An Accounting Model for Social Sustainability the Case of the Banff

University of Calgary PRISM: University of Calgary's Digital Repository

Haskayne School of Business Haskayne School of Business Research & Publications

2017-05 An Accounting Model for Social Sustainability

Ambrosie, Linda M. http://hdl.handle.net/1880/51982 working paper http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/ Attribution No Derivatives 4.0 International Downloaded from PRISM: https://prism.ucalgary.ca

An Accounting Model for Social Sustainability

The Case of the Banff-Canmore Corridor Linda M. Ambrosie, PhD, CPA

Please cite as Ambrosie, L. M. (2017). An Accounting Model for Social Sustainability. The Case of the Banff - Canmore Corridor. Calgary, AB. Working Paper, p. 113 Email for communication: [email protected]

May, 2017 Ambrosie, FINAL May, 2017

Contents Figures and Tables ...... iv

An Accounting Model for Social Sustainability: ...... 5

Executive Summary ...... 5

Defining Social Sustainability...... 5

Model and Measures of Social Sustainability ...... 6

The Banff-Canmore (BCC) Case Study and Results ...... 8

Discussion ...... 10

An Accounting Model for Social Sustainability: ...... 11

Introduction ...... 11

Literature Review ...... 13

Social Sustainability Definition and Model ...... 13

Sustainability ...... 13 Social Sustainability ...... 14 Model and Measures ...... 16 Proxy Assets to Social Cohesion Improvement (increased Social Sustainability) ...... 19 Proxy Liabilities that Deplete to Social Cohesion (decreased Social Sustainability) ...... 24 Assessment of Sustainability Models ...... 31

Different monitoring systems of Social Sustainability...... 32 Balance Sheet approach to Social Sustainability monitoring ...... 35 Model Accounts for Community Social Sustainability ...... 36 Monetization of Measures ...... 37 Social Sustainability and the Banff-Canmore Corridor (BCC) ...... 38

1. Geography: Spatial and Demographic Limits ...... 39

2. Data Measures and Monetization ...... 43

3. Balance Sheets and Notes to the Balance Sheet: The Banff-Canmore Corridor Case Study ...... 47

Ambrosie, FINAL May, 2017

4. Triangulation of Results: - Stakeholder Consultation through Interviews, Survey and Focus Groups ...... 52

Discussion and Conclusion: The BCC’s Balance Sheets and their interpretation ...... 53

Data Availability ...... 53

The Model ...... 54

Missing from the current study ...... 55

Future avenues for research ...... 56

References ...... 57

Appendices ...... 68

Appendix A: Statistics Canada Geographic Codes and Alberta Information ...... 68

Appendix B: Data Collection for Balance Sheet Years 1996, 2001, 2006, 2011, and 2016, and Data Sources ...... 70

Appendix C: Potential Survey Instruments and Questions ...... 74

CASE STUDY: Social Sustainability of Canada's Communities:...... - 1 -

BANFF-CANMORE CORRIDOR BACKGROUND ...... - 2 -

GOVERNING THE BANFF-CANMORE CORRIDOR (BCC) – Addressing housing, wages and addictions...... - 3 -

Housing and tenure for permanent and seasonal workers ...... - 4 - Education and Income ...... - 5 - Local Wages and Hospitality ...... - 6 - Volunteerism ...... - 9 - MAINTAINING COMMUNITY WEALTH – What to monitor and measure? . - 11 -

REFERENCES ...... - 12 -

GROUP WORKSHEET: OVER TIME What to Measure? How to Monitor? How to Monetize? ...... 17

APPENDIX I – Tourist Visitation, Population and Dwelling Construction ...... 18

APPENDIX II – Housing and Income ...... 19

Ambrosie, FINAL May, 2017

APPENDIX III – Education and Annual Income ...... 22

APPENDIX IV – Financial Insecurity: Debt ...... 23

APPENDIX V – Economic Insecurity: Hourly Wages and Unemployment ...... 24

APPENDIX VI – Physical Insecurity: Self-Inflicted (Drugs and Suicide), Interpersonal (Domestic Abuse) and Property ...... 27

APPENDIX VII - Volunteerism ...... 30

APPENDIX VIII – The Banff-Canmore Corridor Lodging Industry ...... 31

APPENDIX IX – Monetization of Assets and Depletion (Current Dollars) and the Consumer Price Index (CPI) ...... 33

CASE STUDY TEACHING GUIDE ...... 34

iii

Ambrosie, FINAL May, 2017

Figures and Tables Figures: Figure 1: Model of Assets on Social Sustainability...... 19 Figure 2: Model of Depletion of Social Sustainability ...... 24 Figure 3: Canada Household Principal on Debt 1990 - 2014...... 26 Figure 4: Outline of a full Balance Sheet to measure Natural, Social-Economic and Economic Sustainability ...... 35 Figure 5: Federal Electoral District 49 Banff-Cochrane ...... 40 Figure 6: Economic Region No. 4840 Banff, Jasper, Rocky Mountain House ...... 40 Figure 7: Census Division 48 15 Banff, Jasper and Kananaskis ...... 41 Figure 8: Banff Census Subdivision 48 15 032 ...... 42 Figure 9: Canmore Census Agglomeration 48 15 015 ...... 42 Figure 10: Banff-Canmore Corridor ...... 43 Figure 11: Map of the Calgary Health Region with Banff and Canmore...... 45 Tables: Table 1: Community Social Sustainability Accounts and Measures ...... 36 Table 2: Community Social Sustainability Accounts and Monetization ...... 38 Table 3: Key Data Sources and Available Year ...... 44 Table 4: Canmore Preliminary Social Sustainability Balance Sheet 2011 ...... 47 Table 5: Banff Preliminary Social Sustainability Balance Sheet 2011 ...... 50

Ambrosie, FINAL May, 2017

An Accounting Model for Social Sustainability: The Case of the Banff-Canmore Corridor By Linda M. Ambrosie, PhD, CPA

Executive Summary Sustainability is commonly defined as the integration of economic, environmental, and social dimensions. This research narrows its focus to investigate the social dimension and its relationship to the economic dimension: the proper redistribution of wealth to create vibrant and resilient societies. The current research is primarily a subset of social sustainability, which is the impact of implementing a living wage to workers providing tourism services within protected areas. Protected areas naturally attract conservationists keen to preserve pristine environments. Hospitality companies utilize these areas to expand tourism. Private business interests are often supported by lobby groups such as chambers of commerce and hotel associations. Between the conservationists and private sector owners are the employees that provide essential services from room attendants to bartenders who mostly earn minimum wage. These workers have seen their negotiating power eroded due to the lack of organization and representation unlike powerful environmental groups and private enterprise. The ultimate aims of this study are:  To define operationally, measure reliably and monetize relevantly social sustainability.  From the model developed, measure the current state of the Banff-Canmore Corridor’s (BCC) social sustainability.  From the results, determine the impediments to improving social sustainability in the Banff- Canmore Corridor such as offering workers’ living wages.  Last but not least, identify the long-term community benefits of a living wage to workers in a locality?

Defining Social Sustainability Definitions of social sustainability are only just beginning. Following an extensive review, the definition of social sustainability arrived at is: A place where people want to live, work and recreate, now and in the future. These individuals identify physically, emotionally and symbolically with that place such that they collaborate and cohere to continuously improve their condition and that of the community to ensure resilience.

Ambrosie, FINAL May, 2017

This definition relates to place attachment literature and studies. Numerous place attachment studies show that the strongest predictors of attachment, in order of importance, are length of residence, home-ownership and age. Education is a predictor that appears to be mediated by other factors such as ideology, for example a strong attachment to the outdoors and the mountains. School-aged children also play an important role in community participation, a key social element of place attachment. A greater level of attachment correlates with greater community engagement which increases social trust and iteratively attachment. Therefore civic engagement increases community cohesion and ultimately social sustainability. Conversely, financial insecurity, e.g. high levels of household debt, combined with economic insecurity, e.g. unemployment, reduces community engagement. Studies show that men volunteer less when they are seeking work fulltime while women volunteer less when they care for elders irrespective of their employment status. Related to but independent from financial and economic insecurity is physical insecurity of which there are three main forms: self-harm including suicide, interpersonal violence and property crime. Any and all forms of physical insecurity reduce community engagement and over time social sustainability. The virtuous and vicious cycles described here are modeled below.

Model and Measures of Social Sustainability When looking at the predictors, the following diagrams illustrate the positive and negative relationships. Assets that increase social engagement, cohesion and therefore sustainability:

Home-ownership Length of Residence

Income Age Community Engagement Volunteerism Community Cohesion Social Sustainability

Education

Ambrosie, FINAL May, 2017

Depletion (liabilities) that decrease social engagement, cohesion and therefore sustainability:

Men-Fully Unemployed Financial Insecurity Economic )Insecurity Women - Elder Dependents Income Loss REDUCED Community REDUCED Community LESS Social or Engagement Cohesion Sustainability Insufficiency Self-Harm

Physical Insecurity Interpersonal

Property

A Balance Sheet is one method of capturing important trends of core indicators such as income, education, housing and community engagement. The measurements of particular monetized indicators are hypothesized to correlate to social cohesion, the paramount element of social sustainability. As said above, home-ownership is a strong predictor of community engagement and therefore cohesion and ultimately social sustainability. Therefore, within the selected geographic area under study, only resident home-owners and the dwelling occupants are included in the Balance Sheet. Net home equity, education levels and volunteering is set against unemployment and physical insecurity. Based on the prediction model above, the Social Sustainability accounts, measures and monetizers proposed are as follows: Social-Cultural ASSETS DEPLETION (Insecurities) Account Measure Account Measure Housing Permanent resident Financial Permanent resident households households occupied by occupied by owners owners Education Permanent residents over 16 Economic Unemployed adult male permanent years by highest level of residents education attainment Households with a resident elder parent(s) Volunteerism Volunteer hours Physical Crimes against property Self-inflicted injuries and substance abuse Crimes against persons

Social-Cultural ASSETS DEPLETION (Insecurities) Account Monetization Account Monetization Housing Home values of owner- Financial Total principal outstanding on per occupied dwellings owner-occupied household. Education Public and private Economic Unemployment payments to expenditure per resident unemployed permanent resident male over 16 years of the highest adults. level of education Replacement cost of eldercare. attainment Volunteerism Replacement cost of Physical Costs of law enforcement and damage volunteer hours with wage- reparation following property crimes.

Ambrosie, FINAL May, 2017

earning workers Costs of law enforcement, of hospitalization, health care and support for interpersonal violence. Costs of law enforcement for drug trafficking and substance abuse, and of hospitalization, health care and support for self-inflicted injuries.

It is important to stress the exploratory and experimental nature of the models and calculations here. However, the variables selected are core indicators to facilitate comparisons across time and locations, and especially communiate across disciplines. In addition to these core indicators, each region supplements this core with indicators specific to local circumstances. Accounting is a tool that allows us to monetize realities that impact community engagement according to studies. These studies demonstrate that unemployed males withdraw from the community whereas unemployed females continue to engage. As with children, domestic elder care tends to fall on women who then have less time for community volunteering. As for education, someone with a master’s degree has utilized private and public funds to achieve this level of education. Studies show that this person will have fewer health problems, earn more, and volunteer more.

The Banff-Canmore (BCC) Case Study and Results Based on the above model and methodology, an example of the 2011 Canmore Balance Sheet looks as follows:

CANMORE 2011 Owner-occupied Residences 3,660 Previous Balance Sheet 2006 Owner-occupied Residences 3,280 ASSETS LIABILITIES

Ambrosie, FINAL May, 2017

As for Banff, an example is as follows:

BANFF 2011 Owner-occupied Residences 1,175 Previous Balance Sheet 2006 Owner-occupied Residences 1,070 ASSETS LIABILITIES

HOUSING - Owner-Occupied $ 655,152,030 FINANCIAL $ 288,459,990 EDUCATION $ 621,585,680 ECONOMIC $ 28,990,000 VOLUNTEERISM $ 11,831,899 PHYSICAL $ 2,311,986 TOTAL ASSETS $ 1,288,569,609 TOTAL LIABILITIES $ 319,761,976 INTERGENERATIONAL EQUITY $ 968,807,633 per Banff owner- $ 824,517 occupied dwelling Per Banff resident fifteen years and older $ 175,668 A summary of the Notes to the Balance Sheet are: It is important to remember, that for accounting purposes of producing information that is material for decision-making, one balance sheet is informationally barren. It is the change from one period to the next or comparison within an industry or similar economic region that provides trends as to residency and volunteerism. As such, the first attempt here is only a model. Previous years (2006 and 2001) require calculation to arrive at conclusions. But these two Social Sustainability Balance Sheets show that both townships are on equal footing in terms of Social Sustainability when it comes to permanent home-owning residents despite the fact that Banff tends to attract more media attention. However, when social sustainability is calculate for all residents fifteen years and older irrespective of tenure, Banff has almost one-half the social sustainability of Canmore. The reason is that all residents benefit from a cohesive community whether they contribute to it or not. And in the case of Banff, social sustainability is complicated by mobility. However, mobility is a challenge for both Banff and Canmore but in different ways. Canmore’s large population of home-owners is heavily indebted that threatens residency and increases the chance of emigration to other areas. In fact, many families have had to leave Canmore stating the “high cost of living” (p.comm). However, studies show that being financially over-optimistic is common and therefore maximizing borrowing could be more an issue than local costs alone. Meanwhile, Banff suffers from a challenge to address physical insecurity, especially substance abuse and trafficking, a function of worker age group (young adults), marital status (mostly single) and mobility (seasonal work)

Ambrosie, FINAL May, 2017

Discussion The model helped to arrive at a conclusion on the question that motivated this study: requests from the hoteliers in particular to expand the temporary foreign workers program (TFWP) in a province where unemployment is reaching 10% and more depending on the municipality and age group. Based on the model and current legislation, TFWs will not enhance social sustainability for several reasons. From discussions, the hotel workers most in demand are room attendants for cleaning. This arduous work is typically performed by women and in the BCC pays slightly above minimum wage, approximately $14 per hour, which is 60% below the estimated region’s living wage of $21-$24 per hour per adult for a household of two adults and two children. Low wages often correlate to lower education levels of the individuals or in the case of non-Canadian immigrant workers, unrecognized degrees and foreign training. Academic studies and Statistics Canada data both show that high civic engagement correlates to long residency and usually home-ownership, high levels of education and therefore income. More low-paid workers, if current job offers are any indication, leads to more pressure on municipalities to subsidize public transportation and affordable rental housing, the latter a big challenge in an area where residential expansion is legally restricted due to the surrounding protected areas. Low wages and renting lodging reduce the chances of long-term residency, community engagement and therefore social sustainability. The current study requires more work to refine and standardize the account calculations. The account selection requires verification by individuals from sociology and social work. For example, do the crime accounts correctly proxy for physical insecurity and adequately account for concomitant costs? Gender equity is unaccounted for, a major challenge considering the required ownership information to determine if women have equal access to property. The results need to be revisited following interviews, a survey of residents and focus groups to work on the Case Study. Focus groups’ calculations would be compared to those produced in this study. In-depth discussion with focus group participants helps to reveal interpretation of the Balance Sheet and changes, if any, in policy directions. Beyond the current study, the Social Sustainability models, measures and monetization need to be tested on other communities, perhaps one that is not tourism driven, in order to determine the model’s true generalizability.

Ambrosie, FINAL May, 2017

An Accounting Model for Social Sustainability: The Case of the Banff-Canmore Corridor1 Linda M. Ambrosie, PhD, CPA

Introduction Due to the downturn in oil industry, Alberta’s unemployment rate sharply increased to 8.5% in 2016 from a low of 4.8% at the end of 2014(Statistics Canada, 2016). Over the same period, Alberta youth unemployment increased from 9.5% to 13.4%. Despite increasing unemployment and declining living standards, the hotel associations (the Banff & Lake Louise Hospitality Association, the Alberta Hotel & Lodging Association, and the Hotel Association of Canada) continue to successfully lobby for more foreign workers (Dharssi, 2016; TIAC & BLLHA, 2015). Hoteliers argue that hotels, especially resort hotels, cannot afford to pay wages higher than those already offered. They argue that the additional perquisites, such as housing, increase the wage package such that the employee is properly compensated equivalent to a living wage. Furthermore, their investors’ expectations must be fulfilled with an acceptable return to maintain access to needed financial capital to continue to grow and provide shareholders with a return on investment (p.comm). With a drop in the Canadian dollar, destinations such as the Banff Corridor saw a 10% increase in tourism between 2015 and 2016 (CTA, 2016; van Loon, 2016) and an increase in temporary foreign workers (TFW) because Canadian residents allegedly do not see career opportunities in the tourism industry (p.comm). The province of Alberta where the Banff-Canmore Corridor (BCC) is located and regulated now has one of Canada’s better minimum wages at C$12.20 (U$9.40) per hour. But the BCC has some of Canada’s highest costs of living, similar to that of Toronto and Vancouver. In Canmore, the 2015 living wage was estimated at C$23.40 (U$18) per person for two working parents in a family of four (Biosphere Institute, 2015), double the Alberta’s recent minimum wage enacted in October 2016. Canmore’s living wage is even 30% higher than Calgary’s living wage of C$18.10 per person for a family of four.

1 I would like to thank the University of Calgary, Haskayne School of Business in particular Dr. Irene Herremans, the international labour union LiUna in particular Jeffrey Anders and the organization Mitacs at the Univeristy of Calgary, Oba Harding, for their invaluable support and imporant funding of this initial research project. Any errors and omissions are mine. Please send any comments or observations to [email protected] 11

Ambrosie, FINAL May, 2017

Some businesses view wages as an economic expense rather than a human capital investment. However, living conditions and community cohesion cascade from wages which determine human well-being or quality of life. While increased wages reduce returns to the shareholders in the short-term, higher wages potentially reduce recruitment and training costs, and inefficiencies due to turnover (CTHRC, 2013). It also improves morale, employee creativity, and customer satisfaction, thus raising profits and social sustainability in the long-term. In a 2016 survey, Banff hotels recognized that labour shortages and high turnover caused them to lose revenue (BLLHA, 2016). Despite these economic and social benefits of living wages, with the exception of the highest positions the wages offered for hospitality positions, the bulk of work in the BCC, most wages offered are only slightly above that of minimum wage (Job Resource Centre, 2016). Within the Banff Corridor, the aims are to define operationally, measure reliably and monetize relevantly social sustainability. To do so, a model is developed and then applied to the Banff- Canmore Corridor (BCC) to benchmark the current state of the Banff-Canmore Corridor’s (BCC) social sustainability. Based on the results, impediments to social sustainability improvement will emerge such as the high cost of living combined with low wages. Last but not least, what are the long-term community benefits of a living wage to workers in a locality? A living wage is fundamental to the social sustainability of the local communities which can be measured through an increase in the assets of home purchases, education and civicism. When wages are insufficient and workers are transient or uprooted, the personal and community assets acquired by these workers can be depleted through different forms of insecurity: financial (i.e. indebtedness), economic (i.e. employment insecurity) and physical (i.e. interpersonal violence). The test location for the model and method is the Banff-Canmore Corridor (BCC). The effects of the past developments on the social and economic benefits are examined using 1996 as a base line (Statistics Canada censuses) to plot changes by five-year increments to 2011 and soon 2016. This method is well suited to the Banff Corridor because the tourism destination is not confounded by other industries such as the Canmore coal mine which closed in 1979. The BCC is driven by tourism which depends on the splendid natural environment of the Banff National Park to provide desirable economic and social value. Nonetheless, the social sustainability model and metrics developed are generic to ensure it can be used for any other proposed development or community.The report begins with a review of the salient literature on social sustainability to arrive

Ambrosie, FINAL May, 2017 at an operational definition of the concept. With the definition in mind, next is a review of the core conditions of social sustainability, the indicators of those conditions and the different systems to monitor long-term sustainability trends. These indicators are used to develop the model of the relationship among the indicators. Then the indicators are monetized and placed into a Balance Sheet to show how assets such as housing purchases and education investments are offset by debt levels and social strife The method and the outcome are experimental but the study here demonstrates how the monetized presentation of core indicators provides an easily understood dashboard to communicate across disciplines.

Literature Review

Social Sustainability Definition and Model

Sustainability Sustainability emerged most prominently following the United Nation's World Commission on Environment and Development (the Brundtland Commission), in its report Our Common Future that defined sustainability as "development which meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs" (UN WCED, 1987). This definition is now abridged to 'intergenerational equity'. However, this definition has been criticized for being vague (McKenzie, 2004). In 2006, the IUCN’s (2006) Renowned Thinkers called the definition ‘neat but inexact’ and ‘holistic, attractive, elastic but imprecise’(2006, p. 3). Their conclusion was that sustainability “ends up being development as usual, with a brief embarrassed genuflection towards the desirability of sustainability” (2006, p. 4). In fact, some have questioned if sustainability accounting is not simply ”cosmetic irrelevance” (e.g. Owen, Gray, & Bebbington, 1997, p. 175). Because the notion of sustainability is “over-worked and tired”, the IUCN group suggested adding the aspirational value of resilience. Resilience is defined as the “ability to recover from or adjust easily to misfortune or change” (Merriam-Webster.com, n.d.). The addition of ‘resilience’ to sustainability provides a minimum standard. A system, community or individual that cannot rebound to a generally-acceptable base level has exceeded the limits from which recovery is possible. Following the eight 2001 Millennium Development Goals, in 2015 the United Nations defined new goals for the next 15 years. Of the 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), resilience was mentioned in six: the poor (Goal 1); agricultural practices (Goal 2); infrastructure

Ambrosie, FINAL May, 2017

(Goal 9); human settlements (Goal 11); climate hazards (Goal 13); and marine and coastal ecosystems (Goal 14) (UN, 2015). Sustainability is generally accepted to comprise three components: environment, social and economic. In general, there is agreement among different academics as to the definitions of environment and the economy (Herremans & Reid, 2002; Hodge, 1997) whereas 'social' is referred to as culture (Sadler, 1990), legal-administrative (Dorcey, 1991 in Hodge, 1997, pp. 16-17) or political (CIDA, 1991 in Hodge, 1997, pp. 20-21). The fundamental agreement about the social dimension is that the unit is groups or communities with shared values rather than self-interested, revenue-maximizing individuals (economic). Unlike society and the economy, the environment is not a human construct. Both the economic and social will cease when humans cease to exist which distinguishes these two elements from the environment (IUCN, 2006). Much has been written about the economic element and the environment. In fact ‘sustainability’ is more often than not synonymous with the latter. Definitions and studies of social sustainability have lagged because social sustainability was thought of as the handmaiden of the other two: trained workers for the economic sphere and an educated population to guarantee environmental consciousness. The social component is consciously or implicitly a bridge between the components of the environment and the economic (Vallance, Perkins, & Dixon, 2011) but not as a component with its own intrinsic value (Magis & Shinn, 2009).

Social Sustainability Of the three elements, to date the social component is the least recognized, defined and studied (Boyer, Peterson, Arora, & Caldwell, 2016; Dempsey, Bramley, Power, & Brown, 2011; Magis & Shinn, 2009; Murphy, 2012; UNECE, 2005; Vallance et al., 2011). Conversely, much is known and measured of economic (market-based) sustainability with measures such as GDP and GNP. Even the environmental component has been more the object of measurement and accounting (Baker & Schaltegger, 2015; Cuckston, 2013; Freeman & Groom, 2013; Jones & Solomon, 2013; Siddiqui, 2013a). To better measure all components of sustainability, several proposals such as the Genuine Progress Indicator have been proposed and tested, some in the private sector sphere (Jones, 2003, 2014), and far less common in the public sector sphere at the community level (Ambrosie, 2011). The Genuine Progress has also be measured at regional levels (Anielski, 2001, 2007; Pannozzo & Colman, 2009; Jeffrey Wilson, Colman, & Monette, 2001) and national levels (Hayward, Pannozzo, & Colman, 2012). Public sector environmental reporting lags that of the

Ambrosie, FINAL May, 2017 private sector despite higher visibility, expectations and reporting requirements (Ball, Grubnic, & Birchall, 2014; Lodhia & Jacobs, 2013) but it is still more common than social sustainability reporting. Only for the past decade, have scholars tried to define and understand social sustainabilityas distinct from, albeit interconnected with, the environmental and the economic. Previously, society was seen as a threat to the environment requiring education for the proper stewardship of resources and ecosystems. Economic perspectives viewed societal well-being as a necessary pre-condition for a healthy and skilled labour force to produce goods and services. Both perspectives treated the social as a means to an end: environmental protection or economic prosperity devoid of intrinsic value (Magis & Shinn, 2009). The absence of a clear definition of social sustainability is a reflection of this subordination. Often, sustainability was and is synonymous with environmental protection. However, the links to the environment are varied. These variances highlight differing perspectives on the role of social sustainability. Vallance et al (2011) typified social sustainability literature into three heuristic categories: development, bridge and maintenance. Development asks the question how society can alleviate poverty because poverty or disadvantage correlates to environmental inattention or degradation. Bridging perspectives assess how to change behaviors so that society’s members consider their ecological impact. Education provides an example of the different approaches. Is education a goal in itself (development) or should education serve to create environmental awareness (bridging)? Finally, the maintenance branch of the social sustainability literature deconstructs the rituals, values and customs which drive passive or active resistance to behaviour modification even if the new behaviour improves sustainability. One example is people who support conceptually sustainability but refuse to make fundamental lifestyle changes (i.e. taking public transportation, medium/high density residence, etc.). Rather than a definition2, most often social sustainability is framed as a series of existing conditions describing “it as either a currently existing positive condition, or as a goal that remains to be achieved. Where it is deemed not to exist, the community may be deemed ‘at risk’ and in need of support” (McKenzie, 2004, p. 13).

2 The dictionary defines the word definition as “a statement expressing the essential nature of something”.A definition is not a condition. As defined by the same dictionary, a condition is “something essential to the appearance or occurrence of something else” (Merriam-Webster.com, n.d.) 15

Ambrosie, FINAL May, 2017

More recently, a condition of sustainability is resilience. Again, these are factors to achieve social sustainability but not a definition of it. For example, Australia’s WACOSS (2012) provides the conditions for the emergence of social sustainability and indicators of progress towards it. “Social sustainability occurs when the formal and informal processes, systems, structures and relationships actively support the capacity of current and future generations to create healthy and liveable communities. Socially sustainable communities are equitable, diverse, connected and democratic and provide a good quality of life.” (WACOSS, 2012) (Emphasis mine)

One decade ago the UK provided the following definition of social sustainability …places where people want to live and work, now and in the future. They meet the diverse needs of existing and future residents, are sensitive to their environment, and contribute to a high quality of life. They are safe and inclusive, well planned, built and run, and offer equality of opportunity and good services for all” (UK, 2005).

Note that the first part is a definition (essential nature) while the last half consists of conditions. The list of conditions recalls the concept of Sense of Place (Cantrill, 1998; Longo & Hodge, 2007; Stedman, 2003), “the transformation of space into place through the endowment of values stemming from human activities of work, recreation, and living in general” (Herremans & Ambrosie, 2011, p. 6). The commonalities among the above examples are that social sustainability is place-based, process-oriented (Boyer et al., 2016) and forward-looking, in other words, spatially-bounded, ever- transforming and future-orientated. What social sustainability is not is a journey’s end; instead effort is continuous as the ‘place’ transforms and regularly presents new challenges to resolve. Combining the numerous concepts, our definition of social sustainability is A place where people want to live, work and recreate, now and in the future. These individuals identify physically, emotionally and symbolically with that place such that they collaborate and cohere to continuously improve their condition and that of the community to ensure resilience.

Model and Measures With the above definition in mind, many social sustainability frameworks provide a set of characteristics. Human well-being as defined by the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment is people living the kind of lives they value in terms of: 1. access to basic materials for living (food, shelter, and clothing); 2. physical and mental health; 3. security in all its dimensions; 4. social/cultural interactions; and 5. the ability to choose how to achieve these components according to each

Ambrosie, FINAL May, 2017 individual’s needs and wishes (IUCN, 2008, p. 9). More specifically these five components with the social refer to living materials such as food, water, housing, clothing, fuel; health including medicine, clean air and clean water; security defined as protection against disasters (resilience) and against conflict over natural resources; social interactions including recreation, spirituality, education, aesthetics and contentment; and finally, the freedom to choose (access to and control over natural resources, democracy and rights such as participation and gender equity). To summarize, the core of the social is health, education, civic participation and equity. This welfare nucleus is then coated with less tangible notions such as cultural references, value-systems, often manifested as sense of place, and even spirituality. To arrive at fundamental concepts, Magis & Shinn (2009) synthesized three approaches called Basic Needs, Human Development and Freedoms. The first approach is to meet six basic needs: nutrition, primary education, health, sanitation, water supply, and housing, similar to the 2002 Millennium Development Goals (UN, 2015) and the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment. The Human Development approach embraces and transcends the six needs to create enabling environments in which people can enjoy long, healthy and creative lives. The components are equity, sustainability, productivity and empowerment, and currently operationalized as the United Nation’s Human Development Index. The third approach, Freedoms, is broader still because the “expansion of freedoms and the elimination of unfreedoms are both primary ends and the principle means of development” (Magis & Shinn, 2009, p. 24). Synthesizing the three approaches Maggis & Shinn (2009) arrived at the four components of social sustainability: well-being (long, healthy, creative lives), equity (among generations, nations and genders), democratic civil society (civil society participation) and democratic government. With the exception of democratic government, three components align closely with the UN’s Millennium Goals. Based on an equally extensive literature review, Murphy (2012) arrived at four pre-eminent conditions: equity, awareness for sustainability, participation, and social cohesion. Demsey et al (2011) also refers to social interaction and participation, sense of place, security but adds the condition of community stability. However, this last element is probably more the outcome of the previous three conditions rather than one in and of itself. In short, sense of place is mentioned by Murphy (2012), Maggis & Shinn (2009) and Dempsey et al (2011). The first two studies also mention equity and security as fundamental components.

Ambrosie, FINAL May, 2017

Magee et al (2013) proposes a framework from the supposition that sustainability is a social condition. Thus, the economy is an element of the social while the non-social environment is reframed to ecology which is a human construct. In addition to these two elements, the Magee et al (2013) add culture and politics, the former encompasses well-being, values and identity while the latter encompasses power, justice and ethics. To summarize, the above four conceptual frameworks converge with Magis & Shinn (2009) on well-being and with Murphy (2012) on ecological awareness and protection. Similar to Magee et al (2013), the 1992 Rio Declaration placed people at the center of sustainable development. Two decades later, the UN’s new people-centred agenda to 2030 while not defining social sustainability specifically, frames the conditions as 17 sustainable development goals (SDGs): Goal 1 poverty; Goal 2 food security; Goal 3 health; Goal 4 education; Goal 5 gender equality; Goal 6 water and sanitation; Goal 7 reliable and sustainable energy; Goal 8 dignified employment; Goal 9 resilient infrastructure; Goal 10 equality among and within nations; Goal 11 sustainable human settlements; Goal 12 sustainable consumption and production; Goal 13 climate change; Goal 14 marine conservation; Goal 15 terrestrial ecosystem protection; Goal 16 peace and justice; Goal 17 global partnerships (UN, 2015). “We resolve between now and 2030, to end poverty and hunger and everywhere to combat inequalities within and among countries; to build peaceful, just and inclusive societies; to protect human rights and promote gender equality and the empowerment of women and girls; and to ensure the lasting protection of the planet and its natural resources. We resolve also to create conditions for sustainable, inclusive and sustained economic growth, shared prosperity and decent work for all, taking into account different levels of national development and capacities.” (UN, 2015, p. 6)

Any form of sustainability originates with the fulfillment of basic needs that include clean food, water, shelter and air; medical attention (health), education (at least primary); and security. The achievement of these basic needs is sometimes a function of equity of gender and nations; and the freedom to earn a living, associate and participate in democratic institutions. Note that the SDGs do not specifically mention democratic institutions as a condition of sustainability, merely peace and justice. But many of the 169 indicators to measure these goals imply freedom of choice that includes economic activity, education and governments. As defined above, social sustainability is place-based and constantly evolving. As such, the model developed here must capture trends of the particular place that members identify as their

Ambrosie, FINAL May, 2017 community, city and region. To date, few models contain the ability to capture the longitudinal trends (Ambrosie, 2012 Part III). Many models rely on disparate indicators that are not comparable or compared from one period to the next. Therefore a balance sheet is one method of capturing important trends of core indicators such as income, education, housing and community engagement. The measurements of particular monetized indicators are hypothesized to correlate to social cohesion, the paramount element of social sustainability.

Proxy Assets to Social Cohesion Improvement (increased Social Sustainability) Figure 1: Model of Assets on Social Sustainability

Home-ownership Length of Residence

Income Age Community Engagement Volunteerism Community Cohesion Social Sustainability

Education

Source: Ambrosie Community members report greater attachment to the community if they are long-term residents, home-owners, older and more educated (Lewicka, 2011). Of these four predictors, education is the weakest and appears to be mediated by several factors of which the presence of numerous local amenities (e.g. cultural attractions and transportation systems) and ideological rootedness (e.g. landscapes and the environment). Canadian studies found that children at home correlates with greater community engagement and therefore attachment (Robinson & Wilkinson, 1995; Turcotte, 2015). Community attachment correlates with greater community engagement (Anton & Lawrence, 2014; Cuba & Hummon, 1993; Raymond, Brown, & Weber, 2010). Engagement can be in the form membership in clubs or religious organizations, attendance at community meetings or volunteering (Anton & Lawrence, 2014; Cuba & Hummon, 1993) any of which increases social cohesion the greater the number of community members engaged (Ross, Reynolds, & Geis, 2000). Conversely, residents withdraw from community participation because of debt, social strife such as drug and alcohol addition, and violence in all its forms (self-inflicted, interpersonal and property) (Lewicka, 2011). Measures of these indicators are both quantitative (e.g. Canada-wide surveys of giving and volunteering) and self-reported, e.g. the Bollen & Rick Neighbour Cohesion Instrument (Bollen & Rick, 1990; Robinson & Wilkinson, 1995, p. 142). While the quantitative measures account for

Ambrosie, FINAL May, 2017 time and money donated at all census levels, the qualitative survey assesses individuals’ sense of belonging and morale. Sense of belonging positively correlates to social cohesion while exclusion negatively correlates to cohesion. Morale (positive or negative opinions about the neighbor/community) although highly correlated with cohesion, is important to distinguish from belonging because it can act in opposite ways, to increase engagement or encourage emigration. Negative morale about a community may motivate community members to participate in order to improve the community because of immobility due to poverty, for example, or a sense of attachment (belonging) which strengthens the commitment to the community (Bollen & Rick, 1990). Conversely, low morale can also incite mobility when possible and emigration from the community.

ASSET: RESIDENCY AND HOUSING Home-ownership is a reflection of wealth and stability. Home-owners tend to have higher incomes and levels of education. For example, in the past three decades home-ownership has declined among the lowest income groups and the gap is widening (Statistics Canada, 2011a). Because of the investment, homes occupied by owners have increased attachment to the community. Home-owning reduces mobility and thus increases the length of residency. While the study of one Canadian community showed that the greater the equity, often a function of a long residency, the greater the ties to the community (Robinson & Wilkinson, 1995), Rotolo et al (2010) conducted a broad statistical analysis and found that home-ownership itself was the critical variable irrespective of home value. Home-ownership provides an incentive to improve the community because of the barriers to mobility and because community improvements are capitalized into the value of the homes (DiPasquale & Glaeser, 1999). Home ownership is a function of income while tenure (length of residency) is a function of mobility. Uitermark, Duyvenak, & Kleinhans (2007) argued that home-owning, especially new home-owners, do not necessarily help neighbours. These authors argued that whether a homeowner or a renter, tenure in the community is a greater predictor of neighbourliness than ownership. DiPasquale & Glaeser (1999) also found that community attachment works substantially through tenure while more recent studies (Lewicka, 2011; Rotolo et al., 2010) nuanced this relationship by demonstrating that residency is the strongest predictor of community attachment but home-ownership is the second-strongest predictor.

Ambrosie, FINAL May, 2017

But there is a distinction between primary versus secondary residences. All things being equal, residents of secondary properties are no more involved in communities than renters (Biosphere Institute, 2013). The one exception is the small minority of secondary property owners who spend greater than average amounts of time in the community. These secondary properties owners tend to engage in the community and volunteer. But like renters, the numbers of secondary residents who engage is small (McNicol, Barbara J. Glorioso, 2014). Because primary home- ownership reduces substantially mobility (Andrews & Caldera Sánchez, 2011) home-ownership of primary residences strongly correlates to longer tenure. This suggests that owner-occupied homes predict tenure and together form a strong proxy for community engagement. Housing proposition: Owner-occupiers have greater community tenure than renters or secondary residence owners. Housing proposition: The greater the tenure of the dwelling-owner(s), the greater the engagement in the community. Variable: Permanent resident households occupied by owners. Unit Value: Current home values of primary resident owner-occupied dwellings.

ASSET: INCOME AND EDUCATION Justification and Propositions In one study of 206 residents of an Ontario mining community, Robinson & Wilkinson (1995, pp. 145–146) found that income and education related negatively to social cohesion. They provided many suggestions such as higher income means greater educational attainment perhaps making it difficult to fit into the community. Also, those with weaker ties may seek higher levels of education to increase their options outside the community. However Statistics Canada surveys show the opposite relationship. In Canada, education is a predictor of volunteerism. In 2013, 70% of volunteers had post-secondary education and 39% (2 of every 5) had university degrees (Turcotte, 2015). This proportion of more than one-third with university degrees and two-thirds with post-secondary education has held for more than two decades. Therefore, education correlates to volunteerism which proxies for community cohesion. In addition to civic engagement, education has a significant effect on income, health, and environmental participation (Pannozzo, Hayward, Colman, & Hayward, 2008). Public and private expenditure on education from pre-school to post-secondary is a proxy for educational attainment. There is a demonstrated link between public funding level inputs and the quality of education. Under-funded schools are less likely than well-funded schools to provide good computers, quality library books, adequate facilities, art and music supplies, and a range of extra-curricular

Ambrosie, FINAL May, 2017

programs, and are more likely to have students sharing outdated texts. (Pannozzo et al., 2008, p. 24)

Education proposition: The higher the education level, the higher the income. Education proposition: The higher the level of income, the greater the number of homeowners. Education proposition: The higher the education level, the greater the level of community engagement and volunteerism. Variable: Owner-occupied household occupants over 16 years by highest level of education attainment. Unit Value: Total public and private expenditure per occupant for the highest level of education attainment.

ASSET: COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION AND VOLUNTEERISM Justification and Propositions The ILO (2011, p. 13) defines volunteerism as “Unpaid non-compulsory work; that is, time individuals give without pay to activities performed either through an organization or directly for others outside their own household”. Statistics Canada defines volunteers as “people who have provided a service, without monetary compensation, for a group or organization at least once during the 12 months preceding the survey. This includes any unpaid help provided to schools, religious organizations, sports or community associations” (Turcotte, 2015, p. 17). While no one denies the importance of household unpaid activities such as childcare, the definitions here refer to unpaid work performed outside the home. One of the best predictors of community cohesion is the density of citizens’ participation in local organizations whether secular or religious (Kawachi & Kennedy, 1997; Putnam, 2001). Network ties include both strong (friendships) and weak (casual greetings and brief conversations). Ties provide connectivity and social embeddedness among community members that has been shown to increase trust (Hipp & Perrin, 2006; Vézina & Crompton, 2012) and increase community resilience especially for disaster preparedness (Cutter et al., 2008). Volunteerism is probably the best predictor of community cohesion (Colman, 1998; Hayward et al., 2012; ILO, 2011). Education, income and health along with children in the household strongly predict community volunteering (J. Wilson & Musick, 1997). Robinson & Wilkinson (1995) claimed that children (both pre-school and school-aged) and health were are significant predictors of the National Cohesion Index because children induce …people to use community resources they would not otherwise need. Children tend to draw parents into relationships with other parents and with community organizations. Parents with

Ambrosie, FINAL May, 2017

both younger and older children should be more strongly enmeshed in the community because they will be involved in a greater variety of networks.(Robinson & Wilkinson, 1995, p. 146)

Statistics Canada bears this out in its report on volunteering. The volunteer rate for households with no children was 41% versus 59% of households with school-aged children at home. While fewer members of households without children engage in volunteering, those who do contributed annually 30 more hours of volunteer work than those with children, 175 and 146 hours respectively (Vézina & Crompton, 2012). Otherwise said, more household members with children volunteer but they volunteer fewer hours than households without children. Canmore conducts Sense of Community surveys and the results are very similar to those of general surveys in Canada (see Biosphere Institute, 2015). Proposition: The greater number of volunteer hours in the community, the greater the community cohesion. Proposition: The greater the number of community residents that participate the greater the community cohesion. Variable: Volunteer hours. Unit Value: Replacement cost of volunteer hours based on the current hourly minimum wage.

CAVEAT: Neighborhood cohesion does not negatively impact community cohesion As previously stated, the strongest predictor of attachment is the length of residence. An important element of attachment is network ties. Literature suggests that strong ties build strong neighbourhoods. However, building strong ties is time-consuming so that weak ties (frequent, brief contacts with neighbours) may provide greater connectivity and create a sense of trust especially when confronting neighbourhood crime. Hipp & Perrin (2006) found that the sense of cohesion at the neighbourhood level is correlated to community cohesion (no exclusion effect) even though the smaller the geographic unit, the greater sense of cohesion. More time-consuming strong ties produce greater cohesion within smaller geographic areas such as neighbourhoods. Despite the emotional investment in deep strong ties, they do not affect perceptions of cohesion at the community level. Weak ties are equally important as they provide a greater number of linkages (breadth) which improves cohesion among neighbourhoods and at the community level. In other words, both strong (deep) and weak (wide) ties are important. Proposition: Strong neighbourhood ties do not weaken community ties.

Ambrosie, FINAL May, 2017

Proxy Liabilities that Deplete to Social Cohesion (decreased Social Sustainability) Figure 2: Model of Depletion of Social Sustainability

Physical Insecurity Interpersonal

Property

Source: Ambrosie The Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (www.maweb.org) used as a key component of the social all dimensions of security: financial, economic and physical. Financial security is threatened by debt levels and excessive interest payments (Hodge, 1997). Economic security is the condition of having stable income or other resources to support a standard of living now and in the foreseeable future. Indicators of economic insecurity include childhood poverty when caregivers' income is insufficient; an increase in persons over fifty with inadequate pensions and old-age security; and increased uninsured health problems. Physical insecurity is the incidence of self-harm (suicide and substance abuse), interpersonal violence such as domestic abuse and sexual violence, and property insecurity such as home invasions. Insecurities in all its forms reduce individuals’ and households’ engagement with the community because residents are occupied, embarrassed or fearful. Reduced engagement decreases communication and trust among community members and therefore cohesion. In addition to these endogenous factors, there are also exogenous factors that increase insecurities. Tourism is a volatile industry where weather, pandemics and economic downturns have an immediate and devastating effect on visitors and therefore employment. In addition to unforeseen events, there are the seasonal effects of low months of April and November-December in Banff-Canmore when hotel occupancy is 50% or as low as 33% in Canmore (CTA, 2016). Seasonal employees are laid off and expensive capital property is dormant. In short, an increase in business uncertainty, seasonal and permanent unemployment, household dependents, debt and health issues reduce community wellbeing, often reflected in increased self-inflicted and interpersonal violence, as well as theft. These events are burdens on the household economy to secure property and persons, and on communities to provide social support services and policing.

Ambrosie, FINAL May, 2017

DEPLETION: FINANCIAL INSECURITY Excessive debt is a major burden on households and handicaps a household’s ability to improve their overall wealth through home ownership, education and investments such as those for retirement. By 2016, “average household debt in Alberta, including mortgage debt, was $140,763, which means an average monthly debt-servicing cost of more than $1,506” (Jeffrey, 2016, p. 18). Household debt is a combination of consumer debt (credit cards, vehicles, installment and student loans) plus real-estate guaranteed debt which includes mortgages (first and second) and home equity lines of credit (HELOC). The principal may be an investment towards residents’ long-term assets: the house, continuing and child education, etc. Mortgage interest payments as a proportion of debt have not increased since 1990 while gross consumer debt has sharply increased (see Figure 3) so that combined principal and interest is a greater burden than before. The percentage debt burden has decreased on ever more expensive housing, and similarly consumer debt ratio is unchanged at 3% on ever-mounting short-term consumption. When crises hit, people living from paycheque to paycheque at all socioeconomic levels often have difficulty repaying their debts. Relationship breakdowns, domestic violence, illness and disability correlate with debt delinquency (Balmer, Pleasance, Buck, & Walker, 2005) and also job loss which subsequently impacts civic engagement. While home ownership increases civic engagement, low (or no) homeowner equity reduces impediments to mobility normally associated with ownership. .

Ambrosie, FINAL May, 2017

Figure 3: Canada Household Principal on Debt 1990 - 2014

(Source: Statistics Canada, 2015)

Ambrosie, FINAL May, 2017

Student debt is another form of investment which like home-ownership produces long-term personal benefits such as higher incomes and community benefits such as volunteering. The downside of student debt is that graduates must delay other investments such as home-ownership until the student loan is reimbursed. Upon graduation, the average student loan debt owing to the Canada Student Loan Program is $28,495 (Burley & Awad, 2015). In addition to this burden, adults 29 years and younger have the highest unemployment rate and usually are the first to be laid off when organizations downsize. Nonetheless, both home ownership and education are long-term investments that over time increase wealth. Conversely, consumer debt (debt to purchase goods that do not appreciate over time such as clothing and cars) is the greater danger. As mentioned above, thanks to lower interest rates the debt service ratios have not changed significantly in twenty years. At the end of 2014 in Canada, the total debt service ratio for interest only was 6% divided equally between mortgages (3%) and non-mortgage (3%). Of the 3% non-mortgage interest ratio, 2.65% (or 90%) was on consumer debt. Higher real estate prices in Alberta, BC and Ontario help to explain why debtors in those provinces “owed, on average, between $124,700 and $157,700, compared to the national average of $114,400. Together, households in these provinces held $3 out of $4 of household debt in the country” (Statistics Canada, 2012). Even so, at the beginning of 2016 Albertans were the least worried of all Canadians about their debt levels, although that is changing (Mertz, 2016). The academic literature shows that consumer over indebtedness is frequently caused by consumers’ overestimation of their ability to manage the debt combined with an underestimation of the risks. “Consumers find themselves financially overextended both as a result of their own poor planning and as a result of external factors, such as job loss, medical problems, and divorce” (Kilborn, 2005, p. 14). However, even when the cause is not exogenous such as an economic downturn “individuals in financial difficulties tend to lay the blame on exogenous factors such as job or family difficulties, [and] rarely do individuals recognise that the causes for their difficulties lie principally – or at least also – with their inability to manage money and the decisions made regarding spending and indebtedness” (Anderloni & Vandone, 2010, p. 1). Over indebtedness leads to increased stress and mobility when homeowners sell in order to reduce debt, find employment or settle divorce agreements. Proposition: Greater indebtedness increases household vulnerability to economic insecurity that, in turn, increases the probability of mobility and detachment from the community. Variable: Permanent resident households occupied by owners. 27

Ambrosie, FINAL May, 2017

Unit Value: Current total household debt outstanding of all household members.

DEPLETION: ECONOMIC INSECURITY Employment not only provides income but also socio-psychological benefits such as time structure, social purpose and contacts, approved roles and the application of skills. Studies show that the loss of both income and the psycho-sociological benefits affect mental health and well- being with the loss of income accounting for the largest proportion of the effect (Kamerāde & Bennett, 2015). Moreover, “studies have linked family joblessness to the incidence of truancy, youth justice issues, poor health, substance abuse, family violence and ultimately – to intergenerational social disadvantage” (QCOSS, 2009, p. 2). Job loss of primary income earners is a greater burden today because young Canadians remain at home longer than in the past. In 1981, only 40% of Canadian 20-24 year olds lived in the parental home. Since 2005, 60% of this age group still reside in the home (Statistics Canada, 2011b). Thanks to years of full employment, Alberta’s percentage is less than 30% and that of Census Subdivision 4815 (Canmore, Banff, Kananaskis, Bighorn and Jasper) only 23% in 2011. A recent study showed that volunteering while unemployed has a positive and strong correlation to subjective well-being and mental health: the more job-seekers volunteer while unemployed the greater the satisfaction, and the effect is stronger in countries with more generous unemployment benefits (Kamerāde & Bennett, 2015). Yet full unemployment negatively affects men’s willingness to volunteer (Taniguchi, 2006). Unlike women where unemployment and part- time employment encourages women to volunteer, men fully unemployed do little if any volunteering. Previously it was thought that volunteering is a zero-sum game: the greater number of hours of paid labour, the fewer hours of donated activity. Instead, Taniguchi (2006) found that whether men work full-time or part-time the number of volunteer hours was unaffected. The stronger labor-force attachment could mean that men are more fully integrated into the broader society, and as a result, are exposed to more volunteering opportunities, while men who have no employment disengage from volunteering perhaps because they are expected to be job-seeking fulltime (Taniguchi, 2006). Proposition: The greater the adult male unemployment of permanent residents the less they volunteer. Variable: Owner-occupied households with adult males actively seeking employment in the community but still unemployed. Unit Value: Total unemployment payments dispersed for male occupants.

Ambrosie, FINAL May, 2017

Another financial burden for unemployed workers is the care of an elderly parent which is increasingly likely with an aging population. As of 2011, Canadians aged 65 years and older made up 26.5% the population, a proportion now greater than the population of children under the age of 15. Of the population 65+ only 1.1% live with adult children, relatives or non-relatives rather than alone, with a spouse or a common law partner (Statistics Canada, 2011b). Fortunately for Canada the number is low but households responsible for an aging parent may experience a twofold loss of household income: the additional expense incurred and an income-earner may be home-bound or limited to part-time employment. Considering the importance of volunteering to community cohesion, eldercare affects disproportionately women over men. Taniguchi (2006) foundamong women the time spent on elderly care is significantly and negatively associated with volunteering. Proposition: The presence of an elder parent reduces the time available for women to engage in the community. Variable: Households with a resident elder parent. Unit Value: Replacement cost of eldercare based on the cost of homecare support plus other household expenditures to support the elder(s).

DEPLETION: PHYSICAL INSECURITY Physical insecurity can be loosely categorized into three types: self-harm such as suicide and substance abuse; interpersonal violence such as domestic abuse and sexual assault; and property crime such vehicle thefts and home invasions. All forms of insecurity reduce social cohesion but act in different ways. Property crime increases community mistrust while strong trust among neighbours sometimes reduces the fear of crime when neighbours organize a neighbourhood watch program. But more generally, crime itself and fear of crime undermines neighbourhood attachment and fear of crime increases with age (Oh & Kim, 2009). Proposition: The greater the number of crimes against property, the lower the community engagement. Variable: Crimes against property. Unit Value: Costs for criminal investigation and proceedings, and for damage reparation. Equally damaging to community is interpersonal violence and victimization, specifically sexual and domestic violence. There is a common misconception that domestic abuse is a problem linked to poverty, certain cultures and/or substance abuse. But the truth is that this violence occurs at all levels of society regardless of backgrounds and circumstances. Researchers and service providers have found, however, that economic and social factors can have a significant impact on how people respond to violent incidents and what kind of help they

Ambrosie, FINAL May, 2017

seek. Affluent people can usually afford private help - doctors, lawyers and counselors - while people with fewer financial resources tend to call the police or other public agencies. These agencies are often the only available source of statistics on domestic violence, and consequently, lower class and minority communities tend to be overrepresented in those figures, creating a distorted image of the problem.(“Myths About Abuse,” 2009, p. web)

More than 85% of victims are women abused by men and over one-third of women admitted to an emergency room for violence-related injuries were abused by a partner. Many women that remain in these relationships are trying to keep the family together or caring for a disabled or elderly family member. These individuals often suffer from low self-esteem, depression, anxiety, guilt and shame that undermine their confidence to leave (“Myths About Abuse,” 2009). Annually an estimated 9,000 women in Alberta deal with the effects of domestic and family violence which costs the Alberta government an estimated $13,162 per case of which .$11,370 public sector expenditures and $1,792 of private expenditure (Wells, Emery, & Boodt, 2012). Low self-esteem and shame plus elder and childcare reduces neighbourhood or community engagement exactly at a time when community engagement is critical (Alberta Government, n.d.; Fullwood, n.d.). Thus, interpersonal violence presents a twofold loss to the community: the expense of medical treatment and justice resources coupled with the loss of volunteers to improve the community. Proposition: The greater the domestic abuse and other interpersonal violence, the lower the community engagement. Variable: Crimes against persons. Unit Value: Costs for criminal investigation and proceedings, and for hospitalization, health care and support. Last but not least are self-inflicted forms of violence. These include self-harm, suicide and substance abuse. Banff suffers from illegal drug violations and trafficking incidences three to four times higher than the Alberta and Canmore average. More than one decade ago, Alberta had one of the highest costs per capita to address substance abuse (alcohol and illegal drugs) at $1414 per capita compared to the national average is $1267 per capita with two-thirds indirect costs (e.g. productivity) and one-third direct costs for health care and law enforcement (AADAC, 2006; CCSA, 2006). Due to high levels of substance abuse, in March 2017 the Canadian federal government promised an additional C$ 6mn of emergency funding to Alberta to help combat the opioid crisis (CBC News, 2017).

Ambrosie, FINAL May, 2017

While substance abuse presents an increasing challenge, both Banff and Canmore have decreasing levels of suicide and property crime, down to one-third since 19983. One proxy for property crime is household investment in security systems. Banff spends only $11 annually on home security devices and Canmore $20 per household while the Canadian average is $49 and Alberta almost twice the Canadian average at $86 per household annually (Statistics Canada, n.d.- f). This speaks well of the how secure BCC residents feel in their communities. Proposition: The greater the amount of self-inflicted violence, the lower the community engagement. Variable: Annual self-inflicted injuries and substance abuse. Unit Value: Costs for criminal investigation and proceedings for drug trafficking and substance abuse, and for hospitalization, health care and support. Assessment of Sustainability Models With the above propositions in mind, the key question is how to measure, monetize and present a community’s social sustainability. Following is a brief summary of the different progress indicators and how they are derived. To understand the efforts of different groups to measure and monitor social progress, it is important to understand the evolution of economic policy concepts starting with the 20th century Gross National Product to the 21st century Genuine Progress Indicators. GNP/GDP indicators have formed the basis of statistics gathering and public sector accounting for almost a century that explains the gaps in data availability today. On request by the US Senate, the Commerce Department asked the economist Simon Kuznets to develop a uniform set of national accounts in 1932. With the advent of WWII, these accounts and the GNP formed the basis of a war planning tool. "The accounts enabled the nation to locate unused capacity, and to exceed by far the production levels that conventional opinion thought possible" (Cobb, Halstead, & Rowe, 1995, p. 63). Because of the importance of the accounts to taxation for war financing (Miller, 1986; Muller, 2003) and to unused capacity for war planning (Cobb et al., 1995) the GNP and macroeconomists became influential in government policy. Following WWII, the economic model for war was transformed into the model for peace and progress. In the aftermath of WWII, immediate concerns shifted to reconstruction and to avoid another Great Depression. WWII also made governments more keenly aware of international

3 For more data and graphs, see Case Study APPENDIX VI – Physical Insecurity: Self-Inflicted (Drugs and Suicide), Interpersonal (Domestic Abuse) and Property 31

Ambrosie, FINAL May, 2017 interconnectedness and the role of trade in averting future global conflicts. The goal was to foster global economic integration through free trade, free capital mobility and export-led growth (Daly, 1996). The 1968 System of National Accounts recognized sector or industry inputs but only those that were marketable and monetized. Kuznets expressed concerns about reducing welfare to one indicator that is simply the sum of all marketed economic activity but did little at the time to introduce corrections (Muller, 2003). Today, worldwide public sector data collection and analysis agencies recognize that GNP/GDP is not a social indicator which motivated efforts to track social progress and decline.

Different monitoring systems of Social Sustainability. Some 25 years ago a shift began from the long-run goal of “modernization” and “progress” (Costanza, Hart, Posner, & Talberth, 2009; Miller, 1986) to the goal of “sustainability” or intergenerational equity (Daly, 1996). This relatively new public sector goal is a broad concept similar to the concept of 'growth' that has left ample room for a variety of interpretations. Sustainability measures are a growing area of interest for academics and practitioners in terms of both theory and practice. A trend in the sustainability literature, for example, is to examine sustainability conceptually (Daly, 1996; Hodge, 1997) and more recently to move from the conceptual framework to models for measurement (Costanza et al., 2004; Dietz & Neumayer, 2007) in order to determine genuine progress and direct policy. To measure economic wealth, development and sustainability, several National Wealth Models have been proposed over the past decades. Rather than an exhaustive review, I will list the most important methods which I heuristically divide into market models and polis models. Market models are based on assumptions of rationality and market efficiency through fully-informed self- interested individuals seeking to maximize personal wealth. Market-based sustainability models seek to supplement the GDP and still begin with National Economic Accounting and the System of National Accounts. Within the category of market models and a focus on efficiency, I include the System of Integrated Environment and Economic Accounting, and Genuine Savings. These technologies originate from economics and rely on (relatively) efficient markets to determine prices. Public policy is based on the assumption that a nation’s aggregate income, however generated or distributed, is the best outcome (Kirkpatrick & Weiss, 1996a). Jackson & Roberts (2000) call this 'tonnage ideology'.

Ambrosie, FINAL May, 2017

Conversely, the polis models are based on the assumptions of the advancement of public interest, cooperation as well as competition, and acceptance of the ambiguity of information rather than assuming perfection. Conflicts that arise are between public interest and self-interest, referred to as commons problems (Stone, 2002). These models abandon GDP and forge new trails because the GDP is based on the untenable assumption that greater production and consumption necessarily signal progress. These models include the Human Development Index and the Index of Sustainable Economic Welfare, the predecessor to the Genuine Progress Indicator or Index (GPI). Debate is ongoing as to the quantification of ambiguous but essential measures of true wealth. Wealth is not simply 'tonnage' but a host of qualities such as health, leisure time, heritage sites and security which impact wellbeing. Although these models also have their origins in economics, they deviate sharply due to the recognition that increased material output is not always synonymous with improved well-being. However, these models are difficult to operationalize due to widespread debate over valuation methods coupled with techniques for statistics-gathering still heavily focused on macro-economic models of individualistic material output, equilibrium and efficiency. The GPI is arguably the most ground-breaking and promising. Although not a complete break from GNP, the GPI does challenge the 'growth is good' assumption. This method starts with aggregate personal consumption, rather than production, weighted by the Gini coefficient to adjust for income disparities. From this adjusted consumption value, components are added that reflect improved wellbeing such as household and community work. Then deductions are made for costs of defensive expenditures on health and education, and other costs such as pollution, accidents and crime (Cobb et al, 1995; Cobb et al, 1999; Natoli, 2008). GPI figures have been calculated for, among others, the United States, United Kingdom, Austria, Sweden, Germany, the Netherlands, Italy and Australia (Hamilton, 1999; Natoli, 2008). Sub-national GPIs have been calculated in Canada for the provinces of Alberta (Anielski, 2001) and Nova Scotia (Pannozzo & Colman, 2009; Pannozzo et al., 2009). As for developing countries to apply it, Chile was the first (Castañeda, 1999) and more recently Thailand (Clarke & Islam, 2005) and China (Wen, Zhang, Du, Li, & Li, 2007). Not only do the results of the GPI confront the notion that growth and wellbeing are synonymous, but the increasing interest in the GPI demonstrates a broad-based movement towards better measures. But the GPI is not without its detractors. As with the other measures, criticisms refer to items included or excluded and valuation techniques. For example, GPI while adjusting for income

Ambrosie, FINAL May, 2017 disparities does not account for gender inequalities, a key component of the UN’s 17 Sustainable Development Goals. As to valuation, one example is the controversy over the valuation of depletion costs of non-renewable resources, one of the largest deductions to arrive at a GPI. The GPI assumption is that non-renewable sources are completely replaceable by renewable energy sources, also called ‘weak sustainability’. Hamilton (1999) argued that the $75 per barrel replacement cost used in the USA overstates US GPI in view of the declining prices of renewable energy alternatives. But this criticism of inclusion / exclusion and valuation is common to all selected measures from public sector accrual accounting to the GPI calculation. The GPI’s advantage is that it privileges human development and intergenerational equity over a narrower focus on economic production and short-term growth. Two criticisms of the new measures are the monetization of measures and that the data required to proxy for sustainability is based on the information collected by statistics-gathering entities (Neumayer, 2000; Pannozzo & Colman, 2009). Most national statistics institutes are still focused primarily on measuring growth based on GDP accounting. Neumayer (2000) argues that by using the data currently collected from which measures are estimated, the resulting GPIs are considered unreliable due to excessive estimations and extrapolations. Arguably this criticism is unjust because accounting approximates economic reality pragmatically on the basis of particular norms (Mattessich, 1995). Accounting is expected to achieve fair representation not perfection. Moreover, statistics gathering has greatly broadened over the past two decades. Another criticism regards the monetization of indicators, the ethical question of monetizing the invaluable. Pannozzo et al (2009, p. 29) argue that monetization is not to compensate for the full extent of loss or gain in human terms but is a market-based proxy for far-reaching values that draws more attention, speaks to a larger audience and allows for decision-making. Data and valuation are increasingly reliable and the information presented is highly relevant. While there is recognition of broader assets and beneficial expenditures such as health prevention and defensive expenditures such as prisons, I argue that the GPIs main failing is the focus on adjustments to national income (flows) rather than asset recognition and sustaining these assets. The numerous monetized indicators are not formatted into a balance sheet despite much talk of 'new accounting' within GPIAtlantic’s documents. The absence of a balance sheet means that asset maintenance is obscured and important linkages between maintenance and depletion are not coupled. Subsequently, policy focus is still limited to disparate indicators and bounded disciplines

Ambrosie, FINAL May, 2017 rather than remedial action based on broader outcomes. In the absence of a balance sheet, GPI is measuring unsustainability rather than provide directions towards sustainability improvement.

Balance Sheet approach to Social Sustainability monitoring To make the impact of policy decisions affecting important assets more visible, a balance sheet is fundamental. In North America the balance sheet is arranged from higher to lower liquidity. Instead I propose that assets be arranged from greater to lesser longevity similar to European balance sheets. Otherwise said, the left-hand (asset) side is arranged by fleeting Economic Assets on the bottom, more permanent Social-Cultural Assets in the center and long- term Natural Assets top the list. The right-hand side comprises liabilities such as overuse, abuse and borrowing. These are events, natural and human, that deplete the assets on which future generations depend for their social and economic benefit. In addition to Natural Asset depletion, human insecurity (financial, economic and physical) is a deduction from Social-Cultural Assets and Economic Assets. High debt levels, job insecurity and violence are costs that diminish disposable income for housing and education (Social-Cultural Assets). The sum of Assets (Natural + Social- Cultural + Economic) minus Depletion equals intergenerational equity. Otherwise said intergenerational equity is the net claim on Natural, Social-Cultural and Economic pursuant to borrowing on those assets by the current generation through environmental depletion and human insecurity. Figure 4: Outline of a full Balance Sheet to measure Natural, Social-Economic and Economic Sustainability ASSETS DEPLETION (Liabilities) Natural Assets (NA) Environmental Depletion Social-Cultural Assets (SCA) Human Insecurity Economic Assets (EA) = TOTAL DEPLETION = TOTAL ASSETS Assets minus Depletion = INTERGENERATIONAL EQUITY (Source: Ambrosie, 2012) Separating the depletion from the assets allows for the manifold effects of degradation to become visible without specific attribution to any one asset which could be insufficient, inappropriate and/or spurious. Moreover, a separate depletion account facilitates policy-making by highlighting the costs of poor decisions or inaction. The main limitation of this model is the implicit assumption of weak sustainability in that the maintenance of total assets would not affect intergenerational equity. However, strong sustainability could be introduced through an explicit rule that Natural Assets must remain constant while only Social-Cultural Assets and Economic 35

Ambrosie, FINAL May, 2017

Assets can be modified for the sum of total assets to properly represent intergenerational equity. This last point is beyond the scope of the current research which focuses exclusively on the Social- Cultural Assets, otherwise said Social Sustainability.

Model Accounts for Community Social Sustainability With the above full Intergenerational Balance Sheet in mind, and models for Social Sustainability Assets (Figure 1) and Depletion (Figure 2) developed, the Social Sustainability Balance Sheet accounts emerge as follows: Table 1: Community Social Sustainability Accounts and Measures Social-Cultural ASSETS DEPLETION (Insecurities) Account Measure Account Measure Housing Permanent resident households Financial Permanent resident households occupied by owners occupied by owners Education Permanent residents over 16 Economic Unemployed adult male permanent years by highest level of residents education attainment Households with a resident elder parent(s) Volunteerism Volunteer hours Physical Crimes against property Self-inflicted injuries and substance abuse Crimes against persons Like any balance sheet, the one here is irrelevant if one year only. It is the change over time which determines improvement or depletion of core assets/indicators. Changes over time are captured by a form of income statement and asset re-valuations. Housing values are readjusted between balance sheets to account for increases or decreases in prices. Additional construction of owner-occupied dwellings is added. Changes to home-owning residents and their corresponding education levels are additions to or subtractions from the community’s education assets and accounts are adjusted accordingly. Changes to borrowing (consumer and household) are accounted for as increased or decreased debt liabilities. The cost of crime and unemployment are expensed and adjustments to each balance sheet period. The revaluations, additional education and volunteerism investment minus adjusted debt levels and changes to unemployment and crimes expenses serve to arrive at the Intergenerational Equity for the particular locality and for a particular period. As such the Balance Sheet is coupled with changes to income and expenses (an income statement) as both are necessary for fair representation.

Ambrosie, FINAL May, 2017

Monetization of Measures Statistics aggregate information often in physical units whereas accounting allocates transactions and events by sources (inputs) and uses (outputs) to track stocks and flows within an entity using monetized amounts. The purpose of accounting, functionally speaking, is to provide useful information to users of the statements as to resources available to an organization (public, private or non-profit), a change in those resources to meet future obligations and the general governance of the organization (local, regional, national or international). Commodities such as air, water, sun, that are unvalued have an imputed value of zero value which implies that these commodities are superabundant and not destructible (Daly, 1996), and therefore of lower scarcity than man-made capital. Although there is an ethical debate about monetizing the immaterial, Pannozzo & Colman (2009) argue that price signals strongly impact behaviour. With more than a decade of experience with indicators and accounting systems, the authors found that the accounting system had greater policy influence than indicators alone. This is because "the policy arena is dominated by concerns over budgets, costs, and savings, and that expression of results in dollar terms reaches a much wider audience than expression in units specific to a particular indicator" (Pannozzo & Colman, 2009, p. 18). For example, all forms of insecurity have been the object of economic studies that calculate the direct and indirect costs to prevent or repair injuries. We measure in physical units crime, poverty and elderly insecurity which is then valuated and accounted for directly in the public sector System of National Accounts or indirectly in satellite accounts or economic reports (ex. CCSA, 2006; SROI, 2010 among others). Some argue that monetizing only confuses policy-making (Aaheim & Nyborg, 1995). In spite of the value-judgements and bias required to monetize the invaluable, any asset amount recognized under an accounting system is informationally superior to imputing a zero-value economic return on assets (Cobb et al, 1995; Daly, 1996; Pannozzo & Colman, 2009). Although some accounting academics resist the notion of monetizing the invaluable in the public sector (see Carnegie & West, 2005), I argue that those who continue to insist fail to consider recent advances in valuation, especially environmental valuation methods (see Waite, Burke, & Gray, 2014; WBCSD, 2011).

Ambrosie, FINAL May, 2017

Table 2: Community Social Sustainability Accounts and Monetization Social-Cultural ASSETS DEPLETION (Insecurities) Account Monetization Account Monetization Housing Home values of owner- Financial Total principal outstanding on per occupied dwellings owner-occupied household. Education Public and private Economic Unemployment payments to expenditure per resident over unemployed permanent resident male 16 years of the highest level adults. of education attainment Replacement cost of eldercare. Volunteerism Replacement cost of Physical Costs of law enforcement and damage volunteer hours with wage- reparation following property crimes. earning workers Costs of law enforcement, of hospitalization, health care and support for interpersonal violence. Costs of law enforcement for drug trafficking and substance abuse, and of hospitalization, health care and support for self-inflicted injuries.

The Banff-Canmore Corridor is used to test the above model, measures and monetization to see if the social sustainability balance sheet can be usefully operationalized. Operationalization is a function of data availability over several periods, ease of interpretation by different disciplines and the visibility of different policy option consequences that facilitates decision-making.

Social Sustainability and the Banff-Canmore Corridor (BCC) Wages plus federal transfers constitute household income. This income is then invested to produce wealth. It is the accumulation of wealth (housing, education and recreation) that increases well-being. However, most wages offered especially by the hospitality industry within the Banff- Canmore Corridor (BCC) are below a living wage. Therefore, the objective is to determine the long-term community benefits of a living wage to workers in that locality. A living wage is fundamental to the social sustainability of the local communities which can be measured through an increase in the assets of home purchases which increases the length of residency. Residency, home-ownership and higher education increase civicism. Civicism can be proxied by volunteerism which is also a test of social ties and trust within the community. When wages are insufficient and workers are transient or uprooted, the personal and community assets acquired can be depleted through different forms of insecurity: financial (i.e. indebtedness), economic (i.e. unemployment) and physical (i.e. crime and violence).

Ambrosie, FINAL May, 2017

To assess the conditions and constraints of the local residents in the BCC, the following method flows from the main research question. 1. Geography: Define the spatial, demographic and economic boundaries; 2. Measures: Investigate the quantitative indicators, usually physical units, available over time ensuring that the data collection followed a consistent method such that the results are comparable; 3. Balance Sheets: Investigate monetized measures and prepare preliminary social sustainability balance sheets that could guide community policy-making in the tradeoffs among different policies; 4. Stakeholder Consultations: Interview a purposeful sample of tourism establishments (hotels, restaurants and tour operators) and survey a representative sample of Banff Corridor workers to understand perceptions and subsequently refine the model, metrics and results; organize focus groups and interviews of key community stakeholders and policy-makers to test and adjust accordingly the social sustainability balance sheets. The methods to achieve the above objective and sub-objectives are both qualitative and quantitative. Quantitative methods include mining all existing data for indicators on the community assets and the depletion of the region. Qualitative methods include interviews with the hotel associations, hoteliers, municipal employees, community workers and residents in general.

1. Geography: Spatial and Demographic Limits While social sustainability can have equally valid broad and esoteric definitions and interpretations, in order to quantify and monitor progress it is essential that the definition be operationalizable because of the requirement to answer four key questions: Question 1 - Where: How is the Banff Corridor classified by data-gathering institutions such as Statistics Canada? Question 2 - What: What is the data gathered in each geographic unit? Question 3 – When: For what period of years have the data been gathered? Question 4 - How: Have the boundaries and data-gathering methods been consistent over the period of interest, for example since 1980? In response to Question 1, it is important to understand the different classifications. Statistics Canada organizes data based on Federal Electoral Districts, Economic Regions and Censuses (see Appendices

Ambrosie, FINAL May, 2017

Appendix A: Statistics Canada Geographic Codes). As the first suggests, these are areas represented by a Member of Parliament (MP) elected to the House of Commons. Figure 5: Federal Electoral District 49 Banff-Cochrane

As for the second, economic regions are standard units to analyze economic activity. Figure 6: Economic Region No. 4840 Banff, Jasper, Rocky Mountain House

Of importance here are the census divisions which are intermediate classifications between the province (i.e. Alberta = 48) and the municipalities. For example, the Census Division 15 includes the Census Subdivisions of Banff (32), Crowsnest Pass (7), Kananaskis (13), Bighorn No. 8 with Canmore (15), Improvement District no. 12, Jasper Park (37) and Ranchland No. 66 (45).

Ambrosie, FINAL May, 2017

Figure 7: Census Division 48 15 Banff, Jasper and Kananaskis

The most appropriate measure was the Statistics Canada Census Sub-Division which is ‘municipal equivalents’ of 10,000 residents or less. A Census Agglomeration has a population of more than 10,000 residents. While Banff remained a Census Sub-Division for the two decades of balance sheets (48 15 032), it is notable that Canmore moved from a Census Sub-Division (48 15 015) to a Census Agglomeration when its population exceeded 10,000 according to the 2001 census. This is important because far more data is available at the Census Agglomeration level than is available for Census Subdivision due to the fact that it may be possible to identify specific households when the population is under 10,000. In short, like Banff, Canmore was a Census Sub- Division in 1996 but became a Census Agglomeration as of 2001.

Ambrosie, FINAL May, 2017

Figure 8: Banff Census Subdivision 48 15 032

(Source: Statistics Canada, 2017b) Figure 9: Canmore Census Agglomeration 48 15 015

(Source: Statistics Canada, 2017b)

Ambrosie, FINAL May, 2017

As such, this study covers Banff-Canmore Corridor, although there is some data that includes Lake Louise that receives its social services from Banff and Big Horn (Harvie Heights) which gets municipal services from Canmore. Figure 10: Banff-Canmore Corridor

(Source: www.geodiscoverAlberta.com) It is within this area that all data was collected and collated to calculate the social sustainability balance sheet for the BCC4. The boundaries are therefore the Statistics Canada Census Subdivisions of Banff and Canmore, and within the Subdivisions, the unit is owner- occupied dwellings and their residents based on the literature review.

2. Data Measures and Monetization After defining the model and the suggested measures, finding and verifying the data is the next step. The original goal was to verify Balance Sheets from the periods beginning in 1980 to present. However, the most consistent censuses and other Statistics Canada data were available for the years 1996, 2001, 2006, 2011 and soon 2016. Along with census data, Statistics Canada provides a wealth of data from other surveys (see Table 3). In addition to many periodic reports (see References), Statistics Canada was the most consistent and important source of longitudinal data. The province of Alberta also provided invaluable sources such as the Alberta Health Website and Culture & Tourism Alberta. To its credit, the Biosphere Institute in the Town of Canmore has produced standardized biennial reports for almost two decades (e.g. 1999, 2004, 2006, 2009, 2011, 2015).

4 (see Appendix B: Data Collection for Balance Sheet Years 1996, 2001, 2006, 2011, and 2016) 43

Ambrosie, FINAL May, 2017

Table 3: Key Data Sources and Available Year

STATISTICS CANADA 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002 2001 2000 1999 1998 1997 1996 1995 1994 1993 1992 1991 Canadian Community Health Survey (CCHS) 3226              Census of Population, Focus on Geography Series       Elementary-Secondary Education Survey  Employment Insurance Statistics (EIS) 2604                  General Social Survey (GSS) 4501  Giving, Volunteering and Participating (GSS GVP) 4430       Labour Force Survey (LFS) 3701                  National Household Survey (NHS) 5178     Residential Property Values     Satellite Account of Nonprofit Institutions and Volunteering       Survey of Employment, Payrolls and Hours (SEPH) 2612                  Survey of Financial Security (SFS) 2620    Survey of Household Spending (SHS) 3508                  Survey of Uniform Financial System – School Boards Uniform Crime Reporting Survey (UCR) 3302                  OTHER 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002 2001 2000 1999 1998 1997 1996 1995 1994 1993 1992 1991 Alberta Culture and Tourism                  Alberta Health Services online database Alberta Health Web                    Alberta Labour  Biosphere Institute Canmore          Canadian Council of Social Development (CCSD) Canadian Ministers of Education Council (CMEC) Parks Canada Visitor Attendance                         Sources: http://open.canada.ca/en/search/inventory; http://www23.statcan.gc.ca/imdb-bmdi/pub/indexth-eng.htm; http://www.statcan.gc.ca/eng/survey/list

Ambrosie, FINAL May, 2017

The University of Calgary Spatial and Data Center (SANDS) (http://libguides.ucalgary.ca/Data) was instrumental in providing access to databases especially the SDA Microdata Analysis and Subsetting System at the University of Toronto Data Library Service. They also gave instruction on and access to the ArcGIS Community Analyst that provides aggregated data at the community level which can be downloaded as data and/or graphs. Last but not least, the University of Calgary SANDS helped with dwellings per postal code clusters using the website Geocoder to match postal codes with the dwelling counts of dissemination areas from Statistics Canada 2011 Census. In terms of data comparability, there is only one important note with regards to the Health Care Regions. Banff and Canmore belong to the Calgary Region. Banff receives patients from areas outside its township such as Lake Louise which is part of Statistics Canada Improvement District No. 9 and Canmore receives patients from Harvie Heights (District of Big Horn) and Morley a First Nations settlement within the Stoney 142/143/144 Indian reserve. Residents of the reserve go to either Canmore or Cochrane for health services (p.comm). Therefore, the health statistics from the Alberta Health website are not perfectly comparable with Statistics Canada Census Subdivisions. Even with this caveat, the importance of these health measures is indisputable and the healthcare beneficiaries are sufficiently close to the residents based on the Census Subdivision. Figure 11: Map of the Calgary Health Region with Banff and Canmore.

(Source: http://www.albertahealthservices.ca/ahs-map-ahs-zones.pdf) From this array of sources, based on owner-occupied dwellings the accounts are calculated for the Assets (Education, Housing and Volunteerism) and Depletion of the Assets (Economic Insecurity, Financial Insecurity and Physical Insecurity). For a detailed list of data required and the sources of data especially for monetization of the indicators, see Appendix B: Data Collection for Balance Sheet Years 1996, 2001, 2006, 2011, and 2016, and Data Sources. As can be seen from the

Ambrosie, FINAL May, 2017 above, data availability becomes denser after 2000 which makes the 1996 Balance Sheet calculations challenging. But unlike regular accounting that builds the Balance Sheet from preceding years to move forward, I begin with the most recent period with complete data, 2011, and regress to previous years. This is possible for now because there are no other statements or measures, such as an income statement or depreciation that flows into the Balance Sheet (for an explanation see CASE STUDY Appendix B – Housing). As argued above, monetization is not to compensate for the full extent of loss or gain in human terms but is a market-based proxy for far-reaching values that draws more attention, speaks to a larger audience and allows for decision-making. Rather than valuating the invaluable, monetization provides a common denominator for the components and as a shared signalling device across disciplines, policymakers, stakeholders and the general public. Notes to the Balance Sheet Like all accounting reports, the monetized Balance Sheet is accompanied by notes in order to explain the assumptions behind the values, the methods used, important changes between periods and a general discussion of the results. For example, this Social Sustainability Balance Sheet is only one section of the full Balance Sheet (see Figure 4), Social Sustainability only, thus it is important to provide the economic background within which these communities evolve and thrive. The area is one of Canada’s most important protected areas and tourism drives the local economy (see the CASE STUDY). Hotels are an important source of employment but worldwide, the industry has low wages. A discussion of low wages and affordability is an important part of the background needed to provide context for the results. The business librarians at the Haskayne Library provided invaluable instruction on the BCC’s hotels and hospitality corporations through data bases such as Capital IQ and Thomson One for company information. This information was supplemented by websites of professional organizations such as the Hotel Association of Canada, the Alberta Hotel and Lodging Association, and the Banff & Lake Louise Hospitality Association. Information on hotel sales and some financial data is found on specialized real estate websites such as Colliers where there is data on the sales of hotel properties over the years (see http://www.collierscanada.com/en/services/hotels/research).

Ambrosie, FINAL May, 2017

3. Balance Sheets and Notes to the Balance Sheet: The Banff-Canmore Corridor Case Study The two census subdivisions of Banff and Canmore are the geographic boundaries within which the Balance Sheets are calculated based on the more than twenty different surveys and data bases and supplemented with numerous reports. Monetization was more complicated due to the paucity of studies compared to those with physical units. Nonetheless, the preliminary results for 2011 are as follows. Table 4: Canmore Preliminary Social Sustainability Balance Sheet 2011

CANMORE 2011 Owner-occupied Residences 3,660 Owner-Occupied of Total 71% ASSETS LIABILITIES

HOUSING - Owner-Occupied $ 2,167,480,000 FINANCIAL $ 885,288,120 EDUCATION $ 1,836,195,857 ECONOMIC $ 57,400,200 VOLUNTEERISM $ 22,819,720 PHYSICAL $ 2,615,758 TOTAL ASSETS $ 4,026,495,577 TOTAL LIABILITIES $ 945,304,078 INTERGENERATIONAL EQUITY $ 3,081,191,499 per Canmore owner- $ 841,856 occupied dwelling per Canmore resident fifteen years and older $ 303,715 (Excel sheet with calculations is available upon request.) Notes to the CANMORE Balance Sheet: General: Balance Sheet is divided the number by the total residents (owners and renters) over 15 years of age to determine net equity per adult because all residents benefit from a cohesive community whether they contribute to it or not. For key information on the BCC hotel industry, wages and employment conditions in general, see the CASE STUDY, Local Wages and Hospitality One general question still under consideration is whether the monetization should be in current or real dollars. To avoid further complication, the amounts are reported in current dollars. ASSETS AND VALUATION Housing: In 2011 there were a total of 3660 owner-occupied dwellings out of a total of 5180 dwellings. Of 3660 owner-occupied dwellings, 2060 were fully detached and the remainder, 1600

Ambrosie, FINAL May, 2017 were non-detached (duplexes, townhouses or apartments). The median home value was $485,000 according to the Biosphere Institute Reports and $602,080 according to the National Household Survey. Education: Ideally, education accounted for in assets should only be those who have purchased homes in CANMORE and their occupants. Such information is a Statistics Canada Special Tabulation for an additional cost which was not requested here, but is possible. Therefore, the amounts here are estimated as if the education profiles of both populations (dwelling owners versus dwelling renters) are the same, i.e. the education value is underestimated as home owners are high income earners which corresponds to high education levels. Education costs are the sum total of public expenditure plus private household expenditure. Volunteerism: This is the annual replacement cost multiplied by the number of years since the last Balance Sheet, in this case 5 years (2011 minus 2006). In the absence of a household survey of actual volunteering rates and hours, volunteering could be estimated based on owner-occupied dwellings and the educational attainment of their occupants. Total hours of volunteering are then estimated based on national and provincial participation rates. Since the Special Tabulation was not requested, in this preliminary Balance Sheet the value of volunteerism is based on education levels and Canmore's population. DEPLETION AND VALUATION General: Theoretically, the Liabilities should be populated with defensive capital spending such as expanded police forces and headquarters or more women’s' shelters. More information is required on defensive expenditures. Financial Insecurity: Debt is calculated for owner-occupied households only what Statistics Canada calls family units. Statistics Canada defines family units as follows: Family units are comprised of economic families (a group of two or more persons who live in the same dwelling and are related to each other by blood, marriage, common law or adoption) and unattached individuals (a person living either alone or with others to whom he or she is unrelated). http://www.statcan.gc.ca/eng/concepts/definitions/famecon

Due to data gathering difficulties, I used estimates based on Statistics Canada Table 205-0002 Survey of Financial Security (SFS). Homeowners of the Canmore Survey of Household Spending responded that 61% had a mortgage while the overall average for Alberta based on the SFS is 56%. On the SFS, the median Alberta dwelling was worth $350,000 and the median mortgage was $200,000 or 57% of the primary residence. Canmore's median residence is $602,800 according to 48

Ambrosie, FINAL May, 2017 the Survey of Household Spending (SHS). With the average mortgage 57% of the outstanding principal, the estimated Canmore equity outstanding is $345,000. Economic Insecurity: Unemployment was relatively constant in District 4815 that includes Canmore and Banff averaging 685 recipients per month for both regular benefits (unemployment) and other benefits (e.g. compassionate leave). The National Household Survey found that of those in the labour force, only 6.3% were unemployed in Canmore or 495 individuals. The average monthly unemployment beneficiaries are multiplied by the top weekly rate. Eldercare is not included as it is insignificant, less than 40 households (Canadian average of 1.1% of households x 3660 owner-occupied dwellings). Physical Insecurity: The amount calculated here is to be used with caution. I have no background in sociology or social work so my selection of reported incidents that proxy for a sense of insecurity and fear of going out into the community need to be verified. In the absence of expert knowledge I used Total breaking and Entering [0210] Incidents to proxy for home invasions, total Sexual Assault Incidents along with Total Uttering Threats Incidents to proxy for interpersonal violence and Total Drug Violations Charged (not just incidents) to proxy for substance abuse especially trafficking. To be true to a Balance Sheet, Physical Insecurity should be measured by increased defensive capital assets: the expenditure for expanded premises for police officers, more patrol cars, new court houses and judges, larger hospitals, etc. Instead, the value is calculated based on the economic value of attending to the above-mentioned incidents. I recognize that this is a serious shortcoming of the above calculations that needs to be corrected.

Ambrosie, FINAL May, 2017

Table 5: Banff Preliminary Social Sustainability Balance Sheet 2011

BANFF 2011 Owner-occupied Residences 1,175 Owner-occupied of total 46% ASSETS LIABILITIES

per Banff owner-occupied $ 824,517 dwelling per Banff resident fifteen years and older $ 175,668 (Excel sheet with calculations is available upon request.) Notes to the BANFF Balance Sheet General: Balance Sheet is divided the number by the total residents (owners and renters) over 15 years of age to determine net equity per adult because all residents benefit from a cohesive community whether they contribute to it or not. For example, per owner-occupied household both Banff and Canmore are the same, in other words equally active in the community. However, Canmore per resident with 76% owner-occupied households, benefits from higher security, especially physical, as the community is more stable. Banff needs to find a way to encourage more home-owners. That being said, over the past decade the number of owner-occupied dwellings in Banff has increased by 50% from 30% owner-occupies in 2001 to 46% in 2011 without a substantial increase in the total number of dwellings (see CASE STUDY). For key information on the BCC hotel industry, wages and employment conditions in general, see the CASE STUDY, Local Wages and Hospitality ASSETS AND VALUATION Housing: In 2011 there were a total of 1175 owner-occupied dwellings out of a total of 2565 dwellings. The median home value was $560,000 according to the National Household Survey. Education: Ideally, education accounted for in assets should only be those who have purchased homes in Banff and their occupants. As with Canmore, this is a Special Tabulation available upon request for a fee from Statistics Canada. The amounts here are estimated as if the education profiles

Ambrosie, FINAL May, 2017 of both populations are the same. Otherwise said the education value is underestimated as home owners are high income earners which corresponds to high education levels. The Balance Sheet should reflect the value of the higher educational attainment of home-owners compared to renters. Education costs are the sum total of public expenditure plus private household expenditure. Volunteerism: It is the annual replacement cost multiplied by the number of years since the last Balance Sheet. Again, volunteering should be based on owner-occupied dwellings and their occupants, and then estimated based on national and provincial participation rates if a local survey is not available. In the absence of such information, the value of volunteerism is based on education levels and Banff's population. DEPLETION AND VALUATION General: Same as Canmore. Financial Insecurity: Debt is calculated for owner-occupied households only or what Statistics Canada calls family units. For a definition, see Canmore Balance Sheet notes above. Homeowners of the BANFF Survey of Household Spending responded that 68% had a mortgage while the overall average for Alberta based on the SFS is 56%. On the SFS, the median Alberta dwelling was worth $350,000 and the median mortgage was $200,000 or 57% of the primary residence. BANFF's median residence is $560,000 according to the Survey of Household Spending, and if the average outstanding principal on a mortgage is 57% then the estimated median outstanding principal is $319,200. Economic Insecurity: Unemployment was relatively constant in District 4815 that includes Canmore and Banff averaging 685 recipients per month for both regular benefits (unemployment) and other benefits (e.g. compassionate leave). The NHS found that of those in the labour force, only 5.3% were unemployed in Banff or 250 individuals. The average number of monthly unemployment beneficiaries is multiplied by the top weekly rate and then summed for the period between Balance Sheets, here five years (2011 minus 2006). Eldercare is not included as it is insignificant (1175 owner-occupied households x 1.1%). Physical Insecurity: In general, interpersonal violence, such as bar fights and domestic abuse, is one-half in the BCC compared to that of Alberta although increasing. The greatest expenditure for Banff, far higher than the Canmore, Alberta or Canadian average, is substance abuse, especially non-cannabis trafficking and possession. Also, see notes above for Canmore.

Ambrosie, FINAL May, 2017

IMPORTANT NOTE: PRIOR YEARS BALANCE SHEETS (2006 and 2001) FOR BANFF AND CANMORE REQUIRE CALCULATION for the full policy impacts to emerge.

4. Triangulation of Results: - Stakeholder Consultation through Interviews, Survey and Focus Groups As the model and monetization proposed is controversial, surveys and interviews would serve to triangulate the results with information from the population most concerned (see Appendix C: Potential Survey Instruments and Questions). The population would consist of various types of organizations in the Banff-Canmore Corridor, including hospitality businesses, non-profit organizations, local public sector, and individuals knowledgeable about the working and living conditions in the area that can provide information about the economic and social impact of current employment conditions on the community. The suggested sample size is 120 of which 20 interviews and 100 surveys. This number links to the population that is economically dependent on Banff and Canmore. Therefore the region that is economically impacted includes Canmore, Norquay and Lake Louise. From exploratory research to design the study, we found that just seven (7) hotels of the 53 present in the area, have 52.2% of the available rooms. The estimated number of participants is 100 surveys of workers plus 20 interviews with businesses and local authorities. Interviewees and survey respondents could be solicited with the help from the Town of Banff, the Town Council, the Alberta Hotel & Lodging Association, and the Banff Lodging Association. Another possibility is the UNIFOR union representatives to connect with hospitality workers who would be willing to speak. Recruitment could be by e-mail with follow up by telephone. If data is collected from members or clients of these venues/organizations at the venue itself, then the survey should be conducted with permission from the venue. Interviewees will be asked if they wish to be identified so that researchers can fulfill the participant wishes based on a signed consent form. Based on the results of the survey, interviews and focus groups, the Balance Sheet calculation are corrected to closer align with the community reality and trends. The interviews conducted thus far with key informants suggest that for the most part the Case Study (see below) which is based on the Balance Sheet methodology, properly reflects the conclusions of the townships.

Ambrosie, FINAL May, 2017

Discussion and Conclusion: The BCC’s Balance Sheets and their interpretation

Data Availability Many papers in both disciplines of environmental economics and accounting that address the issue of valuation (Brand, 2009; De Groot, Fischer, & Christie, 2010; Jones, 2003; Siddiqui, 2013b), but none locate the information in such a way as to make visible the positives with the negatives. Moreover, key measures of social sustainability are yet to be measured and monitored consistently. For example, volunteerism, a key proxy for social cohesion, is not measured regularly be it community, municipality, provincial or federal. Surveys and reports are often one-off, sporadic or incomplete. Monetization of the value to communities is even more of rarity. One important exception is GPIAtlantic that has argued for almost two decades the importance of measuring volunteerism (Colman, 1998; Hayward & Colman, 2012). When volunteerism is measured, often volunteer organizations are surveyed rather than community members. Volunteering organizations not only come and go, but often a committed community member will volunteer in various organizations in the same period. Querying volunteer organizations rather than community members could double-account certain members while other contributions are left unaccounted for. Different volunteer organizations account differently for volunteers; some with detailed accounting and even monetization while others not at all. The ILO has recently produced a manual including surveys on the importance and measurement of volunteerism (ILO, 2011). Considering the fundamental role of volunteerism to a community’s cohesion and therefore social sustainability, it is unfortunate that such gaps exist at all levels, especially federal, in systematic surveys and reporting of volunteerism. Displaying Depletion or liabilities is especially important because “The bads [] are often technologically invisible; not least in terms of the way decisions are informed and accounted for” (Boyce, 2000, p. 27). A key example is the information at the census subdivision level of substance abuse, currently considered a crisis in many areas of Canada. Instead, statistics-gathers must query local support groups to determine the number of community members affected and even less is known if the affected individuals are long-term residents, seasonal workers or tourists. These are just two examples of the complicated and time-consuming process of obtaining reliable, longitudinal data to populate a Balance Sheet.

Ambrosie, FINAL May, 2017

The Model The model misses some key elements. For example, absent from economic security is the frequency and monetization of motor vehicle accidents which can have devastating effects on families and communities as well as costs to society. More important is the lack of accounting for gender and economic inequality. Hotels seek to expand the Temporary Foreign Workers Programme to have a stable supply of room attendants. Cleaning staff has the highest turnover and are the jobs most difficult to fill. Studies of hospitality cleaning staff demonstrate high levels of medical problems: joint pain, migraines, etc (Ambrosie, 2015; Cañada, 2015). This combined with the lowest hourly wages makes it unsurprising that Canadians are not interested in these positions. Most who apply for these jobs are recent (female) immigrants who have relatively few options due to poor English, the lack of recognition here in Canada of their foreign-earned professional education, and the urgent need to earn an income to support the family resident here and/or back in their country of origin. In Alberta, only 11% of the private-sector workforce is unionized, mostly skilled labour. When public sector is added, the percentage of workers unionized increases to 23.5%5. Most often it is the young and unskilled workers that are non-union, the sector of the population with the lowest wages and the most vulnerable. Campanella et al found that “Employees between the ages of 15 and 24 make up only 7% of Alberta’s union members, despite constituting a sixth of all provincial employees. This is not altogether surprising, as most young workers hold precarious, high-turnover, service-sector jobs that unions have historically struggled to organize”. (Campanella et al., 2014, p. 7)

Accounting for and monetizing inequities such as these is one of the shortcomings of the model and requires further investigation. Equity is a key component of the UN’s Sustainable Development Goals which recommended two main indicators: women’s rights to property such as homes and land, and income differential between men and women. TheSocial Sustainability Balance Sheet modeled here focuses on assets rather than income, therefore further study is needed as to how to investigate the information and then incorporate property rights into the model. However, the model does help to arrive at a conclusion on one of the underlying issues brought forth in the introduction: requests from the hoteliers in particular to expand the foreign workers program in a region where unemployment is reaching 10% and more depending on the age

5 See http://www.albertacanada.com/business/overview/unionization-rates.aspx 54

Ambrosie, FINAL May, 2017 group. Based on the model and current legislation, temporary foreign workers would not enhance social sustainability for several reasons. The hotel workers most in demand are room attendants for cleaning. This arduous work is typically performed by women and in the BCC pays slightly above minimum wage approximately $14 per hour which is 60% less than the estimated region’s living wage of $21-$24 per hour per adult for a household of four. Low wages often correlate to lower education levels of the individuals and for the municipalities it means they will be pressured to subsidize affordable rental housing and public transportation. Low wages and renting properties reduce the chances of long-term residency and thus community engagement.

Missing from the current study Although the model is controversial, it is a starting point to help policy-makers better visualize the trade-offs among different decisions and resource allocations. However, what is here in this current study is a mere beginning. Much more work is needed to refine and standardize the numbers for the BCC Balance Sheet (2011) as well as previous periods. The BCC Balance Sheets are a crude beginning as time was insufficient to complete proper accountings. Because I am not a sociologist, the measures and especially references need to be verified by individuals from that discipline. For example, do the crime accounts correctly proxy for physical insecurity and adequately account for concomitant costs? Gender equity is unaccounted for, a major challenge considering the required access to ownership information. Recommended next is the triangulation of the accounts and outcomes following further interviews. This means a survey of residents to find out their feelings about the community. Another step is to have focus groups work on the Case Study and then compare their calculations to those produced in this study. In-depth discussion with focus group participants helps to reveal interpretation of the Balance Sheet and changes, if any, in policy directions. More qualitative information could be provided by key informants such as homeowners’ organizations. In Canmore these are the Spring Creek Property Owners’ Association, Pineridge Homeowners Association; and the Canmore Community Housing Association. Banff’s resident requirements make Banff a special case to which Banff Housing Association could provide information. Surveys and interviews provide final verification to ensure that the model based on large data generally reflects community reality.

Ambrosie, FINAL May, 2017

Future avenues for research Volunteerism is essential to truly understand the workings of a community. Volunteerism is a function of length of residency and to a less degree, homeownership. Higher educated individuals and families with school age children also bolster community engagement. Employment does not affect civic engagement while unemployment causes men to withdraw. All forms of compassionate care (an elder parent, sick children and adults) reduce the availability to engage with community members and therefore must be accounted for. Domestic violence reduces community volunteering which studies show is a strong support system for victims and their families and could even be a first step to getting help. Resorts attract young adults under the age of 40, workers and visitors, which is also the age group with the highest incidence of substance abuse and sexually transmitted diseases. From the base developed here, there are many avenues to advance the findings. First and foremost is obtaining more accurate data based on the accounts developed. Instead, I was only able to extrapolate and deduce rather that working with real numbers on such essential indicators as volunteerism (see Appendix B). Next is the need for more interviews and perhaps a survey of town residents to confirm the results of the calculations (see Appendix C). In a sense, the current Balance Sheets form a hypothesis which needs to be verified by the town professionals and residents by triangulating the numbers with surveys. Finally, the Balance Sheet needs to be tested with its measures and monetization on other communities, perhaps one that is not tourism dependent in order to determine the model’s true generalizability. Throughout the process it is necessary to resolve the incorporation of equity, especially that of gender, into the model. A promising area of accounting research is gender-sensitive budgeting whereby the impacts on women and vulnerable populations are considered when allocating resources. The BCC’s current push to expand the Temporary Foreign Worker Programme has important implications for gender equity as well as the region’s social sustainability in general.

Ambrosie, FINAL May, 2017

References AADAC. (2006). Costs of Substance Abuse: Alberta in Perspective. Retrieved from http://www.assembly.ab.ca/lao/library/egovdocs/2007/alad/159249.pdf AHLA. (2016a). 2016 Wage Survey. Edmonton, AB: Alberta Hotel and Lodging Association. Retrieved from https://www.ahla.ca/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/2016-Wage-Survey-Results- 1.pdf AHLA. (2016b). Accommodation Guide. Retrieved from https://www.ahla.ca/resources/ahla- publications/accommodation-guide/ AHW. (n.d.). Alberta Health Website Interactive Health Data Application. Edmonton, AB: Alberta Health. Retrieved from http://www.ahw.gov.ab.ca/IHDA_Retrieval/ihdaData.do Alberta Government. (n.d.). Family Violence Hurts Everyone: A Framework to End Family Violence in Alberta. Edmonton, AB. Retrieved from http://www.humanservices.alberta.ca/documents/family-violence-hurts-everyone.pdf Alexander, C., & Gulati, S. (2012). An Economist’s Case for Volunteering (TD Opinion No. April 23). Toronto, CA. Retrieved from https://volunteer.ca/content/td-economics-economists-case- volunteering Ambrosie. (2011). An Accounting System Proposal for Sustainable Communities: The Impact of Cancún’s Marine Parks. European Accounting Association. Rome, Italy. Retrieved from http://prism.ucalgary.ca/handle/1880/48721 Ambrosie. (2012). Tourism: Sacred Cow or Silver Bullet? Haskayne School of Business. University of Calgary, Calgary, AB. Retrieved from http://theses.ucalgary.ca/handle/11023/217 Ambrosie, L. M. (2015). Sun & Sea Tourism: Fantasy and Finance of the All-Inclusive Industry. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Scholars Publishing. https://doi.org/978-1-4438-7804-3 Anderloni, L., & Vandone, D. (2010). Risk Tolerance in Financial Decision Making (No. 2010–5). (C. Lucarelli & G. Brighetti, Eds.), Social Science Research Network. Social Science Research Network (SSRN). Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1653513 Andrews, D., & Caldera Sánchez, A. (2011). The Evolution of Homeownership Rates in Selected OECD Countries: Demographic and Public Policy Influences. OECD Journal: Economic Studies, 37. Retrieved from http://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/content/article/eco_studies-2011- 5kg0vswqpmg2 Anielski, M. (2001). The Alberta GPI Blueprint: The Genuine Progress Indicator (GPI) Sustainable Well-Being Accounting System. Drayton Valley, AB, Canada: The Pembina Institute. Anielski, M. (2007). The Economics of Happiness: Building Genuine Wealth. Gabriola Island, BC: New Society Publishers. Retrieved from file:///C:/Documents and Settings/Owner/My Documents/AA_UofCalg/Research/Lit & Lit Reviews/Anieleski_2007_Ch2DefnWealth.PDF Anton, C. E., & Lawrence, C. (2014). Home is where the heart is: The effect of place of residence on place attachment and community participation. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 40, 451–461. https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2014.10.007 Baker, M., & Schaltegger, S. (2015). Pragmatism and new directions in social and environmental 57

Ambrosie, FINAL May, 2017

accountability research. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 28(2), 263–294. https://doi.org/10.1108/AAAJ-08-2012-01079 Ball, A., Grubnic, S., & Birchall, J. (2014). Sustainability accounting and accountability in the public sector. In J. Bebbington, J. Underman, & B. O’Dwyer (Eds.), Sustainability Accounting and Accountability (2cd ed., pp. 176–195). Oxon, UK: Routledge. Balmer, N., Pleasance, P., Buck, A., & Walker, H. (2005). Worried Sick: The Experience of Debt Problems and their Relationship with Health, Illness and Disability. Social Policy & Society, 5(1), 39–51. Banff Town. (2010). Banff National Park Attendance 2000 - 2010. Banff, Alberta. Retrieved from https://banff.ca/DocumentCenter/View/686 Banff Town. (2014). Banff Housing Strategy. Banff, Alberta: Town of Banff. Berger, J., & Parkin, A. (2009). The Value of a Degree: Education, Employment and Earnings in Canada. Ottawa, Canada. Retrieved from https://library.carleton.ca/sites/default/files/find/data/surveys/pdf_files/Price-of- Knowledge_4th-edition_2009-11_chapter-1_en.pdf Biosphere Institute. (1999). Canmore Growth Management Strategy Thresholds & Monitoring Program 1999 Report. Canmore, AB. Retrieved from http://biosphereinstitute.org/wp- content/uploads/2016/01/1999ThresholdsMonitoring.pdf Biosphere Institute. (2004). Canmore Community Monitoring Program 2003 Report. Canmore, AB. Retrieved from http://biosphereinstitute.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/CCMP2003.pdf Biosphere Institute. (2006). Canmore Community Monitoring Program 2006 Final Report. Canmore, AB. Retrieved from http://biosphereinstitute.org/wp- content/uploads/2016/01/CCMP2006.pdf Biosphere Institute. (2009). Canmore Community Monitoring Program 2008 Final Report. Canmore, AB. Retrieved from http://biosphereinstitute.org/wp- content/uploads/2016/01/CCMP2008.pdf Biosphere Institute. (2011). Canmore Community Monitoring Program 2010 Final Report. Canmore, AB. Retrieved from http://biosphereinstitute.org/wp- content/uploads/2016/01/CCMP2010.pdf Biosphere Institute. (2013). Canmore Community Monitoring Program 2012 Final Report. Canmore, AB. Retrieved from http://biosphereinstitute.org/wp- content/uploads/2016/01/CCMP2012.pdf Biosphere Institute. (2015). Canmore Community Monitoring Program 2014 Final Report. Canmore, AB. Retrieved from http://biosphereinstitute.org/wp- content/uploads/2016/01/CCMP2014.pdf BLLHA. (2015). Accommodation Sector Turnover Statistics. Banff, Alberta. Retrieved from https://bllhma.wildapricot.org/Resources/Documents/Employee Turnover Rates/Accommodation Sector Turnover Statistics - June 2015(1).pdf BLLHA. (2016). Tourism & Hospitality Sector Business Update: Board Presentation. Banff, Alberta. Retrieved from https://bllhma.wildapricot.org/resources/Pictures/Tourism Sector

Ambrosie, FINAL May, 2017

Business Update.pdf Bollen, K. A., & Rick, H. H. (1990). Perceived Cohesion: A Conceptual and Empirical Exandnation. Social Forces, 69(2), 479–504. Boyce, G. (2000). Public discourse and decision making. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 13(1), 27–64. https://doi.org/10.1108/09513570010316135 Boyer, R. H., Peterson, N., Arora, P., & Caldwell, K. (2016). Five Approaches to Social Sustainability and an Integrated Way Forward. Sustainability, 8, 18. Retrieved from http://www.mdpi.com/journal/sustainability Brand, F. (2009). Critical natural capital revisited: Ecological resilience and sustainable development. Ecological Economics, 68(3), 605–612. Retrieved from http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0921800908004394 Burley, G., & Awad, A. (2015). The Impact of Student Debt. Ottawa, ON. Retrieved from http://dev.cfswpnetwork.ca/wp-content/uploads/sites/71/2015/07/Report-Impact-of-Student- Debt-2015-Final.pdf Campanella, D., Barnetson, B., & MacEwan, A. (2014). On the Job: Why Unions Matter in Alberta. Edmonton, Alberta: Parkland Institute, University of Alberta. Retrieved from http://s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/parkland-research- pdfs/Unions_Matter_Report_(low_res).pdf Canada. (n.d.). Minimum Hourly Wages for Canadian Adult Workers since 1965. Retrieved March 1, 2017, from http://srv116.services.gc.ca/dimt-wid/sm- mw/menu.aspx?GoCTemplateCulture=en-CA Cañada, E. (2015). Las que limpian los hoteles. Barcelona, Spain: Icaria Editorial, S.A. Retrieved from http://www.icariaeditorial.com/libros.php?id=1560 Canmore. (2001). Canmore Community Monitoring Program 2001 Report. Canmore, AB. Retrieved from http://biosphereinstitute.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/CCMP2001.pdf Cantrill, J. G. (1998). The Environmental Self and a Sense of Place: Communication Foundations for Regional Ecosystem Management. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 26, 301– 318. CBC News. (2017, March 17). Alberta gets $6M in federal funding to combat opioid crisis. Edmonton, AB. Retrieved from http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmonton/alberta-gets-6m-in- federal-funding-to-combat-opioid-crisis-1.4019686 CBRE. (2016). Alberta Accommodation Outlook 2016. Vancouver, CA. Retrieved from http://www.culturetourism.alberta.ca/tourism/research-and-statistics/statistics/accommodation- statistics/pdf/ab-accommodation-outlook-2016.pdf CCSA. (2006). Costs of Substance Abuse in 2002. Retrieved from http://www.ccsa.ca/Eng/topics/Costs-of-Substance-Abuse-in-Canada/Pages/default.aspx CFWY. (2015). Jasper Business Visitation Report. Jasper, AB. Retrieved from http://westyellowhead.albertacf.com/sites/default/files/westyellowhead.albertacf.com/2014_jas per_business_visitation_study-cfwy.pdf Choi, N. G., & DiNitto, D. M. (2012). Predictors of Time Volunteering, Religious Giving, and

Ambrosie, FINAL May, 2017

Secular Giving: Implications for Nonprofit Organizations. The Journal of Sociology & Social Welfare: Vol. 39: Iss. 2, Article 6., 39(2), 93–120. Retrieved from http://scholarworks.wmich.edu/jssw/vol39/iss2/6 Cobb, C., Halstead, T., & Rowe, J. (1995). If the GDP is up, why is America down? The Atlantic Monthly, 276(4), 59. Retrieved from http://ezproxy.lib.ucalgary.ca:2048/login?url=http://proquest.umi.com/pqdweb?did=6973309& Fmt=7&clientId=12303&RQT=309&VName=PQD Colman, R. (1998). The Economic Value of Civic & Voluntary Work in Nova Scotia. (G. P. I. Altlantic, Ed.), Genuine Progress Index for Atlantic Canada. Halifax, NS: GPI Atlantic. Retrieved from http://gpiatlantic.org/pdf/volunteer/volunteer.pdf Costanza, R., Hart, M., Posner, S., & Talberth, J. (2009). Beyond GDP: The Need for New Measures of Progress. (B. University, Ed.), Pardee Papers No. 4. USA: Boston University. https://doi.org/http://vip2.uvm.edu/~gundiee/publications/Pardee_Paper_4_Beyond_GDP.pdf CTA. (n.d.). 2007 - 2014 Alberta Tourism Market Monitors. Edmonton, AB. Retrieved from http://www.culturetourism.alberta.ca/tourism/research-and-statistics/alberta-tourism-market- monitor/ CTA. (2015). 2015 Alberta Tourism Market Monitor. Edmonton, AB. Retrieved from http://www.culturetourism.alberta.ca/tourism/research-and-statistics/alberta-tourism-market- monitor/ CTA. (2016). 2016 Alberta Tourism Market Monitor Monthly Reports. Edmonton, AB. Retrieved from http://www.culturetourism.alberta.ca/tourism/research-and-statistics/alberta-tourism- market-monitor/ CTHRC. (2013). 2012 Canadian Tourism Sector Compensation Study. Ottawa, Canada. Retrieved from www.ctrhc.ca Cuba, L., & Hummon, D. M. (1993). A PLACE TO CALL HOME: Identification With Dwelling, Community, and Region. Sociological Quarterly, 34(1), 111–131. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1533-8525.1993.tb00133.x Cuckston, T. (2013). Bringing tropical forest biodiversity conservation into financial accounting calculation. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 26(5), 688–714. https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/AAAJ-02-2013-1231 Cutter, S. L., Barnes, L., Berry, M., Burton, C., Evans, E., Tate, E., & Webb, J. (2008). A place- based model for understanding community resilience to natural disasters. Global Environmental Change, 18(4), 598–606. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2008.07.013 Daly, H. E. (1996). Beyond Growth: The Economics of Sustainable Development. Boston: Beacon. De Groot, R., Fischer, B., & Christie, M. (2010). Ch. 1 Integrating the Ecological and Economic Dimensions in Biodiversity and Ecosystem Service Valuation. In TEEB (Ed.), The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity (p. 40). Geneva, Switzerland: The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity. Retrieved from http://www.teebweb.org/ Deloitte. (2014). Town of Banff Economic Prosperity Strategy. Banff, Alberta: Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu Limited.

Ambrosie, FINAL May, 2017

Dempsey, N., Bramley, G., Power, S., & Brown, C. (2011). The Social Dimension of Sustainable Development: Defining Urban Social Sustainability. Sustainable Development, 19, 289–300. Dharssi, A. (2016). Temporary foreign worker exemptions help Banff businesses. The Calgary Herald. Calgary. Retrieved from http://calgaryherald.com/business/local-business/temporary- foreign-worker-exemptions-help-banff-businesses DiPasquale, D., & Glaeser, E. L. (1999). Incentives and Social Capital: Are Homeowners Better Citizens? Journal of Urban Economics, 45(2), 354–384. https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.1006/juec.1998.2098 Freeman, M. C., & Groom, B. (2013). Biodiversity valuation and the discount rate problem. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 26(5), 715–745. https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/AAAJ-02-2013-1226 Fullwood, C. (n.d.). Preventing Family Violence: Community Engagement Makes the Difference. San Francisco, California. Retrieved from https://www.futureswithoutviolence.org/userfiles/file/ImmigrantWomen/PFV-Community Engagement.pdf Hamilton, C. (1999). The genuine progress indicator methodological developments and results from Australia. Ecological Economics, 30(1), 13–28. Retrieved from http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/B6VDY-3X1N34W- 4/2/da3b620ae5bae98729d716c8dc287106 Hart, E. J. (Ted). (2008). Banff‘s Conundrum Affordable housing from 1945 To the incorporation of the Banff Housing Corporation in 1993. Banff, Alberta. Retrieved from https://www.banff.ca/DocumentCenter/View/35 Hayward, K., & Colman, R. (2012). The Economic Value of Voluntary Work in Bhutan. GPIAtlantic. https://doi.org/http://gpiatlantic.org/bhutan/account.html Hayward, K., Pannozzo, L., & Colman, R. (2012). Valuing Bhutan’s True Wealth: Using the new National Accounts to inform enlightened GNH policies. GPIAtlantic. https://doi.org/http://gpiatlantic.org/bhutan/account.html Herremans, I., & Ambrosie, L. M. (2011). Evolution of Social Institutions in the Journey Towards Sustainability: The Case of the Galápagos Islands. Latin American Research Centre Occasional Paper , 1(1), 33. Retrieved from http://dspace.ucalgary.ca/handle/1880/49098 Herremans, I., & Reid. (2002). Developing Awareness of the Sustainability Concept. The Journal of Environmental Education, 34(1), 16–20. Hipp, J. R., & Perrin, A. (2006). Nested Loyalties: Local Networks’ Effects on Neighbourhood and Community Cohesion. Urban Studies, 43(13), 2503–2523. Hodge, T. (1997). Toward a Conceptual Framework for Assessing Progress toward Sustainability. Social Indicators Research, 40(1), 5–98. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/A:1006847209030 Hurst, M. (2011). Debt and Family Type in Canada. Ottawa, Canada. ILO. (2011). Manual on the measurement of volunteer work. Geneva, Switzerland. Retrieved from http://ccss.jhu.edu/wp-

Ambrosie, FINAL May, 2017

content/uploads/downloads/2011/09/ILO_Manual_FINAL_8.29.2011.pdf IUCN. (2006). The Future of Sustainability: Re-thinking Environment and Development in the Twenty-first Century. (T. W. C. Union, Ed.), Report of the IUCN Renowned Thinkers Meeting, 29-31 January 2006 (Vol. 2008). World Conservation Union. https://doi.org/http://cmsdata.iucn.org/downloads/iucn_future_of_sustanability.pdf IUCN. (2008). Shaping a sustainable future: The IUCN programme 2009–2012. (I. U. for the C. of Nature, Ed.) (Vol. 2017). www.iucn.org: Internation Union for the Conservation of Nature. Retrieved from https://www.iucn.org/theme/global-policy/our-work/sustainable-development Jackson, T., & Roberts, P. (2000). A Review of Indicators of Sustainable Development: A Report for Scottish Enterprise Tayside (Vol. 2010). Dundee: Scottish Enterprise Tayside. Jeffrey, R. (2016, February). Albertans’ Crushing Household Debt. Alberta Venture. Edmonton, Alberta. Retrieved from https://albertaventure.com/2016/02/albertans-crushing-household- debt/ Job Resource Centre. (2016). Bow Valley Labour Market Review. Canmore - Banff: Job Resource Centre. Retrieved from http://jobresourcecentre.com/pdf/Fall2014LMR.pdf Job Resource Centre. (2017). Staff Housing Guide. Banff, Canmore, AB. Retrieved from http://jobresourcecentre.com/staffhousingguide/flipbookstaffhousing.html#p=76 Jones, M. J. (2003). Accounting for biodiversity: operationalising environmental accounting. Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal, 16(5), 762–789. Jones, M. J. (2014). Accounting for Biodiversity. (M. J. Jones, Ed.) (First). Oxon, UK: Routledge. Retrieved from BOOK - Irene’s Jones, M. J., & Solomon, J. F. (2013). Problematising accounting for biodiversity. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 26(5), 668–687. Kamerāde, D., & Bennett, M. (2015). Unemployment, volunteering, subjective well-being and mental health. Brussels. Retrieved from http://thirdsectorimpact.eu/site/assets/uploads/documentations/tsi-working-paper-no-7- unemployment-volunteering-subjective-well-being-and-mental- health/TSI_WP8_Unemployment-Volunteering.pdf Kawachi, I., & Kennedy, B. P. (1997). Health and social cohesion: why care about income inequality? British Journal of Medicine, 314, 1037–1040. Kilborn, J. (2005). Behavioral Economics, Overindebtedness & Comparative Consumer Bankruptcy: Searching for Causes and Evaluating Solutions. Emory Bankruptcy Developments Journal, 22(13), 13. Retrieved from https://ssrn.com/abstract=690826 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.690826 Krueger, P. M., Bhaloo, T., & Vaillaincourt Rosenau, P. (2009). Health Lifestyles in the U.S. and Canada: Are We Really So Different? Social Sciences Quarterly, 90(5), 1380–1402. Retrieved from https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2826815/pdf/nihms132827.pdf Krueger, P. M., Tran, M. K., Hummer, R. A., & Chang, V. W. (2015). Mortality Attributable to Low Levels of Education in the United States. PLoS ONE, 10(7). Retrieved from http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0131809&type=printable

Ambrosie, FINAL May, 2017

Lewicka, M. (2011). Place attachment: How far have we come in the last 40 years? Journal of Environmental Psychology, 31(3), 207–230. https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2010.10.001 Lodhia, S., & Jacobs, K. (2013). The practice turn in environmental reporting. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 26(4), 595–615. https://doi.org/10.1108/09513571311327471 Longo, J., & Hodge, T. (2007). Ecosystems Dilemma: Discordance between Nature and Culture. Horizons, 9(3), 25–31. Magee, L., Scerri, A., James, P., Thom, J. A., Padham, L., Hickmott, S., … Cahill, F. (2013). Reframing Social Sustainability Reporting: Towards an Engaged Approach. Environmental Development and Sustainability, 15, 225–243. Magis, K., & Shinn, C. (2009). Emergent Principles of Social Sustainability. In J. Dillard, V. Dujon, & M. C. King (Eds.), Understanding the Social Dimension of Sustainability (1st ed., pp. 15–44). New York: Routeledge. McKenzie. (2004). Social Sustainability: Towards Some Definitions. Hawke Research Institute Working Paper Series, 27, 31. McNicol, Barbara J. Glorioso, R. S. (2014). Second home leisure landscapes and retirement in the Canadian Rocky Mountain community of Canmore, Alberta. Annals of Leisure Research, 17(1), 27–49. https://doi.org/10.1080/11745398.2014.885845 Merriam-Webster.com. (n.d.). Merriam-Webster Dictionary. Retrieved January 1, 2017, from https://www.merriam-webster.com/ Mertz, E. (2016). 35% of Albertans don’t make enough money to cover their bills, debt payments: study. Global News, p. Consumer. Calgary, AB. Retrieved from http://globalnews.ca/news/2969724/35-of-albertans-dont-make-enough-money-to-cover-their- bills-debt-payments-study/ Miller, P. (1986). Accounting for progress -- National accounting and planning in France: A review essay. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 11(1), 83–104. Retrieved from http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/B6VCK-45W6MWV- H4/2/91b3b382dd978e811ca06ca52582255a Muller, P. (2003). A History of National Accounting. Courrier Des Statistiques, English, 9, 35–50. Murphy, K. (2012). The social pillar of sustainable development: a literature review and framework for policy analysis. Sustainability: Science, Practice & Policy, 8(1), 15–29. Myths About Abuse. (2009). Retrieved from http://stopabuse.umich.edu/about/myths.html Neumayer, E. (2000). On the methodology of ISEW, GPI and related measures: some constructive suggestions and some doubt on the “threshold” hypothesis. Ecological Economics, 34(3), 347– 361. Retrieved from http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/B6VDY-4118291- 6/2/6c03bfa02a9241cdc89ca41acf6d359c Oh, J.-H., & Kim, S. (2009). Aging, neighborhood attachment, and fear of crime: testing reciprocal effects. Journal of Community Psychology, 37(1), 21–40. https://doi.org/10.1002/jcop.20269 Owen, D., Gray, R., & Bebbington, J. (1997). Green Accounting: Cosmetic Irrelevance or Radical

Ambrosie, FINAL May, 2017

Agenda for Change? Asia-Pacific Journal of Accounting, 4(2), 175–198. https://doi.org/10.1080/10293574.1997.10510519 Page, R., Bayley, S., Cook, D., Green, J. E., & Ritchie, J. R. B. (1996). Banff-Bow Valley: At the Crossroads. Banff, Alberta. Pannozzo, L., & Colman, R. (2009). New policy directions for Nova Scotia: using the Genuine Progress Index to count what matters. (G. P. I. Atlantic, Ed.), Measuring Sustainable Development. GPI Atlantic. Pannozzo, L., Hayward, K., Colman, R., & Hayward, V. (2008). How Educated are Nova Scotians? Education Indicators for the Nova Scotia Genuine Progress Index. Halifax, NS: GPIAtlantic. https://doi.org/http://www.gpiatlantic.org/publications/pubs.htm Parks Canada. (1997). State of the Parks. Ottawa, Canada. Parks Canada. (2000). Parks Canada Attendance 1995-96 to 1999-00. Ottawa, Canada. Parks Canada. (2010). Parks Canada Attendance 2005-06 to 2009-10. Ottawa, Canada. Parks Canada. (2016). Parks Canada Attendance 2011-12 to 2015-16. Ottawa, Canada. Retrieved from http://www.pc.gc.ca/eng/docs/pc/attend/table3.aspx Pepperdine. (2000). Social Indicators of Rural Community Sustainability: An Example from the Woady Yaloak Catchment. In First National Conference on the Future of Australia’s Country Towns (p. 9). Bendigo, Australia. Putnam, R. (2001). Social Capital: Measurement and Consequences. QCOSS. (2009). Employment & Community Participation. Queensland, Australia. Retrieved from https://www.qcoss.org.au/sites/default/files/QCOSS_Policy_Position_Nov_2009_Employment _and_Community_Participation_0.pdf Raymond, C. M., Brown, G., & Weber, D. (2010). The measurement of place attachment: Personal, community, and environmental connections. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 30(4), 422–434. https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2010.08.002 Referencegroup. (2016). Company directory search results for NAICS 721110 and Geography Banff and Canmore [Data file]. Retrieved from http://www.thereferencegroup.com/ Robinson, D., & Wilkinson, D. (1995). Sense of community in a remote mining town: Validating a Neighborhood Cohesion scale. American Journal of Community Psychology, 23(1), 137–148. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02506926 Ross, C. E., Reynolds, J. R., & Geis, K. J. (2000). The Contingent Meaning of Neighborhood Stability for Residents’ Psychological Well-Being. American Sociological Review, 65(4), 581– 597. https://doi.org/10.2307/2657384 Rotolo, T., Wilson, J., & Hughes, M. E. (2010). Homeownership and Volunteering: An Alternative Approach to Studying Social Inequality and Civic Engagement. Sociological Forum, 25(3), 570–587. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1573-7861.2010.01196.x Sadler, B. (1990). Sustainable development, northern realities and the design and implementation of conservation strategies. In E. Smith (Ed.), Sustainable development through northern conservation strategies (p. 188). Calgary: University of Calgary Press.

Ambrosie, FINAL May, 2017

Siddiqui, J. (2013a). Mainstreaming biodiversity accounting: potential implications for a developing economy. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 26(5), 779–805. https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/AAAJ-03-2013-1242 Siddiqui, J. (2013b). Mainstreaming biodiversity accounting: Potential implications for a developing economy. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 26(5), 779–805. https://doi.org/10.1108/aaaj-03-2013-1242 SROI. (2010). SROI Canada Financial Proxies Database. Calgary, AB. Retrieved from https://www.calgary.ca/CSPS/CNS/Documents/fcss/sroi_canada_financial_proxy_list.pdf?nor edirect=1 Statistics Canada. (n.d.-a). Canada Survey of Giving, Volunteering and Participating. Ottawa, Ont. Retrieved from http://www23.statcan.gc.ca/imdb/p2SV.pl?Function=getSurvey&SDDS=4430 Statistics Canada. (n.d.-b). Consumer Price Index, historical summary, by province or territory. Retrieved March 1, 2017, from http://www.statcan.gc.ca/tables-tableaux/sum- som/l01/cst01/econ150b-eng.htm Statistics Canada. (n.d.-c). National Household Surveys. Retrieved from https://www12.statcan.gc.ca/nhs-enm/2011/dp-pd/prof/index.cfm?Lang=E Statistics Canada. (n.d.-d). Public and private elementary and secondary education expenditures. Retrieved January 1, 2017, from http://www5.statcan.gc.ca/cansim/a26?lang=eng&id=4780014&p2=33 Statistics Canada. (n.d.-e). Satellite account of non-profit institutions and volunteering. Retrieved from http://www.statcan.gc.ca/eng/nea/list/npiv Statistics Canada. (n.d.-f). Survey of Household Spending. Retrieved from http://www5.statcan.gc.ca/cansim/a47 Statistics Canada. (2000). Replacement cost value of volunteer work and paid labour compensation, by primary area of activity. Ottawa, Canada: Statistics Canada. Retrieved from Cansim Table 3880004 Statistics Canada. (2006). 2000 National Survey of Giving, Volunteering and Participating (NSGVP) Questionnaire. Ottawa, Canada: Statistics Canada. Retrieved from http://www23.statcan.gc.ca/imdb-bmdi/instrument/4430_Q1_V1-eng.pdf Statistics Canada. (2011a). Families, Households and Housing. In Canada Yearbook (pp. 196–207). Ottawa, Canada: Statistics Canada. Retrieved from http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/11-402- x/2011000/pdf/families-familles-eng.pdf Statistics Canada. (2011b). Families, Households and Marital Status. Retrieved July 20, 2003, from http://www12.statcan.gc.ca/census-recensement/2011/as-sa/index-eng.cfm?TABID=4 Statistics Canada. (2011c). Focus on Geography. Retrieved from https://www12.statcan.gc.ca/nhs- enm/2011/as-sa/fogs-spg/Pages/FOG.cfm?lang=E&level=4&GeoCode=4815035 Statistics Canada. (2012). Household Debt in Canada. Retrieved from http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/75-001-x/2012002/article/11636-eng.htm Statistics Canada. (2015). Household debt service ratio–Interest and principal. Retrieved from www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/13-605-x/2015006/article/14219-eng.htm

Ambrosie, FINAL May, 2017

Statistics Canada. (2016). Chart 3 Unemployment rates in Alberta and Canada. Retrieved May 1, 2017, from http://www.statcan.gc.ca/daily-quotidien/160205/cg-a003-eng.htm Statistics Canada. (2017a). Census Profile. 2016 Census. Statistics Canada. (2017b). Focus on Geography Series, 2016 Census. Statistics Canada Catalogue no. 98-404-X2016001. Retrieved from http://www12.statcan.gc.ca/census- recensement/2016/as-sa/fogs-spg/Facts-cma-eng.cfm?LANG=Eng&GK=CMA&GC=828 Statistics Canada, & CMEC. (2011). Education Indicators in Canada: Spending on Postsecondary Education. Ottawa, Canada. https://doi.org/ISSN: 1709-8653 ISBN: 978-1-100-18860-7 Fact Stedman, R. C. (2003). Is It Really Just a Social Construction?: The Contribution of the Physical Environment to Sense of Place. Society & Natural Resources, 16, 671–685. Taniguchi, H. (2006). Men’s and Women’s Volunteering: Gender Differences in the Effects of Employment and Family Characteristics. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 35(1), 83–101. https://doi.org/10.1177/0899764005282481 TIAC, & BLLHA. (2015). Banff & Lake Louise Labour Shortage Study. Banff, Alberta. Retrieved from https://bllhma.wildapricot.org/ TransUnion. (2016). TransUnion Consumer MarketTrends®. Burlington, Ontario: TransUnion. Retrieved from http://www.transunioninsights.ca/MarketTrends/files/TransUnion- MarketTrends-Q4-2015-Summary-Tables.pdf TransUnion, & Equifax. (n.d.). 2006 - 2016 Credit Reports. Trip Advisor. (2016). Hotels Banff and Canmore. Retrieved from https://www.tripadvisor.ca/ Turcotte, M. (2015). Volunteering and Charitable Giving in Canada. Ottawa, Canada. https://doi.org/ISBN 978-1-100-25385-5 Uitermark, J., Duyvendak, J. W., & Kleinhans, R. (2007). Gentrification as a Governmental Strategy: Social Control and Social Cohesion in Hoogvliet, Rotterdam. Environment and Planning A, 39(1), 125–141. https://doi.org/10.1068/a39142 UK. (2005). What is a sustainable community? Communities and Local Government. Retrieved from http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20120919132719/http://www.communities.gov.uk/i ndex.asp?id=1139866 UN. (2015). Transforming Our World: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. New York: United Nations. https://doi.org/A/RES/70/1 UN WCED. (1987). Report of the World Commission on Environment and Development: Our Common Future. Transmitted to the General Assembly as an Annex to document A/42/427 - Development and International Co-operation: Environment . Retrieved from http://www.un- documents.net/wced-ocf.htm UNECE. (2005). Sustainable development - concept and action. United Nations Economic Commission for Europe. Retrieved from http://www.unece.org/oes/nutshell/2004- 2005/focus_sustainable_development.html UNIFOR. Collective Agreement between FHR Banff Operations Corporation (The Fairmont Banff Springs) and the Unifor Local 4325 governing employees working in the heat, light and power 66

Ambrosie, FINAL May, 2017

department and the repairs and maintenance department (2012). Retrieved from https://work.alberta.ca/labour/166.html UNIFOR. Collective Agreement between INN VEST Hotels GP XV Ltd. (The Fairmont Palliser) Calgary, Alberta and UNIFOR, Local 4050 (2014). UNIFOR. Collective Agreement between FHR Jasper Operations Corporation (Fairmont Jasper Park Lodge) and Unifor Local 4534 Governing Employees of Fairmont Jasper Park Lodge, Jasper, Alberta, Agreement No. U2015 § (2015). Retrieved from https://work.alberta.ca/labour/166.html UNIFOR. Collective Agreement between Canmore Laundry Facility Operations Ltd (Fairmont Regional Linen Service) and Unifor Local 4050 (2016). Retrieved from https://work.alberta.ca/labour/166.html Vallance, S., Perkins, H., & Dixon, J. (2011). What is social sustainability? A clarification of concepts. Geoforum, 42, 342–348. van Loon, J. (2016). How Banff’s champagne powder and the low loonie are helping Alberta battle recession. Financial Post - Bloomberg News. Toronto. Retrieved from http://business.financialpost.com/news/economy/champagne-powder-hiking-banff-helps- alberta-battle-recession Vézina, M., & Crompton, S. (2012). Volunteering in Canada. Ottawa, Canada. https://doi.org/11- 008-X WACOSS. (2012). WACOSS Model of Social Sustainability. Western Australia Council of Social Service. Retrieved from http://www.regional.org.au/au/soc/2002/4/barron_gauntlett.htm Waite, R., Burke, L., & Gray, E. (2014). Coastal Capital: Ecosystem Valuation for Decision Making in the Caribbean. (W. R. Institute, Ed.). Washington DC: World Resources Institute. Retrieved from http://www.wri.org WBCSD. (2011). Guide to Corporate Ecosystem Valuation: A framework for improving corporate decision-making. World Business Council Sustainable Development. Wells, L., Emery, J. C. H., & Boodt, C. (2012). Preventing Domestic Violence in Alberta: A Cost Savings Perspective (June 5, 2012). SPP Research Paper No. 12-17. Available at SSRN: Social Science Research Network, SPP Resear(12–17). Retrieved from https://ssrn.com/abstract=2088960 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2088960 Wilson, J., Colman, R., & Monette, A. (2001). The Nova Scotia Ecological Footprint. (G. P. I. Altlantic, Ed.), Genuine Progress Index for Atlantic Canada. Halifax, NS: GPI Atlantic. Retrieved from http://gipaltantic.org/pdf/ecofoot/ns-ecofoot.pdf Wilson, J., & Musick, M. (1997). Who Cares? Toward an Integrated Theory of Volunteer Work. American Sociological Review, 62(5), 694–713. https://doi.org/10.2307/2657355

Ambrosie, FINAL May, 2017

Appendices Appendix A: Statistics Canada Geographic Codes and Alberta Information ALBERTAIn the Province - STATS (PR) CAN of Ref: http://www12.statcan.gc.ca/census-recensement/2011/ref/dict/azindex-eng.cfm Alberta (Code 48) there Geographic DEFINITION are: Areas/Codes Census Years Digits to Code Banff Corridor Codes 2011, 2006, 2001, 1996, 1991, Federal Electoral 28 Area represented by a Member of Parliament (MP) elected to the 1986, 1981, 1976, 1971, 1966, 5 Districts FED) House of Commons. 1961 2011, 2006, 2001, 1996 A grouping of complete census divisions (CDs) (with one exception in 4 = 2 dig. (economic region); 48 40 (Banff-Jasper-Rocky Mtn House) Economic Regions (ER) 8 Ontario) created as a standard geographic unit for analysis of for PR + 2 1991, 1986, 1981, 1976, 1971 CMA/CA Canmore regional economic activity. dig. For ER (subprovincial region) Census agricultural regions (CARs) are composed of groups of adjacent census divisions. In Saskatchewan, census agricultural 4 = 2 dig. Census Agricultural 2011, 2006, 2001, 1996, 1991, 48 03 - CAR 3 includes Census Divisions 8 regions are made up of groups of adjacent census consolidated for PR + 2 Region (CAR) 1986, 1981 (CD) No. 3, No. 6, No. 15 subdivisions, but these groups do not necessarily respect census dig. for CAR division boundaries. 48 15 Census Division 15 includes the The general term for provincially legislated areas (such as county, Census SUBDIVISIONS of Banff (32), municipalité régionale de comté and regional district) or their 2011, 2006, 2001, 1996, 1991, 4 = 2 dig. Crowsnest Pass (7), Kananaskis (13), Census Division (CD) 19 equivalents. Census divisions are intermediate geographic areas 1986, 1981, 1976, 1971, 1966, for PR + 2 Bighorn No. 8 incl Canmore (15), between the province/territory level and the municipality (census 1961 dig. for CD Improvement District no. 12 Jasper subdivision). Park (37) and Ranchland No. 66 (45). A group of adjacent census subdivisions. Generally, the smaller, 6 = 2 dig. more densely-populated census subdivisions (towns, villages, etc.) for PR + 2 Census Consolidated 2011, 2006, 2001, 1996, 1991, 77 are combined with the surrounding, larger, more rural census dig. for CD Subdivision (CCS) 1986, 1981, 1976, 1971, 1966 subdivision, in order to create a geographic level between the + 2 dig.for census subdivision and the census division CCS 7 = 2 dig. The general term for municipalities (as determined by 2011, 2006, 2001, 1996, 1991, for PR + 2 48 15 032 for Banff Census Subdivisions provincial/territorial legislation) or areas treated as municipal 435 1986, 1981, 1976, 1971, 1966, dig. for CD 48 15 015 for Canmore (CSD) equivalents for statistical purposes (e.g., Indian reserves, Indian 1961 + 3 dig.for 48 15 013 for Kananaskis settlements and unorganized territories). CSD Disolutions 19 No defintion - does not appear to affect Banff Corridor Incorporations 1 No defintion - does not appear to affect Banff Corridor Normally a small community or settlement that does not meet the criteria established by Statistics Canada to be a census subdivision (an area with municipal status) or a population centre. DPLs are 8 = 2 dig. created by provinces and territories, in cooperation with Statistics for PR + 2 Canada, to provide data for submunicipal areas. In other words, In Alberta, these are Métis settlements Designated Place (DPL) 261 2011, 2006, 2001, 1996 dig. for CD an area less than or equal to 10 square kilometres and unincorporated localities. + 4 dig. for a boundary that respects the block structure (see defn below) the DPL from the previous census, where possible an area that does not overlap the area of a population centre. 3 digits = first digit Census Metro Area Area consisting of one or more neighbouring municipalities situated 2 takes the (CMA) around a core. A census metropolitan area (CMA) must have a total 2011, 2006, 2001, 1996, 1991, second Calgary has a CMA of 825, Edmonton's population of at least 100,000 of which 50,000 or more live in the 1986, 1981, 1976, 1971, 1966, digit of the CMA is 835, RED DEER HAS A CA (not core. A census agglomeration (CA) must have a core population of at 1961, 1956, 1951, 1941 PR, i.e. 8 CMA) of 810 least 10,000. IMPORTANT, taken into account are commuting flows Census Agglomeration followed by 16 in and out of the core. (See rules in Stats Can defintions.) (CA) 2 distinct digits With Census Tracts 3 See below Without Census Tracts 13 See below Area that is small and relatively stable. Census tracts usually have a 7 dig population between 2,500 and 8,000 persons. They are located in followed by census metropolitan areas and in census agglomerations that have a 2 decimals core population of 50,000 or more. A committee of local specialists = 3 dig.for Ex. Calgary tracts are 825 0005.00 (if no (for example, planners, health and social workers, and educators) CA/CMA split) or 825 0005.01 and 825 00005.02 2011, 2006, 2001, 1996, 1991, Census Tracts (CT) also initially delineates census tracts in conjunction with Statistics plus 4 dig indicating tract split into 2 due to 573 1986, 1981, 1976, 1971, 1966, called a CT name Canada. Once a census metropolitan area (CMA) or census CT. Number population increase. Maintaining the 1961, 1956, 1951, 1941 agglomeration (CA) has been subdivided into census tracts, the after first 7 digits (tract name) allows for census tracts are maintained even if the core population decimal = historical comparisons. subsequently declines below 50,000. Census tract naming is tract splits consistent from census to census to facilitate historical into two or comparability. more parts

Population Centre Area with a population of at least 1,000 and no fewer than 400 (POPCTR) persons per square kilometre. The term 'population centre' (POPCTR) replaces the term 'urban area' (UA). Population centres are 48 0040 or POPCTR name = Banff Small Popn Areas (Popn 6 = 2 dig. 101 classified into three groups, depending on the size of their 48 0125 or POPCTR name = Canmore 1,000 to 29,999) 2011 only as it is a new for PR + 4 population. The name of the population centre is the name of the No POPCTR for Lake Louise classification dig. for the Med Popn Areas (Popn principal census subdivision (CSD) when the CSD is (or was) a city, Both POPCTRs are Small, i.e. < 30,000 6 POPCTR 30,000 to 99,999) town or village. If two or more principal CSDs are involved, the residents. Large Popn Areas (Popn population centre may be given a compound name. In other cases, 2 100,000 +) the name of the population centre is an appropriate place name. 'Place name' refers to selected names of active and retired geographic areas as well as names from the Canadian Geographical 2011, 2006, 2001, 1996, 1991, Place Names (PN) 3117 Names Data Base. Place names include names of census subdivisions 1986, 1981, 1976, 1971, 1966, N/A (municipalities), designated places and population centres, as well as 1961 the names of some local places. 8 = 2 dig. Small area composed of one or more neighbouring dissemination for PR + 2 Banff = 48 15 0090 Dissemination Area (DA) 5711 blocks, with a population of 400 to 700 persons. All of Canada is 2011, 2006, 2001 dig. for CD Canmore = 48 15 0116 or 0118 divided into dissemination areas. + 4 dig. for the DA The DA code A dissemination block (DB) is an area bounded on all sides by roads 2011, 2006 (dissemination followed by Dissemination Block 66332 and/or boundaries of standard geographic areas. The dissemination block) a 2 digit DB (DB) block is the smallest geographic area for which population and 2001 (block) code, i.e. a dwelling counts are disseminated. Dissemination blocks cover all the total of 10 territory of Canada. digits. A block-face is one side of a street between two consecutive features intersecting that street. The features can be other streets or 2011, 2006, 2001, 1996, 1991, boundaries of standard geographic areas. Block-faces are used for 1986, 1981, 1976, 1971. Note Block Face 525180 generating block-face representative points, which in turn are used since 2001, block faces were for geocoding and census data extraction when the street and defined outside urban areas. address information are available. Data is NOT distributed at this level. Forward Sortation Area 153 Now postal codes The postal code is a six-character code defined and maintained by Canada Post Corporation for the purpose of sorting and delivering mail. NOTE: Users should proceed with caution if postal codes are 2011, 2006, 2001, 1996 (100% Postal Codes 80948 used as a proxy for standard geographic areas. Postal codes do not data) necessarily respect the boundaries of standard geographic areas 1991, 1986 (20% sample) (e.g., the same postal codeOM can fall in two or more census subdivisions).

Ambrosie, FINAL May, 2017

ALBERTA GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION Standard Geographical Classification (SGC) for Alberta is 48 Source: http://www12.statcan.gc.ca/census-recensement/2011/ref/dict/table-tableau/table- tableau-8-eng.cfm Alberta Geographic Units: Source: http://www12.statcan.gc.ca/census-recensement/2011/ref/dict/table-tableau/table- tableau-1-eng.cfm Federal Electoral Districts = 48 Economic Regions = 8 Census Agricultural Region = 8 Census Division = 19 Census Consolidated Subdivision = 77 Census Subdivisions = 435 Disolutions = 19 Incorporations = 1 Designated Place = 261 Census Metro Area = 2 Census Agglomeration = 16 - - With Census Tracts = 3 - Without Census Tracts = 13 Census Tracts = 573 Small Popn Areas = 101 (Popn 1,000 to 29,999) Med Popn Areas = 2 (Popn 30,000 to 99,999) Large Popn Areas = 2 (Popn 100,000 +) Place Names = 3117 Dissemination Area = 5711 Dissemination Block = 66332 Block Face = 525180 Forward Sortation Area = 153 Postal Codes = 80948 This provided the initial maps based on NTS coordinates and township coordinates NTS – National Topographic System, several overlapping maps: Banff Corridor - Improvement District – Banff-Lake Lousie = I.D. 9 while Canmore belongs to Municipal District of Bighorn No. 8 and Kananaskis is its own - Census District – Banff-Canmore = District 15 - Census Division (four digit geographic code) - Census Subdivision (seven digit geographic code) - Economic Region (four digit code) – Banff-Jasper-Rocky Mtn House is 4840 - Electoral Divisions: Banff-Cochrane No. 49 - Federal Electoral District (five digit geographic code)

Ambrosie, FINAL May, 2017

Appendix B: Data Collection for Balance Sheet Years 1996, 2001, 2006, 2011, and 2016, and Data Sources GENERAL DEMOGRAPHICS  1996, 2001, 2006, 2011, and 2016- Population by age groups  1996, 2001, 2006, 2011, and 2016- Income by households Data Sources: - Census of Population, especially Focus on Geography - National Household Survey (NHS) 5178

ASSETS HOUSING - Community Residency and Commitment  Housing types 1996, 2001, 2006, 2011, 2016  Value of each housing type times the number of housing type occupied by owner. Each balance sheet period the housing assets are calculated anew and the new total figures replace the previous period. There is no depreciation for older residences because the length of residency is the greatest predictor of volunteerism. This differs from normal capital asset accounting. Rather than depreciation, high mortgages increase risk. In short, newer homes with high principal outstanding (little equity) present a greater risk to community cohesion than older homes with long-established residents.  Accounting is only for owner-occupied dwellings and does not include rental or vacation property as these latter two are assumed to be capital investments only and return little to community sustainability due to mobility. Owner-occupied residences proxy for community stability and perhaps community pride. Housing Data Sources: - National Household Survey (NHS) 5178 - CHMC. (n.d.). Housing Market Information. Retrieved from https://www.cmhc- schl.gc.ca/en/hoficlincl/homain/ - Canadian Council on Social Development. (n.d.). Community Data Program. Retrieved from http://www.communitydata.ca/ - Local real estate reports on housing sales prices and other reports on the real estate market such as: o Biosphere Institute. (1999, 2004, 2006, 2009, 2011, 2013, 2015). Canmore Community Monitoring Program Report. Canmore, AB. Retrieved from http://biosphereinstitute.org o Canmore Housing Corporation and the Banff Housing Corporation.

Rev: April, 2017 Social Sustainability | 70

Ambrosie, FINAL May, 2017

EDUCATION - Human Capital Investment  Education: Highest level completed by household residents over 15 in 1996, 2001, 2006, 2011, 2016.  Education: Total cost (public expenditure per student plus private household expenditure per student) to achieve the highest level of education in the above years  Highest education level by permanent resident in the subsequent period is calculated anew based on census data and the new total figures replace the previous period.  Adult unemployment on the depletion side accounts for a reduction in the education investment when educated individuals are unable to apply their skills. Education Data Sources: - IMPORTANT: Statistics Canada does not provide tables with highest education levels by households. For a fee, this special cross-tab needs to be requested from Statistics Canada. - National Household Survey (NHS) 5178 - Statistics Canada. (n.d.). Public and private elementary and secondary education expenditures. Retrieved from http://www5.statcan.gc.ca/cansim/a26?lang=eng&id=4780014&p2=33 - CMEC. (n.d.). Education Indicators in Canada. Retrieved from http://www.cmec.ca/en/ - Statistics Canada, & CMEC. (2011). Education Indicators in Canada: Spending on Postsecondary Education. Ottawa, Canada. https://doi.org/ISSN: 1709-8653 ISBN: 978-1- 100-18860-7 Fact

VOLUNTEERISM – Community Attachment  Volunteerism in Banff / Canmore: Full-time equivalent hours of generalist volunteers.  Volunteerism in Banff / Canmore: Full-time equivalent hours of specialist (non- student) volunteers  Volunteerism in Banff / Canmore: Full-time equivalent hours of student (15-19) volunteers.  1995 – 2015 Alberta minimum wage.  1995 – 2015 Volunteerism x Generalist (or Specialist) hourly wage Volunteerism Data Sources: - Statistics Canada special order Table of Owner-Occupied Dwellings and Highest Education Level of Occupants (see above Education). - National Household Survey (NHS) 5178 - Giving, Volunteering and Participating (GSS GVP) 4820 - Labour Force Survey (LFS) 3701 (for minimum wage = replacement cost)

Rev: April, 2017 Social Sustainability | 71

Ambrosie, FINAL May, 2017

- Statistics Canada. (2000). Replacement cost value of volunteer work and paid labour compensation, by primary area of activity. Ottawa, Canada: Statistics Canada. Retrieved from Cansim Table 3880004 - Statistics Canada Satellite Account of Nonprofit Institutions and Volunteering DEPLETION (Insecurities) FINANCIAL INSECURITY - Debt  The number of owner-occupied dwellings with home equity and/or non-home equity debt (first mortgage, second mortgage, home-equity line of credit (HELOC).  At the balance sheet period, the total amount of outstanding principal owed by owner-occupied households. The amount may need to be extrapolated from the National Household Survey and other financial data such as Equifax. Financial Data Sources: - National Household Survey (NHS) 5178; Census data. - Survey of Household Spending (SHS) 3508 - Canadian Council on Social Development. (n.d.). Community Data Program. Retrieved from http://www.communitydata.ca/ including Equifax/TransUnion credit data by postal code if the community uploads the data to communitydata.ca - Geocoder is used to extract the postal codes for the dissemination areas and then matched with the dissemination area dwelling counts from Statistics Canada 2011 Census. The postal codes can overlap dissemination areas so that some of the dissemination areas will come up multiple times in the original table so the data may need to be cleaned. https://geocoder.ca/?services=1

ECONOMIC INSECURITY – Unemployment and elder dependents  For the entire period, the number of adult permanent residents seeking employment.  For the entire Balance Sheet period, here five (5) years, total amount of unemployment benefits received by permanent resident households.  Eldercare in the household (monthly expenses on food, clothing and household services plus the hourly wage to replace resident care with an outside worker) Economic Insecurity Data Sources: - National Household Survey (NHS) 5178; Census data - Employment Insurance Statistics by Census Division (EIS) 2604 - Labour Force Survey (LFS) 3701 - Survey of Employment, Payrolls and Hours (SEPH) 2612 - Alberta Labour https://work.alberta.ca/labour.html (also provides copies of registered collective agreements)

Rev: April, 2017 Social Sustainability | 72

Ambrosie, FINAL May, 2017

- Survey of Household Spending (SHS) 3508 – for eldercare costs - SROI. (2010). SROI Canada Financial Proxies Database. Calgary, AB. Retrieved from https://www.calgary.ca/CSPS/CNS/Documents/fcss/sroi_canada_financial_proxy_list.pdf?no redirect=1.

PHYSICAL INSECURITY – Health and Violence  Physical insecurity includes property crimes, self-inflicted violence (self-harm, suicide and substance abuse) and interpersonal violence. Each form of violence involves various insurance, medical and judicial agencies from insurers to hospitals to prisons. While many crimes are perpetrated or suffered by non-residents, it is still the permanent residents who bear the personal and capital costs of these acts such as increased police presence to prevent or investigate crime and support services following sexual violence or hospital visits.  Property crime is value of the reparation plus the costs of criminal investigation and proceedings for the Balance Sheet period, here five (5) years.  Self-inflicted violence is the cost of victim hospitalization, health care and support for the Balance Sheet period, here five (5) years.  Interpersonal violence is the costs of bringing the perpetrators to justice inncluding criminal investigation and judicial proceedings and prison. In the case of domestic abuse, this also includes hospitalization, health care and support for the abused and the family for the Balance Sheet period, here five (5) years. Physical Insecurity Data Sources: - Survey of Household Spending (SHS) 3508 - Uniform Crime Reporting Survey (UCR) 3302 - Canadian Community Health Survey (CCHS) 3226 - CCSA. (n.d.). Costs of Substance Abuse. Retrieved from http://www.ccsa.ca/Eng/topics/Costs-of-Substance-Abuse-in-Canada/Pages/default.aspx - Alberta Health Services online database Alberta Health Web - SROI. (2010). SROI Canada Financial Proxies Database. Calgary, AB. Retrieved from https://www.calgary.ca/CSPS/CNS/Documents/fcss/sroi_canada_financial_proxy_list.pdf?no redirect=1

Rev: April, 2017 Social Sustainability | 73

Ambrosie, FINAL May, 2017

Appendix C: Potential Survey Instruments and Questions Possible questionnaire sources:

 Wilkinson, D. (2007). The Multidimensional Nature of Social Cohesion: Psychological Sense of Community, Attraction, and Neighboring. American Journal of Community Psychology, 40(3–4), 214–229. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10464-007-9140-1  Deloitte. (2014). Town of Banff Economic Prosperity Strategy. Banff, Alberta: Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu Limited. Has its questionnaire at the end of the document (pp.134-170 and 112- 130) and Focus Groups (pp. 125-134) using the ‘red dot’ exercise (explanation pp. 132-134), and interviews. Explanation of community consultation pp 92-112)  (McKenzie, 2004) references (Pepperdine, 2000) whose study lists several features of ‘social sustainability’ that were used in a questionnaire to determine social sustainability of rural communities.

Specific Questionnaire to address Social Cohesion From the literature review, community engagement is a function of social cohesion, the following questions emerge for a questionnaire. Home Ownership and Residency Proposition: Home-owning increases community cohesion (Robinson & Wilkinson, 1995, p. 141) Do you own this property? Yes ___ No:___ If yes, what percentage of the property is paid? (home equity has been calculated as the cost price of the home minus the mortgage)

Proposition: Length of residency increases community cohesion (Robinson & Wilkinson, 1995, p. 141) How long have you lived at this address? How many years in this community? How long have you lived in Banff or Canmore?

Proposition: The presence of children in the home increases community participation How many people live with you at the same address? AD ___ CHD___ How many of the people at the same address are related? ___ Does your spouse and/or children like living in the community? Spouse Yes ____ No _____ Children Yes ____ No ____

Proposition: Children 18 or under in the household increases community cohesion (Robinson & Wilkinson, 1995, p. 141) - ages of all children in the household. From this we created dummy variables for having children, having preschoolers, having school age children, and having both.

Rev: April, 2017 Social Sustainability | 74

Ambrosie, FINAL May, 2017

Community Engagement and Volunteerism Proposition: Volunteerism within the community increases community cohesion (Robinson & Wilkinson, 1995, p. 141) - group membership, hours spent volunteering

Income, Education and Health StatsCan reports that the higher the education level, the greater number of hours of volunteering. However, this may not be within the community. Proposition: Higher income positively correlates to higher education (Robinson & Wilkinson, 1995, p. 140) - household income ($ x 1000) and highest education level

Proposition: Higher education positively correlates to community hours of volunteering in the community (Robinson & Wilkinson, 1995, p. 140) - years of education (1 to 7 scale) - hours of volunteerism

Proposition: Poor health negatively correlates to a sense of belonging (cohesion). (Robinson & Wilkinson, 1995, p. 147) Over the past six months, approximately how often: (1 (Daily), 2 (Between daily and weekly), 3 (Weekly), 4 (Between weekly and monthly), 5 (Monthly), 6 (Never), but were reversed and then averaged for the creation of the scale. A. Have you been bothered by your heart beating hard? B. Have you been bothered by an upset stomach? C. Have your hands trembled enough to bother you? D. Have you been troubled by your hands or feet sweating so that they feel damp and clammy? E. Have you been bothered by shortness of breath when not exerting yourself?. F. Have you had spells of dizziness? G. Have you had trouble in getting asleep and staying asleep? H. Have you felt you were going to have a nervous breakdown? I. Have you been bothered by nightmares? J. Have you tended to be tired in the morning? K. Has ill health affected the amount of work you do? L. Have you felt weak all over? Self-identification: Community members self-identify their level of social attachment Independent Variable: Sense of Belonging / Ties to the neighbourhood / community (Bollen & Rick, 1990; Robinson & Wilkinson, 1995, p. 142) Bollen scale of self-perception of social cohesion (Bollen & Rick, 1990) Belonging questions were (1) I feel a sense of belonging to Banff / Canmore . (2) I feel that I am a member of the Banff / Canmore community. (3) I see myself as part of the Banff / Canmore community. Morale questions were

Rev: April, 2017 Social Sustainability | 75

Ambrosie, FINAL May, 2017

(1) I am enthusiastic about Banff / Canmore. (2) I am happy to live in Banff / Canmore. (3) Banff / Canmore is one of the best communities in Alberta.

Community cohesion self-identification (Robinson & Wilkinson, 1995) Response alternatives for all items are 1 (strongly agree), 2 (agree), 3 (neither agree/nor disagree), 4 (disagree), 5 (strongly disagree). Except for Item 5 and Item 15, which are negatively keyed, all other items require recoding before means are computecl (e.g., 1 = 5; 2 = 4; 4 = 2; 5 = 1). After recoding the sense of community/cohesion variable is equal to the mean of all items. 1. Overall, I am very attracted to living in this neighborhood. 2. I feel like I belong to this neighborhood 3. I visit with my neighbors in their homes. 4. The friendships and associations I have with other people in my neighborhood mean a lot to me. 5. Given the opportunity, I would like to move out of this neighborhood. 6. If the people in my neighborhood were planning something I'd think of it as "they" were doing. 7. If I need advice about something I could go to someone in my neighborhood 8. I think I agree with most people in my neighborhood about what is important in life. 9. I believe my neighbors would help me in an emergency. 10. I feel loyal to the people in my neighborhood. 11. I borrow things and exchange favors with my neighbors. 12. I would be willing to work together with others on something to improve my neighborhood. 13. I plan to remain a resident of this neighborhood for a number of years. 14. I like to think of myself as similar to the people who live in this neighborhood 15. I rarely have neighbors over to my house to visit. 16. I regularly stop and talk with people in my neighborhood. 17. Living in this neighborhood gives me a sense of community.

Socio – Economic Information (other than the questions below) (Robinson & Wilkinson, 1995, p. 140) Gender (M/F) Race Language Marital Status (Single, Married, Divorced/Separated, Common Law, Widowed) Employment Status (Employed (FT or PT), Retired, Student, Unemployed) Age

Rev: April, 2017 Social Sustainability | 76

Ambrosie, FINAL May, 2017

Another Example of a More General Survey Interview Questions Guideline to understand Banff Corridor residents  What they do in the area?  Why are they in the area?  What contributions to the community?

Questions: 1. Are you an employee ______or manager______or an owner ______?

2. Is the business locally owned _____ 5. Owned by someone outside the Banff Corridor/Bow Corridor ______? 6. Don’t know ______.

3. In years, how long have you lived in the area?______years

4. Can you list what you consider three of the advantages of living in this area 7. ______8. ______9. ______10. 5. Can you list what you consider three of the biggest challenges 11. ______12. ______13. ______

6. In your spare time, what do you do? 14. Volunteer activities? (active participation) ______15. Social Activities? (passive participation) ______16. Sports? ______17. Other?______

7. Belonging 1 (strongly agree), 2 (agree), 3 (neither agree/nor disagree), 4 (disagree), 5 (strongly disagree) 1 2 3 4 5 I feel a sense of beloning to Banff (Canmore) I feel that I am a member of the community I see myself as part of the Bnf (Cnmr) community 8. Morale 1 (strongly agree), 2 (agree), 3 (neither agree/nor disagree), 4 (disagree), 5 (strongly disagree) 1 2 3 4 5 I am enthusiastic about Banff (Canmore) I am happy to live in Banff (Canmore) Bnf (Cnmr) is one of the best communities in Alta.

18. 9. Accomodation: 19. Home-owner ______20. Rent ______

Rev: April, 2017 Social Sustainability | 77

Ambrosie, FINAL May, 2017

21. Accomodation provided by the employer ______

10. How do you see the future? How do you see the community changing over time?

11. Who are your friends in the area? 22. Permanent residents? 23. Short Term residents? (less than 2 years) 24. Seasonal workers? (just for the winter/summer) 25.

12. Where do you usually meet with or engage with these friends?

13. What different social circles do you see here? In your social circle, where do you usually go to engage with your social circle (name of bars, events, etc.) ______26. 14. Respondent’s Demographics: 27. Age Range: Under 20 ____; 21 – 29 ____; 30 -39 ____; 40 – 49 _____ 50+ ___ 28. Salary Range: Under 10K ___; 11 – 20K _____, 21- 29K ____; 31-39K _____; 29. 40 -49K ______; 51 – 60K ______; 60 – 90K _____ 90K+ ______30.

Additional Questions for Business Owners: A. Have you tried to engage the nearby Aboriginal communities when you look for employees? Yes ____ No ____ B. If yes, what efforts have you made? ______C. If no, why not? ______D. Have you applied for foreign workers? Yes ______No ______E. If yes, what has been your experience with the FW program? ______31. ______32. ______33. 34. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME AND VALUABLE COMMENTS.

Rev: April, 2017 Social Sustainability | 78

Ambrosie, FINAL May, 2017

CASE STUDY: Social Sustainability of Canada's Communities: The Banff–Canmore Corridor (BCC) Dr Linda Ambrosie prepared this case in conjunction with Dr Irene M. Herremans at the Haskayne School of Business, University of Calgary. The story is fictitious while the data are real. This case is intended to be used for educational purposes only and provide material for discussion. The author(s) does not imply or illustrate either effective or ineffective municipal governance or community risk. We thank LiUNA and Mitacs for their financial support. Version: 2017-April In January 2017, over two years into her role as liaison between the town councils of Banff and Canmore, Aileeza Krishia is preparing for today’s meeting of the two town councils. She knows that there are two major challenges to address and is concerned about how to determine the seriousness of the issues. The Banff & Lake Louise Hotel Association (BLLHA) is pressuring the federal government to expand the Temporary Foreign Worker Program not only with a report on the labour shortage (TIAC & BLLHA, 2015) but one showing the number of Canadians refusing hospitality jobs (BLLHA, 2015). Canmore is studying where to build more affordable housing6 as is Banff, but both suffer from limited available land. Also, the RCMP informed Aileeza about the prevalence of drugs and the efforts being taken, including drug-sniffing dogs, to reduce the quantity of drugs ending up in Banff7. As Aileeza flips through her notes and prepares to present the different reports to the councils today, she thinks ahead to the future. What needs to happen to improve the social sustainability of the Corridor? How can she ensure that what the councils monitor improves the well-being of the two municipalities and not simply solves short- term crises? How can the indicators be monetized and which monetized indicators are core for the best long-term outcomes? She remembers the Corridor’s evolution and the recent consulting report highlighting some unique indicators and benchmarks. She decides that

6 Assessment shows limited land for affordable housing efforts http://www.rmoutlook.com/article/Assessment-shows-limited-land-for-affordable-housing-efforts-20170330 7 Jail sentence after dangerous November BNP police pursuit http://www.rmoutlook.com/article/Jail-sentence-after-dangerous-November-BNP-police-pursuit-20170202

Rev: April, 2017 Social Sustainability | - 1 -

Ambrosie, FINAL May, 2017 for the meeting it is a good idea to provide an overview of the history and the social evolution of the BCC. Then she will provide a report on a variety of data to help the councils determine the best measures and presentation of those measure for the long-term social sustainability of the area.

BANFF-CANMORE CORRIDOR BACKGROUND The Banff-Canmore Corridor (BCC) is located in the Rocky Mountains in the southwest part of Alberta. The 6,641 sq. km (2,564 sq. mi) of Banff National Park is a world-renowned UNESCO Heritage site. However, Banff Township covers less than 5 sq. km (less than 2 sq. mi). In contrast, nearby Canmore, only 28 km (17 mi) from Banff Township on the southeast border of Banff Park, covers 69 sq. km (27 sq. mi). Despite Canmore’s municipal area covering 10 times that of Banff, Canmore has 13,992 residents to Banff Township’s 7,851 residents (Statistics Canada, 2017a), barely double. Unlike Banff which has always been driven by tourism, Canmore was a coal-mining town until 1979 when the mine closed. Then Calgary, only 100 km (60 mi) east, won its bid for the 1988 Olympics and Canmore-Kananaskis was selected as the venue for the Nordic events. From a mean, dusty coal-mining town, Canmore was transformed into a gentrified vacation hub, taking in the tourism and residential overflow for Banff before and especially after the winter Olympics (see Appendix I). Tourism visits and dwelling construction illustrate the growth and the important role that Canmore plays. Between 1950 and 1995, Banff Park visitation increased tenfold from one-half million visitors to almost 5 MN. Visitation peaked in 1995 to drop to a low of under 3 MN in 2003-4 at the height of the SARS epidemic which affected tourism across Canada. Internationally, in 2001 the 9/11 terrorist attack in New York occurred and that was followed by the 2007-8 financial crisis. From a visitation and hotel occupancy low in 2009, visitation and hotel occupancy increased steadily especially since the weaker Canadian dollar since 2014. In 2016, the 3.9 MN visitors is not only the highest visitation since 1999, it is the highest attendance to any Canadian federal park representing 27% of all visitors. When Jasper is added, these two federal parks account for 43% of all visitors to parks managed by Parks Canada (Parks Canada, 2016). In 1994-95 when tourism peaked at 4.9 MN visitors the incumbent Minister of Canadian Heritage called for a task force to determine if “this growth in visitor numbers and development threatens the mountain

Rev: April, 2017 Social Sustainability | - 2 -

Ambrosie, FINAL May, 2017 environment” of the Banff-Bow Valley (Page, Bayley, Cook, Green, & Ritchie, 1996, p. 4). The fears expressed in the report proved to be overstated, but with visits returning to the levels of the 90s, is it time to ring the alarm again or should the town councils take a longer view? Whatever the horizon, how should the town councilsbest address competing demands?

GOVERNING THE BANFF-CANMORE CORRIDOR (BCC) – Addressing housing, wages and addictions. After reviewing some of the historical data, Aileeza returned to the present and the petition for more affordable housing. Affordable housing in Banff is an issue that goes back to 1945 (Hart, 2008), and it is not unique to Banff. Jasper Township’s commercial sector like that of Banff, has called for more affordable housing, a relaxation of building restrictions within these national parks (CFWY, 2015) and the expansion of the Temporary Foreign Workers Program (Deloitte, 2014; Dharssi, 2016). Banff’s commercial enterprises and especially hotels, want more temporary foreign workers (TIAC & BLLHA, 2015). But Aileeza knows that Albertans would disagree considering that the province’s unemployment stands at 8.5% as of December, 2016 and in Calgary a whopping 10% (work.alberta.ca), the highest levels of any area west of the Atlantic Provinces. As the Canadian dollar drops against the US dollar and tourism booms, these tourism towns suffer from the opposite: job offers but insufficient job takers (BLLHA, 2015). Some suggest that is because of a lack housing that is affordable compared to the wages offered (Biosphere Institute, 2015).

Rev: April, 2017 Social Sustainability | - 3 -

Ambrosie, FINAL May, 2017

Housing and tenure for permanent and seasonal workers Banff’s population increased from 6,098 in 1996 to 7,851 in 2016, 29% in two decades. Due to controls on construction, Canmore’s population increased twice as fast from 8,354 in 1996 to 13,992 in 2016, 67% over the same period. Canmore’s secondary residences or vacation properties also doubled from 15% in 1997 to 30% by 2011 (see Appendix II). Canmore’s vacation homes aside, of the dwellings for permanent residents 71% were owner-occupied in the mid-90s and 29% rental. By 2011 households occupied by owners declined to 65% proportionally but the number of owner-occupied dwellings grew from 2,004 in 1995 to 3,665 in 2011 (Statistics Canada, n.d.-c). As for Banff, it is true that the party-town atmosphere attracts younger people, a median age of 30 since 2001. Meanwhile, Canmore’s median age increased steadily from 34.3 in 2001 to 39.9 in 2011. Even so, between 2001 and 2011 Banff shifted from 30% owner-occupiers (855 dwellings) to 46% (1170 dwellings) (Statistics Canada, n.d.-c). Aileeza hopes that the 2016 census shows a higher percentage of Banff owner-occupiers, perhaps over 50% if the trend continues. This would be good news because owners generally take more care of their own properties and give back to the community. Even so, the rental situation, at least statistically, is not as bad as some would suggest. When Aileeza compares both Canmore and Banff to Alberta and Canadian housing statistics, surprisingly both towns come out quite well. What is interesting is that despite rental vacancy often near 0%, rental rates are not excessive when compared to other Alberta regions, nor is the rental accommodation condition worse than in other places, in fact it is often better (see Appendix II). Canmore’s average property requiring major repair is much lower than that of Alberta or Canada. As for Banff, in 2011 8.6% of renter-occupied dwellings required major repairs (four times higher than Banff’s owner-occupied dwellings at 1.7%) (Deloitte, 2014; Statistics Canada, n.d.-c), but this is the average for Alberta and Canada. Conversely, Banff appears to have a challenge with above average ‘unsuitable’ rental properties compared to Alberta and Canada. Statistics Canada defines ‘unsuitability’ as a dwelling that lacks sufficient bedrooms for the size and make-up of the household’s residents. Considering the restrictions on construction, it is unsurprising that bedrooms are insufficient for some Banff families.

Rev: April, 2017 Social Sustainability | - 4 -

Ambrosie, FINAL May, 2017

There is a common perception that affordable housing is a problem. And it is true that housing prices are beyond the reach of all except the highest income earners (see Appendix III). But statistics show that since 1996 affordable housing is no more a problem in the BCC than elsewhere in Canada with one exception. Canmore and Banff’s homeowners are more burdened by mortgage and overall shelter costs than renters. At one- in-four homeowners spending 30% or more of income on total shelter costs, this is higher than provincial and national averages of one-in-five or six households. Much of these higher costs are due to debt (see Appendix VI). Household debt is a combination of consumer debt (credit cards, vehicles, installment and student loans) plus real-estate guaranteed debt which includes mortgages (first and second) and home equity lines of credit (HELOC). By 2016, “average household debt in Alberta, including mortgage debt, was $140,763, which means an average monthly debt-servicing cost of more than $1,506” (Jeffrey, 2016). Mortgage interest payments as a proportion of debt have not increased since 1990 while gross consumer debt has sharply increased so that total interest paid is much more than in the past (see Appendix IV). Canada-wide, the debt service ratio has decreased from 10% of disposable (after-tax) income in 1990 to 6% in 2016 thanks to historically low interest rates. The percentage debt burden has decreased on ever more expensive housing, while consumer debt is unchanged at 3% on ever-mounting short-term consumption. This latter interest especially reduces disposable income available to improve well-being. And when crises hit, people living from paycheque to paycheque at all socioeconomic levels often have difficulty repaying their debts. Crises leading to related debt delinquency include relationship breakdowns, domestic violence, illness and disability (Balmer et al., 2005), all of which are factors in job loss outside periods of economic crisis. But these factors are mitigated by education which is also a predictor of income (Berger & Parkin, 2009) and homeownership.

Education and Income Canmore’s population is highly educated. Fifty-five (55) percent of the Canadian population has post-secondary education while 70% of Canmore’s population over 15 years of age has post-secondary education (see Appendix III). For the household, education is an important investment financially and time-wise as higher education correlates to higher income, home-ownership and even health (Krueger, Tran, Hummer, & Chang, 2015). “High

Rev: April, 2017 Social Sustainability | - 5 -

Ambrosie, FINAL May, 2017 levels of education provide knowledge about effective health management strategies and support the development of social psychological or material resources that allow individuals to improve their health” (Krueger, Bhaloo, & Vaillaincourt Rosenau, 2009, p. 1383). Poor health negatively correlates to volunteering, the strongest predictor of community cohesion. Poor health is also linked to unemployment. Unemployment “can signify limited opportunities for employment or economic advancement, put individuals at increased risks of poverty and food or housing insecurity, and increase psychosocial stress— factors that may foster unhealthy lifestyles” (Krueger et al., 2009, p. 1383). Of the total population in Canmore, unemployment jumped after 2008 (see Appendix V). In 2006, it was 1% of the total population for both groups aged 15–24 and 55-64 years. From 2009, the first group doubled to 2%, and for the older group it tripled to 3% of the total population. For the 25–54 year age group it increased from 2.6% to 3.6% of the total population. However, those collecting employment insurance remains low. In 2014, there were only 640 beneficiaries with more than 9,000 working Canmore residents, and 320 beneficiaries of more than 5,000 working Banff residents, far fewer employment insurance beneficiaries than the rest of Alberta. Although that is good news, low wages compared to the high cost of living makes local employment unattractive and undermines business efforts to find good and stable employees (BLLHA, 2016).

Local Wages and Hospitality Probably the greatest tension within the BCC is that between wages offered and a living wage. A living wage is defined as the hourly minimum needed for a household to meet their basic needs. In 2015, the Town of Canmore explored the issue and found the living wage to be $23.40 each for a household of two working adults with two school children, $24.25 for a lone parent with one child, and $20.03 for a single adult (Biosphere Institute, 2015, p. 2). This is 30% higher than Calgary’s living wage of $18 per adult for a four-person household also among the highest living wages in Alberta and Canada (see Appendix V). A few months ago, Aileeza attended the Tourism & Hospitality Sector Business Update organized by the Banff & Lake Louise Hospitality Association where the results of a recent business survey were presented (BLLHA, 2016). The fourteen survey respondents represented 3,821 available rooms and 6,224 food & beverage seats. All at least met their

Rev: April, 2017 Social Sustainability | - 6 -

Ambrosie, FINAL May, 2017

2016 revenue performance and 86% (12 of the 14) exceeded budgeted revenue. Seventy-six percent expected revenue to grow in 2017 by at least 2% and most expected around 5% growth. With this growth, one-half (7) of the 14 businesses expected that their labour needs would not change for 2017 while 6 expected their needs to increase. Ten respondents said that the opportunity cost of a labour force that was less than 100% was more than $250,000. Two respondents estimated that the opportunity cost exceeded $100,000. It is unsurprising then that labour issues topped the concerns for three-quarters of the businesses: changes to labour standards (16%); foreign labour regulations (19%); and the recently introduced minimum wage (42%). The hotels’ strategy in face of the minimum wage increase is to pass some or all of the increase onto their guests (68%) while only 2 businesses said that they will “increase their overall wage structure”. And the respondents’ top strategies to increase revenue were additional investment in the business and increased marketing. Only one-third said enhanced labour attraction and retention was their top strategy for 2016-2017. Rather than increasing wages, controlling the costs of labour was the goal for six respondents (“streamline labour requirements”) while five respondents said “efficiencies through new technology” and three chose “waste reduction”. As the association’s own survey and report confirm, times for the Banff hotels are good and getting better. Industry trends on the resort communities of Banff, Lake Louise, Kananaskis, Canmore and Jasper show that average occupancy increased from 54% in 2009 to 64% in 2016, the highest occupancy in a decade. These Alberta resort hotels are charging the highest ever average daily rate (ADR) of C$253 per room and the highest ever revenue per available room (RevPAR) of C$162 (see Appendix VIII). According to other surveys, Banff hotels’ 2016 ADR was C$216 and RevPAR was C$152 while Canmore’s ADR and RevPAR were C$156 and C$92 respectively (CTA, 2016). Aileeza’s calculations were conservative and based on the lowest advertised rates (Trip Advisor, 2016). Even so, she estimated that the Banff Springs Hotel earned revenue of C$60 million at least in 2016 with annual net operating income8 of $40,000 per room. A median-sized Banff hotel of 100 rooms would have earned revenue of C$7 million and annual net operating income $18,000 per room. A median Canmore hotel of 50 rooms would have earned revenue of C$2 to 3

8 Net Operating Income (NOI) is earnings before debt service, rent, income taxes, depreciation and amortization, also called EBITDAR: earnings before interest, income taxes, depreciation, amortization and rent. NOI is after property taxes, insurance, management fees, franchise fees and capital reserves.

Rev: April, 2017 Social Sustainability | - 7 -

Ambrosie, FINAL May, 2017 million and an annual net operating income of $6-7,000 per room. With such windfalls, employees should benefit as well, should they not? The few points of information on wages offered that Aileeza could find showed that although the Banff Spring Hotel’s workers were non-unionized (with the exception of the grounds and maintenance workers), the wages offered appeared to be 6% higher than the average wages for Banff-Canmore (AHLA, 2016a). But when Aileeza compared the Fairmont Banff Springs sister company in Jasper, the Fairmont Jasper Park Lodge, Jasper employees have even higher wages by an additional 5%. Also, all Jasper Park Lodge employees are covered by a collective agreement that guarantees better rights including employee subsidized housing. But what was truly surprising was the collective agreement that covers all the employees of the Fairmont Palliser in Calgary (407 rooms), a full 30-40% above the average hospitality wage for the BCC, 10-15% above the wages of the Fairmont Jasper Park Lodge and almost 20% above the wages of the mostly non-unionized Fairmont Banff Springs Hotel employees. In fact, all the wages at the Palliser were at least Calgary’s living wage of $18.15 per hour for a household of four. And the Palliser’s ADR for a standard room ranges from $125 to $367 while the Calgary Palliser’s occupancy is near that of Canmore at 58.6%. This translates into a RevPAR of C$73 to C$215 for a standard room (CTA, 2016; Trip Advisor, 2016) similar to that of Canmore and one-half that of Banff. When looking at the wages offered by the BCC tourism industry, with the exception of the highest positions the wages are barely above minimum wage now at $12.25, among the highest in Canada but still one-half of the BCC’s living wage. Hotels and other businesses argue that many offer subsidized housing at one-half the normal cost of housing (see Appendix II). But most of this housing is cooperative with 2, 3, or more per room, shared bathrooms and common areas (Job Resource Centre, 2017). Filipinos make up at least 6-12% of the workers in the area (Job Resource Centre, 2017; Statistics Canada, n.d.- c), and some must work several jobs to make ends meet. On the flip side, Aileeza knows that Banff and especially Canmore are thriving communities, community volunteering bears that out… no pun intended9

9 In 2005, Canmore’s Biosphere Institute created a WildSmart Community program to monitor wildlife activity including bears, to “reduce negative human-wildlife interactions”. http://www.wildsmart.ca/

Rev: April, 2017 Social Sustainability | - 8 -

Ambrosie, FINAL May, 2017

Volunteerism Studies show that citizens’ participation in local organizations, volunteering, predicts community cohesion (Putnam, 2001) because volunteering increases the ties among community members which increases trust and community resilience (Vézina & Crompton, 2012). As for predictors of volunteerism, studies show that education levels not only positively predict volunteerism (Choi & DiNitto, 2012), but that it is the strongest predictor of civic engagement (Rotolo et al., 2010). Another predictor, but less strong, is homeownership because homeowners tend to have more extensive social networks. While participation is high irrespective of home values, home values tend to predict negatively hours volunteered: the higher the home value, the fewer the hours. One suggestion for this is the substitution effect: higher income households donate money rather than time. In short, higher educated home-owners are correlated with participation and hours of volunteerism. In the one data point found, 63% of Canmore’s homeowners volunteered but only 23% of renters. Therefore, the best estimates of hours of volunteerism for Canmore and Banff are the combined indicators of education and housing tenure (see Appendix VII). In 2011, of permanent resident occupied dwellings, Canmore had 71% owner- occupied while Banff had 46%. Also, Canmore had 5% more university graduates than Banff and 5% fewer permanent residents with high school diplomas only (Statistics Canada, n.d.-c). With the exception of university and high-school graduates, all educational levels were identical between the two towns (Appendix III). The higher proportion of university graduates and homeowners in Canmore should correlate to higher levels of volunteerism in Canmore than Banff. Since Aileeza did not know the exact number of hours in each town, she asked her assistant John to estimate volunteer hours based on education level. Economists (Alexander & Gulati, 2012) and statisticians (Statistics Canada, n.d.-e) then multiply the hours of the volunteering by the average hourly wage for the province and the year in question to arrive at the economic value of volunteerism (Appendix IX). But Aileeza knows there are three factors that reduce volunteering outside the home: unemployment, eldercare, personal health concerns, and physical insecurity. Unlike school- aged children who get parents into the community, caring for an elder parent reduces the time available to engage with community members. To estimate the value of such in-home care, economists use the Alberta government’s cash benefit to caretakers which in 2010 was

Rev: April, 2017 Social Sustainability | - 9 -

Ambrosie, FINAL May, 2017

$10,320/year for a single senior. Another estimate is home care support which cost hourly $20.26 in 2006. When this 2006 figure is adjusted for inflation the estimated amount is $22.30 for 2011 (SROI, 2010) close to the estimated replacement cost of a volunteer (see Appendix IX). Another factor that detracts from community engagement is poor personal health. In one community study, poor health was highly negatively correlated to social cohesion (Robinson & Wilkinson, 1995). Those who are unwell detach from the community and use more medical services. Almost a decade ago, emergency room visits cost $231 per visit and hospital stays $1,038 per day (SROI, 2010). So not only does the community lose the valuable help of its members, there are costs to be covered publicly and privately. Physical insecurity can be loosely categorized into three types: self-harm such as suicide and substance abuse; interpersonal violence such as domestic abuse; and property crime such vehicle thefts and home invasions. Banff suffers from illegal drug violations and trafficking incidences three to four times higher than the Alberta and Canmore average (see Appendix VI). Alberta has some of the highest costs per capita to address substance abuse (alcohol and illegal drugs) at $1414 per capita compared to the national average is $639 per capita (see Appendix IX). While substance abuse increases (which might explain above average domestic violence), the good news is that suicide is low and property crime decreased to one-third its 1998 level. Aileeza takes a quick look at all the themes in preparation for today’s meeting: the accommodation industry; park visitation; resident population growth and housing; education and income; civic engagement; financial, economic and physical insecurity. With all these pluses and minuses, Aileeza asks herself how the town councils can guard against losing sight of the proverbial ‘forest for the trees’, especially with so many competing stakeholder demands, some very vocal while others quiet but perhaps more urgent.

Rev: April, 2017 Social Sustainability | - 10 -

Ambrosie, FINAL May, 2017

MAINTAINING COMMUNITY WEALTH – What to monitor and measure? The two towns must look past the attention-grabbing headlines such as drugs and affordable housing, and BALANCE the good with the bad (see Group Worksheet). For example, drugs continue to be a major problem in Banff. This could be due in part to Banff’s reputation as a party-town for young adults. Banff’s median age and high level of drug crimes attests to this draw. But property crimes have dropped and emergency ward visits due to self-harm and suicide are below the provincial average (AHW, n.d.). Interpersonal violence, such as bar fights and domestic abuse, is one-half that of Alberta although increasing. Banff spends only $11 annually on home security devices and Canmore $20 per household while the Canadian average is $49 and Alberta almost twice the Canadian average at $86 per household annually (Statistics Canada, n.d.-f). All that speaks well of the BCC and must count for something! But with so much data from so many different disciplines over two decades, Aileeza wonders: - What core social indicators should the two towns focus on to maintain perspective especially in moments of crisis and competing demands? - How to monetize the costs of social dysfunction and the benefits of community cohesion in order to communicate across disciplines? - How to report the year-on-year results in order to facilitate consensus on the long- term gains of different policy decisions? Along with the longitudinal data she has collected over the past months, these are the questions that Aileeza will put to the council members at their meeting today.

Rev: April, 2017 Social Sustainability | - 11 -

Ambrosie, FINAL May, 2017

REFERENCES AHLA. (2016a). 2016 Wage Survey. Edmonton, AB: Alberta Hotel and Lodging Association. Retrieved from https://www.ahla.ca/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/2016- Wage-Survey-Results-1.pdf AHLA. (2016b). Accommodation Guide. Retrieved from https://www.ahla.ca/resources/ahla-publications/accommodation-guide/ AHW. (n.d.). Alberta Health Website Interactive Health Data Application. Edmonton, AB: Alberta Health. Retrieved from http://www.ahw.gov.ab.ca/IHDA_Retrieval/ihdaData.do Alexander, C., & Gulati, S. (2012). An Economist’s Case for Volunteering (TD Opinion No. April 23). Toronto, CA. Retrieved from https://volunteer.ca/content/td-economics- economists-case-volunteering Ambrosie, L. M. (2015). Sun & Sea Tourism: Fantasy and Finance of the All-Inclusive Industry. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Scholars Publishing. https://doi.org/978-1-4438- 7804-3 Balmer, N., Pleasance, P., Buck, A., & Walker, H. (2005). Worried Sick: The Experience of Debt Problems and their Relationship with Health, Illness and Disability. Social Policy & Society, 5(1), 39–51. Banff Town. (2010). Banff National Park Attendance 2000 - 2010. Banff, Alberta. Retrieved from https://banff.ca/DocumentCenter/View/686 Banff Town. (2014). Banff Housing Strategy. Banff, Alberta: Town of Banff. Berger, J., & Parkin, A. (2009). The Value of a Degree: Education, Employment and Earnings in Canada. Ottawa, Canada. Retrieved from https://library.carleton.ca/sites/default/files/find/data/surveys/pdf_files/Price-of- Knowledge_4th-edition_2009-11_chapter-1_en.pdf Biosphere Institute. (1999). Canmore Growth Management Strategy Thresholds & Monitoring Program 1999 Report. Canmore, AB. Retrieved from http://biosphereinstitute.org/wp- content/uploads/2016/01/1999ThresholdsMonitoring.pdf Biosphere Institute. (2004). Canmore Community Monitoring Program 2003 Report. Canmore, AB. Retrieved from http://biosphereinstitute.org/wp- content/uploads/2016/01/CCMP2003.pdf Biosphere Institute. (2006). Canmore Community Monitoring Program 2006 Final Report. Canmore, AB. Retrieved from http://biosphereinstitute.org/wp- content/uploads/2016/01/CCMP2006.pdf Biosphere Institute. (2009). Canmore Community Monitoring Program 2008 Final Report. Canmore, AB. Retrieved from http://biosphereinstitute.org/wp- content/uploads/2016/01/CCMP2008.pdf Biosphere Institute. (2011). Canmore Community Monitoring Program 2010 Final Report. Canmore, AB. Retrieved from http://biosphereinstitute.org/wp-

Rev: April, 2017 Social Sustainability | - 12 -

Ambrosie, FINAL May, 2017

content/uploads/2016/01/CCMP2010.pdf Biosphere Institute. (2013). Canmore Community Monitoring Program 2012 Final Report. Canmore, AB. Retrieved from http://biosphereinstitute.org/wp- content/uploads/2016/01/CCMP2012.pdf Biosphere Institute. (2015). Canmore Community Monitoring Program 2014 Final Report. Canmore, AB. Retrieved from http://biosphereinstitute.org/wp- content/uploads/2016/01/CCMP2014.pdf BLLHA. (2015). Accommodation Sector Turnover Statistics. Banff, Alberta. Retrieved from https://bllhma.wildapricot.org/Resources/Documents/Employee Turnover Rates/Accommodation Sector Turnover Statistics - June 2015(1).pdf BLLHA. (2016). Tourism & Hospitality Sector Business Update: Board Presentation. Banff, Alberta. Retrieved from https://bllhma.wildapricot.org/resources/Pictures/Tourism Sector Business Update.pdf Canada. (n.d.). Minimum Hourly Wages for Canadian Adult Workers since 1965. Retrieved March 1, 2017, from http://srv116.services.gc.ca/dimt-wid/sm- mw/menu.aspx?GoCTemplateCulture=en-CA Canmore. (2001). Canmore Community Monitoring Program 2001 Report. Canmore, AB. Retrieved from http://biosphereinstitute.org/wp- content/uploads/2016/01/CCMP2001.pdf CBRE. (2016). Alberta Accommodation Outlook 2016. Vancouver, CA. Retrieved from http://www.culturetourism.alberta.ca/tourism/research-and- statistics/statistics/accommodation-statistics/pdf/ab-accommodation-outlook-2016.pdf CFWY. (2015). Jasper Business Visitation Report. Jasper, AB. Retrieved from http://westyellowhead.albertacf.com/sites/default/files/westyellowhead.albertacf.com/2 014_jasper_business_visitation_study-cfwy.pdf Choi, N. G., & DiNitto, D. M. (2012). Predictors of Time Volunteering, Religious Giving, and Secular Giving: Implications for Nonprofit Organizations. The Journal of Sociology & Social Welfare: Vol. 39: Iss. 2, Article 6., 39(2), 93–120. Retrieved from http://scholarworks.wmich.edu/jssw/vol39/iss2/6 CTA. (n.d.). 2007 - 2014 Alberta Tourism Market Monitors. Edmonton, AB. Retrieved from http://www.culturetourism.alberta.ca/tourism/research-and-statistics/alberta-tourism- market-monitor/ CTA. (2015). 2015 Alberta Tourism Market Monitor. Edmonton, AB. Retrieved from http://www.culturetourism.alberta.ca/tourism/research-and-statistics/alberta-tourism- market-monitor/ CTA. (2016). 2016 Alberta Tourism Market Monitor Monthly Reports. Edmonton, AB. Retrieved from http://www.culturetourism.alberta.ca/tourism/research-and- statistics/alberta-tourism-market-monitor/ Deloitte. (2014). Town of Banff Economic Prosperity Strategy. Banff, Alberta: Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu Limited.

Rev: April, 2017 Social Sustainability | - 13 -

Ambrosie, FINAL May, 2017

Dharssi, A. (2016). Temporary foreign worker exemptions help Banff businesses. The Calgary Herald. Calgary. Retrieved from http://calgaryherald.com/business/local- business/temporary-foreign-worker-exemptions-help-banff-businesses Hart, E. J. (Ted). (2008). Banff‘s Conundrum Affordable housing from 1945 To the incorporation of the Banff Housing Corporation in 1993. Banff, Alberta. Retrieved from https://www.banff.ca/DocumentCenter/View/35 Hurst, M. (2011). Debt and Family Type in Canada. Ottawa, Canada. Jeffrey, R. (2016, February). Albertans’ Crushing Household Debt. Alberta Venture. Edmonton, Alberta. Retrieved from https://albertaventure.com/2016/02/albertans- crushing-household-debt/ Job Resource Centre. (2016). Bow Valley Labour Market Review. Canmore - Banff: Job Resource Centre. Retrieved from http://jobresourcecentre.com/pdf/Fall2014LMR.pdf Job Resource Centre. (2017). Staff Housing Guide. Banff, Canmore, AB. Retrieved from http://jobresourcecentre.com/staffhousingguide/flipbookstaffhousing.html#p=76 Krueger, P. M., Bhaloo, T., & Vaillaincourt Rosenau, P. (2009). Health Lifestyles in the U.S. and Canada: Are We Really So Different? Social Sciences Quarterly, 90(5), 1380– 1402. Retrieved from https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2826815/pdf/nihms132827.pdf Krueger, P. M., Tran, M. K., Hummer, R. A., & Chang, V. W. (2015). Mortality Attributable to Low Levels of Education in the United States. PLoS ONE, 10(7). Retrieved from http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0131809&type=pri ntable Page, R., Bayley, S., Cook, D., Green, J. E., & Ritchie, J. R. B. (1996). Banff-Bow Valley: At the Crossroads. Banff, Alberta. Parks Canada. (1997). State of the Parks. Ottawa, Canada. Parks Canada. (2000). Parks Canada Attendance 1995-96 to 1999-00. Ottawa, Canada. Parks Canada. (2010). Parks Canada Attendance 2005-06 to 2009-10. Ottawa, Canada. Parks Canada. (2016). Parks Canada Attendance 2011-12 to 2015-16. Ottawa, Canada. Retrieved from http://www.pc.gc.ca/eng/docs/pc/attend/table3.aspx Putnam, R. (2001). Social Capital: Measurement and Consequences. Referencegroup. (2016). Company directory search results for NAICS 721110 and Geography Banff and Canmore [Data file]. Retrieved from http://www.thereferencegroup.com/ Robinson, D., & Wilkinson, D. (1995). Sense of community in a remote mining town: Validating a Neighborhood Cohesion scale. American Journal of Community Psychology, 23(1), 137–148. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02506926 Rotolo, T., Wilson, J., & Hughes, M. E. (2010). Homeownership and Volunteering: An Alternative Approach to Studying Social Inequality and Civic Engagement. Sociological Forum, 25(3), 570–587. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1573-7861.2010.01196.x

Rev: April, 2017 Social Sustainability | - 14 -

Ambrosie, FINAL May, 2017

SROI. (2010). SROI Canada Financial Proxies Database. Calgary, AB. Retrieved from https://www.calgary.ca/CSPS/CNS/Documents/fcss/sroi_canada_financial_proxy_list.p df?noredirect=1 Statistics Canada. (n.d.-a). Canada Survey of Giving, Volunteering and Participating. Ottawa, Ont. Retrieved from http://www23.statcan.gc.ca/imdb/p2SV.pl?Function=getSurvey&SDDS=4430 Statistics Canada. (n.d.-b). Consumer Price Index, historical summary, by province or territory. Retrieved March 1, 2017, from http://www.statcan.gc.ca/tables-tableaux/sum- som/l01/cst01/econ150b-eng.htm Statistics Canada. (n.d.-c). National Household Surveys. Retrieved from https://www12.statcan.gc.ca/nhs-enm/2011/dp-pd/prof/index.cfm?Lang=E Statistics Canada. (n.d.-d). Public and private elementary and secondary education expenditures. Retrieved from http://www5.statcan.gc.ca/cansim/a26?lang=eng&id=4780014&p2=33 Statistics Canada. (n.d.-e). Satellite account of non-profit institutions and volunteering. Retrieved from http://www.statcan.gc.ca/eng/nea/list/npiv Statistics Canada. (n.d.-f). Survey of Household Spending. Retrieved from http://www5.statcan.gc.ca/cansim/a47 Statistics Canada. (2000). Replacement cost value of volunteer work and paid labour compensation, by primary area of activity. Ottawa, Canada: Statistics Canada. Retrieved from Cansim Table 3880004 Statistics Canada. (2006). 2000 National Survey of Giving, Volunteering and Participating (NSGVP) Questionnaire. Ottawa, Canada: Statistics Canada. Retrieved from http://www23.statcan.gc.ca/imdb-bmdi/instrument/4430_Q1_V1-eng.pdf Statistics Canada. (2011). Focus on Geography. Retrieved from https://www12.statcan.gc.ca/nhs-enm/2011/as-sa/fogs- spg/Pages/FOG.cfm?lang=E&level=4&GeoCode=4815035 Statistics Canada. (2015). Household debt service ratio–Interest and principal. Retrieved from www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/13-605-x/2015006/article/14219-eng.htm Statistics Canada. (2017). Census Profile. 2016 Census. Statistics Canada, & CMEC. (2011). Education Indicators in Canada: Spending on Postsecondary Education. Ottawa, Canada. https://doi.org/ISSN: 1709-8653 ISBN: 978-1-100-18860-7 Fact TIAC, & BLLHA. (2015). Banff & Lake Louise Labour Shortage Study. Banff, Alberta. Retrieved from https://bllhma.wildapricot.org/ TransUnion. (2016). TransUnion Consumer MarketTrends®. Burlington, Ontario: TransUnion. Retrieved from http://www.transunioninsights.ca/MarketTrends/files/TransUnion-MarketTrends-Q4- 2015-Summary-Tables.pdf TransUnion, & Equifax. (n.d.). 2006 - 2016 Credit Reports.

Rev: April, 2017 Social Sustainability | - 15 -

Ambrosie, FINAL May, 2017

Trip Advisor. (2016). Hotels Banff and Canmore. Retrieved from https://www.tripadvisor.ca/ Turcotte, M. (2015). Volunteering and Charitable Giving in Canada. Ottawa, Canada. https://doi.org/ISBN 978-1-100-25385-5 UNIFOR. Collective Agreement between FHR Banff Operations Corporation (The Fairmont Banff Springs) and the Unifor Local 4325 governing employees working in the heat, light and power department and the repairs and maintenance department (2012). Retrieved from https://work.alberta.ca/labour/166.html UNIFOR. Collective Agreement between INN VEST Hotels GP XV Ltd. (The Fairmont Palliser) Calgary, Alberta and UNIFOR, Local 4050 (2014). UNIFOR. Collective Agreement between FHR Jasper Operations Corporation (Fairmont Jasper Park Lodge) and Unifor Local 4534 Governing Employees of Fairmont Jasper Park Lodge, Jasper, Alberta, Agreement No. U2015 § (2015). Retrieved from https://work.alberta.ca/labour/166.html UNIFOR. Collective Agreement between Canmore Laundry Facility Operations Ltd (Fairmont Regional Linen Service) and Unifor Local 4050 (2016). Retrieved from https://work.alberta.ca/labour/166.html Vézina, M., & Crompton, S. (2012). Volunteering in Canada. Ottawa, Canada. https://doi.org/11-008-X

Rev: April, 2017 Social Sustainability | - 16 -

Ambrosie, FINAL May, 2017 GROUP WORKSHEET: OVER TIME What to Measure? How to Monitor? How to Monetize?

WHAT CREATES VIBRANT/COHESIVE COMMUNITIES WHAT REDUCES COMMUNITY VIBRANCY AND COHESION Main Theme: Main Theme:

Sub-theme: Sub-theme:

Sub-theme Sub-theme

Main Theme: Main Theme:

Sub-theme: Sub-theme:

Sub-theme Sub-theme

Main Theme: Main Theme:

Sub-theme: Sub-theme:

Sub-theme Sub-theme

Rev: April, 2017 Social Sustainability | 17

Ambrosie, FINAL May, 2017

APPENDIX I – Tourist Visitation, Population and Dwelling Construction

(Banff Town, 2010; Parks Canada, 1997, 2000, 2010, 2016)

Rev: April, 2017 Social Sustainability | 18

Ambrosie, FINAL May, 2017

APPENDIX II – Housing and Income

( Sources: Biosphere Institute, 1999, 2004, 2006, 2009, 2011, 2013, 2015; Canmore, 2001) And http://www.canmorethomas.com/Blog.php/category/Canmore+Real+Estate/the- canmore-real-estate-market-past-present-future

Banff and Canmore Rental Vacancy Rate 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Banff 1.2 1.2 0% % % Canmor 1.0 1.2 3.7 2.5 1.2 0% 0% 0% 0% % % % % % e Sources: (Banff Town, 2014; Biosphere Institute, 2009, 2015; Deloitte, 2014)

Source: Statistics Canada, National Household Survey

Rev: April, 2017 Social Sustainability | 19

Ambrosie, FINAL May, 2017

( Sources: Biosphere Institute, 1999, 2004, 2006, 2009, 2011, 2013, 2015; Canmore, 2001) (Statistics Canada, n.d.-c)

(Source: Statistics Canada, 2011c) SUBSIDIZED HOUSING FOR SOME BCC WORKERS The average cost of rent in staff Lake Louise Staff Housing and Meals 2015 - 2016 housing, based on survey results Room Deductions per person per night from 98 businesses across Banff, Spruce Grove: $ 17.11 Lake Louise, Canmore and Hector or buildings one to four (studio): $ 11.93 Kananaskis is $405 per month Single accommodation in Brewster/Hillside:$ 11.13 or $13.50 per day per person, Hillside or Brewster couple rooms: $ 9.95 according to the Job Resource Buildings one to four (four or five persons):$ 9.39 Centre’s 2016 Staff Housing Lofts: $ 9.39 Guide. The cost of staff housing is less than half the cost of a Hillside and Brewster 3,4,5 person units $ 8.91 room on the open market. Meals: per meal per day $ 5.50 (excluded free employee duty meal for Lead Hand employees) Sources: http://jobresourcecentre.com/staffhousingguide/flipbookstaffhousing.html and CAW-Canada. FHR Lake Louise Operations Corporation (The Fairmont Château Lake Louise - Lake Louise Alberta) (2016).

Rev: April, 2017 Social Sustainability | 20

Ambrosie, FINAL May, 2017

JASPER PARK LODGE CURRENT STAFF ACCOMMODATION (HOUSING COST) 2016 Month Week Night A/B/C Single $173.70 $81.06 $5.79 A/B/C Double $145.36 $67.83 $4.85 D Single $298.40 $139.25 $9.95 D Double $186.52 $87.04 $6.22 E Both $537.30 $250.74 $17.91 E-5 Both $298.40 $139.25 $9.95 G Singe $206.92 $96.56 $6.90 H Both $117.56 $54.86 $3.92 J Single $201.36 $93.97 $6.71 J Double $173.70 $81.06 $5.79 K Single $201.36 $93.97 $6.71 K Double $173.70 $81.06 $5.79 L Single $204.78 $95.56 $6.83 L Double $177.01 $82.60 $5.90 M Both $117.56 $54.86 $3.92 (Source: UNIFOR, 2015)

Rev: April, 2017 Social Sustainability | 21

Ambrosie, FINAL May, 2017

APPENDIX III – Education and Annual Income BANFF RESIDENTS CANMORE RESIDENTS

https://www12.statcan.gc.ca/nhs-enm/2011/as-sa/99-014-x/2011003/c-g/c-g01_2-eng.cfm (Source: Statistics Canada, n.d.-c2011)

Rev: April, 2017 Social Sustainability | 22

Ambrosie, FINAL May, 2017

APPENDIX IV – Financial Insecurity: Debt - According to 2014 TransUnion/Equifax (n.d.) data, 76% of Banff’s residents and 82% of Canmore’s residents have non-mortgage consumer debt. Of those holding non-mortgage consumer debt, Banff’s per capita average is $23,000 with a median of $4,000. This is only slightly above the Canadian average of $21,000. But for Canmore, the median is $8600 and the average is $42,000, double that of the Canadian average. The most common forms of non-mortgage debt are vehicles, lines of credit, credit cards and student loans. - As for mortgages and housing, statistics bear out that the percentage of households spending 30% or more on shelter costs was 25% of Canmore’s homeowners and 24% of Banff’s homeowners while the Alberta and Canadian average is 18.5%. For renters, 29% of Canmore households and 34% of Banff households spend 30% or more on shelter costs while Alberta’s and Canada’s averages are 39% and 40% respectively.

- Sources: 1996, 2001, 2006 Statistics Canada Census

(Source: Statistics Canada, 2015)

Rev: April, 2017 Social Sustainability | 23

Ambrosie, FINAL May, 2017

APPENDIX V – Economic Insecurity: Hourly Wages and Unemployment

Living Wage Comparisons Year Before Tax Hourly Rates per Adult Locality 2 Ad x 2 Chd 1 Ad x 1 Chd 1 Ad Canmore 2015 $ 23.40 $ 24.25 $ 20.03 Calgary 2015 $ 18.15 $ 17.29 Edmonton 2016 $ 16.69 $ 15.55 Red Deer and Central AB 2016 $ 14.00 Medicine Hat 2013 $ 13.00 $ 13.00 Sources: Biosphere Institute. (2015). Canmore Community Monitoring Program 2014 Final Report. http://www.livingwagecanada.ca/index.php/living-wage-communities/alberta/

Rev: April, 2017 Social Sustainability | 24

Ambrosie, FINAL May, 2017

BANFF – CANMORE WORK SUPPLY AND DEMAND, AND WAGES OFFERED 2016

% ABOVE / % ABOVE / ALBERTA Banff / BELOW AVE. BELOW AVE. UNION Position # ResponsesAve Canmore in %age Calgary in %age WAGES General Manager 193 $ 37.32 $ 46.96 25.83 43.34 16.13 Controller 65 $ 35.37 $ 38.58 9.08 38.24 8.11 Director of Sales 91 $ 33.10 $ 35.83 8.25 34.49 4.20 Front Desk / Reservations Agent 230 $ 14.66 $ 14.42 (1.64) 14.81 1.02 Night Auditor 211 $ 15.74 $ 15.80 0.38 16.09 2.22 Front Desk Supervisor 186 $ 17.39 $ 16.76 (3.62) 17.73 1.96 Housekeeping/Laundry Attendant 235 $ 14.34 $ 14.17 (1.19) 14.36 0.14 $ 15.76 Jasper Park Lodge Housekeeping Supervisor 147 $ 17.50 $ 16.72 (4.46) 17.76 1.49 $ 17.87 Jasper Park Lodge Maintenance Person 29 $ 19.30 $ 17.35 (10.10) 18.92 (1.97) $ 24.54 Banff Springs Hostess 55 $ 13.17 $ 12.76 (3.11) 13.44 2.05 $ 13.50 Jasper Park Lodge F & B Server 99 $ 12.68 $ 12.32 (2.84) 12.91 1.81 Lounge Server 81 $ 12.62 $ 12.33 (2.30) 13.19 4.52 Bartender 85 $ 13.13 $ 12.42 (5.41) 13.41 2.13 $ 14.44 Jasper Park Lodge F & B Supervisor 74 $ 16.90 $ 17.10 1.18 17.4 2.96 Dishwasher 79 $ 13.60 $ 13.59 (0.07) 13.67 0.51 Prep Cook 74 $ 14.99 $ 14.49 (3.34) 15.21 1.47 Line Cook 80 $ 16.60 $ 16.04 (3.37) 16.79 1.14 Banquet Server / Porter 71 $ 12.81 $ 12.34 (3.67) 13.35 4.22 Banquet Captain 56 $ 15.98 $ 16.15 1.06 16.78 5.01 -1.40% 2.39% Conclusion: Banff/Canmore, excluding General Managers, offers wages 4-5 % BELOW that of Calgary and 1.4% below Alberta's Industry Average. General Managers in Banff/Canmore earn 26% ABOVE industry average and 10% ABOVE Calgary General Managers. Source: AHLA. (2016). 2016 Wage Survey. Edmonton, AB: Alberta Hotel and Lodging Association. Retrieved from https://www.ahla.ca/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/2016-Wage-Survey-Results- 1.pdf

Rev: April, 2017 Social Sustainability | 25

Ambrosie, FINAL May, 2017

UNIONIZED = GREY NON-UNIONIZED = WHITE

Palliser to Palliser FAIRMONT AHLA Lodging Bow Valley FAIRMONT AHLA Wage to Jasper Palliser 2016 Fairmont Jasper LINEN FAIRMONT Wage Survey Labour Market PALLISER Survey Banff/ Park to Banff Park Lodge (Canmore) BANFF SPRINGS Banff/Canmore Review (Calgary) Canmore Lodge Springs Front Desk / Reservations $ 14.42 $ 14.27 $ 21.18 47% Night Auditor $ 15.80 $ 14.27 Hostess $ 13.50 $ 12.76 $ 17.75 39% 31% Server $ 11.03 $ 12.32 $ 13.18 $ 15.79 28% 43% Busperson $ 11.56 $ 13.59 $ 13.18 $ 15.93 17% 38% *Senior Chef de Partie $ 22.99 $ 25.61 11% *Chef de Partie $ 21.97 $ 21.16 $ 22.99 5% 9% *First Cook $ 18.78 $ 17.00 $ 16.04 $ 21.09 31% 12% 24% *Second Cook $ 15.92 $ 20.55 29% *General Cook $ 14.84 $ 14.49 $ 14.68 Apprentice Cook -1st year $ 14.84 $ 17.54 18% Apprentice Cook -2cd year $ 15.92 $ 18.43 16% Apprentice Cook -3rd year $ 18.78 $ 20.06 7% Bar Captain $ 15.62 $ 20.96 34% *Barperson $ 14.44 $ 12.42 $ 18.40 48% 27% Server $ 11.03 $ 12.33 $ 15.98 30% 45% Bell Captain $ 21.48 $ 19.15 -11% Bell Person $ 17.29 $ 16.81 -3% *Housekeeping Supervisor $ 17.87 $ 16.72 $ 21.09 26% 18% Houseperson $ 15.36 $ 15.00 $ 14.17 $ 14.12 $ 18.63 31% 21% 24% Room Attendant $ 15.76 $ 18.63 18% * Washperson $ 18.21 $ 17.97 Laundry Attendant $ 15.36 $ 17.22 $ 14.12 Plumber $ 28.07 $ 30.10 7% Carpenter $ 28.07 $ 30.10 7% Painter $ 28.07 $ 25.82 -8% Maintenance Person IV $ 23.62 $ 35.67 Maintenance Person III $ 20.96 $ 28.75 Maintenance Person I $ 18.49 $ 24.54 $ 17.35 $ 17.52 Truck Driver $ 18.51 $ 21.07 $ 17.52 (Sources: AHLA, 2016a; Job Resource Centre, 2016; UNIFOR, 2012, 2014, 2015, 2016)

Alberta Resorts include the resort communities of Banff, Lake Louise, Kananaskis, Canmore and Jasper. (Sources: Canada, n.d.; CTA, n.d., 2015, 2016; Statistics Canada, n.d.-b)

Rev: April, 2017 Social Sustainability | 26

Ambrosie, FINAL May, 2017

APPENDIX VI – Physical Insecurity: Self-Inflicted (Drugs and Suicide), Interpersonal (Domestic Abuse) and Property

Source: Statistics Canada. Table 252-0080 - Incident-based crime statistics, by detailed violations and police services, Alberta, annual

Source: Statistics Canada. Table 252-0080 - Incident-based crime statistics, by detailed violations and police services, Alberta, annual.

Rev: April, 2017 Social Sustainability | 27

Ambrosie, FINAL May, 2017

(Source: AHW, n.d.) Note: Health regions are broader than Census Sub Divisions

Source: Bow Valley Victim’s Services Association (BVVSA). 2010. Annual Report. Bow Valley Victim’s Services Association: Banff, AB from Canmore Monitoring 2010

Rev: April, 2017 Social Sustainability | 28

Ambrosie, FINAL May, 2017

Source: Statistics Canada. Table 252-0080 - Incident-based crime statistics, by detailed violations and police services, Alberta, annual.

Rev: April, 2017 Social Sustainability | 29

Ambrosie, FINAL May, 2017

APPENDIX VII - Volunteerism

(Sources: Statistics Canada, n.d.-a, 2006; Turcotte, 2015; Vézina & Crompton, 2012)

(Sources: Statistics Canada, n.d.-c, n.d.-e, 2000)

Rev: April, 2017 Social Sustainability | 30

Ambrosie, FINAL May, 2017

APPENDIX VIII – The Banff-Canmore Corridor Lodging Industry Rooms Hotels Cumulative % %age of hotels %age of rooms 0-25 19 33.96% 30.65% 2.48% Banff, Lake Louise and Norquay Hotels by Room Number 26-50 6 45.28% 9.68% 3.60% 51-100 19 69.81% 30.65% 23.44% 20 101-200 11 86.79% 17.74% 25.06% 18 16 201-300 3 92.45% 4.84% 11.44% 14 301-400 1 94.34% 1.61% 5.64% 12 SEVEN (7) of the 62 hotels and B&Bs have 45.4% of the 401-500 1 96.23% 1.61% 6.84% 10 6138 available rooms. The two largest hotels with a 501-600 1 98.11% 1.61% 8.96% 8 combined total of 1300+ rooms, or more than 21.5% of 601-700 0 98.11% 0.00% 0.00% 6 the available rooms, are owned by the FAIRMONT: Banff 701-800 1 100.00% 1.61% 12.54% Number of Hotels 4 Springs and Chateau Lake Louise 800 + 0 100.00% 2 62 100.00% 100.00% 0 0-25 26-50 51-100 101-200 201-300 301-400 401-500 501-600 601-700 701-800 800 + Rooms

(Sources: AHLA, 2016b; Trip Advisor, 2016)

(Source: CTA, 2016) Average Daily Rate (ADR) is the total revenue earned divided by the number of rooms that earned revenue. This would exclude courtesy rooms and those occupied by employees. Revenue per Available Room ( RevPAR) is calculated by room sales divided by the number of rooms available for sale within a given period such as a week, month, season or year. Another method to calculate RevPAR is multiplying the ADR by occupancy. These measures allow comparisons among similar hotels with differing room capacity, availability, occ upancy and source markets results (Ambrosie, 2015)

Rev: April, 2017 Social Sustainability | 31

Ambrosie, FINAL May, 2017

(Sources: CTA, n.d., 2015, 2016) Alberta Resorts include the resort communities of Banff, Lake Louise, Kananaskis, Canmore and Jasper. See Appendix V for a comparison of resort hotels room rates in constant 2002 dollars to Alberta’s hourly minimum wage in constant dollars. 2016 BANFF Hotel (Hotels with > 100 Hotel 2016 Average Average 2016 Revenue BANFF 2016 rooms); estimated 72% of Cate- Available Daily Rate 2016 ADR High BANFF per Available Estimated Annual available rooms gory Rooms (ADR) Season Occupancy Room (RevPAR) REVENUE Fairmont-Banff Springs 4 770 $ 300 $ 725 70.8% $ 212.40 $ 59,695,020 Fairmont Chateau Lake Louise 4 550 $ 225 $ 740 70.8% $ 159.30 $ 31,979,475 Banff Centre 3 420 $ 129 $ 330 70.8% $ 91.33 $ 14,001,196 Rimrock Resort Hotel 4 346 $ 217 $ 472 70.8% $ 153.64 $ 19,402,690 Lake Louise Inn 3 247 $ 118 $ 272 70.8% $ 83.54 $ 7,531,909 Inns Of Banff 2.5 244 $ 86 $ 241 70.8% $ 60.89 $ 5,422,685 Banff Park Lodge Resort Hotel 3 211 $ 110 $ 110 70.8% $ 77.88 $ 5,997,928 Banff Caribou Lodge 3.5 190 $ 137 $ 330 70.8% $ 97.00 $ 6,726,673 Moose Hotel and Suites 4 174 $ 188 $ 425 70.8% $ 133.10 $ 8,453,435 Banff Rocky Mountain Resort 3 171 $ 140 $ 301 70.8% $ 99.12 $ 6,186,575 Banff International Hotel 3 162 $ 129 $ 347 70.8% $ 91.33 $ 5,400,461 Mt Royal Hotel 3 135 $ 100 $ 291 70.8% $ 70.80 $ 3,488,670 Banff Ptarmigan Inn 3 134 $ 141 $ 306 70.8% $ 99.83 $ 4,882,587 Douglas Fir Resort & Chalets 3 130 $ 156 $ 290 70.8% $ 110.45 $ 5,240,758 Fox Hotel & Suites 3.5 116 $ 184 $ 388 70.8% $ 130.27 $ 5,515,716 Spruce Grove Inn 2.5 112 $ 92 $ 196 70.8% $ 65.14 $ 2,662,760 Banff Inn 3 107 $ 124 $ 306 70.8% $ 87.79 $ 3,428,717 Hidden Ridge Resort 3.5 107 $ 162 $ 388 70.8% $ 114.70 $ 4,479,452 4326 $ 139 $ 318 70.8% $ 98 $ 5,756,822 72% $ 152 $ 359 $ 108 $ 11,138,706 of BANFF's $139 MEDIAN $318 MEDIAN $98 MEDIAN $ 5.8 mn is available ADR (Average ADR (Average is RevPAR MEDIAN; $11 mn rooms is $152) $359) Hi Season (Average is $108) is the average 2016 CANMORE Hotel (Hotels with > Hotel Average 2016 Revenue CANMORE 2016 50 rooms); estimated 71% of Cate- Available Average Daily CANMORE per Available Estimated Annual available rooms gory Rooms Rate (ADR) ADR High Season Occupancy Room REVENUE Solara Resort & Spa 4 214 $ 140 $ 626 58.9% $ 82.46 $ 6,440,951 Ramada Canmore 2.5 189 $ 89 $ 208 58.9% $ 52.42 $ 3,616,263 Coast Canmore Hotel & Conf Ctr 3 164 $ 108 $ 257 58.9% $ 63.61 $ 3,807,814 Grande Rockies Resort 4 149 $ 141 $ 527 58.9% $ 83.05 $ 4,516,620 Windtower Lodge & Suites 4 105 $ 96 $ 303 58.9% $ 56.54 $ 2,167,049 StoneRidge Mountain Resort 4 104 $ 167 $ 485 58.9% $ 98.36 $ 3,733,859 Holiday Inn-Canmore 3 99 $ 109 $ 348 58.9% $ 64.20 $ 2,319,903 Quality Resort Chateau Canmore 3 93 $ 89 $ 207 58.9% $ 52.42 $ 1,779,431 Best Western Plus-Pocaterra 2.5 83 $ 123 $ 302 58.9% $ 72.45 $ 2,194,782 Rocky Mountain Ski Lodge 2 82 $ 95 $ 162 58.9% $ 55.96 $ 1,674,733 Copperstone Resort 4 75 $ 122 $ 438 58.9% $ 71.86 $ 1,967,113 Falconcrest Lodge 3.5 69 $ 136 $ 386 58.9% $ 80.10 $ 2,017,419 Days Inn-Canmore 2 60 $ 112 $ 224 58.9% $ 65.97 $ 1,444,699 Canmore Rocky Mountain Inn 2 50 $ 99 $ 236 58.9% $ 58.31 $ 1,064,176 1536 $ 111 $ 303 58.9% $ 65 $ 2,180,915 71% $ 116 $ 336 $ 68 $ 2,767,487 of CANMORE's $111 MEDIAN $303 MEDIAN $65 MEDIAN $ 2.2 mn is available ADR (Average ADR (Average is RevPAR MEDIAN; $2.8 mn rooms is $116) $336) Hi Season (Average is $68) is the average (Sources: CBRE, 2016; CTA, 2016; Referencegroup, 2016; Trip Advisor, 2016; p.comm., 2017)

Rev: April, 2017 Social Sustainability | 32

Ambrosie, FINAL May, 2017

APPENDIX IX – Monetization of Assets and Depletion (Current Dollars) and the Consumer Price Index (CPI) Item 1996 2001 2006 2011 2016 ASSETS: Replacement Value of Volunteer Hours – $12.70 $14.88 $18.24 $22.56 $26.37 ALBERTA Average Per Hour Canmore Resale Housing Prices (median) Single Family Detached $208,500 $261,250 $714,803 * $769,000 $1,011,000 * Duplex or Townhouse $175,000 $300,000 $475,000 Multi-Residential $114,900 $177,000 $ 410,000* $329,000 $565,300* Overall Median $158,078 $235,700 $485,000 *Average price as median not available $485,000* $667,000* Education Investment ALBERTA - Per Year K – 12 per student per year $7,884 $7758 $11,022 $14,298 $14,284* Primary per student $10,154 $12,411 Secondary per student $13,283 $19,288 Post-Secondary (Tertiary) incl R & D $19,179 $21,448 $39,937 $40,349 $38,979* * Figures for 2014, last available year DEPLETION: Debt Service Ratio Interest Only – Canadian 8.76% 7.56% 8.49% 7.15% 6.08% Average (Interest to Disposable Income) Mortgage Ratio Interest Only 5.48% 4.14% 4.01% 3.68% 3.09% Non-mortgage ratio Interest Only 3.28% 3.42% 4.32% 3.47% 2.99% of which consumer debt 2.73% 2.95% 3.81% 3.11% 2.63% interest Unemployment Payments Annual cost of Eldercare $10,320 Homecare support (estimated based on $18.50 $20.26 / $22.30 $23.86 Consumer Price Index) hr. Cost of Drug Abuse Per Person $1414 Cost of Interpersonal Violence = Annual Cost $13,162 = From Varcoe in Wells, L., Emery, J. C. H., & .$11,370 Boodt, C. (2012). Preventing Domestic Violence public in Alberta: A Cost Savings Perspective sector +$1,792 private Cost of Self-Inflicted (e.g. suicide) and Other Violence (estimated based on Consumer Price Index) Emergency Medical Service Callout $342 / call $381 Emergency Room $231 /visit $257 Hospital Stay $1038/ day $1156 Police Callout $342/ call $381 Police Investigation $1912 file $2130 Police appearance in court $319 / day $355 Incarceration Provincial Prison $143 / day $159 Incarceration in Federal Prison $260 / day $289 (Sources: Biosphere Institute, 1999, 2004, 2006, 2009, 2013, 2015; Canmore, 2001; Hurst, 2011; SROI, 2010; Statistics Canada, 2000, 2015, n.d.-d, n.d.-g; Statistics Canada & CMEC, 2011; TransUnion, 2016; TransUnion & Equifax, n.d.) Consumer Price Index (CPI) 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 All-items 2002=100 87.6 88.9 90.4 91.3 92.9 95.4 97.8 100.0 102.8 104.7 107.0 109.1 111.5 114.1 114.4 116.5 119.9 121.7 122.8 125.2 126.6 128.4 Canada CPI Annual Increase 1.5% 1.7% 1.0% 1.8% 2.7% 2.5% 2.2% 2.8% 1.8% 2.2% 2.0% 2.2% 2.3% 0.3% 1.8% 2.9% 1.5% 0.9% 2.0% 1.1% 1.4% 2002=100 84.5 86.4 88.1 89.2 91.4 94.5 96.7 100.0 104.4 105.9 108.1 112.3 117.9 121.6 121.5 122.7 125.7 127.1 128.9 132.2 133.7 135.2 Alberta CPI Annual Increase 2.2% 2.0% 1.2% 2.5% 3.4% 2.3% 3.4% 4.4% 1.4% 2.1% 3.9% 5.0% 3.1% -0.1% 1.0% 2.4% 1.1% 1.4% 2.6% 1.1% 1.1% (Source: Statistics Canada, n.d.-b)

Rev: April, 2017 Social Sustainability | 33

Ambrosie, FINAL May, 2017

CASE STUDY TEACHING GUIDE Linda M. Ambrosie under the supervision of Irene M. Herremans wrote this case solely to provide material for discussion. The author(s) do not intend to illustrate either effective or ineffective policy-making but rather provided a scenario that is conducive to analyzing alternatives and using judgement as to the best directions for the future.

Rev: April, 2017 Social Sustainability | 34