An Economic Exploration of Bilingualism, Part Two

In contrast with Montreal’s unique bilingual nature is New Brunswick, which is the only officially bilingual province in the country. That province often sets the pace for bilingual policy and with a roughly 33/66 per cent split between Francophones and Anglophones, it is proving ground for Canada-wide application.

New Brunswick’s largest linguistic minority are the Acadians, which is a group that the English had marginalized by the mid-18th century onward. Taking inspiration from the Franco-Quebecois awakening in the 1960s, the Acadians demanded greater inclusion in the then-Anglo dominated New Brunswick. The relatively poor and more isolated Acadian regions were able to use their size to elect a Francophone premier in 1960 who implemented an equalization plan that improved infrastructure and government services in those regions. This transformation amounted to a greater centralization of power in Fredericton. Nine years later, the provincial government enacted the Official Languages Act, which gave the French population equal status in the province. Most of the premiers elected since the enactment of that bill have been bilingual and sensitive to Francophone demands.

Today, New Brunswick remains Canada’s second-most bilingual province, with roughly 30 per cent of the population identified as bilingual (second only to Quebec with around 42 per cent).

It is important to note the differences between New Brunswick’s “brand” of bilingualism and that of Montreal. As I write in Part One, there has been no conscious effort in Montreal to promote bilingualism: it has arisen spontaneously from various structural and socioeconomic forces. The Anglo-Montrealer minority has had to bend to the will of the much larger Francophone majority and, thus, has not been a significant political force in the city. On the contrary, New Brunswick has an Anglophone majority with a very large, nationalistic Francophone minority. Bilingualism has been chiefly a political concern for New Brunswickers and has been largely manufactured, rather than spontaneous. It arose out of mobilization and demands for parity by what was then a marginalized minority, rather than economic necessity (or efficiency). Moreover, the movement had manifested itself largely through government: legislation, the civil service, and various social programs are bilingual imperative. The province’s education system, although segregated by district and language, focuses primarily on producing future generations of bilingual New Brunswickers. (In New Brunswick, the proportion of students enrolled in French immersion schools is the highest in Canada.)

Not all of New Brunswick’s linguistic history has been political, however, as much of the drive for bilingualism in the province was economically necessary. Statistically, bilingual members of the labour force end up with higher incomes, and boasting a bi- or multilingual workforce is an economic boon. In fact, it can measurably contribute to economic growth. Consequently, provincial governments in New Brunswick have focused on promoting bilingualism as a unique brand on the national and international scene to reap economic gains similar to those of multilingual European countries. At the same time, the province is quickly losing younger workers (especially bilingual Francophones), and the government is worried about upsetting the linguistic balance. In response, the provincial government has attempted to court Francophone and bilingual immigrants–a tough task with many competitors. Nonetheless, the province has experienced growth in service industries arguably attributable to this “bilingual branding.”

Once again, however, one must note that this “economic bilingualism” is the product of a planned effort by New Brunswick’s government and Francophone communities. In reality, the language of business and most government activities is English, which also tends to dominate public affairs. Very few Francophone New Brunswickers are unilingual, while many of their Anglophone counterparts speak only one language. Unlike in Montreal, there is much less pressure for Anglophones to learn French, and much more pressure for Francophones to learn English.

New Brunswick’s government is right to promote bilingualism as an economic asset. Evidence does show that multilingualism in places such as Switzerland can satisfy demands for internationally-accessible services.  Yet, New Brunswick is unlikely to become a world financial centre, which mutes the benefit.

However, the way government promotes bilingualism matters. Requiring all services to be in both languages is unnecessary, especially in areas skewed towards one linguistic group or another. The government justifies this structure by asserting that members of both groups live all around the province, but it is highly unlikely that individuals living in an area dominated by the opposite group will be unilingual. As the Fraser Institute study cited above shows, this kind of policy is quite costly. New Brunswick would be better off directing these resources into promoting bilingual education, which, in addition to its economic benefits, would probably do more to serve–and better integrate–both linguistic groups than blanket regulations mandating bilingual services.

In essence, the state should tailor its strategy toward providing tangible benefits all New Brunswickers, and take a step back to let New Brunswickers form their own unique socio-linguistic identity.

Leo Plumer is an AIMS on Campus Student Fellow who is pursuing an undergraduate degree in economics and political science at McGill University. The views expressed are the opinion of the author and not necessarily that of the Atlantic Institute for Market Studies

An Economic Exploration of Bilingualism, Part One

As an Anglo resident of Montreal, I have gotten to know the city in my three years here as a student. Known as the “cultural capital” of Canada, Montreal is one of the most diverse metropolises in the world. The city has a rather complex demographic history, largely with Anglophone and Francophone residents sharing the island-city through most of its existence. Power and influence has shifted between the English and French since the colonial era, with the Anglophones occupying the business and social elite until a massive cultural shift–the Révolution Tranquille–resulted in the Francophonization of Quebec in the 1960s and 1970s. Today, roughly 60 per cent of Montrealers are native Francophone; Anglophone Montrealers constitute a mere 13 per cent.

Despite these shifts, Montreal is a shining example of bilingualism: Anglophone residents are 80 per cent bilingual and their Francophone counterparts are 51 per cent bilingual. Overall, Montreal is 52 per cent bilingual–the highest rate in Canada.

Economics is the primary driver of the phenomenon: actors make decisions based on perceived value.


In 1993, Jeffrey Church and Ian King constructed a simple model of the economics of bilingualism, which led them to conclude that network externalities and the cost of learning a new language made it more efficient for a linguistic minority to become bilingual. This model suggests that it is more efficient for Anglophone Montrealers to learn French than it is for their Francophone counterparts to learn English. Unsurprisingly, the number of bilingual Anglophone Montrealers exceeds that of bilingual Francophone residents by a sizable margin. Many Montrealers are bilingual, however, despite one’s origin and considering over half of Francophones identify as bilingual–especially younger Francophone individuals–there must be an omitted variable.

A study published by the London School of Economics and Political Science in 2012 notes that Anglophones in French-majority cities assimilate less than Francophone individuals in English-majority cities, which may provide some insight into language diversity in Montreal. English is the lingua franca of the world, for example, and although Francophone residents can sustain themselves in Montreal using solely the French language, the economic incentive to learn English is substantial, especially for those with career prospects abroad. Bilingualism, however, is becoming a standard requirement for obtaining employment in Montreal’s service sector. Moreover, both English and French speaking Montrealers have a variety of incentives to adopt bilingualism and Quebec’s education system makes learning either language quite easy.

In essence, Church and King’s model explains why it is more efficient for Anglophone Montrealers to learn French, whereas the interconnectedness of Montreal with the English-speaking world creates an incentive for Francophone Montrealers to learn English. Alternatively, Montreal’s role as an economic hub that connects to the English-speaking world is a primary driver of the city’s unique bilingual nature: economic incentives outweigh cultural sentimentality.

Montreal has developed a cosmopolitan culture unlike the rest of Quebec, which enhances its standing as a multicultural hub and economic nexus. It certainly should stay that way.

Leo Plumer is an AIMS on Campus Student Fellow who is pursuing an undergraduate degree in economics and political science at McGill University. The views expressed are the opinion of the author and not necessarily that of the Atlantic Institute for Market Studies

Regulation or Moratorium? New Brunswick’s Fracking Future

Shale gas development is a contentious issue in Atlantic Canada. Public concerns over fracking encouraged Newfoundland and Labrador’s (NL) Progressive Conservative government to impose a moratorium and, similarly, the newly elected Nova Scotia (NS) Liberals promised continue the province’s ban on fracking.

In New Brunswick (NB), where seismic testing is determining the possible opportunities for shale gas development, this issue has become an even hotter debate topic.

NB’s Progressive Conservative government asserted that seismic testing will continue and the opposition Liberals–with support from local Aboriginal leaders and other opposition groups–have recently renewed their call for a fracking moratorium.

While there are serious concerns that must be addressed, however, a fracking moratorium is not a sound policy route: there is a risk of shutting down the debate on what could be a major boost for Atlantic Canada’s economy.

The principal public concern surrounding fracking is the contamination of drinking water. Some observers suggest that the fracking process could contaminate drinking water and damage water tables from which people draw their wells. Water contamination is a serious concern for individuals for obvious reasons and, as such, due consideration must be given. There are others, though, who argue that this is not necessarily the case (although, this is, in and of itself, another debate).

However, a moratorium is not an appropriate policy route to deal with these concerns for two reasons.

The first reason is that banning fracking would discourage companies from exploring for possible shale gas opportunities. NB’s shale gas reserves are still largely unknown and not exploring what the province has available would be an irresponsible policy.

The second reason is that a moratorium prohibits constructive discussion on the issue. In other words, banning fracking gives more legitimacy to the anti-shale gas side, which could result in the destruction of legitimate arguments from the pro-shale gas side.

Regulation, rather than moratorium, is a much better policy tool for government to use in dealing with the fracking industry.

Adrian Park, from the University of New Brunswick, recently published an article that notes jurisdictions in the United States that have experienced horror stories associated with fracking are by and large those with weak regulations. Park’s article also points out that those jurisdictions that have developed the resource alongside strong regulation, such as North Dakota and British Columbia, have experienced far fewer publicised horror stories.

British Columbia, for example, requires oil and gas companies to ensure there are no adverse effects on the quality or quantity of water where development is happening. The province also has the Surface Rights Board (SRB), which requires natural resource companies to compensate landowners for damages resulting from resource extraction.

Ultimately, other governments must follow-suit, especially in Atlantic Canada where the economic possibilities from shale gas development are largely unknown. North Dakota and British Columbia are success stories in the fracking industry because they chose a policy route that allowed the industry to develop in a safe manner: they choose to regulate and have the discussion rather than close the debate.

Randy Kaye is a 2013-2014 Atlantic Institute for Market Studies’ Student Fellow. The views expressed are the opinion of the author and not necessarily the Institute