Charting our I nternational Future : A Competitive Greater Montreal - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

▶
charting our i nternational future a competitive greater
SMART_READER_LITE
LIVE PREVIEW

Charting our I nternational Future : A Competitive Greater Montreal - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Feb 16, 2023 104 likes •275 views

Charting our I nternational Future : A Competitive Greater Montreal ISRN Annual Meeting Yves Charette Greater Montreal Economic Development Coordinator Toronto, May 5 th , 2010 Montreal Metropolitain Community at a glance 82 Local

slide-1
SLIDE 1

Yves Charette Greater Montreal Economic Development Coordinator Toronto, May 5th, 2010 ISRN Annual Meeting

Charting our I nternational Future : A Competitive Greater Montreal

slide-2
SLIDE 2

Montreal Metropolitain Community at a glance…

  • 82 Local municipalities
  • 5 Administratives regions
  • 7 Regional conferences of

elected officials

  • 4 360 KM2
  • 3,6 Population
  • 75 Languages spoken
  • 19.4 % of Inhabitants speak at

least two languages at home

  • 120 Cultural communities
  • 150 G $ Metropolitan GDP
  • 1,90 million Jobs
  • 172 900 Jobs in the new

economy

  • 1 International airport
  • 1 Port
  • 5 Universities
  • 66 Cegeps and Colleges
  • 201 Research centers
  • 60 Consulates and foreign

delegations

slide-3
SLIDE 3

Key Economic Indicators

Comparing metropolitan performances Comparing metropolitan performances

GDP per capita (US$) 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 RANK 4.5% 55,148 44,222 Philadelphia-Camden-Wilmington 4.6% 27,883 22,316 Riverside-San Bernardino-Ontario 4.6% 50,132 40,033 Cleveland-Elyria-Mentor 4.7% 48,875 38,759 Baltimore-Towson 4.9% 49,397 38,803 Orlando-Kissimmee 5.1% 44,761 34,953 Sacramento--Arden-Arcade—Roseville 5.1% 50,526 39,423 Portland-Vancouver-Beaverton 5.2% 70,958 55,156 San Francisco-Oakland-Fremont 5.2% 47,544 36,928 Pittsburgh 5.4% 53,851 41,333 San Diego-Carlsbad-San Marcos 5.4% 72,250 55,446 Washington-Arlington-Alexandria 5.5% 46,645 35,668 Miami-Fort Lauderdale-Miami Beach 5.6% 54,203 41,355 Los Angeles-Long Beach-Santa Ana 5.6% 64,318 48,887 New York-Northern New Jersey-Long Island 7.5% 67,216 46,869 Houston-Sugar CAGR (2002-2007) 2007 2002 CITY GDP per capita (US$) 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 RANK 4.5% 55,148 44,222 Philadelphia-Camden-Wilmington 4.6% 27,883 22,316 Riverside-San Bernardino-Ontario 4.6% 50,132 40,033 Cleveland-Elyria-Mentor 4.7% 48,875 38,759 Baltimore-Towson 4.9% 49,397 38,803 Orlando-Kissimmee 5.1% 44,761 34,953 Sacramento--Arden-Arcade—Roseville 5.1% 50,526 39,423 Portland-Vancouver-Beaverton 5.2% 70,958 55,156 San Francisco-Oakland-Fremont 5.2% 47,544 36,928 Pittsburgh 5.4% 53,851 41,333 San Diego-Carlsbad-San Marcos 5.4% 72,250 55,446 Washington-Arlington-Alexandria 5.5% 46,645 35,668 Miami-Fort Lauderdale-Miami Beach 5.6% 54,203 41,355 Los Angeles-Long Beach-Santa Ana 5.6% 64,318 48,887 New York-Northern New Jersey-Long Island 7.5% 67,216 46,869 Houston-Sugar CAGR (2002-2007) 2007 2002 CITY GDP per capita (US$) 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 RANK 0.3% 36,433 35,849 Toronto 1.3% 45,080 42,175 Detroit-Warren-Livonia 1.6% 30,812 28,496 Montréal 2.3% 51,185 45,593 Atlanta-Sandy Springs-Marietta 3.0% 43,451 37,396 Phoenix-Mesa-Scottsdale 3.4% 45,789 38,768 Cincinnati-Middletown 3.4% 34,433 29,063 Vancouver 3.5% 59,070 49,736 Denver-Aurora 3.5% 44,584 37,522

  • St. Louis

3.9% 58,600 48,370 Minneapolis-St. Paul-Bloomington 4.0% 40,015 32,905 Tampa-St. Petersburg-Clearwater 4.0% 53,136 43,676 Chicago-Naperville-Joliet 4.2% 59,398 48,369 Dallas-Fort Worth-Arlington 4.4% 64,669 52,039 Boston-Cambridge-Quincy 4.5% 63,034 50,559 Seattle-Tacoma-Bellevue CAGR (2002-2007) 2007 2002 CITY GDP per capita (US$) 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 RANK 0.3% 36,433 35,849 Toronto 1.3% 45,080 42,175 Detroit-Warren-Livonia 1.6% 30,812 28,496 Montréal 2.3% 51,185 45,593 Atlanta-Sandy Springs-Marietta 3.0% 43,451 37,396 Phoenix-Mesa-Scottsdale 3.4% 45,789 38,768 Cincinnati-Middletown 3.4% 34,433 29,063 Vancouver 3.5% 59,070 49,736 Denver-Aurora 3.5% 44,584 37,522

  • St. Louis

3.9% 58,600 48,370 Minneapolis-St. Paul-Bloomington 4.0% 40,015 32,905 Tampa-St. Petersburg-Clearwater 4.0% 53,136 43,676 Chicago-Naperville-Joliet 4.2% 59,398 48,369 Dallas-Fort Worth-Arlington 4.4% 64,669 52,039 Boston-Cambridge-Quincy 4.5% 63,034 50,559 Seattle-Tacoma-Bellevue CAGR (2002-2007) 2007 2002 CITY Sources: Statistics Canada, US Census Bureau, 2002-2007; Analysis SECOR

slide-4
SLIDE 4

Strategic Issues – Labor productivity

40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 1987 1989 1991 1993 1995 1997 1999 2001 2003 2005 2007

North America 1,61 % 1,86 % 1,66 % North America 1,61 % 1,86 % 1,66 % Montréal 0,91 % 0,45 %

  • 0,20 %

Montréal 0,91 % 0,45 %

  • 0,20 %

Canada 1,32 % 1,16 % 0,36 % Canada 1,32 % 1,16 % 0,36 % CAGR 1987-2007 1997-2007 2002-2007 CAGR 1987-2007 1997-2007 2002-2007

GDP per job - Montréal CMA and North America

(1987- 2007; 2002 constant $)

GDP per job - Montréal CMA and North America

(1987- 2007; 2002 constant $)

Source: Communauté métropolitaine de Montréal

slide-5
SLIDE 5

Strategic Issues - Training

Wash.

  • S. Fr.

Houst. Bost. NY.Sea. Dal. Min. Phi. L.A

  • S. Die.
  • St. L.

Atl. Orl. Balt. Sacr. Tam. Tor. Van. Mont. Den. Chic. Port. Cle. Pitt. Mia. Cin. Detr. Phoe. 25 000 35 000 45 000 55 000 65 000 75 000 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% 45% 50% Wash.

  • S. Fr.

Houst. Bost. NY.Sea. Dal. Min. Phi. L.A

  • S. Die.
  • St. L.

Atl. Orl. Balt. Sacr. Tam. Tor. Van. Mont. Den. Chic. Port. Cle. Pitt. Mia. Cin. Detr. Phoe. 25 000 35 000 45 000 55 000 65 000 75 000 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% 45% 50%

GDP per capita and share of people 25 years and over with a university degree

(US$, %, 2006, 2007)

GDP per capita and share of people 25 years and over with a university degree

(US$, %, 2006, 2007)

Sources: data on the share of people 25 years and over with a university degree : US Census Bureau, 2005-2007 American Community Survey; Statistics Canada, 2006 Census; data on GDP per capita : Statistics Canada, 2006 Census; Bureau of Economic Analysis; Analysis SECOR

slide-6
SLIDE 6

Strategic Issues – Private Investment

1,4% 6,6% 3,0% 4,7% 9,6% 7,4%

Montréal CMA Canada United States

Construction Machinery and equipment

Sources: Institut de la statistique du Québec; Statistics Canada; US Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis

* Administrative regions of Montréal, Laval, Laurentides, Lanaudière and Montérégie. 2008 :

intentions and 2007 : preliminary estimates ** Housing excluded

slide-7
SLIDE 7

Surviving the Recession

The official explanation « Following the financial crisis of 2008 and at the first signs of economic slowdown, the government intervened under an action plan calling for an injection of $15 billion in the economy. Thanks to the government’s quick initiatives, Québec was less affected by the recession than its main partners, i.e. the United States and Ontario. » Budget 2010-2011

slide-8
SLIDE 8

Surviving the Recession

  • Other possible explanations

– Massive investments in infrastructure (Johnson Commission) – Automotive industry (dead with GM) – Financial services (dead with Stock Exchange) – Chronic high unemployment – Lag in Aerospace, ICT and Pharma

slide-9
SLIDE 9

Surviving the Recession

2 5 8 11 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09

North America Toronto CMA Montréal CMA

%, seasonally adjusted

Sources: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics and Statistics Canada

Unemployment rate

Loonie starts kicking Aerospace stalls –post 911 GM shuts down Aerospace takes off Boom in professional & financial services Day‐care policy

slide-10
SLIDE 10

Surviving the Recession

70 85 100 115 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09

Canada Toronto CMA Montréal CMA

2000=100, seasonally adjusted

Source: Statistics Canada

Manufacturing employment

slide-11
SLIDE 11

Surviving the Recession

10 20 30 40 50 60 70 1988 1991 1994 1997 2000 2003 2006 2009

Motor vehicles and parts, Toronto CMA Aerospace products and parts, Montréal CMA

'000

Source: Statistics Canada

Employment

Lagged growth Aircraft motors (Pratt & Whitney)

slide-12
SLIDE 12

2010-2015 Economic Development Plan

A LEARNING REGION AN OPEN & ATTRACTIVE REGION A DYNAMIC REGION

Facilitate the development of skills Increase the impact of clusters and metropolitan networks Increase the ability to attract and retain activities, firms, and individuals

TOP 10

slide-13
SLIDE 13

Economic Development Plan : A Competitive Metropolitan Montréal Region

A LEARNING REGION (Skills task force) A DYNAMIC REGION (Innovation task force) AN OPEN & ATTRACTIVE REGION (Visibility task force + Montreal International)

slide-14
SLIDE 14

Cluster Maturation Process

1 3 6 9 3 Years

Activation Results Impact

slide-15
SLIDE 15

Buzzwords in Urban Economic Development

  • Research needed by policymakers

– Innovation / Productivity / Clusters (e.g. empirical evidence) – Manpower shortage (e.g. obsolete macro indicators) – Place Branding (e.g. marketing a metro region)

slide-16
SLIDE 16

THANK YOU !

http://cmm.qc.ca/ http://grappesmetropolitaines.cmm.qc.ca/