HomeMy WebLinkAboutAPA812:R ECEI VED
'JFr!CE Of :
(.. .?~ c· ;S _.~. _t lSO R
ARLIS
AJask~ Res ources
Library & Info 1mation Services
An chorage Alas ka
Tech n i c a I Report
Number 34
Alaska OCS
Socioeconomic
Studies Program
Sponsor:
Bureau of
Land Management
Alaska Outer
Continental Shelf
Office
Northern Gulf of Alaska
Petroleum Development Scenarios
Economic and Demographic Impacts
I llll l ll lll ll lll lll lll l l ll ll l ll l l ll ll~ilf i! lllllllllll llllll lllllllll ll llll lll I
3 3755 000 14805 6
Th e Unite d Sta t e s Depa r tment o f t he Int rio r wa s d esigna t ed by the Out er
Cont i nent a l She l f (OC 3) Laud3 A~t of 1955 t o c a rry out the ma jority of
the Act 's provisions f o r a dminist e ring the mineral le a sing a nd de v e l op -
ment o f o f fshore are as o f th e Un i te d Sta tes under federal jurisdictio n.
\h thin the Departme nt , t he Bure a u of La nd Management (BLM) h as the
responsibility to meet requirements o f the National Environmental Policy
Act of 1969 (NEPA) as well as other legislation and regulati o ns dealing
with the effects of o ffshore development. In Alaska, unique cultura l
differences and c limatic conditions create a need for developing addi-
t i onal socioeconomi c a nd e nv ironm e ntal information to improve OCS deci-
sion making at all governmental levels. In fulfillment of its f ed era l
responsibilities and with an awareness of these additional information
needs, the BLM has initi a ted s everal investigative programs, one of
which is the Alaska OC S Soc io e conomic Studies Program (SESP).
Th e Alaska OCS Socio ec onom i c Stud ies Program is a multi-yea r rese a rch
effort which a ttempts to pre di c t a nd e v a luate the effects of Alaska OCS
Pe troleum Development upon the physic a l, social, and economic environ-
ments within the state. The ove ra ll methodology is divided into three
broad research components . The first component identifies a n alterna-
tive set of a ssumpti o ns r egard i ng the location, the nature, and the
timing of future petroleum events and related activities. In this
comp o nent, the program t a kes into a ccount the particular ne e ds of the
petroleum industry an d projec ts t h e human, technological, e conomic, a n d
e nvi r onmental offshore a n d on sho re d evelopment requirements of th e
r e giona l p etroleum i ndus try .
The second component focuses on data gathering that identifies those
quantifiable and qualifi a ble facts by which OCS-induced changes c a n be
assessed. The critical community and regional components are identified
and evalua ted. Current endogenous and e x ogenous sources of change and
functional o rganizati on a mong different sectors of community and region-
al life a re ana lyzed. Susceptible community relationships , v a lues,
activities, and proces s es a lso ar e included.
The third research c ompon e nt focuses on an evaluation of the changes
that could occur due to the potential oil and gas development. Impact
evaluation concentrates on an analysis of the impacts at the statewide,
regional, and local level.
In general, program products are sequentially arranged in accordance
with BLM' s proposed OCS lease sale schedule, so that information is
timely to decisionmaking . Reports are; ,available through the National
Technical Information Service,· and the BLM has a limited number of
copies available through the Alaska OCS Office. Inquiries for informa-
tion should be directed to: Program Coordinator (COAR), Socioeconomic
Studies Program, Alaska OCS Office, P. 0. Box 1159, Anchorage, Alaska
99510 .
ARLI S
A l aska Reso ur ces
Lib rarv & Informa ti on Ser vices
~\ncl-tor o !.i"c . A.!r:s k a
II
....
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[<
r
L
[
8
G
6
~
c
c (0
LO
0
f' 00
L -=t ......
0
0 u 0
LO
LO
I""--
('I)
('I) e ,.
TECHNICAL REPORT NO. 34 CONTRACT NO. AA550-CT6-61
ARLIS
Alask \ Resources
Library & Information Services
Anchorage Alaska
ALASKA OCS SOCIOECONOMIC STUDIES PROGRAM
NORTHERN GULF OF ALASKA PETROLEUM DEVELOPMENT SCENARIOS:
ECONOMIC AND DEMOGRAPHIC IMPACTS
PREPARED FOR
BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT
ALASKA OUTER CONTINENTAL SHELF OFFICE
DOCUMENT IS AVAILABLE TO THE PUBLIC THROUGH THE
NATIONAL TECHNICAL INFORMATION SERVICE
5285 PORT ROYAL ROAD
SPRINGFIELD, VIRGINIA 22161
ARLIS
HD
;).. L{ ~-S
I ft q
()~
ho. 3y
III
Alaska Resources .
Library & Information Semces
Anchorage, Alaska
NOTICE
This document is disseminated under the sponsorship of the
U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management,
Alaska Outer Continental Shelf Office, in the interest of
information exchange. The United States Government assumes
no liability for its content or use thereof.
ALASKA OCS SOCIOECONOMIC STUDIES PROGRAM
NORTHERN GULF OF ALASKA PETROLEUM DEVELOPMENT
SCENARIOS: ECONOMIC AND DEMOGRAPHIC IMPACTS
Prepared by
Lee Huskey and William Nebesky
Institute of Social and Economic Research
University of Alaska
June 1979
IV
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
c
c
E
[
r
[
[
[
[
[
[
r
L
[
E
c
[
r~
L
LIST OF TABLES
LIST OF FIGURES
INTRODUCTION
Background
TABLE OF CONTENTS
The Purpose of the Study .
Study Design
Overview.
THE ALASKAN ECONOMY, 1965-1976
Introduction . . . . • .
Growth of Aggregate Indicators
The Causes of Growth. • . .
Structural Change in the Alaskan Economy
Population .
Unemployment
Personal Income . . • • • • • •
Summary: The Effects of Economic Growth
Existing Economic Conditions . . . . •
..
The Economies of the Gulf of Alaska Region, 1965-1976
The Causes of Growth
Summary .
THE ALASKAN ECONOMY IN THE BASE CASE
The Purpose of the Base Case •
Base Case Assumptions
The Alaskan Economy Moderate Base Case Growth
Alternative Base Cases •
THE IMPACT OF NORTHERN GULF OCS DEVELOPMENT
ON THE ALASKAN ECONOMY: THE MODERATE BASE CASE .
The Development Scenarios . . •
Definition and Measures of Impact
Summary of the Moderate Base Case
The Impacts of Northern Gulf OCS Development:
The Impacts of Northern Gulf OCS Development:
The Impacts of Northern Gulf OCS Development:
Summary and Conclusions.
v
Mean Scenario.
5% Scenario
95% Scenario .
.•
. vii
xiii
1
1
2
4
14
17
17
18
21
36
• 45
• 49
52
• 54
57
59
63
. 106
• 109
. 109
. 111
• 128
. 160
. 173
. 173
• 186
• 189
. 190
• 219
. 226
• 229
THE IMPACT OF NORTHERN GULF OCS DEVELOPMENT:
THE CUMULATIVE CASE •
The Impact of Northern Gulf OCS Development
at the 5% Level: The High Base Case •.
The Impact of Northern Gulf OCS Development
at the 95% Level: The Low Base Case .
SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS
Sensitivity to Major Changes in the Base Case •
Sensitivity to State Expenditure Policy .
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
APPENDIX A: HISTORICAL GROWTH, 1965-1976 .
APPENDIX B: MAP MODEL ASSUMPTIONS .
APPENDIX C: A PROCEDURE TO DETERMINE THE SHARE OF OCS
EMPLOYMENT TO ALASKAN RESIDENTS .
APPENDIX D: SELECTED MODEL OUTPUT .
APPENDIX E: CENSUS DIVISION PROJECTIONS
REFERENCES •
VI
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
r
[
233 [
233
240 [
243 [
244 [ 246
255 [
259 c
265
r I .
285 u
293 L
347
[
365
c
[
c
c
[
r-
L
(~
L
[
[
[
r
[
[
[
[
[
r
L
[
[
r=
L
r
L
LIST OF TABLES
1. Growth of Employment, Population, and Personal
Income, Alaska, 1965-1976 .
2. Alaska Economic Growth by Sector, 1965-1976
3. Alaska Fisheries Activity, 1970-1975 •
4. State Real Per Capita Operating and Capital
Expenditures, 1970-1977.
5. The Effect of Structural Change, Alaska, 1965-1976
6. Distribution of Employment, Alaska,
1965, 1970, 1975, and 1976.
7. The Economic Structure of Small States
8. Economic Structure of Small States, 1977.
9. Population Growth, Alaska, 1965, 1970-1976
10. Alaska Population Age-Sex Distribution, 1970, 1976 .
11. Unemployment, Alaska, 1965-1976.
12. Seasonality of Employment, Alaska,
1950, 1960, 1965, 1970, 1975, and 1975.
13. Anchorage Consumer Price Index •
14. Alaska Growth of Real Per Capita Income, 1965, 1970-1976 •
15. Growth of Employment, Population, and Personal
Income, Anchorage, 1965-1976 •
16. Civilian Employment Growth, Anchorage, 1965-1976
17. Location Quotients, Anchorage, 1965, 1970, 1975, 1976
18. Anchorage Basic Sector Growth, 1965, 1970,
1973, 1975, and 1976.
19. Anchorage Distribution of Employment,
1965, 1970, and 1976.
VII.
19
25
30
33
38
40
42
43
46
47
50
51
53
55
62
64
68
69
72
20. Anchorage Population Growth, 1965, 1970-1976
21 . Anchorage Age Di stri buti on of Nonmilitary Base Population
22. Anchorage Unemployment and Seasonality, 1965, 1970-1976.
23. Anchorage Growth of Real Per Capita Income, 1965, 1970-1976
24. Growth of Employment, Population, and Personal Income,
Southcentral Region, 1965-1976
25. Employment by Industry, Southcentral Alaska.
26. Estimated Fish Harvesting Employment •
27. Basic Sector Growth, Southcentral Alaska, 1965, 1970,
1973, 1975, and 1976.
28. Employment Distribution by Industry, Southcentral
Alaska, 1965, 1970, and 1976 •
29. Population Growth, Southcentral Alaska, 1965, 1970-1976.
30. Unemployment and Seasonality, Southcentral Alaska,
1965, 1970-1976
31. Growth of Real Per Capita Income, Southcentral Alaska,
1965. 1970-1976
32. Growth of Aggregate Indicators, Small Economies,
1965, 1970, and 1976.
33. Distribution of Intrastate Flows of Freight and
Mail from Southcentral Origins, 1973
34. The Structure of Local Economies
35. Lower Cook Inlet Employment Scenarios.
36. Beaufort Sea OCS Employment Scenarios.
37. Aggregate Indicators of Economic Growth, Moderate
Base Case, Alaska, 1977-2000 . .
38. The Structure of Employment, Moderate Base Case,
Alaska, 1978, 1980, 1985, 1990, 2000
39. The Components of Population Change, Moderate Base
Case, Alaska, 1977-2000.
VIII
74
76
77
79
82
84
86
89
91
92
94
96
99
102
104
120
121
130
134
137
[
[
[
[
[
[
r:
L
L
[
c
c
c
[
[
I'
L
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
r
l~
[
u
r
l:j
h u
c
[
r
L
40. Age-Sex Structure of the Population, Moderate
Base Case, Alaska, 1980, 2000.
41. Real Per Capita Income, Moderate Base Case,
Alaska, 1977-2000.
42. State Revenues, Moderate Base Case, Alaska, 1977-2000
43. State Expenditures, Moderate Base Case, Alaska, 1977-2000 .
44. State Fund Balances, Moderate Base Case, Alaska, 1977-2000.
139
140
143
145
148
45.
46.
State Fiscal Position, Moderate Base Case, Alaska, 1977-2000 . · 150
Aggregate Indicators of Economic Growth, Moderate Base
Case, Anchorage, 1977-2000.
47. Economic Structure, Moderate Base Case, Anchorage.
48. Aggregate Indicators of Economic Growth, Moderate Base
153
155
Case, Southcentral, 1977-2000. 157
49. Economic Structure, Moderate Base Case, Southcentral. 159
50. Aggregate Indicators of Economic Growth, Low Base Case,
Alaska, 1977-2000. 162
51. Structural Characteristics, Low and Moderate Base Cases. 166
52. Aggregate Indicators of Economic Growth, High Base
Case, Alaska, 1977-2000. 168
53. Structural Characteristics, High and Moderate Base Cases 170
54. Estimated Share of Alaska Resident Employment by OCS Task . 178
55. Direct Employment Requirements, Mean Scenario . . 181
56. Northern Gulf OCS Property Tax Revenues . 183
57. Direct Employment Requirements, 5 Percent Scenario . 185
58. Direct Employment Requirements, 95 Percent Scenario . 187
59. Employment Impact, Northern Gulf OCS Mean Scenario, Alaska. 192
60. The Structure of the Economy, Mean Scenario~ Alaska . . 194
61. Population Impact, Northern Gulf OCS Mean Scenario, Alaska. 196
IX
62. The Migration Component of Population Change,
Northern Gulf Mean OCS Scenario, 1986-1996
63. Age-Sex Structure of the Population, Northern Gulf
Mean OCS Scenario, Alaska .
64. Personal Income Impact, Northern Gulf OCS
Mean Scenario, Alaska
65. Real Per Capita Income Impact, Northern Gulf OCS
Mean Scenario, Alaska
66. State Revenue Impact, Northern Gulf OCS
Mean Scenario, Alaska
67. State Government Expenditure Impacts, Northern Gulf
OCS Mean Scenario, Alaska .
68. Impact on State Fiscal Position, Northern Gulf OCS
Mean Scenario, Alaska
69. Impact on Aggregate Indicators of Economic Growth,
Northern Gulf OCS Mean Scenario, Anchorage
70. Economic Structure, Northern Gulf OCS Mean Scenario,
Anchorage
71. Impact on Aggregate Indicators of Economic Growth,
Northern Gulf OCS Mean Scenario, Southcentral
72. Economic Structure, Northern Gulf OCS Mean Scenario,
Southcentral
73. The Impact on Major Economic Indicators, Northern
Gulf OCS 5 Percent Scenario, Alaska.
74. Structural Characteristics of the Alaska Economy,
Northern Gulf OCS 5 Percent Scenario
75. The Impact on Major Economic Indicators, Northern
Gulf OCS 95 Percent Scenario, Alaska
76. The Impact on Major Economic Indicators, Northern
Gulf OCS 5 Percent Scenario/High Base Case
77. Structural Characteristics of the Alaska Economy,
Northern Gulf OCS, OCS-Moderate Base Scenario/
5 Percent OCS-High Base Scenario.
X
198
200
201
203
206
208
210
213
~6
217
220
222
227
228
235
239
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
c
[
I .
~
[
[
c
c
[
[
r:
L
r
L
[
[
[
[
[
L
[
[
[
r
L
[
L
c
L
78.
79.
80.
81.
82.
83.
The Impact on Major Economic Indicators) Northern Gulf
OCS 95 Percent Scenario/Low Base Case . 242
Capital Move Scenario . 245
The Impact of Northern Gulf OCS Development with Three
Alternate Base Cases: Basic Case, No ALCAN
Construction, and the Capital Move, Mean Scenario . 247
The Effect of Alternate State Expenditure Policies
on the Impact of Northern Gulf OCS
Development Mean Scenario . 250
The Impact of State Expenditures, Northern
Gulf OCS, Mean Scenario. 253
Summary of the Long-run Impacts of Alternative
Development Scenarios (Impacts in the Year 2000) 258
XI
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
c
r L
L
6
b
[
6
[
[
c L
f~
L
l.
2.
3.
4.
5.
LIST OF FIGURES
Structure of the Basic MAP Model . 7
MAP Regions • 10
Alaska Census Divisions • 60
Location of Study Area . . 174
Determination of OCS Employment Estimates
Used in the MAP Model . . 177
XIII
XIV
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
6
D
c
E
[
c
[
[
(
I. INTRODUCTION
Background
The United States, becaus~ of the progressive depletion of U.S. petro-
leum reserves, has become increasingly reliant on foreign energy supplies.
Concern over the reliability of these foreign supplies has led the fed-
eral government to establish policies aimed at increasing domestic energy
supplies. Because of their high potential as a source of oil and gas,
the U.S. Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) figures significantly in the
future energy program of the United States.
Although Alaska has historically played a small role in the U.S. energy
supply, production at Prudhoe and future development of the Alaska OCS
will increase its importance. It has been projected that by 1985 over
25 percent of total domestic crude oil production could be from Alaska
(Federal Energy Administration, 1976). Through 1974, Alaska had pro-
duced only one percent of the total cumulative petroleum production in
the United States (U.S. Geological Survey, 1975); however, the develop-
ment of existing oil and gas reserves and the exploration for additional
reserves will center importantly on Alaska. Alaska accounts for over
one-fourth of the identified oil and gas reserves in the United States,
and an estimated one-third of all undiscovered recoverable domestic oil
reserves are in the state. Since over 60 percent of the estimated
undiscovered OCS reserves in the United States are in Alaska, Alaska is
particularly important to the OCS program (U.S. Geological Survey, 1975).
The development of Alaska's petroleum reserves is also important to the
Alaskan economy. Changes produced by past petroleum development in the
state have been major. The rapid changes in the Alaska economy and
population associated with the development in Upper Cook Inlet and
Prudhoe Bay created strains on the Alaskan society and environment.
At the same time, these developments generated the most prosperous eco-
nomic period in the state's history as well as prospects of continued
prosperity through the next decade. The development of petroleum re-
serves in Alaska's OCS will also affect the population and economy of
Alaska.
The Purpose of the Study
The nature of the changes which result from Alaskan OCS development
will not necessarily resemble those caused by past petroleum development.
One objective of the current study being undertaken by the Institute of
Social and Economic Research (ISER) for the Bureau of Land Management's
OCS Studies Program is to provide the information needed to anticipate
the major dimensions of the economic and social impacts of the proposed
oil and gas developments in the Northern Gulf of Alaska. To achieve
this objective, ISER will provide a series of economic and population
forecasts through 2000 under several alternative scenarios for petroleum
development in the Northern Gulf. By contrasting these forecasts with a
base case forecast, which does not include the proposed development, it.
is possible to assess the major dimensions of the impacts of OCS develop-
ment on population, employment, income, and the state's fiscal position.
2
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
r L
0
c
c
c
[
f'
L
r
L
[
[
[
[
[
r·
L
[
[
c
r:
L
[
fj
D
[
E
[
L
c
L
{'
L
t
This study is part of the Bureau of Land Management•s Alaska OCS Socio-
economic Studies Program. The objective of this program is to assess
the potential impacts of proposed lease sales in the federal offshore
areas of Alaska. The study of the impacts of OCS development in the
Northern Gulf of Alaska is one of a series of studies describing lease
sale impacts. Already completed is a study of the impact of the joint
federal-state sale in the Beaufort Sea (ISER, 1978); future studies will
be conducted for lease sales in the Western Gulf of Alaska, the Lower
Cook Inlet, and the Bering Sea-Norton Sound. The studies program is
concerned with many aspects of OCS impact on many different 1 evel s. The
major objective of this study is to examine only a portion of OCS impact,
the statewide and regional economic and demographic impacts.
In order to assess the impact of the proposed Northern Gulf OCS develop-
ment, the study must accomplish two additional objectives. First, an
understanding of the existing state and regional economies must be de-
veloped. The important economic relationships need to be understood in
order to say anything about future growth and the effect of OCS develop-
ment on the economY. Secondly, the study will develop a process for
economic impact assessment. Rapid growth associated with OCS development
will affect most economic variables; a much smaller number is important,
and information on these dimensions of impact will describe the effect
of rapid growth on the state and regional economies. The process of
economic impact assessment will consist of the selection of the major
'
variables to analyze and the appropriate questions to ask about each
of these.
3
Study Design
This study consists of three major parts: a baseline study of the
economies of the state and its Gulf of Alaska region, a base case projec-
tion describing the future economy without Northern Gulf development, and
an examination of the impact of Northern Gulf development. This section
describes the relationship of each of these parts to the impact assessment
and the methodology chosen to make the necessary projections.
EXAMINATION OF PAST ECONOMIC GROWTH
Examining the past growth of the Alaska economy and the economy of the
Gulf of Alaska region provides an understanding of the way the economy
works. This type of examination is implicit in the development of eco-
nomic models. Making this analysis explicit will emphasize those aspects
of economic growth which are important. The two aspects of the economy
which will be emphasized in such a process are the important causes of
growth and the economic relationships which transfer growth between
sectors of the economy. An examination of the historical period will
provide an indication of the types of response we can expect to OCS
petroleum development. In addition, the historical growth and develop-
ment of these economies provide a point of comparison for future economic
growth, both OCS and non-OCS related.
THE BASE CASE
Petroleum development in the Northern Gulf of Alaska will affect both
the structure and size of the Alaska economy. Changes in the economy
4
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
c
c
L
[
c
Q
c
G
[
[
n
L
L
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
r c
[
13
u
[
8
[
L
[
{ ~
L
which result from the development of the OCS resources can be defined
as the impact of this development. This impact can only be described
as changes from a certain pattern of economic growth which would have
occurred without OCS development. The non-OCS base case is developed
to provide a reference point for the analysis of the impacts of OCS
development. Comparing a projection of economic activity with OCS
development to the base case will isolate the impacts of development.
THE ROLE OF SOCIOECONOMIC PROJECTIONS
The uncertainty of the future, though it may increase the problems associ-
ated with making projections, increases the importance of these projections.
Decision makers in both the public and private sectors need information
about the future in order to plan their actions. The more uncertain the
future events, the more important is some projection of them. Projections
serve tvw important purposes--they serve as a means of determining future
demands and needs for services, and they allow policy makers to test the
alternative effects of various policies.
Models are used to test the relative efficiency of alternative p6licy
choices. When models explicitly include policy variables, such as tax
rates, or variables directly affected by policy, such as the level of
petroleum employment, they can be used to test the effects of policies
described by these variables. By making separate projections under vari-
ous assumptions about policy choices, the effects on important variables
such as population or employment can be compared. Alternative policy
choices can be compared in terms of their relative costs and benefits.
5
Projections increase the information available to decision makers for
making policy choices. Many present policy choices have important future
implications which must be considered by policy makers. For example,
current policy decisions regarding Northern Gulf OCS petroleum develop-
ment will have their major effect in the middle of the next decade. By
providing descriptions of the most probable future levels of important
variables, socioeconomic projections serve as a framework for making
policy choices.
~lETHODOLOGY
This section describes the methodology used to make the projections of
Alaskan economic growth in both the base case and OCS development cases.
Two econometric models, statewide and regional econometric models, are
used to make the projection. This section will describe the models used
and their strengths and weaknesses.
The Statewide Econometric Model
The basic model to be utilized in the analysis of the OCS development
scenarios is the statewide econometric model of the Alaskan economy
developed in the Man-in-the-Arctic Program (MAP) presently being con-
ducted by the Institute of Social and Economic Research of the University
of Alaska. There are three components of this model: an economic model,
a fiscal model, and a demographic model. The basic structure of the model
is ·shown in Figure 1.
6
[
[
[
[
[
L
[
[
[
L
[
c
c
[
~
b
[
r·
L
[
' INDVSTRIAL
,----'~ PRODUCTION ,
. ~UTS IDE FORCES
L . \V
~-
E'EDEPv"\L
TAXES
·J.
·I P;RSONAL
j TAXES
EMI?LOYYJ.ENT
RI::At
· DISJ?OSADLE
PERSON:",L . ... , n~co;.w,
:nATES
~ ~ 1 h'i\GES l\ND
Sl\Ll\IUES
~ .....
\ll
~ .... l PERS~NAL I
I n~co:·:E
/" ,--------z:.. T· [FU~D' k ~S~T-AT~E-· -RE-~VE-~--N-U:-.. s~l~L~:=========~---------1 l\CCU~ULZ\TION [ I" . . ~~ . I~ OUTSIDE FORCES
~ ,,
r ,...-sT-A--T-s---...,k sTl\T.c ExPENorTtm-~s J~ I rcrscAt _ ~__.....-,
~ --
.-. ~u~ ~ ,,
I
\/ \/
CONSU!'J!:R
PRICES
u.s.
I?RICBS ...,
U ,S, INCm-m
,___ CONSTRDcrno~ j J I 1 ~~AL \(----' 1'.,...., o_rJ_r_c_Y_::-_:o.v-1~~ _
1
I. I, RB\'E~:*.,~'ES ~~:. STNl'B C< LOCi\!.~
Hl\GES· l\ND Etti-PLOY~lE~T ~:-------~ .t,OCAL !
.._ ______ .-J 1 r::>:PENDI':'·urms /
J J ·---__ ----~-c~~0----
The economic model is divided into exogenous or basic sectors and endo-
genous or nonbasic sectors. The level of output in the exogenous sectors
is determined outside the state's economy. The primary reason for the
nonbasic sector is to serve local Alaskan markets, so the level of out-
put is determined within the Alaskan economy. The basic industries in
the model are mining, agriculture-forestry-fisheries, manufacturing,
federal government, and the exogenous component of construction. The
nonbasic industries are transportation-communication-utilities, wholesale
and retail trade, finance-insurance-real estate, services, and the remain-
der of construction.
In the model, industrial production determines the demand for labor and
employment; employment is that level needed to produce the required output.
Employment and the wage rate determine wages and salaries,· the most import-
ant component of personal income. The Alaskan labor market is an open one
with equilibrium achieved through migration of individuals. Because of
this, the most important determinant of Alaskan wage rates are U.S. wage
rates; wages are also affected by rapid growth of employment in Alaska.
An estimate of disposable personal income is made by adding an estimate
of nonwage income to wages and salaries and adjusting this by deducting
income taxes. The level of real disposable income is found by deflating
disposable personal income by a relative price index; the major deter-
minants of Alaskan prices are U.S. prices, the size of the economy, and·
the growth rate of the economy. Incomes determine the demand for local
production; incomes and output are simultaneously determined.
8
[
[
[
[
[
['
[
c
[
L
[
c
c
c
c
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[~
[~
['
• >
[
r c
[
6
u
c
6
[
[
c
L
r
L
Population is determined based upon a projection of each of its components--
births, deaths, and migration. The model uses age-sex-race specific sur-
vival rates and age-race specific fertility rates to project births and
deaths for the civilian population. Total civilian population is found
by adding civilian net migration to the natural increase. Net migration
is determined by the relative economic opportunities in Alaska. In the
model, these are described by employment changes and the Alaskan real
per capita income relative to the real per capita income of the United
States. An exogenous estimate of military population is added to deter-
mine total population.
The fiscal model, which provides important pieces of information for the
economic model, also provides a framework for analyzing the effects of
alternate fiscal policies. The fiscal model calculates personal tax pay-
ments in order to derive disposable personal income. The fiscal model,
based on ~n assumed state spending rule, also calculates personnel ex-
penditures, state government employment, and the amount spent on capital
improvements which determines a portion of employment in the construction
industry .. All three submodels are linked through their requirement for
information produced by the other submodels.
The Regional Econometric Model
The regional model provides an allocation of employment, income, and
population in the state to seven regions of the state. These regions
are shown in Figure 2. The economic component is similar in each region
9
__.
0
2
Southy.rest
1
North Slope
7
Fairbanks
FIGURE 2. MAP REGIONS
,...-----, .
l
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
c
r
L
L
6
~
C
6
[
[
f' L
J'
L
to that of the state model. The major difference is that some regional
economies are influenced by economic activity in other regions; the most
notable of these is Anchorage. The demographic component of the regional
modei is much simpler than that component of the state model. Regional
population is estimated as a function of employment. Regional population
is estimated in two components--enclave and nonenclave population. A
weighted average of the nonenclave population to nonenclave employment
ratio for the state and the lagged value in the region is multiplied by
the nonenclave employment to estimate nonenclave population in the current
year. The weights used to determine regional population in this study
equal the proportion of state population for the lagged regional popula-
tion to employment ratio and one minus this proportion for the state ratio.
Enclave employment is added to nonenclave population to determine total
regional population. Enclave employment includes the military and major
construction projects such as the trans-Alaska pipeline. The regional
model has no fiscal component and must accept an exogenous pattern of wage
and salary payments to state and local government workers. Usually the
pattern of wage and salary payments used is taken from a similar state
model projection. Estimates of regional employment, population, and
income in the regional model are constrained to total to equivalent
variables from the state model results.
STRENGTHS AND LIMITATIONS
The models used in this analysis have several strengths and weaknesses
which must be considered when examining the reported results. The prin-
cipal strength of these models is that they capture the essence of the
11
Alaska growth process. Export base industries and government create
growth directly through hiring and indirectly through the demand gener-
ated by their employees for locally produced goods and services. Incomes
earned by these export base workers and the workers who supply the goods
and services provide the base of the economy. Compared to two alternative
forms, the economic base and input-output models, the econometric specifi-
cation of this type is preferred, since it captures the dynamics of industry
growth. The economic base model is useful for projecting marginal changes
but assumes that changes in the support sector are proportional to changes
I
in basic sector employment. This misses both the feedback effect of the
growth of the support sector incomes and the change in the responsiveness
of the support industries over time. While input-output models more pre-
cisely define the interindustry flows of purchases of goods and services,
they represent the economy only at a particular point in time. The econo-
metric approach can capture some of the changing relationships over time,
and these are described by historic changes or incorporated by the modeler.
The limits on the econometric method define the limits on the acceptance
of the resulting projections. No model is able to capture revolutionary
changes which violate the assumptions upon which the model is built, un-
less structural change has been foreseen and incorporated by the modeler.
The limitations of the model increase the more the model is extended into
the future and the more locationally precise the model is expected to be.
In other words, more confidence should be placed in the 1985 results than
in those for 1995, -and state\vide projections are more 1 i kely to be "correct 11
than regional results.
12
[
[
[
[
r,
L
[
[
L
[
6
c
D
[
[
L
r~
L
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
r ._.
r
L
[
lJ
c
c
E
[
l
[
Another important limitation of this model is that the projections ~hould
be considered contingent. The accuracy of the projections depends on
the continued relevance of the model's historical structure and the
accuracy of the assumptions about the level, timing, and distribution of
the exogenous variables. One result of this contingency is that the pro-
jections may not necessarily agree with the actual levels of the projected
variables for any given year. Projections are based on the average
historical relationships between the projected variables and important
exogenous variables. This leads to two reasons why projections in any
year may differ from the actual levels of projected variables. ·First,
estimates of the level of important exogenous variables may differ from
the actual levels. Secondly, in any given year, the relation between
projected and exogenous variables may differ from the historical average.
Cyclical effects may cause yearly divergence from the general trend of
economic growth. The relationships described by the model, while they
may not predict actual levels in any particular year, describe the
general trend of future Alaskan economic growth.
The final limitation of the results concerns the projection of the regional
distribution of state growth. These results are merely allocations of
the projected statewide totals to the regions. This should not be assumed
to be a detailed analysis of the regional economies and should not replace
such analysis.
13
ASSUMPTIONS
Once the model is given, the base case is defined by the assumptions
about the future levels of the exogenous variables. There are four.
major types of assumptions required to define a development scenario.
First, there are assumptions about the growth of exogenous industries in
I
· both the petroleum and nonpetroleum sectors. Secondly, assumptions about
the level of state petroleum revenues are needed. Thirdly, assumptions
about the change in certain national variables are needed. Finally, an
assumption must be made about the way state expenditures grow in the
future.
GENERAL METHODOLOGY FOR ANALYSIS
The general approach to be pursued in the analysis of the impacts of
Northern Gulf OCS development will be as .follows: A set of scenarios
will be developed which contain no Northern Gulf OCS development.
These scenarios will be run using the MAP model and will serve as points
of comparison for each alternate Northern Gulf scenario. Each of the
Northern Gulf development scenarios will then be run. Each of these
runs will then be compared to the appropriate base run to examine the
impact of this hypothetical development on the major dimensions of the
Alaskan economy.
Overview
The remainder of this report will analyze the historical growth of the
state and regional economies and the projections of future growth, both
with and without OCS activity in the Northern .Gulf. The effect of
14
[
[
[
[
[
[
L
[
[
I_,
__ j
c
[
c
L
[
[
r l~
[
[
[~
[
[
r
L
l
E
E
[
[
r· L
t
alternative Northern Gulf development scenarios will be examined.
Part II describes the historical growth in Alaska and its Gulf of Alaska
region. Part III presents the projection of economic activity in a
base case which contains no offshore activity in the Northern Gulf.
Parts IV-VI then describe the impacts of alternative Northern Gulf
development scenarios. Part VII attempts to capture the uncertainty
attached to these estimated impacts by examining· the sensitivity of the
results to several of the uncertain elements of the scenario. Finally,
Part VIII summarizes our major findings.
15
[
[
[
[
[~
[
[
c
r
L
L
B
~
c
6
c
c
f"
l~
r= u
E
II. THE ALASKAN ECONOMY, 1965-1976
Introduction
The historical period serves as a point of reference for discussing poten-
tial future growth. Examining past economic changes provides us with
information not only on what happened," but also on how things happened.
By understanding how things happened in the past, we can acquire an under-
standing of the process of growth in the Alaskan economy. Without some
specific assumption about how this process would change in the future, we
would not expect the future growth to be qualitatively different. Knowledge
of the changes in the levels of and the relationships between economic
variables in the past allows us to assess the possible future economic
effects of potential changes.
In this section, we will examine the Alaskan economy between 1965 and 1976.
This was a period associated with tremendous growth and was chosen to pro-
vide a long-term look at the changes in the economy. The period contains
three significant events: the major Upper Cook Inlet oil development, the
Prudhoe lease sale, and the construction of the trans-Alaska oil pipeline.
We are interested in the comparative activity in three separate periods:
before 1970, after 1970, and the peak years of Trans-Alaska Pipeline System
(TAPS) construction, 1973-1975. The Prudhoe Bay lease sale in 1969 marked
the beginning of Alaska as a major petroleum economy. Comparing the
economy before and after this date will illustrate the effects of this
change.
17
This section has three objectives. The first objective will be to describe
what happened during this period in terms of major economic variables.
The second objective of this section will be to describe the Alaskan
economy's growth process. The growth process includes both the factors
causing growth and the response of the economy to these changes. Finally,
we will attempt to describe the effects of the past growth on indicators
of economic welfare such as unemployment and per capita income. Gaining
an understanding of the economy during this period will allow us to under-
stand better the probable effects of future potential OCS activity.
Growth of Aggregate Indicators
Economic growth is a multidimensional process for which there is no single
summary measure of either the level of growth or the welfare associated
with that growth. Economic growth is usually defined in terms of the
change in the level of certain economic indicators. This is only one aspect
of growth; the effects of growth on the process of change and the level of
economic welfare are also important. This section will describe the change
in some major economic variables, while the other aspects of growth will
be discussed later. Table 1 describes the change in the level of three
aggregate indicators of economic'activity: employment, population, and
personal income. These do not exhaust all of the possible indicators of
economic activity, but they do describe the general economic trends during
the period.
18
[
[~
[
[
[
["
L
[
r~
L
L
[
[
[
L
[
f -,
L=
I,
L
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
b
0
c
c
B
[
[
c
L
r:
L
TABLE 1. GROWTH OF EMPLOYMENT, POPULATION
AND PERSONAL INCOME, ALASKA
1965-1976
Personal Income 1 2 Population Employment ($ Million[
1965 265,192 70,530 858
1970 302,361 92,476 1,412
1971 312,930 97,584 1,557
1972 324,281 104,243 1,698
1973 330,365 109,851 2,008
1974 351,159 128,178 2,436
1975 404,634 161,313 3,514
1976 413,289 171,714 4,133
Annual Average
Percent Change
1965-1976 4.12 8.43 15.36
1970-1976 5.35 10.87 19.60
1All estimates State of Alaska Department of Labor, Research and
Analysis Section, Population Estimates by Census Division, except 1970
which is April 1970 Census of Population.
2Alaska Department of Labor, Statistical Quarterly, various years.
3u.s. Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis, Regional
Economic Information System, July 1978 printout.
19
3
Population grew at an annual average rate1 of 4.1 percent throughout the
period. The state experienced over a one percent greater growth rate
in population after 1970. Of the growth in population between 1965 and
1976, over 75 percent occurred after 1970. The most rapid increase
occurred during the period of trans-Alaska pipeline construction when
total population increased by 15.2 percent between 1974 and 1975.
Growth in population is determined by th~ growth in employment. Total
nonagricultural wage and salary employment grew by almost 150 percent
between 1965 and 1976. Employment growth averaged a rate of 8.43 percent
per year during the period. After 1970 employment grew at a faster aver-
age rate of 10.9 percent per year. More than 78 percent of the growth in
employment occurred after 1970.
Personal income is the final measure of aggregate economic growth. Per-
sonal income is shown in Table 1 in nominal dollars. Its growth reflects
both real economic growth and the increases in prices. Nominal personal
income increased at an average rate of 15.4 percent per year throughout
the period. As in population and employment, the major growth in personal
income occurred after 1970.
1The average annual percent change or average annual rate of growth
is used extensively throughout this paper as an indicator of the function-
ing of the economy. This term is equal to that yearly percentage change
which would have to occur to obtain the end-year projection. This indicator
is calculated as follows: Let B = A(l+r)t where A and B are the start and
end values of some variable; t is equal to the duration of the period of
interest; and r is the average annual percent change. Given A, B, and t,
solve for r.
20
[~
[
[
[
f
[
[
[
[
[
r· L
[ ~
L
L
r
L
[
8
c
[
E
[
L
Overall, these aggregate indicators illustrate a rapidly growing economy.
The major growth in the period occurred after 1970 when the economy was
influenced significantly by the construction of the trans-Alaska pipeline.
Growth in the population occurred at a rate which was slower than the
growth of either employment or personal income.
The Causes of Growth
Three major events shaped the growth of the state during this period.
The first was the development of the Upper Cook Inlet oil and gas fields
during the late sixties. The second major event was the Prudhoe Bay lease
sale in 1969, which produced a major source of revenue for the state and
began an era when the state became a major oil producer. Finally, the
construction of TAPS beginning in 1974 led to the most rapid growth during
the period. This section will examine the Alaskan growth process 1n an
attempt to relate these events and other factors to the growth of the
Alaskan economy.
Traditionally, the growth of regional economies is described by economic
base theory; the practical application of this theory is widely used in
regional analysis. Economic base theory states that a region grows pri-
marily as a result of increased export activity to other regions. The
demand for these exports is not influenced by activity within the region,
so the level of economic activity is fixed by external factors. The
local support sector exists to serve the basic sector and the population
associated with it. Growth occurs as a two-part process; the expansion
of the export sector leads to an expansion of the local support sector.
21
One of the strongest statements in support of this theory was made by
North. He argued that the growth of exports was the most important
reason for growth in a region; he presented economic base theory as a
long-run theory of economic growth (North, June 1955). In response,
Tiebout argued this theory was not a theory of economic development and
it was only valid in the short run. Tiebout pointed out that nonexport
sectors such as government and local investment may generate growth even
in the short run. Tiebout argued that the importance of exports as a
determinant of regional income is inversely related to the size of the
region (Tiebout, 1956). Anything which increases regional income would
lead to economic growth through the expansion of the support sector.
Tiebout expanded the explanation of the causes of growth. Regional
growth may result not only from an expansion of the export base but also
from improved technology, an increase in trade within the local economy,
and the expansion of nonexport sectors. This section will attempt to
assess the role of each of these factors in the growth of the Alaska
economy.
BASIC SECTOR GROWTH
The growth of the export base or basic sector is one of the major causes
of economic growth. The basic sector was still a major force determining
the growth of the Alaskan economy during the period between 1965 and 1976.
This section will examine the growth of the various industries which make
up the Alaskan basic sector. By examining the g_rowth in each industry,
we can see the relative importance of the basic sector to Alaskan economic
growth.
22
\'
L
[
[
L
[
[~,
[
r
I l__,
[
L
[
L
L
[
L
[
[
[
r~
[
[~
[
[
r L
L
§
u
c
6
[
c
r
L
r L
t
A major problem in examining the relation between the economy's basic
sector and its growth is determining which industries in a region are
basic industries. Traditional multiplier analysis is importantly depen-
dent on this, since the size of the multiplier is determined by this
disaggregation.· The problem arises because every industry has both basic
and nonbasic sectors. An Alaskan example is the construction industry
which includes a basic component such as pipeline and federal government-
sponsored construction~ a nonbasic component such as housing construction,
and an investment component which is exogenous in the short run while it
is endogenous in the long run. Even an important support sector industry
such as services has a relatively large basic component in hotel and motel
service which serves the tourist industry.
Many methods exist for defining industries as either basic or nonbasic.
Leven suggested that~ other than conducting a survey, most traditional
methods for separating these sectors incorrectly estimate the importance
of the basic sector (Leven, 1964). In this section, we will determine the
basic sector by definition. Those industries where the level of activity
is affected most significantly by external factors will be considered
basic industries. Mining~ agriculture-forestry-fisheries, manufacturing,
federal government~ and construction are basic industries. The demand for
the products of both mining and agriculture-forestry-fisheries is deter-
mined in national and international markets not within the Alaskan economy.
Manufacturing is largely a part of these two industries since food process-
ing a~d petrochemicals are it~ major components. The level of feder~l
government activity in Alaska is determined by decisions made outside the
23
state. Construction has both basic and nonbasic components; however,
major changes in construction activity are determined by outside agencies
and firms. The most important recent example of this is the construction
of the trans-Alaska pipeline.
Table 2 illustrates the growth of the Alaskan economy by sector. Industry
growth is described by the growth of employment and wages and salaries.
Growth of employment illustrates the direct effect of the industry on the
growth in the number of jobs. Wages and salaries are an important component
of both personal income and industrial output. This measure allows us to
estimate the broader effect of the industry on the economy. The growth
in wages and salaries can differ from employment growth for three reasons.
First, the growth of wage rates can differ between industries. Wage rates
are determined by the industrial productivity, as well as differential
demand. Secondlj, the hours worked in different industries could differ.
During the construction of the TAPS, the hours Horked increased consider-
ably in construction, raising average wages because of overtime. Finally,
wages and salaries can increase at a different rate than employment because
the composition of industrial employment changes.
The distinction between employment and wage and salary growth is important
when examining the relative growth of the.basic sector! Overall employment
in the basic sector grew much less rapidly than the remainder of the economy
in all but the pipeline years~ 1973~1975. Between 1965 and 1976, basic
sector employment increased at an average annual rate of only 2.9 percent
per year, compared to 6 percent for the entire economy and 10.2 percent
24
[
L
L~
[
c
c
6
[
[
[
1'\)
0"1
TABLE 2. ALASKA ECONOMIC GROWTH BY SECTOR
1965-1976
Average Annual Percent Increase
1965 -1976 1970 -1976 1973 -1975
Wages & Wages & Wages &
Emelo~ment Salaries EmElo~ment Salaries EmElo~ment Salaries
. 1 Basic Sector 2.9 16.7 . 4.7 23.6 . 13.8 54.2
Mining 12.5 23.1 4.9 16.3 37.8 68.8
Construction 15.2 29. 1 27.9 50.6 82.2 157.8
Manufacturing 4.6 11.1 4.7 13.0 1.1 15.5
Federal Civilian . 3 7.6 .8 8.0 3.5 12.7
Federal Military -2.7 5.7 -4. 1 4.3 -4. 1 2.5
Support Sector 10.2 18.6 12;3 24. 1 23.7 52.5
Transportation-
Comm. -Utilities 7.4 16.9 9.6 22.8 26.0 58.7
Trade 9.7 16.4 10.2 19.3 19.7 38.9
Finance-Insurance-
Real Estate 11.2 18.5 14.8 24.4 18. 1 30.3
Services 12.6 24.3 16.0 30.9 28.5. 68. 1
Other
State Government 6.6 15.7 5.4 15.8 6.0 23.0
Local Government 1 0. 1 18.8 11.1 21.7 11.9 20.5
Total Nonagricultur~l
Wages and Salaries 6.0 17.5 7.8 23.4 16.5 47.5
1 Agriculture-forestry~fisheries is left out of this table. During the period, changes in the
coverage of fisheries employment distorts the real growth in this industry.·
2Inc1udes military wages and salaries from U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis,
Regional Economic Information System, July 1978 printout.
SOURCES: Alaska Department of Labor, Alaska Labor Force Estimates, ~stimates of Total Population,
various years.
Alaska Department of Commerce and Economic Development, The Alaska Economy: Year End
Performance Report 1977.
for the support sector. After 1970 industrial growth rates were much
closer; basic sector employment grew at a rate of 4.7 percent, compared
to 7.8 percent for the entire economy. The growth rates are much closer
when wages and salaries are considered. Between 1965 and 1976, the wages
and salaries earned in the basic sector grew only .8 percent less than
the economy-wide average of 17.5 percent. After 1970 basic sector wages
and salaries grew slightly faster than the economy as a whole.
The effect of pipeline construction on the growth of the economy can be
seen in the period 1973 to 1975. Employment in the basic sector grew at
13.8 percent annually, while the economy grew at 16.5 percent. Wages and
salaries increased more rapidly, increasing at a rate of 54.2 percent
annually in the basic sector, compared to 47.5 percent for the economy
as a whole.
One of the major reasons for the overall character of the basic sector
was the declining role of the federal government in the state economy.
The federal government has played a major role in the economy of Alaska.
Between 1965 and 1976, federal government civilian employment increased
from 17,400 to 17,900. Employment grew faster between 1973 and 1975 in
response to TAPS construction•s reaching a peak of 18,300 in 1975. The
average growth rate of federal civilian employment was less than one per-
cent per year over the entire period. Military employment actually declined
throughout the period with an average growth rate of -2.7 percent per year.
Wages and salaries in this sector increased but at rates much less than
26
[
~
[
~
[
[
[
[
L
[
[
[
6
[
['
L
I :
L
l
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
r
L
L
~
~
c
c
[
L
L
f'
L
the growth of the economy in general. Federal government employment con-
tinued to supply a stable base for the economy but was not responsible
for the tremendous growth in the economy throughout the period.
The most rapidly growing basic industry was construction. Employment grew
at an average rate of more than 15 percent throughout the period; this was
more than twice the growth rate of the economy. The obvious reason for
this growth was the construction of the trans-Alaska pipeline beginning
in 1974. The most rapid increase in construction employment came between
the period 1973 and 1975 when construction employment increased at a
rate of 82.2 percent per year. The state has estimated that in 1976
construction employment connected with the Alyeska project was approxi-
mately 15,000, or 50 percent of the total state construction employment
{Alaska Department of Labor, 1977). Wages and salaries mirrored the
growth in employment, increasing at an average annual rate of 50.6 per-
cent after 1970.
Mining employment also increased at a rapid rate throughout the period;
its average annual rate was 12.5 percent. Unlike construction, mining
experienced cyclical. growth during the period. Mining employment in-
c rea sed between 1965 and 1970 to 3, 000, then fe 11 to 2, 000 in 1973 before
increasing to 4,000 in 1976. The early growth in mining resulted from·
discovery, development, and production of oil and gas from the Kenai
Peninsula and Cook Inlet fields .. Oil was discovered in 1957 at the
Swanson River; production increased from one million barrels per month
27
in 1966 to a peak in 1970 of 7.5 million barrels per month. Employment
associated with these fields grew at an annual rate of approximately
40 percent in the late sixties, causing mining employment to triple
between 1965 and 1969 in the Cook Inlet Region (Anchorage, Kenai,
Matanuska-Susitna, Seward) (Scott, 1978). Employment-associated with
this development dropped after this peak production. During the 1970s,
the development of the Prudhoe Bay fields resulted in the expansion of
the mining industry. This development led to growth in both exploration
and production employment and headquarters employment in Anchorage. The
most rapid expansion of the mining industry came between 1973 and 1975
when both employment and wages and salaries increased at rates more than
three times as great as the economy.
Manufacturing in Alaska has traditionally been associated with the fish-
ing industry because of the large component of food processing employment.
The composition of manufacturing changed over the period with food proc-
essing becoming less important; this change in composition accounts for
the differential growth in employment and wages and salaries, since food
processing is a traditionally low-paying sector. Between 1970 and 1976,
employment in manufacturing grew at a rate of 4.6 percent annually, while
wages and salaries grew at 11.1 percent. Food manufacturing, because of
its relation to the fishing industry, showed cyclical growth; employment
fell between 1973 and 1974 and did not rise again until 1976. The fastest
growing sector of food manufacturing was 11 other 11 manufacturing which con-
sists principally of petroleum refining, petrochemical, and printing and
28
[
[
[
[
[
[
r-:
L
L
[
[
I'
L
r ,
L
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
r-L:
l
6
0
[
E
[
c
[
f'
L
·publishing. Between 1965 and 1976, employment in "other" manufacturing
increased at an average annual rate of 6.5 percent, which meant that this
sector was increasing its share of manufacturing employment.
Agriculture-fisheries-forestry depends on the development of the state's
renewable natural resources. The growth of these industries depends to
some extent upon the natural resource cycles. State Labor Department
estimates do not include all of the employment in this industry, since
a large proportion of the workers are self-employed. Independent estimates
of employment in these industries suggest little growth. Forestry employs
only about 22 people statewide; most of the logging employment is accounted
for in lumber and wood products manufacturing (Scott, 1979). One indicator
of agricultural activity is employment reported in a yearly agricultural
survey. This survey reports a decline in total agricultural employment
from 900 in 1965 to 750 in 1975 (USDA). The fishing industry has tradi-
tionally been important to Alaska. Based on estimates from Fish and
Game fish ticket data, employment was estimated to have increased from
about 4,340 in 1970 to about 5,720 in 1976. This is an annual growth
rate of 1.3 percent (Rogers and Listowski, 1978). Table 3 shows some
additional indicators of the growth of the fisheries industry. The catch
and value statistics shown in this table illustrate the cyclical nature
of the fishing industry. The real value of fisheries catch peaked in 1973
at $117,842 (in 1967 dollars).
29
TABLE 3. ALASKA FISHERIES ACTIVITY, 1970-1975
1970 1971 1972 1973 1974 1975
Catch
(million 1 bs) 533.6 471.0 422.5 513.1 454.2 442.4
Value ($.000) 97,497 85,585 92,431 . 142,353 "144 ,809 129,402
Real Value
($.000) 88,957 75,735 79,751 117,842 108,147 84,965
SOURCE: Alaska Department of Commerce and Economic Development, The Alaska [
Economy, 1977, 1978.
The major growth in the basic sector was in mining and construction.
The traditionally important fishing industry did not keep up with growth
in other basic sectors. Federal government employment, while it provided
a stable base for the economy, actually declined. Overall, employment
in the basic industries grew rapidly but not as rapidly as the total
economy. The differential growth in average wages led to increases in
basic sector wages and salaries at rates close to state averages.
THE GROWTH OF STATE GOVERNMENT
The growth of nonexport sectors may also be responsible for the growth of
a regional economy. An important sector contributing to the growth of
Alaska between 1965 and 1976 was the expansion of state government. There
are two reasons for selecting state government as a growth-initiating
sector. First, state government experienced rapid growth in the early
1970s. Secondly, this growth was funded by the growth in revenues which
were exogenous to the economy. The lease bonus from the Prudhoe Bay
30
[
[
L
L
b
[
b
[
[
['
L
('
L
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
r L
L
E
[
[
t
r L
lease sale in 1969 resulted in the increased state revenues. This placed
state government in a position equivalent to the basic sector. Growth in
exogenous revenues led to increased expenditures which caused growth in
the econon~. Because of this, state and local government could be a pos-
sible source of economic growth. The growth of state government expendi-
tures will influence the economy in two ways. First, increased state
expenditures will lead to increased employment in state and local 9overn-
ment. Secondly, state capital expenditures will increase employment in
the construction industry. State expenditures on construction of highways
and ports provide increased activity in the construction industry. Examin-
ing the growth of state expenditures during the period will provide an
indication of the state government•s contribution to growth.
Since statehood, total state expenditures have increased at an average
annual rate of 21 percent (Goldsmith, 1977). Examination of expenditures
shows there are three distinct periods of expenditure growth: prior to
the 1969 Prudhoe Bay lease sale, between 1970 and 1972 when the initial
adjustment to these revenues occurred, and after 1972. The primary
interest is in the period after the state received the lease bonus in
1970. In examining expenditures in this period, Scott (1978) found:
1. The constant dollar increase was 62 percent of the
nominal dollar increase.
2. The rate of increase was more rapid between 1970
and 1972 than between 1972 and 1977.
3. Operating expenditures have grown more rapidly over
the whole period, while capital expenditures grew
more rapidly between 1970 and 1972. These suggest
that each type of expenditure may be sensitive to
~iffere~t factors~ with operating expenditures respond-
lng to 1ncreases 1n demand and capital expenditures
responding more to available revenues.
31
The question of whether state expenditures responded to growth or were
growth inducing can be examined in Table 4 (from Scott, 1978), which
shows the growth of rea 1 per capita state expenditures. If expenditures
increased but real per capita expenditures remained constant, the growth
of expenditures could be assumed to be simply keeping up with the growth
in demand. If real expenditures grew faster than population, state
government could be contributing to growth. Both real per capita oper-
ating and capital expenditures increased between 1970 and 1972. Real·
per capita operating expenses increased at an average rate of 19.9 per-
cent in this period, while capital expenditures increased at a rate of
32.3 percent per year. After 1972 and the initial response to the
expanded fund balance, operating expenditures increased at a rate of
3.4 percent and capital expenditures actually decreased at a rate of
-6 percent.
Between 1970 and 1972, state government expenditures expanded much more
rapidly than either population or prices. After 1972, expenditures have
grown more in line with population and prices. The expansion of service
levels between 1970 and 1972 is an indication that state government was
a contributing factor to the growth during this period. The growth of
the service levels reflected the initial response to the l~rge increase
in revenues from the Prudhoe Bay lease sale. State government contributed
to growth since it distributed exogenous revenues to the economy. This
extra demand resulted in economic growth. The long-term consequences
result from the change in the relationship between state expenditures and
economic growth as defined by real per capita expenditures.
32
r
L
r
L
["
[
l:
[
[
r~
L
L
~
[
[
[
[
[
f '
L
[
[
[
[
L
[
[
[
[
r
L
L
fj
Q
[
[
[
L
f'
L
TABLE 4. STATE REAL PER CAPITA OPERATING AND
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES
1970-1977
(Constant 1967 Dollars)
Operating Capital Total
Fiscal Resident 1 Expenditures Expenditures Expenditures
Year Po~ulation Per Ca~ita Per CaQita Per Ca~ita
1970 294,560 $ 722.20 $317.02 $1,039.22
1971 302,361 990.64 374.77 1,365,41
1972 312,930 1,038.74 555.11 1 ,593.85
1973 324,800 1 , 108.15 497.07 1 ,605.22
1974 330,600 1 '168. 14 475.66 1 ,643.80
1975 351 '159 1 '199.92 548.54 1 ,748.46
1976 404,635 1 , 156.97 486.57 1,634.54
i977 413,289 1,224.88 409.17 1,634.05
Average Annual Rate of Increase
1970-1977 5.0% 7.8% 3.7% 6.7%
1972-1977 5.7% 3.4% -6.0% 0.5%
1970-1972 3.1% 19.9% 32.3% 23.8%
1state's estimate from Research and Analysis Section, Employment
Security Division, Alaska De artment of Labor, State of Alaska Current
Population Estimates by Census Divisions, July 1 year . The population
as of the beginning of the fiscal year was used.
33
This historical period illustrates the state's unique financial position.
The revenues associated with Prudhoe Bay production will be available
to the state to increase economic growth. However, Prudhoe revenues are
a fixed flow of resources which will not be affected by economic growth.
Since they are fixed, growth will reduce the share of these revenues
available to existing residents. This relation makes the ability of the
economy to generate revenues to replace Prudhoe revenues an important
future consideration.
SUNMARY
Two major factors have been responsible for the growth of the Alaskan
economy since 1965. The expansion of basic industries and the growth of
state government were the most important growth-initiating factors.
Unlike most states, the Alaskan government had an exogenous source of
revenues in the early 1970s which it could use to expand government
spending in more than a proportionate response to the growth of the
economy. The rapid increase in government spending was important as a
source of growth in the early 1970s. The most important basic sectors
during this period were mining and construction. These industries
experienced particularly rapid growth after 1973 with the construction
of TAPS and development of Prudhoe Bay. The traditionally important
basic sectors of federal government and agriculture-forestry-fisheries
expanded at a much less rapid pace.
34
[
r
r
[
,-,
I
[
L
[
r
L
L
[
[
[
6
[
[
f'
L
[
[
r
[
[
[
L
[
[
r
L
[
u
u
c
E
[
L
{'
L
I'
L
The expansion of state government and the basic sector was important to
growth of the economy, because this expansion led to an increase in
incomes. Factors which cause incomes to increase independently of expan-
sian of either the basic sector or state government can also result in
the expansion of the economy. Income can increase because of an increase
in the productivity of labor or increased demand for labor not associated
with an increase in the basic sector. One factor that is important for
Alaska incomes is the influence of overall U.S. wage rates. Since Alaska
is an open economy, Alaska is part of the U.S. labor market. The Alaska
labor market will reflect changes in the U.S. wage rates. Alaska markets
will adjust through migration. Higher relative wages outside will lead
to out-migration and an increased wage until an equilibrium relationship
is reached.
Growth is transmitted from its initiating source through the economy by
increased demand for local goods and services. As incomes increase, a
portion of this income is spent on goods and services in the local
economy. This additional expenditure leads to increasing employment in
the support sector. This growth in employment leads to increased incomes
which generate new increases in demand. The simultaneous nature of this
process can be seen as growth in income leads to increases in demand and
further income growth; and the ~rocess begins again.
35
Structural Change in the Alaskan Economy
The relation between the growth-initiating sectors and the remainder of
the economy is an important part of the economic growth process. In our
analysis of Alaskan growth, one thing was evident: the growth of employment
in the basic sectors stimulated a greater-than-proportional response in
the remainder of the economy. One measure of this response is the ratio
of total-to-basic sector employment; the larger this ratio, the more im-
portant is the economy's response to basic sector growth. In 1965, the
ratio of total-to-basic employment was 2.25; it had risen to 2.95 by 1973
prior to the trans-Alaska pipeline construction. Even in 1976 with the
tremendous amount of basic construction employment, the ratio was 2.69.
The change in this ratio shows that along with the rapid growth in the
levels of economic acti\:'ity, there has been a qualitative change in the
relationships in the economy. This qualitative change is a change in
the structure of the economy which will be described in this section.
STRUCTURAL CHANGE
The economic relationships which determine the flow of income, goods,
and services are determined by the structure of the economy. The struc-
ture of the economy's productive sector can be defined by the distribu-
tion of employment or gross product among industries. The economy's
structure influences its overall level of activity, the level of prices,
and seasonal and cyclical stability. The structure both affects and is
affected by growth.
36
[
c
[
r:
L
[
E
c
c
f
L
c
L
[
[
[
[
r
[
[
[
[
r
L
L
u
~
[
E
[
L
( 0
L
r
L
The growth of the economy leads to changes in its structure. Structural
change can result from a change in the structure of demand as changes in
incomes and prices affect the structure of consumption. However, changes
in demand may only change the distribution of imports unless supply con-
ditions lead to the production of g6ods locally. If economies of scale
are obtained in production, regional growth will alter the production
costs. As economies grow and achieve economies of scale, they will
substitute local production for imports of goods or services.
The structure of the economy also affects growth. Chinitz suggested that
the structure of the export sector influences important determinants of
growth such as bank lending patterns and entrepreneurship (Chinitz, 1961).
The structure of the export sector may also influence growth through its
propensity for backward and forward linkages. The Alpetco project is a
recent example of a forward linkage from the Alaska petroleum sector.
The structure will influence the economy's response to major exogenous
changes. The region's industrial structure will determine how much of
the incomes generated by export activity will be spent locally. When
the economic change is large relative to the local economy, structural
change may result.
ALASKA STRUCTURAL CHANGE
The ratio of total-to-basic employment has steadily increased from the
early fifties (Goldsmith and Huskey, 1978B). This growth in the nonbasic
or support sector of the Alaskan economy means that equivalent increases
in basic employment \'Jill lead to greater growth. Table 5 illustrates the
37
Year
1965
1970
1971
1972
1973
1974
1975
1976
TABLE 5. THE EFFECT OF STRUCTURAL CHANGE,
ALASKA, 1965-1976
Total
Total Non-Civilian Ratio of Employment
Agri cul tura 1 Total Basic Total/ when using
Emelo,iment Emelo,iment Basic 1965 Ratio
70,530 31 ,393 2.25
92,476 35,028 2.64 78,697
97,584 35,447 2. 75 79,638
104,243 36,137 2.88 81,188
109,851 35,849 3.06 80,541
128,178 45,698 2.80 l02 ,668
161,313 58,592 2.75 131,637
171,714 63,732 2.69 143,185
Total
Employment
when using
1970 Ratio
82,879
93,582 .
95,404
94,643
120,645
154,686
168,256
Basic Employment includes: Mining, Contract Construction, Manufacturing,
Agriculture-Forestry-Fisheries, Fede.ral Government, and Military.
SOURCE: Alaska Department of Labor, Statistical Quarterly, various quarters
(primarily third), 1966-1977.
38
r:
f'
r~
[
[
r:
L
[
F
c
c
L
( '
L
[
r
L
[
[j
g
[
fj
[
[
('
L
I,
L
effect of structural change on growth. The last two columns show what
growth would have been with the given basic sector growth and the main-
tenance of 1965 and 1970 total-to-basic ratios. In all cases, these
ratios underestimate the economY's real growth.
Table 6 provides a detailed d~scription of the structure of Alaska indus-
try in 1965, 1970, and two pipeline years--1975 and 1976. The support
industries as a group expanded. Trade and transportation-communication-
utilities remained constant after 1970. The service industry grew sig-
nificantly in this period, increasing from 10.7 percent to 16.1 percent
of total employment. Business services increased from 1.97 percent to
5.04 percent and were the major component of service sector change.
Finance-insurance-real estate also increased as a proportion of total
employment. (The employment levels are found in Appendix A.)
The Extent of Future Structural Change
The Alaska support sector has increased its share of employment since
1965, which is part of a much longer trend. An important question when
examining potential future growth is what the extent of future structural
change will be. If the support sector were to continue to expand its
share of employment at its past rate of about 2.5 percent per year, the
support sector would account for 85_percent of employment in 2000 and
almost 100 percent six years later. This, of course, cannot happen;
however, there are reasons to expect future growth in the support sector.
The most important reason is that economic growth will increase market
size, which will allow more local production of goods and services.
39
TJ'IBLE 6. DISTRIBUTION OF EMPLOYMENT, ALASKA
1965, 1970, 1975, and 1976
1965 1970 1975 1976
% of Total % of Total % of Total % of Total
Indus!_!:y Em~loyment Em~lo,Yment Employment Emploxment
Total \·:age and Salary
Employ1nent 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00
Nining 1.54 3.24 2.35 2.31
Contract Construction 9.15 7.45 16.04 17.61
1'1anufactu ring 8.90 8.48 5.98 6.02
Food 4.26 4.04 2.68 2.98
logging lumber and Pulp 3.27 2.98 2.09 1.89
Other Manufacturing 1.36 1.45 1.20 1.14
Tr·ansporta tion, Communication,
and Public Utilities 10.30 9.85 10.21 9.18
Trucking and Warehousing 1.72 1.79 2.45 1.89
Water Transportation 1.47 .90 .86 .78
A_i r Transpor·ta t ion 2.72 3.32 2.96 2.70
Other Transportation .76 .95 1.13 1.08
Conmunications and
Public Utilities 3.63 2.89 2.69 2.73
Trade 14.11 16.61 16.25 16.05
Wholesale 2.63 3. 51 3.66 3.55
Retail 11.48 13.10 12.58 12.50
General f.ldse. and Apparel 2.69 3.63. 2.55 2.48
Food St01·es 1.65 1.85 1.62 1.74
Automotive & Service Stations NA 1.81 1.77 1.68
Eating/Drinking Establishments 2.77 3.02 3.88 3.76
Other Retail 4.36 2.78 2.76 2.84
Finance, Insurance, and·
Real Estate 3.08 3.35 3.74 4.14
Services 10.65 12.37 15.58 16.11
Hotels, Hotels, and Lodges 1.46 1. 57 1.96 1.87
Personal .96 .92 .57 .54
Business 1.97 2.16 4.54 5.04
Hedical 2.03 2.35 2.68 2.92
Other 4.22 5.37 5.83 5.75
Government 42.06 38.45 29.22 27.89
Federal 24.72 18.50 11.34 10.45
State 9.87 11.21 9.59 8.22
local 7.47 8.73 8.30 9.21
Agriculture, Forestry, and
Fisheries .20 . 21 .63 .70
SOURCE: Statistical Quarterly, Alaska Department of labor, various issues.
40
[
[
r
[
r~
L
[
L
c
L
( '
L
r·
L
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
r
L
[
t
g
c
[i
[
l
[
r,
L
Tables 7 and 8 give some insight into the limits to the growth of the
support sector. Table 7 compares the Alaskan distribution of employment
to the United States and some other states. Only in finance-insurance-
real estate and transportation does Alaska come close to the employment
shares of other states. The shares of trade and services are well below
those of other states. If the only thing determining industrial produc-
tion were scale economies, the structure of a region could be assumed to
grow toward similar averages. The average of other states is similar to
the U.S. distribution and supports this hypothesis.
Examining Table 7 shows that the variation around the U.S. average cannot
be explained simply by scale. Table 8 shows that real personal income may
explain some of the differences; when personal income is adjusted to
reflect regional cost differences, there is a similarity among states.
The ratio of support employment to personal income is close to 30.00 for
most states independent of their size, although the ratio is lower for
some states larger than Alaska. Alaska's ratio is less than this. Both
Tables 7 and 8 indicate that the support sector in Alaska has room for
expansion.
What explains the support sector's relative underrepresentation in the
Alaska economy? One explanation might be a certain threshold size which
Alaska has not yet reached after which the support sectors grow somewhat
proportionately. A second explanation could be the composition of the
export sector. Large petroleum and mining operations and government pro-
vide much of the support activity internally leading to an underdeveloped
41
~
N
Tnblc 7, 'l'HE ECONOMIC STRUCTURE OF SHALL STATES
Total
· Employment
~thou~ands2'
Alaska 151.7
-Wyoming 168.7
Vermont: 179.5
North Dakotn 227.8
South Da.kotn 227,0
Dela ... •a.rc 231t.3
Montana 263.7
Idaho . 305.5
Nevadn 323.7
New Hampshire 348,1
Ha ... •aii 362.2
Rhode Islnnd 383.0
Maine 384.3
Nc•,.;r Me,cico 430.9
Utah 500.2
Nebraska 583,6
Hest Virginia 549.2
Arkans:1s 714. 5,
Mississippi 778.1
Arizona 829.8
K~ns~s 878.5
Oregon 962.7
Oklahorr.a 1.001. 6
Colorado ~,008!1
Washineton 1,405.6
Average (excluding Alaska)
u.s. Avernge
Source: u.s. Dcp~rtmcnt o£ Lnbor,
Pcrcent'in P~rcent in
Set"vices Trade
15.2 17,5
13.9 21,9
23.4 20~7
19.3 29~0
21.1 27.5
. 16.9 22.0
18.4 25.2
17.5 25.1
40.8 19,8
18.3 21.5
24.0 25.4
18,8 19.9
17,0 21.1
19.5 22,9
.17 .4 24.0
17.4 26 .• 5
15.8 22.1
lll, 0 21.3
14.3 19.7
18.2 24,4
17,5 23.8
17,5 23.7
16.6 23.4
19.'• 23.4
18,4 23,7
19.0 23.3
18.8 22.~
Bureau of Lnbor St~tistics,
r--r L j,_ , • ..~.
Percent in Percent in
Finance-Transportation-
Insur~nce-Cor.~munication-
Real Estate Public Utilities
5.1 9.0
3.4 7.8
·4.0 4 .,7
4.5 6.1
..
4.4 5.4
4.8 5.2
4.4 7.8
5.3 6,0
4.2 6.0
4.9 3.6
6.9 7.8
5.0 3.5
3.9 4.5
4.4 6.0
4.6 6.1
6.6 . i.2
3.6 ' G. 6
4.2 5.4
3.9 4.7
5.fi 5.2
4.9 6.6
6,2 5 •. 7
5.0 6.0
6 • .1 6 .• 5
5.G 5.7
4.8 5.8
5.1 5.S
EmplOj~~~t nnd Earningst June 1978,
.. ~ ,__..,
' )
Percent in
Government
34.5
22.7
18.2
26.8
'24.9
17.8
27.8
21.8
16.1
16 •. 1
24.2
15.7
21.3
26.9
23.8
22,2
20.9
19.0
21.2
23.2
20.9
20.3
22.4
22.2
20.7
21.5
1.5.9
[
[
[
[
L
[
[
[
c
L
L
b
Q
[
6
[
TABLE 8. ECONOMIC STRUCTURE OF SMALL STATES
1977
Total Regional
Personal Support/ Index Employment 1 Support Industry Income Personal of Costs
(Thousands) (Million$) Income (U.S.=l)
Alaska 71,100 4,311 16.5 1.42
\<Jyoming 79,100 3,073 25.7 .90
Vermont 94,700 2,814 33.7 1.02
North Dakota 136,600 4,044 33.8 .92
South Dakota 132,700 4,104 32.3 .92
Delaware 114,700 4,477 25.6 1.02
Montana 147,300 4,661 31.6 .90
Idaho 164,600 5,128 32.1 .90
Nevada 228,800 5,059 45.2 .99
New Hampshire 168,400 5,547 30.4 1.02
Hawaii 234,600 . 6,773 34.6 l. 21
Rhode Island 181,000 6,332 28.6 1.02
Maine 178,300 6,221 28.7 1.02
New Mexico 227,400 6,970 32.6 .88
Utah 256,300 7,510 34.1 .98
Nebraska 336,500 10,491 32.1 .93
West Virginia 264,000 11 '129 23.7 .85
Arkansas 321,100 11,878 27.0 .89
Mississippi 331 ,800 12,019 27.0 .89
Arizona 446,600 14,943 29.9 .99
Kansas 464,700 19,802 23.5 .93
Oregon 511 ,500 16,651 30.7 .998
Oklahoma 510,400 17,839 28.6 .98
Colorada 558,900 18,752 29.8 .98
Washington 755,900 27,534 27.5 .998
Support
Employment/
Regionally
Deflated
Personal Income
23.4
23.1
34.4
31.1
29.7
26.1
28.4
28.9
44.7
31.0
41.8
29.2
29.3
28.7
33.4
29.9
20.1
24.0
24.0
29.6
21.9
30.6
28.0
29.2
27.4
[ 1support sector includes: Services, Trade, Finance-Insurance-Real Estate,
{'
L
['
L
and Transportation-Communication-Public Utilities.
SOURCES: U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Employment
and Earnings, June 1978.
U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Monthly
Labor Review, April 1978.
43
support sector. A third reason could be the high cost of doing business
in Alaska which dampens the effects of scale and reduces the competitive-
ness of Alaska production. The extent of the state could be another
reason for Alaska's underdevelopment of the support sector. The distri-
bution of population may make it more profitable to serve some areas such
as Southeastern and Western Alaska from outside the st~te. The most
optimistic reason would be that it is merely an information problem. If
outside investors do not know the Alaska market, they will underinvest.
That, coupled with the slow reaction of investment in the support sector
to the recent rapid growth, would mean that Alaska could expect future
growth in these sectors merely to catch up with the existing 9rowth in
the basic industry.
SUMMARY
This section has described the second part of the process of economic
growth, the response of the economy to changes in those sectors which
initiate growth. This response has changed in the Alaska economy since
1965; an important indicator of this is the increased share of the
support sector. Relative to other states, Alaska is underserved by the
support sector. Because of this, there is some reason to believe the
support sector will continue to expand as a portion of total employment.
This understanding of structural change and its relation to economic
growth increases our awareness of the effects of the scale and the
timing of future economic activity.
44
[
f~
[
f
c
r·
[
[
r:
L
[
[
[
[
L
[
[
r ~
L
{ '
L
[
[
[
[
[
['
[
[
r t.o
f'
L
[
6
Q
[
6
L
[
('
L
rl
L
Population
Industrial growth and the change in the structure of the economy are not
the only aspects of economic growth. Population growth is another com-
ponent. The level of population is influenced by the level of economic
activity. Migration is a major component of population change, and the
relative economic opportunities within Alaska determine levels of in-and
out-migration. The population of a region also influences the economic
activity. The characteristics and size of the population determine the
region's local demand for goods and services and its labor force composi-
tion.· This section will discuss the growth and composition of the Alaska
population.
Table 9 shows the growth in population between 1965 and 1976. As would
be expected, population increased most rapidly with the con~truction of
TAPS; between 1973 and 1974, population increased 6.29 percent, while
it increased by 15.23 percent between 1974 and 1975. Population increased
by 148,100, or 55.8 percent, between 1965 and 1976.
The age and sex distribution of the population determines the demand that
population places on both public and private services. A population with
a large school-age component will have a higher demand for schools than
the same population with a different distribution. The age-sex distribution
will also influence the size of the labor force produced by a given popula-
tion. Table 10 describes the age-sex distribution in 1970 and 1976.
Comparing the age-sex distribution between 1970 and 1976 shows two observ-
able trends. First, the proportion of males in the population has declined.
45
Number
of Births
1965 7,063
1970 7,560
1971 7,312
1972 6,948
1973 6,611
1974 7,006
1975 7,470
1976 7,834
TABLE 9. POPULATION GROWTH, ALASKA
1965, 1970-1976
Estimated
Number Natural Net 1 of Deaths Increase Migration
1,400 5,663 4,538
l ,431 6,129 l ,672
1 ,455 5,857 4,712
1,467 5,481 5,870
l ,464 5' 147 937
1,468 5,538 15,256
1 ,522 5,948 47,527
1 ,713 6 '121 2,534
Population
as of
July 1
265,192
302,361 2
312,930
324,281
330,365
351,159
404,634
413,289
1Difference between change in population and natural increase.
% Increase
over
Previous Year
3.84
2.66 3
. 3.50
3.60
1.88
6.29
15.23
2.14
2u.s. Department of Commerce, Bureau of Census, 1970 Census of Population.
3Average annual percent increase between 1965 and 1970
SOURCE: Alaska Department of Labor and the Division of Economic Enterprise,
Department of Commerce and Economic Development, as reported in
The Alaskan Economy, Year-end Performance Report, 1977.
46
[
r
[
L
L
['
!:
[
r:
L
[
L
[
[
L
[
[
f '
L
{ ,
.L
L
[
[
[
[
['
[
[
[
f'
L
[
c
fJ
c
E
[
[
('
L
f'
L
TABLE 10. ALASKA POPULATION
AGE-SEX DISTRIBUTION
1970, 1976
1970 1976
Males Females Total Males Females Total ---
Age
A 11 ages 54.2 45.7 51.6 48.4
0-13 16.5 15.7 32.2 14. 1 13.2 27.3
14-19 5.7 5.2 10.9 6.6 6.0 12.6
20-29 12.4 8.7 21.1 11.2 10.4 21.6
30-39 7.7 6.5 14.2 7.8 7.8 15.6
40-54 8.1 6.6 14.7 7.7 7.2 14.9
55-64 2.5 2.0 4.5 3.1 2.6 5.7
64 + 1.3 1.0 2.3 1.1 1.2 2.3
SOURCES: U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, 1970 Census
of Population.
U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, 1976 Survey
of Income and Education Microdata Tape.
47
The second trend is the increase in worki~g-age population relative to the
remainder of the population. The surprising observation is that the age-
sex distribution has maintained relative stability. The tremendous growth
in the population between 1970 and 1976 seems to have affected the distribu-
tion only slightly.
Population has grown rapidly since 1965, although the growth has been
less rapid than the growth in employment. This d;.fferential growth has
resulted in a fall in the dependency ratio {population/employment). The
ratio of population-to-employment has fallen from 3.76 in 1965 to 2.41 by
1976. TAPS construction may be largely responsible for the low ratio in
1975 and 1976, since the pipeline has attracted single workers. The
dependency ratio had fallen substantially before construction on the
pipeline began; in 1973 the ratio was 3.01. The dependency ratio has
fallen as the proportion of the population which is working has increased.
This increase results from a change in the propurtion of the population
which is of working age; the proportion of the population between 14 and 64
has increased from 65.4 percent in 1970 to 70~4 percent in 1976. The in-
creased labor force participation of this population is also responsible.
Population growth results from the net effect of births, deaths, and in-
and out-migration. As would be expected in a region with a small popula-
tion which is experiencing rapid economic growth, migration was the most
important component of population change throughout the period. Migration
accounted for 69 percent of the total change in population between 1970 and
1976. In 1975, it accounted for 89 percent of the increase in population.
48
r
[
[
[
r~: .
[
[-
r:
L
[
L
c
[
L
L
[
f'
L
r·
L
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
r
L
[
B
g
[
E
[
[
('
L
Unemployment
Unemployment has always been an important problem for the Alaska economy.
Table 11 shows the dimensions of the problem. Since 1970, the unemploy-
ment rate has remained close to 10 percent; only in 1975 did it fall below
10 percent. The unemployment rate remained constant even though employ-
ment was increasing throughout the period. This illustrates a particular
Alaska dillema. Increases in employment lead to increases in migration,
which increase the labor force and leave the unemployment rate high. This
·has important welfare effects when skill levels are considered. If migrants
are more qualified and take the new jobs, employment growth may do little
to increase the welfare of original residents. The other factor which
maintained the high unemployment rate was the increase in labor force
participation. The labor force participation rate responds, like migration,
·to economic opportunities. As the employment opportunities expand, more
people enter the labor force. The labor force participation rate increased
from about 40 percent in 1970 to 53 percent in 1976.
One factor influencing unemployment in Alaska is the seasonality of em-
ployment. Economies which are dependent on natural resource production
often have seasonal cycles. This has been accentuated in Alaska by the
severe winters which limit activity. Since the season decline occurs in
the winter months, one measure of seasonality is defined by the ratio of
the fourth-quarter employment to the third-quarter employment. The closer
this index is to one, the less seasonal is the industry. Table 12 shows
the seasonality of Alaska industries. Seasonality has decreased in impor-
tance throughout the historical period. In 1960 the overall seasonality
49
Year
1965
1970
1971
1972
1973
1974
1975
1976
TABLE 11. UNEMPLOYMENT, ALASKA
1965-1976
Total Unemployment
Unemployed Rate (%)
7,700 8.6
9,700 9.0
12 '1 00 10.4
12,900 10.5
13,900 10.8
14,900 10.0
14,900 8.3
21,000 10.5
Labor Force
Participation
Rate (%)
38.16
39.94
40.97
41.27
42.78
46.00
47.40
52.65
SOURCE: Alaska Department of Labor, ~abor Force Estimates, various years.
Alaska Department of Labor, Estimates of Total Resident Population.
50
[
[
I'
[
[
[
r·.
[
L
[
[
L
E
[
[
r .
L
L
L
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
r
L
[
E
~
[
6
[
[
c
TABLE 12. SEASONALITY OF EMPLOYMENT, ALASKA
1950, 1960, 1965, 1970, 1975, and 1976
1950 1960 1965 1970
Mining .6267 . 7143 .7949 .8556
Construction .7900 .5862 .6460 . 7279
Manufacturing .• 2440 .5137 .6531 .5457
Transportation,
Communication, and
Public Utilities .8248 .9683 .9125 .8851
Trade .9226 . 9718 .9905 .9733
Finance, Insurance,
and Real Estate 1.0000 1.0000 .9706 .8942
Services .9583 .9123 .9664 . 9716
Government .9632 .9815 .9617 .9810
Total .7505 . 8313 .8718 .8800
1975
.9009
.8374
.6886
.9887
1.0048
1.0000
.9812
1.0049
.9402
L SOURCE: State of Alaska, Alaska Labor Force Estimates, various years.
r:
L
51
1976
.9690
.6906
.6714
.8871
.9120
.9270
.9387
.9689
.8733
index was .8313. In 1975 the seasonality index for total employment was
.9402; the increase in seasonality in 1976 was due to the pipeline con-
struction employment in the summer of 1976. The decrease in seasonality
since 1960 has been a result of three factors. First, the increased
importance of support sector industries with smaller seasonal components
resulted in lowering the average seasonality. The seasonality index of
services, trade, and F.I.R.E. has always been close to one. Secondly, the
technology became available to work through the winter in construction.
Finally, market forces made it profitable to employ these technologies in
Alaska.
Personal Income
Growth of personal income increases the demand for goods and services and
is an important determinant of the growth of the Alaska economy. Growth
in personal incomes is also a measure of the benefits received from
economic growth. Personal income has grown at an average rate of more
than 15 percent throughout the period. The best measure of the welfare
effects of personal income is real per capita income. Increasing incomes
will only increase welfare if it is increasing faster than prices and
population. Real per capita personal income measures the command of the
average individual over goods and services.
Table 13 shows the effect of price increases in Alaska as measured by the
Anchorage CPI. By comparing the growth in the Anchorage index to the
United States, we can assess one impact of rapid development.
1974, the Anchorage CPI was increasing at a slower rate than the U.S. CPI,
52
[
[
c
L
[
t
[
r
L
L
[
L
r,
L
L
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
r
b
[
t
[J
[
g
[
[
f '
L
r,
L
t
Year
1965
1970
1971
1972
1973
1974
1975
1976
TABLE 13. ANCHORAGE CONSUMER PRICE INDEX
(1967 = 100)
Anchorage
Index
94.2
109.6
112.9
115.9
120.8
133.9
152.3
163.3
% Change
Over
Previous
Years
3.07 1
3.01
2.66
4.23
10.84
13.74
7.22
United ·
States
Index
94.5
116.3
121.3
125.3
133.1
147.7
161.2
170.2
1Average annual rate of price increase 1965-1970.
% Change
Over
Previous
Years
4.23.1
4.30
3.30
6.23
10.97
9.14
5.58
SOURCE: Alaska Department of Commerce and Economic Development,
The Alaska Economy Year End Performance Report, 1978.
53
which meant the price differential between Alaska and the United States
was falling. With the TAPS boom, this trend was reversed. Prices rose
relatively faster in Alaska after 1975 because of bottlenecks and the
rapid increase in demand. Bottlenecks resulted when the rapid increase
in demand was met by the relatively fixed supply system.
Table 14 shows the growth in real per capita personal income. The maximum
increases came in 1973 and in 1975 when real per capita income increased
by over 10 percent. In all but 1972, the growth of real per capita income
was greater in Alaska than in the United States. This shows that an
average Alaskan's command over goods and services has increased at a rate
much greater than in the United States as a whole.
\
~ummary: The Effects of Economic Growth
During the period between 1965 and 1976, the Alaska economy experienced
rapid growth. The expansion of the economy during this period is symbolized
by the growth in three aggregate indicators of economic activity: personal
income, employment, and population. Personal income, \'Jhich measures the
command of residents over goods and services, expanded by 382 percent during
the period from $858 million to $4,133 million. Employment expanded by
144 percent from 70,530 to 171,714 between 1965 and 1976. Population
grew from 265,192 in 1965 to 413,289 in 1976, an increase of 56 percent.
Growth did not occur evenly during the period; the most rapid growth
occurred after 1970. For each of the aggregate indicators,.the growth
rate was more rapid after 1970. Population grew at an average annual rate
54
[
[
[
L
[
r-
L
[
[
L
[
c
[
[
[
L
( '
L
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
r L,
r
L
L
E
g
c
G
[
[
r,
L
('
L
Year
1965
1970
1971
1972
1973
1974
1975
1976
TABLE 14. ALASKA GROWTH OF REAL PER CAPITA INCOME
1965 ~ 1970-1976
Real Per Capita Income in Mi 11 ions
Alaska United States
% Increase % Increase
Over Over
Total Previous Year Total Previous Year
3,435 2,895
4~260 4.40 1 3,348 2.95 1
4,407 3.45 3,406 l. 73
4,518 2.52 3~585 5.26
5,031 11.35 3,742 4.38
5,180 2.96 3,675 -1.79
5,701 10.06 3,636 -1.06
6,124 7.24 3,755 3.27
1Average annual percent increase between 1965 and 1970
SOURCES: U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis, Regional
Economic Information Center, July 1977 printouts.
U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, Statistical
Abstract of the United States, 1966 and 1967.
U.S. Department of Labor, Handbook of Labor Statistics, 1972
and 1977.
55
of 5.4 percent after 1970 compared to 2.7 percent between 1965 and 1970.
Employment grew at an average rate of 10.9 percent per year between 1970
and 1976, compared to 5.6 percent prior to 1970. Personal income grew at
almost twice its pre-1970 rate between 1970 and 1976.
Economic growth during the period examined in this section resulted from
expansion of the basic sector; The industries which were most important
in the basic sector growth were mining and construction. The expansion of
these sectors was directly related to petroleum development in the state.
Prior to 1970, development of oil fields on the Kenai Peninsula and in
Upper Cook Inlet were primarily responsible for growth. The development
of the Prudhoe Bay fields after the lease sale in 1969 resulted in mining
·employment growth both at Prudhoe Bay and in Anchorage. The construction
of the trans-Alaska pipeline to transport the oil from Prudhoe Bay was
responsible for a 158 percent increase in construction employment between
1973 and 1975. This major petroleum-related growth occurred after 1970,
contributing to the more rapid growth in the latter part of the study period.
Two other factors contributed to state economic growth. First, the addi-
tional state revenues available after the Prudhoe lease sale in 1969 allowed
the state to increase expenditures. The increase in state government employ-
ment and capital improvement expenditures were partially responsible for
state growth in the early 1970s. Secondly, as the scale of the economy
increased, the relation between the support sector and basic sector growth
changed. Increased scale allowed more local production of goods and services,
which meant that increased basic sector activity resulted in greater growth
in the support sector.
56
f~
[
" [
r L ....
[
E
c
c
L
[
[
I'
L
r ,
L
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
r
L:
c
L
Existing Economic Conditions
The existing economic conditions in Alaska reflect the end of work on the
TAPS project. The project was completed in 1977, but the peak employment
on the pipeline project occurred in 1976. The fall in construction employ-
ment between 1976 and 1977 illustrates the significance of this to the
economy. Construction employment fell by 35.4 percent from 30,200 to
19,500 in 1977 (Alaska Department of Labor, 1978).
Although the economy experienced a fall in total employment, the drop was
not so great as would have been expected given the response the economy
experienced during the pipeline buildup. Nonconstruction employment
actually-rose between 1976 and 1977. Total nonagricultural wage and
salary employment fell by only 7,000, or only 65 percent of the fall in
construction employment; nonconstruction employment increased by 3,700.
This increase was a result of the expansion of both the basic sector and
the support sector. The major basic sector to increase was mining, which
increased by 1,000 employees.· This increase was a result of the continued
development of the Prudhoe Bay fields and the preparation for further
exploration activity. This included substantial expansion of headquarters
employment in Anchorage. Trade and finance-insurance~real estate accounted
for 1,500 of the increased employment. This was an unexpected response
from the support sector, given decreasing basic sector employment. Local
government added significantly to this growth, expanding employment by
about 2,000.
57
Two delayed adjustments took place in the post-pipeline period. The first
was a response by the support sector to the larger economy. The full ex-
pansion of this sector may have been prevented during the pipeline period
because of the high demand for labor. Another factor which may have been
responsible for the delayed response was the rapid growth of the economy;
the 1977 response was the delayed investment response. The second delayed
adjustment which prevented the proportional drop in the economy in the
post-pipeline period was the spending of accumulated savings and capital
gains. This dissaving lengthened impact of the pipeline beyond the period
of direct employment impact.
The economy has adjusted to the end of the pipeline. Future growth can
be expected to be at much loWer rates than in the past. Future growth
will depend on the expansion of the basic sector and whatever structural
change may occur. One of the most important basic industries for the
future will be mining. With the beginning of production at Prudhoe Bay,
Alaska became the third largest oil producing state. Continued development
at Prudhoe Bay and exploration in NPRA, as wel1 as the OCS areas, will
be responsible for the continued future growth of this industry. The
200 mile fisheries limit will increase the importance of the fishing
industry. Alaska's current domestic catch accounts for only 7 percent
of the fishery resource (Alaska Pacific Bank, 1979). The near-future
growth may be limited because of the investment required to move into
bottomfishery. In the near future, construction will be dependent on
government projects. The next major project planned is the construction
of the ALCAN natural gas pipelin~ in the early 1980s. If constructed,
this project should have impacts similar to the TAPS project.
58
L
[
[
.[
1:
L
[
[
[
I ~
L
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
r L
r
L
[
[
t
r~
L
r~
L
The Economies of the Gulf of Alaska Region, 1965-1976
OVERVIEW
The major impacts from OCS development in the Northern Gulf of Alaska are
projected to occur in the Gulf of Alaska region of the state. The Gulf of
Alaska region contains two major subregions, Anchorage and Southcentral.
The Anchorage region consists of the Anchorage Census Division. South-
central includes six census divisions: Kenai, Seward, Matanuska-Susitna,
Valdez-Chitina-Whittier, and Cordova-McCarthy. It also includes the
Yakutat portion of the Skagway-Yakutat Division. (Figure 3 shows the
Alaska Census Divisions.) The character of each of these subregions
differs. Anchorage is the urban center of the state. The Southcentral
region consists of a series of small, rural economies.
The Gulf of Alaska region is the most populous region of the state. It
contains almost 60 percent of the state's population. Many of the events
which have influenced the growth of the state occurred in the Gulf of
Alaska region. The Cook Inlet oil and gas fields are located in that
region, and the terminus of the trans-Alaska pipeline is also in the Gulf
. of Alaska region at Valdez. This region also contains one of the major
fishing ports in the state at Kodiak. Anchorage, the state•s major metro-
politan center is in the region. The region and its subregional economies
experienced rapid growth between 1965 and 1970. The Gulf of Alaska region
grew faster than the state and increased its share of state employment from
53.6 percent to 56.5 percent. This section will examine the growth of the
Gulf of Alaska's two subregions during the 1965-1976 period.
59
m
0
................ _________ ............ --------------
KU!oXOKWIM
FIGURE 3.
ALASKA CENSUS DIVISIONS
LEGEND
0 Place5 of 25,000 to 50.000 inhabilant5 outside SMSA's
SC"L.E
~!f -~..!,?? lje J_$>0111lES
Al.EUTIAH ISL.ANOS (PART)
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
r
L
[
c
0
c
G
c
[
r
L
r L
ANCHORAGE
The position of Anchorage as the major metropolitan center of Alaska and
the administration and distribution center for much of the state means
that growth in Anchorage reflects the growth in the rest of the state.
This factor explains why Anchorage, while having no actual pipeline
construction, experienced rapid growth during the pipeline period. As
an urban area, the past and future expected growth in Anchorage d~ffers
importantly in its causes and effects from the state as a whole. This
section will describe the historical growth of Anchorage as well as try
to isolate the important causes of growth which are unique to Anchorage.
Growth of Aggregate Indicators
Table 15 shows the growth of three indicators of aggregate economic
activity: employment, population, and personal income. Total employment
increased by about 42,440 during the period; over 73 percent of this
increase occurred after 1970. After 1970 the average growth rate of
employment was 9.7 percent compared to the overall 8.2 percent rate.
Between 1973 and 1975, the period of the most rapid TAPS growth, total
employment increased by 38 percent.
Population followed the same path as employment, increasing more rapidly
in the last six years of the period. Population grew at an average rate
of 5.54 percent per year between 1965 and 1970; for the period after 1970,
the rate was 6.58 percent. Unlike employment, population grew faster
in Anchorage than in the state, which grew at 5.3 percent. This meant
61
TABLE 15. GROWTH OF EMPLOYMENT, POPULATION,
AND PERSONAL INCOME, ANCHORAGE
1965-1976
Personal Income
1965
1970
1971
1972
1973
1974
1975
1976
Average Annual
Percent Change
1965-1976
1970-1976
Population
102,337
126,333
135 '777
144,215
149,440
153 '112
177,817
185,179
5.54
6.58
Employment
30,678
41,995
45,452
48,252
50,627
58,713
69,645
73,113
8.22
9.68
($Million)
371.0
634.9
732.9
800.2
883.1
1111.6
1577.6
1799. 1
15.43
18.96
SOURCES: All estimates State of Alaska Department of Labor, Research and
Analysis Section, Population Estimates by Census Division, except
1970 which is Census of Population.
Alaska Department of Labor, Statistical Quarterly, various years.
U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis, July 1978.
62
[
,-,
L
[
c
c I-
L
[
[
c
[
c
[
[
r.
L
r·
L
L
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
r
L
I'
L
rc
L
that population was concentrating in Anchorage even though the pipeline
construction had slowed the trend toward employment concentration.
Personal income experienced growth similar to state growth; personal
income increased at close to 15 percent annually in Anchorage and the
state. For the entire period, the annual rate of growth was slightly
higher for Anchorage. After 1970 the higher incomes associated with the
pipeline construction led to a slightly faster rate of growth in the
state.
The Causes of Growth
The Anchorage economy expands for reasons similar to those causing expan-
sion in the state economy. One cause of growth is the expansion of the
basic industries of agriculture-forestry-fisheries, mining, manufacturing,
construction, and federal government. For the local economy, state
government growth can also be seen as a basic sector, since the factors
dete_rmining its growth are political decisions external to the region.
The growth of the basic industries is shown in Table 16 which describes
the growth of .all industrial sectors in Anchorage.
Over the period 1965-1976, the fastest growing basic sector was mining.
Mining grew at an average annual rate of 12.91 percent over the period.
Between 1965 and 1970, mining employment increased by an average rate of
20.9 percent per year. The growth of mining was the result of the develop-
ment of regional headquarters and administrative staffs to support the
63
TABLE 16. CIVILIAN EMPLOYMENT GROWTH
ANCHORAGE, 1965-1976
Average Annual Average Annual
Percent Increase Percent Increase
Industry 1965-1976 1970-1976
Total 8.22 9.68
Agriculture, Forestry,
and Fisheries 10.48 11.33
Mining. 12.91 6.63
Contract Construction 8.39 13.69
t~anufacturi ng 6.78 8.14
Transportation, Communication,
and Public Utilities 9.92 11.26
Transportation 10.68 10.77
Air 11.93 10.29
Other 9.52 11.29
Communication 8.60 13.92
Public Utilities 7.75 8. 77
Trade 10.58 10.82
Wholesale 11.94 11.39
Retai 1 10.13 10.61
Finance, Insurance, and
Real Estate 11 .42 13.61
Services 13.69 15.81
Hotels 10.96 11.41
Persona 1 3.81 2.12
Business 18.09 26.71
Medical 13. 17 14.17
Other 13.53 13.51
Federal Government .40 .53
State Government 8.38 8.97
Local Government 7.97 6.96
Average Annual
Percent Increase
1973-1975
17.29
15.82
30.09
29.94
10.58
26.01
31.60
19.28
47.32
16.74
5.22
18.32
28.33
15. 12
13.56
27.23
28.77
4.97
78.67
7.08
19.99
3. 41
5.61
13.06
SOURCE: Department of Labor, Statistical Quarterly, various issues.
64
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
r:
L
[
G
c
c
E
[
['
L
[
~----"-----··------·--------------·--------------------------~--~-~---------
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
,~
L
r
L
[
B
[
[
r
L
development of the Cook Inlet and Prudhoe Bay fields. The growth of
mining employment in Anchorage, as in the state, was cyclical, falling
after 1970 when peak development of Upper Cook Inlet was reached. After
1973 mining employment grew at an average rate of 22.3 percent per year.
The growth during this period included headquarters growth necessary for
the development of the Prudhoe Bay fields. Over the period, Anchorage
averaged more than one-third of the statewide mining employment.
Construction was the second fastest growing major component of the basic
1 sector. Construction grew at an average annual rate of 8.39 percent
between 1965 and 1976. Between 1973 and 1975 when the most rap1d buildup
resulting from the pipeline occurred, the growth rate averaged 29.94 per-
cent. In Anchorage," the construction industry did not include major
projects connected with resource development such as TAPS. Construction
in Anchorage was largely an investment response to expected future
growth and an expansion of the capacity of Anchorage housing and private
sectors to meet the rapid growth in population.
The government component of the basic sector experienced minimal growth
between 1965 and 1976. Federal government remained almost constant
throughout the period, growing at an overall rate of less than one per-
cent per year. State government employment grew at a rate slightly
greater than growth in total employment, an annual average rate of
1Agriculture-forestry-fisheries, while experiencing a very rapid
rate of growth, had little impact on the Anchorage economy. In 1976,
employment in this.industry was only 100 people.
65
8.38 percent between 1965 and 1974. As on the state level, state gov-
ernment is partially responsive to local demands. However, since the
determinants of its growth are outside the region and a large component
of state government is administrative for programs outside of A~chorage,
state government can be considered basic. The n1ost rapid period of
I
growth of state government in Anchorage was in the beginning of the
1970s. Between 1970 and 1972, state government employment grew at a
rate of 20.2 percent per year. This reflects the rapid growth of total
state government at the time.
The final basic sector is manufacturing which grew at an average annual
rate of 6.78 percent between 1965 and 1976. When the period after 1970
is considered, the growth rate increases but it is still less than the
growth rate of total employment. Manufacturing experiences a steady
increase throughout the period, not a cyclical increase as at the state.
level. This is because the manufacturing in Anchorage has only a small
component of food manufacturing which reflects cycles of the fishing
industry.
Anchorage: The Administration and
Distribution Center for Alaska
Anchorage serves as the administration and distribution center for Alaska.
Because of this, traditional service functions such as trade, services,
transportation-communication-utilities, and finance-insurance-real
estate have important basic components. These sectors are support
sectors at the state levels since they respond primarily to growth in
66
r
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
c
L
[
[
[
[
r ,
L
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
r
L
[
~
B
[
B
[
[
c
L
f'
L
state incomes. The distinction arises because the location of support
activities is not spread uniformly with basic activities; economies of·
scale are one primary reason activities would concentrate in one place.
Because a portion of these sectors in Anchorage responds to demands
from outside the region, they can be considered part of the Anchorage
basic sector. This response of the Anchorage support sector provides
a major link between the economies of Anchorage and the state.
There are many ways of distinguishing the basic and nonbasic components
of an industry. The most accurate would be by survey. In a survey, a
sample of firms in each industry would be asked the portion of their
output sold inside and outside the region. A less costly method involves
the use of location quotients. A location quotient for industry i is
defined as the ratio of the percent of total employment in Anchorage in
industry i to the percent of total employment in the state in industry i.
The use of location quotients to measure the basic components of support
industries requires the assumption that consumption in all parts of the
state is similar and that this average consumption is reflected in the
proportion of employment in these industries at the state level. Table 17
shows the Anchorage location quotients for the four support industries:
transportation-communication-utilities, trade, finance-insurance-real
estate, and services.
Table 18 shows the Anchorage basic sector as estimated using location
quotients. The portion of support industry employment which is basic
67
TABLE 17.
Transportation,
Communication, and
Public Utilities
Trade
Finance, Insurance, and
Real Estate
Services
LOCATION QUOTIENTS, ANCHORAGE
1965, 1970, 1975, 1976
1965
.8284
1.2927
1.3706
1 . 1531
1970
.9485
l. 2354
l. 4074
1.2326
1975
1.0323
1.3191
1. 3877
1.2407
1976
l. l 039
1.3548
1.4058
l. 3117
Total Anchorage Employment in Industry i
Location Quotient = _____ T_o_ta_l_A_n..;...ch_o_r_a..._ge~E_m.._p_l o.....,y_m_e_nt ____ _
Total State Employment in Industry i
Total State Employment
[
[
r
[
.r
L
r:
L
[
t
[
[
u
[
[
f'
SOURCE: Alaska Department of Labor, Statistical Quarterly, various issues. L
68 [
[
[
TABLE 18. ANCHORAGE BASIC SECTOR GROWTH
[
1965, 1970, 1973, 1975, and 1976
[ Industry 1965 1970 1973 1975 1976
[ Agriculture, Forestry,
and Fisheries 33 52 82 110 100
Mining 371 958 769 1 '301 1,409
[ Contract Construction 3' 127 3,514 4' 178 7,054 7,587
[ Manufacturing 791 1,018 1,286 1,573 1,629
Transportation, Communication, c and Public Utilities -0 --0 - -0 -230 697
Trade 1,195 1,642 2,239 3,611 4,195
r Finance, Insurance, and L Real Estate 350 573 825 1 ,010 1,229
[ Services 500 1,208 1,323 2,612 3,510
Federal Government 9,395 9,509 9,558 10,222 9,813
E Total Civilian
Basic Employment 15,762 18,474 20,260 27 '723 30 '169
fJ Total Military Employment 15 '190 12,884 14,049 12,642 12' 179
Total Basic Employment 30,952 31,358 34,309 40,365 42,348
D
Total Basic/
b Total Employment .6748 .5714 .5305 .4905 .4965
Civilian Basic/Total
Civilian Employment .5138 .4399 .4002 .3981 .4126
[
[
c SOURCE: Alaska Department of Labor, Statistical Quarterly, various issues.
L
f '
L
69
E
LQ - 1 is equal to LQ The location quotient methodology does not provide
an exact description of the basic component of these industries. This
method may overestimate the basic component if the assumption of similar
consumption is not true. The location quotient may underestimate the true
amount of export component, since it considers only the net difference in
regional consumption and does not allow for interregional trade (Hoover,
1970). For example, the location quotient method estimates no basic
component of transportation prior to 1975. This is surely an under-
estimate, since the Port of Anchorage serves as the entrance source of
supply for approximately 80 percent of the state's population (Munici-
pality of Anchorage, 1978). This analysis is useful in pointing out the
relationship of the Anchorage support sector to the state economy.
Table 18 shows the trends in this component of the Anchorage basic sector.
The component of the basic sector made up of transportation-communication-
utilities, trade, finance-insurance-real estate, and services has been
increasing. In 1965 this component accounted for 13 percent of the
civilian basic sector; and by 1976, it accounted for 31.9 percent.
Overall, the importance of the basic sector to the Anchorage economy
decreased as it did at the state level. The civilian basic sector
decreased from 51 percent ·of total employment in 1965 to 41 percent in
1976.
The Economic Structure
The growth of the Anchorage economy has resulted not only in a change
in the levels of economic indicators but also in a change in the process
by which growth is transmitted. This change is similar to that experienced
70
[
r
r
[
[
[
[
[
r:
L
[
E
[
c
G
[
[
f'
L
[
r ~
·'
[
[
[
[
[
[
f"'
L
[
fJ
B
u
[i
[
[
C'
L
r L
in the state economy. The decreasing proportion of basic employment is
one result of this change. The increase in the support sector means
the economy will have a greater response to growth in the basic sector.
Table 19 details the change in the economy•s structure as measured by
employment distribution.
The growth of the support sector in Anchorage can easily be observed from
this table. The support sector industries increased their share of total
employment from 42.2 percent in 1965 to 58.9 percent in 1976. This is a
result of the increased importance of the support sector in both the state
and Anchorage economies. The share of government has decreased. This is
primarily because of the limited growth of federal government. The share
of federal government fell from 30.6 percent in 1965 to 13.4 percent
in 1976. Total government•s share fell from 43.7 percent in 1965 to
26.4 percent in 1976. The share of employment in construction increased
between 1970 and 1976, reversing the trend betv!een 1965 and 1970. This
reversal may be a short-run phenomenon reflecting only the increased
activity connected with TAPS construction.
Anchorage, like the state, has been experiencing and should continue to
experience an increased importance of the support sector. This structural
change is a result of the increased size of the economy which allows the
production of more goods and services for loca1 consumption. This process
affects Anchorage in a twofold manner, since it provides support sector
goods and services for the state as well as the region.
71
TABLE 19. ANCHORAGE DISTRIBUTION OF EMPLOYMENT
1965, 1970, AND 1976
% of Total Non-Agricultural Wage ~ Salary Employment
Industry 1965 1970 1976
Agriculture, Forestry,
and Fisheries .11 . 12 . 14
Mining 1.21 2.28 1.93
Contract Construction 10.19 8.37 10.38
Manufacturing 2.58 2.42 2.23
Food .59 .47 .46
Lumber .06 . 11 . 19
Paper .01 .01 .03
Other 1.92 1.83 1.56
Transportation,
Communication, and
Public Utilities 8.53 9.30 10. 13
Transportation 5.52 6.67 7.07
Communication 2.20 1.82 2.28
Public Utilities . 81 .82 .78
Trade 17.21 20.52 21.83
~Jholesale 4.00 5.29 5.80
Retail 13.21 15.23 16.03
Finance, Insurance, and
Real Estate 4.22 . 4. 71 5.82
Services 12.28 15.25 21.13
Hotels 1. 50 1.80 1. 97
Personal 1. 31 1.27 .83
Business 2.57 2.83 6. 72
Medical 2.22 2.85 3.63
Other 4.71 6.49 7.97
Federal Government 30.62 22.64 13.42
State Government 5.45 5. 77 5.54
Local Government 7.59 8.61 7.40
r
[
[
[
r:
L
L
E
[
E
~
L
[
[
SOURCE: Al9ska Department of Labor, Statistical Quarterly, various issues. f'
l
72
L
[
r
[
[
['
[
[
f' L
[
fj
Q
[
6
[
[
('
L
F
L
Population
Table 20 shows the growth of population in the Anchorage region. Anchorage
experienced major population growth since 1965. Of the 82,842 population
increase since 1965, 71 percent occurred after 1970. Migration accounted
for 70.6 percent of the increase between 1970 and 1976~ The major migra-
tion increase occurred in 1975 at the height of pipeline activity when
the state estimated migration of 22,222 to Anchorage. As in the state,
migration was the most important component of population growth.
The dependency ratio in Anchorage fell during this period, although the
fall was not so great as at the state level. The dependency ratio in
Anchorage fell from 3.01 in 1970 to 2.53 in 1976, a drop of 16 percent,
compared to a 36 percent drop at the state level. The reason for the
fall was the same as at the state level, an increased proportion of the
population in the labor force. Since Anchorage serves as home to many
workers in other areas of the state, the ratio will be higher.
Anchorage does have comparative age distributions of the population in
1970 and 1975. These illustrate the reasons the population-to-employment
ratio has fallen.
Comparing these figures shows a relatively stable age distribution when
the major growth which took place is considered. However, the proportion
of nonworking-age population has fallen. The population under fifteen
accounte~ for 33.9 percent of the population in 1970 and for 29.3 percent
in 1975. This reflects a relative decrease in family size and a decreased
73
Number
TABLE 20. ANCHORAGE POPULATION GROWTH
1965,. -1970-1976
Estimated Population
Number Natural Net as of
% Increase
over
of Births of Deaths Increase Migration July 1 Previous Year
1965 102,337
1970 3,285 489 2,796 126,333 1
1971 3,192 473 2,719 6,725 135,777
1972 3 '119 490 2,.629 5,809 144,215
1973 4,247 424 3,823 1,.402 149,440
1974 3,123 . 481 2,642 1,030 153,112
1975 2,990 507 2,483 22,222 177,817
1976 3,472 519 2,953 4,409 185.179
1u.s. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, 1970 Census of
Population.
2Percent average annual increase.
4.30 2
7.48
6.21
3.62
2.46
16.14
4.14
SOURCE: Alaska Department of Labor, Estimates of Total Resident Population
and Estimates of Civilian Population, various years.
Alaska Department of Health and Social Statistics,
in communication with the Municipality of Anchorage.
74
[
[
r
[
L
[
[
[
[
[
[
I.
L
[
[
[
f'
-"
[
[
[
f~,
-~
r L
r_,
L
[
fJ
g
c
B
b
[
r
L
[
r
demand for services such as schools. The percentage of the population
available for the labor force, ages 15-64, increased from 64.6 percent
in 1970 to 68.6 percent·in 1975. This is one reason for the decreased
dependency ratio. Table 21 compares the age distribution in the two
periods.
Unemployment
Anchorage, like the state, has a serious unemployment problem, although
the unemployment rate is less than the state. The unemployment rate has
remained less than 10 percent through the period. The unemployment rate
rose to a high of 9.7 percent in 1973 prior to the construction of the
pipeline; the rate then fell to a low of 6.7 percent in 1975 and rose
again in 1976 as pipeline construction came to an end. Except for 1975,
the total number of unemployed increased throughout the period. Increases
in employment opportunities encourage increases in the labor force in a
corresponding manner. The increased labor force results from two forces:
increases in the population from migration and increases in the proportion
of the population in the labor force. Table 22 shows the increased labor
force participation throughout the period. This increased labor force
participation rate is partially an effect of the increase in the age
group available for work.
Seasonality has not been a major factor in the Anchorage economy.
Anchorage is less dependent on traditionally seasonal industries and
has a larger proportion of the less seasonal support sector employment.
75
SOURCE:
TABLE 21. ANCHORAGE AGE DISTRIBUTION OF
NONMILITARY BASE POPULATION
% of 1970
Age Population
0 - 4 10.40
5 -14 23.50
15 -30 28.10
30 -40 15.50
40 -50 12.40
50 -64 8.60
65 + 1.50
76
% of 1975
Population
9.50
19.80
34.10
15.30
11.90
7.30
2.10
[
r:
[
r
[
['
r
L
[
t
[
[
t
[
[
[
[
r L
[
fj
Q
c
u
L
[
r ,
L
r· u
Year
1965
1970
1971
1972
1973
1974
1975
1976
TABLE 22. ANCHORAGE UNEMPLOYMENT AND SEASONALITY
1965' 1970-1976
Labor Force
Total Unemployment Participation
Unemployment Rate (%) Rate (%)
2,249 6.2 41.44
3,267 6.7 43.21
4,418 8.2 44.43
5,140 8.9 44.68
5,818 9.7 44.40
5,980 8.6 49.66
5,279 6.7 . 47.85
7,372 8.4 50.56
Seasonality
Index
.9406
.9526
.9680
.9738
.9281
.9914
.9818
.9920
SOURCE: Alaska Department of Labor, Alaska, Labor Force. Estimates.
77
---------------~---------~~----------------~--------------~---~-~---------------~--~----------------
Only in 1973 is the seasonality index less than .95, which may reflect
more cyclical than seasonal problems. Since the beginning of pipeline
construction, the seasonality index has remained above .98 which reflects
the technology and profit factors on Anchorage's most highly seasonal
industry, construction.
Personal Income
Personal income increased at an average annual rate of approximately
15.4 percent between 1965 and 1976. The growth of personal income is-
only one determinant of the command over goods and services. In order
to increase the command over goods and services, personal income must
increase faster than both population and prices. Real per capita income
reflects the effects of population and prices on incomes.
Table 23 shows the growth of real per capita income over time. The
growth has been about 4 percent per year over the entire period. At
the height of pipeline activity between 1973 and 1975, real per capita
personal income increased at a rate of 9.12 percent per year.
Summary
Anchorage experienced rapid growth between 1965 and 1976. During this
period, the proportion of state population 1n Anchorage increased.
Employment grew more rapidly outside of Anchorage. The differential
growth was a result of the rapid employment growth associated with TAPS
construction outside of Anchorage. Expansion of the traditional basic
sector was an important cause of the growth of the Anchorage economy.
78
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
c:
L
[
E
[
[
b
L
[
r.
L
l
L
[
[
[
[
L
r
[
r
L
r
L
[
f~
g
[
E
c
[
('
L
1' u
TABLE 23. ANCHORAGE GROWTH OF REAL PER CAPITA INCOME
1965, 1970-1976
Real Real
Personal Personal Per Capita
Income Income Personal
Year Thousands Thousands Income
1965 371,037 393,882 3,849
1970 634,884 579,274 4,585
1971 732,881 649 '142 4,781
1972 800,201 690,424 4,788
1973 883,144 731 ,079 4,892
1974 1 '111 ,635 830,197 5,422
1975 1,577,614 1,035,859 5,825
1976 1,799,125 1,110,173 5,950
% Annual Average
Increase
1965 -1976 15.43 9.88 4.04
1970 -1976 18.96 11.45 4.44
1973 -1975 33.65 19.03 9,; 12
SOURCE: U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis,
Regional Economic Information System, July 1978 printouts.
Alaska Department of Labor, Estimates of Total Resident Population.
79
However, the support sector in Anchorage also has an important basic
component. The support sector industries in Anchorage have a basic
component responding to growth outside of Anchorage. This relationship,
along with the increased scale of the economy, was responsible for the
change in the structure of the economy which took place.
The population of Anchorage expanded rapidly during this period. The
major component of growth was migration which was induced by increased
. '
economic opportunities. As at the state level, the increased eccinomic
activity had little effect on the Anchorage unemployment problem; only
in.the peak TAPS year did the unemployment rate fall below 8 percent.
Real per capita did expand during this period as a result of the increased
activity.
SOUTH CENTRAL
Anchorage, because of its link to the rest of the state through the support
function, is indirectly affected by resource development; the remainder of
the Gulf of Alaska region is directly affected by resource development.
The ~outhcentral region contains both the historically important natural
resource industries and the new natural resource industries. Fisheries of
Southcentral are some of the most important in the state, accounting for
close to half the catch of the state's fishing industry. The Upper Cook
Inlet region was the state's first major oil producing region and con-
tributed to the development of the petrochemical industry in Kenai. The
oil port built as the terminus ·of the trans-Alaska pipeline at Valdez
contributed to the economic growth of the Southcentral region during
80
[
[
[
[
[
[
L
b
c
L
[
[
[
C'
L
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
r
L
r
L
[
[j
g
c
[j
[
[
r·
L
r,
I = L
construction and will contribute to its growth in the future. This
section will examine the historical growth of the region.
Growth of the Aggregate Indicators
The aggregate indicators of economic growth illustrate the importance of
TAPS construction to the economy of this region. (See Table 24.) Between
1973 and 1976, the population of the region increased by almost 20,000;
employment, by more than 10,000; and personal income, by $330 million.
Population grew at an overall average rate of 6.34 percent per year during
this period. Population in the region grew by almost 29,196 between 1965
and 1976. Over 67.5 percent of this growth occurred after the beginning
of the pipeline construction in 1974.
Population growth followed a pattern established by employment growth.
Employment grew at an annual average rate of 11.26 percent during the
period; in the post-1970 period, the rate increased to 15.7 percent.
The employment growth rates are greater than the population growth rates.
This reflects the type of employment growth in the region at this time.
Employment connected with mining and construction is more transient than
employment in other sectors and does not bring dependents to the area.
This pattern also results from shift schedules which allow workers,
particularly in mining, to live in other regions. The short-term enclave
nature of the employment, such as construction of the TAPS line, was
another reason for the decreased dependency ratio in the region.
81
TABLE 24. GROWTH OF EMPLOYMENT, POPULATION, AND
PERSONAL INCOME, SOUTHCENTRAL REGION
1965-1976
1965
1970
1971
1972
1973
1974
1975
1976
Annual Average
Percent Change
1965-1976
1970-1976
Population
30,235
37,809
39,227
39,148
39,716
41 ,986
51 ,923
59,431
6.34
7.83
Employment
7,124
9,582
10,127
10,735
12,131
13,645
18,300
23,030
11.26
15.74
Personal Income
( $ Mi 11 ion)
90.1
157.3
165.1
172.9
210.2
264.4
414.0
548.7
17.85
23.15
SOURCES: All estimates State of Alaska Department of Labor, Research and
Analysis Section, Population Estimates by Census Division, except
1970 which is Census of Population. ·
Alaska Department of Labor, Statistical Quarterly, various years.
U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis, July 1978.
82
[
[
[
r
[
[-
[
f-,
L
r~
L
[
t
[
E
[
E
[
r~
L
L
[
[
[
f.,
_,
[
L
[
[
r
L
[
B
g
c
B
6
u
r
L
r·
L
Personal income grew at an average annual rate of 17.9 percent between
1965 and 1976. Most of this growth came after 1973 with pipeline con-
struction. Personal income increased at an annual rate of 37.7 percent
after 1973. There are two reasons the economies of Southcentral did not
feel the full impact of this growth in income. First, the transient and
enclave nature of pipeline construction and mining employment means that
less of the income is spent in the region. Secondly, because they are
smaller economies, the leakages from the economy are greater and there is
less induced response to growth in incomes.
Causes of Growth
The major cause of growth in the Southcentral region was the expansion
of the traditional basic industries. Table 25 provides information on
employment growth by industry and on the basic sector.
The three major industries affecting the growth of Southcentral Alaska
are mining, construction, and fisheries. The fisheries industry includes
both actual harvesting and food processing. The growth rate of mining
averaged 8.27 percent over the entire period. Mining experienced cyclical
growth, declining after 1970 and rising again after 1973. The recent
growth of the industry is a result of exploratory activity and increased
petrochemical activity (Kenai Borough, 1977).
The major mining development occurred early in the period with the develop-
ment of the Kenai-Upper Cook iniet fieids. Petroleum activity in the
Kenai fields can be described in two periods: Field development occurred
83
TABLE 25. EMPLOYMENT BY INDUSTRY
SOUTHCENTRAL ALASKA
Annual Average Percent Increase
Industry 1965 -1976 1970-1976 1973 -1975
Agriculture, Forestry,
and Fisheries
Mining
Contract Construction
Manufacturing
Food
Transportation, Communication,
and Public Utilities
Transportation
Communications
Public Utilities
Trade
Wholesale
Ret a i 1
Finance, Insurance, and
Real Estate
Services
Hotel
Personal
Business
Medical
Other
Government
Federal
State and Local
Total
38.44
8.27
20.71
9.53
6.30
9.51
9.15
22.71
5.90
10.88
11.95
10.47
10.57
12.12
11.61
3.37
18.49
11.60
9.64
-3.80
8.49
11.26
37.87
1. 37
85.19
11:90
8.65
2.09
34.50
19.69
8.38
11.22
10.59
11.46
14.68
16.72
20.09
4.28
37.07
9.15
11.54
-4.28
7.50
15.74
5.16
18.59
131.70
.55
.20
32.62
49.33
2.86
12.66
31.72
60.82
23.95
25.86
21.56
24.77
-1.01
78.12
-6.89
24.90
5.65
6.33
22.82
SOURCE: Estimated from Alaska Department of Labor, Research and Analysis
Section worksheets.
Alaska State Housing Authority, Alaska, Yakutat, Comprehensive
Development Plan, Anchorage 1971.
Alaska Consultants, Inc., Anchorage, Alaska, Yakutat, Comprehensive
Development Plan, December 1976.
84
[
[
[
[
r:
L
r l_;
[
L
[
L
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
r
L
f'
L
[
0
G
c
B
L
E
f"
L
between 1961 and 1968; this phase included the development of both onshore
and offshore fields. During this phase, mining employment increased by
over 600 percent. Major construction of petrochemical facilities also
took place during this period. Three petrochemical plants and sev~n
pipelines were completed between 1961 and 1968. The second major phase
was production. By 1970, all the major components of the petroleum
i_ndustry had begun production {Math Sciences, 1976).
Construction employment increased at an annual average rate of 20.7 per-
cent throughout the period. The major increase occurred between 1973 and
1975 when construction employment increased at an annual rate of 131.7 per-
cent. This increase was a result of the construction of the trans-Alaska
pipeline and the Valdez Port facility. Construction activity in Valdez
accounted for almost 70 percent of total regional employment in 1975 and
78 percent in 1976. Although this is not all TAPS-connected employment,
it shows the magnitude of the effect of this project on the region.
Regional construction employment prior to 1970 was influenced importantly
by petrochemical development in Kenai. Construction of five petrochemical·
facilities and seven pipelines increased Kenai•s construction employment
to a peak of 1,209 in 1968 {Math Sciences, 1976). By 1970 construction
employment had decreased until its regional total was 583.
The final basic industry in the Southcentral region is the fisheries
industry. This industry consists of_ fish harvesting employment and fish
processing employment. Fish processing is a major component of manufac-
turing. The full impact of fisheries cannot be observed from employment
85
-~-----~---------------------~--~---------------------~------------------
data. Employment reported in nonagricultural wage and salary employment
excludes self-employed which is a major component of fishery employment.
(The rapid growth in agriculture-forestry-fisheries employment is pri-
marily a result of a redefinition of the employment category in 1972.)
Employment itself may not be a good indicator of the industry's health;
in most industries, employment may be a good indicator of income, but
fisheries• incomes depend upon the catch and its market value.
Independent estimates of fishery employment have been made based on
catch and gear statistics. The totals for three regions--Prince William
Sound, Cook Inlet, and Southwest--are shown in Table 26.
TABLE 26. ESTIMATED FISH HARVESTING EMPLOYMENT
1970 1971 1972 1973 1974 1975 1976
Employment 1 2,193 2,052 1,853 2,235 1,998 2,031 2,388
Catch 2 269.3 256.6 233.8 362.6 254.5 256.8 245.4
(mi 11 ion 1 bs.)
Value 2 40,681 36,658 44,773 73,496 65,912 60,971 93,668
(thousand $)
Real Value 37 '117 32,469 38,631 60,841 49,225 40,033 57,080
(thousand $)
1Rogers and Listowski, 1978.
2Alaska Department of Commerce and Economic Development, 1977.
Value is deflated by the Anchorage CPl.
86
[
[
[
f-,_
--'
[
c
L
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
I
L
L
[
[
[
[.
[
[
[
r
L.
r·
L
[
tJ
B
[
B
C
[
r
l
r~
L
These regions include more than Southcentral; however, the figures provide
an indication of the probable pattern of industry growth in the South-
central region. Employment in 1976 was only 9 percent higher than in
1970. These figures show the cyclical behavior of fishery employment.
Employment fell until 1972. After that, it peaked at 2,235 in 1973.
After falling slightly, employment then rose to its present level of
2,388. Information on the value and catch show a similar cyclical growth.
Since 1970, catch in the Central region peaked at 362.6 million pounds in
1973 and fell to 256.8 million pounds in 1975. Except for the bonanza
year in 1973, catch has varied relatively little from an average of
253 million pounds. The real value of this catch was only 7.8 percent
higher in 1975 than in 1970; its peak was $60.8 million in 1973. The
catch statistics provide an indication of the importance of the region to
Alaska fisheries. In 1975, the Central region accounted for 47.1 percent
of the total value of fish caught in the state.
The manufacturing sector, because of the large fish processing component,
was affected by the fish harvesting activity in the region. t~anufacturing
increased at an average annual rate of 9.5 percent per year. This was
well over the average rate of increase in the state. Manufacturing has
experienced cycles similar to fisheries, but they have not been as pro-
nounced. The main reason for this is that manufacturing includes campo-
nents of the petrochemical industry in Kenai. The petrochemical industry
is not cyclical, so it stabilizes the Southcentral manufacturing industry.
87
The final basic sector is federal government employment. Federal qovern-
ment employment actually fell during the period from 975 in 1965 to 637 in
1976. The lowest point was in 1974 when employment was 595. Military
employment in the region also followed the same pattern. Military employ-
ment in 1976 was 1,660 less than in 1965. The primary reason for this was
the closure of the Kodiak Naval Station.
Table 27 summarizes the basic sector in the Southcentral region. The
basic sector more than doubled between 1965 and 1976. (The year 1973 has
been included in order to observe the non-TAPS trend.) While the total
basic sector (including the military) remained constant between 1965 and
1973, the civilian basic sector grew by approximately 1,600 employees.
The growth of the civilian basic sector replaced the lost military and
federal government employment.
The Economic Structure
Table 27 shows the basic-to-total employment ratios; between 1965 and
1973, this ratio fell. During this period, the support sector increased
its importance relative to the basic sector. With the construction of
TAPS, the support sector did not expand as rapidly as the basic sector.
The enclave nature of pipeline employment meant that the suport services
were mostly provided by the enclave sector. This limited the necessary
expansion of the support sector to accommodate pipeline employment and
reversed the trend of decreased basic sector importance.
88
r
L
c
·L
[
E
[
L
B
L
[
r ' L
['
L
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
r L
r~
b
[
H
c
r
L
p u
TABLE 27. BASIC SECTOR GROWTH, SOUTHCENTRAL ALASKA
1965, 1970, 1973, 1975, and 1976
Industry
Agriculture, Forestry,
and Fisheries
Mining
Contract Construction
Manufacturing
Federal Government
Tot a 1 Civilian
Basic Employment
Total Military Employment
Total Basic Employment
Total Basic/
Total Employment
Civilian Basic/Total
Civilian Employment
1965
19
345
880
1,188
975
3,407
2,651
6,058
.6197
.4782
1970 1973 1975
99 491 543
762 640 900
583 681 3,656
1,647 2,627 2,656
828 602 672
3,919 5,041 8,427
. 2,110 1,039 747
6,029 6,080 9,174
.5157 .4617 .4817
.4090 .4155 .4605
1976
680
827
6,978
3,234
637
12,356
991
·13,347
.5556
.5365
SOURCES: Estimated from Alaska Department of Labor, Research and Analysis
Section worksheets.
Alaska Department of Labor, Estimates of the Population.
Alaska State Housing Authority, Alaska, Yakutat, Comprehensive
Development Plan, Anchorage, 1971.
Alaska Consultants, Inc., Yakutat, Comprehensive Development Plan,
Anchorage, Alaska, 1971.
89
---------------~------~-----------------------------~-------·----------·-----~~-------------~--------------------
Table 28 illustrates the structure of the Southcentral economy as .defined
by its employment distribution. The non-TAPS trend can be seen by examin-
ing the change between 1965 and 1970. Between these periods, the support
sectors either increased their share of employment or remained constant;
the overall change was not so great as in the state or Anchorage. Only
trade expanded its share significantly from 11.4 percent to 14 percent.
One interesting trend is the reduction of importance of food manufacturing.
The 1976 figures are skewed because of the pipeline construction; in
1976, construction accounts for over 30 percent of the total civilian
emp 1 oyment.
Population
Population in the Southcentral region increased by over 28,000 between .
1965 and 1976; over half of this increase came after 1973. The major
growth in the Southcentral region was a direct result of the construction
of the trans-Alaska pipeline beginning in 1974. Such rapid growth in the
relatively small region meant that migration was the most important
component of growth. Between 1973 and l974,'migration accounted for
90 percent of the increase in population. Table 29 shows the employment
growth in Southcentral.
The dependency ratio in Southcentral fell dramatically from 1965 to 1976.
The ratio dropped from 4.24 in 1965 to 2.58 in 1976, a 40 percent decrease.
The enclave nature of the TAPS construction affected this significantly;
the ratio fell 22 percent after 1973. The trend had been established prior
to this. Increased labor force participation is primarily responsible for
90
c
L
[
L
[
[
8
[
[
,-,
L
r-
L
[
[
[
[
[
[
L
[
r
L
r
6
[
E
c
[
c L
f'
L
---·------------·---··----·---·-----·------··
TABLE 28. EMPLOYMENT DISTRIBUTION BY INDUSTRY
SOUTHCENTRAL ALASKA
1965, 1970, AND 1976
Percent of Total Employment
Industr,Y 1965 1970 1976
Agriculture, Forestry,
and Fisheries .27 l. 03 2.95
Mining 4.84 7.95 3.59
Contract Construction 12.35 6.08 30.30
Manufacturing 16.68 17. 19 14.04
Food 15.24 13.49 9.24
Transportation,
Communication, and
Public Utilities 7. 61 7.93 6.39
Transportation 5.24 5.44 4.24
Communication . 36 .89 1.07
Public Utilities 1.85 1.61 1.08
Trade 11.41 13.96 11 .00
Wholesale 1.43 2. 01 l. 53
Reta i 1 9.99 11.95 9.47
Finance, Insurance, and
Real Estate 2.23 2.20 2.08
Services 10.36 10.72 11.28
Hotel l. 94 l. 61 2.01
Personal . 35 .29 . 16
Business 1.64 l. 19 3.28
r~edi ca 1 1.95 2.87 2.02
Other 4.48 4.76 3.81
Federal Government 13.69 8.64 2. 77
State and Local
Government 20.56 24.29 15.60
SOURCE: Estimated from Alaska Department of Labor, Res~arch and Analysis
Section worksheets.
Alaska State Housing Authority, Yakutat Alaska, Comprehensive
Development Plan, Anchorage 1971.
Alaska Consultants Inc., Anchorage, Alaska, Yakutat Comprehensive
Development Plan, December 1976.
91
Number
of Births
1965
1970 863
1971 505
1972 505
1973 718
1974 768
1975 634
1976 993
TABLE 29. POPULATION GROWTH, SOUTHCENTRAL
ALASKA, 1965, 1970-1976
Estimated Population
Number Natural Net as of
of Deaths Increase Migration July 1
30,235
215 648 37,540 1
139 366 926 38,832
138 367 -406 38,739
173 545 -31 39,253
231 537 1,667 41,457
244 390 9,828 51 ,675
227 766 6,436 58,877
1Data is from April Census.
2Annual average increase from 1965 to 1970.
% Increase
over
Previous Year
2 4.4 .
3.4
-0.2
1.3
5.6
24.6
13.9
SOURCE: State of Alaska, Department of Health and Social Services,
Health Information System Section.
92
[
[
[
c
L
[
[
r
L
r -
L
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
r' L
[.
8
b
c
c
[
[
[
this change. An increase in the proportion of employment covered in these
employment statistics was also responsible for the decrease in this ratio
as fishing became less important.
Unemployment
The unemployment rates were high even during the period of rapid employment
growth in connection with TAPS. Unemployment was highest in 1972 when the
unemployment rate reached 15.0 percent. With the beginning of pipeline
construction, the unemployment rate began to fall, reaching its lowest
point in 1975 at 12.4 percent. Even though the percentage of unemployed
fell throughout the period, the number of unemployed grew.
As in the state, the seemingly contradictory growth in employment and
unemployment is a result of two factors. First, the increased employment
opportunities led to increased migration. Secondly, the increased employ-
ment opportunities were responsible for increased labor force participation.
As can be seen from Table 30, the labor force participation rate increased
from 38.2 percent in 1970 to 54.8 percent in 1976. This increase resulted
from an increased participation among existing population and a high rate
of participation among migrants.
The seasonality index remained close to .80 throughout the period. Only
during 1974 and 1975, did the index rise, indicating a fall in seasonality.
The fall in the seasonality index in 1976 is a result of peak employment
on the pipeline being reached in the summer of 1976.
93
Year
1965
1970
1971
1972
1973
1974
1975
1976
TABLE 30. UNEMPLOYMENT AND SEASONALITY
SOUTHCENTRAL ALASKA
1965' 1970-1976
Labor Force
Total Unemployment Participation
Unemployment Rate (%) Rate (%)
1 '172 10.30 4.1. 38
1,835 13.44 38.24
2,135 14.66 38.90
2,257 15.03 39.17
2,336 14.07 42.94
2,744 14.80 45.09
3,094 12.42 48.68
4,502 13.83 54.78
Season a 1 ity
Index
.8322
.7959
.8375
.7815
.8242
.9481
.9971
.. 7722
SOURCES: Alaska Department of Labor, Labor Force Estimates, various years.
Alaska Department of Labor, Estimates of the Population.
Alaska State Housing Authority, Yakutat, Alaska Comprehensive
Development Plan, Anchorage 1971.
Alaska Consultants Inc., Anchorage, Alaska, Yakutat Comprehensive
Development Plan, December 1976.
94
r
[
[
!
[
!
[
I'
b
r:
L
[
c
c
[
u
t
[
r .
L
r ,
L
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
r u
r
L
L
D
Q
c
6
[
[
f' L
r:
6
E
Personal Income
Personal income is an important economic indicator since it influences
demand and growth of the support sector. It is also a measure of the
growth of residents' economic welfare. The effect of price increases
(measured by the Anchorage CPI) and population increases on the real
per capita income of residents is shown in Table 31. The real per capita
incomes of the Southcentral region increased at an overall average yearly
rate of 5.42 percent; this is less than one-third the rate of increase
of personal income. The most rapid growth occurred between 1973 and 1975,
the period of peak TAPS construction.
Summary
The construction of the trans-Alaska pipeline was the most important
factor determining the economic growth of the Southcentral region. The
majority of the growth in employment, population, and personal income
occurred after 1973. Prior to the construction of the pipeline, South-
central was experiencing a structural change similar to the state. The
basic sector was playing a less important role in the Southcentral economy.
The magnitude of pipeline employment and its enclave nature reversed this
trend. The growth of employmentwas much greater than population, indicat-
ing an increased labor force participation of the population. Per capita
incomes rose with growth. Growth in employment did not dramatically affect
the Southcentral unemployment rate.
. 95
TABLE 31. GROWTH OF REAL PER CAPITA INCOME
SOUTHCENTRAL ALASKA
1965, 1970-1976
Real Per Capita
Personal Real Personal Personal
Income Income Income
Year (Thousands $) (Thousands $) ($)
1965 90,128 95,677 3 '164
1970 157,316 146,234 3,796
1971 165,099 143,536 3,728
1972 172,916 149 '194 3,811
1973 210,235 174,036 4,382
1974 264,428 197,482 4,704
1975 414,045 271 ,861 5,236
1976 548,661 335,983 5,653
Annual Average
Percent Increase
1965 -1976 17.85 12.10 5.42
1970 -1976 23.15 14.87 6.86
1973 -1975 40.34 24.98 9. 31
SOURCES: U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis,
Regional Economic Information System, July 1978 printouts.
Alaska Department of Labor, Labor Force Estimates, various years.
Alaska Consultants, Inc., City of Yakutat, Comprehensive
Development Plan, December 1976,
U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics.
Alaska State Housing Authority, Alaska, Yakutat, Comprehensive
Development Plan, Anchorage, 1971.
. 96
[
[
r L_.
[
[
[
[
1:
L
L
[
r b
c
[
[
r·
L
r ,
L
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
r
L
L
c
Q
c
c
[
c
The Regional Economy in the Southcentral Alaska Region
Southcentral Alaska is made up of a number of local economies. These
economies differ in their size and economic structure. The economies
range from the largest, Valdez with a 1976 employment 6f 7,818, to the
smallest, Yakutat with employment in 1976 equaling 241. The economies
not only differ in size but also in the factors determining their growth.
A question of some interest is whether the region can.be treated as a
single economy. This is important because in our projections Southcentral
is treated as a single economy. In this section, we will examine the
small economies which make up.Sout~central and show why Southcentral can
appropriately be treated as a single region.
In Alaska, the spatial order of the economy is that all local economies
have a position in a regional structure. The link through transportation
and support services in Anchorage makes a large portion of Alaska a region
centered on Anchorage. Our aim in defining economic regions is to provide
sdme spatial disaggregation of this major region .. There are two approaches
which have been taken to define regions. The first approach is based on
the principle of functional integration. This notion would group economies
which are interrelated and integrated. The second approach is based on
the principle of homogeneity. This approach forms regions which are as
much alike as possible and different from other regions (Nourse, 1968).
This section will investigate the Southcentral subregions in terms of·
these principles.
97
The Local Economies
This section will describe the local economies in terms of their size and
growth since 1970. Although each census division is not an individual
economy, the analysis must concentrate on census divisions because of data
limitations. Table 32 shows the employment, population, and personal
income of each subregion in 1965, 1970, and 1976.
Table 32 shows that the growth in the region has been concentrated in
three areas: the Kenai Census Division, the Matanuska-Susitna Census
Division, and Valdez. Between 1965 and i970, t 1he major growth in the
region was centered in Kenai with the petroleum development in Cook
Inlet. Between 1965 and 1970, employment in Kenai grew at an annual
average rate of 15.3 percent per year. Kenai increased its share of
regional employment from 31.9 percent in 1965 to 36.6 percent in 1970.
After 1970, Valdez was the fastest growing region. Between 1970 and 1976,
employment in Valdez increased by over eight times. The construction of
TAPS was responsible for this growth. The fastest growing economy after
Valdez was Matanuska-Susitna which increased employment at a 12.1 percent
rate. Kenai grew at an average annual rate of 10.4 percent after 1970~
During this period, Kodiak and Seward also experienced rapid average
annual growth rates of close to 9.0 percent.
One noticeable trend was nonproportionate gr6wth in population in Matanuska-
Susitna and Kodiak. In Matanuska-Susitna, population \'las determining the
growth of employment. Matanuska-Susitna experienced suburbanization from
98
[
r L
r L
[
[
[
[
[
L
c
[
[
[
['
L
I "
L
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
['
r l--'
r
L
L
§
[
[
TABLE 32. GROWTH OF AGGREGATE INDICATORS
SMALL ECONOMIES
1965, 1970., AND 1976
1 Personal Income
Population Employment (Million$)
Cordova-McCarthy
1965 1 ,991 604 7.5
1970 1 ,857 702 9.8
1976 2,353 1 ,041 17.7
Valdez-Chitina-Whittier
1965 2,396 452 6. 1
1970 3,098 831 9.7
1976 13,000 7,818 163.0
Matanuska-Susitna
1965 6,125 1,083 13.4
1970 6,509 1,145 24.3
1976 14,010 2,269 108.9
Seward
1965 2,213 620 5.7
1970 2,336 692 8.4
1976 3,395 1,136 25.9
Kenai
1965 8,446 1, 753 26.7
1970 14,250 3,576 57.2
1976 16,753 6,465 156.0
Kodiak
1965 9,064 2,310 30.6
1970 9,409 2,469 45.0
1976 9,366 4,153 72.9
Yakutat
1965
1970 350 193 3.0
1976 550 241 4.2
1civilian nonagricultural wage and salary employment.
SOURCES: Alaska Department of Labor. Population Estimates by Census
Divisions, various years.
Alaska Department of Labor, Statistical Quarterly, various years.
U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis,
Regional Economic Information System Printouts, July 1978.
99
Anchorage which actually encouraged growth of employment to serve the
suburban population. The population of Kodiak fell slightly between 1965
and 1976; this was a result of the closure of the Kodiak Naval Station
during the period. Civilian employment growth actually replaced the
decline in military employment. The three major economies in terms of
personal income were Valdez, Kenai, and Matanuska-Susitna, all with more
than $100 million in personal income in 1976.
Functional Integration
Economies can be functionally integrated even though they are physically
separate if they interact in the production and distribution process.
Any set of economies which are open, allowing the exchange of goods and
the flow of productive factors, are functionally integrated. The extent
of this integration depends on the importance of these flows to the
individual economies. The Southcentral Alaskan economy will not have
perfect functional integration, the smallness of these economies and their
separation in distance will assure this. In this section, we will attempt
to determine the degree of integration of these economies.
Transportation links and trade flows are measures of the degree of ex-
change between economies. The Southcentral region, relative to the rest
of the state, has highly developed transportation links. Most larger
communities in the region are linked by roads and/or ferry and by a
highly developed communications system. There are numerous deepwater
ports and commercial marine freight service. The communities of the
Kenai, Seward, Matanuska-Susitna Census Divisions, and Anchorage are
100
[
[
r
[
[
[
[
[
r
L
L
[
c
[
c
[
[
f'
L
r L
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
r u
L
B
u
0
c
[
L
f'
6
E
linked by the Seward, Sterling, and Glenn Highways. Valdez is linked
through the Richardson Highway. Ferry service connects Cordova, Valdez,
Kodiak, Seward, Whittier, Homer, and Seldovia. Van container service is
available in Cordova, Valdez, Kodiak, and Seward (ISER, 1978).
The trade flows between these areas \-Jere described in a census of trans-
portation conducted by the Institute of Social and Economic Research
(ISER, 1976). Table 33 shows the distribution of intrastate freight
from Southcentral points of origin. This is not a pure measure of.
trade flows since it includes transshipments of goods, but it does
provide an indication of the trade links between the economies of the
region. Of all the census divisions, Skagway-Yakutat is the least tied
to the Southcentral region; only 30 percent of the freight leaving Skagway
is shipped to other areas of Southcentral Alaska. For a number of the
divisions (Valdez, Kodiak, Kenai, and Cordova), Anchorage is the destina-
tion for major portions of their flows; while, as an illustration of the
role of Anchorage in the statewide transportation system, less than
30 percent of Anchorage goods flows to other regions of Southcentral.
The existing transportation links and the flows of freight show that the
economies of Southcentral Alaska, when Anchorage is included, do exhibit
a degree of functional integration. The integration described by the
trade flows means that changes affecting one area will have corresponding
effects in the other economies of the region.
101
......
0
N
DESTINATION ...... ORIGI~
Anchorage
Cordova
Kenai
Kodiak
Matanuska-
Sus itna
Seward
Skagway-
Yakutat
Valdez-Chitina-
Whittier
TABLE 33. DISTRIBUTION OF INTRASTATE FLOWS OF FREIGHT
AND MAIL FROM SOUTHCENTRAL ORIGINS, 1973
(Percent of flows from Southcentral origins)
Matanuska-
Anchorage Cordova Kenai Kodiak Sus itna Seward
5.84 .86 6.04 4.14 l. 32 1.03
63.88 13.54 .38 7 .J 7 .48 0
39.90 .62 15.50 2.64 . 17 . 15
76.96 .02 11.87 6.73 0 .01
. 10.59 0 32.46 0 .50 25.91
12.36 .08 5.53 0 0 0
. 14 .02 28.80 0 0 0
41.14 7. 77 15.05 5.46 .73 7.97
SOURCE: ISER., Census of Alaska Transportation, September 1976.
,--.
l J
Skagway-Valdez-Chitina-
Yakutat Whittier
.07 2.63
.65 l. 17
. 15 23.20
0 .26
0 5.71
0_ 68.60
.67 0
2.93 .60
.-----..
J
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
r
{__,
r
L
L
t
Q
c
u
[
[
c
L
r:
L
E
Homogeneity
The economies of the Southcentral region vary in two ways which signifi-
cantly affect their structure--size and basic sectors. Size will determine
the economies of scale which can be reached in a region and the structure
of the support sector. Larger economies can support larger, more diverse
support sectors. The basic sectors also provide an influence on the
support sectors and the economic structure. The economies of the South-
central region can be separated into groups based on size and·the basic
sector. Kenai, Matanuska-Susitna, and Valdez are relatively large
economies with nonfishing basic sectors. Mining and manufacturing are
important for Kenai; construction and transportation, for Valdez; and
the suburban phenomenon, for Matanuska-Susitna. The growth of these
economies will not be affected by natural resource cycles. The remaining
economies are significantly influenced by fisheries, and their attendant
cyclical behavior. These classifications are not distinct. Kodiak and
Yakutat may experience significant petroleum development in the future
which will change their economic base.
Table 34 describes a measure of the structure of these local economies.
The per capita employment in the support sector measures the relative
size of the support sector (transportation-communication-utilities,
trade, finance-insurance-real estate, services, and state and local
government). This ratio provides an indication of how the economy would
respond to exogenous changes in its population caused by expansion of
the basic sector. The similarity among the structures of the local
economies can be seen. Except for Valdez and Matanuska-Susitna, the
103
TABLE 34. THE STRUCTURE OF LOCAL ECONOMIES
(The per capita level of support sector employment, 1976)
Support Sector Per Capita
Census Division Population Employment Support Employment
Kenai 16,753 3,521 .21
Seward 3,395 681 .20
Cordova-McCarthy 2,353 522 .22
Valdez-Chitina-Whittier 13,000 2,327 . 18
Matanuska-Susitna 14,010 1 ,888 . 13
Kodiak 9,366 1,870 .20
Yakutat 550 122 .22
Anchorage 185,179 52,540 .28
SOURCES: Alaska Department of Labor, worksheets, except for Yakutat which
is from Alaska Consultants, Yakutat, Comprehensive Plan, 1976.
104
[
r
r
[
L
[
[
I L,
L
[
[
[
[
('
L
r ,
L
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
~
c
[
G
[
L
I'
L
r:
b
ratio is close to .2. Valdez has a lower value because a large proper-
tion of the population was enclave construction employment associated
with TAPS which did not make full demand on the support sector. The
low level of the ratio in Matansuka~susitna results because of its sub-
urban link to Anchorage. Comparison of the per capita support sector
levels to the Anchorage level of .28 shows that the support sector~ at
least by this measure, is relatively undeveloped. The similarity of
per capita support sector levels means that these economies may respond
to future expansion of their populations in a similar manner.
The above analysis provides the evidence to support treating Southcentral
as a regional economy. Although the area is not fully integrated~ there
is a similarity of structure and existence of trade links between the
local economies. The importance of Anchorage as a regional center should
not be understated; Anchorage serves the region as a center for adminis-
trative~ distributive, and financial services which ties the region to-
gether~ as well as limits the growth of local support sectors. The trade
links and structural similarity mean that the region will experience
similar response to a given exogenous change irregardless of where the
change takes place. By making the additional assumption that these
changes will follow patterns similar to historical changes, Southcentral
can be used as a region for projection.
105
Summary.
The economy of Alaska expanded rapidly during the period 1965 to 1976.
The major industries responsible for this growth were construction and
mining. Development of the Cook Inlet fields was important to growth
in the early part of the period, while the development of Prudhoe Bay
influenced economic growth significantly during the latter part of the
period. The expansion of state government between 1970 and 1972 was also
responsible for a portion of the economy's growth. The construction of
the trans-Alaska pipeline was the most important factor influencing growth
during the period. The economy experienced its fastest' growth during the
period of peak pipeline employment.
The Alaska growth process consists of growth-initiating factors and the
response of the economy to these factors. The major cause of growth was
expansion of the basic sector industries--mining, construction, manufac-
turing, agriculture-forestry-fisheries, and federal government. The
response to change in these sectors occurs with the expansion of activity
in the support sectors. Over the historical period, the response of the
support sector has been nonproportional to the growth in the basic sector.
The support sector has expanded its share of the economy as a result of
the increased scale of the economy which allows a more local production of
the goods and services consumed. This type of structural change can be
expected to continue in the future.
The growth associated with this period affected population, unemployment,
and personal income. Population increased primarily because of in-migration
106
[
r
r t.
L
[
[
f '
[
[
[
[
c
G
[
L
r-
L
r,
L
L
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
r,
L
L
~
6
[
L
[
[
f'
L
r
L
in response to the increased economic opportunities. Population did not
respond as rapidly as employment growth; this was a result of a change in
the character of the population. The increase in the population occurred
mostly in the working ages. Unemployment was only minimally affected
during the period, and the unemployment rate fell only during the period
of most rapid growth in 1975. The seasonality component of unemployment
fell throughout the period primarily as a result of the increased impor-
tance of the less seasonal support industries. Growth increased real
personal incomes; so that for most of the period, it increased faster than
the U.S. average. Finally, prices exhibited a trend toward the U.S. level
as the scale of the economy expanded. The rapid expansion with the TAPS
caused this trend to be reversed.
107
[
[.
[
r~
[
[~
[
r
L
L
0
hl
c
c
[
L
f'
L
III. THE ALASKAN ECONOMY IN THE BASE CASE
This chapter will describe the projected growth of the.Alaskan economy
without the development of the Northern Gulf of Alaska Outer Continental
Shelf (sale no. 55). In order to examine the effect of previous OCS
activity on the impacts of Northern Gulf development, three alternative
base cases will be examined. Each of these cases will have similar assump-
tions concerning future non-OCS developments, but they will have different
assumptions about the development of OCS activity in Lower Cook Inlet and
the Beaufort Sea.
The Purpose of the Base Case
Petroleum development in the Northern Gulf of Alaska may affect both the
structure and the size of the Alaska economy. Changes in the economy which
result from the development of OCS resources can be defined as the impact
of this development. The impact can only be described as changes from a
certain pattern of economic growth which would have occurred without OCS
development. The base case describes the projected growth of the economy
without the development for which the impact is to be measured. Comparing
two projections of the economy, the base case and the OCS case will define
the impact of OCS development.
The base case scenarios described below are consistent, plausible patterns
of development; however, they should not be mistaken for best-guess pat-
terns of development in any sense. The actual pattern likely to occur
is subject to an enormous amount of uncertainty determined by technology,
109
market prices, federal policies, and other uncertain events. To project
any one economic future would be little more than idle speculation, since
at this point many major events and decisions affecting Alaska are un-
certain. The MAP model is designed to permit the formulation of ranges
of scenarios which reflect these uncertainties in order to trace out the
range of possible outcomes. This study does this in respect to various
alternative OCS scenarios. The same approach could be used to determine
the range of alternative non-OCS assumptions. To estimate the impacts of
OCS development, a single base case is needed. This must be selected on
the basis of the consistency and plausibility of the assumptions, consis-
tency with historical growth, and consistency with assumed future patterns
of economic relations. The effect of this base case choice will be
measured by testing the sensitivity of the results to certain of the
more important assumptions.
The purpose of establishing a base case must be kept in mind when examin-
ing the results. The base case is run in order to isolate the changes
resulting from OCS development; this should influence the variables
we examine. Rapid growth associated with OCS development will affect
most economic variables. Although many variables will be affected, a
much smaller number is important, and information on these dimensions
of impact will describe the effect of rapid growth on state and regional
economies. The base case will be analyzed to provide a point of refer-
ence for these dimensions.
110
[
f
[
r
[
[,_
[
[
r L
L
[
c
[
L
[
[
L
L
[
[
[
[
[
[
[·'.
~J
[
[
r
L
[
8
~
c
0
[
c
r~
L
r:
6
Base Case Assumptions
The base case is defined by assumptions about the future levels of
certain exogenous variables; this set of assumptions describes the base
case scenario. The set of assumptions necessary for a base case scenario
includes three important components. The first involves assumptions about
the level of employment in those industries whose level is assumed to be
influenced by factors outside the economy, the exogenous industries.
Those industries include manufacturing, agriculture-forestry-fisheries,
federal government, mining, and a portion of the construction industry.
The second set of assumptions involves the level of certain exogenously
determined revenues which result from the production of the petroleum
industry. These include royalties, production taxes, property taxes,
and corporate income tax. The final assumption concerns the rule which
defines an assumed spending pattern for the state.
The uncertainty surrounding the futur·e petroleum and world energy markets,
as well as state economic decisions which influence economic growth, means
that any assumption about the appropriate base case scenarios is subject
to criticism. An extensive development of a base case scenario which
required considerable time and research would, because of the uncertainty,
be subject to the same type of criticism. The uncertainty involves such
major factors as the construction and timing of the ALCAN gas line and
future state spending policy. Because of this, an extensive development
of the base case scenario was not undertaken in this study; instead, a
reasonable set of assumptions was developed which placed emphasis on
111
consistency of assumptions and reasonableness of approach. This section
describes the set of assumptions used in the base case.
NON-OCS ASSUMPTIONS
Industry Assumptions
There are two special groups of industry assumptions which are required.
First, assumptions about employment connected with special projects,
mainly resource development projects, are needed. Secondly, assumptions
about the growth of the major exogenous industries--manufacturing,
agriculture-forestry-fisheries, and federal government--are required.
Special projects include petroleum projects, major construction projects,
and the operations of these projects. Petroleum activity is assumed to
continue at Prudhoe Bay with further exploration and development of the
Kuparak and Lisburne formations. Mining employment peaks in this area
at 1,783 in 1980. The Upper Cook Inlet fields are the other major area
of petroleum activity. Employment is assumed to increase from its
present level between 1985 and 1990 as the oil fields are shut down.
Gas production continues after 1990 but with a reduced work force.
There is little other new mining activity in the state with other mining
maintaining current levels throughout the projection period.
Major construction projects in the state during the projection period
include the Trans-Alaska Pipeline Service (TAPS) and the ALCAN gasline.
TAPS is completed in 1977, after which the line's capacity is assumed to
112
[
[
f~
r
r
[
['
[
L
[: ..
[
c
c
[
[
f •
L
[
[
[
[
[
[
L
[
r
L
[
13
6
[
8
[
[
L
L
be increased by the addition of four pump stations between 1979 and 1982.
The ALCAN gasline is assumed to be built between 1981 and 1984 with peak
employment of 4,800 in 1982. The only other special construction project
in the state during the projection period is the construction of the
Pacific LNG plant between 1980 and 1983; this project employment peaks in
1982 with 1,300 employees.
TAPS is assumed to require 850 workers per year for its long-term operations.
ALCAN operations employment is assumed to be 96 beginning in 1985. TAPS'
higher operations employment can be accounted for since TAPS has more
pipeline in Alaska, Valdez port employment is part of TAPS employment,
and TAPS has substantial Alaska headquarters employment. Operations
employment for the Pacific LNG plant is 60 beginning in 1984.
The level of employment in federal government and agriculture-forestry-
fisheries and output in manufacturing is set exogenously. Federal govern-
ment employment is assumed to follow its general historical trend and
remain constant at the 1976 level throughout the forecast period. The
trend in the historical period reflected increases in civilian employment,
offsetting decreasing military employment. Employment in agriculture-
forestry-fisheries is assumed to be dominated by increases in fisheries.
Given favorable conditions, employment in Alaska fisheries has been pro-
jected to increase by almost four times between 1975 and 2000. This will
result \'lith the establishment of an American trawl fishery which com-
pletely replaces foreign fishing off Alaska (ISER, 1979). The opposite
extreme would be an assumption of no employment growth without bottomfish
113
development. In this study, we assume an average rate of growth of
3 percent per year. This is consistent with moderate replacement of
the foreign fishery by Alaskans (Scott, 1979).
Output in manufacturing is assumed to increase at an average annual rate
. of 4 percent, which is consistent with both the historical trend and the
assumed growth in the fisheries industry.
National Variables
Alaska is part of the larger U.S. economy, and it is affected by changes
in the national economy. Three assumptions about the future growth of
the U.S. economy are needed. These assumptions are based upon the long-
term projections of the consumer price index by Data Resources, Inc.
Assumed U.S. rates were those from DRI's TRENDCONG0678 forecas~ (DRI,
1978). This assumption assumes the continuation of long-term trends in
important exogenous variables. The average annual rate over the period
of the forecast was used as our assumption. The consumer price index
was assumed to grow at 5.5 percent per year .. The U.S. real per capita
disposable income, adjusted to reflect consistent tax assumptions, was
assumed to grow at 2.2 percent per year. Finally, DRI does not provide
a projection of U.S. weekly compensation. U.S. weekly compensation was
assumed to increase at a rate of 6.8 percent per year.
Petroleum Revenues
The petroleum revenues received by the state consist of royalties, pro-
duction taxes, property taxes, and the corporate income tax. The major
114
[
[
r
r
r
[:
r
[
r L
L
[
[
C
E
[
[~
L
[
[
[
[
[
[
r L.J
r
L
[
5
L
L
r:
L
f'
L
source o.f these revenues in the projection period is the Prudhoe fields.
The revenues are determined by the assumed rate of production of oil
and gas and its wellhead value. Prudhoe oil production is assumed to
peak in 1985 at 641.5 million barrels~ while gas production is assumed
to maintain its peak production of 912 billion cubic feet per year once
this is reached in 1987. The wellhead value of Prudhoe oil is deter-
mined by the following assumptions: constant real West Coast market
price of $12 per barrel~ constant real vessel and processing costs of
$1.75 per barrel, and a TAPS tariff of $5.25 in 1978. The nominal TAPS
tariff is assumed to remain constant until 1990 when increasing operating
costs are assumed to dominate decreasing capital costs; after 1990, the
real tariff is assumed to remain constant. The wellhead value of gas
was assumed to equal $1 .00 per MCF in 1978; this assumes the producers
pay a $.45 per MCF processing cost.1 These wellhead values are only part
of an array of many possible wellhead values. The range of wellhead
values is a _function of the uncertainty about the future levels of those
factors influencing these values. Revenues are determined by existing
state la\"/S describing royalties, production taxes, property taxes, and
corporate income taxes.
THE STATE EXPENDITURE RULE
Because of the central role of state and local government in the Alaska
economy and because the behavior of these governmental units depends
largely on policy choices to be made over the next several years within
1These base case assumptions were selected prior to the passage of
the 1978 Energy Bill which sets a ceiling of $1.68 per MCF on Prudhoe gas.
115
a framework far different from the past, the treatment of expenditures
by state and local governments is a central feature of any development
scenario.
Over the projection period, the state government is assumed to receive
revenues from oil development which far exceed current levels of expen-
ditures. The rate at which state government chooses to spend these
revenues and the composition of these expenditures will serve to deter-
mine not only direct employment in the government sector but will also
impact all endogenous sectors.
Two factors determine the current framework in which state expenditure
policy will be determined. First, revenues to the state will increase
tremendously with the completion of the trans-Alaska oil pipeline. These
revenues will follow closely the pattern of production from Prudhoe Bay.
Secondly, the establishment of the Permanent Fu~d will place new con-
straints on the use of certain petroleum revenues. The Permanent Fund
was adopted in 1976 as a constitutional amendment. It established that
a minimum of 25 percent of all mineral lease rentals, royalties, royalty
sale proceeds, federal mineral revenue sharing payments, and bonuses
received by the state would be placed in the fund. This forced savings
is only a portion of the revenues available to the state. Revenues
accumulating in the General Fund will be greater than in the Permanent
Fund for most of the period.
116
[
[
[
[
[
r.
r·
[
r
L
[
-[
c
c
E
[
[
f-
L
r
L
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
r-L~
r
L
[
[
c
c
L
[
L
r
L
r~
l :
L-'
These changes in the structure of state spending limit the usefulness of
past spending policies in determining the spending rules to be used.
The rate of state expenditures, because it is a matter of policy choice
to be made within a framework far different from past experience, cannot
be modeled simply from past exp~rience. However, past experience can
provide a guide for developing the hypothetical spending rule used in
the simulation. Scott, in his paper 11 Behavioral Aspects of the State
of Alaska's Operating Budget FY 1970 -FY 1977,'' found two major factors
responsible for the growth ·of state expenditures. First, real per capita
~tate expenditures increased in response to real per capita income growth,
. a demand effect. Secondly, expenditures increased in relation to the
available funds for state expenditures. The pattern between capital and
operating expenditures differed. Capital expenditures increased strongly
in response to available fund growth but the higher levels were not main-
tained. The higher levels of operating expenditures were maintained.
Adjustments to available funds seemed to provide a new base for the
growth of these expenditures.
Based on this analysis, the following pattern of state expenditures was
assumed. Expenditures were assumed to increase in response to increases
in personal income. The income elasticity of both capital and operat·ing
expenditures was less than one to reflect assumed increases in scale
economies associated with the production of state services. The major
difference was that the real level of state operating expenditures was
assumed to be maintained while the level of capital expenditures could
fall.
117
The response to fund avai 1 ability was composed of two parts. Expendi-
tures responded to changes in the general fund balance. The response
was weighted depending on the existing surplus; the weight equalled the
previous-year fund balance divided by general fund expenditures. In other
words, the response to a change in the general fund was weighted by the
number of years of existing expenditures which could be taken out 6f the
general fund. The response of capital expenditures was greater than the
operating expenditure response.
Most relationships in the model are derived from historical relations.
The elasticities in the operating and capital expenditure equations cannot
be derived in this manner since the structure will be uniquely different
in the future. Assumptions about these elasticities must be made. The
elasticities in both sets of equations are chosen so that the elasticity
of real per capita income equals .5. Real per capita expenditures in-
crease at half the rate that real per capita incomes increase. This
rate was chosen both to reflect economies of scale in production of
government services and to reflect a decreased importance of state gov-
ernment in the Alaskan economy. Alaska has a much higher ratio of state
expenditures to personal income than other states, and it was assumed
that this ratio should fall toward the other states. The elasticities
for the supply-affected portion of growth were determined by examining
the changes in the period 1970 to 1971, which was the last period of
rising general fund balance. Based on examining changes in this period,
elasticities on the weighted increase in the general fund of 2 percent
for the operating budget and 10 percent for the capital budget were used.
118
[
[
[
[
L
r·-
L
[
r
L
[
[
b
[
E
[
[
J ~
L
r:
L
L
r
f'
[
[
[
[
[
[
r
L
[
B
c
c
c
[
[
r
L
Admittedly, these expenditure rules are highly speculative, but they
seem to reflect the wide range of policy choices open to state govern-
ment as a consequence of new oil revenues. It is impossible to predict
the specific expenditure path. Because of this, we assume a hypothetical
rule which is reasonable. The sensitivity of the impacts measured with
this rule will be tested.
ALTERNATIVE OCS SCENARIOS
Three alternative scenarios describing OCS activity prior to the Northern
Gulf lease sale will be described in this section. Two lease sale areas,
the Lower Cook Inlet and Beaufort Sea, are involved. The first Lower Cook
lease sale took place in 1977, and the Beaufort sale is scheduled for 1979.
The three alternative scenarios describe low, moderate, and high levels of
activity in each area. The employment levels in each of these scenarios
are described in Tables 35 and 36.
These scenarios differ in timing as well as magnitude. The Lower Cook
scenarios range from an exploration-only case to a high case with peak
employment of almost 2,500. The timing differs significantly between
the moderate and high scenarios, with the moderate scenario reaching peak
employment three years prior to the high scenario. The high Lower Cook
scenario also contains the development of an LNG plant with 60 employees
during its operation.
119
TABLE 35. LOWER COOK INLET EMPLOYMENT SCENARIOS
Low 1 Moderate 2 Hi hl
Mining Mining Construction Mining Construction
1978 84 70 0 84 0
1979 126 321 88 126 0
1980 252 664 162 252 0
1981 210 804 108 486 213
1982 126 572 38 776 213
1983 84 523 0 1,285 543
1984 42 622 0 1,590 858
1985 42 604 0 1,548 317
1986 0 545 0 1,347 0
1987 0 411 0 1 , 139 0
1988 0 417 0 1 '139 0
1989 0 417 0 1 '139 0
1990 0 417 0 1 '139 0
1991 0 417 0 1,139 0
1992 0 417 0 1,139 0
1993 0 417 0 1 , 139 0
1994 0 417 0 1 '139 0
1995 0 417 0 1,139 0
1996 0 417 0 1 , 139 0
1997 0 417 0 1 '139 0
1998 0 417 0 1 , 139 0
1999 0 417 0 1 , 139 0
2000 0 417 0 1 , 139 0
Manufacturing
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
l.
l.
r
[
r
r~
[
[
r
L
[
L
[
C
E
1Based on scenarios in Lower Cook Inlet, Final Environmental Impact ~
Statement, 1976. l
2Based on Lower Cook Inlet scenario in Beaufort Sea Petroleum Develop-l-
ment Scenarios. Economic and Demographic Impacts, Technical Report No. 18, _
Alaska OCS Socioeconomic Studies Program, 1978. Distribution between off-
shore/onshore and industry was based on the distribution in the Lower 1 ·
Cook EIS. L
L
120
L
[
[
TABLE 36. BEAUFORT SEA OCS EMPLOYMENT SCENARIOS
f
Low Moderate High
[ Mining Construction Mining Construction Mining Construction
[ 1981 67 49 67 49 67 49
1982 198 198 198 198 198 198
1983 198 247 198 247 198 247
[ 1984 232 247 232 247 232 247
1985 67 99 67 99 67 99
. -.
1986 70 281 112 304 70 403
[ 1987 123 331 276 333 148 642
1988 228 395 479 466 321 810
1989 345 395 616 466 583 761 r 1990 387 132 595 155 710 254
L.1
1991 434 132 524 155 758 254
f' 1992 388 66 503 77 748 127
1993 355 132 432 155 681 254 L 1994 333 132 535 155 647 254
1995 334 59 438 77 616 127
[ 1996 333 18 440 22 572 36
1997 332 0 417 0 551 0
[! 1998 330 0 393 0 547 0
1999 327 0 393 0 548 0
2000 325 0 394 0 542 0
[]
c
L
[
[
['
L SOURCE: BLM-A1aska OCS Office.
r
L
121
[
"
All three Beaufort scenarios contain production of oil and gas. There
is less variation in the Beaufort scenarios than in Lower Cook. In all
cases, peak employment occurs in 1989; it ranges from 740 in the low sce-
nario to 1 ,344 in the high scenario. Since the Beaufort is a joint state-
federal lease sale, it also provides increased revenues to the state. These
include bonus, royalty, severance tax, property tax, and corporate income
tax revenues. They are described in Appendix B.
Developing these alternative base case scenarios allows us to assess the
effects of the level of previous OCS activity on the impacts of the sale
under consideration. The uncertainty of the level of OCS activity makes
this necessary. By comparing the impact of a Northern Gulf scenario with
different base case scenarios, we can assess the sensitivity of development
to previous OCS activity.
The Causes of Economic Growth
The growth of the Alaskan economy is determined by three separate but
interrelated factors: changes in the level of employment in the exogenous
sectors of the economy, changes in the level of personal income, and
changes in state expenditures. If we define economic growth as the
expansion of employment, the effect of these factors can be seen.
Growth of the exogenous sector directly affects economic g1~owth by the
employment it creates. The growth of this sector is determined by external
demand for Alaskan products. The most obvious example of this type of
122
r:
L
[
[
[
c
c
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
~
c
c
6
[
[
[
growth is the employment associated with the cons.truction of the trans-
Alaska pipeline. The employment generated by this project was determined
by demand for Alaska's petroleum resources.
The growth of state expenditures is another source of economic growth.
State expenditures are a source of growth, since they translate revenues
raised outside of the Alaskan economy, such as petroleum-related revenues,
into demand for Alaskan products. State expenditures influence employ-
ment growth in two ways. First, state· capital expenditures on projects.
such as ports and highways increase the output of the construction industry.
This increases the demand for construction employment. Secondly, state
operating expenditures are partially spent on personnel expenditures.
This determines the level of state government employment.
State spending will be determined by two influences which are proxies
for demand and supply effects. The demand for state government services,
as measured by expenditures, has been shown to be income elastic.
Growth of income will generate demand for increased government services.
The second influence on expenditures is a supply influence. With the
flow of revenues from Prudhoe Bay oil and gas, Alaska will begin to
accumulate a surplus in its General Fund. This surplus, unlike the sur-
plus in the Permanent Fund, can be used for state government expenditures.
This fund balance is assumed to have a supply effect on expenditures,
causing them to be increased as funds accumulate in the balance. This
is an assumption which is requir~d about future state spending patterns.
123
The effect of state expenditures on employment is determined by the wage
rate of state employees. Once state personnel expenditures are deter-
mined, the wage rate determines the number of state employees.
Employment in each of these sectors influences the growth of the economy
through the increased demand for goods and services produced in Alaska.
For endogenous sectors, employment is determined by the demand for labor
needed to produce a desired level of output. The demand for output is a
function of real disposable income. Demand is income elastic, so that
increases in personal income lead to increased demand. This effect is
simultaneous; increased incomes lead to increased demand which increases
employment. This increased employment generates its own demand, and the
process continues. The process stops when leakages outside the economy
dominate the flow of income.
Income increases with increases in the average income per worker and
with increases in the number of vmrkers in the economy. The average
income is substantially determined by wages and salaries, so it reflects
changes in the wage rate. The real wage rate is determined by changes
in prices, bottlenecks in the economy associated with rapid growth, and
changes in outside wages. The U.S. labor market affects the Alaskan
real wage rate because of the small size of the Alaskan labor market and
the mobility of Alaskan workers. Because of these factors, migration
becomes the equilibrating factor mainta1ning the relation between Alaska
and U.S. wages. Slow growth leads to out-migration and a reduction in
the supply of labor, not a reduction in the relative wage differential.
124
[
L
r \_.i
r:
L
[
L
[
c
b
[
L
,-
L
['
L
L
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
r
L
[
[J
c
c
c
[
L
r=
L
r
L
Changes in the sectoral composition of employment will also affect the
average wage. As high wage sectors such as construction and mining
increase in importance, wages and salaries will increase more than
proportionally to employment growth.
The response of the economy to increases in income will be determined by
the structure of the economy. Larger economies provide more of their
own goods and services, there are fewer leakages, and the multiplier is
larger. This results because economies of scale allow lowered produc-
tion costs and import substitution. Growth by affecting the structure
of the economy wi 11 influence the response of the economy to increases
in income.
The effect of an increase in personal income on growth will also depend
on the increase in prices resulting from growth. Real income determines
the demand for goods and services. The price level of the Alaskan economy
is determined by U.S. prices, since Alaska imports most of its goods.
The size of the economy also affects the price level; larger economies
provide economies of scale which reduce the cost of production and reduce
prices. The rate of growth also affects prices. Rapidly growing regions
are more subject to bottlenecks and supply constraints which lead to
price increases.
Employment and income growth influence the growth of population in the
state. Population grows as a result of natural increase and migration.
Natural increase (the excess of births over deaths) is a function of the
125
age distribution of the population. Migration is determined by the rela-
tive economic opportunities available in Alaska. Changes in employment
opportunities and the relative per capita income between Alaska and the
rest of the United States will determine migration. Migration has a
considerable effect on the age-sex distribution of the population.
Migration~ r1hich is determined by economic opportunities, primarily
affects the age group under forty. Migration after forty years of age
is a response to other factors such as retirement and the high cost of
living (Seiver, 1975). Because of this, migration is a response to
changing economic opportunities and will affect the proportion of the
population under forty.
State economic growth does not occur uniformly throughout the state but
varies by region. Regional growth depends on the factors causing growth.
Factors which have a similar influence on state growth may affect. the
growth in each region differently. For example, equal growth in state
government employment and exogenous employment, although they may affect
state gt~m'lth the same, will differ in their regional impacts, depending
on the concentration of exogenous employment and the dispersion of state
government expenditures.
The causes of regional growth are the same as those at the state level:
increases in exogenous employment, increases in personal income, and in-
creases in state expenditures. Growth of any of these factors within the
region will lead to growth in the region. The economies of Alaskan regions
are not independent; they are interdependent. Because of this, growth in
126
r l,_;
c
L
r
[
c
c
E
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
c
c.
[
c
[
[
r
L
r
b;
one region will affect growth in other regions. Four processes reflect
this interaction; the strength of the interdependence of the Alaskan
regional economies depends on the strength of these processes. First,
government spending works to distribute growth between the regions.
Increases in state revenues which result from growth in one region will
be translated into growth in other regions through the distribution of
state expenditures. State expenditures are distributed to a region in
relation to its population. However, government centers such as Anchorage
and Juneau receive a greater-than-proportionate share of state expendi-
tures because of the administrative and headquarters functions they serve.
Second, changes in state wage rates will affect growth in the regions.
Increases in wage rates increase personal incomes in each region and
the demand for goods and services in each region. Wage rate increases
throughout the state can result from increases in construction employ-
ment in one region. Third, regions which serve as regional centers will
reflect growth in other regions, since they provide goods and services
to other regions. The growth of Anchorage which serves as the financial,
distributional, and adminstrative center of the state is the most obvi-
ous example of this, although smaller centers such as Fairbanks also
experience this type of relation. Finally, migration between regions
illustrates interaction of the regional economies. Residents of one
region respond to employment opportunities in another region by migrat-
ing to it, so that employment growth in one region determines the
population of other regions.
127
The Alaskan Economy
Moderate Base Case Growth
The base case describes the general pattern of Alaska economic growth
without development in the Northern Gulf of Alaska OCS. The impact of
Northern Gulf development will be measured as changes from this base case
pattern of growth. In analyzing the projected base case growth, we will
examine the change in the magnitudes of the important economic variables,
as well as changes in·the economic structure or process of growth.
The historical economic growth serves as a reference for describing future
projected growth. Between 1965 and 1976, the Alaska economy experienced
rapid growth. Employment grew at an annual average rate of 8.4 percent
throughout the period. Expansion of the mining and construction was largely
responsible for this growth. Economic growth also produced some structural
changes. The most significant of these were the increased importance of
the support sector and the aging of the population. Population grew at an
annual rate of 4.1 percent over the period; migration was responsible for
the large proportion of this growth. Growth had little effect on unemploy-
ment but did improve real per capita incomes of Alaskans relative to the
w.s. average. Historical growth had opposite effects on prices. As the
scale of the economy grew, the price level relative to the United States
fell; however, the rapid growth connected with the impact of TAPS reversed
this trend.
128
[
[
[
[
[
[
c
[
L
L
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
r
L
[
c
c
c
c
[
L
L
L
r:
b
The overall growth of the state economy in the future will be affected
by growth in its basic sector. Rapid increases or declines in this
sector provide interesting periods for our analysis. The early 1980s
are important for basic sector growth. Two special construction proj-
ects, the ALCAN gas line and the Pacific LNG plant, have peak construc-
tion years between 1981 and 1983. Mining activity is also important.
Prudhoe employment is assumed to fall from about 1,800 in 1980 to about
900 in 1983 and then begin to rise; Lower Cook OCS activity peaks in
1981; and Beaufort OCS development begins in 1981. Another event of
importance is the shutdown of the Upper Cook Inlet oil production in
1990. This reduces mining employment by 450, an 11 percent fall. Peak
Prudhoe oil production occurs in 1985; the effect of this on revenues to
the state government makes this an important point in time to consider.
THE STATE
The General Pattern of Development
Economic growth is a multidimensional process which no one indicator can
describe. While population, employment, and personal income do not describe
the full range of growth, they can be used to describe the general pattern
of growth. Employment measures the ability of the economy to create jobs;
personal income measures the effect of the economy on residents• command
over goods and services; and population growth describes the response of
people to these changing economic opportunities. Table 37 shows the pro-
jected levels of population, employment, and personal income. Overall,
there is substantial growth, although it is not so rapid as in the period
between 1965 and 1976.
129
1977
1978
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
TABLE 37. AGGREGATE INDICATORS OF ECONOMIC GROWTH
MODERATE BASE CASE, ALASKA
1977-2000
Personal Income
Population Employment (Millions of Nominal
410,660 185,508 4,072
406,667 178,526 4,236
418,656 185,225 4,743
434,173 194,054 5,395
455,563 206,479 6,401
486,359 224,637 7,916
502,802 230,228 8,571
501 ,479 223,159 8,276
509,057 224,931 8,810
523,083 231,906 9,763
539,029 240,132 10,854
55.6 '942 249,550 12' 146
575,352 259,033 13,531
591 ,580 266,632 14,836
606 '771 273,502 16,226
622,686 280,902 17,781
640,335 289,580 19,613
658,298 298,329 21 ,602
677,649 308,016 23,829
698,466 318,616 26,434
719,126 328,881 29,095
740,455 339,495 32 '116
764,593 352,046 35,661
789,287 364,721 39,559
SOURCE: MAP Model
130
$)
[
~
[
[
[
[
[
r \.._.....;
r
L
[
[
[
c
L
[
[
r
L
r -
L
L
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
r L
G
D
[
[
[
[
r
L
Population is projected to be approximately 789,000 by 2000. Between 1978
and 2000, the population grows at an annual rate of almost 3.1 percent.
This rate is approximately 25 percent less than the average annual growth
rate experienced between 1965 and 1976 but faster than the average rate
of 2.8 percent experienced prior to the construction of TAPS. Population
falls after the completion of both TAPS in 1977 and ALCAN in 1983. In
each case, population declines by less than one percent, and the peak
population is exceeded the following year. The most rapid period of
population growth occurs between 1978, the year TAPS is completed, and
1982, the peak year of ALCAN construction. During this per·iod, popuiation
increases at a rate of 4.6 percent per year.
Employment is projected to grow at an average annual rate of 3.3 percent,
reaching approximately 365,000 by 2000. Like population, employment ex-
periences its greatest growth between 1978 and 1982 when it grows at a
rate of 5.9 percent per year. These projected growth rates are not so
great as the 8.4 percent rate of growth experienced between 1965 and 1976.
Employment is projected to decline after completion of both the TAPS and
ALCAN projects. The decline is more substantial than the decline in popu-
lation, being approximately 4 percent in each case. The 1983 employment
level is not reached until 1986. Employment is projected to grow faster
than population throughout the forecast period; this supports the trend
observed in the historical period. By 2000 the dependency ratio has
fa 11 en to 2. 2.
131
The growth in personal income is related to the growth in employment,
since wages and salaries are a major component of personal income.
Changes in the composition of employment, changes in the productivity
of labor, and changes in the level of prices will result in differential
rates of growth between personal income and employment. Personal income
is in nominal dollars, so it reflects both the real growth of the economy
and increases in prices. Personal income grows at an annual average rate
of 10.6 percent. Personal income grows faster in the period prior to the
1983 ALCAN peak construction. Between 1978 and 1983, personal income grows
at a rate of 15.1 percent per year; this is 4.8 percent greater than the
average yearly rate between 1984 and 2000. This illustrates the importance
of the high-wage pipeline construction employment to growth in personal
income. Between 1978 and 2000, personal income grows at an annual average
rate of 10.7 percent, which is less than the 15.4 percent rate experienced
between 1965 and 1976.
Although population, employment, and personal income do not experience
growth at so rapid a rate as they experienced between 1965 and 2000, eco-
nomic growth is projected to be substantial. Employment is projected to
increase by 104 percent, population by 94 percent, and personal income by
834 percent between 1978 and 2000. The difference between the projection
and the historical period is caused by the major role pipeline construe-
tion played in the historical period.
132
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
r
L
[
C
c
[
c
[
[
f'
L
r~
L
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
F'
L
c
c
0
c
[
[
r L
r
b
Employment and the Structure of the Economy
The increased demand for industrial output will result in growth of Alaska
employment. Total Alaska employment is projected to more than double by
the end of the projection period. We saw in the historical period that
growth does not occur in all industrial sectors evenly. Between 1965 and
197~, we observed structural change which increased the importance of the
support sector in the economy. The projected economic growth continues
the structural change observed in the historical period.
Table 38 illustrates the changing structure of the Alaska economy. This
table shows the growth of three sectors of the Alaska economy--the support
sector which includes transportation-communication-utilities, trade, finance,
and service employment; the government sector which includes state, local,
federal civilian, and federal military employment; and the basic sector
which includes mining, manufacturing, agriculture-forestry-fisheries, and
construction.
The sector which is projected to grow most rapidly is the support sector.
This sector grows at an annual average rate of approximately 5 percent
between 1978 and 2000; this is 1.7 percent faster than the growth of total
employment. The support sector expands more rapidly in all parts of the
period. This sector expands its share from approximately 37 percent of
total employment in 1978 to 53 percent by 2000. Expansion of this sector
is consistent with past trends in the Alaska economy. This projected
expansion of this sector does not exceed the limits suggested by national
comparisons. The projected share is close to the average share of this
133
TABLE 38. THE STRUCTURE OF EMPLOYMENT
MODERATE BASE CASE, ALASKA
1978' 1980' 1985' 1990' 2000
Support Sector Government Ba:;ic Sector
Employment % of Tota 1 Employment % of Tota 1 Employment %
1978 66,504 37.3 68,862 38.6 43,159
1980 76,658 39.5 69,783 36.0 47,612
1985 95,975 42.7 74,472 33.1 54,484
1990 123,176 46.2 78,919 29.6 64,536
1995 152,850 49.6 81,743 26.5 73,424
2000 193,506 53.1 84,417 23.1 86,798
Support Sector includes transportation-communication-public utilities,
trade, finance, and service employment.
Government includes state, local, and federal employment.
of Tota 1
24.2
24.5
24.2
24.2
23.8
23.8
Basic Sector includes mining, manufacturing, agriculture-forestry-fisheries,
and construction employment.
SOURCE: MAP Model
134
r
[
r L
[
[
[
r:
L
I' L
c
E
b
c
L
r
L
r
L
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
r
L
c
G
[
c
[
[
r
L
sector in the U.S. economy and several small states described in Table 7.
The support sector expands because of increased demand for goods and
services. Demand increases as incomes increase. The nonproportional
response of this sector occurs as the scale of the economy expands and
allows more local production of these goods and services.
The nongovernment basic sector maintains a relatively constant share of
total employment throughout the projection period. Its share is close to
24 percent in all years except those connected with large special projects.
The share of total employment is between 25 and 26 percent in the period
with ALCAN construction. Employment in the nongovernment basic sector
expands at an average annual rate of 3.2 percent between 1978 and 2000.
Employment in this sector reaches a peak of approximately 58,000 in 1982
and 1983 when both the ALCAN and Pacific LNG projects are at their peak.
After completion of these projects in 1983, basic sector employment falls
by almost 8 percent. The peak level is not reached again until 1987.
Growth in this sector after the ALCAN project averages an annual rate
of 3.0 percent. Growth is primarily a result of the expansion of manu-
facturing and construction since there is only limited expansion of
special project construction and mining.
The growth of the government sector is a result of the expansion of state
and local government since federal employment is assumed to follow its
historic trend and remain constant. State and local government employment
increases by almost 16,000 between 1978 and 2000. The growth of state
and local government is not strong enough to maintain the share of the
135
government sector. The share of government employment falls from almost
39 percent in 1978 to 23 percent in 2000.
Population
Population grows through natura 1 increase and net in-migration. Natura 1
increase occurs when there is an excess of births over deaths. Migration
results in population increases when in-migrants outnumber out-migrants,
and population decreases when the opposite is true. Each of these factors
affects not only the size of the population but the age and sex distribu-
tion as \vell. The projected population increase of 382,620 between 1978
and 2000 is significantly affected by migration. Population growth in the
base case also continues the aging of the population. Table 39 shows the
components of population change.
As in most small regions experiencing rapid growth, migration is the most
important component of population change. Table 39 shows net migration
from the previous year. Between 1978 and 2000, almost half of the popula-
tion growth is net in-migration. Net in-migration occurs in all but .four
years of the projection period; net out-migration occurs in 1978, 1984,
and 1985--years following the completion of major TAPS and ALCAN construe-
tion. The economic opportunities associated with ALCAN and Pacific LNG
construction are also responsible for major in-migration in 1981 when
migration is responsible for 67 percent of the population growth, and in
1982 when migration accounts for 75 percent of the population growth.
In other years, population increase is divided almost evenly between net
in-migration and natural increase.
136
[
[
[
[
["
[
[
c
r
L
[
c
c
E
b
c
L
('
L
f'
L
L
[
[
TABLE 39. THE COMPONENTS OF POPULATION CHANGE
[ MODERATE BASE CASE, ALASKA
1977-2000
[ Net Migration Natural Increase
f' 1977 -24,935 6,383
1978 -11,241 7,202 _,
1979 5,268 6,697
[ 1980 8,650 6,870
1981 14,253 7,144
1982 23' 180 . 7,633
[ 1983 8,014 8,460
1984 -9,943 . 8,626
1985 -0,528 8,082
[ 1986 6,046 7,971
1987 7,828 8,120
f' 1988 9,585 8,332
1989 9,802 8,614 L. 1990 7,336 8,900
c~ 1991 6,111 9,082 L 1992 6,694 9,220
1993 8,264 9,386
0 1994 8,349 9,616
1995 9,508 9,845
w
1996 1 0, 701 10,120
1997 10,228 10,438
1998 10,603 10,729
1999 13,110 11 , 031 u 2000 13,274 11 ,429
c
[
[
r SOURCE: MAP Model L
r
b
E
137
Population growth results in changes to the age-sex distribution of the
population. Table 40 compares the age-sex distribution of the population
in 1980 and 2000. The aging of the population is projected to continue
with the cohorts over 30 gaining as a proportion of the population. The
proportion of the population over 30 increases from 37.6 percent in 1980
to 43 percent in 2000. One reason for the fall in the dependency ratio
can be easily seen; between 1980 and 2000, the proportion of children
(0-14) falls from 29.6 percent to 28.0 percent.
Personal Income
Personal income is projected to increase at an average rate of 10.6 percent
per year. Increase in personal income is one of the benefits of growth;
it measures the command of residents over goods and services. The full
effect of increases in personal income is diminished by increases in
prices; as prices of goods and services increase, a dollar can buy less.
Economies which increase real personal income may not be increasing bene-
fits if it does not increase as fast as population. Increases in real
pe~ capita income measure real increases in the command of the average
resident over goods and services. Table 41 shows the projected change
in the price level (RPI) and real per capita income.
The Alaska relative price index measures the increase in Alaska prices
relative to a 1957 U.S. average. RPI increases at an average annual rate
of 4.7 percent. Over the period, RPI moves toward the U.S. average
since U.S. CPI is assumed to increase faster, at a rate of 5.5 percent
per year. This supports the pre-pipeline trend; as the scale of the
138
r
[
[
[
f'
L
[
[~
L
[
[
c
[
c
[
L
r
L
r
L
[
[
[
[
[
[
['
[
[
r~
L
r
L
8
c
[
[
[
[
TABLE 40. AGE-SEX STRUCTURE OF THE POPULATION
MODERATE BASE CASE, ALASKA
1980 and 2000
1980 2000
Age Cohorts Males Females Males Females
0 -14 15.08 14.56 14.25 13.79
15 -29 18.47 14.33 15.92 13.14
30 -49 13.35 12.12 14.67 13.27
50 -59 3.31 2.92 3.84 3.72
60 + 3.06 2.81 3.43 3.97
r· SOURCE: MAP Model.
L
r
L
139
TABLE 41. REAL PER CAPITA INCOME
MODERATE BASE CASE, ALASKA
1977-2000
Real Per Capita Alaska Relative
Income Price Index
1977 3,924 252.71
1978 3,724 279.75
1979 3,862 293.36
1980 4,029 308.40
1981 4,317 325.47
1982 4,711 345.51
1983 4,720 361.12
1984 4,431 372.44
1985 4,463 387.79
1986 4,598 405.92
1987 4,732 425.53
1988 4,886 446.35
1989 5,024 468.12
1990 5' 119 489.91
1991 5,221 512.19
1992 5,330 535.75
1993 5,462 560.82
1994 5,590 587.03
1995 5,720 614.78
1996 5,875 644.16
1997 5,997 674.62
1998 6 '139 706.48
1999 6,297 740.64
2000 6,456 776.37
SOURCE: MAP Model
140
[
[
[
[
[
1'
[
r:
L~
r
L
c
[
[
[
c
L
I
L
r
L
L
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
r,
r
L
r~
L
[
G
c
L
[
c
economy increases and more goods and services are produced locally, the
price level falls relative to the U.S. average. During the buildup of the
ALCAN and Pacific LNG, RPI increases faster than the U.S. CPl. This
diverging price level is a result of the rapid growth connected with
development. Overall, the price level follows trends similar to the
historical growth.
Real per capita income expands by 73 percent between 1978 and 2000. The
average rate of growth is 2.5 percent per year. This is less than the
5.4 percent growth in real per capita income between 1965 and 1976 and
the 3.5 percent annual growth rate prior to TAPS construction between
1965 and 1973. This rate is slightly greater than the 2.2 percent increase
assumed for the United States in general. The high wage of special proj-
ect construction workers affects real per capita incomes--real per capita.
income peaks in 1982 and 1983 and falls by 6 percent after the peak ALCAN
year. The rise in real per capita incomes shows an increase in benefits
of growth; however, this does not address distributional questions concern-
ing personal income.
The State Fiscal Position
Over the projection period, state government will receive revenues from
petroleum development which exceed current levels of expenditure. State
government's decision on the expenditure of these revenues will influence
the growth of the Alaska economy. In the historical period, we observed
state government's role in the growth process. State government contributes
141
to growth by the expenditure of revenues directly through state government
employment and indirectly through capital expenditures, which influences
the level of activity in the construction sector. When revenues from
outside the economy such as exogenous petroleum revenues are spent, this
extra demand causes growth. This section describes the projected revenues
to the state, the state•s projected expenditures, and the overall fiscal
position of the state in the projection period.
State Revenues. The State of A"laska has two major sources of revenue,
exogenous petroleum revenues which are determined by the flow of oil and
gas on state lands and endogenous tax revenues which are determined by
the state•s economic activity. Endogenous tax revenues include income
tax, business taxes, and other revenues determined by the growth of the
1 economy. Table 42 shows the growth of state government revenues between
1977 and 2000. Total revenues are almost $6.9 billion larger in 2000 than
in 1977. Overall, these revenues increase at a rate of 10.3 percent per
year. Prudhoe oil revenues peak in 1985. Prior to 1985, the rate of
increase in revenues averages 20.9 percent per year, while this slows to
5.1 percent following 1985. The pattern of revenues follows the pattern
of petroleum revenues received by the state.
The most important source of revenues to the state during the period
between 1977 and 2000 are petroleum revenues. Petroleum revenues include
royalties, production taxes, property taxes, and petroleum corporate
1other tax revenues include revenues from the personal income tax,
nonpetroleum corporate income tax, business license tax, motor fuels tax,
alcohol tax, cigarette tax, school tax, ad valorem tax, and other miscel-
laneous taxes.
142
[
[
[
r:
L
[
['
[
p
L
[
[
L
f
L
r
L
l
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
1977.
1978
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
r L SOURCE: MAP Model
TABLE 42. STATE REVENUES
MODERATE BASE CASE, ALASKA
1977-2000
(Millions of Nominal Dollars)
General Fund Petroleum
Revenues Revenues
796 197
1 ,054 471
1 ,441 861
1 ,625 996
1 ,988 1,278
2,329 1,476
2,651 1 ,643
3,224 2,122
3,629 2,422
3,811 2,431
4,058 2,480
4,312 2,521
4,583 2,563
4,712 2,459
4,880 2,406
5,129 2,430
5,402 2,459
5,637 2,427
. 5,864 2,374
6 '162 2,366
6,494 2,367
6,840 2,365
7,234 2,371
7,678 2,372
143
Other Tax
Revenues
214
207
274
313
355
437
552
650
682
737
793
872
955
1,035
1 '1 08
1 ,208
1 ,324
1,445
1 ,578
1 '750
1 ,944
2,159
2,415
2,718
income taxes from petroleum production. Petroleum revenues are earned
from production on state lands in Upper Cook Inlet, Prudhoe Bay, and
the Beaufort Sea. Because of their importance, Prudhoe Bay production
dominates these revenue flows. Petroleum revenues increase until 1989,
after which their general pattern is declining revenues~ The decrease
in revenues reflects declining production at Prudhoe Bay. Between 1977
and 1989, yearly petroleum revenues increase at an average rate of over
23.8 percent a year. After 1989 petroleum revenues fall, falling 7.5 per-
cent by 2000. Other tax revenues, which include personal and business
taxes, increase throughout the projection period. The increase in these
revenues results from the growth of the economy. These revenues grow at
an average rate of 11.6 percent between 1977 and 2000. Other tax revenues
fall after completion of TAPS in 1977. The increase in these revenues
after 1990 counteracts the decline in petroleum revenues.
State Expenditures. State government expenditures increase during the
projection period; they are shown in Table 43. The increase in state
expenditures is a result of two forces. First, expenditures grow as a
response to the general growth of the economy. Increased population and
prices result in increasing expenditures to provide the same level of
services as measured by real per capita expenditures. The growth of
income is assumed to increase the demand for the level of services pro-
vided. The second force operating on state expenditures is the accumulation
of unspent revenues. These revenues will place pressure on the government
to increase expenditures.
144
r:
L
r-
L
r
L
[
[
[
TABLE 43. STATE EXPENDITURES
[ MODERATE BASE CASE, ALASKA
1977-2000
[ Total Expenditures Real Per Capita
(Millions of Nominal Dollars) ExQenditures
,~,
L 1977 . 1 , 161 1,119
1978 1 ,311 1 , 152
r· 1979 1 ,415 1 , 152
1980 l ,567 1,170 -·
1981 1 ,744 1 , 176
t' 1982 2,015 1,199
_, 1983 2,371 1 ,306
1984 2,580 1 ,381 r 1985 2,74.8 1 ,392
1986 3,062 1,442
r 1987 3,382 1,475
1988 3,750 1 ,509
L 1989 4 '145 1 ,539
1990 4,557 1,572
r~ l_ 1991 4,904 1 ,578
1992 5,284 1,584
[ 1993 5,705 1 ,589 .
1994 6,179 1 ,599
1995 6,667 1,600
G 1996 7,201 1,601
1997 7,809 1 ,610
1998 8,473 1 ,620
Q 1999 9,198 1,624
2000 10,029 1 ,637
[
[~'
[
r
L
SOURCE: MAP Model
r
L
145
t
State expenditures increase more than eight times between 1977 and 2000.
The average annual growth rate during this period is 9.8 percent per year.
After 1989 when petroleum revenues peak, the growth of expenditures is at
a rate of only 8.4 percent per year. The projected growth in state expen-
ditures repeats the experience of the state after the Prudhoe lease sale
over a much longer period. The Prudhoe Bay experience may provide an
indication of how the state will expand services in the future. Despite
the rapid growth of expenditures during the historical period, the func-
tional distribution of expenditures remained fairly stable. From this,
we may be able to infer that the state will continue to distribute experr-
ditures, as in the past, between the nine functional categories {education,
social services, health, natural resources, public protection, justice
development, transportation, and general government) (Goldsmith, 1977).
Real per capita expenditures can be considered a measure of the level of
state services received by an individual. Increases in state expenditures
are of h-10 types: providing additional services and providing the same
level of services to an increased population. Increases in services occur
throughout the period. Real per capita expenditures increase by 46.3 per-
cent between 1977 and 2000. This is a modest expansion when it is compared
to the rise in real per capita expenditures of 118 percent between 1969 and
1973 (Goldsmith, 1977). The growth in real per capita expenditures is not
even throughout the period; almost 81 percent of the increase occurs
between 1977 and 1989 when oil revenues peak.
146
r
[
[
f~
[
[
l'
[
f'
L
[
[
f'
-'
[
[
r~,
--'
[
[
r Li
r
L
c
c
L
r
L
['
6
Balances. The huge increases in revenues which result from the produc-
tion of oil and gas place the State of Alaska in a unique position.
The excess revenues available allow the state to build up its fund bal-
ance. These funds not only provide a source of future revenues; they
also generate interest earnings which increase yearly revenues. There
are two types of fund balances: the permanent fund and the general fund.
(See Table 44.)
The permanent fund is a legislated savings account for the state. In
1976, Alaska adopted a constitutional amendment which established the
permanent fund. The relevant section of the constitution is Article IX,
Section 15, which reads:
ALASKA PERMANENT FUND. At least twenty-five percent of all
mineral lease rentals, royalties, royalty sale proceeds,
federal mineral revenue sharing payments, and bonuses re-
ceived by the State shall be placed in a permanent fund,
the principal of which shall be used only for those income
producing investments specifically designated by law as
eligible for permanent fund investments. All income from
the permanent fund shall be deposited in the general fund
unless otherwise provided by law.
This establishes the permanent fund as a minimum amount of petroleum
revenues which cannot be spent. The permanent fund grows continually
throughout the projection period. By 2000, there are $4.9 billion in
' the permanent fund. The general fund includes the remainder of the
state•s unspent revenues. For most of the period, the general fund
is more important than the permanent fund. At its peak in 1996, the
general fund has $12 billion, which is greater than three times the
amount in the permanent fund. The decline in petroleum revenues after
1989 reduces the rate of increase tn the general fund. Beginning in
147
1977
1978
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
SOURCE: . MAP Mode 1
TABLE 44. STATE FUND BALANCES
MODERATE BASE CASE, ALASKA
1977-2000
(Millions of Nominal Dollars)
General Fund Permanent Fund
Balance Balance
668 2
617 49
815 153
1,054 275
1,500 411
2,056 563
2,630 732
3,558 949
4,748 1,188
5,872 1 ,437
6,983 1,684
8,044 1,936
9,044 2,193
9,837 2,445
10,504 2,689
11 ,096 2 '937 .
11 ,604 3,188
11,956 3,437
12' 128 3,681
12,150 3,924
11,996 4,168
11 ,642 4,413
11 ,086 4,660
10,293 4,907
148
Fund Balance
Interest
35
47
47
69
94
136
186
239
320
421
519
615
708
798
872
937
997
1 '051
1 ,095
1,125
1,145
1,152
1 '146
1,126
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
r L.i
r
L
[
[
c
e
E
c
[
r·
L
L
L
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
['
[
f'
L
L
L
r
L
1997, the general fund is drawn down to make expenditures. Between 1997
and 2000, the general fund is reduced by almost $2 billion. The cyclical
nature of petroleum revenues ~nd their importance as a part of state
revenues mean that when expenditure policies are tied to revenues, they
will eventually lead to expenditures in excess of revenues. Since the
increase in services cannot be supported by normal revenues, the fund
balance must be drawn on. Changes in the.rate of spending out of revenues
will only affect the timing of this, not its eventuality (Goldsmith, 1977).
These fund balances provide an additional source of revenue to the state;
the general fund is assumed to earn interest at a rate of 7 percent per
year, while the permanent fund earns a slightly higher rate of 7.5 percent.
These rates reflect the diverse portfol-io held by the state which includes
both long-and short-term bonds as well as in-state loans. At their peak
in 1997, these revenues are about 18 percent of the state's general fund
revenues. The interest revenues fall as the general fund is decreased.
State Fiscal Position. The state•s fiscal position is determined by two
factors. First, the Prudhoe Bay petroleum revenues are the major portion
of state revenues, which are a fixed flow through time. Growth in the
economy will not affect the level of these revenues. Secondly, economic
growth increases expenditures without the same response in nonpetroleum
revenues. These factors lead to the pattern of the fund balances shown
in the previous section.
Table 45 contains two indicators which illustrate the state•s fiscal
position. The first is the excess of general fund revenues over general
149
1977
1978
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
SOURCE: MAP Model
TABLE 45. STATE FISCAL POSITION
MODERATE BASE CASE, ALASKA
1977-2000
General Fund
Revenues Minus
General Fund
Expenditures Fund Balance
(Mi 11 ions of (Millions of 1977
Nominal Dollars) Constant Dollars)
-137 671 -4 602
302 835
361 1,090
583 1,486
708 1,918
742 2,355
1,145 3,062
1,429 3,873
1,373 4,556
1 ,358 5,153
1 ,313 5,657
1 ,257 6,073
1,044 6,342
912 6,5l7
840 6,627
760 6,673
600 6,634
416 6,506
264 6,313
91 6,062
-109 5,750
-309 5,379
-S46 4,953
150
r:
L
L
[
[
[-
_j
L
[
r
r·
L
l
L
L
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
c
L
r:
l : -
fund expenditures. As long as this is positive, the general fund balance
will increase; when it is negative, the fund balances must be drawn down
to meet expenditures. The excess of revenues over expenditures increases
until 1985, after which it falls. After 1985, expenditures are increasing
faster than revenues. After 1998, expenditures are greater than revenues;
and the fund balance must be drawn down. This pattern has.long-range
effects since it affects not only the level of the general fund but also
the interest earned on the fund balances. This interest is an important
part of revenues to the state.
The other factor affecting the value of the fund balances t~ the state is
prices. As prices increase, the purchasing power of the fund will decrease.
Table 45 shows the value of the fund balances in constant 1977 dollars.
The effect of prices is to reduce the real value of the fund earlier. The
real value of the fund peaks in 1993 at $6.7 billion; this is four years
before the nominal fund balance peaks. By 2000, the real fund balance has
fallen 26 percent from its peak; this compares to the 6 percent fall the
nominal fund balance experiences by 2000. The real fund balance illus-
trates the effect of price increases on the fixed flow of revenue which
is included in the fund.
GROWTH OF THE REGIONAL ECONOMIES
The regions of Alaska do not uniformly reflect state growth. Differ-
ences reflect the location of exogenous employment growth as well as
the size and structure of the regional economy. This section wi11
describe the distribution of state growth in the base case between
151
two of the state's regions--Anchorage and Southcentral. As we have
seen in the historical analysis, Anchorage and Southcentral, while
closely related, are different types of economies. Anchorage is the
state's major region. Its growth is largely affected by its role as
the administration and distribution center for the state. This provides
an indirect link between the Anchorage economy and the state's resource
industries. Because of this role, growth in other parts of the state
is reflected by growth in Anchorage. Southcentral is a combination of
many small, local economies which are significantly dependent on the
resource industries; both petroleum development and fisheries are impor-
tant to these economies. These sma 11 economies, \'Jhi 1 e physically sepa-
rated, form a regional economy with similar structure and important
trade and transportation links.
Anchorage
Aggregate Indicators. Table 46 shows three indicators of the growth of
the Anchorage economy during the projection period. Employment, popula-
tion~ and real disposable income show that the state growth is reflected
in Anchorage even though there is no major exogenous resource development.
Population grows at an annual average rate of 3.5 percent during the period.
Anchorage grows faster than the state, and the concentration of popula-
tion in Anchorage continues throughout the projection period. In 1977,
46.3 percent of the state's population i~ in Anchorage; by 2000, that
has increased to 52.5 percent. Population does not fall after completion
of TAPS but experiences a slight decrease in 1984 after the peak ALCAN
152
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
r:
L
L
[
L
c
E
[
L
('
L
r"
L
[
[
[
[
[
L
[
[
f'
L_.;
f'
L
b
~
c
[
L
[
[
['
L
I'
L
1977
1978
. 1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
TABLE 46. AGGREGATE INDICATORS OF ECONOMIC GROWTH
MODERATE BASE CASE, ANCHORAGE
1977-2000
Real Disposable
Personal Income
Population· Employment (Millions of Constant$)
190 '188 85,523 573
197,348 84,128 586
201,235 87,606 626
207,323 91,938 677
218,413 98,363 741
235,032 107,329 825
244,804 111 ,220 870
243,808 108,713 862
248,194 110,055 887
256,190 114,113 935
265,322 118,863 992
275,583 124,228 1,054
286,278 129 '727 1,120
295,590 134,221 1 '177
305,641 138,703 1,238
315,565 143,318 1,298
326,780 148,754 1 ,371
338,200 154,245 1,442
350,467 160,260 1,524
363,718 166,870 1 ,614
377 '150 173,444 1,702
391,303 180,343 1,796
407,125 188,369 1 ,907
422,609 196,092 2,015
SOURCE: MAP Model
153
year. Between 1984 after the ALCAN is completed and 2000, the population
grows at an average annual rate of 3.5 percent.
Population follows the pattern of employment growth. Employment grows
at an average annual rate of 3.7 percent during the projection period.
As with population, employment experiences a slight decrease in 1984
when the ALCAN construction is in its final year. After 1984 employment
grows at an average of 3.8 percent per year. Throughout the projection
period, the dependency ratio (the ratio of population to employment) falls;
this ratio is 2.22 in 1977 and 2.16 by 2000. This sm~ll decline results
from the aging of the population and the increased participation in the
labor force of the working-age population.
The final indicator of regional economic growth in the projection period
is the total regional real disposable income. This accounts for the
effect of prices and taxes on incomes. Total real disposable income in-
creases at an average of 5.6 percent per year over the projection period.
It experiences a slight peak in 1983, the final peak ALCAN year.
The Economic Structure. Table 47 shows the changes in structure of the
Anchorage economy as measured by the distribution of employment. The
major exogenous industries of mining and exogenous construction grow
only slightly after completion of TAPS; this employment is made up of
headquarters mining employment. Growth over this sector occurs with the
expansion of headquarters employment for the development of Lower Cook
154
[
r
[
r
L
L
[
[
r~
L
[
[
L
c
L
[
L
' L
r·
L
L
_.
U1
U1
TABLE 47. ECONOMIC STRUCTURE
MODERATE BASE CASE
ANCHORAGE
,,..._.._.,
' J
Support Sector I Support Sector II Government Basic Sector
Employment % of Total Employment % of Total Employment % of Total Employment
1978 36,835 43.9 12 '153 14.5 31 ,427 37.4 3,439
1980 42,516 46.4 13,652 14.9 31,763 34.6 3,746
1985 54,003 49.4 17,245 15.8 33,500 30.6 4,581
1990 70,106 52.8 21 ,890 16.5 35,166 26.5 5,548
1995 87,903 55.8 26,785 17.0 36,273 . 23.0 6,625
2000 112,644 58.7 33,924 17.7 37,334 19.5 7,952
Support Sector I includes trade, services, and finance-insurance-real estate employment.
Support Sector II includes transportation-communication-public utilities and other construction
employment.
Government includes state, local, and federal employment.
Basic Sector includes manufacturing, agriculture-forestry-fisheries, mining, and exogenous
construction employment.
SOURCE: MAP Model
% of Total
4.1
4. 1
4.2
4.2
4.2
4. 1
and Beaufort OCS. The major growth occurs in the local support sector.
This sector is composed of two components: 1) local construction and
transportation-communication-utilities and 2) trade, services, and
finance-insurance-real estate. Each component of the support sector
increases its share of total employment during the projection period.
Local construction and transportation-communication-utilities increases
from 14.5 percent in 1978 to 17.7 percent by 2000; while trade, services,
finance-insurance-real estate increases from 43.9 percent to 58.7 percent.
These changes are a continuation of historical changes in the structure of
the Anchorage economy .. These shares are greater than the shares of similar
industries on the state level because of the important administrative and
distributive role of Anchorage.
Southcentral
Aggregate Indicators. Unlike Anchorage, the growth of Southcentral
depends largely upon the growth of the regional exogenous sector. The
exogenous sector is influenced significantly by three events: the con-
struction of the Pacific LNG plant between 1980 and 1983, the develop-
ment of the Lower Cook OCS, and the shutdown of the Upper Cook oil fields
in 1990. Three aggregate indicators--population, employment, and dispos-
able real income--are shown in Table 48. Population falls after the
completion of the trans-Alaska pipeline in 1977. Between 1978 and 2000,
population is projected to grow at an average annual rate of 1.9 percent.
Population falls slightly (less than one percent) in 1991 when the Upper
Cook Inlet oil fields are closed.
156
r~
L
[,
[~~
[
c
L
[
(~
( '
L
I
L
L
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
n Lj
r
L
b;
[i
~
c
c
c
c
1977
1978
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
TABLE 48. AGGREGATE INDICATORS OF ECONOMIC GROWTH
MODERATE BASE CASE, SOUTHCENTRAL
1977-2000 .
Real Disposable
Personal Income
PoEulation EmElo~ment (Millions o~ Constant $)
58,958 23 '117 180
53,826 20,898 145
55,799 21,946 159
59,054 23,745 184
61 ,533 25,452 212
62,582 26,520 232
61 ,933 25,863 216
63,292 26,030 213
63,915 26,323 219
64,866 26,923 229
65,675 27,500 238
67,012 28,318 250
68,418 29 '173 264
1n:015 30~054 277
69,574 30,002 279
70 '713 30,647 290
71 ,825 31,316 303
73,076 32,029 315
74,402 32,810 330
75,849 33,657 345
77,095 34,375 359
78,319 35,084 . 373
79,791 35,958 390
81 ,385 36,886 407
r: SOURCE: MAP Model
t,
p
L
157
Employment grows faster than population in Southcentral during the pro-
jection periods. Employment falls after TAPS is completed in 1977.
After this, it grows at an average rate of 2.6 percent per year. The
ratio of population-to-employment was much higher in 1978 in Southcentral
(2.58) than in the state (2.27). The Southcentral ratio falls toward
the state ratio by 2000 (2.21 for Southcentral and 2.16 for the state).
This trend was experienced in the historical period; the population-to~
employment ratio fell from 4.24 in 1965 to 3.07 prior to the TAPS con-
struction in 1974. The declining dependency ratio results from a change
[.
f~
[
r
!-·,
--·'
c
[
in the character of the population. As at the state level, the population f
b
is aging and the labor force participation is increasing. These factors
account for the greater proportion of employed in the population.
Disposable real income grows throughout the period after falling with
the completion of the trans-Alaska pipeline; in 1978 it is almost 20 per-
cent lower than in 1977. Between 1978 and 2000, disposable real income
increases at an annual average rate of 4.8 percent.
The Economic Structure. Table 49 shows the changes in the structure
of the Southcentral economy during the projection period as described
by changes in the distribution of employment. Two important trends can
be observed from this table. First, those exogenous sectors which have
recently been important to the region's growth, construction and mining,
decrease their importance throughout the projection period. After com-
pletion of TAPS, this exogenous construction decreases, then increases
158
r
L
L.
[
[
[
[
[
L
r
L
I"
L
[
......
()1
1.0
TABLE 49. ECONOMIC STRUCTURE
MODERATE BASE CASE
SOUTH CENTRAL
Support Sector I Support Sector II Government Basic Sector
Employment % of Total Employment % of Total Employment % of Total Employment
1978 8,134 38.6 3 '1 01 14.7 4,717 22.4 5 '146
1980 9,173 38.2 3,515 14.7 4,837 20.2 6,462
1985 10,452 39.2 3,997 15.0 5,402 20.2 6,799
1990 12,293 40.3 4,583 15.0 5,923 19.4 7,729
1995 14,046 41.9 4,991 14.9 6,234 18.6 8,258
2000 16,440 43.2 5,663 14.9 6,517 17. 1 9,438
Support Sector I includes trade, services, and finance-insurance-real estate employment.
Support Sector II includes transportation-communication-public utilities and other construction
employment.
Government includes state, local, and federal employment.
Basic Sector includes manufacturing, agriculture-forestry-fisheries, mining, and exogenous
construction employment.
SOURCE: MAP Model
% of Total
24.4
26.9
25.5
25.3
24.6
24.8
to a peak of 2,578 in 1982 with construction of the Pacific LNG plant and
development of the Lower Cook OCS. After the Cook Inlet oil fields are
shut down in 1980, this mining includes only 780 employees. The second
trend is the increasing importance of the support sector in the region.
Trade, services, and finance-insurance-real estate increase their share
of total employment from 38.6 percent in 1978 to 43.2 percent in 2000. ·
This follows a historical trend. The increased scale of the Southcentral
economy during the projection period leads to a greater-than-proportional
increase in s~pport sector employment.
Alternative Base Cases
Two additional base case projections were made. These base cases differ
in the assumed level of OCS activity in the Lower Cook Inlet and Beaufort
Sea. The major difference between these base cases is one of magnitude;
the high base case assumes a higher level of Beaufort and Lower Cook OCS
activity than the moderate base case. The low base case assumes only
exploration activity in the Lower Cook and lower development activity in
the Beaufort. The major difference between the projected growth of the
base cases in these three scenarios will also be in magnitude. Each alter-
native base case will be described by four major variables: employment,
population, total state expenditures, and the fund balance. These cases
affect the structure of the economy in a manner similar to the moderate
case. (The detailed scenarios are shown in Appendix D.)
160
[
[
[
[
[
[~
[~
-'
[
r
L
b
[
c
6
E
[
[
I :
L
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
r_,
L
6
E
G
E
c
[
L
f'
L
r:
L
LOW BASE CASE SCENARIO
The minimum base case scenario includes the same non-OCS assumptions as
the moderate ~cenario. The difference between these cases involves the
assumptions about OCS activity in the Lower Cook Inlet and Beaufort.
The minimum development scenario assumes only exploration activity in
the Lower Cook. Lower Cook OCS employment occurs between 1978 and 1985
with a peak of 252 in 1980. In contrast, the moderate case has a Lower
Cook OCS employment peak of 912 in 1981 and operations employment of 417
remains throughout the period. The level of activity assumed in the low
Beaufort scenario is much closer to the moderate scenario. The low Beau-
fort scenario contains production and has employment through the entire
projection period. Peak employment of 740 occurs in 1989; this is
68 percent of the peak in the moderate Beaufort scenario. Operations
employment is approximately 82 percent of the moderate case by the end
of the period. Since Beaufort OCS production occurs in state waters,
Beaufort will also generate tax, bonus, a.nd royalty revenues to the
state.
General Pattern of Growth
Table 50 describes four indicators of the magnitude of economic growth
projected for the low base case. Population is projected to increase at
an annual average rate of growth of 3.0 percent between 1978, the year
after the TAPS project is complete, and 2000. The most rapid period of
growth is bet\'Jeen 1978 and 1982, the peak ALCAN year; growth averages
4.4 percent per year during this period. Population falls after comple-
tion of TAPS in 1977 and the last peak ALCAN year in 1983; in both cases,
161
1977
1978
.1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
.1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
TABLE 50. AGGREGATE INDICATORS OF ECONOMIC GROWTH
LOW BASE CASE, ALASKA
1977-2000
State Expenditures
(Mi 11 ions of
Population Employment Nominal Dollars)
410,660 185,508 1 '161
406,709 178,557 1 ,311
417,661 184,486 1 ,415
431 ,495 192,187 1 ,559
451 ,557 203,886 1 ,723
482,344 222,330 1 ,988
498,942 228,242 2,348
497,291 221 ,077 2,559
504,710 222,880 2,727
518,422 229,756 . 3,044
534,266 238,040 3,362
551 ,407 246,998 3,731
569,207 256,188 4 '115
585,921 264,313 4,520
601 ,605 271 ,644 4 ,871
617,354 278,970 5,252
635,153 287,806 5,671
653,018 296,515 5,145
671 ,975 305,943 6,628
691 ,018 315 '281 7,154
712,023 325,984 7,722
733,658 336,919 8,404
757,817 349,551 9,134
782,438 362,225 9,965
SOURCE: MAP Model
162
Fund Balance
(Mi 11 ions of
Nominal Dollars)
671
666
967
1,330
1 ,921
2,640
3,393
4,548
5,986
7,366
8,732
10,049
11 ,306
12,336
13,216
14,033
14,769
15,339
15 '725
15,948
16,008
15,857
15,500
14,900
[
L
I l .
r~
L
L
p
6
c
c
[
[
r ,
L
r
L
[
[
[
[
[
[
f'
[
[
r~
L
b
t
Q
E
L
[
[
r~
L
r~
L
E
the decrease is less than one percent. The rate of population growth is
slightly less than the 3.1 percent rate in the moderate base. By the peak
ALCAN construction year, 1983, population is almost 4,000 greater in the
moderate base case. This is mainly a response to the more rapid Lower
Cook development in the moderate case. By 2000 population is 7,000 ·less
in the low base case.
Employment is projected to be 362,225 by 2000 in the low base case.
This is 2,500 less than in the moderate base case. Employment falls from
185,500 in 1977 to 178,560 in 1978 with the completion of TAPS in the low
base case. After 1978 employment grows at an annual rate of 3.27 percent.
Like population, employment is projected to grow most rapidly with the
buildup before the ALCAN. Between 1978 and 1982, employment increases
at the average rate of 5.6 percent per year. The overall growth is only
slightly less than the growth in the moderate base case. The difference
in employment is almost 2,600 in 1981 when Lower Cook development is at
its peak in the moderate scenario. As in the moderate base case, popu-
lation is projected to increase less rapidly than employment.
Throughout the projection period, state expenditures in the low base case
are only slightly less than in the moderate base case. By 2000 expendi-
tures in the low base case are $9,965 million, which is less than one
percent lower than in the moderate base case. In 1981 at the peak of
Lower Cook moderate development, moderate case expenditures are only
slightly more than one percent higher. The lower base case also has a
similar effect on the fund balances. The fund balance in the low base
163
case is $300 million less than the fund balance in the moderate case.
This is a difference of only 2 percent. The moderate base case has a
larger fund balance even though it has larger expenditures because of the
greater revenues received from the Beaufort OCS. The pattern of the fund
balance is similar in both cases. In the low base case, the fund balance
increases at an annual average rate of 17.2 percent until 1997, when it
peaks. Between 1997 and 2000, the fund falls by 7 percent in the low case
because fund balances are drawn down to meet state expenditures. This is
similar to the pattern found in the moderate base case.
The growth projected for the low base case is similar in magnitude to that
projected in the moderate base case. The difference in the major variables
is small. By the end of the period, the differ~nce varies from the fund
which is 2 percent smaller to state expenditures which is only .63 percent
smaller. The major differences occur early in the projection period be-
cause the major difference in the scenarios is in the Lower Cook OCS
assumption which peaks by 1981.
Structural Differences and Similarities. The main difference between the
low and moderate base cases involves the magnitude of the variables. The
effect of economic growth on the process of change is similar in both base
cases. Four major structural changes were observed in the moderate base
case. These were measured by changes in the employment distribution, the
dependency ratio, the regional distribution of the population, and the
fund balance. The change in the employment distribution measures the
increased importance of the support sector in the Alaska economy. As the
164
[
r~
t '
r
L
L
[
c
c
c
r
l
[
r
L ,.
L
L
[
~
[
[
[
['
L
r
L
economy grows larger, the support sector experiences a greater-than-
proportional growth because more goods and services are produced locally.
The dependency ratio decreases as a greater proportion of the population
is employed. This results from increases in the proportion of the popu-
lation of labor-force age and increased labor-force participation of this
population. The concentration of population in Anchorage was als.o observed
in the moderate base case. Anchorage's role as the administrative and
distribution center for Alaska assures the continuing growth of Anchorage
even if the major cause of growth continues to be resource development
outside the region. The final structural characteristic observed in the
moderate base case concerns the state fiscal sector. The influence of
petroleum revenues on state expenditures leads to expenditures which
increase faster than revenues. Eventually, the fund balances must be
drawn down to meet expenditures.
Table 51 compares these structural characteristics in the low and moderate
scenarios. This table shows that, while the base cases differ slightly
in magnitude, they are quite similar in the important structural charac-
teristics. The s~pport sector expands to about 53 percent of total
employment in both cases. The dependency ratio (population/employment)
falls by about 4 percent between 1980 and 2000 in both cases. Similarly,
Anchorage is projected to contain almost 54 percent of the state's popula-
tion by 2000. General fund revenues net of general fund expenditures are
projected to follow a similar pattern in both cases. In the early part of
the period, revenues exceed expenditures; the fund is being built up. By
the end of the period, expenditures are greater than revenues and the fund
must be drawn down to make up the difference in expenditures.
165
TABLE 51. STRUCTURAL CHARACTERISTICS
LOW AND MODERATE BASE CASES
Percent of Total Employment
in Support Sector
Dependency Ratio
Percent of Total Population
in Anchorage
General Fund Revenues Minus
General Fund Expenditures
(Millions of
Nominal Dollars)
HIGH BASE CASE SCENARIO
low base case
moderate base case
low base case
moderate base case
low base case
moderate base case
low base case
moderate base case
1980
39.4%
39.5%
2.25
2.24
47.8%
47.8%
363
361
1990
46.1%
46.2%
2.22
2.22
50.0%
50.0%
1~029
1,044
2000
53.0%
53.1%
2.16
2.16
53.5%
53.5%
-:-599
-546
The high and moderate base case scenarios differ only in the assumption
made about OCS development in the Lower Cook and Beaufort Sea. The Lower
Cook development scenarios differ in both magnitude and timing between
the two cases. Peak employment does not occur in the high case until
1984; the peak level of employment is 2,448. Peak employment occurs in
the moderate case in 1981; moderate case employment is greater than high
166
[
I
( .
r-,
L
L
[
c
[
[
r
L
r
L
L
[
[
[
l_
[
[
[
r
L
r
L
E
case for the first four years of the period. Operations employment in
the high case is almost three times as high as in the moderate case; it
includes operation of an LNG plant. The Beaufort high scenario peaks in
1989 at 1 ,344 which is 24 percent greater than the moderate Beaufort peak.
By 2000 employment is 38 percent greater in the high case. The higher
Beaufort production also means greater revenues from production in state
waters.
General Pattern of Development. Table 52 shows four indicators of the
magnitude of economic growth in the high base case. Population is pro-
jected to be 801,117 in 2000. This is 11,830, or 1.5 percent, greater
than in the moderate base case. The population falls after TAPS is com-
pleted in 1978 but does not experience a similar fall after ALCAN in 1984.
The moderate base case experiences a fall of .3 percent between 1983 and
1984, while the high base case increases by one percent. This increase
is a result of development activity in the Lm-Jer Cook which increases
employment from 989 in 1982 to its peak of 2,448 in 1984. This increase
counteracts the fall in population after ALCAN is complete. The growth
rate of population between 1978 and 2000 is an average of 3.1 percent
per year which is slightly higher than in the moderate base case.
The assumed growth of employment in the Lower Cook between 1982 and 1984
is not great enough to prevent a fall in employment after ALCAN is com-
plete. Employment falls by almost 3,000 between 1983 and 1984; this is
less than half the fall experienced in the moderate base case. Because
167
[
[
[
L
[
r~
L
r
L
[
L
f"
L
of the earlier Lower Cook development in the moderate base case, employ-
ment in the high case is less than in the moderate case until 1983.
Employment grows at an annual average rate of 3.4 percent between 1978
and 1983. By 2000 employment is almost 4,400 greater than in the moder-
ate base case.
The state's fiscal position is affected in two ways by the different
base cases. First, different rates of growth in population, prices, and
personal income will affect the level of expenditures. Secondly, differ-
ential production in the Beaufort Sea will mean different revenue streams
to the state. By 2000 state expenditures are projected to have reached
$10.1 billion in the high base case. This is one percent greater than
the projected state expenditures in the moderate base case. Expenditures
are greater in the moderate base case until 1984 because of the earlier
Lower Cook OCS activity. Overall, expenditures increase at an average
rate of 9.9 percent per year. The fund balance is greater in the high
base case by $1.5 billion in 2000. The larger fund balance is due to
larger Beaufort Sea OCS revenues and the larger expenditures early in
the period in the moderate case. These early expenditures reduce the
fund and the interest earned on the fund. The fund experiences the same
pattern of growth in the high as in the moderate base case, rising to a
peak and then falling. The peak in fund balance is reached in 1998
which is one year later than in the moderate base case.
169
Structural Similarities and Differences. Table 53 shows the indicators
of the major structural characteristics of the high and moderate base
cases. The structural changes which occur because of the projected growth
are similar in both the high and moderate cases. The support sector will
include over 53 percent of total employment; the dependency ratio will
fall to about 2.16 people per employee; and Anchorage will contain about
54 percent of the state's population. General fund revenues net of general
fund expenditures are slightly higher in the high case, although the dif-
ference is still negative in 2000. The pattern of the fund balance is
similar in both cases.
TABLE 53. STRUCTURAL CHARACTERISTICS
HIGH AND MODERATE BASE CASES
1980
Percent of Total Employment high base case 39.4%
in Support Sector moderate base case 39.5%
Dependency Ratio high base case 2.25
moderate base case 2.24
Percent of Total Population high base case 47.8%
in Anchorage moderate base case 47.8%
General Fund Revenues Minus high base case 362
General Fund Expenditures moderate base case 361
(Millions of
Nominal Dollars)
~\
170
1990 2000
46.3% 53.1%
46.2% 53.1%
2.22 2.17
2.22 2.16
50.0% 53.5%
50.0% 53.5%
1 , 127 -368
1,044 -546
r
L
L
[
[
[
L
r,
L
r ,
L
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
r
L
r
L
r=
L
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
The growth of the Alaska economy between 1977 and 2000 is projected to be
substantial~ although the economy is not projected to grow so rapidly as
it did between 1965 and 1976. This section presented three alternative
base cases, each with different assumptions about the level of OCS activity
in the Beaufort Sea and Lower Cook Inlet. By 2000, population is projected
to be between 782~400 and 801 ,120~ depending upon the level of OCS activity
assumed. Employment is projected to be between 362,225 and 369~105.
The three base case scenarios differ only in magnitude; they exhibit simi-
lar patterns of development. This pattern was i 11 ustrated by the growth
in the moderate base case. The economy•s growth is not projected to be
constant throughout the period. The most rapid period of growth occurs
during the construction of the ALCAN gasline between 1978 and 1982.
During this period, the average annual growth of employment is 5.9 percent,
compared to 3.3 percent for the whole period. Population grows 48 percent
faster than over the entire period when ALCAN is constructed.
Economic growth provides increases in two measures of individual benefits:
real per capita income and real state expenditures. Real per capita income
increases by 65 percent between 1977 and 2000. This means that the real
purchasing power of the average Alaskan increases with economic growth.
Real per capita expenditures is a proxy for the level of services provided
by the state government. Real per capita state expenditures increase by
46 percent over the projection period. Over 80 percent of the increase
occurs prior to 1989 when petroleum revenues peak.
171
Economic growth in all three base case scenarios results in similar struc-
tural characteristics. Structural changes caused by growth affected each
scenario in a similar fashion. In all scenarios, the importance of the
support sector is projected to grow throughout the period. The proportion
of the population which is employed is also projected to increase over the
period. Population is projected to concentrate in Anchorage in all scenarios.
The final structural pattern which is similar in all cases is the relation-
ship between state revenues and expenditures. In all cases, expenditures
exceed revenues by the end of the period, necessitating the reduction in
the fund balance.
172
[
[
[
[
[
l~
r L
L
[
[
[
L
r·
L
[
L
[
[
r
L
r
L
L
D
b
[
r~
L
IV. THE IMPACT OF NORTHERN GULF OCS DEVELOPMENT
ON THE ALASKAN ECONOMY: THE MODERATE BASE CASE
In order to capture the important dimensions of uncertainty surrounding
oil and gas development in the Northern Gulf of Alaska, the development
patterns implied by three alternative resource discovery scenarios were
examined and contrasted with the base case projections presented above.
Figure 4 shows the locat1on of the development area. The alternate OCS
scenarios were designed to capture differences in resource quantities,
transport requirements, and technology, all of which will affect the
impacts of any development which actually occurs. The three scenarios
which were examined included the level of development which would occur
if the mean, 95 percent, and 5 percent probability resource levels were
discovered in the Northern Gulf lease sale area. This chapter will describe
the impacts of each of these scenarios relative to the moderate base case.
The impact of the 95 percent discovery relative to the low base case and
the 5 percent discovery relative to the high base case will be discussed
in the following chapter. The first section of this chapter examines the
petroleum development scenarios, and the next section presents the economic
impacts implied by each of these scenarios.
The Development Scenarios
Three offshore development scenarios were examined, based upon geological,
technical, and employment data prepared by Dames and Moore (Dames and
Moore, 1978). The petroleum development scenarios are for the proposed
Gulf of Alaska OCS lease sale no. 55, currently scheduled for June 1980.
173
·FIGURE 4. LOCATION OF STUDY AREA
SOURCE: Dames and Moore
.trrll r-:r
[
[
[
L
[
[
[
r
L
L
~
Q
c
c
[
[
r~
L
This is the second sale in the Gulf; eleven unsuccessful exploratory wells
were drilled on leases from the 1976 sale. There are no current plans for
drilling on these leases (Dames and Moore~ 1978). The scenarios discussed
below are for the 5 percent~ 95 percent~ and statistical mean levels of
U.S.G.S. resource estimates. The 95 percent scenario contains no economic
reserves~ so it is the same as the exploration scenario. These scenarios
will affect the Alaska economy through the direct employment associated
with the field development and production and the additional revenues
earned by the state.
DIRECT EMPLOYMENT
The development of the Northern Gulf OCS will have two types of employment
effects~ direct employment in the field and headquarters employment. Head-
quarters employment is assumed to increase with development to provide the
engineering support~ coordination~ and administration necessary for the
level of activity in the field. All headquarters employment is assumed
to be located in Anchorage.
The effect of direct OCS employment on the Alaska economy will depend on
the extent the incomes earned in OCS development are spent in Alaska.
Two factors limit the impact. First, the probable enclave nature of the
development will limit the extent of the interaction with the economy when
'
workers are on the job. Secondly, the intern~tional character of many
offshore petroleum firms means they have regular, experienced crews which
are dispatched to jobs around the world (Dames and Moore~ 1978). The
international character of these crews may mean that when they are not
175
working, they will be outside Alaska. The first step in estimating the
overall impact of Northern Gulf OCS development is to estimate the share
of direct employment which will reside in Alaska and interact with the
economy. Figure 5 illustrates the process used to derive the direct OCS
employment impact on the Alaska economy.
Table 54 shows estimates of the share of direct employment to Alaska
residents (SEAR) which were used to adjust the direct employment estimates
provided by Dames and Moore (Dames and Moore, 1978).1 In this context,
Alaska resident means any employee who resides in Alaska and interacts
with the economy during the duration of the project task. SEAR adjust-
ments were made to the direct field employment only; headquarters employ-
ment is all assumed to reside in Alaska. The SEAR-adjusted employment.
is used in the scenarios provided to the MAP model to generate impacts.
SEAR coefficients were determined by the characteristics of the task and
considerations of labor supply and demand. Such task characteristics as
rotation, duration of the job, and specialized skills requirements were
considered. It was assumed that the longer the task's off-duty rotation,
the smaller was the probability that an employee would be an Alaska resi-
dent since he could travel from the site to a residence outside the state.
For the short-duration jobs, it was assumed there was little reason for
workers to reside in Alaska or for Alaskans to move into these jobs.
1Final estimates of direct OCS employment may vary slightly in the
Dames and Moore report. This difference results from a change in the
gas production scenarios to account for lower productivity in gas pro-
duction than originally assumed.
176
[
[
[
[
r
L
c
u
[
[
r :
L
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
r L~
f'
L
L
f1
[
L
L L
r:
L
FIGURE 5. DETERMINATION OF OCS EMPLOYMENT
ESTIMATES USED IN THE MAP MODEL
'
Direct OCS
Field Employment
X
Share of Direct Employment
To Alaska Residents
,II
Direct Alaska Resident
OCS Field Employment
+
OCS Related
Headquarters Employment
' II
ocs Employment Estimates
Used in MAP Model
177
_.
-.....j
co
Task
Onshore
l. Service Base
TABLE 54. ESTIMATED SHARE OF ALASKA
RESIDENT EMPLOYMENT BY OCS TASK
Phase
1979-1984
all phases 1. 00
2. Helicopter Service exploration & development .50
production l. 00
3. Service Base Construction development .50
4. Pipe Coating development .20
5. Onshore Pipeline Construction development .20
6. Oil .Terminal Construction development .50
7. LNG Plant Construction development .50
8. Oil Terminal Operations production l. 00
9. LNG Plant Operations production 1.00
Offshore
l. Surveys exploration .20
2. Rigs exploration .20
3. Plat forms development . 10
production l. 00
4. Platform Install at ion development . 10
5. Offshore Pipeline Construction development . 10
6. Tugboats exploration .40
development .80
production .80
Time Period
1985-1989
1.00
.53
1.00
.53
. 21
. 21
.53
.53
l. 00
1.00
.21
.21
.30
l. 00
. 105
. 105
.42
.88
.88
1990-2000
,.---......,
• J
1.00
.58
l. 00
.58
.23
.23
.58
.58
l. 00
1.00
.23
.23
. 33
l. 00
.116
.116
.46
.97
.97
[
[
[
[
[
[
r t ...
r
L
L
G u
[
r,
L
r
I = L,;
Finally, the more specialized the skills required, the greater the chance
the skills would not be available in Alaska and outside workers would be
hired. This meant a smaller probability that the worker would reside in
Alaska. These factors change in a systematic fashion through the phase of
development so that the probability of workers residing in Alaska increases
from the exploration to the production phase. The final factor considered
was time. It was assumed that over time, as more OCS projects occur and
present non-OCS petroleum projects wind down, the supply of labor for each
of these tasks within Alaska will increase. This will increase the prob-
ability that workers will reside in Alaska. This is reflected by the
increase in SEAR coefficients through time. Appendix C describes the
detailed assumptions behind the SEAR coefficients.
REVENUE
Unlike the OCS activity proposed for the Beaufort Sea, production in the
Northern Gulf OCS occurs only in federal waters. Because of this, the
state will not earn royalty, bonus, or severance tax revenues from the
project. The major source of additional revenues will be the property
tax revenues from onshore facilities. The property tax revenues earned
by the state were based on the estimates of construction cost provided
by Dames and Moore (Dames and Moore, 1978). The property tax which the
state receives is 20 mills on certain.oil and gas properties. The prop-
erty tax specifically excludes such property as oil refining property, gas
processing property, and interest or rights to produce oil. The property
value taxed is depreciated over the life of the field and increased with
inflation (Alaska Department of Revenue, 1977).
179
ALTERNATIVE NORTHERN GULF SCENARIOS
The Mean Probability Resource Level Scenario
The mean scenario represents activity surrounding exploration and develop-
ment of tracts assumed to be leased in the 1980 sale. It is assumed that
1.4 billion barrels of oil and 5.0 trillion cubic feet of gas are discovered.
In this scenario, the discoveries are located in nine separate fields, seven
on the Yakutat shelf and two on the Middleton shelf (Dames and Moore, 1978).
Exploration activity in this scenario begins in 1981 and lasts for ten
years. All phases of.activity overlap. Field development and the con-
struction of facilities begin in 1985 and last through 1990. Production
begins in 1988. Total direct construction employment peaks in 1989.
The majot· construction activ·ity in 1989 is the installation of platforms.
As construction employment declines, mining employment rises to a peak,
of 1,899 in 1991. Petroleum employment maintains a permanent workforce
of approximately 1,000 after 1995. Approximately 70 permanent positions
in manufacturing result from the operation of the LNG plant which begins
operations in 1989. Transportation activity peaks in 1985 with 392 em-
ployees. (Employment levels are shown in Table 55.)
The nonproportional relation between Alaska resident employment and direct
employment results from the changing task composition of industry employ-
ment .. Alaska resident construction employment peaks at 915 in 1987, three
years prior to the peak in total construction employment. After 1987 the
major construction activity is platform installation which is offshore
180
r
[
[
[
r:
L'
[
r
L
L
L
[
c
u
[
[
r ,
L
r
L
[
_.
co _.
Construction
Total SEAR
Direct Adjusted
Employment Employment
1981 0 0
1982 0 0
1983 0 0
1984 0 0
1985 483 254
1986 1 ,417 533
1987 2,485 915
1988 2,661 777
1989 3,266 627
1990 2,941 622
1991 685 88
1992 0 0
1993 0 0
1994 0 0
1995 0 0
1996 0 0
1997 0 0
1998 0 0
1999 0 0
2000 0 0
TABLE 55. DIRECT EMPLOYMENT REQUIREMENTS
MEAN SCENARIO
w . 1 1 n1 ng Manufacturing
Total SEAR Total SEAR
Direct Adjusted Direct Adjusted
Employment Employment Employment Employment
452 106 0
. 564 171 0
935 271 0
989 284 0
1 ,054 315 0
863 286 0
808 305 0
1 ,077 576 0
1 ,338 779 35 35
1 '702 1 '114 3~· 0 35
1 ,899 1 '198 64 64
1 ,484 1 ,034 70 70
1 ,071 939 70 70
840 840 70 70
865 865 70 70
965 965 70 70
990 990 70 70
1 ,015 1 ,015 70 70
1 ,015 1 ,015 70 70
1 ,015 1,015 70 70
Transportation
Total SEAR
Direct Adjusted
Employment Employment
162 68
206 87
348 146
368 155
392 173
358 290
305 248
318 262
398 332
314 290
229 222
196 191
221 215
. 221 215
221 215
221 215
221 215
221 215
221 215
221 215
1Includes headquarters employment based on 2.67 persons per exploration well, .6 persons per development
well, and 40 persons per 2,000 barrels per day during production. Once peak is reached, production employment
is maintained (Alaska OCS Office).
SOURCE: Dames and Moore, 1978
work, assumed to have a low Alaska resident share because it requires
specialized skills and is temporary. Alaska resident mining employment
peaks in 1991 which is when total mining employment peaks. By 1994 all
mining employment is production employment, all of which is assumed to
be Alaska resident. Manufacturing employment is assumed to be all Alaska
resident. Transportation employment, like mining, has a much smaller
Alaska resident component during exploration. Peak resident employment
occurs in 1989 when 332 Alaska residents are employed in transportation.
The only state revenue effects of this development occur because of on-
shore facilities which fall under the state's property tax. Oil terminals
and onshore pipelines are the properties taxed by the state. The property
tax increases to a maximum of $7.8 million in 1992. By 2000 the property
tax has fallen to $6.7 million. Table 56 shows the property tax revenues
from this scenario.
The 5 Percent Probability Resource Level Scenario
This sc~nario describes the activity surrounding the exploration, develop-
ment, and production in the largest assumed find discussed in this report.
It is assumed that 4.4 billion barrels of oil and 13.0 trillion cubic
feet of gas are discovered. Altogether eighteen fields are developed:
twelve fields on the Yakatat shelf, five fields on the Middleton Shelf,
and one field on the Yakataga shelf.
Exploration begins in 1981 and lasts ten years. Mining employment reaches
an early peak of 1,448 in 1984 during exploratinn. Field development
182
r
r
[
[
[
[
[
r
lcci
r
L
[
fj
[
[
E
[
[
r,
L
f'
L
[
[
[
[
r
[
[
[
[
r
L
TABLE 56. NORTHERN GULF OCS PROPERTY
TAX REVENUES
(Millions of Nominal Dollars) ·
Mean Scenario 5 Percent Scenario
1986 • 1 .5
1987 2.0 .5
1988 . 2.4. 1.1
1989 7.8 1.5
1990 7.8 17.8
1991 7 ~8 17.9
1992 7.8 18.0
1993 7.8 18.0
1994 7.7 17.9
1995 7.7 17.8
1996 7.5 17.7
1997 7.4 17.4
1998 7.2 16.9
1999 7.0 16.7
2000 6.7 16.2
1 · SOURCE: Based on construction cost
L
183
begins in 1984 and lasts until 1992. This is two years longer than in
the mean scenario. Construction employment begins in 1984 and reaches a
peak of 7,861 in 1988. Mining employment reaches a peak of 3,749 in 1991
and maintains a permanent employment of approximately 2,000. Production
of oil begins in 1988 and gas in 1989. This scenario also includes an
LNG plant which begins production in 1988 and has a long-term employment
of 170. Transportation employment peaks in 1989 during development, with
761 employees. Table 57 shows the employment levels in this scenario.
As in the mean scenario, the Alaska employment share is greatest in the
production phase and smallest during exploration. Alaska mining employ-
ment peaks at 2,461 in 1991, when total mining employment peaks. Alaska
employment plays a relatively small part in the exploration peak in 1984.
The Alaska resident construction employment peaks one year prior to total
construction employment. This is a result of the increased importance of
platform installation after 1987. Peak Alaska resident construction em-
ployment is 2,222. The shifting task composition of transportation employ-
ment accounts for the increased importance of Alaska resident employment
after production begins. After peaking in 1991 at 660, transportation
employment maintains a permanent employment of about 520.
This scenario produces property tax revenues from onshore facilities.
Property tax reveneus begin in 1986 with the completion of the first on-
shore pipeline. Revenues peak in 1992 at $18 million. By 2000 property
tax revenues have fallen to $16.2 million. (See Table 56.)
184
[
[
[
f~
[~
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
b
[
[~
L
_,j
00
U1
r-_,
""' '' --\i r--1 .,,, _)
Construction
Total SEAR
Direct Adjusted
Employment Employment
1981 0 0
1982 0 0
1983 0 0
1984 1 ,529 765
1985 3,461 2 '1 01
1986 4,748 2,208
1987 4,866 2,222
1988 7,861 1,888
1989 6,051 998
1990 3,799 444
1991 3,867 449
1992 1 ,200 139
1993 0 0
1994 0 0
1995 0 0
1996 0 0
1997 0 0
1998 0 0
1999 0 0
2000 0 0
TABLE 57. DIRECT EMPLOYMENT REQUIREMENTS
5 PERCENT SCENARIO
M' . 1 1n1ng Manufacturing
Total SEAR Total SEAR
Direct Adjusted Direct Adjusted
Employment £:mployment Employment Employment
541 166 0
927 266 0
1 ,426 340 0
1,448 418 0
1 '315 391 0
965 370 0
900 399 0
1,588 798 85 85
2,681 1 ,539 85 85
3,712 2,300 170 170
3,749 2,461 170 170
3,603 2,279 170 170
2,926 2,248 170 170
2,729 2,154 170 170
2,126 2,014 170 170
2,044 2,044 170 170
2 '144 2 '144 170 170
2,194 2,194 170 170
2,194 2 '194 170 170
2,156 2,156 170 170
Transportation
Total SEAR
Direct Adjusted
Employment Employment
196 82
343 144
441 185
539 227
490 430
417 340
445 363
761 628
656 536
688 650
699 660
566 519
-512 501
539 525
539 525
539 525
539 525
539 525
539 525
527 513
1Inc·Iudes headquarters employment based on 2.67 persons per exploration well, .6 persons per development
well, and 40 persons per 2,000 barrels per day during production. Once peak is reached, production employ-
mentis maintained (Alaska OCS Office).
SOURCE: Dames and Moore, 1978
The 95 Percent Probability Resource Level Scenario
The 95 percent probability resource level for the lease sale area in the
Northern Gulf is no oil or gas resources. Because there are no resources,
this scenario describes an exploration-only case. Exploration begins in
1981 and lasts four years. The maximum employment occurs in the first
two years with 541 mining employees and 196 transportation employees.
The Alaska share of this employment is low; at its maximum, it includes
149 mining employees and 82 transportation employees. Because there is
no production, there are no property taxes generated by this project.
(See Table 58.)
Definition and Measures of Impact
OCS development will lead to thanges in those factors which have been
isolated as important to economic growth: exogenous employment, personal
income, and state expepditures. Changes in these factors will result in
changes in population, the structure of employment, the state's fiscal
position, and the regional distribution of growth. These changes are
the economic impact of OCS development.
We will examine the impact of each of the three petroleum scenarios. The
impacts will be compared to economic growth in the moderate case. The
impact will vary since the scenarios vary in terms of their primary employ-
ment impact, timing, level of production, and revenues which accrue to the
state. The impacts wil) be measured as changes from the base case. In
making this comparison, it must be assumed that the economy responds the
same to employment and revenues generated by Northern Gulf OCS develop-
ment as it did to similar changes in the past.
186
{ :
L.
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
f'
LJ
r
L
[
lJ
D
l
6
[
L
TABLE 58. DIRECT EMPLOYMENT REQUIREMENTS
95 PERCENT SCENARIO
M" . 1 1n1ng Transportation
Total Direct SEAR Adjusted Total Direct SEAR Adjusted
Employment Employment Employment Employment
1981 541 149 196 82
1982 541 149 196 82
1983 405 114 142 62
1984 111 21 40 17
1985 0 0 0 0
1 Includes headquarters employment based on 4 persons per exploration
well, .6 persons per development well, and 40 persons per 2,000 barrels
per day during production. Once peak is reached, production employment
is maintained (Alaska OCS Office).
SOURCE: Dames and Moore, 1978
187
Rapid economic growth associated with OCS development will affect most
economic variables. Although many variables will be affected, a much
smaller number is important; and information on these dimensions of
impact will describe the effect of rapid growth on the state economy.
Petroleum development in the Alaska OCS can have two major types of
impact. First, OCS development will affect the magnitude of the eco-
nomic indicators. OCS development will expand the economy. Secondly,
OCS development may change the process of growth. OCS development may
change certain structural trends observed in the base case. Both of
these dimensions will be considered when the impact of OCS development
is examined.
The impact of any specific scenario can be discussed by referring to the
following set of questions:
1. How has the magnitude of economic indicators been changed
by OCS development?
a. How has the growth of the aggregate indicators of
economic activity--employment, population, personal
income--been affected by OCS development?
b. How has OCS development affected the state's fiscal
position? Have state revenues and expenditures
changed? What is the effect on the fund balance?
c. What is the effect of OCS development on the earn-
ing power of individuals, as measured by real per
capita income?
188
r
[
L
[
L
L
[
[
c
L
[
L
c
c
L
[
[
L
I'
L
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
r·
L
c
D
~
0
L
[
[
c
L
r
b
2.
d. What is the effect of OCS development on the
average level of services, as measured by real
per capita state expenditures, provided by the
state?
Has OCS development changed the process of growth?
a. Are the components of population growth changed in
relative importance?
b. Are past trends in the age-sex distribution and
its effect on the dependency ratio changed by OCS
development?
c. Are past trends in the composition of employment
changed by OCS development?
d. Does OCS development change the interaction among
regions?
Summary of the Moderate Base Case
The moderate base case is one of three base cases used in this report.
The alternative base cases used in this study differ by the assumed level
of previous OCS activity; the non-OCS assumptions in all three base
cases are similar. The moderate base case includes moderate development
scenarios of the first Lower Cook OCS lease sale area and the Beaufort
Sea OCS lease sale area.
Substantial growth is projected over the period 1978 to 2000 for the
moderate base case. Employment is projected to reach 365,000 by 2000
189
and grow at an annual average rate of 3.3 percent. The most rapid
growth occurs \vith the construction of the ALCAN gas line between 1981
and 1984. Population is projected to grow at a rate slightly less than
employment and reach 789,000 by 2000. Personal income is projected to
expand at an average annual rate of 10.6 percent between 1978 and 2000~
The growth of these aggregate variables, while substantial, is less than
the growth during the period 1965-1976.
Four structural characteristics of this projected growth were observed.
First, as the scale of the economy expands, the importance of the support
sector increases. Secondly, the changing age distribution of the popula-
tion and labor force participation lead to decreases in the dependency
ratio (population/employment). Third, as the state grows, more of this
growth is concentrated in Anchorage. Finally, the state's fund balance
increases to a peak and then falls as expenditures exceed revenues and
the fund balance is used to make up the difference.
The Impacts of Northern Gulf
OCS Development: Mean Scenario
This section will describe the economic impact of the mean Northern Gulf
OCS development scenario. The impact of this scenario is, as would be
e~pected, intermediate relative to the impacts of the high and low sce-
narios·. Because of this, the mean scenario impacts will be described in
detail in this section, while the impacts of the 5 percent and 95 percent
scenarios will be described as they relate to this scenat'io.
190
[
[
[
[
[~ .
L
[
r~
L
L
[
[
6
[
[
['
L
f"
L
L
[
[
[
[
[
[
r l~
[
[
f' L
The mean Northern Gulf OCS development scenario includes the development
of a number of fields. Each phase of activity--exploration> development,
and production--occurs at different times in each field, so the phases of
activity are not distinct. Exploration begins in 1981. Development begins
in 1985. Both of these phases end in 1990. Production begins two years
prior to the end of exploration and development in 1988. This schedule of
activity provides two significant time periods to examine: 1980-1990, when
development and exploration occur, and 1990-2000, when only production
activity occurs.
EMPLOYMENT
This section will examine the impact of OCS development on employment.
Employment is one of the aggregate indicators of economic growth. OCS
development increases the growth of employment in the projection period.
OCS development not only affects the magnitude of employment growth but
may also change the structure of employment observed in the base case.
If OCS development affects the growth of industries differently than in
the base case, the structure will change.
By 2000 employment is projected to be approximately 5,800, or 1.6 percent
greater than in the moderate base case. {See Table 59.) The average
growth rate between 1978 and 2000 has increased slightly from 3.3 percent
per year in the base case to 3.4 percent per year with OCS development.
The peak impact occurs in 1990 when employment is 10,300, or 3.9 pel~cent
greater than in the base case. This is the same year that total direct
Alaska resident employment reaches its peak.
191
1980
1985
1990 1
1995
2000
TABLE 59. EMPLOYMENT IMPACT
NORTHERN GULF OCS
MEAN SCENARIO, ALASKA
Base Case Mean OCS Scenario
Employment Emp 1 oymen t .
194,054 194,054
224,931 227,742
266,632 278,055
308,016 312,619
364,721 370,496
Impact
·a
2,811
11 ,423
4,603
5 '775
c
L
L
L
[
[
L
L
1Peak direct Alaska resident employment. The end of the exploration-[
development phase.
SOURCE: MAP Model r .
L
192 [
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
r
L
f'
L
[
E
Q
c
[j
[
[
c L
f' u
The overall general pattern of employment impact follows the pattern of
direct Alaska resident employment. Direct employment is close to 20 per-
cent of the total impact throughout the period. Development of the
Northern Gulf OCS does not prevent the fall in employment after the peak
ALCAN construction years in 1983. The growth of employment from 1980,
the year of the OCS lease sale, to 1990, the end of both the exploration
and development, averages 3.7 percent per year. This is 13 percent
greater than in the base case. The growth rate after 1990 is less than
in the base case. The reduced rate of growth in the production period
is a result of the decrease in employment impact from its peak in 1990.
The growth caused by OCS development does not significantly chang.e the
structure of employment from that observed in the base case. Table 60
compares the structure of the economy, as· described by the employment
distribution in the base and impact cases. The major change in the
structure of the economy observed in the base case is supported by the
introduction of the mean Northern Gulf OCS development scenario. The
support sector increases in importance throughout the projection period,
increasing to approximately 53 percent in both cases.
POPULATION
Population is an aggregate indicator of economic activity which measures
the response of people to increased employment opportunities. OCS develop-
ment will increase the magnitude of population growth. OCS development
may also change the characteristics of the population such as the age-sex
193
Support Sector
Moderate Base
Mean Scenario
Government
Moderate Base
~1ean Scenario
Basic Sector
Moderate Base
Mean Scenario
TABLE 60. THE STRUCTURE OF THE ECONOMY
MEAN SCENARIO
ALASKA
Proportion of Total Employment
1980
39.5
39.5
36.0
36.0
24.5
24.5
1985
42.7
42.9
33.1
32.7
24.2
24.3
1990
46.2
: 46.8
I 29.6
28.8
24.2
24.4
1995
49.6
49.8
26.5
26.2
23.8
24.0
2000 ·.
53.1
53.2
. 23.1
22.9
23.8
24.0
Support Sector includes transportation-communication-public utilities,
trade, finance, and service employment.
Government includes state, local, and federal employment.
Basic Sector includes mining, manufacturing, agriculture-forestry-fisheries,
and construction employment.
194
[
[
[
I~
L
[
[
[
c
L
[
[
r ,
L
r ,
L
[
[~
['
[
[
['
r'
[
r
L
L
p
0
E
L
[
L
distribut·ion or the importance of the components of change. This section
will examine the impact bn populatinn of Northern Gulf OCS development.
Population is 16,440 greater by 2000 because of Northern Gulf OCS develop-
ment; this is a 2.1 percent increase over the base case. Population impact
peaks in 1990 at about 21,000, which is 3.5 percent greater than the base
case. This is the year in which both the employment impact and the level
of direct Alaska resident employment on the project reach their peak.
The average growth rate between 1978 and 2000 is 3.2 percent per year.
This is a slight increase from the 3.1 percent rate in the base case.
As in the base case, population grows slightly slower than employment;
the dependency ratio falls from 2.28 in 1978 to 2.17 in 2000. Table 61
describes the population impact.
The pattern of growth is affected by OCS development. The development
of the Northern Gulf OCS does not reverse the d~crease experienced after
the peak ALCAN construction year, 1983. In both cases, population falls
by less than one percent. Population, like employment, grows faster
than in the base case in the period from the beginning of exploration to
the end of development and grows slower after that. Between 1980 and 1990,
the average annual rate of growth is 3.5 percent in the mean scenario
and 3.1 percent in the base case. Between 1990 and 2000, the rate of
growth in the mean scenario is 2.8 percent, compared to 2.9 percent in
the base case. The main reason for this is that impact population
increases throughout exploration and development. After that, impact
population falls and stabilizes during production.
195
1980
1985
1990 1
1995
2000
TABLE 61. POPULATION IMPACT
NORTHERN GULF OCS
MEAN SCENARIO, ALASKA
Base Case Mean OCS Scenario
Population Population
434,173 434,173
509,057 513,372
591 ,580 612,523
677,649 692,017
789,287 80S, 725
Impact
0
4,315
20,944
14,368
16,437
1Peak direct Alaska resident employment. The end of the exploration-
development phase.
SOURCE: MAP.Model
196
r
L
L
[
c
[
L
[
L
J .
L
I
L
[
[
l
r
L
[
t
6
c
6
[
[
L
L
(' u
Northern Gulf OCS development affects the components of papulation change.
The most important effect occurs during the buildup to the peak impact in
1990. Table 62 compares the role of migration in population change between
1984 and 1995. These years cover the peak development years when the
population impact from OCS development increases to its peak of 21,000
in 1990 and then falls to a constant level of approximately 15,000 by
1996. The importance of migration as a component of population change
is increased relative to the base case during this period. Migration
accounts for over 50 percent of the population change from 1986 to 1990
in the OCS case, while it accounts for over 50 percent only in 1988 and
1989 in the base case. Between 1990 and 1995, migration is less important
to population change than in the base. The decrease in level of employ-
ment in the Northern Gulf and the higher number of births resulting from
high population are responsible for this effect. By the time the popula-
tion impact stabilizes in 1995, the importance of migration as a component
of population change is the same; by 1996 migration is responsible for
51.4 percent of the change in population in both cases.
Two related trends concerning the structure of the population were ob-
served in both the base case and the historical period. The first was
the reduction in the dependency ratio. This trend is also projected to
occur in the OCS development case. By 2000 the dependency ratio in both
the base and OCS development cases has fallen to 2.17. The major reasons
for this are an increase in the labor force participation of the working-
age population and an increase in the proportion of working-age population
in the population. This is related to the second observed ~hange in the
197
TABLE 62. THE MIGRATION COMPONENT OF POPULATION CHANGE
NORTHERN GULF MEAN OCS SCENARIO
1986-1996
Migration as a Percent of Total Population Change
Moderate Mean OCS
Base Case Scenario
1986 43.1 53.6
1987 49. 1 59.7
1988 53.5 58.8
1989 53.2 55.4
1990 45.2 50.0
1991 40.2 28.5
1992 42.1 25.5
1993 46.8 40.2
1994 46.5 42.4
1995 49. 1 47.5
1996 51.4 51.4
SOURCE: MAP Model
198
[
r L
[
L
[
[
[
[
L.
i '
L
I ,
L
L
~
[
[
[
[
[
[
r
L
[
6
c
E
~
[
[
r"' L
r=
l_j
structure of the population, the aging of the population. Table 63 shows
the age-sex distribution prior to OCS development and at the end of the
projection per·iod. As in the base case, the population is projected
to age. The population over 30 increases from 37.6 percent in 1980 to
43 percent in 2000.
PERSONAL INCOME
The final aggregate indicator of economic growth is personal income. The
impact of OCS development is to increase personal income relative to the
base case. (See Table 64.) By 2000 Northern Gulf OCS development will
have increased the level of personal income by $937.6 million, or 2.4 per-
cent. Personal income is projected to increase at an average annual rate
of 10.8 percent between 1978 and 2000. This is slightly greater than the
growth rate in the base case of 10.7 percent per year. The peak impact
occurs in 1990, when personal income is $1. l billion, or 7.3 percent
greater than in the base case.
The impact of Northern Gulf OCS development on personal income rises to
its 1990 peak, then falls until 1994. This coincides with the decrease
in the level of project employment. After 1994 direct resident employment
is stable~ the rise in personal income impact is a result of increasing
prices and wages. OCS development is not enough to prevent the fall in
personal income after the peak ALCAN year in 1983. The magnitude of the
fall is similar in both the base and impact cases. Growth in personal
income averages a rate of 11.4 percent per year during the development
and exploration phase. After the end of this phase in 1990, the average
199
\
TABLE 63. AGE-SEX STRUCTURE OF THE POPULATION
NORTHERN GULF MEAN OCS SCENARIO
ALASKA
1980 2000
Age Cohorts Males Females Males Females
0-14 15.08 14.56 14.27 13.81
15-29 18.47 14.33 15.84 13.09
30-49 13.35 12.12 14.83 13.37
50-59 3.31 2.92 3.83 3.70
60 + 3.06 2.81 3.37 3.90
SOURCE: MAP Model
200
[
r
[
[
[
[
[
I'
b
I'
L
[
[
[
[
L
[
[
,-
L
f ~
L
l
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
r
L
r
L
L
0
0
c
c
[
[
r" L
r
L
1980
1985
1990 1
1995
2000
TABLE 64. PERSONAL INCOME IMPACT
NORTHERN GULF OCS MEAN SCENARIO
ALASKA
(Millions of Nominal Dollars)
Base Case Mean OCS Scenario
Personal Income Personal Income
5,395 5,395
8,810 9,008
14,836 15,919
23,829 24,367
39,559 40,496
Impact
0
198
1,083
537
937
1Peak direct Alaska resident employment. The end of the exploration-
development phase.
SOURCE: MAP Model
201
rate of growth is 9.8 percent per year. As with employment and population,
the rate of growth of personal income is faster during the exploration-
development phase than during the same time per1od in the base case and
slower than in the base case after this period.
The growth in persona 1 income reflects the ability of the economy to
generate increased returns to factors. It is not the best measure of the
welfare of the region because it reflects both the growth of employment
and prices. One measure of welfare is real per capita income. This
measures the command of the average individual over goods and services.
Real per capita income accounts for the effect of prices and population
on the growth in personal income. Table 65 shows the impact of Northern
Gulf development on real per capita income. The development of the
Northern Gulf OCS has two differential periods of impact. OCS activity
has a positive effect on real per capita incomes until 1992; after this,
the impact on real per capita income is negative. The impact on real
per capita income is greatest in 1987, the year of the peak direct Alaska
resident construction employment; real per capita income is $140, or
3.0 percent greater than in the base case. By 2000 real per capita income
is less than but not significantly different from the base case. The
differential between the OCS development and base cases is affected by
the composition of employment. The greatest difference occurs when the
peak in high wage construction employment occurs, not when the peak in
total employment occurs. Real per capita income as a measure of welfare
does not consider the distribution of income.
202
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
r:
L
[
[
c
c
[
[
[
r ,
L
['
L
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
r L
r
L
L
c
[
[
TABLE 65. REAL PER CAPITA INCOME IMPACT
NORTHERN GULF OCS MEAN SCENARIO
ALASKA
Real Per Capita Income Relative Price Index
Mean Mean
Base Case Scenario Impact Base Case Scenario Impact
1980 4,029 4,029 0 308.4 308.4 0
1985 4,463 4,511 48 387.8 389.0 1.2
1987 1 4,732 4,873 140 425.5 429.1 3.6
1990 2 5,119 5,250 131 489.9 495.1 5.2
1995 5,720 5,706 -14 614.8 617.1 2.3
2000 6,456 6,448 - 7 776.4 779.5 3.1
1Peak real per capita income impact.
2Peak direct Al~ska resident employment. The end of the exploration-
development phase.
SOURCE: MAP Model
203
The rapid growth which occurs during the exploration and development
phases increases the price level relative to the base case. The rela-
tive price index is one percent greater than in the base by 1990, the
end of the exploration-development phase. After 1990 the economy in the
OCS development case is projected to expand less rapidly than in the
base case. Because of this, prices do not increase as fast in the OCS
case, and the price differential between the cases is reduced.
THE STATE FISCAL POSITION
The development of the Northern Gulf OCS will affect the state fiscal
position in two ways. First, OCS development will affect the revenues
received by the state. The state will receive direct revenues from the
OCS activity in the form of property taxes. The extra economic growth
which will result because of OCS activity will also affect state revenues.
Secondly, OCS development will affect the state's fiscal position through
its impact on state expenditures. The increase in population and economic
activity which will result from OCS development may change the determinants
of state expenditures. Both of these changes will affect the fund balance
and the level of services provided by the state. This section will describe
the impact 6f OCS development on the state's fiscal position.
REVENUES
Northern Gulf OCS development provides the state with a new source of reve-
nue, property taxes from onshore facilities. However, the major revenue
impact results from those revenues not directly generated by the project.
Property tax revenues from Northern Gulf OCS development are projected to
204
[
[
~·
[
~
L
f'
rr
L
r
L
L
[
L
b
L
[
[
r~
L
l
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
r Li
[
[
l
J '
L
be minimal in the mean scenario. Between 1989 and 1993, they are approxi-
mately $7.8 million per year. This is only .2 percent of the total revenues
in 1990. The direct property tax revenues fall to $6.7 million by 2000.
The overall revenue impact is much larger. Table 66 illustrates the
impact of OCS development on total general fund revenues and endogenous
revenues, which is a component of general fund revenues. By 1990, total
general fund revenues are about $5 billion. This is $95 million greater
than in the base case, a two percent increase because of OCS development.
The revenue impact falls with the decrease in direct employment until
1995, when direct resident employment stabilizes. After 1995, the reve-
nue impact increases. By 2000, the impact on total general fund revenues
is $95 million. Total general fund revenues grow only slightly faster
because of OCS development over the 1980-to-2000 period. After 1995,
general fund revenues increase at a rate of 5.6 percent per year com-
pared to 5.5 percent in the base case.
The major components of impact revenues are the endogenous revenues, those
revenues generated by the growth of the economy. 1 The income taxes paid
by OCS resident Alaska employees are included in these revenues. In 1995,
when the impact on general fund revenues is the greatest, endogenous
revenues account for 88 percent of the revenue impact. By 2000, these
revenues account for 95 percent of the impact. Endogenous revenues
1 Endogenous revenues include personal income taxes, nonpetroleum
corporate income taxes, business license taxes, motor fuels tax, alcohol
tax, cigarette tax, ad valorem tax, school tax, fees and license revenues,
ferry revenues, and miscellaneous taxes and revenues.
205
1980
1985
1990 1
1991 2
1995
2000
TABLE 66. STATE REVENUE IMPACT
NORTHERN GULF OCS MEAN SCENARIO
ALASKA
(Millions of Nominal Dollars)
General Fund Revenues Endogenous Revenues
Mean Mean
Base Case Scenario Impact Base Case Scenario Impact
1,625 1,625 0 231 231 0
3,629 3,639 10 450 458 8
4,712 4,804 91 869 945 76
4,880 4,975 95 979 1,063 84
5,864 5,911 47 1 ,600 1,647 46
7,678 7,773 95 3,071 3 '161 90
r
L
f
[
[
r:
L
L
[
[
[
b
l
1Peak direct Alaska resident employment. The end of the exploration-[
d~velopment phase.
2Peak revenue impacts.
r
L
SOURCE: MAP Model
206 [
r
[
r
[
L
c
[
r
L
,__,
L
[
c
0
E
c
[
[
c
L
increase to $3.2 billion by 2000. This is 3 percent greater than in the
base case. As with total revenues, the impact peaks in 1991 and begins
rising again after 1995 when direct employment stabilizes. Over the
period 1980 to 2000, endogenous revenues are projected to increase at an
average rate of 14 percent per year. This is greater than the 13.8 percent
rate of increase in the base case.
STATE EXPENDITURES
Table 67 shows the expenditure impact of OCS development. Total expendi-
tures increase because of OCS development and the pattern of expenditure
impact follows the projected pattern of OCS direct resident employment.
By 2000, state expenditures are projected to be $10.1 billion \'lith Northern
Gulf OCS development; this is $106 million, or one percent, greater than
in the base case. The maximum expenditure impact is achieved nine years
earlier. In 1991, state expenditures are $188 million, or 4 percent greater
than in the base case. Expenditures increase at a rate of 11.3 percent
per year between 1980 and 1991, when they peak, and 7.9 percent after 1991.
This is greater than the base case rate of 10.9 percent in the earlier
period but less than the 8.3 percent in the later period.
Expenditures increase for two reasons. First, expenditures increase be-
cause of. increases in population and prices. As population and prices
increase, expenditures must increase to maintain the same level of
service. Secondly, expenditures will increase if the level of service
provided by state government increases. Real per capita expenditures
are a measure of the level of services provided by the state. Table 67
207
1980
1985
1990 1
1991 2
1995
1996
2000
TABLE 67. STATE GOVERNMENT EXPENDITURE IMPACTS
NORTHERN GULF OCS MEAN SCENARIO
ALASKA
Total State Expenditures Real Per Capita
(Millions of Nominal Dollars) State Expenditures
Mean Mean
Base Case Scenario Impact Base Case Scenario
1,567 1 ,567 0 1 '170 1 '170
2,748 2,762 15 1,392 1,383
4,557 4,713 157 1 ,572 1,554
4,904 5,092 188 1 ,578 1,575
6,667 6,733 66 1,600 1 ,577
7,201 7,268 67 1 ,601 1,576
10,029 10,135 106 1,637 1 ,614
Impact
0
- 9
-18
- 3
-24
-25
-23
1Peak direct Alaska resident employment. The end of the exploration-
development phase.
2Peak state expenditure impact.
SOURCE: MAP Model
-208
[
[
[
[ ,.
[
L
r L_,
r~
L
[
[
[
[
[
[
r
[
[
[
[
[
[
r
L
L
--1· .. ·'.,
[
c
[
[
L
L
L
f'
I :
Li
shows the impact of OCS development on the real per capita expenditures.
Real per capita expenditures are less than in the base case throughout
the period. The difference is less than 1.5 percent throughout the
period. The maximum difference in real per capita expenditures is in 1996
when they are $25 less than in the base case. By 2000, rea·! per capita
expenditures are $1,614 with OCS development; this is 1.4 percent
less than in the base case.
FUND BALANCE
The state's fund balance consists of the total of the permanent and
general fund. The permanent fund will not be affected by Northern Gulf
OCS development because OCS development on the Northern Gulf does not
produce the type of revenues subject to the permanent fund. The fund
balance impact will be on the general fund. Table 68 shows the impact of
OCS development on the fund balance. The fund balance follows the same
pattern as in the base case, rising to a peak in 1997 and then falling as
the fund balance is drawn on to meet expenditures. However, development
of the Northern Gulf OCS according to the mean scenario reduces the level
of the fund balance. By the end of the exploration-development phase in
1990, the fund balance is projected to be $150 million less than in the
base case. This is a 1.2 percent reduction. By the end of the projection
period in 2000, the fund balance is $14.9 billion, or almost 2 percent
less than in the base case. The reduced fund balance generates less
interest revenue which contributes to the reduction in the fund balance.
209
1980
1985
1990 1
1991 2
1995
1997 3
2000
TABLE 68. IMPACT ON STATE FISCAL POSITION
NORTHERN GULF OCS MEAN SCENARIO
ALASKA
(Millions of Nominal Dollars)
General Fund Revenues Minus
Fund Balance General Fund Expenditures
Mean Mean
Base Case Scenario Impact Base Case Scenario Impact
1 ~329 1~329 0 361 361 0
5,936 5,925 -11 1 ,429 1,426 - 2
12,281 12 '131 -150 1,044 1,004 -39
13 '193 12,983 -210 912 851 -60
15,809 15,513 -296 416 409 - 7
16 '164 15,864 -300 91 88 - 2
15,200 14,913 -287 -546 -536 10
r.
[
[
[
[
[
c
L
[
L
[
[
6
L
1Peak direct Alaska resident employment. The end of the exploration-['
development phase. ,
2Maximum impact on General Fund revenues net of expenditures.
3Maximum fund balance impact.
SOURCE: MAP Model
210
r ,
L
f ~
L
[
[
[
r~
[
[
[
[
r
L
[
L
t
g
c
6
[
[
('
L
f'
l
The fund balance is reduced because the increased revenues associated with
OCS development do not cover the increased cost. The difference between
general fund revenues and general fund expenditures describes the im-
balance between revenues and expenditures. The addition of the Northern
Gulf OCS development according to the mean scenario reduces net revenues
below their base case levels between 1981 and 1997. During this per·iod,
the revenue impact of OCS development is less than the expenditure impact.
This results in part from the reliance on petroleum revenues which are
not substantially increased by OCS development. After 1997, the OCS
impact on net revenues is positive, which means the revenue impact is
greater than the expenditure impact. This is not enough to make the
overall fund balance impact positive, but it does reduce the negative fund
balance impact of OCS development. The negative impact on the fund is at
its maximum in 1997 when the fund balance is $300 million less than in
the base case. By 2000, the fund balance is only $287 million less than
in the base case. After 1997, expenditures in both the base and impact
cases grow at similar rates~ while revenues grow slightly faster with
OCS development. This difference in growth rates causes the reduction
in the negative fund balance impact by 2000. The growth in revenues is
primarily a result of the faster growth of endogenous revenues.
The overall impact of Northern Gulf OCS development on the state fiscai
position is negative. The fiscal position is a combination of the impa~t
on state services as measured by real per capita expenditures and the fund
baiance. A ciear negative fiscal impact can be seen since the OCS devel-
opment decreases both the fund balance and the level of real per capita
income from their base case levels.
211
THE REGIONS
This section examines the regional impacts of OCS development on two
regions, Anchorage and Southcentral Alaska. Different types of impact can
be expected in each region since the character of the regions differs:
Anchorage is the metropolitan center of the state. OCS development will
impact Anchorage through both the direct OCS headquarters employment and
Anchorage•s role as the administration and distribution center for the
state. Southcentral will be mainly affected by the direct OCS development;
Northern Gulf activity occurs within Southcentral Alaska. This section
will describe the impact of OCS activity on each region in terms of the
growth of the aggregate indicators of economic growth--population, employ-
ment, and disposable real personal income--and changes in the structure of
the economy as measured by the distribution of employment.
Anchorage
Table 69 shows the impact on Anchorage of developing the Northern Gulf
OCS according to the mean scenario. As at the state level, each of these
indicators increases because of OCS activity. The pattern of increase
follows the pattern of direct resident employment impact.
Population is projected to increase to 431,026 by 2000 with Northern
Gulf OCS development. This is an 8,417, or 2 percent, increase over the
base case. Population grows at an average annual rate of 3.7 percent
from 1980 to 2000. This is slightly faster than the 3.6 percent growth
rate in the base case over the same time period. The Anchorage popula-
tion impact peaks in 1990, when population is 10,343 greater than in the
212
[
[
[
L
[
[
c
L
[
c
[
[
[
[
[
r' L
r~
L
[
[
r~
[
[
[
[
[
f'
L
f'
L
[
u
Q
c
fj
c
L
TABLE 69. IMPACT ON AGGREGATE INDICATORS OF ECONOMIC GROWTH
NORTHERN GULF OCS MEAN SCENARIO
ANCHORAGE
1980
1985
1990
1995
2000
1980
1985
1990
1995
2000
1980
1985
1990
1995
2000
Po~ulation
Base Case Mean Scenario Impact
207,323 207,323 0
248,194 249,962 1,768
295,590 305,932 11 ,343
350,467 357,795 7,328
422,609 431,026 8,417
Em~loyment
Base Case Mean Scenario Impact
91 ,938 91,938 0
110,055 111,258 1,203
134,221 139,743 5,522
160,260 162,462 2,202
196,092 199,012 2,920
Real Disposable Personal Income
(Millions of Constant Dollars)
Base Case
677
887
1 '177
1,524
2,015
Mean Scenario
677
899
1,235
1,547
2,047
Impact
0
12
58
23
32
f' L SOURCE: MAP Model
r' t :
L
213
base case. Even though the major direct employment occurs in the South-
central region, Anchorage has almost half of the population impact. In
1990, 49 percent of the state population impact occurs in Anchorage; by
2000, the Anchorage impact is 51 percent of the statewide impact. As in
the base case, population continues to concentrate in Anchorage. By 2000,
Anchorage contains 53.5 percent of the state population in both the base
case and the OCS development case.
Employment also increases because of Northern Gulf OCS development. By
2000, employment is projected to be 199,012, which is almost 3,000 greater
than in the base case. Over the impact period, 1980-2000, employment grows
at an average rate of 3.9 percent per year in the OCS development case,
which is a slight increase over the base case growth rate. The Anchorage
employment impact also peaks in 1990 at 5,522, which is 4 percent greater
than the base case population. Anchorage has close to 50 percent of the
OCS employment impact throughout the period. As in the base case, popula-
tion increases slower than employment; the dependency ratio has fallen to
2.17 by 2000. This is slightly higher than the 2.16 dependency ratio in
the base case in 2000.
Real disposable income is projected to be $2.0 billion in 2000, an increase
of $32 million over the base case. Real disposable income increases at an
average rate of 5.7 percent per year from 1980 to 2000, which is slightly
faster than the 5.6 percent growth rate in the base case.
214
r,
L
r:
L
L
[
[
[
G
[
[
f '
L
{0
L
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
f~
L
('
L
[' u
t
ECONOMIC STRUCTURE
The impact of OCS development in the Northern Gulf may not affect all
industries equally. Table 70 illustrates the effect of OCS development
on the structure of employment. All of the industrial sectors grow with
OCS development. As in the base case, the most rapid growth occurs in
the support sector. Over the impact period, 1980-2000, transportation-
communication-utilities and local construction increases its share of
employment from 14.9 percent to 17.7 percent; and trade, services, and
finance-insurance-real estate increases its share from 46.4 percent to
58.9 percent. The basic sector maintains a relatively constant share of
employment; the increase in this sector comes mainly from the growth in
manufacturing. Although government employment increases, its share falls
from 34.6 percent to 19.2 percent between 1980 and 2000. The development
of the Northern Gulf OCS supports the changing structure of the economy
projected in the base case.
Southcentral Alaska
Table 71 describes the impact of Northern Gulf OCS development according
to the mean scenario on the Southcentral region of Alaska. This table
shows three aggregate indicators of economic growth which are projected
to increase with OCS development. The lease sale areas are located in
the Southcentral region, so the major direct impact will occur in this
region. The relatively underdeveloped support sector of the region will
limit the impact of OCS development.
215
N __,
O'l
TABLE 70. ECONOMIC STRUCTURE
NORTHERN GULF OCS MEAN SCENARIO
. ANCHORAGE
Support Sector I Support Sector II Government Basic Sector
Employment % of Total ~mployment % of Total Employment % of Total Employment -.
1980 42,516 46.4 13 '652 14.9 31,763 34.6 3,746
1985 54,917 49.7 17,453 15.8 33 '527_ 30.3 4,632
1990 74,018 53.6 22,850 16.5 35,580 25.8 5,692
1995 89,403 56.0 27,195 17.0 36,368 22.8 6,780
2000 114,667 58.9 34,495 17.7 37,427 19.2 8 '1 07
Support Sector I includes trade, services, and finance-insurance-real estate employment.
Support Sector II includes transportation-communication-public utilities and other construction
employment.
Government includes state, local, and federal employment.
Basic Sector includes manufacturing, agriculture-forestry-fisheries, mining, and exogenous
construction employment.
SOURCE: MAP Model
rr--1 ._,' .. .J
~: ,,..___.,
'
% of Total
4. 1
4.2
4.1
4.3
4.3
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
f' c
[
6
Q
c
b
[
[
{'
L
I , u
TABLE 71. IMPACT ON AGGREGATE INDICATORS OF ECONOMIC GROWTH
NORTHERN GULF OCS ~1EAN SCENARIO
SOUTHCENTRAL
1980
1985
1990
1995
2000
1980
1985
1990
1995
2000
1980
1985
1990
1995
2000
SOURCE: MAP Model
Population
Base Case Mean Scenario ~act
59,054 59,054 0
63,915 66,203 2,287
70,015 76,801 6,786
74,402 78,879 4,478
81 ,385 86,386 5,001
Em~lo_lment
Base Case Mean Scenario Imeact
23,745 23,745 0
26,323 27,497 l '174
30,054 33,520 3,466
32,810 34,629 1 ,819
36,886 38,978 2,092
Real Disposable Personal Income
(Millions of Constant Dollars)
Base Case
184
219
277
330
407
217
Mean Scenario
184
235
329
355
439
Imeact
0
16
52
25
31
Population is projected to grow at an average annual rate of 1.9 percent
from the lease sale in 1980 to the end of the period. By 2000, the
population is 86,386, which is 5,001 or 6.1 percent greater than in the
base case. The peak population impact occurs at the end of the exploration-
development phase in 1990. Population is almost 6,800 greater than in
the base case.
Employment is projected to increase to 38,978 by 2000, which is almost
2,100 greater than in the base case. With Northern Gulf development,
employment increases at an annual rate of 2.5 percent bet~t1een 1980 and
2000, compared to 2.2 percent in the base case. Peak employment impact
occurs in 1990 when development and exploration end and peak direct Alaska
resident employment occurs. In 1990 employment is 3,466 greater than in
the base case. Direct resident OCS employment accounts for 46 percent of
the total employment impact in 1990 and 41 percent in 2000.
Real disposable personal income in 2000 is $31 million greater than the
base case because of OCS development. As with the population and employ-
ment impacts, the peak real disposable personal income impact occurs at
the end of the exploration-development phase in 1990. Real disposable
personal income is $52 million, or 20 percent, greater than in the base
case in 1990. The importance of the high wage OCS employment results in
this increase. Northern Gulf OCS development has a major impact on
Southcentral Alaska.
218
[
[
I.
[
[
L
r~
r:
L
[
L
[
c
G
[
[
r,
L
{ "
L
[
[
[
[
[
r~
Li
{'
L
[
B
L
L
L
ECONOMIC STRUCTURE
Northern Gulf OCS development according to the mean scenario supports
the structural change which was projected in the base case. All sectors
increase employment between 1980 and 2000; however) the rate of increase
differs between industries. As in the base case) government's share
decreases from 20.2 percent in 1980 to 16.3 percent. Trade, service)
and finance-insurance-real estate expands its share of employment from
38.2 percent to 42.6 percent between 1980 and 2000. This response is
expected) s i nee the 1 oca 1 economy wi 11 expand the goods and services
produced locally as its scale increases. With the buildup of OCS activity
in the Northern Gulf, the basic sector increases its share from 26.9 per-
cent in 1980 to 27.5 percent in 1990. After the peak in Northern Gulf
activity and the shutdown of the Upper Cook Inlet fields in 1990, the
basic sector's share of total employment is reduced to 25.5 percent.
Table 72 describes these structural changes.
The Impacts of Northern Gulf
OCS Development: 5 Percent Scenario
The five percent probability resource level scenario projects a higher
level of oil and gas discovery than the mean scenario. The higher level
of discovery requires greater development activity than in the mean see-
nario. The most important difference between these scenarios is the mag-
nitude of direct employment; differences in magnitude are also the major
differences between the impacts associated with each scenario. This
section will describe the magnitude of the impact associated with the
219
N
N
0
TABLE 72. ECONOMIC STRUCTURE
NORTHERN GULF OCS MEAN SCENARIO
SOUTHCENTRAL
Support Sector I Support Sector II Government Basic Sector
Employment % of Total Emp}.Qyment % of Total Employment % of Total Employment
1980 9~173 38.2 3,515 14.7 4,837 20.2 6,462
1985 10,792 38.8 4,316 15.5 5,412 19.4 7,317
1990 13,321 39.1 5,338 15.7 6,058 17.8 9,358
1995 14,641 41.4 5,442 15.4 6,265 17.7 9,040
2000 17,155 42.6 -6,157 15.3 6,548 16.3 10,369
Support Sector I includes trade, services, and finance insurance-real estate employment.
Support Sector II includes transportation-communication-public utilities and other construction
employment.
Government includes state, local, and federal employment.
Basic Sector includes manufacturing, agriculture-forestry-fisheries, mining, and exogenous
construction employment.
SOURCE: MAP Model
0/ of Total /0
26.9
26.3
27.5
25.5
25.8
[
[
[
[
L
[
[
r
L
L
B
[J
L
b
[
L
.-
L
r:
I : w
5 percent scenario in terms of four measures of economic activity: employ-
ment, population, state expenditures, and the fund balance. We will also
compare the structural similarities and differences between the mean see-
nario and the 5 percent scenario.
The five percent scenario includes the development of eighteen fields. T~e
number of fields developed means that the phases of development will over-
lap. For our analysis, we will concentrate on the period between the lease
sale in 1980 and the end of exploration in 1991. This year is also the
year of peak direct resident employment. This period includes explora-
tion which lasts from 1981 to 1991 and the major portion of the develop-
ment phase which lasts from 1984 to 1992. The period after 1992 is
dominated by production.
GENERAL PATTERN OF GROWTH
The general pattern of development projected with the inclusion of the
5 percent Northern Gulf scenario is shown in Table 73. Four indicators--
employment, population, state expenditures, and fund balance--are shown.
The other variables mentioned in the discussion can be found in Appendix D.
This scenario, like the mean scenario, increases employment, population,
and state expenditures throughout the projection period. There are two
major differences between the scenarios. First, the maximum population
and employment increases do not occur when peak direct employment occurs
as in the moderate scenario. Secondly, unlike the mean scenario, the
5 percent scenario has a positive fund balance impact in the final year
of the projection period. In this section, we will discuss the impact of
221
1980
19851
1988
19902
1991
1995
2000
1980
1985
1988
1990
1991
1995
2000
TABLE 73. · THE IMPACT ON MAJOR ECONOMIC INDICATORS
NORTHERN GULF OCS 5 PERCENT SCENARIO
ALASKA
Poeulation Emelo_yment
so' 7o 5%
Base Case Scenario Impact Base Case Scenario
434,173 434,173 0 194,054 194,054
509,057 528,700 19,643 224,931 238,432
556,942 595,911 38,969 249,550 271 ,304
591 ,580 629,269 37,689 266,632 283,943
606,771 645,384 38,613 273,502 290,443
677,649 710,099 32,450 308,016 318,397
789,287 824,222 34,935 364 '721 376,353
State Expenditures Fund Balance
(Millions of Nominal Dollars} (Millions of Nominal
1,567 1,567 0 1 ,329 1 ,329
2,748 2,795 47 5,936 5,945
3,750 4,019 268 9,980 9,826
4,557 4,801 245 12,281 12,007
4,904 5,124 220 13 '193 12,892
6,667 6,798 131 15,809 15,508
10,029 10,180 151 15,200 15,290
1Peak employment and population impact.
Impact
0
13,501
21 ,754
17,311
16 '941
10,381
11 ,631
Dollars)
0
9
-154
-274
-301
-300
90
2Peak direct Alaska resident employment. The end of the exploration-
development phase.
SOURCE: MAP Model
222
r:
L
L:
[
[
[
L
[
[
f '
L
r·
L
[
[
[
[
L
[
[
r
L
[
[
6
[i . . ,
'
c
6
[
[
c
L
f' u
Northern Gulf OCS development according to the 5 percent scenario as well
as the differences between the mean and 5 percent scenarios.
Population is projected to be 824,222 by 2000. This is 34,935 or 4.4 per-
cent greater than population in the base case population. Between 1980
and 2000, the population growth rate averages 3.3 percent per year which
is greater than the 3.0 percent rate in the base case for the same time
period. The maximum increase in population as a result of OCS development
occurs in 1988 when population is almost 39,000 greater than in the base
case. This is the same year that direct resident construction employment
reaches its peak. By 1991 when exploration ends, population impact has
risen to another peak of 38,600. The growth rate between 1980 and the
end of exploration averages 3.7 percent per year, compared to 3.1 percent
in the base case. After the major development and exploration activity
is over in 1991, the growth slows to 2.8 percent per year, which is less
than the base case growth rate during this same period.
The pattern of population growth and impact can be explained by the
growth of total employment. Total employment is projected to be 11,631,
or 3.2 percent greater than in the base case by 2000. The inclusion of
the Northern Gulf 5 percent development scenario increases the growth
rate between 1980 and 2000 from 3.2 percent per year in the base case to
3.4 percent per year. As with population, the maximum increase in
employment occurs in 1988. Total dit'ect resident employment in 1988 is
3,399, which is 341 less than the maximum direct employment which occurs
in 1991. The major difference is the composition of this employment.
223
In 1988, over 55 percent of the direct resident employment is in construc-
tion. By 1991, only 12 percent are construction employees. The differ-
ential incomes earned by workers in the construction industry account for
the earlier total peak impact. Employment in the support sector is deter-
mined by demand for output, which is a function of real income. The
higher construction incomes allow them to have a greater impact than an
[
[
[
equal number of other workers. The effect of these high incomes makes the (~
real per capita income impact greatest in 1987 when direct construction
employment is greatest.
to $10.2 billion by 2000; this is $151 million or 1.5 percent greater
than in the base case. The growth rate between 1980 and 2000 is only
slightly greater than in the base case. State expenditures grow at an
average rate of 9.8 percent per year over the period, compared to 9.7 per-
c~nt in the base case. The average rate of growth in expenditures is
11 . 4 percent per year between 1980 and 1981 and fa 11 s to 7. 9 percent per
year between 1991 and 2000. Expenditures grow faster in the base case
after 1991. As in the mean scenario, all determinants of the growth in
expenditures--population, prices, per capita real income--grow slower
during this period as the adjustment from peak impact to production
employment is made. The growth in expenditures is not so rapid as either
population or prices. Because of this, real per capita expenditures
224
'
r L:o
[
[
L
[
L
I ,
L
f'
L
[
[
[
[
f
r~
[
L
r~
L'
r
L
L
L
r' L
are lower than in the base case. By 2000, real per capita expenditures
are $58 or 3.6 percent less than in the base case.
The pattern of the fund balance growth in this scenario is similar to
the base case pattern. The fund rises to a maximum amount in 1997,
then falls in both cases. With Northern Gulf OCS development, the fund
rises to a maximum of almost $16 billion by 1997. After this, the fund
is drawn down as the general fund is used to make up the difference
between expenditures and revenues. The pattern of fund balance growth
with Northern Gulf OCS development in the 5 percent scenario differs in
two ways from the base case. First, the peak in 1997 is not so great.
The fund is $201 million less in 1997 with OCS development. Secondly,
the fund balance does not fall by as much after 1997. By 2000, the fund
balance is actually greater by $90 million than in the base case; the
fund balance is .6 percent greater in 2000 because of OCS development.
The pattern is similar to the one in the mean Northern Gulf scenario.
In both scenarios, the negative impact on the fund balance was reduced
after 1997. The major cause of this pattern is the more rapid increase
in revenues than expenditures in the latter part of the period. This
positive impact on the fund balance is eliminated when prices are con-
sidered. OCS development increases the price level over the base case;
this has the effect of reducing the real value of the fund balance.
Since the fund balance is determined most significantly by a fixed flow
of petroleum revenues which are not affected by Alaskan prices, price
increases generally reduce the real value of the fund. The fund balance
225
measured in constant dollars is reduced throughout the period by OCS
development. By 2000, the real fund balance is $9 million less than in
the base case. The negative impact on both the real fund balance and
real per capita income means that OCS development according to the
5 percent scenario has a negative impact on the state's fiscal position.
STRUCTURAL SIMILARITIES AND DIFFERENCES
The major structural characteristics of the projected economic growth
which were observed to be important in the base case were the increased
importance of the support sector, the decreasing dependency ratio, the
concentration of population in Anchorage, and the pattern of fund bal-
ance growth. The mean Northern Gulf OCS development scenario was shown
to support the base case trends. Table 74 compares indicators of these
structural characteristics between the mean scenario and the 5 percent
scenario.
Similar structural changes occur in both the mean and 5 percent scenario
cases. Both of these scenarios support the base case trends projected
in these characteristics.
The Impacts of Northern Gulf
OCS Development: 95 Percent Scenario
Table 75 shows the impact of the 95 percent Northern Gulf OCS development
scenario on employment, population, state expenditures, and fund balance.
This scenario describes the exploration-only case when no petroleum re-
sources are found. The scenario has only minimal impact on the Alaska
economy.
226
[
r
[
r·
L
L
[
r:
L
[
L
[
L
L
[
[
r
L
r
L
l
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
r
L
[
E
[J
e
~
[
[
f'
L
TABLE 74. STRUCTURAL CHARACTERISTICS OF THE ALASKA ECONOMY
NORTHERN GULF OCS 5 PERCENT SCENARIO
1980 1990 2000
Percent of Employment in the
Su22ort Sector
Mean Scenario 39.5 46.8 53.2
5% Scenario 39.5 47.0 53.4
Dependency Ratio
(Po~ulation/Em~lo~ment)
~lean Scenario 2.24 2.20 2.17
5% Scenario 2.24 2.22 2.19
Percent of Population in
Anchorage
Mean Scenario · 47.8 49.9 53.5
5% Scenario 47.8 49.9 53.4
General Fund Revenues Minus
General Fund Expenditures
(Millions of Nominal $)
Mean Scenario 361 1,004 -536
5% Scenario 361 1,002 -428
227
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
2000
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
2000
TABLE 75. THE IMPACT ON MAJOR ECONOMIC INDICATORS
NORTHERN GULF OCS 95 PERCENT SCENARIO
ALASKA
Po~ulation Em~lo~ment
95% 95%
Base Case Scenario Im~act Base Case Scenario
434,173 434,173 0 194,054 194,054
455,563 456,248 686 206,479 206,985
486,359 487,443 1 ,084 224,637 225,380
502,802 503,935 1 '133 230,228 230,934
501 ,479 502,222 742 223,159 223,513
789,287 789,450 163 364,721 364,731
State Expenditures Fund Balance
Impact
0
507
743
706
353
10
(Million of Nominal Dollars} (Millions of Nominal Dollars)
1,567 1,567 0 1 ,329 1 ,329 0
1,744 1,744 0 1 ,913 1 ,913 1
2,015 2,020 5 2,619 2,618 -1
2,371 2,379 8 3,362 3,358 - 4
2,581 2,588 7 4,507 4,499 - 8
10,029 10,030 1 15,200 15,154 -46
SOURCE: MAP Model
228
[
r
[
[
[
L
r
L
[
L
[
[
[
[
[
r ,
L
r·
L
L
[
[
[
[
[
L
I._,
-~
r l _ _j
r
L
[
8
c
c
E
[
c
c
L
E
Exploration occurs between 1981 and 1984. There is direct OCS employment
only in these four years. The scenario increases employment and popula-
tion by less than one percent. The maximum population impact occurs in
1983 when population is .2 percent greater than in the base case. At
its maximum difference, employment is only .3 percent greater than in
the base case.
The long-term impact is a result of adjustments during the exploration
phase. For example, the growth during exploration phase increases state
expenditures. State expenditures increase from this new base throughout
the projection period. The major long-term impact of this development
scenario is on the fund balance. By 2000 the fund balance is $46 million
less than in the base case. The increased expenditures and the reduced
interest revenues account for the growing negative impact on fund balances.
The minimal impact of this scenario means that it will not affect the
structural changes found in the base case.
Summary and Conclusions
Northern Gulf OCS development will change the magnitude of economic indi-
cators. In all three cases--the 5 percent, mean, and 95 percent scenarios--
the aggregate indicators of economic activity increase. If the Northern
Gulf OCS is developed according to the 5 percent scenario, employment
will be 3.2 percent larger than the base case in 2000, population will be
4.4 percent larger, and personal income will be 4.8 percent larger. The
mean scenario increases employment by 1.6 percent over the base case in
229
2000; population, by 2.0 percent; and personal income, by 2.4 percent.
The 95 percent scenario is the exploration-only case, and it increases
the aggregate indicators by less than one percent.
Northern Gulf OCS development provides increased revenues directly from
property taxes and indirectly from the increase in economic activity.
State expenditures also increase. The pattern in both the production
cases, the mean and 5 percent scenarios, is that over most of the period,
the expenditure impact is greater than the· revenue impact. This means
that the fund balance is drawn down. After production begins, this
trend is reversed and revenues increase faster than expenditures, leading
to a reduction in the negative fund balance impact. By 2000 the fund
balance impact in the 5 percent case is positive.
Two measures of individual welfare are real per capita income and real
per capita state expenditures. In both the development cases, the impact
on real per capita income is positive during exploration and development.
Once production begins, the changing composition of employment and higher
prices lead to a reduction in real per capita incomes below the base
case levels. Real per capita expenditures are less than in the base
case in both production cases.
Overall, the process of growth remains unchanged by OCS development. The
structural changes and changing relationships projected in the base case
are supported by OCS development. One change is an increased importance
230
r
[
['
r-,
[
r
L
L
[
[
L
L
[
[
r .
L
r·
L
[
r
[
[
[
[
[
[
c
r
L
L
G
~
c
c
[
[
f'
L
r
L
E
of migration as a component of population change during the buildup to
peak employment impacts. This is only a short-run change, and base case
proportions are reachedonce direct employment stabilizes. The increased
proportion of employees in the population is also .observed in both develop-
ment cases. As in the base case~ the increased scale of the economy in-
creases the importance of the support sector as the economy provides more
of its own goods and services. Finally, development of the Northern Gulf
OCS increases the concentration 6f population in Anchorage.
231 .
[
[
[
[
[
r L
r L
[
[i u
c
6
[
L
[
f'
U
V. THE IMPACT OF NORTHERN GULF OCS DEVELOPMENT:
THE CU~lULATIVE CASE
The impact of Northern Gulf OCS development will depend on the base case
to which it is compared. In chapter III, we developed three base cases,
each containing a different level of previous OCS lease sale activity.
Varying the base case by the level of previous OCS activity will allow us
to bracket the range of possible Northern Gulf OCS impact. Since the
level of previous OCS activity is one variable which can be controlled to
some extent by BLM, the sensitivity of the Northern Gulf OCS impacts to.
the level of previous OCS activity is of interest. In the last chapter,
we provided an analysis of the impact of OCS development relative to the
moderate base case. In this chapter, we will examine the range of impacts
from the 5 percent scenario on the high base case and the 95 percent
scenario on the low base case. For the most part, these impacts will
differ only in magnitude from those discussed in the mean scenario. The
changes in magnitude vvi 11 be described by the genera 1 pattern of gro~ttth.
Structural similarities and differences will also be discussed.
The Impact of Northern Gulf OCS Development
At the 5 Percent Level: The High Base Case
THE HIGH BASE CASE
The major difference between the high and moderate base cases is the
level of activity assumed in the Lov-Jer Cook and Beaufort OCS lease sale
areas. The high case has a peak direct employment which is more than
233
one-and-one-half times greater than in the moderate case in the Lower
Cook and 24 percent greater in the Beaufort. The high Lower Cook scenario
also includes construction and operation of an LNG facility. The high
base case has greater levels of economic activity than the moderate case.
Population is projected to be 801,117 by 2000 in the high base case, with
a 3.1 percent average annual growth rate. Employment is projected to
increase to 369,105 by 2000. This is almost 4,400 greater than employment
in the moderate base case. The overall state fiscal position differs
between the cases. Expenditures by 2000 are about one percent greater in
the high base case than in th~ moderate case. The larger Beaufort revenues
also lead to an increase in the fund balance between the high and moderate
[
[
[
f
[
[
r-
c
r
base cases. By 2000 the fund balance in the high base case is $16.7 billion L
which is $1.5 billion greater than in the moderate base case. The change
in the structural characteristics found in the moderate base case are
also found in the high base case.
THE GENERAL PATTERN OF GROWTH
Table 76 examines the economic growth with Northern Gulf OCS development
according to the 5 percent scenario relative to the high base case.
Comparing these cases shows us the impact of OCS development. The impact
is similar to that projected in the other cases; population, employment,
and state expenditures all increase as a result of OCS development. The
fund balance is reduced because of OCS development, but the negative
impact decreases by the end of the period.
234
[
[
[
[
G
[
[
I 0
L
r ,
L
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
r L
[
[
D
D
c
G
[
[
[
1980
19851
1988
19902
1991
1995
2000
1980
1985
1988
1990
1991
1995
2000
TABLE 76. THE IMPACT ON MAJOR ECONOMIC INDICATORS
NORTHERN GULF OCS
5 PERCENT SCENARIO/HIGH BASE CASE
Population Employment
5% 5%
Base Case Scenario Impact Base Case Scenario
431,495 431 ,495 0 192 '187 192,187
519,471 540,357 20,886 231 ,560 245,927
564~654 605,100 40,446 . 252,890 275,525
600,285 639,451 39,166 270,213 288,328
616,303 656,425 40 '121 277,510 295,235
689,377 723,291 33,914 312,806 323 807
801 , 117 837,888 36,771 369,105 381,508
State Expenditure Fund Balance
Impact
0
14,367
22,635
18,115
17 '725
11 ,001
12,403
(Millions of Nominal Dollars) (Millions of Nominal Dollars)
1,559 1,559 0 1 ,330 1 ,330 0
2,824 2,904 80 5,937 5,922 -14
3,768 4,071 302 10,004 9,745 -259
4,601 4,877 276 12,460 12,021 -439
4,954-5,206 252 13,465 12,968 -499
6, 782 . 6,945 162 16,518 15,868 -649
10,129 10,343 214 16,724 16,164 -559
1Maximum population and employment impact.
2Peak direct Alaska resident employment. The end of the exploration-
development phase.
SOURCE: MAP Model
235
Population increases at an average rate of 3.4 percent per year from the
beginning of OCS development in 1980 to the end of the period in 2000.
In 2000 population is projected to be 837,888 which is 4.6 percent greater
than in the base case. The maximum increase in population as a result of
OCS development occurs in 1988 when population is 40,446, or 7.2 percent
greater than in the base case. The growth rate during the exploration-
development phase (1980-1991) averages 3.9 percent per year. After 1991,
when production is the dominant activity, the growth rate averages 2.8 per-
cent per year. The economy grows faster than in the base case during the
exploration and development phase and slower during the production phase.
Employment is projected to increase to 381,508 by 2000. This is 12,403
greater than in the base case. The growth rate over the period of OCS
development increases from 3.3 percent per year in the base case to
3.5 percent per year with OCS development. The peak employment impact
occurs in 1988 when total employment is 27,635, or 9 percent greater
than in the base case. Direct OCS resident employment does not peak
until 1991. The reason the maximum employment increase from OCS devel-
opment occurs before the peak direct project employment concerns the
composition of employment. A larger proportion of direct resident
employment in 1988 is construction employment. The higher incomes
earned by these workers increase their impact on the economy. The
impact on personal income from OCS development is also greatest in 1988.
Employment, like population, increases faster in the exploration-development
phase (1980-1991) than after 1991 when production is the dominant activity.
236
[
r
[
[
[
I
l~
[
r L
n
L
c
[
c
[
D
[
[
[
r ' L
L
[
[
c
[
[
[
[
[
r
L
[
u
g
c
G
[
L
r-
L
r~
L
---------~-~~~----~~ "-~~--~--------· ----~~-----------
The state's fiscal position is affected by Northern Gulf OCS development.
By 2000 state expenditures are projected to be $214 million or 2.1 per-
cent greater than in the base case; total expenditures are projected to
be $10.3 billion by 2000. The maximum impact of OCS development on state
expenditures occurs in 1989 when expenditures are $324 million greater
than in the base case. This is 8 percent greater than in the base case.
The maximum expenditure impact occurs after the maximum population impact
because of the lags built into the expenditure rule. The pattern of
expenditure growth differs between the base case and the 5 percent scenario.
Expenditures increase faster with Northern Gulf OCS development than in
the base case, 11.6 percent per year compared to 11.1 percent, during the
exploration-development phase (1980-1991). After 1991 the increase in
expenditures is more rapid in the base c~se, 8.3 percent compared to
7.9 percent per year. The increase over the base case is not so great
as the combined increase in prices and population, so OCS development
has a negative impact on real per capita state expenditures. Real per
capita state expenditures are $51 less than in the base case by 2000.
The pattern of fund balance growth is similar in both the base case and
the OCS development case. In both cases, the fund rises to a peak in
1998 and then falls as the fund balance is drawn down to make up the
difference between revenues and expenditures. At its peak in 1998, the
fund balance with OCS development is $16.6 billion, which is $628 million
less-than in the base case. By 1995 the fund balance is $649 million,
or 4 percent less than in the base case because of OCS development. By
2000 the negative fund balance impact has been reduced to $559 million.
237
This pattern of fund balance impact was projected in both the mean and
5 percent scenarios with the moderate base case.
The relative impacts of the 5 percent development scenario are similar
when they occur with either the moderate or high base case. The popula-
tion impact in 2000 differs beb1een these cases by only 5.3 percent;
the population impact is 34,935 with the moderate base case and 36,771
with the high scenario. The employment impact in 2000 is 11 ,631 with the
moderate base case and 12,403 with the high base case, a difference of
less than 7 percent. The fiscal impacts are less similar. The expendi-
ture impacts differ by over 40 percent in 2000. The fund balance impact
is positive with the moderate base case and negative with the high base
case. The pattern of fund balance impact is similar in each case, with
the negative fund balance impact being reduced by the end of the period.
The lower expenditures and relatively greater size of OCS development in
the moderate case are responsible for the positive fund impact by 2000.
STRUCTURAL SIMILARITIES AND DIFFERENCES
Table 78 compares certain structural characteristics of economic growth
in the mean OCS-moderate base case scenario and the 5 percent OCS-high
base case scenario. These indicators describe the four types of structural
change found in the base case: first, the increased importance of the sup-
port sector as the scale of the economy increases; secondly, the increas-
ing proportion of the population which is employed; third, the continuing
concentration of population in Anchorage; finally, the pattern of state
expenditure which results in their being greater than revenues.
238
[
[
r
[
[
[
[
c
r~
L
[
[
[
c
B
[
[
r-
L
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
r~
L
G
c
E
b
[
(""
L
r
L
--------· ~--·---·····-····-···~~·· ~-·-· -~-~--~·-····-····· ...... -·····-·---···
TABLE 77. STRUCTURAL CHARACTERISTICS OF THE ALASKA ECONOMY
NORTHERN GULF OCS
OCS-MODERATE BASE SCENARIO/
Percent of Employment in. the
Support Sector
Mean Scenario
5% Scenario
Dependency Ratio
(Population/Employment)
Mean Scenario
5% Scenario
Percent of Population in
Anchorage
Mean Scenario
5% Scenario
General Fund Revenues Minus
General Fund Expenditures
(Millions of Nominal $)
Mean Scenario
5% Scenario
5% OCS-HIGH BASE SCENARIO
1980
39.5
39.4
2.24
2.25
47.8
47.8
361
363
239
1990
46.8
47.1
2.20
2.22
49.9
49.9
1,004
1,054
2000
53.2
53.4
2.17
2.20
53.5
53.5
-536
-326
The development of the Northern Gulf OCS, according to the 5 percent see-
nario given the high base case, experiences the structural change which
is similar to that found in the mean scenario case. The support sector
increases its share of employment to about 53 percent in both cases. The
dependency ratio decreases through the projection period, although it is
slightly higher in the 5 percent scenario. ~y 2000, Anchorage has increased
its share of state population to about 54 percent in both cases. In both
the mean OCS-moderate base scenario and the 5 percent OCS-high base case
scenario, general fund revenues net of expenditures are negative by 2000.
In both cases, the fund balance must be drawn on to meet expenditures by
2000.
The Impact of Northern Gulf OCS Development
At the 95 Percent Level: The Low Base Case
THE LOW BASE CASE
The low base case scenario contains the same non-OCS assumptions as the
moderate and high base case scenarios. It differs from these cases in
its assumptions about OCS activity in the Lower Cook and Beaufort Sea.
Lower Cook is assumed to have exploration only in this scenario. Produc-
tion occurs in the Beaufort. Peak employment in the Beaufort reaches
740 in 1989; this is 68 percent of the peak in the moderate Beaufort
scenario. The growth in the low base c~se is less than in the moderate
case. Over the period 1978-2000, population is projected to increase at
an average rate of 3 percent per year. Population is projected to be
782,438 by 2000. Employment is projected to increase to 362,225 by 2000
240
[
r
r
[
[
[
[
r
L
c
l
B
[
L
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
['
[
[
r
L
r
L
[
B
c
B
6
E
C'
L
in the low case. State expenditures are less than one percent lower than
in the moderate case by 2000. They are projected to be almost $10 billion
by 2000. The fund balance is $300 mill ion less than in the moderate base
case by 2000. In 2000 the fund balance is projected to be $14.9 billion.
The pattern of fund balance growth is similar in both cases, rising to a
peak of $16 billion in 1997, then falling as funds are used to make up
the difference between expenditures and revenues .. The structural changes
fo~nd i~ the moderate base case are also found in the low base case.
THE GENERAL PATTERN OF GROWTH
The 95 percent scenario describes the activity associated with only explora-
tion in the Northern Gulf OCS. The development has minimal impact on the
Alaska economy. Table 78 shows the impact of exploration on population,
employment, state expenditures, and the fund balance. The maximum increase
in population occurs in 1983 when OCS explorat·ion activity increases popu-
lation by 1,134, or .2 percent. The maximum employment impact occurs in
1982. Employment is 743 or .3 percent greater than in the base case
because of exploration activity. The expenditure impact follows the
same pattern. Expenditures are $8 million or .3 percent greater in
1983. By 2000 expenditures are still $1 million greater than in the
base case~ The extra expenditures throughout the period result in the
fund balance being $42 million less by 2000. These impacts are similar
to those experienced with the moderate base case.
Because of the small impacts associated with OCS exploration, the structural
change projected in the base case is not affected.
241
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
2000
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
2000
TABLE 78. THE IMPACT ON MAJOR ECONOMIC INDICATORS
NORTHERN GULF OCS
95 PERCENT SCENARIO/LOW BASE CASE
Population Employment
95% 95%
Base Case Scenario Impact Base Case Scenario
431 ,495 431,495" 0 192,187 192,18
451,557 452,241 684 203,886 204,393
482,344 483,427 1 ,084 222,330 223,073
498,942 500,007 1,134 228,242 228,948
497,291 498,073 782 221 ,077 221 ,443
782,438 782,602 164 362,225 362,233
State Expenditures Fund Balance
Impact
0
506
743
706
366
8
(Millions of Nominal Dollars) (Millions of Nominal Dollars) . -
1,559 1,559 0 1,330 1,330 0
1 ,723 1, 723 0 1,921 1 ,921 0
1,988 1,993 5 2,640 2,639 -1
2,348 2,356 8 3,393 3,389 - 4
2,559 2,567 7 4,548 4,540 - 8
9,965 9,966 1 14,900 14,858 -42
SOURCE: MAP Model
242
[
r
r:
f
[
[
L
r L::
r:
L
[
E
[
[
L
[
[
r,
L
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
r
L
r
L
[
t
B
c
B
6
[
r
L
r=
I = L
VI. SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS
Our knowledge of future events is uncertain. In spite of this uncertainty,
we need to make assumptions about certain future events. Events which are
important to the future economy must be incorporated in our projections.
These assumptions which form the basis for both the base case and OCS
development scenarios are uncertain. The uncertainty surrounding these
assumptions makes it necessary to investigate the extent to which our
major findings are sensitive to the more important of these assumptions.
The previous sections tested the sensitivity of Northern Gulf OCS impacts
to OCS-related assumptions. By examining the alternate OCS scenarios, we
saw the effect of varying resource discovery levels on impacts. Examining
the cumulative cases provided an indication of the sensitivity of our
results to the level of previous OCS activity. In this section, we will
test the sensitivity of our results to two general categories of assump-
tions. The first set includes the assumptions about the level of activity
in the base case. We will examine the effect on the OCS impact results
of major changes in the base case assumptions. The second set of assump-
tions to be examined concerns the state expenditure policy which was
assumed to be adopted in the forecast period. Changes in the assumed
expenditure policy will alter the effect of OCS development on state
expenditures and may change the impacts on the economy.
In this section, six specific sensitivity tests were conducted on the
mean Northern Gulf OCS development scenario. Comparing these results to
243
the mean results in our basic case will allow us to assess the sensitivity
of our results to these major sets of assumptions.
Sensitivity to Major Changes in the Base Case
The base case assumptions used in this study contain an element of
uncertainty concerning two major construction projects, the ALCAN gasline
and the state capital move from Juneau to Willow. ALCAN construction is
. included in our assumptions; the capital move is not. This section tests
the sensitivity of our results to these assumptions.
In the base case, the ALCAN gasline is assumed to be constructed between
1981 and 1984 to transport natural gas from Prudhoe Bay to the "Lower 48.11
There is uncertainty concerning not only the timing of this construction
but also the eventuality of construction. For a variety of reasons,
including the recent recognition of substantial oil and gas reserves in
Canada and Mexico, the outlook concerning the feasibility of the ALCAN
line has changed since it was approved (Tussing and Barlow, 1979).
Because of this uncertainty, it is necessary to test the effect on OCS
impact of changes in the ALCAN assumptions. We examine the effect on
the OCS impact of eliminating ALCAN construction from the base case.
Eliminating ALCAN has two types of direct effects. First, major exogenous
employment will be eliminated from 1981 to 1984. Secondly, eliminating
ALCAN will reduce state revenues. Without the ALCAN, there will be no
gas production in either Prudhoe or the Beaufort Sea. The state will not
earn royalties, production taxes, or corporate income taxes from this gas.
The reduction in revenues will affect economic activity through its effect
on state expenditures.
244
[
[
[
[
[
[~
L
r L
r
L
[
c
[
L
t
[
[
£'
L
r-
L
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
r
L
r
L
G
c
B
[
c
The sensitivity of our findings to increased levels of exogenous base case
activity was also tested. The base case assumptions did not include the
capital move from Juneau to Willow. Although Alaskans voted to move the
capital in 1974, recent cost estimates and disagreement over the method
of paying for the move have made it less likely. In the sensitivity test,
the major direct effect of the capital move is assumed to be the increased
construction activity connected with the move. State government employment
is not assumed to be affected by the move. (See Table 79.) The capital
move is assumed to occur between 1981 and 1984, which is at the same time
as the ALCAN construction.
TABLE 79. CAPITAL MOVE SCENARIO
Construction Employment
1980 0
1981 869
1982 664
1983 1 '185
1984 1 '135
1985 716
l SOURCE: Alaska Department of Labor, Alaska's Economic Outlook to 1985,
1978.
245
Table 80 compares the impact of the mean Northern Gulf OCS development
scenario on three sets of base case assumptions: the basic case, the no-
ALCAN case, and the capital move case. These tests show that the magnitude
of OCS impact is relatively insensitive to changes in the base case assump-
tions. However, since the base case is changed in e~ch case, the relative
effect of OCS development will differ in each case. During the OCS
exploration and development phase (1980-1990), the impacts in all three
cases vary by small amounts. In the peak OCS development year, 1990, the
.population and employment impacts of the no-ALCAN and capital move cases
vary by less than 200 people from the base case. Personal income varies
by less than one percent. By 2000,·the differences have increased but
not significantly. The major reasons for the difference in the impact are
the scale of the economy and the state expenditures. The scale of the
economy affects the price level and price level impact of OCS development
as well as the response of the endogenous sector to OCS development. By
2000, the state expenditure impact is greater in the no-ALCAN case than in
either of the other cases; this determines the difference in the other
variables. Expenditure differences result from the long-run revenue dif-
ferences in the ALCAN case. Even in 2000, the impacts differ by less than
10 percent.
Sensitivity to State Expenditure Policy
In the previous analysis, it was necessary to specify an expenditure rule
which captured the essential features of state fiscal policy. Inasmuch as
state expenditures are actually a matter of policy choice, the expenditure
rule could follow any one of.an infinite number of possible specifications.
246
[
[
[
[
r~
L
[
[
r
L
[
[
B
[
B
[
[
[
(:
L
[
--------~----------------------------------------------~----------------~--------------
[
[
E
8
c
E
6
[
r
L
r l :
L
TABLE 80. THE IMPACT OF NORTHERN GULF OCS DEVELOPMENT
WITH THREE ALTERNATE BASE CASES:
BASIC CASE, NO ALCAN CONSTRUCTION,
AND-THE CAPITAL MOVE
MEAN SCENARIO
1981
Population Impact
Basic Case 515
No ALCAN 502
Capital Move 522
Emp1oyment Impact
Basic Case 380
No ALCAN 372
Capital Move 385
Personal Income Impact
(Millions of Nominal Dollars}
-Basic Case 19
No ALCAN 18
Capital Move 19
State Expenditures Impact
(Millions of Nominal Dollars}
Basic Case 4
No ALCAN 4
Capital Move 4
Fund Balance Impact
(Millions of Nominal Dollars)
Basic Case 1
No ALCAN 1
Capital Move 1
SOURCE: MAP Model
247
1983
1,893
1,760
1 ,917
1,278
_1 , 187
1,295
74
64
77
15
13
15
-3
-3
-3
1990
20,944
21,118
20,926
11 ,423
11 ,530
11 ,408
1,083
1,078
1,080
157
163
155
-150
-164
-148
2000
16,437
17,428
16,490
5,775
6,300
5,786
938
1 ,009
936
106
146
106
-287
-552
-276
The expenditure rule chosen in the analysis a£sumes that real per capita
expenditures grow at a rate equal to one-half the rate of growth in real
per capita income. Expenditures are also assum~d to increase with increases
in the available general fund balance. Past pattern of state expenditures
points to these factors as detenninants of expenditure growth (Scott, 1978).
Even if we accept the general form of this rule, the relative effect of
any one component may vary and the sensitivity of the measured impacts to
this variation needs to be tested.
Three alternative formulations of the basic expenditure rule were tested.
Each alternate rule differed by the assumed influence of real per capita
income and the available general fund balance on the growth of state
expenditures. Two cases examine the sensitivity of our measured impacts
to the effect of real per capita income on expenditures. The expenditure
elasticity of real per capita income is the percentage inc1·ease in state
expenditures resulting from a one percent increase in real per capita
income. In the basic rule, the expenditure elasticity of real per capita
income was . 5; two extreme elasticities were tested: the expenditure
elasticity of real per capita income equal to 0 (EL3=0) and equal to
1 (EL3=1). The final rule. tested the sensitivity of our results to the
removal of the effect of the available general fund balance on expendi-
tures (EX6=0). The major difference in all of the variables examined will
result from differences in the expenditure impact.
248
p
L
r
L
[
c
[
b
fj
[
[
C'
L
[
c
L
c
p
0
E
8
f~
[
f'
l
Table 81 compares the relative OCS impacts of the various expenditure
rules. The sensitivity of OCS impact to the expenditure elasticity of
real per capita income can be seen by examining the impacts produced by
the basic rule, the full income effect ruie (EL3=1) and the no-income
effect rule (EL3=0). The relative pattern of expenditure impacts can be
explained by the pattern of real per capita income growth. The basic
pattern of real per capita income growth in the impact case relative to
the base case was shown in Chapter IV. Real per capita income increases .
faster than in the base case as direct OCS employment builds to a peak.
After the peak employment is reached, real per capita income increases
at a slower rate.
The greatest expenditure impact in 1990, the year of peak OCS employment,
occurs in the full income effect case. The impact of $240 million is
greater than either the basic case or the no-income effect case. By
2000 the state expenditure impact has decreased in both cases with
positive income elasticities. This is because the rate of real per
capita income growth after 1990 is lower than in the base case. By 2000
the case with no in~ome effect on expenditures has a slightly larger impact.
The impact on population, employment, personal income, and the fund bal-
ance is influenced by this expenditure effect.
The final expenditure rule tested removed the influence of the available
fund balances from the determination of state expenditures. The impacts
·of OCS development are higher when the fund balance does not influence
249
TABLE 81 . THE EFFECT OF ALTERNATE STATE EXPENDITURE
POLICIES ON THE IMPACT OF NORTHERN
GULF OCS DEVELOPMENT
Population Impact
Basic Case
EL3=1
EL3=0
EX6=0
Employment Impact
Basic Case
EL3=1
EL3=0
EX6=0
Personal Income Impact
(Millions of Nominal Dollarst
Basic Case
EL3=1
EL3=0
EX6=0
State Expenditures Impact
(Millions of Nominal Dollars)
Basic Case
EL3=l
EL3=0
EX6=0
Fund Balance Impact
(Millions of Nominal Dollars)
Basic Case
EL3=1
EL3=0
EX6=0
SOURCE: MAP Model
MEAN SCENARIO
250
1985
4,315
4,504
4,183
4,318
2,811
2,941
2,726
2,812
198
209
191
197
15
20
12
14
-11
-22
- 3
-11
1990
20,944
23,471
19,525
21,085
11,423
13,020
10,560
11 , 503
1,083
1,234
1 ,003
1 ,071
157
240
117
153
-150
-373
-18 .
-147
2000
16,437
17,211
16,663
18,676
5,775
5,836
6,068
6,975
938
976
969
1 ,1 01
106
124
125
177
-286
-1,089
-54
-638
[
r
r
L
[
L:
r
r~
L"
c
[
[
[
L
[
L
[
,.
L
l
[
[
r
[
[
[
[
r
L
c
L
[
lJ
8
c
B
b
[
r' L
r~
t
expenditures. This can be seen by comparing the impacts of the no-fund
balance effect case (EX6=0) and the basic case. The population, employ-
ment, and personal income impacts are greater by 2000. Expenditures are
slightly greater in the basic case in 1990, but the no-fund balance case
has a greater expenditure· impact by 2000. The reason for this differ-
ential impact is straightforward. OCS development increases expenditures
over the base case. This reduces the fund balance relative to the base
case. In the basic rule case, the reduced fund balance relative to the
base case exerts a downward relative pressure on expenditures. This
reduced fund balance will limit the effect of the other factors increasing
expenditures. When the fund balance does not affect expenditures, the
relative reduction in the fund balance does not provide pressure to
limit growth in expenditures.
A more important issue concerning the choice of the expenditure rule is
the assumption imp1icit in our-analysis that the state will choose to
respond to changes caused by OCS development as it responded in the base
case. If the state should behave differently in the face of OCS activity,
I
the measured impacts may change significantly. To ascertain the impor-
tance of this to our results, it may be useful to distinguish that
portion of the total impact due to changes in state spending from that
which is due to changes in the private sector of the economy.
In order to isolate the component of our measured impact which is due to
changes in state expenditures, we examined the impacts of the case in which
251
the base case level of state expenditures was maintained. OCS development
was not assumed to affect state expenditures in this case. Since OCS
development increases both population and prices, such a policy would
mean a reduction in the level of real per capita expenditures. This case
is not presented as a plausible response of the state. However, it does
permit us to separate, for purposes of analysis, that portion of impact
due to state expenditures.
Table 82 illustrates the state expenditure impact. The proportion of
impact due to state expenditures is equal to the proportion of impact
not accounted for in the constant expenditure case. State expenditures
account for close to 20 percent of the impact on employment, population,
and prices. The state expenditure impact is greater in 1990 than in
2000. In 1990, increases in state expenditures account for 24 percent of
the population impact, 26 percent of the employment impact, and 23 percent
of the personal income impact. By 2000, state expenditure increases
account for only 19 percent of the population increase, 18 percent of
employment, and 18 percent of personal income. Examining the fund balance
impact shows the extra revenues accumulated by the state because of OCS
development. By 2000, over $1.5 billion have been accumulated.
252
L
r
[
[
[
r~
L
c
[
c
L
[
[
[
[
( '
L
[
-----------------------------------------------·----------------
[
[
TABLE 82. THE IMPACT OF STATE EXPENDITURES
[ NORTHERN GULF OCS
MEAN SCENARIO
r~
1985 1990 2000 [ Population Impact
[ Basic Rule 4,315 20,944 16,437
Constant Expenditure 3,745 16,024 13,258
[ Employment Impact
r Basic Rule 2,811 ll ,423 5 '775
Constant Expenditure 2.450 8.472 4,727 L
r--Personal Income Impact L (Millions of Nominal Dollars)
[ Basic Rule 198 -1,083 938
Constant Expenditure 177 835 767
t
B
c
E
[
[
('
L
F SOURCE: MAP Model l
C 253
r
L
f'
L
[
[
G
[
E
[
[
l
VII. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
In this report, we have assessed the major impacts that offshore oil and
gas development in the Northern Gulf of Alaska will have on the process of
Alaska economic growth. These projected impacts were assessed in terms of
both an assumed base case growth without the project and the historical
economic growth.
For all of the scenarios, the qualitative nature of the influence of OCS
development on the growth process is similar. Development generates
direct employment activity in the construction, mining, manufacturing, and
transportation industries which builds to a peak during the development
phase, then declines to a stable, long-term level as production dominates
the activity. Since a number of fields are developed in each scenario,
the various phases of development occur simultaneously. This development
activity generates both new private incomes and public revenues which
induce impacts. Expenditure of wages and salaries earned in OCS activity
generates further income and employment in the endogenous sector of the
economy through the increased demand for the output of these sectors.
The increased economic activity also increases public expenditures which
affect economic activity by increasing government employment and construc-
tion expenditures. The private sector has been shown in Chapter VI to
have the dominant effect on the Northern Gulf OCS impacts.
The qualitative nature of the impacts is also similar across scenarios.
Four major structural changes were observed in the base case and the
255
historical period. First, as the scale of the economy increased, more
goods and services were produced locally and the importance of the support
sector increased. Secondly, the population aged and labor force partici-
pation increased over time; this led to an increase in the proportion of
the population which is employed. Thirdly, the role of Anchorage as the
administrative and distributive center of Alaska resulted in population
growth continuing to center in Anchorage. Finally, state expenditures
and revenues were projected to follow a pattern in which expenditures would
increase faster than revenues after the major petroleum revenues peaked.
This pattern of expenditure and revenue increase would necessitate draw-
ing down the general fund balance. This results from the declining
importance of the petroleum revenues throughout the period. All of the
Northern Gulf OCS development scenarios support these trends.
The qualitative impact of OCS development on individual welfare was also
similar across scenarios. In all scenarios, real per capita incomes
increased significantly over the base case levels during the buildup to
the peak employment. After this, increases in population and prices led
to no real significant increases in real per capita income. The level
of real per capita state expenditures is also reduced relative to the
base case by OCS development. The reduction of real per capita state
expenditures is one part of the negative fiscal impact of OCS development.
The other part concerns the impact on the fund balance. In all cases,
the combined effect of increased prices and expenditures from OCS develop-
ment reduces the real value of the fund balance below its base case levels.
256
[
r
[
[
['
[
[
r
L
c:
L
[
t
F
[J
[
L
[
( .
L
L
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
r
L
r'
L
[
E
B
[
B
b
[
[
f'
l :
L
Quantitatively, the impacts across scenarios differ. The single most
important determinant of impact is the size of the field. The 5 percent
scenario has larger development activity and so has a larger impact.
The 95 percent scenario contains only exploration and has only minimal
impact on the major economic variables. Table 83 shows the relative
year 2000 impacts across the five OCS scenarios.
The major dimensions of both base case growth and OCS development are
uncertain. By examining the three alternate development scenarios, we
get some feeling for the range of impacts possible from OCS development
in the Northern Gulf. Examination of the assumptions in the base case
shows that the major assumptions concerning the base case such as ALCAN
do not affect the impact of OGS development significantly. However,
the results are importantly affected by the assumptions made about the
expenditure policy followed by the state.
257
Moderate Base Case
Mean OCS Scenario
5% OCS Scenario
95% OCS Scenario
N
U"l co · High Base Case
5% OCS Scenario
Low Base Cas~
95% OCS Scenario
SOURCE: MAP Model
TABLE 83. SUMMARY OF THE LONG-RUN IMPACTS OF
ALTERNATIVE DEVELOPMENT SENARIOS
(IMPACTS IN THE YEAR 2000)
State Expenditures
(Mill ions of
Population Emplol!llent Nomina 1 Dollars)
16,437 5,775 106
34,935 11 '631 151
163 10 1
36,771 12,403 214
164 8 1
Fund Balance
(Millions of
~aminal Dollars)
-287
90
46
559
42
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
r
L
r
L
[
t
D
[
B
b
[
[
F
lJ
r
APPENDIX A
· Historical Growth, 1965-1976
259
Industry
~lining
Contract Construction
~lanufacturi ng
Food Processing
Logging-Lumber
and Pulp
Other Manufacturing
'-J Transportation, Co1~munication ~
:::> and Public Utilities
Trucking and Warehousing
Water Transportation
Air Transportation
Other Transportation
Comnunications and
Public Utilities
Trade
Who 1 e.saJ c
Retail
Finance, Insurance and
Real Estate
Services
Hotels, tljotels, etc.
Personal
Business
~ied i ca 1
Other
1965
1 , 100
6,400
6,300
3,000
2,300
1,000
71200
1,200
1• 1000
1,900
500
2,600
10,000
1,900
8,100
2,200
7,500
1 ,000
700
1,400
1,400
31000
,..._.....-,
l )
TABLE A.1. GROWTH IN EMPLOYMENT, ALASKA, 1965-1976
Average Nonth1~ Em21oyrrent
1970 1971 1972 ___11u_ _1~ 1975 1976
3,000 2,400 2,100 2,000 3,000 3,800 4,000
6,900 7,400 7,900 7,800 14,100 25,900 30,200
7,800 7,800 8,100 9,400 9,600 9,600 10,300
.3. 700 3,600 3,800 4,600 4,300 4,300 5 '1 00
2,800 2,800 2,600 3,200 3,600 3,400 3,200
1,300 1 ,400 1,500 1,500 1,700 1 '900 2,000
91100 9,800 10,000 10,400 .12,400 16,500 15,800
1, 700 1. 500 . 1,600 1,500 2,200 4,000 3,200
800 800 800 900 1,000 1 ,400 1,300
3,000 2,800 3,000 3,300 4,000 4,800 4,700
900 1,000 1 '000 1 '1 00 1,300 1 ,800 1,900
2,700 3,700 3,600 3,600 31900 4,500 4,7CO
15' 400 16,200 17,100 18,300 21 '1 00 26,200 27,600
3,200 3,200 3,300 3,400 11,,000 5,900 6' 100
12,200 12,900 13,800 14,900 17,100 20,300 21,500
3,100 3,200 3,700 1',,300 4,900 6,000 7,100
11 '400 12,600 14,000 15,200 18,300 25,100 27,700
1,400 1, GOO 1,800 1,900 2,500 3,200 3,200
800 9CO 900 900 800 900 900
. 2,000 2,100 2,100 2,100 3,000 7,300 8,7CO
2,200 2,600 3,000 3,300 3,800 4,300 5,000
5,000 5,400. 6,200 7,000 8,200 9,400 9,900
·:-----1
' J
,---.,
I
,---...
\ ' '
TABLE A.l. (continued)
Industry
Government
Federal
State
Local
Agriculture, Forestry
and F1sheries
. Total Civilian Non-Agricultura1
Wage and Salary Employment
Total Civilian Basic
Military
Totai Basic
Total Support Sector
Total Employment
1965 1970
29,000 35,600
17,400 17.100 .
7,000 10,300
5,300 8,100
100 800
70,500 93,100
31,300 35,600
33 1 000 31,400
64,300 67,000
26,900 39,000
114,000 129,900
Average Monthl~ EmQlovment
1971 1972 1973 1974
38,000 40,500 41 ,600 43,800
17,300 17 ,'200 17,100 18,000
11,700 13,300 13,800 . 14,200
9,000 10,000 10,700 . 11 ,500
900 900 1 ,000 1,000
98,300 104,200 110,000 128,200
35,800 36,200 37,300 45,700
30,1 oo_ 26,500 27,500 27,500
65,900 62,700 64,800 73,200
41,800 44,800 48,200 56,700
133,900 136,500 143,200 161,500
Basic Employment Includes: Mining; Construction; Hanufacturing; Federal Government; Agriculture, Forestt·y and
Fisheries, and t•lilitary.
Support Sector Includes: Transportation, Communication and Public Utilittes; Trade; Finance, Insurance and Real.
Estate; and the Services.
SOURCE: ·Alaska Department of Labor, Alaska Labor Force Estimates, various years.
Alaska Department of Labor, Estimates of Total Resident Population and Estimates of Total Civilian Population.
1975 1975
47,200 47,200
18,300 17,900
15.500 14,100
13,400 15,200
1,000 1,200
161,300 171,100
58,600 63,600
25,300 24,500
83,900 88,100
73,800 78,200
190,200 203,200
Industry 1965
Total 30,678
Agri cu 1 tur·e, Forestry
and Fisheries 33
f·li ni ng 371
Contract Construction 3.127
~!anufacturi ng 791
Transportation, Communication
and Public Utilities ~.618
Transportation 1,694
Air 773
Other 921
Communication 674
Public Utilities 250
Trade 5,280
~lholesale 1 ,226
Retail 4,053
Finance, Insurance and
Real Estate l, 295
Services 3,767
Hotels 460
Personal 402
Business 789
!·ledi ca 1 681
Other 1,444
Federal Government 9, 395
~tate Government 1 ,672
Local Government 2,329
TABLE A.2. ANCHORAGE CIVILIAN EMPLOYMENT GROWTH,
ALASKA, 1965-1976
1970 _j_9D_ 1972 1973
41,995 45,452 48,252 50,627
52 63 76 82
958 916 806 769
3, 514 3,924 4,272 4.178 .
1, 018 1 .• 117 1,215 1,286
3,907 4,591 4,522 4,625
2,800 2,805 2,821 3,129
1 ,482 1,455 1,629 1,835
1. 318 1,350 1,192 1,294
764 1,411 1,289 1,046
343 374 . 411 451
8,617 9,334 9,948 10,663
2,220 2,292 2,423 2,475
6,397 7,042 7,525 8,188
1, 980 2,087 2,415 2,303
6,1103 7,027 7, 725 8,319
755 709 732 811
535 556 556 567
1,188 1 ,194 1 '120 . 1 • 190
1 ,200 1,480 1, 759 1, 993
2, 725 3,088 . 3,459 3,758
9,509 9,530 9,435 9,558
2,421 3,020 3,500 3,667
3,615 3,846 4,349 4,677
SOURCE: Department of Labor, Statistical Quarterly, various issues.
r: r:J . rn ~~ l ...
1974
58,713
100
1,036
5,882
1 ,379
5,383
3,938
2' 123
1,814
1.163
483
12,298
2,860
9,438
3' 151
10,119
1 '114
572
1,680
. 2,283
4,471
.. 9, 925
3,985
5,257
. .....---,
J
1975 , 976
69,645 73.113
11 0 100
1,301 1,409
7,054 .7,587
1, 571 1,629
7,343 7,409
5,419 5,172
2,610 2,668.
2,809 2,504
1,426 1,670
499 568
14,928 15.958
4,077 4,240
10,852 11,718
3,615 4,257
13,455 15,458
1 , 345 1,444
624 607
·3,795 4',914
2,:86 2,(;57
5,410 5,828
10,222 9,313
4,056 4,053
. 5, 979 5,413
Industry
Agriculture, Forestries and
Fisheries
Mining
Contract Construction
Manufacturing
Food
Transportation, Co~rounication
and Public Utilities
Transportation
Communications
Publ1c Utilities
Trade
\vhol esa l e
Retail
Finance, Insurance and Real
Estate
Services
P.c;:;e l
Personal
Business
~ledical
Other
Governr,~ent
Federal
State and Local
Total
r--TI1 1....,,1 __ . _,,J. r-1
TABLE A.3. EMPLOYMENT BY INDUSTRY, SOUTHCENTRAL ALASKA
1965, 1970-1976
1965 1970 1971 1972 1973
19-. 99 85 356 491
345 762 633 611 640
880 583 895 768 681
1 '188 1,647 1 ,627 1,818 2,627
1,086 1 ,293 1,229 1,456 1,995
542 760 796 793 896
373 521 502 442 497
26 85 132 175 209
132 154 163 176 189
813 1,338 1 '319 . 1,383 1 ,460
102 193 .275 162 133
711 1 ,145 1 '134 1 '221 1,327
159 211 204 220 238
738 1,027 1,099 1, 228 1,440
138 154 230 297 300
25 28 29 39 50
117 114 94 87 139
139 275 286 315 451
319 456 460 490 500
975 828 742 626 602
1,465 2,327 2,726 2,932 3,056
7,1.24 9,582 1 0' 127 10,735 12' 131
SOURCE: Estimated from Alaska Department of Labor, Research and Analysis Section Worksheets.
Alaska State Housing Authority, Alaska, Yakutat, Comprehensive Development Plan, Anchorage 1971.
Alaska Consultants, Inc., Anchorage, Alaska, Yakutat, Comprehensive Development Plan, December 1976.
1974 1975 1976
492 543 680
580 900 827 .
1,239 3,656 6,978
2,522 2,656 3,234
2,013 2,003 2,127
1 ,329 1 • 576 . 1,472
708 1 ,1 06 977
218 239 247
03 231 248
1,611 2,337 2,533
202 344 353
1,459 1,983 2,180
308 377 480
1,709 2' 128 2,597
427 467 462
40 49 36
178 441 756
400 391 465
664 780 878
595 . 672 637
3,180 3,455 3,592
13,645 18,300 23,030
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
r
L
c
c
B
c
lJ
L
[
[
.. r --
L
C
-~-~-~-~-~-~------·-------~-----·----.. ----~---------~~-----------~----·-------~--------~---·------
APPENDIX B
MAP Model AssumBtions
A set of assumptions about the level of exogenous variables determines
a development scenario; this section describes the assumptions in the
non-OCS base case scenario. There are four major types of assumptions
required for a scenario. First~ there are assumptions about the growth
of exogenously determined employment in both the petroleum and nonpetroleum
sectors~ Secondly, assumptions about exogenously determined petroleum
revenues received by the state are needed. Thirdly, there are assumptions
about national variables. Finally, an ussumption about the way the sldte
spends its money is needed. Once these assumptions are set, the set of
projections is determined by the model.
EMPLOYMENT ASSUMPTIONS
Employment assumptions include those associated with special projects
and those associated with industry growth in manufacturing, agriculture-
forestry-fisheries, and federal government.
Special Projects
Special projects include three basic types--petroleum projects, major
construction projects~ and operations of the major projects. Tables 8.1
and 8.2 show the project employment assumptions. The methods used to
determine these levels are described below.
265
TABLE B.l. MINING EMPLOYMENT
Prudhoe,1
N. Gulf 2 Lisburne
Upper 3 4 and and Lower Other
Year ~arak Cook OCS Cook Mining
1977 1,586 271 575 2,082
1978 1,624 0 575 2,082
1979 1,585 0 575 2,082
1980 1,783 0 575 2,082
1981 1,402 0 575 2,082
1982 1 '149 0 575 2,082
1983 897 0 575 2,082
1984 904 0 575 2,082
1985 987 0 575 2,082
1986 963 0 610 2,082
1987 9R5 0 645 2)082
1988 985 0 680 2,082
1989 1 ,009 0 715 2,082
1990 1,009 0 750 2,082
1991 1,020 0 300 2,082 -.
1992 1,020 0 300 2,082
1993 940 0 300 2,082
1994 886 0 300 2,082
1995 886 0 300 2,082
1996 886 0 300 2,082
1997 886 0 300 2,082
1998 886 0 300 2,082
1999 886 0 300 2,082
2000 886 0 300 2,082
1Based on employment scenarios from Alternatives for the
Future: Petroleum Develo ment Stud , North Slope of Alaska
Department of Natural Resources, 1977 . · Scenarios for 1 and
5 billion barrel reserves were adjusted to reflect reserves
and production schedules of these fields.
2Exploration activity drilled 9.6 wells; assumed employment
per well equaled 90 man-years from OCS Technical Report No. 17
(Dames and Moore, 1978).
3Estimate by the author based on current employment.
4 Net employment in mining.
266
[
~·
r=
[
[
[
[
r
L
[
[
[
[
D
[
[
L
r .
L
L
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
r
L
r
L
[
(J
B
E
b
[
r~
l
r
I:
L
.. --·--···· ·-·. ------------------~---~~-----------.~~--·-------------------------··· . ---------~--------····· -----·-. -------
TABLE 8.2. CONSTRUCTION EMPLOYMENT
ECONX 1 ECONX 2
P ·r 4
ALCAN 3 ac1 1 c
Year TAPS Total LNG
1977 5,300 1 0 5,300 0
1978 0 0 0 0
1979 90 2 0 90 0
1980 90 0 90 146
1981 90 1,425 1 ,515 844
1982 90 4,763 '1,853 1,323
1983 0 4,663 4,663 420
1984 0 265 265 0
1985 0 0 0 0
1sased on estimate of TAPS construction employment by the Alaska
State Labor Department.
2Assumed construction of four pump stations to increase capacity
by 1982. Pump Station construction employment estimate from The
Beaufort OCS Petro 1 eum Deve 1 opment Scenarios, Dames and Moore.-:--1978.
3Northwest Energy Company manpower estimate, July 17, 1978.
4Based on letter to the Department of Natural Resources from S.
California Gas, March 17, 1978, estimating peak construction employment
of 1 ,500. Four-year construction period from E.I.S. for Pacific Alaska
LNG Project, November 1974.
267
-------------. ----------------·' -------------------------------~~~~-----------~--·----·------·-···------·-
• Prudhoe Bay, Lisburne, and Kuparak mining employment was
estimated from two sources of information. Employment
scenarios were based on the scenarios described in the
Alaska Department of Natural Resources, Alternativei for
the Future: Petroleum Develo ment Stud , North Slo e of
Alaska 1977 . The employment schedules \'/ere adjusted
based on the estim~ted reserves, productivity, and the
production schedules in Beaufort Sea Region Petroleum
Development Scenarios (Technical Report No. 6, Alaska
OCS Socioeconomic Studies Program, 1978).
• Northern Gulf OCS employment is an estimate of 1977
exploration employment. This was based on information
in Monitoring Petroleum Activities in the Gulf of Alaska
(Technical Report No. 17, Alaska OCS Socioeconomic Studies
Program, 1978). Total employment associated with explora-
tion was divided by the total wells drilled to obtain a
man-years-per-well figure of approximately 90. Approximately
9.6 wells were drilled in 1977. Total exploration employment
was adjusted by the percentage of Alaskan resident employment
assumed in the report. There is no activity assumed after
1977.
• Upper Cook employment was an estimate of current employment
made by the author. Employment was assumed to increase
slightly between 1985 and 1990 as the oil fields are shut
down. Gas production is assumed to continue after 1990.
• Other mining was assumed to maintain its 1976 level, except
in Anchorage and Fairbanks which were adjusted to an esti-
mate of the 1977 mining employment.
Table 6 shows special project construction employment.
• ECONXl are highly paid construction workers associated with
major projects, long hours, and extreme working conditions.
Two projects are assumed in this category, the trans-Alaska
pipeline and the ALCAN gasline. TAPS is completed in 1977.
The 1977 employment is based on an actual estimate made by
the Alaska Labor Department. After 1977 the line•s capacity
is assumed to be increased by the addition of four pump sta-
tions. Pump station construction employment estimates made
in Technical Report No. 6 (Alaska OCS, 1978) were used to
estimate employment. With completion of the TAPS construc-
tion in 1977, the line•s capacity is assumed to be 1.2 million
barrels per day. The capacity must be expanded to deliver the
assumed base case North Slope production, which is 1.73 million
268
[
[
[
[
[
[
r
L
[
[
E
[J
[
L
[
r~
L
L
-----~~----- ----~---~------~-------------------------·----
-------~------------------------~-·------· ---···---·------------"---------------.
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
c
E
[
r~
L
l
C
barrels per day by 1983. Four additional pump stations were
assumed to be needed to deliver this production. This was
based on the ratio of capacity to pump stations (. 15 million
barrels per pump station) with eight pump stations. With
this ratio, twelve pump stations would be needed to deliver
1.73 million barrels per day. These additions would also
allow the line some additional capacity. The ALCAN gasline
is assumed to be built between 1981 and 1984. The estimates
are based on the most recent construction manpower estimates
made by Northwest Energy Company in a letter to the state
(July 1, 1978).
• ECONX2 employment is associated with special construction
projects which are assumed to have regular employment sched-
ules and be able to draw on local labor markets. One project
of this type is assumed to be built, the Pacific LNG project.
Pacific LNG is scheduled to begin construction in 1980 and
operations in 1984 (Anchorage Daily News, September 23, 1978).
The construction schedule is based on an estimated peak con-
struction employment of 1,500 (letter from S. California Gas
to Alaska Department of Natural Resources, May 17~ 1978) and
the four-year construction period from the 1974 E.I.S. for
the Pacific LNG project.
Operations employment for these projects is transportation employment
for the pipelines and manufacturing for the petrochemical projects.
Alyeska estimated an operations employment of 300 for startup in 1977
and 850 per year for the long-term operations (Alaska Construction and
Oil, October 1976). ALCAN operations employment is assumed to be 96
beginning in 1985. This estimate was based on ALCAN•s 1976 application
to the Federal Power Commission. The difference in operations employment
is accounted for because TAPS has more pipeline in Alaska, the Valdez
port employment is part of the TAPS employment, and TAPS has substantial
A 1 aska headquarters employment. Operations employment for the Pacific
LNG plant is 60 beginning in 1984.
269
Employment for these special projects is allocated to MAP Regions as
follows:
1. Prudhoe, Lisburne, Kuparak employment to Region 1
2. Upper Cook N. Gulf OCS, Pacific LNG employment in Region 4
3. Other mining at its appropriate regional level
4. ALCAN and TAPS construction based on miles of pipe in region
plus 300 TAPS headquarters in Anchorage in 1977
5. ALCAN operations is allocated by the miles of pipeline in
each region
6. TAPS operations employment will be allocated as follows:
300 in Anchorage, 200 in Valdez, and the remainder based
on the regional distribution of the pipeline.
Industry Growth
The level of employment in federal government and agriculture-forestry-
fisheries is set exogenously. Federal government employment is assumed
to follow its general historical trend and remain constant at the 1976
level throughout the forecast period. The trend in the historical
period reflects increases in civilian employment offsetting decreasing
military employment. The regional allocation will also remain constant.
Employment in agriculture-forestry-fisheries will be assumed to increase
at a rate of 3 percent per year. This reflects an assumption of little
growth in agriculture and a modest increase in fisheries. The South-
central Water Study estimated approximately a 5 percent annual increase
with maximum fisheries development. Employment will be assumed to in-
crease at this rate in each region.
270
[
[
[
[_
[.
[
[
r
b
r:;
L
[
c
c
c
[
L
[
r' L
r~
L
-------------------------------------------------------------------
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
r~
Li
[
[
tJ
Q
[
6
[
[
c
L
Output in manufacturing must be determined exogenously. It is assumed to
increase at an average annual rate of 4 percent which is consistent with
both the historical trend and the assumed growth in the fisheries industry.
Regional growth will be determined by the mix of industries with food
manufacturing growing at the same rate as fisheries, 3 percent; lumber
growing at 4 percent; paper growing at 2.5 percent; and other manufactur-
ing bringing the growth rate into line with the overall 4 percent per year.
PETROLEUM REVENUE ASSUMPTIONS
Petroleum revenues to the state consist of_royalties, production taxes,
property taxes, and the corporate income tax. This section will examine
the revenue assumptions chosen for the base case. ·Where it was possible
and did not conflict with other assumptions made in this study, we used
revenue estimates made by the state; in other cases, revenues were esti-
mated based on assumptions about the wellhead value and production.
COOK INLET REVENUES
Table B.3 details the royalty and severance revenues from oil and gas
production in Upper Cook Inlet. The overall assumption is that oil
production would be over in 1995, while gas production will continue
throughout the projection period. The specific assumptions are:
• Oil royalties and production tax are from a Legislative Affairs
Agency memo of July 14, 1977. Revenues were estimated through
1985; after that a 15 percent decline was assumed in the value
of oil produced. The average production of the well was assumed
271
---------------------------·--~-------------·--
TABLE 8.3. COOK INLET REVENUES 1
Oil Oil Gas Gas
Royalties Production Tax Royalties Production Tax
Fiscal Year (r~i ll ions) (Millions) (Millions) (Millions)
1978 33.1 16.3 4.4 2.3
1979 31.3 14.4 5.4 2.8
1980 29.5 12.7 6.9 3.6
1981 27.9 10.9 8.3 4.4
1982 26.4 9. 1 9.0 4.6
1983 24.6 7.3 9. 1 4.7
-1984 22;9 5.5 9.3 4.8
1985 21.2 3.7 9.4 4.9
1986 20.1 . 3.0 9.4 4.9
1987 19. 1 2.0 9.4 4.9
1988 18.2 l.O 9.4 4.9
1989 17.3 0 8.5 4.4
1990 16.4 0 7.7 3.9
1991 15.6 0 6.9 3.5
1992 14.8 0 6.2 3.2
1993 14. 1 0 5.6 2.9
1994 13.4 . 0 5.0 2.6
1995 12.7 0 4.5 2.3
1996 0 0 4.1 2.1
1997 0 0 3.7 1.9
1998 0 0 3.3 1.7
1999 0 0 3.0 1.5
2000 0 0 2.6 1.4
1same as The Permanent Fund and the Alaskan Economy (Goldsmith, 1977)
study except oil royalties which are the same until 1985, then decline at
15 percent to be eliminated in 1996.
272
[
C
[
[
[
['
[
[
r
L
[
[
[
[
b
[
[
f'
L
r,
L
l
[
[
[
[
[
[
f'
L;
[
L
B.
.
'
6
[
[
I'
L
('
l ' Li
to decline below the taxable rate in 1989, and production was
assumed to stop in 1995.
• Gas royalties and production tax are based on estimates of
production through 1985 made by the Revenue Department in
Revenue Journal, Vol. 1, No. 2, October 1976. Decline after
1985.was assumed by the author to be at a rate of 10 percent
per year. The 1977 ratio of royalties and production taxes
to production was assumed to hold throughout the projection
period.
PRUDHOE BAY REVENUES
Prudhoe Bay will produce the major petroleum revenues for the state in
the projection period. To arrive at revenue estimates, estimates of
production and the wellhead value are needed. These estimates are shown
in Table B.4 and Table B.S .
• Production of oil was assumed to equal estimates made in
Technical Report No. 6 (Alaska OCS Socioeconomic Studies
Program, 1978).
• The wellhead value per barrel of oil was calculated based
on discussion with BLM-OCS. These assumptions reflect
those made with respect toN. Gulf oil.
1. West Coast market price is $12/bbl. This reflects
a $1.50 discount from a $13.50/bbl Gulf Coast price.
The discount is for transport costs. The real market
price stays constant.
2. Vessel costs equal $1.00/bbl from Valdez to the West
Coast and $.75/bbl processing costs. These costs remain
constant in real terms.
3. The TAPS tariff is $5.25 in 1978. The nominal tariff
remains constant until 1990 when it is assumed the increased
273
[
[
TABLE B.4. PRUDHOE BAY OIL
f
Wellhead Wellhead Production r Production Price Value Royalties Tax
Fiscal Year (Million Bbls) ($/Bbl) (Million$) (Million$) (Million$} ['
1978 237.3 5.00 1186.5 148.3 124.6
1979 474.5 5.56 2638.2 329.8 277.0
1980 584.0 6.16 3597.4 449.7 377.7 [
1981 595.7 6.79 4044.8 505.6 424.7
1982 607.5 7.45 4525.9 565.7 475.2 [ 1983 619.6 8.15 5049.7 631.2 530.2
1984 631.5 8.88 5607.7 701.0 588.8
1985 641.5 9.66 6196.9 774.6 650.7 f'
1986 613.2 10.48 6426.3 803.3 674.8 l=
1987 545.7 11.35 6193.7 774.2 650.3
1988 511.9 12.25 6270.8 783.9 658.4 r:
1989 475.4 13.22 6284.8 785.6 659.9 L
1990 409.7 14.24 5834.1 729.3 561.5
1991 367.7 15.02 5522.9 690.4 531.6 L 1992 347.7 15.85 5511.0 688.9 53d.4
1993 329.4 16.72 5507.6 688.5 530.1 E 1994 299.3 17.64 5279.7 660.0 508.2
1995 268.3 18.61 4993.1 624.1 480.6
1996 246.4 19.63 4836.8 604.6 465.5 [ 1997 228.1 20.71 4724.0 590.5 454.7
1998 211.7 21.85 4625.6 578.2 445.2
1999 197.5 23.05 4552.4 569.1 438.2 c 2000 183.8 24.32 4470.0 558.8 430.2
L
[
[
r ,
L
r ,
L
274 [
[
[
TABLE 8.5. PRUDHOE BAY GAS
[
[ Wellhead Well head Production
Production Price Value Royalties Tax
Fiscal Year · (Billion C. Ft) ($/MCF) (Million$) (Million$) (Mil1ion$)
[ 1978 3.9 1.00 3.9 5 4
1979 5.1 1.06 5.4 .7 6
[ 1980 5.9 . l.ll 6.5 8 .7
1981 28 1.17 32.8 4. 1 3.4
[ 1982 43 1.24 53.3 6.7 5.6
1983 50 1.31 65.5 8.2 6.9
1984 780 1.38 1076.4 134.6 ll3.0.
r 1985 830 1.45 1203.5 150.4 126.4
1986 870 l. 53 1331.1 166.4 139.8 L
1987 912 1.62 1477.4 184.7 155.1 r 1988 912 1.71 1559.5 194.9 163.7
L 1989 912 1.80 1641.6 205.2 172.4
1990 912 1.90 1732.8 216.6 181.9
L 1991 912 2. 01 1833.1 229.1 192.5
1992 912 2.12 1933.4 241.7 203.0
E 1993 912 2.23 2033.8 254.2 213.5
1994 912 2.36 2152.3 269.0 226.0
1995 912 2.48 2261.8 282.7 237.5
Q 1996 912 2.62 2389.4 298.7 250.9
1997 912 2. 77 2526.2 315.8 265.3
1998 912 2.92 2663.0 332.9 279.6
E 1999 912 3.08 2809.0 351.1 294.9
2000 912 3.25 2964.0 370.5 311.2
[
[
[
r-:
L
r:
L
E 275
operating costs dominate the decreasing capital costs.
After 1990, the tariff remains constant in real terms.
This assumption reflects only one of a number which could
be made concerning oil wellhead values.
• Production of gas at Prudhoe is assumed to increase follow-
ing the Department of Revenue assumed production until 1987
when the peak production assumed by Dames and Moore (Beaufort
OCS Petroleum Scenarios, 1978) is reached. This production
level is assumed to remain throughout the period.
• The wellhead value of gas was calculated assuming the com-
promise energy bill is adopted so that Prudhoe gas could
sell at a wellhead value of $1.45 per MCF. This assumes
the ability to roll this gas with other gas. It is assumed
that producers pay $.45 processing costs for a net of $1.00
wellhead. A constant real price of gas is assumed. 1
Revenues from these are determined based upon state laws. Royalties
are 12.5 percent of the wellhead value of oil and gas. The production
tax in each case is a fraction of the nonroyalty value. This fraction
depends upon the productivity of the average well in the field. The
production tax on oil was assumed to equal 12 percent through 1989 when
production declines and the rate falls to 11 percent. The production
tax on gas is assumed to equal 12 percent throughout the projection
period.
1Base case was selected prior to final adoption of Federal Energy
Act of 1978 which set a ceiling for Alaskan gas wellhead price.
276
[
r
r
[
r
L
L
[
[
[
L
[
L
f'
L
f '
L
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
L
L
L
L
L
I:
I = '--'
MISCELLANEOUS REVENUES
There are three important miscellaneous petroleum revenues: the property
tax, the reserves taxes, and the corporate income tax. Table B.6 shows
the assumed value of these taxes.
• The property tax taxes all petroleum-related property except
oil refining and gas processing property and leases at a rate
of twenty mills. We used the property tax revenue series
estimated by the Department of Revenue in Alaska Oil and Gas
Structure. This assumed construction of the TAPS and ALCAN
1 i nes.
e The reserves tax involves the repayment by the state of taxes
paid by petroleum producers in 1976 and 1977. Credits of up
to 50 percent of the production taxes are given until the
$499 million collected is repaid. This tax affects only
producers at Prudhoe.
• The Alaskan corporate income tax was changed in the last
legislative session so that no state projection of this
revenue stream is available. The corporate income tax on
petroleum is 9.4 percent of taxable petroleum income. Taxable
income is gross income minus capital and operating costs and
Alaskan taxes. The figure is not net of federal taxes. The
tax was based on estimates of net income determined by the
following procedure.
1. ALCAN and TAPS income was based on an assumption
that these lines wotild be guaranteed a 20 percent after-
tax return on their equity by the rate structure. It
277
TABLE B.6. OTHER REVENUES
Property Tax l Reserves Tax 2 ANCSA 3 Corporate 4 Income Tax
Fiscal Year (Million$) (Million$) (Million$) (Million$)
1978 173.0 (83.3) (23.8) 33.5
1979 185.0 (166.4) (52.9) 127 ~ 8
1980 193.2 (204.8) (72.1) 167.3
1981 226.7 (44.8) (81.6) 188.5
1982 251.8 0 (91.6) 212.8
1983 257.0 0 (102.3) , 265.1
1984 261.4 0 (68.8) 348.9
1985 295.9 0 0 384.8
1986 281.1 0 0 405.1
1987 267.0 0 0 407.2
1988 253.7 0 0 421.6
1989 241.0 0 0 428.7
1990 229.0 0 0 421.4
1991 217.5 0 0 409.7
1992 206.6 0 0 416.5
1993 196.3 0 0 425.7
1994 186.5 0 0 418.8
1995 177.2 0 0 410.1
1996 168.3 0 0 410.7
1997 159.9 0 0 409.9
1998 151.9 0 0 411.0
1999 144.3 0 0 416.6
2000 137.1 0 0 418.5
1Based on estimates in Alaska Oil and Gas Tax Structure, Department
of Revenue.
250 percent of Prudhoe production taxes.
32.0 percent of wellhead value at Prudhoe until $500 million is paid
to the fund.
4Actual fiscal year 78 value; afterwards estimated as explained in
the text.
278
[ -
r·
I_
L
L
I
L
L
[
[
r
[
L
[
[
r LJ
[
L
8 .
.
L
[
[
f'
L
was as~umed that 15 percent of the capital cost of both
projects was equity. The TAPS project was assumed to
cost $10.5 billion and the Alaskan portion of the ALCAN
line was assumed to cost $4.3 billion. The equity
portion was depreciated in a straightline return on the
remaining equity adjusted for an assumed 48 percent
Federal tax rate.
2. Corporate taxable income for Prudhoe Bay gas and oil
production was derived by estimating the components of
revenues and costs. Revenues are derived above. The
cost assumptions were derived from Technical Report
No. 6 (Alaska OCS Socioeconomic Studies Program, 1978).
The assumptions are shown below:
Total Costs
Prudhoe Oil
$9.45 billion
25 %
9.0%
25 years
Prudhoe Gas
$2.6 bi 11 ion
25 ~~
9.0%
26 years
Debt Proportion
Interest on Debt
Project Life
Total Throughput 10.5 billion bbls 26 bi 11 ion MCF
Capital costs per barrel were found with this information.
Per barrel costs were used to account for the flow of in-
vestment over the life of the field. Capital costs equalled
debt service plus depreciation costs. Operating costs were
added for total costs. These costs were:
Capital Costs
Operating-Costs
Prudhoe Oi 1
$1.24/bbl
$1.00/bbl
In addition, $.12 per barrel and $.02
for overhead as per the legislation.
found by subtracting these costs and
taxes from revenues.
Prudhoe Gas
$.14/MCF
$.08/MCF
per MCF were allowed
Taxable income was
allowable Alaska
3. The ratio of oil and gas taxable income to severance
taxes at Prudhoe Bay was applied to Cook Inlet to estimate
taxable income from this production.
4. Estimated corporate income tax was found by applying
the .094 rate to this income.
5. A final portion of the tax includes a redistribution
of multistate corporate profits. This portion allocates
279
worldwide corporate profits based on three factors: non-
production property in Alaska as a percent of worldwide
property, nonproduction payroll in Alaska as a percent
of worldwide payroll, and Alaskan sales as a percent of
worldwide sales. The average of these was taken as the
proportion of worldwide profits which were taxed at
9.4 percent. Conversation with Alaska Department of
Revenue led us to the conclusion that this component
would be extremely small, so it was ignored in this
study.
BEAUFORT OCS REVENUES
Tables B.7 through B.9 show the revenues associated with each of three
Beaufort scenarios. Revenues are based on production estimates provided
by the Alaska OCS Office of BLM. Wellhead values are determined by the
wellhead value at Prudhoe minus transport costs from the Beaufort. These
real 1978 transport costs were $.60 per barrel for oil and $,15 per MCF
for gas. Other assumptions included:
1. Half of the production and offshore capital facilities·
would be located in state waters.
2. A conventional scheme of bonus bidding was used with
$100 million being bid.
3. Discoveries on state-owned properties will be subject to
state royalties and production taxes at current rates.
4. Oil and gas production from the Beaufort is transported
via TAPS and ALCAN rather than new pipelines or alternate
modes.
280
[
[
[
[
[
r
L
L
[
[
('
L
r,
L
[
[
[
[
r
-,
~j
[
[
[
r Li
h
L
L
6
b
[
u
[
[
f'
L
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
. 1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
TABLE B.7. BEAUFORT MINIMUM SCENARIO
DIRECT REVENUE EFFECTS
(Millions of Nominal Dollars)
Production 3 Property 4 Corporate 5
Bonus 1 Royalties 2 Tax Tax Income Tax
50 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 . 31
0 0 0 44
0 0 0 .70
0 0 0 .71
0 0 0 .48
0 0 0 2.01
0 0 0 4.75
0 0 0 8.92
0 9.10 7.60 13.29
0 24.10 20.30 15.05
0 33.00 27.70 16.77
0 42.80 35.90 17.58
0 45.10 37.90 19.04
0 44.00 40.00 20.43
0 50.20 42.20 20.92
0 50.60 42.50 20.37
0 50.70 42.60 19.70
0 49.40 4"1.50 18.89
0 46.30 38.90 17.94
0 42.80 35.90 16.82
1BLM-A1aska OCS Office.
2Royalties estimated at 12.5 percent of total wellhead value.
3Production tax equals 12 percent of the nonroyalty portion of
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
.42
3. 77
5.66
7 .·84
9.27
9.10
9.06
9. 21
8. 72
8.18
7.14
5.81
total wellhead value.
4Tax at 20 mills of petroleum property value.
5corporate income tax at 9.4 percent of taxable petroleum income.
281
TABLE B.B. BEAUFORT MODERATE SCENARIO
DIRECT REVENUE EFFECTS
(Millions of Nominal Dollars)
Production 3 Property4 Corporate 5
Bonus 1 2 Royalties Tax Tax Income Tax
1979 50 0 0 0
1980 0 0 0 0
1981 0 0 0 31
1982 0 0 0 44
1983 0 0 0 70
1984 0 0 0 .71
1985 0 0 0 82
1986 0 0 0 3.03
1987 0 0 0 6.21
1988 0 0 0 n. 01
1989 0 12.50 10.50 16.22
1990 0 33.10 30. 10 18.49
1991 0 51.00 42.90 20.69
1992 0 54.70 46.00 22.06
1993 0 57.80 48.50 24.18
1994 0 61.00 51.20 26.37
1995 0 63.20 53.00 27.60
1996 0 65.40 55.00 28.03
1997 0 67.70 56.80 28.00
1998 0 65.90 55.40 27.81
1999 0 62.20 52.30 27.50
2000 0 58.10 48.80 27.08
· 1BLM-Alaska OCS Office.
2Royalties estimated at 12.5 percent of total wellhead value.
3Production tax equals 12 percent of the nonroyalty portion of
total wellhead value.
4Tax at 20 mills of petroleum property value.
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
.43
7. 12
10.41
11.13
11.96
12.74
11.29
12.41
12.77
11.79
9.87
7.63
5corporate income tax at 9.4 percent of taxable petroleum income.
282
[
[
L
[
[
[
r·
r~
"-:o
h
L
[
t
[
[
E
[
[
f'
L
I'
L
[
[
[
[
[
[
f-.'
··'
[
[
B
Q
[
lJ
L
L
{'
L
r: t :
'"-'
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988·
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
Bonus 1
50
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
o.
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
TABLE B.9. BEAUFORT HIGH SCENARIO
DIRECT REVENUE EFFECTS
(Millions of Nominal Dollars)
Production 3 Property4
Royalties 2 Tax Tax
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 31
0 0 44·
0 0 70
0 0 . 71
0 0 .82
0 0 3.78
0 0 9.21
0 0 16.71
37.50 31.40 24.88
67.10 56.40 28.60
85.10 71.40 32.35
90.70 76.20 34.72
95.60 80.30 38.43
100.80 84.70 42.18
106.40 89.30 44.34
112.20 94.30 . 45. 13
115.90 97.30 45.23
112.70 94.60 45.21
101 . 50 85.20 45.04
91.70 77.00 44.73
1BLM-Alaska OCS Office.
Corporate 5
Income Tax
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
4.51
15.54
19.48
20.43
21.95
23.09
21.97
23.18
23.90
20.42
17.62
13. 19
2Royalties estimated at 12.5 percent of total wellhead value.
3Production tax equals 12 percent of the nonroyalty portion of
total wellhead value.
4Tax at 20 mills of petroleum property value.
5corporate income tax at 9.4 percent of taxable petroleum income.
283
284
[
r
r
l
r:
L
. L
r 6
L
L
[
[
L
L
[
(
L
r
L
. L
[
r
[
[
L
[
r u
L
ti
0
L
c
L
r:
lJ
APPENDIX C
A Procedure to Determine the Share of
OCS Employment to Alaskan Residents
The direct total employment estimates made by Dames and Moore in the
Northern Gulf OCS petroleum scenarios (Dames and Moore, 1978) have been
refined to reflect resident/nonresident composition of this employment.
Resident, in the context of these refinements, refers to an individual
that resides in Alaska for the duration of employment (including offsite).
Resident employees do not need to live in Alaska before the project begins.
Resident employment is assumed to have full impact on the Alaska economy,
while the impact of nonresident employees is assumed to be negligible.
To assist in the determination of the share of employment to Alaska resi-
dents (SEAR), a cross section of information regarding the classification,
structure, duration, and impact of OCS petroleum development-related
employment is presented in Table C. 1, 11 Characteristics of OCS Employment
by Task," which accompanies this appendix.
A brief outline of the table•s format and information content will pre-
cede a discussion of the assumptions used to provide consistency and
accuracy in the interpretation of this information.
TABLE FORMAT
Columns one and two categorize employment by sector (or task) and by phase
of development, respectively. Column three lists the rotation factor
285
TABLE C.l. CHARACTERISTICS OF ocs EMPLOYMENT BY TASK
7
Payments
Allocation 8
5 Coefficients Est·i:n~tc
Potenti <1l Share to Share of Employment
2 3 AK Resident 6 A!< Residents 8 To Alaskan Residents
tmploy~ent Sectors Phose of 2 Rotation 4 Share from Employment 6 In Years: ( SEP.R)
For Petro1eum {Jperations 1 Qev_~J_2f1'1q!~t:_ Fac;_tor3 Duration 4 Industry5 Multiplier 1 5 10 1979-84 1985-89 1990 +
ONSHORE
Exploration 1 .15a
17 1.0 1.0 1.0
1. Service Base Development 1 p .2 1. 5 NA 1.0 1.0 l.O
Production 1 1.0 . 1.0 1.0 1.0
Exploration 2
( .3)b
. 5 .525 .578
2. Helicopter Service Deve 1 u;Jm.Or1t 1.5a p .2 1.5 NA . ~ .525 .573
Production 1 1.0 1.0 1 r. ,I.J
3. Service Base Const. 1.11 T .5 1. 5 1 .5 .525 .5i8
4. Pipe Coating 1.11 T .2 1.1 .2 .2 .21 .231
5. Onshore Pipeline Const. 1.11 T .2 1.1 .2 .2 .21 • 231 t Development .25 .25 .25
6. Oil Terminal Const. 1.11 T .5 1.1 .2 .5 .525 .572
N 7. LNG Plant Const. • . 1.11 T NA 1.1 . .2 .5 .525 .578
00 s. Concrete Platform Const. 'P NA NA ' N.!\ NA' NA NA NA l~f>. CJ)
9. Oil Termina·l Operations ~Production p. 1.0 1.5
} .75 .75 9 1.0 1.0 1.0
.75
10. LNG Plant Operations J p 1.0 1.5 1 :o 1.0 l.G
OFFSHORS,
,, Surveys
}Explocation
T .2 1.1 .2
} .15
.2 .21 .231 ...
.55 .• 55
12. Rigs 2 T • 1 1.1 . 2 .2 .21 . 231
{ Development 2 . 1 (.3)b 1.2c .4
} • 75 .75 9 . 1 .3 .33
13. Plat forms p
1.4d .75
Production 1.0 .8 1.0 1.0 1.0
14. Platfocm Installation } 2 T . 1 1.1 .2 .25 .25 .25 • 1 .1 05 .116
DevelopMent
15. Offshore Pipeline Const. . 2 T • 1 1.1 .2 .25 .25 .25 . 1 .1 05 . 116 I
Exploration 1.5 . 15 c .4 .4 .42 .;,.~£,2 1. 2d
16. Supply-Anchor-Tugboats . Development 1.5 T • 15 1.4d .8 NA .8 .88 .S::3
Production 1.5 .5 1.4 .8 .a .83 .sc::;
a Jl.pproximat ion ----oNumbers in parentheses indicate second 5-year period
cFi rst three years dThereafter . NA =not applicable
r---; r-: r-; r-::; ~· rr::r r-, ClJ r:7! r-:· 1'1""'1 . .r;-:-] __.., . ,.._.__., ~ ______, ~ ~ ~,_,__, ~< , ,.I J J '. j
[
[
[
[
[
[
r u
E
I-'
"-"
t
L
[
c
L
TABLE NOTES
Characteristics of OCS Employment by Task
1. These are the employment sectors (or tasks) requested by Tom Smythe
of Alaska Consultants in his November 21 correspondence with Richard
Schmidt of Peat, Marwick, Mitchell and Co.
2. Dames and Moore, "Alaska OCS Socioeconomic Studies Program, Northern
Gulf of Alaska, Petroleum Development Scenarios," Draft Report,
Task 9BA, October 24, 1978, Table 5-4, pages 119-122.
3. Ibid.
4. Based on discussions found in Planning for Offshore Oil Development,
Gulf of Alaska OCS Handbook, Division of Community Planning, ADCRA,
1978, pages 40-41 and 223-224. Note: P = permanent; T = tempera ry.
5. Interview: Max Beazley, Staff Engineer at Mobil Oil Corporation,
Exploration and Producing. Mr. Beazley is currently working in the
Prudhoe Unit, a planning team for future development in Prudhoe Bay.
6. "Planning for Offshore Oil Development," Division of Community
Planning, ADCRA, October 1977, Table 12, pages 17-18.
7. The factors to the right of the multipliers are the ratios of
respective task-specific multiplier increments (multiplier-1)
to the statewide basic sector employment multiplier (1.5-1 = .5).
(See note 6, above.)
8. 11 A Social and Economic Impact Study of Offshore Petroleum and Natural
Gas Development in Alaska: Phase II,11 Mathematics Science Northwest,
Inc., and Alaska Consultants, Inc., for BLM, October 1976, page 19.
9. Amendments suggested by Ed Phillips, Alaska DNR.
10. Concrete Platform Construction is not considered feasible in the
Gulf of Alaska.
287
associated with each task. The rotation factors are taken from Dames and
Moore (see table note 2) and are calculated as follows:1
1 + Number of days off duty
Number of days on duty
They are used to determine the on-and offsite employment for a given task.
Employment duration {permanent or temporary) by task is listed in column
four. The information in columns one through four characterize employment
by task. They are intended to provide qualitative limits for the SEAR
estimates.
Columns five through seven provide alternative implicit and explicit esti-
mates of the SEAR. Column five includes an industry perspective on the
resident potential of Alaska OCS employment. Column six provides estimates
of the impact multipliers of employment in each task. The multipliers
are implicit indicators of in-state residence. The factors to the right
of the employment multipliers are the implicit SEARs assumed in these
multipliers, given an employment multiplier of 1.5 for Alaska. The payment
allocation coefficients found in column seven were developed for use in
a regional input-output analysis designed to capture the socioeconomic
impacts of OCS petroleum development in the Yakutat area. (See table
note 8.) The values associated with table note 9 are adjustments sug-
gested to compensate for a bias toward higher payment allocation to Alaska
1The assignment of a unitary rotation factor for offshore platforms
production (task 13) suggests that an operations crew is never granted
off-duty leave from the platform. Although this assumption appears to be
questionable, Gordon Harrison of Dames and Moore attributes categorical
data problems to its existence and notes that potential inconsistencies
implied by its use are insignificant and are balanced elsewhere in employ-
ment assumptions for that task.
288
[
[
[
[
f .
L
[
[
r:
L
[
[
[
[
L
[
[
r·
L
f'
L
L
[
t
['
'
[
[
[
[
r L.;
r
L
L
E
[
6
[
l
L
L
r: u
residents that was introduced to facilitate interregional effects. An
even distribution of skills across resident and nonresident groups is
required in order to reinterpret the payment allocation coefficients in
the context of employment and residency. This assumption is, perhaps,
unrealistic during exploration and petroleum field development. Under
this interpretation, the payment allocation coefficients will overstate
the SEAR for tasks relevant to those phases of development.
METHODOLOGY AND ASSUMPTIONS
The task-specific information just outlined has been mapped into a final
SEAR estimate (in column eight) for each task using the following
methodology:
1.
2.
The SEAR estimates contained in columns five, six, and
seven are used to bracket a reasonable SEAR range for
each task. For example, the SEAR range for offshore
platform installation (task 14) extends from .1 to .25.
In the interest of consistency, an additional set of
general, phase-specific SEAR guidelines are developed.
Here, a given employment task is examined in the con-
text of its phase of development.
Tasks subsumed under exploration (Onshore: service base, helicopter service;
Offshore: surveys, rigs, supply-anchor-tugboats) are temporary, require
"extreme specialization," and usually embrace a reparatory work crew
having ''international character."2 These conditions imply a low SEAR
(of approximately .1 to .2) for exploration employment. Of course,
2Dames and Moore, "Alaska OCS Socioeconomic Studi'es Program, North-
ern Gulf of Alaska, Petroleum Development Scenarios/' Draft Report,
Task 9BA, October 24, 1978, pp. 106-107.
289
exceptions to these guidelines occur. For example, helicopter service
during exploration may be contra~ted through Anchorage-based firms.3
The offshore development phase, including platform installation (14) and
operation (13) offshore pipeline construction (15), and supply-anchor-tug
boats (16), is assumed to retain the descriptive and structural character-
istics mentioned above for the case of exploration.
Onshore development includes various types of construction employment.
Although the work force is generally seasonal (not unusual in the Alaska
construction industry), the potential for civil corrstruction work by
Alaska-based contractors is more likely than that of offshore development
or of exploration, particularly as the overall sphere of OCS devel~pment
broadens. It is assumed that a SEAR of about .4 to .5 is consistent with
these conditions.
During production, employment is generally permanent and oriented toward
less specialized, more routine entry-level positions. These employment
characteristics appear to be compatible with Alaska residency. Overall,
we attach a SEAR of 1.0 to tasks subsumed under the production phase.
Table C.2 summarizes the general SEAR guidlines outlined above.
3oames .and Moore, 11 Alaska OCS Socioeconomic Studies Program, Monitor-
ing Petroleum Activities in the Gulf of Alaska and the Lower Cook Inlet
Between April 1975 and June 1978,11 Technical Report #17, August 1978,
p. 38.
290
[
[
[
[
r~
L
[
[
[
[
[
r
L
f'
L
[
[
F
[
[
r l _,
L
[
b
[
[
[
L
r·
L
TABLE C.2.
Exploration
Development
Production
PHASE-SPECIFIC SEAR GUIDELINE
Onshore
. 1 - . 2
.4 .5
1.0
Offshore
. 1 - . 2
. 1 .2
1.0
·.Additionally, there are two principal relationships which influence the
!rend in the share of OCS employment to Alaska residents (SEAR). First,
the internal supply of labor that is qualified to perform the variety of
tasks delineated in column one of Table C.l is assumed to increase in
response to earlier 11 layers" of OCS petroleum development, asa function
of other mining activity, and to more general growth in the Alaska economy.
Second, for those OCS employees that initially accept nonresident status,
it is likely that a certain percentage shift to Alaska residency over time.
We consolidate the combined effects of these employment dynamics into an
assumption calling for a one percent annual average rate of growth in the
SEAR for all tasks having an initial SEAR of less than one. For simplicity,
the continuous compounding of growth per period is replaced by a five per-
cent increase between 1985 and 1989 and a ten percent increase thereafter.
Tttis assumption corresponds to the figures in the three subcolumns under
column eight.
291
[
r
[
['
r L
APPENDIX D
·Selected Model Output
Variable Definitions
POP
MIG NET
NINCTOT
EM99
EMSPP
EMG9P
EMNSP
EMA9
EMGF
EMP9
EMT9
EMS9
EMPU
EMM9
EMFI
EMD9
EMCN
EMCNl
EMGA
EMOT
PI
PIRPC
RPI
E99S
EXOPS
EX CAP
E99SRPC
REVGF
RP9S
RT98
RENS
Population (103 persons)
Net migration (103 persons)
Natural increase (103 persons)
Total employment (103 persons)
Proportion of employment in the support sector
Proportion of employment in the government sector
Proportion of employment in the basic sector
Employment in agriculture-forestry-fisheries (10 3 persons)
Employment in federal government (103 persons)
Employment in mining (103 persons)
Employment in transportation (103 persons)
Employment in services (103 persons)
Employment in utilities (103 persons)·
Employment in manufacturing (10 3 persons)
Employment in finance-insurance-real estate (10 3 persons)
Employment in trade (103 persons)
Employment in construction (103 persons)
Employment in local construction (103 persons)
Employment in state ~nd local government (10 3 persons)
Other employment (10 persons)
Personal income (millions of nominal dollars)
Real per capita personal income
Relative price index ($1957 US = 100)
Total state expenditures (millions of nominal dollars)
Total state operating expenditures (millions of nominal dollars)
Total state capital expenditures (millions of nominal dollars)
Real per capita state expenditures ·
Total general fund revenue (millions of nominal dollars)
Total petroleum revenues (millions of nominal dollars)
Total nonpetroleum tax revenues (millions of nominal dollars)
Total endogenous revenues (millions of nominal dollars)
293
Variable Definitions (continued)
GFBAL
PFBAL
RINS
General fund balance (millions of nominal dollars)
Permanent fund balance (millions of nominal dollars)
Fund balance interest (millions of nominal dollars)
FUND Total fund balance (millions of nominal dollars)
FUND77 Real fund balance (millions of real 1977 dollars)
SIMP General fund revenue minus general fund expenditure
(millions of nominal dollars)
EXBITES State total expenditure as a percentage of personal income
VIABL2 · Nonpetroleum revenu~s as a perce~tage of general fund
expenditures ·
RENSRAT Endogenous revenues as a percentage of personal income
294
f~
I
f:
f '
(,
h
L
L
[
L
[
L
L
I L
L
[
r
[
[
[
['
[
f'
L
r~
L
L
B
c
c
c
[
[
r~
L
f'
6
MODERATE BASE CASE
295
POP M J r~ ~: F ~ Nl:'llCTJ~' r;:-: Q :._) EMS !'P e:G9P ? l1l~SP ENA9
1 q77 410.66 -24.!'}35 6. J~J H~ S. 50 P 0.363 0.378 0. 2 ':)tj 1.1
1'17?. 416. cr,7 -11.241 7 ./.r.2 178.526 :).373 0.3tl6 0.242 1. 2
1979 418.F.')f) 5.7.118 f,.fl<n 18 s. 22 5 0. 3U3 0.374 0.243 1.2
1Cf>() 4 :li~ • 1 7l R.(;"i (. • ;:n 1 <i !I. 0 ') 4 J. 39 5 0. ]6 0.24!) 1. 2
19 f) 1 4~.'1.563 11+. 2'13 7. 1 44 2':6.109 0.408 0.342 0.251 1. 3
1 ~· 82 4SG .J"',C) 2 3. 1 n 7.r,3J 224.(.37 0.422 0. 3 1 y 0.25W 1 • 3
1S 8 1 s•:;. n02 8.()14 ~1.46 2] 0. 2 28 :).423 .O • .J24 0. 25 3 L4
1934 "">"1.479 -9.<J43 8. 6 26 223.159 0.42 0. 3 3 9 0.241 1.4
1Q~') 5 t"J') • OS 7 -0.5/.f' f1 • ') r~ 2 224.G31 0. 427 o. 331 0. 242 1. 4
19% 52.1.083 6.()!1(:: 7. g 71 231.906 n .4 34 0.322 0. 244 1. 5
FJ·n 5 39.0 29. 7.8 :.~() fJ. 1 2 240.132 0.442 0.315 0.244 1.5
1 r. p p. 556.{l4?. g .:>1'. 5 n.JJ?. 21l9. ~. 5 0.44i) 0.307 0.244 1. 6
19 89 57'5.352 9. 8')2 8.614 25 9. 133 !).457 0.3 0.243 1.6
,qgl') 5'11. 5f? 7.336 n. 'l 26Ci.6J2 0. 462 0.296 0. 2 42 1. 7
1 ") q 1 6i)6.771 6.111 9. ·18 2 273.502 ·0.469 o. '291 0. 24 l. 7
1sn (i /.2 • 6 f)(i G.f>')l~ 9.22 2!3'). 902 0.475 0.2 85 0. 21~ 1.8
11'l'J3 6:~0.315 n .2 r. 4 <J. 386 2Pq.5P, 0. 4H3 0.278 0. 239 1. a
19<J4 658.298 B. 31-19 9.616 }.<:)8.329 0.489 0.272 0. 239 1. 8
1 <)C) 5 677.649 9.50B 9. u 45 308.016 0. 49 6 0. 2 65 0.23B 1.9
1 G 16 6CJ8.466 10.701 1 0. 12 318.616 0. 503 0.258 o. 2 39 2.
19 97 71').126 10.228 10.U38 328.881 0. 51 0.2 52 0.238 2.1
1 <)98 740.455 1 0. 6 03 . 10.729 339.495 0. 516 o. 245 0.23/J 2.1
1<1 qq 764.593 1 3 • 1 1 11.031 352.046 0. 524 o. 238 0. 238 2. 2
2~ ~·" 789.2fl7 13.274 1 1. 4 29 364. 721 0. 531 0.231 0.238 2.2
N
u:J
0"1 F;Mr.F EM PC) Ei1T<J .EaS9 EM ?U l\MOT EM1'!9 EMFI
1 1177 42.921 4.'11Ll 9.fl142 22.64<) 1. 1!! 4 14. 55 11.356 5. 779
19 78 42.'l21 4.3 s 1 1 o. 2 C)4 21.9 1. 19 4 14.269 1 1. 9 06 5. 7 38
1979 42.921 1+. 563 10.774 23.693 1 • 2 4 9 14.533 12 .4'1 1 6.176
1 CJ:'JO 42.CJ21 5.104 1 1. 39 3 25. q 45 1. 321 14.1JB6 12.896 6.758
. 19 8 1 42. 921 4.93 1 2. 1 73 29.022 1 .I~ 0 3 15.363 13.37 7.497
1982 42.921 4.57G 13. 232 33.543 1. 507 16. ·J 33 13. H 43 B.524
1fl91 42.Q21 4.27 5 1.3.536 34.395 1. 541 16.234 14. 32 8.839
19 G 4 42.921 4. 41 5 13.237 32.4 7 1 .52b 15.<J79 14.867 8.578
1 9 0'1 42 .CJ21 li.31S 13.551 3J. 27 6 1. 55 1 16. 0 44 15.364 8. 8 CfJ
1'1 a r, 42.97.1 4.312 1 4 • 02 .15.194 1.602 16.293 15.877 9.295
19 87 42.921 4.394 14. 5 S7 37.406 1. 66 16 • 5 83 16 .11 03 9.Hii5
11'lflll 42.'l21 4 • (iII 3 1 :, • 1 )C) 3'l.P. ()~ 1. 7 22 16.90<) 16.t3!f7 10.494
19d9 47.. n 1 11. 13 J q 1S.73'l 42.424 1 • 7i36 17.. 2 3 17.507 11.152
1q90 42.921 4.n53 16. 207 44. 4 32 1. 83 7 . 17.~8/t 18.085 11 .686
, "q 1 1~2-f\21 4 • 3 Ll.l 1fi.6A4 4 (i. 54 J• 1. 88 7 17.7 1 18. 68 12.229
19 q 2 42. <)21 4 • .122 17.1fi6 4 B ~·7 01 1 • 93[l 17 .'l 5 19.297 12.788
1qq3 42.92 1 4.171 17.743 51.354 1. <J'H>. 1fl. 2 2 7 1q. 933 13.464
1q9 4 4?..921 4.12 1 R. 3 02 53.952 2.055 18.503 20.59 14. 1 29
1 q g 5 42.921 4. 12 3 B.'J28 56.901 2.12 H3. S03 21 .269 14.888
10'1(, 42.G21 4.125 1q. 5:11 60. 1 14 2. Hl7 19.126 21.971 15.701
1CJ 97 42. n1 lj. 1 02 20.2Vi 63.2 43 2.253 19.434 22.696 16. 5 13
1 s .:Jii 42 .. 921 4. :nn 20~ iJ')J 66. 526 2.31<) i9. 7 46 23.41+5 17.3 5
Fl c; ') 42.q21 4.078 21.6GB 70.464 2.397 20. 11 24.219 18. 3 52
2') ') ') 42.97.1 4. (", 79 2 2. I+ 2<J 74.399 2. 4 72 20.471 25.019 19.352
·r-J. ~ ~ ~ rJ IT'""J r~ rr---1 r---1 ~~· c-:-J r;-~ ·r-j· ~··~ ··r-J c--, .r----"1 ·:---l ,----,
J j • J
cr--J t'rJ7J r::l ~ .. ~i ... J cr;n r---; r""l r-J r---"1 l') r---"1 :---"l rJ ~ l') rm C-:J r~ rr-J J ' ..
F.M n9 E!1C N EMC !11 EM Gil PI PIRPC Ri?I EX:OPS
1977 ?1~.619 16. :,'j<) 11.1!1') 27. 7.'i(> 4072.313 J<.J/.4.]2 2S2.71 810.
1"l7fl 24.766. 11.4)4 11.:!')7 25.~141 423(:. 48 3723.131 279. 7 5 9 44.
19 79 26. ur c; 12.277 1 1 • 9 72 26.373 4743.19 Jo62.J7 2'13.358. , 0 1 '::i.
l ~li.J 0 28.5(,2 13.52(, 1J.0!)1 26.P.G2 5Jil5. 29 402q. ~4 301!.4 1120.35
1913 1 11.?.35 16.775 14.112. 27 .61~5 6400.84 4317.·09 32~_.469 1247.59
1982 J11.lHi 2 22.3')7 15.768 28. 811 7916.37 4711.11 345.513 1id2.1G
1QP] 35 .G!J3 21 .CJ7 16.513 31.619 Fl570. 5 4720.22 361.121 1696.62
1 q .q 4 3 5. 159 17.124 16.485' 32.f:,(i2 8276.16 ·443"1.22 372.4]5 '1!348.!)8
1'J.g5 35 .Qf\9 17.3Ci2 17. 136 31.551 8809.96 4462.d 387.793 1905.99
1 (j fj 6 37.713 113.643 18.212 31.692 97 63.24 4598.26" . 40 5. 9 15 20 71. 54
19 87 JC). 7?. 3 1'l.G27 19.1fi7 32.61 10851.:. 4732.11 425.528 2310.95
1<)8~ 41.913 20 ,;ll21 20.22r1 33.642 121 !6. 5 4Hil5.77 446.354 2~)fi4 .1 q
1 'j q C) 44.205. 21 .BGS 21.311 34.8()7 13531.3 5024.07· 46B.12 2U 9 5. q 'I
199'1 11/i.l) <j'). 22.111S ::!2.21.3 35.998 11Hl35.5. 5118.93 4 u 9 • 9 06 J227.!i6
1<Jif1 47.q1J 2 3 • I 59 22. ~56 36.7 4 l 16 226. 4 5221.23 51 2. 1 SJ7 J541.8d
199 2 49.819 23.931 23.01)~ 37.255 17780.9 5330.02 535.75 3864.63
, 9 91 :>2.11)8 25.089 2LI. iHl4 37.715 19613. 5461.63 560.815 4214.64
1 t'j q 4 54.3 4 7 2G. 17 5 25.969 38.341 21601.7 5590.0 1 587.026 4608.74
199 ~ 56.887 ?.7. 3 2 9 27.2 38.822 23329.1 5719.94 61il.776 50 24. 2 6
19% 59. 58 3 2 A. 7 88 2fl. 5 ·15 3Q.)2q 26!~34. 5875.33 644.155 5475.53
1997 62.2fi6 29.971 2~1.917 39.946 29094.7 5997.29 6711.6113 5980.6 3
1998 6">. ('11 3 1. 1+ 51 31.396 110.411 32115.7 6139.43 7 06 .4 75 6502.43
N 1 (l<JQ 6 f~ • 2 7 3 33.231 33. 17 5 IIO.P.38 "356(;0.7 6297.37 740.639 7079.38 \.0
'-I 2000 71. 508 3.5.03 ]I+ • 972 ~1.4<36 39558.7 6455.75 776 .. 366 77 43. 56
· ZXC A!? F.'1 {j s F.Cl q Si:\P C FEVGF RP<JS HTq8 · RENS GF B i\L
1977 271.326 11f,0~B2 1118.76 796.27 1~7.201 214.3 01 276.522 668.155
1<?70 ?.PO. 1311.13 1152.4'i 10 53. r~ 47 1. 4 206.916 240.272 617.209
1<J7C) 2 q~. 1414.71 11S1.<) 11140.77 flf, 0. 7 211~.373 222.549 u 14. 7 61
1°8"1 3~ 1. ,1:} 5 1 5fi6. 76 1170. 1 1f·24.51 0 (~ .. ....
.1 ·it) • ji 312.~109 230.856 10S4.02
1 (j q 1 372.12R 171l:l. S9 117S.<J4 1<)[!7.98 127S.41 355.308 2G4.01J 1500.3
19 rJ 2 44:l.n34 2\ 1!~. (l 3 11<:;8.'39 2328.56 1475.74 1~37.17 336.947 2055.96
1 9 fJJ 521.47) 2371 .3C1 D%.03 2650.63 1(>42.7 551.719 419.177 2G30.09
19 ~I!~ 561.r2ti 25110.05 1 3 e 1 • ~~?. 32 24. 12 2i21.71 650.162 447.09S 3558. V.7
_1Ci1') 6?4.2:.5 27 4 7. 9 4 13')2.01 .)(,2[}. 9 1 2422.22 6 H2 .2 '2 7 450.247 4741J.43
1 'lJ! 6 780.!)4(, 3 () 6 , • fl ') 1 ~~ 4 :~ • :;. r.; 31~ 11. 3 3 2l!30.93 737.288 497.79~ ss 71. 6 1
1 q F3 7 !J 33. (" 27 J Jfl 2. 48 11174.r,7 4 !J 58. 240'J.11 7 92.7 58 57!).')19 6':)83.04
1 <)fjfl 90S.n18 3750.11 1 son. ~>3 1n 12. 4 5 25 20.71 1)71.591 6%.·6 75 8044.19
Fl :3 '1 · '160.565 41411.94 15Hl. 96 1! 58) • 1 g 2563.12 <)54.926 75!3.599 9044.13
19 9" 1009.75 4556.67 1572.25 4712.2'l 2 ~59. 19. 1035.2 9 86H.514 9836.55
1991 , 01 0. 06 4'103.7?. 15 77. rn liS!J'i. (•5 240u. 19 110rJ.34 979.1132 105 03.9
1CJ ') 2 1014.08 52 83.61 15H.1.S '11 2Y .112 2430.36 12 07.5 5 11~1.96 11:)'J5.5
199:1 1076.::14 5704.91 15JiJ.(>2 5 1+ 0 , • <} ~ 2459.28 1324.32 1243.75 11604.2
1<1'14 1126.46 (j 17ft ,<"r!j. 1 ~,r.n. 11fi 5(i37.3 2 4 27.37 1445.31 1411.72 11955.7
1 q C)S 1 1(j 3. "19 G(l67.113 16t<•.37 5864 .2 5 23 7] .6 1578.32 H1n .1a 1 i 128. 3
1q9(i 1208.79 7 :.10 1. 2 5 160·:). 56 (;1(i1.67 2365.73 17 4G. 55 11321.53 1.2149.5
1q <J7 127 5. 43 7809.19 1 6 ()l}. 6 g ·. 64 <)4_.16 2367. 1943.9 207 5. 9 6 11995.7
199() 1376. 16 81<72. 7 1G1q. 67 61340.118 2364.71. 2158.69 2355.52 11641.7
1999 14qi).43 '11<17 .66 1624.2 72.311.21 2370. 6 2415.22 26fJ1.24 11086.3
2000 1622.01 1CO?CJ_1 1F.lF,_(;F, 7f,7A 1.1{ ') 1 "71 .CIA ')"J1'l "a ':11\"7'1 t:."J ., .''', ., "" " 0
1977 2.4 35. 343 671'\, (, 671.369 ').131 531.912 557.16 -13"1.4 52
1'17 F\ 4B.Q75 ll (, • '1 54 uH;. 1r!4 li 0 2. 4~ 3 U. 1 J II S68. 500 SfJ5.271 -4.4 16
19 7G 15.3.275 4G.:l78 9(d3.037 B34.H62 0. 13 1 fi 22. 52i) 650.il96 301.853
19 8 .•1 275. 68.529 13 29. 02 10CJ0.213 a. 133 718.529 71.18.6 360.987
1q~1 411.475 0 4 .1.1 07 1 q 11 • 7P. 1!.1P6.1 0. 126 i\06.159 B1B.034 Si32. 7 5.5
19 R2 %3.1.12') 135.U32 2'·19.38 1 ') 1 F! J·2 0.115 ':1 10.7 08 9llll.4~6 707.604
1 'J RJ 7:i1.699 1H6. 174 3]b1.7Cl 2J.'i5. 26 0. 1 2 1 1040.~3 1076.61 742.1+15
1r;~~~~ '11.1(3.649 23H.gH4 45·')7.12 ., 30fi1.74 0. 136 1 1 23. 9 5 1161.92 . 11 115. J 3
1'1'15 1187.55 ]2(1. 2 4 1 ~935.98 31372. (, 9 1).1:'!3 116S.:n 12•'):!.61 11.12!:!~86
1 C'J36 1437.35 421.456 7.lOP ."lG 11555.55 0. 1 2~J 1250 • .2'9 1292.95 1J72.'J'J
19 87 16!11.1.2 518.f.l1LI B667.24 51.53.15 J. 126 1363.94 11.109.16 1358. 28
1988 19 35.8 615.127 997t).G9 56 56. B 0.123 111 97. ') 9 1545.92 1312.75
19 '39 21QJ.r? 71) 13. 2 7 8 11:~37.2 6':73.25 ) .1,42 Hi47.·J3 1697.83 1257.22
1qq 0 21.144.52 7fl7.57 122P1.1 6342.26 o .. 122 1n11.37 1fl65.23 1043.87
199 1 26P.H. H7 B71.898 13192.8 6516.(l9 0. 1.? 1 1971.43 202!J.51 911.687
B02 29 lo. 7 s 936.937 1 Ill) 3 2. 3 n6 26. 54 0.12 2138.22 2198.73 839.52
~'1()3 31P.P.27 Cf16.()43 1 117 q 2. 5 GG7J •. B 0. 118 2320.88 2385•01 760.234
194 4 ]I.IJ7. (\ 2 1 c 'i 1 • ,, 2 1')392.11 6634.G6 0. 1 17 2~)31.44 2599 .LU 600. 2 42
1'19') 36110.52 1001.1,68 15COH.8 6505.81 0. 116 2756.47 21l28. ,:)3 416.027
11'l'1(i 3'123.72 1125.02 16073.2 6312.95 0. 114 3012.15 3088. 54 264.1.118
19 97 4168.14 11114.74 161!13.8 6061.87 0. 11 3 3 2 94 .1 8 3375.16 90.633
1 CJ9R 4413.22 1152.31 16054.9 5741:!.53 0. l J 2 3597.7 36P.3.53 -108.(!95
1999 116')1). 57 1145.91 15745.8 .5378.73 0. 11 39 26.52 1.10 17. 51 -309.109
2" .'\(\
• ·.1 ·' 4907.07 1125. 5 1 15199.9 4953.28 0.109 4310.08 4406.52 -545.977
N
1.0 EX niTES VH.BL2 UENSP.,\ T 00
1 977 0.229 O.fi04 0. 0 68
1f.<7P, I). 2 5 0.506 1).057
197Q 0.24 0.4Ei8 ').')1.17
1 QR I) 0 .2.34 0.410 0.043
1 q II, 0.22 O.LU8 0.041
198 2 ~. 2('· 5 0.!~42 ').')43
1 q flj 0.223 0.431 0. () 4q
1 q '! II ,) • 2 ') 1 0.415 0.051.1
19 S5 0.25 0.403 0. 0 51
lOP, f) 0.25 0.3'13 0. 0 51
19 87 r. • 21.19 ().392 0.')'53
198R 0 • 24 7 0. ]G2 o. •)')4
19 8') 0.246 0.3C'J4 0.056
19 9 .~. ~. 2~ 7 () • .]97 ('.059
1 q Q 1 0.24S 0.401.1 0.06
199 2 (').241 0. 4 1 1 0. 062
1q9J 0.237 0. 4 19 0.063
1'1q4 0.23 3 0.4 29 0.065
1995 ':. 229 0.41.1 ::> •. ') 6 7
1 qqn r.223 0.4">3 0.069
1'l<J7 0.22 0.466 0. 071
1990 0. 215 0.478 1.073
1 ~!9 9 ').~12 0.4'13 0.075
2000 0.201:! 0.508 0.078
rJ r~ r---: r-l r-J r=l r-J ~ ~ r-l r~ c-=J lJ .---, ll ~ ·~ :--:-J LJ I
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
r L__,
r
L
L
D
~
E
c
[
L
r:
L
r
L
MEAN NORTHERN GULF DEVELOPMENT SCENARIO
(Levels and Differences from the Moderate Base Case)
299
nrn C-:-J r:-:J IT"'"""J r-J. IIIT'::J r-::1 r::=J ::::rTI ~l r"""l r---"J r--1 rJ r-J r-J r-J r-J L"l
EH U'l El'!CN E ac ~11 F:~lGJ\ PI PI R I?C RPI EX02S
1977 2!:. s 19 16.5S9 11. 189 27.256 4072.30 3924.32 2 52.71 fl10.
. 1 C7R 24.7f>6 11 .q34 11 • 3 07 25.€)41 4..236. 48 J7 23 •. s l 279.7 5 9 4 4.
1'179 2li~405 12.277 11.472 26.373 4743.19 3862.)7 293.358 1019.
198 0 2fl • 56 2 13.526 13.C•01 26. AG 2 539S. 2!) 40 29.4 4 JQn.L! 1120.35
1° P. 1 31 .) OS 1G.!JI)I~ 14.1G1 27.623 (11119.62 43 2.2. 8 3 325.623 1247.59
19 8 2 Jlj.G;"· 3 22 • .3 7 4 lS.fJJ') 2B.837 79 58.32 4 721 .i~ 5 ·345.814 1!135 .16
1 9A 3 1fi.231 22. 0f!3 16.626 31.6111 P,644.CJ4 1!,7 36. 6 6 361.63 1 1703.05
10134 35.424 17.21)3 1G.61~' 32.803 8360.41 4443.3 373.054 1il59.66
19il5 Jn.6 17.871 17. 391 J 1. 62 5 9008. 04 4510.79 380.998 191B.4
1QP 6 )P, .f.l51 1CJ .6(i3 1r! .6{J') 31.'L3 1 0 1 54. 8 1;6136. 78 408.122 2101.17
19 87 41.51)6 21. J S4 1 9. 979 33 • 1 1 6 115.35.2 IH372 ;.56 42Y .085 2370.06
1 9AB 44.047 22.578 21.208 34. 64 2 1297f! .. 7 so25.gs 450.642 2GfJ6.92
1<1 I] q llfi.415 23.525 2/..344 35.964 14452.9 5150.1 4 7 2. 7 27 3') 20. 6 4
19 ') ,.., 4'1.511 24.2 23. JH> 37.11& 15\l1H.8 52 4 9. s 4·95. OS 3J6!f.J5
1<111 11'1.736 2 4 • 1 f! 7 /.3.8<16 3>1. 13 17JB1.8 5281.79 . 516.516 3701.41
19 92 '31.112 24. 5S 211.~()4 J 8.241 1 81121). 4 5346.79 538.943 3985.63
1 9<)1 S3.17CJ 25. G 38 25.433 3fJ.213 20170. q 5460.54 5 63 ~ 4 7 "4293.68
1CJ'14 55.293 26.674 26.463 38.721 22121.4 557!.3.84 .589.385 4667.79
1')9 5 :,7.813 27.8 26 27.697 39.08 2 43 66. 6 5705.99 617.095 5070.97
1 C) Q 6 6 0. 5 fl3 21"1 • .135 2'l.OG2 39.531 2 70 5:). 8 5n.64.31 646.G6.3 5519.27
19 97 63.322 30.56 30. 5 07 40.169 29781~.8 59!37 .96 677.294 6030.9G
1 'H!l 66. 12 4 32.079 32.024 40.645 3288d.1 G131.5 709.319 6558.54
w 1C1<;1"l 69.434 33.S1CJ3 33.f!37 41.087 36514.4 6289.92 . 743 .. 612 7141.71
0 2000 72.7()9 35. 7 21 3 5. 663 41.748 401~96 .4 6448.28 779.458 7810.61 __.
"ZY.C .a.P E99S ECJ rJ SF PC REVGF RP9S · RT98 RENS GFB.H
1977 27:1.326 116·1.82 1118.56 7 96. 27 1 97. 2 01 214.301 27U.522 G 68. 165
. 1'l7fl 2 fl 0. 1311 ~D 1152.4G 105.~. p 471. 4 206.9 16 240 .. 272 617.209
1~!7 (j 2 <)I). 1414.71 111)1.9 111!10.77 B!i ·J. 7 271~ .37 3 . 222.549 814.761
1980 311.3~5 1566.76 1170.1 H24. 51 996. 3 3 12.9 09 230.8.56 1 G54. 02
1'<;l1 372.12~ ·1743.5(} 11711.06 1lJ8!1.55 1278.41 3S5.o09 264.314 1500.87
19 Fl2 444. no'> 20 18. 8 9 1197.69 233 0. 77 1475.74 .·430.457 338.533 2055.49
1 '"P33 . 52].2(,3 2379.64 1303.~2 2655.01 16Ll2. 7 554.402 422.537 2627.34
19 8 4 5511. 76o 2594.65 13H0.53 3230.48 2121.71 654.15 452.302 35 5C. 2 3
198 s 6511.147 2762.4.6 1 38 3. 3 Jr,Jn. 62 2422.22 6B8.497 lj 57 • 9 4 4737 .• 79
1 0 fl Fj 7 R7 .626 3 ()'1n .r' 1 1430.1') 31!32.?. 1 ~ 4 30. r)rJ 751.246 515.097 58 52.3 5
1CJ B 7 1150.323 3454.3 1459.1 4100.44 24 82.07 8 19 .6 68 6')3.624 6947.JJ
19i"lfl 925.1117 JBn. ~9 149'). 93 4377.05 2523. 13 913.5 09 710.544 7971.75
11HJ!) '177.05 4207.93 1528.1 4664.6 2570.9 1006.07 8 24. 565 8933.7 8
F)qf") n 20. 11 4713.48 1554.33 4(!03.72 2467. 11)94.69 944.659 9 6 86. 7 9
1191 1036.81 5(HJ2.2 15711.53 4f!7 s. 19 2414.02 1171.84 1062.99 10293.7
1'l q 2 1045.73 5419.18 1572.99 5202.18 2438.1U 1257.98 1168.59 10843.6
11 q 3 n Bii. 45 579Ci.nn 1569.7.2 5456.'?~. .. 2467.08 1JG4.31 1296.13 113 29 •. 9
1'1')4 113'J.32 6254.34 1577.28 5685.61 2435.11 14P.1.71 1 ~~59. 13 11667.1
199 ') 1178.0fi 6732,74 1S7G.6 591 ~ .. as 2381.26 161q.27 1646.58 11832.6
1996 127.7.64 77.68.04 1:17'i.Ci2 6212.9(.) 2373.,27 1'7 89. 2 6 1fl72~21 111"!51.2
1<197 1299.15 7887.97 1585.79" 65!15. ~')9 2374.39 1990.75 2135 .. 58 11695.3
1 998 1402.94 8560.98 159G.i)7 6911.39 2.371.9 2213. o s· 2424.36 11341.6
19<J9 151<:J.Fl3 92q'3.53 1601.21 7J1(,.4) 2377.55 2478.03 2760.51 10790.
2~0') 165 3. 84 10134.9 16D.77 7772.99 2378.55 2790.07 3161.16 10006.3
P?!3!\L Il INS POND FlJND77 EXBI TH R99L. E99L SI!1P
1977 2.4 35.343 670.6 671.369 0. 13 1 531.912 557.16 -137.452
107P. 4S'>.'l75 . 46 .r:.54 666.124 602.483 0. 13 4 568.508 595.271 -4. 4 1 6
197 q 153.275 46.878 968.037 834.86:2 0.131 622.528 650.896 301.853
1980 275. 68.529 1329.:')2 10 90. 2B 0. 133 718.529 748.6 36o.qrn
1Q81 411.475 91~. 4 07 1912.34 1485~84 0. 126 806.186 838.061 583.318
ns2 56 J. 425 135.921 2G1e.n 1916.02 0.115 912.631 946.418 706.579
1 () !l) 731.6G'1 1%.141 .3359. 04 2350.01 0. 121 iO 45. 10130.82 740.128
1984 948.649 238.792 4119!3. 88' 3051.CB 0. 135 1131.33 1169.3 11 39. 8 4
J9.3S 1187.55 .. 31<J.(ifi5 5CJ?.5 •. i4 r,l8 51. 77 0. 1J 1 1 1 76. 9 8 1217~22 1426.!.17.
1QP.6 1437.35 420.n2 72r>n.7 451B.9!3 0. 12 5 1270.34 .1312.99 1364.36
19 87 16 J II. 2 517.466 8631.'13 5'; 89.3 8 0.122 1403.26 141.18.48 1341.83
1908 1lJ )') .8 61/..(J28 qq07.55 5562.31 0. 1 21 1565.81 1613.?3 1276.02
19 'l 9 ~1CJ3.07. 701.207 1112f>.9 5lJ55.01 0. 12 1729.57 17BO. 37 1219.31
199'1 2111111. ~~2 7H9. 0115 1 :~ 1 .11 • ] 6199.44 0. 11 9 1 q 02 .2 8 1956.1] 1004.46
1 g 'l 1 2f;flfl.P.7 1'61.414 12CJfl2.6 635G.14 0. 122 2077~4 2134.49 851.285
1'H2 ?.93(i.75 q22.226 1]780.1< 6469.01 0.121 2221.62 22a2. 13 797.754
1993 31R8.27 979.308 11-i51fl.2 65 1 a. 1 0. 118 2382.6 5 24'•6. 79 737.8 05
1'194 3417.02 1032.21 15104.1 61183.62 0. 117 2584.8 6 2652. as 585.992
199? 3681.52 11)711.48 1'1513.1 6.3 6().1 5 0.115 2U05.93 2877.99 408.973
1 9 95 39 23.7 2 1104.32 1 577 5 ~ 6171.7q 0. 1 1 3 30 63 •. :.! 3139.59 261.844
1997 4168.1!.1 1123.87 15863.5 5925.71 0.113 3352.5 3433.47 88.488
1998 4413.22 1131.28 15754.8 5619.43 o. 111 3662.82 3748.65 -108.613
1qqq 465q.57 1124.q 154 49 .6 5256.42 0.11 3<199.05 4090.04 -305.27
2000 4907.07 1104.77 14913.3 4840.63 0.108 4389 .3 2 4486 .. 36 '-5 36. 2 38
w
0
N
EX:BI TES VI AI3L2 RENSRAT
19 77 ". 229 t). 604 !).1)68
1 978 0.25 0.506 0. I) 57
19 7<) 0. 211 0. lll'i!.l 0.047
1g'l~ 0.234 •'l. 4 4 3 0.043
1 q !I 1 0.219 0.43R .11.041
Flfl2 o. 2 04 0.443 0.043 .-
1 'Fl3 0.222 0 .II) 1 !) • 0 4q
19 8 4 1). 2 5 0.416 o. 054
19R5 0. 246 !). 40 5 0.1)51
1986 0.243 0 .3(17 0.051
19 87 0.2.39 0.399 0.052
19R!3 0. 239 0.4 0. 0 ~5
lC'J~(j 0. 2 3fl 0.404 0.057
19 q () t'). 2 39 0.407 0.059
1991 0 •. 241 0.412 0.062
1 qq 2 0.23 9 0.418 0.063
1::>9 3 (). 234 0.426 •'). 064
19 CJ!+ 0. 231 0.435 0.066
1995 1).226 0 .1-!46 0. :)68
19% 0.22 0.46 0. 0 c,q
1 Cj <) 7 0.217 0.473 0.072
1998 0.213 0.485 ·~. ') 7 4
1 999 0.209 0.5 0.076
2000 0.20 5 0.516 o. 078
rJ r-: r-: r-J r-:-J [Lj r--l rr-J r:l r-: r:J r--:-J LJ. r--1 '!J r-l ~ :---l rJ
J:. .n'""' ~, I Li';l.>/\ l:'J. l:'J.H ~'t,; Hl'I EXQl?S EXCA P E99S
1 CJ77 o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o.
1<:l 7 R 0. o. o. o. o. o. o. o.
1979 n. o. o. o. o. 0. o. o.
1'18() 1). 0. 0. o. o. o. o. o.
1981 O.OJ -0.(122 1 R. 701 5. 73 8 0.15 4 o. o. o.
1 982 I). 06 7 . 0. 0 26 41. 9 45 10. 34 o. 301 3.~07 1. 051 4.058
19 8.1 o. 1 1 3 0.0131 74.434 16.4111 0.51 6.432 1.79 8. 251
1'}8~ 0.12'l 0. 1lJ Gq.'2S i7.0B6 0.619 1.1 • ') 77 2.94 14.51}6
1 'Hl5 0.25(j 0.074 1 9 f~. 07 fl 47.992 1.205 12. i~ 15 1. 942 14.518
1q86 0. 48 7 fl.238 391.609 88.523 2.207 29.6 31 7.Co1 36.9 24
1 C) 87 0.812 0. 50 6 ()f31.16 140.453 3. 5.5 7 59.112. 12 .. 295 71.814
1'lHF3 0.931 i. R 33. 1 :~o 140.184 4.287 102.7 36 19.8 123.278
1989 1. C·33 1.156. 9:n.sa2 126. 62 5 4.607 125.227 , 6 .4.85 14.~. 988
, 'l q 0 1 • 1 6 3 1 • 1 1 R 10P,3.34 130. 57 5. 174 1 36. 613 4 Hl.41B 15G.812
1'l9 1 0.94 1.388 fl.S:i.lJ1 60. 51)6 . 4.329 159.532 26.7 54 100. 4 8
19CJ2 0.658 0.9136 6 39. 52 1 6~ 777 3.193 121.0 03 11.651 135.57
1qq) 0.55 o ~SnS 557 .B5'1 -1, 09 4 2.654 79. 0 39 9. 505 91~746
19 9 4 0.49C) 0.3H S19.699 -11.168 2 .36 .. 59.)47 12.868 75.355
1 C)95 0.498 0.258 537.473 -13.953 2. 319 46a 707 15.066 65.5 62
19 9 r, o. 547 0.2 02 616.762 -11.02 2.508 43.738 18.854 66.79 3
1997 0. 5f3 9 0.224 690.055 -9. 332 . 2. 676 50.328 23.723 78.777
1flCJf! O.fi2A 0.235 772.414 -7.028 2. 844 56. 109 26.776 88.217
19 99 0.662 0.248 fl !13. 707 -7 ~4 53 2.974 62.324. 29. 40 1 97. a 67
2 010 0 .69 1 0.251 9 J7. 6 33 -7.473 3. 092 67.047 31.836· 1 os. a s2
w
0
E99SRPC RP93 RT.98 PFDlLL ~ REVGF R'ENS GFBH BINS
1977 0. o. 0. o. 0., o. o. o.
19 78 o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o.
19 79 n. f). j'l "'. o. o. o. o. o.
1C.f!l) 1). o. o. o. o. ·o. o. o.
19 B 1 -1.£l84 O.SG9 (l. 0.31)1 0 .. 301 0.562 0'. o.
19132 -1.296 -2.21 o. 1. 2!36 1. 58 7. -0.462 o. 0.039
1 'H13 -2 .214 4.3~7 Q. 2.GH4 3.36 -2.7 4 7 o. -0.032
1 q 13 4 -0.88.3 6. J 59 (). 3.988 5 .2:jfi . -8.2 38 o. -0.192
, 9!15 -B. 704 9.707 o. 6. 27 7. 69 3 -10.633 o. -o. 5 n
1 C} '36 -11.884 21 .~0 0. OS 13.95fj 17.303 -19.258 o. -o. 7 4 4
19 87 ·-1S.571 42.434 1. 9G 26. 91 1 33. 605 -35.707 o. -1.348
1 'l FH! -l'l.SCJI'l 6!~.6')5 2. 4 2 4.2.01f! 53. f!G<) -.72. 4 37 o. -2.5
19 89 -10.864 81.41 7.78 51.1 4 7 65.96 5 -110.352 o. -5. 0 7 1
1<)90 -17.91A 91.1! 3 4 7. B 1 59. 406 76 .. 14 5 .-11+9.766 o. -7.72 5
1 q q 1 -3.345 95.5l5 1.83 63.504. 83.56 -210.164 o. -10.484
1:192 -1~. 8 1 72. 7S8 7.82 50.43 4 66. 63 -251.93 o. -1~.711
1Gq) -1 q. 4 02" 5S .023 7. fl 39,.9G.2 52. 378 -27£1.359 o. -17.635
199 4 -21.61:!2 41).305 7.74 36.395 47.41 -288.6 09 ~ . -1.9.205
1 995 -23.764 ll(i. 6 29 7. 66 3 s. 9 4 6 46.3 9 4' -295.664 o. -20.2 03
1'196 -24. f.J37 51.312 7.54 . 39.'707 50.68
,.
-298.2 38 o. -20.697
1997 -23.906 f.') • 9 3 7.39 46.85 59,.612 -J·~o .383 c. -20.1377
1 9·9S -23.599 70.t10G 7. 1CJ 54. 352 613 .. 841 -~00.104 o. -21.027
1999 -22. gqa 82.21 5 6.95 62.un 79.277. -296. '262 o. -21.007
2('·0'1 -22.894 94.'155 5.67 71.975 . 9J., 4!13 -286~523 o. -20.738
. _,_ . ". -F: ···-·-·· r:--·r:·~-~-r--·--r-1 · r.::1r··---G'""'"Jr -· ·· rtJ .... -r-:;-1 r-"l r~ r'l· .~l -; ,----., :----l c---1 ~ ~-, :---l ~
!~
l '
FUND P!JND77 R99 L ESI9L
1977 () . o. ·). o.
1"171J o. o. o. o. 197<) 1). o. o. o.
19 81) (j • o. 1). f).
19r!1 0 .S62 -0.267 0.026 o. 0 26
1913 2 -0..462 -2 • 0 0 8 1. 923 1 .n3
1 C) 8 1 -2.747 -S.247 4. 2% 4. 20 b
1 1H1 !I -1! .2 38 -10.666 7 • Jii 2 7. Jfl 2 198 '1. -10.633 -18.91 ij • 6 1 11 P,. 61 It
1 9 f36 -1Q.258 -36.57 2;). 0 4 3 20.043 1q~7 -:~~.707 -()3.77 3'1.32 39~.32
1'JR'1 -72.437 -911. 1108 o7, A17 G7.017 w 19!J9 -110.352 -118.242 H2. 5 36 n2.:i36 0
U"1 19 9 :') -14<1.766 -142.E16 ()J,'J05 90.905 1 =} 9 1 -21".164 -157.'155 FlS. 98 105.9~!
1 'f':J2 -251.Q3 -1S7.527 r~J.398 e J. 39 13
1991 -274.35:1 -154.n25 (; 1. 771 61.771 jC)C)4 -2 813 • 6 09 ·-150 .445 SJ. 1~25 53. 112 5 1 (l(') 5 -2 CiS .66 4 -145.664 4') .458 49.458
1:)% -29&. 238 -141.164 51.049 51 • Q4 9
1 9 0.7 -3 00. 3'L3 .-136.156 58. 315 58. 315.
1993 -300.102 -130.098 65 .12 65.12
1399 -296.262 -122.305 72.531 72. 531 20 00 -2P6.523 -112.64H 7Ci.844 79. H 4 4
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[J
Q
E
b
c
L
L
L
r=
l c
L.i
·5% NORTHERN GULF OCS DEVELOPMENT SCENARIO -
MODERATE BASE CASE
(Levels and Differences from the Base Case)
307
u.L"l' u r. 1. .:.1 J. t" \... ~v T ~L'I';J'; .:;;'!.'> Pl:' .t:L"ll1YP !:: !1NSP E !:'!A !I
1971 41().66 -24.9 35 6.3133 185.508 0.363 0.378 0.259 1 • 1
1978 406.667 -11.241 7. 202 178.526 0.373 0.386 0. 2 42· 1. 2
197q 418.656 ~·-268 r,. 697 1fJ5. 2 25 0 • .183 0.374 0.243 1 .2
10 8:) 434.113 P..li5 G.P.7 1.9 4. 05 4 0.395 0. 36 . 0.245 1. 2
1')8 1 4 Sfi. 3 14. q 9 1 7. 1 44. 2 07. C•2 4 0~4:)8 0. j ll 1 0 .2 51 1.3
1982 488.0'36 24.091 7.663 225.n14 C.42J 0.318 0.259 1.3
19 8 3 505.149 8.tl21 A.524 231.927 0.425 0.322 o. 253 1. 4
1984 5~<'l. 26 3 -4.799 8.72 228. 61 8. o. 42 6 0.331 0.244 1.~
1985 52n.7 11 .otn p. 3:J 1 238.432 o. 441 o. 312 o. 247 1. 4
19B5 5'31.177 13.766 8. 722 2 4 9. 85 6 ·J.449 O.jC5 0. 2tt7 1. 5
19 !37 573.34.5' 13.043 9 • 1 4 2 60. 596 0.457 0.298 0.2 46 1 • 5
1C)flP. 5 q5 • q 1 1 13.%3 '1.515 271.304 0.464 o. 29 1 0.246 1. 6
19 ~ 9 6 1 ll. ~58 a. 27 4 9. 8 Hn 278.573 0.467 0.288 0.245 1. 6
1991) 62Q.269 5.1 6 10.055 2f•3.!143 0. 47 0. 28 5 0.246 1.7
19 q 1 645.Ji.l4 6. 007 10.107 290.443 0.477 0.279 0.244 1. 7
1)92 6"ifl.982 3.394 1·:•. 204 295.1136 0.48 0.2 76 0.2 43 1.8
1'""l3 674.401 5.215 10.199 301.610 0. 48 6 0.271 0.243 1. 8
199 4 691.353 6.668 10.282 309.342 0. 4 93 0.2 65 0. 243 1. 8
19<J5 710.099 fl.318 10. 4 28 J1H.397 . o. 5 0.253 0.242 1 • 9
11?'16 7 J 1 0 07 3 10.332 10.643 329.002 0.507 0.251 o. 242 2.
1997 7'52.424 10. 4 1 4 1·1. 94 339.682 0. 513 0.2 45 0.242 2.1
1998 774.426 10.771 11. 2 36 350.Gf!4 0.52 o. 2 38 0.2 42 2.1
19 99 799.184 13.218 11.544 363.564 0.527 0 •. 2 31 0.242 2. 2
2)!)0 824.222 13.0 98 1 1. 948 376.353 o. 53 4 0.225 0.241 2.2
w
0
00 EMGF El'1.P9 EMT9 EMS9 EMPU EliOT EMM9 EMF!
, qn 42.921 4.514 CJ.842 22. G49 1. 1B 4 14. 55 1 1. 3 56 s. 779
1978 42. n1 4 .J 51 10.?.94 21.9 1.194 14.269 1 1. 9 0.6 5. 7 38
197') 42.921 4.563 10.774 23.693 1.249 :14.538 12.411 6.176
1 <HiO 42.CJ21 5.1 04 1 1. 39 3 25.9 45 1. 321 14.886 12.896 6.758
19 8 1 112.921 5.0C}6 , 2. 2 83 29.127 1. 406 15.383 13.37 7.524
1982 4?..921 4. A 42 13. 4 36 33.781 1. 5 13 16.075. l3. 843 . 8.585
1 o rJJ 42.C}21 4.615 1 3. 8 07 34.74 . 1. 55 16.294 14. 32 8. 928
F:l84 42.921 4.833 13. 803 33.824 1 .563 16. 1 76 14.867 8. 9 28
1 ') 85 42.921 4.706 11}.A.51 36.814 1. 646 16. 524 15.364 9. 7 23
19 B 6 42.921 4.632 1S.452 39.738 1. 72 16.9 19 15.877· 10.467
1987 42.921 4.7q8 16.136 42. 57>3 1. 79 17 .2 83 16.488 11.195
1!frJR 42.921 5.441 17.014 4 5. 28 3 1. 8 55 17.6 38 17.0 32 11.8 86
19 89 42.921 6.378 17.126 4 7. \)76 1 .897 17.B75 17.677 12. 3 4 7 .
1 9 C) 0 42.921 7. 153 17. 7 48 48.413 •. 1. 9 3 1 18.0 48 18.255 12.7 08
1qQ1 42 • Q 2 1 6. ?. 04 1!1.224 5Q.53G 1.979 i8. 2 55 Hl.85 13. 2 53
B92 4 2. 9 2 1 6. 6') 1 18.399 51.98 2.012 ·18.404 19.467 13. 6 28
1 ')93 42.921 6.419 1f!.fl36 54. 1 1 2. 059 '1H.606 20.103 14.169
199 4 42.921 6.2 74. 19.368 56.511~ 2. 11 1 18.8 44 20.76 14.7131.t
199 5 42. 9 2 1' 6. 137 1<1.963 59. 3 58 2. 172 19.119 21 .439 15.516
1 '-'1<"16 42.921 6 .• 1 6Q 2fl.625 62.1)18 2.239 j 9. ~ 37 22.141 16.339
1997 42.92 1 6.246 21 .2 89 65. 8D 2. 306 19.7 52 22.866 17. 18 4
1 998 42.921 6.272 21.904 69.294 ·2.374 20. 0 71 23.o15 1 8. 053
19'19 ll2. r; 2 1 6.2 72 22.753 73.357 2.452 20.4 38 24. 389 19.087
210:)1 4 2. 9 21 6.235 23.505 77.362 2.528 20.796 25., 89 20. 104
[':':j . L""'] Cl r---":1 c-:J f--:-J ~ ----: ...----, ~ ::-l ,_..., :--J r--l r--: r--·. r-:J r-1 r=:-J \ J J
r:n or::::J C1 ~J r1 C:-1 c----1 r---"1 ,---.., . .----. :-----1 r-J :---l rrrr:: C":"-:-:: r-: (7'""""j r-J rrr:-J l J \. ) ' J
.EM DC'I · F.KCN r!MC N1 E~IGA PI Pill PC !?I?. I ~XQ~S
1977 24. B 19 16.559 11. 189 27.256 40 72.3 3 3924.32 252.71 810.
1 '17 r. ?4.76!i 1 1 • 4 311 1 1 • 3 07 25.941 • 4 2 36. 4U 3723.tl1 27'L 7S !) 4 4 •
19 79 21) • II') 5 12.277 11.972 26.3 73 4 7 43 .19 J!J62 .-)7 293.358 1 0 19.
1 Cll'l(} 2fl .562 13.526 13.001 2!i.~-62 5395.29 4029.~4 30r{.4 1120.35
1 q f.l1 .11.335 16.fl17 14. 1 74 27.614 6427.87 4325.38 325.69 1247.59
1 °fl2 35 .Oll2 22. ~ 1 15.871 28.843 79R1. 73 4727.20 345.982 1436.~7
1 <; A1 36 .3 OCJ 22 • ~ 21 16.664 31.732 8669.31 q741.62 361.002 1706.64
198 4 3().4(•8 18. ~~ 5 17.1):)1 3 2. 64 8 8663.22 4540.o4 374.626 1U63 .• 4
1fll35 )q .228 20 • R 2 8 18.501 3,. 57 7 YI1G1.73 47 41-. i! 4 3')3.406 1'J35.94
1986 41.B2fl 2?.. 722 2 O. Ot13 3~.171 i 11 <'Jit. q 4912 • .34 413.4"76 2200.7 9
1<:187 .. 44.1'>7 23.952 21. 27 34.65 1 2 56'). 9 504 8. 93 434.237 2495.24
1C'll"P 4(1. 73 24.CJ46 22.1~55 35.9 55 14045 .. 6 5172.48 .455.6(1') 2BC6.05
19 89 . 48.303 24.85 2 :~. 2 98 37.291 15253 .. 8 5212.07 476.609 3138 .. 17
199 ., 4CJ • 54.6 24.S73 23.927 37.931 163flu.a 5233,65 497.573 3435.34
1 <191 51 • 3G3 25.355 24.703 38.126 17852.1 53 21. 2 519.836 3715.72
199 2 5?..662 25.571 2'i.3% 38.682 1 ')1f33. 9 5367.8 542.336 4039.74
1 CJ93 5L1,4B 26 •. 154 2fi. 111<l 313.691 20n1m.4 5457. JS 56G.469 4344.19
1 <) 9 4 5G. 5.1A 27.3(>1 27.155 38.94 22U05.7 5569.65 592. 269 4698.9 3
19 C) 5 58.972 2H.4B2 2fl.J53 39.26 250Jtl. 5089.11 61').785 5095.91
1 'lQ 6 (: 1 .6'1 211 .C) 6f! 2'1.69.5 39. G 4 1 277 30. 1 5(342.51 649.227· 5533.99
1997 61~. 469 31.22 31.166 40.213 305213.9 5967.14 679.960 6037.40.
. 1998 67.304 32.748 32. 693 40.687 33700.5 6111.18 . 712.093 6564.05
1'lfl9 70.652 34.5!19 34.533 41.123 37403.3 6269.73 746.482 71 45.3 4
2~0') :73.924 36.425 3£i.367 41.784 41437.7 64 26 .3 9 . 782.332 "7811.52
w
0
\.0 E XC liP E9~1S E'J q S Hf'C RSVGF RP9S RT98 RENS GFDAL
19 77 270.326 11(;0.82 111A.56 7 96. 2 7 197.201 214.301 278.522 668.165
1<?7P. 2fll), 1311.13 1152.4q 1053.~~ 471;4 206.916 240.272 617.209
iCJ79 20". 1414.71 1151.9 144;).77 8fl 0. 7 274.373 2:L2.549 814.761
1980 331.395 15(,6.76 1170. 1 1624.51 9<JG.J 312.90'1 2JO.B56 1054.02
111fl1 37/..128 , 7113.5 9 1173.25 1988.8 127H.41 355.741 264.·446 1:;01.11
B82 445. 14B 2D28. 66 11%. 7. 2.131.89 1475.74 439.107 . 339.315 2055.45
19 fl3 524.3:!2 23P.4.2G 1304.06 2656.96 16 42. 7 555.607 424.119 2625.5
19 Fl 4 565.1~99 2599.16 136;!.31i 3239.97 2121 •. 71 660.2 458.752 3554.0 8
1<:185 671.504 2795.1 ~2 1343.g9 %78. 83 21! 22.22 714.249. 48fl.67G 4756.97
1 c, iJ 6 rQ'1.74Q 3?41.05 14n.1s 3Cl 12. 1 2Li.J1.4J 801.702 579.963 5(33<3.63
1~fl7 879.1fl2 3f,1f).r: 1 1449.'19 41 89.35 248Q.G2 879.1)33 680.967 6095.05
1nr~ q~p .. 996 401P. .55 147fi.R6 41167.46 2521.!14 <J75.25 790.535 7Bs9:cn
1'189 1004.7 4436.2 1'31.5.79 4745.!35 251)4.66 1')65.59 903.489 8!.>11.47
19.9 0 1041.21 480 1. 35 1;; 33~ 4:, 4875. 16 2 4 77¥ 1137.63 1002.5 9562.;:!7
111111 1050.16 512 II, 03 1527.31 5034.73' 24 24. 1 1206.43 1106.64 10203.2
19 ~ 2 1'' ~~ 4. 28 5511i.36 1 ~ I!J • '3 1 5285.35 2411A. 33 . 1307.05 1232.43 10761.1
1993 111f>.77 5RSJ.12 15JCi.fl7 5 'i .? 'l. C) z .. 2.477.26 1412.59 135'1.28 112()2.
1 q C) 4 11fifl.01 6:1?. 0. (,I~ 1543.62 57(>C>.8B 24 45.3 1527.25 1518.12 116 27. C;1
1 ':l9 5 1211.f'ifi. 6797.75 1544.56 5995.05 2391.44 1661.)3 17 07 .2 3 1 Hl27 .9
1 f1 q 6 1260.Q<) 7324.32 , 5 ~~ 3. 1 6 6300.99 231~.3.~9 1837.24 1tJ33.CJ6 11092.4
1997 13 34.29 793!3.78 , ')')1. 68 6651 • 23 84 .42 2·.)42.16 220 1. 14 .11795.1
1 q 9fl 14J0.96· 8 (j(\ 4. (>6 .1560. 33 7021.,5 23!32 .. 58 2271.32 2498.37 11518.3
1r;qq 15·4G.R4 CJ340.12 1565.62 7441.45 2387.3 2543.96 2043.U9 11058.
?.:J00 16Rfi.~3 1:')179.8 1578.71 7915.35 23C8~07 2i.l64.35 32 54 • 85 10382.9
P F Brl T. R !NS PliND FUiiD77 EXDI ':E.L I\9 91 I::99L S Il'!P
1n1 2.4 35.343 (,70. (j 671.)69 0.131 531.912. 5 57.1 6 ~137.452
1G7P, ur.<J75 U(,.<i'jl.l c-.u;. 1 B11 1)02.483 0.134 s 68.5 0 8 595~271 -4.416
1919 1<i.1. 275 4t;.H78 9f>fl.')J7 G34.H62 •). 13 1 6 22 .S28 650.896 301.fl53
1~R0 27S. 6().529 1 3 2q. 0 2 1!)(j0. 2P. c. 13 3 718.529 74f3.6 360.'JH7
1 '1 8 1 411.475 94.4 0 7 1912.')9 gas. 72 0. 12 5 806.197 838.072 533.563
1932 %3.4.25 13S. <J 38 2f.i1fl.H7 191S.05 0.114 913.1.183 947.271 706.283
10P.3 731 .6Q'} 1 r. 6 • 1 3fl 3357.2 2347.61 o. 121 1047.32 10B3.14 738.329
19 [! 4 94'1.649 23f!. li 62 1~502. 7 3 3040.B7 0.131 1134.)3 1 17 2. 1 1 45. s 4
1CJA5 1 1 87.55 319.934 5944.52 Jfl22.92 0. 122 1207.57 1247.rl1 1441.79
1 (. ~ (i 14 17 .J 5 422.'}511 7276.04 41152.1 0. 12 1 1356.12 ·1398.78 1331.52
1987 1684.2 51(;. 5"l9 13~79.25 49<.)8.~4 0.12 1 5 07 • 4 1 1552.62 1303. 2 2
19flH 1q:1s.s 60H.969 '11125.67 51+!;5. 24 0. 1 1 q 1(,68.<J5 1716.fll3 12 46.42
19 ~~9 21'1~.07 697.4 76 1 1 0 011 • 5 5841.58 0. 12 183'J.65 1885.45 1176.88
1:)'}1'\ /. 4 U4. 52 701.283 12006. R · G 10 ">. 0 7 o. 121 1 980.i32 2 03 4 .6 7 1002.25
1 Q ') 1 26 fJP. A7 H52.6flfJ 12P<J2. 1 6274. 4A 0. 11 q 2123.21 2180.29 Bf35.312
1qq 2 29 36. 75 91').fl92 1J(,C)7.9 63 90.05 0 .12 2296 .. 01 2356.52 8 cs. 7 66
1 993 31P.f1.27 <173.'134 14450 • .1 6453.87 0. 1 18 2456 • .:t2 2520.56 752.426
1 r,q 4 3Li ~n. 02 1027.46 1')01)4.9 64 35. 2.9 0. 1 16 26 50.0 4 2718. 0 3 614.633
199 5 J(i8~·.52 F71.73 1 55') 8. 5 6331).64 0.1 1 5 2U71.21 2943.28 443.523
1q96 3!123.72 1 1 OJ • f\9 1 51' 16 ~ 1 6163.45 0. 1 1 3 3127.0 4 : 320 3. 4 3 307. 6 6
1997 4168.14 1126.75 15%3.2 593 9.55 J. 1 1 2 3416.65 3497.63 147.137
1 99R 411 13.22 1138. 2 7 15931.5 56 60. 32 0. 111 37 32.8 6 3818.7 -31 .. 734
1Q99 4659.57 1137.27 15717.5 53 27. OJ 0.109 4075. 1 4166.08 -213.973
210~ 4907.07 1123.53 15290. 4944.66 O.iOU 44 72.7 9 4569.23 .-4 27.5 35
w __,
0
EX EITP.S VIABL2 R~~SRI\T
1 977 0. 229 0.604 0. 0 6!1
1f)7P, 1).25 0.506 0.057
1979 r~. 24 '1. 4 68 . 0.')47
1980 0.234 0.443 0.043
1'181 0.219 0.43 8 I). 041
1932 c. 20 4 . r.. 4 43 J. () 43 .·
1 'J B3 0.221 0 .l+ 3 2 O.OWl
1 'lfl4 0.242 0 .I+ 2 0.053
1985 0.227 0.419 o. 0 s
1firl6 0.231 0. 4 1 0.052
1987 " .23 () • 1+ 1 3 0.')51.1
1<1!)1] ('). 229 0.4iS 0.056
1 11 8Q 1).~.14 0.416 0. 059
19 9" 0. 2J6 0. 417 J. 061
1C)fl1 0.232 0.424 0.062
1'?.9 2 0. 2 ]I~ 0. 4 ~9 ().1)64
1:!93 0.2:1 0 .I!,. 36 0.065
1 '1CJ4 0.27.(, 0.445 0. 067
1q9 5 0.222 0.456 '). <) GB
1 9 ':)(\ 0. 216 0.469 o. :)7
,.~,n 0.213 0.4P.3 ;'). 072
1998 (' • 20 9 0.496 <'). 074
1 999 0.205 0.512 0.076
2000 0.201 0.528 0.079
ri1T1 c:--:: r~ rr--: r-1 rn:-:J· r-;::n c:r::::l C::1 r:-:l c~ C'"""'"1 r:---J r-J :----1 r--). c--J c-J r---1 . ·"' ... ' '
PO? !1IGNET NI~~C TOT Er-!99 ~MA9 ":i'lGF EMPY Ei'lT9
1977 0. () . 0. o. o. 0. 0. o.
1q7tl o. o. 0. o. o. o. o. o.
1 '17 9 1'1 '1. .. o. J • o. 0. o. 'J • '.,).
1930 ,. 0. 0. 0~ .) . o. 0. 0. \ .• .
1Q81 0.737 0.738 o. 0.545 o. o. 0.166. o. 11
1982 1.677 1).911 0.03 1.177 0. o. 0.266 0.204
19 CJ 3 2.547 0 .ll 07 0.055 1. 6q9 o. o. 0. 34 o. 27 1
19 84 7.78.1 5.143 0.094 5.45 8 ·J. 0. 0.418 0.566
, 9 P,~ 19.643 11.568 o. 299 13.51)1 0. o. 0.391 1 .3
1<'1 ~ r, 21'1. 09 4' 7. 72 0. 7 51 17.951 o. o. 0 • .12 1. 432
1:.187 34. 3Hi' 5. 215 1 • !)2 2').46L~ 0. 0. 0.399 1. 5 79
1 9fHI -38' .969 3.478 1. 1 83 21.754 0. o. 0.798 1.876
1'~B q JB.706 -1 • 52 8 1 .2 72 19.539 0. o. 1. 539 1. 5 ')
1991 ":17. 68 9 -2.176 1. 1 56 17.311 o. o. 2 .3 1. 54 1
1991 3P.G13 -0.105 1. 0 25 16. q 4 1 o~ o. 2.1.j 6 1 1. 5 41
199?. 'Hi.29fi -3.3 c). 9R4 14.284 o. o. 2.279 1. 2 33
19 93 34.066 -3.049 0. B 13 12.063 o. o. 2.248 1. 0 92
1C.f14 J.L 055 -1.f'iP,1 0.666 11.013 o. 0. 2. 15 4 1. 0 66
199 5 3?.. 4 5 -1. 19 o. 582 10.3B1 o. 0. 2.014 1.035
1996 32 .60 6 -0.369 0. 5 23 10 • .3137 0. 0. 2.044 1. OJ 6
1q97 33.297 0.1 87 0.5 03 10.!302 0. o. 2c 14 4 1. 0 54
1998 33.971 0.167 0.507 11.188 0. o. 2.194 1. 071
1t;l'lq 34.Sq1 0.1 07 0.513 11. S1q o. o. 2.194 1.085
2r.oo 34.935 -0.176 0.519 11.631 '). o. 2. 156 1. 07 6
w __, __.
E!~Sq Er1PU EMOT Et!N9 EMFI Et1 D') E~ICM E!1 CN
1977 c. ·o. o. (). o. 0. o. 0.
1 978 0 • o. o. o. o. o. o. o.
1~79 (\ 0. o. o. o. o. o. o. " .
i<J8') (' 0. 0. o. o. o. o. o.
1'l~1. 0.1 05 0.003 0.021 o. 0.027 0. 1 o. 002 0.043
19?.?. 0.23R 0.007 . (\ • ') 1+2 o. 0. 05 2 (1.22 O.Q')J 0. , 0 3
1 q8.1 C.345 0.009 0. 061 o. 0.089 0.316 0 ~ 005 o. 1 52
1 c; r~ 4 1.:154 0.03 7 o. 1 97 o. 0.35 1. 2 49 0.021 1. 2 81
19 8 s :1.'1]8 0.(\'15 0. 118 o. 0.915 J .2 39 0. 052 J. 4 67
19 G5 4.544 0. 1 1 P. 0. 6 26 o. 1. 17 2 4. 116 0.066 4.078
19 H7 5.167 0.13 0.7 0. 085 1.33 4. & 34 0.075 4. 3 24
1988 5.415 0.1.'33 0. 7 29 O.OBS 1. 392 4. 811 0. 078 4.126
1<"lRG ·4 .fi53 0. 111 0.644 0~ 17 1. 1 q4 4. 1 03 0. 0 66. 2. 9 85
1990 3.9fl2 0.094 (',. 564 (). 1 7 1 .022 3.49 3 0 .o 55 2. 158
1')q1 3. 9 C) 3 0.092 0. 'i4') .o .•. 17 1.024 3.48 0.055 2.196
1'=1(}2 '3.7.7q 0. 0 74 0.4 54 .0.17 0.84 2.fJ£+2 0~045 1. 6 4
19 q 3 2. 7'56 0.·')61 0.379 (). 17 0.705 2.373 O.o037 1.266
1 q 94 2.56.1 0.05G 0.3111' 0. 17 0.655 2. 191 0.034 1 • 1 8 6
199 r.; 7.457 0.05? 0.~1[) 0.17 0.627 2.085 0. 0 33 1. 1 53
i~ C)6 2. SC II O.t;52 0. J 11 o. 17 0. 6J 8 2.1 07 0.033 1. 1 8
1 q <J7 2.637 0. 0 53 0.31(? o. 17 0. 67 1 2. 2 03 0.034 1.249
1098 2.768 O.O'i5 I). 32 4 0. 1 7 c. 704 2.295 0 .o 35 1. 297
1 gq9 2.8 9 4 0. J 56 0. 328 0. 17 0. 7 35 2. 379 0. OJ 7 1.3 58
20 oo· 2. ~ fJ2 0.056 0.325 0.17 0.751 2. 416 .. 0. 0 37 1. 394
... -·\l."" '\ L-.L S:.II.VJ:"Ol .t:...\1..1\ t' .• j!'j "'~
19 77 o. o. o. f). ., .. . t::. 0. o.
1973 o. o. I) •. o. o. o. 0-o.
19 7<1 . 0. o . o. o. o. o. . 0. o .
1'1~0 o. o. 1). o. o. o. o. 0.
1 SA 1 c.r1u3 -n.o 11 27.03'5 8.2 i35 0.221 . 0. o. o •
1q32 0.10 3 0-0 32 65.355 16.17:4 0. 4 69 4. 319 1.514 5.032
19 A 3 J.152 0. 112 <JB.R05 21.402· 0. 681 10. 0 13 2.048 . 12. 9 0 4
1'H3!: o. 5lfi -~.rqs J87. 0'62 1Qq.617 2. 192 15.J15 3 .673' 19.109
1CJP~ 1.3GG 0.0.26 1051.77 27fl.G41 5. (i 13 2CJ.IJ !)2 17.2CJ'J !17.474
19 A 6 1 • .g 7 1 .lt 7U 11~;31 .. 69 314.0(36 7. 56 1. 129.252 49-20 3 179. 162
'1 qf!7 2. 1!:12 2, 0 I~ 1715.93 J1G.i32 9.709 104 .. 287 41 • 1 55 227.529
1Clf\P, 2 .231) '2.313 1!)00.05 2f.l6.711 9.334 . 221.857 43.378 2GC!. 437
B09 1. 9R7 2. 40 4 1 7?.2. 48 187.996 8.489 242.7 59 44.136 291.258
1()9!) 1.714 1.933 15~1 • .14 114.715 7. 666 207.60 31.46.2 244.6P.4
19 9 1 1.747 1 .3 !3S 1625.74 99.97 3 7 .. 6Ll9 173 .. a4s 40. 104 ~20. 309
B92 1. 5') 1 1.427 14·')2.()8 37 .. 789 6.586 1 75 .1 07 50.201 232.75
1Cl'l.3 1. 26 6 0.'1?6 123S.4 -4.205 5. 654 129.551 39.833 17H.207
1Q') 4 . 1. 1 0 6 ().59<) 12 Qi+. -20.359. 5.243 90.1!17 4,. 55 2 141.652
1 CJ 95 1 .• 15 3 0. 4 38 1208.86 -30. 83 6. S.OO'J 71.645 1n .86'J 130.574
1C1Q6 1 • 11) 0 .312 1/.')6.1 -32.H24 5.072 sa·. 4 o1 52. 206 123. 0 7
1997 1. 24 9 0.2(-.7 1434.16 -30.156 5 ."349 56 .s 48 58 .. 862 129 • .586
1 99R 1. 29 7 0. 2 76 1584.79 . -21:!. 242 s. 618 61.625 54.796 131.965
1<199 1.353 0.284 1742.6 -27.641 5~844 65.9 57 59.411 142.453
201')[' 1. 39 4 0.238 1879.1')1 -29 .. 359 5.966 67.961 64.022 150.73
w
-' . N .
E99SRPC REVGF [lP9S RT98' RENS GFDAL PFBAL .RI NS
1977 o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o.
1'17 P. o. o. 1). o. o • o. o. o.
1979 "· '). . 0. "· J .. o. 0 •. o.
1980 o·. 0 •. o. o. o. o. o. 0~
19 B 1 -2.698 0 .01 8 o. 0.433 0.433 0. B 08 0 •• o.
19R 2 -2.28'> 3.33 o. 1.1JJ6 2.3 G9 -0.51 o. 0.057
1CJH3 -:-1.G73 6.331 o. ~.~Hfl· 4. ~ 42 -4.5% o. -0.036
1<) A 4 -1!).055. 1 ~.fl~6 o. 10.038 11.657 -4.3$7 :l • -0.322
1 'Hl.C) -411.016 4Q. 9 17 o. '32. 021 JH. 42 U 8~5 43 o. -:-0~307
1'.J Rfi -19.914 10').77 0.5 6 !1.414 82.169 -32.926 o. 0.598
1987 -21~. ()?lJ 131.348 0.51 86.275 11Q.91..l8 -87.9 0.4 o. -2.305
1()P,A -2r. .(,74 15s.oor 1 • 13 103.659 133-R61 - 1 54. 316 o. -6.159
19139 -2). 17 1f\2.fi% 1~54 110.759 1114 • 89. -232.66 0. -1C.802
, 99 0 -3!1.793' 162.f171 17. !31 10 2. 3 4 133.9B4 -274.235 o. -16.2Sl6
1()'11 -51'.563 15~l.0fl2 17.lJ1. 98.094 1 27.212 -300.656 o. -19.2
B92 -4'~.284 155. 9 3 17. 9 7 99~5 130 .. 467 -3 34.41 o. -21.0 46
1q9J -!~!) .654 137.996 17. qp f~f).27~ 115 .. 53 -342~219. 0~ . -23.409
1 q ') I~ -5'.i.335 12f1.')7U 17.93 fl1 .!)12 1 06. 4 -J27.d2S · o. -23.955
1=39 5 ... 55. uca 1Jf) • B ') 1 17.fl4 82.81 107.045 ·.:.JOO.J32 0~ .. 22.948
1Gfl6 -57.402 13C'I.3/. 17 .66 [17.691 112 0 429 '-257.09 o .. -21.023
1997 -50.()1 15f..~36 17.42 98.264 125.174 -200 .• 586 o. -17.996
1 CJ9A -~9 .338 10 L 02 17.87 112.629 142 ,, 851 -123.426 o. -14.041
1GG9 -5H.SP.6 207.23/J 16.7 1 28.7 4 162 .. 651 -28~ 289 o. -8~ 6 4
2o:n -57.947 236.93 1 6. 1 9 146.262 1 84 0 17 6 90.."152 o. -1.98
...---1 ::-~ IT"-:-1 'r----"1 . ,.--.----;, .-----, ,.....___... ~ :----1 r:-1 ,..--r-. r-:J r! ~ r-ID tTl ("""':"l ,, " ~·
FUND FUND77
1977 o. 0.
1 G?lJ 1). 0.
1979 o. 0.
19 An '}. 1'. ..
1 0 n 1 o .8r1B -0.3B2
19B 2 -0.51 -2. 1)71
19 [l 3 -4.596 -7. fi I~ 9
1C)q4 -4 .J ~ 7 -20.P7S
1CJ81) A.'i43 -4.CJ. 761
1 986 -32.926 -1()J.I.j')J
1 q '!7 -P7 • f1~~ 4 -154.(,i)G
11) RR -1':i ~~ • 3 1 6 -20 1. ')55 w 1 C) fl. 9 -232.66 -231.()76 __.
w 1 q q () -274.2A5 -7.37.1fl4
B'J 1 -3C·" .1:56 -242.215
1<; q2 -3.14.111 -236.4::!
1 I) 9 3 -342.219 -219.453
1 994 -327 .fl28 -19fl.77
1f'l<:l') -300.312 -175.172
1 9 'Jfi -257.09 -149 • .')(14
1 Y;7 -200 .5e6 -122.32
1998 -123.426 -89.215
1399 -28. 289 -51.695
2000 q0.152 -e .617
[(9 cr::.
o.
o.
" l•.
."\
0. :) ]i!
2. 77S
G.S27
1 0 • l)q 2'
]9.206
10'). 83
143.465'
170.959
1137.615
1(d.44f3
1'-,1.78:)
15'1.'Jf1
1J5.S45
118.60.3
114.742
114.!:J87
.122.473
135.163
11tB. 573
162.711
E99 L
o.
o.
0 ..
') .
o. o Jn
2. 77 5
6.S27
10.01!2
39.2')6
105.8.]
1iL3. <:6 5.
17fl.9'i9
187.615
169.1+48
1 51. '18 5
157.7'.1
135.545
11 ~3. 6 0 3
114.742
1'14.887
122.473
135.163
148.573
162.711
r---; ' )
::---J
[
[
[
[
[
[
L
I
'---'
r
L
[
fJ
8
c
c
[
L
f:
L
r:
L
95% NORTHERN GULF OCS DEVELOPMENT SCENARIO -
MODERATE BASE CASE
·(Levels and Differences from the Base Case)
315
1G77
1') 7 s
1979
1fli'JI)
19 A 1
1':• P.2
19 ~ 1
19'l~
1'.l :l')
19 8 6
1 q 'l7
19RR
19 09
1 'J 'l ·)
1'J"J1
1992
1<"lG3
199 4
199'1
1 C) g 6
19')7
1'19~
1999
2 00')
1G77
1978
1 979
1GP()
ns 1
19:·12
19 8 3
19!14
1<1P.5
1986
1987
1<1P8
19~9
1 q r; 0
B91
1"192
1') 9 3
199 4
1005
199 6
1997
1'<'lfl
B9C!
2 000
410.65
4:)1;.6(,7
411Lli56
434.173
I; Sti. 21~ 8
4 !p .41+ 3
"i·)l,91'i
~02.222
')l)fl • :,rq
5:n. 51
53CJ .406
5'17.28')
575.669
5q1.P75
li07.046
622.94~
641).')79
nsn. 517
677. f~55
69!1.668
719.316
71~0.6313
764.75!3
789.45
Ei'!G F
42.021
42.CJ21
42.CJ21
42.921
42.921
42.921
42. 92 1
42.921
42. qz 1
42.921
42.921
42.921
4;?. .921
42.<:<2 1
42. 9 21
42.921
42.<J21
42.921
42.r;21
42.921
42.921
42. q 2.1
4 2. 9 2 1
42.921
-24.qJ5
-11.241
5.268
H.() S
14.'.119
23 • s 52
,'"\ ') ') "" Q. ',, lo.)
-10.:n3
-0.7'iG
5.927
7.771
q • .'l 1113
9.775
7 .312
6.,')91
G.6B1
8.?.47
8.326
<;.4<16
10.697
10. 2 16
10.5CJP.
13.093
13.273
EIH>9
4.514
4.351
4.563
5.1 04
5.0 79
4.725
4.3 89
4.1n6
4.315
4.312
4.399
4 • 6113
4. R 39
4. 853
4. 343
4.322
4. 1 71
4. 12
4 .123
4.125
4.1()2
4.078
4. '} 7 8
4.07CJ
6.3'"!3
7.2')2
(i.6CJ7
6.d7
7. 144
7.liG1
B.'i01
8. 666
8 • 1 02
7. ') i32
p. 126
8.336
8.616
1L9
9.')02
9.22
Ci. 3 fl5
9.61'1
9 • fl4 4
10.11C)
10. 4 37
1 c. 7 2~.!
11 • 0 3
11. 4 28
EMT9
Q.IJ42
10.294
10. 774
11 • 3 9]
12.281
13 • .352
13.634
13. 271
13.56
14.024
14. 50
1'1.1Ll1
15. 7 37
16.2 09
16.685
P. Hill
17.7q4
18. 3:>2
1 fl • Q 211
19.59
20.23li
2 O.H94
21.66CJ
22. 42Cl
r---1
... " ,f/
1P 5. 501'3
178.526
185.225
1".14.054
20li.'l85
225. 3P.
:.!3·1.934
223.513
225.109
232.0:)1
240. 1(16
249.598
259.072
266.663
273.52 9
280.927
289.6
298.341
3 Ofl. 0 27
318.63
328.892
339.507
3 52. •')52
364.731
EMS9
22.649
21.9
23.693
25.945
29.119
33.692
34.5 3 7
32. 53 8
33.31
. 35.212
37.419
39 .H78 .
42.432
44.439.-
1~6. 55
4B. 7 07
51.359
53.955
56. q 04
6').119
63. 2 46
(16 .53
70.466
74.403
0.363
Q .3 73
;).383
0. 39 5
0.408
0.423
;).424
0.42
0.427
J.434
o. 442
0.449
0.457
0. 46 2
:) .46 9
0.475
0. 483
0.489
0. 49 6
0.503
o. 51
0.516
0.524 o. 531
EMPU
1.1fl4
1 • 194
1. 249
1. 321
1.406
1. 51 1
1.545
1. 52 8
1. 552
1 .602
1. ·66
1. 722
1. 786
1.837
1. 887
1. 9 31!
1.998
2. 056
2. 12
2 .187
2. 253
2.319
2.397
2. 47 2
0.378
0.386
o. 37 4
0.36
O.J 41
0 • .318
0.323
o. 3 39
0. 3 31
0.322
0. J 15
o. 3 07
O.J
o. 296
0. 291
0.285
0.278
0.2 72
o. 2 65
0.2 58
0.2 52
0.245
0.2 36
0.231'
E:10T
14. 55
14.269
•• 14.538
14.886
15.3 82
16. 0 6
16.259
15.992
16.0 5
16.297
16.5H5
16.911
'17 • 2 32
17.485
17.711
17. q 51
. 18.228
18.5 03
18.803
19.126
19 .I~ 3 4
19.7 4 7
20 .11
20.471
0. 259
0.242
0.243
0.24J
0.251
0. 259
0.25.)
0. 2.41
0.242
0.244
0. 2 41~
0 ~ 244
0.243
0.242
~. 2~
0.2 4
o. 239
0.239
0.238
0. 239
0.238
0. 238
0. 238
0.238
EM~9
11.356
11.9G6
12.411
12.896
13.37
13. fl43
14. 32
14.867
15.364
15.877
16.4 03
16.947
17.507
18.085
18.68
1CJ.297
19.9 33
2 0.59
21.269
21.971
22.6%
23.445
24.219
25.019
1. 1
1. 2
1.2
1. 2
1.3
1. 3
1. 4
1 • ·'~
1. 4
1.5
1 • 5
1. 6
1. 6
1. 7
1. 7
l .B
1. 8
1.8
1 • 9
2.
2. 1
2· 1
2.2
2.2
EMF!
5. 7 79
5. 7 38
6.1 76
6. 758
7.5 22
8.5 62
8.876
8.596
8. g 17
9.3
9.869•
10.496
11.155
11.688
12.231
12.789
13. 4 6 5
14. 1 3
14.889
15.7 0 2
1 6. 514
17.351
18.352
1<";.353
r--; ITJ"'j r:J !1CJ t:T:l r-:1 r"J C'~ . r:---l (J r-l ,----, ::---l ::--J r-l nrn c~ ,.---c-1 J
" ·'
E:-!Dq 'P.MCN .:::-;eN 1 EMGA P! PIRPC nn EXOPS
1CJ11 24.1"!1'l 16.55'1 11.·1~(\ 27. 2 56 z: I) 72. 313 39 2~ .• 3 2 252.71 1:>10.
1978 2 1~. 76 6 11.4 H 11.)1)7 25.941 '4236.40 3723.81 279.75 9 44.
1 97 "l 2n. 40 5 12.277 11.')7'). 26.373 4743.19 3rl62.07 293.35fJ 1 01 G.
1"'P!) ?.'l.562 13.S26 13.001 26.862 53<J5.29 4029.44 30 <l. 4 1120.]5
FJ n 1 11. 3 2d 16.014 14.171 27.li16 6425.92 4324.77 325.67~ 1247.59
19n2 35. 22. J "! 4 15.P.15 2fj • P. 6 1 7q57. 32 ~7 20. 9 2 345.800 143o.17
1s~n .lfi.123 22.034 1G.577 31.711 f!61L12 4 7 28. 18 361.406 1702.93
19R4 35.222 17.157 15. 518 3 2. 7 6 3 8296.34 41133 .I+ 9 372.599 1fi5~.33
1 'HI 5 3 6. 021 17 .3 7 4 17,141) 31.627 flfi20.69 4462.45 387.8t.!9 1911.75
1q A 6 37.7 3 1Fl.645 13.214 31 • 73 7 9769.54 4596.78 I~ I) 5. 9 7 6 2!)75. 46
1 9 07 l"l. 7 3 5 19. 6 2R 19.1()8 3 2. 63 8 1 013 5H. 7 4730.33 425.576 231.;3.94
1'411 fJ 41.9213 20.1321 20.?./.B 33.664 12141).5 4883.9 446. 397 2586.74
1 Cj •39 44.213 21.U65 ?.1.311 34. 0 2 4 1 3 53 4. 9 5022.23 468.159 · 2H'J7 .66
1~11)1) 4G.059 22.41!1 22.213 36. 0 11 1 4fl 38. 8 5117.13 413G.C)44 J229.uP.
l'l ') 1 47.919 ?.3.159 22.956 36.752 1G22'J .. 6 5219.52 512.224 3 5 II 3. 6 7
19 92 4CJ.A2:~ 23.932 23.1306 37.253 1 7 7 84. 4. 5328.41 535.708 3866.23
1 q !)l 52.112 25.0PCl 21+ .;lP.ll 37.722 1%16.2 5460.07 560.853 4216. 1
1C)94 'Jil. 3') 26. 17 5 25.969 38.346 2 1 6 04. 1 5588.47 587.059 4610.
1 qqs Sfi.RCJ 27. 329 27. '2 313. H24 2JS31.7 5711}.5 614.1'!11 5025.2 5
1'l"ll) ':ifJ.507 2U.7B9 28.5Hi 39.33 26437.4 5874.02 644.193 5476.39
19 <n fi2.2fi9 29. 9 7 2 29.918 39.947 29098. 5 C) 96 • 0 6 671~ .G56. 5981.48
1 'l (j fl 65.013 31 .~53 31.3Clfi 40. 4, 1 32119.4 6138.27 . 706.516 6503.2 LJ
1999 6 8. 27 5 33.232 J j. 1 76 4().839 35663.8 6296.25 . 740.677 7080.22
2 000 71.511 w 35.032 34.974 41. 49 5 39562.7 6454.7 2 776.409 .7744.24
-'
"""-!
~XCl\P 1':995 EQ9snrc R EVGF' P.P 9S RT98 REllS GF13AL
11) 7"7 270.32G 11GO.IJ2 1111!.5G 7 q li. 27 1f17.201 214.301 27Fl. 522 668.165
19 78 280. 1311.13 11 S2 • 4 9 1•} 53. 8 ~~ 71 • 4 206.';}16 240.272 617.209
, 979 2'1 ~ • 1414.71 11')1.CJ 11~ 4(). 77 8G0.7 2 74 • .J 7 J 222.549 Bl4.761
1t:l81) 331 .3q5 1566.76 1170.1 1G24.51 CJ 96. 3 312.909 230. 8 56 1054.02
19 !l 1 172. 12B 1743.59 117J.43 1 98fl. 74 1278.1~1 .· 355.709 2 61+: 415 1501.05
19 ~12 44;,.039 2020.25 11 9f!. 52 2331.07 1475.74 4 3fl. 6 3 4 33Fl.1312 2·JS4.9
1f'J B J ">23.046 2379.) 13 06 • 4 1 2(>53.92 1642.7 553.'193 421.913 2625.9
11Jnl+ 51);~.985 2'Jtl7.53 1113?..77 32?.6.67 2121.71 651 .9 09 449.51 3550.(.5
p; ~ "i 6"i].7C)7 2753.42 1 .1'l 2. (17 3ti2q.f) 2ll22. 22 Gfl3.0CJ3 451.462 4736.78
1~% 77'l.093 .30()4.46 14'~1.130 ]f311~45 2~3G.93 737.752 498.456 5857.48
1 q 137 p, '3il .8 37 33B4.34 111 71J. 2 8 40 57. 66 24B0.11 793.042 570.424 6'i66.66
1G8fl Ci')li.42B 3751.4!) 1S00.01 4J11.85 2 520. 71 871.U11 656.989 8025.72
1 c; A 9 CJ'i'J.4~3 4145.~5 15.l~l.4 4 5 82.4 2563.12 955.121 75U.il78 9023.63
1 99 0 100!1.7 4557.51"1 1571.66 4711.32 2q 59. 1g 10 35. 4 7 136H.77 9F!14.0~
19 9 1 10 Of). HI 49()1~.5') 1577.31 4H7h.53 2406.19 110!3.51 979.676 10£179.3
11J9 2 1'l3.1.2R 52811. 3 1 1:iiL1.2.1 :i128.1G 24.30.36 1207.73 1 1 02 .22 1106U.9
1"' 0] 1(l7f,.2J 5705 .53 1')P,!!.()fJ 5400. 54' 24 59.28 1324.51 1244.03 11575.5
1~! 9 4 112S.81 6179.45 1 ') 9 8. II(, 563 5~ 73 2427.37 1445.49 H11.97 1192tt.9
1995 1163.24 6f>67. 44 1'i99.~'} 5A62.48 2 3 73. 6 ' 1578.47 1600.39 12095.3
1 q 'JI1 12 0P • 4 72i'l1.54 1600.•)7 6159.79 2 3(•5. 7 3 1749.73 1821.77 12114.3
1997 1275. 19 7809.61 1609.26 6492.2 2367. 1944.14 2076.28 1.1958.2
19913 137fi.4 A47J.54 1G1'J.33 6~3r.~35 2364.71 215B.!J4 2355. FJ3 11601.4
19 <) q 11-11!:).6<) 91gf3.S6 1623.C)J 72.31.91 2370.6 2415.49 2681.59 1 10 u.
200~ 1622.23 10:')29.8 Hi3'>.35 7675. q 1 .237l,D8 2718.3 4 3 07 0. 9 9 10246.5
PFOAL EINS l"U ND FUN D77 EXBI TSL R99L E99L SIHP
1977 2.4 3S.3LI3 67j.(, 671.369 ·o.n1 531.912 557. 16 -137.452
1978 4n.cns 46.954 666 .1 84 602.4t33 . 0.134 568 • .508 595.271 -4 .• 416
1 c; 7 9 1'13.27') 46.878 96B.'137 8 34.862 J. 131 -622.528 65 0. ggo 301.353
19 <j(' 2 7 '). (i!L~2<J L)}.g. :}2 1090.28 0.133 718.52~ 7 !H3. 6 360.9 87
19•11 411.47') Q!~.4.'J7 11)12.53 1485.75 0. 12 s UJ6.194 B3 !3 • 06 9 583.505
1'1-12 51"i.l.42 5 .1 3S • '1 34 2C,1A.32 1'11'1.(,1 0. 115 913.258 91.17.046 705.793
19R 1 7.31.(.99 1fHj. 1 "3J'i7.':i9 235·1.46 o') • 121 1 0114 • 3 7 . 1081). 69 7 39.2 7 5
19i34 g4il.61~9 238.69 41Fl'J. 3 .1QSS.09 \). 136 1127.96 i165.92· 1141.71
1 'j 9 5 11fl7.'55 31q.6()4 5 <)211 • 3 3 32.64.14 0.133 1170.41 ... 1210-6.5 14 25 •. 0.3 -19Bf; 1 II 37 • 3 'i 4 2·"). 6 4 1 7 2 911. a 3 4'ii;0.C:6 0.12 u 1251.35 12 911 • 01 1370.51
1 •)fl7 16n4 .2 5 17. fl. 2 5 r~ 6 SO ¥ ~~ 6 51q2.PJ 0. 12b 1361~. 55 140q.77 1356.04
1%8 1935.8 (,13.981 qq 61 • S2 561~5. 7.9 0. 12 3 1498.ii4 1511&.37 1310.66
1989 21()].07· 706.985 11216.7 6061.66 0.122 1647.41 1698.22 1255.19
1'1r'l<) 21~44. 52 7Q6 .134 1225J1.6 (iJ30.14 0.122 1811.72 ·1865.57 10111. 8 6
19 9 1 26 08. f!7 870.322 1JHiH.2 6504.09 0.121 1971.74 20 28.83 909.632
1992 2936.75 935.218 1!J005.7 6613. 5 o. 12 21 38.53 2199.04 837.469
1'l'i3 318R.27 995. on 11~763.13 6(J5q .93 0.118 2321.21 2385. 35 758.145
19 9!~ .3437.C2 1C49.1l1 15361.9 o62•1.39 3., 17 2531.73 2599.72 598.117
1 gqc; ](,P0.52 1 ('Q ~. s 2 1'1'775.8 6i+q1.B9 0. 1 Hi 2756.67 282J.J.7t.t 413.9 06
H9fi 3923.72 1122.71 1 6038. 62'J8.77 0.114 3012.38 308B. 77 262.215
1997 4168.14 1 142. 2R 1612G.3 60 47. 45 0.113 3294.49 3375.47 88.2 66
1q<')~ 1~413.22 1149.68 16014.n 5734.77 0.1.12 .3597. 97 3683.8 -111 .. 66
1999 46 S9 • 57 . 114.1. (} 9 15702.6 53 63.66 J. 11 39 26 .8 3 40 17.82 -312.094
20JI) 49)7. 07 1122.48 15153.5 49.'37.91 o. 109 4310.29 4406.73 ·-549.035
w __,
0::>
EX BITES VI i'IBL 2 RENSRI\T
1<177 0.229 0.604 0.068
19 '/8 o. 2 5 0.506 0.057
1979 0.24 0. 468 o. Q 47
1'1~0 ().234 ().1~43 ').043
19~ 1 ').219 C.438 •1.')41
1 <182 0.204 0 • 1143 o. 0 1~3
1Cl~3 0.222 0.431 0.049
19H 4 1}.2'31 o. rns ').)54
1'1!')5 0.25 0 .I~ 03 O.G51
19 86 0.25 0.393 0.051
1 g G7 0.2uq . 0-39 2 o. ')5.1
1 <:j P. p 0.2117 0.3'12 0.054
19!39 ".246 1).394 0.')56
1 99 0 0 .247 0.397 o. 059
1 q 9 1 0.245 0.404 0.06
1'19/. c. 241 0.411 '1. i}62
1 q 'lJ 1).21'7 0.41Q o. 06 3
H94 0.233 0. 4 29 0.065
19 95 0. 229 I).;* I~ 0. Ofi7
1q'l6 0.223 0 .!15 3 0. \) 6'l
1997 ~'.22 0.466 0.')71
11)')q 0.216 o .'nR 0. 07 3
1999 0.212 0.493 0.075
2"'00 0.20?. 0.508 0.078
r--;. r:-: ----r---~~ r;::-: ~ til c:-:-:-l r-' ~n (j--:-J ~ r---~ . .--.
I :. ,I
crr:-:J r:J 00 C':"J r-: r"J r----, ,---, :-----"1 ·:-l .......--, c-J c-l ..---..,
--""I r~ rJ rr--J l nn L . ' ' -' ; l ) ' )
POP ti!GN!':T NTNCTOT EM99 EMA9 EMGF EMP9 EMT9 .
1977 (') . 0. 0. o .. o. o. o. o.
1t"l7fl o. 0. 0. o. 0. o. o. 0.
197 q (). o. !). 0. 1'1 o. 0. o. ". 19SO ('. 0. o. o. o. o. o. o.
1!')81 0.686 0. 6 R6 o. 0.507 o. . o. o. 149 o. l 08
1982 1.1'84 0.371 0. ')28 o. 743 o. o. 0.149 0.12
1'lfl1 1. 1 3 3 0. () OG 0.041 0.706 o. o. 0.114 0. 09 7
19H4 ().742 -0.4 3 0. 039 0.353 o. 0. 0 .o 21 o. 0 34
1 ql15 0.5JG -0.22A 0.02 0. 17B o. o. o. 0.009
19R6 0.427 -o. 119 0.1)11 0.096 '). o. o. o. 0 05
1 987 0 .376' -o. o s 1 0.1)06 0.064 o. o. o. 0. 0 03
1CJP11 0.343 -0.036 o. 003 0.048 o. o. o. o. 0 02
1989 ".318 -0.':'28 1).1)02 o. 03 8 o. o. o. 0.002
1 99 i) 0. :>9 5 -0.024 0. DO 1 0.031 0. o. o. 0. 002
1 g 9 1 0.?.75 -0.02 0. 0.027 o. o. o. 0. 0 0 1
199 2 0.262 -0.013 -0. o. 02 5 o. o. 0 .. 0.002
199.3 0.243 -0.018 -0.001 0.02 o. o. o. 0. 0 01
1994 fl. 21 g -0.024 -0.001 ().012 o. o. 0. 0.001
1995 0.207 -o .o 12 -0.001 0. 0 11 o. o. o. o. 0 01
19% 0.202 -o. o 04 -0. 001 0.014 0 .. o. o. o. 0 01
19 97 0. 189 -0.011 -f'J.0/)1 0.011 •). o. o. 0.001
1 9 9R 0.183 -0.005 -0.001 o. 012 o. o. o. 0 .. 0 01
19 <)9 0.165 -0.017 -o. o 01 0.006 o. o. o .. o.
2000 0. 16 3 -0.002 -o. oo 1 0.01 o. o. o. 0 .o 0,
w _.
1.0
EMS9 EMPU EMOT EMM9 EMF! EMD9 EMCM EMCN
1977 (.\ . o. o. o. o. o. 0~ o.
19 7fl o. o. o. o. o. o. o .. o.
1979 o. 0 .. o. i). o. o. o. o.
1 C) 80 o. I) • o .. o. o. o. o. 0.
1981 0.098 0.003 0.019 o. 0.025 0 •. ) 93 O.'J01 o. 0 4
1 q 82 0. 14CJ 0.004 o. 0 27 o. o. 039 0.1 38 0.002 0.067
1 q fl3 0.14 2 0.004 0.025 o. 0.037 0. 1 3 0.002 o. 0 64
1 <lB 4 '1.'}fif3 o.on 0.013 o. 0. 01 H 0.)63 0.001 o. 0 33
1 g er.. 0 • c ]l~ 0.001 0. 0 05 o. 0.009 o. 0 31 0. 0.012
1 q Hn 0. 01 9 o. 0. 003 0. 0.005 0. 0 17 o. o. 0 02
1GB7 ').013 0. 0.002 o. 0. OOJ 0.012 o. 0.001
19111'1 (). 01 0. 0.002 0. o. 00 3 0.009 o. 0.
19 89 o.oo9 o. 0. 0 01 o. 0.002 0.0 08 0. o.
1991 0.007 0. 0.001 o .. o. 002 o. 0 06 o. -o.
1C'JC'J1 o. 007 o. 0.001 0 •. 0 .. 002 o. 0 06 o. o.
19 92 o.ro7 o. IJ.')'J1 -(). 0. 002 0 .o 06 0. 0.001
199] o. 005 0. 0.001 o. 0. 00 1 0. 004 o. o.
1 <J q 4 0.003 o. o. o. 0 • OC< 1 0.')')3 0 • -o.
1995 0.004 0. o. o. 0. 001 0. 'J 03 o. o.
1<~CJo 0. () 05 0. o. o. 0.001 o. 0 04 o. o. 0 01
1997 'J.OC4 o. o. o. 0.001 0.)03 0 ... 0. 0 01
1 9 9fl 0.004 0. o. o. 0.001 0.0 03 o. o. 0 02
19qCJ 0.002 0. o. o. 0. 0.002 o. o. 0 01
2JO'l 0. co 4 o. o. o. 0. 001 o. 003 . 0" 0 .o 02
oO..ll4\o7n <:.I.. rJ.. '~r\.... -~~I;' J. LAVC'~ ~ }\~/\t' J:;~':JS
19 '77 0. o. v. o. o. o. o. o.
1~7f'l o. 0 • o. o. 0~ o. o. o.
1979 ,. ('\ .... 1) • o. o. 0 • o. L. • .'.
1 q 13 a :) . 0. o. o. o. o. o. o.
1 ()8 1 0.04 -0.!)29 ?. 5. ~H6 7.68 0.206 o. o .. o.
19 R 2 r-,.(',()7 1).':!·49 4').949 9. 812 0.295 4.012 1 .4 OS 5.4 17
1CJ~) :) • 06 4 0.0'11 40.621 7. q 61 0. 28 6 6. 3 07' 1.573 7.919
1 q SJ 4 0.033 0.101 20.18 2.2 7 0. ·16 4 6.2 42 1. 159 7. 48 4
1 C)~') 0.012 0.07G 11J. 71 -o. 352 o. 095 5. 7 65 -o .4 oa 5. 4 71
1'Hll) 0.002 0 .(14 4 G.301 -1.477 0. Oli 1 3. q 21 -1.453 2. 5 69
l"l ~17 ~. 00 1 0.~28 4.719 -1.7 77 o • or• J 2.9 94 -1.19 1./JG
1 9Hfl 0 • 0.021 3.988 -1.f!!i7 0.042 2. sqg -1.1G 1.3131
11fP.9 n. 0.016 3.621 -1.848 0.039 2. 253 -1.122 1.113
199'1 -1'. 0.013 3. 321} -1.8~1 o. OJ e 2. 013 -1 .054 0. 9 1
19f11 0. 0.01 3.21'1 -1.711 o. 037 1. 7 9 -O.f381 o.r. 2a
1<J 9 2 1). 001 0.008 J. 4 4<) -1 • 6 0 9 o .. o3u 1.598 -j.795 0.695
1'-l<Jl o. 0.0t'7 3. 16!3 -1.559 o. 03 7 1 .4 61 -o. 7 06 0.621
1 '"' "l t< -o. o.oos 2.422 -1.53<J 0.034 1 • .26 2 -o .. 646 0.465
199') "· 0 .. ()02 2. 613 -1.441 0.035 O.Y84 -0.552 0.262
1 995 0.001 0.001 3.383 -1. 309 O.OJB O. A 63 -0.3f!O 0.2 f39
1r,g7 0. 001 0. 0 01 3.277 -1.234 0.038 o.s 55 -0.232 0.422
1 g 9!3 n.c02 o. 3. 777 -1 .. 152 0.041 o. 8 09 0.232 0 .a 36
1999 0. 001 0.001 3.0f!6 -1.121 0. 0 J9 . O.A 36 0. 256 0.89 5
2000 n. 002 -0.001 3.973 -1 .. 031 0.042 0.68 0.223 0.711
w
N
0 E99SJ:lPC R EVGF RPC'iS RT<lR RENS GFBAL PPI3hL RINS
1977 "· o. o. o~ Oa o. o .. o.
10711 o. 0. o. o. o. o .. o .. o.
1 C) 7 9 o. o. (). (). o .. o. a. o ..
1()i11 0. 0. o. o. o. o. 0. c.
1 <) r'l -2 .5 Q$! 0. 7 59 o. 0.402 0.402 0. 7 5 0 •. o.
1:) 13 2 -o. 4 7 3 2. 51)3 f). 1.463 1 .. 865 -1.06 0. 0.053
1 98) 0 .3R 1 3.?.% o. 2. 07 5 2. 7 36 -4. 197 o. -·a. 074
1 <J A4 1.351 2. 552 o. 1. 7 4 6 2 .. 415 -7. ~3 16 o. -0.294
19115 1.963. 1).99 1). 0.866 1. 215 -11.648 o. -o .s 47
1 f;!'l£) -0.111.1 0.113 o. 0.465 0. 662 -14. 1 2q o. -0.815
19 fj 7 -O.JRS -o. 3 4 o. Q~284 . 0.4CG -16.375 o. -0.989
1 9fl R -~ .517 -0.(,02 o. o. 221 0.314 -18.46~ o. -1.146
1Cfflq -0,56G -o.?r•3 0.' o. 19 4 0.279 -20. 504 o. ~1.293
199 n -~.59 1 -n. q 65 .'). o. 1 e 1 0 .. 256 -22.516 o. -1.435
1991 -o. 561 -1.125 o. o. 171~ o. 24ti -24. 57 o. -1.576
19q 2 -o. %9 -1.2')8 o. 08,8 4 0.255 -26. 6 21 o. -1.7 2
199 3 -"). 536 -1.387 1). 0,199 0 • .2 78 -28-711 o. -1.864
11<)4 -0.51}4 -1 • 57 p 0. o. 17 6 0. 244 -30. 8 36 o. -2.01
19 C)') -0.515 -1.77 o. 0.147 0~206 . . -32.9 57 o. -2. , 59
1 996 -(1.49 3 -1.fl75 o. o. 132 0.241 -35.16 o. -2.3 07
1 '"1q7 -0.428 -1.(!65 o. 0. 2 L12 J .. 317 -37.527 o. -2.461
19()8 -;1. 335 -2. 1 33 IJ. 0.242 0.:311 -40.293 0. -2.627
199q -o .277 -2.3 0 1 Q, 0.262 0. 348 --.!f3.277 o .. . -2.821
2000 -0.312 -2. 52 7 o. 0~252 0-322 -46 •. Do o. -J. 0 29
r-....., ~~ ~ r--1 f"""7""'"t ~ r-1 r----r-1 r:J ... ,.-----, :-----,, r--:···--.. .----,·-··· --:·· ~ ~ ~ ,--. ,, "'' .: 1 .... " t', .I
\~ ) c, "
FUND FlJND77 RCJn E99L
1CJ77 0. 0. !). 0.
1 978 o. () . o. o.
1979 o. 0. o. o.
1<) 8 ') o. o. o. o.
19 f} 1 r.7S -0.355 r..'l.15 0.035
1 'J ~12 -1 • 06 -2 • 4 11 2.55 2. 55
19 (\ 1 -I~., 97 -4.801 4. 0 71~ q. 074
1 '194 -7 .816 -1).652 4. 008 4. 008
1'"1 r, 'i -11 • 6 11 q -fJ.5t.:r 2.04 2. 04
1986 ,;,14:129 -9.488 1. 'l:)q 1. 05 9
1 CJ!"J7 -1() .375 -10.32 0. 6 1 0. 6 1
1C'J83 -18.469 -11.004 0.454 0.454
w 1 989 -?.J .504. -11.591.1 0.3ii1 o. J 81
N 1 r; q 0 -22.516 -12.113 0.347 0.347 --'
1q 9 1 -24. 57 -12.602 1').319 1).319
1992 -2().621 -1J.C39 0. 307 o. 307
1CJ91 -?.B.711 -1.3 • .395 0.334 0.334
19 9 ll -]"!. £.!.16 -13.668 0.292 0.292
1 ~9 5 -32,Q57 -13.926 0.204 0. 20 4
19 C) 6 -35.16 -111.13 0.23 0.2 3
1997 -:n. 527 -14.418 0.311 o. 311
1 C'j'J 8 -40.2C'J 3 -11~.762 0. 271 o. 271
1:)99 -43. 27 7 -15.062 o. 31 !).3i
2 001) -46.336 -15.371 0.215. o. 215
[
[
[
[
L
[
c
r~
L
[
[
E
c
c
D.
[
[
f'
L
E
HIGH BASE CASE
323
i.:.. l"t !.'li "'' !" .c; rill.~
1977 410.66 ·-24.rJ35 6 •. W.3 1P.5.50P. 0. JG 3 o. J 7f! 0.25') 1 • 1
1 'l7 s 4'l6.709 -11 • 1 C)<) 7.202 17H.5')7 0.37J c. J 86 ·).242 l. 2
1 (j 7 f1 417.661 ~~. 2 3 F; • (i <)Q 1 fH;, 486 0. 3 .')2 0.3 76 0.242 1.2
1 "'"' '1 411.4'"•5 7. :l()'i (, • n ?.'• 1'12.1!37 a. 3:; ~~ 0. 3 h 3 (j. 2 4~ 1. 2
1rJ,11 LL'i1.534 15.'~"') 7. !4 2•15.34£5 C.40G 0. '34 2 0.25 1. 3
1 c; .'1? 4 84 • 1.: 6 2 J. :ng 7. 5 ri5 223. (:7 5 0.422 0.32 0.25B 1.3
1"P] S07.1S4 14 •. 1'14 B .I> 0 1 233.9/~C) 0.42G o. 317 0. 256 1. 4
1'134 512. 16 -3. 816 U.82U 2 31. :'). 42 :j 0.3 29 0.245 1. 4
1<:1R'; 51'L471 -1.2iQ P.. 5 16 231.56 0. 43 o. J 25 o. 2 45 1.4
11 R (, S11.137 3. J 06 8.351 23fi.106 0. 4 35 1).319 :J. 246 1. 5
1<JR7 :-;I~ F •· i-l g B 6.0,71 e. 376 243.S6 o. 1~43 0. 3 1 1 0.246 1 • 5
1q 0 8 56 !i • 6 51> q .622 n .51+7 2 s 2. ~~ 9 0. 4 '.i 1 0. 3 0 3 0.246 1. 6
1 SHl9 5f33.731 1'1.261 H.822 262.615 :).458 0.296 0. 2 ~I.) 1. 6
1 gq t') 600 .2fiS 7.445 9. 1 17 no. 2 u 0.463 0.292 0.21~4 1.7
1'Vl 1 61fi.31)1 6.725 q .2 95 277.51 0.47 0 • 2fJ 7 0.243 1. 7
19 9 2 6.'32.719 r •• 96 7 9.45 285.074 0.476 0.2 U2 0.242 1.8
Fl<J) GS 1 .22 P.H?4 Ci.618 2<l4.11J9 0. 4fl4 0.275 o. 2 4 1 . 1 • P,
1q g 4 669.f:1J') n.7S2 CJ.flfi(i 3 03.2 0.49 o. 2 69 0.241 1. 8
1 C)Cf 5 £illrl.l77 9. l.f 4 1 10.104 312.806 o. 4 97 0.2 G 2 0 .24 . 1. 9
, (j 'l 6 7 Qll • [, 6 R. CJ H! 10.36q 322. 01'16 0.503 0.'2.57 0.24 2.
1Q ·17 7 29.9 4 10.673 1·1.609 J32.7f39 0 .s 1 1 0.249 a. 24. 2. 1
1<J9f'J 7')1.675 10 .13 2 10.91Cl J 4 3. 616 0. S17 0.243 0.24 2. 1
1lJ9<J 776.143 13.246 11 • 2 27 356.32 0.525 o. 2 36 J. 24 2.2
w 2 ')I)'' !1"1.117 13. 3 54 1 i. 6 28 369. 105 o. 531 0.2 2 9 0.239 2.2
N
~
EMGF' EMP<l EMT9 EMS9 EMPU EMOT EMM9 EMFI
1977 42.921 4.514 CJ.r!42 22. 64'J 1. HJ L) 14. 55 11.356 5.779
1 q 7fl 42. 92 1 ·4.365 10.296 21.905 1 • 19 4 14.27 1.1. 9 06 5. 7 39
1979 42.921 4.368 1'.728 23 • .533 1 • 2 Ll1i 14 • 5 09 12.411 6.133
1 qp ;j 42 ~fl21 4 .6n 11 • 2P ~ 25. SS2 1. 308 14. B 1J 12.896 6.654
19 8 1 4·2.921 4.612 12.125 2 8. B4 1 .397 15.32 13.37 7. 4 49
19!32 1,2.921 4.0'19 1 3. 1 g J 33. 39 1. 502 15.998 13. H43 8.4 83
1fJfl3 47..CJ21 5. 017 1 3. 766 35.328 1. 566 16.366 14.32 9. 077
198 4 42.921 5. 383 13. 7S6 34.347 ·1.577 16.261 14.867 9.063
1')8') 42.Cl21 5.:2 '">q 13. q Otl 34.71H 1. S'J 1 Hi. 2i! 1 15.424 9. 1 A 1
19 Bfi ~2.921 5. 072 14.229 J 6. Oti 4 1 • 62 4 16.442 15.937 9. 514
19 87 '•2.921 4.qgg 1 u. 7 37 38.202 1 ~ 678 16. 7 03 16.463 10.055
1 q ~~ il 42,q21 5.207 1'1.317 40. 67P 1 • 7 4 17.023 17.007 10.685
1 C'o!3 9 42.921 5.52f! 1 5. 92 5 43.296 1. 8CS 17.JS 17.567 1 1. 3 6 1
1 q 9!) 1~2.921 5.69 Hi. 39 4 5. 2 SA 1. 8~l 6 17.6 02 18.145 11.f!93
1'?,'"!1 4?..G21 5 .2G 9 16.fH19 .4 7 •. 4 8 1.908 17.8 4 Hl. 74 12.464
FJC)2 42.921 5.2H9 17.377 49.668 1 • 96 18 •. )84 19.3:>7 13.033
1 CJQ3 4/..q21 5. 1 1~2 17.978 52. 459 2. 0 2·2 18.373 19.<J93 13.741
1qq4 42.921 5.054 1S.5U9 55.133 2.081 18.(,54 20.65 14.426'
1') Q ') U2. 92 1 5. 8 2 3 1'L167 58.0513 2. 1 41~ 1 8. ()5 21.329 15.181
1Qf1fi I~ 2 • q 2 1 4.<J7G Pl. 7 4f_~ 60.('56 2. 20 4 19.231 22. 0 31 15.901
11'l97 42.921 4. 9 S8 20.4211 64.199 2. 273 19.549 22.756 1(>.756
199~ 42.921 4. q 54 ·21.0(j5 67. 54 4· 2.3/.i 19.!367 23.50S 1 7 ·• 6 08
.1C:C,'j 4;>.G21 4.G"i5 21.fl7fi 71.535 2. 417 20. 2 32 24.279 18.624
?""" -.;.I 42. g 2, 4. 9 49 22. 6 41 75.514 2 .4 93 2C.594 25.079 19.635
rl r:""'l r:J .--.....-, r--. (~I ~~ ,.-----.i ~-, r-----1 ·:--l ;~ r-J ..--r~ r:-rJ r-J ~ lii-:-1 L ; .. J j j
L.
rTl c~ r-: rn r-:J cr:;J ['"";'::J rr::1 c:;:m r---':1 lJ r-1 r-1 r-1 c--J i""') :""'"'J r--1 ~
Fr. D!J EMCN T-:MC"!~1 EMGA I\! Pl; HPC I'!P I. ;!XO!.'S
1977 24.(!1') 16.:, .. ,g 1 1. 1 ng 27.256 4072.38 3924.32 .252. 71 810.
1 07 P. 2!1.771 11 • !l ~ (, 11.3·1~ 2 ~ •• fj ij 1 u·2 :n. 42 3724.25 ').79. 75 y 44.
197'1 2f'i. /.47 12.1/.9 11.912 26.421 47 07. JiJi~S. HJ 293.049 1(· 19.
1CR!) ?.n. 1!3 1 3. 21) 3 12. H 4 26. R 1 5301.84 ]qq4.15 307.6JJ 11 1!;.32
1 .. ~ 1 31 • 0(: .l 16.779 14.011 /.7.32!.3 li 3 53 • 4 4 4310.3') 32~.00':1 1/.32.22
1 QS2 ]1~.717 22.411 1').6'17 211. 6 r1 7fl73.6J 1n oq. 21 345.135 1423.47.
1 c; r, 1 36.!13f3 22.!3'7 16 • rn :n .2S7 81131.95 4!)02.<.11 362.572 168d.94
19 iJ 4 36.88B 1f1.7'JJ 17. 2'Jii 32.9!34 gf:14.48 4502.21 375.594 188G.77.
1 ~~ 5 37.31') 1P .3 26 17. 'HI,] 32. 417 ') 2 1l !i. 7 tJ 4556.7.'3 3Ci0. 557 11)60.57
19 8 (j JB.Lifl7 19.117 1 ~~.58 7 32.334 10(·42.1 4637.71 407.G71 2110.47
1~117 40.JP.1 20.2 22 19.453 .'32. 78 4 11124.6 4767.74 426.97 2321.!)2
1 ,., nq 42.575 21 .4~:,p 7.0.531 .13.703 i 2 I!JS. 5 4918.55 447.767 25139.34
1 q '!9 44.9HI. 22.5~5 21.GS6 34. li] 9 138S7.4 5054.72 469.652 2900.26
1f}'1') I~(.. 7 6 22;,9/.7 22. G 26 36.QP.9 15155.5 51 .17. 2 1 4()1.461 323!3.47
1 q ') 1 ~~ n. 711 23.77.3 2.1 . 11/. 1 3fi.819 1660&.9 s 2112.7 9 513.966 JS54.0 1
11}32 <',') • (i ') 24,lli12 24. 30 6 37.423 1 f) 1 92 • 3 5.3 :18. 03 537 .6 36 3Jfli.l.S9
1 '"! 1 SJ.0.1'l 25.7.)5 2'). l.j J 1 37. r; 05 20 1 07. 7 5485.07 562.936 4240.08
,c; Clt: ') s . ] .1 il 26.!31)1 2 (). 'i56 3fl.(·17 2.2157.7 S613.'J7 ·So9.30J 4655.47
1 99'> 57.U6 27 ,q (l:) 27. 7 86 3CJ.163 24399.3 57 36.03 617.043 SOHJ.16
1Q% G0./.4rf 2().0.'39 2B.97 39.734 26810.3 5858. 4 1 645.187 5539.29
1 g <J7 6J.f'67 30.4f;2 :lli. 408 4:). 1% 29611.2 5996.6 8 676.492 6017.27
1908 65.H:.5 31. s 27 31 • fl7 2 40. 6 4 4 326(j4. 4 6139.33 7 08. 481 6555.05
1'l<i9 6q.15'5 33.733 3'3. 6 77 41.084 363-)1.6 6 297. 3 742.741 7138.16
2"<1'1 72.419 35.554 3:'i.496 41.748 402 Gvft 8 64 55. l 9 778.545 7fl07.52
w
N
Ul
'P.XC.\P E q ~JS EC)9S H PC ?.EVG F' RP9S RT98 R.ENS GFDAL
1 !)77 ?.70.32!i 1160.82 1118.'>6 7 96. 27 1()7.201 214.301 278.522 6Gfl.1G5
11)7il 2 no. 1311.13 11 ,.,2 .:n 1053.B4 4 71 • (f 206~933 240.28a 617.245
19 7 q ;.!C).~ •• 1 q i {). 7 1 11!':5.136 1 lt3 9. 7 5 flGJo/ 273.822 222.013 813.789
1 ~1 B.') 32fj .271 •155fJ.6 117ll.l6 16 20. 9%. J 310.3U 227.772 1055.05
19 iJ 1 '367.3% 172.1.39 11ftl.17 1~81.98 1278.41 3:)1.759 2511.9% 1511.52
1 <) 112 41LJ.134 200S."45 11 ~ t). 4 2 12 5. 4 1 147~i .• 74 .·4]5.053 3)1-1.032 2072 .OJ
1 '1 fl) 52().739 2Jf.,2.76 1 2il:.: .n 2£i56.71 1642.7 S'i4.983 421.fi;J7 265'1.46
i 9 ~ lj 577.(,95 2n3J.73 ,~~(j~~ .. j/! 3/.55.{)0 2121.71 C61:i .801 4()'; .82 3S7o.47
1 9 .ss G7;i.fl7 2P24.t:1 1J9:J..14 3t>72.12 2422.22 70Fl.f'J9 48 :). 'JJ 5 474H.96
19.3(, FrJ.R22 3111.91 1 £l] 7 • 1 6 3845.12 24.11.66 7S7.G66 525.775 5864.93
19:17 .(111.1. 872 31~fl"'.3[l 11JS7.3 4·')!15. 13 24113.11 807.~01 589.791 6908.94
1 '! fl q Ci17.577 3 76rl ,4 n 11~fl0.llf! 4.343.36 252C...41 0<!7.26 676.2G1 8067.69
19 89 975.06 4Hl5.B7 1'"·19.55 I~(J71.14 2(,21.78 976.621 781).387 9 1 34. 3 3
1 ()f) 0 1041.20 4(·(10.99 1!i:j9.S7 4U25. fl!l 2::; JS •. J 10fiJ.02 11'! 2. f! 52 10001.7
1 r; '11 1() !Ill • 9 [l 4953.6fl 1!it>J.BI'i ~1')09.16 24W.I • .'35 11 3!3 • 1.3 101,)5.77 107 55.
E92 1:i7Cj.':'2 SJS2. 4l! 1'i73.l!S 5275.09 2:.; 1[!-52 1241.36 1133.31 11434.5
14':)) 111'1.6 57 r 1*. 1 2 i':i77.7fl S5r.6. i!'1 ;::,sJ. D 1.162.7 127q.P.G 12040.3
1<) 9 4 117.1.67 GnC1. 2 fJ 1 ~) <; 0 • 7 c., ')!124.02 ·2~2&. en 1lll)('.2J. 1455.1~8 1~l~'J3.
1~<)') 1212.24 1)782. 23 1 'i I) 4. 111 6073.05 24H1.04 1628. 16!.!9.613 12775.3
1qQ(i 1257.3<! 7322.7.1 1(·00.01) 631!2.{) 2479.73 i7 %. 9 6 18Gq .. 37 12912.3
1997 1317.1 71398.0/. 1 5 t) l). 114 li72i).21 (~4J!! ,03 19(35.7 2115.6 1:2904.8
1 9 98 13<)5.6 85%.5 1G06.71 70 H5. 48 2476 .. 71 220P..09 2·4 07. 12 12714.8
1'1'1() 1511.fl1 9290.09 1611.54 74[15.72 2 4 63. 04 2470.08 27t..;0.7 12324.7
2()0') 1645. 2 10129.1 1{)7.11.02 7939.18 2 4 56~ 93 2777.74 313fl.59 11701.
PF'EL\L RDS ?U ND FUND77 EXLli TEL R99L .E99L SHlP
'1977 2.4 .~5. 343 670. () (,71.Jf.iS 0. 1 J 1 531.'112 557.16 -137.4 52
1 r 1 7 /1 l>fl,<l75 !.16,q':i4 f;t-6. 22 o02.S•15 0.1314 5tiB.509 595.272 -4 • .1 8
1'}79 1Sl. 275 4F..n8 !)(j 7 .I) 1)4 1)]1~.9!)1 0. 1 J2 622.581 650.94S 300.!:>44
'(';fl') 2 7 !'_',. (J~l.461 1330.05 1093.P5 0. 135 714.74 7 44. 1!11 3 62 .'Hl7
H H1 411.475 94.4 79 1922.99 1496.93 0.1/.5 7%.569 828.444 592.942
'19:.12 563.425 136.61)7 26 35. 46 1<}31.91 0.115 <.105.719 939.507 712.469
1COJ 731.609 1P,7,2Cq 33Cf1,1(i 2366.32 0. 117 1036.7 1072.52 7 5~. 7
i<J,14 . 948.649 241.·)39 4525.12 ].)48.11 0 .13 11 49 • 3 5 11!:17~32 11 J 3. 9 6
1 q AS 11R7.55 3?.1.501 5'3 Jl'.. 51 3fi45. 63 0. '132 12:>.2.34 1262.5.8 1411.4 ,q 1!6 14.17.35 421.4'D 7302.28 1+5 3 1 • 7 1 0. 129 1294.23 1336.B9 1365.77
'1'1 87 1 (>!I'! • ~ 518. 34o. Bfi73.14 'j 13 9. 2.5 0. 12 5 13 90.5 2 1435.7!i l370.b7
'I <'i ~~ R 19.1':.,p 615.Slt1 101~03.5 51.i52. 23 o. 122 1520. 1567.9:3 1JJ0.35
1') 89 2199.32 709.Y23 11333.7 1)105.4 0. 121 1669.85 17 20.66 1330.17
19')1'\ /458.6 £0 I~. 3 52 12.460.3 6414.43 0. 121 1838.09 1891.94 1126.6
19(j1 2711.47 P. fl 4 • 5 1 131+66.5 662P.~7 0. 1:?. 2000.85 2057.93 1006.22
1992 2%8. JS 9~.6.21 1 4!1 0.2. 9 6777.69 0.119 2173.3 2233.8 93G.422
1 993 327.9.32 1023.04 1'.)269. 7 6H 6 2. 6 3 :).117 23 5'l. 7 6 2 423.9 866.758
1 gq II 14110,02 10R'5.01. 1'5901.1 6R60.<)9 0. 116 2'j77.J1 2641;.99 711.406
Hgc.; 37 tj 2. 4 <; 1'1Jf-.11 16517.8 6772.62 0. 11 5 2807.52 2tfl') .58 536.719
19 '16 39q7,35 1174.t:)6 1fi"0q.7 66 24n 7 0 0 114 3065.31 3141.7 391.CJC6
1997 425.3.82 120.1.66 17158.6 6417.1 0.113 3334.38 . 34.15.96 248.902
1998 4511).59 1222.37 17 225. 4 6151.21 0. 112 3646.5 3732.33 66.789
1 t)r,q 4766.77 1228.33 17091 .4 5821.85 0 .. 11 3980.98 4071.96 -133.957
200~ 5:} 2 2. (. 6 1220.23 16723.7 5434 .. 6 0.109 4370.14 4466 .s·a -367:.7 54
w
N
"' EX BITES VD.BL2 RENS f<l\. T
19 77 0. 22Cl 0.604 0.068
1Cl7P, 0.25 0.506 0. 057
1 <)7 9 I). 24 2 O.t~fi7 o. 0 47
1 C)fl() () • 2 37 0.442 0.043
F··11 0.219 0.43 8 0.041
1C) R 2 0. 2•} 5 0.442 0.042
19 n.3 0.215 0 .4 35 0. 04~
1 <.J f.l4 0. 21t 1 0.421 0.053
11J CJS 0.24S 0 • I! 11 ;). 0 'jJ
1Cl!11) 0.247 0.4 0.052
1C'J!17 '). 24 tj C.399 .'),()'))
1 988. 0.242 0.39':' 0.054
19R9 1).241 0.4 01 o. 056
199 ') !'\. 244 (). 40 2 0.059
1 q 91 0.241 o .4 or 0.061
19q ~ 0.239 0.415 0. 062
, 9 ') 1 .... • 2 Jlt 0.424 o. %4
1 '1 q 4 0.231 0 .433 0.066
1')q') ().227 0.1.+4 4 0. OG8
1 ')% 0.223 (1.455 0.07
1'1fJ7 0.21G 0.4 69 0.071
19911 n. 215 0.4B2 ').074
1999 0.21 O.L!<)7 0. 075
2000 o. 2 06 0.513 o. 078
r:-J I__, r-:: r1 Cl CTTJ r-Jl ~ ~ L, __ --' ,; r-l .r~ C'---:1 r-1 ,---· ~·· ·, r----j. ~~
' j :~ ·:-J ~
[
[
I L
[
L
[
[
r
I-'
r
L
b
[
[
r ,
L
5% NORTHERN GULF OCS DEVELOPMENT SCENARIO -
HIGH BASE CASE
(Levels and Differences from the Base Case)
327
l:'JI:' !".& l. \.1 f'l' :.·.L ~ !.~'\ L. TlJ"J.: .t.i"l'!"<4 ~L"!~ l"t' :::'1 ~';'I:' r.. r':< .:::0.1:' .r::..n t\:1 .
1977 41"1.66 -24.935 6.383 185.508 0.363 0.378 0.259 1 • 1
1'178 406.70'1 -11.1'1G 1'. 202 17P,. 557 0.373 0.386 0.242 1. 2
1979 1~17.661 4. 2.3 6.699 184.486 0.3B2 0.3,76 0.242 1. 2
1980 431.495 7.005 6.n7.q 1r, 2. 11!7 0. 3Cf 4 0.363 0.244 1.2
19 n 1 .454.273 15.744 7. 011 2 05.895 0. 408 0. J 41 0.2S1. 1. 3
1:; 'l2 486.141 24.292 7. 5') 5 224.856 0.423 0 .J 19 0.258 1 .3
1<')P.3 s~,'~.747 15.1'72 8.466 235. G58 0. 42R o. 3 15 0.257 1. 4
1CJ 8 4 520. 19 1 1.538 a. n 3 236.585 0.4 32 0 .) 21 0. 248 1. 4
198'1 54':1.3'17 1 1. 3 36 8.824 21*5. 927 0.444 0 .. 3 08 0.2 49 1 .4
11'lf!li 56,').731 11.233 q • 1 52 255.065 0.45 0.302 0. 248 1. 5
1 ')? 7 'ifl 7.. ]U' 12.1()8 q. 14 s 261t.996 i). 115 H 0.295 0.247 1. 5
1 ,, i)f} 601).1 12.9q1 q.?H1 275.525 o. 465 0.288 0. 2117 1 • 6
1 q i)q 6?.3. 917 8. 6 9 10.139 2133.001 0.468 0.285 o. 24 7 1. 6
11 (j 'i 6 19. 4 'i 1 '1.221-1 1) • .11') 288.328 0.471 0.282 0.247 1.7
1fi'11 656.425 6.614 1 0. 3 5R 2'15.235 0.471J 0.276 o .. 246 1. 7
1() q 2 670.49 3.5% 1 0. ~~ 71 3C0.08 0.481 0.273 0.245 1. 8
1QQ3 60G • .,~?. 5.794 10. 463 306.934 0.408 0.267 0.245 1 • B
1Cfq4 7 ')4 • 3 ') f3 7. 042 10.561 314.864 '0.4CJ4 0.262 0.244 1. e
1:l95 721.291 a. 219 1'). 714 323.807 0.501 0.2 56 0.244 1. 9
1 9 ')6 742.6S9 8. 4 52 10.91fl 333.013 0. 507 o. 2 5 0.243 2.
19 9 7 764.6fl3 1 O. B93 11.133 344.153 0.514 0.243. 0.243 2. 1
1398 787.251 11.124 11. 4 49 355.465 0.52 0.236 0.243 2.1
199q P.12.471 13.456 11.76H 368.566 0. 52rj o. 229 0.243 2.2
2000 837.8!18 13.245 12.179 381.508 0.534 0.223 0.243 2. 2
w
N co
E~H~F EMP9 EMT1 EI1S9 EMPU EMOT E11l'1 q 'EMF I
19 77 42.921 4. 51 4 q. 842 22.6!.19 1 .1 8Ll . 14.55 11 .356 5. 7 79
1978 42.921 4. 36 5 10.2<16 21.905 1 .. 19 4 14.27 11 •. 9 06 5. 7 39
1979 42.921 4.3 6 A . 1 0. 728 23.533 1.244 14.5 09 . 12.411 6. 133
198') 42.:>21 4.692 11.2F14 25. 552 1.308 14.313 12.896 6.6 54
1 (j ~ 1 42 .n 1 4. 77f~ 12. 2 35 2P. 9 4 5 1. 4 15.) 4 13.37 7. 4 77
19 82 42.921 4.325 13.397 3 3. 62 0 1 .509 16.041 13.81;3 8.545
1 Q83 42.921 5. 377 14. 0 36 35.G76 1. 576 16.426 14.32 9.167
1 <? ~ 4 42.921 5.801 14.277 35.751 1.615 16.459 14.867 9.426
19 8 ') 42.921 5. 6 5 15.21.;4 38.451 1 • 689 16.784 15.424 10.145
1 CJ B6 42.921 5. 3CJ2 '15.704 40.827 1.71.17 17.097 15.937 10.742
19B7 112.921 5. 3 9H 16. 3 53 43.569 1.012 17 .4 3 16.548 11.435
198R 47..921 6.005 17.225 46.277 1.876 17.7 7 6 17. 092 12.122
1 'lH q 42.n1 7.067 17.549 48.131 1.919 18.017 17. 7 37 12.601
1 r, 9:) 4 2. 9 21 7.99 17.965 49. 4 1 5 1 • 953 18.188 18.315 12.959
1()<J1 42.G21 7.76 1H.~62 51. 649 2.004 18.406 1H.91 13.532
19'}/. 42.<J21 7.'>68 1H.64 .• 53.103 2. 037 18.557 19.5 27 1 J. 9 1 3
1'J93 42.921 7. 39 19. 099 55. 37 2.086 18.77 20.163 14.485
1 q g q 42.Cj21 7 .2 01! 1'"l .6 42 57.846 2. 139 19. J 1 2 20. f! 2 1 5. 1 1 9
190 , 47..921 7. 0 J7 2".229 6!). 66 2.199 19.282 21.499 15.845
1 q '15 42.921 7.023 20.R05 63.478 2. 258 19.556 22.2 01 16.569
1Q97 42.921 7.1 02 21 • 'j 05 66.97 2.323 19.8G2 22.9 26 17.462
199~ 1~ 2. 9 21 7. 140 22. 194 70.473 2.397 20.2 08 23 .675 18.353
1999 42.q21 7. 14Q 22.<;93 7 4. 61 2. 47 6 20.579 24.4 49 19.405
20DD 42.921 7.105 23.751 78.6 71 2.552 20 .9 38 . 25. 249 20. 4 35
r-J c~ [! r--1
""--' ,,_j c-J IT""l rr:-1 r:--1 ~ r---1. :--:J c---:J ;-] '! lJ .~1 '~ '~ LJ
l' .t'JjAL ru~; c; FUND FUND77 EXB ITEL F:S9L E9GL SHiP
1C) 77 2.4 35. J 113 n70.6 671.369 0.131 531.912 557.16 -137. 4 52
1 978 48.975 46.954 666.22 602.515 . 0. 1 J 4 56FJ. 5 09 5()5.272 -4.3tl
1G79 15].275 !16. 88 CJ67. 064 834.901 0.132 6 22.5 u 1 650.949 300.844
1q81 27 'i. 68. 4 6 1 1.3.1).05 1093.85 0.135 714 • 71~ 744.811 362.987
1 'i r 1 1+11.475 q4.479 1<i23.'l Ji<r.<(;.')l.j. 0. 125 7%.507 82U.4ti2 5~3. 751
108 7. 5(3.425 136.7?.4 2 (:31~. 9 5 1 92 n. g 0.114 9C8 .502 942.29 711.145
1n3 7 31 .699 1fl7.263 .''1'3fl(i. 6 . /.3Sf!.72 0. 117 101+3.25 1079.06 751.656
19 8 4 9 4fl. 6119 21+0.721 4521.31. 3Cl27.56 0.126 1 1 ')9. 6 2 1197.58 ·1134.71
1rn~s 1187.55 321.235 5922.')3 3771i.37 0. 122 1263.45 1303 .G9 1400.72
1 r,~ 6 1!l)7 .35 I!? 0 .1+1l 1/.21.64 !UCJ (i. 'JJ 0. 12 2 'I 407. 'JJ 144Cj.()fl 12'-1!).61
10 ~17 1684.2 512.701 8:,orJ .19 4937.55 :J • 1 1 ':) 1'!41.75 1586.~6 12B7.55
1 91~ 1Cl 35 .:! 601~.064 97lJi.l. 77 S3ql!.11 0. 11 ~ Hi 90.21 17 46 • 1 4 1235.58
1 'l fl 'l 21CJ'L32 6q1.P13 1 Dq fiii .1'1 57<:J9.32 0. 11 g 1d64.1~3 1915.24 1222.03
j!) q I) ~4 ')f1. 6 778.672 12'12!. q 60U9.62 0.12 2•)14.33 2068.69 1054. 1 s
1 <j 91 27 1 1 • 4 7 853.759 12%7.8 6 2f!. 6. 3 0 ~ 118 2160.01 2217.09 946.812
1'.19 2 29G'l.35 921 .3 13H35.8 642B.71 i) .119 2 3 38.8 5 2 399. 36 8(,8.023
1J9 3 32 29·. 32 983.346 14650.3 6519.21 0. 11 7 2 S02. 6 7 2566.31 822.523
1 q ') 4 34 f!8 • 02 1 01~ 2 .2 3 1~345.6 6527.11 a. , 1s 210 2. n 2770.97 687.297
199 5 ]7 42. 4 5 1091.63 1 58 68. 4 54 51 • 1 7 0.11<+ 2929.7 3 3001.8 522.7 5
1 '·) 9(i J9q]. 35 1129.'1 16258. 1 6317.311 0.11J 3187.67 3264.06 3fl9.789
1qQ7 4253.P2 11SP.06 16514.2 6125.29 0. 111 3463.9 2 35 1H.89 256.0 78
199S 4510. 59 1177.26 1C:5CJ7.3 5877.7 0.,., 3789.22 3875.05 63.055
19'39 4766.77 1 H34 .J(i 16490., 557 o. 55 o. 108 4139.0 3 4230.01 -1 07.172
2000 5022. 6E 1178.14 16164.3 5210.35 0.107 4543.98 46110.42 -325.805
w w
0 F.!X !.li Tr~ S VTAB1.2 R~l~SD AT
1977 r:l. 229 !'). 60 4 ~-068
1')78 0.25 0.506 o. 0 57
1fl7!j 0.21~2 0.4 67 0.047
1980 .'). 2 37 c. 4 42 !).')43
1 9 81 0 .21 A 0.439 0. 0111
1982 0.2 04 0.443 0.042
1 () 81 1'\. 2 1 4 0.436 ~.')48
1 'll~ II 0. 232 0.425 0.052
1985 0.224 0~ 4 22 0. 051
198() o. 2J (\ • I~ 14 0. 0 53
1Qf17 0.22' 0.417 0.055
FlSR 1).227 0.~19 0.057
1CJ89 0.231 0.421 0.06
1'lq 0 0.2 3 4 0.421 0.062
19 q 1 0.2.1 1).1127 •). 062
1qn 0.232 0.4 32 0.065
199 3 0. 22i~ 0.44 0.1)6')
1 C) 94 0.224 0.44B 0. 0 67 ,r,qs 0.221 0. 4 59 0. 069
l q<J5 0. 217 0.471 ').;)71
, ')97 0.212 0.485 o. 072
1 C)~'H! 0.208 0.4 99 0. 071t
1999 0.214 0.515 :) • ") 76
2 0 Q') 0. 20 1 0.531 0.079
nr:: [7~ rr---c-: r-1 rr:r:J c:J c::-:J ITITl r-1 r~ r:--l rJ r-J lJ r-1 :-l :--J rJ
U. '
POP IHGNF.T NINCTOT .'EMCJ9 EMA9 EMGP EM.i?CJ EM T<f
1977 o. o. o. o. " 0. 0. o. \J •
1978 ') . 0. o. o. o. o. o. 0.
11'J7Q o. 0 • o. o. o. o. c. o.
1980 (' . o. 1). o. o. o. 0. o.
1 931 (\ • 7 4 0.74 o. .. o. 547 o. o. 0.166 o. 11
"1Qfl2 1.681 0.913 0.03 1 .18 0. o. 0.266 0.204
19fl.3 2. 56 3 0.818 (•.065 1.7·:l9 0. o. 0 .34 0.271
19 84 ~. 031 5.3 75 0. 0<15 5. 5R 5 o. o. o. 4. 18 o. 572
19 8 5 20.886 12.555 o • .'3 09 14 • .367 0. o. 0. 39 1 1. 3 3 5
1986 29 .59 4 7.928 0.8 18. 9 59 o. o. 0.32 1 .lt75
1 'lfl7 3S.P.52 ?.1CJ7 1 • 074 21. 43 6 o. o. o. 399 1. 616
1988 4".446 3. 368 1.234 22.63 5 o. o. 0.798 1. 9 09
1989 41).187 -1.571 1. 317 20. 3rl 6 o. 0. 1.539 1.624
FlCJ 'l ](J. 16 6 -2. 2?. 1. 1 97 1B.115 (). o. 2.3 1. 5 75
1 991 40 • 121 -0. 111 1.06.) 17.725 o. 0. 2. 4 61 , • 5 73
199 2 37.77"1 -3.37 1 • 021 15.006 o. o. 2. 279 1. 263
HJ3 JS.532 -3.<19 0.84.5 12.744 o. o. 2.248 1. 1 21
1CJg4 34.523 -1 • 7 1 0.6'16 11.E64 o. 0. -2. 15 4 1. 0 9 4
1q9 5 31.914 -1.222 .0. 61 11.001 ') .. o. 2 .o 14 1. 0 62
1 g 9(l 33.998 -0.466 o. 549 10. 927 o. o. 2.044 1.057
1'f(!7 14.74 3 0.22 0.524 11.364 o. o. 2. 14 4 1. 078
199 A 35.576 o. 303 .').53 11.849 o .. o. 2.194 1. 1
1999 36.328 0.21 0.542 12. 246 o. o. 2.1(}4 1.117
w 2000 36.771 -0.1 09 0.551 12.4 03 o. 0. 2. 156 1. 1 1 w __,
EM S:> EMP1J EMOT EMM9 EMFI E~D9 EMCM EMCN
1977 !\ o. .')". c. o • o. o. o.
1978 0. o. o. o. 0. o. o. o.
;o?q (). 0. o. o. 0. o. o. o.
1Cj8'l .~ ,; . o. o. o. o. o. o. o.
1 9R 1 0.106 0. 003 0. 0 21 o. 0.02?, 0.1 0.002 0.043
1'1 n 0.239 0.007 0. 043 0. . 0. 06 2 0.221 0.003 0. 10 4
1(") 81 ~-. 34 9 '1.:)09 0.1)6 0. 0.09 0.319 0 .o 05 0.154
1C1H4 1 .tl 04-0.038 0. 191! 0. 0.3G2 1. 2 8 3 0.021 1. 312
19f3') 3. 7 3 3 0.0 98 (). 5 03 o. 0. 96 4 3. J 9 s· ').1)54 3. 5 61
1 <) f:l6 4. 7G 3 0. 12 2 0. GS5 0. 1.227 4. 296 0.07 4.154
1c;P,7 5.367 0.114 o. 72 7 0.085 1. 38 4. 7 95 0.078 4. 4
,qg 5. 59 9 (). 1 36 ,'). 7"i3 ').085 1 • 437 4.955 0.081 4. 18 5
19tl9 4 .f136 0. 115 n.o67 0. 17 1. 24 4. 2 5 0.060 3.04
19 g 0 4. 1 57 0.097 0.586 0.17 1.066 3. 6 37 0.057 2. 20 1
El9 1 4. 16 9 0. ~ q 5 0.566 0 •. 17 1.0(i8 3.622 0. 057 2.243
1'ig2 3 • 4!~ 0.()77 0.474 6. 17 0.<!111 2.()72 o. 0 47 1. 6 8
1') ') l ?. • 9 1 1 :>.Of"l4 0.397 0.17 G. 7!.::4 2.498 0 .o 39 1. JO 6
1 9 <)4 2.713 0. 0 58 0 •. l5R 0~ 17 0.693 2.312 0.036 1. 2 2 6
19'15 2. 602 0 .0 55 o. 33.3 0.17 0.654 2.2 0.034 1. 1 9 5
199() 2. 6 22 (.•. ')54 ').325 0.17 J.6G.e 2.2 02 0.031t 1. 2 15
1997 2. 771 0.056 0.33.1 0. 17 0.705 2. 3 09 0 ~ 03 6 1.2 92
1 <) 913 2. 929 o.ns7 0. 3 41 0.1 7 0.745 2~4 23 0 .o 37 1. 37 3
1999 3. 07 5 0 eJ 59 0 • .146 (). 1 7 0.78i 2~522 0.039 1.445
2 0 O(J 3.157 o.osq 0.345 0.17 0 •. 8 2. 5 68 Oo 0 39 1. 4 87
. r.. r;\. .. N I c; I~ u 1\ !' L k' Lll P l: l\l' J. ,t;XU!:'::i l;;l.l:A 1.' 1::~':/::l
19 77 o. 1). o. o. . o .. o. o • o.
1978 " o. 0. o. o. o. o. o. ' .
·197G o. (\ . o. o. o. o. o. o.
. 19RO o • o. 0. o. o. o. 0. o.
, qs 1 0.043 -o. o 3 1 27.0q4 fl. 3 7 5 0.223 o. 0. o.
1<H!2 0. 1 0 1' 0.012 li :i. 5 04 16.293 0.472 4.319 1. 524 5.844
B83 '\. 1 51~ 0. 1 13 1·')0.598 21.23 0.681 10.:)19 2.855 12.917
19J4 0.547 -0.022 404. 27 1 Of•. 27 3 2. 232 15. 4 11 3. 725 19.259
1 <).~ s 1.46 0.332 1122.04 283.16 s. 877 61.179 18. 280 .79.692
19 86 1.CJ46 1. 877 1512.32 320.824' 7. 896 108.744 43.591 213.072
Flfn 2 .lB 2 • !~54 17<15. 1 320.7 46 9. 04 226.9~9. 35.302 264.2 37
.1qsa 2. 297 2.6<)8 1977.46 2119.1•)2 9.631 264.97 34.36 2 30 2. 215
19R9 2.:>42 2.B37 100i.C)I~ 191.273 8. 783 2 86. 1 05 3 4 ~ 49 5 32~'.371
,qqo 1. 7 57 2 .27 11·29.17 1Ht.5CJB 7.962 251.7U7 19.855 276.305
199 1 1. 794 1. 7') 1 17:!fl.07 ,1()3.277 7.937 218 .. 157 29.124 252.406
1992 1.541 1. 72 3 1GPO.P.7 40. 6R 4 6. 867 219.669 39. 007· 264.559
1':1 93 1.30(j 1 .2 4 7 1313.68 -1.773 5.928 173.6 09 28.588 209.121
199 4 1.226 0.85 12H3.82 -13.191 5. 514 134.262 3 0 .• 4 79 172.414
1'195 1.1<)5 0.673 12Pfl.7· ..; 2q. 0 12 5. 277 116.07 37.919 162.48L!
19 96 1. 215 0. SJ 5 1364.43· -31.773 5. 326 .103.52 43.365 156. It 22
1 C) 97 1 .29 2 0.47 15 15. 2 -29.032 s .. 613 102.27 50.668 1 63.6 8
10f)~ 1. 37 3 0.479 16 86.7 3 -26.211 5.933 111.253 57.917 181.336
1999 1. 44 5 0. 499 1862.43 -25.293 6.197 121.918 63.255 1 9 a. 9 6 1
2000 1 .487 0.511 2014.2 -26.q18 6. 347 130.312 6Jl.462 2i4.344
w w
N
'F.9 95 RPC REVG'P RP9S RT98 RENS GP'BAL PFBAL RI NS
1 CJ77 (). 0. o. o. o. 0. o. o.
1 en n () . o. o. o. o. o. 0. o.
197C) o. o. 0. o. o. o. o. o.
1qll0 1). o. o. o. o. o. .o. o.
19 8 1 -2.7r.·4 l).fJ19 0. o. 434 0. 43 4 0.81 0 •· 0.
1 q P.2 -2 .3 03 3.3.15 o. 1. 9 37 2. 37 -0.514 o. o. 0 57
1'~ A 3 -1.082 6 • .1fl2 o. 3.931 4. 986 -4.555· 0 •. -o. o JC
19R4 -1C) .302 16.507 0. 10.511~ 12. 171 -3.8 05. 0. -o. 31 9
1 CJ CJ 5 -1o .44A 53.'502 o. 34.459 41.225 -14.48 0~ . -o. 266
1<)fl(j -1~. 277 1G£i. 441 ').5 69.401 UU.519 -80.637 o. -1.014
1987 -14 .()07 135. f!(14 ().51 ()1.658 117. 8 2~J -163. 9 53 o. -5.645
19 I'IFl -Jq.n 157.633 1.13 1 09.17 7 140.811 -258.719 o. -11.477
1989 '"1!3.31'7 163.461 1. 54 111i.423 151.973 -366.059 o .. -18.11
1(jO(J -32.342 1G1.1l24 17.111 1 01!. 10 5 141.261 -43C).)Qq o. -25.6 8
1Q9 1 -44. 24 1 :>2 • I) 3 1 17. 91 11}~.912 '134 .572 -498.715 o. -30.7 51
1 q92 · -34 .on 151.023 17. q7 105. 6.18 1 J8. 26 8 -567.113 o. -3~.91
1'i'l) -t~.1. finn 130.516 17.98 91-! • 2 8 123.136 -611.:348 . o .. -39.698
19 '3 4 -~0.839 11!3.805 17. 93 83.135 1 14 • 216 -635.457 0. -42.79lf
1 C) 95 -Cj1.546 111!.703 17. 114 ?,q.266 115.177 ·-Gq9.42G o. -44 •. 482
19 CJ 6 -5J. 3q3 124.23 17.66 94.032 12o.ua:r ! -6 51. 54 3 o. -45. 4 G
1997 -53.855 138.199 17. 4 2 104. 333 1.12. 743 -61,4.367 o. -45.608
,qql3 -53.107 160.q53 17 .P.7 120w 21 152.22ll -6 28. 1 02 o. -ll5.106
19<)9 -~2.097 1US.640 16.7 130.377 174.554 -6 01.316 o .. -43.967.
2 000 -51 .234 213.133 1(). 19 157.832 1911.463 -ssq. 3 67 o. -42.092
...---. r-: ~-r----1 r-J ~ c-JJ r:--1 ~ r-J r~ c:'l. lJ ··~ r--,-.___, ~ CJ r--J ' ' I L J L. ·-..I --
FUND FU ND77 R99L E99L
1977 o. n. o. o. 1978 o. 0. 0. 0. 1979 r,. 0. o. 0. 1 QO 0 1'\ 0. 0. (). 19Q1 n.r'1 -o .3m 0.038 0.038 198 2 -0. 514 -3.')15 2. 783 2.783 1 <183 -4.555 -7.61 6.544 6.544 1984 -.3.80') -20 • .554 10.266 10.266 191}.S -11;. 4(1 -fi6.2'i4 41. 108 41.108 19 :! G -1~0.(·3 7 -135.1 r7' 112.7q2 112.792 ,q i37 -1h],G5J -201.691 151.226 151.226· 1 988 -?.Sfl.719 -262.121 178. 207 .178. 207 w 1Gf3') w -3b6.fl59 . -3 06 • 07 H 1'14.5A1 194.5fl1 w 1Q9tJ. -4'39.3~9 -32t~.H='~5 1 76. 71+7 176.747 1991 -4 ~lfl. 715 -342.578 159. 162 1 SG. 16 2 1() 9 2 -567.113 -34Fl,9P. 165.555 165.555 Fl9 3 -611.348 -JI.~J. 414 142.916 142.916 jq')4 -635,!l57 -jJJ .rrn 125.('17r. .125.'l78 1C)'J.5 -649.426 -321.449 122.217 122.217 1 996 -6 'i 1 • s 4 3 -307.359 122.363 122.363 1997 -fi4!~.3i'i7 -291. B12 128.932 128.932 1'198 -62R.1~2 -273.516 142.722 142. 722 19QQ -6 () 1 • 3 1 6 -251.301 15r1. 04r) 1 511. 0 51 2000 -559. 367 -224.25 173.344 173.844
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
r
LJ
[
[
§
D
u
E
c
L
LOW BASE CASE
335
1 q77 41') .66 -24.'~1S 6. 11'.1 1P s. sor. 0.363 0 • .l7H 0.2 5q 1 • ,
1() 78 1~1)(;. 709 -11.1'.l9 7 • 2 1)2 178.~')7 0.373 o •. h!6 :).242 1. 2
1979 417.f(i1 4.2.1 (i. fii}:'J 184. 4H6 0.382 0.3 76 0.242 1 .2
1fH!Q 411.4Ci') 7.()(l'j 6 .. n.2(~ 1'l2.1H"7 o. J<jlf 0.163 0. 244 l. 2
1 q n 1 4'11.~·57 13.':27 7. "'4 ?. ·~3. 138 tl r;. 4 ·)6 C.J45 Q • 2 4'J 1. 3
1 C) iJ2 4 il?. • J 4 4 21.318 7. L~RS 222. JJ 0.421 0.321 0.2513 . 1 .3
1 '! l'l.i I~ <)fl • 9 ll 2 R.1.'J6 8.324 228.242 0.423 o. 3 25 0.252 1. 4
19134 497.291 -1·J.1'i3 i3.'i'1B 22'1.077 0.112 0.341 0.24 1.4
198 5 5() 4 • 71 -0.564 7.Q5q 2 22. IHJ 0. 426 o. 3 33 0. 2 I+ 1 1.4
19 86 518.1122 5.B52 7. ilS 2 229.7 56 0.433 0. 3 24 0. 243 , • 5
1 CJ 87 S111,256 7.!"\10 7.•Jf)H ?..!11.04 0. lj 4 1 0. 3 16 0 .• 242 1.5
1flPil 551 • 4 :)7 p. q .1 p • /.1 5 2 46. CJCHJ 0.44tJ 0.309 0. 242 1. b
FU:l9 56 CJ. 21". 7 9. 3 3'1 8. 4 74 256.1!.)8 0.456 0.303 0.2ll2 1. 6
1')')() SA') .921 7.973 8. 7 41) 264.313 0.4(,1 0.2ql3 0.2lll 1 • 7
1G<J 1 6111.6()'1 6. 72 7 A .%1 27 1 • 6114 0. 461.! 0. 29 3 0. 239 1. 7
199 2 617.'354 r •• 6 24 9. 126. 27B.'-J7 0. 4 74 0.2 87 0.239 1 .8
1993 635.153 P.. ~ 09 'l • 20 2fl7.B06 0. 4i! 2 0.2fl . 0. 23 8 1.fl
19 9 4 67>3.018 13.337 9.:>31 296.515 0.1~8<) o. 2 74 0. 238 1. 8
1995 ()71.975 9. 1 qq 9.761 305.943 o. 496 0.26 7 0.237 1 • 9
1""fl6 6fl1.01P. Q.023 10.023 3 1 5. 2f! 1 0.502 0.261 0. 237 2.
1997 1 n. 02.1 10.734 H·.274 325.984 . 1).509 0.253 0 • 237 . 2. 1
1998 7 ]J .6'"·8 11.048. 10. 591 336.919 o. 516 0. 2 47 0.237 2.1
1Gqq 757.817 13.251 10.912 349.551 .0. 52 4 0. 2 39 o. 237 2.2
?.""~")') 782.438 n . .J 13 11.316 362.225 \).53 0.2 33 0.237 2.2
w w
0'1
EM GF' E~1P9 .Ei1T9 EMS9 EMPU EMOT EMM9 EMFI
1977 IJ2.921 4. 514 9. 842 22. l'i49 1.104 14.55 11 • 356 5. 779
1Q7P, 4?..G21 4.365 1!).2Clfi 21.905 1. 19 4 14. 27 11;906 5.739
1979 4 2. 921 . 4·. J (i 8 1-).728 23. ~·33 1 • 24 4 .-14.5 C9 12.411 6. 1 3 3
1 q F! ') 42.921 4.692 11.284 25.552 1. 300 14.Fl13 12~e% 6.6 54
1 c. fl 1 47.921 4.336 12. 033 2B.495 1. 387 15. 2611 13. 37 7. 3 6
19 8 2 4 2. 92 1 4. 1 3 13.113 33. 0 73 1. 493 15.949 13 .843 8.4 02
F•fl3 1~2.!<21 3 .BJ6 13. ~ 36 3J.qq 2 1. 53 16.163 14.32 8.735
19F.I4 42.92l 3.835 13. 1 33 32. 05 7 '1.514 15.904 14 • 86 7 8. 4 71
19HS 4?..921 3. 7 SJ 1 3. 44<) 32. 86 6 1. 54 15. 969 15.36!+ 8. 7 02
1()fl6 4?..q21 3. 725 13.911 34.749 1. 59 16.217 15.877 9. 1 81
19 87 42.921 3. (l 3 5 14. 4 52 )(i. 96<:J 1 .64 'j 16.:)1 16.403 9. 7 53
1 n~n 47..921 3.q•s 15. 0 OP J'l.J•)4 1 • 7 0 f~ 16.1'!21 1 6. 'i '17 1 O.J52
19 gq 4~.921 4. 1 .51 1S.S9 41.786 1. 77 1 17. 135 17. 5()7 10.992
19 q ') 4:?.921 4.]6 16.091 4 3. 91 8 1 • 82 ~) 17.4 07 1 8. 085 11.555
1 'l <11 42.92 1 3.06f! '!(i.5P0 4fi.11() 1.P.77 17.6 49 1f!.6(j 12.121
1~ C) 2 4 2. 921 3.856 1 1. ·:c n 1~8.2 55 1 .92H. 17.·387· 19. 2')7 12. 6 7 4
1 'J 93 47..921 .'3.11:)9 17.ri53 50. 933 1.989' 18.171 19.qJJ 13.357
1 Q 1111 42.G21 3. 711 1fJ.209 53.::,14 2 .. 04b 18.q4ii 20. 59 14.019
B95 47..921 3.661 18. B2.J 5o.396 2. 109 18.739 21 • 26 9 14.761
1 (')96 42.<121 3.619 1 G. 4 1 5G. 2 1 1 /., 17 19.025 21.971 15.4f33
1Q9 7 42. Y21 3.6 2 0. 092 62.538 2.239 19.347 22.696 16. J 33
199 8 42.921 3. 'i ~Hl 10. 7 66 65. 8Htl 2.307 19.571 23.445 17. 187
1 <'j(JCl. 42.921 3 .::.q 5 21.545 6f.J.F!3!0 <!. 3f] 5 20. 0 38 2tt.219 18. 1 32
20 00 q2.921 3. 59 3 22.1')6 73.76 :L.46 2.0 .4 25.019 19. 19
r~ r--:: r~ r-:-; ~ r::::-1 c-:--::1 r;---] ~ r-J r:J r'"~ ,.---~ r--: ,......--, ,....--..., :--1 ~ rJ l l ... J l_ ) . l : J
nn c~ r-r:r:-J r---J cr::-J rJ cr::J em ~J c--J [:--J r-1-r-----"1· r-l r--1 r-1 :----1 ~ l j L -
E'J C'l E~lCN F.:1C': !{ 1 EMGA PI Pin PC FPI EXOPS
11177 '.'+.81') Hi. '559 11.1!10 27. 25(i 4072.38 3<)2~. 32 ~!)2.71 8 10 •.
Pnf! 24 • 77 1 1 1 .ID6 11.]0'1 25.('•4'1 4 2 Jl. 42 3724.25 271J.75 g 4 4.
1979 ?.6.247 12.12Cj 11. 912 211.421 4.7 ')7 • J lj/~.5 .1 u 293.049 10 19.
1 q;n 2A. B 13.20 J 12.111~ 2fi. il1 530l.tll> :.!9 Y4 • 15 3 07.6 33 ll1!J.32
1 'In 1 ]1').736 16.1tJ4 . 1 3. 8<19 27.412 CJ267.25 4278.38 324.412 1232.22
19 fl2 3tt ,1127 22. ·} ')6 1'l.!'i55 20.451 778B. 36 4G8~.B8 344.602 1410.43
1 9!13 35 .f,2J 21. 793 1(,, 33G 31.314 ~!tt5:3.86 4703.56 360.J17 1676.29,
1 I')" 4 .14.777 '16•946 1~ • .11)7 32.437 8155.89 41-!11.l.17 371.:,113 18 30. 0 7
1935 35.611 17. 1 9 16.964 3 j. 32 3 8GF35.5 4IJ40.·J6 3 86 .B36 1r.i87.08
1 n n,r, 37.31 1:1.44(· . i p • J J11 31.4'-ll.t gfi21. Ll5 ~~ 2. H 9 404.95 L05J.14
1q87 39. 32 u 19.L:t•5 113.'187 32.4 15 1 ·HO .IJ 4720.5 4211.~J70 22C)l.1.1
1 q ~l8 41.427 ?.0. 53 1 20. O·J'J 33. 49 2 11945.4 4!.Hi6.2 4q5.1fl7 2~iiS.52
1 1<f1'1 41.652 ?'t.'5.14 21.051 ]II. (, 0 3 13293.5 5003.09 LJ(,G. E.l06 2Bu9.B7
H'J1 l~'i. 6~ l 22. 16(, 21.tJB7 3S.72'j 111u JS. 1 510lJ.':jl) 11 u H • n 1 4 Jl'J7.5j
1q'l1 117. s q 7 2 2 • '.j l'.l 22.7 51 JG. 'j~J! 161)5].9 521').21 511.2<1 351tJ.7C3
1CJ9 2 4Q.4)3 23.70.3 23.S8fJ 37.14 17590.9 5 J 26 • J 1 534.001 3846.62
1 CJ91 51.749 2ll. f)(j 4 24.682 37.57H 1 94211. 5 5461.'.11 559.9 213 4194.1
1 () '1 4 51,C\77 25.r<4J 2'3.76 3!!.232 2139S.5 55(}0.2.1 5H6. 104 . 458<.J.25
119 'j S5. 4>1 2 n. <l6B 26.957 3!3.717 23579.7 5717.76 613.712 5~02.19
1q<Jn 58.864 28.21 2A. 1 311 3'1. 247 2 5C: 5i3. 6 58LJ7. ~5 (,42. ~137 5<>46.57
19 97 n1.675 2').62!3 29.574 39.623 ie7on. 6 5990.23 673.101 5917.61
1991' 6q.479 31.11~8 31.093 40.i7J J174n.G 61:37.!J 7 05. 102 6452.18
w 1'1'1CJ 67.753 32.t134 32.r.7fl 40.6 5 352fl0~ 2 62<17. ]q 739.-293 7034.25 w 20!)~ 70.985 34.729 34.671 41.325 39151.6 645'6.57 775 .oo~: 7698.62 '-1
EXCAr> F.IJ Cj s .E9qSRI.'C R EVGF RP9S RT9P. R ENS GPBhL
1977 27'). 3.26 1HO. 82 1118.56 7 96. 269 197.2 214.3 01 .278 .'322 6od.165
1f')711 2 p .'). 1311.13 1i'i2.37 1051.Rq q 7 1 .. 4 206.'133 2!.t 0. 2fHl 617.21.15
1117 '.l 2C):'l. 1~111.71 '\1'i'.l.8h 11~ 3 9. 7 ') IJ6·').7 273.322 222.013 !313.789
19R"' 32Q .271 1~i5~!.(, 1 1i4. 16 1620. 996. j 31 0.3 8 227.772. 1055.05
1r.; rn 367.3% 1723. ]q 1176.L~5 1<J79.55 1276.41 3 50. 3 6 3 257.599 1509.12
19 8 2 4 38. 35B 19iJ7.U 11<)5.81 23 Hl~ 53 14 75 A 71{ 410 .~26 328.462 2076.1:J8
1C'!83 s 1 n. 3A 9 231+7. 63 1305.115 21)41.6 1642.7 ;>45.471 410.R47 2661.78
1~i H !I 55(}.4fl!) 2559.?.7 138'i.15 32i5.i 2121.71 & !~ 4. 2 6 3 439.203 3599.S5
, 9 0 c:; 6'iJJ·?R 2727 •. 18 1]~16.76 3620.69 242i.t.lB G76.11i2 4'12.·')97 t.; •t9f.i .t1J
1'186 711.1.?.56 3 [' 113 • 7 144CJ.fl3 31102. 1 ?. 4 2'1 •. 9 1 730.619 4 il ~l .. 9 5 ') 5'j 28. U2
19 Fl7 Al7.L112 J3f>1.6f'; 14t11.97 4047.45 24 7B. 65 '71)5.191 560.0',)5 71)47.66
1 q ')i~ 9')'>.241 3730. :>8 1519.71 429q. 57 251il. 62 !362.611 645.01! H 1 1 /. .lJ 7
1111'!fl 9')7.021 tn 15 •. n 1C)i~ll.f32 4558.% 2553.8~ 9q2.d11 74J.Ot.l5 9114.2
B'l 1 1~ "' 4. 1 452') •. 11 1S7il.2S 4667.32 2430.95 1!)18.65 851.055 9.194.7
19'11 10J1 .08 41370.91 1')fl.l.'.i5 41!22.41 2 JG4. 37 1092.01 964.129 10:535.6
19 C)~ 1021.29 52:-.1.84 ~5<)('.(i9 5')32.76 2 4 00 • :.fl 1183.17 10H7.67 111')7.9
BC) 3 '1"1fi4.fl1 5 () 7 ·"· t'l C) 1 ';I.J 4.% 53::00.79 242B.1~. 1309 .. 47 1/./.7.98 11595.2
1 qrq 111J.n~ 6145.23 1Gil:•.6 5Sr'0,47 23'13.23 142fl.l)5 13-=!~.25 1191<;.5
19 <) "i 1149. 1 Gfi2Fl.:;5 1(i!)7.27 51J·:)4. 14 23!.11.42 ,. 15Ci1.11 15 ~I 1 • 18 120 G 5. 2
1 9')(\ 11~l2.7i 7 15 3. i3 j I) 1 1. I) 5 608.1.17 2327Q77 17?.3.att l793.BP. 1204'1.
1CJC)"7 12 .s lj. 45 777.2 ./.6 1611.28 6393.15 2n3. s 1906.6 2034.21 118Gf3.4
19fJ[l 136!.96 134·"'3.72 1(i24.'i2 67 !f 2. 36 2321.79 2125.08 23113.27 1.1t.t76.6
1 g •)9 147(i.21 9131~.35 1630.41 7134.33 23'29. 04 23!33. 17 2644. 11 10876.9
2000 1607. 52 9%5.2 9 164.'3.37 ?:i73.25 2.3J1-72 2St14,56 3030.63 100 34. 1
1.' td 1\L. R INS FU~lD FDND77 EXD!TE!.. R99L E99L SHIP
1977 2. II 35.343 67[.6 671.369 ':1.131 531.912 557. 16 -137.453
197R 4?..975 4G.ll:-i4 666.22 6 0 2. 5 15 • 0. 1 J4 56~J. 5 09 595.272 -4~3 8
1979 153.275 46.88 967. 06!t FJ34.CJ01 0. 132 622.581 653.949 300.8 44
19 A rJ 275. 611.461 11J0.;)5 109.1. H5 0. 1) 5 714.74 744.8il 362.987
1QP1 411.475 0.11.47'1 1'l2fl.5'l ll>G7.P2 0. 1:2 7 7%.4 69 82(!. 3i!4 590.54
191) 7. "i63.425 136.4')9 2G4''.3 1938.46 •). 1 1 5 8 'J7 • 1 13 9 ):; • 9 719.713
1 9A3 '731.699 187.638 3393.47 23132.76 0. 122 1 0 2P: • 0 4 1 0 6.1. A 6 753.171
1 'I p 4 q4f1.649 241.202 454H.'2 1097.07 0.136 1112.56 1150.52 1154.73
..... __ nqs 1, 87 __ • 55 32J. 117 'iQtHi.] fl 3914_ • .73 1.13.1 1156.25 11%.49 1438.19
1 f1 fl6 1437.35 42LI.qP4 7366.17 4(j 0 2. 1 5 0 ~ 12q 12 37.7 6 12H0.41 1379.79
1C) fJ 7 168().2 522. 'll R 07.31.A6 52 OJ. 1 9 0. 126 1350.06 1395.2~ 1365.69
1 ~; 88 193').[) 619.651 1 ') 1) 4 13 • 7 5710.66 0. 12 4 14 83.4 3 1531.36 1316.82
1'JP') 21"7. .2.2 713.0H6 11 3 ·16 • 4 6127.f~6 o. 122 16 28. 4 1679.2 12G7.76
1')'11) 2440.75 80 2. 411 1:n3s.s 63 fl4. 57 0.1 n 1789.27 18113. 12 1029.03
1 r; 9 1 2f>8').6 875.685 13216.2 6539.71 o. 12 2 1952.24 2009.32 il80.718
1<1<1 2 2<'<?.5.5 938.534 14031.1-1 fi(i 38 .!:JIJ 0.121 2121.84 2182.34 817.266
19 q 1 317).85 0 %.'168 1tl7f,9.1 6£i73.31 ) • 1 1 9 23,')2. 74 2366.88 735.648
1 Ci 9 I; 341"l.25 1 0 '+ r; • 7 1 5 J )P • f! 6G21. 2 0. 117 2513.77 25111. 7'6 569.703
19 9 'j Jf,')9. 62 10'JO.B1 1!) ??,IJ, fj 64!32.49 0. 116 27 37.2 5 28•)<J.31 386.0 55
19911 3fl9q.·J2 1119.04 15948.1 62 80. 56 0. 1 15 2988.63 3065.02 223.246
1'1147 41.1!).3 1135.Q6 16007.7 6016.A4 0. 113 3254.47 3335.45 59.586
1CJ9A 438 o. 25 1141.23 1 5856. 9 5689.65 0.112 3561.)5 3646.88 -150.812
1999 46 22 .G2 1131.88 15499.5 53 04. 22 0. 11 JIJ<n.cn 39A2.95 -357.34
2000 4866.29 11 08. 08 11-1900.4 4864.23 0. 109 4274.4 4 4370.88 -599.121
w w co EXBT 'rr.S VI ADL 2 RE~SR hT
19 77 0.229 0.604 0.068
1 <l?R 0.25 0.506 o. 0 57
1q7<} 0.242 0.467 0. 0 !17
1 •:; 8 " 1'\. 237 (). 442 c. ·)4)
1 q '11 0.722 0.437 0.041
19 '\2 1)./.:)5 0.442 0.042
19R3 ~. 22 3 ., • 4 3 ~.04C)
. 1 0 :~ 4 0.253 0.414 0.054
198'i r'l.2"i1 0.401 c. :) 51
1 C) IJ6 0.2'>2 0. 3q 1 o. 0 51
1'< ::J 7 0.25 . 0.3 9 0.052
1 ') q g 0. 2'i 0.389 0. ') 511
1 C:FI9 0.248 0.191 0. 0 56
Fl q () 0.249 0. J 9ft 0.05!3
Fl9, 0.246 G. 4') 1 n.o6
1q!J2 0.242 0.4 09. 0.01)2
1903 0.23R 0.417 0. 0 6.'3
1 !') !)4 0.234 0. 4 27 0.065
1QQ') 0.23 0 .4 JP. 0. 067
1qC)O (). 226 0.45 0.%9
1•H7 0. 221 0.463 o. 071
1<'lq8 1).217 0.4 76 0. 073
1G99 :>.212 0.49 :).1)75
2 000 0. 2 QG 0.506 0. 077
(.~··.~. J--··i---J -·---L":"J·-· -T--:--1. ·---Tl'"--r-1-----!!--·-·-c-J
[
[
[
[
[
[
L
r L:;
r
L
L
fl
c
u
c
[
L
95% NORTHERN GULF OCS DEVELOPMENT SCENARIO -
LOW BASE CASE
(Levels and Differences from the Base Case)
339
r;:J (['":l c=l ~! lJ :-----; ,....---, .---: :--l r-""". ·:---1 :---; :-----1 r--m1 c~ r-: ,..._.._, r-; ~' J
~ II I I l.ii"l,., .)
?FBI\!. RINS F rJND P u~ n77 EXB!Tr:L R 99L E99t SI:-:P
19 77 2.4 3'5.343 (,70.6 671.369 0. 131 531.912 5"l7.1G -137.4 53
1979 48.975 4G.9')4 6(>6.22 602.515 0.13 4 S68.5 09 595 .272 -4.38
1Q7q 15.1.275 4 6 .f~ ~ %7.064 fl34.fl01 0. 132 622.581 650.949 300.844
19 RO 275. 68.1161 133').()5 1(93.85 0.135 714.74 741~.811 362.9 87
1981 411.475 9<1.479 1921.34 1497.44 o. 127 796.503 821.i.378 5<J1.2R5
1 a fl2 563.425 136.C)S1 263Y.23 1936. 0. , 1 5 899.646 9 33. 4 33 7i7.tl95
19 g] ?31.!i99 187.')63 .1389.26 2377.9 0.121 1:)32.1 1067.91 750.035
1984 94R.649 2Li0.907 4SI~().!I1 ]rJ') 0. 3 0. 1 J7 1 1 1 G. 56 1 1 5 !I. 52 1151.15
193 '5 11137.55 :122.572 5974.8 .3 g 06. 11 0. 133 1158.42 1198.66 1434. 3~
19 8 h 1437.35 424. 174 7 .152. 24 4592. 7 o. 12 9 1238.>.16 1281.51 1377.45
1<lP7 11iP11.2 521 .n i.IJ ~3715.R4 5193. 0 G 126 13 50. h 7 1395.f!Y 13 63. 6
19RR 19 35. B 618.53 1')':3(·.7 5()99.88 0.124 1'>83.88 1531.8. 13111.91
1989 21CJ2.22 711.B31 112il6.7 6116.57 (). 122 16 28.7 7 1{)7q.57 1255.92
19f11) 244(). 75 H01. 027 12.113.9 63 72.86 0.122 l7 89.6 H343.45 10 27.23
Fl9 1 21iFl0.6 874.176 13192.8 6527.61 0.122 1 9 52.5 4 2009.63 870.906
1CJC17. 2925.5 936 .8CJ9 14008.3 6626.41 0. 1 21 2122.12 2182.63 815.453
1991 31D.85 995.205 14742.1 6660.62 0. 1 19 2JQ3.J1 2367.15 733.844
1 qq4 3419.25 1047.f32 15::110. 66 0 8. 2 9 a. 1 11 ;!S14.•)J 2582.02 567.891
1<'1115 365<1.62 1 orr. • H 1 56 9!~ • 2 64(,9.41 0. 116 27 37.5 2809.57 384.211
1g96 3t399. 12 1116.89 15915.5 6267.34 0. 115 2988~88 3065.27 221.309
1 99 7 41 39. 3 1133.58 15t;7?.. q 6003.37 0. 113 32 54. 6 4 3335.62 57.3 63
1998 4380.25 1 13 8. 8 15819.7 5675.95 0.112 3561.31 3647.14 -15 3. 'l 48
nqg 4622. 6 2 1129.28 15459.q 5290.32 0.11 3892.27 39!33.25 -359.801
2000 4866.29 11 05 • J 1 14P5fl.2 4B 50. 15 0. 109 4274.77 4371.21 _:601.707
w
~ __.
EXBI TE S VI ABL 2 RENSFAT
1977 0.229 0.604 0.068
1978 ('\.2'1 0. 5') 6 0.057
1 ~7 9 0 .24 2 0~467 o. 047
1<"if3 0 0. 217 0.1P.l2 0.04]
19 g 1 0.221 ".4]7 ) • Q 41
1GP2 (). 2 )5 0 • 4 ~~ 2 0.042
19 8 3 0.223 0. 4 3 o. 049
1 984 0.253 0. 4 14 0. D 54
1 q P. 5 0 .2 S2 0 .11 01 0.051
Fl.% ~.252 0. 3 9 1 J. 0 5 i
1 9 ~l7 (') • 251 0.39 0.052
19fl8 I). 2 5 O.lfl9 0. 054
198C) (). 21.18 0.391 ·).!i56
1 '1GQ 0.249 0 .3'1 4 0. 0 5Jl
1 q q 1 0.246 0 • I~ () 1 0.06
19 92 0.242 0.409 0.062
1 'l GJ 0.23'! o .t•n J.063
, C)<) 4 0.234 I). I~ 2 7 ).1)65
1 q CJ5 0.23 0.438 :J.067
1 C) 96 0.27.6 0.45 ·).069
19 97 0.221 (). 1Hi3 0. i)71
1 998 0.217 0.476 r). 07 3
1999 0.212 0 .II q '.). 07 5
200') 0.209 0. 50 6 0. 0 77
c.;v ._. ~·.L .1. \.1 L't ;.:. J. L'i J..L't \..J.V l :;, •• .1 "J ,, L I"J/\ 7 r:.nuJ.: Lf.l.t"'.t LL"l "..!. "J
1977 o. Q. o. o. o~ 0. o. o.
1 C)7 8 0 • 0. o. o. o. o. o. 0.
1q 7G o. 0. o. 0. a. o. o. o.
198 0 " 0. r::. 0. o. . 0 • ;) . o.
1 ') q 1 0 .684 0.6fl5 0. o. 506 0. o. 0.14'3 0. 1 013
198 2 1. OH 4 0.372 0.028 0.743 0. o. 0. 149 . o. 1 2
1!)fl3 1 ~ 1 )4 ·0. 0.1 0. '}41 0.706 () . o. 0. 114 0.097
1q~ 4 0.7P2 -o.3n 0. 039 0.366 0. o. o. 021 o. 0 35
1q R5 O.S66 -0.23R 0.022 0.183 o .. o. c. 0.009
1'J8fi 0.45 -() . , ] 0.012 0.094 o. 0. 0. 0.005
11"lfl7 O.)q') -0.062 0. 0 Oti o. 0(. . ,
\Jo 0 • o. 0. 0 OJ
1 'lfHl !I. 359 -0.()/J 0.01)1~ 0.043 •). 0. o. 0 •. 002
1 C)89 0.332 -0.029 0. 002 0.034 o. o. o. o. 002 ..
1990 0. 3 07 -0.026 o. 001 0.026 0. o. o. c. 001
1391 "' • 286 ~.0. 0 2 o. 0.022 o. o. o. 0.001
10 '1?. 0.26P. -0.0111 -0. o.o1n o. o. o. o. 0 01
19 '} 3 0. 25 -0.017 -0.001 0.014 o. o. 1). o. 00 1
1 C) 94 0.233 -o. o 16 -0.001 o. 011 o. o. o. 0 .. 001
1'Jt15 0.217 -0.015 -0.001 0.009 o. o. o .. o. 0 01
199 6 o. 196 -c .o 21 -0.01)1 0. 0 1)3 o. o. 0 .. 0.
1997 0.189 -0.0 0 5 -0.002 0.007 o. 0. o. o. a 01
1<198 0.1~ -o .oo6 -0.001 0.008 o. o. o. o. 0 01
1999 0. 17 2 -0.0~!7 -'J. 001 0.009 0. o. o. 0 .. 001
w 2 000 0.154 -o. o OR -0.001 o.ooq o. o. o .. o. 0 01
.p.
N·
EMS9 El1PU EMOT EMM9 EMFI E11D9 EMCM EMCN
1<177 o. o. 0~ o. o. c. o. o.
1Cj78 C'. o. o .. r) .. o. . 0 ~ o. o.
1 97 q 0 • o. o. o. 0. o. 0 .. o.
1~f30 ('I • o. o. o .. 0. o. 0 .. o.
19 A 1 0.!'197 0.003 0.019 a. 0. 02 5 o. 0 93 0 .OOi 0.04
19 fl2 0.14') (\.004 0. 027 0 .. 0. 0 Jfl o. 1 38 0.002 0.066
"193) 0.141 0.004 0. 025 o. 0. 036 0.13 0.002 0.064
1C'IB4 (\ • 07 3 0.002 0.~13 0. 0. 019 0.!) 6f3 0. 001 o. 034
1 Q~ ') 0. 03 5 0 .. 001 0. 007 6. 0 .. 009 0. J 3.3 0.001 o. 013
19 f3 6 ".018 (1. 0. ') 03 . 0. 0.005 O.J17 0. 0. 002
19f17 0 .l' 1 3 0. o. on o. 0.003 o. 0 1, o. 0~ 0 01
19R8 0. 00 ') o. 0. 001 0 .. 0.002 o. 0 09 0. o.
1989 J.~·JB o. 0.001 0 .. o. 002 o. 007 o. -o.
1 qq ') 0. 006 0. 0.001 o. 0.002 o. 0 06 o .. -o.
19 tj 1 O.OOii o. o. 001 o_. 0.001 0 .·:> 05 o. o.
1992 o .. oos 0. 0.001 o. 0.001 0. 0 04 o. o.
1Cl(j3 0 • 001~ 0 .. o. 0 .. 0.001 0.004 o .. o.
199 4 0.004 0. 1. o. 0 .. 001 0.')03 o. 0.
1 qq'.) 0.00) 0. o. 1). 0. 001 o. 0 03 o. o.
1Q% 1).001 o. o. o. 0 .. 0.001 0. -o ..
1997 G. on 3 0. '). o .. 0. 001 o. 0 03 o. 0 .o 01
1998 o. 001 0. '). o. 0.001 0.003 0 .. 0. 0 C2
1C!<J9 0.004 o. o. o. 0. 001 0.01)3 0 • o. 002
2')1)') 0.004 0. o. b. o. 001 0.0 03 ,... 0 .. 002 v.
r--1 r--:: r-; ~ r;, ·~ ITr1 rr--J r-"--1 ~' r:-J C":"":'J ;-"' ~. ~ ~ .---, ..---·~ • \i i. J
r:r:-1 r::J c:1 •:--7fil r--· r1 :""J ~ .-, r---1 -----"1 ·~ ·:-1 iJ
~ c~~ r---r--1 . J l. J ' .•
\ I.
'F,MD9 EMCN E~C~f 1 Et1 G!, t)T ~ ... PIRPC RPI EXOPS
1977 . 24.fl19 16 ... ,~,g 11.1!39 27.256 4072.38 3 9 24.3 2 252.7, . 8 10.
1978 24.77 1 , 1. 4 36 , , • 309 25.941. ·~t2.n. 42 3724.25 2 71.). 7 5 G44 •
1C!7~ 2li.247 12.12<1 ,, .'112 .?.C..421 47 07. . 3845.78 2lJ3.0L!9 1019.
1991'1 28. 18 13. 2:! 3 , 2. 84 2n.81 53.')1.84 3994.15 . 307 .633 1114.32
1 G81 ]:) .828 16.473 ·13.CJ3~ 27. 38 3 G2CJ2. 12 !1213 6. 13 324.619 1232.22
19 82 34.565 22.122 15.621 28.5 7 B 29. 1 4695. 7'9 344.899 11l14. 43
19 g 3 35.753 21.857 1G.4 31.406 0496.34. 4711.6 360.oOS 1682.58
1qn4 34.P.41~ 16,f]f~1 16.34'2 32.536 11 177. 23 44 1 G. 8 37L719' 18.36.3
1SR5 3':i.643 , 7. 2 03 1G.q77 3, • ~~ 86%.63 41-147.50 3ll6.99 Hl<J2.B9
1 9Rii 37.327 "18.448 1Fl. 04 31.537 9f)27.34 4 581. ~ 405.016 2056.(~5
lC) P. 7 3Q,33G 1 Q • 4 1!5 1 8. <Jc3fl 32.431 1 0 7.1 2. 6 4718.58 4211.631 2294. 02
19S3 41.4 36 20. 5 J 1 2:':'. 1.·09 33.511 1194':1.2 4U64.11 445.234 2567.84
1 C)f'!9 43.659 21.534 21. 05, 34.617 1321'J7. 5001.02 1!66.fl5l 2H71.f37
, 9 C) f) Ill). 6 t) lJ 22.1(.6 21 .<JR7 35.739 1463H.4 5107.99 488 .. 1357 3199.28
1 C) 9 , 117.551 22.939 22.759 3 6. 5 56 16056.9 5217.3 511 .. 332 3520,29
1~'12 4 q ,!13 ::1 2 3. 7 03 :?.3.~l!fl 37. , 4 5 1 ?'S<"~J. a 53 26. 1 9 534. fl qJ 3847.94
19 9 3 51. 7"J2 2L+.rHi4 7.4.682 37.5H1 19427.4 5460.1'7 559.97 41lJS.22
1 q C)!.! 53.98 25. 9 43 25. 76 3f3. 23 4 2139tl.4 5588.55 5flG.146 4590.19
1 c;q 5 56.465 27.069· 26.958 38.718 235!32.5 57 16. 2 1 613.755 50 02. 9 5
13% 58. 8 f, 5 2fl. 2, 28.139 3CJ.247 2596•).8 5U 45. 9.4 642 .4 77 . 54 4 7. 18
1 9<n 61.677 29.6 3 29. 57 6 3CJ.621 28711.7 5tHJ8. ') 673.145 5918.04
19<}8 154.482 31 • 1 5 31.095 40.172 3l7.52 .2 6136 .. 17 705 .. 149 6452.66
1999 67.756 32. 9 35 32. 879 40. 648 35284.1 62 96 .. 2 739.3~2 7034.71
2') 00 70.Gf!i3 31+.731 34.673 41.324 ]q155.9 6455'.52 775.054 '7699.06
w
-l=>o w
EXChP E99S . E99 SRPC REVGP RP9S RT 98 RENS . GFBAL
19 77 270.32 6 1, 6!) .fl2 111fl.56 796.269 197.2 214.301 278.522 668.165
197A 2W". 1311.13 1152.37 10 53. 84 4 71. 4 2 06.9 33 240.288 617.21+5
107() 2'1 0. 1414.71 1i55.86 1439.75 8 (>0 ~ 7 273.!122 222.013 tl13.789
198"1 J 2CJ. 27 1 1'358.6 1174.16 16/.0. 996.3 310.38 227.772 1055.05'
1 ~ fll 31i7.356 1723.39 1173.G3 1') H 0. 3 127P.. 41 350. 7 59 257.0% 1509.86
19!12 439.758 199.3.03 11<JS.3l+ 2J2i.01 1 47 5. 74 432.272 330.3.)4 21) 7 5. 8
198.1 ~1<).9.18 235:l.51 1:106. 22 2644.87 1 G 42. 7 547.!)26 413.558 2657.56
, qq 4 5G0.615 25Ci6.71 1:386. 34 32 1fJ. 67 2121.71 646.014 441.699 3591.76
1 CJ n s 6S2.fi62 2732.1)4 1397.(,6 3621.77 2!121.88 6 77 .f)67 443.388 4787.25
, 9 flf, 77Q.79i 304(1.14 H 49. 1~g . Jfl02. 25 2429.91 731.094 4Fl<J.635 5914.[39
i C1 i! 7 iJ3G.?.G3 3363.37 1 (l fJ, • 4 ~~ 4047.14 247U.65 785. lt71 560. 408 7031.G4
1'l88 gr·t~. 106 3731.79 F'19.06 42 98.99 25113.62 (162. ·'J22 645.383 13094.95
1989 955 .9 73 4116.31 , '3 ~~f.! • , 3 45 511. 2 2s 53. a9 942.993 743.346 <jQCJ4.44
1CJ 90 101)3. 13 4521.04 , 577.5fl 4666.4 2430.95 1018~82 851.297 9073.15
, 9 9 1 1~<;1).29 1W7 1.% 15112.118 4U2'\, JG 2364.37 , 0 92., 8 964.36 10512.2
. , <J<J2 102').61 5.?.'J2.J~ l:iCJ0.04 5:)r~,. 57 2400. 5fl 1 193.34 1087.91 11082.8
1993 1:':'611. 1Cl S671.28 , sen. 92 53 4CJ. 4 6 •. 24::!8.14 D09.64 1228.21 11%8.2
1 9 94 1113 • .14 6145.49 16•)4.98 . 55 7r1. 02 2393.23 14 29.0 1 13g5.48 l1fJ90.7
1qCJ5 114fl.69 6628.55 16:X:.fi8 5802.57 2341 .. 42 :1561.29 1581.42 12034.G
FJ% 1192. s 7153.97 161').93 6~01.43 2327.77 1 724. 1794.12 1:.:!016 .. 4
1<197 1254.65 7722.72 1610.fl4 G3C! 1. 25 2323. 5 1<106. 76 2034.42 11833.6
19 q l3 B61.21 840Ll .2 7 Hi24.12 6740.42 2321 .. 79 2126. 1 2 2318.58 11439.5
1999 1476.48 9134.92 l(i 30.0 3 7132.28. 2329.'04 2 3 83 ~4 5 2644.48 10837.3
2000 1607.A2 9%5 .f17 1643.02 7571~07 2.3 31 • 7 2 2684.89 3031.05 9991.92
1977
1<J7R
1979
1'H!O
1981
1 <) B2
1<1~3
19 R 4
11J35
19 Rf.i
19 87
.1 t'd~8
19119
1990
1 q q 1
H92
11J9.1
199 4
1995
19C)6
19<n
H9R
19q9
2') 0 I)
1 <:'77
1Q7f)
1979
1 9fl 0
1 Clfl1
19 07.
19 ~3
19fll+
19fl'i
1 q fl6
1fl87
19AS
1'1119
E19.')
1 C) q 1
1(}92
19CJ3
1GQ 4
1CJ9 5
1 '1%
1997
1998
1-(j9'1
2:1')~
0 •
o. o.
o.
0.04
0.067
'). 064
I'). c 3!.1
0 .01 3
0.002
0. 00 1 o.
-o.
-o. o.
'l.
o. o. o.
-a.
J.0!)1
0.002
0.002
!).0~2
E9 9SRPC
0.
0. o.
0 •
-2.528
-!"!. 117
0.369
1. 18 9
0 .~02
-0.332
_,...52 3
-o • G So
-0.695
-').700
-0.(.73
-0.653
-0.638
-0.618
-').58 2
-').51A
-0.437
-J. 39 8
. -0.375
-~.354
r,n\'"'
o.
o~
f).
0.
-0.029
0 .o 5
0. O'l 1
0.:199
0 .o 77
0. (I 1~3
r'). 0 26
0.01P.
0.014
0. 0 1
0.007
~) • () r'j 5
0 .003
0,002
.Q.001
-o.
-0.0")2
-o .. oo 2
-o. o 02
-1).0')2
REVGF
o. o.
i}.
0.
0.754
2. 4 .g
3.27
2.567 -
1.1)36
0.145
-".316
-0.57.fl
-o. 762
-0.918
-1 .05C!
-1.191
-1.328
-1 ·'' !)7
-1.!378
-1.734
-1 .. fl95
-1.941
-2 .o 51
-2. 172
!:'..!.
o.
o.
'>. o.
21J.879
40. 742
40.118
21 • .132
11. 12'i
6.34
4. 668
3.867
.1. 4%
3. ?. 2 3
3. 094
2.98
2,.B1!7
2.fl4
2.1367
2. 1 q 1·
3.117
3. 621
3. 949
4.32
o. o.
Co .• o. o.
0.
o.
0. o. o.
o.
o.
o.
!).
o. o.
o.
o.
o. o. o.
.').
o.
" . ' .
I:'I!{PC
o.
o.
o.
o.
7.75
q_ C) 1
U.0.19
.?..629
-0.4fJ
. -1.699
-2.016
-2. OIJ
-2. ()66
-2.
-1.906
-1.816
-1.7 46
-1.(,56
-1. 551
-1.50A
-1.·332
-1. 23
-1.145
-1.059
nT98
o.
o. o.
o.
0.397
1.446
2. 055
1.751
o. 925
0.475
()., 2 8
o. 211
0.18 2
{). 17i
0.164
0.164
o. 16 5·
0.167
().176
o. 167
0.155
0.231
o. 211 3
n. 329
RPI
o.
0.
0~
o.
0.207
0.297
0.2H7
·? .176
0. 104
0.066
0. 053
0. 047
I) • 044
o. 042
0.042
0. 042
0.042 o. 042
o. 043
0.04
i) .01.4'
0.047
0.049
0. 05
RENS
o. o.
o. o.
0.397
1. 842
2. 7 11
2.416
1. 2 91
o. 676
0.403
0. 30 2
0.261
0~243
0. 231
C•. 23 3
0.231
0.233
. 0.21~2
0.231
0.202
0-311
0. 365
().1;.2
EXOPS
o. o. o.
o.
o.
3.997
6.29
6.228
5.11 OA
3. 8OS
2. 8 07
2. 3 25
2.')05
1.745
1. 508
1.313
1. 121
0.9 34
0.758
0.605
0.4 3
0.477
o. 4 65
0.4 41
GFBAL
o. o. o.
0.
0. 7 45
-1 • 0 75
-4. 212
-7. Hi5
-11.582
-13.92()
-16.J16.
-17 • C} 26
-19.766
-21.555
-23. 3 67
-25.18
-26.984
-28.797
... 30.641
-32.578
-34.801
-37.137
-39. 598
-1~2.1a4
~XC.\ P
o. o.
0. o.
0 •
1. 4
1. 55
1. 13 .
-0.365
-1.464
-1.149
-1.134
-1.048
-0.97
-0.7811
-0.684
-0.62
-o. 5 37
-o .4 o&
-0.267
1).202
0.246
0 .. 272
0.295
f> FBAL
0. o. o. o. o ...
0. o. o.
·0.
o.
0-o.
o. o. o. c.
o. o. o • ·o.
o. o ..
l).
0 0
E99S
o. o.
o. o. o.
5.3 97
7.!379
7. 4 4
5. 555
2. 4 41
1.714.
1. 2 12
o. 9 45
0.73
0.648
0.5 35
c. 313 7
0.266
0.~03
o. 1 72 a. 4 61
.0. 5 55
0.574
0.586
RINS
o. o. o. o.
o.
0.052
-o. 075
-0.295
-0.545
-0.811
-0.975
-1.121
-1.255
-1.384
-1. 5 09
-1. 6 36
-1.762
-1.889
-2.016
-2.1 4 5
-2. 281
-2.4 36
-2.6
-2.77 2
FUND
1977 o.
107F! a.
1979 o.
1981 /').
1 9 Hi 0.745
19 R2 -1.075
198 3 -4.212
1'1P4 -7 • 7 p 5
19 R S -11.582
1 9A(. -13.9?.6
1'1P7 -16.016
1988 -17.9 26
w 1 9 :J9 -19.76(.,
~ 19 91) -21.555 (J1
19 9 1 -23.367
1'lG2 -25. H!
19<J 3 -26.9f!4
1 1)1)4 -213.797
1G<JS ~30.641
1996 -32. 578
19 97 -34.801
1998 -37.137
1999 -:19.59 8
20.00 -42.1~4
F UND77
0.
0.
o.
1).
-0.373
-2.456
-4. 8 S4
-6.7 64
-H.618
-9.453
-10.1CJ1
·-n.1ss
-11.293
-11.711
-12.r:·n
-12 .£~ 3 4
-12.691
-12.906
-13 .01'2
-13.223
-13.473
-13.7 03
-13.898
-14 .OP-2
,.__.....,
l J
R99L E99L
o. 0.
(). o.
0. 0 .. n. o. o. 0 35 o. 0 35 .
2.533 2 .SJ 3
4.'}')4 4. 054
3.996' J.CJ96
2. 1 7 2.17
1. 10 3 1. 10 3
0.613 o. 6 1 3
'~· 445 0~445
0. 368 0. 36A
0.3.32' 0.3.32
.J. 3 !') 1 0.301
0. 29 o. 21
o. 2 75 0.2 75
0. 265 0. 265
0.252 0.252
1).2'>1 0.251
0. 169 o. 169
0.2 ')6 0.256
0. 2 99 . 0.299
0.332 0.332
[
[
[
[
[
['
f
'
_,
[
r=
L
l
u
c
C
D
[.
L
c L
APPENDIX E
Census Division Projections
The purpose of this appendix is to describe the methodology chosen to
allocate the MAP projections for the Southcentral Region to census
divisions within the region. Projections of employment, population,
and income for the Southcentral Region were made through the year 2000.
Within the Southcentral Region, it is necessary to disaggregate the results
to census divisions. The following seven census divisions are included:
Matanuska-Susitna, Kenai-Cook Inlet, Seward, Valdez-Chitina-Whittier,
Kodiak, Cordova-McCarthy, and.Yakutat (a portion of the Skagway-Yakutat
Census Division). Population, income, and employment by the five regional
industrial sectors was allocated to each census di~ision. Census division
projections were made consistent with projections made by Alaska Consul-
tants (1979).
The approach described below produces only allocations of regional projec-
tions and cannot be assumed to substitute for a detailed analysis and
forecast of local economic growth. Two types of information are used to
make the census division allocations: historical information on the census
divisions and the regional projections made by the MAP model. Judgmental
review of the historical period is used to set starting parameters for
each census division. These parameters are adjusted throughout the pro-
jection period to account for changes in relationships at the regional
level. This process allows the census division allocations to reflect
changes in relationships such as scale effects projected by the MAP model.
347
The allocation of population and income to the census divisions depends
upon the allocation of employment. Census division allocations of employ-
ment follow traditional economic base theory. This theory assume~ the
main cause of regional economic growth is the growth in the region's basic
sector; growth in the basic sector is determined by factors external to
the region. Employment in the nonbasic sector responds to growth in the
basic sector since it serves the basic sector. Once the relation between
these sectors is known and basic employment is known, nonbasic employment
is determined. For this allocation,process, industrial sector I (mining
and exogenous construction), sector II (manufacturing and agriculture-
forestry-fisheries}, and·sector III (government) are basic. Sector IV
(construction and transportation-communications-utilities) and sector V ·
(trade, services, and finance) are nonbasic. Employment was allocated
in the following six steps:
e Adjustment for Census Division ofDirect Impact. For the
base case and each OCS scenario, the regional totals were
adjusted by subtracting the projections made by Alaska
Consultants for the census divisions of impact. Alaska
Consultants' projections were used for Yakutat, Cordova,
Seward, and Kodiak. 1
• Allocation of Employment in Industries I and II and
Federal Government. Employment in these industries was
allocated to each census division exogenously. This
allocation wi 11 reflect assumptions regarding particular
1Kodiak is assumed to be unaffected by Northern Gulf OCS development·
and remains at its base case level throughout. -
348
[
[
l'
[
r~
l:
r:
L.
[
.[
[
[
I
L
f'
L
L
[
[
[
[
[
r
[
r L
F"
L
r~
L
r: u
projects and developments such as a bottomfishery in Kodiak
or construction and operation of an LNG in Kenai. Alaska
resident OCS employment in excess of Alaska Consultants'
resident employment estimates were allocated to the other
census divisions based on the proportion of population in
the census division. ·
• Allocation of State and Local Government Employment.
Regional projections of government employ~ent in the base
case were allocated to the census divisions using the shift-
share technique. Shift-share ahalysis assumes that the growth
rate of subregions is related to that of regions. The sub-
regional growth rate is made up of a share component equal
to the regional rate plus a shift component which describes
the subregion's comparative advantage.
The comparative advantage term for each census division was
found by examining the growth rate of government employment in
each census division over four periods: 1965-1970, 1965-1976,
1970-1976, and 1972-1976. The average annual growth rates for
government employment for each census division and the region
are shown in Table E. 1.
After examining the differential in growth rates from Table E.l.
th~ differences shown in Table E.2 were selected for the pro-
jection period. For each census division, except Valdez, the
average differential over all periods was used. The period
349
TABLE E.l. GROWTH RATES OF STATE AND LOCAL
GOVERNMENT EMPLOYMENT FOR SELECTED PERIODS
Census Divisions 1965-1970 1965-1976 1970-1976
Kodiak 1.089 1 .078 1.098
Kenai 1~122 1.108 1.096
Matanuska-Susitna 1. 061 1.107 1.147 .
Se\'/ard 1.038 .. 1.053 1. 066
Cordova 1.071 1. 078 1.084
Valdez 1.070 1.075 1.079
Southcentral Region 1.097 1.085 1.075
1972-1976
1.029
1.062
1.103
1.100
1.060
1.104
1.052
SOURCE: Alaska Department of Labor, Labor Force Estimates, various years.
TABLE E.2. · YEARLY GOVERNMENT EMPLOYMENT GROWTH
RATES FOR THE PROJECTION PERIOD
Census Division Growth Rate
Kodiak R -.04
Kenai R + .02
Mat-Su R + .03
Seward R -. 01
Cordova R
Valdez R
Yakutat R
Where: R is the Southcentra 1 r·eg i ana 1 rate of growth from
the MAP regional model.
350
[
[
L-
L
[
[
c
f
L.
r:
L
[
[
[;
c
L
[
L
f '
L
r~
L
L
r
L
r=
L
[
t
b
[
L
[
L
('
L
1972-1976 was dropped for Valdez to abstract from pipeline-
induced increases. Yakutat was assumed to resemble the Cordova
Census Division since separate information was not available
for this area. A check against the Lynn-Canal Icy Straits
labor market area which contains Yakutat shows that this is
a reasonable assumption. Excess government employment was
allocated to the census divisions based on the proportion of
·government employment in the initial allocation.
• Allocation of Nonbasic Employment. Economic base theory is
operationalized through the development of nonbasic/basic
multipliers which describe the relationship between the sectors.
Two multipliers are developed to allocate nonbasic employment
to the region, one describing Sector IV and one describing
Sector V. The long-run multipliers for a change in basic
employment are assumed to equal the average nonbasic-to-
basic ratios found for the period 1972-1976 (except Valdez,
where 1975 and 1976 were ignored because of the pipeline).
Table E.3 shows the nonbasic/basic ratios used in the projec-
tion. (Yakutat is assumed to be the same as Cordova. A
check against a 1976 employment survey in Yakutat conducted
by Alaska Consultants showed these ratios to be similar.)
The major cause of growth in the Matanuska-Susitna Census
Division (without the capital move) is assumed to be the
growth of this area as a suburban community of Anchorage.
Because of this assumption, nonbasic employment is assumed
351
TABLE E.3. NONBASIC/BASIC MULTIPLIERS
FOR THE PROJECTION PERIOD
Multiplier for
Sector IV Multiplier for
(Construction and Sector V
Transportation-(Trade, Services, and
Communications-Finance-Insurance-
Census Division Utilities} Real Estate)
Kodiak • 18 .35
Kenai .39 .. 57
Seward .11 .33
Cordova .18 .32
Valdez .25 .38
Yakutat • 18 .32
to grow as a function of population. Estimates of Matanuska-
Susitna (Mat-Su) Census Division nonbasic employment are based
on the following approach:
1. Mat-Su population is estimated as a function of Anchorage
population using the following regression equation:
Mat-Su Population= -9851 + .1269 x (Anchorage Population)
R2 = .986
This was estimated in "The Effects of Regional Population
Growth on Hunting for Selected Big Game Species in South-
central Alaska, 1976-2000" (ISER, 1978).
2. Nonbasic employment is estimated using multipliers
relating the change in population and the change in
employment. These multipliers are assumed to equal
the average from the period 1970-1976; they were
.03 for industry IV and .06 for industry V.
352
[
[
I~
• L:
L
[
L;. ~.
[
f'
[
I L
r·
L
L
r
[
L
L
[
[
r
L
[
L
[
L
f'
L
r:
I = L
The extra regional nonbasic employment was allocated to
the census division based on the proportion of employment
in the census division. This captures any scale effecti
projected at the regional level since multipliers in
larger regions will change.
• Allocation of Regional Population. Except for the Matanuska-
Susitna Census Division, population was allocated as a
function of total civilian employment. Population-to-
employment 1ratios were found from t\>10 sources. For Kodiak,
Kenai, Seward, and Valdez, population/employment ratios \'/ere
found by comparing Alaska Labor Department estimates of popu-
lation and employment. Iri all but Valdez, the ratios used
are the average of the 1972-1976 ratios. For Valdez, the
1975 and 1976 ratios were not included in the average because
of the pipeline. The population-to-employment ratios for
Cordova and Yakutat were based on estimates made by Alaska
Consultants. Table E.4 shows these estimates.
The extra popula-tion in the region was allocated based on
the proportion of total population occurring in each census
division. For this allocation, the population in Matanuska-
Susitna was assumed to equal that found by multiplying the
population/employment ratio by total employment.
353
TABLE E.4. POPULATION-TO-EMPLOYMENT RATIOS
FOR THE PROJECTION PERIOD
Census Division
Kodiak
Kenai
Seward
Cordova
Valdez
Yakutat
Population-to-Employment
Ratio
2.3
2.6
2.3
2.1
2.6
2.2
SOURCES: Alaska Department of Labor, Labor Force Estimates by Industry
and Al~ea and Population Estimates by Census Division.
Alaska Consultants, Inc, Cordova Comprehensive Development
Plan, 1976, and Yakutat Comprehensive Development Plan, 1976.
• Allocation of Real Disposable Personal Income. Real dispos-
able personal income by place of residence was allocated to
each census division by the proportion of the total popula-
tion in the census division.
Tables E.5 through E.8 include the estimates of growth in each census
division in the Southcentral region in five-year increments.1 These
1Low scenario projections are provided for only the period of sig-
nificant impact, 1981-1984.
354
L
r-·
L'
[
[
I L
[
L
[
[
L
[
L-
I
L
r ,
L
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
I
L
L
u
[J
[
c
C.
E
projections are corisistent with the census division projections made
for the communities of impact (Alaska Consultants, 1978) and the MAP
projections for the Southcentral region. However, the variables will
not add to the Southcentral totals. Since a portion of the growth in the
Matanuska-Susitna Census Division is assumed to be Anchorage metropolitan
area growth, a portion of the Matanuska-Susitna population is assumed to
be projected in the Anchorage region.
355
[
TABLE E.5. CENSUS DIVISION PROJECTIONS [ NORTHERN GULF MODERATE BASE CASE
1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1990 1995 2000 r
Seward [ EM1EX 3 3 4 4 4 4 5 7 9
EMRR 223 224 204 245 290 352 508 543 568
EMG9 404 412 420 428 437 446 492 543 600 [
EMS4 93 95 117 100 103 106 131 141 161
EMS5 433 438 443 455 469 484 562 734 955
L POP 3,468 3,516 3,564 3,634 3,779 3,967 4,415 4,920 5,732
DPIR 10.2 11.9 13.1 . 12.6. 12.7 13.6 17.4 21.8 28.7 r I
L.
Kodiak
EM1EX 2 2 4 5 6 7 9 9 9 r-
EMRR. 1,867 2,644 2,776 2,916 3,062 2,382 2,734 2,932 3,082 L
EMG9· 2,031 2,099 2,120 2 '141 2,163 2,184 2,296 .2,366 2,414
I
EMS4 495 533 588 643 733 778 863 959 1 ,048 L
EMS5 1,302 1 ,416 1,540 1 ,672 1 ,801 l,917 2,306 2,803 2,998
POP 10,856 11,447 12,017 12,614 13,278 13,851 15,668 17,967 19,556 [
DPIR 33.8 38.9 44.1 43.6 44.6 47.5 61.9 79.6 97.9
Cordova [
EM1EX 2 2 2 2 3 3 4 5 8 L EMRR 409 707 717 727 737 439 474 496 549
EMG9 359 404 408 412 416 420 440 452 489
EMS4 97 98 100 101 103 104 112 117 128 [ EMS5 281 290 300 310 321 328 384 438 599
POP 2,872 3,002 3,054 3,104 3 '156 3,208 3,498 3,714 4,322 L DPIR 8.9 10.2 11.2 10.7 10.6 11.0 13.8 16.5 21.6
Yckutat [
EM1EX 2 2 3 3 2 2 4 6 6
EMRR 53 96 98 108 110 75 86 107 112 [ EMG9 90 90 90 95 95 100 110 123 130
EMS4 44 41 43 55 60 60 80 75 72
EMS5 71 73 73 82 85 93 123 149 156 i '
L
POP 604 604 622 634 634 639 746 877 934
DPIR 1.9 2. 1 2.3 2.2 2. 1 2.2 2.9 3.9 4.7 r
L
356 [
-----------------
[
[ TABLE E.5. (Continued)
[. 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1990 1995 2000
Kenai
E EMlEX 851 1,549 2,028 1 '125" 705 705 880 430 430
EMRR 2,100 781 807 833 920 2,278 2,644 3,319 4,202
EMG9 856 848 907 1,056 1 '111 1,037 1 '251 1,397 1,536
[ EMS4 1,870 1,875 2,046 1,766 1,569 1,687 1,945 2,046 2,412
EMS5 4,378 4,591 4,762 4,393 4,123 3,894 5 '110 5,401 6,316
[ POP 27,044 28,370 29,775 26,291 25' 100 26,307 29,015 29,001 32,801
DPIR 82.8 96.4 109.2 .90.9 84.3 90.3 114.6 128.5 164;2
[ Matanuska-Susitna
r~ EMl EX 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6
EMRR 100 56 58 60 62 94 141 167 215
L EMG9 622 604 634 723 748 685 749 756 749
r= EMS4 622 695 690 751 754 696 873 1,076 1,264
L EMS5 1 ,991 2,329 2,197 2,514 2,709 2,520 3 '117 3,825 3,731
[ POP 16,458 17,495 18,533 19,750 20,608 21,645 27,659 34,623 43,778
DPIR 51.2 59.4 . 68.0 68.3 69.2 78.2 118.4 162.6 230.4
B Valdez
EMlEX 417 327 327 327 327 327 327 327 327
~ EMRR 41 25 26 28 29 45 56 72 95
EMG9 475 463 486 557 576 530 585 597 599
EMS4 293 270 261 292 284 243 253 254 256 c EMS5 716 688 630 743 776 665 691 696 697
POP 5,223 17,495 18,533 19,750 20,608 4,958 4,674 4,468 4,464 c OPIR 16.6 16.9 . 17. 1 18.2 18.7 17.0 18.5 19.8 22.3
[
EMlEX includes exogenous construction, mining, and all direct OCS employment.
t EMRR includes other manufacturing and agriculture-forestry-fisheries.
EMG9 includes federal, state, and local government.
EMS4 includes local construction and transportation.
r~ EMS5 includes trade, services, and finance-insurance-real estate. L
POP is population.
r~ DPIR is real disposable personal income (millions of constant dollars).
l
[ 357
[
TABLE E.6. CENSUS DIVISION PROJECTIONS [ LOW NORTHERN GULF DEVELOPMENT SCENARIO
MODERATE BASE CASE
1981 1 1982 1983 1984
[
Seward [
EM1EX 3 4 4 4
EMRR 224 205 245 290 l~-EMG9 414 423 431 438
EMS4 110 140 119 108
EMS5 441 448 459 471 ,--
L
POP 3,376 3,628 3,686 3,795
DPIR 11.7 13.5 12.9 12.8 [
Kodiak [ EM1EX 2 4 5 6
EMRR 2,644 2, 776 2,916 3,062
EMG9 2,099 2;120 2 '141 2,163 r·
EMS4 533 588 643 733 L
EMS5 1 ,416 1,540 1,672 1 ,801 [ POP 11 ,447 12,017 12,614 13,278
DPIR 39.5 44.8 44.2 44.8
[
Cordova
EM1EX 2 2 2 3 c EMRR 707 717 727 737
EMG9 404 408 412 416
EMS4 103 110 111 106 c
EMS5 291 301 311 319
POP 1,507 1,538 1,563 1 ,581 [
DPIR 5.2 5.7 5.5 5.3
Yakutat [
EM1EX 2 3 3 2 [ EMRR 97 98 108 110
EMG9 94 93 96 95
EMS4 82 71 70 63 r•
EMS5 79 81 84 86 L
POP 708 692 670 642 [ DPIR 2.4 2.6 2.4 2.2
358 [
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
E
G
c
B
[
E
r-=
I ' L
TABLE E.6. (Continued)
1981 1 1982 1983 1984
Kenai ---
EMlEX l,645 2,129 1,200 720
EMRR 1 ,234 1 ,294 1,357 1,484
EMG9 849 908 1,054 1 '111
EMS4 1 '792 1,957 1,707 1,550
EMS5 4,623 4,970 4,379 4,116
POP 29,863 31 ,267 27,677 26,505
DPIR 103.1 116.6 97.1 89.4
Matanuska-Susitna
EMlEX 68 71 54 16
EMRR 56 58 60 62
EMG9 604 634 722 747
EMS4 526 559 591 624
EMS5 1 ,052 1,118 1 '182 1,248
POP 17 ,884 20,022 21,274 21 '137
DPIR 58.2 66.0 66.3 66.5
Valdez
EMlEX 344 344 341 330
EMRR 25 26 28 29
Et4G9 464 487 556 476
EMS4 256 248 280 281
· EMS5 690 656 749 773
POP 4,625 4,579 5,080 5,171
DPIR 18.1 18.2 19.6 19.8
1only years with significant impact.
EMlEX includes exogenous construction, mining, and all direct OCS employment.
EMRR includes other manufacturing and agriculture-forestry-fisheries.
EMG9 includes federal, state, and local government.
EMS4 includes local construction and transportation.
EMS5 includes trade, services, and finance-insurance-real estate.
POP is population.
DPIR is real disposable personal income (millions of constant dollars).
359
---·----
[
TABLE E.7. CENSUS DIVISION PROJECTIONS n MEAN NORTHERN GULF DEVELOPMENT SCENARIO
MODERATE BASE CASE .
1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 Cl
Seward r
L:
EM1EX 3 440 5 7 9
EMRR 223 354 510 543 568 [ EMG9 404 463 510 545 602
EMS4 93 144 . 263 155 175
EMS5 433 511 510 736 957 [
POP 3,468 4,135 4,775 5,056 5,768
DPIR 10.8 14.7 20.4 22.7 29.3 [
Kodiak F
EM1EX 2 7 9 9 9 L
EMRR 1,867 2,382 2,734 2,932 3,082
EMG9 2,031 2,184 2,269 2,366 2,414 I
EMS4 495 778 863 959 1,048 L
EMS5 1,302 1,917 2,306 2,803 2,998 [ POP 10,856 13,851 15,668 17,967 19,556
DPIR 33.8 49.2 67.0 80.8 99 .. 3 c
Cordova
EM1EX 2 3 557 17 24 [ EMRR 697 749 812 902 969
EMG9 359 420 475 495 523
EMS4 97 119 313 324 332 [
EMS5 281 329 439 530 652
POP 2,872 3,240 4,098 4,536 5,000 R DPIR 8.9 11.5 17.5 20.4 25.4
Yakutat [
EM lEX 2 2 12 20 20 L EMRR 94 111 164 197 204
EMG9 90 107 179 l88 198
HiS4 44 129 554 395 520 r·
L EMS5 71 104 231 250 263
POP 604 815 2,148 2,175 . 2,306 r,
DPIR 1.9 2.9 9.2 9.8 11.7 L
360 L
[
[ TABLE E.7. (Continued)
[ 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000
Kenai
[ EMlEX 851 1 ,055 1 ,602 712 787
EMRR 2,100 2,278 2,644 3,319 4,202
EMG9 856 1 ,031 1,270 1,357 1 ,497
[ EMS4 1 ,870 1,736 1 ,783 1,890 2,165
EMS5 4,378 4,738 5,787 5,690 6,686
[ POP 27,046 28,900 33,794 32,191 34,404
DPIR 84.2 102.7. 144.6 144.8 174.7
[ Matanuska-Susitna
EMlEX 6 230 469 187 235 r EMRR 100 94 141 167 215
L Ei"1G9 622 681 761 734 730
r EMS4 622 669 721 949 l, 151
L EMS5 1 ,991 2,500 3,199 3,908 4,866
[ POP 16,458 21,869 28,972 35,553 44,846
DPIR 51.2 76.4 118.7 145.8 189.7
E Valdez
EMlEX 417 387 451 376 388
EMRR 41 45 56 72 95
G EMG9 475 527 594 580 584
EMS4 293 245 228 231 228 c EMS5 716 693 769 724 732
POP 5,222 5,058 4,048 3,345 4,547
b DPIR 16.3 18.0 . 17.3 15.0 23.1
b EMlEX includes exogenous construction, m1n1ng, and all direct OCS employment.
EMRR includes other manufacturing and agriculture-forestry-fisheries.
E EMG9 includes federal, state, and local government.
EMS4 includes local construction and transportation.
r-EMS5 includes trade, services, and finance-insurance-real estate.
L POP is population.
r" DPIR is real disposable personal income (millions of constant dollars).
u
r 361
[
TABLE E.8. CENSUS DIVISION PROJECTIONS [ HIGH NORTHERN GULF DEVELOPMENT SCENARIO
MODERATE BASE CASE
I"
L" 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000
Seward l~
EM1EX 3 116 34 7 9
EMRR 223 353 514 544 568 [ EMG9 404 454 528 549 605
EMS4 ' 93 147 391 185 198.
EMS5 433 497 619 743 963 [
POP 3,468 4,093 5,129 5,140 5,832
DPIR 10.8 17. 1 22.1 23.5 29.9 [
Kodiak r
EM1EX 2 7 9 9 9 L,
EMRR 1,867 3,214 3,689 3,957 4,159
EMG9 2,031 2 '184 2,269 2,366 2,414 r
L.
EMS4 495 778 863 959 1,048
EMSS 1,302 1 ,917 2,306 2,803 2,998 [
POP 10,856 13,851 15,668 17,967 19,556
DPIR 33.8 . 57.8 . 67.5 82.0 100.4 u
Cordova
EM1EX 2 3 54 50 57 [ EMRR 409 749 884 945 1,012
EMG9 359 421 509 530 556
EMS4 97 124 478 502 504 L
EMSS 281 329 492 584 704
POP 2,872 3,252 4,834 5,222 5,666 lJ DPIR 8.9 13.6 20.9 23.8 29.7
Yakutat [
EM1EX 2 3,495 64 100 137 [ EMRR 53 117 237 263 271
EMG9 90 166 242 255 267
EMS4 44 i83 904 847 843 ('
L EM$5 71 197 329 357 369
POP 604 1,239 3,420 3,519 3,670 r
DPIR 1.9 5.2 14.8 16. 1 18.8 L
362 [
L
[ TABLE E .8 ~ (Continued)
[ 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000
Kenai
[ EMlEX 851 2,242 2,012 1 , 214 1 ,283
EMRR 2,100 2,278 2,644 3,319 4,202
EMG9 856 1,005 1 ,262 1 '315 1 ,444
[ EMS4 1 ,870 2,145 1,583 1 ,697 2,058
EMS5 4,378 5,671 6,237 6,136 7,165
[ POP 27,044 33,397 35,205 34,049 36,853
DPIR 84.2 139.4 151.6 155.5 189.3
[ Matanuska-Susitna
EMlEX 6 992 732 283 553
f' EMRR 100 94 141 167 215
L EMG9 622 664 756 711 704
r EMS4 622 681 617 819 1 ,052
L EMS5 1 ,991 2,464 3,323 4,050 5,010
POP 16,458 22,806 29,963 36,703 46,049 [ DPIR 51.2 88.0 124.6 155.2 229.7
[ Valdez
EMlEX 417 591 522 462 474
EMRR 41 45 56 72 95
B EMG9 475 514 590 562 563
EMS4 293 287 200 204 216 c EMS5 716 787 821 765 780
POP 5,223 5,567 5,609 5,139 4,855
b DPIR 16.3 23.3 24.1 23.5 25.0
L EMlEX includes exogenous construction, m1n1ng, and all direct OCS employment.
EMRR includes other manufacturing and agriculture-forestry-fisheries.
t EMG9 includes federal, state, and local government.
EMS4 includes local construction and transportation.
r,, EMS5 includes trade, services, and finance-insurance-real estate.
L POP is population.
DPIR is real disposable personal income (mi 11 ions of constant dollars). r u
[ 363
364
[
r
r:
~
.[
[
[
[
r.
L
r
b_.
[
[
L
[J
[
L
f'
L
r
L
L
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
L
t
f'
L
r
L
REFERENCES
Alaska Consultants, Inc. 1976. Cordova Comprehensive Development Plan.
Alaska Consultants, Inc. 1976. Yakutat Comprehensive Development Plan.
Alaska Consultants, Inc. 1979. Northern Gulf of Alaska Local Socio-
economic and Physical Systems Impact Analysis. Report prepared for
the Bureau of Land Management, Alaska Outer Continental Shelf Office.
Alaska Department of Commerce and Economic Development. 1978. The Alaska
Economy: Year End Performance Report 1977.
Alaska Department of Community and Regional Affairs. 1978. Planning for
Offshore Oil Development, Gulf of Alaska OCS Handbook.
Alaska Department of Labor. Various Years. Population Estimates by
Census Division.
Alaska Department of Labor. Various Years. Statistical Quarterly.
Alaska Department of Natural Resources. 1977. Alternatives for the
Future Petroleum Development Study, North Slope of Alaska.
Alaska Department of Revenue. 1976. Alaska Oil and Gas Tax Structure.
Alaska Pacific Bank. 1979. 1979 Economic Forecast.
Alaska State Housing Authority. 1971. Yakutat Comprehensive Development
Plan.
Chinitz, B. 1961. Contrasts in Agglomeration: New York and Pittsburgh.
American Economic Review, Vol. 51.
Dames and Moore. 1978. Beaufort Sea Petroleum Development Scenarios,
prepared for the Bureau of Land Management, Alaska Outer Continental
Shelf Office.
Dames and Moore. 1978. Monitoring Petroleum Activity in the Gulf of
Alaska, prepared for the Bureau of Land Management, Alaska OCS Office.
Dames and Moore. 1978. Northern Gulf of Alaska Petroleum Development
Scenarios, prepared for the Bureau of Land Management, Alaska OCS
Office.
Data Resources, Inc. 1978. U.S. Long-Term Review.
Goldsmith, S. 1977. The Permanent Fund and the Growth of the Alaskan
Economy. Institute of Social and Economic Research, University of
Alaska. Report for the House Special Committee on the Alaska
Permanent Fund.
365
Goldsmith, S. and L. Huskey. 1978. Structural Change in the Alaskan
Economy: The Alyeska Experience. Unpublished. Paper for presenta-
tion at the 29th Alaska Science Conference. Institute of Social
and Economic Research, University of Alaska.
Institute of Social and Economic Research. 1976~ Census of Transporta-
tion, prepared for the U.S. Department of Transportation.
Leven, C. 1964. Regional and Interregional Accounts in Perspective.
Regional Science Association, Papers and Proceedings, Vol. 13.
Math Sciences Northwest. 1976. A Social and Economic Impact Study of
Offshore Petroleum and Natural Gas Development in Alaska. A Report
for the Bureau of Land Management.
North, D. 1955. Location Theory and Regional Economic Growth. Journal
of Political Economy, Vol. 63.
Nourse, H. 1968. Regional Economics.
Rogers, G., and G. Litowski .. 1979.
Fishing in Southeastern Alaska.
Economic Importance of Commercial
(Forthcoming.)
Scott, M. 1978. Behavioral Aspects of the State of Alaska's Operating
Budget FY1970-FY1977. Institute of Social and Economic Research.
Report for the Alaska Legislative Affairs Agency.
Scott, M. 1979. Southcentral Alaska's Economy and Population, 1965-2025:
A Base Study and Projection. Institute of Social and Economic Research.
Report for the Alaska Water Study Committee.
Seiver, D. 1975. Alaskan Economic Growth: A Regional Model with Induced
Migration. Unpublished. Paper presented at the Meetings of the
Regional Science Association. Institute of Social and Economic
Research. ·
Tiebout, C. 1956. Exports and Regional Growth. Journal of Political
Economy, Vol. 64.
Tussing, A. and C. Barlow. 1979.
Look at the Current Impasse.
The Alaska Highway Gas Pipeline: A
Report for the Alaska State Legislature.
U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census. 1966. Statistical
Abstract.
U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census. 1970. 1970 Census.
U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics. 1978. Employment
and Earnings.
U.S. Department of Labor. Bureau of Labor Statistics. 1978. Monthly
Labor Review.
366
L
r L
r~
L
[
[
[
L
r
L
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
r Li
c
[
g .
G
u
~
[
t
L L
l'
L
[
u.s.
---------~-----
Department of the Interior, Geological Survey. 1975. Geological
Estimates of Undiscovered Recoverable Oil and Gas Resources in the
United States, Geological Survey Circular 725.
367
368