Civic participation: Potential differences between ethnic groups

Published September 2007

Background to the research

The Commission for Racial Equality (CRE) commissioned the Policy Research Institute (University of Wolverhampton) to conduct this study in order to develop their thinking around the CRE's integration agenda.

The overall aim of this research was to gain a thorough understanding of any differences between ethnic groups in levels of civic participation, and in motivations, and barriers affecting civic participation, with reference to six types of active non-political participation identified by the Home Office:

• social participation;
• informal volunteering;
• formal volunteering;
• employer supported learning;
• neighbourhood activities; and
• engagement in social networks.

Research was conducted across the UK between October 2006 and February 2007. Research activities included a review of the literature; focus groups using Participatory Appraisal methods; the facilitation of community research with 'hard to reach' groups conducted by focus group participants; a questionnaire survey; and interviews with national experts in policy and practice.

The policy context and existing research

Alongside equality and interaction, civic participation is an important component of the CRE integration agenda and the Government's civil renewal agenda. The value of active participation to wider civil society has been well documented. For example, active participation can provide a range of benefits to individuals and communities in terms of opportunities for meeting and engaging with a wider set of people from different backgrounds and also in terms of opening up more accessible channels to voice concerns about issues affecting them.

The Home Office Citizenship Survey (2005) findings suggest that half the people in England and Wales engage in some form of volunteering, and that the most poplar types of activity are 'fundraising/sponsored activity' and 'advice-giving'. Key motivations include being directly asked to participate, and having friends or family who are already involved. The opportunity to improve job prospects or skills is also an important incentive. The main barriers to participation include time commitments - particularly work commitments - and lack of awareness of opportunities to participate.

The 2005 survey also found that participation rates among the ethnic minority populations as a whole were lower than for the majority white population, particularly with respect to formal volunteering. These differences were due to lower participation among Asian and Chinese groups. For other ethnic minority groups, participation rates were either the same as, or higher than, for the majority population.

The same survey showed that people who were actively involved in religion were more likely to participate in formal and informal volunteering than those who were not, and this was particularly true for white people. Participation in all forms of voluntary activities was higher among those who had formal educational qualifications, particularly with formal volunteering.

Other research studies (2001 Citizenship survey; Fahmy, 2003; Williams, 2003) have shown that those with higher incomes, and those living in more affluent areas, demonstrate higher levels of civic participation. Similarly, poor households and those reporting high levels of material and social deprivation report lower levels of involvement in political, social, voluntary or community activity.

In the light of recent research (Kenway et al, 2007) showing that the level of poverty is significantly higher among certain ethnic minority groups in Britain than among others, it may be supposed that the barriers to civic participation highlighted above may disproportionately affect certain ethnic groups.

The role of social capital, both individual and collective, is an important element in civic participation and can also help explain differential participation rates. However, where certain ethnic groups demonstrate social capital, research has shown that this can sometimes be confined within the same groups (see Li, 2005 and Coutts et al., 2007). The same conclusion is reflected in research conducted by Ipsos MORI, which found that there is little interaction between ethnic groups, with fewer than half of white Britons mixing with people from different ethnic groups (Ipsos MORI, 2007).

According to some, this inclination to associate only with people from one's own ethnic group runs counter to integration. According to others, the building of 'bonds' (i.e. close ties within homogenous groups) within ethnic groups can be an important and necessary step in building 'bridges' (that is, links between different groups), and thus it may actually contribute to greater integration.

Levels of civic participation

Overall levels of participation in all activity types were largely similar across ethnic groups. However, for informal volunteering and engagement in social networks, there were some differences. The Indian ethnic group for example showed highest participation rates, followed closely by the Pakistani ethnic group. Similarly for formal volunteering, the South Asian ethnic group showed the highest participation rates.

Of those identifying a religious belief, highest rates of participation in formal volunteering were among Hindus, followed by Sikhs and Muslims. Christians showed the lowest level of participation.

More than a third (39%) of participants, particularly Pakistani and Black ethnic groups, considered that people's ethnicity did have a bearing on people's involvement in community activities and nearly half (44%) thought that religion has a bearing on people's involvement in community activities. Muslims were more likely (68%) to indicate they enjoyed civic participation than their Christian counterparts (45%).

In terms of deprivation, those participants from the top 10% most deprived areas in the country showed lower participation rates than those from less deprived areas. The differences in participation rates were particularly stark for formal volunteering (0% and 38%) and neighbourhood activities (10% and 46%).

Motivations for civic participation

The research found that motivating factors were influenced by both altruistic and individualistic concerns, ranging from personal, practical and social motivations to economic, cultural and religious motivations. The 'big 5' motivations for civic participation identified by the focus groups and the questionnaires were:

• making friends;
• helping;
• being part of a community;
• interest; and
• personal development.

The idea of wanting to be helpful, and 'to do something useful' was expressed by two-thirds of the sample (64%), who felt it 'important' to participate in civic activities. Of this group, the Black and Indian ethnic groups were most likely to attach this social value to community participation, followed by Pakistanis and Bangladeshis.

Enjoyment, interest and personal satisfaction were also motivating factors identified by the majority of respondents. Just over half (57%) of the questionnaire sample identified these factors regardless of ethnicity or religion. Other reasons provided ranged from more practical immediate benefits, such as improved health or English language skills, to broader social aims, such as working to tackle injustices, or engaging in culture exchange.

The study revealed that people define their 'community' in terms of a wider geographical area than their own neighbourhood, often referring to ethnic or religious identities. As part of this there was a keen interest in giving something back to the wider community and engaging in the sharing of cultural practices. The ultimate goal expressed across ethnic minority groups was to establish greater understanding and harmony between people and cultures.

The majority of respondents felt there were differential rates of civic participation according to ethnic identity. However there were differences in opinion about the extent to which deprivation or religion had a greater impact.

People from ethnic minority groups were more likely than White/White British participants (57%) to feel that it is important to take part in community activities. Indeed, focus group discussion revealed that people from some ethnic minority groups appeared to value the spirit of 'community' more than did those from the majority White population, even if their definitions of 'community' were often based on their own ethnic identity.

Being affiliated to a religious organisation, regardless of ethnicity, seemed to play an important role in motivating people to engage in civic participation. Key factors identified included the civic spaces made available by religious institutions, and the framework of values that a given religion provided.

A range of other motivating factors were also explored, including deprivation. It was found that while those in the top 10% most deprived areas in the UK indicated less knowledge and enjoyment of civic participation, they were also more likely to indicate that civic participation is important (80%). Some expressed a greater degree of motivation to tackle the higher levels of crime experienced in their neighbourhoods.

Barriers to civic participation:

The research revealed a range of barriers from personal, practical and social barriers to economic, cultural and religious barriers. The 'big 5' barriers to civic participation were a combination of practical and social barriers:

• lack of time;
• family commitments;
• work commitments;
• crime and vandalism; and
• racism and religious hatred.

Regardless of ethnicity, 'lack of time' was the main reason given for why people did not engage in community activities, particularly for those in full time work.

Nevertheless, a third of the respondents (33%) felt that their own ethnicity was an influential factor in their levels of civic participation. A fear of crime and racism, particularly in the areas where they lived, was frequently cited by people from ethnic minority groups as a barrier to civic participation. For some, particularly the Gypsy/Traveller participants, overt racism was a frequent experience.

Another barrier highlighted, particularly by ethnic minority respondents, was that many organisations were simply perceived as not being culturally relevant to them.

Furthermore, nearly half of the respondents (44%) were either unsure or had no knowledge about community activities in their area. This lack of knowledge seemed disproportionately to affect groups that were already excluded, particularly ethnic minority groups with specific language needs.

The issue of 'community confidence' was also raised by a number of respondents from ethnic minorities who felt that they did not have the same 'rights' or were not as well equipped to voice their views as the majority population. This seemed to be particularly significant for those with English language difficulties, and for particular sub-groups within ethnic minority groups, such as women and children.

A number of issues were raised about how the lack of understanding on the part of existing community organisations about religion and religious needs can serve to exclude certain religious groups. For example, the lack of women-only environments was stressed and questions were raised about the suitability of certain locations where alcohol was served.

Over a third (39%) of respondents felt that their level of income influenced how much they were able to take part. The majority of responses indicated that concerns about low income always took priority over civic participation and, as research elsewhere shows, this can disproportionately affect ethnic minority populations.

It was also found that the nature of employment for particular ethnic groups, for example in the retail and catering business sector, restricted the extent to which people were able to engage in mainstream civic activities.
Finally, a common theme raised by people of all ethnic groups was the lack of opportunities to participate for people living in deprived areas, because of the lack of community facilities coupled with concerns about safety.