Philadelphia Region

PHILADELPHIA REGION The Philadelphia region has experienced the full spectrum of neighborhood change since 2000. Overall, 7 percent of regional residents live in strongly economically expanding neighborhoods, while 24 percent live in strongly declining neighborhoods. Both types of neighborhood change occurred more commonly within the city of Philadelphia. Large amounts of displacement have occurred within South Philadelphia and Kensington, while the city’s Near Northeast region has undergone significant poverty concentration. Upper North Philadelphia has undergone outright abandonment, as has the Parkside area of West Philadelphia. But areas of West Philadelphia closer to the University of Pennsylvania observed displacement or even outright growth. The suburbs, by contrast, have mostly experienced forms of economic decline. The low-income population of strongly declining suburban neighborhoods has grown by 48 percent. These areas have also seen white flight, as their white population has fallen by 19 percent, or about 95,000 people. Strong poverty concentration occurred in the eastern suburbs of Delaware County, such as Yeadon, Darby, Milbourne, and East Lansdowne. In other areas, such as Camden and Chester, poverty concentration occurred alongside neighborhood abandonment. Regional Total Population: 5,329,045 Regional Low-Income Population: 1,452,574 Regional Nonwhite Population: 1,989,516 Central City Population: 1,555,731 Central City Low-Income Population: 721,699 Central City Nonwhite Population: 1,005,631 NET DISPLACEMENT (Low-Income Change in Tracts with Strong Expansion, 2000-2016) Central City: -18,609 Suburbs: -2,955 NET CONCENTRATION (Low-Income Change in Tracts with Strong Decline, 2000-2016) Central City: 85,340 Suburbs: 80,168 1 DETAILS ON TABLES The following tables depict aggregated population and housing change in two categories of neighborhoods across the metropolitan area, its central cities, and its suburbs. The categories are: • Economically expanding neighborhoods, which are those experiencing the kind of population changes associated with growth and displacement. These are neighborhoods where the low-income* share of population has fallen since 2000 (indicating that an area has grown less poor overall) and the absolute number of non-low-income residents has grown since 2000 (indicating that middle-income residents see the area as an attractive place to live). • Economically declining neighborhoods, which are those experiencing the kind of population changes associated with abandonment and poverty concentration. These are neighborhoods where the low- income share of population has grown since 2000 (indicating that an area has more less poor overall) and the absolute number of non-low-income residents has fallen since 2000 (indicating that middle-income residents do not see the area as an attractive place to live). Two variants of this measure exist, and a separate table is provided for each. They are: • In the upper set of tables, a strong, narrow measure, which only includes census tracts that have a change of +/-5 percent or greater in low-income population share, and a change of +/-10 percent for non- low-income population. This approach classifies fewer neighborhoods overall, excluding areas with only small changes in their income profile. This is the more robust and preferred measure. It is also the measure used in the accompanying maps. • In the lower set of tables, a weak, broad measure, which includes all census tracts with any change that meet the criteria for the two categories above, with no cutoffs for scale. This approach classifies more neighborhoods overall, but is noisier, because it includes tracts with very small population changes. In addition, because this report relies on American Community Survey sampling data with margins of error, this measure is more likely to include erroneously classified tracts. However, this broad measure can provide a useful outer estimate of the scale of neighborhood economic expansion and decline. Three sets of tables are provided. They are: • Figures for the entire metropolitan region, aggregating central cities and suburbs into one set of tables. • Figures for central cities. • Figures for suburban areas, defined as any area in the metropolitan region not included in a central city. This includes incorporated and unincorporated communities. Each table depicts the number of people in each of the two neighborhood categories, both overall and in various population subsets. It also shows the number of housing units of various types in each neighborhood category. • 2016 Share indicates what share of the regional, city, or suburban population of a given group live in expanding or declining tracts. The box is shaded in accordance with the size of the share. • 2016 Total indicates the absolute number of individuals in a given group that live in expanding or declining census tracts. • Net Change since 2000 indicates the change of population of a subgroup in expanding or declining tracts since 2000, both in percentage and in absolute terms. These have been colored to indicate the type of change. In economically expanding tracts, green indicates net growth while blue indicates net displacement. In economically declining tracts, red indicates net poverty concentration while purple indicates net abandonment. Darker shades indicate larger percentage changes. * For the purposes of this report, “low-income” is classified as individuals at 200 percent of poverty line or less. 2 DETAILS ON MAPS Neighborhood change has also been mapped by individual census tracts, incorporating the same data used to create the tables above. The map incorporates the strong measure of neighborhood change used to create the tables. In the maps, tracts have been subdivided into four categories: • Economically expanding areas with low-income displacement, indicated in blue, where a neighborhood’s income profile is improving while low-income population declines on net. These are typically places undergoing changes traditionally associated with gentrification, in which economic pressures push out lower incomes while higher income residents arrive. • Economically expanding areas with overall growth, indicated in green, where a neighborhood’s income profile is improving while low-income population increases on net. These are typically places with significant new housing construction, where residents across the income spectrum are arriving. • Economically declining areas with abandonment, indicated in purple, where a neighborhood’s income profile is worsening while low-income population declines on net. These are typically places experiencing the worst neighborhood economic decline, with people across the income spectrum leaving and outright depopulation occurring. • Economically declining areas with poverty concentration, indicated in red, where a neighborhood’s income profile is worsening while low-income population increases on net. These are typically places where higher-income flight and eroding housing stocks are causing rapid demographic and economic transition, contributing to the impoverishment of the area. The categories are also shaded to indicate the scale of low-income population change within the census tracts. The maps allow intra-regional comparisons of observed neighborhood change. However, because these classifications have been made using American Community Survey data with margins of error, precise measures are not possible and it is likely that some individual tracts are erroneously classified. As a consequence, readers are advised to focus more on clusters of tracts undergoing similar changes rather than individual outliers, particularly outliers with smaller-scale changes. 3 TABLES FOR METROPOLITAN AREA - Philadelphia Region ECONOMICALLY EXPANDING NEIGHBORHOODS ECONOMICALLY DECLINING NEIGHBORHOODS Population Change by Subgroup in Neighborhoods Population Change by Subgroup in Neighborhoods Experiencing Strong Economic Expansion Experiencing Strong Economic Decline (Philadelphia Metro) (Philadelphia Metro) 2016 Share 2016 Total Net Change Since 2000 2016 Share 2016 Total Net Change Since 2000 TOTAL 6.7% 356,925 15.4% +47,703 TOTAL 24.0% 1,279,615 -1.4% -18,565 Low-Income 6.6% 95,984 -18.3% -21,564 Low-Income 39.5% 574,121 40.5% +165,508 Poverty 7.1% 49,321 -24.2% -15,737 Poverty 40.9% 284,183 47.0% +90,847 Extreme Poverty 7.9% 25,750 -23.3% -7,843 Extreme Poverty 39.6% 128,453 33.4% +32,181 American Indian 11.5% 715 -10.1% -80 American Indian 28.9% 1,798 -32.9% -880 Asian 10.8% 32,872 67.7% +13,267 Asian 20.6% 62,758 45.7% +19,691 Black 6.0% 64,620 -20.3% -16,492 Black 44.1% 475,840 9.6% +41,786 Hispanic 8.3% 38,956 47.1% +12,480 Hispanic 37.9% 178,006 85.3% +81,957 White 6.3% 211,053 21.1% +36,714 White 15.8% 530,119 -24.0% -166,975 College-Educated 8.5% 111,207 114.5% +59,370 College-Educated 13.3% 173,218 21.3% +30,421 Non-College 6.0% 138,937 -3.8% -5,416 Non-College 28.4% 659,223 -4.0% -27,687 Families 5.6% 33,540 -6.6% -2,376 Families 24.4% 147,320 -17.8% -31,887 Families in Poverty 5.2% 4,526 -48.3% -4,222 Families in Poverty 45.1% 39,436 26.4% +8,233 Non-Poor Families 5.6% 29,014 6.8% +1,846 Non-Poor Families 20.9% 107,884 -27.1% -40,120 Single Mothers 5.3% 3,143 -45.9% -2,671 Single Mothers 46.8% 27,826 25.5% +5,654 Children (Under 18) 5.6% 67,031 -4.9% -3,451 Children (Under 18) 25.9% 307,719 -10.7% -36,758 Young Adults (18-34) 9.5% 118,763 27.2% +25,405 Young Adults (18-34) 25.9% 323,942 6.6% +20,024 Adults (35 to 64) 6.2% 130,123 21.1% +22,689 Adults (35 to

Load more