1. Who Do We Plan For? The Demographics of Southern New England Presenters: Henry Renski, UMASS Amherst Susan Strate, UMASS Donahue Institute Rachel Franklin, Brown University Barry Bluestone, Northeastern UniversityModerator: Robert Mitchell, FAICP, Planning Consultant

2. The Changing Demographic Profile of Southern New England: A Little Bigger, More Diverse, and a Whole Lot OlderDr. Henry Renski Associate Professor Dept. Landscape Architecture & Regional Planning University of Massachusetts Amherst 3. Todays Talk A brief note on data, methods, and projections Population Size and Growth: Past, present and future A little biggerRace and Ethnicity More diverseThe Changing Age Profile A whole lot olderImplications for Planning 4. Data, Methods, and Projections Historic data collected from U.S. Census Bureau Decennial Census (100% counts, STF1) Downloaded from National Historical Geographic Information SystemState and National Demographic Projections (2010 to 2040) University of Virginia, Weldon Cooper Center for Public Service Measure rates from inter-cohort changes between 2000 and 2010 Insights from Massachusetts Regional Projections w/ Donahue InstituteRemember! Nobody can predict the future Assumes continuation of recent trends in fertility, mortality & migration A baseline scenario: What we might expect in the absence of dramatic change or policy intervention? Expect dramatic change!! 5. The long view: Population change in Southern New England, 1790 to 2010 14,000,000 12,000,000 10,000,000De-industrializationGreat Depression8,000,000 6,000,000 4,000,000Maine splits from Massachusetts1.1 million additional residents by 20402,000,0001790 1800 1810 1820 1830 1840 1850 1860 1870 1880 1890 1900 1910 1920 1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 20400 6. Growing, but not as fast as the nation: Population growth by decade, 1940 to 2040 United States Southern New England20% 15% 10%2030 to2020 to2010 to2000 to1990 to1980 to1960 to0%1950 to5% 1940 to10 yr. growth rate25% 7. Southern New England becoming more diverse Share of So. New England Population by Race 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% White20Black/African American20Asian Other, inc. more than one race20Change in Persons300,000 200,000 White100,000Black/African American0 -100,000-200,000Asian2000 to 2010 to 2020 to 2030 to 2010 2020 2030 2040Other, inc. more than one race 8. So. New England looking more like the nation Difference in shares by race 2000Difference in share (So. NE U.S.)0.10 0.0820100.0620400.04 0.02 0.00 -0.02 -0.04 -0.06 -0.08 -0.10WhiteBlack and African AmericanAsianOther, inc. more than one race 9. Hispanic population continues to grow but much slower than nation as a whole Share of So NE population 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 2000 Hispanic 2010Non-HispanicChange in Persons2040 500,000 400,000 300,000 200,000 100,000 0 -100,000 -200,000 -300,000HispanicNon-HispanicDifference in share (So NE US)0.10 0.0820000.0620100.0420400.02 0.00 -0.02-0.04 -0.06 -0.082000 to 2010 to 2020 to 2030 to 2010 2020 2030 2040-0.10HispanicNon-Hispanic 10. Were getting a lot older 2030: 2.45 mil age 65+ 20.4% of population2010 2020 2030 20402010: 1.6 mil age 65+ 14.0% of population2020: 2.0 mil age 65+ 16.8% of population0 to 4 5 to 9 10 to 14 15 to 19 20 to 24 25 to 29 30 to 34 35 to 39 40 to 44 45 to 49 50 to 54 55 to 59 60 to 64 65 to 69 70 to 74 75 to 79 80 to 84 85+Persons1,000,000 900,000 800,000 700,000 600,000 500,000 400,000 300,000 200,000 100,000 02040: 2.49 mil age 65+ 20.3% of population 11. ..even older the U.S. as a whole 85+ 80 to 84 75 to 79 70 to 74 65 to 69 60 to 64 55 to 59 50 to 54 45 to 49 40 to 44 35 to 39 30 to 34 25 to 29 20 to 24 15 to 19 10 to 14 5 to 9 0 to 4-1.25%2010 Overrepresented in middle aged, near-retirees, and elderly Underrepresented among young families and children2030 Overrepresented in all age cohorts above 60 years Greatly underrepresented in ages under 30 years20102030-0.75% -0.25% 0.25% 0.75% Difference in Share, So. NE U.S.1.25% 12. Implications for planning Broad ranging impacts Increased demand for different forms of housing Health care services, transit needs, pressure on municipal revenues Fewer college aged-students in next several decadesTrends likely to vary by sub-region Boston steady in-migration of college-aged residents Metro suburbs gain young families & school-aged children Berkshires/Cape & Islands in-migration of retireesMany unknowns in the years ahead Policy: e.g. Debates on federal immigration/VISA policy Climate change: Impacts on migration & infrastructure Economic opportunities in the region 13. Thank you for your time! hrenski@larp.umass.edu 14. Who Do We Plan For The Demographics of Southern New England The Foreign Born Population in Southern New England Presentation to the Southern New England APA Conference (SNEAPA)Thursday, October 17th, 2013 Presenter: Susan Strate, Population Estimates Program Manager http://www.donahue.umassp.edu 15. Immigration and Population ChangeImpact of Immigration on Population Change Foreign Born as Percent of Total Population Shifting World Origins Educational Attainment Age Structure of the Foreign Born Implications for Regional Population and Economy 16. Immigration and Population ChangeUMass Donahue Institute. Source data: U.S. Census Bureau, Population Division. Cumulative Estimates of the Components of Resident Population Change for the United States, Regions, States, and Puerto Rico: April 1, 2010 to July 1, 2012 (NST-EST2012-04). December 2012. 17. Immigration and Population ChangeUMass Donahue Institute. Source data: U.S. Census Bureau, Population Division. Cumulative Estimates of the Components of Resident Population Change for the United States, Regions, States, and Puerto Rico: July 1, 2011 to July 1, 2012 (NST-EST2012-04). December 2012. 18. Immigration and Population ChangeUMass Donahue Institute. Source data: U.S. Census Bureau, Population Division. Cumulative Estimates of the Components of Resident Population Change for the United States, Regions, States, and Puerto Rico: July 1, 2011 to July 1, 2012 (NST-EST2012-04). December 2012. 19. StateForeign Born as a Percent of Population by U.S. StateUMass Donahue Institute. Source: IPUMS USA. Steven Ruggles, J. Trent Alexander, Katie Genadek, Ronald Goeken, Matthew B. Schroeder, and Matthew Sobek. Integrated Public Use Microdata Series: Version 5.0 [Machine-readable database]. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota, 2010. Dataset: 20072011, ACS 5-year sample. U.S. Census Bureau.California New York New Jersey Florida Nevada Hawaii Texas Massachusetts Illinois Maryland Rhode Island Washington Arizona Connecticut Virginia NewMexico Colorado Georgia Oregon Delaware Utah Minnesota North Carolina Kansas Alaska United StatesEstimated % Foreign Born 27% 22% 21% 19% 19% 18% 16% 15% 14% 14% 14% 13% 13% 13% 11% 10% 10% 10% 10% 9% 8% 7% 7% 7% 6% 13%Estimated Rank % Foreign Born 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 - 20. Percent Foreign Born By CountyUMass Donahue Institute. Source: Minnesota Population Center. National Historical Geographic Information System: Version 2.0. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota 2011. https://www.nhgis.org/. Dataset: 2007-2011, ACS 5-year sample. U.S. Census Bureau. 21. U.S. percent: 4.721 22. U.S. percent: 6.222 23. U.S. percent: 7.9239 24. U.S. percent: 11.124 25. U.S. percent: 12.525 26. Long-Term Trend of Attracting Foreign-Born The Foreign Born Population as a Percent of Total Population in MA and the U.S. 1850-2010 35.0% MA, 1910, 31.6% 30.0% 25.0%MA, 16.2%20.0%CIVICS SLIDE MA, 14.9%15.0% US, 12.9%10.0% US, 9.7%5.0% 0.0% 1850 1860 1870 1880 1890 1900 1910 1920 1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010UMass Donahue Institute. Source Data for U.S.: U.S Census Bureau Report Foreign Born 50 Years Growth v4.3. Source Data for MA: Minnesota Population Center. National Historical Geographic Information System: Version 2.0. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota 2011. https://www.nhgis.org/. Datasets: 1850-2000 Decennial Census Data and 2010 ACS, U.S. Census Bureau. 27. Foreign Born Population in CT-MA-RI: World Area of Birth by Decade of Entry EuropeAsiaCaribbeanMexicoOther Central AmericaSouth AmericaOther World Areas2000 or later1990s1980sBefore 19800%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%UMass Donahue Institute. Source: Minnesota Population Center. National Historical Geographic Information System: Version 2.0. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota 2011. https://www.nhgis.org/. Dataset: 2007-2011, ACS 5-year sample. U.S. Census Bureau.100% 28. Region of Birth of the Foreign Born in Southern New England in 1900UMass Donahue Institute. Source: Minnesota Population Center. National Historical Geographic Information System: Version 2.0. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota 2011. https://www.nhgis.org/. Dataset: 1900 Decennial Census. U.S. Census Bureau. 29. Region of Birth of the Foreign Born in Southern New England, 2007-2011UMass Donahue Institute. Source: Minnesota Population Center. National Historical Geographic Information System: Version 2.0. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota 2011. https://www.nhgis.org/. Dataset: 2007-2011, ACS 5-year sample. U.S. Census Bureau. 30. Region of Birth for the Foreign Born in Southern New England Compared to the U.S. 2007-2011UMass Donahue Institute. Source: Minnesota Population Center. National Historical Geographic Information System: Version 2.0. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota 2011. https://www.nhgis.org/. Dataset: 2007-2011, ACS 5-year sample. U.S. Census Bureau. 31. Educational Attainment by Country of Birth: US Foreign BornEducational Attainment by Nativity and Country of Birth, Population 25 years and over. : 20095.2 27.928.16.111.226.822.513.7 49.548.7 23.118.728.974.530.813.422.227.4 28.561.229.715.957.0 9.3 15.332.38.521.214.711.4TotalNative8.6 Foreign bornMexicoChina7.7PhilippinesIndiaEl SalvadorLess than high school diplomaHigh school graduate (includes equivalency)Some college or associate's degreeBachelor's degree or higherSource: U.S. Census Bureau, 2009 American Community Survey. 32. Shifting Educational Attainment of Foreign Born Population in MAUMass Donahue Institute. Source: American Community Survey 2007-2011 Public Use Microdata Sample Data. U.S. Census Bureau. 33. Educational Attainment: MA Foreign Born vs. U.S. Foreign BornUMass Donahue Institute. Source: ACS 5-Year Estimates - Public Use Microdata Sample 2007 - 2011. 34. Educational Attainment: MA Foreign Born vs. U.S. Foreign BornEducational Attainment of the Native Born and Foreign Born Populations aged 25 and over in the United States and Massachusetts U.S. Population Years 25+ All Ages Native Foreign 25+ Born BornMA Population 25 Years + All Ages Native Foreign 25+ Born BornNo HS Diploma15%11%32%11%8%24%HS Graduate29%30%22%26%27%24%Some College, Including Associates29%30%18%24%25%17%Bachelor's Degree18%18%16%22%23%17%Advanced Degree10%10%11%17%16%18%Bachelor's Degree or Higher28%28%27%39%40%35%UMass Donahue Institute. Source: ACS 5-Year Estimates - Public Use Microdata Sample 2007 - 2011UMass Donahue Institute. Source: ACS 5-Year Estimates - Public Use Microdata Sample 2007 - 2011. 35. Age Profile of the Foreign BornThe Foreign Born and Native Born Populations by Age Group in MA, CT, RI 2007-2011UMass Donahue Institute. Source: IPUMS USA. Steven Ruggles, J. Trent Alexander, Katie Genadek, Ronald Goeken, Matthew B. Schroeder, and Matthew Sobek. Integrated Public Use Microdata Series: Version 5.0 [Machinereadable database]. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota, 2010. Dataset: 2007-2011, ACS 5-year sample. U.S. Census Bureau. 36. Age Distribution of the Foreign Born and Native BornUMass Donahue Institute. Source: IPUMS USA. Steven Ruggles, J. Trent Alexander, Katie Genadek, Ronald Goeken, Matthew B. Schroeder, and Matthew Sobek. Integrated Public Use Microdata Series: Version 5.0 [Machine-readable database]. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota, 2010. Dataset: 2007-2011, ACS 5-year sample. U.S. Census Bureau. 37. Projected Dependency Ratios Inverse Dependency Ratios in MassachusettsIndependent workers per dependent person6 MA5MA - Child MA - Old age43210 19801990200020092015 YearUMass Donahue Institute, March 2011202020252030 38. Summary: International migration is a significant contributor to population growth and maintenance, particularly in the Northeast as our region continues to lose domestic population to the South and West. The US, and Northeast States in particular, together with border states like California and Texas, have a long history as a destination for the Foreign Born; however immigration is starting to disperse to other parts of the Unites States in more recent years. Place of Birth of the Foreign Born population is also shifting over time, with a smaller percentage immigrating from Europe, and increasing percentages immigrating from Asia and Latin America, including South and Central America. As these origins also tend to have lower median ages than European countries, recent immigrants contribute to a younger population in the region.The profile of the Foreign Born in the MA, CT, and RI region differs from the national profile in many significant ways. The Foreign Born in our region tend to have higher levels of educational attainment than the U.S. Foreign Born, particularly at the Advanced Degree level. Place of birth for the Foreign Born in this region also varies substantially from the U.S. profile, with a higher percentages originating in Europe, South America, the Caribbean, and other world regions, and a drastically smaller percentage (10 times smaller) originating in Mexico. For both the US and the region, the percentage of foreign born from Latin America and Asia has been increasing over time. A younger age profile together with increasing levels of educational attainment among the foreign born serve to revitalize the regions workforce and also to off-set the age-dependency ratio issues looming ahead for the ageing New England region. 39. Thank you for your interest! Susan Strate, Manager Population Estimates Program sstrate@donahue.umassp.eduUMass Donahue Institute Economic and Public Policy Research Office of the President 100 Venture Way, Suite 9 Hadley, MA 01035 413-575-0753 www.donahue.umassp.edu 40. College Student Migration in Southern New England: Who Comes, Who Goes, and Why We Might Care Rachel S. Franklin Spatial Structures in the Social Sciences (S4) Population Studies and Training Center (PSTC) Brown University Providence, Rhode IslandWho Do We Plan For The Demographics of Southern New England Southern New England Planning Conference October 17, 2013 41. Background Students who go to college and, especially, who graduate from college have a highly desirable attribute: human capital In general, states and cities would like to attractand keepthese individuals When students stay put after graduation, they not only work, but also form households, buy homes, and consume Ill do three things in the next several minutes: In-, Out-, and Net migration of college students for Connecticut, Massachusetts, and Rhode Island The quality of schools involved on both sidesFranklin | Who Do We Plan For The Demographics of Southern New England | SNEAPA 2013 42. Basic Data Integrated Post Secondary Education Database (IPEDS), for 2008 Tabulates state of residence for college freshmen at time of application All two- and four-year public and private (non-profit) schools offering at least an associates degree and having full-time, first time undergraduates Institution-level data are aggregated by state to produce state-tostate flows of college freshmen Unit of observation is the institution, not the student We dont observe any attributes of actual students But we can make use of information about the quality/characteristics of the schoolFranklin | Who Do We Plan For The Demographics of Southern New England | SNEAPA 2013 43. Measuring Quality Following e.g. Carnevale & Rose (2004), Hoxby and Avery (2013), we use Barrons Profiles of American Colleges (2009) to classify schools as: High quality (n=181): Barrons most and highly competitive categories e.g. Wesleyan, Amherst College, or Tufts, Smith College, Boston Univ. Medium quality (n=270): Barrons very competitive category e.g. Fairfield University, Salve Regina University Lower quality (n=828): Barrons competitive and less competitive categories e.g. Umass Dartmouth, Central Connecticut State Univ., URI, Rhode Island College Other (n=529): Non-competitive or special schools Community colleges (n=1,022): This comes from IPEDSState ConnecticutN 35High 0.17Medium 0.03Low 0.31Other 0.14CC 0.34Massachusetts Rhode Island91 110.22 0.180.04 0.180.40 0.360.16 0.180.18 0.09Franklin | Who Do We Plan For The Demographics of Southern New England | SNEAPA 2013 44. Measuring Flow v. Counterflow Could use net migration, but resulting values are dependent on population size (and by extension size of geographic unit) An alternative is demographic effectiveness or efficiency (as used by e.g. Plane or Shryock): E j =100(Net j / Gross j ) This measure captures the extent to which all the movement in and out actually results in redistribution of population Values close to zero suggest inefficiency; higher values (- and +) indicate efficiency: migration results in population change Of course, compositionally, the population could change substantially, even if theres no net redistribution of peopleFranklin | Who Do We Plan For The Demographics of Southern New England | SNEAPA 2013 45. State-Level Student Migration, 2008 State Alabama Alaska Arizona Arkansas California Colorado Connecticut Delaware District of Columbia Florida Georgia Hawaii Idaho Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maine Maryland Massachusetts Michigan Minnesota MississippiInsOutsNet8,395 203 7,151 4,033 10,080 6,610 8,627 3,054 7,518 7,859 6,942 1,083 3,042 9,622 12,319 8,408 4,849 5,950 4,795 3,030 7,067 22,515 5,715 7,423 3,6982,633 1,477 3,298 1,907 21,981 6,835 13,849 1,832 1,876 10,921 10,086 2,738 2,403 23,963 4,723 3,193 2,946 2,756 2,437 2,992 15,240 17,823 7,487 12,282 1,4135,762 -1,274 3,853 2,126 -11,901 -225 -5,222 1,222 5,642 -3,062 -3,144 -1,655 639 -14,341 7,596 5,215 1,903 3,194 2,358 38 -8,173 4,692 -1,772 -4,859 2,285Effectiveness State 52.25 -75.83 36.87 35.79 -37.12 -1.67 -23.23 25.01 60.06 -16.30 -18.46 -43.31 11.74 -42.70 44.57 44.95 24.41 36.69 32.61 0.63 -36.64 11.63 -13.42 -24.66 44.71Missouri Montana Nebraska Nevada New Hampshire New Jersey New Mexico New York North Carolina North Dakota Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Rhode Island South Carolina South Dakota Tennessee Texas Utah Vermont Virginia Washington West Virginia Wisconsin MissouriInsOutsNetEffectiveness7,592 1,779 2,828 1,016 5,363 3,248 1,940 26,328 11,756 3,244 11,698 4,406 5,755 27,663 8,159 7,960 2,098 7,224 6,174 6,009 4,580 11,785 4,794 4,986 8,631 7,5926,444 1,356 2,506 2,279 5,084 30,872 1,711 28,516 5,419 1,293 12,398 2,318 4,014 15,932 2,665 2,310 1,473 5,621 17,310 1,360 2,404 9,842 6,785 1,031 7,501 6,4441,148 423 322 -1,263 279 -27,624 229 -2,188 6,337 1,951 -700 2,088 1,741 11,731 5,494 5,650 625 1,603 -11,136 4,649 2,176 1,943 -1,991 3,955 1,130 1,1488.18 13.49 6.04 -38.33 2.67 -80.96 6.27 -3.99 36.90 43.00 -2.91 31.05 17.82 26.91 50.76 55.01 17.50 12.48 -47.42 63.09 31.16 8.98 -17.19 65.73 7.00 8.18 46. Student Migration for Southern New England StateIn-State Net Migration Effectiveness (proportion)Out-migrantsIn-migrants13,8498,627-5,222-23.230.55High Quality5,0864,818-268-2.710.37Medium Quality3,025653-2,372-64.490.07Low Quality5,0043,118-1,886-23.220.54Other5889-579-96.980.67Community College14629-117-66.860.9817,82322,5154,69211.630.68High Quality6,46114,5048,04338.360.44Medium Quality4,499655-3,844-74.580.13Low Quality5,9685,600-368-3.180.75Other6281,27965134.140.67Community College26747721028.230.982,6658,1595,49450.760.66High Quality8782,1051,22741.130.17Medium Quality4701,15168142.010.261,0974,1783,08158.410.69125 95614 111489 1666.17 7.770.66 0.96ConnecticutMassachusettsRhode IslandLow Quality Other Community College 47. ------76500-70-2 5-5-151261-02550-2 4-4 9-7 47550Connecticut Effectiveness Medium---7-5-2 57655000-7-5-2-151261-02550754------5000-7-5-2 5-025-151-2-4 9-7 41 2676-8 1--5075-----2 4-4 9-7 4-1 00Connecticut Effectiveness All-1 0051261-0255075-----2 4-4 9-7 4-1 00Quality Migration ConnecticutConnecticut Effeciveness HighConnecticut Effectiveness Low 48. ------765000-7-5-2 5-151261-02550-2 4-4 9-7 4750050Massachusetts Effectiveness Medium---1-7-5-2 57655000-7-5-2-025-1512615504----5000-7-5-2-1-2-4 9-7 17651261-025504-----2-4 9-7 2Massachusetts Effectiveness All-1 007651261-0255075-----2 4-4 9-7 4-1 00Quality Migration MassachusettsMassachusetts Effectiveness HighMassachusetts Effectiveness Low 49. ------765000-7-5-2 5-151261-02550-2 4-4 9-7 4750050Rhode Island Effectivenes Medium---1-7-5-2 57655000-7-5-2-025-1512615504----5000-7-5-2-1-2-4 9-5 77651261-025504-----2-4 9-6 7Rhode Island Effectiveness All-1 007651261-0255075-----2 4-4 9-7 4-1 00Quality Migration Rhode IslandRhode Island Effectiveness HighRhode Island Effectiveness Low 50. Interstate Student Trading in Southern New England 24 percent of Connecticuts out-migrating freshmen head to Massachusetts, which is the most popular state to go to (only 9 percent to Rhode Island) 10 percent of students leaving Massachusetts go to Connecticut and 15 percent to Rhode Island Actually New York is the most popular destination of all the states When students leave Rhode Island, 37 percent go to schools in Massachusetts and 10 percent to ConnecticutFranklin | Who Do We Plan For The Demographics of Southern New England | SNEAPA 2013 51. Interstate Student Trading in Southern New EnglandPercent Incoming to DestinationOrigin StateDestination StateHigh QualityMedium QualityLow QualityConnecticutMassachusetts0.400.040.49MassachusettsConnecticut0.560.110.32ConnecticutRhode Island0.160.210.55Rhode IslandConnecticut0.510.050.41MassachusettsRhode Island0.170.190.52Rhode IslandMassachusetts0.330.060.48Franklin | Who Do We Plan For The Demographics of Southern New England | SNEAPA 2013 52. Conclusions (Why Should We Care?) Whether students stay or go can matter (or at least be interesting) for a few reasons: 1.2.Students often stay put in the area in which they went to college (although New England is so small, who knows what the impact for us really is) If studentsespecially the brightestare leaving because they have to and not because they want to, thats a shame 3.When states exchange students of the same quality (so, low effectiveness), whats actually accomplished? 4.i.e., is migration a function of home state school quality and/or capacity?For CT, MA, and RI, migration effectiveness between these states for high quality schools is relatively low (circa 16-18 effectiveness)Highly efficient flows indicate redistribution of high quality (or low quality) students We see this for low quality schoolsFranklin | Who Do We Plan For The Demographics of Southern New England | SNEAPA 2013 53. The Impact of the Coming Demographic Revolution on the Southern New England Housing MarketSNEAPA Conference Worcester, MA October 17, 2013 Barry Bluestone, Director Dukakis Center for Urban & Regional Policy Northeastern University School of Public Policy & Urban Affairs www.northeastern.edu/dukakiscenterA Think and Do Tank 54. Demographic Revolution 55. Slow Population Growth in Connecticut, Massachusetts, & Rhode IslandDukakis Center for Urban & Regional Policy www.northeastern.edu/dukakiscenter 56. D.C. Nevada Utah Texas Idaho Oregon Arizona North Carolina Washington Maryland California Florida Georgia Minnesota Virginia New Hampshire U.S. Total New Jersey Tennessee Delaware Louisiana Vermont South Carolina Alaska Michigan Rhode Island Arkansas Wisconsin Mississippi Montana Colorado Maine Missouri Massachusetts Kentucky Indiana New Mexico Hawaii Connecticut Kansas Pennsylvania Illinois Alabama Oklahoma Wyoming New York Ohio West Virginia Iowa South Dakota Nebraska North Dakota600%500%400%300%200%100%Proportion of State's Household Growth accounted for by those Age 55+ 2007-2020U.S.:Conn: Mass: R.I.: 135%99% 93% 106%Dukakis Center for Urban & Regional Policy www.northeastern.edu/dukakiscenter 530%And getting older, faster 99%149% 135% 113% 149%113%0% 57. Bimodal Age Distribution 58. Aging Baby BoomersDukakis Center for Urban & Regional Policy www.northeastern.edu/dukakiscenter 59. A Dearth of Experienced WorkersDukakis Center for Urban & Regional Policy www.northeastern.edu/dukakiscenter 60. And here come the MillennialsDukakis Center for Urban & Regional Policy www.northeastern.edu/dukakiscenter 61. A Closer Look at Massachusetts MillennialsBaby BoomersDukakis Center for Urban & Regional Policy www.northeastern.edu/dukakiscenter 62. What will this mean for Housing?Massachusetts exemplifies the new Demographics of Southern New England What are the implications of this Demographic Revolution on Housing Demand? Lets take a look at regional housing projections for Greater Boston under TWO Economic Growth Projections 63. Greater Boston - Housing Production 2000-2005 vs.Current Trend Projection Housing Demand 2012-2020 Annual Production/Annual Projection 14,00012,000 12,000 10,998Slight Shift toward Multifamily Housing10,0008,00054%51%49%6,1005,9296,00046%5,900 5,0694,0002,0000 All HousingSingle-Family 2000-2005Multi-Family2012-2020Dukakis Center for Urban & Regional Policy www.northeastern.edu/dukakiscenter 64. Greater Boston - Housing Production 2000-2005 vs. Faster Economic Growth Projection Housing Demand 2012-2020 Annual Production/Annual Projection 25,00020,00019,10015,000If Greater Bostons economy grows faster and attracts more younger workers, need to DOUBLE housing production rate and shift toward Multi-Family Housing 54%10,99846%10,00010,3008,80046% 5,929 5,069 5,0000 All HousingSingle-Family2000-2005Multi-Family2012-2020Dukakis Center for Urban & Regional Policy www.northeastern.edu/dukakiscenter 65. Other Factors that Could Affect Housing Demand Decline in Young Household Income Increase in College Debt Increased Desire for City/Village Living Decreased Tolerance for Commuting 66. Demographic Data for Greater Boston 1990 - 2010% % Change, 199 Change, 200 0-2000 0-2010199020002010$67,010 $86,225 $43,787$69,784 $90,460 $43,312$68,802 $93,484 $39,2084.1% 4.9% -1.1%-1.4% 3.3% -9.5%39.2%50.1%-5.9%27.7%28.3%26.7%39.5%-5.7%47.8%Average Household Size2.592.512.48-3.0%-1.2%Average Household Size, Owner-Occupied Units2.862.762.70-3.6%-2.2%Average Household Size, Renter-Occupied Units2.222.172.18-2.3%0.7%26.3%28.2%28.9%7.1%2.5%Median Household Income (2010 $)a Median Homeowner Income (2010 $)a Median Renter Income (2010 $)aRenter-Occupied Households Paying More Than 30% of Income on RentOwner-Occupied Households w/ Mortgage Paying More than 30% of Income on HH CostsPercent of Households with One Person41.7%Dukakis Center for Urban & Regional Policy www.northeastern.edu/dukakiscenter 67. Median Household Income by Age of Householder in Five-County Greater Boston Region 2010 Dollars20002010Percent Change 2000-2010Householder under 25 years$38,357$26,380-31.2%Householder 25 to 44 years$78,295$77,692-0.8%Householder 45 to 64 years$86,687$84,296-2.8%Householder 65 years and over$36,388$38,0434.5%Note: These figures represent averages (weighted by number of households in each age group) of the age specific median household incomes of Essex, Middlesex, Norfolk, Plymouth, and Suffolk Counties.Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2000 Census, 2010 ACS 1-Year EstimatesDukakis Center for Urban & Regional Policy www.northeastern.edu/dukakiscenter 68. Average College Debt Massachusetts 4-Year College and Univesity Students $30,000$25,541 $25,00066% Increase $20,000$15,417 $15,000$10,000$5,000$02000-20012009-2010Dukakis Center for Urban & Regional Policy www.northeastern.edu/dukakiscenter 69. Shift in Housing Demand Young Households All of these trends suggest that future demand for housing may require a greater supply of multiunit housing both condo and rental and less single-family housing Younger households may also wish to live closer to the city or in village centers less so in farflung suburbsDukakis Center for Urban & Regional Policy www.northeastern.edu/dukakiscenter 70. Shift in Housing Demand Aging Baby Boomers Aging Boomers may wish to age in place but not in their current homes They may wish to remain near friends and familiar local community amenities As such, they may give up their large single family homes for smaller multi-family housing but in the communities where they now liveDukakis Center for Urban & Regional Policy www.northeastern.edu/dukakiscenter 71. Shift in Housing Demand Need for More Affordable Units Declining incomes for renter households means we need to find more affordable units or they will face ever larger housing hurdles This means we need to free up rental housing for low and moderate income families And it means we need to build more affordable units as part of new developments Dukakis Center for Urban & Regional Policy www.northeastern.edu/dukakiscenter 72. Housing Developers Respond 73. Number of Housing Permits Issued in Greater Boston, 2000-2013 16,000Huge Increase in Permits Up 114% since 201115,10714,000 12,71312,33212,00011,27011,12010,0009,7729,563 8,9298,558 7,9668,000 6,529 5,8236,0005,275 4,7144,0002,0000 2000200120022003200420052006200720082009201020112012Dukakis Center for Urban & Regional Policy www.northeastern.edu/dukakiscenter2013 (Est) 74. Proportion of Housing Permits by Type of Structure Greater Boston Single Family2-4 unit 5+ Unit2000-200264.7%7.4%27.8%2011-201341.0%4.2%54.7%2013 (Est)34.0%3.9% 62.2%Major Shift to the Production of the Multi-Unit Housing we need for aging boomers and young Millennials Dukakis Center for Urban & Regional Policy www.northeastern.edu/dukakiscenter 75. Thank You 76. Northeastern University Dukakis Center for Urban & Regional Policy Policy Focus Areas: Economic Development Housing The Kitty and Michael Dukakis Center for Urban & Regional Policy conducts interdisciplinary research, in collaboration with civic leaders and scholars both within and beyond Northeastern University, to identify and implement real solutions to the critical challenges facing urban areas throughout Greater Boston, the Commonwealth, and the nation. Founded in 1999 as a think and do tank, the Dukakis Centers collaborative research and problemsolving model applies powerful data analysis, multidisciplinary research and evaluation techniques, and a policy-driven perspective to address a wide range of issues facing cities, towns, and suburbs, with a particular emphasis on the greater Boston region. The Dukakis Center works to catalyze broadbased efforts to solve urban problems, acting as both a convener and a trusted and committed partner to local, state, and national agencies and organizations. In November 2008 the Center was renamed in honor of Kitty and Michael Dukakis for the extraordinary work that both of them have done to make the City of Boston, the Commonwealth, and the nation a better place to live and work.A Think and Do Tank Labor/Management Relations Program Evaluation State and Local Public Finance Transportation Workforce DevelopmentDukakis Center for Urban and Regional Policy Northeastern University 343 Holmes Hall 360 Huntington Avenue Boston, MA 02115 (617) 373-7870 www.northeastern.edu/dukakiscenter 77. GRADUATE PROGRAMSSchool of Public Policy and Urban Affairs:MS in Urban & Regional Policy Master of Public Administration Online option available.MS in Law & Public Policy Focus areas in Sustainability, Climate Change and Environmental Policy; Health Policy; Crime and Justice and Urban Policy.PhD in Law & Public Policy All courses are offered in the evenings in order to accommodate students who are working full-time during the day. The masters programs have admissions cycles for starting in either the Fall or Spring Semester. Fosters interdisciplinary social science research on critical public policy issues Provides professional training for tomorrows leaders Energizes sustained community involvement through collaborations with local and regional institutions