Site MenuExplaining Aboriginal Turnout in Federal Elections: Evidence from Alberta, Saskatchewan and Manitoba
Data and Methods
The data used for this study are drawn from two components of the Equality, Security and Community (ESC) survey.footnote 23 In 2000–2001, the ESC study interviewed a nationally representative sample of Canadians (n=5152) with regard to their well-being, participation in civil society, and attitudes toward the state and each other. In 2004, an additional subsample of Aboriginal respondents was collected in Alberta, Saskatchewan and Manitoba (n=608). The Aboriginal sample includes a nearly identical survey instrument, with additional information gathered specific to the Aboriginal experience in Canada.footnote 24 By utilizing these two data sets we can conduct an analysis of Aboriginal turnout that is sensitive to what is particular about Aboriginal circumstances, and also make instructive comparisons with the broader Canadian population.
While it would be ideal to have a nationally representative sample of Aboriginals, a focus on Aboriginals living on the Prairies is instructive for several reasons. Outside the North, Manitoba and Saskatchewan have the highest proportion of Aboriginals (14%) and Alberta has the second highest proportion (5%). Furthermore, unlike much previous research, our sample includes Aboriginals living both on-reserve and off-reserve. Most previous research into the voting behaviour of Aboriginal peoples has been based solely on samples of Status Indians on reserves. In our sample, by contrast, approximately 29 percent are living off-reserve.footnote 25 It is also important to note that the ESC Aboriginal Sample mimics in significant ways the actual population of the Prairie provinces, especially with respect to the key socio-economic variables in our analysis. Table 1 provides a comparison of the ESC Aboriginal sample with the 2006 Census for each province in our sample and for the Canadian population. In terms of both educational attainment and income, our sample mirrors the census estimates very closely. In other words, while not strictly representative, our sample does approximate the Aboriginal population with respect to key characteristics.
Where our sample differs significantly is with respect to the communities represented. Most importantly, our sample over-represents those individuals who self-identified as "North-American Indians" in each province and under-represents those who identified as "Métis." Also, most of our sample (about 85%) report membership in one of just eight different bands. It is also important to note that a substantial proportion in each province self-categorized as "Other". The ESC survey instrument allowed respondents to self-identify as "Other Aboriginal Identity (e.g. First Nations, Cree, Ojibway, Dene, Blackfoot, etc.)."
| Census | ESC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Aboriginal identity | |||
| North American Indian | 52% | 65% | 14% |
| Métis | 45% | 4% | -41% |
| Inuit | 1% | 0% | -1% |
| Other | 2% | 30% | 28% |
| Registered Indian status | 49% | 97% | 48% |
| Aboriginal language spoken at home | 8% | 31% | 23% |
| Education* | |||
| Less than high school diploma | 44% | 43% | -1% |
| High school diploma | 21% | 18% | -3% |
| Greater than high school diploma | 34% | 39% | 4% |
| Median income (000s) | 18 | 24 | 6 |
† Data are from the Community Highlights database, Census 2006, available from Statistics Canada.
* As regards the census figures, note that this is expressed as a share of the Aboriginal identity population aged 15 and over.
** Note that these figures are for the Aboriginal subsample, that is, for Alberta, Saskatchewan and Manitoba, only.
| Census | ESC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Aboriginal identity | |||
| North American Indian | 64% | 51% | -13% |
| Métis | 34% | 12% | -22% |
| Inuit | 0% | 0% | 0% |
| Other | 2% | 37% | 35% |
| Registered Indian status | 64% | 93% | 29% |
| Aboriginal language spoken at home | 16% | 57% | 41% |
| Education* | |||
| Less than high school diploma | 49% | 48% | -2% |
| High school diploma | 22% | 24% | 2% |
| Greater than high school diploma | 29% | 28% | 0% |
| Median income (000s) | 14 | 20 | 6 |
† Data are from the Community Highlights database, Census 2006, available from Statistics Canada.
* As regards the census figures, note that this is expressed as a share of the Aboriginal identity population aged 15 and over.
** Note that these figures are for the Aboriginal subsample, that is, for Alberta, Saskatchewan and Manitoba, only.
| Census | ESC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Aboriginal identity | |||
| North American Indian | 57% | 51% | -6% |
| Métis | 41% | 12% | -29% |
| Inuit | 0% | 0% | 0% |
| Other | 1% | 37% | 36% |
| Registered Indian status | 58% | 92% | 34% |
| Aboriginal language spoken at home | 13% | 21% | 8% |
| Education* | |||
| Less than high school diploma | 50% | 50% | 0% |
| High school diploma | 21% | 26% | 6% |
| Greater than high school diploma | 29% | 24% | -5% |
| Median income (000s) | 15 | 21 | 5 |
† Data are from the Community Highlights database, Census 2006, available from Statistics Canada.
* As regards the census figures, note that this is expressed as a share of the Aboriginal identity population aged 15 and over.
** Note that these figures are for the Aboriginal subsample, that is, for Alberta, Saskatchewan and Manitoba, only.
| Census | ESC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Aboriginal identity | |||
| North American Indian | 60% | 55% | -4% |
| Métis | 33% | 10% | -24% |
| Inuit | 4% | 0% | -4% |
| Other | 3% | 35% | 32% |
| Registered Indian status | 53% | 94% | 41% |
| Aboriginal language spoken at home | 12% | 37% | 25% |
| Education* | |||
| Less than high school diploma | 44% | 47% | 3% |
| High school diploma | 22% | 23% | 1% |
| Greater than high school diploma | 35% | 30% | -5% |
| Median income (000s) | 17 | 22 | 5 |
† Data are from the Community Highlights database, Census 2006, available from Statistics Canada.
* As regards the census figures, note that this is expressed as a share of the Aboriginal identity population aged 15 and over.
** Note that these figures are for the Aboriginal subsample, that is, for Alberta, Saskatchewan and Manitoba, only.
The ESC also has a relatively higher proportion claiming that they are either subject to a treaty or registered with the Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development; indeed, most of our sample reported this status. Unlike the Census, however, we are not able to distinguish between these two categories, suggesting that we may have over-estimated the extent of difference between our sample and the census in this regard. Finally, we also observe a difference in Table 1 between the percent of our sample who speak an Aboriginal language at home compared to the general population. Our sample over-represents this segment of the population to varying degrees depending on the province.
To summarize, while differences between our sample and the broader Aboriginal population prevent us from deriving firm conclusions about Aboriginal turnout, in general, these data shed light on the determinants of turnout among a broad range of Aboriginal peoples. Furthermore, given our intent to contrast traditional, resource-based models with Aboriginal-specific explanations, these data are, arguably, perfectly suitable. First, the similarity between our sample and the Aboriginal population in terms of the distribution of critical socio-economic resources (education and income) permits us to assess the general impact of these factors with some confidence. Second, inasmuch as the Aboriginal politics literature has focused on territorially-based First Nations communities whose members strongly identify as Aboriginal, the overrepresentation of First Nations communities and of those who speak Aboriginal languages actually give us significant leverage to examine the implications of the nationalism and post-colonial theses.