Planning for shrinking cities

[ssiguy]

With this virus bringing our immigration rates down to effectively zero and due to high unemployment, we will have very low immigration rates for years to come and it's time we started planning for what was once unthinkable......shrinking cities. Immigration rates will never return to the levels of the past few years and that for Canada is a demographic timebomb. A staggering 80% of all our population growth is due to immigration. What's worse is that our immigrants disproportionately account for our fertility rates as they tend to be younger than the Canadian average.

Of course some areas will be less effected than others but many of our cities are growing almost exclusively due to immigration. Sound impossible? Just go look to the US where it's plunging immigration rate has led to population declines not only in cities in NY and Chicago but even LA. This despite the fact that the US has a birthrate 20% higher than Canada.

All Canadian cities since the industrial revolution have been based upon one basic premise...……. they will always grow. That truth is no longer valid and our successful urban areas will be the ones that prepare for this new eventuality.

[milomilo]

This is based on a very dubious assumption that immigration levels will stay low. I don't see much logical reason for that, especially if our cities would shrink without it.

[JHikka]

A lot of your post is based on the assumption that immigration will simply not happen again or not return to similar levels pre-2020. I disagree and think immigration will resume eventually.

In saying this, i've thought of this idea of a shrinking population as a sort of post-growth world far off into the future once Africa hits its population peak and the world population begins declining on the whole (2070s? 2080s?) and what it would mean for countries and areas that require mass growth to operate. With many unknowns still unresolved (such as climate change) it's unreasonable to assume that Canada won't be taking in new people on an almost constant basis. What do we do when oceans rise and the citizens of Oceania, Bangladesh, etc. have to be relocated? Surely Canada will be in a prime position to take them on compared to others. One potential example of many.

A lot of people will know about the one child policy previously in place in China and, whether or not we agree with it, it wouldn't be crazy to assume that they wouldn't also implement a two or three child policy in the future to maintain its population moving forward once it begins shrinking. Nothing would stop other countries from implementing similar policies, and we in Canada already supply parents with additional benefits based on the number of children they have.

As of today we already have shrinking areas and towns in Canada which are experiencing an exodus and natural decline in population.

[whatnext]

Originally Posted by JHikka

A lot of your post is based on the assumption that immigration will simply not happen again or not return to similar levels pre-2020. I disagree and think immigration will resume eventually.

In saying this, i've thought of this idea of a shrinking population as a sort of post-growth world far off into the future once Africa hits its population peak and the world population begins declining on the whole (2070s? 2080s?) and what it would mean for countries and areas that require mass growth to operate. With many unknowns still unresolved (such as climate change) it's unreasonable to assume that Canada won't be taking in new people on an almost constant basis. What do we do when oceans rise and the citizens of Oceania, Bangladesh, etc. have to be relocated? Surely Canada will be in a prime position to take them on compared to others. One potential example of many.

A lot of people will know about the one child policy previously in place in China and, whether or not we agree with it, it wouldn't be crazy to assume that they wouldn't also implement a two or three child policy in the future to maintain its population moving forward once it begins shrinking. Nothing would stop other countries from implementing similar policies, and we in Canada already supply parents with additional benefits based on the number of children they have.

As of today we already have shrinking areas and towns in Canada which are experiencing an exodus and natural decline in population.

It's hard to imagine voters in a country with double digit unemployment welcoming an influx of people competing for jobs. But immigration aside, a lot of the thigs that make density work are going to be broken. Who wants to get on a transit plague-wagon to get to their job? Get in a cramped elevator with 12 strangers?

[thurmas]

With Trudeau in power I do not see immigration rates falling other than this year as an aberration as his voting base is built of urban and suburban new Canadian voters.

[wave46]

Originally Posted by whatnext

It's hard to imagine voters in a country with double digit unemployment welcoming an influx of people competing for jobs. But immigration aside, a lot of the thigs that make density work are going to be broken. Who wants to get on a transit plague-wagon to get to their job? Get in a cramped elevator with 12 strangers?

Life will go on without much change, I imagine. COVID-19 will just become a thing like the flu as to perception of risk.

Maybe more people will wear masks and whatnot (like Tokyo or Seoul), but I can't imagine that in the long-term there will be significant changes.

Humans are weird about risk. They'll drive at 100 km/h in a steel metal box alongside other steel metal boxes on a freeway (or even better, with a steel metal box flying at them mere feet away on a 2-lane highway) and think nothing of it.

[logan5]

Immigration stimulates the economy. If anything, immigration will increase in the next year or 2.

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by whatnext

It's hard to imagine voters in a country with double digit unemployment welcoming an influx of people competing for jobs. But immigration aside, a lot of the thigs that make density work are going to be broken. Who wants to get on a transit plague-wagon to get to their job? Get in a cramped elevator with 12 strangers?

This will all pass. The movement towards densification is far from over.

[someone123]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

This will all pass. The movement towards densification is far from over.

There will no doubt be a lot of economic damage that shakes out of the shutdown and concerns around public exposure to the virus, but the direct damage to physical infrastructure and demographics in Canada is nil. We have people who are choosing to stay home, not a decimated working age population or bombed factories.

And to be frank now that we have a clearer idea of what the fatality rate is like, it's looking unlikely that it's worth a protracted shutdown, even if testing and tracing, treatments, or a vaccine all fail to keep the spread in check.

[Corndogger]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

This will all pass. The movement towards densification is far from over.

Densification is done for a long time. The economic mess we're in is going to force civic politicians across the nation to finally admit that what they've been selling us is wrong and that densification is not cheaper than how we used to live. Canada is not Hong Kong. We can live spread out and it will cost less than cramming everyone together and then having to building multibillion dollar transit systems to take people back and forth between a couple of points. Thank God AB had the foresight to build freeways as they will be a huge selling card in the near future. The days of mass cramming of people are over. This will be great for most of the nation other than say places like the lower mainland. If I was you I'd be voting for whatever party promises to actually build the road system Christy Clark promised to do in your last election campaign.

[MonkeyRonin]

Originally Posted by ssiguy

With this virus possibly bringing our immigration rates down to effectively zero and due to possibly high unemployment, we will possibly have very low immigration rates for possibly years to come and it's time we started planning for what was once unthinkable......shrinking cities. Immigration rates will possibly never return to the levels of the past few years and that for Canada is a demographic timebomb. A staggering 80% of all our population growth is due to immigration. What's worse is that our immigrants disproportionately account for our fertility rates as they tend to be younger than the Canadian average.

Fixed that for you.

[wave46]

Japan is going through something similar right now. Its cities are shrinking much less than its rural areas.

I'd wager that this would continue, even with a Japan of <100 million people.

So, I'd not be betting against Canadian cities for the next few decades.

[Truenorth00]

Somebody doesn't understand the heartland/hinterland model. TMV will be the very last cities to see shrinkage. Places like Edmonton, Winnipeg, Regina would all suffer first. And virtually every rural area before them.

[Drybrain]

I think there's a good chance Canadian cities flatline (or something close to it) in terms of population growth over the next 12-24 months, but I don't see why that would go longer term, barring some wild recalibration of global politics/demographics. If anything, with the US going more nativist what with Trump's haranguing again about immigration, we may benefit by attracting people who would otherwise go there.

I do think, however, that Canada ought to be looking 10, 15, 20, 25 years into the future, when immigration levels are far from guaranteed to remain high due to all sorts of variables. But in the immediate post-pandemic world? Not very concerned.

[someone123]

Originally Posted by Drybrain

I think there's a good chance Canadian cities flatline (or something close to it) in terms of population growth over the next 12-24 months, but I don't see why that would go longer term, barring some wild recalibration of global politics/demographics. If anything, with the US going more nativist whawith Trump's haranguing again about immigration, we may benefit.

The US cutting down on immigration is a huge boon to Canada. Trump's "Muslim ban" made Canada more attractive to top students and graduates from countries like Iran. These are the sort of people who will either start successful businesses or attract tech jobs to Canada and are a net win when they are admitted.

It's odd but there are a bunch of US tech companies that have offices in Canada designed for people who have a hard time getting into the US. Canada should absolutely encourage those types of things when possible, although I think we should be careful about who gets citizenship since that is permanent.

[Corndogger]

Originally Posted by someone123

The US cutting down on immigration is a huge boon to Canada. Trump's "Muslim ban" made Canada more attractive to top students and graduates from countries like Iran. These are the sort of people who will either start successful businesses or attract tech jobs to Canada and are a net win when they are admitted.

It's odd but there are a bunch of US tech companies that have offices in Canada designed for people who have a hard time getting into the US. Canada should absolutely encourage those types of things when possible, although I think we should be careful about who gets citizenship since that is permanent.

We need to be careful about who we let in. I'd be much more comfortable letting Iranians in if they would overthrow their regime first. We also need to keep in mind that Trump is not going to be president forever. It's possible he could be out as of next January 20. If that happens and Biden and Congress remove all of the restrictions, the people who have come to Canada as a second choice will very likely move to the U.S. because the opportunities and pay is so much better.

[Corndogger]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

Somebody doesn't understand the heartland/hinterland model. TMV will be the very last cities to see shrinkage. Places like Edmonton, Winnipeg, Regina would all suffer first. And virtually every rural area before them.

Very likely will be the exact opposite. Vancouver and Toronto have been very propped up by immigration for a long time. Their growth is not natural and it's very questionable if it's sustainable. I find it strange that you included Montreal. Maybe that's because your ideas are based on very dated notions and ideas that most Canadians never accepted to begin with.

[wave46]

Originally Posted by Corndogger

Very likely will be the exact opposite. Vancouver and Toronto have been very propped up by immigration for a long time. Their growth is not natural and it's very questionable if it's sustainable. I find it strange that you included Montreal. Maybe that's because your ideas are based on very dated notions and ideas that most Canadians never accepted to begin with.

Why would immigrants stay there if there was nothing for work?

The fact they are growing despite the many disincentives to stay (extremely high cost of living) there seem to indicate that those cities have something that is keeping people there.

Tokyo and New York City are growing despite the demographic pressures of Japan and the exodus of people from upstate New York.

[Corndogger]

Originally Posted by wave46

Why would immigrants stay there if there was nothing for work?

The fact they are growing despite the many disincentives to stay (extremely high cost of living) there seem to indicate that those cities have something that is keeping people there.

Tokyo and New York City are growing despite the demographic pressures of Japan and the exodus of people from upstate New York.

They stay because the feds help cover their costs and clustering. If Toronto, etc. is so great then why is there is so little migration from within Canada to those cities? The idea that Vancouver, Montreal and Toronto are so much greater than other cities because they are bigger is old school European thinking. In reality they're not. Vancouver is a nice place to visit but to live there is a totally different story. Vastly overrated as is Toronto.

[wave46]

Originally Posted by Corndogger

They stay because the feds help cover their costs and clustering. If Toronto, etc. is so great then why is there is so little migration from within Canada to those cities? The idea that Vancouver, Montreal and Toronto are so much greater than other cities because they are bigger is old school European thinking. In reality they're not. Vancouver is a nice place to visit but to live there is a totally different story. Vastly overrated as is Toronto.

I've personally known many Canadians who've moved to Toronto.

I'd imagine that being the respective employment centres for each province in the high end of their fields (you're not top 1% employment jobs in Hearst, ON) provides a substantial economic benefit to those cities.

In fact, the world seems to be ever moving to a handful of prime cities for that very reason. London and Paris crush other cities in England and France with respect to economic clout. Beijing and Shanghai make Chengdu and Wuhan look like podunk outposts. Tokyo towers over Sapporo and Osaka.

It seems a natural byproduct of capitalism - the best breeds an attractant for the best.