Would You Rather Be Pittsburgh Or Detroit?
Photo Credit: _G2 on Flickr
Turns out it’s Pittsburgh.
The Washington Post and the New York Times have been exploring Pittsburgh and Detroit and the differences and lessons from both experiences. These urban experiences are case studies in the contrast between urban areas taking advantage of next generation thinking, and those trapped in old thinking.
The New York Times’ article is a powerful profile of Pittsburgh:
This is what life in one American city looks like after an industrial collapse:
Unemployment is 5.5 percent, far below the national average. While housing prices sank nearly everywhere in the last year, they rose here. Wages are also up. Foreclosures are comparatively uncommon.
A generation ago, the steel industry that built Pittsburgh and still dominated its economy entered its death throes. In the early 1980s, the city was being talked about the way Detroit is now. Its very survival was in question.
Deindustrialization in Pittsburgh was a protracted and painful experience. Yet it set the stage for an economy that is the envy of many recession-plagued communities, particularly those where the automobile industry is struggling for its life.
“If people are looking for hope, it’s here,” said Sabina Deitrick, an urban studies expert at the University of Pittsburgh. “You can have a decent economy over a long period of restructuring.”
Pittsburgh’s transition has been proceeding for decades in fits and starts, benefiting some areas much more than others. A development plan begun in the 1980s successfully used the local universities to pour state funds into technology research.
Entrepreneurship bloomed in computer software and biotechnology. Two of the biggest sectors are education and health care, among the most resistant to downturns. Prominent companies are doing well. Westinghouse Electric, a builder of nuclear reactors, expects to hire 350 new employees a year for the foreseeable future. And commercial construction, plunging in most places, is still thriving partly because of big projects like a casino and an arena for the Penguins hockey team.
The question is whether Pittsburgh can serve as a model for Detroit and other cities in the industrial Midwest as they grapple with large-scale cutbacks in the automotive industry. Even with the federal government’s $17.4 billion bailout, General Motors, Chrysler and Ford are expected to continue shrinking.
John Craig writing in the Washington Post chimes in with his own thoughts:
So when I think about the lessons the Steel City’s 30-year economic transformation may hold for Detroit, another town built on an industry beaten by competition and confronting bankruptcy, I have to say that the first and hardest lesson for the Motor City is this: Fundamental change will be much longer in coming than you can imagine. You’ll survive. The automakers, bailed out or not, will shrink and adapt to a new future and a new reality. The city will remake itself in whatever ways it can. But there’ll be no “getting over” your past, only moving beyond it.
Organizing and managing contraction is not an activity we Americans know much about. But you’re stuck with the job, Detroit, and it will go better for you if you’re clear-eyed about who you are and where you’ve come from.
While these articles are limited to two cities, the lessons here are applicable to cities across America. There are valuable lessons in Pittsburgh’s experience for cities looking to survive this period of collapse and contraction. The most important thing is to remember the core strengths of your own community and accentuate them, while embracing change, using nimble management models, and fostering creativity.
