Cities have lower mortality rates, and that’s not all: Why cities matter

Above: Image from the cover of Glaeser's new book "Triumph of the City"

It should come to no surprise to anyone familiar with the work of ICIC that we’re a firm believer in cities acting as engines of economic growth and opportunity. That’s why we were delighted to read a recent article in European Magazine that interviewed one of our favorite urban economists – Harvard Professor Ed Glaeser, who also happens to be a huge proponent of investing in our cities.

We’ve heard Glaeser speak several times this past year, perhaps as a result of our overlapping work, or perhaps because Glaeser is on a whirlwind speaking tour for his new book, Triumph of the City. We had the opportunity to chat with him at the “Smaller Industrial Cities” conference here in Massachusetts, and were excited to see him speak at the CEOs for Cities annual conference in Chicago back in October. And of course, there are the two copies of his book sitting on my own desk at home (excessive? Perhaps…)

Yet, despite the times I’ve heard him speak, or the chapters of his book I’ve flipped through, I still found the interview with European Magazine to be captivating. He reiterated a few things we already knew about cities, but brought to our attention some interesting new perspectives about cities and their governments.

What we knew:

·  Cities help to preserve the environment. Though it may sound counterintuitive (namely, because cities have long been perceived as filthy, pollution-ridden environments), cities are actually good for the environment. When we increase density, we become less dependent on fuel (we drive less) and energy (single-family homes, like those found in the suburbs, use on average 83% more electricity than urban apartments).

·  Cities make us smarter. Despite our increasingly globalized world and instant communication across national borders, smart people and innovative companies still choose to congregate in cities. Why? Because proximity allows us to share ideas with one another, leading to new innovation. As Glaeser explains, cities allow for the creation of new ideas. Cities act as engines of economic growth an opportunity. This is why we’re seeing rural residents in developing nations (think: India) flock to the cities at an alarming rate. Opportunity exists here where it couldn’t in areas where people are disconnected from each other.

Interesting new tidbits:

·  Cities have lower mortality rates.  Again, this may seem surprising given the perception that cities foster high rates of crime. However, in this article Glaeser notes that the two biggest causes of death in the U.S. are suicides and car accidents. He explains, “There are just far fewer people driving drunk in big cities than there are in rural areas. It is just a lot safer to take the public transportation after a few beers than to get behind the wheels of a car.”

But suicide? How is that explained? Glaeser says that there is a correlation between density and suicides, at least partially because of hunting licenses being more prevalent (and therefore guns) in rural areas. Increased access to guns = easier access to suicide weapons.  

·  We don’t have to save every city. Both here in the U.S. and in Europe, there are countless examples of cities that were once economic powerhouses. But now, as industries have shifted, some of these cities have begun to die. Glaeser says we don’t have to save every city, or try to make it the city it once was. He cites Germany as a place that has done too much to prop up its declining cities—instead, we should focus on making sure there is equality for the citizens left in t hose cities (something Germany has also excelled in doing, despite heavy investment).

·  Cities need strong governments—until they’re strong cities—in which case the government should step out of the way.  Sound confusing? Well, the rationale is that emerging cities (especially in third-world nations where residents are moving to cities in droves) need strong governments to make the needed investments: in infrastructure, education, policies, etc. Density without strong government can lead to water pollution, disease, corruption and other horrors that were once associated with cities in the developed world.

But once cities are developed, the way to foster innovation and help cities to thrive is by the government taking a step back.

Glaeser explains, “I often say that the best economic development strategy is to attract and train smart people and then more or less get out of their way which suggests the limits of what you can do. In many senses the most important government policies are to focus on dealing with the downsides of density, dealing with the crime congestion, contagious disease – issues that just can kill a city rather than thinking that the government can be engaged in playing venture capitalist and choosing particular industries.”

One could certainly surmise that he’s referencing cities like Cambridge, MA – the city in which he works (Harvard).

The article in European Magazine is a bit long, but certainly worth the read. You can read it in its entirety here. For anyone who is interested in cities, not just here in the U.S. but across the globe, this is a must read – even, if like us, you’ve had the chance to see Glaeser speak times before. 

BY Amanda Maher on January 3rd, 2012

TAGS: cities | environment | ed glaeser