Based on Dr. Paul Kershaw’s presentation at the 2021 HELP EXPO Series: Exploring ‘What is’ and ‘What Could Be’ for BC’s Children and Families
The Balanced Supply of Housing provided funding to Dr. Paul Kershaw to explore the critical issue of how higher home prices impact child vulnerability. Using 30 provincial Early Development Instrument (EDI) vulnerability rates, tracked since 2005, this research offers a comprehensive comparison across provinces, with a particular focus on British Columbia (BC) compared to other regions.
Highest Rates of Child Vulnerability Found in BC
British Columbia stands out with the highest EDI vulnerability rates consistently since 2005, with a slight increase over time. When compared to Ontario, BC’s rates are several points worse. To put this into context, if BC had Ontario’s same rate, there would be a 25% reduction in child vulnerability, decreasing from 6 to 4.5 vulnerable children per kindergarten class or, “approximately 3,200 fewer children starting kindergarten being vulnerable.”
The reasons behind BC’s elevated rates are multifaceted, including home, community, and cultural factors. However, when considering broader economic, political, and systemic factors, it becomes evident that the economy has made hard work pay off less for the generations raising children in BC compared to other provinces. Despite provincial economic growth rates being higher than most provinces, this growth has not translated into reduced EDI vulnerability rates. Instead, there is a weak association between better economic growth and reduced EDI vulnerability, with trends showing an increase in vulnerability alongside economic growth.
Comparing Economic Indicators: Housing Costs and Earnings Disparity
To gauge whether the economy benefits the generation raising young children, Dr. Kershaw looks beyond GDP. Lower unemployment rates among those aged 25-44 correlate with higher EDI vulnerability, suggesting that working families may need extra supports to ensure that children are ready for kindergarten. This insight challenges the reliability of unemployment levels as a measure of economic success for families.
Another factor impacting child vulnerability is housing stress, as measured by the gap between household income and housing costs. The growing gap between home prices and earnings is a big problem across the country, especially in BC. While housing prices have more than doubled since the mid-1970s across Canada, typical earnings for 25–34-year-olds have remained constant. In BC, housing has tripled after adjusting for inflation, while earnings have remained flat and even decreased. In Metro Vancouver, there has been a quadrupling of average home prices over the last several decades, while earnings have not kept pace, even decreasing when adjusted for inflation. In the 1970s and 1980s, saving for a 20% down payment took an average of five years. To put the drastic change into perspective, today, it takes an average of 13 years in Canada as a whole, 20 years in BC, and nearly 30 years in Metro Vancouver.
Higher housing costs clearly correlate with higher EDI vulnerability. However, some provinces with lower housing costs, like Manitoba, still have vulnerability rates close to those in BC, indicating other influential factors, including colonization, low-income levels, income inequality, female labour force participation, childcare services, the proportion of children relative to workers, population size and density, and relative affluence (GDP per capita).
In 2019, BC had the highest EDI vulnerability rate at 34%, significantly higher than Alberta’s at 29%. Despite Alberta’s higher GDP per capita ($80K versus BC’s at $53K), “it is not clear that GDP per capita should be weighted as heavily as housing costs because Alberta still has a relatively high vulnerability rate” compared to other provinces in the country. Conversely, Prince Edward Island, with the worst GDP per capita, had one of the lowest vulnerability rates at 18%. Compared to Ontario, BC’s child vulnerability is significantly higher, though Ontario has relatively high home values. Differences in early childhood education, with Ontario offering two years of kindergarten versus BC’s one, could contribute to this disparity.
Policy Implications
In 2006, BC’s high vulnerability rate was primarily due to low income levels. By 2019, despite a 10% decrease in low-income households, the significant increase in housing costs from $310K-$487K to $619K-$700K exacerbated child vulnerability. This trend indicates that improvements in income were insufficient to counterbalance the adverse effects of rising housing costs.
To reduce early vulnerability, it is crucial to support the generations raising young children through effective housing affordability measures. Comprehensive poverty reduction plans and revised adequate income standards are two policy measures that can help families succeed and reduce child vulnerability. Policymakers must plan and budget accordingly, citizens must demand these changes, and political incentives must align with these priorities.
For more information on how higher home prices impact child vulnerability, visit Dr. Paul Kershaw’s non-profit organization GenSqueeze.
