Creative Class

The economic crisis appears to be causing a slight but noticeable shift from the suburbs to the cities, according to an analysis of recent Census data by Brookings demographer William Frey, reported in the Wall Street Journal.

“The central-city population in U.S. metropolitan areas with more than one million people (excluding New Orleans …) grew at an annual rate of 0.97% between July 2007 and July 2008 …That compared with a growth rate of 0.90% in 2006-2007, and growth rates around 0.5% in the years between 2002 and 2005, when the robust real-estate market led to new jobs and new housing developments outside the cities, where open land is more plentiful … Population growth in the cities has translated to slower growth in the suburbs. U.S. suburbs in metro areas greater than 1 million people grew at a 1.11% annual rate in 2007-2008, the same as a year earlier and down from growth rates between 1.29% and 1.48% between 2002 and 2005.”

The combined effects of the recession, job loss, and the housing crisis have made it more difficult for many to sell their houses, in effect locking them in place and slowing rates of residential and geographic mobility. Frey points out that:

“This shows cities were reviving at the end of this decade, and they are also surviving a recession that has been a lot harsher for other parts of our landscape …Cities are big enough and diverse enough that they are able to survive these ups and downs in the economy a lot better.”

And this is especially true of the biggest and most diverse cities, like New York and Chicago, which are hubs of large mega-regions, as well as magnets like greater D.C. and Silicon Valley which continue to draw in highly skilled and ambitious people from the U.S. and the world. Large Rustbelt cities, like Detroit, continue to lose people, and rates of growth in housing-driven Sunbelt cities have slowed considerably.

The June unemployment numbers do not look very pretty for the United States. After four months of improvements in the number of jobs lost, the numbers again increased to 467,000 up from 322,000 in May. The unemployment rate, now at 9.5 percent, is the highest in 26 years. The recession is entering its 20th month and will soon reach two years with little end in sight.

While the great recession of the 21st century grinds on, explanations for it continue to elude us. Some think that it is a depression and they may be right. I suggest that we have at least four issues on our plate that have emerged as a perfect story. The solutions to all are institutional. First, let’s start with the financial crisis. This financial crisis resulted from market failure. The lack of rules or what some like to call regulatory arbitrage, that is, working the rules led to the financial meltdown. We are still not out of the woods on this one because the rules have not been fixed. Without rules markets cannot work.

Second, we now have a global recession with falling demand and rising unemployment. A classic case of underused resources. The recession was in part caused by the financial crisis, but only in part. It is clear now that at least two interpretations are in order. First, it was a classic case of over-investment in housing. We have about two to three million too many houses. It will take about six years to work this off through population growth and attrition. This “inventory recession,” to use an old phrase, is nothing new, only the sector is - housing. The other interpretation is that it was caused by imbalances in the global economy between rich and poor countries. In either case, as Richard Florida pointed out with housing, or Business Week with global imbalances, new rules are needed.

Third, we have finally realized that we do indeed have a sustainability issue in the environment. It is both about the carbon footprint and about the type and amount of energy used. This is not a cause of our current financial and economic problems but it impacts it directly since it is about investment, and with a huge amount of uncertainty where to invest it is also putting a drag on the economy. Rules would help.

Finally, we are just realizing that globalization that started a few decades ago might be a dead end. It is a dead end not because the world does not want to globalize (most do) but because markets cannot work without rules. And in a global economy we need global rules. Here is the rub. All of the above problems in some way suffer from having a global economy without a set of global rules. When the last era of globalization ended at the dawn of the first world war, the rules that governed up to then also evaporated and it took decades to put them back in place after the second world war.

We are now into the second decade of the second globalization of the world economy. Until we are able to put the “rules of the game” in place markets, I am afraid the economy, and the financial sector, cannot be expected to lead to growth. The environmental rules are even more onerous. We just might need to start working on the rules of the game sooner rather than later. This seems like a task for the creative class. What is needed is talent and honesty in order to put a global structure in place where all can prosper. This is no small task.

In an intriguing post, Stirling Newberry suggests that Reaganism set in motion basic economic and geographic forces that have led to a “self-inflicted recession” and shaped the demise of the conservative movement.

[T]he epicenters of that “Reagan Democrat” revolt are now the areas that are hardest hit by the present depression: California, the Upper Midwest, and the Sunbelt South. This is not an accident …

The only places that are doing well in the Republican universe are those strongly associated with mining, plus Republican metro centers such as Phoenix and Salt Lake City, which are the recipients of the labor draining from the rest of the Republican heartland. Resource extraction is the only bright spot in the Republican world …

The Bush boom produced a moment where it seemed like the producers of Residential Real Estate, the back bone of the Republican donating and agitating base, were finally at their pinnacle. Truck Dealers, Home Builders, Real Estate Agents, and the Small Business class that catered to the people who lived in the “boomburgs” saw rapid increases in employment, wages, and social power. They had the money and the confidence to try to press their social agenda on the rest of the country. It was, of course, doomed to failure; since none of these people made anything that could be exported; or if they did, it came at the costs of increased imports that counter-balanced them.

The New York Times asks artists how the recession is affecting their lives and work (h/t: Alison Kemper). Money quote:

“I love it. The only thing that makes me sad is that I can’t make a living right now.”

While the responses comprise a small, ad hoc sample, my read is that the artists in major centers like NYC and San Francisco seem more upbeat than those in harder-hit Rustbelt communities.

Housing starts dipped to record lows in April. Just 357,000 single family homes were started last month, while total starts feel to 458,000 - an all-time record low. Calculated Risk charts the trend.

The Financial Times highlights the global scale of the real estate crisis:

The slump across global commercial property markets has accelerated since the turn of the year, with the emerging markets in particular struggling under the combination of capital value and rental falls. The pace of decline in capital values accelerated in the first quarter, while almost every country in the world is reporting a slide in rents …

Business Week’s Michael Mandel crunches the numbers and turns up some disturbing results. While recession has hit hardest at blue-collar workers, it is taking its toll on professional jobs as well. Unemployment for professionals overall increased by roughly four percent between August 2008 and April 2009. But the recession is hitting much harder at certain types of professionals. Computing and mathematical jobs (heavy on software engineers, computer scientists, and systems analysts) are down 9.3 percent; engineering and architectural jobs (two-thirds engineering) are down 10.3 percent; and “creative professional” jobs - working artists, musicians, dancers, entertainers, reporters, editors, writers, and other media types - are down 11.3 percent.

Here’s a cool map of the global banking crisis.

Right now, many in the media, at watercoolers, and in the blogosphere are busy castigating a variety of CEOs and individuals at upper and mid management levels for a variety of failures. Although some individuals certainly deserve a virtual lashing, many were just being creative (inventing new hedge funds, derivatives, CMBS, etc.).

Excessive condemnation runs the risk of creating a broad-based workplace culture across a wide spectrum of industries in which leaders and brilliant thinkers only look to avoid risks rather than seek opportunities.  Indeed, that is in part the nature of recession - collective attempts to minimize the possibility of failure.

While we all try to sort out how the world fell into this recessionary hole, it’s also important to remember the value that embracing failure can have in our 21st century economy.

Diane Jermyn in her Incubator column in the Globe and Mail did just that last week. She interviewed three specialists on business and entrepreneurial culture and asked about the role of failure in successful enterprises. Here are some noteworthy passages:

“If you’re going to have an innovative culture, you must understand that that comes with the acceptance of failure. Innovation comes with a lot of mistakes.” [says Tony Champman, CEO of communications firm, Capital C]

“You need a culture that allows failure for success because without it, people become anti-failure,” says Charles Plant [Managing Director of the Market Readiness Program for entrepreneurs at MaRS]. “Trying different things is the act of innovation. If you fail 14 times, hopefully you’re going to succeed on the 15th try. Without failure, we’re not going to be driving and growing the economy.”

“Everybody in theory embraces the concept of failure and risk but if the person at the helm is purely financially driven, there really isn’t a lot of tolerance for risk” says Chapman.

This last comment is an important one to monitor in uncertain times or in companies facing adversity - only looking to minimize expenses and cut costs may not be the right solution (how far has it gotten General Motors?).  And in some knowledge-oriented industries, managing through risk minimalization isn’t necessarily an option.

“Anybody who’s in the business of inventing the future has to be more tolerant of risk and failure because the future hasn’t been created yet,” says Chapman. “If you’re in the business of creativity or innovation, software, technology or ideas, you have to be tolerant of experimentation and creativity.

But in these times, any organization needs to minimize the downside of failures:

Is there a permissible way to fail?

Everyone agrees that the key to successful failure is doing it in a sensible manner to protect against the downside. The trick to successful failures is to know when to quit.

“I think you have to quickly acknowledge when something is a failure and have a back up plan of what you’re going to do,” says Plant. “Don’t keep flogging a dead horse.”

Does your workplace appreciate and accept failure? Or do you work in fear of making a mistake?

Other thoughts?

My very favorite casualty of the reset - conspicuous consumption. The New York Times reports:

In just the seven months since the stock market began to plummet, the recession has aimed its death ray not just at the credit market, the Dow and Detroit, but at the very ethos of conspicuous consumption. Even those with a regular income are reassessing their spending habits, perhaps for the long term. They are shopping their closets, downscaling their vacations and holding off on trading in their cars. If the race to have the latest fashions and gadgets was like an endless, ever-faster video game, then someone has pushed the reset button…

Still, economists point out that the Great Depression created a generation of cautious savers. The longer the downturn this time, they say, the more likely it is to change financial habits permanently.

“Though the recession was always talked about in economic terms, we felt really strongly that, in fact, it was a crisis of culture,” said Tracy Johnson, research director for the Context-Based Research Group, a market research firm in Baltimore that views the recession as a rite-of-passage that will reorder consumer priorities. Ms. Johnson has advised clients to focus on quality rather than quantity. Malls redecorated in screaming red “sale” signs are not the way to go, she said, because “if you just give people the opportunity to buy more, you’re not matching up to where their minds are…”

Carol Morgan, who teaches law at the University of Georgia and whose husband has a private law practice, said she felt a responsibility to cut needless spending. “That is probably something that is a prudent thing to do in any event, but particularly now I see it as the right thing, as the moral thing to do,” she said, adding that she also hoped to increase her charitable giving. “Before, extravagance and opulence was the aspiration, and if we can replace that with a desire to live more simply…”

Any sharp decline in consumer spending will feed on itself, said Juliet B. Schor, an economist at Boston College and the author of “The Overspent American: Upscaling, Downshifting and the New Consumer” (Basic Books, 1998). Typically, people spend when those around them are spending, but in a downturn, the need to compete evaporates. “You can stay right where you are without falling behind,” Ms. Schor said.  Consumers’ focus may have shifted, she said, from striving to catch up to those above them to contemplating the fates of those below them.

Listen in to hear Richard Florida interviewed on Lawrence O’Donnell’s To the Point on NPR last Friday. Some details about the appearance:

From Detroit to LA, the Recession Reshapes America

With Detroit home prices at record lows, is this the end of a great American city or its best chance for a revival? How will the crash reshape America? That is the title question of Richard Florida’s piece in the Atlantic this month.

Tell us, what are your thoughts on Detroit?