News   Apr 03, 2020
 926     0 
News   Apr 02, 2020
 2K     3 
News   Apr 02, 2020
 773     0 

Statscan 2017 numbers

Social Justice

Active Member
Member Bio
Joined
Jun 22, 2017
Messages
477
Reaction score
628
I posted this in the Canada forum on SSP - I think it belongs here as well
Calgary CMA 2016
population 1,374,650
Visible minority 34%

Calgary City 2016
Population 1,222,405
  1. Visible minority 36%

    Below was as far as I was able to drill down to my neighbourhood, NE Calgary. Very suburban and in the north, new, growing, and under development. Approximately 70% visible minority. This is the outlier, all other Calgary Federal electoral districts have a more even distribution.

    Census Profile, 2016 Census
    Calgary Skyview (Federal electoral district)

    Visible minority population approximately 70%
    Total - Visible minority for the population in private households
    Population 135,110
    Total visible Minority 93,910

    South Asian 50,290
    Chinese 5,220
    Black 9,705
    Filipino 13,040
    Latin American 3,365
    Arab 3,780
    Southeast Asian 3,015
    West Asian 2,535
    Korean 230
    Japanese 215

    Not a visible
    minority 41,200


    Even though the southern boundary extends into the SE, it's considered to be in the NE.

    Census Profile, 2016 Census
    Calgary Forest Lawn [Federal electoral district]

    Visible minority population approximately 53%
    Total population 111,100
    Total visible minority 58,640
    South Asian 12,740
    Chinese 4,655
    Black 9,285
    Filipino 11,000
    Latin American 2,775
    Arab 6,665
    Southeast Asian 7,465
    West Asian 1,295
    Korean 75
    Japanese 95
    Not a visible minority 52,465


    Calgary Nose Hill
    Population 115,560
    Visible minority 47%

    Calgary Rocky Ridge
    Population 130,415
    Visible minority 39%

    Calgary Signal Hill
    Population 120,005
    Visible minority 29%

    Calgary Heritage
    Population 110,965
    Visible minority 27%

    Calgary Centre
    Population 115,495
    Visible minority 25%

    Calgary Shepard
    Population 146,680
    Visible minority 25%

    Calgary Confederation
    Population 117,160
    Visible minority 24%

    Calgary Midnapore
    Population 119,920
    Visible minority 22%
I love these types of stats! I wish there was a detailed breakdown of ethnicity by neighborhood in Calgary. I also wish stats can would so a more detailed breakdown of TFR, ethnicity and religion.
 

Blader

New Member
Member Bio
Joined
Mar 2, 2018
Messages
93
Reaction score
79
I love these types of stats! I wish there was a detailed breakdown of ethnicity by neighborhood in Calgary. I also wish stats can would so a more detailed breakdown of TFR, ethnicity and religion.
@ Social Justice

Calgary Martindale breakdown by census tracts
2 census tracts
Boundary
West - Metis Trail
North - 80 Ave
South - 64 Ave
East - Falconridge Blvd

Population 2016 Census
15,020
11,865 visible minority 79%
8,140 South Asian
1,395 Filipino
800 Black
395 Latin American
240 Arab
230 Southeast Asian
225 West Asian
150 Chinese
10 Japanese

Source
http://www12.statcan.gc.ca/census-recensement/2016/dp-pd/prof/index.cfm?Lang=E
Select postal code
Check the map - your neighborhood will have more than one census tract. So some math involved.

What is TFR?
 
Last edited:

Social Justice

Active Member
Member Bio
Joined
Jun 22, 2017
Messages
477
Reaction score
628
@ Social Justice

Calgary Martindale breakdown by census tracts
2 census tracts
Boundary
West - Metis Trail
North - 80 Ave
South - 64 Ave
East - Falconridge Blvd

Population 2016 Census
15,020
11,865 visible minority 79%
8,140 South Asian
1,395 Filipino
800 Black
395 Latin American
240 Arab
230 Southeast Asian
225 West Asian
150 Chinese
10 Japanese

Source
http://www12.statcan.gc.ca/census-recensement/2016/dp-pd/prof/index.cfm?Lang=E
Select postal code
Check the map - your neighborhood will have more than one census tract. So some math involved.

What is TFR?

TFR = Total Fertility Rate

It is the average number of children that would be born to a woman over her lifetime if:
  1. She were to experience the exact current age-specific fertility rates (ASFRs) through her lifetime, and
  2. She were to survive from birth through the end of her reproductive life.
It is obtained by summing the single-year age-specific rates at a given time. The TFR (or TPFR—total period fertility rate) is a better index of fertility than the crude birth rate (annual number of births per thousand population) because it is independent of the age structure of the population. If a population has a TFR of under 2.1 then the population will eventually begin to experience a natural decrease due to a lack of children that replace the adult population.


Unfortunately Canada has a TFR of 1.6 :(
 

kora

Active Member
Member Bio
Joined
Nov 15, 2016
Messages
258
Reaction score
664
What are people's thoughts on the population growth rate of the Calgary area? Are you pleased with the current rate? Would you like the population rate to increase back to 2014/2015 levels?
We definitely need to beat Austin, so growth of 65,000 a year is in order. Let's push 4% growth a year.
 

Social Justice

Active Member
Member Bio
Joined
Jun 22, 2017
Messages
477
Reaction score
628
We definitely need to beat Austin, so growth of 65,000 a year is in order. Let's push 4% growth a year.
We'll have to build a lot more firehalls to accommodate that growth ;)
 

UrbanWarrior

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Mar 28, 2016
Messages
3,385
Reaction score
7,838
Location
Mission
We need to hurry up and become Canada's 2nd city already. I think in the long run it's reasonable to believe Calgary will be bigger than Montreal.
Haha what? :p I wouldn't call that reasonable at all.

Montreal is a metro area of nearly 4.5 million. It would take the Calgary CMA like a century of 2014-level growth and Montreal staying at their 5-year average for us to surpass them (that is to say, it will not happen even in the long run save for a cataclysm in Montreal). If you're talking strictly municipal population then sure, but Calgary certainly wouldn't be Canada's "2nd city" just by surpassing the municipality of Montreal in population, considering by that point both the Montreal and Vancouver metropolitan areas will still be significantly larger than us.
 

Oddball

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Mar 18, 2016
Messages
1,131
Reaction score
1,068
Haha what? :p I wouldn't call that reasonable at all.

Montreal is a metro area of nearly 4.5 million. It would take the Calgary CMA like a century of 2014-level growth and Montreal staying at their 5-year average for us to surpass them (that is to say, it will not happen even in the long run save for a cataclysm in Montreal). If you're talking strictly municipal population then sure, but Calgary certainly wouldn't be Canada's "2nd city" just by surpassing the municipality of Montreal in population, considering by that point both the Montreal and Vancouver metropolitan areas will still be significantly larger than us.
Haha yeah. It's more than a touch optimistic to say that Calgary needs to take down Montreal for the second spot in the country. Calgary's main objective... errr hope?... it isn't like you can really direct population growth. This isn't the Soviet Union. Our main hope is that we should continue to keep growing faster than our immediate metropolitan peers in Ottawa (1.32M) and Edmonton (1.32M) and maybe gain a bit of ground on Vancouver (2.46M) because barring The Big One, we're gonna be in 4th place for quite a while. The 2016 census had the GVA roughly 1.1M people larger than the Calgary CMA (1.39M).
 

Surrealplaces

Administrator
Staff member
Member Bio
Joined
Sep 24, 2015
Messages
7,799
Reaction score
20,721
Location
Calgary
I think it'll until we pass Vancouver or Montreal, if it ever does happen. That said, I'm sold enough to remember when Winnipeg was the big dog on the prairies.....
 

kora

Active Member
Member Bio
Joined
Nov 15, 2016
Messages
258
Reaction score
664
Speaking of metro areas, in 1951 Windsor and London were bigger than Calgary. in 1971, Quebec was bigger. In 1981 we were about the same size as Winnipeg. All I'm saying is we've been consistently climbing the charts of metro rankings. No city grows forever. Look at what's happened to America's once largest cities like Cleveland (peaked at #7 in 1920), St. Louis (peaked at #4 in 1870), Cincinnati (peaked at #5 in 1860) and Pittsburgh (peaked at #6 in 1910). None of them are in the top 20 anymore. Then again, it's entirely possible Calgary will meet an equal fate, following in the steps of Winnipeg. Or that could happen to Montreal or Vancouver.
 

kora

Active Member
Member Bio
Joined
Nov 15, 2016
Messages
258
Reaction score
664
I'll also say that LA wasn't a top 20 metro area in 1900. By 1960 it was #2.
 

Oddball

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Mar 18, 2016
Messages
1,131
Reaction score
1,068
Haha, not withstanding that Vancouver is maybe more like LA than we are? :p

That's a nice little list of heads Calgary has hunted in the past century, but I think that Calgary's next hurdle is rather more of a wall-climb though. With a persistent annual growth rate of 2.5% we're about 20 years away from hitting 2.4M people for the CMA. The end of that period would mean growth in the range of 50-60 thousand people per year. I guess I just don't see it going quite that way myself. That seems incredibly optimistic on it's own and never mind the fact that Vancouver grows pretty well too. Our growth rate from 2011-2016 might have been considerably higher, but our absolute growth wasn't. Calgary only closed the gap on Vancouver by about 27K. I think it's stagnation in Windsor, London, Hamilton and Quebec that has been a big factor in our surpassing them.

I think it will literally take the Big One for Calgary to catch Vancouver this century. I'll be happy to eat that crow though.
 

Habanero

Active Member
Member Bio
Joined
Feb 15, 2016
Messages
391
Reaction score
372
Location
Calgary
Speaking of metro areas, in 1951 Windsor and London were bigger than Calgary. in 1971, Quebec was bigger. In 1981 we were about the same size as Winnipeg. All I'm saying is we've been consistently climbing the charts of metro rankings. No city grows forever. Look at what's happened to America's once largest cities like Cleveland (peaked at #7 in 1920), St. Louis (peaked at #4 in 1870), Cincinnati (peaked at #5 in 1860) and Pittsburgh (peaked at #6 in 1910). None of them are in the top 20 anymore. Then again, it's entirely possible Calgary will meet an equal fate, following in the steps of Winnipeg. Or that could happen to Montreal or Vancouver.
Also Detroit, was once #4 and even more recent....sometimes in the 50's. Of course the motor city is a whole story to itself. Vancouver will always grow because it's a nice city, and there's a segment of the population that can't take winter, Vancouver's the only large metro that you can go to, and get away from those arctic freezes. Montreal on the other hand....it's a nice city, but it's only growing due to international immigration. With international immigration now spreading around to the smaller centres, those smaller centres will only continue to take in more immigrants over time. Montreal's future growth will probably slow down in comparison to other cities, and it already has on a per capita basis.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

CBBarnett

Active Member
Member Bio
Joined
May 22, 2016
Messages
688
Reaction score
1,872
It's very hard for cities to overtake each other when they get to the top of the lists for their national population. Being one of the largest cities has significant (although not insurmountable) advantages. Assuming growth continues overall in the country into the long-term, it will likely continue to accumulate to the larger cities disproportionately over smaller centres. For all the talk of Montreal's "decline" it is a relative decline, not absolute. Montreal's CMA still added nearly 1 million over the past 20 years.

I think it is conceivable for Calgary to continue to gain on Vancouver proportionally, although I wouldn't say it is likely we will ever pass it in size. Maybe? But not sure if there is much long-term evidence to support such a claim. It also isn't clear that anyone smaller than us will clearly surpass Calgary, although Ottawa and Edmonton are similar enough in size that inevitable fluctuations in the local economies and demographics might be enough to trade around the 3-4-5 spots for the next century. I would be interested to see how the Calgary-Edmonton corridor evolves on such a timeframe, Canada doesn't have another example of 2 centres of 1 million + only 250km apart both with large absolute growth potential. We are already well linked economically, and that is likely to continue. Perhaps a 5 - 7 million person corridor (~3 million currently) in 50 or 100 years is in the cards! That could be exciting.

Predicting the future is fun!
 

Social Justice

Active Member
Member Bio
Joined
Jun 22, 2017
Messages
477
Reaction score
628
It's very hard for cities to overtake each other when they get to the top of the lists for their national population. Being one of the largest cities has significant (although not insurmountable) advantages. Assuming growth continues overall in the country into the long-term, it will likely continue to accumulate to the larger cities disproportionately over smaller centres. For all the talk of Montreal's "decline" it is a relative decline, not absolute. Montreal's CMA still added nearly 1 million over the past 20 years.

I think it is conceivable for Calgary to continue to gain on Vancouver proportionally, although I wouldn't say it is likely we will ever pass it in size. Maybe? But not sure if there is much long-term evidence to support such a claim. It also isn't clear that anyone smaller than us will clearly surpass Calgary, although Ottawa and Edmonton are similar enough in size that inevitable fluctuations in the local economies and demographics might be enough to trade around the 3-4-5 spots for the next century. I would be interested to see how the Calgary-Edmonton corridor evolves on such a timeframe, Canada doesn't have another example of 2 centres of 1 million + only 250km apart both with large absolute growth potential. We are already well linked economically, and that is likely to continue. Perhaps a 5 - 7 million person corridor (~3 million currently) in 50 or 100 years is in the cards! That could be exciting.

Predicting the future is fun!
Excellent post. The size of cities usually follows a Paredo distribution:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pareto_distribution

It's a distribution found several times in nature. The larger the city the more 'momentum' it gains.
 

Top