The Ontario Federation of Anglers and Hunters (OFAH) is an influential sport/interest group that has a long history of advocacy and involvement with policies and management related to the conservation of wildlife and outdoor recreation. Since the 1990’s, the OFAH have been outspoken with their criticisms towards particular Indigenous treaty hunting and fishing rights, co-management agreements, and land claims which are perceived to threaten conservation, future recreational opportunities, and the outdoor economy. Using semi-structured interviews with 20 Indigenous and non-Indigenous respondents and a content analysis of the OFAH’s official documents, this thesis analyzes and compares the views surrounding treaty rights between the OFAH leadership and ordinary hunters and fishers inside and outside the organization. Discourse Analysis, Group Position Theory, and Colour Blind Racism theory were used to flesh out how the meanings and perceived legitimacy of treaty rights are constructed and negotiated, and whether opposition to Indigenous harvesting rights reflects a reactionary response to defend settler-Canadians’ sense of superiority, privileges, and access to resources. The results showed that the OFAH and 55% of the respondents expressed feelings of concern, resentment, and in some cases opposition, revealing an established sense of group position. Although the OFAH leaders and 45% of the respondents displayed varying and limited degrees of support for treaty rights, the general pattern showed how OFAH leaders and respondents drew on similar repertoires with arguments and justifications based on equality, fairness, and a concern for wildlife conservation in order to criticize and/or oppose treaty rights. Consequently, these criticisms directly and indirectly work to define and redefine treaty rights and Indigenous treaty hunters and fishers in a negative manner. This case shows how resentment of and opposition to treaty rights within a settler colonial context embodies a perceived threat to settlers’ sense of group position and the status quo. / Thesis / Master of Arts (MA) / The Ontario Federation of Anglers and Hunters (OFAH) is an influential organization that has criticized Indigenous peoples’ treaty hunting and fishing rights and land claims for allegedly threatening conservation, recreational opportunities, and the outdoor economy. This thesis analyzes and compares the views surrounding treaty rights between the OFAH leadership and ordinary hunters and fishers inside and outside the organization. Interviews with 20 (Indigenous and non-Indigenous) respondents and a review of the OFAH’s official sources showed that OFAH leaders and 55% of the respondents expressed feelings of concern, resentment, and opposition. Although OFAH leaders and 45% of the respondents displayed limited degrees of support for treaty rights, the general pattern showed how they drew on similar arguments based on equality, fairness, and a concern for wildlife to criticize and/or oppose treaty rights revealing a defensive reaction to maintain their privileges and access to resources.

This thesis investigates how a change in the municipal asylum seeker share affects voting for the Sweden Democrats (SD), a far-right anti-immigration party, in both national Parliament and Municipal Council elections in Sweden. To circumvent the endogeneity problem, I use an instrumental variables strategy where the share of available apartments in Allmännyttan is used as an instrument for the municipal share of asylum seekers living in Migration Agency provided accommodation (ABO). I have exploited municipal level panel data on municipality characteristics, allocations of asylum seekers and national elections. I am not able to find support for any effect of a change in the municipal share of asylum seekers on voting for the Sweden Democrats. Consequently, I cannot provide any support for either the group position theory or the contact hypothesis.

Explaining the rising support for right-wing populist parties in Europe during the last decade is an issue that interests both economists, sociologists and political scientists. A number of theories suggest that the rising inflow of migrants to Europe has had an important causal effect on right-wing populist support. However, as migration patterns generally are not exogenous to right-wing populist support, it is difficult to interpret the estimates of a correlation study causally.  In this paper, I exploit a Swedish refugee dispersal program as a natural experiment to estimate the effect of refugee inflow on the support for the right-wing populist party the Sweden Democrats using an instrumental variable strategy. Despite detailed institutional knowledge, I am not able to find support for any short-term effects of refugee inflow on the self-reported preferences for the Sweden Democrats. This goes against the findings of most previous studies.  However, the multicollinearity of some of my covariates are high. In addition, as the program was introduced in 2016, there are few years available for identification. Thus, the precision of the estimates is relatively low and the study would benefit from adding more years to the panel data set.