The Grow th of W orcester in National Perspective Edw ard Glaeser - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

▶
the grow th of w orcester in national perspective
SMART_READER_LITE
LIVE PREVIEW

The Grow th of W orcester in National Perspective Edw ard Glaeser - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Feb 10, 2023 135 likes •557 views

The Grow th of W orcester in National Perspective Edw ard Glaeser Director, Rappaport Institute for Greater Boston and Professor of Economics, Harvard University www.hks.harvard.edu/ centers/ rappaport Grow th and I ncom e in MA Growth and

slide-1
SLIDE 1

The Grow th of W orcester in National Perspective

Edw ard Glaeser Director, Rappaport Institute for Greater Boston and Professor of Economics, Harvard University

www.hks.harvard.edu/ centers/ rappaport

slide-2
SLIDE 2
slide-3
SLIDE 3

Grow th and I ncom e in MA

Barnstable County, Massachusetts Berkshire County, Massachusetts Bristol County, Massachusetts Essex County, Massachusetts Franklin County, Massachusetts Hampden County, Massachusetts Hampshire County, Massachusetts Middlesex County, Massachusetts Norfolk County, Massachusetts Plymouth County, Massachusetts Suffolk County, Massachusetts Worcester County, Massachusetts

  • .02

.02 .04 .06 Population Growth, 2000-2010 40000 50000 60000 70000 80000 Median Income, 2000

Growth and Income

slide-4
SLIDE 4
  • .05

.05 .1 .15 Average Population Change, 2000-2010 30000 35000 40000 45000 50000 Average Median Income, 2000 2 4 6 8 10 10 quantiles of popdens2000 Average Median Income, 2000 Average Population Change

slide-5
SLIDE 5

.05 .1 .15 Average Population Growth by County, 2000-2010 1 2 3 4 5

Average Population Growth by Median Income in 2000 (Quintiles)

slide-6
SLIDE 6

.02 .04 .06 .08 Average Population Growth by County, 2000-2010 1 2 3 4 5

Average Population Growth by Distance to Nearest Port (Quintiles)

slide-7
SLIDE 7

The Central Paradox

Why is it that in an era in which transportation and communication costs have virtually vanished, cities have become more important than ever? Urban resurgence is visible in high income levels, robust housing prices, and a concentration of innovation in urban areas. This is even clearer in the developing world.

slide-8
SLIDE 8
slide-9
SLIDE 9
slide-10
SLIDE 10
slide-11
SLIDE 11
slide-12
SLIDE 12

I nnovation in the I ndustrial Age

Francis Cabot Lowell goes to Manchester and memorizes the structure of power looms– Boston associates establish Lowell and Lawrence. The “father of American watch-making,” “went to Boston to perfect himself as a journeyman watchmaker ... so that he could get the instruction of Tubal Hone, then the best watch- maker in America.” Lawrence establishes the Lawrence Scientific School at Harvard; Rogers comes to Boston for the scientific atmosphere and gets the legislature to found M.I.T.

slide-13
SLIDE 13
slide-14
SLIDE 14

Ford’s Big I dea ( River Rouge)

slide-15
SLIDE 15

The Decline of the Costs of Moving Goods

Dollars per Ton Mile (Real)

Railroad Revenue per Ton Mile

year 1890 2000 .02323 .185063

slide-16
SLIDE 16

.02 .04 .06 .08 .1 Average Population Growth by County, 2000-2010 1 2 3 4 5

Average Population Growth by Average January Temperature (Quintiles)

slide-17
SLIDE 17

Tem perature and Grow th: Large Cities

Jan Temp 2000 Population Growth 2000-10 . 20 40 60 80

  • .4
  • .2

.2 .4

Birmingh Montgome Anchorag Glendale Mesa cit Phoenix Scottsda Tucson c Anaheim Bakersfi Fremont Fresno c Long Bea Los Ange Oakland Riversid Sacramen San Dieg San Fran San Jose Santa An Stockton Aurora c Colorado Denver c Washingt Hialeah Miami ci

  • St. Pete

Tampa ci Atlanta Chicago Fort Way Wichita Baton Ro New Orle Shrevepo Baltimor Boston c Detroit Minneapo

  • St. Paul

Kansas C

  • St. Loui

Lincoln Omaha ci Las Vega Jersey C Newark c Albuquer Buffalo New York Rocheste Charlott Greensbo Raleigh Akron ci Cincinna Clevelan Columbus Toledo c Oklahoma Tulsa ci Portland Philadel Pittsbur Memphis Arlingto Austin c Corpus C Dallas c El Paso Fort Wor Garland Houston Plano ciSan Anto Norfolk Virginia Seattle Madison Milwauke

slide-18
SLIDE 18

Tem perature and Grow th: Sm all Cities

Jan Temp 2000 Population Growth 2000-10 . 20 40 60 80

  • .2

.2 .4 .6

slide-19
SLIDE 19
slide-20
SLIDE 20

City 1950 Pop. 2000 Pop. Change New York 7,891,957 8,008,278 +1.5 % Chicago 3.620,962 2,896,016

  • 20%

Philadelphia 2,071,605 1,517,550

  • 27%

Los Angeles 1,970,358 3,694,820 +87% Detroit 1,849,568 951,270

  • 52%

Baltimore 949,708 651,154

  • 32%

Cleveland 914,808 478,403

  • 48%
  • St. Louis

856,796 348,189

  • 60%

Washington 802,178 572,059

  • 29%

Boston 801,444 589,141

  • 26%
slide-21
SLIDE 21
slide-22
SLIDE 22
slide-23
SLIDE 23
slide-24
SLIDE 24

.2 .4 .6 .8 Mean Change in Population, 1970-2000 Lowest Second Third Fourth Highest

Source: U.S. Census Bureau

Change in Population, 1970-2000 by Quintile of Percent College Graduates, 1970

Figure 7:

slide-25
SLIDE 25

Figure 4: Population Growth for MSAs in the Northeast and Midwest

8% 15% 15% 20% 53%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 0 - 7.5% 7.5% - 9.5% 9.5% - 11% 11% - 15% 15%-31%

Percent of Population with a BA (1970) Average Population Growth (1970-2000

Data from the United States Census

slide-26
SLIDE 26

.05 .1 .15 Average Population Growth by County, 2000-2010 1 2 3 4 5

Average Population Growth by Share with BA in 2000 (Quintiles)

slide-27
SLIDE 27

College Education and Grow th in Larger ( over 2 0 0 k) , Colder Cities

Share w. BAs 2000 Population Growth 2000-10 . 10 20 30 40 50

  • .4
  • .2

.2 .4

Anchorag Aurora c Colorado Denver c Washingt Chicago Fort Way Wichita Baltimor Boston c Detroit Minneapo

  • St. Paul

Kansas C

  • St. Loui

Lincoln Omaha ci Jersey C Newark c Albuquer Buffalo New York Rocheste Charlott Greensbo Raleigh Akron ci Cincinna Clevelan Columbus Toledo c Oklahoma Tulsa ci Portland Philadel Pittsbur Memphis Norfolk Virginia Madison Milwauke

slide-28
SLIDE 28

College Education and Grow th: Colder, Sm aller Cities

Share w. BAs 2000 Population Growth 2000-10 . 20 40 60 80

  • .2

.2 .4 .6

Decatur Huntsvil Flagstaf Fayettev Fort Smi Jonesbor Little R North Li Arvada c Boulder Fort Col Greeley Lakewood Longmont Loveland Pueblo c Thornton Westmins Bridgepo Bristol Danbury Hartford Meriden New Brit New Have Norwalk Stamford Waterbur West Hav Wilmingt Boise Ci Idaho Fa Nampa ci Pocatell Arlingto Aurora c Berwyn c Blooming Bolingbr Champaig Cicero t Decatur Des Plai Elgin ci Evanston Joliet c Mount Pr Napervil Oak Lawn Oak Park Orland P Palatine Peoria c Rockford Schaumbu Skokie v Springfi Waukegan Wheaton Anderson Blooming Elkhart Evansvil Gary cit Hammond Lafayett Muncie c South Be Terre Ha Ames cit Cedar Ra Council Davenpor Des Moin Dubuque Iowa Cit Sioux Ci Waterloo Kansas C Lawrence Olathe c Overland Topeka c Owensbor Portland Bowie ci Frederic Gaithers Brockton Cambridg Chicopee Fall Riv Haverhil Lawrence Lowell c Lynn cit Malden c Medford New Bedf Newton c Quincy c Somervil Springfi Taunton Waltham Worceste Ann Arbo Battle C Dearborn Dearborn Farmingt Flint ci Grand Ra Kalamazo Lansing Livonia Pontiac Rocheste Royal Oa Saginaw

  • St. Clai

Southfie Sterling Taylor c Troy cit Warren c Westland Wyoming Blooming Brooklyn Burnsvil Coon Rap Duluth c Eagan ci Eden Pra Maple Gr Minneton Plymouth Rocheste

  • St. Clou

Columbia Florissa Independ Lee's Su

  • St. Char
  • St. Jose
  • St. Pete

Springfi Billings Great Fa Missoula Carson C Reno cit Sparks c Manchest Nashua c Bayonne Camden c Clifton East Ora Elizabet Passaic Paterson Trenton Union Ci Vineland Santa Fe Albany c Hempstea Mount Ve New Roch Niagara Schenect Syracuse Utica ci White Pl Yonkers Ashevill Cary tow Concord Durham c Gastonia High Poi Rocky Mo Winston- Bismarck Fargo ci Canton c Dayton c Elyria c Euclid c Hamilton Ketterin Lakewood Lorain c Mentor c Middleto Parma ci Springfi Youngsto Broken A Edmond c Lawton c Midwest Norman c Beaverto Gresham Hillsbor Medford Salem ci Allentow Bethlehe Erie cit Lancaste Reading Scranton Cranston Pawtucke Providen Warwick Rapid Ci Sioux Fa Chattano Clarksvi Jackson Johnson Knoxvill Murfrees Amarillo Lubbock Wichita Layton c Ogden ci Orem cit Provo ci Salt Lak West Jor Alexandr Chesapea Hampton Lynchbur Newport Portsmou Richmond Roanoke Suffolk Bellingh Everett Kennewic Kent cit Spokane Vancouve Yakima c Charlest Huntingt Appleton Eau Clai Green Ba Janesvil Kenosha La Cross Oshkosh Racine c Sheboyga Waukesha West All Cheyenne

slide-29
SLIDE 29

Chinitz: Contrasts in Agglom eration: New York and Pittsburgh

slide-30
SLIDE 30

.5 1 1.5 Average Employment Growth, 1977-2000 Lowest Second Third Fourth Highest

Source: County Business Patterns, 1977 and 2000

Average Employment Growth, 1977-2000 by Quintile of Average Firm Size, 1977

g

slide-31
SLIDE 31
  • Avg. Firm Size

Change in P.C. GDP 2000-2009 . 10 15 20

  • .2

.2 .4

Alabama Alaska Arizona Arkansas Californ Colorado Connecti Delaware Florida Georgia Hawaii Idaho Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisian Maine Maryland Massachu Michigan Minnesot Mississi Missouri Montana Nebraska Nevada New Hamp New Jers New Mexi New York North Ca North Da Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylv Rhode Is South Ca South Da Tennesse Texas Utah Vermont Virginia Washingt West Vir Wisconsi Wyoming

slide-32
SLIDE 32

W hat Does the Model Teach Us?

Five variables explain about 40 percent of the growth rates in colder (under 40 degrees), smaller (under 200k) cities.

  • January Temperature still matters– 10

degrees, 5 percentage points more growth.

  • Share with HS degrees– 10 percentage

points is 6.1 percentage points more growth.

  • Also,
  • Households with kids (positive),
  • Latin American (positive), and
  • Density (negative).
slide-33
SLIDE 33

A Statistical Model of Cold, Sm all City Grow th

Fitted values Percent Growth 2000-10 Fitted values

  • .1

.1 .2 .3

  • .2

.2 .4 .6

Decatur Huntsvil Flagstaf Fayettev Fort Smi Jonesbor Little R North Li Arvada c Boulder Fort Col Greeley Lakewood Longmont Loveland Pueblo c Thornton Westmins Bridgepo Bristol Danbury Hartford Meriden New Brit New Have Norwalk Stamford Waterbur West Hav Wilmingt Boise Ci Idaho Fa Nampa ci Pocatell Arlingto Aurora c Berwyn c Blooming Bolingbr Champaig Cicero t Decatur Des Plai Elgin ci Evanston Joliet c Mount Pr Napervil Oak Lawn Oak Park Orland P Palatine Peoria c Rockford Schaumbu Skokie v Springfi Waukegan Wheaton Anderson Blooming Elkhart Evansvil Gary cit Hammond Lafayett Muncie c South Be Terre Ha Ames cit Cedar Ra Council Davenpor Des Moin Dubuque Iowa Cit Sioux Ci Waterloo Kansas C Lawrence Olathe c Overland Topeka c Owensbor Portland Bowie ci Frederic Gaithers Brockton Cambridg Chicopee Fall Riv Haverhil Lawrence Lowell c Lynn cit Malden c Medford New Bedf Newton c Quincy c Somervil Springfi Taunton Waltham Worceste Ann Arbo Battle C Dearborn Dearborn Farmingt Flint ci Grand Ra Kalamazo Lansing Livonia Pontiac Rocheste Royal Oa Saginaw

  • St. Clai

Southfie Sterling Taylor c Troy cit Warren c Westland Wyoming Blooming Brooklyn Burnsvil Coon Rap Duluth c Eagan ci Eden Pra Maple Gr Minneton Plymouth Rocheste

  • St. Clou

Columbia Florissa Independ Lee's Su

  • St. Char
  • St. Jose
  • St. Pete

Springfi Billings Great Fa Missoula Carson C Reno cit Sparks c Manchest Nashua c Bayonne Camden c Clifton East Ora Elizabet Passaic Paterson Trenton Union Ci Vineland Santa Fe Albany c Hempstea Mount Ve New Roch Niagara Schenect Syracuse Utica ci White Pl Yonkers Ashevill Cary tow Concord Durham c Gastonia High Poi Rocky Mo Winston- Bismarck Fargo ci Canton c Dayton c Elyria c Euclid c Hamilton Ketterin Lakewood Lorain c Mentor c Middleto Parma ci Springfi Youngsto Broken A Edmond c Lawton c Midwest Norman c Beaverto Gresham Hillsbor Medford Salem ci Allentow Bethlehe Erie cit Lancaste Reading Scranton Cranston Pawtucke Providen Warwick Rapid Ci Sioux Fa Chattano Clarksvi Jackson Johnson Knoxvill Murfrees Amarillo Lubbock Wichita Layton c Ogden ci Orem cit Provo ci Salt Lak West Jor Alexandr Chesapea Hampton Lynchbur Newport Portsmou Richmond Roanoke Suffolk Bellingh Everett Kennewic Kent cit Spokane Vancouve Yakima c Charlest Huntingt Appleton Eau Clai Green Ba Janesvil Kenosha La Cross Oshkosh Racine c Sheboyga Waukesha West All Cheyenne

slide-34
SLIDE 34

HS Graduation and Grow th: Sm aller, Colder Cities

Adults w HS degree 2000 Population Growth 2000-10 . 40 60 80 100

  • .2

.2 .4 .6

Decatur Huntsvil Flagstaf Fayettev Fort Smi Jonesbor Little R North Li Arvada c Boulder Fort Col Greeley Lakewood Longmont Loveland Pueblo c Thornton Westmins Bridgepo Bristol Danbury Hartford Meriden New Brit New Have Norwalk Stamford Waterbur West Hav Wilmingt Boise Ci Idaho Fa Nampa ci Pocatell Arlingto Aurora c Berwyn c Blooming Bolingbr Champaig Cicero t Decatur Des Plai Elgin ci Evanston Joliet c Mount Pr Napervil Oak Lawn Oak Park Orland P Palatine Peoria c Rockford Schaumbu Skokie v Springfi Waukegan Wheaton Anderson Blooming Elkhart Evansvil Gary cit Hammond Lafayett Muncie c South Be Terre Ha Ames cit Cedar Ra Council Davenpor Des Moin Dubuque Iowa Cit Sioux Ci Waterloo Kansas C Lawrence Olathe c Overland Topeka c Owensbor Portland Bowie ci Frederic Gaithers Brockton Cambridg Chicopee Fall Riv Haverhil Lawrence Lowell c Lynn cit Malden c Medford New Bedf Newton c Quincy c Somervil Springfi Taunton Waltham Worceste Ann Arbo Battle C Dearborn Dearborn Farmingt Flint ci Grand Ra Kalamazo Lansing Livonia Pontiac Rocheste Royal Oa Saginaw

  • St. Clai

Southfie Sterling Taylor c Troy cit Warren c Westland Wyoming Blooming Brooklyn Burnsvil Coon Rap Duluth c Eagan ci Eden Pra Maple Gr Minneton Plymouth Rocheste

  • St. Clou

Columbia Florissa Independ Lee's Su

  • St. Char
  • St. Jose
  • St. Pete

Springfi Billings Great Fa Missoula Carson C Reno cit Sparks c Manchest Nashua c Bayonne Camden c Clifton East Ora Elizabet Passaic Paterson Trenton Union Ci Vineland Santa Fe Albany c Hempstea Mount Ve New Roch Niagara Schenect Syracuse Utica ci White Pl Yonkers Ashevill Cary tow Concord Durham c Gastonia High Poi Rocky Mo Winston- Bismarck Fargo ci Canton c Dayton c Elyria c Euclid c Hamilton Ketterin Lakewood Lorain c Mentor c Middleto Parma ci Springfi Youngsto Broken A Edmond c Lawton c Midwest Norman c Beaverto Gresham Hillsbor Medford Salem ci Allentow Bethlehe Erie cit Lancaste Reading Scranton Cranston Pawtucke Providen Warwick Rapid Ci Sioux Fa Chattano Clarksvi Jackson Johnson Knoxvill Murfrees Amarillo Lubbock Wichita Layton c Ogden ci Orem cit Provo ci Salt Lak West Jor Alexandr Chesapea Hampton Lynchbur Newport Portsmou Richmond Roanoke Suffolk Bellingh Everett Kennewic Kent cit Spokane Vancouve Yakima c Charlest Huntingt Appleton Eau Clai Green Ba Janesvil Kenosha La Cross Oshkosh Racine c Sheboyga Waukesha West All Cheyenne

slide-35
SLIDE 35

HS Graduation and Grow th: Colder, Larger Cities

Adults w HS degree 2000 Population Growth 2000-10 Fitted values 60 70 80 90

  • .4
  • .2

.2 .4

Anchorag Aurora c Colorado Denver c Washingt Chicago Fort Way Wichita Baltimor Boston c Detroit Minneapo

  • St. Paul

Kansas C

  • St. Loui

Lincoln Omaha ci Jersey C Newark c Albuquer Buffalo New York Rocheste Charlott Greensbo Raleigh Akron ci Cincinna Clevelan Columbus Toledo c Oklahoma Tulsa ci Portland Philadel Pittsbur Memphis Norfolk Virginia Madison Milwauke

slide-36
SLIDE 36

The Massachusetts Misfit

Population Growth 2000-10 Fitted values

  • .1

.1 .2

  • .05

.05

Brockton Cambridg Chicopee Fall Riv Haverhil Lawrence Lowell c Lynn cit Malden c Medford New Bedf Newton c Quincy c Somervil Springfi Taunton Waltham Worceste

slide-37
SLIDE 37

The Massachusetts Model

Fitted values Percent Growth 2000-10 Fitted values

  • .02

.02 .04 .06

  • .05

.05

Brockton Cambridg Chicopee Fall Riv Haverhil Lawrence Lowell c Lynn cit Malden c Medford New Bedf Newton c Quincy c Somervil Springfi Taunton Waltham Worceste

slide-38
SLIDE 38

Just Three Variables

  • Share with HS degree– 10 percentage points

higher is one percent more growth.

  • Share that is Latin American– ten percentage

points higher is 1.7 percent more growth.

  • Share that is Asian American– ten

percentage points higher is 1.2 percent more growth.

  • Little impact of households with kids or

density or January temperature (within MA). A very immigrant-heavy story.

slide-39
SLIDE 39

W hy Don’t The Other Variables Matter in Massachusetts?

  • In much of America, the lower density cities

are growing as part of the ongoing growth of sunbelt sprawl. There is sprawl in MA but not within cities.

  • Temperature doesn’t matter that much

between Lowell and Worcester.

  • But immigration is crucial– cities remain

gateways and Boston’s high prices make entry more difficult.

slide-40
SLIDE 40
slide-41
SLIDE 41

Housing Values 07-09 Population Growth 2000-10

  • .5

.5 200000 400000 600000 800000

Birmingh Montgome Anchorag Glendale Mesa cit Phoenix Scottsda Tucson c Anaheim Bakersfi Fremont Fresno c Long Bea Los Ange Oakland Riversid Sacramen San Dieg San Fran San Jose Santa An Stockton Aurora c Colorado Denver c Washingt Hialeah United S Miami ci

  • St. Pete

Tampa ci Atlanta Honolulu Chicago Fort Way United S Wichita United S Baton Ro New Orle Shrevepo Baltimor Boston c Detroit Minneapo

  • St. Paul

Kansas C

  • St. Loui

Lincoln Omaha ci Las Vega Jersey C Newark c Albuquer Buffalo New York Rocheste Charlott Greensbo Raleigh Akron ci Cincinna Clevelan Columbus Toledo c Oklahoma Tulsa ci Portland Philadel Pittsbur Memphis United S Arlingto Austin c Corpus C Dallas c El Paso Fort Wor Garland Houston Plano ci San Anto Norfolk Virginia Seattle Madison Milwauke

slide-42
SLIDE 42

Policies for Healthy Sm all Cities

  • Skills
  • Entrepreneurship
  • Attracting people– often immigrants– who

have a healthy demand for urban options.

  • Quality of Life is an Economic

Development Policy

  • Housing policy matters.
  • Smokestacks or currently hot industrial
  • ptions (green jobs) typically are failures.