![]() Per capita income offers a second performance yardstick. By the end of this period, the Twin Cities population had grown 70 percent, while Pittsburgh and Buffalo had fallen 15 percent. Second, for the most part, this divergence began at the outset in 1969 and continued through 2017. At the bottom, populations have declined markedly in metropolitan areas of Cleveland, Pittsburgh, Buffalo, and Detroit to a lesser extent. At the other end of the spectrum, population has soared in the Twin Cities, Indianapolis, and Columbus. This shows that first, there is marked dispersion in the population growth of these places. The chart below indexes each area’s own population to a value of one starting in 1969 and tracks relative population growth to 2017. ![]() Department of Commerce (BEA) (all the way back to 1969), we can examine eleven large, historically prominent metropolitan areas that represent the backbone of the Great Lakes economy. Using population estimates for the Great Lakes metropolitan areas from the U.S. ![]() Population and per capita income provide an answer How have the leading cities in the Great Lakes region fared? Nearly every downtown area has been revitalized to bolster the local economy, but for metropolitan areas overall, economic performance has been mixed. Most large cities have outperformed their surrounding rural areas and outpaced smaller satellite cities that were built around old-line manufacturing. Yet, cities like Detroit and Cleveland continue to lag in their re-development, while others such as the Twin Cities, Indianapolis, and Columbus, are much further along the path to wealth and growth. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |