rankings

Houston's Not Resilient? Really?

Tory Gattis — Tue, 02 Aug 2011 12:04:48 -0400

Alert reader Jessie sent me this article about Houston ranking "very low" on a "resilience capacity index". For real. I was dumbfounded too. And now I'm going to post out-of-character and get a little snippy...

Let's skip right past the parade of articles and data showing Houston and Texas weathering the great recession better than just about everywhere else in the country. It's so strong Rick Perry might win the Republican presidential nomination based on it. That alone should make them question their entire methodology. Go back to the dot-com and Enron crashes, and you'll find the same minimal impact. Sounds like we're pretty resilient to me.

Then there's their explicit declaration that it represents the ability of a city to weather the shock of a major storm or flood. I'll point to both Tropical Storm Allison and Hurricane Ike. Both were devastating - yet we bounced back relatively quickly from each one. You might note on their map that New Orleans ranks higher than Houston, yet Hurricane Katrina knocked New Orleans on its back for years. Maybe they need to add a "levees upkeep" variable to the index?

Let's look at some of the problematic variables that make up the index:

Economic diversification: I'll admit there's some value here, but it's also worth noting that some of the wealthiest and most successful cities in the country built that success around one strong, dominant industry: NYC and finance, DC and govt, SF/SV and tech, Houston and energy, etc.
Income equality: also a proxy for "we don't have any high-paying industries" - nor the corresponding tax base. How is this helpful for resilience? (more on the value of income disparity here)
Educational attainment, being out of poverty, and home ownership: a proxy for using tight zoning and land-use regulation to keep out apartments, new and affordable housing, and immigrants.
Metropolitan Stability: aka "stagnation". Cities that aren't growing have amazingly stable populations because nobody wants to move there and none of the residents can sell their houses.

My cynical side thinks that, since the University of Buffalo put this out, they intentionally chose variables that made Buffalo look good, even though it's one of the most stagnant metro economies in the country.

All in all one of the worst designed indexes I've ever seen - and there are some doozies out there.

OK, I feel better. End venting (and snippyness).

Read more from Tory at HoustonStrategies.com.

California Expenses Putting a Strain on Business

Kirsten Moore — Wed, 06 Oct 2010 22:47:38 -0400

Is it any wonder why California’s economy has been so sluggish during the recession? According to the 2010 Kosmont-Rose Institute Cost of Doing Business Survey, one-third of the nation’s forty most expensive cities are located in California, deterring businesses from setting up shop in the state. The increases in sales, income, and vehicle taxes in 2009 further depressed the business climate and exacerbated the problem of unemployment. Though local governments are trying to cut costs and boost local businesses, they have not been able to reverse the effects of outrageous taxes and fees.

As one would predict, the ten most expensive cities in California in 2010 are located almost exclusively in the Bay Area or Los Angeles Area. Berkeley, Oakland, and San Francisco round out the Bay Area localities with San Francisco actually making the top ten national rankings as well. Beverly Hills, Culver City, Inglewood, Los Angeles, San Bernardino, and Santa Monica all represent Los Angeles County while Rancho Santa Margarita fills the final spot. However, none of these cities joined San Francisco on the national list.

There is one thing missing from Kosmont’s national list of most expensive cities: the Great Plains states and Midwest. With the exception of Chicago, there are no cities on the list from the area between Arizona and Ohio. Even in the West, there are only three cities, San Francisco, Portland, and Phoenix, that made the top ten.

Where do we find the least expensive cities? They are in the middle of the country, of course. Five of 2010’s least expensive cities are in Texas, one is in Nevada, and one is in Wyoming. Texas has fared surprisingly well during the recession, as have states like North Dakota. Low business costs and a bustling energy industry have made these states havens for new businesses and job seekers alike.

Companies in California are now packing up and moving north and west to save money. Friendlier and more stimulating business climates in states such as Arizona, Washington, Oregon, and Colorado are luring companies like Google, Hilton, and Genentech. As Larry Kosmont, President and CEO of Kosmont Companies, commented, “Just being located in California, cities are at a ‘cost’ disadvantage right out of the gate.” If California wants to keep the companies that bolstered its success during the beginning of the decade, it must reconsider its recent tax hikes and have faith that improving the business climate will stimulate the economic growth that the state sorely needs.

Unlivable Vancouver

Wendell Cox — Fri, 12 Feb 2010 23:52:29 -0500

Just in time for the winter Olympics, The Economist has rated Vancouver as the world’s most livable city. The Economist rates cities (presumably metropolitan areas or urban areas) “over 30 qualitative and quantitative factors across five broad categories: stability, healthcare, culture and environment, education and infrastructure.” There is no doubt that Vancouver is in a setting that is among the most attractive in the world. It is also clear that the quality of life is good in Vancouver.

Vancouver won another honor in the last month, that of most unaffordable housing market in the six nations surveyed by the Demographia International Housing Affordability Survey (United States, United Kingdom, Canada, Australia, Ireland and New Zealand). In Vancouver, housing costs 9.3 times annual gross household incomes and is rated severely unaffordable. This measure, the Median Multiple, would be 3.0 or less in a properly functioning urban market. The second most expensive major “city” in Canada was Toronto, far behind Vancouver, but still severely unaffordable at a Median Multiple of 5.2.

Meanwhile, Pittsburgh, the ranked highest city in the United States (yes, higher than Portland, Seattle or San Diego) shows that affordability and livability are not incompatible. Pittsburgh has a Median Multiple of 2.6.

Vancouver’s high ranking, however, makes it clear that the cost of housing (and by extension, the cost of living), has little to do with The Economist ratings. As Owen McShane wrote here to commemorate the last release of The Economist ratings, the cities are ranked based upon their attractiveness to expatriate executives. These are not ordinary Canadians. At historic credit underwriting standards, 85% of Canadians households could not qualify for a mortgage on the median priced house in Vancouver.

Vancouver is doubtless among the most livable cities in the world for those for whom money is no object. But for ordinary Canadians, affordability is a prerequisite to livability. This makes Vancouver Canada’s least livable city.

Texas Dominates Milken's New Best Performing Cities Index

Mark Schill — Wed, 11 Nov 2009 10:55:23 -0500

Texas metropolitan regions hold down four of the top five and nine of the top 16 places in Milken's new Best Performing Cities Index, released this morning. The rankings were authored by previous New Geography Contributor Ross DeVol, director of Regional Economics at Milken.

It's refreshing to see a set of rankings attempting to take an objective, hard data-based look at comparative analysis. The Milken Rankings are a combination of job growth, wage and salary growth, high-tech GDP growth, and high-tech location quotients (see page 8 of the report).

A region's industry mix plays a big role in its ranking; you can see energy-centric regions scoring well. But remember that these rankings also explicitly factor in high tech growth and high tech concentration.

Regions that avoided real estate inflation and those maintaining what they have or simply avoiding rapid decline tend to score better.

“‘Best performing’ sometimes means retaining what you have,” said DeVol. “In a period of recession, the index highlights metros that have adapted to weather the storm. As we move forward in a recovery that still lacks jobs, metros will be further tested in their ability to sustain themselves.”

The rankings include 324 regions, breaking them into two groups based on region size.

You can view the full lists at Milken's interactive rankings website, and the full report includes analyses of the top large and small places.

Here's the top and bottom 25 Large places:

Top 25 Large Regions			Bottom 25 Large Regions
2009 rank	2008 rank	Metropolitan area	2009 rank	2008 rank	Metropolitan area
1	4	Austin-Round Rock, TX MSA	176	97	Bradenton-Sarasota-Venice, FL MSA
2	13	Killeen-Temple-Fort Hood, TX MSA	177	150	Birmingham-Hoover, AL MSA
3	3	Salt Lake City, UT MSA	178	144	Memphis, TN-MS-AR MSA
4	7	McAllen-Edinburg-Mission, TX MSA	179	117	Miami-Miami Beach-Kendall, FL MD
5	16	Houston-Sugar Land-Baytown, TX MSA	180	120	Cape Coral-Fort Myers, FL MSA
6	21	Durham, NC MSA	181	183	Spartanburg, SC MSA
7	9	Olympia, WA MSA	182	178	Wilmington, DE-MD-NJ MD
8	5	Huntsville, AL MSA	183	189	Dayton, OH MSA
9	14	Lafayette, LA MSA	184	73	Merced, CA MSA
10	2	Raleigh-Cary, NC MSA	185	191	Hickory-Lenoir-Morganton, NC MSA
11	15	San Antonio, TX MSA	186	193	Cleveland-Elyria-Mentor, OH MSA
12	29	Fort Worth-Arlington, TX MD	187	170	Providence-New Bed.-Fall Riv., RI-MA MSA
13	23	Dallas-Plano-Irving, TX MD	188	186	South Bend-Mishawaka, IN-MI MSA
14	37	El Paso, TX MSA	189	185	Kalamazoo-Portage, MI MSA
15	45	Wichita, KS MSA	190	197	Canton-Massillon, OH MSA
16	88	Corpus Christi, TX MSA	191	192	Ann Arbor, MI MSA
17	17	Seattle-Bellevue-Everett, WA MD	192	187	Atlantic City, NJ MSA
18	40	Baton Rouge, LA MSA	193	188	Youngstown-Warren-Board., OH-PA MSA
19	72	Tulsa, OK MSA	194	190	Grand Rapids-Wyoming, MI MSA
20	20	Greeley, CO MSA	195	196	Lansing-East Lansing, MI MSA
21	8	Tacoma, WA MD	196	199	Holland-Grand Haven, MI MSA
22	48	Fort Collins-Loveland, CO MSA	197	198	Warren-Troy-Farmington Hills, MI MD
23	54	Little Rock-N. Little Rock-Conway, AR MSA	198	194	Toledo, OH MSA
24	67	Shreveport-Bossier City, LA MSA	199	200	Detroit-Livonia-Dearborn, MI MD
25	41	Wash.-Arl.-Alex., DC-VA-MD-WV MD	200	195	Flint, MI MSA

And the top and bottom 25 Small regions:

Top 25 Small Regions			Bottom 25 Small Regions
2009 rank	2008 rank	Metropolitan area	2009 rank	2008 rank	Metropolitan area
1	1	Midland, TX MSA	100	110	Vineland-Millville-Bridgeton, NJ MSA
2	7	Longview, TX MSA	101	94	Parkersburg-Marietta-Vienna, WV-OH MSA
3	5	Grand Junction, CO MSA	102	114	Williamsport, PA MSA
4	26	Tyler, TX MSA	103	117	Mansfield, OH MSA
5	10	Odessa, TX MSA	104	85	Jackson, TN MSA
6	29	Kennewick-Pasco-Richland, WA MSA	105	115	Muncie, IN MSA
7	15	Bismarck, ND MSA	106	63	Flagstaff, AZ MSA
8	6	Warner Robins, GA MSA	107	112	Racine, WI MSA
9	11	Las Cruces, NM MSA	108	70	Dothan, AL MSA
10	17	Fargo, ND-MN MSA	109	105	Sheboygan, WI MSA
11	45	Pascagoula, MS MSA	110	97	Niles-Benton Harbor, MI MSA
12	23	Sioux Falls, SD MSA	111	100	Altoona, PA MSA
13	8	Bellingham, WA MSA	112	95	Terre Haute, IN MSA
14	38	College Station-Bryan, TX MSA	113	59	Redding, CA MSA
15	2	Coeur d'Alene, ID MSA	114	122	Lima, OH MSA
16	12	Cheyenne, WY MSA	115	75	Janesville, WI MSA
17	81	Texarkana, TX-Texarkana, AR MSA	116	96	Elkhart-Goshen, IN MSA
18	27	Waco, TX MSA	117	119	Anderson, SC MSA
19	16	Houma-Bayou Cane-Thibodaux, LA MSA	118	113	Dalton, GA MSA
20	44	Laredo, TX MSA	119	120	Springfield, OH MSA
21	40	Abilene, TX MSA	120	84	Lewiston-Auburn, ME MSA
22	25	Iowa City, IA MSA	121	116	Muskegon-Norton Shores, MI MSA
23	72	Glens Falls, NY MSA	122	121	Saginaw-Saginaw Township North, MI MSA
24	24	Billings, MT MSA	123	123	Battle Creek, MI MSA
25	64	Ithaca, NY MSA	124	124	Jackson, MI MSA

Entrepreneurship on the Rise?

Matthew Leiphon — Tue, 12 May 2009 14:18:58 -0400

The Kauffman Foundation, the "world's largest foundation devoted to entrepreneurship," recently released the 2008 edition of their "Index of Entrepreneurial Activity."

The index, which measures the rate of business creation at the individual owner level, reports that despite the recession, "new business formation increased in 2008." This growth was not present in all sections of the nation, however. According to the Kauffman survey, the Midwest saw a slight decline in business start-ups in 2008. Unfortunately, while entrepreneurship was apparently on the rise, there was a drop in the formation of the "highest-income-potential types of businesses".

On a more local level, the states of Georgia, New Mexico, and Montana led the pack, each showing over 500 per 100,000 adults creating businesses each month. Bringing up the rear were West Virginia, Iowa, and Ohio, with the last showing a rate of creation of 190 per 100,000 adults per month.

In general, 2008 rates of entrepreneurial activity as reported by the Kauffman survey are higher along the west coast and in the Rocky Mountain states, and lower in the midwest and mid-atlantic regions. These findings would seem to have some overlap with the patterns reported by Newgeography's "2009 Best Cities for Job Growth" rankings, which, in general, showed stronger conditions in the west (outside of California) and pockets of weakness in the midwest and mid-atlantic regions.

College Towns Get High Marks for Quality of Life

DeloreZ — Sun, 29 Mar 2009 16:00:04 -0400

It's hard to find a quality of life ranking that satisfies the preferences and desires of everyone but Bizjournal's recent ranking of mid-sized metros does highlight and affirm the presence of colleges and universities as an increasingly common and important thread in quality of life analyses.

The study compared 124 mid-sized metros in 20 statistical categories, using the latest U.S. Census Bureau data. The highest scores went to well-rounded places with healthy economies, light traffic, moderate costs of living, impressive housing stocks and strong educational systems.

Mid-size places of 100,000 to 1 million residents have experienced strong growth since 2000, exhibiting some of the strongest domestic migration rates among all metropolitan areas regardless of size.