Economics

October 2012

Communities in Boom:
Canadas Top Entrepreneurial Cities
Ted Mallett, Vice-President & Chief Economist Queenie Wong, Senior Research Analyst Simon Gaudreault, Economist

Entrepreneurs and communities are intrinsically linked. Entrepreneurs build cities and cities enable entrepreneurship. Cities get their starts humbly enough from people working with their natural surroundingsa harbour, crossroad or resource deposit. But for a few communities the spark would endure, creating urban clusters that would serve regional, national or even world markets with their goods and services. Independent businesses and start-ups are the vital sources of energy on which communities grow and flourish. This year, in CFIBs fifth annual instalment of Communities in Boom, we identify the large and mid-sized cities in Canada that have the strongest signs of entrepreneurial activity.
There is no single best way to measure the entrepreneurship quotient of cities, so CFIB combines a range of approaches to arrive at a series of scoreswith the understanding that it is still a highly simplified way of looking at communities. Numeric data in any form cannot fully identify their complex fabric or the nuanced processes undertaken daily by Canadas 2.6 million self-employed. It may seem obvious, but one of the surest signs of an entrepreneurial hot spot is the presence of a high concentration of entrepreneurs and a high business start-up rate. It is also important that business owners have high levels of optimism and success in their operations. Good public policy is also critical, so we look at the presence of supportive local government tax and regulatory policies. For cities with populations of 25,000 or more, CFIB assembled 14 indicators. Drawing from published and custom tabulated Statistics Canada sources, the index also contains direct perspectives from CFIBs membership, which numbers more than 109,000 business owners across Canada. The 14 indicators are grouped into 3 main categories: Presence is a representation of the scale and growth of business ownership, as well as its industrial diversity. Perspective covers indicators associated with optimism and growth plans. Policy represents indicators associated with the actions local governments take with respect to business taxation and regulation.

www.cfib.ca

Canadas Entrepreneurial Cities For 2012, we added two more variables to the analysis and modified the measurement methodology slightly. So for reference, we also provide recast results for 2011 to allow for proper comparisons. See page 3 for a more complete discussion of how other analysts have approached the subject, and page 4 on the specific indicators used in this study. Once beyond the top five, city scores start grouping very close together. A citys Policy score is used to break ties. But at that point, the most relevant information is the relative strengths among the three major scoring criteria. Some cities score highly because of small business presence, others because of an optimistic perspective, while others have enlightened local government policy. The analysis includes cities of very different makeup and placementlarge vs. small, isolated vs. proximate. It is helpful to break out the rankings among large (CMA) versus mid-sized (CA) cities and to look at the component strengths.

Results:
Overall scores
Top overall scores once again go to prairie cities in 2012. These places generally have the highest levels of business ownership, the most upbeat business climates and the most positive local government policy environments. Grande Prairie, Alberta, takes the top spot in 2012 with a score of 65 out of 100. Top 10 Overall scores, all cities
Score: (/100)

Big city entrepreneurial presence

Western cities clearly do well here, as do suburban areas that ring a large urban core. These diverse economies have lots of business start-ups and show above average growth in the number of business establishments. Top Presence scores, big cities
Score: (/25)

1. Grande Prairie 2. Saskatoon 3. Regina 4. Moose Jaw 5. Lloydminster 6. Red Deer 7. Prince Albert 8. Edmonton 9. Lethbridge 10. St Johns

65 64 62 61 60 60 59 59 59 57

Calgary Kelowna Edmonton Suburban Vancouver Suburban Toronto Suburban Montreal City of Vancouver

16 16 15 14 13 13 13

Saskatoon, Saskatchewan runs a close second with a score of 64, followed by Regina (62), Moose Jaw (61), Lloydminster (60) and Red Deer (60). See Table 1 on page 8 for the detailed rankings for all 103 cities1.

Big city entrepreneurial perspective

When it comes to the places where business owners are most upbeat, the list is distributed a little wider across the country. Those in Saskatchewan and Alberta are not much of a surprise, but the top five also include representation from Quebec, Newfoundland and Labrador and Northern Ontario.

The city definitions are based on Statistics Canadas Census Metropolitan Areas (CMAs) and Census Agglomerations (CAs), which cover local economic regions better than simply using municipal boundaries. There are 99 CMAs and CAs with populations above 25,000 in Canada. In addition, CFIB disaggregates CMAs in Toronto, Montreal and Vancouver into core and suburban areas, while Ottawa-Gatineau is split into its Ontario and Quebec components, which is why 103 cities are included in the 2012 rankings. Following the new
1

2011 population census, three new CMAs with a population of at least 25 000 are included in the rankings: Rivire-du-Loup, QC; Cranbrook, BC; Miramichi, NB.

Canadas Entrepreneurial Cities Top Perspective scores, big cities

Score: (/35)

Regina Quebec City Saskatoon St. Johns Calgary Sudbury

25 23 22 22 20 20

What makes an entrepreneurial city?

Just as people have sought the secrets of entrepreneurial success for themselves, others have tried to understand the characteristics and drivers of growing communities. In one sense, the two concepts could not be more different. Entrepreneurs are mobile, self directed individuals capable of changing their environment and their place in it. Communities on the other hand are the environmentdotted lines on a map, inanimate grids anchored to the ground. In another sense, though, communities take on personalities based on the activities of their residents. Residents also form a sense of belonging and loyalty that conceptually extend beyond mere placement of their foundation footings2. If we also take into consideration the fact that the majority of business relations and information channels are local, it is not surprising to note that most entrepreneurs create and operate their businesses within an hours distance of their homes.3 It is also important to note that almost anywhere one looks, there is some sort of individual entrepreneurial activity taking place. Churn is a consistent force within local economies at any point in a business cycle. The question is, are entrepreneurial acts happening in sufficient quantity to be making a difference to the economy at a neighbourhood, city or regional level. The health and growth of communities have bearing on the individuals who live and work there. Residents and those who run the local governments have assets planted in the ground in their communities. The value of those assets is dependent on the level of economic activity that happens around them. Growing communities raise property values,

Big city entrepreneurial policy

Centres where local governments are trying their hardest to support entrepreneurship and where business owners themselves rate their governments most highly include some centres from the above groups, but some others enter the top rankings for the first time. Top Policy scores, big cities
Score: (/40)

Saskatoon Regina St. Johns Thunder Bay Oshawa

29 26 26 26 26

Mid-sized city entrepreneurial presence, perspective & policy

Cities in the next tier that do well overall with respect to entrepreneurship are often associated with Canadas resource sectorsoil and gas in the western cities, the manufacturing arc of southeastern Quebec and mining in Ontario midTop 10 Overall scores, mid-sized cities
Score: (/100)

1. Grande Prairie 2. Moose Jaw 3. Lloydminster 3. Red Deer 5. Prince Albert 6. Lethbridge 7. Saint-Georges 8. Saint-Hyacinthe 9. Wood Buffalo 10. Victoriaville

65 61 60 60 59 59 57 57 55 54

See Jane Jacobs, The Death and Life of Great American Cities, Random House; 1961. 3 See Saxenian, Regional Advantage: Culture and Competition in Silicon Valley and Route 128, Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1994.

Canadas Entrepreneurial Cities utilize infrastructure more effectively and provide residents with a greater range of economic and social opportunities. Shrinking communities, however, strand peoples builtup assets. Although individuals are capable of moving to greener pastures, moves are not costless. The origins of a community usually emerge from the attributes of locationweather, a harbour, a crossroad, a natural resource nearby. People converge on that location to take advantage of the opportunitiesand the lower collective costs of meeting their needs. Communities often get their first spurt of growth from the production of goods from their nearby resources. Often it is in the production of goods and the business economies of scale that lead to community growth. Later, however, as the business service sector develops and concentrates some of these cities see further expansion as they become regional or national business centres4. Proximity to other cities can make a big difference in how a community can develop particularly among small and mid-sized centres that can take on very different characteristics depending on their distance from larger more integrated urban areas5. City boundaries and government structures are relevant, insofar that they become the basis for data collection and measurement, but they are often arbitrary or meaningless from an economic development standpoint. In some cases entrepreneurship is rooted in neighbourhood characteristics, in others it may be because of regional economic advantages6. Despite the millions of influences that affect community growth, nothing would happen if it werent for individuals making entrepreneurial decisions to hire, invest or innovate. The more of those people in a community, the stronger the growth that follows. Edward Gleasers studies7 of major US cities finds that among the many variables, including population density and industrial diversity, two dominant causes of growth were 1) high numbers of self-employed people and 2) low costs of business operations. He adds that cities provide the venues for cross-pollination of ideas, and the likelihood that someone will seize a concept from one type of industry and apply it to a completely different one in a new way. He sums up by saying that places where educated people want to live are the most likely to foster this type of ideas exchange. Education and cultural activities are also worth noting because they are commonly used as investment in community growth. Although there may positive linkages in the short term, the long-term causal relationships are not always clear. Do strong public institutions generate better cities or to strong communities generate better institutions?

CFIBs entrepreneurship index components:

All these theoretical concepts provide a rich list of potential metrics on which to measure entrepreneurial quotient of cities across Canada. In practice, however, there are relatively few available that are clear, consistent and timely. But even with the limited data, there are certainly many ways to measure the level of entrepreneurship in a municipality.

4 Duranton & Puga, From Sectoral to Funcional Urban Specialization, Journal of Urban Economics 57, 2005 343-370 5 OTSUKA, AKIHIRO. 2008. Determinants of New Firm Formation in Japan: A Comparison of the Manufacturing and Service Sectors. Economics Bulletin, vol. 18, no 4, p. 1-7. 6 Rosenthal & Strange, The Geography of Entrepreneurship in the New York Metropolitan Area, FRNBY Economic Policy Review, Dec 2005, 2953

7 See Gleaser, Triumph of the City: How Our Greatest Invention Makes Us Richer, Smarter, Healthier, and Happier, The Penguin Press; 2010

Canadas Entrepreneurial Cities The Communities in Boom rankings aim to assess the degree to which municipalities have enabled entrepreneurs and small businesses to start, grow, and prosper. In addition to using various data sources from Statistics Canada, the perspectives of small business owners are taken into consideration based on unique CFIB data. Most of the data for the following indicators are collected on a CMA/CA basis (population of 25,000 and over) based on data available from Statistics Canada. In some instances, provincial averages are derived for missing/suppressed data. Where available, more city core and urban data have been included for Toronto, Montreal, Vancouver, and Ottawa-Gatineau. As said previously, this study covers 14 indicators under three specific areas: Presence, Perspective and Policy, to assess the level of entrepreneurship in a municipality. Each of these three major concepts relies on four or five data series to arrive at an objective score. To create consistent scales, each variable is standardized to a numeric scale of 0 to 100. The city with the top data point is given 100, while the bottom data point is given a zero. The data for all other cities are then given the proportional value within that 0-100 range. The scores are then averaged and then weighted across the three major categories to arrive at a total score out of 100. municipality points to a greater proportion of business leaders, more business opportunities, increased competition, and higher employment growth. Source: Statistics Canada, July 2010June 2011 Canadian Business Patterns and Census 2011.

Self-employment as a percentage of total employment

Looking at the proportion of individuals that are self-employed is another indication of entrepreneurship. A higher percentage of selfemployed in a municipality shows that individuals are more willing to start a business in the municipality given the current environment. Source: Statistics Canada, July 2011-June 2012 Labour Force Survey.

Industry Diversity
Industry diversity measures the range of industries present in a municipality. The more diverse a municipality, the better off a municipality since there is greater variation of skills and experiences needed in the community. As a result, more opportunities are created for workers and more goods and services can be provided to consumers. Municipalities with high industry diversity tend to be more stable and have greater ease in creating and sustaining economic growth. While a municipality with rich access to natural resources can be a positive attribute, heavy reliance on one particular resource industry makes the municipality vulnerable to high unemployment rates in economic or industry-specific downturns. Such municipalities may also experience artificial high wage inflation which negatively affects surrounding businesses in other industries. Source: Statistics Canada, Census 2006.

Presence
Business establishment growth
The net change in business establishments between July 2010 and June 2011 provides the most recent look at how the number of businesses has increased. Higher net business establishment growth suggests that a municipality possesses a stronger ability to foster new or experienced entrepreneurs in the area. Source: Statistics Canada, July 2010-June 2011 Canadian Business Patterns.

Perspective
Expected future business performance
Data on small business confidence sheds light on how business owners expect to perform in the next year based on foreseeable customer demand and local economic conditions. The higher the level of business confidence, the better a municipality is at creating ideal conditions for business growth in the area.

Business establishments per capita

In addition to business establishment growth, it is also important to assess the level of entrepreneurship relative to the population size of a municipality. The higher number of business establishments per individual in a

Canadas Entrepreneurial Cities Source: CFIB Your Business Outlook Survey, aggregate results, August 2011 to July 2012. (per cent of respondents who reported that they expect their business to perform Much better or Somewhat better in the next 12 months)

Life Satisfaction
Life satisfaction is a proxy for quality of life which can have a significant effect on business growth. People tend to be happier and more motivated in areas that are more urban. It is assumed that the higher the percentage of individuals in a municipality who are satisfied or very satisfied with life, the greater likelihood that individuals would be willing to take on new ventures (e.g. starting up a business) and the greater likelihood that residents would be involved in the community. International measures of life satisfaction have been shown to correlate with higher levels of intergenerational income mobility. Source: Statistics Canada, 2011 Canadian Community Health Survey.

Future full-time hiring expectations

Firms in need of workers on a permanent basis demonstrate that business is exhibiting signs of long term growth. A greater percentage of businesses that plan on hiring more full-time workers in the next three to four months is further indication that a municipality is in a stronger position to grow. Source: CFIB Your Business Outlook Survey, aggregate results, August 2011 to July 2012. (per cent of respondents who are hiring in next three to four months)

Overall State of Business

Current business performance can be attributed to the environment present in a municipality. Municipalities with a higher percentage of business owners in a good state show greater strength in creating a business friendly environment. Source: CFIB Your Business Outlook Survey, aggregate results, August 2011 to July 2012. (% respondents who reported that the general situation of their company is Good)

Policy
Cost of local government
Many businesses are concerned about how government spending can affect taxes in the long run because a heavy tax burden increase operating costs and reduce the businesses chances of succeeding. The higher the cost of government, the greater the pressure put on tax revenues. A higher percentage of businesses citing the cost of government as a concerning issue would suggest that a municipality is doing less to control spending and keep taxes at an overall reasonable level. Source: CFIB, Our Members Opinions Survey, July 2011 to June 2012. (% respondents who indicate cost of local government as a major concern for their business)

Commercial, Industrial and Institutional Building Permits

The number of building permits as a proportion of population in a municipality is able to capture the breadth of new building projects by existing businesses. The greater number of building permits per 1,000 capita, the stronger the municipality is at attracting business investment. Dollar amounts of building permits are also available, but we choose not to use them because the skew toward megaprojects. Source: Statistics Canada, Investment, Science and Technology Division, May 2011-May 2012, custom tabulation and Census 2011.

Local government tax balance

The most important issue to small business owners is total tax burden as it affects businesses bottom line and impedes business growth. Property tax is one of the most burdensome types of taxes for small businesses. The total property tax rate includes municipal, education, and other applicable tax rates for commercial businesses. The higher the ratio of the commercial property tax rate to the residential property tax rate, the worse off a municipality is in bringing fair taxation to commercial businesses. Source: Various municipal and

Canadas Entrepreneurial Cities provincial governments. (ratio of commercial property tax rate to the residential tax rate) local government has subscribed to the BizPal program, which aggregates all regulatory requirements of federal, provincial and municipal governments to a single point of contact)

Local government sensitivity to local businesses

Business owners expect their local governments to be aware of their contributions to society and to help provide a sound environment for growth. The higher the percentage of business owners who feel that their local government is aware of the small business sector, the more likely that the local government is taking concrete actions to promote the sector and the more likely that the business will stay in operation and feel engaged in the community. Source: CFIB, Our Members Opinions Survey, July 2011 to June 2012. (% respondents who give a Good rating to their local government on Awareness of small business)

Variables not in the analysis

Other factors not included in the study can also influence the level of entrepreneurship in a municipality. Unfortunately these have not been measured on a basis consistently or objectively enough to enter into CFIBs analysis. Examples of these factors include but are not limited to urbanization, social environment, education, and innovation. Agglomeration: Entrepreneurship tends to thrive on the edges of larger cities. Research has shown the positive impact of agglomeration on entrepreneurship. Firms in the same industry can choose to locate themselves in close proximity of each other to benefit from similar skilled labor, technology, or information abundant in the area. As a result of denser urban areas, there can be an increased need for goods and services. Large cities not only attract new residents but also provide new opportunities for aspiring business owners. Social Environment: Ideas and information are often created and shared under specific social environments. To capture this effect, it may be insightful to look at the concentration of establishments that help promote the entrepreneurial culture. Ideally, the number of business establishments in food services, arts, entertainment, recreation, information technology, fashion or other innovative industries can be examined as a percentage of total business establishments. Education: Municipalities with a higher proportion of educated workers have an advantage. Especially among self-employed individuals, educated individuals have the ability to innovate and test out new ideas. It can be assumed that the greater percentage of self-employed individuals with higher education (i.e. bachelor degree), the greater ability in being able to start and sustain a business.

Local government regulations

Regulatory burden is the second most important issue for small business owners as it bears high costs to business owners in terms of time and money. The higher the proportion of business owners who cite regulatory burden as an issue, the worse off municipalities are in creating a sound environment for businesses. Source: CFIB, Our Members Opinions Survey, July 2011 to June 2012. (% respondents who indicate government regulation and paperburden as a major concern for their business)

BizPal
BizPal is an online source of information for permits and licences that may be required to start and grow a business. With the increased usage of BizPal, businesses have a higher likelihood of succeeding if given the right information. There are areas that BizPal can improve on to better serve small businesses. While BizPal may not be a perfect solution for all businesses, it can be a good source for a business to refer to when first starting out. Hence, municipalities are given partial scores even if they have not registered with BizPal to date. Municipalities that have registered with BizPal are allocated full scores. Source: BizPal website http://www.bizpal.ca/en/. (whether

Canadas Entrepreneurial Cities Innovation: There are numerous ways to measure innovation, but none are perfect. One method is to consider the percentage of people in the labour force with skills in natural and applied sciences. Workers in these fields have the knowledge required to come up with new ideas for products and services in the marketplace. The more innovation present in a municipality, the stronger a municipality is in promoting entrepreneurship.

Canadas Entrepreneurial Cities

Table 1: Entrepreneurial 2012 City Entrepreneurial Index: All Rankings, 2012

2012 Rank 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 Grande Prairie Saskatoon Regina Moose Jaw Lloydminster Red Deer Prince Albert Edmonton Lethbridge St. John's Saint-Georges Saint-Hyacinthe Calgary Wood Buffalo Victoriaville Sudbury Qubec Alma Shawinigan Drummondville Val-d'Or Saguenay Sault Ste. Marie Toronto, excl. City Rivire-du-Loup Miramichi Brandon Granby Sherbrooke Rouyn-Noranda Kelowna Joliette Charlottetown Orillia Corner Brook Prince George Salaberry-de-Valleyfield Kentville Timmins Fredericton Trois-Rivires Penticton Parksville Baie-Comeau Moncton Sorel-Tracy Rimouski Saint-Jean-sur-Richelieu Kawartha Lakes London Abbotsford Vernon Guelph Bathurst V. Strong Overall Score 0-100 65 64 62 61 60 60 59 59 59 57 57 57 57 55 54 54 54 53 53 53 53 53 52 52 52 52 52 52 52 52 52 52 51 51 51 51 51 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 49 49 49 49 48 48 Presence 0-25 17 13 11 12 13 12 11 15 15 9 11 12 16 10 11 10 11 11 11 12 10 10 11 13 11 11 12 10 11 11 16 13 11 12 10 12 10 9 10 9 11 14 14 7 9 9 10 11 9 10 12 14 9 9 Moderate Relative Strengths Perspective Policy 0-35 0-40 23 25 22 29 25 26 19 30 18 29 21 27 18 30 19 25 19 25 22 26 21 25 22 23 20 21 21 24 18 25 20 24 23 20 17 25 17 25 16 25 20 23 23 20 14 27 15 24 18 23 18 23 17 23 20 22 19 22 19 22 14 22 18 21 14 26 13 26 16 25 14 25 18 23 16 25 15 25 17 24 15 24 13 23 13 23 21 22 19 22 19 22 18 22 17 22 15 25 16 23 14 23 13 22 15 24 16 23 Modest Weak 2012 Rank 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 Halifax St. Catharines - Niagara Campbell River Fort St. John Thetford Mines Sept-les Montral, excl. City Thunder Bay Chatham-Kent Brantford Port Alberni Chilliwack Hamilton Winnipeg Kamloops Peterborough Montral, City Windsor Ottawa Vancouver, excl. City New Glasgow Leamington Truro Saint John Owen Sound Victoria Barrie Toronto, City Midland Kingston Brockville Kitchener Nanaimo Medicine Hat Oshawa Cranbrook Stratford Courtenay Cape Breton Vancouver, City Belleville Cornwall Gatineau Duncan Woodstock Norfolk North Bay Centre Wellington Sarnia Overall Score 0-100 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 47 47 47 47 47 47 47 47 47 47 46 46 46 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 44 44 44 44 44 44 43 43 42 42 41 41 40 40 40 39 39 38 38 38 34 Presence 0-25 10 11 12 14 10 10 13 9 6 9 10 12 11 11 14 12 12 9 10 14 9 7 9 11 11 12 10 13 7 9 12 9 10 11 9 13 10 12 8 13 7 6 9 12 9 8 7 6 7 Relative Strengths Perspective Policy 0-35 0-40 15 23 14 23 15 21 13 21 18 20 18 20 15 20 12 26 16 25 14 24 13 24 11 24 13 23 14 22 11 22 16 19 19 16 12 25 13 23 15 17 13 23 16 22 14 22 12 22 13 21 13 20 16 19 13 19 12 25 10 25 8 24 12 23 11 23 10 23 8 26 11 19 9 23 13 17 9 24 10 18 9 24 12 22 14 17 8 19 12 18 5 25 9 22 12 20 10 17

Strong

Canadas Entrepreneurial Cities

10

Table 2: Data, Source Data, 2012

Area(3) Change in estab. Estab. per capita Selfempl. share of total empl. % Industry Diversity Number of Building Permits Per Capita Per 1000 Next 12mth Business Expectations ="Stronger" % response Increase in FT Hiring Expectations Overall State of Business ="Good" % response Life Satisfaction (Very Satisfied or Satisfied) % response Cost of Local Government a Concern Government Awareness of Small Business ="Good" % response Regulation & Paper Burden a Concern % response Local Property Tax Gap Bizpal

Per 1000

Abbotsford (B.C.) Alma (Que.) Baie-Comeau (Que.) Barrie (Ont.) Bathurst (N.B.) Belleville (Ont.) Brandon (Man.) Brantford (Ont.) Brockville (Ont.) Calgary (Alta.) Campbell River (B.C.) Cape Breton (N.S.) Centre Wellington (Ont.) Charlottetown (P.E.I.) Chatham-Kent (Ont.) Chilliwack (B.C.) Corner Brook (N.L.) Cornwall (Ont.) Courtenay (B.C.) Cranbrook (B.C.) Drummondville (Que.) Duncan (B.C.) Edmonton (Alta.) Fort St. John (B.C.) Fredericton (N.B.) Gatineau CMA Granby (Que.) Grande Prairie (Alta.) Sudbury (Ont.) Guelph (Ont.) Halifax (N.S.) Hamilton (Ont.) Joliette (Que.) Kamloops (B.C.) Kawartha Lakes (Ont.) Kelowna (B.C.) Kentville (N.S.) Kingston (Ont.) Kitchener (Ont.) Leamington (Ont.) Lethbridge (Alta.) Lloydminster (Alta./Sask.) London (Ont.) Medicine Hat (Alta.) Midland (Ont.) Miramichi (N.B.) Moncton (N.B.) Montral CSD Montral Rest of CMA Moose Jaw (Sask.) Nanaimo (B.C.) New Glasgow (N.S.) Norfolk (Ont.) North Bay (Ont.)

CMA CA CA CMA CA CA CA CMA CA CMA CA CA CA CA CA CA CA CA CA CA CA CA CMA CA CA CMA CA CA CMA CMA CMA CMA CA CA CA CMA CA CMA CMA CA CA CA CMA CA CA CA CMA CMA CMA CA CA CA CA CA

3.99 5.19 -0.91 -0.95 -2.65 -2.96 3.43 -0.68 4.64 2.31 2.04 -1.57 -10.12 0.54 -6.90 2.19 -0.19 -8.48 -3.22 2.16 2.66 0.09 2.30 2.74 -1.07 1.31 4.98 7.68 1.41 0.92 0.86 0.10 5.11 7.52 -6.91 4.06 -1.50 -1.20 0.67 -0.22 4.00 -1.64 -0.74 0.87 -5.85 0.70 1.60 1.77 1.77 6.26 -2.56 1.06 0.90 -6.73

4.75 4.05 3.41 3.69 3.18 3.12 3.91 3.43 3.12 7.70 6.11 2.41 3.50 4.64 3.68 3.89 3.80 2.78 4.79 5.48 4.19 5.15 6.25 9.37 4.20 3.80 4.13 11.98 3.36 4.13 4.35 3.90 4.43 5.23 3.02 6.24 4.23 3.11 4.05 3.57 5.86 8.97 3.82 6.35 3.23 3.06 4.07 4.59 4.59 3.80 4.67 3.21 3.74 3.29

7.21 5.67 4.17 5.14 4.17 1.51 5.08 4.91 5.97 8.93 6.98 4.61 5.97 5.51 4.63 6.55 4.59 2.93 6.98 6.72 9.84 6.98 7.62 6.98 4.61 3.85 5.39 8.12 3.25 4.46 4.67 6.28 5.67 5.26 7.34 8.77 4.61 4.56 4.21 5.97 7.94 8.12 3.43 5.52 5.97 4.39 2.44 6.32 6.32 4.35 5.03 3.55 6.11 4.35

% deviation from average 10.60 9.10 14.52 4.00 0.71 1.79 1.53 10.23 3.16 3.01 9.02 6.27 12.50 4.99 13.40 6.36 4.42 2.58 0.84 2.38 14.64 4.25 1.92 13.62 7.10 8.55 16.08 13.96 0.04 9.31 8.55 3.01 2.46 0.25 7.69 3.09 6.50 7.67 9.49 24.22 3.38 12.63 2.31 10.82 11.54 0.06 6.80 4.25 0.69 1.79 2.50 4.73 19.76 6.38

% response

% response

0.98 2.79 4.72 2.55 2.54 2.36 2.84 1.74 2.54 2.61 1.05 1.08 4.16 3.89 2.61 1.64 3.53 2.80 1.87 1.68 3.45 2.52 2.04 2.43 3.32 1.82 2.93 4.65 2.30 1.57 2.26 1.93 2.47 1.63 2.44 3.58 4.67 2.85 2.14 3.48 2.23 2.82 2.40 2.21 4.43 3.49 2.65 1.63 1.63 1.16 2.17 1.51 0.13 2.42

56 42 42 52 45 42 44 50 22 58 46 35 42 31 49 46 38 42 30 46 39 31 57 46 47 38 50 58 64 48 43 42 42 46 42 48 43 33 44 45 45 55 40 25 38 45 55 51 41 49 42 35 24 29

28 15 15 24 13 12 20 25 6 29 15 10 15 13 22 15 18 15 15 15 15 3 30 15 18 5 15 55 24 14 16 14 15 9 15 14 12 10 21 20 24 26 15 7 13 13 18 30 15 22 14 10 10 15

33 51 51 39 37 33 43 43 36 43 34 38 37 40 41 34 52 33 34 34 33 24 43 34 43 41 51 52 56 43 38 39 51 34 37 29 33 44 44 43 49 43 43 28 29 37 50 49 46 58 23 38 21 29

89.8 93.5 95.8 90.9 94.9 88.0 93.2 88.9 91.4 93.3 95.7 90.5 88.0 93.5 92.0 89.8 91.2 91.1 95.7 89.9 95.0 91.9 92.5 92.0 92.8 95.1 94.6 89.3 90.2 93.0 93.3 92.4 94.4 90.5 93.9 92.2 93.7 88.4 87.2 91.1 93.9 91.2 93.6 93.9 90.9 96.3 93.5 93.1 93.5 93.0 91.9 94.8 91.6 90.2

80 15 0 55 13 31 51 46 45 65 80 53 67 22 47 56 37 41 79 79 21 58 42 91 26 84 26 51 32 39 37 55 65 54 58 69 54 49 61 62 51 20 56 61 71 41 48 59 44 6 65 63 47 41

7 8 10 2 3 23 0 6 13 6 4 3 7 3 7 3 1 37 2 24 22 4 10 0 4 2 5 0 4 5 3 3 13 7 8 5 9 31 5 19 7 13 6 3 14 9 9 5 13 6 11 2 9 11

58 32 100 84 62 12 72 60 67 60 71 56 72 44 48 68 40 73 67 81 57 54 58 77 62 99 66 80 61 74 62 74 70 83 77 76 55 72 67 70 71 48 71 80 72 57 53 76 76 15 68 78 60 54

Commercial rate / Residential rate 2.619 1.942 1.949 2.119 3.468 2.610 2.481 2.649 2.645 3.551 2.849 2.482 2.005 2.401 2.537 2.293 2.755 2.560 3.001 2.716 1.863 2.851 2.473 2.642 3.010 2.281 2.055 1.626 2.686 2.668 3.006 2.509 1.862 2.825 2.046 2.617 2.409 2.672 2.814 1.733 2.143 1.820 2.740 2.262 1.925 3.486 3.553 3.440 2.727 1.973 2.737 2.418 2.589 2.401

1= Yes

1 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 0

Canadas Entrepreneurial Cities

Area(3) Change in estab. Estab. per capita Selfempl. share of total empl. % Industry Diversity Number of Building Permits Per Capita Per 1000 Next 12mth Business Expectations ="Stronger" % response Increase in FT Hiring Expectations Overall State of Business ="Good" % response Life Satisfaction (Very Satisfied or Satisfied) % response Cost of Local Government a Concern Government Awareness of Small Business ="Good" % response Regulation & Paper Burden a Concern % response Local Property Tax Gap

11
Bizpal

Per 1000

Orillia (Ont.) Oshawa (Ont.) Ottawa CMA Owen Sound (Ont.) Parksville (B.C.) Penticton (B.C.) Peterborough (Ont.) Port Alberni (B.C.) Prince Albert (Sask.) Prince George (B.C.) Qubec (Que.) Red Deer (Alta.) Regina (Sask.) Rimouski (Que.) Rivire-du-Loup (Que.) Rouyn-Noranda (Que.) Saguenay (Que.) Saint John (N.B.) Saint-Georges (Que.) Saint-Hyacinthe (Que.) Saint-Jean-sur-Richelieu (Que.) Salaberry-de-Valleyfield (Que.) Sarnia (Ont.) Saskatoon (Sask.) Sault Ste. Marie (Ont.) Sept-les (Que.) Shawinigan (Que.) Sherbrooke (Que.) Sorel-Tracy (Que.) St. Catharines - Niagara (Ont.) St. John's (N.L.) Stratford (Ont.) Thetford Mines (Que.) Thunder Bay (Ont.) Timmins (Ont.) Toronto CSD Toronto Rest of CMA Trois-Rivires (Que.) Truro (N.S.) Val-d'Or (Que.) Vancouver CSD Vancouver Rest of CMA Vernon (B.C.) Victoria (B.C.) Victoriaville (Que.) Windsor (Ont.) Winnipeg (Man.) Wood Buffalo (Alta.) Woodstock (Ont.)

CA CMA CMA CA CA CA CMA CA CA CA CMA CA CMA CA CA CA CMA CMA CA CA CA CA CA CMA CA CA CA CMA CA CMA CMA CA CA CMA CA CMA CMA CMA CA CA CMA CMA CA CMA CA CMA CMA CA CA

0.39 0.75 1.31 1.57 1.24 4.69 1.78 0.72 6.07 -0.75 3.94 2.04 4.86 3.23 1.23 1.66 0.33 3.35 5.94 2.86 1.18 1.13 -0.74 3.67 3.25 1.37 -0.40 2.35 0.77 -0.61 0.58 0.36 0.85 -2.13 0.35 -0.28 -0.28 3.27 -3.99 -0.99 2.71 2.71 3.97 2.35 2.41 -0.04 1.36 7.46 -1.41

4.37 2.60 3.80 3.44 5.57 5.54 3.50 3.84 3.65 4.56 3.89 6.86 4.29 3.89 4.45 3.51 3.04 3.79 5.15 5.26 3.63 3.58 3.29 4.79 2.91 3.63 3.20 3.91 3.28 3.60 4.03 4.46 4.22 3.66 3.29 5.70 5.70 3.52 3.52 4.22 5.99 5.99 5.67 5.33 5.68 3.60 3.79 3.29 4.06

5.97 3.40 5.54 5.97 6.98 6.98 5.24 6.98 3.60 6.25 4.17 4.95 4.79 3.69 5.13 4.37 3.84 3.89 5.67 5.67 6.63 5.67 1.72 5.10 4.89 3.85 7.43 4.98 5.67 5.11 4.02 5.97 5.67 3.74 5.97 7.12 7.12 4.12 4.61 4.37 7.05 7.05 7.69 6.66 5.67 5.40 4.30 8.12 6.00

% deviation from average 2.37 4.18 10.85 2.98 0.44 4.55 0.65 11.27 3.80 3.05 5.87 9.03 6.53 8.18 5.74 3.02 2.41 2.01 14.22 8.35 5.17 8.54 5.90 0.56 1.29 3.35 7.05 3.08 11.37 2.06 6.99 9.61 8.93 3.58 5.76 3.50 1.65 4.19 4.24 4.42 7.79 2.37 4.97 8.20 11.78 9.52 2.45 25.42 12.16

% response

% response

2.48 1.43 1.79 4.89 1.44 3.45 3.77 1.14 2.48 1.44 3.60 2.72 2.70 3.67 3.17 3.71 2.69 2.65 5.17 7.06 1.37 2.60 1.45 3.19 5.31 1.83 0.98 2.15 3.27 2.08 4.98 3.76 2.04 1.86 2.64 1.97 1.97 4.01 2.38 4.78 2.58 2.58 2.17 2.79 2.52 1.82 1.80 9.61 2.57

42 36 40 31 46 48 38 46 42 36 44 69 61 42 42 42 59 42 42 42 42 42 38 57 38 42 42 48 42 45 42 28 42 46 42 42 45 29 35 42 44 47 46 48 42 41 45 55 29

15 5 17 13 15 16 11 15 22 19 20 30 32 15 15 15 26 8 15 15 15 15 11 23 15 15 15 20 15 15 34 5 15 14 15 15 20 5 9 15 13 17 15 10 15 16 21 26 12

37 28 38 22 34 19 42 34 58 38 64 46 62 51 51 51 63 28 51 51 51 51 32 60 37 51 51 51 51 42 57 28 51 31 37 32 34 48 54 51 34 38 34 32 51 36 43 43 50

90.9 91.4 92.4 95.0 91.9 92.2 94.2 93.0 92.7 94.3 95.3 91.2 94.3 93.4 93.4 94.4 93.5 93.6 95.5 94.6 94.6 94.6 91.1 92.6 91.1 95.8 95.0 94.2 94.6 91.7 93.3 91.6 95.5 91.4 93.5 93.2 93.2 95.0 92.3 94.4 88.8 92.3 92.2 91.9 95.0 91.1 90.1 89.3 90.6

35 28 57 64 81 73 51 82 46 71 32 32 51 3 37 8 38 37 4 27 37 16 91 46 20 37 5 36 21 67 20 57 35 27 49 65 40 12 70 0 67 74 79 82 26 47 51 50 76

8 1 4 4 3 5 3 9 51 5 5 11 7 2 10 0 14 7 6 2 10 4 7 38 8 10 4 4 11 5 1 9 2 6 4 3 9 7 1 0 0 6 8 8 25 7 8 3 10

57 60 63 100 48 74 66 69 39 48 71 64 66 93 76 92 88 69 64 52 76 50 97 61 54 76 55 73 66 80 49 78 89 57 60 67 68 61 90 91 54 67 77 62 81 59 66 84 81

Commercial rate / Residential rate 2.356 2.014 2.705 2.727 2.717 2.185 2.501 2.172 2.325 2.122 2.729 1.799 1.908 1.870 1.561 1.732 2.387 3.448 1.340 1.955 2.048 2.230 2.391 1.813 2.357 2.738 1.680 1.835 2.244 2.361 2.405 2.711 2.194 2.371 2.200 4.126 2.143 1.664 2.523 1.683 4.454 3.759 2.677 3.411 1.460 2.505 3.162 2.176 2.600

1= Yes

1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 1 0

Notes: 1) For Montreal, Toronto, and Vancouver, CMA data for Net Business Start-ups, Businesses per Capita, and Self-employment Intensity were applied to city cores and outskirts. 2) For Ottawa and Gatineau, Ottawa-Gatineau CMA data for Net Business Start-ups and Businesses per Capita were applied. 3) A census metropolitan area (CMA) or a census agglomeration (CA) is formed by one or more adjacent municipalities centred on a large urban area (known as the urban core). A CMA must have a total population of at least 100,000 of which 50,000 or more must live in the urban core. A CA must have an urban core population of at least 10,000. To be included in the CMA or CA, other adjacent municipalities must have a high degree of integration with the central urban area, as measured by commuting flows derived from census place of work data. Source: Statistics Canada. 4) The total property tax rates used include municipal, education, and other applicable levies on downtown properties.

Canadas Entrepreneurial Cities

Appendix: City Entrepreneurial Index: All Rankings, 2011

2011 Rank

Overall Score 0-100 65 64 62 62 61 61 59 58 58 58 58 58 56 56 56 56 56 55 54 54 54 53 53 53 53 53 53 53 52 52 52 52 52 52 52 51 51 51 51 51 51 51 50 50 50 50 50 50 49 49 49 49 49 49 49 49 49 48 48 47 47 47 47 47 47 47 47 Presence 0-25 17 13 12 12 12 13 11 11 12 10 14 11 11 10 11 13 16 16 10 10 11 9 10 11 10 10 11 11 11 9 13 10 14 14 16 9 10 14 7 11 13 9 10 8 9 10 9 10 9 11 9 9 10 12 10 13 14 7 11 7 9 10 10 9 10 10 11

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67

Grande Prairie Saskatoon Moose Jaw Regina Prince Albert Lloydminster Saint-Georges Charlottetown Red Deer Wood Buffalo Edmonton Trois-Rivires Victoriaville St. John's Alma Joliette Kelowna Lethbridge Drummondville Sudbury Rivire-du-Loup Val-d'Or Prince George Saint-Jean-sur-Richelieu Rimouski Shawinigan Saint-Hyacinthe Qubec Brandon Rouyn-Noranda Toronto, excl. City Thetford Mines Fort St. John Kamloops Calgary Moncton Salaberry-de-Valleyfield Penticton Baie-Comeau Sherbrooke Montral, excl. City Saguenay Oshawa Corner Brook Thunder Bay Port Alberni Sorel-Tracy Sept-les Sault Ste. Marie Orillia Fredericton Kitchener Guelph Campbell River Stratford Vernon Vancouver, excl. City Belleville Medicine Hat Chatham-Kent Kentville Nanaimo London Halifax Winnipeg Hamilton Miramichi

Relative Strengths Perspective 0-35 24 21 21 22 20 19 21 19 19 23 19 23 19 21 20 19 18 15 19 19 19 18 18 17 19 19 21 23 16 19 15 19 15 15 17 19 18 14 22 18 17 22 13 17 16 15 17 19 13 12 16 17 16 14 17 14 17 15 14 15 13 14 14 16 15 15 14

2011 Rank Policy 0-40 24 30 29 28 29 29 27 28 27 25 25 24 26 25 25 24 22 24 25 25 24 26 25 25 24 24 21 19 25 24 24 23 23 23 19 23 23 23 22 22 21 20 27 25 25 25 24 21 27 26 24 23 23 23 22 22 18 26 23 25 25 23 23 22 22 22 22

Overall Score 0-100 47 47 46 46 46 46 46 45 45 45 45 45 44 44 44 44 44 44 44 43 43 43 43 42 42 42 42 42 42 42 41 40 38 38 36 34 Presence 0-25 14 9 9 11 12 11 11 7 10 12 12 12 8 9 8 10 11 11 14 7 10 6 12 12 6 8 8 12 13 9 12 7 6 9 7 7

68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103

Parksville Granby Ottawa St. Catharines - Niagara Abbotsford Owen Sound Barrie Kawartha Lakes Bathurst Saint John Victoria Montral, City Cape Breton Windsor Kingston Timmins Chilliwack Peterborough Cranbrook Midland New Glasgow Centre Wellington Toronto, City Brockville Cornwall Truro Brantford Courtenay Vancouver, City Woodstock Duncan North Bay Leamington Gatineau Norfolk Sarnia

Relative Strengths Perspective 0-35 11 17 14 12 12 15 16 12 12 12 13 17 12 11 13 12 11 15 12 12 9 16 13 5 13 11 11 12 11 16 11 11 9 12 5 9

Policy 0-40 22 21 23 23 22 20 19 26 23 21 20 16 24 24 23 22 22 18 18 24 24 21 18 25 23 23 23 18 18 17 18 22 23 17 24 18