29th Metropolis Canada Conference
Join us in Vancouver from March 10 to 12, 2027, to explore migration in an ever-changing ecosystem
Understanding migration and inclusion in Canada
ACS-Metropolis brings together data and dialogue on Canadian identity, immigration and integration.
9th Metropolis Identities Summit
Join the conversation on identity, diversity, trust and social harmony in Canada
Canadian Index for Measuring Integration and Inclusion
Compare immigrant outcomes across provinces, cities and groups, with more than 30 years of data
Public Opinion Portal
Explore Canadian public opinion with interactive charts: filter by group, compare up to three questions and follow answers over time
Program evaluation
Find out what is working, whom your program reaches and what difference it makes, from planning to funder reporting
About the Association for Canadian Studies (ACS) & the Metropolis Institute
The Association for Canadian Studies and Metropolis Institute advances knowledge and understanding of Canadian history, civic life and public policy. Through evidence-based research, publications, public dialogue and knowledge mobilization, ACS examines how history, immigration, diversity and evolving identities shape Canada and Canadians’ sense of belonging. By convening researchers, policymakers, educators and community organizations from across the country, ACS-Metropolis supports informed civic participation, strengthens public understanding and develops practical responses to complex issues facing Canadian society.
In the news
All news- September 22, 2026
- September 22, 2026
- September 11, 2026
- September 10, 2026
- September 3, 2026
From the library
Explore the library
Immigration Levels, Shared Values and Acceptance of Difference
Immigration has become a prominent political issue in Quebec and Alberta. During the 2026 Quebec election, the Parti Québécois proposed substantial reductions in permanent and temporary immigration, citing pressures on housing, French-language integration and public services. Alberta’s October 19, 2026 referendum includes a non-binding question on expanding provincial control over immigration to reduce admissions to what the government describes as sustainable levels. Across Canada, the share saying there were too many immigrants was 58% in the March 2025 ACS–Léger poll, 57% in the September 2025 EKOS State of the Nation survey (not commissioned by ACS), and 45% in the October 2026 ACS–EKOS survey. The decrease was particularly large in Quebec (58% to 40%) and Alberta (61% to 46%). In October 2026, respondents in Manitoba, Saskatchewan and Atlantic Canada were most likely to say there were too many, while Quebec and British Columbia were less likely. That which follows will provide a detailed analysis of the October 9-15, 2026 survey conducted for the Association for Canadian Studies by the firm EKOS with a focus on opinion on immigration levels and how it affects attachment to Canada and concern over shared values.
Demography Diversity and Identities in a Changing Canada
This edition of Canadian Issues seeks to inform the parameters of the current conversation. Its central contribution is to connect demographic change to the institutions, identities and political narratives through which that change is understood and managed. The contributions move from a historical account of Canada’s demographic transformation to the policy challenge of sustaining immigration, from regional lessons about integration to new forms of racial and religious diversity, and finally to the changing meaning of multiculturalism and the politics of demographic anxiety. Taken together, they show that demography is not simply a matter of population outcomes. It is also about where people live, whether institutions can respond, how identities are measured, whether newcomers can participate fully, and whether Canadians retain confidence in both diversity and the country’s capacity to oversee and effectively manage the changes.
National Identity Across Canada
Following Quebec’s provincial election and ahead of Alberta’s October 19 referendum, questions of provincial identity and attachment to Canada are especially timely. Across Canada, 60% of respondents are very attached to the country, compared with 39% to their province. Quebec stands apart: 45% are very attached to Canada and 47% to Quebec, while 40% identify as provincial-first or provincial-only. Yet 62% of Quebecers also feel very much attached to other Canadians. Alberta presents a different pattern: 61% are very attached to Canada, compared with 38% to Alberta; 22% identify as provincial-first or provincial-only, and 59% feel very much attached to other Canadians. Alberta’s October 19 vote asks whether voters wish to remain a province of Canada or initiate the constitutional process toward a possible, future binding separation referendum; it is not itself a vote on immediate separation. Together, the findings show that provincial identity, Canadian attachment, and solidarity with fellow Canadians do not necessarily move together. They should not be read as a forecast of referendum voting.
Academic Freedom, Speech and Collective Responsibility in Canada
This survey examines Canadians’ views on the limits of academic freedom and acceptable expression, with particular attention to political advocacy in the classroom, religious and ethnic prejudice, historical denial and collective responsibility. The findings come from a Leger survey of 1,538 Canadians conducted for the Association for Canadian Studies from September 4 to 6, 2026. Six in ten Canadians believe academic freedom should not protect professors who use class time to advocate political views unrelated to the subject being taught. Younger adults are less certain about where to draw this boundary. Respondents who support such protection are also considerably more likely to regard the justification of terrorism, the denial of documented atrocities and the minimization of their victims as acceptable. Most Canadians reject statements that portray religious or ethnic communities as inherently untrustworthy, attribute harmful beliefs to an entire religion or hold members of a religious group collectively responsible for the actions of a foreign government. Nevertheless, younger respondents are consistently more likely to consider such statements acceptable, including one-third of those under 25 who say it is acceptable to question whether a well-documented historical atrocity occurred. The findings also examine whether Muslims should be expected to denounce terrorism committed in the name of Islam, Jewish Canadians to condemn actions of the Israeli government and Russian Canadians to denounce actions of the Russian government. These expectations are not symmetrical: criticism of an elected government’s policies or military actions is not comparable to condemning terrorism. The comparison nevertheless reveals a common tendency to require members of religious or national-origin communities to answer publicly for conduct over which they have no individual control or responsibility.
Canadians Doubt Prospects for Global Reconciliation as International Divisions Strain Friendships
A Leger survey conducted for the Association for Canadian Studies from September 4 to 6, 2026, finds considerable pessimism about the prospects for resolving several major international conflicts. Among the four conflicts examined, Canadians view the conflict between Israelis and Palestinians as the least reconcilable: only 14% believe reconciliation is possible, compared with 23% for Russia and Ukraine, 26% for Iran and Western countries, and 35% for Russia and the United States. Younger Canadians are generally more optimistic than older respondents, while men are more likely than women to see the conflicts as reconcilable. Francophones express particularly strong pessimism, with 68% describing the Israeli-Palestinian conflict as irreconcilable, compared with 55% of anglophones. This pessimism extends beyond international relations into Canadians’ personal lives. Just over half of respondents, 52%, believe it is becoming increasingly difficult for people with opposing views on major international conflicts to remain friends, while only 21% disagree. This perception is remarkably consistent across French-speaking, English-speaking and allophone Canadians, suggesting that the polarizing effects of international conflicts cross linguistic boundaries. The findings point to a broader concern: global conflicts increasingly shape domestic relationships and make it more difficult to preserve dialogue across deeply held political differences.
Hear No Antisemitism See No Antisemitism
Surveyed for the November-December 2025 Campus Antisemitism and Student Experiences (CASE) study, Canadian Jewish postsecondary students do not divide neatly into a Zionist/anti-Zionist binary. The CASE survey therefore uses a four-point spectrum that captures variation in the importance respondents assign to Zionism: most say it is very important to their identity, others say it is somewhat important, and smaller shares say it is not very important or not important at all. At the core of the analysis is this distribution in the importance assigned to Zionism. The survey instrument did not provide respondents with a definition of Zionism in connection with this item; responses therefore reflect respondents' own understandings of the term (though CASE is informed by the IHRA definition of Antisemitism). This differs from the published CASE report, which provides a terminology definition of Zionism for readers of the report. As Table 1 shows, 69% of respondents with valid answers to this item say Zionism is very important to their identity, 18% say it is somewhat important, and 13% say it is either not very important or not important at all; the "not important at all" endpoint represents 7% of respondents. Comparing respondents across this spectrum reveals sharp differences in attachment to Israel and other dimensions of Jewish identity, as well as markedly different reports and evaluations of antisemitism. The four groups are large enough to support comparison within the CASE sample, with some caution for the smaller categories.