Matching Items (9)
Filtering by

Clear all filters

41817-Thumbnail Image.png
ContributorsMokwa, Michael (Author) / McIntosh, Daniel (Author) / Eaton, John (Author) / Evans, Anthony (Author) / Hill, Kent (Author) / L. William Seidman Research Institute (Contributor)
Created2016-04-13
Description

The 2016 College Football Playoff National Championship Game was held on January 11, 2016, in Glendale, Arizona. The W. P. Carey School of Business at Arizona State University was commissioned to conduct an economic impact assessment of the Game and events surrounding it, including the impact of direct and indirect

The 2016 College Football Playoff National Championship Game was held on January 11, 2016, in Glendale, Arizona. The W. P. Carey School of Business at Arizona State University was commissioned to conduct an economic impact assessment of the Game and events surrounding it, including the impact of direct and indirect visitor and organizational expenditures. This study utilized multiple research, survey and analytical methodologies. This report will outline the methodologies used and the results obtained in the study and the economic impact. 

41818-Thumbnail Image.png
ContributorsJames, Tim (Timothy Jon) (Author) / Evans, Anthony John (Author) / Madly, Eva (Author) / L. William Seidman Research Institute (Contributor)
Created2014-04-04
Description

This study examines the economic impact of the Central Arizona Project (CAP) to the State of Arizona in two aspects: the construction of CAP, 1973‐1993; and the impact of CAP's water supply delivery operations, 1986‐2010. A modified IMPLAN input‐output model for the State of Arizona is used to implement both

This study examines the economic impact of the Central Arizona Project (CAP) to the State of Arizona in two aspects: the construction of CAP, 1973‐1993; and the impact of CAP's water supply delivery operations, 1986‐2010. A modified IMPLAN input‐output model for the State of Arizona is used to implement both analyses. The economic impacts for each analysis are assessed in terms of gross state product (GSP) and employment.

43586-Thumbnail Image.png
ContributorsHoffman, Dennis L. (Author) / Hogan, Timothy D. (Author) / L. William Seidman Research Institute (Publisher)
Created2005-02
Description

For those interested in one of the most extreme state tax and expenditure limitations, TABOR – Colorado’s initiative that limits the funding of most expenditures to annual revenue growth restrained by the sum of annual population growth and inflation rates – would seem to be exactly the right choice. To

For those interested in one of the most extreme state tax and expenditure limitations, TABOR – Colorado’s initiative that limits the funding of most expenditures to annual revenue growth restrained by the sum of annual population growth and inflation rates – would seem to be exactly the right choice. To some, the initiative simply limits government to spend within its means. However, the analysis in this paper reveals that, true to the language in the 1992 Colorado initiative, TABOR limits government growth, and over time the public sector, as a share of the overall economy, declines sharply – crowding out opportunities for investments in strategic initiatives or opportunities for tax reform that may be popular with large voter constituencies or the business community. Advocates point out that provisions in TABOR do allow for voter overrides, but these are costly in both time and money, and until the overrides take place, government is
hamstrung. A simpler, more efficient alternative would be to elect fiscally conservative legislators and hold them accountable for prudent fiscal decisions that strike the right balance between a tax base conductive to economic growth and strategic investments that provide public sector infrastructure, nurturing the business climate and promoting the health and well-being of the citizenry. The paper first outlines the TABOR amendment in Colorado and examines its fiscal consequences for that state. It then examines the potential impact of a TABOR in Arizona.

43588-Thumbnail Image.png
ContributorsRex, Tom R. (Author) / L. William Seidman Research Institute (Publisher)
Created2005-06
Description

The research for this report was conducted in two phases. The first phase analyzed the change in national job quality using multiple datasets, going back as far as 1970. In addition, the level and change in job quality was estimated for one state (Arizona). Some inconsistencies in the measurement of

The research for this report was conducted in two phases. The first phase analyzed the change in national job quality using multiple datasets, going back as far as 1970. In addition, the level and change in job quality was estimated for one state (Arizona). Some inconsistencies in the measurement of job quality exist across datasets. Complete results of this analysis, with a strong focus on Arizona data, are available in the report "Job Quality in Arizona". The second phase analyzed data for all states but was limited to two datasets, one presenting industrial data, the other occupational data. Because of the limited availability of state data by occupation, the time period analyzed was restricted to the years 2000 and 2003. The level of job quality in 2003 and the change between 2000 and 2003 are presented. The findings of the second phase, initially reported in "Job Quality in Arizona Compared to All States", are included in the current report, excluding detail provided for Arizona in the original report. Additional national and regional analyses are included in the current report.

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).

43568-Thumbnail Image.png
Created2007-06
Description

This paper explores whether a knowledge economy explanation for economic growth seems to fit with the growth experience of the Sunbelt during the 1990s. The issue is addressed through analysis of two different datasets. First, the education and income characteristics of the people moving to the Sunbelt region are examined

This paper explores whether a knowledge economy explanation for economic growth seems to fit with the growth experience of the Sunbelt during the 1990s. The issue is addressed through analysis of two different datasets. First, the education and income characteristics of the people moving to the Sunbelt region are examined using migration data from the 2000 census. Then we look at the link between the knowledge economy metric of the share of college educated adults and economic growth in the Sunbelt in the 1990s using data for 116 Sunbelt MSAs.

68479-Thumbnail Image.png
ContributorsHeffernon, Rick (Author) / Muro, Mark (Author) / Melnick, Rob (Author) / Kinnear, Christina (Author) / Hill, John K. (Contributor) / Hogan, Timothy D. (Contributor) / Rex, Tom R. (Contributor) / Morrison Institute for Public Policy (Publisher)
Created2001-03
Description

Does H20 = Growth in Arizona? That is how many people view the water-growth equation -- any introduction of "new" water supplies inevitably stimulates population growth and economic activity. However, the report by Morrison Institute for Public Policy, Growth on the Coconino Plateau, offers some surprisingly contrary conclusions. Completed on

Does H20 = Growth in Arizona? That is how many people view the water-growth equation -- any introduction of "new" water supplies inevitably stimulates population growth and economic activity. However, the report by Morrison Institute for Public Policy, Growth on the Coconino Plateau, offers some surprisingly contrary conclusions. Completed on behalf of Arizona Department of Water Resources and the Coconino Plateau Watershed, this document is relevant for all regions of rural Arizona. Among the findings: - Some rural areas in the West have constructed major water supply projects only to see most of their towns languish, not prosper. - New water infrastructure in growing rural counties hasn't affected the size so much as the pattern of new development. - Leapfrog sprawl into unincorporated areas has been discouraged in regions where cities and towns hold control over the distribution of new water supplies. Bottom line, water won't automatically produce population growth. But planning for water - how it is supplied and governed - does offer a useful tool for managing future growth. Moreover, it can provide some measure of protection for the environment. We believe this report has important application well beyond northern Arizona. By providing original research and analysis on the water-growth equation, this report helps resolve one of Arizona's most critical issues. As a result, public policy discussions in the future will be able to focus on the state's most important growth drivers and how they can be managed.

89442-Thumbnail Image.png
ContributorsHunting, Dan (Contributor) / Gilmore, Taylor (Contributor) / Rex, Tom (Contributor) / Morrison Institute of Public Policy (Contributor) / L. William Seidman Research Institute (Contributor) / Center for Competitiveness and Prosperity Research (Contributor)
Created2019-05-01
Description

Mexico is Arizona’s No. 1 trading partner with over $15 billion in trade annually. The bulk of Arizona’s international commerce is with Sonora, the immediate neighbor to the south, but there are other potential economic opportunities worth exploring across Mexico. Here the focus is on Guanajuato, one of Mexico’s most

Mexico is Arizona’s No. 1 trading partner with over $15 billion in trade annually. The bulk of Arizona’s international commerce is with Sonora, the immediate neighbor to the south, but there are other potential economic opportunities worth exploring across Mexico. Here the focus is on Guanajuato, one of Mexico’s most economically advanced states with robust international trading ties. Watts College of Public Service and Community Solutions and Morrison Institute for Public Policy at Arizona State University researched the potential for enhanced economic ties between Arizona and Guanajuato, a state and capital city by the same name located in Central Mexico, 227 miles northwest of Mexico City and about 1,100 miles southeast of Phoenix. Watts College and Morrison Institute partnered with the L. William Seidman Research Institute at ASU’s W.P. Carey School of Business to produce a detailed economic profile of Guanajuato in order to guide ongoing and future exploration of expanded trade with Arizona.