Alberta
Olivia and Noah most popular baby names in 2020
Olivia continued a record streak as the most popular baby girl’s name in Alberta in 2020 while Noah remained in the top spot for baby boys.
Alberta families welcomed 49,030 babies in 2020 – 25,160 boys and 23,870 girls. Olivia was the most popular girl’s name for the eighth year in a row, giving it the longest popularity streak for any girl’s name in Alberta since 1980. Noah placed first on the boys’ names list for the second consecutive year.
Other popular names for girls were Emma, Charlotte, Ava and Sophia. Oliver, Liam, Benjamin and William rounded out the top five names for boys.
Alberta remains a province of many cultural and ethnic backgrounds, and many of our youngest members have names reflecting that diversity. Alberta is home to baby girls named Amara, Amaya, Zahra, Zoya, Baani, Danika, Raya, Thalia, Yuna and Chimamanda. Some of Alberta’s youngest boys are named Mateo, Ahmed, Bodhi, Yusuf, Zorawar, Arjun, Gurbaaz, Miguel, Abdul and Idris.
“Last year was difficult for everyone, but every new baby that an Alberta family welcomed brings joy and also hope for the future. Whether parents welcomed their firstborn or a sibling to other children, they can count on the same thing: Alberta is a great place to raise a family and we have a strong future ahead of us.”
In a year unlike any other, positivity seemed to be a popular theme for some new parents, with names like Hope, Peace, Faith, Charity, Joy, Happy and Brave appearing on the list of registered names.
Some parents also seemed to be inspired by athletes (Kobe, Muhammad-Ali, Beckham), mythology (Artemis, Persephone, Aries, Zeus), music (Dre, Zeppelin, Bowie), video games (Zelda, Link, Eevee), literature (Guinevere, Atticus) and places (Cairo, Nile, Phoenix).
Quick facts
- Notable changes to the 2020 lists:
- Isla appeared in the top 10 list for girls for the first time. The name was 12th most popular among girls in 2019.
- Theodore and Levi appeared in the top 10 list for boys for the first time. The names were 19th and 27th most popular among baby boys in 2019, respectively.
- Lily increased in popularity among girls’ names, from 24th most popular in 2019 to ninth in 2020.
- Ethan dropped to 12th place among the most popular boys’ names, after appearing in the top 10 list every year since 2000.
- Historically, girls’ names that held the No. 1 spot for the longest consecutive time period include:
- Jessica: six years (1990-1995)
- Emily: five years (1998-2002)
- Olivia: eight years (2013-2020)
- Historically, boys’ names that held the No. 1 spot for the longest consecutive time period include:
- Matthew: five years (1995-1999)
- Ethan: nine years (2001-2009)
- Liam: seven years (2010-2016)
- The highest birth count recorded in recent history for Alberta was 56,744, recorded in 2015.
- Parents have up to one year to register their child’s birth. As a result, the list of 2020 baby names and birth statistics may change slightly.
Girls’ names and frequency (top 10)
(In brackets is the number of children with each name)
| Place | Girl names (2020) | Girl names (2019) | Girl names (2018) | Girl names (2017) | Girl names (2016) |
| 1 | Olivia (236) | Olivia (229) | Olivia (235) | Olivia (236) | Olivia (292) |
| 2 | Emma (184) | Charlotte (188) | Emma (230) | Emma (215) | Emma (249) |
| 3 | Charlotte (161) | Sophia (181) | Charlotte (175) | Charlotte (187) | Sophia (215) |
| 4 | Ava (159) | Emma (178) | Emily (164) | Ava (184)
Sophia (184) |
Ava (207) |
| 5 | Sophia (151) | Ava (161) | Ava (161) | Emily (159) | Emily (187) |
| 6 | Amelia (145) | Amelia (159) | Abigail (153) | Abigail (154) | Charlotte (180) |
| 7 | Isla (133) | Emily (150) | Harper (150) | Amelia (149) | Amelia (172) |
| 8 | Emily (127) | Abigail (141) | Sophia (146) | Isabella (141) | Abigail (171) |
| 9 | Lily (123) | Hannah (137) | Amelia (145) | Aria (129)
Chloe (129) |
Chloe (166) |
| 10 | Abigail (114) | Elizabeth (124) | Elizabeth (130) | Lily (127) | Aria (137) |
Boys’ names and frequency (top 10)
(In brackets is the number of children with each name)
| Place | Boy names (2020) | Boy names (2019) | Boy names (2018) | Boy names (2017) | Boy names (2016) |
| 1 | Noah (239) | Noah (275) | Liam (225) | Noah (250) | Liam (277) |
| 2 | Oliver (229) | Liam (234) | Oliver (212) | Liam (244) | Benjamin (252) |
| 3 | Liam (206) | Oliver (225) | Noah (199) | Benjamin (229) | Lucas (247) |
| 4 | Benjamin (182) | Ethan (213) | Ethan (188) | Logan (226) | Oliver (230) |
| 5 | William (178) | Jack (198) | Logan (182)
Lucas (182) |
Lucas (216) | Noah (228) |
| 6 | Jack (169) | William (185) | Jacob (181) | William (213) | William (213) |
| 7 | Lucas (163) | Lucas (174) | William (178) | Ethan (192) | Ethan (205) |
| 8 | Theodore (159) | Owen (167) | Benjamin (176) | Oliver (190) | Jack (197) |
| 9 | Levi (153) | Benjamin (163) | Jack (167) | Jack (189) | Lincoln (192) |
| 10 | Owen (152) | Jacob (162) | Alexander (158)
James (158) |
Jacob (178) | Owen (189) |
From the Fraser Institute
On Monday, the Smith government announced that beginning next year it will change the way it funds surgeries in Alberta. This is a big step towards unlocking the ability of Alberta’s health-care system to provide more, better and faster services for the same or possibly fewer dollars.
To understand the significance of this change, you must understand the consequences of the current (and outdated) approach.
Currently, the Alberta government pays a lump sum of money to hospitals each year. Consequently, hospitals perceive patients as a drain on their budgets. From the hospital’s perspective, there’s little financial incentive to serve more patients, operate more efficiently and provide superior quality services.
Consider what would happen if your local grocery store received a giant bag of money each year to feed people. The number of items would quickly decline to whatever was most convenient for the store to provide. (Have a favourite cereal? Too bad.) Store hours would become less convenient for customers, alongside a general decline in overall service. This type of grocery store, like an Alberta hospital, is actually financially better off (that is, it saves money) if you go elsewhere.
The Smith government plans to flip this entire system on its head, to the benefit of patients and taxpayers. Instead of handing out bags of money each year to providers, the new system—known as “activity-based funding”—will pay health-care providers for each patient they treat, based on the patient’s particular condition and important factors that may add complexity or cost to their care.
This turns patients from a drain on budgets into a source of additional revenue. The result, as has been demonstrated in other universal health-care systems worldwide, is more services delivered using existing health-care infrastructure, lower wait times, improved quality of care, improved access to medical technologies, and less waste.
In other words, Albertans will receive far better value from their health-care system, which is currently among the most expensive in the world. And relief can’t come soon enough—for example, last year in Alberta the median wait time for orthopedic surgeries including hip and knee replacements was 66.8 weeks.
The naysayers argue this approach will undermine the province’s universal system and hurt patients. But by allowing a spectrum of providers to compete for the delivery of quality care, Alberta will follow the lead of other more successful universal health-care systems in countries such as Australia, Germany, the Netherlands and Switzerland and create greater accountability for hospitals and other health-care providers. Taxpayers will get a much better picture of what they’re paying for and how much they pay.
Again, Alberta is not exploring an untested policy. Almost every other developed country with universal health care uses some form of “activity-based funding” for hospital and surgical care. And remember, we already spend more on health care than our counterparts in nearly all of these countries yet endure longer wait times and poorer access to services generally, in part because of how we pay for surgical care.
While the devil is always in the details, and while it’s still possible for the Alberta government to get this wrong, Monday’s announcement is a big step in the right direction. A funding model that puts patients first will get Albertans more of the high-quality health care they already pay for in a timelier fashion. And provide to other provinces an example of bold health-care reform.
Nadeem Esmail
Senior Fellow, Fraser Institute
From the Montreal Economic Institute
Alberta’s move to fund acute care services through activity-based funding follows best practices internationally, points out an MEI researcher following an announcement made by Premier Danielle Smith earlier today.
“For too long, the way hospitals were funded in Alberta incentivized treating fewer patients, contributing to our long wait times,” explains Krystle Wittevrongel, director of research at the MEI. “International experience has shown that, with the proper funding models in place, health systems become more efficient to the benefit of patients.”
Currently, Alberta’s hospitals are financed under a system called “global budgeting.” This involves allocating a pre-set amount of funding to pay for a specific number of services based on previous years’ budgets.
Under the government’s newly proposed funding system, hospitals receive a fixed payment for each treatment delivered.
An Economic Note published by the MEI last year showed that Quebec’s gradual adoption of activity-based funding led to higher productivity and lower costs in the province’s health system.
Notably, the province observed that the per-procedure cost of MRIs fell by four per cent as the number of procedures performed increased by 22 per cent.
In the radiology and oncology sector, it observed productivity increases of 26 per cent while procedure costs decreased by seven per cent.
“Being able to perform more surgeries, at lower costs, and within shorter timelines is exactly what Alberta’s patients need, and Premier Smith understands that,” continued Mrs. Wittevrongel. “Today’s announcement is a good first step, and we look forward to seeing a successful roll-out once appropriate funding levels per procedure are set.”
The governments expects to roll-out this new funding model for select procedures starting in 2026.
* * *
The MEI is an independent public policy think tank with offices in Montreal, Ottawa, and Calgary. Through its publications, media appearances, and advisory services to policymakers, the MEI stimulates public policy debate and reforms based on sound economics and entrepreneurship.
Poilievre To Create ‘Canada First’ National Energy Corridor
Trump Takes More Action To Get Government Out Of LNG’s Way
Mainstream Media Election Coverage: If the Election Was a NHL Game, the Ice Would be Constantly Tilted Up and to the Left
Selective reporting on measles outbreaks is a globalist smear campaign against Trump administration.
FREE MARINE LE PEN!’: Trump defends French populist against ‘lawfare’ charges
Jury verdict against oil industry worries critics, could drive up energy costs
The book the carbon taxers don’t want you to read
-
2025 Federal Election1 day agoRCMP memo warns of Chinese interference on Canadian university campuses to affect election
-
2025 Federal Election2 days agoFifty Shades of Mark Carney
-
2025 Federal Election18 hours agoResearchers Link China’s Intelligence and Elite Influence Arms to B.C. Government, Liberal Party, and Trudeau-Appointed Senator
-
2025 Federal Election2 days agoCommunist China helped boost Mark Carney’s image on social media, election watchdog reports
-
2025 Federal Election2 days agoConservative Party urges investigation into Carney plan to spend $1 billion on heat pumps
-
MAiD2 days agoDisability rights panel calls out Canada, US states pushing euthanasia on sick patients
-
Justice2 days agoCanadian government sued for forcing women to share spaces with ‘transgender’ male prisoners
-
Alberta2 days ago
Alberta takes big step towards shorter wait times and higher quality health care