# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Chapter 13 – Half of children in foster care are Indigenous - Vanier

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The Vanier Institute of the Family is a national, independent, think tankdedicated to understanding families and family life in Canada.

# data[].attributes.body
Indigenous children are about 14 times more likely than non-Indigenous children to be in foster care among the children in Canada under 15.

The high rate of Indigenous children in foster care ressemble a lot the outcomes of the “Sixties Scoop.

Province with a big proportion of Indigenous have a lot more cases of children in foster case

# data[].attributes.body
Indigenous women represent 16% of all female homicide victims, and 11% of missing women, but Indigenous people are only 4.3% of the population in Canada.

Indigenous woman experience 50% more violence from their current or ex-partner

56% of Indigenous women have suffered physical assault, and 46% have experienced sexual assault.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Higher Rates of Unemployment - #5 of 8 Key Issues

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Historically, Indigenous people have experienced higher unemployment rates than other Canadians. Why? This blog post answers that question.

# data[].attributes.body
Poor education over generations create chronic unemployment over generations.

The lack of employment in due to many reason but the main ones are the cultural difference and the poverty

The unemployment rate for Indigenous people keep rising over the years (10.2% in 2008 to 14.2% in 2010)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
How many Canadian Indigenous voices will it take for us to remember that unemployment is an intersectional issue? Unemployment among Indigenous communities is definitely not rooted in a singular factor, but rather, is a quilt of a multitude of reasons spanning generations.

The Indigenous population comprises 4.9% of the Canadian population, totalling a rough estimate of 1.67 million people. Of this, the unemployment rate of Indigenous people is 11.6%, compared to that of non-Indigenous people is 7.6% from June to August 2021 (Bleakney et al., 2021). Why do Indigenous people have substantially higher unemployment rates? What barriers might they face in their pursuit of employment?

It is undeniable that Indigenous communities in Canada suffer from socioeconomic disparities fueled by a long, tragic history of mistreatment. Through the Residential School system, the 'cultural genocide' enforced by foreign settlers, as per the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, established a deeply painful chain of generational trauma, the effects of which are still evident today. Generational trauma is passed down in the family through genetics, and is experienced through specific behaviours of family members and their treatment of a child during early development. These behaviours give rise to problems like self-esteem issues, loss of identity, depression, mistrust, fatigue, and imbalanced immune responses, as well as a family history of diseases (Gillespie, 2020).

With such an array of interpersonal conflicts, it is expected that the Indigenous population of Canada should also receive comparable assistance from the government. Unfortunately, that is not the case. Indigenous communities receive little to no mental health aid that is actually accessible, explaining its adverse impact on employment rates. How is it equitable to expect trauma-ridden individuals to focus on job stability when they are still striving for a chance at mental stability?

Along with intergenerational trauma, Indigenous communities face socioeconomic and environmental disparities, creating a gap between the resources accessible to Indigenous versus non-Indigenous populations. One significant example of that gap is the inaccessibility of funded educational services. Indigenous communities on reservations do have access to one or two schools on the reserve for children under 18, however, these educational institutions tend to be so remote (or rather, the Indigenous reserves are), that countless children are sexually assaulted, kidnapped, and murdered on their way to and from school and never make it home. And even out of those who get home safely, their dreams of pursuing post-secondary education are often crushed once tuition costs and location are factored into the picture.

In 2018, Indspire, a charity focused on making education financially accessible to Indigenous students in Canada, published a summary of an in-depth survey of the experiences of Indigenous students pursuing post-secondary education (Post-secondary Experience of Indigenous Students, 2018). The most common message in the students' testimonies was the lack of funding and accessibility to financial aid in Canadian post-secondary institutions. Some students had no choice but to bring their children to class because they were unable to pay for childcare and were too far away from their family and community (Post-secondary Experience of Indigenous Students, 2018).

Stemming from this, another issue that the survey-takers mentioned is that without adequate financial aid for housing, childcare, food, and tuition, many students inevitably chose to drop out of school to work minimum wage jobs (if hired) to sustain themselves, and/or focus on their home life. Without a solid educational background and access to any external career-building resources, the youth remain unqualified for high-paying, stable jobs, and the unemployment rate increases.

Other major factors affecting Indigenous Canadians' employment struggles include environmental racism, mental illnesses - which often inform alcohol and drug usage - and poverty. An example of environmental racism would be strategic policies, creation and locations of institutions and houses surrounding a target community, which gives that population a specific disadvantage. Indigenous reserves often receive muddy, dark brown, contaminated water, a problem which issues the Boil Water Advisory, and the prey that they consume is ridden with dangerous contaminants, because of their proximity to mining rigs (Luo, 2021). This results in chronic illness, gastrointestinal disorders, and cancer. Due to the remote nature of Indigenous reserves, most individuals don't have quick access to reputable hospitals, public transportation, and driving tests, and cannot afford a car or be eligible for insurance.

There is also a very limited selection of minimum wage jobs in nearby communities. As a result, job security is scarce. When you pile on drug and alcohol usage triggered by mental illness and physical health issues, it is evident that an individual cannot possibly ace a job interview, or work efficiently in these conditions.

These socioeconomic factors tie into self-esteem issues and the emotional and physical effects of intergenerational trauma. This is hardly a position conducive to job interviews and employment, is it? And the undeniable, glaring topic of racism in the hiring process and work environment has not even been touched upon yet.

It is clear that there are many hurdles that Indigenous job seekers in Canada must overcome to simply get a foot in the door. Most non-Indigenous Canadians have never had to, and may never will, think about these issues, further contributing to negligence from recruiting agents and coworkers. It is important for all of us to stay educated and aware, seek out ways to help, ensure we are not unconsciously contributing to the aforementioned negligence, and have compassion when amplifying Indigenous voices.

SOURCES Bleakney, A., Masoud, H., & Robertson, H. (2021, November 16).
This article uses data from the Labour Force Survey to examine trends in employment, unemployment and labour force participation among indigenous people in the 18 months following the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. trends for indigenous and non-Indigenous people, by age group, sex, region and occupation, as well as for First Nations people and Métis, are presented. Labour market impacts of COVID-19 on Indigenous people living off reserve in the provinces: March 2020 to August 2021. https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/pub/45-28-0001/2021001/article/00037-eng.htm

Luo, C. (2021, November 14). The water crisis in Canada's First Nations communities. ArcGIS StoryMaps. https://storymaps.arcgis.com/stories/52a5610cca604175b8fb35bccf165f96

Gillespie, C. (2020, October 27). Generational trauma might explain your anxiety and depression-here's what it means. Health. https://www.health.com/condition/ptsd/generational-trauma Post-secondary experience of indigenous students following the Truth and Reconciliation Commission. (2018, September). https://indspire.ca/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/PSE-Experience-Indigenous-Students-Survey-Summary-Sept2018.pdf

This article was written by summer student Ilesha Prabhudesai and edited by summer student Cossette Penner-Olivera. This article was funded by the Government of Canada.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The Unemployment Crisis of Indigenous People in Canada | Journey to Diversity Workplaces

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
How many Canadian Indigenous voices will it take for us to remember that unemployment is an intersectional issue? Unemployment among Indigenous communities is definitely not rooted in a singular factor, but rather, is a quilt of a multitude of reasons spanning generations.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
In 2024, the majority of First Nations people living off reserve (86%), Métis (70%) and Inuit (82%) reported that it was very or somewhat important to have health care services that support Indigenous traditional medicines, healing and wellness practices.

Released today, new data from the Survey Series on First Nations People, Métis and Inuit sheds light on health care access and experiences among Indigenous people aged 15 and older. The purpose of this survey series is to improve the visibility of First Nations people living off reserve, Métis and Inuit in national statistics and to fill key data gaps with timely and culturally relevant data.

Over one-quarter of Indigenous people wait two weeks or more for non-urgent care with a health care provider

Primary health care providers serve a crucial role in health maintenance and are linked to better health outcomes. In 2024, 70% of Métis, 66% of First Nations people living off reserve, and 52% of Inuit consulted a health care provider for a non-urgent primary health care need (such as check-ups and prescription refills) in the 12 months prior to the survey.

Timely access to a primary health care provider is important, yet wait times have been increasing in Canada and they tend to be longer in more remote areas among Indigenous people. Among those who had consulted a primary health care provider in the 12 months prior to the survey, most reported wait times that ranged from two days to less than two weeks. Inuit were most likely to report waiting one month or more to access a primary health care provider (18%, compared with 14% for First Nations people living off reserve and 11% of Métis) (Chart 1).

When asked about their level of satisfaction with wait times, about half of First Nations people living off reserve (50%), Métis (52%) and Inuit (57%) reported being satisfied or very satisfied.

Over one-quarter of Indigenous people have unmet health care needs

Indigenous people often face barriers to health care that contribute to health disparities, including navigating complex health care policies and funding, and sometimes even having to travel outside their communities to access services.

Unmet health care needs in the 12 months prior to the survey were reported by 32% of First Nations people living off reserve, 30% of Métis, and 29% of Inuit. A higher percentage of off-reserve First Nations women than men reported unmet health care needs in the 12 months prior to the survey (Table 1).

When asked why their health care needs were unmet, commonly reported reasons among First Nations people living off reserve, Métis and Inuit were difficulty getting a referral to a specialist and not being given the correct treatment or prescription. Among First Nations people living off reserve and Inuit, another commonly reported reason was health care services not being in their area/being too far away (Table 2).

Among Indigenous people who need mental health care and seek such care, about three-quarters report needs that are partially met or unmet

Mental health disparities among Indigenous people have been widely reported. These disparities are rooted in historical factors such as colonial, assimilationist policies, that have had adverse direct and intergenerational impacts, as well as contemporary factors such as access barriers to mental health services.

Almost half (47%) of First Nations people living off reserve, 43% of Métis and 35% of Inuit reported needing mental health care in the 12 months prior to the survey. More First Nations, Métis, and Inuit women than men reported that they needed mental health care. The need for mental health care trended higher among younger than older First Nations people living off reserve, Métis and Inuit with significant differences found between the oldest and youngest age groups (Table 3).

Among those who needed mental health care and sought such care, 28% of First Nations people living off reserve, 23% of Métis and 22% of Inuit reported that their needs were fully met, while nearly three-quarters reported partially met or unmet mental health care needs.

Inuit report travelling significant distances from their community to access health care

For some Indigenous people, extensive travel is necessary to access health care, and this can result in financial burdens, emotional stress, anxiety, and feelings of isolation. Roughly one in five First Nations people living off reserve (18%), 16% of Metis and 40% of Inuit travelled outside their community to access health care services in the 12 months prior to the survey.

While most First Nations people living off reserve and Métis who travelled for health care in the 12 months prior to the survey reported travelling less than 500 km (55% and 63%, respectively), a different scenario was seen among Inuit, just over half of whom reported travelling 1,500 km or more (Table 4).

Roughly one in five Indigenous people report experiencing unfair treatment, racism or discrimination from a health care professional

Racism, discrimination, and marginalization within the health care system are documented barriers to health care for Indigenous people. About 24% of First Nations people living off reserve, 23% of Inuit and 18% of Métis reported that they experienced some form of unfair treatment, racism, or discrimination from a health care professional in the 12 months prior to the survey. First Nations women living off reserve and Métis women were nearly twice as likely to report this compared to men (Chart 2).

Among First Nations people living off reserve and Inuit who had experienced unfair treatment, racism or discrimination from a health care professional, the most reported setting was the hospital emergency room (50% for First Nations people living off reserve and 34% for Inuit), with 36% of Métis also reporting similar experiences in this setting. Among Métis, the most reported setting was the doctor's office (46%) (Table 5).

Most Indigenous people report that having health care services that support Indigenous traditional medicines, healing and wellness practices are very or somewhat important

In the Indigenous context, the integration of culturally appropriate and safe care-defined as care that reflects the values, traditions, and social norms of a patient's culture and where patients feel respected, safe and valued-is important. In addition, the Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada called on the Canadian health care system to recognize and integrate traditional knowledge, therapies and healing practices into the treatment approach for Indigenous people.

In 2024, health care services that support Indigenous traditional medicines, healing and wellness practices in the Canadian health care system were very or somewhat important to First Nations people living off reserve (86%), Inuit (82%) and Métis (70%) (Chart 3).

However, most Indigenous people experiencing unfair treatment, racism or discrimination felt that their concerns and values were not taken into consideration in their interactions with health care professionals. More specifically, among those who experienced unfair treatment, racism or discrimination in the 12 months preceding the survey, 67% of First Nations people living off reserve, 65% of Métis and 58% of Inuit reported that their health concerns were minimized or dismissed (Table 6).

A further 21% of First Nations people living off reserve, 12% of Métis and 9% of Inuit indicated that their cultural protocols were not respected (e.g., not allowed to smudge or use traditional medicines).

Of those who stated that culturally appropriate services were important, 68% of First Nations people living off reserve, 67% of Inuit and 61% of Métis reported such services would make them feel respected for their culture, beliefs and identity. Roughly half of First Nations people living off reserve (49%) and Inuit (50%) reported that such services would make them more likely to seek health care. About half of Inuit (48%), 41% of First Nations people living off reserve and 32% of Métis reported that these services would make them feel safer discussing sensitive or traumatic experiences (Table 7).

Did you know we have a mobile app?

Download our mobile app and get timely access to data at your fingertips! The StatsCAN app is available for free on the App Store and on Google Play.

Contact information

For more information, or to enquire about the concepts, methods or data quality of this release, contact us (toll-free 1-800-263-1136; 514-283-8300; infostats@statcan.gc.ca) or Media Relations ( statcan.mediahotline-ligneinfomedias.statcan@statcan.gc.ca).

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The Daily — Health care access and experiences among Indigenous people, 2024

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
In 2024, the majority of First Nations people living off reserve (86%), Métis (70%) and Inuit (82%) reported that it was very or somewhat important to have health care services that support Indigenous traditional medicines, healing and wellness practices.

# data[].attributes.body
Wait time have been increasing in Canada and health care as become even less accessible to indigenous people.

Many Inuit have report waiting one month or more to access basic health care.

Among those who needed mental health care 28% of First Nations people living off reserve said that their needs were fully met, but the rest said that their need where not met.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Access to primary health care services for Indigenous peoples: A framework synthesis - International Journal for Equity in Health

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Background Indigenous peoples often find it difficult to access appropriate mainstream primary health care services. Securing access to primary health care services requires more than just services that are situated within easy reach. Ensuring the accessibility of health care for Indigenous peoples who are often faced with a vast array of additional barriers including experiences of discrimination and racism, can be complex. This framework synthesis aimed to identify issues that hindered Indigenous peoples from accessing primary health care and then explore how, if at all, these were addressed by Indigenous health care services. Methods To be included in this framework synthesis papers must have presented findings focused on access to (factors relating to Indigenous peoples, their families and their communities) or accessibility of Indigenous primary health care services. Findings were imported into NVivo and a framework analysis undertaken whereby findings were coded to and then thematically analysed using Levesque and colleague’s accessibility framework. Results Issues relating to the cultural and social determinants of health such as unemployment and low levels of education influenced whether Indigenous patients, their families and communities were able to access health care. Indigenous health care services addressed these issues in a number of ways including the provision of transport to and from appointments, a reduction in health care costs for people on low incomes and close consultation with, if not the direct involvement of, community members in identifying and then addressing health care needs. Conclusions Indigenous health care services appear to be best placed to overcome both the social and cultural determinants of health which hamper Indigenous peoples from accessing health care. Findings of this synthesis also suggest that Levesque and colleague’s accessibility framework should be broadened to include factors related to the health care system such as funding.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Skip to text

Text begins

Highlights

In 2021, over one in six Indigenous people (17.1%) lived in crowded housing that was considered not suitable for the number of people who lived there.

The share of Indigenous people living in crowded housing declined overall among all three groups (First Nations, Métis and Inuit) from 2016 to 2021, including among First Nations people with Registered or Treaty Indian status living on reserve. However, for Inuit living in Nunavut, the Inuvialuit region and outside Inuit Nunangat, the share living in crowded housing increased from 2016 to 2021.

Multigenerational households were the most common living arrangement among First Nations people living in crowded housing (34.5%), followed by couples living with children (21.7%). Among Métis and Inuit living in crowded housing, the most common living arrangement was couples living with children.

Indigenous people were almost twice as likely to live in crowded housing in 2021, compared with the non-Indigenous population (17.1% versus 9.4%). However, the gap between the Indigenous and non-Indigenous population narrowed by 1.7 percentage points from 2016 to 2021.

In 2021, 16.4% of Indigenous people lived in a dwelling that was in need of major repairs.

First Nations people and Métis were less likely to be living in a dwelling in need of major repairs in 2021, compared with five years earlier. For Inuit overall, the share living in a dwelling in need of major repairs in 2021 was similar to 2016 levels, while Inuit living in Inuit Nunangat (+1.2 percentage points) were more likely to live in housing needing major repairs.

Indigenous people were almost three times more likely to live in a dwelling in need of major repairs (16.4%) in 2021 than the non-Indigenous population (5.7%). Nevertheless, the gap between the Indigenous and non-Indigenous population narrowed by 2.3 percentage points from 2016 to 2021.

Introduction

Adequate and suitable housing that provides residents with a safe environment to live and work in is essential for mental and physical well-being and a higher quality of life. Living in poor housing conditions, such as houses with overcrowding, mould or structural defects, is associated with the spread of infectious and respiratory diseases, chronic illness, injuries, and poorer mental health. ,

In 2019, the National Housing Strategy Act declared that "the right to adequate housing is a fundamental human right affirmed in international law" and recognized that having an affordable and safe place to live gives individuals and families the environment they need to succeed, grow and live in dignity. However, many Indigenous people in Canada live in inadequate housing, particularly among those living in remote or northern communities.

Although the 2016 Census of Population revealed that housing conditions among Indigenous people had improved overall, they remained much more likely to be living in inadequate housing than the non-Indigenous population.

This article uses new data from the 2021 Census of Population to report on housing conditions among Indigenous people in Canada. In addition, it will examine how housing conditions have changed among First Nations people, Métis and Inuit since 2016.

Over one in six Indigenous people live in crowded housing

Over one in six Indigenous people (17.1%, or 309,345 people) lived in housing that was considered not suitable for the number of people who lived there, according to the National Occupancy Standard. Housing suitability is a measure of crowding, which refers to whether a dwelling has enough bedrooms for the size and composition of the household.

Crowded housing is categorized into dwellings that have a shortfall of one, two, or three or more bedrooms. Just over 1 in 10 Indigenous people (10.7%) lived in housing that had a one-bedroom shortfall, 3.7% lived in housing with a two-bedroom shortfall, and 2.8% lived in housing with a shortfall of three or more bedrooms.

Nevertheless, the share of Indigenous people living in crowded housing declined by 0.9 percentage points from 2016 to 2021.

While the share of Indigenous people living in crowded housing remained much higher than the non-Indigenous population (17.1% versus 9.4%), the gap between the two groups narrowed from 9.5 percentage points in 2016 to 7.8 percentage points in 2021.

Fewer Indigenous people live in a dwelling in need of major repairs, compared with five years earlier

Approximately one in six Indigenous people (16.4%, or 295,745 people) lived in a dwelling that was in need of major repairs in 2021, down 2.7 percentage points from 2016.

Dwellings in need of major repairs include those that require major repairs such as defective plumbing or electrical wiring and those that require structural repairs to walls, floors or ceilings.

Although Indigenous people were almost three times more likely to live in a dwelling in need of major repairs (16.4%) than the non-Indigenous population (5.7%) in 2021, the gap narrowed by 2.3 percentage points from 2016.

First Nations people living on reserve are more likely to live in crowded housing

Over one in five First Nations people (21.4%, or 224,280 people) lived in crowded housing in 2021, with 12.9% living in housing with a one-bedroom shortfall, 4.8% living in housing with a two-bedroom shortfall and 3.8% living in housing with a shortfall of three or more bedrooms. Overall, the share of First Nations people living in crowded housing declined by 1.2 percentage points from 2016.

First Nations people who had Registered or Treaty Indian status under the Indian Act were over twice as likely to live in crowded housing, compared with First Nations people without Registered or Treaty Indian status (25.4% versus 11.2%).

First Nations people with Registered or Treaty Indian status living on reserve were almost twice as likely to live in crowded housing, compared with those who lived off reserve (35.7% versus 18.4%). However, the share of First Nations people with Registered or Treaty Indian status living in a crowded dwelling on a reserve fell at a faster pace from 2016 to 2021, compared with that of their counterparts living off reserve (-0.6 percentage points versus -0.2 percentage points).

Just over one-third (34.5%) of First Nations people in crowded housing were living in a multigenerational household, with at least one person living with a child and a grandchild. This share was higher (44.9%) among First Nations people with Registered or Treaty Indian status living on reserve.

In multigenerational households, grandparents play an important role in raising children and passing on traditional values, knowledge and teachings to younger generations. In addition, living in a multigenerational household may be a family's solution to housing issues in their community, such as affordability or housing shortages.

Other common living arrangements among First Nations people living in crowded housing included couples living with children (21.7%) and one-parent families (18.2%).

Nationally, First Nations people were most likely to live in crowded housing in Manitoba (35.7%) and Saskatchewan (34.3%) and least likely to do so in Atlantic Canada.

Fewer First Nations people living in a dwelling in need of major repairs

In 2021, almost one in five First Nations people (19.7%, or 206,845 people) were living in a dwelling in need of major repairs, down 3.9 percentage points from 2016.

First Nations people with Registered or Treaty Indian status were more likely to live in a dwelling in need of major repairs, compared with those without Registered or Treaty Indian status (22.8% versus 12.0%).

Over one-third of First Nations people with Registered or Treaty Indian status living on reserve lived in a dwelling in need of major repairs (37.4%), almost three times the rate of their counterparts living off reserve (12.7%). Nevertheless, the share of First Nations people with Registered or Treaty Indian status living in a dwelling in need of major repairs on a reserve fell at a faster pace from 2016 to 2021 than the share of those living off reserve (-6.5 percentage points versus -1.4 percentage points).

Nationally, the share of First Nations people living in dwellings in need of major repairs was highest in the Northwest Territories (30.0%) and Manitoba (28.7%) and lowest in Newfoundland and Labrador (8.6%).

Approximately 1 in 12 Métis live in crowded housing

Approximately 1 in 12 Métis (7.9%, or 49,565 people) were living in crowded housing in 2021, down 0.6 percentage points from 2016.

In 2021, 6.2% of Métis were living in housing with a one-bedroom shortfall, 1.3% were living in housing with a two-bedroom shortfall and 0.5% were living in housing with a shortfall of three or more bedrooms.

Among Métis living in crowded housing in 2021, one-quarter were living in a household composed of a couple with children (25.6%). Other common living arrangements among Métis living in crowded housing included one-parent families (23.3%) and multigenerational households (22.0%).

Nationally, the share of Métis living in crowded housing was higher in Yukon (10.9%), the Northwest Territories (10.7%) and Manitoba (10.0%), and lower in Newfoundland and Labrador (4.4%) and Nova Scotia (4.9%).

In 2021, 335,350 Métis were living in a census metropolitan area (CMA) of 100,000 or more people. Métis living in a CMA were more likely to live in crowded housing, compared with their counterparts living outside a large city (8.3% versus 7.5%). Among those living in large cities, the highest share of Métis living in crowded housing was seen in Kingston (14.8%), Toronto (11.3%) and Winnipeg (11.1%).

Métis less likely to be living in a dwelling in need of major repairs, compared with five years earlier

In 2021, approximately 1 in 10 Métis (10.0%, or 62,640 people) were living in a dwelling in need of major repairs, down 1.2 percentage points from 2016.

The share of Métis living in a dwelling in need of major repairs was lowest in Newfoundland and Labrador (8.2%), British Columbia (9.0%), and Alberta (9.0%), and highest in the Northwest Territories (19.4%), New Brunswick (13.7%) and Yukon (13.2%).

Métis living outside a large city were more likely to live in a dwelling in need of major repairs, compared with their counterparts living in a CMA (11.5% versus 8.7%). However, among Métis residing in CMAs, the share living in a dwelling in need of major repairs was higher for those in Trois-Rivières, Quebec (15.9%); Saint John, New Brunswick (14.6%); and Moncton, New Brunswick (12.5%).

Just over half of Inuit living in Inuit Nunangat-specifically Nunavut-live in crowded housing

Just over two in five Inuit (40.1%, or 28,260 people) lived in crowded housing in 2021, with 20.7% living in housing with a one-bedroom shortfall, 10.0% with a two-bedroom shortfall and 9.4% with a shortfall of three or more bedrooms.

This large share of Inuit living in crowed housing was mainly driven by those living in Inuit Nunangat, who were four times more likely to live in crowded housing than Inuit living outside Inuit Nunangat (52.9% versus 11.4%). Inuit Nunangat is the traditional homeland of Inuit, which includes Nunatsiavut (Labrador), Nunavik (northern Quebec), Nunavut and the Inuvialuit region (Northwest Territories).

Among Inuit living in Inuit Nunangat, those living in Nunavut (60.0%) were the most likely to live in crowded housing, while those in Nunatsiavut (17.7%) were the least likely to do so.

Within Inuit Nunangat, the lack of access to appropriate and affordable housing is well documented. Inuit living in these regions face a number of challenges, including high construction, operation and maintenance costs. In addition, due to barriers such as higher costs of living, fewer employment opportunities, lower income levels and the lack of housing markets for resale, many Inuit rely on public or subsidized housing.

Among Inuit living in crowded housing in 2021, the living arrangements were mostly made up of couples living with children (36.3%) and multigenerational households (35.4%). Over one-third of Inuit living in crowded housing in Inuit Nunangat were couples living with children (37.2%) or multigenerational households (36.7%). Outside Inuit Nunangat, approximately one-quarter of Inuit living in crowded housing were couples living with children (27.6%) or multigenerational households (22.9%).

Overall, the share of Inuit living in crowded housing edged down 0.6 percentage points from 2016 to 2021. There were fewer Inuit living in crowded dwellings in Nunatsiavut (-2.5 percentage points) and Nunavik (-5.1 percentage points) compared with five years earlier, and more Inuit living in crowded housing in Nunavut (+3.6 percentage points), the Inuvialuit region (+1.9 percentage points) and outside Inuit Nunangat (+0.4 percentage points).

Inuit living in Inuit Nunangat are more likely to live in a dwelling in need of major repairs

Over one-quarter of Inuit (26.2%, or 18,460 people) were living in a dwelling in need of major repairs in 2021. However, Inuit living in Inuit Nunangat were almost three times more likely to live in a dwelling in need of major repairs, compared with their counterparts living outside Inuit Nunangat (32.7% versus 11.5%).

Within Inuit Nunangat, approximately one-third of Inuit in Nunavut (35.5%) and the Inuvialuit region (33.0%) were living in a dwelling in need of major repairs, compared with one-quarter of Inuit living in Nunatsiavut (28.2%) and Nunavik (26.5%).

Overall, Inuit were as likely to be living in dwellings in need of major repairs in 2021 as they were in 2016. However, Inuit living in Inuit Nunangat were more likely to be living in a dwelling in need of major repairs (+1.2 percentage points) compared with five years earlier, while Inuit living outside Inuit Nunangat (-0.6 percentage points) were slightly less likely to be living in a dwelling requiring major repairs.

Looking ahead

In the coming months, releases from the Census of Population will provide more comprehensive data for Indigenous people living in Canada. Upcoming data releases for the 2021 Census include education and labour force characteristics, which will provide a more comprehensive socioeconomic portrait of Indigenous populations in Canada.

Additional information

Additional analysis on First Nations people, Métis and Inuit can be found in the Daily article; in the Census in Brief article on Métis in Canada, Catalogue no. 98-200-X; and in the article on shelter costs on reserve.

Additional information on First Nations people, Métis and Inuit can be found in the data tables; the Census Profile, Catalogue no. 98-316-X; and the Focus on Geography Series, Catalogue no. 98-404-X.

For details on the concepts, definitions and variables used in the 2021 Census of Population, please consult the Dictionary, Census of Population, 2021, Catalogue no. 98-301-X.

In addition to response rates and other data quality information, the Guide to the Census of Population, Catalogue no. 98-304-X, provides an overview of the various phases of the census, including content determination, sampling design, collection, data processing, data quality assessment, confidentiality guidelines and dissemination.

Acknowledgments

This report was prepared by Alexandria Melvin and Thomas Anderson of Statistics Canada's Centre for Indigenous Statistics and Partnerships, with the assistance of other staff members in that centre, and the collaboration of staff members of the Census Subject Matter Secretariat, Census Operations Division, Communications Branch, and Data Access and Dissemination Branch.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Housing conditions among First Nations people, Métis and Inuit in Canada from the 2021 Census

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
This Census in Brief article reports on housing conditions among First Nations people, Métis and Inuit in 2021. It describes the share of First Nations people, Métis and Inuit living in crowded dwellings and dwellings in need of major repair, and reports variation by provinces, territories, and the regions of Inuit Nunangat.

# data[].attributes.body
In 2021, 17.1% of Indigenous people lived in crowded housing considered not suitable for the number of people who lived there.

Indigenous people were almost twice as likely to live in crowded housing in 2021, compared with the non-Indigenous population (17.1% versus 9.4%).

First Nations people who had Registered or Treaty Indian status under the Indian Act were over twice as likely to live in crowded housing, compared with indigenous who did not

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Indigenous People face the worst housing outcomes in the country.

Hon. Marc Miller, Minister of Crown-Indigenous Relations [1]

To understand the complexities of the housing situation, some basic information on the reserve system, created in 1876, is required. The two articles linked below provide an overview of on-reserve housing.

In Canada, the Indigenous population grew by 9.4 percent from 2016 to 2021; however, the housing stock in Indigenous communities did not increase even close to the same rate. The 2022 federal budget allocated $4.3 billion over seven years towards mitigating the housing crisis, a figure that falls far short of what is needed, according to the Assembly of First Nations, which asked for $44 billion to deal with overcrowding and homes in dire need of repair in reserves.

The housing crisis at a glance:

18 percent of Indigenous households living in urban, rural and northern areas are experiencing core housing needs, meaning their housing falls below at least one of the adequacy, affordability or suitability standards.

18.8 percent of the Indigenous population live in low-income households.

Nearly a quarter of Indigenous children ages 14 and younger live in low-income households in 2021, more than double that of non-Indigenous children.

Almost one in six Indigenous people lived in a home needing major repairs in 2021, a rate nearly three times higher than the non-Indigenous population.

17.1 percent of Indigenous people live in overcrowded housing, almost double the number of non-Indigenous people living in crowded housing

Inuit living in crowded housing: 40.1 percent

First Nations living in crowded housing: 21.4 percent

Métis living in crowded housing: 7.9 percent

Indigenous people are overrepresented among the 35,000 people who experience homelessness each night in Canada.

Photo: Unsplash

Indigenous people are more than twice as likely to experience hidden homelessness (couch surfing), especially in the north, compared to their non-indigenous counterparts.

The higher rates of homelessness for Indigenous people are associated with systemic barriers in education, employment, and the intergenerational effects of colonization.

Indigenous people living off-reserve have lower homeownership rates and are more likely to live in subsidized housing.

According to the Parliamentary Budget Officer, there is a $636 million annual gap between what Indigenous households living in off-reserve rural, urban and northern communities pay for housing and what is deemed affordable.

Assembly of First Nations and the Institute of Fiscal Studies and Democracy released a joint study in 2021 that identified the need for housing in First Nation communities at about 55,000 new units and 81,000 renovations on reserve.

Impacts of the housing crisis

Physical and mental health & housing

As noted above, Indigenous people frequently live in overcrowded houses that need significant repairs. Common issues include poor ventilation, broken windows, leaky roofs, and water-damaged walls, all of which create a fertile environment for the rapid spread of viruses. Moisture in the walls and ceilings leads to mould growth, triggering asthma and respiratory diseases.

Overcrowded living conditions impact mental health in many ways:

Stress, anxiety and depression

Sleep problems

Physical health problems

Relationship difficulties

Education & housing

Not having access to a quiet space for homework and studying affects a child's school performance. Poor performance in school impacts a child's opportunity for higher education and employment. Children growing up in crowded houses may not get the sleep they need, leading to difficulty concentrating in school, fatigue and behavioural issues. Behavioural issues can result in negative interactions with teachers and peers, which may, later in life, impact personal and professional relationships.

Employment & housing

When physical and mental health and education are negatively impacted, finding and keeping stable employment is also impacted.

Culture & housing

The on-reserve housing crisis drives some community members to relocate to urban centres for better accommodation. Separated from family, community and culture, they are often at their most vulnerable. Students who leave communities for higher or better education opportunities may be unable to return to their communities due to the housing crisis.

Family violence & housing

Empty red dresses representing missing and murdered Indigenous women and girls and two-spirit people. Photo: Bob Joseph

Overcrowded, unsafe housing is a factor in the higher rates of gender-based violence against Indigenous women, girls and gender-diverse people. Housing shortages may force women and children to remain in unsafe living situations.

Climate change & housing

Indigenous communities are often identified as most vulnerable to climate change, specifically fire and flood events. When homes are destroyed, it exacerbates the already crowded living conditions as the same number of people are now living in fewer homes.

Reserves were frequently located on floodplains. People living in flood-prone reserves deal with substantial risks, including property damage, deteriorated health, and disrupted livelihoods and education due to repeated and sometimes prolonged, evacuations. Emergency removal from their homes and separation from family is also traumatic for residential school survivors.

80.7% of the 985 Indigenous reserves have some flood exposure in terms of either population or residential properties at the 100-year return period. [2]

The Kashechewan First Nation community members have been evacuated 14 times to at least 22 host communities across Ontario since 2004 (consecutively from 2004 to 2008 and 2012-2019) because of actual flooding events or flooding risk and the potential failure of the dike that surrounds the community. [3]

Reserves are also located in forests prone to wildland fires, and it's projected that wildland fires will increase in number, size, and intensity due to climate warming. Reserves are often remote with limited access, which makes evacuation challenging and exacerbates firefighting efforts.

Approximately 12.3% of the Canadian population currently live in the wildland-urban interface (WUI), which includes 32.1% of the on-reserve First Nations population. Currently, 17.8% of the on-reserve WUI population is exposed to FRI of ≤250 years, compared with only 4.7% of the remaining WUI population. [4]

The housing crisis is at the epicentre of many barriers Indigenous Peoples endure. The Liberals have pledged to develop an urban, rural, and northern Indigenous housing strategy. They have budgeted $300 million over five years to allow the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation to work with Indigenous communities to build to create a plan.

For those looking for further learning, our Working Effectively with Indigenous Peoples® training has helped thousands of individuals and organizations better understand Indigenous history, culture and how the Indian Act affects Indigenous Peoples today.

[1] Standing Committee on Indigenous and Northern Affairs, The Effects of the Housing Shortage on Indigenous Peoples in Canada, Evidence, 4 March 2022
[2] Chakraborty, L., Thistlethwaite, J., Minano, A. et al. Leveraging Hazard, Exposure, and Social Vulnerability Data to Assess Flood Risk to Indigenous Communities in Canada. Int J Disaster Risk Sci 12, 821-838 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13753-021-00383-1
[3] Thistlethwaite, J., Minano, A., Henstra, D., Scott, D., Indigenous Reserve Lands in Canada Face High Flood Risk, Centre for International Governance Innovation, Policy Brief No. 159 - April 2020
[4] Erni, S., Johnston, L., Boulanger, Y., Manka, F., Bernier, P., Eddy, B., Christianson, A., Swystun, T., Gauthier, S. Exposure of the Canadian wildland-human interface and population to wildland fire, under current and future climate conditions 9 April 2021
Featured photo: Siksika Nation, Alberta - May 2, 2021, Shutterstock

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Inadequate Housing and Crowded Living Conditions - #3 of 8 Key Issues

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
This article explains some of the basic information about the reserve system to understand the housing situation's complexities better.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Skip to text

Text begins

Start of text box
Mental wellness resources and crisis help for First Nations people, Métis and Inuit
End of text box

Acknowledgments

We would like to acknowledge the review of preliminary findings and/or draft versions of the report by Indigenous organizations, including Inuit Tapiriit Kanatami, the Métis National Council, and the National Association of Friendship Centres, and federal departments including Indigenous Services Canada and Crown Indigenous Relations and Northern Affairs Canada. The analysis and the report were greatly strengthened by the suggestions and recommendations provided in the process. We also thank Jodie Golden, Public Health Agency of Canada ( PHAC) for reviewing the draft report for safe messaging.

Abstract

Suicide rates have consistently been shown to be higher among First Nations people, Métis and Inuit in Canada than the rate among non-Indigenous people; however, suicide rates vary by community, Indigenous group, age group and sex. The historical and ongoing impacts of colonization, forced placement of Indigenous children in residential schools in the 19th and 20th centuries, removal of Indigenous children from their families and communities during the "Sixties scoop" and the forced relocation of communities has been well documented. These resulted in the breakdown of families, communities, political and economic structures; loss of language, culture and traditions; exposure to abuse; intergenerational transmission of trauma; and marginalization, which are suggested to be associated with the high rates of suicide. While suicide among Indigenous people has been examined previously, studies were based on a decades-old cohort or used an area-based geozones approach. Past studies also examined suicides among only one or two Indigenous groups using the same methodology. Finally, they did not examine suicide among Indigenous people for some geographies such as on and off reserve, rural areas and small, medium and large population centres.

This article attempts to fill some of these knowledge gaps using the 2011 Canadian Census Health and Environment Cohort (CanCHEC), resulting from a record integration between the 2011 National Household Survey (NHS) and the Canadian Vital Statistics Database (CVSD). It presents suicide rates for the 2011 to 2016 time period among self-identifying First Nations, Métis, Inuit, and non-Indigenous people in private dwellings in Canada. It also explores the influence of socioeconomic factors in the disparity in risk of suicide between First Nations people, Métis, Inuit and non-Indigenous people in Canada.

Suicide rates among First Nations people, Métis and Inuit were significantly higher than the rate among non-Indigenous people. The rate among First Nations people (24.3 deaths per 100,000 person-years at risk) was three times higher than the rate among non-Indigenous people (8.0 deaths per 100,000 person-years at risk). Among First Nations people living on reserve, the rate was about twice as high as that among those living off reserve. However, suicide rates varied by First Nations band, with just over 60% of bands having a zero suicide rate. The rate among Métis (14.7 Note E: Use with caution deaths per 100,000 person-years at risk) was approximately twice as high as the rate among non-Indigenous people. Among Inuit, the rate was approximately nine times higher than the non-Indigenous rate (72.3 versus 8.0 deaths per 100,000 person-years at risk). Suicide rates and disparities were highest in youth and young adults (15 to 24 years) among First Nations males and Inuit male and females.

Socioeconomic factors, including household income, labour force status, level of education, marital status and geographic factors such as living on or off reserve (First Nations people) and community size (Inuit) accounted for a notable proportion of the disparity in risk of death by suicide among First Nations people (78%), Métis (37%) and Inuit (40%) adults, 25 years or older. However, due to limitations of the data, the role of other previously-identified factors such as historical and intergenerational trauma, community distress, cultural continuity, family strength and mental wellness were not explored here.

The findings from this study could contribute further to the understanding of suicide among First Nations people, Métis and Inuit in Canada, particularly with respect to the variability in suicide rates and socioeconomic factors associated with the disparity in suicide risk.

Introduction

First Nations people living on and off reserve, Métis and Inuit, die by suicide at a higher rate than non-Indigenous people. These suicides not only result in loss to family, friends and peers leading to immense grief and bereavement, but also to the community and society at large, in particular when the deceased is a young person. The impact of suicide is more widespread and severe in small Indigenous communities where many people are related and many experience similar personal and collective adversity.

The suicide rate for children and youth was previously reported to be 10 times higher among males and 22 times higher among females between 2005 and 2007 in areas with a high percentage of First Nations people compared with low-percentage areas. In Inuit Nunangat, the Inuit homeland made up of the Inuvialuit Region (northwest part of Northwest Territories), Nunavut, Nunavik (Northern Québec), and Nunatsiavut (Northern Labrador), the suicide rate among children and youth was 33 times higher than for the rest of Canada between 2004 and 2008. In fact, suicide is one of the leading causes of death among children and youth in areas with a high proportion of First Nations people and in Inuit Nunangat.

In adults, the suicide rates (1991 to 2006) among First Nations people and Métis have been reported to be twice as high as that among non-Indigenous adults. The suicide rate among adults in Inuit Nunangat (1999 to 2003) was four times higher than the rate among all adults in Canada; the disparity was greater among men than women.

It is important to note, however, that national level suicide rates may underestimate regional or community level differences. For example, previous reports have shown that suicide rates among First Nations youth in British Columbia range from 0 to 633 deaths per 100,000 people by tribal council. In fact, the majority of these tribal councils had a zero or very low suicide rate. A similar regional variance has been seen among Inuit communities in Nunavut. The suicide rate varied from under 50 deaths per 100,000 in Whale Cove to just over 250 deaths per 100,000 people in Qikiqtarjuaq.

Several representatives of Indigenous peoples and governments, communities and government agencies have developed programs, policies or strategies to address the high suicide rate among First Nations people, Inuit and Métis. Development and evaluation of these require timely data on suicide rates. Many existing estimates of suicide rates are based on an older cohort (1991 Census cohort), which excluded non-tax filers and those under 25, or are from studies that used an area-based geozones approach. The latter classified areas with higher proportions of First Nations residents as First Nations "identity areas" or examined mortality rate in Inuit Nunangat as a proxy for the rate among Inuit. These approaches may have led to under or over estimation of suicide rates. In addition, past reports have only estimated suicide rates among one or two Indigenous groups using the same methodology. Finally, there are gaps in knowledge of suicide rates among Indigenous people for certain geographical areas, including urban areas and on or off reserve.

This article presents suicide rates among self-identifying First Nations, Métis, Inuit and non-Indigenous peoples, who lived in private dwellings (i.e., excluding those who were in collective dwellings and institutions), for the 2011 to 2016 time period. These findings are based on the 2011 Canadian Census Health and Environment Cohort (CanCHEC), which was developed by integrating records in the the 2011 National Household Survey (NHS) and the Canadian Vital Statistics - Deaths Database (CSVD from 2011 to 2016). Suicides that occurred over the follow up period of 5.63 years (from Census day on May 10, 2011 to end of follow-up on December 31, 2016) were used to generate age-standardized and age-specific mortality rates. These are presented as estimated number of deaths by suicide per 100,000 person-years at risk. The person-year concept is often used in cohort studies and represents unit of time when individuals are at risk of dying, and can be roughly understood as persons per year. Specifically, the article (1) presents suicide rates among First Nations people, Métis and Inuit alongside comparisons with the suicide rates of non-Indigenous people to explore disparities, a better understading of which could inform prevention strategies, (2) presents the estimated proportion of First Nations bands that experienced no suicides as an estimate of the variability in suicide rates, and (3) explores the role of socioeconomic and geographic factors in explaining the excess mortality from suicide among the three groups.

Results

Suicide among First Nations people in Canada

In the current analyses, among the 851,280 First Nations people (based on population estimates using the 2011 CanCHEC and its weights), including status and non-status individuals, living on and off reserve and in private dwellings in 2011, an estimated 1,180 people died by suicide between 2011 and 2016. This resulted in an age-standardized suicide rate of 24.3 deaths per 100,000 person-years at risk (Table 1), which was three times higher than the suicide rate among non-Indigenous people (8.0). The suicide rate was higher among males than females (29.6 versus 19.5, respectively). This pattern is similar to that seen among non-Indigenous people among whom males (12.3) also had a higher suicide rate than females (3.9). However, these numbers indicate that the disparity in suicide rates - measured by dividing the suicide rate among First Nations people by that among non-Indigenous people (or rate ratios [ RR]) - between First Nations and non-Indigenous peoples is higher among females than males (RR = 5.0 among First Nations females and RR = 2.4 among First Nations males; Table 1).

﻿

Suicide rates were highest among youth aged 15 to 24 (48.7; non age-standardized) (data not shown) when compared with other age groups. Suicide rates were lower among the older age groups. They were significantly higher among First Nations people than non-Indigenous people in most age groups under 45 years of age, but the disparities were widest among those under 15 years ( RR = 8.9) and 15 to 24 years ( RR = 6.3) (data not shown). This was particularly apparent among females between 15 and 24 years of age ( RR = 12.0; Table A.1 in appendix).

The suicide rate was nearly twice as high among First Nations people living on reserve than among First Nations people living off reserve (non age-standardized rate of 34.1 versus 19.5, respectively). Among on-reserve First Nations people, suicide rates were highest for males aged 15 to 24 years (78.8) (Chart 1). Rates were lower in the older age groups among both males and females on reserve (Table A.2 in appendix). Disparities were particularly elevated among 15 to 24-year-old First Nations females living on reserve ( RR = 15.8) in comparison to non-Indigenous females across Canada. Disparities were smaller in the older age groups, but continued to be seen until age 55 for females and age 45 for males. For those aged 55 and older, suicide rates were not statistically different between on-reserve First Nations and non-Indigenous people. A similar comparison to rates among First Nations people living off reserve was not done since most age-specific estimates were not published due to low cell counts or precision (table A.2 in appendix).

No significant differences were seen in the suicide rates among First Nations people (on and off reserve combined) by province and territory. However, in every province, the suicide rate among First Nations people was higher than the non-Indigenous rate (Atlantic provinces were grouped together to increase sample size; suicide rates were not reportable for the non-Indigenous population in Yukon, Northwest Territories and Nunavut). And, the rate ratios were notably higher in the Prairie provinces. It was 4.6, 4.5 and 3.5 in Manitoba, Saskatchewan and Alberta, respectively. In other provinces, it ranged from 1.9 to 2.6. Suicide rates did not differ significantly by type of population centre. It was 28.8 among First Nations people in rural areas, 22.9 Note E: Use with caution among those in small population centres and 18.8 Note E: Use with caution among those in large population centres. The suicide rate among First Nations people in each of these areas was significantly higher compared with non-Indigenous rates (9.3 for rural areas, 9.0 for small population centres and 7.2 for large population centres).

These national and provincial level estimates, while useful, underestimate the variability in the suicide rates among individual First Nations communities. Suicide rates were estimated at the band level using a geographic approach (for more details, please refer to the methods section). Of the just over 600 First Nations bands in Canada, 555 were associated with reserves that were enumerated in the 2011 NHS and with individuals in the CanCHEC cohort. Just over 60% of First Nations bands had experienced no suicides between 2011 and 2016. The proportion of bands without suicides, when examined in the context of the overall on-reserve suicide rate among First Nations people (34.1) highlights the obscuring of variability in the national level estimate. This proportion of bands with zero suicide rate varied by province and territory. A larger proportion of bands in the Atlantic provinces (55%), Ontario (71%), Saskatchewan (53%), British Columbia (78%), Yukon (80%) and Northwest Territories (74%) had zero suicide rates. In the other provinces, the proportion ranged from 39% to 44%. It should be noted that 31 reserves were incompletely enumerated in the 2011 Census many of which were in Ontario and Québec (a brief description of these reserves can be found in the methods section), and were not included in this analysis. Also, band members who did not live on their band's reserve at the time of the Census were not included in the analysis.

Socioeconomic factors have previously been shown to be associated with suicide among Indigenous people in North America. To examine if similar patterns were evident in the 2011 CanCHEC cohort, the role of individual socioeconomic factors such as household income, labour force status, level of education, marital status and geographic factors such as living on or off reserve on risk of death by suicide were examined for First Nations people aged 25 years or older. After adjusting for age and sex, the risk of suicide among First Nations adults was twice as high as that among non-Indigenous adults (hazard ratio [HR] = 2.0; Table A.4 in appendix). Adjusting for household income resulted in a decrease in risk by 35%. After further adjusting for labour force status, level of education and marital status, First Nations adults were still at a higher risk of suicide than non-Indigenous adults ( HR = 1.4). Together, these factors accounted for 66% of the excess suicide risk. Further adjusting for living on and off reserve resulted in a HR of 1.2, which was not significantly different from 1.0. Together, all these factors accounted for 78% of the excess suicide risk among First Nations adults.

Suicide among Métis in Canada

Based on the current analysis, of the 452,985 self-identifying Métis (based on population estimates using the 2011 CanCHEC and its weights) who lived in private households in 2011, approximately 415 individuals died by suicide in the 2011 to 2016 period. As a result, the suicide rate was 14.7 Note E: Use with caution deaths per 100,000 person-years at risk (Table 2), which was nearly twice as high as the rate among non-Indigenous people (8.0). The rate among Métis males (22.6 Note E: Use with caution ) was more than three times higher than the rate among Métis females (7.2 Note E: Use with caution ). The suicide rate was nearly twice as high among Métis (22.6 Note E: Use with caution ) as non-Indigenous males (12.3). However, the suicide rates for Métis (7.2 Note E: Use with caution ) and non-Indigenous females (3.9) were not significantly different from each other.

﻿

Among the provinces and territories, because of low counts when broken down, suicide rates for Métis could only be generated for Ontario, Manitoba, Saskatchewan, Alberta and British Columbia combined (Ontario and west). In these provinces, the rate among Métis (13.4 Note E: Use with caution ) were higher than that among non-Indigenous people (7.6). Suicide rates among Métis in rural (16.5 Note E: Use with caution ), small (12.8 Note E: Use with caution ) and large population centres (15.5 Note E: Use with caution ) were not significantly different. The rate among Métis in large population centres was higher than the rate among non-Indigenous people (7.2; marginally significant). Suicide rates could not be published for medium population centres due to low cell counts.

Among Métis adults over 25, after adjusting for age and sex, the risk of suicide was twice as high as that among non-Indigenous adults (hazard ratio = 1.9; Table A.4 in appendix). Adjusting for household income, labour force status, population centre type of place of residence, level of education and marital status accounted for 37% of excess suicide risk. The risk of suicide was 1.6 times higher among Métis than non-Indigenous people after adjusting for these factors.

Suicide among Inuit in Canada

There were approximately 59,220 Inuit in Canada in 2011 who lived in private households (based on population estimates using the 2011 CanCHEC and its weights). Among them, there were an estimated 250 deaths by suicide between 2011 and 2016. This lead to a suicide rate of 72.3 deaths per 100,000 person-years at risk (Table 3). This was nine times higher ( RR = 9.0) than the suicide rate among non-Indigenous people (8.0). The suicide rate was three times higher among Inuit males than Inuit females (109.3 versus 35.4 Note E: Use with caution , respectively).

﻿

Suicide rates among Inuit were highest in youth; the highest suicide rate was seen among Inuit males between 15 and 24 years of age (363.2; non age-standardized) living in Inuit Nunangat (Chart 2). Publishable estimates could only be produced for Inuit females between the ages of 15 and 24 and 25 to 34. Suicide rate among females 15 to 24 years of age was 108.9 Note E: Use with caution , which was 33 times higher than non-Indigenous females of that age (Table A.3 in appendix).

Rates among Inuit were also compared by Inuit Nunangat region. Rates were significantly higher among Inuit in Nunatsiavut (188.2 Note E: Use with caution ; non age-standardized) than those in Nunavik (98.1) and Nunavut (94.0). Rates among Inuit in Inuvialuit region could not be published due to low reliability of estimates.

The national, Inuit Nunangat and Inuit regional level estimates underestimate the variation in rates among individual Inuit communities. Among the 50 Inuit communities, 11 communities had a suicide rate of zero. However, for most communities (66%), estimates were too unreliable to be published. It should be noted that some deaths may not have linked to the NHS and others may not have been in Vital Statistics at the time of data integration. The latter shortcoming has previously been reported by Jack Hicks. These exclusions may have biased the estimate of number of communities without suicides.

In multivariate analyses, among Inuit adults 25 years and older, the risk of death by suicide was 4.8 times higher than the risk among non-Indigenous adults, after accounting for age and sex (Table A.4 in appendix). After further adjusting for household income, labour force status, level of education and marital status, the hazard ratio decreased to 3.4 suggesting that these factors accounted for 37% of the excess risk of death by suicide among Inuit. After adjusting for size of community (population centre type), Inuit adults were still at 3.3 times higher risk of suicide than non-Indigenous adults ( HR = 3.3). All combined, these factors accounted for 40% of the excess risk of suicide among Inuit adults.

Discussion

The report is the first to examine suicide rates among all three Indigenous peoples, including First Nations people, Métis and Inuit, of different age groups and living in different geographies using one methodology. However, gaps in knowledge remain. Further research is needed to assess long-term trends and estimate the role of other risk and protective factors of suicide among Indigenous peoples, which should be done in consultation with First Nations people, Métis and Inuit, as recommended by the Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada.

In the current analysis, the suicide rates among First Nations people, Métis and Inuit were many times higher than the non-Indigenous rate during the 2011 to 2016 time period. The rates were highest among Inuit and, specifically, adolescents and young adults. The suicide rate among First Nations people living on reserve was higher than that among those living off reserve, and among males than females. The higher suicide rate among males has been attributed to their tendency to use more lethal methods and to the differential effect of specific stressors in the two sexes. However, greater disparities were observed among First Nations females, where higher suicide rates were seen when compared with non-Indigenous females. These patterns are similar to what has been previously reported.

Of particular concern is the high rate of suicide among Indigenous children under 15. The suicide rate among First Nations boys, nationally, was four times higher than among non-Indigenous boys. It was ten times higher among First Nations boys living on reserve. As with other national trends, this rate may obscure regional differences. Previously reports have suggested that in some remote First Nations communities in Ontario, under-15 suicide rates were nearly 50 times higher than non-Indigenous rates. And, among Inuit communities of Nunatsiavut, the age-specific disparity was largest among 10 to 19-year-olds relative to their non-Indigenous counterparts outside Inuit Nunangat ( RR = 15.8). Also, rate of death by suicide among Inuit children 10 to 14 years of age appears to be increasing since 1989 although significant fluctuations are seen across time. In line with these rates among children, suicidal ideation among grade 5 to 8 school children in Saskatoon was nearly twice as high among Indigenous children as non-Indigenous children after accounting for mental health, cognitive abilities and bullying experiences. While risk factors for suicide among children are numerous and complex, a recent report suggests that Inuit children and youth in Nunavut experience a lack of mental health services that are specific to them, culturally relevant and of adequate quality.

And, while time trends were not examined here, suicide attempts among First Nations people in British Columbia have been reported elsewhere to be declining. Risk of self-inflicted injury hospitalization among Registered Indians, and disparity between them and their non-Indigenous counterparts decreased between 1991 to 2010. However, this is in contrast to trends in remote First Nations communities in Ontario. There, Indigenous youth suicide was previously reported to be on the rise because of the emergence of suicide among communities that previously did not experience it, exposure to suicide or suicide attempts among family members and peers, and increase in clusters of suicides.

Methods

Data

The 2011 Canadian Census Health and Environment Cohort (CanCHEC) used here is a population-based integrated dataset that follows the non-institutional (household) population enumerated in the 2011 National Household Survey (NHS) for different health outcomes such as mortality, cancer, and hospitalizations. Briefly, record integration for the 2011 CanCHEC was carried out using Statistics Canada's Social Data Linkage Environment (SDLE). The SDLE helps create linked population data files for social analysis through integration to the Derived Record Depository (DRD), a dynamic relational database containing only basic personal identifiers. Survey and administrative data are linked to the DRD using a generalized record integration software that supports deterministic and probabilistic integration.

The NHS is a voluntary survey, conducted in May 2011, of approximately 4.5 million (30%) private dwellings randomly selected from the 2011 Census of Population. The NHS covers all persons who usually live in Canada, including permanent and non-permanent residents, and individuals living on First Nations reserves, Métis settlements or Inuit communities. There were 36 incompletely enumerated First Nations reserves in the 2011 NHS. In 13 of these communities, enumeration was delayed because of forest fires in Northern Ontario and occurred at a later date. The NHS excludes residents of institutions (for example, hospitals, nursing homes, penitentiaries) and collective dwellings (for example, work camps, hotels, shelters).

Records for approximately 6.7 million NHS respondents were eligible for integration; 97% linked to the DRD using a probabilistic approach based on telephone number, surnames, given names, birthdate, and place of residence. No differences in integration rates were found by collection mode, province, sex, or birth decade. To ensure representativeness of the linked cohort, weights were calculated to adjust for non-integration.

To protect the confidentiality of Census respondents, data made available for analysis did not contain personal identifiers such as name, and address. In addition, estimates based on small cell counts (fewer than five deaths or fewer than 10 total individuals) were suppressed.

Variables

Self-reported Indigenous identity, age, sex, household income, labour force status, highest level of education, marital status and province of residence variables were available in the 2011 NHS dissemination dataset. Variables for the Inuit Nunangat regions were generated using Standard Geographical Classification (SGC) codes. Similarly, a variable for on and off-reserve areas of residence was generated using SGC. A binary suicide variable was created using ICD-10 codes in the "Underlying cause of death" variable in the CVSD. Generation of suicide and person-years at risk variables are described in the following section.

Estimation of weighted suicide rates

For suicide rate estimates, each person's time at risk of death by suicide was split into single years of follow-up, and within each year of follow-up, into durations before and after birth date. In the process, each person was aged on his or her birthday. This allows for the appropriate categorization into age groups for computing suicide rates. Weighted age-standardized suicide rates (ASMRs) (see figure 1 for a brief description of this measure) and their 95% confidence intervals were estimated. Those under the age of one were excluded from the analysis due to under-representation of this group in the integrated dataset. Briefly, ASMRs were computed by dividing the count of cohort members who died by suicide in the follow-up period by the total person-years at risk. Age standardization was done with age-specific mortality rates in 5-year age groups using the 2011 total Indigenous population as the reference population. Weighted age-specific suicide rates generated without age standardization were used for comparisons between age groups within an Indigenous group or between an Indigenous group and the non-Indigenous population. These rates were also used to compare suicide rates in the on and off-reserve First Nations populations since their age structures were somewhat similar in 2011 (median age: 23.9 and 27.1 years, respectively). Suicides were identified using the following International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems 10th Revisions ( ICD-10) codes: X60-X84, Y87.0. For each member of the cohort, person-years of follow-up were calculated as the number of days from the beginning of the study period to the date of death or end of study divided by 365.25. Variance was calculated using 500 bootstrap weights.

Description for Figure 1
﻿

Figure 1 is a schematic showing the method used to estimate the suicide rate using number of deaths as the numerator and person-years as the denominator. The schematic illustrates a hypothetical example with seven individuals who were "followed" from May 10, 2011 (Census day) to December 31, 2016 (end of follow-up period) to see if they had died. In this example, three of the seven individuals died during follow-up. Person 1, 4 and 7, who died during the follow-up period, each contributed 3.0, 1.5 and 4.2 person-years at risk, respectively, to the denominator. The others, who were alive as of December 31, 2016, each contributed 5.6 person-years to the denominator. In all, the seven individuals contributed 31.1 person-years to the denominator. The crude mortality rate is calculated by dividing the number of deaths by the total person-years contributed by the seven individuals, and multiplied by 100,000. In this hypothetical example, the crude suicide-related mortality rate is 9,646.3 deaths per 100,000 person-years of follow-up.

Age-standardized and age-specific suicide rates, expressed as the number of deaths by suicide per 100,000 person-years at risk, were generated by sex, Indigenous identity and select geographic areas. Indigenous identity, as self-reported in the 2011 NHS Survey, included: First Nations, Métis, Inuit, Multiple Indigenous identity, Indigenous identity responses not indicated elsewhere and non-Indigenous. However, in this paper, only estimates for single identity groups are presented. Geographic areas studied include: province/territory; on or off-reserve; rural areas or small, medium and large population centres, and for Inuit, inside/outside Inuit Nunangat and by the four regions of Inuit Nunangat (Nunatsiavut, Nunavik, Nunavut, and the Inuvialuit region), as well as outside Inuit Nunangat. Rate ratios, or the ratio of suicide rate among First Nations people, Métis or Inuit over suicide rate among non-Indigenous people were computed to examine the magnitude of disparity in the Indigenous group compared to the non-Indigenous population. To estimate variance of the rate ratios, variance and covariance of the mortality rates in the Indigenous group of interest and non-Indigenous population were estimated using PROC RATIO in SAS-callable SUDAAN. Variance of the rate ratios was then computed using Taylor linearization and the variance and covariance estimates from PROC RATIO, and used in generating 95% confidence intervals.

Hypothesis testing was done to identify suicide rates that were significantly different from one another using p<0.05. The weighted number of suicides and suicide rates were not published if (1) the unweighted number of suicides in a cell was less than five, (2) the weighted population count in the cell were less than 10, or (3) coefficient of variance (CV) was greater than 33.3% (40% for those under 15 years). Weighted numbers of suicides were also randomly rounded to base five. ASMRs with CV greater than 16.6% and less than or equal to 33.3% are presented with an "E" to indicate that these should be used with caution.

Estimation of suicide rate by First Nations band

For estimating suicide rates by First Nations band, reserve CSDs associated with each band were grouped. Reserves that were shared by multiple bands were grouped separately. This was done for seven reserves. Three of these had a population of 10 or less. And, one was incompletely enumerated in the 2011 NHS. This grouping resulted in about 600 First Nations bands. Of these, 561 included individuals that were in the 2011 CanCHEC. Others were associated with reserves that were incompletely enumerated in the 2011 NHS or had participated in the 2011 Census and not the NHS. In the end, 555 bands were included in the analysis. Suicide rates were computed by First Nations band, from which the number and percentage of bands with a reportable zero suicide rate were identified. The percentage of bands with a zero suicide rate were calculated with and without the reserves that were associated with multiple bands and were found to be similar.

Multivariate analysis

To examine the role of socioeconomic and geographic factors in the excess risk of suicide among Indigenous people relative to non-Indigenous people, Cox proportional hazards modelling was performed. Analyses were restricted to those 25 years and older to allow for the use of labour force status, level of education and marital status as covariates. For this analysis, age at baseline on Census day, was used since other covariates also had the same reference period. Hazard ratios for suicide were estimated among First Nations people, Métis and Inuit (with non-Indigenous people as the reference group). Covariates were entered sequentially into the model in this order: age group together with sex, household income quintile (based on after-tax income adjusted for economic family size), labour force status (employed, unemployed and not in the labour force), highest level of education (less than high school, high school, post-secondary education below Bachelor's level and university degree), marital status (never legally married or single, legally married and not separated, separated but still legally married, divorced or widowed) and living on or off reserve (for First Nations people) or in population centres or rural areas (for Métis and Inuit). Household income quintiles were generated for each province and territory separately to account for regional differences. In secondary analysis, household income was used as a continuous variable or household income quintiles were generated at the national level and used in place of the original income quintile variable to examine the robustness of the influence of this predictor on the relative risk of death by suicide among First Nations people, Métis and Inuit. Covariates were chosen based on previous literature on the relationship between socioeconomic factors and suicide. and the availability of related variables in the 2011 NHS data.

From the hazard ratios (age and sex-adjusted and additionally adjusted for socioeconomic factors), the percent of excess risk of suicide among First Nations, Métis and Inuit people accounted for by household income, labour force status, highest level of education, marital status and geography was computed. The proportion of excess mortality explained was calculated as the difference between the age and sex-adjusted and the final hazard ratios, divided by the former minus 1. Analyses were not carried out separately by sex due to sample size limitations.

Assessing validity of suicide rates

Suicide rates based on the linked 2011 CanCHEC cohort were compared with previously generated estimates using different methodologies to assess validity.

The non age-standardized suicide rate for the total population of Canada between 2009 and 2013 was previously estimated to be 11.4 deaths per 100,000 people; in comparison, in the CanCHEC cohort, the overall suicide rate was 10.5 deaths per 100,000 person years between 2011 and 2016. While there are no published rates of suicide for First Nations people, Métis and Inuit for the 2011 to 2016 period, suicide rates for all individuals in Inuit Nunangat, which is home to 73% of Inuit in Canada, was previously estimated to be 83.5 deaths per 100,000 people. In the 2011 CanCHEC cohort, the rate was 83.5 deaths per 100,000 person years at risk. However, the estimates by Inuit Nunangat region between 2011 and 2016 (167.3 Note E: Use with caution in Nunatsiavut, 87.5 in Nunavik and 83.1 in Nunavut) were somewhat different in comparison to previous estimates from the 2009 to 2013 period (185.4, 98.3, 79.0, respectively). While, the estimates are similar, there are several potential reasons for this discrepancy between the two sets of estimates. While there is some overlap in time periods for the two estimates (2009 to 2013 for previous estimates and 2011 to 2016 for the estimates in this report), they are not identical. There is some year-to-year fluctuation in suicides rates. For example, in Nunavut, previous estimates suggest that the rate ranged from 58.2 to 108.5 deaths per 100,000 people. Some deaths that occurred between 2011 and 2016 were not linked to the 2011 NHS. Also, the CanCHEC cohort excludes institutional population (e.g., nursing homes, jails), and those living in collective dwellings (e.g., motels, hotels, rooming houses) at the time of census collection and those that were not enumerated by the 2011 NHS. The denominators used in the two studies are also different; in the previously published tables, the suicide rates are per 100,000 people; in the current study, the rates are per 100,000 person years.

Limitations

Several limitations of the analysis should be noted. Suicide rates presented in this article may underestimate the true rates because of (1) exclusion of the institutional population and population living in collective dwelling, (2) exclusion of persons not enumerated by the 2011 NHS including the homeless among whom Indigenous people are overrepresented, (3) non-integration of some deaths between 2011 and 2016 to the 2011 NHS, (4) potential integration error, (5) potential misclassification of suicides in the CVSD to avoid stigmatization or as a result of misclassification as an accident, or inability in ascribing a cause, etc., and (6) potentially missing deaths, due to processing delays, in Vital Statistics at the time of data integration. Furthermore, Indigenous identity in the Census is self-reported, which may have led to underestimation or overestimation of suicide rates in some Indigenous groups. Also, 36 Indian reserves and Indian settlements were incompletely enumerated in the 2011 NHS, which could have resulted in under or over-estimation of suicide rates. Most (29) of these reserves were in Québec and Ontario, with the rest in Saskatchewan, Alberta and British Columbia. Among the ones in Québec and Ontario, some are proximal to Census Metropolitan Areas (CMA) while others were rural or remote. The former includes Kahnawake, Kanesatake and Wendake. Mortality rates for small areas and small subgroups of the population may experience substantial year-to-year random fluctuations since death is a relatively rare event, particularly death by suicide. Finally, baseline socioeconomic and demographic factors used in the multivariate analysis may not reflect conditions at the time of death. This may have led to some biases in the findings.

Appendix

﻿ ﻿ ﻿ ﻿ ﻿ ﻿

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Suicide among First Nations people, Métis and Inuit (2011-2016): Findings from the 2011 Canadian Census Health and Environment Cohort (CanCHEC)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The article presents suicide rates for the 2011-2016 time period among self-identifying First Nations, Métis, Inuit, and non-Indigenous people in private dwellings in Canada. It also explores the influence of socioeconomic factors in the disparity in risk of suicide between First Nations people, Métis, Inuit and non-Indigenous people in Canada.

# data[].attributes.body
The suicide rate of adult indigenous people is twice the amount of non-indigenous people.

The biggest cause of those suicide is the trauma from their experience and the colonization.

Indigenous people have a bad mental health and have more difficulty then non-Indigenous people to get help which lead to suicide.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Higher Rates of Suicide - #8 of 8 Key Issues

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Learn about the higher rates of suicide among Indigenous peoples in Canada and the complex factors that contribute to this issue.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Indigenous Safe Drinking Water Crisis in Canada- overview — The Indigenous Foundation

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Importance of Clean Water In 2010, the United Nations General Assembly recognized the basic human rights to water and sanitation, decreeing that everyone has the right to sufficient, continuous, safe, acceptable, physically accessible, and affordable water for personal and domestic use. The Sixth

# data[].attributes.body
In 2018, there were 174 unsafe drinking water advisories in over 100 First Nations communities

Every year many Indigenous people lose their life due to the bad water they have.

Canada has the world’s third largest freshwater reserves but 618 First Nations Communities are not supplied with safe drinking water.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Indigenous Services Canada has announced it won't end long-term advisories until 2023 at the earliest. In 2015, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau committed to ending all long-term drinking water advisories by March 2021. When that deadline passed, the government recommitted to ending long-term advisories without a target date.

This announcement comes as no surprise to many First Nations outraged by the lack of progress on ending drinking water advisories in their communities, and the growing divide and gap that exists between Indigenous and non-Indigenous communities.

Examples of First Nations across Canada enduring persistent drinking water issues are endless. Neskantaga First Nation in Northern Ontario has been on a long-term boil water advisory since 1995. Semiahmoo First Nation recently had a 16-year boil water advisory lifted, after connecting to the nearby Metro Vancouver water line through the city of Surrey, B.C. The community is only a five-minute drive from the city of White Rock.
Read more: Water crisis in First Nations communities runs deeper than long-term drinking water advisories
Internationally, the right to water is recognized by the United Nations. It entitles everyone, without discrimination, access to safe, sufficient, physically accessible and affordable water. In Canada, while our water quality is ranked among the best in the world, First Nations across the country struggle to access a safe supply.

That's why the government's announcement wasn't surprising to those of us who have been following this issue for years. The true crisis is much greater than what is conveyed in the media, and there's a lack of awareness about how water is managed in First Nation communities.

Small systems not under federal jurisdiction

While the federal government is responsible for funding and overseeing water management in First Nations, this does not typically include small systems and individual wells and cisterns. And provincial governments and municipalities have no jurisdiction over water management on reserve.

In addition, the Safe Drinking Water for First Nations Act was enacted despite criticism from First Nations.

First Nations face disproportionately higher numbers of drinking water advisories, and are subjected to these advisories for longer periods of time than non-Indigenous people. This is due to inadequate and chronic under-funding, regulatory voids and a lack of resources to support water management. The number of water-borne diseases in First Nations communities is 26 times higher than the national average, and people living on reserve are 90 times more likely to have no access to running water compared to non-Indigenous people in Canada.

At any given moment, there are more than 100 drinking water advisories in place for First Nations across Canada, according to the federal government, the First Nations Health Authority and Saskatoon Tribal Council. But this figure doesn't come close to revealing the real crisis. It is merely the tip of the iceberg.

The pervasiveness of the drinking water crisis is slowly stifling and oppressing First Nations across Canada.

Still no access

It's been 10 years since the federal government's National Assessment on Water and Wastewater Systems in First Nations Communities highlighted the state of water for First Nations people.

The government report estimated that 13.5 per cent of First Nations had trucked-in water, 13 per cent had individual wells and 1.5 per cent had no water service at all. Since the Liberal government announced in 2015 its intention to eliminate long-term drinking water advisories, attention has been placed on federally funded drinking water systems, which are larger community systems.

THE CANADIAN PRESS/John Woods

But many communities, like those in the Prairies or more remote locations, have hundreds of advisories in place for individual wells or cisterns that fail to meet Canadian Drinking Water guidelines. These systems are not well-funded or closely monitored.

In many of these First Nations, water has elevated levels of heavy metals, including iron and manganese, and contaminants like E. coli. Residents don't trust the drinking water and there is a preference to rely on bottled water as a reliable drinking water source. Even Nations near urban centres, like Tsuut'ina Nation just outside of Calgary, struggle to trust the water from their wells.

Taking matters into their own hands

According to Mario Swampy, council member with Samson Cree Nation, residents are dealing with more than 100 drinking water advisories affecting their individual systems. His estimation illustrates how this water crisis is far more serious than national media would suggest.

This has lead to Samson Cree Nation taking matters into its own hands by creating a community-based committee called Nipiy. It brings together community members, leadership, consultants, academics and non-profits to collaboratively work on water management.

Samson Cree Nation Facebook page

Samson Cree Nation, in an attempt to close the existing gap between Indigenous and non-Indigenous communities on safe drinking water, is struggling to adequately address its ongoing boil water advisories that aren't captured in the federal government's commitment.

In December 2020, the government earmarked an additional $1.5 billion to address water management. The recent federal budget committed additional investments to close the infrastructure gap that exists between Indigenous and non-Indigenous communities. While these investments help, they will not be enough to undo the damage caused by decades of underfunding.
Read more: Federal budget 2021: $18 billion is a step towards closing gaps between Indigenous and non-Indigenous communities
First Nations organizations like the Atlantic First Nations Water Authority are moving towards autonomy and control over their water. But more is needed.

What to do

Adequate funding for infrastructure and improvements, operations and maintenance, capacity-building and training that promote building, growth and development are key.

In order for First Nations, including communities like Samson Cree Nation, to achieve equity in water access, quality and quantity, the current model of dependency must be challenged in changed. Full autonomy, decision-making and control over their internationally recognized right to water is the only way forward.

If we really want to close the gap between Indigenous and non-Indigenous communities on safe drinking water, we need to look across the entire spectrum - from First Nations that rely on bottled water to those with individual wells and communities with reliable tap water. We must address the real magnitude of this crisis.

In 1991, the federal government committed to achieving equality for all in accessing safe water by 2001. Thirty years later, not only have we failed to achieve this, we have also failed to understand just how far from equality we really are.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Tip of the iceberg: The true state of drinking water advisories in First Nations

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Indigenous Services Canada has announced it won't end long-term advisories until 2023 at the earliest. In 2015, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau committed to ending all long-term drinking water advisories by March 2021. When that deadline passed, the government recommitted to ending long-term advisories without a target date.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Over-representation of Indigenous persons in adult provincial custody, 2019/2020 and 2020/2021

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
This Juristat article presents data and information on the extent of Indigenous over-representation in correctional systems across Canada in 2019/2020 and 2020/2021, using three new corrections indicators recently developed: Incarceration Rates for Indigenous and non-Indigenous persons, the Over-Representation Index, and the Custodial Involvement Rate. In addition, trends in the use of bail and remand will be explored, along with possible impacts on over-representation. The findings are presented from five provincial correctional service programs reporting to the Canadian Correctional Services Survey (CCSS): Nova Scotia, Ontario, Saskatchewan, Alberta, and British Columbia.

# data[].attributes.body
On an average day there are 42.6 Indigenous people in provincial custody per 10,000 population compared to 4.0 non-Indigenous people.

Indigenous people oftenly understand the law differently and don't know that their act are wrong.

In 2020 and 2021, the average daily count of Indigenous persons in custody was about 4,100.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Overincarceration of Indigenous people: a health crisis

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Indigenous people are greatly over-represented in the incarcerated population in Canada.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Postsecondary educational attainment and labour market outcomes among Indigenous peoples in Canada, findings from the 2021 Census - Indigenous Watchdog

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Overview of the study Statistics Canada:This study uses data from the 2021 Census to report on postsecondary educational attainment and labour market outcomes among Indigenous adults aged 25 to 64 years.

# data[].attributes.body
A bit under half of Indigenous adults completed a postsecondary qualification in 2021. The higher level was usually finishing their Cegep. This is the same for woman and men.

Indigenous women would oftenlly complete a higher level of education then Indigenous mens

Among Indigenous adults, the rate of having a postsecondary qualification was higher in areas closer to economic centres.

# data[].attributes.body
the unemployment rate of Indigenous people went up of 4% from June to August in 2021

The Residential School and the cultural genocide created a trauma that parent transmit to their child leaving them with mental problem like low self esteem.

Indigenous communities receive almost no help for their trauma which make finding a job very hard.

# data[].attributes.body
Indigenous peoples represent 30% among the 150,000 to 300,000 homeless in Canada

Indigenous people living off-reserve have lower homeownership rates and are more likely to live in subsidized housing

Overcrowded living condition impact mental health in many way such as: Stress, sleep problem, drepression and more...

# data[].attributes.body
Indigenous people living on reserve are 50% more likely to kill themselves then Indigenous living off reserve.

Suicide rates are higher for young adult from 15 to 24 year old in Indigenous community

The main cause of those death is the Indian act and the colonization.

# data[].attributes.body
Neskantaga First Nation in Northern Ontario has been on a long-term boil water advisory since 1995.

The government estimated that 13.5% of Indigenous had trucked-in water, 13% had individual wells and 1.5% had no water service at all.

residents deal with more than 100 drinking water advisories affecting their individual systems.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
A Winnipeg mother says she was scarred for life when her first child was taken away at birth by social workers, who told her she was unfit to parent her newborn daughter because she was just 17 at the time.

"I don't know how one could fully heal from that trauma," said the woman, now 41, whom The Canadian Press has agreed not to identify because of her family's involvement in the child welfare system. "Having a baby taken away from birth ... the bond is broken."

New census data suggests Indigenous children continue to be overrepresented in the child welfare system.

Statistics Canada released data from the 2021 census that says Indigenous children made up 53.8 per cent of all children in foster care.

This has gone up slightly from the 2016 census, in which 52.2 per cent of children in care under age 14 were Indigenous. At the time, only about eight per cent of kids that age in Canada were Indigenous.

More than three per cent of Indigenous children living in private households in 2021 were in foster care compared to the 0.2 per cent of non-Indigenous children. Nationally, Indigenous children accounted for 7.7 per cent of all children 14 years of age and younger.

Statistics Canada says because of difficulties in collecting census data on First Nations and in other Indigenous communities, some caution should be exercised in comparing census years.

In recent years, there has been a significant push from Indigenous leaders and child welfare advocates across the country to address the myriad systemic issues contributing to the overrepresentation of Indigenous children in care. But experts say factors like colonialism, chronic underfunding of child welfare systems, discriminatory practices and poverty remain.

The child welfare system was part of the Winnipeg mother's life since before she was born. Some of her siblings were taken from her mother, a residential school survivor, as part of the Sixties Scoop. She was allowed to stay with her mother, but she doesn't know why.

The pain of having her daughter taken was repeated when her second and third children became permanent wards of the province.

She used alcohol to cope with a family member's death at the time, she said. Her children were living with their father when workers apprehended them due to poverty, she said.

Years later, when the woman's granddaughter went into the system and she became pregnant with her fourth child, she knew she needed to break the cycle. She started working with First Nations advocates and parenting groups to learn more about the culture that was stripped from her.

"I've done so much healing. I learned about our grief and loss and about positive coping skills," said the woman, who is now caring for her granddaughter and four-year-old son.

"Learning my culture and traditions really saved me."

There are about 10,000 children in care in Manitoba and about 90 per cent are Indigenous.

The Winnipeg mother said while there have been some improvements in the child welfare system thanks to First Nations authorities and social workers, prevention is still lacking.

"It should be about keeping families together and empowering the parent.... They need something to keep the families together."

Mary Teegee, executive director of Carrier Sekani Family Services in British Columbia, said generations of children have been ripped from their parents through the residential school system and the Sixties Scoop, and are being raised without the support of their families, culture or communities.

This has contributed to addictions, mental health issues and trauma, she said.

"This isn't just because Indigenous people can't take care of their children. It's because of generation after generation of attacks on family, class and nation structures."

Cora Morgan, the First Nations family advocate for the Assembly of Manitoba Chiefs, said without proper investments in prevention and healing, government reforms alone won't get to the root of the issue.

"Right now we've been in a situation where government dictates how things are going to happen," she said.

"There needs to be free will of our nations to be able to bring children home."

Justin Trudeau's Liberal government introduced Indigenous child welfare legislation in 2019 and it came into force in 2020.

The legislation is supposed to affirm the rights of First Nations, Inuit and Métis peoples to exercise jurisdiction over child and family services with the goal of reducing the number of Indigenous children in care.

Indigenous Services Canada says as of July, 37 groups have sent notices of intention to exercise legislative authority and 27 have requested to enter into co-ordination agreements. Out of this, two First Nations have entered into co-ordination agreements with the federal and provincial governments.

Experts say it's too soon to tell what effect the legislation will have on reducing the number of Indigenous kids in care.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
More than half the children in care are Indigenous, census data suggests | CBC News

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
A Winnipeg mother says she was scarred for life when her first child was taken away at birth by social workers, who told her she was unfit to parent her newborn daughter because she was just 17 at the time.

# data[].attributes.body
Indigenous children represent 53.8% of all children in foster care in 2021.

Justin Trudeau's introduced Indigenous child welfare legislation in 2019 and it came into force in 2020.

Social worker told a 17 year old woman that she was unfit to have a child and took it away.

# data[].attributes.body
In my own word

In the last years, a lot of indigenous woman have been missing and murder and 582 cases across the country where found.

Aboriginal women experience a lot more violence at home for exemple: They are 3.5 times more likely to experience violence than non-Aboriginal women.

More then half of Indigenous women reported suffering violence at homes, like being beaten, choked, orbeing sexually assaulted, versus 37% of non-Aboriginal women

# data[].attributes.body
Indigenous people lose more time of their life being incarcerated than to premature death from cancer, injuries, heart disease and stroke.

Most of Indigenous people have a bad health due to their incarcerated time.

Indegenous woman lose 6–9 times more years of life than non-Indigenous women,

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Postsecondary educational attainment and labour market outcomes among Indigenous peoples in Canada, findings from the 2021 Census

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
This study uses data from the 2021 Census to report on postsecondary educational attainment and labour market outcomes among Indigenous adults aged 25 to 64 years. As First Nations people, Métis and Inuit are more likely to live in certain regions, which can impact their participation in both education and the labour market, the article pays particular attention to patterns in educational attainment and employment among those residing in remote areas, on reserve, and communities across Inuit Nunangat.

# data[].attributes.body
In 2021 a little under half of Indigenous adults had completed a postsecondery qualification.

Because of their education the gap of employment rate is quite big between Indigenous and non-Indigenous but it disappear if we compare those with a bachelor degree or higher

Indigenous adults with a bachelor’s degree or higher were more likely to work in professional occupations than non-Indigenous adults (55.7% and 49.1%).

# data[].attributes.body
Indigenous are in more need of health care but don't have access to it due to the prices.

Hospital manage by indigenous people are a lot less racist and way more accessible.

For indigenous accessing health care is more difficult since they need to find a hospital that will accept them so racism free.

# data[].attributes.headline
The Gap between indigenous and non-Indigenous people in economic

# data[].attributes.subject
The Gap between indigenous and non-Indigenous people in economic

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
A Compendium Report to the Department's 2023 Annual Report to Parliament.

Table of contents

List of tables

Table 1: Comparison of the gap in median income 2015 to 2020 (adjusted), Indigenous and non-Indigenous populations, aged 25 to 64, Canada

Table 2: Comparison of the gap in median individual income, 2015 to 2020, Indigenous and non-Indigenous populations, aged 25 to 64, by gender, Canada (Five-Year Change)

Table 3: Number of people living in a low-income situation, 2015 to 2020, Indigenous and non-Indigenous populations, Canada

Table 4: Comparison of the gap in the percentage living in a low-income situation 2015 to 2020, Indigenous and non-Indigenous populations, Canada

Table 5: Comparison of the gap in percentage living in a low-income situation 2015 to 2020, Indigenous and non-Indigenous populations, by gender, Canada (Five-Year Change)

Table 6: Number of individuals employed, 2016 to 2021, Indigenous and non-Indigenous populations aged 25 to 64, Canada

Table 7: Comparison of the gap in employment rate 2016 to 2021, Indigenous and non-Indigenous populations, aged 25 to 64, Canada

Table 8: Comparison of the gap in employment rate 2016 to 2021, Indigenous and non-Indigenous populations, aged 25 to 64, by gender, Canada (Five-Year Change)

Table 9: Comparison of median employment income (adjusted) 2015 to 2020, Indigenous and non-Indigenous populations, aged 25 to 64, Canada

Table 10: Comparison of median employment income 2015 to 2020, Indigenous and non-Indigenous Populations, aged 25 to 64, by gender, Canada (Five-Year Change)

Table 11: Number of people with at least a high school credential, 2016 to 2021, Indigenous and non-Indigenous populations, aged 25 to 64, Canada

Table 12: Comparison of the percentage of people with at least a high school credential 2016 to 2021, Indigenous and non-Indigenous populations, aged 25 to 64, Canada

Table 13: Comparison of the gap in the percentage of pepole with at least a high school credential 2016 to 2021, Indigenous and non-Indigenous populations, aged 25 to 64, by gender, Canada (Five-Year Change)

Table 14: Number of people with a university degree, 2016 to 2021, Indigenous and non-Indigenous populations, aged 25 to 64, Canada

Table 15: Comparison of the gap in the percentage of people with a university degree 2016 to 2021, Indigenous and non-Indigenous populations, aged 25 to 64, Canada

Table 16: Comparison of the percentage with a university degree 2016 to 2021, Indigenous and non-Indigenous populations, aged 25 to 64, by gender, Canada (Five-Year Change)

Table 17: Number of households residing in a dwelling classified as crowded, 2016 to 2021, Indigenous and non-Indigenous populations, Canada

Table 18: Comparison of the percentage of dwellings classified as crowded 2016 to 2021, Indigenous and non-Indigenous populations, Canada

Table 19: Number of households residing in dwellings in need of major repair, 2016 to 2021, Indigenous and non-Indigenous populations, Canada

Table 20: Comparison of the percentage of dwellings in need of major repair 2016 to 2021, Indigenous and non-Indigenous populations, Canada

Table 21: Number of Indigenous and non-Indigenous children comprising the total population of children aged 0 to 17 in foster care, 2016 to 2021, Canada

Table 22: Comparison of the percentage of children aged 0 to 17 in foster care, 2016 to 2021, Indigenous and non-Indigenous populations, Canada

Table 23: Number of Indigenous and non-Indigenous people capable of holding a conversation in an Indigenous language, 2016 to 2021, Canada

Table 24: Number of custody admissions of individuals with Indigenous and non-Indigenous identity, 2016 to 2017 to 2020 to 2021, Canada

Table 25: Comparison of the employment rate, 2016 to 2021, Indigenous and non-Indigenous populations, aged 25 to 64, urban areas, Canada

Table 26: Summary of the size and direction of the change in gap between Indigenous and non-Indigenous populations from 2016 to 2021 for all domains, Canada

List of figures

Figure 1: Distribution and number of Indigenous people in Canada by province and territory, 2021

Figure 2: Composition of the Indigenous population in Canada by province and territory, 2021

Figure 3: Median individual income, 2020, Indigenous and non-Indigenous populations, aged 25 to 64, Canada

Figure 4: Median individual income 2005 to 2020 (adjusted), Indigenous and non-Indigenous populations, aged 25 to 64, Canada

Figure 5: Median individual income, 2020, First Nations and non-Indigenous populations, aged 25 to 64, by region

Figure 6: Median individual income, 2020, Métis and non-Indigenous populations, aged 25 to 64, by region

Figure 7: Median individual income, 2020, Inuit and non-Indigenous populations, aged 25 to 64, by Inuit region

Figure 8: Median individual income, 2020, Indigenous and non-Indigenous populations, aged 25 to 64, by gender, Canada

Figure 9: Percentage living in a low-income situation, 2020, Indigenous and non-Indigenous populations, Canada

Figure 10: Percentage living in a low-income situation, 2005 to 2020, Indigenous and non-Indigenous populations, Canada

Figure 11: Percentage living in a low-income situation, 2020, First Nations and non-Indigenous populations, by region

Figure 12: Percentage living in a low-income situation, 2020, Métis and non-Indigenous populations, by region

Figure 13: Percentage living in a low-income situation, 2020, Inuit and non-Indigenous populations, by Inuit region

Figure 14: Percentage living in a low-income situation, 2020, Indigenous and non-Indigenous populations, by gender, Canada

Figure 15: Employment rate, 2021, Indigenous and non-Indigenous populations, aged 25 to 64, Canada

Figure 16: Employment rate, 2001 to 2021, Indigenous and non-Indigenous populations, aged 25 to 64, Canada

Figure 17: Employment rate, 2021, First Nations and non-Indigenous populations, aged 25 to 64, by region

Figure 18: Employment rate, 2021, Métis and non-Indigenous populations, aged 25 to 64, by region

Figure 19: Employment rate, 2021, Inuit and non-Indigenous populations, aged 25 to 64, by Inuit region

Figure 20: Employment rate, 2021, Indigenous and non-Indigenous populations, aged 25 to 64, by gender, Canada

Figure 21: Median employment income, 2020, Indigenous and non-Indigenous populations, aged 25 to 64, Canada

Figure 22: Median employment income, 2005 to 2020 (adjusted), Indigenous and non-Indigenous populations, aged 25 to 64, Canada

Figure 23: Median employment income, 2020, First Nations and non-Indigenous populations, aged 25 to 64, by region

Figure 24: Median employment income, 2020, Métis and non-Indigenous populations, aged 25 to 64, by region

Figure 25: Median employment income, 2020, Inuit and non-Indigenous populations, aged 25 to 64, by Inuit region

Figure 26: Median employment income, 2020, Indigenous and non-Indigenous populations, aged 25 to 64, by gender, Canada

Figure 27: Percentage of people with at least a high school credential, 2021, Indigenous and non-Indigenous populations, aged 25 to 64, Canada

Figure 28: Gap in high school completion (in percentage points) between Indigenous and non-Indigenous populations, aged 18 to 24, 25 to 34, 35+ and 25 to 64, 2021, Canada

Figure 29: Percentage of people with at least a high school credential, 2001 to 2021, Indigenous and non-Indigenous populations, aged 25 to 64, Canada

Figure 30: Percentage of people with at least a high school credential, 2021, First Nations and non-Indigenous populations, aged 25 to 64, by region

Figure 31: Percentage of people with at least a high school credential, 2021, Métis and non-Indigenous populations, aged 25 to 64, by region

Figure 32: Percentage with at least a high school credential, 2021, Inuit and non-Indigenous populations, aged 25 to 64, by Inuit region

Figure 33: Percentage of people with at least a high school credential, 2021, Indigenous and non-Indigenous populations, aged 25 to 64, by gender, Canada

Figure 34: Percentage of people with a university degree, 2021, Indigenous and non-Indigenous populations, aged 25 to 64, Canada

Figure 35: Gap in university completion (in percentage points) between Indigenous and non-Indigenous populations, aged 25 to 34 and 25 to 64, 2021, Canada

Figure 36: Percentage of people with a university degree, 2001 to 2021, Indigenous and non-Indigenous populations, aged 25 to 64, Canada

Figure 37: Percentage of people with a university degree, 2021, First Nations and non-Indigenous populations, aged 25 to 64, by region

Figure 38: Percentage of people with a university degree, 2021, Métis and non-Indigenous populations, aged 25 to 64, by region

Figure 39: Percentage of people with a university degree, 2021, Inuit and non-Indigenous populations, aged 25 to 64, by region

Figure 40: Percentage of people with a university degree, 2021, Indigenous and non-Indigenous populations, aged 25 to 64, by gender, Canada

Figure 41: Percentage of dwellings classified as crowded, 2021, Indigenous and non-Indigenous populations, Canada

Figure 42: Percentage of dwellings classified as crowded, 2001 to 2021, Indigenous and non-Indigenous populations, Canada

Figure 43: Percentage of dwellings classified as crowded, 2021, First Nations and non-Indigenous populations, by region

Figure 44: Percentage of dwellings classified as crowded, 2021, Métis and non-Indigenous populations, by region

Figure 45: Percentage of dwellings classified as crowded, 2021, Inuit and non-Indigenous populations, by region

Figure 46: Percentage of dwellings in need of major repair, 2021, Indigenous and non-Indigenous populations, Canada

Figure 47: Percentage of dwellings in need of major repair, 2001 to 2021, Indigenous and non-Indigenous populations, Canada

Figure 48: Percentage of dwellings in need of major repair, 2021, First Nations and non-Indigenous populations, by region

Figure 49: Percentage of dwellings in need of major repair, 2021, Métis and non-Indigenous populations, by region

Figure 50: Percentage of dwellings in need of major repair, 2021, Inuit and non-Indigenous populations, by Inuit region

Figure 51: Percentage of Indigenous and non-Indigenous children comprising the total population of children aged 0 to 17 in foster care, 2021, Canada

Figure 52: Percentage of children aged 0 to 17 in foster care, 2021, Indigenous and non-Indigenous populations, Canada

Figure 53: Percentage of children aged 0 to 17 in foster care, 2011 to 2021, Indigenous and non-Indigenous populations, Canada

Figure 54: Percentage of children aged 0 to 17 in foster care, 2021, First Nations and non-Indigenous populations, by region

Figure 55: Percentage of children aged 0 to 17 in foster care, 2021, Métis and non-Indigenous populations, by region

Figure 56: Percentage of Indigenous populations with knowledge of an Indigenous language, 2021, Canada

Figure 57: Percentage of Indigenous populations with knowledge of an Indigenous language, 2001 to 2021, Canada

Figure 58: Percentage of First Nations with knowledge of an Indigenous language, 2021, by region

Figure 59: Percentage of Métis with knowledge of an Indigenous language, 2021, by region

Figure 60: Percentage of Inuit with knowledge of an Indigenous language, 2021, by region

Figure 61: Percentage of Indigenous populations with knowledge of an Indigenous language, 2021, by gender, Canada

Figure 62: Percentage of Indigenous populations with knowledge of an Indigenous language, 2021, aged 0 to 19 and aged 20+, Canada

Figure 63: Custody admissions associated with Indigenous and non-Indigenous people in 2021 to 2022 as a percentage of their respective 2021 Census populations, Canada

Figure 64: Percentage of custody admissions of individuals with Indigenous and non-Indigenous identity, 2016 to 2017 to 2020 to 2021, Canada

Figure 65: Comparison of total and urban employment rates, 2021, Indigenous and non-Indigenous populations, aged 25 to 64, Canada

Executive summary

Keywords: Indigenous Peoples, First Nations, Inuit, Métis, income, employment, family, culture, Indigenous languages, housing, foster care, justice, incarceration.

This report serves as a compendium to the Department's Annual Report to Parliament and provides an update on the 2020 report using data from the 2021 census cycle. It provides a broad overview of the socio-economic gaps between First Nations, Inuit and Métis populations and the non-Indigenous population in Canada. It covers a wide range of social and economic variables that can be linked primarily to data collected as part of the Census of Population. It highlights not only the gaps that exist today, but also the evolution of those gaps over time. The report also acknowledges that while progress has been made, much work remains to address the ongoing challenges faced by Indigenous Peoples and communities and to advance meaningful reconciliation.

In Canada, the Census of Population is conducted every five years. In 2022, data from the 2021 Census of Population were made available. This report focuses on a subset of these data and examines indicators related to income, employment, education, housing, foster care and Indigenous languages. Indicators related to incarceration are also examined using data from the most recent Adult Correctional Services Survey. As new data on the health domains included in the 2020 report have yet to be published, the health indicators are excluded from this report.

Indigenous Peoples in Canada face significant and long-standing socio-economic gaps when compared to the non-Indigenous population. These gaps have been shaped by a long history of colonialism, discrimination and marginalization, which have had a profound impact on Indigenous people and continue to affect their lives today. Although gaps remain, significant work is being done to narrow them and improve conditions. Continued measurement of these socio-economic gaps is important as it helps determine whether progress is being made over time. It can also help demonstrate whether existing programs and policies are properly designed and resourced. Lastly, it can help ensure accountability of those who design and implement programs, policies and calls for reflection to clearly and transparently define what progress means.

Overall, median individual income was higher in 2020Footnote 1 than in 2015 for all Indigenous groups, even after accounting for inflation. Although a similar proportion of individuals were employed compared to 2016, those who were employed made more, bringing home an additional $800 to $4,200 a year in income after adjusting for inflation. Increased income means fewer low-income households. Between the non-Indigenous population and each of the Indigenous groups, there was a clear narrowing of gaps, by 31.8 to 46.5%. The total number of Indigenous people living in a low-income situation dropped from 471,560 in 2015 to 335,560 in 2020. Overall, 136,000 fewer Indigenous people (60,190 Registered Indians living on reserve, 45,030 Registered Indians living off reserve, 8,975 Non-Status Indians, 2,840 Inuit and 18,965 Métis) were living in a low-income situation over 2015. In addition to contextualizing the historic implications of the pandemic on the socio-economic well-being of all Canadians, Census 2026 will be important to determine whether there have been lasting changes in these gaps beyond the availability of government benefits during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Improving Indigenous education is a crucial step towards closing the socio-economic gaps and achieving substantive equality in recognizing that additional service supports may be required to enable Indigenous children to achieve equal outcomes. Among those 25 to 64 years of age with at least a high school education, a small narrowing of the gaps was observed for Registered Indians living off reserve and Non-Status Indians, while a large narrowing of the gap was seen for Métis. In total, there were 80,280 more Indigenous people with a high school education in 2021 (925 Registered Indians living on reserve, 26,150 Registered Indians living off reserve, 25,545 Non-Status Indians, 1,730 Inuit and 25,930 Métis). Increases in high school completion are important as it often represents a critical step to employment and higher education. From 2016 to 2021, there was a widening of the gap for all Indigenous groups in the proportion of the population with a university degree. Although an additional 47,980 Indigenous people (4,985 Registered Indians living on reserve, 14,630 Registered Indians living off reserve, 9,200 Non-Status Indians, 890 Inuit and 18,275 Métis) obtained a university education over 2016, the non-Indigenous population saw greater gains in university completion during the same time period.

Housing quality and conditions generally improved for Indigenous people from 2016 to 2021; however, the narrowing of the gap in the proportion of dwellings that were crowded was due in part to increases in crowding for the non-Indigenous population. Overall, the total number of Indigenous households experiencing crowding was relatively flat from 2016 (25,220 dwellings) to 2021 (25,345 dwellings). Both Métis and Non-Status Indians had lower proportions of crowded dwellings than the non-Indigenous population in 2016 and 2021. There were also substantial improvements in the proportion of dwellings requiring major repairs. From 2016 to 2021, there were 3,715 fewer dwellings associated with Indigenous people that required major repairs.

Indigenous children continue to be overrepresented in foster care. The census data collection method identifies only children in foster care who reside in a private home. It excludes those in institutions, group homes or other care arrangements. The proportion of Registered Indians, Non-Status Indians and Métis children in foster care remained fairly stable over the period. There was an increase of almost one percentage point for Inuit children. In total, there were 17,410 Indigenous children in foster care in 2016 compared to 17,320 in 2021.

In addition to the socio-economic gaps, the declines in Indigenous language knowledge are noteworthy. In 2021, there were over 70 Indigenous languages spoken in Canada. For more than 20 (28.6%) of those languages, 500 or fewer people reported speaking them as their mother tongue. Overall, 243,155 individuals could conduct a conversation in an Indigenous language, 188,905 people reported having at least one Indigenous mother tongue and 182,925 reported speaking an Indigenous language at home at least on a regular basis. Indigenous languages are a vital part of Canada's cultural and linguistic diversity and are essential to Indigenous Peoples' identity, culture and well-being. Many of the Indigenous languages in Canada are endangered, at risk of extinction due to the impacts of colonialism, residential schools and ongoing discrimination.

Indigenous Peoples in Canada continue to be overrepresented in the criminal justice system, as both victims and offenders. Reporting on custody admissions is limited to a pan-Indigenous identifier. From 2016 to 2021, the percentage of Indigenous adults who entered a correctional facility for remand or who were sentenced to custody or a community supervision program increased slightly from 29.9% to 31.2%. However, the total number of these admissions decreased considerably during the same period, with the number of admissions for Indigenous adults dropping from 74,823 in 2016 to 46,633 in 2021, a difference of 28,190 people.

Income, employment, education, housing, foster care and incarceration are key areas in which Indigenous Peoples face systemic barriers and inequalities. Continued measurement of these gaps is crucial to inform policies and programs that aim to improve socio-economic conditions and reduce disparities between Indigenous and non-Indigenous Peoples. Furthermore, preserving Indigenous languages and promoting language revitalization initiatives can help foster appreciation for Indigenous cultures and maintain this vital component of Canada's linguistic and cultural landscape. Addressing socio-economic disparities and preserving Indigenous languages are essential components of reconciliation. These efforts contribute to the establishment of a more equitable and just society for all Canadians, promoting greater understanding and respect between Indigenous and non-Indigenous Peoples.

Introduction

Each year, Indigenous Services Canada provides a report on:

1. the socio-economic gaps between First Nations, Inuit, Métis and other Canadians and the measures taken by the Department to reduce those gaps; and

2. the progress made towards the transfer of departmental responsibilities to Indigenous organizations as part of its obligations under the Department of Indigenous Services Act. The 2020 report provided a detailed overview of the demographic and socio-economic trends reported on through Statistics Canada's Census of Population.

This compendium report provides an update to the 2020 report using data from the 2021 census cycle. It provides a broad overview of the socio-economic gaps between First Nations, Inuit and Métis and the non-Indigenous population in Canada. It covers a wide range of social and economic variables, ranging from income and education to housing and language use. It highlights not only the gaps that exist today, but also the evolution of those gaps over time.

Method

A note on terminology

At the outset, we wish to acknowledge that some terms in this document may be offensive and problematic for certain individuals who will read this report. While the language that is used in Canada to describe and speak about Indigenous Peoples is evolving to be more respectful and reflective of how Indigenous Peoples and communities themselves choose to be identified, some pieces of legislation continue to use outdated and colonial terminology.

For example, Canada's Constitution Act, 1982 recognizes three distinct "aboriginal peoples of Canada", namely, "Indian, Inuit and Métis". The Government of Canada now uses the terms "Indigenous" and "First Nations". However, "Aboriginal" and "Indian" remain the legal terms that continue to be used in certain circumstances.

Also, as the Indian Act (PDF), a very outdated and colonial piece of legislation, continues to be in effect, terms such as "registered Indian" (also referred to as "status Indian") remain in use. As these remain accepted legal terms, for the purposes of this report, which requires reference to the Indian Act and its provisions and requires precision in terminology for statistical purposes, the legal terms will be used.

Indigenous Peoples is a collective name for the original peoples of North America and their descendants. More than 1.8 million people in Canada (5.0% of the population of Canada) self-identified as an Indigenous person on Canada's 2021 Census of Population. Indigenous Peoples are the fastest growing population in Canada. Between 2016 and 2021, the Indigenous population grew by 8.0%, while the non-Indigenous population grew by 5.4%. The Indigenous population is also the youngest in Canada: in 2021, 41.2% of Indigenous people were under the age of 25, compared to 27.3% of the non-Indigenous population.

Figure 1 shows the distribution of Indigenous populations across Canada. The figure includes the number of Indigenous individuals living in each province and territory, as well as the proportion of Indigenous Peoples in its overall population. Indigenous Peoples make up the largest proportion of the population in Nunavut (85.8%), the Northwest Territories (49.6%) and the Yukon Territory (22.3%), followed by Manitoba (18.1%) and Saskatchewan (17.0%).

The associated table indicates which proportion of the overall Indigenous population resides in each province and territory. Although Indigenous people comprise only 2.9% of Ontario's population, the province is home to the largest population of Indigenous people, with 406,585 individuals or 22.5% of the Indigenous population in Canada, followed by 16.1 and 15.7% in British Columbia and Alberta, respectively.

The Canadian Constitution recognizes three groups of Indigenous Peoples: First Nations, Inuit, and Métis. These are three distinct peoples with unique histories, languages, cultural practices and spiritual beliefs. Figure 2 shows how the composition of Indigenous populations varies across the provinces and territories. This figure also includes "Other Indigenous" which is comprised of those with multiple Indigenous identities and those who identify as a band member only.

Figure 1: Distribution and number of Indigenous people in Canada by province and territory, 2021

Text alternative for Figure 1: Distribution and number of Indigenous people in Canada by province and territory, 2021

Population size

Percentage of Region Population

Percentage of Indigenous Population

Source: Indigenous Services Canada. Custom Tabulations, 2021 Census of Population.

Source: Indigenous Services Canada. Custom Tabulations, 2021 Census of Population.

Note: "Other Indigenous" comprises those with multiple Indigenous identities and those who identify as a band member only.

Composition of the Indigenous population in Canada, 2021

First Nations

The term "First Nations" includes Registered Indians (also called Status Indians) and Non-Status Indians. Registered Indians are individuals registered as Indians under the Indian Act.

According to the Census, there were 831,720 Registered Indians in Canada in 2021, comprising 46.0% of the Indigenous population. According to the Indian Register, which is an administrative list of all Registered Indians that is maintained by Indigenous Services Canada, there were 1,040,319 Registered Indians as of December 31, 2021.

Indigenous Services Canada officially recognizes 619 First Nations in Canada, which represent more than 50 Nations and 50 Indigenous languages.

Some First Nations reside on reserve. A reserve is a parcel of land for which legal title is held by the Crown (Government of Canada), for the use and benefit of a particular First Nation. There are 3,406 reserves in Canada.

According to the 2021 Census of Canada, about 37.5% of Registered Indians live on reserve and 62.5% live off reserve. Overall, 48.0% of Registered Indians live in urban areas.

Of the 883 populated census subdivisions associated with First Nations communities in the 2021 Census, 635 or 71.9% have less than 500 inhabitants while only 39 or 4.4% have more than 2,000 inhabitants.

Non-Status Indians account for 16.3% of the total Indigenous population and live almost exclusively off reserve (97.4%). Overall, 75.0% live in urban areas.

Inuit

Inuit are Indigenous people of the Arctic. The word Inuit means "the people" in the Inuit language of Inuktitut. The singular of Inuit is Inuk.

According to the Census, Canada's self-identified Inuit population was 69,705 in 2021, comprising 0.2% of the national population and 3.9% of the Indigenous population. The majority (69.7%) live in Inuit Nunangat, which means "homeland", and 44.3% in Nunavut in particular.

Inuit Nunangat comprises 51 communities across four regions: Inuvialuit Settlement Region (Northwest Territories and Yukon), Nunavut, Nunavik (northern Quebec), and Nunatsiavut (Labrador).

In the 2021 Census, just over four-fifths (81.2%) of Inuit in Canada reported that they were enrolled under or were a beneficiary of an Inuit land claims agreement. Of Inuit who were enrolled under or were a beneficiary of an Inuit land claim agreement:

32,620 (57.6%) came under the Nunavut Land Claims Agreement;

13,235 (23.4%) came under the James Bay and Northern Quebec Agreement;

5,920 (10.5%) came under the Labrador Inuit Land Claims Agreement; and

4,860 (8.6%) came under the Inuvialuit Final Agreement.

Most Inuit who are not enrolled under or are not a beneficiary of a land claim agreement (13,080) live outside Inuit Nunangat (86.4%).

Métis

Of the 624,220 Canadians who self-identified as Métis in the 2021 Census, 224,655 (36.0%) reported membership in a Métis organization or Settlement. Four-fifths (79.8%) reported being a member of one of the five signatories to the Canada-Métis Nation Accord.

In 2021, the Métis Nation of Alberta had the largest membership reported among Métis organizations, at 45,350, followed closely by the Manitoba Métis Federation, at 43,920, and then by the Métis Nation of Ontario (36,240), Métis Nation British Columbia (27,140) and Métis Nation-Saskatchewan (26,700).

3,540 people reported being a member of one of the eight Métis Settlements of Alberta.

Measuring the socio-economic gaps

Why measurement is important

First, continued measurement helps determine whether progress is being achieved over time. Second, ongoing measurement can help demonstrate whether existing programs and policies are properly designed and resourced, and whether there are program and policy gaps that must be addressed. Third, by tracking program and policy performance and identifying gaps, measurement can help ensure accountability of those who design and implement programs and policies. Finally, measurement calls for reflection to clearly and transparently define what progress means. By stimulating conversation and inviting challenge, the iterative process of defining how to measure progress focuses attention on the things that truly matter.

What is important to measure

The socio-economic dimensions addressed in this report were originally selected and analyzed as part of the 2020 Annual Report to Parliament based on a review of the various socio-economic wellness frameworks being used around the world. This compendium report provides an update on these measures to determine the progress that has been made towards narrowing the gaps between Indigenous and non-Indigenous people in Canada.

Examining gaps between Indigenous and non-Indigenous populations helps contextualize the extent of the differences between groups. Without a basis for comparison, raw statistics are difficult to interpret. It is sometimes suggested that focusing on gaps between different populations is inappropriate as it may involve an implicit value judgment. It suggests that the lower-scoring population should aspire to the level of the higher-scoring population on a particular indicator, even if the indicator is of little importance to the lower-scoring population. This is a fair critique and is why the current report focuses on key socio-economic indicators that appear regularly in Indigenous wellness frameworks and that are recognized internationally as important to quality of life in most cultural contexts.

The indicators

The complete set of indicators addressed in this report includes the following.

Domain

Indicator

Data Source

Poverty
Percentage of the population that lived in a low-income situation in the year preceding the Census

Census of Population, Canada, 2006, 2011, 2016, 2021

Median employment income
Median employment income received by the working-age population in the year prior to the Census

Census of Population, Canada, 2006, 2011, 2016, 2021

University completion
Percentage of the working-age population with a university degree

Census of Population, Canada, 2001, 2006, 2011, 2016, 2021

State of repair
Percentage of dwellings in need of major repair

Census of Population, Canada, 2001, 2006, 2011, 2016, 2021

The 2020 Annual Report to Parliament also included a health domain with a number of indicators linked to vital statistics such as life expectancy and infant mortality. Although new publications on these critical indicators are in development, no new data had been published on these indicators as of the time this report was drafted. Therefore, the health domain and its indicators will be omitted from this iteration of the report and will be reported in a future version once the data are available.

Limitations of the data

Data for the first six sets of indicators (from income to housing) are taken from the Census of Population that is conducted every five years and enumerates private dwellings and the people who reside within them. This robust source of socio-economic information remains the cornerstone of data because of its unparalleled ability to support distinctions-based, cross-time analyses for all of Canada, including reserves and the territories.

Despite its richness, the Census has some important limitations. For example, Indigenous people are classified in the Census as Indigenous (or not) based on self-identification, which can be imperfect given variations in how respondents interpret or understand the Indigenous identity questions, as well as their individual choices respecting whether and how to self-identify as an Indigenous person.

Each of the Indigenous identities is determined through a combination of census questions and is subject to interpretation. For example, Statistics Canada looks only at question 24: "Is this person First Nations, Métis or Inuk (Inuit)?" As Indigenous Services Canada is responsible for maintaining the Indian Register, there is a greater emphasis on the importance of identifying Registered versus Non-Status Indians. Indigenous Services Canada considers an individual's response to question 26: "Is this person a Status Indian (Registered or Treaty Indian as defined by the Indian Act of Canada)?" before question 24 (identity). This seemingly small difference can lead to differences in how the Indigenous identity groups are reported.

Another important limitation is that the Census of Population includes a relatively narrow range of socio-economic indicators and does not capture the various other dimensions of well-being that are important from an Indigenous perspective. For example, the National Outcome-Based Framework includes indicators on governance, the environment, participation in cultural activities, relationship to the land and systemic racism. It also counts only those residing in private dwellings, which leads to an undercount as it inherently excludes those who reside in institutions, who are transient or who are experiencing homelessness.

The 2021 Census was further complicated by the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, which profoundly impacted the way data were collected for this census cycle. The 2021 Census was launched on May 11, 2021. In order to mitigate the circumstances created by the pandemic and prevent further spread of COVID-19 in First Nations and Inuit communities, Statistics Canada implemented a data collection approach that differed from previous censuses. To minimize face-to-face interactions, the 2021 Census data collection initially prioritized self-enumeration (paper questionnaires, online) rather than in-person interviews with an enumerator. In addition to the constraints caused by the COVID-19 pandemic, the uncovering of burial sites at former residential schools as well as the forest fires in northern Ontario and the western provinces further impacted participation by Indigenous communities and their residents. In order to mitigate the impact of low participation in the 2021 Census, Statistics Canada revised its data collection strategy in July 2021 and sent travel teams of enumerators to various regions across Canada. Engagement efforts were bolstered through an expanded Indigenous Liaison Program at Statistics Canada, and efforts were made to hire census staff locally within communities.

All data collection activities for the 2021 Census ceased on September 24, 2021. Despite all efforts by Statistics Canada, a total of 63 census subdivisions defined as reserves and settlements were incompletely enumerated. Previously, the number of incompletely enumerated reserves had declined; for example, it was 30 in 2001, 22 in 2006, 36 in 2011 and 14 in 2016. In 2021, the estimated census response rate in Indigenous and northern communities was 85.6%. Comparatively, the overall census response rate was 98% in 2021, and the response rate in Indigenous communities was 92% in 2016.

Given the larger number of First Nations communities that were incompletely enumerated in 2021, Statistics Canada has urged caution when comparing variables that are strongly tied to First Nations reserves. For example, Indigenous language knowledge is typically substantially higher among those residing on a reserve. As some of those responses were not captured during this census data collection cycle, there is an increased risk of potentially erroneous or confounding conclusions. Any potential drop in Indigenous language knowledge may stem from a real drop in the number of Indigenous language speakers or from the fact that fewer Indigenous language speakers were counted this census and are missing from the overall findings.

As we move beyond the census to seek other sources of data on justice, the persistent gaps in data on Indigenous populations become more evident as data are limited to a pan-Indigenous identifier. Where such limitations exist, the best data available are used to illustrate the gaps between Indigenous and non-Indigenous populations.

The analysis

To the extent possible, this analysis is distinctions-based. Data are presented for the three main distinctions groups: First Nations, Inuit and Métis. First Nations data are further disaggregated, given the significant differences in socio-economic outcomes that are known to exist among the following groups: Registered Indians living on reserve, Registered Indians living off reserve and Non-Status Indians. Where possible, data for the past 20 years have been included to illustrate how socio-economic gaps between Indigenous and non-Indigenous populations have evolved.

Regional analyses are also provided. Notably, some very small populations of First Nations and Métis in the territories are also the populations experiencing the largest gaps relative to the non-Indigenous population. Because statistics based on very small populations are less reliable and can create a skewed image of overall trends, one option would be to exclude them from broader analyses and/or discuss them separately. In the interest of transparency, however, it was decided to retain these small populations as part of the general analysis. Readers are encouraged to interpret statistics for small populations with caution, especially when data are further broken down by gender, age or other variables.

For the first time in census history, 2021 marks the shift to reporting on gender rather than biological sex. A new question on gender was included in the 2021 Census to reflect a growing social and legislative recognition of transgender and non-binary people. Gender identity refers to a person's internal and individual experience with gender. It may not be visible to others and it may not align with socially constructed gender norms. A person may refer to their gender identity in a multitude of ways including Woman, Man, Non-binary, Two-Spirit, Pangender, Agender, Gender Queer, Gender Fluid, Transgender or Cisgender.

The 2021 Census is the first census to provide data on transgender people and non-binary people. Census 2021 allowed individuals to write in responses other than male or female for the gender question. All these responses were condensed into a single non-binary gender for reporting purposes. Even with this amalgamation, the number of non-binary people is still quite small. Given this, Statistics Canada further aggregates data into a two-category gender variable when necessary to protect the confidentiality of responses provided. In these cases, individuals in the category "non-binary persons" are distributed in the other two gender categories and are denoted by the "＋" symbol. "Men＋" includes men (and/or boys), as well as half of non-binary persons. "Women＋" includes women (and/or girls), as well as half of non-binary persons. Detailed analyses by gender are provided where feasible.

Measuring the gap

A number of different approaches can be taken to assess the gaps between Indigenous and non-Indigenous populations. For instance, the difference between groups (e.g., there was a difference of X % or Y dollars between group A and B) can be used to get a sense of where the gaps exist. However, limiting analysis to look only at the differences between groups can hinder the comparability between groups and indicators over time. Another choice is to examine the relative variation. The % change in gaps can be calculated, allowing for the relative size of the changes to be compared.

In this report, the gap between the total Indigenous population (or Indigenous group) and the non-Indigenous population is provided for each indicator. The gap is reported as the difference between the two populations. An analysis of the % change in the gap from 2016 to 2021 is also presented and discussed where feasible.

A common approach to interpreting % change is to use Cohen's d effect size measure as a guide. According to Cohen's conventions, a small effect size is typically defined as a Cohen's d of 0.2, a medium effect size as a Cohen's d of 0.5, and a large effect size as a Cohen's d of 0.8. Using these conventions, a % change of 5% would be considered a small effect size, a % change of 12.5% would be considered a medium effect size, and a % change of 20% or more would be considered a large effect size.

In the spirit of accessibility and transparency, the goal of this report is to provide a large volume of data to inform partners and stakeholders. For each figure, a brief summary of the more notable findings is presented. The full data tables are available in Appendix A and readers are encouraged to engage with the data. To obtain a copy of the data associated with this report or to obtain additional census data related to Indigenous Peoples in Canada, please contact the Indigenous and Northern Statistics Team (INSTAT) at instat@sac-isc.gc.ca.

Findings

Income - Median individual income

Median income is a well-established measure of material well-being. Although it does not capture an individual's assets, median income is one way of estimating a person's wealth. Median individual income refers to a person's total income before tax from all sources including market income (such as employment wages) and government transfers (such as Old Age Security pension and other government benefit programs). In the census, income information is provide through tax records from the previous calendar year. For example, for data collected in the 2021 Census, income from January 1, 2020 to December 31, 2020 is reported. Similarly, for Census 2016, income data is based on 2015.

Median individual income includes government benefits, which is of particular importance for 2020. In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, a number of new government benefits were offered such as the Canada Emergency Response Benefit (CERB). Statistics Canada has analyzed these most recent census data and concluded that "the decrease [in poverty rates] was mostly driven by increased government transfers and temporary pandemic-related benefits."

For a full list of all data tables relevant to median income, please see Appendix A, tables A1.1 to A1.6.

Source: Indigenous Services Canada. Custom Tabulations, 2021 Census of Population.

Source: Indigenous Services Canada. Custom Tabulations, 2006 to 2021 Census of Population.

Note: The dollar values have been adjusted for inflation and are stated in terms of their value in 2020.

Source: Indigenous Services Canada. Custom Tabulations, 2021 Census of Population.

Source: Indigenous Services Canada. Custom Tabulations, 2021 Census of Population.

Source: Indigenous Services Canada. Custom Tabulations, 2021 Census of Population.

Source: Indigenous Services Canada. Custom Tabulations, 2021 Census of Population.

Note: Given that the non-binary population is small, Statistics Canada implemented a method producing a two-category gender variable to prevent disclosure of identifiable data for lower levels of geography. Consequently, information will be disseminated using the following categories: Men+, Women+. Individuals in the "non-binary persons" category are distributed in the other two gender categories and are denoted by the "+" symbol.

Measuring the gap

Overall, in all cases, the gaps between the Indigenous group and the non-Indigenous population shrunk between 2015 and 2020.

There was a large narrowing of the gap in individual median income for all Indigenous groups compared to the non-Indigenous population, with the largest change occurring among Métis, at 30.4%.

Generally, Indigenous women+ had substantially greater gains than Indigenous men+ in terms of closing the gap with their non-Indigenous counterparts.

For Indigenous men+, the gaps in median individual income relative to the non-Indigenous population remained relatively stable between 2015 and 2020, with the exception of Métis for whom the gap more than doubled (220.0%) from $500 in 2015 to $1,600 in 2020.

All Indigenous women+ saw a large narrowing of the gap between 2015 and 2020, particularly Inuit women+ for whom the gap with their non-Indigenous counterparts closed entirely (-100.0%).

It is important to acknowledge that the general narrowing of the gaps may stem from the increased availability of government benefits during the COVID-19 pandemic.

The full dataset for this figure is available in Appendix A - Table A1.6.

Employment income

The median employment income measure complements employment rates, as it is a common way to assess the quality of jobs held by the employed population. For a full list of all data tables relevant to employment income, please see Appendix A, tables A4.1 to A4.6.

Source: Indigenous Services Canada. Custom Tabulations, 2021 Census of Population.

Source: Indigenous Services Canada. Custom Tabulations, 2006 to 2021 Census of Population.

Note: The dollar values have been adjusted for inflation and are stated in terms of their value in 2020.

Source: Indigenous Services Canada. Custom Tabulations, 2021 Census of Population.

Source: Indigenous Services Canada. Custom Tabulations, 2021 Census of Population.

Source: Indigenous Services Canada. Custom Tabulations, 2021 Census of Population.

Source: Indigenous Services Canada. Custom Tabulations, 2021 Census of Population.

Note: Given that the non-binary population is small, Statistics Canada produced a two-category gender variable that was applied to prevent disclosure of identifiable data for lower levels of geography when necessary. Consequently, information will be disseminated using the following categories: Men+, Women+. Individuals in the "non-binary persons" category are distributed in the other two gender categories and are denoted by the "+" symbol.

Measuring the gaps

After adjusting for inflation from 2015 to 2020, the comparison shows that all Indigenous groups saw an increase in employment income in terms of the amount earned; however, the gaps between each Indigenous group and the non-Indigenous population showed more variability.

There was a large narrowing of the gap in employment income for Inuit, from $10,800 in 2015 to $8,000 in 2020.

There was a medium narrowing of the gap for Registered Indians living on reserve (13.3%), while the gap in employment income remained relatively stable for Registered Indians living off reserve.

There was a widening of the gap for Non-Status Indians and Métis. Both groups saw a small increase in dollar value between 2015 and 2020, of only $900 and $800 respectively.

In general, Indigenous women+ saw greater narrowing of gaps in median employment income than Indigenous men+, although the results are somewhat mixed.

Among Inuit men+, there was a small narrowing of the gap in median employment income compared to the non-Indigenous population, at 13.8%.

For Métis men+, the median employment income was above that of the non-Indigenous population in 2015; the opposite was true in 2020, leading to the seemingly large change in the gap (366.7%), but in reality the change was actually very small.

There was a medium widening of gaps for Registered Indian men+ off reserve and Non-Status Indian men+, at 22.0 and 23.1%, respectively.

Registered Indian women+ off reserve saw a medium narrowing of the gap (14.8%), while Registered Indian women+ living on reserve and Inuit women+ experienced a large narrowing of gaps at 21.0 and 44.0%, respectively.

Like Métis men+, Métis women+ also saw a widening of the gap, at 33.3%.

The full dataset for this figure is available in Appendix A - Table A4.6.

Education - having at least a high school credential

In addition to being a baseline requirement for many careers, completion of a formal education at the high school level or above has the benefit of ensuring that individuals have the literacy, numeracy and other skills they need to participate fully in Canada's economy and in civil society, and to effectively access the services and benefits to which they are entitled. As with most measures, high school completion can be assessed in a number of ways. The census measures the highest level of education each person has achieved. All individuals who have a high school diploma or equivalency degree or who have engaged in any form of post-secondary education (e.g., university, college or trade school) are considered to have at least a high school credential. As seen in Table 11, there were 80,280 more Indigenous people with a high school education in 2021 than in 2016. For a full list of all data tables relevant to high school completion, please see Appendix A, tables A5.1 to A5.7.

Changes in a population's education levels tend to start with youth. As the availability of and need for formal education expands, young people strive to obtain the credentials they need to achieve their career goals. Although older adults can and do obtain additional educational credentials, most people complete their formal education when they are relatively young. Looking at the educational attainment of younger cohorts can therefore provide some insight into how the overall gap in education can be expected to change in the future. Simply put, if the gaps are smaller among younger cohorts (under 25 years of age), the overall gaps are in the process of narrowing.

Source: Indigenous Services Canada. Custom Tabulations, 2021 Census of Population.

Figure 28: Gap in high school completion (in percentage points) between Indigenous and non-Indigenous populations, aged 18 to 24, 25 to 34, 35+ and 25 to 64, 2021, Canada

Text alternative for Figure 28: Gap in high school completion (in percentage points) between Indigenous and non-Indigenous populations, aged 18 to 24, 25 to 34, 35+ and 25 to 64, 2021, Canada

-36.8

-35.0

-27.3

-30.8

-16.1

-14.2

-11.0

-12.6

-12.2

-9.8

-6.3

-8.0

-39.6

-37.8

-31.7

-34.7

-6.3

-5.2

-4.8

-5.2

Source: Indigenous Services Canada. Custom Tabulations, 2021 Census of Population.

Source: Indigenous Services Canada. Custom Tabulations, 2021 Census of Population.

Source: Indigenous Services Canada. Custom Tabulations, 2021 Census of Population.

Source: Indigenous Services Canada. Custom Tabulations, 2021 Census of Population.

Regional variation in high school attainment is modest among Métis, and the gaps relative to the non-Indigenous population range from close to zero in the four Atlantic Provinces to 14.4 percentage points in the Northwest Territories.

The full dataset for this figure is available in Appendix A - Table A5.5.

Source: Indigenous Services Canada. Custom Tabulations, 2021 Census of Population.

Source: Indigenous Services Canada. Custom Tabulations, 2021 Census of Population.

Note: Given that the non-binary population is small, Statistics Canada produced a two-category gender variable that was applied to prevent disclosure of identifiable data for lower levels of geography when necessary. Consequently, information will be disseminated using the following categories: Men+, Women+. Individuals in the "non-binary persons" category are distributed in the other two gender categories and are denoted by the "+" symbol.

Measuring the gaps

There was an increase in the overall percentage of people with at least a high school credential; however, the gap did not close for all Indigenous groups compared to the non-Indigenous population.

There was a small narrowing of the gap for Registered Indians living off reserve (12.0%) and for Non-Status Indians (10.1%).

There was a large narrowing of the gap for Métis (24.6%).

The gaps for Registered Indians living on reserve and Inuit were relatively stable from 2016 to 2021.

There was a small narrowing of the gap in high school completion rates for Registered Indian men+ living off reserve (7.2%) and Non-Status Indian men+ (7.4%). Métis men+ saw a medium narrowing of the gap (19.8%), from 8.6% in 2016 to 6.9% in 2021.

There was a small widening of the gap for Inuit men+, from 32.9% in 2016 to 36.6% in 2021.

Between Indigenous women+ and non-Indigenous women+, there was a narrowing of gaps in the percentage of people with a high school education across all groups except Inuit women+ for whom the gap remained relatively stable.

Métis women+ saw the largest narrowing of the gap at 28.3%, from 5.3% in 2016 to 3.7% in 2021.

The full dataset for this figure is available in Appendix A - Table A5.7.

Children in foster care

The Census of Population is designed to enumerate private households. Therefore, with respect to children in foster care, the census counts only those who reside in a private home. Those living in institutions, group homes or other care arrangements are not included in census counts related to children in foster care and are therefore not reflected in the data presented in this report.

Indigenous children are far more likely than non-Indigenous children to be in foster care. Although Indigenous Peoples represent only 5.0% of the Canadian population, Indigenous children make up over half (52.0%) of the children in foster care (Figure 51). From 2016 to 2021, the number of Indigenous children in foster care was relatively flat, decreasing by only 90 children in 5 years (Table 21). For a full list of all data tables relevant to children in foster care, please see Appendix A, tables A9.1 to A9.4.

The regional breakdowns for Inuit are not presented as the small numbers make it difficult to interpret differences in the percentage of Inuit children in foster care across Inuit regions. It is notable that the percentage of Inuit children in foster care inside Inuit Nunangat (2.0%) is lower than the percentage outside Inuit Nunangat (8.0%). However, this pattern could be misleading as some Inuit children in foster care outside Inuit Nunangat may originate from families inside Inuit Nunangat.

Source: Indigenous Services Canada. Custom Tabulations, 2021 Census of Population.

Indigenous children are over-represented in foster care. Of all children aged 0 to 17 in foster care, 26.3% were Registered Indian children living off reserve, 9.2% were Non-Status Indian children, 7.6% were Registered Indian children living on reserve, 5.8% were Métis children and 2.6% were Inuit children.

Source: Indigenous Services Canada. Custom Tabulations, 2021 Census of Population.

Note: Figure 52 includes a statistic for all Registered Indian children, in addition to the breakdown between those on and off reserve. In subsequent charts related to foster care, the breakdown is not included as it may be misleading, since Registered Indian children in foster care off reserve may come from families living on reserve.

Source: Indigenous Services Canada. Custom Tabulations, 2021 Census of Population.

Note: Registered Indian includes both those living on and off reserve since Registered Indian children in foster care off reserve may come from families living on reserve.

Figure 54: Percentage of children aged 0 to 17 in foster care, 2021, First Nations and non-Indigenous populations, by region

Text alternative for Figure 54: Percentage of children aged 0 to 17 in foster care, 2021, First Nations and non-Indigenous populations, by region

Registered Indians

Non-Status Indian

Non-Indigenous

Source: Indigenous Services Canada. Custom Tabulations, 2021 Census of Population.

Note: Registered Indians include both those living on and off reserve since Registered Indian children in foster care off reserve may come from families living on reserve.

Source: Indigenous Services Canada. Custom Tabulations, 2021 Census of Population.

The percentage of Métis children in foster care differed markedly across regions, peaking in Manitoba at 2.6%.

The full dataset for this figure is available in Appendix A - Table A9.4.

Measuring the gaps

Indigenous children in Canada continue to be overrepresented in foster care.

The proportion of Indigenous children in foster care in 2021 remained relatively stable compared to 2016 with the exception of Inuit children.

Indigenous language knowledge

Indigenous languages have a very important role in Indigenous cultures and reflect the rich and distinct worldviews of the different Indigenous nations across the country. In 2021, there were over 70 Indigenous languages spoken in Canada. For more than 20 (28.6%) of those languages, 500 or fewer people reported speaking them as their mother tongue. In 2021, 243,155 individuals could conduct a conversation in an Indigenous language, 188,905 people reported having at least one Indigenous mother tongue and 182,925 reported speaking an Indigenous language at home on a regular basis. From 2016 to 2021, the number of individuals able to conduct a conversation in an Indigenous language dropped by over 20,000 (Table 23). This may be due in part to the 63 incompletely enumerated First Nations communities for the 2021 Census. For a full list of all data tables relevant to Indigenous language knowledge, please see Appendix A, tables A10.1 to A10.8.

Knowledge of Indigenous languages is not compared to non-Indigenous languages in this report. Instead, the report examines trends in Indigenous language use over time and whether those trends reflect Indigenous Peoples' aspirations with respect to the preservation and practice of their ancestral languages.

Source: Indigenous Services Canada. Custom Tabulations, 2021 Census of Population.

In 2021, knowledge of an Indigenous language, meaning the proportion of Indigenous people who can conduct a conversation in an Indigenous language, was highest among Inuit (58.5%) and Registered Indians living on reserve (40.4%), and lowest among Métis (1.2%) and Non-Status Indians (1.8%).

The full dataset for this figure is available in Appendix A - Table A10.1.

Source: Indigenous Services Canada. Custom Tabulations, 2021 Census of Population.

Figure 58: Percentage of First Nations with knowledge of an Indigenous language, 2021, by region

Text alternative for Figure 58: Percentage of First Nations with knowledge of an Indigenous language, 2021, by region

Registered Indian on reserve

Registered Indian off reserve

Non-Status Indian

Source: Indigenous Services Canada. Custom Tabulations, 2021 Census of Population.

Source: Indigenous Services Canada. Custom Tabulations, 2021 Census of Population.

Source: Indigenous Services Canada. Custom Tabulations, 2021 Census of Population.

Source: Indigenous Services Canada. Custom Tabulations, 2021 Census of Population.

Note: Given that the non-binary population is small, Statistics Canada produced a two-category gender variable that was applied to prevent disclosure of identifiable data for lower levels of geography when necessary. Consequently, information will be disseminated using the following categories: Men+, Women+. Individuals in the "non-binary persons" category are distributed in the other two gender categories and are denoted by the "+" symbol.

The likelihood of knowing an Indigenous language was similar for men+ and women+ across all Indigenous populations.

The full dataset for this figure is available in Appendix A - Table A10.6

Source: Indigenous Services Canada. Custom Tabulations, 2021 Census of Population.

Justice - Incarceration

Disproportionate levels of incarceration can be a strong indicator that a holistic examination is needed of both crime and the institutional responses to it. The Adult Correctional Services Survey collects annual data on the delivery of adult correctional services from both the provincial/territorial and federal correctional systems. Reporting on custody admissions is limited to a pan-Indigenous identifier. In 2021, 46,633 Indigenous people were admitted to remand, custody or community sentence. From 2016 to 2021, the total number of Indigenous adult admissions decreased considerably from 74,823 to 46,633, a difference of 28,190 people (Table 24). For a full list of all data tables relevant to incarceration, please see Appendix A, tables A11.1 to A11.2.

Indigenous

Non-Indigenous

Indigenous identity unknown

Number

Percentage change from previous year

Number

Percentage change from previous year

Number

Percentage change from previous year

Source: Indigenous Services Canada. Custom Tabulations, 2021 Census of Population and 2021 to 2022 Adult Correctional Services Survey.

Source: Indigenous Services Canada. Custom Tabulations, 2016 to 2017 to 2021 to 2022 Adult Correctional Services Survey.

A focus on urban settings

According to the 2021 Census, about 48.0% of Registered Indians, 75.0% of Non-Status Indians, 50.7% of Inuit, and 71.1% of Métis live in urban areas. Analyses of these data revealed that gaps between Indigenous and non-Indigenous populations living in urban settings are generally similar to those that exist between Indigenous and non-Indigenous populations overall. Employment rates provide a useful illustration.

Source: Indigenous Services Canada. Custom Tabulations, 2021 Census of Population.

Urban employment rates were almost identical to total employment rates both in the overall trends and relative to each other.

In urban settings, the highest employment rate was among Métis (69.5%) and the lowest among Registered Indians living off reserve (58.1%).

Urban employment rates and corresponding gaps relative to the non-Indigenous population were relatively stable for Registered Indians off reserve, Non-Status Indians and Métis when compared to overall employment trends and disparities (both in urban settings and throughout Canada).

Among Inuit, the urban employment rate was higher than the total employment rate (59.1% compared to 55.2%).

Accordingly, the gap in employment rate among Inuit living in urban areas relative to their non-Indigenous counterparts compared to the gap among Inuit in total was slightly smaller, at 20.5 percentage points.

The full dataset for this figure is available in Appendix A - Tables 12.1 and 12.2.

Measuring the gaps

The gap in employment rate among Indigenous people in urban areas remained relatively stable from 2016 to 2021 for Registered Indians off reserve, Non-Status Indians and Métis.

Among Inuit, he the gap in employment rate narrowed by 7.3%, from 16.4% in 2016 to 15.2% in 2021.

Conclusions

Indigenous Peoples in Canada face significant and long-standing socio-economic gaps when compared to non-Indigenous people. These gaps have been shaped by a long history of colonialism, discrimination and marginalization, which have profoundly impacted Indigenous communities and continue to affect their lives today. This report focuses on the gaps for which the Census of Population can be used to assess the scale and scope of changes over time. The Department's 2020 Report to Parliament established baseline measures for many of these indicators and quantified the gaps between the socio-economic well-being of Indigenous Peoples and their non-Indigenous counterparts. In summary, Indigenous Peoples in Canada were found to experience significant disparities in well-being compared to non-Indigenous Canadians. Indigenous Peoples in Canada have lower median incomes and are more likely to live in poverty. They also experience significant employment disparities compared to non-Indigenous Canadians, as the unemployment rate among Indigenous people is generally higher. Indigenous Peoples in Canada experience lower levels of educational attainment compared to non-Indigenous Canadians, including lower rates of high school graduation and university education. They are more likely than non-Indigenous Canadians to experience inadequate housing conditions. In the criminal justice system, Indigenous Peoples are overrepresented in incarceration rates. Indigenous children in Canada are also vastly overrepresented in the child welfare system, accounting for a disproportionate number of children in foster care.

As seen throughout this report, progress has been made towards closing these gaps, but at times the extent of progress can be difficult to assess. Given that a 5.0-percent change would be considered a small effect size, a 12.5-percent change would be considered a medium effect size and a 20-percent change or more would be considered a large effect size, it is possible to examine all domains to determine the direction and size of the relative change in socio-economic gaps between Indigenous Peoples in Canada and the non-Indigenous population (Table 26). For a full summary of each domain, see Appendix B.

From 2015 to 2020, median individual income increased across the board. Even after accounting for inflation, income was higher for all Indigenous identities and increased at a higher rate than that of the non-Indigenous population. A large narrowing of the gap was observed for each Indigenous group, with increases ranging from $4,500 to $9,900 since 2015. Increased income meant fewer households in a low-income situation. Again, a large narrowing of the gap was observed between each Indigenous group and the non-Indigenous population. The narrowing of gaps ranged from 31.8% for Inuit to 46.5% for Non-Status Indians. The total number of Indigenous people living in a low-income situation dropped from 471,560 in 2015 to 335,560 in 2020. Overall, 136,000 fewer Indigenous people (60,190 Registered Indians living on reserve, 45,030 Registered Indians living off reserve, 8,975 Non-Status Indians, 2,840 Inuit and 18,965 Métis) were living in a low-income situation since 2015.

Registered Indian on reserve

Registered Indian off reserve

Non-Status Indian

Inuit

Métis

Source: Indigenous Services Canada. Custom Tabulations, 2016 to 2021 Census of Population.

Since 2016, there have been slight improvements in the gaps in employment rate relative to the non-Indigenous population for Registered Indians living on reserve, Non-Status Indians and Métis. Even though the gaps remained stable for Registered Indians living off reserve and Inuit, the 2021 findings are noteworthy. Given the employment challenges presented by the COVID-19 pandemic such as lockdowns, business closures and changes in consumer habits, the fact that Indigenous people remained employed at proportionate levels to their non-Indigenous peers is an important finding. In 2016, 502,925 Indigenous people were employed, and that number rose to 538,415 in 2021; an additional 35,490 Indigenous people were working in 2021 with increases across all Indigenous groups (10,020 Registered Indians living off reserve, 16,725 Non-Status Indians, 1,040 Inuit and 10,060 Métis) with the exception of Registered Indians living on reserve, who saw a decline of 2,355 employed people. The gaps in employment income were more varied, as the gap narrowed for some groups (Registered Indians living on reserve and Inuit), one group saw no change (Registered Indians living off reserve) and for others, the gap widened (Non-Status Indians and Métis). Despite these differences, employment income was higher in 2020 for all Indigenous groups, even after accounting for inflation, with individuals bringing home an additional $800 to $4,200 per year in income. Census 2026 will be important to determine how the increased availability of government benefits during the COVID-19 pandemic impacted income and employment. Census 2026 will be crucial in helping contextualize the historic implications of the pandemic on the socio-economic well-being of all Canadians.

In total, 80,280 more Indigenous people aged 25 to 64 had a high school education in 2021 than in 2016 (925 Registered Indians living on reserve, 26,150 Registered Indians living off reserve, 25,545 Non-Status Indians, 1,730 Inuit and 25,930 Métis). For Registered Indians living off reserve, Non-Status Indians and Métis, the gaps in the proportion of those 25 to 64 years of age with at least a high school education compared to the non-Indigenous population narrowed, ranging from 10.1 to 24.6%. From 2016 to 2021, an additional 47,980 Indigenous people (4,985 Registered Indians living on reserve, 14,630 Registered Indians living off reserve, 9,200 Non-Status Indians, 890 Inuit and 18,275 Métis) obtained a university education. Despite these gains, the gaps in university completion relative to the non-Indigenous population widened for all Indigenous groups, from 15.9 to 22.9%. Education is the key to breaking the cycle of poverty. By improving education outcomes among Indigenous people, we can equip individuals with the knowledge and skills necessary to succeed in the modern economy. This can help Indigenous people secure higher-paying jobs and improve their overall economic well-being. Education is a powerful tool for promoting social inclusion and cultural revitalization. Indigenous education can help preserve and revitalize traditional cultures and languages, which are important components of Indigenous identity. This can foster a sense of belonging and pride in Indigenous communities, which can lead to improved mental health and social cohesion. Improving Indigenous education can also help address the historical injustices and traumas experienced by Indigenous Peoples.

Generally speaking, housing quality and conditions improved for Indigenous people from 2016 to 2021. The gaps in both the proportion of dwellings that were crowded and the proportion of dwellings in need of major repair generally narrowed between census cycles. However, the narrowing of the gap in the proportion of crowded dwellings was due in part to increases in crowded dwellings among the non-Indigenous population. The greatest decline in the number of crowded dwellings was found among Registered Indians living on reserve, from 12,160 crowded dwellings in 2016 to 10,705 in 2021, a difference of 1,455. From 2016 to 2021, although the non-Indigenous dwellings in need of major repair increased by 2,525, the number of Indigenous dwellings in need of major repair dropped by 3,715. This decline was driven by 6,005 fewer dwellings of Registered Indians living on reserve and 485 fewer dwellings of Registered Indians living off reserve requiring major repair.

Indigenous children continue to be overrepresented in foster care. The census data collection method identifies only children in foster care who reside in a private home. It excludes those in institutions, group homes or other care arrangements. The proportions of Registered Indian, Non-Status Indian and Métis children in foster care were actually fairly stable over the period. The proportion of Inuit children in foster care increased by almost 1.0%. In total, there were 17,410 Indigenous children in foster care in 2016 compared to 17,320 in 2021.

In addition to socio-economic gaps, declines in Indigenous language knowledge are noteworthy. In 2021, 243,155 individuals could conduct a conversation in an Indigenous language, 188,905 people reported having at least one Indigenous mother tongue and 182,925 reported speaking an Indigenous language at home at least on a regular basis. In 2021, there were over 70 Indigenous languages spoken in Canada. For more than 20 (28.6%) of those languages, 500 or fewer people reported speaking them as their mother tongue. Indigenous languages are a vital part of the country's cultural and linguistic diversity and are essential to Indigenous Peoples' identity, culture and well-being. Many of the Indigenous languages in Canada are endangered, facing the risk of extinction due to the impacts of colonialism, residential schools and ongoing discrimination. The loss of Indigenous languages has significant impacts on Indigenous Peoples' well-being, cultural identity and sense of belonging. Language loss also results in the loss of traditional knowledge and cultural practices.

Indigenous Peoples in Canada continue to be overrepresented in the criminal justice system, as both victims and offenders. From 2016 to 2021, the percentage of Indigenous adults who entered a correctional facility for remand or who were sentenced to custody or a community supervision program increased slightly from 29.9% to 31.2%. However, the total number of these admissions decreased considerably during this same period, from 74,823 in 2016 to 46,633 in 2021, a difference of 28,190 people.

Addressing socio-economic gaps between Indigenous and non-Indigenous people in areas such as income, employment, education, housing, foster care and incarceration is crucial for reconciliation. These gaps are a result of systemic barriers and inequalities that have led to the marginalization of Indigenous Peoples.

Addressing these socio-economic gaps requires a holistic approach that takes into account not only economic factors but also social, cultural and spiritual factors. This includes supporting language and cultural revitalization, improving access to education and promoting community empowerment. Further narrowing the disparities between the Indigenous and non-Indigenous populations will require additional commitments to address historical and ongoing injustices, support Indigenous self-determination and incorporate Indigenous knowledge and perspectives into policy and program development. Indigenous-led solutions and approaches are necessary to address the socio-economic gaps experienced by Indigenous Peoples in Canada.

Appendix A

Appendix B

Table B1. Overview of the change in gap observed between Indigenous and non-Indigenous populations from 2016 to 2021 for all domain indicators, Canada

Source: Indigenous Services Canada. Custom Tabulations, 2016 to 2021 Census of Population.

Notes:

A % change of 5.0% would be considered a small effect size, a % change of 12.5% would be considered a medium effect size and a % change of 20.0% or more would be considered a large effect size.

The on/off reserve breakdown is not included for children in foster care as it may be misleading, since Registered Indian children in foster care off reserve may come from families living on reserve.

Footnotes

Footnote 1

In the census, income is reported for the previous calendar year. For the 2021 census, income data were based on total earnings in 2020.
Return to footnote 1 referrer

Thank you for your feedback

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
An update on the socio-economic gaps between Indigenous Peoples and the non-Indigenous population in Canada: Highlights from the 2021 Census

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
A Compendium Report to the Department's 2023 Annual Report to Parliament.

# data[].attributes.headline
Reason for the unemployment or Indigenous peoples

# data[].attributes.subject
Reason for the unemployment or Indigenous peoples

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
In this article, we look at the barriers - some tangible, some not - that maintain the status quo of exorbitant rates of unemployment amongst Indigenous people in Canada.

There have been massive, comprehensive studies done on this issue for years yet sadly, the barriers identified decades ago are pretty much the same in 2019 - not a lot of traction on the ground in terms of change and improvement.

What is the root of the barriers to employment that so many Indigenous people in Canada face? It can be pretty safely said that the seeds were sown at the time of contact. European settlers viewed Indigenous people as inferior and savage, and many Indigenous people viewed settlers with distrust, anger and fear.

Move along the timeline to the enactment of assimilation laws and residential schools and we see the ensuing intergenerational fallout of those laws - crushing poverty, poor health, low esteem, broken families and lower-than-average education achievements. And then there's the and its paternalistic laws that continue to further exacerbate the situation.

So, what are the most common barriers?

1. Literacy and education: high school and basic literacy skills are requirements for nearly all jobs.

Among those aged 25 to 65, just over one-third (35%) of off-reserve First Nations people had a literacy score of level 3 or higher, while the figure was 50% for Métis. In comparison, 57% of non-Aboriginal individuals had a literacy score of level 3 or higher (Chart 1). At the same time, almost one-quarter (24%) of off-reserve First Nations people and 40% of Métis had higher levels of numeracy, compared with 49% of their non-Aboriginal counterparts. [1]

2. Cultural differences: employers and co-workers may not understand or respect the unique cultural differences of Indigenous people which can create a worksite atmosphere of disrespect, resentment or distrust.

3. Racism/discrimination/stereotypes: this is one of the fundamental barriers to Indigenous people getting a job and remaining in the job, and it is directly related to the attitudes passed down since European settlers arrived in North America. There are a number of myths and misconceptions about Indigenous people and perceived special treatment that some non-Indigenous people still believe are truths.

4. Self-esteem: poverty, broken families, racism, stereotypes, discrimination, and few role models all contribute to low self-esteem. It's hard to present well in a job interview when one is struggling with low self-esteem.

5. Poverty and poor housing: Many First Nations children, living on-reserve, start each day in an overcrowded, inadequate home that likely is in need of repairs, has asbestos, and mould, and may not have drinking water. Unhealthy living conditions affect a person's mental and physical well-being.

One in five Indigenous people lived in a dwelling that was in need of major repairs in 2016
One-quarter (26.2%) of Inuit, 24.2% of First Nations people and 11.3% of Métis lived in a dwelling that was in need of major repairs. In comparison, 6.0% of the non-Indigenous population reported living in a dwelling in need of major repairs. [2]

6. Lack of a driving license: a real stumbling block in remote communities - just getting to the nearest office to write the initial test can be challenging. Taking driver's training is similarly a challenge as there may not be easily accessed training providers or, for that matter, a vehicle on which to learn.

7. Transportation: few remote communities are serviced by public transit; vehicle insurance is expensive and out of reach for many in pre-employment situations; again, owning a vehicle or having access to a vehicle is frequently not a reality.

8. Child care: safe, affordable child care is a challenge for mainstream Canadians - it is even more of a challenge for parents in Indigenous communities.

[1] Literacy and numeracy among off-reserve First Nations people and Métis: Do higher skill levels improve labour market outcomes?
[2] First Nations People, Métis and Inuit in Canada: Diverse and Growing Populations, Statistics Canada
Featured photo: Unsplash

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
8 Basic Barriers to Indigenous Employment - #1 of 3

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Listed here are just some of the more obvious barriers to Indigenous employment and meaningful, lasting careers.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Introduction

The Indigenous people discussed in this study are the descendants of the original inhabitants of the land now identified as Canada. In 2016, the number of Indigenous people in the country was approximately 1 700 000, which represents 4·9% of the country's total population. Indigenous people in Canada comprise three main groups: the First Nations, Métis, and Inuit people.

First Nations are the first peoples of the landmass called Turtle Island, the term many Indigenous people use to describe northern America. This term reflects the absence of borders and traditional stories about how Mother Earth was created on the back of a turtle. There are more than 630 different First Nations across Canada, with more than 50 languages, and they account for 976 000 individuals. Of these people, approximately 744 000 are registered under the Indian Act of Canada and are known as status First Nations, and 232 000 are not registered under the Act (non-status First Nations). Over 331 000 (about 44%) of the status First Nations population live on one of the 3100 government-defined communities across Canada called reserves.

Métis people are usually described as being of mixed Indigenous and French European settlers' ancestry. However, this description is not how Métis people would describe themselves. Métis are politically and relationally connected to Red River, Manitoba ( figure 1), the first Métis settlement,

and account for over 588 000 individuals.

Inuit people are a circumpolar people of a land called Inuit Nunangat, comprising Nunavut (a northeast territory in Canada), Nunavik (located in Quebec), Nunatsiavut (located in Newfoundland and Labrador), and Inuvialuit (located in Yukon and in the Northwest Territories; figure 1). It is the smallest group of the three, with 65 000 individuals.

Indigenous people in Canada face substantial socioeconomic inequality compared with non-Indigenous Canadians due to impacts of colonisation, such as forced removal from their land and communities. Thousands of Indigenous children have died in residential or industrial schools.

, The residential school programme was created to assimilate Indigenous children into the settlers' culture and often involved forcedly removing children from their communities, with the overall goal of eliminating Indigenous people in Canada as distinct peoples.

Survivors of residential schools have reported mistreatment including psychological abuse, and physical and sexual violence. Analyses of registers concluded that almost half of the recorded deaths of children were caused by tuberculosis, in combination with poor care, malnourishment, and poor hygiene. Residential schools have constituted a major source of trauma for Indigenous people in Canada and the impact of these schools continues to live on as intergenerational trauma today. The total number of victims of this system is unknown. Not all deaths were recorded in registers, and buried bodies of children are still being discovered on the premises of former residential schools as of 2022.

Nowadays, Indigenous people face systemic issues, including racism, discrimination, and bias within institutions (eg, hospitals and health-care facilities) related to this historical context, which have not stopped after the closure of the last residential school in Canada in 1996. These systemic issues contribute to explaining disparities in health outcomes for Indigenous people in Canada compared with non-Indigenous Canadians. These disparities include increased rates of type 2 diabetes, hypertension, substance-use disorder, and mental health challenges, and increased post-surgery mortality and complications., Indigenous people in Canada tend to live in more rural regions, have lower rates of educational attainment, and are more likely to live in intergenerational housing and face housing insecurity than non-Indigenous Canadians., The average income and lifetime earnings are lower for Indigenous than non-Indigenous people, with the lowest incomes found for First Nations who live on reserve.

In 2011, the life expectancy at age 1 year for girls in Canada was 76·1 years for Inuit, 77·7 years for First Nations, 82·3 years for Métis, and 87·3 years for non-Indigenous people. The life expectancy at age 1 year for boys in Canada was 70·0 years for Inuit, 72·5 years for First Nations, 76·9 years for Métis, and 81·4 years for non-Indigenous people.

The report from the Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada entitled Calls to Action, published in 2015, lists 94 calls for further action to redress the legacy of residential and industrial schools.

Some of these calls constitute an agenda for research and education in health care. Call to Action 19 includes the identification of gaps in health outcomes between Indigenous and non-Indigenous communities. Call to Action 23 recommends that all levels of government provide cultural competency training for all health-care professionals.

There is a scarcity of available resources for occupational medicine specialists and occupational health providers on the specific problems encountered by Indigenous people with regards to work-related health issues. These problems include occupational health issues and social determinants of health related to work and employment. The International Labour Organization (ILO) defines occupational health as including "the maintenance and promotion of workers' health and working capacity; the improvement of working environment and work to become conducive to safety and health and the development of work organizations and working cultures in a direction which supports health and safety at work and in doing so also promotes a positive social climate and smooth operation and may enhance productivity of the undertakings." Occupational health includes, and goes beyond, the usual categories of occupational hazards (biological, chemical, physical, biomechanical, and psychosocial hazards).

WHO defines social determinants of health as the non-medical factors that influence health outcomes. Several of these determinants are related to work and employment: income and social protection, unemployment and job insecurity, and working life conditions.

Our objective is to summarise the available evidence in the field of work and health for Indigenous people in Canada.

Study selection

A total of 31 studies are summarised in this narrative review ( table 1). Relevant findings are summarised in different categories that are listed in the following paragraphs. The two researchers (QD-M and JL) both agreed on including 76 references and excluding 720 references, and they were in disagreement (ie, one researcher had included the paper for full-text analysis, and the other had not) for 30 references. These 30 references were reviewed, and the researchers reached a consensus to include nine of them. Therefore, the total number of papers included for full-text analysis was 85, of which 54 were excluded because were not related to occupational health and medicine ( figure 2).

Employment and unemployment rates

The nature of the occupational risks encountered by Indigenous people depends on their access to the job market. From 2007, when such data started to be tracked, to 2019, unemployment rates have been shown to be higher and wages to be lower for Indigenous people than for non-Indigenous people. In 2019, the unemployment rate for the non-Indigenous population was 5·5% versus 10·1% for Indigenous people, which is the largest difference since 2007. In 2019, the First Nations' unemployment rate was 11·7% versus 8·3% for Métis. However, when data are adjusted for level of education attained, employment rates are similar.

The mean weekly earnings were CA$945 for Indigenous people compared with $1018 for non-Indigenous people in 2019. The gap in mean weekly earnings between Indigenous and non-Indigenous people continues to decrease and went from -11·7% in 2007 to -7·2% in 2019. The number of weeks worked per year contribute to the earning gaps between Indigenous and non-Indigenous people. However, there is a convergence in the number of weeks worked between Métis people and non-Indigenous people. Indigenous people were disproportionately burdened by the 2008 economic crisis: the probability of unemployment was higher and more persistent for them than for non-Indigenous people.

11% of employed First Nations people living on reserve were self-employed in 2017, with employed men more likely to be self-employed (13%) than women (8%).

Education and training

Indigenous people have less access to training than do non-Indigenous people. At the end of the 20th century, the majority of Indigenous youth did not finish secondary school, and had no credentials for jobs in the mainstream economy or in their home communities. Several examples of short-term educational and skills-training programmes have been identified, including the federally funded Aboriginal Skills and Employment Partnership programme and the Trades Access Programme. However, the success of these programmes is assessed on participation figures and numbers, rather than on whether these programmes are consistent with Indigenous people's needs and values., Alternatively, distance-learning opportunities have provided the training and education necessary to access higher-paying and higher-skilled employment opportunities than were previously available, including many remote work careers, especially for those living in isolated communities.

Nature of employment

A higher proportion of Indigenous people are working in the goods-producing sector (agriculture, mining, oil and gas extraction, utilities, construction, and manufacturing) than non-Indigenous people (23·0% vs 20·7% in 2019). Indigenous people in Canada are most commonly employed in health care and social assistance, retail and wholesale trade, and public administration industries. In 2010, there was a higher proportion of Indigenous people than non-Indigenous people employed in the following activity sectors: health care and social assistance (14·4% of Indigenous people vs 12·7% of non-Indigenous people), public administration (10·2% vs 6·1%), and construction (10·8% vs 7·5%).

Meanwhile, they were under-represented in professional, scientific, and technical services (3·4% vs 7·8%).

Additionally, according to some researchers in the 1980s, the scarce availability of alternative employment sources increased the incorporation of Indigenous people into industrial employment. With regard to the difficulties faced by Inuit communities, worksite facilities and comfort are often tailored to southern (ie, non-Inuit) expectations rather than to the needs of Inuit people.

Fishing, hunting, and gathering are important activities, especially in Inuit communities. Employment has an effect on traditional food consumption. For example, in some communities (such as the Cree community of Mistissini, QC), the income generated from employment allowed for purchasing of traditional food. Whereas in Iqaluit, NU, being employed increased the risk of having an acute gastrointestinal illness, which might be explained by employment limiting time available for proper food safety practices or time to access the land for country food, resulting in increased retail food consumption. Alternatively, increased income could be leading to more unhealthy food consumption behaviours., The structuration of communities, such as the James Bay Cree, after large-scale development, has disrupted traditional hunting, trapping, and fishing activities, and reduced the quality of life of affected individuals (eg, increased risk of suicide or substance abuse). The shift from traditional forms of work to the formal labour market might not be beneficial. Disruption of traditional fishing and hunting might also be related to environmental pollution. The Mohawk Nation at Akwesasne (in northeast America) has been affected by the contamination of the St Lawrence River with polychlorobiphenyls and other pollutants released by several industrial facilities. Increased concentrations of blood serum polychlorobiphenyls have been explained by both dietary exposure and occupational exposure in people working in these industrial facilities.

Chronic disease and work

Indigenous people have increased rates of chronic diseases compared with the general population. Métis individuals, for instance, have higher rates of cardiovascular diseases, metabolic syndrome, and obesity, than Canada's non-Indigenous population does., A review published in 2013 found that Métis individuals have a higher prevalence of type 2 diabetes (5·6-7·1%) than the general population in Canada (3-4%). Further, Indigenous people who had diabetes were found to work more years before retirement than non-Indigenous people. It was unclear whether the longer employment was due to psychosocial variables or to the insufficient financial support available to Indigenous people. Addressing socioeconomic disparities including employment obtainment is necessary to reduce the chronic disease burden faced by Canada's Métis population. The incidence of interstitial lung disease and idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis might be higher in the Cree of Eeyou Istchee, QC, than in other populations. However, this hypothesis requires further diagnostic evidence, and data on occupational exposures are scarce.

Psychological safety

Unemployed Indigenous people in Canada were found to have decreased levels of psychological wellbeing. Data from the 2012 Aboriginal Peoples Survey showed that only 13·6% of unemployed Indigenous people reported the highest level of psychological wellbeing compared with 20·2% of Indigenous people employed full time. Policies to address the basic psychological needs of Indigenous people are warranted. Rates of workplace racism and discrimination faced are higher among Indigenous employees than non-Indigenous employees.

Data from the 2014 Canadian Public Service Employee Survey showed that federal workers identifying as Indigenous were about two times more likely to face harassment (adjusted OR 1·84, 95% CI 1·74-1·94) or discrimination (2·20, 2·04-2·37) than other respondents. A study conducted with Indigenous women working in forest processing plants in the Northern Prairies showed that some women thought that addressing cultural differences and empowering Indigenous women were more important than directly addressing racism and structured inequality in their workplace. Work-related values, definition of success, and career choices might differ between Indigenous and non-Indigenous people. Stereotypes regarding Indigenous people at the workplace have been perpetuated for years, where some employers have reported that Indigenous people worked slowly, loitered for a long time, and had to be constantly supervised.

Discussion

This Review is the first summary of the available evidence relevant to work and health issues for Indigenous people in Canada that we are aware of ( table 2). This Review brings a contribution to some of the calls to action from the 2015 report from the Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada.

In particular, this Review helps to identify gaps between Indigenous and non-Indigenous populations (Call to Action 19), and it can be used for educational purposes in the field of occupational health and medicine training (Call to Action 23).

Indigenous people experience intersectionality in the issues they face in workplaces. In a scoping review on intersectionality in health interventions, Ghasemi and colleagues wrote that "human beings are shaped by the interaction of multiple interlocking locations (such as race/ethnicity, gender, social class, age, migration status, etc), and these interactions occur within a context of interconnected systems and power structures."

Indigenous people face intrinsic discrimination, which comes in addition to other social determinants of health such as low socioeconomic status, increased unemployment, gender discrimination, and ageism. For instance, Indigenous people (particularly those living on reserve) have a lower rate of completing high school than non-Indigenous people, which is then associated with higher chances of unemployment, which can then negatively influence their health.

Intersectionality was particularly well shown in the data from WorkSafeBC (the Workers' Compensation Board of British Columbia). Their study showed that the injury rates associated with being Indigenous were reduced-but still existing-when adjusted for other factors such as age, gender, and geographical area, which showed that Indigenous people face adverse effects from various determinants of health in addition to being Indigenous. For example, one study showed that Indigenous women aged 50 years and older have a higher risk of injury than other Indigenous people. Occupational health issues can cumulate with environmental health issues for Indigenous people. Exposures might not be limited to work settings, and in some circumstances, industrial pollution might be a source of occupational exposure for workers that continue to be exposed in their dwellings, as the pollution goes beyond the borders of the workplace.

From an occupational health perspective, the fact that Indigenous people are more likely to be self-employed than the Canadian average means that fewer Indigenous people are covered by a workers' compensation board, with reduced benefits in case of a disease or injury related to work. The increase of distance-learning opportunities might offer more possibilities for Indigenous people to get higher skilled, higher paid positions than were available before, which might also help to reduce exposure to physical, chemical, and biological hazards. The higher prevalence of type 2 diabetes in Indigenous people, especially in Métis, than in the general Canadian population could possibly lead to an increased risk of excluding them from safety-sensitive positions due to the potential risk of hypoglycaemia.

There are several studies that have shown that Indigenous workers face psychosocial hazards at the workplace that are in addition to general psychosocial hazards encountered by any worker.

First, Indigenous workers encounter increased amounts of racism, discrimination, harassment, and stigmatisation. These prejudices are not surprising, and they are supported by existing findings.

Demeaning stereotypes are still perpetuated in workplaces. We hypothesise that the effect could be multiplicative: a poor psychosocial climate in the workplace might trigger more demeaning comments unrelated to the work performed by Indigenous workers. Consequently, they would experience both the poor psychosocial climate and an increased number of specific psychosocial exposures, which can be made worse because of the overall psychosocial climate.

Second, there are specificities pertaining to the work-life balance of Indigenous workers. The situation faced by miners illustrates the intertwined challenges of obtaining a job, which might be associated with Indigenous land dispossession and environmental pollution. Indigenous workers in this situation are likely to have-both at the workplace and at home-an intrapsychic conflict of obtaining a salary from a company that might contribute to land pollution and dispossession. We can parallel this situation with those of workers exposed to important occupational risks in exchange for high-paying employment opportunities. In research done with nuclear workers in France, some retirees diagnosed with work-related cancers were reluctant to criticise their former company for failing to protect their health. It is possible that Indigenous people might have similar behaviours, leading to conflicts imported from the workplace, and the work contract in particular, to their home (and vice and versa).

One way to reduce work-related psychosocial issues specific to Indigenous people is to associate the issues to the work, considering their culture. For instance, psychosocial issues can be mitigated in mining industries when Indigenous communities are associated with signatory mining projects, or by addressing cultural differences and empowering the workers.

A typical way companies have chosen to address cultural differences is to have all employees go through mandatory e-learning or in-class training sessions. Among the six reasons why companies are using e-learning, listed by Welsh and colleagues in a highly cited paper on this topic (ie, provide consistent worldwide training, reduce delivery cycle time, increase learner convenience, reduce information overload, improve tracking, and reduce expenses), none are about improving working conditions. The use of e-learning services is somewhat similar to the management of psychosocial risks: by providing some top-to-bottom training sessions to raise awareness on psychosocial risks, some employers feel that they have completely and definitely fulfilled their obligations. In doing so, they are transferring the responsibility for psychosocial issues in the workplace from the employer to the employees; if psychosocial risks remain once the workers are trained to manage them, the company could blame the workers for not applying the principles they had been taught, and relinquish itself of any responsibility. A similar strategy might be being used by employers of Indigenous people. By having their workers go through mandatory e-learning or training sessions on psychosocial risks, employers feel that they can transfer the responsibility of arranging a safe psychosocial working climate to the workers, dismissing other psychosocial factors that are out of the workers' hands (eg, workload, or unequal participation of all workers in decision making). These methods beg the question as to whether a workplace can be durably improved with such cosmetic training modules.

Although there is some research available related to psychosocial hazards faced by Indigenous workers, research on some main topics in occupational medicine, such as occupational cancers or musculoskeletal disorders, is scarce. Additionally, we did not find a lot of data published by workers' compensation boards on Indigenous workers' occupational diseases and injuries. The 2017-19 Association of Workers' Compensation Boards of Canada report does not include any information on Indigenous status, as such information is not collected by all workers' compensation boards. Further research might include linkage between data from workers' compensation boards and provincial medical registry and vital statistics, as completed in British Columbia.

Recent data from 2021 published by CAREX Canada showed that rates of occupational exposure to asbestos in the three territories were among the highest in Canada. In 2016, exposure to asbestos occurred in 290 per 10 000 workers in Nunavut, 247 per 10 000 in Yukon, and 191 per 10 000 in the Northwest Territories, compared with the federal mean of 129 workers exposed per 10 000 workers. Meanwhile, the proportion of people identifying themselves as belonging to at least one Indigenous group is the highest in the three territories (86% in Nunavut, 23% in Yukon, and 51% in the Northwest Territories) according to the 2016 Canadian census data. However, these differences need to be statistically adjusted depending on the nature of industries, and it is very likely that such differences will be reduced after such adjustment. These disparities might illustrate the cumulation of several risk factors for Indigenous workers. Assessing occupational exposures in the three territories might be a convenient proxy to assess the specificities of exposures for Indigenous workers.

Our Review has some limitations, partly because the scope of occupational health is broad. Our aim was to describe the current state of what has been studied so far, and what has not been studied. As we said earlier, the usual topics in occupational health were not aligned with the main topics that we retrieved in our research. The methodology of a narrative review was the best fit for this initial investigation into the challenges faced by Indigenous people with regards to occupational health. However, given that this Review was a first assessment of this topic, the choice of keywords was very broad ( appendix). Although we did not identify many studies on occupational cancers or musculoskeletal disorders, it might be useful to do subsequent research with a narrower scope and more specific keywords targeting these topics. Further studies on data provided by workers' compensation boards for Indigenous and non-Indigenous people might be interesting, as well as qualitative studies on the difficulties encountered by Indigenous people trying to access workers' compensation. Further studies on the empowerment of Indigenous workers might also provide some useful insight for preventing psychosocial risks in workplaces. Additional investigation into the cumulation of environmental and occupational exposures (such as with polychlorobiphenyls) might also help improve prevention strategies. Finally, the scope of our Review was about Indigenous people in Canada, but it might be interesting to compare our findings with further research in occupational health issues for Indigenous people living in other areas in the world.

Conclusion

To our knowledge, this narrative review is the first attempt to describe the specificities of occupational health issues encountered by Indigenous workers. For many Indigenous people, workplaces are sites where they encounter discrimination, bias, and culturally unsafe conditions that can impact their wellbeing and life beyond the workplace. However, Indigenous workers are not only experiencing psychosocial risks and mental health issues at the workplace, they might also accumulate environmental and occupational exposure to chemicals produced by industries that have settled on their lands. It seems that empowerment of Indigenous people in workplaces, with initiatives such as signatory industrial projects, could be beneficial to their occupational health.

QD-M and JL wrote the original draft. QD-M did the conceptualisation, funding acquisition, methodology, project administration, supervision, and reviewed and edited the draft. JL did the data collection, and reviewed and edited the draft. JW did the supervision, methodology, and reviewed and edited the draft. All authors had full access to all the data in the study and had final responsibility for the decision to submit for publication.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Work and health challenges of Indigenous people in Canada

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada has published 94 calls to action to redress the legacy of residential schools where thousands of Indigenous children have died. The objective of this narrative review is to address some of these calls by summarising the available evidence on work and health issues encountered by Indigenous workers in Canada.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Report a problem on this page

Is something not working? Is there information outdated? Can't find what you're looking for?

Please contact us and let us know how we can help you.
Privacy notice

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Labour force characteristics by region and detailed Indigenous group

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Number of persons in the labour force (employment and unemployment) and not in the labour force, unemployment rate, participation rate and employment rate by Atlantic region, Central provinces, Western provinces, Indigenous population (First Nations or Métis) and Non-Indigenous population, sex, and age group, last 5 years.