Home » The Role of Neighbourhood Context in shaping Migrant Resilience: A Comparative study of four Neighborhoods in Ottawa-Gatineau

The Role of Neighbourhood Context in shaping Migrant Resilience: A Comparative study of four Neighborhoods in Ottawa-Gatineau

The aim of this project was to examine the role of neighbourhoods in shaping migrants’ resilience. In particular, based on conversations with our community partners (OLIP, CESOC, City of Gatineau, SITO), there was interest in understanding how the social and spatial environment at the neighbourhood level (services/amenities, demographics, housing, transportation, employment opportunities, community organisations/associations, etc.) influences the settlement and integration experiences of migrant groups. In addition, our partners were concerned with issues of equity (access to and use of services &issues of discrimination) and safety (presence of violence, drugs & other problems).

What was our approach?

Neighbourhoods represent a useful and potentially insightful scale to examine migrant resilience at the interface of structure/agency: how immigrants perceive the built & social environment (amenities, services, safety) of the neighbourhoods where they live, work, educate children, & play (i.e., a safe & supporting environment for them & their children). Neighbourhoods are spaces of everyday life that afford opportunity to investigate the role of structural context on migrants’ experiences, including not only neighbourhood characteristics but also government policies at various scales (education, health, housing, etc.) and how these translate into institutional practices and programs (services) offered on the ground. Concomitantly, we can study people’s experiences (access to services, social networks), feelings (sense of comfort, belonging), and their level of agency by examining their practices, choices &decision making (why they move in a neighbourhood, how long they stay, access to and use of services, strategies to meet needs, local community engagement, perception of opportunities/challenges, and etc. ). Moreover, it is important to take into account individual characteristics &markers of identity such as class, gender, age, ethnicity/race, migrant category, language, religion, family composition, etc. and their role in shaping their embodied experiences of and practices in everyday spaces of the neighbourhood.

Conceptually, we proposed to examine the role of neighbourhoods in shaping migrant resilience through the prism of Henri Lefebvre’s (1991) tria-lectical conceptualization of space as lived, conceived and represented. Empirically, the focus was on 4 neighbourhoods with distinct characteristics in Ottawa-Gatineau (2 in Ottawa, 2 in Gatineau) that were selected with the help of our community partners. Building on previous work on the social geography of the interprovincial border in Ottawa-Gatineau (Gilbert et al., Veronis, Veronis & Ray), the comparative nature of our study was key in providing new insights into the role of factors at multiple scales (provincial, municipal, local), thus improving understanding of how the institutional context shapes migrant resilience at more micro-scales (neighbourhood, community, family, individual).

We adopted a community-based participatory research approach incorporating qualitative mixed-methods (critical ethnography, photo voice interviews, and community feedback sessions). In addition to advancing conceptualizations of migrant resilience and resilient neighbourhoods, the project aimed to provide concrete recommendations for policy & practice that was of interest to our community partners and practitioners in various sectors, and policy makers at three levels government beyond Ottawa-Gatineau.

This project consisted of 5 research stages over 20 months (May 2018-Dec2019):

  1. Neighbourhood selection &literature review (May-June 2018): With our community partners, we selected 4 neighbourhoods (2 in Ottawa, 2 in Gatineau) with distinct characteristics (housing, demographics, services/amenities, transportation, employment, etc.) to account for factors that may shape migrant resilience. We also undertook a broad literature review on immigrant experiences at the neighbourhood level & on resilience research at the neighbourhood scale. Preparation of ethics application.
  2. Census profile &critical ethnography (June-Sept 2018): Detailed profiles for each neighbourhood were prepared using Census2011/2016 data(immigrant population, countries of origin, ethnic identity, languages, age, education, income, housing, etc.).We also conducted a critical ethnography (Carspecken 1995) of each neighbourhood for qualitative understanding of their material & social forms through visits and participant observation in various spaces and public and community events (with permission). Detailed field notes were taken. These were complemented with a scan of local media (mainstream and n’hood/community media) to understand local representations of each n’hood. Findings from Stage 2 helped prepare for data collection at Stage 3.
  3. Photo-voice Interviews (August-Dec 2018): We recruited 10-12 participants/n’hood(n=44) from diverse countries of origin, migrant status, times of arrival, gender, class, age, ethnicity/race, family, etc. The goal was not to be representative but to capture a diverse range of experiences to better understand the influence of neighbourhood characteristics on migrant resilience. We conducted a 2-step interview:
    1. meeting to discuss their immigration &settlement experiences, fill a demographic survey,& introduce project (45-60 min);
    2. meeting to discuss migrants’experiences, level of comfort/discomfort in the n’hood & what they like/dislike about it using their photographs (60-90 min).They were given one week between meetings and asked to take at least 5-10 photographs. Photo-voice is a bottom-up, creative approach that gives power and voice to participants (Wang&Burris 1997) while adding a visual element to support discussions of n’hood experiences.
  4. Analysis &Community Feedback (Jan-May2019): Interview data & photos were analysed using constructivist & interpretive approach (Cloke et al. 204).In each neighbourhood, we organized a focus group/community feedback workshop to which all participants were invited, along with local reps/leaders and other local residents to share our preliminary findings and seek input & recommendations. Depending on interest/availability we also organized an exhibit with participants’ photos from Stage 3. Light refreshments were offered; the event was an opportunity for dialogue & engagement between researchers, community, and local leaders & reps.
  5. Dissemination (June-Dec 2019) Findings were disseminated through various activities targeting diverse audiences.

Principal Investigators:

  • Brian Ray, bray@uottawa.ca
  • Luisa Veronis, lveronis@uottawa.ca

Co-investigators:

  • Anyck Dauphin, UQO
  • Jen Ridgley, Carleton U

Community Partners:

  • OLIP
  • CESOC
  • Ville de Gatineau
  • SITO