A Social Profile of
Greater Sudbury
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
Acknowledgements
Introduction
Executive Summary
6
7
11
1.0 Population
1.1 Population Changes
1.2 Population Projections
1.3 Age
1.4 Marital Status
1.5 Living Arrangements
2.0 Families & Children
2.1 Family Structure
2.2 Children at Home
2.3 Families with Children at Home
3.0 Seniors
3.1 Senior Population
3.2 Senior Population Projections
3.3 Seniors’ Living Arrangements
4.0 Language
4.1 Official / Non-Official Languages and Mother Tongue
5.0 Mobility and Migration
5.1 Mobility
5.2 Net Migration
5.3 Origins and Destinations
6.0 Immigration, Ethnic Origins and Visible Minorities
6.1 Period of Immigration and Place of Birth
6.2 Ethnic Origins
6.3 Visibility Minority
7.0 Aboriginals
7.1 Aboriginal Population
7.2 Aboriginal Mobility
7.3 Aboriginal Highest Level of Educational Attainment
7.4 Aboriginal Employment and Income
8.0 Education
8.1 School Attendance
8.2 Highest Level of Schooling (Population 15 years and over)
8.3 Post-Secondary Qualifications
9.0 Labour Force
9.1 Current Trends
9.2 Unemployment by Age
9.3 Unemployment by Presence of Children and Gender
9.4 Unemployment Rate by Level of Education
9.5 Labour Force by Industry Groups
14
17
20
21
22
24
28
34
38
42
42
44
48
49
49
51
52
52
53
56
56
57
59
60
63
69
70
73
74
75
1
Social Profile of Greater Sudbury
77
79
80
9.6 Occupation
9.7 Work Activity
9.8 Unpaid Work
10.0 Transportation and Commuting
10.1 Place of Work
10.2 Mode of Transportation to Work
11.0 Income and Poverty
11.1 Income
11.2 Poverty
11.3 Low-Income Families
11.4 Low-Income Non-Family Persons
11.5 Low-Income Female Lone-Parent Families
11.6 Low-Income Children (Under 6 Years)
11.7 Low-Income Individuals
11.8 Low-Income Seniors
12.0 Shelter and Dwellings
12.1 Household Size
12.2 Dwelling Types
12.3 Tenure
12.4 Shelter Costs
Summary
Conclusion
Glossary of Selected Census Terms
83
83
85
93
97
97
100
102
105
105
108
109
110
110
116
122
123
References
129
2
Social Profile of Greater Sudbury
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1. Census Families by Family Structure, Greater Sudbury, 1996 – 2006
Table 2. Low-Income Cut-Offs (LICO) Table, 2005
Table 3. Incidence of Low-Income by Select Groups, CGS 2000, 2005 and Ontario, 2005
25
93
96
LIST OF MAPS
Map 1. City of Greater Sudbury (CGS)
Map 2. Persons per Square Kilometre – CGS
Map 3. Persons per Square Kilometre – Urban Core
Map 4. Persons Aged 65+ – CGS
Map 5. Persons Aged 65+ – Urban Core
Map 6. Female Lone Parent Families – CGS
Map 7. Female Lone Parent Families – Urban Core
Map 8. Children 25+ Living at Home – CGS
Map 9. Children 25+ Living at Home – Urban Core
Map 10. Children Aged 18 to 24 Living at Home – CGS
Map 11. Children Aged 18 to 24 Living at Home – Urban Core
Map 12. Children Aged 6 and Under – CGS
Map 13. Children Aged 6 and Under – Urban Core
Map 14. Persons Aged 85+ – CGS
Map 15. Persons Aged 85+ – Urban Core
Map 16. Home Language French – CGS
Map 17. Home Language French – Urban Core
Map 18. Persons of Aboriginal Descent – CGS
Map 19. Persons of Aboriginal Descent – Urban Core
Map 20. Persons Ages 25-64 with No Certificate, Diploma or Degree – CGS
Map 21. Persons Ages 25-64 with No Certificate, Diploma or Degree – Urban Core
Map 22. Persons Ages 25-64 with Apprenticeship or Trades Certificate or Diploma – CGS
Map 23. Persons Ages 25-64 with Apprenticeship or Trades Certificate or Diploma – Urban Core
Map 24. Persons Ages 25-64 with a Certificate, Diploma or Degree – CGS
Map 25. Persons Ages 25-64 with a Certificate, Diploma or Degree – Urban Core
Map 26. Population 25 years + Unemployment Rate as Percentage of Total – CGS
Map 27. Population 25 years + Unemployment Rate as Percentage of Total – Urban Core
Map 28. Households by Income over $100,000 – CGS
Map 29. Households by Income over $100,000 – Urban Core
Map 30. 2005 Median Household Income – CGS
Map 31. 2005 Median Household Income – Urban Core
Map 32. Families by Prevalence of Low-Income – CGS
Map 33. Families by Prevalence of Low-Income – Urban Core
Map 34. Non-Family Persons 15 years+ by Prevalence of Low-Income – CGS
Map 35. Non-Family Persons 15 years+ by Prevalence of Low-Income – Urban Core
Map 36. Female Lone-Parent Families by Prevalence of Low-Income - CGS
Map 37. Female Lone-Parent Families by Prevalence of Low-Income – Urban Core
Map 38. Children Under 6 Years of Age by Prevalence of Low-Income – CGS
Map 39. Children Under 6 Years of Age by Prevalence of Low-Income – Urban Core
Map 40. Persons 65+ by Prevalence of Low-Income – CGS
Map 41. Persons 65+ by Prevalence of Low-Income – Urban Core
8
9
10
18
19
26
27
29
30
32
33
36
37
40
41
46
47
54
55
61
62
64
65
66
67
71
72
87
88
90
91
94
95
98
99
100
101
103
104
106
107
3
Social Profile of Greater Sudbury
Map 42. Owner Households Spending 30% or More of Household Income on Shelter – CGS
Map 43. Owner Households Spending 30% or More of Household Income on Shelter – Urban Core
Map 44. Tenant Households Spending 30% or More of Household Income on Shelter – CGS
Map 45. Tenant Households Spending 30% or More of Household Income on Shelter – Urban Core
112
113
114
115
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1. Population Changes (1996-2006)
Figure 2. Greater Sudbury Population (2001-2006)
Figure 3. Population Growth by Age Groups (1976-2006), CGS
Figure 4. Population Pyramid (2001-2006), CGS
Figure 4.1. Percent of Projected Population Change by Age Groups (2006-2031)
Figure 5. Percent Change in Population by Age Groups (1996-2006), CGS
Figure 6. Marital Status, 2006, CGS
Figure 7. Percent Change of Marital Status (1996-2006), CGS
Figure 8. Living Arrangement of Population, 2006, CGS
Figure 9. Percent Change in Living Arrangement (1996-2006), CGS
Figure 10. Living Arrangements for Non-family Individuals (1996-2006), CGS
Figure 11. Family Structure, 2006, CGS
Figure 12. Changes in Family Structure (1996-2006), CGS
Figure 13. Percent Change in Population by Family Structure (1996-2006), CGS
Figure 14. Proportion of Children at Home by Age Groups, 2006, CGS
Figure 15. Percent Change in Child Population Living at Home by Age Groups (1996-2006), CGS
Figure 16. Number of Children by Family Structure, 2006, CGS
Figure 17. Families with Children at Home, and Number of Children, 2006
Figure 18. Family Structure, With & Without Children at Home (1996-2006), CGS
Figure 19. Population of Seniors as Percent of Total Population
Figure 20. Percent Change of Senior Population (1996-2006), CGS
Figure 21. Proportion of Seniors by Age Groups and Gender
Figure 22. Percent of Change in Senior Population (2007-2031), CGS
Figure 23. Percent Change in Senior Population by Living Arrangements (1996-2006), CGS
Figure 24. Senior Population by Family Status by Age Groups, 2006, CGS
Figure 25. Proportion of Official and Non-official Languages by Mother Tongue, 2006, CGS
Figure 26. Percent Change in Knowledge of Official Languages (1996-2006), CGS
Figure 27. Mobility Categories
Figure 28. Origin of Internal Migrants (2001-2006), CGS
Figure 29. Destination of Internal Migrants (2001-2006), CGS
Figure 30. Period of Immigration, CGS
Figure 31. Population by Ethnic Origins (1996, 2006), CGS
Figure 32. Percent Change in Population by Aboriginal Identity (1996-2006), CGS
Figure 33. Percent Change in Population by Aboriginal Identity (2001-2006), CGS
Figure 34. Mobility Status – Place of Residence 5 years ago, by Aboriginal Identity
Figure 35. Highest Level of Educational Attainment by Aboriginal Identity, 2006
Figure 36. Labour Force Activity by Aboriginal Identity, 2006, CGS
Figure 37. Median Earnings in 2005 by Aboriginal Identity (15 years +), CGS
Figure 38. Median Income in 2005 by Aboriginal Identity, CGS
Figure 39. Population by School Attendance and by Age Groups, CGS & Ontario
Figure 40. Population by Highest Level of Schooling, CGS & Ontario
Figure 41. Population by Highest Level of Schooling by Age, 2006, CGS
14
14
15
16
17
20
21
21
22
22
23
24
24
25
28
31
34
34
35
38
38
39
42
43
43
44
45
48
49
50
51
52
53
53
56
56
57
58
58
59
60
63
4
Social Profile of Greater Sudbury
Figure 42. Population by Highest Level of Schooling by Age, 2006, Ontario
Figure 43. Population by Post-Secondary Qualifications by Gender, 2006, CGS
Figure 44. Unemployment Rate by Age Groups (1996-2006), CGS
Figure 45. Unemployment Rate by Presence of Children at Home and Gender, 2006
Figure 46. Males Unemployment Rate by Presence of Children (1996-2006), CGS
Figure 47. Females Unemployment Rate by Presence of Children at Home (1996-2006), CGS
Figure 48. Unemployment Rate by Age and Level of Education, 2006, CGS
Figure 49. Top 5 Industries (2001-2006), CGS
Figure 50. Change in Labour Force by Industry Groups (2001-2006), CGS
Figure 51. Labour Force by Top Industries and by Gender, 2006, CGS
Figure 52. Labour Force by Top Occupations and by Gender, 2006, CGS
Figure 53. Average Employment Income by Top Occupations, 2005, CGS
Figure 54. Female Employment Income as % of Males, All Occupations (2000-2005), Canada,
Ontario, CGS
Figure 55. Female Employment Income as a Percent of Male Employment Income by Top
Occupations, 2005, CGS
Figure 56. Population (15 years +) by Work Activity and Gender, 2006, CGS
Figure 57. Population (15 years +) by Hours of Unpaid Housework and Childcare by Gender, 2006,
CGS
Figure 58. Hours of Unpaid Housework by Gender, 2006, CGS
Figure 59. Hours of Unpaid Childcare by Gender, 2006, CGS
Figure 60. Hours of Unpaid Senior Care by Gender, 2006, CGS
Figure 61. Place of Work for Employed Labour Force, 2006, CGS and Ontario
Figure 62. Mode of Transportation to Work for CGS & Ontario, 2006
Figure 63. Percent of Population by Mode of Transportation and Age for Employed Labour Force
Figure 64. Median Individual, Household and Family Incomes, 2006, CGS and Ontario
Figure 65. Income Ranges for Individuals, 2005, CGS
Figure 66. Family and Household Income Ranges, 2005, CGS
Figure 67. Non-Family Persons Income Ranges, 2005, CGS
Figure 68. Median Family Income by Family Type, Including Single Person Families, 2006, CGS
Figure 69. Historical View of Incidence of Low-Income in CGS, 1986-2006
Figure 70. Low-Income Families by Economic Family Structure, 2006, CGS
Figure 71. Low-Income Individuals by Age Groups, 2006, CGS and Ontario
Figure 72. Households by Household Size (1996, 2006), CGS
Figure 73. Percent Change in Household Size (1996-2006), CGS
Figure 74. Private Dwellings by Structure Type (1996-2006), CGS
Figure 75. Percent Change in Private Dwellings by Structure Type (1996-2006) CGS
Figure 76. Median Monthly Shelter Costs (Owner, Tenant) by Selected Municipalities, 2006
Figure 77. Tenant and Owner Households Spending 30% + on Shelter (2001-2006), CGS
63
68
70
73
73
74
74
75
75
76
77
78
78
79
80
81
81
82
82
83
83
84
85
86
89
92
93
96
97
105
108
109
109
110
111
111
5
Social Profile of Greater Sudbury
AUTHORS
Janet Gasparini, Executive Director
Annette Reszcynski, Senior Social Planner
Lynn O’Farrell, Coordinator of Research & Evaluation
Tammy Turchan, Researcher & Data Analyst
Wanda Eurich, Researcher & Data Analyst
Jody Tverdal, Executive Assistant
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The authors would like to thank The Trillium Foundation for funding this important project. In addition,
special thanks are extended to our partners at the Social Planning Network of Ontario, particularly Ted
Hildebrand and Richard Lau.
The City of Greater Sudbury Planning Department, and especially, Paul Bascomb, Krista Carre and David
Grieve should be acknowledged for their assistance as it pertained to mapping. We would be remiss if we
didn’t also thank Kyle Murdoch (ESRI Canada Ltd.) in this respect. Thanks also to Amanda Colina at
Statistics Canada Advisory Services for her help with navigating the Census universe.
CONTACT FOR MORE INFORMATION
Lynn O’Farrell, Research/Evaluation OR Tammy Turchan, Researcher/Data Analyst,
Social Planning Council of Sudbury,
30 Ste. Anne Road, Suite 105,
Sudbury, ON P3C 5E1
Telephone: (705) 675-3894
Fax: (705) 675-3253
Email: [email protected] OR [email protected]
This report will be available online at www.spcsudbury.ca
RECOMMENDED CITATION
Social Planning Council of Sudbury (2009). A Social Profile of Greater Sudbury. ON: Author.
COPYRIGHT
Copyright for this document belongs to the Social Planning Council of Sudbury. This document may be
reproduced freely for educational purposes.
© Social Planning Council of Sudbury, 2009
6
Social Profile of Greater Sudbury
INTRODUCTION
The following Community Social Profile presents information and a brief analysis of trends with respect
to the City of Greater Sudbury (CGS). This Profile is part of a provincial project funded by The Trillium
Foundation which involves Social Planning Councils (SPC) from 14 communities.
Using graphs, maps and charts, the report paints a picture of the city as it pertains to population (current
and projected), characteristics of households, income and earnings, labour force characteristics, levels of
education among citizens, and shelter and housing, to name but a few categories. For interpretation
purposes, it is important to note that the maps represent a city-wide analysis; that is, data from each census
tract is divided by CGS total population. In other words, the maps illustrate the proportional distribution
across the City of Greater Sudbury. Neighbourhood maps and analyses are available upon request1.
Geographic Coverage
The following report is based on the City of Greater Sudbury’s geographic and administrative boundary,
which includes two Aboriginal reserves (Whitefish Lake First Nation and Wahnapitae First Nation).
Maps 2 and 3 provide a graphic illustration of the CGS, emphasizing its vast geography, which is
characterized by a distinct urban core surrounded by a sparsely populated outlying area. It is important to
note that the City of Greater Sudbury was officially formed in 2001, representing the amalgamation of six
(6) regional municipalities – Onaping Falls, Capreol, Walden, Nickel Centre, Rayside-Balfour and Valley
East – the City of Sudbury as well as nine unincorporated townships.
Time Period
This report attempts to provide an historical analysis primarily from 1996-2006 although in certain
instances data as far back as 1976 is included.
Data Sources
The Community Social Profile is based on 2006 census data, as well as data from previous censuses
(1996, 2001). Where available, updated statistics are incorporated into the profile in an attempt to provide
a more accurate reflection of the current situation (for example, most recent labour force indicators are
incorporated into the section on Labour). Other sources of information are utilized in order to provide
context with respect to the identified trends.
A Decade of Change (1996-2006)
In addition to the development of a current portrait of the community using the 2006 Census data, the
present report discusses changes that have taken place over a ten year time period. This timeframe has
been chosen primarily because data from the 1996 and 2001 Censuses are still available. In some
instances, comparisons cannot be made between 1996 and 2001 or 2006 data as a result of changed census
categories. In most instances, all three census data are compared, with changes captured in both absolute
(numbers) and relative (percent) terms.
Geographical Units
The census data that are displayed in maps are at the Census Tract (CT) level primarily because
Dissemination Area data is not always available for the City of Greater Sudbury. Census Tracts are small,
relatively stable areas of approximately 2,500 to 8,000 people and are located in large urban centres with
urban core populations of 50,000 or more.
For the purposes of clarification, in addition to providing information at the Census Tract level, Map 1
identifies the communities that make up the City of Greater Sudbury; a city which has been transformed
from a predominantly mining-based economy, to its present status as a diversified regional urban centre
focused on technology, education, government and health services.2
7
Social Profile of Greater Sudbury
Map 1 – City of Greater Sudbury
8
Social Profile of Greater Sudbury
As Map 2 illustrates, the City of Greater Sudbury covers a large geographic area characterized by rural
and urban populations. In general, the population is concentrated within the core of the city, with several
distinct groupings outside of the black box (please refer to the enlarged map on page 9 which shows the
downtown core, the South End, Minnow Lake, and New Sudbury.
Map 2: Persons per Square Kilometre – CGS
9
Social Profile of Greater Sudbury
Map 3: Persons per Square Kilometre – Urban Core
10
Social Profile of Greater Sudbury
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The following section captures the key social trends as identified in the three censuses (1996, 2001 and
2006).
Following five years of population loss, in 2001, Greater Sudbury’s population gradually increased such
that in 2006, it recorded a population of 158,265 – slightly higher than that reported for 2001 but well
below that which was reported in 1996 (165,336). This slight growth, which is projected to be sustained
over the next two decades, falls far short of provincial projections during this same time period (3% vs.
28% respectively).
In general, Greater Sudbury reported a significantly higher proportion of seniors (in comparison to other
age categories) and a declining youth population between 1996 and 2006. This is expected to continue
into the future, with the 65+ population projected to grow substantially.
From the perspective of families and households, Greater Sudbury experienced a decline in the number of
married couples, as well as a decline in the number of families reporting children (especially under the age
of 6) in the home. This was somewhat reflected in the decreased number of households with three or
more persons, and the increased number of one and two person households in 2006.
Three areas where the city witnessed relatively little change was with respect to language,
mobility/migration and immigration.
In the first instance, Greater Sudbury reported a consistently higher bilingual population (much higher
than the province or nation), and a significant and consistent Francophone population in 2006.
The past ten years saw very little change with respect to mobility/migration as Greater Sudbury reported
losing migrants (predominantly youth) to Southern Ontario; although most recent data has shown a
lessening of this trend. 2006 witnessed a trend towards internal migration within the city itself; that is,
people living in the former City of Sudbury moved outwards to the six former regional municipalities.
Although 2006 saw a slight increase in the number of immigrants choosing Greater Sudbury as their
destination of choice, for the most part, the city lagged behind the province in this regard. Moreover,
future projections (2031) for the city are expected to fall well below projected provincial levels, with the
possible exception being the rapidly growing (and young) urban Aboriginal population.
Greater Sudbury witnessed improvements in terms of the education levels of its citizens between 1996 and
2006, particularly with respect to apprenticeship and trades qualifications. In addition, the city compared
favourably to the province in terms of the number of residents reporting post-secondary qualifications.
Greater Sudbury’s labour force indicators, and particularly its overall unemployment rate, improved
significantly during the past decade, the only possible exception being the consistently high youth (15-24
years) unemployment rate.
In 2006, Greater Sudburians tended to be employed in ‘retail trade’ and ‘health care and social assistance’
occupations.
A gendered analysis of employment patterns in the city showed that the ‘mining, oil and gas extraction’
category had the highest concentration of the male labour force, with ‘construction’ and ‘manufacturing’
11
Social Profile of Greater Sudbury
representing the next highest categories. In contrast, the top industry for employed females in the city was
‘health care and social assistance’, with ‘retail trade’ and ‘educational services’ representing the next
highest categories.
Occupational categories reflected further gender differences insofar as almost two-thirds of Greater
Sudbury’s female labour force were employed in ‘sales and service’ and ‘business, finance and
administration’ occupations in 2006. In contrast, one-half of the male labour force was employed in
‘trades, transport and equipment operation’ and ‘sales and service’ occupations.
In terms of annual earnings, gender differences were expressed in the general tendency for Greater
Sudbury females to report earnings significantly lower than their male counterparts in all occupations. In
2005, women reported earning 58 cents for every dollar earned by their male counterparts (representing a
decrease of 4 cents since 2000).
Employment earnings were not the only area where gender-based discrepancies were reported.
Differences were also noted in the category unpaid work. Specifically, women in Greater Sudbury
reported disproportionately higher rates of unpaid work (e.g. housework, caring for children and/or senior
care) than their male counterparts in 2006.
Median individual and household incomes in Greater Sudbury improved during the past ten years, such
that in 2005, the city reported individual and household median incomes on par or better than the
province. However, the city’s median family income and its non-family median income was reported to
be lower ($3,000 to $5,000, respectively) than that reported for the province.
In general, couple families in Greater Sudbury reported earning more than single parent families ($71,446
vs. $41,813 respectively), who in turn, reported earning more than non-family persons ($41,813 vs.
$23,807 respectively).
Among single parent families, male lone-parents reported median incomes approximately 36% higher
than their female counterparts ($51,041 vs. $32,585 respectively).
Non-family persons continued to be the most vulnerable group, reporting the lowest median income
($23,807) of all census families in Greater Sudbury.
Greater Sudbury witnessed significant progress on the poverty front. In 1986, almost 1 in 6 (15%) families
and 1 in 2 (44%) unattached individuals lived in poverty, compared to approximately 1 in 10 (9%)
families and 1 in 3 (36%) unattached individuals in 2005.
Census figures also showed that in 2005, 1 in 3 female lone parents, 1 in 4 seniors living alone and/or with
non-relatives, and 1 in 5 children under the age of six were living in poverty in Greater Sudbury. Female
lone-parents with dependent children at home (under 18 years of age) were the most vulnerable to
poverty, with more than 1 in 2 (54%) living in poverty. It is important to note that of those individuals
who reported falling below the LICO, 18% were between the ages of 15 and 24.
When analyzing changes experienced with respect to shelter and dwellings during the decade (1996 –
2006), there was a steady and continuous decline in the size of the average Greater Sudbury household,
combined with a steady increase in the number of actual households reported.
12
Social Profile of Greater Sudbury
During this same time period, Greater Sudbury reported an increased number of couple households
(without children), as well as an increased number of single person households.
The 2006 census reported a change in building stock, the most significant being an 11% proportional
increase in the number of <5 storey apartments, and to a lesser extent, a 5% proportional increase in the
number of single-detached dwellings. All other dwelling types remained consistent or experienced
declines.
In 2006, an increasing number of Greater Sudburians were home owners as opposed to renters, reflecting
a rising trend in homeownership.
Compared to 2001, fewer renters (two in five or 40%) and homeowners (one in eight or 21%) in Greater
Sudbury reported spending 30% or more or their annual income on shelter.
A broader perspective on shelter costs which encompasses local housing markets and apartment vacancy
rates showed that Greater Sudbury experienced significant change during this past decade. For example,
the city had one of the lowest apartment vacancy rates in Canada, having gone from a high of 11% in
1996 to a rate of 0.7% in 2008.
During this same time period, the average rent for a two-bedroom apartment in Greater Sudbury increased
by approximately $180, with the average selling price of a home in the city increasing by approximately
$30,000.
13
Social Profile of Greater Sudbury
1.0
POPULATION
1.1 Population Changes
Statistics Canada indicates that the City of Greater Sudbury has experienced a population decline of 4
percent, or 5784 less people, since 1996. Although this is contrary to the nation and the province, which
experienced population growth of 10 and 13 percent respectively; it is comparable to other northern
communities, such as Sault Ste Marie (-6%) and Thunder Bay (-4%). 3 4 5 6
Figure 1:
Population Changes, 1996-2006
10%
Canada
13%
Ontario
-4%
Greater Sudbury
-6%
Sault Ste Marie
-4%
-10%
Thunder Bay
-5%
0%
5%
10%
15%
% change (1996-2006)
Source: Statistics Canada, 1996, 2006 Census
However, 2001 marked a decided turn for the better as population growth began to gradually increase; as
reflected in the 2% growth (or 2645 more people) that occurred between 2001 and 20067.
Figure 2:
Greater Sudbury Population 2001-2006
158500
158000
158265
# of people
157500
157000
156500
156000
155500
155620
155000
154500
154000
2001
2006
Source: Statistics Canada, 2001, 2006 Census
14
Social Profile of Greater Sudbury
Figure 3 illustrates changing population trends over the course of thirty years. In general, Greater
Sudbury paints a very clear picture of population shifts insofar as all age groups under 35 years
experienced declines; particularly, those aged 0-9, and to a lesser extent the 10 to 19, 25 to 34 and 20 to 24
age cohorts (in descending order). Conversely, increases occurred amongst the over 35 age cohorts;
particularly amongst the 65+ cohort, and to a lesser extent the 45 to 64 and 35 to 44 cohorts (in
descending order).
Of particular importance is the rate at which Greater Sudbury is aging, as reflected in the 184% increase in
the senior (65+) population, (from 8,275 to 23,495 seniors) and the concurrent decline in the 0-4 age
cohort (-45%, or from 13,875 to 7,700).8 9 10 11
Figure 3:
Population Growth by Age Groups (1976-2006), Greater Sudbury
180000
65+
160000
55-64
P opulation
140000
45-54
120000
35-44
100000
25-34
80000
20-24
15-19
60000
10-14
40000
5-9
20000
0
1976
0-4
1981
1986
1991
1996
2001
2006
Source: Statistics Canada, 1976-2006 Census
15
Social Profile of Greater Sudbury
Figure 4 illustrates the population by age groups and gender within Greater Sudbury in the five year
period between 2001 and 2006: the population data for 2001 is represented by the black lines and 2006 is
represented in colour. Males are represented in blue (left) and females in pink (right).
Figure: 4
Population Pyramid - Greater Sudbury CMA
2001
2001
2006
2006
85+
80-84
Males
Females
75-79
70-74
65-69
60-64
Age Groups
55-59
50-54
45-49
40-44
35-39
30-34
25-29
20-24
15-19
10-14
5-9
0-4
5
4
3
2
1
0
1
2
3
4
5
Population %
The Pyramid for Greater Sudbury illustrates that between 2001 and 2006 the population remained fairly
stable with decreases in the 35-39 and under 20 age cohorts (particularly those aged 0-4 and 5-9) and
increases in the 55-64 and 65+ cohorts (particularly those aged 80+).
The largest age cohort in 2006 for males was the 40 to 44 category, whereas for females it was the 45 to
49 cohort. This trend reflects a large ‘baby boom’ population which is expected to increase well into the
near future.
Population growth, as reflected in building permits issued between 2000 and 2005 indicates that new
residential development has been occurring primarily in the former City of Sudbury (40%) – particularly
the South End, Valley East (23%), Nickel Centre (12.7%) and Walden (10.7%)12. Areas of the city
experiencing little or no growth in 2005 included Onaping Falls, Capreol, Coniston and Falconbridge.
16
Social Profile of Greater Sudbury
1.2 Population Projections
Greater Sudbury’s 2006 population of 158,265 is projected to grow by 4% (6945 people) by the year
2031. However, as the graph below illustrates, the population aged 54 years and younger is decreasing,
particularly among the youth population (under 25) and increasing among those aged 55 and over,
especially among the senior population (65+) which is expected to experience a 76% growth.
Figure 4.1:
Percent of Projected Population Change by Age Groups, 2006-2031
65+
76%
55-64
7%
45-54
-10%
35-44
-1%
-6%
25-34
-19%
-19%
-18%
-14%
-19%
20-24
15-19
10-14
5-9
4%
0-4
-40%
-20%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
All ages
% of change
Source: Statistics Canada estimates, 2007 and projections of Ontario Ministry of Finance
The population aged 65 and over is projected to almost double from 15 percent of the population in 2006
to 25 percent by 2031.
Maps 4 and 5 illustrate where the senior (65+) population is concentrated in Greater Sudbury. In 2006,
the elderly population (65+) generally tended to reside in the following areas: pockets of New Sudbury
and to a lesser extent, pockets of the South End and Minnow Lake.
17
Social Profile of Greater Sudbury
Map 4: Persons Aged 65+ - CGS
18
Social Profile of Greater Sudbury
Map 5: Persons Aged 65+ - Urban Core
19
Social Profile of Greater Sudbury
1.3 Age
When considering population change during the ten year period between 1996 and 2006, the largest
decline (25% each) occurred amongst children aged 0-4 and youth aged 25-34.
Typical of baby boom trends, the age cohort (55-64) experienced the greatest growth at 31%. The next
largest growth occurred amongst the senior population (65+) which grew by 22%13 14. (Please refer to
Figure 5).
Figure 5:
Percent Change in Population by Age Groups (1996-2006), Greater Sudbury
22%
65+
31%
55-64
16%
-11%
-25%
45-54
35-44
1
-17%
25-34
-13%
20-24
-9%
15-19
-18%
-25%
10-14
5-9
-30%
-20%
-10%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
0-4
% of change
Source: Statistics Canada, 1996, 2006 Census
Calculating the median age represents another way to measure the age of Greater Sudbury’s population as
a whole. The median age is the age at which half the population is above (older) and the other half is
below (younger).
Greater Sudbury reported a slightly higher (older) median age than the province and country (41 years vs.
39 years and 39.5 years respectively). The city’s median age for males (40.1) and females (41.8) was also
slightly older than that reported provincially and nationally15.
The Northeast region is projected to have a median age of approximately 48 by 2031, the highest of all
five regions (GTA, Central, East, Southwest and Northwest). Declining fertility rates – Greater Sudbury
recorded the fifth lowest fertility rate for all CMA’s16 in 2005 – and a large baby boomer population will
slow the rate of population growth over the projected period.
It is important to note that when comparing provincial population projections to actual census figures;
provincial projections for the CGS have tended to overestimate population growth by as much as 7,000.17
20
Social Profile of Greater Sudbury
1.4 Marital Status
There are five categories of marital status: legally married (and not separated); separated (but still legally
married); never married (single); divorced; and widowed.
In 2006, the dominant marital status (50%) of the population aged 15 years and over is that of married or
common-law partners and almost one-third (31%) are single. The remainder are divorced or widowed
(7% each) or still legally married but separated (4%).
Figure 6:
Marital Status, 2006, Greater Sudbury
7%
7%
31%
4%
Never married (single)
Married (not separated)
Separated (still legally married)
Divorced
Widowed
50%
Source: Statistics Canada, 2006 Census
Between 1996 and 2006 the percent of ‘separated’ (but legally married’) individuals grew by 26%, which
matched provincial trends.18 The next highest categories were those who identified as ‘divorced’ (+9%),
‘widowed’ (+6%), and those ‘never married/single’ (+3%)’. The only group to experience a decline (-6%)
was the ‘married (not separated)’ group. (Please refer to Figure 7).19 20 21
Figure 7:
Percent Change of Marital Status (1996-2006), Greater Sudbury
6%
Widowed
9%
Divorced
26%
Separated (but still legally married)
-6%
Married (and not separated)
3%
Never married (single)
0%
Total population 15+
-10%
-5%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
% of Change
Source: Statistics Canada, 1996, 2006 Census
21
Social Profile of Greater Sudbury
1.5 Living Arrangements
The term ‘living arrangements’ captures both ‘census family’ members and ‘non-family’ individuals.
Census families consist of married or common-law couples, with or without children, as well as loneparent families. Non-family individuals include those living with relatives (e.g. sibling, cousin), those
living with non-relatives (e.g. room-mate) and those individuals living alone.
Figure 8 shows that in 2006, 85% of the population lived with family persons; about 11% lived alone,
with the remainder living with non-relatives (2.5%) or relatives (1.5%).
Figure 8:
Living Arrangement of Population, 2006, Greater Sudbury
1.5% 2.5%
11%
Living with relatives
Living with non-relatives
Living Alone
Family Persons
85%
Source: Statistics Canada, 2006 Census
The decade 1996 – 2006 saw a decline in the percent of the population who reported living with others
(particularly those living with relatives), and an increase in the number of residents who reported they
lived alone (+15%) – a large portion of this group were senior women who experienced the death of their
spouse22. In general, the increase in those persons ‘living alone’ was consistent with provincial trends.
Figure 9:
Percent Change in Living Arrangement, 1996-2006, Greater Sudbury
-5%
With family persons
15%
Living alone
Living with non-relatives
-11%
Living with relatives
-35%
-40%
-30%
-20%
-10%
0%
10%
20%
% of change
Source: Statistics Canada, 1996, 2006 Census
22
Social Profile of Greater Sudbury
Non-Family Individuals
As the graph below (Figure 10) illustrates, the majority of non-family individuals lived alone (73%),
representing a slight increase since 1996. By the same token, fewer individuals were living with relatives
or non-relatives in 2006. 23 24
Figure 10:
Living Arrangements for Non-family Individuals,
1996-2006, Greater Sudbury
% o f In d iv id u a ls
80%
70%
60%
73%
65%
50%
1996
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2006
16%
10%
Living w ith relatives
19%
16%
Living w ith non-relatives
Living Alone
Source: Statistics Canada, 1996, 2006 Census
23
Social Profile of Greater Sudbury
2.0
FAMILIES & CHILDREN
2.1 Family Structure
As of 2006, 85% of the city’s population lived within census families25, representing 46,325 families in
total. Of these families, 83 percent (38,480) were couple families and 17 percent (7,805) were lone-parent
families.
The majority represented married couple families (69% or 32,090), followed by both common-law
couples and female-led lone parents (14% or 6,390 and 6,360 respectively), then male-led lone parents
(3% or 1,430).26 (Please refer to Figure 11).
Figure 11:
Family Structure, 2006, Greater Sudbury
3%
14%
Married
14%
Common-law
Female-led lone parent
Male-led lone parent
69%
Source: Statistics Canada, 2006 Census
The trend towards more common-law, divorced and separated families, has led to a decrease in so called
‘traditional’ families (characterized by legal marriage contracts) and an increase in more non-married
couple families.
Since 1996, there has been a decrease (-5%) in the proportion of married couples and an increase in the
proportion of common-law (+4%) and lone-parent (both sexes) families (+1%). The following graph
(Figure 12) illustrates these trends:
Figure 12:
Changes in Family Structure, 1996-2006, Greater Sudbury
80%
70%
% of Families
60%
74%
69%
50%
1996
40%
2006
30%
20%
10%
10%
14%
13%
14%
3%
3%
0%
Married
Common-law
Female lone-parent
Male lone-parent
Family Type
Source: Statistics Canada, 1996, 2006 Census
24
Social Profile of Greater Sudbury
Table 1 shows proportional changes within Greater Sudbury’s ‘Census Families by Family Structure’ that
have taken place since 1996. For example, although on the rise, lone-parent family composition remained
fairly consistent during this time frame, with the majority of these families being female-led (82%) and a
minority being male-led (18%).27 28 29 30
Table 1:
Census Families by Family Structure, Greater Sudbury, 1996 – 2006
Percent of Family Structure
Total Families
Total Married/Common-law
Married
Common-law
Total Lone Parent
Female-led
Male-led
Source: Statistics Canada, 1996-2006 Census
1996
46095
39085
34315
4770
7010
5815
1195
%
100.0%
84.8%
74.4%
10.3%
15.2%
12.6%
2.6%
2001
45580
38030
32695
5335
7465
6225
1240
%
100.0%
83.4%
71.7%
11.7%
16.4%
13.7%
2.7%
2006
46325
38480
32090
6390
7805
6360
1430
%
100.0%
83.1%
69.3%
13.8%
16.8%
13.7%
3.1%
Another way to view family structure would be to look at how much change has occurred within a
particular group (for example, lone-parent families) rather than how the whole (for example, family
structure) has changed over time.
The following graph (Figure 13) illustrates the change (growth or decline) each family structure
experienced in the decade 1996 – 2006. The greatest change occurred amongst common-law couples,
with a 34% increase in this family formation. Moreover, common-law couples with children at home
increased by 38% compared to those without children (28%). Another striking change was the 21%
decrease in married couples with children at home and the 11% increase amongst lone-parent families –
particularly the 20% growth in the number of male-led lone-parent families31.
Figure 13:
Percent Change in Population by Family Structure, 1996-2006, Greater
Sudbury
Married couples
-6%
16%
With no children at home
% of change
With children at home
-21%
34%
Common-law couples
With no children at homoe
38%
28%
With children at home
Lone-parent families
11%
9%
Female lone-parent
20%
Male lone-parent
-30%
-20%
-10%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
Source: Statistics Canada, 1996, 2006 Census
25
Social Profile of Greater Sudbury
Maps 6 and 7 illustrate that in 2006, the highest concentration of female lone-parent families was in the
Minnow Lake and Donovan/Flour Mill areas. The next most concentrated areas were the South End,
pockets of New Sudbury, Garson, and Valley East.
Map 6: Female Lone Parent Families – CGS
26
Social Profile of Greater Sudbury
Map 7: Female Lone Parent Families – Urban Core
27
Social Profile of Greater Sudbury
2.2 Children at Home
In 2006, Greater Sudbury reported 46,840 children (of all ages) as living at home. The majority of these
children lived within married families (65%) or female lone-parent families (21%), and a minority lived
within common-law families (11%), with even less residing with a male lone-parent (4%).32
Figure 14 illustrates that among all the children living at home, those between 6 and 14 years of age
represented over one third (37%) of all children in 2006. Although the proportion of children under 6
years of age was lower in 2006 than in 2001 (19% vs. 23%), it still accounted for one-fifth of all children
at home. Youth aged 18 – 24 represented 20% of all children living at home while those aged 25 years
and over represented 10%.33 34
Figure 14:
Proportion of Children at Home by Age Groups, 1996, 2006, Greater Sudbury
7%
A g e G ro u p s
25 years and over
10%
21%
18 - 24 years
20%
13%
14%
15 - 17 years
36%
37%
6 - 14 years
Under 6 years of age
19%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
23%
25%
30%
35%
40%
% of Children at Home
2006
1996
Source: Statistics Canada, 1996, 2006 Census
For purposes of clarification, children aged 25 years and over who remain in the home longer and/or
return home after completing their education have been referred to as ‘boomerang offspring’35.
Maps 8 and 9 illustrate that in 2006, Greater Sudbury’s ‘boomerang offspring’ tended to live in pockets of
New Sudbury, the South End and Valley East; and to a lesser extent Onaping Falls, Garson and Minnow
Lake.
28
Social Profile of Greater Sudbury
Map 8: Children 25+ Living at Home – CGS
29
Social Profile of Greater Sudbury
Map 9: Children 25+ Living at Home – Urban Core
30
Social Profile of Greater Sudbury
Figure 15 shows that the decade beginning in 1996 and ending in 2006 witnessed a 13% drop in the total
number of children living at home.
The greatest change occurred amongst the youngest and eldest of these children. There was a 26%
decrease in children under age 6 at home and a 19% increase in those aged 25 and over living at home 36
37
. The third most significant decrease in the child population occurred within the 18-24 age-cohort,
which witnessed an 18% decrease in the decade beginning in 1996 and ending in 2006.
Figure 15:
Percent Change in Child Population Living at Home by Age Groups,
1996-2006, Greater Sudbury
-13%
Total Children
19%
Age groups
25 years and over
18 - 24 years
-18%
15 - 17 years
-6%
6 - 14 years
-11%
-26%
Under 6 years of age
-30%
-25%
-20%
-15%
-10%
-5%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
% of change
Source: Statistics Canada, 1996, 2006 Census
Maps 10 and 11 illustrate that in 2006 the greatest concentration of children (18-24 years of age) living at
home resided in the South End, the east end of Minnow Lake, as well as pockets within Valley East and
New Sudbury.
31
Social Profile of Greater Sudbury
Map 10: Children Aged 18 to 24 Living at Home – CGS
32
Social Profile of Greater Sudbury
Map 11: Children Aged 18 to 24 Living at Home – Urban Core
33
Social Profile of Greater Sudbury
2.3 Families with Children at Home
In 2006, Greater Sudbury was home to 46,325 families. Slightly less than half (40%) of these families did
not have children living at home. Of those families with children at home (60%), most had only one child,
except for married couples, who were more likely to have two children.
Figure 16:
Number of Children by Family Structure, 2006, Greater Sudbury
All Families
40%
24%
28%
Male lone parent
8%
21%
76%
3%
0 Children
Female lone parent
30%
60%
1 Child
9%
2 Children
3 or more
Common-law couple
53%
Married couple
47%
0%
10%
20%
40%
50%
60%
6%
25%
20%
30%
16%
25%
70%
80%
8%
90%
100%
Source: Statistics Canada, 2006 Census
As Figure 17 illustrates, there was a steady decline in the number of families with children at home (from
66% in 1996 to 60% in 2006). Moreover, there was an increase in lone-child families and a decrease in
the number of families with three or more children.
Figure 17:
Families with Children at Home, and Number of Children, 2006
70%
66%
60%
% of Famillies
60%
50%
43%
40%
40%
47%
41%
40%
1996
34%
2006
30%
20%
16%
13%
10%
0%
Families without
children at home
Families with
children at home
1 child at home
2 children at
home
3 or more children
at home
Source: Statistics Canada, 1996, 2006 Census
34
Social Profile of Greater Sudbury
Between the years of 1996 – 2006 there was a steady decline in the number of married couples and an
increase in the number of common-law and lone-parent families. In addition, less married couples (-4360)
and more common-law (+1620) and lone-parent families (+795) had children at home in 2006 than a
decade earlier.38 39 (Please refer to Figure 18).
Figure 18:
Family Structure, With & Without Children at Home, 1996-2006
40000
# of Fam ilies
35000
30000
25000
1996
20000
2006
15000
10000
5000
0
Married
couples
With
With Common- With no
With no
children children
law
children children
at homoe at home couples at homoe at home
Loneparent
families
Female
loneparent
Male
loneparent
Family Types
Source: Statistics Canada, 1996, 2006 Census
To reiterate, of all the children living at home, 19% are under 6 years of age. Maps 12 and 13 indicate
that in 2006, the highest concentration of these children were located in Garson and Valley East; and to a
lesser extent, pockets of New Sudbury, Minnow Lake, the South End and the Donovan/Flour Mill.
35
Social Profile of Greater Sudbury
Map 12: Children Aged 6 and Under – CGS
36
Social Profile of Greater Sudbury
Map 13: Children Aged 6 and Under – Urban Core
37
Social Profile of Greater Sudbury
3.0
SENIORS
3.1 Senior Population
Between 1996 and 2006, the proportion of seniors rose from 12% to 15% of the city’s total population,
which was higher than the province and the nation (both at 14%). The following graph (Figure 19)
illustrates the proportion of seniors by age group.
Figure 19:
Population of Seniors as Percent of Total Population
85+
1%
5%
75-84
8%
65-74
15%
All seniors 65+
0%
2%
4%
6%
8%
10%
12%
14%
16%
% of total population
Source: Statistics Canada, 2006 Census
As previously stated, the senior population increased by 184% (8,275 to 23,495) between 1976 and 2006,
and by 22% (19,290 to 23,495) between 1996 and 2006. The most significant growth occurred within the
85+ age cohort (70%), followed closely by the 75-84 age cohort (46%).40 41
Figure 20:
Percent Change of Senior Population, 1996-2006, Greater Sudbury
85+
70%
75-84
46%
65-74
5%
All seniors 65+
22%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
% of change
Source: Statistics Canada, 1996, 2006 Census
38
Social Profile of Greater Sudbury
Proportionately, in 2006, senior women outnumbered senior men (16% or 13,275 vs. 13% or 10,220),
particularly amongst the older seniors (85+).42
In 2006, Greater Sudbury reported 2,290 seniors aged 85 years and over, which represented 10% of the
senior population. In addition, the population of female seniors (85 years and older) outnumbered their
male counterparts by 103% (1,535 women versus 755 men). Figure 21 illustrates the proportion of male
and female seniors by age group.43
Figure 21:
Proportion of Seniors by Age Groups and Gender
Females
52%
12%
37%
65-74
75-84
85+
Males
58%
0%
10%
20%
30%
7%
35%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Source: Statistics Canada, 2006 Census
Maps 14 and 15 indicate that in 2006, the highest concentration of seniors 85+ occurred in pockets of New
Sudbury and to a lesser extent, the South and West End.
39
Social Profile of Greater Sudbury
Map 14: Persons Aged 85+ - CGS
40
Social Profile of Greater Sudbury
Map 15: Persons Aged 85+ - Urban Core
41
Social Profile of Greater Sudbury
3.2 Senior Population Projections
As previously indicated, the population of seniors is expected to grow by 76% by 2031, with the greatest
growth expected to be amongst the oldest seniors (85+) at 112%. This is much greater than the 4%
growth expected for the city’s entire population during this same time period44.
Figure 22:
% of Change Projected in Senior Population, 2007-2031, Greater
Sudbury
112%
85 years and over
Total population
growth 4%
75-84 years
72%
65-74 years
72%
76%
All Seniors 65+
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
120%
% of Change
Source: Statistics Canada estimates, 2007, and projections Ontario Ministry of Finance.
3.3 Seniors’ Living Arrangements
It is important to note that approximately 1,900 seniors live in institutional care (i.e. nursing homes).
Census data reflects only the age, sex, marital status and mother tongue of institutionalized populations;
therefore any other characteristics of these institutionalized seniors are not included in the data or analysis
(i.e. living arrangements, prevalence of low-income, etc.).
In 2006, 65 percent of seniors in Greater Sudbury reported living with family persons. Of the remaining
35 percent of ‘non-family’ seniors, 29 percent reported living alone, 4 percent reported living with
relatives, with the remaining 2 percent living with non-relatives. In general, seniors were two and one half
times more likely to report living alone (29% vs. 11%) than the general population.
In terms of living arrangements, the greatest increase for the senior population between 1996 and 2006
was amongst those living with non-relatives (+33%), followed by those living with family (+27%) which
represents a higher rate of growth than the growth rate for all seniors (22%).
Seniors living alone experienced a 13 percent increase, and those living with relatives experienced a 15
percent decrease45 46. (Please refer to Figure 23).
42
Social Profile of Greater Sudbury
Figure 23:
% Change in Senior Population by Living Arrangements, 1996-2006,
Greater Sudbury
27%
with family persons
Total senior population
increase 22%
13%
living alone
33%
with non-relatives
-15%
with relatives
-20%
-10%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
% change
Source: Statistics Canada, 1996, 2006 Census
As seniors age, the proportion of those living as spouses or common-law partners tends to decrease while
the proportion of those seniors living as non-family persons tends to increase.
In 2006, 40% of seniors aged 85+ lived within census families (with spouses, common-law partners or
children). The majority (60%) were non-family individuals, and most reported living alone. Provincially,
elderly females were twice as likely as their male counterparts to live alone47 48. (Please see Glossary for
census terms).
Figure 24:
Senior Population by Family Status by Age Groups, 2006, Greater
Sudbury
All seniors 65+
2%
5%
57%
35%
3%
65-74 years
66%
27%
4%
Spouses
2%
75-79 years
55%
80-84 years
0%
8%
42%
Common-law partners
38%
5%
Lone parents
Non-family persons
49%
1%
85 years +
13%
25%
0%
20%
60%
40%
60%
80%
100%
% of Seniors
Source: Statistics Canada, 2006 Census
43
Social Profile of Greater Sudbury
4.0
LANGUAGE
4.1 Official / Non-Official Languages and Mother Tongue
Knowledge of the two official languages, English and French, refers to an individual’s ability to converse
in one or both of these languages, whereas mother tongue refers to the first language an individual learns
at home as a child and still knows as an adult.
In 2006, the two official languages (English and French) made up 91% of the city’s populations mother
tongue. The dominant mother tongue in Greater Sudbury was English (64%), followed by French (27%),
with approximately 8 percent of the city’s populations’ reporting the following non-official languages (in
order of priority: Italian, Finnish, German, Ukrainian, and Polish). 49
Figure 25:
Proportion of Official and Non-official Languages by Mother Tongue,
2006, Greater Sudbury
8%
27%
English
French
Non-Official Languages
64%
Source: Statistics Canada, 2006 Census
In 2006, Greater Sudbury reported a significantly higher rate (39%) of bilingualism than the province
(11%) and the nation (17%)50. In addition, over one-third (39%) of the population reported speaking both
official languages, 59% reported only English, and a small proportion reported only French (2%).
44
Social Profile of Greater Sudbury
Figure 26 shows that between 1996 and 2006, the percentage of Greater Sudbury residents who reported
speaking English only, French only, and both English and French, remained consistent. There was a very
small drop (-2%) in the English speaking population, a small increase (+4%) in the French speaking
population, and a 6% decrease in the population that reported speaking both languages. The most
dramatic change occurred amongst those who reported speaking neither official language; a 53% decrease
(from 545 to 255 persons)51 52.
Figure 26:
% Change in Knowledge of Official Languages, 1996-2006, Greater
Sudbury
Neither English nor
French
-53%
English & French
-6%
4%
French only
-2%
English only
-60%
-50%
-40%
-30%
-20%
-10%
0%
10%
% of change
Source: Statistics Canada, 1996, 2006 Census
Maps 16 and 17 indicate that in 2006, the highest concentration of the Francophone population was
located in Valley East and Rayside-Balfour followed by pockets in New Sudbury.
45
Social Profile of Greater Sudbury
Map 16: Home Language French – CGS
46
Social Profile of Greater Sudbury
Map 17: Home Language French – Urban Core
47
Social Profile of Greater Sudbury
5.0
MOBILITY AND MIGRATION
5.1 Mobility
Between 1996 and 2001, four in ten Canadians reported changing residences, fitting within the ‘mover’
category.
According to Statistics Canada, there are four kinds of mobility status. Non-movers are those that have
lived in the same residence. Movers are those that have changed residence. If they relocate within the
municipality (e.g. Greater Sudbury) they are considered non-migrants. If movers come from another
municipality, they are considered internal-migrants and if movers come from another country, they are
considered external-migrants. (Please refer to Figure 27).
Figure 27: Mobility Categories
Population (15 years +)
Non-mover
Mover
(Lived in same residence)
Non-migrant
Migrant
(Changed residence within same
city/town
Internal Migrant
External Migrant
(From within Canada)
(From outside Canada)
Almost two-thirds (62%) of the Greater Sudbury population were non-movers between 2001 and 2006.
One-quarter (24%) changed residences within the city itself, while 10% moved to the CGS from another
city in Ontario or from another province, with 1% moving here from another country.53
As a point of clarification, prior to 2001, what is now referred to as the City of Greater Sudbury included
the City of Sudbury, six (6) regional municipalities and nine unorganized townships.
In order to avoid confusion, when referring to moves ‘within the city’, the authors are making reference to
migration patterns between the former City of Sudbury and the six former regional municipalities, and to a
lesser extent, the nine former unorganized townships.
Comparatively speaking, the CGS had a higher proportion of non-movers and non-migrants (62% and
24%) than the province and the nation (59% and 22% respectively). In addition, it reported less internal
(10%) and external (1%) migrants than its provincial (14% and 5% respectively) and national (15% and
4% respectively) counterparts54.
48
Social Profile of Greater Sudbury
5.2 Net Migration
Net migration reflects the difference (positive/negative) between the number of people who moved into
Greater Sudbury from another city, province, or country and the number of people who moved out of
Greater Sudbury to another city, province, or country.
In 2000/01, the city experienced a net migration of -699, with more individuals reporting a move out of
(-5693) than into (+4994) the city. By 2006, the city’s net migration had turned positive (+836)55 56.
5.3 Origins and Destinations
As stated earlier, 10% (14,745) of the city’s population moved to Greater Sudbury from another Canadian
city. The following graph (Figure 28) illustrates the top 10 origins of these internal migrants between
2001 and 2006.
Other than Cochrane, the highest proportion of internal moves were within the CGS itself, that is, people
living in the former City of Sudbury moved outwards to the six former regional municipalities between
2001 – 2006.57
Figure 28:
Origin of Internal Migrants, 2001-2006, Greater Sudbury
Cochrane
Sudbury (city)
Algoma
Nipissing
Toronto
Ottawa
Simcoe
Thunder Bay
Peel
Timiskaming
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
1600
# of people
Statistics Canada, 2006 Census
49
Social Profile of Greater Sudbury
The following graph illustrates the destinations of choice for Greater Sudbury’s internal migrants between
2001 and 200658.
Ottawa, Simcoe and Toronto represented the top three preferred destinations (respectively), with the
former City of Sudbury representing the fourth. To reiterate, for purposes of clarification, individuals
moved from the former six (6) regional municipalities into the former City of Sudbury). (Please refer to
Figure 29).
Figure 29:
Destination of Internal Migrants, 2001-2006, Greater Sudbury
Ottaw a
Simcoe
Toronto
Sudbury (city)
Nipissing
Algoma
Waterloo
Manitoulin
Durham
Middlesex
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
# of people
Statistics Canada, 2006 Census
50
Social Profile of Greater Sudbury
6.0
IMMIGRATION, ETHNIC ORIGINS AND VISIBLE MINORITY
6.1 Period of Immigration and Place of Birth
Immigrants are defined as those individuals who are granted permission by immigration authorities to
reside in Canada on a permanent basis; some will have resided in Canada for a number of years while
others will have only arrived recently.
Between 1996 and 2006, the immigrant population in Greater Sudbury decreased by 14 percent.
However, as a proportion of the city’s population, the immigrant population remained fairly consistent,
representing approximately 7 percent of Greater Sudbury’s total population. This was in stark contrast to
the provincial average of 28 percent.59 60 61
Slightly less than half (45%) of Greater Sudbury’s immigrant population immigrated prior to 1961 with
the remainder (49%) largely immigrating between 1961 and 2000 and to a lesser extent (6%) between
2001 and 200662.
Figure 30:
Period of Immigration, Greater Sudbury
2001 to 2006
6%
1996 to 2000
5%
1991 to 1995
4%
1981 to 1990
8%
1971 to 1980
1961 to 1970
12%
20%
Before 1961
45%
% of immigrant population
Source: Statistics Canada, 2006 Census
The majority (36%) of current immigrants living in Greater Sudbury reported being between 25 and 44
years of age at the time of immigration, followed by those who reported being 15 to 24 years of age
(32%). 29 percent of current immigrants were children 14 years old and under, while 3 percent were 45
years old and over at the time of immigration63.
Prior to 2001, three-quarters of Greater Sudbury’s immigrant population came from Europe (74%). The
majority of these European immigrants came from Italy (22%) and the United Kingdom (14%), while the
other 38% came from other Southern, Northern, Eastern and Western European countries. 10 percent
emigrated from Asia and the Middle East, 6 percent from the United States, 4 percent from Africa, and 5
percent from other parts of the world (i.e. Oceania, Central and South America, the Caribbean and
Bermuda)64.
Greater Sudbury became home to 655 recent immigrants, that is, those who immigrated between 2001 and
2006. The most striking change between recent immigrants and immigrants from earlier times has been
51
Social Profile of Greater Sudbury
their ethnicity. While earlier immigrants reported European heritage (74%), primarily Italian and United
Kingdom status, those who immigrants after 2001 were more likely to be from Asia and/or the Middle
East (37%), followed by Africa (19%), United States (15%) and other parts of the world (6%).65
6.2 Ethnic Origins
Statistics Canada definition of ethnic origins refers to the ethnic and/or cultural origins of a person’s
ancestors. Ancestors are those that a person is descended from and is usually more distant than a
grandparent.
The following graph (Figure 31) illustrates the ethnic origins of Greater Sudbury residents during the
decade beginning in 1996 and ending in 2006. The data contains both single and multiple responses, and
shows the top ten ethnic origins as reported by residents were as follows (in descending order): French;
Canadian; English; Irish; Scottish; Italian; German; Finnish; Ukrainian; and North American Aboriginal.
Amongst the top 5, a higher proportion of Greater Sudbury’s population reported their ethnic origin as
French (+7%), Irish (+2%), and Scottish (+2%) than in 1996, while a smaller proportion reported
Canadian (-3%) and English (-2%). In addition, the proportion of the population reporting Aboriginal
origins (North American Indian, Métis, and Inuit) more than doubled between 1996 and 2006 (from 4% to
9% or 7,155 to 14,600 respectively).66 67
Figure 31:
Population by Ethnic Origins, 1996 and 2006, Greater Sudbury
French
Canadian
English
Irish
Scottish
2006
Italian
1996
German
Finnish
Ukrainian
North American Aboriginal
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
45%
50%
% of population
Statistics Canada, 1996, 2006 Census
6.3 Visible Minority
Since the 1996 Census, Statistics Canada collects data on the visible minority population through a direct
question which asks individuals to self-identify according to visible minority status. (See Glossary for a
more detailed definition).
In 2006, visible minorities made up 2% of Greater Sudbury’s population, in comparison to 22% of
Ontario’s and 15% of Canada’s population. However, for Greater Sudbury this represented a 14%
increase from the 1996 census68 69.
52
Social Profile of Greater Sudbury
7. 0
ABORIGINALS
7.1 Aboriginal Population
The proportion of Greater Sudbury’s Aboriginal population increased two-fold, from 3% (4,470) of the
total population in 1996 to 6% (9,950) in 2006 (please refer to Figure 32 and 33).
Figure 32:
% Change in Population by Aboriginal Identity, 1996-2006, Greater
Sudbury
Total Population
-4%
123%
Aboriginal
-20%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
120%
140%
% of change
Source: Statistics Canada, 1996, 2006 Census
Contrary to Greater Sudbury’s total population, which experienced decline between 1996 and 2001,
followed by very slight growth between 2001 and 2006, the Aboriginal population has grown by 123%
and 35% respectively, during this same timeframe70 71 72.
Figure 33:
% Change in Population by Aboriginal Identity, 2001-2006, Greater
Sudbury
2%
Total Population
35%
Aboriginal
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
% of change
Source: Statistics Canada, 2001, 2006 Census
As the following maps (18 and 19) illustrate, in 2006, Greater Sudbury’s Aboriginal population tended to
be concentrated in and around Walden, the Donovan/Flour Mill and Valley East; and to a lesser extent,
Minnow Lake and the West End of the city
53
Social Profile of Greater Sudbury
Map 18: Persons of Aboriginal Descent – CGS
54
Social Profile of Greater Sudbury
Map 19: Persons of Aboriginal Descent – Urban Core
55
Social Profile of Greater Sudbury
7.2 Aboriginal Mobility
In 2006, Greater Sudbury’s Aboriginal population was more mobile than the general population. Only
half (50%) remained in the same residence as occupied 5 years previous, compared to almost two-thirds
(64%) of the total population.
Over one-third (35%) reported moving residences within the CGS, with 13% moving here from another
Ontario municipality, compared to the total population, 25% of whom reported moving residences within
the city, with 8% moving from another Ontario municipality.73 74
Figure 34:
Mobility Status - Place of Residence 5 years ago, by Aboriginal Identity,
2006
64%
Non-movers
50%
25%
Movers within city
35%
Movers within Canada
Movers outside
Canada
Total Population
8%
Movers within Ontario
13%
Aboriginal
2%
2%
1%
0%
Source: Statistics Canada, 2006 Census, Community Profiles
7.3 Aboriginal Highest Level of Educational Attainment
Greater Sudbury’s Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal population (15 years of age and older) reported
comparable rates of high school certificates and college diplomas (25% and 23% respectively). However,
Aboriginals were more likely to be without a high school certificate than the non-Aboriginal population
(30% versus 25%) and less likely to have a university degree (7% versus 14%).75 (Please refer to Figure
35).
Figure 35:
Highest Level of Educational Attainment by Aboriginal Identity, 2006,
Greater Sudbury
without HS certificate
with HS certificate
Trades certificate
Non-Aboriginal
Aboriginal
College
University without degreee
University with degree
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
% of population 15 years +
Source: Statistics Canada, 2006 Census
56
Social Profile of Greater Sudbury
A gendered analysis showed that in 2001, one in three Aboriginal women aged 25 to 34 years have
completed post-secondary education.
In 2001, Aboriginal men in Greater Sudbury were less likely (2%) than their female counterparts (9%) to
report possession of a University degree, and both were less likely to report a University degree than their
non-Aboriginal counterparts.76
7.4 Aboriginal Employment and Income
As Figure 36 illustrates, the participation rates amongst the Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal population in
Greater Sudbury was comparable in 2006 (62 and 63 percent, respectively); however, both were below the
provincial average (67%).
In contrast, the Aboriginal unemployment rate (12%) was much higher than that which was reported for
Greater Sudbury’s non-Aboriginal population (8%) or that which was reported for the province (6%).77
When considering the youth unemployment rate, 35% of Greater Sudbury’s Aboriginal youth population
aged 15 to 25 years were unemployed in 2001.78
Figure 36:
Labour Force Activity by Aboriginal Identity, 2006, Greater Sudbury
12%
Aboriginal
62%
8%
Unemployment rate
Non-Aboriginal
63%
Participation rate
6%
Total Ontario
Population
67%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
% of population 15 years +
Source: Statistics Canada, 2006 Census
Comparable participation rates did not translate into comparable earnings insofar as in 2005, Aboriginals
(15 years +) earned 80% of what their non-Aboriginal counterparts earned; 89% when full-time, full-year
employment earnings were taken into account. (Please refer to Figure 37).
57
Social Profile of Greater Sudbury
Figure 37:
Median Earnings in 2005 by Aboriginal Identity (15 years +) Greater
Sudbury
$50,000
$45,000
$45,112
$40,000
$40,364
dollars
$35,000
$30,000
$25,000
$20,000
Total Population
$26,793
Aboriginal
$21,435
$15,000
$10,000
$5,000
$-
Median earnings
Median earnnigs full-time, full-year
Source: Statistics Canada, 2006 Census, Community Profiles
Earnings represent one form of income. Income can include earnings, along with, farm income,
government transfers (i.e. child benefits, OAS, CPP, E.I.), RRSP’s, pensions, investments and other
government or money sources.
The median incomes of individuals and households in Greater Sudbury reflected income disparities
between the Aboriginal population and the total population. For example, Aboriginal median income
represented 71 and 84 percent of the total populations’ individual and household incomes, respectively. In
real dollars, Aboriginals’ individual and household incomes were between $8,000 and $8,500 less
annually ($7,957 less for individuals and $8,595 less for households). (Please refer to Figure 38). 79 80
Figure 38:
Median Income in 2005 by Aboriginal Identity, Greater Sudbury
$60,000
$50,000
$54,959
$46,361
dollars
$40,000
Total Population
$30,000
$20,000
Aboriginal
$27,430
$19,473
$10,000
$Median income (persons 15 yrs +)
Median household income
Source: Statistics Canada, 2006 Census, Community Profiles
58
Social Profile of Greater Sudbury
8.0
EDUCATION
8.1 School Attendance
School attendance is defined by Statistics Canada as either full-time or part-time attendance at school,
college, or university from September 2005 to May 2006.
In 2006, Greater Sudbury’s attendance and non-attendance was on par with the province (70% and 30%,
respectively), with slightly more of the city’s population between 20 – 24 years old attending school (58%
vs. 56%) and slightly less between 15 – 19 years old (81% vs. 83%)81.
Figure 39:
20 - 24
Years
Population by School Attendance and by Age Groups, Greater Sudbury
and Ontario, 2006
Ontario
56%
44%
Greater Sudbury
58%
42%
15 - 24
Years
15 - 19
Years
Attended
Ontario
17%
83%
Greater Sudbury
19%
81%
Ontario
70%
30%
Greater Sudbury
70%
30%
0%
20%
40%
Did Not
Attend
60%
80%
100%
120%
Source: Statistics Canada, Census 2006
59
Social Profile of Greater Sudbury
8.2 Highest Level of Schooling (population 15 years and over)
According to the most recent census (2006) Greater Sudbury had a higher percentage of its residents
reporting a college and/or trades certificate compared to its provincial counterpart. Conversely, it also
reported more residents as having less than a high school certificate, and fewer residents with a university
degree. (Please refer to Figure 40).
Figure 40:
H ig h e s t L e v e l o f S c h o o lin g
Population by Highest Level of Schooling, Greater Sudbury and Ontario, 2006
13%
University with degree
2%
University without degree
20%
4%
College
18%
Trades certificate
8%
23%
Greater Sudbury
11%
Ontario
25%
27%
With HS certificate
Without HS certificate
22%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
26%
30%
% of population 15 years +
Source: Statistics Canada, 2006 Census
Greater Sudburians who reported lower levels of education (e.g. those residents without a certificate,
diploma or degree) tended to live in Onaping Falls, Nickel Centre, Valley East as well as pockets of
Rayside-Balfour and the Donovan/Flour Mill. (Please refer to Maps 20 and 21).
60
Social Profile of Greater Sudbury
Map 20: Persons Aged 25 to 64 with No Certificate, Diploma or Degree – CGS
61
Social Profile of Greater Sudbury
Map 21: Persons Aged 25 to 64 with No Certificate, Diploma or Degree – Urban Core
62
Social Profile of Greater Sudbury
8.3 Post-Secondary Qualifications
The most recent census indicated that 57 percent of Greater Sudburians aged 25 to 64 years had a postsecondary qualification, mirroring the provincial rate.
In 2006, approximately 54% of Greater Sudbury’s population aged 20 to 64 years reported having a
college education (vs. 40% provincially), 17% reported possessing a trades education (vs. 13%
provincially), and 29% reported possessing a university degree (vs. 41% provincially). 82 83 (Please refer
to Figure 41 and 42).
Figure 41:
Population by Highest Level of Schooling by Age, Greater Sudbury, 2006
15-19 yrs
28%
68%
University with degree
20-24 yrs
13%
25%
5%
44%
University without degree
12%
College
Trades certificate
25-64 yrs
16%
29%
12%
24%
16%
With HS certificate
Without HS certificate
65 yrs +
7%
10%
0%
12%
17%
20%
51%
40%
60%
80%
100%
% of population 15 years+
Source: Statistics Canada, 2006 Census
Figure 42:
Population by Highest Level of Schooling by Age, Ontario, 2006
15-19 yrs
30%
67%
University with degree
20-24 yrs
15%
4%
4%
18%
48%
12%
University without degree
College
Trades certificate
25-64 yrs
26%
9%
22%
5%
25%
14%
With HS certificate
Without HS certificate
65 yrs +
11%
4% 12%
11%
22%
41%
% of population 15 years+
Source: Statistics Canada, 2006 Census
63
Social Profile of Greater Sudbury
Of the 17% of Sudburians with an apprenticeship/trades education, the highest concentration resided in
Onaping Falls and pockets of Valley East, followed by Garson and pockets of Rayside-Balfour.
Map 22: Persons Aged 25-64 with Apprenticeship or Trades Certificate or Diploma – CGS
64
Social Profile of Greater Sudbury
Map 23: Persons Aged 25-64 with Apprenticeship or Trades Certificate or Diploma – Urban Core
65
Social Profile of Greater Sudbury
Areas of the CGS where residents reported a certificate, diploma, or degree included Garson, pockets of
Valley East and the South End, followed by Nickel Centre, Onaping Falls, the West End, pockets of New
Sudbury, Walden and Minnow Lake.
Map 24: Persons Aged 25 to 64 with a Certificate, Diploma or Degree - CGS
66
Social Profile of Greater Sudbury
Map 25: Persons Aged 25 to 64 with a Certificate, Diploma or Degree – Urban Core
67
Social Profile of Greater Sudbury
When one analyzed educational qualifications and fields of study reported by Greater Sudburians, there
were distinct differences based on gender, both of which were in line with national trends.84
Figure 43 illustrates in 2006, the top three study categories as reflected by male post-secondary graduates,
aged 25 to 64 years, were ‘architecture, engineering, and related technologies’ (52%), followed by
‘business, management and public administration’ (11%), and ‘personal, protective and transportation
services’ (7%). For every female graduate of an ‘architecture, engineering or related technology’
program, there were 17 male graduates.
The top three study categories as reflected by female post-secondary graduates, aged 25 to 64 years, were
‘business, management and public administration’ (29%), followed closely by ‘health, parks, recreation
and fitness’ (26%), and ‘social and behavioural sciences and law’ (12%). 85
Figure 43:
Population by Post-secondary Qualifications by Gender, Greater Sudbury, 2006
Education
Visual/performing arts, and communitcation technologies
Humanities
Social and behavioural sciences and law
Business, management and public administration
Female
Physical and life sciences and technologies
Male
Mathematics, computer and information sciences
Architecture, engineering, and related technologies
Argiculture, natural resources and conservation
Health, parks, recreation and fitness
Personal, protective, and transportation services
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
Source: Statistics Canada, 2006 Census
68
Social Profile of Greater Sudbury
9.0
LABOUR FORCE
9.1 Current Trends
When considering labour force trends, it is important to place current statistics within the context of most
recent happenings. Updated labour force information reflecting statistics collected between December
2007 and December 2008, as well as most recent (January 2009) data is likely to provide the first
significant information about the impact of world economic shifts on Sudbury.
Insofar as Greater Sudbury is impacted by larger global trends, the most recent being the economic
meltdown which occurred in the fall of 2008, and which continues to impact the city’s local economy, the
author’s have decided to include a brief section describing most recent events on a national, provincial and
local level.
Following little change in Canada in October 2008, employment fell by 71,000 in November 2008, the
biggest monthly loss since 1982, with the decrease split between full-time and part-time work.
The employment declines were concentrated in Ontario (-66,000), where there was a large drop in fulltime work, with the steepest employment decline in November 2008 occurring within the manufacturing
sector. The provincial unemployment rate rose 0.1 percentage point to 6.3%.
In Sudbury, two years ago the price of nickel was $15 a pound and the outlook for the mining industry
was positive, with both Vale Inco and Xstrata reporting increased profits. At the present time, nickel
hovers just above $4 per pound and operations at several mines have been suspended with hundreds of
workers having lost their jobs and/or having retained their positions but remaining on paid leave until
nickel prices improve.
Most recent data from Statistics Canada indicates that between December 2007 and December 2008,
Greater Sudbury experienced slight shifts in unemployment, employment and participation rates.
The city’s unemployment rate increased by 0.9% to 5.6%; however, on a positive note, both its
employment (+1.2%) and participation rates (+1.8%) increased to 62.2% and 65.8% respectively). 86 87 88
69
Social Profile of Greater Sudbury
9.2 Unemployment by Age
Greater Sudbury’s unemployment rate was higher (8%) in 2006 than that which was reported for the
province (6%). Moreover, the city’s youth, aged 15 to 24 years experienced a disproportionately higher
unemployment rate (18%) than their provincial counterparts, even though the five years between 1996 and
2001 saw proportionately less youth unemployed (from 1 in 4 in 1996 to 1 in 5 youth in 2001).
The unemployment rate for those 25 years and older and those 15 years and older followed a similar
pattern to those youth (15-24 years), decreasing from 9% and 12% (respectively) in 1996, to 7% and 9%
(respectively) in 2001, and finally, to 6% and 8% (respectively) in 200689 90 91.
Figure 44:
Unemployment Rate by Age Groups, Greater Sudbury, 1996-2006
30%
24%
% of population
25%
20%
15%
10%
18%
18%
1996
2001
12%
9%
2006
9%
8%
7%
6%
5%
0%
Population 15 yrs+
Population 15-24 yrs
Population 25 yrs+
Source: Statistics Canada, 1996-2006 Census
Maps 26 and 27 illustrates that in 2006, the area of the city housing those (aged 25 years and older) with
the highest rates of unemployment (5%-6%) was in the Donovan/Flour Mill, followed by pockets of the
downtown core, New Sudbury, Valley East, and Copper Cliff.
70
Social Profile of Greater Sudbury
Map 26: Population 25 years + Unemployment Rate as Percentage of Total – CGS
71
Social Profile of Greater Sudbury
Map 27: Population 25 years + Unemployment Rate as Percentage of Total – Urban Core
72
Social Profile of Greater Sudbury
9.3 Unemployment by Presence of Children and Gender
In 2006, women who had no children living at home had a lower unemployment rate than men (9% vs.
12%). However, when the variable ‘children living at home’ was factored into the equation, the situation
reversed with males tending to report lower unemployment rates.
2006 census data indicated that 10% of women with children under 6 were unemployed, compared to 3%
of men. The situation was slightly worse for women with children at home (both under & over 6) insofar
as they reported 11% unemployment (as opposed to 1% for men).
However, most recent census data indicated that as children reached school age (6 years and over), the
unemployment rate between women and men equalized somewhat, to 5% and 3%, respectively92.
Figure 45:
Unemployment Rate by Presence of Children at Home and Gender,
2006
% of population 15 years +
14%
11%
12%
12%
10%
9%
10%
8%
Males
6%
3%
4%
3%
Females
5%
1%
2%
0%
without children at
home
with children under 6
yrs only
with children 6 and
over only
with children under 6
and over 6 yrs
Source: Statistics Canada, 2006 Census
Figure 46:
Males Unemployment Rate by Presence of Children, 1996-2006, Greater
Sudbury
18%
16%
14%
12%
17%
14%
12%
11%
1996
9%
10%
9%
8%
2001
6%
6%
3%
4%
4%
4%
2006
3%
1%
2%
0%
without children at
home
with children under 6
yrs only
with children 6 and over
only
with children under 6
and over 6 yrs
Source: Statistics Canada, 2006 Census
73
Social Profile of Greater Sudbury
Figure 47:
Females Unemployment Rate by Presence of Children at Home, 19962006, Greater Sudbury
18%
16% 15%
15%
16%
15%
14%
12%
10%
11%
10%
10% 9%
1996
10%
9%
2001
8%
5%
6%
2006
5%
4%
2%
0%
without children at
home
with children under 6
yrs only
with children 6 and over
only
with children under 6
and over 6 yrs
Source: Statistics Canada, 2006 Census
9.4 Unemployment Rate by Level of Education93
The level of one’s education has a direct impact on one’s ability to gain employment, with those without a
high school, college/trade, or university degree, diploma or certificate experiencing a much higher
unemployment rate than their educated counterparts94.
Figure 48 indicates that those without a High School certificate were far more likely to be unemployed
than those with post-secondary education, and to a lesser extent, those with a High School certificate. In
2006, those between the ages of 15-24 with a High School certificate or less were far more likely to report
being unemployed (42%) than their 25 – 54 aged counterparts (15%).
Figure 48:
Unemployment Rate by Age and Level of Education, Greater Sudbury,
2006
Total
University
8%
6%
18%
5%
13%
College
6%
12%
Trades
6%
15%
4%
5%
8%
9%
Total Ages
15 to 24 yrs
6%
25 to 54 yrs
High School
10%
None
5%
0%
6%
18%
14%
10%
6%
75 yrs +
5%
9%
22%
20%
65 to 74 yrs
30%
3%
40%
18%
50%
60%
70%
% of population (15 yrs +)
Source: Statistics Canada, 2006 Census
74
Social Profile of Greater Sudbury
9.5 Labour Force by Industry Groups
A few of the top 5 industries in Greater Sudbury shifted between 2001 and 2006 (see Figure 49). Both
‘retail trade’ and ‘health care and social assistance services’ remained as the top industries in Greater
Sudbury. ‘Public administration’ and ‘educational services’ shifted their 3rd and 4th positions, while
‘accommodation and food services’ was replaced by ‘mining, oil, and gas extraction’ services.
Figure 49:
Top 5 Industries, Greater Sudbury, 2001 - 2006
2001
2006
1. Retail trade
1. Retail trade
2. Health care and social assistance
2. Health care and social assistance
3. Public administration
3. Educational services
4. Educational services
4. Public Administration
5. Accommodation and food services
5. Mining and oil and gas extraction
Source: Statistics Canada, 2001, 2006 Census
Figure 50 illustrates how many more or less people were employed by industry between 2001 and 200695
96
.
Figure 50:
Change in Labour Force by Industry Groups, 2001 to 2006, Greater Sudbury
-1500
-1000
persons in labour force
0
-500
500
1000
1500
Health care and social assistance
Educational services
Mining and oil and gas extraction
Construction
Professional, scientific and technical
Wholesale trade
Other services (except public admin.)
Acoommodation and food services
Finance and insurance
Retail trade
Real estate and rental and leasing
Arts, entertainment and recreation
Management of companies
Utilities
Public admininstration
Manufacturing
Agriculture, forestry, fishing and hunting
Transportation and warehousing
Information and cultural industries
Administrative support and waste management
Source: Statistics Canada, 2001, 2006 Census
75
Social Profile of Greater Sudbury
The following graph (Figure 51) illustrates the differences in labour force participation rates by gender for
the top industries in Greater Sudbury. As of the most recent census, ‘mining, oil and gas extraction’ had
the highest concentration of the male labour force at 13% as compared to 1% of the female labour force.
The other male-dominated top industries were ‘construction’ (11% male vs. 1% female) and
‘manufacturing’ (10% male vs. 2% female).
The top industry for the female labour force was ‘health care and social assistance’ with 1 in 5 (20%)
being employed within this sector compared to 4% of their male counterparts. The other femaledominated top industries were ‘retail trade’ (14% female vs. 11% male) and ‘educational services’ (12%
females vs. 5% males)97.
Figure 51:
Labour Force by Top Industries and by Gender, Greater Sudbury, 2006
Retail trade
Health care and social assistance
Educational services
Female
Public administration
Male
Mining and oil and gas extraction
Total
Accommodation and food services
Construction
Manufacturing
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
% of labour force
Source: Statistics Canada, 2006
76
Social Profile of Greater Sudbury
9.6 Occupation
In essence, there are 10 major categories to describe the type of work engaged in by persons (based on the
1991 Standard Occupational Classification).
In 2006, 70% of Greater Sudbury’s labour force reported working in four of the ten identified occupations.
As shown in Figure 52, 1 in 4 (25%) reported working in ‘sales and service’, followed by ‘business,
finance and administration’ (19%), ‘trades, transport and equipment operators’ (16%) and ‘social science,
education, government and religion’ (10%).
Almost two-thirds (62%) of the female labour force reported working in two of the ten identified
occupations: ‘sales and service’ (32%); and ‘business, finance, and administration’ (30%).
Almost half (48%) of the male labour force reported working in the following two occupational
categories: ‘trades, transport and equipment operators’ (29%); and ‘sales and service’ (19%)98. (Please
refer to Figure 52).
Figure 52:
Labour Force by Top Occupations and by Gender, Greater Sudbury,
2006
Sales & service
Business, finance & administration
Trades, transport & equipment operators
Social science, education, government & religion
Female
Management
Male
Health Occupations
Total
Natural & applied sciences
Primary industry
Art, culture, recreation & sport
Processing, manufacturing & utlities
0%
5%
10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35%
% of labour force
Statistics Canada, 2006 Census
77
Social Profile of Greater Sudbury
Figure 53:
Average Employment Income by Top Occupations, Greater Sudbury, 2005
Sales & service
All Occupations
$38,628
Business, finance & administration
Trades, transport & equipment operators
Social science, education, government & religion
Management
Health Occupations
Natural & applied sciences
Primary industry
Art, culture, recreation & sport
Processing, manufacturing & utlities
$0
$10,000 $20,000 $30,000 $40,000 $50,000 $60,000 $70,000
Average Income
Source: Statistics Canada, 2006 Census
In 2005, the average employment income for all the top occupations in Greater Sudbury was $38,628.
The highest average incomes were reported for the following occupations (in descending order):
Management; Primary Industry; and Health Occupations; followed closely by Natural and Applied
Sciences. At the opposite end of the spectrum, the lowest average employment incomes were found in the
Sales and Services; Art, Culture, Recreation and Sport sectors; and to a lesser extent the Business, Finance
and Administration sector.
There were significant differences in the average employment incomes of men and women within these
occupations.
On average, women earned 58% of what their male counterparts earned in all occupations, that is, women
earned 58 cents for every dollar men earned in Greater Sudbury. This was a greater income-gender
differential than that reported for the province or nation (64% or 64 cents to the dollar, respectively).
Moreover, the income-gender differential has grown from 62% in 2000 to 58% in 2005 (that is women
earned 62% of their male counterpart’s employment income in 2000 compared to 58% in 2005).
Figure 54:
Female Employment Income as % of Males, All Occupations, Canada,
Ontario, Greater Sudbury, 2000-2005
66%
64%
64%
62%
64%
64%
63%
62%
Canada
Ontario
60%
Greater Sudbury
58%
58%
56%
54%
2000
2005
Source: Statistics Canada, 2001, 2006 Census
78
Social Profile of Greater Sudbury
When comparing all full-time and part-time workers between 2000 and 2006, the largest income-gender
gap occurred within the ‘processing, manufacturing and utilities’ occupational category (23%) where
women earned on average $10,964/year compared to male earnings of $47,418/year; and the ‘health
occupations’ category (32%) where women earned on average $43,761/year compared to the
$136,058/year earned by their male counterparts.
The narrowest income-gender gap (82%) occurred within the ‘art, culture, recreation and sport’
occupation, which had one of the lowest average employment incomes – $20,368/year for women and
$24,889/year for men99.
Figure 55:
Female Employment Income as a Percent of Male Employment Income
by Top Occupations, Greater Sudbury, 2005
52%
Sales & service
Business, finance & administration
73%
Trades, transport & equipment operators
49%
Social science, education, government & religion
69%
Management
69%
% of income
32%
Health Occupations
68%
Natural & applied sciences
All Occupations
58%
Primary industry 0%
82%
Art, culture, recreation & sport
Processing, manufacturing & utlities
23%
Source: Statistics Canada, 2006 Census
9.7 Work Activity
Approximately half (49%) of Greater Sudbury’s population, aged 15 and over, reported being full-year,
full-time workers.
In 2005, the average employment income for part-year or part-time workers was $21,838, which
represented 41% of the average income ($53,859) for full-year/full-time workers.
In 2005, 54% of male workers aged 15 and over were employed full-time/full-year as compared to 43% of
female workers. The average full-time/full-year employment income was $62,791 for males and $41,588
79
Social Profile of Greater Sudbury
for females. Women with full-time/full-year jobs earned two-thirds (66%) of what their male counterparts
earned.
Whereby males were more likely to be employed full time/full year than females (54% vs. 43%), females
were more likely to work part-time or part-year (50% females vs. 35% males). (Please refer to Figure 56)
The average part-time or part-year employment income was $28, 201 for males compared to $16,835 for
females. Therefore, although women made up a greater proportion of the part-time, or part-year labour
force, in 2005 they earned just 60% of what their part-time, or part-year male counterparts earned100.
Figure 56:
Population (15 yrs +) by Work Activity and Gender, Greater Sudbury,
2006
60%
54%
50%
% of population
50%
40%
43%
35%
males
30%
females
20%
10%
0%
part year or part time
full year, full time
Source: Statistics Canada, 2006 Census
9.8 Unpaid Work
Unpaid work refers to the number of hours that a person spends doing housework, maintaining the house
or doing yard work without getting paid for doing so. For example, this includes time spent preparing
meals, mowing the lawn, or cleaning the house, for oneself or for relatives, friends or neighbours.
In 2006, most people aged 15 years and older in Greater Sudbury reported performing some form of
unpaid work: 91% performed unpaid housework, 38% performed unpaid childcare, and 21% performed
unpaid senior care.
However, in 2006, unpaid work was disproportionately performed by women. 1 in 5 women (20%) spent
30 hours or more on housework and childcare compared to less than 1 in 10 men (9%).
Over one-third of men and women (35% and 36%, respectively) reported spending between 5 and 29
hours a week on these activities in 2006, with 57% of men and 46% of women falling into the zero to less
than 5 hours a week category. (Please refer to Figure 57).
80
Social Profile of Greater Sudbury
Figure 57:
Population (15 yrs+) by Hours of Unpaid Housework and Childcare by
Gender, Greater Sudbury, 2006
45%
40%
% of population
35%
39%
33%
30%
25%
Males
20%
15%
19%
17%
10%
11%
9%
5%
0%
Females
22%
3%
60+ hrs
18%
13%
13%
6%
30-59 hrs
15-29 hrs
5-14 hrs
< 5 hrs
No hours
Source: Statistics Canada, 2006 Census
Not only were women more likely than men to perform unpaid work in 2006, they were also more likely
to report spending more time performing this work.
In terms of housework, 67% of women spent 15 hours or more a week performing housework compared
to 33% of men. Conversely, 57% of men spent less than 15 hours on housework, compared to 43% of
women.
Figure 58:
Hours of Unpaid Housework by Gender, Greater Sudbury, 2006
80%
70%
74%
67%
60%
60%
60%
50%
52%
Males
48%
40%
40%
40%
30%
20%
59%
41%
Females
33%
26%
10%
0%
60+ hrs
30-59 hrs
15-29 hrs
5-14 hrs
< 5 hrs
No hours
Source: Statistics Canada, 2006 Census
81
Social Profile of Greater Sudbury
In terms of childcare, 62% of women spent 15 hours or more on childcare, compared to 38% of men.
Approximately 50% of women and men reported spending less than 15 hours a week on childcare.
Figure 59:
Hours of Unpaid Childcare by Gender, Greater Sudbury, 2006
80%
70%
73%
60%
60%
50%
53%
40%
51% 49%
50% 50%
47%
51% 49%
Males
Females
40%
30%
20%
27%
10%
0%
60+ hrs
30-59 hrs
15-29 hrs
5-14 hrs
< 5 hrs
No hours
Source: Statistics Canada, 2006 Census
As stated, in 2006, 21% of Greater Sudburians reported spending time caring for their elders. Again,
more women performed this work (23% females vs. 18% males) as well as spent more time doing this
work. Of those spending more than 5 hours a week on senior care, almost two-thirds (63%) were women,
with the remainder being men (37%)101 102 103.
Figure 60:
Hours of Unpaid Senior Care by Gender, Greater Sudbury, 2006
70%
66%
60%
61%
61%
55%
50%
50% 50%
40%
30%
45%
39%
Males
39%
Females
34%
20%
10%
0%
20+ hrs
10-19 hrs
5-9 hrs
< 5 hrs
No hours
Source: Statistics Canada, 2006 Census
82
Social Profile of Greater Sudbury
10.0
TRANSPORTATION & COMMUTING
10.1 Place of Work
In 2006, the vast majority (86%) of employed Greater Sudburians (15 years and over), were employed at a
usual place of work. Almost 1 in 10 had no fixed workplace and almost 1 in 20 worked from home104.
Figure 61:
% of population (15 years +)
Place of Work for Employed Labour Force, Greater Sudbuy & Ontario,
2006
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
86% 83%
Greater Sudbury
Ontario
9% 10%
4%
0%
Usual place of work No fixed workplace
address
7%
1%
Worked outside
Canada
Worked at home
Source: Statistics Canada, 2006 Census
10.2 Mode of Transportation to Work
The majority of employed Greater Sudburians aged 15 years and over reported driving their car, van, or
truck to work (77%), greater than the provincial average of 71%. In general, Greater Sudburians were less
likely (5%) than their provincial counterparts (13%) to report using public transit as a viable option to
driving to work.105
Figure 62:
Mode of Transportation to Work for Greater Sudbury & Ontario, 2006
% of population 15 yrs +
90%
80%
77%
71%
70%
60%
50%
Greater Sudbury
40%
Ontario
30%
20%
9% 8%
10%
5%
13%
7% 7%
1% 1%
0%
Car,truck,van
as driver
Car,truck,van
as passenger
Public transit
Walked or
Bicycled
All other
methods
Source: Statistics Canada, 2006 Census Community Profiles
83
Social Profile of Greater Sudbury
Figure 63 illustrates of the 77% of Sudburians who reported driving their own vehicle to work, the
greatest proportion were 35 – 54 years of age (55%), followed by those 25 – 34 years of age (20%), and
finally, those 15 – 24 years (11%). 12% of drivers were between 55 – 64 years of age and 2% were
seniors, aged 65 to 74.
Similarly, of the 9% of Sudburians who reported being passengers in vehicles, 53% were between 25 and
54 years of age, approximately 40% were youths, 15 to 24 years old, with the remainder being seniors 55
– 64 and 65 – 74 years of age (7% and 1% respectively).
Figure 63:
% of Population by Mode of Transportation & Age for Employed Labour
Force
Car,truck,van as driver
11%
12% 2%
27%
28%
20%
15-24 yrs
Car,truck,van as passenger
20%
16%
17%
39%
7% 1%
25-34 yrs
35-44 yrs
Public transit
18%
16%
22%
37%
5% 1%
45-54 yrs
55-64 yrs
Walked or bicycled
All other methods
18%
0%
22%
21%
17%
18%
34%
22%
25%
8% 1% 1%
12% 1%
65-74 yrs
75 yrs +
10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
% of population (15 years +)
Source: Statistics Canada, 2006 Census
As previously indicated, in 2006, 5% of Sudburians reported relying on public transit to get to work, the
majority of whom were between the ages of 25 and 54 (53%) and 15 to 24 (37%). Seniors represented a
small percentage of transit users – those between 55 and 64 years (5%) and those aged 65 to 74 years
(1%).
Similar to the province, 7% of the Greater Sudbury labour force reported walking or biking to work, with
1% using some other mode of transportation, such as taxi or motorcycle.
The greatest proportion of walkers or bikers were those between the ages of 25 and 54 years (56%) and
youths, aged 15 to 24 years (34%), while seniors aged 65 to 74 years, and 75 and over, accounted for 1%
respectively106.
84
Social Profile of Greater Sudbury
11.0
INCOME & POVERTY
11.1 Income
The authors’ of this report have chosen to utilize median incomes rather than average incomes for the
following reasons. In general, averages are sensitive to extremely high and low values, whereas medians
represent the half-way value, that is, the value that divides the population into two halves – the half with
incomes below the median and the half with incomes above the median. (For a review of census terms,
please see Glossary).
For the purposes of clarification, Statistics Canada utilizes the previous year’s income in its analysis (that
is, 2006 Census data reflects the annual income of the previous year, that is, 2005).
The graph below (Figure 64) illustrates that in 2005, individual and household median incomes in Greater
Sudbury were on par or better than that reported for the province. However, Greater Sudbury’s median
family income was slightly lower than that reported for the province ($69,993 vs. $72,734 respectively)
with non-family median income 15% lower ($23,807 vs. $27,365 respectively).107 108 109 110
Figure 64:
Median Individual, Household and Family Incomes, Greater Sudbury
and Ontario, 2006
$27,547
$27,258
Individual
$55,201
$53,634
Household
Greater Sudbury
Ontario
$69,933
$72,734
Family
$23,807
$27,365
Non-family
0
10000
20000
30000
40000
50000
60000
70000
80000
Median Income
Statistics Canada, 2006 Census
The median income for individuals aged 15 years and over in Greater Sudbury in 2005 was $27,547 which
was on par with the province. This means that for all of the individuals who reported incomes in 2005,
half were below $27,547 and half were above.
Figure 65 illustrates the skewed distribution of income with 20% of Greater Sudbury individuals reporting
incomes of less than $10,000/year and 17% reporting incomes exceeding $60,000/year. It should be noted
that these incomes include working youth (15+) living at home.
85
Social Profile of Greater Sudbury
Figure 65:
18%
16%
14%
12%
10%
8%
6%
4%
2%
0%
$5
,0
00
<
-9
$1
,9
0,
99
00
0
-1
4,
$1
99
5,
9
00
0
-1
9,
$2
99
0,
9
00
0
-2
4,
$2
99
5,
9
00
0
-2
9,
$3
99
0,
9
00
0
-3
4,
$3
99
5,
9
00
0
-3
9,
$4
99
0,
9
00
0
-4
4,
$4
99
5,
9
00
0
-4
9,
$5
99
0,
9
00
0
-5
9,
00
0
>
$6
0,
00
0
Median Income $27, 547
$5
,0
00
% of population
Income Ranges for Individuals, Greater Sudbury, 2005
Individual Income
Statistics Canada, 2006 Census
When considering the middle portion of the income spectrum, the median income for families in Greater
Sudbury in 2005 was 4% lower than the province’s median income for families.
The median household income in Greater Sudbury was $55,201 which was 3% higher than the province’s
median household income of $53,634.
The same skewed distribution was evident amongst families and households, with over one in four (28%)
families and one in five (21%) households earning over $100,000 in Greater Sudbury (2005).
Maps 28 and 29 indicate that in 2005, those households in Greater Sudbury who reported earning
$100,000+ annually tended to be located in the South End and to a lesser extent Walden, pockets of
Valley East and a small pocket located in the downtown core. In contrast, Greater Sudbury households
who were significantly less likely to report earning more than $100,000 in 2005 resided in the following
areas: Minnow Lake, Donovan/Flour Mill, the West End, most of the downtown core and a small pocket
in the South End and New Sudbury.
86
Social Profile of Greater Sudbury
Map 28: Households by Income over $100,000 – CGS
87
Social Profile of Greater Sudbury
Map 29: Households by Income over $100,000 – Urban Core
88
Social Profile of Greater Sudbury
At the other end of the spectrum, about one in seven families (14%) and one in four households (26%)
earned less than $30,000/year in 2005. (Please refer to the Glossary of Census Terms for a more detailed
explanation of the differences between ‘family’ and ‘household’ categories).
Figure 66:
30%
25%
20%
Family
15%
Household
10%
5%
0,
0
0
$1
$1
0,
00
<
-1
$2
9,
99
0,
00
9
0
-2
$3
9,
99
0,
00
9
0
-3
$4
9,
99
0,
00
9
0
-4
$5
9,
99
0,
00
9
0
-5
$6
9,
99
0,
00
9
0
-6
$7
9,
99
0,
00
9
0
-7
$8
9,
99
0,
00
9
0
-8
$9
9,
99
0,
00
9
0
-9
9,
99
9
>
$1
00
,0
00
0%
00
% of Families and Households
Family and Household Income Ranges, Greater Sudbury, 2005
Income
Statistics Canada, 2006 Census
As indicated earlier in this section, Greater Sudbury’s household median income was on par with that
which was reported for the province.
It is interesting to note that according to Maps 30 and 31, those households with median incomes of more
than $72,521.61 but less than $90,652.00 were concentrated in Valley East and Walden.
In contrast, households with median incomes of less than $36,260.80 tended to be located in the
Donovan/Flour Mill and pockets within the downtown core.
The next highest geographic concentration of lower to middle median income households (earning less
than $54,391.20 but more than $36,260.80 in 2005) was as follows: Capreol, Minnow Lake, the West
End, some of the downtown core as well as small pockets within Rayside-Balfour, New Sudbury and the
South End.
89
Social Profile of Greater Sudbury
Map 30: 2005 Median Household Income – CGS
90
Social Profile of Greater Sudbury
Map 31: 2005 Median Household Incomes – Urban core
91
Social Profile of Greater Sudbury
In 2005, the median income in Greater Sudbury for non-family persons was $23,807 which was 15% less
that that reported for the province ($27,365). Over two in five (42%) non-family persons in Greater
Sudbury made less than $20,000 and one in ten (11%) made more than $60,000.
Figure 67:
0
00
0
$6
$5
0,
00
>
9,
0,
00
9
0
-4
0
$4
5,
00
0
0,
00
$4
-5
9,
99
4,
-4
-3
0
5,
00
$3
99
9
9
99
9,
99
4,
-3
0
$3
0,
00
0
5,
00
$2
0,
00
9
9
99
9,
-2
4,
-2
0
-1
$2
$1
5,
00
0
0
9
99
9
99
9,
4,
-1
-9
0,
00
$1
$5
,0
0
0
<
9
99
,9
9
,0
0
9
0
16%
14%
12%
10%
8%
6%
4%
2%
0%
$5
% of non-fam ily persons (15 yrs+)
Non-family Persons Income Ranges, Greater Sudbury, 2005
Income
Statistics Canada, 2006 Census
In general, couple families earned more than single parent families, who in turn, earned more than nonfamily persons. Median income for couple families (married and common-law) was 41% higher than the
median income reported for lone-parent families ($71,446 vs. $41,813).
Amongst couple families, the median 2005 income for ‘married couples’ was 23% higher than the median
income for ‘common-law couples’ ($80,795 vs. $62,096). Similarly, amongst lone-parent families, male
lone-parents’ reported a median income 36% higher than that which was reported for their female loneparent counterparts ($51,041 vs. 32,585).
Non-family persons were the most vulnerable from an economic standpoint, reporting the lowest median
income ($23,807). In 2005, these individuals earned 43% less than lone-parent families, and 67% less
than couple families.111 (Please refer to Figure 68)
92
Social Profile of Greater Sudbury
Figure 68:
Median Family Income by Family Type, including Single Person families,
Greater Sudbury, 2006
Married couple
$80,795
$62,096
Common-law
Female lone-parent
$32,585
Male lone-parent
$51,041
Non-family
$23,807
$$10,000 $20,000 $30,000 $40,000 $50,000 $60,000 $70,000 $80,000 $90,000
Median Income
Statistics Canada, 2006 Census
11.2 Poverty
Low-income Cut-off’s (LICO’s) are used by Statistics Canada to determine the proportion of individuals
and families that live in straitened circumstances. These cut-offs are determined by the percentage of
income spent on food, shelter and clothing (20% more than the average family/individual), by family size,
and by area of residence. For example in Greater Sudbury, a family of 4 whose income was less than
$33,251 in 2005, was considered to be living in ‘straitened circumstances’.
Low-income Cut-Offs (LICO) Table, 2005112
Table 2:
Size of Area of Residence
Family
size
1
2
3
4
5
6
7+
Source: Statistics Canada
Rural (farm
and non-farm)
Small urban
regions
30,000 to
99,999
100,000 to
499,999
500,000 or
more
14,303
17,807
21,891
26,579
30,145
33,999
37,853
16,273
20,257
24,904
30,238
34,295
38,679
43,063
17,784
22,139
27,217
33,046
37,480
42,271
47,063
17,895
22,276
27,386
33,251
37,711
42,533
47,354
20,778
25,867
31,801
38,610
43,791
49,389
54,987
Historical Perspective of Poverty in Greater Sudbury: 1986 – 1996 – 2006
The incidence of low-income improved significantly over the last 20 years in Greater Sudbury. In 1986,
almost 1 in 6 (15%) families and 1 in 2 (44%) unattached individuals lived in poverty, compared to less
than 1 in10 families and 1 in 3 unattached individuals in 2006113 114 115.
Of the 15% of families who reported earnings below the low-income cut-off (before tax) in 2005, the
highest concentration were living in the Donovan/Flour Mill, and to a lesser extent, pockets within
Minnow Lake, the downtown core and Rayside-Balfour. (Please refer to Maps 32 and 33).
93
Social Profile of Greater Sudbury
Map 32: Families by Prevalence of Low-Income – CGS
94
Social Profile of Greater Sudbury
Map 33: Families by Prevalence of Low-Income – Urban Core
95
Social Profile of Greater Sudbury
Figure 69 provides an historical view of the incidence of low-income in Greater Sudbury during the past
two decades.
The decade beginning in 1996 and ending in 2006 saw the incidence of low-income for ‘economic
families’ and ‘unattached individuals’ dropping by 5% and 7% respectively (though unattached
individuals were between three and four times more likely to report low-income relative to individuals
living within ‘economic families’.
Figure 69:
Historical View of Incidence of Low-Income in Greater Sudbury, 19862006
50%
45%
40%
44%
35%
43%
36%
30%
1986
25%
1996
20%
2006
15%
15%
10%
14%
9%
5%
0%
Economic Families
Unattached Individuals
Statistics Canada, 1986, 1996, 2006 Census
Table 3 below illustrates the prevalence of low-income by select groups for Greater Sudbury in 2000 and
2005 as well as for Ontario in 2005.
Table 3:
Incidence of Low-Income by Select Groups,
Greater Sudbury 2000, 2005 and Ontario 20051
Greater
Greater
Sudbury
Selected Groups
Sudbury
2005
2000
Total population
15%
13%
Unattached (non-family) persons
42%
36%
Couples (married or common-law)
7%
5%
Female lone-parents
41%
35%
Male lone-parents
21%
16%
All Seniors (65>)
13%
8%
Seniors (65>) living alone/with non-relatives
37%
26%
All children (<18)
16%
15%
Children 0 – 5 yrs
21%
20%
Ontario
2005
15%
34%
9%
32%
16%
12%
35%
17%
19%
Source: Statistics Canada, 2001, 2006 Census, Custom tabulation
1
Table compiled from 3 data sources: Community Profile, PCensus Profile Report, and Statistics Canada Cat. No 97-563XCB2006017 for Greater Sudbury.
96
Social Profile of Greater Sudbury
Overall, the prevalence of poverty was less in Greater Sudbury from 2000 to 2005, in addition to being
less than that reported for the province (13% vs. 15%).
Although the situation improved for Greater Sudburians in 2005, more than 1 in 3 unattached individuals
(36%) and female lone parents (35%) reported living in poverty. More than 1 in 4 seniors who lived alone
or with non-relatives, and 1 in 5 children under 6 years reported living below the LICO.116 117
11.3 Low-Income Families
In 2005, there were 4,225 families (9% or 1 in 10) and 7,645 unattached (non-family) individuals (36% or
1 in 3) who reported living in poverty. Lone-parents with dependent children at home (under the age of
18) were most vulnerable, with more than 1 in 2 (54%) living in poverty118.
Figure 70:
Low Income Families by Economic Family Structure,
Greater Sudbury, 2006
Couples without
children 5%
Unattached (nonfamily) individuals 36%
Couples with children
(<18)
8%
Lone parents with
children (<18) 54%
Statistics Canada, 2006 Census
11.4 Low-income Non-Family Persons
In 2005, 1 in 3 unattached individuals reported living below the low-income cut-off.
Of the 36% unattached (non-family) individuals who reported living below the LICO (before tax) in 2005,
the majority resided in the Donovan/Flour Mill, the downtown core and the north-west end of the city.
The next most concentrated areas included: the West End as well as pockets of Minnow Lake, RaysideBalfour, New Sudbury and the West End. (Please refer to Maps 34 and 35).
97
Social Profile of Greater Sudbury
Map 34: Non-Family Persons 15 years+ by Prevalence of Low-Income – CGS
98
Social Profile of Greater Sudbury
Map 35: Non-Family Persons 15 years+ by Prevalence of Low-Income – Urban Core
99
Social Profile of Greater Sudbury
11.5 Low-Income Female Lone-Parent Families
Of the 35% of female lone-parents who reported living below the low-income cut-off in 2005, the highest
concentrations were found in the Donovan/Flour Mill, Walden, the north-west end of the city as well as
pockets of Minnow Lake and Rayside-Balfour. (Please refer to Maps 36 and 37).
Map 36: Female Lone Parent Families by Prevalence of Low-Income - CGS
100
Social Profile of Greater Sudbury
Map 37: Female Lone Parent Families by Prevalence of Low-Income – Urban Core
101
Social Profile of Greater Sudbury
11.6 Low-Income Children (Under 6 Years)
In 2005, approximately 5,300 children under 18 years of age were living in low-income families in the
city, representing approximately 15% of all children.
Of these children, 1 in 3 (34%) were under the age of 6, over 1 in 4 (27%) were 10 – 14 years, over 1 in 5
(22%) were 6 – 9 years, and 1 in 6 (17%) were 15 – 17 years.119
Of the 34% of children under the age of 6 who lived within a family reporting low-income in 2005, the
highest concentrations were located within the Donovan/Flour Mill and to a lesser extent, the downtown
core as well as a small pocket in the South End. (Please refer to Maps 38 and 39).
102
Social Profile of Greater Sudbury
Map 38: Children Under 6 Years of Age by Prevalence of Low-Income – CGS
103
Social Profile of Greater Sudbury
Map 39: Children Under 6 Years of Age by Prevalence of Low-Income – Urban Core
104
Social Profile of Greater Sudbury
11.7 Low-Income Individuals
About 13 percent of the Greater Sudbury population reported individual incomes below the low-income
cut-off in 2005. Children (17%) and youth (18%) represented the largest groups experiencing lowincome.
In terms of age groups, with the exception of youth between 15-24 years of age, the city reported slightly
better figures in terms of the prevalence of low-income than its provincial counterpart.120
Moving on to the senior population, it is important to note that 2005 saw some improvements in Greater
Sudbury, although more than 1 in 4 seniors who lived alone or with non-relatives, reported living below
the low-income cut-off.
When considering other specific populations, it is interesting to note that 1 in 3 unattached individuals
(36%) also fell below the low-income cut-off in 2005.
Figure 71:
Low Income Individuals by Age Groups, Greater Sudbury and Ontario,
2006
9%
70 > yrs
7%
65 - 69 yrs
13%
11%
55 - 64 yrs
10%
45 - 54 yrs
10%
35 - 44 yrs
12%
12%
11%
25 - 34 yrs
Greater Sudbury
14%
14%
15%
15 - 24 yrs
Ontario
18%
18%
17%
0 - 14 yrs
0%
2%
4%
6%
8%
10%
12%
14%
16%
18%
19%
20%
% of population
Statistics Canada, 2006 Census
11.8 Low-Income Seniors
In 2005, seniors aged 65+ reporting low-income tended to reside in pockets of the downtown core. The
next highest concentration of seniors 65+ living below the LICO was in the Donovan/Flour Mill, New
Sudbury, the West End, as well as pockets of Nickel Centre and the South End. (Please refer to Maps 40
and 41).
As mentioned previously, in terms of living arrangements, elderly females were twice as likely as their
male counterparts to report living alone.
105
Social Profile of Greater Sudbury
Map 40: Persons 65+ by Prevalence of Low-Income – CGS
106
Social Profile of Greater Sudbury
Map 41: Persons 65+ by Prevalence of Low-Income – Urban Core
107
Social Profile of Greater Sudbury
12.0
SHELTER & DWELLINGS
12.1 Household Size
The Census distinguishes between a household and a dwelling in the following way: a household refers to
the characteristics pertaining to the person(s) who occupies a dwelling (e.g. size, type, average gross
monthly rent, etc.) whereas a dwelling refers to the physical attributes of a set of living quarters (e.g.
structure type, period of construction, tenure, etc.).
Between 1996 and 2006 Greater Sudbury experienced a significant shift insofar as the proportion of one
and two person households increased by 6% (from 56% to 62% respectively). Likewise, the proportion of
larger households of three (3) or more people declined from 44% in 1996 to 38% in 2006.
Figure 72:
Households by Household Size (1996,2006) Greater Sudbury
2%
Household size
6+
1%
4-5
24%
21%
1996
18%
16%
3
2006
32%
2
35%
24%
1
27%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
% of all households
Source: Statistics Canada, 1996, 2006 Census
Figure 73 illustrates the percent of change that has occurred in household sizes, that is, the rate of decline
or increase. Between 1996 and 2006 there was a 42% decline in larger households (3 or more persons), a
16% increase in 1 person households, and a 15% increase in 2 person households. These changes reflect a
growing provincial trend towards smaller households. 121 122
108
Social Profile of Greater Sudbury
Figure 73:
Percent Change in Household Size, 1996-2006, Greater Sudbury
-19%
6 or more persons
-17%
4-5 persons
-6%
3 persons
2 persons
15%
1 person
16%
-25%
-20%
-15%
-10%
-5%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
% of change
Source: Statistics Canada, 1996, 2006 Census
As mentioned previously, the average household size has continued to decline, just as the number of
households has continued to increase (from 63,140 in 2001 to 65,075 in 2006). During this same time
period Greater Sudbury reported an increased number of households containing a couple (married or
common-law) without children, as well as more single person households.123 (Please refer to Figure 73).
12.2 Dwelling Types
An additional 1,805 dwellings were added to the Greater Sudbury housing stock between 1996 and 2006,
which represented a 3% increase over this time period.
Apartments with less than 5 storeys experienced an increase from 15% to 16% as was the case for singledetached houses (from 59% to 61%). All other dwelling types remained consistent or declined. 124 125
(Please refer to Figure 74).
Figure 74:
Private Dwellings by Structure Type (1996-2006), Greater Sudbury
Movable dwelling
1%
1%
16%
15%
Apartment, less than 5 storeys
7%
7%
6%
7%
4%
5%
5%
5%
Apartment, 5 or more storeys
Apartment, detached duplex
Row house
Semi-detached house
2006
1996
61%
Single-detached house
59%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
% of all dwellings
Source: Statistics Canada, 1996, 2006 Census
109
Social Profile of Greater Sudbury
Thus, from 1996 to 2006, Greater Sudbury experienced a proportional increase of 11% in <5 storey
apartments (or 9,655 to 10,715) and a proportional increase of 5% in single-detached houses (or 37,640 to
39,708). All other types experienced a proportional decrease from 3% to 19%. (Please refer to Figure
75).
Figure 75:
% Change in Private Dwellings by Structure Type (1996-2006), Greater
Sudbury
Movable dwelling
-19%
11%
Apartment, less than 5 storeys
Apartment, 5 or more storeys
-3%
Apartment, detached duplex
-13%
Row house
-4%
Semi-detached house
-6%
Single-detached house
-25%
-20%
-15%
-10%
-5%
5%
0%
5%
10%
15%
% of change
Source: Statistics Canada, 1996, 2006 Census
2006 saw 491 total residential units created in Greater Sudbury, an increase of 48 units from 2005.126 The
vast majority or these new units (96%) were single detached dwellings.
Geographically speaking, 2005 saw the creation of new residential units in the former city of Sudbury
(primarily the South End); Valley East, and to a lesser extent, Nickel Centre and Walden.127
12.3 Tenure
In terms of tenure, between 2001 and 2006 there was an increase in the number Greater Sudbury residents
who reported being home owners (65% and 67%, respectively) as opposed to renters (34% and 33%,
respectively),128 reflecting a rising trend in homeownership.129
12.4 Shelter Costs130
In general, apartment vacancy rates went from a high of 11% in 1999, to a low of 0.7% in 2008 – much
lower in comparison to Toronto (2.8%).131
During this same time period, the average two-bedroom apartment in CGS increased ($600 to $780 per
month132), with the average selling price of a home in the CGS also increasing from $105,000 to
$134,000.133
In 2006, the median monthly shelter cost for tenants was $626 compared to $821 for owners.
110
Social Profile of Greater Sudbury
Statistics Canada defines shelter costs for homeowners as mortgage payments, property taxes, condo fees
and utilities. For renters, the costs include rental payments and utilities.
Greater Sudbury’s shelter cost for tenants and owners was lower than that which was reported for the
province ($801 and $1,046 respectively). In comparison to other northern communities, shelter costs in
Greater Sudbury were less than that which was reported for North Bay, but higher than that which was
reported for Sault Ste. Marie and Thunder Bay. (Please refer to Figure 76).
Figure 76:
Median Monthly Shelter Costs (Owner, Tenant) by Selected
Municipalities, 2006
Thunder Bay
North Bay
Sault Ste. Marie
Owner
Tenant
Greater Sudbury
Ontario
Canada
$-
$200
$400
$600
$800
$1,000
$1,200
Monthly costs
Source: Statistics Canada, 2006 Census
Looking at income-to-shelter-cost ratio is one way of measuring the “affordability” of housing. Figure 77
shows renters in Greater Sudbury spent proportionately more of their household income on housing costs
than home owners in 2006. For example two in five (40%) renters and one in eight (12%) homeowners in
CGS spent 30% or more towards shelter, compared to 2001, when almost half (45%) of CGS tenants and
one in seven (15%) homeowners spent 30% or more of their household income on shelter. 134 135 However,
tenants and owners in Greater Sudbury fared better than their provincial counterparts insofar as 45% of
tenants and 21% of homeowners in Ontario spent 30% or more on shelter in 2006 136 137.
Figure 77:
Tenant and Owner Households Spending 30% + on Shelter, 20012006, Greater Sudbury
50%
%of household income
45%
40%
45%
35%
40%
30%
2001
25%
2006
20%
15%
15%
10%
12%
5%
0%
Tenants
Owners
Source: Statistics Canada, 1996, 2006 Census
111
Social Profile of Greater Sudbury
Maps 42 and 43 show that in 2006, the greatest concentration of the city’s homeowners spending 30
percent or more on shelter were located in the West End as well as pockets of Valley East and Minnow
Lake.
Map 42: Owner Households Spending 30% or More of Household Income on Shelter - CGS
112
Social Profile of Greater Sudbury
Map 43: Owner Households Spending 30% or More of Household Income on Shelter – Urban Core
113
Social Profile of Greater Sudbury
According to 2006 Census data, a greater proportion of tenants spending 30% or more of their income on
shelter lived in pockets of the downtown core, the Donovan/Flour Mill, the South End and New Sudbury.
(Please refer to Maps 44 and 45).
Map 44: Tenant Households Spending 30% or More of Household Income on Shelter - CGS
114
Social Profile of Greater Sudbury
Map 45: Tenant Households Spending 30% or More of Household Income on Shelter – Urban Core
115
Social Profile of Greater Sudbury
SUMMARY
POPULATION
To summarize, the ten year period between 1996 and 2006 saw the following trends materialize in the
City of Greater Sudbury.
In terms of population, while there was a slight decline over this period, the two most recent censuses
(2001 and 2006) reported a slight increase in the population of Greater Sudbury. The most striking
increase was within in the 65+ age cohort.
Population projections for the city suggest that Greater Sudbury will experience substantially less growth
than the province as a whole (3% versus 28% respectively). Moreover, what can be described as the
exponential growth of the seniors population will translate into a higher median age (that is, by 2031,
Greater Sudbury is expected to report an older population than the province or nation).
FAMILIES & CHILDREN
Greater Sudbury reported a higher proportion of ‘common-law’ families, consistent levels of ‘lone-parent’
families (primarily female-led) and decreased ‘married couple’ families during the ten year period (19962006).
The most striking change was the decrease in families reporting ‘children at home’, particularly those
families with children age six and under.
Concurrently, there was a significant increase in the number of children aged 25+ living at home. As
mentioned previously, the trend for Greater Sudbury’s youth (25+) to remain in the home longer
(‘boomerang offspring’) mirrors what is happening provincially and nationally.
SENIORS
To reiterate, the senior’s population (65+) experienced what could be described as an exponential rate of
growth – in proportion to all other age groups in Greater Sudbury – with senior females showing
substantial growth.
It is expected that the current trend which sees senior females outnumbering their male counterparts by a
ratio of 2:1, will continue well into the future.
LANGUAGE
In general, there has been very little change insofar as Greater Sudbury continues to report a fairly high
bilingual population – much higher than that reported for the province and/or nation – and a significant
and consistent Francophone population.
MOBILITY/ MIGRATION, IMMIGRATION, ETHNIC ORIGINS & VISIBLE MINORITY
During the decade between 1996 – 2006 Greater Sudburians were generally non-movers and non-migrants
compared to their provincial counterparts.
116
Social Profile of Greater Sudbury
According to the most recent census, the highest proportion of internal moves were within the city itself,
that is, people living in the former City of Sudbury moved outwards to the six former regional
municipalities.
Between 1996 and 2001, Greater Sudbury reported losing young migrants to southern Ontario, although
most recent data appears to show a lessening of this trend.
In addition, census data suggests that the city has generally not been a destination of choice for
immigrants new to the province or country, despite the fact that Greater Sudbury did report a very slight
increase in its immigration rate between 2001 and 2006.
Although positive, immigration levels are significantly below both current and projected provincial rates.
In general, consistently low levels of immigration has meant that for all intents and purposes, the three
dominant ethnic groups in Greater Sudbury (Francophones, Anglophones and to a lesser extent,
Aboriginals) have remained intact, with the latter ethnic population of Aboriginals increasing
significantly.
For example, since 2001 Greater Sudbury’s Aboriginal population has doubled in size. This rate of
growth is expected to continue into the future, representing an increasing proportion of the city’s total
population.
ABORIGINALS
As mentioned in the previous section, the proportion of Aboriginals in Greater Sudbury doubled between
1996 and 2006. Not only did the most recent census report the non-native population to be younger (with
a median age of 31) than the total population, it has also been shown to be slightly more mobile in general.
When one considers education, most recent census statistics show the city’s Aboriginal population as
slightly less educated than their non-native counterparts – they were slightly more likely to not complete
high school and slightly less likely to report graduating from a trades program.
Insofar as other post-secondary education, Aboriginals were as likely as their non-Aboriginal counterparts
to report a college diploma but half as likely to report a university degree.
During the decade between 1996—2006, Greater Sudbury’s Aboriginal population reported improved
labour force indicators, as reflected in participation rates which were comparable to the rates experienced
for the total population.
However, there were clear differences between native and non-native residents of the city when it came to
unemployment rates (both provincially and locally). In general, Aboriginal residents reported higher
unemployment rates than their non-Aboriginal provincial counterparts, and to a lesser extent, than nonAboriginal residents of CGS.
Comparable participation rates generally have not translated into comparable earnings insofar as Greater
Sudbury Aboriginals earned only 80% of what their non-Aboriginal counterparts earned in 2005; 89%
when you took into account full-time, full-year employment earnings.
117
Social Profile of Greater Sudbury
Income disparities between Greater Sudbury’s Aboriginal population and the total population were most
apparent when comparing the median incomes of individuals and households in 2005. In real dollars,
individual and household incomes for Greater Sudbury’s Aboriginal population were reported to be
approximately $8,000 – $8,500 less than those which were reported for non-Aboriginal individuals and
households in Greater Sudbury.
EDUCATION
Compared to the province, Greater Sudbury reported a higher percentage of college and trades certificates
among its residents in 2006. Conversely, it also reported more residents as having less than a high school
certificate, and fewer residents with a university degree.
Greater Sudbury was comparable to the province in terms of the number of residents reporting postsecondary qualifications.
Most recent census data suggests the city was also comparable to the country insofar as males in Greater
Sudbury were more likely to report an ‘architectural, engineering and related technology’ education,
followed next by ‘business, management and public administration’; and finally by ‘personal, protective
and transportation-related’ training.
In contrast, Greater Sudbury females were much more likely to be enrolled in ‘business, management, and
public administration’ programs; followed closely by ‘health, parks, recreation and fitness’; and finally by
‘social and behavioural sciences and law’.
These differences held particular significance insofar as labour force indicators (such as participation and
unemployment rates), employment by industry and occupation, and income and earnings by gender.
LABOUR FORCE
Current Trends
Despite national and provincial job losses owing to this most recent recession, current statistics suggest
that Greater Sudbury has suffered fewer job losses than other areas of the province (for example, Windsor,
St. Thomas and Oshawa; all of whom have experienced significant losses in the manufacturing sector).
Greater Sudbury reflects a more positive picture which has been confirmed by January 2009 statistics
which showed a slight increase in the unemployment rate. This was offset by improvements in both the
participation and employment rates between December 2007 and December 2008.
Insofar as the mining sector locally has been forced to lay off workers until such time as the price of
nickel improves, the fact that both Vale Inco and Xstrata have chosen to place a significant proportion of
these workers on paid leave suggests that they anticipate a turn around in the near future.
With this updated picture of Greater Sudbury’s economy in mind, the remainder of this section represents
a continuation of the salient trends that characterized the city between 1996 and 2006.
Participation and Unemployment
Labour force indicators improved between 1996 and 2006, and in particular, unemployment rates for
Greater Sudbury decreased by several percentage points.
118
Social Profile of Greater Sudbury
However, it should be noted that while unemployment amongst the youth (15 – 24 years of age) dropped
from one in four unemployed youth in 1996, it has remained fairly static at one in five unemployed youth
since 2001.
In terms of gender, females and males in Greater Sudbury reported comparable participation and
unemployment rates. However, when there were children living at home (and particularly young
children), the participation rate for women generally decreased, and their unemployment rate increased
(compared to their male counterparts).
In addition to affecting men and women differently, unemployment was shown to disproportionately
affect those less educated residents of Greater Sudbury, as reflected in 2006 census statistics which
showed that those without a high school certificate were twice as likely to be unemployed than their
university-educated counterparts.
Employment by Industry
When one considered employment in relation to industry, it is interesting to note that ‘retail trade’ and
‘health care and social assistance’ categories represented the top two employers in Greater Sudbury in
2001 and 2006. It was significant that the former experienced slight change, whereas the latter category
experienced significant growth during this same time period.
In terms of gender, ‘mining, oil and gas extraction’ had the highest concentration of the Greater Sudbury
male labour force, with ‘construction’ and ‘manufacturing’ representing the next highest categories,
respectively. The top industry for employed females in the city was ‘health care and social assistance’,
with ‘retail trade’ and ‘educational services’ representing the next highest categories, respectively.
Employment by Occupation
In terms of occupation, gender differences were reflected in the fact that in 2006, two-thirds of Greater
Sudbury’s female labour force was employed in ‘sales and service’ and ‘business, finance, and
administration’ occupations, compared to the Greater Sudbury male labour force, one-half of which was
employed in the ‘trades, transport and equipment operator’ and ‘sales and service’ occupations.
As mentioned previously, gender differences were especially salient in the analysis of employment
incomes and earnings.
On average, in 2005, women earned 58% of what their male counterparts earned in all occupations; that is,
women earned 58 cents for every dollar earned by their male counterparts. This represented an incomegender differential which was greater than that reported for the province (64% or 64 cents to the dollar)
and/or that which was reported in 2000 (that is, in 2000, Greater Sudbury females earned 62% or 62 cents
for every dollar males earned).
The largest income-gender gap occurred within the ‘processing, manufacturing and utilities’ and the
‘health’ occupations categories.
In contrast, the ‘art, culture, recreation and sport’ occupation, though not a particularly high paying
occupational category, reported more comparable average employment incomes for males and females
($24,889 and $20,368 respectively).
119
Social Profile of Greater Sudbury
Work Activity
In general, males were more likely than females to be employed full time/full year; and females
conversely, were more likely than their male counterparts to be employed part-time or part year.
In terms of average employment income, Greater Sudbury males reported earning approximately $21,000
more ($62,791) in 2005, than their female counterparts ($41,588). In other words, women with fulltime/full-year jobs earned two-thirds of what their male counterparts earned.
This pattern held true for part-year or part-time workers in Greater Sudbury insofar as males earned on
average, $11,366 more in 2005 than their female counterparts ($28,201 versus $16,835 respectively).
Therefore, although women made up a greater proportion of the part-time or part-year labour force, in
2005 they earned just 60% of what their part-time, or part-year male counterparts earned.
Unpaid Work
A majority of Sudburians reported performing some form of unpaid work (for example, housework,
childcare, senior care, yard work, etc.) in 2006; with women reporting disproportionately higher rates than
their male counterparts.
Not only did more women perform unpaid work, they also spent more time engaged in this activity than
their male counterparts. Two-thirds of women in Greater Sudbury reported spending more than 15 hours
per week performing housework and caring for children, with 64% reporting more than five hours a week
spent on senior care.
TRANSPORTATION & COMMUTING
In general, Greater Sudburians reported driving their cars, vans and/or trucks to work more often than
their provincial counterparts. Conversely, compared to their provincial counterparts, they were far less
likely to report utilizing public transit as a viable option to driving to work.
Of those who drove their own vehicles to work, the greatest proportion were between the ages of 35 and
54 years, with those aged 25—34 years a distant second. Conversely, users of public transit tended to be
youth (15 to 24 years), followed closely by those 34 – 54 years of age.
INCOME & POVERTY
Income
According to the latest census (2006), individual and household median incomes in Greater Sudbury were
on par or better than that which was reported for the province. However, the city’s median family income
and its non-family median income were slightly lower than that which was reported for the province.
When considering extremes within the income spectrum, 28% of families, and 21% of individuals in
Greater Sudbury reported annual median incomes in excess of $100,000. At the other end of the
spectrum, one in seven families and one in four households in Greater Sudbury, reported earning less than
$30,000.
In general, couple families earned more than single parent families ($71,446 vs. $41,813, respectively),
who in turn, earned more than non-family persons ($41,813 vs. $$23,807 respectively).
120
Social Profile of Greater Sudbury
Among single parent families, male lone-parents reported median incomes approximately 36% higher
than their female counterparts ($51,041 vs. $32,585, respectively).
Non-family persons were the most vulnerable, reporting the lowest median income ($23,807) of all census
families in Greater Sudbury.
Poverty
Greater Sudbury reported significant progress on the poverty front insofar as in 1996 approximately 1 in 5
families and 1 in 2 unattached individuals lived in poverty.
This compares to less than 1 in 10 families, 1 in 3 unattached individuals and 1 in 2 lone-parents (with
dependent children at home) who reported being below the low-income cut-off in 2006. It is important to
note that of those individuals who reported falling below the LICO in 2006, 18% were between the ages
of 15 and 24.
In addition, according to the most recent census, Greater Sudbury reported 1 in 3 female lone parents, 1 in
4 seniors living alone and/or with non-relatives, and 1 in 5 children under the age of five as living in
poverty.
SHELTER & DWELLINGS
Household Size
The ten year period between 1996 and 2006 saw a significant shift in terms of dwellings and households
in Greater Sudbury.
One and two person households experienced an increase, with 3+ person households experiencing a
significant decline during this same time period.
As mentioned previously, the average household size has continued to decline, at the same time as Greater
Sudbury has witnessed an increase in the actual number of households reported. This increase was
primarily reported for couple households without children, as well as for single person households.
Dwelling Types
Greater Sudbury has recently experienced somewhat of a building boom, as reflected in the increased
number of building permits issued in 2005.
In addition, the 2006 Census reported a change in building stock, the most significant of which was an
11% proportional increase in the number of <5 storey apartments, and to a lesser extent, a 5% proportional
increase in the number of single-detached dwellings.
All other dwelling types remained consistent or experienced declines, with ‘movable dwellings’ (that is
mobile homes) and ‘apartments, detached duplex’ experiencing the greatest declines.
Tenure & Shelter Costs
Greater Sudbury reported a slight increase in the number of individuals who reported being home owners
as opposed to renters in 2006, reflecting a rising trend in homeownership in general.
In 2006, the median monthly shelter costs for Greater Sudbury tenants ($626) and owners ($821) was
lower (by approximately $175 and $225, respectively) than that reported by their provincial counterparts.
121
Social Profile of Greater Sudbury
From a regional perspective, in 2006, shelter costs in Greater Sudbury were lower than those reported for
North Bay, but higher than those reported for Sault Ste. Marie and Thunder Bay.
Compared to 2001, fewer renters and homeowners in Greater Sudbury reported spending 30% or more or
their annual income on shelter.
A broader perspective on shelter costs which encompasses local housing markets and apartment vacancy
rates shows that Greater Sudbury experienced significant change during this past decade.
For example, the city reported one of the lowest apartment vacancy rates in Canada, having gone from a
high of 11% in 1996 to the current rate of 0.7% reported in 2008.
During this same time period (1996—2008), the average two-bedroom apartment in Greater Sudbury
increased by approximately $180, with the average selling price of a home in the city increasing by
approximately $30,000.
CONCLUSION
In conclusion, Greater Sudbury’s Community Social Profile paints a broad picture of trends, based on
information gleaned from the 1996, 2001 and 2006 Statistics Canada census enumerations.
It is the intention of the Social Planning Council of Sudbury (SPC) to update this profile every five years,
with the end result being the compilation of relevant and timely data for planning purposes. It is hoped
that the information contained in this report will also provide the basis for community consultations, in an
effort to bring a representative cross-section of the community to bear on the city’s most pressing social
and economic issues.
Recognizing the fact that updated census information is released only every five years, the SPC will be
producing a yearly ‘Trends Report’ which will build on census data, but which will also incorporate
relevant local data to provide the most up-to-date picture of the city’s social and economic landscape. It
should be noted that Trends Report will expand on the Community Social Profile by discussing possible
implications associated with the identified trends.
Finally, it is anticipated that these ‘Trends Reports’ will be disseminated to various individuals and
organizations in the non-profit, private and public sectors, in order to engage and inform public debate.
With this information in place, broad community consultations can then be held to determine priority
areas, including identifying the most appropriate course of action.
122
Social Profile of Greater Sudbury
GLOSSARY OF SELECTED CENSUS TERMS
Aboriginal Identity Population – Refers to those persons who reported identifying with at least one
Aboriginal group, that is, North American Indian, Métis or Inuit, and/or those who reported being a Treaty
Indian or a Registered Indian, as defined by the Indian Act of Canada, and/or those who reported they
were members of an Indian band or First Nation.
Age – Refers to the age at last birthday (as of the census reference data).
¾ Median Age – age where exactly one half of the population is older and the other half is younger.
Census Family – Refers to a non-married couple (with/without never-married sons and/or daughters of
either or both spouses), a couple living common-law (with/without never-married sons and/or daughters of
either or both partners) or a lone-parent of any marital status, with at least one never-married son or
daughter living in the same dwelling.
¾ Census Family Living Arrangements – the classification of persons in terms of whether they are
members of a family household or a non-family household, and whether they are family or non-family
persons.
¾ Census Family Status – the classification of the population according to whether or not they are
members of a census family.
¾ Census Family Structure – the classification of census families into families of now-married
couples (with/without never-married sons or daughters living at home of either or both spouses),
families of common-law couples (with/without never-married sons or daughters living at home or
either or both partners) and lone-parent families by sex of parent.
Family persons refer to household members who belong to a census family. They, in turn, are further
classified as follows:
¾ Spouses – persons of the opposite or same sex who are legally married to each other and living in the
same dwelling.
¾ Common-law partners – two persons of opposite sex or of the same sex who are not legally married
to each other, but live together as a couple in the same dwelling.
¾ Lone-parent – a mother or a father, with no spouse or common-law partner present, living in a
dwelling with one or more children.
¾ Children refer to blood, step-or adopted sons and daughters (regardless of age or marital status) who
are living in the same dwelling as their parent(s), as well as grandchildren in households where there
are no parents present. Sons and daughters who are living with their spouse or common-law partner,
or with one or more of their own children, are not considered to be members of the census family of
their parent(s), even if they are living in the same dwelling as their parent(s). In addition, those sons
and daughters who do not live in the same dwelling as their parent(s) are not considered members of
the census family of their parent(s).
¾ Non-family persons – household members who do not belong to a census family. They may be
related to Person 1 (e.g. Person 1’s sister, brother-in-law, cousin, grandparent), or unrelated to
Person 1 (e.g. lodger, room-mate, employee). The person living alone is always a non-family person.
Citizenship – Refers to the legal citizenship status of the respondent. Persons who are citizens of more
than one country were instructed to indicate this fact.
123
Social Profile of Greater Sudbury
Dwelling:
¾ Structural Type of Dwelling – refers to the structural characteristics and/or dwelling configuration,
that is, whether the dwelling is a single-detached house, an apartment in a high-rise building, a row
house, a mobile home, etc.
¾ Apartments, duplex – as a % of total occupied private dwellings – In 2006, improvements to the
enumeration process and changes in structural type classification affected the historical comparability
of the ‘structural type of dwelling’ variable. In 2006, ‘apartment or flat in a duplex’ replaces
‘apartment or flat in a detached duplex’ and includes duplexes attached to other dwellings or
buildings. This is a change from the 2001 Census where duplexes attached to other dwellings or
buildings were classified as an ‘apartment in a building that has fewer than five storeys’.
¾ Average value of dwelling – refers to the dollar amount expected by the owner if the dwelling were to
be sold.
Economic Family – Refers to a group of two or more persons who live in the same dwelling and are
related to each other by blood, marriage, common-law or adoption.
Ethnic Origin – the ethnic or cultural group(s) to which the respondent’s ancestors belong.
Family Characteristics – 20% sample data – Census family refers to a married couple (with/without
children of either or both spouses), a couple living common-law (with/without children of either or both
partners) or a lone parent of any marital status, with at least one child living in the same dwelling. A
couple may be of opposite or same sex. ‘Children’ in a census family include grandchildren living with
their grandparent(s) but with no parents present.
Household – Refers to a person or group of persons (other than foreign residents), who occupy the same
dwelling and do not have a usual place or residence elsewhere in Canada. It may consist of a family
group (census family) with or without other non-family person, of two or more families sharing a
dwelling, of a group of unrelated persons, or of one person living alone.
Household Type – the basic division of private households into family and non-family households.
¾ Family household refers a household that contains at least one census family, that is, a married couple
with or without never-married sons or daughters, or a couple living common-law with or without
never-married sons or daughters, or a lone-parent living with one or more never-married sons or
daughters (lone-parent family).
¾ One-family household refers to a single census family (with or without other non-family persons) that
occupies a private dwelling.
¾ Multiple-family household refers to one in which two or more census families (with or without
additional non-family persons) occupy the same private dwelling.
¾ Non-family household refers to either one person living alone in a private dwelling or to a group of
two or more people who share a private dwelling, but do not constitute as a census family.
Household Size – refers to the number of persons residing in private households.
124
Social Profile of Greater Sudbury
Immigration:
¾ Age at Immigration – Refers to the age at which the respondent first obtained landed immigrant
status. A landed immigrant is a person who is not a Canadian citizen by birth, but who has been
granted the right to live in Canada permanently by Canadian immigration authorities.
¾ Period of Immigration – Refers to ranges of years based on the year of immigration question. Year
of immigration refers to the year in which landed immigrant status was first obtained.
Income:
¾ Before-tax income – refers to the total sum of all income from all sources (i.e. employment income,
government transfers, pensions, investments, etc.) before federal, provincial and territorial taxes have
been paid for the year leading up to the census enumeration. Before-tax income reflects family, nonfamily, individual and household incomes.
¾ Median income of census families – refers to that amount which divides their income size
distribution, ranked by size of income, into two halves. The incomes of the first half of the families
are below the median, while those of the second half are above the median. Median incomes of
families are normally calculated for all units in the specified group, whether or not they reported
income.
¾ Composition of Income – refers to the relative share of each income source or group of sources,
expressed as a percentage of the aggregate income of that group or area.
¾ Employment Income – Refers to total income received by persons 15 years of age and over during
calendar year leading up to the census enumeration date, as wages and salaries, net income from a
non-farm unincorporated business and/or professional practice, and/or net farm net self-employment
income.
¾ Incidence of Low-income – The incidence of low-income is the proportion or percentage of economic
families or unattached individuals in a given classification below the low-income cut-offs. These
incidence rates are calculated from unrounded estimates of economic families and unattached
individuals 15 years of age and over.
¾ Income Status – Refers to the position of an economic family or an unattached individual 15 years of
age and over in relation to Statistics Canada’s low-income before-tax or after-tax cut-offs.
¾ Low-income Cut-Offs (LICO) – Measures of low-income known as low-income cut-offs (LICO)
were first introduced in Canada in 1968 based on 1961 Census income data and 1959 family
expenditure patterns. At that time, expenditure patterns showed Canadian families as spending about
50% of their income on food, shelter and clothing. It was arbitrarily estimated that families spending
70% or more of their income on these basic necessities would be in ‘straitened’ circumstances. Based
on this assumption, low-income cut-off points were set for five different sizes of families, taking into
account the degree of urbanization. Since then, these cut-offs have been updated yearly by changes in
the consumer price index.
Journey to Work: Place of Work Status – Refers to the place of work of non-institutional residents 15
years of age and over who worked at some time in the year preceding the census enumeration.
Labour Market Activities:
¾ Employed – Refers to persons 15 years of age and over, excluding institutional students, who, during
the week (Sunday to Saturday) prior to Census Day: (a) did any work at all for pay or in selfemployment; or (b) were absent from their job or business for the entire week because of vacation,
illness, a labour dispute at their place of work or other reasons.
125
Social Profile of Greater Sudbury
¾ Full-Time or Part-Time Weeks Worked – Refers to persons who worked for pay or in selfemployment in the year preceding the census enumeration These persons were asked to report
whether the weeks they worked were full-time weeks (30 hours or more per week) or not, on the basis
of all jobs held. Persons with a part-time job for part of the year and a full-time job for another part of
the year were to report the information for the job at which they worked the most weeks.
¾ Labour Force Activities: – Refers to the labour market activity of the population 15 years of age and
over, excluding institutional residents, in the week (Sunday to Saturday) prior to Census Day.
Respondents were classified as either employed, unemployed or not in the labour force. .
¾ Labour Force Activities: Not in the Labour Force – Refers to those persons 15 years of age and
over, excluding institutional residents, who, in the week (Sunday to Saturday) prior to Census Day,
were neither employed or unemployed.
¾ Labour Force Activities: Occupation (based on 1991 Standard Occupational Classification,
please see below) – Refers to the kind of work persons were doing during the reference week, as
determined by their kind of work and the description of the main activities in their job.
¾ Labour Force Activities: Participation Rate – Refers to the total labour force in the week (Sunday
to Saturday) prior to Census Day, expressed as a percentage of the population 15 years of age and
over, excluding institutional residents. The participation rate for a particular group (age, sex, marital
status, geographic area, etc.) is the labour force in that group expressed as a percentage of the
population for that group.
¾ Labour Force Activities: Unemployed – Refers to persons 15 years of age and over, excluding
institutional residents, who, during the week (Sunday to Saturday) prior to Census Day, were without
paid work and were unavailable for work and either:
a. Had actively looked for work in the past four weeks; or
b. Were on temporary lay-off and expected to return to their job; or
c. Had definite arrangements to start a new job in four weeks or less.
¾ Labour Force Activities: Unemployment Rate – Refers to the unemployed labour force expressed
as a percentage of the total labour force in week (Sunday to Saturday) prior to Census Day. Data are
available for persons 15 years of age and over, excluding institutional residents.
The unemployment rate for a particular group (age, sex, marital status, geographic area, etc.) is the
unemployed labour force in that group expressed as a percentage of the total labour force in that group, in
the week prior to enumeration.
Language:
¾ Knowledge of Non-Official Languages – Refers to the language or languages, other than French or
English, in which the respondent can conduct a conversation.
¾ Knowledge of Official Languages – Refers to the ability to conduct a conversation in English only,
in French only, in both English and French or in none of the official languages of Canada.
¾ Mother Tongue – Refers to the first language learned at home in childhood and still understood by
the individual at the time of the census.
Marital Status – Refers to the conjugal status of a person.
¾ Legally Married (not separated) – Persons whose husband or wife is living, unless the couple is
separated or a divorce has been obtained. In 2006, legally married same-sex couples are included in
this category. Persons who live together as a couple but who are not legally married to each other are
referred to as ‘common-law’. These persons can be of the opposite or the same sex.
126
Social Profile of Greater Sudbury
¾ Separated (but still legally married) – Persons currently married, but who are no longer living with
their spouse (for any reason other than illness or work), and have not obtained a divorce.
¾ Divorced – Persons who have obtained a legal divorce and who have not remarried.
¾ Widowed – Persons who have lost their spouse through death and have not remarried.
¾ Never married (single) – Persons who have never married (including all persons less than 15 years of
age) and persons whose marriage has been annulled and have not remarried.
Mobility:
¾ Components of Migration (In- and Out-) – People who move from one city or town to another in
Canada are considered internal migrants as opposed to external migrants, who come from another
country to live in Canada. Migrants are further divided into three categories based on whether: they
lived in the same province (intra-provincial migrants); they lived in a different province
(interprovincial migrants); they lived outside Canada (external migrants) during the reference period in
question.
¾ Place of Residence 5 years Ago – Information indicating whether the person lived in the same
residence on Census Day, as he or she did five years before. ‘Movers’ are further subdivide into:
those who moved within the same city or town (non-migrants), those who moved to a different city or
town (internal migrants), and those who came from another country (external migrants).
¾ Mobility status, one year refers to the status of a person with regard to the place of residence on the
reference day in relation to the place of residence on the same date one year earlier.
¾ Mobility status, five years refers to the status of a person with regard to the place of residence on the
reference day in relation to the place of residence on the same date five years earlier.
Mode of transportation to work – Refers to the mode of transportation to work of non-institutional
residents 15 years of age and over who worked at some time in the year leading up to the census
enumeration.
Occupation – Refers to the kind of work persons were doing during the reference week, as determined by
their kind of work and the description of the main activities in their job.
Owner’s Major Payments – Refers to the total average monthly payments made by owner households to
secure shelter.
Place of Origin – Refers to the country in which a person, born outside Canada, last resided before
immigrating to Canada.
Rent, Gross – Refers to the total average monthly payments paid by tenant households to secure shelter.
Schooling:
¾ Highest Level of Schooling –Refers to the highest grade or year of elementary or secondary school
attended, or the highest year of university or other non-university completed. University education is
considered to be a higher level of schooling than other non-university. Also, the attainment of a
degree, certificate or diploma is considered to be at a higher level than years completed or attended
without an educational qualification.
¾ School Attendance – Refers to either full-time or part-time (day or evening) attendance at school,
college or university during the nine-month period between September and May leading up to the
127
Social Profile of Greater Sudbury
census enumeration. Attendance is counted only for courses which could be used as credits towards a
certificate, diploma or degree.
¾ Major and/or dominant field of study – 20% sample data – ‘Field of study’ is defined as the main
discipline or subject of learning. It is collected for the highest certificate, diploma or degree above the
high school or secondary school level.
Unpaid work – Number of hours that the person spent doing housework, maintaining the house or doing
yard work without getting paid for doing so. For example, this includes time spent preparing meals,
mowing the lawn, or cleaning the house, for oneself or for relatives, friends or neighbours.
¾ Persons reporting hours of unpaid housework – Refers to the number of persons reporting hours of
unpaid housework, yard work or home maintenance in the week (Sunday to Saturday) prior to Census
Day.
¾ Persons reporting hours looking after children, without pay – Refers to the number of persons
reporting hours spent looking after children without pay.
¾ Persons reporting hours of unpaid care or assistance to seniors – Refers to the number of persons
reporting hours spent providing unpaid care or assistance to seniors of one’s own family.
Visible Minorities – Refers to the visible minority group to which the respondent belongs. The
Employment Equity Act defines visible minorities as persons, other than Aboriginal peoples, who are nonCaucasian in race or non-white in colour.
128
Social Profile of Greater Sudbury
REFERENCES
1
Maps within this report reflect a city-wide analysis, which illustrates the proportional distribution of demographics across the
whole city. That is, demographic data for each census tract is divided by the City of Greater Sudbury’s total population. This
provides a profile of the whole City of Greater Sudbury rather than profiles of each specific neighbourhood. For example, of
the families in Greater Sudbury, 14% are female lone-parents. Of these, most (5%) are living in Minnow Lake and the
Donovan/Flour Mill areas, followed by (4%) living in the South End, New Sudbury, Garson, and Valley East areas, and so on.
For those interested in deeper analyses, The Social Planning Council of Sudbury can produce neighbourhood data, maps, and
analyses at the neighbourhood level. That is, demographic data for each census tract is divided by the population within that
census tract. This will illustrate the proportional distribution within neighbourhoods.
2
http://www.city.greatersudbury.on.ca/keyfacts/index.cfm?app=keyfacts&lang=en. (28/11/2008).
3
Statistics Canada. 2007. Population and dwelling counts, for Canada, provinces and territories, and census subdivisions
(municipalities), 2006 and 2001 censuses - 100% data (table). Population and Dwelling Count Highlight Tables. 2006 Census.
Statistics Canada Catalogue no. 97-550-XWE2006002. Ottawa. Released March 13, 2007.
4
Statistics Canada, 2002. Population and Dwelling Counts, for Canada, Provinces and Territories, and Census Subdivisions
(Municipalities), 2001 and 1996 Censuses - 100% Data. Population and Dwelling Count Highlight Tables. 2001 and 1996
Census. Statistics. Ottawa.
5
PCensus 2006. 2006 Census: Census Snapshot. Total Population. Profile Report, 2006 Census for Greater Sudbury.
6
Statistics Canada, 1996. Population, 1996s (100% data). Profile of Census Divisions and Subdivisions, 1996 Census,
Sudbury Regional Municipality.
7
PCensus 2001. 2001 Census: Population by Sex and Age. Profile Report, 2001 Census for Greater Sudbury.
8
PCensus 2006. 2006 Census: Population Overview. 2006 Population by Age. Profile Report, 2006 Census for Greater
Sudbury.
9
Statistics Canada. Table 1. Selected Characteristics for Census Tracts, for 1976,1981,1986,1991 Census (100% data). Cat.
No. 95-824, 95-933, 95-159, 95-348.
10
Statistics Canada, 1996. Population, 1996s (100% data). Profile of Census Divisions and Subdivisions, 1996 Census,
Sudbury Regional Municipality.
11
PCensus 2001. 2001 Census: Population by Sex and Age. Profile Report, 2001 Census for Greater Sudbury.
12
City of Greater Sudbury. Development Review 2005. Prepared by the Community and Strategic Planning Section; Planning
Services Division; Growth and Development Dept., March 2006.
13
PCensus 2006. 2006 Census: Population Overview. 2006 Population by Age. Profile Report, 2006 Census for Greater
Sudbury.
14
Statistics Canada, 1996. Total population by sex and age groups (100% data). Profile of Census Divisions and
Subdivisions, 1996 Census, Sudbury Regional Municipality.
15
Statistics Canada, 2007. . Community Highlights for Greater Sudbury (CMA), Ontario, and Canada: Age Characteristics.
Community Profiles, 2006 Census.
16
Statistics Canada. Report on the Demographic Situation in Canada, 2005 and 2006. Catalogue # 91-209-X.
17
Ontario Ministry of Finance, Ontario Population Projections Update 2007—2031: Ontario and Its 49 Census Divisions.
Spring 2008.
18
http://www.fin.gov.on.ca/english/economy/demographics/census/cenhi06-6.pdf. (28/11/2008).
129
Social Profile of Greater Sudbury
19
Statistics Canada, 1996. Total population 15 years and over by legal marital status (100% data). Profile of Census
Divisions and Subdivisions, 1996 Census, Sudbury Regional Municipality.
20
PCensus 2001. Marital Status: Persons 15 years of age and over by marital status. Profile Report, 2001 Census: for Greater
Sudbury.
21
PCensus 2006. Persons 15 years of age and over by marital status. Profile Report, 2006 Census for Greater Sudbury.
22
http://www.fin.gov.on.ca/english/economy/demographics/census/cenhi06-6.pdf (28/11/2008).
PCensus 2006. 2006 Census: Families by Living Arrangements. Persons in private households by living arrangements.
Profile Report, 2006 Census for Greater Sudbury.
23
24
Statistics Canada, 1996. Total number of persons in private households (20% data). Profile of Census Divisions and
Subdivisions, 1996 Census, Sudbury Regional Municipality.
25
Statistics Canada. 2007. Household Living Arrangements (11), Age Groups (20) and Sex (3) for the Population in Private
Households of Canada, Provinces, Territories, Census Metropolitan Areas and Census Agglomerations, 2006 Census - 20%
Sample Data (table). Topic-based tabulation. 2006 Census of Population. Statistics Canada catalogue no. 97-553-XCB2006018.
Ottawa. Released September 12, 2007.
26
PCensus 2006. 2006 Census Family Structure and Children: Census families in private households by family structure.
Profile Report, 2006 Census for Greater Sudbury.
27
Ibid.
28
PCensus 2001. Family Structure and Children: Census families in private households by family structure. Profile Report,
2001 Census: for Greater Sudbury.
29
Statistics Canada, 1996. Total husband-wife families by family structure (20% sample data). Profile of Census Divisions
and Subdivisions, 1996 Census for Sudbury Regional Municipality.
30
Statistics Canada, 1996. Total lone-parent families by sex of parent (20% sample data). Profile of Census Divisions and
Subdivisions, 1996 Census for Sudbury Regional Municipality.
31
Ibid.
32
Statistics Canada. 2007. Number of Children at Home (8) and Census Family Structure (7) for the Census Families in Private
Households of Canada, Provinces, Territories, Census Metropolitan Areas and Census Agglomerations, 2001 and 2006
Censuses - 20% Sample Data (table). Topic-based tabulation. 2006 Census of Population. Statistics Canada catalogue no. 97553-XCB2006007. Ottawa. Released September 12, 2007.
33
Statistics Canada, 1996. Total number of never-married sons and/or daughters at home (20% sample data). Profile of
Census Divisions and Subdivisions, 1996 Census for Sudbury Regional Municipality.
34
PCensus 2006. 2006 Census Family Structure and Children: Total children at home by age. Profile Report, 2006 Census for
Greater Sudbury.
35
http://www.thaindian.com/newsportal/world-news/young-boomerang-adults-at-home-strain-family-life_10016753.html.
(28/11/2008).
36
PCensus 2006. 2006 Census Family Structure and Children: Total children at home by age. Profile Report, 2006 Census for
Greater Sudbury.
37
Statistics Canada, 1996. Total number of never-married sons and/or daughters at home (20% sample data). Profile of
Census Divisions and Subdivisions, 1996 Census for Sudbury Regional Municipality.
130
Social Profile of Greater Sudbury
38
PCensus 2006. 2006 Census: Family Structure and Children. Census families in private households by family structure.
Profile Report, 2006 Census for Greater Sudbury.
39
Statistics Canada, 1996. Total husband-wife families by family structure (20% sample data) and Total lone-parent families
by sex of parent (20% sample data). Profile of Census Divisions and Subdivisions, 1996 Census for Sudbury Regional
Municipality.
40
Statistics Canada, 1996. Total population by sex and age groups (100% data). Profile of Census Divisions and
Subdivisions, 1996 Census, Sudbury Regional Municipality.
41
PCensus 2006. 2006 Census: Population by Age and Sex Comparison. Population by Age. Profile Report, 2006 Census for
Greater Sudbury.
42
Ibid.
43
Ibid.
44
Statistics Canada estimates, 2007, and projections Ontario Ministry of Finance. Appendix 91: Table 9.44 Population by 5year age Group, each year, 2007-2031, Greater Sudbury. Retrieved online November 3, 2008 at
http://www.fin.gov.on.ca/english/economy /demographics/projections/demog08.pdf.
45
PCensus 2006. 2006 Census: Families by Living Arrangements. Persons 65 years and over by living arrangements. Profile
Report, 2006 Census for Greater Sudbury.
46
Statistics Canada, 1996. Total number of persons 65 years and over (20% sample data). Profile of Census Divisions and
Subdivisions, 1996 Census, Sudbury Regional Municipality.
47
http://www.fin.gov.on.ca/english/economy/demographics/census/cenhi06-6.pdf (28/11/2008).
48
Statistics Canada. 2007. Census Family Status (6), Age Groups (20) and Sex (3) for the Population in Private Households of
Canada, Provinces, Territories, Census Metropolitan Areas and Census Agglomerations, 2006 Census - 20% Sample Data
(table). Topic-based tabulation. 2006 Census of Population. Statistics Canada catalogue no. 97-553-XCB2006014. Ottawa.
Released September 12, 2007.
49
PCensus 2006. 2006 Census: Mother Tongue. Total Population by Mother Tongue. Profile Report, 2006 Census for Greater
Sudbury.
50
Statistics Canada. 2007. Knowledge of Official Languages (5), Number of Non-official Languages Known (5), Age Groups
(17A) and Sex (3) for the Population of Canada, Provinces, Territories, Census Metropolitan Areas and Census
Agglomerations, 2006 Census - 20% Sample Data (table). Topic-based tabulation. 2006 Census of Population. Statistics
Canada catalogue no. 97-555-XCB2006009. Ottawa. Released December 04, 2007
51
Ibid.
52
Statistics Canada, 1996. Total population by knowledge of official languages (20% sample data). Profile of Census
Divisions and Subdivisions, 1996 Census, Sudbury Regional Municipality.
53
PCensus 2006. 2006 Census: Mobility. Total Population by 5 year mobility status. Profile Report, 2006 Census for Greater
Sudbury.
54
Statistics Canada. 2007. Mobility Status 5 Years Ago (9), Mother Tongue (8), Age Groups (16) and Sex (3) for the Population
Aged 5 Years and Over of Canada, Provinces, Territories, Census Metropolitan Areas and Census Agglomerations, 2006
Census - 20% Sample Data (table). Topic-based tabulation. 2006 Census of Population. Statistics Canada catalogue no. 97-556XCB2006006. Ottawa. Released December 04, 2007.
55
Statistics Canada, 2002. The Daily, Thursday, September 26, 2002. Migration 2000/01 for Census Metropolitan Area
Migration. Retrieved online: http://www.statcan.ca/Daily/English/020926/d020926d. html. (28/11/2008).
131
Social Profile of Greater Sudbury
56
Statistics Canada, 2007. The Daily, Thursday, September 27, 2007. Migration 2005/2006 for Census Metropolitan Area
Migration. Retrieved online: http://www.statcan.ca/Daily/English/070927/d070927c. html. (28/11/2008).
57
Statistics Canada, 2007. Census Division of Residence 5 Years Ago (289) for the Inter-Census Division Migrants Aged 5
Years and Over of Census Divisions, 2006 Census - 20% Sample Data. Statistics Canada, 2006 Census. Catalogue Number 97556-XCB2006014.
58
Ibid.
Statistics Canada, 1996. Total population by place of birth (20% data). Profile of Census Divisions and Subdivisions, 1996
Census, Sudbury Regional Municipality.
59
60
PCensus 2006. 2006 Census: Immigration and Place of Birth. Total Population by Immigrant Status and Place of Birth.
Profile Report, 2006 Census for Greater Sudbury.
61
Statistics Canada. 2007. Immigrant Status (4) for the Population of Canada, Provinces and Territories, 1911 to 2006
Censuses - 20% Sample Data (table). Topic-based tabulation. 2006 Census of Population. Statistics Canada catalogue no. 97557-XCB2006006. Ottawa. Released December 04, 2007.
62
PCensus 2006. 2006 Census: Immigration and Place of Birth. Total Immigrant Population by Period of Immigration. Profile
Report, 2006 Census for Greater Sudbury.
63
PCensus 2006. 2006 Census: Immigration and Place of Birth. Total Immigrant Population by Age at Immigration. Profile
Report, 2006 Census for Greater Sudbury.
64
PCensus 2006. 2006 Census: Immigration and Place of Birth. Total Immigrants by Place of Birth. Profile Report, 2006
Census for Greater Sudbury.
65
PCensus 2006. 2006 Census: Recent Immigration and Place of Birth (2001-2006). Total Recent Immigrants by Selected
Places of Birth. Profile Report, 2006 Census for Greater Sudbury
66
Statistics Canada, 1996. Total population by ethnic origin (single and multiple responses) (20% sample data). Profile of
Census Divisions and Subdivisions, 1996 Census, Sudbury Regional Municipality.
67
PCensus 2006. 2006 Census: Ethnic Origin. Total Population by Ethnic Origin (single and multiple responses). Profile
Report, 2006 Census for Greater Sudbury.
68
PCensus 2006. 2006 Census: Visible Minorities. Total Population by Visible Minority Groups. Profile Report, 2006 Census
for Greater Sudbury.
69
Statistics Canada, 2007. Census trends for Census metropolitan areas and census agglomerations (table). 2006 Census.
Statistics Canada Catalogue no. 92-596-XWE. Ottawa. Released December 4, 2007.
70
Statistics Canada, 1996. Total population by Aboriginal groups and non-Aboriginal population (20% data). Profile of
Census Divisions and Subdivisions, 1996 Census, Sudbury Regional Municipality.
71
PCensus 2006. 2006 Census: Aboriginal Population. Population by Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal Identity. Profile Report,
2006 Census for Greater Sudbury.
72
PCensus 2001. 2001 Census: Aboriginal Population. Population by Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal Identity. Profile Report,
2001 Census: for Greater Sudbury.
73
Statistics Canada. 2008. Greater Sudbury / Grand Sudbury, Ontario (table). Aboriginal Population Profile. 2006 Census.
Statistics Canada Catalogue no. 92-594-XWE. Ottawa. Released January 15, 2008.
74
Statistics Canada. 2007. Greater Sudbury / Grand Sudbury, Ontario (table). 2006 Community Profiles. 2006 Census.
Statistics Canada Catalogue no. 92-591-XWE. Ottawa. Released March 13, 2007.
132
Social Profile of Greater Sudbury
75
Statistics Canada, 2008. Labour Force Activity (8), Highest Certificate, Diploma or Degree (14), Aboriginal Identity (8), Age
Groups (12A) and Sex (3) for the Population 15 Years and Over of Canada, Provinces, Territories, Census Metropolitan Areas
and Census Agglomerations, 2006 Census – 20% Sample Data (table). Topic-based tabulation. 2006 Census of Population.
Statistics Canada catalogue no. 97-559-XCB2006019. Ottawa. Released March 04, 2008.
76
Urban Aboriginal Task Force, Sudbury Final Report. August 2007.
77
Ibid.
Ibid.
78
79
Statistics Canada. 2008. Greater Sudbury / Grand Sudbury, Ontario (table). Aboriginal Population Profile. 2006 Census.
Statistics Canada Catalogue no. 92-594-XWE. Ottawa. Released January 15, 2008.
80
Statistics Canada. 2007. Greater Sudbury / Grand Sudbury, Ontario (table). 2006 Community Profiles. 2006 Census.
Statistics Canada Catalogue no. 92-591-XWE. Ottawa. Released March 13, 2007.
81
Statistics Canada. 2008. Attendance at School (3), Highest Certificate, Diploma or Degree (13), Age Groups (10A) and Sex
(3) for the Population 15 Years and Over of Canada, Provinces, Territories, Census Metropolitan Areas and Census
Agglomerations, 2006 Census - 20% Sample Data (table). Topic-based tabulation. 2006 Census of Population. Statistics
Canada catalogue no. 97-560-XCB2006032. Ottawa. Released October 28, 2008.
82
Statistics Canada. 2008. Highest Certificate, Diploma or Degree (14), Age Groups (10A) and Sex (3) for the Population 15
Years and Over of Canada, Provinces, Territories, Census Metropolitan Areas and Census Agglomerations, 2006 Census 20% Sample Data (table). Topic-based tabulation. 2006 Census of Population. Statistics Canada catalogue no. 97-560XCB2006007. Ottawa. Released March 04, 2008.
83
PCensus 2006. 2006 Census: Post Secondary Education by Sex Comparison. Population 25 to 64 years with Postsecondary
Qualifications by Major Field of Study. Profile Report, 2006 Census for Greater Sudbury
84
Statistics Canada. 2008. Major Field of Study - Classification of Instructional Programs, 2000 (13), Highest Postsecondary
Certificate, Diploma or Degree (12), Age Groups (10A) and Sex (3) for the Population 15 Years and Over With Postsecondary
Studies of Canada, Provinces, Territories, Census Metropolitan Areas and Census Agglomerations, 2006 Census - 20% Sample
Data (table). Topic-based tabulation. 2006 Census of Population. Statistics Canada catalogue no. 97-560-XCB2006005.
Ottawa. Released March 04, 2008.
85
PCensus 2006. 2006 Census: Post Secondary Education by Sex Comparison. Population 25 to 64 years with Postsecondary
Qualifications by Major Field of Study. Profile Report, 2006 Census for Greater Sudbury.
86
Centre for Canadian Policy Alternatives, 2009. Leadership for Tough Times Alternative Federal Budget Fiscal Stimulus
Plan. Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives, January 2009, p.7.
87
Robinson, D. Labour Force Developments and Trends for Greater Sudbury for the period November 9 to 15, 2008
Department of Economics, Laurentian University.
88
Statistics Canada, CANSIM, table (for fee) 282-0090 and Catalogue no. 71-001-XIE. Last modified: 2009-01-09.
89
Statistics Canada, 1996. Total population 15 years and over by labour force activity (20% sample data). Profile of Census
Divisions and Subdivisions, 1996 Census, Sudbury Regional Municipality.
90
PCensus 2001. 2001 Census: Labour Force. Total Population 15 years and over by Labour Force Activity. Profile Report,
2001 Census for Greater Sudbury.
91
PCensus 2006. 2006 Census: Labour Force by Sex Comparison. Total Population 15 years and over by Labour Force
Activity. Profile Report, 2006 Census for Greater Sudbury.
92
PCensus 2006. 2006 Census: Presence of Children and Labour Force by Sex Comparison. Profile Report, 2006 Census for
Greater Sudbury.
133
Social Profile of Greater Sudbury
93
Statistics Canada. 2008. Labour Force Activity (8), Highest Certificate, Diploma or Degree (14), Major Field of Study Classification of Instructional Programs, 2000 (73), Age Groups (9) and Sex (3) for the Population 15 Years and Over of
Canada, Provinces, Territories, Census Metropolitan Areas, and Census Agglomerations, 2006 Census - 20% Sample Data
(table). Topic-based tabulation. 2006 Census of Population. Statistics Canada catalogue no. 97-560-XCB2006011. Ottawa.
Released March 04, 2008.
94
Statistics Canada. 2008. Labour Force Activity (8), Highest Certificate, Diploma or Degree (14), Major Field of Study Classification of Instructional Programs, 2000 (73), Age Groups (9) and Sex (3) for the Population 15 Years and Over of
Canada, Provinces, Territories, Census Metropolitan Areas, and Census Agglomerations, 2006 Census - 20% Sample Data
(table). Topic-based tabulation. 2006 Census of Population. Statistics Canada catalogue no. 97-560-XCB2006011. Ottawa.
Released March 04, 2008.
95
PCensus 2001. 2001 Census: Labour Force by Industry. Total Labour Force 15 years and over by Industry. Profile Report,
2001 Census for Greater Sudbury.
96
PCensus 2006. 2006 Census: Labour Force by Industry. Total Labour Force 15 years and over by Industry. Profile Report,
2006 Census for Greater Sudbury.
97
PCensus 2006. 2006 Census: Labour Force by Industry and Sex Comparison. Total Labour Force 15 years and over by
Industry. Profile Report, 2006 Census for Greater Sudbury.
98
PCensus 2006. 2006 Census: Labour Force by Occupation and Sex Comparison. Labour Force 15 years and over. Profile
Report, 2006 Census for Greater Sudbury.
99
Statistics Canada. 2008. Employment Income Statistics (4) in Constant (2005) Dollars, Work Activity in the Reference Year
(3), Occupation - National Occupational Classification for Statistics 2006 (720A) and Sex (3) for the Population 15 Years and
Over With Employment Income of Canada, Provinces, Territories, Census Metropolitan Areas and Census Agglomerations,
2000 and 2005 - 20% Sample Data (table). Topic-based tabulation. 2006 Census of Population. Statistics Canada catalogue no.
97-563-XCB2006063. Ottawa. Released September 30, 2008.
100
PCensus 2006. 2006 Census: 2005 Employment Income by Sex and Work Activity. Total Population 15 years and over by
Sex and Work Activity. Profile Report, 2006 Census for Greater Sudbury.
101
PCensus 2006. 2006 Census: Unpaid Housework. Total Population 15 years and over by hours of Unpaid Housework.
Profile Report, 2006 Census for Greater Sudbury.
102
PCensus 2006. 2006 Census: Unpaid Childcare. Total Population 15 years and over by hours of Unpaid Childcare. Profile
Report, 2006 Census for Greater Sudbury.
103
PCensus 2006. 2006 Census: Unpaid Senior Care. Total Population 15 years and over by hours of care to seniors. Profile
Report, 2006 Census for Greater Sudbury.
104
Statistics Canada. 2008. Place of Work Status (5), Age Groups (9) and Sex (3) for the Employed Labour Force 15 Years and
Over of Canada, Provinces, Territories, Census Metropolitan Area and Census Agglomerations, 2006 Census – 20% Sample
Data (table). Topic-based tabulation. 2006 Census of Population. Statistics Canada catalogue no. 97-561-XCB2006006.
Ottawa. Released March 05, 2008.
105
Statistics Canada, 2007. 2006 Community Profiles, Greater Sudbury, Ontario.
106
Statistics Canada. 2008. Mode of Transportation (9), Age Groups (9) and Sex (3) for the Employed Labour Force 15 Years
and Over Having a Usual Place of Work or No Fixed Workplace Address of Canada, Provinces, Territories, Census
Metropolitan Areas and Census Agglomerations, 2006 Census - 20% Sample Data (table). Topic-based tabulation. 2006
Census of Population. Statistics Canada catalogue no. 97-561-XCB2006012. Ottawa. Released March 04, 2008.
107
Statistics Canada. 2008. Total Income Groups (23) in Constant (2005) Dollars, Age Groups (7A), Highest Certificate,
Diploma or Degree (5) and Sex (3) for the Population 15 Years and Over of Canada, Provinces, Territories, Census
134
Social Profile of Greater Sudbury
Metropolitan Areas and Census Agglomerations, 2000 and 2005 - 20% Sample Data (table). Topic-based tabulation. 2006
Census of Population. Statistics Canada catalogue no. 97-563-XCB2006005. Ottawa. Released May 01, 2008.
108
Statistics Canada. 2008. Family Income Groups (22) in Constant (2005) Dollars and Economic Family Structure (14) for the
Economic Families in Private Households of Canada, Provinces, Territories, Census Metropolitan Areas and Census
Agglomerations, 2000 and 2005 - 20% Sample Data (table). Topic-based tabulation. 2006 Census of Population. Statistics
Canada catalogue no. 97-563-XCB2006023. Ottawa. Released May 01, 2008.
109
Statistics Canada. 2008. Household Income Groups (22) in Constant (2005) Dollars and Household Type (11) for the
Private Households of Canada, Provinces, Territories, Census Metropolitan Areas and Census Agglomerations, 2000 and 2005
- 20% Sample Data (table). Topic-based tabulation. 2006 Census of Population. Statistics Canada catalogue no. 97-563XCB2006045. Ottawa. Released May 01, 2008.
110
Statistics Canada. 2008. Total Income (7), Age Groups (5A) and Sex (3) for the Persons 15 Years and Over Not in the
Economic Families of Canada, Provinces, Territories, Census Metropolitan Areas and Census Agglomerations, 2005 - 20%
Sample Data (table). Topic-based tabulation. 2006 Census of Population. Statistics Canada catalogue no. 97-563-XCB2006034.
Ottawa. Released May 01, 2008.
111
Statistics Canada. 2008. Total Income (7), Age Groups (5A) and Sex (3) for the Persons 15 Years and Over Not in the
Economic Families of Canada, Provinces, Territories, Census Metropolitan Areas and Census Agglomerations, 2005 - 20%
Sample Data (table). Topic-based tabulation. 2006 Census of Population. Statistics Canada catalogue no. 97-563-XCB2006034.
Ottawa. Released May 01, 2008.
112
Statistics Canada. Income Research Paper Series, Low-income Cut-offs for 2006 and Low-income Measures for 2005.
Statistics Canada Catalogue no. 75F0002MIE, no. 004. (28/11/2008).
113
Ibid.
114
Statistics Canada, 1996. Total – Economic families (20% sample data) and Total- Unattached individuals Incidence of Lowincome %. Profile of Census Divisions and Subdivisions, 1996 Census, Sudbury Regional Municipality.
115
Statistics Canada, 1986 Census. Incidence of Low-Income Table 1: Selected Characteristics for Census Tracts, 1986 Census
– (20% Data). Catalogue No. 95-160.
116
Statistics Canada, 2006. Community Profiles for Greater Sudbury and Ontario from 2006 Census. Retrieved online from:
http://www12.statcan.ca/english/census06/data/profiles/community/Details/Page.cfm?Lang=E&Geo1=
CMA&Code1=580__&Geo2=PR&Code2=35&Data=Count&SearchText=greater%20sudbury&SearchType=Begins&SearchP
R=01&B1=All&Custom=. (28/11/2008).
117
Statistics Canada. 2008. Income Status Before Tax (4), Economic Family Structure and Presence of Children for the
Economic Families; Sex, Household Living Arrangements and Age Groups for the Persons 15 Years and Over not in the
Economic Families; and Sex and Age Groups for the Persons in Private Households (88) of Canada, Provinces, Territories,
Census Metropolitan Areas and Census Agglomerations, 2000 and 2005 - 20% Sample Data (table). Topic-based tabulation.
2006 Census of Population. Statistics Canada catalogue no. 97-563-XCB2006017. Ottawa. Released May 01, 2008.
118
Ibid.
119
Statistics Canada. 2008. Income Status Before Tax and Income Status After Tax (8), Economic Family Structure and
Presence of Children for the Economic Families; Sex, Household Living Arrangements and Age Groups for the Persons 15
Years and Over not in Economic Families; and Sex and Age Groups for the Persons in Private Households (88) of Canada,
Provinces, Census Metropolitan Areas and Census Agglomerations, 2005 - 20% Sample Data (table). Topic-based tabulation.
2006 Census of Population. Statistics Canada catalogue no. 97-563-XCB2006028. Ottawa. Released June 26, 2008.
120
Ibid.
121
PCensus 2006. 2006 Census: Households. Private households by size of household. Profile Report, 2006 Census for Greater
Sudbury.
135
Social Profile of Greater Sudbury
122
Statistics Canada, 1996. Total number of private households by household size (20% data). Profile of Census Divisions and
Subdivisions, 1996 Census, Sudbury Regional Municipality.
123
Statistics Canada, Community Profiles. 2001 and 2006.
124
Statistics Canada, 1996. Total number of occupied private dwellings by structural type of dwelling (20% sample data).
Profile of Census Divisions and Subdivisions, 1996 Census, Sudbury Regional Municipality.
125
PCensus 2006. 2006 Census: Dwellings. Occupied private dwellings by structure type. Profile Report, 2006 Census for
Greater Sudbury.
126
City of Greater Sudbury; Building Services; Building Permit Statements 1995—2006; Total residential units created = new
residential units + miscellaneous units – cancelled permits.
127
City of Greater Sudbury, Development Review 2005
128
Statistics Canada. Community Profiles, 2001, 2005 censuses.
129
Statistics Canada, Changing Patterns in Canadian Homeownership and Shelter Costs, 2006 Census. Census year 2006.
Catalogue no. 97-554-X
130
Statistics Canada, 2006. Community Profile Reports for Greater Sudbury, Sault Ste. Marie, North Bay, Thunder Bay, and
Canada.
131
CMHC. Spring 2008. Rental Market Report. Ontario Highlights
132
CMHC. Spring 2008. Rental Market Report. Ontario Highlights
133
CGS, Developmental Review, 2005. Prepared by the Community and Strategic Planning Section, Planning Services
Division, Growth and Development Department, March 2006.
134
PCensus 2001. 2001 Census: Households. Rented and Owned Dwellings. Profile Report, 2001 Census for Greater Sudbury.
135
PCensus 2006. 2006 Census: Households. Rented and Owned Dwellings. Profile Report, 2006 Census for Greater Sudbury.
136
Statistics Canada. 2008. Gross Rent as a Percentage of 2005 Household Income (10), Household Type (11) and Age Groups
of Primary Household Maintainer (8) for the Private Households with Household Income Greater than Zero, in Tenantoccupied Private Non-farm, Non-reserve Dwellings of Canada, Provinces, Territories, Census Metropolitan Areas and Census
Agglomerations, 2006 Census - 20% Sample Data (table). Topic-based tabulation. 2006 Census of Population. Statistics
Canada catalogue no. 97-554-XCB2006051. Ottawa. Released May 01, 2008.
137
Statistics Canada. 2008. Owner's Major Payments as a Percentage of 2005 Household Income (10), Household Type (11),
Age Groups of Primary Household Maintainer (8) and Presence of Mortgage (3) for the Private Households with Household
Income Greater than Zero, in Owner-occupied Private Non-farm, Non-reserve Dwellings of Canada, Provinces, Territories,
Census Metropolitan Areas and Census Agglomerations, 2006 Census - 20% Sample Data (table). Topic-based tabulation.
2006 Census of Population. Statistics Canada catalogue no. 97-554-XCB2006050. Ottawa. Released May 01, 2008.
136
Social Profile of Greater Sudbury