CANADIAN COMPANION Global Goal 12: Ensure Canada Ranks Our Kids Sustainable Production 6 Deserve Better

UNICEF REPORT CARD 14

eCee nna nSTILLih . STUCK IN OH THECANADA! MIDDLE CANADIAN COMPANION Global Goal 12: Ensure Canada ranks Our kids sustainable production 6 deserve better. and consumption

Global Goal 4: Ensure Canada ranks inclusive and equitable quality education for all 8

Global Goal 8: Promote full Canada ranks and productive employment eCee nna nand decent worki h .for all 11

Global Goal 10: Reduce Canada ranks inequality within and among countries 14

Global Goal 11: Make OH CANADA!Canada ranks cities inclusive, safe, resilient and sustainable 19 Global Goal 12: Ensure Canada ranks Our kids sustainable production and consumption 6 Global Goal 3: Ensure Canada ranks deserve better.healthy lives and promote well-being 29 Global Goal 4: Ensure Canada ranks inclusive and equitable quality education for all 8 Global Goal 1: End poverty Canada ranks in all its forms everywhere 32 Global Goal 8: Promote full Canada ranks and productive employment Global Goal 2: End hunger, Canada ranks and decent work for all 11 UNICEF REPORT CARD 14 achieve food security and Canadian Companion improved nutrition 37 Global Goal 10: Reduce Canada ranks inequality within and Global Goal 16: Promote Canada ranks among countries 14 unicef.ca/irc14 peaceful and inclusive societiesunicef.ca/IRC14 37 Global Goal 11: Make Canada ranks cities inclusive, safe, resilient and sustainable 19

Global Goal 3: Ensure Canada ranks healthy lives and promote well-being 29

Global Goal 1: End poverty Canada ranks in all its forms everywhere 32

Global Goal 2: End hunger, Canada ranks UNICEF REPORT CARD 14 achieve food security and Canadian Companion improved nutrition 37

Global Goal 16: Promote Canada ranks unicef.ca/irc14 peaceful and inclusive societies 37 Report Card 14 Canadian Companion Oh Canada! Our kids deserve better

CANADIAN COMPANION TO UNICEF REPORT CARD 14

Oh Canada! Our kids deserve better

Visit unicef.ca/irc14 for UNICEF Report Card 14, Building our Future: Children and Sustainable Development Goals in Rich Countries, infographics and background papers. Data sources and full references are cited in the Report Card.

Author: Lisa Wolff Contributors: Martha Friendly, Julie Richardson, Joan Durrant, Ron Ensom, Anita Khanna, David Macdonald, Christine Holliday, Dr. Bryan Smale Editor-in-Chief: Meg French Creative Director: Tiffany Baggetta Art Director: Calvin Fennell

UNICEF Canada extends our gratitude to the young people who contributed to this report, and to the Lyle S. Hallman Foundation and the Lawson Foundation for their support.

Aussi disponible en francais.

All photos from: ©UNICEF Canada

Extracts from this publication (at unicef.ca/irc14) may be reproduced with due acknowledgement. Requests to utilize larger portions or the full publication should be addressed to [email protected].

We suggest the following citation:

UNICEF Canada. 2017. UNICEF Report Card 14: Canadian Companion, Oh Canada! Our kids deserve better. UNICEF Canada, Toronto.

For more information about UNICEF Canada: call 1 800 567 4483 or email [email protected]

Charitable Registration No. 122680572 RR0001

II UNICEF Canada June 2017

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Can Canada be the best place in the world to grow up? 1

Sustainable childhoods 2

Great childhoods 4

CANADA AT THE TOP 12

RESPONSIBLE CONSUMPTION AND PRODUCTION (GOAL 12) 12

QUALITY EDUCATION (GOAL 4) 14

DECENT WORK AND ECONOMIC GROWTH (GOAL 8) 19

REDUCED INEQUALITIES (GOAL 10) 22

CANADA IN THE MIDDLE 28

SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITIES (GOAL 11) 28

CANADA AT THE BOTTOM 30

GOOD HEALTH (GOAL 3) 30

NO POVERTY (GOAL 1) 40

FOOD SECURITY AND NUTRITION (GOAL 2) 44

PEACE, JUSTICE AND STRONG INSTITUTIONS (GOAL 16) 50

So Canada, how do we make things better? 56

Calling on Canada to Act 56

APPENDIX A: Connecting the SDGs to Child Well-being Indicators 60

APPENDIX B: An Alternative Possibility Gap Calculation 61

APPENDIX C: Summary of Canadian SDG indicators of child and youth well-being 62

SOURCES AND ENDNOTES 62

III Report Card 14 Canadian Companion Oh Canada! Our kids deserve better

IV UNICEF Canada June 2017

CAN CANADA BE THE BEST PLACE IN THE WORLD TO GROW UP?

A message from President and CEO, David Morley

The answer to this question is a resounding ‘yes’. It must be, Oh Canada! Our kids deserve better distills the data into a for the alternative is an unacceptable reality for too many of comprehensive picture of childhood in Canada. It highlights our children. the areas where we’re performing well, where we’re falling behind and where we must actively turn our attention. UNICEF Canada’s report Oh Canada! Our kids deserve better focuses attention on an alarming pattern in our It is only by better understanding the state of our children children’s well-being that demands urgent attention. Over that we can begin to design solutions and direct smarter the past ten years, Canada’s middle ranking among wealthy investments to see real progress in their lives. countries on UNICEF Indices measuring the state of children and youth has remained unchanged. More worrying are There is no greater priority for any nation than the well-being the widest gaps between Canada and the top performing of its children. It’s up to all of us – individual Canadians, nations that present themselves in child health, violence the private sector and all levels of government – to come experienced by children and children’s own sense of well- together and ensure all of our children from coast to coast to being. These gaps are symptoms of higher rates of poverty, coast are safe, healthy, educated and have dreams for their social competition and stress, all of which affect children futures – dreams they can achieve. and can alter the trajectory of their lives. Sincerely, We stand out among nations for many of the wrong reasons.

For too long, too many children have been living a life that doesn’t measure up to the ideas held by Canadians across the country I’ve spoken to. Many think of Canada as a country of safety, of peace and of shared prosperity. We think our children are healthy and happy. This report shows David Morley us there is still a considerable distance to go for this to be President and CEO true for all children in Canada. UNICEF Canada

We’ve seen improvements in many areas, but progress has slowed and Canada’s children remain stuck in the middle among rich nations. Yet Canada has the innovation, capacity and resources to move the needle. So why isn’t Canada already the best place in the world to grow up in? Why do we rank 25th out of 41 rich nations?

1 Report Card 14 Canadian Companion Oh Canada! Our kids deserve better

SUSTAINABLE CHILDHOODS

In September 2015, 193 nations, including Canada, came together to set universal targets for the world: the Sustainable Development Goals, or SDGs.

The Global SDGs are an ambitious global agenda. They not Canada does comparatively well in some aspects of child only aim to end extreme poverty and hunger by 2030, but well-being and lags behind in others. All countries have areas are also designed to provide lifelong education for all, protect for improvement; all rank in the middle or bottom third on the planet, and promote peaceful and inclusive societies – at least two of the nine SDGs. A remarkably wide range and they include goals and targets to protect children from of countries achieve the top rank in at least one of the 27 violence, combat climate change and reduce inequality. In indicators. Generally, Canada’s highest-ranking indicators achieving the Global Goals by 2030, we have the potential to relate to education and the somewhat softer impact of the grant every child a fair chance in life, ensuring them health, Great Recession over the past decade on parental and youth safety, education and empowerment. employment in contrast to peer nations. It may surprise few that the Nordic countries are sustaining better, more equitable The most telling sign of a nation’s progress is the state of its outcomes for children in more areas of their lives, but they are children and youth – a sensitive indicator of the well-being of now joined by Germany and rising performers including Korea, people, prosperity and the planet. The universal concept of Slovenia and Japan. child well-being is rooted in the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC), but the Agenda for Sustainable Development Four UNICEF Indices have measured and compared the state adds new dimensions, including reducing inequality and of Canada’s children and youth from different angles over the stemming climate change. Progress across all these past decade (see figure 6). The UNICEF Indices are not directly dimensions will be vital to children’s well-being around the comparable as somewhat different indicators are used, but world and in Canada. On the other side of the coin, a society they reveal a pattern. Canada’s middle ranking hasn’t improved. cannot be inclusive and sustainable without prioritizing the Close to a third of our peer nations have advanced up the well-being of its children and youth. UNICEF’s league tables rankings, while almost half have moved down them, mostly over the past decade have brought this into sharper focus: the related to the impact of the recent recession. Since the first best-performing countries for children also enjoy economic Index in 2007, the United Kingdom has advanced eight places prosperity and pursue environmental sustainability. Canada up the rankings, from 21st to 13th place. Our lack of movement is, in the minds of many, a big, clean, safe and healthy nation. up the Index should be of great concern. What can and should But the data in this Report Card suggest it is not so very clean, we be doing differently to improve the well-being of children safe or healthy for its children and youth. and youth in Canada? Why isn’t Canada one of the best places in the world to grow up? UNICEF Report Card 14 measures rich countries according to the state of their children – including how equitably and When we look at the specific indicators that make up this sustainably they create the conditions for their well-being. It most recent index, in Canada, 7 of the 21 indicators have ranks the world’s 41 high-income countries in league tables of improved and 8 have worsened (see figure 4). This is their performance on each of 27 indicators of child and youth concerning because the trend over the past several decades well-being, aligned to official targets for achievement of 10 of has been improvement in the majority of well-being indicators. the 17 SDGs1. Of the 27 indicators, Canada has data to report While that improvement was not significant enough to move on 212. In a composite Index of Child and Youth Well-being and us up the overall rankings compared to our peer nations, it Sustainability,3 Canada is in a middle position at 25th place. was a change in the right direction. Worsening indicators should raise alarm bells. If our peer nations can achieve better outcomes for children and youth, so can we.

2 UNICEF Canada June 2017

When we measure the “Possibility Gaps,” the distance between Canada’s outcomes and those of the best- performing nations for each indicator, there is a consistent pattern revealed by UNICEF’s Indices (see figure 5). The widest gaps are in child health, violence experienced by children, and children’s own sense of well-being. Recent evidence suggests that countries with poorer outcomes in these three areas typically have higher income inequality. Along with high income inequality come high rates of poverty, social competition and stress, which may contribute to these poorer outcomes for children and youth.4 They affect children broadly and make life more difficult for the poorest. Income inequality also sustains wider inequality among Canada’s children in other well-being outcomes, and it may help explain Canada’s lack of progress in the rankings.5

Many countries at the top of the league tables have high economic prosperity, but the high GDP of some lower in the rankings like USA and New Zealand shows that the economic wealth of a nation isn’t sufficient to lift child and youth well-being. It is the support at the family level that is also important – along with critical policies that support child and youth well-being. Countries at the top of the Index have improved or sustained greater overall income equality and high-quality, universal early childhood programs including parental leave and integrated early health, development and learning. The values of a nation also matter. Countries that rank at the top tend to have a stronger collective commitment to child well-being and give greater priority to public investments in children from birth. Some, like the United Kingdom, that have adopted similar policies have climbed up the rankings. Lessons from these top performers must be considered in Canada if we are going to build the momentum we need and take the actions that are required as a nation to move out of the middle ranking and achieve great outcomes for our children and youth.

1 There are 17 SDGs with 169 targets. For 2 Indicators for which Canada has no data are 4 See UNICEF Report Card 13 (2016). Report Card 14, UNICEF focused on the noted in the Appendix. 5 Ibid. Goals and targets with the greatest direct 3 Countries of the European Union (EU) and the impact on children and youth in high-income Organization for Economic Co-operation and country contexts. Development (OECD).

3 Report Card 14 Canadian Companion Oh Canada! Our kids deserve better

GREAT CHILDHOODS

No generation should have to settle rather than dream.

The standards achieved by the highest-performing nations UNICEF Report Card 14 highlights the actions that could should contribute to debate in Canada about how to have the greatest impact across a range of indicators. achieve them here. Data provided through reports such as Canada’s recent advances in public policy and investment UNICEF Report Cards are critical to understanding where for children, including child-focused income benefits, may we are successful as a nation and where we can make create measurable progress in the coming years. There improvements, and help us set goals for where we need to remains considerable distance to cover to achieve the go. But data for data’s sake is not valuable – it must drive quality, universal policies that are clearly working in the action. In the past, we have focused considerable debate top-performing nations, including parent/child leave benefits, on the data: What is the best way to measure child poverty? early child development programs and measures to further Are immunization rates in Canada really that low? Those reduce child poverty and broader income inequality. Will are important questions, but they aren’t the questions that Canadians call on our political leaders to act quickly and will move us forward. What if we focused instead on how with determination to improve the well-being of children we might create better outcomes? The data are a starting and young people? And will we all do our part as individuals point for debate: Why does Canada rank so low on the Index and communities? There is an untapped wealth in social and why haven’t we seen any momentum up these indices innovation for and with children and youth. Where indicator over the past decade? Are we content to be good, or do we rankings are lowest and the “Possibility Gaps” are widest, want great outcomes for our children and youth? What will we can invest, direct policies and services, and innovate it take to move up the Index? The universal SDG Agenda is other actions to close them. We also need to ask if our a window of opportunity to bring about a dramatic change investments, policies, programs and actions need retooling in the well-being of children across Canada, including to address the aspects of children’s lives where indicators Indigenous children and youth. As a baseline year, the 150th are eroding: the “Progress Gaps.” birthday of Canada’s Confederation could be the point of departure to accelerate and push past mediocrity.6 These are disruptive, uncertain times, but one thing has become crystal clear. To “build a strong, fair Canada built Clearly, better is possible. It is also measurable within a for change,” the national agenda ushered in with the federal short timeframe when a society has clear targets and smart budget this year, we need to build strong, fair childhoods. policies. The well-being of children is a shared responsibility We need better outcomes to enable our children and young among families, communities, the private sector and public people to thrive in a rapidly changing society in a rapidly institutions, but all of the well-being indicators in the Report changing world. Card are influenced by social values and by policy choices at all levels of government. The Canadian Companion to Are we ready?

6 See UNICEF Report Card 7 (2007), UNICEF Report Card 9 (2010), UNICEF Report Card 11 (2013) and UNICEF Report Card 13 (2016).

4 UNICEF Canada June 2017

Measuring and monitoring the state of children and youth in the Sustainable Development Goals

For the past 70 years, UNICEF has played a leading role in advocating for and developing better data on the situation of children and youth worldwide. We’ve created regular progress reports on the state of children, innovations like our indices and new approaches to measuring child poverty and inequality. We have built the capacity in more than 100 countries for data relating to the well-being of children including the Multiple Indicator Cluster Survey (MICS) – the world’s largest children’s census. We work with governments and agencies in data collaboratives to create and standardize approaches to indicators and surveys. We are developing innovative ways with and for children and youth to create their own data, like U-Report and Wellbot.

The Sustainable Development Goals and targets expand the typical frameworks of child and youth well-being, but they also exclude some important indicators. Of the SDG indicators directly focused on children, some are more relevant than others to children in high-income countries. Some of the indicators recognize and have direct relevance to Indigenous children, who are deprived of some of the basic living conditions enjoyed by non-Indigenous children. SDG indicators range across the “ecology” of childhood, from outcomes in children and youth to indicators related to family, social and institutional conditions around them and across their lifecourse. Different social and institutional conditions explain most of the differences in child well-being across affluent nations.

The primary lens for the SDG targets is their contribution to broad social well-being and prosperity within a sustainable environment. They are seen by the world leaders and partners who shaped them as the necessary prerequisites for sustainable development. A focus on comprehensive child and youth well-being would include more indicators and typically would exclude some of the SDG indicators. So, the child-focused SDG indicators can be integrated with comprehensive child well-being monitoring, and play their part in national sustainable development monitoring.

A considerable challenge is the lack of data – particularly internationally comparable data – to measure many of the SDG targets. The indicators in UNICEF Report Card 14 adhere as closely as possible to a range of relevant SDG targets for which there is internationally comparable data, as a starting point. They are not an exhaustive set of child-focused SDG indicators, nor of child and youth well-being, but are curated to cover a wide set of SDG goals. As a custodian for ten of the global SDG indicators and co-custodian for the remaining seven, UNICEF supports national and international partners in meeting the data demands of the SDGs, including the development of child-related indicators, global data standards and national statistical capacity building. Measuring progress - or the lack of it - in the well-being of children and youth is essential to policy-making, to the cost- effective allocation of limited resources and to transparency and accountability. Like all countries, Canada has data gaps to fill to measure the SDGs, which will contribute to better monitoring of the state of Canada’s children.

5 Report Card 14 Canadian Companion Oh Canada! Our kids deserve better

UNICEF league table of child and youth well-being across Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

Norway 14595221221330 Germany 884769292415 Denmark 42215 10 3201910 Sweden 6913167 11 6215 Finland 215161 15 451129 Iceland 3172 27 18 18271 Switzerland 5312112 727317 Republic of Korea510 312116622222233 Slovenia 11 27 11 23 91100221133 Netherlands 766178 12 34 33 14 Ireland 931221337 81881899 Japan 23 18101 32 33 36 8 United Kingdom1634152031661144991166 Luxembourg191214253 15 31 28 19 Austria 10 10 926241133118833002288 Spain 28 26 3123622881166116644 Estonia 18 20 26 21 14 29 44443355 Portugal 30 32 1242622777712127 France 15 71714203344223322552211 Czech Republic 17 16 25 22 13 31 26 24 6 Australia 12 28 23 39 23 17 31818 Croatia 20 14 24 36 35 18 11 14 11 Poland 22 24 32 31 42233117711002200 Italy 31 23 18 19 30 20 30 15 2 Canada 32 37 29 81111441199663377 Belgium 14 11 19 6281199336633223322 Cyprus 13 30 34 21 52236 Latvia 27 21 27 18 16 25 12 38 Malta 24 39 28 229221133221122 Slovakia 21 19 34 35 19 24 10 29 26 Greece 29 35 20 33 32 36 28 17 3 Hungary 26 22 31 30 33 30 21 23 17 Lithuania 25 25 33 29 27 33 531 New Zealand1838153422669933553333 Israel 36 13 728223399337733442255 Turkey 40 37 41 22 29 322 United States33363632173355113322004400 Mexico 34 41 30 44044111155 Romania37333540253388112233772244 Bulgaria 35 38 39 38 39 40 25 734 Chile 29 40 37 38 37 35 26 39

Higher Average Lower insufficient data

6 UNICEF Canada June 2017

Country No Zero Good health and Quality Decent work Reduced Sustainable Responsible Peace, justice and poverty hunger well-being education and economic inequalities cities and consumption strong institutions The league table summarizes growth communities and production the overall findings of this Norway 14595221221330 Report Card. Countries are Germany 884769292415 listed in order of their average Denmark 42215 10 3201910 performance across nine Sweden 6913167 11 6215 Sustainable Development Finland 215161 15 451129 Goals. Goal 5 (Gender) is also Iceland 3172 27 18 18271 included in the Report Card, Switzerland 5312112 727317 but there were too many gaps Republic of Korea510 312116622222233 in the available data for the Slovenia 11 27 11 23 91100221133 results to be incorporated Netherlands 766178 12 34 33 14 into this composite table. Ireland 931221337 81881899 Before goals with multiple Japan 23 18101 32 33 36 8 indicators are ranked, each United Kingdom1634152031661144991166 indicator has been normalized Luxembourg191214253 15 31 28 19 using a z-scores method Austria 10 10 926241133118833002288 and averaged using equal Spain 28 26 3123622881166116644 weights. Each country’s rank Estonia 18 20 26 21 14 29 44443355 within a particular goal is Portugal 30 32 1242622777712127 shown, ranging from 1 for the France 15 71714203344223322552211 highest performer to 41 for Czech Republic 17 16 25 22 13 31 26 24 6 the lowest. Australia 12 28 23 39 23 17 31818 Croatia 20 14 24 36 35 18 11 14 11 Poland 22 24 32 31 42233117711002200 Italy 31 23 18 19 30 20 30 15 2 Canada 32 37 29 81111441199663377 Belgium 14 11 19 6281199336633223322 Cyprus 13 30 34 21 52236 Latvia 27 21 27 18 16 25 12 38 Malta 24 39 28 229221133221122 Slovakia 21 19 34 35 19 24 10 29 26 Greece 29 35 20 33 32 36 28 17 3 Hungary 26 22 31 30 33 30 21 23 17 Lithuania 25 25 33 29 27 33 531 New Zealand1838153422669933553333 Israel 36 13 728223399337733442255 Turkey 40 37 41 22 29 322 United States33363632173355113322004400 Mexico 34 41 30 44044111155 Romania37333540253388112233772244 Bulgaria 35 38 39 38 39 40 25 734 Chile 29 40 37 38 37 35 26 39

Higher Average Lower insufficient data

7 Report Card 14 Canadian Companion Oh Canada! Our kids deserve better

Figure 1: How Canada ranks by Sustainable Development Figure 3: Index of Child Goal (SDG) and Youth Well-being and Sustainability (2017) Position Sustainable Development Goal Rank Distance from (SDG) Mean Ranking Rank Country

Top Responsible Consumption and 6 13 1 Norway Production 2 Germany Quality Education 8 13 3 Denmark Decent Work and Economic Growth 11 10 4 Sweden Reduced Inequalities 14 7 5 Finland Middle Sustainable Cities and 19 0 6 Iceland Communities 7 Switzerland Bottom Good Health 29 -9 8 Korea No Poverty 32 -13 9 Slovenia Zero Hunger 37 -16 10 Netherlands Peace, Justice and Strong 37 -17 11 Ireland Institutions 12 Japan 13 United Kingdom Figure 2: How Canada ranks by indicator 14 Luxembourg 15 Austria Best 16 Spain Indicator Rank Value Performing 17 Estonia Country 18 Portugal Basic Learning Proficiency 4 80.8% 83.1% 19 France Children in Jobless Households 4 4.2% 2.1% 20 Czech Republic Awareness of Environmental 6 71.0% 82.0% 21 Australia Problems 22 Croatia Income Advantage Gap 11 32.9% 20.6% 23 Poland Teen Mental Health 14 22.0% 14.2% 24 Italy Teen Drunkenness 17 7.2% 1.7% 25 Canada  26 Belgium Breastfeeding 18 30% 71% 27 Cyprus Preschool Participation 19 96.5% 99.9% 28 Latvia Air Pollution in Cities 19 9.7 PM2.5µ 4.8 PM2.5µ 29 Malta Excluded Youth (NEET) 20 7.1% 2.0% 30 Slovakia Bottom-end Income Inequality 23 51.6% 34.2% 31 Greece Teen Births 23 9.5/1,000 1.6/1,000 32 Hungary Child Income Poverty 24 22.2% 9.2% 33 Lithuania Overall Income Inequality 24 1.12 0.70 34 New Zealand Children’s Food Security 24 11.9% 1.4% 35 Israel Bullying 27 15.0% 4.5% 36 Turkey Social Transfers 29 21% 66% 37 United States Unhealthy Weight 29 25.0% 8.3% 38 Mexico Neonatal Mortality 31 3.6/1,000 0.9/1,000 39 Romania Teen Suicide 31 8.5/100,000 1.7/100,000 40 Bulgaria 8 Child Homicide 33 0.90/100,000 0.00/100,000 41 Chile UNICEF Canada June 2017

Figure 4: Canada’s progress in 21 indicators of child and youth well-being

Indicators that have improved Indicators that have worsened NOTE: The changes over time over time over time may not in all cases be statistically significant; any direction of ++ Overall Income Inequality –– Income Advantage Gap improvement or decline is included. ++ Child Income Poverty –– Basic Learning Proficiency ++ Neonatal Mortality –– Excluded Youth (NEET) ++ Teen Drunkenness –– Bottom-end Income Inequality ++ Teen Births –– Air Pollution in Cities ++ Teen Suicide –– Unhealthy Weight ++ Child Homicide –– Teen Mental Health –– Bullying

Figure 5: Indicators by size of the Canadian “Possibility Gaps” (largest to smallest)

Rank Possibility Gaps NOTE: The “Possibility Gap” is a theoretical measure of the 1 Child Homicide difference between Canada and 2 Children’s Food Security the best performing country in 3 Teen Births each indicator (calculated as the 4 Teen Suicide difference between the values as a 5 Teen Drunkenness percentage of the best performing 6 Neonatal Mortality country value). The larger the gap, 7 Excluded Youth (NEET) the more room for improvement. 8 Bullying 9 Unhealthy Weight 10 Child Income Poverty 11 Air Pollution in Cities 12 Children in Jobless Households 13 Social Transfers for Children 14 Overall Income Inequality 15 Income Advantage Gap 16 Breastfeeding 17 Teen Mental Health 18 Bottom-end Income Inequality 19 Awareness of Environmental Problems 20 Preschool Participation 21 Basic Learning Proficiency

9 Report Card 14 Canadian Companion Oh Canada! Our kids deserve better

Figure 6: Comparison of UNICEF Index rankings over time

UNICEF Index of UNICEF Index of UNICEF Index of UNICEF Index of UNICEF Index of Child and Youth Child Well-being Child Inequality Child Well-being Child Inequality Well-being and Country (Report Card 7) (Report Card 9) (Report Card 11) (Report Card 13) Sustainability 2007 2010 2013 2016 (Report Card 14) 2017 Norway 7 7 2 2 1 Germany 11 12 6 14 2 Denmark 3 1 11 1 3 Sweden 2 8 5 23 4 Finland 4 2 4 2 5 Iceland 5 3 20 6 Switzerland 6 4 8 2 7 Korea 8 Slovenia 12 9 9 Netherlands 1 3 1 6 10 Ireland 9 6 10 7 11 Japan 12 United Kingdom 21 21 16 14 13 Luxembourg 18 7 29 14 Austria 18 9 18 5 15 Spain 5 20 19 22 16 Estonia 23 8 17 Portugal 17 14 15 19 18 France 16 11 13 28 19 Czech Republic 15 16 14 11 20 Australia 13 21 Croatia 12 22 Poland 14 13 21 27 23 Italy 8 23 22 32 24 Canada  12 10 17 26 25 Belgium 10 15 9 29 26 Cyprus 27 Latvia 28 10 28 Malta 24 29 Slovakia 19 23 31 30 Greece 13 22 25 14 31 Hungary 19 17 20 14 32 Lithuania 27 25 33 New Zealand 34 Israel 35 35 Turkey 34 36 United States 20 24 26 18 37 Mexico 38 Romania 29 21 39 Bulgaria 33 40 Chile 41

10 UNICEF Canada June 2017

Canada’s rank on the Index of Child and Youth Well-being and Sustainability

OUT OF 41 Norway Canada ST TH RANKED 1 TH 25 COUNTRIES RANKED 25

Global Goal 12: Ensure Canada ranks sustainable production and consumption 6 Chile RANKED 41ST

Global Goal 4: Ensure Canada ranks inclusive and equitable quality education for all 8

Global Goal 8: Promote full Canada ranks and productive employment and decent work for all 11

Global Goal 10: Reduce Canada ranks inequality within and among countries 14

Global Goal 11: Make Report Card : 10 Canada ranks cities inclusive, safe, 10 resilient and sustainable 19 Report Card 11: 17 Report Card 7: 12 20 Report Card 14: 25 Global Goal 3: Ensure

Canada ranks Canada’s Ranking 30 healthy lives and promote Report Card 13: 26 well-being 29

Global Goal 1: End poverty Canada ranks 2007 2010 2013 2016 2017 in all its forms everywhere 32 Year

NOTE: These Indices and rankings are not directly Global Goal 2: End hunger, Canada ranks comparable as different indicators and measurement achieve food security and approaches are used, but a number of indicators are improved nutrition 37 consistent and the data reveal some consistent patterns. UNICEF Report Cards 7, 11 and 14 are based on national Global Goal 16: Promote averages for each indicator of child and youth well- Canada ranks peaceful and inclusive being; Report Cards 9 and 13 measure equality gaps societies 37 within indicators.

11 Report Card 14 Canadian Companion Oh Canada! Our kids deserve better

CANADA AT THE TOP

Canada performs well in indicators related to our strong, universal public education system – as it does consistently – particularly now that public policy is starting to catch up to peer nations in the provision of preschool child development and learning opportunities.

As many wealthy countries suffered considerable job and income losses during the Great Recession in contrast to Canada, our performance in related indicators of children’s material well-being and social inclusion is also comparably better. Our moderate level of income inequality looks fairly benign in contrast to some other high-income countries, but UNICEF research suggests that moderate income inequality may be associated with mediocre child well-being outcomes on average, and persistent inequality gaps among Canada’s children.7 There are encouraging signals that Canada may be starting to turn the tide against child poverty and income inequality, but the poorest group (the bottom 10% by family income) has made fewer gains than everyone else. Erosion in the income advantage gap, the NEET rate, and mental and physical health may be signs of the continuing impacts of inequality.

RESPONSIBLE CONSUMPTION AND PRODUCTION (GOAL 12) — Canada ranks 6

Awareness of Environmental Problems

Top performer: Possibility Gap:8 PORTUGAL — 82.0% 11 PERCENTAGE POINTS

Average: Canada: Direction of change:9 62.1% 71.0% N/A (RANKS 6)

SDG 12 to achieve sustainable awareness among students. Canada of human activity on their environment, consumption and production includes is not known as a world leader the more they will be able to contribute few child-focused targets and in sustainable consumption and to progress towards sustainability. indicators. Indicator 12.8.8 is the production according to indicators most directly relevant target involving such as waste production, material Figure 7 shows that most young children and youth in high-income consumption or carbon emissions per people in high-income countries countries, with available data to capita. However, the greater young are aware of current environmental measure the level of environmental people’s understanding of the impact challenges: an average of 62 per cent

12 RESPONSIBLE CONSUMPTION AND PRODUCTION (GOAL 12) UNICEF Canada June 2017

Figure 7: Percentage of 15-year-old students familiar with five or more environmental issues

70 Country average 2015: 62.1% 60

50 r cent 40 Pe

20 10 0 2 5 0 7 4 3 0 8 0 6 3 0 0 1 8 8 3 2 4 6 5 4 7 6 7 0 6 1 6 5 4 3 9 6 6 3 56. 55. 53. 53. 49. 44. 38. 0 82. 75. 73. 72. 72. 71. 71. 70. 67. 66. 66. 66. 65. 64. 64. 63. 62. 62. 61. 61. 60. 60. 58. 58. 58. 58. 57. 57. 57. 57.

l y l a a a a a d d d a y a ly n e a k s n a y c e e d g a a d s d n a a i i i i i i i i r r i l i i m e i d r n m n n a t c l e e e l c i n r r n d n a g n n n v a a a t a k t a n ke a a a o a a t a t e a d r b n h a u a u n r a p u e r o a l l l w I p r a g l a s l i l a t t n g d r o e t m t e u a C o v r g a s a r v u l e n r S r n e u l l I a s a r g La o s n Ko p b e r J m o Tu h u I Po S w u Fr c lo e e l E t n Fi C G u f I A z e i C i N e m t Z Po S B d S o H S i B L K A D Re e h Ro e t t c x w w d i i h e l e e n c S b Lu N it e N U u z n p C U Re

Below average Average Above average

of 15-year-olds are familiar with at least Canada is a strong performer, with able to explain the problem. More than five of seven key issues at age 15: 71 per cent of youth aware of these aware, many young people are deeply issues. In general, air pollution had concerned about their environment and • greenhouse gases in the the highest level of recognition, with in our workshops with young people atmosphere around 83 per cent of students having it was clear that Indigenous youth • use of genetically modified some knowledge of this. Given its are particularly aware of and affected organisms (GMOs) prevalence and direct impacts on by interconnected environmental • nuclear waste children and youth, this awareness is concerns (UNICEF Canada, 2017). Their • the consequences of clearing not surprising. Many youth are also awareness is a promising sign for the forests for other land use aware of the extinction of plants and sustainability of the planet. • air pollution animals (79 per cent). Awareness of the • extinction of plants and animals effects of greenhouse gases fell in the • water shortage middle, with 65 per cent of students

7 See UNICEF Report Card 13 (2016). 8 The “Possibility Gap” is the distance, or difference in values, between Canada and the top- performing country. The value may not be statistically significant in all cases. 9 The value may not be statistically significant in all cases.

RESPONSIBLE CONSUMPTION AND PRODUCTION (GOAL 12) 13 Report Card 14 Canadian Companion Oh Canada! Our kids deserve better

QUALITY EDUCATION (GOAL 4) — Canada ranks 8

Basic Learning Proficiency

Top performer: Possibility Gap: ESTONIA — 83.1% 2.3 PERCENTAGE POINTS

Average: Canada: Direction of change: 68.6% 80.8% NEGATIVE (RANKS 4) (2.2 PERCENTAGE POINTS)

Providing inclusive, quality education advanced education systems. Canada among its 15-year-olds. Countries with is key to the SDGs. Failure to achieve is developing new approaches to broader inclusion, of over 80 per cent, basic skills and a minimum level of measure how well education systems are Canada, Estonia, Finland and Japan educational achievement imposes a support children’s holistic learning and (above the average of 69 per cent). high cost on individual children and well-being while preparing them for Their national educational approaches on society through school dropout, futures not yet imagined.10 – although diverse – are evidently more lower productivity and wages, and successful than others in ensuring higher unemployment. Achieving For now, measures of basic baseline competency. However, some universal proficiency in fundamental competency in reading, mathematics countries make much more effective skills ensures a fairer chance in life and science literacy show that even in use than others of the resources they for all children and young people. At the best-performing countries, 1 in 5 have available: the highest-performing the same time, getting a balance 15-year-olds does not reach a level of nation of all on this measure, Estonia, right so that young people are self- basic competency (see figure 8). No has a per-capita national income directed learners valued for their country, no matter how wealthy or how that is less than half that of the other unique capacities and dreams, with long established its education system, countries in the top five. Canada’s adaptable skills for a rapidly changing approaches universal competency in performance has remained stable for world of work, is a challenge in reading, mathematics and science many years.

10 See People for Education, Measuring What Matters initiative.

14 RESPONSIBLE CONSUMPTION AND PRODUCTION (GOAL 12) UNICEF Canada June 2017

Figure 8: Achievement of baseline educational standards (proportion of 15-year-olds achieving baseline competency in reading, mathematics and science)

100

80 Country average 2015: 68.6% 70

50 er cent P 40

20 10

0 83.1 82.4 81.4 80.8 79.3 77.9 77.2 76.7 75.7 75.5 74.9 74.6 73.3 72.6 71.9 71.7 71.7 71.6 71.0 70.8 70.3 70.0 69.7 69.4 66.6 66.4 65.2 65.2 64.6 63.8 62.6 59.5 59.2 56.7 48.0 47.0 45.5 40.7

ey Italy orea atvia Chile oland Spain L rance Israel urk Japan inland T F Ireland P ortugal F Austria Croatia Estonia Canada Norway epublic Iceland Greece Slovenia Belgium P Sweden Hungary Slovakia Bulgaria Denmark Germany Australia Lithuania Romania

Switzerland uxembourg Netherlands L New Zealand United States Czech R epublic of K United Kingdom R

Below average Average Above average 2012 2006

“In Toronto we might get lots of programs, maybe the rest of Canada is lacking them.”

– Workshop Participant, 15

RESPONSIBLE CONSUMPTION AND PRODUCTION (GOAL 12) 15 Report Card 14 Canadian Companion Oh Canada! Our kids deserve better

Preschool Participation (ages 3 to 6)

Top performer: Possibility Gap: MALTA — 99.9% 3.4 PERCENTAGE POINTS

Average: Canada: Direction of change: 95.3% 96.5% N/A (RANKS 19)

Target 4.2 of the SDGs aims to “ensure five, highlighting positive outcomes in provide universal preschool learning that all girls and boys have access to their development, education, health, in the year before formal education quality early childhood development, jobs, reduced criminal behaviour and starts. But it remains an outlier in the care and pre-primary education so that poverty reduction. These effects seem provision of universal, quality early they are ready for primary education.” to be particularly positive for children child development opportunities for Early childhood development is from disadvantaged backgrounds. younger children. Expanding coverage a driving force for sustainable is a key opportunity for Canada to development in all societies (Britto, Figure 9 shows that almost all put children on a track toward great, Yoshikawa, & Boller, 2011). Through children in high-income countries equitable outcomes. The inclusion of public investment in quality, universal are benefiting from some level of the federal government as a partner early care and education, a good start organized learning one year before in a new National Framework on in life can not only benefit children starting school, which begins much Early Learning and Child Care with today, but also their communities and later in some countries than in others. provincial, territorial and Indigenous societies into the future. A growing On average and in Canada, over 95 governments is a key step, though body of evidence attests to the per cent of children participate in the initial investment and coverage long-term benefits of high-quality formal preschool provision. Canada’s are substantially less than in top- preschool education and care for provinces and territories have made performing countries. Canada has a lot children aged between three and substantial progress in recent years to of ground to cover.

16 RESPONSIBLE CONSUMPTION AND PRODUCTION (GOAL 12) UNICEF Canada June 2017

Figure 9: Children’s participation in organized preschool learning (participation rate one year before official age for entering primary school)

100

60 r cent

Pe 40

20 4 1 3 7 3 3 7 7 0 0 9 8 1 3 9 9 8 8 8 3 2 1 0 9 8 8 7 4 0 9 1 7 5 4 2 2 0 91. 91. 90. 89. 89. 80. 72. 95. 95. 95. 94. 93. 93. 92. 0 99. 99. 99. 99. 99. 99. 99. 99. 99. 98. 98. 98. 98. 98. 98. 97. 97. 96. 96. 96. 96. 96. 96. l l a d e n o d k y a ly d n g d a a a d s n y e e a a s a s a a d a y t e m i r r i i a r l i i i i i i l n c c n a e a n e n d m n d a i c r u e t n l a u a i a v n g a n r n t n a r i a n a r t a d u a t a o a n p h e a a a a ke l p x l w I l l a l u g e p o a a l r r s g a r m r e o n d a t a C e g t t o t M I l n S e a e u e l n r v l y r e n o Ko b La a g r r r J s m s e Fr e w c h I o u S Po Tu Fi M z f I n u G l C C u t e N Z m it C i e E B i o S Po H S B d D e L K h Ro A t e w c w x t i d e i S l e b e N n N Lu t u i U p n U Re

Country average 2014: 95.3% 2013/14 2010 2005

NOTE: Data for Canada refer to adjusted net enrolment rate, one year before the official primary entry age, both sexes (%). Data provided by Martha Friendly, Childcare Resource and Resource Unit, Canada.

Making early learning and care programs good for kids

SDG target 4.2 emphasizes the importance of access to high-quality early childhood education and care (ECEC) as a means to achieving equity and transforming lives through good early cognitive, physical and social development. Access alone is insufficient for achieving positive child outcomes; services must also be of high quality. As a result, meeting target 4.2 means developing methods to accurately measure and monitor quality standards in ECEC (Braukauf & Hayes, 2017). At a minimum, measures of quality should capture: (a) the system design and organization (structure) of services, including qualifications, staff-child ratios and health and safety regulations; (b) practice within ECEC settings (process), including relationships, the role of play and the integration of care and education; and (c) child outcomes, including the child’s social, emotional, mental and physical well-being and equality of opportunity, as well as secondary benefits to family and community.

For national monitoring efforts key considerations include:

• Monitoring ECEC quality in different contexts. ECEC services in high-income countries vary widely in terms of decentralization, curriculum and funding structure, but the indicators of quality service provision and child outcomes are fairly universal.

RESPONSIBLE CONSUMPTION AND PRODUCTION (GOAL 12) 17 Report Card 14 Canadian Companion Oh Canada! Our kids deserve better

• The interplay between home environment and formal care. The child’s home environment and its interaction with formal settings influences child outcomes, and measures should be sensitive to this. ECEC services are most effective when there are sufficient family support policies and services such as income benefits.

• What it means to be ‘ready for primary education’ or ‘developmentally on track’. Quality ECEC settings foster child development, and recognize children as unique, active learners and capable explorers of their environment. The concept of ‘school readiness’ can be problematic if it shifts the focus too far from how children learn through play – vital in developing skills such as self-regulation and attentiveness – towards a more school-like pedagogy emphasizing the development of ‘basic skills’ such as literacy. It can also be problematic if it fails to support children’s unique developmental trajectories.

As Canada’s federal, provincial, territorial and Indigenous governments develop frameworks for ECEC, they can ensure quality is high on the policy agenda by collecting data for both service provision and child-focused outcomes. This will link improvements in the quality of ECEC to other policy measures and enhance equity in access and in outcomes.

Data Pothole

Indicator 4.2.1 measures the percentage of children under 5 years of age who are developmentally on track in health, learning and psychological well-being. Basically, the made-in-Canada Early Development Instrument provides this data (now used by many provinces), but it is not used in enough peer nations to include in the UNICEF Index. The EDI results underscore the importance of providing more early child development programs in Canada. Developmental challenges show up before children start school. EDI results also reveal the importance of a universal approach: while the income-deprived children have disproportionately more developmental challenges by age 5, the majority of children are in higher-income families.

Data Pothole

Indicator 4.5.1 calls for parity indices for education-related SDGs. In high-income countries, children in lower-income families, Indigenous children and boys fall farther behind. Indicator 4.a.1 calls for a measure of the equitable distribution of educational resources, including computers and infrastructure for students with disabilities.

18 RESPONSIBLE CONSUMPTION AND PRODUCTION (GOAL 12) UNICEF Canada June 2017

DECENT WORK AND ECONOMIC GROWTH (GOAL 8) — Canada ranks 11

Excluded Youth (NEET)

Top performer: Possibility Gap: JAPAN 2.0% 5.1 PERCENTAGE POINTS

Average: Canada: Direction of change: 7.1% 7.1% NEGATIVE (RANKS 20) (0.2 PERCENTAGE POINTS)

Any strategy for achieving sustainable and achievement, and contribute to and creating decent employment. economic development has to include poor mental and physical well-being. Canada’s governments at all levels, opportunities for young people Many young people not in education private-sector employers like RBC, and transitioning to adulthood to engage or at work are not developing their programs such as Pathways to Education in full, productive employment. A key skills or their confidence and may have been adjusting to make education measurement of countries’ success be at higher risk of social isolation, and employment more inclusive in delivering opportunities for young involvement in risky behaviour, and through a range of programs. Support people and an official SDG indicator poor mental and physical health (Bell & for “green” jobs and apprenticeships (8.6.1) is the share of youth aged Blanchflower, 2011; Eurofound, 2012). could also help power the sustainability 15-24 not in education, employment NEET status is affected not only by agenda. Opportunities within these or training (NEET). Given the focus opportunity at the stage when young measures need to include the most on children in this report, in figure 10 people are transitioning to adulthood, vulnerable, including Indigenous children we measure NEET for ages 15-19. In but also by opportunity in the early and children in care. Making the Shift Canada and on average across wealthy years, since those starting life with is a new social innovation approach countries, 7 per cent or 1 in 13 young fewer advantages tend to accumulate that aims to help ensure that homeless people is not in employment, education disadvantage. Young people who don’t young people achieve housing stability or training. NEET rates have fluctuated complete high school and who become and family supports that are essential in Canada and in most countries over homeless are typically part of the NEET to stay in school or access training and the past decade, particularly since population. employment.12 Given Canada’s average the Great Recession ended, as more performance in NEET, we have a lot of young people graduate high school and The solutions include a focus on work ahead to close the gap with the continue post-secondary education. creating affordable and diverse best-performing countries, which achieve But for some, constrained education education opportunities for young NEET rates that are half of Canada’s. and employment opportunities people from the early years through discourage high school engagement high school and post-secondary years,

11 See Making the Shift, The Homeless Hub: http://homelesshub.ca/blogs/making-shift.

DECENT WORK AND ECONOMIC GROWTH (GOAL 8) 19 Report Card 14 Canadian Companion Oh Canada! Our kids deserve better

Figure 10: Proportion of youth (aged 15-19) not in education, employment or training (NEET rate) 40 40 35 35 30 30 25 25 20 20 er cent P er cent 15 P 15 10 Country10 average 2014: 7.1% Country average 2014: 7.1% 5 5 0 0 2.0 2.4 2.9 3.2 3.5 3.5 3.6 3.8 4.0 4.3 4.6 4.7 5.4 5.5 5.5 5.7 6.1 6.8 7.0 7.1 7.1 7.2 7.2 7.6 7.6 7.7 7.8 7.9 8.4 9.1 10.4 10.5 10.8 11.2 12.1 12.5 12.7 14.1 15.3 21.0 2.0 2.4 2.9 3.2 3.5 3.5 3.6 3.8 4.0 4.3 4.6 4.7 5.4 5.5 5.5 5.7 6.1 6.8 7.0 7.1 7.1 7.2 7.2 7.6 7.6 7.7 7.8 7.9 8.4 9.1 10.4 10.5 10.8 11.2 12.1 12.5 12.7 14.1 15.3 21.0

ey Italy ey atvia orea Chile L oland Israel rance Malta Spain Italy urk Japan atvia inland orea T P oland F Israel Ireland Chile urk Japan epublic L F Iceland inland ortugal Estonia Canada Austria Cyprus rance omania Greece Malta Croatia Spain Mexico Norway F Bulgaria T SwedenSloveniaP Belgium FSlovakiaP Hungaryortugal Austria Cyprus Ireland Greece Croatia Germany Denmarkepublic Norway Iceland Estonia CanadaAustralia R omania Mexico SwedenSlovenia Belgium SlovakiaP Hungary Bulgaria Germany Denmark Australia R uxembourg Switzerland Netherlands L uxembourg Switzerland Netherlands New Zealand United States L New Zealand Czech R United States epublic of K United Kingdom Czech R R epublic of K United Kingdom R 2014 2010 2005 2014 2010 2005

Children in Jobless Households

Top performer: Possibility Gap: JAPAN — 2.1% 2.1 PERCENTAGE POINTS

Average: Canada: Direction of change: 9.0% 4.2% NO CHANGE (RANKS 4)

Another key indicator related to Goal 8 no one works for pay, and the rate has Most Canadian children in low-income is adult unemployment. Growing up in worsened in many rich countries since families have at least one parent who a household where no adult works has the Great Recession. The results range works full-time. Our particular challenge been linked to a greater risk of income from 2 per cent of children in Japan to 19 is to create decent jobs that pay a living poverty (OECD, 2011), poorer education per cent in Ireland. In Canada, only 4 per wage, and continue to improve child- achievement, bullying and being NEET cent of children live in jobless families focused income benefits and universal (Schoon et al., 2012). Figure 11 shows – half the average across peer nations. services to ensure children are not the proportion of children living in This compares very favourably, though deprived at a vulnerable stage of life by households where nobody has a paid job. the rate has not improved in recent employment conditions and children’s About one in ten children in the countries years. Instead, Canada has a substantial services that fail to include all Canadians. surveyed lives in a household where proportion of “working poor” families.

20 DECENT WORK AND ECONOMIC GROWTH (GOAL 8) UNICEF Canada June 2017

Figure 11: Proportion of children under 18 in jobless households (based on self-defined economic status of adults)

15 r cent

Pe 10 Country average 2014: 9.0%

5 0 8 6 9 4 0 0 3 0 1 3 4 6 1 9 0 2 2 5 6 8 0 0 1 3 4 8 8 9 1 2 2 5 0 4 7 8 2. 2. 4. 4. 4. 5. 5. 16. 18. 5. 6. 6. 6. 6. 6. 6. 7. 7. 8. 8. 11. 12. 13. 14. 14. 14. 16. 0 8. 8. 9. 9. 9. 9. 10. 10. 10. 11. l l n d a a d y n a g s a a s y e k d s d a a y a a c a e a a n d y d i i i r e i i l i t i i a m i i i r a n e d n a e r e d n c n u n r l l c t m r n n n t n n a r a k t a n v g a a p a r a a d u n a n a r a t a b t e iu a o a a a l l w a a o e l p l a s I a u p l g l a r o n r e o t t a a m s v u t e g o d g v l m n y I e u u M r r l r l S a n e J e K a o m b s r r n o p La g r Po w S o Fr c l h e u e u I z f C o E l e e e Fi C I A t G C n t N S m d S i Po i B Z i o R S h Re B H e e t G D L K

w c x it e h w li d S u n c e b L N e e it N u U z n p C e U R

Below average Average Above average

Data Pothole

Goal 8 includes indicators of the percentage and number of children aged 5-17 engaged in child labour (8.7.1) and the frequency of fatal and non- fatal occupational injuries (8.8.1). Young people are particularly vulnerable to exploitative, dangerous working conditions, and there is considerable variability in these conditions across the country. As Canada works to comply with International Labour Organization treaties, data is a necessary tool to track their compliance.

DECENT WORK AND ECONOMIC GROWTH (GOAL 8) 21 Report Card 14 Canadian Companion Oh Canada! Our kids deserve better

REDUCED INEQUALITIES (GOAL 10) — Canada ranks 14

Overall Income Inequality

Top performer: Possibility Gap: ICELAND — 0.70 0.42

Average: Canada: Direction of change: 1.17 1.12 POSITIVE (RANKS 24) (0.03 PERCENTAGE POINTS)

Much of the focus of efforts to improve role in determining their access to share their wealth more equally, and child well-being is on the child poverty opportunities and resources. it is no coincidence that they tend to rate, given the negative impacts of low have better overall child well-being income on a range of child outcomes. One of the key SDG indicators of outcomes. In Canada, the Palma Ratio Emerging research by UNICEF and inequality uses the Palma Ratio, is close to 1, a little better than the others is bringing into sharper focus which measures the income share average but still more unequal than the dampening impacts of overall of the bottom 40 per cent of the most countries. The share of total income inequality – the income gap population relative to the top 10 income going to the top 10 per cent of between the richest and everybody per cent.12 Figure 12 measures this households with children is 12 per cent else – on child well-being broadly inequality gap for households with more than the share of the bottom (UNICEF, 2016). Children growing up children under age 18 (values below 1 40 per cent. The persistent level of in less equal countries tend to have indicate less inequality; values above 1 income inequality in Canada may help worse average outcomes and more indicate more inequality). explain why we have been stuck in the inequality among them, particularly middle of league tables of child well- in health, the quality of relationships Most high-income countries spread being. Countries with more income children have with parents and peers, their wealth very unequally. In two- equality tend to have better outcomes levels of violence and life satisfaction thirds of countries, the bottom 40 for children and youth. The private (UNICEF Office of Research, 2016). per cent of households with children investment gap and the gap in public In more unequal countries, child have less income than the top 10 investment in children and youth also poverty is more intractable, and per cent. A third of these countries contribute to wider inequalities among children’s family income plays a larger have Palma Ratios less than 1; they children.

12 This is a child-focused adaptation of the Palma Ratio, where a value of 1.0 indicates that the income share of the top 10 per cent of the population is the same as that of the bottom 40 per cent. A value less than 1 indicates that the bottom 40 per cent receives a higher share of income than the richest 10 per cent; conversely, a value greater than 1 indicates they are receiving a smaller share.

22 REDUCED INEQUALITIES (GOAL 10) UNICEF Canada June 2017

Figure 12: Palma Ratio of income inequality based on households with children, 2014 and 2008

3.0

2.5

2.0 ti o

Ra 1.5

lma Country average 2014: 1.17 Pa 1.0

0.5

0.0 0.70 0.74 0.76 0.81 0.82 0.83 0.83 0.85 0.86 0.86 0.94 0.99 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.01 1.01 1.02 1.05 1.06 1.06 1.07 1.10 1.12 1.12 1.19 1.20 1.21 1.35 1.36 1.46 1.50 1.56 1.61 1.64 1.64 1.73 1.77 1.89 2.21 2.80 l l d y n d a a s a k e a c y s a a n y d g d a a d d y a n a a a s e a y e o i m i r i i i t r r i l i a i i i i i e l n a e n e d r c l n u t l a n n m d l n n e c r i c n t a k r a a n g a n n v t a i a d a r n iu n b a a a p a u a o a a a a t t e a r ke h l w l e s a p g l l r l l I o u p a a a r x r e a g m a v u o a r o d n t t t t e g s C e n v l l u m y r M n e a S u r l I e o Ko r n p r J e b r g a s s r m La c w o e Fr o e Po h S u Tu I Fi l f e A l C C u z I n u G N e e t m i C Z E it M S S o h B S H i Po d B D Re G e K A L Ro t e c e h w x w t li d i c S e n b N Lu e e it N u z U n p C U Re

2014 2008

Children growing up in less equal countries tend to have worse average outcomes and more inequality among them, particularly in health, the quality of relationships children have with parents and peers, levels of violence and life satisfaction.

REDUCED INEQUALITIES (GOAL 10) 23 Report Card 14 Canadian Companion Oh Canada! Our kids deserve better

Bottom-end Income Inequality

Top performer: Possibility Gap: ICELAND — 34.2% 17.4 PERCENTAGE POINTS

Average: Canada: Direction of change: 51.2% 51.6% NEGATIVE (RANKS 23) (1 PERCENTAGE POINT)

In the spirit of the SDGs, which seek at the median. of child well-being such as educational to leave no one behind, an indicator of achievement and health is key to bottom-end inequality focuses on the Canada is moderately unequal and aligning efforts to reach and include gap between the poorest children and close to the average values compared the most excluded children, rather children with “normal” family incomes. to peer nations measured by both the than relying on population averages to Figure 13 shows that in most countries, Palma Ratio and the UNICEF measure decide on investments, policies and the poorest 10 per cent of households of bottom-end income inequality.13 services. The Canada Child Benefit with children under age 18 have fallen In both measures, we have failed to is a progressive, universal program farther behind the median income in make progress despite a consistent intended to benefit children broadly their countries over the past decade. A annual growth in GDP (national wealth), but particularly families with the lowest wide gap between the poorest 10 per but over time bottom-end income incomes. Canada needs to take a cent and the median in Canada shows inequality has widened more. Wealth universal, progressive approach to more the importance of tracking bottom-end accumulation in Canada is not helping children’s services including parental inequality along with broader income to close the gaps in family income and leave benefits and ECEC. Countries inequality. In Canada, the income well-being among children. that have the best child well-being of households with children at the outcomes generally take this approach bottom 10th percentile of the income Measuring bottom-end inequality not to counter the impacts of income distribution is about half that of families only in income but in other indicators inequality on children and youth.

13 Relative income gap (“bottom-end inequality”) is measured as the gap between household income of the child at the 50th percentile (the median) and that of the child at the 10th percentile, reported as a percentage of the median.

24 REDUCED INEQUALITIES (GOAL 10) UNICEF Canada June 2017

Figure 13: Relative income gap between median income and that of the bottom 10 per cent of households with children, 2014 and 2008

60 Country average 2014: 51.2% 50

40 er cent P 30

0 34.2 37.1 38.5 38.6 39.0 41.9 42.3 42.3 43.0 44.0 44.1 44.6 44.6 44.9 45.2 45.7 46.6 46.7 49.2 49.2 49.5 50.6 51.6 52.2 52.8 53.7 53.7 56.6 56.8 58.9 59.7 59.8 60.3 61.1 62.4 63.2 64.6 65.0 65.7 67.4 71.1

ey Italy orea Chile atvia rance Malta oland urk L Israel Spain inland T Japan F Austria Ireland F Cyprus P Croatia ortugal IcelandNorway epublic Canada Estonia Greece Mexico Sweden SloveniaBelgiumHungary Slovakia P Bulgaria Denmark Germany Australia Lithuania Romania

Switzerland uxembourg Netherlands L New Zealand United States Czech R United Kingdom epublic of K R

Below average Average Above average 2008

The Canada Child Benefit is a progressive, universal program intended to benefit children broadly but particularly families with the lowest incomes. Canada needs to take a universal, progressive approach to more children’s services including parental leave benefits and ECEC.

REDUCED INEQUALITIES (GOAL 10) 25 Report Card 14 Canadian Companion Oh Canada! Our kids deserve better

Income Advantage Gap

Top performer: Possibility Gap: TURKEY — 20.6% 12.3 PERCENTAGE POINTS

Average: Canada: Direction of change: 38.1% 32.9% NEGATIVE (RANKS 11) (0.8 PERCENTAGE POINTS)

The adverse impacts of inequality can developed a broad measure of socio- educational difference associated with last a lifetime. One way in which this economic background: the ESCS a one-unit increase in the ESCS index plays out is through the impact of index. Figure 14 shows the association is equivalent to more than one year of socio-economic status on students’ between a one-unit increase in the schooling. educational achievement. Children’s ESCS index and students’ results family backgrounds cause their paths in reading, mathematics and Canada performs better than average. to diverge early in life, even before science. A higher value indicates However, unlike many of the top- they start school, though early child that socioeconomic background performing countries, we haven’t development services can cut the has a greater impact on students’ managed to close the gap over the gap.14 Some countries allow the gap achievement. Socio-economic past decade. To do that, the solutions to widen as children grow, affecting advantage leads to better school lie partly in the flexibility and inclusivity educational achievement by age 15, results in every high-income country. of school curriculum and engagement, and their future opportunities. Fifteen-year-olds from more affluent but also in the reach of quality ECEC families achieve substantially better and in reducing levels of child poverty The Programme for International educational results than their less and income inequality. Student Assessment (PISA) has advantaged peers. On average, the

14 See Bradbury, B., Corak, M., Waldfogel, J., & Washbrook, J. (2015). Too many children left behind: The U.S. achievement gap in comparative perspective. New York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation; Blanden, J., & Machin, S. (2010). Intergenerational inequality in early years assessments. In K. Hansen, H. Joshi, & S. Dex (Eds.), Children of the 21st Century: The first five years (Vol. 2, 153–168). Bristol: The Policy Press; Brooks-Gunn, J., & Duncan, G. J. (1997). The effects of poverty on children. The Future of Children, 7(2), 55–71. https://doi.org/10.2307/1602387; and Waldfogel, J. (2013). Socio-economic inequality in childhood and beyond: An overview of challenges and findings from comparative analyses of cohort studies. Longitudinal and Life Course Studies, 4, 268–275. https://doi.org/10.14301/llcs.v4i3.263.

26 REDUCED INEQUALITIES (GOAL 10) UNICEF Canada June 2017

Figure 14: Socio-economic advantage and school results

40 Country average 2014: 38.1

20 Score point difference

0 20.6 26.6 27.4 29.9 30.5 31.1 31.4 31.8 31.9 32.0 32.9 33.3 35.0 35.3 35.5 36.4 37.7 37.9 38.4 38.5 38.5 38.8 39.4 39.7 41.4 41.6 41.8 42.0 42.1 42.3 43.6 43.7 44.4 45.7 46.3 46.4 47.1 52.1 56.3

ey Italy atvia Chile orea urk Spain L oland Israel Malta rance T inland Japan ortugal Ireland Croatia P F Austria F Iceland Estonia Canada Greece Norway epublic P Slovenia SwedenSlovakia Bulgaria BelgiumHungary Denmark Lithuania Romania Germany Australia

Switzerlanduxembourg L Netherlands United States New Zealand Czech R United Kingdom epublic of K R

Below average Average Above average 2012 2006

Data Pothole

Goal 10 includes an indicator of the percentage of the population reporting discrimination on a basis prohibited under international human rights law. In 2016, a Canadian Human Rights Tribunal found that the federal government discriminates in the provision of services to First Nations children. Services to which all Canada’s children are entitled are funded and provided differently for First Nations communities, with many documented cases of First Nations children going without or provided with inferior services such as specialized wheelchairs (The Jordan’s Principle Working Group, 2015). As the Government of Canada responds to better fulfil Jordan’s Principle and provide equitable services, there is a need to collect and report data to measure the access and outcomes for Indigenous children.

REDUCED INEQUALITIES (GOAL 10) 27 Report Card 14 Canadian Companion Oh Canada! Our kids deserve better

CANADA IN THE MIDDLE

Goal 11 to achieve sustainable communities has few indicators directly related to children and youth for which there are internationally comparable data.

Air pollution is a universally relevant indicator of healthy environmental conditions in communities, particularly affecting growing children. But it is a limited vantage point on the Goal of “inclusive, safe, resilient and sustainable communities”. For instance, adequate housing would be another important indicator. Community safety indicators relevant to children and youth are well-developed in many parts of Canada and include a wide range reflected in the SDGs, from traffic safety and access to public transit to civic participation. All countries should have national strategies to track these indicators to fulfill their SDG obligations. In the general absence of comparable data across communities and countries, we rely on the official SDG indicator for monitoring air pollution according to annual mean levels of fine particulate matter in cities (11.6.2).

SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITIES (GOAL 11) — Canada ranks 19

Air Pollution in Cities

Top performer: Possibility Gap: IRELAND — 4.8 PM2.5µ 4.9 PM2.5µ

Average: Canada: Direction of change: 10.7 PM2.5µ 9.7 PM2.5µ NEGATIVE (RANKS 19) (0.5 PM2.5µ)

Children are particularly susceptible harmful to health in heavily polluted Figure 15 shows the annual average to air pollution because they breathe environments. The decline in outdoor levels of air pollution in urban areas in more air per unit of body weight play is a growing concern in many in rich countries, measured in than adults. Their lungs are especially high-income countries – itself a proxy concentrations of PM2.5µ. This is vulnerable to damage from air pollution indicator of child well-being because particulate matter so fine that it is while developing in the womb and of its influence on physical and mental able to penetrate the lungs and enter during the first years of life, and studies health, social development and many the bloodstream, causing a variety indicate that ultrafine particles can other dimensions of children’s lives. of health problems (World Health do permanent damage to children’s Another indicator for Goal 11 directly Organization, 2016). The data have brain tissue (UNICEF, 2016, p. 6). relevant to children is the average share been weighted to take account of the There is no question that making of the built-up area of cities that is open proportion of children in each country cities sustainable, safe and healthy for space for public use for all, including living in urban areas. The World children requires reducing air pollution. by age (11.7.1). This is also relevant to Health Organization has established The steady trend of urbanization makes the aim of supporting free, outdoor a safe level of air quality to be below the Goal more challenging to achieve. play, but there is a lack of internationally 10 micrograms of PM2.5µ per cubic Outdoor play and exercise can be comparable data at this time. metre. Nearly half of high-income

28 SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITIES (GOAL 11) UNICEF Canada June 2017

Figure 15: Air pollution measured by annual average PM2.5µ concentrations in urban areas, weighted by proportion of child population (0-19) living in urban areas

15 Country average 2013: 10.7 10 PM2.5 concentrations 5 0 7 7 1 4 7 8 1 3 3 7 2 4 8 9 4 1 5 8 8 8 3 8 9 2 2 8 4 9 9 3 8 9 0 2 3 5 7

0 4. 4. 5. 5. 5. 6. 6. 6. 7. 7. 7. 8. 8. 8. 9. 9. 9. 9. 9. 10. 10. 10. 11. 11. 11. 11. 12. 12. 12. 12. 13. 13. 14. 14. 16. 18. 23. 24. l l y y d a ia d n d d a a a s o n d ia a k y s e y a c d e ly g a n s e a a li a i i i i r r i i r t l m e n n e n n t e m c n r d u c n r l n c l a d i e a n g k n t i a t a a r a a a a d a a a o a a n a a b a e ke t u a p n h iu r r l w r o l u l l a a a x p l s g p l r I r t t e t v o t d n m a g u r e o a a C g s e n r e a r e S u n y m l r M l l I r o s s o m g a n r p e b J r Ko I w c e l S Po u Fr u Tu u Fi I C n M A C z G e N E Z i C e e m e f S Po S d H B it B A Ro K D G Re e h o e t w t w x c i d h e i e l n e c S Lu N b N it e U z u n C p U Re 2013 2010 2005

countries fail to meet this standard: air pollution originating in the United NOTE: The trend data for figure the average level of urban air pollution States, though the US has made 15 is incorrect; the text description to which children in urban areas are significant progress to reduce urban correctly describes an increase in exposed exceeds the safety threshold. air pollution and has a lower level on Canada’s urban air pollution. Canada’s average level is 9.7, just average than Canada. below the safe level. However, some communities have more or less air pollution, at different times of the year. Air quality has been improving over the “Air pollution is getting worse? past decade in almost all high-income I definitely thought it was getting better.” countries studied: the exceptions are Canada and Turkey, where there was – Workshop Participant, age 16 a deterioration. This is something of a myth-buster for Canadians, many of whom assume we are much cleaner than the more urbanized European nations and our neighbour to the south. As urbanization continues its steady increase in Canada, continuing effort is needed to curb emissions from cars, power generation and industry. Some Canadian communities are affected by

SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITIES (GOAL 11) 29 Report Card 14 Canadian Companion Oh Canada! Our kids deserve better

CANADA AT THE BOTTOM

The indicators where Canada lags behind peer nations ring alarm bells. The high rate of relative income poverty and high levels of violence in children’s lives are unacceptable.

They are associated with less food security, poor mental health health and broader well-being because health problems in and more unhealthy weight. They take a big toll on children’s childhood can have a lasting impact throughout life. potential, blunt the capacity of families to thrive and generate large social and economic costs borne by all Canadians. The variation among wealthy countries is great among many Canada’s performance in indicators that relate to child health of these indicators, particularly rates of child poverty, food may be surprising and concerning to those who might assume insecurity, adolescent suicide and chronic bullying. One of that universal health care translates to great child health the most telling indicators of the priority a country gives outcomes across the board. It is encouraging that many its children is its investment in them. Canada is one of the child health outcomes in Canada, as in in most high-income wealthiest of all nations, but invests less in children than countries, continue to improve. Rates of neonatal mortality and many. However, the ship is turning with the generational adolescent “risk behaviour” such as drunkenness and teenage Canada Child Benefit introduced in 2016 and more births have improved. But as in many wealthy countries, substantial provincial/territorial child-focused benefits. We children’s mental health seems to be eroding as income hope this will help Canada advance up the league tables. inequality has increased. In Canada, unlike many countries, But if we want to get to the top, we must continue to catch there has been little progress to reduce teen suicide. A focus up by reducing violence and providing the universal public on children is fundamental to the attainment of sustainable services children need.

GOOD HEALTH (GOAL 3) — Canada ranks 29

Neonatal Mortality

Top performer: Possibility Gap: JAPAN — 0.9 PER 1,000 2.7 PER 1,000

Average: Canada: Direction of change: 2.8 PER 1,000 3.6 PER 1,000 POSITIVE (RANKS 31) (0.5 PER 1,000)

The first prerequisite of child well-being target 3.2. All high-income countries groups. Neonatal mortality continues is to ensure that as many children as have reduced their neonatal mortality to fall but figure 3.1 suggests that there possible survive the first year of life. rates below the global target of 12 is still room for improvement. In 2015, The neonatal mortality rate, which deaths per 1,000 live births, although an average of 2.8 children per 1,000 tracks deaths in the first four weeks of averages in some countries hide stark were dying in the first four weeks of life life, is an official SDG indicator under differences between different social across rich countries. Japan has set a

30 GOOD HEALTH (GOAL 3) UNICEF Canada June 2017

Figure 16: Neonatal mortality rates (deaths in the first 28 days of life, per 1,000 live births)

10 s

4 Country average 2015: 2.8 per 1000 Deaths per 1000 live birth 6 9 1. 2 0. 2 2 2 3 4 5 5 6 7 8 9 9 1 1 1 3 6 0 2 6 3 0 3 4 5 6 7 8 8 0 1 1 1 2 2. 2. 2. 2. 2. 2. 2. 2. 2. 2. 2. 2. 3. 3. 3. 3. 3. 4. 5. 5. 7. 8. 0 1. 1. 1. 1. 1. 1. 1. 2. 2. 2. 2. 2. l l n a n c d y y n a y s a a e a e a y k a a s y i d i a g l e a i i i i i i d d d i le ia o a e l r a m n r l c m r r i n n n e a a a n d c v n n n k d e r c r u t g u t a n a a t ke i p d a b a r i a n n e o t a a a a a h a e l l o w I u p o s r a g l l l a r x a e u r s t g t a t a e d m r v n t C g v n e I r S l m l u u r n a l e J p Ko b o s r r s g La n e a o w c e Fr h u Po e lo S u Tu l Fi I f E e A u t G n z m N e i i e Z t C M S S o Po B h H i S d B Re e G A L K D t e h c x e w w t li d i c e S n b Lu N e e t N z u i U n C p U Re

2015 2010 2005

new historic benchmark by achieving a to different registration practices, Another way to examine progress is the neonatal mortality rate of 0.9 per 1,000, and therefore how much of a public rate of reduction of neonatal mortality. despite having the highest percentage health gap Canada has. U.S. studies Canada’s rate continues to decline, but of low-weight births in the OECD (a have found that the main reason for Australia and the Netherlands have high rate of low birth weight is also a higher infant mortality rates when made substantial progress despite concern in Canada).16 compared with European nations is a having already relatively low mortality very high percentage of preterm births, rates. Over time, Canada’s rankings in Canada is above the rich-world average rather than differences in registration international comparisons have fallen. for neonatal mortality at 3.6 per 1,000. practices (MacDorman & Mathews, The social determinants of pregnancy A Canadian study suggests that 2009). In Canada, preterm births outcomes in Canada, including the national differences in the registration account for two-thirds of infant deaths. impact of poverty, and the wide regional of premature, very early gestation Preterm births are generally linked to variations across Canada, call for births call for caution in interpreting low income and social exclusion, and continuing momentum to reduce international rankings of neonatal are a sensitive indicator of overall infant mortality. morality (Joseph et. al., 2012). It is not population health. resolved how much of the difference in Canada’s ranking is attributable

16 See OECD Family Database 2016: https://www.oecd.org/els/family/CO_1_3_Low_birth_weight.pdf.

GOOD HEALTH (GOAL 3) 31 Report Card 14 Canadian Companion Oh Canada! Our kids deserve better

Teen Suicide

Top performer: Possibility Gap: PORTUGAL — 1.7 PER 100,000 6.8 PER 100,000

Average: Canada: Direction of change: 6.1 PER 100,000 8.5 PER 100,000 POSITIVE (RANKS 31) (0.2 PER 100,000)

In high-income countries, suicide is rates of suicide among Indigenous well as cultural contexts, like many generally the leading cause of death children are much higher than the health indicators the solutions lie among young people of both sexes average. In many countries, children in broader social conditions as well after accidents, accounting for 17.6 per who identify as LGBTIQ2S also have as individual supports. Untreated cent of all deaths. Figure 17 reflects higher than average rates. Depression significantly increases the suicide rate for adolescents aged the risk of suicide. Even though 15-19. The rate is lowest, at 1.7 per Adolescent suicide rates have fallen effective treatments are available, 100,000, in Portugal, and tends to be in the majority of countries in recent most Canadian youth with Depression low in southern European countries. years. It is concerning that the rate in do not seek appropriate treatment or The highest rate, of 15.6 per 100,000, Canada remains relatively unchanged. have efficient access to appropriate is in New Zealand. In Canada, the rate In six countries, the suicide rate rose. care, because we don’t make it easy or of 8.5 is above the average of 6.1 per In a handful of countries including appealing. Pathway Through Care and 100,000. the Netherlands, New Zealand and WellAhead are child-centred initiatives the United States, girls’ suicide rates that focus on simple, innovative Across the board, boys are more likely increased while the rates for boys methods for promoting mental health to die by suicide than girls – three declined. Cultural differences make and integrating mental health literacy times more likely, on average. Girls comparing rates across countries and access to treatment in schools.17 attempt suicide around twice as often challenging in the search for solutions. Culturally appropriate programs for as boys, though they generally choose As an outcome of severe emotional Indigenous youth are critical. methods that are less lethal (Beautrais, and spiritual crisis or poor mental 2003; Bridge et al., 2006). In Canada, health, in response to personal as

17 See http://teenmentalhealth.org/pathwaythroughcare/ and http://www.mcconnellfoundation.ca/kh/programs/child-and-youth-wellbeing.

32 GOOD HEALTH (GOAL 3) UNICEF Canada June 2017

Figure 17: Adolescent suicide rates (aged 15-19 per 100,000 population based on the latest available data, 2008-2013)

14 12

8 Country average 2012/13: 6.1 6

2 Suicide rates per 100,000 population 3.6 5.0 5.5 5.8 6.1 6.6 6.6 6.7 6.8 6.9 7.3 7.4 7.5 7.6 7.7 7.9 8.5 9.0 10.3 10.3 11.3 13.3 15.6 0 1.7 1.9 2.0 2.2 2.4 2.5 3.0 3.7 3.7 4.0 4.0 4.2 4.2 4.8

ey (2012) Italy (2011) atvia (2011) orea (2012) Chile (2012) Spain (2012) urk Israel (2012) Malta (2013) rance (2010) L oland (2012) T Japan (2012) inland (2012) ortugal (2012) Cyprus (2011) F Croatia (2012) Austria (2013) P Ireland (2011)F epublic (2012)Norway (2012) Mexico (2012) Canada (2010)Estonia (2011) P Bulgaria (2011) Hungary (2012) Sweden (2012) Belgium (2011) Denmark (2011) Germany (2012) Romania (2011) Australia (2010) Lithuania (2012)

uxembourg (2012) Switzerland (2012) L Netherlands (2012) United States (2012) New Zealand (2010) Czech R United Kingdom (2012) epublic of K R

2012/13 2009 2006

“Teen suicide and social transfers for kids are related.”

– Workshop Participant, age 17

GOOD HEALTH (GOAL 3) 33 Report Card 14 Canadian Companion Oh Canada! Our kids deserve better

Teen Mental Health

Top performer: Possibility Gap: GERMANY — 14.2% 7.8 PERCENTAGE POINTS

Average: Canada: Direction of change: 23.1% 22.0% NEGATIVE (RANKS 14) (0.2 PERCENTAGE POINTS)

Mental health is included in SDG target cent in Italy. The rate in Canada is 22 mental-health disorders that emerge 3.4. The Health Behaviour in School- per cent, close to the average of 23 prior to adulthood impose a 10-fold aged Children (HBSC) survey provides per cent. Girls are much more likely higher health cost than those emerging a non-clinical, self-reported measure of to report symptoms related to their later in life (Lee et al., 2014). adolescent mental health. Every four mental health than boys, with the gap years, schoolchildren aged 11-15 in a widening as they become older. There is a manifest need for more large number of countries are asked objective, standardized, international how often they experience each of Unlike many health indicators, the data on adolescent mental health in four symptoms: feeling low, irritability, reporting of mental-health issues is on high-income countries – as well as nervousness and sleeping difficulties the rise in many high-income countries: sharing of positive initiatives that can (see figure 18). 13 of the 29 countries surveyed had an help determine future policy. The increase of more than two percentage Public Health Agency of Canada in An average of 1 in 4 adolescents (23 points in self-reported symptoms partnership with the Mental Health per cent) reports experiencing two between 2010 and 2014, with Commission of Canada recently or more psychological symptoms particularly large increases in Slovenia, released a more comprehensive set of more than once a week, ranging from Luxembourg, Sweden and the indicators that include not only clinical the lowest incidence of 14 per cent Netherlands. In Canada, the rate has data, but also child and youth self- in Germany to the highest of 36 per remained fairly stable. If left untreated, reported mental health.

34 GOOD HEALTH (GOAL 3) UNICEF Canada June 2017

Figure 18: Adolescent mental health issues (percentage of adolescents reporting two or more psychological symptoms – feeling low, irritability, nervousness, and sleeping difficulties – more than once a week)

25 Country average 2014: 23.1%

20 r cent Pe 15

5 5 2 7 0 4 1 0 6 9 7 9 1 4 9 0 5 6 9 9 1 9 4 6 3 4 9 9 9 3 4 5 36. 0 14. 14. 15. 15. 17. 18. 18. 19. 20. 20. 21. 21. 21. 22. 22. 22. 22. 22. 23. 24. 26. 26. 27. 27. 27. 27. 27. 28. 28. 32. l y a y d n k s d a a a d d y a a a n a a c g e e d a a y i a i r m i i r i i i i i i t i l n r a m d n t d n e l r c c l r t g n a a n n a n n v n k n a a a o n a iu a a a a t d b u n e a a a t s u w l p l e l l g o a a a l I t r m d a r g o n t e v u o a e g m u n S l l r v e e n u r l r r o n g r e a r s La m p b M e o c I h o Fr Po u A Fi n e z C l I u w l G e N e i t C E it m Po h i B S H S S B G D K L Ro Re e t w x d e h S e c N Lu it e z n C U

Below average Average Above average 2010 2006

“We’re generally a very ‘happy’ country so we should be ranking at the top of most categories, right?”

– Workshop Participant, age 16

GOOD HEALTH (GOAL 3) 35 Report Card 14 Canadian Companion Oh Canada! Our kids deserve better

Teen Drunkenness

Top performer: Possibility Gap: ICELAND — 1.7% 5.5 PERCENTAGE POINTS

Average: Canada: Direction of change: 6.9% 7.2% POSITIVE (RANKS 17) (4.1 PERCENTAGE POINTS)

Target 3.5 of the SDGs aims to Figure 19 shows the percentage of and 2014. In some countries, the “strengthen the prevention and schoolchildren aged 11-15 in each improvement was dramatic: in Ireland, treatment of substance abuse, country who reported having been Spain and the United Kingdom, the including… the harmful use of alcohol.” drunk in the previous 30 days. There rate more than halved, and Canada has Although the official indicator focuses is substantial variation between made significant progress as with other on adults, drinking by children is also a countries, with a low in Iceland of 2 forms of adolescent “risk behaviour” matter of public concern in many high- per cent. Canada’s rate of 7 per cent such as cannabis use and smoking. income countries, not least because of is just above the average. In most the association with injuries (de Looze countries, the incidence of adolescent et al., 2012; Pickett et al., 2005). drunkenness declined between 2010

Figure 19: Adolescent drunkenness (percentage aged 11-15 who reported having been drunk in the previous month)

15 r cent

Pe 10 Country average 2013/14: 6.9%

5 6 7 8 5 7 0 3 4 4 5 5 8 3 4 8 4 0 0 1 2 2 2 4 5 8 0 0 7 4 10. 12. 12. 0 1. 4. 4. 4. 4. 4. 4. 4. 5. 5. 5. 6. 7. 7. 7. 7. 7. 7. 7. 7. 7. 8. 8. 8. 9. 10. l d e y n s d d g n e a a y a a a d a a a c a y a k a a l i i i t i i i i i i r i r i n c e d n n r c r n l m d m l t r g a a v t n n n k n n a a a n t d n a a u e t a a o a iu a b a a l u I l l p s o l e a a a g t a e a r o e d n g t v u o m g e l e S r u m M l v u n r l r r e r b La r g a s m p c Fr w I Po o o h n u I e z G A n e l l u C t m e i C E it e Po S h i B S S H B e G K Ro Re L D t w x e d h S c N Lu e it e z n C U

Below average Average Above average 2010

36 GOOD HEALTH (GOAL 3) UNICEF Canada June 2017

There is no greater priority for any nation than the well-being of its children. It’s up to all of us – individual Canadians, the private sector and all levels of government – to come together and ensure all of our children from coast to coast to coast are safe, healthy, educated and have dreams for their futures – dreams they can achieve.

– David Morley, UNICEF Canada President and CEO

GOOD HEALTH (GOAL 3) 37 Report Card 14 Canadian Companion Oh Canada! Our kids deserve better

Teen Births

Top performer: Possibility Gap: KOREA — 1.6 PER 1,000 7.9 PER 1,000

Average: Canada: Direction of change: 13.3 PER 1,000 9.5 PER 1,000 POSITIVE (RANKS 23) (4.7 PER 1,000)

Reducing the adolescent birth rate is a Figure 20 tracks the number of Without exception, all countries show target for global health due to the high births per 1,000 women aged 15-19, a decline in the teenage birth rate individual and social costs associated with wide variation among wealthy between 2005 and 2015. The progress with teenage pregnancies and births. countries. The lowest teenage birth has been particularly marked in Iceland, Very young mothers face higher risks rate is found in the Republic of Korea, which reduced its rate by 63.5 per of mortality and birth complications with 1.6 per 1,000, while five other cent over that period, but 10 countries affecting the survival and health of countries – Denmark, Japan, the reduced their rates in excess of 40 per their children, in addition to the likely Netherlands, Slovenia and Switzerland cent and Canada’s rate of decline has adverse impact on their own economic – have a rate of 4 or fewer per 1,000. also been significant. It is not entirely opportunities. Preventing early The rate in Canada is 9.5, significantly clear why adolescent “risk behaviour” pregnancies can therefore improve the above the best-performing countries is generally on the decline, but life chances and health prospects of but below the average of 13.3. public health approaches and higher two generations of children. opportunity and social costs may be having an influence.

“We have a bad sex-ed, it’s not talked about enough.”

– Workshop Participant, age 16

38 GOOD HEALTH (GOAL 3) UNICEF Canada June 2017

Figure 20: The adolescent birth rate (number of births per 1,000 females aged 15-19)

20 Country average 2015: 13.3% 10 Births per 1000 females aged 15-19

0 1.6 2.8 3.6 3.9 4.0 4.0 4.9 5.7 5.7 5.7 5.9 5.9 6.4 6.4 6.8 7.2 8.1 8.3 8.8 9.2 9.3 9.4 9.5 9.7 10.1 10.4 12.4 13.1 13.3 13.8 13.9 16.4 17.7 19.9 21.2 23.3 26.8 34.0 36.8 47.5 62.2

ey Italy orea atvia Chile Spain rance Israel oland L Malta urk Japan inland T Cyprus F Austria F Croatia ortugal Ireland P Iceland Norway Greece Canada epublic Estonia Mexico Slovenia Sweden Belgium P HungarySlovakia Bulgaria Denmark Germany Lithuania Australia Romania

Switzerland uxembourg Netherlands L United StatesNew Zealand Czech R epublic of K United Kingdom R 2015 2010 2005

Data Pothole

Goal 3, focused on health, includes a number of indicators relevant to children and youth that should be monitored in high-income countries including coverage of substance abuse treatment, access to family planning, affordable medicine and vaccination. Injuries and tobacco use should also be tracked for this Goal. In Canada, vaccination rates are not adequately measured, though progress is being made. While Indigenous children have outcomes in these areas that are typically worse than the average, some SDG indicators address health conditions that should not be prevalent in a high- income country like Canada but are particularly acute in some Indigenous communities including tuberculosis, ambient air pollution (including indoors) and unsafe water and sanitation.

GOOD HEALTH (GOAL 3) 39 Report Card 14 Canadian Companion Oh Canada! Our kids deserve better

NO POVERTY (GOAL 1) — Canada ranks 32

Child Income Poverty

Top performer: Possibility Gap: DENMARK — 9.2% 13 PERCENTAGE POINTS

Average: Canada: Direction of change: 21.0% 22.2% POSITIVE (RANKS 24) (1.8 PERCENTAGE POINTS)

There are wide variations in child 60% of the median. On average, 1 agenda aims to attract immigrants to poverty rates across rich countries. in 5 children (from birth to age 17) in sustain and grow social and economic The rate and depth of child poverty high-income countries lives in poverty, prosperity. To increase human capital, have worsened in many countries though there is wide variation, from closing the inequality gaps among since the onset of the Great Recession, only 1 in 10 in Denmark, Iceland and Canada’s children will be just as more than poverty among other age Norway to 1 in 3 in Israel and Romania important. Most of Canada’s provinces groups. Canada’s rate has slightly (see figure 21). Canada’s level of child and territories have targets to reduce improved in the last few years, but poverty is close to the average of 1 in 5. the rate of child income poverty; they remains stubbornly high in contrast to may soon be joined by the federal many of our peer nations. Living in poverty and deprivation during government. Children in Canada are childhood creates inequalities in child poorer than any other group, at a The universal standard measures of development and health that show up developmental stage when it has a poverty are based on income. SDG by the time children start school, and very significant impact; they must be a indicator 1.2.1 aims to measure the can yield lifelong damage, with proven priority for new targets and measures proportion of people living below the effects on health and educational to continue to shore up the incomes of national poverty line – including the attainment.18 These impacts can Canadians as called for by Campaign share of children. Most high-income evolve into large earnings differences 2000 (Campaign 2000, 2016). countries measure the risk of child in adulthood (Heckman & Savelyev, poverty as a level of family income 2013). Canada’s federal innovation

18 See, for example: UNICEF, The State of the World’s Children 2005, p. 17; Hackman, D.A., & Farah, M.J. (2009). Socioeconomic status and the developing brain. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 13, 65–73. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2008.11.003

40 NO POVERTY (GOAL 1) UNICEF Canada June 2017

Figure 21: Relative income poverty (percentage of children aged 0-17 living in households with incomes lower than 60% of the median, 2014 and 2008)

25 Country average 2014: 21.0% 20 er cent P 15

0 9.2 10.0 10.2 10.9 11.5 12.8 13.7 14.7 14.8 14.8 15.1 15.1 17.5 17.7 18.2 18.2 18.3 18.8 19.2 19.7 19.7 19.8 21.1 22.2 22.3 23.5 24.1 24.3 25.0 25.1 25.4 25.5 25.5 25.6 29.4 30.5 31.6 31.7 31.8 36.1 39.3

ey Italy orea atvia Chile rance oland Malta L Spain urk Israel inland Japan T mania F Cyprus F Austria Ireland Croatia P ortugal IcelandNorway epublic Estonia Canada Greece Mexico Slovenia Sweden BelgiumSlovakia Hungary P Bulgaria Denmark GermanyAustralia Lithuania Ro

Switzerland uxembourg Netherlands L New Zealand United States Czech R epublic of K United Kingdom R

Below average Average Above average 2008

NOTE: The relative child poverty rate measures the proportion of children living in a household where disposable income is less than 60% of the national median (after taking taxes and benefits into account and adjusting for family size and composition using the OECD modified equivalence scale).

NO POVERTY (GOAL 1) 41 Report Card 14 Canadian Companion Oh Canada! Our kids deserve better

Social Transfers for Children

Top performer: Possibility Gap: FINLAND — 66% 45 PERCENTAGE POINTS

Average: Canada: Direction of change: 37.5% 21% NO CHANGE (RANKS 29)

If child poverty rates were entirely rates by up to two-thirds of the market rate by 38 per cent (the average rate dependent on market household rate. The league table is based on 2014 among wealthy nations) and improved incomes, they would be much data prior to the implementation of the Canada’s ranking to 20th place.21 Even higher across the board. Instead, federal Canada Child Benefit (CCB) with the CCB, considerable room governments intervene through in July 2016, so Canada’s rank of 29 remains for more improvement in benefits and taxes to reduce poverty based on a child poverty reduction social transfers by federal, provincial and income inequality. Social rate of 21 per cent (well below the and territorial governments to help transfers to families with children average of 37 percent) doesn’t capture achieve better child well-being can be highly effective in reducing its impact.19 The impact of the CCB on outcomes. At minimum, Canada’s relative child poverty, as figure 22 Canada’s ranking will be measurable CCB payments need to be indexed to reveals. On average, social transfers after 2017, but David Macdonald inflation (prior to 2020) and protected in high-income countries reduce child of the Canadian Centre for Policy within a legislated federal child poverty poverty rates by about one-third. In Alternatives estimated its hypothetical reduction strategy. 11 countries, social transfers more impact (if applied in 2014).20 Had the than halve child poverty, and Finland, CCB been implemented in 2014, it Iceland and Norway cut child poverty would have reduced the child poverty

19 In July 2016, the Canada Child Tax Benefit, the National Child Benefit Supplement and the Universal Child Care Benefit were rolled into a new Canada Child Benefit that provided more benefit particularly to lower- and middle-income families. Estimates from SPSD/M 22.3 as calculated on request of UNICEF Canada by David Macdonald, Senior Economist with the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives in May 2017. A similar calculation of the impact of social transfers (excluding the CCB) based on Canadian Income Survey Public Use Microdata File (2014) yields a child poverty reduction of 17%, which would not alter Canada’s ranking. The difference in poverty reduction is due to the difference in transfer payments between the data sources. 20 Using Statistics Canada’s tax modelling software (SPSD/M). 21 As calculated by David Macdonald using SPSD/M 22.3 for 2014. The scenario assumes the cancellation of the UCCB, NCBS and CCTB and the implementation of the CCB at the initial rates and income levels as reflected in Budget 2016 but applied to the 2014 year.

42 NO POVERTY (GOAL 1) UNICEF Canada June 2017

Figure 22: Effectiveness of social transfers (percent reduction in the rate of child poverty due to social transfers, 2014 and 2008)

40 Country average 2014: 37.5% r cent Pe 30

10 6 19 18 18 18 10 8 0 66 65 64 61 58 55 54 53 53 52 50 50 48 46 45 44 43 43 40 40 36 33 31 27 26 24 24 24 22 21 l l d d y k d n d s a y a e a y s c g a a a a a a d y n a a n s e a o r i i i r m i r i i i i i t l a i i i e n n a n e m n u r n l c d l t l n d r a e c c a r t n a k n n v a g a t n a i a a a d o a a a n iu n b u a t a a t a a p e r l l w l l p s r e g a a o l I u p a a x r m e d r t a g a u o o t t n g a e s n e e y u m v n l l r v u l t I e o r g e s r p b s La M r S a J r c n r Fr o o h u S m Fi I I w n z C A u l u e C l Po G N e i t e e m it E C M S i S H B S Po B d D K G A h Re e L Ro t e w x t d e h i S e c n N Lu it e z U n C U

Below average Average Above average 2008

NOTE: Reduction in child poverty is measured as a proportional difference between child poverty rates before and after social transfers. Child poverty rates are measured using income thresholds at 60% of the median household income of the total population. The capacity of income benefits or transfers to reduce child poverty depends on multiple factors including their size and targeting, and the initial levels of pre-transfers child poverty. The roles of taxes and other social programs are not considered here.

Data Pothole

Multidimensional Child Poverty: Family income is only one, though an important, indicator of the risk of poverty and deprivation. Children also rely on quality public services that money can’t buy, and a sizeable proportion of children with family incomes above the monetary “poverty line” are deprived in material and other aspects of well-being (a fairly consistent pattern where multidimensional measures are used). The SDGs call for a reduction “at least by half [of] the proportion of men, women and children living in poverty in all its dimensions according to national definitions.” UNICEF has developed the Multiple Overlapping Deprivation Analysis (MODA) tool to measure multidimensional deprivation among children. It is based on the conditions for children established in the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC), though there are a variety of methodologies, and variables may include nutrition, clothing, education, health care, social activities and quality of housing. If we asked young people, many would include access to high-speed Internet, which is an SDG indicator of social and economic inclusion. Children who are deprived in a certain number of these policy-relevant dimensions are considered to be in “multidimensional child poverty” (Chzhen, Bruckauf, & Toczydlowska, 2017). Most high-income countries and 40 lower- income countries have made a commitment to monitor multidimensional child poverty. Canada remains an outlier, without a measure of multidimensional poverty at any level of government to help guide investments, policies and services to the areas in which children are deprived. All levels of government in Canada should use MODA as part of their poverty reduction strategies to better reveal which children are deprived and in what ways.

NO POVERTY (GOAL 1) 43 Report Card 14 Canadian Companion Oh Canada! Our kids deserve better

Data Pothole

Goal 1 calls on governments to measure the adequacy of their investment in people according to the proportion of the budget allocated to poverty reduction programs and to spending on essential services (indicators 1.a.1, 1.a.2 and 1.b.1). They should also measure the proportion of the budget spent on children and youth as called for by article 4 of the Convention on the Rights of the Child.

FOOD SECURITY AND NUTRITION (GOAL 2) — Canada ranks 37

Children’s Food Security

Top performer: Possibility Gap: JAPAN — 1.4% 10.5 PERCENTAGE POINTS

Average: Canada: Direction of change:22 12.7% 11.9% N/A (RANKS 24)

Food security is a target for SDG Goal masks higher food insecurity for some where 62 per cent of children under 2 to end hunger and ensure access children, particularly in low-income 18 were in food-insecure households to safe, nutritious and sufficient food families and among homeless youth in 2012 – literally off the chart below. that can ensure normal growth and and northern Indigenous communities. Food insecurity affects learning and development. Measuring the prevalence Canadian data show that food insecurity social functioning and has impacts on of moderate or severe food insecurity disproportionately affects households mental and physical health, increasing among children under the age of 15 is a with children under age 18 (Tarasuk, children’s risks of a variety of chronic partial indicator, for which internationally Mitchell, & Dachner, 2014). In 2012, health problems including Depression comparable data is available. According an estimated 1.15 million Canadian and asthma. No level of food insecurity to this, some countries are doing children under 18 lived in households among children is acceptable given much better than others, as figure that were struggling to afford the Canada’s ample resources. Addressing 23 reveals. Rates of food insecurity food they need.23 Nationally, 1 in 6 food insecurity among families with among children vary widely from less children are exposed to some level of children means, first and foremost, than 2 per cent in Japan to more than household food insecurity, but the rate ensuring that all families have sufficient 30 per cent. At 12 per cent, Canada is is even higher in the Maritimes and the financial resources to meet their basic close to the average, but this average North. Most concerning is Nunavut, needs.

44 FOOD SECURITY AND NURITION (GOAL 2) UNICEF Canada June 2017

Figure 23: Food insecurity (share of children below the age of 15 living with a respondent who is food insecure, 2014/15)

20 r cent Pe 15 Country average 2014: 12.7% 10

5 9 2 7 0 0 6 9 2 5 6 5 8 3 4 5 8 9 1 8 9 0 7 9 9 7 4 0 8 9 9 0 1 0 2 4 7 7 4 5 8 8 34. 14. 15. 16. 17. 17. 17. 18. 19. 19. 21. 25. 26. 33. 8. 9. 10. 10. 10. 11. 11. 11. 12. 12. 12. 0 1. 4. 4. 4. 4. 5. 5. 6. 7. 7. 7. 7. 8. 8. 8. 8. l l n a y y a k s y a a a y a a s y n a i d e g e i d d l c i d i a n i i d e ia e d s a a a o a r r i m t r i l il a m i i i a e e t n n c a r n n d a l l k n d v n c u n e r c r u t a u n a a n a r g t n n i p d a a a n r a a n t b i a a a a t a e h a o a ke l w o s l l I l o g p e l r p l u a a a r x a e o r r a s m a u g v t n e t C t d t g r m I u n e l l M a n S v r y e u l e J Ko r e o b n r p s a La s r r g m w Fr c e lo e o Po S h u Tu f C z A Fi I e u l G u C I n e t N m e Z E C i it M S o i h B S H S Po d B G e D Re A K L Ro t e c w x w t i e h d i l e S c n b Lu N e e N t u z i U n p C U Re

Below average Average Above average

“Healthy nutritious meals are expensive, more than junk food.”

– Workshop Participant, age 16

22 Available data suggest that in most parts of Canada, food insecurity in 2012 remained at or above the levels experienced in prior years (Tarasuk, Mitchell, & Dachner, 2014). 23 Internationally comparable time-series data were not available. Available data suggest that food insecurity in most parts of Canada has persisted or increased over the past decade, with significant improvement in Newfoundland and Labrador (Tarasuk, Mitchell, & Dachner, 2013).

FOOD SECURITY AND NURITION (GOAL 2) 45 Report Card 14 Canadian Companion Oh Canada! Our kids deserve better

Unhealthy Weight

Top performer: Possibility Gap: DENMARK — 8.3% 16.7 PERCENTAGE POINTS

Average: Canada: Direction of change: 15.2% 25.0% NEGATIVE (RANKS 29) (3.9 PERCENTAGE POINTS)

Target 2.2 of the SDGs is to end all 25 per cent, or 1 in 4 children, is well and obesity tend to affect children forms of malnutrition by 2030. The above the average of 15 per cent. The at the bottom of the income scale main focus is on ending stunting healthiest country in this respect is more than others. Lifting children and wasting in very young children Denmark, where the rate has fallen out of poverty and reining in overall in low-income countries, but the to less than 10 per cent from already income inequality will help to boost indicators track overweight as well low levels. Unhealthy weight is not nutrition and health. The federal as underweight. Figure 24 shows necessary baggage in a wealthy, government’s commitment to curb that unhealthy weight among children urbanized country. marketing to children of unhealthy food (between ages 11-15) is a pressing and beverages is a welcome effort to challenge across high-income Obesity has been linked to multiple address this stubborn and very costly countries. All but four countries have health conditions in childhood, to lower problem. A school nutrition program child overweight and obesity rates self-esteem, and to a heightened could also contribute to improvements above 10 per cent. With a rank of 29 risk of cardiovascular diseases and in children’s healthy eating. out of 30 countries, Canada’s rate of diabetes in adulthood. Food insecurity

“Canada has lots of fast food, it’s much cheaper.”

– Workshop Participant, age 17

46 FOOD SECURITY AND NURITION (GOAL 2) UNICEF Canada June 2017

Figure 24: Rates of obesity (1-15 year olds who are obese or overweight, 2014/15)

r cent Country average 2014: 15.2%

Pe 15

5 4 9 0 4 0 2 4 7 8 6 1 3 8 2 3 4 5 6 7 0 2 3 3 1 2 3 5 0 1 3 27. 18. 20. 25. 18. 0 8. 10. 10. 10. 11. 11. 12. 13. 13. 13. 14. 14. 14. 14. 14. 14. 15. 15. 15. 15. 16. 16. 17. 17. 18. l l k s d y e a y a n g a a a c a d d d a y n a y a e a a r i m i e i i i i i i r i i l a i t d n a c n r e r l n t r c d l a n t a n n k v n n a a n a g n a n iu a d u r b t a a a a t a e a a l w a s o a a l l l g p e I u m a r r a e o s t u o g e n l u lg m u I v e n v t l b La r n S r r a M n r e o h r s m o p o z Fr e A w l c Po C u l u e e N t e E I Fi G C t i B S m S B h i Ro Re H S Po D t L G e e w x h S N c Lu e z C

Below average Average Above average 2010 2006

Food insecurity affects learning and social functioning and has impacts on mental and physical health, increasing children’s risks of a variety of chronic health problems including Depression and asthma. No level of food insecurity among children is acceptable given Canada’s ample resources.

FOOD SECURITY AND NURITION (GOAL 2) 47 Report Card 14 Canadian Companion Oh Canada! Our kids deserve better

Breastfeeding (at 6 months)

Top performer: Possibility Gap: NORWAY — 71% 41 PERCENTAGE POINTS

Average: Canada: Direction of change: 45% 30% N/A (RANKS 18)

Good nutrition starts from birth. Although some of the data are Breastfeeding is relatively free of Breastfeeding contributes to SDGs relatively old and do not refer to cost, and is higher where there are related to nutrition and health. WHO exclusive breastfeeding, the results stronger social and workplace policies and UNICEF recommend exclusive indicate that the proportion of mothers including maternity leave. All infants in breastfeeding for six months. However, who start to breastfeed is now high in Canada should have access to Baby- most mothers in high-income almost all high-income countries. But Friendly Initiative services following the countries stop breastfeeding before by the time an infant is six months examples set by the governments of six months. Given this context, it is old, between a third and a half are Quebec, Ontario, Manitoba and others, worth measuring breastfeeding rates no longer breastfed. In Canada, like together with the Breastfeeding in high-income countries, especially as Greece and the United Kingdom, the Committee for Canada. As in many this is one of the few positive health drop-off rate is more substantial, from child health indicators, these efforts indicators in which rich countries tend close to 90 per cent at initiation to 30 swim upstream against the broad to lag behind poorer ones.24 per cent at six months. social influence of income inequality and its attendant impacts.

Breastfeeding is relatively free of cost, and is higher where there are stronger social and workplace policies including maternity leave. All infants in Canada should be covered by Baby-Friendly Initiative commitments following the examples set by the governments of Quebec, Ontario, Manitoba and others, together with the Breastfeeding Committee for Canada.

24 The data were gathered for the EU Statistics on Income and Living Conditions survey (EU-SILC).

48 FOOD SECURITY AND NURITION (GOAL 2) UNICEF Canada June 2017

Figure 25: Breastfeeding rank/rate estimates in high-income countries Figure 26: League table of breastfeeding rates Estimates Reference Country by time and Average ranking year prevalence of breastfeeding Country at all time Ever breastfed At 6 At 12 periods months months Australia 2010 8 7 8 Turkey 1 Austria 2006 7 13 15 Japan 2 Canada 2011/12 10 (89%) 18 (30%) 19 (9%) Norway 3 Chile 2011/12 3 15 13 Mexico 4 Czech Republic 2005 2 13 15 New Zealand 5 Denmark 2013 21 22 Korea 6 Finland 2010 8 6 7 Switzerland 6 France 2012/13 18 19 19 Finland 8 Germany 2009/12 14 9 11 Australia 9 Greece 2007/08 11 20 21 Sweden 10 Ireland 2012 19 23 Czech Republic 11 Italy 2013 13 12 14 Chile 12 Japan 2009 3 2 2 Germany 13 Korea 2012 11 4 3 Austria 14 Mexico 2012 4 United States 15 Netherlands 2006/08 17 18 Italy 16 New Zealand 2006 5 4 Spain 16 Norway 2013 3 1 (71%) 6 Canada 18 Spain 2011 17 11 11 Greece 19 Sweden 2010 1 (98%) 8 15 Netherlands 20 Switzerland 2003 6 3 9 United Kingdom 21 Turkey 2008 1 (74%) France 22 United Kingdom 2005/10 15 16 24 Ireland 23 United States 2011 16 10 10 Denmark 24

Average (From 86 45 25 Based on the average ranking Actuals) of breastfeeding rates: ever CDA Distance breastfed, at 6 months and at 12 3 -15 -16 from Average months

CDA Distance from Top -9 -41 -65 Performer

NOTE: Breastfeeding rates are not exclusive breastfeeding rates. The league table is only indicative, as data are from different years and therefore not directly comparable.

FOOD SECURITY AND NURITION (GOAL 2) 49 Report Card 14 Canadian Companion Oh Canada! Our kids deserve better

PEACE, JUSTICE AND STRONG INSTITUTIONS (GOAL 16) — Canada ranks 37

Child Homicide

Top performer: Possibility Gap: MALTA — 0.00 PER 100,000 0.90 PER 100,000

Average: Canada: Direction of change: 0.65 PER 100,000 0.90 PER 100,000 POSITIVE (RANKS 33) (0.17 PER 100,000)

Perhaps one of the most disturbing indicator of social violence. While the suicide and cancer (Statistics Canada, SDG indicators is the child homicide international average for the countries 2017). It is unacceptable, but at least rate. Goal 16 includes indicator 16.1.1, included is 0.65 deaths per 100,000 the child homicide rate has declined which tracks the rate of intentional children, Canada’s rate is 0.9 – the steadily along with the overall homicide homicides per 100,000 people. Figure fifth highest. Children make up a rate. However, Canada also sustains 27 adapts this to show the child substantial proportion of the victims comparatively high rates of violence homicide rate in high-income nations. of homicide in Canada, estimated against children in other forms “below All high-income countries have to at 1.5 per 100,000 annually (closer the tip,” including the much more address rates of violence affecting to 7 per 100,000 among Indigenous prevalent form of bullying. These forms children as they seek to develop females).25 Child homicide is the fourth of violence have been more persistent peaceful and inclusive societies. Child leading cause of death among young over time. homicide is a “tip of the iceberg” people aged 1-24, after accidents,

25 From Conference Board of Canada. (2017). How Canada Performs Report Card: http://www.conferenceboard.ca/hcp/default.aspx.

50 PEACE, JUSTICE AND STRONG INSTITUTIONS (GOAL 16) UNICEF Canada June 2017

Figure 27: Child-homicide rate (deaths of children aged 0-19 by intentional assault per 100,000)

1 Country average 2012/13: 0.65 per 100,000

Child homicide rates (per 100,000 population) 0 0.00 0.01 0.13 0.17 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.20 0.21 0.24 0.25 0.26 0.27 0.28 0.31 0.32 0.32 0.37 0.38 0.38 0.42 0.43 0.46 0.48 0.52 0.55 0.62 0.66 0.76 0.78 0.84 0.90 1.23 1.91 2.66 5.98

ey (2012) Italy (2011) atvia (2011)orea (2012) Chile (2012) Malta (2013) Spain (2012)oland (2012) rance (2010) L Israel (2012) Japan (2012) Turk inland (2012) Austria (2013) Ireland (2011) P Croatia (2012)ortugal (2012)F F Cyprus (2011) epublic (2012)Estonia (2011) Canada (2010)Norway (2012) Mexico (2012) P Sweden Hungary(2012) Belgium(2012) (2011) Bulgaria (2011) Germany (2012) DenmarkAustralia (2011) Ro (2010)mania (2011) Lithuania (2012)

uxembourg (2012)Switzerland (2012) L Netherlands (2012) New Zealand (2010) United States (2012) Czech R United Kingdom (2012) epublic of K R 2012/13 2010 2006

All high-income countries have to address rates of violence affecting children as they seek to develop peaceful and inclusive societies. Child homicide is a “tip of the iceberg” indicator of social violence.

PEACE, JUSTICE AND STRONG INSTITUTIONS (GOAL 16) 51 Report Card 14 Canadian Companion Oh Canada! Our kids deserve better

Bullying

Top performer: Possibility Gap: SWEDEN — 4.5% 10.5 PERCENTAGE POINTS

Average: Canada: Direction of change: 10.8% 15.0% NEGATIVE (RANKS 27) (0.9 PERCENTAGE POINTS)

Bullying includes emotional and bullying. While chronic bullying in and just nation if it continues to sustain psychological as well as physical Sweden and Iceland affects less violence against its most vulnerable. violence. It is linked to ill health, low than 5 per cent of children, Canada The differences in levels of violence self-esteem, poorer educational has the fifth-highest rate at 15 per between societies underline the fact outcomes, Depression and thoughts cent, well above the average of 11 per that violence is a learned, socially of suicide (UN Special Representative cent. Many countries have brought condoned behaviour – not a normal of the Secretary-General on Violence bullying rates down, while bullying has part of childhood. Reducing the against Children, 2016). Figure 28 increased in others and remained fairly maltreatment of children, supporting gives some indication of the scale of stable in Canada over the past decade. more effective approaches informed the problem, showing the proportion by young people to reduce bullying of children aged 11-15 who reported Together, rates of child homicide in all forms, and freeing children from having experienced bullying at school and bullying are at alarming levels in the impacts of racialized violence and 2 or more times a month. At least 1 in Canada, particularly in comparison to poverty are critical to reducing the 10 children in high-income countries the majority of high-income countries. violence burden in young lives. regularly and repeatedly experiences Canada will never be a safe, peaceful

Many countries have brought bullying rates down, while bullying has increased in others and remained fairly stable in Canada over the past decade.

52 PEACE, JUSTICE AND STRONG INSTITUTIONS (GOAL 16) UNICEF Canada June 2017

Figure 28: Children aged 11 to 15 who had experienced bullying at least twice in the past month

15 r cent

Pe Country average 2014: 10.8% 10

5 0 3 5 9 3 6 0 7 3 9 7 0 1 6 7 2 5 6 2 3 5 3 4 6 6 9 1 3 4 3 5

0 4. 4. 5. 5. 5. 6. 6. 6. 7. 7. 8. 8. 8. 9. 9. 10. 10. 10. 10. 11. 11. 12. 12. 13. 13. 14. 15. 15. 16. 22. 29. l l n d ly n c k e y d a a s a y y d a a e d g a a a a a a i i r i t i r e i i a m i i i i i e n l c a n t l d n n m c n r r d r a a a n a a k n g t n v n d a t b e a a a n a r a o n a u u a a t l I p w l e g l a a l u i s o a e u m e r o a s v d a o t g n g t e S r e r M l v m n I n l u l u p n o r r r g m b r a s La w c I o u o Fr Po u h I G C e l Fi l n e A e N e i m C E it S h S H S Po B B Re D G K Ro e L t x h e d c N e e t Lu z i n C U

Below average Average Above average 2010 2006

NOTE: Chronic bullying refers to when children experience bullying 2 or more times in the past month.

Canada will never be a safe, peaceful and just nation if it continues to sustain violence against its most vulnerable. The differences in levels of violence between societies underline the fact that violence is a learned, socially condoned behaviour – not a normal part of childhood.

PEACE, JUSTICE AND STRONG INSTITUTIONS (GOAL 16) 53 Report Card 14 Canadian Companion Oh Canada! Our kids deserve better

Data Pothole Data Pothole

Target 16.2 aims to end all forms of violence against Goal 16 calls for indicators of peaceful and just societies children. One of its three indicators is the proportion for children that measure various forms of violence and of children aged 1-17 who experienced any physical exploitation. Canada’s data on crime and victimization punishment and/or psychological aggression by are expanding to address issues that are challenging caregivers in the past month. While low- and middle- to measure, such as trafficking, and the Murdered and income countries increasingly participate in household Missing Indigenous Women and Girls Inquiry aims to surveys that include questions about these prevalent fill data holes for this highly victimized group. The Goal forms of violence, Canada fails to do so. The National also has indicators that are not sufficiently tracked and Longitudinal Study of Children and Youth included would require asking children and youth for their views a single question about the frequency with which on aspects of their society, such as whether they feel caregivers used physical punishment, but this survey safe walking alone, if they are satisfied with the public was discontinued after its eighth cycle was conducted services they experience, if they believe decision- in 2008-2009. At that time, approximately 1 in 4 making includes and responds to them, and if they have parents of 2- to 9-year-olds reported having physically been discriminated against or harassed. Importantly, punished their children. The Canadian Incidence there is also an indicator to measure the existence Study of Reported Child Abuse and Neglect also was of “independent national human rights institutions in discontinued after its third cycle was completed in compliance with the Paris Principles.” Although most 2008. Data from each of its three cycles indicated that peer nations achieve this indicator, Canada will not until approximately three out of four substantiated incidents it has a National Commissioner for Children and Youth of physical maltreatment occurred in the context of and all provinces and territories establish Child and punishment. Only ongoing and consistent tracking Youth Advocates/Representatives with full powers of the use of physical punishment by parents and and responsibilities. caregivers can provide a useful picture of the prevalence of this form of violence against Canada’s children.

How national averages hide the vulnerable: the example of Indigenous children

Values of non-discrimination and inclusion are at the heart of the Sustainable Development Agenda, reflected in its central promise of “Leaving no one behind.” National averages, which we use as a starting point for debate about the state of children, often render invisible the most disadvantaged and excluded children. Data to measure the equity gaps of Indigenous children from four geographically diverse countries (Australia, Canada, Mexico and Norway) are partial, and not always culturally appropriate or respectful of Indigenous rights. Some SDG indicators are specific about the state of Indigenous peoples. Some are highly relevant to revealing the circumstances of Indigenous children in high-income countries (e.g., 1.4.1, proportion of population living in households with access to basic services; 9.1.1, proportion of the rural population who live within 2 km of an all-season road). The SDG Agenda calls on all governments to disaggregate data and make all children visible.

54 PEACE, JUSTICE AND STRONG INSTITUTIONS (GOAL 16) UNICEF Canada June 2017

Goal 1: End Poverty Indigenous children typically face rates of poverty higher than national averages. In 2010, 38 per cent of Indigenous children (First Nations, Inuit and Métis) in Canada lived in income poverty compared to 17 per cent of non-Indigenous children. Further disaggregation by identity shows that half the children of Status First Nations in Canada lived in poverty. In Mexico, 78.6 per cent of children and adolescents in Indigenous households and 90.8 per cent of those who spoke an Indigenous language were in poverty in 2014. This is compared with 50.7 per cent of non- Indigenous children and adolescents.

Goal 3: Health and Well-being In 2011, 11 per cent of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander babies in Australia were born with low birth weight – more than twice the proportion of non-Indigenous babies. Data collected in 2014 showed adolescent birth rates among Sami people in Norway were more than twice the national average. Aboriginal children in Canada experience higher rates of injury, suicide, obesity, infant mortality, and health conditions such as tuberculosis.

Goal 4: Quality Education Despite progress in many countries, closing the education gap between Indigenous and non-Indigenous children remains a challenge. According to a 2015 Australian government report, Aboriginal and Torres children continued to lag behind their non- Indigenous peers in reading and numeracy, with low attendance one of the critical factors behind this achievement gap. Language is a factor in low school attendance, and preschool programs have an important role to play in supporting Indigenous languages. For instance, in 2015, around half of the 1,000 Sami children enrolled in Norwegian preschool were in Sami-language kindergartens. Yet official statistics on the language of children leaving kindergarten do not include the Sami language.

The SDG agenda is a window of opportunity to support dramatic change in the lives of Indigenous children and youth. One way to promote that is to support Indigenous communities in the advancement of comprehensive, culturally relevant data (Young et al., 2015). Efforts in Canada to improve data collection must respect the OCAP® principles of Indigenous Ownership, Control, Access and Possession of data, respecting their particular cultural contexts, their worldviews about child well-being and their rights. Such data and monitoring can support a stronger focus on policy responses for inclusion and equity.

The Australian government’s annual report on progress for Indigenous children on selected indicators in health, education, employment and economic opportunities reveals equity gaps. Canada has unique approaches to support Indigenous-led data and information, including federal support for the National Collaborating Centre for Aboriginal Health and the First Nations Information Governance Centres.

Source: Richardson, D., Bruckauf, Z., Toczydlowska, E., & Chzhen, Y. (2017). Comparing Child-focused SDGs in High- income Countries: Indicator development and overview. Innocenti Working Paper 201, UNICEF Office of Research – Innocenti, Florence.

PEACE, JUSTICE AND STRONG INSTITUTIONS (GOAL 16) 55 Report Card 14 Canadian Companion Oh Canada! Our kids deserve better

SO CANADA, HOW DO WE MAKE THINGS BETTER?

UNICEF Report Card 14 delivers a child-centred assessment of where high-income nations stand in the journey towards sustainable development.

It reminds us that sustainable development will not come Only concerted action will close the distances to the without the well-being of children and youth. There are best outcomes for children and youth achieved by top- many positive stories within these indicators and rankings. performing countries. National shortcomings in producing Canada has achieved declines in the rates of neonatal data should not be an excuse for failing to act on the data mortality, teenage births and drunkenness, and child we have. Perfect data is an unattainable ideal and should homicide. It has sustained a high-performing, equitable not be the enemy of good data. On the other hand, good education system and advanced preschool participation. should not be the enemy of great when it comes to the Young people show a high level of environmental outcomes we should expect for Canada’s children and awareness. Yet, even where our indicators are improving, youth. We can allow ourselves to be stalled by debates some of the “Possibility Gaps” – the distances between over statistics and be content with mediocrity, or we can Canada’s outcomes and the outcomes achieved by the get on with filling data gaps and closing the “Possibility best performers – are still too large. Gaps” revealed by the league tables. We need to work in new and different ways to improve child well-being so We are still far from delivering for Canada’s children the that we build the momentum needed in Canada and see vision held out by the SDGs; that by achieving the Global measurable change the next time we take the temperature Goals by 2030, we have the potential to grant every child a of the state of our children and youth. fair chance in life, ensuring them health, safety, education and empowerment. Calling on Canada to Act Income inequality is wide, affecting children broadly and leaving farther behind those with the lowest family Based on the evidence collated in this incomes; the income advantage gap is stretching the capacity of Canada’s public education system to even Report Card, we urge Canadians to take out the impacts of inequality. Too many young people action in five ways. are excluded from education and employment. Unhealthy weight, poor mental health and bullying persist with little 1. Make data-driven decisions to prioritize efforts to progress. The rise in urban air pollution is also a concern improve child well-being. for child health and development. Never before have we recorded erosion in so many indicators of child and youth The league table shows which countries come closest well-being in Canada – the general trend in the past has to achieving child-focused targets for each SDG. To free been to make improvements in most indicators. ourselves from the middle, we need to focus on the indicators where Canada lags farthest behind our peers (the National income levels do not explain the differences “Possibility Gaps”) and those that are eroding or stuck (the between Canada and the top performing countries; nor do “Progress Gaps”). Communities, civil-society, governments rates of immigration, the unique inequalities experienced and all levels and funders—be they community, family or by Indigenous children, or problems with data. Countries corporate foundations—should focus their energy on the that rank high on income equality tend to also score well on gaps we can address that will have the greatest impact on limiting poverty, ensuring healthy lives and reducing violence. well-being. This demonstrates that government policies and priorities are critical if children are to make sustained progress.

56 UNICEF Canada June 2017

2. Collect disaggregated data. Invest in the Early Years National averages often conceal extreme inequalities within any Different levels of government need given indicator. Some children are so excluded they are missing from to cooperate to put in place universal, available data. Data collection efforts should aim to be as inclusive as progressive policies and programs possible, but also sensitive to children with diverse cultural and gender for the early years combined with identities and respectful of their rights. Every agency and organization a capacity to identify those falling that collects population data should also measure the gaps, using behind. This will help us close the UNICEF’s bottom-end inequality calculation and other parity measures “Equality Gaps” among Canada’s where data permits. children and youth and boost overall outcomes. 3. Develop an SDG Strategy.

The Government of Canada has committed to meeting the The Big-City Challenge Sustainable Development Goals in Canada and therefore must lead the development of a pan-Canadian strategy for SDG implementation What if Canada’s three largest cities that incorporates key measures for children’s rights and well-being. – Toronto, Montreal and Vancouver This should involve participatory and inclusive consultations with key – agreed on a “Possibility Gap” they stakeholders, including: provinces and territories; First Nations, Métis could pursue in collaboration, such as and Inuit; civil society and the academic and research community; the unhealthy weight? With 30 per cent private sector; and children and young people. of Canada’s children in these cities, we could make measurable progress 4. Dream for our children. up the league tables of child and youth well-being, change the lives of Start a conversation in your family, community and workplace about what millions of children and provide other we want for our children. What kind of values do we want to influence communities with possible solutions to our actions? Canada needs to consider how overall income inequality, be adapted and adopted. family stress and competition are affecting the well-being of children and youth across income, gender and other social divides. We need to dream big for our children and take action to keep those dreams alive. The “Beat the Index” Challenge

What if every community in Canada 5. Listen to children and young people. chose lagging indicators and made a Children and young people are experts in their own lives. They plan to “beat” the national averages? know what fuels their dreams and brings them life satisfaction, and We would ignite a virtuous cycle of they have ideas that can contribute to new solutions for the biggest raising community outcomes as well challenges to well-being. Whether you are a parent, a community or as the national averages, and make business leader or in government, you can create opportunities to measurable progress up the league engage with children and young people, listen to their experiences and tables of child and youth well-being. ideas and work with them to develop new solutions.

57 Report Card 14 Canadian Companion Oh Canada! Our kids deserve better

eCee nna nih .

ONE YOUTH

UNICEF Canada is taking One Youth is a movement of children, young people and adults who want the action to help improve the best possible opportunities for every young person in Canada. One Youth will well-being of children and elevate the well-being of children and youth to a higher national priority.

youth in Canada through We have a bold goal: to make Canada #1 on the UNICEF Index of Child Well- its new initiative, being by 2030. One Youth.

How are we going to do this? By using One Youth’s three pillars:

1. Measure 2. Design 3. Influence • Understand what’s important to • Launch the One Youth Design • Start a dialogue with Canadians children and young people Studio to create a safe space for about child well-being to bust children, youth and adults to come myths and make it a priority issue • Create the Canadian Index of together, take chances and come for Canadians Child and Youth Well-being to up with ideas, test their ideas and develop a way to measure child try to solve these issues • Use our collective voice to and youth well-being and track influence every Canadian to how well our children and youth • Develop a Designing with Kids contribute to positive change and are doing Toolkit so that communities across make Canada a better place for the country can work together with children and youth • Focus where Canadian children children and young people to find are falling behind other countries new local solutions • Rally Canadians to speak up and why and get friends, community and decision-makers to address the issues and improve the lives of children and young people across the country

58 UNICEF Canada June 2017

59 Report Card 14 Canadian Companion Oh Canada! Our kids deserve better

APPENDIX A: CONNECTING THE SDGS TO CHILD WELL-BEING INDICATORS

Goal Target (by 2030 unless specified) Report Card 14 indicator Relationship to SDG global indicators Official SDG indicator which uses 60% of the median for cross-country Relative child poverty (60% of the median household income) End poverty in all its forms everywhere 1.2 Reduce at least by half the proportion of men, women and children comparability 1 of all ages living in poverty in all its dimensions according to national Based on UNICEF MODA methodology, which uses 7 child-specific definitions Proportion of children living in multidimensional poverty dimensions of poverty for cross-country comparability 1.3 Implement nationally appropriate social protection systems and measures for all, including floors, and by 2030 achieve substantial Reduction in the rate of child poverty due to social transfers Adapts the official SDG indicator for better country coverage coverage of the poor and the vulnerable 2.1 End hunger and ensure access by all people, in particular the poor Official SDG measure of food insecurity applied to households with children End hunger, achieve food security and people in vulnerable situations, including infants, to safe, nutritious Children under 15 living with a respondent who is food insecure (%) 2 under 15 and improved nutrition and sufficient food all year round Obesity is a form of malnutrition, and is highly relevant for high-income 2.2 End all forms of malnutrition Obesity rates among adolescents aged 11-15 countries. Differs from the official SDG indicator 3.2 End preventable deaths of newborns and children under 5 years of Neonatal mortality rate Official SDG indicator 3 Ensure healthy lives and promote age well-being Suicides of adolescents aged 15-19 per 100,000 population Official SDG indicator applied to relevant age group 3.4 Promote mental health and well-being 11-15-year-olds reporting 2 or more psychological symptoms more than Indicator chosen for its relevance for high-income countries and links to once a week (%) suicidal behaviour. No matching global indicator 3.5 Strengthen the prevention and treatment of substance abuse, Children aged 11-15 who reported having been drunk in the previous Drunkenness is a proxy of harmful use of alcohol among children and young including harmful use of alcohol month (%) people. Differs from the official SDG indicator 3.7 Ensure universal access to sexual and reproductive health-care Number of births per 1,000 females aged 15-19 Official SDG indicator applied to the relevant adolescent population services 4.1 Ensure that all girls and boys complete free, equitable and quality 15-year-old students achieving baseline proficiency across reading, Official SDG indicator covering young people at the end of secondary Ensure inclusive and equitable primary and secondary education leading to relevant and effective 4 mathematics and science (%) education, adapted to reduce subject-specific bias quality education for all learning outcomes 4.2 Ensure that all girls and boys have access to quality early childhood Participation rate in organized learning (one year before official primary development, care and pre-primary education so that they are ready for Official SDG indicator entry age) primary education Share of adult respondents agreeing "university education is more Measure of values and attitudes towards equal gender opportunities for 5 Achieve gender equality and 5.1 End all forms of discrimination against all women and girls important for a boy than for a girl” children. No matching global indicator empower all girls everywhere Gender difference in girls' and boys' share of daily participation in Proxy of intergenerational transfer of norms as regards gender roles. No housework by age matching global indicator 5.2 Eliminate all forms of violence against all women and girls in the Women aged 18-29 who reported having experienced sexual violence Differs from the global indicator in age group and recall period due to limited public and private spheres before age 15 (%) availability of cross-national data 8.5 Achieve full and productive employment and decent work for all New indicator showing the proportion of children impacted by Children living in jobless households (%) 8 Promote full and productive employment women and men unemployment/inactivity of household members and decent work for all 8.6 By 2020, substantially reduce the proportion of youth not in Official SDG indicator, but with more child-specific age coverage (15-19 Youth aged 15-19 not in education, employment or training (%) employment, education or training rather than 15-24) 10.1 Progressively achieve and sustain income growth of the bottom Palma Ratio: ratio of income share held by top 10% of households with Not an official SDG indicator, but a standard indicator of inequality, adapted 10 Reduce inequality within and among 40% of the population children to bottom 40% to reflect children's experience countries 10.2 Empower and promote the social, economic and political inclusion Impact of socio-economic status on students' performance across 3 Not an official SDG indicator, but an equal-opportunity measure regularly of all, irrespective of economic or other status subjects reported by PISA 10.3 Ensure equal opportunity and reduce inequalities of outcome, Not an official SDG indicator, but consistently used by UNICEF Report Cards Gap between household income of child at 50th percentile (median) including by eliminating discriminatory laws, policies and practices and to measure how far behind the poorest children are being allowed to fall and child at 10th percentile, reported as % of median promoting appropriate legislation, policies and action in this regard from 'average' standards in society

12.8 Ensure that people everywhere have the relevant information and Ensure sustainable production and Not an official indicator but reflects the SDG focus on education for 12 awareness for sustainable development and lifestyles in harmony with 15-year-old students familiar with 5 or more environmental issues (%) sustainable development (including climate-change education) consumption patterns nature

16.1 Significantly reduce all forms of violence and related death rates Deaths of children aged 0-19 by intentional assault per 100,000 Official SDG indicator adapted for children aged 0-19 16 Promote peaceful and inclusive societies everywhere for sustainable development Children aged 11 to 15 who have experienced bullying at least twice a Bullying as a form of physical and psychological violence corresponds to the 16.2 End abuse, exploitation, trafficking and all forms of violence month in the past month (%) official indicator but focuses on children against and torture of children Women aged 18-29 who reported having experienced physical violence Differs from the global indicator in age group and recall period due to limited before age 15 (%) availability in cross-national data

Missing Canadian data

60 UNICEF Canada June 2017

APPENDIX B: AN ALTERNATIVE POSSIBILITY GAP CALCULATION

Goal Target (by 2030 unless specified) Report Card 14 indicator Relationship to SDG global indicators Official SDG indicator which uses 60% of the median for cross-country Rank Possibility Gaps (z scores) Relative child poverty (60% of the median household income) End poverty in all its forms everywhere 1.2 Reduce at least by half the proportion of men, women and children comparability 1 of all ages living in poverty in all its dimensions according to national Based on UNICEF MODA methodology, which uses 7 child-specific definitions Proportion of children living in multidimensional poverty dimensions of poverty for cross-country comparability 1 Unhealthy Weight 1.3 Implement nationally appropriate social protection systems and 2 Breastfeeding measures for all, including floors, and by 2030 achieve substantial Reduction in the rate of child poverty due to social transfers Adapts the official SDG indicator for better country coverage coverage of the poor and the vulnerable 3 Social Transfers for Children 2.1 End hunger and ensure access by all people, in particular the poor Official SDG measure of food insecurity applied to households with children End hunger, achieve food security and people in vulnerable situations, including infants, to safe, nutritious Children under 15 living with a respondent who is food insecure (%) 2 under 15 and improved nutrition and sufficient food all year round 4 Teen Suicide Obesity is a form of malnutrition, and is highly relevant for high-income 2.2 End all forms of malnutrition Obesity rates among adolescents aged 11-15 countries. Differs from the official SDG indicator 5 Teen Drunkenness 3.2 End preventable deaths of newborns and children under 5 years of Neonatal mortality rate Official SDG indicator 6 Bullying 3 Ensure healthy lives and promote age well-being Suicides of adolescents aged 15-19 per 100,000 population Official SDG indicator applied to relevant age group 7 Bottom-end Income Inequality 3.4 Promote mental health and well-being 11-15-year-olds reporting 2 or more psychological symptoms more than Indicator chosen for its relevance for high-income countries and links to once a week (%) suicidal behaviour. No matching global indicator 8 Child Income Poverty 3.5 Strengthen the prevention and treatment of substance abuse, Children aged 11-15 who reported having been drunk in the previous Drunkenness is a proxy of harmful use of alcohol among children and young including harmful use of alcohol month (%) people. Differs from the official SDG indicator 9 Neonatal Mortality 3.7 Ensure universal access to sexual and reproductive health-care Number of births per 1,000 females aged 15-19 Official SDG indicator applied to the relevant adolescent population services 10 Income Advantage Gap 4.1 Ensure that all girls and boys complete free, equitable and quality 15-year-old students achieving baseline proficiency across reading, Official SDG indicator covering young people at the end of secondary Ensure inclusive and equitable primary and secondary education leading to relevant and effective 11 Teen Mental Health 4 mathematics and science (%) education, adapted to reduce subject-specific bias quality education for all learning outcomes 4.2 Ensure that all girls and boys have access to quality early childhood 12 Children’s Food Security Participation rate in organized learning (one year before official primary development, care and pre-primary education so that they are ready for Official SDG indicator entry age) primary education 13 Awareness of Environmental Problems Share of adult respondents agreeing "university education is more Measure of values and attitudes towards equal gender opportunities for 5 Achieve gender equality and 5.1 End all forms of discrimination against all women and girls important for a boy than for a girl” children. No matching global indicator 14 Excluded Youth (NEET) empower all girls everywhere Gender difference in girls' and boys' share of daily participation in Proxy of intergenerational transfer of norms as regards gender roles. No housework by age matching global indicator 15 Air Pollution in Cities 5.2 Eliminate all forms of violence against all women and girls in the Women aged 18-29 who reported having experienced sexual violence Differs from the global indicator in age group and recall period due to limited public and private spheres before age 15 (%) availability of cross-national data 16 Overall Income Inequality 8.5 Achieve full and productive employment and decent work for all New indicator showing the proportion of children impacted by Children living in jobless households (%) 8 Promote full and productive employment women and men unemployment/inactivity of household members 17 Child Homicide and decent work for all 8.6 By 2020, substantially reduce the proportion of youth not in Official SDG indicator, but with more child-specific age coverage (15-19 Youth aged 15-19 not in education, employment or training (%) employment, education or training rather than 15-24) 18 Teen Births 10.1 Progressively achieve and sustain income growth of the bottom Palma Ratio: ratio of income share held by top 10% of households with Not an official SDG indicator, but a standard indicator of inequality, adapted 19 Preschool Participation 10 Reduce inequality within and among 40% of the population children to bottom 40% to reflect children's experience countries 10.2 Empower and promote the social, economic and political inclusion Impact of socio-economic status on students' performance across 3 Not an official SDG indicator, but an equal-opportunity measure regularly of all, irrespective of economic or other status subjects reported by PISA 20 Children in Jobless Households 10.3 Ensure equal opportunity and reduce inequalities of outcome, Not an official SDG indicator, but consistently used by UNICEF Report Cards Gap between household income of child at 50th percentile (median) 21 Basic Learning Proficiency including by eliminating discriminatory laws, policies and practices and to measure how far behind the poorest children are being allowed to fall and child at 10th percentile, reported as % of median promoting appropriate legislation, policies and action in this regard from 'average' standards in society

11 Make cities inclusive, safe, resilient 11.6 Reduce the adverse per-capita environmental impact of cities, Annual average PM2.5 concentrations in urban areas, weighted by Official SDG indicator but weighted to reflect the proportion of children living NOTE: The “Possibility Gap” is a theoretical measure of the difference and sustainable including by paying special attention to air quality proportion of child population (0-19) living in urban areas in cities between Canada and the best performing country in each indicator (the 12.8 Ensure that people everywhere have the relevant information and Ensure sustainable production and Not an official indicator but reflects the SDG focus on education for 12 awareness for sustainable development and lifestyles in harmony with 15-year-old students familiar with 5 or more environmental issues (%) relative positions are based on z-scores and distance from the mean). The consumption patterns sustainable development (including climate-change education) nature larger the gap, the more room for improvement. 16.1 Significantly reduce all forms of violence and related death rates Deaths of children aged 0-19 by intentional assault per 100,000 Official SDG indicator adapted for children aged 0-19 16 Promote peaceful and inclusive societies everywhere for sustainable development Children aged 11 to 15 who have experienced bullying at least twice a Bullying as a form of physical and psychological violence corresponds to the 16.2 End abuse, exploitation, trafficking and all forms of violence month in the past month (%) official indicator but focuses on children against and torture of children Women aged 18-29 who reported having experienced physical violence Differs from the global indicator in age group and recall period due to limited before age 15 (%) availability in cross-national data

Missing Canadian data

61 Report Card 14 Canadian Companion Oh Canada! Our kids deserve better

APPENDIX C: SUMMARY OF SOURCES AND CANADIAN SDG INDICATORS OF ENDNOTES CHILD AND YOUTH WELL-BEING Beautrais, A. L. (2003). Suicide and Indicator Rank Value Top Average Change serious suicide attempts in youth: Basic Learning Proficiency 4 80.8% 83.1% 68.6% -.2.2 A multiple-group comparison study. American Journal of Psychiatry, 160, Parental Employment 4 4.2% 2.1% 9% 0 1093–1099. https://doi.org/10.1176/ Environmental Awareness 6 71% 82% 62.1% N/A appi.ajp.160.6.1093 Income Advantage Gap 11 32.9% 20.6% 38.1% -0.8 Teen MentalIndicator Health Rank14 Value22% 14.2%Top Average23.1% Change-0.2 Bell, D., & Blanchflower, D. (2011). Young people and the Great Recession. Teen Drunkenness 17 7.2% 1.7% 6.9% +4.1 Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Breastfeeding 18 30% 71% 45% N/A 27, 241–267. https://doi.org/10.1093/ Preschool Participation 19 96.5% 99.9% 95.3% N/A oxrep/grr011

Air Pollution in Cities 19 9.7 PM 2.5 4.8 PM 2.5 10.7 PM 2.5 -0.5 Bridge, J. A., Goldstein, T. R., & Brent, Excluded Youth (NEET) 20 7.1% 2% 7.1% -0.2 D. A. (2006). Adolescent suicide and Bottom-end Income Inequality 23 51.6% 34.2% 51.2% -1 suicidal behavior. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 47, 372– Teen Births 23 9.5/1000 1.6/1000 13.3/1000 -4.7 394. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469- Child Income Poverty 24 22.2% 9.2% 21% -1.8 7610.2006.01615.x Overall Income Inequality 24 1.12 0.70 1.17 - 0.03 Children’s Food Security 24 11.9% 1.4% 12.7% N/A Britto, P. R., Yoshikawa, H., & Boller, K. (2011). Quality of early childhood Bullying Indicator Rank27 Value15% 4.5%Top Average10.8% Change+0.9 development programs in global Social Transfers 29 21% 66% 37.5% 0 contexts: Rationale for investment, Unhealthy Weight 29 25% 8.3% 15.2% +3.9 conceptual framework and implications for equity. Social Policy Report, 25(2). Neonatal Mortality 29 3.6/1000 0.9/1000 2.8/1000 -0.5 Bruckauf, Z., & Hayes, N. (2017). Teen Suicide 31 8.5/100k 1.7/100k 6.1/100k -0.2 Quality of childcare and pre-primary Child Homicide 37 0.9/100k 0 0.65/100k -0.17 education: How do we measure it? Innocenti Research Brief.

Campaign 2000 (2016). Report Card on Child and Family Poverty in Canada 2016. Toronto, ON: Campaign 2000.

Chzhen, Y., Bruckauf, Z., & Toczydlowska, E. (2017). Sustainable Development Goal 1.2: Multidimensional child poverty in the European Union. Innocenti Working Paper 2017, UNICEF Office of Research – Innocenti, Florence.

62 UNICEF Canada June 2017

de Looze, M.E., Pickett, W., MacDorman, M.F., & Mathews, T.J. Tarasuk, V., Mitchell, A., & Dachner, Raaijmakers, Q., Kuntsche, E., (2009). Behind international rankings of N. (2013). Household food insecurity Hublet, A., Gabhainn, S. N., … infant mortality: How the United States in Canada, 2011. Toronto: Research to ter Bogt, T. (2012). Early risk compares with Europe. NCHS Data identify policy options to reduce food behaviors and adolescent injury in Brief, 23. National Center for Health insecurity (PROOF). Retrieved from 25 European and North American Statistics. http://proof.utoronto.ca/ countries: A cross-national consistent relationship. The Journal of Early OECD. (2015). Doing Better for Tarasuk, V., Mitchell, A., & Dachner, N. Adolescence, 32, 101–122. https://doi. Families. OECD Publishing, Paris. (2014). Household food insecurity in org/10.1177/0272431611414062 Canada, 2012. Toronto: Research to Pickett, W., Molcho, M., Simpson, K., identify policy options to reduce food Eurofound. (2012). NEETs – Young Janssen, I., Kuntsche, E., Mazur, J., insecurity (PROOF). Retrieved from people not in employment, education Boyce, W. F. (2005). Cross national http://proof.utoronto.ca/ or training: Characteristics, costs study of injury and social determinants and policy responses in Europe. in adolescents. Injury Prevention, 11, UNICEF. (2016). Clear the air for Publications Office of the European 213–218. https://doi.org/10.1136/ children: The impact of air pollution on Union, Luxembourg. ip.2004.007021 children. New York, NY: Author.

Heckman, J.J., Pinto, R., & Savelyev, Raphael, D. (2010). The health of UNICEF Canada. (2017). My Cat P. (2013). Understanding the Canada’s children. Part I: Canadian Makes Me Happy. Toronto, ON: mechanisms through which an children’s health in comparative UNICEF Canada. influential early childhood program perspective. Paediatrics & Child Health, boosted adult outcomes. American 15, 23–29. https://doi.org/10.1093/ UNICEF Office of Research – Innocenti. Economic Review, 103, 2052–2086. pch/15.1.23 (2016). Fairness for Children: A league https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.103.6.2052 table of inequality in child well-being in Schoon, I., Barnes, M., Brown, V., rich countries. Innocenti Report Card The Jordan’s Principle Working Parsons, S., Ross, A., & Vignoles, A. 13. Florence, Italy: Author. Group (2015) Without denial, delay, (2012). Intergenerational transmission or disruption: Ensuring First Nations of worklessness: Evidence from UN Special Representative of the children’s access to equitable services the Millennium Cohort and the Secretary-General on Violence against through Jordan’s Principle. Ottawa, Longitudinal Study of Young People in Children (2016). Ending the torment: ON: Assembly of First Nations. England. United Kingdom Department Tackling bullying from the schoolyard to for Education Research Report, DFE- cyberspace. New York, NY: Author. Joseph, K.S., Liu, S., Rouleau, J., RR234. Retrieved from http://natcen. Lisonkova, S., Hutcheon, J. A., Sauve, ac.uk/media/134300/intergenerational- World Health Organization (2016). R., … Kramer, M. S. (2012). Influence transmission.pdf Ambient air pollution: A global of definition based versus pragmatic assessment of exposure and burden birth registration on international Statistics Canada. (2017). Health Fact of disease. Geneva, Switzerland: comparisons of perinatal and Sheets: the 10 leading causes of death, Author. Retrieved from http://who.int/ infant mortality: Population based 2013. Retrieved from http://www. phe/publications/air-pollution-global- retrospective study. BMJ, 344, e746. statcan.gc.ca/pub/82-625-x/2017001/ assessment/en/ https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.e746 article/14776-eng.htm Young, N.L., Wabano, M.J., Usuba, K., Lee, F. S., Heimer, H., Giedd, J. N., Sylva, K., Melhuish, E., Sammons, P., Pangowish, B., Trottier, M., Jacko, D., Lein, E. S., Šestan, N., Weinberger, Siraj-Blatchford, I., & Taggart, B. (2011). Cobiere, R.G. (2015). Validity of the D. R., Casey, B. J. (2014). Adolescent Pre-school quality and educational Aboriginal Children’s Health and Well- mental health—Opportunity outcomes at age 11: Low quality has being Measure: Aaniish Naa Gegii? and obligation. Science, 346, little benefit.Journal of Early Childhood Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, 547–549. https://doi.org/10.1126/ Research, 9, 109–124. https://doi. 13, 148–154. https://doi.org/10.1186/ science.1260497 org/10.1177/1476718X10387900 s12955-015-0351-0

63 Report Card 14 Canadian Companion Oh Canada! Our kids deserve better

. . . eCee n64na nih .