Alberta’s separation debate puts two foundations of its prosperity at risk: the people who choose to live here and the businesses that choose to invest here. In my study of 352 randomly sampled Albertans, conducted over the summer of 2026, 49 per cent agreed or completely agreed that they would seriously consider moving to another province if Alberta voted to separate. My companion research on investment examines another consequence: businesses can postpone financial commitments while they wait for political uncertainty to resolve. Together, these findings expose a central danger of separation. Alberta could begin paying an economic price before its constitutional future is decided.
The argument rests on three findings. Respondents placed substantial weight on prolonged uncertainty and personal financial harm. Nearly half said a separation vote would make them seriously consider leaving Alberta. Historical and market evidence, meanwhile, shows why uncertainty matters to investment decisions. A proposal presented as a way to strengthen Alberta must therefore answer a practical question: how would it protect the province’s ability to retain residents and attract capital throughout the separation process?
Most respondents favour staying - and their commitment runs deep
Among the Albertans I surveyed, 72 per cent said they were either completely committed to staying in Canada or very likely to vote to stay. By comparison, 20 per cent were either completely committed to leaving or very likely to vote to leave. The remaining were somewhat likely to vote to stay or somewhat likely to vote to leave. They expressed a preference; they were not an undecided group.
The difference in conviction was greater still. Fifty-seven per cent were completely committed to staying in Canada, compared with 13 per cent completely committed to leaving. Support for separation is a meaningful minority position in this sample, but firm attachment to Canada is substantially more widespread. To understand what lies behind those positions, I examined which potential consequences respondents considered most concerning.
Three concerns account for most of the measured weight
I tested 14 potential separation concerns. Three accounted for more than half the measured preference weight: years of uncertainty during the separation process, a hit to personal financial security and the possibility that the United States would absorb Alberta. These concerns connect the constitutional debate to household decisions about careers, savings, retirement and where to build a future. They also raise a question about the destination of separation: whether leaving Canada would deliver the independence its advocates seek.
The concentration extended across the sample. For 83 per cent of respondents, at least one of those three fears ranked among their top two concerns. Adding the concern about losing Canadian citizenship increased that coverage to 90 per cent. These figures describe the importance respondents assigned to the scenarios, rather than their probability. They nevertheless establish the questions a separation proposal must answer: how long would uncertainty last, how would financial security be protected, and what would Alberta’s eventual relationship with its neighbours become?
Investment decisions can change before borders do
The economic consequences do not have to wait for separation. An investor can delay a project long before voters reach a final decision, and that delay can affect workers, suppliers and communities expecting the investment. In my companion working paper, The Cost of Asking: Investment Chill in the Run-Up to Separation Referendums, I examined Quebec, Brexit, Scotland and Catalonia, alongside an analysis of Alberta equity returns. The underlying mechanism is straightforward: when the future becomes less certain, waiting becomes more attractive.
That mechanism matters particularly in Alberta, where major energy projects require substantial upfront spending and long periods to recover their costs. Once built, their assets cannot simply be transferred to another jurisdiction. A company considering such a commitment must assess the future operating environment. Uncertainty can change when it commits, how much it commits and whether another opportunity receives the capital first. Alberta can lose an economic opportunity without an existing facility closing.
The historical evidence demonstrates the scale of the issue. My paper reports that Quebec’s share of Canadian non-residential investment fell from 22.5 per cent in 1976 to 17.6 per cent in 1981, a decline of 4.9 percentage points. I also examined the longest available interprovincial migration series: 54 consecutive years, from 1971/72 through 2024/25. Quebec recorded net out-migration throughout that period. An improving trend reversed sharply after the 1976 Parti Québécois victory, with the net outflow reaching 46,429 people in 1977/78.
The historical comparison is descriptive, rather than a calculation of losses caused exclusively by separatism. Quebec’s language policies and other economic forces also mattered, while Scotland experienced a more muted response. My Alberta analysis found a shift in oil-adjusted equity performance following the December 2022 Sovereignty Act, consistent with investors repricing risk. Other sector-specific explanations remain possible, and equity returns do not directly measure deferred projects. The evidence supports taking investment uncertainty seriously without assigning every economic change to a single political cause.
Households also decide where to commit their futures
Businesses are not the only ones making commitments. Households invest years in careers, homes and communities, and a separation vote could prompt some to reconsider those commitments. I asked respondents whether they agreed with the statement: “If Alberta voted to separate from Canada, I would seriously consider moving to another province.” Forty-nine per cent agreed or completely agreed, including 39 per cent who completely agreed. The strength of that response makes retention a central issue in evaluating separation.
Considering a move is different from making one, so this finding is not a forecast that half the province would leave. It identifies a substantial group for whom separation could change the calculation about living here. Actual departures could affect employers, local businesses, the tax base and housing demand. The survey does not estimate how many would follow through or what property prices would do. It does establish a risk that any credible proposal must address: some residents could respond to Alberta leaving Canada by leaving Alberta themselves.
How I measured the findings
I used best-worst conjoint (also called MaxDiff) to measure the relative importance of separation concerns. Respondents repeatedly saw small groups of concerns and selected their biggest and smallest fear in each group. This forces comparisons rather than allowing every issue to receive an equally high importance rating. The findings presented here come from the 352-person random sample; bots and duplicate responses were screened out. The results remain preliminary, and the rankings measure concern among the scenarios tested, not the likelihood of those scenarios or their power to change votes.
A separation proposal must account for the costs of getting there
The economic case for separation must explain how Alberta would sustain confidence throughout the process. Promises about the eventual destination cannot answer what happens while households and businesses wait for clarity. My research identifies strong attachment to Canada, concentrated concern about uncertainty and financial security, and a willingness among many respondents to reconsider living in Alberta after a separation vote.
Those findings set a clear test. A proposal intended to strengthen Alberta must demonstrate how it would retain people, protect financial security and keep investment moving during a prolonged transition. Alberta’s prosperity depends on residents and businesses continuing to choose it. Putting those choices in doubt creates an economic risk before any constitutional change is complete. The cost of asking can arrive before the answer is given.
Glowa, Tim, THE COST OF ASKING: Investment Chill in the Run-Up to Separation Referendums (June 16, 2026). Working paper available at SSRN.