Northern Housing Report

Economic and demographic context

2024 mining shocks continued to shape gross domestic product (GDP) growth, while public-sector activity helped cushion economic impacts

Yukon’s real GDP increased modestly by 0.6% in 2025 following a sharp decrease in 2024 (Figure 1). Growth in services and non-mining goods industries partially offset ongoing mining-related declines. Higher territorial spending drove public-sector growth and private-sector activity.

Still, mining continued to weigh heavily on the economy after the June 2024 heap leach failure and shutdown of the Eagle Gold Mine. The mine accounted for roughly 10% of Yukon’s GDP in 2023. Mining-related industries kept declining in 2025, the territory’s first full year without the mine’s contribution.

Real GDP in the Northwest Territories declined a further 2% in 2025. This was the weakest performance in Canada, as mining weakness continued to spread across the broader economy. Public administration and healthcare partially offset the downturn amid the territory’s large public sector.

Before the downturn, mining accounted for roughly one fifth of territorial GDP. Diamond-sector weakness intensified after diamond prices collapsed in 2024 and aging mines moved closer to closure. Financial pressures within the diamond sector deepened. The owner of the Ekati diamond mine filed for creditor protection, while several major mines face closure over the coming years.

Nunavut’s real GDP level remained high in 2025 after growing at its fastest pace in 5 years in 2024. Elevated gold prices, higher output at existing mines, notably Agnico Eagle’s operations, and major capital projects — including mine-life extensions and exploration programs — supported growth in 2024.

Mining contracted in 2025 as Baffinland Iron Mines reduced production at the Mary River mine by roughly one third amid weaker iron ore prices. Public-sector activity and residential construction helped support the broader economy.

Nunavut matches national tariff exposure while Yukon and the Northwest Territories remain less vulnerable

Yukon and the Northwest Territories have the lowest exposure to U.S. tariffs among provinces and territories. In Nunavut, effects should track national trends, with greater sensitivity due to less economic diversification.

As noted in our 2026 Summer Housing Market Outlook, tariffs are expected to weigh on investment and exports through 2026. Recovery is expected to begin in 2027 as trade diversification progresses nationally. However, Nunavut's limited export diversification may slow its recovery.

Transient labour plays a larger role in territorial workforces and has grown fastest in Nunavut 

A larger share of workers in the Territories lived elsewhere in Canada while earning income in the Territories, reflecting the region’s greater reliance on transient labour:

• Yukon: 14%³
• Northwest Territories: 21%
• Nunavut: 37%
• Provinces: 3%

These shares have shown recent growth across the Territories, especially in Nunavut, while remaining flat in the provinces. While reliance on transient labour can place upward pressure on housing demand, it may also reflect a lack of available housing. Limited housing options can make it more difficult for workers to relocate permanently to the Territories.

Shifts in workforce size and employment shaped unemployment rates

The Northwest Territories and Nunavut rely more on transient workers who move in and out. As a result, their labour force has declined at times.⁴ This pattern has not been seen elsewhere in Canada in recent years. As a result, diverging unemployment rate trends were driven not only by changes in employment, but also by changes in labour force size:

• Yukon: The unemployment rate (4.2%) remained largely unchanged in 2025 after increasing in 2024 from a historic low.⁵ During this period, labour force growth — driven by migration and non-permanent residents — outpaced job gains. Employment weakness was concentrated in goods-producing industries, particularly mining and construction, but public-sector gains offset some of these losses.⁶
• Northwest Territories: The unemployment rate declined to 5.0% despite economic weakness. While jobs remained below the 5-year average, labour-force contraction drove unemployment lower. Slower employment growth reflected mining-related job losses outside Yellowknife, while the capital continued to see job gains.
• Nunavut: The unemployment rate increased to 10.6% despite relatively strong economic conditions. This partly reflected a labour-force rebound after a temporary dip in 2024. Mining drove job gains, but stalled public-sector hiring meant overall employment growth lagged labour force growth.

While Indigenous unemployment was higher across all 3 territories, disparities with non-Indigenous populations remained below 5-year averages. Over the past year, the gap narrowed only in the Northwest Territories.

Indigenous workers continue to earn about 12% to 20% less than non-Indigenous workers across the Territories. The gap was smallest in Yukon and largest in Nunavut.⁷ These wage gaps have narrowed in Yukon and the Northwest Territories in recent years, but widened modestly in Nunavut.

Population growth moderated across the North, though to varying degrees

Population growth across the 3 centres moderated in 2025 following stronger gains in 2024. That year, Whitehorse and Yellowknife reached record highs, while Nunavut⁸ recovered from a sharp slowdown (Figure 2).

Slower population growth in 2025 likely tempered housing demand, though less so than nationally. Growth across the 3 northern centres continued to outpace the national rate. Despite this relative strength, federal immigration changes enacted in 2025 contributed to slower growth, with impacts varying across the Territories. The impact of this policy on overall growth depended on the share of non-permanent residents and the relative strength of other factors such as interprovincial migration and natural increase.

• Whitehorse: Non-permanent resident shares fell nearly a full percentage point to roughly 4%, the largest decline among the Territories. Tighter federal policy restrictions on international students meant Yukon was more affected due to its larger student population, compounded by declines in work-permit holders. Yukon also experienced net outmigration to the provinces as labour market competition intensified.
• Yellowknife: Despite slower growth, non-permanent resident shares remained relatively stable, near 2%. Interprovincial migration stabilized near net zero after years of outflows, supported by continued employment growth in the capital.
• Nunavut: Non-permanent resident shares remained below 1%. Population growth continued to be driven by natural increase (births minus deaths), supported by Canada’s highest fertility rate. Still, Nunavut continued to lose working-age residents to other parts of Canada amid severe affordability and housing pressures.⁹

Housing supply

Residential investment recovery remains uneven

Real investment in new residential construction in the Territories remained below 2021 levels in 2025 (Figure 3). This was a larger decline than that seen nationally. Across the North, trends diverged due to differences in the timing of public and subsidized housing projects. Private development continued to face high construction costs, limited land availability and uneven economic and demographic conditions.

In both Whitehorse and Yellowknife, private housing starts in 2025 were supported by policy measures. This included streamlined permitting in Whitehorse that helped clear development backlogs and upzoning initiatives in both Whitehorse and Yellowknife to promote infill development.

Economic conditions also supported starts, as record-high population growth over the previous 2 years, combined with improving borrowing conditions, helped sustain demand.

Together, these policy and economic factors likely strengthened builder confidence that new supply could be absorbed.

Looking ahead, private-market supply is expected to increase in 2026 across the 3 territorial capitals. This reflects elevated units under construction in Whitehorse and Iqaluit, as well as strong permitting activity across the 3 centres in 2025. As these projects are completed, market housing supply is expected to grow.

However, higher private-market activity in 2026 is not expected to significantly narrow the gap between per-capita housing starts in the Territories and the rest of Canada.

Social housing investment in new construction continued to play a major role in the Territories

Non-market investment makes up a large share of new construction in the Territories, especially in Nunavut. This helps drive overall new housing supply. In 2025, social housing accounted for about 6% of new residential construction investment in Canada. By comparison, the share was 35% in Yukon, 36% in the Northwest Territories and 93% in Nunavut.

The Northwest Territories saw the clearest shift toward private activity in 2025, as its non-market share of total investment in new construction fell sharply from 94% in 2024. Nunavut, by contrast, remained overwhelmingly driven by social housing. Recent volatility in the Territories reflects the timing of public and subsidized projects more than stronger private-market conditions.

High construction costs, low land availability and other challenges continue to weigh on Northern supply conditions

From Q1 2021 to Q4 2025, construction hard costs¹⁰ per square foot followed similar trends in Yellowknife, Whitehorse and the southern comparator city of Calgary. However, construction cost levels were consistently higher in the North. Since 2021, construction costs in Yellowknife and Whitehorse have remained around 1.5 and 1.3 times higher than in Calgary, respectively.

Over the same period, housing starts per capita remained lower in both northern centres (Figure 4). This suggests that higher construction costs in these territorial centres are an important factor limiting housing supply relative to southern Canada.

We don’t publish construction cost estimates for Iqaluit because several underlying data sources don’t cover the centre. We are working to address this data gap with the aim of including Iqaluit estimates in future editions of the Northern Housing Report.¹¹

As outlined in the Housing Design Catalogue Construction Cost Estimate Summary, higher construction costs reflect unique Northern construction challenges. These include logistical challenges driven by harsher weather conditions that shorten construction seasons in the North:

• Limited delivery window for materials that may not align with construction timelines, leading to additional staging and storage requirements.
• Short construction seasons can also require accelerated schedules and overtime wages.
• Reliance on specialized Northern transportation systems to deliver materials and labour, including winter ice roads, air travel and water barges. These options can be costly and are only available during certain seasons.

The North’s smaller population and labour force base also create indirect cost pressures:

• Limited local trade availability raises labour premiums and increases reliance on transient skilled labour. This raises costs through transportation and accommodation needs, as well as wage premiums to attract workers from outside the region.
• Less robust supply chains reduce access to construction materials.

Beyond construction costs, limited developable and serviced land also constrains housing supply in Whitehorse, Yellowknife and Iqaluit, according to recent local and federal housing plans.

• Terrain and climate conditions, especially permafrost, create challenges for land development in the Territories. Projects often require specialized foundation design and, in some cases, suitable excavation equipment for frozen ground.
• These conditions also make essential infrastructure harder and more expensive to provide, including water and wastewater systems. This can delay the availability of serviceable land and slow housing development.

These factors increase project contingency costs. They also contribute to wider construction cost ranges in Yellowknife and Whitehorse than in Calgary.

Private rental market

Private rental conditions remained tight, despite moderating demand

Vacancy rates differed across the 3 centres but remained tight. They rose in Whitehorse but stayed very low in Yellowknife and Iqaluit. Despite this, rent growth remained lower than in the rest of Canada (Figure 6). This likely reflected affordability pressures, as high living costs left households less able to absorb larger increases.

Whitehorse: The vacancy rate rose rapidly to 1.9% this year, surpassing its 5-year average. A slowdown in population growth in 2025 eased demand pressure on rental supply that had persisted since 2021.

Vacancy rates eased mainly in smaller, more affordable rental segments, such as apartments, reflecting a declining non-permanent resident population. Higher-priced rentals — including condominium apartments, townhouses and single-detached units — remained tight despite some supply expansion. Rental demand was supported as many households remained priced out of homeownership, while public-sector employment continued to grow.

More vacant units limited landlords' ability to raise rents. The median rent reached $1,364, an increase of 4.1%, its slowest growth since 2019. The slowdown was driven primarily by weaker demand for smaller units. Larger units continued to see strong rent growth as new supply was quickly absorbed.

Yellowknife: The vacancy rate declined to 1.3%, almost half the 5-year average. Historically strong working-age population growth, supported by job gains, continued to absorb new units. Vacancy rates remained exceptionally low despite another year of substantial rental supply growth.

A record expansion in the 1-bedroom rental stock did little to ease market conditions, as vacancy rates increased only modestly. Meanwhile, 2-bedroom vacancies fell to just 0.8%, despite substantial supply growth the previous year.

The median rent increased 4.1% to $1,975. While rent growth moderated from its 2024 peak, the slowdown was concentrated in 3-bedroom-and-larger units. With no new 3-bedroom-and-larger units added, more households remained in place this year, limiting rent growth. In contrast, rent growth accelerated for 1-bedroom units, while 2-bedroom units continued to drive overall rent growth amid exceptionally low vacancy.

Iqaluit: The vacancy rate remained extremely low at 0.3% for a third consecutive year in 2025, representing only 6 vacancies out of nearly 2,000 units. This occurred alongside another year of modest rental supply growth.

Despite net outflows among renter-heavy populations, underlying housing needs stemming from overcrowding continued to keep demand ahead of available supply. As a result, nearly all unit types remained virtually fully occupied.

The median rent across all structures reached $3,025, with rent growth slowing to its weakest pace since 2020. Slower rent growth was observed across all bedroom types. Affordability pressures beyond housing costs alone likely tempered rent growth, as many households had limited capacity to absorb further increases.

Affordability and housing suitability

Higher Northern living costs add pressure beyond traditional affordability benchmarks

Higher day-to-day living costs in the North mean households devote more income to essentials such as food, transportation and utilities. As a result, affordability measures based on rent or mortgage costs may understate the financial strain households face compared with the rest of Canada.

Ownership affordability has deteriorated significantly since 2021 and remains worse for Indigenous households

Wage growth across all 3 markets continued to be outpaced by increases in the income required to carry existing mortgages since 2021. The income required to afford a new mortgage rose by an even greater amount.¹³

As a result, homeownership affordability worsened more rapidly than nationally, reflecting rising home prices across the North. By contrast, national home prices declined over the same period. Despite faster Indigenous wage growth, persistent income gaps kept homeownership even less attainable for Indigenous households (Table 1).

Source: CMHC, Statistics Canada, Equifax, Yukon Bureau of Statistics

Note: A mortgage-to-income ratio above 30% is considered Exceeds affordability thresholds. Mortgage payments include CMHC mortgage insurance and assume a 5% down payment, with interest rates of 6.3% in 2021 and 4.18% in 2025. House prices reflect Q4 of the respective year. For Iqaluit, a full-year average price was used because of limited sales data. Average household median income is the weighted average of median incomes across household types.

Across all households, far fewer could afford homeownership in the 3 markets than in 2021 (Figure 7).

Since 2023, however, affordability pressures based on new mortgages have moderated in all 3 markets:

• Whitehorse and Yellowknife: Falling interest rates provided some affordability relief, but rising home prices largely offset these gains, leaving income requirements relatively unchanged. Continued income growth nevertheless contributed to modest improvements in affordability.
• Iqaluit: Affordability improved more noticeably from 2023, but Iqaluit remained the least affordable of the 3 markets. Slower home price growth and declining interest rates reduced purchase costs, while income growth further improved affordability.

These mortgage-based affordability measures exclude utility costs in all markets, as comparable utility cost data were not available. Utility costs are often higher in the North — particularly in the Northwest Territories and Nunavut. This is partly driven by isolated grids, reliance on diesel generation for electricity and colder climates that increase heating needs.

Many territorial communities also face limited access to home insurance and higher premiums, further constraining housing availability and increasing financial risk for homeowners. As a result, these affordability measures likely understate the overall housing cost burden and broader challenges faced by Northern homeowners relative to Canada.

Private rental affordability pressures were broadly unchanged since 2023, with many households still priced out of the private market

Private rental market housing options remained unaffordable for many households in 2025 (Figure 7):

• Whitehorse and Yellowknife: 1 in 5 households.
• Iqaluit: Nearly 1 in 2 households.

While the share of households unable to afford private rental housing remained broadly unchanged since 2023, affordability trends varied by unit type. In Whitehorse and Yellowknife, pressures worsened for households renting 2-bedroom units as rents rose faster than incomes. In Iqaluit, income growth outpaced rent growth across unit types. However, housing remained the least affordable in Iqaluit as higher rents consumed a larger share of income.

Lower average incomes among Indigenous households than among non-Indigenous households likely deepened affordability pressures. In 2021, a larger share of Indigenous private renter households spent 30% or more of their income on shelter across all 3 centres.

Supply constraints pushed households into unsuitable living conditions

Unsuitable housing, or overcrowding, was higher in Yellowknife and Iqaluit than the national average, which was 5.4% in the last Census. Conversely, the rate was slightly lower in Whitehorse. Since then, overcrowding across these 3 centres has likely worsened faster than nationally, driven by a sharper imbalance between household growth and housing completions.

While Statistics Canada hasn’t yet released newer Census data, more recent local data indicate that overcrowding has intensified in Yellowknife. The share of households living in unsuitable housing rose from 6.6% in 2019 to 8.0% in 2024.¹⁴

Comparable up-to-date overcrowding data aren’t available for Whitehorse.  However, household growth outpaced new housing completions by a wider margin than during 2016 to 2021, when overcrowding was already increasing. This suggests more households may have had to double up or live in less suitable housing, though likely to a lesser extent than in Yellowknife.

While data were unavailable for Iqaluit, other indicators suggest overcrowding remained severe. Near-zero private rental market vacancy and ongoing pressure in the social housing sector limited housing options. As of January 2025, nearly half of Nunavut Housing Corporation households were underaccommodated, meaning they were living in overcrowded conditions. Waitlists also remained long.¹⁵

As of the 2021 Census, overcrowding was consistently more prevalent among Indigenous households. Disparities were smallest in Whitehorse and largest in Iqaluit.

Non-market housing remains a primary part of the housing system

Social housing

Amid heightened supply pressures, social housing continued to support many households across all 3 centres. As of the 2021 Census, these shares exceeded the national rate of approximately 1 in 9 households:

• Whitehorse and Yellowknife: More than 1 in 3 Indigenous households lived in subsidized housing, about double the share among non-Indigenous households.
• Iqaluit: Roughly 4 in 5 Indigenous households lived in subsidized housing, marginally lower than among non-Indigenous households.

For Yellowknife and Iqaluit, social housing income thresholds remained below the minimum income required to afford average market-rate options. As a result, some households may earn too much to qualify for social housing while still earning too little to afford market housing.

Source: CMHC, Government of Yukon, NWT Housing Corporation, Nunavut Housing Corporation

Note: “Income needed to afford private-market rent” uses 2025 market-rate surveyed rents and calculates the minimum income required for shelter costs to remain at or below 30% of household income. Green (empty circle) indicates non-market housing income thresholds exceed the minimum income required to afford average market-rate units, while red (filled circle) indicates thresholds fall below a least one market affordability level.

While the share of subsidized housing across the centres exceeded the national share of 4%, limited availability meant many households remained under strain:

• In Whitehorse, social housing comprised roughly one quarter of the rental market (786 units). Vacancy remained effectively non-existent in 2024, while more than 200 households were on the rent-geared-to-income waitlist. The 2026 Whitehorse Housing Needs Assessment indicates a substantial need for additional social housing over the next 5 years.
• Social housing comprised roughly 12% of Yellowknife’s rental stock (313 units). The 2026 Territorial Housing Needs Assessment reported that public housing waitlists exceeded 300 households in Yellowknife, suggesting vacancy remained near zero.
• In Iqaluit, public housing administered by the Nunavut Housing Corporation accounted for roughly one fifth of the total rental stock. Some of these units were not habitable without significant repairs. As of February 2025, there were 36 vacant public housing units, while waitlists exceeded 400 households.

Government staff and other employer-provided housing

Other common forms of non-market housing in the Territories include government staff housing and other employer-provided housing. These housing forms are often tied to employment, reducing demand on the private rental market. They also support housing stability in the North, where housing costs are high and supply is limited.

In Iqaluit, these housing segments comprised roughly two thirds of the rental stock. Comparable data were unavailable for Whitehorse and Yellowknife.