Section 3: Census divisions
Archived Content
Information identified as archived is provided for reference, research or recordkeeping purposes. It is not subject to the Government of Canada Web Standards and has not been altered or updated since it was archived. Please "contact us" to request a format other than those available.
- Main page
- Section 1: Census metropolitan areas
- Section 2: Economic regions and regional portraits
- Section 3: Census divisions
- Section 4: Maps
- Quality of demographic data
- Methodology
- Appendix A: Glossary
- Appendix B: Explanatory notes for the tables
- Appendix C: Sources and remarks
- Related products
- More information
- PDF version
Census divisions (CDs) with the highest growth rates in the past year
Between July 1, 2014 and June 30, 2015 (2014/2015), 52% of CDs posted a positive population growth rate. Specifically, the population increased in 151 of the 293 CDs in Canada, remained stable in 18 CDs and decreased in 124 CDs. The CDs with population increases generally had larger populations than those with population decreases, their average populations in 2014/2015 being 202,400 and 35,100, respectively. The territories formed the region with the largest proportion of growing CDs (70.0%), followed by the Prairies (61.7%) and Ontario (61.2%).
Start of text boxFor the rest of this analysis, a rate higher than -1 per thousand and lower than 1 per thousand is considered to be nil or low. Rates are based on the ratio of the number of events during the period (t, t+x) to the average of the populations at the beginning and end of the period. Five-year rates are annualized. Preliminary postcensal estimates are subject to revision. Future updates could affect trend analysis.
For a second consecutive annual period, the Mirabel CD (Que.) was in the top spot in Canada in terms of growth. Its population rose from 47,000 to 49,000 between 2014 and 2015, for an annual growth rate of 41.3 per thousand. Its intraprovincial migration rate of 24.0 per thousand, the highest of all the CDs in Canada, is the reason behind the strong growth in Mirabel. Quebec also had the third CD with the strongest growth rate, La Jacques–Cartier, at 27.8 per thousand. These CDs are located on the outskirts of Quebec’s two most populous CDs, Montréal and Québec respectively.
There was a certain slowdown in population growth in CDs in the Prairies, which had 7 of the 10 CDs with the strongest total growth in 2013/2014, but only four in 2014/2015. Moreover, the rates of the two Alberta CDs that remained among the top 10 were lower than they had been in the five last years. The growth rate of 22.6 per thousand in Division No. 6 (Calgary) in 2014/2015 was indeed lower than its annualized rate for the 2010-2015 period, which was 28.7 per thousand. The same was true in Division No. 11 (Edmonton), whose rate of 22.0 per thousand in 2014/2015 was down compared to the rate for the 2010-2015 period, which was 26.8 per thousand annually. In Manitoba, Division No. 10 (MacDonald) was ranked sixth (+23.5 per thousand) and Division No.2 (Hanover–Steinbach) was ranked seventh (+22.9 per thousand).
Two British Columbia CDs were among the 10 CDs with the strongest growth: Central Okanagan (+31.4 per thousand) ranked second, and Fraser Valley (+21.6 per thousand) ranked tenth. Lastly, Nunavut also had two CDs that posted the strongest growth, namely Keewatin, which ranked fourth (+25.0 per thousand) and Baffin, which ranked fifth (+24.7 per thousand). Keewatin was the CD with the highest level of natural increase in Canada (+25.3 per thousand).
Census divisions with the highest rates of decline in the past year
In 2014/2015, the Atlantic provinces had the largest proportion of CDs that recorded population decreases (83.0%). British Columbia also had a significant proportion (48.3%). Consequently, these regions had the most CDs among the 10 CDs with the greatest total decreases. The Atlantic, which had five CDs in this ranking in 2013/2014, still had three in 2014/2015. Notably, Guysborough (N.S.), with a rate of -32.8 per thousand, or a net loss of 245 persons, was first in Canada in terms of decline. This CD was also the one with the lowest natural increase in Canada (-12.6 per thousand). Two Newfoundland CDs also posted very low rates, namely Division No. 9 (Glenburnie–Birchy Head–Shoal Brook) and Division No. 3 (Channel–Port aux Basques), with respective rates of -25.4 per thousand and -19.0 per thousand.
In 2014/2015, five British Columbia CDs were among the 10 CDs with the largest total population decrease in Canada. Stikine, ranked first in 2013/2014, was ranked third in 2014/2015, with a rate of -27.1 per thousand. A sharp decline in total migration (-46.1 per thousand, the lowest in Canada) was the reason behind this population decline. However, the small size of this CD makes it more sensitive to population changes. The four other CDs were not among the top 10 in this ranking in 2013/2014 and had a more pronounced decrease than what was recorded during the 2010-2015 period. The CDs are Skeena–Queen Charlotte (-29.4 per thousand), Kootenay Boundary (-23.3 per thousand), Fraser–Fort George (-21.8 per thousand) and Alberni–Clayoquot (-17.2 per thousand). Fraser–Fort George is by far the most populous of the 10 CDs in the ranking, its population falling from 94,400 to 92,300, for a net loss of 2,000 people.
Two Prairie CDs round out the ranking, namely Division No. 10 (Wynyard, Sask.) and Division No. 20 (Swan River, Man.), with respective rates of -24.0 per thousand and -18.9 per thousand. In both CDs, most of the decrease resulted from especially low net intraprovincial migration (-20.9 per thousand and -15.9 per thousand, respectively).
Lastly, a comparison of the age pyramids of the two CDs whose growth goes in opposite directions (Mirabel and Guysborough) shows strong contrasts in terms of age structure. Mirabel, whose growth is very strong, presents a large numbers of persons aged 0 to 10 years and 25 to 55 years, as indicated by wider sections at the bottom and centre of the pyramid. This composition suggests the presence of many young families. Conversely, the pyramid for Guysborough is narrower where young children and young adults would be, while most of its population is in the age groups from 50 to 74 years, as shown by the wide upper part of the pyramid.
Description for figure 3.1
This stacked column graph or age pyramid compares the age structure of the CD of Guysborough (N.S.) and the Mirabel CD (Que.) for July 1, 2015 in relative value.
The left side shows males and the right side shows females.
The horizontal axis shows the population in relative value and the vertical axis shows age.
Age | Guysborough (N.S.) | Mirabel (Que.) | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
Males | Females | Males | Females | |
per thousand | ||||
0 | 3.3 | 2.4 | 6.8 | 6.9 |
1 | 3.0 | 2.6 | 7.0 | 7.8 |
2 | 3.0 | 2.3 | 6.7 | 7.4 |
3 | 3.0 | 2.0 | 8.3 | 6.3 |
4 | 3.0 | 2.0 | 6.9 | 7.0 |
5 | 3.4 | 3.0 | 7.6 | 7.9 |
6 | 3.4 | 3.1 | 8.0 | 7.2 |
7 | 3.8 | 3.5 | 6.9 | 7.4 |
8 | 3.4 | 3.4 | 7.0 | 6.4 |
9 | 3.7 | 2.6 | 7.0 | 7.0 |
10 | 3.9 | 4.5 | 6.6 | 5.7 |
11 | 5.2 | 4.1 | 6.8 | 6.7 |
12 | 4.5 | 3.3 | 7.0 | 5.4 |
13 | 3.9 | 4.4 | 6.1 | 6.4 |
14 | 4.5 | 4.2 | 5.7 | 6.3 |
15 | 5.3 | 5.2 | 6.0 | 5.1 |
16 | 6.4 | 6.1 | 5.9 | 5.9 |
17 | 4.2 | 5.4 | 6.3 | 6.5 |
18 | 5.2 | 5.7 | 5.9 | 5.9 |
19 | 4.5 | 5.0 | 6.0 | 6.3 |
20 | 4.4 | 4.6 | 6.7 | 6.3 |
21 | 5.7 | 5.0 | 6.4 | 6.1 |
22 | 2.7 | 4.2 | 6.4 | 6.5 |
23 | 4.2 | 1.9 | 7.2 | 7.3 |
24 | 1.5 | 1.8 | 7.4 | 7.5 |
25 | 2.9 | 1.9 | 7.5 | 6.7 |
26 | 2.9 | 1.6 | 7.7 | 6.7 |
27 | 2.7 | 1.6 | 6.7 | 8.3 |
28 | 1.6 | 2.7 | 7.4 | 7.2 |
29 | 3.1 | 2.0 | 7.7 | 7.0 |
30 | 1.9 | 3.8 | 7.4 | 7.3 |
31 | 3.3 | 3.3 | 9.2 | 8.7 |
32 | 3.0 | 2.3 | 7.1 | 7.2 |
33 | 4.6 | 3.3 | 8.7 | 9.9 |
34 | 2.7 | 2.0 | 8.5 | 8.4 |
35 | 3.1 | 2.9 | 8.9 | 8.6 |
36 | 2.6 | 5.0 | 9.1 | 8.7 |
37 | 3.7 | 3.8 | 8.5 | 8.4 |
38 | 3.1 | 4.2 | 8.5 | 8.7 |
39 | 3.7 | 3.8 | 8.3 | 7.9 |
40 | 5.8 | 4.2 | 8.6 | 8.2 |
41 | 4.1 | 4.8 | 7.7 | 7.7 |
42 | 3.9 | 4.4 | 7.5 | 7.3 |
43 | 5.6 | 5.4 | 7.4 | 6.9 |
44 | 3.8 | 5.4 | 8.9 | 7.6 |
45 | 6.9 | 5.2 | 8.1 | 7.8 |
46 | 5.6 | 5.3 | 7.8 | 7.9 |
47 | 6.7 | 6.8 | 7.4 | 6.9 |
48 | 6.0 | 6.8 | 7.5 | 7.2 |
49 | 8.7 | 8.3 | 8.2 | 7.2 |
50 | 9.2 | 8.6 | 8.1 | 7.8 |
51 | 8.4 | 8.7 | 7.9 | 7.3 |
52 | 9.7 | 10.7 | 7.1 | 6.7 |
53 | 10.5 | 10.6 | 7.6 | 6.8 |
54 | 10.5 | 10.9 | 7.0 | 6.5 |
55 | 9.9 | 10.1 | 7.0 | 6.6 |
56 | 9.1 | 9.8 | 7.2 | 5.4 |
57 | 11.3 | 10.2 | 5.6 | 5.4 |
58 | 9.7 | 10.6 | 5.8 | 4.9 |
59 | 9.7 | 10.7 | 4.8 | 4.9 |
60 | 9.2 | 10.2 | 5.0 | 5.5 |
61 | 10.6 | 11.0 | 5.1 | 4.6 |
62 | 9.9 | 10.3 | 4.7 | 3.7 |
63 | 11.0 | 10.1 | 4.2 | 4.7 |
64 | 11.6 | 12.6 | 4.4 | 3.9 |
65 | 10.7 | 10.3 | 4.1 | 3.7 |
66 | 10.2 | 11.7 | 4.2 | 4.4 |
67 | 12.6 | 11.6 | 3.9 | 3.9 |
68 | 11.3 | 12.5 | 3.0 | 3.3 |
69 | 8.7 | 7.6 | 3.2 | 3.7 |
70 | 10.1 | 9.0 | 2.9 | 3.1 |
71 | 8.3 | 9.5 | 3.6 | 2.4 |
72 | 9.2 | 8.6 | 2.5 | 2.8 |
73 | 7.8 | 6.9 | 2.3 | 2.6 |
74 | 6.5 | 7.2 | 2.3 | 1.8 |
75 | 6.3 | 7.9 | 1.8 | 2.0 |
76 | 6.0 | 6.8 | 1.8 | 1.9 |
77 | 6.1 | 4.2 | 1.5 | 1.7 |
78 | 6.5 | 4.4 | 0.9 | 1.7 |
79 | 4.1 | 4.4 | 1.2 | 1.4 |
80 | 3.9 | 3.0 | 1.0 | 1.6 |
81 | 3.4 | 3.9 | 1.2 | 1.0 |
82 | 4.1 | 2.0 | 0.8 | 0.9 |
83 | 3.3 | 2.7 | 0.7 | 0.8 |
84 | 2.4 | 2.0 | 0.7 | 0.8 |
85 | 2.0 | 3.3 | 0.6 | 0.5 |
86 | 2.4 | 1.8 | 0.4 | 0.8 |
87 | 1.2 | 2.6 | 0.5 | 0.6 |
88 | 1.2 | 2.2 | 0.3 | 0.4 |
89 | 1.9 | 0.4 | 0.5 | 0.5 |
90 | 0.5 | 0.4 | 0.0 | 0.3 |
91 | 0.3 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.1 |
92 | 1.0 | 0.3 | 0.1 | 0.2 |
93 | 0.7 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.1 |
94 | 0.1 | 0.0 | 0.3 | 0.2 |
95 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.1 | 0.1 |
96 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.1 | 0.0 |
97 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 |
98 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.1 | 0.0 |
99 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 |
100 and over | 0.1 | 0.0 | 0.2 | 0.1 |
Source: Statistics Canada, Demography Division |
The youngest census divisions
On July 1, 2015, 88 of Canada’s 293 CDs (30%) had a median age below that of Canada (40.5 years). In 81 of these 88 CDs (92%), the proportion of the population aged under 15 years of age was greater than the proportion of persons aged 65 and older. All of the 10 youngest CDs were in northern Canada, whether in the three territories or in the northernmost areas of the provinces. Specifically, three of the CDs were in Manitoba, one in Saskatchewan, one in Alberta, three in Nunavut and one in the Northwest Territories. The only CD with one of the lowest median ages that was not in western Canada was Nord-du-Québec (Que.).
Start of text boxFor the purposes of this article, various indicators will be used to measure the aging of a population. The distribution of the population under 15 years and 65 years and over and the median age will be the indicators considered. The median age is an age “x” that divides the population into two equal groups, such that one contains only those individuals older than “x” and the other those younger than “x.”
In the table of the 10 youngest CDs, the CDs are presented in decreasing order based on their proportion of people under 15 years. In the table showing the 10 oldest CDs, the CDs are ranked in decreasing order based on their proportion of people aged 65 years and over. Although median age is not used to rank the CDs, this indicator will be discussed in the rest of the text.
All of the 10 youngest CDs in Canada on July 1, 2015 were also on the list in the previous year. The ranking remained the same for every region, with a minor change in Division No. 19 (Peguis 1B) and Division No. 22 (Thompson) in Manitoba, which changed places. Accordingly, Keewatin (Nvt.) remained the youngest CD, with a median age of 23.7 years and a proportion of persons 14 years and under of 34.3%. It was followed by three Manitoba CDs, namely Division No. 23 (Pukatawagan 198), Division No. 19 (Peguis 1B) and Division No. 22 (Thompson), with median ages of 24.0, 24.8 and 24.8 years, respectively.
The oldest census divisions
On July 1, 2015, 205 of Canada’s 293 CDs (70%) had a median age greater than or equal to that of Canada (40.5 years). In 185 of these 205 CDs (90%), the proportion of the population aged 65 and older was greater than the proportion of persons under the age of 15. British Columbia had three of the oldest CDs in Canada, while Quebec and Ontario each had two. The three other CDs were in Nova Scotia, New Brunswick and Manitoba.
As with the youngest CDs, all of the oldest CDs in Canada on July 1, 2015 were also on the list in the previous year, except for Stikine (B.C.), which took the place of Charlevoix (Que.). The median age was highest in Haliburton (Ont.), at 55.8 years, making it the oldest CD in Canada for a second consecutive year. In second place was Guysborough (N.S.), with a median age of 55.4 years. Aging has been rapid in this CD, since its median age was 54.5 years in the previous year. These two CDs are also the only ones in Canada with a proportion of persons aged 65 and older that is greater than 30%.
The number of CDs in which the median age was at least 50 years has increased since July 1, 2014, from 44 to 57. Nearly half (27) of all these CDs are in Quebec.
Population aging can also be reflected by the distribution of the population by age. On July 1, 2015, the proportion of persons 65 years and older was greater than the proportion of people under the age of 15 in 192 of the 293 CDs (66%). Most of these CDs were in provinces in Central and Eastern Canada.
As in previous years, Atlantic Canada continued to have the largest proportion of CDs in which persons aged 65 outnumbered persons 14 years and under (44 of 47, or 94%). The senior population exceeded the youth population in 76 of 98 CDs (78%) in Quebec and in 37 of 49 CDs in Ontario (76%). Conversely, in the Prairie provinces, the senior population exceeded the youth population in only one-quarter of the CDs (16 of 60, or 27%). In this regard, Alberta stood out clearly from the rest of Canada with its 0-to-14 population exceeding the population 65 years and older in all of the province’s 19 CDs. The trend in the territories was similar to that of Alberta. All the CDs in the three territories had a higher proportion of young people under 15 than persons aged 65 and older (10 out of 10). Finally, the proportion of persons aged 65 and older was higher than the proportion of the population under 15 years in 66% of the CDs (19 of 29) in British Columbia.
Description for figure 3.2
This stacked column graph or age pyramid compares the age structure of the CD of Haliburton (Ont.) and the CD of Keewatin (Nvt.) for July 1, 2015 in relative value.
The left side shows males and the right side shows females.
The horizontal axis shows the population in relative value and the vertical axis shows age.
Age | Haliburton (Ont.) | Keewatin (Nvt.) | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
Males | Females | Males | Females | |
per thousand | ||||
0 | 3.5 | 2.7 | 15.6 | 13.7 |
1 | 3.7 | 2.8 | 15.4 | 13.2 |
2 | 3.7 | 2.8 | 15.1 | 12.7 |
3 | 3.8 | 2.7 | 15.2 | 12.3 |
4 | 4.0 | 2.3 | 13.7 | 11.8 |
5 | 3.7 | 2.4 | 13.3 | 12.7 |
6 | 3.6 | 3.3 | 10.7 | 11.1 |
7 | 3.7 | 2.7 | 10.7 | 9.9 |
8 | 2.8 | 3.1 | 11.6 | 11.4 |
9 | 3.4 | 3.2 | 8.6 | 9.7 |
10 | 3.1 | 3.8 | 9.4 | 9.7 |
11 | 3.8 | 3.8 | 10.1 | 9.6 |
12 | 4.8 | 2.4 | 9.0 | 10.1 |
13 | 3.8 | 2.9 | 8.7 | 8.6 |
14 | 4.3 | 2.9 | 11.4 | 8.1 |
15 | 4.2 | 3.3 | 9.7 | 8.9 |
16 | 3.8 | 3.3 | 9.0 | 8.9 |
17 | 4.7 | 4.8 | 9.2 | 8.1 |
18 | 4.5 | 3.9 | 9.5 | 9.6 |
19 | 4.7 | 3.9 | 10.2 | 8.6 |
20 | 4.8 | 5.1 | 7.7 | 8.2 |
21 | 5.1 | 4.7 | 8.0 | 9.9 |
22 | 6.1 | 4.2 | 9.5 | 7.8 |
23 | 6.4 | 3.9 | 8.7 | 10.1 |
24 | 4.9 | 4.9 | 10.5 | 10.1 |
25 | 5.3 | 4.8 | 9.2 | 8.3 |
26 | 3.8 | 4.0 | 9.7 | 8.7 |
27 | 4.7 | 2.6 | 8.3 | 8.0 |
28 | 3.7 | 3.4 | 6.7 | 9.0 |
29 | 4.4 | 3.7 | 7.8 | 7.8 |
30 | 3.5 | 3.4 | 8.1 | 8.4 |
31 | 3.4 | 3.6 | 7.0 | 9.7 |
32 | 3.2 | 3.8 | 6.3 | 6.4 |
33 | 3.5 | 3.5 | 6.2 | 6.6 |
34 | 3.1 | 3.5 | 7.9 | 5.4 |
35 | 3.1 | 3.3 | 7.4 | 7.8 |
36 | 3.2 | 2.9 | 5.8 | 5.6 |
37 | 3.4 | 3.2 | 7.2 | 6.4 |
38 | 4.0 | 2.9 | 6.0 | 4.6 |
39 | 3.5 | 3.3 | 7.1 | 4.2 |
40 | 3.5 | 3.6 | 5.8 | 4.8 |
41 | 3.7 | 3.9 | 4.7 | 5.2 |
42 | 3.7 | 4.0 | 6.3 | 5.2 |
43 | 3.5 | 3.7 | 6.0 | 5.5 |
44 | 4.3 | 4.4 | 8.5 | 6.3 |
45 | 4.3 | 4.2 | 6.0 | 6.0 |
46 | 5.0 | 5.4 | 6.0 | 6.1 |
47 | 5.9 | 5.0 | 6.6 | 5.4 |
48 | 6.3 | 5.9 | 4.6 | 4.1 |
49 | 8.3 | 7.2 | 6.0 | 4.1 |
50 | 8.6 | 8.0 | 6.2 | 3.4 |
51 | 9.1 | 9.8 | 6.4 | 4.5 |
52 | 8.9 | 8.3 | 6.4 | 5.5 |
53 | 9.2 | 8.8 | 5.6 | 4.9 |
54 | 10.2 | 9.3 | 5.0 | 4.4 |
55 | 9.5 | 9.9 | 5.8 | 4.0 |
56 | 11.1 | 10.9 | 3.8 | 4.3 |
57 | 11.3 | 9.0 | 3.3 | 2.7 |
58 | 10.6 | 9.5 | 4.0 | 2.4 |
59 | 10.1 | 9.4 | 3.7 | 1.8 |
60 | 9.2 | 10.2 | 3.9 | 2.0 |
61 | 10.4 | 10.4 | 2.6 | 2.2 |
62 | 11.0 | 10.0 | 1.8 | 2.7 |
63 | 10.6 | 9.9 | 1.1 | 2.1 |
64 | 9.6 | 10.2 | 1.3 | 1.9 |
65 | 10.2 | 10.8 | 1.2 | 2.1 |
66 | 10.4 | 11.4 | 1.2 | 2.4 |
67 | 11.4 | 11.0 | 0.7 | 1.9 |
68 | 10.4 | 9.9 | 1.4 | 1.9 |
69 | 8.3 | 9.0 | 1.6 | 2.0 |
70 | 7.5 | 9.3 | 1.0 | 0.7 |
71 | 8.8 | 6.7 | 0.7 | 0.9 |
72 | 8.3 | 7.5 | 0.7 | 0.8 |
73 | 7.5 | 7.3 | 1.0 | 0.8 |
74 | 6.4 | 7.8 | 1.4 | 0.3 |
75 | 6.6 | 6.4 | 0.4 | 0.7 |
76 | 5.9 | 4.8 | 0.7 | 0.6 |
77 | 5.4 | 5.3 | 0.2 | 0.7 |
78 | 5.9 | 5.6 | 0.1 | 0.3 |
79 | 5.5 | 6.2 | 0.4 | 0.4 |
80 | 5.2 | 5.2 | 0.4 | 0.7 |
81 | 5.1 | 4.2 | 0.7 | 0.3 |
82 | 5.0 | 3.6 | 0.7 | 0.4 |
83 | 3.1 | 3.9 | 0.4 | 0.1 |
84 | 3.8 | 3.4 | 0.2 | 0.1 |
85 | 3.3 | 3.8 | 0.1 | 0.0 |
86 | 1.8 | 3.2 | 0.1 | 0.0 |
87 | 2.1 | 2.1 | 0.0 | 0.0 |
88 | 2.0 | 1.9 | 0.0 | 0.1 |
89 | 2.0 | 1.7 | 0.1 | 0.1 |
90 | 1.4 | 1.3 | 0.1 | 0.1 |
91 | 1.1 | 0.4 | 0.1 | 0.0 |
92 | 0.4 | 0.6 | 0.2 | 0.0 |
93 | 0.3 | 0.8 | 0.0 | 0.0 |
94 | 0.3 | 0.6 | 0.0 | 0.0 |
95 | 0.2 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 |
96 | 0.2 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.1 |
97 | 0.2 | 0.7 | 0.0 | 0.1 |
98 | 0.2 | 0.2 | 0.0 | 0.0 |
99 | 0.0 | 0.1 | 0.0 | 0.0 |
100 and over | 0.2 | 0.6 | 0.0 | 0.0 |
Source: Statistics Canada, Demography Division |
- Date modified: