Social inclusion of newcomers to Canada: An information problem?

Library & Information Science Research 27 (2005) 302 – 324

Social inclusion of newcomers to Canada: An information problem? Nadia CaidiT, Danielle Allard Faculty of Information Studies, University of Toronto, 140 St. George Street, Toronto, Ontario, Canada M5S 3G6 Available online 22 June 2005

Abstract This article examines how information service providers, particularly libraries, may assist effectively in meeting the information needs of immigrants. In order to understand information practices of immigrants and cater to their needs, a holistic approach is advocated that encompasses a closer examination of theories and principles of social inclusion and social capital in addition to information seeking behavior. Only through this holistic overview can one apprehend the role that information plays in the world of immigrants at various stages of their integration into their adopted society. The issues raised have implications for frontline information providers as well as for policy makers interested in programs, policies, and funding priorities concerning information provision and access strategies that enable social inclusion of newcomers and longer established immigrants into the social fabric of Canada. D 2005 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction Canada considers itself a mosaic of cultures, and Toronto is often placed among the world’s most multicultural cities. According to the 2001 census data, 18.4% of the total population in Canada was born outside the country (the highest level in 70 years) according to

T Corresponding author. E-mail addresses: [email protected] (N. Caidi)8 [email protected] (D. Allard). 0740-8188/$ - see front matter D 2005 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.lisr.2005.04.003

N. Caidi, D. Allard / Library & Information Science Research 27 (2005) 302–324

303

Statistics Canada (2001). The majority of the immigrants who arrived in Canada during the 1990s were between 25 and 64 years old, and a growing proportion of them most often speaks a language other than English or French at home. The needs of newcomers and longer established immigrants range from the satisfaction of basic individual needs (e.g., housing, job skills, and access to employment opportunities, education, and learning) to increased civic participation and social connections. Government agencies and community-based organizations have invested much time and effort in providing resources and information for newcomers to Canada in various forms [e.g., English as a Second Language (ESL) classes, settlement, and citizenship programs, multi-lingual services, Internet classes, and children programs] (Mylopoulos, 2000, 2004; Papillon, 2002). These efforts aim at enabling newcomers and longer established immigrants to participate at various levels of local life. Increasingly diverse societies require new directions for information organization and provision aimed at immigrant groups, such as the promotion of culturally sensitive and relevant resources and services (e.g., Web sites and community digital libraries as well as multilingual retrieval and access tools), along with involving immigrants in the process of gathering and designing information resources and systems that are meaningful to them. Without mechanisms in place to ensure that newcomers are adequately integrated in their newly adopted society, these groups may be at greater risk of being at the margin of the democratic process or feeling isolated and lacking opportunities and choice. It is increasingly clear from the literature that social exclusion hurts not only those people who are excluded (their needs are not met), but also the broader society and even the economy (Warschauer, 2002). While social inclusion theories acknowledge the exclusion and marginalization of various groups due to their economic, social, and cultural conditions, it has not been previously considered that social exclusion may also be an information problem: those without adequate access to information are socially excluded, and those who are socially excluded may also lack access to mainstream sources of information or the proper social capital. When the information needs of newcomers relating to such services as settlement, housing, employment opportunities, health, or education are not easily met, then navigation through the system and inclusion into their new country may become a daunting and frustrating process. This article examines the literature of information needs and use in light of social inclusion theories and principles. The aim is to build bridges between these two domains of inquiry to comprehend and perhaps redefine what social inclusion means from an informational perspective, and how it should be assessed and measured. The issues raised have implications for frontline information providers as well as for policy makers interested in programs, policies, and funding priorities concerning information provision and access strategies that enable social inclusion of newcomers and longer established immigrants into the social fabric of Canada. 2. Information practices of immigrant communities Information provision is a key component of social inclusion. Yet, relatively little is known about the ways in which newcomers and longer established immigrant communities locate and access content in forms that are understandable and usable to them. Little is known either

304

N. Caidi, D. Allard / Library & Information Science Research 27 (2005) 302–324

about their attitudes, values, awareness of, and skills in utilizing various information institutions and related technologies. This situation results in large measure from the heterogeneous nature of immigrants as a user group. Immigrants to Canada tend to belong to various categories (i.e., skilled workers, sponsored family members, business class immigrants, refugees, foreign students, or temporary workers) and have diverse backgrounds, educational levels, and familiarity with Canadian institutions and values. Skilled workers or business class immigrants may have information needs and practices that differ from those of sponsored family members or refugees, for instance. Similarly, it is reasonable to believe that newer generations of immigrants are more likely to have access to information in electronic form (e.g., through Web sites or mailing lists) prior to their arrival than older generations of immigrants. Another important aspect of the problem is the dynamic nature of the immigration process. Indeed, immigrating and adapting to a new country may be best understood as a process with stages variously associated with specific needs and attitudes toward resources, institutions, or technologies. Early after arriving in the host country, a newcomer will be likely to have pressing needs for information that will contribute to his/her survival. As the immigrant becomes accustomed to the adopted country, finds his/her place in society, and contributes economically and socially to its welfare, different needs may arise such as the need for belonging more fully and becoming an active citizen (e.g., political participation, civic duties, and cultural celebrations) (Papillon, 2002). According to Mwarigha (2002), there are three stages in the settlement process of newcomers. In the first stage new immigrants’ needs include pressing matters such as food, shelter, orientation to the new city, language interpretation, and language instruction. In the intermediate stage newcomers’ needs revolve around access to various Canadian systems and institutions, which include municipal services, legal services, long-term housing, health services, and employment-specific language instruction. Lastly, immigrants bstrive to become equal participants in Canada’s economic, cultural, social, and political lifeQ (Mwarigha, 2002, p. 9). The implications are that immigrant information needs tend to become more diverse and individual. However, learning how to overcome many systemic barriers to equal participation can be viewed as a common process for all immigrants at this stage. Citizenship and Immigration Canada usually characterizes a newcomer as someone who has been in the host country for five years or less. As the newcomer becomes a longer established immigrant, his/her information practices are bound to evolve as well. The literature of information-seeking behavior teaches us that different user groups have different information practices (i.e., familiarity with, access to, and uses of formal and informal sources of information such as libraries, archives, museums, media, organizations, and individuals). Chatman’s theory of information poverty is useful in understanding how certain groups have difficulty obtaining useful information for solving everyday life problems. She argues that there exists a class of information poor who lack access to information, characterized by their difficulty or inability to obtain useful information either from people they know (insiders) or outsiders to their group or even from the mainstream sources of information such as the media. Chatman’s extensive ethnographic studies of female prisoners, female janitors, elderly women, and so on (Chatman, 1985, 1987, 1991a, 1991b; Chatman & Pendleton, 1995)

N. Caidi, D. Allard / Library & Information Science Research 27 (2005) 302–324

305

contributed to a better understanding of the situated nature of information needs and sources. By depicting the information environment of the people she investigated, she was able to convey the localized and situated nature of their information needs and sources. The works of Chatman and others (e.g., Dervin, 1983; Dervin & Nilan, 1986; Taylor, 1991) shed light on how information needs (i.e., the situation out of which the information need arises and how people define the need) and their resolution arise out of their particular social, cultural, and work environments, and are better factors for predicting informationseeking behavior than demographic characteristics. Included in the environment is the setting within which the information seeking occurs, the attitudes of others that may encourage or inhibit information seeking, the kinds of problems that arise in the setting, and the ease of access to information resources (Taylor, 1991, pp. 226–228). New immigrants also have particular social, cultural, and work environments. Hence, understanding the stages of immigrants’ adaptation to the host country, their differing environments, and the situations they face and for which they have an information need can elicit findings about how and whom they approach in order to find information to solve their everyday problems. Researchers in the field of information studies have also pointed out the importance of social networks as sources of information for so-called vulnerable or marginalized populations. The importance of social networks in immigrants’ lives is discussed widely both in information studies as well as in the immigration and settlement literature, which provide a fruitful avenue of research for understanding immigrants’ information practices (Bishop, Shoemaker, Tidline, & Salela, 1999; Portes & Bach, 1985; Wasserman & Faust, 1994). Numerous studies shed light on the value of social networks for frontline information providers who can then provide better services to the communities they serve, be they lowincome communities or particular ethno-linguistic groups (Birkel & Repucci, 1983; Fisher, Durrance, Bouch Hinton, 2004; Gollop, 1997; Liu, 1995). Chatman’s studies also advance the importance of social networks in information seeking. However, her findings showed that, rather than finding a prevalence of mutual trust and support among members of a given group, there was instead a fair amount of secrecy and cautionary attitudes among group members, thus hindering information sharing. The findings from these and other studies illustrate how information seeking and use differs according to particular circumstances and is influenced by the social structures to which individuals belong (Dervin, 1983; Haythornthwaite, 1996; MacIntosh-Murray, 2003; Savolainen, 1993). Understanding the role played by social networks in mediating access to information resources contributes to an understanding of the social and cultural context of the information practices of newcomers. Newcomers may have differing social network structures (in terms of the size, density, and strength of the network ties), which in turn affect their transition to their newly adopted society. Questions remain as to what constitutes a high-quality immigrant social network and who are the people who play a mediating role (i.e., the gatekeepers as discussed by Agada (1999), Metoyer-Duran (1993), and others). Network characteristics usually encompass the range, quality, and variety of positions to which an individual has access; the size and density (i.e., interconnectivity among the members of the network); and the strong and weak ties in one’s social network that give access to these resources

306

N. Caidi, D. Allard / Library & Information Science Research 27 (2005) 302–324

(Granovetter, 1983; Lin, 2001; Wellman, 1983). New immigrants may not have a fully developed social network upon their arrival to Canada, or may have one that might not be adequate (in size, density, and strength of the ties) to help facilitate their transition. As immigrants get established in Canada for a longer period of time, their social networks’ characteristics may evolve and change, reflecting their interactions with the environment. Moreover, differences between the first, second, and third generations of immigrants may widen as the first generation may be at an increased risk of lower occupational status, higher underemployment, higher poverty, and so on. First generation immigrants may also be more inclined to maintain transnational relationships in the form of friendships and kin networks with people from their country of origin (Papillon, 2002). Assessing the differences within and across immigrant groups (including at different stages of the immigration process) is essential. More research is needed that shows how the attributes of the social networks of new immigrants affect their ability to find information, to resolve problems, or to deal with situations in their everyday lives. Chatman’s work on socially disadvantaged groups in society is also relevant to our discussion of immigrants insofar as it illustrates how marginalized communities are implicated in center-periphery theories of information seeking (Chatman, 1985, 1996). Chatman argues that the information poor constitute a class shaped by both economic and social exclusion. Those who are information poor are often marginalized members of society and therefore the knowledge they possess is generated at the periphery of society. Feminist and critical race theorists, for example, argue that what one knows emerges from one’s social location (Mohanty, 2003; Narayan, 2003). Thus, members of society not located in the mainstream, but on the margins, have different understandings of the world. It is therefore essential that libraries and other frontline service providers take into consideration what it is that these often-marginalized members of society do know, how they come to know it, and how they make sense of it, including how they search for information. Only then can an attempt be made to create better access for and with them and to develop societies that are inclusive of and meaningful to their perspectives. Concepts such as centerperiphery theories of knowing and information poverty lend themselves well to rethinking immigrants’ information-seeking behavior and its relationships to social inclusion. The literature on social inclusion spans various disciplinary fields. In the immigration and settlement studies field, the thinking about social inclusion is often conceptualized in terms of social capital. As originally conceptualized by Lin (2001), social capital refers to bresources embedded in a social structure which are accessed and/or mobilized in purposive actionsQ (p. 12). In the immigration and settlement studies field, social capital has been operationalized in many ways. Duncan (2003), for instance, states that ba society that is socially inclusive is a society that grants access to everyone to the vehicles of the good life, as it is defined by that societyQ (p. 31). A 2001 Organization for Economic Co-Operation and Development (OECD) report defines social capital as the bnetworks together with shared norms, values and understanding which facilitates cooperation within or among groupsQ (p. 41). Social capital has also often been defined as an asset, or as Duncan puts it, ba public goodQ that resides in the relationships between members of a society and between members of a society and the institutions of that society (e.g., government bodies, the police, business organizations, non-

N. Caidi, D. Allard / Library & Information Science Research 27 (2005) 302–324

307

governmental organizations (NGOs), and political organizations) (Duncan, 2003, p. 31). In other words, social inclusion generates social capital, whereas social exclusion reduces social capital by reducing the levels of trust required for a vibrant economy and a well-functioning society. The implications for social inclusion are that the better one’s social capital, the better one’s chances of integrating into society, and by extension the better one’s chances to live the good life. Less research has examined where information fits within the universe of things contributing to social capital. Johnson (2003) has linked social capital and information resources in her study of the urban poor in Mongolia. Her findings point out that better access to information along with various other social changes can indeed contribute to the inclusion of marginalized members of society. More research is needed to further these findings. In this article, the claim made is that in order to understand information practices of immigrants, there is a need to look at theories of information-seeking behavior, social inclusion, and social capital. Only through this holistic overview can one comprehend the role that information plays in the life world of immigrants, at various stages of their integration into their new communities and societies. Thinking about information as an inherent part of social capital is key, as is the rethinking of social inclusion in informational terms. Access to information resources and the skills and literacy needed to make use of information for everyday life problems are part of the social capital of individuals. In turn, access to information enables the social inclusion of newcomers and longer established immigrants, in the same way that it contributes to all citizens’ chances to live the good life (i.e., a life that is self-determined and fulfilling). This reframing raises important questions for information institutions, such as, Can new immigrants’ uses of information institutions be improved or facilitated through a better understanding of their social networks? How can information institutions make the best use of services that new immigrants may be already familiar with through their social networks? How can information institutions and other service organizations (such as settlement organizations) work together toward enabling the social inclusion of newcomers and longer established immigrants? This can be done by broadening one’s understanding of the concepts of social inclusion and social capital. The concept of social inclusion can incorporate more elements of a social capital analysis, while the concept of social capital should include the information and informational resources which are an inherent part it. These intersections are explored in the remainder of the article. 3. Rethinking social inclusion Social inclusion is a concept that is commonly employed in social policy circles although the term itself has a variety of meanings that have been used to justify a multitude of policy initiatives. But what does social inclusion mean here? How does social inclusion differ from social integration, social cohesion, or even social exclusion? It is essential to unpack these terms before going further in the analysis of information practices of immigrants and the role of information institutions in enabling social inclusion of these communities.

308

N. Caidi, D. Allard / Library & Information Science Research 27 (2005) 302–324

A fuller understanding of the similarities and differences between social inclusion and social exclusion can be revealed through a discussion of their historical development as well as the milieu in which they develop. Indeed, because social inclusion/exclusion theories are shaped by the political and ideological convictions that inform them (Silver, 1995), it is difficult to fully define either social inclusion or exclusion. The next section reviews the European Union (EU) model because of its predominant conception of social exclusion (both in Europe and North America) and compares it with the emerging Canadian discourse on social inclusion. 3.1. Social inclusion/exclusion: The European model The notion of social exclusion is a concept that has been deployed by French social policy makers in the early 1970s but is relatively new to North America and is not as well known or commonly used in Canada. The term was first used in France as a response to the problem of bsustaining social integration and solidarityQ (Atkinson, 2000, p. 1038). It was meant to identify those individuals excluded from the social fabric of French society, particularly as it related to employment and employment-based benefits (Barata, 2000). These people were characterized as bpeople with mental and physical disabilities, the suicidal, aged, abused children and youth drop-outs, adult offenders, as well as substance abusersQ (Barata, 2000, p. 1). As it was originally conceived, the socially excluded represented those people who were considered to be on the margins of French society because they lacked incomeearning capacity, which had a detrimental effect on their participation within larger French society. The term carried with it negative connotations of undeserving poor apparently unwilling to integrate within larger French culture. Policy makers viewed this unwillingness to integrate as a threat to social cohesion in France (Atkinson, 2000). In the early 1990s, the concept of social exclusion emerged in Great Britain and later became part of the EU policy discourses, albeit with a clear shift in meaning. While there remained a focus on neo-liberal conservative notions of the undeserving poor and their potential threat to the social cohesion of society, it was assumed that social exclusion existed not because poor people were necessarily unwilling to integrate, but because significant changes in the economy and labor market resulted in greater poverty and unemployment. As Atkinson (2000) notes, bExclusion was increasingly being seen as a problem with its roots in wider societal changes, in particular changes in labour marketsQ (p. 1040). This shift materialized as a criticism of the European welfare state and of the development of the notion of social exclusion to account for the increasing number of persons without work or adequate income resulting in poverty, societal breakdown, and social marginalization. This new connotation of the term focused less on victim blaming and instead pointed to the changes in the European economy as prohibiting the socially excluded from the badequate realization of social rightsQ (Barata, 2000, p. 1). A parallel can be drawn between the undeserving poor in the social inclusion literature and the abundant literature on information seeking of various user groups. Early research in information-seeking behavior tended to place the responsibility for the existence of communication or knowledge gaps upon the individuals themselves, who were viewed in

N. Caidi, D. Allard / Library & Information Science Research 27 (2005) 302–324

309

some way as deviant or deficient because they lacked adequate education or income, for instance, and were therefore bless able and willing to intake information both because of lower ability as well as less opportunity to gain and use informationQ (Dervin, 1980, p. 77). Dervin was among the first scholars to question this conception of information as something existing outside and separate from the individual, something that would be there to fill a gap. Instead, she defined information as something that is subjective and co-constructed by the user in the process of making sense of a particular situation. Found within the notion of the undeserving poor and the incompetent information seeker is the idea that both parties somehow deserve the situations in which they find themselves in, therefore their disadvantages are, to a certain extent, justifiable. Social exclusion, as it is currently conceptualized in Europe, is still very much premised on the desirability of social cohesion, which is understood as necessary to ensure the maintenance of social progress. Social cohesion reflects the notion that members of a society should possess a collective identity in terms of bcommunity, regional, or national cohesionQ (Barata, 2000, p. 3) that will ensure that all members of a society work towards the same goals and consider themselves meaningful members of a society. It is necessary that members of a society understand themselves as contributing to the society of which they are a part rather than being concerned primarily with individual objectives, particularly those at odds with national agendas. Social exclusion was viewed as a major threat to cohesion because it was seen to undermine the social collective identity of nations. By contrast, Canada’s agenda of multiculturalism does not promote social inclusion for the sake of social cohesion. Social exclusion is also conceived of as a multi-dimensional concept, which encompasses economic, cultural, social, and political dimensions. As such it does not conflate exclusion with only one source and emphasizes the multiple interconnected ways in which exclusion occurs (i.e., on many levels and as a result of multiple inequalities) (Office of the Deputy Prime Minister, 2004). Perhaps most importantly, social exclusion is understood as a process rather than simply the state of things. Such a conception emphasizes actors and policies that encourage or discourage exclusion. It calls for accountability by those processes and people contributing to exclusion and it creates conceptual space for the development of solutions to social exclusion. Within the EU, social inclusion is thought to be the natural solution to exclusion (Council of the European Union, 2004). It is worth noting that social exclusion and poverty have often been conceptualized as synonymous although critics of the EU’s conception of social exclusion suggest that exclusion is by no means coextensive with poverty (Mitchell & Shillington, 2002). As Atkinson (2000) argues, one can be socially excluded without being poor and vice versa. The EU’s model of social exclusion largely emphasizes social inclusion policies that draw broadly on labor market adjustments and increasing employment. The anti-poverty movement, according to Mitchell and Shillington (2002), argues that, while social exclusion is most certainly affected by poverty, an emphasis on employment policies is not nearly adequate to capture or redress the reasons why people are poor. Adequate social inclusion policies must take as their starting point that poverty occurs for myriad reasons and that inclusion will be achieved when those multiple factors are mediated.

310

N. Caidi, D. Allard / Library & Information Science Research 27 (2005) 302–324

As Levitas (2003) puts it, bThe idea of dsocial inclusionT is now the central legitimating concept of social policy in Europe and elsewhereQ (para. 1). Indeed within the EU today, multiple initiatives are underway to combat social exclusion at both an EU and a memberstate level. Despite an overwhelming emphasis on social exclusion and inclusion policies within the EU, however, it is very difficult to find a definition that nails down exactly what the EU means as it advocates for inclusion. For example, the UK’s Social Exclusion Unit Web site states, Social exclusion is a shorthand term for what can happen when people or areas suffer from a combination of linked problems such as unemployment, poor skills, low incomes, poor housing, high crime environments, bad health and family breakdown. The Social Exclusion Unit was set up by the Prime Minister to help improve Government action to reduce social exclusion by producing joined-up solutions to joined-up problems. (Office of the Deputy Prime Minister, 2004.)

While this definition points to the interconnectedness of social exclusion, it is quite vague in both its rendering of a complete definition and the strategies that will be employed to facilitate inclusion. Two major gatherings were held in the early 2000s to work out the details of what social inclusion policies should look like in EU member states. The Lisbon accord, followed by the Nice accord, places social inclusion foremost on the EU agenda and defines it in relatively broad terms, namely as a social condition linked closely to poverty. Emerging out of the Lisbon and Nice accords is the requirement that each member state submit documentation on its own strategies to promote inclusion. This requirement indicates both the emphasis put on social inclusion as a policy endeavor and the belief by the EU that social exclusion is a broad concept that is enacted for various circumstantial reasons and should be countered also using multiple and differing strategies. In conclusion, social inclusion, within European policy rhetoric, consists of a series of policies and strategies that are put in place to eradicate social exclusion. The term inclusion has not been subject to scrutiny within this context, although what constitutes appropriate measures for social inclusion has been hotly contested. This is due, in part, to the political and ideological convictions that inform conceptions of social inclusion. Britain, for example, with its political justification based on neo-liberal individualism, focuses on social inclusion policies such as equal opportunity legislation and welfare-to-work programs, while France, which focuses on solidarity, conformity, and reinforcing social bonds, employs social inclusion policies that support community re-integration (Silver as cited in Barata, 2000).1 Outside of EU policy circles the term social inclusion has begun to take on radical new meanings that push the boundaries of social exclusion and its narrow focus on social cohesion and employment. 3.2. Social inclusion in the Canadian context Canada’s national agenda of multiculturalism has informed the mobilization of social inclusion principles with regard to immigrant rights along the lines of diversity and 1

A contentious example of French social inclusion policies is the banning of all attire denoting religious affiliations in schools.

N. Caidi, D. Allard / Library & Information Science Research 27 (2005) 302–324

311

tolerance. Canada’s Multiculturalism Act is an official policy that brecognizes the potential of all Canadians, encouraging them to integrate into their society and take an active part in its social, cultural, economic and political affairsQ (Canadian Heritage, 2004). The policy acts to position multiculturalism as a fundamental tenet of Canadian society on which other Canadian policies are formulated and enacted. Social inclusion is facilitated within the Multiculturalism Act in several sections; in particular, the act states that it is the policy of the Canadian government to bpromote the full and equitable participation of individuals and communities of all origins in the continuing evolution and shaping of all aspects of Canadian society and assist them in the elimination of any barrier to that participationQ and to bensure that all individuals receive equal treatment and equal protection under the law, while respecting and valuing their diversityQ (Canadian Heritage, 2004). Both of these statements require the Canadian government to facilitate the participation and involvement of all individuals in Canada regardless of their race or ethnicity and to eliminate barriers that may prevent their inclusion within Canadian society. Although multiculturalism is part of the official Canadian policy, there have been debates in the immigration and settlement studies field over the meaning of multiculturalism and its relationship to citizenship, social cohesion, and social integration. As Omidvar and Richmond (2003) state, We are witnesses [. . .] to a real and growing contradiction between Canada’s official policies of multiculturalism, antiracism and immigration citizenship acquisition, and the growing reality of social exclusion for Canada’s newcomers. (p. 12.)

Indeed, the data on Canada’s new immigrants have shown that their levels of poverty and social exclusion have been increasing steadily since the early 1990s (Omidvar & Richmond, 2003; Papillon, 2002; Saloojee, 2005). Social policy theorists have interpreted this issue in various ways, including questioning the relationship between multiculturalism and social cohesion. Jedwab (2003), for instance, has documented the preoccupation within Canadian policy circles about the point at which diversity in a culture encroaches upon social cohesion, hence the perceived societal resistance to multicultural practices. If multiculturalism and social cohesion are assumed to be at odds, it is not surprising that multiculturalism is not as wholly endorsed as is claimed in Canadian official discourses and policy documents (Li, 2003). Jedwab (2003) and others, however, argue that these two concepts are not mutually exclusive: individuals are complex and have multiple attachments and perspectives, and in democratic societies, citizens can hold multiple identities. To stifle individual expression or attempt to subsume it under a repressive notion of social cohesion may be what leads to the disruption of the social fabric. An imposed homogeneity for the sake of a false notion of sameness may in fact be what encourages social alienation, isolation, and exclusion. Li (2003) suggests that social inclusion discourses, while claiming to favor multiculturalism and a politics of diversity, often advocate for conformity and cohesion when they distinguish between bdeservingQ and bundeservingQ immigrants based on race and country of origin (who are very similar to bdeservingQ and undeservingQ poor). Li deconstructs popular

312

N. Caidi, D. Allard / Library & Information Science Research 27 (2005) 302–324

and government discourses around bdiversityQ and determines that the term is significantly caught up with articulations of race. He suggests, The complexity and subtlety in which braceQ is articulated in Canadian society suggest that conventional approaches to studying blatant bracial discriminationQ are inadequate, and that confronting the problem of bracialQ signification remains a daunting challenge in the social inclusion of visible minorities and racialized immigrants. (p. 16.)

It remains to be seen the extent to which social inclusion is possible for new immigrants when they are systematically excluded based on race. Further, if it is not assumed that Canadians might be required to adjust to facilitate the integration of newcomers, social inclusion might actually mean social assimilation. Others argue that racism is itself a form of social exclusion (Saloojee, 2003, p. 1). Saloojee (2003) and others attribute the increasing levels of poverty among new immigrants to racial inequality and discrimination resulting in their beconomic, social, political and cultural disadvantageQ (p. 9). Richmond (2004, p. 4) argues therefore that a social inclusion policy within Canada that is meaningful to newcomers must be explicitly anti-racist. Further, Omidvar and Richmond (2003) argue, For immigrants and refugees, social inclusion would be represented by the realization of full and equal participation in the economic, social, cultural and political dimensions of life in their new country. In a simple but useful sense, therefore, social inclusion for immigrants and refugees can be seen as the dismantling of barriers that lead to exclusion in all these domains. (p. 1.)

Understood from this perspective, a social inclusion strategy that is meaningful to Canada’s new immigrants does not focus on social cohesion, instead it makes visible and seeks to break down barriers that prevent full participation into their new country. Within Canada, new attempts at articulating social inclusion are taking place. Although not strictly focussing only on immigration and newcomers, their articulations of inclusion have been pushing the meaning of inclusion, attempting to define and operationalize the term in significant new ways. For example, a social inclusion research conference, held under the sponsorship of Human Resources Development Canada (HRDC) and the Canadian Council on Social Development (CCSD), aimed to plot new directions for social policy within Canada using social inclusion as the impetus and foundation. The stated purpose of this 2003 conference was to develop a national social inclusion research agenda. Additionally, multiple organizational initiatives centered around social inclusion are underway, among them the Atlantic Canada Women’s Centre’s Social and economic inclusion project (2000). This project was geared toward policy makers, NGOs, educators, and other interested parties in order to teach them how to facilitate participation and community development in generating social and economic inclusion policies that speak to the needs and values of community members. The assumption was that community members indeed have a stake and a position in their social inclusion and should participate in deciding in what society they would like to be included.

N. Caidi, D. Allard / Library & Information Science Research 27 (2005) 302–324

313

Another thought-provoking social inclusion initiative has recently been undertaken by the Laidlaw Foundation, a private foundation undertaking research and advocacy work around child well-being and youth engagement. Researchers at the Laidlaw Foundation have explored the meaning of the term social inclusion and its potential usefulness as a tool to encourage social justice and inclusion for marginalized members of Canadian society, particularly children (Frazee, 2003; Luxton, 2002; Mitchell & Shillington, 2002; Omidvar & Richmond, 2003). To them, social inclusion is best understood as both a process and a goal. As a process it breflects a proactive, human development approach to social well-being that calls for more than the removal of barrier or risks. It requires investments and action to bring about the conditions for inclusionQ (Luxton, 2002, p. viii). That is, social inclusion is conceived here in the same way it is by the EU, namely a method of achieving social change. As a goal it bcalls for the validation of diversity as well as a recognition of the commonality of lived experiences and the shared aspirations among peopleQ (Luxton, 2002, p. ix). For researchers at the Laidlaw Foundation, social inclusion implies more than simply being the vehicle by which marginalized groups are included in the existing organization of society. Instead social inclusion values the perspectives and differences of those on the margins and seeks to transform cultural practices and institutions to accommodate diversities (Luxton, 2002). This conception is reminiscent of anti-racist, feminist notions of margin and center where those on the margins (e.g., bundeserving poorQ) were frequently omitted from contributing their knowledge to society because of racism, silencing, and oppression. Inherent too is the notion that those on the margins have access to different information, knowledge, and ways of conceiving of the world than those in the center. This conception of situated knowledge delegitimizes the authority of the center and assumes that different groups have different knowledge to contribute to society based on their various identities. Conceived in these terms, social inclusion values diverse identities and fundamentally questions both the process and result of social inclusion. It seems essential indeed that people have a voice in what they are included into. Involvement and engagement expresses the right and support of individuals to make meaningful decisions about themselves and their community. Meaningful involvement and engagement cannot occur without access to relevant information, information that individuals have determined they need. These concerns represent a move away from social cohesion as the motivating impetus for inclusion and focus instead on outcomes such as well-being, self-esteem, and access to social power, rather than employment and poverty levels (Mitchell & Shillington, 2002). A host of questions still remain: How is social inclusion perceived by newcomers? What does it mean to them in a real and concrete sense? What type of social inclusion should be advocated for, and by whom? What type of social inclusion is actually possible? How can information institutions such as libraries, museums, and archives best facilitate social inclusion for newcomers? Given the particular political and social environment that exists within Canada for newcomers, what social inclusion should look like and what type of social inclusion is actually possible are questions most certainly at issue for newcomers, settlement agencies, and the Canadian public at large.

314

N. Caidi, D. Allard / Library & Information Science Research 27 (2005) 302–324

3.3. Social inclusion/exclusion: Summary This overview of the framing of social inclusion in various milieu shows the variety of ways in which the concept of social inclusion has been enacted. Inclusion strategies are as varied as the politics that inform them. Rather than trying to determine and define exactly what social inclusion is and what it should look like, there is a need to account for the complexity of the notion of social inclusion. Perhaps, the most useful way of framing social inclusion is through questioning its merit as Barata (2000, p. 6) and others do: Social inclusion into what? By whom? And to what effect? The diversity of perspectives on this issue also makes it difficult to outline productive ways to conceive of the term from the perspective of information studies (i.e., information practices of immigrants). None of them addresses the ways in which social inclusion/ exclusion can be thought of as an informational problem that has to do with access (or lack thereof) of meaningful and relevant information that fulfills the needs of immigrants, although many of the perspectives hint at ways in which this is possible. How then can the information studies discourse contribute to the dialogue around social inclusion? How can information institutions enable or encourage social inclusion? How and should they collaborate with other institutions such as settlement organizations to increase social inclusion of newcomers?

4. Social inclusion: An information problem Information provision is a key component of social inclusion. The ways in which newcomers and immigrant communities locate and access content in forms that are understandable and usable to them is essential to their integration into society. In recent years, concerns about the digital divide in the information studies literature (and elsewhere) have prompted renewed interest in the isolation of vulnerable populations from mainstream sources of information. The digital divide literature suggests that certain backgrounds and experiences characterize those who are significantly more at risk of being socially excluded. Among the key risk factors are the following: low income, family conflict, being in care, school problems, being an ex-prisoner, being from an ethnic minority, living in a deprived neighborhood in urban and rural areas, mental health problems, age, and disability (Cabinet Office, 2001, p. 11). These risk factors are compounded in the case of new immigrants by the fact that these individuals tend to be part of visible minorities, live in particular neighborhoods, have lower incomes, may have children at higher risks of schooling problems. While not specifically targeting newcomers, recent literature on the digital divide has begun to understand information provision and access as an issue directly related to social inclusion. As it was originally conceived, the notion of digital divide meant the division between those who had access to new forms of information and communication technologies (ICTs) and those who did not (Warschauer, 2002). This conception was narrowly defined between the bhavesQ and the bhave-notsQ where the have-nots were characterized as already

N. Caidi, D. Allard / Library & Information Science Research 27 (2005) 302–324

315

possessing lower economic, educational, and social status. The inability to harness new information technologies was yet another way that communities experienced marginalization. Social inclusion frameworks fit well in this digital divide perspective because they highlight the complexity of the marginalization process (i.e., the digital divide is connected to other systems of marginalization). The lack of access to technology is therefore to be positioned within a larger framework of exclusion, reduced resources, and social power. As Warschauer (2002) notes, the concept of social inclusion reflects particularly well the imperatives of the current information era, in which issues of identity, language, social participation, community, and civil society have taken central stage. (Technology for Social Inclusion section, para. 2.)

Addressing social inclusion through technological initiatives has therefore become a strategy of policy making within various organizations including libraries (Council of Administrators of Large Urban Public Libraries of Canada, 2004). However, if we conceive of the digital divide in terms simply of haves and have-nots, social inclusion policies would only require us to increase access to ICTs among marginalized communities. The rendering of the digital divide in these simple terms will not result in social inclusion because digital divide issues cannot be characterized merely in terms of access. It is not only that individuals do not have access to ICTs; it is that they do not possess the literacy (technological and otherwise) to use these technologies effectively. Warschauer (2002) refers to these skills as bmeaningful social practicesQ (Models of Access section, para. 4). Along the same lines, Schuler (2001) talks about dcivic intelligence,T which includes (1) access to relevant and usable content (e.g., downloadable, in known language, and graspable), which may vary among individuals, communities, and countries; (2) skills in using libraries and information and communication technologies (ICTs); (3) a supporting environment (i.e., adequacy of mechanisms that promote and facilitate utilization, development, and maintenance of ICTs); and (4) attitudes as to the appropriateness, usefulness, and relevance of libraries and ICTs to one’s purposes, including the values and awareness of the use of libraries and ICTs held by users. To provide equality of access of ICTs is not an effective strategy for social inclusion because without proper skills and education, access is meaningless. Instead Warschauer argues that we need to include notions of information literacy into our understanding of the digital divide. De Castell and Luke characterize literacy as bhaving mastery over the processes by means of which culturally significant information is codedQ (as cited in Warschauer, 2002). Literacy (information, technological, and other types of literacy) is often mobilized as an empowering concept that increases social development. By encouraging communities’ participation, literacy is both a practice and outcome of social inclusion. Social inclusion theories are often invoked in the digital divide literature in relation to the call for participatory community-based ICT initiatives. Many advocates of ICTs see them not as barriers to information or the toys of the rich and powerful, but as powerful mobilizing tools for marginalized groups (Day, 2001). These arguments stress the transformative nature of ICTs to act as vehicles of dissemination of knowledge and inclusion. Understood in this sense, ICTs can be used to increase social inclusion and community participation. For these

316

N. Caidi, D. Allard / Library & Information Science Research 27 (2005) 302–324

models to be effective, community participation in their development is crucial (Day, 2001). Yet again an argument can be made for the inclusion of marginalized voices in the determination of both the strategy for social inclusion and the development of the vision of society that we are trying to create. 5. Implications for information institutions Newcomers and immigrant communities have varied backgrounds and presumably different experiences with information, its institutions, and its technologies. In some societies, libraries are viewed as study places where users bring their own books and the library institution tends to be associated with the elites or the former colonial powers. In others, such as the former socialist regimes in Eastern Europe, there has long been a deep mistrust of information, which was often equated with propaganda when issued from dofficialT sources—government organizations, the media, etc. (Caidi, 2004). The information culture in these countries tended to promote a particular form of interaction with knowledge and learning styles, which forced libraries to emphasize collection building rather than user needs and services, and universities to emphasize student retention and regurgitation of class materials rather than critical thinking skills and independent learning (Borgman, 1996, 1997; Caidi, 2003). Libraries are social and cultural institutions with specific processes, practices, and interaction with information and its users (Buckland, 1988, 1992). Their role and mission vary according to the sociocultural context and values of the milieu in which they develop. For certain low-income groups, libraries are not a part of their information-seeking strategies (Pendleton & Chatman, 1998). Various studies have deconstructed the language of power and the values embedded in traditional library objects such as bibliographic descriptions and classification schemes (Beghtol, 2002; Bowker & Star, 1999; Frohmann, 1994; Olson, 2000, 2001; Radford & Radford, 1997). Similarly, newcomers may have had different experiences and exposure to other information institutions such as archives or museums. Bourdieu’s study of museum visitors in France showed that cultural capital (i.e., one’s ability to read and understand cultural codes) is not distributed equally among social classes but instead is divided along class and educational lines (Bourdieu, 1993; Bourdieu & Darbel, 1966). As Haywood (1995) notes, a culture is both the repository of all past information growth and also the slowly maturing bcompostQ wherein the loosely arranged ingredients of new information moments potentially reside. . .the information and knowledge transmitted to individuals within it will carry strong reinforcing signals about the values, beliefs and roles that underwrite and sustain one kind of social structure rather than another. (p. 129.)

Cross-cultural metaphors of information institutions and ICTs have not been heavily studied, although much can be learnt from them (Caidi, 2001; Duncker, 2002). Duncker’s study of digital libraries and computing metaphors among the Maori in New Zealand suggests that metaphors are deeply rooted in cultural practices and as such should be an integral part of information systems design. Lenhart et al.’s (2003) study of the barriers to Internet access shows that what a person thinks of the Internet affects their Internet use or keeps them off-

N. Caidi, D. Allard / Library & Information Science Research 27 (2005) 302–324

317

line. Previous research on the use of Internet search tools (Iivonen & White, 2001) has shown differences in how users from different cultural groups searched for information. These differences in behavior have implications for the usable design of information resources and services for culturally diverse groups (Caidi & Komlodi, 2003; Komlodi, Caidi, & Wheeler, 2004). Assessing the contextual and situational factors constituting the information environment (or binformation horizonsQ as Sonnenwald, 1999, puts it) that defines information practices of immigrants is therefore essential. In the case of new immigrants to Canada, not only do many tend to lack a strong command of English, they are also less likely to be familiar with local institutions and practices relating to the flow of useful information (multicultural classification schemes in libraries would be a worthy goal, for instance). What then are the socioeconomic, linguistic, or cultural characteristics of these immigrant groups that could help us understand their information behavior? How does one’s culture affect one’s information-related activities? Do information horizons change over time? If so, are there discernible gender differences? Generational differences? Differences among cultural groups? Various initiatives have started examining the role of information institutions in enabling social inclusion. One such example is the work of the Department for Culture, Media and Sport in the UK, which released a 1999 consultation document entitled Libraries for All (Department for Culture and Media, 1999). With respect to information and social inclusion, the document states, In disadvantaged communities isolation and inertia may constitute formidable barriers to the flow of information, personal relationships may be weak, and creative neighborhood networks may function poorly. Such communities are unlikely to enjoy the vital flow of information, through which residents share their experiences and act collectively to express their needs and improve their quality of life. (p. 9.)

The document also identified various key barriers to the use of libraries by socially excluded groups, among them: institutional barriers (e.g., opening hours, availability of library services, staff attitudes, rules and regulations, and sense of ownership), personal/social barriers (e.g., basic literacy skills, low income, and low self-esteem), environmental barriers (e.g., physical access, remote areas, decay, and isolation), and perceptions barriers (sense of isolation, educational disadvantage, relevance of libraries to one’s needs, lack of knowledge about existing facilities and services). All of these barriers illustrate powerfully the multiple ways exclusion can occur and the myriad considerations institutions must heed if they are committed to operating establishments that are indeed inclusive. More recently, a report on Community Technology Centers as Catalysts for Change mentions prominently the place of libraries in enabling social inclusion (Davies, Schwartz, Servon, & Pinkett, 2003). They argue that balthough community institutions, such as libraries, city hall, and Community Technology Centres (CTCs) are rarely thought of as public spaces like parks and plazas, they certainly function as public spaces, and can be important anchors in neighborhoodsQ (p. 10). The report goes on to say that CTCs function well as public spaces because they promote community identity, promote social interactions, improve accessibility, and increase participants’ involvement in civil society (p. 10). All of these benefits certainly contribute to social inclusion. The report therefore makes a strong

318

N. Caidi, D. Allard / Library & Information Science Research 27 (2005) 302–324

argument for creating public spaces as a means of increasing social networks and community involvement at the local level. Libraries, CTCs, and other information institutions not only provide information (the wherewithal needed to navigate the world), but as public spaces, they also provide a venue where individuals can meet each other, collaborate, and share their stories and perspectives. The report states, Indeed, in the rapidly changing demographic profiles that are typical of low-income neighborhoods, public spaces offer, at their most basic, a common ground for different ethnicities, classes and ages to mix. This is why successful public spaces, those that promote uses and activities across these demographic boundaries, are essential to fostering community change; without them, there are no places where different people can come together as equals comfortably. (p. 11.)

Davies et al.’s (2003) report offered recommendations for CTCs that would augment their ability to function as effective community spaces. These recommendations can be extended to information institutions as well. These include the following: enhancing facility design, raising the profile of existing centers and undertaking partnerships and outreach with other community institutions, creating programming agendas that target community issues, and allowing the space to be used for multiple and mixed purposes (pp. 21–23). Increasingly, information institutions and settlement services organizations realize that they need to increase the services they offer beyond basic ESL courses. Omidvar (2001), for instance, calls for a coherent national body of concerned citizens informing and shaping national policies of settlement and immigration, shored up by grass-roots movement of immigrants taking part in a strengthened local democracy, backed by the professionals in the field. (p. 7.)

This coherent national body, based on notions of participation, would redress how these organizations conceive of their roles and the services they were mandated to perform. In particular an emphasis is placed on conceiving settlement as a long-term process rather than the provision of immediate and emergency needs (Omidvar & Richmond, 2003). Likewise, Mwarigha (2002) identifies several problems with the current form of immigration service provision. She argues that although services are most needed during a newcomer’s second stage of settlement, in fact most service provision is aimed to satisfy settlement needs during the first stage. While the outcome of the third stage is vital to successful settlement, it is during the first and second stages that formal service provision has the most impact. Currently however the majority of federal and provincial settlement programs are based on meeting needs of the first stage of settlement, while the most important barriers to successful settlement are most prominent in the second. (p. 10.)

When necessary information is not available at all stages of immigration, the social exclusion of newcomers is to be expected. Others, like Mylopoulos (2000), fall short of specifically advocating that libraries be understood as sites of social inclusion, but invoke the language of bcommunity information as a social need,Q suggesting that new immigrants require community information in order to address their social needs, and that this information can and should be provided by libraries.

N. Caidi, D. Allard / Library & Information Science Research 27 (2005) 302–324

319

This need for information can easily be taken up within a social inclusion framework whereby the provision of such information will result in inclusion and empowerment at all stages of the immigration process. The particular circumstances of newcomers, the social capital that they have access to, and the environment in which they find themselves often put them in a vulnerable position and can lead to feelings of marginalization or even exclusion. The provision of information has not been clearly established as a factor of inclusion; however, when we recognize not only that finding information is a necessity for newcomers in a way that might not be for other vulnerable groups, and the way that information seeking is caught up in other brecognizedQ facets of social inclusion (like the ability to access social networks and social capital), we can infer that information is most certainly an important aspect of social inclusion. As information professionals, it is incumbent upon us to facilitate the implementation of social inclusion through our information institutions. 6. Conclusion If one assumes that libraries should be proactive in addressing the information needs of newcomers as one means of facilitating social inclusion, the next question becomes, How is this accomplished? Chu (1999) like Warschauer (2002) argues that encouraging literacy practices will go a long way in encouraging social empowerment. Chu points out that bpublic discourse on literacy is a discourse of powerQ (p. 339) necessary for individuals to be selfconstituting agents. In other words, like access to information technologies, individuals do not have the literacy skills to navigate the library or other information institutions. The first step in providing social services to immigrants and other marginalized communities would be facilitating literacy of these services. Fisher et al. (2004) identified four building blocks in immigrants’ constructs of the public library: (1) discovery of the library and experience of its safe and accommodating environment; (2) awareness of the resources available and acquisition of library skills; (3) telling family and friends about how libraries can help them; and (4) learning to trust library staff (p. 760). The ability to navigate various information institutions may indeed contribute to social inclusion of newcomers. This is a call for more dialogue so that the existing literacy practices of newcomers are incorporated into the development of new ones. It is particularly important for information institutions to collaborate closely with various settlement and other agencies serving immigrants as a means to examine the lived experiences of new immigrants. Once these new immigrants are in Canada, how do they find the information they need to deal with situations they encounter in their everyday lives? Which kinds of information problems do they face? What factors influence where they go to find the information they need, and their success in finding the adequate information (in terms of relevance and usability)? This examination also entails a careful look at the role that one’s culture plays in shaping information practices (i.e., the structure of their social networks, their perceptions and attitudes toward various information institutions (e.g., libraries) and information technologies).

320

N. Caidi, D. Allard / Library & Information Science Research 27 (2005) 302–324

Similarly, there are ways in which information institutions can make their resources and services more relevant to immigrants. These changes call for both changes in the practices and process as well as the scope of these information institutions. For instance, in terms of scope, there is a call for information institutions to include records from the community into the collections. Indeed, the archiving of a community’s records is a powerful way to establish and remember a particular community’s memories. The inclusion of the archival material of vulnerable and marginalized communities and other groups such as immigrants enables the creation of a public record and public shared history that contribute to feelings of inclusion within a culture as well as promoting social legitimacy by way of tangible documentary records. Further these archives must necessarily be fully accessible and efforts will have to be made to make them accessible in whatever terms particular communities understand accessibility. The value of using archives, for example, to create a sense of social inclusion is often overlooked within organizations attempting to build communities and empower marginalized individuals such as settlement organizations. Perhaps this is because information-housing services such as archives have historically been the purview of privileged and wealthy institutions such as universities, foundations, and governments. Further access to these archives has historically been very limited. Smaller organizations with fewer resources have not often seen the value of contributing their scant resources to projects such as archives. However within the last several years, more and more organizations are recognizing the value of seeking out, collecting, and storing records of their own histories and the histories of the community members they represent. Information (as a resource) and facilitating access to it should be recognized as necessary factors that enable inclusion of newcomers in their adopted society. Indeed, newcomers are vulnerable to social exclusion because of the risk that they will end up at the social periphery; and it is our hope that information institutions start paying more attention and allocating more resources to this task. Making information available to newcomers in a way that is both usable and understandable (i.e., culturally meaningful to them) is key. This includes providing content in languages other than English or French (the two official languages of Canada) as well as going into the community to meet with community members and appropriate mediators, organizing orientation sessions and information literacy programs, providing assistance to immigrant groups and agencies in selecting and organizing materials and resources that are relevant to the needs of their constituencies (e.g., expert help with collection development and cataloguing of the agency’s collections, arranging for storytelling hours in various languages, supporting a book club’s needs and providing readers advisory services, helping with information portals). Building these relationships ought to be thought of as an ongoing process, along the lines of Kanter (1994)’s marriage analogy where the bgetting engagedQ phase is followed by bsetting up housekeepingQ and blearning to collaborate,Q all of which are essential if one is serious about making the relationship work. Information providers and policy makers alike are therefore urged to bridge the gaps among social inclusion, social capital, and the provision of information resources. The

N. Caidi, D. Allard / Library & Information Science Research 27 (2005) 302–324

321

decisions to be made by information institutions in terms of scope, programming, and processes must be considered carefully and revised on an ongoing basis so as to foster the inclusion of newcomers on the terms under which they desire to be included.

Acknowledgments The authors would like to thank the following individuals for providing useful comments on previous drafts of this article: Janet Salaff (University of Toronto), Chryssafi Mylopoulos (formerly from Toronto Public Library), and Ted Richmond (Laidlaw Foundation, Toronto).

References Agada, J. (1999). Inner-city gatekeepers: An exploratory survey of their information use environment. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 50, 74 – 85. Atkinson, R. (2000). Combating social exclusion in Europe: The new urban policy challenge. Urban Studies, 37, 1037 – 1055. Atlantic Centre for Women’s Health (2000). The social and economic inclusion project. Halifax, NS7 Atlantic Centre for Women’s Health. Barata, P. (2000). Social exclusion in Europe: Survey of the literature [Electronic version]. Toronto, ON7 Laidlaw Foundation. Retrieved March 30, 2005, from http://206.191.51.193/files/children/literature-review.pdf. Beghtol, C. (2002). A proposed ethical warrant for global knowledge representation and organization systems. Journal of Documentation, 58, 507 – 532. Birkel, R., & Repucci, N. (1983). Social networks, information-seeking, and utilization of services. American Journal of Community Psychology, 11, 185 – 205. Bishop, A. P., Tidline, T., Shoemaker, S., & Salela, P. (1999). Public libraries and networked information services in low-income communities. Libraries & Information Science Research, 21, 361 – 390. Borgman, C. L. (1996). Automation is the answer, but what is the question? Progress and prospects for Central and Eastern European libraries. Journal of Documentation, 52, 252 – 295. Borgman, C. L. (1997). From acting locally to thinking globally: A brief history of library automation. Library Quarterly, 67, 215 – 249. Bourdieu, P. (1993). The field of cultural production. New York7 Columbia University Press. Bourdieu, P., & Darbel, A. (1966). L’amour de l’art: Les muse´es et leur public. Paris7 Ed. de Minuit. Bowker, G. C., & Star, S. L. (1999). Sorting things out: Classification and its consequences. Cambridge, MA7 MIT Press. Buckland, M. K. (1988). Library services in theory and context (2nd ed.). Oxford7 Pergamon. Buckland, M. K. (1992). Redesigning library services: A manifesto. Chicago, IL7 American Library Association. Cabinet Office (2001). Preventing social exclusion: Report by the Social Exclusion Unit [Electronic version]. London7 Social Exclusion Unit. Retrieved March 31, 2005 from http://www.socialexclusion. gov.uk/downloaddoc.asp?id=232. Caidi, N. (2001). Technology and values: Lessons from Central and Eastern Europe. Proceedings of the ACMIEEE joint conference on digital libraries (pp. 173 – 174). New York7 ACM. Caidi, N. (2003). Cooperation in context: Library developments in Central and Eastern Europe. Libri, 53, 103 – 117. Caidi, N. (2004). National information infrastructures in Central and Eastern Europe: Perspectives from the library community. Information Society Journal, 20, 25 – 38.

322

N. Caidi, D. Allard / Library & Information Science Research 27 (2005) 302–324

Caidi, N., & Komlodi, A. (2003). Digital libraries across cultures: Design and usability issues. SIGIR Forum, 37, 52 – 54. Canadian Heritage. (2004). Canadian multiculturalism act. Retrieved August 17, 2004 from http:// www.pch.gc.ca/progs/multi/policy/act _e.cfm. Chatman, E. A. (1985). Information, mass media use and the working poor. Library & Information Science Research, 7, 97 – 111. Chatman, E. A. (1987). The information world of low-skilled workers. Library & Information Science Research, 9, 265 – 283. Chatman, E. A. (1991a). Channels to a larger social world: Older women staying in contact with the great society. Library & Information Science Research, 13, 281 – 300. Chatman, E. A. (1991b). Life in a small world: Applicability of gratification theory to information-seeking behavior. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 42, 438 – 449. Chatman, E. A. (1996). The impoverished life world of outsiders. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 47, 193 – 206. Chatman, E. A., & Pendleton, V. (1995). Knowledge gap, information-seeking and the poor. Reference Librarian, 49-50, 135 – 145. Chu, C. (1999). Literary practices of linguistic minorities: Sociolinguistic issues and implications for literacy services. Library Quarterly, 69, 339 – 359. Council of Administrators of Large Urban Public Libraries of Canada. (2004). Sustaining Canada’s digital capacity: An urban library strategy to sustain socially inclusive ICT networks. Toronto, ON. Retrieved August 14, 2004 from http://www.fis.utoronto.ca/PhD/cavanagh/Sustaining%20Canada’s%20Digital%20Capacity. htm. Council of the European Union (2004). Joint report by the commission and the council on social inclusion [Electronic version]. Brussels, Belgium7 Author. Davies, S., Schwartz, A., Servon, L., and Pinkett, R. (2003). Community technology centers as catalysts for community change. [Electronic version]. New York: Ford Foundation. Retrieved March 31, 2005 from http:// www.bctpartners.com/resources/CTCs _as _Catalysts.pdf. Day, P. (2001). Participating in the information society: Community development and social inclusion. In L. Keeble, & B. Loader (Eds.), Community informatics: Shaping computer-mediated social relations (pp. 305 – 323). London, UK7 Routledge. Department for Culture, Media and Sport. (1999). Libraries for all: Social inclusion in public libraries: Policy guidance for local authorities in England. London: Author. Retrieved November 14, 2004 from http:// www.culture.gov.uk/global/publications/archive _1999/lib _soc _inclusion.htm. Dervin, B. (1980). Communication gaps and inequities: Moving toward a reconceptualization. In B. Dervin, & J. M. Voigt (Eds.), Progress in communication sciences, Vol. 2. (pp. 73 – 112). (1980). Norwood, NJ7 Ablex Publishing. Dervin, B. (1983). An overview of sense-making research: Concepts, methods, and results to date. Paper presented at the meeting of the International Communication Association, Dallas, TX. Dervin, B., & Nilan, M. (1986). Information needs and uses. In M. Williams (Ed.), Annual review of information science and technology (pp. 3 – 33). Medford, NJ7 Learned Information. Duncan, H. (2003, April). Social inclusion, social; capital and immigration. Canadian Issues: The`mes Canadiens, 4, 30 – 32. Duncker, E. (2002). Cross-cultural usability of the library metaphor. In Proceedings of the ACM-IEEE Joint Conference on Digital Libraries (pp. 223 – 230). New York7 ACM. Fisher, K. E., Durrance, J. C., & Bouch Hinton, M. (2004). Information grounds and the use of needs-based services by immigrants in Queens, New York: A context-based, outcome evaluation approach. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 55, 754 – 766. Frazee, C. (2003). Thumbs up!: Inclusion, rights and equality as experienced by youth with disabilities [Electronic version]. Toronto, ON7 Laidlaw Foundation Retrieved March 30, 2005 from http://www.laidlawfdn.org/files/ children/frazee.pdf.

N. Caidi, D. Allard / Library & Information Science Research 27 (2005) 302–324

323

Frohmann, B. (1994, October). The Dewey decimal classification as technobureaucratic discourse. Unpublished paper presented at the 57th Annual Conference of the American Society for Information Science, Alexandria, VA. Gollop, C. (1997). Health information-seeking behavior of older African-American women. Bulletin of the Medical Library Association, 85, 141 – 146. Granovetter, M. (1983). The strength of weak ties: A network theory revisited. Sociological Theory, 1, 210 – 233. Haythornthwaite, C. (1996). Social network analysis: An approach and technique for the study of information exchange. Library & Information Science Research, 18, 323 – 342. Haywood, T. (1995). Info-rich, info-poor: Access and exchange in the global information society. London7 Bowker. Iivonen, M., & White, M. (2001). The choice of initial Web search strategies: A comparison between Finnish and American searchers. Journal of Documentation, 57, 465 – 491. Jedwab, J. (2003). Social confusion: the decline of dcohesionismT in Canada and its lessons for the study of citizenship. Canadian Diversity, 2, 81 – 83. Johnson, C. (2003). Information networks: Investigating the information behaviour of Mongolia’s urban residents. Doctoral dissertation, University of Toronto. Kanter, R. M. (1994). Collaborative advantage: The art of alliances. Harvard Business Review, 27, 96 – 108. Komlodi, A., Caidi, N., & Wheeler, K. (2004). Cross-cultural usability of digital libraries. In Chen, Z., Chen, H., & Miao, Q. (Eds.), Digital libraries: International collaboration and cross-fertilization: 7th International Conference on Asian Digital Libraries (ICADL 2004, Shanghai, China, December 13–17, 2004) (pp. 584–593). Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag (lecture notes in Computer Science). Lenhart, A., Horrigan, J., Rainie, L., Allen, K., Boyce, A., Madden, M., et al. (2003). The ever-shifting Internet population: A new look at Internet access and the digital divide [Electronic version]. Washington, DC7 Pew Internet and American Life Project. Retrieved March 31, 2005 from http://www.pewinternet.org/pdfs/ PIP_Shifting_Net_Pop_Report.pdf. Levitas, R. (March, 2003). The idea of social inclusion. Paper presented at the Building a Social Inclusion Research Agenda Conference, Ottawa, ON. Retrieved August 14, 2004, from http://www.ccsd.ca/events/ inclusion/papers/rlevitas.htm. Li, P. (2003, March). Social inclusion of visible minorities and newcomers: The articulation of braceQ and bracialQ difference in Canadian society. Paper presented at the Building a Social Inclusion Research Agenda Conference, Ottawa, ON. Retrieved August 14, 2004 from http://www.ccsd.ca/events/inclusion/papers/peter_li.pdf. Lin, N. (2001). Building a network theory of social capital. In K. Lin, & R. S. Cook (Eds.), Social capital: Theory and research (pp. 3 – 29). NY7 Aldine de Gruyter. Liu, M. (1995). Ethnicity and information seeking. Reference Librarian, 49/50, 123 – 134. Luxton, M. (2002). Feminist perspectives on social inclusion and children’s well-being [Electronic version]. Toronto, ON7 Laidlaw Foundation. Retrieved March 30, 2005 from http://www.laidlawfdn.org/files/children/ luxton.pdf. MacIntosh-Murray, A. (2003). Information behaviour of health care providers for improving patient safety. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Toronto. Metoyer-Duran, C. (1993). Information gatekeepers. Annual Review of Information Science and Technology. vol. 28 (pp. 111–150). Mitchell, A., & Shillington, R. (2002). Poverty, inequality, and social inclusion [Electronic version]. Toronto, ON7 Laidlaw Foundation. Retrieved March 30, 2005 from http://www.laidlawfdn.org/files/children/mitchell.pdf. Mohanty, C. T. (2003). Feminism without borders: Decolonizing theory, practicing solidarity. Durham, NC7 Duke University Press. Mwarigha, M. S. (2002). Towards a framework for local responsibility: Taking action to end the current limbo in immigrant settlement—Toronto [Electronic version]. Toronto, ON7 Maytree Foundation Retrieved March 31, 2005 from http://www.maytree.com/PDF_Files/TowardsFrameworkReport.pdf. Mylopoulos, C. (2000, March). Tending to the city’s needs: Serving newcomer immigrants: The value of community information. MultiCultural, 24 – 59.

324

N. Caidi, D. Allard / Library & Information Science Research 27 (2005) 302–324

Mylopoulos, C. (2004). New faces on the block: Emerging immigrant communities and how to identify them. Feliciter, 50, 12 – 18. Narayan, U. (2003). The project of feminist epistemology: Perspectives from a nonwestern feminist. In C. McCann, & S. K. Kim (Eds.), Feminist theory reader: Local and global perspectives (pp. 308 – 317). New York7 Routledge. Office of the Deputy Prime Minister. (2004). Social inclusion unit home. Retrieved August 14, 2004 from http:// www.socialexclusion.gov.uk/. Olson, H. A. (2000). Difference, culture, and change: The untapped potential of LCSH. Cataloging & Classification Quarterly, 29, 53 – 71. Olson, H. A. (2001). Sameness and difference: A cultural foundation of classification. Library Resources & Technical Services, 45, 115 – 122. Omidvar, R. (2001). Social inclusion: A new vision of immigrant settlement in Canada. Ottawa, ON7 Caledon Institute of Social Policy. Omidvar, R., & Richmond, T. (2003). Immigrant and social inclusion in Canada [Electronic version]. Toronto, ON7 Laidlaw Foundation Retrieved March 30, 2005 from http://www.laidlawfdn.org/files/children/richmond.pdf. Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (2001). The well-being of nations: The role of social and human capital. Paris7 Author. Papillon, M. (2002). Immigration, diversity, and social inclusion in Canada’s cities. Ottawa, ON7 Canadian Policy Research Networks. Retrieved August 14, 2004 from http://www.urbancenter.utoronto.ca/pdfs/home/debates/ CPRNImmigration.pdf. Pendleton, V., & Chatman, E. (1998). Small world lives: Implications for the public library. Library Trends, 46, 732 – 751. Portes, A., & Bach, R. (1985). Latin journey: Cuban and Mexican immigrants in the United States. Berkeley, CA7 University of California Press. Radford, M. L., & Radford, G. P. (1997). Power, knowledge, and fear: Feminism, Foucault, and the stereotype of the female librarian. Library Quarterly, 67, 250 – 266. Richmond, T. (2004, March). Promoting newcomer civic engagement: The role of umbrella organizations in social citizenship. Paper presented at the Metropolis Immigration Research Conference, Montreal, QC. Retrieved Jan 10, 2005 from http://206.191.51.193/files/Promoting_Newcomer_Civic_Engagement.pdf. Saloojee, A. (2003). Social inclusion, anti-racism and democratic citizenship. Working Paper Series Perspectives on Social Inclusion. Toronto, Canada7 The Laidlaw Foundation (http://www.laidlawfdn.org). Savolainen, R. (1993). The sense-making theory: Reviewing the interests of a user-centered approach to information seeking and use. Information Processing & Management, 29, 13 – 28. Schuler, D. (2001). Cultivating society’s civic intelligence: Patterns for a new bworld brainQ. Information, Communication, and Society, 4, 157 – 181. Silver, H. (1995). Fighting social exclusion. In Democratic Dialogue (Ed.), Social exclusion, social inclusion (pp. 9–14). Belfast, Ireland: Democratic Dialogue. Sonnenwald, D. H. (1999). Evolving perspectives of human information behaviour: Contexts, situations, social networks and information horizons. In T. D. Wilson, & D. K. Allen (Eds.), Exploring the contexts of information behavior (pp. 176 – 190). London7 Taylor Graham. Statistics Canada. (2001). Census 2001 data. Ottawa, ON. Retrieved August 16, 2004 from http:// www12.statcan.ca/english/census01/home/index.cfm. Taylor, R. (1991). Information use environments. In B. Dervin, & M. J. Voight (Eds.), Progress in Communication Sciences, Vol. 10 (pp. 217 – 255). (1991). Norwood, NJ7 Ablex Publishing Corp. Warschauer, M. (2002). Reconceptualizing the digital divide. First Monday, 7 (7). Retrieved August 16, 2004 from http://www.firstmonday.dk/issues/issue7_7/warschauer/. Wasserman, S., & Faust, K. (1994). Social network analysis: Methods and applications. Cambridge, UK7 Cambridge University Press. Wellman, B. (1983). Network analysis: Some basic principles. Sociological Theory, 1, 155 – 200.