department of applied economics & statistics
DESCRIPTION
TRANSCRIPT
REGIONAL INNOVATION SYSTEMS AS THE KEY TO GLOBAL
COMPETITIVENESS: IMPLICATIONS FOR RURAL AREAS AND WORKERS
by
David Barkley and Mark S. Henry, Professors
and
Santosh Nair, Research Associate
Department of Applied Economics & StatisticsClemson University
The Global EconomyThe Knowledge EconomyThe High-Tech Economy
The New Economy
Changes in TechnologyChanges in Production Practices
Changes in Location of Economic ActivityChanges in the Demand for Labor
Regional Innovation Systems
Research Triangle Park, (NC)
International Center for Automotive Research (SC)
Scripps Institute East Coast Facility (FL)
Translational Genomics Research Institute (AZ)
Oregon Nanotechnology & Microtechnologies Institute
Stowers Institute for Medical Research (MO/KN)
Table 1. Summary Characteristics of the “Old” and “New” Economies
Old Economy
Oligopolistic Product Markets
New Economy
Rapidly Expanding Service SectorLarge-Scale Manufacturing Intense International Competition
Standardized Products Small-Batch Production Runs
Assembly Line Production Just-In-Time Inventory Replacement
Vertically Integrated Firms Product Specialization
Long Product Life Cycles Robotics
Separability of Activities Computer-Integrated manufacturing
Information and Communication Technologies
Vertically Disintegrated Firms
Table 2. Employment Change by Industry, Metro Vs. Nonmetro, 1990-2000
Percentage Change in Employment
U. S. South
Metro Nonmetro Metro Nonmetro
Total
20.0%
17.6% 28.3% 17.1%
Farm 1.4 -3.5 -.2 -1.0
Construction 29.1 35.8 37.3 33.0
Manufacturing -4.3 2.8 .4 -5.5
Trans. & Pub. Utilities 27.0 18.3 38.1 19.4
Wholesale Trade 12.9 12.6 22.6 11.5
Retail Trade 18.6 20.8 26.7 21.9
Fin., Ins., and R. E. 22.0 34.9 32.3 31.7
Services 37.6 33.2 49.1 41.6
Government 6.9 13.5 10.9 15.7
Federal Civilian -11.6 -1.7 -9.1 5.0
Military -23.7 -23.6 -15.4 -20.4
State & Local 17.0 20.6 22.7 22.1
Source: BEA, REIS.
Industry
A. Growing Industries
Employment
Change
(000)
Percent
Change
Retail trade 2,082.0 1.3
Employment services 1,763.5 4.4
State and local government education 1,730.0 1.6
Food services and drinking places 1,337.3 1.5
Offices of health practitioners 1,228.9 3.3
Construction 1,013.7 1.4
Educational services 759.2 2.6
Ambulatory health care services except offices of health practitioners
669.8 3.9
State and local general government, n.e.c. 669.7 .9
Wholesale trade 638.2 1.1
Source: Berman, 2004
Table 3. Industries with the Largest Wage and Salary Employment Growth and Declines, 2002-2012
Industry
B. Declining Industries
Employment Change (000)
Percent Change
Agricultural products -323.6 -1.8
Cut and sew apparel manufacturing -204.7 -12.2
Aerospace product and parts manufacturing -82.6 -1.9
Semiconductor and other electronic component manufacturing
-79.4 -1.6
Computer and peripheral equipment manufacturing
-67.7 -3.1
Fabric mills -67.0 -6.9
Navigational, measuring, electromedical, and control instruments manufacturing
-55.0 -1.3
Private households -54.3 -.7
Textile and fabric finishing and fabric coating mills
-42.3 -6.9
Pulp, paper and paperboard mills -41.8 -2.8
Table 3. Industries with the Largest Wage and Salary
Employment Growth and Declines, 2002-2012 (cont.)
Source: Berman, 2004
Table 4. Average Wages in Expanding and Contracting Industries, 2002-2003
Expanding Industries
Contracting Industries Difference
South Atlantic
Delaware $28,407 $49,609 -43%
Maryland 32,535 48,008 -32%
Dist. Of Columbia 42,413 62,721 -32%
Virginia 29,375 46,323 -37%
West Virginia 22,805 33,832 -33%
North Carolina 33,926 38,041 -11%
South Carolina 31,012 36,986 -16%
Georgia 34,418 44,481 -23%
Florida 29,979 35,352 -15%
Expanding Industries
Contracting Industries Difference
East South Central
Kentucky
$29,035
$37,371
-22%
Tennessee 31.844 36,881 -14%
Alabama 28,584 36,577 -22%
Mississippi 26,764 30,638 -13%
Table 4. Average Wages in Expanding and Contracting Industries, 2002-2003 (cont.)
Expanding Industries
Contracting Industries Difference
West South Central
Arkansas 27,256 31,869 -14%
Louisiana 26,408 39,550 -33%
Oklahoma 25,259 35,917 -30%
Texas 31,663 48,751 -35%
United States $35,410 $44,570 -21%
Source: Economic Policy Institute, 2004.
Table 4. Average Wages in Expanding and Contracting Industries, 2002-2003 (cont.)
Table 5. Employment Distribution and Change by Occupation, South and U.S., 1999-2002
Shares (1999) % Change 1999-2002
Occupation U. S. South U. S. South
Officials and Managers
10.5%
10.0% 1.7% 2.1%
Professionals 15.7 13.1 5.3 5.6
Technicians 6.1 5.6 -.9 2.8
Sales Workers 12.2 13.0 -.8 -4.0
Office and Clerical Workers
14.4 13.6 -2.7 .1
Craft Workers 8.0 8.9 -6.8 -4.7
Operatives 13.9 16.0 -10.7 -12.7
Laborers 7.9 8.7 -3.2 -2.1
Service Workers 11.3 11.1 6.0 4.9
Total 100.0 100.0 -1.1 -1.5
Source: The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.
Table 6. Occupations with Largest Job Decline, United States, 2002-2012
Occupation
Quartile Rank by 2002 Median
Income
Typical Source of Education or Training
1. Farmers and ranchers 3 Long-term on-the-job training
2. Sewing machine operators 4 Moderate-term on-the-job training
3. Word processors and typists 3 Moderate-term on-the-job training
4. Stock clerks and order fillers 4 Short-term on-the-job training
5. Secretaries, except legal, medical, and executive
3 Moderate-term on-the-job training
6. Electrical and electronic equipment
3 Short-term on-the-job training
7. Computer operators 2 Moderate-term on-the-job training
8. Telephone operators
9. Postal service mail sorters, processors, and processing machine operators
10. Loan interviewers and clients
2
2
2
Moderate-term on-the-job training
Short-term on-the-job training
Short-term on-the-job training
Source: Hecker, 2004
Table 6. Occupations with Largest Job Decline, United States, 2002-2012 (cont.)
OccupationQuartile Rank By 2002
Median Income
Typical Source of Education or Training
11. Data entry keyers 3 Moderate-term on-the-job raining
12. Telemarketers 4 Short-term on-the-job training
13. Textile knitting and weaving machine setters, operators, and lenders
3 Long-term on-the-job training
14. Textile winding, twisting, and drawing out machine setters, operators, and lenders
3 Moderate-term on-the-job training
15. Team assemblers 3 Moderate-term on-the-job training
16. Order clerks 3 Short-term on-the-job training
17. Door-to-door sales workers, news and and street vendors, and retail workers
3 Short-term on-the-job training
18. Travel agents 3 Postsecondary vocational award
19. Brokerage clerks 2 Moderate-term on-the-job training
20. Eligibility interviewers, government programs
2 Moderate-term on-the-job training
Source: Hecker, 2004
Table 7. Occupations with Largest Job Growth,
United States, 2002-2012
Occupation
Quartile RankBy 2002
Median Earnings
Typical Source Of Education Or Training
1. Registered nurses 1 Associate degree
2. Postsecondary teachers 1 Doctoral degree
3. Retail salespersons 4 Short-term on-the-job training
4. Customer service representatives 3 Moderate-term on-the-job training
5. Combined tool preparation and serving workers, including fast food
4 Short-term on-the-job training
6. Cashiers, except gaming 4 Short-term on-the-job training
7. Janitors, and cleaners, except maids and housekeeping cleaners
4 Short-term on-the-job training
8. General and operations managers 1 Bachelor’s or higher degree, plus work experience
9. Waiters and waitresses 4 Short-term on-the-job training
10. Nursing aids, orderlies, and attendants 3 Short-term on-the-job training
Source: Hecker, 2004
Table 7. Occupations with Largest Job Growth,
United States, 2002-2012 (cont).
Occupation
Quartile Rankby 2002
Median Earnings
Typical Source of Education Or Training
11. Truck drivers, heavy and tractor-trailer 2 Moderate-term on-the-job training
12. Receptionists and Information clerks 3 Short-term on-the-job training
13. Security Guards 4 Short-term on-the-job training
14. Office clerks, general 3 Short-term on-the-job training
15. Teacher assistants 4 Short-term on-the-job training
16. Sales representatives, wholesale and manufacturing, except technical and
scientific products
1 Moderate-term on-the-job training
17. Home health aides 4 Short-term on-the-job training
18. Personal and home care aides 4 Short-term on-the-job training
19. Truck drivers, light or delivery services 3 Short-term on-the-job training
20. Landscaping and groundskeeping workers
3 Short-term on-the-job training
Source: Hecker, 2004
Table 8. Fastest Growing Occupations, United States, 2002-2012
Source: Hecker, 2004
OccupationQuartile Rank by
2002 Median Income
Typical Source of Education or Training
1. Medical assistants 3 Moderate-term on-the-job training
2. Network systems and data communications analysts
1 Bachelor’s degree
3. Physician assistants 1 Bachelor’s degree
4. Social and human service assistants 3 Moderate-term on-the-job training
5. Home health aides 4 Short-term on-the-job training
6. Medical records and health information technicians
7. Physical therapist aides
8. Computer software engineers, applications 9. Computer software engineers, systems software
3
3
1
1
Associate degree
Short-term on-the-job training
Bachelor’s degree
Bachelor’s degree
10. Physical therapist assistants 2 Associate degree
Table 8. Fastest Growing Occupations, United States, 2002-2012 (cont.)
Source: Hecker, 2004
OccupationQuartile Rank by
2002 Median Income
Typical Source of Education or Training
11. Fitness trainers and aerobics instructors 3 Postsecondary vocational award
12. Database administrators
1 Bachelor’s degree
13. Veterinary technologists and technicians 3 Associate degree
14. Hazardous materials removal workers 2 Moderate-term on-the-job training
15. Dental hygienists 1 Associate degree
16. Occupational therapist aides
17. Dental assistants
18. Personal and home care aides 19. Self-enrichment education teachers
3
3
4
2
Short-term on-the-job training
Moderate-term on-the-job training
Short-term on-the-job training
Work experience in a related occupation
20. Computer systems analysts 1 Bachelor’s degree
Table 9. Elements of Regional Systems of Innovation (Acs, 2002).
A. Inter-firm relationships 1. Network economies2. Clusters3. Supplier chains as source of innovation4. Cooperation and trust
B. The knowledge infrastructure 1. University research2. Focus new product R&D3. External sources of knowledge4. Local R&D spillovers
C. Community and the public 1. Emphasis on regional level sector 2. Public-private partnerships
3. Community, cooperation and trust
D. Internal organization of the firm 1. Organic organization 2. Continuous innovation 3. Matrix organizations
E. Institutions of the financial sector 1. Venture capital 2. Informal financial sector
F. Physical and communication 1. Global orientationinfrastructure 2. Electronic data exchange
G. Firm strategy, structure and rivalry 1. Easy to start new firms 2. Inexpensive access to
knowledge 3. Entrepreneurship is crucial
Table 9. Elements of Regional Systems of Innovation (Acs, 2002). (cont.)
Table 10. Examples of Innovation Measures Used in Previous Research on Innovative Activity or Capacity
A. Innovative Activity or Capacity
Patents
Academic R & D Expenditures
Industrial R & D Expenditures
Federal R & D Expenditures
Innovation Counts
Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) Grants
Undergraduate/Graduate Degrees in Science and Engineering
Professional Employment in High Tech Industries
Table 10. Examples of Innovation Measures Used in Previous Research on Innovative Activity or Capacity
(Cont.)
B. Human Capital or Labor Quality
High School Graduates as % of Population
College Graduates as % of Population
Technical School Graduates as % of Population
Working Age Population
Managerial, Professional, and Technical Employment
Online Population
Computer Availability and Use in Schools
Table 10. Examples of Innovation Measures Used in Previous Research on Innovative Activity or Capacity
(Cont.)
C. Entrepreneurial Environment
Venture Capital Investments
Initial Public Offerings
New Publicly Traded Companies
Employment in “Gazelle” Firms
New Business Start-Ups
Job Churning (product of business start-ups and business failures)
Small Business Employment
Employment/Establishments in Business Services
Diversity of Population
Table 10. Continued
D. Agglomeration Economies
Employment/Establishments in High Technology Industries
Inc. 500 Companies
Population Density
Density of Establishments
Export Activity
Manufacturing Employment Growth Rate
Importance of Regional Economy to U.S. Economy
E. Competitiveness of Local Economy
Sources: Huovari (2001), Hill (1998), Catalytix (2003), Porter (2001), SGBP (2001, 2002), Atkinson and Gottlieb (2001), Gardiner (2003), Markusen (2001), Acs (2002), Florida (2002).
National State Technology & Science Index Overall Index, 2004
Rank Rank State (2004) State (2004)
Massachusetts 1 New Mexico 14California 2 New York 15Colorado 3 Pennsylvania 16Maryland 4 Arizona 17Virginia 5 Georgia 18Washington 6 Oregon 19New Jersey 7 North Carolina 20Minnesota 8 Illinois 21Utah 9 Vermont 22Connecticut 10 Texas 23Rhode Island 11 Ohio 24New Hampshire 12 Michigan 25Delaware 13
National State Technology & Science Index Overall Index, 2004 (cont.)
Rank Rank State (2004) State (2004)
Kansas 26 Hawaii 39Wisconsin 27 Alaska 40Nebraska 28 Wyoming 41Indiana 29 Louisiana 42Idaho 30 Nevada 43Missouri 31 South Carolina 44Florida 32 North Dakota 45Maine 33 West Virginia 46Tennessee 34 South Dakota 47Oklahoma 35 Kentucky 48Alabama 36 Arkansas 49Iowa 37 Mississippi 50Montana 38
Source: DeVol and Kuepp (2004).
Table 11. Selected Measures of Metropolitan Innovative Environment
A. Innovative Activity
PATENT: Number of patents issued per 1000 population (USPTO, 1990-99)
ARD: Academic R&D expenditures per 1000 population (NSF, 1998-2000)
SED: Doctorates awarded in science and engineering per 1000 population (NSF, 1998-2000)
GSS Graduate science and engineering students per 1000 population (NS, 1998-2000)
ETEC: Percentage of employment in technical professions – computer science; engineering except civil; natural, physical, and social science (BLS, 2000)
Table 11. Selected Measures of Metropolitan Innovative Environment (cont.)
B. Labor Force Quality
PHSG: Percentage of adult population (25+) that are high school graduates (CBP, 2000)
PCG: Percentage of adult population (25+) that are college graduates (CBP, 2000)
PWP: Percentage of population (age 16-64) that are employed (Census, 2000)
Table 11. Selected Measures of Metropolitan Innovative Environment (cont.)
C. Entrepreneurial Environment
PCEST: Percentage change in number of establishments (CBP, 1990-2000)
PEL2O: Percentage of establishments with fewer than 20 employees (BLS, 2000)
INC500: Number of Inc 500 companies per 100,000 population (www.inc500.com, 2000)
VCAP: Venture capital investments ($) per capita (Price Waterhouse Coopers, 2000)
EMB: Percentage of employment in managerial and business professions (BLS, 2000)
Table 11. Selected Measures of Metropolitan Innovative Environment (cont.)
D. Agglomeration Economics
HTEMP: Percentage of employment in high-technology industries (CBP, 2000)
HTEST: Percentage of establishments in high technology industries (CBP, 2000)
ITEMP: Percentage of employment in information technology industries (CBP, 2000)
ITEST: Percentage of establishments in information technology industries (CBP, 2000)
E. Competitiveness in Global Economy
EXPORTS: Exports as a percent of gross metropolitan product, metro areas ranked in quantiles (DOC, 1999)
Table 12. Metropolitan Areas in Regional Innovation Systems Cluster Groupings
1. Outliers (4)
Atlanta, GA CMSAAustin, TX MSARaleigh, Durham, Chapel Hill, NC
CMSABaton Rouge, LA MSA
2. High (12)
Dallas-Fort Worth-Arlington, TX CMSAHouston-Galveston-Brazoria, TX CMSAHuntsville, AL MSAMelbourne-Titusville-Palm Bay, FL MSAOrlando, FL MSAPensacola, FL MSARichmond-Petersburg, VA MSASan Antonio, TX MSASarasota-Bradenton, FL MSATampa-St. Petersbusrg-Clearwater, FL
MSATulsa, OK MSAWest Palm Beach-Boca Raton, FL MSA
Table 12. Metropolitan Areas in Regional Innovation Systems Cluster Groupings (cont.)
3. College Towns (5)
Athens, GA MSABryan-College Station, TX MSACharlottesville, VA MSAGainesville, FL MSATallahassee, FL MSA
4. Medium (20)
Augusta-Aiken, GA-SC MSABirmingham, AL MSACharleston-North Charleston, SC MSACharlotte-Gastonia-Rock Hill, NC-SC MSACincinnati-Hamilton, OH-KY-IN MSAColumbia, SC MSAGreensboro--Winston-Salem–High Point,
NC MSAGreenville-Spartanburg-Anderson, SC MSAJackson, MS MSAJacksonville, FL MSAKnoxville, TN MSALexington, KY-IN MSAMemphis, TN-AR-MS MSANashville, TN MSANew Orleans, LA MSANorfolk-Virginia Beach-Newport News,
VA-NC MSA Oklahoma City, OK MSA
Roanoke, VA MSAWilmington, NC MSA
Table 12. Metropolitan Areas in Regional Innovation Systems Cluster Groupings (cont.)
5. Below Average (47)
Abilene, TX MSAAlbany, GA MSAAlexandria, LA MSAAmarillo, TX MSAAshville, NC MSAAuburn-Opelika, AL MSABeaumont-Port Arthur, TX MSABiloxi-Gulfport-Pascagoula, MS MSAChattanooga, TN-GA MSAClarksville-Hopkinsville, TN-KY MSAColumbus, GA MSACorpus Christi, TX MSADecatur, AL MSADothan, AL MSAEnid, OK MSAEvansville-Henderson, IN-KY MSAFayetteville, NC MSAFayetteville-Springdale-Rogers, AR MSAFlorence, SC MSA
Fort Smith, AR-OK MSAFort Walton Beach, FL MSAGoldsboro, NC MSAGreenville, NC MSAHattiesburg, MS MSAHickory-Morganton-Lenoir, NC MSAJackson, TN MSAJacksonville, NC MSAJonesboro, AR MSAKilleen-Temple, TX MSALafayette, LA MSALake Charles, LA MSALakeland-Winter Haven, FL MSALawton, OK MSALittle Rock-North Little Rock, AR MSALong View-Marshall, TX MSALubbock, TX MSALynchburg, VA MSA
Table 12. Metropolitan Areas in Regional Innovation Systems Cluster Groupings (cont.)
5. Below Average (47) (cont.)
Macon, GA MSAMobile, AL MSAMonroe, LA MSAMontgomery, AL MSAMyrtle Beach, SC MSAOdessa-Midland, TX MSAOwensboro, KY MSAPanama City, FL MSAPine Bluff, AR MSARocky Mount, NC MSASan Angelo, TX MSASavannah, GA MSASherman-Denison, TX MSAShreveport-Bossier City, LA MSASumter, SC MSATuscaloosa, AL MSATyler, TX MSAVictoria, TX MSAWaco, TX MSAWichita Falls, TX MSA
6. Low (18)
Anniston, AL MSA Brownsville-Harlingen-San Benito, TX MSA Danville, VA MSA Daytona Beach, FL MSA El Paso, TX MSA Florence, AL MSA Fort Myers-Cape Coral, FL MSA Fort Pierce-Port St. Lucie, FL MSA Gadsden, AL MSA Houma, LA MSA Huntington-Ashland, WY-KY-OH MSA Johnson City-Kingsport-Bristol, TN-VA MSA Laredo, TX MSA McAllen-Edinburg-Mission, TX MSA Naples, FL MSA Ocala, FL MSA Punta Gorda, FL MSA Texarkana, TX-Texarkana, AR MSA
Map 1: Persistent Poverty and RIS Counties, Southeastern United States, 2000
COUNTIES
Poverty
Persistent Poverty Counties
Metro Counties
RIS Counties
Other Non Metro Counties
Map 2: Persistent Poverty and RIS (Including Medium) Counties, Southeastern United States, 2000
Counties
Poverty
Persistent Poverty Counties
Metro Counties
RIS Metro Counties
Other Non-Metro Counties
Table 13. Mean Values for Indicators of Innovation by Cluster Grouping
Indicators Outliers High College Towns Medium Average Low
1. Innovative Activity
PATENT: Patents issued .58 .20 .24 .14 .08 .07
ARD: Academic R&D 482.34 47.59 1357.06 86.79 51.52 2.57
ETEC: Employment in Tech. Prof. 7.25 4.02 3.29 2.86 1.65 1.03
2. Labor Force Quality
PHSG: High School Graduates 84.03 82.09 83.88 81.09 78.48 71.96
PCG: College Graduates 33.13 25.38 37.32 24.47 19.23 16.10
PWP: Working Population 69.28 62.42 64.82 65.66 63.29 54.40
3. Entrepreneurial Environment
PCEST: Change in Establishments 39.65 22.41 19.90 22.54 13.95 33.19
PEL20: Establishments < 20 emp. (%) 84.33 85.86 86.00 84.06 85.08 87.71
INC500: Inc. 500 Companies (%) 8.25 0.25 0.00 1.45 0.05 0.00
VCAP: Venture Capital ($) 386.71 281.53 122.62 44.13 7.57 0.00
73EMP: Business Services Emp. (%) 9.67 11.16 5.92 7.72 5.51 5.52
73EST: Business Services Estab. (%) 7.81 7.26 5.83 5.88 4.44 4.63
EMB: Emp. In Mng. And Bus. Prof. (%) 12.67 7.33 7.48 7.06 5.49 4.39
4. Agglomeration Economics
HTEMP: High Tech Employment 11.40 7.46 4.53 6.60 5.10 3.25
HTEST: High Tech Establishments 9.55 8.73 9.14 6.75 5.56 4.76
5. Competitiveness
EXPORT: Export Rank (1-4) 3.75 3.17 1.20 3.40 1.49 1.89
Table 14. Changes in Aggregate Economic Activity by Cluster Groupings, 1990-2000
Change in Change in Change in Personal Earnings by Earnings by Cluster Grouping Income Place of Work Place of Residence (%) (%) (%)
A. Metro Counties
Outliers (32)a 128.27 149.24 130.82
High (58) 96.26 99.92 98.87
College Towns (13) 91.23 98.74 90.93
Medium (113) 84.86 93.16 81.20
Below Average (106) 76.63 73.80 73.65
Low (33) 73.53 63.84 65.44
a Number of metro or nonmetro counties in the cluster grouping.
Table 14. Changes in Aggregate Economic Activity by Cluster Groupings, 1990-2000 (cont.)
Change in Change in Cluster Grouping Employment Population (%) (%)
A. Metro Counties
Outliers (32)a
62.26 44.27
High (58) 42.20 28.25
College Towns (13) 42.61 31.74
Medium (113) 34.51 20.27
Below Average (106) 26.88 14.69
Low (33) 24.27 17.87a Number of metro or nonmetro counties in the cluster grouping.
Table 14. Changes in Aggregate Economic Activity by Cluster Groupings, 1990-2000 (cont.)
Change in Change in Change in Personal Earnings by Earnings by Cluster Grouping Income Place of Work Place of Residence (%) (%) (%)
B. Monmetro Counties
Outliers (31) 87.28 81.02 89.38
High (40) 78.54 73.43 80.05
College Towns (24) 79.69 70.61 76.45
Medium (136) 72.84 71.88 66.89
Below Average (315) 60.05 52.99 53.77
Low (42) 68.31 61.73 61.65
Rural LMAs (349) 65.16 59.85 59.29
Table 14. Changes in Aggregate Economic Activity by Cluster Groupings, 1990-2000 (cont.)
Change in Change in Cluster Grouping Employment Population (%) (%)
B. Monmetro Counties
Outliers (31) 32.74 23.00
High (40) 31.27 22.01
College Towns (24) 25.29 22.22
Medium (136) 21.33 12.25
Below Average (315) 15.89 7.06
Low (42) 19.55 12.83
Rural LMAs (349) 17.88 10.39
Table 15. Changes in Per Capita Economic Activity by Cluster Groupings, 1990-2000
Change in Earnings Change in Earnings
Per Worker by Per Employed Resident
Cluster Grouping Place of Work by Place of Residence
(%) (%)
A. Metro Counties
Outliers (32)a 51.89 96.20
High (58) 40.25 69.04
College Towns (13) 39.10 62.29
Medium (113) 42.34 54.02
Below Average (106) 37.10 47.60
Low (33) 31.13 40.62
a Number of metro or nonmetro counties in the cluster grouping
Table 15. Changes in Per Capita Economic Activity by Cluster Groupings, 1990-2000 (cont.)
Change in Change in
Per Capita Share of Population
Cluster Grouping Personal Income in Poverty
(%) (%)
A. Metro Counties
Outliers (32)a 58.20 -9.81
High (58) 51.29 -5.43
College Towns (13) 45.88 -17.01
Medium (113) 53.26 -12.07
Below Average (106) 53.74 -11.41
Low (33) 47.09 -12.91
a Number of metro or nonmetro counties in the cluster grouping.
B. Monmetro Counties
Outliers (31) 37.16 60.97
High (40) 31.88 53.04
College Towns (24) 36.47 49.98
Medium (136) 39.87 41.86
Below Average (315) 31.90 30.71
Low (42) 34.92 37.41
Rural LMAs (349) 35.63 35.79
Table 15. Changes in Per Capita Economic Activity by Cluster Groupings, 1990-2000 (cont.)
Change in Earnings Change in Earnings Per Worker by Per Employed Resident Cluster Grouping Place of Work by Place of Residence (%) (%)
B. Monmetro Counties
Outliers (31) 52.55 -13.70
High (40) 44.10 -8.05
College Towns (24) 47.29 -14.37
Medium (136) 53.32 -16.40
Below Average (315) 48.77 -12.19
Low (42) 49.97 -7.52
Rural LMAs (349) 49.96 -13.97
Table 15. Changes in Per Capita Economic Activity by Cluster Groupings, 1990-2000 (cont.)
Change in Change in Per Capita Share of Population Cluster Grouping Personal Income in Poverty (%) (%)
Table 16. Regression Results for Change in Nonmetro County Population and Employment, 1990-2000
Intercept -.292 -3.66 -.430 -3.66College Grad .003 1.48 .003 1.16Pupil/Teacher .006 2.34 .006 1.66Rec. Infrastructure .021 3.46 .016 1.72Amenity Rank (1-7) .029 3.86 .042 3.57Govt. Expenditure -.047 -6.43 -.038 -3.46High-Tech Emp -.006 -.97 -.011 -1.16Tech. Occupation .018 4.76 .030 5.22Manufacturing. Emp. -.06E-3 -2.01 -.000 -.74POP 1990 (000,000) -13.340 -1.51Emp 1990 (000, 000) -90.097 -.98MSA Pop Change .127 2.37MSA Emp Change .184 2.55MSA Pop Density .000 -.52 .000 .04Outlier .069 2.79 .060 1.55High .088 4.12 .046 1.41College Town .049 1.76 .018 .44Low -.006 -.39 -.000 -.01Very Low .009 .41 .030 .87R2 .409 .232
F 13.74 6.00
State Fixed Effects Yes Yes
N 584 584
Variable Coefficient t-value Coefficient t-value
Population Equation Employment Equation
Table 17. Regression Results for Change in Nonmetro County Earnings, 1990-2000
Intercept -.55 -3.85 -.482 -4.59College Grad .003 .69 .005 1.53Pupil/Teacher .022 4.45 .018 4.75Rec. Infrastructure .018 1.39 .027 2.81Amenity Rank (1-7) .061 3.73 .046 3.86Govt. Expenditure -.026 -1.67 -.026 -2.28High-Tech Emp -.000 -.04 -.009 -.90Tech. Occupation .031 3.80 .027 4.74Manufacturing. Emp -.24E-3 -3.57 -.16E-3 -3.28Earnings, 1990 -7.46E-8 -1.19 -5.15E-8 -1.04MSA Earnings Change .158 2.96 .204 5.16MSA Pop Density -.000 -.55 -.000 -.25Outlier .007 .12 .020 .48High .058 1.26 .076 2.28College Town .085 1.45 .110 2.58Low -.027 -.86 -.025 -1.10Very Low .052 1.10 .039 1.16R2 .272 .395
F 7.42 12.95
State Fixed Effects Yes Yes
N 584 584
Variable Coefficient t-value Coefficient t-value
Earnings by Place of Work Earnings by Place of Residence
Table 18. Regression Results for Changes in Nonmetro County Earnings Per Worker, 1990-2000
Intercept .016 .10 -.042 -.41College Grad .001 .53 .005 1.94Pupil/Teacher .015 4.77 .013 3.90Rec. Infrastructure -.003 -.38 .021 2.44Amenity Rank (1-7) .018 1.77 .021 1.95Govt. Expenditure .014 1.46 -.014 -1.44High-Tech Emp .009 1.08 -.003 -.30Tech. Occupation -.003 -.56 .019 3.70Manufacturing. Emp -.21E-3 -5.04 -.15E-3 -3.58Earnings, 1990 -.010 -7.05 -.014 -12.64MSA Earnings Change .082 .84 .163 3.94MSA Pop Density -.000 -.27 .000 .44Outlier -.010 -.27 .039 1.06High .022 .77 .074 2.52College Town .070 1.91 .105 2.80Low -.015 -.74 -.006 -.31Very Low .027 .91 .015 .50R2 .302 .529
F 8.57 22.29
State Fixed Effects Yes Yes
N 584 584
Variable Coefficient t-value Coefficient t-value
Earnings by Place of Work Earnings by Place of Residence
Innovation Policies for Non-RIS Regions(Rosenfeld, 2002 and Tödtling, 2004)
Industry Clusters
• Support clusters in new industries related to existing industrial base
• Strengthen emerging/potential clusters in the region
Innovation Policies for Non-RIS Regions(Rosenfeld, 2002 and Tödtling, 2004)
(Continued)
New Firms
• Promote entrepreneurship and new firm development
• Attract cluster-related firms
Innovation Policies for Non-RIS Regions(Rosenfeld, 2002 and Tödtling, 2004)
(Continued)
Knowledge and Innovation
• Develop cluster-specific technology centers
• Attract branches of national research organizations
• Build up and attract new labor skills
Innovation Policies for Non-RIS Regions(Rosenfeld, 2002 and Tödtling, 2004)
(Continued)
Networks
• Link firms to local and external knowledge providers
• Technology transfer programs