2011 Benchmarks: Introduction
Established in 2001, the BC Progress Board tracks changes in the economic performance and social wellbeing of British Columbia. The Board consists of
up to 18 business executives and academic leaders from around the province. British Columbia has the natural and human capital to become a leader in
Canada. Moreover, the province is well placed to become a global leader. The Board has two mandates:
- Measure and benchmark British Columbia's
performance over time, and relative to other jurisdictions, in
order to determine if BC's competitiveness and quality of life are
improving;
- Advise the Premier on strategies, policies and actions that could enhance BC's economic and social wellbeing regardless of
whether government, business or individual actions are required.
The BC Progress Board's benchmark work is the most comprehensive review available of the state of the province's economy,
innovation, education, environment, health and societal performance.
Indicators are grouped into two categories:
- economy, innovation and education; and,
- environment, health and society.
Each category has three core targets and 13 performance indicators. Under the
"Economy, Innovation, and Education" category, the core targets
are: real GDP per capita, personal income, and jobs. Under the
"Environment, Health and Society" category, the core targets are:
environmental quality, health outcomes, and social condition.
Historical and Recent Results |
| British Columbia's outcomes have improved considerably since the BC Progress Board was established in 2001 but, due mainly to similar improvements in other provinces, this has not generally translated into better ranks. The figures to the right present BC's ranks on the six core targets for the most recent year available and for 2000. |
|
| The Board's initial goal for the six core targets was to maintain first place in Canada in environmental quality and health outcomes, and to achieve a first- or second-place rank in the other four core targets. Health outcomes and environmental quality have improved significantly since 2000 which has allowed British Columbia to maintain its first-place ranks on these core targets. |
|
| British Columbia ranked third for real GDP per person in 1990 and growth well below the national average in the 1990s only cost the province one rank position. British Columbia lost another rank position to fifth by 2010 even though it had above-average growth. Similarly, BC lost one rank position as its real personal disposable income per person fell by four percent between 1990 and 2000 and another in 2008 even though income grew by twenty-four percent between 2000 and 2010. |
|
| Employment rates in the last twenty years have moved in three distinct bands that rarely overlap. Alberta, Saskatchewan and Manitoba dominate the top three positions and appear likely to continue to. British Columbia had strong employment growth between 2001 and 2007 but its employment rate remained at least four percentage points away from the top two provinces. |
|
| Ranks for the crime, income assistance and LICO components of the social condition index have not changed for six to eleven years even though rates improved between 2000 and 2010. |
|
 |
|
 |
Reporting Framework |
| The BC Progress Board issues benchmark reports that compare BC to other jurisdictions, and, within BC, compare the province's major metropolitan areas to each other and to the non-metropolitan area of the province (Regional BC). |
|
External Performance Review |
| The external performance review includes sections on "Economy, Innovation, and Education," and "Environment, Health and Society" and compares BC to Canada's other provinces, to other jurisdictions in North America, and to OECD countries. Six core targets and 26 performance indicators are used to assess the province's economic performance and social wellbeing. |
Internal Performance Review |
| The internal performance review provides regional comparisons within BC. It has the same two categories as the external review: "Economy, Innovation, and Education" and "Environment, Health and Society." For the first category, the internal review tracks ten regional indicators, and for the second it tracks eight. The internal review compares the major metropolitan areas and Regional BC and provides detail on BC's development regions and health authorities. |
Economy, Innovation and Education
Metro Vancouver, which is identical to the Vancouver Census Metropolitan Area (CMA) outperforms Regional BC on seven of ten regional Economy,
Innovation and Education indicators. They are: jobs; employment income; economic dependency ratio; secondary school graduates; university completion;
science employment; and new business formation. Although close, Regional BC has an edge on housing starts and non-residential building permits. Regional
BC has much higher retail sales per capita than does Vancouver.
Environment, Health and Society
Metro Vancouver and Regional BC are more closely matched in the eight Environment, Health and Society indicators than in the Economy, Innovation and
Education comparisons. Regional BC and Vancouver are essentially tied on cancer mortality and low birth weight rate. Vancouver has the edge on life
expectancy; crime; employment insurance; and income assistance.
|
