Go to the Globe and Mail homepage

Jump to main navigationJump to main content


Report on Business

Economy Lab

Delving into the forces that shape our living standards
for Globe Unlimited subscribers

Entry archive:

Economy Lab has moved

Only Globe Unlimited members will now have access to a wide range of insightful commentary
and analysis on the economy and markets previously offered on this page.

Globe Unlimited subscribers will be able to read these columns,
written by some of Canada’s most deeply respected economists,
such as Christopher Ragan, Sheryl King, Andrew Jackson, and Clement Gignac,
as part of our ECONOMIC INSIGHT section.

All of our readers will still be able to browse the Economy Lab archives and read our
broader coverage of economic data and news by accessing their 10 free articles a month.

Learn more about Globe Unlimited and how to subscribe.

Oil rig. (Kevin Van Paassen/The Globe and Mail/Kevin Van Paassen/The Globe and Mail)

Oil rig.

(Kevin Van Paassen/The Globe and Mail/Kevin Van Paassen/The Globe and Mail)

Economy Lab

How all Canadians benefit from Alberta's oil wealth Add to ...

The recent exchange between the premiers of Ontario and Alberta on the question of oil prices and the exchange rate raises an interesting question: if the government of Alberta chose to manage its natural resources in the best interests of Canadians outside Alberta, what would it do differently?

Alberta’s petroleum reserves constitute a huge store of wealth for its residents, akin to a winning lottery ticket. As everyone knows – or should know – the smart thing to do with a winning lottery ticket is to put the proceeds in the bank and to base spending on the investment income it generates, and not on the windfall itself. This is roughly the approach taken by Norway: much of its oil revenues are invested in a sovereign wealth fund whose purpose is to provide a flow of income to future generations of Norwegians after its oil reserves run out.

Alberta has chosen not to pursue a policy of maximizing and saving resource rents. If it had, the pace of development would have been much slower: higher royalty rates would have added to the costs of producing oil. And if an Alberta wealth fund invested a significant portion of its holdings outside Canada, this outflow of capital would at least partly offset the upward pressures on the Canadian dollar.

It’s not hard to build a strong case that this is what the Alberta government should do. Probably the most powerful argument against is that pointed out by Maclean’s columnist Colby Cosh: “[I]’s not at all clear to me that it is smart for a non-sovereign jurisdiction that doesn’t control its borders to ‘save’ for a totally different future populace.” Norwegians can be fairly certain that their grandchildren will benefit from the revenue generated by their oil fund. Albertans cannot be so sure; the Alberta of the future will be largely populated by the grandchildren of people who don’t currently live there.

Alberta has essentially decided to dissipate its resource rents in the form of cost inflation, and one of the ways this shows up is in higher wages. (A slower pace of development would have kept wage growth in check.) But this effect is not only limited to Alberta, for the same reason Albertans can’t be sure that their grandchildren will benefit from an oil wealth fund: the free flow of workers across provinces. This mobility means that wages will be set at the national level, not by province or sector. As I noted here, the last resource boom increased wages across Canada – including in Ontario.

Non-Albertans who wish that the economic benefits of Alberta oil production were spread across Canada can stop wishing: it’s already happening.

Follow on Twitter: @stephenfgordon

In the know

Most popular videos »


More from The Globe and Mail

Most popular