Richard Florida and the "creative class," 15 years on.

NA Confidential was born in 2004. Until some time around 2006 or 2007, there was no mechanism on Blogger.com to tag posts with searchable labels.

Since then, the label "creative class" has appeared here only four times, most recently in 2013. By contrast, if I look back to the pre-label era, "creative class" was mentioned as many as 20 times (or more) in 2005 and 2006. Chronologically, this makes sense given that Richard Florida's original book on the topic was released circa 2002.

The point is this: both Florida's concept of a "creative class" and our discussion about it are subject to evolution. They change as conditions change, and that's what "dynamic" is all about, as contrasted with "static."

Two perspectives follow. In the first, the author is more willing to allow Florida a chance to chart the evolution of his characterization.

The Evolution Of The Creative Class, by Pete Saunders (Forbes)

When I was in college and first became politically aware, so to speak, was in the '80s when Ronald Reagan was president. Many people from that era remember that perhaps the principal economic theory driving his election in 1980 was the theory of supply side economcs, or that lower barriers on regulations would lead to more goods and services available to consumers, at a lower price. Related to supply side economics was the so-called "trickle-down" theory, meaning that lower taxes on the wealthy would have a stimulative effect on the economy -- job creators would create more jobs, greater corporate profits would result in higher worker wages. Back then, I didn't buy it because I thought the world's corporate titans would keep the profits for themselves and invest in the business, rather than people. In my opinion, that's pretty much proven to be correct.

When Richard Florida arrived on the scene some fifteen years ago with his book "The Rise of the Creative Class", he seemed to be proposing something very similar to supply-side or trickle-down economic theory. His thesis was that the cities that were thriving were doing so because of the success of those in the creative economy -- talented and educated professionals who worked in knowledge-based industries like business and finance, technology, healthcare and medicine, law, and education. He argued that cities that employed the creative class strategy, reorganizing their built environment to accommodate the needs and desires of creative class types, would find themselves stronger and more prosperous than they'd ever been, because the impact would trickle down to all sectors of the urban economy. I initially bought that idea, because after decades of people -- and money -- flowing away from cities, I believed cities needed the infusion of capital for revitalization.

How far we've all come since then.

Wetherell takes a narrower view. As for those of us here in New Albany chatting about the creative class 13 years ago, and noticing that we didn't seem to have one, I think we were doing the best we could with the evidence we had. There wasn't a politician or community "leader" with a better idea, was there?

As Jeff Gahan's putsch against affordable housing rolls forward, shouldn't we be asking: Are there any now?

Richard Florida Is Sorry, by Sam Wetherell (Jacobin)

For years, Richard Florida preached the gospel of the creative class. His new book is a mea culpa.

Richard Florida, one of the most influential thinkers about cities in postwar America, wants you to know that he got almost everything about cities wrong.

If you live in an urban center in North America, the United Kingdom, or Australia, you are living in Richard Florida’s world. Fifteen years ago, he argued that an influx of what he called the “creative classes” — artists, hipsters, tech workers — were sparking economic growth in places like the Bay Area. Their tolerance, flexibility, and eccentricity dissolved the rigid structures of industrial production and replaced them with the kinds of workplaces and neighborhoods that attracted more young people and, importantly, more investment.

His observations quickly formed the basis of a set of breezy technical solutions. If decaying cities wanted to survive, they had to open cool bars, shabby-chic coffee shops, and art venues that attract young, educated, and tolerant residents. Eventually, the mysterious alchemy of the creative economy would build a new and prosperous urban core.

Today, even Florida recognizes that he was wrong. The rise of the creative class in places like New York, London, and San Francisco created economic growth only for the already rich, displacing the poor and working classes. The problems that once plagued inner cities have moved to the suburbs ...