Ontario and Nipissing District: Population and Dwelling Update, 2011 Census

Home , Nipissing District, South Algonquin, Temagami

District of Nipissing Social Services Administration Board (DNSSAB), May 2012

Page 1 of 31

Introduction The District of Nipissing Social Services Administration Board (DNSSAB) provides essential human services to the citizens of Nipissing District. These services include Ontario Works, Children‟s Services, Housing, and Emergency Medical Services (EMS). The core service areas are supported by Corporate Services, and governance is provided by a Board of Directors comprised of 12 elected officials representing the district‟s municipalities and areas. DNSSAB is located in North Bay and serves the area of Nipissing District which is comprised of 11 municipalities, two unorganized areas, and two First Nations, as shown on the map below:

Purpose This is a descriptive report that presents the first available data from the 2011 census: population and private dwellings. The data is presented in summary form, with a brief description of the meaning of the data as interpreted by the author.

Page 2 of 31

The report provides a population and dwelling update on Ontario and Nipissing District. As part of the corporate strategies of leveraging data & information, and facilitating community planning, the report is intended to:

i) Put some context and meaning around the raw census data and connect some of the dots. ii) Provide DNSSAB and its stakeholders1 with data and information to facilitate informed decision-making for planning, advocacy, policy and program development, and service delivery. iii) Generate discussion and debate around the population and dwelling counts and trends, in terms of their relevance to the human services sector and other related social and economic sectors.

Limitations This report is not an explanatory one. For example, it does not explain why the population and dwelling counts are what they are or what caused a change in population and dwellings in a given area, etc. Connecting all of the dots would involve answering specific research questions such as why did the population change or not change? Or, what caused the increase –or decrease- in the number of private dwellings? Answering these types of questions requires different statistical tools, methodologies and analysis than the descriptive techniques used, and are beyond the scope of this report.

Having said the above, one central theme that emerges from the report is the phenomenon of strong household growth relative to population growth (or decline as the case may be). Some possible explanations are provided as to why the number of households is growing faster than the population, or why household growth is occurring in areas where there has been population decline. However, the explanations are based on past household and family trends and cannot be confirmed until the 2011 census family and household data is released in September 2012.

The report does not go into detailed analysis for each of the district‟s municipalities and areas. Separate reports for these areas will be available in the future (see “Scope” below).

Scope This is the first report of a series that will be rolled out as the census data becomes available. The series of reports will include individual reports for the district‟s respective municipalities and areas.

The report presents the population and dwelling data for Ontario and its 49 census divisions, and Nipissing District. For each level of geography, the population data is

Page 3 of 31 presented first followed by the dwelling data. For both variables, the current (2011) counts are stated and the five year change from the 2006 census is also stated. The past 20-year trend (1991 to 2011) for the population and number of dwellings is also presented, and comparisons are made between Nipissing District and Ontario.

Data Unless stated otherwise, the data in this report is derived from the Canadian Census of Population. The current population and dwelling counts are derived from the Statistics Canada 2011 census, released publicly on February 8, 2012. The trend data is from previous Statistics Canada censuses, 1991, 1996, 2001, and 2006.

The dwelling data in this report refers to “private dwellings” as defined by Statistics Canada (see Endnote 3). The term “dwelling” is used interchangeably with “household” in the report, as the two approximate closely to each other based on past census counts.

Report Production This report was written by Dave Plumstead, MBA; DNSSAB Research Analyst.

Acknowledgements A special thanks to the City of North Bay‟s GIS department for assistance with creating the maps.

Page 4 of 31

Contents Introduction ...... 2 Report Purpose ...... 2 Report Limitations...... 3 Scope ...... 3 Data ...... 4 Report Production ...... 4 Acknowledgements ...... 4 Key Findings ...... 6 I. ONTARIO POPULATION 2011………………………………………………………………………………………………………….10 1.0 Population 2011 by Census Division ...... 10 1.1 Population Change: 2006 to 2011 by Census Division ...... 12 1.2 Population 20-year Trend: 1991 to 2011 ...... 13 II. ONTARIO PRIVATE DWELLINGS 2011……………………………………………………………………………………………..15 2.0 Private Dwellings 2011 by Census Division ...... 15 2.1 Private Dwelling Change: 2006 to 2011 by Census Division ...... 17 2.2 Private Dwellings 20-year Trend: 1991 to 2011 ...... 19 III. NIPISSING DISTRICT POPULATION 2011………………………………………………………………………………………..20 3.0 Population 2011 by Municipality and Area ...... 20 3.1 Population Change: 2006 to 2011 by Municipality and Area ...... 21 3.2 Population 20-year Trend: 1991 to 2011 ...... 23 3.3 Population Change Comparison: Nipissing and Ontario ...... 24 IV. NIPISSING DISTRICT PRIVATE DWELLINGS 2011……………………………………………………………………………25 4.0 Private Dwellings by Municipality and Area ...... 25 4.1 Private Dwelling Change: 2006 to 2011 by Municipality and Area ...... 27 4.2 Private Dwellings 20-year Trend: 1991-2011 ...... 29 4.3 Dwelling Change Comparison: Nipissing and Ontario ...... 29 References ...... 30 End Notes ...... 31

Page 5 of 31

Key Findings

The following are key findings from the analysis, taken from the main body of the report. Based on previous census data and analysis, the findings are classed as either new findings or confirmation findings as defined below:

New finding: reveals something that is not presently known; is unexpected; indicates that a given trend is not continuing with the same magnitude and /or has changed direction.

Confirmation Finding: confirms what is already known; is expected; indicates that a given trend is continuing with the same magnitude and in the same direction.

ONTARIO

Population New Finding: Ontario’s census population is 12.8 million people. Toronto, Peel and York account for over one-third of the population.

Confirmation Finding: There is significant variation in population and area across Ontario’s 49 census divisions. Land area ranges from just 630 square kilometres in Toronto to over 400,000 square kilometres in Kenora. Meanwhile the population ranges from 13,000 people in Manitoulin to over 2.5 million people in Toronto.

Confirmation Finding: Northern Ontario accounts for 88% of Ontario’s land area, but just 6% of the population.

New Finding: Northern Ontario has an average population density of 7 people per square kilometre while Southern Ontario has 244 people per square kilometre.

Population Change: 2006 to 2011 New Finding: Ontario’s population has increased by approximately 5.7% (690,000 people) since 2006. Southern Ontario has seen the majority of this growth, with Halton, Peel, and York accounting for half of the population increase.

New Finding: Most of Northern Ontario saw a population decrease since 2006. The northern population is down by approximately 1.4% (-11,000 people) and Kenora and Thunder Bay account for 88% of this decrease.

Population 20-year Trend Confirmation Finding: Ontario’s long-term population trend is one of continued growth. Over the past 20 years, the province has grown at an average annual rate of 1.4%, or 138,000 people.

Page 6 of 31

Private Dwellings New finding: Ontario currently has approximately 4.9 million private dwellings. The proportional distribution of these dwellings across Ontario’s 49 census divisions generally follows that of population. For example, 94% of Ontario’s private dwellings are located in Southern Ontario, with the remaining 6% located in Northern Ontario.

New Finding: The average household size in Ontario is 2.6 persons per dwelling.

Confirmation Finding: Ontario’s average household size has been holding relatively steady during the past 20 years, although it is trending slightly towards smaller households.

New finding: There is variation in average household size across the province. Household size currently ranges from 2.2 persons per dwelling in Haliburton to 3.2 persons per dwelling in Peel and York. In Northern Ontario, the average household is smaller with 2.3 persons /dwelling.

Private Dwelling Change: 2006 to 2011 New Finding: There are approximately 333,000 more private dwellings in Ontario since the 2006 census which represents a 7.3% increase.

Confirmation Finding: Household growth (7.3%) continues to outpace population growth (5.7%).

New Finding: Ontario’s dwelling/ population change ratio is 0.48. For every increase in population of one person between 2006 and 2011, there was an increase of 0.48 private dwellings.

New Finding: Whereas 12 census divisions had a population decrease since 2006 only four of these divisions had a corresponding decrease in private dwellings (and three of these are in Northern Ontario). Thus dwelling growth continues, even in areas that are experiencing population decline.

Private Dwelling 20-year Trend Confirmation Finding: Ontario’s trend in private dwellings is one of continued growth. Over the past 20 years, the number of private dwellings in Ontario has grown at an average annual rate of 1.7%, or 62,500 dwellings.

Page 7 of 31

NIPISSING DISTRICT

Population New Finding: Nipissing District’s census population is approximately 85,000 people. North Bay accounts for 63% of the population.

Confirmation Finding: There is significant variation in population and area across Nipissing District. Land area ranges from just 3.6 square kilometres in Mattawa to over 6,000 square kilometres in Nipissing South. Meanwhile, the district’s population ranges from less than 100 people in Nipissing South to over 53,000 people in North Bay.

Confirmation Finding: There is a wide measure of population density across the municipalities and areas. Two of the district’s population centres – Mattawa and North Bay – have over 150 persons per square kilometre. Meanwhile, four of the rural areas – Temagami, Mattawan, and the two unorganized areas - have less than one person per square kilometre.

Population Change: 2006 to 2011 New Finding: Nipissing District’s population has increased by 0.4% (349 people) since 2006.

New Finding: Some municipalities and areas have experienced population growth while others have had population decline. In absolute terms, West Nipissing had the highest population growth in the district with an increase of 739 people since 2006. North Bay had the largest decrease with -315 people, followed by Temagami (-114 people).

Population 20-year Trend Confirmation Finding: Nipissing District’s long-term population trend is a stationary one. The district’s population in 2011 is the same as it was 20 years ago in 1991.

Population Change Comparison: Nipissing and Ontario Confirmation Finding: Nipissing District continues to lag the province in population growth. Whereas Ontario has averaged intercensal growth of 6% between the previous five census periods (25% cumulative growth), Nipissing on average has had no growth over the same period.

Private Dwellings by Municipality and Area New finding: Nipissing District currently has approximately 36,000 private dwellings. The proportional distribution of these dwellings across the district’s municipalities and areas generally follows that of population.

Page 8 of 31

New Finding: The average household size in Nipissing District is 2.3 persons per dwelling.

Confirmation Finding: Over the past 20 years, the district’s average household size has been steadily trending downwards towards smaller households.

New finding: There is significant variation in the average household size across the district. On average, the largest households are in Chisholm and East Ferris (2.6 and 2.7 persons /household respectively) while the smallest ones are in South Algonquin and Mattawan (2.2) and Temagami (2.1 persons /household).

Private Dwelling Change: 2006 to 2011 New Finding: There are approximately 1,200 more private dwellings in the district since the 2006 census, which represents a 3.5% increase.

Confirmation Finding: Household growth (3.5%) continues to outpace population growth (0.4%) in Nipissing District.

New Finding: West Nipissing and North Bay account for 92% of the district’s growth in private dwellings.

New Finding: Nipissing’s dwelling/ population change ratio is 3.4. For every increase in population of one person between 2006 and 2011, there was an increase of 3.4 private dwellings. This ratio is significantly higher than Ontario (0.5) due to North Bay, which saw relatively strong household growth despite a population decline.

New Finding: In three of the district’s municipalities, the change in the number of private dwellings is opposite to the change in population. Mattawa has fewer dwellings but more people than in 2006, while Calvin and North Bay have more dwellings but fewer people.

Private Dwelling 20-year Trend Confirmation Finding: Unlike the population trend, the district’s trend in private dwellings is one of continued growth. Over the past 20 years, the annual number of private dwellings in Nipissing District has grown at an average rate of 0.8%, or 261 dwellings /year.

Dwelling Change Comparison: Nipissing and Ontario Confirmation Finding: Ontario’s average growth of private dwellings has been 7.6% between census periods over the past 20 years (34% cumulative growth). In comparison, Nipissing District’s average intercensal dwelling growth during the same period has been 4% (16% cumulative growth).

Page 9 of 31

1.0 Population 2011 by Census Division

Figure 1

Page 10 of 31

The 2011 census of population recorded 12,851,821 people living in Ontario. As shown by Figure 1 on the previous page, Ontario‟s land area and population vary widely across the 49 census divisions.2 Land area ranges from just 630 sq. km. in Toronto to over 400,000 sq. km. in Kenora. Meanwhile the population ranges from 13,000 people in Manitoulin to over 2.5 million people in Toronto.

The variation between the northern and southern census divisions is quite evident from the map. Northern Ontario starts at the southern borders of Parry Sound and Nipissing District, and includes 11 of the 49 census divisions. As noted by the large, upper section of the map, the north covers an area of approximately 803,000 sq. kms. which is 88% of Ontario‟s total land area (Kenora is clearly an outlier and accounts for half of Northern Ontario‟s area, or 45% of Ontario‟s total area). On the population side however, Northern Ontario has a relatively small population of approximately 775,000 people which accounts for just 6% of Ontario‟s total population.

Contrast the above to Southern Ontario which includes the remaining 38 census divisions but covers an area of just 106,000 sq. kms. With a population of approximately 12 million people, Southern Ontario accounts for the remaining 94% of the population. Toronto, Peel and York account for over one-third of Ontario‟s population.

The stark contrast between northern and Southern Ontario in terms of land area and population is best measured by population density: whereas Northern Ontario has an average population density of 7 people per sq. km. (3 people if the outlier of Greater Sudbury is removed), Southern Ontario has 244 people per sq. km. (139 people if the outlier of Toronto is removed). This fundamental difference in population and area continues to have numerous implications for forming public policy, conducting planning, and delivering programs and services across multiple sectors throughout the northern and southern census divisions.

New Finding: Ontario’s census population is 12.8 million people. Toronto, Peel and York account for over one-third of the population.

Confirmation Finding: There is significant variation in population and area across Ontario’s 49 census divisions. Land area ranges from just 630 square kilometres in Toronto to over 400,000 square kilometres in Kenora. Ontario’s population ranges from 13,000 people in Manitoulin to over 2.5 million people in Toronto.

Confirmation Finding: Northern Ontario accounts for 88% of Ontario’s land area, but just 6% of the population.

New Finding: Northern Ontario has an average population density of 7 people per square kilometre while Southern Ontario has 244 people per square kilometre.

Page 11 of 31

1.1 Population Change: 2006 to 2011 by Census Division

Figure 2

Page 12 of 31

Figure 2

Figure 2 on the previous page shows the relative change in population between the 2006 and 2011 census periods and divisions. Since 2006, Ontario‟s population has increased by approximately 690,000 people or 5.7%.

As noted by the map, Southern Ontario has seen the majority of this growth, with the exception of the far southwest and two of the central divisions (Kawartha Lakes and Prince Edward) which had population declines. Halton, Peel, and York – with a combined increase of approximately 340,000 people - account for half of Ontario‟s growth.

Also evident from the map is the population decline in most of Northern Ontario over the five-year period. The northern population is down by approximately 11,000 people – or 1.4%. Kenora and Thunder Bay account for 88% of this population decrease, with decreases of 6,800 and 3,000 people respectively.

The exception to the northern population decline is Nipissing, Parry Sound, Manitoulin and Greater Sudbury, where the population actually increased over the past five years. Greater Sudbury experienced the greatest growth of approximately 2,500 people (1.6%), followed by Parry Sound with 1,200 (3.0%).

New Finding: Ontario’s population has increased by approximately 5.7% (690,000 people) since 2006. Southern Ontario has seen the majority of this growth, with Halton, Peel, and York accounting for half of the population increase.

1.2 Population 20-year Trend: 1991 to 2011

Figure 3 Ontario Census Population, The side chart shows 20-year Trend; 1991-2011 that Ontario‟s population trend is 14,000,000 one of continued 12,000,000 growth, as evidenced

10,000,000 by the consistent,

8,000,000 systematic increase in the number of people 6,000,000

# people # over the past 20 4,000,000 years. During this 2,000,000 time, Ontario‟s 0 1991 1996 2001 2006 2011

Page 13 of 31

population has increased by approximately 27.4% (2.8 million people). The intercensal growth rate has been in the range of 6.0% to 6.5% until the latest period (2006 to 2011) where it dipped below to 5.7%. Since 1991, Ontario has grown at an average annual rate of 1.4%, or 138,000 people. As evidenced earlier however, the population growth has not been consistent across the province.

Confirmation Finding: Ontario’s long-term population trend is one of continued growth. Over the past 20 years, the province has grown at an average annual rate of 1.4%, or 138,000 people.

Page 14 of 31

2.0 Private Dwellings 2011 by Census Division

Figure 4

Page 15 of 31

In addition to the population counts, the first 2011 census data release also includes the number of „private dwellings‟ for Ontario and its census divisions and areas. The number of private dwellings offers insight into the households formed by the population and thus is a key marker for important demographic characteristics and trends such as household size and composition.3

The 2011 census recorded 4,887,508 private dwellings in Ontario. Given the strong correlation between the number of private dwellings and the people living in them, it‟s not surprising to see from Figure 4 that the distribution of these dwellings closely follows that of population. If Figures 1 and 4 are compared side by side or looked at together, it becomes evident that the analysis of population and dwellings is generally the same in terms of geographic distribution and proportion. As with population, 94% of Ontario‟s private dwellings are located in the south, with the remaining 6% located in the north.

Based on the 2011 population and dwelling counts, Ontario has an average of 2.6 persons per dwelling. It‟s interesting to note from the table below that the average household size in Ontario has been holding relatively steady Persons /dwelling Table 1 during the past 20 years, although it is trending Ontario 1991 1996 2001 2006 2011 slightly towards smaller households. # people 2.8 2.7 2.7 2.7 2.6 Analysis of the data shows that there is variation from the provincial average across the census divisions. Average household size currently ranges from 2.2 persons per dwelling in Haliburton, to 3.2 persons per dwelling in Peel and York. With the exception of Kenora, the range in average household size in Northern Ontario is 2.3 to 2.4 persons per dwelling. This indicates that northern households are smaller than average which implies more dwellings per capita. Many of the southeastern divisions also have smaller household sizes than central Ontario.

The difference of one person per dwelling may not appear significant but it affects the number of households per capita, and dwelling growth rates. Additionally, the average number of people per dwelling is a proxy for household formation and composition which makes it an important indicator to watch at both the provincial and sub-provincial levels.

New finding: Ontario currently has approximately 4.9 million private dwellings. The proportional distribution of these dwellings across Ontario’s 49 census divisions generally follows that of population. For example, 94% of Ontario’s private dwellings are located in Southern Ontario, with the remaining 6% located in Northern Ontario.

New Finding: The average household size in Ontario is 2.6 persons per dwelling.

Page 16 of 31

Confirmation Finding: Ontario’s average household size has been holding relatively steady during the past 20 years, although it is trending slightly towards smaller households.

New finding: There is variation in average household size across the province. Household size currently ranges from 2.2 persons per dwelling in Haliburton, to 3.2 persons per dwelling in Peel and York. In Northern Ontario, the average household is smaller with 2.3 persons /dwelling.

2.1 Private Dwelling Change: 2006 to 2011 by Census Division There are approximately 333,000 more private dwellings in Ontario since the 2006 census which represents a 7.3% increase. Thus household growth continues to outpace population growth (5.7%). It‟s interesting to note that Ontario‟s dwelling/ population change ratio is 0.48, i.e. for every increase in population of one person between 2006 and 2011, there was an increase of 0.48 private dwellings.

Figure 5 on the following page shows the relative change in private dwellings between the 2006 and 2011 census periods and divisions. Most of the growth in dwellings has been in Southern Ontario which is to be expected given the strong correlation between population and dwellings, and Ontario‟s population and dwelling distribution as noted earlier. However, what is not as expected is the growth in private dwellings across the province. Whereas 12 census divisions had a population decrease since 2006 (Figure 2) only four of these divisions had a corresponding decrease in private dwellings (and three of these are in Northern Ontario). Thus dwelling growth continues, even in areas that are experiencing population decline.

One possible explanation for this phenomenon of household growth relative to the population is the growing number of smaller – and single - households. While Ontario‟s average household size has been holding relatively steady, many areas within the province (such as Nipissing District) are seeing a trend towards smaller – and single - households. As the number of people per dwelling decreases, and/or more people live alone, the number of households will increase faster (or decrease slower as the case may be) than if more people lived in the dwellings, and/or lived with others. This phenomenon can be a difficult one to grasp because it is counterintuitive (how can the population go down but the number of households stay the same or go up?!). However, it should not be underestimated from an economic and social standpoint because it reflects important demographic and household characteristics that in turn, affect the supply and demand for public services and programs. As further census household and family data is released in September 2012, the analysis will be expanded to look at this phenomenon in more detail.

Page 17 of 31

Figure 5

Page 18 of 31

New Finding: There are approximately 333,000 more private dwellings in Ontario since the 2006 census, which represents a 7.3% increase.

Confirmation Finding: Household growth (7.3%) continues to outpace population growth (5.7%).4

New Finding: Ontario’s dwelling/ population change ratio is 0.48 - for every increase in population of one person between 2006 and 2011, there was an increase of 0.48 private dwellings.

New Finding: Whereas 12 census divisions had a population decrease since 2006 (Figure 2) only four of these divisions had a corresponding decrease in private dwellings (and three of these are in Northern Ontario). Thus dwelling growth continues, even in areas that are experiencing population decline.

Figure 6 2.2 Private Dwellings 20-year Trend: 1991 to 2011 The side chart shows Figure 6 Ontario Private Dwellings, the change in the 20-year Trend; 1991-2011 number of private dwellings in Ontario 6,000,000 over the past 20 5,000,000 years. Not

surprisingly, the slope 4,000,000 of the curve is similar 3,000,000 to that of population and displays a trend

# dwellings # 2,000,000 of continuing growth. 1,000,000 During this time, the 0 number of private 1991 1996 2001 2006 2011 dwellings in Ontario has increased by approximately 1.2 million (34%). The intercensal growth rate has been in the range of 7.5% to 7.9% until the latest period (2006 to 2011) where it dipped below to 7.3%. Since 1991, the average annual growth rate of private dwellings in Ontario has been 1.7%, or 62,500 dwellings.

Confirmation Finding: Ontario’s trend in private dwellings is one of continued growth. Over the past 20 years, the number of private dwellings in Ontario has grown at an average annual rate of 1.7%, or 62,500 dwellings.

Page 19 of 31

3.0 Population 2011 by Municipality and Area The 2011 census of population recorded 84,736 people living in Nipissing District.5 This represents 0.6% of Ontario‟s population and 11% of Northern Ontario‟s population. As shown by the map below, the variation in land area and population that was described earlier for Ontario is also evident at the sub-levels of geography such as Nipissing District.

Figure 7

For example, Nipissing North and South account for nearly two-thirds of the district‟s land area, but only 2.0% of the population. North Bay on the other hand is one of the district‟s population centres and accounts for just 2.0% of the land area but 63.0% of the population.6

Nipissing District covers an area of 17,000 sq. km. but again, this land area varies considerably by municipality and area. For example, land area ranges from 3.6 sq. km in Mattawa to 6,700 sq. km. in Nipissing South. And the district‟s population is equally as varied, ranging from just 80 people in Nipissing South to over 53,000 people in North Bay. This variation in land area and population results in a wide measure of population density across the respective municipalities and areas, as shown in Table 2 on the following page.7

Page 20 of 31

Population Density Table 2 This is highly relevant from a service manager‟s perspective (people /sq. km.) because the variance in population and area is a major Mattawa 553.4 consideration and challenge in the planning and delivery of North Bay 168.1 human services across the district. East Ferris 29.1 Nipissing 10 23.7 New Finding: Nipissing District’s census population is Bonfield 9.7 approximately 85,000 people. North Bay accounts for 63% West Nipissing 7.1 Chisholm 6.1 of the population. Calvin 4.0 Papineau-Cameron 1.7 Confirmation Finding: There is significant variation in South Algonquin 1.3 population and area across the district. Land area ranges Mattawan 0.8 from just 3.6 square kilometres in Mattawa to over 6,000 Nipissing North 0.5 square kilometres in Nipissing South. Population ranges Temagami 0.4 from less than 100 people in Nipissing South to over 50,000 Nipissing South 0.01 people in North Bay. Nipissing District 4.9 Confirmation Finding: There is a wide measure of population density across the municipalities and areas. Two of the district’s population centres – Mattawa and North Bay – have over 150 persons per square kilometre. Meanwhile four of the rural areas – Temagami, Mattawan, and the two unorganized areas - have less than one person per square kilometre.

3.1 Population Change: 2006 to 2011 by Municipality and Area Since the 2006 census, Nipissing‟s population has increased by 349 people, or 0.4%.8 Figure 8 on the following page shows the relative change in Population change Table 3 population in the district‟s municipalities and areas since the (# people) 2006 census. It can be noted that while some municipalities and West Nipissing 739 East Ferris 81 areas have experienced population growth, others have had Nipissing North 55 population decline. The population decline has been split Nipissing 10 37 between five of the rural areas and North Bay. Bonfield 35 Mattawa 20 In terms of relative population growth, Nipissing South and Mattawan 15 Mattawan experienced the largest relative change, although this Nipissing South 13 represents a small number of people as shown in Table 3. In Calvin -40 South Algonquin -42 absolute terms, West Nipissing had the highest population Chisholm -55 growth in Nipissing District with an increase of 739 people since Papineau-Cameron -80 2006. Temagami -114 North Bay -315 With regards to population decline, Temagami, Papineau- Nipissing District 349

Page 21 of 31

Cameron and Calvin experienced the largest relative change since 2006. In absolute terms however, North Bay had the largest decrease in the district, with a loss of 315 people, followed by Temagami (-114).

Figure 8

Based on Population trend analysis in previous work (Plumstead, 2008) the above changes are in keeping with the population trend for some of the municipalities and areas, while for others, the change marks a trend reversal. More detail on the population trends for each of the municipalities and areas will be presented in separate reports.

New Finding: Nipissing District’s population has increased by 349 people (0.4%) since 2006.

Page 22 of 31

3.2 Population 20-year Trend: 1991 to 2011 Nipissing District‟s Figure 9 Nipissing District Census Population, population trend – as 20-year Trend; 1991-2011 measured by a long term change in the 100,000 mean – continues to 80,000 be somewhat

stationary as shown

60,000 in the side chart. In fact, the district‟s 40,000 # people # population in 2011 is

20,000 the same as what it was 20 years ago in 0 1991. 1991 1996 2001 2006 2011 During the trend period, the district has had an average population of 84,738 with a variation of less than 1.7% (1,500 people) from the average. The largest variation occurred between 1996 and 2001 when the population decreased 1.7%. During the remaining periods, the average population variation was minimal at 0.4%.

It‟s important to note that while Nipissing‟s aggregate population trend does not reflect change, there has been change at the sub-aggregate level, i.e. in the composition of the population. Previous research has shown what some of these changes are (Plumstead, 2010, 2011). One of the most noted changes is that of age, which has been well documented. For example, since 1991 the number of senior citizens ages 65 years and over in the district has increased 33% while the number of children ages 0 to 14 years has decreased 23%. Yet the overall number of people in the district has remained the same. This is one example of the compositional change that is underway in the population but there are others which include changing family types and households. These sub-population changes are of paramount importance because they are shaping public services and programs, and affecting service levels. One of the best examples of this is in the DNSSAB Emergency Medical Services. Today, there is basically the same number of people living in Nipissing District as there was 15 years ago but the number of ambulance calls has nearly doubled.9

As the remaining census data is released throughout the year, subsequent reports will provide updates on how the population is changing. As more data enters the picture, more dots can be connected and further descriptions provided as to how the population is changing.

Page 23 of 31

Confirmation Finding: Nipissing District’s long-term population trend is basically a stationary one. The district’s population in 2011 is the same as it was 20 years ago in 1991.

3.3 Population Change Comparison: Nipissing and Ontario Intercensal Table 4 The difference in population growth rates between Nipissing population District and Ontario is evident from the earlier analysis of the change, % Nipissing Ontario respective areas, not to mention previous reports from 1991-1996 0.1 6.6 DNSSAB (see References). Table 4 summarizes the 1996-2001 -2.3 6.1 provincial and district growth rates during the past 20 years 2001-2006 2.1 6.6 2006-2011 0.1 5.7 which covers five census periods. The table confirms that in Average 0.0 6.2 terms of population growth, Nipissing District continues to lag well behind the province.

On average, Ontario‟s population has grown by approximately 6% during each census period over the past 20 years (25% cumulative growth). In comparison, Nipissing District on average has not grown during the same period.

Confirmation Finding: Nipissing District continues to lag the province in population growth. Whereas Ontario has averaged intercensal growth of 6% between the previous five census periods (25% cumulative growth), Nipissing on average has had no growth over the same period.

Page 24 of 31

4.0 Private Dwellings by Municipality and Area Household formation and composition is a reflection of many of the social and economic characteristics of the population. As mentioned earlier, the number of „private dwellings‟ approximates closely to the number of „households‟, so this first look at Nipissing‟s dwelling counts since the previous census offers insight into family and household composition.

The 2011 census recorded 36,145 private dwellings in Nipissing District. This represents 0.7% of Ontario‟s dwellings and 11% of Northern Ontario‟s (the same share as population). As would be expected – and similar to that for Ontario described earlier – the distribution of these dwellings closely follows that of the population (as was seen in Figure 7) as shown in Figure 10 below:

Figure 10

Analysis shows that the municipalities and areas have the same share of the district‟s dwellings as they do population (within 0.2%). The notable exceptions are North Bay which has proportionately more dwellings, and East Ferris which has proportionately less dwellings.

Page 25 of 31

In terms of the number of people living in the dwellings, Nipissing District has an average of 2.3 persons per dwelling. On average, Nipissing‟s households are smaller than Ontario‟s meaning that the district has more households per capita. But unlike Ontario‟s 20-year Persons /dwelling Table 5 trend, the district‟s average household size Nipissing District 1991 1996 2001 2006 2011 continues its downward trend since the 1991 # people 2.7 2.6 2.5 2.4 2.3 census as shown by Table 5.

Persons /dwelling Table 6 There is significant variation in the average household size Municipalities & Areas across the district as shown in the side table. The largest East Ferris 2.7 households are in East Ferris and Chisholm while the Chisholm 2.6 smallest ones are in South Algonquin, Mattawan and Papineau-Cameron 2.5 Temagami. The district‟s population centres –Mattawa, West Bonfield 2.5 Nipissing and North Bay – approximate to the district‟s Calvin 2.5 Nipissing South 2.5 average. Nipissing 10 2.5 Mattawa 2.4 In some cases this latest census data is consistent with the West Nipissing 2.3 past data meaning that past trends are continuing. For Nipissing North 2.3 example, in East Ferris and Chisholm the average household North Bay 2.3 size has not changed since the last census in 2006. These South Algonquin 2.2 areas tend to have larger families with more children and Mattawan 2.2 Temagami 2.1 youth, and fewer senior citizens. Similarly, in South Nipissing District 2.3 Algonquin the average household size remains the same and is relatively small, due to smaller family size (less children and youth) and larger numbers of senior citizens (Plumstead, 2008).

In other cases however, the data points to change. For example, Mattawa has seen an increase in average household size since 2006 which is in the opposite direction to the trend. This suggests that over the past five years, Mattawa has seen a significant change in household composition and family type.

Further analysis of the household characteristics and trends will be conducted after the release of the census family and household data in September 2012.

New finding: Nipissing District currently has approximately 36,000 private dwellings. The proportional distribution of these dwellings across the district’s municipalities and areas generally follows that of population.

New Finding: The average household size in Nipissing District is 2.3 persons per dwelling.

Confirmation Finding: Over the past 20 years, the district’s average household size has been steadily trending downwards towards smaller households.

Page 26 of 31

New finding: There is significant variation in the average household size across the district. On average, the largest households are in Chisholm and East Ferris (2.6 and 2.7 persons /household respectively) while the smallest ones are in South Algonquin, Mattawan and Temagami (2.2 and 2.1 persons /household).

4.1 Private Dwelling Change: 2006 to 2011 by Municipality and Area Similar to Ontario, household growth in Nipissing District continues to outpace population growth (0.4%): there are approximately 1,200 more private dwellings in Nipissing District since the 2006 census, which represents a 3.5% increase.10 However, the district has a dwelling/ population change ratio of 3.4 which is significantly higher than Ontario‟s (0.5). For every increase in population of one person since 2006, there was an increase of 3.4 households. This ratio is high due to North Bay which saw relatively strong household growth despite a population decline.

Figure 11 below shows the relative change in private dwellings in the district‟s municipalities and areas since the 2006 census: Figure 11

Page 27 of 31

It can be noted that for most of the municipalities and areas, the change in the number of dwellings follows the change in population. The exceptions are in Mattawa, Calvin, and North Bay, where the change in the number of dwellings is opposite to the change in population. Mattawa has fewer dwellings but more people than in 2006, while Calvin and North Bay have more dwellings but fewer people.

In absolute terms however, the most significant change in the number of dwellings has occurred in North Bay. As the side table shows, North Bay has Dwelling change Table 7 665 more private dwellings than it did in 2006. And yet the city‟s (# dwellings) population is down by 315 people over the same period. While North Bay 665 the phenomenon of household growth on the back of population West Nipissing 447 Nipissing North 62 decline was evidenced earlier for Ontario, the magnitude of East Ferris 61 North Bay‟s household increase given the population decline is Nipissing 10 25 surprising. As mentioned in the endnotes, the city of North Bay is Bonfield 24 currently in the process of having the census population and Mattawan 11 dwelling counts confirmed by Statistics Canada. Nipissing South 7 Calvin 3 Table 7 also reveals that West Nipissing has experienced Mattawa -9 significant dwelling growth since 2006 which aligns with its Chisholm -17 South Algonquin -18 population growth over the same period. West Nipissing and Temagami -19 North Bay account for 92% of the district‟s growth in private Papineau-Cameron -34 dwellings. Nipissing District 1208 New Finding: There are approximately 1,200 more private dwellings in Nipissing District since the 2006 census which represents a 3.5% increase – so household growth continues to outpace population growth (0.4%).

Confirmation Finding: Household growth (3.5%) continues to outpace population growth (0.4%).

New Finding: West Nipissing and North Bay account for 92% of the district’s growth in private dwellings.

New Finding: Nipissing’s dwelling/ population change ratio is 3.4 - for every increase in population of one person between 2006 and 2011, there was an increase of 3.4 private dwellings. This ratio is significantly higher than Ontario (0.5) due to North Bay which saw relatively strong household growth despite a population decrease.

Page 28 of 31

4.2 Private Dwellings 20-year Trend: 1991-2011 The chart below shows the growth in the number of private dwellings in Nipissing District over the past 20 years. It can be noted that the slope of the curve is much steeper than that of the population Figure 12 Nipissing District Private Dwellings, curve in figure 9 20-year Trend; 1991-2011 which underscores 40,000 the consistent 35,000 dwelling growth rate, 30,000 relative to the change in population. 25,000 20,000 During this 20-year

15,000 period, the number of # dwellings # 10,000 private dwellings in 5,000 Nipissing has 0 increased by 16% 1991 1996 2001 2006 2011 (5,220 dwellings) and intercensal growth has ranged from 1.0% to 6.0%. On average, the number of dwellings has increased annually by 0.8%, or 261 dwellings /year.

Confirmation Finding: Unlike the population trend, the district’s trend in private dwellings is one of continued growth. Over the past 20 years, the number of private dwellings in Nipissing District has grown at an average annual rate of 0.8%, or 261 dwellings /year.

4.3 Dwelling Change Comparison: Nipissing and Ontario Intercensal Table 8 The side table shows the difference in dwelling growth rates dwelling between Nipissing District and Ontario. While both Ontario change, % Nipissing Ontario and Nipissing have experienced growth, the district has had 1991-1996 6.1 7.9 more variation between census periods. It‟s interesting to 1996-2001 1.2 7.5 note that during two of the census periods, household growth 2001-2006 5.2 7.9 2006-2011 3.5 7.3 in Nipissing was relatively strong compared to the province Average 4.0 7.6 (5% >) despite the district‟s weak population growth during the same periods.

Confirmation Finding: Ontario’s average growth of private dwellings has been 7.6% between census periods over the past 20 years (34% cumulative growth). In comparison, Nipissing District’s average intercensal dwelling growth during the same period has been 4% (16% cumulative growth).

Page 29 of 31

References

Plumstead, D. (2008). Population trend: Nipissing District municipalities, TWOMOs & First Nation. In Nipissing District housing needs, supply & affordability study (pp. 37-60). North Bay, Ontario: District of Nipissing Social Services Administration Board.

Plumstead, D. (2010). Section I: key trends. In Nipissing District: a socioeconomic profile and report (pp. 6-7). North Bay, Ontario: District of Nipissing Social Services Administration Board.

Plumstead, D. (2011). A demographic perspective, 2011 & 2031 (Discussion paper). North Bay, Ontario: District of Nipissing Social Services Administration Board.

Page 30 of 31

Endnotes

1 As defined in DNSSAB‟s Strategic Plan 2014, “stakeholders” are considered to be Nipissing citizens /clients; DNSSAB employees and Board of Directors; service delivery partners; governments /funders; related organizations of interest; and the community at large.

2 Based on the Statistics Canada definition, a “census division” is an administrative area that is the general term for provincially legislated areas (such as county, municipalité régionale de comté and regional district) or their equivalents. They are groups of neighbouring municipalities joined together for the purposes of regional planning and managing common services (such as police or ambulance services). These groupings are established under laws in effect in certain provinces of Canada.

3 The Statistics Canada definition for private dwelling is “a separate set of living quarters designed for or converted for human habitation in which a person or group of persons reside or could reside. In addition, a private dwelling must have a source of heat or power and must be an enclosed space that provides shelter from the elements, as evidenced by complete and enclosed walls and roof and by doors and windows that provide protection from wind, rain and snow”. While this definition is different than that of a „household‟, the number of private dwellings and the number of households closely approximate to each other. For example in the 2006 census, there was a 0.02% difference (744 dwellings /households) between the number of „private dwellings‟ and the number of „households‟ in Ontario. This report uses the two terms interchangeably.

4 According to Statistics Canada, the number of private dwellings in Canada has outpaced population growth since 1971 (The Daily, March 13 2007).

5 It should be noted that at the time of this report, North Bay city staff have asked Statistics Canada to review /confirm the 2011 census population and dwelling counts for North Bay.

6 The term „population centre‟ replaces the term „urban area‟ from previous censuses. Statistics Canada defines population centres as areas with a population of at least 1,000 and no fewer than 400 persons per square kilometer. All areas outside population centres are considered rural areas. Nipissing District has three population centres which are North Bay, Sturgeon Falls (in West Nipissing), and Mattawa.

7 It should be noted that some of the municipalities are more densely populated at the sub-municipal level. For example, there are neighborhoods in North Bay and Sturgeon Falls that have more than 1,000 persons per square kilometre.

8 The percentage change in Nipissing District‟s population between 2006 and 2011 is based on the revised 2006 count of 84,387, not the original count of 84,688. After the publication of the 2006 census population counts, Statistics Canada revised Nipissing South‟s population downward from 571 to 67 and East Ferris‟ population upward from 4,228 to 4,431 (both due to data error) giving a net population change of – 301 for the district. Thus the revised 2006 population count is the original count of 84,688 – 301 = 84,387. It should be noted that after Statistics Canada uncovers data errors, it flags the data but it does not go back and update all the original data tables, i.e., the original census data is left as is. In future census publications, the data is adjusted where possible but this not always the case. The current 2011 census tables are still using the unrevised 2006 population count for Nipissing District .

9 In 1996 the district’s population was 84,832 and ambulance call volume was 11,986. In 2011, the district‟s population was 84,736 and ambulance call volume was 20,842. Source: DNSSAB EMS; Ontario Ministry of Health, Emergency Health Services.

10 The percentage change in Nipissing District‟s private dwellings between 2006 and 2011 is based on the revised 2006 count of 34,928, not the original count of 35,074. After the publication of the 2006 census dwelling counts, Statistics Canada revised Nipissing South‟s number of dwellings from 249 to 25 and East Ferris‟ from 1,560 to 1,638 (both due to data error) giving a net dwelling change of -146 for the district. Thus the revised 2006 population count is the original count of 35,074 - 146 = 34,928. It should be noted that after Statistics Canada uncovers data errors, it flags the data but it does not go back and update all the original data tables, i.e., the original census data is left as is. In future census publications, the data is adjusted where possible but this not always the case. The census tables are still using the unrevised 2006 dwelling counts for Nipissing District.

Page 31 of 31