The impacts of students The impacts of students on Urban Areason Urban Areas

Mark Livingston, Moira Munro, Ivan Mark Livingston, Moira Munro, Ivan TurokTurok

Glasgow UniversityGlasgow University

Students in Cities: ContextStudents in Cities: Context

Transient:Transient: DistinctiveDistinctive

Numerically significantNumerically significant Census, 2001: Over 3% of pop.Census, 2001: Over 3% of pop.

Policy towards continuing growthPolicy towards continuing growth Financial support for students Financial support for students

reducedreduced

Growth within citiesGrowth within cities

Table 1: Changing Student Numbers: Selected institutions

Higher education institution 1996-97 2006-07 % change

The University of Birmingham 22967 30415 32.4% The University of Central England in Birmingham* 19220 23860 24.4% The University of Leeds 24222 33315 37.5%

Leeds Metropolitan University 17908 27495 53.5%

The University of Liverpool 18154 20665 13.8%

Liverpool John Moores University 19406 24370 25.6% The University of Oxford 19805 24640 24.4% The University of Newcastle-upon-Tyne 16096 19700 22.4%

The University of Northumbria at Newcastle 19107 29630 55.1% Source: HESA *Name changed to Birmingham City University

Research questionsResearch questions

Students as residents:Students as residents: Lively, buzzy quartersLively, buzzy quarters Degraded, deteriorated neighbourhoodsDegraded, deteriorated neighbourhoods

Students as workers:Students as workers: Enhancing city competitiveness, Enhancing city competitiveness,

productivityproductivity Displacing local jobs.Displacing local jobs.

Studentification:Cardiff.Studentification:Cardiff.

Research questionsResearch questions

Students as residents:Students as residents: Lively, buzzy quartersLively, buzzy quarters Degraded, deteriorated neighbourhoodsDegraded, deteriorated neighbourhoods

Students as workers:Students as workers: Enhancing city competitiveness, Enhancing city competitiveness,

productivityproductivity Displacing local jobs.Displacing local jobs.

Student cities?Student cities?

PUAs %

Students

% Students living at

home PUAs %

Students

% Students living at home

PUAs

% Students

% Students living at

home Cambridge 17.0 2.9 Stoke 3.4 19.5 Birkenhead 1.3 58.4 Oxford 16.7 2.8 Manchester 3.4 22.1 Chatham 1.3 40.9 Cardiff 7.0 10.8 Hull 3.4 13.3 Aldershot 1.2 48.6 Southampton 6.5 8.7 Derby 3.3 18.7 Warrington 1.2 49.2 Coventry 5.7 14.3 Reading 3.2 14.9 Wakefield 1.2 36.2 York 5.5 7.5 Belfast 3.1 41.3 Ipswich 1.2 31.4 Leeds 5.1 12.6 Glasgow 3.1 43.6 Burnley 1.2 49.0 Nottingham 5.0 10.3 Northampton 2.9 17.4 Milton Keynes 1.2 40.1 Brighton 4.9 10.0 Bournemouth 2.8 15.8 Barnsley 1.1 43.8 Leicester 4.5 21.1 Portsmouth 2.8 21.2 Wigan 1.1 60.5 Edinburgh 4.5 15.8 Huddersfield 2.7 31.6 Worthing 1.1 42.3 Sheffield 4.2 13.4 Birmingham 2.7 32.5 Crawley 1.1 54.4 Bristol 4.2 11.8 Sunderland 2.7 27.1 Gloucester 1.1 42.0 Plymouth 4.1 12.0 Preston 2.6 28.1 Hastings 1.0 38.4 Swansea 4.1 21.2 Bradford 2.6 37.4 Swindon 1.0 35.3 Liverpool 3.9 23.2 Middlesbrough 2.0 40.4 Doncaster 1.0 45.1 Aberdeen 3.8 23.8 Bolton 1.8 48.8 Peterborough 0.9 41.2 London 3.6 31.0 Telford 1.6 29.0 Mansfield 0.9 49.3 Luton 3.5 30.0 Rochdale 1.5 57.6 Grimsby 0.9 41.1 Norwich 3.5 10.7 Blackburn 1.3 48.5 Southend 0.9 49.1 Newcastle 3.5 22.7 Blackpool 1.3 40.7

Student neighbourhoods?Student neighbourhoods?

More students create more More students create more concentrated neighbourhoods.concentrated neighbourhoods.

Students are strongly residentially Students are strongly residentially segregated:segregated:

Index of dissimilarity:Index of dissimilarity:

D=∑n

i=1

ti | pi-P|

2TP(1-P)

Segregation:Segregation:

% Students

% lndex of Dissimilarity

% Students

% lndex of Dissimilarity

% Students

% lndex of Dissimilarity

Cardiff 7.0 82.8 Coventry 5.7 63.6 Swindon 1.0 33.5 Leeds 5.1 80.7 Aberdeen 3.8 63.0 Blackpool 1.3 32.3 Southampton 6.5 78.6 Sunderland 2.7 62.8 Peterborough 0.9 31.8 Hull 3.4 76.1 Portsmouth 2.8 61.7 Barnsley 1.1 31.3 Sheffield 4.2 75.6 Northampton 2.9 60.2 Gloucester 1.1 31.3 Nottingham 5.0 74.7 Belfast 3.1 60.1 Grimsby 0.9 29.9

Cambridge 17.0 74.5 Bournemouth 2.8 58.8 Milton Keynes 1.2 29.6

Reading 3.2 73.4 Telford 1.6 57.1 Doncaster 1.0 28.8 Edinburgh 4.5 71.9 Bradford 2.6 56.5 Blackburn 1.3 28.7 Swansea 4.1 71.5 Preston 2.6 55.3 Mansfield 0.9 27.4 Plymouth 4.1 71.5 Birmingham 2.7 55.3 Aldershot 1.2 27.4 Stoke 3.4 68.4 Brighton 4.9 53.9 Rochdale 1.5 27.3 Bristol 4.2 68.1 Huddersfield 2.7 50.3 Worthing 1.1 27.1 Norwich 3.5 66.8 Luton 3.5 48.2 Southend 0.9 26.9 Oxford 16.7 66.4 Wakefield 1.2 48.0 Crawley 1.1 25.6 Manchester 3.4 66.1 Middlesbrough 2.0 46.2 Burnley 1.2 25.4 Derby 3.3 65.5 Glasgow 3.1 44.2 Hastings 1.0 25.3 York 5.5 65.5 Ipswich 1.2 39.1 Birkenhead 1.3 22.8 Liverpool 3.9 65.3 London 3.6 36.7 Wigan 1.1 22.6 Newcastle 3.5 64.6 Bolton 1.8 35.1 Leicester 4.5 63.8 Chatham 1.3 34.6

More students, greater More students, greater segregationsegregation

% students in the PUA by Index of Disimilarity

R2 = 0.3746

0.0

20.0

40.0

60.0

80.0

100.0

120.0

0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 12.0 14.0 16.0 18.0

% of Students

Ind

ex

of

dis

imila

rity

Primary Urban Areas

Linear (Primary Urban Areas)

Log. (Primary Urban Areas)

Atrium

Rapid Residential TurnoverRapid Residential Turnover

Unstable, lack of cohesion etc.

PUA % Students

Gross Turnover

(%)

Mean turnover

in top decile of student areas*

PUA % Students

Gross Turnover

(%)

Mean turnover

in top decile of student areas*

PUA % Students Gross Turnover

(%)

Mean turnover

in top decile of student areas*

Cambridge 17.0 35.3 45.0 Stoke 3.4 19.0 44.5 Chatham 1.3 20.6 46.6 Oxford 16.7 37.1 46.7 Manchester 3.4 20.9 44.3 Aldershot 1.2 22.4 0.0 Cardiff 7.0 26.1 37.7 Hull 3.4 24.8 54.9 Warrington 1.2 17.0 18.0 Southampton 6.5 27.2 56.5 Derby 3.3 21.2 45.4 Wakefield 1.2 18.5 31.5 Coventry 5.7 21.8 34.7 Reading 3.2 23.2 45.6 Ipswich 1.2 20.2 32.1 York 5.5 25.3 44.4 Glasgow 3.0 18.0 30.2 Burnley 1.2 20.6 N/A Leeds 5.1 25.5 71.7 Northampton 2.9 23.7 38.8 Milton Keynes 1.2 23.5 58.1 Nottingham 5.0 23.6 53.3 Bournemouth 2.8 23.2 41.7 Barnsley 1.1 17.8 33.9 Brighton 4.9 26.4 41.7 Portsmouth 2.8 22.3 41.6 Wigan 1.1 16.9 N/A Leicester 4.5 21.5 39.2 Huddersfield 2.7 19.5 31.1 Worthing 1.1 21.6 N/A Edinburgh 4.2 24.2 49.9 Birmingham 2.7 17.8 34.1 Crawley 1.1 19.4 N/A Sheffield 4.2 21.9 53.5 Sunderland 2.7 18.1 36.0 Gloucester 1.1 21.1 N/A Bristol 4.2 23.7 48.7 Preston 2.6 19.5 37.2 Hastings 1.0 25.3 N/A Plymouth 4.1 25.9 51.7 Bradford 2.6 20.4 36.3 Swindon 1.0 20.2 54.8 Swansea 4.1 20.2 36.4 Middlesbrough 2.0 18.8 42.0 Doncaster 1.0 18.5 15.0 Liverpool 3.9 18.8 40.9 Bolton 1.8 18.5 24.0 Peterborough 0.9 22.6 N/A London 3.6 22.0 27.2 Telford 1.6 22.1 27.7 Mansfield 0.9 18.6 21.9 Aberdeen 3.6 20.9 37.3 Rochdale 1.5 18.8 N/A Grimsby 0.9 21.0 N/A Luton 3.5 19.9 33.0 Blackburn 1.3 22.5 23.7 Southend 0.9 17.2 N/A Norwich 3.5 22.2 40.2 Blackpool 1.3 19.4 22.9 Newcastle 3.5 21.4 51.0 Birkenhead 1.3 16.3 N/A

Student as workers.Student as workers.

Patterns of work vary:Patterns of work vary: Increasing term time working (40%)Increasing term time working (40%)

Long hours:Long hours: 20% < 10hrs20% < 10hrs 25% 10-15 hrs25% 10-15 hrs 1/3 20hrs+1/3 20hrs+

Concentrated:Concentrated: Entry level positionsEntry level positions 38% retail; 18% hotels and catering38% retail; 18% hotels and catering

Bring Bring advantagesadvantages to employers. to employers. FlexibilityFlexibility Personal qualities.Personal qualities.

Impacts on urban labour Impacts on urban labour marketsmarkets

% of students

who have jobs*

Mean weekly hours

worked+

student workers as a % of

all employed*

% of students

who have jobs*

Mean weekly hours

worked+

student workers as a % of

all employed

*

% of students who have jobs*

Mean weekly hours

worked+

student workers as a % of

all employed

*

Oxford 16.4 11.7 7.1 Manchester 28.2 15.7 2.5 Ipswich 46.0 14.7 1.3

Cambridge 12.7 10.8 5.3 Bournemouth 34.9 17.9 2.5 Aldershot 50.1 12.9 1.2

Cardiff 24.5 13.2 4.3 Northampton 36.8 17.6 2.4 Telford 34.2 15.6 1.2 Southampton 26.3 16.7 4.0 Sunderland 32.6 14.5 2.4 Burnley 38.5 24.1 1.2

Coventry 23.9 15.1 3.6 Preston 38.7 18.1 2.4 Worthing 48.6 17.3 1.2

Brighton 29.8 15.7 3.6 Hull 24.8 20.8 2.3 Wigan 45.4 14.6 1.2

Leeds 28.5 19.3 3.5 Portsmouth 35.2 18.2 2.3 Warrington 45.3 16.4 1.2

York 26.7 15.3 3.5 Edinburgh 36.8 18.5 2.3 Wakefield 39.6 17.4 1.2

Luton 37.3 18.3 3.3 Huddersfield 32.9 15.0 2.2 Chatham 39.0 19.8 1.2

Leicester 28.3 15.0 3.3 Norwich 26.4 14.9 2.2 Gloucester 48.5 19.2 1.1

Plymouth 30.2 15.8 3.2 Birmingham 29.1 17.8 2.2 Barnsley 37.3 15.8 1.1

Liverpool 26.6 17.7 3.1 Reading 33.6 19.4 2.1 Hastings 41.5 11.9 1.1

Belfast 38.4 18.4 3.0 Aberdeen 39.6 18.1 2.1 Milton Keynes 43.8 18.8 1.1

Swansea 26.9 20.7 2.9 Bradford 28.1 18.5 2.0 Doncaster 39.4 8.8 1.0 Nottingham 22.1 15.3 2.8

Middlesbrough 34.3 15.9 1.8 Crawley 43.7 15.7 1.0

Sheffield 25.1 16.0 2.7 Bolton 39.5 16.7 1.8 Swindon 45.7 14.1 1.0

Derby 33.0 17.5 2.7 Glasgow 41.1 17.7 1.7 Mansfield 39.1 12.6 1.0

London 30.4 20.4 2.7 Blackburn 42.1 16.8 1.5 Peterborough 46.0 19.3 0.9

Bristol 28.9 18.4 2.7 Rochdale 36.9 18.5 1.4 Grimsby 41.8 14.4 0.9 Stoke 29.0 18.7 2.7 Blackpool 41.0 10.3 1.4 Southend 44.4 13.4 0.9 Newcastle 28.4 19.2 2.6 Birkenhead 42.5 14.2 1.4 Total 34.2 17.6 2.2

Student employment by PUA Student employment by PUA employment rateemployment rate

y = 0.6379x - 3.207

R2 = 0.1598

0.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0

40.0 45.0 50.0 55.0 60.0 65.0 70.0 75.0

% of population aged 16-74 in employment

% o

f S

tud

ents

wh

o h

ave

job

s

PUA

Linear (PUA)

GloucesterSwindon

Liverpool

Aldershot

ManchesterNewcastle

Reading

Birmingham

London

Glasgow

Displacement effects?Displacement effects?

y = 0.5074x - 2.5612

R2 = 0.1326

y = 0.4119x + 55.344

R2 = 0.3675

0.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0

70.0

80.0

90.0

100.0

60.0 65.0 70.0 75.0 80.0 85.0 90.0

% of population aged 19-24 in employment

% o

f S

tud

ents

wo

hav

e jo

bs

and

% o

f E

con

om

ical

ly a

ctiv

e st

ud

ents

wh

o h

ave

job

s

PUA (% students whohave jobs)

PUA (% economicallyactive students who havejobsLinear (PUA (% studentswho have jobs))

Linear (PUA (%economically activestudents who have jobs)

Liverpool

London

London

Liverpool

Manchester

Aldershot

Aldershot

Birmingham

Birmingham

Newcastle

Newcastle

Manchester

Conclusions:Conclusions:

Students significant as residents.Students significant as residents. Students seem to be able to get jobs Students seem to be able to get jobs

when they wantwhen they want But probably easier in buoyant labour But probably easier in buoyant labour

marketsmarkets No evidence of displacement at No evidence of displacement at

aggregate levelaggregate level But tight concentrationBut tight concentration Enable changing working practices?Enable changing working practices?