Linking the indicators to society and the economy

View the most recent version.

This chapter provides context for the three indicators in this report by examining some of the relationships among society, the economy and the environment that influence changes in the air quality, water quality and greenhouse gas (GHG) indicators. This chapter also illustrates some of the costs of environmental stressors to society and the economy. 

Although the indicators focus on separate issues and cover different geographic areas and time periods, they are connected in fundamental ways:

• Some of the same social and economic forces drive the changes in the indicators.
• Some of the same substances impact all three indicators.
• The indicators reflect stresses in some of the same regions of the country.

Activities that burn fossil fuels, such as transportation, emit GHG emissions as well as air pollutants that combine to form ground-level ozone, such as nitrogen oxides (NO_x) and volatile organic compounds (VOC). In addition, industrial processes and the burning of fossil fuels produce NO_x and sulphur oxides (SO_x), which fall as acid precipitation. This precipitation affects waters in sensitive lakes and rivers, harming aquatic organisms, notably in parts of eastern Canada (Environment Canada 2005a).

One of the general findings repeated at both the household level and throughout the economy is that, while energy use is becoming more efficient, overall energy consumption and GHG emissions are still increasing.

Societal pressures
Economic pressures
The social and economic costs
What’s next?

Societal pressures

Population
Behaviours

Population

Population characteristics influence the pressures that Canadians place on the environment. For example, with growing numbers of people living in and around urban areas, the potential for impacts on local and regional air and surface water quality are multiplied.

Between 1990 and 2005, Canada’s population grew by 17%, from 27.7 million to 32.3 million people (Statistics Canada n.d.a). Although Canada’s overall population density is low, the trend towards living in urban centres is continuing. From 1991 to 2006, urban populations increased by 21%, while rural populations decreased by 2% (Figure 13).

Aquatic ecosystems in drainage areas where populations are highly concentrated may experience increased stress from wastewater discharges and other uses. Likewise, aquatic ecosystems in drainage areas with low population but widespread agriculture may also experience increased stress. Population densities range from near zero in the Arctic to over 19 persons per square kilometre in the St. Lawrence major drainage area, whose waters feed into the Great Lakes and the St. Lawrence River. More than 62% of Canadians lived in this area in 2001, (Statistics Canada n.d.b). The Pacific and St. Lawrence major drainage areas are among the most urbanized in the country, with more than four fifths of their population living in urban areas. Meanwhile, agricultural land use is highest across the Prairie region, including the Mississippi and Nelson major drainage areas.

Behaviours

The behaviours of individual Canadians also have an effect on the environment. How they heat and cool their homes or commute to work, what products and services they choose, and even the recreational activities they participate in have an impact on the air quality, water quality and GHG indicators. There are a variety of factors that influence Canadians’ consumption behaviours. Income and prices are key drivers, but climate, geography, trends in housing size and density, and the adoption of technology can also affect how much energy, water or other resources are consumed.

Household energy use

The Canadian Environmental Sustainability Indicator (CESI) initiative has funded several surveys that focus on energy and water use to provide socio-economic context to the indicators. This section features data from one of these surveys, the 2006 Households and the Environment Survey, which was developed to gain a better understanding of household behaviour and practices that have, or are perceived to have, positive or negative impacts on the environment.

Households contribute to air and GHG emissions through the use of electric power, home heating fuels and gasoline and diesel. Close to a fifth (17%) of energy consumed in Canada is used directly by households for heat and power (Statistics Canada n.d.c).

With more people choosing to live alone or in smaller households, the number of dwellings has been increasing more quickly than the population (Statistics Canada n.d.d). Larger homes and the greater abundance of electronic devices used by Canadians have also contributed to higher residential energy demand (Natural Resources Canada 2006a). On the other hand, furnaces and appliances have become more energy-efficient, and improved insulation and other building envelope improvements have increased the energy efficiency of new and renovated houses (Natural Resources Canada 2006b).

The type, age and efficiency of home heating systems also have an impact on the amount of energy used and the quantity of emissions. For example, natural gas or hydro-electricity produce fewer GHG emissions and air pollutants than oil, and wood‑burning stoves are a particularly large source of air pollutants, producing a third of all fine particulate matter (PM_2.5) emitted in 2005, excluding open sources such as dust from unpaved roads (Environment Canada 2007e).

In 2003, two thirds of Canadian households heated their homes using hot-air or hot‑water furnaces powered by natural gas or oil. Electric baseboard heating, used by more than a quarter of households, was especially common in Quebec. Stoves burning wood, pellets, coal and other fuels were the main heating equipment for 4% of households (Natural Resources Canada 2006b).

More than a quarter of Canadian households had central air conditioning in 2003 and another 15% had one or more window or room air conditioners, but large regional differences exist. For example, 60% of all residential air-conditioning systems were located in Ontario, and nearly three out of every four households in Ontario and a third of households in Quebec and the Prairies were equipped with air-conditioning systems (Natural Resources Canada 2006b). In Ontario, peak demand for electricity now occurs in the summer instead of the winter as a result of air conditioner usage (Ontario Power Generation Conservation Bureau 2007).

Households can reduce their ecological impact by using less energy; for example, by turning down the thermostat at night during the winter. In 2006, 40% of households had a programmable thermostat, more than double the number in 1994. Of those who owned this type of thermostat and programmed it, two out of three turned down the heat at night. On the other hand, 17% of the households equipped with a programmable thermostat had not, in fact, programmed it (Statistics Canada 2007a).

Switching to more energy-efficient appliances and light bulbs is another way to reduce energy consumption. Over 55% of Canadian households now use compact fluorescent bulbs, which use up to three-quarters less energy than traditional light bulbs (Natural Resources Canada 2005). Between 1994 and 2006, the proportion using at least one compact fluorescent light bulb almost tripled (Statistics Canada 2007a).

Energy is also used by households to run a variety of other devices, including small gasoline engines that power equipment such as lawnmowers. These emit relatively high amounts of pollutants that can adversely affect air quality. In one year, the average gasoline-powered lawnmower emits as much PM_2.5 as an average passenger car travelling about 3300 km (Environment Canada 2007e). In 2006, an estimated 21% of non-apartment-dwelling households owned a snow blower. When they also had a lawn or garden, 67% of households owned a gasoline-powered lawnmower, and 5% owned a leaf blower (Statistics Canada 2007a).

Personal transportation

After energy use in the home, transportation is the biggest contributor to households’ demand for energy. It is also the largest contributor to households’ GHG emissions (Statistics Canada n.d.e). In 2005, the volume of gasoline sold at the pump decreased by 1% from the previous year, the first decline in a decade. However, sales increased by 23% from 1990, reaching 36.2 billion litres in 2005 (Statistics Canada n.d.f).

Households’ vehicle choices have had an important impact on air pollutant and GHG emissions. From 1990 to 2005, emissions from light-duty gasoline vehicles such as automobiles decreased by 13% for GHGs, 73% for NO_x and 70% for VOC. However, the increased popularity of sport utility vehicles, vans and light trucks has resulted in a 112% increase in GHG emissions from these vehicles. Meanwhile, the NO_x and VOC emissions associated with these light-duty trucks decreased by 32% and 39%, respectively (Environment Canada 2007a, 2007e).

Choosing to drive less also contributes to a healthier environment. In 2006, 83% of households owned or leased a motor vehicle for personal use. Nearly half of them used only one vehicle, another 39% used two vehicles and 12% used three or more vehicles. A majority of households drove their vehicles less than 20 000 km each year (Statistics Canada 2007a).

During the warmer months in 2006, 73% of Canadians working outside the home travelled to work by motor vehicle, 14% walked or cycled, and 10% used public transit. In colder months the proportion of commuters who travelled by car increased to 81% (Figure 14). In both seasons, well over half of all commuters travelled to work in a motor vehicle. This has implications for both air quality and GHG emissions (Statistics Canada 2007a).

Air travel is also becoming increasingly popular, contributing to GHG emissions and other environmental effects. Between 1990 and 2005, the number of passengers travelling on major Canadian airlines rose 51% to 32 million, while the distance travelled increased by more than two thirds to 84 billion passenger-kilometres (Statistics Canada n.d.h).

While motorized watercraft and snowmobiles use very little fuel in comparison to cars and trucks, they can produce a disproportionate amount of air pollution. Twelve percent of households owned these vehicles, with 70% using less than 100 litres of fuel in 2005 (Statistics Canada 2007a). Traditional two-stroke boat engines waste a significant amount of gasoline and oil, which is released directly into air and water as pollution (Environment Canada 2000).

Household-level impacts on water

Human settlements can influence water quality through the release of wastewater effluents and contaminated runoff into receiving water bodies. These releases typically contain nutrients, suspended solids, chloride and metals such as copper, iron, lead and zinc. However, hundreds of other substances can be released as well, including industrial chemicals, pesticides, oil and grease, and pharmaceutical products (Environment Canada 2001a). Conventional secondary wastewater treatment systems are designed to remove solid materials and substances associated with domestic wastewater, but may not adequately remove all constituents.

The quality of water in Canada’s rivers and lakes is also influenced by individual behaviour. For example, fertilizers and pesticides used on lawns and gardens can make their way into stormwater systems, potentially affecting aquatic life in receiving water bodies. In 2005, 32% of households with a lawn or garden used fertilizers, while 29% used pesticides. The use of chemical pesticides was down only slightly from 1994 levels. In addition, a wide range of household chemicals can make their way into sanitary sewers. Over 39% of households flushed their leftover pharmaceutical products down the drain or put them in the garbage in 2005 (Statistics Canada 2007a). Recent research has shown that these products can harm many aquatic species (e.g., through hormonal disruption).

Also of concern for municipalities is the overall increasing demand for water, which is straining the capacity of existing water and wastewater infrastructure and increasing the costs and energy required for treatment. Municipalities withdrew approximately 15 billion litres of water per day from surface and groundwater in 2004, an increase of 10% since 1991 (Environment Canada 2003, Environment Canada 2007d). Households used 56% of this water—on average, 329 litres per person per day. This was relatively unchanged from the 341-litre average reported in 1991 (Environment Canada 2007d).

Use of water-saving devices, such as water-saving showerheads and low-flow toilets, is increasing. For example, 54% of Canadian households reported having a water-saving showerhead in 2006, as opposed to 42% in 1994 (Statistics Canada 2007a). Summer water-use restrictions are also in place in many municipalities.

Economic pressures

Transportation
Energy production
Agriculture
Other industries

Canada’s economy is driven by many forces. Financial and real capital use, natural resource endowments, productivity, trade, and the degree to which Canadians save, consume and participate in the workforce all play a role. Growth in economic activity brings benefits in the form of increased income, but can also lead to increased pressure on the environment. One way of limiting this pressure is to reduce energy use.

Industrial energy use can be studied by measuring energy use per unit of goods and services produced. Ideally, this would be done by dividing energy use in a given industry by some physical measure of the industry’s production, say tonnes of cement or bushels of wheat. This is not possible for most industries, as industrial outputs are almost always heterogeneous and, therefore, not easily added together in physical units. A measure of the volume of industrial production is available in monetary terms, however. This is known as real gross output and is equal essentially to the value of an industry’s sales corrected for inflation.

In 2002,¹ the following four industry groups accounted for over 73% of total industrial energy use: manufacturing; utility; mining and oil and gas extraction; and transportation and warehousing.²

Using a measure of energy use per unit of real gross output, two of these industries improved their performance from 1990 to 2002 (Figure 15). The manufacturing industry used 33% less energy per unit of real gross output in 2002 as compared with 1990. The transportation and warehousing industry decreased its use of energy per unit of real gross output by 15% over the same period. In contrast, the utility industry’s energy needs increased by 7% and those of the mining and oil and gas extraction industry increased by 3%. 

Looking just at the real gross output of these industries, each one of them increased its real output considerably between 1990 and 2002 (manufacturing, 55%; utilities, 31%; transportation and warehousing, 38%; mining and oil and gas extraction, 49%). These increases meant that absolute energy use (Figure 16) increased over the period for each of the industries, in spite of the downward trend in energy use per unit of real gross output for the manufacturing and transportation and warehousing industries. The increase in absolute energy use for each of the sectors was as follows: manufacturing, 4%; utilities, 39%; transportation and warehousing, 17%; and mining and oil and gas extraction, 54%.

The size, location, technologies and practices of industrial facilities, farms, mines, stores and offices affect the quantity and distribution of pollutants as well. The following sections look in detail at several industries whose activities significantly influence the air quality, GHG emissions and freshwater quality indicators.

Transportation

Transportation keeps the economy moving by distributing goods and linking people in different communities and countries. Demand for transportation services is rising, driven in part by increased trade with the U.S. (Statistics Canada 2006a).

Transportation, including cars and trucks, transit, airlines, railways, marine transport and pipelines, consumed 31% of all energy used in Canada in 2005 (Statistics Canada n.d.j). A quarter of Canada’s total GHG emissions (Environment Canada 2007a), more than half of all NO_x and almost a third of VOC (Environment Canada 2007e), were emitted by transportation activities in 2005. Transportation can also influence water quality—runoff from roads carries a number of substances including silt, nutrients, metals, de-icing salts and petroleum products.

Since 1990, the movement of freight has increased for all modes of transport, but the trucking industry has seen the greatest rise in goods shipped, due in part to the advent of just-in-time delivery (Figure 17). On a tonne-kilometre (t-km) basis, which takes into account both the weight of shipments and the distance travelled, freight carried by the trucking industry increased 140% to 185 billion t-km between 1990 and 2003 (Statistics Canada n.d.k).

Greenhouse gas emissions from heavy-duty diesel vehicles rose 84% from 1990 to 2005 (Environment Canada 2007a). On the other hand, PM_2.5 emissions from heavy-duty gas and diesel vehicles fell 59% over the same period, while NO_x increased 9% overall, although these emissions experienced annual fluctuations (Environment Canada 2007e). New regulations limiting the sulphur content of diesel fuel to 15 parts per million and new engine technologies to reduce particulate matter and NO_x from truck engine emissions should help improve air quality in the future.

Energy production

As noted in the chapters on the individual indicators, energy production has a large impact on air quality, GHG emissions and water quality. 

Oil, gas and coal production emits air pollutants and GHGs while using large amounts of water. Furthermore, Canada’s oil sands are becoming increasingly important, accounting for 42% of total national crude oil and equivalent production in 2005 (Statistics Canada n.d.n). With current technology, these deposits are second only to Saudi Arabia’s oil reserves (CAPP n.d.). However, extracting oil from oil sands is more energy-intensive than conventional oil recovery.

The majority of dams in Canada are used primarily for hydro-electric generation, although other uses include irrigation, flood control, water supply, treating mine tailings and recreation. Dams alter the natural flow and shape of rivers, potentially affecting downstream water temperatures, metal concentrations and oxygen levels, preventing the transport of sediments containing nutrients and, for certain spillways, releasing gas bubbles with concentrations dangerous to fish (Fidler and Miller 1997, Environment Canada, 2001a).

In 2005, 60% of electric power was generated from hydro power and 15% from nuclear sources, while the remainder was produced using fossil fuels (Figure 18) (Statistics Canada n.d.o). Electricity and heat generation accounted for 17% of total GHG emissions in 2005 (Environment Canada 2007a), as well as a quarter of total emissions of SOx and a tenth of NO_x emissions (Environment Canada 2007e). In addition, in 2005, thermal-electric power generators³ withdrew 32 138 million cubic metres of water for cooling purposes and discharged 31 247 million cubic metres, mainly into surface water bodies (Statistics Canada 2007b).

Agriculture

Over the past several decades, Canadian crop and livestock operations have grown considerably, becoming larger and more specialized. Between 1981 and 2006, the number of farms decreased by 28%, while cropland areas increased by 16% (Statistics Canada n.d.p).

The agriculture sector is the largest source of atmospheric emissions of ammonia, accounting for 90% of the total, including open sources (Environment Canada 2007e). Ammonia can interact with other air pollutants to lead to the formation of PM_2.5. It also contributes to emissions of methane and nitrous oxide, both potent GHGs. Greenhouse gas emissions for the agriculture sector reached 8% of total emissions in 2005 (Environment Canada 2007a).

Agricultural activities may also degrade water quality. Exceedances of water quality guidelines for nutrients occur as a result of, for example, the application of nutrients in the form of chemical fertilizer, manure, compost, or sewage sludge to increase crop productivity. High turbidity (suspended solids), pathogens, and the presence of pesticides can result from runoff from fields and the removal of natural vegetation along stream banks. If sound management practices are followed, however, the environmental risks to water quality can be reduced.

Real farm expenditures on chemical fertilizers rose by 54% from 1980 to 2005. Over the same period, fertilized areas increased by 37% to over 250 000 km² nationally (Statistics Canada n.d.p). Livestock production is an important  source of phosphorous and nitrogen emissions; for the whole of Canada, manure production increased by 13.9% from 1981 to 2001, with the largest amounts produced in southern Alberta, Ontario and Quebec (Statistics Canada 2006b).

Pesticides, which are used to control weeds, insects and other pests, can potentially harm non-target organisms. Effects vary depending on the chemical used and the level and duration of exposure. Pesticides can also contaminate water through runoff and infiltration into groundwater. From 1980 to 2005, real expenditures on chemical products such as herbicides, insecticides and fungicides increased by 121% (Statistics Canada n.d.p).

Other industries

In 2005, large industrial and institutional facilities reporting to the National Pollutant Release Inventory discharged at least 115 000 tonnes of effluent into coastal and freshwater bodies. Municipal water and wastewater services discharged 86% of this effluent, with a further 6% coming from pulp and paper mills, 3% from waste treatment and disposal, 1% from metal ore mining and 3% from all other sectors combined. A total of 481 facilities across Canada reported discharges of 84 different substances to either coastal or freshwater bodies, with the largest being ammonia (46% of all emissions), nitrate (45%) and phosphorus (6%) (Environment Canada 2007c). Recent improvements in pollution prevention and control have reduced overall amounts of pollutants released by pulp and paper mills, especially methanol, ammonia and nitrate (Environment Canada 2006b).

Industries are also major emitters of air contaminants and GHGs. According to Environment Canada, industrial emissions of NO_x totaled 804 kilotonnes in 2005, up 56% from 517 kilotonnes in 1990, while industrial emissions of VOC totaled 735 kilotonnes, an increase of 3% from 1990. In contrast, from 1990 to 2005, emissions of PM_2.5 by industry declined by 42% to 117 kilotonnes (Environment Canada 2007e). From 1990 to 2005, GHG emissions from manufacturing industries decreased by 16%, while emissions in the industrial processes sector were unchanged (Environment Canada 2007a).

The social and economic costs

Degradation of the natural environment has many costs, including reductions in ecosystem goods and services, impacts on human health, and expenditures to prevent, reduce and treat pollution. Over the coming decades, adapting to climate change will also present significant additional expenses.

Expenditures to protect the environment and our health

Part of the economic dimension of the issues covered by the CESI indicators is the cost associated with reducing GHG emissions and air and water pollution. From purchasing energy-efficient cars and appliances to retrofitting their homes, individual Canadians are already spending to reduce their impact on the environment.

Over the years, Canadians have invested billions of dollars in water and wastewater infrastructure. In 2005, local governments spent close to $4.3 billion on water purification and supply and over $3.6 billion on sewage collection and disposal (Statistics Canada n.d.q.). Waterborne diseases and new contaminants such as pharmaceuticals will continually challenge our capacity to treat water and wastewater.

Canadian companies have also substantially increased their spending to mitigate their impact on the environment. Capital and operational spending by primary and manufacturing industries reached $6.8 billion in 2002, a 24% increase from 2000 (Statistics Canada 2004b). Much of this increase resulted from responses to new environmental regulations and industry’s efforts to reduce air emissions such as GHGs.

In total, Canadian businesses spent $1.106 billion to reduce GHG emissions in 2002. The oil and gas extraction industry spent almost $245 million, followed by the pulp, paper and paperboard mills industry at $242 million. In 2004, over a quarter of businesses surveyed introduced new or significantly improved equipment to reduce GHG emissions (Statistics Canada 2006c).

Businesses also invested $428 million in capital spending in 2002 to prevent and control water pollution. Significantly more was invested that year on protecting air quality—about $1.531 billion, three quarters of which was contributed by the oil and gas, electric power, and petroleum and coal products industries (Statistics Canada 2004b).

Current and potential socio-economic costs of pollution

Based on data from eight cities (Quebec, Montréal, Ottawa, Toronto, Hamilton, Windsor, Calgary and Vancouver), Health Canada has estimated that 5900 premature deaths each year in these cities are attributable to air pollution (Judek et al. 2004). Economists have also tried to estimate the social costs of poor health due to air pollution. A monetary estimate of all the health impacts—health care costs, lost productivity, and pain and suffering—runs to the billions of dollars per year in Canada (Chestnut et al. 1999).

While the air quality indicators focus on human health, pollution also has other socio-economic costs. For instance, elevated levels of ground-level ozone affect vegetation, impairing crop yields and ecosystems. Reducing these ozone levels would therefore have generally beneficial results on crop yields and commercial forest growth. Extensive field experiments conducted under the National Crop Loss Assessment Network showed that several economically important crop species are sensitive to ozone levels typical of those found in the U.S. (U.S. EPA 1996). There have also been observations of negative impacts of ozone at commonly occurring levels on tree species in field studies. These include the Aspen FACE (Free-Air Carbon Dioxide Enrichment) study where it was shown that the growth of sensitive varieties of aspen could be reduced by up to 31% due to ozone (Percy et al. 2006).

Particulate matter is a significant contributor to acid deposition (Environment Canada 2005a). This has direct socio-economic impacts that include decreased forest growth, detrimental influences on recreational and commercial fishing due to lake acidification, and increased rates of corrosion of buildings and structures, particularly historical buildings and electrical towers. These impacts are considerable; for example, material corrosion caused by acid deposition has been estimated to have cost $975 million in damages in Ontario alone (Ontario Ministry of the Environment 2005).

Particulate matter also impacts the welfare of Canadians in a number of ways. For instance, it leaves visible dirt and grime, increasing the effort and energy required for cleaning. It can also impair visibility, and this can affect the public’s enjoyment of scenic vistas and a variety of daily activities both in the places in which they live and work and in the places where they travel for recreation. One study funded by Environment Canada indicated that residents of British Columbia’s Lower Mainland would be willing to pay an average of $48 per household per year to improve visibility by 20% during the summer (Haider et al. 2002). 

Environmental degradation will potentially have even greater socio-economic costs in the future. For instance, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (2007) has concluded that North America, among other regions, is vulnerable to climate variability and extremes resulting from climate change and will face environmental, economic and social costs if global efforts fail to reduce GHG emissions. In fact, the report states that North America is already experiencing warming that is affecting natural systems. Expenditures could therefore occur in two areas: reducing GHG emissions to try to prevent the most destructive climate change impacts, and implementing measures to adapt to the climate change impacts that will inevitably occur over the next few decades.

If extreme weather events become more frequent and intense, damage to towns and cities and agricultural crops could also occur. In addition, forest productivity and wildlife could be affected by impacts such as pest disturbances, disease and fire. In humans, continually increasing emissions could lead to pollution-related health problems, heat-related deaths, and a higher incidence of waterborne and vector-borne diseases.

Degradation of water quality has important socio-economic impacts. Economic activities such as fishing, tourism and agriculture can be adversely affected by degraded water quality. For example, a third of shellfish-growing areas on the Atlantic Coast were closed in 1997 due to bacterial or chemical contamination (Statistics Canada 2000). For Nova Scotia alone, closure of shellfish areas results in estimated losses of at least $8 million a year, in addition to the $155 million already lost from 1940 to 1994 (GPI Atlantic, 2000).

Since the 1970s, many pollution prevention and control programs have been initiated to reduce nutrients and toxins in water. These public investments in water quality have had a positive impact on riverfront development or re-development, such as in the Great Lakes. In contrast, aquatic environment degradation such as algal blooms because of natural causes or water pollution, is still causing limitations and costs for recreational and water-related tourism activities. In 2001, 43% of Canadian Great Lake beaches had bacteriological counts exceeding the provincial standard at least once, resulting in a number of temporary closures during the summer season (Environment Canada and U.S. EPA 2003). In 2005, a quarter of all Canadian households were aware of a swimming restriction or closure at a nearby beach. Among those, two thirds chose not to swim because of the restriction (Statistics Canada 2007a).

While the freshwater indicator focuses on aquatic life, water quality can also impact human health. Various microbial pathogens can occur naturally in source water and have been responsible for outbreaks of illnesses in Canada, e.g., E. coli, Cryptosporidium and Giardia (Environment Canada 2001a). However, in identifying the cause of the illness, it can be difficult to determine whether the source of the microbial pathogen is foodborne or waterborne, or spread by person-to-person contact. Giardiasis, sometimes called "beaver fever," is an intestinal parasitic infection characterized by chronic diarrhea and other symptoms. Community outbreaks may occur by ingesting Giardia cysts from fecally contaminated food or unfiltered water. Between 1988 and 2004, the number of new cases of giardiasis in Canada declined by 63%, reaching a point where there were 13 reported cases per 100 000 people in 2004 (Public Health Agency of Canada n.d). However, estimates from studies in North America and Europe indicate that only about 1 to 10% of cases are reported (Health Canada and Statistics Canada 1999).

Although rare in most parts of Canada, the risk of microbial disease associated with drinking water can be a concern among small and remote Canadian communities, particularly in First Nations communities (OAG 2005). Of the 740 First Nations community water systems assessed in 2003, about 29% (218) were classified as posing a potential high risk to health and safety, primarily based on considerations of operations or drinking water treatment (INAC 2003). As of August 2007, there were 97 boil water advisories in effect in First Nations communities across Canada (Health Canada, n.d). In 1999, 79 out of 752 surveyed municipalities stated they had issued at least one boil water advisory during the year, the average duration being 39 days (Environment Canada, 2001b) In addition, it is estimated that 20% to 40% of all rural wells in Canada could have nitrate concentrations or coliform bacteria occurrences in excess of drinking water guidelines (van der Kamp and Grove 2001).

What’s next?

Further research will take place to integrate the indicators with the CESI surveys and with measures of socio-economic performance. This will be a key goal for future reports.

The Households and the Environment Survey is scheduled to be conducted every two years, with the next version scheduled for late 2007 and early 2008. This iteration of the survey will examine trends in household ownership of energy- and water-consuming equipment.

Results from Statistics Canada’s surveys on agricultural water use, industrial water and drinking water plants scheduled for 2007 and 2008 will provide many additional opportunities to link socio-economic activities with the indicators.

---

Notes

1. 2002 is the last year for which detailed energy accounts consistent with real gross output estimates exist.
2. These categories are defined by the North American Industry Classification System.
3. Includes fossil fuel electric power generation and nuclear electric power generation.