North Dakota Competitiveness: Creating a State Economic Strategy
|
|
- Marlene Phillips
- 5 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 North Dakota Competitiveness: Creating a State Economic Strategy Professor Michael E. Porter Harvard Business School March 28, 2012 For further material on regional competitiveness and clusters: For state economic profiles: State Competitiveness Rich Bryden Copyright 2012 Professor Michael E. Porter
2 The Economic Challenge for Governors in 2012 Achieving Fiscal Stability Enhancing State Competitiveness 2012 State Competitiveness Rich Bryden 2 Copyright 2012 Professor Michael E. Porter
3 What is Competitiveness? Competitiveness is the productivity with which a state utilizes its human, capital, and natural endowments to create value Productivity determines wages, jobs, and the standard of living It is not what fields a state competes in that determines its prosperity, but how productively it competes 2012 State Competitiveness Rich Bryden 3 Copyright 2012 Professor Michael E. Porter
4 Where Does Productivity Come From? Businesses and government play different but interrelated roles in creating a productive economy Only businesses can create jobs and wealth States compete to offer the most productive environment for business 2012 State Competitiveness Rich Bryden 4 Copyright 2012 Professor Michael E. Porter
5 Agenda 1. How is your state doing? State Performance Scorecard 2. Why? 3. Where to go from here? Explaining your state s performance, strengths, and weaknesses Action Steps 2012 State Competitiveness Rich Bryden 5 Copyright 2012 Professor Michael E. Porter
6 Prosperity GDP per Capita, North Dakota Performance Scorecard Start Position Trend 38 1 Current Position Wages Average Private Wage, Job Creation Private Employment Growth, and Labor Mobilization Proportion of Working Age Population in the Workforce, Labor Productivity GDP per Workforce Participant, New Business Formation Traded Cluster Establishment Growth, and Innovation Patents per Employee, Cluster Strength Employment in Strong Clusters, Leading Clusters by employment size, 2009 (national rank) Processed Food (38) Heavy Machinery (18) Oil and Gas Products and Services (17) Agricultural Products (36) #NA State Rank 2012 State Competitiveness Rich Bryden 6 Copyright 2012 Professor Michael E. Porter
7 Gross Domestic Product per Capita, 2010 $65,000 $60,000 Comparative State Prosperity Performance High but declining versus U.S. Delaware Connecticut Alaska Wyoming High and rising prosperity versus U.S. $55,000 $50,000 New Jersey Massachusetts New York $45,000 $40,000 $35,000 $30,000 $25,000 U.S. GDP per Capita: $42,346 Nevada Low and declining versus U.S. North Carolina Colorado Washington Texas New Hampshire California Illinois Minnesota Wisconsin Hawaii Rhode Island Kansas U.S. GDP per Capita Real Growth Rate: 0.63% Maryland Nebraska Louisiana Georgia Indiana Pennsylvania Ohio Tennessee Utah Vermont Missouri Florida Oklahoma Arizona Michigan Maine New Mexico Kentucky Alabama Idaho Montana South Carolina Arkansas West Virginia Mississippi -1.0% -0.5% 0.0% 0.5% 1.0% 1.5% 2.0% 2.5% 3.0% 3.5% Real Growth in Gross Domestic Product per Capita, 2000 to 2010 Source: BEA. Notes: GDP in real 2005 dollars. Growth rate is calculated as compound annual growth rate. Low but rising versus U.S State Competitiveness Rich Bryden 7 Copyright 2012 Professor Michael E. Porter Virginia Iowa South Dakota Oregon North Dakota
8 Proportion of Working Age Population in the Workforce, % 70% 65% 60% Comparative State Labor Mobilization Performance High but declining versus U.S. Michigan Delaware Indiana Georgia Alabama Colorado Idaho Minnesota New Hampshire Wisconsin Alaska Missouri Utah Maryland Nebraska Montana Hawaii Nevada North Carolina Tennessee South Carolina Texas Oregon Mississippi South Dakota Wyoming Washington Illinois Massachusetts Ohio Maine California Pennsylvania Arizona Florida Oklahoma New York Kentucky New Mexico Arkansas High Labor Force Participation and Participation rising versus U.S. Iowa Vermont Kansas New Jersey Louisiana North Dakota Virginia Connecticut Rhode Island U.S. Labor Force Participation Rate: 64.7% 55% West Virginia Change in Labor Force Participation Rate: -2.4% Low and declining Low but rising 50% versus U.S. versus U.S. -7% -6% -5% -4% -3% -2% -1% 0% 1% 2% Change in Proportion of Working Age Population in the Workforce, Notes: Source BLS State Competitiveness Rich Bryden 8 Copyright 2012 Professor Michael E. Porter
9 Gross Domestic Product per Labor Force Participant, 2010 $140,000 $130,000 Comparative State Labor Force Productivity Performance High but declining versus U.S U.S. GDP per Labor Force Participant Real Growth: 0.803% Delaware Highly productive and productivity rising versus U.S. Alaska $120,000 Wyoming $110,000 Connecticut New York $100,000 $90,000 $80,000 $70,000 $60,000 Nevada Low and declining versus U.S. Washington New Jersey Texas Illinois Colorado Pennsylvania Georgia Rhode Island Ohio Michigan New Hampshire Utah Arizona Florida Missouri Kentucky South Maine Carolina Vermont Massachusetts California Louisiana Virginia North Carolina Minnesota Indiana Oklahoma Kansas Iowa New Mexico Tennessee Alabama Wisconsin West Virginia Arkansas -0.5% 0.0% 0.5% 1.0% 1.5% 2.0% 2.5% 3.0% 3.5% Real Growth in Gross Domestic Product per Labor Force Participant, Sources: BEA, BLS. Notes: GDP in real 2005 dollars. Growth rate is calculated as compound annual growth rate. 9 U.S. GDP per Labor Force Participant: $85,229 North Dakota Low but rising versus U.S State Competitiveness Rich Bryden Copyright 2012 Professor Michael E. Porter Hawaii Idaho Mississippi Montana Maryland Nebraska Oregon South Dakota
10 Gross Domestic Product per Employed Worker, 2010 $150,000 $140,000 Comparative State Employee Productivity Performance High but declining versus U.S U.S. GDP per Employed Worker Real Growth: 1.42% Delaware Highly productive and productivity rising versus U.S. Alaska $130,000 $120,000 Connecticut New York Wyoming $110,000 New Jersey California Massachusetts $100,000 $90,000 $80,000 $70,000 $60,000 Low and declining versus U.S. Washington Texas Illinois Virginia Nevada Colorado Minnesota Pennsylvania Georgia Michigan Kansas Florida Utah Ohio Arizona Missouri New Hampshire Kentucky South Carolina Maine Vermont Louisiana Wisconsin North Carolina Montana Sources: BEA, BLS. Notes: GDP in real 2005 dollars. Growth rate is calculated as compound annual growth rate. 10 North Dakota 0.0% 0.5% 1.0% 1.5% 2.0% 2.5% 3.0% 3.5% Real Growth in Gross Domestic Product per Employed Worker, U.S. GDP per Employed Worker: $94,315 Low but rising versus U.S State Competitiveness Rich Bryden Copyright 2012 Professor Michael E. Porter Idaho Hawaii Rhode Island Indiana Nebraska Oklahoma Iowa New Mexico Tennessee Arkansas Maryland Alabama West Virginia Mississippi South Dakota Oregon
11 Patents per 10,000 Workers, High and declining innovation Comparative State Innovation Performance U.S. average Growth Rate of Patenting: +2.25% California Vermont 15 Idaho Massachusetts Washington (16.5, +10.6%) Minnesota Connecticut New Jersey Delaware New Hampshire Colorado Michigan -6% -4% -2% 0% 2% 4% 6% Growth Rate of Patents per 10,000 Workers, 2000 to 2010 Source: USPTO utility patents, Bureau of Labor Statistics. Note: Growth rate calculated as compound annual growth rate (CAGR) State Competitiveness Rich Bryden 11 Copyright 2012 Professor Michael E. Porter Oregon High and improving innovation rate versus U.S. U.S. average Patents per 10,000 Employees: 7.77 New York Utah Texas Arizona Illinois Wisconsin North Carolina Pennsylvania Maryland Rhode Island Ohio New Mexico Indiana Iowa Nevada Florida Kansas Tennessee Missouri Georgia Virginia Oklahoma Kentucky Wyoming North Dakota Montana South Carolina Alabama Louisiana South Dakota West Virginia Nebraska Hawaii Arkansas Alaska Mississippi Low and declining innovation Maine Low and improving innovation = 2000 patents in 2010 = 500 patents in 2010
12 Why? What Drives State Productivity? 1. Quality of the Overall Business Environment 2. Cluster Development 3. Policy Coordination among Multiple Levels of Geography/ Government 2012 State Competitiveness Rich Bryden 12 Copyright 2012 Professor Michael E. Porter
13 Why? What Drives State Productivity? 1. Quality of the Overall Business Environment 2. Cluster Development 3. Policy Coordination among Multiple Levels of Geography/ Government 2012 State Competitiveness Rich Bryden 13 Copyright 2012 Professor Michael E. Porter
14 Quality of the Overall Business Environment Context for Firm Strategy and Rivalry Factor (Input) Conditions Access to high quality business inputs Human resources Capital access Physical infrastructure Administrative processes (e.g., permitting, regulatory efficiency) Scientific and technological infrastructure Rules and incentives that encourage local competition, investment and productivity e.g., tax policy that encourages investment and R&D Flexible labor policies Intellectual property protection Antitrust enforcement Related and Supporting Industries Local availability of suppliers and supporting industries Demand Conditions Sophisticated and demanding local needs and customers e.g., Strict quality, safety, and environmental standards Consumer protection laws Government procurement of advanced technology Early demand for products and services Many things matter for competitiveness Economic development is the process of improving the business environment to enable companies to compete in increasingly sophisticated ways 2012 State Competitiveness Rich Bryden 14 Copyright 2012 Professor Michael E. Porter
15 Improving the Business Environment Common Action Items 1. Simplify and speed up regulation and permitting 2. Reduce unnecessary costs of doing business 3. Establish training programs that are aligned with the needs of the state s businesses 4. Focus infrastructure investments on the most leveraged areas for productivity and economic growth 5. Design all policies to support emerging growth companies 6. Protect and enhance the state s higher education and research institutions 7. Relentlessly improve the public education system, the essential foundation for productivity in the long run 2012 State Competitiveness Rich Bryden 15 Copyright 2012 Professor Michael E. Porter
16 Why? What Drives State Productivity? 1. Quality of the Overall Business Environment 2. Cluster Development 3. Policy Coordination among Multiple Levels of Geography/ Government 2012 State Competitiveness Rich Bryden 16 Copyright 2012 Professor Michael E. Porter
17 What is a Cluster? A geographically concentrated group of interconnected companies and associated institutions in a particular field Traded Clusters Compete to serve national and international markets Can locate anywhere 30% of employment Local Clusters Serve almost exclusively the local market Not directly exposed to cross-regional competition 70% of employment 2012 State Competitiveness Rich Bryden 17 Copyright 2012 Professor Michael E. Porter
18 Example: Massachusetts Life Sciences Cluster Health and Beauty Products Teaching and Specialized Hospitals Cluster Organizations MassMedic, MassBio, others Surgical Instruments and Suppliers Medical Equipment Dental Instruments and Suppliers Biological Products Biopharmaceutical Products Specialized Business Services Banking, Accounting, Legal Ophthalmic Goods Specialized Risk Capital VC Firms, Angel Networks Diagnostic Substances Containers Research Organizations Specialized Research Service Providers Laboratory, Clinical Testing Analytical Instruments Cluster Educational Institutions Harvard, MIT, Tufts, Boston University, UMass 2012 State Competitiveness Rich Bryden 18 Copyright 2012 Professor Michael E. Porter
19 Example: Houston Oil and Gas Cluster Upstream Downstream Oil & Natural Gas Exploration & Development Oil & Natural Gas Completion & Production Oil Transportation Gas Gathering Oil Trading Gas Processing Oil Refining Gas Trading Oil Distribution Gas Transmission Oil Wholesale Marketing Gas Distribution Oil Retail Marketing Gas Marketing Oilfield Services/Engineering & Contracting Firms Equipment Suppliers Specialized Technology Services Subcontractors Business Services (e.g., Oil Field Chemicals, Drilling Rigs, Drill Tools) (e.g., Drilling Consultants, Reservoir Services, Laboratory Analysis) (e.g., Surveying, Mud Logging, Maintenance Services) (e.g., MIS Services, Technology Licenses, Risk Management) Specialized Institutions (e.g., Academic Institutions, Training Centers, Industry Associations) 2012 State Competitiveness Rich Bryden 19 Copyright 2012 Professor Michael E. Porter
20 Strong Clusters Drive Regional Performace Specialization in strong clusters Breadth of industries within each cluster Strength in related clusters Presence of a region s clusters in neighboring regions Job growth Higher wages Higher patenting rates Greater new business formation, growth and survival On average, cluster strength is much more important (78.1%) than cluster mix (21.9%) in driving regional performance in the U.S. Source: Porter/Stern/Delgado (2010), Porter (2003) 2012 State Competitiveness Rich Bryden 20 Copyright 2012 Professor Michael E. Porter
21 Clusters and Economic Diversification Jewelry & Precious Metals Footwear Financial Services Note: Clusters with overlapping borders or identical shading have at least 20% overlap (by number of industries) in both directions State Competitiveness Rich Bryden Processed Food Business Services Apparel Leather & Related Products Fishing & Fishing Products Agricultural Products Distribution Services Publishing & Printing Oil & Gas Transportation & Logistics Education & Knowledge Creation Chemical Products Plastics Hospitality & Tourism Information Tech. Medical Devices Biopharmaceuticals Entertainment Aerospace Vehicles & Defense Analytical Instruments Tobacco Communications Equipment Prefabricated Enclosures Lighting & Electrical Equipment Building Fixtures, Equipment & Services Power Generation Motor Driven Products Furniture Heavy Construction Services Aerospace Engines Textiles Heavy Machinery Construction Materials Forest Products Production Technology Mining & Metal Manufacturing Sporting & Recreation Goods Automotive 21 Copyright 2012 Professor Michael E. Porter
22 The Evolution of Regional Economies San Diego Climate and Geography Hospitality and Tourism Transportation and Logistics Sporting Equipment U.S. Military Aerospace Vehicles and Defense Power Generation Analytical Instruments Communications Equipment Information Technology Education and Knowledge Creation Medical Devices Bioscience Research Centers Biotech / Pharmaceuticals State Competitiveness Rich Bryden 22 Copyright 2012 Professor Michael E. Porter
23 North Dakota national employment share, 2009 Traded Cluster Composition of the North Dakota Economy 2.5% Overall change in the North Dakota Share of US Traded Employment: 0.04% 2.0% Heavy Machinery 1.5% Oil and Gas Products and Services 1.0% Power Generation and Transmission 0.5% 0.0% North Dakota Overall Share of US Traded Employment: 0.24% Furniture Agricultural Products Processed Food Analytical Instruments Financial Services Forest Products -0.5% 0.0% 0.5% 1.0% Change in North Dakota share of National Employment, 1998 to 2009 Source: Prof. Michael E. Porter, Cluster Mapping Project, Institute for Strategy and Competitiveness, Harvard Business School; Richard Bryden, Project Director. 23 Employment Added Jobs Lost Jobs Employees 1,500 = 2012 State Competitiveness Rich Bryden Copyright 2012 Professor Michael E. Porter
24 North Dakota national employment share, % Traded Cluster Composition of the North Dakota Economy (continued) Overall change in the North Dakota Share of US Traded Employment: 0.04% Entertainment 0.3% Hospitality and Tourism Financial Services 0.2% Heavy Construction Services North Dakota Overall Share of US Traded Employment: 0.24% Building Fixtures, Equipment and Services Automotive Information Technology Distribution Services Prefabricated Enclosures Publishing and Printing 0.1% 0.0% Business Services Construction Materials Furniture Plastics Lighting and Electrical Equipment Jewelry and Precious Metals Sporting, Recreational and Children s Goods Metal Manufacturing Transportation and Logistics Education and Knowledge Creation Chemical Products Leather and Related Products Medical Devices Employment Fishing and Communications Equipment Aerospace Vehicles and Defense Fishing Products Apparel Textiles Added Jobs Biopharmaceuticals Motor Driven Products Aerospace Engines Lost Jobs -0.2% -0.1% 0.0% 0.1% 0.2% Change in North Dakota share of National Employment, 1998 to 2009 Source: Prof. Michael E. Porter, Cluster Mapping Project, Institute for Strategy and Competitiveness, Harvard Business School; Richard Bryden, Project Director. 24 Production Technology Employees 1,000 = 2012 State Competitiveness Rich Bryden Copyright 2012 Professor Michael E. Porter
25 Job Creation, 1998 to 2009 Financial Services Oil and Gas Products and Services Forest Products Education and Knowledge Creation North Dakota Job Creation in Traded Clusters 1998 to 2009 Power Generation and Transmission Distribution Services Analytical Instruments Publishing and Printing Processed Food Business Services Production Technology Metal Manufacturing Plastics Information Technology Medical Devices Entertainment Construction Materials Communications Equipment Lighting and Electrical Equipment Biopharmaceuticals Sporting, Recreational and Children's Goods Aerospace Engines Fishing and Fishing Products Prefabricated Enclosures Leather and Related Products Textiles Hospitality and Tourism Jewelry and Precious Metals Transportation and Logistics Apparel Motor Driven Products Chemical Products Building Fixtures, Equipment and Services Aerospace Vehicles and Defense Agricultural Products Furniture Automotive Heavy Construction Services Heavy Machinery Footwear 5,000 4,000 3,000 2,000 Net traded job creation, 1998 to 2009: +11,317 1, ,000-2,000 Indicates expected job creation given national cluster growth.* -3,000 * Percent change in national benchmark times starting regional employment. Overall traded job creation in the state, if it matched national benchmarks, would be 651 Source: Prof. Michael E. Porter, Cluster Mapping Project, Institute for Strategy and Competitiveness, Harvard Business School; Richard Bryden, Project Director State Competitiveness Rich Bryden 25 Copyright 2012 Professor Michael E. Porter
26 North Dakota Wages in Traded Clusters vs. National Benchmarks Information Technology Oil and Gas Products and Services Heavy Construction Services Heavy Machinery Production Technology Financial Services Distribution Services Business Services Processed Food Prefabricated Enclosures Metal Manufacturing Building Fixtures, Equipment and Plastics Agricultural Products Publishing and Printing Transportation and Logistics Automotive Furniture Construction Materials Leather and Related Products Education and Knowledge Creation Hospitality and Tourism Apparel Entertainment Power Generation and Transmission Aerospace Vehicles and Defense Biopharmaceuticals Communications Equipment Analytical Instruments Medical Devices Aerospace Engines Tobacco Chemical Products Forest Products Lighting and Electrical Equipment Motor Driven Products Jewelry and Precious Metals Sporting, Recreational and Fishing and Fishing Products Textiles Footwear North Dakota average traded wage: $41,853 $0 $25,000 $50,000 $75,000 $100,000 $125,000 Wages, 2009 U.S. average traded wage: $56,906 l Indicates average national wage in the traded cluster Source: Prof. Michael E. Porter, Cluster Mapping Project, Institute for Strategy and Competitiveness, Harvard Business School; Richard Bryden, Project Director State Competitiveness Rich Bryden 26 Copyright 2012 Professor Michael E. Porter
27 Productivity Depends on How a State Competes, Not What Industries It Competes In State State Traded Wage versus National Average Cluster Mix Effect Relative Cluster Wage Effect State State Traded Wage versus National Average Cluster Mix Effect Relative Cluster Wage Effect Connecticut +27,171 7,028 20,142 Oregon -10,359-1,304-9,056 New York +24,102 3,628 20,474 Missouri -10,427-1,425-9,002 Massachusetts +16,169 4,391 11,778 Alabama -10,934-3,563-7,371 New Jersey +13,535 3,761 9,774 Florida -11,007-1,559-9,448 California +9, ,224 Wisconsin -11,722-3,516-8,206 Maryland +6,651 2,496 4,155 Nebraska -11, ,018 Washington +5,652 2,692 2,960 Utah -11,992 2,072-14,064 Virginia +5,319 1,617 3,702 Tennessee -12,172-3,156-9,016 Illinois +2, ,642 Indiana -12,554-4,840-7,714 Colorado +1,662 2, Vermont -13,368-1,572-11,796 Texas ,494-2,142 Oklahoma -13, ,069 Delaware ,060-10,896 Nevada -14,277-2,365-11,911 Alaska ,417 1,487 North Dakota -14,394 1,004-15,397 Pennsylvania -3, ,975 South Carolina -15,276-5,067-10,209 Louisiana -4, ,375 Arkansas -15,378-4,560-10,818 Georgia -5,322-1,102-4,220 Hawaii -16,043-12,555-3,487 Minnesota -5, ,150 New Mexico -16, ,835 New Hampshire -6, ,761 Kentucky -16,215-5,024-11,191 Arizona -7,021 1,149-8,169 Maine -16, ,412 Kansas -7,705 2,241-9,946 Iowa -16,606-2,721-13,885 Wyoming -8,057 1,040-9,097 West Virginia -16,645-3,894-12,751 Michigan -8,176-2,544-5,633 Idaho -18, ,884 North Carolina -9,245-4,330-4,915 Mississippi -19,942-5,291-14,651 Ohio -9,284-2,495-6,788 Montana -20,073-2,259-17,815 Rhode Island -9,791-2,290-7,501 South Dakota -20, ,257 On average, cluster strength is much more important (78.1%) than cluster mix (21.9%) in driving regional performance in the U.S. Source: Prof. Michael E. Porter, Cluster Mapping Project, Institute for Strategy and Competitiveness, Harvard Business School; Richard Bryden, Project Director data State Competitiveness Rich Bryden Copyright 2012 Professor Michael E. Porter
28 North Dakota Cluster Portfolio, 2009 Jewelry & Precious Metals Financial Services Apparel Processed Food Leather & Related Products Business Services Fishing & Fishing Products Distribution Services Publishing & Printing Agricultural Products Oil & Gas Transportation & Logistics Education & Knowledge Creation Chemical Products Plastics Hospitality & Tourism Information Tech. Medical Devices Biopharmaceuticals Entertainment Aerospace Vehicles & Defense Analytical Instruments Tobacco Communi cations Equipment Lighting & Electrical Equipment Prefabricated Enclosures Building Fixtures, Equipment & Services Power Generation & Transmission Motor Driven Products Furniture Heavy Construction Services Aerospace Engines Textiles Heavy Machinery Construction Materials Forest Products Production Technology Metal Manufacturing Footwear LQ > 1. Sporting & Recreation LQ, or Location Quotient, measures the state s share in cluster employment relative to its overall share of U.S. employment. Goods An LQ > 1 indicates an above average employment share in a cluster. Automotive 2012 State Competitiveness Rich Bryden 28 Copyright 2012 Professor Michael E. Porter LQ > 4 LQ > 2
29 2012 State Competitiveness Rich Bryden 29 Copyright 2012 Professor Michael E. Porter
30 Cluster Development Common Action Items 1. Build on the state s existing and emerging clusters rather than chase hot fields 2. Pursue economic diversification within clusters and across related clusters 3. Create a private sector-led cluster upgrading program with matching support for participating private sector cluster organizations Government should listen and remove obstacles to cluster improvement 4. Align other state economic policies and programs with clusters 2012 State Competitiveness Rich Bryden Source: Porter/Stern/Delgado (2010), Porter (2003) 30 Copyright 2012 Professor Michael E. Porter
31 Aligning Economic Policy and Clusters Business Attraction Education and Workforce Training Export Promotion Natural Resource Protection Clusters Science and Technology Investments (e.g., centers, university departments) Standard Setting / Certification Organizations Specialized Physical Infrastructure Environmental Improvement Clusters provide a framework for organizing the implementation of many public policies and public investments to achieve greater effectiveness 2012 State Competitiveness Rich Bryden 31 Copyright 2012 Professor Michael E. Porter
32 Why? What Drives State Productivity? 1. Quality of the Overall Business Environment 2. Cluster Development 3. Policy Coordination among Multiple Levels of Geography/ Government 2012 State Competitiveness Rich Bryden 32 Copyright 2012 Professor Michael E. Porter
33 Geographic and Governmental Influences on Productivity Nation Neighboring State State Neighboring State Metropolitan Areas Metropolitan Areas Metropolitan Areas Rural Regions Rural Regions Rural Regions 2012 State Competitiveness Rich Bryden 33 Copyright 2012 Professor Michael E. Porter
34 Defining the Appropriate Economic Regions Billings Economic Area Minot Economic Area Grand Forks Economic Area ND MT MN SD WY Bismarck Economic Area Aberdeen Economic Area Fargo Economic Area The economies of states are often an aggregation of distinct economic areas with differing circumstances Source: Data from Bureau of Economic Analysis Prof. Michael E. Porter, Cluster Mapping Project, Harvard Business School; Richard Bryden, Project Director State and City Competitiveness Rich Bryden 34 Copyright 2012 Professor Michael E. Porter
35 North Dakota Metropolitan Areas Grand Forks MSA Bismarck MSA Fargo MSA 2012 State and City Competitiveness Rich Bryden 35 Copyright 2012 Professor Michael E. Porter
36 Average Private Wage, 2009 Wage Performance in North Dakota Metropolitan Areas $44,000 U.S. Growth Rate of Wages: 3.01% North Dakota Growth Rate of Wages: 3.94% $42,000 U.S. Average Private Wage: $42,403 $40,000 $38,000 Fargo MSA* $36,000 $34,000 Bismarck MSA North Dakota Average Private Wage: $33,929 Rest of State $32,000 Grand Forks MSA* $30, % 3.1% 3.3% 3.5% 3.7% 3.9% 4.1% 4.3% Growth Rate of Private Wages, *North Dakota portion only Source: Census CBP, authors analysis. Note: Bubble size in chart is proportional to employment in State Competitiveness Rich Bryden Copyright 2012 Professor Michael E. Porter
37 Average Private Wage, 2009 Employment Performance in North Dakota Metropolitan Areas $44,000 U.S. Growth Rate of Employment: 0.52% North Dakota Growth Rate of Employment: 1.57% $42,000 U.S. Average Private Wage: $42,403 $40,000 $38,000 $36,000 Fargo MSA* $34,000 Bismarck MSA North Dakota Average Private Wage: $33,929 $32,000 Rest of State Grand Forks MSA* $30, % 0.5% 1.0% 1.5% 2.0% 2.5% 3.0% Growth Rate of Private Employment, *North Dakota portion only Source: Census CBP, authors analysis. Note: Bubble size in chart is proportional to employment in State Competitiveness Rich Bryden Copyright 2012 Professor Michael E. Porter
38 Geographic and Governmental Influences on Productivity Nation 1. Influence and access federal policies and programs Neighboring State State Neighboring State 4. Integrate policies and infrastructure planning with neighbors Metropolitan Areas Metropolitan Areas Metropolitan Areas 2. Work with each metro area to develop a prioritized strategic agenda Rural Regions Rural Regions Rural Regions 3. Connect rural regions with proximate urban areas 2012 State Competitiveness Rich Bryden 38 Copyright 2012 Professor Michael E. Porter
39 Agenda 1. How is your state doing? State Performance Scorecard 2. Why? 3. Where to go from here? Explaining your state s performance, strengths, and weaknesses Action Steps 2012 State Competitiveness Rich Bryden 39 Copyright 2012 Professor Michael E. Porter
40 Agenda 1. How is your state doing? State Performance Scorecard 2. Why? 3. Where to go from here? Explaining your state s performance, strengths, and weaknesses Action Steps Biggest Action Item of All 2012 State Competitiveness Rich Bryden 40 Copyright 2012 Professor Michael E. Porter
41 Create an Economic Strategy What is the distinctive competitive position of the state or region given its location, legacy, existing strengths, and potential strengths? What unique value as a business location? For what types of activities and clusters? Define the Value Proposition Develop Unique Strengths What elements of the business environment can be unique strengths relative to peers/neighbors? What existing and emerging clusters represent local strengths? Achieve and Maintain Parity with Peers What weaknesses must be addressed to remove key constraints and achieve parity with peer locations? Economic strategy requires setting priorities and moving beyond long lists of separate recommendations State Competitiveness Rich Bryden 41 Copyright 2012 Professor Michael E. Porter
42 How Should States Compete for Investment? Tactical (Zero Sum Competition) Strategic (Positive Sum Competition) Focus on attracting new investments Compete for every plant Offer generalized tax breaks Provide subsidies to lower / offset business costs Every city and sub-region for itself Government drives investment attraction Also support greater local investment by existing companies Reinforce areas of specialization and emerging cluster strength Provide state support for training, infrastructure, and institutions with enduring benefits Improve the efficiency of doing business Harness efficiencies and coordination across jurisdictions, especially with neighbors Government and the private sector collaborate to build cluster strength 2012 State Competitiveness Rich Bryden 42 Copyright 2012 Professor Michael E. Porter
43 Harnessing the New Process of Economic Development Competitiveness is the result of both top-down and bottom-up processes in which many companies and institutions take responsibility Old Model New Model Government drives economic development through policy decisions and incentives Economic development is a collaborative process involving government at multiple levels, companies, teaching and research institutions, and private sector organizations 2012 State Competitiveness Rich Bryden 43 Copyright 2012 Professor Michael E. Porter
44 Example: Organizing for Economic Development Cluster Committees South Carolina Council on Competitiveness Executive Committee Chaired by a business leader and reporting to the governor Convenes working groups, provides direction and strength, holds working groups accountable Coordinating Staff Task Forces Automotive Apparel Cluster Activation Education / Workforce Hydrogen / Fuel Cells Agriculture Research / Investment Start-ups / Local Firms Textiles Travel and Tourism Distressed / Disadvan. Areas Measuring Progress Effective economic policy also requires coordination within government 2012 State Competitiveness Rich Bryden 44 Copyright 2012 Professor Michael E. Porter
45 Summary The goal of economic strategy is to enhance productivity. This is the only way to create jobs, high income, and wealth in the long run Improving productivity and innovation must be the guiding principles for every state policy choice Improving productivity does not require new public resources, but using existing resources better Improving productivity demands that governors mobilize the private sector, not rely on government alone Economic strategy is non-partisan and about getting results 2012 State Competitiveness Rich Bryden 45 Copyright 2012 Professor Michael E. Porter
46 Next Steps 1. Reach out to your team 2. Reach out to the business community 3. Take advantage of Harvard Business School data and tools to support this effort. Go to The prosperity of the U.S. economy will depend more on the success of states in improving competitiveness than what happens in Washington 2012 State Competitiveness Rich Bryden 46 Copyright 2012 Professor Michael E. Porter
Vermont Competitiveness: Creating a State Economic Strategy
Vermont Competitiveness: Creating a State Economic Strategy Professor Michael E. Porter Harvard Business School April 10, 2012 For further material on regional competitiveness and clusters: www.isc.hbs.edu/econ-clusters.htm
More informationNew Hampshire Competitiveness: Creating a State Economic Strategy
New Hampshire Competitiveness: Creating a State Economic Strategy Professor Michael E. Porter Harvard Business School March 28, 2012 For further material on regional competitiveness and clusters: www.isc.hbs.edu/econ-clusters.htm
More informationRhode Island Competitiveness: Creating a State Economic Strategy
Rhode Island Competitiveness: Creating a State Economic Strategy Professor Michael E. Porter Harvard Business School March 28, 2012 For further material on regional competitiveness and clusters: www.isc.hbs.edu/econ-clusters.htm
More informationSouth Carolina Competitiveness: Creating a State Economic Strategy
South Carolina Competitiveness: Creating a State Economic Strategy Professor Michael E. Porter Harvard Business School March 28, 2012 For further material on regional competitiveness and clusters: www.isc.hbs.edu/econ-clusters.htm
More informationTennessee Competitiveness: Creating a State Economic Strategy
Tennessee Competitiveness: Creating a State Economic Strategy Professor Michael E. Porter Harvard Business School March 28, 2012 For further material on regional competitiveness and clusters: www.isc.hbs.edu/econ-clusters.htm
More informationPennsylvania Competitiveness: Creating a State Economic Strategy
Pennsylvania Competitiveness: Creating a State Economic Strategy Professor Michael E. Porter Harvard Business School March 28, 2012 For further material on regional competitiveness and clusters: www.isc.hbs.edu/econ-clusters.htm
More informationTexas Competitiveness: Creating a State Economic Strategy
Texas Competitiveness: Creating a State Economic Strategy Professor Michael E. Porter Harvard Business School March 28, 2012 For further material on regional competitiveness and clusters: www.isc.hbs.edu/econ-clusters.htm
More informationThe New Carolina Initiative
The New Carolina Initiative Professor Michael E. Porter Harvard Business School New Carolina Annual Celebration September 22, 2011 For further material on regional competitiveness and clusters: www.isc.hbs.edu/econ-clusters.htm
More informationNew Jersey Competitiveness
1 New Jersey Competitiveness State and Cluster Performance Professor Michael E. Porter Harvard Business School Prepared for Governor Chris Christie April 17, 2010 None of this information may be duplicated,
More informationColorado River Basin. Source: U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Reclamation
The Colorado River supports a quarter million jobs and produces $26 billion in economic output from recreational activities alone, drawing revenue from the 5.36 million adults who use the Colorado River
More informationTABLE 3c: Congressional Districts with Number and Percent of Hispanics* Living in Hard-to-Count (HTC) Census Tracts**
living Alaska 00 47,808 21,213 44.4 Alabama 01 20,661 3,288 15.9 Alabama 02 23,949 6,614 27.6 Alabama 03 20,225 3,247 16.1 Alabama 04 41,412 7,933 19.2 Alabama 05 34,388 11,863 34.5 Alabama 06 34,849 4,074
More informationTABLE 3b: Congressional Districts Ranked by Percent of Hispanics* Living in Hard-to- Count (HTC) Census Tracts**
Rank State District Count (HTC) 1 New York 05 150,499 141,567 94.1 2 New York 08 133,453 109,629 82.1 3 Massachusetts 07 158,518 120,827 76.2 4 Michigan 13 47,921 36,145 75.4 5 Illinois 04 508,677 379,527
More informationUnemployment Rate (%) Rank State. Unemployment
States Ranked by March 2016 Unemployment Rate Seasonally Adjusted Unemployment Unemployment Unemployment 1 South Dakota 2.5 19 Delaware 4.4 37 Georgia 5.5 2 New Hampshire 2.6 19 Massachusetts 4.4 37 North
More informationUnemployment Rate (%) Rank State. Unemployment
States Ranked by February 2018 Unemployment Rate Seasonally Adjusted Unemployment Unemployment Unemployment 1 Hawaii 2.1 19 Alabama 3.7 33 Ohio 4.5 2 New Hampshire 2.6 19 Missouri 3.7 33 Rhode Island 4.5
More informationUnemployment Rate (%) Rank State. Unemployment
States Ranked by September 2017 Unemployment Rate Seasonally Adjusted Unemployment Unemployment Unemployment 1 North Dakota 2.4 17 Indiana 3.8 36 New Jersey 4.7 2 Colorado 2.5 17 Kansas 3.8 38 Pennsylvania
More informationUnemployment Rate (%) Rank State. Unemployment
States Ranked by November 2015 Unemployment Rate Seasonally Adjusted Unemployment Unemployment Unemployment 1 North Dakota 2.7 19 Indiana 4.4 37 Georgia 5.6 2 Nebraska 2.9 20 Ohio 4.5 37 Tennessee 5.6
More informationUnemployment Rate (%) Rank State. Unemployment
States Ranked by April 2017 Unemployment Rate Seasonally Adjusted Unemployment Unemployment Unemployment 1 Colorado 2.3 17 Virginia 3.8 37 California 4.8 2 Hawaii 2.7 20 Massachusetts 3.9 37 West Virginia
More informationUnemployment Rate (%) Rank State. Unemployment
States Ranked by December 2017 Unemployment Rate Seasonally Adjusted Unemployment Unemployment Unemployment 1 Hawaii 2.0 16 South Dakota 3.5 37 Connecticut 4.6 2 New Hampshire 2.6 20 Arkansas 3.7 37 Delaware
More informationUnemployment Rate (%) Rank State. Unemployment
States Ranked by September 2015 Unemployment Rate Seasonally Adjusted Unemployment Unemployment Unemployment 1 North Dakota 2.8 17 Oklahoma 4.4 37 South Carolina 5.7 2 Nebraska 2.9 20 Indiana 4.5 37 Tennessee
More informationUnemployment Rate (%) Rank State. Unemployment
States Ranked by August 2017 Unemployment Rate Seasonally Adjusted Unemployment Unemployment Unemployment 1 North Dakota 2.3 18 Maryland 3.9 36 New York 4.8 2 Colorado 2.4 18 Michigan 3.9 38 Delaware 4.9
More informationUnemployment Rate (%) Rank State. Unemployment
States Ranked by November 2014 Unemployment Rate Seasonally Adjusted Unemployment Unemployment Unemployment 1 North Dakota 2.7 19 Pennsylvania 5.1 35 New Mexico 6.4 2 Nebraska 3.1 20 Wisconsin 5.2 38 Connecticut
More informationUnemployment Rate (%) Rank State. Unemployment
States Ranked by July 2018 Unemployment Rate Seasonally Adjusted Unemployment Unemployment Unemployment 1 Hawaii 2.1 19 Massachusetts 3.6 37 Kentucky 4.3 2 Iowa 2.6 19 South Carolina 3.6 37 Maryland 4.3
More informationEstimated Economic Impacts of the Small Business Jobs and Tax Relief Act National Report
Regional Economic Models, Inc. Estimated Economic Impacts of the Small Business Jobs and Tax Relief Act National Report Prepared by Frederick Treyz, CEO June 2012 The following is a summary of the Estimated
More information3+ 3+ N = 155, 442 3+ R 2 =.32 < < < 3+ N = 149, 685 3+ R 2 =.27 < < < 3+ N = 99, 752 3+ R 2 =.4 < < < 3+ N = 98, 887 3+ R 2 =.6 < < < 3+ N = 52, 624 3+ R 2 =.28 < < < 3+ N = 36, 281 3+ R 2 =.5 < < < 7+
More informationClusters and Competitiveness. The Chamber of Facon of Albania
Clusters and Competitiveness The Chamber of Facon of Albania Clusters, Innovation and Jobs Our Economic Challenge Clusters and Regional Economic Development Cluster Policy and Economic Development Key
More informationThe American Legion NATIONAL MEMBERSHIP RECORD
The American Legion NATIONAL MEMBERSHIP RECORD www.legion.org 2016 The American Legion NATIONAL MEMBERSHIP RECORD 1920-1929 Department 1920 1921 1922 1923 1924 1925 1926 1927 1928 1929 Alabama 4,474 3,246
More informationPRESS RELEASE Media Contact: Joseph Stefko, Director of Public Finance, ;
PRESS RELEASE Media Contact: Joseph Stefko, Director of Public Finance, 585.327.7075; jstefko@cgr.org Highest Paid State Workers in New Jersey & New York in 2010; Lowest Paid in Dakotas and West Virginia
More informationRutgers Revenue Sources
Rutgers Revenue Sources 31.2% Tuition and Fees 27.3% State Appropriations with Fringes 1.0% Endowment and Investments.5% Federal Appropriations 17.8% Federal, State, and Municipal Grants and Contracts
More informationFY 2014 Per Capita Federal Spending on Major Grant Programs Curtis Smith, Nick Jacobs, and Trinity Tomsic
Special Analysis 15-03, June 18, 2015 FY 2014 Per Capita Federal Spending on Major Grant Programs Curtis Smith, Nick Jacobs, and Trinity Tomsic 202-624-8577 ttomsic@ffis.org Summary Per capita federal
More informationInterstate Pay Differential
Interstate Pay Differential APPENDIX IV Adjustments for differences in interstate pay in various locations are computed using the state average weekly pay. This appendix provides a table for the second
More information5 x 7 Notecards $1.50 with Envelopes - MOQ - 12
5 x 7 Notecards $1.50 with Envelopes - MOQ - 12 Magnets 2½ 3½ Magnet $1.75 - MOQ - 5 - Add $0.25 for packaging Die Cut Acrylic Magnet $2.00 - MOQ - 24 - Add $0.25 for packaging 2535-22225 California AM-22225
More informationIndex of religiosity, by state
Index of religiosity, by state Low Medium High Total United States 19 26 55=100 Alabama 7 16 77 Alaska 28 27 45 Arizona 21 26 53 Arkansas 12 19 70 California 24 27 49 Colorado 24 29 47 Connecticut 25 32
More informationSTATE INDUSTRY ASSOCIATIONS $ - LISTED NEXT PAGE. TOTAL $ 88,000 * for each contribution of $500 for Board Meeting sponsorship
Exhibit D -- TRIP 2017 FUNDING SOURCES -- February 3, 2017 CORPORATE $ 12,000 Construction Companies $ 5,500 Consulting Engineers Equipment Distributors Manufacturer/Supplier/Producer 6,500 Surety Bond
More information2015 State Hospice Report 2013 Medicare Information 1/1/15
2015 State Hospice Report 2013 Medicare Information 1/1/15 www.hospiceanalytics.com 2 2013 Demographics & Hospice Utilization National Population 316,022,508 Total Deaths 2,529,792 Medicare Beneficiaries
More informationCurrent Medicare Advantage Enrollment Penetration: State and County-Level Tabulations
Current Advantage Enrollment : State and County-Level Tabulations 5 Slide Series, Volume 40 September 2016 Summary of Tabulations and Findings As of September 2016, 17.9 million of the nation s 56.1 million
More informationMAP 1: Seriously Delinquent Rate by State for Q3, 2008
MAP 1: Seriously Delinquent Rate by State for Q3, 2008 Seriously Delinquent Rate Greater than 6.93% 5.18% 6.93% 0 5.17% Source: MBA s National Deliquency Survey MAP 2: Foreclosure Inventory Rate by State
More informationStates Ranked by Annual Nonagricultural Employment Change October 2017, Seasonally Adjusted
States Ranked by Annual Nonagricultural Employment Change Change (Jobs) Change (Jobs) Change (Jobs) 1 Texas 316,100 19 Nevada 36,600 37 Hawaii 7,100 2 California 256,800 20 Tennessee 34,800 38 Mississippi
More informationChild & Adult Care Food Program: Participation Trends 2017
Child & Adult Care Food Program: Participation Trends 2017 February 2018 About FRAC The Food Research and Action Center (FRAC) is the leading national organization working for more effective public and
More information2016 INCOME EARNED BY STATE INFORMATION
BY STATE INFORMATION This information is being provided to assist in your 2016 tax preparations. The information is also mailed to applicable Columbia fund non-corporate shareholders with their year-end
More informationFiscal Year 1999 Comparisons. State by State Rankings of Revenues and Spending. Includes Fiscal Year 2000 Rankings for State Taxes Only
Fiscal Year 1999 Comparisons State by State Rankings of Revenues and Spending Includes Fiscal Year 2000 Rankings for State Taxes Only January 2002 1 2 published annually by: The Minnesota Taxpayers Association
More informationHOME HEALTH AIDE TRAINING REQUIREMENTS, DECEMBER 2016
BACKGROUND HOME HEALTH AIDE TRAINING REQUIREMENTS, DECEMBER 2016 Federal legislation (42 CFR 484.36) requires that Medicare-certified home health agencies employ home health aides who are trained and evaluated
More informationTable 6 Medicaid Eligibility Systems for Children, Pregnant Women, Parents, and Expansion Adults, January Share of Determinations
Table 6 Medicaid Eligibility Systems for Children, Pregnant Women, Parents, and Expansion Adults, January 2017 Able to Make Share of Determinations System determines eligibility for: 2 State Real-Time
More informationSentinel Event Data. General Information Copyright, The Joint Commission
Sentinel Event Data General Information 1995 2015 Data Limitations The reporting of most sentinel events to The Joint Commission is voluntary and represents only a small proportion of actual events. Therefore,
More informationChild & Adult Care Food Program: Participation Trends 2016
Child & Adult Care Food Program: Participation Trends 2016 March 2017 About FRAC The Food Research and Action Center (FRAC) is the leading national organization working for more effective public and private
More informationWeekly Market Demand Index (MDI)
VOL. 8 NO. 28 JULY 13, 2015 LOAD AVAILABILITY Up 7% compared to the Weekly Market Demand Index (MDI) Note: MDI Measures Relative Truck Demand LOAD SEARCHING Up 18.3% compared to the TRUCK AVAILABILITY
More informationHolding the Line: How Massachusetts Physicians Are Containing Costs
Holding the Line: How Massachusetts Physicians Are Containing Costs 2017 Massachusetts Medical Society. All rights reserved. INTRODUCTION Massachusetts is a high-cost state for health care, and costs continue
More informationRankings of the States 2017 and Estimates of School Statistics 2018
Rankings of the States 2017 and Estimates of School Statistics 2018 NEA RESEARCH April 2018 Reproduction: No part of this report may be reproduced in any form without permission from NEA Research, except
More informationVoter Registration and Absentee Ballot Deadlines by State 2018 General Election: Tuesday, November 6. Saturday, Oct 27 (postal ballot)
Voter Registration and Absentee Ballot Deadlines by State 2018 General Election: All dates in 2018 unless otherwise noted STATE REG DEADLINE ABSENTEE BALLOT REQUEST DEADLINE Alabama November 1 ABSENTEE
More informationSentinel Event Data. General Information Q Copyright, The Joint Commission
Sentinel Event Data General Information 1995 2Q 2014 Data Limitations The reporting of most sentinel events to The Joint Commission is voluntary and represents only a small proportion of actual events.
More informationIntroduction. Current Law Distribution of Funds. MEMORANDUM May 8, Subject:
MEMORANDUM May 8, 2018 Subject: TANF Family Assistance Grant Allocations Under the Ways and Means Committee (Majority) Proposal From: Gene Falk, Specialist in Social Policy, gfalk@crs.loc.gov, 7-7344 Jameson
More informationSTATE ENTREPRENEURSHIP INDEX
University of Nebraska - Lincoln DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln Business in Nebraska Bureau of Business Research 12-2013 STATE ENTREPRENEURSHIP INDEX Eric Thompson University of Nebraska-Lincoln,
More information2017 Competitiveness REDBOOK. Key Indicators of North Carolina s Business Climate
2017 Competitiveness REDBOOK Key Indicators of North Carolina s Business Climate 2017 Competitiveness REDBOOK The North Carolina Chamber Foundation works to promote the social welfare of North Carolina
More informationCONNECTICUT: ECONOMIC FUTURE WITH EDUCATIONAL REFORM
CONNECTICUT: ECONOMIC FUTURE WITH EDUCATIONAL REFORM This file contains detailed projections and information from the article: Eric A. Hanushek, Jens Ruhose, and Ludger Woessmann, It pays to improve school
More informationMaine s Economic Outlook: 2009 and Beyond
Maine s Economic Outlook: 2009 and Beyond January 2009 James Breece, Ph.D. University of Maine System Outline 1. External Economic Drivers 2. Current Conditions 3. Economic Projections 4. Long-term Trends
More informationTENNESSEE TEXAS UTAH VERMONT VIRGINIA WASHINGTON WEST VIRGINIA WISCONSIN WYOMING ALABAMA ALASKA ARIZONA ARKANSAS
ALABAMA ALASKA ARIZONA ARKANSAS CALIFORNIA COLORADO CONNECTICUT DELAWARE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA FLORIDA GEORGIA GUAM MISSOURI MONTANA NEBRASKA NEVADA NEW HAMPSHIRE NEW JERSEY NEW MEXICO NEW YORK NORTH CAROLINA
More informationState Authority for Hazardous Materials Transportation
Appendixes Appendix A State Authority for Hazardous Materials Transportation Hazardous Materials Transportation: Regulatory, Enforcement, and Emergency Response* Alabama E Public Service Commission ER
More informationFORTIETH TRIENNIAL ASSEMBLY
FORTIETH TRIENNIAL ASSEMBLY MOST PUISSANT GENERAL GRAND MASTER GENERAL GRAND COUNCIL OF CRYPTIC MASONS INTERNATIONAL 1996-1999 -
More informationChild & Adult Care Food Program: Participation Trends 2014
Child & Adult Care Food Program: Participation Trends 2014 1200 18th St NW Suite 400 Washington, DC 20036 (202) 986-2200 / www.frac.org February 2016 About FRAC The Food Research and Action Center (FRAC)
More informationThe Welding Industry: A National Perspective on Workforce Trends and Challenges (Updated in February 2010)
The Welding Industry: A National Perspective on Workforce Trends and Challenges (Updated in February 2010) Prepared by Jongyun Kim, Ph.D. Joint Center for Policy Research Lorain County Community College
More informationCRMRI White Paper #3 August 2017 State Refugee Services Indicators of Integration: How are the states doing?
CRMRI White Paper #3 August 7 State Refugee Services Indicators of Integration: How are the states doing? Marci Harris, Julia Greene, Kilee Jorgensen, Caren J. Frost, & Lisa H. Gren State Refugee Services
More informationGrants 101: An Introduction to Federal Grants for State and Local Governments
Grants 101: An Introduction to Federal Grants for State and Local Governments Introduction FFIS has been in the federal grant reporting business for a long time about 30 years. The main thing we ve learned
More informationWeights and Measures Training Registration
Weights and Measures Training Registration Please fill out the form below to register for Weights and Measures training and testing dates. NIST Handbook 44, Specifications, Tolerances and other Technical
More informationArizona State Funding Project: Addressing the Teacher Labor Market Challenge Executive Summary. Research conducted by Education Resource Strategies
Arizona State Funding Project: Addressing the Teacher Labor Market Challenge Executive Summary Research conducted by Education Resource Strategies Key findings 1. Student outcomes in Arizona lag behind
More informationFigure 10: Total State Spending Growth, ,
26 Reason Foundation Part 3 Spending As with state revenue, there are various ways to look at state spending. Total state expenditures, obviously, encompass every dollar spent by state government, irrespective
More informationInterstate Turbine Advisory Council (CESA-ITAC)
Interstate Turbine Advisory Council (CESA-ITAC) Mark Mayhew NYSERDA for Val Stori Clean Energy States Alliance SWAT 4/25/12 Today CESA ITAC, LLC - What, who and why The Unified List - What, why, how and
More informationThe Regional Economic Outlook
The Regional Economic Outlook Presented by: Mark McMullen, Director of Government Svcs Prepared for: FTA Revenue Estimating Conference September 15, 2008 Recent Economic Performance 2 1 The Job Market
More informationFiscal Research Center
January 2017 Georgia s Rankings Among the States: Budget, Taxes and Other Indicators ABOUT THE FISCAL RESEARCH CENTER Established in 1995, the (FRC) provides nonpartisan research, technical assistance
More informationTHE STATE OF GRANTSEEKING FACT SHEET
1 THE STATE OF GRANTSEEKING FACT SHEET ORG ANIZATIONAL COMPARISO N BY C ENSUS DIV ISION S PRING 2013 The State of Grantseeking Spring 2013 is the sixth semi-annual informal survey of nonprofits conducted
More informationPercentage of Enrolled Students by Program Type, 2016
Percentage of Enrolled Students by Program Type, 2016 Doctorate 4% PN/VN 3% MSN 15% ADN 28% BSRN 22% Diploma 2% BSN 26% n = 279,770 Percentage of Graduations by Program Type, 2016 MSN 12% Doctorate 1%
More informationHigh-Tech Nation: How Technological Innovation Shapes America s 435 Congressional Districts
High-Tech Nation: How Technological Innovation Shapes America s 435 Congressional Districts John Wu, Adams Nager, and Joseph Chuzhin November 2016 itif.org/technation High-Tech Nation: How Technological
More informationFiscal Research Center
January 2016 Georgia s Rankings Among the States: Budget, Taxes and Other Indicators ABOUT THE FISCAL RESEARCH CENTER Established in 1995, the (FRC) provides nonpartisan research, technical assistance
More informationDashboard. Campaign for Action. Welcome to the Future of Nursing:
Welcome to the Future of Nursing: Campaign for Action Dashboard About This Dashboard: These graphs and charts show goals by which the Campaign evaluates its efforts to implement recommendations in the
More informationRegional Competitiveness in Northeast Massachusetts
Regional Competitiveness in Northeast Massachusetts Professor Michael E. Porter Institute for Strategy and Competitiveness Harvard Business School Northeast Regional Competitiveness Council North Shore
More informationGROWING THE MIDDLE: SECURING THE FUTURE LOS ANGELES
GROWING THE MIDDLE: SECURING THE FUTURE LOS ANGELES 02.21.18 MANUEL PASTOR @Prof_MPastor THE WIDENING GAP 1 THE WIDENING GAP INEQUALITY: HOW CALIFORNIA RANKS Household* Gini Coefficient, 1969 Mississippi
More informationTable 8 Online and Telephone Medicaid Applications for Children, Pregnant Women, Parents, and Expansion Adults, January 2017
Table 8 Online and Telephone Medicaid Applications for Children, Pregnant Women, Parents, and Expansion Adults, January 2017 State Applications Can be Submitted Online at the State Level 1 < 25% 25% -
More informationLarry DeBoer Purdue University September Real GDP Growth. Real Consumption Spending Growth
Larry DeBoer Purdue University September 2011 Real GDP Growth Real Consumption Spending Growth 1 Index of Consumer Sentiment 57.8 Sept 11 Savings Rate (percent of disposable income) Real Investment Spending
More informationHow North Carolina Compares
How North Carolina Compares A Compendium of State Statistics January 2013 Prepared by the N.C. General Assembly Program Evaluation Division Program Evaluation Division North Carolina General Assembly Legislative
More informationRegional Competitiveness in Central Massachusetts
Regional Competitiveness in Central Massachusetts Professor Michael E. Porter Institute for Strategy and Competitiveness Harvard Business School Central Massachusetts Regional Competitiveness Council Meeting
More informationNational Collegiate Soils Contest Rules
National Collegiate Soils Contest Rules Students of Agronomy, Soils, and Environmental Sciences (SASES) Revised September 30, 2008 I. NAME The contest shall be known as the National Collegiate Soils Contest
More informationAll Approved Insurance Providers All Risk Management Agency Field Offices All Other Interested Parties
United States Department of Agriculture Farm Production and Conservation Risk Management Agency Beacon Facility Mail Stop 080 P.O. Box 49205 Kansas City, MO 644-6205, 207 INFORMATIONAL MEMORANDUM: PM-7-06
More informationIs this consistent with other jurisdictions or do you allow some mechanism to reinstate?
Topic: Question by: : Forfeiture for failure to appoint a resident agent Kathy M. Sachs Kansas Date: January 8, 2015 Manitoba Corporations Canada Alabama Alaska Arizona Arkansas California Colorado Connecticut
More informationSTATE AGRICULTURAL ORGANIZATIONS SUPPORTING S. 744 AS APPROVED BY THE SENATE AGRICULTURE COMMITTEE
STATE AGRICULTURAL ORGANIZATIONS SUPPORTING S. 744 AS APPROVED BY THE SENATE AGRICULTURE COMMITTEE ALABAMA ALASKA ARIZONA Alabama Department of Agriculture & Industries* Alabama Poultry & Egg Association
More informationTable 1 Elementary and Secondary Education. (in millions)
Revised February 22, 2005 WHERE WOULD THE CUTS BE MADE UNDER THE PRESIDENT S BUDGET? Data Table 1 Elementary and Secondary Education Includes Education for the Disadvantaged, Impact Aid, School Improvement
More informationCritical Access Hospitals and HCAHPS
Critical Access Hospitals and HCAHPS Michelle Casey, MS Senior Research Fellow and Deputy Director University of Minnesota Rural Health Research Center June 12, 2012 Overview of Presentation Why is HCAHPS
More informationHow North Carolina Compares
How North Carolina Compares A Compendium of State Statistics March 2017 Prepared by the N.C. General Assembly Program Evaluation Division Preface The Program Evaluation Division of the North Carolina General
More informationUNCLASSIFIED UNCLASSIFIED
The National Guard Bureau Critical Infrastructure Program in Conjunction with the Joint Interagency Training and Education Center Brigadier General James A. Hoyer Director Joint Staff West Virginia National
More informationVOLUME 35 ISSUE 6 MARCH 2017
VOLUME 35 ISSUE 6 MARCH 2017 IN THIS ISSUE Index of State Economic Momentum The Index of State Economic Momentum, developed by Reports founding editor Hal Hovey, ranks states based on their most recent
More informationF O R E S T R I V E R M A R I N E
F O R E S T R I V E R M A R I N E Regional Sales Manager - Eric Rose Cell: (574) 361-8673 E-mail: erose@forestriverinc.com Sales Coordinator - Neil Massing (574) 825-8168 Cell: (574) 825-6180 E-mail: nmassing@forestriverinc.com
More informationnational assembly of state arts agencies
STATE ARTS AGENCY GRANT MAKING AND FUNDING Each of America's 50 states and six jurisdictions has a government that works to make the cultural, civic, economic and educational benefits of the available
More informationStatutory change to name availability standard. Jurisdiction. Date: April 8, [Statutory change to name availability standard] [April 8, 2015]
Topic: Question by: : Statutory change to name availability standard Michael Powell Texas Date: April 8, 2015 Manitoba Corporations Canada Alabama Alaska Arizona Arkansas California Colorado Connecticut
More informationengineering salary guide
engineering salary guide At a time when lean practices and agile teams create the expectation of doing more with less, employers need to develop new strategies to attract and retain the best employees
More informationEXHIBIT A. List of Public Entities Participating in FEDES Project
EXHIBIT A List of Public Entities Participating in FEDES Project Alabama Alabama Department of Economic and Community Affairs Alabama Department of Industrial Relations Alaska Department of Labor and Workforce
More informationHIGH SCHOOL ATHLETICS PARTICIPATION SURVEY
2011-12 HIGH SCHOOL ATHLETICS PARTICIPATION SURVEY Conducted By THE NATIONAL FEDERATION OF STATE HIGH SCHOOL ASSOCIATIONS Based on Competition at the High School Level in the 2011-12 School Year BOYS GIRLS
More information*ALWAYS KEEP A COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE OF ATTENDANCE FOR YOUR RECORDS IN CASE OF AUDIT
State Alabama Alaska Arizona Arkansas California INSTRUCTIONS FOR CLE ATTENDANCE REPORTING AT IADC 2012 TRIAL ACADEMY Attorney Reporting Method After the CLE activity, fill out the Certificate of Attendance
More informationFiscal Research Center
January 2018 Georgia s Rankings Among the States: Budget, Taxes and Other Indicators ABOUT THE FISCAL RESEARCH CENTER Established in 1995, the (FRC) provides nonpartisan research, technical assistance
More informationFiscal Year 2005 Comparisons. Includes Fiscal Year 2006 Rankings for State Taxes Only
Fiscal Year 2005 Comparisons Includes Fiscal Year 2006 Rankings for State Taxes Only October 2007 Published annually since 1969 (except FY2001 and FY2003) by: The Minnesota Taxpayers Association 85 East
More informationSupplemental Nutrition Assistance Program. STATE ACTIVITY REPORT Fiscal Year 2016
Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program ACTIVITY REPORT Fiscal Year 2016 Food and Nutrition Service Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program Program Accountability and Administration Division September
More informationDepartment of Defense INSTRUCTION
Department of Defense INSTRUCTION NUMBER 4715.02 August 28, 2009 Incorporating Change 2, August 31, 2018 USD(A&S) SUBJECT: Regional Environmental Coordination References: (a) DoD Instruction 4715.2, DoD
More informationNovember 24, First Street NE, Suite 510 Washington, DC 20002
820 First Street NE, Suite 510 Washington, DC 20002 Tel: 202-408-1080 Fax: 202-408-1056 center@cbpp.org www.cbpp.org November 24, 2008 TANF BENEFITS ARE LOW AND HAVE NOT KEPT PACE WITH INFLATION But Most
More informationSTATE ARTS AGENCY GRANT MAKING AND FUNDING
STATE ARTS AGENCY GRANT MAKING AND FUNDING Each of America's 50 states and six jurisdictions has a government that works to make the cultural, civic, economic and educational benefits of the available
More information