Wright State University CORE Scholar
Economics Student Publications Economics
1993 Urban Revitalization: Is Dayton on the Right Track? Kirby Clark Wright State University - Main Campus
Follow this and additional works at: https://corescholar.libraries.wright.edu/econ_student Part of the Business Commons, and the Economics Commons
Repository Citation Clark, K. (1993). Urban Revitalization: Is Dayton on the Right Track?. . https://corescholar.libraries.wright.edu/econ_student/49
This Master's Culminating Experience is brought to you for free and open access by the Economics at CORE Scholar. It has been accepted for inclusion in Economics Student Publications by an authorized administrator of CORE Scholar. For more information, please contact [email protected], [email protected]. Urban Revitalization:
Is Dayton on the Right Track?
A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the rquirements for the degree of Master of Science
By
KIRBY CLARK B.A., Wright State University, 1992
1993 Wright State University WRIGHT STATE UNIVERSITY
SCHOOL OF GRADUATE STUDIES
September 3. 1993
I HEREBY RECOMMEND THAT THE THESIS PREPARED UNDER MY SUPERVISION BY Kirby Clark ENTITLED Urban Revitalization: Is Davton on the Right Track? BE ACCEPTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF Master of Science.
y..!- John P. Blair, Professor Thesis Director
„.._v : - V - • Samuel Staley, Instructor Thesis Reader
RogJr Sylvester, Director of Graduate Program in Social and Applied Economics Table of Contents
Page
Forward iv
I. Overview 1 Introduction 1 A Short History of Revitalization Efforts 2 Funding Changes 5 The Example of Cleveland 6 Other Sources for community Involvement 8 Results and Conclusions 10
II. Shift-Share Analysis 13 Introduction 13 Methods Used in the Study 14 The Shift-and-Share Procedure and Analysis 15 Comparative Analysis 27 Dayton Record is Poor 32
III. Needs of the Dayton Community 33 Introduction 33 Dayton’s Strengths 34 Proposal 36 Development Strategy 37 CDC Responsibilities and Conclusion 39
Footnotes 42
References 44
ii List of Tables
Major Category Shift Share Analysis
Dayton Shift Share Analysis Forward
The purpose of this paper is to review the steps taken by cities to turn their declining economies into rejuvenated, revitalized and prosperous localities. There are as many approaches to revitalization as there are cities and success is dependent upon the focused efforts of the community, private and public. Nevertheless, some programs are much more successful than others. I have attempted to focus on the more successful programs to see if there are elements that can be applied to other cities such as Dayton.
The paper consists of three parts. The first part contains an overview of the research literature on revitalization and common elements of success.
Second, a shift share analysis of Dayton and its surrounding communities is performed since any analysis of Dayton’s Economic Development policy requires an understanding of the economy’s strengths and weaknesses. In addition, knowing which industries are competitive within the regions provides an essential foundation for developing public policy. My evaluation of the needs of the Dayton community is contained in the third part.
My hypothesis is the cities and regions with long-term success in revitalization have a mixture of private/public support that is not dependent upon public funding for economic growth. In defining what is successful in revitalization I used the following criteria. (1) What is the focus of the community economic development program? Were they made as a result of crisis or proactive planning? Are they reflective of expansionist or protectionist plans? Proactive and expansionist plans have a higher level of community involvement and support. (2) What form of support exists for this program? There is the single network approach where an organization of government agencies, universities, colleges and private enterprise is formed to meet the needs of the region. However, some communities continue to have a multidimensional grouping of separate agencies that may or may not focus on the same regional development plan. The successful program’s main tool, with either approach, is the focus generated from a community development council. (3) What are the sources of financial support for new enterprise development? The more successful programs have a higher percentage of private funding. (4) Is there a single program of assistance for new business developments for marketing, location selection, management assistance, community RLF, community development bank, venture capital and research through local universities? Columbus, Cincinnati and Fort
Wayne use several different agencies to meet the needs of new enterprise development.
(5) What is the education level of the community population and the local retention level of the graduates with advanced degrees from the universities?
This addresses the availability of the locality to train and retain its work force.
(6) The returns on the investment by the community on job creation determines what the cost is to create a job. If it costs $50,000 to create one job with a return of $15,000 to the community, the cost is too high. However,
v Robert Premus, John Treacy and Mr. Samuel Staley for their kindness, understanding and help with this paper. Finally to a very special group of supporters, mentors and just super people--Now, Wiz, Lady, Big Bird, Big
Easy, Dad, The Rude, Boss, Dictator, Space Cadet, Zipper, Double T, Little
Boy, Prof, The Dodger and the Polish Lady-Kathy and I would like to say,
"Thanks, for your support!" I O v e rv ie w
Introduction
Since the 1960’s war on poverty, urban revitalization using publicly funded programs for growth in jobs and living standards had elegant sounding implications. Programs such as public housing projects, urban renewal and economic development programs provided special interest groups and politicians with new tools to revitalize declining areas. Unfortunately, these programs have had limited impacts on revitalization of urban areas. The history of urban revitalization indicates that public funding, wholly or in large portions, in urban development programs has not met with a great deal of success.
But, regions can benefit greatly through public/private co-operative administration of a revitalization program. Highly successful revitalization programs contain a larger percentage of private to public funding. It is the focused involvement of private enterprises, universities, and government agencies that creates a business climate promoting sound opportunities for successful revitalization.
This concept is evident in programs in Cleveland, Ohio and Pittsburgh,
Pennsylvania where the returns to investment are the new jobs, improvements in housing and business climate, and revitalized growth.
These successful communities have very limited participation in the zero-sum game and have not relied on tax abatement programs.
1 2
The zero-sum game is not concerned with employment growth but in the movement of jobs from one locality to another. This type of game is a bidding war for jobs that results in a loss of income through tax abatements.
Instead, these cities developed and administered revitalization programs with the assistance of innovative funding, progressive development policies and co-operative research and development programs.
This new approach established a business climate that became the springboard for addressing the needs of the urban area such as equal housing opportunities and improved government services. It is the commercial, specifically small business, development that expands the opportunities for revitalization. In order to understand this approach, a look back at the failed revitalization efforts is necessary.
A Short History of Revitalization Efforts
The cost of publicly funded revitalization programs has many local governments declaring fiscal insolvency. In Ohio, Cleveland may be the best example of the misuse of subsidies and abatements in revitalization efforts.
In the 1970s, Cleveland was determined to get into bidding wars against other regions for jobs. As a result, the tax rates went up to the point that the population rebelled. Local governments were unable to receive assistance from state and federal governments because they were reeling from deficits and budget cuts. Not all of the problems with government budget deficits are 3 the result of failed revitalization, but it is increasingly a large segment. Tax abatements reduce funding for public services. History has a myriad of illustrations where communities supported high risk, sunset, and low market return commercial enterprises with large subsidy packages that failed [Nunn,
1993]. The local Navistar program in Springfield is a good example; although it has not completely closed, it has not been a boom to the local economy.
The excessive use of government loan guarantees or tax abatements to businesses that do not generate returns or fail leaves revitalization areas abandoned, left to decay while successful businesses and the public are subject to ever increasing tax burdens. The great society of the late 1960s gave rise to the Appalachian Regional Commission (ARC). Its purpose was to create jobs for those in the Appalachian Mountains coal regions so the people would become educated and self- supporting. The government has built roads, sewer systems and lines, industrial parks, and tourist attractions but has not provided long-term employment to the area.
Should the public pay for the private speculation of new business or industry by developing industrial/research parks or enterprise zones? This question goes back to the days of the development of a national transportation system in the United States. "State and local governments offered subsidies to influence the routes selected by private railroads and canal companies. Subsidies became so significant that they distorted the economics of route selection."1 Investing in infrastructure is one area where public funding can be used effectively to stimulate economic development.
Yet, building infrastructure is now subject to certain conditions and pressures defined by the public sector. In Champaign/Urbana, Illinois the
Research Park was built with money equally derived from private and public expenditure. "Such targeting should not only be through direct expenditure of government funds, but also through credit support for conventional lender investment, through the point in time when the private business investment is made."2 Money needs to be made available to build parks from commercial interest to be paid back by the developers. It is becoming a common practice for private developments in Industrial/Research Parks to share in the cost building the infrastructure.
If the competitiveness of a region’s economy is to improve, it is necessary for the local private and public leaders to evaluate, formulate and execute economic policy to promote revitalization. They must establish procedures that reduce or eliminate restrictions on financing to insure that development is open to all who want to participate. The benefits of this co operative effort can be in improvements in education, quality of the labor force, infrastructure and the financial soundness of the region. The cost of revitalization, however, should not depend upon the local, state or national governments continued funding of the programs. The private and public 5 sectors in equal partnership have lowered the job creation cost and made revitalization efforts pay dividends.
Funding Changes
The partial deregulation of the banking industry in 1980 with the
Monetary Control Act and the 1989 Community Reinvestment Act has promoted a new type of bank: Development Banks. Born out of the turbulence of the deregulation of the last decade the banking industry is going through an enormous transition. Partial deregulation changed bank management forcing it to become more astute in the short-term bank loan interest rates and long term credit extensions in a volatile interest market. "Now that deposits rates are variable, the banks must be able to reprice its loans with variations in the cost of funds."3
The next problem for bank management was the loss of the larger and more stable commercial accounts brought about by the commercial industry’s ability to finance its own debt. This contributed to the banks uncertain profitability by taking away the underwriting of large commercial accounts.
The Monetary Control Act has made credit available to small and midsize firms and changed the focus of banks commercial lending practices.
One of the principal objectives of instituting a development bank is to reduce the amount of public expenditure in economic development. The next is to develop a more productive relationship with the economic development professionals both public and private.
The passage of the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) required public disclosure of the local banking industry’s involvement in community reinvestment. This act is allowing the public to monitor banking’s efforts on community involvement. As a result of CRA the banks are reviewing their own published performance and searching for ways to interact more directly with economic development and low income housing. "This strategy has largely succeeded in the minimizing public investment, and thus maximizing the leverage of fewer public dollars."4 The best example of the co-operation in the use of this new banking trend is the revitalization of Cleveland, Ohio.
The Example of Cleveland
The Ameritrust Development Bank is unique in that it is a full-service bank with a prescribed market niche. Its largest source of depositors are the larger corporations in Cleveland with lending practices directed toward the smallest, high-risk segment for housing and commercial development. The reasons for the lending policy are many--reducing the tendency of speculators to establish unreasonable market clearing prices on property is of special significance.
The entire purpose of community reinvestment should be to bring low and moderate income communities back into the economic mainstream. That goal is ill served by artificial pricing, 7
which leads to aggravate urban blight by concentrating subsided housing and commercial ventures in low-income areas."5
The bank started in 1986 with $3.9 million in capital from the Ameritrust
Company and was expected to average $5 million per year in deposits for the
next three years. The bank expected to operate at a loss for the first five
years.
The deposit estimates were right on target. Within three years the
development bank had 15 million dollars in deposits. The operating margins were stronger than expected and loans were in excess of $35 million with
around $25 million invested in commercial and residential real-estate.
Focusing on economic development, the impact of around 10 million dollars in
business loans made to 78 different companies resulted in the gain of 1,439 jobs. The average business loan amounted to around $125,000. The typical
business loan portfolio, not provided by the development bank, were approximately 40% public subsidy, 10% private (owner’s equity) and 50% bank loan. In comparision, the $35 million development fund typically is 75% bank financing, 20% private and 5% public subsidy. The mix of both private and public funds for revitalization projects seems to be a trend. "In
Cleveland, the cost is split roughly 50% public and 50% private."6 This
illustration is one way a community revitalized without continued state and federal governments help. 8 Other Sources for Community Involvement
The use of a revolving loan fund (RLF) is another way to finance business ventures and revitalization efforts. Through co-operative efforts, a community can establish guidelines loans and with prudent financing, promote a successful revitalization program. The RLF is the public version of a development bank created to support loans for the start-up, expansion and retention of businesses. "The purpose of RLFs is to bridge capital gaps where local financial submarkets are underserved (venture capital markets, for example) or to convey a subsidy to business otherwise unable to retain or create jobs."7
Members of RLF have to be aware of the traps of funding a myriad of failed industries. Like any loan business the important part of the fund is the manner of operation and funding to pay its own bills. After initial funding, the
RLF should sustain itself through loan repayments like any other bank.
Unlike private banks the RLF’s only provision is to make loans. The operation is unlike private banks in that the governing body must have the professional capacity to act as bank and a government agency.
The revolving loan funds were created by Congress in 1986 with the passage of Title IX of the Public Works and Economic Development Act. The administration of the RLFs is through the U.S. Department of Commerce,
Economic Development Administration (EDA). The purpose of the program is to make one-time grants to distressed areas or an area hit with sudden and 9
severe employment dislocation. "The EDA requires administrative entities to
have staff with additional training or special expertise in business, banking or
other training to administer RLF programs."8 To handle the administration, I
believe that it must incorporate members from the public sector and a strong
diverse membership from the private sector.
A case study of RLF of Southeastern Illinois Regional Planning and
Development Commission (SIRPDC) showed that an initial endowment of
$555,555 in 1983 grew to $1.32 million in 1991 where $779,459 is loaned out
and $540,209 available for loan. The report also reflects that the fund has
$3.32 in collateral for $1 of RLF loan. The average loan is $80,000 with
personal and/or corporate guarantees required, and the administrative board
consists of one banker and four local community leaders.
Finally, Community Development Corporation (CDC) have a long
history of involvement in revitalization. The war on poverty created the
background for the establishment of the CDCs; and, through the years, the federal government’s support has ebbed and flowed with the change of
administrations. The goals of most CDCs have been to put local control of
economic development in the hands of the community. "By the early 1980s when federal dollars budgeted for neighborhood development began to dry
up, CDCs looked to private sources of funding and to a much lesser extent,
state and local governments."9 In today’s market the CDCs focus on the 10 supply of equity capital, loans, technical assistance and incubator space in support of local home-grown enterprises.
Results and Conclusions
The Pittsburgh High Technology Council is a great example of successful community revitalization and development efforts. It was established in 1981 with a $250,000 grant from the Ben Franklin Partnership.
By 1983 it became a nonprofit enterprise, with the support of commercial growth and the universities in Pittsburgh. The program structure was to develop a base to replace the steel, coal, textile and declining manufacturing base with high technology. It has a 1993 membership cf over 800 companies, a staff of 25 and a $2.5 million budget. It has created 769 companies with an estimated 68,000 employees: 60% of the firms employ fewer than 25, 20% of the firms employ between 25 and 99 and the last 20% are firms with over 100 employees.
In my opinion the wave of the future in the revitalization is with the co operative effort of the community with a strong influence from the private sectors. Pennsylvania, New York, Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, Minnesota,
Wisconsin, Mississippi, Texas, North Carolina, New York, Idaho, Arizona,
Maryland, New Mexico, South Carolina, Colorado and Florida all have cities that have established a new trend in revitalization by employing single contact networks for trend analysis, management improvements and resource 11 assistance with strong private and public involvement and support. They have stayed away from the zero-sum game by creating new jobs and new industries plus shored-up and retained the old industries.
The trend is not to grant tax abatements; because the deteriorating economic base forces a tax shift to other businesses and the public, thus weakening the government’s budget.10 The more important factor against using abatements and tax incremental financing is the diminishing federal support programs available to local governments. Block grants and revenue sharing programs are drying up. Taking these things into consideration, local communities are forced into developing new strategies to revitalize their economy. These strategies have to address new jobs, bolster infrastructure and build economic development.
The following are the most common traits of the successful revitalization programs of the 36 chambers of commerce economic development packages that I reviewed for this article.
1. In 30 cases there were strong university ties to the revitalization
efforts.11
2. All have a community development council (CDC) with a broad range
of community involvement and participation.
3. In 25 cases the initial CDC funding was from a government agency,
most in the range of $250,000 to $1 million, the average being
$650,000. 4. All have a higher commercial to government funding ratio to CDCs and
the more successful have over 60% commercial funding. The CDCs
develop and administer the revolving loan fund for revitalization efforts.
5. Most (31) have local resources for seed and start-up capital loans
either through RLFs or development banks.
6. After the initial funding, 22 of the 31 RLFs achieved independence.
The RLF is able to generate income for the CDC and the need for
government endowments diminish.
7. All of the areas developed one network for information transfer and all
publicized the achievement and expansions. II. SHIFT-SHARE ANALYSIS
Introduction
In evaluating the revitalization planning efforts of Dayton or any city, there must be a point of focus. As a starting point in developing a program, an analysis of the past development is a logical first step. The Dayton-
Springfield Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA) has gone through considerable change over the last decade.12 The growth of Dayton in the private sector employment is 16.25 percent from 1980 to 1990. The private sector created approximately 53,000 jobs in the MSA in the past decade. The national growth rate in the private sector averaged 24.96 percent over this same period. Therefore, Dayton grew slower than the national average.
Understanding the past growth of the area may lead to developing a program from which Dayton could build. Granted, most of the area’s long time residents and business leaders can speak freely about what business and factories were in the area. They can speculate about the impact of the plant closures and failed businesses but they are sometimes blind when looking at the new enterprises and their impact or overall patterns. The shift- share analysis looks at the growth patterns of the area and that of the nation.
This study looks at the area as a whole and not specifically at a single segment of the metropolitan statistical area. It also allows for analysis of growth patterns of a region.
13 14 Methods Used in the Study
In this evaluation, I looked at the growth of the Dayton-Springfield
MSA in comparison to the 90-minute land market.13 I selected Columbus,
Cincinnati-Middletown-Hamilton in Ohio and Indianapolis in Indiana as points of comparison. These are the large markets with which Dayton competes for private sector industry growth. However, I also wanted to look at the area between these larger cities to see how the growth in the smaller cities and the hinterland has been in relation to the large markets’ growth. I selected the small cities of Fort Wayne, Muncie and Richmond in Indiana and Lima in Ohio to get closer to and encompass Dayton. Richmond and Lima are not classified as MSAs according to the standard established by U.S. Department of Commerce while Ft Wayne and Muncie are.
I defined the Lima region as the four-county area including Allen,
Auglaize, Mercer and Van Wert counties. The Northern SA (statistical area) is Dayton’s hinterlands, the area outside the established MSA is Champaign,
Clinton, Darke, Preble and Shelby counties. Likewise I defined the
Richmond, Indiana area as the four-county area including Fayette, Randolph,
Union and Wayne counties.
The U.S. Department of Commerce, County Business Patterns of 1980 and 1990 is the data base I selected and it does not include the growth of the public sector job markets. I selected not to look at public sector jobs because
I feel that solid development from the private sectors does a better job of 15 meeting local needs. When including the public sector and looking at the past 30 years, the changes to the Dayton area are even greater. However, with the recent changes in the public sector job market and the down-turn of defense spending, this is a negative growth market and the potential growth is in the private sector. I will not address the private sector changes from the
1960s to 1980s as they have been quite thoroughly covered and evaluated in a study conducted by the Dayton Area Progress Council Task Force in 1987.
The Shift-and-Share Procedure and Analysis
The shift-and-share procedure is relatively simple in its formula and interpretation. For illustration purposes I am using the Dayton MSA manufacturing sector of the major category shift-share analysis of Table 1.
Starting in column two, the employment figure in 1980 is 113,251. The next column is the employment figure for 1990 of 101,645 which when subtracted from the previous column’s figure shows a negative growth of
11,606 as seen in the fourth column. The fifth column is the growth rate for
Dayton in manufacturing over the last decade, in this case, a negative 10.25 percent. In the sixth and seventh columns are the national employment figures for manufacturing in 1980 (21,151,842) and 1990 (19,173,382).
Column eight shows a decline of 1,978,460 jobs for the nation in manufacturing over the past decade with column nine showing the negative Major Category Shift Share Analysis £ ^ l ^ £ V i V S.io cvncp'® U ' :•*:!; ! : * • : : ' LU; sJjm ! 8 - s! gicM'r-iinJQiin^iin-’CMicMitS' UJ! 8i 0,3, 5 -- 0 I J -r- - ! y co O 2:SiQi5S!7ri^iSi!g.Sig!«|3 o a I o); n li|:o ! s^ n i 0 <0 °0 > - i C© ' C ! ™ I ! ™ j t — I j ^ n i ,r Ico!c ^ !jcoS o I c S ! . ^ * r CM Z^Z.'z c cm 4 f 1 i £1 £ , t o 3 * ■ 1 ■ v < m ' f ^ aimm ift i^ ' ^ ' - ^ O C i p i D K D l j O i , i^ I 2 ^ q <0 I m 0 co I co i c o ; to Io> ; to o I i co c co 1| CM CM Ii C*J I fN** i j^v' . * I . oq-> ^ I p I j*. I ^ iO’ itO ^ . C\|I O x C ICO, fx»ICO t COICO m ; ■?“ O 00 w S j E i o l e f o i i CO f f (O O) S( CM■ kJ I P3 ! COI C£I s i S3'5 I «s» ^ 12I ! i ^ j , -sg* J |f ^ i o oo E ; ito CM O ! tD d CM | - | CO i . “ I . 7“ * i • ,|? C\# i O oiS: iiS co ! t- j U S • .P P • P rO 1 ^ lQ S- lQ ' | ^ 1IQ i m %£ 2 : , , ; v! c s{C i T . 1 c v i ! r o ' f ^ : ' ; « ilu; * > ' r - (° j> s . IS;5 I : p N- ;tX I CJ' \a’m :^ico • ° ios‘ ov ! |ov (®S s '!® i^ !©S 'Hr. ‘ iii;®v , ;S!^»w!•^ltDio 5 . o'§'® in : o 1 3 1 COiD Z | •2,^ ^ ! UJ . a £rs D CL cu m ! o cm■; !T : 1 co o Q ^ § UJ * s . .'l l.g o S .^ 0 > i CO' 30 I i ^ |o !! i V I 3!^|^'x9 ^ v3 ^ 9 x ' ^ | ^ ! v3 - l i v l O v , ^ , v S l ^ , :m , m CO cvj m - CM ; co 00 O ,C i n !( o>CD , ,in ,CO i I^ CO ,O w'O’WiSJjlCD'h-'COiSgicniin;^ fNlfSikicviglaS:ss:g O) co cc ; iO X ^ -.’ C O .C O iC O i-o ih -: . 2 • .2 -: ih i-o O iC O .C O C -.’ ^ X iO ;cc 8 I CVI iCMiCVJICOICOCO ^ , , T- ^ Y 1 o ! j UJiCD : g i n c i r ^ ; : p ; : p ; M C i p , j ! i i I' ! , ^ m \ S ' Ico o l ! ! I; IT O ^■ID ■ ‘^ , ISis! S; c o i m i ’• ico;o>!2:i-,in i ; i o . 53 tr\ 8 tM,rv«i it K - 3 C s * cn ■ . rx —... ^ 2 * i : ! CM| pigiraiJSiSi^ kt 8 0-2 cm 0 ' ! CM i !S;s n n i n n i oo; , i ! CM; igjlifS ■!>!■ S : S f i S i ® ; ? . § : S ! j '< _0 ^ s s i o i h - * - o i h io s s ^ S v ! T ! H I! C O t 2 1 O ) ■ m •? ® c: S ^ i o }!i T- S CD I ISS * s j c mj, i ; •w i €4 -- 10I CD' cm ;;ii' !|i®iJ5;aiSiSiS!8lSitiSljSi £;s;sigig'§ CD i CM| = !K|SSiS.!S:!5.S TO '. O I 7- , I : r - ' CO - r : I• ^ '.I , 7- O 0 COI^lO If^ O !C im ; -- o ;c CO v ', - ;j i co to O j i ) -iO iT IjC CO IV co o - > b co > 5 j- ico too 1 o; o i—{— i! cOitn-JZ tn i£c I— , I w , I— - m ‘r- ,CO■ n , - ‘t r | Ik O 011 i co ICVJ CD a>' Siv>m S ?? o> co it 10 0,(8, ! rI * CD -; - S, c m I : LD: ,CO ! ! r - ! f y ! f l O - ,CO 00 ICO ! -;■f»- CO '■ ■ CM• ^LU i C: , CMI CM CO - m CDICO CO ico ur S ,CXI ■ in 1 CsJ co‘ 5 -P— CMCO■: to CO:px CO CO g - o > £ o {/} :o•: o 1 f»*.• m c© • m ■■ CD; I ii - CD r o k ; ! tr ! § 8 1 : 2 '! S ‘ § ! § ; ; ^ : JI, :r- ! S lg iS ilg S !l'| :g ig :g !2 :? ; : 2 ° ■ 1 13i8 S 1 * a !n;5;s:8:^!S!c5 : LU I UJ : 1 ■ ' r*».’ ■' Q , ■ < • co , - :^;>.Z wo wo :^;>.Z E 'J2'' 2 07 J i O) § ZE'> i m CO : a ■5 co r c pj m ‘ O iC *-'in ’ K ; o : G j ; g ; - t , & . i o - o o ■: i ito iin Z - Z : ? = ...... p — ' ^ , d l i o i • Sp. O C i ■ • - ;S cd [ to i cj 1 , ! o ; CM i , OJ ! I; CM r- ! COi CD ,' ^ •C ^ J 11 S • ®; ^ ® ® CT, | C to oiSi«:^ oiSi«:^ r-'K^ISISiS'o^cjiS: - ^ ^ ’ to to ’ ^ ^ - • I —• , X !'S:; ; £ ; £ ; i© ip: im i iLO CMi 0 0 ! 0 0 ! 0 7 4 -t- !T 't t • I «*g- ^ ! I t ' o to ! TO ! IS! oj CVi p 110 ! p CD: : CD p ! m on CM; CO ' ; 'T p ' p ioi o x ! «?y'x’ rn 1 ■ ■OS fx- * I m 5 . > 1 n ‘^ : \ m m : ‘.^± in ,m ^ f S- ! ° - f CD !S- ° ^ wiginioiif-: v S i icn coi S v < g ^ ^ £ . g ‘r-(COi _ i CO_ i CO; i(0 cj i - iCVJ i - i O i i n : A A : ; n J i i O 1 1, co - r i ® i h , • ): a ) 1 p ; ; t o i ( 07t fv.5 : fx.! J j h- r Ij^ ; o 1 :m ]m ! un cj>. a) cj>. !un t ; CM to cm CO iT- CO . cm • CO R O i O ; 1 © I 1 : ; C\l> , CO. !I to : , 0 «q. ; 16 CG i O m \ m >■ Major Category Shift Share Analysis i.lf' O ^ XiS.Sllfl'S O 1 l ? c , T ; g j S 1 3 , ^ . 7 / 1 5 1 7 11? 7 - I ^ 2 ! J U i o SiE 21 j of >icg . 1 ._ !1 :CL; ^ 2 • ^ {A C ; t? i OJ < O ■ S ■ e g ! Cjeg O^ o llo U : v Jr;coio) m^io i.:fe.s.8-: : CD O Sico !h- 3 Z‘§'?; 0 > I • S! • !9 o: ■ ieg 1 ! o : vi, 9R co c •' 9 ! • S j | ; 5 - ; ,|_ . 0 ; I I O i « ! i0s- , so ;e Ic !e o : ;! co eg ■. I^ •it S co ; s: eg cd co " f eg; m 1 r- I ico ftX ftX 8lftl8||8iciSit?:5i®iS. ja ja ' 1 / . pi hl / ' p N* N* g? I $ N , N® N$» I ? 'g * ’ N * N i Sp eg eg h . « Sg»;8;8ia:S!SI:« c|gls!a|^!s;g;~iSi ■ V a ^ ■ 1 CVI a ” '^ u. 5.y d... d... u. 5.y i ICD! ■Sig.J.DC eg [ eg eg CO! t — . ^r r- r r l^ D C O O C M 'C O 'C O ; lX) lX) ; O 'C O 'C 1 e .eg: ’. g eg e ■ o c : m ; eg m co co C'-fO. ' ' •CO'T-.flO-. . cvj ^ c o : ^ ■ 2 ■ ■ ^ 2 :.^ cvj o c i O < ! r>- I1 X^ ‘X Q ,^ SjW j S ,^ Q_i i:, « T-,r- « : 2i£:^,o !5' O : i O ; ! w i2 ^ • j5; t»,CO|g | |fg O ,:C )tT» y < O ;C ijt5 O C • • ^ , ■ 3 • O ' I S 2 ' S ' P i,o : 3 2 ; S ■ 2 ? ; S . : ' CL, ! LU. :' O: • W:>'Z 3 g i-co^-fe^oig'SiSig-o^ivn > w rs 'co « ®!§:| | t Q.2>§!5 LUs !X. ^>ll~. it □ UJ 2 J _ o > , = Q'<'^'X'W, ^,P c : « ! : « 1 I ) 1 !O • CO , £ ! O IO n i , hw '3' . d to! 7 to 1 , ed h !{ w cnj a S i g i ^ i S S i ^ l s S l i S l i ^ i i S . s S . a ? ! OjW !fj 1 ! fvj Icvi CO !CO I j COj W 5 i S 3 ; 0 5 1 I0 ^ 5 ~ ‘S ~~ T.' ^ ^ : sP « « : sP ^ 1os n t w < !C £ IO IT IO !CO 1 £ !- =ll co S i=:lhl 1 1 00 , ; :OJ i -‘ ' (M •■ 1 •: ^ o> Q ’. 1 to ir— — — — ir ‘ — o t Vf D ^ CD ‘ f> 'V .cojgicg'^r:3 g » O c > s^r j ,g ^co j g < g :c - r 1 o i co CVJ! to !c i 1 ! co : CO ICD |2 : j 100 cm . r - > - cm - r . r S i cd S . ' I V i i^ : S I ;I o l CVJ or>iLo -h- s ‘i 00 V? ^ ’ O - ‘vO j ! s SJ 00 | g ;co eg ■ h>» ) - O CO ^ eg m 03 •! co > ICD i : ICVI , . , . $e*i m icvi m Sis COICO 7 & O g o ® , - • in: ! ^ oo ; i«•'§ g 0 1 1 1 :w | !f—. !*T 1 : c oijo co 'M oio);o ;r to; \ m 2 — 1ti T— m , CO I g io> CO Ig go 1 - _ : 4 I ;£| 50 S.'S 129gia'SI® m eg OJ'S S; a O , r- I ; I CO ; ■ • ■ - ■ r CO >r- 0 ^ , ■ r x 1 ^ IOJ i CVJ^ ^ ■ - r - o t ^ : “t ; !os ?- cQ j i S i ui! in: V i 3 £>;2;fe i 1 0 ! m >; i CD; (O ■ ! CM (CO i (CO '® 1 ir>. ;■ 11— ^ ' , CD■ g ie : eg ^ ) ;O , QO : ,. ^ r- ■ : ■■ ■ - r Y 1 ® ® - r i m Si ! ; i 1 ;h«“ j 'CO, 'CO, 1 W I W ^ sj j j s , m qo 05 cd ! ■ 1 1 | £| l | ill ! S!®! !pimi ; ^ ; CVJ ( ^ CVII ;CO i I o i j : | £ J l < o - - • >o!S ! S'O O dso • f—1 o>£*: ^ CCj t ! ! ; ! _ : t : ! | 8 I CO f D O i C j ; S i w - i f u n O ! J T ' r * .?5!inir^iS!r-:fcf05ioo!o « ; r :|sr' (g'to^S isi j fv. r- ! , CCi•; '5!!8!2!$ ;2'” i|.^:*:^iSi§ S m . ^ i s s i a S i s « ! 3 ? : , V i ^ i i^ •m ; 21 i V i I • 3 : c o > g o ; ^:co i-,5Sicg;ffiiT-ig>io 2 5 d j u j u ! : . ! O . O!CJ iT- iCO ! .. CVJ! I -| -| ~ ! ; I ; ; 5 5 e ! V eg ! 12 ;§!«!SlSlS I : • R iw £; f-! R 100 1 ! \m 1 — • “ jS t 0 — !r- !> r ied iCVI ! O i^ 11 \m ^ ^ t I f ) ! h - : CD I r - s :CO - I CD - r !h ) f I C D i ^ i ® I cvii co ® i ^ i D C ^ - i I i i 1 i r-.l^ - ir T .i^ s f • ]a> m $ Simjg j*2 1 - t jt- O C t— tn|Co|S S!S!S m\m\^ k V—» f—' , CO !, T“ r- ’ co c o : co i :r co o c ^ 1 I® 1W > ^ . ■P.. y i ! cy .■ . P ^ 1 f^- 10 W i f 1 - > co jwlSl- p — .r. — ip £ i ! W ^ g I 'o I si^sSi SISIS! *1 ~r~ 1 ;co ; I !®'Sj !«! I co i ; g g ' eg “l^s # 0 i 00 ^r!co» S;g go m i :r- n c cgloo! co co l l ll^ O C v® t -v® o tn ;co CO! ICO r- CVlj »tn00! I i eg i«o| !O !«r! f0> i ■m i ; , . s r OOi CO! eg * 00 d c i ; o 17 ;• ! i * 1 Major Category Shift Share Analysis m §!«!© Si§ig !8 i'S i0 :i03 h- 5 ,P:i'. i s-i ,i s -iiw js S p > I'H1!'! ! 1 1 : 1 1 ! ! ' ! 1 H ' I i > ! O i ' i O 'ic ^' !^ CVJI^m I ^ nin m m 00iS!‘°!2;c3:m 0 1 , 0 1 i® !s b M i ! ! I i i i I ! i ; m *V 5 o !S! M - ,r .CM ,^ 6 ! I !I < l«i i 00I 03! CO,co11-1 in 0; !o> 104; i 03 I 03 ! m PJitMl o> CO CO m 1 03 04 04 I 03 '• !CJ> ! !«EXi ;co i® ■ ; i£ - CM• i ! 1 1 'Is- * 0 xr ID ' , ^ ) O 0 , 00 »q. TO ■ J ■ , • 1 . ! LU * n , I co . th i i® 1 : ^ i o csi c cc! ; j1 » w * e b . CL-j Ovg v 'O jT - • L C yj y : : S|«!K ! : . : . - ;t J ;: £ co . :||S!8 ■ lilin ■ !?? LO!c'5 ■ ! S : v:i§ S) ! S i ! l ° ; Ico i ! i ■ gJcoi o Jic ig L | : ; | LU:i ; ? i Z i Z n i UJ | , CC■ , - ^ g!wiR§|S 0 5 ! O : O ! 5 O cr 81 o: 2 _ i >_ O Zi^'Z'WiD Zi^'Z'WiD d ,'SSlsS ! I 1 s ! Vp» !i v© i ! 1 s? |f^ ‘ ! • ; ! ! ! I ! i j ! mi® O r-I l J?| ? R jJ - llr s IO - .r W CO 04 O 3 f— . Q CO I03 (D l l CO!i 03 h*- r- ®Sir" i !- , !T- iC3:H; : H 3 i C ! i 1 !«lg ^ 04 ^ ! 100 -- o > o i co 1 o> i^ ico ^ rnw- v ■ |tn islSiieislSllsisicviiS! !! n g t n a j 0 1 - I - ) 1 . i ; ',05 !2 ' i a T™’ ^ Sis S a . ^ ^ o>iS;S!®:S;S'm:C 03 n *n | z_» Sf co l l ® | . o! ^ ! o ~T'^ ' T '~ 1 cm I i im 03 05 ! 05 03 vjin coicy CO 1i-im T~ n \P 4!0 lIC 0: ■04 !I 00 IS Ol CO! 00: coir-.iSl 04 * d i a S !; h» 04 2 2 . j o - 3 , CD ! - |OQ G r j i ■ - r n - t r i ) r^-i Io ! Io * P TO l p < !o o) i 5 t n 2 — © ! 1 p j10> ^ I jCO ICO r o l 2 m : (5 ■ (*5 ' : m : m w Sloin-N' w ! ■co : o S { • o fi -a. fw: «--a0. =- := ? :D r- r !o ! s :(D Cf j ;C\f •■ - p ‘ , ; g i : iT_ : h , > • !!f“ CO : 03 - i ; o -c -in I- ■ itO' S' m JZi ^sr■ m > m n ;n ■ ;n in ,o h*- j jy 04 CO h- ^ .|s» T- -T O “ ! ^ | , ' o ■oo O ■ S :TO 5 Y r * 04 04 ■ 04 i cvi ■ • ! • , ; , I fTi . ft ; t f ■ CD 03 ‘ , g "T00 I cs i 8 ■ ^ LO ! m m 00 - ! > i e : , . !X i C! < ' (CO! , X ‘Qc;;i UJ ; O 1 i ! lif^ iCO i ,o .O !O , ~ I< : cc; ^ cc; : i oiS O1 v 4■o ( ’ ■^ ?***“ |■ jv, ' 04 ■ ' ’’ ; oQ ^ «■i(n ^11 O i $!CM 7 T n i S . iT- :7- S , 0 ! « : 2 ; , s o> : . UJ ! « ! cm i ! cm i ,a> « ;!cp _ , : ; 3! ' E : O ' K ^:Q : ^ i co: J I UJ O) 2 q :0 ;O ! :tn ! ;:03 O M 1 O S i r * i . a ™ ;T;C > ™ §lin■|S-i5>:®ilfl.8:2 !S; SiSi” 2 8 i o o i n ^ i i * o — h- c i j co o ■i ooJg i m P i o 5 c i / O i ^ ^ ^ g i ; ^ C ffi;a-z,OT < : X : : < X lico — ^ - ~ ! | ’ 2; 2 1 w i U i T ’ i Q ' ■’“ :CO 1 ■ ;oN N®’ !°;S:oiW 5,f2!!£2:SiOigia!!°;S:oiW ; o ; o U , U co - ; o o o> < g (f) 0 .H S: cm.' : «S 2 .. ,J o H2ia io i . - h ! ; Q co m ISIS! ltfl£l ! j ; !^ :CO Ioo Io :5;2 > ) V CD ! iN- CO I (0 1 CO I(0 55 t t CM , p*-■ £ Sig;5,gi^ to r o 2 ;§I. ; to CO § • ey “ ■ !04 co »“ ; ^ ■i cvi ■ in ^ , 1 |®i 1 ! r ^ - 104 ^ ; ^ 2 oi v»; » jv i co 0 , X _4_ 1 ? ,K V 2 • . CXJ' i 03 00 ! ; : ; ;- i o o c m iC 'P- ! •*■ - 'P - iCO !P . p K ' — - r ' - p i O *? 2 $ j O)! CD® i 00! g m ! r j , ^ ™ S 5 m i ‘ico in in 8 ^ ao : j o ; o § o ^ j i ! c f • O - if SO ; iCD 1 1 “ t (■• 04 •!O) 00 X ' S ^ ! S ! ^ ® ' °? ' S T 0^KlS l K ^ 10 ‘ IT- i O d ‘CO m 04,0cum £ ' m ' )£ d i 8 t - i •co , coto tn;Jr ;J n t r t ;: i 1 :® MSlaicS! ' !,§>: c \ j coI oo ,j g , £i i S i i £ ; ko: o k 3 i g i O ; W ! ® £ . 1 Si! ! it!5 'S eo, o e t- m Oi0 2 ■ i22 iCO00 2 lo ( I CMi !i TT : o i iCSif cj §: § : c%j : iSi? & 03 , y ■ xy tn in l IC0 Ml ®lgj >:TZ\ it- •CM : ; \~~ I ■ cm kt o I oo 04 18 i j Major Category Shift Share Analysis —r— r i— — - t ! (11 : ; a ' ^5: ' ^5: ; a ! " * i I i i ■; I i i 1 i . ''sT D !a O ■3 ic o c > CO © GO ££? ! ;e !CO ;CO ' : iCOCO CO 'GO 3 ' I !00 00 i I CM !e '• © CM “ Q ; CM ' ‘ CVI ' > ICVI ! e CVI la !CM O * CM iQ !! CVI © 'e *T S ' ■ : o: f ! ' s iO ' i i ! ! ' f i iCO ■ « CO iCO I CO ;; : > CO ' 00 ]CO !CO i CO 5 o iGO : (oil jli lii I ! I |0C i LU ■ ;2iS, i i ! 2 i i , O)I , , ; i : i ' ~ \ \ m m m : \ \ m m m 3 \ {..m m im ^ o , o ; o ; o i o ! o ; , o c ! ;o ; O o i ; ! o “ o : o a j ,' o ! o | ! o | o ; o ® «coIi«o o jc ^ ^ i , -*. .o i ^ ., * 0 i- 0 M iC , M jC M IC M iC M !C M iC M !C M !C M ! . ■ jiC e ^ f i ;f^. x h r.co • ; • • ■ ' -'^riJSifSl^lcotwoiLoiioiGo'S* . ■ 5 M M I T !CM ; I - CM05 * r : v® o c io im: m i o t i icm co CO c o . in i co !m :i ■ - : t : in ! m I 1 I !jco h- • h- -7-: CO l P*» Ii CM 04 ! i o c i ; g o j co co j o m coi z: 00 ! ) O M I O C Io ; o 1I* n o o) i !joo r— iicotrs ? * t o i * o t 1 ; 1 ; ( N | - r ; _ *I I ! , !^ ! —* I _ CM! S CO w I CO w CO! i CO t ^ co n m —f— | cmI o) ' \m i ico ; m m 5 5 3 i h - ; o ! ; o - i h i CM 'S ® i II h- COi rrt; t r : r ' J m ? ! oto i»! » i e* ! er* ! i - ! - 7 M- t m T- _ —. 3 . ! O) 1 CO‘ :cm j ; o i ICO! ICO! :^ r • r :^ gj ‘ m ~ 1 I iOC 1 i ® | ® ) ! W > CO >< : ? ’ JI 1 co | ^'00 ! 0 ! / I i g i g i L ® is!* Im I rr» r . ! il'ojB S ^ D ’ ;x : " jCM | " : '■ S CO!CO ' , jz lu sa-2 co ic r 5 : Q uj i O -m £ i O ; z - 1 o ! ieo ICO I 1- - h* 1N-1 h- ! 0 3 - ! i« © r ! © lC ^ i« & C ‘ CSJi ! .T^! ! !CM o e i o i O i O | o l o l O i O ! o ; o ! j ]04 CVIi CVJi ! CNIj CVii CVI . ICO i ' < *■ ! to o ; c © m m O! 00 - r 'O “ t p ' I P i mlc icy ic !cm icm y ic lcm I cm .co | t T— CM 6 - icfli I i j q ! w i n i n i n i n i n i w S n CMl CMl CMl m; im M lC M lC M lC M IC M lC M IC M C 2 I I ;§:« ! t ' i i i io> i ! i ! i ! : * » j pw I ftei, I tf*s» II C OIC T C O I C O ! C O! C O MC IC!NiWlW l W i N I CM! CMICM ! vO \o “Ji \ i1 \U \w o> i 2 c5inl,r 3 i ; I i ! m 1 o o :c ic t i t ico i: co o It !co co m j c » Ip. s ip. jCO ’ p*. i irs. IS|8!8!§i8^i ps. I h» ) > 5 ICO I i :O 05 1 a> IO O) SiSiPllig!?! m i a > ; oi ) : ^ !^ ;o im j o i N ( eNi eN i o'-1 I 1 ! |O 1 i I l ■O*‘ 1 I C iO i iCO | ; j ^ i ; i | j • !O • Z ^ i i iCO J ^ ! ^ ! CM ! | CM I ^ |CM |co ^ CM ICM !CM |S go uj uj 3 ' | j ! 2! ! j | ' 3 x E .2 E 3 x 2 ! *£> m 5 ' % T i rI 'qi»im!w‘lo!S:ai£3iS5:sl I !r ;io 1 lu ^ ; ^ lu s es& > ; m . ! ; ! J ; ; ; , ! UJ ; ; . © ? O ^ m jp ! S £1 C I ICO !TTi o>{ ' i S'* CM; CO j Iv® i 4- -4 y . & ! 1 ; i:o S{ , !X I(& , . « vy.i i 2 j llOi C iO Ih- I - Ih 1 iO C i ! | m ! j I2 CLi i I S S , n *%« ; V'>‘M n . ! i ; ; ; 1 ' ! • S : ^ i ,! g! ^ !« D i CM j w t UJ ! 1 w ^ 1' ! w ® 1{^ w iCM '. CM( CM !Cft ! co ® ! D C ! © i © l ,! co ; i o coc . - - i xc , COiso ;COjCO j tCD ! ly' i ^ io ' y l ' O 'r- 'r- CD - r ' - r ' - T 1 % i n i * m j § ! ^ COICOj m S3 00 N® ~y CD > • ! im I ^ i i^ CM 1 i LO i o r ! o 00 O p^ ' ^ CO ip I S ' n L 100 !}£2 '€0' , - r ! CO; CM 19 Major Category Shift Share Analysis : : : T.. , . T-. i i i; iin m i q ito in t w to i !-to i j n tn ’t g , ’ O) ’ O) ; !O) ! iCD05 W O) CT ii® ■ i o g ‘ i ! : ICO oCJCMI CMi CMl OJCMi i iO M JjC lO M lC M IC M iC M iC IW M olCVJIC : , ^ f ' O C ' O C i O ^ l O t ' O C ' O ■ f ' ““ O C l O C I ^ ^ . ) i Qjcviioaicvi^cviscviicvilcviicviJcvi^i i : < ; d ! ; i i ? " ; :t © o i: Y ^:c ■ : ^ : ^ ! !CO ! -J-• !CO: *7 © ^ I© ffjcOlCO'COlCOiCO'COiCOlCOlCO'CO! lu 2 i — co 2 u l w v i n t t o o l o t lu i n i i E i ^ i L S J j ^ i i :' S; jis ig §> ! ; : : I i 1 ; : i ; I j : ’ 1 : ; ' ! • : o iH c i j cvi I op i ; q o J .Q GIOa i lGOIcO:aO Q.!QO s \ t05 Qi co, §:■; \ ICO ! ■; iUjO . |^^,rg'7- '7 ,r.g ^ | ^ ^ ~ a. o :o o i . m i & : - j£ !CO I i j£ i ; i i i o e ; ! iS I i I to to ; eN 1 i ■ co , ^ ^5—= , I I O l ) O i ® 7 ICO CO |! r cmcm - t h ® ! co V© I^ ! oo o i i Im o>o - h t 5 — 0 1 1 i d I d ' d i 'd I d i d I IO 110! COI IO j #r» iCO ic ic;«-^ i - coi i « m cm; jX S ©’ v© e j X© I , xS x© ’ 105 COi CO! CO( >; °> O (C O !C O !C O IC O iC O IC O C ,w i 1 c i S ; S l j v c ! eN ; i "T o ”T - ^ 1 q ~ r- r > y~ 1 3 0 Q i' ‘ ‘ s ‘ i ‘ i ' i ' <&!<£» to to * ;co i o r** t 00 n !t o it to 0 5 0 & t l I I cs •2 i ^ !i > o • 2 o, lo o i o , o : o : ; m 0 m :■ CO I ! 1 1 ’Hp i t o i u > j n; m a% COICO i ito l I f f i l f f i a "^3" ICM ) i !iO f***» 00 ^ i v u . I GOh- i > ^. w r>.> r^.. 1— 5 O L ' f \ T :T o iinj : ® j n ii ito ! e o! • s yI :p. : : ps. I O ,«Q- I i : ' ! .10 00 \0 ^ ^ 00 t : ! ! : - r ve ;\9 ve . 0 00 0 .in H r f ir— O 5 I ®, i N ' 1 i ? i ICO'. m , 52 0 * (0 co: , « : 1 . ; ; j j j ; j j ; H f. cojo o ic o c iff., i iCD 5 I CO CD I ! ! COCOi ICO CO ;o :o C o t ' - . 3 o ’•: o 1 ' ' d ©■O 't*- 7 ^ ' ^ O ' i ^ ‘ 7 O . ^ f f i ‘ ^ ; § ■ s ' i iTO,>1 -'@x; ox ■ M ox 1 ; m ‘ iC '■ ox I ,(° i 1 ^ ox r ' ! ox ‘ «x ex o n o o : o « . I ; • i • ; r , n i , , , :■ ; ; 1T- T- T- ' ! i (/> ! < ! ;j o i in o n to t to t i ™; n ;t , ™ ■ ! CM1 Q CVI iCM ! CVI i :« is :s |s is ;s ;s ;s 's :j's ‘ • 0 . 0 1 ^ f ;8 T X ; ■ ; 2 :to - 3 ,0 2 1 <33‘ 1 © CM • <0 3 ■ : : ,LU * ■ • • • ■' I S I .SV i Ia"*- I O ,s ^ 1 ,s.'* I s© ' iCD x®' ; O C N©s iy t * ; so O ; C s® | i 0 C i 0 C : 0 ( I O C < 0 ( < ) iCO a CO' ' ; CO iCO :i CO5 iCO :CO S ! : uj i > . ! M i o : ^ r ICO ! r . ' ,h ' to ^ CM : X ! :ff o ID! i M ! V• iS|Si^!Sit ^;i co ! ^ ; 1 CO ; : ^ - ; r J I i LU l i ! ■ 1 n !o C ^ ^ i < C71l Cr>: i i G)CT>! £GO; O G )£ 7 !C > T )'C !G )iO 3 )iC :0 > r iC n lC 1 7 !C 3 < o g to m . o t i o t i m i m i n t i n i i n i t D !1 *? eo ■ ' x > o 5 . 2 m Q lu ; | < ^ ^ CM s k i O v c ; " » r ' ^ - ;r y :r - i, ! v- ! ,o> , O ; i S& O . o tO. J; l o C i D C 1 D O1C ! O O C ' ' CO1 COCO I ! CO CO 1 ! CO CD i CD ICO co i © I w i ® • i I co i® i w © oo i eg i ! o o cd • oo : 1 -«T . c o . to ! c o * *- • •i ^; ois o oi~m , i rvi ii rvi 0 1 0 1 i ; 1 0 to. to:to o ;t o u .■ i o o t !t i o n t i m iS: i S I'sy , T- ■ N ^ cm cm c i l a i S “ 5 ;aj !|cvi iw j ; a ;coto , .22 , 1 to cvj 0 1 0 0 1 0 5 4 0 cm \XT 1 . 0 ( 1 ^ w m l P l X O C 8 r- n n ^ S . g , o , w p , - ,k ;w ^ 1 w ; ! 1 i :J 7 5 1 5 CM 5 5 5 , ^ ^ © © i^f !^r ; ^ ! ^ , ^ ; ^ ; m j 1 1 O CD. O Z * 2 : to i m to < in in 51 5 15 15 5 j o 5 ; S ; £2 1 ’ « g i e I a id id a © i : ,i 1 ------0 2 ■> 92 2 . : :S:sg CD ID W I I 0 to : to , < m, eu O)’T- to : to CO. - !CO ■ r- - r csj ;ry, ; y r , ' fij : CO ■ ' rr O 0 03 if) m CD s- ' , , ‘ III’ O^ ; § • CO ; § CO ; iCO ; CD ICD jCO 'CO ! CO ! CD j £ vi ) JC\j\' d WlWiWiS; S i W i W l W d J N \jjc\J'C VJlC J)C N iv)iC =; . v> i :co oo : co i co I coco i > co co f :co i ' S S O v l O i l O V ' O t ' O I I O t l ^ O t ' O t i ^ • d ’d O C . ^ O . O t ^ i ^ X ‘ b i g 5 ! | l s ? i S , CO< , j < b , c w - S ■^ tO II : iCO• ! T- o>f : I IQ t O £ 3 : t S s! >_ : § o ;o g iCVJif>| JiCM ICVJ:CVJ!O LUiCVJ'CVJ'CVi|CM ^ ; : IO ^ 1 ^ 03 '■ • ; 7 | 3 P m l | O! } O !t lO ! O i|t ’l£ O l l ) f t ; O t l O t to 0 T“ CO 03 TO 10 O s-! !O ! O iCM ! CM ICXI »M I , CMC^J 1 CM ! 2 I I IO tO| IO j oo ico j jooico 1 O i i^T :CO 0 t ! !^T ii to V ] > o OJ 6 s ; 8 : S m M LO CM -> i S : ; 8 i ; I ! ^ ico !CVJ Cvj , . CM C\i i CSJ j 1 ; , : ;CO . (VO o if} 0 t cm 0 — i ^ ; s . iCOjCD;CO!C 1 ‘ i 1 it ! : o a • a a o v •'vPV® « X.® •' 'V© I N® i ■ 1 O1 O O 0 — 5 t's osl v!os l® s lo itf':s® ^ - • CXI ! • ' w 'r- : i r I iR i i i;OJ i ;S R w w 1 . f* * 7 ^ , T- ; T- ; CO ; T- ,! T- to ^ 2!S:^ ‘^; iCV|i<0: ‘ ^ > :^ 2 : ! s ! '•o> o o !c ■c S ;2 : z x :2 S 3 10 —. CD 2 : | ; i i l l | ! l i : l S ! l | | . 1 ; ^ . 3 ■ | O Q 3 . 2! ; f ; § ! g ! '2 (D 05 ! o ! ro 05! o i^T - t i to 5 5 tO-CNJlO) IU) IO I IO > a - - T - t i£) d : g ' . ^ f to iC 1CO1 i ! CT CO 1 ) i ■ O) • cvi: iQ i co - o i o co, 7 4 0 : o c : : ^ to m \ m 4 0 0 j CVI ! |CO lOi'-CJ>! 1 ! ! CO ! s o 1SI© CM 7 I ® ; I® : * ■ - oo 1 1 iCM: , ■0> i ! • O ;CM ! 1 . jr; ! n-J- ! y ^ j ^3 crH 5 | g ^T , f 2 5 5 ; . 1 ; ! 20 Major Category Shift Share Analysis !UJ O i O l O ' O i O ' ! O ’ r ' > i in O in tn r i ‘ i i in m ■ J O m «in i ; £51 m ^ « * 0 ! 0 | 0 ! 0 ; 0 I •53' ! ! I N- ^ I 0 ‘ ^ ID 0 I l 0 i ! 0 : i^miiniiniiniiniiniinliniin'f^ a ' i 1 1 { o ^ ^ : l£L!CVI!CVJ!CM!CMICM!OJ!CMICM ,-^ ® : .-,.-^ n i .-^ s ,-^ n o i ic ico m o i i ic ico m .^ v u i n i i n i m i n t 1 H o ® Q:r-!»:Q.in S n i . Q : » ! - r : Q '® S : O T ; , ? : 3 ; CO e y> “.in r i T r n i r ic ; icm I | in ) CD! I CO! CO! ICO! CM ! ! 0 | — 'r: 'tr & im«Ti \ m 7 CMi i m m ' O N - r , ® ' O : ■ m ^ CO I 441 m cm ) ' O) ! “ i flO i flO *tn. n t * : ^ * l - i^r i CM1 I 1 05 ! co 1 > a w w > t 04 0 ^ ; h- 00 CM, 5 ■ 55 rr% 5 TO' ^ • ^ —: ! ' ■ . iriirtifiI ! 1 i rvii rvti I fvi i l O it - * r - r '. • tO CM *2i W ’ I •1 7” Y :s:££ ^ . X ; : ; CO ! co ico i 3!0| ( l C0! ( ( ( ig .(0 ;(0 i(0 0 !C 0 lC |l0 |(0 0 |C !(0 ;3 * ! iiO) O) * ; E j i m i i I■ ,©x- ^5 e»5 i ^ ^ i ^ i mji! i ; n ii iin i jv !in n i i uj i ^ I 2 , ^ v ^ ^ O p ■ ® 1 'CO > ■0 ■rpj! ; ° ; , ^ ^ m ^ ^ : ^ 05! icvi i ■i ^ i ^ • cq I ^ o g . ; § o i ; i ; i i ;o| ^,C Ikt ic :^* co , S i T . a r - ; r ^ : M ^ - . i!cm 2 t j g I k , " COI J ^ : : ! 2 5 = I;E ; I => 5 2 '!> 5 ljj $ f v- i in D i CD< r w yj' ' 5 1 w 2 < 2 2 ' 2 Cr 2 m ‘ ^ ^ D O ' O i O ® !-' O C l S - t i M C l O 'C j!’- > 8 J. ; ; ; * b UJ.* 8 ^ii-i^rjinimi",!- Micoih-iOiiniSii^ UJ , V 2 , i ; : ; 18 ; 1 O)’ ) IO iC *%T iCM - ;CD ! pw ; ; : c |c ojc oio oa ;iijco coooco o |icoc co 1 o M!MI CM!MiM| € i€\l ;€M M |C i€M !€M M iC M IC ■ !€M eM . r^-, p p*. ^ 1 r CO | ji m Iin;t ,n [J; J [ ■,in ; tn n Ii m ! n ji ;m jin |m m C O i h - ; C M ! 0 0 j ! ^ 0 0 i “ O | 1 ■ 05 C*J ® | O 1 if o 7“ — - ;CM ICM |CM ICM ;CM - ! ' 105 i iCO;c •■; 1- ■O - r : * i co; I CO : - t CD r r 0510510510 CMI CO1 CO7 05 i • m ®!S CO ICO ICO CD XT w 05 0 | :r ,^ i coi • I ! o'*I js$ 0s Is® jco ip«». |5 s i ICO io io O ICO ico I O I O 7 * !CO i S l • n ~ o i in 05 0 CD 0 1 0 1 0 , 0 CO; I 1 ^ N ! - - ; JO I TO ; - >it- I I (00 i Z , i^r ,. ! 1 100 o!c o ojS : !Ii ico jooco co S :o,o,o.o.^ Jh» jfK.! *f*N. t|N» |0> : 1 ; t- n o•l ; 1i• vn l7 - to t > p- f-^ CO{ m COi CO ! CO i I CO ; S 0 ; ^ , o i O ' O i o COICO ; CO ICO ! CM i o | co co m \ m CD M ' CM| 8 CO o 05 ) i I 1051050 tn t — ■ ■ ■ — ■ — — r r co m CD 10 s mr% :co n ii «»-iCO * o c - !CM i - r - T- 5T; COT- 1 T- ■ O)i h- ! 1 i m i ; . oo ioo 1 ro;W:CM : W ; o -r ; rn ■o5; i m \ m n •i fji • in in CD 0 , 0 in 1 : :§ o ic \ co , o>;t ; ; to > o I Z ‘ 2 ; ; 2 ‘ Z I ; I ' CC ! O: lZ ^ ' , ^ r^~ ' CO 0.1 t ^. )^ ; : .• , to 1 ■ ■CM - \m : rn m ■ li UT; 2 n 05 03 . . : . w , .• h- w 'ociK I iuJi^ | ■ ! ‘ ' ; ’ 00I TOI CO . ^ iCD! ! C\J - I. COO » ;~ i Q I CO Q i §’S! I |§ § IS ( 5 1I 05 (3 !!t 05 05 N i N i W j y f i W i ■ J ! r- T- iT" I <5— O ' 0 ) 0 , 0 1 0 ! o t - i 0 - o o o , o rg 2 i . ; O Y“ ICO'CO*1^ ' ! , O C O IC O IC O C O IC O C O iC O iP L iC coi coi o ic o ic o ic o .c o c - ^ i •;2 ;a!‘ ; 8 (T- ; > S2: S . S i l k i I iCM ^ I . j• I ©>• • yj O)1 051 O) ^ X i fDl S IS i § _ E! i£ ??: _0. 0! 0 (0 !0 <0 .0 d_;0 5 p i in in i p uj ICO ® w i ^ i O M .'C C i ';|X -^ ^ r^ r » i o 5 -c M 0 ' *C o a o i > V O^r ! ^ I O ‘2 j ^ ^ ^ J ^ ^ ^ j^ , SX. IJ ps. P^» , D O!C CD CO! CO * CD i : ifMtCMiCMlCMiCMlCMlCMiCM ^'SlSiSlSiSlSlK; h- ih ■s ■CM -!0 CO , , , , ., iT— ■ ., , , , , , , , , , :c o o oi° ‘ 'ico ° ■ - ir ' 1 ' f-|CVj' •*", • o> co ■:co ! m I ^ I C O 1 ' - •t i ( COI CM ( CM , — i < o j “ f 1 : ^ ^ j! ^ C O: | C O | : C O y l .Missis* ! i 05 ! 05 I 05 i!Ii 05 05 05 05 J cm o> i; i is o r>-; ooi V i i l : ; i cocm i : i l i V «q>tsry I c=j! ^ ! «y 1 cr*1 CM SI o>! o>! > io > !o > io > o co i co i co i to i co i i ei 0s ) 0s * I 0 s * ! § < » ico im i im ico » < § ! = IJ n=- I r” ■ —i ■ c o ; i iX i i i t^‘ i ^ i i it^‘^ i i iiX <1 < i 5 QO! W! M|€M | €M ! N I |W W O CO ! O « I ' O I o O 1 io o 0 m i o i o o i i o cm ! c o i ; p c o 1 o o ICOICOICOi |C0 00 o coi , co to i i ( - 05 - i j i p r 'Ki i I * i n i l I c 8 «0 CO oii , coi|j in v m 05 \ 9 j ii , I I COI CO ’ O ! CO ’iO l &+ & t i OiO 7 j (7- — 8 CO rr\ i I 0s- i n I I in lf I 11 !CO i i csj 0 fOi lflO W CO 051 KT '••■g irn^r CO • r- CM __ . S!f2! g! O; cc! si 2 8 tn i ; |io > -r- .«— ! ! ! 105 1 I N» i N» ■ tt ; CO \Q CO «8 VO j - 01 :4} 0 ! I | 21 Major Category Shift Share Analysis ItiiS 121 . I ': j 1iiSi 1 i 2IS2 tjeo e j t i ! l ^ < .> - T ^ l^ CM : 5 :i 0 CM oo ; CM if^- O I UJ ; ; > ^ M i ! cvi to i «r : 2 o io o ia o io O ie o io O ifiiG i ■ {G jCQ Q iO O fC j£O O fG |cO w C i •Sr ; , ; , , . ; ; . ! : 3 '■ . i n i ; n i ! o i ! n i ! n i i n i ': n i ! n v < n t i ■ A j , Q. . 1 : ; !o [Jj!co!e9!eS'e®'6©te&'aO'C©:e©;ej; SlCMiCMiCM'CMiCMiCM uj ; ; o *>; sr ■ !' <0 I <0 CO I o ! i o 00 b ,,, | j 2 5 1 5 uj >i n iin!c *m iin i !i *cn m n ii : in ; ; : ; I j ^ i O l W O c ' j K i D C I ^ :,3s- v®i :,x?,j© ; x® ™'§ O T ° ! ) o l S ' S '.§ i™ c oic oico;c ; o ;c o !c o ;ic co o iiji co coco co c CM|CMiCM!CMICM(CMiCMiCMiCMioO' m CNj!CMI«Ml w 0 . U1 S' - ' 1 S UJ1 ! K 2 . - ; 2 o.ji^iz | E, | o.ji^iz o. -1 I) ! ! !b :b b b t ; o ®: IICO ICO - ! tCO CO <0 j 5T aj;r- ;r j a I^ |r- i - • r - |r - Ir I i^ 0> - t ICOCf) i ) i 1 0 CVJ; - i r ICD ICO oo 01 'T ! CM'T I CO' ; TO O I r^-• CM'h-iCM.CM-CM'O; !O) «m D ici T iC io ■ ; i TOCM ioo cvi i iID 2 c ? ’2 0 ' 5 00 O 0 C ! GO 100!C0 m lOi D iC fltO E §|g!5! glssiss ; r ^ i .in tin co CM i CM » C\J ‘ n * 0 Ia 'O : 'IO as IC :0 !r- i I CD - ! : 05 r - a g OOfOfl : fflO OiflO 'O . ’ ^ T’T 5 11T— f=“ 1 2 • i m i : - 5 i 4 ;I co col i ) 0 cm S i ; :' Olc0ie000l00i00i< |<30 O 0 <® ! i 0 0 i cN •, 0 cN ! 0 • eN l £'- 0 0 0 e i 0 c l cO ( 0 0 l O : • : ^ ir >j i i n i i n i t o n i ' CO! CVI' p^-^'O ^ - ^ ip l O - '^ I V lC J O i T T m i<3- iCO - r O ! O ! O ! O . O ' O : O ! O : !: .'!! ! O O O O O O O O : o o ] o 0 §!§!§!§!§'§!§!§:§ M O j V (M fxt >| - i i n i 11 00 m r ^ i ^ oic I ioo co CD 1 ! CO O i S I I ? |W iS i^ ;^ O ;« v S - S I r iS S !« iS l^ :SO CO S s 3? 0 - 1 O T I* 1 ; 2 CO f-“ j 0 0 T O|i ' T 5 O — i T O 0 0 ' 0 0 i 0 0 1 0 0 i 0 0 i 0 0 ; 0 0 '; 0 0 m w ' oil. %. I f*. |) -» j I ! r :^ i : f : j i I m\ & 03 f-- cm 0 TO an • \£* ^: I i ~ m < ) l\3 ^■ - ■ ^ — 1 i i < g0: iO h- niTO ,g.05:L ; \r^ m CO in t CM CM - 22 23 ratio of 9.35 percent. From this information you can conclude that Dayton is losing employment faster than the nation in manufacturing. At the bottom of columns six, seven, eight and nine are the national figures on total employment for the decade. The totals for the nation in column eight show a growth of 18,683,207 jobs indicating a 24.96 percent national growth rate. The share column (10) shows that if Dayton were to have grown at the national rate it would have experienced an increase of 28,271 jobs in manufacturing based upon the initial endowment of jobs in 1980. This does not mean that Dayton should have increased this number of jobs; it is just an indication of what it would be if it had grown at the national rate known as a benchmark. "If a locality grew at the national average it would have maintained its share of national employment, hence the ’share’ of the shift and share analysis" [Blair, 1991, 186], The mix column (11) looks at the national growth rate and the growth rate of the individual national industries, in our case manufacturing, to see if it is growing faster or slower than the national rate. We know that the growth rate for the nation is 24.96 percent. We also know from earlier investigation that the growth rate for manufacturing on the national level is a negative 9.35 percent which is below the national rate. The mix is saying that with the negative growth of the sector combined with the positive national growth, given our initial endowment of 113,251, Dayton’s manufacturing sector has a 24 loss of 38,864 jobs. That is if Dayton’s manufacturing industries would have grown at the national rate. Again, this is a benchmark. The competitive column (12) is of some significance for it looks at the growth rate of the locality verses that of sector’s national growth rate. So if Dayton would have declined at 9.35 percent (the decline for manufacturing nationwide) instead of the 10.25 percent it would have 1,013 more jobs accounting for the negative number in the competitive column. What this is saying is that Dayton is declining faster than the nation in the area of manufacturing. It is not saying that the area in not conducive to manufacturing or the that it is not a good environment for manufacturing. It is a benchmark that asks a question of those in planning to look into the reason(s) for the decline. It could be that the area had a larger than average base in specific manufacturing industries that were sunset industries-- industries that were in a declining market and were consolidated into smaller operations or simply went out of business. This process is just a benchmark for those in the planning stage to understand what the past looked like and what base they have to build on. It can be a process to evaluate the competitiveness of one area to another for analytical proposes. With the understanding of how to read the shift-and-share tables, the major category analysis needs a little explanation. The breakdown of employment is by industry and are consolidated for reason of simplicity. The major categories contain the total employment for each industry in the locality, 25 whereas the subcategories totals do not always do so for reasons of disclosure. For example, looking at Dayton’s first combined industry of agriculture-forestry-fishery (AG/FOR/FISH) it shows an employment growth of 941. As will be seen later with the break down into the first stage subcategory the growth will not be reflective in the presentation because of the number of firms and employment totals are closely aligned. For disclosure reason an alpha character is used to give approximate size and numbers in this classification. The growth occurred in the area of landscape and horticultural services, the boom is mowing lawns. It is for this reason that the major category is selected for first stage analysis and comparative advantage or competitiveness. Table 2 Dayton Shift-Share Analysis DAYTON MSA i EMPLOY 80 1 EMPLOY 90 : GROWTH < RATE I US EMP 80 1 US EMP 90 ! GROWTH ! RATE I SHARE: MIX 1 COMfCTTWC AG/FOR/FISHl 942 1883 941 | 99 89% ! 289843 ': 531010 |1 241167 ! 83.21%) 235 ' 549 ; 157 MINING j 511 i 348 ; -163 : -31 90% : 996007 i 723190 i' -272817 i-27.39%! 128 ; -268 ! -23 CONST. 14651 ; 17112 ! 2461 ; 16.80% 1 4473561 1i 6290387 !i 816816 1 18.26% | 3657 i -982 ; -214 MANUF. 113251 j 101 645 i -1 1 6 0 6 -1 0 26% I 2 1 1 5 1 8 4 2 j 19 1 7 3 3 8 2 -197841® I-9.35% I 28271 ; -3 8 8 6 4 i -101c TRAMS/UTL 13555 !, 16047 ; 2492 •[ 18 38% i 4631152 5591848 960696 ! 20.74% !. 3384 ! -572 1 -320 WHSALE 16945 ;* 20438 1 3493 j 20.61% | 5215520 6327616 1112096 ! 21 32%! 4230 > -617 : -120 RETAIL 68954 ! 82914 i 13960 ! 20 25% I 15045287 19815054 4769767 ! 31 70% i 17213 1 4647 -7900 FIRE 16427 ' 16816 ; 389 ! 2.37% ! 5278404 6956484 1678080 I 31 79% I 4101 1122 ! -4833 l -1U03 SERVICES ; 79123 i 121418 ! 42295 I 53.45% I 17195327 I 28800088 11604761 j 67.49% I 19751 : 33647 UNOASSFiee 1877 | 542 ! -1235 ’ -65 80% | 558592 318348 -240244 I -43 01% I 469 i -1276 i -428 TOTAL 326238 j 379263 I 53027 | 16.25% i 74844160 5352738? 18883287 j 24.SSX ) 81438 ! -2613 i -25798 Here is the Dayton MSA’s total look (Table 2-Dayton Shift-Share Analysis). In getting familiar with the table, column 5 rate is the growth rate 26 for the Dayton community by industry classification. Column 4 is the total growth in employment for Dayton by industry in the private sector. At the bottom of columns four and five are the total growth and rate for the Dayton MSA which is 53,027 increasing 16.25 percent. The total growth in Services is 42,295 increasing at 53.45 percent. Mining growth is down 163 jobs decreasing 31.90 percent. The nation’s total growth is in column 8 and the rate of growth is shown in column 9 by industry sector in the private enterprise. At the bottom is the totals for the nation in growth of 18,683,207 jobs with a rate of 24.96 percent. The Service sector grew 11,604,761 jobs, an increase of 67.49 percent. The manufacturing sector lost 1,978,460 jobs, deceasing 9.35 percent. The share, mix and competitive is taking the nation’s total growth and comparing them with the local industry. The share is the measure of what local industry growth would be at the nation’s total growth rate of 24.96 percent. Manufacturing would have grown by 28,271 jobs while Service would have only increased by 19,751 jobs. The mix is the check on what the industry sectors’ growth rates are verses the national rate measuring the rate of change faster than or slower than 24.96 percent. In the manufacturing sector, growth is 35 percent below the national rate so we would expected to be down 33,864 jobs. In fact, Dayton has a lower growth rate than the national sector’s rate resulting in an 27 additional 1,013 jobs lost as indicated by the competitive column. Services sector growth would have generated 33,647 jobs in addition to the share growth for Dayton. However, our Service industries grew at 53.45 percent while the sector growth was 67.49 percent and the growth rate is down 11,103 jobs. This says we are growing slower. Taking a look at the Dayton’s major category (Table 1) the first item to point out is the total growth for the decade was 53,027 at the ratio of 16.25 percent. This is below the national average of 24.96 percent but, it is a benchmark item for comparison. There is nothing in the analysis that says an area must grow at the national rates to be effective. The second area is the competitive column. Dayton has only one area in which it seems to have an advantage and that is in the first category (AG/FOR/FISH) with its positive relationship. The rest of the industries show that the area is growing slower or declining faster than the national industry rates. There are generally major disparities to look for. For example, "FIRE" (Finance-Insurance-Real Estate) which shows a growth of 2.37 percent while the national industry grew at 31.79 percent which means Dayton is down 4,833 jobs. This may be a point of concern and maybe call for further investigation by the Dayton community. Looking at the competitive and mix components for the fastest growing industries, three stick out: retail, FIRE and services. Dayton shows growth in these areas but from 10 to 30 percent lower than the national averages 28 depending on which industry. This may be the growth areas for the future. The rest of the industries are reflective of the national growth patterns plus or minus a few percent. Finally, one could conclude that Dayton’s strength rests in the service industry with support in the wholesale and retail areas. Dayton’s weakness is in the manufacturing and FIRE sectors. Mining and unclassified have the lowest growth rates; therefore, they are the real weakness. I selected manufacturing and FIRE because these sectors have a large population and very poor growth in comparison to the national growth trends. Comparative Analysis After evaluating Dayton, the 90-minute land market entered the thought process as to how the major cities in the area compared. The major benchmark to notice is the total percentage growth for Cincinnati (26.72), Columbus (35.86) and Indianapolis (32.33) were all larger than the national average. Their growth was between 10 percent and 20 percent higher than Dayton’s. In fact, while looking at Ft. Wayne and Northern SA, the counties surrounding Dayton, they also have larger growth rates. This is interesting with Ft.Wayne loosing a truck assembly, Navistar, plant to Springfield in the last decade. The Northern Statistical Area has been assessed as a basically agricultural region. Dayton did have a larger growth rate than Lima, Richmond and Muncie. An interesting fact is that all areas combined have 29 positive growth rates giving the region a 27.21 growth rate, which is better than the nation’s. For the rest of the analysis it is broken into sections or industry growth groups for better comparison. Each industry is taken and the growth of each statistical area is compared to Dayton. (See Table 1 column 1 for industry.) A. The first industry grouping of AG/FOR/FISH and the second MINING seems to be very limited for growth in large numbers of actual jobs. For all the of areas in this study, the growth rate in agriculture is extremely high and it is reflective of the national growth rate of 83.21 percent and then some. My investigation to explain the growth in this area was limited to the state of Ohio and the employment service department. It appears the boom is in providing lawn care services and to a lesser extent pet care services. As for the mining industry, in this region, growth follows the veins of sand and gravel deposits. In fact the mining industry is in decline throughout the nation at 27.39 percent. For the most part it is reflective of the areas under study. B. In the evaluation of the construction industry, there are some interesting observations to be made. First is the national growth rate which is 18.26 percent with Dayton’s rate at 16.8 percent and a negative competitive rating of 214. Next is the growth rate of the three major cities around Dayton with considerably higher rates and positive competitive ratings. Columbus is the lower of the three at 29.95 percent with Cincinnati at 42.57 percent and 30 Indianapolis has a 49.57 percent growth rate in construction. The interesting thing is that their total growth is larger than the national average. The lowest growth rates in construction are Richmond with a negative 18.83 percent, Lima with a negative 3.26 percent and Muncie with a 1.68 percent. Their overall growth rates are the lowest in the region. This suggests a pattern that total growth of an area impacts this industry. As a base for development, the construction industry requires investment money and this suggest it is a lagging indicator of the area’s growth. To support this thought the exception is the Northern SA. It is growing at 10 percent in construction with total growth of 23 percent. The national growth rate for construction is 18.26 percent with Dayton’s rate at 16.8 percent and a total growth rate of 16.25. This may be an area for investigation to see if other areas have the same indicators. C. Manufacturing is another interesting area and the comparison of this study’s cities with Dayton has what may be some strong points. This industry has nationally declined 9.35 percent. Dayton is declining at 10.25 percent with Indianapolis dropping 15.39 percent, Columbus down 15.84 percent and Cincinnati at 11.38 percent. With the recent events in the defense spending, the impact on Cincinnati may alter the figure radically. The lowest readings come from Richmond at 27.31 percent, not surprising with the loss of the school bus plant. Next was Muncie down 19.23 percent and Lima (home of the M-1 tank) ahead of Dayton at negative 8.74 percent. 31 The only area to show growth is the Northern SA with a positive 14.38. This growth came from four manufacturing operations food, lumber and wood, latex and plastics, and fabricated metal. There are new entries from electronic and electric equipment, Transportation Equipment and 14 unclassified industries. Dayton, on the other hand, is doing well in Latex and Plastics, Instruments, Furniture and real poorly in unclassified operations. [Attachment 1, Manufacturing Tables.] D. Transportation and Utilities is one area in which Dayton shows a growth, although at 18.38 percent it is well below that of Indianapolis (47.65), Columbus (38.86) and Cincinnati (30.15). However, the national growth is 20.74 percent. The competitive components for trucking and warehousing, air transportation, and transportation services suggests that Dayton has an advantage in these areas. These areas are also strong for the other three major cities in this region. [Attachment 1, Transportation - Utilities Tables.] I would point out that trucking and warehousing in the other major cities in Ohio are below Dayton’s growth of 24.19 percent with Cincinnati showing 5.78 percent and Columbus with 17.54 percent both below the national rate of 22.92 percent. I would point out that the growth rates in Indiana are very strong in the trucking and warehousing area. Air transportation is very strong in this region which is not a surprise nor is the growth in transportation services. Both are above the national growth rates for the region as a whole. Dayton is not doing well in the area of communication, which is surprising, with a negative growth of 13.31 percent while the national rate is declining at 3.26 percent. Cincinnati, Columbus, Indianapolis, Fort Wayne and Lima all have positive growth rate in communications. One last noticeable area in this classification is commercial bus service. It has a national growth rate of 24.69 percent and this region is almost void of growth. Columbus, Muncie and Richmond have positive growth and the rest are negative. Dayton, Indianapolis and Lima were closed out in this industry. E. In the wholesale and retail industries there are no surprises for Dayton. Wholesale growth for the nation is 21.32 percent with Dayton a little short with 20.61. The competitive advantage goes to Columbus, Cincinnati and Richmond with all having larger positive growth rates than the national average. All the rest have growth rates slower than the national average with the Northern SA having the only negative growth rate. Retail growth for the nation is 31.79 percent and Dayton is setting at 20.25 percent. The competitive advantage in retail goes to Cincinnati, Indianapolis, Northern SA with Columbus showing the largest gain. All the areas in the region show positive growth. This is an area in which I feel the numbers are volatile because rapid changes in the past two years are not reflective of the area growth. I would point out that in the last year the growth in retail with major chain developments indicates that this is an area for further study. I would point to Columbus’s growth in retail and the new 33 downtown shopping center as an example to study including the small specialty shops. Dayton’s one competitive advantage in retail is apparel shops. F. Finance-Insurance-Real Estate on the national scale is growing at 31.7 percent while Dayton is only 2.37 percent. An interesting observation when comparing the competitive advantage is that in FIRE only Columbus and Indianapolis have the advantage. These are the highest total growth areas in the study. On the national level, there are two categories under FIRE that show rapid growth. [Attachment 1, FIRE Tables]. The security and commodity industry is showing a 91.31 percent growth and the holding and investment industry is growing at 92.75 percent. I point these out because I think they are essential to the growth of an area. For Dayton, the security and commodity industry shows a 115.30 percent growth rate and the holding and investment industry has closed down. The latter, I believe, is the area that supplies the money for new enterprise development. This is the start-up and venture capital money for advanced technology and technology transfer applications. G. The service sector industries have the highest combined growth rate of the study with a national rate of 67.49 percent. Dayton’s growth rate is 53.45 percent which is 11,103 jobs short of the sector’s growth. The competitive advantage is with Columbus, Indianapolis, Richmond and the Northern SA with all areas in the study with aservice sector growth above 50 34 percent. Dayton has a competitive advantage in miscellaneous repair, motion picture, educational services, and engineering services [Attachment 1, Service Tables]. There are three areas of concern for Dayton with lagging growth in lodging, personal services and recreational services. For building purposes, however, the 23.15 growth in engineering services with the nation’s growth of 7.43 percent is no surprise. This is only reinforcement for planning purposes. The 45.78 percent in educational services is only slightly better than the nation’s 42.43 percent and a small but strong indicator of the area’s training capacity. I believe a stronger signal is needed in the area of advanced degrees for the professional areas in engineering and science. H. The last classification--Unclassified--shows a decrease of 43.01 percent on the national level with Dayton falling at 65.8 percent. The competitive advantage goes to Cincinnati, Columbus, Indianapolis and Fort Wayne with Cincinnati having the only positive growth in the region. The rest are declining faster than the nation which signals to me the lack of new industry growth. This may be the area that saves Cincinnati in the next decade. This is an area in which I would like to expand the investigation locality. 35 Dayton Record is Poor The Dayton area shift and share analysis is a tool that may provide area planners help in restoration of the area. It is a tool subject to misuse and abuse. The shift and share analysis simply says that the growth of the industries in each sector is compared to the growth of the nation. This study tried to take it one step further by comparing the growth of the surrounding areas with that of Dayton. The study only looked at the private sector growth for all of the areas taking a leap of faith that this must be the sector that provides long-term growth for Dayton. The indications are that Dayton is not meeting the regional growth potential in the private sectors. The regional growth is the average growth for this study. The regional total growth rate is 27 percent and Dayton is 11 percent behind with 16 percent. Dayton has one competitive advantage over the nation’s industrial growth rate in AG/FOR/FISH and for the region it ranks seventh. Dayton does have a comparative advantage in manufacturing over Cincinnati, Columbus and Indianapolis yet, ranks 4th in the region. By all indications, Dayton’s growth in the private sectors is behind that of it major competitors-Cincinnati, Columbus and Indianapolis. This study falls short in the detailed analysis of individual sectors that may provide more insight to the competitiveness of the Dayton area. Several presentations in this area are possible and should be made for the planners of the Dayton community. I will suggest that the studies be conducted by the 36 local universities as a matter of building a binding relationship for extended growth opportunities. BBS. Needs of the Dayton Community Introduction One cannot work on a project of this nature and not learn a great deal about what it takes to establish a plan for economic development. There are programs that have succeeded in the revitalization of cities and regions by providing a variety of business with programmed assistance. They have a strong focused group of leaders from both the public sector and the private sector. They achieve economic development through a high level of community involvement from the private sector to stimulate growth. These successful communities write about their achievements offering a contact point to those who want information. They track each potential development inquiry offering assistance in the planning process. They help the new enterprises and the established firms meet the challenges of business development. It is a business created to get information out and bridge the knots in the development process. To meet the needs of a challenged community it takes the combined efforts of the private sector, the local universities14 and the public sectors supporting each other. This coming together is a task. Dayton has started this process several time only to fall short each time. They ask for the university communities’ support in the development efforts of the community then hire outside sources to develop the ideas. This dees not create a 37 focused effort on the solutions for the area. It is difficult to work on a project that lacks a central focus from the public or private sectors. The co-operative effort of all the local universities makes a unified front for development. This seems to be a central issue in the rapid turn around for Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, Corning, New York, Austin, Texas and other cities. The universities are not without fault. They fail to support each other for the good of the community. Often they are not timely in publishing reports for the business community: six months to a year lag is not good business. A word in their defense is that it is difficult to make a six months study with a two month budget while watching the big contracts go elsewhere. After years of planning and hard work to unite our universities’ educational programs in engineering, the Dayton community15 received a set back from the Board of Regents in June. They tabled this project so that they could evaluate the state’s education system to see if the program is needed or if the area’s advanced engineering programs already in place are meeting our needs. This is insinuating that the Dayton community is not able to evaluate its own needs. The reaction from this community should have rocked the state houses from all segments of this community. All public and private leaders should have made it known that this action may retard the growth of this community. This community needs to increase the amount of funds going through these universities for research and development. It is research that attracts the new 38 39 industries that drives development. This action by the state negates the hours of study and investment of time and money to address the competitive needs of the Dayton region. The boundaries of Dayton region is another issue. I contend that the borders do not stop at the metropolitan statistical area of Montgomery, Green, Clark and Miami counties. The Dayton community needs to encourage the support of adjoining areas to bolster economic development in the area. It takes only a glance at the northern statistical area shift and share analysis to prove that we need each other. We must convince them that it is to their advantage to use us for their growth and we, in turn, will benefit from their growth.16 Dayton’s Strengths This area was known for its strong manufacturing background in the private sector while enjoying gains from the strong ties with the defense and energy departments that together promoted long-term growth. Dayton still has some strong associations in manufacturing with metal fabrication, machinery, instruments, furniture and the rapid growth of the latex and plastics industries. This is a good base on which to build. It can be expanded in the area of electronics to tie into the defense technology transfer programs with university support. The last decade saw a 59.17 percent decline in Dayton’s Electric and Electronic Equipment manufacturing base. 40 The question that needs to be asked now is how would a stronger educational system impact this area? Dayton has strong links to engineering and this service industry is growing at a rate three times faster (23.15 percent) than the national rate of 7.43 percent. This is better than Cincinnati, Columbus or Indianapolis. They all have considerably slower growth in engineering services yet they enjoy better success in the electronics arena. This addresses the issue of the advanced degrees in engineering, because these areas have schools that supply that need. In the communications industry, Dayton is retreating faster than the national average while around them there is positive growth. The national growth rate is a negative 3.26 percent. Dayton’s growth in communications is a negative 13.63 percent while Cincinnati, Columbus and Indianapolis all have a comparative advantage with positive growth rates. We should be able to feed from their strengths. Dayton is the center of the 90-minute land market. The next area of interest, for many reasons, is the growth in the area surrounding Dayton. The growth of the hinterland is faster than Dayton. What services can Dayton supply to help that area grow yet benefit from that growth? Dayton has the competitive advantage in trucking and warehousing and public transportation. All of the service sector industries could have an impact in this arena. Dayton can be a center for capital formation and investment capital. 41 The growth in the hinterland’s manufacturing is stronger than Dayton’s in metal fabrication, electronics, transportation equipment, plastics and miscellaneous industries. Dayton has absolute advantage in the construction industries that can supply assistance to the hinterland. This may speak to the issue of the lag in construction with the rapid growth in the hinterland. The statistical area for Columbus, Cincinnati and Indianapolis is at least 6 to 10 counties in size and I suggest that the Dayton planning community should think on that level. The expansion up the I-75 corridor is not an uncontested Dayton expansion region.17 This by itself may have an impact for the immediate Downtown Dayton Area. By supplying what they need in terms of development assistance, we help them grow. For example, in the past year Darke County has gone to Miami and Ohio State Universities for development assistance. It has happened more than once, and in many other areas, and the Dayton area is passed by. The final ingredient is available and in place. It is an abundance of leadership. I believe that a successful strategy can be learned and repeated. We have some of the best business people in the country here that meet this competitive challenge every day. We have the support of the defense department with both money and talent. We need to develop a strong voice in the state that will enhance our economic development. The chamber of commerce has a strong voice but a combination of all of the local chamber units will be stronger. We need a focus. 42 Proposal Dayton needs a goal that everybody can accept and focus on. The Board of Regents need to resolve the advanced engineering degree issue. I have two strong reasons for selecting this issue. First, it will generate tremendous goodwill in the university community without costing a dime in the beginning. Second, it will establish an attainable goal that can be resolved in a relatively short period of time. The third reason is that the Dayton community needs the focus, an attainable goal and the degree. I also picked it because a focused effort will succeed. In 1986 Dayton, Louisville, Kentucky and a city in New Jersey were candidates for a headquarters facility for the Presbyterian Church Council. The search committee selected the city in New Jersey as its choice for the facility. This so angered the community in Louisville that when the national council met for the yearly meeting they began a blitz campaign against the selection committee’s decision. The national conference was being held in Louisville and the community hit them with everything they could muster. The governor came in to press the issue, a high ranking catholic bishop made an appeal and needless to say the united front of the community paid off. The council reversed the decision of the search committee and Louisville became the regional center for the Presbyterian church. My strategy is three pronged and relentless. It needs to be played on all fronts simultaneously. The Dayton Area Chamber needs to act as the 43 Miami Valley Chamber of Commerce gathering other area chambers of commerce including those in the hinterland to gain support. The main front has to come from the private sector business community. The flank attack has to come from the government sector with all the area leaders hitting the issue at every step. The final assault will come from th-j education community showing how this will have a negative impact on the development of the area. The slowing growth not only affects the immediate area but with the defense closures there will be far more reaching impact that will include the hinterland. We can point to the need for the strong ties between development and the universities. Universities supply talent that has the skills necessary for new product development. We can use the slow growth of the Dayton MSA as an indicator that we are behind the eight ball with a troubled economy. This may be the tie that binds the group together. Development Strategy The Dayton Area Chamber has to take the lead in becoming the Miami Valley Chamber of Commerce. The Dayton Downtown Partnership (DDP) could become the research arm for the Miami Valley Chamber of Commerce and the start of the Community Development Council (CDC). I would point out that the DDP has several of the ingredients for a CDC. Its formation is the results of private enterprise and public concern for economic 44 development. It has the support of the central business district and a board of private and public leaders. The DDP has a staff which could easily be adopted to be the central CDC. Each chamber will have a CDC that will feed the central unit for tracking purposes which will become the central point of contact for the region. The universities tie into this network by supplying the needed assistance for problem solving, research assistance, marketing surveys and most importantly tracking the projects of all CDCs. Through this mechanism we offer this service to the area chamber units and the business community at large, especially the hinterlands. This makes the voice of the area larger than the MSA, and hopefully it will pick up the support for the frontal attack. This second issue is very important. The private sector business community must assemble a united front in public and in private to register their strongest protest to the state government officials. It is to Dayton’s benefit that the areas growth rate continues to rise and the training level of available workers meet the needs. There must be a commitment from the business community to support the CDC. The public sector must also provide a united front. It would be beneficial if the major players from each of the towns, cities and counties would have a conference on the establishment of some type of Economic Development Council to over see the research assistance for the region, and 45 to include all the major players of the public research facilities; again issuing their support to the CDC. If you can get this accomplished, you win regardless of the state’s response. You have built a network to address the needs of the region. You have publicly established a central point that can handle any inquiry as to economic development issues. You have established binding ties to the hinterland with the offer of guaranteed assistance. I will wager that if you go after the educational issue as a sound business decision the area can win. I would use the current R&D expenditure from the Base, OATC, universities, the Edison Projects and private industry in the Dayton region. I would use the DESC, Mound Labs and the Base engineering population along with the private sector as a unit for the need of the advanced degree, knowing that AFIT was part of the proposal. The use of the Mound Labs may be useful for research because it could supply jobs to clean up the job site. How many jobs will it take to dispose of the hazardous waste? There may be a chance for industry development in clean up operation for international use. We should pressure the department of energy for the labs inclusion as part of the educational package. We should request that all of the present equipment and staff be transferred to the universities while the energy department maintain the budget for the next three to five years. We need this time to study the decaying process and to start research for alternate sources 46 of fuel and all types of waste disposal. The investigation should include alternative methods of reducing all varieties of human waste. CDC Responsibilities and Conclusion The CDC has the responsibility for providing assistance in the search for financing business opportunities plus also offering t le many services of business development issues. They are a source of funding for start-up and first stage development. The greater the success of the regional economy the stronger the Revolving Loan Fund (RLF) is. I believe it is essential for successful development that the CDC and the RLF maintain a high degree of independence from government restrictions and in the hands of private development. Knowing that, the product innovation development cycle is extremely risky. From innovation to commercial success there is about an eight percent survival rate in new product development. Demand that the CDC have established procedures and controls on the funding of new developments. The venture capitalist and normal commercial banks do not fund seed, start up, first and very few second stage development projects. There are some indicators that show the success rate of the CDC’s RLF sponsored business enterprise have higher success rates than that of any sponsored government agency. In part because the CDC is part of the community and local leaders are involved. 47 My hunch is that the stronger and more frequent use of the university system for development stages, along with the strong influence of the business community, the development process become systematic. I am not saying they are able to pick the winner from the loser in projects at the entry window. I am saying that projects may be able to move more quickly through the development process to the point where commercial interest takes over because of the concentrated assistance. When a project’s development shows it has commercial possibilities, the venture capitalist banks know that the market research, second and third stage product development revision have been done and the business data is available. In cases where it is a small business venture, the reputation of the CDC is at stake. Therefore, the well organized unit has prepared the prospect for this move. In regions like Dayton there is a central CDC and smaller district CDCs throughout the region. The Central Unit has a board made up of the leadership from the region with a strong influence from the private sector. The internal structure is not unlike that of a business with sections to handle the different functions of the CDC. The local CDCs are administered by its local leadership and they are diverse in nature-some do residential business; others, small commercial business, and the central unit handles relocations and expansions. I can see the need for the City of Dayton to have four satellite CDC’s and the central unit. As for the other chamber units outside of 48 Montgomery County should have a central unit plus. However, this area needs more study for an organizational structure for the Miami Valley Chamber. I am slightly familiar with the Minneapolis-St. Paul complex from a visit and inquiries. This unit had three infusions of funds intc the RLF before becoming independent. The printed material on the Pittsburgh High Technology Council had one infusion. The RLFs are managed much like a bank, it is often the members of the banking community that oversee this operation. I am sure that there is a network of white knights and angels in the network to provide additional financial assistance. Almost all of the CDCs have local access to venture capital funds, some bein-2 from the local industrial corporations. Dayton does not have a formal venture capital fund or market. But, I do not know that they need one from the shift-share analysis. There are many holes in this project that need filled in as the program progresses. However, it is a suggested start. It shows that Dayton does have strengths from which to build. It has the leadership to develop a program in place. Should the focus come arid the riefwork be built, it will be worth watching. It will be an education in economic development that will have the local universities writing and teaching for many years. The greatest benefit will be the enhanced living conditions and economic stability the development will bring to the whole community. That is the objective of economic development. 49 Footnotes 1. Blair, John P., Urban and Regional Economics. Homewood, IL: Irwin, 1991, p. 219. 2. Barbash, Mark. "Emerging Trends and Opportunities in Economic Development Financing," Economic Development Review. Vol. 10, NO. 2, Spring 1992, p. 5. 3. Kolesan, John M. "The Use of Banking Financing for Economic Development," Financing Economics Development, edited by Richard D. Bingham, Edward W. Hill and Sammis B. White. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications, 1990, p. 245. 4. Ibid., p. 248. 5. Ibid., p. 247. 6. Barrett, Katherine, and Richard Greene. "Focus on the Best," Financial World. March 2, 1993, p. 52. 7. Walker, J. Christopher. "Revolving Funds for Economic Development," Financing Economic Development, edited by Richard D. Bingham, Edward W. Hill and Sammis B. White. Newbury Park, CA: Sage, 1990, p. 177. 8. Chell, Michael A. "Economic Development Administration Revolving Loan Funds," Economic Development. Vol. 10, No. 2, Spring 1992, p. 31. 9. Wiewel, Win and Jeff Weintraub. "Community Development Corporations as a Tool for Economic Development Financing," Financing Economic Development, edited by Richard D. Bingham, Edward W. Hill and Sammis White. Newbury Park, CA: Sage, 1990, p. 161. 10. I have taken a leap of faith in reaching this conclusion from reviewing the material I received from the thirty-six chambers of commerce and the economic development councils/commissions and telephone conversations with members of their governments. In the Minneapolis area, I had a relative inquire about establishing a new business in the area. The purpose was to find out what assistance is available for finance, marketing and location. The most interesting aspect was that without regard to where the process was started, the ending was with a 50 single office. The different local governmental agencies were contacted as well as the chamber, collages/university and private developers all strongly suggested we first contact the office of Economic Development a the chamber as the starting point. 11. It was by design of the six communities program structure that universities were not needed. In four cases, the sole purpose was to save the jobs by supplying funds for a leverage buyout and save the factory. Shares were sold to community members and the pay back came between six and twelve years. In the other two cases, the program was a package deal from two different large corporations, 3M and Control Data. 12. In the rest of this article, I will use Dayton in referring to the Dayton- Springfield MSA. 13. Reference for the Dayton Development Council, Regional Profile pamphlet of 1992 from the Dayton Chamber of Commerce, "90-Minute Market," pages 8 and 9. 14. When using the term "universities," I am including all the area colleges and universities in the MSA and the hinterlands. They all contribute to the development process by serving the local CDCs and participating in the regional planning. 15. This is in reference to the 1987 study of the Dayton metropolitan area requirements for improving economic growth with the subsequent development of Challenge 95, Vision 2000 and other projects developed to retain and promote growth in the Dayton community. 16. This is in reference to the impact study of the Philadelphia Federal Reserve on the city and suburban growth and the relationship between them. It basically says that as the central city declines there is support that shows a decline in suburbanian growth. 17. In the formation of the statistical areas, the purpose was to show the growth in the area surrounding Dayton. The influence of Ft. Wayne does not end at the Indiana border as it does in this study. Its influence comes into Ohio to the I-75 corridor and south to somewhere around Sidney I would expect. Lima does not have as much success. This would make a good study to find the limits of Dayton’s influence before and after establishment of a central unit. 51 Reference Altman, Frank and Charles A. Malkerson. "Creating Secondary Market for Existing Development Loans: The Community Reinvestment Fund," Economic Development Review, Vol. 10, No. 2., Spring 1992. Barbash, Mark., "Emerging Trends and Opportunities in Economic Development Financing," Economic Development Review. Vol. 10, No, 2., Spring 1992. Barrett, Kathleen and Richard Greene, "Focus on the Best," Finance World. March 2, 1993, pp. 36-60. Bemis, James R., "Access to and Availability of Project Financing," Economic Development Review. Vol. 10, No. 2., Spring 1992. Bingham, Richard D., Edward W. Hill and Sammis B. White, edited by, Financing Economic Development: An Institutional Response. Newbury Park, CA: Sage, 1990. Blair, John P. Urban and Regional Economics. Homewood, IL: Inwin, 1991. Blair, John P. and Keith Ewald, ed. Manufacturing Development Policy: Economic Restructuring in Ohio. Dayton, Ohio: The Wright State University Press, 1991. Blair, John P. and Robert Premus, Community Factors Evaluation. Dayton, Ohio: The Dayton Area Progress Council Task Force on Economy and Statistics and Wright State University, October 1, 1987 Chell, Michael A., "Economic Development Administration Revolving Loan Funds," Economic Development Review. Vol. 10, No. 2., Spring 1992. Cooper, Arnold C., "Spin-offs and Technical Entrepreneurship.", IEEE Transactions On Engineering Management. Vol. EM-18, No.1, February 1971. Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia, City and Suburban Growth: Substitutes or Complements?, by Richard Voith, Business Review, Philadelphia, September-October 1992, pp. 21-33. "Hot Spots: America’s New Growth Regions are blossoming Despite the Slump," Business Week. October 19,1992, pp. 80-88. 52 Lenzi, Raymond C., "Nontraditional Sources of Economic Development Financing," Economic Development Review. Vol. 10, No. 2., Spring 1992. Lundquist, Jerrold T., "Shrinking Fast and Smart," Harvard Business Review. November-December 1992, pp.74-85. National Conference of State Legislatures. Building Communities That Work: Community Economic Development.bv Barbara Puls, Washington, DC, January 1991. National Council for Urban Economic Development, publications, Alternative Approaches to Financing Business Development, and A Salute to Imaginative Economic Development Programs. Economic Development Administration, December 1989. Nunn, Samuel, Four Arguments for the Elimination of Local Tax Abatement. Indianapolis: Urban Affairs Association. April, 1993. Perry, Nancy J. "What’s Next for the Defense Industry," Fortune. February 22, 1993. Regional Research and Technology Program North Texas Commission, Innovations and Tomorrow’s Economy: The Wisdom of Strategic Investment in A Regional Science and Technology Research Base. Dallas/Ft Worth Airport, Texas, October 1988. Smith, Lee, "Can Defense Pain Be Turned to Gain?," Fortune. February 8, 1993. U. S. Department of Commerce, County Business Patterns. Bureau of The Census, Washington, DC, 1980 and 1990. Wilkinson, Jonnie, "Bankers, the Community and Economic Development," Economic Development Review. Vol 10. N 2., Spring 1992.