|

NewEconomy
Index.org Home
Metro Index Home
Introduction
Overview &
Methodology
The Rankings
Summary of Results
THE
INDICATORS
PART
I: KNOWLEDGE JOBS
Managerial,
Professional, and Technical Jobs

Workforce
Education
PART II: GLOBALIZATION
Export Focus
of Manufacturing
PART III: ECONOMIC
DYNAMISM
"Gazelle"
Jobs

Job Churning

New Publicly
Traded Companies
PART IV: THE DIGITAL
ECONOMY
Online Population

Broadband Telecommunications
Capacity

Computer Use
in Schools

Commercial Internet
Domain Names

Internet
Backbone
PART V: INNOVATION
CAPACITY
High-Tech Jobs

Degrees Granted
in Science and Engineering

Patents

Academic Research
and Development Funding

Venture Capital
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
STRATEGIES
Data Sources
The Metropolitan
Areas and their Major Cities
Weighting Methodology
Endnotes
The Authors

|
 |
Workforce Education
A weighted measure of the educational attainment (advanced degrees,
bachelor's degrees, or some college course work) of the workforce.7
Why Is
This Important?
An educated workforce is critical to increasing productivity and fostering
innovation. In fact, knowledge-based jobs (those requiring post secondary,
vocational, or higher education) grew from 27 percent of total employment
in 1983 to 31 percent in 1993, and are expected to grow to more than 33
percent in 2006. Metro areas with a more educated workforce are better
positioned to capitalize on this trend.
Knowledge
workers are important not only because the principal factor determining
where high-tech firms locate is an adequate supply of skilled labor, but
also because their presence boosts incomes. Paul Gottlieb found that from
1980 to 1997, the per capita incomes of metro areas with the most educated
populations grew 1.8 percent in real terms per year, while those with
the least-educated populations grew only 0.8 percent per year.8
Finally,
entrepreneurs are more likely to have higher levels of education, and
as entrepreneurial start-ups become more important to a region's economic
success, having more knowledge workers increases entrepreneurial activity.
The Rankings:
More highly educated individuals are more likely to move than less-educated
individuals.9 As a
result, metro areas that have attracted large numbers of people from other
parts of the United States generally have a more educated workforce (e.g.,
San Francisco, Washington, D.C., Denver). Similarly, metro areas with
strong higher education systems (e.g., Austin, Raleigh, Boston) also score
well. Meanwhile, many metros with a low score have experienced net out-migration
(for example, Grand Rapids, St. Louis, Milwaukee), have seen high levels
of immigration from developing nations (e.g., Los Angeles, San Antonio,
Miami), or have invested less in education (e.g. Greensboro, New Orleans,
the Florida metros, Memphis).

 |
 |
100th-76th
Percentile |
 |
 |
75th-51st
Percentile |
 |
 |
50th-26th
Percentile |
 |
 |
25th-1st
Percentile |
| METRO
AREAS BY RANK |
| Rank |
Metro Area |
Score |
| 1 |
Washington |
0.74 |
| 2 |
San Francisco |
0.69 |
| 3 |
Denver |
0.68 |
| 4 |
Minneapolis |
0.68 |
| 5 |
Austin |
0.67 |
| 6 |
Raleigh-Durham |
0.66 |
| 7 |
Richmond |
0.65 |
| 8 |
Houston |
0.65 |
| 9 |
Seattle |
0.64 |
| 10 |
Oklahoma City |
0.64 |
| 11 |
Rochester |
0.64 |
| 12 |
San Diego |
0.63 |
| 13 |
Boston |
0.63 |
| 14 |
New York |
0.63 |
| 15 |
Sacramento |
0.63 |
| 16 |
Salt Lake City |
0.62 |
| 17 |
Norfolk |
0.62 |
| 18 |
Buffalo |
0.62 |
| 19 |
Cincinnati |
0.61 |
| 20 |
Charlotte |
0.61 |
| 21 |
Portland |
0.61 |
| 22 |
Dayton |
0.61 |
| 23 |
Philadelphia |
0.60 |
| 24 |
Atlanta |
0.60 |
| 25 |
Nashville |
0.60 |
| 26 |
Cleveland |
0.60 |
| 27 |
Columbus |
0.59 |
| 28 |
Hartford |
0.58 |
| 29 |
Pittsburgh |
0.58 |
| 30 |
Detroit |
0.58 |
| 31 |
Dallas |
0.57 |
| 32 |
Milwaukee |
0.56 |
| 33 |
Indianapolis |
0.55 |
| 34 |
Las Vegas |
0.55 |
| 35 |
St. Louis |
0.54 |
| 36 |
Chicago |
0.53 |
| 37 |
Louisville |
0.53 |
| 38 |
Miami |
0.53 |
| 39 |
Jacksonville |
0.53 |
| 40 |
New Orleans |
0.53 |
| 41 |
Memphis |
0.53 |
| 42 |
Kansas City |
0.52 |
| 43 |
Phoenix |
0.52 |
| 44 |
Orlando |
0.50 |
| 45 |
West Palm Beach |
0.49 |
| 46 |
Greensboro |
0.48 |
| 47 |
Tampa |
0.46 |
| 48 |
Grand Rapids |
0.45 |
| 49 |
San Antonio |
0.44 |
| 50 |
Los Angeles |
0.44 |
|
U.S. Average |
0.48 |
|
Top 50 Metro Average |
0.59 |
|
|
| ALPHABETICALLY |
| Metro Area |
Rank |
Score |
| Atlanta |
24 |
0.60 |
| Austin |
5 |
0.67 |
| Boston |
13 |
0.63 |
| Buffalo |
18 |
0.62 |
| Charlotte |
20 |
0.61 |
| Chicago |
36 |
0.53 |
| Cincinnati |
19 |
0.61 |
| Cleveland |
26 |
0.60 |
| Columbus |
27 |
0.59 |
| Dallas |
31 |
0.57 |
| Dayton |
22 |
0.61 |
| Denver |
3 |
0.68 |
| Detroit |
30 |
0.58 |
| Grand Rapids |
48 |
0.45 |
| Greensboro |
46 |
0.48 |
| Hartford |
28 |
0.58 |
| Houston |
8 |
0.65 |
| Indianapolis |
33 |
0.55 |
| Jacksonville |
39 |
0.53 |
| Kansas City |
42 |
0.52 |
| Las Vegas |
34 |
0.55 |
| Los Angeles |
50 |
0.44 |
| Louisville |
37 |
0.53 |
| Memphis |
41 |
0.53 |
| Miami |
38 |
0.53 |
| Milwaukee |
32 |
0.56 |
| Minneapolis |
4 |
0.68 |
| Nashville |
25 |
0.60 |
| New Orleans |
40 |
0.53 |
| New York |
14 |
0.63 |
| Norfolk |
17 |
0.62 |
| Oklahoma City |
10 |
0.64 |
| Orlando |
44 |
0.50 |
| Philadelphia |
23 |
0.60 |
| Phoenix |
43 |
0.52 |
| Pittsburgh |
29 |
0.58 |
| Portland |
21 |
0.61 |
| Raleigh-Durham |
6 |
0.66 |
| Richmond |
7 |
0.65 |
| Rochester |
11 |
0.64 |
| Sacramento |
15 |
0.63 |
| Salt Lake City |
16 |
0.62 |
| San Antonio |
49 |
0.44 |
| San Diego |
12 |
0.63 |
| San Francisco |
2 |
0.69 |
| Seattle |
9 |
0.64 |
| St. Louis |
35 |
0.54 |
| Tampa |
47 |
0.46 |
| Washington |
1 |
0.74 |
| West Palm Beach |
45 |
0.49 |
|
Go
to next indicator >>
Metro Index Home | Introduction
| Overview &
Methodology | The Rankings |
Summary of Results
Development Strategies | Data Sources
Metro Areas | Endnotes
| The Authors
The Progressive
Policy Institute (PPI)
Technology, Innovation, and New Economy Project
600 Pennsylvania Ave., S.E., Suite 400, Washington DC 20003
Phone: (202) 547-0001
www.ppionline.org
Website design by OnlineWorkshop.
|