Income and Expenditure Accounts Technical Series
Indigenous Peoples Economic Account: Methodology and Preliminary Results

Acknowledgements

This article outlines the methodology and some early results obtained from the Indigenous Peoples Economic Account (IPEA) pilot-project developed by Statistics Canada. This economic account includes economic indicators (GDP, output and total number of jobs) as well as a Human Resource Module (HRM). The HRM provide additional demographic and socio-economic information about Indigenous paid workers holding a job, such as sex or education level. The estimates are available by industry and province/territory.

The IPEA was developed as part of a cost recovery project funded by Indigenous Services Canada (ISC).

We wish to acknowledge the technical support from The National Economic Accounts Division’s (NEAD) Production and Information Management section as well as ongoing support from Indigenous Services Canada.

Thanks also goes out to our Statistics Canada colleagues in the Economic Analysis Division and Centre for Indigenous Statistics and Partnerships for their assistance in developing the IPEA and reviewing the final product. Along with them, the Bank of Canada provided us will helpful comments and suggestions during their review.

Finally, a very special thanks goes to the Native Women’s Association of Canada, First Nations Financial Management Board, and the Congress of Aboriginal Peoples for reviewing the report and providing us with suggestions. Their contribution had a significant impact on the overall quality and usefulness of the report.

Introduction

The diversity of Canada’s population and workforce contributes to its economy. Yet macroeconomic indicators such as the gross domestic product (GDP) are not developed to highlight the participation of different socio-economic or demographic groups in the economy. Disaggregating economic indicators to better understand the participation of various groups in the Canadian economy can be a challenging task. It requires a re-examination of how the economy is usually thought of and measured. In other words, to understand the impact that each group has on the economy, one must not focus on the contribution of an industry, but rather on the contribution of individuals with similar demographic characteristics. The data to enable such undertakings are limited; most data sources are articulated around the type of economic agents, such as households and governments or disaggregated by industry. Most data sources rarely offer insight on the demographics of who is behind economic transactions.

While it is possible to find labour or population estimates about most segments of the population, Statistics Canada has yet to produce macroeconomic indicators related to a specific demographic sub-group of the population. With this publication, that serves as a pilot project, Statistics Canada will for the first time release macroeconomic estimates pertaining to a specific demographic, namely, Canada’s Indigenous peoples.^Note 

This paper examines the feasibility of developing an Indigenous Peoples Economic Account (IPEA) consistent with the Canadian System of National Accounts (CSNA) and presents a preliminary set of data. In this first iteration of the IPEA, three main components are included; a suite of economic indicators (GDP, output and total jobs), a human resource module, which provides estimates related to paid worker jobs by various socio-demographic characteristics such as age group and education level, and a supplementary analysis showing how the estimates of GDP, output, and total jobs could be further broken down according to location of the residence (on vs off reserve) and the Indigenous identity group.

This feasibility study starts by discussing thematic economic accounts, also referred to as satellite accounts, within the framework of the System of National Accounts (SNA). The methodology and data sources used to produce all three main components are then addressed. Finally, preliminary results based on the proposed methodology are presented.

Macroeconomic indicators are key in policy making and the lack of such estimates pertaining to Indigenous peoples has long been considered an important data gap. With this paper, Statistics Canada is presenting preliminary macroeconomic and socio-demographic estimates related to Indigenous peoples in order to provide further resources for data users. As such, Statistics Canada welcomes all comments and questions regarding the results, the methodology or any other component that could help improve the quality and reliability of this product.

Background and scope

The Canadian System of National Accounts (CSNA) produces a wealth of economic estimates which help understand the Canadian economy. Statistics Canada has been using satellite accounts as a means of focusing on various areas of interest in the CSNA for decades. The areas of interest have traditionally been either the production of specific products or of various sectors of the economy which are not well articulated in standard industry classification systems. In the case of the Indigenous Peoples Economic Account (IPEA), the area of interest is the production generated by specific economic agents; the Indigenous peoples of Canada.

Economic accounts

An economic account such as the IPEA is often referred to as a satellite account. Satellite accounts or thematic economic accounts are extensions of the core System of National Accounts (SNA). They follow the main principles, classifications and definitions of the SNA and therefore estimates in those accounts are directly comparable and consistent with the rest of the SNA. Satellite accounts or thematic economic accounts such as the IPEA are used to enrich the Canadian System of National Macroeconomic accounts by providing supplementary information on particular topics, such as tourism or culture. They also offer a flexibility that the SNA does not. For example, they can expand or refine the production boundaries, present the activities based on different aggregates or use alternative valuations. In other words, satellite accounts offer a means of borrowing some of the best features of the international SNA framework while giving freedom to depart from some of its restrictions.

The Indigenous Peoples Economic Account

The IPEA is a suite of economic statistics that aim at measuring the economic contribution (in GDP terms) of Indigenous peoples to the Canadian economy. In other words, the IPEA is the umbrella under which a series of macroeconomic indicators pertaining to Indigenous peoples in Canada was developed. This economic account has been developed on a basis consistent with the Canadian System of National Accounts (CSNA). With this statistical instrument, the goal is to provide a more comprehensive picture of the participation of Indigenous peoples in the Canadian economy.

In the current iteration of the IPEA, there are three main components; the Indigenous Peoples Economic Indicators (IPEI), the Human Resource Module (HRM) as well as supplementary analysis tables.

First, the core of the IPEA is the economic indicators. The IPEI provide a measure of gross domestic product (GDP), output and total number of jobs. These estimates are calculated based on the share of Indigenous labour income^Note  and the share of gross operating surplus attributable to Indigenous-owned businesses.^Note  The preliminary IPEI estimates are available for the years 2012 through 2020.

Second, to complement and enhance the analytical capacity of the economic indicators, a Human Resources Module is also available. The HRM provides a statistical snapshot of the employment of Indigenous peoples along with insights into trends over time by province and territory as well as industry. Using the HRM estimates, analyses can be made on the following key statistics: employee jobs, hours worked and wages and salaries. These key statistics can be analyzed according to various job characteristics of paid workers (full-time or part-time, occupation group) and the characteristics of the persons holding them (sex, age group and level of education). In addition, it should be emphasized that the HRM uses the number of jobs as its key measure of employment and not the number of people employed.

Finally, to further enhance the indicators, supplementary tables were developed to break down the economic indicators according to the distinct Indigenous identity groups.^Note  Another table presents the indicators according to location of the residence; on or off reserve.^Note  Due to data restrictions, these tables are only available for 2015.

In addition to the national level, most of the estimates presented in this paper are available at the provincial and territorial level. The exceptions are the two tables included in the supplementary analysis as well as the HRM estimates based on occupations. Those tables are only available at the national level due to data availability and quality constraints. The occupation estimates are based on the 2016 National Occupational Classification (NOC).  Moreover, when possible, the industry detail is available based on the 2-digit North American Industry Classification System (NAICS).

The Canadian System of National Accounts

The foundation of the IPEA is the data contained within the Canadian System of National Accounts (CSNA). The CSNA is based on the 2008 System of National Accounts (2008 SNA), an internationally recognized framework used to measure economic activity within a country or region. The framework is used by countries throughout the world to record their production, incomes, investment, consumption, financial transactions and stocks of assets and liabilities. The data are organized into a sequence of accounts that articulate the change in wealth from one period to another by tracking the activities of economic agents (households, governments, and corporations). The SNA provides a set of concepts, classifications and accounting rules for compiling and integrating data to give a comprehensive picture of the economy and how it works. Key measures that emerge from this framework include GDP at both basic and market prices, household disposable income, investment, capital stock, productivity, the international balance of payments and government debt.

Another key macroeconomic product of the CSNA is the annual supply and use tables (SUTs). Those tables contain the most comprehensive and detailed statistics relating to production, intermediate use and final consumption of goods and services in the Canadian economy. These tables balance the total supply of all products in the economy with their uses. They measure economic activity by industry as well as by product. Given the level of detail they provide, they are the primary building block and benchmark for macroeconomic estimates such as GDP, output and jobs. Because all the estimates of the IPEA are rooted in the CSNA estimates which are benchmarked to the SUTs, GDP, jobs and output estimates of the IPEA are also benchmarked to those estimates.

Why produce the Indigenous Peoples Economic Account?

As mentioned earlier, satellite accounts focusing on specific subjects are an excellent tool to provide reliable macroeconomic estimates pertaining to a specific topic, or as is the case with the IPEA, associated to specific populations. While aggregates such as the ones presented in the CSNA are great to understand the economy as whole, they often hide the economic reality and range of experiences by some groups or individuals. By providing reliable macroeconomic estimates comparable to the total economy, the IPEA could help in understanding the importance of Indigenous peoples in the economy.

Moreover, to develop meaningful and efficient policies and initiatives, objective evidence is needed. While the provincial and territorial estimates for the core CSNA provides reliable macroeconomic measures, they are too aggregated to inform policy makers on issues pertaining to specific regions or groups including Indigenous peoples and communities. The IPEA provides objective and reliable macroeconomic estimates pertaining to Indigenous peoples. In addition, when all the estimates presented in this paper are combined, a better picture of the economic reality of the Indigenous population is available through GDP measures and the various socio-demographic labour statistics. With the current estimates, it is possible to identify the industries where younger Indigenous peoples work or compare average annual wages between the sexes. These measures can be leveraged to identify where policy might be needed.

Furthermore, data gaps are more difficult to see at an aggregated level. By shining a light on the economics of Indigenous peoples, the IPEA could help recognize, understand, and resolve data gaps in statistics pertaining to Indigenous peoples. This could also draw attention to the need for additional data related to Indigenous peoples in order to measure their economic participation through a different lens.

Finally, the IPEA is intended to initiate and contribute to the conversation regarding the economic realities of the Indigenous population in Canada. Considering the IPEA only depicts preliminary economic estimates according to the structures of the CSNA, further context may be necessary to best interpret the data. For example, Indigenous peoples may be more likely to live in more remote areas, which might influence accessibility and the types of jobs pursued. For the sake of transparency, the IPEA provides a picture of what can be measured and the challenges associated to those measurements. However, when interpreting the results, users should always consider the broader regional, historical and economic context of Indigenous peoples. This first iteration of the IPEA is establishing the foundations for improved economic measures pertaining to Indigenous peoples. To this end, Statistics Canada is seeking users’ comments and questions about this product. It is by being part of the conversation that together we can improve the accuracy of the measurements.

Sources and methods

When an economic account such as the IPEA is developed, it is necessary to elaborate a methodology that indirectly measures the economic indicators while providing reliable estimates. Many options could be used and the choice of the methodology is usually based on the data available and its reliability.

For this iteration of the exploratory IPEA, an approach based primarily on labour income was chosen. Ratios based on the labour income of Indigenous peoples were derived and then applied to macroeconomic indicators. More specifically, the ratio that represents the labour income earned by Indigenous workers over the labour income of all workers was derived and then applied to GDP measures. For gross operating surplus (profits),^Note  adjustments were made using preliminary analysis of the Canadian Employer-Employee Dynamics Database^Note  linked to the Census of Population and National Household Survey. These ratios were then also applied to estimates of output. Labour income ratios were derived using the methodology developed for the economy-wide HRM which is explained in further detail in a later section of the paper. To produce the HRM, there are three main data sources; the Census of population (census) and National Household Survey (NHS), the Labour Force Survey (LFS) and the Canadian Productivity Accounts (CPA). Socio-demographic variables from the first data sources are used to distribute the estimates of the CPA by demographic characteristic.

Through the long form questionnaires of the census and NHS, information pertaining to Indigenous identity and labour income is available. Additional socio-demographic variables are also available allowing for the production of estimates based on other characteristics such as age group or sex. In addition to the main ratio of Indigenous labour income over the total labour income, the NHS and the census are used to derive other ratios based on the socio-demographic variables of interest, for example, ratios based on sex or age. For the current iteration of the IPEA, the 2011 NHS and 2016 Census of population where used.

The questions^Note  about Indigenous identity were used to define the Indigenous population to be included in the measurement. Like the other socio-demographic variables used in the HRM, Indigenous identity is based on self-identification questions. This means that Indigenous identity is not contingent on any status vis-à-vis any treaty or law. Moreover, no adjustments were made to the source data. This means that people in any Indigenous community that were incompletely enumerated in the census or NHS^Note  is not included in any of the Indigenous related estimates presented in this paper.^Note Note 

Other data sources that include economic and demographic data were considered for the production of the IPEA estimates. The main alternative would have been the LFS. However, the coverage of the survey has some limitations which could have impacted the ability to derive representative estimates. For example, First Nations reserves are not included in the sample. Given the aim of the IPEA, this was considered to be a significant limitation and as such, LFS was ruled out as the main data source. However, in the production of the HRM estimates, LFS estimates were used as an indicator series for the interpolation between NHS and census reference years. LFS also served as an indicator series for the years beyond the latest census. When used as an indicator, LFS helps adjust the movement of the time series. This means that values from LFS are not used directly; only the observed trends.

The final data source needed to produce the HRM estimates is the CPA. The jobs count estimates produced by the CPA are the official jobs count of the CSNA. All concepts and classifications used are coherent with the SNA framework. The CPA estimates reflect the total economy and, as such, they account for all workers, including peoples living on First Nations reserves.

Human Resources Module Methodology

The methodology used to produce the Human Resources Module (HRM) estimates is not new; Statistics Canada produces a number of HRMs associated with various satellite accounts. Over the years, the methodology has been refined and adapted to fulfill the needs of the various satellite accounts. While improvements are still possible, this methodology generates reliable estimates.

There are five major steps involved. The first step consists of disaggregating the total of jobs, hours worked, and wages and salaries according to the full-time and part-time break down. This is done for all classes of workers (employee or self-employed) across each province and territory and by North American Industry Classification System (NAICS). All of this is done using data produced within the CPA. At this point, no adjustments are needed.

The second step consists of distributing the estimates across Indigenous identity, occupation, sex, age group and education level based on the ratios derived from the NHS and census. This step relates only to employee jobs, as occupational details are not developed for the self-employed. The Census of Population and NHS are used to distribute the NAICS industry group totals established in the second step for the years 2010 and 2015 (i.e., the reference years for the 2011 NHS and 2016 census).

To develop occupational distributors for the industry group totals, special census tabulations are prepared, identifying persons who had employment income in the reference year and were not self-employed. The selected persons are grouped according to their industry and whether they worked mainly full-or part-time during the reference year. For each of these groups the distribution of the (weighted) sample by occupation is determined, as well as the distribution of total hours worked and wages and salaries.

The occupational distributor for hours worked is based on the distribution of total hours (jobs multiplied by average hours worked) across occupations within each industry group. The occupational distributor for wages and salaries is based on the distribution of total wages and salaries (jobs multiplied by hours worked multiplied by hourly earnings) across occupations in each industry group.

The second step only provides two data points. Therefore, the third step is to build the time series using LFS as the indicator series. This entails using the corresponding LFS annual average series by Indigenous identity, occupation, age group, education level and sex to build a time series. As mentioned earlier, the estimates from LFS, meaning the level they provide, are not used directly but rather only the growth or the movement from year to year is used as an indicator. As a result of incorporating the LFS growth rates, some volatility in the time series can occur. This volatility can present itself in fluctuations in the HRM estimates from one year to the next. Therefore, once a time series is created using the estimates from step 2 as an anchor point and the LFS estimates as an indicator, it is necessary to validate and potentially adjust the estimates to reduce the volatility.

To this end, the fourth step consist of smoothing the LFS estimates. This step entails smoothing (using a four-year moving average) to reduce volatility in the occupational time series found in the LFS. It is implemented in a way that preserves the overall industry group totals (from the CSNA) and the occupational distributions (from the NHS and census). A simple moving average is applied to the indicators used to build the time series on jobs, hours worked and wages and salaries, full-and part-time, by occupation and for each industry. A four-year moving average was judged to provide the best results overall in terms of reasonableness and consistency, reduced volatility, and minimizing the need for manual adjustments.

Finally, once we have the final time series estimates, where the volatility due to LFS has been reduced, some final limited adjustments are made. The last step in developing the total industry estimates involves adjustments when the smoothed series appear out of line or generate erratic movements in the implied average annual hours or average hourly earnings.

While the Indigenous Peoples Economic Indicators are available for all reference years from 2012 to 2020, the HRM estimates are only available for the reference years 2012 to 2019. Considering how the labour market had to adjust in 2020, for this first iteration, the time that has elapsed between the previous anchor point, based on labour income estimates from the 2016 Census of population, and the 2020 reference year, was considered too significant. In conjunction with the exceptional nature of 2020 due to the worldwide COVID-19 pandemic, estimates based on socio-demographic characteristics would have been too volatile and would have been subject to major revisions once the data from the most recent census would have been incorporated. Should there be another iteration of the IPEA, the estimates of the HRM will be revised to incorporate the results of the latest census and the 2020 reference year will be added. Nevertheless, in the current publication, the IPEI estimates provide a total number of jobs, by industry, for the reference year 2020 without socio-demographic detail.

Moreover, like all estimates presented in this article, the estimates of the HRM have been subjected to a data rounding confidentiality procedure to prevent the possibility of associating statistical data with any identifiable Indigenous person. All job estimates have been rounded to a multiple of five. While providing protection against disclosure, this procedure does not add significant error to the data. It does, however, result in certain data inconsistencies. Rounding can significantly distort results for variables with small cell counts. Individual data cells containing small numbers may lose their precision. As a result, users must be careful when using any estimates associated to less than 50 jobs since those are more likely to have been significantly impacted by the distortions due to rounding. Furthermore, some cells have been supressed due to data quality issues. Moreover, rounding may cause minor differences in corresponding totals and cell values appearing in different tables. For example, the number of paid workers jobs for the total economy might not match the sum of each individual industry combined. It should also be noted that to avoid further distortions due to rounding, the average annual wages and salaries have been derived before the values of paid workers jobs were rounded. The values for wages and salaries have been adjusted to maintain the average annual wages and salaries while reflecting the rounded values of paid workers jobs.

Indigenous Peoples Economic Indicators Methodology

The Indigenous Peoples Economic Indicators (IPEI) provide an indication of the economic strength of Indigenous peoples in Canada. It depicts the levels of GDP, output, and jobs attributable to Indigenous peoples for each province and territory across a number of industries. Considering that this report was intended to produce exploratory estimates, it is important that the methodology employed be coherent.

Box 1: What is Gross Domestic Product?

Gross domestic product (GDP) refers to the total unduplicated value of the goods and services produced in the economic territory of a country or region during a given period. A valuation expressed in terms of the prices actually paid by the purchaser after all applicable taxes and subsidies.

There are three different ways to measure GDP, all of which, in theory, result in the same value. In practice, a statistical discrepancy is often observed due to differences in data sources.

Production Based GDP: The value of output less intermediate consumption plus any taxes less subsidies on products not already included in the value of output.

Income Based GDP: Compensation of employees plus gross operating surplus (profits of incorporated businesses) plus gross mixed incomes (profits of unincorporated businesses) plus taxes on production, taxes on imports less subsidies on production, and subsidies on imports.

Expenditure Based GDP: The sum of expenditure on final consumption plus gross capital formation plus exports less imports.

Due to the nature of a “peoples” based economic account, the theoretical underpinning of GDP for the IPEI is Income Based GDP. As such, the goal is to measure the following variables and then aggregate them together;

• Compensation of Indigenous Employees
• Operating Surplus (profits) of Indigenous companies
• Mixed income of unincorporated Indigenous-owned businesses

For this first iteration, labour income ratios will be used to derive both compensation of employees as well as mixed income. For operating surplus, preliminary analysis and validation using the Canadian Employer-Employee Dynamics Database linked to the Census of Population and National Household Survey will be used.

For more detail on the three approaches to measuring GDP, please see appendix B

The methodology to derive the IPEI relies heavily upon the processes developed in the Human Resource Module (HRM) to produce estimates of Indigenous GDP, output, and jobs in Canada. The IPEI leverages a combination of the Indigenous labour income ratios from the HRM and ratios developed using preliminary analysis from the Canadian Employer-Employee Dynamics Database linked to the Census of Population and National Household Survey. These ratios are then combined and applied to macroeconomic estimates of total GDP and output. To calculate the total jobs held by Indigenous peoples the process is slightly different. The Indigenous labour income ratio is applied only to self-employed jobs. Together with the number of paid worker jobs already derived from the HRM, this produces the total number of jobs held by Indigenous peoples in Canada.

The IPEI can be summarized into a five step process:

1. Calculate the Indigenous labour income ratios from the HRM
2. Establish ratios of the revenue of Indigenous-owned businesses from the linked CEEDD database
3. Create implicit Indigenous GDP ratios from the above mentioned ratios using estimates of the components of income GDP from Statistics Canada’s Supply-Use Tables (SUTs)
4. Establish macroeconomic totals across time
5. Apply the ratios to these macroeconomic totals to produce Indigenous GDP, output, and jobs.

The first step involves calculating the Indigenous peoples labour income ratios by industry, province and territory, and time. The HRM provides the labour income of Indigenous peoples with that level of detail. The calculation of this ratio can be seen below. Dividing the sum of Indigenous labour income by the total labour income in its associated industry produces the Indigenous peoples labour income ratio for that industry. This step is repeated for each industry and province and territory, resulting in distinct ratios for the Indigenous economies across Canada.

$$Indigenouspeoples labour income rati{o}_{ip}=\frac{IndigenousLabourIncom{e}_{ip}}{AllLabour Incom{e}_{ip}}$$

$\begin{array}{l}Wherei=industry\hfill \\ p=provinceorterritory\hfill \end{array}$

The second step involves a similar calculation using revenue from the linked CEEDD database.

As a third step, Indigenous labour income ratios along with revenue ratios are combined into an implicit GDP ratio using income breakdowns from Statistics Canada’s official Supply-Use tables by geography and industry.

Now that the ratios have been calculated, the fourth step involves preparing macroeconomic estimates of total GDP, output, and self-employed jobs across Canada for the entire economy. This step is necessary in order to determine the portion of which can be accounted for by Indigenous peoples. For output and GDP, developing these datasets involves collating varied macroeconomic sources and projecting them forward in time. The IPEI leverages estimates of gross output and income-based GDP that are already published in the Canadian System of National Accounts. This data is available at the provincial and territorial level, however they do not span all the years that the IPEI estimates. In order to derive estimates for years beyond what is available, various macroeconomic indicators are used to project forwards. For example, in the context of this report, estimates of current dollar GDP were only available up to the year 2018. To produce 2019 and 2020 totals, the IPEI projected forwards based off varied internal macroeconomic indicators. Each industry and variable may require a distinct approach to produce estimates for 2019 and 2020. This also applies to projecting these estimates across different provinces and territories.

For self-employed jobs, the Canadian Productivity Accounts already have estimates for each industry and province and territory as well as for the entire time period included in the IPEI. Therefore, there is no need for projections.

The last step of the IPEI involves applying the implicit Indigenous GDP ratios to the estimates of total GDP and output, and labour income ratios to self-employed jobs by industry and province and territory to account for the proportion that can be attributed to Indigenous peoples. Using GDP as an example, the formula for this process can be seen below:

$$GDP of Indigenous people{s}_{ip}=Implicit Indigenous GDP rati{o}_{ip}XGD{P}_{ip}$$

$\begin{array}{l}Wherei=industry\hfill \\ p=provinceorterritory\hfill \end{array}$

To determine the total number of jobs held by Indigenous peoples, the Indigenous labour income ratio is used. It is also necessary to sum the number of Indigenous self-employed jobs with the number of Indigenous paid jobs calculated in the Human Resource Module.

With this step complete, the IPEI have been estimated. The IPEI first calculated Indigenous income ratios from the HRM, Indigenous led-business revenue ratios from preliminary analysis of the CEEDD database linked to the Census and NHS and then calculated implicit GDP ratios using the SUTs. Estimates of total GDP, output, and jobs for the Canadian economy were then collated and projected forwards. Finally, those ratios were applied to calculate the portion of which can be attributable to Indigenous peoples.

Indigenous Peoples Economic Account – Supplementary Analysis Methodology

The supplementary tables for the Indigenous Peoples Economic Account (IPEA) provides additional detail regarding the Indigenous Peoples Economic Indicators (IPEI). Where the IPEI estimates the GDP, output, and jobs attributable to all Indigenous peoples, the supplementary tables provides those same estimates but with further disaggregation. For the supplementary analysis, two tables have been developed. The first one breaks down Indigenous GDP, output, and jobs in order to distinguish that which is produced by First Nations, Métis, Inuit, multiple Indigenous Identities, or other Indigenous identities. The second table presents estimates of the levels of GDP, output and total jobs that can be attributed to Indigenous peoples living on reserve versus off reserve. Due to data constraints, those tables are only available at the national level.

Methodologically, the supplementary analysis builds on the work already done for the IPEI. It leverages the distribution of Indigenous identity according to the 2016 Census of Population and applies it to estimates of the IPEI. The same applies for the proportion of Indigenous peoples living on or off reserve. Considering the additional distributions are only available from the census, only estimates for 2015 can be estimated. As new data sources are developed and current ones enhanced, it is possible that if future iterations of the IPEA were to be pursued, the necessary information would be available to provide a break down by Indigenous groups for the entire IPEI time series. Such a possibility should be reviewed when further work on this topic is conducted.

The Indigenous identity table is produced by taking the same implicit Indigenous ratio by industry and geography previously calculated in the IPEI for 2015 and multiplying it by the distribution of Indigenous peoples by identity reported in the 2016 Census. In the 2016 Census, an individual who identified as an Indigenous person or as a Status Indian or a member of a First Nation or Indian Band provided the details necessary to associate them with the following groups:

• First Nations
• Métis
• Inuit
• Other Indigenous identities^Note 
• Multiple Indigenous identities^Note 

The distribution of labour income amongst these Indigenous groups determines how we redistribute the GDP, output, and jobs attributable to Indigenous peoples as a whole. For example: if there was $1 billion of GDP produced in the construction industry by Indigenous peoples as a whole, but the Census indicates that 75% of the income was accrued by people identifying as First Nations, then 75% of the $1 billion in GDP would be taken. This would indicate that First Nations peoples contributed $750 million to the GDP of the construction industry in 2015. This step would be repeated for the other Indigenous identities for each industry.

The on reserve versus off reserve table follows a similar methodology. It takes the same Indigenous labour income ratio from the IPEI but instead of multiplying it by the distribution of labour income earned by the various Indigenous groups, it multiplies it by the distribution of labour income earned by Indigenous peoples living on versus off reserve. For example, if in 2015, Indigenous peoples earned $2 billion in labour income in Canada in the utilities industry, of which $1 billion was earned by those living on reserve, then 50% of the GDP attributed to Indigenous peoples could be accounted for by Indigenous peoples on reserve.

Current measurement challenges and future improvements

While the methodology used to derive the estimates presented in this article may appear simple, it is subject to a range of challenges. Some challenges are inherent to the data sources chosen. Others are the result of the methodology or the definitions used. All those challenges determine the limitation of the estimates presented in the article. In other words, it is important to understand the underlying assumptions and challenges in order to properly use the estimates of this economic account.

Through the Indigenous Peoples Economic Account, estimates of GDP, output, jobs, and hours worked and wages and salaries are produced. As such, all values presented are estimations of what the actual value is. Different definitions, data sources or a different methodology would likely result in different estimates.

The current methodology was preferred to others mainly due to data availability. It uses the most current and complete data available from the census, NHS and LFS. The current methodology also makes use of the most complete macroeconomic measures produced in the CSNA along with preliminary estimates from the CEEDD regarding the profit generated by Indigenous-owned businesses. Statistics Canada acknowledges that other approaches^Note  might have resulted in different estimates. For example, when estimating the surplus component of GDP, the current approach only considers businesses that are majority owned (i.e. 50% +1) by people identifying as Indigenous. Defining Indigenous-owned businesses differently, such as any businesses where at least one owner identified as Indigenous would have led to different results. However, given the current availability of data, this approach was considered the most appropriate. As new data becomes available, the choice of methodology could be altered or the methodology could be refined.

The census and NHS were central to the development of all the estimates included in the IPEA. In their long form version, they include a wealth of information about Canadians with labour being a main topic. Respondents were asked to provide information about their identity, job status, employment income, employer, etc. One of the key aspects of the IPEA, and the CSNA in general, is that it measures the economic activity where it took place. For example, when the CPA provides a count of paid worker jobs, the geography is based on the location of the work not the residence of the worker. When estimates are derived at the provincial and territorial level, it is rarely a major issue. However, for some industries, such as mining, where workers often reside in a province but work in a different one, this distinction is essential. Therefore, to get the most precise estimates in the IPEA, when using census and NHS, the geography was based on the province of work, which is available through the long form questionnaire. However, for some observations this information was not available. In such cases, the province of residence was used as a proxy for the province of work. The impact of this assumption on the final values of the economic indicators and HRM estimates is limited.

The self-identification of Indigenous peoples within the NHS and census is of particular importance to the IPEA and how its estimates are produced. An individual must identify as First Nations, Métis, Inuit or have Registered or Treaty Indian status and/or Membership in a First Nation or Indian band in these surveys in order to be in the scope of the IPEA. As such, any response mobility from NHS to census can impact the portions of the economy that are contributed to by Indigenous peoples. Response mobility can be defined as the same respondent reporting a different identity from one year to the next. For instance, if in the Maritime Provinces, less individuals were identifying themselves as Indigenous in the NHS in 2011 than in the 2016 census of population, it could inflate the growth of the economic indicators within this time series. Further work would need to be undergone in order to determine the magnitude of this effect.

The census and NHS not only collect information on a wide variety of topics; the information they collect is also very reliable. The values of income provided in the 2016 Census of population are very precise since they are taken directly from administrative files provided by the Canadian Revenue Agency. As for the 2011 NHS, respondents could opt for Statistics Canada to use their reported income taxes.^Note  While this provides a great level of precision, it also leads to desynchronization between the various estimates collected. The labour income collected by census or NHS is for the year prior. For example, in the 2016 Census of the population, respondents are asked about the value of the labour income in 2015. However, the other data collected are for the reference week or for the year of the census, 2016. For example, respondents are asked about their occupation during the reference week of 2016. For many socio-demographic variables, this has little to no impact, such as age. For other socio-demographic variables, such as the industry in which one works or occupation, this desynchronization could create a timing discrepancy when deriving estimates, and could be a potential source of error. Nevertheless, given the average job tenure in Canada,^Note  it is unlikely to have a significant impact on the results presented in this article. Therefore, in the current iteration, no adjustments were made to correct for this desynchronization in the estimates.

As discussed earlier, the methodology used to derive estimates of Indigenous GDP, output and jobs rely on ratios partially based on labour income and revenue of the Indigenous population over the total population. While both the numerator and the denominator are measured using the same variables from the same data sources and as such are technically subject to the same possible mismeasurements, those ratios are not perfect measures of all economic activities. Therefore, once applied to macroeconomic estimates such as GDP which also measure non-market activities, bias could be introduced. In other words, the current methodology relies on income, which means that any non-market economic activities is not included when ratios are derived. Therefore, if non-market transactions, such as bartering or harvesting activities are more commonly used by Indigenous peoples than in the total population, the numerators of the ratios used are likely underestimating the economic activity of the Indigenous population. In fact, there is evidence a large proportion of the Indigenous population engage in hunting, fishing or trapping activities,^Note  although the time spent and scale of these activities will determine its impact. Similarly, while the labour of volunteers is not included in GDP measures, the economic activities generated by volunteer workers is included. For example, if the volunteer of a non-profit organisation sells a calendar his labour is not included but the sale of the calendar is measured in the revenue of the non-profit organisation and as such, is included in GDP. Therefore, if there is more economic activities resulting from non-paid labour work in Indigenous communities than in the general population, the ratios derived based on paid labour income will be underestimating the economic activities of Indigenous peoples. The extent of those potential bias is currently unknown. Additional data on volunteering and non-market transactions would be needed to assess the impact of those potential biases.

In addition to limitations specific to this economic account, the Indigenous Peoples Economic Account will be subject to similar limitations as the macroeconomics estimates it is based on. This means that the IPEA estimates are limited by how the various economic transactions are articulated within the CSNA.

For example, the System of National Accounts (SNA) acknowledges that the production of goods for our own consumption should be included. However, it is internationally agreed that production for self-consumption can, in some instances, be relatively insignificant compared to overall production and as such, it would be more burdensome to measure this own-account production than it would be to include them in the estimates of the overall economy. Therefore, those activities are not measured. For example, the SNA does not measure the production of tomatoes by individuals in their backyard for own consumption. Since those tomatoes are not grown for resale but mainly for private consumption of the gardener’s household, it is accepted that this activity is not measured in the economic estimates produced by the CSNA. There is also no information about such activity that is available to produce economic estimates. However, should the gardener increase his production and start selling his tomatoes, then his production of tomatoes would be included in the economic measures. The decision of whether or not to measure certain activities is made at the national level and not at the community level. In other words, while one activity would be important and significant for one region or community, it is possible that at the national level, this activity could have an insignificant impact on the overall economic estimates. That being said, what is true of the economy as a whole, might not be true of all segments of the population. This is particularly relevant in the scope of the IPEA, considering Indigenous populations have pursued activities such as harvesting and hand crafting goods for millennia.

Finally, the macroeconomic estimates presented in this paper are not and should not be considered measures of wellbeing for Indigenous peoples across the country. Macroeconomic measures, such as GDP, are not designed to measure the wellbeing of the population. GDP is a monetary measure of all goods and services produced, or all the income generated in the economy during a given year. ​Similarly, total jobs and output are economic indicators. To get a better picture of wellbeing other key measures would be needed. Those key measures, such as health, education or sustainability are not measured by GDP or output. Nevertheless, these economic indicators are important. They provide information about the size of the economy. Moreover, the trends observed help understand how an economy is performing over time and in comparison to other sectors. In addition, because the economic indicators presented in this paper are consistent with the CSNA, they are comparable with economic indicators for the total economy. As incomplete or imperfect as they may be, the macroeconomic estimates presented in this article are a first step in understanding the economic reality of Indigenous peoples in Canada and their participation in the overall economy.

Analysis of the preliminary results

It should be noted that, for the analysis section, unless specified otherwise, all references to GDP, output or jobs concern the portion that is attributable to Indigenous peoples measured using their share of labour income and the share of gross operating surplus attributable to Indigenous-owned businesses. Those economic indicators are also referred to as Indigenous GDP, Indigenous output or Indigenous jobs. These short forms were used purely to lighten the text as much as possible. The goal of this report was to present preliminary economic estimates pertaining to Indigenous peoples, therefore, no comparisons were made between Indigenous peoples and non-Indigenous people, nor with the whole economy.

Moreover, all definitions and terminology used in reference to the demographic characteristics are based on the concepts used in the 2016 Census. All references to industries are those based off of the North American Industry Classification System (NAICS). The details regarding sex, education level, occupation, and age group are limited to the reporting structure of the census. As such, some distinctions, such as the difference between gender and sex, cannot be done. In the future, new data may allow for this distinction, and may become more inclusive with non-binary responses. When providing demographic estimates regarding sex, this reports remains consistent with the Census and NHS, referring to Indigenous males or females.

The following analyses are only examples of what data users may be able to glean from these estimates. The intent of this section was only to provide brief highlights of the estimates, however, there may be other significant results that can be extracted from the estimates.

Preliminary national results

In 2020, in Canada, Gross Domestic Product (GDP) attributable to Indigenous peoples was $48.9 billion. Every year prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, Indigenous GDP experienced growth, from $41.7 billion in 2012 to $54.1 billion in 2019. In 2020, the pandemic caused a 9.5% decline in GDP values. Output attributable to Indigenous peoples and total jobs held by Indigenous peoples experienced a similar trend; a continuous growth up to 2019 and a decline of about 9% in 2020. Nevertheless, from 2012 to 2020, all three indicators showed growth.

In 2012, the value of Indigenous output was estimated at $81.9 billion and by 2020, the value had grown to $97.0 billion, representing a growth of 18.5%. As for jobs, the growth between 2012 and 2020 was not as pronounced. The number of jobs held by Indigenous peoples grew by 10.3% from 707,935 in 2012 to 781,145 in 2020.

A closer look at GDP by industry shows that growth between 2012 and 2019 was widespread, occurring in almost all industries. Some industries such as Health care and social assistance, Accommodation and food services, and Construction experienced especially large growth during this period. Accommodation and food services was also the industry that experienced the largest decline in 2020, where Indigenous GDP declined by over 28%, from $1.9 billion in 2019 to $1.3 billion in 2020. Transportation and warehousing (-21.2%) and Health care and social assistance (-14.3%) also experienced large decreases in their Indigenous GDP values. In 2020, not a single industry saw the Indigenous GDP value increase, with Real estate and rental and leasing (-1.8%) showing the smallest decline. This industry is also one of the major contributors to the total Indigenous GDP value, not only in 2020 but throughout the series. Along with Construction, Health care and social assistance, and Public administration, they made up more than half of the total Indigenous GDP.

Output by industry also followed similar trends to those of GDP. All industries experienced growth in Indigenous output from 2012 to 2019, with the exception of Management of companies and enterprises. Some industries, mainly Accommodation and food services, Health care and social assistance, and Administration and support, waste management and remediation services experienced large growth during this period. In 2020, the consistent growth experienced by most industries came to a stop. For all industries, the output value declined, although there was only slight decreases in Real estate and rental and leasing (-0.2%) and Public administration (-0.9%). Similarly to GDP, Accommodation and food services (-24.1%) and Transportation and warehousing (-19.3%) were amongst the industries that saw their output values decrease the most in 2020. Output in Health care and social assistance (-14.8%), and Construction (-10.5%) also experienced a significant decline.

The total number of jobs held by Indigenous peoples followed a relatively consistent pattern to that of GDP and output. Overall, from 2012 to 2020 the number of jobs grew. During that period, that number grew every year with the exception of 2020 where a 10.6% decrease was observed. Similar to GDP and output, the largest decrease in 2020 was observed in the Accommodation and food services industry (-21.1%). While all industries declined in 2020, the Public administration industry remained relatively stable with 124,865 jobs, a 4.0% decline from 2019. When this industry is combined with Health care and social assistance, Retail trade, and Construction, they account for roughly half of the jobs held by Indigenous peoples in Canada.

While the economic indicators provide an estimate for the total number of jobs held by Indigenous peoples, the Human Resource Module (HRM) provides a more detailed breakdown of paid worker jobs by various characteristics. No such details are available for self-employed jobs. Nevertheless, the HRM provides a reliable picture of the Indigenous workforce since about 93% of the jobs held by Indigenous peoples are paid worker jobs.

Between 2012 and 2019, in Canada, employee jobs were held roughly equally between males and females. The HRM also provides information by industry. Therefore, it is possible to notice that, between 2012 and 2019, the number of jobs held by males in the Accommodation and food services industry grew faster than the number of paid worker jobs held by females. Nonetheless, about two thirds of the employee jobs in that industry were held by females. Moreover, jobs in the Accommodation and food services industry were split roughly equally between part-time and full-time. This contrasts with all other industries where a larger proportion of employee jobs were full-time. For example, in the Utilities industry almost all paid workers jobs were full-time jobs. Between 2012 and 2019, the proportion of full time employee jobs held by Indigenous peoples in that industry was around 97%. This distribution is also apparent at the total economy level, where from 2012 to 2019, almost four fifths of all employee jobs held by Indigenous peoples were full-time jobs.

Between 2012 and 2019, about 36% of the paid workers jobs held by Indigenous peoples were held by someone aged 45 or older, representing the largest age group. This was followed by those aged 25 to 34 and 15 to 24. Those aged 35 to 44 represented the smallest group. For most industries, the proportion of paid workers aged 45 years or older is similar or larger than the proportion of the other age groups. Among the main exceptions were Retail trade and Accommodation and food services. In those two industries, between 2012 and 2019, the largest group was those between the age of 15 and 24 years old. During this period, in the Retail trade industry, about 3 out of 5 paid workers jobs were held by someone aged between 15 and 34 years old while in the Accommodation and food services industry, it reached nearly 3 out of 4.

In Canada, between 2012 and 2019, the number of paid workers jobs held by an Indigenous individual with a high school diploma or less grew from 341,235 to 423,105. They represented slightly more than half the jobs held by Indigenous peoples. During that same period, the number of paid workers jobs held by an Indigenous individual with a university degree or higher grew from 70,050 to 92,315. The distribution of Indigenous paid workers by education level remained stable during the period. Indigenous peoples with a university degree or higher held jobs mainly in the Educational services, Public administration and Health care and social assistance industries. Roughly two-thirds of the jobs held by Indigenous peoples with a university degree were in those three industries.

Since many Indigenous individuals hold a paid worker job in service-providing industries such as Retail trade, it is not surprising to find out that amongst the most common occupations are Service representatives and other customer and personal services occupations and Sales support occupations. The Service support and other service occupations and Industrial, electrical and construction trades occupations were also amongst the most common. Between 2012 and 2019, occupations related to health, mainly Assisting occupations in support of health services and Technical occupations in health, experienced large growth. For the Technical occupations in health, in 2012, the number of paid workers jobs held by an Indigenous person was 9,350 and by 2019, this number had risen to 14,665. A similar growth can be seen in the Assisting occupations in support of health services. The number of paid workers jobs held by an Indigenous person was 14,755 in 2012 and by 2019, this number reached a high of 22,680.

Overall, at the national level, the majority of jobs held by Indigenous paid workers were in the services and sales industries. Moreover, the main economic indicators were all showing constant growth prior to the pandemic.

Preliminary results for the provinces and territories

Prior to the impact of COVID-19 in 2020, every province and territory experienced significant GDP growth. However, estimates indicate declines in 2020 for each province and territory. The most significant decreases could be seen in the Yukon (-16.1%), Manitoba (-15.9%) and Nunavut (-15.7%). The smallest declines were found in Prince Edward Island (-4.2%) and Ontario (-4.8%). In terms of share, combining Ontario, Alberta and British Columbia accounted for nearly 60% of the total Indigenous GDP in Canada. The proportion of most provinces and territories in the national total remained relatively constant between 2012 and 2020.

Similarly to the Indigenous GDP, every province and territory experienced significant growth in output between 2012 and 2019. These growths ranged from 23.2% in Nova Scotia to 75.6% in Nunavut. The majority of these regions experienced continuous growth year to year, however estimates indicate that each province and territory declined in 2020. The largest declines in 2020 in Indigenous output were in Yukon (-16.9%), Manitoba (-14.3%) and Nunavut (-14.2%). Similarly to GDP, three provinces, Ontario, Alberta and British Columbia accounted for nearly 60% of all Indigenous output in the country. Between 2012 and 2019, the contribution to the total Indigenous output of each province and territory remained stable.

The trend demonstrated by output and GDP could also be seen in jobs, with nearly 60% of jobs held by Indigenous peoples were in Ontario, Alberta, and British Columbia. Between 2012 and 2020, the number of jobs held by Indigenous peoples grew in all provinces and territories. The fastest growths were observed in Prince Edward Island, Newfoundland and Labrador, and Ontario. In 2020, the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic, all provinces and territories saw a decline in the number of jobs held by Indigenous individuals.

Generally, all provinces and territories were impacted by the pandemic in 2020. Prior to that year, from 2012 to 2019, the three economic indicators, namely GDP, output and total number of jobs, had grown for all provinces and territories. While some provinces or territories may have grown faster than others, the share of each province and territory in the total economy remained relatively stable over time.

Newfoundland and Labrador

In 2020, GDP attributable to Indigenous peoples declined -7.3%. However, since 2012, Indigenous GDP demonstrated significant increases, growing from $1.3 billion to $1.6 billion. The Construction industry contributed the most to GDP during this time period, reaching $209.7 million by 2020. Health care and social assistance ($262.7 million), Real estate and rental and leasing ($221.8 million), Public administration ($197.8 million), and Educational Services ($107.3 million) industries continued to play an important role in 2020. Similar results could be seen from 2012 to 2020 in output and total jobs, which grew 9.3% and 21.3% respectively.

Paid worker jobs held by Indigenous peoples in Newfoundland and Labrador have seen gradual changes to their education levels since 2012. Although paid worker jobs have increased in all education categories, those with a university degree have seen the most significant growth, increasing 62.7% from 2012 levels to reach 3,595 jobs in 2019. This trend was particularly apparent in Educational services where the share of jobs held by individuals with a university degree or higher rose from 56.1% to 61.6% and Health care and social assistance industries where the share grew from 20.0% to 28.1%.

Prince Edward Island

From 2012 to 2020, Prince Edward Island has seen large increases to Indigenous GDP (+$21.3 million) and output (+$44.5 million), representing growth of 50.0% and 57.7% respectively. Jobs held by Indigenous peoples did not quite see the same surge, only growing 25.5% to 1,180 by 2020. However beginning in 2017 there has been modest contractions in jobs and GDP. The pandemic in 2020 has only exacerbated the decline, with GDP (-4.2%) and jobs (-8.5%) falling from 2019 to 2020. Much of these declines were contributed to by reductions in Accommodation and food services as well as Agriculture, forestry, fishing and hunting industries. Some of these declines were tempered by growth in Public administration during the same time period.

Breaking down the labour statistics of paid worker jobs in Prince Edward Island by work activity from 2012 to 2019 depicts a relatively stable makeup, albeit with a growing number of jobs. In 2012, there were 880 paid worker jobs held by Indigenous peoples. Full-time workers accounted for 72.7% of all paid worker jobs, 85.7% of hours worked, and 90.0% of wages and salaries. These shares have remained relatively stable across time, despite increases in all indicators. Increases in full-time jobs (+41.4%), the corresponding hours worked (+43.8%), and wages and salaries (+87.2%) from 2012 to 2019 has resulted in the average annual wages and salaries increasing to nearly $47,500.

Nova Scotia

Nova Scotia has seen large growth in Indigenous GDP (+18.4%), output (+14.6%) and jobs (+12.1%) from 2012 to 2020 despite significant declines in 2020. During this time period, some industries have outperformed others. In 2012, the Accommodation and food services industry had a GDP of $27.3 million, accounting for 2.5% of the total GDP attributable to Indigenous peoples. However, in 2019 this had increased to $56.5 million, nearly doubling the share to 4.0%. The Construction industry showed the opposite trend, with a share of 7.1% in 2012 declining to 6.2% in 2019, although still growing overall by 12.7%. Pandemic-related challenges had differing impacts to these industries, dropping Accommodation and food services by 52.9% in 2020, while Construction showed a more modest 7.7% decline.

While paid jobs in the Accommodation and food services industry saw huge growth between 2012 and 2019, the demographics of the Indigenous peoples holding those jobs also saw significant change. In 2012, there were 655 paid jobs that could be accounted for by those aged 15 to 24 years old, representing 53.0% of all jobs. By 2019, this share had grown to 59.0%, with jobs attributable to this younger workforce growing by 119.8% in the same time period. This trend is also present at the total economy level, with the share of paid worker jobs held by Indigenous peoples aged 15 to 24 years old growing from 20.2% in 2012 to 22.4% in 2019.

New Brunswick

GDP attributable to Indigenous peoples demonstrated considerable growth from 2012 to 2020, rising 22.2% from $571.4 million to $698.2 million. A similar trend can be seen in output and jobs, resulting in $1.5 billion in output, and 12,020 jobs in 2020. The year 2020 saw declines in GDP (-8.4%), output (-6.6%), and jobs (-11.8%) relative to 2019, however, this trend was not the case for every industry. In 2020, the Professional, scientific and technical services industry exhibited growth across GDP (+4.8%) and output (+6.0%), while jobs did not change. There were no industries displaying growth in jobs, although a number of industries remained stable including Information and cultural, and Wholesale trade industries.

In New Brunswick, the proportion of paid jobs between the sexes has remained stable from 2012 to 2019. In 2012, 51.3% of jobs were associated with females, and that saw little change in 2019 (50.9%). Despite there being slightly more jobs attributable to this sex, the gap between average annual wages and salaries only increased. In 2012, the average was $30,100 compared to $40,300 for males. In 2019, that gap has widened from $31,500 for females and $44,200 for males. This trend is particularly evident in Public administration, where males made 56.5% of the wages and salaries in 2019 despite representing less than half of paid worker jobs.

Quebec

Economic indicators in Quebec displayed sizable growth in GDP (+20.1%), output (+20.1%), and jobs (+11.2%) from 2012 to 2020. During that time period, Construction, Real estate and rental and leasing, Health care and social assistance, and Public administration were the largest contributors to Indigenous GDP. Together, they accounted for approximately half of the GDP attributable to Indigenous peoples over this time frame. Although a number of industries were impacted by the pandemic beginning in 2020, none were harder hit than Accommodation and food services. The industry’s GDP and output decline by nearly a third to $96.8 million and $210.5 million respectively, while jobs contracted 33.2% to 3,960.

The education levels of Indigenous peoples with paid jobs have been changing in Quebec. The proportion of individuals with a high school diploma or less has been steadily declining from 44.4% in 2012 to 41.5% in 2019. Those with a college diploma or university degree or higher have risen from 31.7% to 34.0% in the same time period. This is particularly true in the Arts, entertainment and recreation industry where jobs held by Indigenous peoples with a college diploma or university degree increased from 27.0% to 34.8%.

Ontario

Ontario demonstrated considerable increases in all three economic indicators from 2012 to 2020. During this time period, GDP attributable to Indigenous peoples rose 19.3% from $9.3 billion to $11.1 billion. Output rose 23.3% to $22.8 billion and jobs rose 14.4% to 192,435 jobs. Growth occurred in almost all industries during this time, highlighted by the Construction industry which grew over 50% by 2020 to $1.5 billion. Although most industries experienced a decline in 2020, there were a number of industries that saw increases in their GDP. In the same year, Real estate and rental and leasing (+4.7%), and Construction (+2.0%) had the largest increases to Indigenous GDP.

Paid jobs in Ontario are increasingly being held by younger Indigenous peoples, despite each age group seeing considerable growth. In 2012, 42.4% could be accounted for by those aged 15 to 34. In 2019, that reached 44.0%. This trend is also apparent in the share of wages and salaries, going from 26.8% to 28.7%. Older age groups have continued to have significantly higher annual wages and salaries in 2019, with those aged 15 to 34 making an average $28,300 annually compared to $55,300 for those aged 35 and older.

Manitoba

Manitoba had significant economic growth during the time period of this analysis; however, the pandemic had a particularly large impact in 2020, offsetting much of the previous increases. From 2012 to 2019, GDP (+31.5%), output (+27.3%), and jobs (+20.3%) experienced considerable expansion. Utilities, Construction, and Retail trade industries were demonstrating huge increases before being heavily impacted in 2020. Consequently, GDP fell 15.9% in 2020, closely matched by similar declines in output and jobs. In fact, no industries experienced growth in Indigenous GDP in 2020, where Manufacturing (-1.7%) proved to be the most economically resistant to COVID-19 impacts.

Before the pandemic started in 2020, the sociodemographic characteristics of the Indigenous peoples working paid jobs were relatively stable, while still experiencing growth overall. The share between the sexes remained close to an even distribution, approximately 78% of jobs were considered full time, and around 81% of jobs were held by those with a college or high school diplomas or less. During this same time, the distribution of age groups also remained relatively stable, with jobs held by those aged 15 to 24, 25 to 34, and 35 to 44 years old all each hovering around a 21% share. That is not to say that all industries experienced little change. For instance, the Agriculture, forestry, fishing and hunting industry saw a shift towards a more even distribution between the sexes. In 2012, 19.3% of jobs were held by females, but grew to 26.8% by 2019.

Saskatchewan

The GDP attributable to Indigenous peoples experienced significant growth between 2012 and 2020. GDP rising 16.6% to $4.3 billion was facilitated by a smaller overall impact (-6.2%) than most provinces from the pandemic in 2020. Much of this smaller decline was buffered by increases in the Real estate and rental and leasing industry (+5.4%) and Health care and social assistance industry (+5.1%). A similar trend occurred for output and jobs. There was significant increases from 2012 to 2019, but jobs differed from output and GDP in that there were no jobs growth in any industry in 2020.

Saskatchewan experienced relatively stable demographic distributions when comparing labour statistics between the sexes. From 2012 to 2019, around 49% of paid worker jobs could be attributed to males. They continued to hold a slight majority in terms of hours worked, accounting for roughly 53%. However, the share of wages were a little more disparate, with males accounting for around 56%. As a result, males had a significantly higher annual average wages and salaries. In 2019, males had an annual average $48,700 compared to $36,400 for females.

Alberta

In general, the Indigenous peoples economic indicators have closely followed the Mining, quarrying, and oil and gas extraction industry and the Construction industry. At their lowest point in 2016, these industries accounted for 29.2% of the GDP attributable to Indigenous peoples. By 2019, the Indigenous GDP attributable to these industries reached $3.4 billion, while output and jobs approached $7.0 billion and jobs 32,625 respectively. With few exceptions beyond 2020; overall GDP, output, and jobs were closely aligned with year over year changes in these industries. The Mining, quarrying, and oil and gas extraction industry proved relatively resilient in 2020, with GDP only edging down 0.5%. Combined with small increases to Utilities, Manufacturing, and Educational services industries, overall GDP declines of 11.7% in 2020 were partially offset. Similar declines in 2020 could be seen in output and jobs.

An analysis of the sociodemographic details of the Mining, quarrying, and oil and gas extraction industry depicts differences when compared to all industries as a whole. For instance, in these industries roughly 93% of paid worker jobs were full time, while the Indigenous economy within Alberta has remained around 80%. They also differ in the distribution of paid jobs attributable to the sexes. At the total Indigenous economy level, jobs have been split relatively equally between the sexes. For Mining, quarrying, and oil and gas extraction industry, it has been dominated by males, where almost 80% of paid worker jobs could be attributable to them

British Columbia

British Columbia was among the provinces the most impacted by the pandemic. In 2020, the GDP attributable to Indigenous peoples fell 12.0%, output decreased 9.6%, and jobs declined 11.5%. Much of the Indigenous economy was driven by Construction, Real estate and renting and leasing, and Public administration. Together, they made up at least 38.7% of total output and GDP from 2012 to 2020. These three industry groupings have made up around 24.7% of jobs in that same period, largely due to the magnitude of jobs in the Retail trade and Accommodation and food services industries impacting those shares.

Examining the labour statistics of paid jobs held by Indigenous peoples depicts a growing work force, although not all at the same pace. From 2012 to 2019, the number of paid worker jobs has increased 29.3% to 139,790. However, hours worked increased 33.8% and wages and salaries increased 47.3%. As a result, average annual wages and salaries increased by $5,300 dollars to reach $43,300 per year in 2019.

Yukon

Indigenous GDP (-16.1%), output (-16.9%), and jobs (-18.8%) in the Yukon saw significant declines from 2019 to 2020. This was the largest decline in GDP across Canada. Much of the drop can be attributed to the Construction industry, where GDP and output halved to $16.8 million and $37.7 million respectively. Public administration also saw considerable declines. However, not all industries were contracted in 2020. The Mining, quarrying, and oil and gas extraction industry (+23.1%) and the Information and cultural industries (+13.5%) rose to $27.3 million and $7.5 million respectively.

The demographic characteristics of paid jobs attributable to Indigenous peoples in the Yukon denoted a slightly aging workforce while remaining predominantly skewed towards females. From 2012 to 2019, paid workers aged 45 or older have gone from representing 46.1% to 50.5% of the Indigenous workforce. This is particularly evident in Public administration, where the number of paid worker jobs rose from 1,065 in 2012 to 1,735 in 2019. While the share of paid worker jobs attributable to females remained relatively stable at 62% during this time period, this was not true for all industries. In Public administration the share grew from 60.0% in 2012 to 68.1% in 2019.

Northwest Territories

From 2012 to 2019 there was a period of economic growth for Indigenous peoples in the Northwest Territories. This was evidenced by GDP growing 15.7% to $900.8 million, along with output (+26.1%) and jobs (+13.5%) growing at similar rates. During this time period, the Mining, quarrying, and oil and gas extraction industry, Construction industry, and Public administration industry were dominant, representing nearly half of the total Indigenous GDP by 2019. In 2020, that proportion rose further to 51.3%, mainly due to the fact that Mining, quarrying, and oil and gas extraction (-10.5%) contracted less than most industries while Construction and Public Administration grew by 8.4% and 6.9%, respectively. However at the total economy level, Indigenous GDP still declined by 5.8% in 2020.

Sociodemographic details for Indigenous paid workers have been relatively stable in the Northwest Territories between 2012 and 2019. Around 51% of jobs can be accounted for by females, and 81% of jobs were considered full time. There were some modest changes in the shares of jobs by age group and education level. For instance, those aged 15 to 34 went from representing 39.0% to 37.0% of paid jobs, while those aged 35 years or over saw their share grow from 61.0% to 63.0%. In terms of education levels, those with a high school diploma or less saw their share of the jobs decline from 60.5% to 57.6% due to higher growth rates in other education levels.

Nunavut

From 2012 to 2020, Nunavut experienced considerable overall growth in GDP, output, and jobs. Indigenous GDP grew 18.4% to $816.0 million, output rose 50.8% to $2.0 billion and jobs increased by 11.5% to 9,535 jobs. In fact, the growth was even more evident pre-pandemic as declines in GDP (-15.7%), output (-14.2%), and jobs (-16.1%) in 2020 were significant. The decreases were particularly apparent in Construction, Educational services, and Public administration, which together dropped 22.0% in 2020 in terms of GDP, a reduction of over $110 million. However, not every industry experienced declines in 2020. For instance, Professional, scientific and technical services increased by 11.8% to $12.2 million.

There are indications that the Indigenous peoples in the workforce are achieving a higher level of education over time. In 2012, 70.4% of jobs were held by those with a high school diploma or less, while those with a college diploma, a trade certificate, or a university degree or higher represented 16.7%, 8.9%, and 4.0% of the share respectively. By 2019, that distribution had changed, where those with a high school diploma or less declined to 66.9% and those with a college diploma (18.0%), a trade certificate (9.7%), or a university degree or higher (5.4%) represented progressively larger shares.

Preliminary results of the supplementary analysis tables

To complement the estimates available at the national level, a supplementary table was developed to provide the breakdown of the estimates of the IPEI based on the location of residence; on versus off reserve. Essentially, this table depicts the total GDP, output, and jobs attributable to all Indigenous peoples living on reserve regardless of their specific Indigenous identity group compared to all Indigenous peoples living off reserve. Reserves do not include Inuit Nunangat or reserves that were not enumerated in the 2011 NHS and 2016 Census. To see how reserves were defined, please see appendix C. It is important to remember that this table is only available for 2015 due to the information available in the 2016 Census.

When interpreting the data, it is also important to consider the wider economic, geographic, cultural, and historical context regarding these estimates. Indigenous populations are not evenly distributed on and off reserve, nor did they have equal access to support when pursuing economic activities. This may have impacted the results of the supplementary analysis.

The GDP attributable to Indigenous peoples living on reserve was $6.5 billion, which represented 13.5% of the total Indigenous GDP. About half of the Indigenous GDP generated by people living on reserve is attributable to two industries; Public administration and Health care and social assistance. This contrasts with the GDP attributable to Indigenous peoples living off reserve where those two industries account for about one-fifth of the total GDP.

The value of output generated by Indigenous peoples living off reserve was $79.5 billion, representing 86.2% of the total value of output generated by all Indigenous peoples. The industries that contributed the most were Construction, Public administration and Manufacturing. As for the value of output generated by people living on reserve, the main contributors were Public Administration, Construction and Health care and social assistance.

Nearly one in five jobs held by an Indigenous individual was occupied by someone living on reserve. Individuals living on reserve held jobs mostly in Public administration, Health care and social assistance and Construction industries. Indigenous peoples living off reserve held jobs primarily in Health care and social assistance Retail trade, Construction, and Public Administration.

Another table was developed to supplement the information available at the Canada level. This table provides a breakdown of the main indicators according to the Indigenous group with which an individual identifies. Again, the greater historical, geographical, cultural, and economic context of each unique Indigenous identity must be kept in mind when interpreting these estimates. Each group had their own distinct histories that may impact the results of these supplementary estimates to a greater or lesser extent.

In 2015, the GDP attributable to individuals identifying as First Nations was $24.0 billion. As for those identifying as Métis, they generated a GDP of $21.0 billion. People identifying as Inuit were responsible for $1.7 billion of GDP. The remaining $1.3 billion of GDP attributable to Indigenous peoples was generated by people identifying with multiple groups and people identifying to other Indigenous identity groups (see appendix C).

The share of each identity group for output are similar to the share of GDP. Roughly 50.1% of the Indigenous output is attributable to people identifying as First Nations. Those identifying as Métis produced 43.5% of the total Indigenous output while those who identified as Inuit were responsible for 3.7%. Together, those identifying to more than one group or identifying to other groups were responsible for 2.6% of the total Indigenous output.

In Canada, in 2015, Indigenous peoples held a total of 793,615 jobs. Of this number, 55.0% were occupied by people identifying as First Nations, 39.4% as Métis and 3.0% as Inuit. About 1.2% of the jobs where held by people identifying to more than one Indigenous group and 1.4% were occupied by people identifying to other Indigenous groups.

From an industry perspective, differences were observed. For example, 22.3% of individuals identifying as First Nations held a job in the Public administration industry. This proportion was 19.4% for Inuit and 7.9% for Métis. In some other industries, such as Health care and social assistances, the differences were less pronounced. About 15.9% of jobs held by Inuit were in that industry. For individuals identifying as First Nations, Métis or identifying to more than one Indigenous group, this industry accounted for roughly 12.0% of the jobs they held.

Conclusion

In conclusion, it is possible to produce estimates for GDP, output and jobs pertaining to Indigenous peoples. The use of ratios are necessary and the data sources to produce such ratios are limited but do offer great quality estimates. Areas of challenge and potential improvements to the current methodology have been identified. Future iterations should also make use of all new or improved data sources. Furthermore, it is possible to develop estimates at the provincial and territorial level as well as by industry. It is not possible to provide further breakdown, such as GDP attributable to the various Indigenous groups, for all reference years nor for all geographies due to data constraints at this time. Nevertheless, a snapshot at the national level can be produced. Moreover, the early results obtained looked promising. They rely heavily on the HRM methodology that has been used by many satellite accounts over the years and on preliminary data from the CEEDD databased linked with the NHS and Census of population.

Based on the early results obtained, it is possible to see that from 2012 to 2020, all measured economic indicators showed a growing Indigenous economy. At the national level, Indigenous GDP and output as well as jobs held by Indigenous peoples posted positive growth every year since 2012. The only exception was in 2020, mainly because of the worldwide COVID-19 pandemic. All provinces and territories also saw their main economic indicators increase during the 2012 to 2020 period.

Appendix A: Data tables

Table 1 Indigenous Peoples Economic Indicators

Table 1.1 Indigenous Peoples Economic Indicators, Output by industry

Table 1.2 Indigenous Peoples Economic Indicators, Jobs by industry

Table 1.3 Indigenous Peoples Economic Indicators, Gross Domestic Product by industry

Table 2 Indigenous Peoples Human Resource Module

Table 2.1 Indigenous Peoples Human Resource Module, by sex and industry

Table 2.2 Indigenous Peoples Human Resource Module, by age group and industry

Table 2.3 Indigenous Peoples Human Resource Module, by work activity and industry

Table 2.4 Indigenous Peoples Human Resource Module, by level of education and industry

Table 2.5 Indigenous Peoples Human Resource Module, by occupation

Table 3 Indigenous Peoples Economic Indicators, by Indigenous identity and industry, 2015

Table 4 Indigenous Peoples Economic Indicators, by residence on or off reserve and industry, 2015

It is important to note that users must be careful when using any estimates associated with less than 50 jobs since those are more likely to have been significantly impacted by the distortions due to rounding. Furthermore, some cells have been supressed due to quality issues. For example: if the manufacturing industry in Prince Edward Island has estimates of 35 jobs, then the estimates of GDP, output, and jobs should be viewed with more skepticism than if it had 500 jobs. Jobs estimates were rounded to the nearest 5 jobs.

Due to rounding, minor differences can be expected in corresponding totals and cell values appearing in different tables.

Appendix B: Description of data source

Census of population and National Household Survey

The Census of population and the National Household Survey (NHS) provide comprehensive data on the demographic, social and economic characteristics of Canadians. For the current iteration of the IPEA, the 2011 NHS and 2016 Census of population were used. With the 2016 Census of population, detailed information, via the long form questionnaires, was solicited from one in every four households. As for the 2011 NHS, slightly less than one-third of all private dwellings in Canada in 2011 were surveyed.

Given its large sample size, the Census serves as the most reliable source of information on occupational distributions. As such, data from the 2016 Census and 2011 NHS are used primarily to distribute the CSNA totals for employee jobs, hours worked and wages and salaries across occupations, sex, education level and age group. The Census of population and the NHS are also used to identify the population of interest for IPEA.

The data used in the HRM calculations are based on occupational distributions for persons who had employment income in the census/NHS reference years (in this case, 2015 and 2010). For the purpose of the HRM, the self-employed are excluded in the calculations.

The samples are broken down into part-and full-time categories according to whether the weeks worked in the reference year were primarily full-time (30 or more hours per week) or part-time (less than 30 hours per week). Also, industry group and occupation relate to the main job held during the reference week (defined as the job at which the most hours were worked) or, if unemployed, to the main job held since the start of the reference year (defined as the one in which the most weeks were worked). No information is provided regarding any other job held by the respondent.

To produce all the estimates presented in this article, the census and NHS microdata available internally were used. Values were then rolled up to the appropriate level of detail needed to produce the estimates.

For more information on the 2016 Census of population, please consult the Guide to the Census of population, 2016 which is available on Statistics Canada website. A similar publication is also available for the 2011 National Household Survey.

Labour Force Survey

The Labour Force Survey (LFS) is conducted monthly and includes approximately 56,000 households, which translates roughly to a sample size of 100,000 people. The LFS collects basic labour force activity information including industry and occupation of employment for the survey reference week (normally the week including the 15th of the month), both for employees and the self-employed. It does not cover military personnel or civil servants stationed abroad, or persons residing on First Nations reserves. This last exclusion was deemed significant for the purpose of the IPEA. Therefore, LFS could not be used as the main data source for the HRM. Nevertheless, LFS provides sufficient information to be used as an indicator series to develop the time series on jobs, hours worked and wages and salaries by occupation, age group, sex and education level for each industry group in the HRM. As an indicator series, LFS was used, in conjunction with other macroeconomic indicators, to estimates the growth of the each series.

For more information on the Labour Force Survey, please consult the Guide to the Labour Force Survey which is available on Statistics Canada website.

Canadian System of National Accounts

Canadian Productivity Accounts

The Canadian Productivity Accounts (CPA) are responsible for producing, analyzing and disseminating Statistics Canada's official data on productivity and for the production and integration of data on employment, hours worked and capital services consistent with the System of National Economic Accounts.

The CPA database in the Canadian System of National Accounts (CSNA) provides industry totals for employee jobs and hours worked, and wages and salaries, for both full-time and part-time jobs. Comparable data are also available for self-employment jobs but the income variable is the net income of unincorporated businesses. Paid workers and self-employed jobs are added to derive the total number of jobs by industry and province and territory. These totals are for all jobs, including those held by both Indigenous and non-Indigenous workers. The data are classified on a North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) basis by province. The jobs estimates from the IPEI are derived for the total number of jobs from CPA. In the HRM, CPA’s database is also used but only the data pertaining to employees are used.

CPA provincial and territorial labour statistics are produced by integrating different data sources in order to generate estimates consistent with the CSNA. Surveys such as the Labour Force Survey (LFS) and the Survey of Employment, Payrolls and Hours are used. Administrative data such as the T4, T1 and PD7 are used as well. Finally, additional data sources such as information about strikes provided by Employment and Social Development Canada or information on employment and wages in mining provided by Natural Resources Canada is used to adjust the estimates to properly reflect an industry or the current events. Each data source used plays a crucial role in producing accurate and coherent measures of labour. For example, LFS is used to estimate average hours per job and to derive benchmarks for jobs and hours while SEPH is used to allocated paid workers jobs and wages.

Overall, the CPA is a very complete source of information for the IPEI and the HRM. It makes use of many data sources to ensure a high level of quality. It is also Statistics Canada only labour statistics program that provides estimates of hours worked that is consistent in term of concepts and coverage with the CSNA.

For more information on the Canadian Productivity Accounts, please consult the Methodological Guide: Canadian System of Macroeconomic Accounts available on Statistics Canada website.

Gross Domestic Product

There are three approaches to measuring GDP, each providing a different perspective on Canadian economic activity. Moreover, measuring GDP with three different approaches and comparing the result is a way to verify the estimates, as each estimate should, in theory, be identical. Statistics Canada produces GDP measures according to all three methods and compares them for consistency and data quality. While these three approaches should result in identical values of GDP, for statistical reasons they diverge, that is, there is a statistical discrepancy between the three measures. Statistical discrepancies occur mainly due to data sources varying. Some data sources are more complete than others. Since all three approaches rely on a multitude of data sources, for each method, there are some data sources that are less complete, resulting in those measurement differences.

The first method to measure GDP is called the production approach. This approach consists of calculating an industry or sector’s output and subtracting its intermediate consumption (the goods and services used to produce the output) to derive its value added. Total GDP for the economic territory consists of summing the gross value added of all industries or sectors for a given province or territory.

For example, if the total output of the automotive industry was $10 billion worth of cars and $6 billion of material inputs (steel, plastic, electricity, business services, etc.) was used to produce the cars, the value added for the automotive industry would be $10 billion in output less $6 billion in intermediate consumption, equalling $4 billion in value added.

The second approach is the expenditure approach. It consists of summing the expenditures of those ultimate, or final, purchases of the goods and services in a given period in a given province or territory. This includes household final consumption expenditure on goods and services, government final consumption expenditure on goods and services, non-profit institutions serving households’ final consumption expenditure on goods and services; business, household, government and non-profit institutions serving households’ investment (including investment in inventories); and exports less imports.

Finally, the third approach is the income approach. It consists of summing all the factor, or primary, incomes generated in the production process plus taxes less subsidies on products and production for a given province or territory. More generally, this consists of the earnings resulting from the use of labour and capital in the production of goods and services during an accounting period. For employees, the labour income includes wages and salaries and employers’ social contribution. For self-employed, it is not possible to distinguish between the return of the person’s labour and the capital of the unincorporated business. Therefore, both are measured as mixed income. The earnings accruing to businesses are measured in the gross operating surplus.

Regardless of the approach used, the GDP estimates produced at Statistics Canada are benchmarked to the estimates of the supply and use tables (SUT). Those tables contain a detailed snapshot of all economic activity taking place in province or territory. They present the structure of an economy as well as interlinkages among the various economic actors. Those tables provide sufficient information to allow users to derive GDP based on all three approaches.

To produce the estimates, ratios were applied to published provincial and territorial current dollar GDP estimates. For years where the published value was not available, estimates were derived using internally available data. Because the IPEI estimates for those years are based on non-published GDP estimates, they are subject to larger revisions than other IPEI estimates.

For more information about the different approaches to calculate GDP, please consult on Statistics Canada website the Methodological Guide: Canadian System of Macroeconomic Accounts. On the website, the User Guide: Canadian System of Macroeconomic Accounts can also be found. This document also contains valuable information to understand to value added and GDP.

Output

Output and GDP are two macroeconomic measures which are closely related. Put simply, output represents the total value of the goods and services produced during a given period in a geography, while GDP represents the total value added of the goods and services produced. In other words, the main distinction between the two concepts is due to products that are not used for final consumption but rather for intermediate consumption, meaning that they are used as inputs into the process for producing other goods or services.

In the CSNA, output is measured by adding the intermediate inputs, labour cost, capital cost and net taxes on production.

National accountants consider three type of output; market output, output for own final use and non-market output. The first one, market output, consists of output intended for sale at economically significant prices. This includes things such as food, clothing, manufactured goods and services that are sold in store or online. It also includes goods and services that are bartered or used for payments in kind.

The second category, output for own final use, consists of output retained by the producer for his or her own final consumption or capital formation, often referred to as 'own-account production'. For example, this include products made and consumed by the same household, such as tomatoes grown in one’s garden for their own consumption.

Finally, non-market output represent products produced by governments and non-profit institutions that are supplied to other institutional units, such as households, either for free, or at economically non-significant prices. For example, police and health care services are non-market output.

To produce the estimates, ratios were applied to published provincial and territorial current dollar output estimates. For years where the published values were not available, estimates were derived using internally available data. Because the IPEI estimate for those years are based on non-published output estimates, they are subject to larger revisions than other IPEI estimates.

For more information about output and how it differ from GDP, please consult on Statistics Canada website the User Guide: Canadian System of Macroeconomic Accounts. The Methodological Guide: Canadian System of Macroeconomic Accounts, available on the website as well, also contains information about output.

Appendix C: Key definitions

Basic price

The basic price valuation includes the costs of production factors (labour and capital) and taxes and subsidies on production factors. In other words, the basic price of a good or service is its selling price before wholesale, retail and transportation margins and before product taxes like the Value Added taxes. This price reflects the revenues received by producers from the sale of these goods and services. This is different from the market prices which include the margins and taxes noted above to better reflect the price paid by the consumer of the good or service.

Benchmark

Values which are obtained from higher quality observations and serve as standards for gauging values that are obtained from less reliable sources.

For example, annual gross domestic product values derived from comprehensive annual surveys or censuses within the balanced framework of the supply and use tables are benchmarks for the monthly gross domestic product indicators which are typically based on observations collected by sample monthly surveys.

Canadian System of National Accounts (CSNA)

A coherent, consistent and integrated set of Canadian macroeconomic accounts based on internationally agreed concepts, definitions, classifications and accounting rules. Closely related to the international standard defined by the United Nations' System of National Accounts.

Economic activity

An activity is a process, that is, the combination of actions that result in goods being manufactured or services being provided. In other words, any activities that involve the exchange of goods or services or any transaction that involve money are economic activities. Put simply, economic activities are producing, buying or selling goods or services. Examples of economic activities include activities such as running a business, working for wages, buying goods and services, exporting goods and bartering.

In contrast, non-economic activities include activities that do not involve money or the exchange of goods or services. Examples of non-economic activities include activities such as going to a church to pray, walking the dog, growing tomatoes in the garden for your own consumption or taking care of your own child.

Economic agent

Economic agent refers to an individual or legal entity participating in the economic process. Example of economic agents include consumers purchasing goods or services, businesses manufacturing goods or providing services, government providing services to the population or workers providing labour for wages.

Employee jobs or paid worker jobs

All jobs in which the person employed draws compensation for services rendered and for whom the employer must complete a Revenue Canada T4 form. Jobs in which workers are paid by tips or commissions are included. Self-employed proprietors of unincorporated enterprises and unpaid family workers are not included.

Employment

Employment data (i.e., number of jobs) comes from the Canadian Productivity Accounts of the CSNA. It represents the number of jobs held by the self-employed, employees and unpaid family workers.

First Nations identity

Refers to individuals who reported that they identify as First Nations according to Question 18 in the 2011 NHS and 2016 Census. Question 18 asks: “Is this person an Aboriginal person, that is, First Nations (North American Indian), Métis or Inuk (Inuit)?”

Full-time job

One in which a person usually works 30 hours or more per week

Gross Domestic Product (GDP)

Gross Domestic Product (GDP) or value added is a key measure of economic performance in the IPEA. It is defined as the total unduplicated value of the goods and services produced in the economic territory of a country or region during a given period. GDP can be measured three ways: as total incomes earned in current production (income approach), as total final sales of current production (expenditure approach), or as total net values added in current production (value added approach). It can be valued either at basic prices or at market prices.

Gross Domestic Product attributable to Indigenous peoples

It is the GDP derived to measure the economic participation of Indigenous paid workers and Indigenous-owned businesses in the Canadian economy.

Hours worked

The total number of hours that a person spends working, whether paid or not. In general, this includes regular and overtime hours, breaks, travel time, training in the workplace, and time lost in brief work stoppages where workers remain at their posts. Time lost to strikes, lockouts, annual vacation, public holidays, sick leave, maternity leave, or leave for personal needs is not included.

Human Resource Module (HRM)

The aim of the Human Resource Module (HRM) is to provide timely and reliable statistics on the human resource dimension of the production attributable to Indigenous peoples in Canada. The Indigenous Peoples Economic Indicators already provides some information on the number of jobs; the HRM provides further details about the socio-demographic characteristics of paid workers jobs held by Indigenous peoples.

Indigenous-owned businesses

For the purpose of this analysis, an Indigenous-owned business is defined as a business where 50% +1 of the owners identify as Indigenous.

Indigenous peoples

In the context of the Indigenous Peoples Economic Account, individuals who self-identified as First Nations (North American Indian), Métis or Inuk (Inuit) and/or those who are Registered or Treaty Indians (that is, registered under the Indian Act of Canada), and/or those who have membership in a First Nation or Indian band according to the 2016 Census of population and the 2011 National Household Survey.

Indigenous Peoples Economic Account (IPEA)

The Indigenous Peoples Economic Account is a suite of economic statistics that aim at measuring the economic contribution of Indigenous peoples in the Canadian economy, as defined per the CSNA. In other words, the IPEA is the umbrella under which was developed a series economic measures pertaining to Indigenous peoples in Canada. This economic account has been developed on a basis consistent the Canadian System of National Accounts (CSNA), but with a focus on the economic measures attributable to the paid labour of Indigenous peoples. All estimates produced as part of the IPEA shared common definitions.

Indigenous Peoples Economic Indicators (IPEI)

The Indigenous Peoples Economic Indicators provide estimates (levels and growth rate) of gross domestic product (GDP), output and total number of jobs. The estimates are part of the Indigenous Peoples Economic Account, and as such, follow the same definitions.

Inuit identity

Refers to individuals who reported that they identify as Inuit according to Question 18 in the 2011 NHS and 2016 Census. Question 18 asks: “Is this person an Aboriginal person, that is, First Nations (North American Indian), Métis or Inuk (Inuit)?”

Job

A job is defined as an explicit or implicit contract between a person and an institutional unit to perform work in return for compensation for a defined period or until further notice. The institutional unit may be the proprietor of an unincorporated enterprise; in this case the person is described as being self-employed and earns a mixed income.

Individuals may have more than one source of income from employment because they work for more than one employer or, in addition to working for one or more employers, they work on their own account as self-employed. Consequently, the number of jobs exceeds the number of persons employed by the number of second, third, etc. jobs

Mixed income

It represents the return to both self-employed labour and capital of the unincorporated business. Mixed income consists of earnings of proprietors of unincorporated businesses (sole proprietorships and partnerships) such as retailers and consultants, earnings of independent professional practitioners such as lawyers and dentists, net (after expenses) rental income of owners of real property and the accrued net farm income of farm operators. Data are insufficient to distinguish between the income accruing to the capital factor of production (i.e. the return of the unincorporated business) from the income accruing from labour of the self-employed, hence the term mixed income.

Métis identity

Refers to individuals who reported that they identify as Métis according to Question 18 in the 2011 NHS and 2016 Census. Question 18 asks: “Is this person an Aboriginal person, that is, First Nations (North American Indian), Métis or Inuk (Inuit)?”

Multiple Indigenous identities

Includes persons who identify with any two or all three of the following: First Nations (North American Indian), Métis or Inuk (Inuit). In the 2011 NHS and 2016 Census, this occurs when a respondents indicates more than one identity in question 18. Question 18 asks: “Is this person an Aboriginal person, that is, First Nations (North American Indian), Métis or Inuk (Inuit)?”

Multiple-job holder

A person who is employed in more than one job during the reference period.

North American Industry Classification System (NAICS)

An industrial classification system used to group producers into industries on the basis of similarities in their production processes. Developed jointly in 1997 by Canada, Mexico and the United States, it provides a common framework of classification which places industrial statistics compiled by the three countries on a comparable basis.

National Occupational Classification (NOC)

The NOC provides a systematic classification structure that categorizes the entire range of occupational activity in Canada. The basic principle of classification of the NOC is the kind of work performed. Occupations are identified and grouped primarily in terms of the work usually performed, this being determined by the tasks, duties, and responsibilities of the occupation. Factors such as the materials processed or used, the industrial processes and the equipment used, the degree of responsibility and complexity of work, as well as the products made and services provided, have been taken as indicators of the work performed when combining jobs into occupations and occupations into groups.

Occupation

A collection of jobs, sufficiently similar in work performed (tasks, duties and responsibilities) to be grouped under a common title for classification purposes.

Other Indigenous identities

Includes persons who are not First Nations (North American Indian), Métis or Inuk (Inuit), but who have Registered or Treaty Indian status and/or Membership in a First Nation or Indian band. This occurs when a Census respondent indicates no to question 18, but yes to one or both of questions 20 and 21. Question 18 asks: “Is this person an Aboriginal person, that is, First Nations (North American Indian), Métis or Inuk (Inuit). Question 20 asks: “Is this person a Status Indian (Registered or Treaty Indian as defined by the Indian Act of Canada?” and question 21 asks: “Is this person a member of a First Nation/Indian band?”

Output

Output consists of those goods or services that are produced within an establishment that become available for use outside that establishment or in some special cases within the producing establishment.

Part-time job

One in which a person usually works less than 30 hours per week.

Production and output

Production is the process of combining labour, capital, energy, material and service inputs to produce goods and services.

Reserves

Includes six census subdivision (CSD) types legally affiliated with First Nations or Indian bands, i.e., Indian reserve (IRI), Indian settlement (S-É) (except for the four Indian settlements of Champagne Landing 10, Klukshu, Two and One-Half Mile Village, Two Mile Village and Kloo Lake located in Yukon), Indian government district (IGD), terres réservées aux Cris (TC), terres réservées aux Naskapis (TK) and Nisga'a land (NL).

Satellite account or thematic economic account

An accounting system that follows the basic principles of the System of National Economic Accounts but also expands the analytical capacity for selected areas of economic or social concern, without overburdening or disrupting the central system. Satellite accounts are linked with the central framework of the national accounts and through them to the main body of integrated economic statistics.

Self-employment jobs

Includes working-owners of unincorporated enterprises, and members of their households who work without a wage or salary (i.e., unpaid family workers).

Sex

Sex is defined according to the 2016 Census and the 2011 NHS. In these surveys, respondents are asked in question 2: “What is this person's sex? A respondent may only respond with female or male. As a result of this, the IPEA cannot distinguish between sex and gender.

System of National Accounts (SNA)

The System of National Accounts (SNA) consists of a coherent, consistent and integrated set of macroeconomic accounts, balance sheets and tables based on a set of internationally agreed concepts, definitions, classifications and accounting rules. In its broad outline, the Canadian System of National Accounts (CSNA) bears a close relationship to the international standard as described in the United Nations publication: System of National Accounts 1993.

Wages and salaries

Consists of monetary compensation and payments-in-kind (e.g., board and lodging), to wage earners and salaried persons employed in private, public and non-profit institutions in Canada including domestic servants and baby-sitters. Other forms of compensation included are commissions, bonuses, tips, directors’ fees, taxable allowances, and the values of stock options of corporations. Bonuses, commissions and retroactive wages are recorded in the period paid rather than earned. Wages and salaries are recorded on a gross basis, before deductions for taxes, employees’ contributions to employment insurance, and private and public pension plans.

Appendix D: List of acronyms



References

Statistics Canada. 2021. User Guide: Canadian System of Macroeconomic Accounts. Catalogue no. 13-606-G.

Statistics Canada. 2020. Guide to the Labour Force Survey. Catalogue no. 71-543-G.

Statistics Canada. 2016. Methodological Guide: Canadian System of Macroeconomic Accounts. Catalogue no. 13-607-X.

Statistics Canada. 2013. NHS User Guide. Catalogue no. 99-001-X2011001.

Statistics Canada. 2020. Guide to the Census of Population, 2016. Catalogue no. 98-304-X2016001.

Statistics Canada. 2017. Aboriginal Peoples Reference Guide, Census of Population, 2016. Catalogue no. 98-500-X2016009.

Statistics Canada. 2018. Dictionary, Census of Population, 2016. Catalogue no. 98-301-X2016001.

Statistics Canada. 2013. Aboriginal Peoples Reference Guide, National Household Survey, 2011. Catalogue no. 99-011-X2011006.

Statistics Canada. 2013. Income Reference Guide, National Household Survey, 2011. Catalogue no. 99-014-XWE2011006.

Statistics Canada. 2013. National Household Survey, Dictionary, 2011. Catalogue no. 99-000-X2011001.