The Brookings Institution Metropolitan Policy Program Bruce Katz, Director

The Brookings Institution Metropolitan Policy Program Bruce Katz, Director The State of American Cities and Suburbs Habitat Urban Conference March 18, 2005

The State of American Cities and Suburbs I What are the general demographic and economic trends affecting the United States? II What are the major trends affecting cities and suburbs? III What do these trends mean for urban and metropolitan policy?

I What are the general demographic and economic trends affecting the United States? Major demographic forces are changing the United States Population Growth Immigration Aging Internal Migration

Population Growth The 1990s presented the strongest growth in four decades US population growth (millions), 1990-2000 35 33 Source: U.S. Census Bureau 30 25 24 23 22 20 15 10 5-1960-1970 1970-1980 1980-1990 1990-2000

Immigration More than 1/3 of this population growth was driven by immigration Components of population change, 1990-2000 Source: U.S. Census Bureau 34.7% Net Immigration 65.3% Natural Increase

Immigration Despite a decade of rapid immigration, the share of the U.S. population that is foreign-born is lower now than in the 1900s Immigration, 1900-2000 Population in Millions 35 30 25 20 15 10 13.6% 14.7% 13.2% 11.6% 8.8% Foreign-born Population (in Millions) Percent of total Population 7.9% 6.9% 6.2% 5.4% 4.7% 11.1% 16% 14% 12% 10% 8% 6% 4% Percent of Total Population 5 0 10.3 13.5 13.9 14.2 11.6 10.3 9.7 9.6 14.1 19.8 31.1 1900 1910 1920 1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000* 2% 0%

Aging At the same time, the US population is aging US Age Distribution, 1970 vs. 2020 Source: U.S. Census Bureau 1970 2020 Male 85+ Female Male 85+ Female <5 <5 6% 4% 2% - 2% 4% 6% 6% 4% 2% - 2% 4% 6%

Aging Minorities, however, have younger age structures than whites US Age Distribution, 2020 Male Whites Female Male Hispanics Female \ Source: U.S. Census Bureau Blacks API/AI Male Female Male Female

America s New Demographic Regions The New Sunbelt Migration growth states Melting Pot America The Heartland Diversity states Slow growth states

America s New Demographic Regions Source: William H. Frey New Sunbelt Melting Pot Heartland States

New Sunbelt New Sunbelt: Examples 15 15 10 12.2 8.6 10 10.0 8.1 5 1.9 5 1.6 0 0-5 -5-10 Colorado -10 Georgia -15-15 Immigration Domestic Migration Natural Increase Source: William H. Frey

Melting Pot Melting Pot: Examples 15 10 5 7.4 California 10.4 15 10 5 6.0 New York 5.3 0 0-5 -5-10 -7.2-10 -10.2-15 -15 Immigration Domestic Migration Natural Increase Source: William H. Frey

Heartland Heartland: Examples 15 Pennsylvania 10 5 0 0.9 2-5 -2.1-10 -15 Immigration Domestic Migration Natural Increase Source: William H. Frey

Hispanics are concentrated in Washington, California, Arizona, New Mexico, Texas, Florida and isolated urban pockets Hispanic share of population by county, 2000 Below 12.5% 12.5% - 25.0% Above 25.0% Source: William H. Frey

Asians are concentrated in California and isolated urban pockets Asian share of population by county, 2000 Below 4.3% 4.3% - 10.0% Above 10.0% Source: William H. Frey

Blacks are concentrated in the South and industrial cities of the North African-American share of population by county, 2000 Below 12.6% 12.6% - 25.0% Above 25.0% Source: William H. Frey

Whites are principally concentrated in the heartland White share of population by county, 2000 Below 69.1% 69.1% - 85.0% Above 85.0% Source: William H. Frey

I What are the general demographic and economic trends affecting the United States? Major economic forces are changing the United States Globalization Deindustrialization Knowledge Industries Rapid Innovation

Globalization Importing dramatically increased in the 1990s Trade of goods and services in Billions of constant 2000 dollars, 1990-2000 Source: Bureau of Economic Analysis 1,420 1,220 1,020 820 620 Exports of Goods Exports of Services Imports of Goods Imports of Services 420 220 20 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000

Deindustrialization Since 1970, the U.S. has moved from a manufacturingbased economy to one based on services Share of employment in manufacturing and services, 1970 and 2000 Source: Bureau of Economic Analysis 35% 30% 25% 20% 1970 2000 32% 15% 10% 22% 19% 5% 11% 0% Manufacturing Services

Knowledge Industries The share of U.S. investment in New Economy industries is steadily rising Share of real investment and GDP in New Economy industries, 1990-1999 Source: Ned Hill, "Innovation and Economic Development." Presentation to the White House Office of Science and Technology and the National Governors Association 35% 30% 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0% Share of Real Investment Share of Real GDP 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000

Rapid Innovation Innovation is speeding up, with time-to-market expected to fall to just over a year by 2006 Time from research and development to market, in months, 1998, 2003, and 2006 Source: Ned Hill, "Innovation and Economic Development." Presentation to the White House Office of Science and Technology and the National Governors Association 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 18 15 13 1998 2003 2006

The State of American Cities and Suburbs I What are the general demographic trends affecting the United States? II What are the major trends affecting cities and suburbs? III What do these trends mean for urban and metropolitan policy?

II What are the major trends affecting cities and suburbs? 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Cities are growing, but metros are still sprawling Regional variation is substantial Cities and suburbs are becoming more diverse The geography of work is changing The geography of poverty is changing

Large cities grew faster in the 1990s than they did in the 1980s and 1970s 50 largest cities, population 1970-2000 Source: U.S. Census Bureau 12% 10% 8% 6% 6.3% 9.8% 4% 2% 0% -1.6% -2% -4% 1970s 1980s 1990s Source: THE BROOKINGS Brookings calculations INSTITUTIONof U.S. Census Bureau data

Several large cities gained population during the 1990s after losing population in the 1980s Selected cities, population growth 1990-2000 20% 15% 1980s 1990s 18.6% Source: U.S. Census Bureau 10% 5% 5.7% 4.0% 6.5% 0% -5% -10% -5.1% -5.5% -7.3% -7.4% Atlanta Chicago Denver Memphis

Cities in growing metros grew, while those in slow growth metros generally declined City Category Number of Cities City Population Change MSA Population Change Rapid Growth (over 20%) 14 32% 25% Significant Growth (10 to 20%) 22 15% 22% Moderate Growth (2 to 10%) 36 7% 13% No Growth (-2 to 2%) 6 0% 11% Loss (below -2%) 20-7% 6%

Still, population is decentralizing in nearly every U.S. metropolitan area Selected cities and suburbs, population growth 1990-2000 50% 40% 44% 37% City Suburbs Source: U.S. Census Bureau 30% 22% 20% 16% 19% 18% 10% 6% 4% 7% 9% 0% Atlanta Chicago Denver Memphis Top 100

Suburbs Suburbs grew faster than cities in the 1990s Percent population growth, 100 largest cities and suburbs 1990-2000 Source: U.S. Census Bureau 20% 15% 17.0% 10% 8.8% 5% 0% Cities Suburbs

Suburbs Every household type grew at faster rates in the suburbs than in cities Population growth, 1990-2000 Source: William Frey. A Census 2000 Study of City and Suburb Household Change. Brookings, Forthcoming 35% 15% -5% All Households Married - no children Married - with children Other Family - no children Other Family - with Nonfamily Central City 8.6% -1.9% 5.5% 10.4% 19.0% 12.9% Suburbs 18.0% 10.3% 11.8% 20.1% 41.2% 26.9%

20% Suburbs However, First Suburbs are growing much slower than all other suburbs, at a rate comparable to cities Percent population growth, 100 largest cities, suburbs, the U.S., and First Suburbs 1990-2000 15% 10% 8.8% 10.3% 13.1% 17.0% Source: U.S. Census Bureau 5% 0% Cities First Suburbs U.S. Suburbs

In the Northeast/Midwest stagnant growth and sprawl are common Change in population and density, 1982-1997 Source: Fulton et al, 2001 10% 0% -10% -20% -30% -40% 5.0% 0.4% Cleveland, OH Detroit, MI Pittsburgh, PA -8.0% -18.7% -23.8% -35.5% Change in Population Change in Density

In the South/Southeast, many cities are growing and spreading out Change in population and density, 1982-1997 Source: Fulton et al, 2001 80% 60% 40% 20% 0% -20% -40% 60.80% 38.80% 38.80% Atlanta, GA Charleston, SC Charlotte, NC -11.40% -20.20% -20.20% Change in Population Change in Density

In the West, some cities are growing and densifying Change in population and density, 1982-1997 Source: Fulton et al, 2001 80% 60% 40% 20% 0% 72.90% 47.30% 31.20% 21.90% 2.80% 5.50% Los Angeles, CA Ft. Collins, CO Phoenix, AZ Change in Population Change in Density

Central City Growth in the 1990s was fueled by Asians and Hispanics Population growth, 100 largest cities 1990-2000 50% 40% 42.6% 38.3% Source: U.S. Census Bureau 30% 20% 10% 6.4% 0% -10% -20% -8.5% Hispanic Black Asian White

If not for immigration, several of the nation s largest cities would not have grown during the 1990s Population growth with and without foreign-born, 1990-2000 Source: U.S. Census Bureau 20% 15% 10% 5% 18.1% 1.7% 9.4% Overall 4.6% Without immigration 4.0% 2.6% 0% -5% -1.4% -3.9% -1.7% -3.9% -10% Dallas New York Minneapolis- St. Paul Chicago Boston

Immigration In the 1990s, immigration increased by 49% in both cities and First Suburbs Percent change in foreign born population in cities and First Suburbs, 1990-2000 Source: U.S. Census Bureau 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 49% 49% 0% Cities First Suburbs

In aggregate, the racial makeup of the 100 largest cities has shifted. Share of population by race and ethnicity, 1990 Source: U.S. Census Bureau 17% 6% White 53% Black Hispanic 24% Other

In 2000, the top hundred cities became majority minority Share of population by race and ethnicity, 2000 7% Source: U.S. Census Bureau 23% 44% White Black Hispanic Asian Multi-racial 24%

In many metro areas, the locus of immigration is shifting from the central city to the suburbs Washington region, share foreign-born by census tract, 2000 Source: Singer, At Home in the Nation s Capital, June 2003 O N I 270 MONTGOMERY I 95 ARLINGTON ALEXAN DRIA DISTRICT OF CO LU M B IA O UDOUN Route 50 FAIRFAX I 495 Percent Foreign Born (by Census Tract) Less than 5% I 66 PRINCE GEORG 5% - 15% 16% - 25% UQUIER 26%- 35% Greater than 35% PRINCE W ILLIAM I 95 C A CHARLES

Suburbs The percent of each racial/ethnic group living in the suburbs increased substantially Share of population by race and ethnicity, 1990 Source: U.S. Census Bureau 60% 50% 40% 1990 2000 39% 33% 51% 55% 46% 50% 30% 20% 10% 0% Blacks Asians Hispanics

Suburbs In addition, every minority group grew at faster rates in the suburbs than in central cities 100% Population growth by race and ethnicity, 1990-2000 50% Source: U.S. Census Bureau 0% -50% Black White Hispanic Asian Central Cities 5.0% -9.3% 46.2% 37.3% Suburbs 36.1% 4.8% 71.9% 63.4%

Suburbs Now more than 1 in 4 suburban households are minority Minority share of population, 1990-2000 30% 27.0% Source: U.S. Census Bureau Percent of households 20% 10% 19.0% 0% 1990 2000

In First Suburbs, the trend is even more pronounced, with minorities now making up one-third of the population Racial/Ethnic Minorities Non-Hispanic White Percent of First Suburban population other than Non- Hispanic White, 1980-2000 16% 24% 33% Source: Brookings Analysis of U.S. Census Bureau data 1980 1990 2000

Nationally, 78 percent of jobs are found over 3 miles outside the central business district; one-third are located over 10 miles away 22% 43% 35% Central Business District (CBD) Jobs Within 3 Miles From CBD Jobs Between 3 And 10 Miles From CBD Jobs More Than 10 Miles Away From CBD Source: Glaeser, Kahn, and Chu, Job Sprawl: Employment Location in U.S. Metropolitan Areas, 2001

Employment decentralization But the level of employment decentralization varies widely across metropolitan areas. Share of metropolitan employment, 1999 70% 3-mile radius 10-mile radius Outside 10-mile radius 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% National Boston Dallas

II What are the major trends affecting metropolitan areas? 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Cities are growing, but metros are still sprawling Cities and suburbs are becoming more diverse The economy continues to restructure The geography of work is changing The geography of poverty is changing

The number of poor people in U.S. metropolitan areas is large and has been increasing for the past two decades Number of poor residents (US Metropolitan Areas), 1980-2000 30 25 20 Number of People in Poverty 19.3 23.1 25.8 Source: Concentrated Poverty: A Change in Course, Kingsley and Pettit, 2003 (Millions) 15 10 5-1980 1990 2000

Poverty rates in central cities have declined over the 1990s, while poverty rates in the suburbs have increased slightly Poverty rates for central cities and suburbs, 1990-2001 20% 15% 19% 17% 1990 2002 Source: Current Population Survey, 2002 10% 9% 9% 5% 0% Central City Suburbs

In fact, the share of suburban residents living in poor suburbs has increased by almost 10% in the last two decades Share of residents living in poor, middle income, and affluent suburbs, 1980-2000 Source: Swanstrom, Casey, Flack, and Dreier, Pulling Apart: Economic Segregation among Suburbs and Central Cities in Major Metropolitan Areas, 2004 Poor Suburb = Suburbs with per capita incomes less than 75% of its metro area Affluent Suburb = Suburbs with per capita incomes over 125% of its metro area

But the number of people living in high poverty neighborhoods declined during the 1990s Population of high-poverty neighborhoods by location, 1990-2000 Non Metropolitan Suburbs Source: Paul Jargowsky, Stunning Progress, Hidden Problems: The Dramatic Decline of Concentrated Poverty in the 1990s 2003 Central City Total US 2000 1990 0 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 6,000 7,000 8,000 9,000 10,000 11,000 Population (in thousands)

During the 1990s, number of high-poverty tracts in Chicago dropped from 187 to 114, and there were 179,000 fewer people living in high poverty areas 1990 2000

But neighborhoods of concentrated poverty have been increasing in First Suburbs 9.0% 8.0% 7.0% 6.0% 5.0% 4.0% 3.0% 2.0% 1.0% 0.0% 2.7% 4.7% 6.6% 8.4% 1970 1980 1990 2000 Tracts with 20% poverty rate Percent of Census tracts in First Suburbs with poverty rates of 20%, 30%, and 40% or higher, 1970-2000 Source: Brookings Analysis of U.S. Census Bureau data; Geolytics Neighborhood Change Database (NCDB) Tracts with 30% poverty rate Tracts with 40% poverty rate

The State of American Cities and Suburbs I What are the general demographic trends affecting the United States? II What are the major trends affecting metropolitan areas? III What do these trends mean for urban and metropolitan policy?

The New Competitive Cities Agenda 2 Build on Assets 3 Create Neighborhoods of Choice 1 FIX THE BASICS 4 Build Family Wealth 5 Influence Metropolitan Growth

Fix the Basics Good schools Safe streets Competitive taxes and services 21 st century infrastructure Functioning real estate market

Fix the Basics The Philadelphia Story In 1999, Philadelphia had 30,900 vacant residential lots The city had 36 abandoned structures per 1,000 residents compared to an average of 2.6 nationally 15 different public agencies were responsibility for vacant properties Insufficient resources for demolition, site preparation, and brownfield remediation compounded problem

Fix the Basics Philadelphia Neighborhood Transformation Initiative A $1.6 billion dollar 5 year program to remove blight from Philadelphia neighborhoods. Reform of the city's delivery systems. Build 16,000 new houses and demolish 14,000 buildings. Rehabilitate 2,500 properties. Creation of a Philadelphia Land Bank. Clearing of 31,000 vacant lots in the first year. Facilitation of neighborhood planning in a citywide context

Build on Assets Fixed institutions (universities and hospitals) Employment clusters Downtown Historic Properties Waterfront Cultural institutions/parks

Remake Build on the Assets Urban Landscape Milwaukee Freeway Demolition Removal of a little-used spur of the never-completed Park East Freeway began in 2002 to reclaim 11 blocks of downtown land Renewal project will add commercial and residential development of mixed types, taking advantage of the unique features downtown (e.g. the river, entertainment venues, etc.)

Create Neighborhoods of Choice Neighborhood markets Mixed-income communities Home-ownership Opportunities Access to capital

Murphy Park replaced the Vaughn Public Housing Project on the North side of St. Louis Vaughn High Rises Four nine-story buildings 656 units Typical of 1950s-era, urban renewal public housing towers George L. Vaughn High Rises, 1995

Under the direction of Richard Baron, the community has been transformed into a less dense, more dignified and safer neighborhood Murphy Park Development Townhouses, garden apartments and single-family homes 413 units New Urbanist design and defensible space technique Murphy Park, Today

Build Family Wealth Access to quality jobs Income and work supports Access to financial institutions Asset building

Build Family Wealth The Earned Income Tax Credit Has Increased Substantially 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 Number of Tax Filers Claiming EITC (Millions) Total Amount of Credit (Billions) 0 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000

Build Family Wealth Chicago EITC Outreach Campaign Outreach partnership between Mayor Daley s office, employers, business associations, and community groups Place information on EITC in bill inserts, paychecks, grocery store bags, McDonald s tray liners Chicago-based Center for Law and Human Services coordinates free tax preparation at 20 sites throughout city $16M in EITC claimed at free tax assistance centers in 2001 South Shore Bank helps EITC claimants without bank accounts to open savings accounts with their refunds

Influence Metropolitan Growth Metropolitan governance Land-use reform Transportation reform Access to metropolitan opportunity Urban reinvestment

Influence Metropolitan Growth Governance California Metropolitan Suballocation Land-Use Ohio The Clean Ohio Fund (2000) Transportation Maryland Smart Growth-Neighborhood Conservation Act of 1997 Metro Access California Fair Share Affordable Housing Law Urban Reinvestment New Jersey The Rehabilitation Subcode of 1998

Influence Metropolitan Growth The New Metropolitics Older Suburb Central City Housing Schools Retail Newer Suburb Rural Area Quality of Life Conservation Congestion Working Families Farm Preservation

The New Competitive Cities Agenda 2 Build on Assets 3 Create Neighborhoods of Choice 1 FIX THE BASICS 4 Build Family Wealth 5 Influence Metropolitan Growth