Mowat Centre

��˾��ֱ�� has 'key role to play' in developing and implementing new AI technologies, Ontario Economic Summit will hear

noreen.rasbach — Wed, 24 Oct 2018 14:04:42 +0000

��˾��ֱ�� has 'key role to play' in developing and implementing new AI technologies, Ontario Economic Summit will hear

noreen.rasbach Wed, 10/24/2018 - 10:04

Cutline

“It’s really in our wheelhouse – supporting our employers and workers as they start to navigate the implications of AI and other changes,” says Maureen MacDonald, dean of ��˾��ֱ��'s School of Continuing Studies (photo by Romi Levine)

Chris Sorensen

Topic

Our Community

Artificial Intelligence

Creative Destruction Lab

Faculty of Information

Mowat Centre

Research & Innovation

Rotman School of Management

School of Continuing Studies

Technology

Vector Institute

Subheadline

The University of Toronto can play a key role in not only developing economy-boosting automation and artificial intelligence technologies, but ensuring Ontario workers are in the best possible position to reap the rewards.

That’s the message Maureen MacDonald, the dean of ��˾��ֱ��’s School of Continuing Studies, intends to deliver during a “great debate” on AI and the workforce at this week’s Ontario Economic Summit, an annual gathering of cabinet ministers, CEOs and post-secondary education leaders.

MacDonald, one of several university representatives at the three-day event in Niagara-on-the-Lake, says ��˾��ֱ�� is well-equipped to work with the province and employers to improve workers’ skills and education so they can succeed in the knowledge economy.

“It’s really in our wheelhouse – supporting our employers and workers as they start to navigate the implications of AI and other changes,” she says.

“AI can do the work, but someone still has to manage around the process. I think that’s where universities and, specifically, continuing education units can add value.”

The debate, presented by ��˾��ֱ��, is one of several scheduled discussions about the future of work at this year’s summit, organized by the Ontario Chamber of Commerce. Also on the agenda: presentations on AI’s potential impact on the labour market, strategies for businesses to respond to labour market changes and potential solutions to maintain Ontario’s global competitiveness.

Ontario Premier Doug Ford will wrap up the event Friday with remarks that follow a roundtable with delegates and provincial cabinet ministers.

��˾��ֱ�� and AI: Faculty members on their research and its impact

The development and implementation of AI technologies in a range of fields, from medicine to transportation, is predicted by some to create a US$100-billion global industry by 2025. And since Ontario has emerged as a hub of AI research – thanks in part to the work of deep learning “godfather” and ��˾��ֱ�� University Professor Emeritus Geoffrey Hinton and his students – the province is in a unique position to benefit from what many are calling a transformative technology.

“With universities, employers and other stakeholders working together, Ontario has the opportunity to seize the tremendous economic potential offered by AI,” says Vivek Goel, ��˾��ֱ��’s vice-president of research and innovation.

“The University of Toronto has a key role to play when it comes to both developing and implementing these new technologies, and ensuring students are equipped with the necessary knowledge and skills to succeed in the jobs and industries of tomorrow.”

��˾��ֱ��’s contributions to the AI phenomenon go well beyond producing world-leading research. For example, the Creative Destruction Lab, a seed-stage accelerator program affiliated with the Rotman School of Management, this week held its annual Machine Learning and the Market for Intelligence conference, which is designed in part to educate business leaders about the power of AI and how it can be adopted by their businesses. At the same time, ��˾��ֱ�� is supporting scores of AI-powered startups through its network of nine incubators and accelerators.

Last year, ��˾��ֱ�� worked with scores of partners to help establish the Vector Institute for Artificial Intelligence, which is emerging as one of the leading centres of its type globally and helping to attract significant talent and investment to Ontario. As well, in 2012 ��˾��ֱ�� co-founded SOSCIP, which has become a key player in boosting innovation in Ontario. The consortium, funded by the federal government, the Ontario government and industry, marries research-minded companies with leading academics, and then supercharges the partnerships with the latest in computational power.

��˾��ֱ�� is also emerging as a place to understand how AI and automation technologies will affect our lives. Just last month, Professor Brian Cantwell Smith, a philosopher and cognitive scientist, was named the Reid Hoffman Chair in Artificial Intelligence following a $2.45-million donation to ��˾��ֱ��’s Faculty of Information from the LinkedIn co-founder. The Centre for Ethics, too, has developed programming that focuses on the myriad ethical questions posed by AI development.

As for AI’s impact on jobs, Mowat Centre Director Andrew Parkin recently embarked on a three-year project that aims to better understand how prepared Ontarians are to adapt to employers’ shifting needs.

So far, Parkin says, there’s a mix of good and bad news: Ontario remains on par with other leading jurisdictions, but there’s already evidence of “skills polarization” emerging in the labour force, with some groups set to reap the rewards of technology-driven changes while others are at risk of falling further behind.

“Ontario is in as good a position as almost any other society to take advantage of these technologies,” says Parkin, who is also an associate professor at the Munk School for Global Affairs & Public Policy and will be delivering an overview of some of the project’s early findings at this week’s economic summit.

“But that doesn’t mean each and every Ontarian is well-positioned.”

Case in point: The majority of the 21,000 students who took continuing education courses at ��˾��ֱ�� last year already had post-secondary degrees, according to MacDonald. Hence, a key challenge is finding novel ways – from online courses to condensed certificate programs – to encourage those without a post-secondary degree to continue investing in education.

“As post-secondary institutions and continuing educations units, we have to be flexible enough to accommodate people who can’t take big chunks of time out of their work days for education,” says MacDonald.

She adds that, for the province, “It’s really about creating a cultural of life-long learning. It’s ultimately up to the individual to embark on it, but we can support it financially and in other ways.”

City, feds and province to likely play it safe on Toronto’s housing crisis: ��˾��ֱ�� expert

Romi Levine — Tue, 18 Apr 2017 18:25:03 +0000

City, feds and province to likely play it safe on Toronto’s housing crisis: ��˾��ֱ�� expert

Romi Levine Tue, 04/18/2017 - 14:25

Cutline

All three levels of government are meeting to figure out how to ease Toronto's housing woes (photo by Spacing Magazine via Flickr)

Romi Levine

Author legacy

Romi Levine

Topic

Toronto Mayor John Tory, Federal Finance Minister Bill Morneau and his Ontario counterpart, Charles Sousa, are meeting today to discuss ways of cooling Toronto’s hot housing market.

A Royal LePage housing survey released Tuesday indicated that the average price of a two storey home in the GTA is $894,919, up 22 per cent over last year, while average condo prices are up 11 per cent to $408,908 – putting home ownership out of reach for many Torontonians.

But there isn’t a quick fix to Toronto’s housing woes, says Sunil Johal, policy director at ��˾��ֱ��'s Mowat Centre, located at the School of Public Policy and Governance. He spoke with ��˾��ֱ�� News reporter Romi Levine about what the municipal, provincial and federal leaders can accomplish today.

Are any housing solutions set to come out of today’s meeting?

Housing prices are a really vexing challenge for governments. There's no real consensus on what's actually causing price increases. People have different opinions on whether it's inadequate supply, heightened demand or the role of foreign speculation. Without knowing what the actual problem is, it's really tough for governments to design a solution that they'll have confidence will actually work.

What we're seeing now is more of a political conversation. Due to the intense media focus on affordability issues, there's now a need to be seen to be doing something, but there are huge risks to taking the wrong type of action here. It's likely we'll see more tinkering around the margins than any kind of substantive measure. The only exception to that would be something that targets foreign buyers as was done in Vancouver because there's less of a political risk with that type of initiative than if governments were to take action against residents of Ontario or Toronto more specifically.

Who is – or should be – trying to find the causes of Toronto’s rising house prices?

All levels of government – the federal government, province and the city – are studying this issue. But in terms of what the experts that are looking at this say, many of them have vested interests because they're bank economists or otherwise have skin in the game.

I don't think anybody has an exact handle on what's going on, and that makes it a risky area to design policy intervention because you might over-correct or under-correct. And, that's a problem.

The other issue for governments is the real estate market boom sustaining the economy when you have 500,000 Ontarians working in the construction industry and almost 600,000 that work in finance, real estate and the insurance sectors combined. If you were to over-correct or deflate the housing market too suddenly, you have the risk of layoffs in those sectors, and you also have significant risks around current homeowners who are actually happy with the fact that home prices are very high. You don't want to over-correct to the point where people are seeing paper losses on their property.

Is playing it safe the best approach?

I think any action this year should be incremental, rather than come in with a “Big Bang” solution that might actually have unintended consequences.

Is there any way of knowing if we're in a housing bubble before it bursts?

It's always obvious after the fact that there was a bubble. But in the midst of a bubble, psychology takes over, and I think that's where things get risky for individuals who are trying to get into the housing market. The issue is timing it to when prices go down. Those who can do that are those who will make a lot of money. Those who can't are going to be left taking significant losses on properties they purchased.

The provincial government is planning on addressing the housing market in its budget at the end of April – what's the best way for them to take on the issue?

The challenge for the province is designing interventions that don't affect areas outside of Toronto unnecessarily because Toronto is in its own unique situation. Right now, the province can certainly look at province-wide taxes or measures to curb speculation from either residents or non-residents depending on how they design that kind of a tax. That's probably the main measure in the short-term.

Millions of Canadians could lose jobs to automation, ��˾��ֱ��'s Mowat Centre reports

Romi Levine — Tue, 22 Nov 2016 19:47:10 +0000

Millions of Canadians could lose jobs to automation, ��˾��ֱ��'s Mowat Centre reports

Romi Levine Tue, 11/22/2016 - 14:47

Cutline

An automated sorting area at a distribution centre in England (photo by Dan Kitwood/Getty Images)

Romi Levine

Author legacy

Romi Levine

Topic

Global Lens

Mowat Centre

School of Public Policy & Governance

Subheadline

In the next 10 to 15 years, between 1.5 million to 7.5 million jobs in Canada could be at risk, affecting even lawyers, doctors and engineers

As technology advances, occupations from truck drivers to lawyers are at risk of becoming at least partly automated, bringing about higher unemployment and more temporary workers.

A report released today by the Mowat Centre says that, over the next two decades, millions of Canadians could be out of jobs. The Centre is part of the University of Toronto’s School of Public Policy & Governance.

Read Huffington Post story on the report

��˾��ֱ�� News spoke with Sunil Johal, one of the authors of the report, about how Canada can adapt social policies to deal with dramatic shifts in the job market.

Is the rise of precarious work a symptom of an economic downturn or are there other factors?

I think there’s more to it than business cycles at this point. We’re seeing longer-term trends around precarious employment and non-standard work increasing over 20-year periods now. That’s something that outlives a three-to-four year economic downturn.

The main difference now from 20 to 25 years ago is the technological element to this. I think we’re seeing the rise of automation, robotics, artificial intelligence, the gig economy – all of these things together are culminating in a labour market that is far more precarious, far more task-based and in many cases, far more job-free.

How will automation affect Canadian workers?

The broader impacts of automation are yet to be seen. Companies are still figuring out how to leverage this new technology in a way that’s to their benefit that may impact jobs in a negative way.

We looked at a number of studies that have examined what potential job losses could look like in Canada. It’s a fairly broad range, but at the low end you’re looking at 1.5 million jobs in Canada and at the high end, you’re looking at about 7.5 million jobs that could be at risk of automation. That is a big number but, even if you take the low end of that, over the next 10-15 years that’s a lot of people.

The labour market in Canada right now is roughly 18 million.

That’s a game changer. We talk in the report about the fact that in the global financial crisis, Canada lost roughly 400,000 jobs. We’re talking double, triple or quadruple that number at the low end of these estimates.

Do the federal or provincial governments have policies in place to support workers at risk of losing their jobs to automation?

No, the social infrastructure is not in place right now for this type of major change to our economy. We can even argue that in the status quo current state of play in Canada, for many people, programs like employment insurance, the health care system and childcare are insufficient today. If they get worse in the labour market in the next five to 15 years, absent significant changes, those programs are not sufficient to meet the needs of Canadians in terms of coverage, quality of coverage and fundamentally, how they’re designed.

Are there examples of good social policy that Canada can learn from?

We set out a number of recommendations and options in terms of what governments might want to think about to modernize our social infrastructure.

One of the interesting ones was Denmark’s model of labour market training and support. They have a model called the “flexicurity” model – providing both flexibility and security to workers.

It’s much easier for Danish companies to hire and fire people – up to 25 per cent of Danes in the private sector switch jobs every year. There are significant levels of income replacement for unemployed workers – up to 90 per cent income replacement for workers and much higher levels of investment in training and skill support than we see in Canada.

In a world where more disruptions are happening more quickly, we would argue the Danish model is much more nimble and supportive and much more in-tune with the 21st century labour market than Canada’s model, which you could characterize as a very good model in the 1960s but not such a good model in 2016.

As we saw in the U.S. election, election cycles mean politicians can attempt to back-track on policies. What assurance do we have that long-term policies will stay in place to support at-risk workers?

The one thing that’s happening with technology that makes me optimistic that we can actually see changes – that there is a policy window for governments to do something about this – is the fact that technological disruption is not just going to be impacting those at the low-end of the income scale.

We’re going to see doctors, lawyers, engineers – all kinds of white collar professionals potentially see their job impacted in some way by these changes. That gives a much broader constituency of support for the necessary investments and program adjustments that’ll be needed in the coming years.

New regulations mean business as usual for Uber, says ��˾��ֱ�� expert

lavende4 — Mon, 09 May 2016 14:40:23 +0000

New regulations mean business as usual for Uber, says ��˾��ֱ�� expert lavende4 Mon, 05/09/2016 - 10:40

Cutline

Toronto taxi drivers protesting against Uber (All photos by Getty Images)

Noreen Ahmed-Ullah

Author legacy

Noreen Ahmed-Ullah

Topic

School of Public Policy and Governance

For months, Torontonians have debated the fate of Uber, even as the taxi industry has threatened protests and the ride-hailing service has issued threats of its own to leave the city. As Uber continued to operate illegally – outside the terms of the current taxi bylaws – councillors and the mayor discussed solutions. This week, after a heated debate, City Council finally approved new regulations for Uber. ��˾��ֱ�� News talked with Sunil Johal, policy director at the Mowat Centre at ��˾��ֱ��’s School of Public Policy and Governance, about the new laws governing Uber and whether these will settle the issue, once and for all.

What will change for Uber? Do the new regulations go far enough in regulating Uber?

Toronto’s new rules will largely mean business as usual for Uber, its drivers and customers. UberX drivers will now be required to file documentation, such as criminal record checks and insurance certificates, directly with the city rather than with Uber as had been the case previously, and obtain a city license. But Uber drivers won’t be required to have cameras in their car, undertake training courses or have rates regulated by the city (other than a small change to the base fare).

What effect these rules will have on the ground transportation system in Toronto is uncertain right now. Taxis have operated in a supply-managed marketplace for decades, and the effects of allowing more cars on congestion, consumer satisfaction, safety and accessibility will take some time to sort out. The City will need to closely monitor these types of issues over the next one to two years and be prepared to make adjustments as needed.

[quote (class="additional class" | author="Sunil Johal")]“Indications are that Uber is pleased with the new rules” - Sunil Johal[/quote]

How have the rules changed for taxi drivers? Is it enough to satisfy the taxi industry?

The new rules reduce a number of mandated requirements for taxis, including the elimination of 17 days of training for new drivers, refresher courses and the need to have CPR and First Aid certification. They also permit taxis to discount fares from regulated rates, and charge higher rates if trips are booked through a smartphone. Any rate reductions would need to be borne by individual drivers rather than taxicab brokers.

These amendments seem to have been designed to win the favour of the larger taxicab brokerages in the city, and also go some ways to removing time-consuming requirements for individual drivers. I expect we’ll see taxi brokerages start to explore the possibility of re-constituting themselves as Private Transportation Companies (PTCs), the classification Uber has under the new rules, as they would have greater flexibility around pricing and fewer costs. More individual drivers will also likely explore driving for PTCs, as their income potential may be higher.

Do you think the controversy ends here or will this continue? Is the city, Uber or the taxi industry still pursuing other issues or regulations?

Indications are that Uber is pleased with the new rules, and I anticipate the taxi industry will take a careful look at how their business model is going to be impacted. Some in the industry who invested in taxi medallions at a cost of $300,000 or more in recent years may still be very unhappy with the impacts of these rules on their investments. The city has committed to studying compensation for medallion owners and this could remain a friction point in the coming months.

It’s interesting to note that City Council actually requested the province step in to regulate companies like Uber. Whether the province wants to get involved in what has proven to be a political minefield will bear watching.

Are similar battles playing out in other cities? Are any of the regulations or new laws interesting enough that you think they’ll influence how other cities deal with Uber?

Toronto adopted an approach that is largely similar to that of many other cities in the US and elsewhere. A number of other cities in Ontario like Mississauga and Hamilton are currently developing approaches to their own taxi industries, and will likely use Toronto’s approach as a starting point for discussions.

For more about the Uber debate, watch Urban Studies professor Shauna Brail's video:

Mowat Centre: cities need a bigger say in infrastructure

sgupta — Mon, 30 Nov 2015 14:26:20 +0000

Mowat Centre: cities need a bigger say in infrastructure sgupta Mon, 11/30/2015 - 09:26

Cutline

Report recommends a role for municipalities in infrastructure spending. (Photo by Ross G. Strachan via Flickr.)

Alan Christie

Author legacy

Alan Christie

Features

Mowat Centre

Infrastructure

Subheadline

Report recommends more flexibility in raising revenue

A new Mowat Centre report offers guiding principles to the federal government on helping municipalities through spending on infrastructure – not just handing out money but being strategic about it.

The report, titled From the Ground Up: The Role of Local Governments in Building Canada’s Economic Infrastructure Network, argues that while commitments from the new government in Ottawa to double infrastructure spending are promising, it is crucial to act strategically and “get the most out of each dollar spent.”

Sara Ditta, author of the report, told ��˾��ֱ�� News that infrastructure spending has suffered from a “fragmented” approach and that she hopes to “change the conversation a little.” The Mowat Centre is an independent public think tank located at the School of Public Policy & Governance at ��˾��ֱ��.

In the 1950s, the federal government owned the most infrastructure while municipal governments owned the least. That has changed significantly.

The federal government now owns 12 per cent while local governments account for 51 per cent (provincial governments own the rest). Locally-owned infrastructure includes roads, bridges and other means of connecting broader trade networks.

“These are crucial parts of the system for delivering goods and services to and from Canada,” the report says. “A port, airport or international hub is likely to be as efficient and effective as the infrastructure to which it is connected – much of which is owned, operated and maintained by local governments.”

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau says he is committed to giving Canadian municipalities a voice in making decisions, something critics say has been lacking for several years.

The report states that “local insights are often overlooked” by other levels of government and that municipalities have “limited opportunities to contribute to discussions on strategic infrastructure investments of national importance.” Local governments can provide significant knowledge and expertise in this area.

Infrastructure “is closely tied to productivity and quality of life in several ways,” the report states. Congestion, it suggests, is costing about $15 billion a year, or nearly one per cent of Canada’s GDP. Poor infrastructure results in increased costs and decreased returns on investment. All this can be ultimately detrimental to Canada’s economic prosperity.

One of the barriers municipalities have to overcome is the lack of fiscal tools to fund infrastructure. “Local governments are forced to raise funds primarily through property taxes,” the report says, “which are an inflexible and inefficient way to raise revenue.” Municipalities are estimated to receive only eight cents of every tax dollar raised across the country.

“It is considered unrealistic to expect to close local infrastructure funding gaps with such a strong reliance on property taxes,” the report continues. “Other sources of tax revenue by local governments in other countries to fund infrastructure projects include income taxes, consumption taxes, business taxes, tourist taxes and vehicle registration taxes.”

New revenue tools have been a topic of discussion at recent conferences at ��˾��ֱ��, including one involving Toronto city manager Peter Wallace and President Meric Gertler, where Anne Golden, a ��˾��ֱ�� alumna and former head of the United Way of Greater Toronto, suggested raising revenue for transit through a city sales tax.

The Mowat report does not go as far as recommending a sales tax, but says that new mechanisms are needed to raise revenue and fund infrastructure projects strategically to ensure that public dollars go further.

“A first step,” the report suggests, “would be to look at new models already being used in provinces like Manitoba, which dedicated a portion of its provincial sales tax to infrastructure projects.”

(See the original of the above photo at Flickr.)

picpath

sites/default/files/2015-11-30-bridge.jpg

Canada Next: John Tory on the future of Canadian cities and the role of ��˾��ֱ��

sgupta — Wed, 18 Nov 2015 08:52:11 +0000

Canada Next: John Tory on the future of Canadian cities and the role of ��˾��ֱ�� sgupta Wed, 11/18/2015 - 03:52

Cutline

“��˾��ֱ�� is in the top 20 [universities] in the world and it is a huge selling point in terms of attracting not only investment but attracting the best and brightest to Toronto,” John Tory says (photo by Bora vs. Bora via Instagram)

Alan Christie

Author legacy

Alan Christie

Topic

City & Culture

Addressing income and wealth inequality at the local level

sgupta — Mon, 02 Nov 2015 10:50:14 +0000

Addressing income and wealth inequality at the local level sgupta Mon, 11/02/2015 - 05:50

Cutline

The University of Toronto Scarborough, which helped host the Toronto 2015 Pan Am/Parapan Am Games, is an example of an anchor institution that's “already doing great things when it comes to ensuring the surrounding community benefits from projects.” says

Alan Christie

Author legacy

Alan Christie

Topic

Subheadline

Mowat Centre highlights the importance of institutions that serve as anchors for communities

Construction skills programs for at-risk youth. Small-business snack shops. The collaborative development of the Eglinton Crosstown Light Rail project.

Community-centred projects such as these – anchored by institutions including ��˾��ֱ�� – can catalyze local economies, says new research from The Mowat Centre. The independent think tank recently released two reports detailing new strategies in building community wealth across Ontario.

The reports, done in conjunction with the Atkinson Foundation, focus on the emergence of Community Benefits Agreements (CBAs) and how “Anchor Institutions” – which include the University of Toronto – can play a “significant role in building local assets and leveraging them to create a greater supply of decent work and other economic opportunities.”

Nevena Dragicevic, a policy associate at the Mowat Centre, said in an interview with ��˾��ֱ�� News that “the most interesting thing about these community wealth-building strategies is that they amplify existing public and private investments, which in a time of shrinking budgets and cuts to services is really important.” The Mowat Centre is an independent public think tank located at the School of Public Policy & Governance at ��˾��ֱ��. Dragicevic worked on both reports.

The Ontario government has pledged to spend $130 billion over the next 10 years in public infrastructure plus the millions it will spend on goods and services. In a foreword in the CBA report, the Atkinson Foundation’s Colette Murphy writes that “it’s time to use this considerable economic power even more deliberately and strategically to address income and wealth inequality.”

Murphy wrote that “there’s a growing movement of people – inside and outside government – who aren’t content to watch fissures open up and leave our province deeply divided along race, gender and income lines.” This includes not just anti-poverty activists but managers of public institutions such as universities, hospitals and colleges, as well as some in the private sector.

Other cities, such as Glasgow and Cleveland, have negotiated CBAs with developers to develop better procurement strategies, workforce development hubs and collaborations with organizations that engage, train and support workers in low-income communities.

Dragicevic said that the Eglinton Crosstown Light Rail Transit project in Toronto is being used as a “test case” for a local CBA. The new line crosses through or near five neighbourhoods identified by Toronto as “neighbourhood improvement areas.” Metrolinx signed a CBA with the Toronto Community Benefits Network in 2014 aimed at ensuring the $5.3 billion infrastructure project creates economic opportunities for residents in those areas as well as for low-income Torontonians across the city.

Projects such as the Eglinton LRT “take so long to come to fruition” Dragicevic said, so it is vital that coalitions between government, developers and community leaders are maintained, and promises kept.

She said the role of anchor institutions in building community wealth “is just coming into public consciousness, although some of them have behaved in that way by using their purchasing power or intellectual resources to invest in the community.”

Dragicevic pointed to ��˾��ֱ�� Scarborough as one of the anchor institutions “already doing great things when it comes to ensuring the surrounding community benefits from projects.”

The anchor institution report said ��˾��ֱ�� Scarborough’s Master Plan Infrastructure Initiative is projected to create 2,500 full-time equivalent jobs from 2012 to 2019.

The anchor strategies include a “hammerheads” program that gives at-risk youths a 16-week intensive experience in construction and trades with a guaranteed job placement after graduation. UTSC is exploring having the program become a contractual requirement for all future construction projects.

The initiative also provides that in new buildings, not subject to existing contracts with food service providers, smaller vendors are offered a chance to set up shop. The vendors then hire from the local community and student body.

UTSC is also partnered with the East Scarborough Storefront, a community organization, to develop a workforce program that will connect local residents with skills and interest in construction, with job opportunities at UTSC.

picpath

sites/default/files/2015-11-02-mowat-tpasc.jpg

Mowat Centre

��˾��ֱ�� has 'key role to play' in developing and implementing new AI technologies, Ontario Economic Summit will hear

��˾��ֱ�� and AI: Faculty members on their research and its impact

City, feds and province to likely play it safe on Toronto’s housing crisis: ��˾��ֱ�� expert

Millions of Canadians could lose jobs to automation, ��˾��ֱ��'s Mowat Centre reports

Read Huffington Post story on the report

New regulations mean business as usual for Uber, says ��˾��ֱ�� expert

Mowat Centre: cities need a bigger say in infrastructure

Canada Next: John Tory on the future of Canadian cities and the role of ��˾��ֱ��

Read more about the Mowat Centre reports

Addressing income and wealth inequality at the local level