As part of the national survey we conducted at the end of June and into early July, we asked a series of questions we regularly track about the public’s impressions of the economy.
THE NATIONAL ECONOMY
As the country heads towards an election less than 100 days away, the overall health of the economy is acceptable (34%) or good (43%), according to 77% of Canadians surveyed. These results indicate an uptick in positive sentiment over the last two months. In April the gap between good and poor perceptions was 7 points, today it is 20.
Majorities in every region see the national economy as good or acceptable, with Quebec most positive and Alberta least positive. Younger people and men tend to be a bit more positive in their feelings about the economy.
THE “ECONOMY WHERE I LIVE”
Perceptions of the national economy aside, 77% also say the economy “where they live” is good or acceptable. This indicator is up 7 points in the last two months. Over that period, we’ve seen a 9-point rise in BC, a 7-point rise in Ontario, and a 12-point rise in Alberta. Quebec results have been stable.
POLITICAL CHOICE
Liberal Party supporters are the most positive about the economy, and Conservatives are most negative. It is worth noting that only a quarter to a third of supporters of opposition parties say they economy is poor today.
Among those who say the economy is in good healthy, 51% say they would vote Liberal if an election was today, 20% would vote Conservative, 14% NDP and 9% Green. Among those who say the economy is in acceptable or poor shape, the plurality would cast a ballot for the Conservatives.
PERSONAL ECONOMIC EVALUATIONS AND MACRO CONDITIONS
When we ask people to assess their own personal economic situation, we find more people saying they are confident about their own economic situation (42%) than who are worried (30%) with the remaining (27%) saying they are a little confident and a little worried.
Politically, we find that Liberal supporters are more likely to be confident (59%) than opposition party supporters. But at the same time, the correlation between personal economic evaluation and vote intention does not appear strong.
We also find a correlation between one’s personal economic assessment and perceptions about how the economy is doing locally. Those confident about their personal economic situation are far more likely to assess the economy where they live as doing well than those who are worried about their economic situation. But the relationship isn’t perfect. Some who are confident in their own personal economic situation may think the economy isn’t doing well as are some worried about their personal situation who think the economy is doing well or acceptably.
UPSHOT
According to Bruce Anderson: “A range of issues other than the overall health of the economy are more prominent for many voters right at the moment, including economic questions like the cost of living and taxes.
But with only about a third of voters indicating that the economy is in poor shape, and that number shrinking a bit in recent months, this context may play to the advantage of incumbents.
For the Conservatives, the numbers indicate that they win a good share of the vote if people feel the economy is underperforming, but the heart of that battle is among people who characterize the economy as ‘acceptable’. If they can convince these voters that the economy is worse than they think or persuade them that a Conservative government can shift it from acceptable to good, Mr. Scheer’s prospects improve significantly.
At the same time, it isn’t easy for opposition politicians to manufacture negative opinion about the economy – people tend to trust their local and personal experiences to give them a sense of how things are going.”
According to David Coletto: “Less than 100 days from the election, we see an electorate feeling increasingly positive about the broad macroeconomic trends in the country. This bodes well for the Liberals as they work to rebuild its 2015 coalition and make a case for re-election. The positive economic story is recognized by most Canadians – especially those in the Liberal voter universe.
But, too often we assume that a strong economy will re-elect an incumbent government. In some cases, it lifts support for the government party because macroeconomic perceptions are linked to personal economic assessments. But increasingly, I think it has less of an impact, especially when the economy is doing well. Voters are more likely to punish a government when the economy is bad than reward it when it’s good. “
Our survey was conducted online with 3,092 Canadians aged 18 and over from June 28 to July 2, 2019. A random sample of panellists was invited to complete the survey from a set of partner panels based on the Lucid exchange platform. These partners are double opt-in survey panels, blended to manage out potential skews in the data from a single source.
The margin of error for a comparable probability-based random sample of the same size is +/- 1.8%, 19 times out of 20. The data were weighted according to census data to ensure that the sample matched Canada’s population according to age, gender, educational attainment, and region. Totals may not add up to 100 due to rounding.
In our latest survey, we offered respondents a list of possible issues that might affect their vote and asked them to identify the three that would be most important to them.
THE BIGGEST ISSUES?
• In every election, health care is at or near the top of the list of what people say matters to them (although it isn’t always evident that this is actually what happens on election day), in this year, climate change and the cost of living rival health care for public attention. This is the first time that climate change has occupied such a central place in the public debate.
• The adage holds that elections are almost always about the economy, but in this instance, the top economic concern isn’t so focused on jobs, but the cost of living, taxes and housing affordability.
• Income inequality and making sure the wealthy pay their fair share also attract a fair bit of attention.
• “Backroom deals” is low on the list of public preoccupations which suggests that the SNC Lavalin issue may have limited shelf life.
PARTY ADVANTAGES ON THE ISSUES
Exploring the issues of concern and how people say they would vote if the election were today, reveals which issues play to the advantage to which parties:
• Of the top six issues, the Liberals have an advantage over the Conservatives on health care, climate change, and housing affordability. The Conservatives have an advantage on the cost of living, taxes and good jobs and wages.
• Of the other issues measured, the Liberals have an advantage over the Conservatives on reducing discrimination, income inequality, making sure the wealthy pay their fair share, standing up to Donald Trump, public transit and indigenous reconciliation.
• The Conservatives have an advantage over the Liberals on reducing the deficit, managing immigration, securing the border to illegal immigration, and “backroom deals.”
To visualize this a different way, the Liberals fare best if the election centres on fighting climate change and discrimination, managing the challenging relationship with US President Trump, working to reduce income inequality, cut out of pocket health care costs, public transit and affordable housing. The Conservatives would fare better if the election turns on reducing the deficit, securing the border and managing immigration, taxes and the cost of living.
The NDP fares best on income inequality, indigenous reconciliation, out of pocket health costs, and fighting discrimination. The Green Party draws more support around climate change, indigenous reconciliation, transit, “backroom deals,” and income inequality.
UPSHOT
According to Bruce Anderson: “The Conservatives can win an election that focuses on taxes, deficits, the cost of living, and immigration. They face a bigger challenge if voters focus on climate change, income inequality, health care, and fighting discrimination.
Strategically, this leaves the Liberals with two alternative imperatives. They may fight to win votes from the Conservatives by drawing a contrast on climate change and reminding people of their middle-class tax cuts and climate refund. And they may fight to win votes from the NDP and Green Party by highlighting their efforts to reduce income inequality, fight discrimination, create good jobs and fight climate change.
In this pursuit, drawing a contrast with the Conservatives as the party most likely to win if the Liberals don’t succeed, may be an important message, as will reminding voters that if they care about the cost of living, the Ford government’s record in Ontario shows that conservative governments can make life harder as they pursue deficit reductions.
For the Conservatives, the strategic implications include trying to increase the number of people who vote fiscal and immigration issues and becoming more competitive on climate change. They must also avoid losing their advantage on the cost of living issue as voters wonder whether the Ford government cutbacks would be echoed by a Scheer government. The Conservatives remain vulnerable, as they were in 2015, on issues of equality and discrimination. Pressing on the immigration issues often carries the risk of being seen as playing to the intolerant, a risk heightened in the context of an election where Max Bernier is pitching hard at this issue, and where Donald Trump is pursuing this issue aggressively as well.”
According to David Coletto: “Elections are not always fought on a defining issue that voters respond to when they go into the ballot box. But sometimes, elections become about a single issue and which party is best to deal with it. At this stage in the pre-election period, the parties and leaders are trying to define that question.
Our polling suggests that a handful of issues are likely to consume voters and offer parties opportunities to differentiate and motivate voters. The cost of living and housing are important to many voters. At the same time, growing concern about climate change and deliberation about the best approach to tackle is something new to the federal issue landscape.
Issue salience will ultimately be what matters. If the election is ultimately framed around pocketbook issues (taxes and the cost of living), the Conservatives have the advantage. If instead, it becomes about protecting public services like health care and reducing out of pocket healthcare costs, broader values of inclusion and diversity, the Liberals are well placed to excel.
Climate change, perceptions about the cost of living, and immigration appear more complicated in my mind.
If climate change becomes the defining issues of the campaign, then the Conservatives may struggle, especially if concern continues to grow and it becomes more of a consensus issue than it is now. But there’s also a risk for the Liberals in that their more “middle-of-the-road” approach, compared to the NDP and Green plans, may be deemed too modest for voters seeking a more ambitious climate agenda.
On the cost of living, how the issue is framed can also impact the way voters respond to the issue. If more voters are convinced that policy choices the Liberals have made life more unaffordable or that Mr. Trudeau is not sensitive or empathetic to the concerns voters have, the Conservatives can benefit. If on the other hand, the focus becomes on protecting public services, reducing inequality and increasing wages, and reducing out of pocket healthcare costs, then both the Liberals and NDP could benefit. There’s also a growing understanding that climate change itself is making life more expensive and a failure to act will continue to put pressure on people’s household budgets and those of governments having to spend to mitigate the impacts of global warming.
On immigration, few voters raise the issues as their top concern (5%), but it is an issue that could benefit the Conservatives if its salience rises between now and election day. But as Bruce notes above, if the Conservatives shift the battlefield more aggressively to immigration, it opens the door to Maxime Bernier, whose rhetoric and platform on these is likely to outflank the Conservatives. There are opportunity and risk in such a strategy.”
Our survey was conducted online with 3,092 Canadians aged 18 and over from June 28 to July 2, 2019. A random sample of panellists was invited to complete the survey from a set of partner panels based on the Lucid exchange platform. These partners are double opt-in survey panels, blended to manage out potential skews in the data from a single source.
The margin of error for a comparable probability-based random sample of the same size is +/- 1.8%, 19 times out of 20. The data were weighted according to census data to ensure that the sample matched Canada’s population according to age, gender, educational attainment, and region. Totals may not add up to 100 due to rounding.
ABOUT ABACUS DATA
We are the only research and strategy firm that helps organizations respond to the disruptive risks and opportunities in a world where demographics and technology are changing more quickly than ever.
We are an innovative, fast-growing public opinion and marketing research consultancy. We use the latest technology, sound science, and deep experience to generate top-flight research-based advice to our clients. We offer global research capacity with a strong focus on customer service, attention to detail and exceptional value.
As I write this, a friend is texting me about how hungover he is after his most recent night on the town. It’s been two days, yet he is still suffering the consequences of his last bender. Could the debilitating headache, nausea, and unplanned day of couch-surfing with greasy carbs be enough to keep this millennial from drinking again? Possibly. His fellow millennials have allegedly begun to quit because of it.
As headline after headline suggests that millennials are becoming teetotalers and causing the downward shift in alcohol consumption numbers, we decided to do a little fact-checking. While findings from the World Health Organization and Beer Canada have shown a slight decline in worldwide alcohol consumption and beer sales respectively, it’s really too early to assign blame to millennials, who have already been accused of killing everything from mayonnaise to golf.
To drink or not to drink? That is the question
Upon polling Canadian and American millennials, we found little difference (2 to 5 points) in their likelihood to drink a variety of alcohol compared to the likelihood of other generations.
When further prompted about the frequency of their drinking habits, millennials demonstrated slightly higher alcohol consumption levels than everyone else. Millennials are more likely to consume alcohol a few times a week than other generations. While largely attributable to their age, their level of consumption is demonstrative of their willingness to consume alcohol regularly.
If millennials drink just as often or more than everyone else, they can’t exactly be held responsible for the decrease the industry is seeing in alcohol sales. We hypothesize that rather than a change in consumption levels, millennials are changing how alcohol is consumed. No longer just looking for the next fun night out, millennials prefer to enhance the social and digital experiences that go alongside alcohol consumption. Their interests in craft brewers and Instagrammable cocktails are making waves in the industry.
To the average millennial, alcohol is still a worthy drink. But it’s place in social settings is changing. Instead of just cracking a cold one open and moving on, young people today are interested in knowing the story behind the beer. Where the beer came from, the packaging, the flavours etc. are all important to the new millennial drinking experience. You need only to look at the staggering increase in the number of Canadian breweries from 2017 to 2018 to notice how preferences have evolved. Millennials are increasingly supporting the local market and smaller breweries in search of those unique experiences. As eye-roll inducing as the word “experience” may be, millennials gravitate towards trends that provide exactly that. Whether it’s smoking alcohol like they did in 2013 or their newfound obsession with rosé, millennials are engaging with alcohol differently. Providing them with shareable moments instead of a wicked hangover makes these millennials more likely to come back for more.
While some still continue to stay comfortable with their go-to brands, many are choosing to step outside of it to try something new. It may be true that some of that newness involves trying wellness inspired drinks that are low-calorie alternatives to alcohol, but millennials haven’t lost the taste for alcohol altogether. The fad known as “sober-curious” appears to be just that, a temporary interest for those wishing to be healthier and hangover-less. A generational shift towards sobriety has yet to happen, and the proportion of those who don’t drink versus those who do remains stable. Millennials aren’t killing the alcohol industry just yet, but the headlines may be.
This week we completed a large national survey of over 3,000 Canadian adults. Along with our usual update on the political landscape, we also explore the issues Canadians say will affect how they vote.
THE WORLD AND AMERICA ARE HEADING IN THE WRONG DIRECTION
For every Canadian (17%) who thinks the world is heading in the right direction, almost four (62%) feel that it is off on the wrong track. Almost identical numbers feel the same way about the US: 18% say it is heading in the right direction, 70% say America is off on the wrong track.
This is something that majorities of supporters of all parties see, is the majority view in all regions and across all generations.
WHAT ABOUT CANADA?
Canadians are quite a bit more likely to say things are heading in the right direction here (35%) compared to the US or the world in general, but the plurality of Canadians continue to feel the country is headed off on the wrong track (43%).
The mood of the country has remained static over the past few months. Liberal Party supporters (68%) feel Canada is headed in the right direction, while Conservative supporters are the least likely to feel this way (17%). NDP and Green Party supporters have mixed opinions with about three in ten feeling things are headed in the direction and about four in ten feeling they are off on the wrong track.
While positive feelings about the direction of the United States and the world have remained static since we started tracking them, views on Canada have dropped.
SLIGHT IMPROVEMENT IN ASSESSMENTS OF THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT
Today 35% approve of the performance of the Trudeau government, while 47% disapprove. In April approval stood at 32%.
ACCESSIBLE VOTER POOLS REMAIN PRETTY STABLE
Accessible voter pools for the Liberals (49%), Conservatives (47%) and NDP (44%) are largely unchanged from our May survey. The Green Party pool remains high at 41% but 3 points lower than in May. In Quebec, 31% would consider voting for the BQ, up three since May.
Some other findings of note:
• 20% of 2015 Liberal voters say they would not consider voting Liberal today. Most have shifted towards the Conservatives (56%), while 30% would vote NDP (15%) or Green (15%).
• Only 5% of past Conservative Party voters say they would no longer consider voting for the Conservatives.
• For the NDP, 15% of 2015 NDP voters remain open to voting for the party this year, almost half of whom live in Quebec. The biggest challenge for the NDP remains conversion of “willing to consider” to “would vote for them today”: just 29% of those who would consider the NDP would cast a ballot for the NDP today. As many (28%) would vote Liberal, 15% would vote Conservative, and 10% Green.
IF THE ELECTION WERE TOMORROW? A TOSS UP.
If an election were held tomorrow, 33% say they would vote Conservative, 32% Liberal, 16% NDP, and 11% Green. These numbers are very similar to those in our last poll.
Below the national numbers, we are seeing a softening of Liberal support in Quebec as the Conservatives pick up some support. Ontario remains deadlocked, while BC remains a close three-way race with the Liberals slightly ahead of the Conservatives. We have the Liberals ahead by 10 in Atlantic Canada.
CONSERVATIVES WOULD WIN IF ONLY OLDER PEOPLE VOTED.
Generation gaps persist: the Conservatives would win an election if the only voters were 45 older, while the Liberals would prevail if the only voters were under 45. Green Party support is twice as high among those under 30 as it is among those 60 or older.
AMONG UNION MEMBERS, THE LIBERALS LEAD & THE NDP IS THIRD.
Union members are important buttresses for the Liberal Party today. Members of private sector unions are twice as likely to vote Liberal rather than NDP, and public sector union members lean similarly towards the Liberals over the NDP. The Conservatives trail the Liberals among all union members and lead the Liberals by 3 among non-union voters.
GENDER GAP? CONSERVATIVES AND LIBERALS TIED AMONG MEN AND WOMEN
Conservatives lead by 2 over the Liberals (34% to 32%) with the NDP at 13% and Greens at 9%. Among women, the Liberals are ahead by 1 over the Conservatives (32% to 31%) with the NDP at 18% and the Greens at 13%.
HIGH SCHOOL EDUCATED VOTERS PREFER THE CONSERVATIVES
Conservatives have a strong lead among those who have not attended college or university, while the Liberals have a lead among those with university education, and a wide lead among those with more than one degree.
PREFERRED PRIME MINISTER
Asked which party leader they would prefer to see as Prime Minister after the election, 35% picked Justin Trudeau (up 2 since May), 31% Andrew Scheer (up 1), 14% Elizabeth May (down 5), 13% Jagmeet Singh (up 1), and 7% Max Bernier (up 1).
Among Liberal supporters, 89% would prefer Justin Trudeau to be Prime Minister. Among Conservative supporters, 88% would prefer Andrew Scheer, but among NDP supporters, only 2 in 3 would prefer Jagmeet Singh to be Prime Minister after the election. The same is true of Elizabeth May. Only 68% of those who would vote Green want her to be PM after the next election.
REPUTATION OF LEADERS: TRUDEAU NUMBERS TICK UPWARDS A BIT
Today, 35% say they have a positive view of Mr. Trudeau and 46% negative, a slight improvement since May. For Mr. Scheer, 34% viewing him negatively compared with 31% positively. This is largely unchanged since May.
For Mr. Singh, we see 26% positive and 25% negative, a slight improvement in his numbers overall. For Ms. May, we find 32% positive, 17% negative, a 5-point climb in positive ratings since April.
DOUG FORD REMAINS DEEPLY UNPOPULAR
Worth noting is the fact that Doug Ford continues to show remarkably high negative ratings nationally (55%) and in Ontario (62%). The recent cabinet shuffle and departure of his chief of staff has not – to this point anyway – reversed the negative trend. Today, only 20% of Ontarians have a positive impression of Premier Ford, down 2 since May.
VOTER FLUIDITY & SECOND CHOICES
We continue to see a high degree of potential volatility. Four in ten Liberal and NDP voters say they are likely or very likely to be persuaded to vote for a party other than the one they currently support, and 53% of Green supporters say the same thing. One in three Conservative supporters says they may be persuaded to switch their vote.
Among Liberal voters who could defect, the NDP would pick up 42% followed by the Greens (22%) and the Conservatives (21%). Among NDP potential defectors, 39% see the Liberals as their second choice while 34% would vote Green and 16% Conservative. Among Green Party supporters who might switch, the NDP 38% and the Liberals 27% would pick up most of that support, followed by the Conservatives at 11%.
For the Conservatives, 27% say they would vote NDP if not Conservative, 21% Liberal, and 18% Green.
What these numbers highlight is two things. First, a strong NDP campaign could thwart Liberal hopes, and the opposite is true too: a weak outing for the NDP will create growth opportunities for the Liberals. Second, the Conservatives have the best potential to hold their current vote, but a relatively weak prospect of picking up switchers from other parties.
UPSHOT
According to Bruce Anderson: “The late winter saw a lot of downward pressure for the Liberals around the Wilson-Raybould, SNC issue, and growing opportunity for the Conservatives. The impact of that issue may be dissipating now, which is helpful for the Liberals, as is the ongoing public opinion about Ontario Premier Doug Ford.
The Conservative path to victory at this point rests on climate concerned and progressive voters splitting their votes three ways plus avoiding a situation where the prospect of a Scheer government becomes tied to the austerity and other image problems besetting the Ford Conservatives in Ontario. Their prospects improve if they can also become more appealing as a second choice and make a stronger connection with younger and more highly educated voters.”
According to David Coletto: “With just over three months to go before election day, I continue to see a highly competitive and fluid political environment. The mood of Canadians remains defensive, while slightly improving, the Prime Minister’s image remains negative, but there’s little affection for any of his opponents save for Ms. May.
Our data does offer some clues about where the election might go, and next week I’ll share some potential scenarios based on some analysis I’ve been doing. But in the meantime, it’s clear that the Liberals will continue to tell what they see as a positive story about their time in government – low unemployment, expanded trade, and reducing inequality. It needs to convince more of its former supporters that the country is indeed headed in the right direction and now is not the time to revert course to the Conservatives.
For the Conservatives, there’s still a clear path to victory for them, but they have made little progress in expanding their support, despite the vulnerability of the Liberals. They have been stuck in our tracking in the low 30s for most of the past few years. Either they will rely on lower turnout and a more motivated base to get them over the line or expand the audience and convert past Liberal and NDP supporters to their view of the world.
The NDP continues to struggle to gain any traction. While their vote intention numbers and accessible voter pool remain constant, their leader remains unknown, their base in Quebec has completely disintegrated, and they have no clear policy advantage yet. Even with the release of their full platform, we see no bounce or positive movement in any of their metrics.
Finally, while the Greens remain in a much better position than they did only a few months ago, it appears that their momentum may have stalled or peaked. Their accessible voter pool has shrunk slightly over the past month and they haven’t been successful in converting more of it into actual supporters. The potential for a Green breakthrough remains in place but time is running out for the Greens.”
METHODOLOGY
Our survey was conducted online with 3,092 Canadians aged 18 and over from June 28 to July 2, 2019. A random sample of panellists was invited to complete the survey from a set of partner panels based on the Lucid exchange platform. These partners are double opt-in survey panels, blended to manage out potential skews in the data from a single source.
The margin of error for a comparable probability-based random sample of the same size is +/- 1.8%, 19 times out of 20. The data were weighted according to census data to ensure that the sample matched Canada’s population according to age, gender, educational attainment, and region. Totals may not add up to 100 due to rounding.
ABOUT ABACUS DATA
We are the only research and strategy firm that helps organizations respond to the disruptive risks and opportunities in a world where demographics and technology are changing more quickly than ever.
We are an innovative, fast-growing public opinion and marketing research consultancy. We use the latest technology, sound science, and deep experience to generate top-flight research-based advice to our clients. We offer global research capacity with a strong focus on customer service, attention to detail and exceptional value.
On behalf of Food & Consumer Products of Canada, Abacus Data conducted a national public opinion survey of a representative sample of 2,500 Canadians. The study explored public attitudes towards rising food prices and implications to consumers if the government doesn’t help the food, beverage, and consumer product sector respond to the challenges the industry is facing in Canada.
Here’s a highlight of what we found:
Almost 9 in 10 Canadians are worried about rising food costs.
Rising food costs concern almost all Canadians across the country. 89% agree that they are worried about rising food costs while 8% disagree.
Concern about rising food costs is consistent across the country and across every age group with those age 45 and over express more intense concerns. There’s also political consensus on the issue. Liberal, Conservative, and NDP supporters all agree that they are worried about rising food prices.
Almost all Canadians agree that it’s critically important that Canada has a strong and sustainable food, beverage, and consumer product industry.
While rising food prices are worrying most Canadians, there’s also nearly a consensus that Canada should have a strong and sustainable food, beverage, and consumer product industry. 92% of Canadians agree while only 4% disagree.
This view is also shared across the country and across political tribes. Older Canadians are more likely to absolutely agree than younger Canadians, but this is more a difference of degree rather than direction.
Canadians believe that if the food, beverage, and consumer product industry’s challenges are not a priority for the government, food prices are likely to rise, middle-class manufacturing jobs will be lost, and fewer Canadian grown food products will be used in food and beverage products made in Canada.
Survey respondents were shown a list of challenges facing the industry that were identified by an independent report produced for FCPC. After reviewing the report’s findings, respondents were asked whether a number of consequences were likely to happen as a result.
70% felt that the price of food, beverage, and consumer products will likely rise as “companies manage the growing costs of doing business in Canada.”
55% believed that it is likely that “good, middle-class manufacturing jobs will be lost as it will be harder for these companies to operate in Canada.”
50% felt that it is likely that “fewer ingredients grown by Canadian farmers will be used in good and beverage manufacturing meaning that the value-added will be done outside of Canada, and middle-class jobs will not be created here.”
9 in 10 Canadians believe it is important that political parties and those running to be Prime Minister detail in their platforms how they will work with industry to make it strong going forward.
There’s a broad desire by Canadians to see their political leaders outline how they will work with the food, beverage, and consumer product industry to respond to the challenges it faces and help it grow.
This view was shared by Canadians in all regions of the country and more importantly by supporters of the Liberal, Conservative, and New Democratic parties.
UPSHOT
According to David Coletto: “There’s no doubt that Canadians are becoming increasingly concerned about the rising cost of living. Food prices are an important part of that equation and our research finds broad concern about rising food costs.
At the same time, Canadians also want to see a strong and sustainable domestic food and beverage sector that buys and uses ingredients from Canadian farmers.
Canada’s largest manufacturing sector is facing headwinds that are putting pressure on margins and making it difficult to grow. Canadians recognize that there will be consequences if the government doesn’t support the sector and prioritize its challenges. Rising food prices, lost middle-class, manufacturing jobs, and less value-added production is seen as likely to happen if government and industry don’t work together to overcome the challenging business environment.
There is a political opportunity here for political parties as they craft their election platforms to address growing concerns about the cost of food and worries about the future of manufacturing jobs in Canada. There’s an audience for political leadership that sees food security, affordability, and home-grown and made products as central to Canada’s future.”
METHODOLOGY
The survey was conducted online with 2,500 Canadians aged 18 and over from May 8 to 12, 2019. A random sample of panelists was invited to complete the survey from a set of partner panels based on the Lucid exchange platform. These partners are typically double opt-in survey panels, blended to manage out potential skews in the data from a single source.
The margin of error for a comparable probability-based random sample of the same size is +/- 2.0%, 19 times out of 20.
The data were weighted according to census data to ensure that the sample matched Canada’s population according to age, gender, educational attainment, and region. Totals may not add up to 100 due to rounding.
We are the only research and strategy firm that helps organizations respond to the disruptive risks and opportunities in a world where demographics and technology are changing more quickly than ever.
We are an innovative, fast-growing public opinion and marketing research consultancy. We use the latest technology, sound science, and deep experience to generate top-flight research-based advice to our clients. We offer global research capacity with a strong focus on customer service, attention to detail and exceptional value.
Find out more about how we can help your organization by downloading our corporate profile and service offering.
Don’t miss any of our releases and receive our weekly “Worth a Look” newsletter by signing up for our email list. We promise no more than 2 emails a week… unless there’s something really important we want to share.
Last week, we reported that 12% of those who had a committed choice today said they would vote Green, which represents 9% of the adult voting age population. Another 35% say they would consider voting Green, totaling 44%. This is more than enough to win an election, but the chances of converting all accessible voters are fairly slim, based on the past experience not only of the Greens but of other parties.
The potential Green voter pool is 35% among those 60 or older, and a whopping 58% among those under 30. The accessible Green pool is large enough to have a major impact on every part of the country.
The 9% who say they would vote Green today is made up this way: ¾ voted Green in 2015, the rest comes mainly from those who voted Liberal or NDP in 2015 or who didn’t vote.
Those who say they would vote Green if an election were held today, estimate that there is a 72% chance that they will vote Green in October. Those considering Green but not decided say there is a 30% chance they will vote Green in October.
IF THEY LOOK AWAY FROM GREEN?
If we just focus on the accessible Green voter (the 35% who say they are considering the Green Party today but not ready to vote for them) 65% are also considering the NDP, 58% are considering the Liberals, 44% the Conservatives, 33% the BQ, and 33% the People’s Party. Asked who they are most likely to vote for, the Liberals would win 34%, the NDP 27% and the Conservatives 24%.
In an effort to explore the potential for a two-party race at the national level to turn into a question of strategic voting, we asked current and accessible Green Party voters whether they would be more likely to vote Liberal or Conservative if they lived in a riding where those two parties were the only ones in contention to win. Among current Green voters, the Liberals would win 63% compared to 37% for the Conservatives. Among accessible Green voters, the Liberals would pick up 58% compared to 42% for the Conservatives.
HOW THEY DO FEEL ABOUT THE LEADERS?
Current Green voters have a 79% positive view of Elizabeth May. They are 24% positive and 47% negative about Justin Trudeau. Their views of Andrew Scheer are 10% positive and 56% negative. Jagmeet Singh has a blend of 25% positive, 29% negative and 46% neutral.
Accessible Green voters are 57% positive towards Ms. May, which puts her ahead of the other leaders but by a smaller margin. 34% have a positive view of Mr. Trudeau, 30% are positive towards Mr. Singh and 22% have a positive view of Conservative leader Scheer.
Asked which party leader they would prefer to see as PM after the next election, 81% of current Green voters say it is Elizabeth May, followed by 10% for Justin Trudeau, 4% Andrew Scheer, and 3% Maxime Bernier.
Among accessible Green voters 35% prefer to see Justin Trudeau as PM after the election, 26% Elizabeth May, 20% Andrew Scheer, 16% Jagmeet Singh and 3% Maxime Bernier.
Green voters and Green accessible voters have a negative view of Doug Ford and are three times more likely to have a negative view of Jason Kenney as to have a positive view of the Alberta Premier.
WHAT’S MOTIVATING GREEN VOTERS?
Among those who would vote Green today, 68% say they are motivated by positive feelings about the Greens, while a third say they are motivated by unhappiness with other parties. 20% say their motivation is more about Elizabeth May, 80% say it is about party values and policies.
50% say climate change is the driving issue for them, 50% say it is other environmental concerns.
Also noteworthy that one in three current supporters and one in three considering the Greens say their interest isn’t about the environment. It’s related to the party’s positions on other issues.
Some additional points worth noting:
Across Canada, 82% agree “climate change is a crisis and we need to take it more seriously”, including 46% who strongly agree. Among current Green voters, 65% strongly agree and a totally of 94% agree. Among Green accessible voters the numbers are very similar. Among Liberal and NDP voters the patterns are similar to those for the Green Party.
Interesting is the fact that 62% of current Conservative voters agree with this statement, and 85% of their accessible voters do as well. In Alberta, 68% agree “climate change is a crisis and we need to take it more seriously.”
Across Canada, 73% say they “want to see the Liberals adopt a stronger environmental agenda”, which includes 90% among current Liberal voters, 89% among current Green voters, 84% among Green accessible voters. Among accessible Liberal voters, 86% feel this way. Even 43% of current CPC voters share this view.
While most want a stronger environmental agenda, a very large majority (89%) say “environmental policies need to be pragmatic about the cost of living and the need for jobs.” This includes 87% in BC, 89% in Ontario, and 90% in Quebec. Among current Green voters, 80% agree, and among accessible Green voters, the number is 88%.
69% of those considering the Green Party say “the Conservatives would be the worst choice for the environment” as do 77% of current Green voters. Among those who aren’t currently considering the Green Party, 43% agree with this thought.
More than half of all those surveyed 61% say they are upset about the TransMountain pipeline. Among current Green voters, the number is 69%, among accessible Green voters, it is 66%. In BC, the number is 62%. Worth noting is that strong agreement with this statement is 22% nationally and is below 30% everywhere but Alberta, where 41% strongly agree that they are upset about the TMX pipeline. WHAT OUTCOME ARE GREEN VOTERS HOPING FOR?
Among those who would vote Green today, 35% would like to see a Green Party government, 43% say they are hoping for more Green MPs to influence the debate in Ottawa, 17% say they don’t really care if there are more Green MP’s as long as environmental issues are taken more seriously.
Among Green accessible voters, only 10% hope to see a Green Party government, 36% more Green MPs, while 41% don’t really care if there are more Green MP’s.
UPSHOT
According to Bruce Anderson: “Based on today’s snapshot, and how people who are thinking about voting Green describe the intensity of their intentions, the range of outcomes for the Green Party could be as low as 7% and as high as 17%. But of course, these ranges are tied to the current context – there will certainly be new variables introduced and fluctuations to come.
Based significantly on the focus of young people and the climate change issue, the Green Party is the fastest growing tent in Canadian politics. The Conservatives, while leading in the polls for most of this year find themselves relatively poorly positioned with these voters. The NDP seems to lack impact with these voters.
Voters thinking Green show some displeasure with the Liberals and an instinct to want them to go further, faster on environmental issues, but at the same time, there is a strong streak of pragmatism when it comes to economic and cost of living issues. If they feel the election will come down to a choice between Liberals and Conservatives, more Green votes will shift to the Liberal column than to the Conservatives. The TMX issue has caused some Liberal votes to shift towards the Green Party. However it’s worth wondering if the Conservatives push for a pro-pipeline agenda, will this risk driving Green voters towards the Liberal Party.”
According to David Coletto: “Over the past few months, we have seen a rapid increase in the number of Canadians looking at the Green Party as a viable option for their support. From 38% in December to 44% today. At the same time, the Green Party’s share of the vote has increased to 12% with support highest in BC, Saskatchewan and Manitoba, and Atlantic Canada. But there’s also been increases in Ontario and Quebec as well.
This broad-based supporter is driven primarily by support and interest among those under 44 but the party finds considerable interest from all age groups.
So far, interest in the Green Party seems to be a combination of concern about the environment and climate change and dissatisfaction with the other options on offer. Given that only 35% of Green voters would prefer to see a Green Party government elected in October is evidence of that. But there’s broad interest in seeing more Green MPs elected suggesting arguments focused on that could be helpful to the party in electing more MPs across the country.
With the by-election victory last month along with strong results in Atlantic Canada and BC, the Green Party has likely never been as well positioned as it is now to breakthrough. Elizabeth May is the only leader with higher positives than negatives and as many people would now consider voting Green as the NDP.
But with this growing interest also comes scrutiny and response from the other parties. Already the NDP has released an ambitious climate change plan and the Liberals will likely continue to make it central to their campaign this fall.
Given that almost half of Green supporters are open to voting Liberal or NDP and even more of its potential supporters are still open to those two parties means converting this latent support into actual votes remains the significant challenge for Ms. May and her party.
But as the 2011 federal election taught us, a wave can build quickly when the right conditions materialize. Many would have been hard-pressed to identify 10 ridings the NDP could have won in Quebec when that election started and the party ended up winning almost 60 seats.”
Our survey was conducted online with 1,500 Canadians aged 18 and over from May 27 to 30, 2019. A random sample of panelists was invited to complete the survey from a set of partner panels based on the Lucid exchange platform. These partners are double opt-in survey panels, blended to manage out potential skews in the data from a single source.
The margin of error for a comparable probability-based random sample of the same size is +/- 2.6%, 19 times out of 20. The data were weighted according to census data to ensure that the sample matched Canada’s population according to age, gender, educational attainment, and region. Totals may not add up to 100 due to rounding.
ABOUT ABACUS DATA
We are the only research and strategy firm that helps organizations respond to the disruptive risks and opportunities in a world where demographics and technology are changing more quickly than ever.
We are an innovative, fast-growing public opinion and marketing research consultancy. We use the latest technology, sound science, and deep experience to generate top-flight research-based advice to our clients. We offer global research capacity with a strong focus on customer service, attention to detail and exceptional value.
Find out more about how we can help your organization by downloading our corporate profile and service offering.
Don’t miss any of our releases and receive our weekly “Worth a Look” newsletter by signing up for our email list. We promise no more than 2 emails a week… unless there’s something really important we want to share.
This week, we completed a nationally representative survey of 1,500 Canadians and explored their views on Canadian politics to update our regularly tracking. Early next week we will release an in-depth analysis of the Green Party’s rise and surrounding implications.
For now, here’s our view of the federal political landscape:
DIRECTION OF THE COUNTRY
By a nine-point margin, Canadians are more likely to think (45%) the country is headed on the wrong track, rather than headed in the right direction while 36% say it is headed in the right direction. The wrong direction number is unchanged from March, while the right direction number is up marginally by two points.
APPROVAL OF THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT
Today 32% approve of the performance of the Trudeau government, while 49% disapprove. These numbers are also basically unchanged from our last reading in April.
ACCESSIBLE VOTER POOLS
Today 49% say they would consider voting Liberal, compared to 48% in our last poll. 47% say they would consider voting Conservative, down 3 points. 45% would consider the NDP, compared to 44%, 44% would consider the Greens (up 4 points since April and 8-points since December), and 21% would consider voting for the People’s Party. In Quebec, 28% would consider voting for the BQ.
CURRENT VOTING INTENTION
If an election were held tomorrow, 33% say they would vote Liberal, 32% Conservative, 16% NDP, and 12% Green. These numbers suggest some softening of Conservative support over the month, some strengthening of the Green Party, and an ongoing weak trend for the NDP. Today, the NDP trails the Green party in BC, Saskatchewan & Manitoba, and Atlantic Canada. In Quebec, where the NDP won 25% of the vote and 16 seats in 2015, the party is polling at 10% only two points ahead of the Greens and 34 points behind the Liberals.
We now see a pretty tight four-way race in BC, with the Liberals at 29%, the Conservatives at 28%, the Green Party at 18%, the NDP at 17% and the People’s Party with a notable 6%. The Greens appear to be eating into NDP support.
In Ontario, the Liberals have a 3-point edge over the Conservatives (33% to 30%), with the NDP back at 22% and the Greens at 12%. The People’s Party is at 2%. Compared to our last wave, this is a weakening of Conservative support and strengthening of Green Party and NDP support.
In Quebec, the Liberals are well ahead at 44% with the Conservatives at 21%, the Bloc at 14%, NDP at 10%, the Greens at 8%, the People’s Party at 1%. Compared to our last wave, this is a 10-point improvement for the Liberals.
In Atlantic Canada, the Conservatives have the edge (34%) over the Liberals (31%), with the Greens at 15%, the NDP at 11% and the People’s Party at 6%. These numbers reflect a big drop for the Liberals, a softening for the NDP, and strengthening of Conservative and Green Party support in the region. In 2015, the Liberal Party swept all 32 seats in Atlantic Canada, beating the Conservatives by 40 points in the popular vote.
Among those who say they are most motivated to vote the Conservatives (35%) have a 3-point advantage over the Liberals (32%) followed by the NDP (15%), and 12% for the Greens.
We also are noticing an increasing age divide in vote intentions. The Liberals lead among 18 to 29-year-olds (by 11 over the NDP and 12 over the Conservatives) and among those aged 30 to 44 (by 5 points over the Conservatives). The Liberals and Conservatives are basically tied among those aged 45 to 59 while the Conservatives have a healthy lead of 11-points among those aged 60 and over.
PREFERRED PRIME MINISTER
When asked which of the party leaders they would prefer to see as Prime Minister after the next election, 33% picked Justin Trudeau, 30% Andrew Scheer, 19% Elizabeth May, 12% Jagmeet Singh, and 6% Max Bernier. This is a slight 3-point decline for Andrew Scheer, and a 5-point increase for Elizabeth May, who now polls better than the NDP leader in every region of the country on this question.
REPUTATION OF LEADERS
Currently, 33% say they have a positive view of Mr. Trudeau and 47% negative, which is essentially unchanged from our last wave. For Mr. Scheer, we find an increase in his negative numbers, up 4 since April while his positives are down 2. Overall, 35% view the Conservative leader negatively while 29% have a positive impression.
For Mr. Singh, we see 23% positive and 27% negative, mostly unchanged. For Ms. May we find 32% positive, 17% negative, a 5-point climb in positive ratings since April.
Worth noting is the fact that Doug Ford continues to show very high negative ratings nationally (55%) and in Ontario (61%). Among those open to voting Conservative, 26% have a positive impression compared with 37% who view him negatively. Among those who say they would vote Conservative today, 35% view him positively but almost as many (28%) have a negative impression of the Ontario Premier.
In Ontario, we have also seen a rise in Mr. Ford’s negatives. Last October, 48% of Ontarians had a negative view of the Premier. Today it is up to 61%, the highest we have tracked since we started regularly tracking Mr. Ford’s image. In the vote and swing seat-rich GTHA, only 20% have a positive view of Mr. Ford compared to 63% who view him negatively.
UPSHOT
According to Bruce Anderson: “The race to this fall’s election features some really unusual dynamics with the role of the Green Party, the challenges facing the NDP, and the challenge to the Conservatives of the People’s Party all looking as though they could influence the outcome.
Perhaps the most important of the influences though may turn out to be the way Ontario voters feel about the Conservative brand. Doug Ford’s popularity is remarkably low, given the relative strength of the Ontario economy. He arrived in office with a significant amount of public skepticism and his spending cuts have added more controversy. Public interest in deficit-fighting has not been that strong in recent years, even though people wanted a more frugal government, it’s not clear that they expected to be seeing cutbacks on public services and programs.”
According to David Coletto: “As we have noted in the past, the federal political landscape remains very fluid. Almost 1 in 5 Canadians are open to voting for 3 or more of the main political parties. The rapid ascent of the Green Party in both vote intention and more importantly, vote consideration, is something we will watch very closely. Tune into more analysis next week on some additional questions we asked of those open to voting Green.
The damage of the SNC-Lavalin controversy to the Liberals persists but the Conservatives nor the NDP have not been able to take advantage of this opportunity. Instead, many more Canadians are now giving the Greens a look as Ms. May’s popularity grows. Given that one in five Canadians would now prefer her as Prime Minister is clear evidence of how fast things can change in this environment.
For the Conservatives, the silver lining in these numbers is the advantage they continue to have among more motivated voters. But relying along on motivating their base may not be enough to win the election. Despite the SNC-Lavalin controversy shaking lose some voters from the Liberals, the Conservatives have not expanded their tent at all over the past five months. In fact, there’s some evidence to suggest fewer Canadians are open to voting Conservative than earlier this year.”
METHODOLOGY
Our survey was conducted online with 1,500 Canadians aged 18 and over from May 27 to 30, 2019. A random sample of panelists was invited to complete the survey from a set of partner panels based on the Lucid exchange platform. These partners are double opt-in survey panels, blended to manage out potential skews in the data from a single source.
The margin of error for a comparable probability-based random sample of the same size is +/- 2.6%, 19 times out of 20. The data were weighted according to census data to ensure that the sample matched Canada’s population according to age, gender, educational attainment, and region. Totals may not add up to 100 due to rounding.
ABOUT ABACUS DATA
We are the only research and strategy firm that helps organizations respond to the disruptive risks and opportunities in a world where demographics and technology are changing more quickly than ever.
We are an innovative, fast-growing public opinion and marketing research consultancy. We use the latest technology, sound science, and deep experience to generate top-flight research-based advice to our clients. We offer global research capacity with a strong focus on customer service, attention to detail and exceptional value.
Find out more about how we can help your organization by downloading our corporate profile and service offering.
Don’t miss any of our releases and receive our weekly “Worth a Look” newsletter by signing up for our email list. We promise no more than 2 emails a week… unless there’s something really important we want to share.
With Climate Change being one of the ballot box issues for the upcoming Federal Election, candidates would do well to recognize the importance climate change plays in the electoral calculus of Canada’s millennials. Candidates without a credible plan on climate change will find it difficult to gain the support of Canada’s largest voting segment.
In our most recent Canadian Millennials Report, we found that 87% of millennials consider themselves to be either environmental moderates or ardent environmentalists. This attitude demonstrates that most millennials care, in some capacity, about the environment. However, to represent millennials as a bunch of ardent climate activists would be a misnomer. Millennials and the rest of Canada see a multitude of options available to address climate change that is as diverse as they are. Regulation, innovation, incentives, and punishment are all things that millennials, and more broadly Canadians, think any good environmental plan should have.
Note: This graph is representative of the general population, not millennials specifically.
To further this, millennials have different views on the government’s performance on climate change. In a survey we conducted earlier this year (just before the federal carbon pricing policy came into effect), 37% of millennials said that they think that the federal government has done a poor or very poor job on climate change. Meanwhile, 28% of millennials believe that they have done an acceptable job and 17% believe that they have done a good to very good job.
As millennials make up 27.5% of the Canadian Population and 37% of the electorate they have the potential to swing the vote. While the traditional pocketbook issues will certainly play a factor, the issue of climate change may just be catalytic enough to drive them to the polls. At 73%, millennials are more likely than other generations to consider climate change as one of their top five factors affecting their vote. 15% consider it to be their number one issue.
Millennials are not the innocuous activists they were once supposed to be. They are a present electoral reality, and if political parties want to win in October, they need to have the millennials on-side. They are environmental stewards who want to see electric vehicles become a majority. They are the future, and their opinion on how climate change should be resolved is guaranteed to steer their votes this upcoming election season. What politicians and their parties will do about it remains to be seen.
As Canada’s political parties prepare their election platforms, the latest Clean Energy Canada – Abacus Data nationwide poll explored opinions about what should be included in a plan to combat climate change. The results showed:
• All 8 of the possible components tested found a majority say that they should ideally or must be included in a climate plan.
• At the top of the list of “must haves” are vehicle pollution standards, investments in renewable energy, incentives to spur clean technology innovation, and phasing out the use of coal for energy.
• More than 90% also feel that a plan to reduce emissions should include incentives to help people buy and use EVs, spending to expand public transit, and cleaner fuel regulations.
• On the question of whether a policy should include a price on pollution, 34% said this must be in a plan, and another 44% said it should ideally be part of an emissions reduction plan.
Looking underneath the surface of national opinion for some additional insights, especially when we compare Albertans and Conservative Party oriented Canadians, two groups where differences of opinion on climate change have been most striking in the past:
• On phasing out coal, Albertans are less enthusiastic (just 29% say it must be in a climate plan) but broadly of the view that it should ideally be (49%). Eight in ten Conservative voters say a coal phase out must (34%) or should be (47%) part of a climate plan. Among “Conservative opportunity” voters (those who say they would consider the CPC but aren’t currently planning on voting CPC, 43% say a coal phase out must be and 49% should be in a climate plan.
• On pricing pollution, majorities in every region say this must or should be in a climate plan, led by BC (84%) and with Alberta lower than anywhere else at 69%). 59% of Conservative voters and 82% of Conservative opportunity voters believe a price on pollution is a should have or must have. Supporters of other parties are even more convinced.
• On investments in renewable energy, more than 90% across the country say this must or should be in a climate plan. In Alberta, 48% say must and 46% say should ideally. Among Conservative voters, 37% say must and 50% say should, and among Conservative opportunity voters results are 50% must be and 43% should be in a plan.
• On incentives to support clean technology, more than 90% across the country say this must or should be in a climate plan. In Alberta, 48% say must and 49% say should ideally. Among Conservative voters, 40% say must and 53% say should, and among Conservative opportunity voters results are 53% must be and 43% should be in a plan.
• On investments to expand public transit, more than 85% across the country say this must or should be in a climate plan. In Alberta, 38% say must and 50% say should ideally. Among Conservative voters, 32% say must and 56% say should, and among Conservative opportunity voters results are 39% must be and 52% should be in a plan.
• On investments in to make it easier to buy and use electric vehicles, more than 85% in every region say this must or should be in a climate plan. In Alberta, 34% say must and 52% say should ideally. Among Conservative voters, 33% say must and 49% say should, and among Conservative opportunity voters results are 38% must be and 51% should be in a plan. The youngest voters are 8 points more likely than the oldest voters to say that this must be in a climate plan.
• On regulations to deliver cleaner fuels, more than 90% in every region say this must or should be in a climate plan. In Alberta, 35% say must and 56% say should ideally. Among Conservative voters, 30% say must and 59% say should, and among Conservative opportunity voters results are 39% must be and 54% should be in a plan.
• On regulations to ensure vehicles are manufactured to emit less pollution and be more fuel efficient, 95% or more in every region say this must or should be in a climate plan. In Alberta, 46% say must and 49% say should ideally. Among Conservative voters, 42% say must and 51% say should, and among Conservative opportunity voters results are 50% must be and 46% should be in a plan.
QUOTES
“With strong support across the political spectrum for a range of existing measures to tackle climate change, there appears to be little public support for moving backwards. As all parties begin to build plans to address climate change, the question is not what should be undone—but what more can we do. Given the impacts already being felt in Canada, from recent floods to forest fires, it’s clear that climate change should be a ballot box issue, and that all parties need to put forward credible, comprehensive plans to address it.”
—Dan Woynillowicz, Policy Director, Clean Energy Canada
“A great deal of the discussion about climate policy has centred on carbon pricing, but these results reveal not only that many people believe a price on pollution should be part of a climate plan, but that they would like to see a range of other policies adopted as well. Another common misperception may be that conservative-leaning voters and Alberta voters are opposed to a range of measures that could help combat climate change – on the contrary, these numbers underscore that most people, Alberta and Conservative voters included, expect a solid could plan must or should ideally include all of the elements tested.”
—Bruce Anderson, Chairman, Abacus Data
METHODOLOGY
The survey was conducted with 2,515 Canadian residents aged 18 and older from April 23 to April 29, 2019. A random sample of panelists was invited to complete the survey from a set of partner panels based on the Lucid exchange platform. These partners are typically double opt-in survey panels, blended to manage out potential skews in the data from a single source.
The margin of error for a comparable probability-based random sample of the same size is +/- 1.8%, 19 times out of 20.
The data were weighted according to census data to ensure that the sample matched Canada’s population according to age, gender, educational attainment, and region. Totals may not add up to 100 due to rounding.
ABOUT ABACUS DATA
We are the only research and strategy firm that helps organizations respond to the disruptive risks and opportunities in a world where demographics and technology are changing more quickly than ever.
We are an innovative, fast-growing public opinion and marketing research consultancy. We use the latest technology, sound science, and deep experience to generate top-flight research-based advice to our clients. We offer global research capacity with a strong focus on customer service, attention to detail and exceptional value.
Find out more about how we can help your organization by downloading our corporate profile and service offering.
Don’t miss any of our releases and receive our weekly “Worth a Look” newsletter by signing up for our email list. We promise no more than 2 emails a week… unless there’s something really important we want to share.
Yes, the Millennials have been and are going to turbo-charge the sharing economy and continue to throw our traditional economy into chaos. Let me explain…
We will begin by dispelling some myths about the sharing economy. Firstly, people sharing things is not a new phenomenon. Humans have been formally sharing stakes in property since the first family farms of the Fertile Crescent over 6,000 years ago. It was the enterprising British and thrifty Dutch that brought us into modernity with the first joint-stock companies in 1600. Purchasers of these stocks shared in the ownership of a business (usually a ship or a fleet of ships going off to India). Joint-stock companies allowed for the financing of these expensive ventures and dispersed the losses if a ship were to sink off of some forlorn coast. The last great wave of the sharing economy developed in the 1970s and 80s. The wide acceptance of time-share holiday properties became a hot trend in North America. Moreover, co-operative communities or communes in the “back to the earth” movement sprung up around the world. The point being, the sharing economy is not new – it didn’t arrive with the internet and it certainly isn’t dependent on the “Gig economy”. It’s been around as long as there have been expensive stuff that humans want but couldn’t afford.
Nevertheless, the sharing economy has been changing since its fetal days in the Tigris river valley. Back then, only a handful of feudal families and their merchants could own a share of property. Property ownership remained a privilege of the elite until the 17th century with the innovation of the joint-stock company which opened the sharing economy to merchants and the upper middle classes. Over the next three centuries, more people would be attracted to stock markets and shared asset ownership. The last great expansion in the 70s and 80s brought the shared economy to the broader middle classes of developed nations. The time-sharing of properties and expansion of affordable financial instruments made joint-ownership attainable. Most recently, the internet has accelerated the sharing revolution and now encompasses almost all the world’s population. While the sharing economy is not new, the breadth of economic inclusion it now possesses has fundamentally altered the playing field. Millennials are technologically savvy, globally minded, and are ready to push us into the realm of sharing everything.
The Right Conditions:
For the sharing economy to thrive there needs to be the right conditions such as expensive or burdensome assets, actors with insufficient resources to solely purchase the asset, and a method for independent actors to communicate and collaboratively share in the ownership of the asset. As we said earlier millennials are, relatively speaking, broke. The cost of living is outstripping many of their incomes and according to a recent Abacus Data study, 48% of millennials make less than $50,000 a year. Comparatively, only 30% of generation X make less than $50,000 a year. Millennials are also twice as likely to report being unemployed or in part-time work than either Gen X or the boomer generations.
Low wages and uncertain employment conditions have transformed assets such as cars or houses—once considered a regular cost of living expense—into unattainable dreams for a lone millennial to own. So far, the millennial experience satisfies the first two criteria of a thriving sharing economy; relatively high-priced goods and actors with insufficient resources to independently purchase them. The third criteria, a method for independent actors to communicate and collaboratively purchase an asset, has been facilitated through the ubiquity of the internet and the pervasiveness of Gig economy platforms which allow strangers to collectively purchase (or lease) an asset, as we can see with gig-companies like Zip Car or Uber. Strangers can lease time to use the car (Zip Car) or just a back seat (Uber) to travel to a destination.
The interconnectedness of the internet primed the sharing economy’s way to dominate all sectors of society, but it would all be for nought if millennials weren’t comfortable with the sharing economy idea. A little over a decade ago, it would be unimaginable to welcome complete strangers into the spare rooms of your home, its something that might have even warranted a call to the police by your neighbours, presuming you had turned your attic into some kind of brothel. But to millennials, Airbnb is a natural extension of their everyday lives, they grew up with these internet sharing platforms and are open to the idea of sharing (almost) everything.
The Impact on Business
If more people share their cars, homes, and even dinner plates, fewer “things” will need to be produced. For example, our data shows us that only a third of millennials own their own home, choosing to rent or live at home with their parents instead. The same trend is true with cars; 36% of millennials neither own nor rent a car, whereas only 18% of boomers and Gen Xers do not own or rent a car. If your company produces goods that are traditionally owned by a single person or family, try the following exercise: take your current number of customers and subtract a third of them… the remainder is your new customer base after the sharing economy takes its portion. You can see how this trend of non-ownership can drastically change the global economy. Business models, regulations, and even societal conventions have to change to cope with the new super-charged sharing economy. Millennial culture is sharing culture and it looks like we will be living in a more “shared” world in the years to come.
At Abacus we strive to understand the nuances of generational change and how it impacts you and your business. The Canadian Millennials Report is the largest syndicated study of millennials in Canada. We survey 2,000 millennials twice a year on a range of topics including politics, social values, and consumer trends. If you are interested in learning more about this generation, reach out to us and we would be happy to connect.
