Connect with us

Fraser Institute

Urban Population Densities in Canada and Abroad—an Update

Published

3 minute read

From the Fraser Institute

By Steven Globerman and Milagros Palacios

Canadian cities—including Toronto and Vancouver, which are experiencing high and increasing housing costs—can accommodate much more housing supply as they have much lower population densities than other major comparable urban centres around the world, finds a new study by the Fraser Institute, an independent, non-partisan Canadian public policy think-tank.

“Compared to their international peers, Canadian cities have much lower levels of density, which means there’s an opportunity to expand the supply of housing and perhaps make housing more affordable, too,” said Steven Globerman, Fraser Institute senior fellow and co-author of Urban Population Densities in Canada and Abroad—an Update.

The study, which compares population densities in 30 metropolitan centres in highincome developed countries, finds that Canadian cities are among the least-dense.

Even Vancouver—Canada’s densest major city with 5,750 people per square kilometre—ranks 13th out of 30, and is significantly less dense than San Francisco (6,656 people per square kilometre), a comparable west coast city. In Toronto, there are 4,552 people per square kilometre. In fact, Toronto’s population could double and the city would still be less dense than New York City (10,712). And crucially, Toronto and Vancouver are significantly less dense than many other major cities around the world, including London (10,663) Tokyo (15,531) and Paris (20,360).

“Some of the most desirable, liveable cities in the world have much higher population densities than Canada’s biggest cities,” Globerman said. “Canadian cities can become significantly more dense, and possibly more affordable, without necessarily sacrificing living standards.”

  • Affordable housing in cities is a major public-policy issue in Canada.
  • Zoning and related restrictions on increased construction of multi-family housing in urban centres have been identified by the federal government and several provincial governments as major impediments to affordable housing.
  • Governments are promoting increased population density in urban areas through financial incentives and other initiatives but face opposition from homeowners and other interest groups concerned that density will bring a diminished quality of living.
  • In fact, urban population densities in Canada are relatively low compared to medium- and large-sized cities in other wealthy countries.
  • Moreover, there is no consistent evidence showing that increased urban density leads to a lower quality of living.

 

Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.

Follow Author

Education

Renaming schools in Ontario—a waste of time and money

Published on

From the Fraser Institute

By Michael Zwaagstra

It appears that Toronto District School Board (TDSB) trustees have too much time on their hands. That’s the only logical explanation for their bizarre plan to rename three TDSB schools, which bear the names of Canada’s first prime minister, Sir John A. Macdonald, British politician Henry Dundas and Egerton Ryerson, founder of public education in Ontario.

According to a new TDSB report, the schools must be renamed because of the “potential impact that these names may have on students and staff based on colonial history, anti-indigenous racism, and their connection to systems of oppression.”

Now, it’s true that each of these men did things that fall short of 21st century standards (as did most 19th century politicians). However, they also made many positive contributions. Canada probably wouldn’t exist if John A. Macdonald hadn’t been involved in the constitutional conferences that led to Confederation. More than anyone else, he skillfully bridged the divide between British Protestants and French Catholics. But for a variety of assigned sins typical to a politician of his era, he must be cancelled.

Henry Dundas supported William Wilberforce’s efforts to abolish slavery throughout the British Empire, but believed a more moderate approach had a higher chance of success. As a result, he added the word “gradual” to Wilberforce’s abolition motion—an unforgivable offense according to today’s critics—even though the motion passed with a vote of 230-85 in the British House of Commons.

Egerton Ryerson played a key role in the founding of Ontario’s public education system and strongly pushed for free schools. He recognized the importance of providing an education to students from disadvantaged backgrounds, something that was unlikely to happen if parents couldn’t afford to send their children to school. And while Ryerson was not directly involved in creating Canada’s residential school system, his advocacy for a school system for Indigenous students has drawn the wrath of critics today.

Knowing these facts from centuries ago, it strains credulity that these three names would so traumatize students and staff that they must be scrubbed from school buildings. Despite their flaws, Macdonald, Dundas and Ryerson have achievements worth remembering. Instead of trying to erase Canadian history, the TDSB should educate students about it.

Unfortunately, that’s hard to do when Ontario teachers are given vague and confusing curriculum guides with limited Canadian history content. Instead of a content-rich approach that builds knowledge sequentially from year-to-year, Ontario’s curriculum guides focus on broad themes such as “cooperation and conflict” and jump from one historical era to another. No wonder there is such widespread ignorance about Canadian history.

On a more practical level, renaming schools costs money. Officials with the nearby Thames Valley District School Board, which is undergoing its own renaming process, estimate it costs at least $30,000 to $40,000 to rename a school. This is money that could be spent better on buying textbooks and providing other academic resources to students. And this price tag excludes the huge opportunity cost of the renaming process. It takes considerable staff time to create naming committees, conduct historical research, survey public opinion and write reports. Time spent on the school renaming process is time not being spent on more important educational initiatives.

Interestingly, the TDSB report that recommends renaming these three schools has six authors (all TDSB employees) with job titles ranging from “Associate Director, Learning Transformation and Equity” to “Associate Director, Modernization and Strategic Resource Alignment.” The word salad in these job titles tells us everything we need to know about the make-work nature of these positions. One wonders how many “Learning Transformation and Equity” directors the TDSB would need if it dropped its obsession with woke ideology and focused instead on academic basics. Given the significant decline in Ontario’s reading and math scores over the last 20 years, TDSB trustees—and trustees in other Ontario school boards—would do well to reexamine their priorities.

Egerton Ryerson probably never dreamed that the public school system he helped create would veer so far from its original course. Before rushing to scrub the names of Ryerson and his colleagues from school buildings, TDSB trustees should take a close look at what’s happening inside those buildings.

In the end, the quality of education students receive inside a school is much more important than the name on the building. Too bad TDSB trustees don’t realize that.

Continue Reading

Business

Lower taxes will help increase living standards for Canadian families

Published on

From the Fraser Institute

By Jake Fuss and Grady Munro

According to a new poll from RBC, nearly half (48 per cent) of Canadians can’t maintain their standard of living due to rising costs. These polling results should come as no surprise; recent research has shown that Canadian living standards are in a historic decline.

Governments across the country should take note, and immediately cut the largest expense for families—taxes.

Consider this. Gross domestic product (GDP) is the value of all goods and services produced in the economy, and is the most widely used measure of economic prosperity. And by measuring GDP on a per-person basis (and adjusting for inflation), we can track how living standards of Canadians change over time.

According to the latest data from Statistics Canada, as of September 2024, GDP per person was $58,601 compared to $59,905 in June 2019 (after adjusting for inflation). And since the fourth quarter of 2022, living standards have fallen in seven of the last eight quarters.

The driving factor behind this decline in living standards is Canada’s sluggish economic growth in recent years. Moreover, as highlighted in the poll, inflation over the last several years has left Canadians weary and struggling to cope with the elevated cost of necessities such as food and housing.

Again, if governments want to help improve living standards, they should reduce taxes and leave more money in the pockets of Canadian families.

In 2023 (the latest year of comparable data), the average Canadian family spent a larger share of its income on taxes (43.0 per cent) than on food, shelter and clothing combined (35.6 per cent). In other words, taxes are the largest single expense for Canadian families, and governments have the power to lower this expense to help families make ends meet.

Tax reductions would also benefit the overall economy and increase opportunities for workers. Across a variety of income levels ranging from $50,000 to $300,000 a year, Canadians in nearly every province face a higher combined (federal and provincial/state) personal income tax rate than Americans in virtually every U.S. state.

Of course, jurisdictions compete to attract and retain high-skilled workers such as doctors, engineers and entrepreneurs because these individuals contribute greatly to overall economic growth. By maintaining higher tax rates than U.S. states, provinces remain at a competitive disadvantage in attracting these workers. Lowering both federal and provincial income tax rates would improve Canada’s competitiveness and help increase economic growth.

A stagnant economy and rising cost of living are reducing living standards while stretching the finances of Canadian families. This budget season, governments from coast to coast should lower taxes to improve the economy and put more money back in the pockets of hard-working Canadians.

Jake Fuss

Director, Fiscal Studies, Fraser Institute

Grady Munro

Policy Analyst, Fraser Institute
Continue Reading

Trending

X