Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-m42fx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-20T20:19:44.189Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Multilevel Governance of Immigration and Settlement: Making Deep Federalism Work

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 July 2009

Christopher Leo  and
Martine August
Christopher Leo*
Affiliation:
University of Winnipeg
Martine August*
Affiliation:
University of Toronto
*
Christopher Leo, Department of Politics, University of Winnipeg, 6L07, 515 Portage Avenue, Winnipeg, Manitoba, R3B 2E9; christopher.leo@shaw.ca. http://blog.uwinnipeg.ca/ChristopherLeo/
Martine August, Department of Geography and Planning, University of Toronto, Sidney Smith Hall, 100 St. George Street, Room 5047, Toronto, Ontario, M5S 3G3; martine.august@utoronto.ca.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Abstract. This study addresses the question of how best to ensure that national immigration policies are appropriately adjusted to meet the disparate requirements of different communities. We argue that this is the core objective of multilevel governance, which, however, has become freighted with competing ideological objectives, objectives that are perhaps best expressed in Hooghe and Marks's distinction between type I and type II governance, the former oriented to collective decision making and the latter embodying market-oriented approaches to governance. Our argument is that these competing sets of ideologically driven objectives divert multilevel governance away from its core objective of appropriateness to community circumstances. An accompanying article (Leo and Enns, 2009) explores problems posed by ideologically driven, type II multilevel governance in Vancouver. The current article takes up a contrasting case, that of the Canada-Manitoba Agreement on Immigration and Settlement, focusing especially on Winnipeg. We find that in this case the provincial government chose an approach to multilevel governance that did not hew to either type I or type II governance templates, but drew on both to build an impressively successful system of immigration and settlement, carefully tailored to meet the requirements of disparate Manitoba communities. Success was built not on the application of a preconceived template for good governance but on resourcefulness and flexibility in working out ways of making national policies fit local circumstances.

Résumé. La question que pose cette étude est la suivante : comment s'assurer que les politiques nationales concernant l'immigration et l'insertion sociale correspondent parfaitement aux besoins disparates des communautés différentes? Nous prétendons que c'est précisément la raison d'être de la gouvernance multipalier. Or, celle-ci est présentement surchargée de préoccupations idéologiques opposées et contradictoires qui trouvent leur meilleure expression dans la distinction que Hooghe et Marks ont faite entre le type I et le type II de gouvernance; l'un s'oriente vers la méthode collective de décision, l'autre incarne les approches de la gouvernance déterminées par les contraintes du marché. L'essentiel de notre argument est que ces approches idéologiques opposées entravent et contredisent l'objectif principal de la gouvernance multipalier, qui est de rendre les politiques gouvernementales sensibles aux circonstances particulières des communautés. Un article connexe (Leo et Enns, 2009) aborde les difficultés que pose, à Vancouver, la gouvernance multipalier de type II déterminée par des contraintes idéologiques. Le présent article aborde un cas tout à fait contraire, soit celui de l'Entente Canada-Manitoba sur l'immigration et l'insertion, centré sur Winnipeg. Nous constatons que, dans ce cas, le gouvernement provincial a opté pour une approche de la gouvernance multipalier qui ne cadrait pas avec les modèles de gouvernance de type I ou II, mais qui s'est inspirée des deux pour bâtir un modèle d'immigration et d'insertion qui est d'autant plus impressionnant et bien réussi qu'il est méthodiquement conçu en fonction des besoins disparates des communautés manitobaines. Ce succès provient non pas de l'application d'un modèle préconçu de bonne gouvernance, mais d'une quête ingénieuse et flexible des moyens qui permettent de concilier les politiques nationales et les circonstances régionales.

Type
Research Article
Information
Canadian Journal of Political Science/Revue canadienne de science politique , Volume 42 , Issue 2 , June 2009 , pp. 491 - 510
Copyright
Copyright © Canadian Political Science Association 2009

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Anderson, Katie and Leo, Christopher. 2006. “Immigration and Settlement in Saint John, New Brunswick: Community Perspectives on a Federal-Provincial Agreement.” Unpublished manuscript. http://blog.uwinnipeg.ca/ChristopherLeo/ISSJecomm06-04-18.pdf.Google Scholar
Blatter, Joachim. 2004. “From “spaces of place” to “spaces of flows”? Territorial and functional governance in cross-border regions in Europe and North America.” International Journal of Urban and Regional Research 28: 530–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bradford, Neil. 2005. “Place-based Public Policy: Towards a New Urban and Community Agenda for Canada.” Ottawa: Canadian Policy Research Networks.Google Scholar
Canada. Parliament. 2002. House of Commons Standing Committee on Citizenship and Immigration. Competing for Immigrants. Ottawa: Public Works and Government Services Canada–Publishing.Google Scholar
Canada. Parliament. 2003. House of Commons Standing Committee on Citizenship and Immigration. Settlement and Integration: A Sense of Belonging “Feeling at Home.” Ottawa: Communication Canada–Publishing.Google Scholar
Casella, Alessandra and Frey, Bruno. 1992. “Federalism and clubs. Towards an economic theory of overlapping political jurisdictions.” European Economic Review 36: 639–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Citizenship and Immigration Canada. 1998. “Canada and Manitoba Reach Agreements on Provincial Nominees and Immigrant Settlement Services.” News release, June 29.Google Scholar
Citizenship and Immigration Canada. 2001. Towards a More Balanced Geographical Distribution of Immigrants. Ottawa: Strategic Policy, Planning, and Research, CIC Communications Branch.Google Scholar
Citizenship and Immigration Canada. 2002. “Innovative Pilot Program to Assist Refugees.” Press release, November 13.Google Scholar
Citizenship and Immigration Canada. 2003a. “Canada and Manitoba Sign New Immigration Agreement.” Press release, June 6.Google Scholar
Citizenship and Immigration Canada. 2003b. Canada-Manitoba Immigration Agreement. Ottawa. http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/about/laws-policy/agreements/manitoba/can-man-2003.asp (December 21, 2007).Google Scholar
Citizenship and Immigration Canada. 2006. Canada—Permanent Residents by Province or Territory and Urban Area. http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/resources/statistics/facts2006/permanent/18.asp (May 15, 2008).Google Scholar
Clément, G. 2002. “The Manitoba Advantage: Opportunity and Diversity.” Horizons 5: 16–17. http://policyresearch.gc.ca/page.asp?pagenm=v5n2_art_07 (December 21, 2007).Google Scholar
Clément, G. 2003. “The Manitoba Experience.” In Canadian Immigration Policy for the 21st Century, ed. Beach, Charles M. and Reitz, Jeffery G.. Kingston: John Deutsch Institute for the Study of Economic Policy.Google Scholar
Doan, Lan and MacFarlane, Shannon. 2003. “Immigrant Seniors: No Longer a Forgotten Group.” Presentation summary from the National Settlement Conference II, Calgary. http://www.integration-net.ca/inet/english/vsi-isb/conference2/session/8a.htm (December 22, 2007).Google Scholar
Frey, Bruno and Eichenberger, Reiner. 1999. The New Democratic Federalism for Europe: Functional, Overlapping, and Competing Jurisdictions. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
Garcea, Joseph and Pontikes, Ken. 2004. “Federal–Municipal–Provincial Relations in Saskatchewan: Provincial Roles, Approaches and Mechanisms.” In Municipal—Federal–Provincial Relations in Canada, ed. Young, Robert and Leuprecht, Christian. Montreal: McGill-Queen's.Google Scholar
Gibbons, R.G. and Vander Ploeg, C.. 2000. Pioneers 2000: A National Conference on Canadian Immigration: Final Report. Winnipeg: Business Council of Manitoba, Council for Canadian Unity, and Canada West Foundation.Google Scholar
Good, Kristin. 2006. “Multicultural Democracy in the City: Explaining Municipal Responsiveness to Immigrants and Ethno-Cultural Minorities.” Doctoral dissertation. University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario.Google Scholar
Hooghe, Lisbet and Marks, Gary. 2002. “Types of Multilevel Governance.” Cahiers européens de Sciences Po 2: 1–30.Google Scholar
Huynh, Vien. 2004. “Closer to Home: Provincial Immigration Policy in Western Canada.” Building the New West report #35. Calgary: Canada West Foundation.Google Scholar
Janzen, L. 2005. “Manitoba has record growth in population.” Winnipeg Free Press, March 26.Google Scholar
Leo, Christopher. 1995. “The State in the City: A Political Economy Perspective on Growth and Decay.” In Canadian Metropolitics, ed. Lightbody, James. Toronto: Copp Clark Pitman.Google Scholar
Leo, Christopher. 1997. “City Politics in an Era of Globalization.” In Reconstructing Urban Regime Theory: Regulating Local Government in a Global Economy, ed. Lauria, Mickey. Thousand Oaks: Sage.Google Scholar
Leo, Christopher. 1998. “Regional Growth Management Regime: The Case of Portland, Oregon.” Journal of Urban Affairs 20: 363–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leo, Christopher. 2006. “Deep Federalism: Respecting Community Difference in National Policy.” Canadian Journal of Political Science 39: 481–506.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leo, Christopher and Andres, Todd. 2008. “Deep Federalism through Local Initiative: Unbundling Sovereignty in Winnipeg.” Canadian Journal of Political Science 41: 93–117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leo, Christopher and August, Martine. 2006. “National Policy and Community Initiative: Mismanaging Homelessness in a Slow Growth City.” Canadian Journal of Urban Research (supplement) 15:1–21.Google Scholar
Leo, Christopher with August, Martine, Pyl, Mike and Rogers, Matthew D.. 2007. “Multilevel Governance without Municipal Government.” Unpublished manuscript. http://blog.uwinnipeg.ca/ChristopherLeo/WpgAbs07-11-13.pdf.Google Scholar
Leo, Christopher and Brown, Wilson. 2000. “Slow Growth and Urban Development Policy.” Journal of Urban Affairs 22: 193–213.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leo, Christopher and Enns, Jeremy. Forthcoming. “Multilevel Governance and Ideological Rigidity: The Failure of Deep Federalism.” Canadian Journal of Political Science. http://blog.uwinnipeg.ca/ChristopherLeo/ISV07-11-26.pdf.Google Scholar
Leo, Christopher and Fenton, Robert. 1990. “'Mediated Enforcement' and the Evolution of the State: Development Corporations in Canadian City Centres.” International Journal of Urban and Regional Research 14: 185–206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leo, Christopher and Pyl, Mike. 2007. “Multilevel Governance: Getting the Job Done and Respecting Community Difference—Three Winnipeg Cases.” Canadian Political Science Review 1: http://ojs.unbc.ca/index.php/cpsr/issue/view/2/showToc.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McDonald, James T. 2004. “Toronto and Vancouver Bound: The Location Choice of New Canadian Immigrants.” The Canadian Journal of Urban Research 13: 85–101.Google Scholar
McIsaac, Elizabeth. 2003a. Nation Building through Cities: A New Deal for Immigrant Settlement in Canada. Ottawa: The Caledon Institute of Social Policy.Google Scholar
McIsaac, Elizabeth. 2003b. “Immigrants in Canadian Cities: Census 2001: What Do the Data Tell Us?” Policy Options May: 58–63. http://www.maytree.com/PDF_Files/ImmigrantsInCdnCities.pdf (December 28, 2007).Google Scholar
Morrish, Margot. 2006. Director, Strategic Planning and Program Support Branch, Immigration and Multiculturalism Division, Manitoba Labour and Immigration. Interview, May 29.Google Scholar
Norton, Alan. 1994. International Handbook of Local and Regional Government. Aldershot: Edward Elgar.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Omidvar, R. and Richmond, T.. 2003. Immigrant Settlement and Social Inclusion in Canada. Toronto: The Laidlaw Foundation.Google Scholar
Province of Manitoba. 2001. Labour and Immigration. Manitoba Immigration Statistics Summary: 2000 Report. Winnipeg: Manitoba Labour and Immigration.Google Scholar
Province of Manitoba. 2004. Labour and Immigration. Annual Report 2003–2004. Winnipeg: Manitoba Labour and Immigration.Google Scholar
Province of Manitoba. 2007a. Labour and Immigration. “Provincial Nominee Program: Are You Eligible?”http://www.gov.mb.ca/labour/immigrate/pnp/eligible.html (December 21, 2007).Google Scholar
Province of Manitoba. 2007b. Labour and Immigration. “Provincial Nominee Program: How to Immigrate to Manitoba, Canada.”http://www.gov.mb.ca/labour/immigrate/pnp/index.html (December 23, 2007).Google Scholar
Saint-Martin, Denis. 2004. Coordinating Interdependence: Governance and Social Policy Redesign in Britain, the European Union and Canada. Ottawa: Canadian Policy Research Networks.Google Scholar
Schwager, Robert. 1999. “The Theory of Administrative Federalism: An Alternative to Fiscal Centralization and Decentralization.” Public Finance Review 27: 282–309.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weingast, Barry. 1995. “The Economic Role of Political Institutions: Market-preserving Federalism and Economic Development.” Journal of Law and Economic Organization 11: 1–31.Google Scholar