CHAPTER FOUR: EVALUATING THE VITALITY OF COMMUNITIES
Previous Page | Table of Contents | Next Page
For over 35 years, the Official Languages Act (the Act) has upheld the strengthening of Canada's linguistic duality. Fostering the vitality of official language minority communities is one of the most important aspects of implementing the Act. The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and Part VII of the 1988 Act clarify the Government of Canada's obligations in this respect. Recent amendments to the Act through Bill S-3 reinforce these obligations by requiring "positive measures" to foster the growth and development of official language communities.
But what exactly do "vitality" and "development" mean? How can we better understand what makes a community healthy, strong and capable of addressing the challenges it faces? To what extent do federal government support and the efforts of these communities produce the best results? How can we measure a reality as complex as the vitality of communities?
The importance of asking questions like these becomes clear to stakeholders once they see community vitality as a purpose, an ultimate goal, a reason for an official languages policy. For communities, it is largely a question of group empowerment; of choosing for themselves the way they can most fully contribute to Canadian society. Such questions are also of interest to federal institutions, which from now on must take positive action to achieve targeted results and examine new forms of governance with communities. For researchers, highly curious by nature, these questions present an intellectual challenge and a chance to apply knowledge and methodologies.
This chapter is the product of an extensive examination of the vitality of official language communities, which involved many studies conducted over several years.20
FOSTERING THE VITALITY AND DEVELOPMENT OF OFFICIAL LANGUAGE COMMUNITIES
There were also consultations—particularly a public forum in 2005—to bring together ideas and concerns of key stakeholders in community vitality, namely representatives of official language communities, researchers and governments.
The following pages present four main themes that emerged from this examination. First is the notion of "community" and its scope within the context and reality of official language communities. This is followed by a discussion on how we define "community vitality". The chapter then examines "indicators" that could be used to measure and assess community vitality. Finally, various approaches for government action are proposed to facilitate community empowerment by building a knowledge base.
The word "community" is difficult to define because it means something different to each individual. However, if we want to assess a community's vitality, we must first attempt to define community itself. How does a sense of belonging to a community establish or organize itself?
Within the context of official languages, community traditionally refers to a geographical area where official language communities live: a neighbourhood, a town, a city or a region. Historically, official language communities have constituted such territorial communities. They settled the land, established towns and cities, and built churches and businesses. In short, they established the foundations of what are sometimes still called rooted English or French communities. From this point of view, the term essentially refers to the product of settlement, which fosters both interaction between individuals and a sense of belonging.
But for many, the notion of community takes on a more modern and subtle meaning. The inclination is to think in terms of networks of institutions, organizations or individuals associated with either one of the official language communities. A group of individuals with a shared interest—in this instance, their culture and language—may be called a community. Here, territory is less important. Instead, community implies an active tie of solidarity in a geographically dispersed group. Many such communities are commonly known as having a collective identity: for example, the Quebec English-speaking community, the Atlantic Acadian community, or the Franco-Manitoban community.
When reflecting on the meaning of community, we might consider other distinctions depending, for example, on population mobility. The movement of Anglophones and Francophones within Canada may add some diversity to communities, just as exogamy could. Immigration also contributes to diversity and new meanings of community arise. Thus, with diversity and migration comes an on-going renewal of networks or communities of interest.
All in all, community is an amalgamation of these realities; realities that co-exist rather than being mutually exclusive—realities that, together, play an influential role in the lives of citizens within a society.
Like community, vitality is a complex idea that could take on several meanings for official language community stakeholders.
In its familiar sense, vitality refers to life—whatever is full of energy and health. But when we speak of vitality in the context of official language communities, are we referring to those individuals who speak the minority language, or to their collective existence?
The vitality of a community may be considered from an individual or collective point of view. Researchers often study vitality through the lens of demographic, human, social, political, economic and cultural capital. At the individual level, language can be seen as a facet of vitality since it is, above all, a skill. Language is knowledge that can be used to represent values, symbols and experiences, and that as such makes up part of one's individual identity. Language is thus one of many aspects of individual vitality. Other facets of vitality could include physical and mental health, a sense of personal safety, access to affordable housing and leisure time.
At the collective level, linguistic vitality deals with the use of language across time and space, and the numerous functions it fulfills in various areas of society such as culture, religion, education, administration, media and the law, to name a few. From this point of view, linguistic vitality is a characteristic of the community as a whole, as are access to capital, employment and the environment.
Vitality is, then, a multidimensional, multisectoral concept. Researchers often study vitality as a form of capital—the resources available to official language communities. The term demographic capital is used to describe the aspect of vitality associated with the number of individuals within the community; it also includes factors such as age structure, fertility and migratory flows. Human capital—including human resources, schooling and skills—rounds out the demographic portrait.
Social capital is increasingly recognized as a key factor of vitality, and can be defined as the degree of community synergy: the prevalence of informal networks, clubs and associations. This refers to characteristics that lead people to co-operate through collective action for the collective good.
Political capital is also often seen as an influential factor affecting vitality, when understood in the broad sense of resources of power and influence. This is an asset that most often manifests itself through community leadership. It is also found in community institutions such as schools, media, churches and organizations that speak for the community, have legitimacy within official language communities and are recognized by government authorities. Community vitality also includes cultural and economic dimensions, which are other distinct forms of capital.
Evaluating vitality and its indicators
If community vitality constitutes a desired end, then any strategy to strengthen it requires a good understanding of the official language community's current situation, in terms of its vitality and, consequently, the end point or objective.
When it comes time for communities to assume responsibility for themselves and make strategic decisions based on facts, an evaluation of the vitality of official language communities becomes a necessity, both for communities wanting to take charge of their own destiny, and for government institutions responsible for supporting them.
| The vitality of a community may be considered from an individual or collective point of view. Researchers often study vitality through the lens of demographic, human, social, political, economic and cultural capital. |
Community vitality is highly complex and dynamic, and several indicators can be used to evaluate it. An indicator is a unit of information used to measure, as precisely as possible, the expression of a changing reality. It is a way of assessing a complex reality, in this instance an official language community, by examining one of its components. The indicator is not reality itself, but rather a sign indicating a state or trend. For example, within the context of official language communities, factors such as the level of education of the linguistic minority compared with that of the majority could be used as an indicator of the minority's capacity to develop and grow. And why not measure the prevalence of volunteer work within the minority compared with the majority to get an idea of the relative social cohesion of the two groups?
STRATEGIC DECISIONS BASED ON FACTS
Actually, an almost endless number of indicators can be used to study an official language community. Hence, judicious selection is of the highest importance when choosing indicators. One thing is certain: it is important to begin with the official language community's collective values. Furthermore, the results sought and the changes to be measured must also be taken into account before making a decision regarding the choice of indicators. Above all, the development of indicators must always be conducted with the collaboration of all stakeholders.
To be useful, all indicators should have certain essential characteristics. They must, for example, be relevant to the objectives sought. They must be valid; that is, they must properly reflect what we are trying to measure. Indicators must also be easy for all stakeholders to use. Other essential characteristics include reliability and comparability of data, as well as completeness and feasibility.
Luckily, many groups and communities (official language and other) have launched projects to evaluate community vitality and have chosen indicators that can serve as a guide. This is particularly true of the Community Health and Social Services Network in Quebec and the Federation of Canadian Municipalities. Communities looking to take charge of their development can always learn from the experience of others.
| Example of a set of indicators The Federation of Canadian Municipalities (FCM, 2001) has chosen sets of indicators under the following themes: human capital, standard of living, quality of employment, quality of housing, social tension, collective health, municipal safety, community participation. For example, under the theme of community participation, the FCM chose the following indicators: voter participation (percentage), charitable donations, donations to the United Way, recycling, percentage of homes with a newspaper subscription, quality of the environment and social infrastructure. |
Stakeholders
Community vitality presupposes a certain level of self-empowerment with regard to the community's development. An inclusive approach is essential, where all stakeholders work together as part of an open and transparent process. Official language communities, public institutions and researchers are the main players. Each must make a unique contribution to the creation of a knowledge base regarding community vitality.
It goes without saying that official language communities must take a leading role and establish a certain degree of control over the process. Since they are called upon to take charge of their destinies, they are best qualified to find, through research and evaluation, the means to better understand their own situation, establish their starting points and target their objectives. Thus, the onus is on them to develop their vision of a healthy and strong community capable of addressing the challenges it faces. It is their responsibility to define the values that will guide all action, because they truly are both the object and subject of this knowledge, and they will be the first to reap the benefits.
Federal institutions play an equally important role, given that the very concept of community vitality is embedded within the Canadian judicial framework as it pertains to the equality of English and French. The amendments made to the Official Languages Act by Bill S-3 require these institutions to take positive action to foster the development and growth of official language communities. Within their accountability framework, these institutions will clearly have to show how their duty to consider the situation of official language communities is fulfilled in their policies, programs and actions. As stakeholders, their role consists of, among other things, ensuring the coordination, facilitation and funding of research on vitality. Federal institutions must also ensure the dissemination of research and work to enable communities to improve their knowledge. As well, any action taken by federal institutions should not be carried out in isolation. They must foster interdepartmental and intergovernmental collaboration. They must enhance their databases and make them accessible. Finally, they must, within the framework of their own research, take the reality of official language communities into account.
Researchers make up the third group of stakeholders. Communities and federal institutions will have to draw on their skills to deal with the technical aspects of research. The onus is on these stakeholders to apply a research discipline and strict methodology to broaden understanding of vitality and help interpret research results.
COMMUNITY VITALITY: THE STAKEHOLDERS
In short, a participative approach must be contemplated, extending from and consistent with recent advances in horizontal governance, and in the spirit of the Action Plan for Official Languages and its accountability framework.
We have just seen what a fundamental role research on vitality plays in providing direction for community action. It empowers communities by providing them with knowledge. Such research is bound to be the product of efforts made by partners rallying together and committed to the cause. What, then, are the courses of action most likely to help us arrive at an approach to vitality based on indicators and results?
The Government of Canada's role comes into play, both at the beginning and end of the community revitalization process.
First, the federal government serves as a creator of knowledge. Federal institutions publish and finance research—the purpose of which is normally related to their mandate, particularly for the development of policies and programs. More often than not, the results of such research ignore official language communities or fail to include them or define the fundamental conditions that influence their development. As well, a number of federal organizations subsidize research and the creation of knowledge together with the academic and scientific communities. Research on official languages and the vitality of official language communities should be a priority for these federal institutions. The Government of Canada should also examine the decisive role funding agencies such as the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council, the Canadian Institutes of Health Research, the Canada Council for the Arts and others, play to advance research on official language communities and the issue of official languages in this country.
As important as research on vitality may be, however, it is not an end in itself. It is merely a precursor to action.
Once a diagnosis on community vitality has been made, the federal government's role is to recognize the duty to act—in all of its operations. The Canadian government develops programs and provides services to the Canadian population, which includes official language communities. To meet its new obligations following the adoption of Bill S-3, the government must act; federal institutions must take concrete and positive action to promote community vitality. These actions must be reflected in the policies and programs they develop, the activities they implement, their communication with the public, the services they deliver and the assessment of their performance.
Overall, the government must implement a consistent approach to foster vitality based on factual data and the needs of communities.
| Therefore, the Commissioner recommends: That the Minister of Official Languages ensure that all federal institutions, within their respective mandates, establish a strategy to foster the vitality of official language minority communities that includes:
|
