Arizona is one of the states in which the high-wage end of the employment distribution provides a more favorable impression of its job quality than that based on all employment. Thus, Arizona’s subpar job quality is not due to a scarcity of high-wage jobs, but instead results from lesser job quality in the remainder of the employment distribution. In particular, Arizona has an above-average share of very low-paying jobs that serve tourists and seasonal residents. In turn, the low overall average wage in Arizona — 7 percent less than the U.S. average — primarily results from factors other than job quality. The average wage in Arizona is less than the U.S. average in the vast majority of industries and occupations, both high- and low-paying.

Education decisions are among the most important choices people ever make. So we were surprised and disappointed to see an article so loosely reasoned and reckless in its conclusions as “Five Reasons to Skip College” published in Blank Slate at Forbes.com on April 18, 2006. The article never provides a numerical assessment of the costs and benefits of going to college, uses statistics inappropriately and in a way that biases the conclusions against college, contains conceptual errors on how to evaluate the return on a college education, and greatly exaggerates the only substantive criticism of typical evaluations of the financial worth of a college degree.

Enrollment in degree-granting institutions of higher education in Arizona as a percentage of the state’s population was about equal to the national average in 2003. The Arizona figure was higher than the national average at private for-profit institutions, slightly greater than the national average at public institutions, but considerably below average at private not-for-profit institutions. Total revenues and expenditures per student at Arizona institutions of higher education were far below the national averages in 2003, among the least in the nation. Among public institutions, Arizona’s higher education revenues and expenditures were not as far below average, but still ranked among the bottom 10 states in the nation.

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.

This paper provides a capsule perspective on the lessons economists have learned from investigating growth and income gaps across countries. After providing the lessons for growth and development across countries, the paper asks whether these lessons can be extended to growth and income differentials between regions or states of the United States. It should be stressed that applying to regional growth what is known about country growth is partly untested at this time, and hence merely suggestive.

High quality early childhood programs have proven effective in raising educational attainment and improving earnings and labor market performance. These results are all the more appealing in light of the general ineffectiveness of adult retraining programs. In the area of crime prevention, sociologists and criminologists have also turned their attention to early childhood intervention programs. In contrast to juvenile treatment programs, early interventions hold special promise in that they are preventative rather than crisis-oriented and take place before anti-social behavioral patterns become entrenched. The purpose of this report is to provide a comprehensive look at the economic issues surrounding early care and education in Arizona.

Universities contribute to the local community in three distinct ways: 1) Traditional Economic Impact; 2) Benefits to Individuals and Society; 3) Creation of Knowledge. Among the results are higher incomes of individuals and the community as a whole, higher-quality jobs, enhanced economic development, and improvements in prosperity and quality of life.

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" (June 2005), 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).

As the transition from the industrial age to the information age/knowledge economy continues, economic competitiveness has taken on added importance and new meanings. The concepts of competitiveness, productivity, and prosperity can be applied to individuals, companies, regions (such as metropolitan areas or states), and countries, though the meaning/interpretation of each may vary somewhat by the unit of analysis.

As part of the Long Term Pavement Performance (LTPP) Program, Arizona DOT constructed 16 SPS-1 test sections on U.S. Route 93 near Kingman. The SPS-1 study was designed to study a variety of structural sections in new asphalt concrete construction. Opened to traffic in 1993, the project was monitored at regular intervals until it was rehabilitated in 2006. Surface distress, profile, and deflection data collected throughout the life of the pavement were used to evaluate the performance of various flexible pavement design features, layer configurations, and thickness. This report documents the analyses conducted as well as practical findings and lessons learned that will be of interest to Arizona DOT.