Which Type of Household Has the Lowest Percentage of Families Living in Poverty
Census in Cursory
Children living in low‑income households
Census in BriefRelease appointment: September 13, 2017
Highlights
- Nearly 1.2 million Canadian children younger than 18 (17.0%) lived in a depression‑income household in 2015.
- Children whose family shared a dwelling with others were less probable to exist in depression income, especially children in lone‑parent families.
- Alberta, with high employment and median income, had the everyman rate of children living in low‑income households. Quebec, with loftier government benefits to families with children, was the only province where children were less likely to live in low‑income households than adults.
- Among large urban centres, Windsor, Ontario, had the highest rate of children living in low‑income households.
Introduction
The well‑being of children has long been a priority for Canadians. In 1893, Ontario enacted the first comprehensive kid welfare legislation in Canada, and, in 1944, Canada introduced the Family unit Assart Deed, which provided universal benefits for every kid. In 1989, the Firm of Eatables resolved to eliminate child poverty by the year 2000. Poverty reduction legislation has likewise been adopted more recently in many provinces and territories.
Under diverse government programs, Canadian families receive significant financial support for children, and Canada has made important progress in alleviating child poverty since the mid‑1990s. Although at that place is no single agreed‑upon measure of poverty in Canada, it is well known that having depression income is a major aspect of living in poverty.
A key purpose of the census is to provide information on modest population groups, both in terms of geography and in terms of demographic characteristics. This article focuses on persons who were younger than 18 at the time of the 2016 Census and living in low‑income households.
Low income in this Census in Brief article is determined using the after‑tax low‑income mensurate (see "Data sources, methods and definitions"). A person living alone had low income if his or her afterward‑tax income was under $22,133, while persons in a household of four had low income if the household'due south after‑tax income was under $44,266.
Children represent near one‑quarter of depression‑income persons in Canada
There were four.viii one thousand thousand Canadians living in a low‑income household in 2015, of whom 1.2 one thousand thousand (nearly one in four) were children. The proportion of depression‑income persons who are children has been dropping since the mid‑1990s, when close to one in three low‑income persons were younger than eighteen. While the share of children in the population has decreased since the mid‑1990s, their share in the low‑income population has decreased faster.
Ane of the factors underlying this improvement was the introduction of various family‑related programs, such equally the Canada Child Tax Benefit. The boilerplate child do good received by families has virtually doubled since the mid‑1990s.
While children fabricated up a smaller proportion of the depression‑income population, the incidence of living in a low‑income household remained higher for children than adults in 2015. Nearly 1.2 million out of 6.8 million Canadian children lived in a depression‑income household, a rate of 17.0%. For adults (anile eighteen and older), the low‑income rate was 13.4%.
Younger children were more affected by low income, partly considering the earnings of new mothers tend to driblet in the year of childbirth and for several years thereafter. Notation 1 While 15.9% of children anile xi to 17 lived in a low‑income household, for children younger than 6 this rate climbed to 17.8%. Among all children, the lowest incidence of living in a low‑income household was for 17‑year‑olds (fourteen.6%), and the highest was for children under 1 year of historic period at the time of the 2016 Demography (18.3%).
Data table for Chart 1
| Age | Percent |
|---|---|
| 0 | eighteen.iii |
| 1 | eighteen.2 |
| two | 17.7 |
| three | 17.4 |
| iv | 17.v |
| v | 17.half-dozen |
| 6 | 17.five |
| 7 | 17.9 |
| eight | 17.viii |
| 9 | 17.half dozen |
| ten | 17.4 |
| xi | 17.1 |
| 12 | 16.7 |
| 13 | xvi.4 |
| 14 | xv.ix |
| 15 | 15.9 |
| sixteen | 15.2 |
| 17 | 14.half dozen |
| 18 years and older | 13.four |
| Source: Statistics Canada, Demography of Population, 2016. | |
Children living in a lone‑parent family are more than iii times as likely to live in a low‑income household as children in a two‑parent family unit
Beginning in the late 1990s, low‑income rates for lonely‑parent families started to drop every bit a consequence of increased employment, combined with enhanced child care support and the introduction of the national child tax benefit program. Note 2 Despite this decline, almost two in v children in lone‑parent families (or 38.9%) lived in a low‑income household in 2015. This rate was 3 and a half times higher than for children in two‑parent families (11.two%).
Furthermore, the vast majority of children living in a alone‑parent family unit lived with their mother. The low‑income charge per unit for these children was much higher than for children who lived with their begetter (42.0% compared with 25.v%).
The likelihood of living in a low‑income household increases with the number of children under 18 in the family unit
The depression‑income rate for children who lived in a two‑parent family unit with no other siblings under eighteen was 9.0% in 2015. This rate was essentially higher, at 16.iv%, for children who lived in a two‑parent family that had iii or more than children.
Among children who lived in a lone‑parent family, the low‑income charge per unit was 30.v% when the family included only one child. The rate increased to 37.ii% when there were two children in the family and to 55.1% when the number of children rose to three or more.
| Family unit structure and household living arrangements | Percentage of children in low-income households | Number of children in depression-income households | Full number of children |
|---|---|---|---|
| Family blazon | |||
| Two-parent family | 11.2 | 602,850 | 5,389,300 |
| Lone-parent family | 38.9 | 531,295 | i,366,485 |
| Lone-mother family unit | 42.0 | 465,040 | ane,106,255 |
| Solitary-father family | 25.v | 66,255 | 260,235 |
| Persons not in census families | 36.8 | 29,680 | 80,590 |
| Family type and number of children in family Tabular array 1 Noteone | |||
| 2-parent family with children aged 0 to 17 years | |||
| I child | 9.0 | 106,690 | 1,183,175 |
| 2 children | 8.8 | 221,330 | 2,529,205 |
| Three or more than children | 16.iv | 274,085 | 1,675,450 |
| Lone-parent family unit with children anile 0 to 17 years | |||
| I child | 30.5 | 154,790 | 507,580 |
| 2 children | 37.2 | 201,545 | 541,270 |
| Three or more children | 55.i | 174,955 | 317,635 |
| Household living arrangements and family blazon Tabular array 1 Note1 | |||
| I-family household | 17.7 | 1,037,395 | 5,845,170 |
| Ii-parent family unit | 11.seven | 559,205 | 4,798,185 |
| Lone-parent family unit | 45.7 | 478,195 | 1,046,980 |
| Household shared with other persons | x.six | 96,755 | 910,620 |
| Two-parent family | seven.iv | 43,650 | 591,115 |
| Lone-parent family unit | sixteen.6 | 53,105 | 319,505 |
| |||
Children whose family shares a home with others are less probable to alive in a low‑income household
Depression‑income rates also change with different household living arrangements. Note 3 For many families, sharing a domicile with others might mean sacrificing some privacy, but they may do good by sharing some of the living costs.
Census information show that over 5.eight one thousand thousand Canadian children lived in a one‑family unit household and close to 911,000 children lived in a family that shared a dwelling with others. In 2015, 17.seven% of children in a one‑family unit household had low income, compared with 10.6% of children whose families shared a dwelling with others.
The low‑income rate for children whose family unit shared a dwelling with others was lower regardless of the family unit type. The depression‑income rate for children who lived in a ii‑parent family household without sharing was 11.7%, while the rate for children living in a 2‑parent family that shared the dwelling with others was vii.four%.
But the gap was more than pronounced amid children in solitary‑parent families. Among the children whose family lived alone, the depression‑income charge per unit was 45.7%, compared with 16.6% for children in a lone‑parent family that shared a dwelling with others.
Alberta has the lowest rate of children living in low‑income households, while Quebec is the only province where children are less likely than adults to live in low‑income households
The rate of children living in low‑income households varied significantly across the country in 2015.
The rate of children living in depression‑income households was more often than not higher in the Eastern provinces. Nova Scotia and New Brunswick recorded the highest rates of all the provinces, at 22.two%, while energy‑booming Alberta had the lowest rate of children living in low‑income households, at 12.8%.
Despite having the 2d‑lowest median household income in Canada, Quebec had the 2d‑lowest rate of children living in depression‑income households after Alberta. This may be due in part to Quebec having lower kid care costs and higher child benefits per family than any other province. Annotation four Quebec was also the only province where children were less likely to live in low‑income households than adults (14.3% of children, compared with fourteen.7% of adults).
Conversely, the gap betwixt children and adults living in low‑income households was widest in Manitoba (21.9% of children, compared with 13.v% of adults), followed past Saskatchewan (17.eight%, compared with 11.four%) and Alberta (12.8%, compared with 8.ii%).
Data table for Nautical chart 2
| Province | Children | Adults |
|---|---|---|
| per centum | ||
| British Columbia | xviii.v | 14.9 |
| Alberta | 12.eight | 8.2 |
| Saskatchewan | 17.eight | eleven.4 |
| Manitoba | 21.9 | 13.5 |
| Ontario | 18.iv | xiii.4 |
| Quebec | 14.iii | 14.7 |
| New Brunswick | 22.2 | 16.0 |
| Nova Scotia | 22.ii | 16.2 |
| Prince Edward Island | 21.7 | xv.vii |
| Newfoundland and Labrador | 17.8 | 14.9 |
| Source: Statistics Canada, Census of Population, 2016. | ||
Among large urban centres, Windsor, Ontario, has the highest rate of children living in depression‑income households
The rates of children living in depression‑income households varied more at lower levels of geography—census metropolitan areas (CMAs) and census agglomerations (CAs)—than at the provincial level.
In 2015, in 7 of the country'southward 35 large urban centres, or CMAs, at to the lowest degree ane in v Canadian children was living in a low‑income household.
Windsor, Ontario, had the highest rate, with nearly ane in four children (24.0%) living in a depression‑income household. This is consistent with the fact that the median household full income in Windsor dropped 6.4% between 2005 and 2015, the largest refuse of whatsoever big city.
The six other CMAs where more than i in v children was living in a low‑income household were Saint John and Moncton, New Brunswick; London, St. Catharines‒Niagara and Belleville, Ontario; and Winnipeg, Manitoba. In these CMAs, the charge per unit of children living in a low‑income household varied between xx.3% and 23.ane%.
In dissimilarity, 8.3% of children in the CMA of Québec lived in a depression‑income household. This rate was almost three times lower than in Windsor. Other rates that were noticeably beneath the national charge per unit of 17.0% were recorded in Saguenay, Quebec; Calgary and Edmonton, Alberta; and Guelph and Oshawa, Ontario.
The differences in the rates of children living in low‑income households were even larger between CAs than betwixt CMAs. Petawawa, Ontario, had the lowest rate among CAs, at v.0%. In contrast, the rate of children living in a low‑income household was nearly seven times higher in Hawkesbury, Ontario and Quebec (34.half dozen%). Note 5
Data table for Chart 3
| CMA | percent |
|---|---|
| Windsor, Ont. | 24.0 |
| Saint John, N.B. | 23.1 |
| London, Ont. | 22.2 |
| Winnipeg, Homo. | 21.v |
| St. Catharines–Niagara, Ont. | 20.6 |
| Belleville, Ont. | 20.5 |
| Moncton, Due north.B. | 20.3 |
| Thunder Bay, Ont. | 19.nine |
| Toronto, Ont. | 19.7 |
| Peterborough, Ont. | 19.4 |
| Vancouver, B.C. | eighteen.9 |
| Halifax, Northward.S. | 18.8 |
| Hamilton, Ont. | 17.six |
| Brantford, Ont. | 17.4 |
| Saskatoon, Sask. | 16.9 |
| Regina, Sask. | 16.7 |
| Trois‑Rivières, Que. | 16.6 |
| Greater Sudbury, Ont. | 16.four |
| Abbotsford–Mission, B.C. | 16.ii |
| Montréal, Que. | 15.7 |
| Kingston, Ont. | 15.5 |
| Kitchener–Cambridge–Waterloo, Ont. | 15.three |
| Kelowna, B.C. | fifteen.3 |
| Victoria, B.C. | 15.2 |
| Lethbridge, Alta. | 15.0 |
| Sherbrooke, Que. | 14.9 |
| Ottawa–Gatineau, Ont. and Que. | 14.nine |
| St. John's, Nfld. | 14.nine |
| Barrie, Ont. | 14.7 |
| Oshawa, Ont. | thirteen.7 |
| Edmonton, Alta. | 13.two |
| Guelph, Ont. | 12.4 |
| Calgary, Alta. | 12.2 |
| Saguenay, Que. | 10.8 |
| Québec, Que. | 8.3 |
| Source: Statistics Canada, Demography of Population, 2016. | |
Data sources, methods and definitions
Data sources
The data in this analysis are from the 2016 Census of Population. Further information on the demography can be constitute in the Guide to the Census of Population, 2016, Catalogue no. 98‑304‑10.
Specific information on the quality and comparability of census data on income can be found in the Income Reference Guide, Demography of Population, 2016, Catalogue no. 98‑500‑X2016004.
Methods
Random rounding and percentage distributions: To ensure the confidentiality of responses collected for the 2016 Census, a random rounding process is used to alter the values reported in individual cells. As a result, when these data are summed or grouped, the total value may non match the sum of the individual values, since the total and subtotals are independently rounded. Similarly, per centum distributions, which are calculated on rounded data, may not necessarily add up to 100%.
Because of random rounding, counts and percentages may vary slightly between dissimilar census products, such as the analytical documents, highlight tables and data tables.
Definitions
In this Demography in Brief article, low income is calculated using the afterward‑revenue enhancement low‑income measure (LIM) for individuals living in the 10 provinces. Institutionalized persons, persons living in collective dwellings and persons living on Indian reserves are excluded.
Individuals are divers every bit having depression income if the after‑tax income of their household falls below half of the median adjusted household subsequently‑tax income. Adapted household income is calculated using the income of a household divided by the square root of the household size. The median income is the corporeality that divides the income size distribution into ii equal parts.
In 2015, the afterwards‑taxation LIM threshold for ane‑person households was $22,133. For other household sizes, the threshold is equal to the i‑person threshold multiplied by the square root of the household size. For example, the later‑revenue enhancement LIM threshold for a household with two members was $31,301; with four members, it was $44,266.
The term "child" in this Census in Brief article refers to children by birth, marriage, common‑constabulary union or adoption who are living in the same dwelling equally their parent(south), equally well as grandchildren in households where no parents are present, and were younger than xviii years of historic period at the time of the demography. The term "family unit" refers to the census family, which consists of a married or common‑law couple with or without children, or of a lone parent with at least one child living in the same dwelling. The term "household" refers to a single person, to i or more census families sharing a dwelling house, or to unrelated persons sharing a dwelling.
The income data nerveless in the 2016 Census of Population represent the income of the previous twelvemonth (2015). The information on family and household status and size, and on geographical characteristics, were nerveless close to the demography reference date of May x, 2016, and represent that date.
Please refer to the Dictionary, Census of Population, 2016, Catalogue no. 98‑301‑Ten, for boosted information on the census variables.
Additional information
Additional analysis on income can be establish in The Daily of September 13, 2017, and in the Census in Cursory article entitled Household contribution rates for selected registered savings accounts, Catalogue no. 98‑200‑X2016013.
Boosted information on income can be found in the Highlight tables, Catalogue no. 98‑402‑X2016006; the Data tables, Catalogue nos. 98‑400‑X2016097 to 98‑400‑X2016131; the Demography Profile, Catalogue no. 98‑316‑X2016001; and the Focus on Geography Serial , Catalogue no. 98‑404‑X2016001.
Thematic maps for this topic are besides bachelor for diverse levels of geography.
An infographic entitled Income in Canada, 2016 Census of Population also illustrates some key findings on income trends.
For details on the concepts, definitions and variables used in the 2016 Census of Population, delight consult the Dictionary, Census of Population, 2016, Catalogue no. 98‑301‑Ten.
In addition to response rates and other data quality information, the Guide to the Census of Population, 2016, Catalogue no. 98‑304‑X, provides an overview of the various phases of the demography, including content determination, sampling design, drove, data processing, data quality cess, confidentiality guidelines and dissemination.
Acknowledgments
This report was prepared by Xuelin Zhang of Statistics Canada's Income Statistics Partitioning, with the assistance of staff members of Statistics Canada's Census Subject Matter Secretariat, Census Operations Division, and Communications and Broadcasting Branch.
Report a problem on this page
Is something not working? Is in that location information outdated? Can't detect what you lot're looking for?
Please contact united states and permit us know how we can help you.
Privacy notice
- Date modified:
Source: https://www12.statcan.gc.ca/census-recensement/2016/as-sa/98-200-x/2016012/98-200-x2016012-eng.cfm
0 Response to "Which Type of Household Has the Lowest Percentage of Families Living in Poverty"
Post a Comment