Why are some U.S. cities successful, while others are not? Empirical evidence from machine learning

The U.S. population has become increasingly concentrated in large metropolitan areas. However, there are striking differences in between the performances of big cities: some of them have been very successful and have been able to pull away from the rest, while others have stagnated or even declined....

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Azzopardi, Damien
Other Authors: Fareed, Fozan, Lenain, Patrick, Sutherland, Douglas
Format: eBook
Language:English
Published: Paris OECD Publishing 2020
Series:OECD Economics Department Working Papers
Subjects:
Online Access:
Collection: OECD Books and Papers - Collection details see MPG.ReNa
LEADER 02786nma a2200277 u 4500
001 EB002075119
003 EBX01000000000000001215209
005 00000000000000.0
007 cr|||||||||||||||||||||
008 220928 ||| eng
100 1 |a Azzopardi, Damien 
245 0 0 |a Why are some U.S. cities successful, while others are not? Empirical evidence from machine learning  |h Elektronische Ressource  |c Damien, Azzopardi ... [et al] 
260 |a Paris  |b OECD Publishing  |c 2020 
300 |a 21 p 
653 |a Economics 
653 |a United States 
700 1 |a Fareed, Fozan 
700 1 |a Lenain, Patrick 
700 1 |a Sutherland, Douglas 
041 0 7 |a eng  |2 ISO 639-2 
989 |b OECD  |a OECD Books and Papers 
490 0 |a OECD Economics Department Working Papers 
024 8 |a /10.1787/7f77c2e7-en 
856 4 0 |a oecd-ilibrary.org  |u https://doi.org/10.1787/7f77c2e7-en  |x Verlag  |3 Volltext 
082 0 |a 330 
520 |a The U.S. population has become increasingly concentrated in large metropolitan areas. However, there are striking differences in between the performances of big cities: some of them have been very successful and have been able to pull away from the rest, while others have stagnated or even declined. The main objective of this paper is to characterize U.S. metropolitan areas according to their labor-market performance: which metropolitan areas are struggling and falling behind? Which ones are flourishing? Which ones are staying resilient by adapting to shocks? We rely on an unsupervised machine learning technique called Hierarchical Agglomerative Clustering (HAC) to conduct this empirical investigation. The data comes from a number of sources including the new Job-to-Job (J2J) flows dataset from the Census Bureau, which reports the near universe of job movements in and out of employment at the metropolitan level. We characterize the fate of metropolitan areas by tracking their job mobility rate, unemployment rate, income growth, population increase, net change in job-to-job mobility and GDP growth. Our results indicate that the 372 metropolitan areas under examination can be categorized into four statistically distinct groups: booming areas (67), prosperous mega metropolitan areas (99), resilient areas (149) and distressed metropolitan areas (57). The results show that areas that are doing well are predominantly located in the south and the west. The main features of their success have revolved around embracing digital technologies, adopting local regulations friendly to job mobility and business creation, avoiding strict rules on land-use and housing market, and improving the wellbeing of the city's population. These results highlight that cities adopting well-targeted policies can accelerate the return to growth after a shock