Study Guides (248,403)
Canada (121,540)
Geography (172)
GEOG 2RC3 (28)
Final

EXAM GEO.docx

47 Pages
269 Views
Unlock Document

Department
Geography
Course
GEOG 2RC3
Professor
Tracy Prowse
Semester
Winter

Description
Janurary 30, 2013 Social and Demographic Trend Urbanization – process of societal change whereby the proportion of the population classes as urban increases. • 1851 comparison to 2006 13.1% to 80%, 1000 to be considered a urban society • Census metropolitan area – large area with at least 100k people, together with adjacent smaller urban centres and even rural areas that have a high degree of economic and social integration with urban area ( see table 4.4 p.138) Hamilton CMA. • Hamilton, Burlington, and Grimsby. (Central MetropolitanArea) Social and demographic Trend Canada’s aging population • People of working age per senior. (1971 = 6.6 , 2012 = 4.2 , 2036 = 2.3) • Canada’s aging population will require more workers to support the retirees. • People have to contribute more or the pension plan is going to go down!!!! Require more workers. • Baby boom 1946-1965 periods approaching retirement age. (Population triangle) • Going from less rectangular to more triangular 2036 • Considerable variation across space, (younger population in the west Saskatchewan, larger urban populations are more younger) • Education: % of population entering college/university (2001) • U.S = 52% , U.K = 43%, Canada 49% Canada – educational attainment (adults): • Highest level attained university: 13.3% of population in 1995 to 2010 (15.7%) , as well as increase in post-secondary certificate/diploma • High school diploma attainment is pretty constant • Some high school is cut in half by 2010 • Primary education is highest 12.2% and 7.3% in 2010. • Full/part time enrollment from 1995 to 2007 = Increase in university students 846k to 1080k. Female went up 56% to 59% and males 43.9% to 41.0%. MORE WOMEN than MEN over time. • Degree granted: females increases males decreasing. On average 60% female and 40% males. • Over a period of 5 years 16k P.H.D ‘s came to Canada • Doctorates granted in Canada (2007) 4.8k where 55.4% males and 44.6% female • At McMaster: First BAgranted in 1894 (16) people, june 2000 = 100k degrees • Current total = 130k given since 1992 so 3.3k-3.5k degrees granted annually th • 141,307 alumni (may 20 , 2010) Social Change in Canada since 1970s • Trend 1970-2005: men attending uni decrease as opposed to increase in women • Female participation rate in labour force 60% in 1991 as opposed to 24% in 1951 • Greater than 60% husband and wife working in 1991 as ooposed to less than 20% husband Factors underlying trends: • Increase opportunities, necessity, and desire (For equality) for women What was the catalyst for these changes? Post war baby boom; economic growth increased affluence • 1960- decade of protest (counter culture) social change = challenge of establishment/status quo • Manifested in changing values, norm, politics, o main target (Vietnam war) • Result (women liberation movement and feminism) Gender divide: 2001 census • 51% females and 49% males : every 96 men per 100 women • As age increase the men/100 women decrese due to higher life expectancy for womentHighest ratio of men to women at rockwood, Manitoba 122.8 men to 100 women • Reason- ? • Incarceration RATES (in federal prisons ) as of march 31, 1999 • 12.5k men, 305 women (1/10 canadians have a criminal record) Conclusion: • Faultines 4 identified by bone • Aboriginal/non-aboriginal, Centralist/decentralist, oldtimers/newcomers, French/English • International faultlines: Ireland – religion, U.S – race, Balkans – ethnicity. So what kind of country is canada in terms of its standard of living? 2007 – united nations human development index rankings: • Top 10 vs. Bottom 5. th • Mostly western/ advancedthndustrial nations Canada is ranked 4 • But Canada is ranked 10 with 12% of population below poverty line • So how can Canada be one of the best countries in which to live when prevalence of poverty is higher than many other industrial nations? January 31, 2013 Part II - Themes in Canada’s Geography Canada’s Economic Geography. • Introduction: middle economic power in the world • Smallest economy of G8 countries (u.s, japan, u.k, Germany, france, Italy, Russia, and Canada) –advanced industrial nations. • Canada/u.s each otherlargest trading partner (78.9% of canada’s exports in 2007 destined for u.s) • Canada – net exporter of commodities (u.s – net importer) • Dependence on global economic conditions and China’s rise in economy. Pg.17-26 General sector model ( of economic development) • Evolution of an economy/society from pre-industrial to post-industral featuers o Decrease in primary sector employment (extracting resources) o Increase, then decrease in secondary sector employment (manufacturing) o Increase in tertiary sector employment (more than ¾ of employment education and heatlh being the biggest, does not produce goods. Services) Share of labour force graph • Primary continuous decline across time • Secondary increase in employment and a subsequent decline in post industrial • Tertiary shows a continuous increase across time. • (pre-industrial - Mercantile , industrial, post industrial – global) GROSS DOMESTIC PRODUCT (GDP) • measure of values of good and services produced by the domestic economy • 2006 census : primary 6.2% , secondary 17.3%, tertiary 76.5% Staples theory (of economic development) • Economic growth and development based on export of natural resources i.e resource- based economy driven by external demand (what if it runs out?) • “Hewers of wood and rawers of water” • Harold innis (1930) – fish, fur, timber (see vignette 1.3 pg.21) Economic region – a geographic area characterized by distinct economic activities e.g industrial region; agricultural region • Table 1.5 pg.20 economic structure of canada’s six geographic regions, 200 • Why does each region have different economic structure? Why should economic profile of Ontario be different than sayAtlantic Canada? • Regional disparities – long term , chronic differences between regions as measured by objective indicators of well-being (income, employment, etc.) e.g atlantic Canada vs. industrial heartland Heartland – hinterland (core-periphery] “An abstract theory.. that explains how the capitalist economic system explains how the capitalist economic system evolved into distinct spatial units”(Bones, 2008, 15) • Heartland (core) regions – favoured areas; industrialized, urbanized (better resources e.t.c) • Hinterland (periphery) regions – resource producing regions which supply core regions with raw materials energy, foodstuffs… In terms of canada’s regions: • Heartland = great lakes – St.lawrence lowland • Hinterland = Atlantic Canada; territorial north • See table 1.4 p.19 • Core region – southern Ontario/Quebec • Upward transitional region – B.C • Downward transitional region –Atlantic Canada • Resource frontier – territorial north (where does western Canada fit?) • Space economy- The distribution and location of economic activities i.e the spatial pattern of resource extraction and the production, distribution and consumption of goods ands services • Economies of scale – benefits/advantages/ savings associated with increasing level of output, ile as output increases the per unit cost of production decreases. Significant trends since 1970s 1. Natural resources no longer playing a mjor role in shaping the geography of Canada’s national economy, rsources still important, but no longer capable of “changing the map of settlement or altering regional politc power balance” (as in the past), - Wallace , 2012 • BUT primary sector still very important, natural resourcse are basis for recent westward shift in balance of political/economic power (2011 census – first time that more Canadians live west of Ontario)Alberta economy rising and Ontario decreasing. 2. Deeper integration of Canada/u.s economics. E.g free trade agreement 1988 and NAFTA 1993 • BUT thickening of the body bone pg. 22-25 why has this happened and what are the implications of thicker border? 3. Recognition that canda’s economic future tie dto knowledge ECONOM rather than traditional resource-based economy • All of this in the context of GLOBALIZATION – emergence of capitalism as a truly worldwide mode of organizing economic activity ( and as the most powerful basis for allocating resources) –capitalism dominant mode on terms how resources are allocated Incomes in CANADA • Mediam family income 68,860 (2008) • Spatial variation in medial family income: o Nunavut 58k,Alberta 86k, newfoundland 59k, NWT 98k • What about income distribution? Top 10% of families avg income 185k and bottom 10% avg income 10k • 1980-2000 top 1% of canada have almost doubled share of national income from 7.6% to 13.6% • Plutocracy – society ruled by the wealthy. Diagram depicting income inequality – Lorenz Curve Line of Perfect equality (45 degree straight line) All families have same income • Greater curvature – greater inequality • GINI coefficient – higher value = greater inequality ( 0-complete equality; 1 = complete inequality) • Question: to what extent is income in Canada equally/unequally distributed?) Summary: • Core/periphery (heartland/hinterland) model –central • Role of resources (staples theory) fish fur and timber have become significant drivers of canadian development • Transition from industrial to power-industrial capitalism • Importance of economic relations with U.S and China. 40 mins, 40 m/c chapt 1,2,3 pg.72-74 and 4 Material covered lectures up to end of social and emographic trends jan 30. 25% of mark Feb 13 – 10:30 am February 4, 2013 Introduction POVERTY IN CANDA • -Questions Description • What is poverity • Who is poor? Explanation • Why does poverty exist? Prescription • What can/should be done? Geographic dimensions of poverty: • Spatial patters, and Spatial processes –AT all geographic scale Defining poverty: • Statistics Canada does not measure poverty; instead, it uses the concept of a low income cutoff – (LICO) – doesn’t have a poverty line • Families spending > 59 of its income on necessities (food, shelter, clothing) are said tot be in “straightening circumstances” • The average Canadian family spends 39% of its income on necessities, so, • At what point (Above 39%) should one be considered to be in straightened circumstances Poverty in Canada graph • -LICO for families and unattached individuals afeter tax 1995-2004 • -seems to be going down, but the rich are getting richer and poor getting poorer. • Vancouver, HC, Canada (general) • Some social agencies define poverty as low income relative to the average or median income of Canadians – poverty is RELATIVE • Other groups e.g the fraser institute, define poverty as the inability of a family to buy a prescribed “basket of goods” poverty is ABSOLUTE • Note: policy response to poverty depends on your view of poverty is it relative or absolute? • Variations in LICO depending on SIZE of community and RURALVS. URBAN. • (Toronto vs. rural area) Explaining Poverty: • Why are people poor? – various perspectives: 1. Culture of poverty-- Poverty results from internal pathology of deviant groups BUT is this blaming the victim???? 2. Cycle of poverty-- Poverty result from individual inadequacies being transmitted from one generation to the next BUT is this blaming the victim??? 3. Institutional malfunctioning—Poverty is rooted in the failure of the state i.e the state does a poor job in planning for and administering to those in need, BUT is it too easy to blame the state?? 4. Inequitable distribution of resources—Poverty is the inevitable outcome of capitalism i.e capitalism features “HAVES” and “HAVE NOTS” , BUT resources and wealth can be redistributed if the political will to do so exists. 5. Labour market theory – Poverty is the result of differential wages paid in different job sectors. The big picture: • Poverty is caused by a range of factors • Poverty produces a range of consequences • The causes and consequences are interdependent and difficult to separate CONSTELLATION OF FACTORS Question: Which one of these factors do you think is most important? (or if we want to intervene, where would it be best to state?) • How important is education? • What are the consequences of a poor education? General trends: • Increased number of single part mostly women families in poverty • For all age groups, more women are poor than men (Wage gap) Spatial patterns • LOCAL scale – inner city POOR vs. suburbs RICH • REGIONAL sale – regional disparities (Atlantic Canada use to be poorer until the last few years, particularly ONTARIO) Change profile of socio-economic status • Shrinking and erosion of middle class.. Rich get richer poor get poorer • Shrinking of middle class more of an HOUR glass as opposed to a TRIANGLE. Middle group becomes much smaller. Poverty in Canada groups (different categories) • Higher are unattached indiiduals under 65 years SINGLE IS BAD Poverty in Hamilton 1. One in five Hamilton residents live on incomes below LICO in 2000 2. 60% of families experienced an overall decrease in average income between 1990-2000 3. Specific population groups experienced disproportionately higher levels of poverty: visible minorities, aboriginals, disabled, youth, seniors, and single mothers 4. Ultimately, poverty is a product of income levels and affordability” Between 1996 and 2006 poverty rate declined to just under 90k people (18.1) but from 2001- 2006 number of full time workers living below the poverty line increased 22% to 10,155 (poverty rate defined by LICO) See http://www.sprc.hamilton.on.ca(social planning and research council of Hamilton) LICO thresholds hamilton before tax 2005 • 1 person 20,778 • 3 persons 31,801 • 5 persons 43,791 • 7 persons 54, 987 (2006) median individual income = 26, 404) -UNDERESTIMATION Hamilton Beasley Neighbourhood (KING ST. - BARTON) • Population 5k • Unemployment 45% • Average household income <1/2 hamilton average • Poverty rate 2.5x higher than city average • 56% below LICO • Social assistance rate 23x provincial average • Poorest neighbourhood in hamiton one of 20 poorest in CANADA National council of welfare report • Public cost of poverty in Canada 25 billion/year and climbing while poverty rate remains unchanged • Federal government urged to take a long term (investment) approach to preventing poverty • “Canada could save billions of dollar on health care, prisons, shelters, and social services if the government tackled the roots of poverty” (what are the roots of poverty?) (Hamilton spectator 29, septemeber 2011) Conclusion Questions: 1. Who is responsible? 2. What are the right/responsibilities of the poor? 3. What are the rights/responsibilities of those who are not poor? 4. What kind of problem is poverty? Social economic political? 5. What is the best goal (reduce/eliminate, poverty/disparity) Caution: Our pre-occupation with numbers- lose sight of the fact that there are individual lives/people behind the numbers Lect 12 – Feb 6 Canada’s aboriginal peoples (see bone, chp3 pg97-105), Chp 4 (pp.158-162) Introduction: Marginalized/disenfranchised population: (politically the group tends not to have a stronger voice then it otherwise should have) • Chronologically disadvantaged • Ability of a group to meet its needs is severely compromised over an extended period of time as a ersult of economic, social, political disadvantages • E.g aboriginal; homeless;… • Issues of social welfare, who gets what, where, and why? (Factors underlying distribution of wealth, resources, and well-being; related to issues of social justice) 2006 Census: • 1.319,890 persons with aboriginal ancestry (4.3% of Canada’s population) • See vignette 4.6 pg.161 • 608,850 Indians • 292,310 Metis • 45,070 Inuit • Approximately 600 bands (largest = 6 nations) with 2370 reserves Cultural regions of aboriginal people 2.2 Social demographic conditions INCREASE IN POPULATION 100 years ago population 100k effects of European disease and assimilation • Now greater than 1.3 million • Increase begain in 1940s • 1951 aboriginals less than 2% of canada’s population • 2006 aboriginals = 4.3% of canada’s population Why? • Higher birth rate (rate of natural increase = 3%) • Decreasing mortality rates • Very young populations: • 21% of canadians <15% • 38% of aboriginals <15 years • Fertility rate = 30/1000 (2x national average) • See figure 4.8 (Pg.159) 1901-2006 Table 4.14 shows aboriginal population by identity and canada and regions 2001-2006 Highest concentration in norther saskatchewa, BC, and alberta Social demographic conditions (cont) • High infant mortality rate • High suicide rate • Impact of population increase: 1. Myth of vanishing indian dispelled 2. Increased political power 3. Increased demands on government to meet needs and address past injustices High unemployment rates Social demographic conditions (cont) • High incarceration rates (aboriginals = 4.3% of canadaian population, yet 15% of inmates in federal prisons) • Administration = department of indian affairs and northern development (DIAND) • Only ethno-culture group to be administered (civilized) • So far no aboriginal person has held the position of minister of DIAND. The changing position of aboriginals in Canada • Indian act 1876 – many revisions • Status vs “non-status” Indians • Only ethno-cultural group able to give up its ethnic status Cultural political diversity – absence of consensus • 55 aboriginal languages, 11 language families , many cultures, various historical experiences. Re-establishing of aboriginal identity on map of Canada through: • TOPONYMS – place name e.g. Iqaluit – formerly Frobisher bay, NUNAVUT – “our land” • TREATIES – see figure 3.9 (pg.103) fig 3.10 (104); vignette 3.7 (p.99) vignette 3.8 pg.105 vignette 3.9 pg 106. Important events of past 30 years • Mackenzie valley pipeline inquiry (berger report: northern frontier, norther homeland) – recommendation whether pipeline should be built – attitudes have changed and now aboriginals are supporting the pipeline • James bay cree/ hydro quebec agreement – coming to agreements about hydro. • Haida Indians = queen charlotte islands (stopping logging ) • Meech lake accord – Elijah harper • Assembly of first nations • Royal commission on aboriginal affairs 1996 • Nunavut 1999 • Oka WHAT IS THE SIGNIFICANCE OF THESEAND OTHER EVENTS FOR BOTH ABORIGINALSAND NON-ABORIGINALS? • Aboriginal/non-aboriginal faultline (see pp.97-106) Aseembly of first nations – grand chief 1991-1997 OVIDE mercedi (standoffish) cool relations with Ottawa 1997-2000 Phil Fontaine “cosy relations with Ottawa 2000-2003 Mathew Coon come (much more confrontational, militant) 2003-2009 Phil Fontaine 2009-Present Shawn Atleo (conciliatory) Two views on how to proceed: • “Rights based activist approach – government of Canada must address aboriginal challenges and share political power with first nations (centralist/decentralist faultline argument – strong federal government or divergence to provinces) • Cooperative approach – cautious incremental cooperation fostering political partnerships with non-aboriginal business and governments Summary: • Growing Political Preference • Improving social economic conditions but still marginalized disenfranchised Issues: • LAND CLAIMS, SELF-DETERMINATION, REPARATIONS, HUMAN DIGNITY Vignette 3.9 from colonal straightjacket to aboriginal power Until 1969 aboriginals largely invisible to most other Canadians due to geography reserves and remote settlement lack of political presence and assimilation politices e.t.c Question: what happened in 1969? What was the catalyst for the changes to aboriginal/non- aboriginal relations that began in the 1970s? February 7,2013 Agriculture in Canada • Introduction :Ager, agric (latin) = Field • St. Isadore – patron saint of farmers and farming • Census farm : an agricultural holding with sales of agr. Products in excess of 250 dollars per year (1968) • An agricultural holding which produces at least one of the following intended for sale (intent to sel to earn a living) – crops, livestock, poultry, animal products, greenhouse/nursery products, mushrooms, sod, honey, or maple syrup products. Agriculture-related issues: 1. Impacts of urbanization on agricultural land 2. Decline of family farm vs. agribusiness 3. Genetically modified food (importing vs. domestic production and consumption) Commercial agriculture in Canada, not much is used for commercial agriculture 5.2% of the second largest country in the world is suitable for commercial agriculture, Toronto, Quebec, and Western Canada.. Not much at all inAtlantic Canada • Arable land as % of total land area = 5.2% • Role of physical environment as main determinant of where commercially viable agriculture can take place (soil, temperature, moisture) Statistics • Contribution of agr. To GDP has decreases from 1961-1996 from 4.4% to 2% • Area of farmland steay (more or less) in last 60 years 1901- 25.7 million hectares to 2001 67.5 million.. increasing huge jump in 1931 to 66 million hectares.. 1951 70.4 million hectares (MAX) URBANIZATION • Number of farm has decreased from 511k in 1901 to 246k in 2001. • Average farm size has increase 1901 – 50.3 hectares to 273 hectare MAX in 2001 • Total farm population has decrease from 1996-2001 .. 851k to 727k (SIGNIFICANT DROP) • Age of farmers has increased from 15%>65 years (as of may 15, 2001)Another 68k (20%) expected to be 65 by 2011 (vs 9% of entire labour force will turn 65 by 2011 census) • Total area of farms relatively constant but number of farms is decreasing. Question: What are the implications of these trends for the future of Canada’s food supply? Economics of farming • 1991 – avg. each Canadian spent 1650/year on food and only 110 (6.7%) went to farmers • 1950s – 22% of disposable income spent on food • 2000 – 9.8% of disposable income spent on food • 1974-2004: gross farm revenue = constant • operating costs increased by 40%, Net farm income decreased by 50% • 80% of today’s food bill – marketing/packaging, i.e increase in cost of food not reflected in higher farm incomes • Farmers faced with “cost-price squeeze” – they being squeezed out of the business. Response of farmers: 1. Get out of farming 2. Supplement income with off-farm employment 3. Increase scale of farming Personal preference when making purchase decisions -Doesn’t matter where the food comes from Agribusiness “industrialization” of farming • 1998 “agrifood” industy – 8.4% of GDP vs. farms – 2% of GDP The food we eat 1. 1920s – 18 weeks chicken to reach market weight, 2000 – chickens took 6 weeks 2. 1950s – 2.3 years for cattle to reach market weight, 2000 – 1 year 3. 1900 – hens laid 80 eggs/year, 2000 – 272 eggs/year How is this possible? Increasing levels of productivity! Farmers much more productive and only applies at certain skills. How are these dramatic increases in productivity achieved? • Agribusiness • Economies of scale Food system – analogous to an hourglass: • Farmers at top, consumers on bottom • For food to get from farmers to consumers it must pass through narrow part of the hourglass, i.e the small number of large companies which control the industry. Agribusiness: the sum total of all operations involved in the manufacture and distribution of farm supplies: production operations on the farm, storage, processing and distribution of farm commodities and products made from them • a SYSTEM rather that an INSTITUTION (family farm – stronger values) – production line Agribusiness corporations consist of: (owns all of these things) 1. Farm input manufacturers – e.g feed, machinery, fertilizer, seeds 2. Good processing and manufacturing – e.g surgar refining, flour milling, “convenience food” or home meal replacement sector” (>1$ billion/year in Canada) 3. Food distribution and retailing – e.g transportation, marketing, advertising 4. Farms The cost of farming – price range for a single pierce of machinery – John deere S-series combine U.S: Combine – 294k-454k, Header 132k-149k, Total 426k- 593k In 2012 avg cost for a single detached home in Canadian CMAs = 499k Heinz corporation, Leamington, Ontario (tremendous amount of corporate control, plant at this time) • 1980- 300 farmers supplying tomatoes • 2002- 55 famers supplying tomatoes Other issues: 1. Subsidies –in general canadaian farmers undersubsidized vs. European/American farmers: 2005 wheat subsidies Europe 141/tonne, u.s 76/tonne, and 8/tonne in Canada 2. Marketing boards – arm to ensure price stability for producers, e.g dairy farmers of Ontario But, BOARDS may be a violation of free trade regulations of NAFTA/WTO without this “protection”, Ontario farmers unable to compete againstAmerican farmers. Summary: Questions: 1. What are the implications of these trends for the future of canada’s food supply? 2. Does it matter if Canadian agrictulture continues to decline why or why not? 3. David vs. goliath (family farms vs agribusiness) 4. Agriculture/farmers have disappeared from the political map Part II : THEMES in Canada’s Geography IntroductionAtlantic Canada • East coast- point of European contact • Recent colonial history (especially newfoundland) Changing space relations: • 19 century – strong regional economy • 20 century peripheral position in national economy • “supply” region i.e hinterland/periphery region ( downward transitional region) Most recent province to arrive in confederation is NEWFOUNDLAND Atlantic Canada • Defining characteristics: orientation to the sea (livelihood, settlement pattern, etc) • What happens when this disappears? (Cod fishery) • Questions: why did atlantic Canada not remain a “gateway” to Canada (as compared to the atlantic seaboard of the united states)? Why did this gateway function shift to central Canada? • Geographical and political fragmentation of this region • <2% of Canada’s area (excluding Labrador) • 5.4% of Canada’s area (including Labrador) Does Labrador “belong” to this region? • 7.2% (2.3 million) of Canada’s population (2006) • Share of Canada’s GDP 6.0% (See table 9.1; figure 9.1) • Bone uses political boundaries to define areas. • 3 CMAs • Halifax 1996 332k compared to 2006 372k INCREASE • St.john’s 174k in 1996 and then to 2006 increase • St. John 125k declining from 1996 to 2006 from 125k to 122k • Populaion density – 4.9 persons/km • Population growth rate less than national average in postwar era, despite high birth rate – Why? • HIGH outmigration rate throughout post WWII era, resulting in a high dependency ration – especially in newfoundland • (CENTRAL CANADA= SOUTHERN ONTARIO AND SOUTHERN QUEBEC) • Most rural of canada’s regions NFLD+ LABRADOR – urban % = 57.7 and rural is 42.3 NS is 55.8 and 44.2 PEI 44.8 and 55.2 NB 50.4 and 49.6 Can 79.7 and 20.3 • even the territorial north has a high percent urban 58.7% -halifax was a major point of entry, but by the time it was growing people bypassing Halifax and entering city of montreal. Table 9.3 and 9.4 on pg. 379 ECONOMY • Primary Sector – DECREASING (Cod fishery collapse) • Secondary Sector – underdeveloped (HAMILTON STEEL PRODUCTION HIGHEST NOW) • Tertiary sector – (surprisingly?) greater share than any other region • Regional disparity – importance of government intervention (Regional development programmes – DREE, ARDA, FRED, and transfer payments from federal government) • Much of Canada’s armed forces personnel based in Atlantic Canada counted as a Tertiary sector. • Importance of regional consciousness/sense of place – sense of belonging , attachment, identity felt by inhabitants of a region (bone chp.1) Atlantic Canada: • Downward transition region • Political and geographical fragmentation (no other region has this) • Cultural diversity • Slow economic growth (signs that its turning around – dependent on these megaprojects) • Reliance on resources/megaprojects • Environmental challenges – Code fishery collapse (bone p.380-387) Sydney Tar Ponds (p.367, 373) Questions: • Why is atlantic Canada a downward transitional region? • What can or should be done about this from a policy perspective? Physical geography • Geology and landforms • Northern extension of Appalachian mountains • General alignment of hills/valleys southwest to northeast • Coastal rocks formed in carboniferous period – coal in cape Breton • Other mineral resources – nickel, cobalt, copper at Voisey’s Bay, Labrador and offshore oil fields. e.g Hibernia on Grand Banks • Appalachian mountains – old heavily eroded (low relief) Climate • 3 climate zones (fig. 2.6) in atlantic Canada – atlantic, arctic, and subarctic • Summers generally cool, wet and winters are short and mild but heavy snowfall and rain Fog • Cold Labrador current meets warm gulf stream – st john’s = 120 days of fog/year Soils • Generally poor and unable to support commercial agriculture (except in PET and Annapolis Valley in Nova Scotia) Question: to what extent has alantic canada’s physical environment contributed to its status as a downward transitional region? ENVIRONMENTAL CONTEXT Physical: Geology Physiology Soils Vegetation Human environment relations HUMAN RESPONSE Economy, Settlement, demographics, culture HasAtlantic Canada reached its potential in terms of what environmental conditions permit? The Making of a Hinterland Region (See atlantic canada’s historical geography p.367-373) th Regional economy mid to late 19 century: • Farm fishery, forest, commercial shipping • Pre industrial landscape ( era of wood, wind, water for energy, construction and transportation) • Prosperous yet profoundly local society (other than the ties that relate to resources are not very strong to what becomes of the other world) • 4/5 rural • Absence of major cities (Halifax = imperial outpost) • Newfoundland remains british colony until 1949 0 at Moratorium put on the cod fishery near 2000, hit peak from 1965-1970. Cod fishery Gradual increases in catches of northern coast up to 1960-1970. Tradgedy of the commons – there for the community use and each of people using resouces not much impact but everyone doing the same disappeareance of resource spawning biomass 1994 area. LOWEST spawning.. 1980s HIGHEST spawning. PEI – originally called St.Johns island. Lect 16 February 27 , 2013 Atlantic Canada Role of External events as determinants of economic growth/development: • Crimean war • Reciprocity treaty • U.s civil war • Cyclical nation of economic growth characterized by alternating periods of expansion and decline, depending on external demand for resources (periods of boom and bust typical of these regions) Technological changes: • Steamships replaced sailing vessels • Iron replaces wood in shipbuilding and construction Political context (p.367-374) • External events decisions – adverse effect on region, e.g national policy (1879 – connect the east to west build transcontinental railway completed 1885. Second objective is to protect Canadian manufacturers.Aseries of tariffs from goods imported from U.S to give Canadian manufacturers assistance) • Net effects of technological change and national policy were more positive in Ontario/quebec and more negative inAtlantic Canada National Policy (1879) – two objectives: • Build railway across Canada • Impose tariffs taxes on manufactured goods imported from united states in order to protect Canadian Manufacturers to stimulate growth in the manufacturing sector of Canada’s economy. Result: This region begins to lag behind central Canada in terms of economic growth, and fails to develop a major urban centre/metropolis to act as a focal point for regional economic growth • E.g nova scotia’s iron and steel industry (based in Sydney, N.S see p.373) • 1896- 32k tonnes of pig iron • 1912- 425k tonnes of pig iron Share of canadian pig iron production in Sydney: (DECREASING throughout time. • 1913- 43% • 1929 - <30% • 1971 - <10% In general, atlantic Canada received a disproportionately SMALL share of benefits from the national policy – region becomes economical (as well as already being physically peripheral/marginal to the emerging industrial heartland (southern Ontario/Quebec); • Widening disparity (vs. central Canada) through 19 and 20 centuries By mid 20 century – state intervention to address growing disparity: 1961 ARDA(agricultural rehabilitation and development act) 1961 ADRA( agricultural and rural developmentACT) 1966 FRED ( fund for rural economic development’) Note emphasis on RURAL issues – remains most rural in most of canada’s regions (didn’t have a great deal for agriculture as oppose to enormous potential for agriculture in south Ontario and quebec) • Social demographic changes in post WWII era – outmigration; increase dependency ratio. Question: how can we explain these regional economic growth trends from a theoretical perspective? ASSUME: 2 regions,Aand B (region B is larger) • Both regions have same population density and per capita income (purchasing power) • Aconsumers goods industry with ubiquitous inputs THEN: if regionAcan support 1 optimum sized plant, then region B can support 2 or more such plants. IF: the population of regionA is stable, Region B is growing, then the industry located in region B can benefit from economies of scale such that it can produce/sell its products at a LOWER price than the same industry in regionA: therefore consumers in region B pay LESS than consumers in region A(for the same good) FINALLY: if the savings in production costs in region B are greater than the transportation costs from B toA, then consumers in regionAwill be able to purchase goods from region B at a lower cost than the same goods made in their own region. RESULT: (based on demographics cause RegionA– higher cost of production and lower demand was stable and Region B was increasing) In regionA(atlantic Canada): • Per unit cost of production INCREASES • Level of production DECREASES In region B (Central Canada) • Per unit cost of production DECREASES • Level of production INCREASES Relative disadvantages in regionA(higher production cost/lower demand) reinforce hinterland status of region A • Disparities between two regions increase • RegionAbecomes downward transitional region Summary • For decades, atlantic Canada was canada’s economically troubled region, yet while unemployment and outmigration continue, atlantic Canada and especially newfoundland and Labrador, has a second change (bone, 2011,400) – (megaprojects resource sector part of second change and tertiary sector especially in tourism huge economic income in newfoundland and labrador) • Thus the future in the 21 century looks promising but the prospects for sustainable economic growth remain problematic (bone, 2011, 400) Lecture 17 Feb 28 (Bone Chp 5,6 ) Treating an individual province as a region. Top map depicts Ontario as a region and quebec as another. But in second map industrial heartland consisted of (south Ontario and quebec) The great lakes st- Lawrence lowlands: Canada’s industrial heartland Inroduction • Heartland: a geographic area in which a nation’s industry population and political power are concentrated; also known as a “core” region (see bone, ch 1) • ‘Main street” – Canadian equivalent to U.S • “Megalopolis” (BOSYNYWASH) – large concentration of urban population. Boston , NY and Washington. • Area = 175k km^2 (1.8% of Canada) • >55% of canada’s population (“a concentration greater than that in the core of any other developed nation” Yeats, 1997 • 6 of 10 larges CMAs. 18 of 33 CMAs • Density >100 person/km^2 (10x higher than anywhere else in Canada) • 93% of ontario’s population lives in this region; 80% of quebec’s population lives in this region • (Montreal, quebec city + trois riverieres) • Ontario/quebec together account for 62% of canada’s population MOST of which lives in the heartland. Problem/ challenge of regional boundaries: • Text: Treats Ontario and quebec (entire provinces) as SEPARATE regions (get statistics very readily) Lectures: • Treats southernmost parts of ON/Quebec as one region – INDUSTRIAL HEARTLAND • Treats the northernmost of ON/Quebec as belonging to the near North and /or FAR North (See Maps) Also what about the name of the region?? 1. Great lakes – St lawrence Lowlands (physiographic region) 2. Industrial Heartland (historical significance of the industry) 3. Central Canada (does this capture the essence of the region? Not really at the centre more like core) 4. Other possible names???? • What FACTORS underlie the heartland status of this region? (Why here why not on the east or west coast) • What are the impacts/consequences of this type of development on people and the environment in this region (And in other regions)? • What is the future of Canada’s industrial heartland? 3 Sets of characteristics: • Physical – CLIMATE , SOILS, TRANSPORTATION, ENERGY • Cultural – FRENCH/ENGLISH • Economic – RESOURCES, TRADE – CREATION OF WEALTH The remarkable paradox – 2 distinct linguistic/cultural regions (Faultline) – cultural/social DISUNITY, yet at the same time economic UNITY. Historical Development of he industrial Heartland to 1850 Toponyms: PLACE NAMES: (based on elevation and not LATITUDE) • Upper Canada = Canada west = south Ontario • Lower Canada = Canada east = south Quebec Staples theory – economic development linked to export of resources to external • Harold Innis “The fur Trade” • FISH, FUR, TIMBER, WHEAT (exported to foreign markets) th Late 18 century • Upper Canada: largely unsettled interior of eastern northAmerica • Lower Canada : “new france” – French settlement along st.lawrence River; • Seigneurial system of land tenure featured long, narrow lots of land with access to river front (to get around people needed access to water transportation, to maximize property to water) Struggle between Britain/france for control of NorthAmerica culminates in British victory (over france) on the Plains ofAbraham (1759) Settlement of Upper canada: • United Empire Loyalist (1770s-1800) • War of 1812 • Year 1842 of 450k • Year 1851 of 952k • Year 1860 of 1400k Location of settlement influenced by geography i.e soils , water transportation (see maps) Intensification filling in further away from the lake and the river.Attachment to the water for transportation and consumption purposes.As well as agriculture. Contrast between upper Canada and lower Canada: • Upper Canada had better physical resources base soils, climate) for agriculture than lower Canada By the end of the 19 century Lower Canada: • Shortage of arable land • High birth rate • Francophone migration to u.s (new Orleans and lousianna) Upper Canada: • No shortage of agriculturally productive land • Growing wheat economy • System of towns/cities facilitated export of wheat and import of manufactured goods from Britain + U.S -LONG LOTS to maximize water transportation!!!!!!!!!! By 1850 Lower Canada : • 16 citiies/towns >1000 • 14 of these <5000 • Large = montreal (58k) and quebec city (42k) – no intermediate places Upper Canada: • 38 cities/town >1000 • Kingston, Hamilton, London, Ottawa = 5k to 25k • Largest = Toronto (31k) Present day system of cities in place: • Beginning of industrial era; • Dominance of montreal, Toronto Technologies transferred first to the u.s than Canada! Lecture 18 March 4 The industrial Heartland in the Mid-nineteenth century • Importance of water transportation (physical) • No settlement on Canadian shield (physical) • Proximity to New York city and the ESTABLISHED manufacturing core of the United states (SITUATION) – centre of major capital and investments Significance between lower and upper Canada. Upper Canada more spaced compared to lower Canada. Physical environment prevents this. • Trade routes of staples- development of urban system + dominance of Montreal (HISTORICAL) – Foreign markets exportation • South/west Ontario – (south of Canadian shield) best soils for agriculture; also most heavily populated (PHYSICAL) – agricultural base in southern Ontario gives it that economic advantage • Dominance of Montreal in lower Canada (Quebec city “peripheral” relative to Montreal) Dominance of Toronto in Upper Canada ‘(London, Kingston, Hamilton “peripheral” relative to Toronto) Variety of Geographical and historical factors underlying development of industrial heartland. Historical development of the industrial heartland 1850-1950 • Urbanization: The process whereby a society nation is transformed form one which is predominantly rural in character to one which is predominantly urban in character • Industrialization: the process by whereby an economy becomes increasingly dominated by the factory mode of production 1851 – 50% of was rural and 50% was urban. Questions: th th • How are the urbanization and industrialization linked? – 19 -20 century there was definitely a connection between the two. • What factors account for the concentration of manufacturing in southern Ontario/Quebec? -during this time manufacturing isn’t the dominant mode of production during this time 1880s – Rise of industrial capitalism • ¼ of population – urban • Agriculture beginning to decline; manufacturing on the increase • Ontario/Quebec differences: Ontario – Wheat decreasing specialty agriculture increasing, urban/industrial growth, Toronto Quebec – Rural society, outmigration, Montreal (Note: Recall PREVIOUSLY DISCUSSED DIFFERENCES) th th General context of urban –industrial growth in the late 19 century early 20 century • 1880-1910 – can GNP increased 4x • 1881-1921- population of Ontario and quebec increased from 3m to 5m (62.5% of total Canadian population) • By 1913- Canada ranked third (after u.s , Britain) in value of manufactured goods/capita (more then ¼ of population) • 1880-1920 – manufacturing employment increased from 200k to 400k Cycles of economic growth • KUZNETZ CYCLES 15-25 YEARS (period of expansion and period of decline) • KONDRATIEFF CYCLES 50-60 YEARS Growth in 1873, 1914, 1970, decline in 1845, 1895, 1939 Associated with technological stages, and difference parts of the world dominating. After first world war United states emerges as dominant geographic region as opposed to Britain. -Steam power, electricl heavy engineerin, information and communication. Regional differences in manufacturing types, ontario’s dominance based on electrical goods, primary metals, automobiles (high value-added) -Montreal high manufacturing going on there, but tend to be lesser value as they went through the process) Urbanization trends: • 1851- 13.% urban • 1881- 23.3 (47k -1880) – MORE THAN HALF CLASSIFIEDAS URBAN • 1901 – 34.9 (15k – 1905) • 1931 – 52.5 (23k) • 1951 – 62.9 (37k) Why is the 1880 figure more than 3 times greater than the 1901 figure? What had to do as defined as an industry or an establishment. Very small scaled operations were classed as manufacturing establishments before.. small blacksmiths. Definitional thing. General factors underlying urban-industrial growth 1. Resources/energy • Soil-agriculture potential • Water- transportation , power, domestic/industrial consumption • Coal –Appalachia (via water) – energy source adjacent area to southern Ontario/quebec 2. Initiative/entrepreneurship • U.k/American investors (people play the role PROXIMITY to NEW YORK CITY) • Extreme concentration in wealth in Montreal “the square mile” • Local idiosyncrasies – sir allan macnab in Hamilton 3. Government Policy • National policy 1879 – two goals 1. To unify east/west by building trans Canada railway; 2. Promote/protect Canadian manufacturers by placing tariffs/taxes on imported manufactured goods from the U.S • -Resulted in emergence of branch plant economy (e.g Hamilton) • By 1950 – American owned firmed accounted for greater than ½ of Canadian manufacturing (note: proximity toAmerican manufacturing core region) • Impacts of foreign U.S investments in manufacturing: increase dependence on u.s technology, R&D, and decision making. 4. Corporate policy • Increase corporate size through mergers/amalgamations (Economics of scale) e.g. steel industry, textiles, banking (expansion of services) 5. Immigration th th • Late 19 century /early 20 century – most immigrants from u.s, western Europe (1912,1913 mostly) • Increase population – EXPANDING MARKETS, LABOUR FORCE FOR GROWING INDUSTRIAL SECTOR • So many came from Europe and Britain they were already accustomed to it already NOTE: immigrants from Britain brought with them skills/familiarity with factory work, conditions, etc Summary: • Variety of social, economic, political , historical and geographical factors accounting for the concentration of industry in southern Ontario/quebec • Urbanization and industrialization processes were “mutually reinforcing” • Theme of metropolitan dominance (first montreal, then Toronto) – Dominance of Toronto after stock market crash in 1929. • Despite dual society in cultural terms, the regions (south Ontario and south Quebec) functioned as a single economic entity (HOW? WHY?) March 6, 2013 Recent Trends • Greater gold horseshoe (Peterborough to London to st.catharines) = 8 million people (1/4 of canada’s population) this number increased by 630k (8.4%) from 2001-2006 • Milton ON 31,5000 (2001) 54k (2006) 84k (2011) fastest growing community in Canada (Expect change but the most fast the more faster you have to accommodate these people) • Changing industrial structure of regional economy • Shifts in metropolitan power (montreal vs. Toronto) • Changing social geography of cities • Declines of rural/agricultural areas (rapid urban growth) • Question: what will the industrial heartland look like in 25 years? Hamilton: The emergence of an Industrial city Introduction • Urbanization/industrialization • General stages in the evolution of the Canadian urban system: 1. Mercantile phase – up to 19 century; imperial outposts (Halifax, qubec city) cities serve administrative, military roles; economic functions related to export of staples 2. Commercial phase – early 19 century to 1860/1870s transition between mercantile/industrial phase commercial interests/activities determine urban development (MONTREAL- population grows immigrants) 3. Industrial phase – late 19 century to 1960s: growth driven by manufacturing; national network of transportation/communications; centralization of metropolitan power (metropolitanism) (Toronto, montreal) th 4. Post-industrial phase – late 20 century to present decline of older industrial central cities: increase in service sector, decrease in manufacturing: globalization intensifies … (urban system responding to local and interests global in nature) 1846 – Hamilton officially becomes a city Hamilton 1850-1900 Image of industry: • Late 19 century – positive jobs/growth/opportunity th • Late 20 century – negative pollution/decay/obsolescence Background: • 1777/1778 first non-native settlers (Richard Beasley or Robert land) • 1778 Barton township surveyed byAugustus Jones (finding out whats where) • 1818 courthouse/jail for district of gore built (Hamilton known as a district town, district of GORE) • 1826 canal cut through Burlington beach • 1846 hamilton becomes a city (population = 7000) Emergence of Hamilton as an industrial city 1834: 1.4k 1891: 49k Contextual(regional/national) factors underlying industrial growth: • Reo-construction of the welland canal (1887) • Electric power from DeCew Falls (1898) (hamilton investors to put up this project, consistent and reliable supply of electricity very low cost) • “Boosterism” (attract people to city, offer more land , tax breaks and e.t.c to lure manufacturers to the city) • National Policy (incentives for americans to establish branched plants in northAmerica Factors underlying industrial growth: Local: • Long history/traiditon of industry (calvin McQuesten – first foundry 1835) • Great western railway (sir allan macnab, 1854); leads to manufacture of rolling stock - one of first in canada (railway cars/locomotives) first rolling mill (process of steel) in Ontario- 1963) • Corporate histories: steel company of Canada, dominion foundries and steel) Rise of manufacturing: Year: 1861 – 84 establishments and 2,225 employees 1921 – 312 establishments and 21,609 employees 1893: “Hamilton, the Birmingham (great industrial city in London) of Canada” Hamilton’s industrial legacy: • Economic – jobs, middle – class wages • Environment – pollution (harbour = toxic hotspot) • Social – blue collar neighbourhoods (East) vs. white collar neighbourhoods (West) • Political – left wing/labour/NDP • Image – lunchbucket town – steel city, labour town  union movement. (no indication that Hamilton was industrial city, no longer there today) Randle reef area – adjacent to pier 16 Geography – Western Canada (PRAIRIES) • Northern most part of Saskatchewan and part of Manitoba not identified as the prairies • But using this political unit as making up regions Western Canada (Prairies) Introduction • 17.1% of canada’s population • 19.8% of canada’s area • 22.6% of canada’s GDP (2006) • Upward transitional region (taking non-traditional hinterland roles) – how/why is the traditional hinterland status of the region changing? (downwards in atlantic Canada) • Resource-based economy • marginal/peripheral position in geographic economic terms • Recent settlement history (vs. regions in the east) political history none of these three part of Canada in 1867 • See key topic: agricultural transition p.337-347 : radical departure from its t
More Less

Related notes for GEOG 2RC3

Log In


OR

Join OneClass

Access over 10 million pages of study
documents for 1.3 million courses.

Sign up

Join to view


OR

By registering, I agree to the Terms and Privacy Policies
Already have an account?
Just a few more details

So we can recommend you notes for your school.

Reset Password

Please enter below the email address you registered with and we will send you a link to reset your password.

Add your courses

Get notes from the top students in your class.


Submit