The Prevalence of Prosperous Shrinking Cities

Abstract

The majority of the shrinking cities literature focuses solely on instances of population loss and economic decline. This article argues that shrinking cities exist on a spectrum between prosperity and decline. Taking a wider view of population loss, I explore the possibility of prosperous shrinking citiesif they exist, where they exist and under what conditions shrinking cities can thrive. Examining census place data from the 1980 to 2010 U.S. Census and American Community Surveys, 27 percent of 886 shrinking cities were found to have income levels greater than their surrounding regions. Shrinking and prosperous shrinking cities of all sizes were found across the United States. Shrinkage was most prevalent in the Rust Belt region and prosperous shrinkage in coastal regions. Prosperous shrinking cities were overwhelmingly found within megapolitan regions and were rarely principal cities. Multivariate regression analysis found that both population (city size) and the severity of shrinkage (magnitude of population loss) had no effect on economic prosperity. Talent (location quotient of education) was found to be the strongest predictor of prosperous shrinkage.

Small towns shrinkage in the Jilin Province: A comparison between China and developed countries

“…Urban shrinkage is not necessarily a bad thing, and not all shrinking towns will go into decline. Shrinking towns can enjoy economic prosperity [64], and their residents can be happy [65]. In 2019, the Chinese government issued the document "Key Tasks of New Urbanization Construction in 2019", which proposed that shrinking small and medium-sized cities should reduce and strengthen themselves, change the conventional thinking of incremental planning, and strictly control their growth.…”

Critiques of the Shrinking Cities Literature from an Urban Political Economy Framework

“…While efforts to strictly quantitatively define what does and does not count as a shrinking city are common, Hartt (2019) questions the utility of such a strict threshold for shrinkage, instead arguing that cities are situated on a spectrum from prosperity to shrinkage. Hartt (2019) and Weaver et al (2016) also point out that shrinkage and decline are distinct phenomena; areas like affluent suburbs that are losing population but retaining quality of life should not be conflated with cities rife with abandonment, neglect, and lack of social support. Weaver et al (2016) explain that a shrinking and nonshrinking dichotomy may oversimplify the dynamic nature of cities, and “that even ‘shrinking cities’ contain spaces of growth and stability within their boundaries.…”

“…This scarce work requires researchers to actively engage in the operations of organizations like community development corporations or other development related nonprofits and then make theoretical contributions that draw from such collaborations (Griffin and Thomas 2015; Dewar and Linn 2015; Draus, Roddy, and McDuffie 2014). On the other hand in literature that aims to describe existing scenarios, demographics and morphological features (e.g., Hartt 2019; Weaver et al 2016; Beyer, Hagemann, and Rieniets 2006), the overarching goal is often to “present shrinking processes and make it possible to understand them, to see them within the overall context of global developments so that their status can be assessed” (Beyer, Hagemann, and Rieniets 2006, 6). With a few exceptions (e.g., Ryan 2014; Dewar and Thomas 2012), there is little overlap between scholarship that pursues both goals that would allow a conversation that theorizes about causes or develop solutions based on such ideas.…”

Urban Shrinkage and Sustainability: Assessing the Nexus between Population Density, Urban Structures and Urban Sustainability

“…The newly cleared-out sites can be used to develop green infrastructure [67,68]. Ultimately, appropriately approached de-densification can result in a high quality of life in a shrinking city [50,69]. Transformation of the disadvantages of shrinkage to advantages depends on the lens through which shrinkage is perceived [70], its reflection in the urban agenda [14] and the planning culture [71] resulting from the overall context.…”

“…On the other hand, it is obvious that too high a density can generate negative externalities in the form of traffic congestion, high real estate prices, and a negative impact on the quality of life (cf. [50]). Indeed, the quality of life does not necessarily have to be associated with urban density [51] and moreover, the problem of population density, due to the thermal island effect, is growing proportionally to the progressing climate change [52].Analytical and normative strands of analysis may pose different implications for shrinking cities.…”