Indicators Project Home
The Boston Foundation
The Boston Indicators Project
Hub of Innovation
Civic Agenda
Data Portal
Whats next?
Links and Resources
Contact Us
spacer


Civic HealthCultural Life and the ArtsEconomyEducationEnvironmentHousingPublic HealthPublic SafetyTechnologyTransportation  
Economy
ECONOMY OVERVIEW
Highlights HIGHLIGHTS
Innovations INNOVATIONS
Civic Agenda CIVIC AGENDA
Research RESEARCH
Links and Resources LINKS & RESOURCES
ECONOMY INDICATORS
At-A-Glance AT-A-GLANCE
3.1 Maintaining the Region’s Competitive Edge
3.2 Infrastructure to Support the Knowledge Economy
3.3 Economic Strength and Resilience
3.4 Affordable Cost of Living, Metro Boston
3.5 A Skilled Workforce
3.6 Economic Equity
3.7 Economic Mobility and Opportunity
Error: 13
Description: Type mismatch
Source: Microsoft VBScript runtime error

Economy: Goals & Measures

Goals
Indicator Measures
How are we doing?
iconGoal

3.1 Maintaining the Region’s Competitive Edge

iconIndicator

3.1.1 Share of young knowledge workers Metro Boston versus other regions

According to a 2003 Census Bureau analysis, Greater Boston experienced only a slight net gain in young, single, college-educated workers between 1995 and 2000, despite the then-booming economy, while all of its major competitor regions saw greater gains.
iconIndicator

3.1.2 Innovation capacity measured by patents per capita

In 2003, patents were granted to Massachusetts innovators at a rate of about 61 per 100,000 residents – an increase of 8.3% over 2002 and the highest rate among the Leading Technology States.  However, patents are a highly mobile form of intellectual capital, and do not guarantee local start-ups and jobs.


iconGoal

3.2 Infrastructure to Support the Knowledge Economy

iconIndicator

3.2.1 Level of Research and Development funding

In 2003, Massachusetts attracted the highest per capita share of federal R&D funds among all states, $425 per 1,000 residents.  The $4.6 billion in federal research grants was second only to California’s more than $15 billion.
iconIndicator

3.2.2 Share of the nation’s venture capital investment

With only 2.3% of the nation’s population, Massachusetts received 10% of all venture capital invested nationwide between the first quarter of 1995 and the third quarter of 2004.  However, other Leading Technology States – and foreign economies – are working hard to attract a greater percentage.
iconIndicator

3.2.3 Funding for higher education

In fiscal year 2005, Massachusetts ranked 47th among all states in per capita appropriations for public higher education, at $137, falling further behind competitor Leading Technology States.  The Commonwealth decreased per capita tax appropriations by 28% between the 2000 and 2005 fiscal years compared to an increase of 13% in New York, 7% in New Jersey, and 4% in California.


iconGoal

3.3 Economic Strength and Resilience

iconIndicator

3.3.1 Employment by industry sector

Employment in Metro Boston peaked in late 2000/early 2001, and then declined through January 2004, lagging behind the nation. The City of Boston lost about 25,000 payroll jobs between the second quarters of 2002 and 2004.  Job loss across most sectors was offset slightly by growth in the education and health care sectors.
iconIndicator

3.3.2 Unemployment rate

Unemployment in Boston rose from 2.8% in 2000 to 6% in 2003. In Metro Boston, it declined to 4.8% in 2004, lower than the national rate of 5.7%.  However, Boston’s low rate may mask discouraged workers and out-migrating residents, and rates varied greatly across Boston neighborhoods (see 3.6.3).
iconIndicator

3.3.3 Strong office and hotel markets

Boston’s average hotel occupancy rate was 71% in 2003, down only slightly from the highs of the late 1990s. The opening of the new Boston Convention and Exhibit Center is also spurring hotel occupancy.  Boston’s office vacancy rate has increased from its historic low of 1.5% in 2000 to a high of 13.8% in 2003, declining somewhat since then to 12.8%. Overall office space availability reached 20% in 2004, reflecting the recent spate of corporate consolidations and mergers.


iconGoal

3.4 Affordable Cost of Living

iconIndicator

3.4.1 Median household income adjusted by cost of living

The Boston Metro region (PMSA) had the second highest median household income among comparable metro areas in 2003, second only to the San Francisco metro area. However, its cost of living is 38% higher than average, so the region’s higher wages do not translate into a higher standard of living for most.
iconIndicator

3.4.2 Family Self-Sufficiency Standard

In 2003, it required an income of $54,612 per year to afford the basics for two adults with two children in Boston, and $51,284 for a single parent with two children, an increase of 28% and 31% respectively over equivalent estimates for 1998.
iconIndicator

3.4.3 Families and children living in poverty

Boston ranks 13th among the nation’s large school districts in the percentage of low-income school-age children, with almost 75% of its students qualifying for the reduced-price or free lunch program in 2004- 2005, a rate that has held steady since 1999. The number of families in poverty increased slightly over the 1990s, despite the high tech boom, from 17,598 to 17,982 and 15.3% by 2000, while the rate for families with children in poverty declined somewhat, from 22.9% to 22.2%, with a more pronounced decline among female-headed households with children under 5, from 54.6% in 1990 to 45.6% in 2000.


iconGoal

3.5 A Skilled Workforce

iconIndicator

3.5.1 Educational attainment, Boston and metro region

In 2000, 36% of Boston residents, and 40% in the region, held a Bachelor’s degree of higher. However, one-third of the state’s workers lack the skills to compete in the knowledge economy, and in 2000, 47% of Seattle’s population and 45% of San Franciscans held a Bachelor’s degree or higher.
iconIndicator

3.5.2 Job training, adult education and English language skills

As of 2004, more than 25,000 MA residents were on waiting lists for Adult Basic Education and English instruction (ESOL), including about 3,500 in Boston waiting for ESOL.


iconGoal

3.6 Economic Equity

iconIndicator

3.6.1 Income disparities between top and bottom quintile of population — the GINI Index

Earning inequality has been increasing in Boston for 40 years. In 2000, the top 3% of families in Boston earned about 19% of the total of all family incomes, up from 11.6% in 1960. Overall, the US has the greatest income inequality in the industrialized world.
iconIndicator

3.6.2 Income by race, educational attainment, neighborhood

In general, Bostonians with a college degree saw a 20% or better increase over the 1990s while other groups’ incomes were stagnant or declined. White households earned more than double the income of Asian and Latino households in Boston, and incomes varied considerably by neighborhood.
iconIndicator

3.6.3 Unemployment by race/ethnicity

Results in Boston varied considerably by census tract, according to the 2000 Census, from a low of 3% to a high of 11%.  In 2003, unemployment in Massachusetts was 5.8% for whites, 5.4% for Asians, 10.6% for Latinos, and 12.1% for blacks.


iconGoal

3.7 Economic Mobility and Opportunity

iconIndicator

3.7.1 Number of Associates degrees awarded

In 2003, enrollment in Massachusetts’ community colleges at 118,198 students was just 2.5% higher than in 1992.  In Boston, between 1997 and 2003, degrees granted at Bunker Hill Community College increased 22%, but declined by 2% at Roxbury Community College.  Enrollment in the state’s non-credit workforce development courses in FY2004, at 77,625, was at an eight-year high.