Can you write a briefing note for action?

Final Exam - Brieng Note #3 Instructions: You are an economist working for the department of Immigration and Citizenship Canada (ICC). The Minister for ICI needs to decide whether to increase, decrease, or keep the level of annual immigration to Canada unchanged.| The Minister, after reading the following blog: htt s://worthwhile.t e ad.com/worthwhi1e canadian initi/2016/10/the-carbon-costs-of immigrationhtmLis unsure whether to increase, decrease or leave unchanged the number of annual immigrants. As an unbiased economic policy analyst, you are asked to write a formal 3-page brieng note (approximately 1200 words) seeking a decision from the Minister, based on your recommendations, on action regarding the increase/decreaseo change of annual immigration levels. Your brieng note should present economic arguments based on facts and may require a rebuttal or acceptance of the information found in the article. You are to base your advice on what you have learned in class throughout the semester with emphasis from the last chapter studied. Of importance, your briefmg note should clearly state options and your recommendation for increasing, decreasing, or keeping the level of annual immigration to Canada unchanged; and give much thought to environmental issues. Blog read by the Minister: Worthwhile Canadian Initiative A mainly Canadian economics blog Author biosCategoriesPosts by authorResourcesArchives A Supreme Folly | Main | Why is it so hard to know the relationship between immigration and economic performance? The carbon costs of immigration Canada is, as far as countries go, relatively cold and sparsely populated. Our houses are large by global standards, and we drive a fair amount. We are rich enough to consume a lot of stuff. These factors, together with the oil sands, mean that we have one of the world's highest levels of C02 emissions on a per capita basis: 13.5 metric tons (MT) per person in 2013. Over the past decade, Canada has been admitting about a quarter of a million new immigrants annually. The majority of them come from countries, such as the Philippines, India or China, which are warmer, poorer, and more densely populated than is Canada - and where the typical person produces far fewer C02 emissions on a per capita basis. When someone moves from one of these countries to Canada, and adopts a Canadian lifestyle, their "carbon footprint" - the amount of carbon they use in their daily lives - would be expected to increase. This is the carbon cost of immigration. 1 did a back-ofthe-envelope calculation of the increase in global C02 emissions associated with Canada's immigration ows. I started out by assuming that when the typical immigrant moves from, say, China to Canada, they go from producing the average Chinese level of carbon emissions (7.55 MT per person per year) to the average Canadian level (13.53 MT). By multiplying the difference in per capita carbon emissions by the number of immigrants from that country, I estimated the increase (or, in some case, the decrease) in global carbon emissions associated with people moving to Canada and adopting a Canadian lifestyle. For example, if the 34,130 people who immigrated from China to Canada in 2013 all increased their carbon emissions by 5.98 MT annually when they switched from having a Chinese lifestyle to a Canadian lifestyle, global carbon emissions would rise by about 200,000 metric tons annually. The results of these calculations are shown below. The full data, with all source countries, is here: Download C02 and immigration Potential Increase in carbon emissions from Immigration to Canada. new permanent residents. 2013. Source country Per capita CO: emissions, Number of Potential metric tons new increase in Source Canadalsource permanent CO; country country residents emissions. differentia| Metric tons Top ten source countries China 7.55 5.98 34.130 204.145 India 1.59 11.94 33.087 395.126 Philippines 1.01 12.53 29.545 370.065 Pakistan 0.85 12.69 12.603 159.880 Iran 8.00 5.54 11.291 62.501 United States of America 16.39 -2.86 8.501 -24.291 These calculations suggest that, in 2013 alone, immigration to Canada - and the associated adoption of a high-carbon Canadian lifestyle - could have increased global carbon emissions by almost 2.5 million metric tons annually. Now there is a serious problem with these back-ofthe-envelope calculations. First, they include emissions associated with industrial activity, and industrial activity is unlikely to change much as a result of emigration or immigration. Second, the calculations assume that migrants live a lifestyle that is typical of their country of residence. This is almost certainly not the case. If the typical person who moves from India to Canada is an urban, educated, middle-class professional, their carbon emissions prior to immigration will likely be higher than the Indian average of 1.59 MT per person. If that Indian immigrant once they arrive in Canada, moves into a small apartment and takes public transit, their post-migration carbon emissions will be lower than the Canadian average of 13.5 MT per person. If I had to guess, I 7 Page 2 of 3 would suggest that the actual increase in global carbon emissions associated with people moving to Canada is in the ve hundred thousand to one million MT range, rather than 2.5 million MT. But it is not nothing. Climate and geography mean that life in most parts of Canada is intrinsically energy intensive. Encouraging people to move here has potentially serious impacts on the environment. The Trudeau government has already increased the planned immigration levels for 2016 to 280,000 to 305,000 new permanent residents, and Immigration Minister John McCallum has announced plans to further increase these levels "substantially". The analysis here suggests that a full accounting of the costs and benets of increasing immigration ows might prompt a reconsideration of the government's plans. One frequently touted motivation for immigration is demographics. Canada's population is aging. The thinking seems to be that only by bringing in more young people will we be able to support all the old folks. Yet, given that Canada is such an energy intensive place to live, perhaps there are other, more environmentally friendly solutions to our demographic problems. Perhaps, rather than bringing workers into Canada to care for our old folks, we should be moving our old folks to warmer, gentler climes; places where labour is relatively abundant. Rather than solving our demographic crisis by bringing workers from the Philippines to Canada, perhaps we could think about shipping our old folks out to the Philippines instead. Set up old folks homes near the beach at Boracay. Or some other place with a warm, low-carbon lifestyle and lowcost healthcare. Just a modest proposal for solving the looming demographic crisis