Subscribe to this blog 
How will the Crash affect Rural America — II
February 17th, 2009 by Mike Knutson
Richard Florida is one of my favorite economists (and I love his blog too). I like his work because place matters in his analysis of what drives the economy, and I think he’s got his finger on a lot of complex issues surrounding our economy. But each time I read his work, I leave frustrated at his dismissive attitude towards rural places.
That’s largely how I felt when after reading “How the Crash Will Reshape America” in the March 2009 issue of The Atlantic. It’s as if rural places are irrelevant. That said, there’s a lot of good information for those of us who care enough about rural to think about.
Some predictions made by Florida include:
- New York City will remain the dominant financial market despite claims by some that it will lose out to up-and-comers (Shanghai, Hong Kong, and other Asian and Middle Eastern financial capitals). He bases his analysis on New York’s ability to attract a critical mass of financial talent. As long as it’s an attractive place to live, talented people will migrate there, giving it a leg up on the less open up-and-coming financial centers.
- The rise of mega-regions will continue. These belts of economic concentration will continue because talent is drawn to these places– and the pace of innovation increases population increases.
- Rust Belt cities and towns, symbolized by Detroit, will continue to decline. No real surprise here, and Florida offers no insights worthy of repeating. Detroit,
- Sun Belt cities (ie – Las Vegas and Phoenix) that experienced rapid economic growth built on the back of real estate and construction will need to transform themselves if they hope to survive this crisis. Interestingly, Florida identifies the absurdity upon which the economics of these cities were built, comparing them to a “giant Ponzi scheme,” but he is not as quick to write off their futures as he is with Rust Belt communities.
- Suburbs have outlived their usefulness. Florida has always had a thing against suburbs, and admittedly, so do I. The suburban lifestyle, which made sense while our economy was based on manufacturing, was subsidized by government policies that promoted homeownership (ie – Fannie Mae, adjustable rate mortgages and subprime loans) and automotive transportation (ie – interstate and highway systems). Those subsidies, however, don’t make sense during a time of financial constrains and age of the “idea economy.”
- We need to rethink the emphasis on homeownership and improve the infrastructure of our mega-regions. Florida preaches against homeownership because he thinks it prohibits people from freely moving to places where the economic conditions call for their talents. He also thinks increased population density will make our economy more productive.
Where does this leave rural?
As always, Florida provides a lot to ponder. Unfortunately, his vision for the rural Midwest is bleak.
But I don’t think we should allow Florida’s vision to demoralize our efforts to build a vibrant future for rural places. As Eric Abrahamson’s blog, The New Pioneers, suggests, rural America does boast many of the characteristics young, talented, creative types are seeking. (read Eric’s post titled “Dreaming of Small Town Life” for more on these characteristics.) By focusing on these characteristics and making some adjustments, rural places pose great potential.
The big question in my mind, however, is how will the crash change what people value? If McMasions, consumerism, and suburbs are out, why can’t inexpensive housing, lower crime, and small town living be in?
It is far too early to know for sure what the crash will mean for our rural communities. But I’m a firm believer that some rural communities will work hard enough to recreate themselves to meet whatever changes the crash creates.
Tags: eric abrahamson, New Pioneers, Richard Florida, rust belt cities, sense of place
Posted in Community Development, Economic Development, Housing, In the News, Quality of Life, Rural | Comments (
1 )
March 5th, 2009 at 10:05 am
Great points regarding Florida’s blindspots when it comes to rural America. Knowledge workers or the creative class do not all have the same preferences when it comes to how they want to live. Even if Florida is right about the big trend towards continued urbanization, the microtrend of knowledge workers moving to the country could have a major impact on the future of rural communities. One also has to ask if Florida is looking at the demographic pattern in the rear view mirror. Will the trends he documents continue over the next several decades if the quality of life in urban America continues to deteriorate?