Tourism, Education, and Exports: Nova Scotia in the Context of Cheaper Energy and a Weaker Dollar

In recent months, oil prices have fallen dramatically and the Canadian dollar has weakened, which has led to speculation that Canada’s economy could be on the verge of an economic crisis. Yet, despite the obvious drawbacks of these developments, they could yield serious economic benefits for Nova Scotia, particularly for firms that export their goods and services to other jurisdictions. On the contrary, however, the cost of imports could rise and harm those consumers who rely on imported goods and services.

Nova Scotia’s economy relies heavily on education, exporting goods and services, and tourism, all three of which could benefit from lower energy prices and a weaker dollar. In fact, these two developments could help the province achieve the recommendations featured in the OneNS report, i.e. doubling the revenue from tourism in the next ten years, expanding the province’s export industry to meet the demand of the global economy, and developing a strategy that would help retain international students in Nova Scotia after they graduate.

Most projections anticipate that the Canadian dollar will remain relatively weakened in the coming months, which could bring enormous benefits to the province’s tourism industry and the estimated 24,000 individuals working in it–one person for every twenty living in communities across the province. In Nova Scotia, 1.9 million tourists traversed the province in 2014 and hotels sold 250,800 rooms, which generated $285 million in economic activity. There are also spillover benefits that help indirectly stimulate the local economy. Essentially, as the Canadian dollar weakens relative to other currencies and exchange rates fall, visiting Canada will become more attractive to foreigners and those who have already planned their vacations will have additional money to spend.

A weaker Canadian dollar might also encourage international students to pursue an education in Canada and postsecondary institutions in Nova Scotia could be among the primary beneficiaries. Furthermore, it would also make housing more affordable for international students who benefit from a lower exchange rate, which could dissuade students from choosing schools in Europe or the United States. Lastly, an influx of international students would increase the demand for local goods and services, resulting in additional economic activity and generating more revenue for local and provincial governments.

In his keynote speech at the Institute’s “For the Love of Nova Scotia, Let’s Focus on the Economy” event on February 11th in Halifax, Oxford Frozen Foods President John Bragg argued that Nova Scotia’s export industry should expand to the global market. Fortunately, these exporters will benefit from lower energy costs and a weaker currency and the time is ripe for those firms to expand their marketing efforts to countries in Asia and Europe wherein demand for the goods and services that Canadian firms offer is high. In fact, Clearwater Seafood Incorporated reported $444.7 million in earnings in the 2014 fiscal year and international sales have been rising in recent months. As Roger Taylor put it in the Chronicle Herald, “Product has a lot to do with it, but Clearwater is proving that being based in Nova Scotia is no impediment to successfully doing business around the world.”

To clarify, falling oil prices and a weakening currency has some clearly negative effects, particularly for Canadian firms in the western region. In Nova Scotia, however, those two developments could bring tremendous economic benefits to the province by encouraging tourism in the region, enticing international students into attending one of Nova Scotia’s premier postsecondary institutions, and making Canadian exports more affordable to international consumers.

Rinzin Ngodup is an AIMS on Campus Student Fellow who is pursuing a graduate degree in economics at Dalhousie University. The views expressed are the opinion of the author and not necessarily that of the Atlantic Institute for Market Studies

Pasteurizing the Canadian Dairy Industry

The CBC reported recently that residents of Newfoundland and Labrador pay double for dairy products compared with Ontarians. In Windsor, Ontario, for example, one may expect to pay $3.65 per gallon, whereas in some rural Newfoundland communities, one can expect a similar price per litre. On average, in fact, the price of dairy in Canada is almost 43 per cent higher than in the United States.

For Canadians–including even the lactose intolerant among us–this deal is raw.

Since the 1970s, Canada has run a system of “supply management,” through which provincial marketing boards, sanctioned by the federal government, set the price of dairy products, protect the Canadian industry from foreign competition, and control supply in the domestic market. Each board determines a quota governing both entry into the market and production within it, and requires farmers to purchase producer rights. Producers must sell that milk back to the marketing board, which then distributes the product to stores. Furthermore, the government enforces import quotas and imposes high tariffs on foreign products to insulate domestic production from outside competition.

In essence, this process “protects” both consumers and producers from market fluctuations that come with globalized trade and the associated risk of shocks in the agricultural industry. It also promotes local agriculture and ensures product quality.

Despite these objectives, the reality is different. Firstly, Canadian consumers pay more for dairy products than do consumers in other countries. The Conference Board of Canada estimates that Canadian families can expect to spend $276 more per family on dairy than our counterparts in the developed world. Dairy Farmers of Canada (DFC) claims that Canada, unlike our trading partners, does not devote subsidies to agriculture, implying that consumers do not give domestic producers “special treatment.” Consumers do subsidize Canadian dairy, however, through paying artificially inflated prices: setting the price of dairy products, insulating our industry from foreign competition, and controlling its supply is an indirect subsidy to the industry. Moreover, limiting the supply drives prices upward and higher prices means additional income for those with producer rights. Lastly, limiting entry into the market, while simultaneously enforcing prohibitively high tariffs on foreign products, reduces competition, which affords Canadian farmers an advantage. Indeed, the World Trade Organization (WTO) restricts Canadian dairy exports specifically because they view supply management as a subsidy.

This variety of quota and regulatory system is, essentially, geared to make market entry incredibly difficult and concentrate power in the largest firms. First and foremost, one must purchase quota rights to begin producing. In Newfoundland and Labrador, a scarcity of inputs raises the cost of production even further, while the provincial government pushes aggressively for “pro local” policies, such as an initiative to allot land for homegrown feed, which is the chief expense of Newfoundland and Labrador dairy farms. Unfortunately, these developments have consequences for the market structure: Newfoundland has the most concentrated dairy industry in Canada, with just 34 farms and 174 cows per farm. Even Prince Edward Island, with 200 smaller farms, produces more than twice the milk of Newfoundland.

It is difficult to identify how supply management benefits Canadians. The system is not necessary to ensure quality, and although it may protect producers from unanticipated price fluctuations, several industries fare well without government protection. The foregone benefits of a deregulated dairy industry far outweigh the complications of price volatility. It seems the only remaining claim is that “locally grown, locally produced” is better–a dubious and subjective claim at the very least. After all, many consumers may believe milk imported from the Maritimes, or internationally, is “better.” In any case, it ought not to be the producer that decides what each consumer prefers. Supply management is a net loss for Canadians and a particularly grave loss for residents of Newfoundland and Labrador.

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