Rural and Small Town Canada Analysis Bulletin
Rural insights from the Canada Emergency Wage Subsidy: January 17, 2021 to May 8, 2021

Background

The onset of the COVID-19 pandemic in the spring of 2020 led to temporary closures, reduced hours, and the implementation of various safety measures for rural and urban businesses across Canada. As the pandemic charted its winding course, these responses needed to be adapted on an ongoing basis. The disruptions impacted businesses in rural and urban^Note  areas differently due to differences in their economic environments and regional variation in pandemic measures.

The Canada Emergency Wage Subsidy (CEWS) program was implemented in March 2020 to help offset employers’ revenue losses and to reduce job losses as a result of the economic effects of COVID-19.^Note 

This article analyzes the use of the CEWS program by rural businesses using Statistics Canada’s updated CEWS Regional and Community-level database.^Note  This update covers the timeframe from January 17 to May 8, 2021, representing the 12^th to the 15^th four-week CEWS claim periods.^Note 

At a glance: key rural findings

Over the 16 weeks from January 17 to May 8, 2021, or the 12^th to the 15^th CEWS claim periods, rural businesses received $1.5 billion in CEWS payments, representing 10.2% of the national total. These rural subsidies supported an average of 420,000 employees per CEWS period. During the same interval, urban businesses received $12.9 billion in CEWS payments, supporting an average of 3.6 million employees.

Across these first 15 CEWS periods, rural businesses’ shares of both CEWS payments and number of supported employees has remained steady at approximately one-tenth of the nationwide totals. On average, slightly more than one in every six (16.9%) rural employees was supported by the CEWS program over the four periods covered, below the one in five (21.3%) for urban employees. This share remained relatively stable, compared to the average levels over the three previous CEWS periods.

In both rural and urban areas, the manufacturing, construction, and accommodation and food services industries received the largest shares of CEWS subsidies. In rural areas, 46.0% of CEWS subsidies and 44.9% of supported employees were in these industries. The combined shares of these three industries in urban areas were comparatively lower at 37.3% of CEWS subsidies and 36.2% of supported employees.

Both subsidies and the number of employees supported declined in rural areas over the time studied

Coinciding with the decline of the pandemic’s second wave in Canada,^Note  CEWS subsidies to rural areas showed a gradual decline from a four-period high of about $3.8 billion in periods 12 and 13 to $3.3 billion in period 15 (Chart 1). The number of supported employees in rural areas also declined over this timeframe, from 448,000 in period 12 to 379,000 employees by period 15.

Data table for Chart 1



Data table for Chart 1
Table summary
This table displays the results of Data table for Chart 1 Employees supported and CEWS amount, calculated using employees and dollars units of measure (appearing as column headers).

	Employees supported	CEWS amount
	employees	dollars
Period 3: 10-May-2020	432,676	1,016,442,000
Period 4: 07-Jun-2020	395,058	909,596,000
Period 5: 05-Jul-2020	459,041	771,149,000
Period 6: 02-Aug-2020	442,143	704,735,000
Period 7: 30-Aug-2020	374,894	388,700,000
Period 8: 27-Sep-2020	292,564	245,767,000
Period 9: 25-Oct-2020	499,107	400,286,000
Period 10: 22-Nov-2020	439,971	362,440,000
Period 11: 20-Dec-2020	360,064	300,000,000
Period 12: 17-Jan-2021	448,058	384,329,000
Period 13: 14-Feb-2021	443,926	384,133,000
Period 14: 14-Mar-2021	408,499	348,349,000
Period 15: 11-Apr-2021	378,829	343,509,000
Note: These figures are based on all approved CEWS claims as of November 8, 2021. Actual values may fluctuate as claims continue to be reassessed by the Canada Revenue Agency. Source: Canada Emergency Wage Subsidy Regional and Community-level Database Version 3.0.

One in six rural employees supported by CEWS in periods 12 to 15

The majority of industries had a smaller proportion of employees supported for periods 12 to 15 compared to the periods 9 to 11 (October 25, 2020 to January 16 2021).

On average, CEWS subsidies supported one in six (16.9%) employees in rural areas over periods 12 to 15. Some rural industries continued to request more support than others, with the share of employees receiving support being the highest in accommodation and food services (34.3%), manufacturing (28.0%) and transportation and warehousing (25.9%) (Chart 2).

Compared to the one in six employees supported by CEWS in rural areas, the program helped keep over one in five (21.2%) employees in their jobs in urban areas. Urban employees were more likely to be supported than their rural counterparts in all industries except for transportation and warehousing, agriculture, forestry, fishing and hunting, finance and insurance, and management of companies and enterprises.

Data table for Chart 2



Data table for Chart 2
Table summary
This table displays the results of Data table for Chart 2 Periods 9 - 11 (October 25, 2020 - January 16, 2021) and Periods 12 - 15 (January 17, 2021 - May 8, 2021), calculated using percent units of measure (appearing as column headers).

	Periods 9 - 11 (October 25, 2020 - January 16, 2021)	Periods 12 - 15 (January 17, 2021 - May 8, 2021)
	percent
Accommodation and food services	35.7	34.3
Manufacturing	29.4	28.0
Transportation and warehousing	26.0	25.9
Arts, entertainment and recreation	21.9	25.6
Management of companies and enterprises	22.7	21.5
Mining, quarrying, and oil and gas extraction	23.7	21.1
Wholesale trade	24.4	20.2
Construction	20.6	19.5
Information and cultural industries	22.5	18.1
Real estate and rental and leasing	14.7	15.4
Agriculture, forestry, fishing and hunting	15.2	15.4
Professional, scientific and technical services	17.7	15.3
Retail trade	15.3	14.8
Administrative and support, waste management and remediation services	12.0	10.7
Other industries	9.6	9.5
Finance and insurance	5.9	7.6
Health care and social assistance	6.0	7.0
Educational services	2.1	2.3
Utilities	0.9	0.8
Source: Canada Emergency Wage Subsidy Regional and Community-level Database Version 3.0.

Manufacturing had the highest share of both CEWS payments and supported employees among rural industries

Over the four CEWS periods covered by this article, manufacturing received the largest share of CEWS subsidies for rural industries, at 16.7% (Chart 3). This share was relatively unchanged from the 16.8% seen for the previous three CEWS periods.^Note  The next largest shares among rural industries were in construction (16.3%) and accommodation and food services (13.0%). The shares for these two industries were also relatively stable when compared to the previous three periods.

Looking at the shares of a rural industry’s employees supported by CEWS, the largest ones were in manufacturing (17.9%), accommodation and food services (16.2%), and construction (10.8%). Accommodation and food services and manufacturing also had the highest shares of employees supported in an industry in urban areas, at 14.6% and 13.0%, respectively. However, retail trade was the third most prominent industry in this respect in urban areas rather than construction, as was the case for rural areas, with a 12.4% share of supported urban employees.

Data table for Chart 3



Data table for Chart 3
Table summary
This table displays the results of Data table for Chart 3 CEWS Amount and Employees supported, calculated using percent units of measure (appearing as column headers).

	CEWS Amount	Employees supported
	percent
Manufacturing	16.7	17.9
Construction	16.3	10.8
Accommodation and food services	13.0	16.2
Agriculture, forestry, fishing and hunting	7.5	6.2
Transportation and warehousing	7.3	7.2
Retail trade	5.8	9.9
Other industries	5.6	5.3
Mining, quarrying, and oil and gas extraction	5.6	3.8
Arts, entertainment and recreation	3.9	3.2
Wholesale trade	3.5	3.7
Professional, scientific and technical services	3.2	2.7
Health care and social assistance	2.9	5.3
Management of companies and enterprises	2.7	1.9
Administrative and support, waste management and remediation services	2.3	2.4
Real estate and rental and leasing	1.5	1.2
Educational services	0.8	0.7
Information and cultural industries	0.8	0.7
Finance and insurance	0.6	1.0
Utilities	0.1	0.0
Source: Canada Emergency Wage Subsidy Regional and Community-level Database Version 3.0.

Rural workers less likely than urban counterparts to be supported by CEWS in all but two provinces and territories

In ten provinces and territories,^Note  a greater share of employees in urban areas were supported by CEWS than in rural areas (Chart 4). The largest difference was in Northwest Territories, where urban employees were nearly twice as likely to have received CEWS support compared to rural employees, at 14.4% and 7.9%, respectively.

The share of employees supported varied by region. Among rural businesses, the highest shares of employees for whom CEWS helped maintain employment were in Alberta (21.3%), Quebec (20.0%) and Prince Edward Island (18.2%). In urban areas, the highest shares of supported employees were in Alberta (24.6%), Quebec (22.1%) and Ontario (21.5%).

Data table for Chart 4



Data table for Chart 4
Table summary
This table displays the results of Data table for Chart 4 Rural businesses and Urban businesses, calculated using percent units of measure (appearing as column headers).

	Rural businesses	Urban businesses
	percent
Canada	16.9	21.3
Newfoundland and Labrador	12.7	18.4
Prince Edward Island	18.2	17.2
Nova Scotia	14.3	14.7
New Brunswick	17.3	17.0
Quebec	20.0	22.1
Ontario	15.6	21.5
Manitoba	11.9	16.9
Saskatchewan	12.7	18.8
Alberta	21.3	24.6
British Columbia	14.5	20.1
Yukon	8.4	13.0
Northwest Territories	7.9	14.4
NunavutData table for Chart 4 Note 1	10.1	Note ...: not applicable
... not applicable Note 1 According to the definition of rural and urban areas used in the source database, no areas in Nunavut were classified as urban. Return to note 1 referrer Source: Canada Emergency Wage Subsidy Regional and Community-level Database Version 3.0.

Over the four claim periods that are the focus of this article, Quebec, Ontario, and Alberta together received over two-thirds (69.8%) of all CEWS subsidies given to rural areas, at 26.7%, 20.1%, and 23.0%, respectively. The same provinces also contained over two-thirds (69.2%) of all CEWS-supported employees in rural areas over this timeframe, at 30.4% for Quebec, 19.9% for Ontario, and 18.9% for Alberta.

Methodology

Figures in this analysis are based on Canada Revenue Agency microdata files containing all approved CEWS claims up to November 8, 2021. The total amount of CEWS claims and employees supported will fluctuate compared to the microdata files used in this analysis as claims continue to be reassessed by the Canada Revenue Agency.

The Canada Emergency Wage Subsidy Regional and Community-level Database Version 3.0^Note  was created using Canada Revenue Agency’s Canada Emergency Wage Subsidy (CEWS) microdata and linking these with Statistics Canada’s Business Register.

Using the Standard Geographical Classification 2016 (SGC),^Note  these data are available at the following geographical levels: Canada, province/territory, census metropolitan area (CMA), census agglomeration (CA), and census subdivision (CSD). A rural and urban breakdown at the Canada and provincial/territorial levels was also created. CSDs outside CMA/CAs were classified as “rural”, while those inside CMA/CAs, as “urban”. The database also contains breakdowns by industry sector (2-digit NAICS) and subsector (3-digit NAICS) levels.^Note 

See the Canada Emergency Wage Subsidy Regional and Community-level Database Version 3.0 metadata document for more details on the database used in this analysis.^Note