Is the creative class the chicken or the egg?
In deciding how we should plan for increases in population and jobs, we are forced to confront a worrying uncertainty: do smart people generate a thriving economy, or does a thriving economy attract smart people? While both are no doubt true, when we are trying to plan for our future, it matters which one comes first.
This question arises in the context of debates about whether the provision of amenities will attract the kinds of people who will interact with others in ways that increase productivity and economic growth. From the perspective of Richard Florida, a critical mass of the kinds of people he defines as the creative class, facilitates the sharing of knowledge and key components of both human and cultural capital in ways that not only stimulate innovation, but also attract other members of that class to the community. Members of the creative class are said to be attracted to places that have high levels of diversity and tolerance.
Edward Glaeser also believes that amenities, including the weather play an important role in attracting highly skilled workers. However, climate and consumer oriented amenities are not enough to overcome the attraction of an already established community of peers, such as those that are more likely to be found in economically thriving urban centers.
Of course, more structurally oriented arguments emphasize the role played by the demand for labor generated by an expanding productive sector, perhaps one that reflects a regional competitive advantage. Critics argue that amenities are never enough to attract the creative class—there has to be a supply of well-paying jobs.
Unfortunately, because because economic development in urban areas is generally not the product of well-designed experiments involving random assignment, we are really unable to determine with any confidence what comes first in the causal chain.
Consider the fact that Tucson once ranked third among mid-sized US cities on Florida”s creativity index, but Tucsonans continue to be anxious about our abilility to attract and retain young professionals in our community. Despite the fact that many of our highly marketable graduates had developed their knowledge and skills at the University of Arizona, and despite their familiarity with the unique diversity, tolerance, and natural and cultural amenities of the region, their expectations regarding the possibility of their finding a good job in the region have actually been quite low. The loss of this valuable resource is referred to as a brain drain, and our performance in this area may explain Tucson”s recent decline in creativity rankings.
Because colleges and universities, especially institutions of the first rank like UA, are so important to the development and support of a creative economy, we need to find ways to make the most of what they have to offer. While we may never discover which comes first, if we don”t find ways to partner more closely with this great university to help generate more attractive employment opportunities, we can be sure that our rankings will continue to decline.