This Could Be the Start of Something Big: Looking for the...

Manuel Pastor 1/11/2011

1

This Could Be the Start of Something Big:

Looking for the New America

Manuel Pastor

January 2011January 2011

La Conyuntura vs. the Long-run

We tend to think about short-term politics and economicspolitics and economics . . .


2





. . . But we better look long-term as well.

If we do, three trends –demographic change, economic transition, and shifting nature of leadership – stand out as key


3

Change is Gonna Come . . .

Leading the U.S. in Demographic ChangeCalifornia's Changing Demographics, 1980-2000

5.3% 9.2%11.3%90%

100%

67 1%

7.5%

7.0%

6.5%

19.4%

26.0%

32.6%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

67.1%57.2%

47.1%

0%

10%

20%

30%

1980 1990 2000

Anglo African American Latino Asian Pacific Other


4

Immigration as a Factor

And currently . . .

Immigrants are:

• One in three L.A. County residents

• 46 percent of the LA County workforce

• Children of immigrants are 64 t f ll LA C t hildpercent of all LA County children

• Of the children of immigrant parents, nearly ninety percent are US citizens

Source: PERE analysis of 2006 ACS data


5

Foreign Born Population by Census Tract

Ancestry & Migration

Chinese, 5.0%

Filipino, 4.8%

Other, 3.3%

Migrated Over 30 Years AgoLos Angeles County

Other Latin American, 11.6%

Western European, 9.7%

Korean, 3.2%

Salvadoran, 3.1%

Other Eastern European, 2.9%

Guatemalan, 1.8%Japanese, 1.7%

Armenian, 1.5%

Other Asian, 1.4%

Asian Indian, 1.0%

Other Middle Eastern, 1.0%Other, 8.5%

Source: PERE analysis of 2005 and 2006 ACS data

Mexican, 44.6%

Vietnamese, 0.9%

Iranian, 0.9%

African, 0.6%

Russian, 0.6%Taiwanese, 0.4%

South Asian, 0.2%


6


Korean, 6.0%

Guatemalan, 5.3%

Salvadoran, 4.8%

A i 3 4%

Migrated within the Last 10 YearsLos Angeles County

Other Latin

Filipino, 7.1%

Chinese, 7.1%

Korean, 6.0% Armenian, 3.4%

Other, 3.3%


Asian Indian, 2.5%

Japanese, 2.1%

Other Asian, 1.9%

African, 1.6%

Iranian, 1.4%

Other Eastern Other, 14.0%


Mexican, 36.3%

American, 9.5% European, 1.4%

Other Middle Eastern, 1.3%

Vietnamese, 1.2%

Russian, 1.2%

Taiwanese, 1.0%South Asian, 0.9%


Korean, 6.0%

Guatemalan, 5.3%

Salvadoran, 4.8%

A i 3 4%


Other Latin

Filipino, 7.1%

Chinese, 7.1%

Korean, 6.0% Armenian, 3.4%

Other, 3.3%


Asian Indian, 2.5%

Japanese, 2.1%

Other Asian, 1.9%

African, 1.6%

Iranian, 1.4%



Mexican, 36.3%



Vietnamese, 1.2%

Russian, 1.2%



7


Chinese, 7.1% Korean, 6.0%

Guatemalan, 5.3%

Salvadoran, 4.8%

A i 3 4%


Other Latin

Filipino, 7.1%

Armenian, 3.4%

Other, 3.3%


Asian Indian, 2.5%

Japanese, 2.1%

Other Asian, 1.9%

African, 1.6%

Iranian, 1.4%



Mexican, 36.3%



Vietnamese, 1.2%

Russian, 1.2%



Korean, 6.0% Guatemalan, 5.3%Salvadoran, 4.8% Armenian, 3.4%


Other Latin

Filipino, 7.1%

Chinese, 7.1%

Other, 3.3%


Asian Indian, 2.5%

Japanese, 2.1%

Other Asian, 1.9%

African, 1.6%

Iranian, 1.4%



Mexican, 36.3%



Vietnamese, 1.2%

Russian, 1.2%



8


Korean, 6.0%Guatemalan, 5.3%

Salvadoran, 4.8% Armenian, 3.4%


Other Latin

Filipino, 7.1%

Chinese, 7.1%

Other, 3.3%Western

European, 2.7%

Asian Indian, 2.5%

Japanese, 2.1%

Other Asian, 1.9%

African, 1.6%

Iranian, 1.4%



Mexican, 36.3%



Vietnamese, 1.2%

Russian, 1.2%


Los AngelesGlendale

South Central Area: Overview

Inglewood

Glendale

Montebello

South Central

Compton

Santa Ana

Long Beach

N

Scale equals: 1 to 450,000d:/data/GISCA/scag_js_02.apr - field: 2000 counties - view: South Central - layout: SouthCentral_overview

County Boundaries

Los Angeles City Boundaries

South Central Area Boundaries


9

South Central High School Demographics 1981-1982 School Year

7% 10%

31%

7%2%1% 1%1%2%

99%91% 90%

98%93%

42%

57%

68%

Crenshaw Washington Prep Jefferson Jordan Locke Manual Arts Fremont

OtherLatinoAfrican American

30%

1% 1%

South Central High School Demographics 2004-2005 School Year

44%

92%

80% 80%88%

63%

70%

55%

7%

20%

37%

20%12%

Crenshaw Washington Prep Jefferson Jordan Locke Manual Arts Fremont

OtherLatinoAfrican American


10

San Diego

San Diego


11

San Diego

San Diego


12

San Diego

San Diego


13

California Looking Forward, 2000-2050California Demographic Projections, California Department of Finance

6.5% 6.7% 6.7% 6.6% 6.5% 6.4%90%

100%

Multirace

32.6%

38.7%43.0%

46.8% 50.4% 53.6%

11.0% 12.0% 12.7% 12.8% 12.5% 12.1%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

nt

of

To

tal

Po

pu

lati

on

American Indian

Black

Pacific Islander

Asian

47.1%39.2%

33.7%29.5%

26.1% 23.3%

0%

10%

20%

30%

2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050

Year

Per

cen

Hispanic

White

California Looking Forward, 2000-2050California Demographic Projections, California Department of Finance

60,000,000

Multirace

30,000,000

40,000,000

50,000,000

To

tal

Po

pu

lati

on

American Indian

Black

Pacific Islander

Asian

0

10,000,000

20,000,000

2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050

Year

T

Hispanic

White


14


15


16


17

The Future is Now . . .

90%

100%

Ethnic Composition by Age for California, 2008

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

Other or Mixed Race

0%

10%

20%

30%

0‐18 18‐39 40‐64 >65

Asian Pacific

Latino

African American

Non‐Hispanic White

The Future is Now . . .


18

Demographics and State Capital Spending Adjusted for Income250

cap

ita

As Is the Underinvestment . . .

100

150

200

nd

ing

cap

ital

ou

tlay

s ad

just

ed f

or

per

ce

(100

= a

vera

ge

of

U.S

. sta

tes)

0

50

0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40%

percent age/ethnic difference

Per

cap

ita

stat

e sp

enin

com

e

Demography and Economic Inclusion

Dramatic crack in the economy, with significant policy attentionwith significant policy attention to the Great Recession

With skyrocketing unemployment, foreclosures and budget issues, the short-term focus makes sense

But looking long-term, another set of worries emerges around the distribution of opportunity


19

The Challenge of Inequality . . .

25%

Income Distribution in the U.S., 1917‐2007

10%

15%

20%

percent of income

0%

5%

1917

1920

1923

1926

1929

1932

1935

1938

1941

1944

1947

1950

1953

1956

1959

1962

1965

1968

1971

1974

1977

1980

1983

1986

1989

1992

1995

1998

2001

2004

2007

Top 1% (incomes above $398,900 in 2007)

Top 5‐1% (incomes between $155,400 and $398,900)

Top 10‐5% (incomes between $109,600 and $155,400)

Source: Emmanuel Saez, Striking It Richer: The Evolution of Top Incomes in the United States (Update : August 5, 2009).

The Challenge of Inequality . . .

$80 000

$90,000

Figure 3‐1. U.S. Resident Median Family Income 1947‐2007(in 2007 Dollars)

$40,000

$50,000

$60,000

$70,000

$80,000

Latino

Asian and Pacif ic Islander

White

Non-Hispanic White

$0

$10,000

$20,000

$30,000

1947 1952 1957 1962 1967 1972 1977 1982 1987 1992 1997 2002 2007

Black


20

Putting It Together

Unequal Unequal

Deregulated

Disconnected

So the new story emerging in our book: equity is key to growth

What’s the Evidence?

Utilizing weighted regression approach to 341 metro areas in the U.S. 1990-2000

P it i f ti fPer capita income as a function of:(+)regional education

(-) manufacturing concentration

(+)central city presence

(-) previous income

(?)region of U S(?)region of U.S.

(-) measure of inequity, including ratio of city to suburb poverty, concentration of poverty, income distribution, black-white segregation


21

And From the Federal Reserve

Federal Reserve of Cleveland studies almost 120 mid-size regionsstudies almost 120 mid size regions, looking for factors that predict regional prosperity

Usual suspects: skilled workforce, quality of life, industrial decline

Unusual suspects: income inequality, racial exclusion, concentration of poverty – and they’re highly significant

It’s a Broader Story

Underinvestment in each other makes us less competitive as a nation

Social tensions over who Social tensions over who will gain and who will lose make us less likely to cohere on what we need to do to thrive


22

And a Broader Conversation

We set out in the book to generate a catalog of best practices for

But when we talked to leaders, the conversation was not about zoning regs, tax-sharing, or policy per se

combining equity & economic growth

Instead, it was about reframing a local and national conversation about social equity and who we are as a people, a region, a country

Metros offer new scale for doing well and doing good, fusing competitive-

Starting at Home . . .

good, fusing competitiveness and inclusion

Configuration of metropolitan space and opportunity has become center – from racial justice to spatial justicejustice to spatial justice

Metros offer new opportunities to bridge difference face-to-face, race-to-race, space-to-space


23

Leadership and Governance

Need to rethink our cherished beliefs

Need to innovate not just for efficiency but for effectiveness

Need to think about inside and outside skills and strategies

efficiency but for effectiveness

Need to govern not manage & lead by example not position

How Do We Lead in These Times?

Understanding the distinction between diversity – and justice


24


Understanding the distinction between diversity and justice

Understanding the importance of policy, advocacy and organizing


Understanding the distinction between diversity and justice

Understanding the importance of policy, advocacy and organizing

Understanding the need for unexpected alliances, and new collaborations

Understanding that collaboration and conflict can go together


25

Can We Meet Our Challenges?

Can We Meet Our Challenges?

This Could Be the Start of Something Big: Looking for the...

Documents

Transcript of This Could Be the Start of Something Big: Looking for the...