berger, 1968, pp.xv-xvi). ETHNO-RELIGIOUS IDENTIFICATION AND COMMUNITY PLANNING Social scientists have determined that individuals who identify with a specific ethno-religious group w i l l exhibit behavior patterns, attitudes, values, goals, and needs which are different from those of other segments of society. Being identified with a common cultural group means the sharing of "not merely such items as the culture of dress, language, food, and sports which are relatively easy to appreciate and acquire, but also those less tangible items such as values, memories, sentiments, ideas and attitudes" (Berry, 1951, p. 217). Gerhard Lenski (1963) reports that variables associat-ed with ethno-religious group membership exert as much influence on attitudes and behavior as does position i n the social class structure. o Lynn McDonald, ci t i n g studies by R. Regenstreif (1965), R. Alford (1963), J. Meisel and G. Raquet (1963) and G. Anderson 1966), concludes that re-l i g i o n and ethnic group membership have been found i n most Canadian studies to affect voting behavior more than any factors" (l971> P' 1^9)' He de-termined, i n fact,.that "social class, which i s the most important influence on voting i n most countries, i s of less importance than religion i n explain-ing Canadian voting behavior" (1968, p. 129). The voting of ethnic groups i s not simply a function of ethnic issues or ethnic candidates. Ethnic tendencies i n voting express the entire culture and traditions of the groups. Glazer and Moynihan (1970, p. 168) state: Ethnic groups do not, i f they ever did, act simply as cohesive voting blocs. Rather, their influence i s exerted through common group consciousness, through the effect of common antecedents and cultural traditions which enable them to view developing issues from a common point of view. Traditionally, the planner has paid l i t t l e attention to people's predispositions, i.e. their beliefs, values, goals, and. behavior patterns. "Planning began as a reform movement, not as a client-centered service, and when predispositions conflicted with the requirements of planning ideology, they were rejected" (Gans, 1968, p. 21). In cases where the planner has been cognizant of ethnic minorities he has tended 'to think of a minority as a homogeneous group which can be characterized by a stereotype like 'the Jew* or 'the Negro'" (K. Lewin, 19^8, p. 194). In viewing ethno-religious minorities as homogeneous, discrete groups, the planner has fa i l e d to focus attention on economic, social, and cultural differentiation within these groups. "No ethnic minority group i s homo-geneous and undifferentiated although i t may appear as such to the majority groups and the other minority groups" (Vrga, 1971> P« 39«) Ultimately a social or physical plan w i l l be successful only to the extent that i t reflects the values, needs, attitudes, and goals of those who are exposed to i t . The planner must be cognizant of the fact that the populations residing in his jurisdiction w i l l impose on their environment their own constructions and meanings which are characteristic of their cultures, as opposed to others. "The environment, i s defined by the culture of the people who li v e i n it"(Gans, 1968, p. 2 ) . In his book People and Plans, ( i960) Gans gives a simple example of the planning of a park which i s a physical environment calling for decisions concerning arrangement of f l o r a , fauna, walkways and f a c i l i t i e s . I f the planner's values conflict with those of the people who will, eventually use the park "the plan may not be adopted, or i f adopted i t may result i n a part that w i l l never be used as much as i t could have been" (1968, p. 6 ) . "It i s not the park alone," argues Gans (1968, p. 6 ) , "but the function and mean-ings which the park has for the people who are exposed to i t that affect the achievement or non-achievement of the planner's aims." Another example presented by Gans is one i n which the planner's perspective of a neighbour-hood differed radically from that of the people who resided i n the area. He describes two conflicting views of the West End i n Boston (1968, p. 7): Most of the planning reports described the area as a neighbourhood of five storey tenement buildings i n narrow streets, without sufficient sun and ai r , and characterized by insufficient parking, garbage-strewn alleys, and high del-inquency s t a t i s t i c s . The people who li v e i n i t saw something entirely different: cheap, spacious apartments, a neighbourhood f u l l of friends and family, and freedom from attack by delinquents. Given the above examples, i t i s evident that the planner must make decisions which reflect, not his personal or professional preferences, which are based on the values of his own culture, but those which reflect the cultures of residents i n the area. He can determine the degree to which his plans should reflect "ethnicity" and " r e l i g i o s i t y " by determining the degree of ethno-religious identification among the individuals of minority ethnic extraction who reside i n the municipality of his jurisdiction. The planner, too, may be called upon to aid minority group leaders who are charged with the formulation of policy and the distribution of funds for their particular group. In that the planner can ascertain some knowledge of the ethno-religious profiles of the members of the ethnic group who reside i n various geographic areas within a metropolitan region, he can aid these leaders and administrators i n determining the future need for ethnic and religious f a c i l i t i e s and institutions, and the geographic areas most desirable for f a c i l i t y location. 11 CHAPTER II JEWISH AND ITALIAN ETHNIC MINORITIES The literature i n Chapter I, describing ethnic clustering and dispersion, contends that because immigrants were poor i n financial re-sources and had strong ethno-religious ties they concentrated i n urban ethnic clusters. However, as members of the ethnic minority improved their socio-economic status and as the intensity of ethno-religious identification weakened, they moved their residence from the ethnic concentration (or refrained from moving to the cluster i f coming from another North American city) to one of a variety of suburban communities. The implication i s that, generally, socio-economic and ethno-religious profiles of ethnic minority members residing in the urban ethnic cluster and in suburban communities d i f f e r significantly. In order to investigate the above assertion and the factors which influence ethnic clustering and dispersion, two ethnic minority groups, Jews and Italians, were examined. As w i l l be shown, members of the Jewish and Italian Vancouver Metropolitan area ethnic minorities are highly con-centrated i n specific neighbourhoods i n the City of Vancouver and have experienced, i n recent years, a sharp increase in suburban settlement i n Richmond, Burnaby, North Vancouver, and West Vancouver Census data were used to examine residential patterns of Jews, Italians, and a non-Jewish, non-Italian "control" population (subsequently referred to as the"control" population) located i n the Greater Vancouver Metropolitan area. Not only does the census provide highly reliable information on population s t a t i s t i c s , but ethnic groups are enumerated separately. Hence, population figures for Italians and Jews can be isolated and compared with those for a l l others. JEWISH AND ITALIAN CONCENTRAIONS IN THE CITY OF VANCOUVER 1 1 The 1961 census reports that 10,300 Italians and 7,301.Jews resided i n the Vancouver Metropolitan area (Vancouver, Burnaby, Richmond, North Vancouver, West Vancouver, New Westminster, Coquitlam, Port Coquitlam, Surrey, Port Moody, Fraser M i l l s , Delta, University Endowment Area), con-stituting 2.3# and 1$, respectively, of thethentotal Metro population. The proportions of a l l Metro area Jews, Italians, and the "control" population resident i n the City of Vancouver and i n the rest of the Meto-politan area are displayed i n Figure 1. Figure 1 PROPORTIONS IN CITY OF VANCOUVER AND REMAINING METROPOLITAN AREA: "CONTROL" POPULATION, JEWS, ITALIANS C i t y of Vancouver I—j Remaining Metro Area c o •rl U CO i-H P. o p« <4-l o 100 -80 -60 40 20 "Control" Population *>•;*: . .. ;»/ \ % .•*•** 1 • » ;^  * # » * * •# ** • « * * *''' * * "i Jews I t a l i a n s 1. Based on paternal descent These figures reveal that while the "control" population distributes i t s e l f almost equally between the City of Vancouver and the remaining Metro area, Jews and Italians are proportionately over-represented i n the c i t y and under-represented i n the rest of the Metropolitan area. A chi-square test (Table A, appendix I) indicates that the resident-i a l distribution of Italians and Jews between the City of Vancouver and the remaining Metropolitan area i s significantly different (P<£.05) from that of the "control" population. Jews and Italians are more l i k e l y to reside i n the ci t y than i s the rest of the population. Since Jews and Italians tend to locate i n the city, i t i s necessary to determine i f they concentrate i n particular neighbourhoods. Ethnic residential concentration or clustering does not imply that a given ethnic group constitutes the large majority of the population i n a particular area. Rather, ethnic concentration involves "varying degrees of over-representation of ethnic minorities i n certain areas and neighbourhoods of extreme cultural diversity" (A. Richmond, 1972, p. l ) . Italian and Jewish clustering was determined by examining those con-tinguous census tracts which contained the largest proportions of each ethnic minority. Four continguous westside tracts (22, 34, 35, 45), containing 42.4$ of a l l Vancouver City Jews, and four adjacent eastside tracts ( 7 , 8 , 9 , H ) , containing 36.4$ of a l l Vancouver City Italians, were located. The locations of these areas are displayed on the map i n Figure 2. The westside area bounded by Broadway and 57th Avenue on the north and south and Cambie and Granville Streets on the east and west, with 42.4$ of a l l Vancouver City Jews, contained less than 5$ of a l l city non-Jews and a total of only 7«2$ of the t o t a l Metro population. Similarly, the eastside area, on the shore of the Burrard Inlet, bounded by Terminal Avenue on the south, Boundary Road on the east and Clark Drive on the west, with 36.4$ of a l l Vancouver City Italians, contained less than 7$ of a l l Vancouver City non-Italians and only 8$ F I G U R E 2 L O C A T I O N S O F J E W I S H AND I T A L I A N C L U S T E R S 15 of the t o t a l Metropolitan area population. It i s obvious from these percentages, clearly l a i d oit i n Table 1, that Jews and Italians are over-represented i n particular neighbourhoods i n the City of Vancouver. TABLE 1 PERCENTAGES OF POPULATIONS IN JEWISH AND ITALIAN CLUSTERS WESTSIDE CLUSTER EASTSIDE CLUSTER City Jews City Non-Jews Total Metro Population City Italians City Non-Italians Total Metro Population Percentage Population 42.4 4.9 7.2 36.4 6.8 8.0 Absolute Numbers 2,692 22,286 24,978 4,711 26,190 30,901 I t must, however, be emphasized that because Jewish and Italian populations are minority groups, constituting 1.6$ and 3 .4$, respectively, of the t o t a l c i t y population, they do not constitute an absolute majority i n those areas i n which they are heavily concentrated and s t a t i s t i c a l l y over-represented. Chi-square tests (Table g, appendix i ) determined that Jewish resident-i a l distribution between four westside census tracts and the rest of the c i t y i s significantly different (P -C .05) from that of the non-Jewish c i t y pop-ulation. Similarly, Italian residential distribution between four east-side census tracts and the rest of the c i t y i s significantly different (P < . 0 5 ) from that of c i t y non-Italians. This substantiates the fact that Jews and Italians tend to concentrate i n particular areas i n the City of Vancouver. JEWISH AND ITALIAN SUBURBAN MOVEMENT While Jews and Italians concentrate i n particular neighbourhoods within the City of Vancouver, both groups have experienced increased settlement i n the suburban communities of Richmond, Burnaby, North Vancouver, and West Vancouver. Indication of change i n suburban settlement i s available through the comparison of 1951 with 1961 census data. Population numbers and factor increases for Jews, Italians, and the "control" population are displayed i n Table 2. The figures indicate quite clearly that a strong suburban movement characterized the Metro area during the 1950's, with a l l three groups participating. With the expansion of residential construction and, hence, an increase of housing opportunities, this was to be expected. What was not expected, however, was the dissimilar-i t y between the ethnic minorities and the "control" population i n terms of the proportion of suburban factor increase to over-all factor increase. Whereas, the proportion of the "control" population suburban factor increase to over-all factor increase, 1.89/1.47, was 1.28, i t was 1.to for Italians and 2.13 for Jews. Not only were Jews and Italians participating i n the suburban movement, they were participating at a greater rate than that of the remaining population. This was especially true of the Jewish population. QUESTIONS AND HYPOTHESES It has been confirmed i n the previous pages that Jews and Italians are two ethnic minorities which form ethnic clusters within the City of Vancouver. In recent years they have both experienced increasing suburban settlement, at a rate faster than the rest of the population. What factors contribute to their urban residential concentration and their increasing settlement i n the suburbs? Does the general assertion that specific characteristics distinguish urban cluster ethnic members from suburban ethnic members hold true for Jews and Italians? Is generation status, the further one i s removed from the immigrant generation, associated with residential clustering and distribution among TABLE 2 POPULATION CHANGE I95I-I96I: "CONTROL" POPULATION, ITALIANS, JEWS. Areas of Residence Italians Jews "Control" Population 1951 I96I Factor Increase 1?51 1961 Factor Increase 1?51 Factor 196l Increase Total Population i n Four Suburbs (Richmond, Burnaby, North Vancouver, West Vancouver) 9^7 3,699 3.91 219 626 2.86 120,542 227,236 1.89 Total Population i n the Remaining Metro Area 5,6l6 14,601 2.60 5,248 6,675 1.27 398,156 562,929 i . 4 i Total Metro Area 6,563 18,300 2.79 5,467 7,301 1.34 518,698 764,564 1.47 18 these two ethnic minorities? Does the nature and extent of social net-works based upon kith and kin influence residential choice among Italians and Jews? W i l l socio-economic status, ethno-religious identification, generation status, and social networks vary among ethnic members i n different suburban communities? I f so, w i l l these variation be related to travel distance (measured i n travel time) tothe urban cluster? Several major hypotheses, based on the queries, were formulated. They are as follows: (1) The socio-economic status of Jewish and Italian ethnic cluster residents w i l l be significantly lower than that of Jewish and Italian suburban population. (2) Jewish and Italian ethnic cluster residents w i l l manifest a significantly higher degree of ethno-religious identification than that of Jewish and Italian suburban residents. (3) The further the removal from the immigrant generation, the less l i k e l y one i s to locate i n the urban ethnic cluster. (k) Kin interaction and friendship ties with members of one's own ethnic group w i l l be stronger among cluster Jews and Italians than among Jewish and Italian suburban residents. (5) The closer i n travel time a suburban area i s to the urban ethnic cluster, the more similar w i l l be the socio-economic and ethno-religious profiles of Jewish and Italian residents to those of Jewish and Italian cluster residents. CHAPTER III METHODOLOGY In studying Italian and Jewish clustering and dispersion, the primary focus of research centered on a comparison of urban cluster Jews with those Jews located i n the four suburban municipalities of Richmond, Burnaby, North Vancouver, and West Vancouver, and, similarly, urban cluster Italians with those Italians resident i n the four suburban communities. E l i g i b i l i t y for inclusion i n the Jewish category was operationally defined as any individual who reported that either one or both parents were Jewish or who indicated that he had been converted to Judaism. Italians were operationally defined as those individuals who wera either born i n Italy or, i f born i n the United States or Canada, reported that one or both parents were of Italian extraction. A secondary dimension of interest focused on determining whether the suburban minority ethnic sub-populations differed significantly from the sub-urban majority ethnic sub-population. Individuals of Anglo-Saxon extraction, those persons who were born i n the British-Isles together with those born i n Canada or the United States who reported Anglo-Saxon ancestry, constituted 68$ of the t o t a l Richmond, Burnaby, North Vancouver, and West Vancouver population. The actual numbers and proportions of the t o t a l population of each area who claimed Anglo-Saxon ancestry i s l a i d out i n Table 3« TABLE 3 THE ANGLO-SAXON ETHNIC GROUP: FOUR SUBURBAN MUNICIPALITIES Richmond Burnaby ' North Vane West Vane. Numbers 26,053 65,188 45,906 21,002 Percentage of Total Populatior 60$ 65* 73$ 83$ Source: St a t i s t i c s Canada 20 Since Anglo-Saxons constituted the majority i n each geographic area, this ethnic group was chosen as the basis of comparison. SAMPLE SELECTION Two alternatives for identifying Jewish and Italian households were possible i n selecting samples from the urban cluster and the four suburbs. Ideally, a cross section of the t o t a l populations of a l l areas should have been screened for ethnic identity; those households reporting one or more Jewish or Italian members, as operationally defined, would then have been interviewed intensively. Yet, the relatively small percentage of Jews and Italians i n the t o t a l populations of these areas would have made such a procedure highly i n e f f i c i e n t . Many households would have had tabe approached to yi e l d the desired number of Jewish and Italian households for interviews. Because of limitations on time, this alternative was rejected. The second alternative, reliance on master l i s t s of a l l Jewish and Italian households i n the residential study areas had a serious limitation. The only method of compiling such master l i s t s was to extract names from ethnic and religious organization membership rosters (these often included names of persons who were not a f f i l i a t e d but who were regarded as potential members), ethnic charity supporters'lists (these too included potential supporters), ethnic newspapers' subscribers l i s t s , and the Vancouver Telephone Directory (Jewish and Italian-sounding names were extracted). Whereas such compilation assured a relatively comprehensive coverage of Jewish and Italian households, i t did not, i n a l l probability, include a l l households. Such omissions represent the most serious restriction on the use of l i s t s as the basis of sample selection, since the characteristics of the unlisted may be quite different from those of the l i s t e d . While this limitation was recognized, i t was decided that 21 sample selection based on master l i s t s was the more feasible of the two techniques. Hence, master l i s t s were compiled for the Jewish and Italian populations. A l l l i s t e d respondents contacted for interviews were screened to determine i f they f i t t e d into the Italian or Jewish categories as operationally defined i n this research. The l i s t e d names and addresses were divided into five categories corresponding to the urban ethnic cluster and the four suburban communities. The number of Italian and Jewish households i n each geographic area i s shown i n Table k. TABLE h NUMBERS OF JEWISH AND ITALIAN HOUSEHOLDS IN FIVE RESIDENTIAL AREAS Residential Area Italians Jews Cluster 890 710 Richmond 92 130 Burnaby 2k2 96 North Vancouver 153 76 West Vancouver 87 103 Selection of sampling units within each area was made through the use of a table of random numbers. This insured that every l i s t e d household unit within an area had an equal chance of being included i n the particular areas sample. Either the husband or the wife qualified as a respondent... It was not possible to compile a near-comprehensive l i s t of the Anglo-Saxon ethnic group. Therefore, the procedure instituted was to select every third home on a block. I f one or more of the residents i n the home answered that they were of AngJoSaxon descent, they were asked to participate i n the sample survey. This procedure was followed u n t i l the desired Anglo-Saxon sample size for each geographic area was contacted. (Not a l l Anglo-Saxon respondents who were contacted agreed to be interviewed. See Table 5, r Anglo-Saxon Response Rates). SAMPLE SIZE AND RESPONSE RATE While an attempt was made to obtain a 10$ sample of a l l I t a l i a n and Jewish households i n each of the four suburbs and a 3$ sample from each ethnic cluster, not a l l persons contacted were available for interviews. Similarly, while a sample of 60 Anglo-Saxon households, 15 i n each of the four suburbs, was desired, not a l l respondents contacted could be interviewed. The number of selected households, rates of response, and reasons for incomplete interviews are displayed for Italians i n Table 5, for Jews i n Table 6, and for Anglo-Saxons i n Table rJ. Of the t o t a l number of households originally selected (206), interviews were completed with 157, yielding a completion rate of 76$. Of the t o t a l number of households selected, 19$ refused to grant interviews. The rate of refusal was highest for the Anglo-Saxon group (2850); Italian (l6#) and Jewish (15$) rates were quite similar. THE SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE According to Festinger and Katz (1966, p. 3^0 ), a survey questionnaire "must translate research objectives into specific questions, the answers to which w i l l provide the data necessary to test the hypotheses." The questionn-o aire used i n this research contained thirty-eight questions designed to e l i c i t information pertaining to the following: 2 Questionnaire contained i n Appendix I TABLE 5 RESPONSE RATE OF ITALIANS SAMPLED Responses North West Cluster Richmond Burnaby Vancouver Vancouver Total Number of Selected Households 25 10 20 15 10 80 Moved Out of Survey Area 1 (5) 1 (1) Not Found at Home Despite 1 Repeated V i s i t s (k) 1 (5) 1 (7) 3 Language D i f f i c u l t i e s 2 (8) 1 (5) 3 00 Refused to Grant Interviews 2 (8) 2 (20) (20) 3 (20) 2 (20) 13 (16) Number of Completed Interviews 20 (80) 8 (80) 13 (65) n (73) 8 (80) 60 (75) Number {(Percent) TABLE 6 RESPONSE RATE OF JEWS SAMPLED Responses Cluster Richmond Burnaby North Vancouver West Vancouver Total Number of Selected Households 22 14 10 10 / 10 66 Moved Out of Survey-Area 1 (5) * 1 (2) Not Found at Home Despite Repeated V i s i t s l (7) 1 (2) •Language D i f f i c u l t i e s Refused to Grant Interviews 3 (14) 2 ( 14 ) (10) 2 (20) 2 (20) 10 (15) Number of Completed Interviews 18 (82) 11 (79) 9 (90) 8 (80) 8 (80) 54 (82) Number (Percent) * One cluster respondent spoke only Yiddish. Because of interviewer's fa m i l i a r i t y with Yiddish language, interview was completed. TABLE 7 RESPONSE RATE OF ANGLO-SAXONS SAMPLED Responses Richmond Burnaby North Vancouver West Vancouver Total Number of Selected Households 15 15 15 / 15 60 •Moved out of Survey-Area *Not Found at Home Despite Repeated V i s i t s Language D i f f i c u l t i e s Refused to Grant Interview 3 (20) 5 (33) 6 (40) 3 (20) 17 (28) Number of Completed Interviews 12 (80) 10 (67) 9 (60) 12 (80) 43 (72) Number (Percent) * Since sample selected on a door-to-door basis, not from a master l i s t , these categories do not apply. 26 The degree of ethno-religious identification as man-if e s t by ethno-religious behavior, (questions 17, 18, 19, 20, 31, 37, 28, 29, 30, 31), and ethno-religious attitudes, beliefs, and behavioural intentions (questions 32, 33* 3^ 35> 36, 37, 38). Generation status (questions 3,^ >5>6). Socio-economic status(questions 7,8*9*10,11; 12,26). The nature and extent of intra-ethnic and inter-ethnic social networks (questions 22, 23, 2k, 25). Demographic information such as family size, age of head of household, and length of residence inthe municipality (questions 1,2,13). Intention of moving from the present municipality of residence, reasons for such intended movement, and future destination (questions Ik, 15, l6). Generation status was calculated based on a four-point schema. Goldstein and Goldscheider (1968, p. 39) comment that "immigrants who arrived as children might properly be regarded as a group i n themselves." Therefore, the f i r s t generation was divided into two categories: Fj_ included a l l foreign-born persons who came to North America at age 12 or more; F 2 included a l l foreign-born persons who arrived i n North America as children (under 12 years of age) and therefore spent most of their formative years i n Canada or the United States. Second generation (S) included a l l North American-born persons of foreign-born parents. The third generation (T) included a l l North American-born persons of North American-born parents, thus encompassing third, fourth, and higher generation persons. W. Warner and L. Srole, who used this four-category classificatory scheme i n their study of the Jewish community i n Yankee City, maintain that such a c l a s s i -f i c a t i o n i s the most precise practical for research purposes (l9^ 7> pp. 200^ -202) In order to provide a satisfactory assessment of occupational status, defined i n terms of social prestige, occupations were c l a s s i f i e d according to the Blishen socio-economic index (Blishen, 1958). This index was based on 1951 census data concerning the education and income levels of 343 occupations 27 i n Canada as classified by Statistics Canada. The 3^3 occupational group- ' ings were f i r s t ranked according to the mean income and mean years of schooling reported. From this data, standard scores were computed for education and income and each occupation rated according to this combined score. The scores' ranged from a low of 32.0 for hunters and trappers to a high of 90.0 for judges. In addition to scoring occupation, Blishen divided his occupations into seven classes. Blishen Socio-economic Social Class Index  1 90.0 - 73.2 2 73.1 - 57.0 3 56.9 - 52.0 4 51.9 - 50.5 5 50.4 - 45.1 6 45.0 - 41.8 7 41.8 - 32.0 The boundaries between classes were based on comparisons with prestige scales devised by Tuckman (±947), Hall and Jones (1950) and Moser and Hall (1954). According to A. Richmond "this index represents the best available means of classifying occupational status i n Canada" (1972, p. 24). A l l respondents i n this sample survey were cla s s i f i e d according to the seven classes devised by Blishen. , Three specific questionnaires were ut i l i z e d , one for each ethnic group, rather than a general one. It was decided that specific questions like "What proportion of your close friends who reside i n the Vancouver Metropolitan area are Jewish?" administered to Jews, "What proportion are Italian!" asked of Italians, and "What proportion are Anglo-Saxon?" asked of Anglo-Saxons, I 28 were less ambiguous than a general question l i k e "What proportion of your close friends who reside i n the Vancouver Metropolitan area are of the same ethnic extraction as yourself, or are members of your ethnic group?" Questions 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 25, 28, 35, 36 are specifically worded on each group questionnaire. The questionnaires contained both open-ended questions calling f o r a word or sentence response, and items phrased to be compatible with a Likert response format, l i t h e latter, respondents were asked to indicate their degree of agreement or disagreement along a four or five point con-tinuum as for example: (a) strongly agree (b) agree (c) uncertain (d) dis-agree (e) strongly disagree. Responses were coded 1 through 5, with higher numbers indicating greater agreement with the item. A l l coded responses were transformed to common standardized units so that a l l variables could be compared as to their relative value regardless of the units i n which they were measured. STATISTICAL TECHNIQUES Two multivariate s t a t i s t i c a l techniques, factor analysis and stepwise discriminant analysis, were u t i l i z e d to analyze the respone data obtained from the sample survey. Essentially, factor analysis i s a s t a t i s t i c a l procedure which re-duces a number of intercorrelated variables to a smaller number of clusters or factors which, when taken together, account for the major proportion of the variance of the original variables. Factor analysis was used i n this research for the three reasons: 1. A principal objective of factor analysis i s to determine the underlying dimensionality of a set of variables (i.e. questions), to test for the empirical existence of s t a t i s t i c a l l y independent clusters or groups 29 of highly interrcorrelated characteristics. Having delineated the separate patterns of interrelationships involved, the relationship of each variable to the separate patterns and the scores of each respondent on these patterns can be determined. 2. Factor analysis can be useful for attaining s c i e n t i f i c parsimony or economy of description. Data on a large number of variables can be unwieldly for description or manipulation. The management, analysis, and understanding of such data can_be f a c i l i t a t e d by reducing them to their common factor patterns. Since these factors concentrate and index the dispersed information i n the original data, they can replace the larger number of variables without much loss of information (Rummel, 1967, p. kkQ). 3 . Factor analysis can be used to transform data to meet the require-ments of other s t a t i s t i c a l techniques, specifically, i n this research, step-wise discriminant analysis. According to Snedecor and Cochran "in practical application, correlations between the variates usually have the effect of making the discriminant function less accurate" (1967, p. 4 l 6 ) . Because factor analysis allows for the computation of uncorrelated or orthogonal factor scores for each respondent on a l l factors, these scores can become new data for use i n stepwise discriminant analysis. Stepwise discriminant analysis, the second multivariate s t a t i s t i c a l technique u t i l i z e d i n this research, i s a procedure for estimating the linear functions that best separate discrete groups to test whether these groups d i f f e r significantly and, i f so, to detect the relative efficiency of the variables which f a c i l i t a t e the discrimination. Having divided each ethnic group into spatial sub-groups based upon geographic area of residence, stepwise discriminant analysis was employed to determine i f these groups were significantly different as measured by the factor scores of each respondent on a l l the factors. This technique was u t i l i z e d to 30 identify those factors which contributed significantly to sub-group differentiation at the .05 level and the relative importance of each contributing factor to the discrimination among the groups. • 31 CHAPTER IV RESULTS AND ANALYSIS DESCRIPTION OF FACTORS EXTRACTED FROM QUESTIONNAIRE DATA A 32-variable correlation matrix, calculated from the 157 questionn-aires, was factor analyzed by means of a principal axis factoring solution ( i n i t i a l communalities, as squared multiple correlations of each variable with a l l others, were placed i n the principal diagonal of the matrix). The rotated factor matrix, obtained by applying the varimax rotation solution to the principal axis factor matrix, i s presented i n Table C (Appendix II). Four orthogonal factors were extracted, accounting for 68.4$ of the t o t a l variance of the original variables. These four factors represent s t a t i s t i -cally independent (uncorrelated) clusters of relationship common to a l l 32 variables. They may be thought of as four categories into which the variables cluster or, alternately, as illuminating four empirically different pers-pectives for describing the questionnaire data. Factor loadings are as correlation coefficients between variables and factors. They are "measurements of which variables are involved i n what factor and the degree and direction of this relationship" (Rummel, 1970, p. 137). Comparison of the factor loadings for a l l factors and variables enables one to identify those variables most closely related to a factor and allows for description of each factor. Variables, reordered according to their highest correlation with a factor together with their loading on that factor, are displayed i n Table 8. The four factors extracted from the questionnaire data were described as follows: TABLE 8 - VARIABLES REORDERED ACCORDING TO HIGHEST CORRELATION WITH FACTOR FACTORS VARIABLES 1. Participation i n the act of prayer (PRAYER) .87 2. Belief i n the existence of God (BEU.EFGD) ^ .86 3 . The importance of children marrying a member of .86 the same ethnic group (MARRY ET) 4. Sending one's children to a religious school .84 (REL SCHL) 5. Belief that religious truth i s the highest form .84 of truth REL TRUT) 6. Enjoying the intellectual stimulation of learning .82 about one's religion (LEARNING) 7. Membership i n a number of ethnic and/or religious .81 organizations (REL ORGS) 8. The presence of relatives i n one's municipality .80 (NO. REL) 9. Members of the same ethnic group as the largest .80 proportion of one's close friends (CLOSE FD) 10. V i s i t i n g with relatives i n one's municipaltiy .78 (VST REL) 11. Attendence at prayer services (PREYSERV) .76 12. Refusal 1Q change one's name to a less ethnic- .74 sounding name ETH NAME) 13. Receiving ethnic-Canadian literature (ETH BOOKS) .65 VARIABLES FACTORS ik. Fluency i n speaking the ethnic language (SPKET LG) 15. Belief that the notion of God i s not outdated i n this s c i e n t i f i c era (SCIENCE) IS. Religious symbols i n the home (REL SYMB) 17. Desiring one's children to speak the ethnic language (CHID SPK) 18. Generation status (GEN STAT) 19. Receiving literatrue from the ethnic country (FR BOOKS) 20. Church membership (CHURCHMB) ': 21. V i s i t i n g with members of ethnic groups different from one's own (VST NETH) 22. Cfccupation(OCCUP) 23. Financing children's university education (S UNV) 2k. Number of cars owned (NO. CARS) 25. Membership i n general organizations (GEN ORGS) 26. Intention of moving from one's municipality (INTENDMV) 27. Age of head of household(AGE) 28. Language spoken i n the home (LANG HOM) 29. Number of children i n the family (NO. CHLD) 30. Length of residence i n one's municipality (YRS. RESD) 31. Satisfaction with one's present car (CAR DESR) 32.. Home ownership (HOUSING) .66 .65 .61 .58 • 53 • 52 .kk -.39 .85 .80 .76 .69 .Ik .62 .62 -51 -.79 .61 34 Factor 1 clearly reflects a dimension of Ethno-Religious Identification. This factor correlates positively with variables 1 through 20 and correlates negatively with variable 21. Respondents with high positive scores on this factor strongly identify with their particular ethno-religious group. Factor 2 was identified as Socio-Economic Status. This factor correlates positively with variables 22 through 25. Respondents with high positive scores are high i n socio-economic status. Factor 3 was best identified as a Residential Mobility Index. It correlates positively with variable 26 and correlates negatively with var-iables 27 through 30. Negatively correlated variables relate to. the dem-ographic characteristics of those respondents who are l i k e l y to move from their municipality. A high positive score denotes propensity to move. Factor h was most aptly identified as Status Aspiration. This factor correlates negatively with variable 31 and positively with variable 32. Respondents with high negative scores on this factor do not own a home and desire a more expensive car. THE JEWISH ETHNIC GROUP Jewish respondents were divided into five spatial groups corresponding to location of residence in the Jewish cluster, Richmond, Burnaby, North Vancouver, or West Vancouver. Step-wise discriminant determined that three factors, ethno-religious identification, residential mobility, and socio-economic status, differentiated among the residential groups (P <- .05). The most powerful discriminator was ethno-religious identification; the second and third strongest were mobility and socio-economic status. Ethno-Religious Identification A l l residential groups were significantly different from each other on the ethno-religious factor (P < .05) with two 3 5 exceptions: Richmond was not significantly different from the Cluster, nor was Burnaby different from West Vancouver. These results indicate that while Cluster and Richmond Jews manifest a similar degree of Jewish id e n t i -fication, the intensity of their "Jewishness" i s significantly different from that of West Vancouver, Burnaby, and North Vancouver Jews. Furthermore, while the magnitude of ethno-religious identification i s similar among West Vancouver and Burnaby Jews, the extent of their Jewish identification i s significantly different from that of North Vancouver Jews. A comparison of group means on the ethno-religious factor (Figure 3) clearly shows that the intensity of Jewish identification i s strongest among dluster and Richmond Jews. A relatively weak ethno-religious identification i s exhibited by West Vancouver and Burnaby Jews, but the North Vancouver group manifests the lowest degree of Jewish identification. Several variables which were highly correlated with the queries and hypotheses outlined i n Chapter II were investigated i n order to obtain a more detailed account of the composition and characteristics of Jews i n each residential area and to determine the forces involved i n ethnic clustering and dispersion. Generation Status The high positive loading (.52) of generation status on the ethno-religious factor indicates that there i s a high positive correlation between this variable and the factor. This suggests that the more one i s removed from the immigrant generation, the less intense his ethno-religious identification. This being the case, i t would be expected that generation status i s associated with residence in specific communities. The generation breakdown of the t o t a l Jewish sample i s shown i n Table 9. F I G U R E 3 E T H N O - R E L I G I O U S I D E N T I F I C A T I O N GROUP MEANS BY A R E A OF R E S I D E N C E J E W I S H R E S P O N D E N T S 2.0 -1.0 -0 1.0 -2.0 -o c u (0 CZ 1_ CZ >• > (0 CD O JZt > +- £ (0 JZ in JZ CZ +- +-Z3 o L_ 1_ m — — Z3 O <D o a. CD •z. 3s R e s i d e n t i a 1 A r e a s 37 TABLE 9 GENERATION STATUS OF JEWISH RESPONDENTS F 2 S T Total Numbers 9 12 23 10 5k Percent of Total Sample ni 22$ *3* 18$ 100$ I t i s evident from these figures that second generation Jews comprise the largest generation category, accounting for almost one-half of the t o t a l . sample. The remaining generation categories are composed of a more or less equal number of respondents. The residential distribution of each generation group i s displayed i n Figure k. It appears that foreign-born respondents tend' to reside i n the Cluster while North American-born respondents (S and T generation groups) are more l i k e l y to locate i n suburban communities. However, a chi-square test determined that there i s no significant difference (P> .05) between the residential distribution of foreign-born Jews and that of North American-born -. Jews (Table D, Appendix II). This suggests, therefore,that generation status among Jewish respondents i s not associated with location i n specific residential areas. Familial Interaction And Friendship Ties Variables associated with fam i l i a l interaction and friendship ti e s were examined to determine their relationship to location of residence. Having relatives located i n one's municipality of residence, the frequency of v i s i t s with these relatives, and the proportion of the respondent's friends who were of Jewish extraction, were investigated. The high positive loadings of the above variables (.80, .78, .80, respectively)on the ethno-religious identification 38 F I G U R E 4 R E S I D E N T I A L D I S T R I B U T I O N B Y G E N E R A T I O N G R O U P S J E W I S H R E S P O N D E N T S F, F 2 S T G e n e r a t i o n G r o u p s C l u s t e r I | B u r n a b y i 1 N o r t h V a n e . W e s t V a n e . I ^ R i c h m o n d 39 factor demonstrates that a very high positive correlation exists between these variables and the factor. Therefore, i t was expected that Jewish respondents located i n different residential areas would d i f f e r with regard to the magnitude of kin interaction and the extent of friendship ties with other Jews. The response distribution to the question "Do you have relatives (other than your immediate family) resident i n your municipality?" i s exhibited i n Figure 5. The figures show that the largest percentage of Jewish respondents reporting the presence of relatives i n their municipality were found among Cluster and Richmond Jews (89$ and 73$)' The over-whelming majority of Burnaby, West Vancouver, and North Vancouver respondents indicated, on the other hand, that no relatives were located i n their municipalities. A chi-square test, used to determine significant differences among group distributions, established that the cluster was not significantly different (P y .05) from Richmond (Table E . l , Appendix Il)nor were West Vancouver, Burnaby and North Vancouver significantly different franeach other (Table E.2). How-ever, the Cluster and Richmond distributions were significantly different (P < .05) from those of the three remaining suburban communities (Table E.3). It appears, then, that having relatives or not having relatives i n one's municipality i s associated with residential location that this variable different-iates areas marked by a higher degree of Jewish identification from those areas characterized by a lesser degree of "Jewishness". Investigation of the frequency of v i s i t s between respondents and their relatives determined that Cluster and Richmond Jews v i s i t more frequently with relatives than do those Jews located i n West Vancouver, Burnaby, and North Vancouver. Ninety-four percent of the Cluster respondents and 75$ of the Richmond group reported that they visited very frequently or frequently with 40 FIGURE 5 PROPORTION OF RESPONDENTS WITH RELATIVES IN OWN MUNICIPALITY BY AREA OF RES IDENCE JEWISH RESPONDENTS 100 -50 -l'.„' '1 t 4 • •*. o o T3 c ro C (D >- > CO O > +- £ ca jC 10 x: +- CZ +-O w 1_ l _ — •— CD =J o C J ce CD Res i d e n t i a 1 A r e a s t ^ ' - - ; l Have R e l a t i v e s i i Do Not Have R e l a t i v e s hi relatives (Figure 6 ) . A chi-square test concluded that no significant difference ( P > .05) existed between these two groups of respondents (Table F, Appendix I I ) . Similar v i s i t i n g patterns did not exist among West Vancouver, Burnaby, and North Vancouver respondents. West Vancouver respondents reported only occasional v i s i t s ; the North Vancouver respondent indicated that he never vi s i t e d with his relatives. While the small number of respondents i n these three areas precluded the use of a chi-square test to determine significant differences, i t i s obvious that v i s i t i n g patterns of West Vancouver, Burnaby, and North Vancouver Jews are different fromthose of Cluster and Richmond Jewish respondents. These data suggest, therefore, that the magnitude of fam i l i a l interaction i s associated with residential location i n that i t discriminates between areas relatively high i n Jewish identification and those marked by a lesser degree. Examination of friendship ties discloses that this variable, too, i s associated with residential location. Over 90$ of Cluster Jews and over 80$ of those i n Richmond indicated that their c i r c l e of close friends i s composed exclusively or almost exclusively of other Jews (Figure 7)« Such homogeneous Jewish friendship circles were not evident among West Vancouver, Burnaby, nor North Vancouver Jewish respondents. While a substantial proportion of res-pondents i n each of the above three areas reported that many or some of their close friends were Jewish, over 35$ i n We&t Vancouver, over 40$ i n Burnaby and over 60$ i n North Vancouver indicated that their friendship circles were exclusively non-Jewish. A chi-square test determined that friendship patterns of Cluster and Richmond Jews were not significantly different (P > .05) from each other (Table G.t,Appendix II), nor were those of West Vancouver, Burnaby, and North 42 F I G U R E 6 F R E Q U E N C Y O F V I S I T S W I T H R E L A T I V E S R E S I D I N G IN T H E S A M E M U N I C I P A L I T Y : B Y A R E A O F R E S I D E N C E J E W I S H R E S P O N D E N T S • o o c •o c ID <D c >• > 4 - c > X ! 00 E ra JZ *• c -t-— u (/) i_ i_ O •— CD o S: CD z R e s I d e n t i a 1 A r e a s V e r y F r e q u e n t l y ' * F r e q u e n t l y Ev:/"-1 O c c a s i o n a l I y f • 1 N e v e r F I G U R E 7 E X T E N T O F J E W I S H F R I E N D S H I P S B Y A R E A O F R E S I D E N C E J E W I S H R E S P O N D E N T S j r - ^ ' - ' J A II J e w i s h F r i e n d s I 1 A l m o s t A l l J e w i s h F r i e n d s E E S M a n y J e w i s h F r i e n d s I J S o m e J e w i s h F r i e n d s I J N o J e w i s h F r i e n d s kk Vancouver different from each other (Table G .2) . However, the Cluster and Richmond patterns were significantly different from those of the remaining three suburban communities (Table G .3) . Evidently, friendship ties d i f f e r -entiate residential areas characterized by a high degree of Jewish identi-fi c a t i o n from those marked by a lesser degree. Residential Mobility The second discriminator brought down by discriminant analysis was residential mobility. This factor, combined with the ethno-religious factor, differentiated a l l residential groups fromeach other with the exception of the Cluster and Burnaby. Residential mobility, then was in f l u e n t i a l i n differentiating West Vancouver from Burnaby, two groups which had been similar on the ethno-religious factor. Group means on this second factor index relative residential s t a b i l i t y -mobility among respondents in the five areas (Figure 8). Comparing these figures, one finds that West Vancouver respondents are the most residentially stable; Cluster and Richmond respondents follow. Relatively greater residential mobility i s displayed by Burnaby and North Vancouver respondents. Mobility information was obtained primarily through a question asking i f the respondent had any intentions of moving from his present municipality within the next five years, and, i f so, why? He was also asked to state his probable destination. The "intent to move" breakdown of Jewish respondents within each of the five residential communities i s displayed i n Figure 9« None of the respondents i n West Vancouver, the Cluster, nor i n Richmond expressed intent to move although a small proportion i n each of the three areas indicated uncertainty. On the other hand, a substantial proportion of Burnaby and North Vancouver respondents expressed a probable or definite 45 F I G U R E 8 R E S I D E N T I A L M O B I L I T Y G R O U P M E A N S • B Y A R E A OF R E S I D E N C E J E W I S H R E S P O N D E N T S + 2.0 -I + 1.0 -i c cd S tx Z3 O u o - l.o H 2.0 H CD +-</> zz> O XI c o E -ct: >-JO (0 C i_ CO o tz ro o o c ro CD R e s i d e n t i a I A r e a s 46 F I G U R E 9 I N T E N T I O N T O M O V E F R O M P R E S E N T M U N I C I P A L I T Y B Y A R E A O F R E S I D E N C E J E W I S H R E S P O N D E N T S IOO CO g •d P. CO V U o 8 o u 6) 50 -i . t- • 1 +-C o £ O DC >-(0 c L 3 CD O C ro > L. O i . : u c ro > CD R e s i d e n t i a I A r e a s D e f i n i t e l y N o t I q ' P r o b a b I y N o t K " f d U n c e r t a i n I I P r o b a b l y Y e s I I D e f i n i t e l y Y e s intention of moving from their municipalities. A chi-square test confirmed that West Vancouver, the Cluster, and Richmond were not significantly different (P > .05) (Table H.l, Appendix II) nor was North Vancouver sign-ificantly different from Burnaby H.2. However, Burnaby and North Vancouver were significantly different (P ^ . 0 5 ) from the remaining three residential groups (Table H.3). Those North Vancouver and Burnaby respondents who indicated a strong propensity to move were queried as to why they intended to move and to where they expected to go. The four Burnaby respondents reported the following: one respondent, a United States citizen, planned to return to that country to be with relatives and friends; two respondents planned to purchase homes in other suburban municipalities, one in North Vancouver, the other in Coquitlam; one respondent, employed in downtown New Westminster, planned to move to that municipality to decrease travel time to and from his place of employment. Of the five North Vancouver respondents, one intended to leave Vancouver upon completion of his university education but was uncertain as to his destination; two respondents, who perceived employment opportunities in Eastern Canada as superior to those in Vancouver, intended to move to Montreal or Toronto; one respondent intended to purchase a home in Coquitlam or Surrey; one planned to move to the West End which, he contended, was "a much more cosmopolitan area with a lot more excitement and action than you find in this place." None of the above respondents intimated that a lack of Jewish facilities nor a lack of Jewish friends was connected in any way with -intentions to move, nor did they indicate that their destination might be the Cluster. 48 Socio-Economic Status A third discriminator, socio-economic status, combined with ethno-religious identification and residential mobility, significantly different-iated (P .05) among a l l the residential groups. Group mean scores on the socio-economic status factor are shown i n Figure 10. A t-test, used to compare group means, determined that West Vancouver respondents, the highest socio-economic status group, differed significantly (P ^  .05) from other suburban Jews but did not d i f f e r s i g n i -ficantly (P > .05) from Cluster Jews. West Vancouver and Cluster variances were, however, significantly different (F-test, P ^ . 0 5 ) , with West Vancouver being the more homogeneous of the two residential groups. Of the three remaining suburbs, North Vancouver and Burnaby, the lowest socio-economic status groups, did not d i f f e r significantly (P > .05) from each other, but were different (P < .05) from Richmond. Richmond, the most heterogeneous of the three groups, was similar, i n i t s variance, to the Cluster. The results of socio-economic status data suggest that although this variable i s associated with residential location, i t clearly does not d i s -tinguish areas marked by a high degree of ethno-religious identification from those characterized by lesser Jewish identification, nor does i t distinguish between Cluster and suburban residents. Correlations Between Travel Time to the Cluster and Two Factors,  Ethno-Religious Identification. and Socio-Economic Status Estimates of travel time between the Jewish Cluster and each of the four suburban communities were calculated to ascertain i f significant correl-ations between this attribute and the two factors, ethno-religious identification and socio-economic status, existed. Information on distance and average daily speed along major cit y routes from the center of the sample population i n 49 F I G U R E S O C I O - E C O N O M I C S T A T U S GROUP MEANS BY A R E A OF R E S I D E N C E J E W I S H R E S P O N D E N T S + 2.0 pi cd o u o + 1.0 H JZZL - l.o H - , o H 0 in 3 TD C O E x: o or >-(O c 1_ m o c 1_ o o c: 0 R e s i d e n t i a I A r e a s 50 the urban Cluster to the sample center i n each of the suburbs was provided by Link-Node Network Description maps (Vancouver Transportation Study, 19o7)« Distance divided by speed yielded travel time estimates. These estimates are displayed i n Figure 11. While a correlation of .55 was found between travel time approximations and mean scores for each suburb on the ethno-religious factor, this product-moment correlation coefficient was not significant ( P > . 0 5 ) . Similarly, a - .56 correlation between travel time estimates and socio-economic status mean scores was not significant (P 7 " . 0 5 ) . Hence, i t must be concluded, based on a sample of only four areas, that no significant relationship exists between travel time to the Cluster and the degree of Jewish i d e n t i f i -cation manifest by suburban residents, nor between travel time and the socio-economic status of suburban respondents. THE ITALIAN ETHNIC GROUP Italian respondents were divided into five residential groups corresp-onding to location i n the Italian Cluster, Richmond, Burnaby, North Vancouver, or West Vancouver. Stepwise discriminant analysis determined that the two factors which differentiated the spatial groups from each other were ethno-religious id e n t i f i c a t i on and socio-economic status, i n that order. Ethno-Religious Identification •Al l residential groups were significantly different from each other on the ethno-religious factor with the exception of the Cluster and Burnaby. Hence, Italian Cluster residents and those located i n Burnaby manifest a similar degree of ethnoieligious identification. FIGURE 11 TRAVEL TIME BETWEEN FOUR SUBURBAN COMMUNITIES AND THE JEWISH CLUSTER 52 Group means on the above factor reveal that the intensity of ethno-religious identification i s strongest among Cluster and Burnaby Italians (Figure 12), and i s lowest among Richmond and West Vancouver respondents. The same variables investigated i n the Jewish group, generation status, kin interaction, and friendship t i e s , were extracted from Italian data and examined so as to determine the characteristics and composition of the Italian group i n each residential area and to gain more substantial insight into ethnic clustering and dispersion. Generation Status The generation breakdown of the t o t a l Italian sample i s shown i n Table 10, below. Foreign-born Italians who came to North America at age 12 TABLE 10 GENERATION STATUS OF ITALIAN RESPONDENTS F l F 2 s T Numbers 23 10 IT 10 Percent of Total Sample 38$ 17$ 28$ 17$ or more comprise the largest generation category, followed by second-gen-eration respondents. The remaining categories, Fg and T, are smaller than the preceeding two and are composed of an equal number of respondents. The residential distribution of each generation group i s displayed i n Figure 13. It appears that foreign-born respondents (F^ and F2)tend to reside i n the Cluster, while North American-born respondents (S and T) are more l i k e l y to locate in suburban communities. A chi-square test (Table I, Appendix II) confirmed that the residential distribution of the former i s s t a t i s t i c a l l y significantly different ( P < . 0 5 ) from that of the la t t e r . F I G U R E 12 E T H N O - R E L I G I O U S I D E N T I F I C A T I O N G R O U P M E A N S B Y A R E A OF R E S I D E N C E I T A L I A N R E S P O N D E N T S + 2.0 -+ 1.0 -- 1.0 -- 2.0 -O • c o X) c 1_ c >- > ro co o JZ) > 4- E ro JZ cn JZ CZ +- +-ZJ - o !_ l_ w — '— Z3 (> CO O or CQ 3: R e s I d e n t i a I A r e a s F I G U R E 1 3 R E S I D E N T I A L D I S T R I B U T I O N B Y G E N E R A T I O N G R O U P S I T A L I A N R E S P O N D E N T S F, F 2 S T G e n e r a t i o n G r o u p s u-'rf'i C l u s t e r I J R i c h m o n d I I W e s t V a n e . I J B u r n a b y V ;• i N o r t h V a n e . 55 These data for the Italian group, therefore, indicate that generation status i s associated with location of residence i n the Cluster among foreign-born persons and with residence i n suburban communities among North American-born persons of Italian extraction. Familial Interaction and Friendship Ties Familial interaction and friendship ti e s were examined and, as with Jews, i t was expected that Italian respondents located i n different residential areas w i l l d i f f e r from each other with respect to the intensity of kin i n -teraction and the extent of friendship ties with other Italians. The Cluster and Burnaby contained the highest proportions of res-pondents reporting the presence of relatives i n their municipality (Figure Ik). These two groups were not found to d i f f e r significantly, (P > . 0 5 ) , nor were they significantly different from the North Vancouver group (Table J . l , Appendix II ) . Over 60$ of the respondents i n each of the two remaining communities, Richmond and West Vancouver, indicated that no relatives reside i n their municipalities. While these two groups were not significantly different from each other (Table J.2), they were significantly different (P ^ . .05) from the Cluster, Burnaby, and North Vancouver groups (Table J .3)« Having relatives i n one's municipality thus appears to discriminates areas marked by a higher degree of ethno-religious identification from those character-ized by a lesser degree. An examination of frequency of v i s i t s between respondents reporting the presence of relatives i n their municipalities and these relatives demon-strates that the magnitude of famil i a l interaction i s most intense among Cluster and Burnaby respondents (Figure 15). 56 F I G U R E 14 P R O P O R T I O N OF R E S P O N D E N T S WITH R E L A T I V E S IN OWN M U N I C I P A L I T Y BY A R E A OF R E S I D E N C E I T A L I A N R E S P O N D E N T S 100 -50 -IS * / 1, 'y i" j, • • • * v.* \ 1 V . ' . V ' •;.;)•.:, , **, • "* f-* • ° , ^ .i . . *J . * . * • * * J i-i •.',.* hi • * • ' tf j v** ' I ' ** * - . l • * * / . ' ' r* V;*.K -,-<• .. ••v "•. )•. \ 1 <l „"". zL. • • 1 1 ' , o • c O 1_ ro X ) CD >- > ro c 4- X) > O (D x: E C 4- 4- x: — l _ L. (rt o O 13 O Q) .— m 2 • 3: or R e s i d e n t i a I A r e a s b^--"l H a v e R e l a t i v e s I I Do N o t H a v e R e l a t i v e s 5 7 F I G U R E 1 5 F R E Q U E N C Y O F V I S I T S W I T H R E L A T I V E S R E S I D I N G I N T H E S A M E _ M U N I C I P A L I T Y : B Y A R E A O F R E S I D E N C E I T A L I A N R E S P O N D E N T S o t= o ro c >- > c ro © o > 4- ro JZ E Ul c +- -t-n i_ i_ u w — 23 o — <D o m 2 3 R e s i d e n t i a I A r e a s EES! V e r y F r e q u e n t l y t 1 F r e q u e n t l y E£3) O c c a s i o n a l I y \ \ N e v e r 58 One hundred percent of the Cluster respondents and 80$ of those residing i n Burnaby reported that they vi s i t e d very frequently or frequently with relatives compared to 29$ i n North Vancouver and none in West Vancouver and Richmond. A chi-square test performed on v i s i t i n g distributions of the Cluster and Burnaby respondents substantiated that they were•not significantly different (P y- .05) from each other (Table K.l, Appendix I I ) . They were both, however, significantly different from the North Vancouver group Tables and K .3) . A chi-square could not be calculated for the West Vancouver aniRichmond groups since the numbers contained i n each frequency category were too small to make for accurate computation. It i s , however, obvious that these two groups d i f f e r from the Cluster and Burnaby. The results of famil i a l interaction analysis indicate that the mag-nitude of kin interaction i s related to residential location i n that i t discriminates between areas marked by a relatively high degree of ethno-religious identification and those characterized by a lesser degree. As to friendship t i e s , friendship circles of Cluster and Burnaby Italian respondents are almost exclusively Italian (Figure 16). Ninety-five percent of the Cluster group and almost 85$ of Burnaby Italians i n -dicated that a l l or almost a l l of their close friends were Italian. A chi-square test substantiated that these two groups were not significantly different (P > .05) from each other (Table L . l , Appendix II). Homogeneous Italian friendship circles are not as prevalent among North Vancouver Italians and are to t a l l y non-existent among West Vancouver and Richmond respondents. Thirty-six percent of North Vancouver respondents reported that almost a l l of their close friends were Italian while 64$ reported many or some were Italian. The North Vancouver group was not only significantly different (P > .05) from the Cluster and Burnaby (Table L .3) but was also different 59 F I G U R E |6 E X T E N T O F I T A L I A N F R I E N D S H I P S B Y A R E A O F R E S I D E N C E I T A L I A N R E S P O N D E N T S IOO -to o p. n CJ u o g u u V CM 50 -!'.*-»' ~',\ j * ' 1 | %«' .'•I •' •'.""I j * ; " |' - '* L CD Ifl 3 C J " D C o E O CC r1 '"'•-'VI L •: r >• X I (D C 1_ 3 CD 1 I " / . \ S u c ro > O u tz > cn CD R e s i d e n t i a I A r e a s '-'•'•--•fl A i l I t a l i a n F r i e n d s ' j A l m o s t A l l I t a l i a n F r i e n d s -i M a n y I t a l i a n F r i e n d s I I S o m e I t a l i a n F r i e n d s I -I N o I t a l i a n F r i e n d s 6O from West Vancouver and Richmond (Table L.1+). While no respondents i n the latt e r two groups indicated that a l l , almost a l l , or even many of their close friends were Italian, 50$ i n West Vancouver and 25$ i n Richmond reported some and 50$> i n West Vancouver and 75$ i n Richmond reported that none of their close friends were of Italian extraction. While these two groups were not found to d i f f e r significantly (Table L.2), they are obviously different from the Cluster and Burnaby. Evidently, friendship ties are associated with residential location and do, to a great extent, differentiate among areas marked by differing levels of Italian identification. Socio-Economic Status The second discriminator, socio-economic status, considered j o i n t l y with ethno-religious identification, did not change the relationship between any of the residential groups. Hence, while a l l groups were significantly different from each other, the Burnaby and Cluster groups were s t i l l similar. A t-test used to compare group means on just the socio-economic status factor indicated (Figure 17) that Cluster respondents, the lowest socio-economic status group, were significantly different (P <. .05) from a l l groups with the exception of Burnaby. Significant differences among the remaining three suburban groups were also found. West Vancouver respondents were the highest socio-economic status group, followed by Richmond and North Vancouver. As to differences i n variances, an F-test determined that West Vancouver, the most homogeneous group, was significantly different ( P . 0 5 ) from a l l others. V a r i a b i l i t y among the four remaining groups was not significantly different. 61 FIGURE 17 SOCIO-ECONOMIC STATUS GROUP MEANS BY AREA OF RESIDENCE ITA L I A N RESPONDENTS + 2.0 -I (X O u o + 1.0 H - i.o H - 2.0 CD in O "O c O E or (D c: i _ CQ O c CO 1_ O o c: CD Res i d e n t i a I A r e a s 0£ The results of the above analysis on socio-economic status data suggest that this variable i s associated with residential location and, for Italians, clearly distinguishes areas characterized by a high degree of ethno-religious identification from those marked by a lesser degree. Correlations Between Travel Time to the Cluster and Two Factors,  Ethno-Religious Identification and Socio-Economic Status Estimates of travel time between the Italian Cluster and each of the four suburban communities were calculated to test for significant correlations between this attribute and the two factors, ethno-religious identification and socio-economic status. The same procedure for determining travel time as was used for the Jewish sample was instituted for Italians. Travel time approximations are displayed i n Figure 18. A correlation of .38 between travel time and mean scores for each suburb on the ethno-religious factor was not significant (P > .05). Similarly, a .Ok correlation between travel time and socio-economic status mean scores was non-significant. Therefore, i t was concluded, based on a small sample size of four, that no significant relationship, exists between travel time to the Italian Cluster and the degree of ethno-religious identification manifest by suburban Italians, nor between travel time and the socio-economic status of these respondents. These conclusions were similar to those reached for the Jewish sample. JEWS AND ITALIANS IN EACH OF THE FIVE RESIDENTIAL AREAS Stepwise discriminant analysis was u t i l i z e d to determine i f significant differences existed between Jewish and Italian respondents i n each of the five residential areas, and the particular factors which made for such different-iation. FIGURE 18 TRAVEL TIME BETWEEN FOUR SUBURBAN COMMUNITIES AND THE ITALIAN CLUSTER O N 6\ Cluster Jews and Italians The one factor which significantly discriminated (P < .05) cluster Jews from cluster Italians was socio-economic status. Figure 19, below presents group mean scores on this factor and group variances. Not only Figure 19 SOCIO-ECONCMIC STATUS OF CLUSTER JEWS AND ITALIANS: MEANS AND VARIANCES +1.5 • 4-1 § +0.5 CD N iH T3 U ccl »d ti to 4J CO -0.5 -1.0 --1.5 -JEWS ITALIANS I I mean W?!] variance are mean scores of Jews and Italians significantly different (P < .05) but also group variances. While Jews resident i n the westside Jewish cluster are much higher i n socio-economic status than Italians located i n the east-side Italian cluster, the former group i s also more heterogeneous on this factor. 65 Richmond Jews and Italians Richmond Jews and Italians were differentiated from each other on the ethno-religious factor. Group means and variances, displayed i n Figure 20, indicate that Richmond Jews manifest a higher degree of ethno-religious identification and are significantly more variable (P < .05) than are Richmond Italians. Figure 20 ETHNO-RELIGIOUS IDENTIFICATION OF RICHMOND JEWS AND ITALIANS: MEANS AND VARIANCES . +1.5 -ra +1-0 -i § +0.5 CD •H •a u «j *a c a) co -0.5 -1.0 --1.5 -JEWS ITALIANS • mean variance North Vancouver Jews and Italians North Vancouver Jews and Italians were also differentfrom each other on the ethno-religious factor. Group means and variances are shown i n 66 Figure 21. In North Vancouver, Italians were found to manifest a significantly Figure 21 ETHNO-RELIGIOUS IDENTIFICATION OF NORTH VANCOUVER JEWS AND ITALIANS: MEANS AMD VARIANCES +1.5 JEWS . +1.0 Tt § +0.5 0) N •H •O U ttf c cd 4 J CO -0.5 -1.0 --1.5 • ITALIANS mean variance (P < .05) higher degree of ethno-religious identification than Jewish res-pondents. However, group variances were not significantly different. Burnaby Jews and Italians Two factors discriminated Burnaby Jews from Burnaby Italians, ethno-religious identification and residential mobility, in that order. Group means and variances on ethno-religious identification are shown i n Figure 22. While the magnitude of ethno-religious identification i s much stronger among Italians than i t i s among Jews, variances are not significantly different (P > .05). 67 Figure 22 ETHNO-RELIGIOUS IDENTIFICATION OF BURNABY JEWS AND ITALIANS: MEANS AND VARIANCES +1.5 co +1-0 • H § +0.5 •a ca • H 0 •a id *S -0.5 cd JEWS co -1.0 -1.5 ITALIANS | | mean variance Residential mobility combined with the ethno-religious factor strengthened the discrimination between the two Burnaby ethnic minorities. Group means and variances on the residential mobility factor are displayed i n Figure 23. Figure 23 RESIDENTIAL MOBILITY OF BURNABY JEWS AND ITALIANS : MEANS AND VARIANCES +1.5 JEWS •ITALIANS co +1-0 4-> • H § +0.5 •u CD • H O u co -0.5 co CO -1.0 -I 1* • mean fiwl variance 68 A t-test determined that Burnaby Jews and Italians differed significantly (P < .05) on this factor. Hence, the propensity to move is significantly greater among Burnaby Jews than i t is among Burnaby Italians who are more residentially stable. Group variances were not significantly different. (P>.05). West Vancouver Jews and Italians West Vancouver Jews do not differ significantly from West Vancouver Italians on any of the four factors investigated in this research. ANGLO-SAXONS COMPARED WITH JEWS AND ITALIANS IN EACH OF THE FOUR SUBURBAN COMMUNITIES Anglo-Saxon Respondents In Four Suburban Communities Anglo-Saxon respondents were divided into residential groups corresp-onding to location in each of the four suburban communities being investigated. Stepwise discriminant analysis determined that socio-economic status differ-entiated (P < .05) a l l the groups from each other with the exceptions of Burnaby and North Vancouver,and Burnaby and Richmond. West Vancouver res-pondents constituted the highest socio-economic status group, followed by Richmond, North Vancouver, and Burnaby, respectively (Figure 2k). Variances did not differ significantly (P > .05) among the groups. Figure 24 SOCIO-ECONOMIC STATUS OF ANGLO-SAXON RESPONDENTS: .MEANS AND VARIANCES +1.5 RICHMOND BURNABY NORTH VANC. WEST VANC. 4-1 <H § +0..5 CD •H 0 u ctf *g -0.5 cd 4-1 CO -1.0 i — m m -1.5 • mean variance Anglo-Saxon respondents i n each suburban community were compared with Jewish and I t a l i a n respondents resident i n the corresponding suburb. Stepwise discriminant a n a l y s i s was again used t o determine i f s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s e x i s t between AngloSocons and each of the ethnic m i n o r i t i e s and the f a c t o r s which make f o r such d i f f e r e n c e s . Richmond Anglo-Saxons, Jews^ and I t a l i a n s Richmond Anglo-Saxons and Richmond Jews d i f f e r e d (P < .05) from each other on the ethno-religious f a c t o r . Figure 25 i n d i c a t e s that Jewish 70 Figure 25 ETHNO-RELIGIOUS IDENTIFICATION OF RICHMOND JEWS AND .ANGLO-SAXONS: MEANS AND VARIANCES +1.5 • JEWS co +1-0 -I 4-> Ti § +0.5 •rt 0 t > U «d t i n cd • u co -0.5 -1.0 --1.5 ANGLO-SAXONS vc."'-:. | j mean |7r3 variance ethno-religious identification i s much more intense than that of Anglo-Saxons. Variances, too, were significantly different. (P < . 0 5 ) , with Anglo-Sxaons being a more heterogeneous group. Richmond Anglo-Saxons and Richmond Italians were not found to be significantly different (P> .05) on any factor being investigated. Burnaby Anglo-Saxons, Jews, and Italians In Burnaby, Anglo-Saxons and Italians differed from one another on two factors, ethno-religious identification and socio-economic status, i n that order. Group means and variances on the ethno-religious factor, shown i n Figure 26, indicate that Italian ethno-religious identification i s significantly 71 Figure 26 ETHNO-RELIGIOUS IDENTIFICATION OF BURNABY ITALIANS AND ANGLO-SAXONS: MEANS AND VARIANCES +1.5 • ITALIANS ANGLO-SAXONS co +1-0 -« 4-> § +0.5 CD U CtJ •O d ed •u 0} -0.5 • -1.0 --1.5 j j mean fjc^ variance (P < .05) more intense than that of Burnaby Anglo-Saxon respondents. Anglo-Saxons are, however, a more significantly (P < .05) heterogeneous group than are Italians with respect to this factor. The second factor, socio-economic status, combined with the f i r s t , strengthened the differentiation between Burnaby Anglo-Saxons and Italians. Group means and variances on this factor, displayed i n Figure 27, indicate that Anglo-Saxon respondents are significantly higher (P < .05) i n socio-economic status than Italian respondents. Variances are, however, not significantly different (P > .05). 72 Table 27 SOCIO-ECONOMIC STATUS OF BURNABY ITALIANS AND ANGLO-SAXONS: MEANS AND VARIANCES +1.5 -ITALIANS ANGLO-SAXONS * +1-0 4-1 •H S +0.5 <L> •H 0 •a u to "g -0.5 to 4J CO -1.0 -1.5 • | | mean pSSn variance Burnaby AngloSaxons and Burnaby Jews were not found t o d i f f e r s i g n -i f i c a n t l y on any f a c t o r i n v e s t i g a t e d i n t h i s research. North Vancouver Anglo-Saxons, Jews, and I t a l i a n s Ethno-religious i d e n t i f i c a t i o n d i f f e r e n t i a t e d North Vancouver Anglo-Saxons from both North Vancouver Jews and I t a l i a n s . Group means, shown i n Figure 28, d i s c l o s e that ethno-religious i d e n t i f i c a t i o n i s more intense among 73 Figure 28 ETHNO-RELIGICUS IDENTIFICATION OF NORTH VANCOUVER JEWS, ITALIANS, AND ANGLO-SAXONS: MEANS AND VARIANCES +1.5 JEWS ITALIANS ANGLO-SAXONS •H § +0.5 cu cd CO -0.5 • -1.0 --1.5 j j mean luw.1 variance I t a l i a n s than among Anglo-Saxons. Conversely, North Vancouver Jewish ethno-r e l i g i o u s i d e n t i f i c a t i o n i s l e s s intense than among North Vancouver Anglo-Saxons. Anglo-Saxon v a r i a b i l i t y i s s i g n i f i c a n t l y d i f f e r e n t (P < .05) from that of both Jews and I t a l i a n s . Anglo-Saxons are a more heterogeneous group with regard toethno-religious i d e n t i f i c a t i o n . West Vancouver Anglo-Saxons ; Jews, and I t a l i a n s West Vancouver Anglo-Saxons d i d not d i f f e r s i g n i f i c a n t l y from e i t h e r West Vancouver Jews or I t a l i a n s on any f a c t o r i n v e s t i g a t e d i n t h i s research. 74 CHAPTER V CONCLUSIONS AND PLANNING IMPLICATIONS This study of three ethnic groups in five areas was designed to investigate the following: 1. whether specific characteristics such as intensity of ethno-religious identification, socio-economic status, generation status, and the nature and extent of social networks distinguish urban cluster Jews and Italians from Jewish and Italian suburban residents; 2. whether cluster Jews and Italians are different from each other on these same characteristics; 3. whether Jewish and Italian populations in each suburban community diff e r from one another, and from the majority Anglo-Saxon residents, on these characteristics. Implications for planning are discussed under the headings of.zoning, citizen participation, and parks and open spaces. ETHNIC CLUSTERS Italian and Jewish residents, in their respective clusters, are characterized by similar high levels of ethno-religious identifica-tion, strong familial ties and intense kin interaction, and a preference for associating almost exclusively with members of the same ethnic group. These groups dif f e r in generation composition in that Italian cluster residents are mostly foreign-born, while the Jewish cluster population is composed of both foreign- and North American-born residents. These two groups also d i f f e r on socio-economic status i n that Jewish cluster residents are high in socio-economic status, while cluster Italians are low in this aspect. 75 PLANNING IMPLICATIONS: Zoning 1. Ethno-religious F a c i l i t i e s : Churches and synagogues are used extensively by c l u s t e r I t a l i a n s and Jews and are necessary for most r e l i g i o u s p r a c t i c e s . Some also house afternoon r e l i g i o u s schools which are u t i l i z e d by those c h i l d r e n who desire some r e l i g i o u s t r a i n i n g while attending p u b l i c school. Zoning provisions must be made to accomodate these uses. Most c l u s t e r Jews and I t a l i a n s , too, send t h e i r c h i l d r e n to p a r o c h i a l , rather than, p u b l i c schools and s i t e s should be set aside f o r t h i s d u p l i c a t e school system. 2. Commercial Establishments: Cluster I t a l i a n s and Jews have retained t r a d i t i o n a l food patterns. This creates p a r t i c u l a r market demands and consequent need for s p e c i a l i t y shops such as stores which handle kosher food products. Since these stores tend to be small and l o c a l i n character, they serve also as meeting places and c o n s t i t u t e an important l i n k i n each group's informal communication network. For commercial establishments to perform t h i s dual function, they are best located i n convenient spots throughout the r e s i d e n t i a l area rather than i n large commercial concentrations. The planner should accomodate t h i s need. Furthermore, concentrations of other ethno-religious groups such as Chinese, Pakistanian, and ' East Inidan groups, may have s i m i l a r needs and, therefore, 76 warrant similar considerations by the planner. Citizen Participation A high rate of participation in ethnic organizations i s characteristic of cluster Italians and Jews. These organizations may be called upon to speak as representative voices of the ethnic community and should be consulted by the planner to obtain citizen in-put into his development of local area plans. This i s in con-trast to the Anglo-Saxon population which must, in most cases, be organized for the purpose of representative consultation. Similar strong ethnic organization ties are li k e l y found among many other ethnic groups. Parks and Open Space Italians and Jews use parks and open space in markedly different ways. Whereas Jews have a usage pattern similar to that of the Anglo-Saxon population, Italians, by contrast, tend to limit their outdoor act i v i t i e s to the streets and spaces in their immediate neighborhood. The Italians, therefore, would be most l i k e l y to make extensive use of small and numerous parks rather than the large neighborhood-centered parks more frequently considered suitable for the majority of the population. Since i t has been established that, in their use of parks and open space, Jews and Italians d i f f e r , i t would be a mistake for the planner to look upon a l l ethnic groups as similar in their preference for park and open space amenities. Before allocating 77 sites for park purposes, the planner should ascertain the particular needs and preferences of the groups for which he is planning. Changes In Population Trends Since Italian residential concentration is confined mostly to the foreign-born generation, federal immigration policies do have a profound effect upon the future of the Italian cluster. If the immigration rate i s such as to maintain or increase the present level of foreign-born Italian residents, the cluster w i l l remain and could, in fact, grow. On the other hand, i f immigration rate i s such as to res t r i c t or cut-off the inflow and cause a decline in the foreign-born, the cluster w i l l , in time disappear to be replaced by a non-Italian concentration. When considering f a c i l i t i e s particularly oriented to serving the needs of the Italian population, the planner must be conscious of the potential effects of federal immigration policies and, by extension, other policies which could affect the composition of local area populations. SUBURBAN COMMUNITIES Jews and Italians in the suburban areas differ from the majority Anglo-Saxon population as follows: 1 . Richmond Jews are characterized by a similar intensity of ethno-religious identification as was found among cluster Jews. 2. Italians in Burnaby are characterized by a similar level of ethno-religious identification as was evident among cluster Italians. 78 3. The l e v e l of ethno-religious i d e n t i f i c a t i o n among North Vancouver I t a l i a n s was found to be lower than that of c l u s t e r I t a l i a n s , but higher than that of t h e i r Anglo-Saxon counterparts. PLANNING IMPLICATIONS Richmond Richmond and c l u s t e r Jews are s i m i l a r i n l e v e l s of ethno-religious i d e n t i f i c a t i o n . Therefore, the planning implications f o r t h i s group are s i m i l a r to those enumerated f o r c l u s t e r Jews. Since Richmond I t a l i a n s are found not to d i f f e r from the Richmond Anglo-Saxon popula-t i o n , no s p e c i a l planning implications need be considered by the planner. , Burnaby Burnaby and c l u s t e r I t a l i a n s are s i m i l a r i n ethno-religious respects. Therefore, the planning implications f o r t h i s group can be considered to be s i m i l a r to those enumerated f o r c l u s t e r I t a l i a n s . Because the Burnaby Jewish population does not d i f f e r from the majority Anglo-Saxon population, no s p e c i a l planning implications need be considered. North Vancouver Since North Vancouver I t a l i a n s are unlike both c l u s t e r I t a l i a n s and the North Vancouver majority Anglo-Saxon population, t h e i r s p e c i a l needs and requirements are probably d i f f e r e n t from those of both populations. The p a r t i c u l a r needs of t h i s group must be ascertained by further i n v e s t i g a t i o n . The North Vancouver Jewish population does not d i f f e r from the Anglo-Saxon population and, therefore, no s p e c i a l planning implications need be considered. 79 West Vancouver Neither the I t a l i a n nor Jewish populations were d i s t i n g u i s h a b l e from the Anglo-Saxon population resident i n this suburb and, therefore, p a r t i c u l a r planning implications need not be considered. CONCLUSION A Federal policy, of m u l t i c u l t u r a l i s m was i n s t i t u t e d i n recent years with the expressed purpose of promoting and encouraging c u l t u r a l d i v e r s i t y and ethnic i d e n t i t y . The Canadian Government P o l i c y of M u l t i c u l t u r a l i s m report states the following: ...Canada would be the poorer i f we adopted programmes of a s s i m i l a t i o n f o r c i n g our c i t i z e n s to forsake and forget the cul t u r e they have brought to t h i s country. One of man's basic needs i s a sense of belonging and a good deal of contemporary s o c i a l unrest, at a l l age l e v e l s , e x i s t s because t h i s need has not been met. Ethnic groups are not the only way i n which the need f o r belonging can be met, but they have been an important one i n the development of Canadian society. Vibrant ethnic groups can give Canadians of second, t h i r d and subsequent generations a f e e l i n g that they are connected with t r a d i t i o n and human experience i n various parts of the world and d i f f e r e n t periods of time. Each ethnic group has the r i g h t to preserve and develop i t s own cul t u r e and values w i t h i n the Canadian context. A p o l i c y of m u l t i -c u l t u r a l i s m within a b i l i n g u a l framework i s b a s i c a l l y the conscious support of i n d i v i d u a l freedom of choice. We are free to be ourselves. But t h i s cannot be l e f t to chance. It must be fostered and pursued a c t i v e l y . This study has demonstrated that planners can, i n some small way, f o s t e r and f a c i l i t a t e the r e a l i z a t i o n of t h i s p o l i c y . SUMMARY OF PLANNING IMPLICATIONS CONSIDERED Re s i d e n t i a l Areas Jews I t a l i a n s Cluster Zoning C i t i z e n P a r t i c i p a t i o n Parks & Open Space Ethno-religious f a c i l i t i e s & schools, commercial establishments Ethnic organizations Similar to Anglo-Saxon population Ethno-religious f a c i l i t i e s & schools commercial establishments Ethnic organizations Parks and s t r e e t use . Richmond Zoning C i t i z e n P a r t i c i p a t i o n Parks & Open Space Ethno-religious f a c i l i t i e s & schools, commercial establishments Ethnic organizations Similar to Anglo-Saxon population S i m i l a r to Anglo-Saxon population i t II II i t t i II t i i t n II Burnaby Zoning C i t i z e n P a r t i c i p a t i o n Parks & Open Space Similar to Anglo-Saxon population II i t II II II i t II II Ethno-religious f a c i l i t i e s & schools commercial establishments Ethnic organizations Parks and s t r e e t use North Vancouver Zoning C i t i z e n P a r t i c i p a t i o n Parks & Open Space Similar to Anglo-Saxon population II II i t II II i t t i t i S p e c i a l considerations t t II t i t i West Vancouver Zoning C i t i z e n P a r t i c i p a t i o n Parks & Open Space Similar to Anglo-Saxon population i t i t II II It It M 11 S i m i l a r to Anglo-Saxon population i t i t i t t i t i i t II t i BIBLIOGRAPHY BIBLIOGRAPHY 8 1 \Abramson, H. "Ethnic P l u r a l i s m I n the C e n t r a l C i t y , i n F e i n s t e i n ( e d . ) , E t h n i c  Groups I n the C i t y , Toronto, Heath and Co., 1971« A c k o f f , R. The Design of S o c i a l Research, Chicago, U n i v e r s i t y of Chicago P r e s s , 1953-A l f o r d , R. P a r t y and S o c i e t y , Chicago, Rand and McNally, 1963. \mes R. and Basu A. " C r o s s - C u l t u r a l Contact and A t t i t u d e Formation," S o c i o l o g y and S o c i a l Research, 55:1 Anderson, C. White P r o t e s t a n t Americans, New J e r s e y , P r e n t i c e - H a l l , 1970. Anderson, G. "Voting Behaviour and the E t h n i c R e l i g i o u s V a r i a b l e : A Study of a F e d e r a l E l e c t i o n i n Hamilton, O n t a r i o , " Canadian J o u r n a l of Economics and  P o l i t i c a l S c i e n c e , 32: 29-37, 1966. B e l l , W. " S o c i a l Choice, L i f e S t y l e s and Suburban Residence," i n Dobriner, (ed . ) , C l a s s I n Suburbia, 1963 "The C i t y , The Suburbs and a Theory of S o c i a l Choice," i n Greer, (ed . ) , The New U r b a n i z a t i o n , 1968. Berger, B. Working-Class Suburbs, Berkeley, U n i v e r s i t y o f C a l i f o r n i a P r e s s , 1968. l l e r r y , B. Race R e l a t i o n s , New York, Houghton M u f f l i n and Co., 1951. B e r r y J . and W i l d e r , G. S o c i a l Psychology: The Canadian Context, Toronto, McClennand and Stewart, L t d . , 1972. Beyer, G. Housing and S o c i e t y , New York, MacMillan Co.., 1965. v B l i s h e n , B., Jones, F., e t a l . Canadian S o c i e t y : S o c i a l P e r s p e c t i v e s , Toronto,1970. Borhek, J . "Ethnic Group Cohesion," American J o u r n a l of S o c i o l o g y , 76:1 ( J u l y , 1970) \ Breton, R. " I n s t i t u t i o n a l Completeness of E t h n i c Communities and the P e r s o n a l R e l a t i o n s of Immigrants," American J o u r n a l of S o c i o l o g y , LXX:2 (September, 1964), 193-205. Burgess, E. and Park, R. (eds), The C i t y , Chicago, U n i v e r s i t y of Chicago Press,1925. C a t t e l l , R. F a c t o r A n a l y s i s , New York, Harper B r o t h e r s , 1952. Census M e t r o p o l i t a n Area of Vancouver, 1951, S t a t i s t i c s Canada. Census M e t r o p o l i t a n Area of Vancouver, 1961, S t a t i s t i c s Canada. C l a r k , S. The Suburban S o c i e t y , Toronto, 1966. \ l o l l i s o n , P. "Immigrants and Residence, S o c i o l o g y , 1:3 (September 1967),277-292. Conway, F. Sampling: An I n t r o d u c t i o n f o r S o c i a l S c i e n t i s t s , London, A l l e n and Unwin, 1967!! 82 BIBIIOGRAPRY (cont) Dobriner, W. Class In Suburbia, New York, Prentice H a l l , 1963. Donaldson, S. The Suburban Myth, New York, Columbia U n i v e r s i t y Press, 1969. Douglas, H. "The Suburban Trend," i n Dobriner (ed.), The Suburban Community, 1958. ^Duncan, 0. and Dunca, B. "R e s i d e n t i a l D i s t r i b u t i o n and Occupational S t r a t i f i c a t i o n , ' American Journal of Sociology, LX (1955), 493-503. Duncan, 0. and Lieberson, S. "Ethnic Segregation and A s s i m i l a t i o n , " American  Journal of Sociology, LXIV (January, 1959), 364-74. E'isenstadt, S. From Generation t o Generation, Glencoe, The Free Press, 1956. S E l i a s , C , G i l l e s , J . , and Riemer, S. (eds.), Metropolis: Values In C o n f l i c t , Belmont, Wadsworth Publishing, 1966. Wliot, J . (ed.), Minority Canadians: Immigrant Groups, Toronto, Prentice - H a l l , 1971. Ernst, R. Immigrant L i f e i n New York, New York, Friedman, Inc., 1965. Festinger, L. and Katz, D. Research Methods i n the Behavioural Sciences, New York, Holt, Rinehart and Winston, I966T F i s h b e i n , M. (ed), Readings In A t t i t u d e Theory And Measurement, New York, Wiley and Sons, 1967. Vitzpatrick, J . "The Importance of •Community* In the Process of Immigrant A s s i m i l a t i o n , " The I n t e r n a t i o n a l Migration Review, 1:1-3 (October, 1966-June 1967). \ F r a n c i s , E. "The Nature of the Ethnic Group, "American Journal of Sociology, 52:5 (March, 1947). Frieden, B. and Morris, R. Urban Planning and S o c i a l P o l i c y , New York, Basic Books, 1968. Frutcher, B. Introduction t o Factor A n a l y s i s , New York, Van Nostrand Co., 1954 Gans, H. People and Plans: Essays on Urban Problems and Solutions, New York, Basic Books, 1968. : \ "Planning and S o c i a l L i f e : F r i e n d s h i p and Neighbourhood Relations i n Suburban Communities," Journal of the American I n s t i t u t e of Planning, XXVII:2 (May, 1961) 134-41. "Some Comments On The History of I t a l i a n Migration And On The Nature Of H i s t o r i c a l Research, "International Migration Review, l:3(Summer, 1967. The Levittowners, New York, Pantheon Books, 1967-The Urban V i l l a g e r s , New York, The Free Press, 1962. BIBLIOGRAPHY (cont) 83 Glanz, R. Jew and I t a l i a n , New York, Shulsinger Brothers, 1970. Vxlazer, N. and Mclntire, D. (eds.), Studies In Housing And Minority Groups, Berkeley, U n i v e r s i t y of C a l i f o r n i a Press, i960. Wazer, N. and Moynihan, D. Beyond The Melting Pot, Cambridge, M.I.T. Press, 1970. Goldstein S. and Goldschneider C. Jewish Americans, New Jersey, P r e n t i c e - H a l l , 1968. Gordon, A. Jews In Suburbia, Boston, Beacon Press, 1959 ^Gordon, M. A s s i m i l a t i o n In American L i f e , New, New York, Oxford Press, 196k. Greer, S. The Emerging C i t y : Myth and R e a l i t y , New York, The Free Press, I962. The New Urbanization, New York, 1968. H a l l , J . and Jones, D. "The S o c i a l Grading Of Occupations," B r i t i s h Journal of Sociology, 1:1 (March, 1950) 31-35). V Hallowell, A. Culture and Experience, P h i l a d e l p h i a , U n i v e r s i t y of Pennsylvania Press, 1955 \ Handlin, 0. The Newcomers, Cambridge, Harvard University, Press, 1959* Hannan, H. Modern Factor A n a l y s i s , Chicago, U n i v e r s i t y of Chicago Press, 1968. Henrysson, S. A p p l i c a b i l i t y Of Factor Analysis In Behavioral Sciences, Stockholm, Almquist and W i k s e l l , 1957. Hope, K. Methods of M u l t i v a r i a t e Analysis, London, U n i v e r s i t y of London Press, 1968. Horst, P. Factor Analysis Of Data Matrices, New York, Holt, Rinehart and Winston,1965 Huthmacher, J . A Nation Of Newcomers, New York, D e l l Publishing, 1967. I o r i z z o , L. The Italian-Americans, New York, Twayne Publishers, 1971. Jansen, C. "The I t a l i a n Community In Toronto," i n E l l i o t (ed.), Immigrant Groups, Ontario, P r e n t i c e - H a l l , 1971. Jones, L. "Ethnic Concentration And A s s i m i l a t i o n , " S o c i a l Forces, 1+5:3 (March, 1967) Johnston, R. Urban R e s i d e n t i a l Patterns, London, B e l l and Son, 1971. Kantrowitz, N. "Ethnic And R a c i a l Segregation In The New York Metropolis, American Journal of Sociology, 7k (May, 1969) 685-695. Kish, L. Survey Sampling, New York, Wiley and Sons, 1965. Krishnaiah, P. (ed.), M u l t i v a r i a t e Analysis, New York, Academic Press, 1968. Kramer, . J . and Leventman, S. Children Of The Gilded Ghetto, New Haven, Y a l U n i v e r s i t y Press, 1961. 84 BIBLIOGRAPHY (cont) Kurokawa, M. Minor i t y Responses: Comparative Views Of Reactions To Subordination, New York, Randan House, 1970. Lawley, D. and Maxwell, A. Factor Analysis As A S t a t i s t i c a l Method, London, Butterworth, 1963. Lenski, G. The Religious Factor, New York, Doubleday And Co., 1963. Lewin, K. Resolving S o c i a l C o n f l i c t , New York, Harper and Brothers, I9U8. Ldeberson, S. Ethnic Patterns In American C i t i e s , Glencoe, The Free Press, 1963. X _ 'Suburbs And Ethnic R e s i d e n t i a l Patterns,"'American Journal of Sociology, LXVII (May, 1962) 673-681. McDonald, M. "Religion and Voting: A Study Of The 1968 Canadian Federal E l e c t i o n In Ontario," Canadian Review of Sociology and Anthropology, 6(3),1969. "Attitude Organization And Voting Behavior In Canada," Canadian Review of Sociology and Anthropology, 8(3), 1971. McEntire, D. Residence and Race, Berkeley, U n i v e r s i t y of C a l i f o r n i a , i960. McKenna, M. "The Melting Pot: Comparative Observations In The U.S. And Canada," Sociology And S o c i a l Research, 53:4 (July, 1969). Meisel, J . and Paquet, G. "Some Quantitative Analyses Of Canadian E l e c t i o n R e s u l t s , " CPSA Conference On S t a t i s t i c s , 1963. Michelson, W. Man And His Urban Environment: A S o c i o l o g i c a l Approach, Ontario, Addison-Wesley Press, 1970. Morrison, D. M u l t i v a r i a t e S t a t i s t i c a l Methods, New York, McGraw-Hill, 1967. ^Ossenberg, R. (ed.), Canadian Society, Pluralism, Change And C o n f l i c t , Ontario, P r e n t i c e - H a l l , 1971. > a r e n t i , M. "Ethnic P o l i t i c s And The Persistence Of Ethnic I d e n t i f i c a t i o n , " American P o l i t i c a l Review, 6l (September, 1967), 717-726. Parsons, Brinckerhoff, et a l . Vancouver Transportation Study, C i t y of Vancouver,1968 'Porter, J . The V e r t i c a l Mosaic, Toronto, U n i v e r s i t y of Toronto Press, 1970 Rao, C. Advanced S t a t i s t i c a l Methods In Biometric Research, New York, Wiley and Sons, 1952. ~ "Discriminant Function Between Composite Hypotheses And Related Problems, " Biometrika, 53, 339-45. R e g e r s t r e i f , P. The Diefenbaker Interlude, Toronto, Longmans, ±965. 85 BIBLIOGRAPHY (cont) V Report of the Royal Commission On B i l i n g u a l i s m and B i c u l t u r a l i s m , The Contribut-ion Of The Other Ethnic Groups, Ottawa, Queens P r i n t e r , 1970. \ Richmond, A. Immigrants And Ethnic Groups In Metropolitan Toronto, I n s t i t u t e f o r Behavioral Research, 1967. ^ Post-War Immigrants In Canada, Toronto, U n i v e r s i t y of Toronto Press, v "Toronto's Ethnic Ghettoes," Canadian Forum, L I I : 6 l 6 (May, 1972) . v Readings In Race And Ethnic Relations, Toronto, Pergamox Press,1972. Rosenberg, L. Changes In The Jewish Population In The Old Area of Jewish S e t t l e -ment In Montreal, Montreal, "Canadian Jewish Congress, 1958. ^Rosenthal, E. "Acculturation Without A s s i m i l a t i o n , " American Journal of Sociology, LXVI, 275-88. Ross, P. (ed), The Ghetto And Beyond, New York, Random House, I969. v R o s s i , P. Why Families Move, Glencoe, The Free Press, 1955. Rummel, R. Applied Factor Analysis, Evanston, Northwestern U n i v e r s i t y Press, 1970 "Understanding Factor A n a l y s i s , " Journal Of C o n f l i c t Resolution, XI : 4 , (December, 1967) Sabagh, G. "Some Determinants Of Intrametropolitan R e s i d e n t i a l M o b i l i t y : Con-ceptual Considerations," S o c i a l Forces, 48:1 (September, 1969) Sack, B. History of the Jews In Canada, Montreal, Canadian Jewish Congress, 1945. Schnore, L. '*The Growth of Metropolitan Suburbs," i n Dobriner (ed), The Suburban Community, 1958. '*The Socioeconomic Status of C i t i e s And Suburbs, " American Socio-l o g i c a l Review, 28 (1963) , 7 6 - 8 5 . The Urban Scene, Glencoe, The Free Press, 1965. S h e r i f , C. and S h e r i f , M. (eds.), A t t i t u d e , Ego-Involvement And Change, New York, Wiley and Sons, 1967. » Simons, J . "Changing Residence In The C i t y : A Review Of Intra-Urban M o b i l i t y , The Geographical Review, 58:4 (October, 1968). Simons, J . and Simmons, R. Urban Canada, Toronto, Copp Clark, 1969. Sklare, M. "Jews, Ethnics And The American C i t y , " Commentary, A p r i l , 1972, 70-77 . The Jews: S o c i a l Patterns Of An American Group, Glencoe, The Free Press, Sklare, M and Greenblum, J . Jewish I d e n t i t y On The Suburban F r o n t i e r , New York, New York, Basic Books, 1967^ 86 BIBLIOGRAPHY (cont) Spada, A. The I t a l i a n s In Canada, Canada Ethnica VI, Ottawa, 1969. Tuckraan, J . "The S o c i a l Status Of Occupations In Canada," Canadian Journal Of Psychology, l(l947), 71-94. ^ V a l l e e , F., Schwartz, M., and Darkuell, F. "Ethnic A s s i m i l a t i o n And D i f f e r e n t -i a t i o n In Canada," i n Blishen, et a l . (eds.), Canadian Soci e t y :  S o c i a l Perspectives, 1970. Vancouver Sun, June 3, 1972. , - August 12, 1972. Vrga, D. "Adjustment vs. A s s i m i l a t i o n , " i n F e i n s t e i n (ed). Ethnic Groups In The uixy Toronto, Heath Lexington Books, 1971. Earner, L. and S r o l e , L. The S o c i a l Systems Of American Ethnic Groups, New York, Yale U n i v e r s i t y Press, 1945-Winch, R., Greer, S., and Blumbeeg, R. " E t h n i c i t y And Extended Familism In An Upper-Middle Class Suburb," American S o c i o l o g i c a l Review, 32:2 ( A p r i l , 1967). Wirth, L. The Ghetto, Chicago, U n i v e r s i t y of Chicago Press, 1956. Y i n , R. (ed), The C i t y In The Seventies, New York, Peacock Publishers, 1972. NZanden, J . American Minority Relations, New York, Ronald Press, 1966. Zimmer, B. and Hawley, A. "Suburbanization And Church P a r t i c i p a t i o n , " S o c i a l  Forces, XXXVII (May, 1959), 348-54. APPENDIX I 87 T A B L E A C H I - S Q U A R E T E S T : R E S I D E N T I A L D I S T R I B U T I O N S BETWEEN T H E C I T Y OF V A N C O U V E R AND T H E R E S T OF T H E METRO A R E A J E W S , I T A L I A N S , " C O N T R O L " P O P U L A T I O N A r e a s J e w s 1 t a 1 i a n s " C o n t r o 1 " Popu1 a t i o n T o t a 1 M e t r o A r e a E x c 1 u d i ng C i t y o f V a n c o u v e r 3748 9395 39z troo 9 5 7 5 3 5 9 3 9 9 3 2 7 4 0 5 6 4 3 C i t y o f V a n c o u v e r 3553 890S 372 063 6 3 4 4 12 941 3 6 5 2 3 7 3 8 4 5 2 2 T o t a 1 7301 • 18 3 0 0 7 6 4 5 6 4 7 9 0 165 x 2 " = 8 0 7 9 d f = 2 S i g n i f i c a n t (P < . 0 5 ) T A B L E B C H I - S Q U A R E T E S T S : R E S I D E N T I A L D I S T R I B U T I O N BETWEEN FOUR C E N S U S T R A C T S AND T H E R E S T OF T H E C I T Y OF V A N C O U V E R JEWS AND NON-JEWS A r e a s J e w s N o n - J ews T o t a I P o p u I a -t i o n C e n s u s T r a c t C 1 u s t e r ( 2 2 , 3 4 , 35,4 5) 4/2. 24 566 24 9 7 8 2 6 9 2 22 2 8 6 R e s t O f T h e C i t y 5132 353 6/2 3 5 9 5 4 4 3 6 5 2 3 5 5 892 T o t a 1 6 3 4 4 3 7 8 I 78 3 8 4 5 2 2 x 2 = I 3 7 2 0 d f = I S i g n i f i c a n t ( P < . 0 5 ) I T A L I A N S AND N O N - I T A L I A N S A r e a s I t a I i a n s N o n - t t a I I a n T o t e I C e n s u s / 0 3 9 T r a c t C I u s t e r ( 7 , 8 , 9 , I I ) 4 7 I I 26 I 90 30 90I R e s t O f T h e C i t y II90Z Ml 720 8 2 3 0 3 4 5 39I 3 5 3 62 I T o t a I I 2 94 I 37 I 58I 3 8 4 5 2 2 x 2- = 14 6 0 ! d f = I S i g n i f i c a n t ( P < . 0 5 ) 8 9 ETHNIC IDENTIFICATION AND RESIDENTIAL LOCATION QUESTIONNAIRE: JEWISH RESPONDENTS 1. What i s the age of the head of the household? 2 . How many children are i n your family? 3. In which country were you born? K* I f you were born outside Canada or the U.S., how old were you when you arrived i n North America? 5. In which countries were your parents born? 6. At approximately what age did they arrive i n North America? 7. What i s the occupation of the head of the household? 8. I f your children desire to go to university w i l l you finance their education? a. definitely b. most c. uncertain d. not e. definitely yes probably probably not 9. Do you own or are you renting your present dwelling? 10. How many cars does your family own? 11. What make of car(s)? 12. What make of car would you like to own? 13. How long have you lived i n this area? Ik. Do you have any intention of moving within the next five years? a. definitely b. not c. uncertain d. not e detinitely yes probably probably not 15. Why? 16. To where do you intend to move? ; 17. What language i s most often spoken i n your home? 18. Can you speak Yiddish/Hebrew? a. very b. quite c. somewhat d. very e. none well well l i t t l e at a l l 19. Would you like your children to speak Yiddish or Hebrew? a. definitely b. most c. uncertain d. not e. definitely yes probably probably not 90 20. How many books, newspapers or magazines does your family receive from Europe or Israel? 21. How many Jewish-Canadian newspapers or magazines does your family subscribe to? 22. What proportion of your close friends who reside i n the Vancouver Metropolitan area are Jewish? a. a l l b. almost a l l c. many d. some e. none 23. Do you have relatives residing i n this municipality? a. yes b. no 2k. How often do you v i s i t with these relatives? a. very b. frequently c. occasionally e. never frequently 25. How often do you v i s i t with Jewish friends? a. very b. frequently c. occasionally d. never frequently 26. To which community, service, social, profesional organizations do you and your husband/wife belong? 27. To which ethnic and/or religious organizations do you and your Wife belong? 28. Are you a member of a synagogue? 29. Do you/ did you/ do you intend to send your children to a religious school? a. definitely b. most c. uncertain d. not e. definitely probably probably not 30. About how often doyou attend prayer services? a. several time a week b. once a week c. several times a month d. once a month e. several times a year f. once a year (High Holidays) g. never 31. Do you have a mezzuzah affixed to your doorpost? a. yes b. no 32. I see no objection tcchanging to a less Jewish-sounding name i f i t would help i n getting me into jobs or schools which ordinarily discriminate against Jews. a. strongly b. agree c. uncertain d. disagree e. strongly agree disagree 91 33. It i s important that my child marries a Jew? a. strongly b. agree c. uncertain d. disagree e. strongly agree disagree 3^ . I believe that religious truth i s higher than any form of truth. a. strongly • b. agree c. uncertain d. disagree e. strongly agree disagree 35* Which of the following best describes your participation i n the act of prayer? a. prayer i s a regular part of my behavior b. I pray primarily i n times of stres and/or need, but not much otherwise. c. prayer i s restricted pretty much to formal worship service d. prayer i s only incidental to my l i f e e. I never pray 36. I believe that the notion of God i s not outdated i n this world of science. a. strongly b. agree c. uncertain d. disagree e. strongly agree disagree 37. I enjoy the intellectual stimulation of learning about the Bible and the history and doctrines of Judaism. a. strongly b. agree c. uncertain d. disagree e. strongly agree disagree 38. Which statement comes closest to expressing your belief about God? a. I know God really exists and I have no doubt about i t . b. While I have doubts, I feel that I believe i n God. c. I find myself believing i n God some of the time, but not at others d. I don't know whether there i s a God and I don't believe there i s a way to find out. e. I don't believe i n God. APPENDIX II TABLE C VARIMAX ROTATED FACTOR-LOADINGS MATRIX FACTOR VARIABLE 1 2 3 4 AGE .26 -.05 -.67 .23 NO. OF CHLD .30 -39 .36 GEN STAT •53 -.08 -.49 -r03 OCCUP -.07 .85 .02 .10 UNV .04 .80 .18 .08 HOUSING .Ik •30 -15 .61 NO. CARS -.11 .76 .14 .32 CAR DESR -.10 -.17 .15 -79 YRS RESD .k6 -.03 -.51 .03 INTENDMV -.03 -.09 .Ik -.21 LANG HOM .21 -.33 -.62 -.17 SPKET LG .66 -.28 -.50 .01 CHLD SPK • 58 -.32 -.26 .23 FR BOOKS • 52 -.28 -.49 .06 ETH BOOKS .67 .28 -.25 .09 CLOSE FB .80 -.28 -.32 •05 ET NAME .20 -.05 -.04 MARRY ET .86 -.04 -.28 -.01 NO. REL .80 -.17 -.10 .11 VST REL •78 .18 -.38 .10 VST NETH -.39 .21 .35 -.18 REL ORGS .81 .30 -.10 -.02 GEN ORGS -.32 • 69 .05 .01 CHURCHMB .kk -.02 -.16 .19 REL SCHL .Ok -.24 -.16 -.01 REL SYMB .61 -.07 -.19 .07 PRAYSERV .76 -.24 -45 .11 RELTRUT .84 -.32 -.21 .08 PRAYER .87 -.23 -.24 .14 SCIENCE .65 -.05 -.42 .08 LEARNING .82 -.08 -.21 .14 BELIEFGD .86 -.22 -•33 .05 Proportion of Common Variance Explained .52 .18 .22 • 07 T A B L E D C H I - S Q U A R E T E S T : R E S I D E N T I A L D I S T R I B U T I O N S OF F O R E I G N - B O R N AND NORTH A M E R I C A N - B O R N J E W I S H R E S P O N D E N T S G e o g r a p h i c A r e a s F o r e i g n -bo r n N o r t h A m e r i c a n -b o r n T o t a 1 1 4 22 S u b u r b s 1 1 25 . 36 7 1 1 C l u s t e r 1 0 8 1 8 T o t a 1 21 33 54 x 2 = 2 . 2 3 * d f = I N o t s i gn i f i c a n t (P > . 0 5 ) * C o r r e c t e d f o r c o n t i n u i t y - S Q U A R E T E S T S : R E L A T I V E S R E S I D E N T IN R E S P O N D E N T ' S OWN M U N I C I P A L I T Y J E W I S H R E S P O N D E N T S T A B L E E.I C a t e g o r i e s C 1 u s t e r R i c h m o n d T o t a 1 H a v e Re 1 a t i v e s 1 4 . 9 9 . 1 0 1 6 8 24 Do N o t 3 . 1 0 1 . 9 0 H a v e Re 1 a t i v e s 2 3 5 T o t a 1 1 8 1 1 2 9 x 2 = .43* d f = I N o t s i g n i f i c a n t ( P > . 0 5 ) * C o r r e c t e d f o r c o n t i n u i t y 9 5 TABLE E.2 C a t e g o r i e s West Vane. Burnaby North Vane. Tota 1 Have R e l a t i v e s 1 .60 1 . 80 1 .60 2 2 1 5 Do Not 6.40 5. 20 6.40 Have Re 1 at i ves 6 7 7 20 Tota 1 8 . 9 8 25 = 1.06 df = 2 Not s i g n i f i c a n t CP?-. 05)--TABLE E.3 C a t e g o r i e s C 1 u s t e r R i chmond West Vane. Burnaby North Vane. Tota 1 Have Re 1 at i ves ! 5.58 1 3.42 24 5 29 Do Not 1 3.42 1 1 .58 Have Re 1 at i ves 5 20 25 Tota 1 29 25 54 x 2 = 20.71* df = I S i gn i f i cant (P < .05 ) ^Cor r e c t e d f o r c o n t i n u i t y 9 7 C H I - S Q U A R E T E S T : F R E Q U E N C Y OF V I S I T S WITH R E L A T I V E S R E S I D E N T IN OWN M U N I C I P A L I T Y J E W I S H R E S P O N D E N T S T A B L E F C a t e g o r i e s C l u s t e r R i c h m o n d T o t a 1 V e r y F r e q u e n t l y 1 0 . 0 5 . 0 1 2 3 1 5 4 . 0 2 . 0 F r e q u e n t 1y 3 3 6 O c c a s i on -a l l y 2 . 0 1 . 0 1 2 3 T o t a 1 1 6 8 24 X df N o t s i gn i f i = 3 . 4 8 = 2 c a n t C P > . 0 5 ) SQUARE T E S T S : E XTENT OF J E W I S H F R I E N D S H I P S AMONG J E W I S H RESPONDENTS T A B L E G.I C a t e g o r i e s C 1 u s t e r R i c h m o n d T o t a 1 A l 1 1 3 12.41 7.59 7 20 A 1 m o s t A l 1 3.72 2.28 4 2 6 Many Some 1 .86 1.14 1 2 3 T o t a 1 1 8 1 1 29 x* = 1.15 d f = 3 N o t s i g n i f i c a n t ( P > . 0 5 ) 99 TABLE G.2 Categor i es Burnaby West Vane. North Vane. Tota 1 4.68 4.16 4.16 Many Some 5 5 3 1 3 4. 32 3.84 3.84 None 4 3 5 1 2 Tota 1 9 • 8 8 25 x * = 1.05 df = 2 Not s i g n i f i c a n t (P >.05) T A B L E G . 3 C a t e g o r i e s C 1 u s t e r R i c h m o n d B u r n a b y W e s t V a n e . N o r t h V a n e . T o t a l 1 0. 7 4 9 . 2 6 A l l 2 0 0 2 0 3 . 2 2 2 . 7 8 A 1 m o s t A l l 6 0 6 2 . 1 5 1 . 8 5 M a n y 2 2 4 6 . 4 4 5 . 5 6 S o m e 1 . 1 1 1 2 6. 4 4 5 . 5 6 N o n e 0 1 2 1 2 T o t a 1 2 9 2 5 5 4 x Z = * 4 6 . 2 6 d f = 4 S i g n i f i c a n t ( P < . 0 5 ) C H I - S Q U A R E T E S T S I N T E N T I O N TO MOVE FROM P R E S E N T M U N I C I P A L I T Y J E W I S H R E S P O N D E N T S T A B L E H.I C a t e g o r i e s W e s t Va n c . C 1 u s t e r R i c h m o n d T o t a 1 D e f i n i t e 1 y N o t 4 . 97 1 1 . 1 9 6 . 8 4 6 1 1 6 2 3 1 . 73 3 . 8 9 2 . 3 8 P r o b a b 1 y N o t 1 5 2 8 1 . 30 2 . 92 1 . 78 U n c e r t a i n 1 2 3 6 T o t a 1 8 1 8 1 1 37 x 2 = 2 . 2 0 d f = 4 N o t s i g n i f i c a n t C P > . 0 5 ) . T A B L E H.2 C a t e g o r i e s N o r t h V a n e . B u r n a b y T o t a 1 D e f i n i t e l y N o t P r o b a b 1 y N o t 2 . 6 5 2 . 3 5 2 3 5 2 . 7 0 1.41 U n c e r t a ? n 2 1 3 2 . 1 2 1 . 8 8 P r o b a b 1 y Y e s 2 2 4 D e f i n i t e l y Y e s 2 . 6 5 2 . 3 5 3 2 5 T o t a 1 9 8 1 7 1 . 4 0 d f = 3 N o t s i g n i f i c a n t ( P J > . 0 5 ) T A B L E H.3 C a t e g o r i e s W e s t V a \ n c . C 1 u s t e r R i c h m o n d N o r t h V a n e . B u r n a b y T o t a 1 D e f i n i t e 1 y N o t . 1 7 . 1 3 7 . 8 7 2 3 2 2 5 7 . 5 4 3 . 4 6 P r o b a b 1 y N o t 8 3 1 1 6 . 1 7 2 . 8 3 U n c e r t a i n 6 3 9 2 . 7 4 1 . 2 6 P r o b a b 1 y Y e s 0 4 4 3 . 4 3 1 . 5 7 De f i n i t e 1 y Y e s 0 5 5 T o t a 1 3 7 1 7 5 4 X x = 2 6 . I 2 d f = 4 S i g n i f i c a n t ( P < . 0 5 ) T A B L E I C H I - S Q U A R E T E S T : R E S I D E N T I A L D I S T R I B U T I O N S O F F O R E I G N - B O R N - A N D N O R T H A M E R I C A N - B O R N I T A L I A N R E S P O N D E N T S G e o g r a p h i c A r e a s F o r e i b o r n g n - N o r t h A m e r i c a n -b o r n T o t a 1 1 2 . 1 9 . 9 S u b u r b s 1 7 5 2 2 2 0 . 9 1 7 . 1 C 1 u s t e r 1 6 2 2 3 8 T o t a 1 3 3 2 7 6 0 x 2 = 5 . 6 2 * d f = I S i g n i f i c a n t ( P < . 0 5 ) * C o r r e c t e d f o r c o n t i n u i t y 105 C H I - S Q U A R E T E S T S : R E L A T I V E S R E S I D E N T IN R E S P O N D E N T ' S OWN M U N I C I P A L I T Y I T A L I A N R E S P O N D E N T S T A B L E J . I C a t e g o r i e s C 1 u s t e r B u r n a b y N o r t h V a n e . T o t a 1 H a v e Re 1 a t i v e s 1 5 . 9 0 1 0 . 3 4 8 . 7 5 1 8 1 0 7 35 Do N o t 4 . 0 9 2 . 6 5 2 . 2 5 H a v e Re 1 a t i v e s 2 3 4 9 T o t a 1 2 0 • 1 3 1 1 44 xZ = 2 . 7 7 d f = 2 N o t s i g n i f i c a n t ( P < . 0 5 ) TABLE J.2 Categor i es West Vane. R i chmond Tota 1 Have Re 1 at i ves 2.5 2.5 3 2 5 Do Not 5.5 5.5 Have Re 1 at i ves 5 6 1 1 Tota 1 8 8 1 6 x 2 = .58* d f = I Not s i g n i f i c a n t (P>.05) ^ C o r r e c t e d f o r c o n t i n u i t y TABLE J.3 Categor i es C l u s t e r Burnaby North Vane. R i chmond West Vane. Tota 1 Have 29. 33 1 0.67 R e l a t i v e s 35 5 40 Do Not 1 4. 67 5. 33 Have Re 1 at i ves 9 1 1 20 Tota 1 44 16 60 xZ = I I .36* df = I S i g n i f i c a n t (P < .05)" *C o r r e c t e d f o r c o n t i n u i t y C H I - S Q U A R E T E S T S F R E Q U E N C Y OF V I S I T S W I T H R E L A T I V E S I N OWN M U N I C I P A L I I T A L I A N R E S P O N D E N T S T A B L E K . I C a t e g o r i e s . C 1 u s t e r B u r n a b y T o t a 1 V e r y F r e q u e n t 1y 12.21 6. 79 1 4 5 1 9 F r e q u e n t 1 y O c c a s i o n -a l l y 5.79 3.21 4 5 9 T o t a 1 1 8 1 0 28 x Z = I.20* d f = I N o t s i g n i f i c a n t (P>.05) * C o r r e c t e d f o r c o n t i n u i t y T A B L E K.2 C a t e g o r i e s C 1 u s t e r North Van. Tota 1 Very Frequent!y 1 0. 00 3. 92 1 4 0 1 4 4. 32 1 .68 Frequent 1 y 4 2 6 Occas i on- 3. 60 1 .40 a 1 ly Neve r 0 5 5 Tota 1 1 8 7 25 xX = I 8.48 df = 2 S i g n i f i c a n t CP<.05). T A B L E K . 3 C a t e g o r i e s B u r n a b y N o r t h V a n e . T o t a 1 V e r y F r e q u e n t 1 y 2 . 9 4 2 . 0 6 5 0 5 F r e q u e n t l y 2 . 9 4 2 . 0 6 3 2 5 O c c a s i o n -a l l y N e v e r 4. 12 2 . 8 8 2 5 7 T o t a 1 1 0 7 1 7 x* = 6 . 1 5 d f = 2 S i g n i f i c a n t ( P < . 0 5 ) I l l C H I - S Q U A R E T E S T : E X T E N T OF I T A L I A N F R I E N D S H I P S AMONG I T A L I A N R E S P O N D E N T S T A B L E L. I C a t e g o r i e s C 1 u s t e r B u r n a b y T o t a 1 1 5 . 76 1 0 . 2 4 A 1 1 1 7 9 26 2 . 4 2 1 . 5 8 A 1 m o s t A l l 2 2 4 1 . 8 2 1 . 1 8 M a n y 1 2 3 T o t a 1 2 0 1 3 33 x * = I . 3 7 d f = 2 N o t s i gn i f i c a n t (P > . 0 5 ) T A B L E L . 3 C a t e g o r i e s C l u s t e r B u r n a b y N o r t h V a n e . T o t a 1 1 9 . 5 6 . 5 A l 1 26 0 26 6 . 0 2 . 0 A l m o s t A l 1 4 4 8 M a n y Some 7 . 5 2 . 5 3 7 1 0 T o t a 1 33 1 1 44 x Z = 2 2 . I 4 d f = 2 S i g n i f i c a n t (P < . 0 5 ) TABLE L.2 Categor i es West Vane. R i chmond Tota 1 3.0 3.0 Some 4 2 6 5.0 5.0 None 4 6 1 0 Tota 1 8 8 1 6 Not x 2 = .26* df = 1 s i g n i f i c a n t (P> . 05) T A B L E L.4 C a t e g o r i e s W e s t V a n e . R i c h m o n d N o r t h V a n e . T o t a 1 A 1 m o s t A 1 1 2.37 1 .63 0 4 4 2.96 2. 04 Many 0 5 5 4. 74 3.26 Some 6 2 8 5 . 9 3 4.07 N o n e 1 0 . 0 1 0 T o t a 1 1 6 1 1 27 XA = 2 0 . 8 1 d f = 3 S i g n i f i c a n t »(P< .05) 

Cite

Citation Scheme:

        

Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics

Share

Embed

Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                        
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            src="{[{embed.src}]}"
                            data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
                            data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
                            data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
                            data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
                            async >
                            </script>
                            </div>
                        
                    
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:
http://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.831.1-0101535/manifest

Comment

Related Items