All news

Fact Sheet - First Report of the Institute of Wellbeing

6/9/2009 1:12:00 PM

The first report of the Institute of Wellbeing describes findings in three of the eight CIW domains:
Living Standards
Healthy Populations
Community Vitality

The Report also highlights key links and interconnections among the domains, showing the dynamic interactions that shape wellbeing

Living Standards

Author:
Andrew Sharpe, Ph.D., Executive Director, Centre for the Study of Living Standards
Jean-François Arsenault, Economist, Centre for the Study of Living Standards

Scope

• The Living Standards domain tracks the level and distribution of income and wealth, poverty rates, income volatility and disparity, and economic security, including the security of jobs, food, housing, and the social safety net.
• Measures nine  indicators of living standards, including: after-tax median income; income distribution; incidence of low income; wealth distribution; CSLS economic security index; long-term unemployment; employment rate; CIBC employment quality index; housing sustainability and affordability

Trends

• Looks at data from 1981-2008 to track a number of trends in the evolution of living standards. During this time period:
  • Canadians were on average somewhat better off in terms of income and wealth
  • But, income and wealth inequality increased
  • Little progress was made in reducing poverty
  • There was an overall improvement in labour market conditions, but long-term unemployment increased
  • The social safety net continued to fray, providing less support for the disadvantaged
  • The bottom line was that Canada became a much richer country, but the top 20% received the lion’s share of rising income and wealth

Highlights

• Many Canadians made more money – but this was in part because they worked longer hours
  • Real pre-tax personal income per capita rose 36.5% between 1981 and 2008 and after-tax per capita income rose 28.8%
  • Average annual hours worked per person of working age rose 2.8% over the same period
• Canadians were wealthier on average
  • Average real net worth in 2007 was up 73.3% % on a per capita basis and 51.7%  on a household basis from 1981
• Inequality increased – the rich got richer
  • The after-tax income of the top 20% of households rose 39% from 1981 to 2007,  while the increases for all other income groups were between 21% and 26%
• There was little progress in the fight on poverty. The poverty rate for all persons was 9.2% in 2007, down from 11.6% in 1981. The poverty gap ($6,700) was the same in 2007 as it was in 1981.
• The unemployment rate was lower in 2008 (6.1%) than in 1981 (7.6%) but the proportion of long-term unemployed (more than 52 weeks) was higher in 2008 (6.7%) vs. 1981 (5.7%)
• There was a sizeable increase in the ratio of the employed to the working age population - which reached 63.6% in 2008, up from 60.1% in 1981 due to the increased participation of women in the labour force
• Key social programs provided less support for the working population
  • Welfare benefits in real terms were significantly lower in 2007 than in 1986 – which likely contributed to the increase in income inequality

Healthy Populations

Authors:
Nazeem Muhajarine, Ph.D., University of Saskatchewan & Ronald Labonté, Ph.D., University of Ottawa

Scope

• The Healthy Populations domain focuses on measuring key aspects of health status and some health determinants not covered by other domains
• Measures 10 indicators: self-rated health; health-adjusted life expectancy; diabetes; depression; life expectancy at birth; infant mortality; smoking; patient satisfaction with health services; population with a regular family doctor; influenza immunization among age 65+

Trends

• The relatively high standard of living enjoyed by Canadians is matched by life expectancy rates that are among the best in the world. But a closer look at additional health indicators reveals a more mixed picture:
  • While Canadians generally have high levels of health, there are discrepancies in health according to social groupings
  • Life expectancies are substantially shorter in all three northern territories – shockingly shorter in Nunavut where a child born in 2004 could expect to live only 70.4 years – more than 10 years less than the national average. This mirrors the poor health status and life expectancy of Aboriginal peoples, who make up 85% of Nunavut’s population.
  • Taking into account the limitations brought on by disease and disability, the number of years lived in full health by Canadians peaked in 1996 for both women and men (59.7 and 55.7 years of expected good health respectively) and have since dropped.
  • Canadians are increasingly likely to develop a chronic disease or mental illness during their lifetime

Highlights

• On average, a Canadian born in 2005 could expect to live to 80.4 years, up from 74.9 years in 1979
• Though living longer, Canadians’ rating of their health status has declined. The proportion of Canadians who considered themselves as having very good or excellent health peaked in 1998 at 65.2% and decreased dramatically in 2003 to 58.4%.  This decline runs across the population but is most marked among teenagers
• The majority of Canadians rate the quality of their health care system as excellent or good – 87% in 2007 up from 84% in 2000-01
• Obesity, linked to a number of chronic illnesses including diabetes, reached 16% in 2007, up from 12.7% in 1994
• Rates of chronic diseases are substantially higher among Aboriginal Canadians – one factor contributing to the unacceptable health gap between Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal Canadians. In 2001, 11% of adults on selected reserves reported diabetes – more than three times the level of the general population
• Some Canadians are adopting healthier lifestyles
  • The rate of smoking among youth dropped by 42% between 1994 and 2007. The gender gap (girls used to smoke more than boys) has disappeared. But smoking rates among those 20-34 and 45-65 went up between 2005 and 2007
  • Physical activity increased over last decade, but stalled between 2005 and 2007

Community Vitality

Author: Katherine Scott, Canadian Council on Social Development

Scope

• The Community Vitality domain focuses on issues of social relationships and networks, and on the conditions that promote these relationships and facilitate community action on behalf of current and future residents
• Measures 11 indicators including: participation in group activities; volunteering; number of close relatives; providing assistance to others; property crime; violent crime; walking alone after dark; trust, experience of discrimination; caring for others; belonging to community

Trends

• Canadians have strong social relationships with their families and communities - the positive trend of most of the indicators suggests that the wellbeing of Canadians, as measured by the quality of their relationships, is improving over time

Highlights

• Canadians are participating more in organizations and volunteer activities
  • More Canadians (61%) were members of non-profit, voluntary organizations in 2003 compared with the late 1990s (51%)
  • Volunteering with non-profit and charitable organizations was higher in 2003 (33%) than in 1997 (31%)
• Our social networks are shrinking, as we report fewer close relatives and friends
  • In 2003 compared to 1996, the number of Canadians reporting six or more closerelatives dropped (37% vs. 34%) and the number reporting six or more close friends dropped (40% vs. 30%)
• Canadians are providing more help and caring more about others
  • In 2004 compared to 1997, 83% of Canadians reported they extend unpaid care and assistance to family, friends and neighbours – an increase from 73%
  • Canadians show more concern about the needs of others regardless of the pressures of their own lives (42% in 2003 vs. 27% in 1994)
• Crime is going down, including the national crime rate, property crime and violent crime – and Canadians generally feel safe walking alone after dark
• A majority of Canadians believe that they can trust others, but a sizeable minority does not
• 35% of visible minorities report discrimination, compared to 10% of people not of a visible minority group
• Canadians feel they belong, with 64% of us expressing strong attachment to their local community in 2005, up from 58% in 2001 – attachment is highest in Newfoundland and lowest in Quebec

Connecting the Dots

Why it’s important

• One of the key goals of the CIW is to connect the dots among the many factors that influence wellbeing. The intention is to go beyond the traditional “silo approach” that has too often shaped public policy decisions
• It is only by understanding how a variety of factors combine and interact that policy shapers and decision makers can bring forward policies and programs that meet the challenges of the 21st century

Money and education interconnect with health and community vitality

• People with higher incomes and education tend to live longer, are less likely to have diabetes and other chronic conditions, and are consistently more likely to report excellent or very good health
• Household income continues to be the best predictor of future health status. The formula is straightforward: more income equals better health, less income equals worse health. This is true in all age groups and for both women and men
• The effect of income and education is especially marked among women. Women in the lowest income category report poorer health than men with similar incomes. Fewer women than men at the lowest education level (less than secondary school) report positive health.
• People with higher levels of education and family incomes are more likely to be involved in at least one organization. Higher income and older individuals tend to be more deeply engaged in volunteer activities and are more likely to report that “people can be trusted”

Some are more likely to be poor than others

• Together, lone parents, unattached individuals aged 45-64, recent immigrants (since 2000, three-quarters of newcomers are visible minorities), persons with work-limiting disabilities, and Aboriginal peoples living off-reserve, represented 62% of persistent low-income persons, but just 25.9% of the population (2003)

There is good reason to worry about today’s youth

• Teenagers are experiencing a reduction in both their levels of income and in their health
• In 1980, the proportion of workers aged 14-24 who worked in low-paid jobs was 31.2%, but by 2000 the percentage jumped to 45.0%. This at a time when education attainment, productivity and GDP were steadily rising
• In 1998, over 80% of 12–19 year olds reported excellent or very good health, but by 2005 only 67% did so in. A steadily increasing share of teenagers reported problems with everyday functions (memory, thinking and mental wellbeing – a trend that augurs poorly for their health as this generation ages)

Good public policies can improve wellbeing, bad ones can harm it

• The introduction of the child tax credit and the National Child Benefits Supplement in the mid- 1990s provided additional income to poor working families and lowered the poverty rate for this group
• Poverty among elderly Canadians dropped by 15.6 percentage points from 21.0% in 1981 to only 5.4% in 2006. This development reflected increased government transfers to seniors in the form of Canada Pension Plan/Quebec Pension Plan, Old Age Security, and Guaranteed Income

Supplement payments

• Changes in Employment Insurance have made the program less generous in terms of required qualification period, coverage, and duration of benefits. In 2007, the proportion of unemployed Canadians receiving EI benefits was 44.4%, down from 66.6% in 1981 and 83.8% in 1989
• Financial risk has also increased due to the delisting of medical services such as vision care and physiotherapy in Ontario. Private out-of-pocket spending on health care in Canada rose from $2.3 billion current dollars in 1981 to $16.5 billion in 2007

Canada needs policies that address root causes

• Health, for example, is greatly influenced by many socio-economic conditions. These conditions have been shaped by both private economic practices (‘the market’) and public policies (regulation, taxes and transfers)
• Delivering better health results will require public policy interventions tailored to socially excluded groups as well as initiatives outside the health field. These include poverty reduction measures such as a living wage, affordable housing, food security, early learning initiatives, and more available, affordable childcare

News & Announcements