Tag: statistics canada

• Toward smaller condominium apartments

  Statistics Canada recently published some data (from 2022) looking at investors in the condominium apartment market. Here is what they believe to be the share of condominium apartments used as investment properties in Ontario’s 10 largest census metropolitan areas:

  

  It’s worth noting that this is after excluding condominium buildings where every single suite is owned by a single investor. This is/was most prevalent in London, and it’s the result of there being property tax benefits to registering a condominium (individual unit assessments), even though for all intents and purposes it’s a rental building (building in its entirety assessed).

  The article goes on to rightly suggest that the prevalence of investors, and the way that condominiums are financed, could be leading to the construction of more buildings with smaller suites. Here’s the proportion of new condominium apartments under 600 square feet by period of construction:

  

  The unsurprising takeaway is that condominium suites have gotten smaller. In the 1990s, the average condominium apartment built in the Toronto CMA was 947 square feet. This is compared to 640 square feet after 2016. And the same thing happened in Vancouver, which went from an average of 912 square feet to 790 square feet.

  Investor preferences certainly have something to do with this. But what the article doesn’t specifically mention is that this phenomenon is also a direct response to rising build costs: making suites smaller was how the market tried to maintain some level of affordability. Put differently, imagine how expensive new condominiums would be if the average size was still 947 square feet.

  But there are obviously limits to this. I was with one of our architects the other week and he made an interesting comment to me. He said, “Brandon, before when build costs used to go up and things got less affordable for consumers, we could just make the suites smaller to offset the impacts. But I don’t see how we can go any smaller now. We’ve reached the limit.”

  This is one of the reasons why I think this downturn is going to ultimately be a good thing for Canada’s housing markets. It’s a reset. It’s forcing everyone out of complacency and, hopefully, it means that when the next cycle begins we’ll be starting from a better foundation.

  2024.10.05

• Canada is growing a lot

  This week it was announced that Canada’s population grew by approximately 430,000 people over the last quarter (+1.1%). And that it represents the highest population growth rate of any quarter since the second quarter of 1957. Even more impressive, though, is the fact that in the first 9 months of this year we have already added over 1 million people in total. This beats all full-year periods since Confederation in 1867!

  Here’s what all of this starts to look like visually:

  

  The unfortunate side of these records is that it is coming at a time where we’re, perhaps counterintuitively, building a lot less new housing; which is to say that construction starts are declining. In fact, I was on a call this week where people who examine development and construction costs all day were predicting a 5-6% decline in hard costs in the Toronto region next year. And this is a direct result of fewer new projects getting started.

  Broadly speaking, this is how things tend to work in real estate development: there are heavy lags between changes in demand and changes in supply because of how long it takes to build new buildings. But what’s happening right now is more than this. Interest costs are impacting everyone. And investor interest in pre-construction homes has softened significantly, demonstrating how much our industry relies on individual investors. Many projects cannot go.

  What I ultimately think this is going to do is exacerbate our current supply-demand imbalances. Meaning that when the market does come back — and it of course will — it’s going to come back with a vengeance. And that’s because it is going to need to catch up to all of the new demand that is accumulating as we speak.

  2023.12.21

• Immigration to Canada is back

  According to the Globe and Mail, Canada’s census metropolitan areas (or city regions) grew by about 574,000 people for the year ending July 1, 2022. This is the highest number on record (or at least since Statistics Canada started tracking this figure in 2001), which is not entirely surprising given that immigration flows slowed dramatically during the pandemic.

  The other thing that the pandemic did was accelerate a trend of people leaving the biggest city regions for other parts of a province. During this same time period, Vancouver saw a net intraprovincial migration loss of about 14,300 people, Montreal saw about 29,500, and Toronto saw 78,077. But again, this was a trend that was building prior to the pandemic:

  

  It is perhaps no surprise that these losses follow the order of our largest city regions. And it once again suggests that we are not doing enough when it comes to housing supply/affordability and homes for young families. These intraprovincial losses are not because these city regions aren’t desirable. It’s in fact the exact opposite.

  2023.01.12

• The densest downtowns in Canada

  A few days ago I tweeted this chart out (from Statistics Canada):

  

  It is a list of the densest downtowns in Canada (people per square kilometer). But to be more precise, it is a list of the densest primary downtowns for each census metropolitan area.

  In the case of Toronto, for instance, it considers downtown Toronto, but it does not consider downtown Mississauga, downtown Brampton, or any other “downtowns” across the CMA. And in the case of Vancouver, it ignores important centers such as Burnaby.

  Many were quick to point this out on Twitter and it is a fair comment. Our cities are often more polycentric than a chart like this might make it seem.

  The other thing to consider is that these density numbers are dependent on what you assume as the boundary for each downtown. For downtown Vancouver it’s a fair bit easier because it is a peninsula surrounded by water.

  But for downtown Toronto, it’s more nebulous. Where do you draw the line? In this case, Statistics Canada is using the same downtown boundary as what’s in our Official Plan, but that happens to include the lower-density University of Toronto lands. So are we comparing apples to apples?

  I don’t know. But go Hamilton!

  2022.11.08

• Sorry, you can’t build that kind of housing here — downtown or the distant suburbs

  Between 2016 and 2021, and according to this recent report from Statistics Canada, the population of the Toronto CMA (Census Metropolitan Area) grew by over 274k people:

  

  The population of the Montréal CMA grew by nearly 188k people:

  

  And the population of the Vancouver CMA grew by over 179k people:

  

  These are the three largest CMAs in the country and they, not surprisingly, also have the three largest “downtowns.” As of the spring of 2021, the most populated downtowns were as follows: Toronto (275,931 people), Vancouver (121,932 people), Montréal (109,509), Ottawa (67,169 people), and Edmonton (55,387).

  In this exercise, Statistics Canada breaks down each CMA into 5 categories, which are generally based on two things: (1) your typical monocentric city model (downtown in the middle with a declining gradient of surrounding sprawl) and (2) how long it takes to commute — by car during non-rush hours — from downtown to the surrounding areas.

  The good news in all of this is that Canada’s downtowns seem to be doing just fine. Broadly speaking, they are growing at a faster rate than their respective CMAs and growing at 2x the rate of the previous census cycle. Halifax’s downtown grew at 26.1% from 2016 to 2021 and Calgary grew at 21%, to give two more examples. So I think you can safely ignore what you may have heard about a pandemic exodus. Those people are now returning from the country after realizing that there aren’t any pretentious coffee shops and expensive butcher shops.

  But something else is also going on in Canada’s largest urban centers. The concurrent trend is continued urban sprawl. The biggest downtowns are growing quickly, but so are the distant suburbs (30 minutes or more from downtown). And they are growing at a faster rate than everything in between. This is not entirely surprising, but it is obviously concerning from a climate change perspective and because it suggests that people are being forced to do the old “drive until you qualify” thing.

  These two phenomena are the most pronounced in the Toronto CMA. If you scroll back up to the top of this post, you’ll see that downtown absorbed a decent chunk of the population growth (about 14%), particularly considering its small footprint. But then if you look at the distant suburbs (the mustard color), you’ll see that it’s where 72% of new entrants went!

  The question I like to ask with all of this is, “are people choosing to move to the distant suburbs because that’s the housing and location that they truly want, or are people choosing it because it’s all they can afford?” There is an argument out there that sprawl is a natural market outcome and that we shouldn’t be forcing people to live in higher-density housing. And I am certainly sympathetic to giving people as much choice as possible.

  But how much choice are we really giving people in our biggest cities? We have figured out how to intensify our downtowns through mid- and high-rise development. And evidenced by the growth rates, many people are enjoying this form of housing and the kind of urban lifestyle that comes along with it. But if it happens to not work for you, our current solution is, “either be rich so you can remain close to downtown or go for a drive.”

  What is clear from this latest census data is that we haven’t yet figured out the in-between. The missing middle is still missing. And that’s because we have clear mechanisms in place to more or less ensure this is the case: (1) We restrict meaningful growth from taking place in our single-family neighbourhoods and (2) we have made a habit out of shifting some of the incumbent tax burden to new entrants through things like development charges.

  Overall, it’s a devilishly clever system where two things happen: “Sorry, you can’t build that kind of housing here. Build it somewhere else. By the way, I’d like to keep my property taxes as low as possible, so not only do I not what you close to me, but I’d also like you to help pay for some things. Cool?” This is the arrangement that we are seeing playing out in these charts. It can be easy to ignore, but it’s there.

  Charts: Statistics Canada

  2022.11.06

• Sticking close to home — two-thirds of young Americans live near where they grew up

  Here in Canada, there is often a belief that Americans tend to be more mobile than Canadians. Don’t like the cold weather? Just move south. Taxes too high? Just move south. Housing too expensive? Just move south.

  But just how mobile is mobile? A new study by the US Census Bureau and Harvard University found that by age 26, more than 2/3 of young adults in the US actually just live where they grew up, with 80% living within 100 miles, and 90% living within 500 miles.

  Migration distances were also found to be impacted by both race and parental income (though these two things likely exhibit a relationship on their own). If you are a young white or Asian adult, the “radius of economic opportunity” tends to grow and you’re more likely to live further away from where you grew up.

  The most popular destinations overall are New York, Los Angeles, Washington, and Denver (in this order). And while New York and Los Angeles remain at the top regardless of who you are, San Antonio and Phoenix are top destinations for Hispanics, and San Francisco is a top destination for Asians.

  Regardless, home appears to be a pretty sticky place.

  But what about Canadians? Are we less mobile? Looking at net domestic migration rates, Canada saw 254,143 interprovincial migrants between 2018-2019, whereas the US saw just over a million between 2020-2021. So on a per capita basis, Canada’s rate is actually higher.

  Statistics Canada also estimated earlier this year that as of July 1, 2016, somewhere around 4 million Canadians were living abroad — or about 11% of citizens. This is a much higher percentage compared to Americans.

  Of those living abroad, roughly half are believed to have received their citizenship through descent, meaning they were born abroad to Canadian parents. About 1/3 are Canadian citizens by birth. And about 15% are naturalized citizens.

  So it turns out that Canadians are in fact pretty mobile. We also seem to like going further afield.

  2022.07.26

• Canada is a suburban nation

  Statistics Canada has started releasing some of the results from its 2021 survey and there is a new classification that is now being used in its analysis of Census Metropolitan Areas (CMAs). Instead of organizing city regions jurisdictionally, it is now using a new functional classification that is based on travel times to downtown.

  This has resulted in five new geographic categories: Downtown, Urban Fringe (<10 min to downtown), Near Suburb (10-20 min to downtown), Intermediate Suburb (20-30 min to downtown), and Distant Suburb (over 30 min to downtown). Below is chart from a recent Globe and Mail article that summarizes these classifications, but keep in mind that percentage growth is different than total population growth (the next chart from New Geography covers this one).

  

  This is more granular than their previous approach, which used to be fairly binary: city core vs. the suburbs. But at the same time, it reflects a very suburban and monocentric view of cities. Downtown is in the middle. People generally need to drive to said downtown for things like work and entertainment. And so how long does it take to do that?

  

  Though in all fairness, this lens is our reality. When you apply the above classification and look at Canada’s 41 largest metropolitan areas, only 4.7% of us live in a downtown and only about 28.5% of us live in what is presumably an urban setting (downtown + urban fringe). And the numbers are actually less urban in a CMA like Toronto, where 11.5% live in the urban core (downtown + urban fringe) and 88.5% live in the suburbs, whether near or distant.

  However, one could argue that we are at least becoming slightly more urban. Only 11.5% of Torontonians might currently live in the urban core (2021), but 16% of our growth from 2016 to 2021 went to it (see above chart). Of course, this is an incremental kind of shift. About 84% of our population gain also went to the suburbs, with the vast majority of it going to distant suburbs (a 30 minute commute in Toronto is nothing after all).

  As Wendell Cox points out in this recent New Geography article, Canada remains a suburban nation.

  2022.02.27

• Comparing the weekly earnings of Canada’s visible minorities to white people

  We just finished up three days of snowboarding and skiing in Tremblant, Quebec and we’re now in Montreal closing out the long weekend. I am arguably Toronto’s greatest fan and supporter, but I continue to admit that Montreal is the coolest city in Canada.

  In other news, Theresa Qiu and Grant Schellenberg recently authored a Statistics Canada report looking at the weekly earnings of visible minorities and white people across the country. The study focuses on Canadian-born individuals aged 25 to 44 who were gainfully employed and making money in 2015.

  The reason why they isolated the study to Canadian-born visible minorities is that they wanted to eliminate the noise around new immigrants who may be struggling with the language(s), the recognition of their foreign credentials, or some other variable.

  In this case, every individual that factors into the study was born in Canada and, in theory, had access to similar sorts of opportunities. Of course, we know this isn’t always the case, but it’s an attempt an equal baseline.

  The findings are pretty interesting.

  Korean, Japanese, and South Asian men all tend to earn more than white males (which formed the baseline for the study). More than 60% of Chinese and Korean men also have a bachelor’s degree or higher, whereas only 24% of white males are in the same position.

  This is an important data point because we know that economic outcomes tend be positively correlated with educational attainment. The benefits of education also tend to compound later in life and this study only focuses on people aged 25 to 44. So the spreads could widen.

  One the factors that is surely influencing the above findings is that visible minorities are overwhelmingly urban. About 60% of visible minorities in Canada live in just three cities: Toronto, Montreal, and Vancouver. This compares to only 27% of white people.

  Again, an important data point given that people in big cities tend to earn more than those in smaller communities.

  For the full study, click here.

  2022.02.20

• Canada’s national net worth spiked largely because of home prices

  Here are some interesting figures from a recent Statistics Canada article about Canada’s national net worth.

  In the first quarter of this year, Canada’s national net worth increased by over $1 trillion or 7.7% to reach nearly $15 trillion. This is, as I understand it, record-breaking. National net worth is defined as the sum of national wealth and Canada’s net foreign asset position, the latter of which is assets that Canada owns abroad, minus the value of any domestic assets owned by foreigners. Most of the increase this past quarter was in national wealth.

  Here is a chart that speaks to this (quarterly change in national net worth by component). Again, the light blue is national wealth. It is the biggest bar.

  

  On a per capita basis, which is much easier to contextualize, national net worth rose from $365,184 to $392,496.

  The other metric that is up is household savings. We’ve talked about this before on the blog, but check out this chart. In the first quarter of this year, it was 13.1%. And at the beginning of the pandemic, back in Q2-2020, it was 27.4%. I believe these figures represent the percentage of after-tax disposable income that is saved. Either way, a double digit savings rate is not typical for Canadians.

  

  So what is driving this increase in national wealth? A big part of it is the value of residential real estate, which increased 9.4% in the first quarter. StatsCan is calling this “unprecedented” but I don’t know how far back they are looking to make this claim.

  Because of this, increases in net worth have been, not surprisingly, unequally felt. For households that own their home, net worth increased by over $730 billion last quarter. For households that rent their home, net worth increased by approximately $43 billion. On a per household basis, this translates into net worth increases of approximately $73,000 and $8,000, respectively.

  This is a meaningful spread.

  For the full Statistics Canada article, click here.

  2021.06.20

• Statistics Canada publishes its wastewater-based estimates of drug use

  In March 2018, Statistics Canada launched the largest “wastewater-based epidemiology pilot test” ever conducted in North America. Over a 12 month period, it collected wastewater samples across the country in order to test for traces of cannabis and other drugs. The pilot captured 8.4 million people in Vancouver, Edmonton, Toronto, Montréal, and Halifax. And it was allegedly timed to coincide with the legalization of cannabis in Canada on October 17, 2018.

  This week Statistics Canada published its findings. While the study does cover over 8 million people, it was not intended to be representative of the entire Canadian population. Some sites, such as Vancouver, had nearly complete coverage of the metro area population. While others, such as the Halifax site, only covered about half of the metropolitan area. In any event, the findings are interesting.

  

  Above is one example: methamphetamine load per capita for the five study cities. The y-axis is grams per million people per week. And the time period is, again, March 2018 to February 2019. Average levels for Edmonton and Vancouver were found to be about 3.7x higher than those in Montréal and Toronto. There was also no apparent seasonal/monthly variation, which is something else they looked at.

  Here I learned that a large portion of this drug passes through the body unchanged. And so the concentrations they discovered in wastewater is likely a fairly direct indicator of consumption within the population. Stats Canada is still reviewing its findings and evaluating this approach to collecting large scale urban data. But I am certain we’ll be seeing more of these kinds of urban studies.

  Chart: Statistics Canada

  2019.08.28