No full-text available
To read the full-text of this research,
you can request a copy directly from the authors.
The Community Well-Being (CWB) Index: Disparity in Well-Being Between First Nations and Other Canadian Communities Over Time
... Given that all indicators are expressed as proportions in a 0-100 range, the CWB does not require any additional normalization procedures. Each component in the CWB is given equal weights (O'Sullivan & McHardy, 2004) and although the aggregation process is not described in the documents, it is assumed that it uses a linear aggregation process, the most common method in CIs. ...
How can government policy and decision-makers obtain a more nuanced understanding of rural and small-town community conditions and capacities in order to support decision-making and deliver targeted programs and services? How can community differences be captured in the day-to-day work of governments at all levels? This is an inherent challenge facing government decision makers. The range
of definitions of rurality can be imperfect for policy purposes and small area data can face numerous challenges, reducing its robustness and utility. In response to these issues, many jurisdictions have adopted composite indicators for rural development, to provide a snapshot of community conditions and changes over time. This study presents a comparative analysis of composite indicators (CI) for rural
development, local economic development, community resilience, and community well-being in five countries: Canada, New Zealand, Poland, Slovakia, and Spain. It explores leading practices and offers recommendations for robust rural CI development.
... In 2001, Indian and Northern Affairs Canada (INAC, now CIRNAC) created the Community Well-Being Index (CWB) as a complement to the Registered Indian HDI. In Canada, the CWB remains the only tool for measuring the socioeconomic well-being of individual First Nation, Inuit, and non-Indigenous communities across Canada (O'Sullivan 2011;O'Sullivan and McHardy 2004). 8 The CWB consists of a numerical score ranging from zero to 100 which is calculated by adding four equally-weighted components that encompass the following indicators: 1) total income per capita, 2) education (high school and postsecondary graduation), 3) housing (overcrowding and need for major repairs), and 4) labour force (participation and employment). ...
Modern Treaties are presented as a means for improving the lives of First Nations, Inuit, and Métis peoples in Canada by providing specific rights, and negotiated benefits. However, the positive impacts of Modern Treaties on Indigenous well-being are contested (Borrows and Coyle 2017; Coulthard 2014; Guimond et al. 2013; Miller 2009; Poelzer and Coates 2015). Developing a more transparent, consistent, collaborative and contextual way of measuring well-being relevant to the cultural realities of Modern Treaty beneficiaries is an important step for generating comparative methods that could systematically demonstrate whether, and under what conditions, such agreements can effectively reduce socioeconomic disparities and improve the quality of life of Indigenous communities. The authors first examine previous attempts at measuring Indigenous well-being, then reflect on well-being in relation to the Modern Treaty context. Subsequently, the authors provide an example from one Self-Governing Indigenous Government, the Nisga'a Lisims Government, to collect well-being data through the Nisga'a Nation Household Survey using a mixed quantitative-qualitative method developed through a culturally grounded and participatory approach.
... Over time and in general, the distribution of the CWB scores of Inuit communities present a shift to the right, while retaining the same shape which can be seen in Figure 6. This is associated with an "across the board" improvement of well-being in Inuit communities and is consistent with what is observed for both First Nations and Other Canadian communities (see O'Sullivan and McHardy, 2004, for these data). ...
This paper provides an empirical analysis of the relationship between the political stability of First Nations in Saskatchewan and a number of measures of social and economic well-being. Our results show that among First Nations in Saskatchewan the average term of elected leadership is 4.5 years. Simple descriptive statistics support the basic hypothesis that more stability, represented as less frequent changes in elected Chiefs, is associated with better socio-economic outcomes for First Nation communities. Our findings also show evidence that there are limits to how much more socio-economic gains can be achieved by increasing political stability of First Nation governments. At some point the positive contribution of greater stability to socio-economic outcomes decreases, such that it may eventually reduce, rather than improve positive socioeconomic outcomes. With this paper we hope to inform the current debate of the merits or risks associated with any future changes in First Nation elections and their resulting systems of governance.
Background
The environment plays a large role in the health of individuals; however, more research is needed to better understand aspects of the environment that most influence health. Specifically, our study examines how the social environment influences cardiovascular health (CVH).
Methods and Results
The social environment was characterized using measures of belonging and life and work stress in individuals, as well as nationally derived measures of marginalization, deprivation, economic status, and community well‐being in neighborhoods. CVH was defined by the American Heart Association's Cardiovascular Health Index—a summed score of 7 clinical and behavioral components known to have the greatest impact on CVH. Data were obtained from the Canadian Community Health Survey 2015 to 2016 and multiple national data sources. Multilevel regression models were used to analyze the associations between CVH and the social environment. Overall, 27% of Canadians reported ideal CVH (6–7 score points), 68% reported intermediate CVH (3–5 score points), and 5% reported poor CVH (0–2 score points). The neighborhood environment contributed up to 7% of the differences in CVH between individuals. Findings indicated that residing in a neighborhood with greater community well‐being (odds ratio [OR], 1.33 [95% CI, 1.26–1.41]) was associated with achieving higher odds of ideal CVH, while weaker community belonging (OR, 0.67 [95% CI, 0.62–0.72]) and residing in a neighborhood with greater marginalization (OR, 0.87 [95% CI, 0.82–0.91]) and deprivation (OR, 0.67 [95% CI, 0.64–0.69]) were associated with achieving lower odds of ideal CVH.
Conclusions
Aspects of individual‐level social environment and residing in a neighborhood with a more favorable social environment were both independently and significantly associated with achieving ideal CVH.
Abstract Indian and Northern Affairs Canada (INAC) recently developed the Community Well-Being Index (CWB). This composite indicator combined census data on income, education, housing, and labour force activity to produce “well-being” scores for individual Canadian communities. INAC’s analyses of the CWB revealed a disparity in well-being between Indian reserves and other Canadian communities. This study examines,the degree to which that disparity is a function of the small size and remote locations of many reserves, as opposed to the fact that they are reserves per se. The Matching Communities 2001 (Maxim and White, 2001) analysis created by Paul Maxim
ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any references for this publication.