Download Edge Cities: Competitive and Collaborative Creative Economy

Edge Cities:
Competitive and Collaborative
Creative Economy Strategies for Surrey
A White Paper for the Surrey Economic Summit
Contributing to the Liveable Cities Theme
September 18, 2008
Catherine Murray, PhD
Professor and Co-Director
Centre for Policy Studies on Culture and Communities
Simon Fraser University
August 31, 2008
Photo Credits:
The Surrey Museum, Surrey, B.C. (http://www.pacsbc.com)
The Living Arts Centre, Mississauga, Ontario (http://www.livingartscentre.ca)
Maison des arts, Laval, Quebec (http://www.ville.laval.qc.ca)
Edge Cities: Competitive and Collaborative Creative
Economy Strategies for Surrey
2
Abstract
This paper makes the case for a new framework to make Surrey the best place for creative workers to live, work and
contribute to sustainable economic growth and overall quality of life. Rising property taxes, rents and inflation in the value
of industrial and office property have set up the preconditions for a migration of the so-called ‘creatives’ to the ‘edge
cities’ in North America. Surrey’s designation as a Cultural Capital of Canada in 2008 offers an opportunity to consolidate
a creative city strategy that is not found in the recent Parks, Recreation and Culture Plan (2007-2017) endorsed by its
City Council in July 2008. The most effective strategy for edge cities to adopt is to complement but differentiate from the
cultural competencies of the core cities, while seeking new cooperative partnerships with others at the edge. As BC’s
second largest city, Surrey should develop a specialised and separate cultural/creative planning capacity, instate a city
grants program and other support programs, and cooperate in a feasibility study for mapping and expanding regional
creative labour and enterprise capacity.
The Author
Catherine Murray is Professor in the School of Communication, Co-Director of the Centre for Policy Studies on Culture
and Communities and an associate of the Masters’ of Public Policy Program at Simon Fraser University. She came to SFU
in 1992 after a position as Vice President, Media and Telecommunications at Decima Research, Toronto. Her research
interests include cultural participation and creative labour; cultural infrastructure and creative cities; cultural industries and
especially broadcast policy; communication rights and global trade; and research design in policy evaluation.
Dr. Murray is a co-author of “Creative Spaces” (forthcoming: Sage); From Economy to Ecology: A Policy Framework for
Creative Labour (2008), Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Media in BC (2007), Researching Audiences (2003) and “BC’s Place
Based Approach: Policy Devolution and Cultural Self-Determination” in Cultural Policy and Cultural Public Administration
in Provincial and Territorial Governments in Canada (forthcoming in 2008) and over 60 publications. She has served on
nine not-for-profit Boards, including SFU, BC Film and the Canadian Broadcast Standards Council.
Acknowledgements
I am indebted to Nancy Duxbury, PhD (CPSCC) for editorial assistance and to Christina Johnson (BA Communication),
Erin Schultz (MA candidate, Urban Studies), and Kelsey Johnson (BA Communication), SFU, for research assistance. Dr.
Alison Beale, author of the Quebec Roundtable Report on the State of Cultural Infrastructure has been invaluable for her
insight into cultural development in the City of Laval.
I am grateful for the support of the SFU Surrey Knowledge Transfer Fund, which made this research possible. I also
acknowledge the support of Infrastructure Canada for enabling prior research and knowledge dissemination in this area.
Paper prepared for the Surrey Regional Economic Summit, September 18, 2008
Edge Cities: Competitive and Collaborative Creative
Economy Strategies for Surrey
3
A Paradigm Shift in the New Economy
Despite a cyclical downturn in international visits to BC, arts, culture and heritage
have been successfully linked to tourism, recreation and sport in BC policy
since 1993. Tourism is now the second largest contributor to the provincial GDP
(at about 4.5%). This paper argues that three factors are driving the need for
differentiation of Surrey’s cultural economic development strategies from tourism
and recreation.
Tourism is now the second
largest contributor to the
provincial GDP (at about 4.5%).
Boundary Spanning and Growth
The first factor is a broadening of the boundaries of the cultural sector
under the impact of new digital technologies making production and
distribution more accessible, flexible, mobile and affordable. Arts, culture
and heritage are being joined up with the ‘creative industries’ – including design,
architecture, new media and fashion – as a generator of economic growth.
Policies for the creative economy require new understanding of risk, innovation,
cultural entrepreneurship, public infrastructure, and creative work to enable and
sustain economic growth.
The cultural-creative sector
cast[s] an economic footprint
of $84.6 billion in 2007, putting
it ahead of forestry and fishing
combined
The creative economy is defined to include all activities that are based on the original expression of an idea and economic
or gift transaction of intellectual property held in private or in common. New techniques of measuring economic impacts
are finding the creative economy is larger than supposed. The cultural-creative sector has been estimated to cast an
economic footprint of $84.6 billion in 2007, or 7.4% of the total real GDP (excluding tourism), putting it ahead of forestry
and fishing combined, and putting Canada in close contention with Britain the acknowledged leader in creative economy
policies (Conference Board of Canada, 2008). In the U.S., the creative economy is estimated to represent about 7.75%
of the US economy (Hartley, 2005). Like tourism, the creative economy sector is highly labour intensive. And according to
the OECD, it is growing faster than many other sectors.
It is worth noting that since 1996, consumer spending on culture in Canada
grew 48% (compared to 18% growth in the consumer price index) which today
representing 3 times the spending on culture by all levels of government.
Consumer spending on culture in BC is higher than Ontario and Quebec. Surrey’s
2001 share of this cultural/consumer spending annually is estimated at $332.5
million, most of which is leaking outside of its borders.
Consumer spending on culture
in BC is higher than Ontario
and Quebec.
Shift to Creative City Focus
Second, there is a shift from a global to a local lens in understanding the creative economy. Contrary to
expectations during the 1990s, centralization of cultural power in ‘global cities’ has been uneven, and place is accepted to
be an important driver of creativity (Drake, 2003). There has been a shift from a tourist-driven cultural branding approach
to cities to an endogenous growth, distributed node approach. A survey of 38 countries around the world has found that
the priority for policymakers is targeted strategy for stimulating creative enterprise start-ups and fostering a creative labour
force (Gollmitzer and Murray, 2008; Evans, 2007). The creative city model positions local action, both public and private,
as the primary force for creating creative cities – cities that will attract investment, generate innovation, and develop
intellectual-property-intensive enterprises and a creative class of workers – but which also requires policy development
and infrastructure investment from all three levels of government (Gertler, 2004). As a socio-economic lens is increasingly
applied to the local creative economy, municipalities are recognising that the cultural/creative industries have grown
increasingly complex, demanding new skills, new business models, global perspectives and integrated strategic municipal
policies to catalyse them. Local participatory decision-making, horizontal municipal coordination, new independent cultural
planning offices, and new policy instruments are featured.
Paper prepared for the Surrey Regional Economic Summit, September 18, 2008
Edge Cities: Competitive and Collaborative Creative
Economy Strategies for Surrey
4
The Integrated Planning Model
The third factor driving the need for differentiating a cultural/creative strategy in economic development is the
integrated community sustainability planning challenge to link cultural with social and environmental goals
without ignoring economic realities. Traditionally, the culture sector has been recognized for its valuable role in
creating a sense of place by fostering community and individual development, building connections, local identity, sense of
belonging and contributing to liveability and improved quality of life. In some cities, arts and culture have developed within
a social planning paradigm (City of Vancouver), ‘community services’ or are housed with parks, recreation and community
sports with a large emphasis on participatory and non-professional art (e.g., Bloomington, Minnesota; Irvine, California;
Surrey, BC). Some cities have built an arts, heritage or community facility as a way of ensuring quality of life or liveable
communities on an incremental basis. How cities connect the arts, cultural-creative sector, economic development, social
structure and the environment is the key (William R. Morrish, Director, US Design Centre for the Urban Landscape). As
Canadian municipalities – indeed, many around North America – have increasingly shouldered the burden of more cultural
spending than provincial or federal levels (St Cyr and Gattinger, forthcoming), they are positioning themselves as creative,
cultural cities.
Creative cities back their vision statement with a municipal arts, culture and heritage
­– or explicit creative city – policy which lays out the strategic direction they wish to
pursue (Bradford, 2004). Separate cultural planning administrations are increasingly
Traditionally, the culture
being set up, frequently evolving from earlier arrangements within broader
sector has been recognized
departments. For example, integrated cultural strategies and separate offices have
for its valuable role in
been Vancouver (1987 culture principles), Regina (1993), Calgary (1996), Toronto
creating a sense of place
(2003) and Montreal (2005). ‘Creative city’ documents per se appeared around 2003
with Toronto’s Cultural Plan for the Creative City and Vancouver’s Creative City. They
have also been adopted by mid-size cities: Halifax (which has its own cultural affairs
division and plan in 2006), Moncton (2005), London (2005), Kitchener-Waterloo
(developing its own culture cluster strategy for the downtown core working with Artscape, a noted not-for-profit developer),
St. Catherine’s (in process) and smaller communities (Kamloops, Prince Edward County). Of cities similar in size to
Surrey, only the City of Victoria would seem to be a hold out, with arts and culture responsibilities grouped under parks
and recreation, firmly based in the participatory, community arts model, with professional arts organizations supported
through the CRD regional government. In Quebec alone, there are over 130 communities that have adopted cultural plans
at the municipal or regional level. Figure 1 reviews cultural planning activity in BC’s larger communities.
Paper prepared for the Surrey Regional Economic Summit, September 18, 2008
Edge Cities: Competitive and Collaborative Creative
Economy Strategies for Surrey
Figure 1.
Mapping BC Cultural Infrastructure: Overview of Municipal Inventories
Source: Keenleyside, 2008
Paper prepared for the Surrey Regional Economic Summit, September 18, 2008
5
Edge Cities: Competitive and Collaborative Creative
Economy Strategies for Surrey
6
Trends in Edge Cities
In the UK, economists are noting strong competitive pressure on the creative industries, which have come from
technological change, globalization and the strong pound. These forces have squeezed the profitability for smaller scale
firms obliging them to look for cheaper rents and associated costs (Gibbon, 2008). Urban and rural economies are
increasingly coming to resemble each other.
‘Bedroom’ post-suburban or edge cities1 adjacent to Canada’s major metropolitan areas (Mississauga, Laval and Surrey)
face special challenges and opportunities as engines of creativity in the transition to the ‘Creative Economy.’ They
represent a surprising blind spot in Canadian urban planning literature on the creative economy and, indeed, are scarcely
on federal and provincial cultural policy radar. Toronto, Montreal and Vancouver ‘core’ cities have well over a decade
(and in some cases, 30 years) of track record in attracting cultural/creative labour
and enterprises to their regions, using creative enterprise strategy, zoning, special
tax abatements or amenity-density bonusing schemes, and constructing creative
districts and creative incubators. From a policy/public investment perspective, in
many edge areas have
many cases edge areas have tended to take a ‘free ride’ on cultural infrastructure
tended to take a free ride on
and activity (mainly located in the core) until the mid-to-late 1990s, contributing to
cultural infrastructure and
regional cultural development funding arrangements administered by, for example,
activity
Metro Toronto, the Conseil des arts de Montreal, and the GVRD/Metro Vancouver,
and supporting local activity – libraries, museums, archives, festivals, public courses
and various community centre activities being most common ­– but usually without
a professional arts venue/sector strategy. The reasons are two-fold. First, public
resources and services across metropolitan areas have been inequitably distributed (Frisken and Norris, 2001), and
cultural capital and operational spending has tended to cluster in the core. Second, suburban areas have had to struggle
with negative images and an anti-suburban bias, often antithetical to the perception of them being good places to live and
create (Kling et al, 1995, Bye, 2002).
Edge cities may be endowed with potential comparative advantage, including
lower rental rates to attract artists who wish to reside and work there and (usually)
Edge cities are beneficiaries of excess manufacturing space stock at more affordable rates, well suited to
rehearsal, storage and creative inputs such as large scale set design. Edge cities
unrestrained gentrification in
are beneficiaries of unrestrained gentrification at the core, as artists are forced
the core, as artists are forced
out of their original districts and arts organizations strain to keep afloat. Rising
out of their original districts
property taxes, rents and inflation in the value of industrial and office property
and arts organizations strain
have set up the preconditions for a migration of the so-called ‘creatives’ to their
to keep afloat.
edge cities in North America, which have responded in different ways according to
their special historical, demographic, immigrant and ethno-cultural profiles. Some
studies of these migrant creators and organizations paint a picture of mid-career
artists who seek greater artistic security and stability in live/work space over the buzz of the urban core and precarious
nature of the night time economy (Bye, 2006).
In Canada, the City of Laval has a full cultural/creative plan (first adopted in 1992 and revised in 2005) dedicated to
promote accessibility and innovative cultural practices that blend community and professional arts, including consolidation
of the City’s leadership in music and its standing symphony orchestra2, the development of new media arts, and a
1 This is broadened beyond the original meaning in U.S. urbanism (coined by Joel Garreau) of unincorporated areas contiguous with the boundaries of
centre cities, to include spatial arrangements in which a variety of commercial, recreational, shopping, arts, residential, heritage and religious activities
are conducted in different places linked primarily by roads. Edge Cities typically refer to contiguous or edge nodes in polycentric regions like Irvine,
California or Silicon Valley, which are distributed spatially and may not have a downtown core. These edge cities are often less than 30 years old and
cope with rapid growth. The shorter the growth trajectory, the more they are referred to as ‘pop up’.
2 Indeed, the Surrey mayor’s invitation to the CBC Vancouver Symphony Orchestra, cut by the CBC, is evocative of the Laval approach in attracting a
“flagship” group.
Paper prepared for the Surrey Regional Economic Summit, September 18, 2008
Edge Cities: Competitive and Collaborative Creative
Economy Strategies for Surrey
7
core Maison des arts with well known programming reputation and interest in animation in partnership with local post
secondary institutions. It has a granting program for post secondary students studying the local arts. Laval uses its
libraries as key cultural access points, and has introduced a grant program to provide a book for every baby. It has
invested in the design of a multicultural centre, adjacent to the main library, frequently the first portal of immigrants. Laval
has also pioneered the crossover of science and heritage sectors, featuring a cosmodome and biotechnology museum.
It has a preference for local artists in all municipal spending. Laval’s administrative structure consolidates culture,
community arts and the city’s Internet communications in one major bureau.
The other main edge city, Mississauga, under the championship of the mayor
Hazel McCallion, conducted a major review in 2005, restructured its cultural
planning division into an autonomous department, and developed both capital,
operational and new enterprise start up granting programs for the arts in
2007 after critical shortages in rehearsal and production space, and lack of
consistency in one-off facility development, were identified. The mayor also
made a major gift to the Mississauga Foundation, earmarked for cultural/
capacity building. Mississauga is currently involved in its own creative city
planning process. The master creative/cultural plan scheduled for 2009, is
expected to feature a hub in new media development. Indeed, Mississauga’s
budget for cultural operations grants alone was $1,056,000 for 2007-2008 (split
among festivals, small capital grant programs and awards to arts groups).3
Surrey is poised to achieve
recognition as an inclusive,
sustainable and creative centre
of scientific, artistic and
technological innovation
Surrey’s Opportunities for Positioning as a Creative City
As a Cultural Capital of Canada in 2008 (and the only one of the three edge cities in this study to win such a designation4),
Surrey is poised with strong potential for achieving recognition as an inclusive, sustainable and creative centre of
scientific, artistic and technological innovation, with flourishing economic and cultural sectors, and talented and diverse
citizens. Its festivals, visual and performing arts, museums, cuisine, design, architecture and sport stand at the cusp
of making Surrey a great place to create, visit, study, work and live (Canada’s Theme at the 2010 Expo). Surrey has
furthermore been recognised as an Olympic venue, with a games preparation centre that will draw events and volunteers
to a new centre in Whalley. It has an innovative and visible public art program, with a focus on art and the environment
and enhancing its green space, which is highlighted on its city website much more prominently than Mississauga or Laval.
A recent set of community consultations among residents revealed civic pride in signature events in the city: the Surrey
Festival of Dance, International Writers’ Conference, and renowned Vaisakhi Parade. Surrey’s film development office in
the economic branch furthermore reveals a robust amount of film location activity. Favourite screen locales like Crescent
Beach, Blackies Spit, Cloverdale and Fraser Downs indicate a trend in visual representation to the external world.
The rapidity of Surrey’s population growth (25% from 1996 to 2006) has
stretched planners. Surrey adds population on the scale of a small city every
year. Growth is expected to slow only to 17% by 2018. Compared to Laval,
Surrey has tremendous potential assets in its higher concentration of youth
and greater cultural diversity of its population (see Appendix A). Educational
exposure to the arts is one of the biggest predictors of later arts patronage,
and practice for creative expression. The development of the new Children’s
Festival in Surrey (independent from the Children’s Festival in Vancouver) is an
important start in this regard. Other potential alliances with artists-in-residence
Residents revealed civic pride
in signature events in the city:
the Surrey Festival of Dance,
International Writers’
Conference, and renowned
Vaisakhi Parade
3 Comparing grants program budgets is difficult. The City’s Arts Review Task Force report of 2005, found Mississauga allocated around $1.21 per capita
to municipal arts operating grants, compared to $5.98 for Vancouver. It was advised to immediately rise to $3.00 per capita, and did so, with advice to
further consider funding in the context of its new plan. Per capita spending is $5.35 for Toronto. Data is not available for Laval.
4 But the only one of Regina, Toronto, Edmonton and Trois-Rivières in the large class size to win the designation on a project basis without an
integrated creative city strategy.
Paper prepared for the Surrey Regional Economic Summit, September 18, 2008
Edge Cities: Competitive and Collaborative Creative
Economy Strategies for Surrey
8
programs in schools, Artstarts in Schools, and other programs are also typical of other cities trying to cultivate future
creators and audiences.
The edge cities all show significant growth in the creative labour force well
above the general labour force; and all have the second highest absolute
Educational exposure to the
numbers of artists compared to the core cities. In general, BC would appear
arts is one of the biggest
to have a head start in attracting creative labour, and three of the four cities
predictors of later arts
with the highest artistic concentrations in Canada are in British Columbia.
patronage, and practice for
Not surprisingly, then, Surrey fares the best among edge cities for its share
creative expression.
of cultural/creative population. When measured as a proportion of provincial
population, the least concentrated metropolitan area is Vancouver, which
has 30% of the cultural labour force in BC. The most recent time series data
available (Hill Strategies, Artists in Large Canadian Cities, 2006) shows Surrey’s creative labour force grew significantly
in the 1990s and was one-fifth (19%) of the size of Vancouver’s in 2001, although it did not grow as quickly as Coquitlam,
Port Coquitlam or Richmond. Surrey’s largest groups in 2001 were musicians and singers, artisans and painters. By
contrast, Mississauga and Laval have artist pools 1/10th the size of their core cities. While smaller, they may be more
affluent. Mississauga, like Toronto, shows average creative incomes higher than those in other cities.
Three of the four cities
with the highest artistic
concentrations in Canada
are in British Columbia
As measured by enterprises, Surrey is still characterized by a significant agricultural
and green space presence, a diversified profile in major industry sectors including
services, high technology/biomedical, agricultural and greenhouses, manufacturing,
plastics and telecommunications. With 19,000 reported businesses5, it is charting a
healthy rise in small- and medium-size business but, unlike Mississauga, it cannot
claim to be head office for many Fortune 500 companies. Like Mississauga, it is not
home to a local university, but has three satellite campuses located there (University of
Toronto, the Ontario College of Art and Design, and Sheridan College branches), while
Surrey has two (Simon Fraser University and Kwantlen University College).
Comparative Cultural Infrastructure
On a provincial basis, trends in cultural space development in which to enable creative production are positive, if not
yet sufficient. Average annual growth in spending on cultural infrastructure (by all three levels of government) has been
highest in BC and Quebec (Roads to Rinks, 2007).
In the past ten years, Surrey has spent $67 million on cultural and recreational
facilities (now worth about triple that value) but only a relatively small amount (some
In the past ten years,
$12 million or 4% of the total $298 million, including parks) went to culture. Spending
Surrey has spent $67
was targeted to the newest museum in BC (the Surrey Museum) and renovations and
million on cultural and
expansions to the Surrey Arts Centre, which draws audiences widely from the Lower
recreational facilities
Mainland. Notably, all of the capital for the SAC came from the City of Surrey. With the
(now worth about triple
Bell Performing Arts Centre (and three other theatres), the City has the traditional set
that value)
of facilities considered to be anchors for community arts, especially when considered
in conjunction with the geographic distribution of youth centres and local community
centres across the six communities comprising Surrey. The City continues to levy property taxes equal to $64 per capita to
support recreation and cultural services, and it has set aside money for the planning of Phase II of the museum, including
a public plaza.
The City has also introduced a few fiscal or legislative measures in support of its growth needs and prosperity, although
they have not been directed to culture. For example, a hotel tax levy has been introduced, with the funds going exclusively
5 This is on par in number with Mississauga.
Paper prepared for the Surrey Regional Economic Summit, September 18, 2008
Edge Cities: Competitive and Collaborative Creative
Economy Strategies for Surrey
9
to support the Surrey Tourism and Convention Association. As well, the City has recently implemented a density bonusing
program for the City Centre area.
Mississauga has won planning awards for its creation of a suburban core, with major cultural amenities close to a
burgeoning restaurant and cultural sector, while Surrey has widely distributed its arts and museum facilities (the museum
in Cloverdale, the Bell Performing Arts Centre in Sullivan and the Arts Centre in Newton), distant from the lifestyle
amenities that support destination cultural events, but characterized by a number of green/environmental awards.
Challenges
Various sources indicate a relative underdevelopment of not-for-profit arts organizations in Surrey, about 36 groups
(one for 11,267 residents as reported by the Surrey Arts Council) compared to Mississauga’s 215 groups (about one for
every 2,844 residents for Mississauga as listed by the Mississauga Arts Council). Edge cities have begun to develop
strategies to build capacity in this sector: indeed, Mississauga has created both a grant program for start-up groups
and an operational grants program. Halifax Regional Municipality has a special tax exemption program for non-profit
organizations that own their own facilities. London, Ontario, has a neighbourhood creative cluster funding program
which houses groups of artist-run cooperative organizations, and a community arts investment program. Such a priority
becomes all the more important when it is apparent that the biggest driver for cultural infrastructure in this province
– the bricks and mortar of creative spaces – has been at the local level: local community arts organizations, working
independently or with the support of local governments to build new incubators, performance spaces, art galleries, identify
heritage structures, and establish museums (Keenleyside, 2008).
The biggest driver for cultural
infrastructure in this province
has been at the local level: local
community arts organizations,
working independently or with
the support of local governments
to build new incubators,
performance spaces, art galleries, identify heritage structures,
and establish museums
Philadelphia’s Social Impact of the Arts Project shows a strong correlation
between the presence of cultural providers, dense social networks, and the
decline of poverty in low- income areas and makes the case for ‘natural’
cultural district development on an evolutionary, small scale model (Stern
and Seifert, 2007). Connecting artists and community through creating small
organizations and partnerships can help embed a creative community into the
wider socio-economic milieu. Individual artist ownership of physical spaces
and artist co-operatives have proven to be effective models in maintaining
artistic spaces and presence in a community over time, often enabled by
municipal intervention during development or created by non-profit real estate
developers (Duxbury and Murray, 2008).
Voluntary not-for-profit organizations serve as important catalysts, offering training, exhibition and support for emerging
cultural entrepreneurs and artists. As a review of Canada Council for the Arts spending shows (see Figure 2), there are
sharp asymmetries in grants to creative organizations between the core and edge cities. Surprisingly, Surrey’s 18 grants
totalling $139,670 show the importance of the Surrey Art Gallery and Heritage House Publishing in accessing federal
cultural production grants. However, they are dwarfed in comparison to Vancouver’s 638 grants for $14,617,173 in
2006 alone.
Paper prepared for the Surrey Regional Economic Summit, September 18, 2008
Edge Cities: Competitive and Collaborative Creative
Economy Strategies for Surrey
10
Figure 2.
Canada Council for the Arts Investments (Grants to Artists and Arts Organizations)
Fiscal Year 2006 (April 1st 2006 - March 31st 2007) – Summary Totals
City
Total grants awarded
(FY 2006)
Surrey
Vancouver
Mississauga
Toronto
Laval
Montreal
TOTAL
139,670
14,617,173
277,800
32,702,169
96,010
2,974,055
50,806,877
Source: Canada Council for the Arts
Second, Surrey is not getting its fair share of federal infrastructure spending in BC,
Surrey is not getting
which also tends to concentrate in Vancouver (See Figures 3 and 4). SFU’s CPCC
its fair share of federal
database notes the federal Cultural Spaces Canada program allocated only 2 capital
infrastructure spending
contributions to Surrey (for a total of $84,000) since its launch in 2001, which is out
in BC
of $13.7 million over 59 projects in BC. In addition, Infrastructure Canada gave $1
million to the Surrey Learning and Discovery Centre (Surrey Museum), which was matched by $1 million from the province
and $2.96 million from Surrey. This compares with $43 million in 106 projects in the period from 2001 to mid-2008 across
BC – way below expected per capita levels (Figure 5). Surrey also faces a barrier because, as yet, BC does not have a
significant provincial cultural infrastructure investment program, unlike Ontario and unlike the highly developed provincial
infrastructure plan in Quebec (Duxbury, 2008). As well, unfortunately, the national evidence does not suggest that the
municipal share of the gas tax flowed through to municipal cultural facilities across Canada.
Paper prepared for the Surrey Regional Economic Summit, September 18, 2008
Edge Cities: Competitive and Collaborative Creative
Economy Strategies for Surrey
Figure 3.
Mapping BC Cultural Infrastructure:
Recent Federal Investment
Total: $43,376,084
106 projects
(2001 – 2007)
Source: Keenleyside (2008)
Figure 4.
Number of Cultural Projects Funded in BC by Region
Number of cultural projects funded in British
Columbia by region (CSC, ICP, MRIF)
60
Cariboo Chilcotin Coast
50
Kootenay Rockies
40
Northern British Columbia
30
Thompson Okanagan
Vancouver Coast & Mountains
20
# cultural projects
Vancouver Island
10
0
Region
Source: Keenleyside (2008)
Paper prepared for the Surrey Regional Economic Summit, September 18, 2008
11
Edge Cities: Competitive and Collaborative Creative
Economy Strategies for Surrey
12
There are important provincial barriers identified in Under Construction, a recent report on the state of cultural
infrastructure in Canada (Duxbury, SFU, 2008), and in a background report on cultural infrastructure in BC (Keenleyside,
2008). These include: a lack of BC cultural infrastructure policy (although a recent study by Vis-à-Vis Consulting argues
for the need for one, presenting an inventory of known project proposals and plans which overlooked Surrey),
a legacy of underdevelopment of mid-range projects (a casualty of the Union of BC Municipalities’ capital ceiling rule for
$1 million on projects), and an urgent need for a BC cultural infrastructure plan.
Figure 5 documents similar startling asymmetries in spending in the other edge cities. Clearly, when it comes to built
infrastructure, the entrenched or unintended worldview is that suburban centres do not need large, professional class
amenities in Canada, or support for creative districts at the edge. In summary, Surrey is not achieving the policy
recognition it should in BC or federal cultural policy, overlooked in a recent BC cultural infrastructure review, and its artists
and organizations underrepresented as recipients of the BC Arts Council and Canada Council for the Arts. However,
Surrey is developing recognition as chair of the Regional Cultural Development Advisory Committee (a partnership among
municipalities), and as an active member of the Creative City Network of Canada for some time.
Figure 5.
Federal Cultural Infrastructure Investments: Core and Edge Cities Compared
Vancouver CMA
Total funding received
Total from CSC
Total from INFR
Vancouver CMA
City of Vancouver
City of Surrey
$22,738,645
$11,885,247
$1,084,000
$7,703,085
$6,306,085
$84,000
$15,035,560
$5,579,162
$1,000,000
Total funding received
Total from CSC
Total from INFR
$181,660,599
$170,936,449
$43,000
$16,215,096
$10,753,796
$43,000
$165,445,503
$160,182,653
$-
Montreal CMA
Total funding received
Total from CSC
Total from INFR
Montreal CMA
City of Montreal
City of Laval
$31,839,648
$30,073,502
$0
$17,161,544
$17,161,544
$0
$14,678,104
$12,911,958
$0
Toronto CMA
Toronto CMA
City of Toronto
City of Mississauga
Source: Database developed by the Centre of Expertise on Culture and Communities, Simon Fraser University
A final challenge is that Surrey shows underdevelopment in the high wage cultural/creative labour sector, often unionized,
including film or TV or sound recording, vis-à-vis Vancouver and appears to be missing the high-value added IT/new
media crossover potential being examined in Mississauga.
In Surrey, there are few studios for post-production or other work in the film sector like Burnaby (an oversight that is
odd, given Surrey’s dominance of 45% of warehouse space in the Lower Mainland), and no clusters of new media
development. Even Oakville, Ontario, which has been late to the creative city planning model, has an infrastructure plan
to develop a standalone ‘creativity and innovation centre’ in downtown Oakville, in order to create a ‘street level cluster
Paper prepared for the Surrey Regional Economic Summit, September 18, 2008
Edge Cities: Competitive and Collaborative Creative
Economy Strategies for Surrey
13
of creativity, technology and information based service agents’ integrating library, theatre and city administrative space.
This is a significant advancement over Surrey Art Galleries’ lab approach, which while laudable, is not purpose-built for
clustering.
Surrey’s population may be growing so quickly that some of the new creative entrepreneurial activity is invisible. For
example, a survey of SFU’s ethnic media database and community directories in multiple languages (www.bcethnicmedia.
ca) reveals some 40 media sources in print, radio, and television based in Surrey (including other languages of
production), including at least a core of the new creative industries – equivalent if not better than other edge cities. City
commissions of new media collaboration with SFU Surrey are promising (the Glocal project under Lorna Boschman
and colleagues along the Serpentine Greenway and the collaboration on Museums in Motion with Ron Wakkary and
colleagues for an interactive program guide at the Surrey Museum).
There are also many blind spots in current creative economy mapping in edge cities. The emergent Bhangra popular
music scene in the Lower Mainland – also strong in Mississauga – has mounted a successful Pacific festival annually in
concert with some savvy student entrepreneurs out of UFV and SFU, which is currently anchored in Vancouver due to the
size needs in venues, despite the fact that the majority of older and young Bhangra teams (and audiences) at present are
from Surrey. Such initiatives are often dependent on special creative start up assistance offered within a fully integrated
creative city framework (City of London, UK).
Edge cities typically attract existing businesses from the core (like the Vancouver Sun’s printing operation) using tax
inducements, and have become increasingly important laboratories for a variety of policy experiments, from enterprise
and empowerment zones, urban development corporations (like the City of Ottawa), public-private partnerships, businessincubator projects and new strategies of social enterprise development (Brenner and Theodore, 2002).
The Strategic Challenge: Cooperation and Competition
In a excellent study of different strategies to effect a creative city approach, Canadian urbanist Neil Bradford suggests
the major success factors relate to the ability to adapt to change, minimize negative consequences of rapid economic
growth, and take advantage of the opportunities that change provides (Bradford, 2006). A second consideration is the
ability to attract inward investment and attract and maintain talented people. A third
is effective local and regional governance. Effective responses require, among other
Edge Cities have become
things, effective leadership, sound governance, sufficient fiscal capacity, coordinated
increasingly important
public policies, high quality social services, enhanced cultural facilities and physical
laboratories for a variety
infrastructure, and attractive natural environment. It helps if cities have a mixed,
of policy experiments and
diverse economy, proactive local agents of change, and lower levels of income
new strategies of social
inequality and environmental pollution (Slack et al., 2006). In short, the literature
enterprise development
is less than helpful: cooperative strategies internal to the city, involving all the
stakeholders are foundational, and competitive strategies are assumed externally.
A competitive assessment of core/edge city partnerships shows the City of Vancouver is embarked upon a major cultural
facilities development program, and successful in attracting federal and provincial pre-commitments to a major cultural
precinct around the redevelopment of the Queen Elizabeth Theatre, building up to Canada’s sesquicentennial in 2017. It
has a capital fund set aside for infrastructure, and while the overall budget is not growing as quickly as Toronto’s (which
has had a 26% increase in the last three years), it is also based on leveraging partnerships with the private sector. Other
plans include a major move for the Vancouver Art Gallery and other amenities. Vancouver continues to compete headon with Toronto for the ‘foreign service’ film location business, and recently is encountering competitive pressure from
massive investments in Toronto studio space.6 BC’s relative underdevelopment of the music industry compared to Ontario
6 Filmport is the result of an open, worldwide proposal call by TEDCO (the City of Toronto Economic Development Corporation), intended to spur
rejuvenation of the Toronto port lands by developing a convergence district of film and media companies large studios and stimulating knowledge-based
jobs.
Paper prepared for the Surrey Regional Economic Summit, September 18, 2008
Edge Cities: Competitive and Collaborative Creative
Economy Strategies for Surrey
is also a strategic liability (see Music BC). There is an opportunity for a concerted
regional strategy in which Surrey can consider joining Burnaby as a major audiovisual service centre, enhancing Metro Vancouver, while lobbying the provincial
government to redefine its regional film incentive to stimulate further location
production in Surrey.
Given the federal Conservative government’s preference for policy devolution
in culture, and policy preference for the principle of competition in infrastructure
grants among Canada’s A-list cities for new venues like the National Portrait
Gallery, the prognosis for Surrey’s head-to-head competition with Vancouver in
the short to medium term is not good. UK urban planners reject any idea that
suburbs or edge cities can become fully culturally independent or equal to their
cores especially if they are vying for global city status (Gibbon, 2008). However,
strategies of complementarity are more promising.
Urban theorists have been looking at new ideas about regionalism to get away
from the idea that everyone has to have their own hockey rinks, soccer fields, or
major theatres duplicating amenities at the core. In a roundtable on BC cultural
infrastructure planning held at SFU, cultural planning professionals debated if it
was feasible to rationalize a plan for the distribution of cultural infrastructure from
a macro-geographic perspective. There is a residual distrust among BC planners
of top-down measures, but a rational acceptance that not every community can
have everything. Concentrating resources in a regional hub is just as antithetical to
a community’s right to building its identity as the sole concentration of amenities in
an urban core, which may make resources less accessible to residents outside it
(Keenleyside, 2008).
14
There is an opportunity for a
concerted regional strategy
in which Surrey can consider
joining Burnaby as a major
audio-visual service centre,
enhancing Metro Vancouver
Concentrating resources in a
regional hub is antithetical to
a community’s right to
building its identity
But edge cities have special challenges in positioning vi-à-vis their cores, which have received little attention in the
creative city literature as yet. A new ‘regionalism’ may be emerging, but it is based on a competitive assessment of
strengths and weaknesses, new thinking about service standards, and a rejection of a cookie-cutter creative city
strategy, instead seeking to define ‘authenticity’ (i.e., unique, local differentiation) in creative city visions. The blurring of
artistic disciplines, core and periphery, rural and urban, professional and community arts practices characteristic of the
creative economy represent new opportunities for communities. There are important opportunities to develop selective
specialisation fostering creative labour, and attracting more in-migration of artists; fostering emergent organizations, and
attracting micro enterprises and mid-size arts organizations to Surrey to either do some of their business (by offering
storage, or rehearsal areas), or access to travelling performance or exhibition space at preferential rates in municipally
owned space (so the artist’s margin is higher than at the ‘home’ venue).
The Greater Toronto Area and Montreal Region have all struggled with amalgamation in the model of an authoritative
upper-tier metropolitan government which served to reinforce the centralization of federal-provincial infrastructure
investments, and under-represent edge cities and mid-size projects (Jeannotte, 2008). In the early years, the arts, culture
and heritage sectors suffered under amalgamation. By contrast, Metro Vancouver is seen by some urbanists to offer
a working model of cooperative governance where votes are weighted by size but operating consensually, enhancing
municipal choice and flexibility, but doing little to overcome intra-municipal inequalities (Frisken and Norris, 2001).
The regional picture of cultural development planning in Metro Vancouver evolved in two phases. First, municipal: In
the mid-1990s, an inter-municipal Regional Cultural Development Advisory Committee, consisting of municipal cultural
managers throughout the region, began meeting on a regular basis to improve coordination and information sharing
among the region’s municipalities, to improve the information base for cultural development in the region, and to
determine regional strategies and priorities in cultural development. Second, regional: Metro Vancouver, the regional
Paper prepared for the Surrey Regional Economic Summit, September 18, 2008
Edge Cities: Competitive and Collaborative Creative
Economy Strategies for Surrey
15
cooperative government, has also played a role through including culture as a
aspect of its regional planning strategies (i.e., identified as part of regional town
centres and recently as an important component of The Sustainable Region
Connecting spaces, creative
initiative) and in administering a small cultural grants program for region-serving
labour, the new creative
organizations. Recently, Metro Vancouver established a Regional Culture
economy and place-making
Committee with a goal to facilitate regional collaboration on cultural tourism
other identified regional priorities. The direction of future regional collaboration
promises to remain a major
and support remains to be seen. The City of Laval is apparently working with the
challenge for edge cities in
City of Montreal effectively in selective disciplines, but suffers some of the same
Canada.
bias in arts funding for its organizations and creators. The City of Mississauga
is choosing its competitive stance in the coming months, but has a formidable
competitor in the City of Toronto – the only Canadian city to have clear ‘Global
City’ aspirations, and twinned for research and development on creative economy strategies with London, UK. Connecting
spaces, creative labour, the new creative economy and place-making promises to remain a major challenge for edge
cities in Canada.
Recommendations
Surrey has elements of the creative city package, without the explicit branding or organizational infrastructure as yet, and
its last complete integrated cultural plan was developed in 1999. Surrey’s Parks, Recreation and Culture Strategic Plan for
2007-2017 identifies a set of initiatives to create a ‘core’ including the move of city hall to Whalley, agglomerate facilities,
explore the development of a Whalley theatre space, cultural corridor, and expansion of the Kla ‘how’ eya Aboriginal
Centre. Typical of a Parks/Recreation and engineering focus, the plan is long on facilities and priorities, but short on an
understanding of the external creative/economy policy developments that strategically influence the opportunity-screening
grid. For example, it is silent on the need for any feasibility study for the development of a flagship aboriginal tourism
centre, yet aboriginal cultural tourism is one of British Columbia’s major strategic cultural initiatives since 2005.
The plan also recognizes the priority of staking Surrey’s leadership in intercultural inclusion, including a full-time
assignment of an intercultural coordinator. However, references to other edge city best practices or experiences with
a multicultural centre (Laval) or other ethno-cultural economic enterprises already existing in Surrey, or developing in
precincts (as Mississauga is considering) are absent.
In identifying infrastructure/space needs, Surrey’s strategic plan identifies multipurpose space as a top tier priority (5 out of 5 in rank), with effective public art,
gallery space and protection of heritage assets as second tier priorities (4.5 out
of 5). The third tier is enhancement of volunteer support for heritage assets and
continuation of the expansion of the museum’s second phase including a public
plaza space. While it endorses continuance of the 1999 priority to decentralize
arts, culture and heritage activities to each of the city’s member communities,
there is no budget attached.
Aboriginal cultural tourism
is one of British Columbia’s
major strategic cultural
initiatives since 2005.
Compared to other edge and mid-size cities, Surrey has not yet joined up its creative/economic vision, its stakeholders,
or its model of creative governance. In addition to the Surrey Arts Council, artists and creative entrepreneurs, the School
District, the post secondary institutions,
the business and tourism sectors, and developers need to be engaged. The new Surrey Foundation will be an important
ally. The trend in cultural development is to engage such broad-based ‘creative’ councils in planning (e.g., Creative
Scotland, or Mississauga’s Cultural Policy Task Force).
Paper prepared for the Surrey Regional Economic Summit, September 18, 2008
Edge Cities: Competitive and Collaborative Creative
Economy Strategies for Surrey
16
To better position Surrey against Vancouver in the Greater Vancouver region and explore commonalities with other edge
cities, the following recommendations are made:
1. Surrey should develop a separate cultural vision (updating its 1999 plan) and consider adopting a distinct variant
of the creative city framework (see, for example, http://www.toronto.ca/culture/creativecity2008.htm). (These
processes may take between 2 to 5 years, and are evolutionary and fully participatory.)
2. A separate office of cultural planning should be established with increased staffing levels and cultural granting
programs instated, drawing from other Edge City models. Cultural planning interests should be integrated
horizontally in all planning processes of the City.
3. To become a more attractive place for cultural ‘creatives’ to work and live, planning for live/work space initiatives,
including subsidized artist housing (expanding the current three sites of social/non market co-op housing in
Surrey), studio space and zoning flexibility should be considered.
4. The Cultural Capital 2008 initiative should consolidate its key community partners and conduct a feasibility study
for a set of creative economy enterprise initiatives, including: specially targeted new business start up assistance,
tax rebates for not-for-profit owned cultural businesses, and cultural-creative incubators which encourage
emerging artists and encourage cross-disciplinary work. Special attention should be given to a feasibility study for
an intercultural creative space (like the MT Space in Kitchener, Ontario, or the Montréal, arts interculturel [MAI] in
Montreal).
5. More operational funding is needed for existing City-owned cultural-creative activities and spaces.7 In particular,
Surrey-based artists and arts organizations need capacity building to improve their access to Canada Council for
the Arts, Canadian Heritage, and BC Arts Council funding.
6. The City should lobby Metro Vancouver and the Province of BC for a Provincial Cultural Infrastructure plan, and
fair access to future federal and provincial facility funding programs.
7. Youth and multicultural advisory boards for the creative/economy/city plan are essential to identify potential areas
for innovative financing and new public/private partnerships.
In particular, partnerships with the School District, Artstarts in Schools and the Surrey Foundation should target
youth/creative initiatives, including artist residencies in schools, core arts/cultural curriculum, and youth centres as
multidisciplinary alternative arts hubs – ‘Surrey: Future Creators Live Here.’
8. A partnership to explore an aboriginal-city tourism initiative should be investigated.
9. Surrey can be a leader in research and development of creative city initiatives for edge cities in North America,
and should consider directing its Cultural Capital speakers series to these and related themes.
7 Surrey currently provides $900,000 to the Surrey Arts Centre in operating costs, below per capita levels in operational funding set by other creative
cities.
Paper prepared for the Surrey Regional Economic Summit, September 18, 2008
Edge Cities: Competitive and Collaborative Creative
Economy Strategies for Surrey
17
Index of Figures
Figure 1. Mapping BC Cultural Infrastructure: Overview of Municipal Inventories.
Figure 2. Canada Council for the Arts Investments (Grants to Artists and Arts Organizations)
Figure 3. Mapping BC Cultural Infrastructure: Recent Federal Investment
Figure 4. Number of Cultural Projects Funded in BC by Region
Figure 5. Federal Cultural Infrastructure Investments: Core and Edge Cities Compared
Appendix A: Edge Cities: Demographic Profiles
Selected Sources
Bradford, Neil. (2004). Creative cities: Structured policy dialogue report. Ottawa: Canadian Policy Research Networks
(CPRN). www.cprn.com/documents/31340_en.pdf
Brenner, Neil and Theodore, Nik. (2002). Cities and geographies of actually existing neoliberalism. Antipode, pp. 349-379.
Bye, Carolyn. (2002). A new angle: Arts development in the suburbs. Report to the McKnight Foundation on Twin Cities,
Minnesota.
Carter, Woody, Frolick, R., Frye, T., J.H. Lewis, K. Kane-Willis. (2002). Edge cities or edge suburbs? Presented to the
Midwest Association of Public Opinion Research. Institute for Metopolitan Affairs, Roosevelt University. Chicago.
City of Laval. (2006). Laval’s cultural policy: Laval, city of culture—a culture that is alive and forward looking.
City of Surrey. (2008, July). Parks, Recreation and Culture strategic plan for 2007-2017.Final Report. Professional
Environmental Recreational Consultants Ltd. Jly. rey. http://www.surrey.ca/NR/rdonlyres/1C088F3C-3933-4535-B2EC51BEF955F077/42288/surreyfinalstrategicplanreport.pdf
City of Surrey. (2006, April 21). Labour force fact sheet. http://www.surrey.ca/NR/rdonlyres/17FC5181-BB73-44DB-A59CCAD7E632B808/0/2006_Labour_Force.pdf
City of Mississauga. (2005). A framework for the future vitality of the arts in Mississauga. Report of the Mississauga Arts
Review Task Force to Mayor McCallion.
Davoudi, Simin. (2003). Polycentricity in European spatial planning: From and analytic tool to a normative agenda.
European Planning Studies, 11(8): 979-999.
Drake, Graham. (2003). “This place gives me space”: Place and creativity in the creative industries. Geoforum, 34: 511524.
Duxbury, Nancy. (2008). Under construction: the state of cultural infrastructure in Canada. Report to Infrastructure
Canada. SFU Centre for Policy Studies on Culture and Communities. August 31. www.cultureandcommunities.ca/
Duxbury, Nancy and Murray, Catherine. (Forthcoming in 2009). Creative spaces. In Raj Isar and Helmut Anheier (Eds.),
Cultural expression, creativity and innovation. Sage Publications.
Paper prepared for the Surrey Regional Economic Summit, September 18, 2008
Edge Cities: Competitive and Collaborative Creative
Economy Strategies for Surrey
18
Evans, Graeme. (2007). Creative spaces, tourism and the city. In G. Richards and J. Wilson (Eds.), Tourism, creativity and
development. London: Routledge. pp. 57-72.
Frisken, Frances, and Norris, Donald F. (2001). Regionalism reconsidered. Journal of Urban Affairs. Volume 23, (5): 467478.
Gattinger, Monica and St. Pierrre, Diane (Eds.). (Forthcoming 2008). Cultural policy and cultural public administration in
provincial and territorial governments in Canada. Institute of Public Administration in Canada.
Gertler, Meric. (2004). Creative cities: What are they for, how do they work and how do we build them? Canadian Policy
Research Network.
Gibbon, Christopher. (2008). The creative suburb? Paper presented to the International Forum on the Creative Economy,
Conference Board of Canada, March 17-18, 2008. BOP Consulting, London.
Gollmitzer, Miriam and Murray, Catherine. (2008, March). From economy to ecology: A policy framework for creative
labour. A report prepared for the Canadian Conference of the Arts.
Hartley, John (ed.). (2007). Creative industries. Oxford: Blackwell.
Higgs, Peter and Cunningham, Stuart. (2008). Embedded creatives: Revealing the extent and contribution of creative
professionals working throughout the economy. Paper presented to the International Forum on the Creative Economy. Lac
Leamy, Quebec. March 17-18, 2008.
Hill Stategies. (2006, March). Artists in large Canadian cities. Statistical Insight into the Arts. Vol.4 (4).
Jeannotte, Sharon. (2007, November 19). The state of cultural infrastructure: Policy and issues dialogue—Regional
Roundtable Background Paper—Ontario Region. Centre for Expertise on Culture and Communities.
Keenleyside, Peg. (2007, December 13). The state of cultural infrastructure: Policy and issues dialogue—Regional
Roundtable Background Paper—Pacific Region. Centre for Expertise on Culture and Communities.
Kling, Rob and Olin, S. and Poster, Mark. (1995). Beyond the edge: The dynamism of postsuburban regions. In
Postsuburban California. University of California Press.
Mommaas, Hans (2004, March) Cultural clusters and the post-industrial city: Towards the remapping of urban cultural
policy. Urban Studies, 41(3): 507-532.
Murray, Catherine, Baird, Nini and Beale, Alison. (Forthcoming 2008). British Columbia’s place-based approach: Policy
devolution and cultural self-determination. In Monica Gattinger and Diane Saint Pierre (Eds.), Cultural policy and cultural
public administration in provincial and territorial governments in Canada. Institute of Public Administration in Canada.
PricewaterhouseCoopers. (2007, May). Inter-jurisdictional study of best policies and
practices for public sector arts and culture. Report prepared for the British Columbia
Ministry of Tourism, Sport and the Arts – Pacific Arts Initiative (Phase 1).
www.tsa.gov.bc.ca/arts_culture/library.htm
Sancton, Andrew. (2001). Canadian cities and the new regionalism. Journal of Urban Affairs. Volume 23, (5): 543-555.
Paper prepared for the Surrey Regional Economic Summit, September 18, 2008
Edge Cities: Competitive and Collaborative Creative
Economy Strategies for Surrey
19
Slack, Enid, Bourne, Larry S., & Priston, Heath. (2006, March 3). Large cities under stress: Challenges and opportunities.
A report prepared for the External Advisory on Cities and Communities. Toronto: University of Toronto. www.utoronto.ca/
mcis/imfg/pdf/Big%20cities%20report%20-%20March%203%202006.pdf
Vis a Vis Management Resources. (2007, May). A case for investing in arts, heritage and cultural infrastructure. British
Columbia Ministry of Tourism, Sport and the Arts.
Statistics
Cultural Human Resources Council. (2004). Canada’s cultural sector labour force. Prepared by Hill Strategies Research
Inc. Retrieved August 20, 2008, from http://www.culturalhrc.ca/research/G738_CHRC_AnnexA_intro_E.pdf
Cultural Human Resources Council. (2004). Cultural sector fast stats. Prepared by T.J. Cheney Research Inc. Retrieved
August 20, 2008 from http://www.culturalhrc.ca/research/CHRC_Cultural_Sector_Fast_Stats_2004-en.pdf
Dugas, Erika. (2006, November 2). What Canadian households spend on culture goods and services. Focus on Culture,
15 (4). Catalogue no. 87-004-XWE. Retrieved August 20, 2008, from http://www.statcan.ca/english/freepub/87-004XIE/87-004-XIE2003004.htm
Hill Strategies Research Inc. (2006, March 29). Artists in large Canadian cities. Retrieved August 20, 2008, from http://
culturescope.ca/ev_en.php?ID=11308_201&ID2=DO_TOPIC
Hill Strategies Research Inc. (2004, October). Artists in Canada’s provinces, territories and metropolitan areas. Retrieved
August 20, 2008, from http://culturescope.ca/ev_en.php?ID=7875_201&ID2=DO_TOPIC
Mercadex International Inc. (2002, December). Face of the future: A study of human resources issues in Canada’s cultural
sector. Findings and recommendations. Retrieved August 20, 2008, from
http://www.culturalhrc.ca/research/CHRC_Face_of_the_Future_-_Findings-2002-en.pdf
Mercadex International Inc. (2002, December). Face of the future: A study of human resources issues in Canada’s cultural
sector. Highlights of the literature review. Retrieved August 20, 2008, from http://www.culturalhrc.ca/research/CHRC_
Face_of_the_Future_-_Highlights-2002-en.pdf
Statistics Canada. (2004, January 13). Focus on Culture, 14 (3). Catalogue no. 87-004-XIE2002003. Retrieved August 20,
2008, from http://www.statcan.ca/bsolc/english/bsolc?catno=87-004-X&CHROPG=1
Statistics Canada. (2004, July 8). Focus on Culture, 14 (4). Catalogue no. 0040287-004-XIE. Retrieved August 20, 2008,
from http://www.statcan.ca/bsolc/english/bsolc?catno=87-004-X&CHROPG=1
Statistics Canada. (2004, December 2). Economic contribution of culture in Canada. Education, Culture and Tourism.
Catalogue no. 81-595-M2004023. Retrieved August 20, 2008, from http://cansim2.statcan.ca/cgi-win/cnsmcgi.
pgm?Lang=E&SP_Action=Result&SP_ID=3961&SP_TYP=2&SP_Sort=-0
Statistics Canada. (2004, December 2). Economic contribution of the culture sector in Ontario. Education, Culture and
Tourism. Catalogue no. 81-595-M2004024. Retrieved August 20, 2008, from http://cansim2.statcan.ca/cgi-win/cnsmcgi.
pgm?Lang=E&SP_Action=Result&SP_ID=3961&SP_TYP=2&SP_Sort=-0
Paper prepared for the Surrey Regional Economic Summit, September 18, 2008
Edge Cities: Competitive and Collaborative Creative
Economy Strategies for Surrey
20
Statistics Canada. (2000, December 22). Canadian culture in perspective: A statistical overview. 2000 Edition. Culture,
Tourism and the Centre for Education Statistics Division. Catalogue no. 87-211-XIB. Retrieved August 20, 2008, from
http://culturescope.ca/ev_en.php?ID=7855_201&ID2=DO_TOPIC
Appendix A:
Edge Cities: Demographic Profiles
Surrey
Population and dwelling counts
Population in 2006
Population in 2001
2001 to 2006 population change (%)
Total private dwellings
Population density per square kilometer
394,976
347,820
13.6
139,193
1,245.30
Age characteristics
Total population
Median age of the population
(%) of the population aged 15 and over
(%) of the population under 15
394,980
37
79.9
20.1
Immigrant status and period of immigration
Total population
Immigrants
Before 1991
1991 to 2000
2001 to 2006
Mississauga
Laval
668,549
612,925
9.1
223,737
2,317.10
368,709
343,005
7.5
148,146
1,492
668,550
37
80
20
368,710
40
82
18
392,450
150,235
68,355
52,640
29,230
38.3%
17.4%
13.4%
7.4%
665,655
343,250
157,560
110,875
74,805
52%
24%
17%
11%
364,625
73,565
46,270
18,365
8,935
20%
13%
5%
2%
Citizenship
Total population
Canadian citizens
392,450
346,560
88.3%
665,655
571,350
86%
364,620
351,665
96%
Language spoken most often at home
Total population
English
French
Non-official language
English and French
English and non-official language
French and non-official language
English, French and non-official language
392,450
265,800
895
109,470
425
15,750
65
45
665,655
436,570
3,625
193,135
960
30,935
185
245
364,625
45,900
257,475
46,935
3,750
2,595
6,300
1,660
13%
Visible minority population characteristics
Total population
Total visible minority population
Chinese
South Asian
Black
Filipino
Latin American
Southeast Asian
Arab
West Asian
Korean
Japanese
Multiple visible minority
392,450
181,005
20,210
107,810
5,015
16,555
3,785
9,240
1,805
1,790
7,665
2,090
4,395
364,625
51,725
2,265
3,335
16,895
460
6,285
5,530
14,035
1,675
120
105
730
14%
68%
46%
665,655
326,425
46,120
134,750
41,365
30,705
12,410
14,160
16,785
6,015
6,865
2,425
9,100
Source: Statistics Canada
Paper prepared for the Surrey Regional Economic Summit, September 18, 2008
66%
49%