9th Metropolis Identities Summit
Join the conversation on identity, diversity, trust and social harmony in Canada
Understanding migration and inclusion in Canada
ACS-Metropolis brings together data and dialogue on Canadian identity, immigration and integration.
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
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.
The importance of our ancestral connections: The relationship between attachment to ethnic origin (s) and attachment to Canada
Nearly two-thirds of Canadians—64 per cent—say they are attached to their ethnic origins or ancestry, including 28 per cent who describe themselves as very attached. Attachment is relatively widespread across the country, reaching 67 per cent in both Quebec and Atlantic Canada, 66 per cent in British Columbia and 65 per cent in Ontario. Quebecers and British Columbians are the most likely to say they are very attached to their ancestry, at 33 and 32 per cent respectively. At the same time, national attachment remains considerably stronger. Eighty-two per cent of Canadians say they are attached to Canada, including 50 per cent who are very attached. Regional differences are nevertheless significant. Attachment to Canada reaches 92 per cent in Atlantic Canada, compared with 73 per cent in Quebec. Only 33 per cent of Quebecers say they are very attached to Canada, compared with 63 per cent in Atlantic Canada, 58 per cent in Alberta and 55 per cent in British Columbia. One of the most important findings concerns generational change. Canadians aged 18 to 24 are the age group most likely to say they are very attached to their ethnic origins, at 36 per cent. Yet 85 per cent of this same age group say they are attached to Canada. The youngest Canadians therefore appear comfortable holding both identities simultaneously. Their attachment to ancestry does not translate into rejection of the country. There is, however, a major age divide in the intensity of Canadian attachment. Only 40 per cent of Canadians aged 18 to 24 say they are very attached to Canada, compared with 62 per cent of those aged 55 to 64 and 69 per cent of those aged 65 and older. Younger Canadians are not necessarily detached from Canada, but their attachment is more likely to be qualified as “somewhat” rather than “very” strong.
AI and Chat Use: Lessons Learned
This study was conducted through a web-based survey among Canadians aged 18 and older. A total of 1,700 respondents completed the survey, including a booster sample of 200 individuals with an immigration background. The base sample of 1,500 respondents was distributed to reflect the general Canadian population, while the additional 200 respondents allowed for more robust analysis of immigrant populations. Respondents were randomly selected from Leger’s online panel and invited to participate via email. The questionnaire was available in both English and French. Fieldwork for this study took place from April 14 to April 27, 2026. The project was led by the Association for Canadian Studies in collaboration with the Diversity Institute and the Future Skills Centre – Centre des Compétences futures. The Future Skills Centre – Centre des Compétences futures is funded by the Government of Canada’s Future Skills program. The opinions and interpretations in this presentation are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect those of the Government of Canada.
Canadian Views on Selected Religions and on Atheism
The survey results suggest that Canadian opinion toward major religious groups is generally positive but uneven, with Christianity receiving the highest net-positive rating overall at 57%, followed by atheism at 50%, Judaism at 40%, and Islam at 26%. One of the most striking findings is generational: Canadians aged 18–24 give Islam its highest rating, at 41%, and place atheism highest of all at 58%, while older Canadians remain considerably more positive toward Christianity and Judaism. This points to a younger cohort that is less anchored in traditional Christian identification and more open toward religious diversity, though Islam still trails Judaism and Christianity in most groups. Regionally, Quebec stands out for ranking atheism slightly above Christianity and for giving comparatively low ratings to Islam and Judaism, while Ontario, Manitoba/Saskatchewan, and British Columbia are more positive toward Judaism and Islam than Quebec. The results also show that education, language, immigration status, and identity shape perceptions in important ways. University-educated Canadians are more positive toward all four categories, suggesting that education is associated not simply with secularism but with broader tolerance across religious and non-religious identities. Francophones give the lowest positive ratings to Islam and Judaism while ranking atheism highest, reflecting Quebec’s distinctive secular culture. By contrast, allophones and immigrants are more positive toward Christianity and Islam, and foreign-born Canadians are notably more positive toward Judaism than Canadian-born respondents. It is interesting to note that people who rate one religious or non-religious group positively often rate others positively as well, suggesting that favourable attitudes are less a zero-sum competition between faiths and more a general disposition toward pluralism. The major exception is that Islam remains the most weakly rated group, indicating that anti-Islamic sentiment or discomfort with Islam remains a significant challenge within the broader Canadian landscape of religious tolerance.