Use of GIS in studying urban employment structure and delineating the Aerotropolis: Memphis, TN

Transcription

1 Use of GIS in studying urban employment structure and delineating the Aerotropolis: Memphis, TN Angela Antipova, University of Memphis Department of Earth Sciences 28th Annual Louisiana Remote Sensing and GIS Workshop April 25, 2012

2 Memphis America s distribution center cotton and lumber to nation and world, multimodal logistics complex at global level. FedEx, has its headquarters in Memphis, handles almost all cargo. Superb air connectivity, Source: FedEx Ground delivery truck FedEx Freight Truck 2

3 FedEx handles almost all cargo. 2007: FedEx handled 94% of 3.7mln metric tons of cargo over 2mln packages per night. 300 cargo flights, both domestic and international FedEx Express Airbus A

4 300 cargo flights, both domestic and international 4

5 The idea that where we live and work is determined in large part by where commerce takes place and that this is determined by the transportation of goods and services is not a new one. where the largest cities in the world are to realize that this is how we ve built cities next to seaports and river ports, and after that next to rail lines and then interstates. Airports are the next logical locations for urban planning. Donna Clapp, Aerotropolis. The landing in the heart of 21st century urban planning. Business facilities,

6 What is Aerotropolis? Kassarda, John.D. Did not coin the word Airport city a ¼ mile north of Zhuhai airport (China) Repurposed use of the word 2000, Urban Land Attempt to document something categorically new Identify a phenomenon 6

7 What is Aerotropolis? A new urban form placing airports in the center with cities growing around them, connecting workers, suppliers, executives, and goods to the global marketplace. ( 7

8 8

9 9

10 More on Aerotropolis, studies global connectivity, local economic growth by attracting aviation-related and other business poor air service might inhibit local employment growth attractiveness of city is decreased Studies on Aerotropolis as job generators (Brueckner, 2003): frequent airline traffic and urban economic development: facilitates face-to-face contact with businesses in other places high-tech industries attracting new firms to metro area. manufacturing, distribution facilities, retail, hotel, entertainment, convention, trade complexes ( 10

11 Aerotropolis and service-related jobs Increase in airline traffic frequent service stimulates established enterprises (Brueckner, 2003). Service related employment benefit more wholesale and retail trade, services, FIRE-finance, insurance, and real estate; 10% increase in airline traffic is associated with a 1% of an increase in service-related jobs, goods-related jobs (manufacturing) benefit less no such relationship between air travel and manufacturing Chicago s O Hare airport: increase in air traffic by 50%, service-related employment in Chicago metro area might be raised by 185,000 jobs. 11

12 Other studies: More on Aerotropolis connection between size of an airport and high-tech employment (Button et al., 1999), connection between base-year airline traffic and population growth in a metro area (Greene, 2002). 12

13 Physical structure (Urban form) Time rather than distance as primary aerotropolis planning metric important that air-related commercial facilities are within close proximity to airport, 15mins. 13

14 14

15 15

16 Physical structure urban form (cont-d): development along airport transportation corridors cluster-shaped rather than strip-shaped. aerotropolis is not a static model, no aerotropolis is the same all include similar features Amsterdam Zuidas, Beijing Capital Int l Airport, Chicago O'Hare Int l Airport, Las Colinas, Texas, and South Korea's Songdo Int l Business District (Kassarda, 2011) 16

17 Aerotropolis New urban form airport, outlying corridors, airport-related businesses located within airport city and along transportation corridors associated residential clusters. similar in shape to traditional metropolis (central city and concentric suburbs) can stretch up to 20 miles (30 km) outward from an airport. 17

18 Problem The real question is not whether Aerotropolises will evolve around major airports (they surely will). It's whether they will form and grow in an intelligent manner, minimizing problems and bringing about the greatest returns to the airport, its users, businesses, surrounding communities, and the larger region it serves. My question is: How to delineate the boundaries of an Aerotropolis? 18

19 19

20 20

21 Study area Shelby county, TN Fayette county, TN Desoto County, MS TAZ (Traffic Analysis Zone) 21

22 22

23 23

24 m Railroad Interstate Miles 24

25 m Trucking facility Intermodal terminal Rail yard Railroad Interstate Miles 25

26 Population density /sq miles 26

27 Good highway connections are of utmost importance to air express and air cargo operations. battle for air freight is won on ground not air good highway connections a key factor. obusiness/aero_exec_summ.aspx 27

28 Hub worldwide accessible rail access, excellent airline passenger service multimodal infrastructure: air, land (roads and rail), water Memphis port is 4 th largest inland water port in U.S.) transfer goods and people effectively, further influence land values, business development, resulting urban form. 28

29 A rendering of the soon-to-be-finished Ground Transportation Center at Memphis International Airport. Moving walkways will transport customers between the Terminal building and the new Ground Transportation Center. 29

30 Objectives: Job centers To understand whether current-day mediumsized urban area conforms to the traditional monocentric or polycentric urban model, a study was conducted in Memphis, TN. Another objective: finding consistent criteria for boundary of Aerotropolis, urban form up to 25 kilometers outward from Memphis International Airport specialization in industries supporting air logistics and ground services. 30

31 Delineation of employment areas literature review on job concentration identification Numerous studies identify employment concentrations as part of their analysis (Gordon and Wong, 1985; Gordon et al., 1989a, 1989b; Gordon, et al., 1991; Gordon, and Richardson, 1996; Schwanen, Dieleman and Dijst, 2003; Sultana, 2000; Shearmur, 2006; Shearmur et al., 2007; Horner, 2007). 31

32 Criteria to locate employment centers Job density frequently used (Forstall and Green, 1997; McMillen, 2001; Lee, 2007). Job density values vary: 500 to 2000 per center (Zhou and Kockelman, 2006; Cervero, 1989) 7 to 10 jobs per acre (Cervero and Wu, 1997; Guiliano and Small, 1991). Problem of this approach: job density defined merely on land area, Not as relationship between job distribution and resident workers (Forstall and Green, 1997). 32

33 Employment density/sq mile 33

34 Why not Employment center? 34

35 Jobs-to-resident workers ratio (JWR): job concentration criterion emphasis on net in-commuting as the most significant characteristic of a worker concentration (Forstall and Green, 1997). Caveats: 1: cutoff value of 10 employees per acre inappropriate in smaller metropolitan areas. 2: areas such as airports: most of jobs located in a small part such places typically have a much lower job density (Forstall and Green, 1997). 3: entire area might be identified employment center most of jobs might be concentrated within a small portion of the entire area. 35

36 Jobs-to-resident workers ratio 36

37 High ETW: why not employment center? 37

38 Data and methods GIS was used to investigate employment structure of the Memphis, Tennessee. County employment data: Traffic Analysis Zone (TAZ) level employment data: local Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO). By applying a set of criteria, it was possible to delineate concentration of employment which revealed multiple nuclei structure. 38

39 Major Job concentrations criteria: 1. Employment to workers ratio at least 1.25; 2. Number of jobs at center in absolute terms at least 500 for all sectors; 3. Number of jobs in relative terms at least 10% of county-level jobs in corresponding sector; 4. Principle of contiguity (areas need be continuous, at least share a corner). 4 distinctive major employment centers. 39

40 Validation of the centers identified 4 major centers: just 6.03% of all territory of Shelby county, Memphis, TN, 5.6% households, 5.3% population, and 4.5% of resident workers at county-level. 46.6% of all jobs Major centers: Central Business District (CBD): center 1 government district: center 12 University of Memphis: center 4 Aerotropolis (airport and surrounding businesses): center 13 40

41 % of the Shelby county employment to define the major center status Center ID %_sh_tot emp %_sh_to t_ret %_sh_to t_ind %_sh_tot_ wh %_sh_to t_serv %_sh_tot_of f %_sh_tot_gov shelby_t RETAIL_ INDUST WHOL_sh SERV_sh OFF_sh GOVt_sh otemp sh _sh

42 CBD (center 1): 14.14% Shelby jobs prc_gov 26% prc_ret prc_ind 5% 4% prc_wh 4% prc_gov 6% University of Memphis (Center 4) prc_off 35% prc_ret 16% 11.3% Shelby jobs prc_ind 7% prc_wh 3% prc_off 24% prc_serv 37% prc_serv 33% Center 12, <2% prc_ret 11% prc_ind 1% prc_wh 0% prc_serv 4% prc_off 4% prc_serv 7% Aerotropolis (center 13) prc_gov 2% 19.5% Shelby jobs prc_off 15% prc_ret 8% prc_ind 17% prc_gov 80% prc_wh 51% 42

43 Local job centers (subcenters): Criteria were relaxed: local character and less significance at county level: requirement on percentage of jobs relative to county omitted. 10 local subcenters were found: 20% of all county employment Functional specialization: simple proportion method >=20% for functional specialization Six industrial categories were considered: retail, manufacturing, wholesale, services, office, and government. 43

44 Center 2 Center 3 Center 5 prc_serv 8% prc_off 24% prc_gov prc_ret prc_gov 11% prc_ret 17% 18% 19% prc_serv 16% prc_serv prc_gov 27% 1% prc_wh 13% prc_ret 27% prc_ind 19% prc_ind 5% prc_wh 4% prc_off 21% prc_serv 15% prc_gov 1% prc_wh 11% prc_ind 16% Center 6 Center 7 Center 8 prc_off 28% prc_gov 9% prc_serv 13% prc_wh 8% prc_ind 7% prc_off 14% prc_ret 57% prc_off 38% prc_serv 48% Center 9 Center 10 Center 11 prc_off 18% prc_ret 30% prc_off 29% prc_gov 8% prc_ret 20% prc_gov 3% prc_gov 4% prc_off 11% prc_gov 2% prc_off 22% prc_serv 19% prc_ret 30% prc_ret 36% prc_wh 1% prc_ret 43% prc_i 2% prc_wh 7% prc_ind 1% prc_wh 27% prc_ind 16% prc_serv prc_ind 30% prc_serv 31% 44 prc_wh prc_in 1%

45 12 m Trucking facility Intermodal terminal Rail yard Railroad Interstate Miles

46 In total, 13 centers identified SHELBY Area,m i POP worker HH TOT. EMP RETAIL INDUST_M FG WHOLESA LE SERVIC E OFFIC E PRC empce INDUST_M WHOLESA SERVIC OFFIC nt13 areami POP worker HH TOT. EMP RETAIL FG LE E E GOV T GOV T % total

47 Conclusion While arbitrary delineation of this economic hub exists, consistent criteria are required. Application of the method described above let delineate Aerotropolis based on a set of clear criteria. A total of almost 20% (19.49%) of all Shelby County jobs are concentrated within area (94,404 out of all 484, 403, as of 2006). This includes 30% of all manufacturing, 60.5% of all wholesale industry, 13.9% of all offices found across Shelby County. These three industrial sectors support air logistics and ground services. 47

48 m Trucking facility Intermodal terminal Rail yard Railroad Interstate Miles 48

49 m Trucking facility Intermodal terminal Rail yard Railroad Interstate Miles 49

50 m railyards Trucking_shelbyprj INTERMODAL_TERMINALS aerobound_chamberprj tl_2011_us_rails interstatehwy illustr_empcent13 illustremplall13 aerotropolis_etw_dissolve shelbytn_county2005pr mem_ref.jpg RGB Miles Red: Band_1 Green: Band_2 Blue: Band_3 50

51 m railyards aerobound_chamberprj tl_2011_us_rails interstatehwy pdenmi

52 52

53 Future work: Population density and employment centers 53

54 Future work: Measure distribution of centers to determine the extent of concentration or dispersal of centers, both across the space and relative of population centers. Source: tax-credit-act-making-the-china-hub-a-reality-at-lambert Thank you! 54