Social and Demographic Trends in Burnaby and Neighbouring Communities 1981 to 2006

Transcription

1 Social and Demographic Trends in and Neighbouring Communities 1981 to 2006 October 2009

2 Table of Contents October Introduction Population... 3 Population Growth... 3 Age Structure Families and Households... 6 Family Type and Size... 6 Household Type and Size... 7 Dwellings... 9 Tenure... 9 Affordability Cultural Diversity Immigration Mother Tongue Home Language Visible Minorities Aboriginal Identity Labour Market Labour Force Jobs to Labour Force Employment by Industry Employment by Gender & Industry Unemployment Education Income Average Income Incidence of Low Income Summary Social and DEMOGRAPHIC Trends in and NEIGHBOURING communities: 1981 to

3 1. Introduction Over the last 25 years, has witnessed significant changes in its demographic profile. It has become a much more urban and culturally diverse community. This report provides a statistical picture of those changes using Statistics Canada Census data from 1981 to Information is provided on population size, age structure, families and households, cultural diversity, labour force, education and income. To add perspective to s current profile, 2006 Census information is included for the neighbouring communities of,, the (Port Moody, Coquitlam and Port Coquitlam combined),, and the (City and District of North and West combined). Information for Metro as a whole is included as well. Together, this information provides an overview of important social and demographic trends and establishes a baseline for monitoring changes in the future. Social and DEMOGRAPHIC Trends in and NEIGHBOURING communities: 1981 to

4 2. Population Population Growth is situated in the central area of Metro. As an established municipality, few tracts of undeveloped land remain for new residential development. Recent population growth has mainly occurred in areas which have undergone residential intensification. Over the last twenty-five years, s population has grown by 49%, from 136,494 in 1981 to 202,799 in By comparison, Metro s population grew by 67%, from 1,268,185 in 1981 to 2,116,585 in 2006, driven mainly by development in the outer suburbs (see Figure 1). As shown in Figure 3, of the neighbouring areas, had the highest growth rate (13.6%) while the had the lowest (1.2%) between 2001 and s population represented 9.6% of the Metro s population in 2006, down from 11% in Figure 2: Population Growth Rate and Metro, 1981 to % In the 5 year period between 2001 to 2006, s population grew by 4.6 %, less than the regional rate of 6.5% (see Figure 2). Figure 1 Population Growth - and Metro, 1981 to % Metro People 250, , , ,000 50,000 0 Figure 3: Population Growth Rate and Neighbouring Communities, 2001 to Metro Metro Metro People 2,500,000 2,000,000 1,500,000 1,000, ,000 0 Social and DEMOGRAPHIC Trends in and NEIGHBOURING communities: 1981 to

5 Age Structure Figure 4: Population Age Distribution - Figure 4 illustrates s changing age structure. The aging trend is most noticeable in the baby boom generation. Those aged 40 to 59 (the age of the baby boomers in 2006) represented of the population in 2006 compared to 23% of the population in The percentage of seniors also increased, but at a lesser rate, in the same period, from 13% of the population in 1986 to 14% in Except for a slight increase in the percentage of 20 to 24 year olds between 1996 and 2006, the percentage of younger adults (aged 20 to 39) has decreased. In 2006, 20 to 39 year olds represented of the population, down from 37% in The percentage of children (aged 0 to 19) decreased slightly from 22% of the population in 1986 to 21% in residents were slightly older than their regional counterparts in 2006 (see Table 1). Those aged 0 to 19 accounted for 21% of the city s population, compared to the regional proportion of 22%. The working age population (20 to 64 year olds) represented 63% of the city s population compared to 66% for the region. On the other hand, younger seniors aged 65 to 79 represented 9.9% of the population in compared to 9.2% for the region while older seniors (those aged 80 and over) represented 3.9% of s population compared to 3.6% for the region. Of the 2006 population aged 80 and over, 63% were women in compared to 64% in Metro Females Males Females Males Females Males Social and DEMOGRAPHIC Trends in and NEIGHBOURING communities: 1981 to

6 Table 1: Age Proportions - and Neighbouring Communities, 2006 Age Group North Shore Metro % 4.9% 4.5% 4.5% 6.2% 5.2% 4.3% % 14.3% 18.9% 17.9% 21.1% 20.8% 13.6% 17.8% % 39.2% 30.5% 35.1% 35.3% 36.1% 43.2% 37.1% % % 29.8% % 27.2% % 9.2% 11.1% 9.4% 8.5% 7.5% 9.4% 9.2% % 4.4% 4.8% 3.4% % 3.8% 3.6% Of the neighbouring communities, (27%) and the (26%) had the highest proportion of preschool and school age populations. had the highest proportion of 20 to 44 year olds (43%), and the had the highest proportion of seniors aged 65 to 79 years (11.1%) and seniors 80 years and over (4.8%). Social and DEMOGRAPHIC Trends in and NEIGHBOURING communities: 1981 to

7 18% 16% 14% 12% 3. Families and Households Family Type and Size In 2006, there were 56,035 census families 1 in, up from 52,155 in 2001 and 36,175 in The majority of families were headed by married couples (75%), 8% were headed by common-law couples, and 17% were headed by single parents in As shown in Figure 5, there has been a steady increase in the percentage of single parent families since Figure 5: Single Parent Families, 1981 to 2006 Figure 6: Single Parent Families and Neighbouring Communities, % 17% 16% 15% 14% 13% Metro Of s 56,035 families in 2006, 34% had no children living at home, 32% had one child at home, 25% had two or more children at home and 9% had three or more children. Of the neighbouring areas, had the highest rate of families with no children at home (43%) while had the highest percentage (12%) of families with 3 or more children. The average number of persons per family in was 2.9 compared to 3.0 for Metro (see Table 2). Single Parent Families Of the 9,285 single parent families in 2006, 83% were headed by women, a rate which has largely remained unchanged since Of the neighbouring communities, only had as high a percentage of single parent families in The regional average was slightly lower at 15% (see Figure 6). 1 Statistics Canada makes reference to census families and economic families. A census family generally refers to a couple (married or common-law) and their children who live together in the same home; a single parent and his or her child(ren) who live in the same home; or a couple without any children who live in the same home. Children in a census family include grandchildren living with their grandparent(s) but with no parents present. A census family is often referred to as a nuclear family. An economic family refers to all persons living in the same home who are related by blood, marriage, common-law or adoption. By definition, all members of a census family are also members of an economic family but an economic family includes extended family members if they are living in the same home. Social and DEMOGRAPHIC Trends in and NEIGHBOURING communities: 1981 to

8 Table 2: Families by Number of Children at Home - and Neighbouring Communities, 2006 Family Size North Shore Metro No children 34% 43% 37% 31% 34% 31% 36% 1 child 32% 29% 27% 31% 27% 29% 29% 2 children 25% 22% 28% 29% 28% 32% 23% 27% 3 or more children 9% 6% 8% 9% 12% 9% 8% 9% Total number of families 56,035 15,585 48,150 50, ,755 55, , ,120 Average number of persons per family As shown in Table 3, only 6% of children living at home in were aged 25 and over in By 2006, this percentage had grown to 17%. Figure 7: Household Growth Rate and Metro, 1981 to % Table 3: Age of Children Living at Home -, % 8% under 6 years 21% 24% 23% 21% 19% 18% 6-14 years 35% 32% 34% 33% 32% 29% years 15% 12% 11% 12% 12% 12% years 24% 22% 21% 21% 23% 24% 25 years & over 6% 9% 11% 13% 15% 17% % Metro Household Type and Size The number of households 2 in grew from 52,600 in 1981 to 78,025 in 2006, an increase of 48%. By comparison, the number of households in Metro increased at a higher rate of 71% during this period, from 476,720 to 817,030. As shown in Figure 7, the greatest 5-year growth period in occurred between 1981 and 1986 (11% increase). In contrast, the highest 5-year growth period in Metro occurred between 1986 and 1991 (15% increase), a period when the number of households grew by 8%. 2 A household refers to a person or group of persons who occupy the same dwelling. A household may consist of a family, with or without other persons, two families occupying the same dwelling, a group of unrelated individuals, or one person living alone. Social and DEMOGRAPHIC Trends in and NEIGHBOURING communities: 1981 to

9 Family households 3 represented over two-thirds (68%) of all households in in Of these, 95% were one-family and 5% were multiple-family households. The remaining 32% of households were non-family. 4 In 1981, 69% of households were comprised of families. This percentage dipped to 64% in 1991 and has since gradually increased (see Figure 8). Figure 8: Household Type, 1981 to One-family Multiple-family Non-family In 1981, the average household size in was 2.53, falling to 2.43 persons in By 2006, average household size had increased to 2.57 persons. Metro followed a similar trend during this period (see Figure 10). Figure 10: Average Number of Persons per Household and Metro, 1981 to Metro Of the neighbouring communities, the highest percentages of non-family households in 2006 were found in and (46% and 44%, respectively). In contrast, the highest percentages of family households were found in (78%) and (77%). also had the highest percentage (7%) of multiple-family households (see Figure 9). Figure 9: Households by Household Type, and Neighbouring Communities, Metro One-family Multiple-family Non-family 3 Family households are divided into two subcategories: one-family households and multiple-family households. A one-family household consists of a single family (e.g. a couple with or without children). A multiple-family household is made up of two or more families occupying the same dwelling. 4 A non-family household consists of either one person living alone or of two or more persons who share a dwelling but do not constitute a family. Social and DEMOGRAPHIC Trends in and NEIGHBOURING communities: 1981 to

10 Dwellings There has been a notable change in the type of dwellings occupied by residents over the last 25 years. In 1981, single family houses represented over half (52%) of the city s housing stock compared to only 28% in In contrast, apartments in buildings with 5 or more floors increased from of the city s housing stock in 1981 to 19% in 2006 (see Table 4). Table 4: Dwelling Type, # % # % # % # % # % # % Single Detached 27, , , , , , Semi-detached n/a 2, , , , ,675 3 Row house n/a 3, , , , ,250 9 Apartment, detached duplex n/a 2, , , , , Apartment, building -5+ floors 5, , , , , , Apartment, building < than 5 floors 13, , , , , , Other n/a Total no. of units 52, , , , , , As shown in Table 5, of the neighbouring communities, the had the highest percentage of single family dwellings (45%) while had the highest percentage of apartments in both low and high rise buildings (66%). Table 5: Dwelling Type and Neighbouring Communities, 2006 Dwelling Unit Type (as % of housing stock) Metro Single Family House 27% 18% 44% 41% 43% 45% 19% 35% Apartment (in both low and high rise buildings) 46% 66% 34% 31% 23% 26% 59% (e.g. duplexes, Other townhomes) 27% 16% 22% 28% 34% 29% 22% 25% Total dwelling units 78,030 27,050 67,930 61, ,145 70, , ,030 Tenure Since 1991, home ownership rates have steadily increased. In 2006, 61% of households owned their dwellings compared to a low of 52% in 1986 and 1991 (see Figure 11). Figure 11: Owner-Occupied Dwellings, 1981 to % 58% 56% 54% 52% Social and DEMOGRAPHIC Trends in and NEIGHBOURING communities: 1981 to

11 As shown in Figure 12, ownership rates vary for neighbouring communities. In 2006, the highest rates were in (77%), (76%) and (75%) while the lowest rate was in (48%). In the region as a whole, in 2006, 65% of households owned their dwellings. Figure 12: Owner-occupied Dwellings and Neighbouring Communities, 2006 As shown in Figure 14, average gross monthly rent for tenant households in in 2006 was $860. Highest average gross monthly rents were found on the ($1,075) and ($983), and lowest average gross monthly rents were found in ($806) and ($737). Figure 14: Average Gross Monthly Rent and Neighbouring Communities, $1,100 7 $1,000 $900 $800 $700 $600 Metro Metro In 2006, the average value of owned dwellings in was $481,545. Of the neighbouring communities, the North Shore had the highest average value of owned dwellings ($765,236) and, where apartments comprise 66% of the housing stock, had the lowest ($374,303) (see Figure 13). Figure 13: Average Value of Owned Dwellings and Neighbouring Communities, 2006 $800,000 $700,000 $600,000 $500,000 $400,000 $300,000 $200,000 Metro Affordability A measure of housing affordability is the percentage of households spending or more of total monthly household income on shelter costs. In 2006, one third (25,790) of s 78,030 households spent or more of their income on shelter. Of these households, renters were much more likely than owners to spend a substantial portion of their income on shelter. Since , the percentage of renters paying or more of their total monthly household income on rent has increased from in 1986 to 43% in For owners, the percentage has increased significantly from 14% in 1986 to 27% in 2006 (see Figure 15). Figure 15: Households Spending or More of their Income on Shelter, 1986 to renters owners Social and DEMOGRAPHIC Trends in and NEIGHBOURING communities: 1981 to figures have not been included since the 1981 Census reported on the number of households that spent 25% or more of their income on shelter.

12 In 2006, similar affordability patterns were experienced in neighbouring communities and Metro as whole, with 43% of renters and 27% of owners in Metro spending or more of their total monthly income on shelter (see Figure 16). Figure 16: Households Spending or More of their Income on Shelter and Neighbouring Communities, 2006 Metro renters owners 55% 45% 35% 25% 4. Cultural Diversity Immigration Over the past 25 years, s population has become much more culturally diverse. In 2006, immigrants 6 comprised over half (51%) of the city s population, up from 28% in 1981 (see Figure 17). Of the 102,030 immigrants in in 2006, the highest proportion (38% or 38,515) immigrated to Canada between 1991 and Figure 17: Immigrant Population, 1981 to 2006 Of the neighbouring communities, only (57%) had a higher immigrant population than (see Figure 18). Figure 18: Immigrant Population and Neighbouring Communities, 2006 In 2006, the largest group of s immigrants originated from China (21,465), accounting for 21% of the immigrant population, followed by immigrants from Hong Kong (11,120), Taiwan (8,630), Philippines (6,350) and South Korea (5,845), as depicted in Figure 19. Figure 19: Top 10 Places of Origin of s Immigrant Population, 2006 China Hong Kong Taiwan Philippines South Korea India Italy UK Viet Nam Fiji Metro 0 5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000 25,000 Number of people 6 Immigrants include all residents who have been granted the right to live in Canada permanently by immigration authorities. Most were born outside of Canada, but a small number were born in Canada. Social and DEMOGRAPHIC Trends in and NEIGHBOURING communities: 1981 to

13 7 As shown in Table 6, of s 21,790 recent immigrants (immigrants who arrived in Canada between 2001 and 2006), the majority originated from China (36%) followed by South Korea, (8.7%), the Philippines (8.4%), Taiwan (6.4%) and India (5.3%). Table 6: Top 10 Places of Birth of s Recent Immigrants, 2001 to 2006 China 7, % South Korea 1, % Philippines 1, % Taiwan 1, % India 1, % Iran % Russian Federation % Afghanistan % United States of America % Hong Kong % All other places of birth 5, % Total recent immigrants 21, In 2006, immigrants from Asia represented 66% of all immigrants in, compared to 26% in In contrast, Europe (including the UK) was the source of 29% of all immigrants in 2006, down from 58% in 1981 (see Figure 20). Figure 20: Places of Origin of s Immigrant Population, 1981 and 2006 USA UK Other Europe Asia Other Mother Tongue The diversity of s population is also reflected in the languages spoken by residents. In 1981, 77% of the population spoke English as a mother tongue 7 (see Figure 21). By 2006, those with English as a mother tongue represented less than half of s population (43.5%) 8. In Metro 57% of the population spoke English as a mother tongue in Figure 21: Population with English as a Mother Tongue-, 1981 to % 8 75% 7 65% 55% 45% As shown in Table 7, the most common mother tongues other than English in 2006 were Chinese 9 (26%), Korean (3.6%), Tagalog (2.6%), Punjabi (2.5%) and Italian (2.2%). Table 7 : Top Ten Mother Tongues -, 2006 English 85, % Chinese (incl. Cantonese & Mandarin) 50, % Korean 7, % Tagalog 5, % Panjabi (Punjabi) 4, % Italian 4, % Spanish 3, % Persian (Farsi) 2, % Hindi 2, % Russian 1, Vietnamese 1, Persons reporting a single mother tongue 196, Social and DEMOGRAPHIC Trends in and NEIGHBOURING communities: 1981 to Mother tongue is defined as the first language learned at home in childhood and still understood by the individual at the time of the Census. 8 The Census for 1986, 1991, 1996, 2001 and 2006 provided respondents with the opportunity to report more than one language learned in childhood. Statistics in this section are based on the population reporting a single mother tongue. 9 Of the 26% of the population reporting Chinese as a mother tongue, 8.4% specifically identified Cantonese and 7.5% identified Mandarin as their mother tongues.

14 8 7 Of s neighbours, the had the highest percentage of the population with English as a mother tongue (71%) and had the lowest (39%) in 2006 (see Figure 22). Figure 22: Population with English as a Mother Tongue, and Neighbouring Communities, 2006 Home Language Similar to mother tongue, the number of people reporting a home language other than English has increased over the last 10 two decades. In 1981, 89% of the population spoke English as their home language. By 2006, 62% of residents with a single 11 home language spoke English at home (see Figure 23). 95% 9 85% 8 Metro Figure 23: English as a Home Language, 1981 to 2006 Chinese 12 (21%), Korean (3.3%), Punjabi (1.5%), Tagalog (1.3%) and Persian (1.1%) were the most common home languages after English (see Table 8). had 58 different home languages in Table 8: Top Ten Home Languages, 2006 English 120, % Chinese (incl. Cantonese and Mandarin) 40, % Korean 6, % Punjabi 2, % Tagalog 2, % Persian (Farsi) 2, % Spanish 1, % Russian 1, % Italian 1, % Vietnamese 1, % Persons reporting a single home language 192, Four percent of s population (7,950) reported speaking both English and a language other than French at home in As with mother tongue, of s neighbours in 2006, the had the highest percentage of residents who spoke English at home (84%) and had the lowest share (53%). In Metro, 7 of residents reported English as a home language (see Figure 24). Figure 24: English as a Home Language and Neighbouring Communities, % 7 65% Metro 10 Home language is defined as the language most often spoken at home. 11 Statistics for home language are based on the population reporting a single home language. 12 Of the 21% who identified Chinese as a home language, 6.8% specifically identified Cantonese and 6.9% identified Mandarin as their home language. Social and DEMOGRAPHIC Trends in and NEIGHBOURING communities: 1981 to

15 Visible Minorities The 1996 Census was the first time information on visible minorities 13 was collected. In 1996, 69,590 people or 39% of s population described themselves as visible minorities. In 2006, over half (55%) of s residents identified themselves as visible minorities (111,295 people). The dominant visible minority groups in 2006 were people of Chinese, South Asian, and Filipino origin. Of s neighbours, had the highest percentage of visible minorities (65% of its population) while the had the lowest percentage (23%). In total, 42% of Metro s residents described themselves as visible minorities (see Figure 25). Figure 25: Visible Minorities and Neighbouring Communities, Metro Aboriginal Identity 3.5% % % % 0. The 1996, 2001 and 2006 Censuses included a question on Aboriginal identity. 14 In 1996, 2,500 people identified themselves as Aboriginal in (1% of the City total). In 2006, this number had increased to 3,010 people although the percentage remained constant at 1% of s population. In Metro, 2% percent of the population identified themselves as Aboriginal in 2006 (see Figure 26). Figure 26: Aboriginal Population and Neighbouring Communities, 2006 Metro As shown in Table 9, s aboriginal population is much younger than s population as a whole. Table 9: Age Distribution of s Aboriginal population, 2006 Aboriginal Population Total Population Age Group # % # % % 9, % % 33, % , % 78, % % 53, % % 20, % % 7, % Total 3, , Statistics Canada defines visible minorities as persons, other than Aboriginal peoples, who are non-caucasian in race or non-white in colour. 14 Aboriginal identity refers to those persons who reported identifying with at least one Aboriginal group, (i.e, North American Indian, Métis or Inuit (Eskimo), and/or those who reported being a Treaty Indian or a Registered Indian as defined by the Indian Act of Canada and/or who were members of an Indian Band or First Nation). Social and DEMOGRAPHIC Trends in and NEIGHBOURING communities: 1981 to

16 85% 8 75% 7 65% 55% 5. Labour Market Labour Force The labour force refers to persons, 15 years of age and over, who were either employed or unemployed (i.e., persons without paid employment who had actively looked for paid work) during the week prior to Census Day. Over the twentyfive year period between 1981 and 2006, there has been a gradual decrease in the labour force participation rate (the percentage of population 15 years and older in the labour force) in. In 1981, 68% of the population aged 15 and over were in the labour force. By 2006, the participation rate had dropped to 64%. During this time, the male labour force participation rate decreased from 8 in 1981 to 69% in 2006, while the female participation rate remained comparatively constant at around (see Figure 27). Figure 27: Labour Force Participation Rates, 1981 to 2006 Figure 28: Labour Force Composition, 1981 to % 52% 48% 44% 7 65% Men Women The participation rate for women with children at home is higher than the participation rate for the general female population aged 15 and over in (see Figure 29). In 2006, 66% of women with children at home were in the labour force compared to 53% with no children at home. Women whose children were all under 6 years old had the highest participation rate (68%), followed by women whose children were 6 years old and over (66%) and then women with children both under 6 and 6 years and over (63%). Figure 29: Female Labour Force Participation Rates, 2006 Men Women Total 55% In terms of composition, there has been a steady increase of women in the labour force. In 2006, women accounted for almost half (48%) of s labour force, up from 44% in 1981 (see Figure 28). Women Women - no children at home Women with children at home Women with children under 6 only Women with children under 6 & 6+ Women with children 6+ only Of the neighbouring communities, the 2006 labour force participation rates ranged from 63% in (just under s rate of 64%) to 7 in the. New Westminster had the highest female participation rate (66%) and the had the highest male participation rate (75%), as shown in Figure 30. Social and DEMOGRAPHIC Trends in and NEIGHBOURING communities: 1981 to

17 Figure 30: Labour Force Participation Rates and Neighbouring Communities, % 7 65% 55% Metro Men Women Total Jobs to Labour Force The jobs to labour force balance in a city is a measure of the opportunity for workers to hold a job in their home municipality. Often referred to as the jobs to labour ratio, this measure is calculated by dividing the total number of jobs in the city by the total number of employed city residents. In 2006, had 115,010 fixed workplace jobs 15 and an employed labour force of 102,120 people, or 1.13 jobs for every employed resident. Of the neighbouring communities, (1.24) and (1.07) also had more jobs than employed labour force while New Westminster (.73), the (.7), the (.61) and (.6) had fewer jobs than employed labour force (see Figure 31). Figure 31: Ratio of Jobs to Employed Labour Force and Neighbouring Communities, 2006 In terms of the actual percentage of residents who work in their home city, 28% of employed residents worked in in As shown in Figure 32, of the neighbouring communities, had the highest percentage of residents who worked in their home municipality (53%) and had the lowest (15%). Figure 32: Percentage of Employed Residents who work in their home municipality (area) and Neighbouring Communities, 2006 New Westminster A fixed workplace job refers to a job that takes place in mainly one location. A job with no fixed workplace refers to a job where the worker travels to different locations. Examples of workers with no fixed workplace jobs include contractors, tradespersons, couriers and taxi drivers. Social and DEMOGRAPHIC Trends in and NEIGHBOURING communities: 1981 to

18 As indicated in Figure 33, of the total number of jobs in Metro in 2006 (977,615), had the largest share (34%) and had the smallest share (2%). s share was 12%. Figure 33: Share of Metro s Jobs and Neighbouring Communities, 2006 Other areas 16% 12% 2% 6% 11% 34% 7% 12% Employment by Industry In 2006, the retail trade industry employed the largest proportion of s labour force (12%), followed by professional, scientific and technical services (), health care and social service related industries (9%), manufacturing industries (8%), and accommodation and food service industries (8%). As shown in Table 10, retail trade also employed the largest proportion of the labour force in (12%), the (12%) and Metro (11%). Table 10: Labour Force by Industry - and Neighbouring Communities, 2006 New West Metro Retail trade 12% 11% 12% 11% 12% 9% 11% Professional, scientific and technical services 7% 14% 9% 5% 8% 9% Health care and social assistance 9% 11% 8% 9% 9% 9% Manufacturing 8% 9% 5% 8% 11% 8% 7% 8% Accommodation and food services 8% 7% 7% 9% 7% 7% 8% Educational services 7% 7% 7% 6% 5% 7% 8% 7% Construction 6% 7% 5% 4% 8% 7% 4% 6% Wholesale trade 6% 5% 4% 7% 6% 6% 4% 5% Transportation and warehousing 5% 6% 4% 8% 8% 5% 4% 6% Finance and insurance 5% 4% 6% 6% 4% 5% 5% 5% Other 24% 26% 28% 23% 26% 26% 29% 26% Employment by Gender and Industry Figure 34: Employment by Gender 2006 In terms of gender, the industries that employed the most women in in 2006 were health care and social services (15%), retail trade (13%), accommodation and food service industries (), professional, scientific and technical services (9%) and educational services (8%). The industries that employed the most men in were professional, scientific and technical services (11%), manufacturing (), retail trade (), construction (9%) and wholesale trade (7%) (see Figure 34). 16% 12% 8% 4% Construction Manufacturing Wholesale Trade Retail Trade Prof., science & tech. Men Women Educational services Health Care & Social Accommodation & Food Social and DEMOGRAPHIC Trends in and NEIGHBOURING communities: 1981 to

19 Unemployment Over the last twenty-five years, s unemployment rate has fluctuated from 4.9% in 1981, to 10.9% in 1986, to 6.8% in 2006 (see Figure 35). Figure 35: Unemployment Rate, 1981 to 2006 In relation to neighbouring communities, had the highest unemployment rate in 2006 (6.8%) while the North Shore had the lowest rate (4.7%). Across Metro the rate was 5.6% (see Figure 36). Figure 36: Unemployment Rate: and Neighbouring Communities, % 8% 6% 4% 8% 7% 6% 5% 4% 3% 2% 2% Metro In relation to the different segments of the population, also had the highest unemployment rates for men (6.2%) and women (7.4%), including women with no children at home (7.2%) and women with children at home (7.1%) in The had the lowest unemployment rates in these categories in In terms of youth aged 15 to 24, unemployment is traditionally higher than the general population. In 2006, the unemployment rate for youth in was 11.8%. Of the neighbouring communities, the unemployment rate for youth ranged from a low of 10.1% in to 12.1% in (see Figure 37). The Metro rate was 11%. Figure 37: Unemployment Rates and Neighbouring Communities, % 12% 8% 6% Men Women Youth yrs Women - no children at home Women with children at home 4% 2% Metro Social and DEMOGRAPHIC Trends in and NEIGHBOURING communities: 1981 to

20 6. Education Educational attainment has steadily increased in since The proportion of the population aged 15 and over with some form of post secondary education increased from 45% in 1981 to 57% in Similarly, only 17% of the population aged 15 and over did not have high school graduation in 2006 compared to 42% in 1981 (see Figure 38). Figure 38: Educational Attainment, 1981 to 2006 The percentage of residents with university degrees increased from 8% in 1981 to 26% in Of residents aged 25 to 64 years with post secondary qualifications, the top fields of study in 2006 were: business management and public administration; architecture, engineering and related technologies; and health, parks, recreation and fitness. In the surrounding communities, the percentage of the population aged 15 and over with some form of post secondary education in 2006 ranged from 48% in to 65% on the (see Figure 39). 7 Figure 39: Educational Attainment and Neighbouring Communities, 2006 Pop. without high school graduation Pop. with post secondary education Pop. with degree 7 Metro Pop. without high school graduation Pop. with post secondary Pop. with degree 16 In 2001, educational attainment was measured for the population aged 20 and over in contrast to the population aged 15 and over in 1981, 1986, 1991, 1996 and For this reason, 2001 has not been included in this chart. Social and DEMOGRAPHIC Trends in and NEIGHBOURING communities: 1981 to

21 $140,000 $120,000 $100, Income Average Income Figure 40 presents average before-tax incomes for economic families for and neighbouring communities in The ($125,491) and ($88,971) 18 had the highest average income for families. The lowest family incomes were in ($74,790) and ($74,413). Average family income in Metro was $87,788. $80,000 $60,000 Figure 40: Average Before-tax Income for Families and Neighbouring Communities, 2005 Average income differs by family type. In, economic families (including married and common-law couples) had an average before-tax income of $79,842 in 2005 compared to an average of $62,481 for male single-parent economic families and $46,228 for female single-parent economic families. The average before-tax income for non-family persons was $31,574. Incidence of Low Income Metro The most widely used measure of poverty is Statistics Canada s Low Income Cut-Offs (LICOs). While Statistics Canada states that LICOs are not official poverty lines, the LICOs represent levels of income at which people spend disproportionate amounts of money for food, shelter and clothing. LICOs are based on family and community size, and are updated annually to account for changes in the consumer price index. 17 An economic family refers to all the persons who live in the same dwelling who are related to each other by blood, marriage, common-law or adoption. In 2005, the highest proportion of families with incomes below the before-tax LICOs in and neighbouring communities were found in (24.2%) and (22.1%). The had the lowest proportion of low income families (12.2%). Of and the neighbouring communities, the highest proportion of non-family persons 15 years and over with incomes below the before-tax LICOs were found in (44.2%) and (42.9%). The had the lowest proportion of low income individuals (33.1%), as depicted in Figure 41. Figure 41: Low Income Families and Non-Family Persons and Neighbouring Communities, 2005 The 2006 Census also provided information on the prevalence of low income amongst children under 6 years and seniors aged 65 and over. Of and neighbouring communities, the highest incidences of before-tax low income amongst children in 2005 were found in (26.8%) and (26.3%). Amongst seniors, (26.7%) and (25%) had the highest incidences of before-tax low income with at 24.1% (see Figure 42). Figure 42: Low Income Amongst Children and Seniors and Neighbouring Communities, % 15% 5% Families Non-family persons Children under 6 Seniors (65+) Metro Metro 18 Income from all sources from the year preceding the Census is used to determine average annual income. Therefore, income data in the 2006 Census is from Social and DEMOGRAPHIC Trends in and NEIGHBOURING communities: 1981 to

22 As presented in Figure 43, the prevalence of low income among families and individuals has increased over the last 25 years. In 1980, 11% of families lived below the beforetax LICO compared to 22.1% in Among unattached individuals aged 15 and older, the percentage of those with incomes below the before-tax LICOs increased from 34% in 1980 to 42.9% in Figure 43: Low Income Families and Non-family persons 1980 to % 35% 25% 15% 5% Families Non-family persons Social and DEMOGRAPHIC Trends in and NEIGHBOURING communities: 1981 to

23 8. Summary This report documents key social and demographic trends that have shaped over the twenty-five year period from 1981 to It also provides 2006 Census information from neighbouring communities to add further context to s current demographic profile. Notable trends and findings include: substantial population growth in between 1981 and 2006, but at a slower rate than the region - grew by 49% compared to 67% for the region an aging of the population - seniors (65+) comprised 14% of the population in 2006, up from 13% in to 59 year olds the age range of the baby boomers in represented of the population in 2006, up from 23% in 1986 an increase in the proportion of families headed by a single parent - 17% of families were headed by single parents in 2006, up from 12% in 1981 a substantial increase in older children (aged 25 and over) living at home - 17% of the children living at home were 25 and over in 2006, up from 6% in 1981 a decrease in the prevalence of single-family housing - single-family dwellings comprised 27% of s housing stock in 2006, down from 52% in 1981 (single-family dwellings comprised 35% of Metro s housing stock in 2006) an increase in the percentage of both owner and renter households that spend or more of their income on shelter - in 2006, 43% of renters and 27% of owners spent or more of household income on shelter, up from and 14% respectively in 1986 (Metro renters and owners had the same housing affordability rates as in 2006) a significant increase in the percentage of residents who are immigrants - immigrants comprised 51% of s population in 2006, up from 28% in 1981 (immigrants comprised of the population in Metro in 2006) a substantial decrease in the number of residents who speak English as a mother tongue - in 2006, 43.5% of residents spoke English as a mother tongue, down from 77% in 1981 (57% of Metro s population spoke English as a mother tongue in 2006) a steady increase in the percentage of women in the labour force - women represented 48% of the labour force in 2006, up from 44% in 1981 a jobs to labour force ratio of 1.13 jobs for every employed resident in in comparison, had a 1.24 jobs, had 1.07 jobs and had 0.6 jobs per employed resident a 12% share of the region s jobs - had the highest share of the region s jobs at 34% a higher 2006 unemployment rate than the region s - had an unemployment rate of 6.8% in 2006 compared to 5.6% for the region an increase in educational attainment, particularly in the percentage of residents aged 15 and over with university degrees - 26% of residents aged 15 and over had university degrees in 2006, up from 8% in 1981 (25% of Metro s population had a university degree in 2006) an increase in the prevalence of low income amongst families and individuals - in 2005, 22% of families and 43% of unattached individuals lived below Statistics Canada s low income cut-offs (LICOs), up from11% and 34% respectively in 1980 (in Metro 17% of families and of individuals lived below the LICOs in 2005) Social and DEMOGRAPHIC Trends in and NEIGHBOURING communities: 1981 to