Resurgent Cities?European Urban Trajectories 1960-2005

Vlad Mykhnenko & Ivan TurokCentre for Public Policy for Regions (CPPR) & Department of Urban Studies, University of Glasgow

The RGS-IBG Annual International Conference, The Royal Geographical Society, Kensington Gore, London

30th August 2006

Background

New conventional wisdom about the contribution of cities to national and regional growth– contain the key drivers of innovation, creativity and

productivity in advanced, knowledge-based economies – provide vital economic, social, educational and cultural

facilities to help attract and retain vital human capital and creative talent (‘buzz’)

– contain the assets and infrastructure to attract high order business and consumer services & tourism

Illustration

“Cities and metropolitan areas are drivers of economic development … creating growth, innovation and employment … The European Union will be most successful in pursuing its growth and jobs agenda, if all regions – especially those with the greatest potential for higher productivity and employment – are able to play their part. Cities are essential in this effort. They are the home of most jobs, businesses, and higher education institutions and are key actors in achieving social cohesion. Cities are the centres of change, based on innovation, entrepreneurship and business growth” (European Commission, 2005)

Research Questions

Are there any signs of an improvement (‘resurgence’) in the position of European cities – in historical terms & relative to their national contexts?

Any obvious attributes associated with stronger or weaker city growth?– size– regional location– national political-economy

Population as an indicator of urban economic dynamism and growth

1. A consequence of wider conditions in different places – differential employment opportunities

2. A contributor to economic development – skilled labour, enterprise, demand for consumer & public services

Both facilitated by rising personal mobility, wider regional disparities, falling international barriers (hence easier ‘adjustment’) and increasing policy attention

Hence economic and demographic trends becoming more interdependent

“there can be no doubt that at all stages of urban growth and decline there is causal interaction between population and employment movement” (Cheshire and Hay, 1989)

Link between population & employment trends

EU-25 NUTS-1 regions: changes in employment and populaiton between 1995 and 2003, %

R2 = 0.53

-10

-5

0

5

10

15

20

-30 -20 -10 0 10 20 30 40 50employment growth

popu

latio

n gr

owth

Eurostat Regio Database (2006).

EU-25: employment and population correlations in NUTS-1 regions, 1995-2003

UK's 37 NUTS-2 regions: changes in employment and population, 1985-1995, %

R2 = 0.66

-4

-2

0

2

4

6

8

10

-20 -10 0 10 20 30

employment growth

popu

latio

n gr

owth

UK: employment and population correlation in NUTS-2 regions, 1985-1995

Eurostat Regio Database (2006) and NOMIS (2006).

Five propositions

1. The rate of population growth in cities has increased in recent years and in relation to their national averages

2. Big cities have performed better than smaller cities ‘cos of the larger scale of opportunities, assets & amenities

3. Cities in the economic and political core of Europe (where proximity to wealth and power is high) are growing more strongly than those in the periphery

4. Cities located in regions with a higher quality of life (e.g sunnier climate) have out-performed cities elsewhere

5. Western European cities are growing more strongly than those in the East

Methods and data sources

City as a continuous built-up area with over 200,000 population in 2000

Europe from the Atlantic to the Urals Created by amalgamating constituent local authorities

or using nationally defined urban agglomerations Yields 310 cities in 36 countries of Western and

Eastern Europe They account for 37% of total population (42% in

Western Europe; 30% in Eastern) Data traced back to 1960 at 5-year intervals

Examples of British and Irish cities

Key findings

Europe overall

Far fewer growing cities than before, more declining cities

Europe: number of cities by absolute and relative population change direction

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

1960-65

1965-70

1970-75

1975-80

1980-85

1985-90

1990-95

1995-00

2000-05

Growing StableDeclining Relatively growingRelatively declining

Relative improvement for large cities

Europe: average annual % population change by city size

-0.5

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

1960-65

1965-70

1970-75

1975-80

1980-85

1985-90

1990-95

1995-00

2000-05

Small Medium Large Average city

Absolute fall of small cities

Europe: shares of growing cities by size

0%

25%

50%

75%

100%

1960-65

1965-70

1970-75

1975-80

1980-85

1985-90

1990-95

1995-00

2000-05

Small (200,000-400,000)Medium (400,000-1,000,000)

Large (>1,000,000)

But not strong statistically

Europe: city population size and growth, 1960s

R2 = 0.30-5

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

10,000 100,000 1,000,000 10,000,000population (log-scale), 1960

% p

er y

ear

Europe: city population size and growth, 2000-2005

R2 = 0.07

-3

-2

-1

0

1

2

3

4

100,000 1,000,000 10,000,000 100,000,000population (log-scale), 2000

% p

er y

ear

1960s-70s were all about urbanisation, esp to smaller cities. Not any more

Relationship between urbanisation and city growth rates

Europe: urbanisation and city population change, 1960s

R2 = 0.29

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100national urbanisation % rates, 1960

% p

er y

ear

Europe: urbanisation and city population change, 2000-2005

R2 = 0.04

-3.0

-2.5

-2.0

-1.5

-1.0

-0.5

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

40 50 60 70 80 90 100national urbanisation % rates, 2000

% p

er y

ear

Levels of urbanisation and population concentration in cities have stabilised; The East-West gap endures

Europe: urbanisation and concentration levels, shares of total population

20%25%30%35%40%45%50%55%60%65%70%75%80%

urbanisation:West

urbanisation:East

concentration:West

concentration:East

Most cities have become growth laggards, following rather than leading national population change trends

Europe: city and national population growth, 1960s

R2 = 0.20

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

-0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5

national % change

aver

age

city

% c

hang

e

Europe: city and national population growth, 2000-2005

R2 = 0.65

-3

-2.5

-2

-1.5

-1

-0.5

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

-2 -1 0 1 2 3national % change

aver

age

city

% c

hang

e

Quality of life not an influence

Europe: sun and population growth in cities, 1960s

R2 = 0.01

-5

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 4500 5000solar radiation, Wh/m2/day

% p

er y

ear

Europe: sun and population growth in cities, 2000-2005

R2 = 0.05

-3

-2

-1

0

1

2

3

4

1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 4500 5000solar radiation, Wh/m2/day

% p

er y

ear

Key findings

The West v. the East

Dramatic decline in Eastern Europe;Steady decline then stabilising in the West

Europe: annual city population growth rates in the West and the East

Eastern Europe

Western Europe

-1.0

-0.5

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

1960-65

1965-70

1970-75

1975-80

1980-85

1985-90

1990-95

1995-00

2000-05

% p

er y

ear

Number of growing cities flatters the West, disparages the East

Western Europe: number of cities by population change direction

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

1960-65

1965-70

1970-75

1975-80

1980-85

1985-90

1990-95

1995-00

2000-05

no. o

f citi

es

Growing Stable Declining

Eastern Europe: number of cities by population change direction

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

1960-65

1965-70

1970-75

1975-80

1980-85

1985-90

1990-95

1995-00

2000-05

no. o

f citi

es

Growing Stable Declining

Most cities still lagging in the West; Dramatic transformation in the East

Western Europe: number of cities with positive or negative population change relative to the national average

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

1960-65

1965-70

1970-75

1975-80

1980-85

1985-90

1990-95

1995-00

2000-05

Relatively growing

Relatively declining

Eastern Europe: number of cities with positive or negative population change relative to the national average

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

1960-65

1965-70

1970-75

1975-80

1980-85

1985-90

1990-95

1995-00

2000-05

Relatively growing

Relatively declining

Cities lag behind more in the West, but have stabilised. Major decline in the East

Western Europe: population growth of cities v. nations

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

1960-65

1965-70

1970-75

1975-80

1980-85

1985-90

1990-95

1995-00

2000-05

% p

er y

ear

National population change (non-weighed mean)

City population change (non-weighed mean)

Eastern Europe: population growth of cities v. nations

-1.0-0.50.00.51.01.52.02.53.03.54.0

1960-65

1965-70

1970-75

1975-80

1980-85

1985-90

1990-95

1995-00

2000-05

% p

er y

ear

National population change (non-weighed mean)

City population change (non-weighed mean)

No differences between cities in the core and periphery

Western Europe: annual % population growth rates in the core and peripheral cities

0

0.25

0.5

0.75

1

1.25

1.5

1.75

2

2.25

2.5Politicalcore

Politicalperiphery

Economiccore

Economicperiphery

Geographiccore

Geographicperiphery

Capital cities are growing faster, especially in the West, recently in the East

Western Europe: average annual population change in capitals and other cities

0.00

0.25

0.50

0.75

1.00

1.25

1.50

1.75

2.00

2.25

1960-65

1965-70

1970-75

1975-80

1980-85

1985-90

1990-95

1995-00

2000-05

Capitals Other cities

Eastern Europe: average annual population change in capitals and other cities

-1.0

-0.5

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

1960-65

1965-70

1970-75

1975-80

1980-85

1985-90

1990-95

1995-00

2000-05

Capitals Other cities

Continuity + decline in Eastern EuropeEastern Europe: city population growth rates, 1960-2005

Belgorod

Magd

eburg

Cluj-N

.

G.Ber

lin

Halle

Togliatti, 28% Balakovo, 17%

Nebr.Chelny, 13%

SaranskG.Novgorod

G.Dre

sden

Budapest

Chem

nitz

I.-Frankivs'k

Luts'kNizhnekamsk Ternopil'

BrestStaryi Oskol

Naberezhnye Chelny

Minsk

Kryv.R

ihSofiaTirana

Cluj-NapocaChişinău

Constanţa

GalaţiBraşov

IaşiTimişoara

G.Leipz

ig

BrestHrodna

-3

-2

-1

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

aver

age

% p

er y

ear

1960s 1980s 2000s

Similar but confused by ‘recovery’ in the West

Western Europe: city population growth rates, 1960-2005 G.Toulon, 8.9% Vitoria-Gasteiz,

8.6% G.Bonn, 8.2%

G.ToursG.Grenoble

G.Malmö

Bruns

wickG.Glas

gow

G.Bel

fast

G.Hagu

e

G.G

lasgow

G.Milan

G.Trie

ste

G.Genoa

G.Florence

G.Geneva

G.Lausanne

G.Zurich G.Tampere

G.Turku

G.Mes

sina G.Trieste

AlicanteMurcia G.Madrid

Palma de M.G.Utrecht

G.Heerlen GranadaWuppertal

-2

-1

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

aver

age

% p

er y

ear

1960s 1980s 2000s

Trajectories: long-term growth, fairly recent decline but little resurgence

Most common population growth trajectories (number of cities)

1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2005

Constant decline (5)

Long-term decline (8)

Medium-term decline (75)

Recent decline (41)

Growth set-back (26)

Recent resurgence (12)

Medium-term resurgence (7)

Long-term resurgence (23)

Constant growth (94)

Conclusions – Western Europe

Cities clearly out-paced national trends during the 1960s and early 1970s – engines of growth

Then sharp slowdown lasting a decade Then broadly stabilising at a low rate of growth

and below national trends Slight recovery since the nadir of early 1980s,

especially for large cities/capitals, but not robust Many more cities are now growing than shrinking,

but only very slowly Resurgence premature, but improvement signs

Conclusions – Eastern Europe

Cities far out-paced national trends throughout the 1960s-1980s – partly planned, partly universal (yet failed) urbanisation ‘catching-up’ with the West

Then dramatic slowdown lasting a decade Broadly stabilising at a slow rate of decline,

analogous to national trends No recovery since the nadir of the late 1990s,

except for a few large cities and capitals Four times as many cities are now shrinking than

growing