1. Students as catalysts of city and regional growth Mark Livingston, Moira Munro and Ivan Turok University of Glasgow

2. “Britain’s great teenage transhumance” Students - rapidly growing section of city populations: –0.8m (1991) - 2.3m (2005) –Transient – but distinct (& relatively fixed) characteristics –Increasingly varied (though social disparities remain) –A growing target of policy attention – talent attraction Potential impacts: 1.Source of (skilled) labour supply 2.Stimulus to neighbourhood revitalisation 3.A catalyst for new consumer services & amenities 4.Intangible effects: atmosphere, image, reputation

3. Especially important in former industrial cities? Economic diversification Human capital in-migration Low demand housing Richer amenities Image enhancement AND student location decisions less influenced by state of the local labour market so can help to initiate growth

4. Objectives Analytical framework to examine effects on cities, neighbourhoods and disadvantaged communities Net effects at regional scale (origins & destinations) How effects differ between types of HEI and regional contexts Tensions and policy lessons Methods Quantitative national picture of student places 5 case studies across the UK for causal relationships and detailed impacts

5. Example of simple typology HEI TypeStudent origin Graduate destination Examples Local ladderLocal ? SpringboardLocalElsewhere? MagnetElsewhereLocal? Training groundElsewhere ?

6. 1. Students as workers Do students occupy distinct niches or displace locals for jobs? –Great majority work in ‘low value’ service industries Students may offer: –Flexibility –Greater social capital & soft skills –Lower wage expectations? –Specialised skills? Could block entry points, depress wages, increase casual work But could attract/retain businesses, foster learning, increase competitiveness

7. Student workers (2001 census) % of students economically active England36.3 Scotland44.0 Wales33.0

8. Student workers

9. Students and economic activity Economically active students as a % of economically active population

10. Hours worked % of students 1-2 hours0.7 3-5 hours4.0 6-15 hours36.9 16-30 hours30.2 31-37 hours9.2 38-48 hours14.9 49 + hours4.1

11. More students tend to work where there is more work

12. Students work more where more students work

13. 2. Student as residents Negative media portrayals are common: –Anti-social, attract crime, create grime, undermine neighbourhood cohesion –‘Studentification’ and displacement BUT also – vibrant, ‘buzzy’ quarters; novel and interesting businesses; social diversity Can students help neighbourhood regeneration?

14. How students live

15. % of population that are students

16. Leeds: Census 2001

17. Bradford: Census 2001

18. Students & area deprivation (Students living independently)

19. Bristol

20. Newcastle

21. 3. Students as consumers Supporting the night-time economy Demand for (& supply of) culture, arts, music, entertainment – lively attractive urban areas Can these amenities help to attract other forms of investment?

22. Conclusions Initial support for significance of students as workers and residents Suggests different kinds of ‘student cities’ with different kinds of impact, positive and negative Next steps: –More data analysis –And then case studies…