Feature article
Year-end Review
by P. Cross*
Introduction
The major themes of 2003 revolved around international
events. The accelerating integration of China (symbolized by its
accession to the World Trade Organization late in 20011)
and other emerging markets into the world economy continued to rapidly
change the economic landscape, especially for trade and direct investment.
China’s share of US imports has grown to 12.1%, leapfrogging
Mexico into second place behind Canada’s 17.8%. By last year,
China had become a major consumer of commodities (its oil imports,
for example, rose to second behind the US), helping to boost prices
for our metals and energy exports.2
But recent events have also highlighted that increasing global
integration also raises our vulnerability to situations over which
we have little control. The September 11 attacks marked a new age
of global terror. The spread of the SARS virus from China to Canada,
on top of the appearance of West Nile virus the year before, showed
how easily diseases can follow trade and travel across borders.
The discovery of the first case of mad cow disease in Alberta closed
most foreign markets to our beef. The outbreak of war in Iraq also
brought on a sharp drop in international travel flows in the second
quarter. Finally, the power blackout in Ontario originated in the
mid-western US grid.
Figure 1
For Canada, the major economic event last
year was the turnaround in the Canadian dollar against its US counterpart.
The 21.7% increase from 63.39 cents (US) to 77.13 during the year
was the largest 12-month movement up or down in our history. With
the US current account deficit at a record level, its dollar fell
against a number of major currencies. However, several Asian countries
(notably China and Japan) resisted an appreciation of their currencies,3
shifting the bulk of the adjustment of the US devaluation to the
euro (which hit a record high) and the Australian and Canadian dollars.
Output
Real GDP decelerated from 3.3% to 1.7%, making Canada and Germany
the only two G7 countries where growth slowed last year. Still,
Canada was in the mid-range of G7 growth, after leading the way
in 2002. While it lagged behind the US, the UK and Japan, all of
which accelerated to nearly 3%, Canada’s growth remained far
ahead of the major continental European nations, which continued
to struggle to post even a fractional increase in their second year
of a common currency. So far this decade, annual growth in Canada
has averaged 2.3%, half the giddy 5% pace set at the height of the
boom between 1998 and 2000.
There was much discussion during the year over
the seemingly biblical series of negative shocks to the economy—
the SARS epidemic in Toronto starting in March, the discovery of
a case of mad cow (BSE) disease in Alberta in May, a strike at Inco
in June, the power blackout in August in Ontario, followed by Hurricane
Juan in Nova Scotia and forest fires in BC. But every year is marked
by similar disasters: drought cost grain farmers on the prairies
billions of dollars in lost output in the previous two years, time
lost to work stoppages in 2002 hit a 5-year high (and 73% more than
in 2003) while forest fires in Quebec were so intense the sky was
hazy as far south as New York. There is no statistical evidence
that the shocks in 2003 were a significant factor in the economy’s
slowdown for the year as a whole, although they affected the quarterly
distribution of growth. (The Bank of Canada estimates SARS, BSE
and the blackout shaved 0.3 percentage points off GDP over the second
and third quarters, but 0.2 points were recovered in the fourth).4
The small effect of these events on GDP partly
just reflects the enormous size of our economy today. Compared with
annual GDP of $1.2 trillion, even a major event such as the $1 billion
(at annual rates) lost to the Inco strike is barely 0.1% of output,
whereas $1 billion represented 1% of GDP in 1972. As well, some
of these events had a larger influence on the distribution than
the overall level of income. For example, the loss of export markets
for cattle producers due to the mad cow scare was partly offset
by increased purchasing power for beef consumers as prices fell,
as well as gains for producers of substitutes such as poultry and
seafood. The largest persistent effect of any of these events appears
to have been the loss of tourism in Canada, where annual output
fell by the equivalent of 0.1% of GDP.5
But not all of this can be attributed to SARS: the slide in tourism
began after September 11, and was further compounded by the Iraq
war and the appreciation of the Canadian dollar last year.
Still, solid gains in the first and fourth quarters bracketed
virtually no growth in the second and third. The lull in real GDP
growth over nearly six months inevitably raises questions about
how to characterize this period in terms of the business cycle,
even suggesting comparisons with recessions such as occurred in
1981-82 or 1990-92.
But rather than the classic V-shape of an economy in recession
(Figure 2), the slack in mid-2003 was comparable with 1986. Quarterly
growth stalled over the first half of that year, including a 0.5% dip in monthly GDP between November
1985 and June 1986. The weakness originated in the energy sector
(Figure 3), where oil prices crashed below $10 a barrel, sending
oil and gas output down 6% and exploration and development a whopping
63%. These losses depressed GDP, even before taking account of the
spin-off effects on industries that supplied the oilpatch or the
loss of purchasing power by its workers. In the longer run, the
stimulus to other sectors of the economy from lower oil prices through
reduced inflation and interest rates boosted growth.
Figure 2
Figure 3
A similar situation appears to have caused the stand-off in growth
this year. A significant part of the export sector was sent reeling
by a lurch in relative prices due to the rising loonie, whose positive
implications for domestic demand unravelled more slowly as prices
and interest rates fell (as in 1986). As well, the short-term weakness
of the economy was compounded by the events cited above, notably
the power blackout in August. The latter was particularly important
to the mid-year slump, causing the largest loss of hours worked
and the most widespread drop in output on record, just as the economy
was beginning to snap out of its second-quarter slump (GDP had jumped
0.5% in July). Without this, third-quarter growth would have been
stronger and the fourth weaker, a pattern less likely to raise the
question of whether there had been a recession. But it was the weakness
in export industries in manufacturing that had slowed the underlying
trend of growth close to zero, leaving GDP vulnerable to these negative
shocks.
Households
Household spending posted a third straight year of solid growth.
Housing again led the way, although it was unable to match the double-digit
increases of the previous two years. Consumer spending continued
to grow by a little over 3%. But spending on durable goods slowed
sharply, from 9% to 2%, due largely to slumping auto sales. Elsewhere,
services recorded faster growth, although most of the improvement
reflected a sharp increase in travel abroad, of little benefit to
retailers in Canada.
Auto demand showed signs of fatigue or saturation, falling 6%
after seven years of rising sales. Nevertheless, the number of vehicles
sold was the second highest on record. There were important shifts
within the auto market. The share of the three North American producers
shrank from 59% to 56%, far below the 74% when the current boom
in auto sales began in 1995. Moreover, they lost significant ground
in the lucrative market for trucks, minivans and SUVs, increasingly
their mainstay as their share of passenger car sales dropped from
65% in 1995 to 41% last year.
Personal disposable income growth slowed from 4.7% to 2.8%, barely
keeping ahead of price increases. With consumer spending growing
steadily and housing still booming, households had to find other
means to finance their outlays. They did so by running down their
savings rate and borrowing more. The drop in the savings rate, from
4.2% to a record low of 2.0%, freed up $15 billion. Meanwhile, consumers
borrowed a record $50 billion, $30 billion in mortgages alone.
At 2.0%, the personal savings rate in Canada was as low as that
of the US for the first time since 1971 (in the second half of the
year it was even lower, reaching 1.4% versus 2.0% in the US). Since
consumer outlays increased at exactly the same pace in the two countries,
the difference originated in incomes. While personal income growth
was also comparable, the big difference was the much faster growth
of disposable income south of the border (4.4% against 2.8%). Over
the last two years, US income taxes fell by 20.5% (or $255 billion),
almost all federal, transforming slow personal income growth into
a solid gain in disposable incomes (but also creating a large budget
deficit). Conversely, in Canada the income tax burden on personal
income was little changed at 15.2%, after three years of declines
from 17% in 1999 to 15.4% in 2002 (Figure 4). Low interest rates
and rising household wealth encouraged low personal savings in both
countries.
Figure 4
The personal sector balance sheet continued the shift from financial
to non-financial assets that began with the stock market crash.
Since then, the share of non-financial assets in household portfolios
has risen for three consecutive years, from 42.4% to 45.5%, the
highest since 1992 (Figure 5). Much of this increase reflected more
wealth held in housing. The last time households moved out of financial
assets for such a long period was during the peak of the inflationary
outbreak in 1973-74, when non-financial assets rose to a record
54% of all assets. Since then, there had been a steady shift towards
financial assets until 2000, especially during the stock market
boom of the 1990s.
Figure 5
Corporate Canada
Despite a small recovery in business investment, the outstanding
feature of the corporate sector remained its massive net saving,
which rose from $35 billion (itself a record) in 2002 to $57 billion.
The increase in the corporate surplus originated in an 18% hike
in undistributed corporate profits, as before-tax profits pulled
out of a 2-year slump with a double-digit increase while dividend
payments fell.
Non-financial corporations devoted most of their improved finances
to the continued restructuring of balance sheets. Firms paid off
short-term debt at an accelerating rate of $15 billion, while locking
in low interest rates with $18 billion of bond issues. The rally
in the stock market supported $31 billion of new equity (although
this remains well below its peak of $54 billion in 2000).
The emphasis on raising profits and repairing
balance sheets may have its origins partly in the perceived weakness
of corporate finances in recent years. Downgrades of corporate debt
were at a high level throughout 2001 and 2002 (although less than
in the US or the EU). Meanwhile, the risk premium on BBB-rated securities
soared from 150 basis points to over 300 late in 2002, when global
corporate defaults jumped from a quarterly rate of 20 in 2000 to
100.6
All these measures of corporate financial
health showed fundamental improvement last year. Downgrades of Canadian
credit ratings fell sharply. Lower loan losses played a major role
in boosting bank profits. Risk spreads on corporate debt declined
to their lowest level since 1997. With interest rates on their bonds
falling rapidly, corporate treasurers shifted their debt insurance
towards bonds and away from short-term debt, extending the maturity
of corporate liabilities.7 The conservatism
of firms also may have been reinforced by the economy entering the
uncharted waters of a record rise against the US dollar.
The results of this restructuring were evident in all the major
measures of corporate financial health. The ratio of debt to equity
for non-financial firms continued its decade-long decline by tumbling
to 0.62 in 2003, its lowest since 1970. The ‘quick’
ratio of current assets to liabilities–a measure of liquidity–rose
to 0.89, also a post-1970 record. Meanwhile, the ratio of short-
to long-term debt tumbled to a post-1964 low of 9.46. This ratio
spent two decades hovering around 20 before starting to decline
in the 1990s.
Figure 6
Stock markets around the world snapped out of a 3-year bear market
with a 29% gain, their best in seven years, fuelled by the boom
in Asia. Emerging markets led the recovery, up 64%. The Toronto
market gained 24%, essentially matching the US.
The improved tone of the stock market reflected
a number of other factors. Markets began their recovery almost immediately
after the initiation and swift end of major combat operations in
Iraq. Profit growth resumed after slowing over the previous two
years. Corporate scandals continued to emerge, but on a smaller
scale than in recent years.8 Part
of the rally appears to reflect ongoing efforts to restore investor
confidence in financial reporting, auditing standards and corporate
governance. Canada created a new Public Accountability Board to
upgrade and supervise audits9. The increase
in stock markets also eased concerns about pension funding shortfalls.
Business investment rose 3.4% in volume, pulling out of a 2-year
slump. The increase was focused on computers and software, partly
because sharply lower prices made them easier to buy. As well, the
heightened interest in investment by manufacturers was reflected
in a double-digit gain for industrial machinery. The volume of spending
in most other areas remained weak, notably for furniture, transportation
equipment and telecommunications.
The distribution of investment growth by industry suggests that
factors other than lower prices played a larger role. While all
14 major industry groups of the economy could have taken advantage
of cheaper prices for imported machinery and equipment by investing
more, only five did so. And of these, manufacturing had by far the
largest increase, boosting outlays by $1.5 billion (11%) despite
lower profits. This strongly suggests that the need to improve productivity,
as the competitive pressures from a rising dollar mounted, was a
paramount concern.
Manufacturers trimmed spending on structures, reflecting growing
unused capacity. Total outlays for structures rose, however, buoyed
by spending on conventional oil and gas projects. Investment was
sluggish in most other sectors. Rising commodity prices, especially
metals, did not stimulate investment at least until 2004, when a
35% hike is planned. The ICT sector experienced deep cuts, especially
for telecom operators, Internet service providers and computer and
electronics manufacturing. Finance, another industry that invested
heavily around the year 2000, continued to retrench at a double-digit
rate.
The public sector again stepped up investment, notably for infrastructure
at the local level. Utilities also boosted outlays, led by water
and sewage where, after years of neglect, investment has doubled
since the Walkerton disaster. Health care and universities posted
double-digit gains, with the latter boosted by the arrival of the
‘double-cohort’ of graduates from Ontario high schools
as Grade 13 disappeared.
Inventory accumulation increased slightly last year. Most of this
reflected the replenishing of stocks in the grain distribution system,
which had been run down over the previous two years by poor crops.
As well, the closing of foreign borders to beef exports forced farmers
to hold more cattle. Non-farm inventories rose sharply in the first
half of the year, especially when manufacturing shipments slumped,
but these were reined in by year end.
Balance of Payments
Trade flow across the border fell in both directions for a third
straight year, despite explosive growth with China. Canada’s
current account surplus rose $2.4 billion last year to almost $26
billion, recouping most of its drop the year before. The increase
originated in a higher surplus for goods and a falling deficit for
investment income. The rising exchange rate played a role in both.
For goods, the price of imports fell faster than exports, partly
because of the exchange rate as well as higher prices for our energy
products. The cost of servicing our external debt was reduced by
the rising dollar, especially for debt denominated in US dollars.
Travel was the one sector where the trade balance worsened significantly
last year, with its deficit more than doubling to a 10-year high
of $4.3 billion. Most of this reflected a sharp drop (12.8%) in
spending by visitors coming to Canada, the first retreat in 15 years
(and the 1987 drop was not surprising given the previous year’s
boost from Expo 86 in BC). The decrease was about equally spread
between visitors from the US and overseas, suggesting that SARS
and the Iraq war played at least as large a role as the US exchange
rate. Meanwhile, Canadian travel spending abroad edged up 2%, entirely
for trips overseas.
Our trade with China continued to grow rapidly (Figure 7). Imports
have doubled since 1999, including a 16% increase last year. China
accounted for 5.5% of all imports last year, nearly twice the share
from Japan or Britain and close to the other EU nation’s 7.6%.
Meanwhile, led by the turnaround in commodity prices, exports rebounded
13% after a dip the year before, and have grown by 75% since 1999;
starting from a much lower level, however, exports trailed imports
by nearly $14 billion last year (versus $124 billion in the US).
The trade deficit with China represents 1.1% of GDP in both countries.
Figure 7
The year solidified some recent trends in the trade balance by
sector. The surplus in energy products first edged out forestry
in 2001, which historically always had the largest surplus, by less
than $1 billion. In 2003, this gap jumped to $10 billion ($41.4
billion versus $31.5). Meanwhile, the deficit in trade in machinery
and equipment, the largest of any sector before 1998, declined steadily
from $22.4 billion to $9 billion last year (partly because of sharply
lower import prices). Instead, consumer goods have become the sector
with the largest deficit, reaching $29.1 billion last year, over
triple the shortfall for machinery and equipment. This mixture of
a relatively small deficit for capital goods and a much larger one
for consumer goods parallels the trend in the US trade deficit (of
course, their overall trade is in deficit and ours in surplus thanks
to the resource sector). Canada’s surpluses in agricultural
and automotive products fell slightly last year, due to the closing
of key markets to our beef exports and increased import penetration
in domestic auto sales.
Foreign direct investment in Canada was the slowest in a decade.
In fact, Canadians bought back firms from foreign direct investors
in the second half of last year for the first time since 1990, as
the rising dollar made firms here more expensive for foreigners
to acquire. Meanwhile, the stronger dollar sustained a rapid increase
in Canadian direct investment abroad of $30 billion, including a
large number of takeovers late in the year.
Equity flows were the mirror image of direct investment. Enticed
by the rising stock market in Canada and the rising dollar, foreigners
bought almost $13 billion of stocks here, after a sell-off the year
before. Conversely, Canadians bought a net of only $4.3 billion
in foreign markets, the lowest in 13 years. Some of this reticence
may reflect a lower rate of return due to the exchange rate, although
this did not stop Canadians from buying a record $8.2 billon of
foreign (mostly US) bonds.
Labour Markets
Overall, job growth last year was steady at 2.2%. The most obvious
change in employment last year was a slump in manufacturing, its
first significant drop since 1993 (a marginal dip in 2001 was related
to the crash in the ICT sector). Offsetting this was an upturn in
non-manufacturing demand to 2.8%. Strong domestic demand kept services
and construction growing steadily, while the beleaguered primary
sector posted its first significant increase since the mid-1980s
and its largest since the surge in commodity prices in 1972 (Figure
8). This reflected healthy international demand for our key resource
products, as well as the recovery of agriculture from drought. Output
in the primary sector rebounded 6% last year after back-to-back
declines.
Figure 8
A more fundamental shift in the labour
market was the more equal distribution of jobs and especially unemployment
by educational attainment. The 1990s saw employment gains heavily
skewed toward people with more education, especially those with
university degrees. But since 2000, annual job growth for university
graduates slowed from 6% in the 1990s to 4%,10
just as the supply of graduates accelerated sharply. As a result,
the proportion of the university-educated holding a job has fallen
from 78.4% in 2000 to 76.1%. While this is still higher than any
other group, the 2.3 point drop is in sharp contrast with increases
for other groups, especially people holding a postsecondary diploma
or certificate, whose employment rate of 73.5% is now only 2.6 points
lower than the university-educated, the smallest gap on record.11
Figure 9
The convergence of labour market outcomes was
most evident in unemployment rates. University graduates have seen
the largest increase of any group since 2000, from 3.9% to 5.5%,
their second highest level on record (the peak of 5.9% was set in
the aftermath of the recession in the early 1990s). The rising unemployment
rate for university graduates reflects supply outstripping demand.
Their numbers grew faster than any other sector of society, up 6.4%
in 2003 to bring the total gain since 2000 to 15%. Graduates from
Canadian universities have been steady at about 175,000 in recent
years, equivalent to 5% of the labour force of university graduates.
The faster growth of this segment of the population than of recent
graduates may reflect an influx of immigrants with university credentials
(in 2001, 42% had degrees, up from 19% in 1981)12.
The number of people without a university degree rose only 2% since
2000, almost all of whom had some postsecondary schooling.
The gap in the unemployment rate for people with and without degrees
fell to 2.7 percentage points last year, the smallest on record.
This differential was as high as 6.7 points in 1992 and averaged
5.5 points for the 1990s. So far this decade, it has shrunk to
3.2 points on average, almost entirely due to higher unemployment
for university graduates.
Gains by people with postsecondary degrees
or certificates have led this convergence of unemployment in recent
years. In the early 1990s, the university-educated had an unemployment
rate nearly four percentage points lower than people with a postsecondary
certificate or diploma. By 2003, the gap had narrowed to an all-time
low of less than half a point (5.5% versus 5.9%). This trend reflects
a leveling-off of unemployment for people with a postsecondary certificate
and increases for the university educated. For the former, unemployment
was steady at about 6% over the last three years, well down from
its peak of over 9% in the early 1990s. Unlike university graduates,
this occurred despite a steady increase in the labour force participation
rate of this group, reflecting strong job growth of 10%. The increase
in unemployment for university graduates was dampened by a steady
drop in their labour force participation over the last five years,
totaling 2.3 points. This contrasts with rising participation rates
for all other educational groups since 2000. Again, this reverses
the trend in the 1990s, when people with less than high school education
left the labour force at a much faster rate than more educated people.13
Figure 10
The reasons for this reversal in unemployment of the university-educated
and other groups are complex, and could reflect mostly short-term
forces such as the bursting of high-tech bubble in 2000. Some of
it may originate in the difficulty of recent immigrants in the labour
market. Part of the answer also appears to lie in the changing demand
for different occupations, with blue-collar growing more than white-collar
jobs last year for the first time since 1997.
Moreover, the 2.2% gain in blue-collar jobs occurred despite no
contribution from factories, instead relying heavily on a 6-year
high in growth for jobs in the primary sector and construction.
The upturn in funding for health care in recent years played a part,
as demand rose faster for technicians than professionals in this
field.
Figure 11
Conversely, white-collar employment slowed from three consecutive
years of 3% growth at the peak of the high-tech boom from 1998 to
2000, to 2% over the last three years, including a 1.8% gain in
2003. Most of the slowdown over the last three years originated
in managerial jobs and natural and applied sciences, supporting
the notion that the boom-bust cycle in high-tech drove these sectors.
From 1997 to 2000, science jobs jumped 23% and managerial by 5%;
in the three years since, growth in science slowed to 7%, while
managerial fell outright by 3% (despite a small recovery last year).
Figure 12
The end result was to lower the unemployment rate for blue-collar
workers from 8.1% to 7.7% last year, while nudging white-collar
unemployment up to 4.5%. The 3.2 percentage point gap in the unemployment
rate between white- and blue-collar workers was the lowest since
1989: it peaked at 6.4 points in 1991 (when recession sent blue-
collar unemployment to 12.8%) and hovered around 4% over the last
decade.
While jobs continued to fall overall for people with high school
education or less, there were also some subtle shifts of interest.
In particular, people with no high school training saw jobs edge
up for the second year in a row, reflecting the upturn in the primary
sector (notably farming) and construction.
Job security appeared to improve last year. All of the increase
in jobs originated in a gain of 300,000 permanent positions, their
best since 2000. Meanwhile, temporary jobs suffered their first
setback (-32,000) on record back to 1997. Casual and seasonal jobs
fell, while the upward trend in term employment was at least temporarily
interrupted.
Workers were also less threatened by layoffs. Both permanent and
temporary layoffs were unchanged after a total increase of 152,000
over the previous two years. With overall employment up, this implies
a lower layoff rate (another indication that the mid-year slump
in growth should not be compared with the recession of the early
1990s, when nearly 1.5 million workers lost their job every year).
The number of people who left (rather than losing) their job continued
to rise steadily. This marks a sharp reversal from the 1990s, when
job leavers fell steadily from 1990 to 1999. Since then, their numbers
have risen 21% despite the weaker labour market. There seems to
be no one reason for this trend, with sharp increases for reasons
ranging from illness and family responsibilities to going to school
to dissatisfaction with their job (the latter group grew every year
since 1995 to become the most common reason for leaving, other than
returning to school).
Despite a slight rise in their unemployment rate in recent years,
an increasing number of youths quit their jobs and dropped out of
the labour force because they were dissatisfied with their last
job. Since 1995, youths in this group have risen from 32,000 to
an all-time high of 85,000 to account for just over half the increase
in this category (there were increases of 24,000 each for both men
and women over 25). Going back to school did not appear to be a
large factor.
Wages and Prices
Before 2002, Canada had posted a lower inflation rate than the US
for eight straight years. Then, in 2002, our inflation rate surpassed
the US. This continued in 2003, despite the sharp increase in the
Canadian dollar against its US counterpart, which should have dampened
prices here relative to the US.
That it did not reflects a number of factors. The US dollar was
not allowed to devalue against a number of Asian currencies: as
a result, the trade-weighted US dollar fell only 8.5% last year,
raising the price of imports by just 2.7%. In turn, imports account
for a relatively small 14% in the US economy.
The CPI in Canada rose 2.8%, up from 2.2% the year before largely
because of the cost of energy. Retailers also recovered profit margins
squeezed by the dollar’s depreciation before last year, with
both margins and the dollar reaching post-1994 highs. As well, cigarette
prices jumped 16% after tax hikes. The cost of most other goods
fell, partly reflecting the lower price of imports. Durable goods
prices fell for the fourth year in a row, as intense competition
in the auto market accompanied continued rapid declines in the price
of computing power. Semi-durables prices also dipped, with clothing
down for a second straight year. The cost of food was held in check
by falling beef prices due to the mad cow case, the rapid spread
of the ‘carb-free’ diet fad (reflected in declines for
pasta and rice) and the lower cost of imported fruits and vegetables.
Conversely, the cost of services increased 3.6%, despite sharp price
cuts by the slumping travel industry. Auto insurance premiums jumped
at a double-digit rate, while the housing boom pushed up the cost
of shelter.
Commodity prices rallied for the second straight year. The upturn
in commodity prices coincided almost exactly with the December 2001
admission of China into the World Trade Organisation. China’s
rapid industrialisation has made it a major consumer of oil and
industrial materials.
Industrial materials led the increase, after two years of falling
behind food and energy prices. Metals spearheaded the increase,
notably gold, nickel and zinc, which hit their highest levels in
years. Energy prices slowed after rapid gains in 2002, but remained
twice as high as they were just after September 2001.
Wage settlements were quick to reflect the sudden shift in sectoral
fortunes. After leading the way in 2002, wage increases in manufacturing
fell to a 6-year low of 2.4% as demand decelerated sharply. Conversely,
the public sector and primary industries posted the largest increases
at about 3%, after lagging through most of the previous decade.
Construction saw the largest acceleration, with the housing boom
creating shortages in some trades.
Conclusion
So far in the new millennium, several long-standing trends in our
economy have been reversed. The personal savings rate in Canada
has dipped below that of the US, while households increasingly relied
on debt to finance their spending, especially on housing. Partly
because of increased investment in housing, the long-run shift in
the mix of household assets to financial assets has been reversed
since the stock market crash in 2000. The mirror image of the deterioration
of household balance sheets was an improvement in the corporate
sector. The decade began with two years of declining investment
after the high-tech boom. Now, record financial surpluses and sharply
improved balance sheets leave firms well-positioned to continue
the tentative recovery of investment that began last year and they
intend to continue into 2004.
Our relation with the rest of the world also is changing rapidly,
shaped in part by the turnaround in our dollar. Trade in goods across
the border has slumped for three straight years, despite rapid growth
with China, while travelers to Canada fell for the first time in
15 years. Foreign direct investment in Canada was the lowest in
a decade, dampened by the rising dollar. The exchange rate also
largely explains the wedge between job losses in manufacturing and
increases elsewhere.
Some of the most entrenched trends in the labour market in the 1990s
have also changed in recent years. Demand for people with university
degrees slowed just as supply accelerated. Meanwhile, jobs picked
up for other workers, partly because of robust growth in construction
and the primary sector (which enjoyed its best year in two decades
as commodity prices soared). As a result, the gap in the unemployment
rate for people with and without a degree shrank to a record low.
The convergence of labour market outcomes was also reflected in
the smallest gap between blue-collar and white-collar jobs in over
a decade.
Recent feature articles
* Current Analysis (613) 951-9162
or ceo@statcan.ca.
1. See China-competing
in the Global Economy, Ed. by W. Tseng and M. Rodlauer, IMF,
2003.
2. See “The Hungry Dragon”,
p. 59-60 in The Economist, Feb. 21, 2004.
3. Dollar assets held by Asian central banks
rose by almost $240 billion (US), with China’s foreign exchange
reserves reaching $420 billion in November and Japan’s $650
billion in December, according to “Remarks by Chairman Alan
Greenspan” to the Economic Club of New York, March 2, 2004.
This also allowed the US to finance its current account deficit
relatively painlessly.
4. p. 11, Bank of Canada, Monetary
Policy Report, Oct. 2003.
5. An increase in domestic tourism
cushioned a 12% drop in spending by non-residents, according to
National Tourism Indicators, Fourth quarter 2003, Catalogue
no. 13-009.
6. p. 5, Bank of Canada, Financial
Systems Review, June 2003.
7. p. 11, ibid.
8. p. 21, US Federal Reserve Board,
Monetary Policy Report to the Congress, February, 2004.
9. p. 29, OECD Economic Outlook,
December 2002.
10. Interestingly, the slowdown
was most pronounced for people with graduate degrees, the group
that led the way with a 61% gain in the 1990s.
11. The drop in the employment
rate for people with degrees was confined to people 25 and over,
with roughly equal declines for both men (-3.5 percentage points)
and women (-2.7 points). But there were contradictory movements
within this age group. For men, the drop was equally evident for
both those aged 25 to 44 (-2.9 points) and 45 and over (-2.3). But
for women, the decrease was heavily concentrated in the 25 to 44
group (-2.9 points), as those 45 and over saw a drop of only 0.4
points in their employment rate.
12. From p. 1, G. Picot “The Deteriorating
Economic Welfare of Immigrants, and Possible Causes.” Unpublished
paper, Analytical Studies Branch, Statistics Canada, 2004. He finds
(p. 17) their earnings have fallen and low-income rates have risen
for this group, partly because of the rapid increase in education
among Canadians.
13. A more detailed examination
shows the withdrawal from the most educated labour force was led
by women between 25 and 44, whose labour force participation fell
1.5 points over the last five years. This was in marked contrast
with rising participation for women in all other education groups,
totaling nearly 2 points. The drop was especially marked for women
with a graduate degree. The withdrawal from the labour force in
this group also was evident for older women and men over 25 (although
this does not stand out as much for men, whose attachment to the
labour force has been declining slowly for years for most education
groups).
|