LANSING — Michigan’s future mobility economy is no longer defined by a single corridor, company, or technology. Instead, it is emerging as a regional system, shaped by geography, workforce concentration, infrastructure, and the realities of an evolving auto and energy market.
That regional structure is a central takeaway from the 2025 Council on Future Mobility & Electrification (CFME) Annual Report, which argues that Michigan’s competitiveness in electric vehicles, advanced manufacturing, autonomy, and air mobility will depend less on marquee announcements and more on how well the state aligns its distinct regional strengths into a cohesive economic strategy.
Rather than concentrating growth in one place, Michigan’s mobility future is unfolding unevenly — but deliberately — across the state.
Southeast Michigan: The System Integrator
Southeast Michigan remains the undisputed command center of the state’s mobility economy.
Anchored by Detroit and the surrounding counties of Wayne, Oakland, and Macomb, the region continues to host the densest concentration of automotive headquarters, engineering talent, supplier networks, and research infrastructure anywhere in North America. Even as electric vehicle timelines have shifted and some investment announcements have cooled, Southeast Michigan’s role has not diminished — it has evolved.
The region increasingly functions as a systems integrator, where vehicle hardware, software, power systems, manufacturing processes, and policy converge. Engineering-heavy roles, advanced testing, validation, and mobility software development dominate the regional footprint, reinforcing its long-term relevance regardless of near-term market cycles.
State mobility planners view Southeast Michigan as essential not just for production, but for decision-making and execution — the place where mobility technologies are refined, scaled, and integrated into real-world systems.
Central Michigan: Where Policy Meets Production
Central Michigan, including the Lansing region, plays a different but equally critical role.
This part of the state sits at the intersection of manufacturing capacity, workforce retraining, and public policy. With legacy auto plants, supplier operations, and proximity to state government, Central Michigan has become a proving ground for translating policy goals into operational reality.
As EV investment ebbs and flows nationally, Central Michigan’s importance lies in adaptability. Facilities here are often retooled rather than replaced, and workforce programs focus on reskilling experienced workers rather than building from scratch. That makes the region especially valuable during periods of uncertainty, when execution matters more than expansion.
In many ways, Central Michigan functions as the stabilizer in Michigan’s mobility ecosystem — absorbing change while maintaining industrial continuity.
West Michigan: Manufacturing Agility Over Scale
West Michigan’s mobility footprint tells a quieter story — but one with growing influence.
Rather than relying on massive OEM campuses, the region has built strength around advanced manufacturing, automation, and EV-adjacent components. Mid-sized manufacturers in the Grand Rapids corridor are often more flexible, capable of shifting between traditional automotive, electrified systems, and non-automotive markets as demand changes.
That agility has insulated parts of West Michigan from the sharpest swings in EV investment sentiment. While it may lack headline-grabbing megaprojects, the region’s ability to pivot makes it a durable contributor to Michigan’s broader supply chain.
For policymakers, West Michigan represents a model of industrial resilience — growth driven by adaptability rather than scale alone.
Northern Michigan and the Upper Peninsula: Infrastructure and Inclusion
Northern Michigan and the Upper Peninsula occupy a different place in the mobility economy — one defined less by manufacturing density and more by infrastructure, access, and inclusion.
While traditional mobility employment is lighter in these regions, their role is expanding as Michigan focuses on statewide connectivity. Planning efforts emphasize charging infrastructure, digital access, logistics, and resilience rather than vehicle assembly.
These regions are increasingly viewed as essential to ensuring that Michigan’s mobility transition does not leave rural communities behind. From drone logistics to emergency response and infrastructure monitoring, Northern Michigan’s geography positions it as a testbed for mobility use cases that extend beyond urban environments.
Advanced Air Mobility: A Layer That Connects the State
Advanced air mobility (AAM) cuts across all of these regions.
Unlike traditional automotive clusters, AAM assets are distributed statewide — from drone testing corridors to manufacturing facilities and regulatory pilot programs. Michigan’s approach has been to treat air mobility not as a standalone sector, but as a connective layer that links regions together.
Cargo drones, medical transport, infrastructure inspection, and future passenger air mobility all rely on assets that span urban, suburban, and rural areas. In that sense, AAM reinforces the idea that Michigan’s mobility economy is not centralized, but networked.
What the Regional Picture Reveals
The regional breakdown reveals a strategic shift.
Michigan is no longer betting its mobility future on a single technology or market cycle. Instead, it is building a diversified ecosystem in which different regions contribute different capabilities — engineering depth, manufacturing agility, workforce adaptability, infrastructure reach.
That approach may lack the simplicity of a single megaproject narrative, but it offers resilience in a volatile global mobility market.
The Bottom Line
Michigan’s future mobility economy will not be won in one city or one sector.
It will be determined by how effectively the state connects Southeast Michigan’s engineering core, Central Michigan’s production and policy alignment, West Michigan’s manufacturing flexibility, and Northern Michigan’s infrastructure role into a coherent system.
The CFME report makes one thing clear: Michigan’s advantage lies not just in what it builds, but where and how it builds it. In an era defined by rapid technological change and policy uncertainty, geography itself has become part of the strategy.
