Population Shifts and Walking in the United States July 2012 2

Population Shifts and Implications for

Walking in the United States

by

Peter Tuckel

Department of Sociology

Hunter College

[email protected]

William Milczarski

Department of Urban Affairs & Planning

Hunter College

[email protected]

July 2012

mailto:[email protected]

mailto:[email protected]

Population Shifts and Implications for Walking in the United States by Tuckel and Milczarski

July 2012

1

Major population shifts in the United States point to changes in American

attitudes and behaviors regarding walking. These shifts are likely to result in a

substantial increase in both recreational and utilitarian walking. Three

demographic changes, in particular, are likely to promote this “walking

revolution:” (1) the aging of the baby boomers, (2) the different transportation

priorities of young people, and (3) the decline of the suburbs.

The Aging of the Baby Boomers

The first demographic shift with implications for walking is the aging of the baby

boom generation. The baby boomers – those who were born between 1946 and

1964 – number approximately 78 million Americans. They constitute over a

quarter of the total U.S. population. Each day, on average, 10,000 of the boomers

reach the traditional retirement age of 65.

As the boomers become “seniors,” they are undergoing major lifestyle changes.

Boomers who were physically active throughout their adult years want to

maintain an active lifestyle but they know that they can no longer engage in

rigorous physical activity, at least not to the same extent as beforehand. So they

are trading in their tennis and jogging shoes for walking shoes. Even boomers

who have been sedentary during most of their middle-age years know that in

order to maintain their health (or prevent a further deterioration in their health)

they need to be physically active. As these less physically active boomers grow

older, it is reasonable to assume that their preferred mode of exercise will be

walking. Studies have repeatedly shown that walking is the most popular form of

exercise for older adults. It has no “entry costs” and, unlike many other physical

activities, produces little or no wear and tear on the body. On the other hand,

walking offers significant health benefits including strengthening of muscles;

lowering the risk of heart disease, diabetes, and osteoporosis; controlling weight;

combating depression; and even reducing the risk of Alzheimer’s.


July 2012

2

Moreover, when the boomers become empty-nesters and approach retirement

age, they want to live in places where they can walk more, says Christopher

Leinberger, a researcher at the Brookings Institution.1 Leinberger cites a recent

survey conducted by the National Association of Realtors (NAR) showing that

boomers prefer to live in more “walkable” communities – whether these

communities are situated in cities, older suburbs, or small towns.2 Respondents

in the NAR survey were given a choice between living in a “suburban sprawl”

community characterized by single-family homes on large lots, few sidewalks, and

minimal public transportation versus living in a “smart growth” community

characterized by mixed housing, ample sidewalks, and access to businesses and

public transit. Significantly, younger adults between the ages of 18-29 and adults

60 years and over (i.e., the boomers reaching retirement age) opted for the

“smart growth” community more so than any other age group.3 This preference

to live in more pedestrian-friendly communities has important implications for

promoting walking. Research demonstrates that just residing in an area in which

the physical infrastructure is pedestrian-oriented leads to more frequent walking

– even among those who may not have been previously disposed to walking.

Officials in many cities, aware of the growing numbers of older people in their

midst and the enormous discretionary spending power of the boomers, are

demonstrating a heightened sensitivity to the needs of older residents. The

Department of City Planning in New York City, for example, predicts that within

the next two decades the proportion of the City’s population made up of school

children and the proportion comprising older adults (65 and over) will be roughly

the same – 15 percent each. This represents a sharp reversal from 1950 when the

ratio of schoolchildren to seniors stood at 2 to 1.4 And the economic power of the

boomers is staggering. Statistics show that Americans 50 years of age and over

account for one-half of the total amount of discretionary spending.

To create a more hospitable environment for older adults, cities across the nation

are implementing changes to improve the quality of life for seniors. This means

lengthier time to cross streets, smoothly-paved sidewalks, lots of benches, better


July 2012

3

lighting, and having stores in close proximity to their residences. New York City,

to take one example, is now in the process of installing countdown clocks at more

than 400 busy intersections to make streets safer for seniors as well as

introducing a host of other pedestrian friendly initiatives.5

The Different Transportation Priorities of Young People

A second demographic shift which has implications for walking is the entry into

adulthood by members of “Generation Y” (those born between 1980 and 1999).

This generation has a different set of priorities pertaining to transportation than

other age cohorts, according to a recently released report by the Frontier Group

and U.S. PIRG.6

Since the end of World War II until the beginning of this century, the number of

vehicle miles driven in the United States increased steadily. During the last

several years, however, this six decades-old trend has changed course.7 In 2011,

for example, Americans drove 6 percent fewer miles than they did in 2004. What

is surprising is that this trend away from driving has been particularly pronounced

among members of “Generation Y.” The annual number of miles driven per

capita by members of this cohort declined from 10,300 to 7,900 during the years

from 2001 to 2009. This represents a 23 percent drop. There has also been a

corresponding drop in the number of drivers’ licenses among young people.

According to figures gathered by the University of Michigan, only two thirds of

those 18 years of age possessed a driver’s license in 2008 compared to 80 percent

who had a driver’s license in 1983.8

The report by the Frontier Group and U.S. PIRG offers several explanations for this

marked decline in driving among young people.9 First, the cost of owning a car

and higher gas prices have imposed a disproportionate burden on young people

because of underemployment, unemployment, or credit-card debt to pay off

college expenses. Yet even among younger adults who are from more affluent


July 2012

4

households or are gainfully employed, attitudes and behavior regarding driving

has changed dramatically. Among those aged 16-34 from households with

annual incomes exceeding $70,000, the use of alternative modes of

transportation increased noticeably between 2001 and 2009 (public transit,

biking, and walking by 100 percent, 122 percent, and 37 percent, respectively).

This same age group with jobs also drove an average of 2,100 fewer miles (a 16.4

percent decline) during this same time span.10

A second factor is the enactment of more stringent state laws to obtain a driver’s

license. These Graduated Drivers’ Licensing (GDL) laws require applicants to

spend more time training on the road, impose a greater number of requirements

to obtain a permit, and place a number of restrictions on novice drivers. A third

factor reducing the amount of driving by young people is the impact of new

communications technology on social behavior. Many young people today do not

feel the need to drive in order to get together with friends. They can connect

with their friends thru social networking platforms (e.g., Facebook, Twitter),

calling them on their cell phones, texting, or video chatting. This new technology

also permits them to make more efficient use of public transportation. Through

websites and smartphone applications they can easily access the fares and

schedules of different types of public transportation and furthermore access real-

time data such as how long they have to wait before the next bus or subway

arrives.

As plausible as these explanations are in accounting for why young people are

driving less, there is an additional reason for this behavioral change which has to

do with the overall devaluing of the status attached to driving. In previous

generations owning (or at least driving) a car was considered a rite of passage, a

critical step marking the transition from adolescence to adulthood. Now it

appears that owning or driving a car has lost some of its status among younger

Americans. The Frontier Group and U.S. PIRG report cites a recent survey

conducted by KRC Research and Zipcar which found that among respondents

between the ages of 18 to 34, almost half (45%) reported that they “consciously


July 2012

5

made an effort” to use alternative means of transportation rather than drive a

car.11 This percentage figure was higher than that of all other age groups.

Owning or driving a car may have lost some of its appeal among young Americans

because they view cars as adversely effecting the environment. Or, it may be that

car ownership is simply not as “cool” as it once was, supplanted by possessing the

latest communications technology. 12 This loss of status, when factored in with

rising fuel costs, more stringent requirements to get a license, and virtual

socializing, provides a powerful complex of reasons why young people are pivoted

to walk more than previous generations.

It therefore comes as no surprise that many young Americans say they prefer to

live in more densely populated, walkable communities. As mentioned above, the

survey on community preferences carried out by the National Association of

Realtors found that younger adults (18-29) and baby boomers opted for living in

a “smart growth” community instead of a “suburban sprawl” community by a

greater margin than all other age groups . This attitudinal preference is also

matched by their behavior. Data show that “in 2009, 16 to 34-year-olds walked to

destinations 16 percent more frequently than did 16 to 34-year-olds living in

2001.” 13

The Decline of the Suburbs

A third shift which is likely to lead to an increase in walking is the decreasing

attractiveness of the suburbs.14 According to William Frey, a prominent

population expert at the Brookings Institution, in every decade since 1920 the

suburbs experienced faster growth than their urban centers – due mainly to the

increasing ownership of the automobile.15 Families were able to escape the

congestion and the squalor of the cities by fleeing to the surrounding suburbs.

Here they could realize the American Dream – owning a single-family unattached

house on a spacious parcel of land. Yet there was a tradeoff. They also became

totally dependent on the automobile. Commuting to work meant traversing

lengthy distances by car. Even going to other destinations within their same

communities such as schools, stores, or offices entailed travelling by car.


July 2012

6

Now, according to the latest census figures, it is the cities which are outstripping

the suburbs in population growth. The most recent census data show that

between the period July 2010 and July 2011, in 27 of the 51 largest metropolitan

areas in the country, city centers grew at a faster rate than their suburbs.16 The

resurging growth of metropolitan areas means, of course, that fewer people will

be relying on driving and more will be using alternative forms of transportation

such as public transportation, walking, and biking.

Why are the cities outstripping the suburbs in population growth? One reason for

this, of course, is the drying up of the credit market has prevented people from

buying a house in the suburbs. Another reason is the persistently high price of

gasoline (which is unlikely to revert to the good old days of under $3.00 a gallon),

which is giving pause to people who might otherwise consider moving to the

suburbs. Yet it is not just these economic factors which are responsible for the

demographic trend favoring the cities. Quality-of-life issues are also playing a

significant role.17 Simply put, the cities have become more attractive places in

which to live. Over the last few decades, crime rates have plummeted in many

U.S. cities. As a result, downtown areas once filled with boarded up buildings

defaced with graffiti again have become vibrant urban centers. So too the urban

landscape dotted with air-polluting factory smokestacks has changed its contours

as service-oriented businesses have replaced large-sized factories in the cities.

And, of course, the cities provide many cultural and entertainment attractions not

found in the suburbs and the convenience of having stores, offices, schools, and

places of residence in close proximity to one another. As noted in one

journalistic account explaining the reasons why one couple opted for living in the

city versus the suburbs: “They can walk to public transportation, grocery stores

and parks, all while avoiding suburban gridlock.” 18

Reflecting these demographic trends is the sharp reversal in the value of real

estate in well-to-do outlying suburbs. Up until the recent past, housing in these

affluent suburbs, in which the only viable means of transportation was the

automobile, commanded the highest prices per square foot. Today, according to


July 2012

7

research by Leinberger and Mariela Alfonzo, real estate in walkable

neighborhoods -- where people can shop, go to work, or run errands without

having to get into a car -- have the highest values. In fact, their research shows

that the more walkable a neighborhood is, the costlier the value of the real

estate.19

As America looks to its future and determines its spending priorities regarding

transportation, it should be careful not to adapt familiar paradigms of the past in

which towns and cities were configured around the needs of the automobile and

other modes of transportation like walking were given scant, if any, attention.

Broad and diverse groups of Americans have indicated a strong desire to walk

more and also to live in communities which are more walkable. This commitment

is likely to be enduring because it is driven not just by economic exigencies. The

graying of the baby boomers, the lifestyle choices of Generation Y, and the

rejuvenation of our downtowns are likely to translate this commitment into the

makings of a “walking revolution.”


July 2012

8

Notes

1. Christopher B. Leinberger. “The Death of the Fringe Suburb,” New York

Times, November 6, 2011.

2. Ibid.

3. Belden, Russonello & Stewart, LLC. The 2011 Community Preference Survey:

What Americans are looking for when deciding where to live,

commissioned by the National Association of Realtors, March, 2011.

4. Anemona Hartocollis, “A Fast-Paced City Tries to Be a Gentler Place to Grow

Old,” New York Times, July 19, 2010.

5. Ibid.

6. Frontier Group and U.S. PIRG Education Fund. Transportation and the New

Generation: Why Young People Are Driving Less and What It Means for

Transportation Policy, April, 2012.

7. Ibid.

8. Mike Ramsey. “Old Mustang Is Put Out to Pasture,” Wall Street Journal, April

16, 2012.

9. Frontier Group and U.S. PIRG Education Fund, op. cit.

10. Ibid.

11. KRC Research. Millennials & Driving: A Survey Commissioned by Zipcar.

November, 2010.


July 2012

9

12. Mike Ramsey, op.cit.

13. Frontier Group and U.S. PIRG Education Fund, op. cit.

14. Christopher B. Leinberger, op. cit.

15. Conor Dougherty and Robbie Whelan, “Cities Outpace Suburbs in Growth,”

Wall Street Journal, June, 28, 2012.

16. Ibid.

17. Ibid.

18. Ibid.

19. Christopher B. Leinberger, ““Now Coveted: A Walkable, Convenient

Place,” New York Times, May 25, 2012.

Documents

Population Shifts and Walking in the United States July 2012 2