Great Lakes Cities As Climate Refuges? A Possibility But Not The Only One

Dismissing the fact that it could happen comes at other city's own peril.

A view of sunbathers along Chicago’s Lake Michigan lakefront. Source: gettyimages.com

If there is one region of the U.S. that I draw inspiration from regarding the revitalization of our nation’s old industrial centers, particularly the Rust Belt cities surrounding the Great Lakes, it’s ironically the Old South that became part of today’s Sun Belt.

There are plenty of readers who may detect a certain amount of envy in my writings about Sun Belt cities like Atlanta, Dallas, Charlotte, Nashville, Austin and others. Truth is, they’re right. I am envious of the growth of Sun Belt cities over the last half century. They’ve benefitted from a general shift in American public opinion that could not have been anticipated in, say, 1965, or 1915, or better yet, 1865.

I’m purposely leaving out Western cities like Phoenix, Las Vegas, Los Angeles, the Bay Area and others from the Sun Belt mix here because their growth profiles followed a different path than their Southern cohorts. However, look closely – there are historical parallels between the South following the Civil War and the Midwest following deindustrialization.

Both regions had economic systems that were upended (yes, slavery was an economic system). Both regions endured decades of economic and social upheaval following the collapse of their respective economic systems. Both regions drew the ire of people from other parts of the country for their inability to adapt and transform. Leaders of both regions tried unsuccessfully to reclaim new versions of their old systems in efforts to bring back their glory. Southern cities had to go through a deep soul-searching period to come to terms with what went wrong within them, and figure out what was right about them. Today’s legacy manufacturing hubs are still in that spot now.

Overall, the South was able to transform itself, with a remarkable rise beginning in the 1970’s. But it didn’t happen overnight. After the Civil War, Reconstruction and Jim Crow exacted a huge cost on the region’s economic fortunes. One could say that the Civil Rights Movement opened southerner’s own eyes to the changes it needed to make, and it did.

Nor did the transformation happen throughout the South. The boom in Nashville, for example, hasn’t extended to Memphis. New Orleans’ popularity as a cultural tourism hub doesn’t raise its economic fortunes as much as one might think; it remains somewhat poorer than comparable cities.

Yet the post-Civil Rights Movement South saw a “New South” arise. This was epitomized by Atlanta in the early 1970’s, which sought to position itself as an integrated modern city that was ready to do business. Southern cities capitalized on things that made Northern cities less attractive – a more temperate climate, a lower cost of living, a better quality of life. Southern cities attracted people and businesses that were drawn to these qualities. However, it’s important to note that the South endured a century of being in the wilderness before rising again.

That’s why this recent article in Planetizen from Greg Flisram struck a nerve with me.

Flisram notes that recent efforts by Great Lakes cities to present themselves as climate change havens could be overblown:

“Its inland-north location, moderating climate, and abundant supply of fresh water gives it a major edge against other parts of the country where extreme heat and drought will soon wreak regular havoc. Beyond that, its proximity to some of the most productive farmland in North America makes it one of the most food-secure regions of the country. It is a national leader in renewable energy production, particularly wind and hydroelectric power. It’s at low risk for major natural disasters. The list goes on and on.

But the new “cool is cool” marketing hook, which comes complete with the veiled promises of shorter, milder winters, may be downplaying the very real climate challenges facing the region. More than this, they may portray an unrealistically optimistic future for a region still struggling with decades-long economic dislocation and population loss.”

Flisram goes on to say that the Great Lakes will be exposed to very real climate change challenges of its own. Wildly vacillating lake levels, sewage overflow problems resulting from stronger rain events, and the continued prospect of hot and humid summers (without any real relief from our notoriously frigid winters) will plague the region, according to Flisram. Poor air quality from Canadian wildfires has hit Midwestern cities the last three summers, with no signs of abating. Furthermore, intrusion from invasive species like Asian carp, and national (and international) attempts to gain access to 20 percent of the world’s fresh surface water could threaten the very strengths we tout.

Flisram concludes with this bomb:

“In the end, whether the region ever emerges as a future climate retreat may depend less on any natural advantages or accidents of geography, than how well it responds to its own climate-related challenges. Equally critically, the cities of the Great Lakes must contend with the other problems that have dogged them for years: lead pipes; a lack of decent jobs, and failing schools.”

Sounds quite a bit like what someone from Buffalo, Cleveland or Detroit would’ve said about sleepy Southern towns during the Roaring Twenties – they’ve got their own problems to deal with, and they’re not ready for prime time.

There’s that saying that history doesn’t repeat itself, but it does often rhyme. If you extend the Rust Belt-Sun Belt analogy I made earlier to the present day, you’d note that the Great Lakes manufacturing centers are about as removed from their industrial peaks today as Southern cities were from peak plantation economy in the 1920’s – about 60 years. Few Northerners would’ve expected realistic challenges from Southern cities at that time. However, technological advances like the widespread use of air conditioning and connecting the nation via the interstate highway system, and taking advantage of Northern city missteps like labor union corruption and urban unrest, opened doors fifty years later that no one previously thought would open again.

Climate change could be one factor that draws more eyes to the Great Lakes region, but not the only one or even the main one. I’d expect that people looking for greater water security and availability would consider the region first in the coming decades, and that would target Western Sun Belt locales over Southern destinations, for now. There could be displacement from hurricanes in the Gulf and Atlantic coastal areas, where cost/benefit analyses could dissuade residents from rebuilding on low-lying lands.

I suspect that more people would be willing to give the region another look because of its affordability, its quality of life, and the quality of its urbanism. Others may disagree, but I see deferred maintenance and poor city services, poorly-performing schools, and high crime rates as legacies of deindustrialization. They’re the result of bad policy decisions, inaction, and governmental and social neglect from decades past. They can be overcome.

Truth is, however, we don’t know now what could spark the transformation of Great Lakes cities, anymore than we knew what would do the same for Southern cities 100 years ago. So let’s keep trying until we get it right.