Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Research in REAL
Geoffrey J.D. Hewings
Director,
Regional Economics Applications Laboratory
217.333.4740 (244.9339 fax)
hewings@illinois.edu
Preliminary findings
Why Per Capita Income declining?
Preliminary findings
Migration patterns US-Chicago relatively stable
but continued net loss
As Partridge et al. (2010) have shown, volume
migration in US has decreased since 2002
Preliminary findings
Chicago MSA net loss $23 billion dollars in terms of
family income in 16 years. This means $1.45 billion
income per year.
Preliminary findings
Inflow from RUS has lower than those outmigrating:
Selection bias? Yes.
People who move longer distance (both move in
and move out) are earning more than people
who are not moving or moving in short distance.
Does Chicago make people more productive over
time?
Possible stage of life selection bias are inmigrants younger (recent college graduates) and
out-migrants more experienced?
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Dynamics of change
Stylized facts
Every year,
86-88% people stay in the same house as last
year
Every year, around 7-9% people change their
household locations within a region
5% move in or out
Region loses 0.3-0.6% people through net
outflows
26
27
College
Graduates
28
Start of
Net
outflow
29
Modeling Framework
30
Progress
Current Progress
Disaggregated households by age, income
Generated consumption profiles
Migration separated into in- and out Developed industry*occupation matrices
Forecasts 2010-2040
Use micro-simulation to map age, education,
occupation and income characteristics onto
Stayers
In-migrants
Out-migrants
31
Future Work
Micro-simulation will be used to model location
choices of
In-migrants
Existing residents changing houses
This will provide micro-spatial basis of population
and employment change that will be integrated with
macro model to explore interaction of macro
changes with growth in 300 communities within
Chicago region
Preliminary analysis suggests problems
accommodating population increases
32
National Economy
Final Demand
(F)
Output
Dynamic IO
Land Use
Population (P)
Employment (E)
Income (Y)
Intra-regional-level
Population
33
34
35
44
6.17%
1.32%
1973-1980
1980-1984
1984-1990
3.26%
1990-1994
0.65%
-0.09%
1994-2001
2001-2006
45
49
Results
Population ageing will lower the economic growth of Illinois
However, investment in human capital offsets significantly the
negative effects of ageing population.
Growth of Per-capita Output
2.00%
One-sector model
Two-sector model
1.50%
1.00%
0.50%
0.00%
2001
2006
2011
2016
2021
2026
2031
2036
2041
2046
-0.50%
-1.00%
50
2.00
1.00
0.00
-1.00
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
Alexander
Union
1997
-2.00
-3.00
-4.00
Year
Illinois State
52
ARIMA
AR(1)
AR(2)
MA(1)
MA(2)
Intercept
Short-Run
Long-Run
Alexander
ARIMA(1,0,0)
-0.682
--
--
--
-0.083
-1.290
0.537
Brown
ARIMA(1,0,0)
-0.773
--
--
--
0.088
-0.219
-0.531
Calhoun
ARIMA(0,0,1)
--
--
-1.000
--
0.074
-5.777
1.597
Cass
ARIMA(1,0,0)
-0.502
--
--
--
-0.104
1.262
-0.232
Greene
ARIMA(1,0,0)
-0.556
--
--
--
-0.029
0.820
-0.155
Jackson
ARIMA(1,0,0)
-0.674
--
--
--
-0.067
-0.886
0.132
Jersey
ARIMA(0,0,0)
--
--
--
--
0.003
0.606
0.197
Madison
ARIMA(0,0,1)
--
--
-1.000
--
0.059
-2.855
0.778
Monroe
ARIMA(0,0,1)
--
--
-1.000
--
0.044
0.266
-0.035
Morgan
ARIMA(1,0,0)
-0.415
--
--
--
-0.023
-0.095
0.073
Pike
ARIMA(0,0,2)
--
--
-1.918
1.000
-0.092
-0.066
0.127
Randolph
ARIMA(1,0,0)
-0.763
--
--
--
0.214
2.650
-1.175
St. Clair
ARIMA(2,0,0)
-0.786
-0.419
--
--
0.082
-4.266
0.832
Scott
ARIMA(0,0,1)
--
--
--
-1.000
-0.005
3.377
-1.101
Union
ARIMA(1,0,0)
-0.298
--
--
--
-0.093
-1.720
0.311
53
Employment
May 2008
Percentage Decrease %
Winnebago
-498.8214
137443
0.362929651
Lake
-1296.534
339376
0.382034675
Whiteside
-48.5357
21224
0.228683095
Rock Island
-274.3571
80427
0.341125617
Mercer
-5.4286
3197
0.16980294
Henderson
-14.886
1126
1.322024867
Hancock
-26.2168
5016
0.522663477
Adams
-210.7143
34480
0.61112036
Jersey
-85.7015
5190
1.65128131
Calhoun
1.1071
893
-0.123975364
Douglas
-24.7143
7294
0.338830546
Edgar
-33.5714
6700
0.501065672
Coles
150.1429
24758
-0.606441958
Cumberland
-24.5357
2371
1.034824968
Jasper
-36.0376
2447
1.472725787
Clark
-39.7857
4966
0.801161901
Crawford
4.2289
7314
-0.057819251
Lawrence
-46.2512
4775
0.968611518
54
55
Japan
(Steel)
(Machinery)
Monetary
Trade, CO2
Import contents
of exports
China
(Plastic products)
Emissions from
Transport sect.
Australia
(Coal)
UK
Final consumption
56
USA
Final consumption
Cyprus, Romania
Non-OECD EU
Switzerland, Norway
Malaysia, Philippines,
Thailand
Target
countries in
this study
Iceland
Rest of World
OECD countries
57
1.4
Embodied
Direct
0.9
1.5
0.8
1.3
0.7
0.6
0.5
Embodied
Direct
1.1
0.9
0.4
0.7
0.3
0.5
0.2
0.3
0.1
0.1
2.3
-0.1
58
Summary
Other projects:
Supply chain impacts of Minority SBEs
Alternative uses of coal to generate energy (clean coal, gasification,
coal to oil)
Empirical challenges to the NEG (using Chinese interregional flow
data)
Interstate trade
Economic interdependence in a metro region
Melting the iceberg transport margins in CGE models
Comparison of Walrasian and Marshallian CGE models on same
data base
Continuous time econometric-IO modeling
Evaluation of urban revitalization in Turkey (Deniz Ay)
Labor force dynamics in Guatemala (KrugmanBlanchflower/Oswald-Harris/Todaro-Mortenson/Pissarides)
Matching indicators to develop new housing price index (Esteban
Lopez)
59
60