Indeed, a popular employment search company, defines remote work as “work done outside of a traditional office environment, also referred to as working from home or telecommuting. The concept of remote work is that employees can successfully execute projects and daily tasks without needing to commute to an office” (Indeed, 2022). The pandemic proved how much work could be completed in this manner, as companies and schools were forced to adapt. There are numerous advantages to this, but a disadvantage is that these people lack the community aspect of having a designated place to work. With this in mind, data from Statistics Canada is used to determine how successful a women’s center for remote work would be in two census metropolitan areas (CMAs): Kelowna, British Columbia and St. Catharines, Ontario. This center would give women a designated space outside of the home to do their work in a positive community setting without the sexism that is often found in a typical workplace environment.
Table 1
Relevant Data Findings
| Variable | Kelowna | St. Catharines |
| Prevalence of women who work from home (%) | 10 | 6.6 |
| Prevalence of women aged 15 and over who have a postsecondary certificate, diploma or degree (%) | 55 | 50 |
| Prevalence of women who use methods other than a motor vehicle to commute (%) | 13.1 | 9.7 |
| Prevalence of low income based on the Low-income measure, after tax for women aged 18-64 (%) | 12.5 | 16.1 |
| Prevalence of women who are interprovincial migrants in relation to place of residence five years earlier (%) | 8.1 | 1.0 |
| Population density (people per square kilometre) | 67.1 | 290.6 |
Note. Adapted from Statistics Canada’s 2016 Census of Population.
Information was collected in a variety of categories to create a full picture of the two CMAs. The six selected variables are presented in Table 1. Some key findings are how the two CMAs differ slightly in most categories with only the last two showing any significant contrast. Each category informs an aspect of a potential women’s center for remote work. The first category shows that Kelowna has a slightly higher percentage of women who work from home than St. Catharines, which could mean that the CMA is friendlier towards remote work and would use the women’s center more. The second category highlights that Kelowna and St. Catharines have similar levels of postsecondary education. Both of these CMAs are home to universities—the University of British Columbia and Brock University respectively—so they have students who could use a remote work center to study and watch asynchronous lectures. The third category shows that both CMAs are largely dependent on motor vehicles for transportation, with Kelowna using slightly less. This means that a center in either CMA would need adequate parking but Kelowna’s might also need a few bike racks.
The fourth category shows that St. Catharines has a higher prevalence of women who are considered low-income, but both CMAs have over ten percent of their populations. This informs the funding of the centers, as some women might not be able to afford to use them if payment is required. This might mean that there are both paid and unpaid areas, or the center accepts that it is not accessible to low-income populations. The fifth category illustrates how Kelowna has over eight times more interprovincial migrants than St. Catharines. This means that a center in Kelowna might need to be more aware of cultural norms in other provinces while a center in St. Catharines would be almost entirely visited by Ontarians and could reflect that in its design. Women in Kelowna could also be recent migrants who are open to finding new places and experiences while women in St. Catharines might be more set in their ways from being in the same province for a longer time. Both centers would need to reflect this in their marketing. The sixth category, which is also the most significant difference in the data set, shows how St. Catharines has a population density that is over four times that of Kelowna. This means that a center in St. Catharines has a higher number of potential visitors than one in Kelowna. It also means that citizens in St. Catharines live in a more dense environment so the center there might need to be designed to feel open and airy.
Ultimately, the similarities and differences between Kelowna and St. Catharines are that Kelowna has a slightly higher prevalence of women who work from home, women who have postsecondary education, and women who commute without using motor vehicles. Kelowna also has a notably higher percentage of women who are interprovincial migrants. St. Catharines, on the other hand, has slightly higher rates of women who are low income as well as a much higher population density than Kelowna. These similarities might exist because Kelowna and St. Catherines both have larger CMAs in their provinces—Vancouver and Toronto respectively—that they are considered adjacent to. The same types of people might prefer the environment of a smaller CMA instead of the largest one in the province. Some of the similarities might also be due to overall trends in Canada, such as reliance on motor vehicles, that remain prevalent even when studying the more specific context of a CMA. Some of the differences might also be due to larger trends, such as Ontario’s higher population density when compared to British Columbia, that carry into the CMAs. St. Catharines’ higher population density could also explain some of its other differences since population growth usually occurs at a higher rate in low or middle-income groups than high-income groups.
There are some limitations to conducting this type of comparison using just data available through StatsCan. The first is the lack of detail in some of the census categories. For example, the first variable in Table 1 lists the prevalence of women who work from home. However, the census does not have this information separated for women who run businesses from their homes (such as hair salons) and women who work remotely from their computers in home offices. A remote work center would only be useful for the second category, but since they both fit under the same definition it is difficult to make conclusions. Another limitation is the scale of the location studied. A CMA is a large area and it can be hard to discuss a smaller location within the CMA using StatsCan’s data. There is plenty of variety between neighbourhoods in Kelowna and in St. Catharines and a remote work center might be more successful in one than in another, but the census is not specific enough to decide this. The third difficulty is that statistics can only say so much about a place. A remote work center would need to reflect the CMA’s character and connect to its people to be truly successful, but this information cannot be gained from numbers on a chart. It requires a combination of resources that illustrate as many different aspects of the CMA as possible.
In conclusion, a women’s center for remote work would be similarly successful in both Kelowna and St. Catharines. The CMAs have similar rates of remote workers and students who would use the center and most visitors would drive and thus would require parking. A St. Catharines center might consider low-income support while a Kelowna center might factor other provinces’ cultures and norms into its design and operation. St. Catharines’ higher population density might mean that one center would not be enough to service the whole CMA, so multiple would be required in various locations so that they do not get overwhelmed. This data is from the 2016 census because the 2021 census is incomplete in the areas that were studied, but it would be interesting to compare how a remote work center would function in each CMA in the aftermath of the pandemic.
