More highly educated people tend to live in cities.  Indiana’s population is less concentrated in urban areas than the national average.  So is real reason for Indiana ’s low proportion of college-educated adults – the so called “brain drain” – simply the fact that we like to live in smaller towns?

That’s one of many questions that come to mind while looking at the patterns of regional development within our state that emerge from recently collected data.  Using the twelve multi-county Economic Regions defined by the Indiana Department of Commerce, we’ve used data from the 1990 and 2000 decennial Census to profile population, workforce and economic base throughout the state.  What emerges is a story of sharp contrasts.

Data on the overall state economy mask a very important fact.  The Indianapolis region and the remainder of the state do not march to the same beat.  The nine-county Indianapoliseconomic region is larger than any of the other 11 regions, of course.  With just over 1.6 million residents in 2000, the Indianapolis region has more than twice as many people as the South Bend region, the next largest. 

But it’s the composition, not just the size, of the Indianapolis economy that stands out as strikingly different from the rest of the state.  Residents of Indianapolis are more likely to be urban, younger, and non-white than other Hoosiers. Statistically speaking, they are more highly educated, less blue collar, and have longer commute times than the rest of Indiana .  And they are better paid.

In all of these instances, the differentials involved are substantial.  17.1 percent ofIndianapolis adults have a 4-year college degree as their highest academic credential. For the rest of the state it’s just 10.4 percent. Almost 1 out of every 4 workers outsideIndianapolis works in a production or transportation related occupation, while only 15.4 percent of Circle City workers fall into that category.  And the average job inIndianapolis paid $38,122 in 1999, almost 19 percent more than jobs elsewhere in the state.

Sharp differences between “out state” and a major urban area are hardly confined to the state of Indiana , of course.  They often reflect urban versus rural economic differences in occupational specialization and industry mix as much as anything.  Indeed, it is interesting to note that the four- countyGary region, equally urban as Indianapolis , ranks second in the state in earnings per job.

That’s why a second dimension of contrast in the Indiana regional economic picture is even more dramatic.  That is between the Indianaeconomic regions outside Indianapolis and the rest of the nation.

The degree to which the workforce in the 11 economic regions outside Indianapolis are concentrated in production-related occupations that do not require advanced educational credentials is stunning.  In theKokomo region more than 28 percent of the workforce is in production and transportation occupations, double the national average of 14 percent.  And in five of the 11 regions outside Indianapolis , the proportion of adults whose education stopped with a college degree is less than 10 percent.

Is there a lesson in the growth of the Indianapolis region that other regions in the state can use?  Perhaps.  It is possible, say, for a Muncie or a Terre Haute to attract a population of 1.6 million people, become the state capital, and rebuilt the state’s interstate highway system to put itself at the hub? Probably not.  Not all aspects of the CircleCity ’s growth recipe fit the other regions of the state. 

But maybe its time to start learning which parts do, so we can start closing the gaps that separate us from the rest of the nation.