Tuesday, December 09, 2008

Death of the American Town

Forbes published another ranking, this time the top-10 "Fastest-Dying Towns." I'm not concerned with which places made the infamous list. Lost in the booster publicity storm that inevitably follows is the great content presented in the narrative:

Incomes have dropped in all the places on the list since 2000. Even before adjusting for inflation, workers in places like Asheboro, N.C., or Spanish Lake, Mo., saw median incomes decline over the last seven years. In the former, this is a result of job losses in the manufacturing and heavy industry sectors; in the latter, an inability to attract highly skilled workers has hampered annual salaries.

Median incomes can drop if young workers or immigrants are moving to an area and taking newly formed jobs at lower salaries, which isn't necessarily a sign that times are tough. However, if the number of folks under the poverty line surges while incomes drop, it's a sign of economic decline instead of transition. This is what's happening in places like Middletown, Ohio, which saw the seven-year poverty rate jump from 12% to 22%.

Incomes have dropped in all the places on the list since 2000. Even before adjusting for inflation, workers in places like Asheboro, N.C., or Spanish Lake, Mo., saw median incomes decline over the last seven years. In the former, this is a result of job losses in the manufacturing and heavy industry sectors; in the latter, an inability to attract highly skilled workers has hampered annual salaries.

The problem, across the board, is the inability to attract people. Out-migration rates won't tell you much about the economic health of a place. On the other hand, in-migration rates are robust predictors. Yet time and again, the sophisticated analysis is ignored and policies to keep people from leaving are rolled out. Perception informs reality.

As an aside, Pittsburgh merits mention:

Though gloomy, this news is not necessarily a nail in these places' coffins. That's because turnarounds are possible, though without new industry it's difficult to know how long many of these spots can stay on life support.

"Until or unless other industries see this as a low-cost viable place to do business, turning into a Gary or Youngstown would be the worst-case scenario." says Cornell. "Pittsburgh is a good case in the sense that medical and biotech firms took the place of steel mills. That didn't help the steel workers, who don't have the necessary skills, but it helped their kids."

If there is an American post-industrial city sporting a better recovery than Pittsburgh, I'd like to know about it.

6 comments:

The Urbanophile said...

The thing about Pittsburgh is how hard it was hit. I can't think of another city that took the wallop Pittsburgh did with the death of the steel industry. St. Louis and Cleveland had terrible declines, but they were gradual over time. Detroit may yet go through the same pain, however.

LCathleen said...

As for as big cities go, Pittsburgh was probably the hardest hit. But Youngstown was hit by the steel industry collapse just as hard as Pittsburgh (I know, I was young, but I lived through it with my family) and it has never recovered. As much as Jim Russell would like to see it lead the post-industrial recovery, there's wishful thinking and there's reality, especially with GM's problems and all the layoffs at Lordstown. Y-town did not position itself to attract new industry quickly enough when economic times were a bit better and it's looking rough for the old hometown. I'd like to see it make a comeback too. I am currently in Pittsburgh.

Jim Russell said...

I'm still trying to figure out why Pittsburgh is leading the Rust Belt pack. I'm not sure if Pittsburgh was the hardest hit. Was the population exodus remarkably acute?

Small cities should be lumped together because one company/mill often dominated the economic landscape. That particular political geography (one municipality/one mill) was most vulnerable to the economic restructuring. However, some small cities limped along thanks to foundation money (among other things: See Longworth).

Given the demands of globalization, Youngstown's revitalization is tied to that of Cleveland and Pittsburgh. Thanks to the collapse, Youngstown has the political latitude to embrace novel approaches to urban redevelopment. Youngstown is leading the way for Cleveburgh. On that score, look no further than Congressman Tim Ryan.

As you make your way East from Chicago, there is room for one more urban boom. Pittsburgh is best positioned to be that city.

John Morris said...

Not sure how fair it is to compare Pittsburgh to most other rust belt cities. The difference is the absolutely deluxe assets left behind by Carnegie and others. Remember that this was number 3 in corporate headquaters.The colleges, museums etc...These were posed for growth just as industry was becoming dramatically more high skilled.

It might be more fair to compare Pittsburgh to Ann Arbor, or Madison.

The other lesson is likely about the benefits of labor mobility which benefited both the people who left and those who are starting to come in now.

LCathleen said...

Yes, the exodus in Pittsburgh was remarkably acute -- almost a whole generation had to leave to find work. Pittsburgh has been shrinking since the 1980's, it's only just recently (in the last 2-3 years really), that the population decline has slowed and population may even be increasing. What's most notable about Pittsburgh is that it is attracting young urban professionals with good-paying jobs. Youngstown, on the other hand, has lost over 1/2 of its population since the 1980's and is poised to lose even more in the next 5-10 years. Youngstown is doing some good stuff under Mayor Williams, like downsizing city services, tearing down buildings and old, abandoned homes that were abandoned since I was a child and really were eyesores. And I think the business incubator is a good idea. However, outside of a handful of people in Youngstown, there is not the base of young urban professionals relocating to Youngstown as there is in Pittsburgh. I disagree that Youngstown's revitilization has been tied to Pittsburgh's -- perhaps it should be, but I don't see that happening -- the two cities are really going in reverse directions. I don't know if they have been working with Cleveland, but you might have noted that behind Detroit and Flint, the Cleveland metro area has the next largest unemployment and poverty rates. Youngstown, however leads all of Ohio percentage-wise for unemployment, foreclosure and poverty levels, so there is much work to be done, so that Youngstown can lead the way to recovery. Ignoring these things, I think, denies the reality of many of those who live there and have to deal with these things on a daily basis.

The Urbanophile said...

It's certainly not fair to compare Pittsburgh to much smaller places, even decent sized smaller cities like Youngstown. Pittsburgh was always a city properly so-called. The problem with most of these "dying towns" is that they were effectively economic constructed created by the economic demands of big cities. Wasn't there some essay about the small town of the Midwest that "existed because Chicago needed them"? Places like Kokomo, Indiana exist because big cities like Detroit need them. The minute that need disappears, they are through.

Things are different for what you might call "true cities". These places, usually metro areas greater than one million, but sometimes smaller, have a diverse economies and independent reasons for being. Though they may be subsidiary nodes in an urban hierarchy, they are not purely at the mercy of decision makers elsewhere, and have substantial indigenous economic life. Pittsburgh is in this category. Youngstown is not. And that makes all the difference.