You are on page 1of 36

International Benchmarking

Study of the Canadian Television


Production Sector

March 2019
About Nordicity
Nordicity is a leading international consulting firm providing private- and public-sector clients with
solutions for Economic Analysis, Strategy and Business, and Policy and Regulation across four priority
sectors: arts, culture and heritage; digital and creative media; information and communication
technologies (ICTs) and innovation; and, telecommunications and spectrum. With offices in Ottawa
(HQ), Toronto, Vancouver and London, UK, Nordicity is ideally placed to assist our clients to succeed in
the rapidly evolving global markets.

International Benchmarking Study of the Canadian Television Production Sector 1 of 35


Contents
Executive Summary 4 
1.  Introduction 6 
1.1  Background 6 
1.2  Mandate 6 
1.3  Methodology 7 
1.3.1  Data Collection and Analysis 7 
1.3.2  Export Statistics 8 
2.  Benchmarking Analysis 9 
2.1  Television Production Output 9 
2.1.1  Annual Value of Television Fiction Production 9 
2.1.2  Annual Number of Hours of Domestic Television Fiction Production 10 
2.2  Public Support for Television Production and Broadcasting 11 
2.2.1  Public Money Invested in Television Production 11 
2.2.2  Audience Share of Publicly Owned Television Channels 14 
2.3  Television Broadcaster Revenue and Spending 15 
2.3.1  Television Industry Revenue 15 
2.3.2  Broadcaster Spending on Original Television Content 16 
2.3.3  Broadcaster Spending on All Television Content 17 
2.4  Exports 18 
2.5  Critical Acclaim 22 
2.6  Gender Diversity 23 
2.7  Employment 24 
3.  Summary of Key Findings 26 
References 28 
Appendix A: Data Sources and Notes 29 

International Benchmarking Study of the Canadian Television Production Sector 2 of 35


List of Acronyms and Initialisms

BFI British Film Institute


CAVCO Canadian Audio-Visual Certification Office
CMPA Canadian Media Producers Association
CNC Centre national du cinéma et de l'image animée (France)
CPTC Canadian Film or Video Production Tax Credit
CRTC Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission
EAO European Audiovisual Observatory
FLS Foreign location and service
FTE Full-time equivalent
GDP Gross domestic product
KPI Key performance indicator
PSTC Film or Video Production Services Tax Credit
UK United Kingdom
US United States

International Benchmarking Study of the Canadian Television Production Sector 3 of 35


Executive Summary
In February 2019, the Broadcasting and Telecommunications Legislative Review Secretariat (the
“Secretariat”) commissioned Nordicity to prepare an international benchmarking study of the television
production sector.
The Secretariat identified a series of areas and key performance indicators (KPIs) upon which it sought to
compare the performance of Canada’s television production sector to seven core peer countries: Australia,
Belgium, France, Germany, Ireland, Denmark and the United Kingdom (UK). Selected data from Austria
and Sweden has also been included for certain KPIs.
To produce this benchmarking analysis, Nordicity collected data from a variety of country-specific reports,
pan-European reports, and subscription data services (i.e. Statista, Mediametrie Eurodata TV). When data
was not available, Nordicity attempted to produce estimates. A list of the sources used for each indicator
can be found in Appendix A.
The results of the benchmarking analysis indicate that Canada ranked last in terms of public expenditures
on television production and broadcasting among the peer countries. In 2016, federal and provincial
governments provided the equivalent of $52 per capita in funding to domestic television production and
broadcasting. This included the parliamentary appropriation for CBC/Radio-Canada’s conventional
television services, tax credits and other direct public funding for domestic productions (including the
federal government’s contribution to the CMF).
By comparison, public expenditures on television production and broadcasting were equal to $148 per
person in Denmark, $137 in Germany, and $112 in the UK. The higher levels of public expenditures in
these European countries reflected the higher levels of funding of their public broadcasters through
household television licence fees, which themselves reflected government policies that put more
emphasis on non-commercial sources of revenue for television broadcasters.
Canada’s low level of public funding for television production and broadcasters was accompanied by
relatively low levels of broadcaster spending on original television programming. Canada ranked fifth out
of six benchmarking countries (for which data was available) in terms of domestic broadcasters’ spending
on original programming – domestic and foreign (Figure 7).
Despite the low levels of spending by Canadian broadcasters, Canada was the leader among the
benchmarking countries in terms of total per-capita expenditures on the production of television fiction
programming (Figure 1) and the annual number of hours of television fiction programming (Figure 2).
This high level of production output was also reflected in Canada’s relative level of employment in
television production and broadcasting. Canada’s television production and broadcasting sector
employed 2,014 FTEs for every million inhabitants in 2016 (Figure 14). This was second only to Australia
(2,666 employees per million inhabitants).
Despite the relatively low levels of investment in television programming by Canadian broadcasters and
governments, the Canadian television production industry was in the middle of the pack in terms of
exports. Export performance was assessed using an export index.1 Under this export index, the US’s per-
capita of rate of television exports was set to 100; the benchmarking countries were then assessed against
the US’s rate of television exports. Canada’s television export index was equal to 72.9 in 2016, placing it

1
This index approach was used in order to protect the propriety of Mediametrie Eurodata TV’s export data.

International Benchmarking Study of the Canadian Television Production Sector 4 of 35


well behind the UK (430.3) and Denmark (231.9), but ahead of Ireland (52.0), Germany (47.6) and France
(37.1) (Figure 9).
Canada’s export performance was consistent with the quality of its programming, as indicated by the
critical acclaim for its television programs. Canada ranked third among the eight benchmarking countries
in terms of the number International Emmy Award nominations garnered between 2007 and 2018, and
fourth on a population-adjusted basis (Figure 12).
Because of the lack of consistent gender diversity KPIs across countries and time, the participation of
women in audiovisual production – and thereby television production – was approximated using statistics
for the percentage of feature films with a female director. This particular KPI provided the most
comprehensive dataset over time and across countries, even though it was not specific to television. On
the basis of feature film directors, Canada ranked sixth out of the eight benchmarking countries (Figure
13). The latest data for Canada (from 2015) indicated that women accounted for 17% of feature film
directors.2 This put Canada ahead of Australia and the UK, but behind other European countries.

2
Rina, Fraticelli (2015), Women in View on Screen 2015, prepared for Women in View.

International Benchmarking Study of the Canadian Television Production Sector 5 of 35


1. Introduction
1.1 Background
Since the early 1990s, Canada’s broadcasting and telecommunications sectors have been governed by the
Broadcasting Act (1991), Telecommunications Act (1993) and Radiocommunication Act (1985). In recent
decades, however, the broadcasting and telecommunications sectors in Canada – and around the world –
have been experiencing rapid change, as new technologies have combined with market liberalization to
create new products, services, markets and business models.
In light of these rapid changes, the federal government announced in Budget 2017 that it would launch a
joint review of the legislation governing the broadcasting and telecommunications sectors in Canada –
the Broadcasting and Telecommunications Legislative Review (the “Legislative Review”).
The Legislative Review will gather and assess evidence on a variety of public policy areas within the
telecommunications and broadcasting sectors. Among these public policy areas is the support of
Canadian content and the creative industries.
The Broadcasting Act currently provides a strong policy basis for the federal government, the Canadian
Radio-television and Telecommunications (CRTC) and industry players to support the “creation and
presentation of Canadian programming.”3 The Legislative Review will consider how the current framework
and tools for supporting content creation and presentation should potentially be changed to better
reflect the realities of digital distribution and consumption, and if changes in legislation are required to
facilitate these new frameworks and tools.

1.2 Mandate
As part of the Legislative Review, the federal government appointed an external expert panel (the “Panel”)
to lead the review and, among other things, investigate Canadian content creation in the digital age. In
February 2019, the Legislative Review Secretariat (“the Secretariat”), on behalf of the Panel, commissioned
Nordicity to prepare an international benchmarking study of the Canadian television production sector.
The Secretariat identified a series of areas and key performance indicators (KPIs) upon which it sought to
compare the performance of Canada’s television production sector to seven core peer countries. The
seven core peer countries selected by the Secretariat included:
Australia France Ireland
Belgium Germany United Kingdom (UK)
Denmark
In addition to these core peer countries, where data was available for Austria and Sweden, KPIs for these
non-core countries were also added to the benchmarking analysis.4

3
Broadcasting Act (1991), section 3(1)(e).
4
Austria was included because it is a German-speaking country bordering another German-speaking country (i.e.
Germany) with a population approximately ten times larger. This is similar to the situation that exists between Canada
and the US.

International Benchmarking Study of the Canadian Television Production Sector 6 of 35


The KPIs comprising the scope of the benchmarking study included:
1. The total annual value of television production budgets
2. The total annual hours of television production
3. The amount of public money invested in television production
4. The audience share of publicly-owned television channels
5. Television industry revenue
6. Broadcaster spending on original television content
7. Broadcaster spending on all television content
8. Exports of television programs
9. Critical acclaim
10. The gender diversity of television programming
11. Employment in television production

The following report presents the results of this benchmarking analysis.

1.3 Methodology
1.3.1 Data Collection and Analysis
To produce this analysis, Nordicity collected data from a variety of country-specific reports, pan-European
reports, and subscription data services (i.e. Statista, Mediametrie Eurodata TV). A list of the sources used
for each indicator can be found in Appendix A.
To compare the various KPIs across the benchmarking countries, Nordicity converted monetary data to
Canadian dollars at the average market exchange rate for each given year. These exchange rates were
sourced from the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD).5
All dollar amounts presented in this report are in Canadian dollars unless indicated otherwise.
All monetary and non-monetary data (e.g. number of hours of programming) were then converted to
population-adjusted KPIs – either on a per-capita or per-million-inhabitants basis. Population statistics
were sourced from Statistics Canada and the OECD.6

5
OECD (2018), “Exchange rates.”
6
Statistics Canada (2018), “Population estimates, July 1, by age and sex,” Table 17-10-0005-01; OECD (2018),
“Population,” OECD.stat.

International Benchmarking Study of the Canadian Television Production Sector 7 of 35


When data was not available, Nordicity attempted to produce estimates. These estimates were made
using reasonable assumptions drawn from our research. For example:
 In the case of France, we could only obtain statistics on the monetary volume of television made
with financial support from the Centre national du cinéma et de l'image animée (CNC). In order to
estimate the overall level of television production in various genres, we undertook additional
research to establish the approximate share of total television production in France accounted for
by CNC-supported production.
 In the case of the UK, we could only obtain statistics on the amount of spending by domestic
broadcasters on original television production (in various genres). In order to estimate the total
monetary volume of television production in the fiction genre, we used statistics published by in
by Pact7 in relation to the portion of UK independent producers’ revenue from primary
commissions of television programs and used this to approximate the portion of UK production
budgets financed by broadcaster licence fees.
In the relevant subsections within this report (or Appendix A), we further discuss these estimation
processes.

1.3.2 Export Statistics


Mediametrie Eurodata TV supplied the television exports data analyzed in this report. Television exports
are measured in terms of the number of domestically produced television series that aired at least once
outside the producing country in one of the 48 jurisdictions8 for which Eurodata TV collects television
programming data. For example, if a Canadian-produced television drama series commissioned by
CBC/Radio-Canada was first aired on that network, and then aired outside of Canada on television
channels in the United States (US) and Ireland, then this would represent two exported series.
Because of the commercial propriety of the Mediametrie’s telelvison exports data, we only report this
particular KPI on an indexed basis. In this case, the annual number of television series exports per capita
for the US was set equal to 100, and the per-capita exports of the eight benchmarking countries were then
related the US’s per-capita number of exports. For example, if Country A displayed an index value of 200,
the implication was that Country A’s number of per-capita exports of television series was twice that of the
US.
The television exports data supplied by Mediametrie Eurodata TV includes television series in the fiction,
factual and entertainment (i.e. lifestyle and reality) genres and excludes films, television movies, single-
episode programs, and any programming in the news, sports and children’s genres.

7
Oliver & Ohlbaum (2018), UK Television Production Survey: Financial Census 2018, a report prepared for Pact, p.10.
8
These 48 jurisdictions include separate jurisdictions for Canada’s English- and French-language markets, and
Belgium’s French- and Flemish-language markets. A list of all the jurisdictions can be found in Appendix A.

International Benchmarking Study of the Canadian Television Production Sector 8 of 35


2. Benchmarking Analysis
2.1 Television Production Output
In the following subsection, we compare the output of television fiction production in Canada to the other
seven benchmarking countries. We make the comparison on the basis of television fiction production
instead of for all genres of television production because data for fiction production was available in more
of the benchmarking countries.

2.1.1 Annual Value of Television Fiction Production


Among the five benchmarking countries for which data was available, Canada was the clear leader in
terms of the population-adjusted expenditures on television fiction production in 2016. The equivalent of
$90 per capita of television fiction production took place in Canada in 2016 (Figure 1). These numbers
included domestic production9 ($48 per capita) and foreign location and service (FLS) production ($42 per
capita).
Figure 1
Total expenditures on the
production of television fiction*
programming, 2016
($ per capita)

Source: See Appendix A


n.d.: no data available
* Includes drama, comedy, animation and
other children’s programming
Canada was followed by Ireland with $69 per capita in television fiction production. Like Canada, Ireland
maintains a competitive fiscal incentive regime, which helps to attract significant levels of FLS. In

9
In Canada, domestic production is referred to Canadian content production.

International Benchmarking Study of the Canadian Television Production Sector 9 of 35


particular, its section 481 (“s481”) tax credit provides domestic and foreign producers with an income tax
rebate of 32% of eligible Irish expenditures.10 In fact, the data in Figure 1 indicate that FLS production
accounts for the vast majority of television fiction production in Ireland. In 2016, it accounted for $58 per
capita or 84% of the total.
The UK was ranked third with $41 per capita in television fiction production. The UK also maintains fiscal
incentives to support the creation of certain types of domestic production and attract FLS production. The
UK’s tax reliefs support the production of high-end television programs (i.e. television programs with
budgets over £1 million per hour), television animation programming and children’s television
programming.
In Australia, the production of domestic and foreign television fiction programming in 2016 was equal to
$16 per capita. Australia’s main fiscal incentive is the Producer Offset. It provides an income tax rebate of
20% of qualifying Australian production expenditure (QAPE) to television programs and series.11 In
addition to the Producer Offset, television projects with total Australian spend over A$15 million can
receive the additional 16.5% Location Offset.

2.1.2 Annual Number of Hours of Domestic Television Fiction Production


The statistics published by the EAO and Screen Australia permitted us to compare the benchmarking
countries in terms of the annual number of hours of domestic television fiction production. In the case of
Canada, statistics on the annual number of hours of production were not available, per se. However, the
data published on the total annual volume of production spending and average hourly budgets were
used to estimate the number of hours of domestic television production.
Among the benchmarking countries, Canada’s level of domestic television fiction production was
relatively high when measured in terms of hours of produced domestic content adjusted for population.
In 2016, Canada produced 48 hours of domestic television fiction programming per million inhabitants
(Figure 2). As with all the benchmarking countries, this figure included fiction television programming
created for either general or children’s and youth audiences.
The population-adjusted rate of production was even higher in Canada’s French-language market (83
hours per million inhabitants). In the English-language market, domestic fiction television production was
equivalent to 35.0 hours per million inhabitants in 2016.
As with Canada, multiple language markets may have also played a role in the fact that Belgium was
ranked second among the benchmarking countries with 28.1 hours of domestic television fiction
production per million inhabitants.
According to the EAO, several of the benchmarking countries (i.e. Germany, France, UK and Denmark) are
characterized by production sectors that produce a relatively low number of hours per title.12 According to

10
Screen Ireland (2019), Ireland’s 32% Tax Credit.
11
Screen Australia (2018), Producer Offset Guidelines, updated December 1, 2018, p. 3.
12
European Audiovisual Observatory (2017), TV fiction production in the European Union , pp. 13-14.

International Benchmarking Study of the Canadian Television Production Sector 10 of 35


the EAO, the low number of hours per title is linked to higher average budgets and greater potential for
export. 13
Figure 2
Number of hours of television
fiction produced, 2016
(per million inhabitants)

Source: Nordicity tabulations based on


data from CMPA Profile, Screen Australia,
European Audiovisual Observatory
See notes in Appendix A

2.2 Public Support for Television Production and Broadcasting


In the following subsection, we examine KPIs for public financial support of television production and
broadcasting, as well as public broadcasters’ audience share in the benchmarking countries.

2.2.1 Public Money Invested in Television Production


Public money can play an important role in financing television production. In many countries, publicly-
funded broadcasters represent the largest broadcasters and hold a significant market share. As a result,
they also fund a large share of domestic television production.
In some countries, the public funding given to public broadcasters is complemented by tax credits or even
direct funding sources (i.e. grants, loans or equity investments made by governments directly in television
projects). For example, in Canada, provincial and federal governments offer tax credits for television

13
European Audiovisual Observatory (2017), TV fiction production in the European Union , pp. 1, 14.

International Benchmarking Study of the Canadian Television Production Sector 11 of 35


production in eligible genres.14 Canada also has the Canada Media Fund (CMF) and several smaller
independent production funds that provide financing to the production of specific types of television
programming.
In many countries, public broadcasters are funded out of a mandatory household television licence fee. So
while the imposition of this fee is mandated by government legislation or regulation, the money does not
directly originate from a government treasury.
Similarly, in Canada, the CMF operates with a combination of revenue from the federal government and
commercial companies, specifically broadcasting distribution undertakings (BDUs) (i.e. cable, satellite and
internet-production television services). However, the contributions made by commercial companies to
the CMF are not necessarily driven by business or market decisions; but are actually mandated by industry
regulation.15
The data in Table 1 indicate that Germany provided the highest level of public funding for television
production and broadcasting in 2016, with a total of just under $11.2 billion. It was followed by the UK and
France. Canada ranked fourth out of the eight benchmarking countries, with just under $1.9 billion in
public funding in 2016.
Among the eight benchmarking countries, Canada ranked last, however, in terms of the per-capita
amount of public money spent on television production and broadcasting. In 2016, federal and provincial
governments spent the equivalent of $52 per capita in the production and broadcasting of domestic
television programs. This included the parliamentary appropriation for CBC/Radio-Canada’s conventional
television services ($812 million), the value of federal and provincial tax credits ($755 million), the CMF
($286 million), and other direct public funding for domestic production ($22 million).16
Countries such as Denmark, Germany, the UK and France had far higher levels of public money invested in
television production and broadcasting, largely on account of the household television licence fees that
they have instituted to fund their public broadcasters. Figure 3 provides a breakdown of the public money
invested in domestic television production. It indicates that in most of the benchmarking countries the
vast majority – or even all – of the public money invested in television production is comprised of public
funding for public broadcasters. With the exception of Australia and Canada, this public funding is in the
form of a household television licence fee.17
Canada is the only country among the eight benchmarking countries for which tax credits and other direct
public funding actually accounts for the majority of the public money allocated to television production
and broadcasting. Out of the $52 per capita in total funding for television production in 2016, $30 was
from tax credits and other direct public funding, namely the CMF; $22 was from the parliamentary
appropriation for CBC/Radio-Canada’s conventional television services.

14
Genres such as news, sports, talk shows, reality television, games shows and pornography are not eligible for the
Canadian Film or Video Production Tax Credit (CPTC). For a full list of the excluded genres, please see the CPTC
Application Guidelines.
15
The regulation of BDUs’ financial contributions to the CMF and other television-content creation are set out in
Section 34 of the Broadcasting Distribution Regulations (SOR/97-555).
16
CMPA et al. (2018), Profile 2017: Economic Report on the Screen-based Media Production Industry Canada, p. 51;
CRTC (2018), Conventional Television: Statistical and Financial Summaries, 2013-2017, p. 13.
17
Nordicity (2016), Analysis of Government Support for Public Broadcasting, prepared for CBC/Radio-Canada, p. 23.

International Benchmarking Study of the Canadian Television Production Sector 12 of 35


Table 1
Public funding for domestic television production and broadcasting, 2016 ($M)
Public funding for Domestic tax credits Total public funding
public broadcasters and other direct for domestic
public funding television production
Germany 11,179 0 11,179
United Kingdom 6,873 139 7,012
France 4,888 746 5,634
Canada 812 1,063 1,875
Australia 1,331 89 1,420
Denmark 830 0 830
Belgium 758 1 759
Ireland 263 21 284
Source: Annual reports of public broadcasters, CMPA Profile, Screen Australia, Screen Business (UK), Screen Ireland, CNC (France)
See notes in Appendix A

Figure 3
Public funding for domestic
television production and
broadcasting, 2016
($ per capita)

Source: Annual reports of public


broadcasters, CMPA Profile, Screen
Australia, Screen Business (UK), Screen
Ireland, CNC (France)
See notes in Appendix A

International Benchmarking Study of the Canadian Television Production Sector 13 of 35


2.2.2 Audience Share of Publicly Owned Television Channels
Canada also ranked the lowest in terms of the audience share of publicly owned television channels
amongst the benchmarking countries. During the 2016 broadcast year, CBC/Radio-Canada held a 13.4%
audience share in the French-language market and a 5.2% audience share in the English-language market
(Figure 4). When weighted by the relative size of each language market in Canada, CBC/Radio-Canada
held a national audience share of approximately 7.4%.
In the European benchmarking countries, publicly owned television channels held audience shares
ranging from 31% (France) to 62% (Denmark). In many European countries, these high market shares were
partly due to the fact the government owns more than one public broadcaster. For example, in Denmark
the government owns both DR and TV2; in the UK, the government owns the BBC, Channel 4 and S4C
(Wales); and in Germany, both ZDF and ARD are government owned.
Figure 4
Audience share of publicly
owned television channels, 2016

Source: Nordicity tabulations based on


data from Mediametrie, Numeris (Canada),
RTE (Ireland), CIM/GfK (Belgium),
Kantar/Gallup (Denmark), Statistics Canada
and OECD
See notes in Appendix A

International Benchmarking Study of the Canadian Television Production Sector 14 of 35


2.3 Television Broadcaster Revenue and Spending
In the following subsection, we examine KPIs related to television broadcasters’ revenue and their
spending on content in each of the benchmarking countries.

2.3.1 Television Industry Revenue


Television industry revenue in Canada and the benchmarking countries includes revenue from
advertising, subscription fees, household television licence fees and government funding of public
broadcasters.
In 2016, Canada’s television broadcasting industry earned total revenues of $7.28 billion, or $202 per
capita (Figure 5). On this basis, Canada’s television industry was smaller than the industries in Denmark,
Germany, the UK, Australia and France. With the exception of Australia, all of these other countries also
had significantly higher levels of funding for their public broadcasters – either from household television
licence fees or government funding (Table 1).
Figure 5
Television industry revenue,
2016
($ per capita)

Source: Nordicity tabulations based on


data from CRTC, IHS Markit, DR (Denmark),
Danske Medier (Denmark) and PwC
(Denmark), Statbel (Belgium)
See notes in Appendix A

On a per-capita basis, Canada’s television industry was larger than the industries in Belgium and Ireland in
2016. Ireland’s relatively small size was likely attributable to the prominence of UK-originated
programming in its market, which may have limited the size of the domestic industry. In 2016, the BBC and
the so-called opt-out channels (i.e. UK channels simulcasting their UK broadcast feed but selling

International Benchmarking Study of the Canadian Television Production Sector 15 of 35


advertising in Ireland) combined for a 22% audience share.18 Other multichannel (i.e. specialty channel)
services accounted for 38%.19
Figure 6 provides a breakdown of the per-capita television industry revenue in terms of commercial
revenue (i.e. from advertising and subscription fees) and public funding for public broadcasters (i.e. from
household television licence fees or direct government grants). Figure 6 also indicates the percentage
share of television industry revenue from commercial sources. Canada has the highest share (89%) among
the eight benchmarking countries.
Figure 6
Television industry revenue,
commercial vs. public funding,
2016
($ per capita)

Source: Nordicity tabulations based on


data from Annual reports of public
broadcasters, CRTC, IHS Markit, DR
(Denmark), Danske Medier (Denmark) and
PwC (Denmark), Statbel (Belgium)
See notes in Appendix A

2.3.2 Broadcaster Spending on Original Television Content


In comparison to the other benchmarking countries, Canada displayed relatively lower levels of per-capita
spending on original television content (domestic and foreign). In 2016, Canadian broadcasters spent $46
per capita on original television content ($46 in the English-language market and $44 in the French-
language market) (Figure 7).
Canada’s level of spending was comparable to Australia and Ireland – two countries that also import
English-language programming. However, it was significantly lower than the UK, Germany and France –
countries with large public broadcasters and, in some cases, limited options for importing television
content in their home language (e.g. Germany).

18
Mediatique (2017), A report on market structure, dynamics and developments in Irish media, prepared for the
Broadcasting Authority of Ireland, p. 23.
19
Ibid.

International Benchmarking Study of the Canadian Television Production Sector 16 of 35


Figure 7
Television broadcaster
spending on original television
content, 2016
($ per capita)

Source: Nordicity tabulations based on


data from CRTC, RTE, Olsberg-SPI/Nordicity,
IHS Markit
n.d. – no data available
See notes in Appendix A

2.3.3 Broadcaster Spending on All Television Content


Broadcaster spending on all television content includes expenditures on fees to license original and
previously-aired television content (i.e. acquired programming), as well as rights to air live sports
programming. Among the seven benchmarking countries for which data was available, Canada ranked
fifth in terms of broadcaster spending on all television content in 2016, with $128 per capita (Figure 8).
Most of the benchmarking countries were, in fact, very close in terms of per-capita spending. Five (of
seven) countries’ spending was between $128 and $159. The only outliers were the UK ($220) and Ireland
($51).
In the case of Ireland, the low spending was, again, likely due to the prominence of UK-originated
television signals within the domestic broadcast market, thereby, removing the need for Irish
broadcasters, such as RTE and TV3, to license foreign content for re-broadcast in Ireland.

International Benchmarking Study of the Canadian Television Production Sector 17 of 35


Figure 8
Television broadcaster
spending on all television
content, 2016
($ per capita)

Source: Nordicity tabulations based on


data from CRTC, RTE, Olsberg-SPI/Nordicity,
IHS Markit, DR (Denmark), TV2 (Denmark)
and Kantar Gallup
n.d. – no data available
See notes in Appendix A

2.4 Exports
As noted in Section 1.3.2, the data for the annual number of exported television series was supplied by
Mediametrie Eurodata TV. This export data measures not only the number of titles exported on traditional
television, but also the reach of those exported titles. So, for example, a title that airs in five countries
would count as five exported television series; similarly, two titles that aired in 5 countries each would
count as 10 exported television series.
Because of the commercial propriety of the export data, we have published it in terms of index values. For
each year, the level of exported television series – on either an absolute-level or population-adjusted basis
– for the US was set to 100. All other countries’ population-adjusted levels of exports were then indexed to
the US. So, for example:
 If a country displayed an index value of 50, the implication was that its annual number of
exported television series was half that of the US (Table 2).
 For the analysis of exports on a population-adjusted basis, an index value of 50 implied that the
population-adjusted level of television series exports was half that of the US (Figure 9 to 11).
Table 2 presents the export performance of the benchmarking countries between 2013 and 2017. The
countries are ranked in terms of their relative performance in 2017. As noted, each country’s annual
number of exports has been indexed to the US’s level of exports. In 2017, Canada had an index value of
8.2. In other words, Canada’s level of exports in 2017 (not adjusted by population) was 8.2% of the US’s
level.

International Benchmarking Study of the Canadian Television Production Sector 18 of 35


Table 2
Annual number of domestically produced television series airing for the first time in other countries
(US = 100)
2013 2014 2015 2016 2017
UK 78.9 74.5 81.1 86.4 86.6
Germany 7.8 6.7 6.3 12.1 11.9
Canada-Total 9.9 8.0 9.4 6.5 8.2
France 4.9 7.5 6.0 9.6 7.5
Australia 8.1 8.7 7.0 6.7 6.6
Canada-English 8.3 5.6 7.6 5.8 6.1
Denmark 2.5 3.1 4.0 6.1 4.0
Belgium 1.9 1.8 2.3 3.4 3.3
Ireland 2.2 2.1 0.8 1.6 0.7
Source: Nordicity tabulations based on data from Mediametrie EurodataTV / New on the Air (NoTa)
See notes in Appendix A

Among the eight benchmarking countries, the UK was the clear leader in terms of exports on a
population-adjusted basis. In 2017, it posted an index value of 430.3 (Figure 9). In other words, its
television series exports, on a population-adjusted basis, were over four times that of the US.
Denmark was another strong export performer in 2017. It posted an index value of 231.9. In other words,
for every one million inhabitants, it exported 2.3 times more television series than the US did in 2016.
Figure 9
Annual number of domestically
produced television series
airing for the first time in other
countries, 2017
(number per million inhabitants,
US = 100)

Source: Nordicity tabulations based on


data from Mediametrie EurodataTV / New
on the Air (NoTa)
See notes in Appendix A

Canada’s export performance placed it among a second tier of countries, along with Belgium and
Australia. In 2017, Canada exported 72.9 television series per million inhabitants. The export performance
of Canada’s English-language production sector was slightly higher than the national average; the export
performance of Canada’s French-language sector was slightly lower.

International Benchmarking Study of the Canadian Television Production Sector 19 of 35


Canada’s export performance placed it ahead of a third tier of countries consisting of Ireland, Germany
and France. The export performance of Germany is understandable given the limited number of countries
where German is spoken as an official language. However, the relatively weak export performance for
France is surprising given the potential to export television series to the numerous French-speaking
countries around the world.
France’s weak performance may be partly due to the portfolio of countries in Mediametrie’s NoTa
database. That database includes 45 of the leading media markets around the world, but other than
Canada, Belgium Lebanon, Vietnam and Ivory Coast, excludes most of the potential importing countries
where French is widely spoken. See Appendix A for a complete list of countries in the NoTa database.
The export data supplied by Mediametrie also permitted us to compare the year-to-year export
performance of the benchmarking countries between 2013 and 2017. These time-series statistics show
that the UK was consistently the leading country in terms of television series exports between 2013 and
2017. Its export index never fell below 350 during that five-year period (Figure 10).
Interestingly, Denmark experienced a sharp improvement in its export performance between 2013 and
2017, allowing it to assume a clear second position to the UK from 2014 onwards. In 2013, Denmark’s
export index was just below 150 and third among the benchmarking countries – behind the UK and
Ireland. By 2016, its index had climbed to 350, before dipping back down to 230 in 2017. Given its small
population, Denmark’s export success during that period can likely be attributed to a few successful
television series such as the recent success of its Nordic noir breakout hits such as The Killing and The
Bridge.20
Belgium also displayed improved television export performance between 2013 and 2017. In 2013, it
posted an export index of 54 – sixth out of eight countries. By 2017, its export index had reached 92.4,
placing it third among the eight benchmarking countries. Like Denmark, the improved export
performance of Belgium appears to have been underpinned by the success of some of its television
dramas, such as Professor T, Clan and 13 Commandments.21
Canada’s export performance gradually trended downward between 2013 and 2017. Its export index was
at a five-year peak of 89.2 in 2013, but declined to 72.9 in 2017.
Australia experienced a similar downward trend. Its export index declined from 118.3 in 2014 to 86.0 in
2017. Ireland appears to have displayed the sharpest decrease in export performance between 2013 and
2017. Its export index dropped from 154.8 to 52.0.

20
The Local (2019), “Danish shows take TV world by storm.”
21
Mark Lawson (2018), “Is Belgian drama the new Scandi-noir?” The Guardian, February 22, 2018.

International Benchmarking Study of the Canadian Television Production Sector 20 of 35


Figure 10
Annual number of domestically
produced television seris airing
for the first time in other
countries, 2013-2017
(number per million
inhabitants, US = 100)

Source: Nordicity tabulations based on


data from Mediametrie EurodataTV / NoTa
See notes in Appendix A

A closer examination of Canada’s export performance on a language-market basis shows that the year-to-
year fluctuation was wider in Canada’s French-language market, where the index ranged between 80.2 in
2014 and 24.5 in 2016 (Figure 11). In Canada’s English-language market, the index ranged between 102.7
in 2013 and 69.2 in 2014.
Figure 11
Annual number of
domestically produced
television series airing for
the first time in other
countries, Canadian
language markets
(number per million
inhabitants, US = 100)

Source: Nordicity tabulations


based on data from Mediametrie
EurodataTV / NoTa
See notes in Appendix A

International Benchmarking Study of the Canadian Television Production Sector 21 of 35


2.5 Critical Acclaim
The quality of a television program is often assessed by examining the critical acclaim that it garners.
Specifically, for television, the number of International Emmy Award nominations or wins can be used to
try and compare the quality of programming.22
Table 3 presents the total number of International Emmy Award nominations garnered by each of the
benchmarking countries between 2007 and 2018. The UK led all of the benchmarking countries with 80
nominations over this 12-year period. Canada tied with France for third position among the benchmarking
countries with a total of 18 nominations.
Table 3
Total number of International Emmy Award nominations, 2007-2018
2007 - 2018
UK 80
Germany 28
Canada 18
France 18
Denmark 9
Belgium 8
Australia 5
Ireland 0
Source: Nordicity tabulations based on data from International Academy of Television Arts &
Sciences
See notes in Appendix A

On a population-adjusted basis, Canada’s 18 nominations translated into an average of 0.52 nominations


per million inhabitants (Figure 12), thereby, placing Canada fourth out of the eight benchmarking
countries.
Television programs produced in Denmark and the UK displayed the highest levels of critical acclaim
across the benchmarking countries, with 1.62 and 1.28 nominations per million inhabitants, respectively.

22
The standard Emmy Awards are excluded from the analysis because they are exclusively for US-produced TV
programming.

International Benchmarking Study of the Canadian Television Production Sector 22 of 35


Figure 12
Number of International Emmy
Award nominations,
2007-2018
(per million inhabitants)

Source: Nordicity tabulations based on


data from International Academy of
Television Arts & Sciences
See notes in Appendix A

2.6 Gender Diversity


From a cultural and social policy perspective, it is important that a country’s television programming
reflects as wide a swathe of the population as possible. Different domestic audiences should all have the
opportunity to see their own social and cultural experiences reflected on-screen. Women account for half
the population, however, for decades they have been under-represented in the key creative roles within
audiovisual production, namely the roles of producer, writer and director.
Increasing the participation of women in these creative roles is now an important policy issue in Canada
and many other countries. Many governments and audiovisual-support agencies (e.g. CMF) have
established targets and implemented programs and initiatives to promote women within the sector and
help meet these targets.
While the policy emphasis is clear and data collection in Canada is becoming more comprehensive, many
other countries have been adhering to very different KPIs to track their progress in gender diversity. For
example, our research only found three countries (i.e. Canada, Australia and France) for which data was
available for the proportion of female television directors.
Because of the lack of consistent gender diversity KPIs across countries and time, we have approximated
the participation of women in audiovisual production – and thereby television production – using
statistics for the percentage of films with a female director. This particular KPI provides the most
comprehensive dataset over time and across countries, even though it is not specific to television.

International Benchmarking Study of the Canadian Television Production Sector 23 of 35


On the basis of feature film directors, Canada ranks sixth out of the eight benchmarking countries (Figure
13). The latest data for Canada (from 2015) indicates that women accounted for 17% of feature film
directors.23 This put Canada ahead of Australia and the UK, but behind other European countries.
This multi-country comparison, however, has to be interpreted with caution because some of the data
reflects multi-year averages. The KPI for Australia is for the 2011-2017 period. For the European
benchmarking countries, the KPI represents an average over the 2012-2016 period. The multi-year
averages for the Australia and the European benchmarking countries could understate the current level of
female participation, if one accepts that that participation has been gradually increasing in recent years in
response to policy measures and increased awareness.
Figure 13
Percentage of films made with a
female director, various years
(see notes in Appendix)

Source: Nordicity tabulations based on


data from CMPA Profile, Screen Australia,
Screen Ireland, European Audiovisual
Observatory
See notes in Appendix A

2.7 Employment
Because of the manner in which employment is reported on an industry basis for most European
countries, it is not possible to easily separate television-production employment from employment in film
or video production. For that reason, we have analyzed the employment impact in terms of employment
in audiovisual production, including television, film or video production and post-production. The analysis
also includes data for employment in the television broadcasting industry, which is additional to television
production employment.
Among the eight benchmarking countries, Canada displayed the second-highest level of employment in
audiovisual production and television broadcasting services in 2016 (Figure 14). Audiovisual production
and television broadcasting services in Canada generated 2,014 employed persons per million inhabitants
in 2016.

23
Rina, Fraticelli (2015), Women in View on Screen 2015, prepared for Women in View.

International Benchmarking Study of the Canadian Television Production Sector 24 of 35


Australia was the leading country in terms of employment impact, with 2,666 employed workers per
million inhabitants. However, this relatively high level of employment is slightly overstated in comparison
to the other benchmarking countries because it includes employment at cable, satellite and Internet
protocol television (IPTV) platform providers (i.e. BDUs). If employment at Canada’s BDUs were included in
its employment rate, Canada’s rate would increase to 2,746 employed persons per million inhabitants –
putting it ahead of Australia.
Figure 14
Employment in audiovisual
production and television
broadcasting, 2016
(number of employed persons
per million inhabitants)

Source: Nordicity tabulations based on


data from CMPA Profile 2017, Olsberg-
SPI/Nordicity (Ireland), Australian Bureau of
Statistics, Eurostat
See notes in Appendix A

International Benchmarking Study of the Canadian Television Production Sector 25 of 35


3. Summary of Key Findings
This report provides a benchmarking analysis that compares the performance of Canada’s television
production sector to that of seven core peer countries (i.e. Australia, Belgium, Denmark, France, Germany,
Ireland and the UK). Selected data from Austria and Sweden has also been included for certain KPIs.
Constructing such a benchmarking analysis was challenging because there were significant
inconsistencies in the availability, definition, composition and quality of data published by different
countries. This report attempted to address these inconsistencies and arrive at datasets that could, by and
large, be compared across the benchmarking countries. For example, where pan-European statistics had
been published by Eurostat or the EAO, these statistics were used for the European countries included in
the benchmarking analysis.
In some cases, certain KPIs were only available as combined data for television and film production (e.g.
employment). In other cases, data exclusively for the film sector had to be used to approximate
performance in the wider audiovisual sector, and thereby, the television production sector (e.g. gender
diversity).
The results of the benchmarking analysis indicate that Canada ranked last in terms of public expenditures
on television production and broadcasting. In 2016, federal and provincial governments provided the
equivalent of $52 per capita in funding to domestic television production and broadcasting. This included
the parliamentary appropriation for CBC/Radio-Canada’s conventional television services, tax credits and
other direct public funding for domestic productions (including the federal government’s contribution to
the CMF).
By comparison, public expenditures on television production and broadcasting were equal to $148 per
person in Denmark, $137 in Germany, and $112 in the UK. The higher levels of public expenditures in
these European countries reflected the higher levels of funding of their public broadcasters through
household television licence fees, which themselves reflected government policies that put more
emphasis on non-commercial sources of revenue for television broadcasters.
Canada’s low level of public funding for television production and broadcasting was accompanied by
relatively low levels of broadcaster spending on original television programming. Canada ranked fifth out
of six benchmarking countries (for which data was available) in terms of domestic broadcasters’ spending
on original programming – domestic and foreign (Figure 7).
Despite the low levels of spending by Canadian broadcasters, Canada was the leader among the
benchmarking countries in terms of total per-capita expenditures on the production of television fiction
programming (Figure 1) and the annual number of hours of television fiction programming (Figure 2).
This high level of production output was also reflected in Canada’s relative level of employment in
television production and broadcasting. Canada’s television production and broadcasting sector
employed 2,014 FTEs for every million inhabitants in 2016 (Figure 14). This was second only to Australia
(2,666 employees per million inhabitants).
Despite the relatively low levels of investment in programming by Canadian broadcasters and
governments, the Canadian television production industry was in the middle of the pack in terms of
exports. Export performance was assessed using an export index.24 Under this export index, the US’s per-
capita of rate of television exports was set to 100; the benchmarking countries were then assessed against

24
This index approach was used in order to protect the propriety of Mediametrie Eurodata TV’s export data.

International Benchmarking Study of the Canadian Television Production Sector 26 of 35


the US’s rate of television exports. Canada’s television export index was equal to 72.9 in 2016, placing it
well behind the UK (430.3) and Denmark (231.9), but ahead of Ireland (52.0), Germany (47.6) and France
(37.1) (Figure 9).
Canada’s export performance was consistent with the quality of its programming, as indicated by the
critical acclaim for its television programs. Canada ranked third among the eight benchmarking countries
in terms of the number International Emmy Award nominations garnered between 2007 and 2018, and
fourth on a population-adjusted basis (Figure 12).
Because of the lack of consistent gender diversity KPIs across countries and time, the participation of
women in audiovisual production – and thereby television production – was approximated using statistics
for the percentage of feature films with a female director. This particular KPI provided the most
comprehensive dataset over time and across countries, even though it was not specific to television. On
the basis of feature film directors, Canada ranked sixth out of the eight benchmarking countries (Figure
13). The latest data for Canada (from 2015) indicated that women accounted for 17% of feature film
directors.25 This put Canada ahead of Australia and the UK, but behind other European countries.

25
Rina, Fraticelli (2015), Women in View on Screen 2015, prepared for Women in View.

International Benchmarking Study of the Canadian Television Production Sector 27 of 35


References
Broadcasting Act (1991)
Canadian Media Producers Association (CMPA), the Department of Canadian Heritage, Telefilm Canada,
the Association québécoise de la production médiatique (AQPM) (2019), Profile 2017: Economic Report on
the Screen Sector in Canada.
Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission (2017), Communications Monitoring
Report 2017.
European Audiovisual Observatory (2017), TV fiction production in the European Union.
Fraticelli, Rina (2015), Women in View on Screen 2015, prepared for Women in View.
Lawson, Mark (2018), “Is Belgian drama the new Scandi-noir?” The Guardian, February 22, 2018.
Le Lab Femmes de Cinema (2017), Study of the emergence of a new generation of European female film
directors: updated 2017.
Mediatique (2017), A report on market structure, dynamics and developments in Irish media, prepared for
the Broadcasting Authority of Ireland.
Nordicity (2016), Analysis of Government Support for Public Broadcasting, prepared for CBC/Radio-
Canada.
OECD (2018), “Population,” OECD.stat.
Ofcom (2017), Communications Market Report 2017.
Ofcom (2017a), International Communications Market Report 2017.
Ofcom (2017b), Public Service Broadcasting Annual Research Report 2017
Oliver & Ohlbaum (2018), UK Television Production Survey: Financial Census 2018, a report prepared for
Pact.
Olsberg-SPI (2017), Economic Analysis of the Audiovisual Sector in the Republic of Ireland, prepared for
Department of Culture, Heritage and the Gaeltacht, Ireland.
Screen Australia (2018), Producer Offset Guidelines, updated December 1, 2018.
Screen Ireland (2019), Ireland’s 32% Tax Credit.
Statistics Canada (2018), “Population estimates, July 1, by age and sex,” Table 17-10-0005-01.
The Local (2019), “Danish shows take TV world by storm.”

International Benchmarking Study of the Canadian Television Production Sector 28 of 35


Appendix A: Data Sources and Notes

Exhibit Sources Notes

Figure 1 CMPA Profile 2018 1. Television fiction includes drama,


Total expenditures on Screen Australia comedy, animation and children’s
live action programming.
the production of British Film Institute, Ofcom
television fiction* (UK) 2. Statistics for Canada, UK, Ireland
programming, 2016 and Australia include domestic
Screen Ireland and FLS production.
($ per capita)
CNC (France) 3. Some UK figures have been
estimated based on the
assumption that spending on
original production by public
service broadcasters (i.e. BBC,
Channel 4, ITV and 5) accounts for
75% of total production budgets
(with other sources of financing
accounting for 25%). This
assumption was based on the
statistics published in the Pact
Census 2018 (p. 10) which
indicated that UK independent
broadcasters’ revenue from
primary commissioned (domestic
and international) accounted for
79% of their total revenue in 2016.
4. Interviews with CNC indicated that
CNC-supported television
programming likely accounted for
99% of television fiction
production in France; 100% of
television animation production;
and 75% of total production in the
documentary.
Figure 2 CMPA Profile 1. Includes live action fiction
Number of hours of Screen Australia programming for general and
children’s audiences; excludes
television fiction European Audiovisual animation programming.
produced, 2016 Observatory, TV fiction
(per million inhabitants) production in the European
Union

International Benchmarking Study of the Canadian Television Production Sector 29 of 35


Exhibit Sources Notes

Table 1 Annual reports of public


Public funding for broadcasters
domestic television CMPA Profile 2018
production and Screen Australia
broadcasting, 2016 ($M)
Screen Business (UK)
Figure 3
Screen Ireland
Public funding for
CNC (France)
domestic television
production and
broadcasting, 2016
($ per capita)
Figure 4 Mediametrie, Eurodata TV 1. Audience shares for Canada based
Audience share of Worldwide - One Television on CBC/Radio-Canada only;
Year in the World 2017. excludes provincial public
publicly owned
(republished by Ofcom in broadcasters.
televison channels,
International 2. Canada-Total audience share (i.e.
2016
Communications Market combination of both language
Report 2017) markets) estimated using a
Numeris (Canada) population-weighted average of
RTE (Ireland) audience shares of CBC-Radio-
Canada in the English- and French-
CIM/GfK (Belgium) language markets.
Kantar/Gallup (Denmark) 3. Audience statistics for Belgium
only available for 2018. Overall
audience share of public
broadcasters in Belgium estimated
using weighted average of
audience shares of
French/Walloon public
broadcaster (RTBF group
channels) and Dutch/Flemish
public broadcaster (VRT channels).
The German-speaking market –
which only accounts for 1% of the
population – was excluded from
the calculations.
Figure 5 IHS Markit (republished by 1. Total industry revenue for
Television industry Ofcom in International Denmark estimated by summing
Communications Market statistics for total television
revenue, 2016 ($ per
Report 2017) advertising revenue, the public
capita)
CRTC (Canada) television licence fee and
subscription television revenue in
DR, Danske Medier and PwC Denmark.
(Denmark)

International Benchmarking Study of the Canadian Television Production Sector 30 of 35


Exhibit Sources Notes

Statbel (Belgium)

Figure 6 IHS Markit (republished by 1. Total industry revenue for


Television industry Ofcom in International Denmark estimated by summing
Communications Market statistics for total television
revenue, commercial vs.
Report 2017) advertising revenue, the public
public funding, 2016
CRTC (Canada) television licence fee and
($ per capita)
subscription television revenue in
DR, Danske Medier and PwC Denmark.
(Denmark)
Statbel (Belgium)
Figure 7 IHS Markit (republished by 1. Data includes spending on
Television broadcaster Ofcom in International domestic and foreign content.
Communications Market 2. Data for Ireland includes
spending on original
Report 2017) broadcaster licence fees for
television content, 2016
($ per capita) CRTC (Canada) projects receiving s481 support
RTE and Olsberg- (€57.1M) and estimated value of
SPI/Nordicity (Ireland) broadcaster in-house production
at RTE and TV3 (€152.4M).
3. Canadian figures estimated by
assuming that 90% of spending on
foreign programming in the
English-language market was for
original content. In the French-
language market, the assumption
was 10%.
Figure 8 IHS Markit (republished by 1. Data includes spending on
Television broadcaster Ofcom in International domestic and foreign content.
Communications Market 2. Data for Ireland includes
spending on all
Report 2017) broadcaster licence fees for
television content, 2016
($ per capita) CRTC (Canada) projects receiving s481 support
RTE and Olsberg- (€57.1M), estimated value of
SPI/Nordicity (Ireland) broadcaster in-house production
at RTE and TV3 (€152.4M), and RTE
DR, TV2 and Kantar Gallup spending on acquired Irish
(Denmark) telelvision programming (€30M).
3. Data for Denmark estimated by
summing total content spending
by the two largest broadcasters
TV2 and DR, and then using their
combined audience share (75.7%)

International Benchmarking Study of the Canadian Television Production Sector 31 of 35


Exhibit Sources Notes

to extrapolate the estimated total


amount of content spending.

Table 2 Mediametrie Eurodata TV 1. Data only covers new series of


Annual number of Worldwide / NoTa fiction, factual and entertainment
that have been broadcast on
domestically produced
channels and countries monitored
television programs
by NoTa (see list of countries
airing for the first time
below). Films, TV movies and other
in other countries
one-off broadcasts such as
(US = 100)
sporting events, etc. are excluded
from the analysis. News, kids
Figure 9 programmes and weather are also
excluded. Co-productions are
Annual number of included and counted in the
domestically produced exports of each of co-production
television programs country. Adaptations are included
airing for the first time and counted in the exports of
in other countries production countries and
(number per million development countries (e.g. the
inhabitants, US = 100) Australian adaptation of "First
Date," broadcast in New Zealand,
will count as an Australian AND a
Figure 10
British program – where the
Annual number of concept has been developed –
domestically produced export).
television programs 2. The export statistics include data
airing for the first time for the following importing
in other countries, countries: Argentina, Australia,
Canadian language Austria, Belgium (French), Belgium
markets (number per (Dutch), Brazil, Canada (English),
million inhabitants, US = Canada (French) Chile, China,
100) Colombia, Czech Republic,
Denmark, Egypt, Finland, France,
Germany, India, Ireland, Israel,
Figure 11
Italy, Ivory Coast, Japan, Lebanon,
Annual number of Malaysia, Mexico, Morocco,
domestically produced Netherlands, New Zealand,
television programs Norway, Poland, Portugal,
airing for the first time Romania, Russia, Saudi Arabia,
in other countries Singapore, South Africa, South
(number per million Korea, Spain, Sweden, Turkey,
inhabitants, US = 100) Ukraine, United Arab Emirates,
United Kingdom, United States,
Venezuela and Vietnam.

International Benchmarking Study of the Canadian Television Production Sector 32 of 35


Exhibit Sources Notes

Table 3 International Academy of 1. Includes total nominations (2007-


Total number of Television Arts & Sciences 2018) in the following award
categories: Arts Programming,
International Emmy
Comedy Series, Documentary,
Award nominations,
Drama Series, Non-Scripted
2007-2018
Entertainment, Telenovela, Short
Form, Series, TV Movie or
Figure 12 Miniseries, Best Performance by an
Actor, Best Performance by an
Number of International
Actress.
Emmy Award
nominations, 2007-2018
(per million inhabitants)
Figure 13 Le Lab Femmes de Cinema, 1. Since the percentage of female
Percentage of films Study of the emergence of a directors provides the most
new generation of European comprehensive dataset over time
made with a female
female film directors: and across countries, this KPI has
director, various years
updated 2017. been used to approximate gender
Screen Australia diversity in the wider audiovisual
sector and television production
Rina Fraticelli, Women in sub-sector.
View on Screen 2015
(Canada) 2. Figure for Canada for 2015; figure
for Australia is for 2011-2017. All
other figures are averages for the
2012-2016 period.
Figure 14 CMPA Profile 2017, 1. Data include employment in
Employment in Olsberg-SPI/Nordicity television, film or video
(Ireland), production and post-production;
audiovisual production
and television broadcasting
and television Australian Bureau of services.
broadcasting, 2016 Statistics,
(number of employed 2. Due to the manner in which
Eurostat employment is reported on an
persons per million
inhabitants) industry basis in most European
countries, employment in film or
video production in addition to
television production.
3. Employment for Canada measured
in terms of full-time equivalents
(FTEs); employment in other
countries measured in terms of
number of employees.
4. Data for Australia includes
employment at television
distribution platforms (i.e. cable,
satellite and IPTV).

International Benchmarking Study of the Canadian Television Production Sector 33 of 35


Exhibit Sources Notes

5. Eurostat data is for SIC 59.11


Motion picture, video and television
programme production activities;
59.12 Motion picture, video and
television programme post-
production activities; and 60.2
Television programming and
broadcasting activities.

International Benchmarking Study of the Canadian Television Production Sector 34 of 35


For further information about this report, please contact:
Dustin Chodorowicz
Partner
Nordicity
dchodorowicz@nordicity.com

International Benchmarking Study of the Canadian Television Production Sector 35 of 35