Perceptions of Australian cultural identity among Asian Australians.
An area of long-standing interest in studies of national identity has been the implications of wider cross-border movements of people from diverse social, cultural and political backgrounds for national identity (McAllister & Moore, 1991; Phillips & Holton, 2004; Robertson, 1992; Tololyan, 1991). This study raises the issue about the role of transnationalism which incorporates the dual processes of globalisation and localisation in determining attitudes towards national identity, among transnational migrants. For instance, it is suggested that the emergence of transnationalism and transnational communities are likely to challenge the normative character of the politically and culturally bounded nation state (Appadurai, 1996a, 1996b; Castles & Davidson, 2000; Cohen, 1996; Wong, 2002).
The research is set a time when perceptions of disloyalty to the nation state among transnational citizens has led to a fear of internal disintegration and a climate of global insecurity (Joppke, 2004; Kofman, 2005). Governments have responded to the rise in transnationalism and cultural diversity, through reasserting their authority, in shaping national identity and national citizenship (Holton, 1998; Kofman, 2005). As an example, the Howard government in Australia has proposed new citizenship tests which incorporate tests relating to Australian cultural/historical values and English competence. In light of these contemporary, theoretical and policy issues, drawing on a representative sample of Asian Australian migrants, (1) this paper examines whether transnational migrants feel a sense of connection or belonging to cultural conceptions of Australian national identity. Furthermore, I examine whether different social background experiences have a causal effect on views towards national identity.
The paper is divided into four main sections. In the first section, I discuss theories of transnationalism and how they are applied in the local Australian context. Second, I draw on the pre-existing literature in the social sciences on dimensions of Australian national identity, and focus specifically on the cultural aspects of national identity. I briefly mention contemporary, social and political debates about the issues of national identity and social cohesion in a country of increasing cultural diversity. Third, I examine the role of social background in determining attitudes towards cultural conceptions of national identity. Finally, using the 2003 Australian Survey of Social Attitudes, I analyse whether different groups of Asian Australians feel a sense of connection to cultural conceptions of national identity. In the discussion, I demonstrate that finding out about the views of different subgroups of Asian Australians as representative of other transnational migrants has important policy implications for Australian multiculturalism and citizenship.
Transnational Belonging and National Identity
There are two conflicting points of view about how transnationalism shapes feelings towards national identity in the local and global context.
1) The first is the view that the rise in expressions of transnationalism is weakening national feelings. For example, according to the glocalisation hypothesis, with increasing cultural diversity, local and global identities are strengthening while at the same time national identities are weakening (Dijkstra, Geuijen, & de Ruijter, 2001; Hall, 1991). Eriksen for example, argues that as nation states become more diverse, a shared national identity will become less important (Eriksen, 1997). The phenomenon of belonging to a local and global identity but not a national identity is otherwise expressed in terms of hybridisation (Bhabha, 1990b; Hall, 1996), creolisation (Hannerz, 1990, 1996) and cosmopolitanism (Beck, 2002; Cheah & Robbins, 1998). In the Australian context, studies of Asian Australian transnational communities show that Asian Australians feel a sense of detachment from the 'national community'. For example, research suggests that Asian Australians tend to identify with a complex and fragmented hybrid identity (Ang, 2001; Ang, Chalmers, Law, & Thomas, 2000; Gilbert, Khoo, & Lo, 2000; Joshi, 2000; Julian, 2004; Lee, 2006; Lo, 2000, 2006; Thomas, 2003; Wise, 2003).
2) The second view suggests that even with increasing cultural diversity, national attachment is not weakening and indeed attachment to the national is still felt strongly among culturally diverse citizens in western democracies. For example, Evans and Kelly, show that in the developed world, many people continue to feel a sense of national pride (Evans & Kelley, 2002). Other research conducted in Europe, suggests that there is no evidence that national identity is weakening in Europe (Deflem & Pampel, 1996; Dombrowski & Rice, 2000). In the Australian context, Phillips and Holton observe that attachment to cultural conceptions of national identity among British Australians vary. across different subgroups of British Australians indicating that transnationalism may not be the only factor influencing attitudes towards Australian national identity (Phillips & Holton, 2004).
Dimensions of National Identity in Australia
There have been many contemporary studies in sociology on what constitutes national identity (Alexander, 1993; Bauman, 1990; Schlesinger, 1991). According to Ian McAllister, "national identity is the feeling of being associated with a national group, defined by a common heritage which may be based on many attributes, the most common being race, history, territory, language and history" (McAllister, 1997, p. 5). Most studies of national identity have generally distinguished between ethnic and civic dimensions of the national identity (Jones, 1997; Jones & Smith, 2001; McAllister, 1997; Phillips, 1996, 1998; A. Smith, 1991).
The ethnic or cultural dimension of national identity tends to represent a strong and exclusive national identity in any given society (Lewin-Epstein & Levanon, 2005; McAllister, 1997). People in the national community who do not know each other personally but share a common history constitute this ethnic conception of national identity. For example, Eriksen shows that even though members of the national community do not know each other personally, their mutual feelings depend on the ability of national ideologies to transfer their sentiments to the abstract level (Eriksen, 2004). Benedict Anderson (1983) describes this common national bond in terms of an 'imagined community'.
By contrast, the civic dimension of national identity emphasises a 'formal' civic identity, focusing on legal norms and a shared political culture (Eriksen, 1993; McAllister, 1997; Pakulski & Tranter, 2000). In the last few decades, there has been more discussion of the formal dimension of national identity because of the absence of shared experiences and collective values means that a political formal identity can be constructed more easily (McAllister, 1997). In general, both the ethnic and civic dimensions of national identity revolve around the quest for a sense of belonging to the larger community or national identity.
So far, empirical research on Australian ethnic identity has focused on the symbolic and informal maintenance of national boundaries (Bean, 1995; Goot & Watson, 2001; Phillips, 1996, 1998; Turner, 1994). The study of these symbolic and informal boundaries is primarily concerned with how citizens engage in the exclusion of the 'other'. The foundations of this exclusion of the 'other" is created through what Alexander (1993, p. 291) has called the 'national community'. Traditions, texts, discourses and collective memories that reinforce and construct symbolic boundaries all combine to form the 'national community' (Bauman, 1992; Calhoun, 1993; A. Smith, 1991).
The symbolic codes that categorise Australia's ethnic identity might include Australian sporting, historical, scientific, and other cultural achievements. As an example, Australian involvement in war and sporting events are two dominant themes in representations of Australian ethnic identity. In terms of the symbolic significance of war, Anzac day has become a public holiday to commemorate Australian military, involvement in overseas wars, conflicts and natural disasters. (2) Australia's sporting heritage is also symbolic of Australian ethnic identity. For example, Australian political leaders often describe contemporary, sporting events as symbols of Australian identity. (3)
The political endorsement of particular cultural symbols forms part of a larger social and political debate in Australia and other western countries regarding the need to install a sense of loyalty among migrants from culturally diverse backgrounds (Foner, 2001; Kofman, 2005). For example, the suggestions that migrants from different backgrounds may not feel a sense of commitment to national identity have stimulated debates in the Australian media regarding the value of multiculturalism. It is argued among conservative commentators that multiculturalism, once promoted in the Australian Labor Party (ALP) during the 1980s and early 1990s as a defining symbol of Australian identity, is contributing to a fragmented society with too many different loyalties (See for instance, Albrechtsen, 2005; Eccleston & Legge, 2005; Mirza, 2006). Political leaders have responded to public opinion with new citizenship proposals which not only suggest that migrants must appreciate Australian civic values but they should also be required to pass a test on their knowledge of Australian cultural/history values and English before they are allowed access to national citizenship (DIMA, 2006).
The combination of popular images of multiculturalism and the literature on transnationalism often brushes over the complexities and realities of diasporas from different social and cultural backgrounds who may in fact feel a strong sense of commitment to national identity, in both its cultural and civic dimensions. Therefore, the empirical analysis of this paper not only investigates how Asian Australian migrants feel towards cultural conceptions of national identity but also how Asian Australian migrants from different social backgrounds might feel towards national identity in Australia.
Social Background and Commitment to National Identity
Researchers have considered a number of different aspects of social background as possible determinants of views about Australian identity (Phillips, 1998). For example, studies have shown that two objective indicators of social class i.e. education and occupation have an important influence views towards cultural conceptions of national identity. For example, evidence shows that a lower level of education is associated with a stronger commitment to cultural conceptions of Australian identity (Chant, Knight, Smith, & Smith, 1989), support for 'Australian nativism' (Jones, 1997) and feeling warmly towards 'Australians' (Bean, 1995; Phillips, 1997). Evidence also shows that there is an association between occupation and an Australian cultural identity (Jones, 1997; Phillips, 1997).
Research has also shown that gender and age have some importance as predictors of support for cultural conceptions of Australian identity. For example, studies have shown that men are more likely than women to identify with a cultural national identity (Bean, 1995; Chant et al., 1989; Jones, 1997). However, other research has shown that women and men are characterised more by similarity, rather than departure in their general dispositions towards national identity (Wickes, Smith, & Phillips, 2006). A number of studies have also demonstrated that age can have a causal effect on attitudes towards a cultural national identity (Bean, 1995; Jones, 1997; Phillips, 1997).
To date there have been no large-scale empirical studies on how Asian Australians view cultural conceptions of national identity. So far, our understanding of the Asian Australian experience of cultural conceptions of national identity has been limited to qualitative studies, which allow for more complexity and depth in the analyses but may substantially reduce generalisability (Clark, 2006). Adding to this research, I now turn to an empirical investigation of Asian Australian views towards cultural conceptions of national identity and the effects of social background (i.e. social class, age, gender, generation and marital status). Overall, the analysis will examine the glocalisation hypothesis that suggests that transnational migrants feel a strong attachment to local and global identities and a weak attachment to the national by focusing on a subgroup of transnational Australians i.e. Asian Australians.
Data and Measures
The data for the study comes from the 2003 Australian Survey of Social Attitudes (AuSSA). AuSSA (2003) is a large biennial survey that studies the social attitudes and behaviour of Australians (Gibson, Wilson, Denemark et al., 20044). The survey contains cross-sectional data on the social attitudes and behaviour of Australians and is distinguished by its inclusion of a large number of Asian Australian respondents (N=273). The national survey was administered to a random sample of respondents and was collected through personal interviews and mail out surveys. The interview schedule explored numerous social issues using open and closed questions and interviews were completed with 4270 respondents. One limitation of the survey was that to avoid giving participants a long survey, for some sections, the survey was divided into two questionnaires. This meant that the number of Asian Australians who participated in the first questionnaire was (n=l17) and in the second questionnaire (n=156).
The first stage of the analysis involved operationally searching for Asian Australians through observing relationships between variables in the AuSSA (2003) and coming up with appropriate identification markers. John Shelton Reed (1975/76) likens this process to 'searching for needles in haystacks'. For example, Table I reports a general description of the background of Asian Australian respondents who participated in the AuSSA (2003).
To construct a new variable of Asian Australians, I included all Australians who identified with one or more of the above criteria. Table 2 highlights the birthplace of Asian Australian respondents who reported one of the criteria in Table 1.
Although the AuSSA (2003) did not include Asian Australians with a connection to all Asian countries, over twenty-two countries were represented which provided a broad cross-section of Asian Australians from different social, cultural, economic and political backgrounds.
The first dependent variable in the present paper is national identity. More specifically, the variable measures attitudes towards what it means to be Australian and is based on the following question from the Australia and the World/National Identity Module in the AuSSA (2003): "Some people say that the following things are important for being truly Australian. Others say they are not important. How important do you think each of the following is?" The response list included eight items: 'have been born in Australia', 'to have Australian citizenship', 'to have lived in Australia for most of one's life', 'to be able to speak English', 'to be Christian', 'to respect Australian political institutions and laws', 'to feel Australian' and 'to have Australian ancestry'. Respondents were asked to answer whether they felt each item was very important, fairly-important, not important or not important at all.
Table 3 represents the results of a factor analysis using varimax rotation of the above indicators of national identity in the AuSSA (2003). For the first question, the results in Table 3 show that two main factors emerged, each of which had eigenvalues exceeding 1.0. The first three items 'being born in Australia', 'having Australian ancestry' and 'living in Australia most of one's life' loaded strongly on the first dimension. The items 'speaking English' and 'being Christian' did not load as strongly. Overall, this dimension included ascribed characteristics that were not easily accessible to all respondents (see McAllister, 1997).
In terms of the second factor, three items, which included achieved and more inclusive characteristics loaded strongly onto the second factor: 'respect for Australia's political institutions and laws', 'Australian citizenship' and 'feeling Australian'. The results of the second dimension suggest that 'citizenship', 'respect for Australia's political institutions' and being apart of a collectivity (i.e. feeling Australian) are all important aspects for being truly Australian. The second factor can be regarded as an inclusive, civic dimension where all citizens are considered to be an equal part of society (Eriksen, 1993). Factor analyses of the responses to the seven questions are in line with other studies on national identity which included similar items (Jones & Smith, 2001; Lewin-Epstein & Levanon, 2005). This paper focuses on the items in the first factor which hang together as a reliable measure of an ascribed identity in a scale ranging from 5 (not very supportive) to 38 (very supportive) with a Cronbach's alpha coefficient of .76.
A second measure of national identity was constructed to tap into issues of national pride. National pride describes the positive feelings citizens have towards their country, which derives from one's sense of national identity (T. Smith & Jarkko, 1998). According to Evans and Kelley, "national pride involves both admiration and stake holding--the feeling that one has some kind of share in an achievement or an admirable quality" (Evans & Kelley, 2002, p. 303). Betts and Rapson (1996) further suggest that national pride in Australia is operationalised as a sense of pride in and commitment to Australia (Betts & Rapson, 1996, p. 61).
A measure of national pride was derived from the Australia and the World/National Identity Module in the AuSSA (2003) with the following question: "How proud are you of Australia in each of the following?" The list consisted of ten characteristics including: 'the way democracy works', 'its political influence in the world', 'Australia's economic achievements', 'its social security system', 'its scientific and technological achievements', 'its achievements in sports', 'its achievements in the arts and literature', 'Australia's defence forces', 'its history' and 'its fair and equal treatment of all groups in society'. Respondents were asked to answer whether they were very proud, somewhat proud, not very. proud, not proud at all or can't choose.
Table 4 shows the results of the factor analysis. The first five items that loaded on the first factor represent pride in Australia's democracy and sense of equality. This factor relates to civic conceptions of national identity. In the second factor, the items: 'its history', 'achievements in sport', 'defence forces', 'achievements in arts and literature' and 'scientific achievements' represent pride in achievements in Australian culture. This paper focuses on the items in the second factor which combine together in a scale ranging from 5 (not very. supportive) to 20 (very supportive) with a Cronbach's alpha coefficient of .76 and form a valid and reliable measure of 'cultural pride'.
Social background variables were used in the analysis as control variables in order to gauge whether social background factors influence attitudes towards the cultural dimension of national identity in Australia. The control variables include education, gender, occupation, age (in years), and generation, marital status.
The results in Table 5 show that Asian Australians felt that speaking English was important to being truly Australian with 51 percent of respondents reporting that it was very important and 37 percent of respondents repotting that it was fairly-important. Similarly, Asian Australians felt that living in Australia all of one's life was important for being truly Australian with 23 percent of respondents reporting that it was very important and 46 percent respondents reporting that it was fairly-important. The Asian Australian respondents placed less importance on being Christian, being born in Australia and having Australian ancestry as important for being truly Australian. This is most likely because the items C, D and E are the more exclusive items out of the five and are generally not inclusive of many Asian Australians. An interesting finding, however, was that the items C, D and E still achieved a little support with over 20 percent of Asian Australian respondents reporting that these items were important for being truly Australian.
Table 6 below demonstrates the importance of social difference in shaping views towards an ascribed identity among the Asian Australian respondents. The results report that the social background factors of occupation, age and generation had varying effects on attitudes towards an ascribed identity among Asian Australians. Occupation had a moderate causal effect on attitudes towards an ascribed identity with non-professional Asian Australians more likely to support an ascribed identity compared with Asian Australians who work in professional occupations. Age produced a very weak effect with the older age cohort more likely to endorse an ascribed ethnic identity compared with the younger age cohort of Asian Australians. Generation also had a strong effect with second-generation Asian Australians more likely to be supportive of an ascribed identity compared with first-generation Asian Australians.
Drawing upon survey questions relating to cultural pride, Table 7 shows the distribution of Asian Australian responses towards indicators of cultural pride. Overall, Table 7 shows that Asian Australians reported sport as the strongest source of national pride with 55 percent (very proud) and 40 percent (somewhat proud), indicating that up to 95 percent of Asian Australians felt that Australia's sporting achievements made them feel proud of their national identity. This was followed by high levels of pride in Australia's scientific achievements with 37 percent (very proud) and 46 percent (somewhat proud), in Australia's defence forces with 28 percent (very proud) and 52 percent (somewhat proud) and in Australia's arts and literature achievements with 21 percent (very. proud) and 59 percent (somewhat proud).
Distinctly lower were expressions of pride in Australia's history achievements with only 19 percent (very proud) and 47 percent (somewhat proud). It appears that less pride is drawn from Australia's history achievements than other cultural achievements, which may come from a number of sources. For example, the immigration restrictions placed on the Chinese gold miners during in the 1850s, the implementation of the White Australia Policy." and racism fuelled by anti-Asian sentiment in the 1980s and 1990s (5) have all possibly contributed to lower levels of pride in Australia's history, achievements.
In turning to the effects of social background on levels of cultural pride among Asian Australians, Table 8 demonstrates that there was a strong association between education and levels of cultural pride among Asian Australians. The results report that levels of pride in Australian cultural achievements declined with higher levels of formal education among Asian Australians. The results are consistent with previous studies of the effects of social background on national identity., which have shown a relationship between education and cultural conceptions of national identity. (Bean, 1995; Chant et al., 1989; Jones, 1997; Phillips, 1997).
The analysis proceeds with a regression analysis of attitudes towards cultural conceptions of national identity among Asian Australians. To construct a measure of a cultural conception of national identity, I first combined the two dimensions 'ascribed identity' and 'cultural pride', which I previously showed as valid and reliable measures.
The relationship between the two variables of 'ascribed identity' and 'cultural pride' was examined using a Pearson's correlation coefficient. The results showed a medium positive correlation between the two variables (r = .32, n = 156, p <.05 ***). Given that the two variables were moderately correlated, the analysis proceeded with combining the two dependent variables into one dependent variable called 'Australian Cultural identity'. The scale of 'Australian cultural identity' ranged from 10 (not very supportive) to 55 (very supportive) with a Cronbach's alpha of .78. In Table 9 the multivariate regression analysis estimates the effects of social background in structuring attitude formation towards a cultural conception of national identity. The results show that education and occupation produced negative effects. The university educated were less likely than the non-university educated to ascribe importance to 'Australian cultural identity'.
The empirical findings in this paper allow us to expand on the current discourse about transnational migrants and national identity. They also present a nuanced appreciation of the effects of social background on views about ascribed dimensions of national identity among transnational Australians. This enables us to provide a detailed account of national identifications among migrants with transnational orientations and connections.
Two broad findings emerged from the research in this paper, which inform theory and analysis. First, it was confirmed that a proportion of the Asian Australian respondents (in some cases up to 30 percent) were supportive of different elements of ascribed cultural dimensions of national identity. In this sense, a moderate proportion of Asian Australians felt a strong sense of belonging to Australia's national community. Second, the regression analysis showed that a number of social factors structure emotional attachment to cultural conceptions of national identity among Asian Australians. For example, it was reported that one's level of education, occupation and generation predicted effects on cultural conceptions of Australian identity among Asian Australians. Therefore, attachment to cultural conceptions of national identity continues to be experienced meaningfully among different groups of Asian Australian migrants with transnational connections and identifications. Overall, the main causality of these findings is that transnational citizens from particular social backgrounds not only hold local and global identifications but also in some cases identify, strongly with the national.
Therefore, the findings only mildly support the glocalisation hypothesis, which suggests that transnational migrants tend to have a strong attachment to local and global identities and a weak attachment to national identity. For example, the results do show that educated, professional and single Asian Australian migrants tend to have a weak identification with cultural conceptions of national identity. This is possibly because they have greater opportunities to travel to other countries, study in challenging environments and experience a wider world of transnational connections and identifications compared with the non university educated, non-professional and the first generation of Asian Australian migrants.
In conclusion, these findings have important policy, implications for the future of multiculturalism and citizenship in Australia, both of which strongly contribute to Australian national identity. In terms of multiculturalism, the expression of cultural diversity among Asian Australian migrants (i.e. maintaining one's birth language and cultural heritage) does not tend to have a causal affect on whether Asian Australian migrants are more or less likely to feel a sense of connection or belonging to Australian identity. Therefore, popular representations of multiculturalism as contributing to a fragmented and fractured national identity do not always hold up with statistical analysis. Furthermore, the suggestions in citizenship proposals that migrants must pass English and history tests before obtaining Australian citizenship seems to have little purpose given that it is the highly educated, English proficient migrants who tend to feel a lower level of connection to a singular national identity.
Appendix Variable Construction Variable Description Ascribed identity A five-item index (Cronbach's Alpha =.76) ranging from 5 (not very important) to 38 (very important), constructed from the following survey question: 1) Some people say that the following things are important for being truly Australian. Others say they are not important. How important do you think each of the following is ... a) to be able to speak English b) to have lived in Australia for most of one's life c) to be Christian d) to have been born in Australia e) to have Australian ancestry Cultural Pride A five-item index (Cronbach's Alpha = .76) ranging from 5 (not very proud) to 20 (very proud), constructed from the following survey question: 1) How proud are you of Australia in each of the following: a) Its achievements in sport b) Its scientific and technological achievements c) Australia's defence forces e) Its achievements in arts and literature f) Its History Australian cultural A 2 item index (Pearson's correlation = .3 ***) identity ranging from 10 (not very supportive) to 55 (very supportive) constructed from the two variables: 1) Ascribed Identity 2) Cultural pride Education Respondents with an education coded as 1. Respondents without a university education coded as 0. Occupation Respondents with a professional occupation coded as 1. Respondents in non-professional occupations coded as 2. Gender Females coded as 1, Males coded as 0 Age Respondents aged 18-34 coded as 1, respondents aged over 34 coded as 0. Respondents aged 50 and over coded as 1, respondents aged under 50 coded as 0. Generation Respondents in the first-generation coded as 1. Respondents in the second-generation coded as 0. Family Status Respondents who are single are coded as 1. Respondents who are married or living with a partner are coded as 2.
Many thanks to Dr Timothy Phillips and Professor Ian McAllister for their many helpful suggestions.
Albrechtsen, J. (2005) 'Cultural Assault on Human Rights: At What Point do the Judges Say the Laws-Our Values-Apply Equally to Everyone', The Australian, 24 August, p. 12.
Alexander, J. (1993) 'Citizen and Enemy as Symbolic Classification: On the Polarizing Discourse of Civil Society'. In M. Fournier & M. Lamont (eds.), Cultivating Differences: Symbolic Boundaries and the Making of Inequality, (pp. 289-308), Chicago, The University of Chicago Press.
Anderson, B. (1983) Imagined Communities, London, Verso Press.
Ang, I. (2001) On Not Speaking Chinese: Living Between Asia and the West, London, Routledge.
Ang, I., Chalmers, S., Law, L., & Thomas, T. (eds.). (2000)Alter/Asians: Asian-Australian Identities in Art, Media and Popular Culture, Annandale, Pluto Press.
Appadurai, A. (1996a) Modernity at Large: Cultural Dimensions of Globalisation, Minneapolis, University of Minnesota Press.
Appadurai, A. (1996b) 'Sovereignty Without Territoriality'. In P. Yeager (ed.), The Geography of Identity, (pp. 40-59), Ann Arbor, The University of Michigan Press.
Bauman, Z. (1990) 'Modernity and Ambivalence', Theory, Culture and Society, 7, 143-169.
Bauman, Z. (1992) Imitations of Postmodernity, London, Routledge.
Bean, C. (1995) "Determinants of Attitudes towards Questions of Border Maintenance in Australia', People and Place, 3(3), 32-40.
Beck, U. (2002) 'The Cosmopolitan Society and its Enemies', Theory, Culture and Society, 19(1-2), 17-44.
Betts, K., & Rapson, V. (1996) 'Pride and Commitment: Patriotism in Australia', People and Place, 5(1), 55-66.
Bhabha, H. (1990b) 'The Third Space'. In J. Rutherford (ed.), Identity, (pp. 227-221), London, Lawrence & Wishart.
Calhoun, C. (1993) 'Nationalism and Civil Society: Democracy, Diversity and Self-Determination', International Sociology, 8, 387411.
Castles, S., & Davidson, A. (2000) Citizenship and Migration: Globalization and The Politics of Belonging, London, Macmillan Press.
Chant, D., Knight, J., Smith, J., & Smith, R. (1989) 'Reconceptualising the Dominant Ideology Debate: An Australian Case Study', Australian and New Zealand Journal of Sociology, 25,383-409.
Cheah, P., & Robbins, B. (eds.). (1998) Cosmopolitics: Thinking and Feeling Beyond the Nation, London, University of Minnesota Press.
Clark, J. (2006) 'Asian Studies in "Crisis": Is Cultural Studies the Answer?' International Journal of Asian Studies, 3(1), 95-110.
Cohen, R. (1996) 'Diasporas and the Nation State: From Victims to Challengers', International Affairs, 72(3), 507-520.
Deflem, M., & Pampel, F. (1996) 'The Myth of Postnational Identity', Social Forces, 75(1), 119-143.
Dijkstra, S., Geuijen, K., & de Ruijter, A. (2001) 'Multiculturalism and Social Integration in Europe', International Political Science Review, 22(1), 55-83.
DIMA. (2006)Australian Citizenship: Much More than a Ceremony, Canberra, Australian Government Publishing service.
Dombrowski, P., & Rice, T. (2000) 'Changing Identities and International Relations Theory', Nationalism and Ethnic Politics, 6, 83-105.
Eccleston, R., & Legge, K. (2005) 'Islamic Extremism has Raised Questions About Whether Australia's Multicultural Policies Have Worked', The Weekend Australian, July, 23-24, pp. 19, 28.
Eriksen, T. H. (1993) 'Formal and Informal Nationalism', Ethnic and Racial Studies, 16(1), 1-25.
Eriksen, T. H. (1997) 'The Nation as a Human Being-a Metaphor in a Mid-Life Crisis? Notes on the Imminent Collapse of Norwegian National Identity'. In F. Olwig & K. Hastrup (eds.), Siting Culture: the Shifting Anthropological Object, (pp. 103-122), London, Routledge.
Eriksen, T. H. (2004) 'Place, Kinship and the Case for Non-Ethnic Relations', Nations and Nationalism, 10(1-2), 49-62.
Evans, M., & Kelley, J. (2002) 'National Pride in the Developed World: Survey Data from 24 Nations', International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 14, 303-338.
Foner, N. (2001) 'Immigrant Commitment to America: Then and Now: Myths and Realities', Citizenship Studies, 5(1), 27-40.
Gilbert, H., Khoo, T., & Lo, J. (2000) 'New Formations in Asian-Australian Cultural Politics'. In H. Gilbert, T. Khoo & J. Lo (eds.), Diaspora: Negotiating Asian-Australia, (pp. 1-14), St Lucia, University of Queensland Press.
Goot, M., & Watson, I. (2001) 'One Nation's Electoral Support; Where Does it Come From, What Makes it Different and How Does it Fit?' Australian Journal of Politics and History, 47(2), 159-191.
Hall, S. (1991) 'Old and New Identities, Old and New Ethnicities'. In A. King (ed.), Culture, Globalisation and the New-World System: Contemporary Conditions for the Representation of Identity, Basingstoke, Macmillan.
Hall, S. (1996) 'Introduction: Who Needs Identity?' In S. Hall & P. du Gay (eds.), Questions of Cultural Identity, (pp. 1-18), London, SAGE.
Hannerz, U. (1990) 'Cosmopolitans and Locals in World Culture'. In M. Featherstone (ed.), Global Culture: Nationalism, Globalization and Modernity, London, Sage.
Hannerz, U. (1996) Transnational Connections, London, Routledge.
Holton, R. (1998) Globalization and the Nation-State, New York, St Martin's Press.
Jones, F. (1997) 'Ethnic Diversity. and National Identity', Australian and New Zealand Journal of Sociology, 33, 285-305.
Jones, F., & Smith, A. (2001) 'Diversity and Commonality in National Identities: An Exploratory Analysis of Cross-National Patterns', Journal of Sociology, 37(1), 45-63.
Joppke, C. (2004) 'The Retreat of Multiculturalism in the Liberal State: Theory and Policy', British Journal of Sociology, 55(2), 237-257.
Joshi, V. (2000) Indian Daughters Abroad: Growing up in Australia, New Delhi, Sterling Publishers.
Julian, R. (2004) 'Living Locally, Dreaming Globally: Transnational Cultural Imaginings and Practices in the Hmong Diaspora'. In N. Tapp & G. Y. Lee (eds.), The Hmong of Australia: Culture and Diaspora, (pp. 25-59), Canberra, Pandanusbooks.
Kofman, E. (2005) 'Citizenship, Migration and the Reassertion of National Identity', Citizenship Studies, 9(5), 453-46Z
Lee, R. (2006) "Flexible Citizenship': Strategic Chinese Identities in Asian Australian Literature', Journal of Intercultural Studies, 2 7(1-2), 213-227.
Lewin-Epstein, N., & Levanon, A. (2005) 'National Identity, and Xenophobia in an Ethnically Divided Society', International Journal on Multicultural Societies, 7(2), 90-118.
Lo, J. (2000) 'Beyond Happy Hybridity: Performing Asian-Australian Identities'. In I. Ang, S. Chalmers, L. Law & M. Thomas (eds.), Alter/Asians: Asian-Australian Identities in Art, Media and Popular Culture, (pp. 152-168), Sydney, Pluto Press.
Lo, J. (2006) 'Disciplining Asian Australian Studies: Projections and Introjections', Journal of Intercultural Studies, 27(1-2), 11-27.
McAllister, I. (1997) 'Political Culture and National Identity'. In B. Galligan, I. McAllister & J. Ravenhill (eds.), New Developments in Australian Politics, (pp. 3-22), Melbourne, Macmillan Education Australia.
McAllister, I., & Moore, R. (1991) 'The Development of Ethnic Prejudice: An Analysis of Australian Immigrants', Ethnic and Racial Studies, 14, 127-151.
Mirza, M. (2006) 'Diversity. Isn't The Way', The Australian, 18 October, p. 29.
Pakulski, J., & Tranter, B. (2000) 'Civic Identity, in Australia', Australian Journal of Social Issues, 35(1), 35-51.
Phillips, T. (1996) 'Symbolic Boundaries and National Identity in Australia', British Journal of Sociology, 47, 113-134.
Phillips, T. (1997). Australian Identity in the 1980s: A Quantitative Sociological Analysis. The University. of Queensland, Brisbane.
Phillips, T. (1998) 'Popular Views about Australian Identity: Research and Analysis', Journal of Sociology, 34(3), 281-302.
Phillips, T., & Holton, R. (2004) 'Personal Orientations Towards National Identity Among British-born Residents', Ethnic and Racial Studies, 2 7(5), 732-756.
Reed, J. S. (1975/76) 'Needles in Haystacks: Studying "Rare" Populations By Secondary Data Analysis of National Sample Surveys', Public Opinion Quarterly, 39, 514-522.
Robertson, R. (1992) Globalization: Social Theory and Global Culture, London, Sage.
Schlesinger, P. (1991) Media, State and Nation: Political Violence and Collective Identities, London, Sage.
Smith, A. (1991) National Identity, London, Penguin.
Smith, T., & Jarkko, L. (1998). National Pride: A Cross-National Analysis. Chicago: National Opinion Research Centre, University of Chicago.
Thomas, M. (2003) 'Hanging Out in Westfield Parramatta'. In M. Butcher & M. Thomas (eds.), Ingenious: Emerging Youth Cultures in Urban Australia, (pp. 102-124), Sydney, Pluto Press.
Tololyan, K. (1991) 'The Nation State and its Others: In Lieu of a Preface', Diaspora, 1(1), 3-7.
Turner, G. (1994)Making it National: Nationalism and Australian Popular Culture, Sydney, Allen & Unwin.
Wickes, R., Smith, P., & Phillips, T. (2006) 'Gender and National Identity: Lessons from the Australian Case', Australian Journal of Political Science, 41(3), 289-307.
Wise, A. (2003) 'On Youth, Hybridity and the Politics of Representing the East Timorese Community'. In M. Butcher & M. Thomas (eds.), Ingenious: Emerging Youth Cultures in Urban Australia, (pp. 85-102), Sydney, Pluto Press.
Wong, L. (2002) 'Home Away From Home? Transnationalism and the Canadian Citizenship Regime'. In P. Kennedy & V. Roudometof (eds.), Communities Across Borders: New Immigrants and Transnational Cultures, (pp. 169-181), London, Routledge.
(1.) The term Asian Australian is an analytic category., which includes Australians of Asian descent. This term exists independently of the subjective experience and captures the diversity' of people who have migrated to Australia from different Asian countries.
(2.) ANZAC day began on the 25 April 1916, the anniversary of the landing of Australian and New Zealand soldiers at Gallipoli.
(3.) For example, at the 2006 Australian Football League (AFL) Grand Final Breakfast, Prime Minister John Howard and Leader of the Opposition Kim Beazley talked about the importance of Australia's sporting heritage as a unifying symbol of Australian identity.
(4.) Gibson et al (2004).
(5.) Historian Geoffrey Blainey and One Nation Leader Pauline Hanson expressed concern that Asian immigration was too high in the 1980s and 1990s.
Table 1. Asian Australian Respondents in the AuSSA(2003) survey Identifying with Asia Markers (N) (a) Parent born in Asia 215 (b) Born in Asia with Asian parents 185 (c) Born outside Asia/Asian parents 57 (d) Language spoken at home Asian 151 (e) Identify with Asian ancestry 177 Total Respondents who identify with one of the above items 273 Source: The Australian Survey of Social Attitudes, 2003 Table 2. Birthplace of Asian Australian respondents, AuSSA (2003) Birthplace Respondents Australia 58 South-East Asia 103 North-East Asia 46 Southern and Central Asia 37 Other 29 Total 273 Source: The Australian Survey of Social Attitudes, 2003 Table 3. Factor analysis of what it means to be truly Australian Being Truly Australian means ... Factor matrix (Varimax Rotation) Factor 1 Factor 2 Born in Australia 0.84 0.12 Have Australian ancestry 0.79 0.13 Lived in Australia most of one's life 0.76 0.24 Speak English 0.48 0.47 Be Christian 0.47 0.23 Respect Australian political institutions and laws -0.01 0.79 Australian citizenship 0.32 0.69 Feel Australian 0.29 0.66 Eigenvalue 2.54 1.88 Variance Explained (%) 31.80 23.60 Number of Cases (N) 4270 Source: Australian Survey of Social Attitudes 2003 (N = 4270) Table 4. Factor analysis of national pride Proud of ... Factor matrix (Varimax Rotation) Factor 1 Factor 2 The way democracy works 0.74 0.11 Political influence in the world 0.77 0.19 Economic achievements 0.73 0.31 Social security system 0.64 0.21 Fair and equal treatment all groups 0.50 0.42 Its history 0.21 0.73 Achievements in sport 0.12 0.73 Defence forces 0.23 0.70 Achievements arts and literature 0.22 0.65 Scientific achievements 0.49 0.51 Eigenvalue 2.80 2.59 Variance Explained (%) 27.99 25.92 Number of Cases (N) 4270 Source: Australian Survey of Social Attitudes 2003 (N = 4270) Table 5. Attitudes towards an ascribed identity among Asian Australians * Response Categories Very Fairly Not Very Important Important important Truly Australian means ... (%) (%) (%) (a) Speak English 51 37 12 (b) Lived in Australia most of 23 46 28 one's life (c) Be Christian 17 13 28 (d) Being born in Australia 12 19 47 (e) Have Australian Ancestry 8 16 44 Response Categories Not Important Total at all (N) Truly Australian means ... (%) (a) Speak English 1 156 (b) Lived in Australia most of 3 156 one's life (c) Be Christian 43 156 (d) Being born in Australia 22 156 (e) Have Australian Ancestry 32 156 * The question was 'Some people say the following things are important for being truly Australian. Others say they are not important. How important do you think each thing is? Source: 2003 Australian Survey of Social Attitudes (N = 156). Note 1: The original survey items (variables) included five response options (values), very important, fairly- important, not very important, not important at all and can't choose. The 'can't choose' option and missing values were recoded to the mean value of each item. Note 2: The AuSSA (2003) was divided into Part A and Part B. Analysis for the above question was restricted to the people who answered Part B of the 2003 AuSSA). This reduced the sample size of Asian Australian respondents from 273 to 156. Table 6. Effects of background experiences on attitudes towards an ascribed identity among Asian Australians Asian Australians Asian Australians (n = 156) (n = 156) (b) (beta) (Constant) 14.37 *** Education (university educated) -.43 .07 Occupation (professional) -.95 -.16 ** Gender (male) -.20 -.03 Age (18-34) -.98 -.15 * Age (50 and over) .75 .12 Generation (1st Gen) -1.39 -.19 *** Family Status (single) -.50 -.09 Adjusted [R.sup.2] -.09 Source: Australian Survey of Social Attitudes, 2003 (N = 156). Note 1: b: Unstandardised regression coefficient. Note 2: beta: standardised regression coefficient p value (p < 10 = *, p < .05 = **, p < .01 = ***). Note 3: For aspects of social background, the four ordinal level factors (education, occupation, gender, age, generation and family status) have been specified in simple binaric dummy variable form. Note 4: The Appendix provides scoring details and means for all variables included in the multiple regression analyses. Table 7. Asian Australian attitudes towards cultural pride * Response Categories Very Somewhat Not Very Proud proud Proud Feel Proud of Australia's ... (%) (%) (%) (a) Sport Achievements 55 40 5 (b) Scientific Achievements 37 46 13 (c) Defence Forces 28 52 15 (d) Arts and Literature 21 59 18 Achievements (e) History 19 47 26 Response Categories Not proud Total at all Feel Proud of Australia's ... (%) N (a) Sport Achievements 0 156 (b) Scientific Achievements 4 156 (c) Defence Forces 5 156 (d) Arts and Literature 3 156 Achievements (e) History 7 156 * The question was 'How proud are you of Australian in each of the following?' Source: 2003 Australian Survey of Social Attitudes (N = 156) Note 1: The AuSSA (2003) was divided into Part A and Part B. Analysis for the above question was restricted to the people who answered Part B of the 2003 (AuSSA). This reduced the sample size of Asian Australian respondents from 273 to 156. Table 8. Effects of background experiences on levels of cultural pride among Asian Australians * Asian Australians Asian Australians (n = 156) (n = 156) (b) (beta) (Constant) 16.08 *** Education (university educated) -.99 -.18 *** Occupation (professional) -.43 -.08 Gender (male) .51 .10 Age (18-34) -.34 -.06 Age (50 and over) .11 .02 Generation (1st Gen) -.30 -.05 Family Status (single) -.13 -.02 Adjusted [R.sup.2] -.02 Source: Australian Survey of Social Attitudes, 2003 (N = 156). Note 1: b: Unstandardised regression coefficient. Note 2: beta: standardised regression coefficient p value (p < .10 = *, p < .05 = **, p < .01 = ***). Note 3: For aspects of social background, the four ordinal level factors (education, occupation, gender, age, generation and family status) have been specified in simple binaric dummy variable form. Note 4: The Appendix provides scoring details and means for all variables included in multiple regression analyses. Table 9. Effects of background experiences on attitudes towards an 'Australian cultural identity' among Asian Australians Asian Australians Asian Australians (n=156) (n=156) (b) (beta) (Constant) 16.08 *** Education (university educated) -.99 -.18 *** Occupation (professional) -.43 -.08 Gender (male) .51 .10 Age (18-34) -.34 -.06 Age (50 and over) .11 .02 Generation (1st Gen) -.30 -.05 Family Status (single) -.13 -.02 Adjusted (R.sup.2) .02 Source: Australian Survey of Social Attitudes, 2003 (N = 156). Note 1: b: Unstandardised regression coefficient. Note 2: beta: standardised regression coefficient p value (p < .10 = *, p < .05 = **, p < .01 = ***). Note 3: For aspects of social background, the four ordinal level factors (education, occupation, gender, age, generation and family status) have been specified in simple binaric dummy variable form. Note 4: The Appendix provides scoring details and means for all variables included in multiple regression analyses.
|Printer friendly Cite/link Email Feedback|
|Publication:||Australian Journal of Social Issues|
|Date:||Mar 22, 2007|
|Previous Article:||Social policy at the 2004 election.|
|Next Article:||The hopes and fears of older Australians: for self, family, and society.|