New research from economist and SCP Fellow Gillian Petit, PhD, JD, explains why GDP per capita is a poor measure of economic performance and economic well-being. Using changes in GDP per capita as evidence of either improving or deteriorating economic well-being is poor economics, poor public policy and poor reasoning.
Main messages
- The statistic “GDP per capita” has been used by some Canadian commentators as a summary measure to make sweeping claims about the state of the Canadian economy. However, this is misleading. Canada’s GDP per capita should not be used as if it were the sole indicator of economic well-being.
- Many conclude that low growth in GDP per capita over the past decade suggests that Canada’s economic growth has been low. But that is untrue. Canada’s economic growth has been on par or ahead of peer countries. Growth in GDP per capita, however, has been decreased by a high growth in temporary residents, like temporary foreign workers and international students. This is an arithmetic quirk of GDP per capita.
- This paper estimates what our GDP per capita growth would have been if Canada’s intake of temporary residents was more in line with recent historical norms. It also estimates the impact on GDP per capita growth in the coming years as a result simply of lowering our intake of temporary residents. Under both scenarios, Canada’s GDP per capita growth would have looked—and will look—very much like our peers.
Read the related article by Matthew Mendelsohn and Dan Skilleter.
Share with a friend
Related reading
New research on the Big Banks and the businesses left behind
The productivity, resilience, inclusive growth and economic sovereignty objectives Canada is trying to achieve are not independent of its financing system. Canada ranks second-worst in the G7 as a place to be an entrepreneur, with 55 per cent of small-business owners saying they would not recommend starting a business here right now. A new SCP report by Michelle Arnold argues that this is not a reflection of the limits of our entrepreneurs, but the limits of our lenders - when it comes to SME financing, what the Big Banks can do is limited by how they're structured. If we want a stronger economy that works for workers, communities and small businesses, we need a financial system diverse enough to serve them.
Built to Exclude: Why Canada’s enterprises need a different kind of financing | Report
Canada's enterprise financing system is dominated by big banks that control 93% of banking assets and nearly 80% of SME lending. While stable and respected, they have structural constraints—minimum deal sizes, rigid credit models, collateral requirements—that systematically stop them from lending to a range of viable businesses. The SMEs left behind include businesses looking for small loans, seasonal enterprises, non-profits, cooperatives and rural firms. If we continue to undercapitalize SMEs trying to get off the ground or grow, this will have cascading economic and social consequences. Canada needs alternative financing institutions that operate alongside commercial banking as permanent, scaled infrastructure.
👏 Letting the big W sink in
In the Spring Economic Update, the federal government moved to make the legislative structure and tax incentive for Employee Ownership Trusts (EOTs) permanent. This is amazing news! At Social Capital Partners, we are grateful that the government has made these changes. Thanks to Prime Minister Mark Carney, François-Philippe Champagne and Ryan Turnbull for understanding the importance of employee ownership. This and more all in one funny-but-factual biweekly read.