ur New Plant Database tallies are complete, and this issue of Site Selection is brimming with related rankings of Top Metros, Industries and States (see the Governor’s Cup cover story on page 146).
|
My congratulations to all of the areas mentioned in the rankings, because they would not appear if they hadn’t been highly successful in attracting corporate investment in 2004.
We are introducing a new ranking this year, Top Micropolitans, which replaces our annual Top Small Towns feature. “Micropolitans” is a term coined by the U.S. Census Bureau to categorize one or more counties centered around a contiguous core urban area population between 10,000 and 50,000. This addition to the rankings and its close ties to our long-running Top Metros content reminded me of the new school of thought that has emerged lately with respect to urban economic development.
I am referring to Carnegie Mellon University Professor Richard Florida’s notion of the so-called “creative class,” which he champions in “The Rise of the Creative Class,” published in 2002 (Perseus Books Group). The premise, in brief, is that cities will prosper to the extent they can attract the nearly 40 million Americans — roughly 30 percent of the work force — who see their roles as purveyors of creativity. Common among the group is a deep-seated appreciation of creativity, individuality and diversity. Space prevents me here from more fully defining the class, but lots of cities have embarked on programs designed to lure its members. (A Bohemian Index helps cities figure out where they stand, so they can go after the right mix of creative talent.)
You can perhaps see where our recognition of a city’s success — a Top Metro even — could easily part ways with Professor Florida’s. Ours, after all, is about actual corporate investment in a city and new jobs created — in short, how many times ground broke for new or expanded corporate projects in a city, state or micropolitan.
A rebuttal to the professor’s theory can be found in “The Curse of the Creative Class,” by Steven Malanga, a senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute. Malanga argues in the January 2004 edition of the Institute’s City Journal publication that “far from being economic powerhouses, several of the cities the professor identifies as creative-age winners have chronically underperformed the American economy. And … some of his top creative cities don’t even do a good job at attracting — or keeping — residents.” (Read the entire article at www.city-journal.org.)
Malanga points out that “five of the 10 places atop Mr. Florida’s creativity index had steep losses of U.S. residents [in the latter half of the 1990s], while some of Mr. Florida’s creative losers — including Las Vegas, Memphis and Tampa — were big winners.”
Maybe it’s just a classic chicken-and-egg question along the lines of, “Which came first, the residents or the industry?” (While mulling that, I would point out that both chickens and eggs helped the food-processing industry make our list of Top Industries of 2004, with 377 projects.) Time permitting, read both works cited here for more on this debate. And keep your subscription to Site Selection current for award-winning, bimonthly intelligence on why industry locates where it does.
Till next time,
