Talented Young Workers and the Prospects for Metropolitan Prosperity

1
Talented Young Workersand the Prospects
forMetropolitan Prosperity
2
Roadmap

• Why the Young Restless Matter
• Quantitative Analysis
• Qualitative Analysis

3
Participating Cities

• Memphis, TN
• Philadelphia, PA
• Portland, OR
• Providence, RI
• Portland, VA
• Tampa, FL

4
Research Agenda

• Detailed Quantitative Analysis
• Demographics, migration, and location of 25-34
  year-olds in 1990 and 2000
• Focus on Top 50 US Metro Areas
• (All with populations gt1 million)
• In-Depth Qualitative Analysis
• Focus groups with young workers in participating
  cities
• Recent movers, college plus education

5
National Context
Why the Young and Restless Matter to
Metropolitan Prosperity
6
Fewer 25 to 34 year-olds

• U.S. 25 to 34 Year Old Population
• 1990 43.5 Million
• 2000 39.6 Million
• Today
• 3.9 Million Fewer
• a 9 Decline

7
A Critical Demographic

• As a group, 25 to 34 year-olds are
• Well-Educated
• Highly Mobile
• Hard-Working
• Adaptable
• Cheap (Relative to Older Workers)
• H.R.s Dream Demographic

8
Big Shifts Among Metros
Change 25-34 year-olds, 1990 to 2000
50 Most Populous Metro Areas
Average of Top 50 Metros
9
Future Outlook Labor Shortage

• Last 30 Years
• Boomers enter prime work years
• Womens labor market participation nearly doubles
• Educational attainment up sharply
• Labor Surplus

• Next 30 Years
• Boomers retire many early
• Womens labor market participation plateaus
• Educational attainmentplateaus
• Labor Shortage

10
Competing in a Knowledge Economy

• Talent is the critical resource
• The Creative Class matters
• Skilled, creative workers
• Attractive, tolerant places
• Innovative, successful economies
• The Young and Restless are the creative class
  that is up for grabs

11
Creative Class Correlates to Young Talent
12
Youth and Tolerance Also Correlated
13
Quantitative Analysis

• National Context Why this matters
• Overall Trends
• Changing Faces
• Talent
• Moving In, Moving On
• Local Patterns

14
Benchmark Cities Have More 25-34s
Rank Metropolitan Area Percent
25-34 1 Austin--San Marcos, TX MSA
18.2 6 Denver--Boulder--Greeley, CO CMSA
16.4 10 Phoenix--Mesa, AZ MSA
15.7 13 San Diego, CA MSA
15.5 15 Seattle--Tacoma--Bremerton, WA CMSA
15.4 18 Portland--Salem, OR--WA CMSA 15.2
15
Changing Faces
Racial and Ethnic Trends Reshapingthe Look of
the Young and Restless
16
Young Adult Population More Diverse
Percent of Population, 1990 and 2000
17
Growth Rates Varied by Demography
Percent Change, 1990 to 2000
18
Hispanics

• Fastest growing segment of the young and restless
  since 1990
• Hispanic 25-34 Up 2.3 million (57)
• Non-Hispanic 25-34 Down 5.3 million (-17)
• San Antonio 25-34 year-olds are majority
  Hispanic Los Angeles (48), Miami (46)
• Low College Attainment an issue (11 vs. 31.9
  for all 25-34s)

19
African-Americans

• Declining slightly, less than whites
• Generally becoming more dispersed
• Magnet Cities for African Americans,
• Atlanta, Orlando, Charlotte, Minneapolis
• Atlanta
• 36 increase in 25-34 year-old African Americans
• 24 college attainment (vs 18 nationally)

20
Smart Women
College Attainment Rate of 25 to 34 Year Olds,
2000 Gender 1990 2000 Change Men
26.9 30.3 3.4 Women 26.3
33.6 7.3
Change in College-educated 25 to 34 Year Olds,
1990-2000 Gender Number Percent Men
150,000 4.2 Women 624,000 18.0
21
Portlands Population Less Diverse
25 to 34 Year-olds Rank Metropolitan
Area Percent White 12 Portland--Salem,
OR--WA CMSA 79.7 17 Denver--Boulder--Greeley,
CO CMSA 77.7 19 Seattle--Tacoma--Bremerton, WA
CMSA 75.9 25 Phoenix--Mesa, AZ
MSA 71.7 32 Austin--San Marcos, TX
MSA 69.1 41 San Diego, CA MSA 61.6
22
Average in College Attainment
25-34 year-olds with a 4-Year Degree, 2000
Rank Metropolitan Area 4 Year
Degree 6 Austin--San Marcos, TX
MSA 38.9 7 Denver--Boulder--Greeley, CO
CMSA 38.1 14 Seattle--Tacoma--Bremerton, WA
CMSA 34.2 27 Portland--Salem, OR--WA
CMSA 29.0 30 San Diego, CA MSA 28.7 44 Pho
enix--Mesa, AZ MSA 24.6
23
Biggest Shifts in Talented 25-34s
Change in College Educated 25-34s
Rank Metropolitan Area Change,
1990-2000 2 Charlotte, NC MSA 56.6 3 Austin--S
an Marcos, TX MSA 56.2 4 Portland--Salem,
OR--WA CMSA 50.0 5 Atlanta, GA
MSA 46.2 6 Denver--Boulder--Greeley, CO
CMSA 40.1 42 St. Louis, MO, MSA -0.7 45 Ne
w Orleans, LA MSA -4.3 49 Providence, RI
MSA -7.0
24
Moving In, Moving On
Migration of the Young and RestlessAmong US
Metropolitan Areas
25
Population Change vs. Migration

• Change Data
• Compare
• 1956-65 birth cohort in 1990
• vs.
• 1966-75 birth cohort in 2000
• (Different people,same age)

• Migration Data
• Compare
• 1966-75 birth cohort in 1995
• vs.
• 1966-75 birth cohort in 2000(Same
  people,different age)

26
Millions Move

• Between 1995 and 2000, 6.6 million 25 to 34
  year-olds moved from one metropolitan area to
  another
• Migration rates vary by a factor of four
• Well-educated are the most likely to move,
  especially long distances

27
Local Patterns
Where do the 25 to 34 year-olds Live in Portland?
28
25 to 34 Year-olds Increasing
Increase in 25 to 34 Year-olds, 1990-2000
29
College-educated young adults
Concentration of College-educated 25-34 year-olds
30
African-American 25-34 year-olds
Concentration of African-American 25-34 year-olds
31
Close-in Neighborhods Key
Concentration of College-educated 25-34 year-olds
3 miles from CBD Growth of 25 to 34
year-olds 1990 to 2000 30 Percent Share of25
to 34 year-olds with a 4-year degree 54 Percent
32
Central or Suburban Growth?
Change in 25-34 year-olds Population 1990-2000
Metropolitan Area Within 3 Miles Outside 3
Miles Seattle--Tacoma, WA CMSA 32 -
6 Portland--Salem, OR--WA CMSA 30 10 Denv
er--Boulder--Greeley, CO CMSA 24 14 San
Francisco-Oakland-San Jose, CMSA 17 -
6 Raleigh--Durham--Chapel Hill, NC MSA -
2 23 Phoenix--Mesa, AZ MSA -5 25 Charl
otte, NC--SC MSA -12 19
33
Smart in the Center or Burbs?
25-34 year-olds with a 4-Year Degree, 2000
Metropolitan Area Within 3 Miles Outside 3
Miles Seattle--Tacoma, WA CMSA 56 32 Portland
--Salem, OR--WA CMSA 54 26 Denver--Boulder--G
reeley, CO CMSA 46 37 San Francisco-Oakland-Sa
n Jose, CMSA 67 38 Raleigh--Durham--Chapel
Hill, NC MSA 40 46 Phoenix--Mesa, AZ
MSA 12 25 Charlotte, NC--SC MSA 35 32
34
From Here . . .
The Economic Importance of Being Different
35
Qualitative Analysis

• What the young and restless want from cities
• City-specific assets and challenges
• A toolkit for cities
• Insights and opportunities

36
What the Young and the Restless Want from Cities

• Open the Circle and Welcome Newcomers
• Welcome New Ideas
• Encourage Diversity
• Create a Place Where People Can Be Themselves
• Let Young People Live Their Values and Create a
  New History

37
What the Young and the Restless Want from Cities

• Build Vibrant Places
• Take Care of the Basics
• Be the Best at Something
• Sell Your Regional Assets
• Know What You Want to Be and Be Willing to Take
  Risks to Achieve It

38
A Toolkit for Cities

• Deliver an appealing reality.
• Put values on display.
• Keep in touch with former residents.
• Create opportunities for civic involvement.
• Use internships to connect with young adults.

39
More Tools . . .

• Survey young adults regularly.
• Celebrate young entrepreneurs and civic
  contributors.
• Communicate development plans to young adults.
• Promote your city.
• Promote a young adult lifestyle.

40
Differences from Other Studies

• Three other studies address migration
• Bill Frey Metropolitan Magnets
• Paul Gottlieb Brain Drain
• Census Bureau

41
Frey Metro Magnets

• Metropolitan Magnets for International and
  Domestic Migrants (Oct. 2003)
• International and domestic migration among 81
  Largest Metros based on Census, 1995-2000
  migration data
• KEY WEAKNESS No age group data
• Domestic migrant magnets all characterized by
  lower-density (p. 9)

42
Gottlieb Brain Drain

• Labor Supply Pressures and the "Brain Drain,
  (January 2004)
• Northeast Midwest have highest proportion of
  young educated counters notion of a brain
  drain.
• WEAKNESS Doesnt measure change in educational
  attainment of 25-34s from 1990 to 2000
• Year 2000 snapshot on attainment change measures
  have life cycle bias--compares location of 15 to
  24 year olds in 1990 to 25 to 34 year olds in
  2000 doesnt separate out effects of
  international migrations