Matching Items (5)
Filtering by

Clear all filters

43574-Thumbnail Image.png
Created2006-03
Description

The long-term trend toward lower-quality jobs in the United States continued between 2001 and 2004. Industrial job quality fell 1.6 percent nationally between 2001 and 2004. The decrease in occupational job quality was not quite as great at 0.9 percent. Thus, overall U.S. job quality dropped 2.5 percent during the

The long-term trend toward lower-quality jobs in the United States continued between 2001 and 2004. Industrial job quality fell 1.6 percent nationally between 2001 and 2004. The decrease in occupational job quality was not quite as great at 0.9 percent. Thus, overall U.S. job quality dropped 2.5 percent during the three years, causing the U.S. average wage to be 2.5 percent less than it otherwise would have been. Arizona’s job quality fell between 2001 and 2004 at a pace worse than the national average. Relative to the national average, the industrial and occupational job mixes each slipped a bit more than 0.3 percent during the three years, for an overall decline of 0.7 percent. In Arizona, job quality in 2004 was 2.0 percent below the national average, but Arizona ranked 23rd among all states.

43580-Thumbnail Image.png
Created2005-11
Description

The educational attainment in 2000 of the entire 25-or-older population in Arizona was similar to the national average and ranked in the middle of the states. Arizona compared less favorably to two sets of comparison states: “competitor” states defined by the Greater Phoenix Chamber of Commerce and “new economy” states

The educational attainment in 2000 of the entire 25-or-older population in Arizona was similar to the national average and ranked in the middle of the states. Arizona compared less favorably to two sets of comparison states: “competitor” states defined by the Greater Phoenix Chamber of Commerce and “new economy” states identified by the Milken Institute. In 1990, however, Arizona’s educational attainment had exceeded the national average. Arizona ranked among the bottom 10 states in the 1990 to 2000 gain in educational attainment. Among both the entire population and those active in the labor force in 2000, the
educational attainment of Arizona residents 55 or older exceeded that of their peers nationally.

43589-Thumbnail Image.png
ContributorsRex, Tom R. (Author) / L. William Seidman Research Institute (Publisher)
Created2005-06
Description

The best way to evaluate job quality would be to analyze a dataset that presents both occupational and industrial data, but the only dataset of this nature available by state comes from the decennial census. It is severely limited by small sample size, the latest data are for 1999, and

The best way to evaluate job quality would be to analyze a dataset that presents both occupational and industrial data, but the only dataset of this nature available by state comes from the decennial census. It is severely limited by small sample size, the latest data are for 1999, and the 1999 data are not consistent with the 1989 data. Thus, the initial work by the Seidman Institute on job quality ("Job Quality in Arizona", March 2005, presented data on Arizona job quality from several sources of either industrial or occupational data. "Job Quality in Arizona Compared to All States" is an extension of the March 2005 report. Arizona’s job quality in the latest year and its change over time is compared to the national average and is ranked among the 51 “states” (including the District of Columbia).

68537-Thumbnail Image.png
ContributorsMelnick, Rob (Director) / Hall, John Stuart (Editor, Contributor) / Cayer, N. Joseph (Editor) / Kamin, Carol (Contributor) / Kiser, Jim (Contributor) / McGovern, Thomas P. (Contributor) / Miller, George (Contributor) / Rex, Tom R. (Contributor) / Robb, Robert (Contributor) / Ryle, Monsignor Edward (Contributor) / Sacton, Frank (Contributor) / Spitzer, Marc (Contributor) / Welch, Nancy (Contributor) / Morrison Institute for Public Policy (Publisher)
Created1997-11
Description

The report includes original articles by Arizona policy practitioners and observers, reprints of pertinent articles by experts beyond Arizona, and a list for further reading. Articles of varying lengths and complexities are purposefully included so as to offer something to readers with different levels of interest in and knowledge of

The report includes original articles by Arizona policy practitioners and observers, reprints of pertinent articles by experts beyond Arizona, and a list for further reading. Articles of varying lengths and complexities are purposefully included so as to offer something to readers with different levels of interest in and knowledge of the subject matter.

68509-Thumbnail Image.png
Created2000-05
Description

The Governor's Strategic Partnership for Economic Development has identified 12 industry clusters in Arizona that collectively drive the economy. The term "cluster" refers to a geographic concentration of interdependent companies, suppliers, products, labor pool, and institutions that together constitute an important competitive advantage for a region. Tourism is recognized as

The Governor's Strategic Partnership for Economic Development has identified 12 industry clusters in Arizona that collectively drive the economy. The term "cluster" refers to a geographic concentration of interdependent companies, suppliers, products, labor pool, and institutions that together constitute an important competitive advantage for a region. Tourism is recognized as one of Arizona's 12 industry clusters. In northern Arizona it ranks as the dominant cluster.

Much of the analysis in this report is based on the concept that industry clusters act as primary growth influences on local economies. Strong clusters produce goods or services that can be sold to consumers outside the region, creating a flow of revenue into the region. This influx of revenue stimulates economic activity in other areas of the local economy such as the retail, real estate, or constructions sectors.

This report profiles the tourism cluster in Coconino County with special focus on the Page area. It examines the cluster's composition, relative size, and importance to the regional economy, and it addresses the cluster's dynamics and requirements for growth. In its conclusion, it presents a menu of options for strengthening the cluster in the Page area.