Opportunity Urbanism: Houston Becomes a Destination for Middle and Creative Classes

In the first decade of the first century, several critical analyses have emerged about the future of American cities. This paper attempts to lay out a new notion: that of "Opportunity Urbanism." This concept stresses a region's ability to create jobs, offer affordable housing, and present entrepreneurial openings to a growing and highly diverse population as the surest signs of urban vibrancy. It emerges the fundamental principle that one of the primary historic roles of cities has been to nurture and grow a middle class-to be an engine of upward social mobility.

Our emphasis on a city's ability to provide opportunity for a broad spectrum of citizens differs from what most consider the main current of today's urban policy thinking. We recognize that concerns about income inequality have been voiced, even by senior policy makers and analysts. Nevertheless, contemporary trends in thought regarding city development concentrate not on upward mobility, or even on the middle class, but on what might best be called an "elite" strategy.

In one view, the fate of urban areas-and of cities in general-depends largely on the area's ability to attract the wealthiest individuals, the people with the highest skills, and those who can perform the most rarefied economic functions. The resulting "superstar cities" cater largely to the upper classes and to those who serve them; generally, those cities are becoming too expensive for middle income individuals or families.

Another popular formulation concludes that to remain vibrant, cities must lure the so-called "creative class" of skilled workers with urban amenities, social attitudes, and cultural offerings. The emphasis here is on the so-called "war for talent." Cities that win this battle, the theory goes, emerge as the avant-garde in technology, culture, and the expanding global economy.

Implicitly, these approaches give short shrift to the need to accommodate either an expanding population or a wide variety of social groups. These formulations emphasize "quality" as opposed to "quantity"; each superstar city should be preoccupied with the struggle to boost its attractiveness to elites, as opposed to seeking ways to keep the doors of opportunity and homeownership open to the working and middle classes. Instead, superstar cities offer what New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg has called "a luxury product."

A handful of urban regions-San Francisco, Boston, perhaps Seattle and Portland-could conceivably succeed with such a strategy. These areas have relatively low percentages of undereducated people, and boast nested concentrations of high-end industries. But it is difficult to see how such areas could accommodate an American population that is expected to rise from 300 million today to at least 400 million in 2050.

For this reason, we believe that "opportunity cities" represent the predominant model for America's urban future, including for some of the more hard-pressed older, industrial cities. Because of widening differences in housing and other costs, there has been a decisive demographic tilt towards cities such as Phoenix, Dallas, Atlanta, Charlotte, and Houston. In a perhaps less-understood phenomenon, these cities are also showing marked gains in attracting high-wage employers and educated migrants, including members of the ballyhooed "creative class." These are, of course, the very jobs and workers that are widely thought to be concentrating in more elite places.

Increasingly, this shift has included a movement of large corporate headquarters and of higher-end jobs to these opportunity cities. Firms that need to compete globally generally expand in business-friendly places that possess decent infrastructure and amenities, and that can accommodate a broad range of employers.

In defining our concept of "Opportunity Urbanism," we rely on a detailed investigation of trends in Houston, an understudied city that has enjoyed some of North America's most rapid economic and population growth over the past generation. We have studied Houston not as an end in itself, but to explore the fundamental economic and demographic dynamics of what Houston Mayor Bill White has defined as, first and foremost, an "opportunity city."

Houston exemplifies the characteristics we identify with Opportunity Urbanism: openness to outsiders, a diverse and highly entrepreneurial economy, a friendly business climate, a commitment to continued infrastructure development (particularly mobility), and a basically positive attitude toward growth. As both our historical and statistical analysis will show, many other cities exhibit some or all of these characteristics, although few as clearly or on such a scale as Houston.

We also address the long-term potential of urban opportunity areas to become global cities. It has long been assumed that although places such as Houston may service regional or national markets, they lack the savoir faire to be taken seriously on an international level. Yet we believe that some opportunity cities have already achieved significant global status and, during the coming generation, will demonstrate the true long-term potential of Opportunity Urbanism.

Finally, we acknowledge the significant challenges faced by "opportunity" cities. By their very nature, these cities attract more than those individuals who are well-heeled, well-educated, or otherwise well-placed for success in the information-age economy. The integration of these newcomers in the advanced economy-where skills are increasingly paramount-represents both the greatest challenge and the foremost advantage for opportunity cities such as Houston.