SS: A high-level overview of how land use policies constrain economic growth and convert productivity gains into land value appreciation instead of more widely distributed gains to standard of living/income (which in turn stunts further productivity gain by reducing labour mobility). The article also makes the case for Provincial intervention traditionally municipal prerogatives based on the distribution of effects of municipal policies crossing far beyond their own jurisdictions.
>That is why growth has become more metropolitan. Canada’s [population growth](https://financialpost.com/tag/population-growth/) has become increasingly concentrated in the country’s 10 largest cities. In the 1970s and 1980s, they accounted for only a bit more than half of total population growth. In the most recent period, they absorbed more than 80 per cent. That is the spatial footprint of a changing economy.
Desperate_Path_377 on
i agree with the articles recommendations, but isn’t it a bit contradictory?
> Second, Canada’s urban regulations make it unusually hard for those cities to grow.
> That is why growth has become more metropolitan. Canada’s population growth has become increasingly concentrated in the country’s 10 largest cities. In the 1970s and 1980s, they accounted for only a bit more than half of total population growth. In the most recent period, they absorbed more than 80 per cent.
it seems like Canada’s large cities are growing. and in fact are growing faster than the the rest of the country.
I understand this is a phenomenon in the US where people are priced out of the Bay Area and it’s crazy salaries. But i just don’t see the same phenomenon in Canada? The median salaries in places like Toronto or Vancouver aren’t dramatically higher.
2 Comments
SS: A high-level overview of how land use policies constrain economic growth and convert productivity gains into land value appreciation instead of more widely distributed gains to standard of living/income (which in turn stunts further productivity gain by reducing labour mobility). The article also makes the case for Provincial intervention traditionally municipal prerogatives based on the distribution of effects of municipal policies crossing far beyond their own jurisdictions.
>That is why growth has become more metropolitan. Canada’s [population growth](https://financialpost.com/tag/population-growth/) has become increasingly concentrated in the country’s 10 largest cities. In the 1970s and 1980s, they accounted for only a bit more than half of total population growth. In the most recent period, they absorbed more than 80 per cent. That is the spatial footprint of a changing economy.
i agree with the articles recommendations, but isn’t it a bit contradictory?
> Second, Canada’s urban regulations make it unusually hard for those cities to grow.
> That is why growth has become more metropolitan. Canada’s population growth has become increasingly concentrated in the country’s 10 largest cities. In the 1970s and 1980s, they accounted for only a bit more than half of total population growth. In the most recent period, they absorbed more than 80 per cent.
it seems like Canada’s large cities are growing. and in fact are growing faster than the the rest of the country.
I understand this is a phenomenon in the US where people are priced out of the Bay Area and it’s crazy salaries. But i just don’t see the same phenomenon in Canada? The median salaries in places like Toronto or Vancouver aren’t dramatically higher.