Wednesday, July 07, 2004
What if There Had Been No Forced Busing
Two Thirds of Central City Losses Might Have Been Avoided
During the 1970s, core city populations declined at an unprecedented rate, and, generally core cities that were growing (such as Los Angeles and Houston) experienced slower growth. Among the cities of 200,000 that had not annexed since before 1950, nearly 60 percent of the 1950 to 2000 population loss occurred in the 1970s, and 97 percent of the loss occurred in the 1950 to 1980 period.
A principal cause of this unbalanced population loss appears to be problems with core city education systems, and it is likely that the most important factor was forced busing.
The following table provides a counterfactual analysis of what core city population would have been during the disasterous 1970s if change in population had been balanced between adults and school age children at the same ratio as the rest of the nation. It is estimated that the cities would have lost only 650,000 people, rather than the actual 2.1 million.
During the 1970s, core city populations declined at an unprecedented rate, and, generally core cities that were growing (such as Los Angeles and Houston) experienced slower growth. Among the cities of 200,000 that had not annexed since before 1950, nearly 60 percent of the 1950 to 2000 population loss occurred in the 1970s, and 97 percent of the loss occurred in the 1950 to 1980 period.
A principal cause of this unbalanced population loss appears to be problems with core city education systems, and it is likely that the most important factor was forced busing.
The following table provides a counterfactual analysis of what core city population would have been during the disasterous 1970s if change in population had been balanced between adults and school age children at the same ratio as the rest of the nation. It is estimated that the cities would have lost only 650,000 people, rather than the actual 2.1 million.
Comments:
I don't buy this argument. There are a lot of cities, particularly in the West, where forced busing was never an issue. Yet Wendell's analysis shows declines in those cities' populations. Meanwhile, the populations of many eastern cities were declining as people moved to the suburbs long before forced busing became an issue.
Compare Boston, where forced busing was a huge issue, with Portland and Seattle, where it was a non-issue. Yet Wendell's data show larger percentage declines in both Portland and Seattle than Boston.
While I accept that forced busing may have played a role in the decline of children's exercise, I suspect it played only a minor role in the decline of central cities.
Compare Boston, where forced busing was a huge issue, with Portland and Seattle, where it was a non-issue. Yet Wendell's data show larger percentage declines in both Portland and Seattle than Boston.
While I accept that forced busing may have played a role in the decline of children's exercise, I suspect it played only a minor role in the decline of central cities.
An interesting perspective. During the 1970s, most of the central city decline occured. One of the things that was different about that decade was forced busing. I have no doubt that it played a major role. On the other hand, I would love to see some econometric research into the matter.
Post a Comment
