LANSING – The driving factors in attracting workers in the “new economy” are different between metropolitan communities and rural areas, according to a final report out of the Land Policy Institute at Michigan State University.

As Michigan looks to recover from the loss of more than 400,000 manufacturing jobs over the past eight years, falling personal income and rising poverty, Soji Adelaja, director of the institute, said it’s important for communities to assess their unique assets and market themselves accordingly.

Adelaja, who gave lawmakers a glimpse at the report back in February, outlined the final findings during the Michigan Land and Prosperity Summit Tuesday.

“Metro areas have a natural income growth edge, while non-metros have a natural population and employment edge,�?� the report contends. �??Holding other factors constant, metro areas have a natural tendency to grow their average income but lose their employment. However, rural areas have a natural tendency to grow population and employment but lose income.�?�

In studying the drivers of economic growth in the new economy, the report found a concentration of “knowledge” workers ages 25 to 34 are associated with job creation in urban communities, but not rural.

While it’s important to have colleges and universities, having those institutions and a concentration of college-educated workers produces faster job and population growth in metro communities than in rural areas.

The report also noted having retired senior citizens drives economic growth because their presence is associated with per capita income growth and job creation, but in urban communities that population can crowd out other age groups. Having senior citizens in rural settings leads to greater per capita income, but their presence presents an even greater problem of crowding out jobs and failing to attract other age groups.

In terms of innovation, the report noted patents provide large job opportunities to urban communities, but only have a “modest” impact on rural areas.

The presence of immigrants, who are becoming more knowledgeable and entrepreneurial, in a community, either rural or urban, attracts other populations, but they only expand the base of jobs in urban settings. But the report noted having an increase of immigrants into a community correlates to a decline in income growth, particularly in rural settings.

The report noted rural communities have to forge more fruitful economic development, including exploring “new agriculture,” that is tied to industries such as alternative energy and information technology.

While lower taxes don’t correlate to job creation and income growth, they do help rural communities in terms of having a larger population.

The report also suggested rural communities try to tie their economy with metropolitan areas, including through recreational activities.

All communities should “avoid the wrong side of growth,” meaning drivers such as population, employment and per capita income seesaw up and down together. The report said this is exampled by machinery’s decline being more pronounced in metro areas than rural communities.

Non-metro communities fare better in terms of the impact of the higher cost of health care in that urban areas experience more of a hit in per capita income growth.

Higher housing values also lead to lower job creation in metro communities compared to in rural settings, the report found. In rural communities, higher housing values relate to population and per capita income, but those aren’t associated in urban settings.

In terms of green infrastructure, the report noted investment in this area attracts population and creates higher per capita income and jobs in both urban and rural settings. The report noted the Obama administration’s push for the federal stimulus presents an opportunity to expand the state’s green infrastructure.

This story was provided by Gongwer News Service. To subscribe, click on Gongwer.Com

a>>