Mega cities, mega savings? Efficiency debates in the Halifax Regional Municipality and the Capital Regional District in Victoria

Metropolitan reform, the reshaping of municipal governing structures and geographic boundaries, has been a significant force in the Canadian urban landscape in the latter part of the 20th century. Reforms in the 1950s and 1960s looked at changing the structure of city regions to address problems of planning coordination, infrastructure and service delivery, due to the burgeoning population growth after World War II, and the pressure of outward expansion beyond the city limits. In the 1990s, the basis of metropolitan reform has shifted away from the earlier focus on solving urban problems to a concentration on achieving efficiency in the governance of regions.;Metropolitan reform has experienced a rebirth in the 1990s as provincial governments have tinkered with the structure of metropolitan regions as a solution to achieving greater fiscal efficiency within them. Consolidation of individual municipalities into one governing structure has been the model dominating recent reforms. Those who oppose the consolidationist trend, such as Andrew Sancton and Robert Bish, argue that there is no evidence that one larger metropolitan unit within a region generates a greater cost savings than many separate municipalities within a region.;This thesis tested the prevailing view that metropolitan consolidation equates with greater efficiency and cost savings using a two region case study. A comparison of the Halifax Regional Municipality and Victoria's Capital Region District was chosen as case study sites because they represent an amalgamated versus non-amalgamated form of regional government, and are regions of similar size in terms of land base and population. An examination of municipal fiscal indicators was used to test the hypothesis that metropolitan consolidation equals a more efficient governing structure and captures cost savings.