Inflation has affected charitable organizations’ expenditures and, along with other factors, the ability and willingness of many Canadians to donate to charities. Indeed, there has been a steady decline in the number of donors. Despite this, the value of donations has increased. Sponsorship levels appear to have increased, based on findings from a relatively small survey with shifting respondent numbers and types. Do these trends leave organizations more vulnerable to a potential economic downturn, the loss of key donors, the loss of an important sponsor, or other surprises?

The article is based on multiple data sources:

• Individuals’ tax filings (which is an important data source but cannot be broken down into the types of organizations supported, because not every taxfiler submits the full details of their donations)

• A Statistics Canada survey of individual donors (which can be broken down by type of recipient organization but has a moderate sample size. As a result, the margin of error of its estimates can be relatively large for smaller charitable sectors.)

• A private survey of sponsorships (which has quite a small sample size but is the only source I found on this topic. The survey had 303 respondents, including sponsors, sponsorship recipients, and sponsorship agencies. Only 6% of respondents completed the survey in French, which calls into question the survey’s national representativeness.)

The first two datasets currently have 2023 as their most recent data year, while the sponsorship survey is from 2024.

1997 to 2023: Steady decline in charitable donors but an increase in the value of donations

The following graph shows that the value of charitable donations has increased substantially since 1997. In fact, charitable donations were 72% higher in 2023 than in 1997 (even after adjusting for inflation). The value of donations to all types of charities was $12.8 billion in 2023, compared with $7.4 billion in 1997 (adjusted for inflation).

More recently, the value of donations to all types of charities was slightly higher in 2023 ($12.8 billion) than before the pandemic ($11.9 billion in 2019, adjusted for inflation).

The graph also demonstrates the slow but steady decline in the number of taxfilers claiming charitable donations, resulting in a 4% decrease between 1997 and 2023. The decrease is amplified when expressed as a percentage of all taxfilers: the proportion claiming charitable donations was 26% in 1997 and 17% in 2023.

Behind the paywall, I outline the key statistics in 1997 and 2023, the median and average donations between 1997 and 2023, findings from StatsCan’s survey of donors, and findings from a survey of sponsors and sponsorship recipients.

Read more

On February 10, 1997, I started working as an arts researcher thanks to my new job as a Research and Policy Analyst at the Ontario Arts Council.

I know that you all love math. (That’s my legacy, right??? Getting a bunch of artsy folks to love math? Lol.)

Given your strong math skills, you know that means that I will hit 30 years of arts research in February of 2027.

At that time, I will retire.

I have really enjoyed this 30 year ride, and I have you all to thank for that. 31 years ago, I didn’t even know what “arts research” might involve. Also, when I started at the OAC, I never would have dreamed that I’d be in this line of work for 30 years, nor that I’d manage my own business for most of it. (I left the OAC to start Hill Strategies in 2002.)

Why leave now? Partly because there are many new challenges on the horizon, and I just don’t feel like I have the energy to take them on. And partly because my business has decreased since the pandemic, which has mostly been OK with me. I love my non work life, and that’s where I’ll focus my efforts as of February.

Again, thanks to you all for paying attention, for being clients (often clients-slash-friends), for being great collaborators, and for making this work possible. I absolutely have to thank my spouse, Robin Cameron, for her support and sage counsel, from the founding of Hill Strategies through today’s announcement.

My last article in the Statistical insights on the arts series will be on February 9, 2027. Completing 30 years, to the day! I’ll continue to publish regularly until then, maybe with some weeks off here and there, for a change. So please keep paying attention!

Love,

Kelly

These are the two sections in today’s article: 1) how many organizations and businesses in the arts, heritage and entertainment provide different types of training to their employees; and 2) how many offer disability-related information in each type of training.

As I’ve noted before, “arts, heritage, and entertainment” is a broad and imperfect approximation of the cultural sector. This classification (which the survey refers to as “arts, entertainment, and recreation”) includes performing arts, spectator sports, and related industries; heritage institutions; as well as amusement, gambling, and recreation industries. Given the sample size, separate data for culture-specific organizations and businesses are not available. This leaves us with the compromise of a broad category that also includes entertainment and recreation related businesses such as amusement parks, casinos, bingo halls, golf courses, ski hills, marinas, and fitness centres.

Survey and questions

The article is based on a Statistics Canada survey of not-for-profit and for-profit organizations across the economy. This iteration of the Canadian Survey on Business Conditions was conducted between January 2 and February 6. The data were released on February 27.

Statistics Canada asked respondents six questions about workplace training offerings, using the wording “Over the last 12 months, has this business or organization provided any [job-related training about the issues listed below]?”

• job-related training about client interaction or service delivery

• job-related training about communication

• technical job-related training

• job-related training about diversity, equity and inclusion

• job-related training on workplace accommodations

• other job-related training related to accessibility for persons with disabilities

The survey describes training as including “peer mentoring, job shadowing, workshops, lessons, self-learning, team discussions, and webinars”.

The response options were: Yes / No / Don’t know.

Each of the above questions contained a brief description of the specific type of training. For example, the question about diversity, equity, and inclusion gave the following examples: “e.g., mental health awareness, disability inclusion, cultural awareness, unconscious bias, 2SLGBTQ+ inclusion, respecting confidentiality, inclusive hiring, bias awareness, inclusive conflict resolution”.

Information about persons with disabilities

Whenever respondents answered “yes” to one of these questions, a follow-up was asked, along with definitions of “disability” and “persons with disabilities”:

“Did any of this training include information on persons with disabilities?

A disability refers to any impairment, including a physical, mental, intellectual, cognitive, learning, communication or sensory impairment, or a functional limitation.

Persons with disabilities refers to a person who has any impairment, including a physical, mental, intellectual, cognitive, learning, communication or sensory impairment — or a functional limitation — whether permanent, temporary or episodic in nature, or evident or not, that, in interaction with a barrier, hinders a person’s full and equal participation in society.”

Response options: Yes / No / Don’t know

Note about my analysis of disability-related training

Unfortunately, because of the question structure (two questions about each type of training) and data reporting (no rolled-up data by type of organization), it is not possible to estimate the overall number of organizations and businesses in the arts, heritage, and entertainment that provided disability training via any form of training. Data for the separate questions cannot be added together, because many of the same organizations might have provided different types of training.

What I could calculate is the percentage of organizations and businesses in the arts, heritage, and entertainment providing disability training for each specific form of training. To do this, I multiplied the percentage of organizations offering each type of training by the percentage offering information on how to interact with persons with disabilities (a subset of those organizations offering that type of training).

Technical training is the most common type of training in culture

The following graph shows that technical training is the most common type of training among organizations and businesses in the arts, heritage, and entertainment (43% offered such training in the past 12 months). Technical training is also the most common type of training among all businesses and organizations in Canada (41%).

Just over one-third of organizations and businesses in the arts, heritage, and entertainment (36%) offer training on client interaction or service delivery (compared with 30% of all businesses).

31% of organizations and businesses in the arts, heritage, and entertainment offer communication training (compared with 23% of all businesses).

29% of organizations and businesses in the arts, heritage, and entertainment offer training related to diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI, compared with 22% of all businesses).

23% of organizations and businesses in the arts, heritage, and entertainment offer training related to workplace accommodations (compared with 22% of all businesses).

Finally, 5% of organizations and businesses in the arts, heritage, and entertainment offer other training related to people with disabilities (equal to the percentage of all businesses).

All of the percentages for organizations and businesses in the arts, heritage, and entertainment are equal to or greater than the percentages of all businesses and organizations in Canada.

Data quality indicators: Very good (B rating) for each different type of training among organizations and businesses in the arts, heritage, and entertainment, except “other training”, which had an A rating (excellent). The ratings are excellent (A) for each different type of training among all businesses and organizations in Canada.

Few organizations or businesses in the arts, heritage, and entertainment include training information about people with disabilities

Read more

Today’s article provides an analysis of changes in the cultural workforce between 2013 and 2025 for what I’m calling “small municipalities and rural areas”. This label of convenience casts a fairly broad net, because the statistics actually relate to all areas of Canada outside the 31 Census Metropolitan Areas (CMAs) for which we have reliable data.

In general, these locations are small municipalities and rural areas. However, the data also include 10 CMAs for which the data are not reliable in a majority of the years in the analysis: Belleville-Quinte West, Brantford, Chilliwack, Drummondville, Kamloops, Lethbridge, Nanaimo, Red Deer, Saguenay, and Thunder Bay. Some non-CMA areas might also be an imperfect fit for the label “small municipalities and rural areas”. But I do think that, by and large, the data relate to small municipalities and rural areas.

This is the fifth and final instalment in my series of articles analyzing local statistics on workers in arts, culture, heritage, and some sport occupations. In the first article in this series, I examined the trends for Canada, the 31 CMAs (as a group), and the 6 largest CMAs: Calgary, Edmonton, Montreal, Ottawa-Gatineau, Toronto, and Vancouver. Three weeks ago, I analyzed changes for 7 CMAs with populations between 500,000 and 1 million: Winnipeg, Quebec City, Hamilton, Kitchener-Cambridge-Waterloo, London, Halifax, and St. Catharines-Niagara. Two weeks ago, I examined changes for 10 CMAs with populations between 220,000 and 500,000: Abbotsford-Mission, Barrie, Kelowna, Oshawa, Regina, Saskatoon, Sherbrooke, St. John’s, Victoria, and Windsor. Last week, I analyzed changes for 8 CMAs with populations under 200,000 (analyzed individually and as a group). The 8 CMAs are: Fredericton, Greater Sudbury, Guelph, Kingston, Moncton, Peterborough, Saint John, and Trois-Rivières.

The articles are based on publicly available occupation statistics from the Labour Force Survey (LFS). As was the case in my other articles, I have created three-year averages to provide a higher level of statistical reliability and minimize the impact of unusual single year estimates in many CMAs. The data in this article labelled 2025 therefore represent the average for 2023-2025. The earliest data point (labelled 2013) is actually the average for 2011-2013.

Key things to know about the Labour Force Survey

In my opinion, data from the Labour Force Survey are useful but imperfect for analyzing the labour force in the arts, culture, and heritage. I outline many limitations at the end of this article and in even greater detail here.

Because of its relatively small sample size, the Labour Force Survey can only offer reliable local data for a broad category of arts, culture, heritage, and sports workers. The summary data relate to what Statistics Canada calls “occupations in the arts, culture, recreation, and sports, except management”. I will generally call this occupation category “arts, culture, heritage, and sport workers”. Details about the occupation groupings within this category are at the end of this article.

Most of the people in this category (roughly 75%) work in the arts, culture, and heritage (rather than sports and recreation). The category covers approximately 60% of all workers in the arts, culture, and heritage.

The data are available for CMAs, not for municipalities per se.

Given the Labour Force Survey’s limitations, the analysis that follows is relatively simple: I examine whether the number of workers in the selected occupation grouping has increased or decreased over 12 years or so.

26% increase for all of Canada

Between 2013 and 2025, there was a 26% increase in the number of workers in the arts, culture, heritage, and sport in Canada (estimates of 510,000 in 2013 and 641,000 in 2025).

15% increase in small municipalities and rural areas

11.8 million people, or 28% of Canada’s population, reside outside of the 31 CMAs for which we have reliable individual data on workers in the arts, culture, heritage, and sport.

16% of all Canadian workers in the arts, culture, heritage, and sport (104,000 people) reside in these (generally) small municipalities and rural areas, a percentage that is below their share of the population.

Between 2013 and 2025, there was a 15% increase in number of workers in the arts, culture, heritage, and sport in small municipalities and rural areas, which is below the Canadian average (26%). Collectively, small municipalities and rural areas were home to 91,000 workers in this occupation grouping in 2013 and 104,000 in 2025.

As shown in the following graph, there have been relatively small fluctuations in the number of culture and sports workers in small municipalities and rural areas. Recent increases (since 2022) are the main factor in the increase in the number of workers since 2013.

Details for specific geographic areas are not available, because the above data represent the Canadian totals minus the totals for the 31 CMAs with reliable data.

To round out this post, I will compare the above findings to other statistics that I previously analyzed related to small towns and rural areas.

Other data on small towns and rural areas

In the linked article, I noted that 20% of Canada’s artists reside in small towns and rural areas. “Census data indicate that there are 41,500 professional artists in rural communities and small towns.”

In the article, “rural areas and small towns” include all communities with less than 30,000 residents.

My analysis of all workers in the arts, culture, and heritage (no sport occupations!) found that about 175,000 people, or 19% of all cultural workers in Canada, reside in rural areas and small towns.

These percentages are similar to today’s analysis: 16% of workers in the arts, culture, heritage, and sport.

By examining artists by occupation in small towns and rural areas, I found that relatively high proportions of craftspeople, visual artists, and photographers reside in rural areas and small towns.

My analysis of median incomes showed that “rural and small town artists have much lower incomes than other workers in rural communities and small towns”.

In this article, “organizations were classified as being in rural areas or small towns if they are located outside of Census Metropolitan Areas or Census Agglomerations (i.e., regions with core cities that have a population of at least 10,000)”. This is not too far off of the new analysis in today’s article. However, today’s article includes workers in Census Agglomerations, plus 10 CMAs for which the data are not reliable.

Here are some key findings from the analysis in the linked article:

• Rural areas and small towns have a higher share of arts, culture, and heritage organizations than their population

• Average revenues are much lower for rural-based arts, culture, and heritage organizations ($214,000) than urban ones ($1.4 million).

• Organizations in the arts, culture, and heritage – whether rural or urban – have lower average revenues than the average for all types of organizations, as shown in the following graph.

• Rural and small town organizations in the arts, culture, and heritage employed 8,400 people in 2021, or 11% of the employees of all not-for-profit arts, culture, and heritage organizations.

• Average employment is much lower for rural organizations (4) than urban ones (16).

Data sources and notes (for the new analysis)

Statistics Canada. Table 14-10-0468-01. Employment characteristics by census metropolitan area, annual. https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/t1/tbl1/en/tv.action?pid=1410046801

Population statistics are drawn from Statistics Canada. Table 17-10-0148-01. Population estimates, July 1, by census metropolitan area and census agglomeration, 2021 boundaries, https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/t1/tbl1/en/tv.action?pid=1710014801

Why analyze the Labour Force Survey?

I’ve analyzed this dataset (now), rather than the census (which has a much larger sample size) because of timeliness and easy availability. The strength of the Labour Force Survey is its frequency. It is conducted monthly, but the local cultural estimates would not be reliable on a monthly basis, particularly for areas with smaller populations. To counter this limitation, my analysis focuses on three-year averages (not annual or monthly data). When multiplied by 12 for each year, then by 3 for the three-year averages, the sample sizes become more interesting.

The Labour Force Survey data can show us trends that the census, conducted only every five years, cannot. In addition, occupation data from the census is published roughly a year and a half after the census is conducted. We will probably be waiting until late 2027 for labour force data from the census in May of 2026.

Occupational categories

The data in this article relate to what Statistics Canada calls “occupations in the arts, culture, recreation, and sports, except management”. Most of the people in this category are cultural workers: I have estimated that roughly 75% to 80% of people in this broad occupation grouping work in the arts, culture, and heritage. And the category covers most (but certainly not all) cultural workers: I have estimated that the workers in this broad occupation grouping account for roughly 60% of all workers in the arts, culture, and heritage. (Further details, including a thorough discussion of LFS limitations, is available here.)

Within this broad occupational category, there are four occupation groupings. In Statistics Canada’s language, these are:

• Professional occupations in the arts and culture, which include: some artists, such as producers, directors, conductors, and musicians; writers, translators, and other communications professionals; as well as librarians, archivists, conservators, and curators.

• Technical occupations in the arts and culture, including: graphic and interior designers; as well as technical workers in libraries, archives, motion pictures, broadcasting, and the performing arts.

• Other occupations in the arts, culture, and sports, including: artists such as dancers, actors, comedians, circus performers, photographers, craftspeople, and visual artists; theatre and fashion designers; select museum and art gallery jobs (e.g., registrars, restorers); assistants in film, broadcasting, photography, and performing arts; as well as a few sports occupations (athletes, coaches, and referees).

• Support occupations in the arts, culture, and sports, including: program leaders and instructors in recreation, sport, and fitness; as well as puppeteers, buskers, magicians, portrayers of Santa Claus, influencers, and models. The recreation and sports workers in this occupational grouping greatly outnumber the cultural workers (which is why I exclude this grouping whenever possible).

LFS limitations (in brief)

Earnings data are not available in the summary dataset published by Statistics Canada. For the cultural sector, this is not a big loss, because the LFS questionnaire captures salaries only, not self-employment earnings. (That’s the more important limitation for the cultural sector and for other sectors where self-employment is common.)

Other important limitations of the LFS:

• People’s description of their main job during the reference period is used to classify them into occupations. Some data on secondary occupations is available but is not covered in this report.

• It doesn’t have a large enough sample size to delve into the details for individual occupation groupings in Census Metropolitan Areas, which is why the broad category is helpful.

• It captures data on Indigenous workers only every three months and only started capturing data on racialized workers in the summer of 2020.

• No data are available for 2SLGBTQIA+, D/deaf, and disabled workers.

Neither the LFS nor the census can provide insights into the reasons behind statistical trends.

Today I offer the fourth instalment in my series of articles analyzing local statistics on workers in arts, culture, heritage, and some sport occupations. The article studies changes between 2013 and 2025 for 8 CMAs with populations under 200,000 (analyzed individually and as a group). The 8 CMAs are: Fredericton, Greater Sudbury, Guelph, Kingston, Moncton, Peterborough, Saint John, and Trois-Rivières. For comparison purposes, I’ll include an analysis of the Canada-wide change between 2013 and 2025.

• Three weeks ago, I examined the trends for Canada, the 31 CMAs (as a group), and the 6 largest CMAs: Calgary, Edmonton, Montreal, Ottawa-Gatineau, Toronto, and Vancouver.

• Two weeks ago, I examined changes for 7 CMAs with populations between 500,000 and 1 million: Winnipeg, Quebec City, Hamilton, Kitchener-Cambridge-Waterloo, London, Halifax, and St. Catharines-Niagara.

• Last week, I examined changes for 10 CMAs with populations between 220,000 and 500,000: Abbotsford-Mission, Barrie, Kelowna, Oshawa, Regina, Saskatoon, Sherbrooke, St. John’s, Victoria, and Windsor.

There are 10 other (mostly small) CMAs with unreliable data in a majority of the years in the analysis. I have excluded these 10 CMAs from the analysis: Belleville-Quinte West, Brantford, Chilliwack, Drummondville, Kamloops, Lethbridge, Nanaimo, Red Deer, Saguenay, and Thunder Bay.

These articles are based on publicly available occupation statistics from the Labour Force Survey (LFS). As was the case in my other articles, I have created three-year averages to provide a higher level of statistical reliability and minimize the impact of unusual single year estimates in many CMAs. The data in this article labelled 2025 therefore represent the average for 2023-2025. The earliest data point (labelled 2013) is actually the average for 2011-2013.

Key things to know about the Labour Force Survey

In my opinion, data from the Labour Force Survey are useful but imperfect for analyzing the labour force in the arts, culture, and heritage. I outline many limitations at the end of this article and in even greater detail here.

Because of its relatively small sample size, the Labour Force Survey can only offer reliable local data for a broad category of arts, culture, heritage, and sports workers. The summary data relate to what Statistics Canada calls “occupations in the arts, culture, recreation, and sports, except management”. I will generally call this occupation category “arts, culture, heritage, and sport workers”. Details about the occupation groupings within this category are at the end of this article.

Most of the people in this category (roughly 75%) work in the arts, culture, and heritage (rather than sports and recreation). The category covers approximately 60% of all workers in the arts, culture, and heritage.

The data are available for CMAs, not for municipalities per se.

Given the Labour Force Survey’s limitations, the analysis that follows is relatively simple: I examine whether the number of workers in the selected occupation grouping has increased or decreased over 12 years or so.

26% increase for all of Canada

Between 2013 and 2025, there was a 26% increase in the number of workers in the arts, culture, heritage, and sport in Canada (estimates of 510,000 in 2013 and 641,000 in 2025).

30% increase in 8 small CMAs

1.4 million people, or 3% of Canada’s population, reside in the 8 CMAs that have populations under 200,000.

3% of all Canadian workers in the arts, culture, heritage, and sport (16,600 people) reside in these 8 CMAs, a percentage that is equal to the CMAs’ share of the population.

Between 2013 and 2025, the 30% increase in number of workers in the arts, culture, heritage, and sport in the 8 CMAs is slightly above the Canadian average (26%). There has been a lot of fluctuation in the number of culture and sports workers, as shown in the following graph. This is not too surprising, given the higher error for these smaller population areas. Collectively, in the 8 CMAs, there were 16,600 workers in this occupation grouping in 2013 and 12,800 in 2025.

6 of the 8 small CMAs saw increases in the number of workers in the arts, culture, heritage, and sport. Only 1 had an increase that was significantly higher than the national average (26%).

Details follow for each of the 8 CMAs, from largest to smallest. Note: The percentage changes are calculated from unrounded estimates.

Read more

Two weeks ago, I examined the trends for Canada, the 31 CMAs (as a group), and the 6 largest CMAs: Calgary, Edmonton, Montreal, Ottawa-Gatineau, Toronto, and Vancouver. Last week, I examined changes for 7 CMAs with populations between 500,000 and 1 million: Winnipeg, Quebec City, Hamilton, Kitchener-Cambridge-Waterloo, London, Halifax, and St. Catharines-Niagara.

Next week, I’ll examine the smallest CMAs, i.e., the 8 with populations under 200,000: Fredericton, Greater Sudbury, Guelph, Kingston, Moncton, Peterborough, Saint John, and Trois-Rivières.

These articles are based on publicly available occupation statistics from the Labour Force Survey (LFS). As was the case in my other articles, I have created three-year averages to provide a higher level of statistical reliability and minimize the impact of unusual single year estimates in many CMAs. The data in this article labelled 2025 therefore represent the average for 2023-2025. The earliest data point (labelled 2013) is actually the average for 2011-2013.

Key things to know about the Labour Force Survey

In my opinion, data from the Labour Force Survey are useful but imperfect for analyzing the labour force in the arts, culture, and heritage. I outline many limitations at the end of this article and in even greater detail here.

Because of its relatively small sample size, the Labour Force Survey can only offer reliable local data for a broad category of arts, culture, heritage, and sports workers. The summary data relate to what Statistics Canada calls “occupations in the arts, culture, recreation, and sports, except management”. I will generally call this occupation category “arts, culture, heritage, and sport workers”. Details about the occupation groupings within this category are at the end of this article.

Most of the people in this category (roughly 75%) work in the arts, culture, and heritage (rather than sports and recreation). The category covers approximately 60% of all workers in the arts, culture, and heritage.

The data are available for CMAs, not for municipalities per se.

Given the Labour Force Survey’s limitations, the analysis that follows is relatively simple: I examine whether the number of workers in the selected occupation grouping has increased or decreased over 12 years or so.

26% increase for all of Canada

Between 2013 and 2025, there was a 26% increase in the number of workers in the arts, culture, heritage, and sport in Canada (estimates of 510,000 in 2013 and 641,000 in 2025).

49% increase in the 10 CMAs, the highest increase among all CMA groups

3.3 million people, or 8% of Canada’s population, reside in the 10 CMAs that have populations between 220,000 and 500,000.

7% of all Canadian workers in the arts, culture, heritage, and sport (47,000 people) reside in these 10 CMAs, a percentage that is very close to the CMAs’ share of the population.

Between 2013 and 2025, the 49% increase in number of workers in the arts, culture, heritage, and sport in the 10 CMAs is the highest among the four groups of CMAs analyzed in this series of articles and is nearly double the Canadian average (26%). While the number of workers increased most years (except 2020 to 2022), a very large increase has occurred since 2022, as shown in the following graph. Collectively, in the 10 CMAs, there were 31,000 workers in this occupation grouping in 2013 and 47,000 in 2025.

All 10 CMAs saw increases in the number of workers in the arts, culture, heritage, and sport, but 3 of the CMAs had increases that were below the national average (26%).

Details follow for each of the 10 CMAs, from largest to smallest.

Read more

Today, as part of my series of articles analyzing local statistics on workers in arts, culture, heritage, and some sport occupations, I examine individual and group changes between 2013 and 2025 for 7 CMAs with populations between 500,000 and 1,000,000: Winnipeg, Quebec City, Hamilton, Kitchener-Cambridge-Waterloo, London, Halifax, and St. Catharines-Niagara. For comparison purposes, I’ll include an analysis of the Canada-wide change between 2013 and 2025.

Last week, I examined the trends for Canada, the 31 CMAs (as a group), and the 6 largest CMAs: Calgary, Edmonton, Montreal, Ottawa-Gatineau, Toronto, and Vancouver.

In upcoming articles, I’ll analyze smaller CMAs: 1) the 10 CMAs with populations between 220,000 and 500,000; and 2) the 8 CMAs with populations under 200,000. The 18 CMAs to come in future articles are: Abbotsford-Mission, Barrie, Fredericton, Greater Sudbury, Guelph, Kelowna, Kingston, Moncton, Oshawa, Peterborough, Regina, Saint John, Saskatoon, Sherbrooke, St. John’s, Trois-Rivières, Victoria, and Windsor.

These articles are based on publicly available occupation statistics from the Labour Force Survey (LFS). As was the case last week, I have created three-year averages to provide a higher level of statistical reliability and minimize the impact of unusual single year estimates in many CMAs. The data in this article labelled 2025 therefore represent the average for 2023-2025. The earliest data point (labelled 2013) is actually the average for 2011-2013. This technique is similar to what I did in my recent analysis of multiple job holding by province.

Key things to know about the Labour Force Survey

In my opinion, data from the Labour Force Survey are useful but imperfect for analyzing the labour force in the arts, culture, and heritage. I outline many limitations at the end of this article and in even greater detail here.

Because of its relatively small sample size, the Labour Force Survey can only offer reliable local data for a broad category of arts, culture, heritage, and sports workers. The summary data relate to what Statistics Canada calls “occupations in the arts, culture, recreation, and sports, except management”. I will generally call this occupation category “arts, culture, heritage, and sport workers”. Details about the occupation groupings within this category are at the end of this article.

Most of the people in this category (roughly 75%) work in the arts, culture, and heritage (rather than sports and recreation). The category covers approximately 60% of all workers in the arts, culture, and heritage.

The data are available for CMAs, not for municipalities per se.

Given the Labour Force Survey’s limitations, the analysis that follows is relatively simple: I examine whether the number of workers in the selected occupation grouping has increased or decreased over 12 years or so.

Reminder of Canada-wide data

There has been a relatively consistent increase in the number of workers in the arts, culture, heritage, and sport in Canada, resulting in a 26% increase between 2013 (estimate of 510,000) and 2025 (641,000). The exception to the increases was between 2020 and 2022, but there has been a solid increase since 2022.

7 CMAs with populations between 500,000 and 1 million

5.1 million people, or 12% of Canada’s population, reside in the 7 CMAs analyzed in today’s article.

12% of all Canadian workers in the arts, culture, heritage, and sport (79,000 people) reside in these 7 CMAs, a percentage that is equal to the CMAs’ share of the population.

Between 2013 and 2025, the 30% increase in number of workers in the arts, culture, heritage, and sport in the 7 CMAs is slightly above to the Canadian average (26%). Most of the increase has occurred since 2022, as shown in the following graph. Collectively, in the 7 CMAs, there were 60,000 workers in this occupation grouping in 2013, 61,000 in 2022, and 79,000 in 2025.

All 7 CMAs saw increases in the number of workers in the arts, culture, heritage, and sport. Only 2 had increases that were below the national average (26%).

Details follow for each of the 7 CMAs, from largest to smallest.

Read more

Today, I’ll highlight the trends for Canada, the 31 CMAs (as a group), and the 6 largest CMAs (individually and as a group). Each of the 6 largest CMAs has a population of over 1.5 million: Calgary, Edmonton, Montreal, Ottawa-Gatineau, Toronto, and Vancouver.

In upcoming articles, I’ll provide a similar analysis for 25 other CMAs: Abbotsford-Mission, Barrie, Fredericton, Greater Sudbury, Guelph, Halifax, Hamilton, Kelowna, Kingston, Kitchener-Cambridge-Waterloo, London, Moncton, Oshawa, Peterborough, Québec, Regina, Saint John, Saskatoon, Sherbrooke, St. Catharines-Niagara, St. John’s, Trois-Rivières, Victoria, Windsor, and Winnipeg.

I’ll analyze these CMAs in three different articles: 1) the 7 CMAs with populations between 500,000 and 1 million; 2) the 10 CMAs with populations between 220,000 and 500,000; and 3) the 8 CMAs with populations under 200,000.

The articles are based on publicly available occupation statistics from the Labour Force Survey (LFS). The LFS has a sample size of 56,000 households each month. The data are imperfect but useful, I think. I should qualify my understanding of their “usefulness” by saying that data on smaller population groups have higher margins of error.

For today’s article, I have created three-year averages to provide a higher level of statistical reliability and minimize the impact of unusual single year estimates in many CMAs. The data in this article labelled 2025 represent the average for 2023-2025. The earliest data point (labelled 2013) is actually the average for 2011-2013. This technique is similar to what I did in my recent analysis of multiple job holding by province.

Focus on broad, longer-term trends

Given the Labour Force Survey’s limitations (which I outline at the end of this post, and in even greater detail here), I will stick to some broad trends among the grouping of workers in the arts, culture, heritage, and sports.

The analysis that follows is relatively simple: I examine whether the number of workers in the selected occupation grouping has increased or decreased over a relatively long timeframe.

Why use the Labour Force Survey, given its limitations?

I’ve analyzed this dataset (now), rather than the census (which has a much larger sample size) because of timeliness and easy availability.

The strength of the Labour Force Survey is its frequency. It is conducted monthly, but the local cultural estimates would not be reliable on a monthly basis. However, when multiplied by 12 for each year, then by 3 for the three-year averages, the sample sizes become more interesting.

The annual averages from the Labour Force Survey can show us trends that the census, conducted only every five years, cannot. In addition, occupation data from the census is published roughly a year and a half after the census is conducted. We will probably be waiting until late 2027 for labour force data from the census in May of 2026.

Occupational categories

Because of its relatively small sample size, the Labour Force Survey provides reliable data only for a broad category of arts, culture, heritage, and sports workers. The summary data relate to what Statistics Canada calls “occupations in the arts, culture, recreation, and sports, except management”.

Most of the people in this category are cultural workers: I have estimated that roughly 75% to 80% of people in this broad occupation grouping work in the arts, culture, and heritage. And the category covers most (but certainly not all) cultural workers: I have estimated that the workers in this broad occupation grouping account for roughly 60% of all workers in the arts, culture, and heritage. (Further details, including a thorough discussion of LFS limitations, is available here.)

Within this broad occupational category, there are four occupation groupings. In Statistics Canada’s language, these are:

• Professional occupations in the arts and culture, which include: some artists, such as producers, directors, conductors, and musicians; writers, translators, and other communications professionals; as well as librarians, archivists, conservators, and curators.

• Technical occupations in the arts and culture, including: graphic and interior designers; as well as technical workers in libraries, archives, motion pictures, broadcasting, and the performing arts.

• Other occupations in the arts, culture, and sports, including: artists such as dancers, actors, comedians, circus performers, photographers, craftspeople, and visual artists; theatre and fashion designers; select museum and art gallery jobs (e.g., registrars, restorers); assistants in film, broadcasting, photography, and performing arts; as well as a few sports occupations (athletes, coaches, and referees).

• Support occupations in the arts, culture, and sports, including: program leaders and instructors in recreation, sport, and fitness; as well as puppeteers, buskers, magicians, portrayers of Santa Claus, influencers, and models. The recreation and sports workers in this occupational grouping greatly outnumber the cultural workers (which is why I exclude this grouping whenever possible).

Earnings data are not available in the summary dataset published by Statistics Canada. For the cultural sector, this is not a big loss, because the LFS questionnaire captures salaries only, not self-employment earnings. (That’s the more important limitation for the cultural sector and for other sectors where self-employment is common.)

Canada-wide data

The first graph shows the nationwide data for each three-year period. The vertical axis is in the thousands. I will focus on the trends over time, more than the raw numbers, mostly due to the occupational category that is imperfect for our purposes. (As noted above, cultural workers represent about three-quarters of all workers in the category, which includes roughly six in every ten cultural workers.)

There has been a relatively consistent increase in the number of workers in the arts, culture, heritage, and sport since 2013. The exception was around the pandemic (2020 through 2022), but there has been a solid increase since 2022. The estimate in 2025 (641,000) is 26% higher than the estimate in 2013 (510,000).

31 CMAs, as a group

29.8 million people, or 72% of Canada’s population, reside in the 31 CMAs with reliable data on workers in the arts, culture, heritage, and sport.

84% of all Canadian workers in the arts, culture, heritage, and sport (roughly 550,000 people) reside in the 31 CMAs with reliable data.

Between 2013 and 2025:

• The 28% increase in the number of workers in the arts, culture, heritage, and sport in the 31 CMAs is slightly above the Canadian average (26%).

• 29 of the 31 CMAs saw an increase, and the other two saw a very small decrease.

6 largest CMAs

20 million people, or 48% of Canada’s population, reside in the 6 largest CMAs.

62% of all Canadian workers in the arts, culture, heritage, and sport (roughly 408,000 people) reside in the 6 largest CMAs.

Between 2013 and 2025, the 26% increase in number of workers in the arts, culture, heritage, and sport in the 6 largest CMAs is equal to the Canadian average. Collectively, in the 6 largest CMAs, there were 314,000 workers in this occupation grouping in 2013 and 395,000 in 2025.

The following graph provides full details.

All 6 large CMAs saw increases in the number of workers in the arts, culture, heritage, and sport. Three had increases above 50%, while the other 3 had increases of 15% or less. Details follow for each CMA, from largest to smallest.

Read more

Read more

Read more

As I have noted in the past, if driven by need rather than personal choice, multiple job holding can be an aspect of the precarity of workers in the arts, culture, and heritage. Today’s article examines the prevalence of multiple job holding for employees in different types of positions in the arts, culture, and heritage. Plus, I offer comparisons between cultural workers and the averages for all Canadian workers, as well as between women and men. I also examine changes in multiple job holding since 1987. This article, similar to my research from two years ago, uses data from the Labour Force Survey (annual averages for 2025).

Readers should be aware that the Labour Force Survey excludes self-employed workers. Because artists have very high self-employment rates, many of them are excluded from the data, as are other self-employed cultural workers. However, those self-employed artists and cultural workers who have an employed position in their main job are included.

In this article, the phrase “workers in the arts, culture, and heritage” relates to the combined total for three occupation groupings that are readily available from Statistics Canada: 1) professional occupations; 2) technical occupations; and 3) other occupations. Information about these broad groups of occupations, representing about 465,000 employees, is provided at the end of the article.

Because of its relatively small sample size, the Labour Force Survey doesn’t allow me to pinpoint specific occupations, even looking at annual averages. That is why I’m sticking with the three readily available groupings of arts, culture, and heritage employees.

Today’s article examines the nationwide picture, and a provincial analysis is planned for next week.

About 10% of employees in the arts, culture, and heritage have multiple jobs, which is close to double the rate among employees in all industries. Multiple job holding in the arts, culture, and heritage has tended to increase over time.

Employees in the arts, culture, and heritage are nearly twice as likely to have multiple jobs than other workers

Employees in the arts, culture, and heritage are much more likely to accumulate multiple jobs than other workers, as shown in the following graph. One in every 10 employees in the arts, culture, and heritage had multiple jobs in 2025, compared with just 5.6% of all Canadian employees. In other words, the multiple job holding rate is 77% higher in the arts, culture, and heritage than for other workers.

The graph also shows that, among broad groupings of employed workers in the arts, culture, and heritage, technical workers are least likely to have multiple jobs. The percentage of employees working multiple jobs is:

• 11.6% for Statistics Canada’s grouping of professional occupations in the arts, culture, and heritage (including some artists, such as producers, directors, conductors, and musicians; writers, translators, and other communications professionals; as well as librarians, archivists, conservators, and curators).

• 7.5% for the grouping of technical occupations in the arts, culture, and heritage (i.e., technical workers in libraries, archives, motion pictures, broadcasting, and the performing arts, as well as graphic and interior designers).

• 11.1% for the third grouping of occupations in the arts, culture, and sports (including artists such as dancers, actors, comedians, circus performers, photographers, craftspeople, visual artists; theatre and fashion designers; select museum and art gallery jobs; assistants in film, broadcasting, photography, and performing arts; as well as sports athletes, coaches, and referees).

Multiple job holding in the arts, culture, and heritage has tended to increase over time

The percentage of arts, culture, and heritage employees holding multiple jobs was much higher in 2025 (9.9%) than in 1987 (7.1%), as shown in the following graph. The multiple job holding rate appears to have returned to rates near or above 10% that were more common before the pandemic. The multiple job holding rate had reached a 25-year low of 7.3% in 2020 (when it was difficult for many cultural workers to have even one job).

The graph shows that the multiple job holding rate in the arts, culture, and heritage did not reach 10% during the first 20 years of data collection (from 1987 to 2006). The rate has ticked above 10% in five years since then: 10.2% in 2007, 10.1% in 2008, 10.9% in 2016, 10.4% in 2019, and 10.1% in 2023. The level in 2025 is just one percentage point below the 10% threshold.

The graph also shows how the multiple job holding rate in the arts, culture, and heritage has always remained above the national average. In fact, the difference has increased from 3.0% in 1987 to 4.3% in 2025.

In culture, men are more likely than women to hold multiple jobs

In 2025, the multiple job holding rate was higher among women than men in the overall economy, but the reverse was true in the arts, culture, and heritage. Overall, 6.4% of employed women have multiple jobs, compared with 4.9% of men, as shown in the following graph. In the arts, culture, and heritage, 8.3% of employed women have multiple jobs, compared with 11.8% of men.

Data sources and notes

The main dataset is Statistics Canada. Table 14-10-0410-01. Multiple jobholders by occupation, annual, https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/t1/tbl1/en/tv.action?pid=1410041001.

The total number of employed workers in each occupation grouping was drawn from Statistics Canada. Table 14-10-0411-01. Job tenure by occupation, annual, https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/t1/tbl1/en/tv.action?pid=1410041101. This dataset was also used to calculate multiple job holding rates (by dividing the count of multiple jobholders by the total number of employees).

Readily available occupation groupings

The three arts, culture, and heritage occupation groupings in the dataset include 464,700 employed workers. There are a few sport workers in one of the occupation groupings, but I estimate that 95% of the combined number of workers in the three occupation groupings work in the arts, culture, and heritage.

The three occupation groupings include:

• 175,500 employed workers in what Statistics Canada calls professional occupations in the arts and culture, which include: some artists, such as producers, directors, conductors, and musicians; writers, translators, and other communications professionals; as well as librarians, archivists, conservators, and curators.

• 175,500 employed workers in what Statistics Canada calls technical occupations in the arts and culture, including: graphic and interior designers; as well as technical workers in libraries, archives, motion pictures, broadcasting, and the performing arts. (Coincidentally, there are the same number of professional and technical workers in the arts, culture, and heritage in 2025.)

• 113,700 employees in what Statistics Canada (rather generically) calls occupations in the arts, culture, and sports, including: artists such as dancers, actors, comedians, circus performers, photographers, craftspeople, and visual artists; theatre and fashion designers; select museum and art gallery jobs (e.g., registrars, restorers); assistants in film, broadcasting, photography, and performing arts; as well as a few sports occupations (athletes, coaches, and referees).

By my estimate, using the granular data that are available in the 2021 census, these three occupation groupings account for about two-thirds of all cultural workers. (The cultural workers who are not covered by the data are mostly those who work in disparate areas of the economy, such as printing, advertising, and architecture.) Unfortunately, the census does not address multiple job holding, and I therefore cannot take advantage of the larger sample size of the census to examine this issue at a more granular level.

Communicating with the public is an important part of what many organizations and businesses in the arts, heritage, and entertainment do. However, my analysis shows that relatively few organizations and businesses incorporate accessibility features into their public communications.

The article is based on a Statistics Canada survey of organizations and businesses across the economy. The survey was conducted between October 1 and November 5, 2025, and the data were released on November 25.

Survey questions

Here is the wording of the questions asked in this iteration of the Canadian Survey on Business Conditions.

Forms of communication

“Over the last 12 months, has this business or organization used any of the following forms of communication with customers or the public?

Forms of communication refers to the different ways information is provided, such as in person, over the phone, virtually, or printed materials with customers or the public.

Select all that apply.

• Printed materials distributed by this business or organization (e.g., advertising materials, menus, forms, magazines, pamphlets)

• Virtual communication (Include communication through email, websites, virtual meetings (e.g., Zoom, Microsoft Teams) or chat bots. Exclude social media posts.)

• Social media (e.g., promoting or branding on social media platforms such as Facebook, Instagram, LinkedIn, X, Snapchat)

• Communication in person or over the phone (Include text messages.)”

Accessibility features

Follow-up questions were only asked to respondents who indicated that they engaged in that form of communication. Each follow-up question started with: “Over the last 12 months, did this business or organization provide any accessibility features when communicating [via this form of communication]? Accessibility refers to ensuring that persons with disabilities can easily use and understand things like websites, documents, and services.”

Examples were given for each form of communication:

• Via printed materials: “e.g., alternate formats, large print versions, accessible file formats or audio formats”

• Virtually: “e.g., live captions, screen display options such as dark mode or high contrast, screen reader support”

• Through social media platforms: “e.g., alternate text descriptions, videos with sound and captioning, closed captioning, plain language”

• In person or over the phone: “e.g., visual aids, volume controllers, video relay service (VRS), speech-to-text services”

Few organizations or businesses in the arts, heritage, and entertainment incorporate accessibility features in their communications

Read more

Recognizing that 2023 data are not particularly current in the present trade environment, I looked into quarterly datasets on international trade. However, as often happens, the categories that are published quarterly (e.g., “personal, cultural, and recreational services”) are very broad and not particularly informative about the situation of the arts, culture, and heritage. I am therefore sticking to an analysis of the 2023 dataset, which was released in October of 2025.

The statistics for the overall cultural sector (which I also call “culture” or “the arts, culture, and heritage”) include all nine domains captured in Statistics Canada’s economic data: live performance + visual & applied arts + written & published works + sound recording + audiovisual & interactive media + heritage & libraries + governance, funding & professional support + education & training + multi domain.

I have combined selected cultural domains and subdomains into an imperfect but reasonable approximation of “the arts”, one that includes live performances, visual arts (including crafts and photography), books, film and video, and sound recording.

Trade surpluses and deficits are calculated as cultural exports minus cultural imports. I have adjusted historical data for inflation.

This is the fourth and final article in a series examining Statistics Canada’s dataset on exports and imports of the arts, culture, and heritage. Previous articles contained analyses of the most recent data for Canada and the provinces, as well as trends in cultural trade (with all countries) between 2010 and 2023.

The USA is Canada’s main cultural trading partner

As I noted a few weeks ago, in 2023, the United States accounts for roughly two-thirds of all cultural exports ($18.1 billion, or 67%) and imports ($22.2 billion, or 62%). Canada had a $4.2 billion trade deficit with the USA in 2023.

The United States accounts for about three-quarters of all arts exports from Canada ($12.5 billion, or 78% of the worldwide total) and two-thirds of all arts imports ($9.4 billion, or 66%). In 2023, Canada had a $3.1 billion arts trade surplus with the USA.

The value of trade with the USA and the American share of Canada’s worldwide trade vary between the four arts goods and services that have the highest levels of international trade:

• Crafts: exports of $6.7 billion to the USA (92% of all crafts exports), imports of $4.1 billion from the US (65% of all crafts imports), surplus of $2.7 billion (after rounding)

• Film and video: exports of $3.8 billion (67% of all film and video exports), imports of $1.1 billion (64% of all film and video imports), surplus of $2.7 billion

• Books: exports of $0.8 billion (88% of all books exports), imports of $2.4 billion (78% of all books imports), deficit of $1.6 billion

• Live performances: exports of $0.6 billion (56% of all live performance exports), imports of $0.9 billion (55% of all live performance imports), deficit of $0.3 billion

Trends since 2010

The cultural trade deficit with the USA has decreased slightly since 2010

Canada has had a cultural trade deficit with the United States in every year since 2010, but the deficit has decreased somewhat over time. As shown in today’s first graph, the cultural trade deficit with the USA was highest between 2012 and 2014 and lowest in 2021. The deficit in 2023 ($4.2 billion) was 15% lower than the deficit in 2010 ($4.9 billion). The statistics in the graph have been adjusted for inflation.

The arts trade surplus with the USA used to be a deficit

In 2023, there was an international trade surplus in the arts of $3.1 billion. The following graph shows that Canada had an arts trade deficit with the USA in eight years between 2010 and 2023 and a surplus in six years, including the five most recent years (i.e., 2019 through 2023).

Data sources and notes

Source: Statistics Canada. Table 12-10-0117-01. International trade of culture and sport products, by domain and sub-domain, and trading partner, 2023.

Note: Statistics Canada also publishes data on interprovincial trade in cultural goods and services, but the most recent data are only from 2021. Because the data are quite old, I’m not analyzing them.

The international trade dataset is based on multiple sources, including surveys and administrative filings by cultural businesses, organizations, and individuals. As just one example, here is the main export-related question from the performing arts survey:

During the reporting period [of x to y], did this business receive revenue from clients outside Canada for the sale of products, services, royalties, rights, licensing or franchise fees?

If the respondent answered yes, they were asked follow-up questions regarding revenues from their exports and the percentage breakdowns of exports by country as well as into 1) goods; 2) services; and 3) royalties, rights, licensing and franchise fees.

The series of questions related to imports is identical to the above, except that the questions refer to “payments to suppliers outside Canada” rather than “revenue from clients outside Canada”.

Today’s article examines the following questions:

• How has Canada’s cultural trade deficit changed since 2010?

• How has Canada’s arts trade surplus or deficit changed since 2010?

• Which provinces have had cultural trade surpluses? How has each province’s cultural trade surplus or deficit changed since 2010?

The surpluses and deficits are calculated as cultural…

Read more

The article includes an analysis of provincial trade statistics in 2023 for culture as a …

Read more

Welcome to 2026! Today’s post delves into recently released data on revenues and expenses for the export and import of cultural goods and services in 2023. I examine trade by type of cultural good or service, including an imperfect but reasonable approximation of “the arts”. The data relate to cultural products, not cultural industries.

Recognizing that 2023 trade data are not particularly current in the present environment, I looked into quarterly datasets on international trade. However, as often happens, the categories that are published quarterly (e.g., “personal, cultural, and recreational services”) are very broad and not informative about the situation of the arts, culture, and heritage. I am therefore sticking to an analysis of the 2023 dataset, which was released in late October.

Future articles will examine international trade into and from each province, as well as trends in cultural trade since 2010.

Canada exports $27 billion in arts, culture, and heritage goods and services

Statistics Canada’s summary of the trade dataset highlighted some key statistics:

• Canada exported cultural goods and services worth $27.1 billion in 2023.

• Canada imported $35.8 billion of cultural products worth in 2023, resulting in a cultural trade deficit of $8.7 billion.

• Cultural goods and services represented 2.8% of all exports and 3.7% of all imports in 2022. (Both are increases from 2022, when exports were 2.6% and imports were 3.4%.)

• Of nine cultural areas, live performance is “the only domain to remain below pre-pandemic levels, despite a 23.9% increase from 2022”.

Today’s first graph highlights the basic facts about Canada’s cultural trade in 2023.

By my calculation, the cultural trade deficit represents 32% of all cultural exports in 2023 (an increase from 30% in 2022). In other words, Canadians spent 32% more on cultural goods and services from abroad than we exported.

Cultural areas with a trade surplus

Despite the overall trade deficit of $8.7 billion in cultural goods and services, five specific areas registered a trade surplus:

• Film and video: $3.9 billion

• Crafts: $1.1 billion

• Interactive media: $0.9 billion

• Architecture: $27 million

• Advertising: $15 million

Below the paywall, the article digs into the most recent data on the value of exports, imports, and trade surplus or deficit for each cultural domain, for an approximation of the arts, and for specific types of arts products, including visual arts, performing arts, film and video, books, and more. The American share of cultural trade is also highlighted.

Read more

Today’s article examines household spending on the arts, culture, and heritage by population size, as well as some other spending items for context. This is my last article on consumer spending in Canada in 2023. Today’s article is also my last one this calendar year, and I wish you joy and peace this holiday season.

As was the case with my other demographic articles (covering spending by income and age), I’ll compare spending by households residing in areas of different population sizes with benchmark averages from an earlier article on household spending: $531 per household on artworks and arts participation items, representing 0.7% of household spending (after taxes, pension contributions, and gifts are excluded), as well as $1,623 per household on cultural goods and services, representing 2.1% of household spending. For context, I’ll also analyze overall household spending and spending on cars.

The data by population size cover a spectrum of areas in which survey respondents live, including population centres of (a) 1,000,000 residents and over, (b) 500,000 to 999,999, (c) 250,000 to 499,999, (d) 100,000 to 249,999, (e) 30,000 to 99,999, and (f) 1,000 to 29,999. Only areas with a density of 400 or more people per square kilometre are considered “population centres”. Respondents in areas with fewer than 1,000 residents and/or a population density below 400 people per square km are classified as rural.

The article offers two main indicators: dollars spent per household and percentage of household spending. The strength of the percentage estimates is that they place the spending levels in the context of how much money each group of Canadians has to spend.

My category of “artworks and arts participation” includes six items: 1) works of art, carvings, and other decorative ware; 2) books; 3) tickets to live performances; 4) movie tickets; 5) admissions to museums, zoos, and other heritage sites; and 6) art and craft materials. The 19 cultural goods and services include these six items, plus 13 others, all of which are listed at the end of this article. Spending details for individual items that are included in arts spending and cultural spending are not provided in today’s article, due to space and time limitations.

Given the limitations of Statistics Canada’s Survey of Household Spending, I would consider the analysis to be a limited but reasonable approximation of consumer spending on the arts. I would consider the broader estimate of spending on culture (including the arts, culture, and heritage) to be a less-limited approximation, but still imperfect. My categories only include those spending items that are available in the dataset, not everything that one might want to include in arts spending or cultural spending. More details on the survey’s methods and limitations are in the notes at the end of the article.

Context: differences in overall consumption and spending on cars by population size

The first graph shows average spending per household on everything. Average consumer spending tends to increase with population size, from an average of $63,000 in rural areas to $83,900 in large cities with at least 1 million residents.

For further context, I’ll examine spending differences on cars. The next graph shows that average spending on vehicles does not have a distinct pattern by population size.

There is no distinct pattern in the final context graph either. As a percentage of total household spending, vehicle purchases are above the national average (5.4%) among rural Canadians (6.0%), residents in cities with 100,000 to 249,999 residents (7.1%), and cities with 500,000 to 999,999 residents (7.3%).

Spending on the arts, culture, and heritage by population size

Similar spending on the arts, culture, and heritage in dollar terms

Average cultural spending is very close to the national average ($1,623 per household) in all but one population size group, the exception being residents of areas with populations between 30,000 and 99,999, who spend an above-average amount ($1,790).

Cultural spending as a percentage of household budgets

Read more

The estimate of the impact on Gross Domestic Product (GDP) represents the economic value added of Francophone cultural activity. GDP, a measure of net economic performance, is by far the most common economic indicator. The total impact on GDP is the sum of direct, indirect and induced impacts:

• Direct impacts represent the value added to GDP by spending in the cultural sector. These estimates come directly from Statistics Canada.

• Indirect impacts represent the value added to GDP by suppliers to cultural organizations, businesses, and individuals. The indirect calculations were performed by Hill Strategies, based on Statistics Canada multipliers.

• Induced impacts represent the value added to GDP from the salaries of cultural staff and supplier staff. As with indirect impacts, Hill Strategies performed these calculations based on Statistics Canada multipliers.

In each province, a portion of indirect and induced cultural spending (and therefore cultural GDP) occurs in other provinces. This report provides two estimates of the impact on GDP: the impact within the province and the total impact across the country.

In addition to the net impact on GDP, the report presents two other economic indicators resulting from French-Canadian cultural activity:

• Production is a measure of gross economic activity, corresponding to total revenues (with some adjustments, e.g., imputed values for free cultural activities). For ease of understanding, this report refers to this indicator as “total revenues”. These estimates come directly from Statistics Canada. The impact on GDP (net value) is calculated from total revenues (gross value).

• The number of Francophones working in culture outside Quebec is taken from previous analyses by Hill Strategies, based on a census data request. The percentage of Francophones in each province is essential to our estimates of Francophone GDP. Statistics Canada does not break down its cultural indicators by language, but Hill Strategies’ special data request from the 2021 census made this calculation possible.

In general, the analysis is detailed and rigorous, while remaining practical. It is based on the share of Francophones in cultural professions, rather than on surveys specific to the cultural sector, which would require extensive resources. More details on the methods can be found in the notes at the end of this report.

National results

Total revenues from Francophone cultural production outside Quebec amounted to $5.82 billion in 2023, an increase of 9% from the estimate of $5.32 billion in 2021 (not adjusted for inflation). The estimate of cultural revenues serves as the basis for estimates of the impact on GDP.

In 2023, the GDP impact of Francophone arts, culture, and heritage (outside Quebec) amounted to $6.15 billion.

As shown in the first graph, this estimate includes:

• A direct impact of $3.12 billion.

• An indirect impact of $1.79 billion.

• An induced impact of $1.24 billion.

The total impact on GDP in 2023 ($6.15 billion) represents a 9% increase over 2021 ($5.63 billion).

According to the 2021 census, 36,100 cultural workers outside Quebec speak French, representing 5.2% of all cultural workers Quebec. We used this proportion (and the proportions in each province) to estimate the GDP of Francophone cultural activity.

Subscribe now

Provincial results

Newfoundland and Labrador

The impact of Francophone arts, culture, and heritage on Newfoundland and Labrador’s GDP was $16.6 million in 2023. In addition, the impact was $3.7 million in other Canadian provinces, for a Canada-wide impact of $20.4 million. The impact on Canadian GDP represents an 11% increase over 2021 ($18.4 million).

The estimated impact in NL includes:

• A direct impact of $11.6 million.

• An indirect impact of $3.4 million.

• An induced impact of $1.7 million.

Revenues from Francophone cultural production in Newfoundland and Labrador totalled $19.6 million.

In the province, 150 Francophones work in culture, representing 2.2% of the province’s cultural workers, according to an analysis of the census by Hill Strategies.

Prince Edward Island

The impact of Francophone arts, culture, and heritage on Prince Edward Island’s GDP was $21.5 million in 2023. Added to this figure is an impact of $5.5 million in other Canadian provinces, for a total impact of $27.0 million across Canada. The impact on Canadian GDP increased by 13% between 2021 ($23.9 million) and 2023.

The estimated impact in PEI in 2023 includes:

• A direct impact of $15.9 million.

• An indirect impact of $3.4 million.

• An induced impact of $2.3 million.

Total revenues from Francophone cultural production on the Island amounted to $25.1 million in 2023.

According to the 2021 census, 190 Francophones in PEI work in culture, representing 7.3% of all cultural workers in the province.

Nova Scotia

The impact on Nova Scotia’s GDP of Francophone arts, culture, and heritage in the province was $171 million in 2023. In other Canadian provinces, the impact was nearly $38 million. The Canada-wide impact was $209 million in 2023, an increase of 20% from 2021 ($174 million).

The estimated impact in N.S. includes:

• A direct impact of $113 million.

• An indirect impact of $35.9 million.

• An induced impact of $22.7 million.

Revenues from Francophone cultural production in Nova Scotia totalled $197 million in 2023.

In Nova Scotia, 1,100 cultural workers speak French, representing 5.6% of all cultural workers in the province.

New Brunswick

The impact of Francophone arts, culture, and heritage on New Brunswick’s GDP amounted to $603 million in 2023. In addition, the impact in other provinces was $166 million, for a Canada-wide impact of $769 million, an increase of 5% since 2021 ($733 million).

The estimated impact in New Brunswick in 2023 includes:

• A direct impact of $420 million.

• An indirect impact of $115 million.

• An induced impact of $67.6 million.

Total revenues from Francophone cultural production in New Brunswick amounted to $686 million in 2023.

In New Brunswick, 3,900 Francophones work in culture, representing 34% of all cultural workers in the province, according to an analysis of the 2021 census by Hill Strategies.

Ontario

The impact of Franco-Ontarian arts, culture, and heritage on Ontario’s GDP was $3.3 billion in 2023. Added to this figure is an impact of $0.3 billion in other Canadian provinces, for a Canada-wide impact of $3.6 billion, an increase of 7% since 2021 ($3.3 billion).

The estimated impact in Ontario in 2023 includes:

• A direct impact of $1.8 billion.

• An indirect impact of $0.9 billion.

• An induced impact of $0.6 billion.

Total revenues from Franco-Ontarian cultural production stood at $3.5 billion in 2023.

According to an analysis of the 2021 census by Hill Strategies, 20,800 Francophones work in culture in Ontario, representing 5.6% of all cultural workers in the province.

Manitoba

The impact of Francophone arts, culture, and heritage on Manitoba’s GDP was $168 million in 2023. In addition, the impact was $38 million in other Canadian provinces, for a total impact of $205 million. This is a slight increase (2%) from the 2021 estimate ($202 million).

The estimated impact in Manitoba includes:

• A direct impact of $111 million.

• An indirect impact of $29.9 million.

• An induced impact of $27.1 million.

Total revenues from Francophone cultural production in Manitoba amounted to $205 million in 2023 (which coincidentally corresponds to the net impact on Canada’s GDP).

In Manitoba, 1,400 cultural workers speak French, representing 5.8% of all cultural workers in the province.

Saskatchewan

The impact of the Fransaskois cultural community on Saskatchewan’s GDP amounted to $83.6 million in 2023. Added to this figure is an impact of nearly $19 million in other Canadian provinces, for a Canada-wide impact of $102 million, an increase of 9% since 2021 ($93.5 million).

The estimated impact in Saskatchewan includes:

• A direct impact of $57.2 million.

• An indirect impact of $15.5 million.

• An induced impact of $10.9 million.

Revenues from Fransaskois cultural production totalled $96 million in 2023.

In Saskatchewan, 520 Francophones work in culture, representing 3.2% of all cultural workers in the province.

Alberta

The impact of Francophone arts, culture, and heritage on Alberta’s GDP was $296 million in 2023. Added to this figure is an impact of $55 million in other Canadian provinces, for a Canada-wide impact of $351 million, which is 8% higher than the 2021 estimate ($324 million).

The estimated impact in Alberta includes:

• A direct impact of $190 million.

• An indirect impact of $65.9 million.

• An induced impact of $40.1 million.

Total revenues from Francophone cultural production in Alberta amounted to $337 million in 2023.

In the province, 2,600 cultural workers speak French, representing 3.2% of all cultural workers in the province.

British Columbia

The impact of Francophone arts, culture, and heritage on British Columbia’s GDP was $823 million in 2023. In addition, the impact was $156 million in other Canadian provinces, for a Canada-wide impact of $978 million, an increase of 15% over the 2021 estimate ($851 million).

The estimated impact in B.C. includes:

• A direct impact of $464 million.

• An indirect impact of $187 million.

• An induced impact of $172 million.

Total revenues from Francophone cultural production in British Columbia amounted to $852 million in 2023.

In the province, 5,300 Francophones work in culture, representing 3.4% of all cultural workers, according to an analysis of the 2021 census by Hill Strategies.

Yukon, Northwest Territories and Nunavut

The impact of Francophone arts, culture, and heritage on the GDP of the three territories was $33.3 million in 2023. Added to this figure is an impact of $8.2 million in the provinces, for a Canada-wide impact of $41.5 million, an increase of 9% compared to 2021 ($37.9 million).

The estimated impact in the territories includes:

• A direct impact of $23.6 million.

• An indirect impact of $5.8 million.

• An induced impact of $3.9 million.

Total revenues from Francophone cultural production in the territories amounted to $42 million in 2023 (which coincidentally equals the net impact on GDP).

In the three territories, 230 Francophones work in culture, representing 8.7% of all cultural workers.

Notes on methods

Statistics Canada defines culture as “creative artistic activity and the goods and services produced by it, and the preservation of heritage”. The calculations relating to economic impact follow this definition of culture, as put forward in the Conceptual Framework for Culture Statistics, 2011. However, translation was the only writing profession left out of the Conceptual Framework for Culture Statistics. We have chosen to include translators among the 52 cultural professions.

The calculations of the proportions of Francophones in cultural professions in Canada and each province are based on a linguistic definition produced by Statistics Canada in the 2021 census: the “potential demand for federal communications and services in the minority official language”. This fairly broad definition includes people outside Quebec whose mother tongue is French and/or who speak French at home, whether it is their primary or secondary language. In total, there are 1.4 million people outside Quebec who would potentially request federal services in French.

Here is a summary of other important choices made in developing the economic impact estimates.

For all estimates:

• Statistics on the direct impact of culture (in total, i.e., all languages combined) are drawn from Statistics Canada’s cultural indicators by province and territory (industry perspective). Statistics Canada does not offer these indicators by linguistic group.

• The industry perspective was chosen for two reasons: 1) these estimates represent culture as an industry, rather than cultural products that may be produced in disparate sectors of the economy; and 2) Statistics Canada’s multipliers are based on an industry perspective.

• The proportion of the economic impact allocated to Francophones comes from the proportion of Francophones outside Quebec in 52 cultural occupations. According to Hill Strategies’ special data request from the 2021 census, there are 36,100 Francophone cultural workers outside Quebec, representing 5.2% of the 688,500 cultural workers outside Quebec.

• The 52 occupational groups retained as cultural workers include workers in the performing arts, sound recording, film, video, broadcasting, libraries, archives, galleries, museums and other heritage institutions, architecture, design, publishing and printing.

• The number of Francophones is based on the potential demand for federal communications and services in the minority official language. These individuals have French as their mother tongue and/or speak French at home, whether as their primary or secondary language.

For direct impact:

• The most recent estimates of the direct impact of culture are from 2023.

• The direct impact of the cultural sector on gross domestic product (GDP) outside Quebec, regardless of language, amounted to $55.4 billion in 2023.

• Given that Francophones represent 5.2% of cultural workers outside Quebec, the direct impact of Francophone cultural activity is estimated at 5.2% of $55.4 billion, or $2.9 billion.

For indirect, induced and total impacts:

• We calculated the indirect and induced impacts using Statistics Canada’s national and provincial input-output multipliers for 2021 (the most recent year). These multipliers are regularly used in this type of analysis. For example, the Culture, Arts, Heritage and Sport Economic Impact Model, put forward by Statistics Canada and Canadian Heritage, is based on these multipliers.

• This report uses the most recent economic statistics and multipliers. Ideally, the economic statistics and multipliers would refer to the same year, but this is not the case. Nevertheless, in our opinion, the best approach in this situation is to use the most recent data available.

• Calculations for Canada excluding Quebec are based on input-output multipliers for Canada as a whole, not an average of the multipliers for the provinces and territories excluding Quebec.

• Statistics Canada’s multipliers cover fairly broad sub-sectors. We have chosen the two most “cultural” sub-sectors: information and cultural industries (which includes publishing, film and sound recording, and broadcasting) and arts, entertainment, and recreation (which includes the performing arts and heritage). Unfortunately, these two sub-sectors extend beyond the cultural sector to include telecommunications, data processing and hosting, sports, lotteries, and entertainment. This is an imperfect choice, but the best possible choice in our opinion.

• To produce a single multiplier for Canada and for each province, we calculated the average of the multipliers for these two subsectors. We applied this average to the total revenues from cultural activity (referred to as “production” by Statistics Canada) to calculate the indirect and induced impacts.

• Statistics Canada provides estimates of the direct economic impact of culture expressed in basic prices. We therefore opted for multipliers expressed in the same way, rather than in market prices.

• The value of cultural production outside Quebec, not divided by language, was $104 billion in 2023.

• The value of Francophone cultural production outside Quebec in 2023 was estimated at $5.44 billion, or 5.2% of $104 billion.

• Most economic impact analyses take into account indirect and induced impacts. In our opinion, these impacts are valid, but there is not universal agreement about this. For example, the Culture, Arts, Heritage and Sport Economic Impact Model, put forward by Statistics Canada and Canadian Heritage, includes indirect and induced impacts. However, Statistics Canada’s culture indicators only provide estimates of direct impact.

• The estimates do not take into account ancillary expenditures by cultural attendees, such as accommodation, food, and transportation. The measurement of ancillary expenditures poses challenges and is subject to disagreement, and these expenditures are often excluded from other economic impact studies.

Using custom data that Hill Strategies requested from Statistics Canada’s 2021 long-form census, this article offers detailed statistics on Jewish cultural workers, including artists and arts leaders. The analysis provides counts and incomes of workers in the arts, culture, and heritage, with comparisons to all workers in the country.

Two weeks ago, I published two articles on Muslim artists and cultural workers in Canada (related to representation and incomes). Those articles, using a religion-only definition, provided some comparative information about Jewish artists and cultural workers.

However, sociology professor Robert Brym has noted that:

Who does the census count as Jewish? Conventionally, a “yes” answer to either of the following questions results in a Canadian being counted as Jewish in the Canadian census: (1) Does the person identify as Jewish by religion? (2) Does the person identify as Jewish by ethnicity and identify with no religion?

The second criterion is included in the count of Jewish workers in today’s article but was absent from my previous article. This provides a broader view of Jewish workers in the arts, culture, and heritage, including Jews by ethnicity who have no religious affiliation. People who identify as Jewish by ethnicity but practice another religion (a relatively small number) are not included here.

How the census counts workers, including artists and other cultural workers

The occupational perspective from the census includes people who work across the economy, as long as they are classified into one of 10 artist occupation groups, 5 arts leadership occupation groups, or 52 cultural occupation groups.

In the census, artists must spend more time as artists than in any other occupation to be classified into an artist occupation group. More specifically, occupational data from the census are based on the number of people who worked more hours in an occupation than in any other between May 1 and 8, 2021, plus people who were not in the labour force at that time but had worked more in that occupation than any other between January of 2020 and May of 2021.

The prevalence of “gig work” and the often-atypical nature of artists’ workflows can make it challenging for official statistics to count artists as artists. As such, census estimates of the number of artists might be low.

The 52 occupation groups included as cultural workers include the 10 artist occupation groups as well as the 5 arts leadership occupation groups, plus many other cultural occupations (e.g., graphic designers, print operators, editors, translators, architects, and professionals in fundraising, advertising, marketing, and public relations), and heritage occupations (e.g., librarians, curators, and archivists). Because the count of cultural workers includes both artists and arts leaders, the number of artists and arts leaders should not be added to the number of cultural workers.

For a deeper dive on the occupation classifications, please see my articles on the methods behind choosing the 52 cultural occupation groups and the strengths and limitations of the census for counting artists and cultural workers.

To ensure confidentiality and data reliability, no estimates of fewer than 40 people are presented in this article.

The challenging context of the pandemic in the spring of 2021 is important to keep in mind when interpreting census data on artists, which were collected in May of 2021. Income data from the census relate to the 2020 calendar year.

Context: All artists, arts leaders, and cultural workers in Canada

Across Canada, there are 202,900 professional artists, representing 1.0% of the Canadian labour force. Examined differently, this means that 1 in every 102 Canadian workers is an artist. (A full article on Canadian artists is available here.)

A similar analysis examines workers in arts leadership occupations in Canada, There are more than 56,000 Canadian workers in five occupation groups, which include individual occupations such as producers, directors, choreographers, conductors, composers, curators, conservators, and arts and heritage managers. Two of the arts leadership occupations (those including conductors and composers as well as producers, directors, and choreographers) are also included as artists. As such, the number of arts leadership workers should not be added to the number of artists.

The broadest analysis relates to the 914,000 workers in arts, culture, and heritage occupations, representing 4.4% of all Canadian workers. The 52 occupation groups in this category include the 10 artist occupation groups as well as the 5 arts leadership occupation groups, other cultural occupations (e.g., graphic designers, print operators, editors, translators, architects, and professionals in fundraising, advertising, marketing, and public relations), and heritage occupations (e.g., librarians, curators, and archivists).

23,000 cultural workers are Jewish, including more than 7,000 artists and 2,200 arts leaders

Census data indicate that there are 23,000 workers in arts, culture, and heritage occupations who are Jewish, including 7,100 professional artists and 2,200 people who work in five occupation groups that are classified as arts leaders.

The 23,000 Jewish cultural workers represent 2.5% of all cultural workers in Canada, twice as high as the share of Jewish workers in the overall labour force (1.2%).

The 7,100 Jewish artists represent 3.5% of all artists in Canada, nearly three times higher than the share of Jewish workers in the overall labour force (1.2%).

The 7,100 Jewish artists pursue a range of artistic endeavours, and there are above-average concentrations in writing, producing, and directing:

• 1,500 are primarily writers (21% of Jewish artists)

• 1,500 are producers, directors, choreographers, and related occupations (also 21%)

• 1,100 are musicians (16%)

• 770 are painters, sculptors, and other visual artists (11%)

• 720 are actors, comedians, and circus performers (10%)

• 480 are photographers (7%)

• 330 are dancers (5%)

• 260 are artisans and craftspeople (4%)

• 190 are conductors, composers, and arrangers (3%)

• 160 are classified as other performers (2%)

Strong concentration of artists and cultural workers among Jewish workers

As shown in the following graph, artists and cultural workers are both much more strongly represented among Jewish workers than among all Canadian workers.

Jewish artists account for 2.8% of all 251,500 Jewish workers in Canada, which is nearly three times the concentration of artists among all Canadian workers (1.0%). Expressed differently, one in every 36 Jewish workers is an artist, compared with one in every 102 workers in the country.

Jewish cultural workers account for 9.2% of all Jewish workers, which is more than double the concentration of cultural workers among all Canadian workers (4.4%). Expressed differently, one in every 11 Jewish workers have a cultural occupation, compared with one in every 23 workers in the country.

There are many Jewish arts leaders in Canada, especially producers, directors, and choreographers

About 2,200 Jewish people work in five occupation groups that are classified as arts leaders. Two-thirds of Jewish arts leaders are in the broad grouping of producers, directors, and choreographers:

• Producers, directors, choreographers, and related occupations: 1,500 (67% of Jewish arts leaders)

• Managers in publishing, motion pictures, broadcasting, and performing arts: 390 (17%)

• Conductors, composers, and arrangers: 190 (8%)

• Library, archive, museum, and art gallery managers: 100 (4%)

• Conservators and curators: 80 (3%)

Jewish people account for 4.0% of Canada’s arts leaders, more than three times higher than Jewish people’s share of all Canadian workers (1.2%).

Readers should be aware that the five arts leadership occupations are an imperfect approximation of the total number of people with senior level positions in the arts. “Arts leaders” is a category that I conceived of in 2022, based on a close examination of occupational classifications that are available from the census. While the grouping is quite broadly based, there are undoubtedly other senior workers in the sector who are not captured in the five occupation groupings. One example of known exclusions is some senior managers in the arts, including those in arts associations. The occupation groupings for senior managers are not separated based on the nature of their work or association (i.e., in the arts or in other sectors of society). Similarly, government employees with an arts-related portfolio at any level of government are not separated based on their portfolios.

Women cultural workers, artists, and arts leaders

55% of Jewish cultural workers are women, higher than the proportion of all Jewish workers (48%) but similar to that of all Canadian cultural workers (54%).

Exactly one-half of Jewish artists are women (including some non-binary people), slightly higher than the proportion of all Jewish workers (48%) but lower than that of all Canadian artists (54%).

Women are much less strongly represented among Jewish arts leaders (39%), but this is close to the proportion of all Canadian arts leaders who are women (42%).

Jewish artists have much lower incomes than other Jewish workers

Income data from the census relate to the 2020 calendar year, which included significant slowdowns in artistic activity. Because of the challenging context in that year, the focus of this article is on overall personal incomes, with employment and household incomes provided as additional information. Personal income includes all sources, such as employment income, net revenue from self-employment, pandemic supports, rental income, investment income, and others.

The median personal income of Jewish artists (from all sources) was $33,200 in 2020, 45% below that of all Jewish workers ($60,000) but 10% above the median of all Canadian artists ($30,200). The graph below depicts the differences in the median personal incomes between Jewish artists, all Jewish workers, all artists, and all workers in Canada.

Readers should be aware that these income statistics are the median across all 10 artist occupation groups. The relatively high proportion of producers and directors (the highest-earning artist occupation group) among Jewish artists will affect the income statistics.

Estimates of employment income include the work-related earnings of artists from all paid and self-employed positions that they held during the year. The median employment income of Jewish artists was just $10,700 in 2020, which is less than one-quarter of the median employment income of all Jewish workers in that year ($47,600). The median employment income of Jewish artists is 9% below the median of all Canadian artists ($11,700).

Household income provides a measure of the family situation of artists. In 2020, the median household income of Jewish artists was $98,000, 31% lower than that of all Jewish workers ($143,000) but 5% higher than the median of all Canadian artists ($93,000).

For all of the above statistics, median incomes were chosen as the key measurement, because the median should provide a better indication of the situation of a typical artist than the average (i.e., the “mean”), a statistic that is more strongly affected by a few individuals with very high incomes. All of the income statistics are shown before taxes.

Incomes of Jewish cultural workers

The median personal income of Jewish cultural workers (from all sources) was $46,400 in 2020, which is 23% lower than the median of all Jewish workers ($60,000) but equal to that of all Canadian cultural workers (also $46,400). The following graph compares the median personal incomes of Jewish cultural workers, all Jewish workers, all cultural workers, and all workers in Canada.

The median employment income of Jewish cultural workers was $32,400 in 2020, which is 32% below that of all Jewish workers ($47,600) and 16% below that of all cultural workers in Canada ($38,400).

In 2020, the median household income of Jewish cultural workers was $117,000, or 18% less than that of all Jewish workers ($143,000) but 7% higher than that of all Canadian cultural workers ($109,000).

Incomes of Jewish arts leaders

The median personal income of Jewish arts leaders (from all sources) was $58,400 in 2020, which is 3% lower than the median of all Jewish workers ($60,000) and 2% higher than that of all Canadian arts leaders ($57,200). In other words, despite their senior artistic positions, Jewish arts leaders still earn slightly less than other Jewish workers in Canada.

The median employment income of Jewish arts leaders was $44,400 in 2020, which is 7% below that of all Jewish workers ($47,600) and 11% below that of all arts leaders in Canada ($50,000).

In 2020, the median household income of Jewish arts leaders was $116,000, 19% less than that of all Jewish workers ($143,000) but 3% higher than that of all Canadian arts leaders ($113,000).

Jewish artists and cultural workers by province and city

Jewish artists and cultural workers are strongly concentrated in Ontario and Quebec. The breakdown by province and region follows.

Ontario is home to 58% of Canada’s Jewish artists and 59% of all Jewish cultural workers, both of which are similar to the province’s 57% share of all Jewish workers. On its own, the City of Toronto accounts for 40% of Canada’s Jewish artists and 38% of all Jewish cultural workers, both of which are much higher than the 27% of all Jewish workers who reside in Toronto.

19% of Jewish artists reside in Quebec, as do 20% of Jewish cultural workers, compared with 21% of all Jewish workers. The Ville de Montréal accounts for 12% of Canada’s Jewish artists, 11% of all Jewish cultural workers, and 9% of all Jewish workers.

British Columbia is home to 16% of Canada’s Jewish artists and 13% of Jewish cultural workers in the country, both of which are higher than the province’s 11% share of all Jewish workers. On its own, the City of Vancouver accounts for 8% of Canada’s Jewish artists, 7% of all Jewish cultural workers, and 4% of all Jewish workers in Canada.

The three Prairie provinces are home to 5% of Canada’s Jewish artists, 6% of all Jewish cultural workers, both of which are lower than the 9% of all Jewish workers who reside on the Prairies.

2% of Canada’s Jewish artists reside in the four Atlantic provinces, equal to the four provinces’ percentages of Jewish cultural workers and all Jewish workers.

Today I’ll analyze household spending by age on the arts, culture, and heritage in Canada in 2023, as well as some other spending items for context. This follows my recent article on spending by income. Next week, I’ll examine spending by urban and rural residents.

As was the case with the income analysis, I’ll compare spending by households in different age ranges with benchmark averages from a previous article: $531 per household on artworks and arts participation items, representing 0.7% of household spending (after taxes, pension contributions, and gifts are excluded), as well as $1,623 per household on cultural goods and services, representing 2.1% of household spending.

For context, I’ll also analyze overall household spending and spending on cars.

Once again, I’ll provide two sets of indicators in this article: dollars spent per household and percentage of household spending. The advantage of the percentage estimates is that they place the spending levels in the context of how much money each group of Canadians has to spend.

The age information represents the age of the person in the household who responded to the survey, not the ages of all members of the household. The age ranges were provided by Statistics Canada.

My category of “artworks and arts participation” includes six items: 1) works of art, carvings, and other decorative ware; 2) books; 3) tickets to live performances; 4) movie tickets; 5) admissions to museums, zoos, and other heritage sites; and 6) art and craft materials. The 19 cultural goods and services include these six items, plus 13 others, all of which are listed at the end of this article. Spending details for individual items that are included in arts spending and cultural spending are not provided in today’s article, due to space and time limitations.

Given the limitations of Statistics Canada’s Survey of Household Spending, I would consider the analysis to be a limited but reasonable approximation of consumer spending on the arts. I would consider the broader estimate of spending on culture (including the arts, culture, and heritage) to be a less-limited approximation, but still imperfect. My categories only include those spending items that are available in the dataset, not everything that one might want to include in arts spending or cultural spending. More details on the survey’s methods and limitations are in the notes at the end of the article.

Context: differences in overall consumption and spending on cars by age group

The first graph shows average spending per household on everything. Average consumer spending is triangular: highest for people between the ages of 40 and 54 (nearly $100,000) and lowest for those under 30 ($68,400) and those 65 and over ($53,200).

As I did two weeks ago, I’ll examine spending differences on cars. (The age old question: Are cars elitist?) The following graph shows that, like total spending, average spending on vehicles is triangular: highest for people between the ages of 40 and 54 ($5,410) and lowest for people 65 and over ($2,810).

The final context graph shows that, as a percentage of total household spending, vehicle purchases are highest among Canadians under 30 years of age, followed by those between 40 and 54 years of age.

Spending on the arts, culture, and heritage by age group

Overall cultural spending in dollar terms

Average consumer spending on the arts, culture, and heritage is highest for people between the ages of 40 and 54 ($1,900) and lowest for those under 30 ($1,350). Like previous graphs, the following one is triangular.

Cultural spending as a percentage of household budgets

Read more