Following is the summary from the subject research report. It shows that city centers have grown jobs at a much faster rate than surrounding suburban centers in the ongoing economic recovery; indeed, jobs on the periphery declined overall. The findings demonstrate the critical fallacy in Fairfax County government's belief that if you allow millions of square feet of development in Tysons and Reston, it will result in high-density development, high real estate valuations, and tens of thousands of added jobs and residents. Apparently not, but that won't stop the County leaders from closing their eyes, clapping their hands, and clicking their heels three times in an effort to make their self-delusions come true.
For over half a century, American cities were decentralizing,
with suburban areas surpassing city centers in both population and job
growth. It appears that these economic and demographic tides are now
changing. Over the past few years, urban populations in America’s cities
have grown faster than outlying areas, and our research shows that jobs
are coming with them.
Our analysis of census data shows that downtown employment centers of
the nation’s largest metropolitan areas are recording faster job growth
than areas located further from the city center. When we compared the
aggregate economic performance of urban cores to the surrounding metro
periphery over the four years from 2007 to 2011, we found that city
centers—which we define as the area within 3 miles of the center of each
region’s central business district—grew jobs at a 0.5 percent annual
rate. Over the same period, employment in the surrounding peripheral
portion of metropolitan areas declined 0.1 percent per year. When it
comes to job growth, city centers are out-performing the surrounding
areas in 21 of the 41 metropolitan areas we examined. This “center-led”
growth represents the reversal of a historic trend of job
de-centralization that has persisted for the past half century.
As recently as 2002-2007, peripheral areas were growing much faster
(1.2 percent annually) and aggregate job growth was stagnant in urban
cores (0.1 percent). While the shift of metropolitan job growth toward
services is aiding job centralization, the strong central growth of
2007-11 appears to be driven by the growing competitiveness of central
cities relative to peripheral locations.
Our analysis shows that city centers had unusually strong job growth
relative to peripheral locations in the wake of the Great Recession.
Some of the impetus for central city growth comes from the relatively
stronger performance of industries that tend to be more centralized,
such as finance, entertainment, restaurants, and professional services.
The story is not just that job growth in central cities is improving
when compared to outlying areas – city centers have also erased their
competitive disadvantage relative to peripheral locations.
We undertook a shift-share analysis that allowed is to separate out
the effects of changing industry mix from relative competitiveness. The
data make it clear that city centers are more competitive in 2011 than
they were in 2007. While city centers had a negative competitive effect
in the 2002-07 period, their relative competitiveness for industry has
been equal to peripheral locations from 2007-11.
The strength of city centers appears to be driven by a combination of
the growing attractiveness of urban living, and the relatively stronger
performance of urban-centered industries (business and professional
services, software) relative to decentralized industries (construction,
manufacturing) in this economic cycle. While it remains to be seen
whether these same patterns continue to hold as the recovery progresses,
(the latest LEHD data on city center job growth are for calendar year
2011), there are structural forces that suggest the trend of center-led
growth will continue.
Click here to download the full report.