Mid-Sized Cities are the Future of Cities, Here are Three Reasons Why
Who will you meet?
Cities are innovating, companies are pivoting, and start-ups are growing. Like you, every urban practitioner has a remarkable story of insight and challenge from the past year.
Meet these peers and discuss the future of cities in the new Meeting of the Minds Executive Cohort Program. Replace boring virtual summits with facilitated, online, small-group discussions where you can make real connections with extraordinary, like-minded people.
The success of very large cities is well documented, as is the strife of small town America. Digging deeper, however, reveals an even more dynamic economic landscape at the local level. From this view, mid-sized cities emerge as those with the most potential to lead an inclusive economic future that bridges the urban-rural divide.
In 2017, I led a team of researchers on a study (Local Economic Conditions 2017) that set out to identify how specific economic factors come together and evolve into different types of local economies. We looked at 224 cities with various population sizes and locations in terms of proximity to metropolitan areas. We surveyed city leaders about the performance of key local economic indicators such as new business starts and availability of affordable housing, and identified five types of cities based on their local economies:
- Rural brain drains: Very small, rural cities with shrinking populations
- Major job centers: Core cities of large metropolitan areas with robust business growth, as well as significant growth challenges including poverty and lack of affordability
- Room to grow: Inner-ring suburban areas characterized by affordable commercial and residential property values but declining retail sector.
- Cities on par: “Average” cities, with generally 50,000 to 100,000 residents, high residential property values, and slow but positive overall economic growth.
- Mid-sized business boomers: Hotbeds of new businesses and business expansions, these are core cities found in mid-sized metro areas, often home to a university or other successful anchor institution.
Among the five types of cities that we identified, mid-sized business boomers – such as Knoxville, Tennessee; Longmont, Colorado; and Raleigh, North Carolina- were the most likely to see great improvements in their overall economic performance over the past year (see Figure 1).
These mid-sized business boomers are on the top of my “cities to watch” list. This is because they share many positive economic attributes of “major job centers,” but since their growth is newer they have greater opportunity to plan for growth. For instance, both types of cities showed progress in the area of business expansions. While both are experiencing growth challenges in terms of the area’s housing affordability, the mid-sized business boomers have yet to experience the extreme downsides of growth, like significant poverty and high demand for basic survival services.
So, what’s contributing to the growth of these cities? And why is their growth so important for the future of all cities and for developing a sustainable, thriving, inclusive national economy? Here are three reasons.
1. Population Hot Spots
While very large cities like New York, Boston and Los Angeles will continue to contribute outsized economic value to the national economy, challenges like the high cost of living and traffic are forcing economic activity to other areas. In an online discussion in August 2017 about suburban vs. urban resurgence, Bloomberg View columnist Noah Smith notes that “the great urban revival” is not ending, it’s perhaps just relocating. He believes it’s a good thing for the economy as smaller places grow, develop and become more productive.
The numbers back up his opinion. Between 2010 and 2015, mid-sized metros (that is, regions with populations between 250,000 and 5,000,000 in 2010) had more people moving into them than anywhere else in the country (see Figure 2). Residents came from larger metropolitan areas, as well as smaller metropolitan areas, micropolitan areas and very rural places. In addition to high growth of domestic migration, increasing numbers of immigrants are also choosing to settle in mid-size cities, contributing to significant population diversity in these areas.
2. Opportunity-Rich Business Ecosystems
The opportunity-rich business ecosystems of many mid-sized business boomers contribute to this robust in-migration. Of the five city types we identified in our research, these cities were the only type experiencing overwhelming new business starts while also experiencing expansion of new businesses (see figure 3).
We know that growth from within, in the form of new businesses and business expansions, is the foundation of long-term economic sustainability. For example, the Kauffman Foundation found that new and young companies are the primary source of job creation in the American economy, while fostering competition into markets and spurring innovation.
Additionally, new and small businesses also create pathways for more inclusive growth. Between 2014 and 2015, the number of minority-owned small businesses increased by 4.9 percent and the number of women-owned small businesses rose by 3 percent.
Many mid-sized business boomers are home to major research facilities, an affordable cost of living and cheaper cost of doing business, with less competition and barriers to entry than larger cities. For start-ups, these factors are necessities. Longmont, Colorado, for instance, has situated itself as the next great Colorado start-up hub, and possess most of these attributes. PC magazine even named Longmont the city with the fastest Internet service in the country in 2017 — outperforming Kansas City, Mo., and Austin (interesting side note: PC mag observes that the best hope for “mega fast” internet service will come from local utilities like Nextlight in Longmont, not major private providers). Area high schools are even paying their students to work with local tech firms.
3. Both Urban and Rural
Although the phrase “urban-rural divide” has become a bit of a cliché when it comes to describing the different ways that various areas have fared in the nation’s post-recession economy, how we define “urban” and “rural” really matters. In fact, much of rural America actually lives in metropolitan areas. The Brookings Institution’s Metropolitan Policy Program found that more than half of people who live in rural areas also live in counties that are part of a metropolitan area. In other words, rural areas may not be as disconnected from cities as some may think.
This is particularly true in regions of mid-sized business boomers. For example, 30 percent of the entire Knoxville, Tennessee metropolitan statistical area (MSA) is rural, with five out of nine counties in the MSA made up of residents living in rural areas. In contrast, only 10 percent of Boston’s MSA is rural. Based on my census calculations, the area doesn’t have a single county where more than a third of the residents live in rural areas, including less densely populated counties in New Hampshire.
As the plight of rural America continues, creating regional solutions that connect rural areas with their urban neighbors is more critical than ever. Because mid-sized metros have lower barriers to entry for new firms, more affordable cost of living, closer cultural ties to rural areas and robust (but not daunting) business and population thresholds, these cities provide the perfect testing environments for improving, creating and developing university-industry partnerships, supply chains and labor markets to connect rural and urban areas.
The characteristics of mid-sized business boomers as population hotspots, opportunity-rich business environments and having unique balance of urban and rural situate them well to lead the future of cities. Their success will depend on their ability to manage growth in an equitable, intentional and proactive way, to forge regional solutions with their rural neighbors, and to harness the power of existing and new populations and business.
Leave your comment below, or reply to others.
Please note that this comment section is for thoughtful, on-topic discussions. Admin approval is required for all comments. Your comment may be edited if it contains grammatical errors. Low effort, self-promotional, or impolite comments will be deleted.
Read more from MeetingoftheMinds.org
Spotlighting innovations in urban sustainability and connected technology
Why one city decays and another thrives can sometimes seem random. So, trying to foresee downrange why the future will happen in City A and not City B is hard. Moreover, to imagine that there is one formula that all 7.8 billion of us should adhere to, wherever it is we live, is clearly nonsensical.
In our work, we study, research, and rank places to determine what the best practices are to increase economic prosperity, social equity, and quality of life. Ultimately, the question we want to answer is: What is it that makes a city a place of the future? In our research, one thing has become clear to us: next-gen talent is the fuel for the future of place. And by extension, jobs of the future will happen in places of the future.
Digital twins and AI analysis would offer significant benefits to organizations across all sectors. By providing a comprehensive look at a geographical area and its infrastructure and assets, these technologies will enable smarter and more targeted field planning optimization. It could help digitize field surveys, offer new levels of remote engineering access, and enable contact tracing around COVID-19.
The focus will continue to shift away from the data itself and towards its relationships. The connections between data are where the most powerful insights lie. With enough data points, organizations can look to analytics to better understand the context and “see” the future.
AI at scale and emerging data technologies truly illustrate this connectivity and potential. Although it’s an emerging field, the benefits are limitless.
In my business, we’d rather not be right. What gets a climate change expert out of bed in the morning is the desire to provide decision-makers with the best available science, and at the end of the day we go to bed hoping things won’t actually get as bad as our science tells us. That’s true whether you’re a physical or a social scientist.
Well, I’m one of the latter and Meeting of the Minds thought it would be valuable to republish an article I penned in January 2020. In that ancient past, only the most studious of news observers had heard of a virus in Wuhan, China, that was causing a lethal disease. Two months later we were in lockdown, all over the world, and while things have improved a lot in the US since November 2020, in many cities and nations around the world this is not the case. India is living through a COVID nightmare of untold proportions as we speak, and many nations have gone through wave after wave of this pandemic. The end is not in sight. It is not over. Not by a longshot.
And while the pandemic is raging, sea level continues to rise, heatwaves are killing people in one hemisphere or the other, droughts have devastated farmers, floods sent people fleeing to disaster shelters that are not the save havens we once thought them to be, wildfires consumed forests and all too many homes, and emissions dipped temporarily only to shoot up again as we try to go “back to normal.”
So, I’ll say another one of those things I wish I’ll be wrong about, but probably won’t: there is no “back to normal.” Not with climate change in an interdependent world.