Suchergebnisse

Numerous studies have found that immigrants to Canada are less satisfied with life than comparable Canadian-born individuals. Yet recent data from the Canadian Community Health Survey (CCHS) suggest that this immigrant satisfaction gap may be disappearing. This article traces the evolution of the immigrant–Canadian born life satisfaction gap from 2009 to 2018 and explores two competing explanations for the declining gap: improved immigrant outcomes and changes to the CCHS design introduced in 2015–2016. The article finds little evidence for the improved outcomes explanation. Indeed, the immigrant satisfaction gap is somewhat illusory—the more substantial gap is between the life satisfaction of White individuals and that of members of certain racialized groups, regardless of immigration status. The 2015–2016 CCHS redesign, however, may be a plausible explanation for the increase in reported life satisfaction. This article provides more evidence that researchers using life satisfaction measures need to be cautious when survey designs change.

AbstractUniversities promise to "[e]nsure students graduate with the knowledge, skills and experience needed to thrive in the workplace and be successful global citizens." (COU 2017). However, it is not obvious that they deliver upon this promise. The incentives within the university system, such as they are, tend to reward research, reputation‐seeking and keeping students satisfied. Yet the status quo may no longer be sustainable. Demographic change threatens to undermine the present model of university funding. Technological change and other factors have the potential to radically change the demand for university education. Canadian universities need to be able to adapt to new conditions to survive and thrive. This paper outlines the economic and political forces that lead the Canadian university sector to underachieve, especially when it comes to teaching and student learning, identifies pressures on the system and discusses reforms that could alter the incentive structure within the university system.

This paper discusses two fundamental methodological differences between feminist economics and neoclassical welfare economics.First, the notion of preference change is central to feminist economics, but on the margins of neoclassical welfare economics. Second, the identification of choice with well-being, which is the basis for much of neoclassical welfare analysis is deeply problematic for many feminists. Finally, the paper discusses ways in which feminist economists can go about evaluating economic policies. ; Cet article discute de deux différences de méthodologie fondamentales entre l'économie féministe et l'économie néoclassique du bien- être social. Premièrement la notion de préférence de changement est centrale à l'économie féministe, mais en marge de l'économie néoclassique du bien-être social. Deuxièmement, l'identification de choix avec le bien-être, ce qui est la base d'une grande partie de l'analyse néoclassique du bien-être social, est extrêmement problématique pour un grand nombre de féministes. Finalement l'article discute des moyens par lesquels les économistes féministes peuvent s'y prendre pour évaluer les politiques économiques.