Sioux Lookout Sector Analysis · PDF file · 2015-01-06Market Study Report . For the Municipality of Sioux Lookout . ... 1 SWOT Analysis ... Specialty care available (ie. massage

Market Study Report for the Municipality of Sioux Lookout

Prepared by:

March 31, 2011

Market Study Report For the Municipality of Sioux Lookout

Prepared by:

McSweeney & Associates 900 Greenbank Road

Suite 201 Ottawa Ontario CANADA K2J 1S8

Tel: (613) 825-2896 Or 1-866-304-2896

Fax: (613) 825-2889 Or 1-877-825-2889

E-MAIL: [email protected]

WEBSITE: www.mcsweeney.ca

mailto:[email protected]

http://www.mcsweeney.ca/

Sioux Lookout Market Study

Table of Contents 1 SWOT Analysis ...................................................................................................... 1

1.1 Key Strengths ...................................................................................................................... 1 1.2 Key Weaknesses .................................................................................................................. 3 1.3 Key Opportunities ................................................................................................................. 6 1.4 Threats or Constraints .......................................................................................................... 7

2 Directions for Development .................................................................................. 9 2.1 Retail/Commercial/Downtown ............................................................................................... 9 2.2 Arts/Culture/Heritage.......................................................................................................... 10 2.3 Tourism ............................................................................................................................. 11 2.4 Health and Social Services Sector ........................................................................................ 11

3 Statistical Overview of Sioux Lookout ................................................................12

4 Demographic Analysis ........................................................................................14 4.1 Population and Age Structure Profile.................................................................................... 15 4.2 Sioux Lookout Incomes ....................................................................................................... 17 4.3 Education .......................................................................................................................... 20 4.4 Post-Secondary Field of Study ............................................................................................. 22 4.5 Migration to Sioux Lookout ................................................................................................. 23 4.6 Knowledge of Official Languages ......................................................................................... 25 4.7 Dwelling Characteristics ...................................................................................................... 26

5 Labour Force Analysis .........................................................................................27 5.1 Key Indicators .................................................................................................................... 28 5.2 Labour Force by Industry .................................................................................................... 29 5.3 Labour Force by Occupation ................................................................................................ 31 5.4 Commuting Patterns ........................................................................................................... 32 5.5 Net Import and Export of Labour Force ............................................................................... 33

6 Economic Base Analysis ......................................................................................34 6.1 Employment Profile ............................................................................................................ 35 6.2 Location Quotient Analysis .................................................................................................. 37

6.2.1 Location Quotients Analysis by Sector ........................................................................................... 38 6.2.2 Dominant Sub-Sectors ................................................................................................................ 39 6.2.3 Location Quotients Analysis by Industry Level ............................................................................... 40 6.2.4 Location Quotients Compared to Benchmarks ................................................................................ 41

6.3 Shift-Share Analysis ............................................................................................................ 43

7 Employer Structure Analysis ...............................................................................47 7.1 Business Sector Analysis ..................................................................................................... 47

7.1.1 Growth in Business Numbers ....................................................................................................... 47 7.1.2 Growth in Business Concentrations ............................................................................................... 48 7.1.3 Growth in Business Concentrations per Capita ............................................................................... 48 7.1.4 Growth in Business Concentrations by Sector ................................................................................ 48

7.2 Business Pattern Analysis .................................................................................................... 49

8 Economic Development Trends Analysis .............................................................50 8.1 Site Selection Factors ......................................................................................................... 50 8.2 Economic Forecast ............................................................................................................. 53

Appendix A: Data Tables ...........................................................................................55


List of Tables and Figures

Table 1: Statistical Overview of Sioux Lookout vs. Ontario, 2010 .......................................................... 12

Table 2: Statistical Overview of 2001-2006 Changes for Sioux Lookout ................................................ 13

Table 3: Population Change from 1996 to 2006, Sioux Lookout vs. Ontario........................................... 15

Table 4: Dwelling Characteristics, Sioux Lookout vs. Ontario, 2001, 2006 and 2010 .............................. 26

Table 5: Where the Sioux Lookout Resident Labour Force Works, 2006 ................................................ 32

Table 6: Place of Residence for Persons Working in Sioux Lookout, 2006 ............................................. 32

Table 7: Net Import-Export of Labour Force for Sioux Lookout, 2006 ................................................... 33

Table 8: Employment Sub-sectors with High LQ, Sioux Lookout vs. Kenora District, 2006 ...................... 42

Table 9: Shift Share Analysis for Sioux Lookout Jobs by Sector, 2001-2006 .......................................... 44

Table 10: Percentage Population by Age, Sioux Lookout, 2001, 2006 and 2010 .................................... 55

Table 11: Percentage Population by Age, Sioux Lookout vs. Ontario, 2010 ........................................... 56

Table 12: Income Levels with % Change, Sioux Lookout vs. Ontario, 2000, 2005 and 2009 .................. 57

Table 13: Total Income Levels, Sioux Lookout vs. Ontario, 2009 .......................................................... 58

Table 14: Total Income Levels, Sioux Lookout vs. Ontario, 2000, 2005 and 2009 .................................. 59

Table 15: Family Income Levels, Sioux Lookout vs. Ontario, 2009 ........................................................ 60

Table 16: Household Income Levels, Sioux Lookout vs. Ontario, 2009 .................................................. 60

Table 17: Highest Level of Schooling, Sioux Lookout vs. Ontario, 2001 ................................................. 61

Table 18: Education Attainment, Sioux Lookout vs. Ontario, 2006-2010 ............................................... 61

Table 19: Education Attainment, Sioux Lookout vs. Ontario, 2010 ........................................................ 62

Table 20: Post-secondary Qualifications by Major Field of Study 2010, Sioux Lookout vs. ON ................. 62

Table 21: Mobility Status, Sioux Lookout vs. Ontario, 2010 .................................................................. 63

Table 22: Knowledge of Official Language, Sioux Lookout vs. Ontario, 2010 ......................................... 63

Table 23: Key Labour Force Indicators, Sioux Lookout vs. Ontario, 2001-2006-2010 ............................. 64

Table 24: Labour Force by Industry, Sioux Lookout, 2001-2006-2010 .................................................. 64

Table 25: Labour Force by Industry, Sioux Lookout vs. Ontario, 2010 .................................................. 65

Table 26: Labour Force by Occupation, Sioux Lookout vs. Ontario, 2010 .............................................. 65

Table 27: Number of Business by Sector, Sioux Lookout, 2003-2007 .................................................... 67

Table 28: Percentage of Local Business, Sioux Lookout, 2003-2007 ..................................................... 68

Table 29: Business Concentration per Capita, Sioux Lookout, 2003-2007 .............................................. 69

Table 30: Business Concentration Sector Mix, Sioux Lookout, 2003-2007.............................................. 70

Table 31: Top 15 Sub-Sectors by Number of Employers for Sioux Lookout, June 2008 .......................... 70

Table 32: Top 15 Industries by Number of Employers, Sioux Lookout, June 2008 ................................. 71

Table 33: % Change of Total Number of Employers, SL vs. Ontario, June 2003 to June 2008 ................ 72

Table 34: Canadian and Ontario Economic Indicators Outlook.............................................................. 73

Table 35: Global Export Forecast by Sector (% Growth) ...................................................................... 73

Table 36: Ontario Merchandise Export Outlook ................................................................................... 73

Table 37: Canadian Industrial Outlook – GDP by Industry.................................................................... 74

Table 38: GDP by Industry Ontario..................................................................................................... 74

Table 39: Canada and Ontario Employment Outlook by Industry – Q1/2011 ......................................... 75


Figure 1: Percentage Population by Age, Sioux Lookout, 2001, 2006, and 2010 .................................... 15

Figure 2: Percentage Population by Age, Sioux Lookout vs. Ontario, 2010 ............................................ 16

Figure 3: Total Median & Average Income, Sioux Lookout vs. Ontario, 2000, 2005 and 2009 ................. 17

Figure 4: Household Median & Average Income, Sioux Lookout & ON, 2000, 2005 and 2009 ................. 18

Figure 5: Total Income, Sioux Lookout, 2000, 2005 and 2009 .............................................................. 18

Figure 6: Total Income, Sioux Lookout vs. Ontario, 2009 ..................................................................... 19

Figure 7: Education Attainment Breakdown for Sioux Lookout, 2010 .................................................... 20

Figure 8: Education Attainment, Sioux Lookout vs. Ontario, 2010......................................................... 21

Figure 9: Post-Secondary Field of Study, Sioux Lookout vs. Ontario, 2010 ............................................ 22

Figure 10: Mobility Status Breakdown, Sioux Lookout vs. Ontario, 1 Year Ago....................................... 23

Figure 11: Mobility Status Breakdown, Sioux Lookout vs. Ontario, 5 Years Ago ..................................... 24

Figure 12: Percentage of Official Language, Sioux Lookout vs. Ontario, 2010........................................ 25

Figure 13: Average Dwelling Value, Sioux Lookout vs. ON, 2001, 2006 and 2010 .................................. 26

Figure 14: Labour Force Indicators, Sioux Lookout vs. Ontario, 2001, 2006 and 2010 ........................... 28

Figure 15: Unemployment Rate, Sioux Lookout vs. Ontario, 2001, 2006 and 2010 ................................ 29

Figure 16: Labour Force by Industry, Sioux Lookout, 2001-2006-2010 ................................................. 29

Figure 17: Labour Force by Industry, Sioux Lookout vs. Ontario, 2010 ................................................. 30

Figure 18: Labour Force by Occupation, Sioux Lookout vs. Ontario, 2010 ............................................. 31

Figure 19: Number of Jobs by Sector for Sioux Lookout, 2006 ............................................................. 35

Figure 20: Jobs Distribution, Sioux Lookout vs. Kenora District, 2006 ................................................... 36

Figure 21: Location Quotients by Employment Sectors, Sioux Lookout, 2006 ........................................ 38

Figure 22: Employment Sub-sectors with High Location Quotients, Sioux Lookout, 2006 ....................... 39

Figure 23: Sioux Lookout Employment Industries with High Location Quotients, 2006 ........................... 40

Figure 24: Location Quotients Compared to Kenora District, Ontario, Canada, by Sectors, 2006 ............. 41

Figure 25: Sioux Lookout Job Change by Sector, 2001-2006 ................................................................ 43

Figure 26: Employment Shift-Share Analysis by Sector, Sioux Lookout, 2001-2006 ................................ 45

Figure 27: Site Selection Factors ........................................................................................................ 51

Figure 28: Site Selection Factors – Combined Rating* of 2010 Factors ................................................. 52


McSweeney & Associates 1 March 31, 2011

1 SWOT Analysis The following SWOT analysis was prepared with the input of Sioux Lookout stakeholders, and represents the views of those stakeholders interviewed.

1.1 Key Strengths General

People – friendly, very open, helpful – lots of volunteers

Very vibrant in the summer with lots to do

Diverse community with lots of industry

Community mindedness

Great community feeling

Excellent diversity in cultures (roughly ½ of the residents are First Nations, the other ½

are immigrants who settled in the area)

Decent relationship with the First Nations (although a lot of work still needs to be done)

Small town

Easy to get involved in the community

Easy to find good employment

Very safe community

Good feel to the community (just feels like home)

Appealing size

Unique shops

Niche type markets (smaller retail stores)

People buy locally

Everything you need is available in the community

Strong sense of community/local businesses – buy locally as much as possible

A very active Chamber of Commerce (promote local business)

Transportation access (rail/air/roads)

Access to First Nations Communities (Hub for First Nations‟ services)

Diversity in industries (Tourism, Government, Retail, Education, Health Care , Social

Services, etc.) ensures that if one sector is hit by hard times, then the town is still

supported by the other industry sectors

Not a typical Northern Ontario mill town

Hub for transportation – airport is very active all year round

First Nations involvement in the community is huge

There are lots of tourist and short term accommodations

First Nations hockey tournament

High quality of life

High school sports and events

Business community supports each other and businesses support the community

Best health facility in Northern Ontario



Local and Northern residents

Sears catalogue store

Restaurants are very busy

Car dealerships are busy, but not for high end new cars – instead higher end used cars

are being sold

Aboriginals very integrated in society (positive relationship)

Lac Seul has a positive relationship with the Sioux Lookout municipal government

Customers from the north are very loyal to Sioux Lookout

All youth from the north come to Sioux Lookout for high school

Courses available in Sioux Lookout through Confederation College (in Thunder Bay)

Excellent recreation activities

Sioux Lookout is the only community in Northwestern Ontario that has successfully

incorporated First Nations into the economic health and future of the town

Good relationship with the First Nations (are treated as partners)

„Hub‟ for First Nations

Large number of professionals in the community

Beautiful natural landscape

Welcoming

Tourism Access to undeveloped/healthy lakes

Good access points to waterways

Only 5hrs from Winnipeg and 4hrs from Thunder Bay

Access to the US Midwest

Largely fisheries-based

Master Angler Program – unique to Northern Ontario, used as a marketing technique,

sustains fish as it is catch and release, costs approximately $15,000-$20,000/year to

maintain

Lack of development (beds on lake), therefore strong fish bases

Enough accommodation – hotels do well

Reserves up North bring in lots of business

For the most part, Town is welcoming of Aboriginals

February – Hockey Tournament

Summer – Blueberry Festival (10 days), Walleye Weekend Fishing Tournament

Annual Pond Hockey Tournament

Retail Excellent grocery store (Johnny‟s Supermarket – Independent grocer)

o Has a great selection – you feel like you are in the city

Coffee shop (Roy Lane Coffee Shop) brings a lot of people to town

Northwest Company

Lots of buildings and land available for downtown development

PJ‟s Gas Bar also brings a lot of people into town



Sioux Lookout also has a Beer Store and LCBO

The new Youth and Cultural Centre

Great beach right in town

Downtown area has lots of garbage cans, a flower basket program (sponsored by the

Town, Chamber and Hydro)

Sidewalks are fairly new and inter-locked

People shop locally

Niche type retail markets

Health Care and Social Services New hospital: major employer in town (employs 300), has a $30 million budget

o Serves local and northern communities

Excellent Health Care

State of the art health care facility

Hospital runs 24/7 including emergency services

Lots of doctors (20+), 2 surgeons

Specialty care available (ie. massage therapy, physiotherapy, chiropractor)

Tremendous demand for health services from the First Nations communities to the north

Medically-managed withdrawal unit

Hospital (both during construction and now that its operational)

Hospital has a hostel

New hospital is facilitating the attraction of health care professionals to the area

First Nations representation on the Board of Directors of the hospital

1.2 Key Weaknesses General

Hard to find qualified workers

Very high municipal taxes

The Town administration can sometimes be too tough, too big-city like and scare

development away with their hardline approach and rules

Heavy use of transient workers due to remote location

Remoteness

Prices are inflated

Limited selection and variety of products available

o Clothing is not readily available – need to go to Winnipeg/Thunder Bay

Attracting business is a problem

Youth who leave for post-secondary education do not return

Forestry sector just pulled out (town did have a dependency on the lumber industry)

Downtown is not a pleasant place to be

Downtown needs a face lift – it is looking old/run down



A lot of people hanging around with nothing to do (often peeing or spitting on the

sidewalk – can be very intimidating)

Needs more effort, work and co-operation to clean up the downtown

Lots of boarded up buildings

The downtown does not have a BIA

No theatres to accommodate live productions (there is a movie theatre) or places for

people to gather

The downtown area is not a place where people want to be – it needs to be more

pleasant

Huge split between wage rates (First Nations often are at or below the poverty line) –

stats can be deceiving

About ½ of the regional population are just surviving financially

Not a lot of discretionary spending

Last 18 months have gotten worse in terms of money coming into and circulating

throughout the town

A lot of businesses are struggling and have not yet made adjustments to their business

models

First Nations community does not feel as if they belong (separate social groups, and

they provide very little input into the Town)

Town Administration does nothing to help get the First Nations involved in the

community

Huge gap in the wage rates between government and private sectors

Residents are not supporting local business

A lot of online purchases happening (travel, books, etc.)

Small town so if someone has a bad experience at a business, this information will get

around the town very quickly

Lots of truck traffic coming through the town

Not sure if there is a strong link between the municipality and First Nations leadership

(not enough of a connection)

Tourism The Province does not support the North/West region as much as they do the Central

and South regions – they feel as if they are on their own

o Disconnected from the needs of Tourism in the area

Air transportation can be cost prohibitive

Tough to tap into airline carriers who travel to the Southern Ontario market

Sometimes run short of rooms when a major event in town

Fairs and festivals are maxed out due to volunteer fatigue

Coastguard does not maintain marker program (of obstacles) on lakes – deterrent to

Tourism because lake is unsafe

Waterfront property is expensive and under-developed



Retail Downtown looks very tired and needs to be cleaned/freshened up – need to brighten up

Front Street and make it more friendly (more greening, fresh paint, new signage, good

parking, etc.)

Chamber members are too afraid of competition and growth

Minimal selection in terms of clothing

Not everyone shops locally

The only grocery store is very expensive

People do travel to Dryden to shop

Retailers do not appreciate their customers and need to better understand customer

service (hours of operation, friendliness, how to treat your customer, etc.)

A lot of people are coming to Sioux Lookout to shop and want more options in terms of

selection – retailers are not providing selection

Industry Specific No large industrial or commercial tax base to draw revenue from so the tax burden is

placed on residential and small businesses

Sawmill closed down putting around 500-600 people out of work - it‟s been closed for

about 3 years

Not much shovel ready industrial land

Some land available around the airport with services, but nothing being done with it

Health Care and Social Services Hospital is reactive vs. proactive

The hospital is small, so it is a constant struggle to ensure they can provide necessary

services

Provincial funders do not always understand the situation with regards to providing

services in the north (new funding formulas do not work in the north)

Need to bridge the gap between provincial and federal government responsibilities

(currently leads to duplication/dropped balls)

Too many different providers of health care and social services in Sioux Lookout (difficult

to coordinate, too many players with fingers in the pot)

No full time optometrist

Lack of adequate housing/care for seniors

Cultural and Heritage Lacking things for the youth to do (Multicultural Centre has some programs, but not

enough)



1.3 Key Opportunities General/Community

Currently revamping downtown core but could be improved

Further diversify the local economy through information technology

Instil a vacant tax so that if properties or vacant buildings lie dormant for too long they

will be forced to pay additional taxes

Need a retail study to determine expansion and attraction opportunities

Need to focus on retaining and expanding local businesses instead of attracting new

ones

Attract more businesses (need to be careful not to displace existing businesses by

flooding the market)

o Need more retail businesses (ie. clothing/furniture)

Don‟t force others out of business

Conflict with the Town and licensing

Need to support Entrepreneurship more

Need a nice modern conference centre

Need to get First Nations representatives around the business table

Need some retraining of staff (motivation and customer service)

25,000 aboriginals (29 reserve communities) – there is access to funding - need to set

up more training programs and facilities for education (blue collar, trades,

apprenticeships, retraining, up grading skills)

More networking and collaboration business to business, business to government and

all with First Nations community

Build a closer working relationship between Council/ Town Administration and the

business community

Ensure education system is preparing the youth for future resource opportunities (ie.

Ring of Fire) and create employment opportunities – do not waste another generation

Tourism Most of the land surrounding Sioux Lookout is Crown land

Limited uses of lands surrounding Sioux Lookout

Listen to the Tourism industry – have a forum to receive their input – Municipality

currently has no contact with the Tourism industry (Municipality dreams up own ideas)

Need to promote events (ie. the Blueberry Festival in the summer) more to the Native

communities to the north

Enhance the tourism experience

Lots of potential to work with First Nations Community to develop and promote their

cultural experiences and traditions

Build off of Northern First Nations Hockey Tournament – which brings in all kinds of

business opportunities – could do a lot more to capitalize on business opportunities

Need to promote the town better (could always do more marketing)



Build more/expand fairs, festivals and special events – including sporting events and

school athletics

Promote fairs, festivals and special events

The Town leaders and administrators along with the business community need to

understand the importance and potential of fairs/festivals and special events

Develop the area in terms of cottages – could market as a cottage area for Thunder

Bay/Winnipeg

Retail Chamber needs to provide additional training courses on customer service skills and how

to expand product offerings (meet client‟s needs and expectations)

Partner with Chamber, Town Council and administration and individual owners to work

together to clean up, paint, change signs on Front Street – need to show that the

downtown cares

Heritage, Arts and Culture

Development of a museum

Health Care and Social Services Tons of resources – need to better coordinate/utilize

Move from reactive to proactive

Consolidate resources (reduce duplication), take advantage of synergies (plan/work

together)

Need to expand specialty hospital services such as eye doctor and physiotherapy

Think strategically in terms of the development of senior care for the future (ie. involve

the private sector)

Lobby the government with regards to the needs of Sioux Lookout in terms of providing

sufficient care to seniors

1.4 Threats or Constraints General/Community

Big Box stores coming in and putting other smaller independents out of business

Education – need to attract better/good teachers to the area

In terms of the environment, decisions regarding conservation are made in Toronto and

do not always take into consideration northern differences

Need to maintain the nature landscapes and the pristine wilderness (balance between

forestry and preservation)

Poor relationships with the First Nations community

Limited moose hunt (species in trouble) – takes away the economic benefits of the

moose hunt on the town

Attitude by Council and some special interest groups to stifle or limit growth of the

community



Taxes are seen as too high

Cost of transportation is very high

Movement of people is difficult and expensive

Air travel is very expensive

A lot of leakage to Dryden for shopping and entertainment

Dryden is only an hour away

Social unrest in the area (First Nations – majority are poor, young are getting frustrated,

need something to lash out at)

Need to continue to build the relationships with the First Nations communities to the

north (need a proactive and supportive municipal government and community

champions)

Tourism Federal regulations with regard to crossing the border – if an American citizen has a

DUI, they cannot come into Canada. This limits tourism as, if one member of the party

has a DUI, the entire group is lost

Lack of information

Lack of desire and interest from the community

Unwillingness from the Town to invest in tourism infrastructure (both hard and soft

services)

Health Care and Social Services

Dependent on public funds (future funding growth will be difficult to come by)



2 Directions for Development

2.1 Retail/Commercial/Downtown Of all of the sectors, this sector likely has the greatest immediate and short term potential for investment attraction. Sioux Lookout can build on its role as a regional services centre, as it currently serves as a service hub for northern communities in addition to the local population. Work on this target sector should begin with a retail study to settle conflicting opinions on the current state of retail in Sioux Lookout:

What square footage of retail and services will the current local population support (primary market)?

What size is the secondary market, and how much additional square footage is required to support the secondary market?

What is the current retail mix, quality, and adequacy (square footage) of retail and services that are available; determine any missing elements or gaps in the size, quality and mix, and recommend targets for attraction. What is the estimated leakage by category?

What are the physical constraints to retail/commercial development? Is there sufficient designated and serviced land in appropriate locations? Are developers/retailers motivated? What are the recommended retail uses for downtown and elsewhere?

The preparation of a retail study will provide direction to address any deficiencies, as well as how to develop the retail market. It will also provide some direction to downtown revitalization. The downtown is also in need of revitalization. In planning for new retail areas, careful consideration needs to be given to the types of commercial uses which should be permitted and are suitable in new areas, versus the types of commercial uses which should be permitted and are suitable for the downtown – setting up a complementary rather than competitive business environment. New retail development that responds to current consumer demands could further support and build the local economy of Sioux Lookout by drawing more visitors and retail dollars into the area (and drastically reducing current retail leakage). The economic relationship between new retail areas and their connectivity with downtown Sioux Lookout is critical. This will inevitably result in some evolution in the nature of downtown retail and services – and Sioux Lookout much like every other local economy, must either support change and evolution or face stagnation. A downtown revitalization initiative should also address:

Street, sidewalk and public space landscaping and entrance treatments to draw people into the downtown. Pay particular attention to façades that can be seen by train passengers;

Design guidelines for building façades, and possibly consider a theme that relates to the history of Sioux Lookout;

The nature and density of development to be encouraged through land use controls in the downtown (retail and services at grade, office and residential above grade, plus multi-unit residential development in close proximity to “main streets”);



Implementation tools, such as considering the designation of the downtown as a Community Improvement Plan area in the Official Plan;

Look for further opportunities to build Sioux Lookout‟s role as an health and social services centre for the area;

Health care could be further developed in Sioux Lookout, and prime targets to investigate to support the development of the health care sector include:

o “Age in place” as a specialization o Further growth and development of senior‟s apartments, and assisted living all in

one complex (or in close proximity to each other). This study could be completed as a Community Improvement Plan (CIP) for the downtown core – the aim of the CIP being to determine placement of potential retail space, design guidelines for building façade improvements and streetscaping as well as development incentives. The focus of both the retail and downtown studies should be to maximise the opportunity to stimulate and optimize the overall economic health and viability of Sioux Lookout, particularly its downtown. Also recommended is the development of better linkages with the First Nations communities (ie. seat on the Board of the Chamber of Commerce, or Town Advisory Committees) to get a better sense of their retail needs and develop more effective means of serving the regional population. A longer term objective would be to undertake a regional marketing, promotions and awareness campaign (partnership between the Province, Town and business community).

2.2 Arts/Culture/Heritage The arts/culture/heritage sector is in the early stages of development, and will require recognition of its importance to the development of the local economy, to tourism, and the local quality of life. McSweeney & Associates has recently completed a study for the Ministry of Culture that validates cultural development as an economic development strategy, using Prince Edward County as the case study. This sector will require significant local and municipal support. The following is recommended: • Ensure that Sioux Lookout is included in the Kenora District planned regional project to

develop a cultural asset mapping inventory; • Upon completion of the inventory, prepare a strategy for the support and development of

this sector, and its integration with the tourism sector. The strategy should have a strong focus on developing and integrating First Nations arts, culture and heritage, which could become a focal point of this sector in Sioux Lookout.



2.3 Tourism The nature of tourism in Northwestern Ontario is evolving, and according to research we have conducted, the target market for tourism in Northern Ontario has changed remarkably in a short period of time. Unfortunately, not all tourism operators either appreciate or want to accept that these changes are not temporary. Sioux Lookout has significant untapped tourism potential, but likely needs product development and refocusing on new tourism market opportunities. We therefore recommend the development of a tourism strategy, which specifically should address the following: • Compilation of a complete inventory of tourism assets, both hard and soft, and current

product offering;

• A market study to clearly communicate the tourism outlook and trends in tourism, how the

tourism market has shifted, the nature of current and potential travellers to Northern

Ontario, desired activities and experiences, potential markets, etc.;

• A strategy for making the shift to new target markets and adapting to new market trends,

creating new and diversified product development;

• A marketing plan and marketing collateral.

Without credible work in this area, it will continue to be difficult to adapt, to reach a consensus for a new focus, and to let go of the past.

2.4 Health and Social Services Sector This sector is strong since Sioux Lookout is a centre for the provision of these services to 29 First Nations communities. The economy of Sioux Lookout would be significantly different (most importantly, significantly smaller) if Sioux Lookout was not a hub for the provision of these services. While this study can only provide a superficial glance into this large and complex sector, the following suggestions for the further development of this sector would appear to have merit: • Public and political recognition of the very significant contribution of this sector to the local

economy;

• More ancillary health and social services could be provided;

• Further development of tele-medicine options for diagnosis and treatment;

• This largely institutional sector could likely be (relatively) easily expanded into areas of

education and training.



3 Statistical Overview of Sioux Lookout The following table provides a profile of the Municipality of Sioux Lookout using 2010 estimates of statistical data. These estimates are prepared based on 2006 Census data. Table 1: Statistical Overview of Sioux Lookout vs. Ontario, 20101

Topic Demographic Variable Sioux Lookout Ontario

Population

Total population 5,423 13,293,008

Projected population 2015 5,345 14,211,555

Projected population 2020 5,307 15,196,416

Labour Force

Total population 15 years and over 4,354 11,045,903

In the labour force2 3,443 7,458,212

Participation rate3 (%) 79.1 67.5

Employment rate4 (%) 76.7 63.5

Unemployment rate5 (%) 3.0 6.0

Income ($)

Average total per capita income (2009) ($) 43,761 42,841

Median total per capita income (2009) ($) 39,370 30,822

Average household income (2009) ($) 90,065 85,814

Median household income (2009) ($) 79,076 67,246

Households

Total number of private households 2,012 4,980,115

Average number of persons in private

households 2.65 2.6

Dwelling

Total number of occupied private dwellings 2,012 4,980,115

Average value of dwelling ($) 210,749 371,018

Source: McSweeney & Associates from Manifold Data Mining Inc. Superdemographics 2010.

1 The content of the report is derived from Manifold‟s proprietary postal code information. No confidential information about an

individual, household, organization or business has been obtained from Statistics Canada. 2 Labour force - Refers to persons who were either employed or unemployed. 3 Participation rate - Refers to the labour force expressed as a percentage of the population 15 years and over excluding institutional residents. 4 Employment rate - Refers to the number of persons employed expressed as a percentage of the total population 15 years and over, excluding institutional residents. 5 Unemployment rate - Refers to the unemployed expressed as a percentage of the labour force.



The following table provides an overview of statistical changes in Sioux Lookout between 2001 and 2006.

Table 2: Statistical Overview of 2001-2006 Changes for Sioux Lookout

Topic Demographic Variable Sioux Lookout Compared to Ontario (ON)

2001 – 2006 2001 2006

Population

Total Population 5,336 5,183 Decreased while increased in ON

Children & Youth (0-19) Decreased Segment % greater than ON

average

Youth Adult (20-44) Decreased Segment % greater than ON

average

Segments 45 and up Increased Segment % smaller than ON average

Jobs6 Percentage Change 2001-

2006 17.1%

Increased at a significantly

faster rate than ON

Labour

Force

Total population 15 years and

over 4,045 4,065 Increased slower than ON

In the labour force 2,870 3,190 Increased faster than ON

Participation rate (%) 71.0 78.5 Grew significantly faster than

ON

Employment rate (%) 68.4 75.3 Grew significantly faster than

ON

Unemployment rate (%) 3.8 4.2 Grew faster but significantly lower than ON

Income ($)

Average total per capita

income ($) 32,678 38,971

Increased at a faster rate than

ON

Median total per capita

income ($) 25,594 34,325

Increased significantly faster

than ON

Average household income ($)

65,238 79,374 Increased at a faster rate than ON

Median household income

($) 55,587 71,289

Increased at a faster rate than

ON

Households

Total number of private households

1,925 1,925 Stable while increased in ON

Average number of persons in private households

2.7 2.7 Stable at a slightly faster rate than ON

Dwelling

Value

Average value of dwelling

($) 151,399 184,898

Increased at a significantly

slower pace than ON Source: McSweeney & Associates from Statistics Canada 2001 and 2006 Census data.7

6 Throughout this report, the word “job” is used as a commonly accepted term to refer to the employed labour force declaring a usual place of employment within Canada (or Ontario or Sioux Lookout as the case may be). It excludes those working in their home, working outside of Canada, or not having a usual place of employment that they report to at the beginning of a work shift. 7 Census data 2001: Statistics Canada, 2001 Electronic Profile, 95F0495XCB01001-Ont, Profile for Canada, Provinces, Territories, Census Divisions and Census Subdivisions, 2001 Census. Census data 2006: Statistics Canada, 2006 Electronic Profile, 94-581-XCB2006001, Profile for Canada, Provinces, Territories, Census Divisions and Census Subdivisions, 2006 Census.



4 Demographic Analysis

Highlights

In 2010, the Municipality of Sioux Lookout had a younger population than Ontario.

Between 2000 and 2009, all average and median incomes (total, family, household) in Sioux Lookout rose, and are higher than those of Ontario. The largest segment of total income earners was the $60,000+ income level.

The percentage of Sioux Lookout residents who have a college, CEGEP or other non-university certificate or diploma is higher than the Provincial percentage in 2010.

The percentage of residents who studied Business, management and public administration is the largest compared to other fields of study, and is higher than in Ontario.

Residents in Sioux Lookout were less likely to have moved than Ontario residents; and a smaller percentage of movers are from outside of the country in comparison to Ontario.

Over 90% of residents in Sioux Lookout speak English only. Less than 10% of residents are bilingual (English and French).

The average value of dwellings in Sioux Lookout increased from $151,399 in 2001 to $210,749 in 2010. These values are lower than the provincial average.



4.1 Population and Age Structure Profile Table 3, derived from 2001 and 2006 Census data, illustrates the population change in Sioux Lookout from 1996 to 2006 in comparison to Ontario.

According to the census data, the population in Sioux Lookout decreased between 2001 and 2006, while it increased in Ontario.

Table 3: Population Change from 1996 to 2006, Sioux Lookout vs. Ontario

1996 2001 2006

Sioux Lookout Population Count 5,165 5,336 5,183

% Change from Previous Census 3.3 -2.9

Ontario Population Count 10,753,573 11,410,046 12,160,282

% Change from Previous Census 6.1 6.6 Source: McSweeney & Associates from Statistics Canada Census data 2001, 2006

Figure 1 and Table 10 in the Appendix represent the changing demographics of Sioux Lookout between 2001 and 2010. The following are some key observations:

The fastest growing age segments are between 50-64 years of age.

The 35-44 age segments declined sharply as a percentage of the total population.

The 0-14 age segments also declined as a percentage of the total population.

Figure 1: Percentage Population by Age, Sioux Lookout, 2001, 2006, and 2010

Source: McSweeney & Associates from Statistics Canada Census data 2001, 2006 and Manifold Data Mining Inc. Superdemographics 2010

0.0

2.0

4.0

6.0

8.0

10.0

12.0

Pe

rce

nta

ge

Age Group

Sioux Lookout 2001 %





Table 11 in the Appendix, and Figure 2 (below) indicate that in 2010:

The 45-49 age segments are the largest of all age segments in both Sioux Lookout and Ontario.

Sioux Lookout‟s population (as a percentage of the total population) aged 55+ years is significantly less than that of Ontario.

Sioux Lookout‟s population (as a percentage of the total population) aged less than 49 years is larger than that of Ontario.

Overall, Sioux Lookout‟s age profile indicates a younger population than that of Ontario.

Figure 2: Percentage Population by Age, Sioux Lookout vs. Ontario, 2010

Source: McSweeney & Associates from Manifold Data Mining Inc. Superdemographics 2010

0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

6.0

7.0

8.0

9.0

10.0

Pe

rce

nta

ge

Age Group


ON 2010 %



4.2 Sioux Lookout Incomes

Based upon Figures 3 to 6, as well as Tables 12 to 16 in the Appendix, the following observations8 can be made with respect to incomes:

All average and median incomes (total, family, household) in Sioux Lookout increased between 2000 and 2009.

The Sioux Lookout median total income and median household income rose more quickly than Ontario between 2001 and 2010. And it is now significantly higher than Ontario.

In 2009, Sioux Lookout had a higher percentage of residents with incomes over $45,000 than did Ontario.

With respect to total income changes from 2000 to 2009, the percentage of the population making more than $60,000 was the largest income segment and has been increasing since 2000.

Figure 3: Total Median & Average Income, Sioux Lookout vs. Ontario, 2000, 2005 and 2009

Source: McSweeney & Associates from Statistics Canada Census data 2001 (2000 incomes) and 2006 (2005 incomes) and Manifold Data Mining Inc. Superdemographics 2010 (2009 incomes)

8 Please note that Census data (2001 and 2006) is not exactly comparable to Superdemographics data (2009) estimates.

15,000

20,000

25,000

30,000

35,000

40,000

45,000

50,000

2000 2005 2009

Inco

me

s $

Year

Sioux Lookout Average total income

Sioux Lookout Median total income

Ontario Average total income

Ontario Median total income



Figure 4: Household Median & Average Income, Sioux Lookout & ON, 2000, 2005 and 2009

Source: McSweeney & Associates from Statistics Canada Census data 2001 (2000 incomes) and 2006 (2005 incomes) and Manifold Data Mining Inc. Superdemographics 2010 (2009 incomes)

Figure 5: Total Income, Sioux Lookout, 2000, 2005 and 2009

Source: McSweeney & Associates from Statistics Canada Census data 2001 (2000 incomes) and 2006 (2005 incomes) and Manifold Data Mining Inc. Superdemographics 2010 (2009 incomes).

30,000

40,000

50,000

60,000

70,000

80,000

90,000

100,000

2000 2005 2009

Inco

me

s $

Year

Sioux Lookout Average household income

Sioux Lookout Median household income

Ontario Average household income

Ontario Median household income

0.0

5.0

10.0

15.0

20.0

25.0

Pe

rce

nta

ge

Income levels






Figure 6: Total Income, Sioux Lookout vs. Ontario, 2009

Source: McSweeney & Associates from Statistics Canada Census data 2001 (2000 incomes) and 2006 (2005 incomes) and Manifold Data Mining Inc. Superdemographics 2010 (2009 incomes).

0.0

2.0

4.0

6.0

8.0

10.0

12.0

14.0

16.0

18.0

20.0

Pe

rce

nta

ge

Income Levels


ON 2009 %



4.3 Education Figures 7 and 8, and Tables 17 to 19 in the Appendix, outline the education levels obtained by Sioux Lookout‟s residents (aged 25-64) for 2001, 2006 and 2010 as compared to Ontario averages.9 The following figure provides a visual breakdown of the educational attainment levels of the Sioux Lookout population aged 25-64 in 2010. Definitions may be found in the footnotes. Figure 7: Education Attainment Breakdown for Sioux Lookout, 201010

Source: McSweeney & Associates from Manifold Data Mining Inc. Superdemographics 2010. *Population aged 25 to 64 in Sioux Lookout.

9 2001 Census data is not directly comparable to 2006 Census data. 10 'Highest certificate, diploma or degree' refers to the highest certificate, diploma or degree completed based on a hierarchy which is

generally related to the amount of time spent 'in-class.' For postsecondary completers, a university education is considered to be a higher level of schooling than a college education, while a college education is considered to be a higher level of education than in the trades. Although some trades requirements may take as long or longer to complete than a given college or university program, the majority of time is spent in on-the-job paid training and less time is spent in the classroom. 'High school certificate or equivalent' includes persons who have graduated from a secondary school or equivalent. Excludes persons with a postsecondary certificate, diploma or degree. Examples of postsecondary institutions include community colleges, institutes of technology, CEGEPs, private trade schools, private business colleges, schools of nursing and universities. 'College, CEGEP or other non-university certificate or diploma' replaces the category 'Other non-university certificate or diploma' used in previous censuses. This category includes accreditation by non-degree-granting institutions such as community colleges, CEGEPs, private business colleges and technical institutes.

Total population* (100%)

Certificate, diploma or

degree (79.6%)

High school certificate or equivalent (19.4%)

Apprentice ship or trades

certificate or diploma (10.5%)

College, CEGEP or other non-university

certificate or diploma (28.9%)

University certificate, diploma or

degree (20.9%)

University certificate or

diploma below bachelor level

(3.7%)

University certificate or

diploma (17.2%)

No certificate, diploma or

degree (20.4%)



Based on the following table, it can be concluded that:

The percentage of Sioux Lookout residents who have a college, CEGEP or other non-university certificate or diploma is higher than the Provincial percentage in 2010.

The percentage of Sioux Lookout residents who have a university certificate or diploma is lower than Ontario in 2010.

Figure 8: Education Attainment, Sioux Lookout vs. Ontario, 2010


0.0 20.0 40.0 60.0 80.0 100.0

No certificate, diploma or degree

Certificate, diploma or degree

High school certificate or equivalent

Apprenticeship or trades certificate or diploma

College, CEGEP or other non-university certificate ordiploma

University certificate, diploma or degree

University certificate or diploma below bachelor level

University certificate or degree

Percentage

Ed

uca

tio

n A

tta

inm

en

t Le

ve

l

2010 Sioux Lookout %

2010 Ontario %



4.4 Post-Secondary Field of Study

For 2010 post-secondary qualifications of persons aged 25-64, the following observation can be made from Figure 9 and Table 20 (in the Appendix)11:

The largest field of study was in the Business, management and public administration field.

The Architecture, engineering, and related technologies and was also a large field of study but not as large as in Ontario.

The Health, parks, recreation and fitness field of study was significantly higher than in Ontario.

Figure 9: Post-Secondary Field of Study, Sioux Lookout vs. Ontario, 201012


11 Changes in census variables do not allow a direct comparison of 2001 and 2006 post-secondary fields of study. 12 'Field of study' is defined as the main discipline or subject of learning. It is collected for the highest certificate, diploma or degree

above the high school or secondary school level.

0.0 5.0 10.0 15.0 20.0 25.0

Educational, recreational and counselling services

Fine and applied arts

Humanities and related fields

Social and behavioural sciences and law

Business, management and public administration

Physical and life sciences and technologies

Mathematics, computer and information sciences

Architecture, engineering, and related technologies

Agriculture, natural resources and conservation

Health, parks, recreation and fitness

Personal, protective and transportation services

Other fields of study

Percentage

Fie

ld o

f S

tud

y


Ontario 2010 %



4.5 Migration to Sioux Lookout

The mobility (refers to whether or not people lived in the same dwelling unit either one year or five years ago) of Sioux Lookout residents in 2010 can be seen in Figures 10 to 11, and Table 21 (in the Appendix). The following figure is a visual breakdown of the mobility status in Sioux Lookout compared to Ontario (2010 estimates data). Definitions may be found in the footnotes. Figure 10: Mobility Status Breakdown, Sioux Lookout vs. Ontario, 1 Year Ago 13

Source: McSweeney & Associates from Manifold Data Mining Inc. Superdemographics 2010 In 2010, the percentage of Sioux Lookout residents that had moved within the previous year (16.8% movers) was more than the percentage of “movers” in Ontario. People moving to Sioux Lookout were more likely to be relocating from other parts of Ontario as opposed to moving from outside of the province.

13 Non-movers are persons who were living at the same address as the one at which they resided one year earlier.

Movers are persons who were living at a different address from the one at which they resided one year earlier. Non-migrants are movers who were living at a different address, but in the same census subdivision (CSD) as the one they

lived in one year earlier. Migrants are movers who were residing in a different CSD one year earlier (internal migrants) or who were living outside

Canada one year earlier (external migrants). Intraprovincial migrants are movers who were living in a different CSD from the one at which they resided one year earlier,

in the same province. Interprovincial migrants are movers who were living in a different CSD from the one at which they resided one year earlier,

in a different province.



Figure 11: Mobility Status Breakdown, Sioux Lookout vs. Ontario, 5 Years Ago


Figure 11 compares the mobility of Sioux Lookout residents five years ago to that of Ontario. The percentage of Sioux Lookout residents that had moved within the past five years was still larger than the percentage of “movers” in Ontario. People moving to Sioux Lookout were still more likely to be relocating from other parts of Ontario as opposed to moving from outside of the province.



4.6 Knowledge of Official Languages

Figure 12 and Table 22 (in the Appendix) illustrate the official languages spoken in Sioux Lookout compared to the averages for Ontario in 2010:

Over 90% of residents in Sioux Lookout speak English only.

Less than 10% of residents are bilingual (English and French) in Sioux Lookout. This percentage is lower than in Ontario.

Figure 12: Percentage of Official Language, Sioux Lookout vs. Ontario, 2010

Source: McSweeney & Associates from Manifold Data Mining Inc. Superdemographics 2010

In addition to official languages, over 10% of residents in Sioux Lookout are knowledgeable in aboriginal languages:

Cree (1.9% of residents);

Ojibway (4.5% of residents);

Oji-Cree (3.1% of residents).

0.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0

70.0

80.0

90.0

100.0

English only French only English and French Neither English nor

French

Pe

rce

nta

ge

Official Languages


Ontario 2010 %



4.7 Dwelling Characteristics Table 4 and Figure 13 present dwelling characteristics in Sioux Lookout for 2001, 2006 and 201014 as compared to Ontario:

The total number of dwellings in Sioux Lookout increased from 1,925 in 2001 to 2,012 in 2010.

The percentages of owned and rented dwellings in Sioux Lookout were stable during the period between 2001 and 2010.

The average value of dwellings in Sioux Lookout increased from $151,399 in 2001 to $210,749 in 2010, and is lower than Ontario.

Table 4: Dwelling Characteristics, Sioux Lookout vs. Ontario, 2001, 2006 and 2010

2001 2006 2010

Sioux

Lookout Ontario

Sioux

Lookout Ontario

Sioux

Lookout Ontario

Total number of dwellings15 1,925 4,219,410 1,925 4,555,030 2,012 4,980,115

% of owned dwellings 70% 80% 70% 80% 70% 70%

% of rented dwellings 30% 20% 30% 20% 30% 30%

Average value of dwelling16 ($) 151,399 199,884 184,898 297,479 210,749 371,018


Figure 13: Average Dwelling Value, Sioux Lookout vs. ON, 2001, 2006 and 2010


14 2010 Manifold Data Mining Inc. Superdemographics 2010 (based on the self-reported values of the 2006 census adjusted for inflation). 15 Dwelling refers to a set of living quarters in which a person or a group of persons resides or could reside, and includes all forms of rental units as well as single family homes. 16 Dwelling value is not the same as average home value.

0

50,000

100,000

150,000

200,000

250,000

300,000

350,000

400,000

2001 2006 2010Ave

rag

e v

alu

e o

f d

we

llin

g (

$)

Year

Sioux Lookout ON



5 Labour Force Analysis

This section examines the characteristics of the labour force that resides in Sioux Lookout, regardless of work location.

Highlights

In 2010, the employment rate in Sioux Lookout (79.1%) was significantly higher than Ontario (63.5%); the unemployment rate was significantly lower than Ontario (3.0% vs. 6.0%).

Compared to Ontario, a higher percentage of the labour force in Sioux Lookout worked in the following industries:

o Agriculture, forestry, fishing and hunting o Transportation and warehousing o Health care and social assistance o Accommodation and food services o Educational services o Public administration.

The number of jobs in Sioux Lookout exceeded the number of labour force

participants, thus making Sioux Lookout a net „importer‟ of at least 140 employees from other communities (such as Dryden and Thunder Bay).

Almost all of Sioux Lookout‟s labour force worked in Sioux Lookout.

Sioux Lookout residents who commute to work outside of Sioux Lookout work in the following industries:

o Mining and oil and gas extraction o Utilities o Transportation and warehousing o Real estate and rental and leasing o Arts, entertainment and recreation o Other services (except public administration).



5.1 Key Indicators Figures 14 and 15, along with Table 23 in the Appendix, provide a comparison of key labour force indicators for Sioux Lookout and Ontario from 2001 to 2010 (2010 estimates). The following observations can be made17:

In 2001, 2006, and 2010, the labour force participation rates and employment rates were significantly higher in Sioux Lookout compared to the Provincial rate.

Since 2001, the unemployment rate in Sioux Lookout has decreased and is significantly lower than the Provincial rate.

Figure 14: Labour Force Indicators, Sioux Lookout vs. Ontario, 2001, 2006 and 2010


17 Participation rate %=labour force/total population 15+

Employment rate %= employed/total population 15+ Unemployment rate %=unemployed/labour force

40.0

45.0

50.0

55.0

60.0

65.0

70.0

75.0

80.0

85.0

2001 2006 2010

Pe

rce

nta

ge

Year

Sioux Lookout Participation rate

Sioux Lookout Employment rate

Ontario Participation rate

Ontario Employment rate



Figure 15: Unemployment Rate, Sioux Lookout vs. Ontario, 2001, 2006 and 2010


5.2 Labour Force by Industry

Figure 16 and Table 24 (in the Appendix) indicate that the experienced labour force in the Health care and social assistance industry had the largest percentage increase between 2001 and 2010, with an estimated increase of 140 jobs. Figure 16: Labour Force by Industry, Sioux Lookout, 2001-2006-2010


2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

6.0

7.0

8.0

2001 2006 2010

Pe

rce

nta

ge

Year

Sioux Lookout Unemployment rate

Ontario Unemployment rate

0.0

5.0

10.0

15.0

20.0

25.0

30.0

Agricu

lture

, fo

rest

ry, fish

ing

and h

unting

M

inin

g a

nd o

il and g

as

extr

act

ion U

tilit

ies

Const

ruct

ion

M

anufa

cturing

W

hole

sale

tra

de

R

eta

il tr

ade

Tra

nsp

ort

ation a

nd

ware

housi

ng

In

form

ation a

nd c

ultura

lin

dust

ries

Fin

ance

and insu

rance

R

eal est

ate

and r

enta

l and

leasi

ng

Pro

fess

ional, s

cientific

and

tech

nic

al se

rvic

es

M

anagem

ent

of

com

panie

sand e

nte

rprise

s

Adm

inis

trative a

nd s

upport

,w

ast

e m

anagem

ent

and…

Educa

tional se

rvic

es

H

ealth c

are

and s

oci

al

ass

ista

nce

Art

s, e

nte

rtain

ment

and

recr

eation

Acc

om

modation a

nd f

ood

serv

ices

O

ther

serv

ices

(exce

pt

public

adm

inis

tration)

Public

adm

inis

tration

Pe

rce

nta

ge

Industry






Figure 17: Labour Force by Industry, Sioux Lookout vs. Ontario, 2010

Source: McSweeney & Associates from Manifold Data Mining‟s Superdemographics 2010.

Figure 17 and Table 25 (in the Appendix) demonstrate the estimated percentage of the labour force by industry in 2010 relative to Ontario. In 2010, a larger percentage of Sioux Lookout‟s resident labour force worked in the following industries as compared to Ontario:

Agriculture, forestry, fishing and hunting Transportation and warehousing Health care and social assistance Accommodation and food services Educational services Public administration.

A smaller percentage of Sioux Lookout‟s resident labour force, as compared to Ontario, worked in:

Construction

Manufacturing Wholesale trade Finance and insurance Information and cultural industries Professional, scientific and technical services Admin. And support, waste management and remediation services Other services (except public administration).

0.0

5.0

10.0

15.0

20.0

25.0

Agricu

lture

, fo

rest

ry, fish

ing

and h

unting

M

inin

g a

nd o

il and g

as

extr

act

ion

U

tilit

ies

Const

ruct

ion

M

anufa

cturing

W

hole

sale

tra

de

Reta

il tr

ade

Tra

nsp

ort

ation a

nd

ware

housi

ng

In

form

ation a

nd c

ultura

lin

dust

ries

Fin

ance

and insu

rance

Real est

ate

and r

enta

l and

leasi

ng

Pro

fess

ional, s

cientific

and

tech

nic

al se

rvic

es

M

anagem

ent

of

com

panie

sand e

nte

rprise

s

Adm

in. and s

upport

, w

ast

em

gm

t and r

em

edia

tion s

erv

ices

Educa

tional se

rvic

es

H

ealth c

are

and s

oci

al

ass

ista

nce

Art

s, e

nte

rtain

ment

and

recr

eation

Acc

om

modation a

nd f

ood

serv

ices

O

ther

serv

ices

(exce

pt

public

adm

inis

tration)

Public

adm

inis

tration

Pe

rce

nta

ge

Industry

Sioux Lookout%

Ontario %



5.3 Labour Force by Occupation Figure 18 and Table 26 (in the Appendix) compare the estimated percentages of the labour force in Sioux Lookout and Ontario by occupation for 2010. In comparison to Ontario, Sioux Lookout has larger percentages of its labour force working in:

Trades, transport and equipment operators and related Social science, education, government service and religion Health.

In contrast, Sioux Lookout has smaller percentages of its labour force, as compared to Ontario, working in:

Management Unique to primary industry Business, finance and administration

Arts, culture, recreation and sport Unique to processing, manufacturing and utilities.

Figure 18: Labour Force by Occupation, Sioux Lookout vs. Ontario, 2010

Source: McSweeney & Associates Manifold Data Mining Inc. Superdemographics 2010.

0.0

5.0

10.0

15.0

20.0

25.0

Managem

ent

Busi

ness

, finance

and a

dm

inis

tration

Natu

ral and a

pplie

d

scie

nce

s and r

ela

ted

Health

Soci

al sc

ience

,

educa

tion, govern

ment

serv

ice a

nd r

elig

ion

Art

, cu

lture

,

recr

eation a

nd s

port

Sale

s and s

erv

ice

Tra

des,

tra

nsp

ort

and e

quip

ment

opera

tors

and r

ela

ted

Uniq

ue t

o p

rim

ary

indust

ry

Uniq

ue t

o

pro

cess

ing, m

anufa

cturing

and u

tilit

ies

Pe

rce

nta

ge

Occupations

Sioux Lookout %

Ontario %



5.4 Commuting Patterns

The following two tables provide information on persons reporting a “usual place of work other than in their home or outside of Canada”, and reveal the following regarding labour force commuting patterns with respect to Sioux Lookout in 200618:

Almost all the Sioux Lookout resident labour force worked in Sioux Lookout. The majority of the Sioux Lookout resident labour force who worked outside of Sioux

Lookout commuted to work in Thunder Bay. The largest number of non-resident labour force commuting to work in Sioux Lookout

travelled from Dryden and Thunder Bay.

0.9% of the workers living in Sioux Lookout had a usual place of work outside of Sioux Lookout.

10.5% of workers declaring a usual place of work in Sioux Lookout lived outside of Sioux Lookout.

Table 5: Where the Sioux Lookout Resident Labour Force Works, 2006

Place of Work Total Male Female

Sioux Lookout 2,655 1,280 1,375

Thunder Bay 25 10 15

Total Resident Labour Force 2,680 1,290 1,390

Total resident labour force with a usual place of work outside of Sioux Lookout 25 10 15

Percent of residents declaring a place of work outside of Sioux Lookout 0.9% 0.8% 1.1% Source: McSweeney & Associates, Statistic Canada, Commuting Flow Census Subdivisions: Sex (3) for the Employed Labour Force 15 Years and Over Having a Usual Place of Work of Census Subdivisions, Flows Greater than or Equal to 20, 2006 Census - 20% Sample Data. http://www12.statcan.gc.ca/census-recensement/2006/dp-pd/tbt/Rp-eng.cfm?TABID=1&LANG=E&A=R&APATH=3&DETAIL=0&DIM=0&FL=A&FREE=0&GC=0&GID=3560034&GK=0&GRP=1&O=D&PID=90656&PRID=0&PTYPE=88971,97154&S=1&SHOWALL=0&SUB=0&Temporal=2006&THEME=76&VID=0&VNAMEE=&VNAMEF=

Table 6: Place of Residence for Persons Working in Sioux Lookout, 2006

Place of Residence Total Male Female

Sioux Lookout 2,655 1,280 1,375

Dryden 105 80 25

Thunder Bay 80 40 45

Lac Seul 28 50 30 25

Kenora, Unorganized 50 35 15

Ignace 25 10 20

Total workforce working in Sioux Lookout 2,965 1,475 1,505

Total non-resident workforce commuting to work to Sioux Lookout 310 195 130

Percent of workers (non-residents) commuting to work to Sioux Lookout 10.5% 13.2% 8.6% Source: McSweeney & Associates, Statistic Canada, Commuting Flow Census Subdivisions: Sex (3) for the Employed Labour Force 15 Years and Over Having a Usual Place of Work of Census Subdivisions, Flows Greater than or Equal to 20, 2006 Census - 20% Sample Data. http://www12.statcan.gc.ca/census-recensement/2006/dp-pd/tbt/Rp-eng.cfm?TABID=1&LANG=E&A=W&APATH=3&DETAIL=0&DIM=0&FL=A&FREE=0&GC=0&GID=3560034&GK=0&GRP=1&O=D&PID=90656&PRID=0&PTYPE=88971,97154&S=1&SHOWALL=0&SUB=0&Temporal=2006&THEME=76&VID=0&VNAMEE=&VNAMEF=

18 Only 2006 year commuting data is available.



5.5 Net Import and Export of Labour Force The next table highlights the industry sectors in which there is a net “export” or “import” of labour. The net export/import calculation is simply the number of jobs in each Sioux Lookout industry minus the number of Sioux Lookout residents working in that particular industry. It is important to note that the export/import numbers indicated under-represent the actual numbers of employees, as this calculation assumes all of the employed resident labour force in that industry works in Sioux Lookout. In 2006, the size of the Sioux Lookout the number of jobs (3,190) slightly exceeds resident labour force (3,050) available in almost all industry sectors in Sioux Lookout, indicating that Sioux Lookout was a net “importer” of at least 140 employees. The size of the Sioux Lookout resident labour force exceeds the jobs available in the following industry sectors in Sioux Lookout: Mining and oil and gas extraction; Utilities, Transportation and warehousing, Real estate and rental and leasing, Arts, entertainment and recreation, and Other services (except public administration). Table 7: Net Import-Export of Labour Force for Sioux Lookout, 2006

Sectors (NAICS classification) Jobs in Sioux

Lookout

Employed Resident Labour Force Sioux

Lookout Net export (-) or

import (+) of labour

Total - Industry - North American Industry

Classification System 2002 3,190 3,050 140

Agriculture, forestry, fishing and hunting 105 85 20

Mining and oil and gas extraction 0 10 -10

Utilities 25 30 -5

Construction 45 40 5

Manufacturing 350 300 50

Wholesale trade 65 65 0

Retail trade 330 320 10

Transportation and warehousing 265 300 -35

Information and cultural industries 60 60 0

Finance and insurance 70 65 5

Real estate and rental and leasing 25 40 -15

Professional, scientific and technical services 90 90 0

Management of companies and enterprises 0 0 0

Administrative and support, waste

management and remediation services 40 40 0

Educational services 250 235 15

Health care and social assistance 780 750 30

Arts, entertainment and recreation 25 30 -5

Accommodation and food services 250 220 30

Other services (except public administration) 60 70 -10

Public administration 355 300 55 Source: McSweeney & Associates from Statistics Canada Census data 2006; Analysis support: Rural Development Division, Ontario Ministry of Agriculture, Food, and Rural Affairs.



6 Economic Base Analysis

This section uses the number of “jobs” in Sioux Lookout as input for the economic base analysis. More specifically, by “jobs” we are referring to the employed labour force declaring a usual place of work in Sioux Lookout (outside of the home), versus labour force by place of residence. The employed labour force therefore includes Sioux Lookout residents and non-residents.

Highlights

Employment in Sioux Lookout is highly concentrated in the following sectors: o Health care and social assistance o Agriculture, forestry, fishing and hunting o Transportation and warehousing o Public administration.

In Sioux Lookout, at the sub-sector level, the Forestry and logging sub-sector and Aboriginal public administration sub-sector dominate employment levels.

Sioux Lookout experienced the largest job increases (145 jobs) between 2001 and 2006 in the Health care and social assistance sector as well as in manufacturing (115 jobs) and public administration (70 jobs).



6.1 Employment Profile The Statistics Canada “North American Industry Classification System” (NAICS) of classifying industries is used for this report. The largest groupings or aggregations of industries categories are called Sectors, which are broken down into Sub-sectors, which are then further broken down into Industries. An example of this breakdown follows:

The following figure illustrates that there were 3,190 jobs in Sioux Lookout in 2006. With 780 jobs in 2006, the Health care and social assistance sector was the largest industry sector employer in Sioux Lookout. Figure 19: Number of Jobs by Sector for Sioux Lookout, 2006

Source: McSweeney & Associates from Statistics Canada Census data 2006; Analysis support: Rural Development Division, Ontario Ministry of Agriculture, Food, and Rural Affairs.

Industry Level

Sub-sector Level

Sector Level 31-33 Manufacturing industries

311 Food manufacturing

3111 Animal food manufacturing

105

0 25 45

350

65

330 265

60 70

25 90

0 40

250

780

25

250

60

355

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

Agricu

lture

, fo

rest

ry, fish

ing a

nd h

unting

Min

ing a

nd o

il and g

as

extr

act

ion

Utilit

ies

Const

ruct

ion

Manufa

cturing

Whole

sale

tra

de

Reta

il tr

ade

Tra

nsp

ort

ation a

nd w

are

housi

ng

Info

rmation a

nd c

ultura

l in

dust

ries

Fin

ance

and insu

rance

Real est

ate

and r

enta

l and leasi

ng

Pro

fess

ional, s

cientific

and t

ech

nic

al

serv

ices

Managem

ent

of

com

panie

s and e

nte

rprise

s

Adm

inis

trative/W

ast

e M

gm

t/Rem

edia

tion

Serv

ices

Educa

tional se

rvic

es

Health c

are

and s

oci

al ass

ista

nce

Art

s, e

nte

rtain

ment

and r

ecr

eation

Acc

om

modation a

nd f

ood s

erv

ices

Oth

er

serv

ices

(exce

pt

public

adm

inis

tration)

Public

adm

inis

tration

Nu

mb

er

of

Jo

bs

Jobs in Sioux Lookout by Industry Sector



The following figure presents the percentage of jobs in each industry sector for Sioux Lookout and Kenora District. Sioux Lookout, when compared to Kenora District, has a higher percentage of jobs in the following sectors:

Manufacturing

Transportation and warehousing

Health care and social assistance.

Figure 20: Jobs Distribution, Sioux Lookout vs. Kenora District, 2006


0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

Agricu

lture

, fo

rest

ry, fish

ing a

nd

hunting

Min

ing a

nd o

il and g

as

extr

act

ion

Const

ruct

ion

Manufa

cturing

Reta

il tr

ade

Tra

nsp

ort

ation a

nd w

are

housi

ng

Fin

ance

and insu

rance

Real est

ate

and r

enta

l and leasi

ng

Adm

inis

trative/W

ast

eM

gm

t/Rem

edia

tion S

erv

ices

Educa

tional se

rvic

es

Health c

are

and s

oci

al ass

ista

nce

Acc

om

modation a

nd f

ood s

erv

ices

Oth

er

serv

ices

(exce

pt

public

adm

inis

tration)

Public

adm

inis

tration

Pe

rce

nta

ge

Sectors

% Sioux Lookout

% Kenora



6.2 Location Quotient Analysis An economic base analysis is an analysis of how the local economy functions. It does not provide solutions to economic problems, but instead provides useful information required for decision-making about economic strategies. The economic base analysis helps determine which economic activities “bring money in”, and where money might be “leaking out”. While the actual flow of money in and out of Sioux Lookout would be the most accurate means of describing the economic base of the area, however data or statistics for this form of cash flow analysis are not available. As such, a surrogate for cash flow is required, and the most common substitute is employment which uses an economic base analysis tool called “Location Quotient Analysis”. This method compares the level of employment concentration (or specialization) in Sioux Lookout to the level of employment concentration in one or more benchmark areas. In other words, does Sioux Lookout have proportionately more or less employees in specific industries than the benchmark area? “Benchmarking” employment in Sioux Lookout to Ontario and Canada provides information on:

The extent to which Sioux Lookout is producing all of the goods or services required for consumption in Sioux Lookout (this potentially identifies opportunities to replace the imports with locally provided goods and services).

Whether the Sioux Lookout economy is producing goods or services in excess of quantities required for local consumption, indicating a high degree of development and specialization (or industry concentration) that results from the goods or services being consumed by non-residents.

The location quotient method is a “first cut” analysis that requires interpretation of the results, but it will point to the economic sectors that deserve a more thorough and in-depth analysis and “street-level” validation. A location quotient of between 0.75 and 1.25 generally indicates the local economy is self-sufficient in that industry. A 1.0 would indicate the exact same proportion of that industry‟s jobs to all Sioux Lookout jobs as that of the benchmark, in this case, Canada. A location quotient of less than 0.75 usually indicates a lack of self-sufficiency, requiring an importation of goods or services, as there is insufficient local employment to produce the required goods/services. A location quotient of greater than 1.25 usually indicates the industry has more local employment than is required to sustain the needs of Sioux Lookout, and is therefore exporting its goods or services, and is bringing money into the community.



6.2.1 Location Quotients Analysis by Sector

The next figure illustrates the location quotients for Sioux Lookout by employment sector compared to Ontario and Canada as benchmarks. Figure 21: Location Quotients by Employment Sectors, Sioux Lookout, 2006


Sector location quotients for Sioux Lookout vary when compared to Ontario and Canada, however most sectors are below the average. Employment in the Health care and social assistance sector is the most highly concentrated sector in Sioux Lookout. Other highly concentrated employment sectors in Sioux Lookout, compared to Ontario and Canada are:

Agriculture, forestry, fishing and hunting

Transportation and warehousing Public administration.

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

Agricu

lture

, fo

rest

ry, fish

ing a

nd h

unting

Min

ing a

nd o

il and g

as

extr

act

ion

Utilit

ies

Const

ruct

ion

Manufa

cturing

Whole

sale

tra

de

Reta

il tr

ade

Tra

nsp

ort

ation a

nd w

are

housi

ng

Info

rmation a

nd c

ultura

l in

dust

ries

Fin

ance

and insu

rance

Real est

ate

and r

enta

l and leasi

ng

Pro

fess

ional, s

cientific

and t

ech

nic

al

serv

ices

Managem

ent

of

com

panie

s and

ente

rprise

s

Adm

inis

trative/W

ast

e M

gm

t/Rem

edia

tion

Serv

ices

Educa

tional se

rvic

es

Health c

are

and s

oci

al ass

ista

nce

Art

s, e

nte

rtain

ment

and r

ecr

eation

Acc

om

modation a

nd f

ood s

erv

ices

Oth

er

serv

ices

(exce

pt

public

adm

inis

tration)

Public

adm

inis

tration

Lo

ca

tio

n Q

uo

tie

nts

Sector

Sioux Lookout LQ Ontario

Sioux Lookout LQ Canada

Normal Range



6.2.2 Dominant Sub-Sectors

The following figure illustrates the sub-sectors that have a significant number of jobs (percentage of jobs exceeding 0.5%) and a significant concentration in Sioux Lookout (location quotient exceeding 1.5 vs. Canada). Figure 22: Employment Sub-sectors with High Location Quotients, Sioux Lookout, 2006

Source: McSweeney & Associates from Statistics Canada Census data 2006; Analysis support: Rural Development Division, Ontario Ministry of Agriculture, Food, and Rural Affairs

In terms of jobs at the sub-sector level, the Forestry and logging sub-sector (80 jobs) and Aboriginal public administration sub-sector (80 jobs) dominate employment levels. Other sub-sectors with high concentrations compared to Ontario and Canada are as follows:

Support activities for agriculture and forestry (20 jobs) Wood product manufacturing (325 jobs) Air transportation (140 jobs) Rail transportation (45 jobs).

7.8

11.6

7.1

11.7 11.9

6.6

0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

6.0

Fore

stry

and loggin

g

Support

act

ivitie

s fo

r agricu

lture

and f

ore

stry

Wood p

roduct

manufa

cturing

Build

ing m

ate

rial and g

ard

en

equip

ment

and s

upplie

s deale

rs

Health a

nd p

ers

onal ca

re s

tore

s

Air t

ransp

ort

ation

Rail

transp

ort

ation

Bro

adca

stin

g (

exce

pt

Inte

rnet)

Am

bula

tory

health c

are

serv

ices

Hosp

itals

Soci

al ass

ista

nce

Acc

om

modation s

erv

ices

Pro

vin

cial and t

err

itorial public

adm

inis

tration

Aborigin

al public

adm

inis

tration

Lo

ca

tio

n Q

ue

tie

nts

Sub-Sector

Sioux Lookout LQ Ontario

Sioux Lookout LQ Canada

Normal Range

33.8

20.7 14.2

16.5 33.8



6.2.3 Location Quotients Analysis by Industry Level

The figure below demonstrates the employment figures by industries that have a significant number of jobs (percentage of jobs exceeding 1.5%) and a significant concentration in Sioux Lookout (location quotient exceeding 1.5 vs. Canada). (LQ concentration indicated in boxes) Figure 23: Sioux Lookout Employment Industries with High Location Quotients, 2006

Source: McSweeney & Associates from Statistics Canada Census data 2006; Analysis support: Rural Development Division, Ontario Ministry of Agriculture, Food, and Rural Affairs In terms of employment at the industry level, the following industries have high concentrations:

Logging Sawmills and wood preservation Scheduled air transportation Non-schedule air transportation Individual and family services Aboriginal public administration.

7.4

8.8

9.7

0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

6.0

7.0

Loggin

g

Saw

mill

s and w

ood p

rese

rvation

Build

ing m

ate

rial and s

upplie

s deale

rs

Health a

nd p

ers

onal ca

re s

tore

s

Sch

edule

d a

ir t

ransp

ort

ation

Non-s

chedule

d a

ir t

ransp

ort

ation

Ele

menta

ry a

nd s

eco

ndary

sch

ools

Out-

patient

care

centr

es

Hosp

itals

(6221 t

o 6

223)

Indiv

idual and f

am

ily s

erv

ices

Tra

velle

r acc

om

modation

Pro

vin

cial and t

err

itorial public

adm

inis

tration (

9121 t

o 9

129)

Aborigin

al public

adm

inis

tration

Lo

ca

tio

n Q

ue

tie

nts

Industry

Sioux Lookout LQ Ontario Sioux Lookout LQ Canada

25.9

12.0

33.8

14.3

33.1

76.0 37.7 53.2

Normal Range

9.8



6.2.4 Location Quotients Compared to Benchmarks

The next figure presents the location quotients by employment sectors for Sioux Lookout in comparison to Kenora District, Ontario and Canada as benchmarks. This analysis compares the employment structure of Sioux Lookout to the employment structure of Kenora, Ontario and Canada. This analysis points out any particular employment concentrations of Sioux Lookout compared to Kenora District that might not be evident when compared to the Ontario or Canadian economies. Figure 24: Location Quotients Compared to Kenora District, Ontario, Canada, by Sectors, 2006


In comparison to Kenora (as a benchmark area), employment in most sectors is below the normal range. Employment in the Health care and social assistance sector is the most highly concentrated in Sioux Lookout compared to Kenora. Other higher concentrations in comparison to Kenora include:

Agriculture, forestry, fishing and hunting

Transportation and warehousing

Public Administration.

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

Agricu

lture

, fo

rest

ry, fish

ing a

nd

hunting

Min

ing a

nd o

il and g

as

extr

act

ion

Const

ruct

ion

Manufa

cturing

Reta

il tr

ade

Tra

nsp

ort

ation a

nd w

are

housi

ng

Fin

ance

and insu

rance

Real est

ate

and r

enta

l and leasi

ng

Adm

inis

trative/W

ast

eM

gm

t/Rem

edia

tion S

erv

ices

Educa

tional se

rvic

es

Health c

are

and s

oci

al ass

ista

nce

Acc

om

modation a

nd f

ood s

erv

ices

Oth

er

serv

ices

(exce

pt

public

adm

inis

tration)

Public

adm

inis

tration

Lo

ca

tio

n Q

uo

tie

nts

Sector

Sioux Lookout LQ KenoraSioux Lookout LQ OntarioSioux Lookout LQ Canada

Normal Range



An examination of the comparison of Sioux Lookout‟s employment structure to that of Kenora District at the more detailed level, or sub-sector level, follows. The following table illustrates the sub-sectors that have a significant number of jobs (percentage of jobs exceeding 0.5%) and also having a significant concentration in Sioux Lookout and Kenora District compared to Canada as the benchmark (location quotient exceeding 1.5 to Canada). In the Sioux Lookout column, sub-sector concentrations that are not found in Kenora District are in bold. In other words, the concentration is at least somewhat unique in Sioux Lookout when compared to Kenora District. Table 8: Employment Sub-sectors with High LQ, Sioux Lookout vs. Kenora District, 2006

Sioux Lookout Kenora District

Forestry and logging

Support activities for agriculture and

forestry

Wood product manufacturing

Building material and garden

equipment and supplies dealers

Health and personal care stores

Air transportation

Rail transportation

Broadcasting (except Internet)

Ambulatory health care services

Hospitals

Social assistance

Accommodation services

Provincial and territorial public

administration

Aboriginal public administration

Wood product manufacturing

Air transportation

Rail transportation

Social assistance


Compared to Kenora, Sioux Lookout has higher concentrations in the following dominated sub-sectors (bold in the table):

Forestry and logging

Support activities for agriculture and forestry Building material and garden equipment and supplies dealers Health and personal care stores Broadcasting (except Internet) Ambulatory health care services Hospitals Accommodation services Provincial and territorial public administration Aboriginal public administration.



6.3 Shift-Share Analysis Shift-share analysis compares local employment growth/decline of Sioux Lookout jobs by industry to the employment growth/decline of that industry within Canada, as well as the job growth overall for Canada. More specifically, this analytical tool examines the job growth/decline by attributing growth, stability, or decline in particular industries over time to three distinct forces:

Canadian economic growth: regional job growth/decline that is attributable to growth, stability, or decline of the entire Canadian economy.

Industry growth: regional job growth/decline that is attributable to the growth, stability, or decline of that particular economic activity in the Canadian economy (with the economic growth component removed).

Regional economic growth: regional job growth/decline that is attributable to the regional economy because it is growing/declining more or less quickly than jobs in the larger economy (with the Canadian economic and industry growth components removed).

This tool, when correctly interpreted, provides greater descriptive power than the location quotient method. It has been applied to all NAICS Industry Sectors using place of work statistics. Shift-share analysis allows examination of changes through time (trends) versus the static snapshot of location quotients. To begin, the change in absolute job numbers between 2001 and 2006 by sector will be examined. The following chart illustrates changes in job numbers by sector in Sioux Lookout between 2001 and 2006. Figure 25: Sioux Lookout Job Change by Sector, 2001-2006

Source: McSweeney & Associates from Statistics Canada Census data 2001, 2006; Analysis support: Rural Development Division, Ontario Ministry of Agriculture, Food, and Rural Affairs.

80

0 25

235

300

295

35

1 6

0

210

635

280

55

285

105

0 4

5

350

330

265

70

25

40

250

780

250

60

355

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

Agricu

lture

, fo

rest

ry, fish

ing a

nd

hunting

Min

ing a

nd o

il and g

as

extr

act

ion

Const

ruct

ion

Manufa

cturing

Reta

il tr

ade

Tra

nsp

ort

ation a

nd w

are

housi

ng

Fin

ance

and insu

rance

Real est

ate

and r

enta

l and leasi

ng

Adm

inis

trative/W

ast

eM

gm

t/Rem

edia

tion S

erv

ices

Educa

tional se

rvic

es

Health c

are

and s

oci

al ass

ista

nce

Acc

om

modation a

nd f

ood s

erv

ices

Oth

er

serv

ices

(exce

pt

public

adm

inis

tration)

Public

adm

inis

tration

Nu

mb

er

of

Jo

bs

Sector

Jobs in 2001 Jobs in 2006



The above figure points out that the largest increase in jobs between 2001 and 2006 was in the Health care and social assistance sector, which increased from 635 to 780 jobs. The largest decline in jobs was in the Accommodation and food services sector, which decreased from 280 in 2001 to 250 in 2006. Table 9: Shift Share Analysis for Sioux Lookout Jobs by Sector, 2001-2006

Sectors (NAICS classification) Growth / Decline

% Growth / Decline

Canada % Growth / Decline

National Economic

Effect

Industry Growth Effect

Regional / Local Effect

Agriculture, forestry, fishing and hunting 25 31.25% -2.44% 7 -9 27

Mining and oil and gas extraction 0 n/a 39.8% 0 0 n/a

Construction 20 80.0% 22.0% 2 3 14

Manufacturing 115 48.9% -8.1% 20 -39 134

Retail trade 30 10.0% 10.9% 26 7 -3

Transportation and warehousing -30 -10.2% 5.8% 25 -8 -47

Finance and insurance 35 100.0% 8.4% 3 0 32

Real estate and rental and leasing 24 2400.0% 15.2% 0 0 24

Administrative/Waste Mgmt/Remediation Services -20 -33.3% 21.4% 5 8 -33

Educational services 40 19.0% 12.5% 18 8 14

Health care and social assistance 145 22.8% 14.6% 54 39 52

Accommodation and food services -30 -10.7% 8.5% 24 0 -54

Other services (except public administration) 5 9.1% 8.7% 5 0 0

Public administration 70 24.6% 8.2% 24 -1 47 Source: McSweeney & Associates from Statistics Canada Census data 2001, 2006; Analysis support: Rural Development Division, Ontario Ministry of Agriculture, Food, and Rural Affairs

The shift-share analysis table above explains 2001-2006 job growth in Sioux Lookout for each industry sector by attributing absolute changes in job numbers to national, industry and regional growth effects. An example of how to interpret the table follows:

The Health care and social assistance sector experienced the largest increase of 145 jobs between 2001 and 2006. This increase may be attributed to the following:

o Overall job growth in the national economy would have resulted in the growth of 54 jobs;

o Jobs in the Health care and social assistance industry in Canada increased during this period as well, therefore job increases (39) can be contributed to the industry‟s overall positive growth;

o The Health care and social assistance job increase in Sioux Lookout was 145, of which 54 can be attributed to the national economic growth and 39 attributed to the growth in the Health care and social assistance industry therefore the local effect was another 52 jobs..

With a loss of 30 jobs between 2001 and 2006, the Accommodation and food services sector experienced the largest decrease between 2001 and 2006. This loss may be attributed as follows:



o Overall job growth in the national economy would have resulted in a growth of 24 Accommodation and food services jobs;

o Jobs in the Accommodation and food services industry in Canada had no change; o There were more jobs lost in Sioux Lookout (-30) than can be attributed to the

growth in the national economy (24 jobs). Therefore, Sioux Lookout suffered a job loss (-54) in excess of what can be attributed to national growth.

The following figure graphically depicts the preceding table for Sioux Lookout:

Figure 26: Employment Shift-Share Analysis by Sector, Sioux Lookout, 2001-2006

Source: McSweeney & Associates from Statistics Canada Census data 2001, 2006; Analysis support: Rural Development Division, Ontario Ministry of Agriculture, Food, and Rural Affairs

The shift-share analysis reveals the following:

The following sectors were growing at a more rapid rate than can be explained by national and industry growths combined, and were an area of strength between 2001 and 2006.

o The Real estate and rental and leasing o Construction o Manufacturing o Finance and insurance o Public administration

Employment in the following sectors in Sioux Lookout suffered local weakness after considering both national and industry growth:

o Administrative/Waste management/Remediation services

Ag

ricu

ltu

re, fo

restr

y, fi

sh

ing

an

d

hu

nti

ng

Min

ing

an

d o

il a

nd

ga

s e

xtr

acti

on

Co

nstr

ucti

on

Ma

nu

factu

rin

g

Re

tail

tra

de

Tra

nsp

ort

ati

on

an

d w

are

ho

usin

g

Fin

an

ce

an

d in

su

ran

ce

Re

al e

sta

te a

nd

re

nta

l a

nd

le

asin

g

Ad

min

istr

ati

ve

/W

aste

M

gm

t/R

em

ed

iati

on

Se

rvic

es

Ed

uca

tio

na

l se

rvic

es

He

alt

h c

are

an

d s

ocia

l a

ssis

tan

ce

Acco

mm

od

ati

on

an

d f

oo

d s

erv

ice

s

Oth

er

se

rvic

es (

ex

ce

pt

pu

bli

c

ad

min

istr

ati

on

)

Pu

bli

c a

dm

inis

tra

tio

n

-80%

-60%

-40%

-20%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Growth / Decline attributable to Local Economic Growth

Growth / Decline attributable to Industry Growth

Growth / Decline attributable to National Economic Growth



o Accommodation and food services o Transportation and warehousing.



7 Employer Structure Analysis

Business structure analysis used Community Business Profile Data (2003 – 2007) from the Ontario Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs, Rural Development Division, as well as Business Pattern Data (June 2003 - June 2008) from Statistics Canada.

7.1 Business Sector Analysis

7.1.1 Growth in Business Numbers

Table 27 (in the Appendix) indicates the number of businesses in each industry from 2003 to 2007. It is important to note that in order for a business to be included in the Canadian Business Register, a business must meet at least one of the following three criteria:

1. Have an employee workforce for which they submit payroll remittances to Canada Revenue Agency (CRA); or

2. Have a minimum of $30,000 in annual sales revenue; or

3. Are incorporated under a federal or provincial act and have filed a federal corporate income tax return within the past three years.

Businesses that are not registered are not included in this section‟s data, the number of which can be significant if they are small businesses.

Highlights

Sioux Lookout‟s local businesses grew strongly from 2003 to 2007 in the following sectors:

o Real estate and rental and leasing o Management of companies and enterprises.

Between 2003 and 2007, the top two sectors with the highest concentration of businesses in Sioux Lookout were Construction and Retail Trade.

From 2003 to 2007, there are three sectors (Utilities sector, Accommodation and food services sector, and Public Administration sector) that have a higher per capita number of businesses compared to the provincial average. All sectors in Sioux Lookout suffered decreases of concentration per capita from 2003 to 2007.

In 2008, the largest number of employers in Sioux Lookout was in the Accommodation Services sub-sector. At the industry level, the largest number of employers was in the RV (Recreational Vehicle) Parks and Recreational Camps industry.



Based on Table 27 (in the Appendix), the following are some key observations:

Overall, more than half the sectors experienced growth in the number of local businesses from 2003 to 2007.

The sectors that had strong growth in the number of local businesses from 2003 to 2007 were:

o Real estate and rental and leasing

o Management of companies and enterprises.

The accommodation sector experienced the largest decline in the number of local businesses between 2003 and 2007.

7.1.2 Growth in Business Concentrations

Table 28 (in the Appendix) indicates the percentage of businesses by sector from 2003 to 2007. The top two sectors with the highest concentration of businesses in Sioux Lookout were:

Construction (increased from 2003 to 2007) Retail Trade (decreased from 2003 to 2007).

7.1.3 Growth in Business Concentrations per Capita

Concentration per capita is the ratio of local businesses per capita to provincial businesses per capita, and indicates the relative concentration or specialization of businesses in different sectors in the municipality. Any value higher than 1.0 indicates that the local economy has a higher per capita number of businesses than the provincial ratio. In Table 29 in the Appendix, we observe that from 2003 to 2007 there are three sectors (Utilities sector, Accommodation and food services sector, and Public Administration sector) that have a higher per capita number of businesses compared to the provincial average. All sectors in Sioux Lookout suffered decreases of concentration per capita from 2003 to 2007.

7.1.4 Growth in Business Concentrations by Sector

Concentration by sector is a ratio indicating the relative specialization of businesses in different industry sectors across a municipality. Values greater than 1.0 indicate that the local concentration of businesses in a sector, relative to other sectors in Sioux Lookout, is higher than the provincial average, indicating a relative local specialization in that sector. As identified in Table 30 in the Appendix, the following businesses had a higher than average concentration in Sioux Lookout:

Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing and Hunting (increased) Mining and oil and gas extraction (increased) Utilities (decreased) Construction (increased) Retail trade (increased) Transportation and Warehousing (decreased) Health care and social assistance (increased) Accommodation and food services (increased) Other services (except public administration) (increased)

Public Administration (increased).



7.2 Business Pattern Analysis As an indicator of employer structure, business pattern data for Sioux Lookout was examined up until June 2008, when the last available municipal level data was collected. Business pattern data is available for both sub-sector and industry levels. Tables 31 and 32 demonstrate Sioux Lookout‟s top 15 sub-sectors and industries by total number of employers and by employee size range in June 200819.

In 2008, the largest number of employers in Sioux Lookout was in the Accommodation Services sub-sector. At the industry level, the largest number of employers was in the RV (Recreational Vehicle) Parks and Recreational Camps industry.

Table 33 indicates the percentage change in total number of employers between June 2003 and June 2008. The following observations can be made:

The total number of employers in Sioux Lookout decreased (9%) over the two year period, while Ontario experienced a 13.0% increase.

Sioux Lookout experienced significant increases in the number of employers in the Real Estate and Rental and Leasing sector.

At the sub-sector level, growth occurred in the number of businesses in: o Accommodation Services o Specialty Trade Contractors o Real Estate o Securities, Commodity Contracts, and Other Financial Investment and Related

Activities o Management of Companies and Enterprises o Air Transportation o Social Assistance.

At the industry level, the most significant increases in the number of businesses were in the following industries:

o Lessors of Real Estate o Other Financial Investment Activities o Management of Companies and Enterprises o Individual and Family Services.

Considerable decreases in the number of businesses occurred in: o Logging o Residential Construction o Full-Service Restaurants.

19 June 2008 Canadian Business Pattern data is the latest data for CSD level, after this edition all CSD level data for Canadian Business Pattern date are no longer available.



8 Economic Development Trends Analysis

8.1 Site Selection Factors In 2010, the 25th Annual Corporate Survey [8] was conducted to rate site selection factors and the impact these factors have on planning decisions.20 Highlighted points of the survey are as follows:

Highway accessibility and Labour costs are consistently the two most important site selection factors.

Occupancy and construction costs is the fourth-place factor, jumping from seventh place in 2009 and receiving a combined 89.8% importance rating.

Three related tax factors made the 2010 Corporate Survey respondents‟ “top10” – tax exemptions, state and local incentives and corporate tax rate.

Availability of skilled labour is always of great importance as a site selector factor. Interestingly, availability of unskilled labour, which is ranked in the 23rd spot for 2010, showed the second largest drop in importance among all the site selection factors.

Inbound/outbound shipping costs is ranked in 8th position in 2010. Energy availability and costs is ranked 9th in 2010, from 4th in 2009. Environmental regulations moved up five spots in the ranking, from 17th in 2009 to 12th

in 2010.

Rounding out the top 10 site selection factors is availability of buildings, which received a combined 81% importance rating from the 2010 survey.

Availability of advanced ICT services factor showed the largest decrease in its importance rating.

In 2010, low crime rate, which is historically ranked as the primary quality-of-life concern as borne out by the survey‟s 25-year record, received an 84.6% importance rating.

20 For more information about the survey please go to : http://www.areadevelopment-digital.com/CorporateConsultsSurvey/24thAnnualCorporateSurvey#pg20



The following two figures provide more detailed results of the 2010 Corporate Survey. Figure 27: Site Selection Factors

Source: The 25th Annual Corporate Survey & 7th Annual Consultants Survey, 2010



Figure 28: Site Selection Factors – Combined Rating* of 2010 Factors

Source: The 25th Annual Corporate Survey & 7th Annual Consultants Survey, 2009



8.2 Economic Forecast21

Table 34 in the Appendix provides the major economic indicators outlook for Canada and Ontario. The following forecast can be observed:

Canada

Canada weathered the financial and economic crisis better than most industrialized countries. [9]

In 2011, Canadian GDP has a positive forecasted outlook from all banks, especially RBC, with a growth range of 2.2% to 3.2%. [10]

Employment has a solid job market performance in 2010. Job creation has been focused on part-time positions, lower-paying industries, and the public and self-employed sectors. [9] The unemployment rate has an outlook of a range between 7.5% to 7.6% in 2011 and 7.2% in 2012.

250,000 net new jobs are expected to improve gradually in 2011 with employers continuing to meet moderate demand through increased productivity, rather than new hires. [9]

Relatively high unemployment rates and moderating wage gains will continue to tame inflation pressures over the next two years. The Consumer Price Index is forecasted to be 2.1 to 2.3 in 2011, and 1.9 to 2.0 in 2012.

The interest rate is expected to remain steady at 2% in 2011. [10]

Ontario The pace of Ontario‟s economic growth is moderating after a strong manufacturing lead

rebound in early 2010. [9] Ontario‟s GDP growth rate is estimated at 2.4% to 3.1% in 2011 and 2.3% to 3.1% in 2012.

The service sector will anchor most employment gains, with private-sector service growth counterbalancing cautious hiring in manufacturing and the public sector. [9] Employment growth is projected to be between 1.1% to 1.9% in 2011 and 1.2% to 2.1% in 2012.

Ontario‟s housing starts are estimated to decline 20.9% in 2011 and to grow 16.0% in 2012.[13] The completion of infrastructure projects accounted for nearly one-fifth of the growth in real GDP, and will cause some drag, although it is expected to be more than offset by stronger non-residential investment by business. [9]

Industrial Outlook Tables 35 to 39 in the Appendix provide the Industrial Outlook for Canada and Ontario. The following forecast can be observed:

In Quarter 1 of 2011, Ontario employers report cautiously for a Net Employment Outlook of +3% for all industries. The Finance, Insurance & Real Estate sector and Transportation & Public Utilities sector expect relatively high net employment with 10% and 16% respectively. The net employment outlook in the Mining and Construction sectors is forecasted to be significantly weaker with -12% and -16% respectively in 2011. [4]

21 All references in the [] for this section are at the end of Appendix.



Canada‟s goods-producing sectors should outperform the service-producing sectors, as well as the national economy, in 2010 and 2011. Scotiabank expected the output growth in the goods-producing sectors to average 5.3% in 2010 and 4.9% in 2011. Much of the anticipated rebound in production reflects the cyclical replenishing of depleted inventories, and the strengthening of the primary sectors that are benefiting from the increasing worldwide demand for energy, mineral, agricultural, and increasingly, forestry products. [5]

A significant recovery in commodity prices will dominate the outlook for ores, metals and industrial materials this year, while the weaker-than-expected growth in the US, particularly in the residential and commercial construction sectors, poses a downside risk to the forecast. [7]

The oil and gas development sector has increased the most due to the mega-projects largely concentrated in western Canada. [5] A significant jump in prices for both oil and gas products will be the main driver of growth in energy exports in 2010. [7] Mineral exploration and production is on the rise in response to the increased demand and higher prices for gold, iron ore, copper, zinc and coal. [5]

The Manufacturing sector is poised for the greatest gain [6] – the sector is forecast to advance a robust 6.6% in 2010 before moderating to 3.6% in 2011. [5]

Canada‟s services exports are recovering from a modest decline in 2009 and are posting more tepid growth rates in 2011 and 2012. [7] Output in the large and diverse service sector is expected to increase an average of 3.0% in 2010, and post a lower 2.2% average advance in 2011, [6] while public services will slow significantly. [5] Momentum has slowed for service sector employment in Ontario after rebounding strongly in 2009.The professional and technical services and financial services industry should be growth leaders in 2011. [12]

Canadian agri-food exports will rebound in 2011. Lowered export volumes are driven mainly by supply-side constraints, particularly in the area of grains and oilseeds because of extreme wet weather conditions in Alberta, Manitoba and Saskatchewan[7]

The price jump seen earlier in the year for forestry products will be short-lived, and conditions in the sector will soften in 2011 and 2012. [7]



Appendix A: Data Tables Table 10: Percentage Population by Age, Sioux Lookout, 2001, 2006 and 2010

Sioux Lookout

2001 %

Sioux Lookout

2006 %

Sioux Lookout

2010 %

Total population by sex and age groups 5,335 5,180 5,423

Population age 0-4 7.2 6.8 6.6

















Population age 85+ 0.7 1.0 1.5 Source: McSweeney & Associates from Statistics Canada Census data 2001, 2006 and Manifold Data Mining Inc. Superdemographics 2010



Table 11: Percentage Population by Age, Sioux Lookout vs. Ontario, 2010

Sioux Lookout Sioux Lookout % Ontario %

Total population 5,423 13,293,008

Population age 0-4 358 6.6 5.5

















Population age 85+ 80 1.5 1.8 Source: McSweeney & Associates from Manifold Data Mining Inc. Superdemographics 2010



Table 12: Income Levels with % Change, Sioux Lookout vs. Ontario, 2000, 2005 and 2009

Sioux Lookout

2000 Ontario

2000

Sioux Lookout

2005 Ontario

2005

Sioux Lookout

2009 Ontario

2009

Total income of population 15 years and over 4,045 9,048,040 4,065 9,819,420 4,354 11,045,903

% change from 2000 0.5 8.5 7.6 22.1

Average income $ 32,678 32,865 38,971 38,099 43,761 42,841

% change from 2000 19.3 15.9 33.9 30.4

Median income $ 25,594 24,816 34,325 27,258 39,370 30,822

% change from 2000 34.1 9.8 53.8 24.2

Census family income of all families 1,475 3,190,990 1,470 3,347,610 1,603 3,727,755

% change from 2000 -0.3 4.9 8.7 16.8

Average family income $ 72,320 73,849 89,526 90,526 101,431 102,215

% change from 2000 23.8 22.6 40.3 38.4

Median family income $ 63,109 61,024 83,223 72,734 86,276 84,173

% change from 2000 31.9 19.2 36.7 37.9

Household income of all private households 1,930 4,219,410 1,925 4,555,025 2,012 4,980,115

% change from 2000 -0.3 8.0 4.2 18.0

Average household income $ 65,238 66,836 79,374 77,967 90,065 85,814

% change from 2000 21.7 16.7 38.1 28.4

Median household income $ 55,587 53,626 71,289 60,455 79,076 67,246

% change from 2000 28.2 12.7 42.3 25.4 Source: McSweeney & Associates from Statistics Canada Census data 2001 (2000 incomes) and 2006 (2005 incomes) and Manifold Data Mining Inc. Superdemographics 2010 (2009 incomes)



Table 13: Total Income Levels, Sioux Lookout vs. Ontario, 2009


Total income of population 15 years and over 4,354 11,045,903

Without income 127 2.9 4.7

With income 4226 97.1 95.3

Under $1,000 84 1.9 4.0

$ 1,000 - $ 2,999 118 2.7 3.3

$ 3,000 - $ 4,999 135 3.1 3.1

$ 5,000 - $ 6,999 135 3.1 3.3

$ 7,000 - $ 9,999 138 3.2 5.4

$10,000 - $11,999 121 2.8 3.9

$12,000 - $14,999 153 3.5 5.6

$15,000 - $19,999 362 8.3 8.4

$20,000 - $24,999 269 6.2 7.0

$25,000 - $29,999 276 6.3 6.2

$30,000 - $34,999 365 8.4 6.3

$35,000 - $39,999 259 5.9 5.7

$40,000 - $44,999 253 5.8 5.0

$45,000 - $49,999 376 8.6 4.2

$50,000 - $59,999 371 8.5 6.7

$60,000 and over 812 18.6 17.1

Median Total Income ($) 39,370 30,822

Average Total Income ($) 43,761 42,841 Source: McSweeney & Associates from Manifold Data Mining Inc. Superdemographics 2010 (2009 incomes)



Table 14: Total Income Levels, Sioux Lookout vs. Ontario, 2000, 2005 and 2009


Ontario 2000 %


Ontario 2005 %


Ontario 2009 %

Total income of population 15 years and over 4,045 9,048,040 4,065 9,819,420 4,354 11,045,903

Without income 4.6 5.0 3.3 4.9 2.9 4.7

With income 95.6 95.0 96.7 95.1 97.1 95.3

Under $1,000 2.6 4.1 2.0 4.1 1.9 4.0

$ 1,000 - $ 2,999 4.8 4.3 2.8 3.4 2.7 3.3

$ 3,000 - $ 4,999 3.0 3.6 2.7 3.2 3.1 3.1

$ 5,000 - $ 6,999 3.1 3.9 2.8 3.4 3.1 3.3

$ 7,000 - $ 9,999 3.7 5.4 3.7 5.5 3.2 5.4

$10,000 - $11,999 4.4 4.1 2.6 3.9 2.8 3.9

$12,000 - $14,999 7.0 6.4 3.7 5.7 3.5 5.6

$15,000 - $19,999 8.0 8.5 8.4 8.5 8.3 8.4

$20,000 - $24,999 9.9 7.4 6.0 7.0 6.2 7.0

$25,000 - $29,999 6.4 6.8 6.6 6.2 6.3 6.2

$30,000 - $34,999 4.9 7.1 7.9 6.3 8.4 6.3

$35,000 - $39,999 6.2 5.7 6.0 5.7 5.9 5.7

$40,000 - $44,999 8.4 5.2 5.7 5.0 5.8 5.0

$45,000 - $49,999 4.4 3.8 8.4 4.2 8.6 4.2

$50,000 - $59,999 7.2 6.2 9.1 6.6 8.5 6.7

$60,000 and over 11.1 12.5 18.1 16.5 18.6 17.1 Source: McSweeney & Associates from Statistics Canada Census data 2001 (2000 incomes) and 2006 (2005 incomes) and Manifold Data Mining Inc. Superdemographics 2010 (2009 incomes)



Table 15: Family Income Levels, Sioux Lookout vs. Ontario, 2009


Census family income of all families 1,603 3,727,755

Under $10,000 11 0.7 2.4

$ 10,000 - $19,999 49 3.1 3.8

$ 20,000 - $29,999 62 3.9 6.6

$ 30,000 - $39,999 87 5.4 8.4

$ 40,000 - $49,999 112 7.0 8.7

$ 50,000 - $59,999 109 6.8 8.5

$ 60,000 - $69,999 140 8.7 8.4

$ 70,000 - $79,999 144 9.0 8.0

$ 80,000 - $89,999 181 11.3 7.4

$ 90,000 - $99,999 130 8.1 6.4

$100,000 and over 577 36.0 31.4

Median Family Income ($) 86,276 84,173

Average Family Income ($) 101,431 102,215 Source: McSweeney & Associates from Manifold Data Mining Inc. Superdemographics 2010 (2009 incomes)

Table 16: Household Income Levels, Sioux Lookout vs. Ontario, 2009


Household income of all private households 2,012 4,980,115

Under $10,000 25 1.2 4.1

$ 10,000 - $19,999 171 8.5 8.4

$ 20,000 - $29,999 124 6.2 8.9

$ 30,000 - $39,999 181 9.0 9.7

$ 40,000 - $49,999 143 7.1 9.2

$ 50,000 - $59,999 187 9.3 8.4

$ 60,000 - $69,999 187 9.3 7.8

$ 70,000 - $79,999 144 7.2 7.2

$ 80,000 - $89,999 165 8.2 6.2

$ 90,000 - $99,999 93 4.6 5.3

$100,000 and over 592 29.4 24.7

Median Household Income ($) 79,076 67,246

Average Household Income ($) 90,065 85,814 Source: McSweeney & Associates from Manifold Data Mining Inc. Superdemographics 2010 (2009 incomes)



Table 17: Highest Level of Schooling, Sioux Lookout vs. Ontario, 2001

Sioux

Lookout Sioux

Lookout % Ontario

%

Total population 20 years and over by highest level of schooling 3,640 8,282,160

Less than grade 9 375 10.3 8.7

Grades 9 to 13 1,315 36.1 31.1

Without high school graduation certificate 745 20.5 16.9

With high school graduation certificate 565 15.5 14.2

Trades certificate or diploma 415 11.4 10.2

College 840 23.1 23.7

Without certificate or diploma 205 5.6 6.6

With certificate or diploma 630 17.3 17.1

University 695 19.1 26.3

Without degree 220 6.0 7.1

Without certificate or diploma 125 3.4 4.9

With certificate or diploma 95 2.6 2.3

With bachelor's degree or higher 475 13.0 19.2 Source: McSweeney & Associates from Statistics Canada Census data 2001.

Table 18: Education Attainment, Sioux Lookout vs. Ontario, 2006-2010

2006 Sioux

Lookout %

2006 Ontario

%

2010 Sioux

Lookout %

2010 Ontario

%

Total population 25 to 64 years by highest certificate, diploma or degree 2,905 6,638,330 3,071 7,436,263

No certificate, diploma or degree 20.1 13.6 20.4 13.3

Certificate, diploma or degree 79.9 86.4 79.6 86.7

High school certificate or equivalent 19.6 25.0 19.4 24.9

Apprenticeship or trades certificate or diploma 10.3 8.8 10.5 8.6

College, CEGEP or other non-university certificate or diploma 28.7 22.0 28.9 22.1

University certificate, diploma or degree 21.2 30.7 20.9 31.0

University certificate or diploma below bachelor level 3.8 4.7 3.7 4.6

University certificate or degree 17.4 26.0 17.2 26.4

Bachelor's degree 9.1 15.9 10.5 16.4

University certificate or diploma above bachelor level 2.6 3.2 2.5 3.1

Degree in medicine, dentistry, veterinary medicine or optometry 0.3 0.7 0.0 0.7

Master's degree 4.6 5.3 4.2 5.3

Earned doctorate 0.5 0.9 0.0 0.9 Source: McSweeney & Associates from Statistics Canada Census data 2006 and Manifold Data Mining Inc. Superdemographics 2010.



Table 19: Education Attainment, Sioux Lookout vs. Ontario, 2010

Sioux

Lookout Sioux Lookout

% Ontario

%

Total population 25 to 64 years by highest certificate, diploma or degree 3,071 7,436,263

No certificate, diploma or degree 625 20.4 13.3

Certificate, diploma or degree 2,446 79.6 86.7

High school certificate or equivalent 595 19.4 24.9

Apprenticeship or trades certificate or diploma 323 10.5 8.6

College, CEGEP or other non-university certificate or diploma 886 28.9 22.1

University certificate, diploma or degree 642 20.9 31.0

University certificate or diploma below bachelor level 114 3.7 4.6

University certificate or degree 528 17.2 26.4

Bachelor's degree 323 10.5 16.4

University certificate or diploma above bachelor level 76 2.5 3.1

Degree in medicine, dentistry, veterinary medicine or optometry 0 0.0 0.7

Master's degree 128 4.2 5.3

Earned doctorate 0 0.0 0.9 Source: McSweeney & Associates from Manifold Data Mining Inc. Superdemographics 2010.

Table 20: Post-secondary Qualifications by Major Field of Study 2010, Sioux Lookout vs. ON

Sioux

Lookout Sioux

Lookout % Ontario

%

Total population with postsecondary qualifications by major field of study 1,850

Educational, recreational and counselling services 151 8.2 6.5

Fine and applied arts 54 2.9 3.6

Humanities and related fields 41 2.2 5.6

Social and behavioural sciences and law 130 7.0 11.8

Business, management and public administration 414 22.4 22.0

Physical and life sciences and technologies 20 1.1 3.5

Mathematics, computer and information sciences 11 0.6 5.5

Architecture, engineering, and related technologies 351 19.0 21.7

Agriculture, natural resources and conservation 78 4.2 1.7

Health, parks, recreation and fitness 394 21.3 13.3

Personal, protective and transportation services 206 11.1 4.9

Other fields of study 0 0.0 0.0 Source: McSweeney & Associates from Manifold Data Mining Inc. Superdemographics 2010.



Table 21: Mobility Status, Sioux Lookout vs. Ontario, 2010

Sioux Lookout Sioux Lookout

% Ontario %

Total population 1 year and over by mobility status 1 year ago 5,423

Non-movers 4,513 83.2 86.5

Movers 910 16.8 13.5

Non-migrants 562 10.4 8.1

Migrants 348 6.4 5.4

Internal migrants 337 6.2 4.4

Intraprovincial migrants 249 4.6 3.9

Interprovincial migrants 88 1.6 0.5

External migrants 12 0.2 1.1

Total population 5 years and over by mobility status 5 years ago 5,423

Non-movers 2,839 52.4 57.7

Movers 2,584 47.6 42.3

Non-migrants 1,496 27.6 22.9

Migrants 1,088 20.1 19.5

Internal migrants 1,012 18.7 14.4

Intraprovincial migrants 759 14.0 12.8

Interprovincial migrants 253 4.7 1.6

External migrants 76 1.4 5.0 Source: McSweeney & Associates from Manifold Data Mining Inc. Superdemographics 2010. Table 22: Knowledge of Official Language, Sioux Lookout vs. Ontario, 2010


Total population by knowledge of official languages 5,423 13,293,008

English only 5,047.0 93.1 86.1

French only 0.0 0.0 0.4

English and French 366.0 6.7 11.4

Neither English nor French 10.0 0.2 2.2 Source: McSweeney & Associates from Statistics Canada Census data 2001, 2006 and Manifold Data Mining Inc. Superdemographics 2010



Table 23: Key Labour Force Indicators, Sioux Lookout vs. Ontario, 2001-2006-2010

Characteristic

Sioux Lookout Ontario

2001 2006 2010 2001 2006 2010

Total population 15 years and over by labour force activity 4,045 4,065 4,354 9,048,040 9,819,420 11,045,903

In the labour force 2,870 3,190 3,443 6,086,815 6,587,575 7,458,212

Employed 2,765 3,060 3,340 5,713,900 6,164,245 7,013,603

Unemployed 110 135 103 372,915 423,335 444,608

Not in the labour force 1,175 875 911 2,961,220 3,231,840 3,587,691

Participation rate (%) 71.0 78.5 79.1 67.3 67.1 67.5

Employment rate (%) 68.4 75.3 76.7 63.2 62.8 63.5

Unemployment rate (%) 3.8 4.2 3.0 6.1 6.4 6.0 Source: McSweeney & Associates from Statistics Canada 2001, 2006 Census data and Manifold Data Mining Inc. Superdemographics 2010.

Table 24: Labour Force by Industry, Sioux Lookout, 2001-2006-2010




Total labour force 15 years and over by industry - 1997 North American Industry Classification System 2,875 3,190 3,443

Industry - Not applicable 0.7 0.8 1.0

All industries 99.3 99.4 99.0

11 Agriculture, forestry, fishing and hunting 5.6 2.8 3.1

21 Mining and oil and gas extraction 0.0 0.5 0.3

22 Utilities 1.0 0.9 1.0

23 Construction 1.6 1.4 1.4

31-33 Manufacturing 6.8 9.6 9.4

41 Wholesale trade 0.9 2.0 1.9

44-45 Retail trade 10.6 10.5 10.6

48-49 Transportation and warehousing 11.1 9.7 9.8

51 Information and cultural industries 1.6 2.0 1.3

52 Finance and insurance 1.0 2.0 2.5

53 Real estate and rental and leasing 1.0 1.3 1.1

54 Professional, scientific and technical services 3.1 2.8 2.9

55 Management of companies and enterprises 0.0 0.0 0.0

56 Administrative and support, waste management and remediation services 1.9 1.9 1.7

61 Educational services 7.7 7.4 7.3

62 Health care and social assistance 23.1 23.8 23.4

71 Arts, entertainment and recreation 1.2 0.8 1.5

72 Accommodation and food services 9.0 7.4 7.7

81 Other services (except public administration) 2.3 2.2 2.2

91 Public administration 9.2 9.7 9.8 Source: McSweeney & Associates from Manifold Data Mining‟s Superdemographics 2010.



Table 25: Labour Force by Industry, Sioux Lookout vs. Ontario, 2010

Sioux Lookout Sioux

Lookout % Ontario

%

Total labour force 15 years and over by industry - 1997 North American Industry Classification System 3443 7,458,212

Industry - Not applicable 36 1.0 1.6

All industries 3407 99.0 98.4

Agriculture, forestry, fishing and hunting 107 3.1 1.7

Mining and oil and gas extraction 11 0.3 0.4

Utilities 34 1.0 0.7

Construction 48 1.4 5.9

Manufacturing 325 9.4 14.0

Wholesale trade 65 1.9 4.7

Retail trade 366 10.6 11.0

Transportation and warehousing 337 9.8 4.7

Information and cultural industries 44 1.3 2.6

Finance and insurance 86 2.5 4.8

Real estate and rental and leasing 37 1.1 1.9

Professional, scientific and technical services 101 2.9 7.3

Management of companies and enterprises 0 0.0 0.1

Administrative and support, waste management and remediation services 58 1.7 4.7

Educational services 253 7.3 6.6

Health care and social assistance 805 23.4 9.3

Arts, entertainment and recreation 51 1.5 2.1

Accommodation and food services 266 7.7 6.2

Other services (except public administration) 75 2.2 4.5

Public administration 339 9.8 5.3 Source: McSweeney & Associates from Manifold Data Mining‟s Superdemographics 2010. Table 26: Labour Force by Occupation, Sioux Lookout vs. Ontario, 2010

Sioux

Lookout Sioux

Lookout % Ontario %

Total labour force 15 years and over by occupation - 2006 National Occupational Classification for Statistics 3,443 7,458,212

Occupation - Not applicable 25 0.7 1.6

All occupations 3,418 99.3 98.4

A Management occupations 289 8.4 10.2

A0 Senior management occupations 25 0.7 1.3

A1 Specialist managers 56 1.6 3.0

A2 Managers in retail trade, food and accommodation services 134 3.9 2.8

A3 Other managers, n.e.c. 73 2.1 3.2

B Business, finance and administration occupations 537 15.6 18.4

B0 Professional occupations in business and finance 11 0.3 2.8

B1 Finance and insurance administration occupations 58 1.7 1.2

B2 Secretaries 69 2.0 1.4



Sioux

Lookout Sioux

Lookout % Ontario %

B3 Administrative and regulatory occupations 47 1.4 2.2

B4 Clerical supervisors 12 0.3 0.5

B5 Clerical occupations 339 9.8 10.4

C Natural and applied sciences and related occupations 238 6.9 6.9

C0 Professional occupations in natural and applied sciences 39 1.1 4.2

C1 Technical occupations related to natural and applied sciences 198 5.8 2.8

D Health occupations 304 8.8 5.1

D0 Professional occupations in health 52 1.5 1.1

D1 Nurse supervisors and registered nurses 54 1.6 1.5

D2 Technical and related occupations in health 114 3.3 1.1

D3 Assisting occupations in support of health services 84 2.4 1.3

E Occupations in social science, education, government service and religion 495 14.4 8.2

E0 Judges, lawyers, psychologists, social workers, ministers of religion, and policy and program officers 185 5.4 2.3

E1 Teachers and professors 163 4.7 4.0

E2 Paralegals, social services workers and occupations in education and religion, n.e.c. 147 4.3 2.0

F Occupations in art, culture, recreation and sport 63 1.8 2.9

F0 Professional occupations in art and culture 45 1.3 1.3

F1 Technical occupations in art, culture, recreation and sport 19 0.6 1.6

G Sales and service occupations 798 23.2 23.2

G0 Sales and service supervisors 29 0.8 0.8

G1 Wholesale, technical, insurance, real estate sales specialists, and retail, wholesale and grain buyers 32 0.9 2.3

G2 Retail salespersons and sales clerks 77 2.2 4.5

G3 Cashiers 60 1.7 1.8

G4 Chefs and cooks 28 0.8 1.2

G5 Occupations in food and beverage service 0 0.0 1.4

G6 Occupations in protective services 21 0.6 1.6

G7 Occupations in travel and accommodation, including attendants in recreation and sport 90 2.6 0.8

G8 Child care and home support workers 64 1.9 1.4

G9 Sales and service occupations, n.e.c. 396 11.5 7.7

H Trades, transport and equipment operators and related occupations 464 13.5 14.0

H0 Contractors and supervisors in trades and transportation 14 0.4 0.7

H1 Construction trades 22 0.6 2.3

H2 Stationary engineers, power station operators and electrical trades and telecommunications occupations 25 0.7 1.0

H3 Machinists, metal forming, shaping and erecting occupations 37 1.1 1.3

H4 Mechanics 110 3.2 2.1



Sioux

Lookout Sioux

Lookout % Ontario %

H5 Other trades, n.e.c. 23 0.7 0.7

H6 Heavy equipment and crane operators, including drillers 11 0.3 0.4

H7 Transportation equipment operators and related workers, excluding labourers 180 5.2 3.2

H8 Trades helpers, construction and transportation labourers and related occupations 43 1.2 2.4

I Occupations unique to primary industry 96 2.8 2.4

I0 Occupations unique to agriculture, excluding labourers 12 0.3 1.5

I1 Occupations unique to forestry operations, mining, oil and gas extraction and fishing, excluding labourers 70 2.0 0.2

I2 Primary production labourers 14 0.4 0.7

J Occupations unique to processing, manufacturing and utilities 135 3.9 7.0

J0 Supervisors in manufacturing 18 0.5 0.4

J1 Machine operators in manufacturing 35 1.0 2.5

J2 Assemblers in manufacturing 6 0.2 2.4

J3 Labourers in processing, manufacturing and utilities 76 2.2 1.7 Source: McSweeney & Associates Manifold Data Mining Inc. Superdemographics 2010.

Table 27: Number of Business by Sector, Sioux Lookout, 2003-2007

Industry (NAICS) 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2003-2007

# Bus. in sector (local) Change

11 - Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing and Hunting 24 24 24 19 22 -2

21 - Mining and Oil and Gas Extraction 1 1 1 1 1 0

22 - Utilities 2 2 2 2 2 0

23 - Construction 43 43 42 40 43 0

31-33 - Manufacturing 11 10 9 6 7 -4

41 - Wholesale Trade 6 9 9 7 7 1

44-45 - Retail Trade 48 47 51 47 46 -2

48-49 - Transportation and Warehousing 31 32 33 33 32 1

51 - Information and Cultural Industries 3 4 4 5 5 2

52 - Finance and Insurance 11 11 8 12 12 1

53 - Real Estate and Rental and Leasing 20 21 20 23 24 4

54 - Professional, Scientific and Technical Services 16 15 15 18 17 1

55 - Management of Companies and Enterprises 5 11 10 8 9 4

56 - Administrative and Support, Waste Management and Remediation Services 12 11 10 11 13 1

61 - Educational Services 7 5 6 6 4 -3

62 - Health Care and Social Assistance 18 20 19 19 21 3

71 - Arts, Entertainment and Recreation 5 5 5 5 5 0

72 - Accommodation and Food Services 54 52 46 47 44 -10

81 - Other Services (except Public Administration) 36 36 38 35 36 0

91 - Public Administration 4 5 5 5 6 2 Source: McSweeney & Associates from Statistics Canada Census data 2001, 2006; Analysis support: Rural Development Division, Ontario Ministry of Agriculture, Food, and Rural Affairs.



Table 28: Percentage of Local Business, Sioux Lookout, 2003-2007

Industry (NAICS) 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2003-2007

% of local businesses Change

11 - Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing and Hunting 6.723 6.593 6.723 5.444 6.18 -0.543

21 - Mining and Oil and Gas Extraction 0.28 0.275 0.28 0.287 0.281 0.001

22 - Utilities 0.56 0.549 0.56 0.573 0.562 0.002

23 - Construction 12.045 11.813 11.765 11.461 12.079 0.034

31-33 - Manufacturing 3.081 2.747 2.521 1.719 1.966 -1.115

41 - Wholesale Trade 1.681 2.473 2.521 2.006 1.966 0.285

44-45 - Retail Trade 13.445 12.912 14.286 13.467 12.921 -0.524

48-49 - Transportation and Warehousing 8.683 8.791 9.244 9.456 8.989 0.306

51 - Information and Cultural Industries 0.84 1.099 1.12 1.433 1.404 0.564

52 - Finance and Insurance 3.081 3.022 2.241 3.438 3.371 0.29

53 - Real Estate and Rental and Leasing 5.602 5.769 5.602 6.59 6.742 1.14

54 - Professional, Scientific and Technical Services 4.482 4.121 4.202 5.158 4.775 0.293

55 - Management of Companies and Enterprises 1.401 3.022 2.801 2.292 2.528 1.127

56 - Administrative and Support, Waste Management and Remediation Services 3.361 3.022 2.801 3.152 3.652 0.291

61 - Educational Services 1.961 1.374 1.681 1.719 1.124 -0.837

62 - Health Care and Social Assistance 5.042 5.495 5.322 5.444 5.899 0.857

71 - Arts, Entertainment and Recreation 1.401 1.374 1.401 1.433 1.404 0.003

72 - Accommodation and Food Services 15.126 14.286 12.885 13.467 12.36 -2.766

81 - Other Services (except Public Administration) 10.084 9.89 10.644 10.029 10.112 0.028

91 - Public Administration 1.12 1.374 1.401 1.433 1.685 0.565 Source: McSweeney & Associates from Statistics Canada Census data 2001, 2006; Analysis support: Rural Development Division, Ontario Ministry of Agriculture, Food, and Rural Affairs.



Table 29: Business Concentration per Capita, Sioux Lookout, 2003-2007

Industry (NAICS) 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2003-2007

Concentration per capita Change

11 - Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing and Hunting 1.337 1.32 0.667 0.582 0.656 -0.681

21 - Mining and Oil and Gas Extraction 1.642 1.705 0.906 0.984 0.878 -0.764

22 - Utilities 5.858 5.511 2.656 2.496 2.306 -3.552

23 - Construction 0.969 0.893 0.439 0.447 0.471 -0.498

31-33 - Manufacturing 0.583 0.26 0.248 0.179 0.207 -0.376

41 - Wholesale Trade 0.274 0.396 0.212 0.175 0.171 -0.103

44-45 - Retail Trade 1.261 0.587 0.655 0.658 0.633 -0.628

48-49 - Transportation and Warehousing 1.991 0.935 0.943 0.85 0.768 -1.223

51 - Information and Cultural Industries 0.531 0.643 0.327 0.424 0.398 -0.133

52 - Finance and Insurance 0.554 0.53 0.224 0.306 0.294 -0.26

53 - Real Estate and Rental and Leasing 0.67 0.648 0.308 0.361 0.345 -0.325

54 - Professional, Scientific and Technical Services 0.276 0.236 0.118 0.149 0.136 -0.14

55 - Management of Companies and Enterprises 0.376 0.66 0.323 0.344 0.329 -0.047

56 - Administrative and Support, Waste Management and Remediation Services 0.655 0.557 0.26 0.304 0.348 -0.307


62 - Health Care and Social Assistance 1.2 1.268 0.608 0.64 0.658 -0.542

71 - Arts, Entertainment and Recreation 0.718 0.663 0.333 0.357 0.347 -0.371

72 - Accommodation and Food Services 2.854 2.638 1.248 1.392 1.299 -1.555

81 - Other Services (except Public Administration) 1.349 1.292 0.697 0.688 0.687 -0.662

91 - Public Administration 8.296 8.925 4.769 5.092 6.174 -2.122 Source: McSweeney & Associates from Statistics Canada Census data 2001, 2006; Analysis support: Rural Development Division, Ontario Ministry of Agriculture, Food, and Rural Affairs.



Table 30: Business Concentration Sector Mix, Sioux Lookout, 2003-2007

Industry (NAICS) 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2003-2007

Concentration, sector mix Change

11 - Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing and Hunting 1.231 1.276 1.277 1.08 1.42 0.189

21 - Mining and Oil and Gas Extraction 1.511 1.648 1.735 1.826 1.902 0.391

22 - Utilities 5.391 5.326 5.086 4.631 4.992 -0.399

23 - Construction 0.891 0.863 0.84 0.829 1.019 0.128

31-33 - Manufacturing 0.536 0.251 0.474 0.333 0.449 -0.087

41 - Wholesale Trade 0.252 0.383 0.406 0.324 0.37 0.118

44-45 - Retail Trade 1.161 0.567 1.254 1.221 1.37 0.209

48-49 - Transportation and Warehousing 1.832 0.904 1.804 1.576 1.664 -0.168

51 - Information and Cultural Industries 0.489 0.621 0.626 0.787 0.861 0.372

52 - Finance and Insurance 0.51 0.513 0.428 0.568 0.636 0.126

53 - Real Estate and Rental and Leasing 0.617 0.627 0.59 0.669 0.747 0.13

54 - Professional, Scientific and Technical Services 0.254 0.228 0.225 0.277 0.295 0.041

55 - Management of Companies and Enterprises 0.346 0.638 0.618 0.638 0.713 0.367

56 - Administrative and Support, Waste Management and Remediation Services 0.603 0.538 0.498 0.563 0.753 0.15


62 - Health Care and Social Assistance 1.104 1.225 1.165 1.187 1.425 0.321

71 - Arts, Entertainment and Recreation 0.66 0.64 0.637 0.663 0.752 0.092

72 - Accommodation and Food Services 2.626 2.549 2.389 2.583 2.811 0.185

81 - Other Services (except Public Administration) 1.241 1.249 1.335 1.277 1.486 0.245

91 - Public Administration 7.634 8.624 9.13 9.446 13.368 5.734 Source: McSweeney & Associates from Statistics Canada Census data 2001, 2006; Analysis support: Rural Development Division, Ontario Ministry of Agriculture, Food, and Rural Affairs. Table 31: Top 15 Sub-Sectors by Number of Employers for Sioux Lookout, June 2008

Total (A)

Indeterminate22 (B)

Subtotal (A - B) 1-4 5-9 10-19

20-49

50-99

100-199

200-499

500 +

Total 325 127 198 85 57 26 20 2 4 3 1

721 - Accommodation Services 32 13 19 5 5 5 4 0 0 0 0

238 - Specialty Trade Contractors 26 15 11 8 3 0 0 0 0 0 0

531 - Real Estate 21 15 6 4 1 0 1 0 0 0 0

113 - Forestry and Logging 17 5 12 5 5 1 1 0 0 0 0

541 - Professional, Scientific and Technical Services 15 5 10 6 0 3 0 1 0 0 0

722 - Food Services and Drinking Places 14 4 10 2 2 2 4 0 0 0 0

22 The establishments in the "Indeterminate" category do not maintain an employee payroll, but may have a workforce which consists of contracted workers, family members or business owners. However, the Business Register does not have this information available, and has therefore assigned the establishments to an "Indeterminate" category. This category also includes employers who did not have employees in the last 12 months.



Total (A)

Indeterminate22 (B)

Subtotal (A - B) 1-4 5-9 10-19

20-49

50-99

100-199

200-499

500 +

813 - Religious, Grant-Making, Civic, and Professional and Similar Organizations 13 2 11 8 2 0 1 0 0 0 0

811 - Repair and Maintenance 11 3 8 5 3 0 0 0 0 0 0

523 - Securities, Commodity Contracts, and Other Financial Investment and Related Activities 10 8 2 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0

551 - Management of Companies and Enterprises 10 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

236 - Construction of Buildings 9 7 2 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0

481 - Air Transportation 9 3 6 0 4 1 1 0 0 0 0

561 - Administrative and Support Services 9 4 5 2 3 0 0 0 0 0 0

445 - Food and Beverage Stores 7 2 5 2 2 0 0 0 1 0 0

624 - Social Assistance 7 0 7 2 2 0 1 0 1 1 0

Source: McSweeney & Associates from Statistic Canada, Canadian Business Pattern June 2008.

Table 32: Top 15 Industries by Number of Employers, Sioux Lookout, June 2008

Total (A)

Indeterminate23 (B)

Subtotal (A - B) 1-4 5-9 10-19

20-49

50-99

100-199

200-499

500 +

Total 325 127 198 85 57 26 20 2 4 3 1

7212 - RV (Recreational Vehicle) Parks and Recreational Camps 24 10 14 4 5 3 2 0 0 0 0

1133 - Logging 17 5 12 5 5 1 1 0 0 0 0

5311 - Lessors of Real Estate 13 10 3 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0

2382 - Building Equipment Contractors 10 5 5 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

5239 - Other Financial Investment Activities 10 8 2 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0

5511 - Management of Companies and Enterprises 10 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

2361 - Residential Construction 9 7 2 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0

2383 - Building Finishing Contractors 9 7 2 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0

7221 - Full-Service Restaurants 9 2 7 2 1 1 3 0 0 0 0

7211 - Traveller Accommodation 8 3 5 1 0 2 2 0 0 0 0

4812 - Non-Scheduled Air Transportation 7 2 5 0 4 1 0 0 0 0 0

23 The establishments in the "Indeterminate" category do not maintain an employee payroll, but may have a workforce which consists of contracted workers, family members or business owners. However, the Business Register does not have this information available, and has therefore assigned the establishments to an "Indeterminate" category. This category also includes employers who did not have employees in the last 12 months.



Total (A)

Indeterminate23 (B)

Subtotal (A - B) 1-4 5-9 10-19

20-49

50-99

100-199

200-499

500 +

6241 - Individual and Family Services 6 0 6 2 1 0 1 0 1 1 0

8134 - Civic and Social Organizations 6 2 4 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 0

4441 - Building Material and Supplies Dealers 5 1 4 2 0 0 2 0 0 0 0

5617 - Services to Buildings and Dwellings 5 2 3 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0

Source: McSweeney & Associates from Statistic Canada, Canadian Business Pattern June 2008. Table 33: % Change of Total Number of Employers, SL vs. Ontario, June 2003 to June 2008

Sub-Sector

Sioux Lookout Total Change from June 2003 to June 2008 %

Ontario Total Change from June 2003 to June 2008 % Industry

Sioux Lookout Total Change from June 2003 to June

2008 %

Ontario Total Change from June 2003 to June 2008 %

Total -9.0 13.0 Total -9.0 13.0

721 - Accommodation Services 3.2 -3.2

7212 - RV (Recreational Vehicle) Parks and Recreational Camps 0.0 -8.6

238 - Specialty Trade Contractors 13.0 8.6 1133 - Logging -19.0 -26.9

531 - Real Estate 40.0 30.6 5311 - Lessors of Real Estate 30.0 25.3

113 - Forestry and Logging -19.0 -25.2

2382 - Building Equipment Contractors 0.0 3.9

541 - Professional, Scientific and Technical Services -6.3 12.4

5239 - Other Financial Investment Activities 66.7 37.9

722 - Food Services and Drinking Places -39.1 -3.3

5511 - Management of Companies and Enterprises 100.0 42.0

813 - Religious, Grant-Making, Civic, and Professional and Similar Organizations 0.0 7.7

2361 - Residential Construction -25.0 4.8

811 - Repair and Maintenance -26.7 -1.3

2383 - Building Finishing Contractors 12.5 16.2

523 - Securities, Commodity Contracts, and Other Financial Investment and Related Activities 66.7 38.3

7221 - Full-Service Restaurants -30.8 0.5

551 - Management of Companies and Enterprises 100.0 42.0

7211 - Traveller Accommodation 14.3 -1.2

236 - Construction of Buildings -35.7 4.4

4812 - Non-Scheduled Air Transportation -12.5 -3.2

481 - Air Transportation 12.5 4.3

6241 - Individual and Family Services 50.0 6.5

561 - Administrative and Support Services -10.0 3.9

8134 - Civic and Social Organizations 20.0 0.4

445 - Food and Beverage Stores -30.0 9.2

4441 - Building Material and Supplies Dealers -16.7 10.5



Sub-Sector

Sioux Lookout Total Change from June 2003 to June 2008 %

Ontario Total Change from June 2003 to June 2008 % Industry

Sioux Lookout Total Change from June 2003 to June

2008 %

Ontario Total Change from June 2003 to June 2008 %

624 - Social Assistance 16.7 7.2

5617 - Services to Buildings and Dwellings -16.7 9.8

Source: McSweeney & Associates from Statistics Canada, Canadian Business Pattern June 2003 and June 2008

Table 34: Canadian and Ontario Economic Indicators Outlook

Annual average percent change

Canada Ontario

2010f 2011f 2012f 2010f 2011f 2012f

Real GDP 2.9-3.1 2.6-3.2 2.5-3.1 3.0-3.3 2.4-3.1 2.3-3.1

Employment 1.6 1.2-1.9 1.3-2.2 1.7-1.8 1.1-1.9 1.2-2.1

Unemployment (%) 8.0 7.5-7.6 7.2 8.7-8.8 8.1-8.2 7.7-7.9

CPI 1.7-1.8 2.1-2.3 1.9-2.0 2.4 2.1-2.3 1.7-2.1

Retail Trade 4.5-4.8 4.0-4.4 3.8-4.6 4.4-4.7 3.9-4.2 3.8-4.3

Housing Starts 28.2 -16.1 5.9 18.6 -20.9 16.0

Existing home sales -2.3 -7.6 -4.8 1.6 -7.0 -5.1

Average Existing Home Price

6.8 -0.8 -1.4 8.7 -1.5 -1.2

Source: McSweeney & Associates from TD Economics, 2011 Prospects lifted as Commodity-Heavy Provinces Retake the Growth LEAD – Dec. 17, 2010 and BMO Provincial Economic Outlook Jan. 7, 2011 and BMO Provincial Economic Outlook, December, 2010 and BMO Economic Forecast Detail-Canada – December 2010 Table 35: Global Export Forecast by Sector (% Growth)

Main Sectors % Share of Total Exports (2009)

Export Outlook (% growth)

2009 2010(f) 2011 (f)

Agri-food 9.6 -9.4 -6 4

Energy 20.3 -39.1 21 5

Forestry 6.1 -21.8 14 5

Chemicals, plastics, 7.6 -17.1 9 7

Fertilizers 1.3 -39.2 14 30

Ores, metals and Other industrial products 12.1 -29.9 19 4

Aircraft & parts 2.8 5.2 -15 -1

Rail and Other Transportation Equipment 0.5 -10.0 -13 3

Advanced Technology 3.8 -20.0 -16 5

Industrial Machinery and Equipment 5.8 -20.1 -5 8

Motor Vehicles and Parts 9.9 -27.9 38 10

Consumer Goods 1.9 -8.0 -6 6

Special transactions* 1.5 -21.6 -20 5

Total Goods Sector 83.3 -26.5 12 6

Total Services Sector 16.7 -4.7 4 3

Total Exports 100.0 -23.6 12 6 Source: EDC Global Export Forecast Fall 2010, p. 33 *2009 is actual data while 2010 and 2011 are forecast. Special transactions* – mainly low-valued transactions, value of repairs to equipment and goods returned to country of origin.

Table 36: Ontario Merchandise Export Outlook

Main Sectors % Share of Exports(2009)

Global Outlook (% growth)

2009 2010(f) 2011 (f)

Industrial Goods 32.4 -25.1 15 4

Motor Vehicle 28.8 -29.0 43 10

M & E 17.0 -20.3 -10 7

Agri-Food 7.0 -5.5 -6 3



Forestry 3.6 -22.9 12 4

Consumer Goods 3.2 0.1 -6 6

All others 8.1 -20.1 -14 3

Total 100.0 -23.3 14 7

Total excl. energy 97.8 -22.8 15 7 Source: EDC Global Export Forecast Fall 2010, p. 56 Table 37: Canadian Industrial Outlook – GDP by Industry

Industry % change (Y/Y)

2010 2011

All industries (GDP) 2.8 3.0

Good Industries 3.4 5.2

Primary Industries -0.2 6.0

Oil & Gas -0.4 6.7

Agriculture -1.6 2.2

Non-energy Mining 0.7 8.7

Forestry, Logging & Other Primary 4.2 9.3

Manufacturing 6.5 6.2

Autos & Parts 28.4 9.2

Aerospace & Other Transport. -11.4 2.5

Wood & Paper Products 3.8 8.2

Food Products 2.3 2.6

Chemicals 7.9 5.0

Plastics & Rubber 11.5 7.9

Computer & Electronics 11.7 5.0

Machinery 0.3 7.4

Metal Products 5.9 7.0

Other Manufacturing 5.0 6.1

Construction 1.6 3.3

Residential 2.4 -0.3

Non-res. & Engineering 1.2 4.9

Utilities 1.3 2.1

Service Industries 2.6 2.1

Wholesale Trade 6.4 3.8

Retail Trade 5.0 2.7

Transportation & Warehousing 4.5 3.4

Information & Cultural Industries 0.6 1.5

Finance, Insurance & Real Estate 3.5 1.8

Professional Services 0.8 3.5

Accommodation & Food Services 1.2 2.8

Public Administration 1.7 0.6

Other Services 0.8 1.6 Source: TD Economics Industrial Outlook, January 19, 2010, p.5

Table 38: GDP by Industry Ontario

Percentage change 2009 2010f 2011f

Agriculture -2.4 2.5 2.8

Forestry -30.5 17.8 18.5

Fishing & trapping 8.8 2.9 4.8

Mining -21.6 20.3 11.2

Manufacturing -13.9 10.3 3.7

Construction -6.0 6.3 3.1

Utilities -8.8 1.7 2.8

Goods-producing industries -11.7 8.6 3.7



Transportation, warehousing & information -2.0 2.3 1.9

Wholesale & retail trade -3.4 8.1 3.7

Finance, insurance & real estate 1.7 3.3 2.6

Community, business & personal services 0.3 1.2 2.9

Public administration & defence 2.3 4.2 2.6

Service-producing industries 0.0 3.3 2.8

All industries -3.1 4.5 3.0 Source: McSweeney & Associates from CBC Fall Provincial outlook Summer July 20, 2010, p.47

Table 39: Canada and Ontario Employment Outlook by Industry – Q1/2011

Industry Canada Ontario

Net Employment Outlook (%)

Net Employment Outlook (%)

All Industries 5 3

Construction -6 -12

Education 6 2

Finance, Insurance & Real Estate 12 10

Manufacturing - Durables 3 3

Manufacturing – Non-Durables 0 -2

Mining 12 -16

Public Administration 7 0

Services 6 5

Transportation & Public Utilities 12 14

Wholesale & Retail Trade 6 3 Source: Manpower Employment Outlook Survey – Q1/2011

References: 1. The Conference Board of Canada, Metropolitan Outlook 1 Autumn 2010 2. TD Economics, Quarterly Economic Forecast December 15, 2010 3. RBC Economic Research, Provincial Outlook December 2010 4. Manpower, Employment Outlook Survey – Q1/2011 5. Scotiabank Group, Industry Trends June 2010 6. TD Economics, Industrial Outlook January 19, 2010 7. EDC Economics, The Moment of Truth – Global Export Forecast Fall 2010 8. The 24th Annual Corporate Survey & 6th Annual Consultants Survey – 2009 9. The Canadian Chamber of Commerce, 2011-2012 Economic Outlook: Canada‟s Economic

Engine Is Chugging Along but Not at Full Steam – December 2010 10. Economy Outlook 2011, Financial Post – Jan. 7, 2011 11. TD Economics, National and Provincial Job Markets in 2010 behind the Scenes – Jan. 6,

2011 12. Scotiabank Group, Provincial Trends-Regional Economic Outlook – Nov. 17, 2010 13. TD Economics, 2011 Prospects lifted as Commodity-Heavy Provinces Retake the Growth

LEAD – Dec. 17, 2010

Documents

Sioux Lookout Sector Analysis · PDF file · 2015-01-06Market Study Report . For the Municipality of Sioux Lookout . ... 1 SWOT Analysis ... Specialty care available (ie. massage