The Urbanization of America:
Evolution of America’s Cities and the Role of Urban Policy
March 7, 2013
The
evolution of cities in the United States was shaped by a confluence of economic
opportunity, immigration, federal urban policy, as well as racial and ethnic
tensions. The urbanization that occurred over time was direct result of the
convergence of cultural norms that developed alongside economic growth
opportunities and broader migration patterns.
Today, urbanization in America is best described by Richard Florida’s
notion of the creative class--cities that flourish focus on attracting
economically ambitious individuals with advanced degrees, thus creating
sustainable neighborhoods. Historically,
technology has played a central role, influencing population movements and
facilitating the transportation of people and goods across greater distances.
This was first evident in the Industrial Revolution.
Industrialization
Urbanization
in the 19th century was facilitated by industrialization and
technological advancements. The
production of steel was vital to growth of industrialized cities. Steel and
concrete was produced in mass, used for construction of large buildings, and transported
across rail and waterways. The advancement in mass production created jobs and
economic opportunity in cities across the country such as Pittsburgh and the
Midwestern United States.
The advancement in transportation
technology enabled the urbanization of cities as industrial manufacturing used
the rail and waterways for the sale of goods across greater distances. The continental railroad system was built
out, resulting in an increase from approximately 9,000 miles of track in 1950
to nearly 260,000 miles of track in 1900.[1] Cities such as Chicago created jobs and grew
at breakneck speed as agricultural and manufactured goods could be produced in
one location and moved using rail and waterways. The Erie Canal connected Chicago to the Great
Lakes and where goods were ultimately sold in New York, the eastern continental
U.S. or even Europe. Geographic location
at the intersection of waterways or a large port was an important factor in the
growth of cities during the Industrial Revolution. The economic growth in cities that ensued from
industrialization was dependent on a growing population and labor supply.
Immigration
Immigration and the supply of cheap labor
were instrumental in the growth of cities in the 19th and 20th
centuries. At the start of the 19th
century, New York had just 60,000 residents, compared with 3.4 million by
1900. According to Judd and Swanstrom,
33.5 million foreigners migrated to America between 1820 and 1919. Population growth was needed to support the
industrialized economy as well as finance trade and investments. The urban community was formed among class
conflict between social and ethnic identity from immigration. For example, working-class immigrants were
found to be segregated, often in slums in close proximity to downtown or near
wharfs.[2] The segregation of immigrant communities was
commonplace-- new migrants found familiarity among people that spoke the same
language. Migrants from Ireland and
Germany were among the most prevalent groups that came to the United
States. New York and Chicago were noted
for having over 80 percent of the population made up of first and second
generation immigrants in 1870. As
populations grew, so did the need for basic services such as police, fire
protection, water and sewer facilities.
More recently, the rise of illegal
immigration has created cultural and ethnic tension in places such as Arizona
and Alabama. The legislation passed in
these states has required law enforcement to check for proper documentation,
threatening jail time in the event that the legal (or illegal) resident does
not demonstrate their ability to be a ‘lawfully present.’ The implication of
this law is that legal Hispanic residents will no longer trust or respect the
legal process if they are subject to unnecessary harassment. The paradox created by immigration in urban
areas is evident in the need for population and economic growth –housing
consumption, labor, and services are demanded and sought by new migrants. The conflict
arises when existing residents feel their political power and cultural norms
threatened by the influx of new residents.
The Great Migration
Prior to the Great Depression, a
period of internal migration among blacks from the South to the industrialized
North was referred to as “the Great Migration.” The blacks sought many of the
same opportunities that foreigners were seeking – economic opportunity and
freedom from racial persecution, among others.
The racially charged criminal justice system in the South and routine
lynching of Blacks encouraged the Great Migration north. Even though economic opportunity was abundant
in the North, it was not equal and Blacks still faced barriers in housing and
employment. Blacks were not allowed in
the most skilled occupations, nor were they permitted to live in exclusively
white neighborhoods. Restrictive
covenants to prevent the sale of real estate to Blacks were widely accepted
prior to 1948. The breakthrough case, Shelley v. Kraemer, ruled that
restrictive covenants to prohibit the sale of real estate based on race were in
violation of the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th amendment. Despite legislative and judicial victories
for African Americans, the presence of racial tension was a persistent social
issue in urban areas throughout the 20th century.[3]
“White flight” was a term propagated
by the movement of whites to the suburbs in the 1950s and 1960s. The population explosion of whites to suburbs
was fed in part by the movement of the black population into the inner cities
and partly by the demand for housing from returning GIs. Access to credit was plentiful (but not
equal) with the creation of the Federal Housing Administration and the Veterans
Administration.[4] The policy of the housing agencies was to
focus construction in neighborhoods outside the inner city. Suburbanization became engrained in society,
with a significant arrangement of racial segregation. According to Darden, migration of Blacks to
suburbia was concentrated in areas with existing minority populations, all but
shut out of newer communities. The
flight to the suburbs among the African American population happened later and
continued into the 1970s. Darden noted
that suburbs occupied by Blacks were characterized by being closer to the
central city, high in density and more impoverished than similar neighborhoods
occupied by whites. The migration of
whites to the suburbs left inner cities with a disproportionate share of poor
residents in need of services, with little tax base to cover the costs. Discrimination
in America’s cities was not impacted by legislation until the Civil Rights Act
of 1964, the Housing and Urban Development Act of 1968 and the Fair Housing Act
of 1968.
Urban Policy
Urban Policy was a result of the
geopolitical and demographic shift to the cities. The interaction of politics,
policy and people in an urban setting precipitated the need for services. The competition between rural and urban areas
for finite resources at the state and federal level was at the heart of the
urban policy debate. However,
representation based on population was not equal. Until 1964, rural areas used legislatures to
their advantage, drawing districts that were inherently unequal in population,
with proportioned representation as high as 40-to-1. In Wesberry
v. Sanders, the Supreme Court mandated that Congressional districts be
approximately equal in representation.
Going one step further, the Supreme Court also applied this ruling to
state legislatures in Reynolds v. Sims. These cases drastically altered the
legislative representation of rural and urban areas. Moreover, the cases improved the political
capital needed to conduct urban policy at the federal and state-level.
The urbanization of America’s cities
was significantly impacted by federal policy.
FDR’s New Deal policies had a substantial impact on restoring confidence
in America’s cities following the Great Depression. The National Industrial Recovery Act of 1933
and the Public Housing Act of 1937 was focused on improving housing conditions
for low-income families. The effect of
Roosevelt’s policies was that it solidified a Democratic majority in the inner
cities through relief and public works projects. The overarching goal of LBJ’s Great Society
programs was to cure social conflict with policies on civil rights, welfare and
education, among others. The crowning
achievements of Johnson’s administration were the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the
Economic Opportunity Act of 1964, and the Head Start Program.[5]
In the Carter administration, urban
policy was concentrated in attracting jobs to distressed cities. The urban trends faced by the administration
was perpetuating on a multitude of levels - dealing with an unequal share of
crime, poverty and social issues, coupled with declining tax base as middle
income workers sought refuge in the suburbs.
In the 1980s, these problems were compounded by the Reagan
administration’s policy of governing urban policy through states and local
governments.[6] According to Wolman, The Reagan policy was
fixated upon a market approach, emphasizing economic growth at an aggregate
national-level. In Washington Abandons the Cities, Caraley hypothesized that Reagan
and Bush policies had a profound effect on urbanization-- “accelerated the
drift of large cities, especially the older ones of the East and Middle West,
into underserviced, violence ridden, crack-infested, homeless-burdened,
bankruptcy-skirting slum ghettos.” However, the unequal economic growth across
geographic regions and within cities was persistent, some areas improved while
others deteriorated from outward population and job migration.
Role of Gentrification
More current
developments in the urbanization of America have focused on the role of gentrification
and the rise of the “creative class”. Michelle
Boyd suggested that mid-century urbanization had the effect of centralizing
African Americans in impoverished communities and stripping them of resources,
thus laying the groundwork for gentrification through racial ordering. The ‘downtown renaissance’ that has occurred
in recent years is broadly based on condo and warehouse loft-developments,
often using tax breaks to finance new housing construction. The new urbanization
model is based on attracting the demographic of young professionals, known as
the creative class. The creative class
is a term proliferated by Richard Florida, used to describe the upcoming
generation of artists, hipsters and young professionals whose tax base and
presence is vital to creating sustainable neighborhoods and new urban
development. Florida suggests that the
new way to attract business is to focus on attracting the human capital. He uses San Francisco, Seattle and Austin as
prime examples of cities that have been able to attract the creative
class. The inevitable effect of this
development pattern is that long-time residents and low-income renters often
become displaced, evicted, or subject to eminent domain land acquisitions as
gentrification takes place. Balancing the
needs of long-time residents and creating a sustainable neighborhood for the
creative class builds a cultural conflict between residents of drastically different
socioeconomic backgrounds. These
conflict and development patterns are likely to persist based on the growing
inequality and separation of classes that exist in the U.S. today.
Conclusion
The
evolution of America’s urbanization has been heavily influenced by technology,
socioeconomic status, race and ethnicity, immigration and the political
process. The interaction of people,
politics and demographics has influenced urban policy in the executive,
legislative and judicial branches. In
the 19th and early 20th centuries, urbanization was
concentrated on industrialization and transportation technologies that allowed
the sale of goods across greater distances, setting the stage for a globalized
economy. The 20th century was
marked by the Great Depression, the flight to suburbia and the deteriorating
quality of city life. Current developments
have focused on revitalizing downtown areas and attracting the creative class
necessary for cities to prosper in the 21st century. The interaction among demographic and
socioeconomic shifts in population migration often creates cultural tension
among long-time and new residents. Furthermore, rising income inequality in
combination with cultural conflict create a significant challenge for
urbanization in the 21st century.
Works Cited
Boyd, Michelle. "Defensive Development: The Role
of Racial Conflict in Gentrification." Urban Affairs Review, July
2008.
Caraley, Demetrios. "Washington Abandons the
Cities." Political Science Quarterly , 1992.
CQ Researcher. Urban Issues. Sage, 2013.
Darden, Joe T. "Black Residential Segregation Since
the 1948 Shelley v. Kraemer Decision." Journal of Black Studies,
July 1995.
Florida, Richard. The Rise of the Creative Class.
Philadelphia: Basic Books, 2002.
Judd, Dennis, and Todd Swanstrom. City Politics:
The Political Economy of Urban America. Glenview, IL: Pearson, 2012.
Lichter, Daniel, and Leif Jensen. "Rurarl
America in Transition: Poverty and Welfare at the Turn of the 21st
Century." Conference on Poverty, Welfare and Food Assistance, May
2000.
Rich, Michael. "Riot and Reason: Crafting an
Urban Policy Response." Publius, Summer 1993.
Wolman, Harold. "The Reagan Urban Policy and its
Impacts." Urban Affairs Quarterly, 1986.
[1]
Competition for railroad development was intense, leading to an over investment
by municipalities as bond defaults and bankruptcies became prevalent. The railroad companies issued stock and
bonds, as well as securing significant subsidies from state and local
governments.
[2]
Historically, sailors and dock workers were thought to be at the bottom of the
social pyramid.
[3] Riots
following the assassination of Martin Luther King, Jr. were a result of the
racial tension between whites and Blacks.
The tension is predicated on the basis of power and representation in
the legislative and judicial branches- often disproportionately in favor of the
white majority. This was and remains
evident along socioeconomic status. More
recently, the acquittal of four white L.A. police officers in the beating of
Rodney King led to rioting in 1992.
[4]
The Veterans administration home loan program was authorized in 1944, while the
Federal Housing Administration was created a decade earlier.
[5] It
is noted in the literature that LBJ’s Great Society and FDR’s New Deal were
successful not only because they benefitted residents of urban areas, but also
the whole nation.
[6] In
Riot and Reason: Crafting an Urban Policy
Response, Michael Rich noted a 50% reduction of federal aid to urban areas
during Reagan’s first term as president.
