Study author Eben Fodor examined the relationship between growth and economic prosperity in the 100 largest US metropolitan areas from 2000 to 2009 to determine whether certain benefits commonly attributed to growth are supported by statistical data.
He found that the slowest-growing metro areas had lower unemployment rates, lower poverty rates, higher income levels, and were less impacted by the recession than the fastest-growing areas.
In fact, in 2009, local residents of slower-growing areas averaged USD 8,455 more per capita in personal income than those of the fastest-growing areas.
"The successful economic development programme is typically the one that creates new jobs," Fodor wrote.
"The new jobs tend to stimulate population growth as people move into the area seeking to take advantage of the new employment opportunities. But growth is not creating employment opportunities. Instead it is reducing them as newcomers fill job openings," he said.
The findings were published in the Economic Development Quarterly.
The study used information taken from the US Census to study 100 of the largest metro areas, representing 66 per cent of the total US population.
It compared 25 slowest-growing metro areas with the 25 fastest-growing from 2000 to 2009. The slowest-growing areas were located in 13 different states, including Connecticut, New York, and Ohio while the fastest-growing areas came from 12 different states, dominated by California, Florida and Texas.
