The geography of income distribution in Canada can be illustrated
in many different ways (refer to Income Measures: Methodological Note). Elsewhere in the Atlas, median income measures
are shown. Here, average values, derived from the 1996 Census of
Population, are mapped for males and females. In addition, the proportions
of private-household Canadians (as reported in the 1996 Census)
who fall below the low
income cut-off (LICO) values are mapped.
Health and Income Relationships
Canada does not have an official measure of poverty (Fellegi 1997).
However, many government and non-government agencies and groups
use various measures of individual or family income as a surrogate
measure of poverty. Income is widely accepted as one of the most
influential non-medical determinants of health. While the precise
mechanisms for income-health relationships are less well known,
common threads of these relationships have been identified.
- income is the single most important modifiable determinant
of health
- the link between poverty and ill-health is clear: with few exceptions,
the financially worst-off experience the highest rates of illness
and premature death
- greater income inequality within society may be associated with
increased overall mortality
- health improves at each step up the income ladder
- health improves with both a higher absolute average income and
a more even income distribution
- higher incomes somehow act as a shield against disease
Illustrations of some of these relationships can be drawn from
the 1996 to 1997 National Population Health Survey. For these analyses,
five income adequacy categories have been collapsed to three: Low
= lowest income and lower middle income; Medium = middle income;
High = upper middle income and highest income. Respondents were
asked to rate their health in terms of whether it was poor to excellent.
Figure 1 (Self-rated Health Status and Income Adequacy Classes)
indicates that Canadians generally consider that their health is
very good to excellent. Notably, this self-rated health status improves
from low to high income adequacy. That pattern is common for Canada
as a whole and by province (Figure 2 Proportion of Population Whose
Self-Rated Health Status is Very Good/Excellent by Income Adequacy
Classes).
[D] Click for larger version, 6 KB Figure 1. Self-Rated Health Status and Income Adequacy Classes
[D] Click for larger version, 13 KB Figure 2. Proportion of Population Whose Self-Rated Health Status is Very Good/Excellent by Income Adequacy Classes
This pattern is confirmed when one examines the occurrence of most
illnesses. The 1996 to 1997 National Population Health Survey asked
respondents to indicate, among other things, whether they suffered
from a chronic health condition (e.g. chronic bronchitis or emphysema,
heart disease, arthritis, diabetes). As one might expect, the highest
proportions of Canadians with chronic conditions occur in the low
income adequacy category (Figure 3 Proportion of Population with
Chronic Conditions by Income Adequacy Classes).
[D] Click for larger version, 11 KB Figure 3. Proportion of Population with Chronic Conditions by Income Adequacy Classes
|