/* NEW, PROJECT-SPECIFIC STYLES HERE*/
.graphic-wrapper p{width:100% !important}
@media all and (max-width: 700px) {
/* MOBILE STYLES HERE */
}
Chicago’s position as the nation’s third-largest city could be in danger, a recent report shouted. A Reuters story last week said the population of Houston could surpass Chicago’s in the next 8 to 10 years. This is consistent with U.S. Census Bureau data that details how Chicago’s population has been lagging, while other large cities still grow.
Data released by the Illinois Department of Health in February show that the population for Chicago, about 2.7 million in 2010, could decrease by 3 percent to 2.5 million by 2025. Meanwhile, Houston’s population could reach 2.54 million to 2.7 million in 2025, according to the Reuters report. But a recent population estimate by the Census Bureau shows an increase in population, rather than a decrease.
Census estimates released in June show that the population of Chicago increased by 1 percent from 2010 to 2014. So why is one projection showing a decrease, but another an increase?
Both data sets are based on estimates and assumptions, says Rob Paral, a Chicago-based demographer. Unlike the 2000 or 2010 census, where all residents answer a questionnaire, any interim projections or estimates must use sampling or a formula based on past population statistics to calculate population.
A health department official, when asked about the bump in 2014 versus the decline in the 2015 projections, stuck with the original report.
“Trend data do not support any increase in the projections for Chicago in the next 10 years,” said Bill Dart, the deputy director of policy, planning and statistics at the health department. Dart explained that the estimates from the census use a different formula than the health department. And factors such as births, deaths, migration, economic boons or natural disasters can disrupt projections.
Despite the minor bump in 2014 from the census, the big picture is that Chicago growth has been flat in recent years, Paral said. Chicago’s population increase from 2010 to 2014 was the smallest posted by any of the 10 largest cities. Houston, and other Southwestern cities such as San Antonio and San Jose, Calif., are growing at a much faster rate.
.g-artboard {
margin:0 auto;
}
#g-chicago-population-charts-population-phone{
position:relative;
overflow:hidden;
width:280px;
}
.g-aiAbs{
position:absolute;
}
.g-aiImg{
display:block;
width:100% !important;
}
#g-chicago-population-charts-population-phone p{
font-family:nyt-franklin,arial,helvetica,sans-serif;
font-size:13px;
line-height:18px;
margin:0;
}
#g-chicago-population-charts-population-phone .g-aiPstyle0 {
font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;
font-size:20px;
line-height:25px;
font-weight:bold;
color:#000000;
}
#g-chicago-population-charts-population-phone .g-aiPstyle1 {
font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;
font-size:14px;
line-height:17px;
font-weight:bold;
color:#000000;
}
#g-chicago-population-charts-population-phone .g-aiPstyle2 {
font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;
font-size:14px;
line-height:25px;
color:#000000;
}
#g-chicago-population-charts-population-phone .g-aiPstyle3 {
font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;
font-size:14px;
line-height:25px;
font-weight:bold;
color:#000000;
}
#g-chicago-population-charts-population-phone .g-aiPstyle4 {
font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;
font-size:14px;
line-height:25px;
text-align:right;
color:#000000;
}
#g-chicago-population-charts-population-phone .g-aiPstyle5 {
font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;
font-size:14px;
line-height:25px;
font-weight:bold;
text-align:right;
color:#000000;
}
#g-chicago-population-charts-population-phone .g-aiPstyle6 {
font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;
font-size:14px;
line-height:17px;
padding-top:6px;
color:#000000;
}
#g-chicago-population-charts-population-phone .g-aiPstyle7 {
font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;
font-size:14px;
line-height:17px;
text-align:right;
color:#000000;
}
#g-chicago-population-charts-population-phone .g-aiPstyle8 {
font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;
font-size:14px;
line-height:17px;
font-weight:bold;
text-align:right;
color:#000000;
}
#g-chicago-population-charts-population-phone .g-aiPstyle9 {
font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;
font-size:14px;
line-height:21px;
text-align:right;
color:#000000;
}
#g-chicago-population-charts-population-phone .g-aiPstyle10 {
font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;
font-size:12px;
line-height:21px;
text-align:center;
color:#000000;
}
#g-chicago-population-charts-population-phone .g-aiPstyle11 {
font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;
font-size:14px;
line-height:17px;
font-style:italic;
color:#000000;
}
#g-chicago-population-charts-population-phone .g-aiPstyle12 {
font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;
font-size:14px;
line-height:24px;
font-weight:bold;
color:#000000;
}
#g-chicago-population-charts-population-phone .g-aiPstyle13 {
font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;
font-size:14px;
line-height:17px;
color:#000000;
}
#g-chicago-population-charts-population-phone .g-aiPstyle14 {
font-size:14px;
line-height:25px;
text-align:right;
color:#000000;
}
#g-chicago-population-charts-population-phone .g-aiPstyle15 {
font-size:14px;
line-height:25px;
text-align:right;
color:#000000;
}
#g-chicago-population-charts-population-phone .g-aiPstyle16 {
font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;
font-size:12px;
line-height:25px;
color:#000000;
}
Comparing Chicago’s
population growth
POPULATION CHANGE
IN THE 10 LARGEST U.S. CITIES
Percent change
in population, 2000-2010
Rank, city
1: New York
2: Los Angeles
3: Chicago
4: Houston
5: Philadelphia
6: Phoenix
7: San Antonio
8: San Diego
9: Dallas
10: San Jose
3.9%
3.6%
1.0%
6.7%
2.2%
6.3%
8.2%
5.6%
6.9%
7.4%
CHICAGO’S POPULATION BY DECADE
Though minuscule, that 1 percent growth was an improvement from the last decennial census. From 2000 to 2010, Chicago’s population declined by 6.9 percent.
Looking back, the city’s population grew rapidly from its founding in 1833 to a peak of 3.6 million in 1950. While increasing in population, Chicago also was adding land area. By 2014 it had grown to 227.6 square miles.
2014 estimate:
2.7 million
4 million
3
2
1
1840
’60
’80
1900
’20
’40
’60
’80
2000
’14
THE CITY’S CHANGING DEMOGRAPHICS
The demographic breakdown of Chicago between 2000 and 2010 changed as the population fell. The city lost more than 180,000 black residents during that time, while gaining a fraction of Hispanic and Asian residents.
“African-American or white growth for a long time have been either very flat or negative,” Paral said. “We had that growth in the ’90s that was basically due to the Latino growth.”
And that Latino growth, along with the growth from undocumented immgrants, has dried up, Paral said. A Pew Research Center report released this month confirmed that immigration from Latin America has slowed since 2000. A second 2015 Pew report said that the number of unauthorized immigrants living in the U.S. has leveled off after nearly two decades of growth.
Chicago’s population change
Race/ethnicity
Change, 2000-10
-52,449 (-5.8%)
White*
Black*
Hispanic
Asian/P.I.*
Other**
-181,453 (-17.2%)
+25,218 (+3.3%)
+20,051 (+16%)
-11,785 (-21%)
*Non-Hispanic.
**Includes those identifying as two or more races.
Taking a look at the
entire metro area
Chicago’s meager population increase from 2010 to 2014 wasn’t constrained to the city limits. The metropolitan area increased by about 93,000 residents, or less than a percentage point, from 2010 to 2014. Chicago’s metropolitan statistical area includes the city, suburbs and extends into Wisconsin and Indiana. Meanwhile, the Houston area increased by more than 9 percent.
METROPOLITAN STATISTICAL AREA
WIS.
Chicago
ILL.
IND.
Chicago-Naperville-Elgin metro area …
9,461,105
2010
9,554,598, +0.99%
2014
… compared to
Houston-The Woodlands-Sugar Land
5,920,416
2010
6,490,180, +9.6%
2014
A look on the brighter side
“There are so many currents in these stories,” says Paral. “It’s not all doom and gloom.”
The city has done a good job of attracting educated young adults, Paral says. Though overall population has stagnated in Chicago, the city is growing in some key areas. The number of college-eduated young adults has increased by more than 30 percent from 2000, according to census data. This ranks it in the middle of the ten largest cities.
RESIDENTS AGE 25-34 WITH A
BACHELOR’S DEGREE OR HIGHER
Change
from 2000
Population rank
2009-2013
1: New York
2: Los Angeles
3: Chicago
4: Houston
5: Philadelphia
6: Phoenix
7: San Antonio
8: San Diego
9: Dallas
10: San Jose
665,910
231,389
249,779
119,557
96,918
57,960
54,709
108,079
69,239
60,370
37.4%
34.9%
31.5%
28.2%
62.4%
24.2%
40.0%
36.6%
7.1%
9.7%
History of Chicago’s rank
The Second City held the No. 2 spot on the list for 10 decades before being surpassed by Los Angeles. New York has long held the top spot, while Southwestern cities such as San Diego and Phoenix have entered the list in the last 50 years. In 2014, each of the 10 most populous cities had more than 1 million residents.
CHICAGO’S RANK AMONG THE
10 LARGEST CITIES, BY DECADE
1:
N.Y
2:
L.A.
3:
Chi.
4:
Hou.
5:
Phil.
6:
Phx.
7:
S.A.
8:
S.D.
9:
Dal.
10:
S.J.
1850
1900
1950
2000
Sources: Illinois Department of Health, U.S. Census Bureau, Rob Paral and Associates, Pew Research Center, Reuters reporting
