Canadian Wellbeing: The Real Deal

Properly measuring quality of life means moving past how "average" Canadians are doing.

When it comes to quality of life, how are Canadians doing? The answer to that question greatly depends on how you define wellbeing.

Not long ago, the gross domestic product was the primary measure of this. The more goods and services produced in the country, the better off we all were. However, it’s now widely agreed that the GDP does not tell us everything we need to know about quality of life. What if growth in production causes pollution and negative health effects? What if income growth exacerbates disparity, poverty, and homelessness? A higher GDP doesn’t necessarily mean greater wellbeing.

The Canadian Index of Wellbeing (CIW) is a promising initiative that presents a new way to measure our quality of life. It offers the first and only national index with a focus on several key indicators that matter to all Canadians. These include: living standards, healthy populations, community vitality, education, environment, time use, and democratic engagement, as well as arts, culture, and recreation.

Following its inaugural report in 2009, the CIW delved even deeper into the issue with its December 2009 report entitled, “How Are Canadians Really Doing? A Closer Look at Select Groups,”, which focused on Aboriginal Peoples, racialized groups, youth, and low-income Canadians.

This report represents an important detour for the CIW because it suggests we need to go beyond the experience of the “average Canadian” to fully understand how the country is doing. Indeed, there are some glaring gaps between the wellbeing of different groups.

For instance, while the CIW’s first report showed that Canadians were, on average, better off in terms of income and wealth than they were in the past, the more recent report indicates that, with our fraying social safety net, poverty and inequality have been on the rise. The findings include:

1. Visible minority or racialized groups are three times more likely to be poor than other Canadians.
2. In 2006, only 61 per cent of First Nations adults aged 25-54 were employed, compared with 82 per cent for non-aboriginal adults.
3. The median annual income for First Nations people aged 15 and over in Canada was $14,517 in 2005, which is about $11,000 lower than the figure for the non-aboriginal population ($25,955).
4. Minimum wage employment grew from 4.7 per cent in 2000 to 5.1 per cent in 2008 – an increase of three quarters of a million people. This growth disproportionately impacted youth, with the percentage of 14- to 24-year-olds with low-paid jobs rising from 31.2 per cent in 1980 to 45 per cent in 2000.

All of these developments coincided with a steady increase in our GDP.

In the health domain, the CIW’s original report indicated that Canadians don’t feel as healthy as they did in the past. The new report shows that this is especially true for particular groups, including some surprising demographics.

For example, teenagers are increasingly experiencing more health problems than before. Only 67 per cent of 12- to 19-year-olds reported good health in 2005, compared with 80 per cent in 1998.

As well, households with incomes below $20,000 are three times more likely to experience a decline in self-rated health than those with higher incomes. Low-income Canadians also have the highest mortality rates, the lowest life expectancy rates, and the greatest frequency of hospitalization and emergency visits.

As for community vitality, the first CIW report showed that Canadians’ social networks are shrinking. In general, we provide more help to others, crime is down, and community trust is high.

However, when the experiences of select groups are considered, the picture is starkly different. According to the latest report, 81 per cent of visible minorities felt they had experienced discrimination because of their race or ethnic origin. Only 54 per cent of Aboriginal Peoples, Blacks, and Latin Americans and 52 per cent of Southeast Asians reported a sense of community belonging and connectedness, compared to 65 per cent of white people. Racialized and low-income people also felt higher levels of physical insecurity.

These gaps demonstrate that indices that generically measure the experiences of populations often present a picture that is insufficient for either general understanding or policy and program development. In that regard, the most recent CIW report adds considerably to our knowledge of how Canadians are really doing.

Going forward, we need a measure of wellbeing that integrates as much as possible the indicators of gender, racial, and age differences into the actual index. This is not an easy task. It requires collecting and releasing relevant data from Statistics Canada, the Canadian Institute of Health Research (CIHR), and other research outlets in disaggregated formats that allow for a deeper level of analysis.

By looking at the different experiences of Canadians, we can also make giant strides towards more effective research and policy development, which could benefit the wellbeing of all Canadians.