by Greg Landry.
Urban and rural polarization can be defined as the political, social, economic, and cultural divide between urban and rural areas. If left unchecked, the implications of polarization include an increase in prejudice and discrimination, slower economic development, and an inability to address societal challenges (Elderman Trust Barometer, 2023). In Canada, dimensions of urban-rural polarization appear frequently in the mainstream media.
Causal Layered Analysis (CLA) is a futures methodology that uses a layered approach by deconstructing and reconstructing complex social problems. The classical methodology unpacks issues across four levels: litany, systemic causes, discourse/worldview, and myth/metaphor (Inayatullah, 1998, Inayatullah et al. 2022, Wahab, 2024). Through this layered approach, this article dives deeper into cultural narratives and structural dynamics contributing to the urban–rural polarization in Canada.
A unique feature of CLA is that each layer may require a different temporal and geographic scale. Compared to other applications of CLA in the literature, this article places more weight on understanding the appropriate geographic scale for each layer. This is somewhat analogous to urban planning, where environmental boundaries often differ from economic or social ones. This variation doesn’t prevent effective planning—it simply means each layer must be analyzed at the appropriate geographic scale before being overlaid onto the planning area.
Litany (Surface-Level Problem)
The Globe and Mail, Canada’s most widely read newspaper, is filled with a plethora of headlines warning about the nation’s urban-rural divide – “Conservatives exploit urban-rural divide…” (Ibbitson, 2010), “Rural-urban divide now beats all others, risking populist backlash” (Ibbitson, 2018), and “Canada’s rural-urban divide is getting deeper, and that hurts all Canadians” (Savoie, 2021).
At the surface level, the urban-rural polarization in Canada is widely characterized by a growing political divide between urban progressives and rural conservatives. Voting patterns, policy preferences, and political rhetoric, often pit urban and rural communities against each other. A study of Canadian federal elections between 1896 and 2019 found that urban-rural divide has been the most significant in recent elections than at any point in Canada’s history (Armstrong, Lucas, and Taylor, 2023). The study employed different definitions of urban and rural and concluded that a definition based on density was the best indicator of differences in the litany over time.
In the 2019 federal election, the median population density for liberal ridings was more than 38 times higher than that of conservative ridings. (Speer and Loewen, 2021b). Canada’s most recent election results once again highlight a sharp divide, with liberal voters concentrated in urban areas and conservative voters in rural areas (figure 1).
Fig. 1 Canadian unofficial election results, 2025 (authors calculations based on Elections Canada data).
Systemic Causes
When examining this layer of urban and rural polarization in Canada, it’s essential to define “urban” and “rural” in ways that reflect the functional boundaries that encompass the systemic causes. Several definitions of “rural” are used in national-level policy analysis, depending on the context (Statistics Canada, 2001a). Rural areas can be defined by variables such as population density, population size, character of the area, or proximity to essential services. The most suitable definition depends on the issue being analyzed. For example, when considering postal delivery or infrastructure deployment such as rural broadband, definitions based on density or distance between homes are most relevant. However, when analyzing where to locate a hospital or professional sports team, the overall size of the population within a geographic area becomes more important.
For the purposes of this section, Census Metropolitan Area (CMA) will be used as the definition of urban, as the boundaries are delineated based on functional regions. This definition of urban also closely aligns with electoral maps from the latest election results, which show that Canada’s CMAs were almost exclusively liberal, while areas outside these larger cities were heavily conservative. A CMA is a region centered around a densely populated urban core of at least 50,000 people, with a total population of 100,000 or more, and includes surrounding areas that are economically integrated through commuting patterns (Statistics Canada, 2021b). In this way, each CMA functions as a distinct, geographically defined system, where residents share access to similar economic and social opportunities by virtue of proximity – though individual outcomes may still vary based on personal circumstances.
Based on this definition, 30 statistical indicators are presented in Figure 2, which serve as markers of systemic causes underlying urban–rural polarization in Canada. The data reveal that urban areas tend to have faster-growing and more diverse populations, higher levels of educational attainment, and greater access to services such as healthcare, transit, and child care, whereas rural areas are characterized by older populations, higher rates of car ownership, and employment concentrated in trades and resource-based industries.
Fig 2. Rural Canada as a percentage of urban Canada (authors calculations based on Statistics Canada’s 2021 Census and table: 13-10-0805-01)
These structural differences shape distinct political priorities: urban voters often support sustainability and inclusion, while rural voters emphasize resource development and localized healthcare. Federal carbon pricing—designed to curb emissions—faced strong opposition from rural communities in the last election, with many arguing the tax disproportionately impacted them due to long-distance travel and reliance on resource industries, while urban policymakers viewed it as a necessary climate measure. The first-past-the-post electoral system further deepens the divide by amplifying urban interests, as cities dominate national policy and host Canada’s most influential media, universities, corporate head offices, bank headquarters and lobbying groups. With political, economic, and intellectual elites concentrated in urban centers, rural perspectives are often marginalized, fueling resentment and a sense of exclusion (Savoie, 2021).
Worldview
This layer explores the dominant narratives and ideologies shaping perceptions. Two major studies using survey data examined how urban and rural Canadians perceive each other’s circumstances and values (Speer & Loewen, 2021a, 2021b). In the survey respondents self-identified if they lived in a “city”, “suburb”, “large town”, “small town”, or “rural area.” This self-identification is important because individuals’ perceptions of their environment often shape their worldviews.
In the urban worldview, progress appears to be closely linked to diversity, sustainability, and social justice. Residents in cities, suburbs and large towns perceive economic growth is higher in cities. From an urban perspective, rural areas are often viewed as economically stagnant, socially conservative, and resistant to change. This narrative can foster a sense of superiority among urban dwellers, who may see rural residents as outdated or disconnected from evolving priorities like climate action and inclusive development.
Conversely, the rural worldview emphasizes stability, self-reliance, and tradition. Rural residents often perceive urban ideologies as intrusive and threatening to their traditional way of life. Rooted in local identity and resource-based livelihoods, there is a strong preference for local autonomy. This perspective is shaped by feelings of alienation and a belief that rural voices are ignored by urban elites, deepening mistrust and reinforcing cultural and political divides.
Myths & Metaphors
In 2022, the Canadian province of Nova Scotia launched a year-long strategic foresight initiative to explore and improve living standards for its residents. Sixty participants from diverse backgrounds—including Indigenous Mi’kmaq, African Nova Scotians, Acadians and other descendants of European settlers, and recent immigrants—came together and used a wide range of foresight methodologies that culminated in the development of four scenarios. The exercise was intended to expose polarities to test public policies against different plausible futures.
The process surfaced the urban-rural divide as a key axis upon which to develop scenarios, underscoring a central tension in the province’s potential trajectory. This tension reflects a deeper historical pattern in Canada, where urban “heartlands” have long dominated politically and economically, relying on rural “hinterlands” for resources (Watkins, 1963). Participants created a metaphor for each of four scenarios that underpinned similar urban and rural worldviews described in the last layer (figure 3).
The first scenario, “Canada’s Silicon East Coast,” is a metaphor for technology-driven urbanization. The second, “Anchored in Tradition,” reflects a future rooted in traditional, conservative rural values—emphasizing heritage and resource-based industries. Here, the province embraces its rural identity, prioritizing stability and cultural preservation. The third scenario, “Fortress Nova Scotia,” portrays cities as fortified enclaves in a dangerous and divided world. The “Fortress” is a powerful image of fear, walls, and defense, and reflects a belief in managed, secure societies with a top-down approach. The fourth, “Hyper-local Renaissance,” is a metaphor for regenerative rural living, community resilience, and self-sufficiency, where goods are produced and consumed at a local level. Inspired by the Solarpunk ethos, it reflects a creative, nature-aligned lifestyle rooted in sustainability and inclusiveness.
Fig 3. Four Scenarios based on Nova Scotia’s 2022 Strategic Foresight Process
While the scenario planning exercise was set out to the year 2060, the future has arrived early. Sparked by American tariffs and rhetoric framing Canada as a de facto 51st state, some aspects of all four scenarios are now being realized in real-time. Rural advocates demand oil and gas pipelines be built immediately for self-sufficiency, while urban Canadians, galvanized by the U.S. rollback of social rights and climate science, are defending a progressive social and environmental agenda. Paradoxically, recent events have become a powerful, unifying force for national identity while tensions over the preferred path forward continue to pull urban and rural areas in different directions.
The key to bridging divides may not be to erase them, but to pull together the complementary aspects of different visions. This allows for a more holistic and resilient path forward. This idea resonates with the Mi’kmaw concept of Etuaptmumk (Two-Eyed Seeing), which refers to learning to see from one eye with the strengths of Indigenous knowledges and ways of knowing, and from the other eye with the strengths of Western knowledges—then using both eyes together for the benefit of all. It reflects the gift of multiple perspectives, treasured by many Indigenous peoples. For the Mi’kmaw, it is a prerequisite for the new consciousness needed for integrative, transcultural, transdisciplinary, or collaborative work.
Bridging the urban-rural divide requires a new metaphor—one that reflects the symbiotic relationship between these communities. In Canada, the Black Ash Tree, now a threatened species, has long held cultural significance for the Mi’kmaw people, who have used it for centuries to craft baskets, canoes, and snowshoes (COSEWIC, 2018). According to Mi’kmaq creation stories, the first people emerged from its wood. They regard it as something akin to a “world-tree,” a symbol echoed in many cultures, including the Norse myth of the great ash tree called Yggdrasil (Hutwohl, 1902).
This “world-tree” metaphor offers a narrative to unify Canada’s divides, structurally integrating four competing futures into a single, resilient organism. The “roots” represent the rural foundation, emphasizing deep cultural continuity and a strong connection to history. They are deep, wide, and often unseen, yet supply raw materials, water, and food, and anchoring the entire tree. The branches signify new growth and opportunities, extending from a solid, traditional base. The trunk symbolizes the Fortress City, providing strength, resilience, and centralized support. The canopy represents vibrant, advanced urban centers of commerce and technological innovation where the fruits of progress are most visible. Crucially, the roots and branches are interdependent, underscoring the mutual reliance between rural and urban communities.
The evolving relationship between urban and rural communities in Canada demands a paradigm shift in policy and national discourse. Historically, the governments in Canada have employed a “rural lens” to ensure that programs and regulations consider the unique circumstances of rural, remote, and northern communities. While this approach has provided some safeguards, it operates within a framework of separation, often reinforcing distinctions rather than fostering integration. Drawing inspiration from Norse mythology, where the world tree requires constant nurturing to maintain its vitality (Lindow, 2001), Canada must similarly tend to the interdependent systems that connect its urban and rural communities.
There is a need for a new policy lens based on an urban–rural nexus that recognizes the mutual reliance between cities and the countryside. Urban centers depend on rural regions for essential resources such as food, water, and raw materials, while rural communities rely on cities for access to markets, technology, and specialized services. These interconnections span economic, social, and environmental dimensions, from labor migration and resource flows to shared ecological impacts. A holistic approach to regenerative development must actively nurture these flows—of people, capital, information, and innovation. Consistently applying this integrative lens in policymaking and national storytelling would help diffuse rising polarization. By viewing the nation not as a collection of separate worlds but as an interconnected network of roots and branches, Canada can build bridges toward a more holistic and resilient future.
Conclusion
This article illustrated that scenarios can help envision futures of divergence, while CLA can envision futures of convergence. It also illustrates that different geographies may be appropriate for each layer of CLA. For instance, in this article, the “litany” was national in scope; “systems” were based on functional regions that transcend administrative boundaries; “worldviews” were based on geographies where people self-identified as urban and rural; and the metaphors were created at a much broader scale.
Polarization isn’t inevitable, it’s a choice. By understanding the layers of the urban-rural divide and implementing transformative strategies, we can foster a more inclusive and interdependent society. A lens based on the urban–rural nexus that blends the best of both worlds through economic hybridity, cultural exchange, and infrastructure equity—offers a path beyond division. The future belongs not to cities or the countryside alone, but to integrated regions where both thrive symbiotically. Urban-rural polarization is rooted in systemic choices and deep-seated narratives. By shifting myths, fostering mutual respect, and redesigning systems for equity, Canada may be in a better position to cultivate a future that bridges divide.
Fig 4 – Urban-Rural Polarization CLA, produced using Photoshop and NightCafe AI
References
Armstrong, D. A., Lucas, J., & Taylor, Z. (2022). The Urban-Rural Divide in Canadian Federal Elections, 1896–2019. Canadian Journal of Political Science, 55(1), 84–106. https://doi:10.1017/S0008423921000792
COSEWIC. (2018). COSEWIC assessment and status report on the Black Ash (Fraxinus nigra) in Canada. Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada. https://www.canada.ca/en/environment-climate-change/services/species-risk-public-registry/cosewic-assessments-status-reports/black-ash-2018.html
Edelman Trust Institute. (2023). 2023 Edelman Trust Barometer: Navigating a polarized world. Edelman. https://www.edelman.com/trust/2023/trust-barometer
Hutwohl, R. (1902) The Legends of Glooscap, by Ivy Hooper. The Theosophist
Ibbitson, J. (2010, August 27). Conservatives exploit urban/rural divide over long-gun registry. The Globe and Mail
Ibbitson, J. (2018, December 10). Rural-urban divide now beats all others, risking populist backlash: As that stark divide becomes more evident in both the U.S. and Canada, suburban voters hold the balance of power. The Globe and Mail.
Watkins, M. H. (1963). A staple theory of economic growth. The Canadian Journal of Economics and Political Science / Revue canadienne d’Economique et de Science politique, 29(2), 141–158. https://doi.org/10.2307/139461
Inayatullah, S (1998). “Causal layered analysis: Poststructuralism as method” Futures. 30 (8): 815–829
Inayatullah, S., Mercer, R., Milojević, I., & Sweeney, J. A. (2022). CLA 3.0 – Thirty years of transformative research. Tamkang University Press.
Lindow, J. (2001). Norse mythology: A guide to the gods, heroes, rituals, and beliefs. Oxford University Press.
Savoie, D. J. (2021, December 10). Canada’s rural-urban divide is getting deeper, and that hurts all Canadians. The Globe and Mail.
Speer, S., & Loewen, P. (2021a). Perceptions and polarization: Measuring the perception gap between urban and rural Canadians. Public Policy Forum. https://ppforum.ca/publications/perceptions-and-polarization/
Speer, S., & Loewen, P. (2021b). Perception and reality across Canada’s urban-rural divide. Policy Options. https://policyoptions.irpp.org/2021/02/perception-and-reality-across-canadas-urban-rural-divide/
Statistics Canada. (2001a). Definitions of rural (Rural and Small Town Canada Analysis Bulletin, Vol. 3, No. 3, Catalogue no. 21-006-XIE). Ottawa.
Statistics Canada. (2021b). Dictionary, Census of Population, 2021 (Catalogue no. 98-301-X). Ottawa. https://www12.statcan.gc.ca/census-recensement/2021/ref/dict/index-eng.cfm
Wahab, A. (2024). Two decades of causal layered analysis: A bibliometric analysis and review (2000–2022). World Futures Review. https://doi.org/10.1177/19467567241235112
