Economic Indicators Report First Quarter 2014: … Indicator Reports...The unemployment rate in each...

Special Report: Brain Drain in WisconsinBy: Carrie Zhang, Assistant Professor of Economics at UW-Stevens Point

Economic Indicators ReportFirst Quarter 2014: Stevens Point AreaRandy Cray, Ph.D., Chief EconomistScott Wallace, Ph.D., Research Associate

Unive

rsity

of W

iscon

sin-S

teve

ns Po

int

Cent

ral W

iscon

sin Ec

onmi

c Res

earc

h Bur

eau

Brain Drain

The Stevens Point Economic Indicator Report is made possible by a genorous grant from BMO Harris Bank.

CWERB Economic Indicators Report - Stevens Point 1

TABLE OF CONTENTS

CWERB 2014 Study on Exporting Activity in North Central Wisconsin ...............................................................2-3 Table 1: National Economic Statistics ..........................................................................................................................3

Central Wisconsin .............................................................................................................................................................3-5 Table 2: Unemployment Rate in Central Wisconsin ..................................................................................................3 Table 3: Employment in Central Wisconsin ................................................................................................................3 Table 4: Wisconsin Employment Change by Sector ...................................................................................................3 Table 5: County Sales Tax Distribution ........................................................................................................................4 Table6:BusinessConfidenceinCentralWisconsin ..................................................................................................4 Figures 1-7.....................................................................................................................................................................4-5

Stevens Point-Plover Area ...............................................................................................................................................5-7 Table8:RetailerConfidenceinStevensPoint-PloverArea ....................................................................................5 Table9:HelpWantedAdvertisinginPortageCounty ..............................................................................................5 Table 10: Unemployment Claims in Portage County ................................................................................................6 Table11:PublicAssistancebyProgramType ........................................................................................................ n/a Table 12: Unemployment Claims in Portage County ................................................................................................6 Table13ResidentialConstructioninStevensPoint-PloverArea ..........................................................................6 Table14:NonresidentialConstructioninStevensPoint-PloverArea ..................................................................7 Figures 8-11 ......................................................................................................................................................................7

Housing Market Information ........................................................................................................................................7-8 Table 15: National Median Home Prices .....................................................................................................................8 Table 16: National Existing Home Sales ......................................................................................................................8 Table 17: National Inventory .........................................................................................................................................8 Table18:NationalAffordabilityIndex ........................................................................................................................8 Table19:LocalAreaMedianPrice ...............................................................................................................................8 Table 20: Local Units Sold ..............................................................................................................................................9 Table 21: Local Median Price .........................................................................................................................................9 Table22:LocalNumberofHomeSales .......................................................................................................................9

A Look at Business Starts Employee Size and the Shifting Economy............................................................... 10-11

Special Report ...............................................................................................................................................................12-19Brain Drain in Wisconsin: How Serious a Problem?

Carrie ZhangAssistant Professor of Economics

Coordinator, Central Wisconsin Economic Research Bureau Special Recognition: JeffreyDallman,ResearchAssistant,CWERBTravisMeier,ResearchAssistant,CWERB

CWERB-SchoolofBusiness&EconomicsUniversityofWisconsin-StevensPoint

StevensPoint,WI54481715-346-3774 or 715-346-2537

www.uwsp.edu/business/CWERBorfollowusonTwitter@UWSPcwerb

Association for University

Business and Economic Research

2 CWERB Economic Indicators Report - Stevens Point

BackgroundThe Central Wisconsin Economic Research Bureau (CWERB)attheUniversityofWisconsin-StevensPoint (UWSP) conducted a study on the exporting activitiesinAdams,Lincoln,Marathon,PortageandWoodcounties.ThisgeographicareawillbereferredtoasNorthCentralWisconsin.FundingforthestudycamefromCentergyInc.,throughtheWisconsinEconomicDevelopmentCorporation.AdditionalfundingfortheCWERBcomesfromBMOHarrisBankofStevensPoint,Wisconsin.

ThepurposeoftheresearchwastoascertainthelevelofexportingactivityinNorthCentralWisconsinand to determine the barriers that are preventing localfirmsfromexportingtoothercountries.First,an internet based survey was used to collect data. ThissurveywasmodeledaftertheoneusedbytheBrookings Institution Metropolitan Policy Program andtheMinnesotaTradeOffice(MTO)tosurveytheMinneapolis-SaintPaulMetroArea.Second,detailedindustrydataweregeneratedfromtheBrookingsInstitution’s Export Nation 2012 database. The resulting statistics provide additional insight into exporting activity within our region.

Executive SummaryThemajorconclusionsdrawnfromthesurveyoftheexportingactivityofbusinessfirmslocatedinNorthCentralWisconsinareasfollows.

ThelowparticipationrateoffirmsinNorthCentralWisconsinwascomparabletothatfoundintheMinnesotaTradeOffice(MTO)studyofMinneapolis-Saint Paul region’s non-urban counties. The degree offirminterestinexportingactivityinNorthCentralWisconsinisafunctionofthesmallsizeofthetypicalfirmfoundintheregionandafunctionofthetypesofbusinessesfoundinaruraleconomy.Theregionis mostly rural and has no major metropolitan area likeMinneapolis-SaintPaulandtherefore,itisnotsurprisingthatthedegreeofparticipationintheCWERBstudywouldmostcloselyresemblethatofthenon-urbanpartoftheMTOproject.

Businessfirmsinourregiontendtobesmalland,inthewordsofasurveyparticipant,are“orientedto meeting local demand.” The Small Business AdministrationstatesinitsWisconsinSmallBusinessProfile,February2013,“mostWisconsinBusinessesareverysmall,as75percentofallbusinesseshavenoemployeesandmostemployershavefewerthan20employees.”

Thisdoesnotmeanthattherearenofirmsthatexportin the region. The survey results and the exporting statistics presented in the report indicate that this is notafaircharacterizationofthesituation.Whatitdoesmean,isthattheconcentrationoffirmshavinganinterestinexportingtoaforeigndestinationisrelatively low when compared to export participation at the national level.

Thefirmswhodidrespondtothesurveywantgovernment programs to help them increase exportingactivity.Thetypesofassistancearedetailedinthereport.However,thelowconcentrationofsuchfirmsbringsintoquestionthestrategyofofferingexport assistance programs to the general business community.Inotherwords,providersandfacilitatorsofexportservicesmaybemoresuccessfuliftheyidentifythespecificfirmsthatareinterestedinexportingandthen,tailortheirexportingassistanceprogramstotheneedsofthosefirms.

The detailed export activity statistics provided in this report give good indication as to which industryclassificationsaremostlikelytocontainfirmsinterestedinexporting.Whileitisbeyondthescopeoftheexportstudy,thedatacontainedinreportcreatesafoundationfortheidentificationofthosefirmsthatcouldpotentiallybenefitfromexportassistance programs.

Major exporting sectors in the region in 2010 include: Machineryat$350million(981directexportjobs),Paperat$253million(562jobs),AgricultureProductsat$125million(554jobs),BusinessServicesat$112million(455),TransportationEquipmentat$105million(174jobs),andFoodat$98million(146jobs).Therewereanestimated5,906directexportjobsintheregionin2010.FromtheU.S.BureauofLaborStatics(BLS),therewere153,206nonfarmjobsinnorthcentralWisconsinin2010,andthusthepercentageofregional jobs directly tied to exporting was 3.8%. This wasonlyslightlylessthanWisconsin’smarkof3.9%.Eachcountyintheregion(Adams,Lincoln,Marathon,Portage,andWood)hasauniqueeconomyandexporting structure. The details are presented in the report.Marathonhasthelargestpercentageofitstotalemployment engaged in exporting activity (4.3%) and Wood the smallest percentage (3.2%).

Lastly,someofthemostprominentexportingsectorsinthefivecountieshaveexperiencedlowannualizedgrowth rates in exporting activity over the 2003-2010

CWERB 2014 Study on Exporting Activity in North Central Wisconsin


timeperiod.Forexample,thepaperindustrywhichisveryimportantintermsofexportingactivityhasexperiencedlowgrowthandfacesstiffinternationalcompetition. This situation creates a special challenge fororganizationswantingtoincreaseexportingactivityintheregion.Incontrast,overthesametimeperiod,themachinerysectorhasexperiencedstronggrowth in the counties and has much promise in termsoffutureexportingactivity.

CopiesofthefullreportcanbeobtainedbycontactingtheCWERBattheUniversityofWisconsin-StevensPointStevensPoint,WI54481,[email protected].

Nationaleconomicstatisticsforfirstquarter2014arepresented below in Table 1.

Central WisconsinThe unemployment rate in each reporting areas isdisplayedinTable2.InMarch2014Marathon,Portage and Wood County all experienced a decline intheirunemploymentrates’fromayearago.TherespectiveMarchratesforPortage,MarathonandWoodwere6.7,6.6and7.3percent.ThelaborforceweightedunemploymentrateforCentralWisconsinwasunchanged,wasat6.8percent.MeanwhileWisconsin’sunemploymentratedroppedfrom7.6to6.7percent.Thus,theunemploymentratesweremuch improved throughout the region and state. The UnitedStatesunemploymentratefellfrom7.6percentto 6.8 percent.

EmploymentfiguresinTable3arebasedonthegovernment’ssurveyofhouseholds.PortageCounty’stotalemploymentfigureexpandedby0.3percent

points and total employment in Wood County rose by 0.4 percent over the past year. Marathon County payrollsgrewbyafasterpace,3.0percentoverthepast twelve months. Central Wisconsin as a whole experiencedanemploymentincreaseofabout2,200positions.Jobsintheregionexpandedfrom141.9to144.1thousandorby1.6percent.Thesurveyofhouseholds also shows that Wisconsin’s payrolls increasedby1.7percent,orbyabout49,000positionsover the period. The nation gained 2.0 percent or about2,790,000jobsoverthesameperiod.

Table 4 gives the most recent employer based payrollsnumbersforWisconsin.Economistsbelievethenonfarmemploymentnumbersbasedonemployerprovideddata,giveamoreaccurateassessmentofthelabormarketconditionsthandoesthe household survey data. From March 2013 to August2014Wisconsin’stotalnonfarmemploymentexpandedfrom2.77millionto2.80millionorbya1.0percent.Thisrepresentsagainofapproximately26,000thousandjobsduringthepastyear.Justlikesixmonthsagothesectorsoftheeconomyto experience job growth were natural resources andmining,construction,manufacturing,tradetransportationandutilities,professional&businessservices,leisure&hospitality,educational&healthservicesandgovernment.However,theemploymentresultsforinformation,andfinancialactivitieswere


disappointing.Thus,therateofjobgenerationinthestate continues to be very modest as measured by this data set.

InTable5,PortageCountysalestaxdistributionswereflatcontractingslightlyfrom$1.295.4thousandto$1294.8thousand,adecreasecloseto0percent.Marathon experienced an increase in sales tax distributionsfromthestate.Marathonrosefrom$2,590.7thousandto$2,635.6thousandorby1.7percent. Similarly Wood County collections also expandedfrom$1,183.3to$1,218.7orbyabout3percentoverthecourseofthepastyear.Despitethebrutalwinterweather,thedatasuggeststherewas some improvement in retail activity in Central Wisconsin.

TheCWERB’ssurveyofareabusinessexecutivesisreported in Table 6. This group believes that recent events at the national level have led to a very slight improvement in the country’s economic condition. In additionandmoreimportantly,theybelievethelocalbusiness climate has improved over the past twelve months.Whenaskedtoforecasteconomicconditionsatthenationallevel,theywerealotmoreoptimisticaboutthefuturedirectionoftheeconomythanintherecent past. They also expressed similar optimism forthelocaleconomyfortheirparticularindustry.Overall,Table6alsoshowsthatthelevelofoptimismexpressedfortheeconomywasgenerallyhigherinMarch 2014 than in September 2013.

Figures1thru7giveahistoricoverviewofhowtheeconomyinWisconsinhasperformedduringthe2008-2014timeperiod.Forexample,Figure5showsadramaticdeclineinWisconsinmanufacturingandthe gradual rebound taking place since 2010. In 2009 about470,000wereemployedinmanufacturingandataendof2010,thenumberofjobsbottomedoutatapproximately425,000.Sincethattimethereboundinactivityhasaddedabout45,000positionstothemanufacturingsector.Figure7showsthesteepreboundinthenumberofpeopleemployedinleisure&hospitality,fromabout265,000in2009to263,000intheearlypartof2014.

Figure 1: Employment Level: WI

Figure 2: Unemployment Level: WI

Figure 3: Unemployment Rate: WI


Figure 4: Labor Force: WI

Figure 5: Manufacturing: WI

Figure 6: Education and Health Services: WI

Figure 7: Leisure and Hospitality: WI, In Thousands

Stevens Point – Plover AreaWe usually include Table 7 which gives employer basedestimatesofindustrialsectoremploymentinPortageCounty.However,pleasenoteatthetimethereportwaswrittenthesedataforMarchwerenotavailablefromtheWisconsinDepartmentofWorkforceDevelopment.Hopefullythesedatawillbeavailableonatimelybasisinthefutureandwillbeincluded in the report.

InTable8theCWERB’sretailerconfidencesurveyfindsthatmerchantsfeelthatstoresaleswereslightly higher than they were one year ago. This iswelcomenewsforthelocaleconomy.Whenitcomestoexpectationsaboutthefuture,itappearsthattheMarch2014assessmentofretailactivitywasmarginallyhigherthanitwasinSeptember2013.Alsothisgroupfeelsthatretailactivityinthesummerof2014 will be at higher than it was 2013. The overall significanceofthesurveyisthatlocalmerchantsaresaying that there are some signs improvements taking place in the local retail sector.

Table9HelpWantedAdvertisingisabarometeroflocallabormarketconditionsandtheindexesforStevensPoint,Wausau,MarshfieldandWisconsinRapids are now based on job advertising on the internet.TheindexforStevensPointandWisconsinRapids rose by 27.9 percent and by 21.5 percent respectivelywhencomparedtoayearago.Further,Wausau experienced a large expansion in the amountadvertisingtakingplace,about47percent.Marshfield’shelpwantedindexalsorosebyapproximately 19 percent. These data suggests that


advertising growth has been growing in the area and should lead to improvement in the job market numbers.

WehaveanewTable10forthisreport.Table10presentsdetailedexportingactivityforPortageCounty. Major exporting sectors in 2010 include: Paperat$38.0million(72directexportjobs),Machineryat$37.6million(108jobs),Foodat$33.2million(54jobs),AgriculturalProductsat$26.3million(117jobs),InsuranceServicesat$24.0million(102jobs),andBusinessServicesat$20.2million(103jobs).

Table 10 also shows industry real export annual growthratesfrom2003-2010;theestimatednumberofdirectexportjobsbyindustryinPortageCounty,and,byindustry,thedirectexportjobsannualizedgrowthratesfrom2003-2010.ThePortageCountyindustrywiththelargestnumberofdirectexportjobswasTravel and Tourism with 128 jobs.

Fromthetable,thereiswasestimated1,187directexport jobs in Marathon County. From the U.S. BureauofLaborStatistics(BLS),therewere31,695totalnonfarmjobsininthecountyin2010,andthusthepercentageofjobsdirectlytiedtoexportingwas

estimated to be 3.8 percent.

DataforTable11wasnotavailablebeforethereportwent to press.

Anothermeasureofthelocaleconomyispresentedin Table 12. It shows that new unemployment claims contractedfrom188to162orby13.8percentovertheyear. Moreover total unemployment claims dropped from1,742to1503orby13.7percentinouryearovercomparison. This signals that the local economy is gaining strength.

Table 13 presents the residential construction numbersfortheStevensPoint-Ploverarea.InouryearlycomparisonthenumberofpermitsissuedinFirstQuarterwas8,thesameaslastyear.The2014constructionhadanestimatedvalueof$887thousandand represents 7 housing units. When comparing FirstQuarter2013tothatof2014residentialalterationactivitycontractedfrom61to50permits.Further,theestimatedvalueofthistypeofactivitywentdownfrom$424.6thousandto$379.6thousand.Overall,the2014constructiondataisoffthepaceofayearago.Thehistoricallybadwinterweatherof2014surelyplayed a role in suppressing the amount residential construction activity.

ThenonresidentialconstructionfiguresinTable14wereasfollowsforFirstQuarter2014.Thenumberofpermits issued was just 1 and its estimated value was $53.7thousand.Thenumberofbusinessalteration


permits was 35 in 2014 compared to 56 in 2013. The estimatedvalueofalterationactivitywas$1.062million2014comparedtothe2013figureof$3.472million.Insum,thepacenonresidentialconstructionactivityfellinthearea.Onceagainthewinterweatherof2014mostlikelyhadastronginfluenceonthenumbers.

Figures 8 thru 11 give an economic history lesson as tohowtheemploymentlevel,theunemploymentlevel,theunemploymentrate,andthelaborforcehavetrendedoverthepastfiveyearsinPortageCounty.PleasenotethedataforthechartsrunsfromJanuary2009toearly2014.Thefiguresclearlyshowtheinfluenceofthegreatrecessiononthearealocaleconomyandthefiguressupplementthereport’syear over year comparisons. This allows the short-termfluctuationsintheeconomytobejudgedmoreproperly.

Figure 8: Employment Level: Portage

Figure 9: Unemployment Level: Portage

Figure 10: Unemployment Rate: Portage

Figure 11: Civilian Labor Force: Portage

Housing Market InformationThefollowingseventablescontaininformationonthenational,regional,andlocalhousingmarket.Housingactivityisanincrediblyimportantaspectofthe economy. We believe the reader will gain valuable insight into housing markets conditions and greater insightintothelocaleconomyinthissectionofthereport.

Table15givesnationalmedianhomepricefortheU.S.and major regions in the U.S. The median home price intheU.S.roseto$198,500inMarch2014.Housingprices in the Midwest remain the lowest in the nation. Themedianhomepriceinourpartofthecountryhasrosefrom$154,600in2013toanestimated$179,600in March 2014. In general housing prices are rising in


alloftheU.S.’sgeographicregions.TheWesthasthehighestmediumhousingpricesat$289,300.

Table 16 National and the Midwest existing home sales data shows a noticeable decline in sales activity overthepastyear.IntheMidwest1,040,000homesareforecastedtobesoldin2014.FortheMidwest,thepreliminaryestimatefor2014isthat160,000fewerhomes will be sold than in 2013. In 2013 the number ofhomesoldintheMidwestbottomedoutat910,000units.

The national inventory ofhomesisgiveninTable17.AsofMarch2014 the inventory backlog is estimated to be 5.2 months. In 2010 thenationalsupplyofhomes was 9.4 months. Thus,agreatdealofimprovementhastaken place in reducing housing inventory number. The statistics indicatethatthebacklogofunsoldhouseshasbeenreducedalmostinhalf.

Table18presentsthenationalaffordabilityindex.Overtheyearsverylowinterestratesandfallinghomepriceshavegreatlyimprovedtheaffordabilityofhomes.However,in2013housingprices and interest rates trended upwards. While stilloutstanding,thepreliminaryestimatefortheaffordabilityindexin2013is175.8,downfrom196.5in2012.Thelowertheindex,thelessaffordablehousingisforthetypicalfamily.Thismeansin2013,ahouseholdearningthemedianincomehas175percentoftheincomenecessarytoqualifyforaconventionalloancovering80percentofamedium-pricedexistingsingle-familyhome.

Table 19 displays data on state and local area median prices. For the most part Wisconsin and local area home prices have been more stable than the U.S. as a whole. In Central Wisconsin the lowest median homepriceisinWoodCountyat$83,000.PortageCountyhasthehighestmedianpriceof$127,500andMarathonfallssomewherebetweenotherthetwocounties,withamedianhomepriceof$115,000.ThemedianpriceofahouseinWisconsinisabout$132,500.Inaddition,afterafewyearsofrisingvalues,thepreliminarydatafor2014suggeststhatthemedian prices in the local area and state are declining.


Table20givesthenumberoflocalhousingunitssold,from2011to2014.Thecountiesofthe region have all experienced increases in thenumberofunitssoldoverthistimeperiod.Pleasenotethelistednumberofhomessoldin 2014 only represents the January to March activity level.

Tables 21 and 22 present the changes that have taken place in local median prices and unitssold,comparingFirstQuarter2013toFirst Quarter 2014. Here we see a decrease in local median home prices has taken place. The numberofhousingunitssoldinMarathonCounty and Portage County increased by 5.5 and 10.3 percent respectively. The lone exception being the 0 percent change in units sold in Wood County.


A Look at Business Starts Employee Size and the Shifting EconomyUWSP Small Business Development Center

VickiLobermeier,SBDCDirectorofEntrepreneurshipActivitiesMaryWescott,SBDCCounselingManager

From2004-2012,thenumberofWisconsinsmallbusinesses with between two and nine employees soared72%,accordingtoUWExtension’sMarkLange. In a March 19 Newsmakers interview on WisconsinEye,Lange,ExecutiveDirector-UWExtensionDivisionofEntrepreneurshipandEconomicDevelopmentspokeoftheshiftinoureconomy. The entire interview is available at www.wiseye.org/Programming/VideoArchive/EventDetail.aspx?evhdid=8621

Langeaddressestheshiftinoureconomynationwide2000to2010,showingtheaveragenumberofjobsperbusinessestablishmentwentfrom11.0to7.4employees.Jobs,asthemetricofbusinessactivitymaybechanging,Langesaidinthebroadcastinterview.Theaveragenumberofjobsperbusinessstartupsfellfrom4.7to2perstartupduringthesameperiod.Thenumberofemployeesperlargepubliclyownedcompanyalsodecreasedfromanaverageof4969percompanyto3226employeespercompany.Thetotalnumberofemployeesperbigcompanydeclinedduringthedecade,asdidthetotal number employed by large companies. While earlyinthedecade,25Mworkedforlargepubliccompanies,thatnumberdroppedto20Mbytheendof2010.Dueinparttowhathasbeentermed,‘forcedself-employment’,thetotalnumberofstartupsgrewrapidlyfrom11.3to19.7Mduringthesameperiod.These national numbers show 2000 to 2010 was a decadeofstructuralshiftforoureconomy.

Lange shares the data developed by a Harvard economist who tracked data by DUNS numbers. Statistics by DUNS number are available at www.youreconomy.org/Thesitecategorizesbusinessesbysizeofemployee,orbusinessstage.Thesiteshowsdatabycompanysizedefinedasself-employed,stage1with2-9employees,stage2with10-99,stage3with100-499 and stage 4 companies over 500 employees. WI data 2004 to 2012 shows the largest increase in jobgrowthwentoninstage1companies,thosewith2-9employees.Stage2companies,thosesized10-99showedzerogrowthduringthesametime2004to2012.

RecentreportsfromtheKauffmanFoundationtellusthatnationwidethetotalnumberofnewbusinessesdeclinedin2013,astheunemploymentratewentdown.Thismightindicateaslowingof‘forcedself-employment’ as jobs become available. The report states the 2013 business creation rate has returned to levelsfoundpriortotherecession.AsreportedintheMilwaukeeJournalSentinel,Wisconsinsawadeclinein entrepreneurial activity with 170 businesses createdforevery100,000adults.Moreonthe2014KauffmanIndexofEntrepreneurialActivityisonlineatwww.kauffman.org/~/media/kauffman_org/research%20reports%20and%20covers/2014/04/kiea_2014_report.pdf.

The UWSP Small Business Development Center 715-346-3838ishappytohelpareabusinessesfindadditional resources.


TotalSBALoanAmountComparedQ12010,2011,2012,2013,2014

Total Business Starts Compared Q1:2010,2011,2012,2013,2014

TotalNumberofSBALoansComparedQ1

2010,2011,2012,2013,2014


Brain Drain in Wisconsin:How Serious a Problem?

Carrie ZhangAssistant Professor of Economics

Coordinator, Central Wisconsin Economic Research Bureau

Introduction A2010pollconductedbyUW-MadisonProfessorKenFoldsteinfoundthat62percentofWisconsinitesagreed with the statement that Wisconsin’s brightest collegegraduatesareleavingtheirhomestateforopportunitiesoutsideWisconsin,andthat“braindrain”isastatewideconcern.Additionally,aspeakeratthegovernor’sconferenceoneconomicdevelopment in February pointed out that combatting “braindrain”isthekeytoWisconsin’sgrowth,with neighboring states like Illinois and Minnesota gainingcollegegraduates.Theseinquiriesraiseseveralquestions.Is“braindrain”aproblemforWisconsin?Ifso,whatarethecauses?Howseriousisthe problem?

Soexactlywhatis“braindrain”?Ineconomics,“braindrain”isdefinedasasituationinwhicheducatedorprofessionalpeopleleaveaparticularplaceforonethat gives them better pay or living conditions. More generally,braindrainisalsocalledhumancapitalflight,withhumancapitalbeingtheknowledge,skills,competencies,andattributesofindividualsthatfacilitatethecreationofpersonal,socialandeconomicwell-being.Differencesinhumancapitalamong workers can be explained by various worker attributes,suchaseducation,healthconditions,experience,andtraining.Improvingindividualhumancapitalcanhelpalleviatetheseverityofsocialinequalityinasociety.Moreover,humancapitalhas been shown to exhibit positive externalities because well-trained individuals tend to spread their knowledgetoothers,thusbenefittinglessskilledindividuals(Lucas,1988).Insum,humancapitalisadrivingforceforthegrowthoftheeconomy(Barroand Sala-i-Martin 2004).

Anylossofhumancapitalfromtheexitofskilledworkerswillleadtolowereducationlevels,lowerpercapitaincomeandfeweropportunitiesforeconomicdevelopment. Brain drain is a comprehensive term thatencompassestheemigrationofallhighlytrainedoreducatedpeopleofallagegroups,not

onlytheout-migrationofyoung(aged25-29),single,andcollegeeducated.Braindrainwillbeworseifhumancapitalflightisassociatedwiththenetlossofyoungcollege-educatedindividualsbecauseofthenegativeimpactoflosttaxrevenuesanddiminishedeconomic prospects. Without a skilled and highly educatedworkforce,oureconomywillexperienceslowergrowth,becauseoflostproductivity.Studieshaveshownthatmore“qualifiedjobapplicants”mean more jobs because companies tend to move to states where they know they can hire an educated workforce.

Thelossofhumancapitalfrombraindrainisusually regarded as an economic cost. Investment in education by local governments may not lead to fasterlocaleconomicgrowthifalargenumberofitshighlyeducatedworkersleavethehomestate.“Braindrain”thusoftenleadstoargumentsthatquestiontheeffectivenessofpublicinvestmentsineducation.ThoughWisconsin’spopulationisincreasing,mostofthegrowthisoccurringinpeople65orolder.Overthepastfiveyears,Wisconsinhaslost9,000collegeeducatedresidents,agedbetween21and29.This,however,hasbeentheexperienceofeverystate.Forhighlyeducatedyoungpeople,thewholeworld is their job market. This is not so much brain drain,butbrainredistribution.Mobilityinoursocietyhasincreasedbecauseofnewtechnologies.Similartotheimportanceofhumancapital,mobilityisalsothekeyfactorinthesuccessofthelocaleconomy.Theinfluenceofmigrationcanbetreatedasanequilibratingmechanisminchangeeconomy(Sjaastad,1962).Economistshaveshownthatmigrationisamethodofpromotingbetterresourceallocation. We could treat migration as an investment inincreasingtheproductivityofhumanresource,andthus,averyimportantfactorforthegrowthofthelocal economy. While we pay close attention to the numberofpeopleleavingthestate,weshouldnotignorethenumberofpeoplecomingtoWisconsin,andthequalityofhumancapitalcarriedbyin-migrants.


Since“braindrain”involvesthelossofhumancapital,ifwereallywanttochecktheseverityofthebraindraininWisconsin,weshouldnotsimplycountthenumberofmigrants,(thenumberoftheinflowandthenumberoftheoutflow).WeshouldalsocarefullyexaminethehumancapitalofmigrantsbothleavingandarrivinginWisconsin,toassesschangesinlaborproductivityofthestate.Arelativelyhigherrateofin-migrationoftalentedpeopleandarelativelylowerrateofout-migrationoftalentovertimecanincreasethelevelofhumancapitalinthelocaleconomy. So we need to consider ways to measure thequantityofhumancapitalcarriedbymigrants.Such measurements and data sources are described in the second section. The third section gives the results ofourstudy.Acomparisonofbraindrainamongregional and neighboring states will also be explored. Policy implications and conclusions are discussed in the last section.

Method and DataThereisnoaperfectwaytoidentifyexactlyhowmuch human capital each person possesses because eachpersonisdifferent.Weadoptageneralmeasurement that takes into consideration shared characteristicsthatinfluencehumancapitalstocks,includingeducationattainment,workexperience,healthstatus,maritalstatus,andothervariables.

Basic ModelPersons with greater human capital are more productivethanthosewithlesshumancapital.Astheamountoftimeapersonspendsinanactivitygrows,thatpersonislikelytodevelopsomemethod,eitheranewtechniqueorsimplymusclememory,toincreaseproficiency,therebyincreasingoutputandincome.Hence,theamountofhumancapitalwithina state is crucial to its competitiveness and gross stateproduct.Thisbegsthequestion:Whatexactlycontributes to human capital development? Certainly thereareformalmeasurementssuchaseducationandexperience.However,otherattributesalsocontributetotheformationandaccumulationofhumancapitalinanygiventrade.AseconomistAlfredMarshallputit,thishappensasif“itwereintheair,and[people]maylearnthemunconsciously”(Marshall,1890).Toestimatethemovementofhumancapitalstocks,weadoptamethodknownasthe“Labor-Income-BasedmeasureofHumanCapital”(LIBHC).EconomistJacobMincerformulatedtheLIBHCtodetermine how much income an individual may commandrelativetotheamountoftheirhumancapital.Thefollowingequationshowsthatincomeis

equaltothecontributionsofvariouscharacteristicsofan individual:

Lnhourlywage = ß0 + ß1Edu + ß2Exp + ß3Sex + ß4Race + ß5Mar +ß6Union + ß7Dis+ .

Intheequation,Lnhourlywageisthenaturallogarithmofanindividual’shourlywage.Eduisthelevelofeducationattainment.Studieshaveshownthathighereducationlevel,woulddramaticallyboosttheprobabilityoffindingajobaswellastheprobabilityoffindingabetterjob,andthusincreaseearninglevels.Expreferstoworkexperience,whichconstitutesanotherkeycomponentofhumancapital.Work experience permits an individual to become moreproductiveandthereforeearnahigherincome.Marisadummyvariableformaritalstatusthathelpstoexplainthepoweroffamilyobligations,whichingeneral,canmotivatepeopletotakeonextraresponsibilities at work and gain extra experience that translateintogreaterhumancapital.Further,Sexisanotherdummyvariableusedforgender,astherearegenderspecificjobsthatrestrictlaborparticipationofcertaingroupandthusaffectstheabilitytoaccumulatehumancapital.Inaddition,wealsocontrolforotherfactorsthatmayaffectindividual’shumancapital.Raceisadummyvariableforethnicity,DisreferstothedisabilitystatusandUnionrepresentstheunionaffiliation.istheerrorterm.Allthesefactorscandistortthelinkbetweenhumancapitalandthewagerate.Theinterceptterm,ß0,showstheextenttowhichhourlywagesresultedfromthecharacteristicsoftheirlocaleconomy,suchastheamountofmachineryandequipmentperworker,theamountofroadsorotherpubliccapitalperworker.Othercoefficients(ß1-ß7)showtheinfluenceofhumancapitalcharacteristicsonhourlywagesofindividuals.

Withtheaboveequations,wecantakeacloselookat the brain drain problem in Wisconsin. We can consider how much human capital on average each out-migrantremovesfromastatebyrelocating,resultinginthe“braindrain”effectorhumancapitalflight.Alternatively,“braingain”istheresultoftheinflowofpersonstothestatewithhumancapital.Thedata sources are described in detail below.

Data SourcesThe U.S. Census Bureau sends a monthly survey tohouseholdscalledtheAmericanCommunitySurvey(ACS)toestimatecharacteristicsoftheU.S.population and households based on the twelve monthsleadinguptotheissueofthesurvey.

3

3


Individual responses are weighted to indicate the amountofpeopleeachrespondentrepresents.TheMincerequationusedinourstudylooksatACSdata to determine the hourly rate or return on humancapitalofin-migrantsandout-migrants.Thisinformationisusedtocalculatethehumancapitaltransferredwhenmigrantsleaveonestateforanother.Wedefinethenetflowofworkersasthedifferencebetweenoutflowofmigrantsandinflowofmigrants.Andsimilarly,thenetflowofhumancapitalisthedifferencebetweentotalhumancapitalstockscarriedbytheout-flowofworkersandthehumancapitalcarriedbythein-flowofworkers.

Asmentionedpreviously,educationattainmentisthemostimportantvariableinfluencingthehumancapital.TheACSsamplesspanfromnoyearsofschoolingto20years(thepresumedamountoftimefromfirstgradetoattainmentofadoctoratedegree).Work experience constitutes another key component ofindividual’shumancapitalstock.Moreyearsofwork experience permit an individual to be more productivethantheaveragegreenhorn,andthereforeearnahigherincome.Inouranalysis,weutilizeageasaproxyfor“potentialexperience”becausetheACSsurveydoesnotdirectlyaskrespondentsabouttheiryearsofwork.Experienceshouldrisewiththeageofworkerswhoremainintheworkforce.The link between potential experience and actual experiencemaybemoretenuousforwomenthanformenbecausewomenaremorelikelytospendtimeoutoftheformallaborforcetoattendtofamilyresponsibilities.Wethereforecontrolforgenderinourequation.

Familial obligations may motivate an individual to wanttoout-performpeersand,therebycontributetoan individual’s human capital accumulation. Health problemscanreducethehumancapitalforworkersifillnesscausesworkerstomissworkforextendedperiodsorifitleadstoalossofcoordinationorknowledge.Wethereforeincludeavariablefordisabilitystatusinourestimation.Finally,weknowthatunionsprotectworkersfromunfairlaborpracticesandcreatejobsecurity.Whilecomfortingfortheworker,unionscreatedisincentivestoseekbetteropportunitieselsewhere,therebyconstraininghumancapitalaccumulation.TheACSsurveyhoweverhasnotcollectedunionaffiliationdata.Inresponse,wedevelopedavariabletoestimatetheprobabilityofunionaffiliationforeachmigrant.Tobeconsideredaunionmember,anindividualmustbeover18yearsofage,currentlyworking,andearnaweeklywagewithin$150oftheaveragewageofunionmembersof

the industry.

Givenouremphasisonthecomprehensivenessof“braindrain”,welimitedoursampletoworkingmigrantsbetweentheageof16and70whohaverelocated within the past year and have resided in their new states more than three months. Those without wage earnings are not taken into consideration. Hourly wages were converted to annualincomeassuminga2,000hourworkyear,andannualincomesareassumedtopersistinthefuture.Future returns are then used to estimate the migrant’s humancapitalstock,using10%annualdiscountrate.

ResultsBrain Drain in WisconsinLet’sseeifourstatehasabraindrainproblem.Figure1showsflowpatternsofmigrants.Weknowfrom2000to2010,64,334workersleftWisconsinperyearonaverageandtheaverageinflowofworkersperyearwas64,793.Forthat11yearsperiod,5,040moreworkersenteredWisconsinthanleftthestate.However,Wisconsinhasexperiencedanetlossof40,726workersfrom2006to2010.Thistrend,ifcontinued,willhaveanegativeeffectonWisconsin’sfutureeconomicgrowth.Statesthathavemoreworkers enter than leave will be in a much better labormarketpositionthanstatesthatfaceanetout-flowofworkers.

Inordertoassesstheseriousnessofbraindrain,weneedtoevaluatethehumancapitalflowpatternsforWisconsin.AsshowninFigure2,thetotalnetlossofhumancapitaltoWisconsinfrom2000to2010wasabout$309,137,167,despitethenetgainof5,040workers during the same period. This tells us that the workersleavingWisconsinweresignificantlymoreskilled and educated than the workers coming in. Although5,040moreworkersenteredWisconsinthan

Figure 1- Flow Patterns of Migrants in Wisconsin


left,therewasanetlossinhumancapital.Wisconsin’sGDPgreweachyearfrom2000to2010(evenduringtherecessionin2008),sothenetlossofhumancapitalisnotpreventingWisconsinfromgrowing.ItmayhoweverbepreventingWisconsinfromgrowingatafasterrate.Figure2showsthat,since2010,Wisconsinhas experienced an increase in net human capital inflowat$2,768,479,479,despite17,779moreworkersleaving Wisconsin than entering the state in 2010. This change may indicate that Wisconsin has had some success in attracting the highly skilled and educated workers. We need to continue this trend line to promoteoureconomicgrowth,especiallygrowthintothefuture.

Wisconsin and its Neighbor StatesInordertohaveabetterunderstandingofourbraindrainproblem,wealsoneedtoexaminetheexperienceofsurroundingstates.Figures3and4showhownetflowsofmigrantsandhumancapitalinWisconsincomparetoitsneighborstates.Ofthe4statessurroundingWisconsin,wecanclearlyseethatmostofourneighborslostworkersfrom2000to2010,exceptforIowawhichgainedmoreworkersthanitlost.IowafarexceededWisconsin’stotalnetgaininworkers,whiletheother3statesexperiencednetlosses.ThenetinflowofworkerstoIowaduringtheperiodis11,087,whileIllinois’snetlosswas381,262workers,Michigan’snetlosswas284,648,andMinnesota’snetlosswas45,190.ItissurprisingthatIllinois lost workers given that Chicago has been a magnetforworkersinthepast.

Itisalsonecessarytochecktheflowpatternofhuman capital carried by these migrants in our borderingstates.InFigure4,weseethatmostofourneighborstateslosthumancapitalfrom2000to

2010,exceptIllinoiswhichgainedover$100billioninincomefromthenetinflowofbyhighlyskilledand educated workers. This result is consistent with theexpectationsofeconomists.Largerandmoreinterestingcitiesareespeciallyattractiveforthehighlyskilledandeducatedworkerswhoprefercommunitiesthathavetheamenitiestheydesire,such as education and job opportunities. The only neighborstatethatreallyenjoyed“braingain”isIllinois.TheproximityofChicagoisalsoonereasonwhyWisconsinlosesmanyofitsyoungandhighlyeducated workers.

Relativelyspeaking,Wisconsin’sbrainproblemmaynot be as dire as initially thought. While Wisconsin lost$309,137,167inincomeinthe11yearperiod,Iowalost$10,132,194,003,Michigan$41,692,937,461,andMinnesota$22,286,727,435.Wisconsinhasmanagedto recover the lost human capital since 2010 with a

Figure 2- Flow Patterns of Wisconsin Human Capital

Figure 3 - Net Flow of Migrants, Wisconsin and its Neighbor States

Figure 4 - Net Flow of Human Capital, Wisconsin and its Neighbor States


surge in highly skilled and educated in-migration ofworkers,despitetheU.S.trendofhumancapitalmovingsouth.ComparedwithMinnesota,IowaandMichigan,Wisconsinhasbeenamagnetforhighlyskilledandeducatedworkers.Amongallourneighbors,IowaismostlikeWisconsin.ThoughIowaperformedbetterthanWisconsininattractingworkersoverall,thestatelostmorehumancapitalthan Wisconsin because it was losing educated and skilled workers while attracting unskilled workers during the period.

Theother2states–MichiganandMinnesota,experiencedanetlossbothinthenumberofworkersandthelevelofhumancapital.DespitethelongtermeconomicstagnationinMichigan,itseemsthatMinnesotahasmoreproblemsinattractingpeople,especially skilled and educated workers. Minnesota hasahigherGSPlevel,largermetropolitanareas,and much higher per capita income than Wisconsin. WhythenhasWisconsinperformedbetterintermsofnetmigrationandhumancapital?SomecluestothiscomefromthedatacollectedbytheNationalCenterforEducationStatistics.Wisconsinisanannualnetimporterofcollege-boundstudentsduetothegoodreputationofcollegeanduniversitiesinWisconsin,whileMinnesotaandMichiganareannualnetexporterofyounghighschoolgraduates.Tornatzky,et.al.(2001)foundthatcollegereputationwasthemostimportantfactordeterminingchoicesofhighschoolgraduates,andstudentsingeneraltended to stay where they earned college degrees. TheirfindingsaresupportedbyareportfromtheUniversityofWisconsinSystem,whichlookedatthenumberofgraduateswhoremaininthestate.Ofall13four-yearinstitutions,81percentofWisconsinresidentsremainedinthestateaftergraduationfromaUWSysteminstitution.Overall–includingnon-residents-67%ofalumniremainedinWisconsin.AtUW-Madison,69%ofWisconsinresidentsstayedinthestate.AtUW-StevensPoint,76%ofUW-StevensPointgraduatesremainedinthestate,with31%livingintheNorthCentralregion.Intotal,81%ofWisconsinresidentswhograduatedfromUW-StevensPointremained in the state.

Ifastateloseshighschoolgraduateswhoobtainacollegedegreeinanotherstate,itwillresultinfewerindividualscontributingtothehomestate’sfutureeconomy.Thesefactsgoagainsttheargumentthat“braindrain”phenomenonshoulddiscourageinvestmentineducation.Ourbetteruniversityandcommunity college system actually curbs brain drain.Statesthatattractmorecollegeenrolleesfrom

other states than they lose will be in a much better economicpositioninthefuture.InsteadofinvestinglessintheeducationinWisconsin,weshouldinvestmore here to attract more educated and young people.Brain Drains in Great Lakes and Midwest RegionRegionalcomparisonsofdomesticmigrationsareillustrated in Figure 5 which shows the net regional flowpatternsofworkersinaverageintheGreatLakesandMidwestfrom2000to2010.WhenwedothealltheregionalcomparisonsofdomesticmigrationsforthewholeUnitedStatesfrom2005to2010,thebiggestloserofworkersistheGreatLakesregions,whilethegreatest gains go to states in the Southeast region. We knowthatmanyworkersleavethenorthernpartofthecountryforsouthernstates,soitisnotsurprisingtoseethattheMidwestexperiencedanetlossofworkers. The situation is even worse in the Great lakesregion.WecanalsoobservefromFigure5,thereismorein-migrationbeforethefinancialcrisisin2008thanafterwards,supportingtheideathatpeopleare

Figure 5 - Net Flows of Migrants in the Great Lakes and Midwest Region


more mobile when they have money.WithregardstothenetflowofhumancapitalinthetworegionsshowninFigure6,wecanseethatthe whole Midwest area lost human capital at a $201,193,186onaverageeveryyearfrom2001to2010,whiletheGreatLakesgained$701,769,370.The Great Lakes is doing better in attracting skilled andeducatedworkersthantherestofthestatesintheMidwest.Despitethis,weshouldnotignoretheproblemofaconsistentnetlossofthehumancapitalsince2003fortheGreatLakesregion.

Figure 6 - Net Flows of Human Capitals in the Great Lakes and Midwest Region

Policy Implications and ConclusionAlackofqualifiedworkersundermineeconomicstabilityandgrowthinthefuturesopolicyandbusiness leaders need to have a clearer picture ofourflowpatternofworkers,andhumancapital especially. We have shown that Wisconsin experiencedanetin-migrationofworkersandbraindrainduringtheperiodof2000to2010.Therealproblemisthattheskilllevelofout-migrantsishigherthanin-migrants.Severalfactorshavecontributedtothenetlossofhumancapitalsinour state. Wisconsin has a lower per capita income levelthanotherstates-$37,623comparedto$39,626nationally. Good paying jobs and career opportunities are the most important criteria to migrants in choosingwheretolive.Anothersignificantfactorcontributing to Wisconsin’s brain drain is the national trend toward urban areas which typically have more job opportunities and higher wages. Though we haveamajormetropolisinMilwaukee,largercitieslikeChicagoandMinneapoliscanattractalotofWisconsin’s educated and skilled workers. It is very importantforworkers,especiallyfortheskilledandeducatedyoungpeopletofindaplacethatis“active,excitingandfun”(ThomasB.FordhamInstitute,2009).

Contrarytoconventionalwisdom,theso-called“braindrain”maynotbeasdireasisoftenportrayedinWisconsin.ComparedwithMinnesota,IowaandMichigan,Wisconsinisamoreattractiveplaceforeducated and skilled workers. Wisconsin did manage torecovermuchofthelosthumancapitalin2010withahugesurgeinhighlyskilledin-migrationofworkers.Wefindthatourwell-regardeduniversityandcommunitycollegesystemhasattractedout-of-stateschoolgraduates,manywhostayinWisconsinafterearningtheircollegedegree.

Long-range comprehensive initiatives should be developed to try to combat the drain in human capital.Firstofall,weneedtocreatejobsthatpaycompetitivewages.Otherresearchershaveemphasizedtheneedtoimplementpolicies,suchastaxcredits,topromotegrowthinindustrieswith“technologicalintensity”,whichtendtogrowfaster,createmorejobs,andleadtohigherincomes.LikeotherstatesintheMidwest,Wisconsin’straditionalmanufacturingindustrieshavenotbeen able to compete with the high-tech industries inSiliconValleyandChicagoforhighlyskilledworkers.IncreasingtheshareofWisconsinfirmswith technological intensity will help combat brain drain,makingourstatemoreattractiveforthefuture


workers. Boosting Wisconsin’s economy will take more than just adding jobs and attracting workers. Thestateneedstofosterhighgrowthindustrieswhich lure highly talented workers.

Secondly,thestateshouldinvestmoreineducationinsteadofworryingthatcollegegraduateswillleaveforotherstates.Itistruethatwelosesomeofourcollegegraduatesduringtheirearly20s.However,themobilityofworkers,especiallyyoungpeopleissomethingthatcannotbe“curbed”orcontrolled.Whilethereislittletostopyoungpeoplefromleaving,wecandoalottoencourageeducatedandhighlyskilledpeopletocome,liveandstayinWisconsin.Evidencefromneighboringstateslike Minnesota indicate that college education is important in curbing brain drain and that college reputationisthemostimportantfactorinattractingyoung high school graduates. The state should also provideincentivessuchasspecifiedtuitionreductionprograms,loanforgiveness,grantaidand/oroffermore graduate school scholarships to keep local talent in-stateandtoattractout-of-statetalent.Expandingsocial opportunities and the cultural diversity ofthestatecanalsohelpaswellasfosteringtiesbetween colleges/universities and local businesses. Insum,keepingandattractingworkerswithhigherhumancapitalrequiresustoengageinlong-rangecomprehensive planning.


ReferencesBarro,R.J.,&Sala-i-Martin,X.(2004).“EconomicGrowth”.Cambridge,MA:TheMITPress.Glaeser,EdwardL.andDavidC.Mare,2001.“CitiesandSkills,”JournalofLaborEconomics.19(2): 316-342.

LouisG.,DenisO.Grayetal.(2001).“WhoWillStayandWhoWillLeave?”SouthernTechnologyCounciladivisionoftheSouthernGrowthPoliciesBoard.

Marshall,A.1890.“PrinciplesofEconomics”.London:Macmillan.

Mulligan,C.B.andSala-i-Martin,X.(1997)“Alaborincome-basedmeasureofthevalueofhumancapital:anapplicationtothestatesoftheUnitedStates”.JapanandtheWorldEconomy,9(2),159–191.

Silvernail,DavidL.andGollihur,Greg.(2003).Maines’CollegeGraduates:WhereTheyGoandWhy”.CenterforEducationPolicy,AppliedResearch,andEvaluation,UniversityofSouthernMaineandFinanceAuthorityofMaine.

Sjaastad,LarryA.,1962.“TheCostsandReturnsofHumanMigration,”JournalofPoliticalEconomy,70Supplement:80-93.

ThomasB.FordhamInstitute.(2009).“LosingOhio’sFuture:WhyCollegeStudentsFleetheBuckeyeStateandWhatMightBeDoneAboutIt.”

Tornatzky,LouisG.,DenisO.Grayetal.(2001).“WhoWillStayandWhoWillLeave?”SouthernTechnologyCouncil,adivisionoftheSouthernGrowthPoliciesBoard.skilledandeducatedyoungpeopletofindaplacethatis“active,excitingandfun”(ThomasB.FordhamInstitute,2009).


Notes

MISSION AND VISION

ThemissionoftheUWSPCentralWisconsinEconomicResearchBureauistofostereconomicdevelopmentbybringingtimelyeconomicanalysistoourregion,focusingonMarathon,PortageandWoodcounties.

The mission has been accomplished through the publicationofEconomicIndicatorReports.ThesereportsarecompiledandreleasedforeachcountyinCentralWisconsin.

The CWERB aspires to be Wisconsin’s premier research centerfocusedonregionaleconomicdevelopment.

HISTORY

TheCWERBisanonprofitorganizationfoundedinOctober1983.ItsoperatingbudgetcomesfromtheprivatesectorandtheUWSPSchoolofBusinessandEconomics.TheCWERBalsorepresentsanimportantpartoftheoutreacheffortsoftheUWSPSchoolofBusinessandEconomics.

SOURCES OF FUNDING •UWSPSchoolofBusinessandEconomics•BMOHarrisBankofStevensPoint•BMOHarrisBankofMarshfield•BMOHarrisBankofWausau•CentergyInc.ofWausau•CommunityFoundationofGreater South Wood County - Wisconsin Rapids

SCHOOL OF BUSINESS & ECONOMICS •Enrollmentof1,000students;Morethan30%ofourstudentscomefromMarathon,PortageandWoodcounties;approximately50%ofourgraduatesstayinthethree-county area •TheSBEisinthepre-accreditationphasebytheAssociationtoAdvanceCollegiateSchoolsofBusiness(AACSB),oncecompleted,SBEwillbeamongthetop18%ofallbusinessschoolsintheworld.

CWERB CLIENTELE •CentralWisconsinbusinessfirmsarethemostcrucialcomponentintheeconomicdevelopmentofourregion.Businessfirmsarekeenlyawareoftheimportantrolethatinformeddecisionmakingplaysinanydevelopmentalstrategy.

•PrivatesectororganizationsdevotedtoeconomicdevelopmentinCentralWisconsin,suchasareachambersofcommerceandtheiraffiliatedeconomicdevelopmentagencies.

•Publicsectororganizationsdevotedtoeconomicdevelopment in Central Wisconsin.

•Thegeneralpublic,inordertomakeinformeddecisions,takeadvantageoftheunbiasedinformationandanalysisabout the economy.

•TheCWERBemploysstudentresearchassistantswhich provides an excellent educational setting while alsoprovidingtheopportunityforstudentstoearnfundstowardeducation.Faculty,staffandstudentsatUWSPutilizethereportsandresourcesoftheCWERB.

CWERB ACTIVITIES ThedisseminationoftheCWERBresearchtakesplacethroughvarioushardcopypublications,electronicmediareportsandpresentations.Forexample,theEconomicIndicatorReportsarepresentedinMarshfield,StevensPoint,WausauandWisconsinRapids.Theaudiencesconsistofbusiness,politicalandeducationalleaders.

The Economic Indicator Reports also contain a special report section that is devoted to a current issue in economics. These special reports are usually presentedbyUWSPfaculty.

Substantialnewspaper,radioandtelevisioncoverageofthe publications and presentations have been instrumental infocusingattentionontheSchoolofBusinessandEconomics.ChiefEconomistRandyCrayhasbeeninterviewed by the local media as well as the Chicago TribuneandCNNRadioonavarietyofeconomicmatters.

ABOUT THE CENTRAL WISCONSIN ECONOMIC RESEARCH BUREAU


uwsp.edu/busecon/cwerbfacebook.com/UWSPsbetwitter.com/UWSPcwerb

Economic Indicators Report First Quarter 2014: … Indicator Reports...The unemployment rate in each...

Documents

Transcript of Economic Indicators Report First Quarter 2014: … Indicator Reports...The unemployment rate in each...