No, Brexit is probably not responsible for certain UK cities’ population decline

Oxford. Image: Getty.

This year’s Cities Outlook from the Centre for Cities shows that, while the population of the UK continues to grow apace, six cities saw their populations fall. More surprising is that, of the six, four are in the Greater South East of England. So what’s going on?

This group of four is made up of Oxford (a fall of 0.5 per cent), Luton (a 0.6 per cent fall), Aldershot (0.1 per cent fall), and Ipswich (a marginal fall of 0.03 per cent, or 40 people). They’re joined by Aberdeen, which maintains the falls seen in previous years, and Sunderland – where the population growth has been sluggish for some time.

Given the strong growth in the Greater South East’s population as a whole, and the growth seen in previous years in the cities themselves (as the chart below shows), their fall in population is somewhat of a surprise. Digging into the data shows what contributed to this.

Source: Centre for Cities/NOMIS, mid-year population estimates.

An age breakdown of this population data shows that three of the four cities – all except Ipswich – saw a decline in their population aged 25 to 49. Interestingly, this fall was seen in many other cities in the Greater South East, with a total of 15 of the 19 cities in this area losing 25 to 49-year-olds.

The components of population growth – migration to and from the rest of England and Wales, migration to and from the rest of the world, and the difference between births and deaths – show that the main cause of population decline in these cities was people leaving for elsewhere in England and Wales.

Between 2016 and 2017 the four cities lost between 1,000 to over 5,000 people to other British cities. International migration on the other hand, although not necessarily from EU countries, is actually offsetting this loss of population, as the chart below shows.

Source: Centre for Cities/NOMIS, mid-year population estimates.

As we pointed out in our response to the recently released Immigration White Paper, cities are heavily reliant on EU immigration of high-and low-skilled labour, especially in the Greater South East, with the most successful cities, such as Cambridge, Oxford and London, among the places with the highest share of migrants. While many predicted that the 2016 referendum would lead to a decline in this migrant pool, the data available suggests that this is not the reason behind the fall in population in Aldershot, Ipswich, Luton and Oxford to date.

This, of course, is only one year’s worth of data. Only time will tell whether the cities’ population declines, and their demographic make-up, persist in the years to come.

Juliana Lindell is a research intern at the Centre for Cities, on whose blog this post first appeared.


 

 
 
 
 

What Citymapper’s business plan tells us about the future of Smart Cities

Some buses. Image: David Howard/Wikimedia Commons.

In late September, transport planning app Citymapper announced that it had accumulated £22m in losses, nearly doubling its total loss since the start of 2019. 

Like Uber and Lyft, Citymapper survives on investment funding rounds, hoping to stay around long enough to secure a monopoly. Since the start of 2019, the firm’s main tool for establishing that monopoly has been the “Citymapper Pass”, an attempt to undercut Transport for London’s Oyster Card. 

The Pass was teased early in the year and then rolled out in the spring, promising unlimited travel in zones 1-2 for £31 a week – cheaper than the TfL rate of £35.10. In effect, that means Citymapper itself is paying the difference for users to ride in zones 1-2. The firm is basically subsidising its customers’ travel on TfL in the hopes of getting people hooked on its app. 

So what's the company’s gameplan? After a painful, two-year long attempt at a joint minibus and taxi service – known variously as Smartbus, SmartRide, and Ride – Citymapper killed off its plans at a bus fleet in July. Instead of brick and mortar, it’s taken a gamble on their mobile mapping service with Pass. It operates as a subscription-based prepaid mobile wallet, which is used in the app (or as a contactless card) and operates as a financial service through MasterCard. Crucially, the service offers fully integrated, unlimited travel, which gives the company vital information about how people are actually moving and travelling in the city.

“What Citymapper is doing is offering a door-to-door view of commuter journeys,” says King’s College London lecturer Jonathan Reades, who researches smart cities and the Oyster card. 

TfL can only glean so much data from your taps in and out, a fact which has been frustrating for smart city researchers studying transit data, as well as companies trying to make use of that data. “Neither Uber nor TfL know what you do once you leave their system. But Citymapper does, because it’s not tied to any one system and – because of geolocation and your search – it knows your real origin and destination.” 

In other words, linking ticketing directly with a mapping service means the company can get data not only about where riders hop on and off the tube, but also how they're planning their route, whether they follow that plan, and what their final destination is. The app is paying to discount users’ fares in order to gain more data.

Door-to-door destinations gives a lot more detailed information about a rider’s profile as well: “Citymapper can see that you’re also looking at high-profile restaurant as destinations, live in an address on a swanky street in Hammersmith, and regularly travel to the City.” Citymapper can gain insights into what kind of people are travelling, where they hang out, and how they cluster in transit systems. 

And on top of finding out data about how users move in a city, Citymapper is also gaining financial data about users through ticketing, which reflects a wider trend of tech companies entering into the financial services market – like Apple’s recent foray into the credit card business with Apple Card. Citymapper is willing to take a massive hit because the data related to how people actually travel, and how they spend their money, can do a lot more for them than help the company run a minibus service: by financialising its mapping service, it’s getting actual ticketing data that Google Maps doesn’t have, while simultaneously helping to build a routing platform that users never really have to leave


The integrated transit app, complete with ticket data, lets Citymapper get a sense of flows and transit corridors. As the Guardian points out, this gives Citymapper a lot of leverage to negotiate with smaller transit providers – scooter services, for example – who want to partner with it down the line. 

“You can start to look at ‘up-sell’ and ‘cross-sell’ opportunities,” explain Reades. “If they see that a particular journey or modal mix is attractive then they are in a position to act on that with their various mobility offerings or to sell that knowledge to others. 

“They might sell locational insights to retailers or network operators,” he goes on. “If you put a scooter bay here then we think that will be well-used since our data indicates X; or if you put a store here then you’ll be capturing more of that desirable scooter demographic.” With the rise of electric rideables, Citymapper can position itself as a platform operator that holds the key to user data – acting a lot like TfL, but for startup scooter companies and car-sharing companies.

The app’s origins tell us a lot about the direction of its monetisation strategy. Originally conceived as “Busmapper”, the app used publicly available transit data as the base for its own datasets, privileging transit data over Google Maps’ focus on walking and driving.  From there it was able to hone in on user data and extract that information to build a more efficient picture of the transit system. By collecting more data, it has better grounds for selling that for urban planning purposes, whether to government or elsewhere.

This kind of data-centred planning is what makes smart cities possible. It’s only become appealing to civic governments, Reades explains, since civic government has become more constrained by funding. “The reason its gaining traction with policy-makers is because the constraints of austerity mean that they’re trying to do more with less. They use data to measure more efficient services.”  

The question now is whether Citymapper’s plan to lure riders away from the Oyster card will be successful in the long term. Consolidated routing and ticketing data is likely only the first step. It may be too early to tell how it will affect public agencies like TfL – but right now Citymapper is establishing itself as a ticketing service - gaining valuable urban data, financialising its app, and running up those losses in the process.

When approached for comment, Citymapper claimed that Pass is not losing money but that it is a “growth startup which is developing its revenue streams”. The company stated that they have never sold data, but “regularly engage with transport authorities around the world to help improve open data and their systems”

Josh Gabert-Doyon tweets as @JoshGD.