January, 2014 Winter Issue Arizona’s Economy Economic and business research center Still in a Hole, But Making Progress: Fourth Quarter Forecast Update By George W. Hammond, Ph.D., EBR Director and Research Professor Recent Developments U.S. real GDP rose by 2.8% in the third quarter of 2013, according to the advance estimate from the U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis. That was faster than the 2.5% growth rate in the second quarter and the 1.1% growth rate in the first quarter. However, third quarter growth was still below the average growth rate during the 1929-2012 period of 3.3% per year. Overall, we have seen steady improvement in real GDP growth through 2013. A rizona is still working its way out of the hole created by the Great Recession, but we are making progress. The state is generating growth in jobs, income, retail sales, and population. But we are not out of the hole just yet. For instance, while state jobs are growing at a faster pace than nationally, we have replaced just 49% of the jobs lost during the downturn. The forecast calls for Arizona to continue growing, and to outpace national growth for most indicators. In particular, the forecast implies that the state will replace all of the jobs lost during the Great Recession by 2015. If that turns out to be the case, it will have taken eight years for the state to get back on even terms. That is a testament to the severity of the downturn and the painful recovery. Of the 2.8% increase in real GDP in the third quarter, 1.04 percentage points came from consumption spending with most of that spending originating in the goods sector (both durables and nondurables) (Exhibit 1). Growth in consumer services was modest in the third quarter. Investment spending contributed 1.45 percentage points to the third quarter growth rate, with particular strength in inventory accumulation. Removing inventory accumulation, real final sales of domestic product rose by 2.0% in the third quarter, slightly below the second quarter increase of 2.1%. Residential investment continued its upward trajectory in the third quarter and nonresidential investment contributed as well, although to a lesser extent. Net exports contributed 0.31 percentage points to growth, with gains in exports In this issue Still in a Hole, But Making Progress: Fourth Quarter Forecast Update . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 Cluster Presence: How Does Metro Tucson Compare?. . . . . . . . 5 The Fresh Produce Industry in Nogales, Arizona: Economic Impacts and Challenges. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 December 1, 2013 helped along by a drop in imports during the quarter. Finally, government spending was flat in the third quarter, with the (fourth consecutive) decline in federal spending roughly offset by an increase in state and local government expenditures. Arizona Job Growth Beats Nation Arizona’s year-over-year job growth continued to outpace the nation through August 2013, which is the most recent data available due to the federal shutdown. According to the latest EBR benchmark of employment estimates (to the March 2013 ES202 data) Arizona’s year-over-year job growth has been at or above 2.0% each month this year. In contrast, national job growth has been between 1.5% and 1.7% on a year-overyear basis. The state seasonally adjusted unemployment rate hit 8.3% in August 2013, up slightly from 8.0% in June and July. Arizona’s unemployment rate was slightly above the national average of 7.3% in August. Housing Activity on the Mend National housing activity slowed during the summer and Arizona followed suit. Total seasonally adjusted housing permits for the nation increased by 14.1% during New UA App Offers Users Real-time Economic Data for Arizona. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Forecast Tables. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Arizona Economic Indicators: AZ and US. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Arizona Economic Indicators: Metro Areas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Arizona Economic Indicators: Counties . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 15 16 17 20 Arizona’s Economy Arizona will continue growing and by 2015 will replace all the jobs lost during the great recession. the June-August period of 2013, compared to the summer of 2012. That was roughly one-half the percentage increase in 2012. In Arizona, total seasonally-adjusted housing permits during the June-August period of 2013 were up 7.2% on a year-over-year basis. That was far slower than the yearover-year increase in 2012 of 47.4%. The slowdown in Arizona was concentrated in single-family permits, although multi-family permit growth slowed during the summer as well. This slowdown may be related in part to labor shortages in construction and to high land prices in desirable areas. Housing permit activity in Phoenix and Tucson also decelerated during the summer of 2013, with the slowdown particularly evident for Phoenix. Both building activity and house prices have increased at rapid rates recently. However, both remain well below peak levels. Indeed, state total housing permits in 2012 totaled 21,726, according to the Census Bureau. That was a 67.0% increase over 2011 and a 75.6% increase over 2010. Even so, housing permits are at a very low level. Indeed, the last time Arizona housing permits were in the 22,000 range was the mid-1970s. Likewise, Phoenix house prices, measured by the Case-Shiller index, are up 41.2% from their bottom in September 2011. Even so, they are still 37.8% below the peak hit in June 2006. Outlook: The Nation Has Room to Grow The national economy is expected to limp out of 2013, with weak real GDP growth in the fourth quarter of 1.6% at a seasonally adjusted annual rate. Slower growth in the fourth quarter is driven by the impact of the federal government shutdown and uncertainty about fiscal policy in general. Growth accelerates in 2014 and 2015 as the federal fiscal drag diminishes, nonresidential fixed investment (business equipment and structures) rebounds, the housing recovery continues, and world growth picks up momentum. Exhibit 1: Inventory Accumulation Made a Big Contribution in the Third Quarter percent 1.00 Percentage Point Contributions to U.S. Real GDP Growth Third Quarter 2013 0.80 0.60 0.40 0.20 0.00 -0.20 -0.40 2 A decline in imports boosts U.S. GDP growth Economic and Business Research Center, Eller College of Management, The University of Arizona January, 2014 Winter Issue Federal fiscal drag is expected to dissipate in 2014, although a portion of federal spending is expected to be sequestered again during FY2014 and emergency unemployment insurance benefits are assumed to be phased out beginning in 2014. Thus, federal spending is expected to be less of a drag, but will not contribute to growth. The housing market is expected to continue its rebound, with national housing starts rising from 914,000 in 2013 to 1.6 million by 2016. Even so, that leaves starts 22.3% below their 2005 peak. The recovery in housing activity is driven by improvement in household growth, low interest rates, and gradually improving credit conditions. House prices continue to rise as well, although the rate of appreciation slows during the forecast. Finally, the outlook for the world economy calls for gradually improving growth through 2015, as the Eurozone picks up steam and other important trading partners (like China, Brazil, Russia, and India) follow suit. This generates improved export performance through 2015, with is roughly matched by growth in U.S. imports, driven by faster domestic income growth. Arizona Bounce on the Horizon The outlook for Arizona is positive. The state is well positioned to grow and for growth to accelerate. This forecast hinges on reduced fiscal drag in 2014-2015, continuing improvement in the housing market that is tied to increased residential mobility, and stronger U.S. and world growth. The outlook for Arizona is positive. The state is well positioned to grow and for growth to accelerate. As Exhibit 2 shows, Arizona is forecast to regain its previous employment peak in 2015. Since that previous high was achieved in 2007, the forecast implies that it will take eight years for the state to get back to even terms after the Great Recession. The national economy is currently forecast to replace all of the jobs lost during the Great Recession by 2014, one year earlier than Arizona. The national economy reaches its previous high before Arizona primarily because the national downturn was less severe. Indeed, from peak to trough during the Great Recession, Arizona jobs declined by 11.8%, compared to 6.3% for the nation. Thus, it takes Arizona longer to dig out of Exhibit 2: Arizona Jobs Get Back on Even Terms in 2015 Arizona Total Nonfarm Employment thousands 3,600 Forecast 3,200 2,800 2,400 2,000 1,600 90 95 00 05 10 15 20 1,200 ebr.eller.arizona.edu 3 Arizona’s Economy the Great Recession because the state fell into a deeper hole. continued erosion of the sales tax base relative to income. Personal income growth bounces back in 2014 after a weak 2013, reflecting less fiscal drag and stronger job growth. State personal income growth is forecast to rise from 3.2% in 2013, to 5.2%, and to 5.9% by 2015. That acceleration reflects stronger growth in earnings by place of work; dividends, interest, and rent, as well as transfer payments. Population growth also accelerates during the forecast, as residential mobility is assumed to rebound. This boosts net migration to the state and drives population growth up to 1.9% per year during the 2016-2017 period. That is much faster than the 1.2% growth rate forecast for 2013, but it is far below the average growth rate during the 1976-2012 period of 2.9% per year. Retail sales growth follows the same pattern, but with a lag, so growth in 2014 slows but then accelerates in 2015 as faster income gains translate into additional consumption. Overall, retail sales growth is expected to be less than income growth during the forecast, which implies As population growth builds momentum in the near term, so does housing activity. Housing permits are forecast to rise from 24,362 in 2013 to 46,312 by 2015, and to 52,839 by 2016. This reflects growth in both single and multi-family permits. Personal income growth will bounce back in 2014 with retail sales growth accelerating in 2015 as income gains translate into additional consumption. Population growth will accelerate as residential mobility rebounds, boosting net migration into the state and driving an increase in housing activity. 4 Economic and Business Research Center, Eller College of Management, The University of Arizona January, 2014 Winter Issue Cluster Presence: How Does Metro Tucson Compare? by Marshall J. Vest, EBR Director (Retired) Metro Tucson has a significant presence in 11 nationally identified “traded” subclusters. Clusters are “geographically concentrated groups of interconnected companies, universities, and related institutions that arise out of linkages or Phoenix: Important Traded Clusters computer programming educational institutions accommodations and related services merchandise wholesaling depository institutions air transportation security dealers and brokers computer services entertainment venues search and navigation equipment aircraft engines catalog and mail order research organizations insurance products electronic components and assembly tourism related services entertainment and related services aircraft facilities support services baked packaged foods ground transportation automotive parts plastic products electronic components process equipment sub-systems and components externalities across industries .” “Traded” clusters, which account nationwide for only about one-third of employment but register much higher wages, are industries that compete across regions. Porteri originally identified 41 traded clusters and recently added three more. The number of subclusters is several times larger. Metro Tucson accounts for nearly 5.5% of all employees nationwide in the “missiles and space vehicles” sub-cluster. With some 17,500 employees, Tucson ranks number 1 in the nation for this activity. Other subclusters with significant activity (In order of number of employees) include hospitality and tourism; professional organizations and services; transportation and logistics; entertainment venues; engineering services; research organizations; medical equipment; software; search and navigation equipment; and optical instruments. With the exception of the latter, all have at least 1,000 employees and an above-average share of employment in that cluster. Metro Tucson’s list of cluster activities is noticeably short compared to the ten other peer metros identified as competitors by local economic developers. The ten Clusters are “geographically concentrated groups of interconnected companies, universities, and related institutions that arise out of linkages or externalities across industries .” Courtesy: UA RedBar Cafe i Porter, Michael. “Cluster Mapping: A Primer.” Cluster Mapping; Powerful Tools for Economic Development. Institute for Strategy and Competitiveness. Web. 25 Nov 2013. . Tucson: Important Traded Clusters missiles and space vehicles hospitality and tourism professional organizations and services transportation and logistics missiles and space vehicles entertainment venues furniture and fittings engineering services furniture research organizations irrigation systems medical equipment electrical and electronic components software packaged chemical products search and navigation equipment biopharmaceutical products optical instruments ebr.eller.arizona.edu 5 Arizona’s Economy Albuquerque: Important Traded Clusters Dallas: Clusters continued... Dallas: Important Traded Clusters accommodations and related services computer programming plumbing products professional organizations and services merchandise wholesaling aircraft engines research organizations depository institutions precision metal products engineering services aircraft prefabricated wood products communications services management consulting metal processing entertainment venues computer services flour electronic components and assemblies tourism and related services final construction search and navigation equipment depository institutions communications services computer programming search and navigation equipment plastic products professional organizations and services tourism related services electronic components and assemblies engineering services facilities support services hydrocarbons merchandise wholesaling jewelry and precious metals products entertainment related services accommodations and related services surgical instruments and supplies wood cabinets, fixtures and other products air transportation Austin: Important Traded Clusters Denver: Important Traded Clusters securities brokers, dealers and exchanges specialty foods and ingredients final construction merchandise wholesaling tourism attractions computer services computer programming process machinery missiles and space vehicles engineering services motor vehicles entertainment related services accommodations and related services paper containers and boxes entertainment venues depository institutions jewelry and precious metals products publishing computer services communications services software transportation vehicle and equipment distribution electronic components furniture and fittings medical equipment catalog and mail order other processed chemicals hydrocarbons electronic components and assemblies educational facilities tourism related services entertainment venues refrigeration and heating equipment communications equipment video production and distribution process equipment sub-systems and components biopharmaceutical products oil and gas machinery education facilities process instruments milk and frozen desserts malt beverages surgical instruments and supplies packaged chemical products plastic products entertainment related services ophthalmic goods communications equipment marketing related services health and beauty products equipment distribution and wholesaling primary construction materials mobile homes tourism related services pumps jewelry and precious metals products paint and coating mobile homes wire and springs 6 software Economic and Business Research Center, Eller College of Management, The University of Arizona January, 2014 Winter Issue metro areas in addition to Tucson are Phoenix, San Diego, Denver, Las Vegas, Albuquerque, Portland, Austin, Dallas, San Antonio, and Salt Lake City. Most of these peers are considerably larger than Tucson – many are twice the size – so it’s understandable why Tucson’s list is short. But it’s also often argued that Tucson’s economy is underdeveloped. Albuquerque for example, is roughly the same size, but has a presence in clusters that is 20% longer. Metro Phoenix, with four times Tucson’s population, has three times the number of significant sub-clusters than Tucson has. The list, headed by computer programming, includes some 32 categories. Educational institutions, accommodations, and merchandise wholesaling also are near the top of the list. The metro Dallas complex, the largest peer, with a population over 6.7 million, Las Vegas: Important Traded Clusters professional organizations and services ground transportation entertainment venues depository institutions engineering services final construction catalog and mail-order air transportation entertainment related services airports has a presence in some 41 categories, led by computer programming, merchandise wholesaling, depository institutions, and aircraft. San Antonio’s list includes 26 while Austin has 21. San Diego, with a population exceeding 3.1 million, lists 32 categories. Research organizations heads the list and biopharmaceutical products enters the list at 17th. Denver has 24 clusters and Salt Lake City has 22. Portland has 26, Las Vegas 17, and Albuquerque has 14. Portland: Important Traded Clusters Clusters provide insights into what drives the economy at the national, state, and local levels. Cluster composition has been found to be an important factor in explaining growth potential, wage levels, and competitiveness. Understanding a region’s cluster composition informs local economic developers’ efforts to promote their economy. Salt Lake City: Important Traded Clusters professional organizations and services merchandise warehousing merchandise wholesaling depository institutions educational institutions entertainment venues management consulting computer services accommodations and related services tourism related services electronic components and assemblies catalog and mail order securities brokers, dealers and exchanges securities brokers, dealers and exchanges insurance products engineering services baked packaged foods search and navigation equipment plastic products medical equipment tourism related services software laboratory instruments communications services primary construction materials specialty foods and ingredients process equipment sub-systems and components marketing related services plastic products food products wholesaling biopharmaceutical products peripherals packaged chemical products saw blades and handsaws dental instruments and supplies dental instruments and supplies jewelry and precious metals products computers wood cabinets, fixtures and other products management consulting wood cabinets, fixtures and other products leather and related products aircraft plastic products paper containers and boxes equipment distribution and wholesaling milk and frozen desserts baked packaged foods farm management and related services communications services electrical parts signs and advertising specialties railroad equipment and rental equipment distribution and wholesaling baked packaged foods ebr.eller.arizona.edu 7 Arizona’s Economy Clusters provide insights into what drives the economy at the national, state, and local levels and can be an important factor in explaining growth potential, wage levels, and competitiveness. An understanding of a region’s cluster composition can enhance local economic developers’ efforts to promote their economy. San Diego: Important Traded Clusters San Antonio: Important Traded Clusters research organizations final construction merchandise wholesaling professional organizations and services professional organizations and services depository institutions computer programming engineering services transportation arrangement and warehousing software engineering services securities brokers, dealers and exchanges tourism attractions entertainment venues research organizations aircraft management consulting computer services insurance products transportation arrangement and warehousing computer services tourism attractions automotive parts peripherals aircraft electronic components communications services turbines and turbine generators baked packaged foods facilities support services biopharmaceutical products wood cabinets, fixtures and other products catalog and mail order motor vehicles publishing footwear communications equipment facilities support services sporting and athletic goods entertainment related services educational facilities meat and related products and services diagnostic substances entertainment venues plastic products plastic products printing services wood products wholesaling baked packaged foods educational facilities process equipment sub-systems and components refrigeration and heating equipment airports specialty foods and ingredients laboratory instruments airports plumbing products metal manufacturing 8 Economic and Business Research Center, Eller College of Management, The University of Arizona January, 2014 Winter Issue The Fresh Produce Industry in Nogales, Arizona: Economic Impacts and Challenges by Vera Pavlakovich-Kochi, Ph.D.* and Gary D. Thompson, Ph.D.** An Industry with a Long Tradition In a recent study funded by the Nogales - Santa Cruz County Economic Development Corporation,1 the impact of the importation of fresh produce from Mexico was evaluated in the context of the local economy of Nogales and Santa Cruz County. The import of Mexican fresh produce through Nogales, Arizona’s largest border port of entry, has a long tradition. For more than a century Nogales has served as the main gateway to North American markets for Sinaloa- and Sonora-grown tomatoes, squash, cucumbers, peppers, and other, mostly winter-harvested, vegetables. Annually, about 120,000 trucks cross the border bringing about $2.5 billion worth of Mexican fresh produce (3-year average). Over time, a true cross-border industry cluster has developed based on intricate business linkages between growers in Sinaloa and Sonora, and distributors/shippers in Arizona.2 In Nogales and Santa Cruz County a number of economic activities have developed around the importation of fresh produce, including customs brokerage services, warehousing and repackaging, shipping/distribution and sale brokerage, and freight forwarding. Whereas the commission fees collected for shipping/distribution and sale brokerage services are the major source of County income associated with the fresh produce imports, about 70 warehouses concentrated along I-19 give the physical landscape a distinctive character. Industry Definition and Sources of Economic Impacts In this report, the fresh produce “industry” is defined as encompassing a number of “primary” and “associated” activities. Primary activities are directly involved in importation, warehousing and distribution of Mexican fresh produce to North American and Canadian markets, and in terms of the North American Industry Classification System include: fresh fruit & vegetable merchant wholesale (NAICS 424); agents and brokers engaged in wholesaling (NAICS 425 ), truck transportation (NAICS 484), support activities for transportation including freight forwarders and custom brokers (NAICS 488), and warehousing and storage (NAICS 493). Associated activities bring additional money to the local economy from outside, such as payroll and operational expenses of the federal employees employed with the Customs and Border Protection (CBP), collection of truck crossing fees by the Arizona Department of Transportation (ADOT), and sale of diesel fuel for transportation from Nogales’ warehouses to final destinations. By combining several research methods,3 it is estimated that the primary activities generate $281.5 million, while associated activities generate additional $21.8 million in Santa Cruz County, or a combined $303.4 million annually, after adjusting for leakage.4 A direct job impact is 2,644 jobs, of which 1,739 are in shipping/distribution/sale brokerage sector followed by 293 in warehousing and storage, 209 at gas stations, about 160 providing custom brokerage/freight forwarding services and truck transportation services from the border to warehousing. The direct wage impact is $146.4 million (Table 1). Total Impact on County Jobs, Wages and Output Through ripple effects, the fresh produce industry generates an additional 1,376 jobs and $43.6 million in wages in Santa Cruz County. Combining direct and secondary (indirect and induced) impacts, the industry supports more than 4,000 jobs, generates $190.1million in wages and produces a total monetary impact of $437.7 million (including wages and taxes) in Santa Cruz County (Table 2). *Eller College of Management, Economic & Business Research Center and School of Geography and Development **Department of Agricultural & Resource Economics ebr.eller.arizona.edu 9 Arizona’s Economy Table 1: Direct economic contribution of fresh produce industry in Santa Cruz Co. Fully one third of Santa Cruz County’s Activity output depends on the Primary activities fresh produce industry. Direct output (adjusted for leakage) Direct jobs $ million Shipping/distribution/sale brokerage Direct wages $ million 225.9 1,739 110.3 Custom brokerage/freight forwarding 14.0 165 5.7 Truck transportation to warehouses 16.8 167 7.2 Warehousing & storage 24.8 293 12.8 281.5 2,364 Total primary activities Associated activities/income sources $ million Gas stations Truck permits (Local government) 136.1 $ million 15.0 209 4.3 3.0 44 2.6 Border inspection (CBP) 3.8 27 3.4 Total associated activities 21.8 280 10.3 303.4 2,644 146.4 Fresh produce direct impact Source: Estimates of “output” are based on a combination of information from interviews with industry representatives and data from an IMPLAN model of Santa Cruz County; “Adjusted direct output” based on % leakage, “direct jobs” and “direct wages” from IMPLAN model.5 The importance of the fresh produce industry for the economy of Santa Cruz County is reflected in the following numbers: 22.3 percent of all County jobs and 24.8 percent of all wages directly or indirectly depend on the import of Mexican fresh produce; a full one third of the County’s output depends on the fresh produce industry (Figure 1). In other words, as expressed in the form of multipliers, the fresh produce industry impacts the County’s economy in the following way:6 • Every 100 direct jobs in the fresh produce industry generate an additional 52 jobs elsewhere in the County (job multiplier of 1.520); • Every $1 in wages to direct employees in the fresh produce industry generates an additional 29 cents in wages in other sectors (wage multiplier of 1.298); • Every $1 in direct output in the fresh produce industry generates an additional 44 cents in other economic sectors in Santa Cruz County (output multiplier of 1.443). Table 2: Fresh produce industry: direct and secondary impacts in Santa Cruz County Impact Jobs Wages $ million $ million Direct impact 2,644 146.4 303.4 Secondary impact* 1,376 43.6 134.3 Total impact 4,020 190.1 437.7 22.3% 24.8% 33.5% 1.520 1.298 1.443 Share of Santa Cruz County total Composite multipliers *Combined indirect and induced impacts. Source: IMPLAN model of Santa Cruz County. 10 Output Economic and Business Research Center, Eller College of Management, The University of Arizona January, 2014 Winter Issue Figure 1 More than 120 local Santa Cruz County: Output Dependent on Fresh Produce businesses (sectors) directly benefit from the fresh produce industry 33.5% portion of output dependent on the fresh produce industry through purchases of goods and services. County Linkages with Local Businesses – are not produced in the County, but imported from manufacturers in Phoenix and Yuma through their retail representatives in Nogales. Close to $47 million leaks out of the County for purchases of goods and services not available locally. According to the IMPLAN model, more than 120 local businesses (sectors) directly benefit from the fresh produce industry through purchases of goods and services. The industry spends $30.6 million7 locally on inputs of various services such as warehousing and storage, curriers and messenger services, business support services, legal services, and automotive equipment rental. Major manufacturing inputs – forklifts and packaging materials Industry Needs and Challenges An on-line survey of members of the Fresh Produce Association of the Americas provided a glimpse into industry needs and Figure 2 Value ($) of Imported Fresh Produce from Mexico billions 8.0 total value imported 7.0 6.0 5.0 4.0 3.0 imported via Nogales 2.0 1.0 2007 2008 Source: BTS RITA, Commodity by BPOE. 2009 2010 2011 ebr.eller.arizona.edu 11 Arizona’s Economy challenges. The three top needs are related to workforce improvement, including increased demand for higher education, better computer skills and better technical skills. This reflects the fact that warehousing, packaging and distribution technology has changed involving more automatization and computerization than it did in the past. On the other hand, one of the unchanged characteristics of the fresh produce industry -- as it relates to the workforce -- is its seasonal character. Although the season for some vegetables has expanded thanks to greenhouse use, the importation and distribution of fresh produce is still concentrated in winter months from October through May, which creates traditionally high unemployment during summer months. Although the value of imported Mexican agricultural products through Nogales doubled between 2002 and 2011 from $1.26 billion in 2002 to $2.53 billion in 2011, the import of Mexican fresh produce through Arizona BPOE was lagging behind a general trend. The value of all U.S. imports of agricultural products from Mexico increased 110% compared to a 38% increase through Nogales in the same period 2004-2011 (Figure 2). There are several possible reasons for this trend and challenges facing the Nogales fresh produce industry. Texas BPOE, most notably Hidalgo (with adjacent McAllen and the expanding Pharr border crossing) have been increasing their share of Mexican fresh produce partly due to growing agricultural production in central Mexico and partly due to border port infrastructure, including inspection services and crossing wait times. Geography also plays a role in shipments destined for U.S. east coast markets as Texas BPOE offer the shortest distance. There is also a continuing competition with Florida tomato growers. Tomatoes comprise about 23 percent of total fresh produce imports through Nogales and thus any continuing dispute with Florida tomato growers potentially affects the volume and shipping price of the Nogales fresh produce industry.8 Notes Vera Pavlakovich-Kochi and Gary D. Thompson, “Bi-national Business Linkages Associated with Fresh Produce and Production-Sharing: Foundations and Opportunities for Nogales and Santa Cruz County,” June 2013, prepared for the Nogales - Santa Cruz County Economic Development Corporation by the University of Arizona Eller College and Department of Agricultural and Resources Economics. Funded by EDA Grant 2012, the study constitutes Phase One of the Nogales Innovation Partnership Project (NIPP). Available at http://ebr.eller.arizona.edu and www.nogalescdc.com. 1 V. Pavlakovich-kochi, A.H. Charney, A.C. Vias and A. Weister, Fresh Produce Industry in Nogales, Arizona: Impacts of a Transborder Production Complex on the Economy of Arizona, An Economic and Revenue Impact Analysis. The University of Arizona: Office of Economic Development. Prepared for The City of Nogales, Arizona, 1997. Available at http://ebr.eller. arizona.edu. 2 Combination of an analysis of data on import value of fresh produce, interviews with industry representatives regarding commissions, and data contained in the IMPLAN input-output model of Santa Cruz County. 3 4 Adjusted for “leakage” from the local economy through purchases of goods and services that are not produced locally. IMPLAN (Impact M for Planning) is a widely used modeling system originally developed by USDA Forest Service, now operated by the Minnesota IMPLAN Group (MIG). It is based on input-output methodology that traces how economic sectors in a regional (state or county) economy are interconnected through purchases and sales of products and services. Based on these relationships, the model traces how any change in one part of the economy ripples across the entire economy. 5 6 A multiplier is obtained by dividing the total impact by direct impact. These are estimates of indirect impacts (i.e., inter-business purchases of goods and services) obtained via IMPLAN model for Santa Cruz County. 7 See for example Arizona State University’s Tim Richards’ analysis; also T. Karts, “Florida, FPAA exchange salvos in tomato dispute,” The Packer, 1/24/2013. 8 12 Economic and Business Research Center, Eller College of Management, The University of Arizona January, 2014 Winter Issue New UA App Offers Users Real-time Economic Data for Arizona Eller College’s Economic and Business Research Center launches Arizona’s Economy app for iPhone and Android. The new Arizona’s Economy Mobile App, developed by the Economic and Business Research Center, offers users access to real-time economic data from the state of Arizona, its counties, Phoenix, Tucson, and the U.S for free on iPhone, iPad, and Android. Mobile device users can compare Arizona and its communities with the nation as a whole. Compiling datasets from multiple government sources, the app provides an intuitive interface for users to quickly evaluate short-term and long-term trends in data including employment, unemployment, retail sales, personal income, population, and more. In addition to the latest real-time data, the graphs also display historical trends. With one click users can calculate percentage change, moving average, and other standard conversions. Users can also share data through their social media accounts or download for further analysis to a PC. The Economic and Business Research Center at the Eller College of Management has a 65+ year history of providing Arizona’s citizens and decision-makers with award-winning economic forecasts, applied economic research, the Arizona Statistical Abstract, and analysis of the latest economic, demographic and business trends in Arizona. New economics app focuses on Arizona and allows users to compare Arizona to the nation using the latest real-time data. “The Arizona’s Economy app puts essential information at users’ fingertips,” said senior research economist Maile Nadelhoffer, who led the project along with EBR’s business research specialist Daniel Kinnear. “Users can access the most recent statistics, select the time-frame that interests them, and set up favorite searches to track important statistics over time.” The app uses dataZoa, a real-time data collection tool developed by Leading Market Technologies (LMT) of Boston and beta tested by the Economic and Business Research Center. LMT gifted UA with software licenses valued at $600,000 in recognition of its contribution to this technology. This free app is now available in the iTunes App Store and Google Play, just search on “Arizona’s Economy.” I have it! EBRC’s FREE Arizona’s Economy app! The latest realAs an Arizona I must have the latest time data for Arizona’s economy business man, I need real-time Arizona on your iPhone or Android! the latest data to data, graphs and keep ahead! You historical trends to quote old data! show my clients! I can’t use your Where can I find it? analyses! ebr.eller.arizona.edu 13 Arizona’s Economy Forecast and Indicator Tables Real-time Economic Data for Arizona in a New UA App! Search on “Arizona’s Economy” in the iTunes App Store or Google Play and download the new Arizona’s Economy mobile app for your iphone, ipad, or android phone today. >>Keeping Current Arizona’s Economy is published quarterly by the Economic and Business Research Center in the Eller College of Management. For continuous updates of Arizona’s economic indicators, check out our website’s Indicators page: http://azeconomy.eller.arizona.edu/az_indicators/ There you can browse indicators by geography or topic and graph each series by clicking on the series title. If you wish to be notified each quarter when a new issue of Arizona’s Economy becomes available, please send an email to EBRPublications.eller.arizona.edu with your name and contact information. Please put “subscribe” in the header line. We do not share our mailing list. 14 Economic and Business Research Center, Eller College of Management, The University of Arizona January, 20134 Winter Issue Forecast Tables Arizona Personal Income ($ mill)   %Chg from Year Ago Retail Sales ($ mill)   %Chg from Year Ago Nonfarm Employment (000s)   %Chg from Prior Population (000s)   %Chg from Year Ago 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 237,513 245,023 257,693 272,803 289,936 308,278 4.5% 3.2% 5.2% 5.9% 6.3% 6.3% 81,271 85,157 88,718 93,095 97,899 102,796 5.0% 4.8% 4.2% 4.9% 5.2% 5.0% 2,462.1 2.1% 6,498.6 2,517.8 2.3% 6,574.7 2,587.0 2.8% 6,668.1 2,675.8 3.4% 6,785.1 2,772.3 3.6% 6,913.7 2,866.6 3.4% 7,031.3 0.9% 1.2% 1.4% 1.8% 1.9% 1.7% Residential Permits (units) 21,726 24,362 33,828 46,312 52,839 55,133   %Chg from Year Ago 67.0% 12.1% 38.9% 36.9% 14.1% 4.3% Phoenix-Mesa-Scottsdale MSA Personal Income ($ mill)   % Chg from Year Ago Retail Sales ($ mill)   % Chg from Year Ago Nonfarm Employment (000s)   % Chg from Year Ago Population (000s)   % Chg from Year Ago 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 165,046 171,556 182,074 193,254 206,501 221,825 5.1% 3.9% 6.1% 6.1% 6.9% 7.4% 55,812 58,917 62,171 65,880 70,285 74,835 4.5% 5.6% 5.5% 6.0% 6.7% 6.5% 1,758.1 1,805.3 1,866.6 1,935.4 2,013.1 2,096.2 2.5% 2.7% 3.4% 3.7% 4.0% 4.1% 4,273.9 4,340.2 4,412.1 4,488.3 4,579.7 4,689.9 1.1% 1.6% 1.7% 1.7% 2.0% 2.4% Residential Permits (units) 15,967 19,187 26,090 33,053 40,182 44,566   % Chg from Year Ago 75.8% 20.2% 36.0% 26.7% 21.6% 10.9% Tucson MSA 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 35,814 36,649 38,606 40,716 43,178 45,971 3.5% 2.3% 5.3% 5.5% 6.1% 6.5% Personal Income ($ mill)   % Chg from Year Ago 12,048 12,466 12,930 13,375 13,876 14,461   % Chg from Year Ago Retail Sales ($ mill) 5.3% 3.5% 3.7% 3.4% 3.8% 4.2% Nonfarm Employment (000s) 361.1 366.5 373.7 382.4 392.2 402.0   % Chg from Year Ago 1.6% 1.5% 2.0% 2.3% 2.6% 2.5% Population (000s) 990.4 996.8 1,006.8 1,019.9 1,036.4 1,053.6   % Chg from Year Ago 0.4% 0.7% 1.0% 1.3% 1.6% 1.7% Residential Housing Permits (units)   % Chg from Year Ago 2,841 3,879 4,478 5,267 6,387 6,533 26.7% 36.5% 15.4% 17.6% 21.3% 2.3% >>Need More? Do you need more detailed and comprehensive forecast data and analysis? Learn about the benefits of becoming a Forecasting Project sponsor. Forecasting Project sponsorship allows your company or organization to access an in-depth menu of economic forecasting and consulting services, as well as, quarterly forecast update meetings. Contact Marshall Vest at mvest@eller.arizona.edu or call 520.621.4075. The Forecasting Project is a community-sponsored research unit within the Economic and Business Research Center producing quarterly economic forecasts for Arizona and its metro areas. These forecasts are recognized as among the most accurate in the Western states. ebr.eller.arizona.edu 15 Arizona’s Economy Arizona Economic Indicators Arizona Summary - Monthly Jul 2013 Aug 2013 Sep 2013 Oct 2013 Nov 2013 Civilian Labor Force (seas. adj.), BLS 3,006,551 3,004,259 3,003,780 2,996,108 2,990,522 Unemployment Rate (seas. adj.), BLS Total Nonfarm Employment (000s, Seas. Adj.), BLS Private Government Average Hourly Earnings - Total Private, BLS Aggregate Retail Sales ($000, accrual)* New Residential Permits (units), Census C-40 8.0 8.3 8.3 8.2 7.8 2,520 2,514 2,515 2,520 2,535 2,087.9 2,099.5 2,098.6 2,111.7 2,137.2 365.7 395.3 420.7 424.2 424.6 23.08 23.13 1,671 1,174 23.01 23.17 23.45 6,600,504 6,823,761 6,668,660 2,290 1,783 1,421 * Figure includes total taxable retail sales, plus restaurant & bar, gasoline, and food sales (not taxed and estimated by EBR). Arizona Summary - Quarterly 2012 Q3 2012 Q4 2013 Q1 2013 Q2 2013 Q3 Population* (seas. adj,), ADOA & EBR 6,509,024 6,529,475 6,547,941 6,565,541 6,585,968   % Chg from Year Ago Natural Increase, ADHS/EBR Birth Rate (per 1,000), ADHS & EBR Net Migration, ADHS & EBR Total Personal Income ($ mil, SAAR) BEA & EBR   % Chg from Year Ago Per Capita Pers. Inc. ($ mil, SAAR), BEA & EBR**   % Chg from Year Ago Civilian Nonag Wage Rate, ($, SAAR), BEA & EBR 1.0% 1.1% 1.1% 1.2% 1.2% 11,280 9,903 6,761 8,196 11,148 14.0 13.2 12.9 12.7 14.0 9,630 11,088 10,179 10,063 11,446 235,748 243,579 239,461 243,142 247,769 3.7% 6.3% 3.2% 3.4% 5.1% 36,218 37,305 36,570 37,033 37,621 2.7% 5.2% 2.0% 2.1% 3.9% 48,020 48,760 48,345 48,546 49,355   % Chg from Year Ago 1.5% 2.3% 0.9% 0.7% 2.8% All Transactions House Price Index, FHFA 250.0 257.9 263.9 275.7 284.6 7.1% 8.3% 11.4% 14.7% 13.9%   % Chg from Year Ago *Population numbers are based on ADOA annual estimates through July 2012 EBR then makes quarterly middle of quarter estimates and projections. **EBR uses BEA income estimates combined with population numbers from ADOA to calculate per capita personal income. Note: this differs from per capita personal income as calculated by BEA which uses Census population counts. SAAR: seasonally adjusted annual rate Inflation and Prices Aug 2013 Sep 2013 Oct 2013 Nov 2013 Dec 2013 233.53 233.95 233.81 233.89 234.58 1.5% 1.2% 0.9% 1.2% 1.5% 236.59 237.15 237.00 236.15 236.10 1.5% 1.3% 0.9% 1.3% 1.8% 204.20 204.00 202.50 201.00 201.80 2.2% 0.8% -0.2% -0.5% -0.4% U.S. Consumer Price Indices (seas. adj.), BLS All Urban Consumers: All Items   % Chg from Year Ago Western States - All Urban Consumers: All items   % Chg from Year Ago U.S. Producer Price Index: All Commodities (seas. adj.), BLS   % Chg from Year Ago 16 Economic and Business Research Center, Eller College of Management, The University of Arizona January, 2014 Winter Issue Arizona Economic Indicators - MSAs Phoenix-Mesa-Glendale MSA Summary - Monthly Jul 2013 Aug 2013 Sep 2013 Oct 2013 Nov 2013 Civilian Labor Force, ADOA 2,038,289 2,040,053 2,037,794 2,030,653 2,026,374 Unemployment Rate, ADOA Total Nonfarm Employment (000s), BLS Private Government Average Hourly Earnings, Total Private, $, BLS Aggregate Retail Sales ($000, accrual)* 6.7 6.8 6.9 6.9 6.7 1,760.1 1,790.4 1,805.7 1,819.1 1,842.4 1,557.9 1,567.3 1,566.9 1,577.5 1,600.9 202.2 223.1 238.8 241.6 241.5 23.90 23.76 23.98 24.18 23.79 4,487,145 4,720,475 4,625,390 4,828,021 Total New Residential Permits (units), Census C-40 1,737 1,255 941 1,151 * Figure includes total taxable retail sales, plus restaurant & bar, gasoline, and food sales (not taxed and estimated by EBR). Phoenix-Mesa-Glendale MSA Summary - Annual Population, ADOA*   % Chg from Year Ago Total Personal Income ($000), BEA   % Chg from Year Ago Per Capita Personal Income ($)**   % Chg from Year Ago Consumer Price Index (Phx-Mesa-Glndle MSA) All Urban Consumers: All items, BLS   % Chg from Year Ago 706 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 4,186,131 4,200,427 4,227,601 4,273,897 4,338,672 1.5% 0.5% 0.3% 0.7% 1.1% 147,270,150 148,944,337 158,053,527 164,546,658 -4.8% 1.1% 6.1% 4.1% 35,456 35,384 37,171 38,006 -5.9% -0.2% 5.1% 2.3% 117.57 118.23 121.48 124.20 -1.4% 0.6% 2.8% 2.2% *Population counts as of July 1st of each year. ADOA population estimates differ from the official Census Bureau estimates. EBR considers the ADOA counts to be the most accurate. ** BEA per capita personal income is calculated using Census Bureau population counts. Tucson MSA (Pima County) Summary - Monthly Civilian Labor Force Unemployment Rate Total Nonfarm Employment (000s), BLS Private Government Average Hourly Earnings, Total Private, $, BLS Aggregate Retail Sales ($000), EBR & ADOR* Total New Residential Permits (units), Census C-40 Jul 2013 Aug 2013 Sep 2013 Oct 2013 Nov 2013 451,428 449,476 454,005 450,582 449,684 7.2 7.6 7.2 6.9 6.2 352.3 357.4 364.6 366.7 368.3 283.6 284.5 284.8 285.8 287.1 68.7 72.9 79.8 80.9 81.2 22.23 22.46 22.20 22.64 22.45 980,898 1,003,930 970,084 928,382 309 308 217 279 251 * Figure includes total taxable retail sales, plus restaurant & bar, gasoline, and food sales (not taxed and estimated by EBR). Tucson MSA (Pima County) Summary - Annual Population, ADOA*   % Chg from Year Ago Total Personal Income ($000), BEA   % Chg from Year Ago Per Capita Personal Income ($), BEA**   % Chg from Year Ago 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 984,274 981,168 986,081 990,380 996,046 0.0% -0.3% 0.5% 0.4% 0.6% 33,573,864 33,766,590 34,931,620 36,058,871 -4.8% 0.6% 3.5% 3.2% 34,414 34,389 35,371 36,335 -5.5% -0.1% 2.9% 2.7% *Population counts as of July 1st of each year. ADOA population estimates differ from the official Census Bureau estimates. EBR considers the ADOA counts to be the most accurate. ** BEA per capita personal income is calculated using Census Bureau population counts. ebr.eller.arizona.edu 17 Arizona’s Economy Arizona Economic Indicators - MSAs Flagstaff MSA (Coconino County) Summary Monthly Civilian Labor Force, ADOA Unemployment Rate Total Nonfarm Employment (000s), ADOA Private Government Average Hourly Earnings, Total Private, $, BLS Gross Taxable Sales ($000 accrual) Total New Residential Permits (units), Census C-40 Flagstaff MSA (Coconino County) Summary Annual Population, ADOA*   % Chg from Year Ago Total Personal Income ($000), BEA   % Chg from Year Ago Per Capita Personal Income ($), BEA**   % Chg from Year Ago Jul 2013 Aug 2013 Sep 2013 Oct 2013 Nov 2013 75,229 74,021 75,215 74,572 73,743 8.0 8.1 7.7 7.8 7.2 64.4 65.0 67.0 67.2 66.6 44.8 45.1 45.1 45.1 44.5 19.6 19.9 21.9 22.1 22.1 15.95 16.48 16.12 16.12 16.10 244,008 247,200 229,693 199,685 32 26 18 25 21 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 133,626 134,679 134,162 134,313 135,695 0.6% 0.8% -0.4% 0.1% 1.0% 4,514,396 4,523,918 4,617,232 4,735,934 -1.7% 0.2% 2.1% 2.6% 33,822 33,607 34,430 34,820 -2.8% -0.6% 2.5% 1.1% *Population counts as of July 1st of each year. ADOA population estimates differ from the official Census Bureau estimates. EBR considers the ADOA counts to be the most accurate. ** BEA per capita personal income is calculated using Census Bureau population counts. Lake Havasu City - Kingman MSA (Mohave County) Summary - Monthly Civilian Labor Force, ADOA Unemployment Rate Total Nonfarm Employment, (000s), ADOA Private Government Average Hourly Earnings, Total Private, $, BLS Gross Taxable Sales ($000 accrual) Total New Residential Permits (units), Census C-40 Lake Havasu City-Kingman MSA (Mohave County) Summary - Annual Population, ADOA*   % Chg from Year Ago Total Personal Income ($000)   % Chg from Year Ago Per Capita Personal Income ($)**   % Chg from Year Ago Jul 2013 Aug 2013 Sep 2013 Oct 2013 Nov 2013 83,893 83,029 82,589 82,122 81,219 9.7 10.2 9.8 9.7 8.7 44.1 44.3 44.4 44.5 44.6 36.7 36.5 36.3 36.4 36.5 7.4 7.8 8.1 8.1 8.1 18.70 19.38 20.32 20.45 20.32 235,779 220,477 208,017 200,937 50 33 39 42 51 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 200,235 200,099 200,417 203,072 203,592 0.1% -0.1% 0.2% 1.3% 0.3% 5,135,030 5,210,338 5,373,492 5,534,671 -3.1% 1.5% 3.1% 2.1% 25,714 26,002 26,524 27,220 -2.9% 1.1% 2.0% 2.6% *Population counts as of July 1st of each year. ADOA population estimates differ from the official Census Bureau estimates. EBR considers the ADOA counts to be the most accurate. ** BEA per capita personal income is calculated using Census Bureau population counts. 18 Economic and Business Research Center, Eller College of Management, The University of Arizona January, 2014 Winter Issue Arizona Economic Indicators - MSAs Prescott MSA (Yavapai County) Summary Monthly Civilian Labor Force, ADOA Unemployment Rate Total Nonfarm Employment (000s), ADOA Private Government Average Hourly Earnings, Total Private, $, BLS Gross Taxable Sales ($000 accrual) Total New Residential Permits (units), Census C-40 Prescott MSA (Yavapai County) Summary Annual Population, ADOA*   % Chg from Year Ago Total Personal Income ($000), BEA   % Chg from Year Ago Per Capita Personal Income ($)**   % Chg from Year Ago Jul 2013 Aug 2013 Sep 2013 Oct 2013 Nov 2013 90,240 90,273 89,841 88,952 88,923 8.2 8.5 8.1 7.7 6.9 54.1 55.4 56.2 56.6 56.9 45.1 45.4 45.6 45.9 46.1 9.0 10.0 10.6 10.7 10.8 16.97 17.65 17.87 18.11 17.63 257,060 259,891 248,573 255,843 69 58 73 66 66 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 211,917 210,899 211,247 211,583 213,294 0.8% -0.3% -0.5% 0.2% 0.2% 6,247,299 6,223,793 6,448,529 6,722,907 -5.0% -0.4% 3.6% 4.3% 29,584 29,602 30,543 31,617 -5.0% 0.1% 3.2% 3.5% *Population counts as of July 1st of each year. ADOA population estimates differ from the official Census Bureau estimates. EBR considers the ADOA counts to be the most accurate. ** BEA per capita personal income is calculated using Census Bureau population counts. Yuma MSA (Yuma County) Summary - Monthly Civilian Labor Force, ADOA Unemployment Rate Total Nonfarm Employment (000s), ADOA Private Government Average Hourly Earnings, Total Private, $, BLS Gross Taxable Sales ($000s), EBR & ADOR New Residential Permits (units), Census C-40 Yuma MSA (Yuma County) Summary - Annual Population, ADOA*   % Chg from Year Ago Total Personal Income ($000)   % Chg from Year Ago Per Capita Personal Income ($)**   % Chg from Year Ago Jul 2013 Aug 2013 Sep 2013 Oct 2013 Nov 2013 94,769 93,667 90,409 90,812 88,504 33.2 32.8 32.4 32.0 28.2 47.6 48.7 49.1 49.8 51.1 33.6 33.8 34.1 34.5 35.7 14.0 14.9 15.0 15.3 15.4 20.20 20.35 20.22 20.28 20.99 176,054 174,518 184,742 195,048 46 58 43 34 42 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 194,737 196,160 200,431 205,174 209,323 0.5% 0.7% 2.2% 2.4% 2.0% 5,143,493 5,272,263 5,487,179 5,399,670 2.6% 2.5% 4.1% -1.6% 26,552 26,792 27,385 26,995 1.3% 0.9% 2.2% -1.4% *Population counts as of July 1st of each year. ADOA population estimates differ from the official Census Bureau estimates. EBR considers the ADOA counts to be the most accurate. ** BEA per capita personal income is calculated using Census Bureau population counts. ebr.eller.arizona.edu 19 Arizona’s Economy Arizona Economic Indicators - Counties Apache County Summary - Monthly Civilian Labor Force, ADOA Unemployment Rate Total Nonfarm Employment (000s), ADOA Total Private Government Gross Taxable Sales ($000s), EBR & ADOR Cochise County (Sierra Vista - Douglas Micropolitan SA) Summary - Monthly Total Civilian Labor Force, ADOA Unemployment Rate Total Nonfarm Employment, ADOA Total Private Government Gross Taxable Sales ($000s), EBR & ADOR Gila County (Payson Micropolitan SA) Summary - Monthly Civilian Labor Force, ADOA Unemployment Rate Total Nonfarm Employment, ADOA Aug 2013 Sep 2013 Oct 2013 Nov 2013 21,587 21,605 21,091 20,667 20,155 20.4 19.6 19.3 20.0 18.7 17,975 18,700 18,425 17,975 17,750 7,575 7,725 7,700 7,700 7,625 10,125 10,400 10,975 10,725 10,275 23,449 28,486 26,287 27,978 Jul 2013 Aug 2013 Sep 2013 Oct 2013 Nov 2013 58,552 8.6 35,575 58,351 8.9 36,275 57,426 8.8 36,250 56,626 8.8 36,000 56,797 7.9 36,375 24,225 24,325 24,175 24,000 24,325 12,050 11,350 11,950 12,075 12,000 140,511 179,059 166,851 151,116 Jul 2013 Aug 2013 Sep 2013 Oct 2013 Nov 2013 23,292 22,967 22,428 22,066 21,882 8.9 9.4 9.3 9.1 8.4 15,000 15,075 14,850 14,775 14,700 Private 9,800 9,775 9,650 9,625 9,625 Government 5,200 5,300 5,200 5,150 5,075 55,390 51,119 48,403 49,393 Jul 2013 Aug 2013 Sep 2013 Oct 2013 Nov 2013 14,463 14,456 14,420 14,144 14,361 Gross Taxable Sales ($000s), EBR & ADOR Graham County Summary - Monthly Total Civilian Labor Force, ADOA Unemployment Rate Total Nonfarm Employment, ADOA 8.4 8.6 8.4 8.2 7.1 8,525 8,725 8,925 9,000 9,000 Total Private 5,825 5,875 5,800 5,850 5,850 Government 2,700 2,850 3,125 3,150 3,150 29,274 28,157 28,609 28,186 Jul 2013 Aug 2013 Sep 2013 Oct 2013 Nov 2013 4,182 4,217 4,176 4,089 4,202 6.9 7.9 7.1 6.7 6.8 Gross Taxable Sales ($000s), EBR & ADOR Greenlee County Summary - Monthly Total Civilian Labor Force, ADOA Unemployment Rate Total Nonfarm Employment, ADOA Total Private Government Gross Taxable Sales ($000s), EBR & ADOR 20 Jul 2013 3,850 3,950 3,975 3,775 4,100 3,375 3,400 3,375 3,225 3,525 575 475 550 600 550 50,987 50,345 40,692 41,419 Economic and Business Research Center, Eller College of Management, The University of Arizona January, 2014 Winter Issue Arizona Economic Indicators - Counties La Paz County Summary - Monthly Jul 2013 Aug 2013 Sep 2013 Oct 2013 Nov 2013 7,779 7,621 7,281 7,251 7,130 9.1 9.8 9.8 9.6 8.8 5,125 5,075 5,050 5,025 4,950 2,775 2,725 2,700 2,700 2,625 2,325 Civilian Labor Force, ADOA Unemployment Rate Total Nonfarm Employment, ADOA Total Private Government Gross Taxable Sales ($000s), EBR & ADOR Navajo County (Show Low Micropolitan SA) Summary - Monthly Total Civilian Labor Force, ADOA Unemployment Rate Total Nonfarm Employment, ADOA Total Private 2,350 2,350 2,350 2,325 24,508 22,625 21,911 24,227 Jul 2013 Aug 2013 Sep 2013 Oct 2013 Nov 2013 40,014 15.3 27,475 39,897 14.7 28,300 39,347 14.5 28,350 38,797 14.7 28,125 38,257 13.5 28,050 18,300 18,500 18,325 18,200 18,075 9,975 Government Gross Taxable Sales ($000s), EBR & ADOR Santa Cruz County Summary - Monthly Total Civilian Labor Force, ADOA 9,175 9,800 10,025 9,925 81,587 75,263 77,083 75,184 Jul 2013 Aug 2013 Sep 2013 Oct 2013 Nov 2013 17,818 17,555 17,447 17,467 17,409 19.5 20.3 20.6 20.5 17.5 12,275 12,275 12,325 12,525 12,925 8,550 8,350 8,350 8,550 8,950 3,975 Unemployment Rate Total Nonfarm Employment, ADOA Private Government Gross Taxable Sales ($000s), EBR & ADOR 3,725 3,925 3,975 3,975 44,869 43,104 41,130 42,108 TABLES: SOURCES AND ABBREVIATIONS EBR: The Economic and Business Research Center, The University ADHS: Arizona Department of Health Services of Arizona. ADOA: Arizona Department of Administration, Office of Employment and Population Statistics MSA: Metropolitan Statistical Area must have at least one core urbanized area of 50,000 or more inhabitants. ADOR: Arizona Department of Revenue PSHIA: Phoenix Sky Harbor International Airport ADOT: Arizona Department of Transportation SAAR: Seasonally adjusted at annual rates ARMLS: Arizona Regional Multiple Listing Service TAR: Tucson Association of Realtors ASPB: Arizona State Parks Board U.S. Bankruptcy Court: District of Arizona BEA: Bureau of Economic Analysis, U.S. Department of Commerce USCBP: U.S. Customs and Border Protection, U.S. Department BLS: Bureau of Labor Statistics, U.S. Department of Labor of Homeland Security Census C-40: U.S. Census Bureau, U.S. Department of Commerce Micropolitan SA: Micropolitan Statistical Area must have at least one urban cluster of at least 10,000, but less than 50,000 inhabitants. * All Aggregate Retail Sales figures reported by EBR include retail, food, restaurant & bars and gasoline sales. Source: Economic and Business Research Center, Eller College of Management, The University of Arizona. ebr.eller.arizona.edu 21 January, 2014 Winter Issue Arizona’s Economy Economic and business research center McClelland Hall, Room 103 P.O. Box 210108 1130 E. Helen Street Tucson, AZ, 85721-0108 Marshall J. Vest Director (520) 621-4075 mvest@eller.arizona.edu Alberta Charney, Ph.D. Senior Research Economist (520) 621-2291 acharney@eller.arizona.edu George W. Hammond, Ph. D. Associate Director & Research Professor (520) 626-1679 ghammond@eller.arizona.edu Daniel Kinnear Specialist, Business Research (520) 626-1673 dkinnear@eller.arizona.edu Pia Montoya Database Specialist (520) 621-2523 pmontoya@eller.arizona.edu Maile L. Nadelhoffer Research Economist & Webmaster (520) 621-4050 mln@eller.arizona.edu Vera Pavlakovich-Kochi, Ph.D. Senior Regional Scientist & Associate Professor of Geography (520) 626-0520 vkp@eller.arizona.edu Heather Peterson Technical Consultant (520) 621-4050 thpeterson@comcast.net Valorie Rice Senior Specialist, Business Information (520) 621-2109 vrice@eller.arizona.edu Phone: 520-621-2155 Fax: 520-621-2150 E-mail: ebrpublications@eller.arizona.edu To subscribe to Arizona’s Economy or other Economic and Business Research Publications, visit: ebr.eller.arizona.edu/subscribe/ Arizona’s Economy, published quarterly by the Economic and Business Research Center at the Eller College of Management, is provided as an educational service by The University of Arizona. Correspondence should be addressed to EBR Publications, McClelland Hall Room 103, PO Box 210108, Tucson, Arizona 85721-0108. Arizona’s Economy is available online at: azeconomy.eller.arizona.edu As part of The University of Arizona’s public mission to improve quality of life for the people of Arizona and the nation, the Economic and Business Research Center is dedicated to providing Arizona citizens and decision makers with high quality economic data and objective forecasts and analyses. Copyright 2013 by The University of Arizona. Information contained in this publication may be copied or reprinted with credit to the Eller College of Management at The University of Arizona. >> Visit us online at ebr.eller.arizona.edu! Thank you to our community sponsors for their ongoing support of Economic and Business Research Center programs. Arizona Department of Transportation Cox Communications Arizona Joint Legislative Budget Committee Elliott D. Pollack and Company Arizona Public Service Company JPMorgan Chase & Co. Bascom Arizona Ventures, LLC Maricopa Association of Governments BBVA Compass Maricopa County CBRE Pima Association of Governments City of Mesa Pima County City of Phoenix Salt River Project City of Tempe Tucson Electric Power Company City of Tucson Special thanks to for its ongoing support of the Economic and Business Research Center website! ebr.eller.arizona.edu