ECONOMIC STUDIES | JUNE 23, 2020
ECONOMIC VIEWPOINT Quebec and Its Regions: Evolution, Comparisons and Experiences Abroad (Part 2) A Comparative Review of Various Indicators Reveals Changes
Part 1 of this Economic Viewpoint looked at federal and provincial government actions in Quebec from the late 1950s to the present day. In Part 2, several indicators have been selected to illustrate how the regions evolved during this time period and the changes that took place. Why look at regional dynamics during a pandemic when all eyes are focused on Greater Montreal’s recovery? Because the Montreal region and peripheral zones are closely linked and it is important to know how they compare to the metropolis. But the objective is also to take note of the gains that all of Quebec’s regions have made over time.
That is why the post-war evolution of Quebec’s regions to the present day cannot be summed up in a few clear-cut findings. Fortunately, thanks to the gains made in recent decades, all the regions are better equipped to rise to the challenges they are facing and take advantage of the resulting opportunities in a future world in which the economy, culture and climate will be very different than in the one that has prevailed until today.
The Current Situation the Economic Viewpoint), is worrisome because it threatens Despite the noticeable reduction in regional disparities since long‑term infrastructure and service viability.2 the 1950s and 1960s, marked differences persist between the territorial zones1 and the administrative regions. These gaps are Interregional net migration is mitigating these trends in part, visible in the variables examined in this Economic Viewpoint. since, in this case, the intermediate zone is experiencing Some of the more recent data may date from 2016, 2017 population growth to the detriment of the two other zones. and 2018; such is the case for the regional data. The data The losses are especially high in Montréal, which lost 1.2% of its selected were the most up-to-date at the time this analysis was population in five years. This shift is different from the one noted written. in the 1960s, as only the metropolitan zone and, to a lesser degree, the Côte-Nord and Nord-du-Québec regions, posted Demographics positive net migration.3 Table 1 on page 2 indicates that, in 2018, more than 60% of all Quebecers lived in the metropolitan zone, and this concentration Immigration data (table 2 on page 3) show that the population is increasing. Between 2013 and 2018, the population grew concentrated in the metropolitan region is not in the process of faster in this zone (4.5%) than in Quebec generally (3.4%). declining through the arrival of new Canadians. In fact, in 2016, On the other hand, in 2018, the peripheral zone represented 88.5% of all newcomers settled in the metropolitan zone, no more than 6.8% of Quebec’s population, down 1.4% especially Montréal (59.1%). They already represent a major share between 2013 and 2018. This demographic decline, which has clearly been going on for some time (table 2 in Part 1 of
2 Marc-Urbain PROULX and Marie-Claude PRÉMONT, La politique territoriale au Québec – 50 ans d’audace, d’hésitations et d’impuissance, Presses de l’Université du Québec, 2019, p. 241. (Available in French only) 1 The territories were defined in part 1 of the Economic Viewpoint and group 3 According to the data for the period 1961–1971 published in Bâtir le Québec, together different administrative regions. 1979, p. 32. (Available in French only)
François Dupuis, Vice-President and Chief Economist • Mathieu D’Anjou, Deputy Chief Economist • Joëlle Noreau, Senior Economist Desjardins, Economic Studies: 418‑835‑2450 or 1 866‑835‑8444, ext. 5562450 • [email protected] • desjardins.com/economics
NOTE TO READERS: The letters k, M and B are used in texts and tables to refer to thousands, millions and billions respectively. IMPORTANT: This document is based on public information and may under no circumstances be used or construed as a commitment by Desjardins Group. While the information provided has been determined on the basis of data obtained from sources that are deemed to be reliable, Desjardins Group in no way warrants that the information is accurate or complete. The document is provided solely for information purposes and does not constitute an offer or solicitation for purchase or sale. Desjardins Group takes no responsibility for the consequences of any decision whatsoever made on the basis of the data contained herein and does not hereby undertake to provide any advice, notably in the area of investment services. The data on prices or margins are provided for information purposes and may be modified at any time, based on such factors as market conditions. The past performances and projections expressed herein are no guarantee of future performance. The opinions and forecasts contained herein are, unless otherwise indicated, those of the document’s authors and do not represent the opinions of any other person or the official position of Desjardins Group. Copyright © 2020, Desjardins Group. All rights reserved. ECONOMIC STUDIES
TABLE 1 Demographic data for 2018 VARIATION INTERREGIONAL NET POPULATION RATE 2018–2013 MIGRATION K QC = 100 % Number % Metropolitan zone 5,135.5 61.2 4.5 -4,803 -0.1 Montréal 2,029.4 24.2 4.7 -23,663 -1.2 Laval 432.9 5.2 4.0 267 0.1 Laurentides 611.0 7.3 5.7 6,294 1.0 Lanaudière 507.9 6.1 4.2 3,381 0.7 Montérégie 1,554.3 18.5 4.0 8,918 0.6 Intermediate zone 2,682.5 32.0 2.8 6,103 0.2 Capitale-Nationale 745.1 8.9 3.4 1,521 0.2 Mauricie 269.3 3.2 3.3 868 0.3 Estrie 326.5 3.9 3.3 1,469 0.4 Chaudière-Appalaches 426.1 5.1 2.1 974 0.2 Centre-du-Québec 247.3 2.9 3.4 874 0.4 Outaouais 390.8 4.7 3.2 951 0.2 Saguenay–Lac-Saint-Jean 277.4 3.3 -0.2 -554 -0.2 Peripherial zone 572.4 6.8 -1.4 -1,299 -0.2 Bas-Saint-Laurent 197.4 2.4 -1.3 -132 -0.1 Abitibi-Témiscamingue 147.5 1.8 -0.2 -406 -0.3 Côte-Nord 91.2 1.1 -4.7 -905 -1.0 Nord-du-Québec 45.6 0.5 3.9 -94 -0.2 Gaspésie–Îles-de-la-Madeleine 90.7 1.1 -2.6 238 0.3 Quebec total 8,390.5 100.0 3.4
Sources: Institut de la statistique du Québec and Desjardins, Economic Studies
of the population in the Montréal (34.0%) and Laval (28.5%) regions that stand out because manufacturing represents regions. one quarter of output, or almost double the Quebec average (14.1%). Finally, it should be pointed out that, due The Economy to the prevalence of ministries and government bodies in ff Output the Capitale-Nationale and Outaouais regions, services • In 2017, the metropolitan zone accounted for nearly clearly fill a bigger share of regional output there than two‑thirds of Quebec’s GDP, with Montréal alone elsewhere. Also worth mentioning are the many insurance representing more than one-third (table 3 on page 3). companies headquartered in the Quebec City–Lévis Montérégie also produced a major share (15.4%) of agglomeration (11 in all), which add to the weight of Quebec’s output as did the Capitale-Nationale region services in the economy. (9.9%) in the intermediate zone. In contrast, the peripheral ff Investment zone represented less than 8% of Quebec’s output. • Capital spending matches investments made by private • Table 4 on page 3 shows how output in each zone and and public companies to expand their production capacity. each region was distributed among the major sectors of This indicator helps determine the relative dynamism of manufacturing, services, and “other,” which combines the various territorial zones and administrative regions. resource development, construction and public utilities. However, caution is advised when interpreting it given that capital spending can be subject to strong cyclical • These three categories are fairly evenly distributed within variations. This caution is especially called for in the the metropolitan and intermediate zones, with services peripheral zone, where the resources cycle has a major clearly dominating, since they represent three-quarters impact (for example, pulp and paper mills, aluminum of the production value. The peripheral zone stands smelters, hydroelectric dams, and so on). out due to the prevalence of “other” sectors because of the importance of resource development. In this • In 2019, the metropolitan zone grabbed more than half regard, Nord‑du-Québec represents the extreme, with of the capital spending in Quebec (table 5 on page 4). nearly two-thirds of its output falling under “other.” Yet this zone’s dominance is less clear when it comes to Centre‑du‑Québec and Chaudière-Appalaches are two the production data (table 3 on page 3), which reached
JUNE 23, 2020 | ECONOMIC VIEWPOINT 2 ECONOMIC STUDIES