Mapping (In)Formal Francophone Spaces: Exploring Community Cohesion Through a Mobilities Lens

Abstract

Immigration is being used as a policy lever to sustain the demography of Canadian Francophone minority communities (FMCs). As FMCs become increasingly diverse, concerns have been raised regarding their capacity to develop and sustain a sense of community cohesion. This study draws on the mobilities paradigm to examine how community members within three different FMCs engaged within and beyond formal and informal Francophone spaces within the cities of Metro Vancouver, Winnipeg and Moncton. Using an occupational mapping method to elicit spatial and dialogic data, we analyze the descriptions of maps from 62 French-speaking participants who were born in, or who immigrated to, Canada in order to obtain diverse perspectives on community cohesion. Our findings are presented according to three themes. The first addresses socio-geographically shaped mobilities within the three FMCs, the second examines participants’ engagement in a range of (in)formal Francophone spaces, and the third explores their convergent and divergent mobilities as shaped by local dynamics. We contribute insights into the relationship between forms of spatial and social mobility that shape experiences of community cohesion within FMCs.

1. Introduction

Our study explored people’s perceptions and experiences of community cohesion within Canadian Francophone minority communities (FMCs) that are experiencing ongoing demographic shifts due to the federal government’s strategic priority to bolster these communities through immigration [1,2,3]. FMCs are communities of French speakers who reside outside of Canada’s only officially Francophone province of Quebec [4]. A key objective of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act [5] was to use immigration as a demographic lever to enhance the development of Canadian FMCs. More recently, the Policy on Francophone Immigration, highlights five key action areas: a Francophone lens; admissions targets for French-speaking permanent residents; actions across the immigration continuum (i.e., promotion, selection, integration); multi-stakeholder collaboration; and data and research [3]. The federal government has enshrined its commitment to demographically supporting Francophone and Acadian communities through its modernisation of the Official Languages Act (Bill C-13) [6] and continues to augment Francophone immigration targets as a percentage of total admissions, despite cutting overall immigration targets in absolute numbers, describing these measures as ‘ambitious and historic’ [7]. Within this political context, researchers have sought to better understand the implications of these initiatives in the daily lives of French-speaking immigrants and the FMCs they settle within [8,9,10].

Studies have highlighted the importance of creating ties between newly arrived and long-settled members of FMCs, for instance through employment opportunities and supporting forms of social participation [11,12,13]. Mianda’s [11] study on the triple minoritization experienced by Francophone immigrants from sub-Saharan African countries centres analysis on gender, race, and language. Findings showed that challenges to integrating the labour market, particularly the Francophone labour market, negatively impacted the participants’ attachment to the French language and their sense of inclusion within the community. Piquemal et al. [13] also examined barriers to integration experienced by immigrants as part of their study, highlighting among them minoritized languages and identities, as well as the lack of recognition of pre-existing skills and credentials. Findings point toward the role of ethnocultural communities serving as a form of ‘sanctuary’ for immigrants who are mediating a range of challenges, arguing the need to better support and include them within welcoming Francophone communities.

Our earlier research [14,15] is one of few studies, if not the only to date, that has specifically examined perceptions and experiences of community cohesion in FMCs undergoing increased demographic diversification in light of immigration. In examining this issue further, the present study addresses how both foreign-born and Canadian-born community members engaged within and beyond their respective FMCs. Empirical research addressing Francophone immigration has mostly focused on a few key aspects. Studies have addressed issues related to governance of migration and service provision, with a particular focus on settlement services [16,17]. A range of studies across disciplines have explored immigrants’ experiences within FMCs and Francophone spaces within those communities. Many of these have focused mainly on the role of more ‘formal’ spaces, such as healthcare settings [18], French first-language schools [19,20], Francophone associations, organizations, and places of worship [21,22]. For example, Delaisse et al. [21] conducted an ethnography of three different spaces within Metro Vancouver’s FMC and described these as ‘landmarks’ providing visibility to the existence of a Francophone community existing within a broader Anglo-dominant society. Their work was also useful in highlighting the ways this FMC acted as a ‘third space’ providing opportunities for immigrants that differed from what was available in the larger mainstream English-speaking community as well as in their small ethno-cultural communities [23].

What remains largely absent from the literature is research providing a deeper understanding of where and how community members engage in and beyond formal, physical spaces within FMCs. An exclusive focus on formal spaces can overlook the diverse realities of community life and arguably reproduces dominant spatial representations. More work is required that highlights the informal spaces where French-speakers engage in a range of activities across their daily lives and how they access these. The mobilities paradigm was adopted as a theoretical framework to inform the analysis and presentation of findings in this paper. Hannam et al. [24] described the mobilities paradigm as the critical study of both mobility and immobility, encompassing “the large-scale movements of people, objects, capital and information across the world, as well as the more local processes of daily transportation, movement through public space and the travel of material things within everyday life” (p. 1). Rather than centre analyses on distinct spaces or populations, proponents of the mobilities paradigm argue that the networks through which people move and engage in daily life need to be understood in their relationality [25]. This theoretical lens is useful for examining ways that social inequalities or precarity may be shaped through people’s spatial and temporal experiences of (im)mobility as mobility is framed as a resource that not all have equitable access to [26]. For instance, in considering the role of critical geography in studies of precarity, Waite [26] argued that the concept is characterized by a double-edge “as it implies both a condition and a possible rallying point for resistance” (p. 412). Her work draws on the example low-paid migrant workers in the United Kingdom (UK) to explore labour market precarity. Smith and Hall [27] further called attention to the ways some experience more privilege within “[…] an uneven relational landscape of mobilities” (p. 500). In their ethnographic study of outreach workers in the UK they identify the varied mobile practices of these ‘street level bureaucrats’. Likewise, Riaño et al. [28] pointed to the importance of control over one’s spatial mobilities in order for them to function as a resource. These arguments echo Bourdieu’s [29] point that in order for resources to operate as forms of capital they must be convertible, thus being shaped by social relations of power.

We wondered whether the presence of diverse community members, both born in Canada and abroad, within shared spaces may be an indication of community cohesion. The concept of social or community cohesion typically refers to mutual trust between individuals of shared locality. As understandings of the term have been further developed, the concept has expanded to encompass notions of shared identity, respect, and high levels of social interaction among other characteristics [30,31]. Gaffikin and Morrissey [32] argued that building an integrated and cohesive community can be supported in three ways: (1) through a shared vision of the future and a sense of belonging, (2) emphasis on shared elements between new communities and those already established, in parallel with valuing diversity such as through democratic dialogue, and (3) the presence of solid and positive relationships between people of different horizons. We drew upon the mobilities paradigm to study how Francophone participants, including both those born in Canada and those born abroad, engaged within and beyond the FMC in their daily lives and how their respective mobilities can help us understand some of the local-level spatial dynamics shaping community cohesion.

2. Materials and Methods

We undertook a multi-sited qualitative study in three Canadian cities: Metro Vancouver, British Columbia; Winnipeg, Manitoba; and Moncton, New Brunswick. The design was informed by ethnographic methodology incorporating several methods through a community-engaged approach [33,34]. The first stage involved a critical analysis of documents published by relevant national stakeholders. The second stage involved data collection with key informants representing provincial and federal stakeholders, as well as a range of community organizations within each of the study sites. The third stage entailed data collection with community members using two methods, in-depth interviews and occupational mapping (i.e., drawn mental maps outlining daily routines). Interview questions addressed participants’ perceptions of their communities’ openness to diversity, their social participation in local Francophone spaces, their interactions with community members, and other details regarding their daily lived experiences related to their intersectional identities within the FMCs. This article presents findings from analysis of data co-created through the occupational mapping method [35]. Additional findings from stages one, two and three are published elsewhere [36,37,38].

In addition to dialogue-based methods, such as in-depth interviews, the incorporation of visual elicitation methods can support the co-construction of knowledge in particular ways. The process of creating the visual image or map can serve as a thinking aid and enable more dynamic interactions between participants and researchers, helping to uncover the practices, performances, and mobilities of daily life [39,40,41]. The approach generates a process and a product as the occupational maps are created and explained by participants, often through storytelling about their experiences in the different places included in their drawing. Given the participant-driven approach and flexibility enabled by this visual method, occupational maps can enable a multisensory way of expressing lived experiences. The participants decide what to include on their maps, helping to redress some of the power imbalances in research [39,41,42,43]. The maps can also help participants “show” the relevant places in their lives that researchers may not be able to access [40]. This method was particularly useful for applying our mobilities theoretical framework methodologically since, as explained by Powell: “more than providing a sense of the physical spaces that we traverse through, maps can shed light on the ways in which we traverse, encounter, and construct racial, ethnic, gendered, and political boundaries” [42] (p. 553).

As part of the data collection sessions in stage three of our study, participants were asked to create an occupational map to generate information complementing their narratives shared during the interview. This method helped to more deeply explore the participants’ mobilities and to understand some of the spatial dynamics characterizing the FMCs. Participants were given the following prompt: ‘On this sheet of paper, can you draw the places that you go to during a typical week and weekend (in your daily life)? Can you describe for me what you draw, what these places are, how you get there and what you do there? (i.e., Describe a typical routine)’. In addition to the visual map created, the elicitation process was audio-recorded to generate a verbatim transcript of the session that was then de-identified to protect participants’ confidentiality. The occupational maps provide insights into where participants engaged socially, shedding light on both the formal and informal spaces characterizing their mobilities within the local Francophonie. Thus, the maps helped us identify the varied spaces/places that formed the basis of their routines, as well as the different mobilities enacted to access these spaces throughout the region.

62 community members participated in stage three and generated maps that were included in the analysis. To be included in this stage, participants had to be 18 years of age or older, be born in Canada or have moved to Canada from another country, and be able to participate in an interview in French. A convenience approach was initially used and then recruitment shifted toward a more purposeful approach aiming for maximum variation to provide a range of perspectives and experiences. We specifically included participants who were born in Canada as well as participants who immigrated to Canada as many existing studies tend to focus on either one population or the other. A description of the participant sample is included in

Table 1. Demographic characteristics of participants by study site.

City	Vancouver (n = 24)		Winnipeg (n = 25)		Moncton (n = 13)
Variables	Number	Percentage	Number	Percentage	Number	Percentage
Gender
Man	10	42%	13	52%	6	46%
Woman	14	58%	11	44%	7	54%
Unspecified	0	0%	1	4%	0	0%
Age range
18–24	1	4%	1	4%	0	0%
25–34	6	25%	1	4%	10	77%
35–44	7	29%	4	16%	2	15%
45–54	4	17%	10	40%	1	8%
55+	6	25%	9	36%	0	0%
Marital status
Never married	7	29%	2	8%	5	38%
Married	8	33%	17	68%	3	23%
Common law	3	13%	1	4%	2	15%
Separated	1	4%	2	8%	1	8%
Divorced	2	8%	1	4%	2	15%
Widowed	1	4%	2	8%	0	0%
Other	2	8%	0	0%	0	0%
Children				0%
Yes	11	46%	22	88%	3	23%
No	13	54%	3	12%	10	77%
Level of education
Less than secondary diploma	0	0%	1	4%	0	0%
Secondary diploma	1	4%	1	4%	1	8%
Technical diploma	0	0%	2	8%	0	0%
College	4	17%	1	4%	3	23%
University (Bachelor)	5	21%	8	32%	6	46%
University (Post-graduate)	14	58%	12	48%	3	23%
Employment status
Unemployed	1	4%	0	0%	1	8%
Part time	0	0%	0	0%	3	23%
Full time	20	83%	25	100%	7	54%
Independent worker/Entrepreneur	1	4%	0	0%	1	8%
Retired	2	8%	0	0%	0	0%
Student	0	0%	0	0%	1	8%
Country/region of birth
Abroad	12	50%	13	52%	11	85%
South Africa	0	0%	0	0%	1	8%
Belgium	0	0%	1	4%	0	0%
Brazil	0	0%	0	0%	1	8%
Burkina Faso	0	0%	0	0%	1	8%
Burundi	1	4%	0	0%	0	0%
Cameroon	0	0%	1	4%	0	0%
China	0	0%	0	0%	1	8%
Republic of the Congo	1	4%	0	0%	1	8%
Ivory Coast	0	0%	1	4%	1	8%
El Salvador	0	0%	0	0%	1	8%
France	4	17%	4	16%	0	0%
French Guiana	1	4%	0	0%	0	0%
Haiti	0	0%	1	4%	0	0%
Mali	0	0%	1	4%	2	15%
Morocco	0	0%	1	4%	1	8%
Martinique	1	4%	0	0%	0	0%
Niger	0	0%	0	0%	1	8%
Poland	0	0%	0	0%	0	0%
Rwanda	1	4%	0	0%	0	0%
Senegal	0	0%	2	8%	0	0%
Sri Lanka	1	4%	0	0%	0	0%
Togo	1	4%	0	0%	0	0%
Tunisia	1	4%	1	4%	0	0%
Unspecified	0	0%	0	0%	0	0%
In Canada	12	50%	12	48%	2	15%
British Columbia	2	8%	0	0%	0	0%
Manitoba	1	4%	5	20%	0	0%
New-Brunswick	1	4%	0	0%	2	15%
Ontario	0	0%	4	16%	0	0%
Quebec	8	33%	2	8%	0	0%
Unspecified	0	0%	1	4%	0	0%
Status upon arrival (for immigrants)
Refugee	4	17%	0	0%	0	0%
Work permit	4	17%	1	4%	1	8%
Travel-work permit	1	4%	0	0%	0	0%
Family reunification	1	4%	2	8%	0	0%
Study permit	1	4%	2	8%	10	91%
Provincial nominee	0	0%	3	12%	0	0%
Qualified worker	0	0%	5	20%	0	0%
Express entry	0	0%	0	0%	0	0%
Unspecified	1	4%	0	0%	0	0%
Time in city of data collection
Between 0 and 5 years	12	50%	2	8%	0	0%
Between 6 and 10 years	3	13%	3	12%	9	69%
More than ten years	9	38%	20	80%	4	31%

.

While the participant sample in all three sites had a similar gender balance some differences across sites are noted. The overall sample size in Moncton is smaller and comprises a higher number of immigrant participants than in the other sites. The participants in Moncton were generally younger (with over half of them being under the age of 35), likely since the majority were there on a study permit. This is also reflected in a lower number of participants in Moncton who were married, had children, or were working full-time. Comparatively, the participants in Winnipeg were generally older. More than half were over 45 years or older, were married, had children, and all were working full time. Vancouver had the most recently arrived immigrants and the highest number of refugees of the three sites. The majority of participants across all sites had at least a university degree. The total sample reflects a broad range of countries of origin and while not statistically representative of the FMCs, does reflect the multiculturalism characterizing these communities.

Findings shared below were generated through a two-stage analysis process. First, the content of each individual map was summarized to identify the types of places (e.g., grocery stores, workplaces, parks), as well as occupations (e.g., errands, work, leisure) participants included on their maps. Once this general understanding of the maps was completed, the second stage entailed a line-by-line coding of the transcripts generated through the occupational mapping elicitation method using an inductive approach. The codes developed through this stage were then reviewed and collapsed into categories. The researchers in each city conducted the analysis of the maps and transcripts generated within their study site. The full research team then met to discuss their respective analyses and to synthesize the findings into the themes described below. All data collection occurred in French and the French-language transcripts were analyzed. Direct quotations included below have been translated by the first author and checked by the researchers who conducted the interviews. All team research team members are fluent in French and English. Ethics approval was obtained from all institutions involved (University of British Columbia, H22-00047; University of Manitoba, HE2022-0045; Université de Moncton, 2122-080).

3. Results

The cities included in this analysis provide interesting cases for analysis given their varied demographic and geographic profiles. Vancouver is located on the west coast of the country in the Pacific Northwest region, Winnipeg is located in the heart of the Canadian prairie provinces, and Moncton is located in the country’s Eastern maritime provinces.

Table 2. Population characteristics of the Vancouver, Winnipeg and Moncton Census Metropolitan Areas [44,45,46].

	Vancouver CMA	Winnipeg CMA	Moncton CMA
Total population	2,642,825	834,678	157,717
Knowledge of official languages (French only and English and French combined)	172,060 (6.5%)	83,730 (10%)	76,020 (48.2%)
Immigrant population	1,089,185 (41.2%)	207,950 (25.9%)	13,345 (8.5%)

highlights a few demographic characteristics of the Census Metropolitan Area (CMA) for each of these cities drawn from the 2021 Canadian Census. Key differences are noted, such as the comparatively higher proportion of French-speakers concentrated in Moncton’s population as compared to Winnipeg and Vancouver, as well as the much higher immigrant-richness of Vancouver’s population as compared to Winnipeg’s and Moncton’s.

Essentially, these cities highlight the diversity of FMCs across the country, underscoring the importance of studying different urban centres in order to generate a more nuanced understanding of community members’ experiences within these localities. In this section addressing socio-geographically shaped mobilities, we begin by providing a brief description of each of the cities and sharing how participants described their routines while drawing their maps. We address how their respective contexts were shown to shape their mobilities. In the next section, we more specifically examine the (in)formal Francophone spaces that participants described engaging in. As part of the final theme, we explore convergent and divergent mobilities as identified in the analysis of participants’ maps and their accompanying narratives.

3.1. Socio-Geographically Shaped Mobilities

Vancouver is one of the main immigrant-receiving metropolitan regions in Canada with one of the highest costs of living in the country. Our findings suggest that the city is characterized by relatively high rates of turnover as people may settle for a time, but do not necessarily stay long term. As shown above in Table 2, the FMC itself has a high proportion of immigrants. The region also receives high rates of migration from other parts of Canada, with the number of Francophones born and raised in the city relatively low as compared to the other study sites. This was reflected in the demographics of the study participants as many of the Canadian-born participants in Vancouver were not born in British Columbia. The Metropolitan region has several municipalities, with many formal Francophone spaces and services concentrated in Vancouver, but many participants living and/or working in other municipalities within the region (e.g., Surrey, Richmond). Even among those who lived in Vancouver, many described being highly mobile through the region and surrounding areas (e.g., Whistler). Thus, participants’ maps highlighted comparatively high levels of mobility, such as commuting for work and accessing varied outdoor spaces for leisure and recreation (e.g., cycling paths, beaches, mountains). The maps of participants from Vancouver illustrated the region’s many different transportation modalities, including personal vehicles, public transit and cycling.

During the mapping elicitation, Alex spoke to the different modalities used to get around the region, including cycling, car and public transit:

Afterwards, the school [in the Francophone school board] where I primarily work, is here. […] I try to go by bike, but it’s really like up and down [hilly]. Sometimes I abandon all, I take the car, sometimes I take the bus but it’s like two buses and each time that I arrive here, the other one passes me by. […] So I can take the bus to go. But, yeah it’s not easy, if not, a bus I use a lot is [bus route number]. And, in reality because I really love—yeah or otherwise I go by bike. The street [X], it’s like one of the areas that I use most […], it’s really a magnificent cycling trail.

Facilitated by the region’s comparably milder weather than Winnipeg and Moncton, cycling was identified as a mode of transportation often used by participants in Vancouver, immigrant and Canadian-born alike. That being said, cycling was typically engaged in by participants with more privileged socio-economic backgrounds who lived rather centrally, highlighting how such socio-demographic indicators may have shaped participants’ experience of mobility. For instance, Daniel talked a lot about cycling while drawing his map, particularly while discussing his involvement with a non-profit community-based cycling shop:

It’s a community cycling shop, so a cycling shop that doesn’t belong to a private entity, that belongs to volunteers. It doesn’t have the goal to make a profit, in fact, they are community cycling shops, and so the goal is to, at once, to provide a means of transportation by bike and to, you can learn bike mechanics very easily in fact.

While Winnipeg is smaller than Metro Vancouver, it remains the largest city in Manitoba. Located within the Canadian Prairie region, Winnipeg is characterized by a more affordable cost of living than Metro Vancouver and its Francophone Saint-Boniface neighbourhood offers many opportunities for socio-cultural engagement. Research participants often referred to the “bridge” (i.e., the Provencher bridge) or the river as a key spatial and symbolic marker of a border between the Francophone and Anglophone worlds. As Fleur contends, “We are on the Francophone side of the river.” The centrality of this neighbourhood in the lives of many participants was highlighted by the maps. For instance, while drawing his map (Figure 1), Marc described his routine as being highly localized in Saint-Boniface where his home and workplace are located:

Early here just around 9:00 at the USB [Université Saint-Boniface]. And it’s important that it’s in French, because if not they won’t understand. Same thing when we talk about swimming lessons, when we want to enroll in things like that. The courses have to be in French, otherwise you won’t understand. So the daycare, then I go to the USB and then I cross the street and I go to the office that is just 5 min from here […].

The concentration of Francophone spaces within the Saint-Boniface neighbourhood promotes walkability among French-speakers who reside in that area, in contrast with participants in Vancouver who were dispersed throughout the region characterized by the lack of definitive Francophone neighbourhood such as in Winnipeg. Similarly, Fleur’s map emphasized the centrality of Saint-Boniface in participants’ lives, even among those who worked elsewhere: “My kids go to school here in Saint-Boniface. […] Home from my children’s school it’s 5 min. So work is downtown. It’s the downtown. So I spend a lot of time here, I stop here, I arrive here, I run my errands in Saint-Vital and a bit in Saint-Boniface.”

The presence of a fully Francophone university (i.e., USB), which is absent from Vancouver where post-secondary educational opportunities in French are limited, was noted as an important employer for the French-speaking community of Winnipeg. Laurent described living in a smaller community south of Winnipeg, but commuting to the city to work at the university, which required a personal vehicle given the lack of public transit in the area:

[Interviewer: So for the moment, the vast majority of your local travels are in relation to work […] at Saint-Boniface?] That’s right. So I live in the small community of LaSalle. That is about […] So that, it’s a route that is, let’s say 40- to 45 min. You said you were interested in knowing how I get there then. […] So we go, we would be in a car, there is no bus service, so I come here for work. So that’s, for the moment, that was the case, and has been the case since I was hired, so it’s 5 days a week. Apart from that, my travels are not very numerous. I will go to church.

Similar to the other two cities, Moncton is the largest urban centre in the only officially bilingual province of New Brunswick. An additional unique characteristic of this city as compared to Winnipeg and Vancouver is the presence of the Acadian French-speaking population in the region [47]. Like Winnipeg, Moncton has a Francophone university (i.e., Université de Moncton) that can provide spaces for local French-speakers to engage in routine activities. Yet, one map drawn in Moncton highlighted ‘alternative’ mobilities by drawing spaces that are not central to the formal Acadian community. Apart from the mosque and the WhatsApp social network through which Ousmane maintained transnational connections with his family and country of origin, most of his daily travels were related to his automotive-related work (e.g., garages, Internet sites for buying and selling vehicles, etc.):

During a normal work week, I get up early in the morning to go pray at the mosque. Before, I prayed at the University mosque, but now I come to the mosque that is closest to where I live. And I return home to have breakfast and I go to the [auto shop] situated in [town] twice a week for the purchase of cars or car parts since I buy used or damaged cars and I repair and resell them. That’s why I go to [name]’s garage in [town]. I also frequent a lot of social media sites to buy and sell cars.

The maps enabled us to begin understanding the varied mobilities of diverse community members within these FMCs, as shaped by particular locally relevant characteristics such as the degree to which participants were reliant on personal vehicle travel in light of the factors such as the availability or lack of public transit and cycling paths, the geographic concentration of Francophone spaces, and participants’ perceptions of the inclusivity of ‘traditional’ or historically present Francophone spaces. In the following section we more closely examine the presence of (in)formal francophone spaces identified through the mapping elicitation method.

3.2. (In)Formal Francophone Spaces

Our previous research has paid particular attention to the role of formal Francophone spaces, such as French-language institutions including schools, service providing organizations and places of worship [12,21]. However, findings from this study, particularly those generated through the mapping method, provided additional insights into the role of both formal and informal spaces in the routines and daily lives of participating community members. In this section we address the varied types of locations and spaces (e.g., social, physical and virtual spaces) that were present on the maps as well as the different types of connections that existed between these spaces, or not. The maps included a number of (in)formal spaces within and beyond each city’s Francophone community. One participant in Vancouver, Arielle, described regularly participating in community events related to both her personal and professional interests while drawing her map (Figure 2):

At the time, it was a lot simpler for me because I was in [specific neighbourhood], it was practically every month. […] the Chamber of Commerce did what we called at the time also a 6 to 8. So, I went regularly, so the Chamber of Commerce, I was never a member, given the fact, the membership criteria are that you have to be an entrepreneur. So, I participated […] in the events, without having any particular status in the structure. And same for the [economic organization] it was as … I was very interested in all their events, whether it be events tied to entrepreneurs, whether it be events tied to economic immigration.

In addition to the types of in-person activities described by Arielle that bring community members with shared interests together, the availability of virtual spaces (i.e., spaces that do not exist within a physical location, such as various forms of media, websites, etc.) played a role in some participants’ sense of belonging to the French-speaking community even when they were not engaging in physical or formal Francophone spaces. Eric included a French-language radio broadcaster as an important space on his map given that it provided him with a sense of connection to the French-language population:

I listen to Radio-Canada, to feel part of the community [laughs], despite finding that still a bit… it’s a bit false, but still [Interviewer: A bit false in what sense?] Well in the sense that it’s random news. You know there is one of the local discussions, but it’s not… I get the impression that I am part of the community, because Radio-Canada, I think I make myself believe that it connects me, but I get the sense that it doesn’t connect me that much.

Thus, while acknowledging that his daily interactions with Francophones may be limited while living in the Anglophone-dominant city of Vancouver, he nonetheless maintains a certain degree of symbolic connection to the community by accessing French-language media.

People’s homes represented important ‘Francophone spaces’ within participants’ maps. Many described their social and familial networks and how interacting with others in French often happened within private spaces, rather than always through formal, organized activities hosted by Francophone associations. For instance, Marie’s extended family members lived in France, and her participation in Vancouver’s local FMC occurred at the time of becoming a parent, when her in-laws supported her engagement with the Francophone community:

We always had visits from families from France and I said, “[Mother-in-law], come with me, you will be my entry” (laughs) so she helped me to speak to people and she presented me to everyone, “I’m introducing you to [name]”, that was my entry, with the mothers’ group, we did evenings with mothers in restaurants downtown [Interviewer: It’s informal? Or is there not an organization?] Yes it’s informal it’s the mothers who organize […] [Interviewer: People you met at [Francophone playgroup for toddlers]?] Exactly, mothers who now continue to work in the community, they are professors, they work in daycares, child care services, always in the community, from time to time, I see their updates on Facebook. When I did my daughter’s third birthday, I invited everyone and they are all there.

Similarly, in Winnipeg, Fleur explained that while she does attend more ‘punctual’ cultural activities, she also regularly meets with up with French-speaking friends within one another’s homes:

And sometimes I go once a month or else once in a while to the cultural activities… the [ethnic] community, I see them once a month. But we don’t meet up in Saint-Boniface, we meet in people’s homes… So everyone lives a bit everywhere. […] Francophone community activities are maybe once every three months and that’s in Saint-Boniface. […] There is for example at the [community space] like at the Molière circle, theatre […] or a music concert, or else it’s a reunion, so it’s things like that.

Fleur specified spending time with people from her own ethnic community, in addition to participating in activities with the broader French-speaking community. Working to ensure immigrants from diverse backgrounds feel welcome within Francophone community spaces was raised by some of the Canadian-born participants in recognition of some of the forms of exclusion Francophone immigrants may experience. For example, Josiane identified as an Acadian who had always supported immigrants’ integration, particularly that of international students as she had recently graduated from the Université de Moncton. She shared the following reflection while drawing her map:

The first thing that comes to mind is the environment at the Université de Moncton. Especially in post-graduate studies, there is a large division between international students and students who are White and born in Canada. That is physically visible in classrooms. It’s literally divided. There are very few interactions, there is an atmosphere of people not wanting to go into projects or to mix with people they don’t know.

She elaborated further on this point, going on to explain that:

I’ve mostly observed it in civil society, I worked for an organization where the head of that organization for a long time, there was a racialized woman who was the executive director. She was excellent, she was fabulous and she received a lot of criticism from members of the organization and other people in the civil society environment […]. Like the things they said implied that because she came from elsewhere, she didn’t understand. It was maybe her culture, it was maybe this, it was maybe her accent. But when I wanted to address those things, like what do you really mean by ‘she doesn’t understand how things work here?’ People don’t want to address that.

Interestingly, our findings also served to identify spaces where diverse community members came together, particularly when they shared a core set of values, such as religious beliefs. Ésméralda, who had immigrated to Moncton from a country in Central Africa, described getting to know local members of the community through her involvement with church, illustrating how both language and religion shaped her everyday experiences of the city. However, she described the challenges, also raised by others, of developing longer term relationships with Canadian-born community members:

I have had Acadian acquaintances at the church in Shediac for years, it is a congregation with Acadians. But outside of that space, we will pretend to continue the relationship elsewhere but it doesn’t work. Since these are not friendships as such, it’s really always in a context. We will meet, yes, we laugh, then it’s over. We get together for such and such an event, then it’s over. We will see each other, greet each other, but there is no such bond of friendship.

In this section we see that participants’ experiences within their communities extend beyond the often-studied formal Francophone institutions, such as schools and workplaces. Particularly when community members felt excluded from formal spaces, we observed on their maps and noted in their transcripts, an emphasis on more informal and private spaces where they can interact with friends and family. These examples show how exclusionary practices tied to specific identity markers can redirect mobility patterns toward alternative, more welcoming environments.

3.3. Convergent and Divergent Mobilities

Expanding on the findings from the previous themes, here we discuss the ways that particular community members addressed coming into contact with one another, or not, based on their varied mobilities. Sharing similar thoughts to Ésmérelda above, Mariana explained her openness to developing relationships with the local and international Francophone community and she resented the insular nature of the Acadian community, noting with a little bitterness:

[…] the Francophone spaces that I frequent are mostly immigrants or who have a connection with immigration otherwise there’s no mixing. For example, one, my boss when I worked for the government, our kids were on the same soccer team but we were never together. Another example, I met an Acadian and I invited to a date. He was supposed to call me back, but he never did. I asked him why and he said that it wasn’t a good match him and I, but maybe I asked myself is it because I don’t see myself with his network?

This sense of closure from the Acadian community toward French-speaking immigrants frustrated Mariana who did not anticipate any immediate change to community cohesion: “We have to change with the children because they are the future and it’s with them that we’ll be able to change things.” Participants in other cities also addressed the challenges of making Canadian-born friends. In Vancouver, Samuel described that while most of his friends were Francophone, the majority were from his home country:

I would really like to have Canadian friends, but it’s so difficult to have Canadian friends despite, I have a [friend] who likes being social with everyone. But born and raised in Canada. Here, it was pretty complicated. There are groups and you have to be part of the group. I find that if there is something that is really missing, it’s that. I find … in Europe, you can go out and make friends like that, here, it’s hard. It’s really groups […] I find that a bit unfortunate, everyone keeps to themselves a bit. Or it’s groups. You have your cinema group. You have your sport group. You have your drinking group.

Samuel was then asked if he had any friends who were from Quebec and noted that similarly to the Acadian community described by participants in Moncton, the inter-provincial migrants from Quebec living in Vancouver remained a tight knit group:

With the Québécois, I don’t know, I have a very good friend who is Québécois […]. But’s it’s a Québécois who is well travelled, he is very open to other cultures. I get the impression that here the Québécois are very close, in a group. My Québécois friend, him, already he feels Canadian in fact, so, here, I’ve met some Québécois, who tell me they feel more Québécois than Canadian. There, it’s a little barrier that they put between us.

Furthermore, some participants described challenges making connections beyond the Francophone community, such as Marianne who shared that she mostly met her friends in Vancouver through work and acknowledged that her friendship group is not highly diverse and that she would like to meet more English-speakers:

There are some who have left, we have … well yes, yes, essentially my friends are Francophone yes. Yes, that I tell myself we should panic a bit, that we should meet some Anglophones. [Interviewer: But why?] Well I don’t know, just to say … yesterday I was making a film of my best friend who came here and who sees that all my friends are French … who tells me “you went to the other end of the world…” [Interviewer: when you say Francophone or French?] It would essentially be French.

In Winnipeg, Aicha shared how she engaged in different languages with different people depending on the location:

We’re reproducing the Senegal here, my country of origin here. So as long as I’m at the university, I speak French. Whereas when I’m outside it. Since it’s English, the first sentiment, is that I close in on myself because I can’t communicate… but outside of my workplace, it’s with my network that is mainly composed of Senegalese people.

These examples speak to a form of social immobility that contributes to symbolic borders being drawn between members of the FMCs, where many of the maps elicited reflections on a lack of diversity within personal networks where people often spend most of their social time with people from the same ethnic community or country of origin. The maps also highlighted ways that differing physical mobilities and geographies contributed to participants’ experiences within the communities. Alex explained that she had to travel to different locations within the region for her work, requiring her to be mobile across the larger FMC:

Sometimes, it depends. It’s pretty flexible how I can organize my days. In general, every Wednesday I am in [city]. And three days a week I am at [public school]. And I work from home one day a week. But I also have like this morning, I was in [city] at the Community Center, and that’s just next to, a garden complex where most of the families that I accompany work, so it’s a large immigrant community, a lot of Francophones.

Working with French-speaking clients in a variety of neighbourhoods led Alex to have a detailed map showcasing a range of transportation options used to travel throughout the Metropolitan region.

Within Winnipeg, the Red River that separates Saint-Boniface from the rest of Winnipeg was present on some maps, including the presence of the bridge playing both a physical and symbolic role in connecting the two, such as with Fleur who explained that while she lived in Saint-Boniface, she nonetheless found herself surrounded by Anglophones: “We are on the right, we are on the French side of the river, but when it’s a bit difficult?… I think apart from one of my neighbours, the closest one. All of my other neighbours only speak English. Yeah, on my street, there is only one person who speaks French.” This highlights the challenges of living in a minority community setting despite the presence of dedicated Francophone community spaces. Marc also described the concerted effort needed to actively maintain one’s ties to the Francophone community in a minority setting:

I have built myself a nice little ideal life I can say, it’s the child, a family dog, wife, French. It’s good, I do, I like what I do. And it’s thanks to studying, working. I could have taken courses at the University of Manitoba. A lot, they start at USB, and they go to the UofM and I think it’s ridiculous, that’s me, I don’t like that, it’s here, you stay here, and really it’s… choices, decisions, and I have positioned myself ok, perfectly so that my children can grow up in French.

Ana shared similar motivations shaping her decision-making about engaging in the Francophone community in relation to her parental responsibilities, which had mobility-related implications:

I drop my children off at daycare [Interviewer: and it’s in French the daycare?] Yes. [Interviewer: Is that a choice that you made?] Yes, yes. [Interviewer: And it’s close also to where you live?] No. It’s not close to where I live. [Interviewer: But you really want him to be in a French-language daycare?] Yes, it’s just that I lived in Saint-Boniface, before and. I don’t know, I didn’t have a very good experience in Saint-Boniface. So, we moved elsewhere because we are more involved in the community where I live.

These findings highlight some of the challenges of remaining connected to the Francophone community when it is embedded within a minority setting. Participants described specific choices and decisions made that helped them to be/stay engaged in the FMC, while others acknowledged experiences of exclusion or marginalization that led them to remain more involved with family and members of their own ethnic community within private spaces. Ultimately, the maps reflected a lack of diversity within participants’ personal networks, and where those were expanded, ties were described as comparatively weak. Thus, it appears that while Francophone spaces enable community members to come into contact with one another, beyond those physical spaces, there remains a lack of ‘mixity’ within the broader multicultural French-speaking community that impacts participants’ experiences of cohesion. Nonetheless, these connections remain important in light of Granovetter’s [48] argument that even weak ties are important because they serve as bridges between networks of more dense close ties. Thus, a lack of weak ties can deprive individuals of resources stemming from those networks, such as information. While the maps highlight a need to further support community cohesion, our analysis of participants’ mobilities provides a step toward identifying weak ties that offer opportunities for strengthening.

4. Discussion

Social cohesion within the Canadian context has been described as a dynamic and ongoing process, rather than a static condition or outcome; and one that emphasizes a sense of belonging to community [49,50]. FMCs have sought to support cohesion and belonging by emphasizing the shared French language among rapidly diversifying communities welcoming increasing numbers of Francophone immigrants [51]. In particular, research has examined the ways Francophone organizations can enable the formation of positive relationships between community members by providing opportunities and spaces for people from different backgrounds to socially interact [15,16]. Drawing on the mobilities paradigm, our study findings help deepen understanding not only of immigrants’ experiences within ‘formal’ FMCs, but also of community members’ engagement within the diverse spaces characterizing ‘Francophone life’ in these cities, whether they were born in Canada or abroad.

The use of occupational maps enabled us to examine participants’ engagement within the FMCs of Metro Vancouver, Winnipeg and Moncton in a more nuanced way by providing an elicitation method informed by a mobilities theoretical framing. As noted above, research has shown that Francophone community spaces serve as ‘spaces of encounter’ for diverse community members, but that these spaces play different roles in people’s lives and some are experienced as more inclusive than others depending on people’s positionality within intersecting systems of privilege and oppression [12,21]. In the present study, our exploration of participants’ mobilities further illuminated the social and spatial distances that we began to identify in previous studies [52,53]. For example, we found that individuals faced difficulties engaging with community members who had different experiences of mobility or immobility, such as those who had migrated internationally and those who had not. This was observed in the data through participants descriptions of remaining primarily within networks of people who shared a similar trajectory of mobility, which despite being characteristic of spatial mobility for some, was nonetheless experienced as a form of social immobility (e.g., in the example of Marianne who immigrated from France only to find herself mainly with French friends in Canada). Riaño et al. [28] similarly used mental maps in their study connecting social and spatial mobilities in the cross-border mobility experiences of entrepreneurs. They propose the notion of spatial mobility capital as a potential resource for social mobility related to a person’s social position, geographic location, and strategies. This is based on their argument that in order to be mobile, one requires “(a) access to mobility options (e.g., transportation infrastructure and communication networks), (b) competence (knowing how to make use of available mobility options), and (c) appropriation (strategies to make use of available mobility options)” [28] (p. 3). Our findings lend further support to this theorization by highlighting varied enabling and constraining considerations participants addressed while describing their mobilities across the FMCs, such as cost and availability of public transit.

The use of mapping also helped us understand the experience of mobility within FMCs as highly context-dependent, shaped by geography, but also local perceptions of belonging. In Winnipeg, where there was a clearly defined Francophone neighbourhood such as Saint-Boniface, community participation for some residents may be associated with purposeful immobility. For example, Marc’s decision to live in Saint-Boniface and remain mostly within the neighbourhood and to participate in the FMC reinforced his sense of rootedness. In such cases, outward mobility—such as attending the University of Manitoba—can be perceived as a threat or ‘betrayal’ to communal cohesion. Yet for most, participation in the FMC entailed mobility across formal and informal Francophone spaces; sometimes burdensome mobility requiring concerted effort (e.g., going out of one’s way to drop the children at the Francophone daycare). In Vancouver, where the Francophone population is more geographically dispersed, participation in the FMC inherently involves mobility across the metropolitan region. Our findings signal the need to attend to intersectionality [54] within FMCs as their populations are multicultural given the colonial dynamics characterizing the global Francophonie [55]. The examples shared by Fleur in Winnipeg, and Josiane in Moncton speak to interactions within formal spaces as being somewhat ‘punctual’, whereas deeper connections are built in private spaces where people can resist forms of exclusion experienced in more public and formal spaces.

The mobilities paradigm and the mapping method are well suited to study the spatiality of FMCs, which are typically dispersed in space and with fluid and ‘mobile’ informal spaces [23]. These spaces are otherwise challenging to grasp through mainly interview-based and observational methods. Indeed, drawing on Augé [56], it is important to also examine the role of ‘non-places’ of circulation, consumption and communication in people’s lives, such as Ousmane’s, who spent much time on social media for buying and selling cars, or Eric who ‘connected’ with the community mainly by listening to French-language radio that also reflect a form of ongoing weak tie to the community [48]. To a certain extent when analysis remains focused strictly on formal spaces, the official ‘face’ of the community, such as Saint-Boniface for instance, the ‘conceived space’ is centred, that is, space designed by the elites. This approach obscures the informal, ‘bottom-up’ lived spaces, or spaces of resistance, such as people’s homes in and outside Saint-Boniface [57]. Thus, our approach better illuminated informal spaces, allowing for a more critical approach to studying Francophone spaces, unsettling dominant spatial representations. This aligns with research by Vadeboncoeur [58] who examined Black place-making processes and movements as a form of resistance to the dominant White spaces of NASCAR racing in the United States. While focused on a diverse population who share a language rather than a constructed racial category, the following point made by Vadeboncoeur [58] can nonetheless inform interpretations of our finding. He explained that: “Despite the collective experience of living in a country where racism is endemic to that country’s cultural fabric, the experience for each individual African American is uniquely shaped by where you live, educational background, social capital, generational differences, and the decisions one makes” (p. 3). While Francophones experience forms of linguistic oppression within minority settings, individuals’ experiences vary widely based on their unique positionalities within intersecting systems of power and oppression [54,59].

Applying a mobilities lens contributed to our understanding of community as something constituted through movement; that is, through daily commutes, and the dynamic maintenance of social ties across space. As such, it is particularly well suited to grasp the relational and processual dimensions of community cohesion within minority-language contexts. For instance, our findings add support to those of Giardiello’s [60] study examining the relationship between identity and mobility among young Italian migrants in Australia, which argued that: “[…] mobility increasingly presents itself as the new context in which a reformulation of old forms of belonging/identity (based on class and ethnicity) are implemented in the direction of new forms of identification and connection; that is, models of hybrid belonging [61]” (p. 5). Likewise, including different cities in our study was crucial for highlighting the ways local geographies can influence community members’ mobilities. This refers not only to the physical geography of the urban space, but also forms of governance at the local scale. For instance, as the federal government has decentralized service provision through competitive contracting for local non-profit organizations, Gonçalves and Ferreira [62] stressed the importance of place-based perspectives given the increasing influence of municipalities in people’s daily lives.

Our analysis contributes findings regarding the forms of context-dependent social and spatial (im)mobilities experienced by participants, but we acknowledge specific limitations of our paper. While we draw on data from three sites included in the study, the different contexts provide important findings that are shaped by each respective context, but that limit comparability across the sites. Further, while all cities were different sizes, each nonetheless represented their respective province’s largest metropolitan areas. Future research should consider examining the experiences of FMCs in smaller regional or rural settings, particularly as these are likely to have specific implications for people’s mobilities. Finally, the drawn maps were an effective method for eliciting data about participants’ daily experiences at the local scale, but research may also benefit from blending this approach with spatial data from geographic maps as Riaño et al. [28] did in their study of transnational migrant entrepreneurs. Such an approach would enable more comparability across participants’ spatial mobilities.

Ultimately, adopting a mobilities lens to study the occupational maps of participants’ engagement within their respective local FMCs contributed to the identification of varied modalities based on preference or necessity. Participants mobilities were shaped by varied concentration of Francophone spaces across regions, as well as the degree of inclusivity experienced within ‘traditional’ spaces, sometimes leading some to prioritize informal, private, or even ‘non-places’ [56] in their daily lives as French-speakers living within minority settings. Given that it can be challenging to ensure the latter are inclusive, it is important to attend to intersectionality for ensuring that formal spaces are welcoming and that a diverse population can develop a sense of belonging. This could also help ensure that interactions within Francophone community spaces are not fleeting and contribute to stronger ties among community members in support of cohesion within an Anglo-dominant city.