in focus
in focusl
finding solutions for shrinking places
Knowing
your limits
With government happy to leave the fate of cities to
market forces, where does that leave those for whom
growth isn’t a realistic option? Clare Goff reports
A SHRINKING CULTURE
The narrative of shrinkage is now common across the UK and
the developed world. Towns and cities, particularly those that
previously had a single economic raison d’etre – from coal to
shipping to cotton – have struggled to reinvent themselves
6 | New Start | March 2011
following the decline of industry. Tyneside lost
10% of its population between 1971 and 2009,
Manchester fell 7% and Stoke-on-Trent 4%.
As the concept of growth has dominated
recent history, the culture of shrinkage will
soon be considered as normal a development,
according to the Shrinking Cities project, a
three-year initiative to research the processes
of city shrinkage around the world. It points to
a combination of declining fertility, an ageing
population and the deindustrialisation of many
Western cities as key factors in their shrinkage.
Liverpool may not yet be ready to give up on
growth but cities across Europe, the US and Japan
are now focused on managing their decline.
Should the UK’s worst-off cities be following suit?
Across the water from Liverpool, Birkenhead
saw 9,500 people – 0.24% of its population –
leave in the ten years to 2009; private sector jobs
growth contracted by 11% over the period. It
was named as one of eight ‘struggling’ cities in
a report by the Centre for Cities think tank, alongside Bolton,
Barnsley, Blackburn and Stoke.
It is cities such as these which will feel the full
force of the withdrawal of public spend in the coming
months. Left to the mercy of market forces and cut out
of a central government growth policy skewed towards
the prosperous southeast, should such cities focus on
managing their decline?
The answer to that question depends where you
sit on the economic spectrum. To free marketers,
shrinkage should be considered as normal a process
of development as growth. In the home of the free
Unleash
ing our co
market – the United States – it is already a reality:
re streng
th
rust belt cities from Detroit to Cleveland lost 50% of
NewSta
rt
www.
cles.org
thema
gazin
efor
making
better
places
.uk/news
tart
march
2011
wheN you
ecoNom r city iS Shr
iNk
ic
be realiSt growth may iNg
Not
doeSN’t ic. but decliNe
have to
be Neg
ative
Give citie
s the chance
to shape
their own
destiny, says
Chris Mur
ray
public
public space in
ha
nds
Practical
transferr advice on
ing asse
ts
their population base in the 50 years to 2000. There are now
180 ghost towns in the US, abandoned either through the
decline of industry or suburbanisation, as people move further
and further away from the centre.
The wrecked infrastructure of Detroit has become
symbolic of the flipside of consumer growth.
The decline and fall of our cities and towns is part of the
natural ebb and flow of economic life, the argument goes.
When Aberdeen lost its fishing industry it found new life as
a market town; when that subsequently faltered the city was
reinvented through oil and it is now Europe’s oil capital. Across
the UK and the developed world, cities have navigated change
in line with changing economic circumstances.
However, globalisation and shifting demographics mean
that some cities will be forced to opt out of economic growth
altogether. The logical conclusion to the free market argument
– and one promoted by centre-right think tank Policy
Exchange which controversially called for Sunderland to be
shut down – is that those cities that fail to renew themselves
should be left to decline.
SURVIVAL OF THE FITTEST?
It’s an idea that has been boosted by Ed Glaeser, a US
economist whose recently-published book the Triumph of the
City argues that our approach to the growth and decline of
cities should be even more laissez-faire than it is currently.
Successful cities such as Cambridge should have more
liberal planning laws so that they can expand further, while
New Start | March 2011 | 7
t
Liverpool’s population has halved since the 1950s and, despite
strong economic growth in recent years, the city still struggles
to stem its population decline.
Having expanded its boundaries during the boom years
as a port and cultural mecca, areas of the city now sag under
baggy infrastructure. In the north Liverpool suburb of Anfield,
boarded up homes and deprived neighbourhoods show the
human and societal cost of population decline. But Liverpool’s
leaders shun the label of ‘shrinking city’.
‘We reject the idea of managed decline,’ says Nick Small,
cabinet member for employment and skills at Liverpool
Council. ‘We want to create growth.’
The recently installed Labour administration in the city
is focused on boosting the skills and staying power of the
population that remains, with what Mr Small says is the
biggest apprenticeship programme in England as well as
graduate schemes to incentivise students to stay on after their
degrees.
It also plans to add yet more infrastructure to the city: a
new waterfront development by Peel Holdings – currently
at the planning stage – will boost the population of north
Liverpool – the city’s key area of decline – by 23,000. Mr
Small says targets to create 100,000 jobs in the city by 2020,
expanding on recent successes in tourism, the knowledge
economy, low-carbon industries and logistics, are realistic.
‘No one’s ever going to say “let’s manage the decline of
this city”. We’re realistically repositioning Liverpool and are
looking to increase the city’s population for the first time since
the 1930s.’
in focusl
those cities not providing the ‘clusters’ that drive the economy
and provide places in which people want to live should wither
and die. In his ‘survival of the fittest’ approach, smart people
with the skills to get ahead will flourish in ever expanding
city clusters, while those unable or unwilling to keep up will
be left behind.
Such an approach tells residents of failing cities to get on
their bikes to find work; public investment and policy to assist
areas unable to attract business and growth is withdrawn.
But government policy has always played a role in the
economic fortunes of our towns and cities, argues Kevin
Gulliver, director of the Birmingham based Human City
Institute, who remembers the last time public funds were
withdrawn from the city. ‘Birmingham was left high and dry
in the 1980s and reinvented itself around tourism, culture and
leisure.’
New arenas were built and the Sadlers Wells Royal
Ballet and Simon Rattle’s orchestra enticed to the city by the
interventions of local government, he says. ‘The local state
did something about the decline of the city in the teeth of an
attitude of “let the market rip”.’
Battered local government in some of the poorest areas
of the country may struggle to bring growth back to their
urban areas in the current economic climate. The likes of
Liverpool are still able to attract private business but the days
when government could entice a new factory or international
company to set up shop in towns like Barrow or Burnley are
long gone.
Dealing with shrinkage
When it comes to policy instruments for coping with shrinkage, the cupboard
is currently quite bare. But in the US, Japan and Europe a number of policy
approaches are emerging:
LEIPZIG, GERMANY: consolidation of housing, ‘conceptual district plans’
YOUNGSTOWN, US: accepting shrinkage, letting declining neighbourhoods
empty out and be converted to green space
DESSAU, GERMANY: growth through shrinkage. Large-scale landscape zone
that links islands of urban density. Citizens can ‘claim’ parts of the green zone,
with ‘claims’ so far including an apothecary garden, multicultural meeting
place and BMX bike course
FLINT, US: a land bank of abandoned properties has been established. Some
are fixed up and sold, the worst buildings are demolished and the land sold on
to local homeowners or developers
TOYAMA, JAPAN: masterplan for revitalisation without growth.
Below: derelict houses in
Anfield, north Liverpool
continued on page 11
t
SMALL CAN BE BEAUTIFUL
For many cities, admitting that large-scale growth will not
return could be the first step on the way back to a prosperous
future. Today’s interventions – for growth and its opposite –
will inevitably be more piecemeal, revolving around business
support, the boosting of skills and dealing with derelict land.
But they should also be more sophisticated, allowing
development that builds on what is there already, both
in terms of infrastructure and people, and which also
acknowledges the limits to growth.
For while city leaders shudder at the notion of shrinkage,
the policy of growth by all means necessary has not always
led to the creation of better places. For many areas a
recognition that smaller is more beautiful, an understanding
that there can be shades of shrinkage and development, and
a focus on strengthening the intrinsic characteristics of their
place will make a bigger difference than the relentless pursuit
of growth.
Drawing tighter boundaries around cities and building to
a greater density is one approach to shrinkage: the Japanese
city of Aomori has been reconfigured as a ‘compact city’, while
in the UK Manchester and Leeds have revitalised their city
centres as residential areas. Such approaches prevent sprawl
and make better use of a city’s resources, creating urban
spaces more fit for purpose for a low-carbon future.
Britain still has a long way to go; even our highest density
cities are low compared to other European countries. Small
towns that expanded their centres with out-of-town sheds
and shopping malls in the last two decades are now retreating
back to their core, and building on their assets.
New Start | March 2011 | 9
in focus
in focusl
been averted if local skills had been invested in first.
In many regeneration zones new buildings and
the infrastructure of growth sit empty, a testament
to the failure of policies that put buildings before
people.
City-regions will begin to take on even greater
importance as towns experiencing shrinkage find
protection and support from their neighbours.
Despite the dismantling of the regional sphere,
areas are unlikely to cast off their regional ties
as the benefits of a partnership-based approach
become even more apparent.
Rupert Greenhalgh looks at how cities abroad
have been reined in to boost prosperity
Interest in densification has received a lot of
attention from policymakers and academics
alike over the last decade.
Agglomeration economies have been
highlighted as the raison d’être of cities and the
‘secret of their success’. There is increasingly
convincing evidence of the importance of
agglomeration economies in terms of economic
development: denser places share critical
infrastructure; match business supply chains
and sources of labour; and support innovation
by creating the environment for shared
learning and the exchange of ideas.
Estimates suggest a growth in urban
density, for example by doubling the size of
a city, could result in up to a 10% increase in
productivity. This doesn’t seem particularly
significant in itself, but applied to scale
economies such as London, or the combined
economies of cities across the north, could
result in significant returns to investment.
Policies aimed at densification therefore
seem to have appeal. Environmental
improvements to remote sites no longer
needed by the market (e.g. grassing over
swathes of old industrial property) have also
been used as a progressive policy tool in parts
of Europe, such as Leipzig, to make areas more
attractive for residents, reduce the negative
visual impacts and to preserve for landscape
amenity and biodiversity value.
THE CASE FOR URBAN GROWTH BOUNDARIES
An urban growth boundary (UGB) is a zoning
tool that slows urban growth by banning
development in designated areas on the urban
fringe.
In effect, it involves drawing a circle around
a city and prohibiting development outside
the circle. Could this be a viable policy to
concentrate growth within town and city
centres, amplifying the benefits of urban
density, while at the same time allowing places
to concentrate their regeneration efforts, rather
than spreading investment too thinly?
UGBs have been used in a number of cities
and regions, such as Queensland Australia; and
Portland Oregon, as a tool to address ‘market
failures’ related to the excessive spatial growth
of cities.
Such failures include the lack of account
taken of the social value of open space when
land is converted to urban use; the failure of
individual commuters to recognise the full costs
of road congestion; and the failure of property
developers to take into account all the public
10 | New Start | March 2011
infrastructure costs generated by projects
(e.g. road and site access, utilities and surface
water management, broadband installation
and ICT infrastructure). Equally, there are welldocumented examples that have managed
growth pressures with developments that
are well-connected, encourage high-density
housing and have accessible employment.
Could UGBs also be used as a tool to
support the ‘re-densification’ of development,
especially within hollowed out towns and city
centres where demand for land has stalled?
IMPLEMENTATION
If administered properly UGBs do appear to
reduce sprawl and achieve smart ‘localised’
growth benefits, but they are also frequently
criticised as being a blunt planning instrument
indifferent to fundamental market forces and
which reduce the standard of living for urban
populations.
In reality, almost any system of land use
planning is likely to have some restricting
effect on supply. But to what extent is supply
actually restricted, and does this cause
significant price distortions or welfare effects?
There is a danger that a UGB may be much too
stringent, needlessly restricting the size of the
city, leading to distortions in land markets and
escalating housing costs.
The best known example of an urban
growth boundary is from Portland, Oregon.
Although some commentators claim Portland’s
UGB is responsible for excessive house price
escalation, others argue the boundary is so
loose that its price effects are negligible.
This controversy illustrates an important
point, namely that there is no way to tell
whether a UGB is set properly without focusing
on the underlying market failures that lead to
urban sprawl; and assessing the costs versus
the benefits of restricting growth to specific
locations within a city-region.
The best way to avoid such errors is to
attack urban sprawl at its source, by developing
incentives that support growth within urban
centres, including adequate public and private
transport infrastructure, investment in public
realm and services, and access to affordable
housing.
Other mechanisms include developing
Above: the city of Portland, Oregon in
the United States uses an urban growth
boundary to combat sprawl
RENAMING ‘DECLINE’
But in our growth obsessed world, will cities
admit they are in decline? Michael Ward, former
chief executive of the British Urban Regeneration
Association and now an independent consultant,
says describing the process of decline as ‘managing
change’ is more palatable. Many former mining
communities in North Wales have gradually
reverted back to being rural areas, and discovered
that introducing a new economic function to an
congestion charges to cover the full economic
costs of travelling to out-of-town retail
centres; and imposing impact fees such as a
development tax designed to preserve open
space, provided that a proper measure of openspace benefits can be calculated.
However, because UGBs simply require
an extension of existing zoning powers, local
policymakers may find them more convenient
to use than taxes or congestion charges. UGBs
could end up as the instrument of choice for
assisting our failing town and city centres, and
equally attacking the negative environmental
impacts of continued urban sprawl.
Implementation must be carefully managed
to avoid perverse outcomes, such as hikes
in land prices, and be developed as part of
wider pan-regional strategies for land use and
transport.
u Rupert Greenhalgh is senior consultant at
the Centre for Local Economic Strategies.
Dudley in the west midlands was hollowed out in the 1980s when
retailers moved to the nearby Merry Hill shopping centre – a dedicated
enterprise zone under the previous Tory government. Now new plans
for the town include renovating its 1,000 year old market and creating a
tighter-knit space that builds on its rich cultural heritage.
‘Town centre regeneration is crucial. That’s where identity is
embedded,’ says Mr Gulliver.
He wants to see town centres filling smaller geographical spaces that
are more densely populated with flourishing small businesses, social
enterprises, cultural attractions, historical connections, housing and even
quality charity shops.
PLACE VS PROFIT
The key to such an approach is consistency. In the last 20 years of
regeneration the needs of a place have often played second fiddle to those
of business and the mantra of growth. Smaller, better planned and more
realistic ambitions for the future will become a necessity in these cashstrapped times, but they may well reap longer-term rewards too.
Maximising the skills of the resident population and the production
of the businesses that already exist will become a greater priority as the
infrastructure-based approach to development is withdrawn. The failure
of large-scale interventions like the Kingsway Business Park in Rochdale –
which has managed to attract only a handful of businesses – could have
area does not have to be painful.
Government intervention must be part of the
picture, however.
‘It remains the responsibility of government,
particularly one that wants to be judged on
prosperity, to extend that to the whole country,’ Mr
Ward says.
Elsewhere in the world cities that have lost their
primary economic function have rediscovered their
prosperity by focusing more clearly on what they
have – on their people and social and cultural assets
– rather than seeking growth from outside.
Julian Dobson, founder of consultancy Urban
Pollinators, argues in a recent blog that the Freiburg
Charter and its 12 principles for ‘sustainable
urbanism’ – including diversity, tolerance and
walkability – is a better way to thinking about the future of our cities.
Flint in Michigan is reinventing itself around its parks and green
spaces following huge population shrinkage, while rural areas of Japan are
coming to terms with ‘living beyond growth’.
These are places that were prepared to – or forced to – step outside
the paradigm of growth and discover a more heterogeneous future. While
not an easy process, it is one that will become more necessary as cities
left behind by recent policy slip into decline and lose the ability to find
growth.
As Hilary Burrage, a regeneration consultant based in Liverpool, says,
city leaders will need to navigate a delicate path between highlighting
the decline of their local communities while talking up their assets to
potential investors. She compares confronting the decline of communities
to dealing with the needs of an ageing population: the parameters
and needs of the population shift; just as older people are dismissed,
communities in decline could get left behind if measured only on the basis
of their economic potential.
Shrinkage is inevitable and, as we move towards a more sustainable
future, is in many cases to be welcomed. Local communities struggling
to find resilience and prosperity could set their sights higher by looking
beyond the mantra of growth and embracing decline.
For as Ms Burrage says: ‘There are several senses of small. Decline need
not be negative.’
New Start | March 2011 | 11