URBAN SIZE

• As city grows, the benefits of agglomeration economies are partly offset by several costs:

longer commuting times, higher land costs, more congestion and pollution

• How does an increase in city size affect the welfare utility (welfare) of the typical worker?

Workforce(millions) Wage

Labour Income Commuting cost Utility

1 $8 $64 $5 $59

2 $10 $80 $10 $70

4 $11 $88 $22 $66

Utility and city size

Combes et al. (2005)

Wage curve: wage as a function of the local labour force, w(N), is increasing in the size of the labour force reflecting agglomeration economies

Cost of living curve: commuting, housingand other consumption goods

Labour supply curve: indicates for any level of net wage, the amount of laboursupplied in the area (here it is assumedperfect mobility)

DIVERSITY, SPECIALIZATION AND URBAN SIZE

Cities of different size and productive specialization can be found in all the economies

Specialized and diversified cities co-exist

Medium size cities tend to be highly specialized in their production patterns, in terms of goods exported form the city

All cities have a base of locally produced goods and services just for local consumption: housing, retail and personal services, business services, repairs and education and health services. (about 60% of total employment)

• Two industries of similar size nationally (USA, 1987): Traditional textile (excluding apparel) High-tech instruments

Textiles Most metro areas have no employmentNone of metro areas > 1m even have 1% of employment in textileMost of specialized areas are medium-small

Instruments: Most metro areas have no employmentVery large metro areas record small sharesSome areas >1m. record shares that are almost 4% of local employment

Why is there specialization?

The effects of economies of localization specific to industries

(different industries have different effects of economies of localization)

+ Agglomeration costs depend on urban size (they are not specific to industry)

E.g.: Brasil 70s 10.000 hab. → 1m. Cost of living rose 2.5-3 fold

For the US between small and vary large, cost of living differentials, 80%-100%

For firms this means wage and land costs rise with city size

If economies of agglomeration are internal to the industry A firm only benefits from locating near others of its own type

City specialized in food production + City specialized in chemicals

→ Everyone loses Production activities unrelated → No productivity gains Combining those cities escalates commuting distances, congestion, rents, pollution,... Cities stay separate

But specialization also means cities will be of different sizes Equilibrium size determined by trade-off between marginal benefits of

economies of agglomeration against marginal costs of diseconomies of agglomeration

City size will depend on the degree of economies of localization

Different urban size linked to different specialization

• What about large metro areas?

Large areas tend to be more serviceLarger areas have higher than national average share of employment in FIRE→ Export to other cities

Large areas tend to have very diverse manufacturing bases

Herfindahl index for manufacturing industries decreases with urban size

Why is it that we find any manufacturing in large metro areas and why is the base so diverse?

Low productivity in both industries, textiles and instruments, in large cities

There are at least two general types of manufacturing activity in large metro areas

Both require large local diverse labour and product markets to thrive

Arts, publishing and high fashion apparel Volatile markets (trends are set and broken and products are tested locally Require a diverse local market (hire just the right people with special talents for just the right job) Agglomeration effects due to urban size, not just industry size (Economies of urbanization)

R&D activities New products undergoing development need to be “tested” in large local product markets Require a very diverse and alive environment, where ideas flow freely across firms Require very specific skilled employees for very specific developments (large diverse labour market) R&D activities don’t show up in “output” in productivity figures above

Duranton y Puga (2005) “From sectoral to functional urban specialisation”

Larger cities have become specialised in management functions whereas smaller cities have become specialised in production

This urban transformation is interrelated to the increasing separation of the management and production facilities of individual firms

Recent studies find patterns in the location of headquarters and business services:

• Headquarters have a strong propensity to out-source business services

• Headquarter location decisions are mostly driven by the existence of a large and diverse local supply of business services rather than by the presence of other headquarters

Model

Firms, in each sector, require both sector-specific inputs as well as business services for their headquarters

There are agglomeration economies in all sectors

Firms face a trade-off between spatial integration of both headquarters and production facilities and the spatial separation of these two functions

If firms decide to split, then both parts of the operation can fully benefit from the relevant agglomeration economies: Sector specific inputs for production Business services for headquarters

Spatial integration Firms manage the interaction between production facilities and headquarters more

efficiently because of savings on communication costs But more expensive inputs due to crowding

1. When communication costs high → split costly → low demand for labour from spatially disintegrated firms → firm will pay low wages

2. When communication costs low → separation efficient → cities specialized by function → each function benefit from specific agglomeration effects → headquarters will pay higher wages