The Measurement of Ethnic and Religious Divisions: Spatial, Temporal, and Categorical Dimensions with Evidence from Mindanao, the Philippines.

Omar Shahabudin Mcdoom,Rachel M Gisselquist

doi:10.1007/s11205-015-1145-9

Abstract

An ever-expanding body of empirical research suggests that ethno-religious divisions adversely impact a host of normatively desirable objectives linked to the quality of life in society, implicitly representing a strong challenge to multiculturalist theory and policies. The appropriate conceptualization and measurement of ethno-religious divisions has consequently become the subject of complex methodological debate. This article unpacks some of this complexity and provides a synthetic critique of how eight key measures each capture the notion of divisions and relate to each other conceptually, theoretically, and empirically within a divided society. It explores simple proportions, fractionalization, polarization, cultural distance, segregation, cross-cuttingness, horizontal inequality, and intermarriage indicators. Furthermore, instead of presenting national-level temporal snapshots of divisions as in much work, it purposely examines how measures also perform at more localized levels of analysis and over time, drawing on individual-level census data from one deeply-divided society, Mindanao, in the Philippines. Analysis underscores four major issues to which researchers should pay more attention: the sensitivity of measures to (1) the underlying causal mechanisms linking divisions with outcomes; (2) the social forces and methodologies shaping the identification and categorization of groups; (3) the passage of time and evolution of divisions; and (4) the level of spatial analysis. The article provides practical guidance and discusses the key implications of these points both for quantitative scholars working with these measures and for qualitatively-inclined empiricists and normative theorists wishing to interpret, evaluate, or otherwise engage the quantitative research on the merits and demerits of diversity.

Highlights

2400 years ago, Aristotle in his description of the ideal polis noted an obstacle to the realization of what he called a ‘‘choiceworthy life:’’ ‘‘ethnic difference causes faction unless people learn to pull together’’ (Reeve 1998)
We highlight four conceptually major points that emerge from the preceding analysis to which we believe researchers should pay more attention and that deserve further investigation. These points will not be altogether new for specialists of ethnic politics, but the empirical precision with which they can be made here allows for deeper theoretical understanding and, importantly, comparisons between measures
In order to select an appropriate measure, researchers will need to specify the mechanism, that is the causal pathway through which ethnic divisions lead to particular outcomes

Summary

Introduction

2400 years ago, Aristotle in his description of the ideal polis noted an obstacle to the realization of what he called a ‘‘choiceworthy life:’’ ‘‘ethnic difference causes faction unless people learn to pull together’’ (Reeve 1998). A large body of empirical research in political science and economics implicitly challenges the view prominent in multiculturalist policies and normative liberal theory (Kymlicka 1995; Young 1990) that ethno-religious diversity should be promoted and protected in societies by evidencing its deleterious effects on a variety of societal objectives related to the quality of life. The appropriate measurement of ethno-religious divisions has become the subject of rich discussion in the scholarly literature. To capture these divisions in their analyses, many researchers have commonly used, and continue to use, the index of ethno-linguistic fractionalization (ELF). A number of researchers, have noted serious limitations with this indicator, and the growing debate among them on how best to measure such divisions underscores the significant methodological complexity in this area.

Objectives

Results

Conclusion