More Protestant churches closing than opening – and understanding the bigger patterns

One source suggests more Protestant churches are closing than are opening:

Photo by Luis Quintero on Pexels.com

About 4,500 Protestant churches closed in 2019, the last year data is available, with about 3,000 new churches opening, according to Lifeway Research. It was the first time the number of churches in the US hadn’t grown since the evangelical firm started studying the topic. With the pandemic speeding up a broader trend of Americans turning away from Christianity, researchers say the closures will only have accelerated…

“In the last three years, all signs are pointing to a continued pace of closures probably similar to 2019 or possibly higher, as there’s been a really rapid rise in American individuals who say they’re not religious.”

The rest of the article deals with why this is happening and what happens to these buildings.

For this post, I am more interested in putting the cited numbers in context. Here are different aspects of this:

  1. As cross-sectional numbers (first sentence above), it is hard to know what do with these figures. In 2019, more Protestant churches closed than opened. This is a one year figure.
  2. Looking at trends over time is useful. The next sentence above says this is the first time that more congregations have closed than opened since Lifeway started tracking this. So this is a reversal or change to a larger trend? How long has anyone tracked this? Is it assumed that it is good or normal that more churches open than close each year?
  3. As noted above, there are fewer people claiming religious affiliation. Are there additional factors involved, such as a shift of attendees toward larger congregations?
  4. Are there other data sources for the number of churches and what does their data show?

With the attention that is paid to the declining number of religious Americans, it would be helpful to continue to look at the corresponding organizational changes including changes in the number of congregations.

Fights between suburban neighbors turn more rancorous, according to lawyers

According to some sources, legal fights between suburban neighbors are now worse:

Photo by EKATERINA BOLOVTSOVA on Pexels.com

Neighbors have long bickered over fences, hedges and property borders. But lawyers involved in such tangles say the pandemic, which kept many people and their neighbors at home—and on one another’s nerves—far more, turned suburban sparring especially toxic. The rancor, they say, hasn’t eased up. Allegations of late have touched on topics including flying dirt, flowerpot placement and stray balls bouncing into a yard…

The leading reasons for flaps between neighbors are trees, fences, parking and noise, “probably in that order,” said Emily Doskow, a lawyer and mediator who edited the book “Neighbor Law.” “Everyone knows that having problems with your neighbors is one of the worst quality-of-life killers ever.”

The New York Peace Institute, a nonprofit that helps people resolve conflicts, got more calls during the pandemic about neighbor disputes, said Jessica Lopez, a program manager who coordinates mediations. Two years later, the caseload hasn’t slowed, she said, adding, “It’s a new normal.”

In a country where protecting single-family homes is vital, suburbanites prize single-family homes, and homeownership is an ongoing ideal plus suburbanites often relate through “moral minimalism,” perhaps this trend is not too surprising.

At the same time, as a sociologist, there are multiple questions I ask after reading this:

  1. Is there a way to get data on this? Are the number of neighbor disputes up in the courts or in lawsuits? Not all disputes go to court; would qualitative data in communities also reveal this?
  2. What exactly was the role of COVID-19 in this? One answer could be that more people spent time at home. Another could be that COVID-19 racheted up tension and disrupted regular social interactions. A third could be that rising property values and demand for property in some places pushed people to see their property differently.
  3. How many communities have alternative options for mediating disputes like these rather than going to court? Are there implementable models that suburbs could offer?

Outside of governments, which actor owns the largest amount of land in the world?

According to a story from the University of Notre Dame, the answer is:

Photo by Ashley Fontana on Pexels.com

the Catholic Church is the largest nongovernmental property owner in the world

While there are no numbers on the number of properties, acres, or value, I would guess that it adds up to a lot. To serve over 1.3 billion adherents around the globe – 2019 pre-Covid figures – requires a number of buildings and properties all over the place.

Asking questions about how much property a religious group should own is another matter. Is one interested in efficiency and how many people are served through each property? Is there a religious group has too much property? Does it matter if the property serves the community as well as religious adherents? All of these could factor into whether the amount of land owned is seen as a moral good or a moral problem.

Trying to get federal workers back in the office in Washington, D.C.

As big downtowns across the United States grapple with more employees working from home, Washington, D.C. is particularly hit hard:

Photo by Pixabay on Pexels.com

At the swearing-in this month for her third term as the District of Columbia’s mayor, Muriel Bowser delivered a surprising inaugural-address ultimatum of sorts to the federal government: Get your employees back to in-person work — or else vacate your lifeless downtown office buildings so we can fill the city with people again…

There are days when downtowns in other American towns can almost look like they did before 2020. In the 9-to-5 core of Washington, though, there’s no mistaking the 2023 reality with the pre-Covid world. Streets are noticeably emptier and businesses scarcer. Crime has ticked up. The city’s remarkable quarter-century run of population growth and economic dynamism and robust tax revenues seems in danger…

According to census data, Washington has the highest work-from-home rate in the country. Week-to-week numbers from the security firm Kastle Systems back this up: The company, whose key fobs are used in office buildings around the country (including the one that houses POLITICO), compiles real-time occupancy data based on card swipes in its 10 largest markets. D.C. is perennially dead last…

To people who depend on commuters’ lunch-hour spending or transit fees, the change is less welcome. According to John Falcicchio, the city’s economic-development boss and Bowser’s chief of staff, the federal government’s 200,000 D.C. jobs represent roughly a quarter of the total employment base; the government also occupies a third of Washington office space — not just the cabinet departments whose ornate headquarters dot Federal Triangle, but plenty of the faceless privately held buildings in the canyons around Farragut Square, too.

On one hand, Washington D.C. is in a unique situation. One employer, the federal government, is responsible for a sizable portion of the local workforce.

On the other hand, this is an issue facing many downtowns. Can asking companies to have workers return or applying threats be successful? Or, is it better to try to offer amenities and encouragements so workers want to return? As a third option, is it time to transition from the decades-long emphasis on commercial downtown space to residences and other uses?

This could be an inflection point for a number of downtowns or it could end up being a version of the same old approach. However, it would not surprise me if the conversation between local politicians and business leaders heats up around this issue.

Infrastructure and the need for public relations

The Metropolitan Water Reclamation District of Chicago holds tours for the public. I recently participated in a live zoom version. You can watch a version here.

Photo by Leon Macapagal on Pexels.com

The tour was very informative about water and processes. We learned about watersheds and the small hill that separates water going into the Great Lakes versus the Mississippi. We learned about how water is cleaned in water treatment plants. We learned about the reversal of the Chicago River. We learned about the Deep Tunnel system. All of this was accompanied by helpful visuals (maps, drone footage) and engaging hosts who answered questions as they arose.

And it was also a public relations exercise. We heard about the ways that the MWRD has improved. We heard about the benefits of all their efforts. They had booklets for people to access, including materials for kids and information in multiple languages. The presentation was smooth.

What the tour could not as easily touch on: is this the best way to deal with water and land in a metropolitan region? Are there harmful byproducts of these systems (how about forever chemicals in sludge sold to local farmers)? Does the Deep Tunnel system solve all the problems it was supposed to?

Infrastructure like this is essential to modern life. People expect clean water to be available. When it is not, it is very surprising. They may complain about water rates and tax bills, but the whole system as experienced in the United States is relatively cheap for consumers.

Thus, positive public relations involving infrastructure can help the public know about these systems that they contribute to and depend on. People do not like a highway construction project that is over budget and over time? They can be informed about how these processes work and about the benefits that will come eventually. The public does not like a rate hike? They can learn about all the amazing systems that make it possible to live modern life.

All of this does not mean that the public relations version should necessarily win the day. I am generally in favor of all of us knowing more about the infrastructure we rely on. Yet, there are also questions or concerns that public relations can not easily bat away. If we can have more informed conversation about infrastructure, perhaps we could avoid protracted debates or simplistic approaches.

Limited options for building wealth for those who cannot achieve homeownership

In an article examining building wealth through homeownership, there seem to be limited alternatives:

Photo by Monstera on Pexels.com

Herbert says there are ways for renters to build wealth outside of home ownership, and he points to stocks and bonds as one example. In some cases, this may be a better investment than housing, he says.

“Renters can do well if they are able to put money into those financial instruments. The rate of return on stocks and bonds over the long term has certainly been higher than the rate of return on homeownership,” he says.

Still, Herbert is optimistic the housing market will improve in 2023 for those who want to go that route.

There are other investment options but this article does not expand much on them. The focus instead is on homeownership and the lengths people might go to achieve it or the ways opportunities might be expanded to more people.

One aspect of the article that struck me was the emotional component of status and success regarding homeownership. Owning a home and/or having a mortgage is not just a financial transaction that will likely pay off one day. It also involves providing for household members, signaling success, and joining a particular social class. It is hard to separate the financial investment and the emotional investment in American society.

Is the key then to promoting other investments or celebrating renting to successfully develop positive connotations and feelings? What if renting was viewed as a flexible form of provision that allowed households the nimbleness needed in today’s uncertain world? or, is investing in stocks and bonds an honorable investment in the future?

Finally, wealth and homeownership do not necessarily have to go together. New structures or systems might decouple this connection or provide multiple pathways to economic success.

When a sprawling suburban development in the Southwest loses its water supply due to drought

On the edges of the Phoenix metropolitan region, one recently constructed suburban development lost its access to water:

Photo by Steve Johnson on Pexels.com

Joe McCue thought he had found a desert paradise when he bought one of the new stucco houses sprouting in the granite foothills of Rio Verde, Ariz. There were good schools, mountain views and cactus-spangled hiking trails out the back door.

Then the water got cut off.

Earlier this month, the community’s longtime water supplier, the neighboring city of Scottsdale, turned off the tap for Rio Verde Foothills, blaming a grinding drought that is threatening the future of the West. Scottsdale said it had to focus on conserving water for its own residents, and could no longer sell water to roughly 500 to 700 homes — or around 1,000 people. That meant the unincorporated swath of $500,000 stucco houses, mansions and horse ranches outside Scottsdale’s borders would have to fend for itself and buy water from other suppliers — if homeowners could find them, and afford to pay much higher prices…

Water experts say Rio Verde Foothills’ situation is unusually dire, but it offers a glimpse of the bitter fights and hard choices facing 40 million people across the West who rely on the Colorado River for the means to take showers, irrigate crops, or run data centers and fracking rigs.

Given conditions in the West and Southwest, this could become more common for suburban areas. See earlier posts here and here.

One key from the article: when you move into a home, is the water supply guaranteed (as much as possible)? It sounds like there was an agreement to sell water to this new development. If you have such agreements or live in unincorporated areas or depend on other water sources, will they always be there?

Water is typically one of the lower concerns of those moving to the suburbs. It is assumed to be there. There might be the occasional problem with pipes, particularly in older homes, but the water should keep flowing. Other infrastructure concerns tend to take precedence; are there enough roads for new residents? Schools?

Without cheap water, it is harder to live the suburban life. As the article notes, how does one wash laundry or dishes with limited or really expensive water? Flushing toilets? This does not even get close to beloved amenities, like swimming pools.

More people working from home + smaller corporate offices = more coworking spaces?

Are recent trends coming together to make coworking spaces more popular? At least a few people think so:

Photo by Katerina Holmes on Pexels.com

A distinct growth sector of the suburban office market, coworking has become a bastion of those downsizing from corporate space, fleeing the congestion of the city, or escaping the domestic distractions of working from home…

He said the New Jersey site opened at that Bell Works in March 2016 with 2,800 square feet. But as the popularity and future trending of coworking became clear, construction began on a 25,000-square-foot version elsewhere in the building — just before the pandemic.

Previously, the concept had been based on a desire in the market for flexibility and a better work-life balance. But the pandemic really hit the gas pedal for coworking…

While coworking sites already make up 7% of total office space, that amount is projected to reach 30% by 2030, she said.

Hauser, whose sister firm Workplace Studio also designs coworking spaces for others, said there are five elements that define coworking: flexible desks, meeting rooms, a sense of community, a community manager, and a source for economic development.

The transformation of office space continues.

One other factor hinted at in the experiences described in the article is this: a cool factor. The ability to access space in an interesting setting – such as the revamped Bell Works site in Hoffman Estates – with on-campus amenities is fun. Setting up coworking space in a quiet strip mall in a sleepy community would be less attractive. Being around energy and excitement helps make the the flexible workspace experience interesting.

I would be interested to know how much coworking space might emerge compared to the corporate office downsizing that might happen in the next few years. What percent will coworking occupy compared to the loss of traditional office space?

Accounting for the “iron law of congestion”

Why is building more lanes to address traffic issues not the best way to go? See the iron law of congestion:

Photo by Pixabay on Pexels.com

There’s a name for the principle behind that apparent paradox: induced demand. Economist Anthony Downs is often credited with first articulating this “iron law of congestion” in 1962, as construction crews were hacking interstates through American cities. Downs published a seminal paper with a stark warning: “On urban commuter expressways, peak-hour traffic congestion rises to meet maximum capacity.” In other words, adding lanes won’t cure snarled traffic; the additional car space inevitably invites more trips, until gridlock is as bad as ever.

Downs was not the first to sound an alarm about the futility of expanding urban roadways — not by a long shot. In 1932, an association representing streetcars warned that “as fast as improvements are made in existing arteries of travel … they are saturated by an increasing volume of traffic.” In 1955, urban observer Lewis Mumford wrote a series of essays in the New Yorker titled “The Roaring Traffic’s Boom,” in which he memorably compared a highway planner widening a congested highway to “the tailor’s remedy for obesity — letting out the seams of trousers and loosening the belt. [T]his does nothing to curb the greedy appetites that have caused the fat to accumulate.”

Downs’ iron law applies not only to U.S. cities, which have grown more traffic-jammed despite billions of dollars in fresh pavement, but also to those around the world. Highway expansions in Norway and Britain haven’t reduced congestion there, either. The principle now meets little opposition among economists and urban planners. “It’s widely accepted,” says John Caskey, who teaches induced demand as part of his urban economics course at Swarthmore College. “For economists interested in urban transportation, there isn’t really any debate.”…

But turning down a new highway lane remains politically challenging. “The highway construction system has vast momentum,” says Rose, the historian. “It has the authority of highway contractors, builders and labor unions. Here is something that labor and management really can agree on: a highway contract.” The auto industry, too, continues to benefit from ongoing investments that expand the “floor space” allotted to its products. In 2019, Tesla CEO Elon Musk tweeted that induced demand “is one of the most irrational theories I’ve ever heard.”

Build it and they will come.

As I read through the longer narrative in this article, it seems that the needs of the automobile were prioritized by drivers, businesses, those in the road industry, and politicians. This has been going on for roughly a century; would academic theories with evidence behind them be able to overcome these interests?

Perhaps at some point in the future, we will able to look back at “peak road” or “peak highway.” Is there a point where new roads and highways or lanes are no longer pursued in the United States? Even if population growth stagnated or slowed, would the United States continue to build roadways? Maybe the costs of maintaining all those roadways will help lead to this moment. It is hard to imagine other scenarios; even as fewer people drive to work compared to earlier years, traffic continues.

If winter was less harsh in the Chicago area, would residents like this?

Let’s say winters in the future in the Chicago region turn out to be not as cold, do not involve as much snow, and/or include more warm days. In just the last month, we have experienced wind chills of roughly -30 degrees below zero and 50 degree days. The Chicago region has had moments of winter but not a full month of winter. Would Chicago residents like a long-term shift away from winter?

Photo by Vishal Shah on Pexels.com

On one hand, many Chicago area residents complain about the winter. They make clear their opinions about the cold, snow, potholes, salt, longer traffic times, winter gear, heating bills, and more. At least a few vacation in warmer climates during the winter and some move to warmer climates.

On the other hand, it is hard to imagine the Chicagoland experience as it is known now without winter. What about the social capital created by griping together? The possibility of a white Christmas? The pride about shoveling and still doing life when talking to people in parts of the country where a light amount of snow shuts everything down? Invigorating winter outdoor activities? Supposed “Bears weather”? Jokes about the two seasons of winter and construction? And so on.

Perhaps new weather patterns would lead to a reconfigured understanding of what winter is. People can adapt to change over time. They can find different ways to bond and different experiences or group identities that bring them together. The long-told tales of the Blizzard of 1967 or Snowmageddon 2011 will fade further into the archives. Chicago could still have a winter that is different than the South or West even if it s different than what it is in the past.