|

NewEconomy
Index.org Home
2002
State Index Home
Introduction
Overview &
Methodology
Overall Rankings
Summary of Results
THE INDICATORS
PART
I: KNOWLEDGE JOBS
Information
Technology Jobs

Managerial,
Professional, and Technical Jobs

Workforce
Education

Education
Level of the Manufacturing Workforce
PART
II: GLOBALIZATION
Export
Focus of Manufacturing

Foreign
Direct Investment
PART
III: ECONOMIC DYNAMISM
"Gazelle"
Jobs

Job Churning

IPOs
PART
IV: THE DIGITAL ECONOMY
Online Population

Commercial
Internet Domain Names

Technology
in Schools

Digital
Government

Online Agriculture

Online Manufacturers

Broadband
Telecommunications
PART
V: INNOVATION CAPACITY
High-Tech
Jobs

Scientists
and Engineers

Patents

Industry
Investment in R&D

Venture
Capital
ECONOMIC
DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIES
Data Sources
Weighting Methodology
Endnotes
The Author



|
 |
Commercial
Internet Domain Names
The number
of commercial Internet domain names (".com") per firm.
"The number of dot-com domain names registered in the United States
actually grew from 9 million in July 2000 to 19 million in July 2001."
WHY
IS THIS IMPORTANT? Despite the much ballyhooed failure
of some high-flying "dot-bombs," the use of the Internet by business continues
to grow. 21
The number of dot-com domain names registered in the United States
actually grew from 9 million in July 2000 to 19 million in July 2001.
22 The big difference between the
dot-com bubble of the late 1990s and today is, while many dot-coms were
based on dubious business models, many of today's dot-com companies are
using the Internet for strategic and effective commercial purposes.
THE
RANKINGS: The number of ".com" domains per firm varies
significantly by state. The highest-ranking state, California, has more
than six times more than the lowest-ranking state, South Dakota. Nevada's
second-place finish could well be a dubious distinction: it may be attributable
to a large number of gambling and adult sites. But most of the other top
finishers, including Maryland, Massachusetts, New York, and Virginia,
are states with a large presence of high-tech companies.
| STATES
BY RANK |
| Rank |
State |
Score |
| 1 |
California |
1.86 |
| 2 |
Nevada |
1.71 |
| 3 |
Arizona |
1.34 |
| 4 |
Massachusetts |
1.34 |
| 5 |
New
York |
1.27 |
| 6 |
Maryland |
1.25 |
| 7 |
Virginia |
1.20 |
| 8 |
Hawaii |
1.16 |
| 9 |
New
Jersey |
1.13 |
| 10 |
Florida |
1.11 |
| 11 |
Utah |
1.10 |
| 12 |
Delaware |
1.08 |
| 13 |
Colorado |
1.04 |
| 14 |
Connecticut |
1.01 |
| 15 |
Washington |
0.97 |
| 16 |
New
Hampshire |
0.96 |
| 17 |
Georgia |
0.91 |
| 18 |
Illinois |
0.88 |
| 19 |
Oregon |
0.83 |
| 20 |
Texas |
0.80 |
| 21 |
Rhode
Island |
0.77 |
| 22 |
Pennsylvania |
0.74 |
| 23 |
New
Mexico |
0.71 |
| 24 |
Minnesota |
0.69 |
| 25 |
Vermont |
0.63 |
| 26 |
Alaska |
0.63 |
| 27 |
North
Carolina |
0.63 |
| 28 |
Ohio |
0.62 |
| 29 |
Michigan |
0.59 |
| 30 |
Tennessee |
0.58 |
| 31 |
Maine |
0.57 |
| 32 |
Alabama |
0.52 |
| 33 |
Missouri |
0.52 |
| 34 |
Idaho |
0.49 |
| 35 |
Indiana |
0.49 |
| 36 |
Kansas |
0.48 |
| 37 |
Louisiana |
0.48 |
| 38 |
Wisconsin |
0.47 |
| 39 |
South
Carolina |
0.46 |
| 40 |
Oklahoma |
0.46 |
| 41 |
Kentucky |
0.43 |
| 42 |
Nebraska |
0.41 |
| 43 |
West
Virginia |
0.37 |
| 44 |
North
Dakota |
0.37 |
| 45 |
Montana |
0.36 |
| 46 |
Wyoming |
0.35 |
| 47 |
Arkansas |
0.32 |
| 48 |
Mississippi |
0.32 |
| 49 |
Iowa |
0.30 |
| 50 |
South
Dakota |
0.29 |
|
U.S.
Average |
0.95 |
|
|
| ALPHABETICALLY |
| Rank |
State |
Score |
| 32 |
Alabama |
0.52 |
| 26 |
Alaska |
0.63 |
| 3 |
Arizona |
1.34 |
| 47 |
Arkansas |
0.32 |
| 1 |
California |
1.86 |
| 13 |
Colorado |
1.04 |
| 14 |
Connecticut |
1.01 |
| 12 |
Delaware |
1.08 |
| 10 |
Florida |
1.11 |
| 17 |
Georgia |
0.91 |
| 8 |
Hawaii |
1.16 |
| 34 |
Idaho |
0.49 |
| 18 |
Illinois |
0.88 |
| 35 |
Indiana |
0.49 |
| 49 |
Iowa |
0.30 |
| 36 |
Kansas |
0.48 |
| 41 |
Kentucky |
0.43 |
| 37 |
Louisiana |
0.48 |
| 31 |
Maine |
0.57 |
| 6 |
Maryland |
1.25 |
| 4 |
Massachusetts |
1.34 |
| 29 |
Michigan |
0.59 |
| 24 |
Minnesota |
0.69 |
| 48 |
Mississippi |
0.32 |
| 33 |
Missouri |
0.52 |
| 45 |
Montana |
0.36 |
| 42 |
Nebraska |
0.41 |
| 2 |
Nevada |
1.71 |
| 16 |
New
Hampshire |
0.96 |
| 9 |
New
Jersey |
1.13 |
| 23 |
New
Mexico |
0.71 |
| 5 |
New
York |
1.27 |
| 27 |
North
Carolina |
0.63 |
| 44 |
North
Dakota |
0.37 |
| 28 |
Ohio |
0.62 |
| 40 |
Oklahoma |
0.46 |
| 19 |
Oregon |
0.83 |
| 22 |
Pennsylvania |
0.74 |
| 21 |
Rhode
Island |
0.77 |
| 39 |
South
Carolina |
0.46 |
| 50 |
South
Dakota |
0.29 |
| 30 |
Tennessee |
0.58 |
| 20 |
Texas |
0.80 |
| 11 |
Utah |
1.10 |
| 25 |
Vermont |
0.63 |
| 7 |
Virginia |
1.20 |
| 15 |
Washington |
0.97 |
| 43 |
West
Virginia |
0.37 |
| 38 |
Wisconsin |
0.47 |
| 46 |
Wyoming |
0.35 |
|
Source: Matthew Zook,
U.C. Berkeley, 2000 data.
Go
to next indicator >>
2002 State Index Home | Introduction
| Overview &
Methodology | The Rankings
| Summary of Results
Development Strategies |
Data Sources
Weighting Methodology | Endnotes
| The Author
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.
|