New Orleans (again)

In 1960, New Orleans had 627,000 people and was the largest and perhaps still most important city in the South. It now is smaller than Lexington, Kentucky. Most of the reason for this is, of course, Katrina, but much of the reason is not. New Orleans had already lost around 20 percent of its peak population before Katrina, and as such was very much like unglamorous cities such as Milwaukee, Cincinnati, and Baltimore. So while it didn't lose as much as Buffalo, Pittsburgh, St. Louis and Cleveland, it was hardly putting in an all-star performance, even before Katrina hit.

A question I want to focus on over the next year is why New Orleans--a city I rather love--has evolved (devolved?) as it has. Race certainly has a lot to do with it, but cannot by itself explain the city's fade. Atlanta is a heavily black, southern city that has performed far better--if less charmingly--than its neighbor to the southwest.

Of the course if this year, I will be president of a small association of academics who do what I do--the American Real Estate and Urban Economics Association. I will be giving my presidential address next January in New Orleans. I therefore think that the focus of the address should be about New Orleans. I have a lot of reading to do between now and then; I welcome suggests for reading, people to talk to, and just opinions from well-informed people about the city's history and its future. You may read my preliminary views in the archives.

Thanks for any suggestions or help.