co Class Notes: Income Segregation, the Value of Longer Leases, and More By webfeeds.brookings.edu Published On :: Wed, 26 Feb 2020 14:06:26 +0000 This week in Class Notes: Reforming college admissions to boost representation of low and middle-income students could substantially reduce income segregation between institutions and increase intergenerational mobility. The Alaska Permanent Fund Dividend increased fertility and reduced the spacing between births, particularly for females age 20-44. Federal judges are more likely to hire female law clerks after serving on a panel… Full Article
co Class Notes: Selective College Admissions, Early Life Mortality, and More By webfeeds.brookings.edu Published On :: Wed, 25 Mar 2020 18:36:42 +0000 This week in Class Notes: The Texas Top Ten Percent rule increased equity and economic efficiency. There are big gaps in U.S. early-life mortality rates by family structure. Locally-concentrated income shocks can persistently change the distribution of poverty within a city. Our top chart shows how income inequality changed in the United States between 2007 and 2016. Tammy Kim describes the effect of the… Full Article
co Playful learning in everyday places during the COVID-19 crisis—and beyond By webfeeds.brookings.edu Published On :: Tue, 07 Apr 2020 20:19:31 +0000 Under normal circumstances, children spend 80 percent of their waking time outside the classroom. The COVID-19 pandemic has quite abruptly turned that 80 percent into 100 percent. Across the U.S., schools and child care centers have been mandated to close, and children of all ages are now home full time. This leaves many families, especially… Full Article
co The fight to contain climate change – Implementing Paris, mobilizing action By webfeeds.brookings.edu Published On :: Mon, 16 Sep 2019 13:00:50 +0000 With the follow-on elements to the Paris Agreement – the so-called Paris “rulebook” – all but finished at COP 24 in Poland last December, the concern of the international climate community is now focused principally on the challenge of rapidly increasing the ambition of country efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. This makes sense. After… Full Article
co COVID-19 and climate: Your questions, our answers By webfeeds.brookings.edu Published On :: The year 2020 was always going to be critical for climate change, but the coronavirus pandemic dramatically altered the picture in some respects. Earlier this week, Brookings hosted a virtual event on COVID-19 and climate change, moderated by Samantha Gross, and featuring Brookings Senior Fellow Todd Stern, Ingrid-Gabriela Hoven of the German Ministry for Economic Cooperation and Development (BMZ), Stéphane Hallegatte of the World Bank, and Pablo Vieira of… Full Article
co At the Corner of Future and Main: The Benefits of High Density, Center City Development By webfeeds.brookings.edu Published On :: Mon, 20 Sep 2004 00:00:00 -0400 This keynote presentation by Bruce Katz at City Hall in Seattle describes how a vibrant center city stimulates a region's economy. The presentation also assesses how Seattle is faring on this front and what steps the city should take as it looks to the future.The metro program hosts and participates in a variety of public forums. To view a complete list of these events, please visit the metro program's Speeches and Events page which provides copies of major speeches, powerpoint presentations, event transcripts, and event summaries. Downloads Download Authors Bruce Katz Publication: Center City Seattle Open House Full Article
co Riding the "Three I's" to Economic Recovery By webfeeds.brookings.edu Published On :: Thu, 20 Mar 2008 00:00:00 -0400 In a rare Kumbaya moment, the nation's leaders of both parties have decided that rebate checks and a flurry of other short-term measures are needed to help stave off an economic slowdown.Unfortunately, but predictably, we're hearing far less from Capitol Hill and the campaign trail about the bigger picture and the long-term challenges facing the American economy. Increasing competition from nations like China and India, the impending retirements of the baby boomers, and the highly unequal distribution of benefits from the recent expansion all signal the potential for slower U.S. economic growth in the future. These challenges, and our responses, will resonate throughout the Puget Sound region. Already, the region is one of America's economic juggernauts. According to the Paris-based Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, the Seattle-Tacoma-Bellevue metropolitan area is the fourth-most productive in the world. And the ports of Seattle and Tacoma together form the eighth-largest gateway for foreign goods nationwide. In that strength — and the strength of other metropolitan areas around the country — are the seeds of solutions. Like the call for "three T's" in the stimulus debate — measures that are timely, targeted and temporary — policies to improve our nation's long-run economic performance and address its overhanging challenges would instead do well to focus on the "three I's" — innovation, intellect and infrastructure. Innovation has always served to propel economic growth. Here, Puget Sound companies lead the world in the fields of aerospace, software and retailing, developing new ideas and products that trump the labor-cost advantages of offshoring. Yet as a nation, we have fallen behind European competitors in innovative new-growth fields like alternative energy, where none of the world's 10 largest solar-cell manufacturers, and only one of the world's 10 largest wind-turbine manufacturers, is a U.S. company. Intellect — the knowledge and skills of our people — translates into economic growth by raising worker output and incomes and creating more of the first "I," innovation. Yet, while the United States sends the highest share of its young people to college worldwide, our rank falls to 16th when you measure who actually graduates. And though the Puget Sound region boasts one of the most-educated adult populations in the nation, the feeder system (especially Seattle's public schools) loses too many young people along the pathway to higher education. Infrastructure supports long-term economic growth in many ways. High-quality transportation infrastructure — roads, transit, rail and ports — speeds the movement of goods and people within and across markets. Yet, the Seattle area succeeds economically despite the real hurdles it faces on this front. Even taking into account high performers like Sea-Tac Airport and King County Metro, rising congestion highlights the lack of cogent plans for key corridors like Highway 520 and the Alaskan Way Viaduct, as well as the need for a renewed commitment to rail transit. To its credit, the Puget Sound region, like other metropolitan areas around the country, has tried to tackle some of these issues on its own. But, because the route to resolving our long-term challenges runs through areas like Seattle, its issues demand national attention. For instance, shouldn't the federal government — through direct investments in scientific research and favorable tax treatment for corporate investment in research and development — help put innovative regions like Puget Sound ahead of the curve in cutting-edge "green" industries? To upgrade our nation's intellectual capacity, shouldn't the federal government partner with states, localities and the private sector to support the diffusion of successful, entrepreneurial urban education models for districts like Seattle? And on infrastructure, shouldn't the federal government deploy its roughly $50 billion in annual transportation expenditures in smarter ways to help relieve congestion and promote sustainability in key trade corridors like the Seattle-Tacoma area? Once we get past the stimulus frenzy, let's have a real debate about the blueprint for bolstering America's long-term economic growth. Building on the strengths, and addressing the challenges, of the "three I's" in regions like Seattle ought to be another strategy leaders in our nation's capital can agree upon. Alan Berube is research director of the Metropolitan Policy Program at the Brookings Institution in Washington, D.C. David Jackson is a policy analyst with the program. Authors Alan BerubeDavid Jackson Publication: The Seattle Times Full Article
co Targeting an Achievement Gap in One of the Country's Most Educated Metropolitan Areas By webfeeds.brookings.edu Published On :: Thu, 19 Jan 2012 00:00:00 -0500 Over the past two decades, the Puget Sound area’s innovation-driven economy has become a magnet for highly educated people from across the country and around the world. Drawn to the region by some of the nation’s most innovative companies—Microsoft, Boeing, Nintendo, Amazon, Genentech and the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, to name a few—the Puget Sound region ranks well on measures of educational attainment. Of the nation’s largest 100 metro areas, the Seattle-Tacoma-Bellevue area is 11th in bachelor’s degree holders and 17th in graduate degree attainment.But for all its brainpower, the region has fallen behind in terms of cultivating homegrown talent, particularly in less affluent school districts located in South Seattle and South King County. Starting from an early age, low-income students and children of color in these communities tend to lag behind on important indicators of educational success. The effects of this achievement gap worsen with time, putting these students at a serious disadvantage that often affects their ability to find jobs and their earning potential. In an effort to address this achievement gap, the Community Center for Education Results has teamed up with the city of Seattle, the University of Washington, the Seattle Community Colleges District, the Puget Sound Educational Service District, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation and others to form the Road Map Project, a coalition working to double the number of South Seattle and South King County students pursuing a college diploma or career credential by 2020. What’s innovative about the Road Map Project is its focus on collective action and community engagement. By bringing together key stakeholders to collaborate on shared goals, the project is creating a new model for efforts to reduce inequality in educational attainment. Its cradle-to-college-and-career approach aims to improve student outcomes beginning with access to prenatal care and kindergarten readiness all the way through to elementary and secondary schooling and beyond. Through a combination of community outreach and partnership building, data-driven goal-setting and performance management, the project supports area organizations working to boost student success and close the achievement gap in South Seattle and South King County. In December, the Project released its baseline report, which provides a detailed snapshot of student achievement in the Road Map region during the 2009-2010 school year. With this initial data in hand, the project will be able to work with area organizations to encourage and track progress on a wide variety of indicators, ranging from birth weight and full-day kindergarten enrollment to proficiency in reading, math, and science, parent engagement to graduation rates and postsecondary enrollment. “Demographics should not determine the destiny of children in this region,” says Mary Jean Ryan, executive director of the Community Center for Education Results. “The children who grow up here deserve as good of an education as the people who show up here.” Authors Bruce KatzJudith Rodin Publication: The Atlantic Cities Full Article
co Seattle Uniquely Placed to Compete on Global Stage, but Success is Not Inevitable By webfeeds.brookings.edu Published On :: Mon, 12 May 2014 15:21:00 -0400 In an increasingly international and interconnected economy, Seattle was global before global was cool. The region’s competitive global assets include internationally competitive firms, strategically important ports and one of the nation’s largest foreign-born populations. Still, today’s unique economic moment demands an extra measure of purposeful global engagement. As cities and metropolitan areas begin to emerge from the Great Recession, leaders are realizing the need to restructure the economy — to move from one based on debt and consumption to one powered by production and innovation. At the same time, most economic growth over the next decade will occur outside of America’s borders. As of 2009, the combined economies of Brazil, India and China eclipsed that of the United States and now account for more than one-fifth of the global economy. By 2018, their share is expected to surpass one-quarter. The developing world, with a rapidly rising middle class, represents a huge market opportunity for American firms. China and India alone are expected to increase their urban populations by more than 500 million over the next 20 years, which naturally leads to a rise in their consumer classes. By 2050, Chinese and Indian consumers will account for more than half of all middle-class consumption worldwide, up from just 2 percent in 2000. These growing metropolises will also require massive investments in infrastructure and face huge challenges as they expand, challenges that U.S. firms have the expertise to solve — in transportation and mobility, in sustainability and clean energy, in information technology and software. America’s metropolitan areas are uniquely positioned to take advantage of this dual challenge through increased trade and investment. The top 100 metro areas not only produce three-quarters of our gross domestic product, they also concentrate our most innovative firms, our research institutions and universities, and the majority of our skilled workers. So how does the central Puget Sound region stack up? Recently, I came to Seattle as part of the Global Cities Initiative, a joint project of the Brookings Institution and JPMorgan Chase. This initiative aims to catalyze a shift in economic development priorities and practices that would result in more globally connected metropolitan areas and more sustainable economic growth. The metro area has a strong platform for trade: firms such as Boeing, Microsoft, and Amazon; world-class research assets including the University of Washington and the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center; and a strong legacy of globally oriented leadership, with a wide coalition, including public, private and civic leaders, actively promoting a regional strategy for global engagement. The data bear this out: While Seattle is the 15th largest metro area in the United States, it has the sixth highest export total, sending more than $47 billion in goods and services abroad in 2012. These exports are overwhelmingly driven by globally competitive clusters in aerospace and information technology. Partly due to this industry specialty, Seattle’s economy is also highly innovative and uniquely oriented toward science, technology, engineering and math: More than one-quarter of jobs in the metro are in STEM occupations, the fourth highest share of any metropolitan area in the country. Still, in such a competitive and dynamic global economy, no metro area can afford complacency. In order to maintain its position in the global economy, Seattle needs to get serious about global engagement. First, focus on global trade and investment. Continue the collaborative efforts of your public, private and civic leaders to focus economic development strategies on growth abroad. In Seattle earlier this month, regional leaders committed to expanding these efforts, joining the Global Cities Initiative’s Exchange, through which the metro area will develop a strategy to increase foreign direct investment in key industries. Second, invest in what matters. To compete globally, metro areas must be strong at home. In Seattle, this means shoring up your workforce-development pipeline so that local residents have a path to good jobs in advanced industries. It also calls for a regional approach to financing and delivering transportation solutions that not only reduce congestion at home, but also improve your connections abroad. Finally, metropolitan leaders must look beyond their own borders, identify their trading partners, and build relationships to increase both trade and investment. For example, as part of the Global Cities Initiative, Chicago and Mexico City entered into a first-of-its-kind economic partnership that builds on the extensive economic, social, cultural linkages between the two metros to make both more prosperous. There are promising efforts under way in the region, as the King County Aerospace Alliance has started collaborating with Aéro Montréal so that the two aerospace clusters can be more competitive. Simply put, in today’s economic landscape, every city is a global city. The success of regional economies hinges on their engagement throughout the global economy. Seattle has an enviable hand to play; but success is not inevitable. This opinion piece originally appeared in the Seattle Times. Authors Bruce Katz Full Article
co The top 10 metropolitan port complexes in the U.S. By webfeeds.brookings.edu Published On :: Wed, 01 Jul 2015 11:25:00 -0400 The United States exported and imported $4.0 trillion worth of international goods in 2014, making it the world’s second-largest trader, after China. The responsibility for moving all those products falls to the country’s 400-plus seaports, airports, and border-crossing facilities, though a smaller group does most of the country’s heavy lifting. In fact, ports in just 10 metropolitan areas move 60 percent of all international goods by value. This level of concentrated port activity creates a spatial mismatch in the country’s trade flows. While a few ports handle a majority of international trade, few of the goods leaving or entering those ports start or end their journey in that port’s local market: 96 percent actually move to or from other parts of the United States. As a result, problems within and outside certain port facilities—whether a labor dispute like the recent West Coast port strike or congestion near Philadelphia’s seaport or airport—quickly become logistical costs borne by the entire country. The 10 largest metropolitan port complexes represent a wide range of U.S. geographies, modal specialties, and international connections. Total volumes for these port complexes, listed below, are based on an aggregation of imports and exports across all sea, air, truck, rail, and pipeline facilities in each region. All data are from 2010, and you can find more detailed metrics within the Metro Freight interactive. 10. Chicago-Joliet-Naperville, IL-IN-WI Total Value: $92.8 billion Local Share: 4.6 percent Top Trade Region: Asia Pacific ($41.5 billion) A traditional Midwest powerhouse of production, metropolitan Chicago is home to a variety of industries and infrastructure assets that connect it to the Midwest and global marketplace. The proximity of factories, warehouses, and rail lines to its major port facilities, particularly O'Hare International Airport, places Chicago at a strategic crossroads for goods distribution. 9. San Francisco-Oakland-Fremont, CA Total Value: $103.9 billion Local Share: 4.4 percent Top Trade Region: Asia Pacific ($77.6 billion) The San Francisco metro area—and the Bay Area as a whole—may be more well-known as a center for tech innovation, but it also contains some of the largest port facilities in the country. The Port of Oakland and the Port of San Francisco account for the bulk of water traffic ($55.3 billion overall) moving through the area, while Oakland International Airport and San Francisco International Airport help transport nearly $48.6 billion in electronics, precision instruments, and other high-value goods. 8. Seattle-Tacoma-Bellevue, WA Total Value: $116.9 billion Local Share: 8.2 percent Top Trade Region: Asia Pacific ($89.4 billion) The Seattle metro area plays a critical role cycling goods throughout the Pacific Northwest and the rest of the country, largely owing to the key connections its port facilities have forged with China ($47.9 billion) and Japan ($22.0 billion). Valuable transportation equipment and electronics represent a large chunk of these port volumes ($52.7 billion), although sizable amounts of machinery, textiles, and agricultural products are also processed through area facilities. The Port of Seattle and the Port of Tacoma are especially important in this respect, as they look to partner more closely in years to come. 7. Miami-Fort Lauderdale-Pompano Beach, FL Total Value: $123.7 billion Local Share: 2.0 percent Top Trade Region: Latin America ($97.2 billion) Miami is the country’s primary gateway to Latin America, especially when excluding petroleum-related trade moving through Gulf Coast ports. And while the region and state have made impressive investments at the Port Miami seaport, it is actually Miami International Airport that generates the most regional trade ($74.8 billion). Miami’s facilities are a key component of Florida’s statewide strategy to use trade and logistics to grow local industries. 6. Laredo, TX Total Value: $124.4 billion Local Share: 0.0 percent Top Trade Region: NAFTA ($121.0 billion) Laredo may only house 250,000 people, but it might be the most important Texas metro area you’ve never heard of, considering that virtually every international good passing through it heads somewhere else in the U.S. The border town is the southernmost point of Interstate 35—the so-called NAFTA superhighway—and handles almost half of U.S./Mexican surface trade. With automotive and other supply chains continuing to stretch across the binational border, Laredo is poised to grow in importance over the coming years. 5. Anchorage, AK Total Value: $137.4 billion Local Share: 0.2 percent Top Trade Region: Asia Pacific ($136.0 billion) Anchorage may be thousands of miles from the closest U.S. market, but it has a long legacy as a major connector to the Pacific marketplace, resting less than 9.5 hours by air from 90 percent of the industrialized world. In particular, Ted Stevens International Airport was the cargo hub for Northwest Airlines Cargo, once the country’s largest carrier, and still has a vibrant freight business led by FedEx Express and UPS hubs. Continued growth in high-value, low-weight goods trade with Asia can only benefit Anchorage’s cargo business. 4. Houston-Sugar Land-Baytown, TX Total Value: $168.1 billion Local Share: 10.6 percent Top Trade Region: Latin America ($48.3 billion) As one of the world’s leading centers for energy and chemical production, the Houston metro area—along with other parts of the Gulf Coast region—depends on an enormous set of seaport facilities to transport these goods. Collectively, $100.6 billion of energy products and chemicals/plastics pass through these ports annually, accounting for about 60 percent of all their international goods. Stretching more than 25 miles in length and situated close to the Gulf of Mexico, the Port of Houston houses many of the area’s marine terminals. 3. Detroit-Warren-Livonia, MI Total Value: $206.7 billion Local Share: 4.9 percent Top Trade Region: NAFTA ($186.6 billion) Although the Detroit metro area contains a number of freight facilities, such as the Port of Detroit, that unite the Great Lakes region, its land border crossings to Canada make it one of the busiest sites of commerce in North America and beyond. Each year, nearly $175.8 billion in international goods travel by truck and rail between Detroit and Canada—relying almost exclusively on the aging Ambassador Bridge and the Michigan Central Railway Tunnel. The planned New International Trade Crossing (NITC), however, holds promise for expanding capacity at this crucial junction. 2. New York-Northern New Jersey-Long Island, NY-NJ-PA Total Value: $349.2 billion Local Share: 9.7 percent Top Trade Region: Europe ($153.9 billion) The Port of New York and New Jersey, which spans several marine facilities including the Port Newark-Elizabeth Marine Terminal, is one of the biggest freight assets in the country, cementing the New York metro area’s role as the chief East Coast seaport complex ($185.0 billion). Remarkably, almost the same value of goods ($162.7 billion) flows through the area’s expansive air cargo facilities, including John F. Kennedy International Airport and Newark Liberty International Airport. Combined with New York’s enormous amount of global corporate headquarters, New York is the country’s most globally fluent metro area. 1. Los Angeles-Long Beach-Santa Ana, CA Total Value: $417.5 billion Local Share: 6.0 percent Top Trade Region: Asia Pacific ($362.2 billion) The Los Angeles metropolitan area not only boasts two of the largest seaports in the Western Hemisphere—the Port of Los Angeles and the Port of Long Beach—but also has one of the busiest cargo airports nationally, Los Angeles International Airport (LAX). Together, these port facilities channel a wide range of international goods like electronics, machinery, and textiles across the country, many of which come from Asian trade partners like China ($211.3 billion) and Japan ($58.5 billion). Still, only a fraction of these goods actually start or end locally (6 percent), speaking to the port complex’s extensive geographic reach in the U.S. Authors Adie TomerJoseph Kane Full Article
co Building and advancing digital skills to support Seattle’s economic future By webfeeds.brookings.edu Published On :: Fri, 23 Oct 2015 00:00:00 -0400 Summary: Why digital skills matter As the influence of digital technologies in the global economy expands, metropolitan areas throughout the United States face the task of preparing residents for an increasingly technology-powered world. Most jobs now require basic computer literacy to operate email and other software, while jobs specific to information technology (IT) require advanced skills such as coding. At home, residents need access to the Internet and consumer technologies to do homework, shop at online retailers, communicate with one another, or check real-time traffic and transit conditions. Digital technologies hold out the promise of more widely shared prosperity, but achieving that vision will require every person to have basic digital skills—the ability to use digital hardware and software to manage information, communicate, navigate the web, solve problems, and create content.1 While some metro areas have made important advances on digital skills acquisition, the effects are not ubiquitous. The Census Bureau found that only 73 percent of U.S. households subscribed to in-home broadband service in 2013, leaving 31 million households without a high-speed in-home connection.2 Pew Research Center finds that over one-third of U.S. adults doesn’t own a smartphone, while 7 percent of smartphone owners lack high-speed Internet access at home and have few ways to get online beyond their smartphone.3 Another survey finds that 29 percent of Americans have low levels of digital skills, and many of these persons tend to be older, less educated, and lower-income.4 In an advanced economy, all residents deserve an opportunity to obtain digital skills. It is up to leaders in each U.S. metropolitan area to determine how best to meet this need. As with any social challenge of this scale, meeting it will require pragmatic problem-solving and deep collaboration across the public, private, and civic sectors. This brief summarizes the results of a workshop held in Seattle to explore these issues. While the findings from the workshop discussions are unique to the Seattle region—making its leaders and residents the primary audience for this brief—the workshop approach can be replicated in any metropolitan area interested in addressing digital skills shortfalls and developing solutions tailored to residents’ needs. Introduction: Digital skills and the Seattle metropolitan economy Metropolitan Seattle is well positioned to prosper in the information era. Advanced industries—including global leaders in aerospace and IT—power the regional economy and have created an impressive network of patent-producing firms that employ over 295,000 people.5 The region’s households actively participate in the digital economy as well, as evidenced by a broadband adoption rate of 82 percent.6 Collaborations bringing together firms, public utilities, and government institutions make Seattle a national leader in the use of data monitoring to reduce energy usage. However, for the region to maintain its position in the years ahead, it will need to cultivate a more inclusive economy that gives every resident the opportunity to acquire the skills needed to succeed in the digital era. Like most U.S. metro areas, metropolitan Seattle continues to struggle with digital inclusivity. Strong broadband adoption across the region masks lagging adoption rates in many low-income neighborhoods and communities of color.7 A skills mismatch between job openings requiring digital skills and the education and skills training of area residents contributes to income inequality.8 This inequality, though less marked than in other cities with similar high-tech economies, continues to increase, with the highest-earning households experiencing rising incomes while lower-income households’ earnings stay relatively flat.9 Meanwhile, more than 45 percent of jobs in the region are more than 10 miles from downtown Seattle and Bellevue, and over two-thirds of poor households now live in the suburbs.10 This kind of job sprawl and suburban poverty limit many residents’ physical access to economic opportunity. But the Seattle area has the assets to address these challenges. The region has a legacy of direct private-sector support for professional skills development and a huge network of IT firms that can expand such efforts. Government agencies and civic institutions already manage programs to promote digital skills acquisition. In addition, there is a regional ethic of supporting equitable economic growth, seen most recently in Seattle’s landmark living wage policy and Sound Transit’s discounted fee system for lower-income riders.11 In an effort to address Seattle’s digital skills gap, the Brookings Institution Metropolitan Policy Program convened a group of leaders from the public, private, and civic sectors to discuss how to continue building a regionally inclusive digital skills infrastructure. The workshop consisted of brief presentations from Brookings experts and local leaders, group discussions of current efforts and challenges, and break-out groups to identify specific barriers and discuss strategies and next steps to improve future outcomes. The following is a distillation of the key themes and lessons from the workshop. 1. Commit to ongoing collaboration There is a clear consensus among Seattle-area leaders that basic digital skills are essential for everyone. The tough part is ensuring that all residents in the region have the opportunity to acquire these skills. This challenge implicates a wide range of stakeholders, from municipal and county government, public libraries, and universities to area businesses, education and training providers, philanthropies, and nonprofits. Many of these actors already manage their own initiatives, to great effect. Programs like the Seattle Goodwill’s Digital Literacy Initiative are working to increase the number of people with 21st-century digital skills, particularly among traditionally underserved populations. The private sector is advancing a similar agenda with major initiatives, such as Microsoft IT Academy and Google’s Made With Code, that promote computational thinking through computer science. Meanwhile, nonprofit training programs like the Ada Developers Academy as well as for-profit training providers such as Code Fellows and General Assembly are getting more people on pathways into tech-intensive careers that pay well. However, despite this demonstrated willingness to act, coordination of activities across the region remains a challenge. Most initiatives operate independently from one another, often resulting in duplicative efforts and missed opportunities for greater impact. Furthermore, current efforts often concentrate activities in either the central cities or specific portions of the three-county region, thereby excluding those who live in other parts of the metro area. For example, the city of Seattle’s excellent digital equity programs extend only to the city limits and are not available in South King County. Without more collaboration, the region will not be able to take full advantage of its creativity, resources, and capacity for pragmatic problem-solving. By committing to ongoing collaborative action, leaders in the Seattle region will be well positioned to design, launch, and maintain smart solutions to the digital skills challenge today and in the future. 2. Identify a convener and organize for action Once stakeholders commit to collaborative problem-solving, they must then determine how best to organize for action. Identifying a neutral convener organization can help expedite this process. Designating a convener ensures that there is a single organization tasked with driving the group’s agenda forward and fostering greater collaboration among stakeholders. The role of convener involves a handful of specific tasks that help keep the group on track and in regular contact. Organizing regular group meetings, delegating critical tasks like research into best practices, and managing communication within the group are all critical functions for the convening organization. To take just one example, the Community Center for Education Results (CCER) fills the convener role for the many stakeholders involved in the Road Map Project, which is working to improve student outcomes in South Seattle and South King County.12 The Seattle area is fortunate to have a number of organizations that could act as convener. Potential candidates include the Workforce Development Council of Seattle-King County (WDC), the Seattle Public Library, the University of Washington, or one of the many large philanthropies in the region. Regardless of which organization ultimately takes on this role, selecting a convener marks a crucial first step toward an actionable, collaboratively developed digital skills agenda for the Seattle region. 3. Develop a shared vision for digital skills acquisition Crafting a shared vision for digital skills acquisition will strengthen the group’s work by ensuring that all involved are on the same page. That vision can support the creation of a coordinated regional plan, which will help stakeholders take advantage of economies of scale and ensure the greatest return on resources invested. This plan should take particular care to address challenges faced by traditionally underrepresented groups, including women and people of color as well as those in lower-income communities.13 Ending the persistent lack of diversity in tech-oriented careers will require a concerted effort on the part of all stakeholders involved.14 To start, the convener’s first task should be organizing a time for stakeholders to sit down, develop a shared vision, and determine the next steps necessary to achieve that vision. Conducting an audit of existing programs in the region that support digital skills acquisition can be a good place to begin. This inventory will highlight any overlapping initiatives while also providing information on gaps in the digital skills infrastructure that will need to be addressed. In addition, the group should work with the private sector to identify the digital skills needed in various industries and begin to map out pathways into tech-oriented careers. This information will ensure that the solutions developed are informed by current and projected industry demand. The industry-sector panels convened by WDC offer one possible approach. Under this model, WDC serves as convener, bringing together key stakeholders from industry, education, workforce development, labor, nonprofits, and other relevant areas to identify shared challenges and engage in collaborative problem-solving. The outcomes and activities of the sector panel are determined by the group, with WDC facilitating the process throughout. WDC has a demonstrated record of success in organizing sector panels for the maritime and health care industries, and it could apply the same techniques to industries requiring digital skills. Preliminary research will provide the data and analyses necessary for truly evidence-based solutions that respond directly to specific challenges in the region. Once this baseline research is completed, the group can begin problem-solving in earnest. To start, the group should identify a punch list of action items that can be easily accomplished in order to start building a record of successful collaborations. As the group designs these solutions, it should also take care to establish performance management systems that track progress over time. Monitoring the performance of each solution implemented will also support efforts to refine and course-correct programming over time. 4. Adopt new roles to accomplish regional goals With a new, shared vision of the community’s digital skills infrastructure in hand, stakeholders will need to align their individual initiatives to that goal and, in some cases, redefine their roles in order to support the broader vision. These new roles should leverage each organization’s core strengths rather than require them to develop new ones. For example, metropolitan Seattle’s public libraries are already community-meeting spots that specialize in information exchange, offer free access to the Internet, and host a variety of classes for the public. This current work positions the libraries to serve as an information clearinghouse for digital skills programs offered in the region, ranging from job-skills training to classes on smartphone use. Likewise, academic experts at the University of Washington and other postsecondary institutions could help create a new curriculum for teaching applied digital skills to diverse populations. At the same time, organizations should be open to adapting their core projects in order to fill gaps in the region’s digital skills infrastructure. For example, technology firms like Microsoft and Google could draw on their extensive civic philanthropic efforts and employee skills-training programs to provide basic, applied digital skills and computer science training that enhances the regional workforce. Such efforts could build on Microsoft’s IT Academy model and Google’s support for programs at the Boys and Girls Clubs, which could be repurposed to address adult needs rather than those of children and teens. As individual organizations adopt new roles, they will need to ensure that services are available to residents across the entire metropolitan area. Anchored by its Department of Information Technology and its Digital Equity Initiative, the city of Seattle has an impressive record of boosting digital skills within the city proper. But the vast majority of area residents live outside Seattle. Furthermore, over 60 percent of the region’s poor households now live in the suburbs. As a result, regional actors like Puget Sound Regional Council, Sound Cities, and county governments face enormous pressure to serve residents across the three-county metro area. To start, organizations should work together to conduct metrowide surveys of digital equity issues, perhaps following the model employed by Seattle’s Digital Equity Initiative. This quantitative and qualitative data will set the baseline for the entire region and will help organizations set achievable benchmark goals for the years ahead. 5. Create a regional digital skills brand and marketing strategy to galvanize action In order to communicate the shared vision to area residents, stakeholders should develop and publicize a new regional brand that positions the Seattle region as a leader in digital skills adoption and more equitable economic outcomes. The associated marketing campaign can counter misconceptions about digital skills and the tech industry, maximize awareness of individual stakeholders’ projects, and minimize costs for each organization. Working together, stakeholders can reach the broadest possible pool of local residents with a cohesive message that encourages digital skills and computer science skills acquisition. Furthermore, by directing residents to centralized information centers like local public libraries, the campaign will connect individuals with experts who can help them find the best programs for their needs. In crafting this branding effort, the Seattle area should look to similar campaigns for inspiration. One example is Portland, Ore.’s We Build Green Cities campaign, a trade-based effort to leverage Portland’s international reputation for environmental sustainability and design in order to increase the region’s exports. Baltimore’s Opportunity Collaborative offers a more equity-focused model that brings together local and state public agencies, nonprofit organizations, and universities to solve common workforce, housing, and transportation challenges. A digital skills marketing campaign patterned after existing efforts will allow the region to capitalize on proven models when positioning itself as a leader in digital skills adoption that supports more widely shared prosperity. Conclusion The Seattle region stands at a crossroads. It has the industrial assets for continued growth that fosters ongoing innovation and provides jobs that pay well. It also has a commitment to shared prosperity, best represented by the public, private, and civic actors that support better wages, affordable transportation options, and education and training focused on science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) occupations. The region should build on these efforts by advancing a shared vision for digital skills and undertaking the sustained collaboration necessary to make that vision a reality. Additional resources The Boston Consulting Group, “Opportunity for All: Investing in Washington State’s STEM Education Pipeline” (2014). The Boston Consulting Group and the Washington Roundtable, “Great Jobs Within Our Reach: Solving the Problem of Washington State’s Growing Job Skills Gap” (2013). Capital One and Burning Glass, “Crunched by the Numbers: The Digital Skills Gap in the Workforce” (2015). City of Austin, “Digital Inclusion Strategy 2014” (2014). City of Seattle Department of Information Technology, Community Technology Program, “Information Technology Access and Adoption in Seattle: Progress Towards Digital Opportunity and Equity” (2014). Communities Connect Network, “Defining Digital Inclusion for Broadband Deployment & Adoption” (2014). Maureen Majury, “Building an IT Career-Ready Washington: 2015 and Beyond” (Seattle: Center of Excellence for Information & Computing Technology, 2014). Seth McKinney, “Economic Development Planning in Seattle: A Review and Analysis of Current Plans and Strategies” (Seattle: University of Washington Evans School of Public Policy, 2013). Seattle Goodwill, “Digital Literacy Initiative: Overview” (2014). Seattle Goodwill, “Digital Literacy: Theoretical Framework” (2014). Angela Siefer, “Trail-Blazing Digital Inclusion Communities” (OCLC and Institute of Museum and Library Services, 2013). Tricia Vander Leest and Joe Sullivan, “ICT Training and the ABCs of Employability: YearUp’s Jobs Program for Urban Youth” (Seattle: University of Washington Center for Information & Society, 2008). Endnotes 1. Go ON UK, a United Kingdom charity focused on cross-sector digital skills, defines basic digital skills across these five categories. Many other definitions of digital skills and related terms like digital literacy exist. For more information on the Go ON UK definition, see www.go-on.co.uk/basic-digital-skills/ (accessed June 2015). 2. This includes households with only a dial-up connection (1.2 million), households with Internet access but without a subscription (4.9 million), and households without Internet access (24.9 million) (Brookings analysis of U.S. Census Bureau, 2013 One-Year American Community Survey, Table B28002 data). 3. Aaron Smith, “U.S. Smartphone Use in 2015” (Washington: Pew Research Center, 2015). 4. John Horrigan, “Digital Readiness: An Emerging Challenge Beyond the Digital Divide,” presentation at the Information Technology and Innovation Foundation, June 17, 2014, available at http://www2.itif.org/2014-horrigan-readiness.pdf?_ga=1.119517193.1896174784.1435243775 (accessed June 2015). 5. Mark Muro et al., “America’s Advanced Industries: What They Are, Where They Are, and Why They Matter” (Washington: Brookings Institution, 2015). 6. Seattle has the 16th highest broadband adoption rate across 381 metropolitan areas (U.S. Census Bureau, 2013 One-Year American Community Survey estimates data). 7. Based on the Federal Communication Commission’s tract-level broadband subscribership data, neighborhoods with lower adoption rates also are the neighborhoods with higher poverty rates and non-white population rates, based on U.S. Census data (Brookings internal calculations of FCC and U.S. Census Bureau data). 8. Capital One and Burning Glass, “Crunched by the Numbers: The Digital Skills Gap in the Workforce” (Boston: Burning Glass Technologies, 2015), available at http://104.239.176.33/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/Digital_Skills_Gap.pdf (accessed June 2015). 9. Households at the 95th percentile grew their annual incomes by over $23,000 from 2007 to 2013, while incomes for households at the 20th percentile went down by nearly $500 (Alan Berube and Natalie Holmes, “Some Cities Are Still More Unequal Than Others—An Update” (Washington: Brookings Institution, 2015). 10. Elizabeth Kneebone, “Job Sprawl Stalls: The Great Recession and Metropolitan Employment Location” (Washington: Brookings Institution, 2013); Elizabeth Kneebone and Natalie Holmes, “New Census Data Show Few Metro Areas Made Progress Against Poverty in 2013” (Washington: Brookings Institution, 2014). 11. Lynn Thompson, “Seattle City Council Approves Historic $15 Minimum Wage,” Seattle Times, June 2, 2014; Sam Sanders, “Seattle Cuts Public Transportation Fares for Low-Income Commuters,” National Public Radio, March 2, 2015. 12. More information on the entire Road Map project is available at http://www.roadmapproject.org/ (accessed June 2015). 13. For more on the importance of distinguishing the lived realities of women of color from those of white women, see, among others: Kimberlé Williams Crenshaw, “Mapping the Margins: Intersectionality, Identity Politics, and Violence Against Women of Color,” Stanford Law Review 43, no. 6 (July 1991): 1241-99. 14. Charles M. Blow, “A Future Segregated by Science?” New York Times, February 2, 2015, available at www.nytimes.com/2015/02/02/opinion/charles-blow-a-future-segregated-by-science.html (accessed June 2015). Downloads Report Authors Jessica A. LeeAdie Tomer Image Source: © Anthony Bolante / Reuters Full Article
co The Road Map to post-secondary success in Greater Seattle By webfeeds.brookings.edu Published On :: Wed, 24 Feb 2016 13:45:00 -0500 Think of Seattle’s workforce and you may imagine overworked tech employees at Amazon, Microsoft software developers, or Boeing engineers. But the region’s workforce’s story is more complicated. Alongside the highly skilled workers driving the region’s strong growth since the Great Recession is an increasingly diverse youth population in South Seattle and its surrounding South King County suburbs often disconnected from the region’s trademark innovation economy. As a result, the region faces a skills challenge as only one-quarter of the roughly one-half of King County adults who hold a bachelor’s degree are Washington natives. This limits both individual opportunity and long-term regional competitiveness: 67 percent of jobs in the state will demand postsecondary education within two years, according to an estimate from Georgetown University, but only 28 percent of students in South Seattle and the South King County suburbs receive a postsecondary credential by their mid-20s. These challenges aren’t unique. Many regions are grappling with rising diversity’s impact on the labor force, and thinking about how educational programs and outreach need to adapt to reach diverse populations in an era of constrained resources and growing suburban poverty. But Greater Seattle has an advantage over many communities: a committed group of cross-sector leaders working together as part of the Road Map Project and its ambitious goal “to double the number of students in South King County and South Seattle who are on track to graduate from college or earn a career credential by 2020 and to close racial/ethnic opportunity gaps.” In the six years since it started, Road Map has tackled the region’s educational disparities in many ways: connecting students to scholarships, boosting parental involvement, and attracting a $40 million federal Race to the Top grant for the region’s school districts. Its approach follows the collective impact model, which emphasizes setting shared goals and coordinating resources and activities to magnify the impact beyond that of isolated interventions. With four years left to meet its goal, Road Map released a report last month analyzing student success at the area’s community and technical colleges. This unique effort—marrying data from Road Map-area high schools with area community and technical colleges—produced a finely-grained view of 2011 high school graduates’ progress toward completion, tracking key criteria such as attaining college-readiness in math and completing 30 or more credits in the first year of college. Community and technical colleges are critical institutions in the region—nearly one-third of 2011 Road Map-area high school graduates were direct enrollees—but the report found that only slightly more than one-third of those students successfully completed a degree or transferred to a four-year institution within three years. And outcomes for blacks, Latinos, and, in many cases, Native Americans, consistently trail those of whites and Asians. In response, the Road Map report recommends a series of strategies aimed at attacking the problem from multiple directions, including working with high schools to boost college readiness, helping institutions improve their ability to deliver on student completion, adopting new culturally responsive strategies, and pushing for increased funding for both the institutions and student scholarships. Filling these gaps and meeting the 2020 goal will be difficult. A different Road Map Project report highlights an improving high school graduation rate, but lagging enrollment of graduates directly into college. Nevertheless, the region’s collaborative approach of working across institutions and jurisdictions continues to hold great promise. As more regions confront similar demographic challenges and seek new solutions for boosting skills and opportunity, Greater Seattle offers a compelling case study in how to move beyond one-off collaborations and initiatives to achieve real systems change. Authors Rachel BarkerAlan Berube Image Source: © JASON REDMOND / Reuters Full Article
co Confronting Concentrated Poverty in Tough Economic Times By webfeeds.brookings.edu Published On :: Wed, 03 Dec 2008 12:00:00 -0500 I want to begin by saying how grateful we were at Brookings to partner with the Federal Reserve System on this concentrated poverty project. We like to think that at Brookings we know a lot about this subject, but it was only through this partnership with the Fed that we were able to ground this understanding in the experiences of the 16 communities across the United States that were the focus of the report’s case studies.The report demonstrates that in addition to managing the macroeconomy, the Fed also possesses a unique and powerful understanding of the U.S. economy from the ground up, which is absolutely necessary for designing smart policy in turbulent times like these. I want to also give special thanks to my colleagues David Erickson and Carolina Reid at the San Francisco Fed. They played several roles in this project for me: intellectual partners, co-conspirators, mood lighteners, and Fed sherpas. It can be tough for foreigners like myself to navigate this system, and they lightened my load throughout the project. I also want to thank my Brookings colleague Elizabeth Kneebone, who performed a lot of the data analysis for this project. I want to argue three points, largely policy points, in my remarks this morning. First, the current economic climate makes the issue of concentrated poverty, and our response, more relevant, not less. Second, major near-term investments our country makes to resolve the economic crisis can and should provide meaningful opportunities for the most disadvantaged families and communities. And third, our longer-run efforts to assist high-poverty areas and their residents must take account of the economic challenges and opportunities that manifest at the regional, metropolitan level. To begin, let’s review where we were when the Fed and Brookings joined forces on this effort in May 2006. The unemployment rate was 4.7 percent, a five-year low. Payrolls were expanding every month for the third consecutive year. The poverty rate, while still above its low in 2000, was dropping. The federal deficit was a relatively manageable 2% of GDP. The Dow was above 11,000, and on its way up. And the 2008 general election promised a storied matchup between party favorites Hillary Clinton and Rudy Giuliani. A lot can happen in 30 months! In the wake of record house-price declines and financial market fallout, the economic outlook today is grim. The unemployment rate is 6.5 percent and rising. One projection suggests that the downturn could eventually increase the ranks of the nation’s poor by anywhere from 7 to 10 million. And amid declining revenues and increased expenditure needs, the U.S. budget deficit is expected to top $1 trillion this year. In short, the situation for the lowest-income communities and their residents is not encouraging. And neither is our starting point. As Paul Jargowsky’s research has shown, the incidence of concentrated poverty in America dropped markedly during the 1990s, after two decades of increase. Some combination of a tight labor market and policy changes to promote work and break up the deepest concentrations of poverty seemed responsible for that decline. But as Elizabeth and I found in a recent Brookings report, we may have given back much of that progress during the first half of this decade. The population in what we termed “high working poverty” communities rose by 40 percent between 1999 and 2005. This suggests that America’s high-poverty areas may have never really recovered from the modest downturn we experienced at the beginning of the decade. Now, with all the turmoil in our economy, it would be easy to lose sight of these places and their residents, who even seem to have missed out on the benefits of recent growth. But if we are to meet the enormous challenges facing our country—economic, social, and environmental—we simply can’t afford to take a blind eye to the continuing problem of concentrated poverty. As decades of research and this report have shown, concentrated poverty magnifies the problems faced by the poor, and exacts a significant toll on the lives of families in its midst. This report greatly enhances our understanding of how high-poverty communities of all stripes bear these costs. Moreover, it suggests that the contemporary circumstances of these communities owe not just to long-term market dynamics, but also to policy choices made over several decades’ time—some deliberate in their intent, and some producing unfortunate unintended consequences. Today we’re at an important inflection point for policy. With the economy souring, we don’t have the luxury of using an “auto-pilot” strategy of macroeconomic growth to reach the most disadvantaged places and their residents. Quite the opposite—just as these communities are often “last in” for economic opportunity during boom times, they seem to be “first out” when things shift into reverse. But the specific nature of the current crisis also poses added challenges for high-poverty communities. That is because many of these areas were ground zero for risky subprime lending over the last several years. In many of the case-study communities in the report, half or more of recent home mortgages were high-cost subprime loans. Now, they are on the front lines of the fallout. Our calculations of HUD data show that census tracts where the poverty rate was at least 40 percent in 2000—the conventional definition behind concentrated poverty—have an estimated foreclosure rate over 9 percent, roughly double the nationwide average. This poses both an immediate and a long-term threat to what little stability these communities possess. Over the short term, these areas face problems associated with heightened property neglect, vacancy, and abandonment. Not only can those conditions breed crime and disorder, but also they can accelerate a process of further disinvestment from high-poverty neighborhoods, which are all too familiar with that cycle of decline. Over the long run, the public sector will work to return foreclosed properties in these neighborhoods to productive use. But there is a danger that we may once again re-concentrate poverty in these neighborhoods if these assets are not managed and deployed strategically. In sum, recent trends and a perilous road ahead merit a meaningful policy response to the challenges facing areas of concentrated poverty and their residents. This brings me to my second point, which is that near-term policy choices can ameliorate the impacts of the current crisis on areas of concentrated poverty. In less than 50 days, a new administration will take office in Washington, facing economic challenges of a scale not seen in decades. The president-elect and his advisors have signaled that they are ready to “do what it takes” to stimulate the economy, create and protect jobs, and catalyze investment in new sectors to spur longer-term growth. I believe that policies advanced by the new administration and Congress in the first few weeks of the new year, if designed and executed well, could matter greatly for the fortunes of the nation’s high-poverty communities. First, a comprehensive strategy to deal with the foreclosure crisis is sorely needed. This would feature, first and foremost, a broad plan to forestall the rising tide of mortgages, including many in high-poverty communities, headed for default due to falling home prices, economic dislocation, and poor underwriting. However, even a sweeping, generous approach will not prevent the inevitable. Especially in high-poverty areas, more loans will fall into foreclosure, more people will lose their homes, and fiscally-strapped local governments will be left to manage the consequences of increasing vacancy and abandonment. The Neighborhood Stabilization Program enacted by Congress and the Bush administration during the summer of 2008 represents an initial effort to arm state and local leaders with the resources to tackle the neighborhood impacts of rising foreclosures. But significant deterioration of the economy in the intervening months suggests that the problem may now be of a much larger scale than was originally anticipated. What’s more, many local governments lack the capacity, expertise, and legal authorities to use existing or additional resources strategically. So the new administration, and HUD in particular, will need to consider a further round of response—using some mix of fiscal, regulatory, capacity-building, and bully pulpit powers—to help cash-strapped local governments mitigate the impacts of foreclosure on their most vulnerable communities. Second, there seems to be wide agreement that the economic recovery package should include a series of measures that inject money into the economy right away. So the package will provide immediate assistance to families, communities, and governments hit hard by the downturn, in the likely form of extended unemployment and increased food stamp benefits, increased state and local aid, and low- to middle-income tax cuts, spending designed to make a real economic impact in the next several months. A couple of details here are of real consequence to communities of concentrated poverty. Income tax cuts included in the package should be refundable, like the Earned Income Tax Credit, or EITC. Boosting the EITC, for instance, would provide additional help to workers most likely to be hit hard by the downturn, and target resources to families most likely to spend the additional cash immediately. As the report shows, at least 30 percent, and as many as 60 percent, of families in the case-study communities today benefit from the EITC. Unemployment insurance benefits should be extended, but also modernized. As the case studies showed, work among residents of high-poverty communities is often seasonal or part-time, even in a good economy. As a result, many laid-off workers from poor areas in several states may not qualify for benefits due to outmoded eligibility rules. Therefore, in addition to extending weeks of eligibility for UI, Congress and the new administration might also consider providing incentives to states to expand the pool of workers who could benefit from the program during the downturn. Third, infrastructure will clearly figure prominently among the spending priorities in the recovery package. Yet there is a significant risk that focusing dollars primarily on projects that states deem “shovel-ready,” as has been discussed, will repeat mistakes of the past. It would primarily subsidize road-building at the metropolitan fringe, and do little to enhance long-run economic growth, or provide better opportunities for low-income people and the places they live. Infrastructure investments of the magnitude under consideration must not only create jobs, but also promote inclusive and sustainable growth. That means setting strict criteria for federal investment, including a real assessment of costs and benefits that considers economic, environmental, and social impacts. As the report shows, poor infrastructure often acts as a barrier to the economic integration of high-poverty communities into their larger municipal and regional areas. To that end, we should also consider providing direct support for large, cash-strapped municipal governments that they could use to modernize and preserve roads, bridges, transit, water, sewer, and perhaps even broadband infrastructure. At the same time, we should hold them and grantees at all other levels of government accountable for connecting younger, disadvantaged workers and communities to the jobs that result. In short, what happens in the first several weeks of the new year here in Washington could, if structured properly, provide meaningful support and opportunity for low-income areas and their residents. At a minimum, this might avert the sort of backsliding these communities suffered during the much milder recession we experienced earlier this decade. So that brings me to my third and final point, which is that, over the longer term, we must advance policies that actively link the fortunes of poor communities to those of their regional neighbors. As you probably heard or read, our division at Brookings is named the “Metropolitan Policy Program.” Our mission is to provide decision makers with cutting-edge research and policy ideas for improving the health and prosperity of cities and metropolitan areas. You might ask, why metropolitan? After all, this is not a term that most Americans use, think about, or even recognize, even though 85 percent of us live in metropolitan areas. A friend of the program once told us that it sounded like a combination of “metrosexual” and “cosmopolitan.” Not exactly what we were going for. More specifically, what relevance does “metropolitan” have for addressing the challenges of concentrated poverty? Well, the report points to skills and employability problems that hold back residents of high-poverty communities. If the route to improving the lives of families affected by concentrated poverty runs in part through the labor market, then we must devise strategies and solutions that respect and respond to the geography of that market—which is metropolitan. The report also points to housing problems, of various stripes, that segregate the poor in these communities and make their daily lives more difficult. Housing markets, too, are metropolitan—and housing dynamics in the wealthiest parts of each metro are inextricably linked to those in the poorest parts. The fact is, our national economy—and that of most industrialized nations—is largely the aggregate of its individual metropolitan economies. In the United States, the 100 largest metro areas account for 12 percent of our land mass, hold 65 percent of our residents, and generate three-quarters of our Gross Domestic Product. They possess even greater shares of our innovative businesses, our most knowledgeable workers, the critical infrastructure that connects us to the global economy, and the quality places that attract, retain, and enhance the productivity of workers and firms. And as the report shows, regions—both metropolitan and non-metropolitan—each retain distinctive clusters that shape their individual contributions to the national economic pie. Photonics in Rochester. Hospitality and tourism in Atlantic City and Miami. Manufacturing in Albany, Georgia. Agriculture and business services in Central California. These clusters do not possess equal strength or equal potential, but they define the starting point for thinking about the regional economic future of these areas, and economic opportunities for their residents. Not only are the assets of our economy fundamentally metropolitan… increasingly, our challenges are, too. In 2006, we found that for the first time, more than half of the poor in metropolitan America lived in suburbs, not cities. While poor suburban families don’t yet concentrate at the levels seen in the communities in this report, they are trending in this direction. Between 1999 and 2005, the number of suburban tax filers living in “moderate” working poverty communities rose by nearly 50 percent. So what does recognition of our metropolitan reality imply for longer-run policies to help the poorest communities and their residents? Bruce has argued elsewhere that our nation must embrace a new, unified framework for addressing the needs of poor neighborhoods and their residents. He has termed this, Creating Neighborhoods of Choice and Connection. Neighborhoods of choice are communities in which lower-income people can both find a place to start, and as their incomes rise, a place to stay. They are also communities to which people of higher incomes can move, for their distinctiveness, amenities, or location. This requires an acceptance of economic integration as a goal of housing and neighborhood policy. Neighborhoods of connection are communities that link families to opportunity, wherever in the metropolis that opportunity might be located. This requires a much more profound commitment to the “educational offer” in these communities and the larger areas of which they are a part. It also requires a pragmatic vision of the “geography of opportunity” with regard to jobs, housing, and other choices. If we take this vision seriously, then our interventions must operate within, and relate to, the metro geography of our economy. This means viewing the conditions and prospects of poor areas through the lens of the broader economic regions of which they are a part, and explicitly gearing policy in that direction. A simple example relates to the geography of work. In the Springfield, Massachusetts metro area, roughly 30 percent of the region’s jobs still cluster in the neighborhoods close to downtown, including Old Hill and Six Corners. In the Miami metro area, by contrast, only 9 percent of the region’s jobs lie close to its downtown, implying transportation needs of a quite different scale for Little Haiti’s residents. In response, we should empower metropolitan transportation planners to address the unique nature of these spatial divides, and measure their performance on creating inclusive systems that overcome them. This metro lens applies to workforce development as well. Labor market intermediaries are some of the most promising mechanisms for bridging the information and skills divide between poor communities and regional economic opportunity. One of the highest performers, the Wisconsin Regional Training Partnership, works in the home region of one of our case-study communities, Milwaukee. If workforce policies and funding at all levels of government were to emphasize employer partnerships, provide greater flexibility, and reward performance, we could grow more capable institutions like these that serve the needs of low-income communities and regional firms alike. A metro perspective can apply to school reform as well. We have called for a new focus at the Department of Education on supporting proven, successful educational entrepreneurs—charter management organizations like KIPP, human capital providers like Teach for America, student support organizations like College Summit. The demand for these entrepreneurial solutions extends well beyond the highest-poverty neighborhoods. Federal education policy should consider investing in these entrepreneurs at the metropolitan scale, to aggregate a critical mass of those organizations, serve a significant percentage of the area’s children, and drive positive changes in the entire public education environment. Finally, our housing policies must embrace metro-wide economic diversity, which is a hallmark of neighborhoods of choice and connection. This means expanding housing opportunities for middle-income families in deprived neighborhoods. We simply cannot continue to cluster low-income housing in already low-income areas, perpetuating the sort of economic segregation evident in so many of the case-study communities, and thereby consign another generation to a childhood amid concentrated poverty. Likewise, we must guard against the possibility that the current foreclosure crisis leads to a re-concentration of poor households in neighborhoods that were just beginning to achieve greater economic diversity. But this is a two-way street. It also means creating more high-quality housing opportunities for low-income families in growing suburban job centers. Requiring or providing incentives to metropolitan areas to engage in regional housing planning, alongside regional transportation planning, may be a necessary first step. Those plans could also apply a more rational screen to the development choices that have fueled sprawl, and thereby added to the social and economic isolation of the lowest-income communities. Let me end where I began. This is both an auspicious and a challenging moment at which to wrestle with the problem of concentrated poverty in America. Auspicious in that we are approaching the dawn of a new government in Washington that has signaled concern for our nation’s low-income residents and communities, recognition that metropolitan economies are the engines of our prosperity, and a pragmatic commitment to doing what works. Challenging in that making progress against concentrated poverty, and improving opportunity for those in its midst, is a tall order when the macroeconomy isn’t cooperating. But the current economic climate is not an excuse to avoid this problem; rather, it’s an imperative to act, strategically and purposefully. That means doing the big near-term things the right way, so that low-income communities and their residents do not bear an excessive brunt of the downturn, and so that they participate meaningfully in our eventual economic recovery. And it means getting the long-term vision right, so that policy advances sustainable, metro-led solutions that connect poor neighborhoods and poor families to opportunity in the wider economy around them. The Federal Reserve System has tremendous, well-earned credibility for understanding and advancing dialogue around the future of our nation’s economic regions. I look forward to continuing to work with the Fed to increase public understanding of concentrated poverty, and to make tackling it a crucial element of strategies to promote regional and national prosperity. Downloads Download Authors Alan Berube Publication: Federal Reserve Board of Governors Full Article
co How to Reverse the Trend of Concentrated Poverty By webfeeds.brookings.edu Published On :: Sun, 28 Dec 2008 00:00:00 -0500 One of Cleveland's neighborhoods made the Washington scene earlier this month. Alas, it wasn't up for a multibillion-dollar bailout.Instead, the Central neighborhood and 15 other communities across the United States were the centerpiece of a new report published by the Federal Reserve System and the Brookings Institution. These communities share a simple, disappointing characteristic. In 2000 - the peak of the last economic boom - at least 40 percent of their residents lived below the federal poverty line. That was about three times the national average. No American needs to look very far to find places like these. Concentrated poverty affects manufacturing cities like Cleveland, and Albany, Ga.; immigrant gateways like Miami, Fla., and Fresno, Calif.; and rural areas like eastern Kentucky and northern Montana. About 4 million poor Americans live in these areas of extremely high poverty. How did this happen? Policy decisions made decades ago - like clustering thousands of the Cleveland region's public housing units in the Central neighborhood - helped shape their trajectory. So too did economic changes, like the long-run loss of decent-paying manufacturing jobs, or - in rural areas - mining and agricultural jobs. By allowing poverty to concentrate in these places, we've magnified the problems their poor residents face. For instance, many low-income children in these communities start school not yet "ready to learn." On top of that, though, they attend schools burdened with lots of other poor kids who face similar challenges, and deal with higher levels of neighborhood crime that affect their mental health and educational performance. The challenges of concentrated poverty extend to many other areas: low adult work-force skills and employment, poor-quality housing and a lack of investment by mainstream businesses. And that's in a good economy. Today, Central - and thousands of other high-poverty communities like it across the nation - faces even more significant challenges as the United States enters what may be its worst recession in decades. So what should Washington do for these places and their residents in the face of such difficult circumstances? First, we must not lose sight of them in the economic turmoil. That's especially true because the roots of this crisis, in the subprime mortgage market, grew in many very poor neighborhoods like Central. As a result, home foreclosure rates in high-poverty communities are more than double the national average. To stabilize these hard-hit communities, Washington must adopt new measures to prevent foreclosure and provide additional resources and guidance for state and local governments to help them cope with the rising numbers of vacant properties. Second, a forthcoming economic stimulus package from Washington that could amount to half a trillion dollars or more should not bypass these neighborhoods and their residents. That implies the need for immediate federal aid to sustain basic public services in states like Ohio, where the deficit for this year already tops $1 billion. It also suggests providing direct assistance to struggling workers and their families, through enhanced unemployment benefits and tax credits. At the same time, the infrastructure dollars in the package - which could amount to more than $100 billion - must be spent strategically. States should not be permitted to go on expanding highway capacity at the metropolitan fringe, to the detriment of poor communities near the urban core. Cities like Cleveland, and metropolitan organizations like the Northeast Ohio Areawide Coordinating Agency, should get their fair share of new transportation funds. And funds should be set aside for training programs that provide low-income residents with a pathway to decent jobs. Third, we have to rethink neighborhood policy over the longer term. For too long, government has funded housing, schools and economic development in these communities as though they were islands unto themselves. That's not how the real economy works. These neighborhoods are part of larger regional labor and housing markets. Decisions made across the Cleveland region, such as where firms locate new jobs, or where families buy homes and send their kids to school, ultimately dictate whether neighborhoods like Central can become real neighborhoods of choice and better connected to economic opportunity. Public policy must leverage that real economy for the benefit of lower-income residents, by building on smart regional strategies like the Fund for Our Economic Future and WIRE-Net in Northeast Ohio. It should diversify housing in poor communities, but also encourage affordable housing development in wealthier parts of metropolitan areas. Cleveland's Central neighborhood, like other high-poverty communities across the United States, faces a tough road ahead. Short-term opportunities, and long-term strategies, are needed to help its next generation of residents overcome the challenges of concentrated poverty. Authors Alan Berube Publication: Cleveland Plain Dealer Full Article
co A New Goal for America’s High Schools: College Preparation for All By webfeeds.brookings.edu Published On :: Thu, 14 May 2009 12:00:00 -0400 INTRODUCTION Economic inequality has been on the rise in America for more than three decades. The nation’s traditional engine for promoting equality and opportunity—its public education system—has been unable to halt that upward trend despite increased public spending at the preschool, K–12, and postsecondary levels. Meanwhile, accumulating research evidence reveals that postsecondary education has, for the past few decades, proved an increasingly powerful tool in boosting the income and economic mobility of disadvantaged students. Here we outline steps that high schools can take to increase the college readiness of poor and minority students, making it more likely that they will be accepted into and graduate from college. The annual income difference between Americans with a college degree and those with a high school degree was more than $33,000 in 2007, up from $12,500 in 1965. More to the point, long-term intergenerational data from the Panel Study of Income Dynamics show that a college degree helps disadvantaged children move up the income distribution past peers in their own generation. Adult children with parents in the bottom fifth of income, for example, nearly quadruple (from 5 percent to 19 percent) their chance of moving all the way to the top fifth by earning a college degree.But too few poor kids get a college degree. About one-third of all youngsters from the bottom fifth of family income enter college and only 11 percent get a degree. By contrast, 80 percent of those from the top fifth enter college and well over half earn a degree.Perhaps the primary reason that poor and minority students do not enter and graduate from college is that they are poorly prepared to do well there. The problem is especially evident in the huge gap between the academic achievement of white, Asian, and middle- and upper-income students as compared with black, Hispanic, and low-income students. And decades of educational reform aimed at reducing this gap have had, at best, modest success. Striking evidence of how few college freshmen meet even the most basic college preparation standards is provided by Jay Greene and Greg Forster of the Manhattan Institute. Defining minimum college readiness as receiving a high school diploma, taking courses required by colleges for basic academic preparedness, and demonstrating basic literacy skills, Greene and Forster report that only around 40 percent of white and Asian students were college ready by these criteria. But that figure was twice the 20 percent rate for black students and more than twice the 16 percent rate for Hispanic students.The latest issue of The Future of Children, devoted to exploring how to improve America’s high schools, contains several articles that touch on student preparation for postsecondary education and the world of work. An especially compelling article, written by Melissa Roderick, Jenny Nagaoka, and Vanessa Coca, of the Consortium on Chicago School Research at the University of Chicago, contains a careful analysis of how to measure whether students are ready for college and a host of proposals for actions high schools can take to increase their students’ readiness for postsecondary education. As the Roderick article and related research and analysis make clear, recent years have seen an upsurge of support for the goal of helping all students, but especially poor, urban, and minority students, prepare for college, enter college, and earn a terminal degree. Attaining that goal, we believe, would boost economic mobility in the United States and help the nation live up to its ideals of equality of educational and economic opportunity. Downloads Download Authors Ron HaskinsJames Kemple Publication: The Future of Children Full Article
co Supermarket Access in Low-Income Areas By webfeeds.brookings.edu Published On :: Tue, 19 Oct 2010 00:00:00 -0400 The Brookings Metropolitan Policy Program and The Reinvestment Fund (TRF) performed a detailed analysis of supermarket access in 10 metropolitan areas, and the results are discussed in a new video, “Getting to Market." Results from the analysis encourage users to view the locations of, and generate reports about, low-supermarket-access communities within the 10 metropolitan areas. This is highly useful data for those working at the national and local levels to tackle the problem of inadequate access through public policy and private investment. You can also access these data alongside any of PolicyMap’s 10,000 data indicators and full functionality at www.policymap.com For those interested in other metropolitan areas, TRF has made available a nationwide analysis of low-supermarket-access communities at www.trfund.com. Media Memo » Profiles of 10 Metropolitan Areas (PDFs) Atlanta, GA Little Rock, AR Baltimore, MD Los Angeles, CA Cleveland, OH Louisville, KY Jackson, MS Phoenix, AZ Las Vegas, NV San Francisco, CA Below are samples of data found on our interactive map Map of the San Francisco area showing Low Access Areas with the access score for the area. Access scores are the degree to which a low/moderate-income community's residents are underserved by supermarkets. Map of Baltimore showing Low Access Areas against the estimated percentage of families that live in poverty. Map of Cleveland showing Low Access Areas against the estimated population above the age of 65. Video Supermarket Access in Metro Areas Full Article
co Challenges Associated with the Suburbanization of Poverty: Prince George's County, Maryland By webfeeds.brookings.edu Published On :: Wed, 08 Dec 2010 00:00:00 -0500 Martha Ross spoke to the Advisory Board of the Community Foundation for Prince George’s County, describing research on the suburbanization of poverty both nationally and in the Washington region.Despite perceptions that economic distress is primarily a central city phenomenon, suburbs are home to increasing numbers of low-income families. She highlighted the need to strengthen the social service infrastructure in suburban areas.Full Presentation on Poverty in the Washington-Area Suburbs » (PDF) Downloads Full Presentation Authors Martha Ross Full Article
co The Re-Emergence of Concentrated Poverty: Metropolitan Trends in the 2000s By webfeeds.brookings.edu Published On :: Thu, 03 Nov 2011 09:57:00 -0400 As the first decade of the 2000s drew to a close, the two downturns that bookended the period, combined with slow job growth between, clearly took their toll on the nation’s less fortunate residents. Over a ten-year span, the country saw the poor population grow by 12.3 million, driving the total number of Americans in poverty to a historic high of 46.2 million. By the end of the decade, over 15 percent of the nation’s population lived below the federal poverty line—$22,314 for a family of four in 2010—though these increases did not occur evenly throughout the country. Find concentrated poverty statistics for your metropolitan area » An analysis of data on neighborhood poverty from the 2005–09 American Community Surveys and Census 2000 reveals that: After declining in the 1990s, the population in extreme-poverty neighborhoods—where at least 40 percent of individuals live below the poverty line—rose by one-third from 2000 to 2005–09. By the end of the period, 10.5 percent of poor people nationwide lived in such neighborhoods, up from 9.1 percent in 2000, but still well below the 14.1 percent rate in 1990. To view an interactive version of this map, please download Adobe Flash Player version 9.0 and a browser with javascript enabled. People Living in Extreme Poverty Tracts 2005 2009 Concentrated poverty nearly doubled in Midwestern metro areas from 2000 to 2005–09, and rose by one-third in Southern metro areas. The Great Lakes metro areas of Toledo, Youngstown, Detroit, and Dayton ranked among those experiencing the largest increases in concentrated poverty rates, while the South was home to metro areas posting both some of the largest increases (El Paso, Baton Rouge, and Jackson) and decreases (McAllen, Virginia Beach, and Charleston). At the same time, concentrated poverty declined in Western metro areas, a trend which may have reversed in the wake of the late 2000s housing crisis. To view an interactive version of this map, please download Adobe Flash Player version 9.0 and a browser with javascript enabled. Concentrated Poverty in the Nation's Top 100 Metro Areas The population in extreme-poverty neighborhoods rose more than twice as fast in suburbs as in cities from 2000 to 2005–09. The same is true of poor residents in extreme-poverty tracts, who increased by 41 percent in suburbs, compared to 17 percent in cities. However, poor people in cities remain more than four times as likely to live in concentrated poverty as their suburban counterparts. The shift of concentrated poverty to the Midwest and South in the 2000s altered the average demographic profile of extreme-poverty neighborhoods. Compared to 2000, residents of extreme-poverty neighborhoods in 2005–09 were more likely to be white, native-born, high school or college graduates, homeowners, and not receiving public assistance. However, black residents continued to comprise the largest share of the population in these neighborhoods (45 percent), and over two-thirds of residents had a high school diploma or less. The recession-induced rise in poverty in the late 2000s likely further increased the concentration of poor individuals into neighborhoods of extreme poverty. While the concentrated poverty rate in large metro areas grew by half a percentage point between 2000 and 2005–09, estimates suggest the concentrated poverty rate rose by 3.5 percentage points in 2010 alone, to reach 15.1 percent. Some of the steepest estimated increases compared to 2005–09 occurred in Sun Belt metro areas like Cape Coral, Fresno, Modesto, and Palm Bay, and in Midwestern places like Indianapolis, Grand Rapids, and Akron. These trends suggest the strong economy of the late 1990s did not permanently resolve the challenge of concentrated poverty. The slower economic growth of the 2000s, followed by the worst downturn in decades, led to increases in neighborhoods of extreme poverty once again throughout the nation, particularly in suburban and small metropolitan communities and in the Midwest. Policies that foster balanced and sustainable economic growth at the regional level, and that forge connections between growing clusters of low-income neighborhoods and regional economic opportunity, will be key to longer-term progress against concentrated disadvantage. Downloads Download the Full Paper Video Concentrated Poverty Grips Communities Authors Elizabeth KneeboneCarey NadeauAlan Berube Image Source: Shannon Stapleton Full Article
co Growth and Income of the Poor By webfeeds.brookings.edu Published On :: Fri, 25 Oct 2013 13:24:00 -0400 Buried in the middle of Table 1 in our new paper, Growth still is good for the poor, is a remarkable statistic: in a sample of 118 countries the average change in the income share of the bottom quintile of the population during the 2000s was 0.004. This is a small change, but what is striking is that it is positive. A common concern these days is that the people in the bottom part of the income distribution are being left behind. But these data show that there is no global trend in that direction. Similarly for the income share of the bottom 40%, there is no trend across countries, either in the 2000s or in earlier decades. The other striking finding in this study, written together with Tatjana Kleineberg of Yale and Aart Kraay of the World Bank, is that changes in income share of the poor are uncorrelated with growth. In general, the relationship between the growth of mean income and the growth of income of the bottom 20% (or bottom 40%) is one-to-one; hence the title. Furthermore, about three-fourths of the variation in income of the poor across countries and over time can be accounted for by growth of average income. There are some interesting exceptions to the one-to-one relationship: Latin America in the 2000s had pro-poor growth with income of the poor rising significantly faster than mean income, while Asia had the opposite, pro-rich growth. We try to explain the changes in income share of the poor with a large number of variables covering dimensions of globalization, macroeconomic policy, and social policy (for example, government expenditure on health and education, primary school enrollment, or Gini coefficient on educational attainment). This part of the paper leads to a non-result: there are no robust correlates with changes in income shares. What are the policy implications? I see both good news and bad news here. The fact that there is no worldwide trend towards lower income shares for the poor is good news. If there were such a trend it would suggest that globalization or some other general force was biased against the poor, and it would be hard to resist such a trend. But that is not the case. The rising inequality that we see in the U.S., for example, is not a general trend in rich countries. Other countries have found ways to maintain or increase the income share of the poor. It is also good news that growth will tend to raise the income of the poor proportionately, as it should always be possible to get most of the population to support a growth agenda. On the other hand, to the extent that we care about poverty reduction, it is bad news that we cannot explain what leads to changes in income shares of the poor and in particular what might bring about pro-poor growth. Our findings do not imply that interventions aimed directly at the poor are pointless. But given the key role of growth in poverty reduction I favor interventions that build up the assets of the poor and enable them to participate in the market economy. A good example would be programs to ensure that the poor have access to maternal and child health services and early childhood education. Intuitively, you may think that such programs should shift income distribution in favor of the poor, and perhaps in some cases they do. But it also possible that the programs have powerful spillover benefits for the whole economy (more skilled labor, less crime – not to mention that the next potential Einstein will probably be born to a poor family in the developing world). If programs aimed at the poor have the side effect of stimulating the whole economy we should be happy about the higher growth, not disappointed that it is not pro-poor. Read and download the paper at worldbank.org » Authors David Dollar Image Source: © Stringer China / Reuters Full Article
co The Growth and Spread of Concentrated Poverty, 2000 to 2008-2012 By webfeeds.brookings.edu Published On :: Thu, 31 Jul 2014 00:01:00 -0400 Downloads Appendix Tables Full Article
co America’s zip code inequality By webfeeds.brookings.edu Published On :: Mon, 21 Dec 2015 12:47:00 -0500 Inequality remained a prominent theme in public debate during 2015, likely helped by the unexpected rise and resilience of democratic socialist Bernie Sanders' run for the Democratic presidential nomination. Although the labor market continued its slow recovery, wage growth remained fairly weak—especially for middle and low earners. The upper middle class continues to pull away from the middle, not least in terms of income and wealth. But it has also become much clearer that inequality is a geographical issue, as much as a social and economic one. Whether the focus is on the more immediate matter of income inequality or the slower-burning issue of intergenerational mobility, there is huge variation between different places in the United States. Not all cities are created equal… National income trends are important, of course. But they can often disguise deep differences by place. The income required to be ‘rich,’ at least by comparison to those around you, varies significantly between different cities, for example. A household income of $100,000 puts you on almost on the top rung (around the 95th percentile) of the income ladder in Detroit. But to reach the same heights in San Jose, California, you’d need an income three times as great, according to calculations by my colleague Alan Berube. There are also very large differences in the extent of income inequality in different metropolitan areas. Using the inequality measure used in another recent paper by Berube, the ratio between incomes at the 20th percentile and the 95th percentile, shows that while some cities have large gaps between rich and poor, others look almost Scandinavian in their egalitarian distributions. Here are the 20/95 ratios for the three most equal and unequal cities in the U.S.: Intergenerational mobility varies—a lot—by place In a groundbreaking research paper in 2014, Raj Chetty and his team at the Equality of Opportunity Project at Harvard showed that rates of intergenerational income mobility also vary considerably between different cities. It was always a stretch to compare the U.S. to Denmark on this front, given the colossal differences between the countries. But such comparisons became virtually unconscionable once the variations within the U.S. become apparent. This year, Chetty and his co-author Nathaniel Hendren went a step further and a big step closer to showing a causal impact of place on the prospects for children raised in different locations. Again relying on large administrative datasets, the two scholars were able to show the variation in earnings for the folk hailing from, say, Baltimore versus Baton Rouge. Professor Chetty presented his new research at a Brookings event in June (which you can view here), just weeks after the eruption of protest and violence in Baltimore following the death of Freddie Gray. One striking finding was that the worst place in America to grow up, in terms of subsequent earnings, is Baltimore City. Critically, Chetty’s research design allows him to show that these differences do not reflect the characteristics of the people of Baltimore; but the characteristics of Baltimore itself. This downward effect on earnings is particularly bad for boys, as we highlighted in an earlier blog: In related work, Chetty and his colleagues also show that children who move to a better place see an improvement in their own earnings—and that the younger they are when they move, the bigger the impact. The children of families who move as a result of the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s Moving to Opportunity program showed sizable improvements in their own outcomes, as Jonathan Rothwell highlighted in his blog, 'Sociology’s revenge: Moving to Opportunity (MTO) revisited.' Race, place and opportunity One of the findings from Chetty’s earlier work is that race, place, and opportunity intersect in important ways. Cities with more segregation, and those with larger black populations, tend to show weaker upward mobility patterns. In order to understand the obstacles to upward mobility, policymakers have to adopt both a place-conscious (Margery Turner) and a race-conscious perspective. This policy was the subject of another Brookings event in November, with contributions from the Deputy Prime Minister of Singapore, the Governor of Delaware, and the Mayor of Newton, Mass. (The event can still be viewed here; for my highlights see this piece.) Being poor and black is generally not the same as being poor and white. Being poor in Cleveland is not the same as being poor in Charlotte. On equal opportunity: think local, act local Many states and cities are upping their game on issues of equality and opportunity, for both bad and good reasons. The bad reason is the relative inertia of the federal government. The good reason is a growing recognition that many of the levers for improving opportunity lie in the hands of institutions and agents at the state and metro level. Colorado has adopted a life-cycle opportunity framework and is pioneering efforts to integrate health and social policy. Charlotte has a high-profile taskforce (which I advise) on improving opportunity. Cincinnati has pledged to lift 10,000 children out of poverty within five years. Louisville is leading a push on school desegregation. Kalamazoo is adding greater student supports to its existing promise of free college. Baltimore’s program to reduce infant mortality has shown remarkable success. Durham, N.C. has rolled out a universal home visiting program. Many of these efforts are building on the emerging ideas around 'collective impact,' harnessing local resources of many kinds around a clearly-articulated, shared goal. Given the scholarship showing just how much particular places influences individual and broader outcomes, this is likely to be where much of the most important policy development will take place in coming years. In terms of equality—and especially equality of opportunity—we need to think local, and act local, too. Authors Richard V. Reeves Full Article
co U.S. concentrated poverty in the wake of the Great Recession By webfeeds.brookings.edu Published On :: Thu, 31 Mar 2016 00:00:00 -0400 Full Article
co How Congress can address the international dimensions of the COVID-19 response By webfeeds.brookings.edu Published On :: Wed, 15 Apr 2020 16:20:50 +0000 Congress and the Trump administration are beginning to pull together the components of a fourth COVID-19 emergency supplemental. The first package included initial emergency funding to bolster foreign assistance programs. In the third package, while containing critical funding for the safety of our diplomatic and development workers, less than half of 1 percent of the… Full Article
co Africa in the news: African governments, multilaterals address COVID-19 emergency, debt relief By webfeeds.brookings.edu Published On :: Sat, 18 Apr 2020 11:30:48 +0000 International community looks to support Africa with debt relief, health aid This week, the G-20 nations agreed to suspend bilateral debt service payments until the end of the year for 76 low-income countries eligible for the World Bank’s most concessional lending via the International Development Association. The list of eligible countries includes 40 sub-Saharan African… Full Article
co COVID-19 and debt standstill for Africa: The G-20’s action is an important first step that must be complemented, scaled up, and broadened By webfeeds.brookings.edu Published On :: Sat, 18 Apr 2020 12:40:08 +0000 African countries, like others around the world, are contending with an unprecedented shock, which merits substantial and unconditional financial assistance in the spirit of Draghi’s “whatever it takes.” The region is already facing an unprecedented synchronized and deep crisis. At all levels—health, economic, social—institutions are already overstretched. Africa was almost at a sudden stop economically… Full Article
co Funding the development and manufacturing of COVID-19 vaccines: The need for global collective action By webfeeds.brookings.edu Published On :: Fri, 24 Apr 2020 16:14:09 +0000 On February 20, the World Bank and the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI), which funds development of epidemic vaccines, cohosted a global consultation on funding the development and manufacturing of COVID-19 vaccines. We wrote a working paper to guide the consultation, which we coauthored with World Bank and CEPI colleagues. The consultation led to… Full Article
co COVID-19 has revealed a flaw in public health systems. Here’s how to fix it. By webfeeds.brookings.edu Published On :: Thu, 30 Apr 2020 16:22:44 +0000 To be capable of surveilling, preventing, and managing disease outbreaks, public health systems require trustworthy, community-embedded public health workers who are empowered to undertake their tasks as professionals. The world has not invested in this cadre of health workers, despite the lessons from Ebola. In a new paper, my co-authors and I discuss why, and… Full Article
co The unreal dichotomy in COVID-19 mortality between high-income and developing countries By webfeeds.brookings.edu Published On :: Tue, 05 May 2020 16:23:05 +0000 Here’s a striking statistic: Low-income and lower-middle income countries (LICs and LMICs) account for almost half of the global population but they make up only 2 percent of the global death toll attributed to COVID-19. We think this difference is unreal. Views about the severity of the pandemic have evolved a lot since its outbreak… Full Article
co Who’s afraid of COVID-19? By webfeeds.brookings.edu Published On :: Wed, 06 May 2020 15:30:02 +0000 Humans are bad at assessing risk even in the best of times. During a pandemic—when the disease is unfamiliar, people are isolated and stressed, and the death toll is rising—our risk perception becomes even more distorted, with fear often overwhelming reason. This is a recipe for disastrous policy mistakes. To be sure, the danger posed… Full Article
co Figures of the week: The costs of financing Africa’s response to COVID-19 By webfeeds.brookings.edu Published On :: Thu, 07 May 2020 16:21:13 +0000 Last month’s edition of the International Monetary Fund (IMF)’s biannual Regional Economic Outlook for Sub-Saharan Africa, which discusses economic developments and prospects for the region, pays special attention to the financial channels through which COVID-19 has—and will—impact the economic growth of the region. Notably, the authors of the report reduced their GDP growth estimates from… Full Article
co Republican-controlled states might be Trump’s best hope to reform health care By webfeeds.brookings.edu Published On :: Thu, 17 Aug 2017 10:03:57 +0000 Early on in this year’s health care debate, we wrote about how the interests of Republican governors and their federal co-partisans in Congress would not necessarily line up. Indeed, as Congress deliberated options to “repeal and replace” the Affordable Care Act, several GOP governors came out against the various proposals. Nevada Governor Brian Sandoval, for… Full Article
co Greece’s recovery bet By webfeeds.brookings.edu Published On :: Wed, 11 Dec 2019 21:50:39 +0000 The victory of liberal-conservatives in the snap elections on July 7 with 39.6 percent of the votes, sealed the completion of Greece's transformative journey from radical populism back to a systemic normality. The economic climate has significantly improved—although at odds with the one prevailing in Europe (Figure 1a and 1b)—however, it remains to be seen… Full Article
co Cyber runs: How a cyber attack could affect U.S. financial institutions By webfeeds.brookings.edu Published On :: Tue, 18 Jun 2019 17:53:49 +0000 Cyber risks to financial stability have received significant attention from policy makers. These risks are worsened by the increasing diversity of perpetrators—including state and non-state actors, cyber terrorists, and “hacktivists”—who are not necessarily motivated by financial gain. In fact, for some actors, the potential of exploiting a cyber event to inject systemic risk into our… Full Article
co How risk-sharing policies affect the costs and risks of public pension plans By webfeeds.brookings.edu Published On :: Mon, 12 Aug 2019 14:52:12 +0000 Risk sharing is an important component of today's public pension system, as the state and local governments strive to balance growing pension costs and risks as well as the competitiveness of compensation to public employees. In traditional public sector defined benefit (DB) plans, the employer bears nearly all investment risk, longevity risk, and inflation risk… Full Article
co How high are infrastructure costs? Analyzing Interstate construction spending By webfeeds.brookings.edu Published On :: Mon, 19 Aug 2019 11:49:25 +0000 Although the United States spends over $400 billion per year on infrastructure, there is a consensus that infrastructure investment has been on the decline and with it the quality of U.S. infrastructure. Politicians across the ideological spectrum have responded with calls for increased spending on infrastructure to repair this infrastructure deficit. The issue of infrastructure… Full Article
co The welfare effects of peer entry in the accommodation market: The case of Airbnb By webfeeds.brookings.edu Published On :: Tue, 15 Oct 2019 13:02:33 +0000 The Internet has greatly reduced entry and advertising costs across a variety of industries. Peer-to-peer marketplaces such as Airbnb, Uber, and Etsy currently provide a platform for small and part-time peer providers to sell their goods and services. In this paper, Chiara Farronato of Harvard Business School and Andrey Fradkin of Boston University study the… Full Article
co Stronger financial stability governance leads to greater use of the countercyclical capital buffer By webfeeds.brookings.edu Published On :: Fri, 17 Jan 2020 07:00:27 +0000 Since the global financial crisis, countries have been setting up new governance arrangements to implement macroprudential policies. Using data for 58 countries, Rochelle Edge of the Federal Reserve Board and Nellie Liang of the Hutchins Center on Fiscal & Monetary Policy at the Brookings Institution look at whether governance, including multi-agency financial stability committees (FSCs),… Full Article
co How should we measure the digital economy? By webfeeds.brookings.edu Published On :: Tue, 21 Jan 2020 14:25:45 +0000 Over the past 40 years, we’ve seen an explosion of digital goods and services: Google, Facebook, LinkedIn, Skype, Wikipedia, online courses, maps, messaging, music, and all the other apps on your smartphone. Because many internet services are free, they largely go uncounted in official measures of economic activity such as GDP and Productivity (which is… Full Article
co Financial conditions and GDP growth-at-risk By webfeeds.brookings.edu Published On :: Fri, 07 Feb 2020 20:30:24 +0000 Loose financial conditions that increase GDP growth in the near-term may come with a tradeoff for higher risks to future economic growth, according to a new paper from Brookings Senior Fellow Nellie Liang, and Tobias Adrian, Federico Grinberg, and Sheheryar Malik from the International Monetary Fund. The authors study 11 advanced economies to develop a… Full Article
co A comparison of deflators for telecommunications services output By webfeeds.brookings.edu Published On :: Wed, 11 Mar 2020 14:57:09 +0000 The telecommunications services industry has experienced significant technological progress yet the industry’s output statistics do not reflect this. Between 2010 and 2017, data usage in the UK expanded by nearly 2,300 percent, yet real Gross Value Added for the industry fell by 8 percent between 2010 and 2016, while the sector experienced one of the… Full Article
co Jennifer Vey on economic inequality and poverty in Baltimore By webfeeds.brookings.edu Published On :: Fri, 01 May 2015 13:00:00 -0400 Amid anger and protests in Baltimore following the death of 25-year-old Freddie Gray from a spinal injury sustained after being arrested by police, much of the discussion has focused on the poverty-ridden neighborhood in which Gray grew up (Sandtown-Winchester, on the city’s west side). Conversation has centered around the economic disadvantages that Gray, his peers, and so many young adults are facing in certain neighborhoods throughout Baltimore and in other U.S. metro areas. Metropolitan Policy Program Fellow Jennifer Vey spoke yesterday with CNN’s Maggie Lake on the poverty and economic inequality prevalent in Baltimore—particularly in impoverished neighborhoods like that of Gray’s and throughout the country. In the interview, Vey says that, “it’s important to look at the events of the last few days in Baltimore against a backdrop of poverty, of entrenched joblessness, of social disconnectedness that’s prevalent in many Baltimore neighborhoods…but that isn’t unique to Baltimore, and I think that’s a really important point here, that we really need to put these issues in a much broader national context. “I think what this really indicates is we’ve been operating under an economic model for quite some time that clearly isn’t working for large numbers of people in this country.” Vey also discusses how we can work to break the cycle: “What we’re really focused on at Brookings is trying to understand how cities and metropolitan areas can really be trying to grow the types of advanced industries that create good jobs, that create more jobs, and also focusing on how then, people can connect back to that economy. What can we do to make sure that more people are participating in that economic growth as it happens?” She goes on to say that investment in education, workforce programs, and infrastructure are all key in incorporating everyone into a prosperous economy. To learn more about poverty in Baltimore, read this piece by Karl Alexander. Authors Randi Brown Full Article
co Turkey after the coup attempt By webfeeds.brookings.edu Published On :: Wed, 20 Jul 2016 09:30:00 -0400 Event Information July 20, 20169:30 AM - 11:00 AM EDTFalk AuditoriumBrookings Institution1775 Massachusetts Avenue NWWashington, DC 20036 Register for the EventThe failed coup in Turkey on July 15 to 16, organized by factions within the Turkish military in an attempt to overthrow the government of President Erdoğan, represents both a victory and a new trial for Turkish democracy. Although the Turkish citizenry brought the country back from the brink of anarchy and civil war, many analysts see last week’s events as a consequence of the political instability and discord that has been mounting for years as Erdoğan has consolidated powers, marginalized the opposition, and redefined Turkey’s democracy. How will the president react in the aftermath of the coup? Will the democratic backsliding intensify, or can the thwarted coup offer new opportunity for reconciling the deeply-polarized nation? The upheaval and political instability in Turkey also holds significant implications for Turkey’s foreign policy and the fate of a neighboring region already in turmoil from the war in Syria and insecurity in Iraq. The West desperately needs a stable, democratic, and predictable partner in its NATO-ally Turkey to address the many challenges besetting the region and to fight the Islamic State (or ISIS). How will recent events affect regional stability and Turkey’s cooperation with the West on security issues, including the resettlement of Syrian refugees? What does the failed coup mean for the coalition against ISIS engagement in Syria? On July 20, the Foreign Policy program (FP) at Brookings hosted a panel discussion to consider these questions and other domestic and international consequences of the coup attempt in Turkey. Brookings Senior Fellow and Director of the Center on the United States and Europe Fiona Hill introduced and moderated a wide-ranging conversation featuring FP Senior Fellows Shadi Hamid, Kemal Kirişci, Michael O'Hanlon, and Ömer Taşpınar. After the discussion, the speakers took questions from the audience. Video Turkey coup attempt was a shockInstitutional collapse of Turkey unprecedentedDisaster averted in failed Turkey coupIncirlik Air Base not irreplaceableTurkey after the coup attempt: Implications for Turkish democracy, foreign policy, and the future of the Syrian War Audio Turkey after the coup attempt: Implications for Turkish democracy, foreign policy, and the future of the Syrian War Transcript Transcript (.pdf) Event Materials 20160720_turkey_coup_transcript Full Article
co COVID-19’s essential workers deserve hazard pay. Here’s why—and how it should work By webfeeds.brookings.edu Published On :: Thu, 09 Apr 2020 19:09:41 +0000 Photos from top left: Courtney Meadows, Sabrina Hopps, Yvette Beatty, and Matt Milzman “We are tired,” said Yvette Beatty, a 60-year-old home health worker at an assisted living center in Philadelphia. “We are scared. Our prayers are running out. How much can we pray?” 》Explore the COVID-19 frontline heroes series: Grocery workers With “a little,… Full Article
co Meet the COVID-19 frontline heroes: Grocery workers By webfeeds.brookings.edu Published On :: Fri, 10 Apr 2020 16:27:57 +0000 Full Article
co Can public policy incentivize staying at home during COVID-19? By webfeeds.brookings.edu Published On :: Thu, 23 Apr 2020 12:30:59 +0000 More than a quarter of the world’s people are in quarantine or lockdown in response to the coronavirus (COVID-19). Tens of millions are required to stay at home, with many of them laid off or on unpaid leave. Given the highly contagious nature of the virus and the absence of a vaccination or cure, the… Full Article
co The next COVID-19 relief bill must include massive aid to states, especially the hardest-hit areas By webfeeds.brookings.edu Published On :: Tue, 28 Apr 2020 15:32:57 +0000 Amid rising layoffs and rampant uncertainty during the COVID-19 pandemic, it’s a good thing that Democrats in the House of Representatives say they plan to move quickly to advance the next big coronavirus relief package. Especially important is the fact that Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) seems determined to build the next package around a generous infusion… Full Article
co American workers’ safety net is broken. The COVID-19 crisis is a chance to fix it. By webfeeds.brookings.edu Published On :: Thu, 30 Apr 2020 19:37:44 +0000 The COVID-19 pandemic is forcing some major adjustments to many aspects of our daily lives that will likely remain long after the crisis recedes: virtual learning, telework, and fewer hugs and handshakes, just to name a few. But in addition, let’s hope the crisis also drives a permanent overhaul of the nation’s woefully inadequate worker… Full Article
co How to increase financial support during COVID-19 by investing in worker training By webfeeds.brookings.edu Published On :: Wed, 06 May 2020 17:46:07 +0000 It took just two weeks to exhaust one of the largest bailout packages in American history. Even the most generous financial support has limits in a recession. However, I am optimistic that a pandemic-fueled recession and mass underemployment could be an important opportunity to upskill the American workforce through loans for vocational training. Financially supporting… Full Article
co We can’t recover from a coronavirus recession without helping young workers By webfeeds.brookings.edu Published On :: Thu, 07 May 2020 20:34:14 +0000 The recent economic upheaval caused by the COVID-19 pandemic is unmatched by anything in recent memory. Social distancing has resulted in massive layoffs and furloughs in retail, hospitality, and entertainment, and millions of the affected workers—restaurant servers, cooks, housekeepers, retail clerks, and many others—were already at the bottom of the wage spectrum. The economic catastrophe of… Full Article
co "The Vital Center": A Federal-State Compact to Renew the Great Lakes Region By webfeeds.brookings.edu Published On :: Mon, 01 Oct 2007 12:00:00 -0400 Brookings John Austin provided Great Lakes regional economic context for a forum of Ohio and Pennsylvania business and civic leaders convened by Congressmen Jason Altmire (PA), and Tim Ryan (OH) to develop strategies for growing the bi-state regional economy. Downloads Download Authors John C. Austin Full Article