[Southsider2k12]

http://thenewsdispatch.com/articles/2012/0...f2816566043.txt

Ball State ranks counties in economic development readiness

By Michael J. Hicks
Ball State University
Published: Monday, April 16, 2012 5:06 PM CDT
Like most practitioners of the dark science of economics, I view a recession as an event that bumps an economy off its long-term growth path. This last recession has certainly done that, but now that signs of recovery grow stronger, many Hoosier communities are going to face more unpleasant news.

For too many places in our state, the long-term prospects for economic growth are poor. For at least a third of Indiana’s counties, the long-term effect of this economic decline is a whole lot worse than any recession. In fact, just about one in six Hoosiers live in counties whose population is shrinking, and more than a third of counties had a population growth of less than 1 percent over the last decade. These are unmistakably places in decline.

Much effort has been made to help hard-pressed communities. The federal government has been pouring money into these places for decades, but fiscal realities argue that the well of federal assistance nears an epic dry spell. At the state level, Indiana has created an environment that is the envy of most states in terms of job attraction and business expansion. While there’s always more work to be done, the cold, hard truth is that only a few counties in Indiana are truly ready for the type of business expansion that will happen in the next two decades. Indeed, only one in seven Indiana counties grew faster than the national average. That is the measure of our readiness for economic growth.

The real problem is that too many places in Indiana lack the broad set of features that are attractive to residents and new businesses. Every community in Indiana has some bright spots, and some problems, yet taken as a whole, there is much need for improvement. Fixes to community problems begin at home, in the local coffee shop, mayor’s offices, community foundations, county councils, school boards and other groups that do not spend most their time thinking about economic development.

*
The first step in enacting meaningful improvement in a community is a frank assessment. So, over the past year, my colleagues and I at Ball State, along with leaders from tourism, the arts, economic and community development, natural resources, other universities and the private sector, have worked on the Community Asset Inventory and Ranking (www.bsu.edu/cber). This report and interactive website is designed to provide a data-driven, county level grade of community assets.

The report uses information that technical research says influences the desirability of a region for residential and commercial investment. In other words, these factors point to the quality of life in a county. The data we use are all the most recently available published data, which can be compared across counties. The ranking groups more than 100 measures into seven key areas: people; human capital-health; human capital-education; government and economy; arts, entertainment and recreation; and public amenities, both static and changeable. We provide grades on the first five rankings, and a simple index number for the last two, since amenities that cannot be changed should not be graded. These are more like aptitude scores than grades.

The grading of Indiana’s counties was an eye-opening experience. I have previously published studies using these data, but until this study, I had not fully absorbed the broad impact of these measures on economic outcomes. As part of the project, we compared per capita income and population growth with grades and individual county GPAs. Astonishingly, our grades are remarkable predictors of a county’s success in attracting residents and business investment.

Unsurprisingly, not everyone is happy that we’ve publicly aired grades. While the rankings are imperfect, as with any study, they tell a pretty clear story across categories. Places that score well in one area typically score well in many. Places that do poorly in one area usually have many sore spots. No county got a 4.0 GPA or failed every measure.

The suburbs of Indianapolis had pretty good report cards as did Fort Wayne and Evansville. East central Indiana and parts of southern Indiana have much room for improvement. Many rural counties had a bright spot or two, and some relatively strong cities such as Columbus and Kokomo struggled against countywide problems.

One oft-voiced concern is that airing of this dirty laundry will hurt local marketing efforts. But really, these are all publicly available data routinely used by business relocation consultants. The only danger these rankings pose to any Indiana community is that they might be ignored.

Michael J. Hicks is an economics professor at Ball State University and director of the Center for Business and Economic Research in the university’s Miller College of Business.

La Porte County’s ranking

People: C-

Human Capital, Education: C

Human Capital, Health: C

Government impact and economy: D

Public amenities, changeable and static: N/A

Arts, entertainment and recreation: A

To check out more of the report, and learn more about La Porte or other counties rankings, visit www.bsu.edu/cber. The link to the survey is at the right top of the Web page in red.