Why was this work started?
The changing face of New Zealand
New Zealand’s population is diverse, reflecting waves of settlement over many centuries.
From the time following the settlement of Maori in New Zealand until about 1950, most people who migrated to New Zealand were from Britain and Ireland. There were also much smaller numbers of French, Dalmatians (many of whom worked in Northland’s gum fields) and Chinese (who were often gold miners in the Otago gold rush). The descendants of these people have lived in New Zealand for generations.
Many Dutch migrated to New Zealand in the 1950s, and Pacific Island peoples in the 1960s and 1970s.
Over the last twenty years, New Zealand has experienced a significant increase in ethnic, cultural and religious diversity.
Since a reform to immigration policy in 1986, there has been a large flow of migrants from non-traditional source countries such as Korea, South Africa and Taiwan as well as smaller flows from a number of Middle Eastern and African countries. Flows from China and India also increased significantly, as well as several waves of Pacific and Asian migrants, and those moving from countries such as Greece and Poland. New Zealand also received a large in-flow of South East Asian refugees following the Vietnam War. From the early 1990s, New Zealand has also been receiving refugees from diverse countries such as Somalia, Zimbabwe and Kosovo.
Between the 1996 and 2006 censuses, the number of New Zealand residents who were born in North-East Asia increased by 55% (74,000); Sub-Saharan Africa increased by 71% (42,000); South and Central Asia increased by 66% (38,000) and Middle East and North Africa increased by 56% (9,000). Over the same time, New Zealand residents who originated from the United Kingdom and Ireland increased by 9% (22,000). Overall, the overseas-born population increased by 45% or by 275,000 people, between the 1996 and 2006 censuses.
Today, New Zealand has the fourth highest rate in the OECD of people born overseas, at 23%.
New Zealand is also more diverse in terms of religion than it was. New Zealanders’ religious affiliations have traditionally been Christian, with increasing numbers since the 1970s stating that they have no religious affiliation. While the majority of New Zealanders still identify as Christian, there has been a decline from 70% of the population in 1991 to 56% in 2006. The percentage of New Zealanders identifying with no religion increased by 15% in the same period.
The number of people identifying with non-Christian religions almost tripled between 2001 and 2006, from 2% to 5.5% or 204,000 people.
The increase in non-Christian beliefs between 1991 and 2006 was driven by the tripling of the Hindu population (to 64,000), the Buddhist population quadrupling (to 41,600), the Muslim population increasing six-fold (to 36,000) and the Jewish population doubling (to 6,900).
The current trend suggests that New Zealand’s ethnic, cultural and religious diversity will continue to increase.
Increased diversity can be a good thing for a society and its economy. The creativity, innovation and challenge to accepted wisdoms that emerge from diversity have the potential to advance the way we do business, work, trade, and enjoy our social and family lives.
While increased diversity brings benefits to our society and economy, it also carries challenges. Key potential problems include: a lack of acceptance of diversity; people experiencing discrimination; and social isolation. International events over recent years such as the Paris and Cronulla riots and the controversy over publication of cartoons portraying Prophet Mohammed demonstrate the severe end of the risks that can be associated with diversity.
Government activity to address social cohesion issues can improve social wellbeing and increase economic growth and at the same time, reduce the risk of future division and social unrest.
While ethnic, religious and cultural diversity are not new in New Zealand, the Connecting Diverse Communities project is the first time that government agencies have developed a whole-of-government approach to improving social cohesion.
Defining ‘social cohesion’
Broadly speaking, a socially cohesive society can be viewed as one where people live together in harmony, where conflicts can be resolved and there is general support for government and the rule of law.
Social cohesion may also be thought of as
"the capacity of a society to ensure the welfare of all its members, minimising disparities and avoiding polarisation. A cohesive society is a mutually supportive community of free individuals pursuing these common goals by democratic means" (Council of Europe, 2005).
Around the world there are many ideas about what ‘social cohesion’ means. The approach and definition for social cohesion will depend on the context that the term is used. Soroka, Johnston and Banting (2005) outline three common approaches:
- Social cohesion is rooted in shared values, a common sense of identity and a common body of norms adhered to by most people.
- Social cohesion requires widespread engagement and participation. This approach is based on the idea that, as contemporary societies are characterised by people who adhere to multiple identities and diverse values, common attitudes alone will not be sufficient to achieve social cohesion.
- Social cohesion is equated with social capital – a web of social networks and interpersonal trust that fosters cooperation between people and collective action.
Jane Jenson, a Canadian social theorist, mapped the dimensions of social cohesion in the late 1990s. Jenson’s framework aligns with and extends the second approach to social cohesion outlined above. Jenson broke down the concept of social cohesion into five dimensions (Jenson, 1998):
- belonging (as opposed to isolation)
- participation (as opposed to non-involvement)
- inclusion (as opposed to exclusion)
- recognition (as opposed to rejection)
- legitimacy (as opposed to illegitimacy).
This definition has been used in New Zealand by government officials in work on settlement issues. It has also formed the basis of a draft indicators framework to measure the impact of settlement outcomes on social cohesion (Peace, Spoonley, Butcher and O’Neill, 2005).
References
Council of Europe (2004). A new strategy for Social Cohesion: Revised strategy for social cohesion. Council of Europe.
Jenson, J. (1998). Mapping Social Cohesion: The State of Canadian Research CPRN Study No. F 03, Ottawa: Renouf Publishing Co.
Peace R., Spoonley P., Butcher A., and O’Neill D. (2005). Immigration and Social Cohesion: Developing an Indicator Framework for Measuring the Impact of Settlement Policies in New Zealand Centre for Social Research and Evaluation, Working Paper 01/05. Wellington: Ministry of Social Development.
Soroka S., Johnston R., and Banting K. (2007). Ties that Bind? Social Cohesion and Diversity in Canada. In K. Banting, T. Courchene, & L. Seidle (Eds.), Diversity, Recognition and Shared Citizenship in Canada (pp.561 – 600). Montreal: Institute for Research on Public Policy.
