Center for Business and Economic Research - Ball State University


CBER Data Center
Projects and PublicationsEconomic IndicatorsWeekly CommentaryCommunity Asset InventoryManufacturing Scorecard

About

Commentaries are published weekly and distributed through the Indianapolis Business Journal and many other print and online publications. Disclaimer

RSS Feed

Disclaimer

The views expressed in these commentaries do not reflect those of Ball State University or the Center for Business and Economic Research.

Recent

Two Key Economic Lessons in One BillHoosiers face trade-offs and opportunity costs in the wake of SEA1.

Time to Fix Economic Development PolicyAllocating tax dollars to land development won’t cause economic growth.

The Unanticipated Effects of SB1Businesses, governments and households may all feel the effects.

The Stupidest of PoliciesThis whipsawing of tariff rates has unnerved financial markets, which on Wednesday, were toying with a liquidity crisis.

View archives

Top Tags

jobs and employment 261
economics 201
state and local government 188
education 186
economic development 171
indiana 171
budget and spending 145
taxes 144
law and public policy 142
workforce and human capital 139
Browse all tags
Reporter / Admin Login

December 1, 2013

Great Places and the Sweep of Economic Geography

Thanksgiving weekend sees most of us huddled with three or more generations of family.  That makes these holidays a good time to think about long-term economic changes and how they affect us.  For example, let's think a bit about where economic development occurs. Let us begin by picking two dates 70 years apart, say 1940 and 2010. 

In 1940 about one-third of all U.S. workers were involved in manufacturing, another 15 percent in agriculture, 5 percent in providing energy and more than 10 percent in moving goods.  Altogether, about 65 percent of folks worked in industries in which most of the goods produced were 'exported' to places outside of where they lived.  This was a less affluent time, and much of household income was spent on food, clothing and heat.  Not surprisingly, by 1940, cities had sprung up around the places where people manufactured goods, mined coal or loaded goods, coal and food products onto transportation equipment.  So, the great centers of affluence were clustered around factories. 

Now take into account that over the coming seven decades households got richer.  This is because we got better at food production, mining, manufacturing and moving all that stuff around.  This brought about two major changes.  First, instead of 65 out of every 100 workers mining, growing, making and moving goods, now fewer than 14 could meet demand.  Second, as households got richer, they bought fewer things that could be exported from the region and spent more money on things that could not be readily moved around.  So, health care, financial services, restaurant visits, amusements and recreation, telecom services and housing became a growing share of our spending patterns.  Manufactured goods and food spending shrank as our share of income.  So what does this mean to the geography of wealth and affluence?

Well, in 1940 the only vibrant cities had big factories, rail yards and lots of associated workers.  In 2010 the only vibrant cities had lots of people in many occupations whose product is mostly consumed locally.  This doesn’t mean there aren’t a few fantastic towns with factories, but it is the vibrant town that ultimately makes the difference. 

This begs the question, "If this is so, why is our community so dead-set on luring the next factory to town instead of making our town a good place to live?"  The answer here is simply that too many folks simply don't know what else to do.

I believe we still need to attract business at the state, and maybe the regional level. A new factory anywhere in Indiana will draw workers from a dozen counties.  Still, the simple truth is that for Hoosier counties, efforts to lure a new factory in hopes it will spur economic growth is like filling the bath tub during a house fire.  It involves something that seems like it might be able to put out the fire, and it keeps you busy; but it won't make much of a difference in the long run.

Link to this commentary: https://commentaries.cberdata.org/706/great-places-and-the-sweep-of-economic-geography

Tags: budget and spending, business, jobs and employment


About the Author

Michael Hicks cberdirector@bsu.edu

Michael J. Hicks, PhD, is the director of the Center for Business and Economic Research and the George and Frances Ball distinguished professor of economics in the Miller College of Business at Ball State University. Note: The views expressed here are solely those of the author, and do not represent those of funders, associations, any entity of Ball State University, or its governing body.

© Center for Business and Economic Research, Ball State University

About Ball State CBER Data Center

Ball State CBER Data Center is one-stop shop for economic data including demographics, education, health, and social capital. Our easy-to-use, visual web tools offer data collection and analysis for grant writers, economic developers, policy makers, and the general public.

Ball State CBER Data Center (cberdata.org) is a product of the Center for Business and Economic Research at Ball State University. CBER's mission is to conduct relevant and timely public policy research on a wide range of economic issues affecting the state and nation. Learn more.

Terms of Service

Center for Business and Economic Research

Ball State University • Whitinger Business Building, room 149
2000 W. University Ave.
Muncie, IN 47306-0360
Phone:
765-285-5926
Email:
cber@bsu.edu
Website:
www.bsu.edu/cber
Facebook:
www.facebook.com/BallStateCBER
Twitter:
www.twitter.com/BallStateCBER
Close