Get documents about "Overview of the Portland Economy
Document Sample
Overview of the
Appendix 2-2 Portland Economy
The current national and state forecasts reported in Appendix 2-1 predict,
as expected, long-term growth despite near-term setbacks. If one accepts the
general thrust of these forecasts (as most forecasters do), then a question
regarding the Portland economy is: Are there any substantial reasons to
believe that the Portland region would not grow in a world where both the
U.S. and Oregon economies are growing? The rest of this appendix explains
why the answer to that question is “No.”
In fact, there are reasons to believe just the opposite. West coast
metropolitan areas have been growth areas for 50 years for both strict
economic and quality-of-life reasons that should continue. Moreover, it is
difficult to perceive how a state economic forecast of growth could be correct
at the same time that the Portland economy (with over half the people and
employment in the state) was stagnating.
Thus, despite short-term economic problems for certain sectors and
households, the long view for the Portland economy, from today’s viewing
point, is a healthy one. The rest of this section provides some information in
support of that conclusion.
Metropolitan Portland serves as an employment, commercial, and service
center for most of Oregon and southwest Washington. It provides retail
shopping, wholesale distribution, and business, financial, and health services.
Specialized manufacturing in the Portland region includes high-tech
equipment, software, primary and fabricated metals, and transportation
equipment. Portland is also an institutional and corporate center for the
region, with the Bonneville Power Administration, the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers, the U.S. Forest Service, Portland General Electric, and Northwest
Natural Gas headquarters located here.
Portland has historically developed around its transportation facilities,
and Portland’s growth has reinforced its status as a West Coast distribution
hub.
The Portland regional economy has four major components, which depend
on one another.
• Residents provide a pool of labor and it is their work that is the basic
engine that drives our economy. Residents purchase goods and
services, demand services from governments and non-profits, and,
both directly and indirectly pay taxes.
• For profit businesses employ most of the workers in our economy,
sell goods and services to residents, government, non-profits, and
Appendix 2-2: Overview of the Portland Economy July 2002 2-2 page 1
other businesses. They are also a major source of tax revenues, but
also rely on government to provide it with educated workers,
infrastructure (such as roads and water), and an array of essential
services.
• Non-profits mostly serve residents and in doing so, they fill in gaps
in areas where businesses and governments cannot fulfill all the needs
of the population. In some parts of the local economy, such as social
services and health care, non-profits are the largest providers.
• Government provides services, infrastructure, and a legal system
that serves the other components of our economy.
Together, these four components are responsible for nearly all of the
employment and spending activity in Portland. This section compares parts
of each component in Portland to that of the region, state, and nation as a
whole to illustrate similarities and differences.
RESIDENTS
POPULATION
The 2000 Census reports 529,000 people lived in the City of Portland on
and about 1,918,000 lived in the Portland-Vancouver metropolitan area. The
Census term for such metropolitan areas is PMSA.1 The Portland-Vancouver
PMSA, which we will refer to the “PMSA” or, with less jargon “the region,”
comprises six counties: Clackamas, Columbia, Multnomah, Washington, and
Yamhill Counties in Oregon plus Clark County, Washington.
The population of the City of Portland rose from 437,319 in 1990 to
529,121 in the 2000 Census. Part of that growth was due to annexations.
Nonetheless, certain trends can be seen in the data. The population of the
City grew 17 percent while the rest of the PMSA saw a 22 percent gain. The
rest of the PMSA started off the decade with well over a million people. Thus,
in pure numbers its growth was much larger than the City’s (310,755 more
people compared with 91,802 for Portland).
Figure 1 shows how the population grew by age category. In the PMSA
and elsewhere in the country there was a large increase in the residents ages
45 to 64—a result of the aging of people born during post-war baby boom.
Half of the City’s population growth is in that age group.
1 PMSA stands for Primary Metropolitan Statistical Area.
2-2 page 2 July 2002 Appendix 2-2: Overview of the Portland Economy
Figure 1: Percent Change in Population by Age, Portland and the
Rest of the PMSA, 1990 - 2000
Total
Under 5
5 to 24
25 to 44
45 to 64
Over 64
-5% 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40%
Portland Rest of PMSA
Source: 2000 Census and 1990 Census.
The City and the rest of the PMSA both showed gains in the 5 to 24 and
the 44 to 64 age groups at rates that were higher than their overall
population growth. Where the areas differ, and dramatically so, are in the
youngest and oldest age groups. Portland experienced only a modest increase
in the population of children under the age of five, while the remaining parts
of the PMSA saw a 21 percent gain. Between 1990 and 2000, we calculated
that for every 100 new children under five recorded by the Census, just nine
resided in Portland. When we look at the population over 64 years of age we
find that the City of Portland lost population, but the rest of the PMSA saw a
14 percent increase.
OCCUPATIONS
Table 1 shows the percentages of workers in the construction,
manufacturing, wholesale trade, and retailing are all higher in Oregon than
in the U.S. For all four of those industries, the shares held by Portland
residents are less than that of the state and rest of the PMSA. For example,
while about 8 percent of the working residents in the rest of the PMSA work
in construction, only 6 percent of those in Portland do. In manufacturing the
difference is about 16 percent of the rest of the PMSA residents versus about
13 percent of Portland residents).
Appendix 2-2: Overview of the Portland Economy July 2002 2-2 page 3
Table 1: Where Residents Work, Various Areas, 2000
Portland Rest of Part
Persons % of Total of the PMSA* Oregon US
Persons 16 and older employed in:
Farming, Forestry, Fishing & Hunting 1,043 0.38% 1.68% 2.89% 1.43%
Mining & Utilities 2,400 0.88% 1.11% 0.84% 1.29%
Construction 15,463 5.67% 7.59% 7.37% 6.77%
Manufacturing 34,864 12.78% 16.01% 14.42% 14.13%
Wholesale trade 11,236 4.12% 5.29% 4.74% 3.82%
Retail trade 30,585 11.21% 11.51% 12.62% 11.84%
Transp., Warehousing, Information & Communication 20,894 7.66% 8.39% 5.91% 7.38%
Finance, Insurance, Real Estate & Leasing 21,090 7.73% 8.00% 6.25% 6.84%
Services 125,857 46.14% 37.25% 40.53% 41.21%
Public Administration 9,120 3.34% 2.92% 4.38% 4.71%
Armed forces 244 0.09% 0.25% 0.05% 0.58%
Total working population 16 & over 272,796 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
Source: U.S. Census 2000. Rest of PMSA calculated by ECONorthwest and excludes Yamhill and Columbia
Counties.
Table 2 shows that within the Portland metropolitan area, higher
percentages of residents in the transportation, warehousing, information and
communications industries and in the finance, insurance, real estate, and
leasing industries live outside of the city. Other evidence suggests that a
disproportionate number of employees in those industries live outside the
City and commute in to work.
There are only two industries where the percentage of residents working
in them is higher in Portland than it is elsewhere in the PMSA: services and
public administration. Among the major subcategories in services are hotels,
restaurants, health care facilities, schools, employment agencies, and
professional service businesses such as law firms.
Table 2: Types of Workers and their Occupations by Residency,
Various Areas, 2000
Portland Rest of Part
Persons % of Total of the PMSA* Oregon US
Class of worker:
Private wage & salary workers 221,026 81.02% 81.14% 76.71% 79.09%
Government workers 31,960 11.72% 10.62% 13.54% 14.61%
Self-employed workers 18,041 6.61% 7.16% 8.75% 5.56%
Unpaid family workers 1,769 0.65% 1.09% 1.00% 0.75%
Total working population 16 & over 272,796 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
Type of occupation:
Management, professional & related 99,578 36.50% 35.12% 32.53% 33.12%
Service occupations 43,404 15.91% 12.62% 15.63% 15.02%
Sales & office jobs 72,047 26.41% 28.81% 26.17% 26.52%
Farming, fishing & forestry jobs 497 0.18% 0.97% 1.57% 0.73%
Construction, extraction & maintenance jobs 18,809 6.89% 8.02% 8.72% 9.43%
Production, transportation & shipping jobs 38,217 14.01% 14.20% 15.35% 14.61%
Military occupations 244 0.09% 0.25% 0.05% 0.58%
Total working population 16 & over 272,796 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
Source: U.S. Census 2000. Rest of PMSA calculated by ECONorthwest and excludes Yamhill and Columbia
Counties.
The previous two tables showed in what businesses and occupations
people living in the City and elsewhere worked. Table 3 shows how many
people worked at establishments inside the City and elsewhere in 2000. More
people worked inside the City than lived in the City in 2000 (Portland got
2-2 page 4 July 2002 Appendix 2-2: Overview of the Portland Economy
more workers commuting into the City for jobs than commuting out to work).
Thus, the totals in these tables differ.
Table 3: Average Annual Employment by Type and Location of
Employment, Various Areas, 2000
Rest of the
Portland PMSA Oregon
Type of establishment or employment:
Businesses with paid employees 311,910 462,743 1,238,813
Non Profits 40,943 36,802 124,340
Civilian Government 55,425 62,009 244,844
Military 1,029 1,325 1,748
Farm workers 29 6,679 21,534
Self employed persons 18,041 49,526 140,307
Unpaid family workers 1,769 7,190 16,037
Total employed 429,146 626,273 1,765,089
Sources: based on ES 202 tapes for Clark, Clackamas, Multnomah, Washington, Columbia and Yamhill
Counties, geocoded data to determine Portland City numbers, and 2000 Census data to estimate farm, self
employed and unpaid family workers. Military FTEs estimated by ECONorthwest. Breakdown of non-profit,
government, and for-profit employment for Clark County estimated by ECONorthwest.
The average number of people employed in Portland during 2000 was over
429,000. Like the rest of the PMSA, about 73 percent were paid employees of
businesses. There was a large difference in the employment pattern for non-
profits. Ten percent of the people working in the City of Portland were
employed by non-profits in the year 2000. This compares to only six percent
in the rest of the PMSA and seven percent in Oregon. Thus, workers in
Portland are over 50 percent more likely to work for a non-profit than
workers elsewhere in the region. An even more dramatic difference is evident
in self-employment. In the City, four percent of those working in 2000 were
self-employed. In the rest of the PMSA, and in Oregon, the self-employed
accounted for eight percent of the workers.
INCOME
Table 4 shows the percentages of families according to their annual
incomes. Family income in Portland averaged $63,514 in the year 2000,
which is just about $100 more than the U.S. average and more than five
thousand dollars higher than the Oregon average. Outside of Portland,
average family incomes in the PMSA were much higher.
Appendix 2-2: Overview of the Portland Economy July 2002 2-2 page 5
Table 4: Distribution of Family Incomes, Various Areas, 2000
Portland Rest of
Families % of Total PMSA Oregon US
Annual family Income range:
Poor & near poor (less than $15,000) 11,972 18.85% 8.14% 10.41% 10.38%
Low income ($15,000 to $25,000) 14,000 22.04% 9.58% 12.72% 11.23%
Lower mid income ($25,000 to $35,000) 13,116 20.65% 10.38% 12.79% 12.11%
Middle income ($35,000 to $75,000) 46,026 72.47% 39.12% 40.19% 38.74%
Upper mid income ($75,000 to $100,000) 14,053 22.13% 14.72% 11.58% 12.30%
Upper income (over $100,000) 17,166 27.03% 18.07% 12.31% 15.25%
Families 14,053 22.13% 14.72% 11.58% 12.30%
Average family income ($/year) $63,514 $70,280 $58,163 $63,411
Sources: U.S. Census 2000 (based on a supplemental survey over the course of a year, thus the number of
families is slightly different than in Table 2. Rest of PMSA estimated by ECONorthwest using family income
distribution projections for Columbia and Yamhill counties from Claritas, Inc.
The distribution of families by income in Oregon closely matches that of
the U.S. For example, 10 percent of the all Portland families were either poor
or near poor (earned less than $15,000 in the year 2000). In the U.S. the
percentage of families in the poor and near poor income range was the
same—10 percent. Oregon, on the other hand, has larger percentages of
families in the income ranges below $75,000 a year and fewer of those
making more than $75,000 when compared to both the U.S. and the City of
Portland.
There is a difference between the distributions of family incomes in
Portland compared to the rest of the Portland-Vancouver PMSA. While 10
percent of Portland families are either poor or near poor, only 8 percent of
those living in the rest of the
PMSA are.
Figure 2: Difference in the distributions of family
income between the City of Portland and the rest of
Figure 2 illustrates these the Portland-Vancouver PMSA, 2000
differences for all six of the 3%
income categories. It shows that 2%
Portland has a higher proportion 1%
of families in the poor to middle- 0%
income ranges, but far fewer -1%
upper- and upper-middle-income -2%
families compared to the rest of -3%
the PMSA. Thus, while the City of
-4%
Portland has a family-income Poor & near Low Lower mid Middle Upper mid Upper
poor income income income income income
distribution much like the United Source: Calculated using data from Table 4.
States, within the Portland
metropolitan area a disproportionate number of affluent families choose to
live outside the City, while a greater share of less well-off families live inside
the city.
Table 5 shows nearly 83 percent of all Portland households earn money
through work. This is a higher percentage than in the rest of Oregon or the
United States, but below that of the rest of the PMSA. About 22 percent of
Portlanders get social security retirement checks—less than for Oregon and
the U.S, which is consistent given the relatively low proportion of residents
over 65 in the city. Where Portland lags is in other retirement income—
2-2 page 6 July 2002 Appendix 2-2: Overview of the Portland Economy
mostly pension income. In comparison with the rest of the PMSA Portland
households are also more likely to rely on public assistance and supplemental
social security, which is designed largely to help people who are both poor
and disabled.
Table 5: Sources of Household Income, Various Areas, 2000
Rest of Part
Portland of the PMSA* Oregon US
Percent of households receiving:
Wage, salary & self employment income 82.93% 84.18% 80.42% 81.06%
Social security retirement benefits 21.64% 21.68% 26.83% 26.25%
Other retirement income 13.19% 15.53% 16.88% 16.94%
Supplemental social security 3.49% 2.34% 3.38% 3.83%
Cash public assistance 2.72% 1.88% 2.95% 2.60%
Food stamp benefits 8.18% 5.16% 8.13% 6.12%
Source: U.S. Census 2000. Rest of PMSA calculated by ECONorthwest and excludes Yamhill and Columbia
Counties.
Table 6 shows the amounts of income received. Households in Portland
who reported wage, salary, or self-employment income in 2000 earned over
$10,000 less than households in the rest of the PMSA. Portland households
with other sources of income, including retirement and public assistance, also
received less money than those in the rest of the PMSA and in the state as a
whole. As a result, the average household income in Portland was less than it
was for the other parts of the PMSA ($51,822 versus $56,510).
Table 6: Average Amounts Received by Household from Sources of
Income, Various Areas, 2000
Rest of Part
Portland of the PMSA* Oregon US
Average amount received by households getting:
Wage, salary & self employment income $51,151 $61,649 $49,486 $55,684
Social security retirement benefits 11,436 12,394 11,847 11,377
Other retirement income 15,411 16,309 16,206 15,563
Supplemental social security 6,234 6,351 6,618 6,233
Cash public assistance 2,963 3,649 2,906 2,990
Source: U.S. Census 2000. Rest of PMSA calculated by ECONorthwest and excludes Yamhill and Columbia
Counties.
Table 7 shows how the spending patterns of people in the Portland PMSA
and elsewhere. The data come from surveys conducted regularly by the U.S.
Bureau of Labor Statistics. They measure the income and spending by
consumer units. A consumer unit is basically a household except that some
households, like those made up of unrelated roommates who don’t share
expenses, are counted as two separate units. Consequently, there are a few
more consumer units than there are households in the country (about five
percent more in Portland).
Appendix 2-2: Overview of the Portland Economy July 2002 2-2 page 7
Table 7: Average Household Living Costs, Various Areas, 1999 - 2000
Portland Seattle
PMSA U.S. PMSA Western U.S.
Average consumer unit characteristics:
Income before taxes $49,035 $44,301 $51,292 $47,078
Persons 2.5 2.5 2.4 2.6
Vehicles 2.2 1.9 2.3 2.0
Percent Homeowners 64% 66% 64% 60%
Average annual spending by category:
Food $5,655 $5,095 $6,542 $5,508
Housing, furnishings and up-keep 12,311 9,755 12,419 11,882
Utilities, fuels, and public services 2,344 2,433 2,225 2,202
Transportation 7,800 7,215 7,402 7,874
Clothing 1,517 1,800 1,917 2,007
Entertainment 2,718 1,877 2,301 2,144
Health care 1,984 2,013 2,514 1,982
Alcoholic beverages and tobacco products 758 655 793 646
Reading and Personal care products & services 700 639 788 700
Miscellaneous 1,656 1,455 1,539 1,658
Cash contributions 2,265 1,187 1,061 1,297
Personal insurance and pensions 4,623 3,400 4,100 3,927
Average annual expenditures $44,331 $37,522 $43,601 $41,826
Source: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics consumer expenditure surveys.
In summary, the information about the residential sector has the
following implications for current and likely future economic activity in the
Portland region:
• Young professionals like Portland; families with children
prefer the suburbs. Portland has proven to be more attractive to
young, college educated people. However, they tend to move out of the
city after marrying or advancing in their careers. The result is that
households outside the city are larger, earn more money, and have
more young children than those in the City. Economic development
actions that can help reduce this shift would help raise the earnings
power of residents and, in turn, stimulate growth in business
activities.
• Portland’s educated workers attract the service industries.
Nationally, there has been a trend way from goods-producing
industries and towards service industries. Portland has been well
positioned in capturing a larger share of the service sector than
outlying areas. The City has the educated workforce characteristics to
continue growing in the services sector.
• Majority of region’s workforce work in the City. According to the
Census data, over 60 percent more people work in the City than
workers live in the City, which means there is a large net
commutation into Portland from the rest of the PMSA. Maintaining a
cost-effective, reliable transportation system will be crucial in
sustaining the City’s access to this labor supply. Those in the Portland
PMSA spend more each year on transportation than those living in
Seattle and the U.S. as a whole.
2-2 page 8 July 2002 Appendix 2-2: Overview of the Portland Economy
• Portlanders receive more welfare and less retirement income
than others in the region. Portland has a disproportionately large
share of the PMSA’s households who get public assistance but a
smaller share of those earning retirement income. Job training, more
access to education, and other services to help elevate the earnings of
Portland households would be beneficial. The low share of retirees,
which appears to be, in part, caused by the out-migration of late-
career households, may be something that is beginning to change as a
result of the plethora of attractive urban empty-nest housing in the
City. This trend should support a natural evolution of high-end retail
and service businesses.
BUSINESSES
This section provides a brief overview of the business component of the
economy. It covers the activities of private enterprises engaged in selling
products or services for profit or personal income. Included is everything from
large corporations with thousands of workers all the way down to self-
employed persons with no employees. Since the data for employer and
nonemployer businesses come from different sources, they are reported in
separate sections.
CURRENT CONDITIONS
Employer Businesses
The most current numbers on the business component come from the U.S.
Economic Census of 19972. In this section we report revenue (sales) data for
the main Census business categories including businesses with no paid
employees. In order to compare Portland to other areas, we divided each
industry’s total revenues by the population. This provides us with measure of
relative importance to the local economies.
The results are shown in Table 8. We find that service industries are
more dominant than goods producing industries in Portland when compared
to the rest of the PMSA. Particularly strong in the city are those industries
that need to be centrally located to the regional population either because of a
need to move goods quickly and efficiently to customers, such as the
wholesaling and transportation industries, and those that benefit from being
centrally located to large white collar labor pools, such as the finance and
insurance industry.
2 For farms we used the 1997 Census of Agriculture.
Appendix 2-2: Overview of the Portland Economy July 2002 2-2 page 9
Table 8: Per Capita Industry Revenues (in dollars), Various Areas, 1997
Rest of the
Portland PMSA Oregon US
Industry:
Farming and ranching $2 $570 $915 $735
Forestry, fishing, hunting & agricultural services 16 43 82 32
Mining and oil & gas extraction 23 92 71 668
Manufacturing 14,736 19,861 14,762 14,366
Wholesale trade 47,304 18,340 16,652 15,275
Retail stores 12,056 9,978 10,112 8,936
Non-store retailing 550 433 459 513
Utilities 4,980 961 1,411 1,539
Construction & contracting 4,488 5,549 4,486 3,532
Transportation & warehousing 3,281 838 1,265 1,298
Information services 3,710 2,279 1,818 2,349
Finance & insurance 23,317 5,604 7,601 8,345
Renting, leasing & real estate 2,495 1,202 1,219 1,279
Holding companies, managing & auxiliary offices 3,623 196 730 387
Professional & technical services (for-profit) 5,013 1,466 1,744 2,467
Administrative, support & waste services 2,126 948 991 1,169
Educational services (for-profit) 101 70 67 66
Health care & social services (for-profit) 2,403 1,343 1,508 1,680
Arts, entertainment & recreation (for-profit) 431 198 302 371
Food & lodging places 2,291 1,099 1,396 1,342
Personal & maintenance services (for-profit) 1,432 668 754 771
Total $134,378 $71,741 $68,345 $67,122
Source: The 1997 Economic Census, 1997 Census of Agriculture, 1997 Economic Census Non-employer
Statistics, and ECONorthwest estimates.
Key findings from the analysis are:
• Portland manufacturing is on par with state and nation but
lags the suburbs. Per capita manufacturing revenues were
substantially higher ($19,861) in the PMSA surrounding Portland
because of the high concentration of semiconductor plants.
• Portland dominates wholesale and retail trades. While Portland
holds its own in manufacturing, it dominates the wholesale and retail
store trade. Per capita sales of both industries well exceed similar
figures for the nation, state, and rest of the PMSA. Wholesalers, by
their very nature, need to be centrally located in metropolitan areas
and, therefore, are concentrated in Portland. The sales at retail stores
benefit from regional tourism and interstate traffic, both of which are
focused in the PMSA in Portland.
• Transportation and warehousing is centered in Portland. For
these sectors, Portland shows $3,281 in sales per capita versus $838 in
the rest of the PMSA. Portland is the center of the aviation and
marine transport industries, which of course tie-in closely with
trucking. Further facilitating this industry is the proximity of
Portland to interstate highways and the city’s central location with
respect to other major cities in the west.
2-2 page 10 July 2002 Appendix 2-2: Overview of the Portland Economy
• Utilities are headquartered in the City. Revenues per capita for
utilities are problematic because it is difficult to attribute their sales
geographically. Utility sales in Portland are higher than the region
because the three largest utilities are headquartered in the city. Thus,
the revenues per capita reflect as much the location of their offices
than where their actual service or products are sold.
• The information industry is strong in the City. The information
industry is centered in Portland because it is the largest media
market and the largest city in the state. According to the Census
broadcasters, publishers, and telecommunications companies’ make-
up the bulk of the “information industry” in Oregon. Another sub-
sector of it, the film and video production business, is also
concentrated in the city—in large part because it is where much of the
business’s creative talent resides.
• Portland serves as state’s key financial center. Being the state’s
traditional financial center and having a large white-collar workforce
probably helps explain why per capita revenues of the finance and
insurance industry is $23,317 in Portland, but only $7,601 for the
state as a whole. Similarly there is much higher revenues per capita
for “holding companies, managing & auxiliary offices” within Portland
than elsewhere in Oregon. This industry is a Census catchall for
establishments ranging from corporate headquarters and bank
holding companies to regional business offices that provide
administrative services to operating corporations.
Non-Employer Businesses
Non-employer businesses are family-run firms (with no paid employees),
self-employed people, or small businesses where only the owners work. Non-
employers are found in virtually every for-profit business category. In some
cases they hold large shares of industry’s revenues. As can be seen in Table 9,
local non-employer firms hold sizable market shares in many key service
sector industries. For example, non-employers in Portland accounted for over
$170 million of the construction industry’s revenues in 1997, which was
almost eight percent of the total earned by that sector.
Non-employers are major factors in three industries whose main functions
are to assist other local businesses and consumers all exhibit higher revenue
per capita figures in Portland than in the rest of the PMSA, state, or nation.
That are: (1) renting, leasing & real estate, (2) professional, technical, &
scientific services, and (3) administrative, support & waste services. All
employ large numbers of white-collar workers and tend to locate centrally in
urban areas so that they are convenient to customers.
Appendix 2-2: Overview of the Portland Economy July 2002 2-2 page 11
Table 9: Percent of Industry Revenues by Non-Employer
Firms, Various Areas, 1997
Industry Portland Rest of PMSA
Mining 0.0% 2.2%
Manufacturing 0.4% 0.3%
Wholesale trade 0.3% 0.7%
Retail stores (in store) 1.9% 1.9%
Non store retailers 14.1% 14.2%
Utilities 0.0% 0.2%
Construction 7.6% 8.6%
Transportation & warehousing 2.2% 9.7%
Information industries 0.9% 0.7%
Finance & insurance 0.5% 1.9%
Renting, leasing, & real estate 26.2% 32.8%
Holding companies & managing offices 0.0% 0.0%
Professional services (for-profit) 11.0% 19.6%
Administrative, support, & waste services 3.8% 6.3%
Educational services (for-profit) 18.0% 17.6%
Health care & social assistance (for-profit) 9.2% 9.5%
Arts, entertainment & recreation (for-profit) 17.4% 19.1%
Food & lodging places 1.5% 3.8%
Personal services (for-profit) 13.7% 23.1%
Source: The 1997 Economic Census, 1997 Census of Agriculture, 1997 Economic Census
Non-employer Statistics, and ECONorthwest estimates.
Businesses with no employers account for 17 percent of the revenues of
the three industries in the PMSA. Not apparent in Table 10 is the geographic
difference between firms with employees and those without. While City of
Portland businesses in the three industries with paid employees generated 53
percent of the PMSA’s revenues, only 40 percent of the non-employer
businesses in the same three industries did so. In other words, those without
payrolls are far more likely to be located outside of the City limits.
Table 10: Revenues of Three Industries by Location and
Type of Establishment, City of Portland and PMSA, 1997
Establishments with Paid Non Employer Firms and
Employees Self-Employed
Revenues % of Total Revenues % of Total
Portland $4,201,713,000 53% $646,227,000 40%
Rest of PMSA 3,698,863,000 47% 955,875,000 60%
Total PMSA 7,900,576,000 100% 1,602,102,000 100%
Source: Combined revenues of the renting, leasing & real estate, professional, technical &
scientific services, and the administrative, support & waste services industries by type of
establishment. Data are from the 1997 Economic Census, 1997 Economic Census Non-
employer Statistics, and ECONorthwest estimates.
Among the possible reasons for this is that self-employed people in these
industries tend to be mid or late career and work at home, thus, are more apt
to live outside the city. They may also see a personal tax advantage to being
out of the city.
2-2 page 12 July 2002 Appendix 2-2: Overview of the Portland Economy
INDUSTRY TRENDS
In 1980 the largest employment sector in the PMSA was manufacturing.
In 2000 it was the service industry.3 In 1980 18.7 percent of workers in the
PMSA were employed by service-producing industries. In 2000, 23.8 percent
were. Construction and agriculture4 showed small increases in their shares of
total employment as well. Nearly every other sector declined. The percentage
of workers employed by government, wholesale trade, utilities and
transportation, and FIRE (finance, insurance, and real estate) all fell
between 1980 and 2000.
In the figures that follow, we show the long-term employment trends of
some major business sectors for the Portland-Vancouver PMSA and the
United States. We used the average annual covered employment by industry,
which is reported by the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS)5. The BLS
data include non-profits, but exclude the work of non-employer businesses.
Total employment numbers are reliable, but we warn readers that
employment down to the local industry level can change suddenly because
each company’s industry code is based on an opinion. That means that a
sudden change in the employment of a given industry in Portland could be
due to a single company’s business being reclassified from one industry to
another. It may have nothing really to do with the success or failure of the
industry. Therefore, we recommend that readers consider the general trends
over long periods of time for Portland employment by industry, instead of
focusing on big changes in any single year. Since the number of employees
nationally is so much larger than the PMSA, we indexed the data in these
figures to 1990 = 100. By indexing we can easily compare trends in the local
market with those of the nation.
The Portland region is drawing an increasing share of a flat
high-tech sector
Oregon Employment Department defines the high-tech sector as the sum
of the computer, electronics, and instrument manufacturing industries.6
Contrary to popular belief, national employment in high tech peaked in 1984
3 2002 Regional Economic Profile, Oregon Employment Department, December 2001. Page 31.
4 While the PMSA is largely urban, there is still over 295,000 acres of harvested farmland in it and in 2000 farm sales
from this land totaled $809 million.
5The advantage of using the BLS data is that it offers an accurate historical record of paid employees in industries. But
there are some disadvantages. As noted earlier, covered employment counts those who work for pay and are covered by
unemployment insurance. That is roughly nine out of every ten workers in the country. Not counted are the self-
employed, the military, most farm employees, and unpaid family workers. The BLS trend data also do not distinguish
between non-profit and business employment. Thus, in this analysis, when we report on employment in the health care
industry, we cannot separate out the non-profit employment as we were able earlier when reviewing the 1997 Economic
Census data and the Oregon Employment Department ES 202 data for 1994 and 2000.
6 According to the 2002 Regional Economic Profile for the Portland PMSA the high tech industry is the sum of SIC 357,
36, and 38. December 2001. Page 26.
Appendix 2-2: Overview of the Portland Economy July 2002 2-2 page 13
when more than 3.4 million people were employed by the sector. Except for a
period from 1993 to 1998, national employment in high tech has been falling.
In 2001 it was down to about 2.8 million. Several factors contribute to the
decline. The industry’s sales have grown dramatically because it consistently
has been able to provide more value for less cost to consumers. This has come
about in large part because of extraordinarily high labor productivity. Output
has grown without increasing employment. Another factor is the shift of high
labor processes to overseas plants. A trend that is accelerating today as
nearly every significant Japanese manufacturer operated multiple plants in
China in an effort to reduce product costs and stay competitive. Finally, the
perception of high tech growth is in part colored by relocations. Expansions in
one region of the country have come partly at the expense of lost growth
opportunities elsewhere. The Portland metropolitan area has been a
beneficiary of this.
In Figure 3, we show the Figure 3: Employment in the Computer & Office
historical employment trends of Equipment Manufacturing Industry, indexed to 1990
= 100 for the PMSA and U.S., 1980 – 2001
office and computer equipment
manufacturers. Locally, makers 210.0
of computer printers are among 190.0
the biggest employers in this 170.0
sector. Nationally, employment 150.0
in this sector peaked in 1984 130.0
when over 514,000 people 110.0
worked for the industry. 90.0
Employment has declined every 70.0
1980 1987 1994 2001
year but two since. In the PMSA PMSA U.S.
there was a surge of employment Sources: ECONorthwest analysis of data from the Oregon Employment
in this sector in the 1990s when Department, U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, and the Washington
Employment Security Department.
new plants opened (the PMSA
has just 1.6 percent of the national employment of this sector). Despite
dropping markedly since 1997, local employment is still about 30 percent
ahead of where it was a decade ago. The industry is being hurt by a sharp
curtailment in computer equipment spending by business and consumers
alike. That weakness is transitory and over the longer term industry orders
should resume their historical upward trend. The ability of the local industry
to garner a share of that growth
will depend in part on how well Figure 4: Employment in the Electronics
they can innovate their product Manufacturing Industry, indexed to 1990 = 100 for
the PMSA and U.S., 1980 – 2001
lines at cost and quality levels
superior to foreign
250.0
230.0
manufacturers. 210.0
190.0
170.0
Companies like LSI Logic, 150.0
Tri-Quint, Lattice 130.0
110.0
Semiconductor, and others are 90.0
large manufacturers in the local 70.0
electronics industry. A surge in 50.0
1980 1987 1994 2001
new manufacturing capacity PMSA U.S.
from firms moving to the PMSA, Sources: ECONorthwest analysis of data from the Oregon Employment
Department, U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, and the Washington
Employment Security Department.
2-2 page 14 July 2002 Appendix 2-2: Overview of the Portland Economy
such as Intel back in 1974, and established local companies, such as
Tektronix and its spin-offs, led to a remarkable, nearly five-fold increase in
employment since 1980. This contrasts sharply with a generally weak
declining trend nationally. The PMSA has clearly developed a critical mass of
manufacturers and skilled workers in this sector and, although the current
downturn in shipments is severe, those companies who make it through will
most likely thrive.
Figure 5 shows the Figure 5: Employment in the Instrument & Related
employment trends for Equipment Manufacturing Industry, indexed to 1990
= 100 for the PMSA and U.S., 1980 – 2001
manufacturers of instruments. A
recession followed by workforce 170.0
reductions starting in 1986 and 150.0
continuing through 1990 by a
large manufacturer caused much
130.0
of the decline seen in the PMSA. 110.0
By 1992 this sector’s employment 90.0
in the PMSA was about 10 70.0
percent below the national level.
1980 1987 1994 2001
PMSA U.S.
Since then local manufacturers Sources: ECONorthwest analysis of data from the Oregon Employment
have generally kept pace and Department, U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, and the Washington
Employment Security Department.
show no signs of competitive
disadvantage or advantage for
the long term.
Figure 6: Employment in the Lumber & Wood
Products Industry, indexed to 1990 = 100 for the
Wood products and paper PMSA and U.S., 1980 – 2001
show job losses in 120.0
Portland and nationally 115.0
110.0
105.0
In Figure 6, we show total 100.0
9 5.0
employment for the lumber and 9 0.0
wood products industry. Local 8 5.0
8 0.0
employment in this industry 7 5.0
suffered a large downturn in the 7 0.0
1980 1987 1994 2001
early 1980s. Employment P MS
A
U .S.
recovered somewhat in the late Sources: ECONorthwest analysis of data from the Oregon Employment
Department, U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, and the Washington
1980s, but has since fallen even Employment Security Department.
though national employment
levels climbed about nine percent
in the last 11 years. Production Figure 7: Employment in the Paper Manufacturing
Industry, indexed to 1990 = 100 for the PMSA and
has been moving out of the U.S., 1980 – 2001
region to other parts of the
110.0
country where raw materials and
labor are less costly. This is a
105.0
trend that is apt to continue. 100.0
95.0
Employment trends in the 90.0
paper industry mirror that of the 85.0
lumber and wood products
80.0
industry (Figure 7). The 1980 1987 1994 2001
PMSA U.S.
Sources: ECONorthwest analysis of data from the Oregon Employment
Department, U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, and the Washington
Appendix 2-2: Overview of the Portland Economy July 2002
Employment Security Department. 2-2 page 15
weakness in local employment can be tied to competition from other regions
of the country where raw material and labor costs are less. Given the capital-
intensive nature of the industry and the difficulty in citing new plants locally,
it is doubtful there would be much employment growth in this sector over the
long term.
Metals, machinery, and transportation equipment job gains
ended with the recession
Locally the largest employers Figure 8: Employment in the Primary Metals
in the primary metals industry Industry, indexed to 1990 = 100 for the PMSA and
U.S., 1980 – 2001
(Figure 8) are foundries and steel
mills. In the 1980s employment 150.0
in this industry grew in the
PMSA while falling rapidly 130.0
elsewhere in the country. Since 110.0
then employment both in the 90.0
PMSA and the U.S. are down 70.0
about 10 percent from where
they were in 1990. The Portland
50.0
1980 1987 1994 2001
metropolitan area historically PMSA U.S.
has had certain competitive Sources: ECONorthwest analysis of data from the Oregon Employment
Department, U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, and the Washington
advantages in this sector Employment Security Department.
including a skilled labor force,
ample scrap metal supplies, relatively cheap electric power, and a centralized
location (one day truck delivery distance from Seattle, Spokane, and
Oakland). These advantages, for the most part, remain. However, Portland
manufacturers are subject to cyclical surges in foreign competition,
particularly when international markets are weak and the U.S. dollar
exchange rate is high. Such are the market conditions today. If the productive
capacity in the PMSA remains intact, employment by this sector will grow
again when market conditions improve.
Figure 9 shows employment
trends in the fabricated metal Figure 9: Employment in the Fabricated Metals
Industry, indexed to 1990 = 100 for the PMSA and
products industries, which U.S., 1980 – 2001
includes many diverse 140.0
manufacturers of metal products
such as architectural steel
130.0
shapes, cutlery, and brass 120.0
fixtures. As with primary 110.0
metals, this is an industry that 100.0
benefits from the skilled 90.0
workforce in the PMSA and
80.0
Portland’s centralized location. 1980 1987 1994 2001
In recent years strong levels of PMSA U.S.
consumer spending and Sources: ECONorthwest analysis of data from the Oregon Employment
Department, U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, and the Washington
negligible pricing pressure on Employment Security Department.
raw materials have helped this
sector. As such, the industries’ employment level has grown faster locally
2-2 page 16 July 2002 Appendix 2-2: Overview of the Portland Economy
than nationally. We would expect, over the long-term, that the fabricated
metals industries would remain strong in the PMSA.
There are many
Figure 10: Employment in the Industrial Machinery
manufacturers of industrial Industry (excluding computers), indexed to 1990 =
machinery in the PMSA. It was a 100 for the PMSA and U.S., 1980 – 2001
strong sector throughout much of 130.0
the 1990s when corporations 125.0
around the world were investing 120.0
heavily in capital equipment. 115.0
110.0
More recently, a sudden drop in 105.0
capital spending coinciding with 100.0
a high exchange rate has hurt 95.0
area manufacturers. These 90.0
1980 1987 1994 2001
conditions are cyclical in nature PMSA U.S.
and, as with other metal Sources: ECONorthwest analysis of data from the Oregon Employment
intensive manufacturing sectors, Department, U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, and the Washington
Employment Security Department.
local makers of industrial
machinery that survive the current weak markets are apt to grow in the
future.
Among the manufactures of Figure 11: Employment in the Transportation
transportation equipment in the Equipment Manufacturing Industry, indexed to 1990
= 100 for the PMSA and U.S., 1980 – 2001
PMSA are Warn Industries,
Consolidated Freightways, and 130.0
Gunderson. It is an important
120.0
110.0
industry because transportation 100.0
manufacturers rely on large 90.0
networks of local suppliers that 80.0
are also manufacturers. Between 70.0
1983 and 1999 employment by 60.0
this industry more than doubled 50.0
1980 1987 1994 2001
in the PMSA while nationally it PMSA U.S.
barely grew at all. Much of this Sources: ECONorthwest analysis of data from the Oregon Employment
Department, U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, and the Washington
industry consists of makers of Employment Security Department.
business capital equipment,
which is a very weak part of the national economy. Fundamentally, the
competitive strengths of the PMSA remain intact, but they are not unique
and the ability of this sector to grow employment locally in the future is
dependent on retaining efficient manufacturing capacity.
Local food manufacturing declined in a flat national market
Even though Oregon has a large agricultural base, only one out of every
200 employees in the national food manufacturing industry work in the
PMSA. Generally, large food manufacturing plants are best located in areas
central to the nation’s households. This gives Portland a distinct
disadvantage.
Appendix 2-2: Overview of the Portland Economy July 2002 2-2 page 17
Local job growth in printing, publishing, and communications
outperformed the national market
The printing and publishing Figure 12: Employment in the Printing & Publishing
Industry, indexed to 1990 = 100 for the PMSA and
industry has grown steadily in U.S., 1980 – 2001
the PMSA since 1980. Even when 130.0
the national trend flattened out 120.0
in the 1990s, local area 110.0
employment grew. This was 100.0
partially fueled by population 90.0
growth. Between 1980 and 2000 80.0
the population of the PMSA grew 70.0
by 44 percent compared with 24 60.0
percent nationally. 1980 1987 1994 2001
PMSA U.S.
With a few exceptions, the Sources: ECONorthwest analysis of data from the Oregon Employment
Department, U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, and the Washington
trend of employment in the Employment Security Department.
communications industry of the
PMSA has stayed ahead of that Figure 13: Employment in the Communications
Industry, indexed to 1990 = 100 for the PMSA and
of the nation. As with publishing, U.S., 1980 – 2001
this is in large part due to the 140.0
PMSA higher population growth 135.0
and its place as the population 130.0
center of a large state. In the
125.0
120.0
1990s this sector grew strongly, 115.0
powered by large investments in 110.0
105.0
capacity by the cellular telephone 100.0
and cable television industries. 95.0
That surge appears to have
90.0
1980 1987 1994 2001
ended abruptly and employment PMSA U.S.
is now declining both nationally Sources: ECONorthwest analysis of data from the Oregon Employment
Department, U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, and the Washington
and locally. The PMSA has no Employment Security Department.
inherent strength or weakness in
this sector, and future growth will likely track national trends.
Trucking and warehousing
was flat after mid-1990’s
Figure 14: Employment in the Trucking &
losses Warehousing Industry, indexed to 1990 = 100 for the
PMSA and U.S., 1980 – 2001
Trucking and warehousing 140.0
employs about 17,400 people in the 130.0
Portland-Vancouver PMSA. Up 120.0
until the mid-1990s, employment in 110.0
this sector grew steadily. It has 100.0
since fallen back, possibly as a 90.0
consequence of the weakness we 80.0
have seen in certain truck
70.0
60.0
transportation dependent 1980 1987 1994 2001
manufacturing sectors and the PMSA U.S.
Sources: ECONorthwest analysis of data from the Oregon Employment
Department, U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, and the Washington
Employment Security Department.
2-2 page 18 July 2002 Appendix 2-2: Overview of the Portland Economy
movement of business to facilities outside the metropolitan area.
Portland PMSA trade sectors slightly outperformed national
trends
Figure 15 shows the Figure 15: Employment in Wholesale Trades,
indexed to 1990 = 100 for the PMSA and U.S., 1980 –
employment trends in wholesale 2001
trades. This is a large sector. 130.0
Over 65,000 people in the PMSA
120.0
worked in this industry during
2001. It generally tracks 110.0
population and commercial 100.0
business growth, which explains 90.0
why employment by wholesalers 80.0
in the PMSA has risen at a faster 70.0
rate than the country as a whole. 1980 1987 1994 2001
Future growth will track local PMSA U.S.
population and business growth. Sources: ECONorthwest analysis of data from the Oregon Employment
Department, U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, and the Washington
Employment Security Department.
The PMSA has a clear
Figure 16: Employment in Retail Trade, indexed to
advantage in retail trade due to 1990 = 100 for the PMSA and U.S., 1980 – 2001
the lack of a sales tax, its 140.0
proximity to Washington State, 130.0
and a steady stream of affluent 120.0
tourists coming through its 110.0
airport. This advantage in 100.0
combination with the relatively 90.0
stronger income growth of the 80.0
PMSA is reflected in the region’s 70.0
faster increase in retail 1980 1987 1994 2001
employment. The PMSA should PMSA U.S.
continue slightly exceeding the Sources: ECONorthwest analysis of data from the Oregon Employment
Department, U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, and the Washington
national trends in this Employment Security Department.
employment sector.
Service sectors are growing
at the national rate
Figure 17: Employment in Social Services, indexed
Social services employment in to 1990 = 100 for the PMSA and U.S., 1980 – 2001
the PMSA has generally tracked 180.0
the U.S. trend over recent years. 160.0
This sector serves local 140.0
populations and depends heavily 120.0
on contributions to non-profits, 100.0
the principal employers in the 80.0
sector, and both direct and 60.0
indirect government support. 40.0
1980 1987 1994 2001
The long-term trend will track PMSA U.S.
the needs of the PMSA’s Sources: ECONorthwest analysis of data from the Oregon Employment
residents for individual and Department, U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, and the Washington
Employment Security Department.
Appendix 2-2: Overview of the Portland Economy July 2002 2-2 page 19
family services, childcare, job training, and other social services. Health care
is another major service sector that tracks the needs of the population, but
Figure 18: Employment in Health Care, indexed to Figure 19: Employment in Engineering, Accounting,
1990 = 100 for the PMSA and U.S., 1980 – 2001 & Management Services, indexed to 1990 = 100 for
the PMSA and U.S., 1980 – 2001
130.0
160.0
120.0
150.0
110.0
140.0
100.0
130.0
90.0 120.0
80.0 110.0
70.0 100.0
90.0
60.0
1980 1987 1994 2001 80.0
1980 1987 1994 2001
PMSA U.S.
PMSA U.S.
Sources: ECONorthwest analysis of data from the Oregon Employment
Department, U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, and the Washington Sources: ECONorthwest analysis of data from the Oregon Employment
Employment Security Department. Department, U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, and the Washington
Employment Security Department.
due to high costs, is under constant pressure to increase labor productivity.
Employment in engineering, accounting, and management services had
been growing faster in the PMSA than in the rest of the country. This was a
reflection of the stronger business
climate in the region as well as Figure 20: Employment in Legal Services, indexed to
the tight labor market that 1990 = 100 for the PMSA and U.S., 1980 – 2001
compelled businesses to 120.0
outsource more work than they 110.0
otherwise would. Now that the 100.0
economy of the PMSA has 90.0
weakened considerably,
80.0
70.0
employment in this service sector 60.0
is beginning to fall back in line 50.0
with the national trend, which it 1980 1987
PMSA U.S.
1994 2001
is apt to track closely with in the Sources: ECONorthwest analysis of data from the Oregon Employment
long term. Department, U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, and the Washington
Employment Security Department.
Figure 20 shows the
remarkable similarity in legal services employment between the PMSA and
the nation. We have no reason to expect any significant difference in this
relationship. Evidently the Portland metropolitan area consistently receives
its share of the country’s legal services work and has neither an
extraordinary competitive advantage nor disadvantage.
2-2 page 20 July 2002 Appendix 2-2: Overview of the Portland Economy
Figure 21: Employment in Construction, Indexed to
1990 = 100 for the PMSA and U.S., 1980 – 2001
160.0
140.0
Construction employment is 120.0
cyclical on a national level and
when viewed for a smaller
100.0
geographic area, like the 80.0
Portland-Vancouver PMSA, the 60.0
swings in employment are often 40.0
wilder. The construction industry 1980 1987 1994 2001
in the PMSA suffered through a PMSA U.S.
severe decline 20 years ago, Sources: ECONorthwest analysis of data from the Oregon Employment
Department, U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, and the Washington
which culminated in 1983 when Employment Security Department.
fewer than 17,000 had jobs. As the local economy recovered, construction
slowly rebounded—more than doubling by 1990. Construction employment
climbed to over 50,000 and remained above that level since 1996. Now it is
declining again. We are on the downward leg of a construction cycle.
Ultimately, however, construction employment follows general population
and economic growth, both of which will be stronger in the PMSA than in the
rest of the country.
With the main exceptions of Figure 22: Employment in Finance, Insurance & Real
regional and multi-state banks Estate, indexed to 1990 = 100 for the PMSA and U.S.,
1980 – 2001
and insurance companies, most
businesses in the finance, 130.0
insurance, and real estate sector 120.0
of the PMSA serve local residents 110.0
and companies. Thus, the trend 100.0
comparison in Figure 22
90.0
basically mirrors the historical
differences between the 80.0
economies of the PMSA and the 70.0
1980 1987 1994 2001
United States, with some periods PMSA U.S.
of weakness in recent years Sources: ECONorthwest analysis of data from the Oregon Employment
resulting from job losses at major Department, U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, and the Washington
Employment Security Department.
banking institutions that were
acquired by out-of-state interests.
Job changes in the hotel industry track the business cycle
Employment in the hotel Figure 23: Employment in Hotels and Other Lodging
industry is affected by the Places, indexed to 1990 = 100 for the PMSA and U.S.,
1980 – 2001
cyclical nature of business travel
and, to a lesser degree, tourism. 130.0
Highly dependent on rising 120.0
household and business incomes,
110.0
100.0
the trend for hotel rooms is 90.0
positive. The upward trend 80.0
evident in Figure 23 will resume 70.0
both nationally and locally once 60.0
the current slump ends. The 1980 1987 1994 2001
PMSA is competitive with the
PMSA U.S.
Sources: ECONorthwest analysis of data from the Oregon Employment
nation in its ability to attract Department, U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, and the Washington
Employment Security Department.
Appendix 2-2: Overview of the Portland Economy July 2002 2-2 page 21
travelers to its lodging places and should, thus, keep pace with national
trends well into the future.
Summarizing our findings about the business sector and their implication
for future economic activity in the Portland region:
• Sectors that rely on talented labor have prospered in
Portland. Relative to its population, most industries the City of
Portland greatly outperform those in the rest of the PMSA, the State,
and the country. Every industry, except manufacturing, construction,
and natural resources, reported higher sales per capita in the City
than outside. In general, industries that rely on a highly productive
labor force and are not land-intensive are thriving in the City. Efforts
to improve, and further educate that work force would help Portland
maintain its apparent competitive advantage. In addition, industries
that depend on having good accessibility to outlying areas and other
regions of the West, seem to prefer the City over the other parts of the
PMSA. Thus, facilitating that location advantage would help ensure
that these industries continue to thrive in the City.
• Nationally, high-tech sector has been a zero-sum game that the
Portland region has won. The high technology industries in the
PMSA have grown by taking market share away from the rest of the
country. Industry trends show declining employment growth. Thus, in
order to growing locally in the future, the PMSA must continue taking
market share away from other regions.
• Self-employed workers prefer the suburbs. Some service sectors
have high percentages of self-employed workers, which are not
counted in the covered employment data that is widely quoted. These
self-employed workers are often well compensated. They show a
strong tendency towards working outside the City. This may be due to
taxes, which discourage self-employment in the City and Multnomah
County, or the living choice to reside outside the City by mid-career
individuals. Encouraging self-employed workers to stay and move into
the City would have potential economic development benefits.
NON-PROFITS
CURRENT CONDITIONS
Non-profits have a sizable impact on the state’s economy and spend
billions of dollars annually providing everything from health care and social
services to fire protection and education to Oregonians. They are defined are
organizations with no owners, that are governed by boards or members, and
are operated for charitable, public benefit, religious, or mutual benefit
purposes.
In Table 11 the 1997 revenues of five segments for which the U.S. Census
reports the activities of tax-exempt organizations separately from businesses
2-2 page 22 July 2002 Appendix 2-2: Overview of the Portland Economy
are shown. These five account for slightly more than two-thirds of the total
employment by non-profits in Oregon.
Table 11: 1997 Revenues and Revenues per Capita for Major
Non-Profit Industry Segments, Various Areas, 1997
PMSA
Revenues $ per Capita Oregon US
Non-Profit industry segment:
Personal, repair, laundry & maintenance services $652,120,000 $364 $264 $384
Arts, entertainment & recreation 136,555,000 76 67 73
Health care & social services 2,964,911,000 1,656 1,501 1,742
Educational services 39,750,000 22 20 21
Professional, technical & scientific services 90,779,000 51 38 59
Source: The 1997 Economic Census.
Data from the Oregon Employment Department show the average
number of paid workers in 2000 employed by non-profits in Multnomah
County and the four other Oregon counties in the PMSA. Each economic
sector has some non-profit employment, but services sectors have the most.
Table 12: Average Annual Employment by
Non-Profit Sector, Various Areas, 2000 ,
Clackamas,
Multnomah Washington & Yamhill
Economic Sector County Counties
Farming, construction & resources 11 86
Manufacturing 181 6
Transportation and utilities 433 68
Wholesale & retail trade 145 10
Health and legal service 18,136 10,867
Educational services 5,814 4,432
Social services 10,088 3,985
Other services and arts 3,666 1,026
Membership organizations 5,343 5,148
Total Paid Employment 43,817 25,628
Source: ES-202 tapes, Oregon Employment Department.
In Table 13 we show the breakdown in total employment by sector in
Multnomah County by non-profits, government, and businesses. We do not
show self-employed because year 2000 data by sector is unavailable for them.
Table 13: Share of Average Annual
Employment by Sector and Type of
Organization, Multnomah County, 2000
Economic Sector Non-Profits Government Businesses
Social services 67% 7% 26%
Education 16% 80% 4%
Health care 53% 6% 41%
Arts and entertainment 15% 1% 84%
Business services 3% 0% 97%
Source: ES-202 tapes, Oregon Employment Department.
Non-profits accounted for 67 percent of social service professionals and
other workers in Multnomah County during 2000. That is more than twice as
many as businesses and nearly ten times as many as government did. Within
that sector we note that non-profits employed 41 percent of the child daycare,
Appendix 2-2: Overview of the Portland Economy July 2002 2-2 page 23
68 percent of the residential care, 72 percent of the job training, and 73
percent of the family and individual social services workers in the County.
Non-profits were also the dominant employers in the health care industry.
INDUSTRY TRENDS
Generally, employment by non-profits has been growing at rates similar
to the overall population. Payrolls have been rising substantially faster. From
1994 (the earliest year that data are available) to 2000 the number of people
working for non-profits for pay rose 17 percent in Multnomah County. The
payroll from non-profits climbed 47 percent to $1,243,000,000, which is over
seven percent of the County’s total. As can be seen in Table 14, in places
outside Multnomah County non-profits have been growing considerably
faster. Presumably rising populations in areas outside of Portland are behind
the increases.
Table 14: Percent change in the
employee counts and payrolls of
non-profits, various counties, 1994 - 2000
1994 2000 Change
Employees:
Clackamas 7,825 9,760 25%
Columbia 498 559 12%
Multnomah 37,543 43,817 17%
Washington 9,909 12,776 29%
Yamhill 1,972 2,533 28%
Payroll (millions):
Clackamas $177 $275 55%
Columbia 5 8 60%
Multnomah 846 1,243 47%
Washington 224 361 61%
Yamhill 33 58 76%
Source: 1994 and 2000 ES-202 data from the Oregon
Department of Employment.
Our findings about non-profits are:
• Non-profits have traditionally preferred the City but are
growing in the suburbs. Non-profits are a large employer in
Portland, Multnomah County, and the rest of the PMSA. In the social
service and health care sectors, non-profits are the principal
employers. Non-profits are concentrated inside Portland, but trends
indicated a steady movement of non-profit employment out to suburbs.
This is a consequence of consumer demand for non-profit services
expanding more in area where population growth is faster.
• Non-profits do not pay property taxes but contribute in other
ways. While most non-profits do not pay property taxes, their
employees do and non-profits account for about two billion dollars
annual payroll in the PMSA. In addition, non-profits provide services
that help alleviate public services spending by local and state
governments.
2-2 page 24 July 2002 Appendix 2-2: Overview of the Portland Economy
GOVERNMENT
CURRENT CONDITIONS
Government is the fourth component of the economy. Unlike the other
three, we cannot assign income or revenues by geography to the government
sector. Thus, we are resigned to comparing the relative importance of the
government sector by another measure. In this section, we chose
employment.
As noted before in Table 2, government (including the military) employed
14.6 percent of the country’s workforce in 2000. In Oregon, only 13.5 percent
held government jobs and in Portland just 11.7 percent of the City’s residents
did. This understates the size of the government sector in the City, however,
because a large percentage of those working for government in Portland live
outside the City. So when we look at the number of those working for
governments in offices and other places of employment in Portland and
compare that to the City’s population, we find that the result is
comparatively large.
There were 110.1 government employees working in Portland per
thousand residents in 2000. From Table 15, we see that this is well above
that of the statewide and national averages. It is not an unexpected result
considering that Portland is the State’s largest city. It has a high
concentration of courts, Federal offices, State and Federal regional offices,
and Portland State University. Just under half of all government employees
in Multnomah County work in education.
Table 15: Government Employees, Various Areas, 2000
Portland Rest of PMSA Oregon US
per 1,000
Employees Residents per 1,000 Residents
Government Employees:
Federal (civilian) 11,304 21.4 5.2 9.2 10.2
State 6,815 12.9 3.9 14.4 15.5
Local 39,574 74.8 36.2 47.9 44.8
Armed Forces 541 1.0 1.0 0.5 2.7
Total 58,234 110.1 46.2 72.0 73.3
Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2000 Census, and ECONorthwest estimates of Portland’s share of
employment in Multnomah County based upon ES-202 data.
Table 15 shows 21.4 Federal government employees working in the city in
2000 per thousand residents—more than twice the national and statewide
rates, and almost four times higher than the rest of the PMSA. Federal
administrative offices that address issues in Oregon tend to locate in the City
of Portland. Some major Federal government offices in Portland include the
U.S. Forest Service, the Bonneville Power Administration, Internal Revenue
Service, and the National Marine Fisheries Service.
The rest of the PMSA has 46.2 government employees per thousand
residents, which is much less than the Oregon and national averages. This
partly due to regional government offices serving the PMSA tending to be
Appendix 2-2: Overview of the Portland Economy July 2002 2-2 page 25
located inside Portland. “Economies of scale” is another factor. That means
that in areas with large populations, you need fewer government employees
to serve every thousand residents. It is the reason why places with low
populations often require more government workers per thousand residents.
In Clatsop, Hood River, and Tillamook counties, which adjoin the PMSA,
there are an average of 72 government employees per thousand residents.
The ratio of state government employment to population in Portland is
low in comparison to national averages because Salem is the center of state
government in Oregon. If Portland were able to achieve the national ratio of
15.5 state workers per 1,000 residents, it would have nearly 1,400 more state
government workers within its borders.
Armed forces employment in Portland and throughout the region is well
below the national average because of the paucity of major military
installations in Oregon.
In summary, while Portland residents were less likely to work for
government, the numbers employed by the Federal, State, and local
governments in Portland offices and other establishments were higher than
other areas relative to the size of the City’s population.
TRENDS IN GOVERNMENT
In Table 16, we show the total employment in the PMSA by government.
Total government employment in the PMSA has been rising at rates similar
to that of the population. Government employed about 12 percent of the
covered non-farm workers in the PMSA during the year 2000. Statewide the
figure was higher—about 15 percent. In total around 127,300 people worked
for government in the PMSA in 2000.
Table 16: Employment by government type, Portland PMSA, 1980-
2000 (in thousands)
Growth Rate Growth Rate
1980 1990 2000 1980 - 1990 1990 - 2000
Federal 16.6 18.5 18.5 1.1% 0.0%
State 16.3 16.6 12.2 0.2% -3.0%
Local 52.8 61.1 89.7 1.5% 3.9%
Total 85.7 96.2 127.3 1.2% 2.8%
Population 1,333.6 1,515.5 1,918.0 1.3% 2.4%
Sources: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics and the U.S. Census.
Nationally, Federal government employment peaked in 1990 and it has
since declined about 15 percent. Federal government employment locally has
resisted this trend and has remained relatively stationary for the last decade.
In 2000, there were 18,500 people working for the Federal government in the
PMSA—about 30 percent of which were employed by the U.S. Post Office.
2-2 page 26 July 2002 Appendix 2-2: Overview of the Portland Economy
Figure 24: Federal Government Civilian Employment, Figure 25: State Government Employment, indexed to
indexed to 1990 = 100 for the PMSA and U.S., 1980 – 1990 = 100 for the PMSA and U.S., 1980 – 2001
2001
120.0
110.0
110.0
105.0
100.0
100.0
90.0
95.0
80.0
90.0
70.0
85.0
60.0
80.0 1980 1987 1994 2001
1980 1987 1994 2001
PMSA U.S.
PMSA U.S.
Sources: ECONorthwest analysis of data from the Oregon Employment
Sources: ECONorthwest analysis of data from the Oregon Employment Department, U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, and the Washington
Department, U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, and the Washington Employment Security Department.
Employment Security Department. Note: In 1996 about 7,100 State employees at OHSU were reclassified as
local government workers.
Nationwide employment by state governments has been rising virtually
uninterrupted for over 20 years. In the PMSA, however, State employment
rose less than one percent in the 1980’s and has declined since 1990.
However, the dramatic drop in 1996 that can be seen in Figure 25 is a result
of a reclassification of workers at Figure 26: Local Government Employment, indexed
Oregon Health Sciences to 1990 = 100 for the PMSA and U.S., 1980 – 2001
University. The organization was 160.0
quasi-privatized in 1996 and it 150.0
approximately 7,100 employees 140.0
were reclassified from being 130.0
State workers to being local 120.0
government workers.
110.0
100.0
Local government 90.0
employment in the PMSA has 80.0
1980 1987 1994 2001
been growing faster than the PMSA U.S.
national trend even after Sources: ECONorthwest analysis of data from the Oregon Employment
accounting for a one-time gain in Department, U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, and the Washington
Employment Security Department.
1996 because of the Note: In 1996 about 7,100 State employees at OHSU were reclassified as
local government workers.
reclassification of OHSU workers
from State to local government.
In summary, the data we examined on the government component of the
local economy reveals the following:
• Federal jobs in region held steady in the 1990s despite declines
nationally. The PMSA has managed to retain many Federal
employees since 1990 even though national employment has declined
sharply. Future retention of Federal workers would be beneficial to
the local economy.
• Portland has less than expected share of state workers. State
worker employment in Portland is below the levels one would expect
in comparison to national averages. Again, the retention of State jobs
inside the City would be beneficial.
Appendix 2-2: Overview of the Portland Economy July 2002 2-2 page 27
OUTLOOK FOR ECONOMIC GROWTH
POPULATION FORECASTS
Long-term population forecasts show the region continuing to grow, but at
a slower rate than in has since 1980. This is due to a combination of an aging
population and less migration. Table 17 shows the forecasts for 2020 for the
six counties in the PMSA and the United States. The county forecasts are
from the State governments of Oregon and Washington. The U.S. Census
provided the national forecast.
Table 17: Population growth rates and forecasts, 1980 - 2000
Growth Rate Growth Rate
1980 2000 2020 1980 - 2000 2000 - 2020
Counties:
Clackamas 241,911 338,391 480,392 1.7% 1.8%
Clark 192,227 345,238 497,199 3.0% 1.8%
Columbia 35,646 43,560 50,250 1.0% 0.7%
Multnomah 562,647 660,486 732,500 0.8% 0.5%
Washington 245,860 445,342 598,800 3.0% 1.5%
Yamhill 55,332 84,992 119,589 2.2% 1.7%
PMSA 1,333,623 1,918,009 2,478,730 1.8% 1.3%
United States 226,542,199 281,421,906 324,927,000 1.1% 0.7%
Sources: The U.S. Census, Washington State Office of Financial Management, and the Oregon
Office of Economic Analysis.
The population of the PMSA grew 1.8 percent between 1980 and 2000
compared to 1.1 percent nationally. The growth rates of both areas will be
less in the next twenty years, although the PMSA will still grow much faster
(1.3 percent versus 0.7 percent). Within the PMSA the slowest growing
county has been Multnomah. Its population is forecast to continue growing
more slowly than the other five counties of the PMSA.
EMPLOYMENT FORECASTS
Both the national and state economies are now in recession. Because of its
industry mix and trading patterns, Oregon’s economic contraction is expected
to be deeper than the nation’s, with an economic rebound that is forecast to
lag the nation’s slightly. This pattern or relationship is typical of the state
and national economies: Oregon’s business cycle tends to lag the nation’s and
exhibits more volatility, with larger job losses during contractions and
stronger employment growth during expansions.
The Oregon Office of Economic Analysis (OEA) forecasts that the state’s
economic contraction will reverse itself in the second quarter of 2002. Job
growth in the second half of this year, however, will be modest and
insufficient to record an overall annual increase in employment.
In the longer term, OEA forecasts that annual job growth in Oregon will
outpace the nation. Table 18 reports forecast Oregon job growth, by major
industry sector. Total employment is expected to increase 2.3 percent
annually in 2003 and 2004, with above average job growth in the service,
construction, and manufacturing sectors. Employment in the government
2-2 page 28 July 2002 Appendix 2-2: Overview of the Portland Economy
sector is forecast to increase approximately 1.0 percent annually; however,
this overall job growth is attributed solely to increases in local government
employment as both state and federal government employment is forecast to
decline.
Table 18: Oregon Forecast Job Growth, by Sector, 2002-2007
Industry Sector 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
Total Nonagricultural -0.6% 2.3% 2.3% 2.2% 2.0% 1.8%
Mining 1.7 1.7 1.8 1.8 1.8 1.8
Construction -6.1 2.7 2.8 2.4 2.3 2.1
Manufacturing -3.8 2.6 2.3 2.0 2.2 1.3
Lumber and Wood Products -1.7 0.6 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.8
Transportation, Communication, Utilities -1.4 1.8 2.9 2.5 2.1 2.2
Trade -0.3 2.1 2.3 1.9 1.7 1.6
Wholesale Trade -2.2 1.5 2.1 2.1 1.8 1.9
Retail Trade 0.3 2.3 2.3 1.9 1.6 1.6
Finance, Insurance, Real Estate 1.2 1.4 1.9 2.1 1.5 1.7
Services 0.8 3.1 2.9 3.0 2.9 2.5
Government 0.6 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.0 0.9
Federal Government -0.8 -0.2 -0.4 -0.5 -0.4 -0.4
State Government 0.1 0.2 -0.4 -0.1 -0.3 -0.1
Local Government 1.0 1.6 1.8 1.8 1.7 1.5
Source: State of Oregon, Office of Economic Analysis, "December 2001 Economic and Revenue Forecast."
Table 19 shows average annual job growth estimates, by sector, based on
historical and forecast employment levels reported in OEA’s December
economic forecast. Over the ten year, 1997 through 2007 period, total
nonagricultural employment in Oregon is expected to increase, on average,
approximately 1.4 percent annually. This compares to a 1.6 percent average
annual growth in the 2001 through 2007 time period. The higher job growth
estimate for the upcoming six-year period.
Table 19: Oregon Job Growth Trends (average
annual percent change), by Sector, 1997-2007
1997 2001
through through
Industry Sector 2007 2007
Total Nonagricultural 1.4% 1.6%
Mining 0.0 0.0
Construction 0.8 1.0
Manufacturing 0.3 1.1
Lumber and Wood Products -1.0 0.2
Transportation, Communication, Utilities 1.6 1.7
Trade 1.3 1.6
Wholesale Trade 0.5 1.2
Retail Trade 1.5 1.7
Finance, Insurance, Real Estate 1.0 1.6
Services 2.4 2.5
Government 1.3 1.0
Federal Government -0.5 -0.5
State Government 0.5 -0.1
Local Government 1.8 1.6
Source: State of Oregon, Office of Economic Analysis, "December 2001 Economic and Revenue Forecast."
As the state’s largest economic region, the Portland metropolitan area is
currently showing similar weakness. Indeed, the same trend in employment
growth for the state is also evident for Portland. That is, Portland’s economic
contraction is expected to be deeper than the nation’s, however, the economic
Appendix 2-2: Overview of the Portland Economy July 2002 2-2 page 29
recovery is forecast to be stronger for the city than for the nation. Figure 27
below compares average annual job growth rates for the U.S. and Portland.
Beyond the second quarter of 2002, the average annual percent change in
employment for Portland exceeds that of the nation.
Figure 27: Comparison of U.S. and Portland job growth rates,
1980-2006
8%
6%
4%
2%
0%
1980 1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004
-2%
Portland Employment
US Employment
-4%
-6%
-8%
Source: ECONorthwest
Table 20 presents ECONorthwest’s intermediate job growth forecast
through 2005 prepared as part of the October 2001, “Tri-Met Revenue
Forecast.” These estimates are strongly influenced by the current economic
recession, with several sectors—especially manufacturing and construction—
experiencing a slow recovery and negative growth rates over this five-year
horizon. (ECONorthwest’s forecast contractions in these sectors match
Metro’s forecast declines.)
2-2 page 30 July 2002 Appendix 2-2: Overview of the Portland Economy
Table 20: Portland Intermediate Job Growth
Forecasts, by Sector, 2001-2005
2001
through
Industry Sector 2005
Total Nonagricultural 1.0%
Mining -10.8%
Construction -4.3%
Manufacturing -0.7%
Lumber and Wood Products 0.9%
Transportation, Communication, Utilities 0.2%
Trade 1.3%
Wholesale Trade -1.4%
Retail Trade 2.3%
Finance, Insurance, Real Estate -0.5%
Services 2.1%
Government 2.6%
Federal Government 0.6%
State Government -5.0%
Local Government 3.8%
Source: ECONorthwest, "Tri-Met Revenue Forecast," October 2001.
Metro tracks employment in Portland and the principal communities in
the Portland metropolitan area including Clark County. In Table 21, we show
the long run forecast from Metro for the City of Portland and the rest of
Metro’s employment zones, which encompass the majority of businesses in
the PMSA.
Metro’s 2000-2025 job forecast shows employment in the region growing
faster than in the City. With the exception of high tech, manufacturing
employment will be little changed over the 25 year forecast period.
Employment in the construction sector is also forecast to grow slowly in
Portland (0.2 percent annually) and the rest of the PMSA (0.9 percent
annually) through 2025.
The service sector, in particular business services, are forecast to be the
strongest overall in terms of job growth for both the City of Portland and the
rest of the PMSA. Indeed, the strong, forecast growth in service sector
employment drives the PMSA average, as employment in all other industry
sectors are forecast to grow slower than the regional average.
Metro’s forecasts suggest:
• The recession will be relatively short. The fundamental economic
advantages of the PMSA remain intact and ensure long-term growth.
• Aging population slows population growth. The only major factor
that works against the strong growth rates the PMSA has seen since
the early 1980’s is the natural slowdown in population expansion due
to the aging of the population.
• The shift from manufacturing to services will continue. Overall,
the forecasts show a continuation of the trends we found in our review
of the historical data. That is, an ongoing transition from a primarily
manufacturing based economy to one that is services based. However,
within manufacturing, the high technology sectors, which in the
Appendix 2-2: Overview of the Portland Economy July 2002 2-2 page 31
Portland metropolitan area have grown dramatically, are forecast to
continue adding employees while other types of manufacturing show
small gains and losses.
Table 21: Metro's Job Growth Forecasts, by Sector, 2000-2025
Average Annual Growth Rates (%)
2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2000
to to to to to to
Area/Sector 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2025
Portland (Employment Zones 101-118, 126)
All Industries 1.7% 1.1% 1.4% 1.4% 1.6% 1.4%
Ag, Forestry, Fisheries & Mining -0.4 0.8 -2.6 -6.0 -12.0 -4.2
Construction -2.2 -0.6 0.8 1.2 1.7 0.2
Manufacturing -0.9 0.3 -0.3 -0.1 0.7 -0.1
Manufacturing (Nondurables) 0.3 0.4 0.2 -0.4 -0.1 0.1
Manufacturing (Durables) -2.2 -1.6 -1.2 -1.3 -0.2 -1.3
Manufacturing (High tech) 1.2 4.7 1.1 2.4 2.8 2.4
Transportation, Communication, and Utilities 1.9 0.7 1.0 0.9 1.1 1.1
Transportation and warehousing 1.7 0.1 0.5 0.3 0.9 0.7
Communication and Utilities 2.1 1.5 1.8 1.6 1.3 1.6
Trade 1.6 0.6 1.0 0.9 1.3 1.1
Wholesale Trade 1.4 1.3 1.4 1.3 1.9 1.5
Retail Trade 1.7 0.3 0.8 0.7 1.0 0.9
Finance, Insurance, Real Estate 0.4 0.8 1.0 0.9 0.6 0.8
Services 3.2 1.8 2.2 2.3 2.5 2.4
Services (Consumer) 3.8 1.8 2.5 2.3 2.4 2.6
Services (Health) 1.9 2.0 1.8 1.8 2.7 2.0
Services (Business and Professional) 4.1 1.7 2.4 2.8 2.6 2.7
Government 1.4 0.7 0.9 0.8 0.5 0.8
Government (Non-education) 1.7 0.5 0.4 0.6 -0.1 0.6
Public Schools -0.3 2.1 3.1 1.5 2.4 1.8
Rest of Metro's Employment Zones
All Industries 2.7% 1.9% 2.2% 2.4% 2.3% 2.3%
Ag, Forestry, Fisheries & Mining 0.3 -3.5 -3.2 -5.4 -11.5 -4.8
Construction -0.7 0.1 1.3 2.1 1.9 0.9
Manufacturing 1.8 0.7 0.9 0.8 0.4 0.9
Manufacturing (Nondurables) 2.0 2.0 1.5 1.2 0.7 1.5
Manufacturing (Durables) -0.3 -0.1 0.2 0.4 -0.2 0.0
Manufacturing (High tech) 3.1 0.7 1.1 0.8 0.6 1.3
Transportation, Communication, and Utilities 2.7 2.0 2.1 1.9 1.7 2.1
Transportation and warehousing 2.7 2.4 2.5 2.2 1.7 2.3
Communication and Utilities 2.6 1.0 1.1 1.1 1.5 1.5
Trade 2.6 2.0 1.9 2.1 1.9 2.1
Wholesale Trade 2.7 1.4 1.4 1.7 1.5 1.7
Retail Trade 2.5 2.2 2.1 2.2 2.0 2.2
Finance, Insurance, Real Estate 1.5 1.5 1.7 1.6 1.8 1.6
Services 4.5 3.2 3.4 3.6 3.6 3.6
Services (Consumer) 4.9 2.8 3.2 3.5 3.7 3.6
Services (Health) 3.6 3.8 3.7 3.7 3.3 3.6
Services (Business and Professional) 5.0 3.1 3.5 3.5 3.7 3.8
Government 2.1 1.2 1.5 1.6 1.9 1.6
Government (Non-education) 3.5 1.6 0.7 1.8 0.5 1.6
Public Schools 0.9 0.8 2.2 1.4 3.1 1.7
Source: Portland Metro, Metro Planning Department's "Metroscope Model," January 2002.
2-2 page 32 July 2002 Appendix 2-2: Overview of the Portland Economy
Related docs
