Sometimes those in the creative communities movement will get a skeptical response from leaders who believe in "real" economic development that focuses primarily on traditional infrastructure projects - roads, buildings, business parks, etc. Usually these leaders have not fully grasped the reality of an incredibly mobile, flexible, high-tech creative workforce that more often than not makes their choice on where to live and work based on its "quality of place."
More research is coming in on this topic, and it keeps reinforcing this fact: The fuel of the new economy is highly educated, highly skilled talent, and that talent wants to live where they can enjoy cultural, entertainment and outdoor amenities while they pursue their creative work. (Creative in this context means research, technology, engineering and other intellectual-property building endeavors in addition to art, culture and media.)
Place matters. Image matters.
The latest evidence is from the Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia, not exactly an institution you would think of as cutting edge or progressive. A paper published this month by Fed economists Gerald A. Carlino and Albert Saiz looked at 150 metropolitan areas around the United States and found that those rich in what they called "consumption amenities" - the things that make a city delightful, such as parks, historic sites, museums, and beaches - "disproportionally attracted highly educated individuals and experienced faster housing price appreciation."
From the Boston Globe:
In other words, urban growth and prosperity have less to do with transportation links and industrial infrastructure than the patterns that govern behavior at a social mixer: Beautiful and charming cities draw a crowd, while the featureless and unattractive wilt like wallflowers.
The Globe article suggests that these findings should factor into how we spend Obama's forthcoming infrastructure stimulus money. Is it really all about "shovel ready" old school infrastructure projects - roads, bridges, etc. - which most agree are long overdue for our country. Or should it also be about stuff that makes a place cool to live in?
"Cool" doesn't seem to fly in most political circles, especially when it comes time to justify spending the public's tax money. More often than not it gets labeled as "pork." However, our leaders would do well to consider this latest evidence and think about its implications for West Virginia's budget allocations for parks, trails, arts, culture and, of course, education.
Again from the Globe article:
Social scientists had long studied the growth of cities, but in the 1990s they started to notice something puzzling: Cities like Seattle and Austin were booming as new-economy hubs for no apparent reason other than the fact that the people responsible for the greatest innovations in high technology had chosen to live in places that were bike-friendly, had good music scenes, and allowed them to show up to business lunches in jeans.
West Virginia has a lot to build on this area. Outdoor beauty is a strength that we can leverage, but only if we invest in the related amenities that bring it all together to make West Virginia an attractive location for the young, talented, entrepreneurial individuals that our state so desperately needs.
Skepticism Results in Underutilized Cultural Amenities
Several areas across the state, such as Fayetteville and Berkeley Springs, have been leveraging local assets (e.g., outdoor experiences, arts, theater) effectively to improve the quality of their social environments.
However, many local officials have difficulty envisioning how their communities could foster economic development through anything other than traditional industries. For the leaders that do choose to buck status quo development approaches, they sometimes experience resistance from their constituents. This creates paradoxical situations in which nothing happens.
The more community members and leaders begin talking amongst themselves, establishing agreed upon strategies to maximize their local environments in non-traditional fashions, the more progress can be made.
Too often in West Virginia, we maintain skepticism and remain closed-minded to the ideas of others. We must begin breaking down those barriers. We must learn to trust each other through mutually-beneficial arrangements. We must take on the political machines that uphold mediocrity. Otherwise, positive change will continue to occur at a snail's pace.
- J. Keeling
Pretty and fun
I was just driving through South Charleston and thinking about this sort of thing. South Charleston's downtown isn't in too bad shape really, except that the storefronts are exceptionally ugly. I mean, really, really awful. Many people TRY to do something good ("I'm going to fix this place up... paint and get a new sign") but they end up making it worse because of (how can I say this without sounding like an elitist pig? Can't? Oh well.) a simple lack of taste. The only solution that I know of is strict zoning with all storefronts needing to pass an architectural review board such as we have in the Village District of Charleston. (Does Lewisburg have similar zoning restrictions?) In a few years, South Charleston could be a showplace. BTW... downtown Huntington needs to do this to expand on the success of Pullman Square.
Post new comment