Spreadsheet: 01506125-2973-4dc5-b0d5-cfaa6da889e6
Sheet: MetaText

LastUpdate | 2013-03-05 00:00:00
SourceLine | U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis
SourceURL | http://www.bea.gov/regional/index.htm
Dataset Description | Gross domestic product (GDP) per employee is the broadest proxy for productivity for states and local areas. It is calculated by dividing GDP by total employment.  Gross domestic product is the most comprehensive measure of economic activity. Data are provided on the Innovation Indicators dashboard for 1997 through 2006 for the state and the nation. Data prior to 1997 are available for the state and the nation, but a break in series in 1997 for the state data complicates the presentation of these data. The only data available by metropolitan area are for 2001 through 2005; county data are not available. GDP for the nation, states and metro areas are presented in both current dollars and inflation-adjusted dollars (though some of the historical data by state are available only in current dollars). The inflation adjustment is unique to each geographic area. Total employment includes an estimate of the number of proprietors as well as wage and salary employment.  Gross Domestic Product Per Employee for the state and nation are presented in the dashboard in current and inflation-adjusted dollars from 1997 through 2006. The annual inflation-adjusted percent change and the current-dollar percentage of the national average also are displayed. The same data are shown for 2001 through 2005 for the metro areas.
Technical Notes | GDP by metro area are prototype statistics that first were released in September 2007 for evaluation and comment by data users. The methodology developed for these prototype estimates is relatively simple. The employment figures are estimates. The primary source is the Census of Employment and Wages, but the BEA must estimate employment for those not counted in the census.
Notes on Visual#1-1 | A healthy economy exists when inflation-adjusted gains in GDP are at least 2-to-3 percent per year. During the 1991-to-2001 economic cycle, the annual average inflation-adjusted growth rate was 7.5 percent in Arizona and 3.7 percent nationally. However, during the 2001-to-2009 economic cycle, the annual average inflation-adjusted growth rate was only 2.9 percent in Arizona and 1.6 percent nationally.  Within an economic cycle, the annual change in GDP is highly variable, exceeding the target during economic expansions and falling short during recessions. During expansions, Arizona’s GDP growth is much higher than the target and the national average due to the state’s much more rapid population growth. However, during recessions—as in 2008 and 2009—Arizona’s economic performance is inferior to the national average. In Arizona, the percent change in GDP during economic expansions has dropped over time, a natural result of the considerable increase in the size of the Arizona economy.
Notes on Visual#1-2 | During expansions, inflation-adjusted GDP growth in Arizona’s metropolitan areas generally is much higher than the target of 2-to-3 percent and also is higher than the U.S. metro average due to the above-average population growth in Arizona. Between the end of the prior recession in 2001 and the peak of the economic cycle in 2007, the annual average inflation-adjusted growth rate ranged between 5.0 and 5.7 percent across five of the state’s metropolitan areas—[NAME] was lower at 3.2 percent. The U.S. metro average was 2.5 percent. Variations in population growth account for some of the differences across metro areas in aggregate economic growth.  The most recent data for GDP by metro area are for 2009, a recessionary year. These estimates remain subject to revision. The preliminary data indicate that the percent change in inflation-adjusted GDP was negative in both 2008 and 2009 in each of the geographic areas. For the entire economic cycle, real GDP growth averaged between 1.9 percent and 3.0 percent across Arizona’s six metro areas, higher than the U.S. metro average of 1.5 percent.
Notes on Visual#1-1 | A healthy economy exists when inflation-adjusted gains in GDP are at least 2-to-3 percent per year. During the 1991-to-2001 economic cycle, the annual average inflation-adjusted growth rate was 7.5 percent in Arizona and 3.7 percent nationally. However, during the 2001-to-2009 economic cycle, the annual average inflation-adjusted growth rate was only 2.9 percent in Arizona and 1.6 percent nationally.  Within an economic cycle, the annual change in GDP is highly variable, exceeding the target during economic expansions and falling short during recessions. During expansions, Arizona’s GDP growth is much higher than the target and the national average due to the state’s much more rapid population growth. However, during recessions—as in 2008 and 2009—Arizona’s economic performance is inferior to the national average. In Arizona, the percent change in GDP during economic expansions has dropped over time, a natural result of the considerable increase in the size of the Arizona economy.
Notes on Visual#1-2 | Reasonable targets for Arizona are for the state’s GDP per employee, a measure of productivity, to be near the national average and for the larger metro areas to have a figure near the U.S. metro average. The most recent data for GDP per employee by metro area are for 2009, a recessionary year. These estimates remain subject to revision. The preliminary data indicate that GDP per employee was less than the U.S. metro average in five of Arizona’s six metro areas, with only the Phoenix area’s figure above average.
Notes on Visual#1-3 | A reasonable target is for GDP per capita, a measure of economic well-being, to be within 5 percent of the national average in Arizona and within 5 percent of the U.S. metro average in the state’s larger metro areas. The most recent data for GDP per capita by metro area are for 2009, a recessionary year. These estimates remain subject to revision. The preliminary data indicate that GDP per capita was considerably less than the metro average in each of Arizona’s six metro areas.
Notes on Visual#2-1 | During expansions, inflation-adjusted GDP growth in Arizona’s metropolitan areas generally is much higher than the target of 2-to-3 percent and also is higher than the U.S. metro average due to the above-average population growth in Arizona. Between the end of the prior recession in 2001 and the peak of the economic cycle in 2007, the annual average inflation-adjusted growth rate ranged between 5.0 and 5.7 percent across five of the state’s metropolitan areas—[NAME] was lower at 3.2 percent. The U.S. metro average was 2.5 percent. Variations in population growth account for some of the differences across metro areas in aggregate economic growth.  The most recent data for GDP by metro area are for 2009, a recessionary year. These estimates remain subject to revision. The preliminary data indicate that the percent change in inflation-adjusted GDP was negative in both 2008 and 2009 in each of the geographic areas. For the entire economic cycle, real GDP growth averaged between 1.9 percent and 3.0 percent across Arizona’s six metro areas, higher than the U.S. metro average of 1.5 percent.
Notes on Visual#2-2 | GDP per employee, a measure of productivity, was marginally higher than the national metropolitan average in Metro Phoenix in 2009. In each of the other five metro areas in Arizona, GDP per employee was at least 22 percent below the U.S. metro average. A number of factors account for the geographic variation, with the industrial mix being the largest factor.
Notes on Visual#2-3 | In 2009, GDP per capita was 11 percent lower than the national metropolitan average in Metro Phoenix, 24 percent below average in Flagstaff and at least 35 percent below average in each of the other four metro areas. The substantial variation in GDP per capita across the metro areas is a result of such factors as industrial mix, household size, and the number of workers per household.
Notes on Visual#3-1 | A reasonable target is for Arizona’s GDP per employee to be near the national average. This has generally been the case historically. The percentage of the U.S. average was never below 99 from 1969 through 1980. Since 1992, the percentage has fluctuated from 95 to 99 percent of the national average. Arizona’s GDP per employee percentage rose to 98.1 in 2009, the highest figure since 1995.
Notes on Visual#3-2 | A reasonable target is for Arizona’s GDP per capita to be within 5 percent of the national average. This was the case from 1970 through 1974. The percentage of the national average generally exceeded 90 through 1987, but has been below 90 in each year since 2000. Arizona’s GDP per capita as a percentage of the U.S. average fell to 84.3 in 2009, the second-lowest figure since 1969.
Notes on Visual#4-1 | The annual inflation-adjusted percent change in GDP per employee typically ranges from slightly negative to 2 percent nationally, with the range broader in Arizona. The change in Arizona varies by year from less-to-more than the national average, though Arizona’s gain was higher in each year from 2005 through 2009.
Notes on Visual#4-2 | Nationally, the annual percent change in GDP per capita is cyclical, with decreases or small gains during economic recessions and increases in excess of 2 percent during strong economic expansions. The percent change in Arizona varies from less than the national average during recessions to more than the U.S. average during expansions. Arizona’s figure was below average in each year from 2007 through 2009.
Notes on Visual#5-1 | Annual inflation-adjusted percent changes in GDP per employee in Arizona’s metro areas were erratic from 2002 to 2009, with declines common in each metro area though the losses in Metro Phoenix have been marginal. In these eight years, the Phoenix and Yuma areas had the strongest performance with an annual average increase of 1.3 percent, above the U.S. metro area average of 0.9 percent. The annual average for Flagstaff matched the U.S. metro average, but [NAME] and Prescott had slight negative averages.
Notes on Visual#5-2 | During the strong economic expansion from 2003 through 2006, the annual inflation-adjusted percent change in GDP per capita generally was positive in Arizona and in each of Arizona’s metro areas. In the recessionary years of 2008 and 2009, every metro posted a loss. Between 2001 and 2009, the annual average increase exceeded the national metropolitan average of 0.5 percent only in the Flagstaff metro area. The annual average for Lake Havasu City, Phoenix, Prescott, and [NAME] was negative.