Report
Perception of Canada and CETA in France - Qualitative Research
Presented to Global
Affairs Canada
Prepared by Leger
Registration number: POR 103-18
Contract number:
08324-180470/001/CY
Awarded:
January 14, 2019
Submission:
March 31, 2019
Contract value:
$88,557.20 (taxes included)
Registration number:
POR 103-18
For more information on this
report, please contact Public Services and Procurement Canada at tpsgc.questions-questions.pwgsc@tpsgc-pwgsc.gc.ca.
Ce rapport est aussi disponible en français.
Leger
507 Place d’Armes, Suite 700
Montreal, Quebec
G1R 2K2
Telephone: 514-982-2464
Fax: 514-987-1960
Canada
This public opinion research report presents
the results of focus groups and a telephone survey conducted by Leger and its
French partner, BVA, for Global Affairs Canada. The quantitative portion of
this study was conducted among 1,005 French nationals between March 8
and 11, 2019.
Cette publication est
également disponible en français sous le titre : Perception des français à
l'égard du Canada et du CETA : recherche qualitative.
This publication may be reproduced
for non-commercial purposes only. Prior written permission from Public Services
and Procurement Canada is required for all other uses. For more information on
this report, please contact Public Services and Procurement Canada at tpsgc.questions-questions.pwgsc@tpsgc-pwgsc.gc.ca or at:
Communications
Branch
Public
Services and Procurement Canada
Portage III,
Tower A
11 Laurier
Street, Suite 16A1
Chicoutimi,
QC K1A 0S5
Catalogue Number:
FR5-157/1-2019E-PDF
International Standard Book Number
(ISBN):
978-0-660-30501-1
Related publications (registration
number: POR 103-18):
Catalogue number: FR5-157/1-2019F-PDF
(final report, French)
ISBN: 978-0-660-30503-5
© Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada,
represented by the Minister of Foreign Affairs, 2019.
Table of Contents
1.2 Methodology – Hybrid Research
1.5 Notes on the Interpretation of Research Findings
1.6 Political
neutrality statement and contact information
2.1 General perception
of Canada – Focus group results
2.2 General perception
of CETA – Focus group results
Appendix
A – Detailed Research Methodology
Appendix B – Recruitment
Guides
1. Summary
Leger is
pleased to present to Global Affairs Canada this report on the results of
qualitative and quantitative surveys on the French’s perceptions of Canada and
CETA.
This report was prepared by Leger,
which was mandated by Global Affairs Canada (contract No. 08324-180470/001/CY,
granted on January 14, 2019), in partnership with its counterpart: BVA.
The Comprehensive Economic and
Trade Agreement (CETA) is an international free-trade agreement signed on
October 30, 2016 between the European Union and Canada, which provisionally
entered into force on September 21, 2017. This agreement, which significantly
reduces tariff and non-tariff barriers, also addresses several aspects related
to the export of goods and services and the establishment of a stable and
favourable investment environment for both European and Canadian companies.
Although the ratification process has been completed in Canada, it is still in
progress in some EU Member States, notably France.
It is in this context that Global
Affairs Canada commissioned Leger to conduct a study to understand the general
perception that the French have of Canada and Canadians, and more specifically
CETA.
Goals:
• Determine the level of knowledge of the French
regarding Canada, beyond stereotypical images of the cold climate, lumberjacks,
etc.
• Identify the values that the French perceive as
inherent to Canada (multilateralism, multiculturalism, economic liberalism,
social equity, tolerance, etc.)
• Identify what the French think of Canada’s
approach to environmental protection and the standards in place to ensure the
safety and nutritional value of food sold in Canada
• Determine whether or not the general French
population is willing to increase its trade relations with Canada
• Determine whether the French see Canada as a
powerful ally for France and Europe in the fight against populism in the world
• Measure the impact of key messages, especially
those on the CETA (economic development, environment, health/food safety,
progressive trade activities, geopolitics, etc.)
1.2
Methodology – Hybrid Research
To achieve the goals of the study,
a research plan based on a hybrid method (i.e. qualitative and quantitative)
was developed. First, a qualitative methodology based on focus groups with
Parisians and Lyoneses was implemented, followed by a
quantitative methodology consisting of a telephone survey of the general
population of France. The two methodologies were used to explore and assess the
perceptions and image of Canada and Canadians in France as well as the French’s
knowledge and opinions about the CETA.
Leger organized a series of four focus groups in France with
participants from the general population. Two groups were conducted in the
greater Paris area, and two other groups were organized in Lyon to obtain the
views of the population living outside the French capital.
In order to participate in the groups, participants had to be
18 years of age or older and have some knowledge of Canada. Those who said
they did not know anything about Canada or had nothing to say about Canada were
excluded during recruitment. The focus groups were conducted in French, and
each session lasted two hours. Based on BVA’s professional advice, a group of
young people under 40 years of age and a group of people 40 years of
age and over were recruited in each city.
Locations and dates
The focus groups were organized in the following cities on the
dates indicated.
Table 1. Recruitment
details
|
City |
Recruited |
Participants |
Target
population |
Time |
Language |
Date |
|
Paris |
10 |
9 |
18 to 39 y.o. |
3:00 p.m. |
FR |
February 12 |
|
Paris |
10 |
10 |
40+ y.o. |
7:00 p.m. |
FR |
February 12 |
|
Lyon |
10 |
9 |
40+ y.o. |
3:00 p.m. |
FR |
February 13 |
|
Lyon |
10 |
10 |
18 to 39 y.o. |
6:00 p.m. |
FR |
February 13 |
|
Total |
40 |
37 |
|
|
|
|
The recruitment guide and the
discussion guide used for this portion of the study are presented in the Appendix
to this report.
Note
regarding the limitations of qualitative research
Qualitative
research allows for a better understanding of opinions within a population
rather than measuring opinions as a percentage, as is the case with a
quantitative study. The results of this type of research should be considered
purely indicative. No conclusions about the general population can be inferred
from the results of this type of research.
Note to the
reader
This report is only about the qualitative
portion of the study. For more information on the quantitative portion of the
study, please refer to the report, “Perception of Canada and CETA in France -
Quantitative Research.”
Discussions with focus group participants demonstrated that
most of them felt a particular closeness to Canada. Many participants reported
having friends or family members who had gone to study, work, or settle in
Canada. Canada has never seemed as close to France as it is today. The election
of Justin Trudeau also helped raise Canada’s profile in France and
highlighted Canada’s founding democratic values. Beyond Canada’s traditional
and clichéd perceptions of vast, pristine spaces populated with wildlife,
participants were familiar with and could describe some of the core values of the
Canadian identity, such as openness to difference, tolerance, freedom, and
multiculturalism, which are intimately associated with the image of Canada. Their
image of Canada and of its values seemed very positive at first glance.
However, it proved to be much more nuanced when we delved into their opinions.
Nevertheless, it was clear that Canada has an indisputable
power of attraction. Only a few of the participants reported that they had
never had any connection with Canada. Many of the participants had either
already thought about travelling, studying, or working in Canada or said they know
someone who has considered doing the same.
Generally speaking, the participants felt that Canada has an
excellent reputation, and while the economy is not the main factor influencing
the overall image of the country, participants perceived Canada as a reliable
economic partner for France. Although Canadian companies and brands are still
not well known, the overall perception of Canadian products was positive, with
participants perceiving them to be of good quality.
Canada truly stood out in the minds of participants for the
quality of its education system and the high level of its academic research.
This perception was very strong, particularly with regard to engineering
education. The participants primarily associated the natural resource sectors,
such as forestry and mining, with the Canadian economy.
Canada also distinguishes itself through its cultural
presence and offerings. It is quite well recognized that Canada is
internationally renowned for its artists. Interestingly, the participants were
able to identify Canadian artists—both Anglophone and Francophone—and not just
the most famous singers from Quebec. In fact, their perception
of Canada was not focused solely on the image of French-speaking Quebec, but
demonstrated an understanding of the reality of Canada as a whole.
CETA
The
participants’ opinion on CETA was not fixed and seemed to be evolving. Their
opinion was both positive and negative. The qualitative component revealed
spontaneous concerns often underpinned by Canada’s economic and cultural
proximity to the United States: the presence of GMOs, hormones, antibiotics,
and pesticides in products. Standards were thought to be a major issue for
CETA. Apart from agri-food products, the other aspects of CETA were much less a
cause of concern and were rather highly considered: labour-force mobility,
investment, etc. However, business and investment opportunities for French
companies were less favourably or even poorly perceived.
Canadian
products were generally not well known, but a certain interest was noted. Maple
syrup, clothing and textiles, cosmetics, and fish and seafood were among the
top Canadian products of interest to participants. They, however, showed less
interest in Canadian meat.
The
participants of the qualitative study viewed the environmental impact of free
trade as an issue. They reported feeling worried about the carbon footprint
resulting from increased trade between France and Canada, especially for
imported products that are already available in Europe. However, in each focus
group, this criticism focused more on the very idea of liberalism and
international trade rather than on Canada itself.
Qualitatively,
the study showed that objective data on CETA and its provisional implementation
improved the overall perception that the French have of CETA with respect to
labour-force mobility, the protection of some 40 French PDOs/RDOs[1], increased French exports, the absence of private arbitration
tribunals to protect investments, and the inadequacy of Canadian farms when it
comes to exporting beef to Europe.
The qualitative
study also revealed a strong desire for more information on CETA, particularly
on the environment, temporary work opportunities, standards, and health issues.
The
results of this research will enable Global Affairs Canada to update and adjust
its messages to ensure that its awareness and communication strategies will
have a positive impact on the target audience upon ratification of the CETA.
1.5 Notes on the Interpretation of Research
Findings
The
opinions and observations expressed in this document do not reflect those of
Global Affairs Canada. This report was drawn up by Leger based on research
conducted specifically for this project. The results of the qualitative portion
of the study cannot be generalized to the entire French population. These
results should be interpreted as a collection of opinions existing among the
French population. The results of the quantitative portion are of a
probabilistic nature and can be generalized to the entire French population.
Registration number:
POR 103-18
Contract number:
08324-180470/001/CY
Awarded:
January 14, 2019
Submitted:
March 31, 2019
Contract value:
$88,557.20 (taxes included)
1.6 Political neutrality statement and contact information
I hereby certify as a
senior officer at Leger that the deliverables fully comply with the Government
of Canada’s political neutrality requirements outlined in the Policy on Communications and Federal Identity and the Directive on the Management of Communications – Appendix C (Appendix C: Mandatory Procedures for Public Opinion
Research).
Specifically, the
deliverables do not include information on electoral voting intentions,
political party preferences, party positions, or ratings of the performance of
a political party or its leaders.
Signed by:
Christian Bourque
Executive Vice-President and Associate
Leger
507 Place d’Armes,
Suite 700
Montréal, Quebec
H2Y 2W8
2. Detailed results
This section of the report presents the results of the
four focus groups on the perceptions and images associated with Canada in
France. Because the survey is qualitative in nature, its results cannot be
considered representative of the general opinion in France with regard to
Canada. It rather consists of a collection of opinions and perceptions existing
among the French population. However, it is not possible to quantify this
information.
General perception of Canada
In the first part of the focus groups, the
facilitators asked the participants to write down three words or expressions
that come to mind when they think of Canada. This was done before even
mentioning the topic of the meeting. This approach allowed for spontaneous
answers that had not been fully thought out in terms of perceptions associated
with Canada. It was only after this first exercise that the facilitators
revealed the topic of the discussion to the participants.
A positive image of Canada, overall
From the outset, the focus group participants
articulated a fundamentally positive view of Canada. They did not perceive
Canada as a truly foreign country; they reported feeling a strong
proximity—even a certain kinship—between France and Canada. This perceived
closeness is built on common ancestors, a common history, and a shared
language. Canadians are seen as their North American cousins, the Francophones
of North America. It should be noted that linguistic proximity to France is
central to this perception of Canada. Because of this perception, Quebec sprung
to the participants’ minds first. However, the focus groups also displayed a
fairly extensive knowledge of English Canada, in terms of geography or cities
and public figures.
Their perception was also modelled on the stereotypes
and clichés associated with Canadian values and the country’s territory namely:
a welcoming, safe, tolerant, multicultural, free country and a vast, frozen,
pristine, natural territory with abundant wildlife.
A country of nature
Not surprisingly, the words mentioned most often in
the focus groups were about nature, which dominated the perception of Canada.
The following words were those most frequently mentioned: greenery, fall
colours (orange), wide-open spaces, vastness, forests, lakes, the St. Lawrence
River, natural parks (Jacques-Cartier), wilderness camping, wildlife (caribou,
bears, whales), and sled dogs. For some participants, this natural image also
implied the idea of a variety and abundance of natural resources.
Territories, cities, and places
When
thinking about Canada, participants spontaneously imagined specific territories,
cities, and sites. The idea of large, Americanized cities was also a recurring
theme; the image of the country’s largest cities (Montréal, Toronto, and
Vancouver) was associated with Canada. Natural tourist attractions, such as
Niagara Falls and Parc national de la Jacques-Cartier, also shaped their
perceptions of the country.
Canadian symbols
Some
symbols were also deeply rooted in the participants’ minds about the image they
have of Canada. Maple syrup, the maple leaf on the flag, and even poutine were some
of the elements that spontaneously came to mind when they thought about Canada.
In addition to these iconic symbols, hockey, curling, figure skating, rugby,
and football were among the strong symbols spontaneously associated with
Canada.
Public figures
The
public figure most frequently mentioned by the participants was
Céline Dion. That is no surprise given her status as an international
star. She is still very well known in France, and was mentioned in all the
focus groups. Garou, Lara Fabian, and
Anthony Kavanagh are also well known and were mentioned in several groups.
These Francophone artists from Quebec generally have a fairly positive image
among the French public and are part of the perceptions that structure the
image of Canada. In addition to Quebec artists, participants in both Paris and
Lyon groups mentioned knowing English-Canadian artists. Leonard Cohen,
Justin Bieber, Drake, and Ryan Reynolds were among the Anglophone
artists known to the participants.
Canada’s image is more mixed than it seems
This
image of Canada, delivered spontaneously by focus group participants, was rather
smooth and generally positive. However, upon further querying, it became clear
that Canada’s image was not as rosy as it appeared; opinions were more nuanced
and critical. Contrasting perceptions were sometimes observed on the topics
that provoked debate in the focus groups (e.g. multiculturalism, tolerance, the
environment, and economic liberalism).
Tolerance
Canada
was generally seen as an open and tolerant country. In all groups, this aspect
of Canada was spontaneously put forward. The country’s multiculturalism was seen
as a fundamental value. The participants described Canada as welcoming, warm,
and open to immigration and differences. The fact that Canada is a country of
immigration seemed to be well known in France. A few participants also pointed
out that this openness to difference on other aspects, such as same-sex
marriage, is more progressive than in France. As such, they believed that many
French may have immigrated to Canada in the hope of availing themselves of this
right.
However,
this image was tempered by conflicting perceptions. Canada was at the same time
seen as a homogeneous country, with the exception of its cities, where
diversity was mainly an impression. The participants believed that Canada
selects its immigrants according to very strict criteria, which gives the
impression that the country is elitist: the doors are not open to “just
anybody.” Having the right diploma and training is required to immigrate to
Canada. As a result, the participants did not see the country as a welcoming
place for refugees, thus overshadowing the humanitarian aspect of immigration.
One
of the negative aspects highlighted by the participants concerned Indigenous people.
The impression was that they are placed on reserves, that they are penned in,
or that the police can move them to make way for pipeline projects.
Economic liberalism
From
an economic standpoint, Canada was defined as a liberal country. Anything that
involves business or trade was perceived as simpler in Canada than in France.
For many participants, doing business in Canada seemed less complicated than in
France. According to them, Canadian companies are freer than French companies.
They are less subject to government rules and oversight than companies in
France.
However,
economic liberalism was also viewed negatively by the participants, some of
them mentioning that they were convinced the Canadian government imposes few
standards on its companies whereas France imposes many more. Quality standards were
thus perceived as inferior to those of France, which had a negative impact on
the perception of products from Canada.
Environmental protection
Most
participants spontaneously had a positive image of Canada’s environment. They
believed that Canada is ahead of France in terms of recycling, waste
management, and overall environmental protection. This perception was fuelled
by Canada’s tourism advertising in France, which promotes wild landscapes,
parks, and nature reserves. However, the participants were aware that their
perception was not really based on any tangible data and that these images were
mostly intended to sell tourist destinations. Nevertheless, in their view, the
fact that Canada is promoting a tourism offer that focuses on experiencing
nature means that it is carefully protecting its natural spaces.
This
perception of Canada was not shared by all participants. Many felt that Canada
is not as virtuous as the image it wants to project. Indeed, some participants
mentioned that, in exploiting its natural resources, Canada is far from being a
country that protects the environment. They, in fact, considered it a country
that attacks nature. The participants noted oil sands, shale gas, mining, and
forestry operations to explain this point of view. They saw a country willing
to resort to expropriation to exploit its natural resources. The lifestyle of
Canadians who drive a four-wheel-drive vehicle was another element in this
regard.
Individual freedoms
Some
participants mentioned perceiving Canada as a democratic country that protects
individual freedoms better than the French government. Some even considered
that Canada is probably better managed than France because they could not think
of major demonstrations happening there (in Canada). For instance, they mentioned
that the French government sometimes limits the right to protest. However, some
participants recalled the student demonstrations, prompting them to consider
the fact that Canada could also resort to repression during demonstrations.
Opportunities in North America, but…
Many
participants said they feel that Canada is a country of opportunities that do
not exist in France. Many participants also reported having friends or family
members who moved to Canada for education, work, or personal reasons. It is a more
accessible version of the American Dream for the French. However, some
experiences tarnished this perception of Canada. Indeed, many people said that
it is very difficult for the French to qualify, be selected, and settle in
Canada. It is also difficult for them to develop social relationships and make
friends. Several participants mentioned that they knew people who had returned
from Canada disappointed with their experience.
An image that is changing
Canada
has consistently been described as the Switzerland of North America, that is, a
neutral, peaceful, calm, discreet, and quiet country. A country that has no
voice or no significant presence on the international stage. In fact, Canada is
often seen as being in the shadow of the United States, on which it depends.
Never alone on the international stage, Canada is only there to support or
accompany other countries.
However,
this image of Canada has been changing in recent years, mainly since
Justin Trudeau came to power. Several participants said that
Mr. Trudeau has given a new impetus to the country’s visibility in France.
Since his election as head of government, they said they are hearing about
Canada more regularly than in the past.
Justin Trudeau
is part of a new generation of leaders, as is Emmanuel Macron, who have
been elected in recent years. In the eyes of many, Mr. Trudeau has a
positive influence on the image of Canada, and that he is modernizing and reviving
the country. For many participants, a Canada led by Justin Trudeau was seen
as a champion of democratic values such as tolerance, openness, and freedom.
Some participants also noted that Mr. Trudeau did not hesitate to stand up
to Donald Trump and distance himself from American positions. In doing so,
Trudeau is giving Canada its own unique voice on the world stage.
Canadians in France
Canada’s
presence in France was mainly felt through its artists, more particularly its
singers. A few participants pointed out a plethora of singers from Quebec a few
years ago, when musicals were popular. Among the most frequently named artists were
Céline Dion, Garou, Roch Voisine, and Lara Fabian. Older participants also
remembered Fabienne Thibault and Marcel Béliveau.
These Francophone artists have been known for many years in France, where they
have left their mark.
The
participants also mentioned more recent artists such as directors
Xavier Dolan and Denis Villeneuve, as well as Drake,
Justin Bieber, and Ryan Reynolds. They also noted that Canada’s new
stars are now highly Americanized. Others also acknowledged that many
English-speaking artists who they believe are American may actually be Canadian
artists.
Canada
is also represented in France by its comedians. Anthony Kavanagh,
Gad Elmaleh, and Rachid Badouri
were cited as examples. They are considered young comedians whose approach to humour
is very American (i.e. stand-up comic style), but in French. Finally,
Dany Laferrière, a member of the Académie Française, was spontaneously mentioned as a Canadian
personality.
Canada is also known for its excellence in sports and its appreciation of sports. Although the participants could not name any specific Canadian athletes, they believed that Canada stands out in certain sports: hockey, curling, figure skating, skiing, track and field, and rugby. They felt that Canadians are more respectful than the French when they attend sporting events.
Economic and commercial partner
The
majority of the participants believed that Canada is a stable and reliable
trading partner. However, the majority of the participants were not certain
about the extent of trade relations between the two countries and felt that
Canada is a minor trading partner of France. In fact, for some of the
participants, Canada was seen more as a competitor than a potential partner. As
an example, they mentioned the competition between Alstom and Bombardier.
The
participants’ knowledge of trade agreements was very limited. Generally
speaking, Canada was perceived as much more liberal than France. In their view,
there appears to be less oversight, fewer rules, and fewer standards to ensure
the quality of Canadian products. That is why the participants believed that
Canada is probably too liberal to be a good trading partner of France. The
proximity between Canada and the United States is probably partially
responsible for this negative perception of Canada.
Many felt
that China is a more important partner than Canada for France, and they did not
immediately see the value of a trade partnership with Canada. However, Canada
is known for producing better-quality—although much more expensive—products
than China. Given the proximity of the European market and the partnerships
with other European countries, the relevance of a trade partnership with Canada
was not obvious to the participants. For many of them, Canada seemed at first
glance too far away to be a good trading partner. The central issue for them came
down to what Canada can offer France. They had a strong understanding of the
benefits France can offer Canada (e.g. luxury products, wine and spirits,
history, industries). On the other hand, without really knowing what Canada can
offer France, the participants could only make assumptions. That is why they
favoured trade with European countries for proximity, and with China, which has
the advantage of producing a wide range of affordable goods.
In
considering potential trade opportunities and partnerships between France and
Canada that could generate interest among the French, the participants
mentioned a number of industrial sectors, including the Canadian petroleum
industry, aeronautics, textiles, the film industry (series), technology (in
general), and pharmaceuticals. In addition to trade, some participants
expressed interest in exchanging culture, knowledge, skills, and labour between
the two countries.
Canadian brands and products
Canadian
brands and products were not well known. Although all participants were
familiar with maple syrup, many had difficulty mentioning other Canadian
products or brands available in France. Only a few Canadian brands were
mentioned in the focus groups: Bombardier (transport and aeronautics),
Canada Goose (textile, clothing), The Ordinary (cosmetics), as well
as Air Canada and Air Transat (airlines).
The
participants stated that they are not regularly exposed to consumer products
from Canada. As one participant pointed out, the French can find Asian
speciality product sections in grocery stores, but not sections with North
American products. Canadian food products that were mentioned include maple
syrup, bison and caribou meat, salmon and lobster, peanut butter, whisky, and
soy. There was generally very little interest in Canadian food products because
they are associated with American food and junk food.
In
addition to the lack of sophistication, a common perception among the
participants was that Canada is more lax than France on product and food
quality norms and standards. Many believed that France has higher and better
standards than Canada to ensure food quality and safety. This negative
perception was also linked to the fear arising from the use of GMOs,
antibiotics, pesticides, and preservatives in the production of Canadian food
products. Very little interest was therefore shown in food products from
Canada. The food products that were of most interest were maple syrup, lobster,
and salmon.
CETA
The
participants had very low basic knowledge of CETA. Most had heard about it in
the media on several occasions, but their knowledge was still very superficial.
Only a few of the participants said they had done some research on the subject.
From the outset, their opinion on CETA was negative. Some of the participants
believed that the French population was not adequately informed about the
agreement, or even that it was intentionally kept in the dark. They felt that
CETA was being negotiated behind closed doors and that the concerns and demands
of the French population were not being heard.
Many
of the participants questioned the timing of the implementation of CETA. In
these difficult economic times for French producers and breeders, the
participants were questioning the merits of a Canada-Europe agreement that
risks further weakening French producers and breeders. It should be noted that
the negative perception the participants had of CETA was primarily the result
of media campaigns by French producers and breeders they had seen.
The concern
and opposition CETA raised revolve around three main topics: the environment,
American liberalism, and the loss of governmental and civil power.
Environment
CETA was
perceived to be incompatible with the environmental values cherished by several
of the participants and the need to protect the environment and fight climate
change. For some of the participants, the idea of partnering with Canada to
import Canadian consumer products into France seemed at odds with environmental
responsibilities. Indeed, it was difficult for them to understand the reasons
for importing products from Canada when such products can already be found in
France or in neighbouring European countries.
American liberalism
Being
part of North America means that Canada is associated with the United States
and with economic liberalism. This perception led to great concern for several
of the participants that this could make it possible for Canada to export lower
quality food products to France. In this regard, they pointed out that Canada’s
norms and standards of quality are far below what France imposes on its own
producers and breeders. There was therefore concern that Canada could import
large quantities of low-quality, low-priced products into France. There was also
a fear that American products could go through Canada and end up in France.
In
the participants’ view, American liberalism allows Canadian and American
producers to use manufacturing methods that they found unacceptable. Strong
images that cause a great deal of fear, such as bleach-washed chicken meat, the
presence of GMOs in ultra-processed products, the presence of hormones and
antibiotics, and the use of pesticides, were some of the concerns mentioned by
many of the participants in all the groups. Since CETA would lift tariffs on
several Canadian food products, some of the participants felt that the French
would no longer be adequately protected against GMOs, hormones, antibiotics,
and pesticides. The concern expressed by the participants was that they would
not be able to trace food and identify Canadian products among French products
on the shelves of grocery stores.
Loss of governmental and civil power
The
participants were concerned that this agreement would weaken the scope of
French laws. Some of the participants believed that CETA would give more power
to large corporations than to signatory states. They feared that France would no
longer be able to enforce its laws, standards, and regulations on its own
territory. France would thus be forced to accept products that do not meet the
French standards it imposes on its producers, who risk penalization. Some also
believed that, in the event of litigation, disputes would be resolved by ad hoc
tribunals and hearings that would not be public. CETA raised the participants’ concerns
that France would lose some of its ability to impose its standards and laws on companies
and multinationals which, in turn, would have the power to impose their own methods.
CETA was therefore perceived as a risk that France and civil society would lose
power to companies.
Few benefits perceived for France under CETA
Many
participants felt strongly that CETA would be negative for France. They believed
it would be far from a win-win agreement and that France would lose under it.
The participants easily saw the benefits that Canada could gain from this trade
agreement. However, they could not readily see the benefits France could reap.
For many of them, France has more to offer Canada than Canada has to offer
France. They wanted to know what France would stand to gain by joining CETA.
Agri-food: the main obstacle to CETA
The
agri-food dimension of CETA monopolized much of the discussion in all focus
groups. For the participants, it was this aspect of the agreement that was the
most controversial as well as the main obstacle to supporting the agreement.
Several participants mentioned that if CETA did not include an agri-food
component, they would have no objection to France ratifying it. The majority of
the participants would be against France ratifying CETA in its current form.
Some of the participants pointed out that imposing strict conditions on food
imports from Canada (e.g. no GMOs, no pesticides, no synthetic products) would
reduce their reluctance. Adding these types of conditions would allow the
participants to be more comfortable with CETA. However, given that they felt CETA
currently opens the doors of the European market to Canadian food products
without control or conditions, they were strongly opposed to the agreement.
Apart from agri-food, there is little reluctance
Opposition to CETA was centred
on the agri-food part of the agreement. The other aspects of the Canada-Europe
trade agreement did not raise any issue or strong opposition from the
participants. Indeed, labour-force mobility, investment, and simplifying
procedures for obtaining a temporary work permit were generally well received
by the participants. The participants even found these aspects of CETA advantageous,
such as boosting the relationship between the two countries, increasing
competition between companies (thus lowering prices for the benefit of
consumers), and allowing the discovery of Canadian brands and products. Some of
the participants also mentioned that, in a global context where several markets
are closing down, as in the United States, offering new opportunities for
French products would be a chance not to be missed.
Appendix A – Detailed Research Methodology
To
achieve the objectives of the study, a research plan based on a hybrid method—qualitative
and quantitative—was developed. First, focus groups (qualitative methodology)
were held with Parisians and Lyonnais. A telephone survey (quantitative
methodology) of the general population of France was later conducted. Both
methodologies were used to explore and assess the perceptions and images
associated with Canada and Canadians in France, as well as knowledge and
opinions about CETA.
This
report is only about the qualitative portion of the study. For more information
on the quantitative portion of the study, please refer to the report “The Image of Canada and CETA by the
General French Population: A Quantitative Research.”
Leger organized a series of four
focus groups in France with participants from the general population. Two
groups were conducted in the greater Paris area, and two other groups were
organized in Lyon to obtain the views of the population living outside the
French capital.
Leger was responsible for
coordinating the recruitment activities and holding focus groups through BVA, a
professional research firm in France. Leger produced the recruitment and
discussion guides in collaboration with Global Affairs Canada. BVA was
responsible for recruiting the participants, booking professional focus group
rooms in both cities, and providing professional French facilitators for each
group. The facilitation was conducted by French professionals to avoid any
possible bias that could have been introduced by Canadian facilitators, as the discussion
content was the perception of Canada.
In order to participate in the
groups, participants had to be 18 years of age or older and have some
knowledge of Canada. Those who said they did not know anything about Canada or
had nothing to say about Canada were excluded during recruitment. The focus
groups were conducted in French, and each session lasted two hours. Based on
BVA’s professional advice, a group of young people under 40 years of age
and a group of people 40 years of age and over were recruited in each
city.
All focus group participants received
an honorarium of €60 for their participation in the discussion. The person responsible for recruitment informed the participants
of all their rights under the Privacy Act and the standards for public
opinion research conducted by the Government of Canada. More specifically,
their privacy was guaranteed, and their participation was considered voluntary.
Locations and dates
The focus groups were organized in
the following cities on the dates indicated.
Table A1. Recruitment details
|
City |
Recruited |
Participants |
Target population |
Time |
Language |
Date |
|
Paris |
10 |
9 |
18 to
39 y.o. |
3:00 p.m. |
FR |
February 12 |
|
Paris |
10 |
10 |
40+ y.o. |
7:00 p.m. |
FR |
February 12 |
|
Lyon |
10 |
9 |
40+ y.o. |
3:00 p.m. |
FR |
February 13 |
|
Lyon |
10 |
10 |
18 to
39 y.o. |
6:00 p.m. |
FR |
February 13 |
|
Total |
40 |
37 |
|
|
|
|
The
recruitment guide and the discussion guide used for this portion of the study
are presented in the Appendix to this report.
Note
regarding the limitations of qualitative research
Qualitative research allows for a better understanding
of opinions within a population rather than measuring opinions as a percentage,
as is the case with a quantitative study. The results of this type of research
should be considered purely indicative. No conclusions about the general
population can be inferred from the results of this type of research.
Appendix
B – Recruitment Guides
RECRUITMENT GUIDE
INTRODUCTION
Hello,
My name is ___________ from the BVA research firm. We are organizing a
research project for the Government of Canada. This project focuses on various
current topics. You don’t need to be an expert to participate.
We are preparing a series of discussions with people like you. During
these discussions, participants will be asked to share their opinions and ideas
with the other people of the group. We are currently organizing these groups
and would be interested in having you as a participant.
Your participation is entirely voluntary, and all the information you
provide is completely confidential. The full names of participants will not be
provided to anyone. A €60 compensation will be given to participants for the
time they take to attend the focus groups and to cover travel expenses. May I
continue?
|
Label |
Value |
|
|
Yes |
1 |
|
|
No |
2 |
TERMINATE |
The focus groups we are
organizing will last a maximum of 2 hours each.
The discussions would take
place in:
|
PARIS |
BVA Factory – 56 Rue Marcel Dassault 92100
Boulogne-Billancourt |
Tuesday, February
12, 2019 |
G1: 3 p.m. to
5p.m. G2: 7 p.m. to 9
p.m. |
|
LYON |
MARKETING
ESPACE - 57 Place de la République 69002 LYON |
Wednesday,
February 13, 2019 |
G3: 3 p.m. to
5p.m. G4: 6 p.m.to 8
p.m. |
I would now like to ask you
a few questions to see if you are eligible to participate in this study.
Note to
recruiters: Terminate as soon as a
respondent refuses to answer a question.
When you finish, say: Thank you for your cooperation. We have
already reached the number of participants with a profile similar to yours. We
are therefore unable to have you participate.
GENDER
[ENSURE A GOOD GENDER MIX IN GROUPS]
Indicate the
respondent’s gender by observation
|
Label |
Value |
|
|
... Man |
1 |
|
|
... Woman |
2 |
AGE
[IN EVERY CITY: ONE GROUP OF 25–40 YEARS OLD
and ONE GROUP OF 41–60 YEARS OLD – ENSURING A GOOD MIX OF AGE IN GROUPS]
We would
like to talk to people of different age groups. Which of these groups do you
belong to?
|
Label |
Value |
|
|
Under 18 years
old |
0 |
|
|
Between 18 and 24
years old |
1 |
TERMINATE |
|
Between 25 and 34
years old |
2 |
|
|
Between 35 and 40
years old |
3 |
|
|
Between 41 and 45
years old |
4 |
|
|
Between 46 and 50
years old |
5 |
|
|
Between 51 and 60
years old |
6 |
|
|
Over 60 years old |
7 |
TERMINATE |
ELIG
[IF YES TO ANY OF THE FOLLOWING CATEGORIES –
EXCLUDE THE PARTICIPANT]
Do you or someone
in your household work in one of the following types of businesses or
organizations?
|
CATEGORIES |
|
|
|
A market research company |
1 |
|
|
A magazine or newspaper |
2 |
|
|
An advertising agency or graphic
design firm |
3 |
|
|
A political party |
4 |
|
|
A radio or television station |
5 |
|
|
A public relations company |
6 |
|
|
Federal or provincial
government |
7 |
|
HOUSEHOLD
[ENSURE A GOOD PROFILE MIX WITH AND WITHOUT
CHILDREN IN GROUPS]
Including yourself,
how many people (adults and children) live in your household?
___ people
|
Label |
Value |
|
|
Only one (myself) |
1 |
IF MORE THAN 1 PERSON AT FOY1
Of these (‘FOY1’)
people in your household, how many are children under 18 years of age?
___ children
|
Label |
Value |
|
|
No children under
18 years of age |
0 |
STATUS
Are you?
|
Label |
Value |
|
|
Single |
1 |
|
|
Married |
2 |
|
|
Living in a civil
union or common law relationship |
3 |
|
|
Divorced |
4 |
|
|
Widowed |
5 |
|
|
(DO NOT READ) I prefer not to answer |
9 |
EMPLOYMENT
[ENSURE A GOOD MIX OF JOB PROFILES IN GROUPS]
What is your
current employment situation?
|
Label |
Value |
|
|
Full-time
employee |
1 |
|
|
Part-time
employee |
2 |
|
|
Self-employed |
3 |
|
|
Student |
4 |
|
|
Homemaker |
5 |
|
|
Unemployed |
6 |
|
|
Retired |
7 |
|
|
(DO NOT READ) I prefer not to answer |
9 |
IF MARRIED OR IN A CIVIL UNION AT STATUS,
ASK THE FOLLOWING QUESTION
EMPLOYMENT – SPOUSE
And what is your
spouse’s current employment situation?
|
Label |
Value |
|
|
Full-time
employee |
1 |
|
|
Part-time
employee |
2 |
|
|
Self-employed |
3 |
|
|
Student |
4 |
|
|
Homemaker |
5 |
|
|
Unemployed |
6 |
|
|
Retired |
7 |
|
|
(DO NOT READ) I prefer not to answer |
9 |
EDUCATION
[ENSURE A GOOD PROFILE MIX IN GROUPS]
What is your level
of education? Which stream?
|
Label |
Value |
|
|
No diploma |
1 |
|
|
Certificate of vocational proficiency/Certificate of professional
competence |
2 |
|
|
Baccalauréat |
3 |
|
|
Bac+1/Bac+2 |
4 |
|
|
Bac+3 |
5 |
|
|
Bac+4 (Master) |
6 |
|
|
Bac+5 and higher |
7 |
|
|
Master’s degree |
8 |
|
|
Engineering degree |
9 |
|
|
Ph.D. |
10 |
|
INCOME
Today, what range
does your household’s monthly NET income fall into?
|
Label |
Value |
|
|
Between 0 and 2,499 euros per
month |
1 |
|
|
Between 2 500 and 3,499
euros per month |
2 |
|
|
Between 3,500 and 4,499 euros
per month |
3 |
|
|
Between 4,500 and 6,000 euros
per month |
4 |
|
|
More than 6,000 euros per
month |
5 |
PREVIOUS PARTICIPATION
Have you ever participated in a focus group
discussion for which you received compensation?
|
Label |
Value |
|
|
Yes |
1 |
|
|
No |
2 |
|
IF YES
When was the last time you participated in a
focus group?
|
Label |
Value |
|
|
6 months ago or
less |
1 |
TERMINATE |
|
More than 6
months ago |
2 |
|
CANADA
[MAKE SURE PARTICIPANTS ARE ABLE TO AT LEAST
MINIMALLY DISCUSS CANADA AND AVOID PEOPLE WHO HAVE NO OPINION AND WHO ARE NOT
ABLE TO DISCUSS – MIXED SENSITIVITY LEVELS]
Our study will focus mainly on a country and the
image you have of it.
I
will mention a few countries; in a few words, could you tell me how you view
each of these countries?
[Interviewer – Probe further. Recruit people
who have at least some minimal knowledge of Canada = Are able to talk about it]
Have
you ever visited this country?
IF YES What
motivated you to visit it?
IF NO Would
you visit it? For what reasons?
|
Quote |
NOTE – Probe further |
VISIT |
|
China |
|
|
|
Germany |
|
|
|
Canada |
|
|
|
Brazil |
|
|
Confidentiality issues:
I would now like to ask you a few
questions related to confidentiality, your personal information, and how the
research will be conducted. We will need your permission on certain matters to
conduct our research. When we come to these questions, feel free to ask for
clarification if needed.
P1) First, we will provide a list of the participants’ names and
profiles (questionnaire responses) to the hosts and facilitator so that they
can sign you up. Do you agree to us providing them this information? I can
assure you that this information will remain strictly confidential.
Yes 1 SKIP TO P2
No 2 READ THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION TO THE
RESPONDENT
Unfortunately, we must give your
name and profile to the focus group hosts and facilitator, since only those who
are invited to participate can take part in the session. The hosts and
facilitator need this information for verification purposes only. Rest assured
that this information will remain strictly confidential. GO TO P1A
P1a) Now that this has been explained, do you agree to us giving
your name and profile to the discussion group hosts and facilitator?
Yes 1 SKIP TO P2
No 2 THANK AND TERMINATE
P2) There will be an audiovisual recording of the session, and
it will only be used for research purposes.
The recordings will only be used by
the research team to prepare the report on the research results.
Do you agree to having an
audiovisual recording of the session be made?
Yes 1 THANK AND GO TO P3
No 2 READ
THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION TO THE RESPONDENT
Unfortunately, an audiovisual
recording of the session is required for the research professional to write his
report. GO TO P2A
P2a) Now that this has been explained, do you agree to us making an
audiovisual recording of the session?
Yes 1 THANK AND GO TO INVITATION
No 2 THANK AND TERMINATE
INVITATION
SECTION
|
GROUP |
Place |
Profile |
Language |
Participants |
Dates |
Time of day |
Type |
Address |
|
GR01 |
PARIS |
41-60 years old |
FR |
8–10 |
February 12 |
3 p.m. to 5p.m. |
In person |
BVA Factory – 56 Rue Marcel Dassault 92100
Boulogne-Billancourt |
|
GR02 |
PARIS |
25-40 years old |
FR |
8–10 |
February 12 |
7 p.m. to 9 p.m. |
In person |
|
|
GR03 |
LYON |
25-40 years old |
FR |
8–10 |
February 13 |
3 p.m. to 5p.m. |
In person |
MARKETING ESPACE 57 Place de la République 69002 LYON |
|
GR04 |
LYON |
41-60 years old |
FR |
8–10 |
February 13 |
6 p.m.to 8 p.m. |
In person |
Description of the groups
- Groups 1 & 2
- General
population of Paris with a good mix
of men and women of different ages, education levels, and professions.
- All Francophones
- Groups 3 & 4
- General
population of Lyon with a good mix
of men and women of different ages, education levels, and professions.
- All Francophones
Someone from our company will contact you to
confirm the group meeting. Could you leave me a phone number where we can reach
you in the evening and during the day?
Name:________________________________________________________________________
Telephone in the evening:_______________ Telephone at work:_____________________
Thank you very much!
Recruited by:__________________________________________________________________
Confirmed by:__________________________________________________________________
As we only invite a small
number of people to participate, your participation is very important to us. We
would like to remind you that a compensation of €60 will be given to you for
your participation. If, for any reason, you are unable to participate, please
notify us so we can find someone to replace you. You can reach us at our office
at ____. Please ask for ____.
Annexe C –Discussion Guide
INTRODUCTION
PRESENTATION
– Welcome to participants
– Introduction of moderator
– Presentation of BVA
PURPOSE OF THE MEETING
– The Canadian government
commissioned BVA to conduct a study on the French’s perception of Canada.
Various themes related to this topic will be discussed in this group today.
RULES OF DISCUSSION
– Briefly explain the dynamics
of the discussion (duration, discussion, roundtable)
– There are no right or wrong
answers.
– Importance of giving your
spontaneous and honest personal opinions
– Importance of reacting to
others’ opinions
– Importance of taking turns to
speak and respecting others’ opinions
PRESENTATION OF THE FOCUS GROUP ROOM
– Audio/video recording for
subsequent analysis
– Presence of observers behind
the mirror
– Information is only gathered
for the purposes of this study and will not be used for other purposes.
CONFIDENTIAL RESULTS
– Today’s discussions will
remain confidential.
– The audio/video recording will
not be shared with other people.
– Your name will not appear in
the report.
Do you have any questions before we
begin?
INTRODUCTION OF PARTICIPANTS (GO AROUND THE TABLE)
– First name only
– Occupation (what they do for a
living)
– Service and/or department
– Hobbies
Warm-up
Questionnaire #1 – INDICATE THE WORDS THAT COME TO MIND WHEN YOU THINK
ABOUT CANADA
Let’s start with a very general
discussion about Canada.
1.1
In this short questionnaire, what are the words you wrote that directly
come to mind when you think about Canada?
Note the words on a board.
PROBE: What made you think of this/these words?
Go around the table to identify all
of the ideas that readily come to the participants’ minds.
IDENTIFY whether there are spontaneous references to the classic image
and clichés associated with Canada (cold, wide open space, wild land,
Natives/indigenous, Canadian cottage/cabin, etc.)
If so, probe further: These are
traditional images and ideas associated with Canada. Is there anything else you
know about Canada?
1.2
What other things do you know about Canada?
Conduct a roundtable on knowledge about Canada.
TRY TO STEER PARTICIPANTS AWAY FROM CLICHÉS ASSOCIATED WITH CANADA AS
MUCH AS POSSIBLE.
CANADA’S REPUTATION AND IMAGE
1.3
In your view, what reputation does Canada have? Why? What is your basis
for saying that? Do you have any specific examples to support your statements?
1.4
Is Canada different from other countries you know? What aspects
distinguish Canada from other countries in a positive way? What aspects
distinguish Canada from other countries in a negative way?
1.5
From a French point of view, would you say that Canada’s image has
changed positively or negatively in recent years? Has it remained stable/the
same? Why do you say that? Do you have any specific examples to support your
statements?
CANADIAN VALUES
Questionnaire #2 – IF CANADA WERE A PERSON, WHAT WOULD ITS LIFESTYLE AND
VALUES BE?
Go around the table to identify the
Canadian attributes that spontaneously come to the participants’ minds. Note
the values on a chart.
PROBE: What made you think of these values?
IDENTIFY whether there are spontaneous references to Canadian values,
such as multiculturalism, multilateralism, democracy, tolerance, openness to
diversity and the world, equality, and economic liberalism.
IF PRESENCE OF CANADIAN VALUES: Do you have examples that support your view of
Canada? Why did you mention this value in particular?
GENERAL PROBING: Of all the values mentioned by the participants, which do you think
best define Canada and Canadians?
Is there a Canadian “model”? How is
it different from the French “model”? How is it different from the American
“model”?
CANADIAN CULTURE
Now let’s talk about culture.
Is Canada a country you know well? Is
Canada well known on the French/international scene? How does it make itself
known?
Who are the major Canadian
personalities known in France and elsewhere?
How do these personalities shape
Canada’s image in France and elsewhere in the world?
Is it positive or negative?
TRADE
Do you think a special relationship
exists between Canada and France? How do you define or perceive the
relationship between the two countries?
And how about the economic relations
between the two countries? Are the two countries economic partners? In your
opinion, what type of commercial partner is Canada? Is it reliable? Stable?
Credible? Is it a trustworthy partner?
And compared to other European
countries, how do you view Canada? Is it a better partner than other European
countries or not? Why? And compared to the United States? Compared to Asian
countries? China?
In your opinion, is there a lot of
trade between France and Canada? Is that a good thing? Should there be more or
less? In what sector in particular?
Food products
Do you often see Canadian products in
France? And how about Canadian food products? Are there too many or not enough?
Are the products easily accessible in France? Have you ever bought any (food
products from Canada)? What do you think of the quality of food products
produced by Canada? Why do you say that?
Would you trust Canadian food
products? Would you buy Canadian food products (dairy products, meat, or
vegetables)? Why or why not?
Environment
What is your perception of Canada
with regard to protection of the environment? Is the country doing well on this
front or not? Why do you say that? In your opinion, is Canada doing better or
worse than other countries with regard to environmental protection? Better than
what country? Worse than what country? And compared to France? Compared to
other European countries?
ACCORDING TO THE GROUP’S KNOWLEDGE LEVEL: Do you believe that Canada makes enough effort
with regard to environmental protection or not? What makes you say that? Is it
more or less than other countries? If not, should it do more?
NOTE TO THE FACILITATOR
If there are negative perceptions or opinions concerning oil produced in
Canada, prompt: And
considering other oil-producing countries you know (the United States, Russia,
Saudi Arabia, Norway, Venezuela), what is Canada’s reputation for environmental
protection compared to these countries?
CETA
Have you heard of the Comprehensive
Economic and Trade Agreement (known as the CETA) or the Accord économique et commercial global (AECG)? What do you
know about this agreement?
IF UNKNOWN, INTRODUCE SOME INFORMATION.
POINTS OF INFORMATION FOR THE FACILITATOR – TO BE USED AS NEEDED
It is an economic and trade agreement between Canada and the European
Union.
The agreement concerns the trading of goods, services, investments and
labour.
1-
It abolishes tariffs on nearly all
products traded between Canada and France (except for certain agricultural
products, such as chicken and eggs).
2-
It facilitates temporary work abroad
(allows certain categories of professionals to work 1 or 2 years in Canada).
3-
The agreement protects French AOPs
and AOCs in Canada (on wine, spirits, and certain food products).
4-
The agreement also guarantees all
signatory countries the freedom to legislate in matters of justice, health,
environment, and culture.
In your opinion, is this a good thing
or not? Do you think France needs this agreement? How about the rest of Europe?
And Canada?
Have you heard positive comments
regarding this agreement? What? What do you think about this?
Have you heard criticism or negative
comments regarding this free trade agreement? What? What do you think about
this?
NOTE TO THE FACILITATOR
If participants engage in a very negative discussion regarding the
agreement, prompt with questions along these lines:
1-
One year after the implementation of
this agreement, French exports to Canada increased by 10%. Is that positive?
Does that change your opinion about this agreement?
This agreement is currently in
provisional application only. Do you think France should go ahead and ratify
this free trade agreement? Why or why not?
Who (or which group) is in favour of
this agreement in France? Why are they in favour of this agreement?
Who (or which group) is against this
agreement in France? Why are they against it?
CONCLUSION
Now that we have discussed different
topics about Canada, I would like to do a little role playing to conclude this
focus session.
Now imagine that you are a special
consultant hired by the Canadian embassy. You must help the embassy present
Canada in France. What advice would you give the embassy to present Canada
effectively to…
… French workers?
… French investors?
… students?
… artists? (discuss)
Do have any other comments you would
like to make before we end this discussion?
Thank participants and end the group.