Here are five predictions for what will shape Britain’s cities this year

For a start, we'll probably hear more from this guy: London's mayor Sadiq Khan. Image: Getty.

Last year was one which confounded predictions and wrong-footed experts in everything from politics to football. But I buy Nesta’s argument that accuracy isn’t everything when it comes to predictions. Thinking about possible futures informs our plans, even if they have to change in light of unexpected events.

With that in mind, here are my predictions about five big issues that will shape the rest of this year for city regions.

First, the rules of global politics and economics will change, with a move towards increased protectionism from some and growing concerns about immigration everywhere. 

Last year’s backlash against globalisation is set to continue with the arrival of President Trump, committed to reintroducing tariffs, revitalising America’s manufacturing industries and working on a bilateral rather than multilateral basis. The French and German elections, whatever their outcome, are set to have wide-ranging implications for the EU and its constitution and, of course, for Brexit negotiations.

All of these changes will affect trade not just internationally but also at the city region level, with different implications depending on the industrial and workforce make-up of each area.

The combination of Brexit with such significant changes in political leaders in the US and EU means that international politics will dominate the national policy agenda this year. It will colour almost every other policy debate and absorb a substantial proportion of ministerial and civil service time, to the exclusion of many other issues – potentially including devolution, which requires considerable policy untangling in such a centralised country.

However, amid international economic upheaval, it is even more important that the UK government does all it can to support city regions up and down the country to thrive. That means, paradoxically, there’s a chance (it may be a slim one but here’s hoping) that the government ends up engaging in more wholesale devolution to city regions to free itself to deal with these international challenges.

Second, as government seeks to support domestic growth, the tension between economics and politics will continue to grow, exemplified by the government’s forthcoming industrial strategy’s recommendations. 

Government needs to support economic growth and boost productivity as quickly as possible in order to raise wages and improve living standards. Economic evidence suggests the way to deliver results quickly is to concentrate investment and resources on the areas that are already successful. This will deliver the fastest, and generate higher levels, of growth and taxes for the UK as a whole.

Yet we already know that the way the UK has supported economic growth in the past has not delivered enough benefit for enough people. This is further bolstered by the fact that many who voted for Brexit and Trump did so in part because they felt their living standards had not improved in recent years. Politicians need to deliver an economy that “works for all” - one that has high productivity and helps the people and places that have been left behind.

But there is no easy way to do this; the risk is that, as economic and political pressure grows, the government ends up investing in policies that history shows neither help growth nor help the more disadvantaged areas – for example, building innovation campuses in deprived communities that lack the skills, business demand or infrastructure to support them to grow rapidly, or for locals to benefit from any jobs created.

The industrial strategy will need to grapple with this. Greg Clark’s commitment to a place-based approach is encouraging but expectations are high, probably too high. To be regarded as successful, the industrial strategy will need to set the tone and pave the way for the UK’s sustainable future growth, make the most of limited funds to invest in innovation and support economic growth, and respond to demands that something happens now for those who are left-behind.

The industrial strategy will shape domestic economic policy for the foreseeable future, and city regions will need to be at the heart of its development and implementation.


My third prediction is that distrust in politicians and the "elite" will continue to grow, with metro mayors and local politics offering new opportunities for national parties to connect with the electorate.

National politicians face stupendous difficulties in delivering on the high expectations of a divided electorate. Take Brexit – the Conservatives need to agree a deal that delivers on all the campaign promises, while holding together its small majority. Labour needs to work out what deal will work best for the 70 per cent of its constituencies who voted Leave and who UKIP is looking to poach, while at the same time as not antagonising its Remain supporters, who the Liberal Democrats are courting. This task will be made more difficult by the lack of trust among the electorate of national politicians and the elite in particular.

Local politics, and the incoming metro mayors in particular, offers new opportunities for national parties to reconnect with a sceptical, divided electorate. The election of city region mayors in May creates a new opportunity for all of the national parties to reinvent themselves and reconnect with the electorate – one recognised by big names like Andy Burnham and Andy Street.

For Labour, there’s an opportunity for mayors to show that Labour can deliver demonstrable change grounded in local priorities rather than political ideology. For the Conservatives, there’s a chance to demonstrate their relevance and value to urban voters, such as in the West Midlands, that have otherwise largely ignored them.

This is not to suggest it will be easy for mayors to build trust. It is a new role and will take time to make a difference. One of the big challenges the new metro mayors will face – as our work on lessons for metro mayors highlights – is setting the tone for the future of the role, as well as for their term. Communicating their aspirations early on, and ensuring they make a start on delivery, will be vital, even if substantial change takes time.

Fourth, 2017 will be a year in which UK city regions and metro mayors rethink their national and international roles.

Across the world, there is a global shift towards mayors being regarded as the pragmatic responses to ideological impasses at national level – the people who not only ensure that services run and potholes are filled, but also those who can take tangible action to tackle big issues like climate change. Global networks such as Benjamin Barber’s Global Parliament of Mayors and C40’s Climate Change Leadership Group will become increasingly important to city leaders keen to make the most of international links and learn from each other about tackling global problems.

Cities will also be looking to pioneer new ways of doing things, with big data and "smart cities" likely to become of increasing interest as cities consider how best to support economic growth and respond better to the needs of their residents and visitors.

Finally, throughout 2017 the nature of work will continue to change, which will impact people and places in different ways. 

Since the recession, the UK has seen strong jobs growth, tepid GDP growth and zero productivity growth. Policy needs to sustain the first and tackle the second and third issues. As the UK continues to specialise in knowledge intensive jobs and industries, skills are becoming more important to individuals’ opportunities and are likely to become a growing policy priority as the government seeks to make it a country that works for everyone.

At the same time, technological advances continue to alter the nature of work, creating the opportunities and challenges of automation, remote working and the gig economy. Job security and in-work poverty will continue to be big challenges facing national and local government. Fixing the skills deficit in the UK will not be easy or quick.

We already know that there are big policy changes on their way this year that will affect the UK labour market in different ways across the country. The National Living Wage will have the biggest impact on low paid cities such as Sheffield, where 28 per cent of people will get a pay rise in April. Questions remain about the long-term impact this will have on future growth – firms replacing people with robots, firms cutting or adding jobs, firms increasing their productivity – particularly in low waged cities.

If 2016 was the year of big decisions about Brexit and Trump, 2017 will be the year these are acted upon. While we know that the fundamentals of what makes city economies thrive have not changed – skills, infrastructure, innovation – how these fundamentals will be affected over the coming year is less clear. 

City regions will be vital to the UK making the most of its new role in the world – we need to do all we can in the months ahead to ensure they are well positioned to do so.

Alexandra Jones is chief executive of the Centre for Cities. 

Want more of this stuff? Follow CityMetric on Twitter or Facebook.

 
 
 
 

Urgently needed: Timely, more detailed standardized data on US evictions

Graffiti asking for rent forgiveness is seen on a wall on La Brea Ave amid the Covid-19 pandemic in Los Angeles, California. (Valerie Macon/AFP via Getty Images)

Last week the Eviction Lab, a team of eviction and housing policy researchers at Princeton University, released a new dashboard that provides timely, city-level US eviction data for use in monitoring eviction spikes and other trends as Covid restrictions ease. 

In 2018, Eviction Lab released the first national database of evictions in the US. The nationwide data are granular, going down to the level of a few city blocks in some places, but lagged by several years, so their use is more geared toward understanding the scope of the problem across the US, rather than making timely decisions to help city residents now. 

Eviction Lab’s new Eviction Tracking System, however, provides weekly updates on evictions by city and compares them to baseline data from past years. The researchers hope that the timeliness of this new data will allow for quicker action in the event that the US begins to see a wave of evictions once Covid eviction moratoriums are phased out.

But, due to a lack of standardization in eviction filings across the US, the Eviction Tracking System is currently available for only 11 cities, leaving many more places facing a high risk of eviction spikes out of the loop.

Each city included in the Eviction Tracking System shows rolling weekly and monthly eviction filing counts. A percent change is calculated by comparing current eviction filings to baseline eviction filings for a quick look at whether a city might be experiencing an uptick.

Timely US eviction data for a handful of cities is now available from the Eviction Lab. (Courtesy Eviction Lab)

The tracking system also provides a more detailed report on each city’s Covid eviction moratorium efforts and more granular geographic and demographic information on the city’s evictions.

Click to the above image to see a city-level eviction map, in this case for Pittsburgh. (Courtesy Eviction Lab)

As part of their Covid Resource, the Eviction Lab together with Columbia Law School professor Emily Benfer also compiled a scorecard for each US state that ranks Covid-related tenant protection measures. A total of 15 of the 50 US states plus Washington DC received a score of zero because those states provided little if any protections.

CityMetric talked with Peter Hepburn, an assistant professor at Rutgers who just finished a two-year postdoc at the Eviction Lab, and Jeff Reichman, principal at the data science research firm January Advisors, about the struggles involved in collecting and analysing eviction data across the US.

Perhaps the most notable hurdle both researchers addressed is that there’s no standardized reporting of evictions across jurisdictions. Most evictions are reported to county-level governments, however what “reporting” means differs among and even within each county. 

In Texas, evictions go through the Justice of the Peace Courts. In Virginia they’re processed by General District Courts. Judges in Milwaukee are sealing more eviction case documents that come through their courtroom. In Austin, Pittsburgh and Richmond, eviction addresses aren’t available online but ZIP codes are. In Denver you have to pay about $7 to access a single eviction filing. In Alabama*, it’s $10 per eviction filing. 

Once the filings are acquired, the next barrier is normalizing them. While some jurisdictions share reporting systems, many have different fields and formats. Some are digital, but many are images of text or handwritten documents that require optical character recognition programs and natural language processors in order to translate them into data. That, or the filings would have to be processed by hand. 

“There's not enough interns in the world to do that work,” says Hepburn.


Aggregating data from all of these sources and normalizing them requires knowledge of the nuances in each jurisdiction. “It would be nice if, for every region, we were looking for the exact same things,” says Reichman. “Instead, depending on the vendor that they use, and depending on how the data is made available, it's a puzzle for each one.”

In December of 2019, US Senators Michael Bennet of Colorado and Rob Portman of Ohio introduced a bill that would set up state and local grants aimed at reducing low-income evictions. Included in the bill is a measure to enhance data collection. Hepburn is hopeful that the bill could one day mean an easier job for those trying to analyse eviction data.

That said, Hepburn and Reichman caution against the public release of granular eviction data. 

“In a lot of cases, what this gets used for is for tenant screening services,” says Hepburn. “There are companies that go and collect these data and make them available to landlords to try to check and see if their potential tenants have been previously evicted, or even just filed against for eviction, without any sort of judgement.”

According to research by Eviction Lab principal Matthew Desmond and Tracey Shollenberger, who is now vice president of science at Harvard’s Center for Policing Equity, residents who have been evicted or even just filed against for eviction often have a much harder time finding equal-quality housing in the future. That coupled with evidence that evictions affect minority populations at disproportionate rates can lead to widening racial and economic gaps in neighborhoods.

While opening up raw data on evictions to the public would not be the best option, making timely, granular data available to researchers and government officials can improve the system’s ability to respond to potential eviction crises.

Data on current and historical evictions can help city officials spot trends in who is getting evicted and who is doing the evicting. It can help inform new housing policy and reform old housing policies that may put more vulnerable citizens at undue risk.

Hepburn says that the Eviction Lab is currently working, in part with the ACLU, on research that shows the extent to which Black renters are disproportionately affected by the eviction crisis.

More broadly, says Hepburn, better data can help provide some oversight for a system which is largely unregulated.

“It's the Wild West, right? There's no right to representation. Defendants have no right to counsel. They're on their own here,” says Hepburn. “I mean, this is people losing their homes, and they're being processed in bulk very quickly by the system that has very little oversight, and that we know very little about.”

A 2018 report by the Philadelphia Mayor’s Taskforce on Eviction Prevention and Response found that of Philadelphia’s 22,500 eviction cases in 2016, tenants had legal representation in only 9% of them.

Included in Hepburn’s eviction data wishlist is an additional ask, something that is rarely included in any of the filings that the Eviction Lab and January Advisors have been poring over for years. He wants to know the relationship between money owed and monthly rent.

“At the individual level, if you were found to owe $1,500, was that on an apartment that's $1,500 a month? Or was it an apartment that's $500 a month? Because that makes a big difference in the story you're telling about the nature of the crisis, right? If you're letting somebody get three months behind that's different than evicting them immediately once they fall behind,” Hepburn says.

Now that the Eviction Tracking System has been out for a week, Hepburn says one of the next steps is to start reaching out to state and local governments to see if they can garner interest in the project. While he’s not ready to name any names just yet, he says that they’re already involved in talks with some interested parties.

*Correction: This story initially misidentified a jurisdiction that charges $10 to access an eviction filing. It is the state of Alabama, not the city of Atlanta. Also, at the time of publication, Peter Hepburn was an assistant professor at Rutgers, not an associate professor.

Alexandra Kanik is a data reporter at CityMetric.