Richard Florida's The Rise of the Creative Class made a bit of a splash last year. His argument -- that "cultural creatives" (an intentionally broad social-economic category) were most attracted to diverse, tolerant urban environments -- resonated with many, particularly those who were encompassed by his "creative class" definition. Florida asserted that the American locations driving the boom of the late 1990s, as well as what we here call the "Tech Bloom" of the 2000s, had particular social-cultural elements in common: relative population density; lively artistic communities; diverse cultures; an embrace of (or at least strong tolerance for) gay communities; and a multiplicity of universities. Urban centers that encouraged contact and connections across a wide array of cultures tended to stimulate the new ideas underlying the digital economy.
Florida's argument is controversial, to say the least. His definition of cultural creatives includes professional categories other sociologists might otherwise omit, and it remains to be seen whether his assertions about the connection between creative workers and economic growth will hold true over the long run. Still, his basic argument -- that knowledge and media work represent key engines of economic growth, and environments supportive of cultural and intellectual diversity are attractive to these kinds of industries -- does seem to capture some of the underlying drivers of the current state of American society.
In his research, Florida does not pay much attention to the environmental attitude of his creative class, other than lumping it into "lifestyle." But while reading an article in yesterday's Christian Science Monitor -- "In Portland, living the green American dream" -- it struck me that there seems to be significant overlap between the creative class professionals and the rapidly growing circle of people embracing green/sustainable design in their lives. People who seek out urban environments with a combination of diverse stimuli and dense connections increasingly also are the people looking for material surroundings with a combination of smart design and high efficiency. The creative class is taking on a distinctly Viridian shade of green.
This can be illustrated by comparing some lists: Richard Florida's list of top Creative Index cities (an amalgam of a variety of factors); a recently-released listing of top cities for hybrid car purchases; and the current list of cities with the most LEED-certified buildings. In all cases, "city" means greater metropolitan area (e.g, San Francisco includes Oakland and San Jose). Bold represents cities showing up on all three lists; italics represents cities on 2 of the 3 lists.
Florida's Top 15 Creative Index cities (City, Index score):
1. San Francisco 1057
2. Austin 1028
3. San Diego 1015
3. Boston 1015
5. Seattle 1008
6. Chapel Hill 996
7. Houston 980
8. Washington 964
9. New York 962
10. Dallas 960
10. Minneapolis 960
12. Los Angeles 942
14. Atlanta 940
14. Denver 940
15. Chicago 935
Top 15 cities for hybrids (City, No. of hybrids registered in 2004, % growth over hybrids registered in 2003):
1. Los Angeles 10,399 102.0%
2. San Francisco Bay Area 8,051 94.0%
3. Washington DC 6,473 52.0%
4. New York 3.779 111.9%
5. Seattle-Tacoma 2,857 67.3%
6. Boston 2,720 84.9%
7. Sacramento 2,182 108.6%
8. Chicago 2,122 71.8%
9. San Diego 1,851 134.3%
10. Philadelphia 1,770 83.2%
11. Portland, OR 1,767 103.3%
12. Baltimore 1,514 79.8%
13. Denver 1,432 76.1%
14. Phoenix 1,217 82.5%
15. Dallas Ft Worth 1,076 82.1%
Top 13 urban regions for "green buildings" (City, LEED certified projects):
1. Seattle 14
2. Portland 10
3. San Francisco 9
4. Los Angeles 9
5. Atlanta 6
6. Pittsburgh 6
7. Sacramento 5
8. Washington 4
9. Denver 4
10. Arlington 3
10. Baltimore 3
10. Boston 3
(15 additional cities have 2 LEED certified buildings)
The three lists are not identical by any means, but the amount of overlap is notable. 11 of the top 15 Creative Index cities are among the top cities for hybrid cars, LEED certified buildings, or both. Boston, Denver, Los Angeles, San Francisco, Seattle and Washington DC show up on all three lists; the cities that show up on two of the three include some predictable entries (Portland, New York) and some surprises (Dalls, Sacramento). Austin, #2 on Florida's list, actually does better than this comparison suggests, as it's #16 on the hybrid car list and among the cities with 2 LEED buildings, just missing the cut-off.
There's certainly an economic aspect to this line-up. Hybrids are more expensive than equivalent gas-only cars, and while there's plenty of evidence that LEED-compliance is not costly, the public perception is often that green buildings cost more. To some degree, the Creative Index cities may generally have more hybrids and LEED buildings than others because they can afford them. But it's hard to deny the cultural element -- the connection between centers of innovation and centers of sustainable design is clear.
So what does this suggest?
First and foremost, it suggests that the next wave of economic innovation may well come from those locations with the greatest support for sustainable technologies and infrastructure. While some of this will come from existing "creative class" residents pushing for greener buildings, transit and industries in their home communities, some will come from innovators and entrepreneurs seeking out appealing hubs of urban sustainability, moving to take advantage of green material surroundings already in evidence. The creative class is demonstrably a mobile class, willing to shift geographic locations as readily as they shift places of employment.
Cities or regions wishing to become innovation centers, then, should consider ways to adopt more sustainable urban planning. If the people most involved in generating economic growth are in fact starting to pay increasing attention to their environmental footprints, the up-front investments in better public transit, support for solar panels and green roofs, even a shift to lighter-color street pavement will pay off handsomely.
It also suggests that we're on the verge of seeing an explosion of sustainable design products and services across the economic spectrum. Purchasing decisions of the creative class -- and marketing crafted by the creatives themselves -- can be more influential than their raw numbers might suggest. Hybrid cars are a good example. The number of hybrid cars on the road is, in absolute terms, still very small. While over 83,000 hybrid vehicles were registered in the US in 2004, that represented only a small fraction of all cars registered. Yet hybrids already have a significant cultural weight, appearing in movies and television, in newspapers and magazines, and talked up by politicians and academics. As a result, the decision-makers at GM and Daimler-Chrysler, who had originally only paid attention to the numbers, are now scrambling to get hybrids on the market as quickly as possible.
The greening of the creative class will not, in and of itself, be sufficient to transform the American cultural landscape into a low-footprint, high-efficiency society. On its own, it's a leading indicator for the success of the "baseline scenario." But even if it's not actively transformative, it's catalytic. A society already familiar with the style and virtues of sustainable dwellings, design and transit is one more willing to consider even bigger changes. A green creative class is not enough to get us to where we need to be, but it certainly points us in the right direction.
