The$Effect$of$Innovation$on$Income$Inequality$in$...
Transcript of The$Effect$of$Innovation$on$Income$Inequality$in$...
-
The$Effect$of$Innovation$on$Income$Inequality$in$
Canadian$Cities$
by$
Hamidreza$Bakhtiarizadeh$
M.A.Sc.,'University'of'British'Columbia,'2015'B.Sc.,'Sharif'University'of'Technology,'2011'
Research'Project'Submitted'in'Partial'Fulfillment'of'the'
Requirements'for'the'Degree'of''
Master'of'Urban'Studies'
in'the''
Urban'Studies'Program'
Faculty'of'Arts'and'Social'Sciences'
©$Hamidreza$Bakhtiarizadeh$2016$
SIMON$FRASER$UNIVERSITY$$
Spring$2016$
'' '
-
'
ii'
Approval$
Name:$ Hamidreza$Bakhtiarizadeh$
Degree:$ Master$of$Urban$Studies$
Title:$ The$Effect$of$Innovation$on$Income$Inequality$in$Canadian$Cities$
Examining$Committee:$ Chair:' Meg'Holden''''''''''''''Associate'Professor,'Urban'Studies'Program'and'
Department'of'Geography'
Peter$V.$Hall$Senior'Supervisor'Professor'Urban'Studies'Program'and'Department'of'Geography'
'
Karen$Ferguson$Supervisor'Professor'Urban'Studies'Program'and'Department'of'History'
'
Sébastien$Breau$'External'Examiner'Associate'Professor'Department'of'Geography''McGill'University''
'
$
$
Date$Defended/Approved:$
'
'
January'7,'2016''
'
'
-
'
iii'
Abstract$
This' research' explores' the' effect' of' innovation' on' income' inequality' in' Canadian'
metropolitan'areas'from'1991'to'2011.'The'analysis'has'been'done'through'regression'
analyses'on'the'income'and'employment'data'obtained'from'long'form'Canadian'census'
and'National'Household'Survey'microRdata.'The'results'show'that'the'positive'correlation'
between' innovation'and' income' inequality' in'Canadian'cityRregions'grew' from'2001' to'
2011T'however,'there'was'no'correlation'between'them'in'1990s.'Among'three'parameters'
that' were' used' as' a' measure' of' innovation' in' this' research' (ratio' of' employment' in'
KnowledgeRIntensive' Business' Services' (KIBS),' highRtech' occupations' and' highRtech'
industries),' the' ratio'of' employment' in'KIBS'has' the'most' significant' effect.'Moreover,'
cities' with' a' high' rate' of' KIBS' activities' have' a' higher' level' of' withinRindustry' income'
inequality,'that'is,'between'highRtech'occupations'and'other'employees'within'the'same'
industry.'
'
Keywords:'' InnovationT'income'inequalityT'knowledge'intensive'business'servicesT'Metropolitan'areaT'Canada.''
-
'
iv'
Acknowledgements$
By'God’s'will,'aid'and'support'the'completion'of'this'thesis'has'become'a'reality.'
I'would'like'to'acknowledge'the'help'of'those'without'whom'I'could'not'have'finished'this'
work.'Firstly,'my'deepest'gratitude'goes'to'my'senior'supervisor,'Peter'V.'Hall,'who'was'
available' to' discuss' any' and' all' elements' of' the' research' process,' and' patience'
throughout' this'work.'He'was'always'available' to' discuss'any'and'all' elements' of' the'
research'process.'I'would'also'thank'Anthony'Perl'and'Meg'Holden'for'all'I'have'learned'
from'them,'and'Terri'Evans'for'her'support,'during'the'course'of'my'studies.'
This'research'would'not'have'been'possible'without'the'generous'support'I'received'from'
Simon'Fraser'University'and'particularly'the'Urban'Studies'Program.'
I'would'also' thank'Research'Data'Centre'staffs,'Lee'Grenon'and'Lisa'Oliver,' for' their'
guidance'in'the'process'of'data'collection'for'this'research.'
Finally,'my'special'thanks'are'due'to'my'mother,'father'and'sister'for'all'their'supports.'
Most'of'all,' I'would' like' to' thank'my' lovely'wife,'Ghazal,' for'her'patience'and'sacrifice'
throughout'my'studies'as'her'words'of'kindness'and'support'were'my'constant'source'of'
motivation.''
-
'
v'
Table$of$Contents$
Approval'................................................................................................................'ii!Abstract'.................................................................................................................'iii!Acknowledgements'..............................................................................................'iv!Table'of'Contents'..................................................................................................'v!List'of'Tables'........................................................................................................'ix!List'of'Figures'.......................................................................................................'xi!List'of'Acronyms'...................................................................................................'xii!
Chapter$1.! Introduction$and$Thesis$Outline$..................................................$1!
Chapter$2.! Innovation,$Inequality$and$Mutual$Effects$..................................$4!2.1.! Innovation'.....................................................................................................'4!
2.1.1.! Geography'of'Innovation'.................................................................'4!2.1.2.! Innovation'Definition'and'Measures'................................................'6!
2.2.! Inequality'....................................................................................................'11!2.2.1.! Urban'Inequality'............................................................................'11!2.2.2.! Inequality'Measure'........................................................................'13!
2.3.! Relationship'between'Innovation'and'Income'Inequality'...........................'14!2.4.! Effect'of'Inequality'on'Innovation'...............................................................'18!2.5.! Patent'Policy'and'Capital'Income'Inequality'..............................................'20!
Chapter$3.! Methodology$................................................................................$22!3.1.! Census'Metropolitan'Areas'and'Census'Agglomerations'Boundaries'.......'23!3.2.! Innovation'Measure'....................................................................................'26!3.3.! Inequality'Measure'.....................................................................................'28!3.4.! Analysis'......................................................................................................'29!
3.4.1.! Control'Variables'...........................................................................'30!Economic'Variables'...................................................................................'30!SocioRdemographic'Variables'....................................................................'31!Institutional'Variables'.................................................................................'31!Geographical'Variables'..............................................................................'32!
3.4.2.! Multivariate'Regression'.................................................................'33!
Chapter$4.! Descriptive$Statistics$..................................................................$36!4.1.! Inequality'....................................................................................................'36!
4.1.1.! NationalRlevel'inequality'................................................................'36!4.1.2.! CMA/CARlevel'Inequality'...............................................................'40!
4.2.! Innovation'...................................................................................................'42!4.3.! Employment'income'...................................................................................'45!
Chapter$5.! Regression$Analysis$...................................................................$47!5.1.! 2001'to'2011'...............................................................................................'48!
-
'
vi'
5.1.1.! The'effect'of'innovation'on'inequality'in'a'decade'(2001R2011)'....'48!5.1.2.! The'effect'of'innovation'on'inequality'in'each'year'.......................'51!
Innovation'..................................................................................................'51!Economic'Variables'...................................................................................'55!SocioRdemographic'variables'.....................................................................'55!Institutional'variables'.................................................................................'56!Geographical'variables'..............................................................................'56!
5.1.3.! Percentile'ratio'analysis'................................................................'56!5.1.4.! Income'distribution'within'or'between'industries'...........................'61!5.1.5.! Causality'test'.................................................................................'69!5.1.6.! Effect'of'parameters'on'innovation'................................................'70!
5.2.! 1991'to'2001'...............................................................................................'72!
Chapter$6.! Conclusion$...................................................................................$80!
References$ 82!Appendix'A.! ''SPSS'Syntax'for'Gini'Coefficient'Calculation'........................'87!Appendix'B.! ''Employment'in'KIBS'and'highRtech'industries'based'on'
NAICS'and'SIC,'2001,'for'130'Canadian'CMA/CAs'included'in'the'study' 89!Appendix'C.! ''The'model'summary'and'the'variance'inflation'factor'
(collinearity'test)'for'each'regression'table'presented'in'Chapter'5'...........'93!Regression'model'of'inequality'and'ratio'of'KIBS'employment'from'2001'to'
2011'('Table'5.1)'...........................................................................'93!Regression'model'of'inequality'and'ratio'of'highRtech'occupations'from'
2001'to'2011'('Table'5.1)'..............................................................'95!Regression'model'of'inequality'and'ratio'of'highRtech'industries'from'2001'
to'2011'('Table'5.1)'.......................................................................'97!Regression'model'of'inequality'and'ratio'of'KIBS'employment'in'2001'
(Table'5.2)'.....................................................................................'99!Regression'model'of'inequality'and'ratio'of'KIBS'employment'in'2006'
(Table'5.2)'...................................................................................'101!Regression'model'of'inequality'and'ratio'of'KIBS'employment'in'2011'
(Table'5.2)'...................................................................................'103!Regression'model'of'inequality'and'ratio'of'highRtech'occupations'in'2001'
(Table'5.2)'...................................................................................'105!Regression'model'of'inequality'and'ratio'of'highRtech'occupations'in'2006'
(Table'5.2)'...................................................................................'107!Regression'model'of'inequality'and'ratio'of'highRtech'occupations'in'2011'
(Table'5.2)'...................................................................................'109!Regression'model'of'inequality'and'ratio'of'highRtech'industries'in'2001'
(Table'5.2)'...................................................................................'111!Regression'model'of'inequality'and'ratio'of'highRtech'industries'in'2006'
(Table'5.2)'...................................................................................'113!Regression'model'of'inequality'and'ratio'of'highRtech'industries'in'2011'
(Table'5.2)'...................................................................................'115!Regression'model'of'P90/P50'and'ratio'of'KIBS'employments'from'2001'to'
2011'(Table'5.3)'..........................................................................'117!
-
'
vii'
Regression'model'of'P90/P50'and'ratio'of'highRtech'occupations'from'2001'to'2011'(Table'5.3)'......................................................................'119!
Regression'model'of'P90/P50'and'ratio'of'highRtech'industries'from'2001'to'2011'(Table'5.3)'..........................................................................'121!
Regression'model'of'P50/P10'and'ratio'of'KIBS'employments'from'2001'to'2011'(Table'5.3)'..........................................................................'123!
Regression'model'of'P50/P10'and'ratio'of'highRtech'occupations'from'2001'to'2011'(Table'5.3)'......................................................................'125!
Regression'model'of'P50/P10'and'ratio'of'highRtech'industries'from'2001'to'2011'(Table'5.3)'..........................................................................'127!
Regression'model'of'analysis'of'ratio'of'KIBS'employment'with'different'variables'(Table'5.4)'....................................................................'129!
Regression'model'of'analysis'of'ratio'of'highRtech'occupations'with'different'variables'(Table'5.4)'....................................................................'131!
Regression'model'of'analysis'of'ratio'of'highRtech'industries'with'different'variables'(Table'5.4)'....................................................................'133!
Regression'analysis'of'Gini'coefficient'with'relative'income'and'coefficient'of'variation'of'income'in'KIBS,'highRtech'industries'and'highRtech'occupations'from'2001'to'2011'(Table'5.5)'.................................'135!
Regression'analysis'of'highRtech'occupations'average'income'as'a'function'of'ratio'of'KIBS'employments'and'other'independent'variables'from'2001'to'2011'(Table'5.6)'.............................................................'136!
Regression'analysis'of'highRtech'industries'coefficient'of'variation'of'income'as'a'function'of'ratio'of'KIBS'employments'and'other'independent'variables'(Table'5.6)'...............................................'138!
Regression'analysis'of'Gini'coefficient'as'function'of'ratio'of'KIBS'employments'and'other'independent'variables'from'1991'to'2001'(Table'5.8)'...................................................................................'140!
Regression'analysis'of'Gini'coefficient'as'function'of'ratio'of'highRtech'occupations'and'other'independent'variables'from'1991'to'2001'(Table'5.8)'...................................................................................'142!
Regression'analysis'of'Gini'coefficient'as'function'of'ratio'of'highRtech'industries'and'other'independent'variables'from'1991'to'2001'(Table'5.8)'...................................................................................'144!
Regression'model'of'inequality'and'ratio'of'KIBS'employment'in'1991'(Table'5.9)'...................................................................................'146!
Regression'model'of'inequality'and'ratio'of'KIBS'employment'in'1996'(Table'5.9)'...................................................................................'148!
Regression'model'of'inequality'and'ratio'of'KIBS'employment'in'2001'(Table'5.9)'...................................................................................'150!
Regression'model'of'inequality'and'ratio'of'highRtech'occupations'in'1991'(Table'5.9)'...................................................................................'152!
Regression'model'of'inequality'and'ratio'of'highRtech'occupations'in'1996'(Table'5.9)'...................................................................................'154!
Regression'model'of'inequality'and'ratio'of'highRtech'occupations'in'2001'(Table'5.9)'...................................................................................'156!
Regression'model'of'inequality'and'ratio'of'highRtech'industries'in'1991'(Table'5.9)'...................................................................................'158!
-
'
viii'
Regression'model'of'inequality'and'ratio'of'highRtech'industries'in'1996'(Table'5.9)'...................................................................................'160!
Regression'model'of'inequality'and'ratio'of'highRtech'industries'in'2001'(Table'5.9)'...................................................................................'162!
Regression'model'of'P90/P50'and'ratio'of'KIBS'employment'from'1991'to'2001'(Table'5.10)'........................................................................'164!
Regression'model'of'P90/P50'and'ratio'of'highRtech'occupations'from'1991'to'2001'(Table'5.10)'....................................................................'166!
Regression'model'of'P90/P50'and'ratio'of'highRtech'industries'from'1991'to'2001'(Table'5.10)'........................................................................'168!
Regression'model'of'P50/P10'and'ratio'of'KIBS'employment'from'1991'to'2001'(Table'5.10)'........................................................................'170!
Regression'model'of'P50/P10'and'ratio'of'highRtech'occupations'from'1991'to'2001'(Table'5.10)'....................................................................'172!
Regression'model'of'P50/P10'and'ratio'of'highRtech'industries'from'1991'to'2001'(Table'5.10)'........................................................................'174!
!
-
'
ix'
List$of$Tables$
Table'2.1! List'of'highRtech'occupations'.......................................................'10!Table'2.2! Knowledge'intensive'business'services'under'code'54'of'North'
American'Classification'System'(NAICS)'....................................'11!Table'3.1! List'of'CAs'that'are'excluded'from'the'analysis'...........................'25!Table'3.2! Provincial'minimum'wage'(hourly)'in'one'year'prior'to'Census'
years'............................................................................................'35!Table'4.1! National'employment'income'inequality'from'1991'to'2011'........'37!Table'4.2! Gini'coefficient'average'and'standard'deviation'of'Canadian'
CMAs/CAs'in'different'population'categories'in'2011'..................'40!Table'4.3! Level'of'innovation'according'to'ratio'of'employees'working'in'
KIBS,'highRtech'occupations'and'highRtech'industries'from'1991'to'2011'in'Canada'............................................................................'43!
Table'4.4! Top'five'innovative'cities'in'Canada'based'on'three'different'measures'in'2011,'share'of'total'employment'.............................'45!
Table'4.5! Average'employment'income'in'different'sectors'and'geographical'areas'in'2011'...............................................................................'46!
Table'5.1! Result'of'regression'analysis'with'three'different'innovation'measures.'Each'of'130'CMAs/CAs'in'each'year'(2001,'2006'and'2011)'is'considered'as'a'single'case'in'the'analysis'(overall,'390'cases'are'used).'..........................................................................'50!
Table'5.2! 'Result'multivariate'regression'analysis'on'in'2001,'2006'and'2011'using'three'different'measures'for'innovation'and'Gini'coefficient'as'the'inequality'measure'(dependent'variable)'.........'53!
Table'5.3! Regression'analysis'results'of'modelling'the'effect'of'innovation'and'other'independent'variables'on'percentiles'ratio'from'2001'to'2011.'............................................................................................'59!
Table'5.4! Multivariate'regression'analysis'of'innovation'measures'with'different'variables'from'2001'to'2011'..........................................'64!
Table'5.5! Regression'analysis'of'Gini'coefficient'with'relative'income'and'coefficient'of'variation'of'income'in'KIBS,'highRtech'industries'and'highRtech'occupations'from'2001'to'2011'....................................'66!
Table'5.6! Regression'analysis'of'highRtech'occupations'average'income'and'highRtech'industries'coefficient'of'variation'of'income'as'a'function'of'ratio'of'KIBS'employments'and'other'independent'variables'from'2001'to'2011'........................................................................'68!
Table'5.7! Pearson'correlation'of'the'Gini'coefficients'and'KIBS'employment'ratio'in'2001,'2006'and'2011'.......................................................'70!
-
'
x'
Table'5.8! Multivariate'regression'analysis'of'Gini'coefficient'as'function'of'Innovation'level'and'other'independent'variables'from'1991'to'2001.'............................................................................................'73!
Table'5.9! 'Result'multivariate'regression'analysis'on'in'1991,'1996'and'2001'using'three'different'measures'for'innovation'and'Gini'coefficient'as'the'inequality'measure'(dependent'variable)'.........'75!
Table'5.10! Regression'analysis'results'of'modelling'the'effect'of'innovation'and'other'independent'variables'on'percentiles'ratio'from'1991'to'2001,'which'represent'different'attributes'of'income'distribution.'78!
-
'
xi'
List$of$Figures$
Figure'4.1! National'Gini'coefficient'trend'from'1991'to'2011'in'Canada'......'37!Figure'4.2! Trend'of'90R'and'50Rpercentile'over'10Rpercentile'employment'
income'in'Canada'from'1991'to'2011'..........................................'39!Figure'4.3! Gini'coefficient'of'all'Canadian'CMA/CA'in'2011'.........................'41!Figure'4.4! Trend'of'employees'in'KIBS,'highRtech'industries'and'highRtech'
occupations'from'1991'to'2011'in'Canada'..................................'42!Figure'4.5! Average'level'of'innovation'calculated'using'three'different'
measures'in'CAs'with'population'of'below'30,000,'between'30,000'and'100,000,'CMAs'and'Canada'.....................................'44!
Figure'4.6! Average'employment'income'in'different'industries'and'occupations'within'different'geographical'areas'in'2011.'............'46!
'
-
'
xii'
List$of$Acronyms$
CA' Census'Agglomeration'
CMA' Census'Metropolitan'Area'
KIBS' KnowledgeRIntensive'Business'Services'
LFS' Labour'Force'Survey'
NAICS' North'American'Industrial'Classification'System'
NHS' National'Household'Survey'
NOC' National'Occupational'Classification'
OECD' Organisation'for'Economic'CoRoperation'and'Development'
RDC' Research'Data'Centre'
SBTC' SkillRBiased'Technological'Change'
SFU' Simon'Fraser'University'
SIC' Standard'Industrial'Classification'
SOC' Standard'Occupational'Classification'
TPP' Technological'Product'and'Processes'
'
-
'
'1'
Chapter$1.$ Introduction$and$Thesis$Outline$
Innovation' is' an' important' factor' in' economic' growth' during' the' last' century'
(Glaeser'1991T'Porter'2000).'It'provides'the'opportunity'for'its'adopters'to'create'new'jobs,'
introduces'new'industry'sectors'and'develops'new'products.'Some'researchers'believe'
that'urban'environments'attract'firms'and'people'because'of'knowledge'spillovers,'and'at'
the' same' time' attraction' and' agglomeration' of' firms' and' people' in' cities' increase' the'
knowledge' spillovers' and' innovation' (Marshall' 1890T' Jaocbs' 1970T' Saxenian' 1996).'
Therefore,' local' governments' try' to' stimulate' innovation' through' attracting' highlyR
educated'creative'class'(Florida'2002)'or'through'supporting'the'existing'people'and'firms'
in'the'region'to'do'more'innovation'(Scott'and'Storper'2007T'and'Storper'2009).'
Most'research'into'innovation'touts'its'benefits.'However,'there'is' less'research'
on' the'negative'effects'of' innovation,' including' the'pressing' issue'of' today,' inequality.'
While'innovation'fosters'economic'growth,'it'is'important'to'understand'how'the'benefits'
of' innovation'are'distributed'in'the'society.'Around'this' issue,'here'are'some'questions'
that'remain'unanswered:'Is'the'large'value'generated'by'innovation'being'captured'by'a'
relatively'small'group'of'people?'Does'innovation'lead'to'an'increase'in'income'inequality'
or'does'it' increase'the'income'of'all'groups'of'people'equally?'What'is'the'relationship'
between'innovation'and'inequality'within'urban'economies?'
Innovative' activities' have' become' an' important' factor' in' the' contemporary'
economy,'since'they'bring'economic'growth'to'regions'through'different'mechanisms'such'
as' increasing' production' efficiency,' introduction' of' new'markets,' etc.' Therefore,' local'
governments'try'to'attract'innovative'labour'force'or'innovative'firms'to'stimulate'regional'
growth.'In'that'case,'it'is'important'for'local'government'to'be'aware'of'the'consequences'
of' having' innovative' activities' in' regions,' especially' negative' consequences' such' as'
income'inequality'(if'indeed'there'is'a'relation'between'innovation'and'income'inequality).''
-
'
'2'
Inequality' has' increasingly' become' one' of' the' problems' in' cities.' It' can' cause'
further'problems'such'as'high'rates'of'crime,'health'problems,'etc'(Fajnzlber'et'al'2002).'
Moreover,'places'with'higher'levels'of'inequality'have'higher'rates'of'murder,'and'people'
say'that'they'are'less'happy'(Glaeser'et'al.,'2008).'There'are'two'streams'in'the'debate'
on' income' inequality.' In' the' first' approach,' income' inequality' is' understood' to' be' an'
inevitable' outcome' of' market' deregulation' and' the' drive' for' efficiency' in' the' global'
economy.'Other'economists'have'had'second' thoughts'on' this' issue.'They'argue' that'
income' inequality' is' not' the' outcome' market' efficiency,' instead,' the' rise' in' income'
inequality' is'due' to' the'power' relations'between' institutions'within' the'market' such'as'
multiRnational'companies,'workers,'customers,'etc.'In'this'approach'it'is'argued'that'gross'
inequality' is' not' efficient' in' the' market' (Atkinson' 2015T' Kuttner' 2013).' In' the' latter'
perspective,'local'governments'should'make'an'effort'to'reduce'the'income'gap'not'only'
to' overcome' its' negative' social' consequences,' but' also' to' increase'market' efficiency.'
Therefore,'local'government'should'care'about'inequality'and'be'cautious'in'supporting'
innovative'activities'when'they'take'economic'development'policies.'
Most' innovative' activities' are' concentrated' in' cities.' According' to' the' National'
Household'Survey'(NHS)'2011,'around'80%'of'Canadian'population'live'in'urban'regions,'
while'90%'of'Knowledge'Intensive'Business'Services'(KIBS)'employments'are'located'in'
urban'regions.'KIBS'employments'are'known'as'a'representative'of'innovative'activities'
(Breau'et' al.' 2014T'Wessel' 2013).'Similarly,' the' level' of' income' inequality' is' higher' in'
urban'regions'than'nonRurban'ones.'Moreover,'both' innovation'(Marshall'1890T'Jaocbs'
1970,'Glaeser'1991)'and'income'inequality'(Korpi'2008T'Baum'Snow'and'Pavan'2013)'
have'a'positive'correlation'with'population'of'urban'region.'Therefore,'the'relation'between'
innovation'and'income'inequality'is'studied'in'Canadian'urban+regions'in'this'research.'
This' research'does'not' focus'on'providing' solutions' for' local' governments'and'
policy'makers'to'overcome'the'income'inequality'problemT'however,'as'the'first'step'of'
solving'the'problem,'it'is'going'to'provide'an'investigation'into'the'mechanisms'through'
which' innovation' may' cause' urban' inequality.' Based' on' the' results' provided' in' this'
research,'it'is'hoped'that'further'studies'will'dig'into'different'possible'policies'to'overcome'
these'negative'consequences'of'innovation.'
'
-
'
'3'
Based'on'the'research'objectives'the'thesis'is'organized'as'follows:'
In'Chapter'2:'Innovation,'Inequality'and'Mutual'Effects,'a'brief'review'of'literature'
on' innovation,' inequality'and'their'mutual'effect' is'presented.'The'chapter'starts'with'a'
review'of'the'literature'on'geography'of'innovation'and'the'effect'of'social'parameters'on'
innovation.' Different' ways' of' measuring' innovation,' and' their' pros' and' cons' is' also'
included.'Then'different'measures'of'inequality'are'introduced'and'a'couple'of'them'are'
selected' for' this' research.' Finally,' different' theories' explaining' the'mutual' relationship'
between'innovation'and'inequality'are'presented.'
Chapter'3'presents'the'methodology'of'the'research,'including'the'sources'of'data,'
process' of' data' collection' and' methods' of' analysis.' The' primary' source' of' data' is'
Canadian'Census'1991,'1996,'2001'and'2006'and'the'National'Household'Survey'(2011).'
In'Chapter'4:'Descriptive'Statistics,'some'descriptive'statistics'on'the'distribution'
of'innovation'and'inequality'at'the'urban'and'national'level'in'Canada'in'2011,'along'with'
their'trend'during'the'20Ryears'period'are'presented.'Moreover,'the'distribution'of'income'
in'innovative'and'nonRinnovation'employment'is'presented.'
Chapter'5:'Regression'analysis,'contains'the'main'analysis'and'discussion'of'this'
research.'Different'regression'models'are'presented'with'the'objective'of'finding'the'effect'
of' innovation' and' some' other' parameters' on' income' inequality' in' the' Canadian'
metropolitan'areas' from'1991' to'2011.'The'analysis'of' this' chapter' is'divided' into' two'
different'distinct'sections'for'the'analysis'of'two'10Ryears'periods'from'2001'to'2011'and'
1991'to'2001.'However,'the'focus'of'discussion'is'on'the'recent'decade.'
Chapter' 6' presents' concluding' remarks' and' suggestions' for' future'works.' This'
research' shows' that' there' is' a' growing' correlation' between' innovation' and' income'
inequality'in'Canadian'cityRregions'from'2001'to'2011.'Among'all'different'parameters'that'
used'for'the'innovation'measurement,'the'ratio'of'employment'in'KIBS'has'the'greatest'
influence'on'income'inequality.'
-
'
'4'
Chapter$2.$ Innovation,$Inequality$and$Mutual$Effects$
This'chapter'discusses'geographical'distribution,'innovation'definition'and'different'
measurement'methods'of'innovation,'which'are'presented'in'academic'literature.'Then'a'
brief'overview'of'inequality'measures,'as'well'as'the'theories'that'are'linking'innovation'to'
income'inequality'in'cityRregions'are'presented.''
2.1.$ Innovation$
2.1.1.$ Geography$of$Innovation$
There'is'a'debate'in'the'literature'about'whether'economic'opportunities'are'evenly'
distributed' geographically' or' if' there' are' certain' places' that' offer' greater' economic'
opportunities.'Friedman’s'(2005)'idea'of'“the'flat'world”'focuses'on'the'global'forces'acting'
on'economic'activities,'arguing'that'economic'activities'can'freely'move'to'different'places'
without'being'confined' to' regional' forces.'However,'we'can'see' that' creative'activities'
were'concentrated'in'some'places'at'different'time'periods,'such'as'Florence'under'the'
Medici,'Paris'in'1920s,'England'during'the'industrial'revolution'and'Silicon'Valley'in'more'
recent'times'(Feldman,'2010).'
Some'economists,'geographers'and'historians'believe'that'most'innovations'are'
made'within'cities'(Marshall'1890T'Jacobs'1985T'and'Glaeser'1991).'They'believe'that'the'
agglomeration' of' people' and' firms,' and' high' levels' of' interaction' in' cities' create' an'
environment'in'which'ideas'quickly'move'from'one'person'to'another,'and'consequently'
help'people' to' innovate.'Access' to' knowledge' is'an' important' factor' that'makes'cities'
conductive'to'innovations.'Furthermore,'according'to'Malmberg'and'Maskell'(1997)'most'
innovations'come'from'the'interactive'processes'within'industrial'systems.'They'believe'
that'the'proximity'and'short'distance'between'firms'make'the'interactive'collaboration'less'
costly'and'smoother.'
Creation' and' transmission' of' knowledge' is' crucial' in' the' innovation' process.'
Philosophers'of'knowledge'make'distinction'between'knowledge'that'could'be'effectively'
-
'
'5'
expressed'in'a'symbolic'forms'of'representation'(explicit'knowledge)'and'other'forms'of'
knowledge' that'cannot'be'expressed'or'codified'(tacit'knowledge)' (Polanyi'1966).'This'
distinction'between'explicit'and'tacit'knowledge'is'important'in'innovation'studies.'Tacit'
knowledge'has'been'known'as'the'central'component'of'the'learning'economy,'and'a'key'
to'innovation'and'value'creation'(Polanyi'1966T'and'Gertler'2003).'Howells'(2000,'p.'53)'
refers'to'tacit'knowledge'as'“knowRhow'that'is'acquired'via'the'informal'takeRup'of'learned'
behaviour'and'procedures.”'Hence,'unlike'explicit'knowledge,'which'can'be'transmitted'
through'sets'of'axioms,' rules,'algorithms'and'statements,' tacit' knowledge'can'only'be'
transmitted'through'experience.'This'idea'makes'proximity'and'faceRtoRface'interactions'
a' crucial' element' of' innovation,' even' with' the' growing' importance' of' long' distance'
interactions' through' information' technology'advances.'The' idea' that' tacit'knowledge' is'
embodied' in'human' interaction'can'help'explain'why'some'places'have'higher' rate'of'
knowledge'creation'and'innovation'than'others.'
Glaeser' et' al.' (1992)' believe' that' the' characteristics' of' the' cities' in' knowledge'
production'and'diffusion'make'them'a'desirable'place'for'most'of'the'people,'despite'the'
high'cost'of'living.'They'claim'that,'in'cities,'people'enjoy'easy'flow'of'ideas'and'improve'
their'productivity'without'paying'for'the'knowledge.'In'their'research,'they'concluded'that'
competition'and'diversity' in'cities'are' two' important' factors,'which' facilitate' innovation.'
Diversified'cities'are'more'innovative'because'ideas'from'one'industry'can'be'transmitted'
and'adopted'in'another'industry.'In'addition,'local'competition'accelerates'imitation'and'
improvement' of' innovators’' ideas.' Researchers' acknowledge' the' role' of' knowledge'
spillovers'and'innovation'in'the'economic'growth'by'defining'it'as'the'engine'of'growth.'
Therefore,' numerous' research'works' stress' the' importance' of' innovation' in' economic'
growth'in'cities.'
The'relation'between'innovation'and'places'is'beyond'only'agglomeration'of'firms'
and'people'in'cities.'Other'specific'attributes'of'different'places'(social,'institutional,'etc.)'
play'an'important'role'in'the'innovation'process'(Saxenian'1996T'Storper'2009).'There'is'
a'shift'in'innovation'analysis'approach'from'focusing'on'artefacts'and'production'side'in'
conventional' technological' systems,' to' considering' users' and' social' context' as' an'
important'factor'in'innovations'(Geels'2004).'The'broadened'approach'usually'is'known'
as' sociotechnical' systems.' Considering' all' different' aspect' of' innovation,' the'
sociotechnical' systems' approach' helps' us' to' thoroughly' understand' the' dynamic' of'
-
'
'6'
innovation' and' generally' technological' regimes.' This' analysis' approach' suggests' that'
knowledge'production'and'innovation'systems'should'be'studied'within'the'social'norms'
and'institutions'that'are'embedded'within'the'region.'Storper'(1997)'also'believes'that'the'
knowledge'production'process'is'embedded'in'regions.'Knowledgeable'people'who'are'
embodiments'of'the'knowledge'are'not'evenly'distributed'in'the'geographical'space.'
In'summary,'innovation'is'not'evenly'or'randomly'distributed'in'the'space.'Despite'
all' technological' advances' in' longRdistance' interactions,' the' capability' of' knowledge'
creation'and'innovation'cannot'be'easily'transmitted'from'one'place'to'another.'Moreover,'
different'attributes'of'regions'(population'density,'competition,'diversity,'institutions,'social'
norms,'etc.)'affect'regional'innovation'systems.'
2.1.2.$ Innovation$Definition$and$Measures$
Researchers'have'used'different'means'to'define'the'concept'of'innovation'in'their'
research'works,'and'consequently'these'different'definitions'lead'to'different'measures'of'
innovation.'For'example,'Technological'product'and'process' innovations'are'defined'in'
Oslo'Manual'by'Organisation' for'Economic'CoRoperation'and'Development'(OECD)'as'
follows:'
Technological' product' and' process' (TPP)' innovations' comprise'implemented'technologically'new'products'and'processes'and'significant'technological'improvements'in'products'and'processes.'A'TPP'innovation'has'been' implemented' if' it' has'been' introduced'on' the'market' (product'innovation)'or'used'within'a'production'process'(process'innovation).'TPP'innovations' involve' a' series' of' scientific,' technological,' organizational,'financial'and'commercial'activities.'The'TPP'innovating'firm'is'one'that'has'implemented'technologically'new'or'significantly'technologically'improved'products'or'processes'during'the'period'under'review'(Oslo'Manual,'2005,'p.25).'
However,'a'broader'definition'is'provided'by'Schumpeter'(1934),'in'which'he'also'
included' three'additional'elements' to' the'Oslo'TPP' innovation'definition.' In'addition' to'
product'and'process'innovation,'Schumpeter’s'definition'also'includes'opening+of+a+new+
market,'development+of+new+source+of+supply'and'changes+in+an+industrial+organisation.'
-
'
'7'
Numerous' variables' have' been' used' for' regional' innovation' measurementT'
however,'as'discussed'in'the'following'paragraphs,'none'of'them'are'able'to'include'all'
different'types'of'innovation.'Each'definition'focuses'on'a'specific'definition'and'type'of'
innovation.' Therefore,' researchers' usually' use'multiple' variables' to' measure' regional'
innovation.''
One'of'the'parameters'that'is'used'to'measure'the'level'of'innovation'in'a'region'
is'number'of'patents'registered'per'millions'of'population.'Sonn'and'Storper'(2008)'used'
the'number'patents'and'their'citation'in'the'United'States'Patent'and'Trademark'Office'
(USPTO)' as' a' measure' of' innovation' to' investigate' the' importance' of' proximity' on'
knowledge'production.'According'to'the'fact'that'a'significant'percentage'of'patents'are'
produced'by'a'group'of'inventors,'they'proposed'a'method'to'assign'a'fraction'of'patent'
to'the'city'of'each'team'member.'For'instance,'if'a'team'of'three'inventors'from'Toronto,'
Montreal'and'Ottawa'create'a'patent,'each'city'will'have'one'third'of'the'patent'in'counting'
number'of'patents.'
While'many'other'researchers'have'used'this'method'in'their'research'work,'there'
are' some' limitations' in' using' the' number' of' patents' per'million' in' the' population' as' a'
measure'of'innovation.'Despite'Sonn'and'Sorper'(2008)'having'used'patent'counts'in'their'
research,'they'have'mentioned'limitations'of'this'method.'First,'some'patents'have'never'
been'commercialized'and' therefore'have'not'had'any' impact'on' the'economic'output,'
while' they' are' counted' as' a' representative' of' innovation.' Second,' the' propensity' of'
innovators' to' patent' their' knowledge' production' varies' among' different' sectors.' For'
instance,' innovators' in' service' sectors' are' less' likely' to' patent' their' work' than' in'
manufacturing,'despite' the' fact' that'knowledge'production' in' the'service'sector'has'an'
increasing'significance'in'the'contemporary'economy.'
Moreover,'Hall'et'al.'(2013)'claim'that'the'share'of'firms,'which'do'not'patent'their'
knowledge'production,'is'significant,'because'patenting'needs'enough'time'and'money,'
and' familiarity' with' the' process,' which' makes' the' process' difficult' for' small' firms.'
Therefore,' using' number' of' patents' as' a'measure' of' innovation'will'miss' a' significant'
number'of'innovations,'which'are'not'registered'as'a'patent.'Lee'(2011)'also'stated'that'
this'measure'has'failed'to'account'for'innovations,'which'are'unlikely'to'be'patented,'such'
as'process'innovations.'
-
'
'8'
Another'measure'of'innovation,'which'has'been'used'by'some'researchers,'is'the'
proportion'of'employees'working'in'those'industries,'which'have'a'high'rate'of'innovation'
and'knowledge'production.'This'measure'is'capable'of'capturing'the'innovations'that'are'
not'being'patented.'Lee'(2011)'used'proportion'of'such'employment'to'measure'regional'
innovation' in' European' cities.' He' used' employment' in' five' overlapping' categories' of'
knowledgeRbased'industries'provided'by'Eurostat:'knowledgeRintensive'financial'services,'
highRtech' knowledgeRintensive' services,' other' knowledgeRintensive' services' and' highR
tech'manufacturing.'However,'he'claims'that'these'classifications'are'too'broad'while'what'
is'counted'as'innovationRrelated'employment'within'each'sector'may'be'very'different.'For'
instance,'he'states'that'this'measure'is'not'able'to'distinguish'between'the'head'office'
employees'of'a'firm'and'the'manufacturing'labours,'whereas'the'former'may'gain'more'
from'innovation'than'the'latter.'In'the'Canadian'context,'this'is'more'problematic'because'
in' Canadian' Census' data' all' the' five' categories' of' knowledgeRbased' industries' are'
aggregated'in'one'category'of'knowledgeRintensive'business'services.'
Gertler'et'al.'(2002)'measured'innovation'through'location'quotient'in'the'highRtech'
industries.' They' defined' highRtech' industries' in' Canada' based' on' Standard' Industrial'
Classification' (SIC),'which' includes' employment' in' industries' related' to' aircraft,' office,'
electrical,' and' scientific' equipment' manufacturing,' bioRmedical,' telecommunications,'
computer,'engineering'and'scientific'services'and'film.'Hall'and'Khan'(2008)'also'added'
communication' equipment'manufacturing,' electrical' wholesales,' employment' agencies'
and'management'consulting'to'the'definition'of'highRtech'industries'to'capture'the'breadth'
of'highRtech'activity.'
On' the' other' hand,' Chapple' et' al.' (2004)' explored' the' possibility' of' using'
occupations' rather' than' industries' with' the' objectives' of' monitoring' and' targeting'
economic' performance.' They' introduced' a' list' of' occupations,' which' are' presented' in'
Table'2.1,' to'measure'the' level'of'highRtech'activities'of'cities'and'compare'the'results'
with'other'measures.'As'these'occupations'are'extensively'dependent'on'creativity'and'
innovation,'the'share'of'employees'working'in'these'occupations'(rather'than'highRtech'
industries)' can' be' a' parameter' that' represents' the' level' of' innovation.' As' discussed'
above,' the' problem' of' using' employment' in' highRtech' industries' as' a' measure' of'
innovation' is' that' all' employees' working' in' a' highRtech' industry' are' considered' as'
innovative'employees,'including'some'nonRinnovative'workers'who'are'doing'routine'jobs'
-
'
'9'
in'the'industry.'Measuring'innovation'based'on'occupations'may'overcome'this'problem.'
Someone'who' has' a' nonRinnovative' job' in' a' highRtech' industry' does' not' count' as' an'
innovative'worker.'
Share'of'employment'in'KnowledgeRIntensive'Business'Services'(KIBS)'is'another'
measure'of'innovation'used'in'literature'(Breau'et'al.'2014T'Wessel'2013)'because'KIBS'
sector'produces'and'diffuses'knowledge,'which'is'crucial'to'innovation.'Muller'and'Zenker'
(2001)' studied' the' interactions' between' KIBS' and'manufacturing' smallR' and'mediumR
sized'enterprises'and'concluded'that'this'type'of'interaction'stimulates'the'generation'and'
diffusion'of'knowledge'within'innovation'systems'at'both'national'and'regional'level.'They'
showed'that'KIBS'play'an'important'role'in'innovation'systems'not'only'by'“transmitting”'
knowledge,' but' also' with' their' crucial' role' in' “knowledge' reRengineering”' (i.e.' the'
appropriation'of'knowledge).'KIBS'firms'enhance'innovation'capacity'of'their'client'firms'
and'get' stimuli' for' their'own' innovations.' In'Canada,'Breau'et'al.' (2014)'have'defined'
innovation'as'the'percentage'of'employees'in'KIBS'in'Canadian'cities.'They'have'used'
code'54'of'North'American'Industry'Classification'System'(NAICS).'Table'2.2'shows'the'
detailed'breakdown'of'this'industry'sector.'
As'discussed'above,'there'are'numerous'variables'in'measurement'of'innovation'
and'knowledge'production.'Due'to'the'limitations'of'each'of'these'methods,'it'would'be'
more'useful'to'improve'the'analysis'through'using'multiple'measures'of'innovation.'In'this'
study,'innovation'is'measured'as'ratio'of'employment'in'KIBS,'highRtech'occupations'and'
highRtech'industries'(see'Section'3.2).'
' '
-
'
'10'
'
Table$2.1$ List$of$high^tech$occupations$
Occupational Employment Statistics (OES) code Occupation title 13017 Engineering, math, natural science managers 22102 Aeronautical & astronautical engineers 22105 Metallurgists/metallurgical, ceramic & materials engineers 22108 Mining engineers 22111 Petroleum engineers 22114 Chemical engineers 22117 Nuclear engineers 22121 Civil engineers 22123 Agricultural engineers 22126 Electrical & electronic engineers 22127 Computer engineers 22128 Industrial engineers, except safety 22132 Safety engineers, except mining 22135 Mechanical engineers 22138 Marine engineers 22199 All other engineers 22999 Other engineers, not elsewhere classified 24102 Physical & astronomers 24105 Chemists, except biochemists 24108 Atmospheric & space scientists 24111 Geologists, geophysicists & oceanographers 24199 All other physical scientists 24308 Biological scientists 24311 Medical scientists 24399 All other life scientists 24999 All other natural scientists & related workers 25102 System analysts 25103 Database administrator 25105 Computer programmers 25111 Programmers, numerical tool & process control 25302 Operation/systems researchers and analysts, except computer 25310 Mathematical scientists 25312 Statisticians
-
'
'11'
25319 All other mathematical scientists 25399 All other systems researchers 25999 All other computer scientists
Source: Chapple et al. 2004. $
Table$2.2$ Knowledge$intensive$business$services$under$code$54$of$North$American$Classification$System$(NAICS)$
Four-Digits NAICS Code Definition
5411 Legal Services
5412 Accounting, Tax Preparation, Bookkeeping, and Payroll Services
5413 Architectural, Engineering, and Related Services
5414 Specialized Design Services
5415 Computer Systems Design and Related Services
5416 Management, Scientific, and Technical Consulting Services
5417 Scientific Research and Development Services
5418 Advertising and Related Services
5419 Other Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services
Source: Statistics Canada (2012)
2.2.$ Inequality$
2.2.1.$ Urban$Inequality$
Over' the' last' 30' years,' income' inequality' has' increased' rapidly' in' advanced'
industrial' economies,' including' Canada.' In' the' income' inequality' ranking' of' all'
Organization' for' Economic' Cooperation' and' Development' (OECD)'members,' Canada'
stands'out' as'having' the' second' largest' surge' in' income' inequality' since' the'midR90s'
(OECD,'2008).'
-
'
'12'
Economic' inequality' could' be' studied' at' different' international,' national,'
province/state'and'city'levels.'Inequality'at'the'city'level'could'be'as'important'as'national'
level'inequalityT'however,'researchers'paid'less'attention'to'the'former'than'the'latter.'It'is'
important'to'pay'attention'to'inequality'in'cities'because'of'its'consequences.'For'instance,'
there'is'a'connection'between'crime'and'inequality'in'cities'as'well'as'between'inequality'
in'countries'and'in'countries'(Daly'et'al.'2001,'Fajnzylber'et'al.'2002)'Moreover,'places'
with'higher'rates'of'inequality'have'higher'rates'of'murder,'and'people'say'that'they'are'
less'happy'(Glaeser'et'al.,'2008).'
Bolton'and'Breau'(2014)'conducted'research'on'the'relation'between'inequality'in'
Canadian'cities'and'city'size.'They'claim'that'larger'metropolitan'areas'experienced'more'
rapid' increases'in' income'inequality'than'the'smaller'metropolitan'areas'between'1996'
and'2006.'They'believe' that' it' is'due' to' the' fact' that'higher'density'metropolitan'areas'
experience' agglomeration' economies.' Through' this' agglomeration' process,' specific'
groups'of'people'from'specific'income'class'are'attracted'to'large'metropolitan'areas.'The'
income'distribution'within'the'people'who'are'moving'to'large'cities'is'polarized.'HighlyR
educated'workers'with'high'income'are'attracted'to'large'cities'for'better'job'opportunities'
and'amenities' to' large'cities,'as'well' as' lowRincome'or'unemployed'people' from'other'
regions'for'low'paid'service'jobs.'Therefore,'highRdensity'metropolitan'areas'experience'
greater'income'gaps'than'others.''
Moreover,'Korpi'(2008)'conducted'research'on'the'effect'of' local' labour'size'on'
wage'inequality'through'analysis'of'Swedish'local'labour'market.'He'concluded'that'there'
is'positive'link'between'wage'inequality'and'labour'market'size.'He'believes'as'population'
size' increases,' the' local' labour' market' becomes' more' diversified,' and' consequently'
earnings'will'be'distributed'more'unequally.'Baum,'Snow'and'Pavan'(2013)'also'studies'
the'wage' inequality' in' the'United'States' from'1979' to'2007,'and'concluded' that' larger'
cities'have'experienced'more'rapid'growth'in'inequality'than'the'others'in'the'same'period.'
According' to' their' research' the' important' factor' that' makes' cityRsize' an' important'
parameter' in' inequality' growth' is' that' groups' of' peoples' with' some' specific' skills' are'
disproportionately'located'in'larger'cities,'and'through'the'analysis'period,'the'demand'for'
these'skills'has'been'increased.'Therefore,' these'groups'of'workers'experienced'more'
significant'rises'in'their'wages'with'respect'to'others.'
-
'
'13'
2.2.2.$ Inequality$Measure$
Many'different'measures'have'been'introduced'for'inequality'measurement'such'
as'Gini'coefficient,'standard'deviation,'Theil'index,'and'decile'ratio.'These'measures'are'
not'different'ways'of'measuring' inequalityT' they'are'measuring'different'definitions'and'
dimensions' of' inequalityT' however,' it' has' been' shown' that' there' is' a' high' correlation'
between'these'measures'(Allison'1978).'
De' Maio' (2007)' conducted' research' on' the' different' methods' of' inequality'
measurement.'He'believes'that'the'most'popular'parameter'in'measuring'inequality'is'the'
Gini'coefficient.'The'strength'of'the'Gini'coefficient'is'that'it'considers'different'aspects'of'
inequality' such' as' inequality' around' mean' and' at' both' ends' of' income' distribution.'
However,' its' weakness' is' that' it' cannot' differentiate' between' different' aspects' of'
inequality,'for'example,'whether'the'rich'are'richer'or'the'poor'are'poorer.'Hence,'there'
might'be'a'difference'between'characteristics'of'two'income'distributions'while'they'have'
a'same'Gini'coefficient.'Moreover,'researchers'should'be'aware'of'the'fact'that'the'Gini'
coefficient'is'the'most'sensitive'inequality'measure'to'the'distribution'around'the'middle'
part'of'the'income'distribution.'
Another' inequality' measure,' which' has' been' used' commonly' in' literature,' is'
Percentiles' ratio.' These' are' simple' measures' that' give' the' sense' of' how' income' is'
distributed'among'the'study'population.'They'help'researchers'understand'whether'the'
change'in'inequality'is'because'of'the'increase/decrease'in'the'top'or'bottom'of'the'income'
distribution.'
Most'of'the'researchers'studying'inequality,'prefer'to'use'more'than'one'measure'
of' inequality' to' be' able' to' capture' different' aspects' of' income' inequality,' such' as'
distribution'around'mean'and'at'both'ends'of'the'income'spectrum'(Breau'2014,'Lee'2011'
and'Moore'2003).'In'this'research,'I'will'use'the'Gini'coefficient'and'income'distribution'
percentiles' to' be' able' to' differentiate' the' effect' of' innovation' on' inequality' around' the'
average'income'and'at'both'ends'of'income'distribution.'
-
'
'14'
2.3.$ Relationship$between$Innovation$and$Income$Inequality$
As' discussed' above,' innovation' is' known' as' the' engine' of' growth' for' regional'
economies.'On'the'other'hand,'innovation'and'knowledge'production'in'cities'affects'the'
distribution'of'earnings.'Although' the'discussion'on' the'effect'of' innovation'on' income'
inequality' has' been' increasingly' considered' in' the' literature' because' of' the' inequality'
growth'in'the'recent'decades,'it'is'not'a'new'concept.'It'was'documented'in'the'Communist'
Manifesto'as'follow:'
“The' bourgeoisie' cannot' exist' without' constantly' revolutionizing' the'instruments' of' production,' and' with' them' the' whole' relations' of'society...Constant'revolutionizing'of'production,'uninterrupted'disturbance'of'all'social'conditions,'everlasting'uncertainty'and'agitation'distinguish'the'bourgeois'epoch'from'all'earlier'ones”'(Marx'and'Engels,'1848)'
Numerous' theories' have' been' introduced' in' the' recent' decades' regarding' the'
distributional'effect'of' innovation'on'earnings'at'a'national'scale,'which'mostly'predicts'
that'the'innovations'increase'the'earnings'inequality.'One'of'the'most'common'theories'
is'skillRbiased'technological'change'(SBTC)'(Berman'et'al.'1997).'
According'to'SBTC,'the'introduction'of'new'technology'–especially'in'the'form'of'
computers,'information'and'communications'technology–'increases'the'demand'of'highly'
skilled' labour'and'decreases' the'demand'of' less'skilled' labour,'since'on'one'hand'the'
operation'of'new'technologies'needs'highly'skilled'and'educated'labour,'and'on'the'other'
hand'new'technologies'usually'improve'productivity'and'consequently'decrease'the'need'
for' less' skilled' labour.' Therefore,' individuals' with' higher' levels' of' education' and'
experience'will'have'more'job'opportunities'and'will'experience'an'increase'in'earnings'
while'those'who'are'not'qualified'to'work'with'the'new'technology'will'lose'their'job'or'see'
a'reduction'in'their'earnings.'
As'an'example'of'SBTC,'Wheeler'(2005)'showed'that'the'introduction'of'computer'
to' industries' increased'the' level'of' income'inequality' in' the'United'States'from'1983'to'
2002.'This'increase'in'income'inequality'was'more'related'to'dispersion'of'income'within'
industries' rather' than' between' industries.' His' findings' show' that' there' is' a' positive'
correlation'between'withinRindustry'inequality'and'frequency'of'computer'usage'and'also'
ratio' of' employees'with' a' college' degree.' His' findings' are' consistent' with' skillRbiased'
-
'
'15'
technological'change'theory.'The'findings'indicate'that'during'the'period'that'the'computer'
was'introduced'as'a'new'technology,'industries'which'needed'more'use'of'computers'had'
higher'income'inequality,'because'people'who'were'highly'skilled'to'work'with'a'computer'
and/or'had'a'college'degree'would'have'seen'an'increase'in'their' income'while'others'
would'have'an'earning'reduction'or'a'relative'lag'in'salaries'relative'to'those'who'have'
computer'skill,'which'leads'to'an'increase'in'income'inequality.'
Acemoglu'and'Autor'(2010)'argue'that'although'SBTC'was'notably'successful'in'
explaining' the'effect'of' innovations'and'new' technologies'on'earnings'distribution,' it' is'
silent'when'it'comes'to'the'empirical'developments'of'the'last'three'decades,'which'are'
listed'as'follows'(p.'1157):'
1.' Significant'declines'in'real'wages'of'low'skill'workers,'particularly'low'skill'malesT'
2.' NonRmonotone'changes'in'wages'at'different'parts'of'the'earnings'distribution'during'different'decadesT'
3.' BroadRbased'increases'in'employment'in'high'skill'and'low'skill'occupations'relative'to'middle'skilled'occupationsT'
4.' Rapid'diffusion'of'new'technologies'that'directly'substitute'capital'for'labor'in'tasks'previously'performed'by'moderately'skilled'workersT''
5.' Expanding'offshoring'in'opportunities,'enabled'by'technology,'which'allow'foreign'labor'to'substitute'for'domestic'workers’'specific'tasks.'
To'explain' the'above' issue,'Acemoglu'and'Autor' (2010)' introduced' taskRbased'
framework' to' effectively' explain' the' effect' of' innovations' on' earnings' inequality.' They'
consider'the'element'of'tasks'in'addition'to'technology'and'skills.'In'this'theory,'the'main'
focus'is'on'the'interaction'between'technology,'skills'and'tasks.'
Unlike' SBTC' theory,' instead' of' simply' claiming' that' people' with' a' higher'
educational'degree'will'be'able'to'work'with'new'technologies'and'be'rewarded,'the'taskR
based'framework'defines'new'tasks'that'are'introduced'by'innovation'in'an'industry.'Then'
it' relates'different' tasks' to'different'skills'and'explains'how'earnings'within'an' industry'
become' polarized' between' groups' of' workers' with' different' skills' with' respect' to' the'
changing'nature'of'the'tasks.'
'TaskRbased'framework'argue'that'innovations'and'new'technologies'will'replace'
human'labour'in'some'manual'routine'tasks'with'ICTs,'but'human'labour'is'still'needed'in'
-
'
'16'
nonRroutine' tasks,' namely,' (1)' complex' and' abstract' tasks' and' (2)'manual' tasks.' The'
former'includes'processing'of'information,'understanding'specialized'and'highly'technical'
subjects,'problem'solving'and'communicating,'and'the'latter'includes'tasks'that'require'
inRperson'interaction'and'physical'abilities.'Therefore,'as'a'consequence'of'diminishing'
routine'jobs'in'the'middle'of'the'wage'distribution,'the'labour'force'will'be'polarized'into'
two'tasks'at'both'ends'of'earning'distribution.'
Tacit'knowledge'is'crucial' in'these'nonRroutine'jobs,'and'their'know9how'cannot'
easily'be'codified'as'explicit'knowledge.'Hence,'the'increasing'importance'of'nonRroutine'
jobs' acknowledge' the' idea' that' innovations' are' mostly' introduced' and' used' in' cities,'
because'cities'allow' for' faceRtoRface' interactions'between'numerous' firms'and'people,'
which' is' important' in' production' and' transmission' of' tacit' knowledge' (as' discussed' in'
section'2.1.1).'
Lee' (2011)'also' looked'at' the' relation'between' regional' innovation'and' income'
inequality' through'analysis'of'European'cities.'He'described' five'mechanisms,' through'
which'innovation'leads'to'income'inequality'(p.'3R4).'
1.' Innovation'leads'to'higher'productivity'in'the'production'process'and'innovative'firms'and'workers'will'benefit'in'the'form'of'wage'gain'
2.' There'may'be'a'greater'dispersion'of'income'within'the'innovative'industry'sector,'which'may'polarize'the'pay'structure'of'the'industry'
3.' If'the'innovations'are'diffused'locally,'SBTC'process'will'affect'the'regional'inequality'
'4.' Innovative'regions'may'attract'highly'skilled'and'highly'paid'labour'from'other'regions.'This'process'will'also'increase'the'number'of'innovations'
5.' When'innovation'raises'the'wage'of'certain'group'of'people,'it'will'stimulate'the'need'for'more'lowRpaid'service'sector'jobs'
However,'his'first'four'theories'are'very'similar'to'the'aforementioned'theories,'the'
fifth'one'explains'that'the'high'wage'innovative'jobs'will'attract'workers'to'the'low'wage'
service'jobs'to'provide'services'for'highlyRpaid'innovative'people.'These'jobs'include'food'
service'workers,'security'guards,' janitors,'cleaners'and'gardeners,'home'health'aides,'
childcare'workers,'and'personal'appearance'and'recreational'occupations.'
-
'
'17'
Similarly,'Florida'(2002)'in'The+Rise+of+Creative+Class,'explains'that'a'significant'
growth'in'the'creative'class'necessitates'growth'in'lowRskilled'lowRwage'labours'to'take'
care'of'the'creative'class'and'“do'their'chores”'(p.71).'Therefore,'according'to'his'theory'
the'growth'of'employment' is'mainly' in'highly'paid'creative'class'occupations'and' lowR
wage' service' sectors,' which' provide' services' to' highRincome' creative' workers.' This'
pattern'of'growth'will'lead'to'polarization'and'earnings'inequality.'One'of'the'reasons'that'
his'idea'in'supporting'creative'class'has'been'criticized'by'Peck'(2005)'is'that'the'rise'of'
creative'class'neglects'the'issues'of'intraRurban'inequality.'
Through'these'different'mechanisms,' innovation'can'increase' income'inequality'
either'within'innovative'industries,'or'between'innovative'industries'and'those,'which'are'
not'heavily'dependent'on'innovation'and'knowledge'production.'Increase'in'the'income'
of'innovative'workers'can'increase'the'demand'for'lowRpaid'service'workers.'Workers'who'
are'attracted' to' the' low'paid'service'sector' jobs'could'have'been'displaced' from'other'
industrial' sectors' in' the' region,' therefore' through' this'mechanism' innovative' industries'
and' low' paid' service' sector' will' experience' economic' growth,' while' other' industries'
potentially' decline.' The'SBTC' theory' suggests' that' income' inequality' increases'within'
industries'because'workers'within'an'industry'will'experience'differential'rises'(or'fall)'in'
their'income'based'on'what'kind'of'tasks'they'are'doing'and'how'valuable'they'are.'
The'presence'of'KIBS'sectors'can'also'affect'the'income'distribution'in'economic'
regions.'KIBS'industries'can'perform'the'research'and'development'outsourced'by'other'
industries,'create'knowledge'and'innovate'new'industries.'They'also'provide'the'support'
activities' for' other' industries' in' their' innovation' progress' such' as' legal' services,'
advertising,'infrastructures'design,'etc.''
Concentration'of'KIBS'activities'can'increase'productivity'within'the'KIBS'sector'
itself,'and'within'the'firms'in'other'industry'sectors'(which'enjoy'KIBS'services'benefits),'
through'different'mechanisms'(Wessel'2011,'p.'1086):'
•' Externalization+of+activities:'reduction'in'average'cost'of'production'through'outsourcing'specific'tasks'or'services'to'other'industrial'sectors'of'the'economyT'
•' Spatial+reorganization+of+production:'reallocating'different'production'tasks'to'different'geographical'placesT'
-
'
'18'
•' Utilization+and+development+of+new+technologies:'introduction'of'new'technologies'through'R&D'activities'within'KIBS'sector'or'in'partnership'with'other'industriesT'
•' Participation+in+cross9border+networks:'expanding'demand'market'or'suppliers'of'an'industry'through'their'crossRborder'networkT'and'
•' Adoption+of+flexible+working+practices:'allowing'workers'to'work'remotely'or'reduced'hours.'
Wessel'(2011)'claims'the'KIBS'sector'is'an'important'distributive'force.'It'divides'
the' lowRwage' and' the' highRwage' segments' of' economy' by' specialization' and'
reorganization' of' production.' For' instance,' different' processes' of' production' that'were'
formerly' done' within' a' single' firm' will' be' separated' to' be' done' in' different' firms' and'
industries' or' different' geographical' locations.' Through' the' products' or' services' value'
chain,'processes,'which'add'a'high'value' to' the'product,'will' create'highRincome' jobs,'
whereas' ones,' which' add' a' low' value' to' the' product,' will' create' lowRincome' jobs.'
Therefore,' KIBS' activities' can' increase' the' income' inequality' in' other' industries.'
Moreover,'partly'because'of'the'use'of'flexible'labour'there'is'a'change'in'the'payment'
scheme,' union' density,' union' coverage' and' legislative' intervention' in' KIBS' sector.' A'
consequence'of'such'adjustment'is'a'growing'gap'between'income'in'KIBS'and'the'rest'
of'the'economy.'
2.4.$ Effect$of$Inequality$on$Innovation$
Among' the' literature' considering' the' relationship' between' inequality' and'
innovation,'most' researchers' do' not' empirically' investigate' to' find' out' which' of' these'
parameters' affects' the' other' one.' There' could' be' a' mutual' effect' between' income'
inequality' and' innovation,' and' it' is' an' open' question' whether' inequality' matters' for'
innovation,'or'innovation'matters'for'inequality'(or'whether'they'are'mutually'dependent'
to'each'other).'For'instance,'Tselios'(2011)'analyzed'microeconomic'data'of'102'Western'
European'regions'over'the'period'of'1995'to'2000,'to'find'out'whether'inequality'is'good'
for' innovation' or' not.' He' concluded' that' an' increase' in' a' region’s' inequality' favours'
innovation.' To' find' out' which' one' is' affecting' the' other' one,' he' has' done' a' Granger'
causality' test' between' 1995' and' 2000.' Tselios' concluded' that' the' casual' relation' of'
innovation'and'inequality'varies'across'space,'because'innovation'has'local'character'and'
-
'
'19'
cumulative' nature.' In' other' words,' in' some' regions,' inequality' in' 1995' caused' more'
innovation'in'2000'and'in'others'more'innovation'in'1995'caused'more'income'inequality'
in'2000.'
Some'of'the'theories'on'the'effect'of'innovation'on'income'inequality'are'explained'
above.'In'this'section,'some'of'the'theories'on'the'effect'of'inequality'on'innovation'are'
studied.'
Income'inequality'could'have'a'positive'or'negative'effect'on'innovation'through'
its'direct'impact'on'market'size'and'price'effect'(Bertola'et.'al.'2006).'On'one'hand,'the'
more' unequal' the' distribution' of' income'means' the' smaller' regional'market' for' a' new'
product,' because' when' the' income' distribution' is' unequal,' only' a' small' number' of'
consumers'can'afford'to'buy'the'newest'products.'Therefore,'the'markets'of'new'products'
–and'consequently'innovative'industries–'grow'slowly.'This'mechanism'is'valid'only'when'
the'markets'are'regional.'
On' the' other' hand,' when' the' price' effect' of' income' inequality' becomes'more'
dominant' than' the' market' size' effect,' one' can' argue' that' inequality' will' accelerate'
innovations,'since'high' income'consumers'have'a'very'high'willingness'to'pay'for'new'
products'and'services.'In'addition,'the'relatively'rich'individuals'are'more'likely'to'pay'for'
better' technologies,' therefore' it' stimulates' the' creative' class' to' innovate' more' in'
competition'with'each'other'(Vernon'1972).'
Another'theory'explaining'the'effect'of'inequality'on'innovation'is'Werner'Sombart'
Thesis' (1913),'Luxury+and+Capitalism.' It'explains' the'mechanism' through'which' luxury'
consumptions' by' ‘rich’' people' leads' to' emergence' of' new'markets' and' consequently'
innovativeness.'Therefore,' inequality'will'provide'an'appropriate'environment'–which' is'
polarized'wealth'distribution–'for'production'and'consumption'of'luxury'materials.''
Overall,' all' the' aforementioned' theories' in' this' section' implicitly' have' the'
assumption' that' local' factors'are'more'dominant' than' interRregional' factors' in' the' local'
market,'whereas'globalization'and'availability' of' transRregional'markets' through' cheap'
transportation' cost' could' reduce' the' effect' of' regional'market' size' and' price' effect' on'
-
'
'20'
innovation.'To' the'extent' that' innovative' firms'are'not' limited' to' their' regional'markets,'
they'will'be'able'to'sell'their'products'or'services'to'‘rich’'people'in'other'regions.'
2.5.$ Patent$Policy$and$Capital$Income$Inequality$
The'focus'of'this'research'is'on'employment'income'(or'wage)'inequalityT'however,'
another'important'aspect'of'economic'inequality'lies'in'the'capital'income'inequality.'For'
example,'Reed'et'al.'(2001)'show'that'oneRquarter'of'the'increase'in'income'inequality'in'
the'1990s' in' the'US' is'due'to' the'capital' income' inequality.' Innovation'also'affects' the'
distribution'of'capital'income.''
Chu'(2010)'conducted'a'research'on'the'effect'of'patent'policy'on'capital'income'
inequality,' and' he' concluded' that' strengthening' patent' protection' increases' economic'
growth'through'encouraging'firms'to'spend'more'on'research'and'development,'and'also'
increases'capital'income'inequality'by'increasing'the'rate'of'return'on'capital.'This'higher'
return'on'assets'leads'to'an'increase'of'the'assetRwealthy'households’'income'relative'to'
assetRpoor'households.'
On' the'other' hand,'Hatipoglu' (2008)' studied' the'effect' of' income' inequality' on'
innovation'within'different' patent' policies.'As'discussed'above' firms'are'more' likely' to'
innovate'where' the' income' inequality' is'high,'because' they'have' their'market' for'new'
products'among'highRincome'consumers.' In'addition,'Hatipoglu'believes' that'when' the'
income' inequality' is' low,' longRterm'patent'would'be'an' incentive' for' innovative' firms' to'
spend'more' on' research' and' development' because' it' increases' the' profitability' of' an'
innovation'by'increasing'the'likelihood'of'the'benefit'from'a'future'demand'jump'in'sales'
to'the'poor.'These'different'ideas'confirm'the'importance'of'policy'making'in'minimizing'
the'side'effects'of'innovation'while'the'economy'is'enjoying'its'benefits.'Specifically,'when'
policy'makers'use'patent+policy'as'an'instrument'to'increase'research'and'development'
and'consequently'economic'growth,'they'need'to'take'into'account'the'potential'negative'
effects'of'patent'policies.''
In' this' chapter,' a' brief' review'of' literature' on' innovation'was'presented.' It'was'
explained'that'innovation'is'concentrated'in'cities'and'that'some'cities'are'more'innovative'
-
'
'21'
than'others.'Moreover,'different'theories'on'the'mutual'effects'of'innovation'and'innovation'
presented'in'literature'were'discussed.'In'the'following'chapter,'the'methodology'of'this'
research' about' innovation' and' inequality' measurement,' and' analysis' of' correlation'
between'innovation'and'income'inequality'are'explained.'
'
-
'
'22'
Chapter$3.$ Methodology$
The'main'source'of'data'in'this'research'is'obtained'from'the'20Rpercent'long'form'
survey' of' Canadian' Census' in' 1991,' 1996,' 2001' and' 2006,' and' National' Household'
Survey'(NHS)'2011.'Detailed'microRdata'of'these'surveys'have'a'relatively'large'number'
of'respondent'(varies'between'5.5'to'6.8'million'per'Census/Survey'year).'Therefore,'it'is'
a' rich' data' source' for' this' research' which' needs' a' relatively' large' sample' size' for'
calculation'of'Gini'coefficient'in'Canadian'cities,'as'a'measure'of'income'inequality.'The'
detailed'microRdata'files'of'Canadian'Census'and'NHS'are'not'publicly'available.'Access'
to'these'files'needs'an'application'process'through'Research'Data'Centre'(RDC).'Most'
of'the'needed'data'in'this'research'was'obtained'from'RDC'at'Simon'Fraser'University'
(SFU).'All'the'data'that'was'released'from'RDC'required'approval'of'RDC'staff'to'make'
sure'that'released'data'meets'the'requirements'to'protect'respondent'confidentiality.''
To'conduct'the'longRform'survey,'Statistic'Canada'used'to'send'the'questionnaire'
to'a'randomly'selected'20Rpercent'of'the'population.'Responding'to'the'longRform'survey'
was'mandatory' for' the' households' who' receive' the' questionnaire1' (Statistics' Canada'
2009).'However,' the'survey'conduction'method'changed' in'2011.'To'conduct' the'NHS'
2011,'questionnaires'were'sent' to'around'50%'of' the'population,'who'could'voluntarily'
respond'to'Statistics'Canada2'(Statistics'Canada'2015).'Due'to'the'difference'in'survey'
conduction'methods'between'NHS'and'Canadian'Census,'one'should'be'cautious'when'
comparing' NHS' with' Canadian' Census' data.' Therefore,' in' this' research' other' than'
Canadian'Census'and'NHS,'Labour'Force'Survey'(LFS)'in'2001,'2006'and'2011'are'used'
to'verify'some'of'the'results'obtained'from'NHS'and'Canadian'Census.'
In'the'following'sections'of'this'chapter,'the'methodology'of'this'research'on'units'
of'analysis,'innovation'and'inequality'measurement,'and'multivariate'regression'analysis'
is'discussed.'
'1Obtained'from:'https://www12.statcan.gc.ca/censusRrecensement/2006/ref/rpRguides/rp/coverageRcouverture/covRcouv_indexReng.cfm'
2'Obtained'from:'http://www12.statcan.gc.ca/nhsRenm/2011/ref/reportsRrapports/swRep/99R002Rx2011001Reng.pdf'
-
'
'23'
3.1.$ Census$Metropolitan$Areas$and$Census$Agglomerations$Boundaries$
The' units' of' analysis' in' this' research' are' Canadian' cities.' These' entities' are'
defined' by' Statistics' Canada' as' Census' Metropolitan' Area' (CMA)' or' Census'
Agglomeration'(CA)'based'on'their'population.'Statistics'Canada'defines'CMA'and'CA'as'
follows:'
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.'
Inclusion'of'municipalities'around' the'urban'core'depends'on' the'degree'of' integration'
with'the'central'urban'area,'which'is'measured'by'daily'commuting'flow.'Therefore,'it'is'
not'unexpected' to'see'changes' in'Canadian'CMAs/CAs'boundaries' in'20'years'of' the'
analysis'period'from'1991'to'2011.'These'changes'are'applied'every'5'years'prior'to'the'
census'years'according'to'the'commuting'patterns'in'the'previous'census'data.''
A' unique' CMA/CA' geographical' boundary' does' not' have' a' constant' identity'
independent'from'its'social'and'economic'interactions.'When'the'interactions'between'a'
CMA/CA' with' a' nearby' region' increases' between' two' census' years,' the' initial'
geographical' boundaries' do' not' represent' the' same' characteristics' at' both' instances.'
Therefore,' in' this'research,'boundaries'of'each'CMA/CA'for'crossRsectional'analysis' in'
each'census'year'is'considered'as'the'CMA/CA'boundaries'defined'by'Statistics'Canada'
at'the'year'of'analysis.'Similarly,'in'the'longitudinal'analysis'CMA/CA'boundaries'of'each'
census'year'is'used'for'that'specific'year,'in'other'words'functional'economic'regions'with'
dynamic'boundaries'over'time'are'considered'as'analysis'entities,'not'fixed'territories.'For'
instance,'as'the'boundaries'of'Edmonton'have'been'changed'slightly'from'2006'to'2011,'
when'I'perform'an'analysis'on'Edmonton'from'2006'to'2011,'I'use'boundaries'defined'by'
Statistics'Canada'in'each'census'year'for'the'corresponding'census'year.'
-
'
'24'
Along'with'the'changes'in'CMA/CA'boundaries,'some'CAs'has'been'merged'to'
other'CMAs/CAs'and'they'do'not'exist'as'an'independent'CA'in'some'census'years'of'
the'analysis.'In'addition,'some'CAs'are'introduced'sometime'after'1991.'Newly'emerged'
CAs' are' excluded' from' the' analysis' because' in' longitudinal' analysis'CMAs/CAs' in' all'
census' years' from' 1991' to' 2011' are' compared' with' each' other.' In' addition,' as' the'
longitudinal'analysis'should'be'consistent'with'the'crossRsectional'analysis'in'each'census'
year,'the'identical'group'of'CMAs/CAs'are'used'in'crossRsectional'analysis.'For'instance,'
Miramichi'was'introduced'as'a'CA'in'2006,'whereas'it'was'not'considered'as'a'separate'
CA'before'2001.'Therefore,'it'has'been'excluded'from'the'analysis.'
CAs/CMAs'that'existed'before'and'merged'into'another'CMA/CA'sometime'after'
1991' are' also' excluded' from' the' analysis.' One' might' consider' the' geographical'
boundaries'of'merged'CAs/CMAs'as'a'single'CA/CMA'in'all'Census'years'(even'when'
Statistics' Canada' did' not' consider' them' as' a' single' CA).' In' this' research,' these'
uncommon' CAs/CMAs' are' excluded' from' analysis' and' merged' CMAs/CAs' are' not'
considered' as' a' single' CMA/CA' in' all' years,' because' when' we' are' studying' a'
geographical'area'as'a'single'entity'the'economic'activities'of'all' the'people'within'that'
area' should' be' linked' together' to' a' specific' degree.' For' instance,' Magog' was' an'
independent' CA' in' 2001,' after' which' it' was' merged' into' Sherbrook.' It' should' not' be'
included'in'Sherbrook'for'analysis'before'2006'because'according'to'Statistics'Canada'
the'social'and'economic'relation'between'Magog'and'Sherbrook'was'not'strong'enough'
to'consider'them'as'one'CMA,'even'though'Magog'became'a'part'of'Sherbrook'CMA'after'
2006.'
According'to'the'aforementioned'selection'process'of'units'of'analysis,'among'all'
CMAs/CAs'defined'in'the'census'years'from'1991'to'2011,'29'CAs'are'excluded'from'the'
analysis'which'are'shown' in'Table'3.1'with' their' total'population' in'2011.'As' the' table'
shows,'other'than'SaintRJérôme,'which'has'the'population'of'68,456'and'has'merged'into'
Montréal'after'1991,'all'these'CAs'has'the'population'of'less'than'30,000.'A'list'of'all'130'
CMAs/CAs'that'are'included'in'the'analysis'is'provided'in'Appendix'B.''
' $
-
'
'25'
Table$3.1$ List$of$CAs$that$are$excluded$from$the$analysis$
CA name Population in 2011 Reason for exclusion Saint-Jérôme 68,456 Merged with Montreal, 1996 Miramichi 28,115 Introduced as a new CA, 2006 Centre Wellington 26,693 Introduced as a new CA, 2006 Magog 25,358 Merged with Sherbrook, 2006 Okotoks 24,511 Introduced as new CA, 2006 Strathroy 20,978 Merged with London, 2001 Salmon Arm 17,464 Introduced as a new CA, 2006 Squamish 17,158 Introduced as a new CA, 2001 Amos 17,090 Introduced as a new CA, 2001 Petawawa 15,988 Introduced as a new CA, 2001 Brooks 13,676 Introduced as a new CA, 2001 Steinbach 13,524 Introduced as a new CA, 2011 High River 12,920 Introduced as a new CA, 2011 Sylvan Lake 12,327 Introduced as a new CA, 2011 Strathmore 12,305 Introduced as a new CA, 2011 Canmore 12,288 Introduced as a new CA, 2006 Ingersoll 12,146 Introduced as a new CA, 2006 Parksville 11,977 Introduced as a new CA, 2001 Lacombe 11,707 Introduced as a new CA, 2011 La Tuque 11,227 Introduced as a new CA, 2011 Gander 11,054 Introduced as a new CA, 2006 Weyburn 10,484 Introduces as a new CA, 1996 Wallaceburg 10,163 Introduces as a new CA, 1996 Selkirk 9,834 Introduces as a new CA, 1996 Smiths Falls 8,978 Eliminated, 2001 Kirkland Lake 8,493 Eliminated, 1996 Kitimat 8,335 Eliminated, 2011 Labrador City 7,367 Eliminated, 2006 Bay Roberts 5,818 Introduced as a new CA, 2006
Source: National Household Survey (NHS), Statistics Canada (2011)
'
-
'
'26'
3.2.$ Innovation$Measure$
As'discussed'in'Chapter'2,'there'are'numerous'variables'used'by'researchers'to'
measure' the' level' of' regional' innovation.' Among' these' measures,' three' of' them' are'
selected' to' be' used' in' this' researchT' (1)' ratio' of' employees' in' highRtech' occupations'
(defined'by'Chapple'(2004)),'(2)'ratio'of'employees'working'in'highRtech'industries'(used'
by'Gertler'et'al.'(2002)'and'Hall'and'Khan'(2008)),'and'(3)'ratio'of'employees'working'in'
KnowledgeRIntensive'Business'Services'(KIBS)'industries.'
HighRtech' occupations' are' defined' according' to' Standard' Occupational'
Classification' (SOC)' system,' whereas' in' Canadian' Census,' occupations' are' defined'
based'on'National'Occupational'Classification'(NOC).'HighRtech'occupations'which'are'
provided'based'on'SOC'are'transformed'into'NOC'classification'system.'Moreover,'the'
NOC' classification' has' slightly' been' changed' from' 1991' to' 2011,' but' the' structure' of'
classification' has' remained' constant3.' Therefore,' the' highRtech' occupations' list' is'
consistent'among'all'analysis'census'years.'
Gertler'et'al.'(2002),'and'Hall'and'Khan'(2008)'defined'highRtech'industries'based'
on'SIC'classification,'however'the'industrial'classification'in'Canadian'Census'changed'
from' SIC' to' North' American' Industrial' Classification' System' (NAICS)' in' 2001.' This'
transition' from' SIC' to' NAICS' changed' the' structure' of' the' classification' significantly.'
Therefore,'being'consistent' in'analysis'would'be'challenging'when'using' the' industrial'
classification'within'a'period'that'includes'years'prior'and'after'2001.'But'2001'is'a'bridge'
year'that'includes'the'employment'data'based'on'both'NAICS'and'SIC'classification.'
The' ratio' of' KIBS' employment' based' on' NAICS' classification' is' defined' as'
proportion'of' people'employed' in'Professional,+ scientific+and+ technical+ services+ (under'
code'54'in'the'NAICS'classification'as'presented'in'Table'2.2).'The'transformation'of'KIBS'
industries'from'NAICS'to'SIC'classification'is'also'a'challenge'in'this'research.'
'3'http://www.statcan.gc.ca/eng/subjects/standard/noc/2011/index'
-
'
'27'
Statistics'Canada'has'provided'concordance'tables'to' translate' industrial'codes'
between'SIC'and'NAICS'classification'systems'however,'these'tables'do'not'provide'an'
detailed' transformation' between' industry' classifications4.' Although,' using' these'
concordance'tables'may'cause'an'error'in'the'transformation'process,'this'is'the'only'way'
to'transform'the'industry'codes'between'NAICS'and'SIC.'In'2001'both'NAICS'and'SIC'
industrial'classifications'are'available'in'the'20%'long'form'Census'microRdata.'To'check'
the'accuracy'of'this'transformation'process'number'of'employees'in'highRtech'industries'
and' KIBS' are' calculated' in' 2001' based' on' both' NAICS' and' SIC' classifications.' The'
comparison'between'numbers'of'highRtech'industries’'employees'in'Canadian'CMAs/CAs'
based'on'SIC'list'of'highRtech'industries'and'its'corresponding'transformation'to'NAICS'
classification'is'presented'in'Appendix'B.'The'difference'between'these'two'classifications'
in'2001'shows'that'the'error'of'transformation'process'is'high.'The'difference'in'number'
of'KIBS'employment'based'on'two'industrial'classifications'varies'from'R35%'to'24%'in'
different' CMAs/CAs.' Also,' number' of' highRtech' industries’' employees' in' different'
CMAs/CAs' according' to' these' two' classifications' varies' from' R10%' to' 30%.' The'
concordance' tables' are' more' accurate' in' transformation' of' KIBS' industries' than' in'
transformation'of'highRtech'occupation,'since'number'of'categories'in'the'former'is'lower'
than'the'latter.'''
According'to'the'error'in'transformation'process'of'industry'codes'from'NAICS'to'
SIC'and'vice'versa,'one'should'be'cautious'in' longitudinal'analysis'within'the'20Ryears'
period'from'1991'to'2011.'Therefore,'when'the'ratio'of'employees'in'KIBS'or'highRtech'
industries' are' used' as' the' measure' of' innovation,' the' analysis' is' performed' on' two'
different'10Ryears'periodT'from'2001'to'2011,'and'from'1991'to'2001,'in'which'NAICS'and'
SIC'classifications'are'used,'respectively.'The'correlation'analysis'of'three'measures'of'
innovation'shows'that'there'is'a'statistically'significant'correlation'between'all'these'three'
variables'(ratio'of'employment'in'KIBS,'highRtech'occupations'and'highRtech'industries)'in'
all'years'(p
-
'
'28'
3.3.$ Inequality$Measure$
Employment' income' inequality' is'calculated'based'on' the'distribution'of'annual'
employment' income' on' individuals,' reported' in' the' longRform' Canadian' Census' and'
National'Household'Survey.'According'to'Statistics'Canada,'employment'income'refers'
to'the'total'income'received'by'persons'15'years'of'age'and'over'during'the'year'prior'to'
the' survey' including' wages' and' salaries,' net' income' from' unincorporated' nonRfarm'
business'and/or'professional'practice'and'net'farm'selfRemployment'income.'
The'main' parameter' used' to'measure' inequality' level' in'CMA/CA'and'national'
level' is' the'Gini'coefficient.'This'variable' is' the'most'popular' inequality'measure' in' the'
literature.'The'Gini'coefficient'varies'from'zero'to'one.'The'higher'the'value'of'the'Gini'
coefficient' represents' the' higher' the' level' of' inequality.' The' Gini' coefficient' can' be'
calculated'using'the'following'equation:'
' 1"#
$% − $'(')*
(%)*
2,'
'(3.1)'
in'which'"'is'the'number'of'cases'whose'income'is'used'in'calculation,'$%'and'$''
are'the'employment'incomes'of'cases'number'-'and'.'in'the'sample'population,'and','is'
the'average'of'employment'income.'The'Gini'coefficients'of'all'CMAs/CAs'are'calculated'
using'the'syntax'presented'in'Appendix'A'on'the'Canadian'Census'and'NHS'2011.'
Percentile'ratios'are'also'used'as'measures'of'employment'income'inequality.+PR
Percentile'income'is'a'value'below'which'P'percent'of'the'population’s'income'fall.'For'
instance,'the'90Rpercentile'(P90)'annual'employment'income'of'Canadians'in'2011'was'
$87,000,'which'means'the'annual'employment'income'of'90'percent'of'the'population'is'
less'than'$87,000.'10R,'50R'and'90Rpercentile'incomes'are'calculated.'Then'50Rpercentile'
over' 10Rpercentile' and'90Rpercentile' over' 50Rpercentile' are' calculated' as'measures' of'
inequality.'Percentile'ratios'provide'more'accurate'information'than'Gini'coefficients'about'
how'employment'income'distributed'in'a'sample'population.'
-
'
'29'
Errors'in'the'reported'employment'income'of'people'at'the'very'top'or'the'bottom'
of' income'distribution'can'cause'a'significant'error' in' the'Gini'coefficient.'For' instance,'
Gini'coefficient'can'be'misleading'when'the' income'data' is' topRcoded.'Fortunately,' the'
reported'annual'income'in'20Rpercent'sample'long'form'Census'and'NHS'microRdata'is'
not'top'coded'and'the'employment'income'is'reported'with'$1'precision.''
On'the'other'hand,'casual'workers'who'are'not'active'enough'in'the'labour'force'
can'cause'errors' in' the' income' inequality'analysis.'To'calculate' the' income' inequality,'