How widespread is the downtown resurgence among the current generation of young adults 25 to 34 years old, often referred to as the Millennials? Answering the question, this article provides a detailed analysis of the past, current, and future geographic population distribution, focusing on the young adults. It first documents the demographic shifts from 1990 to 2015 by distance from the central business districts (CBDs) of the 50 largest U.S. metros. The results of the intrametropolitan analysis reconcile the back-to-the-city thesis with sustained suburban growth, explaining how the two sides have reached different conclusions. Then this article empirically examines the generational residential patterns using a multinomial logistic regression, suggesting the generational characteristics of the Millennials, at least partially, explain their inclination to choose city center over suburbs. The simulations based on the model estimates indicate that ongoing demographic shifts might contribute to more population growth in urban centers over the next two decades.
American Planning Association.2014. “Investing in Place for Economic Growth and Competitiveness.” American Planning Association, Washington, DC.
2.
Baum-SnowNathanielHartley.Daniel2016. “Causes and Consequences of Central Neighborhood Change, 1970–2010.” Paper presented at the Research Symposium on Gentrification and Neighborhood Change, May 25, 2016. Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia, Philadelphia.
3.
BentoAntonio M.CropperMaureen L.MobarakAhmed MushfiqVinhaKatja. 2005. “The Effects of Urban Spatial Structure on Travel Demand in the United States.” Review of Economics and Statistics87:466–78. doi:10.1162/0034653054638292.
4.
BirchEugenie L.2002. “Having a Longer View on Downtown Living.” Journal of the American Planning Association68:5–21. doi:10.1080/01944360208977188.
BlumenbergEvelynRalphKelcieSmartMichaelTaylorBrian D.2016. “Who Knows About Kids These Days? Analyzing the Determinants of Youth and Adult Mobility in the U.S. Between 1990 and 2009.” Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice93:39–54. doi:10.1016/j.tra.2016.08.010.
7.
CarlsonElwood D.2008. The Lucky Few: Between the Greatest Generation and the Baby Boom. New York: Springer.
ClarkWilliam A. V.DielemanFrans M.1996. Household and Housing: Choice and Outcomes in the Housing Market. New Brunswick: Center for Urban Policy Research.
CoutureVictorHandburyJessie. 2017. “Urban Revival in America, 2000 to 2010.” NBER Working Paper No. 24084, National Bureau of Economic Research, Cambridge.
DengYonghengRossStephen L.WachterSusan M.2003. “Racial Differences in Homeownership: The Effect of Residential Location.” Regional Science & Urban Economics33:517–56. doi:10.1016/S0166-0462(02)00058-3.
15.
Díaz-ParraIbán. 2015. “A Back to the City Movement by Local Government Action: Gentrification in Spain and Latin America.” International Journal of Urban Sciences19:343–63. doi:10.1080/12265934.2015.1045306.
Dunham-JonesEllenWilliamsonJune. 2011. Retrofitting Suburbia: Urban Design Solutions for Redesigning Suburbs. Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons.
18.
EasterlinRichard A.1980. Birth and Fortune: The Impact of Numbers on Personal Welfare. New York: Basic Books.
19.
EdlundLenaMachadoCeciliaSviatschiMaria M.2015. “Bright Minds, Big Rent: Gentrification and the Rising Returns to Skill.” NBER Working Paper No. 21729, National Bureau of Economic Research, Cambridge.
20.
EhrenhaltAlan. 2012. The Great Inversion and the Future of the American City. New York: Vintage.
21.
EllenIngrid G.HornKeren M.ReedDavin. 2017. “Has Falling Crime Invited Gentrification?” Working Paper No. CES 17-27, Center for Economic Studies, U.S. Census Bureau, Washington, DC.
22.
EwingReid. 1997. “Is Los Angeles-Style Sprawl Desirable?” Journal of the American Planning Association63:107–26. doi:10.1080/01944369708975728.
23.
EwingReidRongFang. 2008. “The Impact of Urban Form on U.S. Residential Energy Use.” Housing Policy Debate19:1–30. doi:10.1080/10511482.2008.9521624.
24.
FeeKyleHartleyDaniel. 2013. “The Relationship Between City Center Density and Urban Growth or Decline.” In Revitalizing American Cities, edited by WachterSusan M.ZeuliKimberly A., 45–64. Philadelphia: Univ. of Pennsylvania Press.
25.
FilionPierreGrantJill L.2018. “The Impact of Generational Change on Cities.” In The Millennial City: Trends, Implications, and Prospects for Urban Planning and Policy, edited by MoosMarkusPfeifferDeirdreVinodraiTara, 13–25. New York: Routledge.
26.
FloridaRichard. 2002. The Rise of the Creative Class: And How It’s Transforming Work, Leisure, Community, and Everyday Life. New York: Basic Books.
27.
FloridaRichard. 2010. The Great Reset: How New Ways of Living and Working Drive Post-Crash Prosperity. New York: HarperCollins.
FryRichard. 2018. “Young Adult Household Economic Well-Being: Comparing Millennials to Earlier Generations in the United States.” In The Millennial City: Trends, Implications, and Prospects for Urban Planning and Policy, edited by MoosMarkusPfeifferDeirdreVinodraiTara, 41–50. New York: Routledge.
GabrielStuart A.PainterGary. 2008. “Mobility, Residential Location and the American Dream: The Intrametropolitan Geography of Minority Homeownership.” Real Estate Economics36:499–531. doi:10.1111/j.1540-6229.2008.00220.x.
37.
GlaeserEdward L.GottliebJoshua D.2006. “Urban Resurgence and the Consumer City.” Urban Studies43:1275–1299. doi:101080/00420980600775683.
38.
GlaeserEdward L.KolkoJedSaizAlbert. 2001. “Consumer City.” Journal of Economic Geography1:27–50. doi:10.1093/jeg/1.1.27.
39.
GlaeserEdward L.ShapiroJesse M.2003. “Urban Growth in the 1990s: Is City Living Back?” Journal of Regional Science43:139–65. doi:10.1111/1467-9787.00293.
40.
HanlonBernadette. 2008. “The Decline of Older, Inner Suburbs in Metropolitan America.” Housing Policy Debate19:423–56. doi:10.1080/10511482.2008.9521642.
41.
HanlonBernadetteAirgood-ObryckiWhitney. 2018. “Suburban Revalorization: Residential Infill and Rehabilitation in Baltimore County’s Older Suburbs.” Environment and Planning A: Economy and Space50:895–921. doi:10.1177/0308518X18763607.
42.
HomerCollinDewitzJonYangLiminJinSumingDanielsonPatrickXianGeorgeCoulstonJohnHeroldNathanielWickhamJamesMegownKevin. 2015. “Completion of the 2011 National Land Cover Database for the Conterminous United States: Representing a Decade of Land Cover Change Information.” Photogrammetric Engineering & Remote Sensing81:345–54.
43.
HoweNeilStraussWilliam. 2000. Millennials Rising: The Next Great Generation. New York: Vintage.
44.
JacksonKenneth T.1985. Crabgrass Frontier: The Suburbanization of the United States. New York: Oxford University Press.
45.
KahnLisa B.2010. “The Long-Term Labor Market Consequences of Graduating from College in a Bad Economy.” Labour Economics17:303–16. doi:10.1016/j.labeco.2009.09.002.
46.
KainJohn F.QuigleyJohn M.1975. Housing Markets and Racial Discrimination: A Microeconomic Analysis. New York: National Bureau of Economic Research.
LeeSugie. 2011. “Metropolitan Growth Patterns and Socio-Economic Disparity in Six US Metropolitan Areas 1970–2000.” International Journal of Urban and Regional Research35:988–1011. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2427.2010.01004.x.
53.
LeeSugieLeighNancey G.2007. “Intrametropolitan Spatial Differentiation and Decline of Inner-Ring Suburbs: A Comparison of Four U.S. Metropolitan Areas.” Journal of Planning Education and Research27:146–64. doi:10.1177/0739456X07306393.
54.
LeeYongsungLeeBumsoo. 2017. “Are Millennials Leading Reurbanization? The Net Migration Patterns of Older Millennials in the Twenty Largest Urban Areas, 2000–2010.” Paper presented at the Annual Meeting for the Association of Collegiate Schools of Planning, Denver, October 12–15.
55.
LeinbergerChristopher B.2018. “Urbanizing the Suburbs: The Major Development Trend of the Next Generation.” In Suburban Remix: Creating the Next Generation of Urban Places, edited by BeskeJasonDixonDavid, 15–32. Washington, DC. Island Press.
56.
MalmendierUlrikeNagelStefan. 2011. “Depression Babies: Do Macroeconomic Experiences Affect Risk-Taking?” Quarterly Journal of Economics26:373–416. doi:10.1093/qje/qjq004.
57.
MannheimKarl. (1928) 1952. “The Problem of Generations.” In Essays on the Sociology of Knowledge, edited by MannheimKarl, 276–322. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
58.
MawhorterSarah L.2018. “Boomers and Their Boomerang Kids: Comparing Housing Opportunities for Baby Boomers and Millennials in the United States.” In The Millennial City: Trends, Implications, and Prospects for Urban Planning and Policy, edited by MoosMarkusPfeifferDeirdreVinodraiTara, 143–52. New York: Routledge.
59.
McDonaldNoreen C.2015. “Are Millennials Really the ‘Go-Nowhere’ Generation?” Journal of the American Planning Association81:90–103. doi:10.1080/01944363.2015.1057196.
60.
MoosMarkus. 2013. “‘Generationed’ Space: Societal Restructuring and Young Adults’ Changing Residential Location Patterns.” The Canadian Geographer58:11–33. doi:10.1111/j.1541-0064.2013.12052.x.
61.
MoosMarkus. 2014. “Generational Dimensions of Neoliberal and Post-Fordist Restructuring: The Changing Characteristics of Young Adults and Growing Income Inequality in Montreal and Vancouver.” International Journal of Urban and Regional Research38:2078–2102. doi:10.1111/1468-2427.12088.
62.
MoosMarkus. 2016. “From Gentrification to Youthification: The Increasing Importance of Young Age in Delineating High-Density Living.” Urban Studies53:2903–20. doi:10.1177/0042098015603292.
63.
MoosMarkusPfeifferDeirdreVinodraiTara. 2018. The Millennial City: Trends, Implications, and Prospects for Urban Planning and Policy. New York: Routledge.
64.
MyersDowell. 1990. Housing Demography: Linking Demographic Structure and Housing Markets. Madison: Univ. of Wisconsin Press.
65.
MyersDowell. 2016. “Peak Millennials: Three Reinforcing Cycles That Amplify the Rise and Fall of Urban Concentration by Millennials.” Housing Policy Debate26:928–47. doi:10.1080/10511482.2016.1165722.
66.
MyersDowellLeeHyojung. 2016. “Demographic Change and Future Urban Development.” In Land and the City, edited by McCarthyGeorge W.IngramGregory K.MoodySamuel A., 11–58. Cambridge: Lincoln Institute of Land Policy.
67.
MyersDowellPitkinJohn. 2009. “Demographic Forces and Turning Points in the American City, 1950 to 2040.” Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Sciences626:91–111. doi:10.1177/0002716209344838.
68.
NelsonArthur C.2013. Reshaping Metropolitan America: Trends and Opportunities to 2030. Washington, DC: Island Press.
RonaldRichard. 2017. “The Remarkable Rise and Particular Context of Younger One-Person Households in Seoul and Tokyo.” City & Community16:25–46. doi:10.1111/cico.12221.
72.
RyderNorman B.1965. “The Cohort as a Concept in the Study of Social Change.” American Sociological Review30:843–61. doi:10.2307/2090964.
73.
ShumanHowardScottJacqueline. 1989. “Generations and Collective Memories.” American Sociological Review54:359–81. doi:10.2307/2095611.
74.
SiedentopStefanZakrzewskiPhilippStromsPeter. 2018. “A Childless Urban Renaissance? Age-Selective Patterns of Population Change in North American and German Metropolitan Areas.” Regional Studies, Regional Science5:1–20. doi:10.1080/21681376.2017.1412270.
75.
SohmerRebecca R.LangRobert E.2003. “Downtown Rebound.” In Redefining Urban and Suburban America: Evidence from Census 2000, edited by BerubeAlanKatzBruceLangRobert E., 63–74. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.
76.
TapscottDon. 2009. Grown Up Digital: How the Net Generation Is Changing Your World. New York: McGraw-Hill.
77.
TaylorPaul. 2014. The Next America: Boomers, Millennials, and the Looming Generational Showdown. New York: Public Affairs.
WaddellPaul A.1992. “Multinomial Logit Model of Race and Urban Structure.” Urban Geography13:12–141. doi:10.2747/0272-3638.13.2.127.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
