E N V I R O N M E N T A L L A B O U R M A R K E T ( E L M ) R E S E A R C H

Labour Market Transition: A Remedy for Labour Shortages

in the Environment

2 0 0 7

E C O C a n a d a

This project is funded by the Government of Canada's Sector Council Program

This project is funded by the Government of Canada’s Sector Council Program. The opinions and interpretations in this publication are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the Government of Canada.

Copyright © 2007 ECO Canada

All rights reserved. The use of any part of this publication, whether it is reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or means (including electronic, mechanical, photographic, photocopying or recording), without the prior written permission of ECO Canada is an infringement of copyright law.

ECO Canada, 2007. Labour Market Transition: A Remedy for Labour Shortages in the Environment, Environmental Labour Market (ELM) Research, Environmental Careers Organization of Canada.

ISBN 978-0-9783070-3-5

ECO CanadaSuite 200 - 308, 11th Avenue SE

Calgary, Alberta T2G 0Y2

Tel.: (403) 233-0748 or 1-800-890-1924Fax: (403) 269-9544

info@eco.cawww.eco.ca

Printed on recycled paper using vegetable ink

ECO CANADA

i

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ii

NATIONAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE iii

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY iv

1.0 INTRODUCTION 01

2.0 ENVIRONMENTAL EMPLOYMENT 02 2.1 Growing Demand for Environmental Employees 02 2.2 Priority and Target Occupations in the Environment 03 2.3 Potential Supply of Environmental Workers 04

3.0 KEY INFORMANT INTERVIEWS 06 3.1 Industry Perception on Labour Market Transitions 06 3.2 Industry Perception of the Demand for Environmental Employees 06 3.3 Common Industry Practices in Recruitment and Assessment 09 3.4 Training Practices: Industry Experience 10 3.5 Retention Practices: Industry Experience 10

4.0 CONCLUSIONS AND NEXT STEPS 08

GLOSSARY OF TERMS 12

APPENDIX A: MACRO FORECAST 13

APPENDIX B: INDUSTRIAL SHARE FORECAST METHODOLOGY 22

APPENDIX C: KEY INFORMANT INTERVIEWS 23

TABLE OF CONTENTS

i i

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

ECO Canada wishes to express its appreciation to all the organizations and individuals who contributed their time and effort to the development of the study.

In particular, we would like to thank the National Advisory Committee members who provided valuable insights throughout the study.

The study was funded by the Government of Canada’s Sector Council Program, whose continuous support is much appreciated.

Special thanks are extended to the Centre for Spatial Economics for conducting the research and analyzing the data collected through the key informant interviews.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

i i i

NATIONAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE

John Andrew Shannon CampbellQueen’s University Human Resources and Social Development Canada, Sector Council Program (ex-officio)Tony Boydell Royal Roads University Vanessa Goss Human Resources and Social Development Canada, Cecil Burns Sector Council Program (ex-officio)Weyerhaeuser Strand Technologies Grant Trump (Chair)Jane Friesen ECO Canada (ex-officio)Simon Fraser University Anasuya ChattopadhyayKevin Henderson ECO Canada (ex-officio)Nova Scotia Community College Glenn MacDonellIndustry Canada Shaun McNamaraAlberta-Pacific Forest Industries

Linda WooRescan Environmental Services

NATIONAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE

iv

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

One of the most critical issues facing Canada’s environmental sector is a shortage of skilled labour. With the demand for environmental employees continuing to grow it is critical that the sector works to ensure that traditional employee sources, such as post-secondary graduates, are supplemented by emerging sources of labour such as immigration and workers transitioning from other sectors of the economy.

This report, Labour Market Transition: A Remedy for Labour Shortages in the Environment 2007, focuses specifically on the environmental sector’s potential to attract and retain transitioning workers from other sectors of the economy and will shed light on the characteristics of employer demand. This report will also draw upon supply-side research that identifies potential sectors that could supply the environmental sector with skilled workers.

Ultimately, this report represents a first step in the development of a strategy that will allow environmental employers to more effectively attract and retain skilled labour from other sectors of the economy. By gaining a better understanding of those occupations and skills that are in greatest demand and identifying those sectors where these workers reside environmental employers will be able to refine their current human resource (HR) practices to find and retain these new employees.

KEY FINDINGS AND NEXT STEPSThis study reveals that there are a number of sectors that can potentially help offset the growing demand for new environmental employees as they have the following characteristics:

1. they have an above average concentration of occupations that are in high demand in the environmental sector and, 2. they are forecasted to experience declining employment from 2006 to 2011.

Forestry, wood products, paper manufacturing and textile, clothing, and leather are among the sectors that meet this criteria and they may prove to be a valuable source of labour if the environmental sector has the mechanisms developed to transition these workers.

The following represents two first steps that should be taken to address this issue:

ASSESS THE SKILLS AND COMPETENCIES NEEDED FOR OCCUPATIONS IN THE ENVIRONMENTAL SECTORThe competencies of specialized labour in the environmental sector needs to be assessed to clearly determine the nature of employer demand and map it to the competency profiles of employees who could potentially be transitioned from other sectors. This process will also reveal how employers can develop more effective recruitment methods and professional development mechanisms that will increase long-term employee engagement and enhance labour productivity.

FURTHER RESEARCH INTO SUCCESSFUL, LARGE-SCALE TRANSITION PROGRAMS AND A POTENTIAL PILOT PROJECTThis research would develop a more thorough understanding of successful transition programs such as those undertaken by a number of provinces who have experienced considerable down-sizing over the past decade. The results of this work could inform a pilot project that would include a long-term labour transition program for the environmental sector and the development of employer HR resources to increase their effectiveness of recruiting, transitioning and retaining these new employees. This initiative would be of particular relevance to small and medium sized enterprises (SMEs) as it will explore strategies to mitigate labour shortages faced by SMEs in the environmental sector.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1

1.0 INTRODUCTION

The purpose of Labour Market Transition: A Remedy for Labour Shortages in the Environment 2007 is to investigate mechanisms to successfully transition workers from declining sectors of the economy to the environmental sector. Or, alternatively, to add appropriate environmental skills to the existing workers to allow them to remain fully employed in their current sector of the economy.

This is a unique study that uses both a formal forecasting approach as well as interviews with key sector employers to determine the demand for environmental workers. The report also examines current industry practices toward recruitment, retention, and training. In the following sections, first, the forecasted employment by North American Industry Classification Systems (NAICS) codes are presented, which highlight the industries undergoing employment growth or decline. Second, the results of interviews with key informants are presented. The interviews provide employers’ perception about the growth of environmental employment and human resource (HR) practices.

2

2.0 ENVIRONMENTAL EMPLOYMENT

2.1 Growing Demand for Environmental EmployeesThe approach to producing the environmental employment outlook in the current study followed the approach used by ECO Canada in the Profile of Canadian Environmental Employment 2007 .1 In that report, the share of environmental employment in the total employment estimated for 2006 by major industry group was held constant over the forecast period. This assumption likely significantly understates the demand for environmental employment. Environmental employment is concentrated in industries with above average employment growth, which likely explains why the overall growth in the demand for environmental employees exceeds the increase in employment for all industries. Employment in all industries is expected to grow at an annual average rate of 1.4 percent from 2006 to 2011, while the demand for environmental employment is expected to increase by 1.6 percent as shown in Table 1. This is an annual increase of 0.2 percent for environmental employment compared with the growth of total industrial employment. See Appendix A for a discussion on the macroeconomic forecasts developed by the Centre for Spatial Economics.

Table 1: FORECASTED DEMAND FOR ENVIRONMENTAL EMPLOYEES (NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES), 2005-2011

INDUSTRY 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011

Percentage Change

2006–2011

Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing, and Hunting 33,800 34,438 33,670 33,799 33,969 33,862 33,581 -0.5

Mining and Oil & Gas Extraction 8,700 9,639 9,718 9,935 10,146 10,392 10,533 1.8

Construction 38,700 41,273 42,400 41,757 41,427 42,156 43,215 0.9

Manufacturing 44,500 42,836 41,829 41,476 41,359 41,589 41,723 -0.5

Wholesale/Retail Trade 44,900 46,106 46,908 47,947 48,925 49,978 51,069 2.1

Utilities, Transportation, and Warehousing 22,600 23,217 23,300 23,743 24,141 24,417 24,511 1.1

Information, Finance and Insurance, Real Estate, and Management of Companies

13,300 13,542 13,692 13,882 14,145 14,434 14,675 1.6

Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services 67,100 69,825 71,913 72,738 73,898 75,320 76,302 1.8

Administrative and Support, Waste Management andRemediation

79,900 80,290 83,241 85,762 88,743 92,005 94,915 3.4

Education, Health, and Social Assistance 53,600 55,845 57,002 58,468 59,941 61,323 62,667 2.3

Arts, Recreation, Accommodation, and Food Services 36,800 36,679 37,616 38,051 38,853 39,988 40,320 1.9

Other Services (except Public Administration) 24,000 24,354 24,558 24,805 25,066 25,256 25,308 0.8

Public Administration 52,100 52,372 52,717 53,370 53,910 54,369 54,745 0.9

TOTAL 520,000 530,416 538,564 545,735 554,522 565,089 573,565 1.6

Note: Forecasts developed by the Centre for Spatial Economics as of May 2007

1 ECO Canada (2007), Profile of Canadian Environmental Employment 2007, Environmental Labour Market Report. The report can be downloaded from the Publications page at www.eco.ca.

3

2.2 Priority and Target Occupations in the EnvironmentPriority occupations are defined as the ones that are in short supply in the environmental sector and were identified by ECO Canada using the National Occupational Classification (NOC) developed by Human Resources and Social Development Canada (HRSDC). ECO Canada identified 11 occupations at the 4-digit NOC level of aggregation out of a total of 520 available at this level of aggregation. The priority occupations are listed in Table 2.

Table 2: PRIORITY ENVIRONMENTAL INDUSTRY OCCUPATIONS

NOC-S NOC OCCUPATIONDESCRIPTIONS

A123 0212 Architecture and Science Managers

C013 2113 Geologists, Geochemists, and Geophysicists

C021 2121 Biologists and Related Scientists

C022 2122 Forestry Professionals

C023 2123 Agricultural Representatives, Consultants, and Specialists

C031 2131 Civil Engineers

C053 2153 Urban and Land Use Planners

C121 2221 Biological Technologists, and Technicians

C131 2231 Civil Engineering Technologists, and Technicians

C163 2263 Inspectors in Public and Environmental Health and Occupational Health and Safety

E031 4161 Natural and Applied Science Policy Researchers, Consultants, and Program Officers

Note: Statistics Canada uses NOC-S, which has the same 4-digit categories with a different coding convention and aggregation structure

A total of 23 occupations were identified as environmental target occupations as shown in Table 3. They include occupations that have workers who could potentially transition to the environmental sector’s priority occupations. In order to identify these occupations, the educational composition of each occupation in the economy was compared with each of the priority occupations in turn. This evaluation was conducted by constructing and comparing a similarity index (SI). Occupations with an SI above 0.8 are deemed to be likely transition candidates and represent the target occupations.

4

Table 3: ENVIRONMENTAL TARGET OCCUPATIONS

NOC-S NOC OCCUPATIONDESCRIPTIONS

A123 0212 Architecture and Science Managers

A391 0911 Manufacturing Managers

C013 2113 Geologists, Geochemists, and Geophysicists

C021 2121 Biologists and Related Scientists

C022 2122 Forestry Professionals

C023 2123 Agricultural Representatives, Consultants, and Specialists

C031 2131 Civil Engineers

C053 2153 Urban and Land Use Planners

C054 2154 Land Surveyors

C121 2221 Biological Technologists and Technicians

C122 2222 Agricultural and Fish Products Inspectors

C131 2231 Civil Engineering Technologists and Technicians

C143 2243 Industrial Instrument Technicians and Mechanics

C153 2253 Drafting Technologists and Technicians

C154 2254 Land Survey Technologists and Technicians

C163 2263 Inspectors in Public and Environmental Health and Occupational Health and Safety

E031 4161 Natural and Applied Science Policy Researchers, Consultants, and Program Officers

E112 4122 Post-Secondary Teaching and Research Assistants

G121 6221 Technical Sales Specialists, Wholesale Trade

G623 6463 By-law Enforcement and Other Regulatory Officers, n.e.c.

H112 7252 Steamfitters, Pipefitters, and Sprinkler System Installers

H113 7253 Gas Fitters

J012 9212 Supervisors, Petroleum, Gas, and Chemical Processing and Utilities

Note: Statistics Canada uses NOC-S, which has the same 4-digit categories with a different coding convention and aggregation structure

2.3 Potential Supply of Environmental Workers

Rising Industrial Employment Demand and Competition for WorkersThe growth in total employment is forecasted to average 1.4 percent over 2006 to 2011. Table 4 provides the employment outlook for the top 10 industries that are forecasted to grow by 5,000 or more workers between 2006 and 2011. These industries have an above-average concentration of environment-related occupations.

5

Table 4: INDUSTRIES WITH ABOVE AVERAGE EMPLOYMENT GROWTH BETWEEN 2006 AND 2011

3-DIGITNAICSINDUSTRIES CHANGEINEMPLOYMENT(‘000) AVERAGEANNUALPERCENTAGECHANGE

561 - Administrative and Support Services 125.3 3.6

611 - Educational Services 115.7 1.9

541 – Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services 113.3 2.0

621 - Ambulatory Health Care Services 82.4 3.7

238 - Specialty Trade Contractors 60.2 1.7

622 - Hospitals 41.3 1.3

522 - Credit Intermediation and Related Activities 37.0 1.9

524 - Insurance Carriers and Related Activities 24.2 2.0

417 - Machinery, Equipment and Supplies Wholesaler-Distributors

19.6 2.2

911 - Federal Government 14.8 0.9

Note: Forecasts developed by the Centre for Spatial Economics as of May 2007

Of the 60 industries that have an above average concentration of the target occupations, 41 are forecasted to experience rising employment. This means that there will be wide spread demand for these types of workers both inside and outside the environmental sector. So competition will be fierce for these workers.

Declining Sectors and Potential Available SupplyTable 5 provides the employment outlook for industries that are forecasted to decline during 2006 to 2011 and have an above-average concentration of environmental target occupations. The magnitude of the labour shedding from these industries amounts to approximately 100,000 workers. Notably, of the priority occupations identified by ECO Canada as having high demand in the environment sector and the occupations identified via interviews discussed later in this report, 14 industries will experience declining employment, with a total labour shedding of about 80,000.

Table 5: INDUSTRIES WITH DECLINING EMPLOYMENT BETWEEN 2006 AND 2011

3-DIGITNAICSINDUSTRIES CHANGEINEMPLOYMENT(‘000) AVERAGEANNUALPERCENTAGECHANGE

321 - Wood Product Manufacturing -21.6 -2.7

322 - Paper Manufacturing -11.5 -2.6

2361–2379 - Prime Contracting -10.6 -0.5

315 - Clothing Manufacturing -10.3 -3.4

113 - Forestry and Logging -9.3 -4.9

712 - Heritage Institutions -6.7 -5.6

332 - Fabricated Metal Product Manufacturing -5.5 -0.6

115 - Support Activities for Agriculture and Forestry -5.2 -3.3

333 - Machinery Manufacturing -4.1 -0.7

335 - Electric Equipment Appliance Manufacturing -4.0 -1.7

Note: Forecasts developed by the Centre for Spatial Economics as of May 2007

These forecasts suggest that there will be a large number of workers available over the next five years from industries that employ an above-average share of environment-related occupations. See Appendix B for the forecast methodology.

6

3.0 KEY INFORMANT INTERVIEWS

The key informant interviews conducted as part of this study confirm that demand for environmental employment is expanding at a rate equal to if not greater than the demand for overall employment in the firms surveyed. The demand for environmental workers is growing faster than the demand for workers in all industries.

The findings from the interviews provide a number of important insights into the demand for environmental employees and the approaches that companies take to recruit, retain, and train workers. The interviews also examined the question of the success of labour market transitions from other sectors of the economy into the environmental sector.

Originally, 40 employers and employees were contacted from various organizations representing not-for-profit, for profit, and public sectors within growing and declining industries. Interviews were conducted with a mix of small, medium, and large-sized organizations across a range of geographic locations. Out of the original target of 40, 35 individuals responded, which represented a very high response rate (see Appendix C for a list of respondents and the interview questions).

3.1 Industry Perception on Labour Market TransitionsAs indicated by the respondents in the interviews, recruitment of workers from other sectors is not done as a rule, but that it does occur. Approximately one third of the organizations indicated that they had brought in a recruit from outside their sector. In general, these transitions have gone well, although they need to be considered on a case by case basis. Some employers suggested that they would bring in a worker from another sector at a lower level than his or her experience might otherwise indicate, or that they might start the worker off with more general work. For some positions however, there is a need for very specialized skills that workers in other sectors would not have. In some other cases, there are legal requirements that would inhibit the use of workers without specific skills.

Several respondents indicated that they would be open to considering workers from other sectors and that, given the lack of environmental workers, they are starting to examine transition issues. Other respondents, however, indicated that they would not consider these workers and that a transition between sectors and occupations would be very difficult.

A few interview respondents indicated that they are willing to assess workers from other industries. Firms that did transition people in from other industries indicated that it was more challenging, but not impossible. In addition, the different perspectives that these people brought to the jobs were important assets to these firms.

3.2 Industry Perception of the Demand for Environmental EmployeesDemand for environmental workers was found to be rising at a pace well in excess of overall employment growth in the economy, which expanded by 2.0 percent in 2006. The pace of job growth for the environmental sector was equal to if not greater than the pace of overall employment growth for the organizations interviewed (Chart 1).

7

Chart 1: EXPECTED ANNUAL JOB GROWTH: ENVIRONMENT vs. ALL INDUSTRIES

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

ATLANTICCANADA

QUEBEC ONTARIO WEST AVERAGE

EXPECTED ENVIRONMENTAL EMPLOYMENT GROWTH

FORECASTED TOTAL EMPLOYMENT GROWTH

EXPE

CTED

JO

B G

ROW

TH %

Employment growth varied with firm size. Some small businesses did not plan expansion, as they preferred having a small company. Many medium and large firms were experiencing very strong growth, although typically at a slower rate of increase than smaller firms. Small enterprises were experiencing the largest percentage of growth in jobs, partly because an increase of one person was a large percentage increase for a company that had less than ten employees.

Demand for environmental employees was particularly strong in the environment industry, although there were significant variations by type of environmental worker. Employees involved in environmental impact assessment working for mining and oil and gas companies were experiencing very strong growth. This was partly due to the outsourcing of work by the mining and oil and gas companies.

The primary reason provided for employment increases was high demand from the mining and oil and natural gas sector (Chart 2). The second most common answer was that government regulations and policy are increasing demand for environmental workers. The third most common reason was the real estate boom and the risk aversion of lenders and purchasers to identifying potential environmental liabilities.

A number of organizations indicated that there would be a lack of future employment growth for environmental workers. Some of these organizations had just finished significant expansions and did not anticipate any noteworthy increases in the future. Other firms indicated that while their need for environmental work was expanding, they were meeting this demand by outsourcing, so their increase in employment would be minimal.

8

Chart 2: REASONS PROVIDED TO EXPLAIN JOB GROWTH

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

MINING AND OIL& NATURAL GAS

EXPANSION

PERC

ENTA

GE

OF

REAS

ON

S G

IVEN

GOVERNMENTREGULATIONS

REAL ESTATE &RISK AVERSION

LACK OF GROWTH:ECONOMIC

FACTORS

LACK OF GROWTH:EXPANSION JUST

ENDED

LACK OF GROWTH:OUTSOURCING

Table 6 lists the occupations that were identified by the respondents as being employed in the environmental sector. Those listed were mentioned three or more times. In many instances, responses were vague, with generic terms such as “engineers,” “all engineers,” or “technologists” being indicated. This list is similar to the priority occupations. The new occupations include chemists, geographers, chemical engineers, and mechanical engineers.

9

Table 6: ENVIRONMENT-RELATED OCCUPATIONSDESCRIPTIONS OCCURRENCES

Biologists 16

Technicians 16

Engineers 14

Chemists 8

Project and Other Managers 7

Technologists 6

Civil Engineers 5

Geographers 5

Operators 5

Chemical Engineers 3

Environmental Engineers 3

Geologists 3

Mechanical Engineers 3

3.3 Common Industry Practices in Recruitment and Assessment Interview responses indicate that most firms use standard recruitment practices. These include job fairs, trade shows, recruiters, university recruitments, student worker retention, and “word of mouth,” as well as advertisements on the organization’s website, on third party websites, and in newspapers or trade journals. Small firms tend to rely on “word of mouth” and more often recruit locally, while medium-sized firms recruit locally and nationally. Larger firms recruit more nationally and internationally, and some use referral bonuses. Generally, more senior positions require broader geographical searches, conducted by recruiters. Some companies follow a passive approach initially by collecting resumes after a position is advertised, and later pursue a more active search if this approach fails.

Assessment is based on a determination of the minimum qualification standards for the position followed by a comparison of resumes to these standards as part of an initial screening. This step is often done by the human resources (HR) department before the list of potential candidates is provided to the manager.

Most firms use a formal interview in the selection process. Very few organizations use other mechanisms, such as portfolios or simulated tests; a few use psychological and attitude or behavioural tests. The focus of the interview is to assess the formal qualifications of a job candidate to ensure there is a “fit” between the candidate and the organization. Sometimes the potential to learn is also part of the assessment; however, this is usually not done in a formal manner. Typically, references and credentials are checked before a position is offered.

Most firms do not use any formal “prior learning assessment” mechanism. They tend to rely on personal assessments of a candidate’s qualifications and the type of training required. Larger companies tend to use more formal mechanisms in recognizing prior learning, but even here most firms do not follow a formal approach. Even for recognition of foreign credentials, many firms rely on the experience of practitioners within the firms or the knowledge of trustworthy individuals, such as university professors, to assess these credentials.

10

For small firms, brand recognition is a barrier to recruitment. However, the potential of working in the environmental sector often offsets the potential reluctance of recruits to join a small firm. The small size of the firm seems to be a positive factor for employees once they accept the job, and it does not impact worker retention. For large companies, brand recognition often helps attract potential employees. In some cases, however, the bureaucracy within large firms is a negative factor. In most instances, new employees seem to be content with their selections, regardless of the size of the firm. This could be a result of self-selection in the initial stages of the recruitment process, whereby those recruits not interested in working for a small firm will not apply and vice versa.

3.4 Training Practices: Industry Experience In the key informant interviews, all organizations indicated that they support learning. The method for determining the required learning varied widely. Some firms follow a top-down approach, while some use a bottom-up approach. For others, it is a shared effort between management and the employee. The most common form of training is job and sector specific. It often includes on-the-job training, a formal training course, college or university courses, and mentoring. Many of the larger firms have in-house training programs.

3.5 Retention Practices: Industry Experience Retention methods mentioned in the interviews included flexible work hours, social activities, and challenging and rewarding work. Larger companies also provide a multitude of career paths.

There seems to be a large variation in staff turnover that is more region-sensitive than industry specific. A minority of organizations provide a numerical estimate on staff turnover. In several instances, it was stated that turnover had been stable for a prolonged period, but had increased recently. Among the 14 organizations that provided information, staff turnover in British Columbia and Alberta was far higher on average than elsewhere in the country (Chart 3). In general, public sector turnover is lower than private sector turnover, although several private sector companies have low turnover.

Chart 3: ANNUAL STAFF TURNOVER BY REGION

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

PERC

ENT

OF

EMPL

OYED

STA

FF

BRITISHCOMLUMBIA

ALBERTA ONTARIO QUEBEC ATLANTICCANADA

11

4.0 CONCLUSIONS AND NEXT STEPS

As demonstrated throughout this report, the environmental sector faces significant labour shortages. Environmental workers tend to have higher levels of education than workers in all industries, and these types of workers have much lower unemployment rates than the workforce as a whole. As such, the people currently available to work in the environmental sector tend to be fewer in number than those available for other sectors. In addition, since most environmental occupations require university degrees, it takes longer for the needed workers to emerge from the education system than it does for workers in occupations that require lower levels of education. These problems were highlighted in the interviews by a large number of employers who require specialized labour. Given these circumstances the skills shortages facing the environmental sector are likely to persist.

To address these shortages, several steps may need to be taken:

• It is important to use more effective recruitment methods to be able to select better candidates than those derived from interviews alone. This would involve broadening the available labour pool by utilizing current competencies recognition and prior learning assessment mechanisms. This would also involve using job tryouts to recruit and select workers. The supply of environmental employees can be broadened by accessing the available workers from the declining industries that may have the skills and competencies needed by the environmental sector. • In Canada, when there are large-scale layoffs, a provincial rapid response program is initiated, and an industrial adjustment specialist or team facilitates the organization and operation of a re-employment assistance committee or labour management adjustment team. A pilot project is recommended that ties into the public sector’s mass layoff program and thus places the information before a group of motivated job seekers who might possess many of the skills that are needed in the environmental sector. • Companies could use the research from the pilot project recommended above to facilitate the implementation of strategies for recruitment, skills recognition mechanisms, selection processes, and retention methods. SMEs in particular are likely to benefit from a clear articulation of different strategies, which could be implemented independently or in cooperation with ECO Canada where national action is required. • Estimates suggest that there is a significant likelihood of alleviating some of the environmental sector’s labour shortage by embracing work-to-work transitions. Given the reluctance of some firms in the industry to take this step, the practicality of this initiative should be examined in depth via the recommended pilot project, which will be able to determine more precisely the magnitude of gaps in skills and competency profiles and the degree of training needed to transition workers from other sectors into the environmental sector. The pilot project would also increase awareness among employers and employees about potential transition programs.

A pilot project is more likely to succeed in the environmental sector than in many other sectors for a number of reasons. Work-to-work transitions have been observed in the sector and many employers indicate that they are willing to consider candidates that have the potential to learn and grow into their roles. Given the higher level of education of environmental workers and the tendency for worker mobility tends to rise with education, the environment sector appears primed to benefit from a labour market transition program.

12

GLOSSARY OF TERMS

Environmental employment includes individuals who work in at least one of the sectors of the economy related to:

• Environmental Protection (i.e., air quality, water quality, land quality, waste management, restoration and reclamation, human and environmental health and safety, environmental protection management) • Conservation and Preservation of Natural Resources (i.e., fisheries and wildlife, forestry, agriculture, mining, energy, parks and natural reserves, natural resources management) • Environmental Sustainability (i.e., education, research and development, policy and legislation, communications and policy awareness, management for sustainable development)

Statistics Canada’s definitions:Environmental goods and services are goods and services that are used, or can potentially be used, to measure, prevent, limit, or correct environmental damage (both natural or by human activity) to water, air, and soil, as well as problems related to waste, noise, and ecosystems. They also include clean or resource-efficient (“eco-efficient”) technologies that decrease material inputs, reduce energy consumption, recover valuable by-products, reduce emissions, and/or minimize waste disposal problems.2

Environmental industry consists of activities that produce goods and services to measure, prevent, limit, minimize, or correct environmental damage to water, air, and soil, as well as problems to waste, noise, and eco-systems. The industry also includes cleaner technologies, products and services that reduce environmental risk and minimize pollution and resource use. The industry consists of all establishments operating in Canada that are involved either in whole or in part in the production of environmental goods, the provision of environmental services, and the undertaking of environment-related construction activities.3

The North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) is an industry classification system developed by the statistical agencies of Canada, Mexico, and the United States. It is designed to provide common definitions of the industrial structures of the three countries and a common statistical framework to facilitate the analysis of the three economies. NAICS is based on a production-oriented, or supply-based conceptual framework, in that establishments are grouped into industries according to similarity in the production processes used to produce goods and services. A production-oriented industry classification system ensures that statistical agencies in the three countries can produce information on inputs and outputs, industrial performance, productivity, unit labour costs, employment, and other statistics that reflect structural changes occurring in the three economies.4

2 Statistics Canada, (2004).“Environment Industry Survey: Business Sector 2002”. Statistics Canada, Catalogue no. 16F0008XIE, Ottawa.3 Orok, R. (2004), Measuring Employment in the Environment Industry, Statistics Canada, Catalogue no. 16-001-MIE no. 001, Ottawa.4 Statistics Canada, www.statcan.ca/english/Subjects/Standard/naics/2002/naics02-intro.htm

GLOSSARY OF TERMS

13

Appendix A: MACRO FORECAST

Labour Demand ForecastEnvironmental employees are unique in that they are employed throughout the economy in different North American Industrial Classification System (NAICS) industries. Therefore, to understand the demand for environmental employees, a broad perspective needs to be taken that encompasses all the NAICS industries where they are employed. For the current forecast, the historical data from Statistics Canada was used in combination with the most recent macroeconomic and industrial forecasts developed by the Centre for Spatial Economics (C4SE).

One advantage of forecasting the trends in employment demand throughout the economy is that this information also helps to identify industries that are likely to shed labour and therefore may provide workers to the environmental sector.

The steps taken in forecasting environmental employment include:

• Identifying the current level of employment • Demographic and labour force projections • Macroeconomic forecast • Forecasts of industrial output and employment • Forecast of the environmental composition of industrial employment

Historical Employment DataStatistics Canada employment data are available at the national level from the Labour Force Survey (LFS) for industrial employment. These data are available from 1987 to 2006 at an annual frequency for a detailed level of aggregation. The LFS uses the NAICS to classify industrial employment. The identification of the current level of environmental employment is difficult because this sector is not identified in the official data. For the current study, historical data on environmental employment was based on ECO Canada’s recent publication, Profile of Canadian Environmental Employment 2007 (see Table A.1).

APPENDIX A

14

Table A.1: ENVIRONMENTAL EMPLOYMENT BY MAJOR INDUSTRY GROUPINDUSTRYGROUP NUMBEROFENVIRONMENTALEMPLOYEES SHAREOFTOTALWORKFORCE

Administrative and Support, Waste Management, and Remediation 80,290 12.2%

Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing and Hunting 34,438 7.4%

Professional, Scientific and Technical Services 69,825 6.4%

Public Administration 52,372 6.2%

Mining and Oil & Gas Extraction 9,639 4.5%

Construction 41,273 3.9%

Other Services (except Public Administration) 24,354 3.5%

Arts, Recreation, Accommodation, and Food Services 36,679 2.8%

Utilities, Transportation, and Warehousing 23,217 2.5%

Manufacturing 42,836 2.0%

Education, Health, and Social Assistance 55,845 1.9%

Wholesale/Retail Trade 46,106 1.8%

Information, Finance, Insurance, Real Estate, and Management of Companies 13,542 0.9%

TOTAL 530,414 3.2%

Source: ECO Canada, 2007

Demographic and Labour Force ProjectionsDemographics provide a number of inevitable outcomes that are reflections of Canada’s demographic past and reasonable assumptions regarding the future. To understand the future, therefore, it is helpful to understand the past. Canada had a large post–Second World War baby boom, followed by a baby bust generation. In the 1980s and 1990s, Canada experienced the echo boom as the baby boomers had children. The aggregate birth rate rose for a few years due to the large number of baby boomers having children, but the fertility rate, which represents the number of children per woman of childbearing age, remained low.

Now that the baby boomers have mostly moved out of their childbearing years, the birth rate is declining. Chart A.1 illustrates Canada’s population distribution by age/sex cohorts in 1971. At that time the population distribution somewhat resembled a pyramid, although even by then the drop in the fertility rate in the 1960s had started to cause the base of the pyramid to be smaller than the 5–9 and 10–14 age cohorts. As shown in Chart A.2, by 2006 the baby boom generation still comprised the largest five-year age cohorts, with those 45–49 being the single largest group. Subsequent age cohorts are smaller. With the low birth rate and a large baby boom generation, Canada faces an ageing society as the base of the population pyramid is not being replenished.

APPENDIX A

15

Chart A.1: POPULATION DISTRIBUTION BY AGE AND SEX, 1971

POPULATION, THOUSANDS

1200 1000 800 600 400 200 01400 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400

AGE,

FIV

E YE

AR C

OH

ORT

S

90+

85-89

80-84

75-79

70-74

65-69

60-64

55-59

50-54

45-49

40-44

35-39

30-34

25-29

20-24

15-19

10-14

05-09

00-04

MALE FEMALE

Chart A.2: POPULATION DISTRIBUTION BY AGE AND SEX, 2006

90+

85-89

80-84

75-79

70-74

65-69

60-64

55-59

50-54

45-49

40-44

35-39

30-34

25-29

20-24

15-19

10-14

05-09

00-04

1200 1000 800 600 400 200 01400 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400

AGE,

FIV

E YE

AR C

OH

ORT

S

POPULATION, THOUSANDS

MALE FEMALE

APPENDIX A

16

Without immigration, Canada’s population will experience slowing growth and, ultimately, decline. The Canadian government has responded to this demographic outcome by increasing international immigration to just less than 1 percent of total population. It is assumed that this policy will continue in the future, which will help to keep Canada’s population growing at roughly 0.8 percent per year over 2007 to 2011 compared with 1.0 percent on average over the past decade.

The C4SE projects that the under 15 years category will shrink by 0.7 percent on average through 2011, while the 65 and over age category will expand by 2.4 percent on average. The working age (15 years and over) will rise by 1.1 percent on average from 2006 to 2011 after growing by 1.4 percent on average over the past five years. Given the increase in the 65 and over age category, the proportion of those aged 65 and older in the total population is also increasing. In 1989, the share of 65 and older in the population was 14 percent; by 2006 it had edged up to 16 percent, which is a rise of around 2 percent in 17 years. From this point on, the compositional shift accelerates, with the share reaching 18 percent by 2013 and just under 19 percent by 2015, which is an increase of around 3 percent in less than a decade. As shown by Chart A.3, by 2015 there will be more people aged 65 and older than under 15.

Chart A.3: AGING PUTS PRESSURE ON LABOUR SUPPLY

0

5

10

15

20

25

65 +

UNDER 15

15-64 (RIGHT)

1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015

PERC

ENT

OF

TOTA

L PO

PULA

TIO

N

APPENDIX A

17

The rising proportion of 65 and over has negative implications for labour force growth, as labour force participation drops significantly once people reach their fifties (Chart A.4). The peak of the baby boom will reach 50 around 2010. While the labour force is forecast to expand by 1.3 percent on average over the next five years, which is above the average increase in the total population, there is a significant slowing over time. Labour force growth is expected to exceed total population growth until 2009, but slide below the rise in adult population growth by 2010 and beyond as more and more baby boomers drop out of the workforce.

Chart A.4: LOWER PARTICIPATION RATES AFTER AGE 50

PART

ICIP

ATIO

N R

ATE

BY A

GE/

SEX

COH

ORT

, 200

5, %

0

20

40

60

80

100

10

30

50

70

90

15-19 20-24 25-29 30-34 35-39 40-44 45-49 50-54 55-59 60-64 65-69 70+

MALE FEMALE

Currently, there is generally less surplus labour available for jobs that require higher levels of formal education than for jobs that require lower levels of formal education. Chart A.5 illustrates that the unemployment rate, which is an indication of the availability of labour, is lower for people with higher levels of education. Moreover, labour shortages for highly educated workers are likely to persist longer than for workers with lower levels of formal education because it takes four or more years for students to complete their university studies compared with two or three years at the community college level. Consequently, there is the prospect that labour shortages will be particularly acute for jobs that require university education over the next five years.

APPENDIX A

18

Chart A.5: LOWER UNEMPLOYMENT RATE AMONG EDUCATED WORKFORCE

0

4

6

10

12

14

8

2

UN

EMPL

OYM

ENT

RATE

, %

0-8

YRS

SOM

E H

IGH

SCH

OO

L

HIG

HSC

HO

OL

SOM

E PO

ST-

SECO

ND

ARY

PO

ST-

SECO

ND

ARY

UN

IVER

SITY

BACH

ELO

R'S

ABO

VEU

NIV

ERSI

TYBA

CHEL

OR'

S

The Canadian economy is influenced by several major trends. First, strong global economic growth has boosted the commodity prices, which in turn have contributed to the rise in the value of the Canadian dollar (CAD), an increase in Canada’s terms of trade, and a rise in aggregate corporate profits. High profit levels are feeding into business spending on fixed investment and higher employment levels. Second, the United States fiscal and current account deficits are resulting in a long-term depreciation of the US dollar, which is further contributing to the rise in the value of the CAD. The rising CAD is affecting Canadian trade and causing a significant drag on the economy from a contraction in real net exports. This situation is made worse by weaker growth in the United States economy. Third, domestic demand is growing quickly, supported by strong gains in corporate profits, personal disposable income, government revenue, and moderately low real interest rates. These conditions have resulted in a housing boom. Fourth, technological change is continuing to enhance the quality of and demand for computer and information technology. Table A.2 below provides forecasts for macroeconomic parameters of the Canadian economy for 2006 to 2011.

APPENDIX A

19

Table A.2: MACROECONOMIC SUMMARY TABLE (Billions of 1997 Dollars, unless otherwise noted)

2006:3 2006:4 2007:1 2007:2 2007:3 2007:4 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011REAL EXPENDITUREGross Domestic Product 1192.9 1197.2 1204.1 1211.6 1219.7 1228.7 1189.5 1216.0 1246.9 1282.8 1324.0 1362.6

% change at annual rates 2.0 1.4 2.3 2.5 2.7 3.0 2.7 2.2 2.5 2.9 3.2 2.9Consumption 695.1 700.5 706.5 712.5 718.3 724.4 690.6 715.4 739.5 763.5 787.9 813.0

% change at annual rates 5.1 3.1 3.5 3.4 3.3 3.5 4.1 3.6 3.4 3.2 3.2 3.2Government Current 226.1 227.1 229.0 230.8 232.4 233.6 225.2 231.5 237.0 242.1 246.9 251.3

% change at annual rates 2.0 1.8 3.5 3.1 2.8 2.2 3.4 2.8 2.4 2.1 2.0 1.8Government Investment 34.6 34.8 35.1 35.4 35.8 36.2 34.4 35.6 36.7 37.8 38.8 39.4

% change at annual rates 2.0 2.1 4.2 3.0 4.8 4.0 6.6 3.4 3.1 3.0 2.6 1.4Residential Construction 68.9 69.0 68.8 67.7 66.5 64.9 69.8 67.0 61.4 58.5 58.1 59.2

% change at annual rates -6.9 0.3 -0.9 -6.2 -7.2 -9.3 2.4 -4.0 -8.3 -4.7 -0.6 1.8Machinery & Equipment 116.1 116.7 118.2 119.6 120.2 120.8 114.7 119.7 123.4 127.2 132.5 139.1

% change at annual rates 8.5 2.3 5.3 4.7 1.9 2.2 8.0 4.4 3.1 3.1 4.2 4.9Non-Res. Construction 62.4 64.0 65.7 67.2 68.5 69.7 61.7 67.8 69.8 70.4 72.4 74.7

% change at annual rates 10.4 10.5 11.1 9.5 8.0 6.9 10.7 9.8 2.9 0.9 2.9 3.2Exports 478.6 484.2 486.4 489.5 493.6 499.8 478.3 492.3 515.8 542.7 570.7 596.6

% change at annual rates 3.5 4.8 1.8 2.6 3.5 5.1 1.3 2.9 4.8 5.2 5.2 4.5Imports 504.5 503.7 510.4 516.3 521.2 526.6 498.6 518.6 542.7 565.2 588.3 615.2

% change at annual rates 5.1 -0.6 5.4 4.7 3.9 4.2 5.2 4.0 4.6 4.1 4.1 4.6Net Exports -25.9 -19.5 -24.0 -26.8 -27.6 -26.8 -20.2 -26.3 -27.0 -22.4 -17.6 -18.6Inventory Change 13.8 0.9 0.5 0.8 1.4 1.9 11.0 1.1 2.5 3.2 3.5 3.7Housing Starts (‘000s) 220 222 219 209 201 189 228 204 171 155 160 169Motor Vehicle Sales (‘000s) 1830 1659 1646 1626 1612 1614 1668 1625 1610 1593 1591 1614

PRICESGDP Deflator 1.21 1.21 1.23 1.24 1.24 1.25 1.21 1.24 1.27 1.29 1.31 1.33

% change year ago 1.5 0.5 1.4 2.3 2.8 3.2 2.2 2.4 2.4 1.4 1.5 1.9CPI (Unadjusted) 130.4 130.0 131.3 132.4 133.0 133.9 129.9 132.7 135.5 138.0 140.6 143.1

% change year ago 1.7 1.3 1.9 1.6 2.0 3.0 2.0 2.1 2.2 1.9 1.8 1.8CPI - Core 129.1 129.9 130.5 131.5 132.1 132.9 128.7 131.8 134.7 137.7 140.6 143.7

% change year ago 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.4 2.4 1.9 2.4 2.2 2.2 2.2 2.2Hourly Earnings $ 24.6 24.7 25.0 25.2 25.5 25.7 24.5 25.3 26.2 27.0 28.0 29.1

% change year ago 4.1 3.8 2.6 4.0 3.7 3.8 4.3 3.5 3.3 3.2 3.7 3.9Unit Labor Costs 119.6 121.0 122.8 123.6 124.5 125.1 119.6 124.0 126.7 128.6 130.8 133.1

% change year ago 2.8 3.2 3.2 4.1 4.1 3.4 3.3 3.7 2.1 1.5 1.7 1.8

LABOUR MARKETPopulation (millions) 32.6 32.7 32.8 32.8 32.9 33.0 32.5 32.8 33.1 33.4 33.6 33.8

% change year ago 0.8 0.8 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.8 0.8 0.9 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.6Labour Force (millions) 17.6 17.7 17.8 17.9 18.0 18.1 17.6 17.9 18.2 18.5 18.7 18.8

% change year ago 1.5 1.5 2.1 2.0 2.0 2.1 1.4 2.0 1.5 1.3 1.1 0.6Participation Rate % 67.2 67.2 67.6 67.6 67.7 67.8 67.2 67.7 67.9 68.0 68.1 67.9Average Weekly Hours 33.3 33.4 33.5 33.5 33.5 33.6 33.4 33.5 33.6 33.6 33.6 33.5Employment (millions) 16.5 16.6 16.8 16.8 16.9 16.9 16.5 16.8 17.0 17.2 17.5 17.6

% change year ago 1.9 1.9 2.4 1.9 2.1 1.9 2.0 2.1 1.1 1.3 1.4 1.0Unemployment Rate % 6.4 6.2 6.1 6.2 6.3 6.4 6.3 6.2 6.6 6.6 6.4 6.0Productivity (GDP/Hour) 41.7 41.5 41.3 41.4 41.5 41.6 41.6 41.5 41.9 42.6 43.4 44.3

% change year ago 1.1 0.3 -0.6 -0.1 -0.5 0.3 0.8 -0.2 1.2 1.6 1.9 2.1

INCOME DISTRIBUTIONLabour Income 732.0 743.2 758.7 768.7 779.3 789.0 730.1 773.9 810.6 846.6 888.6 930.8

% change year ago 5.4 5.6 5.2 6.2 6.5 6.2 6.1 6.0 4.7 4.4 5.0 4.7Pre-Tax Corp. Profits 203 204 201 206 209 215 200 208 220 226 236 249

% change year ago 5.6 0.8 2.6 4.3 2.7 5.3 5.7 3.7 5.7 2.9 4.3 5.6

FINANCIAL INDICATORSCANADA3-Month T-Bills 4.15 4.17 4.17 4.18 4.20 4.20 4.03 4.19 4.25 4.41 4.49 4.4910-Year GOCs 4.16 4.05 4.10 4.20 4.21 4.24 4.22 4.19 4.36 4.62 4.83 4.90UNITED STATES3-Month T-Bills 4.91 4.90 4.98 4.96 4.95 4.94 4.73 4.96 4.92 4.87 4.81 4.5910-Year Treasury Bonds 4.90 4.63 4.68 4.70 4.80 4.90 4.79 4.77 4.99 5.14 5.37 5.33Exchange RatesUS Dollars per Cdn Dollar 0.892 0.878 0.854 0.901 0.910 0.907 0.882 0.892 0.898 0.895 0.887 0.886

Note: Forecasts developed by the Centre for Spatial Economics as of May 2007

APPENDIX A

20

The forecasts of industrial output (Table A.3) indicate that most industries that supply raw materials to feed global demand will generally grow as fast as or faster than has been the case historically due to strong global economic conditions. In contrast, those industries outside the natural resource sector that rely on external markets will generally experience weaker growth than has been the case historically due to factors such as more moderate growth in the United States and the high value of the Canadian dollar. Finally, industries that directly supply the domestic market, such as services, will generally fair well, as they are sheltered from international competition. Furthermore, demand for these industries tends to rise along with or in excess of domestic income. Total real GDP is forecasted to average 2.7 percent during 2006 to 2007.

Table A.3

REAL GDP AT BASIC PRICES, ANNUAL PERCENT CHANGE2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 1996-06 2002-06 2006-11

Total GDP 2.9 2.9 2.2 2.5 2.9 3.2 2.9 3.4 2.8 2.7Agriculture 5.0 -0.9 0.8 1.9 2.1 1.6 0.6 -3.0 2.7 1.4Forestry 0.2 -3.9 -10.1 -0.2 -0.8 -4.1 -0.9 --- 1.8 -3.3Fishing & Trapping -4.4 2.4 -1.3 1.0 1.3 0.9 -0.7 --- 0.8 0.2Mining 0.7 0.9 2.0 3.0 2.8 3.1 2.1 2.0 2.5 2.6Oil & Gas -0.9 3.2 2.6 3.4 2.6 2.8 2.0 1.3 2.3 2.7Other Mining 3.0 -2.2 1.2 2.4 3.1 3.6 2.2 3.0 2.7 2.5Utilities 4.4 -1.8 0.5 2.7 2.6 2.4 2.2 1.0 1.9 2.1Electric Power 5.7 -2.2 -0.1 2.9 2.8 2.5 2.4 0.2 2.1 2.1Other Utilities -1.2 -0.3 3.0 1.6 1.8 1.7 1.3 5.1 1.1 1.9Construction 5.6 7.1 3.2 -1.0 -0.3 2.3 3.0 5.2 5.2 1.4Manufacturing 0.9 -0.7 -0.6 1.0 1.6 2.4 2.1 2.8 0.5 1.3Food, Beverages & Tobacco 1.6 -1.1 0.8 2.3 2.1 1.3 -0.3 1.5 0.1 1.3Textiles, Clothing & Leather -9.5 -9.0 -4.6 -2.4 -3.7 -2.3 -1.6 -2.1 -7.2 -2.9Wood Products 0.8 -2.2 -8.0 0.1 0.1 -3.2 0.3 4.8 3.2 -2.2Paper Products -3.4 -7.1 -6.6 0.8 1.2 -3.3 1.4 -0.2 -1.3 -1.4Printing -1.0 -2.5 -2.1 1.2 1.8 1.6 1.0 1.2 -2.8 0.7Petroleum and Coal Products -1.8 1.5 0.9 2.2 1.4 1.3 0.8 1.9 0.3 1.3Chemicals 0.9 1.3 1.8 3.6 3.5 2.9 1.1 3.3 3.0 2.6Rubber & Plastics -2.8 -5.6 -1.9 2.0 2.2 3.8 2.2 2.9 -0.7 1.6Non-Metallic Minerals 1.0 0.7 1.1 0.6 1.2 3.1 2.7 4.8 2.3 1.8Primary Metals 2.9 0.7 -2.0 1.7 3.2 4.4 2.5 3.0 1.3 1.9Fabricated Metals 1.2 1.0 0.6 0.5 1.5 3.6 3.0 5.3 0.5 1.8Machinery 3.0 4.9 1.3 0.7 0.7 1.7 2.4 2.6 0.7 1.4Computer & Electronic Products 7.1 4.0 4.4 2.8 2.7 3.8 4.4 5.4 3.9 3.6Electrical Equipment, Appliances & Components -1.7 -2.1 1.2 -0.9 -0.9 0.1 0.8 0.1 -6.8 0.1Transportation Equipment 2.3 -1.0 -0.9 -1.9 1.0 6.2 5.0 2.6 1.1 1.8Furniture & Related Products 1.3 -4.3 2.2 1.5 0.9 1.9 2.0 4.3 -2.7 1.7Miscellaneous Manufacturing -0.9 6.2 4.1 1.0 2.1 3.1 1.4 5.4 3.1 2.3Wholesale Trade 7.1 8.1 1.7 3.9 4.5 5.3 5.1 6.2 5.7 4.1Retail Trade 4.8 5.8 3.8 3.8 3.4 3.3 3.4 4.5 4.7 3.5Transportation 3.8 2.5 1.6 3.4 3.1 2.6 1.7 3.1 2.4 2.5Pipelines 3.4 0.6 -1.2 4.3 3.9 3.8 2.8 2.8 2.1 2.7Other Transportation 3.8 2.8 1.9 3.3 3.1 2.5 1.6 3.1 2.4 2.5Warehousing 5.6 7.4 3.5 3.6 3.4 3.3 2.8 5.3 5.6 3.3Information & Culture 4.1 2.4 3.4 3.7 4.1 4.2 3.8 6.5 2.9 3.8Finance, Insurance and Real estate 3.4 3.8 3.6 3.4 4.0 4.2 3.8 3.6 3.3 3.8Professional, Scientific & Technical Services 3.1 3.0 3.0 2.5 3.1 3.7 3.2 7.4 3.1 3.1Administrative, Support, Waste & Remediation Services 3.6 6.1 4.5 3.8 4.3 4.5 4.0 3.3 5.1 4.2Education Services 1.6 1.6 2.1 2.5 2.4 1.9 1.7 0.8 1.7 2.1Health/Social Services 1.4 2.1 2.5 2.9 2.9 2.9 2.8 1.9 1.9 2.8Health Services 1.4 2.0 2.8 3.3 3.2 3.1 3.2 1.8 1.8 3.1Social Services 1.3 2.2 1.9 2.0 2.4 2.3 2.0 2.1 2.0 2.1Arts, Entertainment & Recreation Services 0.7 2.6 2.3 0.9 2.1 1.8 0.6 3.2 1.3 1.5Accommodation & Food Services 1.0 3.7 3.2 1.9 2.8 3.9 1.6 2.4 1.2 2.7Repair & Maintenance Services 2.5 2.1 2.7 3.0 3.1 3.1 2.7 8.7 2.9 2.9Personal, Laundry & Private Households 1.5 2.2 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.0 1.1 2.2 1.2 2.0Other Services 1.8 2.5 3.0 3.7 3.7 3.1 2.7 5.9 3.0 3.2Government Services 1.4 2.6 1.9 2.5 2.3 2.1 2.0 2.3 2.4 2.2

Note: Forecasts developed by the Centre for Spatial Economics as of May 2007

APPENDIX A

21

Table A.4 describes employment forecasts. The aggregate industrial employment outlook was constructed based on the industrial output forecast and trend labour productivity changes that were recorded over history from 1987 to 2006, although for the Fishing and Forestry industries the trend productivity from 1997 was used owing to a lack of output data prior to that date. The resulting employment outlook was adjusted in two ways. First trend productivity estimates were adjusted for the forecast period if the trend was an extreme value compared with the average productivity outlook. For example, the trend productivity for computer and electronic products was adjusted down from 5.8% to 3.3%. Second, the employment outlook that was derived by extrapolating employment based on output and historical trend productivity was adjusted to replicate the aggregate employment outlook produced for the most recent Canadian macroeconomic forecast.

Table A.4:EMPLOYMENT OUTLOOK, ANNUAL PERCENT CHANGE

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 1996-06 2001-06 2006-11TOTAL 1.4 1.9 2.1 1.1 1.3 1.4 1.0 2.1 2.0 1.4Agriculture 5.4 0.8 0.9 0.7 0.7 0.0 -1.1 -2.0 1.4 0.2Forestry -3.6 -9.4 -11.5 -2.7 -3.5 -7.0 -4.0 -2.8 -3.1 -5.8Fishing & Trapping -2.2 0.8 -2.0 -1.0 -0.9 -1.6 -3.2 -1.4 0.5 -1.7Oil & Gas 10.0 15.7 3.4 2.9 1.9 1.8 0.9 3.2 6.7 2.2Other Mining 13.4 13.5 1.1 0.9 1.4 1.7 0.2 2.9 5.7 1.1Electric Power -6.4 -4.6 0.2 1.9 1.5 1.0 0.8 -0.3 -0.3 1.1Other Utilities -4.7 4.2 2.2 -0.6 -0.5 -0.9 -1.3 0.3 -0.7 -0.2Construction 7.1 4.9 3.8 -1.8 -1.2 1.1 1.7 4.2 5.3 0.7Food, Beverages & Tobacco -2.5 -4.9 1.1 1.3 0.8 -0.2 -1.8 1.0 1.4 0.2Textiles, Clothing & Leather -15.1 -10.1 -4.9 -4.0 -5.5 -4.3 -3.7 -4.4 -9.1 -4.5Wood Products -9.2 -1.6 -7.6 -0.7 -0.9 -4.4 -1.0 2.0 0.6 -2.9Paper Products -2.5 -7.0 -6.8 -0.6 -0.5 -5.2 -0.5 -2.3 -2.8 -2.8Printing -12.1 -8.8 -1.1 0.9 1.3 0.9 0.2 0.0 -0.9 0.4Petroleum and Coal Products 4.5 -10.9 0.6 0.6 -0.4 -0.7 -1.3 -1.1 -0.4 -0.2Chemicals -1.5 -10.3 0.4 1.0 0.6 -0.2 -2.0 0.9 -2.7 0.0Rubber & Plastics 3.8 -9.2 -2.9 -0.3 -0.2 1.1 -0.5 2.3 1.5 -0.6Non-Metallic Minerals -4.0 2.4 1.3 -0.5 -0.1 1.6 1.1 2.8 2.4 0.7Primary Metals -1.7 -0.8 -3.3 -0.9 0.4 1.3 -0.6 -2.3 -1.8 -0.6Fabricated Metals 8.4 -3.4 -0.8 -2.2 -1.3 0.5 -0.2 3.9 1.1 -0.8Machinery -5.6 -5.5 0.3 -1.5 -1.8 -1.0 -0.4 2.5 -0.9 -0.9Computer & Electronic Products 4.2 1.7 2.3 -0.7 -1.0 -0.2 0.4 1.6 -5.2 0.2Electrical Equipment, Appliances & Components

-8.4 8.5 0.6 -2.8 -3.1 -2.3 -1.7 -1.1 -4.1 -1.9

Transportation Equipment -2.6 -2.1 -1.7 -4.0 -1.3 3.6 2.4 2.1 -0.2 -0.2Furniture & Related Products -10.8 -3.1 1.6 -0.4 -1.2 -0.5 -0.5 3.4 -0.6 -0.2Miscellaneous Manufacturing -8.4 -0.3 3.7 -0.8 0.1 0.9 -0.9 1.0 -0.2 0.6Wholesale Trade 4.2 0.5 0.3 1.1 1.5 2.0 1.8 3.3 2.0 1.4Retail Trade 2.2 2.9 3.6 2.2 1.6 1.3 1.3 2.1 2.2 2.0Pipelines -7.4 -20.0 -3.0 1.2 0.7 0.3 -0.7 -4.9 0.0 -0.3Other Transportation -0.7 0.7 1.6 1.7 1.2 0.4 -0.6 1.7 0.6 0.9Warehousing 0.3 11.6 3.9 2.6 2.2 1.8 1.2 4.4 2.5 2.3Information & Culture 2.9 2.9 1.3 0.4 0.6 0.4 -0.1 1.6 -0.2 0.5Finance, Insurance, Real estate 2.8 5.3 3.0 1.4 1.8 1.7 1.3 1.9 3.5 1.8Professional, Scientific & Technical Services

3.1 3.8 3.0 1.1 1.6 1.9 1.3 4.4 2.0 1.8

Administrative, Support, Waste & Remediation Services

3.8 5.5 4.8 2.8 3.0 3.0 2.4 5.1 5.1 3.2

Education Services 6.8 4.7 3.1 2.1 1.7 1.1 0.7 2.4 3.4 1.7Health Services 1.3 2.2 3.4 2.6 2.3 2.0 1.9 2.5 3.2 2.4Social Services -3.7 5.2 3.4 2.1 2.4 2.1 1.7 2.7 2.4 2.3Arts, Entertainment & Recreation Services

-3.9 -0.5 3.6 0.8 1.8 1.2 0.0 3.9 2.5 1.5

Accommodation & Food Services -0.8 1.0 3.6 1.0 1.6 2.6 0.1 1.8 1.5 1.8Repair & Maintenance Services 0.3 -2.6 1.0 0.1 0.0 -0.3 -0.7 0.8 0.0 0.0Personal, Laundry & Private Households

4.1 2.1 2.7 1.3 1.1 0.6 -0.4 2.4 2.9 1.0

Other Services -5.2 4.7 1.7 1.1 0.9 0.1 -0.5 -0.9 0.5 0.6Government Services 0.9 0.5 1.7 1.0 0.6 0.2 -0.1 0.4 1.3 0.7

Note: Forecasts developed by the Centre for Spatial Economics as of May 2007

APPENDIX A

22

Appendix B: INDUSTRIAL SHARE FORECAST METHODOLOGY

To construct the detailed 3-digit NAICS industrial employment forecast, the C4SE used the same approach that was used by FÁS/ESRI for the Irish occupational forecast. 5 FÁS/ESRI projects the occupational shares of industrial employment using a variety of methods, such as geometric extrapolation, or they fit a linear or semi-logarithmic regression equation to the trend of each share. If a regression approach is utilized, the fitted equation is used to project the trend value to provide an estimate of the share in the target year. A decision rule is used to select the projection method. The rule is based on the absolute change in the share over the past five years. For example, if the absolute change in the occupational share over the relevant period was less than 10 percent, between 10 and 40 percent, or more than 40 percent, FÁS/ESRI used a semi-logarithmic regression, geometric extrapolation, or linear regression respectively. The equations used in these approaches are as follows:

Geometric: âij(t+k) = a(0)

ij (1+r)n

Linear: âij(t+k) = □ij + □ij (t+k)

Semi-log: âij(t+k) = □ij + □ij ln (t+k)

Where: âij – projected share of the ith occupation in the jth sector t – time k – number of years to the target date n – number of years from the beginning of the projection period to the target date □ij – intercept of the projection equation □ij – regression coefficient for the variable in question

5 Hughes, G., (1999). “The FÁS/ESRI Occupational Forecasting Model for Ireland”, in Havlíèková, V. (editor) Forecasting Education and Training Needs in Transition Economies: Lessons from the Western European Experience. National Observatory of Vocational Training and Labour Market.

APPENDIX B

23

Appendix C: KEY INFORMANT INTERVIEWS

INTERVIEW PARTICIPANTS

Organization Individual Title

Alberta Environment Kevin Wilkinson Water Approvals Team Leader

Alberta-Pacific Forest Industries Shaun McNamara Environmental Specialist

AMEC Earth & Environmental Colin MacLeod Business Unit Manager

Biogénie S.R.D.C. Carole Barbot Directrice générale

Bodycote Leon Bogdan Président, Division de l’environnement

Cambium Environmental Inc. John Desbiens President

Cascade Environmental Consulting Limited Vic Godbout Principal

DDH Environnement Jean Halde Président

Earth Tech Jocelyn Kirk Human Resources Manager

Earth Tech Consulting Tyler Barkhouse Environmental Division Manager

Eastern Charlotte Waterways Inc. Jeremy Matheson Executive Director

Enviroservices Serge Coderre Président

Epic Environmental Technologies Jack Borreson President

Federation of Canadian Municipalities Noella Beausoleil Human Resources Manager

Géolab Alain St-Pierre Directeur, Projets environnementaux

Golder Associates Ltd. Colin Dunne Human Resources Manager

Imperial Oil Lyndon Graham Construction Manager

CVRD-Inco Limited J. Scott McDonald Executive Vice President, HR

Jacques Whitford Clayton Barclay Area Manager

John Meunier Alain Gadbois Vice-président, Technologies

Natural Resources Canada Brenda Dixon Research and Development Scientist

Natural Resources Canada Trevor Bergh Senior Environmental Management Officer

Newalta Corp Elaine Dare HR Manager, Industrial

Nexen Inc. L. F. (Larry) Kratt Manager, Environment

Ontario Environment Ray Clement Senior Scientist, Research and Development

Quebec Environment Pierre Fréchette Conseiller en ressources humaines

Rescan Environmental Inc. Linda Woo Vice President, Finance and Administration

Sanexen Daniel Bergeron Directeur de projets

SNC-Lavalin Environment Inc. Jacques Benoit Vice-président, Développement stratégique

Tecsult Bernard Desjardins Directeur, Environnement industriel

Terrapex Environmental Ltd. Peter Sutton Senior Project Manager

TransCanada Marilyn Carpenter Environmental Manager

Veolia Gilles Proulx Vice-président des opérations - Est du Canada

Water and Earth Science Associates Roger Woeller Chief Executive Officer

Weyerhaeuser Cecil Burns Environmental Coordinator

APPENDIX C

24

Interview Protocol 1) One of the aspects of our research is to differentiate between the situation faced by small, medium, and large organizations. Roughly how many employees work for your organization? 2) I want to understand how your organization uses environmental workers—that is, workers who work in whole or in part on environmental issues. What types of jobs do they hold and what types of qualifications, skills, and competencies do they need to perform these jobs? 3) Is the demand for environmental workers in your organization and industry fundamentally different than the demand for the total workforce? 4) Is this demand related to a need to change the total number of workers or the hours that these workers devote to environmental work, or is turnover of existing staff the reason for the demand? 5) When a position becomes available, how do you assess the qualifications, skills, and competencies that are needed for the position? Is the approach effective? 6) Are you familiar with the “National Occupational Standards for Environmental Employment” that are published by ECO Canada? If yes, how are they used? 7) Does your company typically recruit environmental workers from inside or outside your organization? If outside, do you recruit nationally, internationally, or from other sectors? From where have you recruited in the past? Was the outcome successful? 8) What process is used to recruit and select new employees? Is this process effective? 9) Do you recognize non-formal learning in understanding the candidate’s skills and competencies? Do you use any tools to help in the assessment process? Are these tools effective? 10) Does your organization support staff learning? How do you determine the learning they require? Is this approach effective? 11) What approaches, if any, does your company take to retain workers? Are these approaches effective? 12) Do you think the size of your organization influences your ability to recruit, hire, or retain environmental workers?

Thank you for taking the time to talk with me. I think we have covered the topics I wanted to discuss. Do you have anything more you would like to add?

APPENDIX C