Keyword search

On November 26 2006, the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) held an international workshop on defining and measuring metropolitan regions. The reasons the OECD organized this workshop are listed below.

1. Metropolitan Regions have become a crucial economic actor in today's highly integrated world. Not only do they play their traditional role of growth poles in their countries but they function as essential nodes of the global economy.2. Policy makers, international organisations and research networks are increasingly called to compare the economic and social performances of Metropolitan Regions across countries. Examples of this work undertaken in international organisation and networks include the UN-Habitat, the EU Urban Audit, ESPON and the OECD Competitive Cities.3. The scope of what we can learn from these international comparisons, however, is limited by the lack of a comparable definition of Metropolitan Regions. Although most countries have their own definitions, these vary significantly from one country to another. Furthermore, in search for higher cross-country comparability, international initiatives have - somehow paradoxically - generated an even larger number of definitions.4. In principle, there is no clear reason to prefer one definition to another. As each definition has been elaborated for a specific analytical purpose, it captures some features of a Metropolitan Region while it tends to overlook others. The issue, rather, is that we do not know the pros and the cons of different definitions nor, most important, the analytical implications of using one definition rather than another. 5. In order to respond to these questions, the OECD hosted an international workshop on 'Defining and Measuring Metropolitan Regions'. The workshop brought together major international organisations (the UN, Eurostat, the World Bank, and the OECD), National Statistical Offices and researchers from this field. The aim of the workshop was to develop some 'guiding principles', which could be agreed upon among the participants and would eventually provide the basis for some form of 'International Guidance' for comparing Metropolitan Regions across countries.

This working paper was presented at this workshop. It provides the conceptual and methodological basis for the definition of metropolitan areas in Canada and provides a detailed comparison of Canada's methodology to that of the USA. The intent was to encourage discussion regarding Canada's approach to defining metropolitan areas in the effort to identify the 'guiding principles'. It is being made available as a working paper to continue this discussion and to provide background to the user community to encourage dialogue and commentary from the user community regarding Canada's metropolitan area methodology.

This objective of this report is to present the status of national data on Aboriginal people who come into contact with the criminal justice system as offenders and victims. The report examines the current and potential collection of an individual's Aboriginal identity through various justice-related surveys at Statistics Canada, the challenges within these surveys to collect these data and provides some insight into the quality of these data. The data and sources are examined within the context of information needs for the justice and social policy sectors, and in relation to the preferred method of measuring Aboriginal Identity at Statistics Canada. Data sources examined include the Incident-based Uniform Crime Reporting Survey, the Homicide Survey, the Integrated Criminal Courts Survey, the Adult Corrections Survey, the Youth Custody and Community Services Survey, the Youth Alternative Measures Survey, the Transition Home Survey, the Victim Services Survey and the General Social Survey on Victimization. Finally, the report briefly describes efforts by other countries to improve justice-related information on their indigenous populations.

This report examines the health of residents of census metropolitan areas (CMAs) through measures such as life expectancy, self-rated health, smoking, heavy drinking, obesity, physical inactivity, high blood pressure, life stress, depression, self-perceived unmet health care needs and number of general physicians and family practitioners per 100,000 population.

This table is part of the topic "Immigration and Citizenship," which shows 2001 Census data on immigration trends in Canada. Information is provided on Canada's immigrant or foreign-born population: its size, its geographic distribution, its origins and its demographic characteristics. Similar information is available for the Canadian-born population and non-permanent residents. Citizenship information from the census shows, for example, the number of immigrants who have acquired Canadian citizenship or the number of Canadians who hold dual citizenship.

Data on the socio-economic characteristics of these populations will be available at a later date.

The following concepts related to immigration and citizenship are available from the 2001 Census: (1) birthplace of respondent (including province or territory of birth), (2) country of citizenship, (3) immigrant status, (4) period or year of immigration, and (5) age at immigration. In addition, for the first time since the 1971 Census, the 2001 Census asked a question on the birthplace of parents. Responses to this question can be used to assess the socio-economic conditions of second-generation Canadians (that is, the Canadian-born children of foreign-born parents).

This table can also be found in the Topic Bundle: Immigration and Citizenship, 2001 Census, Catalogue No. 97F0009XCB2001000.

It is also possible to subscribe to all the day-of-release bundles. Refer to Catalogue No. 97F0023XCB for more information.

This table is available FREE on the Internet, Catalogue No. 97F0009XIE2001001.

This Internet report presents the highlights of the age and sex data release from the 2001Census of Population and Housing. Numerous colour maps, charts and tables illustrate the latest demographic trends and geographic patterns observed from the published data.

This series includes a number of comprehensive articles that supplement the day-of-release information launched through The Daily. These catalogued articles provide an analytical perspective on the 2001 Census release topics. The number and length of these articles vary for each census release and are based on the 21 census release topics disseminated over 8 major release dates.

More focused articles were disseminated as major releases in The Dailyin the weeks following the official release of the data. Other more specialized articles were also announced in The Daily. The articles in the 2001 Census Analysis Series are available free of charge via the Internet.

The 2001 Census defines 27 census metropolitan area (CMAs) and 19 census agglomerations (CAs) with census tracts. This working paper includes three maps for each of these CMAs and CAs. The first map shows the boundary of the CMA/CA and the boundaries of the census subdivision (CSD) components of the CMA/CA for the 1996 Census. The second map shows the transition from 1996 to 2001 (with boundary changes highlighted), and the third map shows the CMA/CA (and component CSDs) as it is defined for the 2001 Census. Accompanying tables list the component census subdivisions and the criteria which they meet to be included in the CMA or CA. The paper describes various factors that can result in changes to the boundaries of CMAs and CAs. For the 2001 Census, municipal restructuring is the factor that has had the greatest impact on the boundaries of some CMAs and CAs.The paper also briefly describes and compares the delineation criteria for metropolitan areas in the United States with those for census metropolitan areas in Canada. An indication is given of the impact on the Canadian CMA program if the American metropolitan area criteria were used.

The Geography Divisions of Statistics Canada and the U.S. Bureau of the Census have commenced a cooperative research program in order to foster an improved and expanded perspective on geographic areas and their relevance. One of the major objectives is to determine a common geographic area to form a geostatistical basis for cross-border research, analysis and mapping.

This report, which represents the first stage of the research, provides a list of comparable pairs of Canadian and U.S. standard geographic areas based on current definitions. Statistics Canada and the U.S. Bureau of the Census have two basic types of standard geographic entities: legislative/administrative areas (called "legal" entities in the U.S.) and statistical areas.

The preliminary pairing of geographic areas are based on face-value definitions only. The definitions are based on the June 4, 1991 Census of Population and Housing for Canada and the April 1, 1990 Census of Population and Housing for the U.S.A. The important aspect is the overall conceptual comparability, not the precise numerical thresholds used for delineating the areas.

Data users should use this report as a general guide to compare the census geographic areas of Canada and the United States, and should be aware that differences in settlement patterns and population levels preclude a precise one-to-one relationship between conceptually similar areas. The geographic areas compared in this report provide a framework for further empirical research and analysis.

This table is part of the topic "Immigration and Citizenship," which shows 2001 Census data on immigration trends in Canada. Information is provided on Canada's immigrant or foreign-born population: its size, its geographic distribution, its origins and its demographic characteristics. Similar information is available for the Canadian-born population and non-permanent residents. Citizenship information from the census shows, for example, the number of immigrants who have acquired Canadian citizenship or the number of Canadians who hold dual citizenship.

Data on the socio-economic characteristics of these populations will be available at a later date.

The following concepts related to immigration and citizenship are available from the 2001 Census: (1) birthplace of respondent (including province or territory of birth), (2) country of citizenship, (3) immigrant status, (4) period or year of immigration, and (5) age at immigration. In addition, for the first time since the 1971 Census, the 2001 Census asked a question on the birthplace of parents. Responses to this question can be used to assess the socio-economic conditions of second-generation Canadians (that is, the Canadian-born children of foreign-born parents).

This table can also be found in the Topic Bundle: Immigration and Citizenship, 2001 Census, Catalogue No. 97F0009XCB2001000.

It is also possible to subscribe to all the day-of-release bundles. Refer to Catalogue No. 97F0023XCB for more information.

This table is available FREE on the Internet, Catalogue No. 97F0009XIE2001001.

On November 26 2006, the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) held an international workshop on defining and measuring metropolitan regions. The reasons the OECD organized this workshop are listed below.

1. Metropolitan Regions have become a crucial economic actor in today's highly integrated world. Not only do they play their traditional role of growth poles in their countries but they function as essential nodes of the global economy.2. Policy makers, international organisations and research networks are increasingly called to compare the economic and social performances of Metropolitan Regions across countries. Examples of this work undertaken in international organisation and networks include the UN-Habitat, the EU Urban Audit, ESPON and the OECD Competitive Cities.3. The scope of what we can learn from these international comparisons, however, is limited by the lack of a comparable definition of Metropolitan Regions. Although most countries have their own definitions, these vary significantly from one country to another. Furthermore, in search for higher cross-country comparability, international initiatives have - somehow paradoxically - generated an even larger number of definitions.4. In principle, there is no clear reason to prefer one definition to another. As each definition has been elaborated for a specific analytical purpose, it captures some features of a Metropolitan Region while it tends to overlook others. The issue, rather, is that we do not know the pros and the cons of different definitions nor, most important, the analytical implications of using one definition rather than another. 5. In order to respond to these questions, the OECD hosted an international workshop on 'Defining and Measuring Metropolitan Regions'. The workshop brought together major international organisations (the UN, Eurostat, the World Bank, and the OECD), National Statistical Offices and researchers from this field. The aim of the workshop was to develop some 'guiding principles', which could be agreed upon among the participants and would eventually provide the basis for some form of 'International Guidance' for comparing Metropolitan Regions across countries.

This working paper was presented at this workshop. It provides the conceptual and methodological basis for the definition of metropolitan areas in Canada and provides a detailed comparison of Canada's methodology to that of the USA. The intent was to encourage discussion regarding Canada's approach to defining metropolitan areas in the effort to identify the 'guiding principles'. It is being made available as a working paper to continue this discussion and to provide background to the user community to encourage dialogue and commentary from the user community regarding Canada's metropolitan area methodology.

This report examines the health of residents of census metropolitan areas (CMAs) through measures such as life expectancy, self-rated health, smoking, heavy drinking, obesity, physical inactivity, high blood pressure, life stress, depression, self-perceived unmet health care needs and number of general physicians and family practitioners per 100,000 population.

This Internet report presents the highlights of the age and sex data release from the 2001Census of Population and Housing. Numerous colour maps, charts and tables illustrate the latest demographic trends and geographic patterns observed from the published data.

This series includes a number of comprehensive articles that supplement the day-of-release information launched through The Daily. These catalogued articles provide an analytical perspective on the 2001 Census release topics. The number and length of these articles vary for each census release and are based on the 21 census release topics disseminated over 8 major release dates.

More focused articles were disseminated as major releases in The Dailyin the weeks following the official release of the data. Other more specialized articles were also announced in The Daily. The articles in the 2001 Census Analysis Series are available free of charge via the Internet.

This objective of this report is to present the status of national data on Aboriginal people who come into contact with the criminal justice system as offenders and victims. The report examines the current and potential collection of an individual's Aboriginal identity through various justice-related surveys at Statistics Canada, the challenges within these surveys to collect these data and provides some insight into the quality of these data. The data and sources are examined within the context of information needs for the justice and social policy sectors, and in relation to the preferred method of measuring Aboriginal Identity at Statistics Canada. Data sources examined include the Incident-based Uniform Crime Reporting Survey, the Homicide Survey, the Integrated Criminal Courts Survey, the Adult Corrections Survey, the Youth Custody and Community Services Survey, the Youth Alternative Measures Survey, the Transition Home Survey, the Victim Services Survey and the General Social Survey on Victimization. Finally, the report briefly describes efforts by other countries to improve justice-related information on their indigenous populations.

The 2001 Census defines 27 census metropolitan area (CMAs) and 19 census agglomerations (CAs) with census tracts. This working paper includes three maps for each of these CMAs and CAs. The first map shows the boundary of the CMA/CA and the boundaries of the census subdivision (CSD) components of the CMA/CA for the 1996 Census. The second map shows the transition from 1996 to 2001 (with boundary changes highlighted), and the third map shows the CMA/CA (and component CSDs) as it is defined for the 2001 Census. Accompanying tables list the component census subdivisions and the criteria which they meet to be included in the CMA or CA. The paper describes various factors that can result in changes to the boundaries of CMAs and CAs. For the 2001 Census, municipal restructuring is the factor that has had the greatest impact on the boundaries of some CMAs and CAs.The paper also briefly describes and compares the delineation criteria for metropolitan areas in the United States with those for census metropolitan areas in Canada. An indication is given of the impact on the Canadian CMA program if the American metropolitan area criteria were used.

The Geography Divisions of Statistics Canada and the U.S. Bureau of the Census have commenced a cooperative research program in order to foster an improved and expanded perspective on geographic areas and their relevance. One of the major objectives is to determine a common geographic area to form a geostatistical basis for cross-border research, analysis and mapping.

This report, which represents the first stage of the research, provides a list of comparable pairs of Canadian and U.S. standard geographic areas based on current definitions. Statistics Canada and the U.S. Bureau of the Census have two basic types of standard geographic entities: legislative/administrative areas (called "legal" entities in the U.S.) and statistical areas.

The preliminary pairing of geographic areas are based on face-value definitions only. The definitions are based on the June 4, 1991 Census of Population and Housing for Canada and the April 1, 1990 Census of Population and Housing for the U.S.A. The important aspect is the overall conceptual comparability, not the precise numerical thresholds used for delineating the areas.

Data users should use this report as a general guide to compare the census geographic areas of Canada and the United States, and should be aware that differences in settlement patterns and population levels preclude a precise one-to-one relationship between conceptually similar areas. The geographic areas compared in this report provide a framework for further empirical research and analysis.