rural-urban common bonds: challenges for governance

1

Rural-Urban Common Bonds: Challenges for Governance

Presentation for the CRRF Annual ConferenceTweed, Ontario

October 14, 2004

byMark Partridge

Canada Research Chair in the New Rural EconomyDepartment of Agricultural Economics

University of SaskatchewanEmail: [email protected]

2

Motivation: Governance Matters

• Regions of Mutual Interest and Bonds– ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT: Jobs Jobs Jobs!

• Rural Canada needs an economic livelihood• Without a critical mass, rural schools, clinics, etc will

close----Then the communities will die too!• Individual rural communities have insufficient size to

act alone.

3

– Infrastructure– Planning/zoning/environmental impacts/water– Tax sharing for broader regions– Other administrative boundaries extend

beyond communities• Health regions• K-12 Education boundaries

4

Central Place Theory• Communities Change in rural/urban space*

– 25K from a “City”• 670 people for a bank• 640 for a grocery store• 955 for a general store

– 150K from the “City”• 320 people for a bank• 435 for a grocery store• 430 for a general store

• * Source, Stabler and Olfert, From Places to Regions, Saskatchewan Communities in the 21st Century. 2002

5

• Rural communities need to be larger if they are closer to cities to ensure that they have a critical mass for services.

• Urban areas benefit from rural consumers.

6

• Motivate Rural inter-relationships through commuting:– Economic livelihood for rural households

• Can maintain rural communities

– Source of labour for urban employers– Easy to identify, frequent, and highly visible

• Links to zoning/planning• Schools• Health regions.

7

Share of "census rural" population within CMA/CA labour markets has doubled within 25 years

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2001Source: Statistics Canada. Census of Population, 1976 - 2001. "Census rural" refers to the population outside settlements of 1,000 or more. A CMA comprises an urban core population of 100,000 or more, and a CA has an urban core population of 10,000 to 99,999 and both include the population in neighbouring municipalities where 50 percent or more of the workforce commutes into the urban core.

Percent of "census rural" population that lives within Census Metropolitan Areas (CMAs) and Census Agglomerations (CAs)

Thanks to Ray Bollman, Statistics Canada

8

Strong growth in metro areas and rural areas strongly influenced by metro areas, Canada, 1996 to 2001

-18

-15

-12

-9

-6

-3

0

3

6

9

12

15

18

CensusMetropolitan

Areas

CensusAgglomerations

Rural and SmallTown areas

Strong MIZ Moderate MIZ Weak MIZ No MIZ Territories

Source: Statistics Canada. Census of Population, 1996 - 2001. MIZ refers to Metropolitan Influenced Zone.

Rural and small town areas


9

In NO MIZ areas (outside the Territories), 37 percent of the population has an Aboriginal identity, Canada, 2001

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

All areas CMAs CAs (50 to99K)

CAs (10 to49K)

Strong MIZ ModerateMIZ

Weak MIZ No MIZ TerritoriesRST

Source: Statistics Canada. Census of Population, 2001 {available at www.statcan.ca/english/IPS/Data/95F0495XCB2001012.htm}.

Larger urban centres Rural and small town areas


38

Metropolitan Influenced Zones (MIZ) in Rural and Small Town Canada, 2001

Source: Statistics Canada. Census of Population, 2001. Map produced by Spatial Analysis and Geomatics Applications (SAGA), Agriculture Division, Statistics Canada, 2004

Larger Urban CentresCensus Metropolitan Areas (CMAs) (urban core of 100,000 or more)

Census Agglomerations (CAs) (urban core of 50,000 to 99,999)


Strong MIZ

Moderate MIZ

Weak MIZ

No MIZ

Territories

(showing Metropolitan Influenced Zones (MIZ))Rural and Small Town areas

A

A

B

B


39

Metropolitan Influenced Zones (MIZ) in Rural and Small Town Saskatchewan, 2001


Larger Urban Centres

Census Metropolitan Areas (CMAs) (urban core of 100,000 or more)



Strong MIZ

Moderate MIZ

Weak MIZ

No MIZ



40

Metropolitan Influenced Zones (MIZ) in Rural and Small Town Ontario, 2001




Strong MIZ

Moderate MIZ

Weak MIZ

No MIZ




41

Metropolitan Influenced Zones (MIZ) in Rural and Small Town Maritimes, 2001




Strong MIZ

Moderate MIZ

Weak MIZ

No MIZ




42

CRFF-FCM CURA Project

• Assess the Rural-Urban Common Bond– What are the common interests?

• Economic interrelationships• Goods & Services and Labour flow both ways

– Service area regions – Commuting

• Governing and service delivery– Infrastructure– Zoning– Economic Development– Revenue Sharing

43

– Other mutual linkages include environmental, healthcare delivery, education, and so on.

44

Tentative CURA Agenda• The five-year project will assess these linkages in

several ways, including:– Assess Rural-Urban Labour Market Links

• Assess impact of rural-urban economic development.• Define commuting linkages.

– Examine retail and producer service area linkages.– These mutual economic interests form the basis of one

form of regional governance/collaboration.• If $ are at stake, the populace finds ways of enhancing

their mutual benefit in economic development. • If families and community livelihoods are at stake, it is

easier for the public to see the common bonds and gains to cooperation.

• Easy to identify other common needs: planning, zoning, transportation, future growth

45

– Examine current governance.• Survey of government officials to discover common

concerns and current levels of cooperation.• Case studies of rural-urban governance.• Propose new ways of improved governance and

service delivery.– E-government

• Pilot Project on enhancing rural-urban governance.

46

Possible FCM Roles

• Help in developing survey instruments for members.

• Help in administering survey.• Consultation on particular case study

regions. (e.g., Brandon MB, Greater Toronto, Northern BC)

• Design and administration of pilot project.• Dissemination of findings to member

governments, media, conferences, etc.

rural-urban common bonds: challenges for governance

Documents