On Friday, the Bureau of Labor Statistics released its monthly unemployment numbers. “Both the unemployment rate (7.9 percent) and the number of unemployed persons (12.3 million) were essentially unchanged in October, following declines in September.” This was based on household survey data from the US. This number only accounts for persons who are still actively looking for work. It does not count people who worked odd jobs for pay, are underemployed or have become discouraged and stopped looking for work. My sense is that the actual “unemployment rate” would look far worse if we adjusted our metrics to really include the full picture of the working family in America.
We focused on
understanding the three main components of unemployment: cyclical unemployment,
is due to lack of demand for labor; frictional, which reflects the time it
takes to match job seekers with those looking to hire; and structural
unemployment, which is a mismatch between the skills in the labor force and the
skills needed by firms. In Norm’s blog, he discusses the political arguments
that both parties make to force our unemployment numbers to fit more cleanly
into one of these categories to assign blame on why unemployment is so high.
So how does this
relate back to coal export terminals? Last week’s initial search yielded not a
financial statement from Millennium, but rather an economic report published by
the company to show its projected positive future impact based on this terminal
development. It included many tables and graphs illustrating many variables,
including education, current income levels, population statistics, and fiscal
expenditures for Cowlitz County. I thought that this document would be
interesting to review this week with our economic focus on unemployment, as
well as relate to our discussions of environmental justice.
The Millennium
terminal in Cowlitz County is a great example of how industrial and environmentally
burdensome projects can move into a community, with many local community
supporters. According to the report, here are a few key statistics about
Cowlitz County.
• Cowlitz County has a population of 102,410
• The largest employment sector in the county is manufacturing, which employs
about 20% of the total workforce; construction comprises 8% of total county
employment
• In 2010, the county had an unemployment rate of 11.1% and a median household
income of $41,000 (in 2012 it was up to 12%)
• County general tax revenues have been hard hit by the recession. Adjusted for inflation, revenues have declined
both in total and on a per capita basis since 2006
• About 52% of workers living in the county are employed within the county;
the County has a net job outflow of more than 8,000 jobs
Clearly, the
county needs jobs, and the local workforce is skilled for industrial type work.
With an unemployment rate higher than the national average, this could be an
appealing proposal. A company coming in promising that “state and local
benefits will include new and significant jobs, wages, output, and tax revenue.
It is also expected that the majority of the positions would be filled from the
local labor pool.” What especially when the first publicly published
information is about initial jobs: Construction activity is estimated to
support 1,350 temporary direct jobs, with an additional 1,300 additional jobs
in the related community. However, this rosy and significant number drops
significantly after construction stops. The long term estimate of the job
creation from this $643M project is 135 direct jobs, and 165 subsequent
secondary (indirect and induced) jobs. For a population of over 100,000, that
is not a very significant unemployment solution.
For some
sections of the community, this proposal’s positive benefits far outweigh the
environmental risks. They are focusing on the positive impacts this development
could bring, including the cleanup of the brownfield site, more jobs and economicstimulus. “I could see us hiring another large group of workers to come in for
good family-wage jobs with benefits,” he said. “That trickles down through the
economy. It’s not only a benefit to us, but to local businesses, schools and
the tax base.”
For the moment,
these two sides are at odds, and working through the NEPA, SEPA and public comment
process before any plans are finalized. What jobs will roll out of the final
decision will wait to be seen.
Lauren, how do you feel about the issue? Jobs are great for a small community that sounds like it could really use them but how do we also account for the environmental costs as well? This is very interesting to me because so much coal comes out of wyoming. It is a really hot button issue, for instance an artist at the University of Wyoming depicted all these burned logs around a circle of coal and tried to relate it to climate change and the pine beetle destruction, after major donors to UW called to complain, it was removed. Here is an interesting article about it if you have time :) http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/science/2012/10/carbon_sink_sculpture_at_university_of_wyoming_mining_and_energy_donors.html
ReplyDeleteLauren, I particularly appreciated your distinction here between the huge number of temporary jobs created during construction and the relatively small number of permanent jobs created. The other thing that is interesting about these economic development projects is the amount of money spent by taxpayers for every job created. This project sounds a little bit different, but talking about environmental impact per job created might be an interesting way of bringing the issue home.
ReplyDeleteWhat's up with the "net jobs outflow of 8,000"? Which jobs are being lost and why?
Ultimately, I fear that much of the current unemployment problem is due to structural unemployment, which accounts for the persistence of the problem. Not sure how that issue plays out in Cowlitz County.