The release of the 2011 census results for Northwestern Ontario were disappointing given the population declines that were registered. There is however one curiosity if one goes back to the 2001 Census. When the three Districts of the Northwest are compared over the period 2001 to 2011, Kenora District is a bit of an anomaly. Between 2001 and 2006, while the Thunder Bay District and the Rainy District registered population declines, Kenora registered a 4.2 percent increase - or 2,617 more people. Now, from 2006 to 2011, Kenora shows a bigger decline than either the Thunder Bay or Rainy River district at -10.6 percent or a drop of 6,812 people. The increase in Kenora District between 2001 and 2006 was attributed in large part to the growing First Nation population and their high birth rates. So what happened? Has the birth rate collapsed? Has a mass out-migration of non-aboriginal population counteracted the growing aboriginal population? Did the Census somehow not enumerate large numbers of first Nations residents in the outlying reserves this time around? Hopefully, there will be answers to these questions.
UPDATE: MONDAY FEBRUARY 13TH. Well, it turns out as announced this morning on the CBC Thunder Bay News that Statistics Canada has announced it missed 13 remote First Nations when it conducted the Census and did them in the fall with the updated numbers for Northwestern Ontario to be released soon. It would have been nice to know this when the numbers were initially released. After all, it likely means the population of the region as a whole probably did not drop 4.7 percent. Who knows, maybe it even went up? Let's hope the government waits for a final tally before reallocating seats in the House of Commons.
Northern Economist 2.0
Friday 10 February 2012
Thursday 9 February 2012
Northern Economist on the Census!
Well, the release of the 20111 Census results yesterday spawned alot of media activity for me yesterday ranging from the Huffington Post to Thunder Bay Television News to editorial mention in the Thunder Bay Chronicle-Journal. Thunder Bay Television has posted part of the interview they conducted with me on Youtube which you can access here.
Wednesday 8 February 2012
2011 Census Results for Population In: Northern Ontario Declines
Statistics Canada released the first set of 2011 census results today dealing with population and dwelling counts. Canada's population is up 5.9 percent from 2006, Ontario's is up 5.7 percent while within Ontario, the North is down overall by 1.4 percent. As the accompanying table shows, the Northeast stayed stable in terms of its overall population while the Northwest showed a decline of 4.7 percent. As for the major urban centers of the North, Greater Sudbury posted a 1.6 percent increase, North Bay a 1 percent increase, and Timmins a 0.4 percent increase. The Sault and Thunder Bay both saw declines in their populations of -0.4 and -1.1 respectively.
The Northwest during the period 2006 to 2011 worked its way through the aftermath of the forest sector crisis with the region outside of Thunder Bay bearing the brunt of the employment and population adjustment. Employment and GDP in Thunder Bay shrank by about 10 percent during the forest sector crisis and its population has been remarkably resilient given the decline. Employment in the region outside of Thunder Bay shrank by almost 30 percent. Employment numbers over the last year have been showing increases in Thunder Bay and the Northwest and these population results are hopefully a lagging indicator. The Northeast has been buoyed by its mining sector though there is a redistribution of population towards the major urban centers. Evidence from the Northeast suggests that should the Ring of Fire mining development successfully proceed, the Northwest can also expect to see stabilization and even some growth in its population.
What will be interesting is the additional sub-regional breakdowns in population with the Northeast and the Northwest. For example, between 2001 and 2006, while the Northwest declined in population, the Kenora District actually saw increasing population. As well, the aboriginal population increased substantially in the Northwest between 2001 and 2006. Further results and analysis on whether these trends have continued since 2006 to come.
The Northwest during the period 2006 to 2011 worked its way through the aftermath of the forest sector crisis with the region outside of Thunder Bay bearing the brunt of the employment and population adjustment. Employment and GDP in Thunder Bay shrank by about 10 percent during the forest sector crisis and its population has been remarkably resilient given the decline. Employment in the region outside of Thunder Bay shrank by almost 30 percent. Employment numbers over the last year have been showing increases in Thunder Bay and the Northwest and these population results are hopefully a lagging indicator. The Northeast has been buoyed by its mining sector though there is a redistribution of population towards the major urban centers. Evidence from the Northeast suggests that should the Ring of Fire mining development successfully proceed, the Northwest can also expect to see stabilization and even some growth in its population.
What will be interesting is the additional sub-regional breakdowns in population with the Northeast and the Northwest. For example, between 2001 and 2006, while the Northwest declined in population, the Kenora District actually saw increasing population. As well, the aboriginal population increased substantially in the Northwest between 2001 and 2006. Further results and analysis on whether these trends have continued since 2006 to come.
Tuesday 7 February 2012
New Health Fiscal Sustainability Report Released
A new report on the fiscal sustainability of public health care in Canada was just released by the Canadian Health Services Research Foundation. The report is titled “The Fiscal Sustainability of Canadian Publicly Funded Healthcare Systems and the Policy Response to the Fiscal Gap” and is authored by myself and Rosanna Di Matteo and is available on the CHSRF web site. For a summary of the results, see below:
Key Messages
- Fiscal sustainability generally refers to the extent to which spending growth matches growth in measures of a society’s resource base. Since 1975, real per capita government health spending in Canada has risen at an average annual rate of 2.3%, in excess of the growth in real per capita GDP, government revenues, federal transfers and total government expenditures.
- Five expenditure scenarios were constructed, using regression determinants and growth extrapolation approaches, for Canada as a whole, each of the ten provinces and the territories for the period 2010–2035.
- For Canada as a whole, real per capita public healthcare spending from 2010 to 2035 can be expected to grow anywhere from 78% to 115% and reach a level in 2035 in 2010 dollars ranging from $6,552 to $8,798 per capita.
- For the provinces, the average increase across the ten provinces from 2010 to 2035 in real per capita provincial government health spending ranges from 81% to 160%. Average estimated spending in 2035 ranges from a low of $6,711 to a high of $10,819 per capita.
- For the Yukon, real per capita public healthcare spending between 2010 and 2035 can be expected to increase from a low of 142% to a high of 652% – a range in 2035 of $14,316 to $41,089 per capita. For the Northwest Territories and Nunavut, low-end growth was 57% while the highest growth was 281%. Spending in 2035 would be estimated to range from a low of $12,423 to a high of $32,557 per capita.
- In terms of the fiscal gap, annual compound growth rates for forecast government health spending exceed those for government revenue growth for most scenarios and jurisdictions. For Canada as a whole, the public healthcare expenditure-to-GDP ratio could rise to as little as 9.5% or to as much as 13.4% by 2035 from the current 7.6%. The territories and most provinces generally also see increases in the public healthcare expenditure-to-GDP ratio by 2035.
- Under the extrapolation assumption that health expenditure trends for the 1996 to 2008 period continue but with lower economic growth, government health spending in Canada in 2035 would reach $8,798 per capita and the public healthcare expenditure-to-GDP ratio would reach 13.4%. This projected increase is equivalent to an increase in public spending today of about $2,797 per capita, possibly requiring up to a 15% increase in per capita revenues.
- Potential policy solutions to make public healthcare spending more sustainable include controlling and restructuring expenditure, raising additional tax revenues, creating a federal health tax to generate revenues for a national health endowment fund, and allowing for a greater private role in healthcare spending.
Sunday 5 February 2012
Where the Jobs Are – Ontario Edition
Statistics Canada’s labor force release on Friday revealed
that in Ontario there was an increase in the number of people searching for
work which pushed the unemployment rate up 0.4 percentage points
to 8.1%. In the 12 months to January 2012, employment in
the province increased with all the growth occurring in
the first half of the period. When
the numbers are examined by major urban centre, it becomes apparent that a
slowdown in employment growth has begun over the last six months with much of
it is being driven by the Toronto area.
The two accompanying figures show the percentage change in seasonally
adjusted monthly employment for major Ontario centers January 2011 to January 2012 (Figure 1) and August 2011 to January 2012 (Figure 2).
Year over year (Figure 1), there were employment increases
in Ottawa-Gatineau, Kingston, Peterborough, Oshawa, Hamilton,
St. Catharines-Niagara, Kitchener-Waterloo-Cambridge, Guelph, Barrie and Thunder Bay. The cities with the largest annual
percent increases in employment were Guelph, Peterborough and Thunder Bay. The last six months (Figure 2) reveal
that a slowdown has indeed begun with employment growth slowing just about
everywhere except Peterborough, Thunder Bay and Hamilton – which all saw
increases in their employment growth rate. Toronto – which accounts for 48 percent of the employment in
Ontario has seen a drop in employment of just under 1 percent over the course
of the year. Brantford has seen
the largest percentage declines in employment. Over the last six months, even the usually robust
Kitchener-Waterloo-Cambridge and Barrie areas have slipped into employment
declines. Right now, the best
places in Ontario for job growth are Peterborough, Hamilton, Guelph and believe
it or not – Thunder Bay.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)