Journal of International Migration and Integration

, Volume 17, Issue 4, pp 1143–1161 | Cite as

Making Sense of Naturalization: What Citizenship Means to Naturalizing Immigrants in Canada and the USA

  • Sofya AptekarEmail author


Immigrant naturalization is both a barometer of inclusiveness and immigrant incorporation and a mechanism of social reproduction of the nation. This article reports on an interview-based study in suburban Toronto and New Jersey that investigated how immigrants explain their decisions to acquire citizenship. It analyzes respondents’ understandings of naturalization in light of different theories of citizenship and different dimensions of the concept. The study contributes to the literature by showing how many American immigrants interviewed while going through the naturalization process resisted framing naturalization as identity-changing, situating it instead as a common-sense move following permanent settlement and belonging. In contrast, Canadian respondents were more likely to characterize naturalization as an active process that tied them to a positively valued nation. While immigrant respondents in both countries were interested in voting and travel benefits of citizenship, only American respondents sought the protection that citizenship would afford in an anti-immigrant policy climate. I discuss how naturalization as a tool of civic integration and political empowerment resonates with immigrants’ own understandings of the process and consider the role played by the institutional contexts around naturalization and immigration more generally.


Naturalization Citizenship Immigration Identity Canada USA 


  1. Aitken, R. (2008). Notes on the Canadian exception: security certificates in critical context. Citizenship Studies, 12(4), 381–396.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Aptekar, S. (2014). Citizenship status and patterns of inequality in the United States and Canada. Social Science Quarterly 95(2): 343--359.Google Scholar
  3. Aptekar, S. (2015). The road to citizenship: what naturalization means for immigrants and the United States. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.Google Scholar
  4. Balistreri, K. S., & Van Hook, J. (2004). The more things change the more they stay the same: Mexican naturalization before and after welfare reform. International Migration Review, 38(1), 113–130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Barnes, A. (2009). Displacing danger: managing crime through deportation. Journal of International Migration and Integration, 10(4), 431–445.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Basch, L., Glick Schiller, N., & Szanton Blanc, C. (1994). Nations unbound: transnational projects, postcolonial predicaments, and deterritorialized nation-states. Langhorne, PA: Gordon and Breach.Google Scholar
  7. Bauder, H. (2008). Immigration debate in Canada: how newspapers reported, 1996–2004. Journal of International Migration and Integration, 9(3), 289–310.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bean, F., & Stevens, G. (2003). America’s newcomers and the dynamics of diversity. New York: Russell Sage.Google Scholar
  9. Bloemraad, I. (2004). Who claims dual citizenship? The limits of postnationalism, the possibilities of transnationalism and the persistence of traditional citizenship. International Migration Review, 38, 389–426.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Bloemraad, I. (2006). Becoming a citizen: incorporating immigrants and refugees in the United States and Canada. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  11. Bloemraad, I., Korteweg, A., & Yurdakul, G. (2008). Citizenship and immigration: multiculturalism, assimilation, and challenges to the nation-state. Annual Review of Sociology, 2008(34), 153–179.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Brettell, C. (2006). Political belonging and cultural belonging: immigration status, citizenship, and identity among four immigrant populations in a southwestern city. American Behavioral Scientist, 50, 70–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2002). Occupational outlook handbook, 2002–2003 edition. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Labor. Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office.Google Scholar
  14. Gilbertson, G. (2004). Regulating transnational citizens in the post-1996 welfare reform era: Dominican immigrants in New York City. Latino Studies, 2004(2), 90–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Honig, B. (2001). Democracy and the foreigner. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Howard, R. (1998). Being Canadian: citizenship in Canada. Citizenship Studies, 2(1), 133–152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Jones-Correa, M. (1998). Between two nations: the political predicament of Latinos in New York City. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
  18. Joshee, R., & Derwing, T. (2005). The unmaking of citizenship education for adult immigrants in Canada. Journal of International Migration and Integration, 6(1), 61–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Joppke, C. (2007). Beyond national models: civic integration policies for immigrants in Western Europe. West European Politics, 30(1), 1–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Kivisto, P., & Faist, T. (2007). Citizenship: discourse, theory, and transnational prospects. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing.Google Scholar
  21. Koulouriotis, J. (2011). Ethical considerations in conducting research with non-native speakers of english. TESL Canada Journal, 28, 1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Li, P. (2003). Deconstructing Canada’s discourse of immigrant integration. Journal of International Migration and Integration, 4(3), 315–333.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Mahler, S., & Siemiatycki, M. (2011). Diverse pathways to immigrant political incorporation: comparative Canadian and US perspectives. American Behavioral Scientist, 2011(55), 1123–1130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Marger, M. N. (2006). Transnationalism or assimilation? Patterns of sociopolitical adaptation among Canadian business immigrants. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 29(5), 882–900.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Massey, D., & Akresh, I. R. (2006). Immigrant intentions and mobility in a global economy: the attitudes and behavior of recently arrived U.S. immigrants. Social Science Quarterly, 87(5), 954–971.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Migration Policy Institute. (2014). Immigrants in the US 1850–2012. MPI Data Hub. Accessed 22 January 2015.
  27. Monsivais, G. (2001). Differences in self-identified national orientation among legal Hispanic immigrants to the United States. Dissertation Abstracts International A: The Humanities and Social Sciences, 62, 4.Google Scholar
  28. North, D. S. (1985). The long grey welcome: a study of the American naturalization process. Washington, DC: National Association of Latino Elected and Appointed Officials Education Fund.Google Scholar
  29. Ong, A. (1999). Flexible citizenship: the cultural logics of transnationality. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
  30. Ong, P. M. (2011). Defensive naturalization and anti-immigrant sentiment: Chinese immigrants in three primate metropolises. Asian American Policy Review, 21, 39.Google Scholar
  31. Pantoja, A. D., Ramirez, R., & Segura, G. M. (2001). Citizens by choice, voters by necessity: patterns in political mobilization by naturalized Latinos. Political Research Quarterly, 54(4), 729–750.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Paquet, M. (2012). Beyond appearances: citizenship tests in Canada and the UK. Journal of International Migration and Integration, 13(2), 243–260.Google Scholar
  33. Plascencia, L. (2012). Disenchanting citizenship: Mexican migrants and the boundaries of belonging. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.Google Scholar
  34. Plascencia, L., Freeman, G., & Setzler, M. (2003). The decline of barriers to immigrant economic and political rights in the American states: 1977–2001. International Migration Review, 37(1), 5–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Public Service Employment Act (S.C. 2003, c. 22, ss. 12, 13). Section 39. Preferences, Priorities, and Entitlements.
  36. Soysal, Y. (1994). Limits of citizenship: migrants and postnational membership in Europe. Chicago: Chicago University Press.Google Scholar
  37. Statistics Canada. (2013). Immigration and ethnocultural diversity in Canada. National Household Survey, 2011. Analytical Document Accessed 22 January 2015.
  38. Sumption, M., & Flamm, S. (2012). The economic value of citizenship for immigrants in the United States. Washington, DC: Migration Policy Institute.Google Scholar
  39. US Census Bureau. (2012). The foreign-born population in the United States: 2010 American Community Survey reports. US Department of Commerce. Economics and Statistics Administration. Accessed 22 January 2015.
  40. Van Hook, J., Brown, S. K., & Bean, F. (2006). For love or money? Welfare reform and immigrant naturalization. Social Forces, 85(2), 643–666.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Waldinger, R. (2015). The cross-border connection: immigrants, emigrants, and their homelands. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Wallace Goodman, S. (2010). Naturalisation policies in Europe: exploring patterns of inclusion and exclusion. Florence, Italy: European Union Observatory on Democracy. European University Institute Robert Schuman Centre for Advanced Studies.Google Scholar
  43. Waters, J. (2003). Flexible citizens? Transnationalism and citizenship amongst economic immigrants in Vancouver. The Canadian Geographer, 47(3), 219–234.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Weil, P. (2001). Access to citizenship: a comparison of twenty-five nationality laws. In T. A. Aleinikoff & D. Klusmeyer (Eds.), Citizenship today: global perspectives and practices (pp. 17–35). Washington DC: Carnegie Endowment.Google Scholar
  45. Wilson, S. J. (2003). Immigration and capital accumulation in Canada. In C. M. Beach, A. G. Green, & J. G. Reitz (Eds.), Canadian immigration policy for the 21 st century (pp. 125–196). Kingston, Ontario: John Deutsch Institute for the Study of Economic Policy.Google Scholar
  46. Winter, E. (2014). (Im)possible citizens: Canada’s ‘citizenship bonanza’ and its boundaries. Citizenship Studies, 18(1), 46–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of SociologyUniversity of Massachusetts BostonBostonUSA

Personalised recommendations