Students as catalysts for regeneration Moira Munro University of Glasgow. March 2010.
The impacts of students on Urban Areas Mark Livingston, Moira Munro, Ivan Turok Glasgow University.
-
Upload
holly-georgia-mccarthy -
Category
Documents
-
view
219 -
download
0
Transcript of The impacts of students on Urban Areas Mark Livingston, Moira Munro, Ivan Turok Glasgow University.
![Page 1: The impacts of students on Urban Areas Mark Livingston, Moira Munro, Ivan Turok Glasgow University.](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062410/56649d985503460f94a83603/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
The impacts of students The impacts of students on Urban Areason Urban Areas
Mark Livingston, Moira Munro, Ivan Mark Livingston, Moira Munro, Ivan TurokTurok
Glasgow UniversityGlasgow University
![Page 2: The impacts of students on Urban Areas Mark Livingston, Moira Munro, Ivan Turok Glasgow University.](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062410/56649d985503460f94a83603/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
Students in Cities: ContextStudents in Cities: Context
Transient:Transient: DistinctiveDistinctive
Numerically significantNumerically significant Census, 2001: Over 3% of pop.Census, 2001: Over 3% of pop.
Policy towards continuing growthPolicy towards continuing growth Financial support for students Financial support for students
reducedreduced
![Page 3: The impacts of students on Urban Areas Mark Livingston, Moira Munro, Ivan Turok Glasgow University.](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062410/56649d985503460f94a83603/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
Growth within citiesGrowth within cities
Table 1: Changing Student Numbers: Selected institutions
Higher education institution 1996-97 2006-07 % change
The University of Birmingham 22967 30415 32.4% The University of Central England in Birmingham* 19220 23860 24.4% The University of Leeds 24222 33315 37.5%
Leeds Metropolitan University 17908 27495 53.5%
The University of Liverpool 18154 20665 13.8%
Liverpool John Moores University 19406 24370 25.6% The University of Oxford 19805 24640 24.4% The University of Newcastle-upon-Tyne 16096 19700 22.4%
The University of Northumbria at Newcastle 19107 29630 55.1% Source: HESA *Name changed to Birmingham City University
![Page 4: The impacts of students on Urban Areas Mark Livingston, Moira Munro, Ivan Turok Glasgow University.](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062410/56649d985503460f94a83603/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
Research questionsResearch questions
Students as residents:Students as residents: Lively, buzzy quartersLively, buzzy quarters Degraded, deteriorated neighbourhoodsDegraded, deteriorated neighbourhoods
Students as workers:Students as workers: Enhancing city competitiveness, Enhancing city competitiveness,
productivityproductivity Displacing local jobs.Displacing local jobs.
![Page 5: The impacts of students on Urban Areas Mark Livingston, Moira Munro, Ivan Turok Glasgow University.](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062410/56649d985503460f94a83603/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
Studentification:Cardiff.Studentification:Cardiff.
![Page 6: The impacts of students on Urban Areas Mark Livingston, Moira Munro, Ivan Turok Glasgow University.](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062410/56649d985503460f94a83603/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
Research questionsResearch questions
Students as residents:Students as residents: Lively, buzzy quartersLively, buzzy quarters Degraded, deteriorated neighbourhoodsDegraded, deteriorated neighbourhoods
Students as workers:Students as workers: Enhancing city competitiveness, Enhancing city competitiveness,
productivityproductivity Displacing local jobs.Displacing local jobs.
![Page 7: The impacts of students on Urban Areas Mark Livingston, Moira Munro, Ivan Turok Glasgow University.](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062410/56649d985503460f94a83603/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
Student cities?Student cities?
PUAs %
Students
% Students living at
home PUAs %
Students
% Students living at home
PUAs
% Students
% Students living at
home Cambridge 17.0 2.9 Stoke 3.4 19.5 Birkenhead 1.3 58.4 Oxford 16.7 2.8 Manchester 3.4 22.1 Chatham 1.3 40.9 Cardiff 7.0 10.8 Hull 3.4 13.3 Aldershot 1.2 48.6 Southampton 6.5 8.7 Derby 3.3 18.7 Warrington 1.2 49.2 Coventry 5.7 14.3 Reading 3.2 14.9 Wakefield 1.2 36.2 York 5.5 7.5 Belfast 3.1 41.3 Ipswich 1.2 31.4 Leeds 5.1 12.6 Glasgow 3.1 43.6 Burnley 1.2 49.0 Nottingham 5.0 10.3 Northampton 2.9 17.4 Milton Keynes 1.2 40.1 Brighton 4.9 10.0 Bournemouth 2.8 15.8 Barnsley 1.1 43.8 Leicester 4.5 21.1 Portsmouth 2.8 21.2 Wigan 1.1 60.5 Edinburgh 4.5 15.8 Huddersfield 2.7 31.6 Worthing 1.1 42.3 Sheffield 4.2 13.4 Birmingham 2.7 32.5 Crawley 1.1 54.4 Bristol 4.2 11.8 Sunderland 2.7 27.1 Gloucester 1.1 42.0 Plymouth 4.1 12.0 Preston 2.6 28.1 Hastings 1.0 38.4 Swansea 4.1 21.2 Bradford 2.6 37.4 Swindon 1.0 35.3 Liverpool 3.9 23.2 Middlesbrough 2.0 40.4 Doncaster 1.0 45.1 Aberdeen 3.8 23.8 Bolton 1.8 48.8 Peterborough 0.9 41.2 London 3.6 31.0 Telford 1.6 29.0 Mansfield 0.9 49.3 Luton 3.5 30.0 Rochdale 1.5 57.6 Grimsby 0.9 41.1 Norwich 3.5 10.7 Blackburn 1.3 48.5 Southend 0.9 49.1 Newcastle 3.5 22.7 Blackpool 1.3 40.7
![Page 8: The impacts of students on Urban Areas Mark Livingston, Moira Munro, Ivan Turok Glasgow University.](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062410/56649d985503460f94a83603/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
Student neighbourhoods?Student neighbourhoods?
More students create more More students create more concentrated neighbourhoods.concentrated neighbourhoods.
Students are strongly residentially Students are strongly residentially segregated:segregated:
Index of dissimilarity:Index of dissimilarity:
D=∑n
i=1
ti | pi-P|
2TP(1-P)
![Page 9: The impacts of students on Urban Areas Mark Livingston, Moira Munro, Ivan Turok Glasgow University.](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062410/56649d985503460f94a83603/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
Segregation:Segregation:
% Students
% lndex of Dissimilarity
% Students
% lndex of Dissimilarity
% Students
% lndex of Dissimilarity
Cardiff 7.0 82.8 Coventry 5.7 63.6 Swindon 1.0 33.5 Leeds 5.1 80.7 Aberdeen 3.8 63.0 Blackpool 1.3 32.3 Southampton 6.5 78.6 Sunderland 2.7 62.8 Peterborough 0.9 31.8 Hull 3.4 76.1 Portsmouth 2.8 61.7 Barnsley 1.1 31.3 Sheffield 4.2 75.6 Northampton 2.9 60.2 Gloucester 1.1 31.3 Nottingham 5.0 74.7 Belfast 3.1 60.1 Grimsby 0.9 29.9
Cambridge 17.0 74.5 Bournemouth 2.8 58.8 Milton Keynes 1.2 29.6
Reading 3.2 73.4 Telford 1.6 57.1 Doncaster 1.0 28.8 Edinburgh 4.5 71.9 Bradford 2.6 56.5 Blackburn 1.3 28.7 Swansea 4.1 71.5 Preston 2.6 55.3 Mansfield 0.9 27.4 Plymouth 4.1 71.5 Birmingham 2.7 55.3 Aldershot 1.2 27.4 Stoke 3.4 68.4 Brighton 4.9 53.9 Rochdale 1.5 27.3 Bristol 4.2 68.1 Huddersfield 2.7 50.3 Worthing 1.1 27.1 Norwich 3.5 66.8 Luton 3.5 48.2 Southend 0.9 26.9 Oxford 16.7 66.4 Wakefield 1.2 48.0 Crawley 1.1 25.6 Manchester 3.4 66.1 Middlesbrough 2.0 46.2 Burnley 1.2 25.4 Derby 3.3 65.5 Glasgow 3.1 44.2 Hastings 1.0 25.3 York 5.5 65.5 Ipswich 1.2 39.1 Birkenhead 1.3 22.8 Liverpool 3.9 65.3 London 3.6 36.7 Wigan 1.1 22.6 Newcastle 3.5 64.6 Bolton 1.8 35.1 Leicester 4.5 63.8 Chatham 1.3 34.6
![Page 10: The impacts of students on Urban Areas Mark Livingston, Moira Munro, Ivan Turok Glasgow University.](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062410/56649d985503460f94a83603/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
More students, greater More students, greater segregationsegregation
% students in the PUA by Index of Disimilarity
R2 = 0.3746
0.0
20.0
40.0
60.0
80.0
100.0
120.0
0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 12.0 14.0 16.0 18.0
% of Students
Ind
ex
of
dis
imila
rity
Primary Urban Areas
Linear (Primary Urban Areas)
Log. (Primary Urban Areas)
![Page 11: The impacts of students on Urban Areas Mark Livingston, Moira Munro, Ivan Turok Glasgow University.](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062410/56649d985503460f94a83603/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
![Page 12: The impacts of students on Urban Areas Mark Livingston, Moira Munro, Ivan Turok Glasgow University.](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062410/56649d985503460f94a83603/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
Atrium
![Page 13: The impacts of students on Urban Areas Mark Livingston, Moira Munro, Ivan Turok Glasgow University.](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062410/56649d985503460f94a83603/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
![Page 14: The impacts of students on Urban Areas Mark Livingston, Moira Munro, Ivan Turok Glasgow University.](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062410/56649d985503460f94a83603/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
Rapid Residential TurnoverRapid Residential Turnover
Unstable, lack of cohesion etc.
PUA % Students
Gross Turnover
(%)
Mean turnover
in top decile of student areas*
PUA % Students
Gross Turnover
(%)
Mean turnover
in top decile of student areas*
PUA % Students Gross Turnover
(%)
Mean turnover
in top decile of student areas*
Cambridge 17.0 35.3 45.0 Stoke 3.4 19.0 44.5 Chatham 1.3 20.6 46.6 Oxford 16.7 37.1 46.7 Manchester 3.4 20.9 44.3 Aldershot 1.2 22.4 0.0 Cardiff 7.0 26.1 37.7 Hull 3.4 24.8 54.9 Warrington 1.2 17.0 18.0 Southampton 6.5 27.2 56.5 Derby 3.3 21.2 45.4 Wakefield 1.2 18.5 31.5 Coventry 5.7 21.8 34.7 Reading 3.2 23.2 45.6 Ipswich 1.2 20.2 32.1 York 5.5 25.3 44.4 Glasgow 3.0 18.0 30.2 Burnley 1.2 20.6 N/A Leeds 5.1 25.5 71.7 Northampton 2.9 23.7 38.8 Milton Keynes 1.2 23.5 58.1 Nottingham 5.0 23.6 53.3 Bournemouth 2.8 23.2 41.7 Barnsley 1.1 17.8 33.9 Brighton 4.9 26.4 41.7 Portsmouth 2.8 22.3 41.6 Wigan 1.1 16.9 N/A Leicester 4.5 21.5 39.2 Huddersfield 2.7 19.5 31.1 Worthing 1.1 21.6 N/A Edinburgh 4.2 24.2 49.9 Birmingham 2.7 17.8 34.1 Crawley 1.1 19.4 N/A Sheffield 4.2 21.9 53.5 Sunderland 2.7 18.1 36.0 Gloucester 1.1 21.1 N/A Bristol 4.2 23.7 48.7 Preston 2.6 19.5 37.2 Hastings 1.0 25.3 N/A Plymouth 4.1 25.9 51.7 Bradford 2.6 20.4 36.3 Swindon 1.0 20.2 54.8 Swansea 4.1 20.2 36.4 Middlesbrough 2.0 18.8 42.0 Doncaster 1.0 18.5 15.0 Liverpool 3.9 18.8 40.9 Bolton 1.8 18.5 24.0 Peterborough 0.9 22.6 N/A London 3.6 22.0 27.2 Telford 1.6 22.1 27.7 Mansfield 0.9 18.6 21.9 Aberdeen 3.6 20.9 37.3 Rochdale 1.5 18.8 N/A Grimsby 0.9 21.0 N/A Luton 3.5 19.9 33.0 Blackburn 1.3 22.5 23.7 Southend 0.9 17.2 N/A Norwich 3.5 22.2 40.2 Blackpool 1.3 19.4 22.9 Newcastle 3.5 21.4 51.0 Birkenhead 1.3 16.3 N/A
![Page 15: The impacts of students on Urban Areas Mark Livingston, Moira Munro, Ivan Turok Glasgow University.](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062410/56649d985503460f94a83603/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
Student as workers.Student as workers.
Patterns of work vary:Patterns of work vary: Increasing term time working (40%)Increasing term time working (40%)
Long hours:Long hours: 20% < 10hrs20% < 10hrs 25% 10-15 hrs25% 10-15 hrs 1/3 20hrs+1/3 20hrs+
Concentrated:Concentrated: Entry level positionsEntry level positions 38% retail; 18% hotels and catering38% retail; 18% hotels and catering
Bring Bring advantagesadvantages to employers. to employers. FlexibilityFlexibility Personal qualities.Personal qualities.
![Page 16: The impacts of students on Urban Areas Mark Livingston, Moira Munro, Ivan Turok Glasgow University.](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062410/56649d985503460f94a83603/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
Impacts on urban labour Impacts on urban labour marketsmarkets
% of students
who have jobs*
Mean weekly hours
worked+
student workers as a % of
all employed*
% of students
who have jobs*
Mean weekly hours
worked+
student workers as a % of
all employed
*
% of students who have jobs*
Mean weekly hours
worked+
student workers as a % of
all employed
*
Oxford 16.4 11.7 7.1 Manchester 28.2 15.7 2.5 Ipswich 46.0 14.7 1.3
Cambridge 12.7 10.8 5.3 Bournemouth 34.9 17.9 2.5 Aldershot 50.1 12.9 1.2
Cardiff 24.5 13.2 4.3 Northampton 36.8 17.6 2.4 Telford 34.2 15.6 1.2 Southampton 26.3 16.7 4.0 Sunderland 32.6 14.5 2.4 Burnley 38.5 24.1 1.2
Coventry 23.9 15.1 3.6 Preston 38.7 18.1 2.4 Worthing 48.6 17.3 1.2
Brighton 29.8 15.7 3.6 Hull 24.8 20.8 2.3 Wigan 45.4 14.6 1.2
Leeds 28.5 19.3 3.5 Portsmouth 35.2 18.2 2.3 Warrington 45.3 16.4 1.2
York 26.7 15.3 3.5 Edinburgh 36.8 18.5 2.3 Wakefield 39.6 17.4 1.2
Luton 37.3 18.3 3.3 Huddersfield 32.9 15.0 2.2 Chatham 39.0 19.8 1.2
Leicester 28.3 15.0 3.3 Norwich 26.4 14.9 2.2 Gloucester 48.5 19.2 1.1
Plymouth 30.2 15.8 3.2 Birmingham 29.1 17.8 2.2 Barnsley 37.3 15.8 1.1
Liverpool 26.6 17.7 3.1 Reading 33.6 19.4 2.1 Hastings 41.5 11.9 1.1
Belfast 38.4 18.4 3.0 Aberdeen 39.6 18.1 2.1 Milton Keynes 43.8 18.8 1.1
Swansea 26.9 20.7 2.9 Bradford 28.1 18.5 2.0 Doncaster 39.4 8.8 1.0 Nottingham 22.1 15.3 2.8
Middlesbrough 34.3 15.9 1.8 Crawley 43.7 15.7 1.0
Sheffield 25.1 16.0 2.7 Bolton 39.5 16.7 1.8 Swindon 45.7 14.1 1.0
Derby 33.0 17.5 2.7 Glasgow 41.1 17.7 1.7 Mansfield 39.1 12.6 1.0
London 30.4 20.4 2.7 Blackburn 42.1 16.8 1.5 Peterborough 46.0 19.3 0.9
Bristol 28.9 18.4 2.7 Rochdale 36.9 18.5 1.4 Grimsby 41.8 14.4 0.9 Stoke 29.0 18.7 2.7 Blackpool 41.0 10.3 1.4 Southend 44.4 13.4 0.9 Newcastle 28.4 19.2 2.6 Birkenhead 42.5 14.2 1.4 Total 34.2 17.6 2.2
![Page 17: The impacts of students on Urban Areas Mark Livingston, Moira Munro, Ivan Turok Glasgow University.](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062410/56649d985503460f94a83603/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
Student employment by PUA Student employment by PUA employment rateemployment rate
y = 0.6379x - 3.207
R2 = 0.1598
0.0
10.0
20.0
30.0
40.0
50.0
60.0
40.0 45.0 50.0 55.0 60.0 65.0 70.0 75.0
% of population aged 16-74 in employment
% o
f S
tud
ents
wh
o h
ave
job
s
PUA
Linear (PUA)
GloucesterSwindon
Liverpool
Aldershot
ManchesterNewcastle
Reading
Birmingham
London
Glasgow
![Page 18: The impacts of students on Urban Areas Mark Livingston, Moira Munro, Ivan Turok Glasgow University.](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062410/56649d985503460f94a83603/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
Displacement effects?Displacement effects?
y = 0.5074x - 2.5612
R2 = 0.1326
y = 0.4119x + 55.344
R2 = 0.3675
0.0
10.0
20.0
30.0
40.0
50.0
60.0
70.0
80.0
90.0
100.0
60.0 65.0 70.0 75.0 80.0 85.0 90.0
% of population aged 19-24 in employment
% o
f S
tud
ents
wo
hav
e jo
bs
and
% o
f E
con
om
ical
ly a
ctiv
e st
ud
ents
wh
o h
ave
job
s
PUA (% students whohave jobs)
PUA (% economicallyactive students who havejobsLinear (PUA (% studentswho have jobs))
Linear (PUA (%economically activestudents who have jobs)
Liverpool
London
London
Liverpool
Manchester
Aldershot
Aldershot
Birmingham
Birmingham
Newcastle
Newcastle
Manchester
![Page 19: The impacts of students on Urban Areas Mark Livingston, Moira Munro, Ivan Turok Glasgow University.](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062410/56649d985503460f94a83603/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
Conclusions:Conclusions:
Students significant as residents.Students significant as residents. Students seem to be able to get jobs Students seem to be able to get jobs
when they wantwhen they want But probably easier in buoyant labour But probably easier in buoyant labour
marketsmarkets No evidence of displacement at No evidence of displacement at
aggregate levelaggregate level But tight concentrationBut tight concentration Enable changing working practices?Enable changing working practices?