Transcript
Page 1: State of Ingenuity: Comparison to National Trends

St t f I itState of IngenuityComparisons to National Trends

Norman Walzer and Brian L. HargerSenior Research Scholar Research Associate

Presented to

SOI Steering CommitteeWhitewater, Wisconsin

11/18/2011 1

Page 2: State of Ingenuity: Comparison to National Trends

Population & Employment TrendsPopulation & Employment Trends

11/18/2011 2

Page 3: State of Ingenuity: Comparison to National Trends

Population Change by Age Cohort

52.5%

60.0%

State of Ingenuity Region

28.5%

44.5%

30.8%30.0%

40.0%

50.0%

to 202

0

Silent Generation

8.1% 7.6%3 6% 4 3%

7.3%11.0%

15.8%

4.6%10.0%

20.0%

30.0%

cent Cha

nge 20

10t

Baby Bust

Generation Z

3.6%

‐0.7%

2.8% 4.3%0.9%

‐7.9%

4.6%2.6%

‐10.0%

0.0%

Perc

Baby BoomersMillennials

‐14.5%‐20.0%

11/18/2011 3

Data Source: Woods & Poole Economics, Inc., 2011.

Page 4: State of Ingenuity: Comparison to National Trends

Population Change by Age Cohort

58.8%60 0%

70.0%

State of Ingenuity Region

31 5%

49.2%

40.0%

50.0%

60.0%

to 203

0

Generation 

8.5% 9.3% 8.3%11.1%

18.4%

31.5%

17.1%

10 0%

20.0%

30.0%

cent Cha

nge 20

20t

Baby Bust

Generation Z

Alpha?

2.7% 4.4% 5.2%0.7%

3.7%5.6%

1.7%

‐5.6%‐10.0%

0.0%

10.0%

Perc

Baby BoomersMillennials

‐12.8%‐20.0%

11/18/2011 4

Data Source: Woods & Poole Economics, Inc., 2011.

Page 5: State of Ingenuity: Comparison to National Trends

Population Change by Age Cohort

43.0%

50.0%

State of Ingenuity Region

21.9%

36.8%

30.0%

40.0%

to 204

0

Generation Z

8.1%5.0%

2.9%5.6%

11.1% 11.1%

4.7%1.2%

5.0%7.3%

9.6%11.4%

2.8%

10.0%

20.0%

cent Cha

nge 20

30t

Baby Bust

Generation Z

1.2%

‐10.3%

‐2.6%

‐10.0%

0.0%Perc

Baby BoomersMillennialsGeneration Alpha?

‐20.0%

11/18/2011 5

Data Source: Woods & Poole Economics, Inc., 2011.

Page 6: State of Ingenuity: Comparison to National Trends

Unemployment RateState of Ingenuity Region

16.0State of Ingenuity Region

U S

12.0

14.0U.S.

ssio

n

on ion

8.0

10.0

Rec

e

Rec

essi

Rec

essi

4.0

6.0

0.0

2.0

90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11

Data Source: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, 1990-2011.* Year by month.

11/18/2011 6

199

199

199

199

199

199

199

199

199

199

200

200

200

200

200

200

200

200

200

200

201

20

Page 7: State of Ingenuity: Comparison to National Trends

Employment Trends by Industry SectorState of Ingenuity Region 

50.0Manufacturing

men

t

40.0

gServicesGovernment

Tota

l Em

ploy

m

30.0

Perc

ent o

f T

10.0

20.0

0.0Data Source: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, 1990-2010.

11/18/2011 7

Page 8: State of Ingenuity: Comparison to National Trends

Per Capita Wage GrowthState of Ingenuity Region

State of Ingenuity R i

United StatesPercent Change (2001 2009)Industry Cluster Region (2001‐2009)

2001 2009 2001 2009 Region U.S.

Agribusiness, Food Processing & Technology $35,614  $43,410  $29,369  $36,577  21.9 24.5

Bi di l/Bi t h i l (Lif S i ) $32 778 $47 618 $40 670 $52 802 45 3 29 8Biomedical/Biotechnical (Life Sciences) $32,778  $47,618  $40,670  $52,802  45.3 29.8

Business & Financial Services $37,930  $49,123  $63,750  $79,518  29.5 24.7

Defense & Security $31,370  $40,487  $51,609  $65,011  29.1 26.0

Education & Knowledge Creation $31,279 $39,048 $33,755 $43,098 24.8 27.7Education & Knowledge Creation $31,279  $39,048  $33,755  $43,098  24.8 27.7

Energy (Fossil & Renewable) $34,703  $42,314  $49,601  $66,403  21.9 33.9

Information Technology & Telecommunications $40,561  $50,831  $64,050  $80,444  25.3 25.6

Transportation & Logistics $30,150  $35,631  $38,066  $45,128  18.2 18.6

Manufacturing Supercluster $45,567  $56,089  $48,912  $62,141  23.1 27.0

Printing & Publishing $31,349  $40,219  $50,204  $62,087  28.3 23.7

Total All Industries $31,788  $37,752  $36,219  $45,559  18.8 25.8

11/18/2011 8

Data Source: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages (QCEW) and the Purdue Center for Regional Development (cluster definitions), 2011.

Page 9: State of Ingenuity: Comparison to National Trends

U.S. Industry Employment & OutputPercent Change, 1998‐2008

Other servicesReligious, grantmaking, civic, professional organizatons Output

Employment

Education servicesHealth care and social assistance

Arts, entertainment, and recreationAccomodation and food services

Other services Employment

Finance and insuranceReal estate, rental, and leasing

Professional, scientific, and technical servicesManagement of companies and enterprises

Administrative, support, waste management and remediation

Wholesale tradeRetail trade

Transportation and warehousingInformation

Finance and insurance

MiningUtilities

ConstructionManufacturing

-50.0 0.0 50.0 100.0 150.0

11/18/2011 9

Source: Employment Projections Program, U.S. Department of Labor, U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2011.

Page 10: State of Ingenuity: Comparison to National Trends

U.S. Industry Employment & Output ForecastPercent Change, 2008‐2018

Religious, grantmaking, civic, professional organizatons Output

Education servicesHealth care and social assistance

Arts, entertainment, and recreationAccomodation and food services

Other services Employment

Fi d iReal estate, rental, and leasing

Professional, scientific, and technical servicesManagement of companies and enterprises

Administrative, support, waste management and remediation

Wholesale tradeRetail trade

Transportation and warehousingInformation

Finance and insurance

MiningUtilities

ConstructionManufacturing

-50.0 0.0 50.0 100.0 150.0

11/18/2011 10

Source: Employment Projections Program, U.S. Department of Labor, U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2011.

Page 11: State of Ingenuity: Comparison to National Trends

U.S. Industry TrendsForecasted Annual Rate of Change, 2008‐2018

Industry DescriptionPct. Of Total Emp. (2008)

Employment Wages OutputSOI Region U.S.

Mining 0.1 0.6 -1.6 0.4 -0.2

Utilities 0.6 0.4 -1.1 0.9 0.9

Construction 5.3 7.7 1.7 1.4 2.9

Manufacturing 16.8 9.5 -0.9 -0.2 2.1

Wholesale trade 4.1 4.3 0.4 0.8 5.3

Retail trade 11.7 12.7 0.4 1.0 4.2

Transportation and warehousing 3.3 3.8 0.9 1.1 2.9

Information 1.2 2.4 0.4 1.0 5.4

Finance and insurance 3.4 5.6 0.5 1.1 9.3

Real estate, rental, and leasing 3.2 5.2 1.1 2.0 2.5

Professional, scientific, and technical services 3.5 7.9 3.0 2.1 3.2

Management of companies and enterprises 0.4 1.3 0.5 1.3 4.3

Ad i i t ti t t t d di ti 6 7 7 2 1 6 1 7 3 5Administrative, support, waste management and remediation 6.7 7.2 1.6 1.7 3.5

Education services 1.5 2.5 2.4 2.7 1.7

Health care and social assistance 11.8 11.8 2.3 2.0 3.6

Arts, entertainment, and recreation 2.0 2.4 1.4 1.7 1.9

Accommodation and food services 7 1 8 0 0 7 1 6 1 6Accommodation and food services 7.1 8.0 0.7 1.6 1.6

Other services 6.2 6.8 1.2 1.8 1.5

Data Sources: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics; Woods & Poole Economics, Inc., 2011.

11/18/2011 11

Page 12: State of Ingenuity: Comparison to National Trends

Gross Regional ProductState of Ingenuity Region

$40,000,000,000

Actual

$35,000,000,000

Forecast

$30,000,000,000

$25,000,000,000

$20,000,000,000 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20000

001

002

003

004

005

006

007

008

009

010

011

012

013

014

015

016

017

018

019

020

11/18/2011 12

Note: Figures are in constant (2005) dollars.Data Sources: Woods & Poole Economics, Inc., 2011.

Page 13: State of Ingenuity: Comparison to National Trends

Industrial & Occupational ClustersIndustrial & Occupational Clusters

11/18/2011 13

Page 14: State of Ingenuity: Comparison to National Trends

Industry Concentrations

0.60

State of Ingenuity Region

Employment Change2001‐2009

0.40

Glass & Ceramics

Business & 2009

)

10.0% or more

5.0% to 9.9%

0.1% to 4.9%

No Change

0 1% t 4 9%e              In

crease

2001‐2009

Arts, Entertainment, Recreation & Visitor Industries

0.20 Education & Knowledge Creation

Financial Services

Forest & Wood Products

Transportation & Logistics

b d h l

Defense & Security

in L

.Q. (

2001

-2 ‐0.1% to ‐4.9%

‐5.0% to ‐9.9%

‐10.0% or moreDecrease

Mi i

0 20

0.00

Advanced Materials

Chemicals & Chemical‐based ProductsPrinting & Publishing

Agribusiness , Food Processing & Technology

Information Technology & Telecommunications

Cha

nge

i Mining

Apparel & Textiles

Manufacturing Supercluster

‐0.40

‐0.20Energy (Fossil & Renewable)

Data Source: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages (QCEW) and the Purdue Center for Regional Development (cluster definitions), 2011.

Supe c uste

Biomedical/Biotechnical

11/18/2011 14

0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 3.00Location Quotient (2009)

Page 15: State of Ingenuity: Comparison to National Trends

Manufacturing Concentrations

0.40

State of Ingenuity Region

0 00

0.20

Computer & Electronic Product Mfg.

9)

-0.20

0.00

Primary Metals Mfg.

Electrical Equipment, Appliance & Component Mfg.

F b i d M lL.Q

. (20

01-2

009

Employment Change

-0.40

Transportation Equipment Mfg.

Machinery Mfg.

Fabricated Metal Products Mfg.

Cha

nge

in L

10.0% or more

5.0% to 9.9%

0.1% to 4.9%

No Change       In

crease

Employment Change2001‐2009

-0.80

-0.60

0 00 1 00 2 00 3 00 4 00 5 00 6 00

q p g

Data Source: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages (QCEW) and the Purdue Center for Regional Development (cluster definitions), 2011.

No Change

‐0.1% to ‐4.9%

‐5.0% to ‐9.9%

‐10.0% or moreDecrease       

11/18/2011 15

0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00

Location Quotient (2009)

Page 16: State of Ingenuity: Comparison to National Trends

Industry Employment ConcentrationsState of Ingenuity Region

Industry Cluster DescriptionLocation Quotient

2001 2009 Change (2001‐2009)Advanced Materials 1.18 1.08 ‐0.10Agribusiness, Food Processing & Technology 1.01 1.04 0.03Apparel & Textiles 0.26 0.26 ‐0.01Arts, Entertainment, Recreation & Visitor Industries 0.53 0.59 0.06Biomedical/Biotechnical (Life Sciences) 0.81 0.73 ‐0.08Business & Financial Services 0.39 0.37 ‐0.03Chemicals & Chemical Based Products 1 55 1 32 0 22Chemicals & Chemical Based Products 1.55 1.32 ‐0.22Defense & Security 0.25 0.29 0.04Education & Knowledge Creation 0.55 0.74 0.19Energy (Fossil & Renewable) 0.46 0.40 ‐0.06Forest & Wood Products 0.75 0.91 0.15Glass & Ceramics 1.07 1.57 0.50Glass & Ceramics 1.07 1.57 0.50Information Technology & Telecommunications 0.36 0.27 ‐0.09Transportation & Logistics 0.81 1.00 0.19Manufacturing Supercluster 2.76 2.58 ‐0.18Primary Metal Mfg 1.61 1.37 ‐0.24Fabricated Metal Product Mfg 3.62 3.29 ‐0.33gMachinery Mfg 5.42 5.05 ‐0.36Computer & Electronic Product Mfg 0.66 0.75 0.10Electrical Equipment, Appliance & Component Mfg 3.22 3.12 ‐0.10Transportation Equipment Mfg 2.28 1.77 ‐0.51

Mining 0.17 0.21 0.03Printing & Publishing 0.63 0.59 ‐0.04

11/18/2011 16

Data Source:  U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages (QCEW) and the Purdue Center for Regional Development (cluster definitions), 2011.

Page 17: State of Ingenuity: Comparison to National Trends

Components of Industry Growth State of Ingenuity Region

Industry Cluster DescriptionNational Job Growth 

ComponentIndustry Job Growth 

ComponentCompetitive Job 

Growth ComponentAdvanced Materials ‐168 ‐4,546 ‐6,952, ,Agribusiness, Food Processing & Technology ‐78 ‐414 ‐748Apparel & Textiles ‐10 ‐526 ‐596Arts, Entertainment, Recreation & Visitor Industries ‐64 16 365Biomedical/Biotechnical (Life Sciences) ‐74 1,999 143Business & Financial Services ‐103 297 ‐1,471Chemicals & Chemical Based Products ‐96 ‐2,673 ‐4,568Defense & Security ‐39 19 460Education & Knowledge Creation ‐151 2,065 7,436Energy (Fossil & Renewable) ‐84 ‐228 ‐2,161Forest & Wood Products ‐52 ‐1,822 ‐1,261Gl & C i 16 567 42Glass & Ceramics ‐16 ‐567 ‐42Information Technology & Telecommunications ‐62 ‐1,341 ‐3,243Transportation & Logistics ‐74 ‐439 922Manufacturing Supercluster ‐512 ‐18,223 ‐24,134Primary Metal Mfg ‐22 ‐965 ‐1,326Fabricated Metal Product Mfg ‐143 ‐3,827 ‐5,968Fabricated Metal Product Mfg 143 3,827 5,968Machinery Mfg ‐174 ‐5,296 ‐7,443Computer & Electronic Product Mfg ‐27 ‐1,172 ‐1,023Electrical Equipment, Appliance & Component Mfg ‐42 ‐1,686 ‐2,033Transportation Equipment Mfg ‐105 ‐3,749 ‐6,336

Mining ‐1 ‐5 6Printing & Publishing ‐43 ‐1,021 ‐1,582

11/18/2011 17

Data Source:  U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages (QCEW) and the Purdue Center for Regional Development (cluster definitions), 2011.

Page 18: State of Ingenuity: Comparison to National Trends

Industry Wage ConcentrationsState of Ingenuity Region

Industry Cluster DescriptionLocation Quotient

2001 2009 Change (2001‐2009)Advanced Materials 1.24 0.88 ‐0.36Agribusiness, Food Processing & Technology 1.39 1.49 0.10Apparel & Textiles 0.31 0.29 ‐0.02Arts, Entertainment, Recreation & Visitor Industries 0.35 0.38 0.03Biomedical/Biotechnical (Life Sciences) 0.74 0.79 0.05Business & Financial Services 0.27 0.27 0.00Chemicals & Chemical Based Products 1 95 1 23 ‐0 72Chemicals & Chemical Based Products 1.95 1.23 ‐0.72Defense & Security 0.17 0.22 0.05Education & Knowledge Creation 0.58 0.80 0.22Energy (Fossil & Renewable) 0.37 0.31 ‐0.06Forest & Wood Products 0.80 1.00 0.20Glass & Ceramics 1.12 1.58 0.46Information Technology & Telecommunications 0.26 0.21 ‐0.05Transportation & Logistics 0.73 0.95 0.22Manufacturing Supercluster 2.93 2.81 ‐0.12Primary Metal Mfg 1.57 1.41 ‐0.16Fabricated Metal Product Mfg 4.22 3.65 ‐0.57M hi Mf 6 71 6 55 0 16Machinery Mfg 6.71 6.55 ‐0.16Computer & Electronic Product Mfg 0.46 0.55 0.09Electrical Equipment, Appliance & Component Mfg 3.41 3.44 0.03Transportation Equipment Mfg 2.84 2.43 ‐0.41

Mining 0.23 0.32 0.09Printing & Publishing 0.45 0.46 0.01Printing & Publishing 0.45 0.46 0.01

11/18/2011 18

Data Source: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages (QCEW) and the Purdue Center for Regional Development (cluster definitions), 2011.

Page 19: State of Ingenuity: Comparison to National Trends

Industry Employment ConcentrationsState of Ingenuity Region

• The region has enjoyed (and continues to enjoy) strong employment concentrations in manufacturing related industry clusters.  However, that dominance is declining due in part to local competitive factors, as well as national and industry related factors.p , y

• The Transportation and Logistics cluster, though relatively small in terms of regional employment, has experienced positive growth.  Th l i t th t h f thi th i b d l lThe analysis suggests that much of this growth is based on local competitive advantages. 

• Several other clusters (Arts, Entertainment, Recreation and Visitor Se e a ot e c uste s ( ts, te ta e t, ec eat o a d s toindustries, Biomedical/Biotechnical, and Defense and Security) could emerge as future sources of regional employment growth.

11/18/2011 19

Page 20: State of Ingenuity: Comparison to National Trends

Occupational Employment Concentrations

0.10

State of Ingenuity Region

M h i S i i

Natural Sciences and Environmental Management

Managerial, Sales, Marketing and Human Resources

Crop and Livestock Workers Health Care and Medical Science

0.00

Job Zone 1

Technology‐Based Knowledge Clusters

Information Technology

-200

9)

Mathematics, Statistics, Data and Accounting

Job Zone 2

Public Safety and 

-0.10

Post‐Secondary Education & Knowledge Creation

Legal and Financial Services, and Real Estate

e in

L.Q

. (20

01-

Arts, Entertainment, Publishing & Broadcasting

Domestic Security

Personal Services Occupations

Primary/Secondary and Vocational Education, 

Remediation & Social Services

-0.20Building, Landscape and 

Skilled Production Workers

Cha

nge

10.0% or more

5.0% to 9.9%

0.1% to 4.9%

     Increase

Employment Change2001‐2009

Engineering and Related Sciences

-0.300 40 0 0 0 60 0 0 0 80 0 90 1 00 1 10 1 20 1 30

Construction Design

Data Source:  U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages (QCEW) and the Purdue Center for Regional Development (cluster definitions), 2011.

No Change

‐0.1% to ‐4.9%

‐5.0% to ‐9.9%

‐10.0% or moreDecrease         

0.40 0.50 0.60 0.70 0.80 0.90 1.00 1.10 1.20 1.30

Location Quotient (2009)

11/18/2011 20

Page 21: State of Ingenuity: Comparison to National Trends

Occupational Employment ConcentrationsState of Ingenuity Region

Occupational Cluster DescriptionLocation Quotient

2001 2009 Change (2001-2009)Managerial Sales Marketing and HR 0 77 0 81 0 04Managerial, Sales, Marketing and HR 0.77 0.81 0.04Skilled Production Workers: Technicians, Operators, Trades, Installers & Repairers 1.29 1.19 -0.10

Health Care and Medical Science (Aggregate) 0.94 0.98 0.04Health Care and Medical Science (Medical Practitioners and Scientists) 0.74 0.84 0.10Health Care and Medical Science (Medical Technicians) 1.01 0.99 -0.02Health Care and Medical Science (Therapy, Counseling and Rehabilitation ) 0.99 1.04 0.05

Mathematics, Statistics, Data and Accounting 0.68 0.68 0.00Legal and Financial Services, and Real Estate 0.83 0.80 -0.03Information Technology (IT) 0.47 0.48 0.01Natural Sciences and Environmental Management 0.40 0.42 0.02Crop and Livestock Workers 0.78 0.84 0.06Primary/Secondary and Vocational Education, Remediation & Social Services 1.13 1.19 0.06Building, Landscape and Construction Design 0.87 0.65 -0.22Engineering and Related Sciences 0.82 0.68 -0.14Personal Services Occupations 1.14 1.09 -0.05Arts, Entertainment, Publishing and Broadcasting 0.80 0.85 0.05Public Safety and Domestic Security 0.89 0.90 0.01Postsecondary Education and Knowledge Creation 0.77 0.72 -0.05Job Zone 2 1.12 1.12 0.00Job Zone 1 1.01 1.04 0.03Technology-Based Knowledge Clusters 0.65 0.65 0.00

11/18/2011 21

Data Source: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages (QCEW) and the Purdue Center for Regional Development (cluster definitions), 2011.

Page 22: State of Ingenuity: Comparison to National Trends

Occupational Employment Growth Components S f I i R iState of Ingenuity Region

Industry Name National Job Growth Component

Industry Job Growth Component

Competitive Job Growth Component

Managerial, Sales, Marketing and HR 1,611 1,900 1,579Skill d P d ti W k T h i i O t T d I t ll &Skilled Production Workers: Technicians, Operators, Trades, Installers & Repairers 2,475 -3,498 -10,173

Health Care and Medical Science (Aggregate) 1,188 2,687 2,178Health Care and Medical Science (Medical Practitioners and Scientists) 219 425 708

Health Care and Medical Science (Medical Technicians) 252 761 312Health Care and Medical Science (Therapy, Counseling & Rehabilitation) 716 1,527 1,162

Mathematics, Statistics, Data and Accounting 419 68 -553Legal and Financial Services, and Real Estate 1,619 2,019 -1,311Information Technology (IT) 243 -100 -329Natural Sciences and Environmental Management 44 37 20gCrop and Livestock Workers 317 -405 -400Primary/Secondary and Vocational Education, Remediation & Social Services 1,434 1,771 1,269

Building, Landscape and Construction Design 110 -129 -757Engineering and Related Sciences 230 -409 -1,361P l S i O ti 530 2 549 1 125Personal Services Occupations 530 2,549 1,125Arts, Entertainment, Publishing and Broadcasting 397 583 500Public Safety and Domestic Security 250 344 66Postsecondary Education and Knowledge Creation 222 139 -422Job Zone 2 9,899 -9,851 -21,214Job Zone 1 3,884 -3,318 -6,647Technology-Based Knowledge Clusters 1,378 155 -1,938

11/18/2011 22

Data Source: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages (QCEW) and the Purdue Center for Regional Development (cluster definitions), 2011.

Page 23: State of Ingenuity: Comparison to National Trends

Occupational Employment ConcentrationsState of Ingenuity Region

• As the manufacturing employment has receded, so has the number of those employed in skilled production occupations.

• The region’s healthcare occupational clusters have enjoyed strong job growth in the past decade due in part to local competitivejob growth in the past decade, due in part to local competitive factors.

• The Personal Services and the Primary/Secondary and Vocational y/ yEducation, Remediation & Social Services clusters have also shown growth potential base on local competitive advantages.

Th T h l B d K l d Cl t h th t ti l• The Technology‐Based Knowledge Cluster has growth potential, based on national and industry wide growth trends, but is declining in the region because of local competitive factors.

11/18/2011 23

Page 24: State of Ingenuity: Comparison to National Trends

Business Vitality & Access to CapitalBusiness Vitality & Access to Capital

11/18/2011 24

Page 25: State of Ingenuity: Comparison to National Trends

Trends in Business EstablishmentsState of Ingenuity Region, 2006‐2008

Type of Business Net Opened2

Net Expanded3

Net Moved In4

Stage /Sector Movement5

Net New6

p p

Total 8,274 1,782 20 ‐1,616 8,460

Noncommercial 198 154 1 ‐149 204

Nonresident1 ‐225 ‐10 0 99 ‐136Nonresident 225 10 0 99 136

Resident1 8,301 1,638 19 ‐1,566 8,392

Self Employed (1) 4,508 1,423 ‐13 ‐2,217 3,701

Stage 1 (2 to 9 employees) 3 973 251 18 500 4 742Stage 1 (2 to 9 employees) 3,973 251 18 500 4,742

Stage 2 (10 to 99 employees) ‐169 ‐35 19 150 ‐35

Stage 3 (100 to 499 employees) ‐9 2 ‐3 0 ‐10

Stage 4 (500+ employees) ‐2 ‐3 ‐2 1 ‐6Stage 4 (500+ employees) 2 3 2 1 6

1 Resident businesses are either stand-alone in area or headquartered in same state; non-resident businesses are headquartered in a different state.2 The “Net Opened” column is the difference in the number of businesses “Opened” and the number of businesses “Closed”.3 The “Net Expanded” column is the difference in the number of businesses “Expanded” and the number businesses “Contracted”.4 The “Net Moved In” column is the difference in the number of businesses “Moved In” and the number of jobs lost in businesses “Moved Out”.5 The “Stage/Sector Movement” column is the difference in the number of businesses that moved between Resident business stages or between Resident,

N R id t N i l t

11/18/2011 25

Non-Resident, or Noncommercial sectors.6 The “Net Expanded” column is the difference in the number of businesses “Expanded” and the number of businesses “Contracted”.

Data Source: National Establishment Time‐Series (NETS) database, 2010.

Page 26: State of Ingenuity: Comparison to National Trends

Trends in Business EmploymentState of Ingenuity Region, 2006‐2008

Type of Business Net Opened2

Net Expanded3

Net Moved In4

Stage /Sector Movement5

Net New6

p p

Total ‐16,816 3,637 ‐2,753 3,039 ‐12,893

Noncommercial ‐2,178 1,313 ‐14 660 ‐219

Nonresident* ‐22 056 802 ‐882 3 948 ‐18 188Nonresident   22,056 802 882 3,948 18,188

Resident* 7,418 1,522 ‐1,857 ‐1,569 5,514

Self Employed (1) 4,508 2,640 ‐13 ‐3,434 3,701

Stage 1 (2 to 9 employees) 7 853 3 618 81 ‐840 10 712Stage 1 (2 to 9 employees) 7,853 3,618 81 840 10,712

Stage 2 (10 to 99 employees) ‐3,397 75 475 1,931 ‐916

Stage 3 (100 to 499 employees) ‐1,642 ‐639 ‐700 545 ‐2,436

Stage 4 (500+ employees) 96 ‐4 172 ‐1 700 229 ‐5 547Stage 4 (500+ employees) 96 4,172 1,700 229 5,547

1 Resident businesses are either stand-alone in area or headquartered in same state; non-resident businesses are headquartered in a different state.2 The “Net Opened” column is the difference in the number of jobs gained in businesses “Opened” and the number of jobs lost in businesses “Closed”.3 The “Net Expanded” column is the difference in the number of jobs gained in businesses “Expanded” and the number of jobs lost in businesses “Contracted”.4 The “Net Moved In” column is the difference in the number of jobs gained in businesses “Moved In” and the number of jobs lost in businesses “Moved Out”.5 The “Stage/Sector Movement” column is the difference in the number of jobs gained and lost in businesses that moved between Resident business stages or

b t R id t N R id t N i l t

11/18/2011 26

between Resident, Non-Resident, or Noncommercial sectors.6 The “Net Expanded” column is the difference in the number of jobs gained in businesses “Expanded” and the number of jobs lost in businesses “Contracted”.

Data Source: National Establishment Time‐Series (NETS) database, 2010.

Page 27: State of Ingenuity: Comparison to National Trends

Business Vitality IndicatorsState of Ingenuity Region

Industry SectorStartup Activity 

(%)Firm Failure 

(%)Small Business il (%)

Industry Sector(%) Rates (%) Failure Rates (%)

Agriculture 3.7 6.8 6.8

Mining 5.2 10.1 8.8

Construction 8.7 9.2 9.3

Manufacturing 3.6 5.9 6.3

Transportation, Communications, Utilities 9.5 9.4 9.7p , ,

Wholesale 6.5 5.5 5.9

Retail 6.4 9.7 8.4

Fi I R l E t t 10 9 7 2 7 3Finance, Insurance, Real Estate 10.9 7.2 7.3

Services 6.6 9.8 9.7

Total 6.9 8.7 8.6

11/18/2011 27

Data Source: BizMiner.com, Local Business Vitality Indicators for the period January 2008 ‐ December 2008.

Page 28: State of Ingenuity: Comparison to National Trends

Small Business Lending & Capital AccessNational Trends (2003‐2010)

• Small business lending in the U.S. peaked in 2008 when depository institutions in the held more than $711 billion in small business loans. 

• From 2008 to 2010 small business lending declined by 8 3 percentFrom 2008 to 2010, small business lending declined by 8.3 percent to $652 billion.  In 2009‐2010, lenders reduced their small loan portfolio by $43 billion.

• Large lenders (those with $10 billion or more in assets) which hold• Large lenders (those with $10 billion or more in assets), which hold about 48 percent of all small business loans, were responsible for more than 55 percent of the decline.

• The market for small business loans has become more concentrated with large lenders holding 48 percent of small business loans in 2010, up from 44 percent in 2003.

11/18/2011 28

Page 29: State of Ingenuity: Comparison to National Trends

Small Business Lending & Capital AccessNational Trends (2003‐2010)

The causes of the downturn in the value of loans held by lenders are if ld Th i l d b t t li it d t th f ll imanifold.  They include, but are not limited to, the following:

• The decline in housing prices; decreasing the value of important collateral for many small business borrowers and subsequently reducing the amount of money 

il bl f h l davailable from the lender.

• The lack of demand for the products or services sold by small businesses; consequently, growth plans have also slowed. In a slowing economy, prudent business owners seek to limit their risk exposure by reducing loan balances andbusiness owners seek to limit their risk exposure by reducing loan balances and avoiding debt.

• Regulators are monitoring lending activity more closely and are more quick to classify loans as nonperforming than they were previously.

• In the new regulatory environment, smaller lenders are likely to be less profitable because they have fewer sales of products and services to spread out over the higher auditing and FDIC costs.  Hence, they have less money to lend to small b i d thbusinesses and others.

11/18/2011 29

Page 30: State of Ingenuity: Comparison to National Trends

Small Business Lending & Capital AccessRegional Trends (2003‐2010)

• Aggregate lending for community lenders in SBA Region 5* declined b 6 3 t f 2009 t 2010by 6.3 percent from 2009 to 2010. 

• The number of small business loans decreased by about 105,000, or nearly 14 percent.  

• Lenders with assets of $100 million to $500 million experienced a 17.2 percent drop in the number of small business loans.  This accounted for more than half of the total decline in small businessaccounted for more than half of the total decline in small business loans.

• The mean loan value decreased by less than 1 percent for small business loansbusiness loans.

• The total assets ratio (small business loans to total assets) declined by over 4 percent.

11/18/2011 30

*SBA Region 5 includes Illinois, Indiana, Ohio, Michigan, Minnesota, and Wisconsin).

Page 31: State of Ingenuity: Comparison to National Trends

Aggregate Value of Small Business Loans*Community lenders with less than $10 billion in total assets

35,000

25,000

30,000

rs Less than $100 million

15,000

20,000

lions

of D

olla

r

$100 million to $499.9 million

$500 million to $999.9 million

$1 billion to $9.9 billion

5,000

10,000

Mill

0

,

2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

*SBA Region 5 includes Illinois, Indiana, Ohio, Michigan, Minnesota, and Wisconsin.Data Source: FDIC Statistics on Depository Lenders (http://www2.fdic.gov/sdi/main.asp)

11/18/2011 31

Page 32: State of Ingenuity: Comparison to National Trends

Aggregate Number of Small Business Loans*Community lenders with less than $10 billion in total assets

600Less than $100 million

400

500

ans

$100 million to $499.9 million

$500 million to $999.9 million

$1 billion to $9.9 billion

300

usan

ds o

f Loa

100

200Thou

02003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

*SBA Region 5 includes Illinois, Indiana, Ohio, Michigan, Minnesota, and Wisconsin.Data Source: FDIC Statistics on Depository Lenders (http://www2.fdic.gov/sdi/main.asp)

11/18/2011 32

Page 33: State of Ingenuity: Comparison to National Trends

Mean Value of Small Business Loans*Community lenders with less than $10 billion in total assets

180Less than $100 million

140

160

olla

rs

$100 million to $499.9 million

$500 million to $999.9 million

$1 billion to $9.9 billion

120

ousa

nds

of D

o

80

100Tho

602003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

*SBA Region 5 includes Illinois, Indiana, Ohio, Michigan, Minnesota, and Wisconsin.Data Source: FDIC Statistics on Depository Lenders (http://www2.fdic.gov/sdi/main.asp)

11/18/2011 33

Page 34: State of Ingenuity: Comparison to National Trends

Ratio of Small Business Loans to Total Assets*Community lenders with less than $10 billion in total assets

0.200

0.175

o To

tal A

sset

s

0 125

0.150

ness

Loa

ns to

0.100

0.125

io S

mal

l Bus

in

Less than $100 million

$100 million to $499.9 million

0.0752003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Rat

i

$500 million to $999.9 million

$1 billion to $9.9 billion

*SBA Region 5 includes Illinois, Indiana, Ohio, Michigan, Minnesota, and Wisconsin.Data Source: FDIC Statistics on Depository Lenders (http://www2.fdic.gov/sdi/main.asp)

11/18/2011 34

Page 35: State of Ingenuity: Comparison to National Trends

Ratio of Small Business Loans to All Business Loans*Community lenders with less than $10 billion in total assets

1.000

s

0.800

o A

ll B

usin

ess

0 400

0.600

ines

s Lo

ans

toLo

ans

0.200

0.400

of S

mal

l Bus

i

Less than $100 million

$100 million to $499.9 million

$500 million to $999 9 million

0.0002003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Rat

io $500 million to $999.9 million

$1 billion to $9.9 billion

*SBA Region 5 includes Illinois, Indiana, Ohio, Michigan, Minnesota, and Wisconsin).Data Source: FDIC Statistics on Depository Lenders (http://www2.fdic.gov/sdi/main.asp)

11/18/2011 35

Page 36: State of Ingenuity: Comparison to National Trends

SBA 7a Program: Number of LoansState of Ingenuity Region

100Boone County

9080

Winnebago County

Kenosha County

Racine County

Rock County

56

4751

60Walworth County

47

2624 26 2833

2930 3236

20

40

9 8 4 7

2420 20

10 11

19

4 80

20

2008 2009 2010 20112008 2009 2010 2011

Data Source: U.S. Small Business Administration, 2011.

11/18/2011 36

Page 37: State of Ingenuity: Comparison to National Trends

SBA 7a Program: Aggregate Amount of Loans State of Ingenuity Region

$30,000,000Boone County

$27,261,800

$25,000,000Winnebago County

Kenosha County

Racine County

Rock County0

$

$17,07

$15,000,000

$20,000,000Rock County

Walworth County

$ $

$8,9

$11,186,5 $$ $

$9,31 $

$14,509,000

$ $ $$ $

$12,794,900$ $

72,100

$

$10,000,000

$601,000

$749,200

$2,567,200

$4,590,300

39,600

500

7,341,500

$2,615,500

$4,310,500

16,500

$5,475,500

$4,310,500

$3,788,900

$6,772,000

$1,773,300

$6,747,000

0

$594,400

$2,615,500

$7,049,400

$7,207,500

$0

$5,000,000

2008 2009 2010 2011Data Source: U.S. Small Business Administration, 2011.

11/18/2011 37

Page 38: State of Ingenuity: Comparison to National Trends

SBA 504 Program: Number of LoansState of Ingenuity Region

16Boone County

13

15

12

14 Winnebago County

Kenosha County

Racine County

Rock County

88

10Walworth County

54

67

54

6

1 0 0 0

4

12 2

0

3

01

32 2

3

10

2

2008 2009 2010 2011

Data Source: U.S. Small Business Administration, 2011.

11/18/2011 38

Page 39: State of Ingenuity: Comparison to National Trends

SBA 504 Program: Aggregate Amount of Loans State of Ingenuity Region

$10,000,000Boone County

$8,412,0

$8,000,000

Winnebago County

Kenosha County

Racine County

Rock County000

$5

$6,000,000

Rock County

Walworth County

$4,359,000

$3,717,0

$3,871,00

$3,1

5,068,000

$4,633,000$4,000,000

$1,025,000 $0 $0 $0

$2,143,000

000 $1,901,000

$215,000

$2,135,000

0015,000

$1,989,000 $0

$516,000

$1,995,000

$1,064,000

$250,700

$998,000

$418,000

$0

$2,000,000

$2008 2009 2010 2011

Data Source: U.S. Small Business Administration, 2011.

11/18/2011 39

Page 40: State of Ingenuity: Comparison to National Trends

Innovation Index

11/18/2011 40

Page 41: State of Ingenuity: Comparison to National Trends

Innovation IndexOverview

The Innovation Index takes a broad look at indicators related to innovation from both the input and output perspectives. 

The Index consists of four components. 

• Human Capital: 30%Human Capital: 30%

• Economic Dynamics: 30%

• Productivity and Employment: 30%y p y

• Economic Well‐Being: 10%

11/18/2011 41

Page 42: State of Ingenuity: Comparison to National Trends

Innovation IndexOverview

Based on statistical analysis, several factors appear to be y , ppespecially important for increasing economic growth:

Ed ti l tt i t• Educational attainment 

• Young‐adult population growth 

• High‐tech employment growthHigh tech employment growth 

• The number of small establishments

11/18/2011 42

Page 43: State of Ingenuity: Comparison to National Trends

Innovation IndexState of Ingenuity Region

88 5Total Innovation IndexU.S. Average = 100.0

79.7

88.5

Human Capital

Total Innovation Index

77.1Economic Dynamics

107.5Productivity and Employment

92.5

0.0 20.0 40.0 60.0 80.0 100.0 120.0

Economic Well‐Being

Data Sources:  U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages (QCEW), the Indiana Business Research Center and the Purdue Center for Regional Development ,2011.

11/18/2011 43

Page 44: State of Ingenuity: Comparison to National Trends

Innovation IndexState of Ingenuity Region

Human Capital

RACINE

Human capital inputs are those characteristics that describe the ability of the population and labor force

KENOSHA87.0

ROCK87.4

WALWORTH83.6

97.1 to innovate.

“High Tech” Employment

Population Age 25-64 with Some College or AA Degree

WINNEBAGO84.7 BOONE

80.3

Some College or AA Degree

Population Age 25-64 with Baccalaureate Degree -20%

Young Adult Population

NOTE: Darker colors indicate higher index values.

Young Adult Population

Population Growth

Tech-Based Occupations

NOTE: Darker colors indicate higher index values.Data Source: Mapping Innovation Tool, StatsAmerica.org, 2011.

11/18/2011 44

Page 45: State of Ingenuity: Comparison to National Trends

Human Capital IndexState of Ingenuity Region

Human capital inputs areHuman capital inputs are those characteristics that describe the ability of the population and labor force to innovate.RACINE

“High Tech” Employment

Population Age 25-64 with Some College or AA Degree

KENOSHA88.8

ROCK74.5

WALWORTH80.7

79.3

Population Age 25-64 with Baccalaureate Degree -20%

Young Adult Population

WINNEBAGO78.7 BOONE

72.7

Population Growth

Tech-Based Occupations

NOTE: Darker colors indicate higher index values.

11/18/2011 45

NOTE: Darker colors indicate higher index values.Data Source: Mapping Innovation Tool, StatsAmerica.org, 2011.

Page 46: State of Ingenuity: Comparison to National Trends

Economic Dynamics IndexState of Ingenuity Region

This component measuresThis component measures local resources available to county entrepreneurs and businesses that encourage innovation RACINEclose to home.

Venture Capital Investment

Average Establishment Churn

KENOSHA79.2

ROCK75.6

WALWORTH78.5

84.3

Churn

Broadband Connections

Change in Broadband Density

WINNEBAGO79.0 BOONE

79.1

NOTE: Darker colors indicate higher index values.

Large Establishments Per Capita

Small Establishments Per CapitaNOTE: Darker colors indicate higher index values.

Data Source: Mapping Innovation Tool, StatsAmerica.org, 2011.p

11/18/2011 46

Page 47: State of Ingenuity: Comparison to National Trends

Productivity & Employment IndexState of Ingenuity Region

This component measuresThis component measures local resources available to county entrepreneurs and businesses that encourage innovation RACINEclose to home.

Job Growth to Population Growth

Change in “High Tech”

KENOSHA90.1

ROCK81.3

WALWORTH87.2

128.6

Change in High Tech Employment Share

Average Patents (per 1,000 workers)

GDP W k

WINNEBAGO94.7 BOONE

86.0

NOTE: Darker colors indicate higher index values.

GDP per Worker

Average Annual Rate of Change (per worker)

NOTE: Darker colors indicate higher index values.Data Source: Mapping Innovation Tool, StatsAmerica.org, 2011.

11/18/2011 47

Page 48: State of Ingenuity: Comparison to National Trends

Economic Well‐Being IndexState of Ingenuity Region

Innovative economies improve economic well-being for residents because they earn more and have in increasing standard of living

RACINEstandard of living.

Average Poverty Rate

Average Unemployment Rate

KENOSHA95.4

ROCK89.8

WALWORTH96.7

94.8

Average Net Internal Migration

Change Per Capita Personal Income

WINNEBAGO90.0 BOONE

89.8

NOTE: Darker colors indicate higher index values.

Income

Change in Wage/Salary Compensation (per worker)

Change in Proprietor Income(per proprietor)NOTE: Darker colors indicate higher index values.

Data Source: Mapping Innovation Tool, StatsAmerica.org, 2011.(per proprietor)

11/18/2011 48

Page 49: State of Ingenuity: Comparison to National Trends

For Further InformationFor Further InformationContact:

Norman Walzer Brian HargerSenior Research Scholar Research [email protected] [email protected]

Center for Governmental StudiesNorthern Illinois University

De Kalb, IL 60115815‐753‐1907


Top Related