Return to News Index

Phila. and Pa.: for worse - or for better

Bruce Katz is a vice president of the Brookings Institution and director of its Center on Urban and Metropolitan Policy
Mark Muro is a senior policy analyst at the Brookings Center on Urban and Metropolitan Policy

A new report was released yesterday examining economic and development trends in Pennsylvania. Its message: This region and state are in trouble.

"Back to Prosperity: A Competitive Agenda for Renewing Pennsylvania," published by the Brookings Institution, looks at key indicators of demographic and economic well-being and finds the state at best stagnant and, in many areas, declining. Simultaneously, the report ranks the state disturbingly high on indicators of sprawl and urban decline - a costly combination.

In the Philadelphia area, the trends are particularly stark. More than 5 percent of Philadelphia's lots and buildings stand vacant, and about 20 percent of residential blocks in the city of have a least one vacant house. Yet outer jurisdictions continue to consume land inefficiently at a torrid pace.

Among large metropolitan areas, in fact, Philadelphia stands out for the extent of its employment decentralization. Overall, nearly 60 percent of the region's jobs lie more than 10 miles away from downtown.

The Philadelphia economy has essentially become an "exit ramp" economy, with new offices and stores dispersed along suburban freeways.

The city's troubling growth patterns prevail across the state. In nearly every region, what growth is occurring is taking place on the periphery, while established cities, boroughs, and townships stagnate or decline.

In nearly every region, from Allentown to Erie and back to York and Harrisburg, Pennsylvania's metropolitan areas are suffering from the same dynamics of sprawl, abandonment, and economic malaise that plague metro Philadelphia.

In short, Philadelphia is not alone. These challenges are statewide - and shared.

The extent of sprawl and abandonment means that the entire state's ability to compete has been compromised. The global innovation economy places a high premium on education. Locales that can attract and retain college graduates are rewarded.

But Pennsylvania lost the greatest number of young people of any state in the 1990s. These workers appear to be choosing "cool cities" with healthy labor markets, vibrant downtowns, and distinctive neighborhoods - the very amenities sapped by sprawl and abandonment. They aren't choosing Philadelphia or Pittsburgh - or Harrisburg or the Lehigh Valley, for that matter.

These trends aren't inevitable. Rather, statewide policies exacerbate them, in many cases subsidizing development in fast-growing outer townships and greenfields at the expense of the state's historic and asset-rich older communities.

What to do?

The state must take an aggressive role in renewing Philadelphia and other cities, boroughs and older towns. This is an opportunity for a new consensus around reinvestment and smarter growth.

Leaders from Philadelphia should join with others around the state in advancing an agenda promoting competitiveness, fiscal responsibility, and an overhaul of the state's anachronistic and unfocused spending, planning, and governance systems.

The heart of this effort should be a new competitive vision for the state that seeks to create a virtuous cycle of distinctive communities, quality jobs, income growth and wealth-building. The state's enviable set of educational and health institutions- "eds and meds" - should be an essential component.

The current divide-a-shrinking-pie mentality, moreover, needs to be replaced by a strategic targeting of state resources to key sectors and key places - namely, the downtowns, main streets, and town centers of existing communities.

Severe fiscal constraints at every level of government and heavy job losses in the state's traditional industries leave little room for delay. The time to act is now.

---

The Brookings report is available at www.brookings.edu/pennsylvania.