“The Growth of the nation depends
not on cities, but [on] its villages”
2
.15
-.05
0
.05
.1
Average Population Change, 2000-2010
24000
22000
20000
18000
16000
0
4
6
Population Density
8
Per Capita Income, 2000
Population Change, 2000-2010
Source: U.S. Census
10
.25
Change in Housing Prices, 2001-2006 vs. 2006-2011
0
Houston
-.25
New York
DC
-.5
Detroit
-.75
Phoenix
-1
Las Vegas
0
.2
.4
.6
Change in FHFA Price, 2001-2006
.8
0
.05
.1
.15
.2
Change in FHFA, 1996-2012
by Quintile of Population Density, 2010
1
2
3
Note: For MSAs with populations greater than 250,000 in 2010.
4
5
0
2
4
6
8
Life Satisfaction by Percent Urbanization
(Quintiles)
1
2
3
4
5
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.
City
1950 Pop.
2010 Pop.
Change
New York
7,891,957
8,175,133
+4 %
Chicago
3,620,962
2,695,598
-26%
Philadelphia 2,071,605
1,526,006
-26%
Los Angeles 1,970,358
3,792,621
+92%
Detroit
1,849,568
713,777
-61%
Baltimore
949,708
620,961
-34%
Cleveland
914,808
396,815
-56%
St. Louis
856,796
319,294
-63%
Washington 802,178
601,723
-25%
Boston
617,594
-23%
801,444
Ford’s Big Idea (River Rouge)
The Decline of the Costs of Moving Goods
Dollars per Ton Mile (Real)
.185063
.02323
1890
2000
year
Railroad Revenue per Ton Mile
0
.02
.04
.06
.08
.1
Average Population Growth by Average January Temperature
(Quintiles)
1
2
3
4
5
Will the last person to leave Seattle
please turn out the lights?
Alfred Peet
Photo by Postdil
The Philips Phenomenon
Photo by BotMultichillT
0
.05
.1
.15
Average Population Growth by Share with BA in 2000
(Quintiles)
1
2
3
4
5
Per Capita GDP 2010
.
100000
SAN JOSE
80000
WASHINGT
SAN FRAN
o
o
o
BOSTON
o
NEW YORK
o
oo
o
o
o
o
DALLAS
o
oo o
LOS ANGE
CHICAGO
o o oo
oo
o
ATLANTA
o
o
o
o
o
ooo
o
oooooo ooo
o
o o
LAS VEGA o oo o oDETROIT
o o o o oo
oo o o
oo o o
o
o o oo o
o
o
o o o o o oo o ooooo
ooo
o
o
o
o
o
o
o oo o o o o o ooo o o
o
oo
o o
ooo
o
o
o
o
o
o
oo o o
o ooo oo
o oo o o oo
o
o o oo o
o
o
RIVERSIDo
o
o
o
o
o
60000
40000
20000
.1
.2
.3
Share w. BAs 2000
o
o
o
.4
.5
8
Qujing
6
Chongzuo
0
2
4
Hezhou
Lanzhou
Laibin
Guangyuan
Bazhong
Suining
Loudi
Baiyin
Zhangjiakou
Nanchong
Dazhou
Yiyang
HeyuanHechi
Yaan
Deyang Mianyang
Xiangtan
Tianjin
Chengdu
Yichang
Guyuan
Yulin
Ziyang YuxiBaoshan Kunming
Xiaogan
Nanning
Suizhou
Hefei
Xiangfan
Leshan
Fuyang
Chongqing
Qingyuan
Guangan
Meishan
Zhangjiajie
Meizhou
Hengyang Yulin
Shangqiu
Hebi
Guigang
Shaoyang
Beihai
Yangjiang
Zhoukou
Maoming
Bengbu
Zhumadian
Tangshan
Datong
Tongling
Nantong
Nanyang
Shenzhen
Chaohu
Ankang
Shiyan
Hanzhong
Changsha
Huangshi
Yibin
Liuzhou
Xinyang
Zhuzhou
Qinhuangdao
Changde
Xuzhou
Longnan
Shijiazhuang
Heze
Qingdao
Weihai
Jieyang
Luohe
Wuhan
Xiamen
Shantou
Zigong
Maanshan
Beijing
Jining
Liuan
Xianning
Shuozhou
Suzhou
Yueyang
Huizhou
Zhengzhou
Laiwu
Yongzhou
Luzhou
Guangzhou
Zaozhuang
Anshun
Zhanjiang
Jingmen
Tianshui
Cangzhou
Huaihua
Sanya
Baoding
Yunfu
Taian
Chuzhou
Anqing
Guilin
Yangzhou
Jingzhou
Xingtai
Yangquan
Quanzhou
Chenzhou
Xuchang
Linyi
Xianyang
Pingdingshan
Shaoguan
Ganzhou
Taizhou
Pingliang
Hengshui
Xian
Puyang
Jiujiang
Taiyuan
ZhongShan
Chizhou
Handan
Qingyang
Huanggang
Wuzhou
Suqian
Wuhu
Anyang
Zhaoqing
Sanmenxia
Ningde
Baoji
Luoyang
Jinan Langfang
Huaian
Jiangmen
Shangluo
Tongchuan
Haikou
Taizhou
Xinxiang
Putian
Pingxiang
Liaocheng
Dongying
Longyan
Zibo
Zhangzhou
Yantai
Dezhou
Xinzhou
Weinan
Kaifeng
Jiaozuo
Zhoushan
Lvliang
Yanan
Wenzhou
Nanjing
Chaozhou
Dongguan
RizhaoWeifang
Linfen
Foshan
Yuncheng
Jinzhong
Shanghai
Binzhou
Nanchang
Shangrao
Shaoxing
Hangzhou
Zhenjiang
Changzhou
Xuancheng
Ningbo
Changzhi
Jingdezhen
Wuxi
Sanming
Yingtan
Jinhua
Yichun
Xinyu
Jincheng
Quzhou
Lishui
Huangshan
Nanping
Suzhou
Huzhou
Jian
Jiaxing
Fuzhou
0
.5
1
1.5
# of Jinshi in Ming/Bianhu
2
2.5
Log GDP PER Person 2010
.
12
Norway
Switzerl
Denmark
Sweden
United
S Belgium
Netherla
Canada
Ireland
Austria
FinlandSingapor
Japan
Germany
Iceland
France
United K
Italy
China, H
Spain
Israel Greece
Slovenia
Portugal
Korea
Czech Re
Slovak R
Trinidad
Croatia Hungary Estonia
Poland
Uruguay
Chile
Lithuani
Brazil
Latvia
Russian
Turkey
Mexico
Argentin
Kazakhst
Panama
Romania
ColombiaMonteneg Bulgaria
Azerbaij
Serbia
Peru
Thailand
Jordan
Tunisia
Albania
Indonesi
10
8
Kyrgyzst
6
300
400
500
PISA Math Score 2009
600
Source: Hanushek, Peterson and Woessman
Chinitz: Contrasts in Agglomeration:
New York and Pittsburgh
Economic Growth and Firm Size
0
.5
1
1.5
2
MSA Employment Growth (1977-2010)
by Average Firm Size (1977) Quintiles
1
2
Smallest firms are in Quintile 1
3
4
5
1.5
1
.5
0
Employment Growth, 1977-2009
2
Employment Growth 1977-2009
(by Quintiles of 1977 Firm Size )
1
2
3
4
5
Venture Capital (1990-1998) and New Industries (2010)
0
5
10
15
20
25
Number of Internet Related Industries (2010)
by Number of VC Firms in Zip Code (1990-1998) Quantiles
1
2
3
Fewest Number of VC Establishments are in Quantile 1
4
5
Logan
Airport
Downtown
South Boston
Waterfront
Innovation District
Attract and train smart people and then get out
of there way.
Quality of life as economic development
strategy.
Taming the demons of density and providing
affordable housing.
Congestion in Singapore
New Technologies and the City
Photo by Mario Roberto Duran Ortiz
The High Cost of Overregulating Height
Image by QuarterCircleS