NewGeography.com blogs
American and European planners have long sought to improve the "jobs-housing" balance, seeking to place residents and jobs within walking or cycling distance. Of course, planners don't place people anywhere. Not surprisingly, their efforts have largely failed, from the new towns of the London area, where people travel about as far to work as anywhere else, to fabled failures of Stockholm, where high rise housing close to suburban employment centers now houses migrants who tend to have far lower incomes than native Swedes.
In the time of Mao Zedong, China had achieved perhaps the ultimate in the jobs-housing balance. Companies provided housing for their workers, who were able to walk to their jobs in the same compound. However, the economic reforms instituted by Deng Xiaoping and his successors has led to an abandonment of this model (Danwei housing) and millions of Chinese households have been lifted out of poverty into affluence. Most Chinese households do not aspire to "living on top" of the factory or office.
Foxconn (Hon Hai Precision Industry), one of the world's largest companies, is among the last to provide large amounts of housing to its workers. In its Shenzhen "Long Hua Campus," which covers only one square mile, Foxconn employs 450,000 people (Figure). They are housed on the campus or nearby in company provided units.
Shenzhen directly borders Hong Kong and Dongguan, which borders the Guangzhou-Foshan urban area. All together, these contiguous Pearl River Delta urban areas, along with others down the western shore to Macao have nearly 50 million people, more than live in any geographic area of the same size anywhere else in the world. These Guangdong province urban areas, along with the special economic regions of Hong Kong and Macau have become one of the world's leading manufacturing and export areas. Shenzhen itself has been estimated to have a population of between 10 million and 15 million, depending on how the migrant workers are estimated. Shenzhen and other major manufacturing centers of China are estimated to house as many as 200 millions migrants from other parts of China (especially rural areas), coming to work in jobs that pay far higher wages than can be earned at home.
 Foxconn itself is the world's largest manufacturer of consumer electronic technology, producing Apple's I-Pod and I-Phone and making products for Dell, Hewlett-Packard, Sony, as well as the Nintendo, Wii entertainment systems.
According to a report in The Wall Street Journal, Foxconn has plans to abandon its Danwei housing and move away from its "perfect" jobs-housing balance to the spatial arrangements that Chinese, Americans and Europeans routinely choose --- to work where they like and live where they like.
Foxconn has had its share of difficulties. There have been the multiple employee suicides at the Long Hua Campus. The company has faced rising costs in its Pearl River Delta operations, including higher wage costs. In its attempt to retain competitiveness, Foxconn is seriously rethinking its business model and appears likely not only get out of the housing business, but will also move many of its operations into central and western China, where costs and wages are lower. This also makes sense in relation to government policy, which seeks to develop the center and west.
Overall, Taiwan headquartered Foxconn employs 920,000 people in China, the equivalent of the entire work force in the Portland or Kansas City metropolitan areas.
Foxconn plans to increase its workforce in China from 920,000 to 1,300,000 and intends for many of its employees to be in new facilities in places like Chengdu (capital of Sichuan), Wuhan (capital of Hubei), Zhengzhou (capital of Henan) and Chongqing (capital of the provincial level Chongqing municipality). Foxconn's decentralization, and the location of other new and expanded businesses in the center and west is strongly supported by China's substantial infrastructure investment. The nation already has more than 40,000 miles of interstate equivalent highways. When all of the gaps are completed, trucks will be able to reach east coast ports from Zhengzhou or Wuhan in about days drive and little more than two days from Chongqing and Chengdu.
At the same time, corporate executives can get to Beijing, Shanghai and the Pearl River Delta and other East Coast urban areas in 2.5 hours or less through some of the world's most modern airports.
Finally, the more decentralized operations will allow the migrant workers to live much closer to their homes, rather than having to travel all the way to the East Coast. This will make more frequent visits to rural villages and families possible.
----
Photo: Wuhan (photo by author)
The Wall Street Journal notes that the London Underground (metro or subway) is on strike and that transit riders are having to find alternate ways to get around. This is of course, not good news, and the transit strikes that happen often in places like Paris and periodically in places like Los Angeles and Philadelphia are a serious impediment to transit's growth (along with spending on extravagant projects and excessive and rising operating costs).
But London is actually well prepared for this emergency. Unlike Paris, Chicago and New York (where making transit strikes illegal did not prevent one), London’s buses and underground are organized in a manner that provides riders with an alternative.
The key is competitive tendering (competitive contracting) of bus service. One of the Thatcher government's most successful reforms was its reorganization of transit in London. It began in 1985, when a small part of the world's largest public bus system was put out to competitive bid. London Transport retained control of the schedules, fares, logos and bus liveries, so that the now privately operated services were an integral part of the system. Riders did not know the difference between the public and private services, until a few years later when the privately operated services began achieving better service reliability than the public services.
By 2000, the entire London bus system had been converted to competitive tendering, with multiple contractors providing the service. Costs per mile dropped by 50%, adjusted for inflation, while service was expanded and ridership rose. Regrettably, some of the efficiency gains were lost once Ken Livingstone assumed the mayorality of the new Greater London Council, while Transport for London (the successor to London Transport) failed to pay sufficient attention to retaining economic competitiveness between the contractors. Still, things are far better today than they were 25 years ago.
This competitively tendered bus system makes it possible for underground riders to get to their destinations by bus, albeit somewhat more slowly.
 Having an alternative is crucial. I recall that in response to a Southern California Rapid Transit District (SCRTD) bus strike (Note), I asked the Torrance and Gardena bus operations to "open their doors" as they traveled through low-income south central Los Angeles on their way to downtown (regulatory restrictions required them to operate in "closed door more" so as not to compete with the services of the larger Southern California Rapid Transit District). It was not long before one of my fellow Los Angeles County Transportation Commission members complained to Mayor Bradley (who had appointed me), which resulted in my withdrawal of the request. My colleague had been more concerned about the good of already well compensated transit employees to a greater extent than south central Los Angeles residents who relied on the buses for their livelihood (granted, this geographic area was outside the electoral constituency of the member).
It is well to remember the less than sage views of Herbert Morrison, Deputy Prime Minister to Clement Atlee in the United Kingdom in the late 1940s. Morrison, the founder of the publicly operated London Transport opined that conversion of privately operated services to publicly operated services would be more efficient and better serve the public because public employees would be driven by an ethic of public service. While Nobel Laureate James Buchanan and the public choice school of economics put an academic end to such muddled thinking, London Underground's workers are in the process of providing even more tangible evidence.
----
Note: SCRTD was the operating predecessor to the current Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Association. The board on which I served, the Los Angeles County Transportation Commission was the policy predecessor.
---
Photograph by the Author
by Anonymous 09/08/2010
Chicago’s Mayor Daley has decided to end his political career. Chicago’s Mayor since 1989, in December he will break his father’s record as Chicago’s longest serving Chief Executive. No one knows the real reason Daley chose to hang it up, whether it’s his wife’s health or his low polling numbers. Long time Chicago Sun-Times reporter Fran Spielman summarizes Daley’s current troubles:
Chicago’s stunning first-round knock-out in the Olympic sweepstakes, political fall-out from his nephew’s pension fund deals and a budget crisis that forced him to deplete the city’s long-term reserves and demand furlough days and other cost-cutting concessions from city employees.
Chicago is facing more of the same — and another painful round of service cuts — to erase a record $654.7 million shortfall in 2010.
The city’s bond rating was dropped. Its homicide rate is on the rise, including the murder of three Chicago Police officers in recent months.
More voters were increasingly viewing Chicago as a city that doesn't work. Being known as a “union” town isn’t an asset in a competitive, global economy. Who will confront Chicago’s problems as the next Mayor?
Several people are interested in being Chicago’s next Mayor. The most noteworthy is Obama’s Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel. Whether Emanuel will leave the White House before the November election to start a campaign for February is anyone’s guess. Would President Obama get involved in local Chicago politics to endorse Emanuel?
Emanuel will face scrutiny over his tenure as a board member of the failed GSE Freddie Mac. What exactly did Rahm Emanuel know about corrupt accounting there? But, Emanuel has other problems. Whether Emanuel can overcome hostility from the African-American and Hispanic community over comments made about issuing drivers licenses to high school dropouts is another issue. Both communities will look to run a candidate in February’s election.
Then there’s the problem Chicago may be reluctant to elect a Jewish Mayor. As Alderman Burke told Professor Milton Rakove’s in an interview :
“There is a latent anti-Semitism in Chicago and a large population that will never vote for a Jew. They would vote for anybody before a Jew.”
Whoever decides to run for Mayor will have to have the backing of powerful Alderman Ed Burke, who is Chairman of the Finance Committee. With $6 million in his campaign fund, Alderman Burke will be the kingmaker behind the scenes. After all, the business community “feels” it is good business to be on the good side of Alderman Burke. Chicago Sun-Times reporter Fran Spielman asked Alderman Burke if he would run:
“Stay tuned,’’ he said, laughing. “It would be one of the farthest things from my mind. [But] in Chicago politics, people never close the door.”
It’s not likely Alderman Burke is going to give up his lucrative legal business to take a pay cut as Chicago’s Mayor. Alderman Burke was handing out the money before Mayor Daley was elected and he will continue in that role no matter who is Chicago’s next Mayor.
The “Chicago Way” is likely to continue whoever is the next Mayor.
Despite its smart growth policies, the city of Austin has approved a new development on the urban fringe that will include new detached housing starting at $115,000.
Austin is the third fastest growing metropolitan area with more than 1,000,000 residents in the United States, following Raleigh, North Carolina and Las Vegas. The city of Austin accounted for 53% (672,000) of the metropolitan area's 1.27 million population in 2000, but has seen more than 70% of the growth since that time go to the suburbs. Now the metropolitan area has 1.65 million people, and the city has 785,000.
The Austin metropolitan area managed to experience only modest house price increases during the housing bubble, though other metropolitan areas in Texas (Dallas-Fort Worth, Houston and San Antonio) did even better (see the Demographia International Housing Affordability Survey). Austin's Median Multiple (median house price divided by median household income) peaked at 3.3, slightly above the historic maximum norm of 3.0. Like other Texas markets, there has been little price decline during the housing bust, illustrating the lower level of price volatility and speculation identified by Glaeser and Gyourko with less restrictive land use regulation. This stability has helped Texas weather the Great Recession better than its principal competition, the more intensely regulated states of California and Florida.
The city of Austin, however, is rare in Texas for generally favoring the more restrictive (smart growth) land use policy devices that have been associated with the extreme house price escalation in California, Florida, Portland, and many other metropolitan areas. The city's freedom, however, to implement the most draconian policies and drive house prices up is severely limited by far less restrictive land use policies in the balance of its home county (Travis), neighboring Williamson County (usually among the fastest growing in the nation), Hayes County and the other counties in the metropolitan area.
Austin is competing. This is illustrated by the recent Austin city council action to approve a new "mega" development on the urban area's eastern fringe that could eventually add 5,000 new houses, town houses and apartments. The first phase will be 350 detached houses that the developer indicates will be priced from $115,000 to $120,000 (including land), an amount less than a building lot San Diego, Los Angeles, Vancouver and Australia.
By comparison with other developments in the Austin area, however, these houses may be expensive. One home builder is currently advertising new detached houses, only 7 miles from downtown Austin for $90,000. These are not the least expensive in Texas. Detached houses in Houston are being advertised for $79,000.
A case study in the 3rd Annual Demographia International Housing Affordability Survey showed that the median income Austin household could purchase the median priced house for 11 years less income than in Perth, Australia (this includes mortgage interest). While both Austin and Perth have been growing rapidly, Austin's faster growth is evidence of stronger demand, which, all things being equal, would have been expected to drive house prices up more than in Perth. But, with more restrictive land use regulation, all things are never equal.
Commuter rail is often sold to the public as a faster means of travel than buses. This can be true if the drive to the park and ride lot is short and your destination is within walking distance of a station. However, it is apparently not true in Austin.
The Austin American-Statesman reports that bus riders showed up at a Capital Metro hearing this week to oppose cancellation of two express bus routes that parallel the new commuter rail line. Their complaint? Taking the train takes longer.
As has become typical for new urban rail projects, Austin's commuter rail line is carrying considerably fewer riders than projected. During its first month of service, daily ridership averaged 900 (450 each way), less than one-half the projected 2,000. This is less than 1/100th of Capital Metro's daily bus ridership.
|
Email this Blog entry
