Chapter 4 is a discussion of Detroit's economic trends, based off of workforce participation, industries in the city, and what kinds of jobs Detroiters held in those industries. This analysis was supported heavily by census data I collected, which is included in an appendix that is uploaded separately

1. 4.1
Detroit Industries and Economic Trends
Erika Campbell
The history of Detroit, as was previously discussed in chapter three, began during the first
cycle of Abu-Lughod’s succession of New World settlement1. However, the argument could be
made that the true beginnings of Detroit have their place in the second cycle, as canals were
constructed and gave access to Antoine Cadillac’s fur-trading post. This access created the
ability for trading and heavier settlement into Detroit unlike anything that had happened before.
It is in this settlement and trading that Detroit finds its earliest industries. Fur-trading, farming,
and mercantilism would all become a part of Detroit’s economic makeup, and from these early
beginnings Detroit only pushes further as a city of industry.
Detroit’s place as the Arsenal of Democracy and an economic boom-town would be
ushered in with the prerequisite of third-cycle (1870-1920s) industrialization. During the third
cycle, industrialization brought economic success and the establishment of the Fordist City.
During wartime and the post-war period, this economic success would continue; however, this
economic success would not last forever. As Sugrue and previous chapters of this work make
clear, the flight of white Detroiters from the city and into suburbs took the industrial jobs with
them.2 The automobile industry that had once built Detroit up would tear it down as
deindustrialization effectively ended the economic boom. Detroiters left in the city no longer had
the jobs needed to support families, pay taxes, and keep up their property. Additionally, the lack
of jobs deterred newcomers from entering the city, leaving Detroit grossly underpopulated and
blighted. By the 1980s (interestingly enough the end of Abu-Lughod’s four cycles) the Fordist
1 Abu-Lughod, J. L. (1999). New York, Chicago, Los Angeles:America's Global Cities (pp. 1-16). Minneapolis, MN:Universityof
Minnesota Press.
2 Sugrue, T. J. (1996). The Origins of the Urban Crisis:Race and Inequality in Postwar Detroit (pp. 1-250). Princeton, NJ:
PrincetonUniversityPress.

2. 4.2
city had collapsed. Today, nearly forty years later, one is left wondering what industries are
keeping Detroiters alive, how Detroit has survived thus far, and what possible solutions may be
drawn from industries on the rise.
To answer these three questions, one must being at the dawn of a new age in Detroit: the
end of the Fordist age. The 1980s industries tell a story of Detroit and its metropolitan area as a
still predominantly manufacture-based workforce. The manufacturing industry employed 28.7%
3of Detroit’s employed persons over sixteen years old, and 31.1% of the urban area. This
accounts for the largest percentage of those employed for both areas. These data make clear that
the Fordist city was still an important concept in the minds of both Detroiters and those who had
fled Detroit. This reliance on factory work, however, would change by the year 20004 in which
only 18.8% of Detroiters and 22.8% of those living in the metropolitan area relied on
manufacturing jobs; resulting in a -45%5 change in Detroit. By the year 20106, the percentage of
those employed over 16 working in the manufacturing industry had dropped again to 13.5%,
representing a -48% drop in the ten years between 2000 and 2010.
The steep decrease in Detroit’s reliance on manufacturing jobs can be linked to an
important facet of the city’s history. The deindustrialization discussed in previous chapters and
as examined by Sugrue had a tremendous effect on those living within the city of Detroit. White
flight partnered with a desire to build larger plants, as well as a decreased demand after wartime
contributed to a loss of manufacturing jobs for those who, either through choice or segregation,
remained in the city. During the latter part of the 20th century it became increasingly clear to
Detroiters that the reliance on manufacturing jobs that had been prevalent in previous decades
3 Social Explorer Tables (SE), Census 1980,U.S. Census Bureau and Social Explorer
4 Social Explorer Tables (SE), C2000,U.S. Census Bureau and Social Explorer
5 All percent changes are my own calculationsbased on the data found from Social Explorer and Census.gov
6 Social Explorer Tables (SE), C2010,U.S. Census Bureau and Social Explorer

3. 4.3
would no longer suffice. Therefore, one must then examine what industries have been supporting
Detroiters, as highest educational attainment has decreased and manufacturing jobs have
disappeared.
The issue of what industries to support is an important question for city policymakers
within Detroit. The educational attainment of inner-city Detroiters has continued to go down, as
is represented in table 4.2, and therefore low-skilled or low education-level jobs are an essential
facet of the city economy. Between the years 2000 and 2010, in fact, the percentage of
Detroiters over twenty-five years old that had attained some form of college went from 56.4% to
44.3%, a -36.8% drop. Therefore, industries in Detroit must be able to (1) attract higher-educated
newcomers to the city, while at the same time (2) offering those low educational-level jobs
existing Detroiters so desperately need. Before discussing the industries that have begun to
accomplish such a large task, it is important to note the class cleavages that exist between
Detroit’s workers and those of the metropolitan area. Between 2000, Detroiters occupied only
21.6% of management occupations in all industries, as opposed to 33.8% of those in the
metropolitan area. In contrast, during the same year Detroiters made up 22.6% of machine
operators and transportation operators while those in the metropolitan statistical area accounted
for a mere 15.4%. This is indicative of the major difference between Detroiters and their
suburban neighbors: education. As was discussed, the college education of Detroiters has
continued to fall, but in the metropolitan statistical area the number of people getting a college
education in 2000 was at an impressive 90%. These occupational and educational differences
help to understand why certain industries have emerged within Detroit to support employ inner-
city Detroiters,

4. 4.4
These factors are one of the main reasons why the education, health and social services
industry has grown from representing 20.9% of the workforce to 25.6% between the years of
2000 and 2010. Education, health and social services is an incredibly vast and broad industry of
the workforce. It may seem, upon first glance, that jobs such as these require educational
attainment (such as a doctor, teacher, social worker, etc). However, the key to understanding
why this industry is responsible for such a large portion of the workforce lies in two key aspects
of the industry.
The first way in which to understand Detroit’s newfound reliance on the education,
health, and social services industry is the way in which the industry is defined, and what workers
that definition entails. Industries are defined by everything “from the CEO to the janitors”
(Jezierski)7. Therefore, not only are the high-education level jobs included in this industry.
Rather, all the entry-level or low-skill jobs that are required to run large facilities are included.
This means that cafeteria workers, orderlies, janitors, and other such support staff are considered
to be part of the industry. For large facilities such as a hospital or university, these support staff
typically make up hundreds, if not thousands, of individuals who may have been previously
unemployed.
The second key to understanding a newfound reliance on the education, health and social
services industry is recognizing the recent financing and priority placed upon two important
facilities under the category of education, health, and social services. Both Wayne State
University and Detroit’s medical complex in the downtown area have been given increasing
funding and attention. In attempts to revitalize downtown Detroit, city policymakers hoped that
these two areas of employment (often referred to as “meds and eds”) would serve two main
7 Quote spoken by Dr. Louise Jezierski in James Madison College,Michigan State University. 3/23/2016

5. 4.5
functions. First, the hope that these two facilities would attract larger numbers of well-educated
individuals looking to settle in Detroit such as students, medical professionals, professors, and
support staff for these two institutions. By attracting these well-educated individuals, Detroit
hopes to stimulate its economy and attract those who have the ability to live in Detroit and
contribute to the city’s economy. Second, these large facilities give great numbers of jobs to
Detroiters who need low-skill work, such as the janitors, cafeteria workers, and orderlies
mentioned previously. In this way, the support of education, health and social services in Detroit
created large amounts of jobs, revenue, and attraction to the city.
Meds and eds are not, however, the only growing industry in Detroit that has been given
extra funding and priority by city policymakers. Richard Florida’s article “Quantifying
Downtown Detroit’s Comeback”8 discusses the rising importance of the cultural businesses that
are starting to permeate the city. These include cultural markers such as museums, coffee shops,
restaurants, theatres, and sports stadiums. Downtown Detroit has, due to the cultural industry,
become “the Detroit region’s commercial, educational, and entertainment hub” (2) home to more
racially diverse, well-educated, and higher-earning individuals than the rest of the city. With the
investment in Downtown Detroit’s cultural capital, there comes greater job opportunities for the
less educated and more affluent alike.
Since 2000, when 8.7% of Detroit’s workers were employed by the “art, entertainment,
recreation, accommodation, and food services” industry, the cultural sites funded by city
government have only grown. In fact, during 2010, 11.3%, or 26,841 members of the workforce
were employed in these cultural jobs. This is even more significant when looked at from the
8 Florida, R. (2013, February 20). Quantifying Downtown Detroit's Comeback [Electronic version]. The Atlantic Cities.

6. 4.6
1980 census data. In 1980, cultural industry jobs accounted for a mere 4.4% of Detroit’s
workforce, representing a large reliance on manufacturing jobs. This increase in percentage of
the workforce (especially between 2000 and 2010) is due to the city’s investment in the
downtown as a cultural center for tourists and natives alike.
One of the most prominent examples of the city officials and city elite’s investment in
downtown’s cultural capital between 2000 and 2010 is the construction of Ford Field in 20029.
Home to Michigan’s NFL team the Detroit Lions, Ford Field is used for various sports, music,
and private events. The 500 million dollar construction was supported by both the city of Detroit
and city elites such as Ford Motor Company. This not only attracts millions to Detroit each year,
but also offers employment opportunities at all levels. From ticket-takers to security,
maintenance, executives, and concessions, Ford Field brings large revenue and greater
opportunity to the city in a spectacular way. This is only one recent example of the city’s
investment in downtown cultural capital and the effect that such investment can have for the
city’s tourist attraction, employment opportunities, and subsequent revenue through taxes and
events.
Detroit’s economy has come a long way from the fur-traders of the 18th century, and has
made even greater strides since the industrial reliance of the early 1900s. Many predicted that the
end of industrialization, and the collapse of the Arsenal of Democracy, would mean the downfall
of Detroit. While Detroit’s economy has suffered greatly from deindustrialization, white flight,
and the 2008 recession, it is not the end of Detroit’s economic success. Rather, smart investments
9 All informationregarding the construction andfunding of FordFieldwas found on their website (citedbelow)
Ford FieldFacts & History. (2005, February13). In DetroitLions.com. Retrieved March 23, 2016, from
http://www.detroitlions.com/ford-field/facts-history.html

7. 4.7
are being made on the part of city elite and officials to make Downtown a cultural capitol within
the city. By investing in large, reliable industries such as meds and eds, and by attracting and
employing people through entertainment services, Detroit is helping to ensure their economic
future.

8. 4.8
Bibliography
Abu-Lughod, J. L. (1999). New York, Chicago, Los Angeles: America's Global Cities (pp. 1-16).
Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.
Census.gov
Florida, R. (2013, February 20). Quantifying Downtown Detroit's Comeback [Electronic
version]. The Atlantic Cities.
Ford Field Facts & History. (2005, February 13). In DetroitLions.com. Retrieved March 23,
2016, from http://www.detroitlions.com/ford-field/facts-history.html
SocialExplorer.com
Sugrue, T. J. (1996). The Origins of the Urban Crisis: Race and Inequality in Postwar
Detroit (pp. 1-250). Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.