HomeMy WebLinkAboutAPA816r
1-
r
-r
J
f
r J-
j~
r
r
L
L
L
u_
r
u_
[
J'.
•
.,
I I ..
.· .! . '·
Technical R~pi ort
~·. ~
St. Geo rg .e Basin
Numbet ·''67
Alaska OCS ,
Socioeconomic .:.
Studies Program.
Sponsor: j
Bureau of:· Land ·.·
M·anagem .ent
Alaska 0 ute r
Continental
Sheff Office
Petroleum o·evelopment Scenarfos
Economic. & Demographic Analysis
NOV 1 1984
.l.:GASKA RF~OURC~ r;nmARY
U.S. DEl'T. OF IX1Et~J.OR
TECHNICAL REPORT NO. 57 CONTRACT NO. AA550-CT6-61
ALASKA OCS SOCIOECONOMIC STUDIES PROGRAM
ST. GEORGE BASIN PETROLEUM DEVELOPMENT SCENARIOS
ECONOMIC AND DEMOGRAPHIC ANALYSIS
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
III
·: .. 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 Unite.d States Government assumes
no liability for its content or use thereof.
ALASKA OCS SOCIOECONOMIC STUDIES PROGRAM·
ST. GEORGE BASIN PETROLEUM DEVELOPMENT SCENARIOS
ECONOMIC AND DEMOGRAPHIC ANALYSIS .
Prepared by
Bradford·H. Tuck
and.
Lee·Huskey
Institute of Social and Economic Research
University of Alaska
April 1981
IV
·····-·---.... ---
· •.. -"! ..
[
[
[
l-·
~~
L
-. r
L.
[
c
.lJ
[
E
r,
I
L
[
..,----...--.--,.·-··-· ·-"'"-· ·----~·--·-· --~--------~-----·~------
j
->
TABLE OF CONTENTS
LIST OF TABLES
LIST OF FIGURES .
INTRODUCTION
.. -·., -.· ...
STATEWIDE AND REGIONAL GROWTH: THE
BASELINE HISTORICAL ANALYSIS .
The Statewide Economy:
Statehood -1978~ ..•.••
Regional Economies: Anchorage,
Southcentral, and. Southwest
The·Aleutian Islands Census
Division. • •••.
THE BASE CASE. • . • • . . . • •
Non-OCS Base Case Assumptions:
MAP Models •...•......•
The Base Case Assumptions . . .
Non-OCS Base Case Assumptions:
SCIMP . . .. .. . .. . . • .. ·-. . . • .
The Base· Projections. • . . . . •
The Base Case: Anchorage, Southcentral,
and Southwest Regions -• . . • •.
Base Case Projections: SCIMP and the
Aleutian IsJands Census Division ..•••
PROJECTED IMPACTS OF THE ST. GEORGE BASIN SALE
Introduction. • ~ ' • . • .: • •· . . • • • • • • • . • .
The Mean Case· Scenario:. Statewide Impacts . . • . •
Impacts of the Mean Case Scenario on the
Anchorage, Southcentral, and Southwest Regions.
The Low (Exploration Only) Case Scenario:
Statewide and Regional Impacts ...... .
The Mean Case Scenario: The Aleutian Islands
Census Division Impacts ..•.•..•...
The Low Case Scenario: The Aleutian Islands
Census Division • • . . • . • • . . . . • .
' APPENDIX A: COMPUTER PRINTOUT OF LOW CASE IMPACTS,
. STATEWIDE AND REGIONAL.
APPENDIX B: FISHERIES ASSUMPTIONS. . •••••••
v
. . . .
•· -.
. . . .
IV
IX
1
3
32
41
73
83
84
100
104
120
131
137
137
139
160
175
178
184
189
231
APPENDIX C: OCS TOTAL DIRECT AND SEAR ADJUSTED
EMPLOYMENT: EXPLORATION ONLY
AND MEAN CASES, ST. GEORGE BASIN.
APPENDIX D: OCS TOTAL DIRECT AND SEAR ADJUSTED
EMPLOYMENT BY PLACE OF WORK AND
REFERENCES •
BY PLACE OF RESIDENCE: EXPLORATION
ONLY AND MEAN CASES, ST. GEORGE BASIN .
0" • • • • ·-• • -: •• ·0 0 • • 0 • 0 •
VI
• • • 249
25l
257
[
[
l-,
[
[
-f-,
L
[
I'
t~
[
c
[j
[
[
[
LIST OF TABLES
vn
~
C":".t•:-__ __::..:.:=---~-=----==---:-:-_:._ ___ .. _-..::::=_-__:_:_:-___ ::-_.~-:=-~:=-~:~-~~~--""""""= ·-'"'-=-""'--··---~'~~----· --~ ------
16. Shellfish Harvest, by Area, Selected Years 1962-1976
17. Residence of Boats and Gear License
Holders Fishing the Aleutians •
18. Military and Related Federal-Civilian Employment
and Wages, Aleutian Islands Census Division, 1978
19. Average Civil ian Monthly Employment Aleutian
Islands Census Division, 1965-1978 .•.
20~ Aleutian Islands Census Division Estimated Resident
and Nonresident Employment, 1978 •...•.•.
21. ·Aleutian Islands Census Division: Civilian Resident
Labor Force, Total Employment, and Unemployment
1970-1975 ••••••••.••••••.
22. Report of Labor Force 1978 Compiled by Bureau
of Indian Affairs ·Anchorage Agency ••.•
23. Personal Income by Place of Residence: Aleutian
Islands Census Division, 1965-1978 ..••••
24. Aleutian Islands Personal Income, 1978-by Place of
Work and to Place of Residence ••••••••
..
25. Family Income: Number and Percent of Native and
White Families by Income Levels Aleut
Corporation Area. • •••••.•.••
.26. Aleutian Islands Civilian and Total Resident
Population: 1960, 1970-1978 •••• _ •
27. Aleutian Islands: Components of Population
Change, 1970-78 • • • • • • • . • • •
28. Aleut Region Population by Community, 1977 .
.......
29. Scenario Economic Assumptions ••••
30.
31.
32.
Resident Employment in Fisheries
Projected Employment in Fisheries and Construction
Aleutian Islands Census Division: 1980-2000.
Projected Population and Components of
Change: Alaska, 1980-2000 .•..
VIII
45
47
52
54
56
59
61
63
65
68
70
71
72
88
93
103
105
[
[
[
r
L
[
[
[
b
c
[
L
r .
L
I .
L~
L
...
l
j
j
j
33. Projected Employment: Alaska, 1980-2000 ••
34. Projected Total and Per Capita Real Personal
Income: A 1 as ka ,, 1_980-2000. . • •
35. Projected Wages and Salaries: Alaska, 1980-2000
36. Projected Real Wage Rates: Alaska, 1980-2000 ••
37. Projected Alaska and U.S. Price Indexes: 1980-2000.
107
• 109
111
• 113
• 114
38. Projected State Government Revenues: Alaska, 1980-2000 ..• 116
39. Projected Total and Per--Capita State Government
Expenditures: Alaska, 1980-2000.
40. Projected Fund Balances. in Current and 1980
Dollars: Alaska, 1980-2000 •••••.
41. Projected Regional Population: 1980-2000 •. . .. . .
42. Projected Regional Tota-l Employment: 1980-2000 •.
43. Projected Regional Support Sector
Employment: 1980-2000. • . •.•
117
• 119
• • 121
• 123
124
44. Projected Regional Government Employment: 1980-2000 •..• 125
45. Projected Regional Basic Employment: 1980-2000 ••.
46. Projected Total Personal Income by Region: 1980-2000.
127
128
47. Projected Per·Capita Regional Personal Income: 1980-2000. 129
48. Aleutian Islands Census Division Employment
Projections:. 1981:-2000 .•••••
-49. Aleutian Islands Census Division: SCIMP
Population Projections, 1981-2000 . .
50. Projected. Statewide Population Impacts,
Absolute Values: ·Mean Case . . . . . .
51. Projected Statewide Population Impacts,
Percentage Differences: Mean Case. .
52. Projected Statewide Employment Impacts,
Absolute Values: Mean Case ........ .
IX
•·
.
.
.
132
. . •· . . . . . 135
.. ·-. . . . . . 140
.. . . •· . . . . 141
. . . . . . . . 143
53. Projected Statewide Employment Impacts,
·Percentage Differences: Mean Case.
54. Projected Statewide Real Personal Income Impacts,
Absolute Values: Mean Case ••.•••••
55. Projected Statewide Real Personal Income Impacts,
Percentage Differences: Mean Case •••••
.56. Projected Statewide Real Wage and Salary Impacts,
Absolute Values: Mean Case ••• ~ .•.•
57. Projected Statewide Real Wage and Salary_ Impacts,
Percentage Differences: Mean Case ••
-58. Projected Statewide Real Wage Rate Impacts,
Absolute Values: Mean Case ••.•••
59. Projected Statewide Real Wage Rate Impacts,
Percentage Differences: Mean Case •••.
60. Projected Statewide Relative Price Index Impacts,
Absolute and Percentage Differences: Mean Case
61. Projected Statewide Revenue & Fund Impacts,
Absolute Values: Mean Case ••• · ••
62. Projected-statewide-Revenue & Fund Impacts,
Percentage Differences: Mean ·case .•
63. Projected Statewide Real Government Expenditure Impacts,
144
146
147
149
• • 150
152
153
154
156
157
Absolute Va 1 ues :. . Mean Case • . • • • • . • • • • . . 158
54. Projected Statewide Real Government Expenditure Impacts,
Percentage Differences: Mean Case ••••• ~ • • • • 159
. 65. Projected Regional Population Impacts, Absolute Values:
Mean·-Case • ·.• • ·~ • • • •. . • • • • • • • •
66. Projected Regional Population Impacts~ Percentage
Differences: Mean Case • • • • • •••
67. Projected Regional Total Employment Impacts,
Absolute Values: Mean Case .....•
68. Projected Regional Total Employment Impacts,
Percentage Differences: Mean Case .•.
69. Projected Regional Basic Sector Employment Impacts,
• 161
162
164
165
Absolute Values: Mean Case •.••••.••....•.. 167
x·
~~ .... --.... ~--·-·· ~ .................. -. -----....,.---~-----:-·:.---·----.....-----~--,..-.. ~ ----_--:--~-~---·----.~--~:-~· ~-=--~:···_ ... ·-:·:·'"·
[
[
t~
[
-·-[
·. ---·--·~ ----,;.
[
[
[~ ... ·
-~
,~
L
[
[
[
r:'
b_)
b
[
L
\I I
~
70. ProjectedRegional Basic Sector Employment Impacts,
Percen.tage Differences: Mean Case. • . • • • .
71. Projected Regional Support Sector Employment Impacts,
Absolute Values: Mean Case •.••••.•••
72. Projected Regional Support Sector Employment Impacts,
168
169
Percentage Differences: Mean ·Case. . • • • • ·170
73. Projected Regional Government Employment Impacts,
Absolute Values: Mean Case .••••.••
74. Projected Regional Government Employment Impacts, ·
Percentage Differences: Mean Case ••...
75. Projected Regional Real Personal Income Impacts,
Abso 1 ute Va 1 ues: · Mean Case • . • • • • • •
76. Projected Regional Real Personal Income Impacts,
Percentage Differences: Mean Case •.•••
77. Projected Regional Real Per Capita Income Impacts,
Absolute Values: Mean Case ..•.••.•••
78. Projected. Regional Real,.Per Capita Income Impacts,
Percentage Differences: Mean Case •••.••
79. Projected Changes· in Resident and Total Population
Mean Case, Aleutian Islands Census Division:
171
172
173
174
176
. . 177
1981-2000 • • . • .• • • • • . . • • • . • . . • ~ • 179
. 80. Projected Changes in Resident and Nonresident Employment,
Mean Case, Aleutian Islands Census Division:
1981-2000 • • -• • . • • • . • • • • • • . • . • . • • 182
81. Projected Changes in Resident and Total Population,
Low Case, Aleutian Islands Census Division:
1981-1988 • .. • • • . • • • • • • • • . . • • • .• · 185
82. Projected Changesin Resident and Nonresident Employment,
·Low Case, Aleutian Islands Census Division:
1981-1988 • • • .. • • • . • • • • • . • . • • • . . 186
XI
.;!-!_··· ~· .•. """" • •. -• • --· ~-· ....... ----------~~--':"..---...-,;'~~~:. ~~:---,., .. -..,.;.,. ... ~ ..... --· .. -.:-~--~--~----..... -· ., -·----:--·--.-----~---,--.. ---~----------~-----------~-~,.-.... -
_ LIST OF FIGURES
1. Distribution of Wage and Salary Income
Alaska, 1965 and .1978 •
2. -MAP Sub-Mode 1 s • • •
3. MAP Statewide Model •••
4. MAP Regions ••••••••
XII
28-
75
78
80
[
[
[
.. [
-_ r· ... L
[
[
[
[
-c
';6
[
[·:
·"
r·
L
r-
L
L
I. INTRODUCTION
The present study provides the historic baseline analysis and base case
projections against which the economic effects of the proposed St.
George Basin OCS lease sale are measured. The analysis and projections
.~re carried out at the statewide level and for selected regions within
th~ st~te economy. The regions include the Anchorage, Southcentral, and
Southwest regions of the Man-in-the-Arctic Program (MAP) models. In
addition, the baseline analysis and projections have also been carried
out at the subregional level for the Aleutian Islands Census Division.
In this instance, projections have been made utilizing the Institute's
.Small Community Population Impact Model (SCIMP).
Part II of the study contains the historical baseline analysis for each
of the economic areas in question and generally focuses on specific
economic an.d demographic concerns relevant to an understanding of the
historic growth of.the economies~ The baseline analysis also assists i.n
laying the foundation for assumptions regarding future growth of the
areas. Particular emphasis has been placed on the analysis of th~
Aleutian Islands Census Division for two reasons. First, this is the
first ISER-OCS lease sale analysis which has called specifically for
study at the census division level. Second, and more important, is the
fact that the Aleutian Islands Census Division can expect the greatest
relative (although perhaps not absolute) impact resulting from the
proposed OCS sale.
Part III contains three important elements. First, the underlying pro-
jection methodology is explained and reviewed in terms of the accuracy
and limitations of the projection methodology and the projections them-
selves. Second, the assumptions necessary to 11 drive 11 the models a.re
presented. Finally, the base case projections for the respective areas
are presented.
Part IV of the study presents a description and analysis of the pro~
jected impacts associated with the proposed St. George Basin sale.
Results for the mean an9 low case scenarios .are discussed, both at the
statewide and regional levels. Supporting materials are contained in
the appendices.
2
··-··---------· ·-----·---·· ------· --------·-· -·-·------·--·----------.-....... ___. ... -
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
c
r
L
[
~
c
[
b
[
[
r·
L
r
L
_J II. STATEWIDE AND REGIONAL GROWTH:
THE BASELINE HISTORICAL ANALYSIS
The Statewide Economy: Statehood -1978
In carrying out the historic baseline studies,. either for Alaska or .the
regions, it is important to keep in mind the purpose of the analysis.
There are three pr
1
imary objectives involved. , , I First, the analysis should
provide the uninitiated reader with a general sense of the structure of
the economy and how and why it has changed over time. Second, the study
should provide some indication of how individuals within the system have
benefited from the functioning of the system; i.e., an assessment of
economic well-being. Third, the baseline history should provide guidance
in developing assumptions regarding future development of the economy.
Hence, the historical baseline study is not simply a description of the
economy, but rather provides an analysis of the growth and changes in
the system, the dimensions of economic well-being, and its future pros-
pects. With these comments in mind, we can now turn to the baseline
study of the state as a whole.
At the risk of oversimplification, the economic history of Alaska can be
summarized as one of resources, defense, disaster, more resources, and.
government. Prior to World War II, interest in the state focused largely
on natural resource exploitation, primarily based on furs, fish, and hard.
rock minerals. World War II and the cold war aftermath lead to a sizeable
military-government involvement in the state, both in terms of population
and economic activitY~
3
The advent of statehood found an economy reflecting a narrowly based
private sector~ largely dependent upon limited natural resource activity,
and a. large federal civilian and military presence. In 1960, for example,
federal civil ian wages and salaries accounted for 25 percent of~ the
total civil ian wage bill, while state government (5.9 percent) and local
government (5.1 percent) made up an additional 11 percent of total wage
and salary payments. When military payrolls are included, 42.5 percent
of wage and salary income was accounted for by government.
Discovery of the Swanson River oil field in 1957 had done much to raise
expectations about future economic prospects, but it was not unti 1 major
discoveries in Cook Inlet during 1965 that the oil and gas industry
became firmly established and significant levels of production were
assured. The·emergence of petroleum resources as a significant factor
in the Alaska economy considerably improved the potential for private
sector development and, more importantly, helped to shore up the extremely .
shaky fiscal base of· state government.
For the mid-and latter part of the decade of the 1960s, it was to be
natural disaster that provided much of the impetus for economic growth.
The Good Friday earthquake of 1964 resulted in a major reconstruction
effort which supported levels of economic activity that probably would
not have been achieved otherwise. A second disaster, of lesser statewide
magnitude but of great consequence for the Fairbanks region, was the
flood of 1967. Disaster relief and reconstruction funds, followed later
by flood control projects, provided a needed boost for the region's economy.
4
[
L
[
[
C
[
r~,
u
[
L
r·
L
r~
L
_j
j
Discovery of oil at Prudhoe Bay in 1968 marks the beginning of the
latest phase of Alaska economic history. Development of the supergiant
field, construction of the oil pipeline, and the related flows of reve-
nue to state government are providing the impetus for sustained economic
growth and diversification that should carry the state well into the-
21st century.
'I\
Against this backdrop, we can now look more specifically at several
important dimensions of growth and change in the Alaska economy. As
suggested earlier, there are certain key measures of economic activity
that are central to the analysis. Personal income and employment data
provide insight into the overall growth of the economy and changes in
the composition of economic activity. In addition, these data can be
used as general indicators of changes in ·economic well-being over time~
An important corollary variable is population growth. It is also instruc-
tive to review aggregatemeasurs of production for the economy.
In addition to these general measures of economic activity, there are·
several specific attributes of the economy that need tobeconsidered.
These include such topics as secular and seasonal unemployment, the
structure of costs and prices, and the role of state government with
respect to determining overall economic activity. Finally, we must
consider-issues related to potential future economic activity~ We now
turn to speci ftc measures of the economy.
5
PRODUCTION
Data measuring the gross value of production by industrial ·Classification
are not available for recent years. However, various measures of the
value of output for selected industries have been compiled and are pre-
sented in Table l. Except for agriculture, the industries reflect the,
primary 11 export base 11 components of the private sector economy. Data
on federal and total government expenditures have also been included
for comparative purposes. Furthermore, a large portion of federal
government outlays indirectly reflects an export of goods and services
by th~ private sector economy of Alaska.
Fisheries and petroleum have clearly dominated growth in the value of
production in the private sector. Value of catch to fishermen has grown
at an average. annual rat~ of 15 percent over the period, and wholesale
value has grown almost.as rapidly (14.4 percent), reflecting both the
substantial growth of shellfishing and rising product prices. When
deflated by the co·nsumer price index (which is appropriate if we are
interested in implicit purchasing power), the value of catch grew at
almost 10.3 percent and the wholesale value by 9.5 percent. Crude oil
and natural gas percentage growth rates are relatively meaningless since
the base in 1960 is negligible, but their· significance is obvious. It
is also worth noting that in 1978 (the last year for which data are
available) production of minerals other than oil and gas and sand and
gravel amounted to 18.4 million dollars, or about 0.6 percent of the
total value of mineral production. Neither has there been any signifi-
cant change in the value of this dimension of mining over the past two
6
c
[
[
'[
[
I'
L
·[
[
['
L
[
[
[
[
L
[
[
r
L
r.
L
L
l. l. . _j . .,; \._' ,J
Table 1. Value of Production for Selected Industries
Various Years, 1960-1979
(millions of current dollars)
Federal Total
l
Industry Agriculture Forestr~ Fisheries Oil &.Gas Government Government
i Value to Fishermen Wholesale Crude Dry Outlays in ·Spending in
I Year Salmon Shellfish Total Value Oil Gas Alaska (FY) Alaska (FY) I
' ! I
l 1960 5.6 47,3 33.6 3.1 40.9 96~7 1.2 .03 155.8 N.A.
l
I 1961 5.7 48.0 35.7 5.1 46.5 128.7 17.7 .129 N.A. N.A.
1962 5.7 52.3 42.1 7.1 58.4 131.9 31.2 • 467 N.A. N.A •
1963 5.3 54.1 31.3 9.6 46.9 109.0 32.7 1.1 N.A. N.A.
1964 5.6 61.0 41.4 10.0 56.8 140.9 33.6 1.7 N.A .. N.A.
,, 1965 5.3 57.5 48.3 14.5 70.1 166.6 34.1 1.8 533.7 N.A.
·I
I
I 1966 5.3 71.2 54.2 17.6 81.9 197.3 44.1 6.3 N.A. N.A.
i 1967 5.2 80.6 24.6 18.3 48.8 126.7 88.2 7.3 N.A. N.A. l
:J '-I 1968 4.9 89.2 49.5 27.9 79.9 191.7 186.7 4·:_4: N.A. N.A.
l 1969 4.3 101 .0 40.6 20.8 68.1 144.2 214.5 r2.1 N.A. N.A.
1970 5.2 93.7 68.0 20.5 97.5 213.9 232.8 1.8.2 728.7 N.A.
I 1971 5.0 103.5 51.4 26.0 85.5 198.7 234.3 18.0 852.9 N.A. I
i 1972 6.0 82.3 45.3 33.6 92.4 185.7 221.7 18.0 989.4 N.A.
1973 7.0 131.4 60.1 61.4 142.4 283.0 239.6 19.5 1018.6 1592
1974 8.1 154.7 65.7 62.8 144.8 254 347.4 22.5 1135.9 1730
1975 9.2 133.5 55.3 55.4 129.4 293 364.6 42.8 1326.8 2000
1976 8.8 149.5 118.0 96.5 . 239.6 452p 318.8 60.5 1368.1 2226
1977 9.9 179.3 171 l57p 349p 723 988.9 66.6 1544.9 2524
1978 9.2p N.A. 238p 272p 543p 1118~ 2701. 5p 89.6 1753.0 2845e
1979 9.1 N.A. 317p 231 606 1243 5493.6 91.5 1932.2 3147
p =preliminary
e = estimate
N.A. = not available
SOURCE: See;Table 1 Notes
Table l Notes
I
The data are primarily obtained from selected tables i"n The Alaksa
Economy: Year-End Performance Report 1978 (Alaska Department of Commerce
and Economic Development, Division of Economic Enterprise;· Juneau, Alaska)
and Alaska Statistical Review (Alaska Department of Commerce and Economic
Development, Division of Economic Enterprise; Juneau, Alaksas 1980). The
latter source is a preliminary report. Specific-sources for each column
· of the table follow.
Agriculture: page B-13 Alaska Statistical Review (ASR). Value of sales
is approximately 74 percent of value of production, with the balance
being used on farm.
Forestry: Data from 1960-1971 are from Alaska Statistical Review (1972),
p. 90, and reflect total end product value. For 1972-1977, the data are
from the 1978 Year End Performance Report and reflect only forest prod-
uct exports. Here the series are not comparable, but individually
reflect growth in the periods in question. Comparable series are not
available over the full period.
Fisheries: Data for 1972~1975 are from the 1978 Year End Performance
Report, p. 58. 1976 data are from Alaska Catch and Production: 1976
(Alaska Department of Fish·and Game). 1977-1979 data are from ASR
(1980). 1960-1971 data are from ASR (1972) p. 74. Data for 1960-71,
1976-79 are comparable. Data forl972-75 represent approximately 92 per-
cent of total wholesale ·value. ·
Oil and Gas: ASR (1980) p. B-3. It should be noted that these data do
not include value added in transportation and here reflect approximate
wellhead value.
Federal Government Outlays in Alaska: 1960-1977 data are from 1978 Year
End Report,. p. 105. 1978-1979 data are from ASR (1980), p. E-2. Data
are for fiscal year ending in given calendar year. ·
Total Government Spending in Alaska: Data from ASR (1980) p. E-1. The
total is net of intergovernmental transfers.
8
[
[
[
[
l l_.
[
[
r' I -L
[
[
[
L
r
L
r
L
t
decades. In deflated dollars~ federal government expenditures have
grown at about 9.3 percent.
Government expenditures are not directly comparable to the value of
.production in other industries since they reflect not only government
production (wages. and salaries) but purchases of). goods and services and
' ·. I \ transfer· payments to individuals. However~ in another sense these
expend1tures do reflect a measure of demand for production of goods and
services throughout the economy as a whole and underscore the continuing
importance of government spending in the economy.
Of particular significance in overall government spending is the role
of state government spending. The state fiscal history can roughly be
divided into three periods: early post-statehood~ Prudhoe Bay sale to
pipeline completion, and Prudhoe Bay production.
During the· first period, federal government grants., both statehood tran-
sition grants and others, were an important component of state government
revenues. The re 1 ati ve· decline in federa r grants were more than offset
by revenues linked to general economic growth and the development of
Cook Inlet petroleum resources~ but expenditures were constrained by
available revenues.
The $900 million Prudhoe Bay lease sale in the fall of 1969 ushered in
the second period and led to an immediate doubling of state government
expenditures. Growth in expenditures continued rapidly, although still
9
constrained by avqilable revenues and the rapidly diminishing balance of
'•
the lease sale. The third period is marked by the commencement. of pro-
duction from Prudhoe Bay; and, for the first time, the state has signi-
ficant potential surplus revenues.·
The rapid expansion of revenues since 1969 has resulted in a closely
correlated growth of state government expenditures. This is reflected
not only in expanding state government employment and wages but also by
total government expenditures for purchases of goods and services and
transfers to local government. The net result has been that state
government spending (both directly and through local government) has
assumed a significant role in the overall determination of economic
activity in Alaska. This is a pattern which will prevail for some time
into the future.
In summary, the role of natural resources in the growth of the Alaska
economy has been dominated by fisheries and petroleum. Forest products
have remained regionally important, primarily for Southeast Alaska, but
have not demonstrated significant growth. Agriculture has remained
stagnant, and, in real terms, the value of production has declined.
Government has remained a major force in the economy, with state and
local government increasing in relative proportion to total government.
EMPLOYMENT, UNEMPLOYMENT, AND WORK FORCE
Analysis of employment, unemployment, and work force,data is important
for several reasons. First, since labor is one of the key factors of
10
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
1:
L
r
L
[
c
[
[
[
[
I~
L
r
L
E
I I I· production, employment data provide a general indicator of the growth
and composition of production over time. The main deficiency with these
data for such purposes is that they ignore changes in factor proportions
over time and differences in factor proportions between industries.
This omission is particularly important in industries that are-highly
·capital-intensive, such as the petroleum industry. Also, siry_C:e these
. , 'I\
data are based on job counts, they do not reflect actual man hours of
production and, hence, provide only an approximate measure of labor
input.·
Second, work force data, in conjunction with total employment data,
determine unemployment. It is instructive to observe the patterns of
unemployment over time and in response to changes in total economic
activity. Third, the data are useful in measuring seasonal patterns of
economic activity and how this may have changed over time.
Tables 2 and 3 provide summary data on employment, labor force, and
unemployment for selected years over the 1960-1978 period.· Total em-
ployment over this period grew at an annual average rate of 4.9 percent.
However,. substantial variation in the growth rate is evident. From 1960-
1973, the rate was 3 percent; while for 1974-1978 (reflecting the pipeline
boom) the rate was 8.6 percent. The growth of the civilian labor force
shows a similar pattern, although increasing at a slightly higher rate .
. .
The result of this is that total unemployment has grown at about 7 percent
per year over the period and the unemployment rate has also increased.
11
. . -·--............ ·-.-------.. -----------. _ ___,_ ___ ,__,...._.. ___ ~ c~----· ·--.. .,., ... 4 ____ _. -·~·-·--.....--·---..--:· ····--···-· ----... ----•
Total Civilian labor Force
Total Unemployment
% of Tot<t1 Labor Force
Total EmploymEmt
Non-Agricultural Wage
and Salary Employment
Mining
~ Contract Construction
!\)
Manufacturing
Food Processing
Log9ing, Lumber, Pulp
TABLE 2. CIVILIAN EMPLOYMENT, UNEMPLOYMENT, AND LABOR FORCE
1960, 1965, 1970-1978, BY BROAD INDUSTRY CLASSIFICATION
(in thousands)
1960 1965 1970 1971 1972 1973 1974 . 1975" .. ....... 1976
73.6
5.9
8.0%
67.7
89.8
7.7
8.6%
82.1
91.6
6.5
"7 .1%
.S5.J
97.7
8 •. 0
8.2%
89.6
103.6
8.6
8.3%
95.0
109.1
9.3
8.5%
99,9
125.6
9.9
7.9%
115.7
156.0
10.8
6.9%
145.3
168.0
14.0
8.3%
154.0
1977
174.0
16.0
9.2%
158.0
1978
181.0
. 20.0
11.0%
161.0
~;_% __ ._%_~._% __ ._%_~._% __ ._%_-._% __ ._%_~_% __ ._%_~._%_
56.9 100.0 70.5 100.0 92.5 100.0 97.6 100.0 105.4 100.0 111.2 100,0 129.7 100.0 163.7 100.0 173.5 100.0 166.0 100.0 163.2.100.0
1.1 1.9 1.1 1.6 3.0 3.2 2.4 2.5 2.1 2.0 2.0 1.8 3.0 2.3 3.8 2.3 4.0 2.3 5.0 3.0 5.6 3.4
5.9 10.4 6.5 9.2 6.9 7.5 7.4 7.6 7.9 7.5 7.8 7.0 14.1 10.9 25.9 15.8 30.2 17.4 19.5 11.7 12.2 7.5
5,8 10.1 6.2 8.8 7.8 8.4 7.8 8.0 ~.1 7.7 9.4 8.5 9.6 7.4 9.6 5.9 10.3 . 5.9 10.9 6.6 11.5 7.0
2.8 4.9 3.0 4.3 3.7 4.0 3.6 3.7 . 3.7 3.5 4.6 4.1 4.3 3.3 4.3 2.6 5.1 2.9 5.5 3.3 6.3 3.9
2.2 3.9 2.3 3.3 2.8 3.0 2.8 2.9 2.8 2.7 3.2 2.9 3.6 2.8 3.4 2.1 3.2 1.8 3.5 2.1 1.8 1.1
Transportation, Communications
Public Utilities 6.8 12.0 7.3 10.4 9.1 9.8 9.8 10.0 10.0 9.5 10.4 9.4 12.4 9.6 16.5 10.1 15.8 9.1 15.6 9.4 16.4 10.0
Trade
Finance, Insurance,
Real Estate
Services
Government
Federal
State
Local
7.7 13.5 10.0 14.2 15.4 16.6 16.1 .16.5 17.1 16.2 18.3 16.5 21.1 16.3 "26.2 16.0 27.6 15.9 28.5 17.2 28.8 17.6
1.4 2.5 2.2 3.1 3.1 3.4 3.2 3.3 3.7 3.5 4.2 3.8 4.9 3.8 6.0 3.7 7.1 4.1 7.8 4.7 8.2 5.0
5.6 9.8 7.5 10.6 11.4 12.3 12.5 12.8 14.0 13.3 15.2 13.7 18.3 14.1 25.1 15.3 27.7 16.0 27:4 16.5 27.6 16:9
22.7 39.9 29.7 42.1 35.6 38.5 38.0 38.9 41.7· 39.6 42.8 38.5 45.3 34.9 49.5 30.2 49.7 28.6 50.7 30.5 52.2 32.0
15.6 27.4 17.4 24.7 17.1 18.5 17.3 17.7 17.2 16.3 17.2 15.5 18.0 13.9 18.3 11.2 17.9 10.3 17.7 10.7 18.1 11.1
3.9 6.9 7.0 9.9 10.4 11.2 11.7 12.0 13.3 12.6 13.8 12.4 14.2 10.9 15.5 9,5 14.1 8.1 13.9 8.4 14.3 8.8
3.2 5.6 5.3 7.5 8.1 8.8 9.0 9.2 11.2 10.6 11.9 10.7 13.1 10.1 15.8 9.7 17.6 10.1 19.1 11.5 19.8 12.1
Table 2 r-fdtes
Sources of data: 1960, 1965 ASR (1972) p. 16. It should be noted
tha.: the "labor force 11 data are actually work force data for these two
years and are not directly comparable with the data for 1970-1978. The
basic difference between the two series is that work force estimates are
based on job counts and, hence, a worker may be counted more than once
if holding two or more jobs. Labor force estimates are supposed to
eliminate this double counting. Thus, the· work force data for 1960
and 1965 somewhat overstate the actual number of employed.
In 1970-1978, labor force and total employment estimates are obtained:,
from Alaska Labor Force Estimates by Area (Alaska Department of Labor),
various years.
Non-agricultural wage and salary data are obtained from the Statistical
Quarterly (Alaska Department of Labor) for the various years.
13
.... ~ ·-·---~---.,...-....,_,., __ ··-· --.. ---~~-·-----.--·---. ~-···---·--
\ il
TABLE 3. INDEX OF SEASONAL VARIATI,ON IN NONAGRICULTURAL
EMPLOYMENT: SELECTED YEARS 1960-1978 ..
"1960 1965. 1970 1972 1974
Total Nonagricultural
Employment 39.4 30.6 22.7 24.6 32.0
Contract Construction 156.2 91.7 69.5 77 ~6-108.2
Manufacturing 136.3 116.3 107.9 105.2 70.8
1976
23.1 .
64.7
78.2
Food Processing 211 .5 195.2 196.3 175.3 100.6 112.0
Trade . 20.8 20.0 15.6 14.8 25.1 13.5
Services 28.4-17.2 10.7 16.2 26.8 13.3
_Unemployment Rate,
All Industries . 117.5 74.4 59.2 65.1 82.3 45.8
labor Force · 28.2 26.5 21.8 21.0 27.1 21.2
1978.
14.0
47.2
86.5
125.0
12.0
17.8
20.0
12.0
SOURCE: Compiled from Statistical Quarterly (Alaska Department of Labor),
selected years. Seasonal variation is measured as the high month
·minus the low month divided by average annual figure, stated as
a percent. Unemployment data are from labor Force Estimates
(Alaska Department of labor), various years.
14
[
[
[
[
[
·[
L
[
[
L
[
L
c
C
L
[
[
r:
L
r
L
[
1
j
j
j
It is also worth noti'ng· that during the pre-pipeline period the unemploy-
ment rate was relatively stable and that the somewhat higher rates of
1977 and 1978 reflect in large part a readjustment to a more normal
post,-pipeline period. These data c1 early i 11 ustrate the openness of the
Alaska labor market.. Large variations ir:t the demand for labor are pri ..
marily met by significant in-and out-migration and by changes in labor
force participation rates. As a consequence, the long-run rate of unem-
ployment is quite stable and the simple expansion of economic activity
has little effect in terms of reducing unemployment. The second block
of data in Table 2 provides annual average e~ployment data by broad
. .
industry classification. In addition to illustrating the sustained
growth of employment and production in all industry categories, these
data also indicate relative changes in the significance of specific
i ndustri es •
Employment in mining: 1s the one basic sector industry that has increased
. its share of total employment • .-The federal government share has declined
substantially over the period, while both state and local government
have grown, with much of the growth in state government employment
occurring during the 1960s and the early 1970s. Local government growth
. .
lagged state government in the early years, but by 1975 local government
employment exceeded state government employment. Of particular interest
is the growth of support. sector activity, including trade, finance,
insurance and real estate, and services. This growth reflects a steady
diversification of support sector activity and the process of import
substitution in response to increasing market size, growth of incomes,
15
and opportunities for spec;ializatiori.
general maturation of the economy.
In short, the data reflect a
I
It is also of interest to consider changes in seasonal patterns of .
economic activity. Table 3 summarizes seasonal activity in selected
industries, as well as for total nonagricultural wage and salary employ-
ment, labor force, and unemployment. Seasonal variation is measured as
the high month minus the low month divided by the average annual figure
for the: respective variable. Because of secular growth in the variables,
the index tends to overstate seasonality for any given year, but for
comparative purposes, over time, the index is satisfactory.
The data reflect two important dimensions of the Alaska economy. First,
seasonality v.aries drastically from industry to industry, with construe-·
tion and manufacturing (especially food processing) showing the greatest
seasonal swings. Second, while significant se~sonality remains in all
industry,. there has been a major reduction over time.
In summary, the data on labor force, employment, and unemployment illus-
trate several important features of the Alaska economy .• First, while
growth has been uneven, aggregate economic activity has increased sub-
stantially since statehood. Contract construction, mining, and support
sector industries· grew rapidly during pipeline construction. With the
exception of contract construction, levels of employment achieved at the
peak of pipeline construction have generally been sustained or have
increased.
16
[
[
~
[
·····[
r··
l __ .....
[
-~
L~
[
L
[
[
c
C
L
[
L
l
L
L
.,
-.,
.,
Second, structural change that refl'ects a general maturing of the economy
has 'occurred,. as evidenced by the increased share of total employment
accounted for by support sector activity, including trade, finance,
insurance and real estate, and services. Coupled with the greatly
reduced dependence of the state on federal goyernment activity and the
growth of petroleum and fisheries, the data indicate a general broaden-
ing and diversification of economic activity.
Third, in addition to sustained secular growth, there has been a marked
dec~ease in seasonal swings in economic activity. In part, this reflects
the relative growth of industries with smaller seasonal variations. In
addition, construction and fish processing seasonality have also reduced
substantially.
Finally, the relative stability of unemployment rates over time clearly
indicates the openness of the Alaska labor market. The generally higher
than national average' unemployment rates have not responded to aggregate
economic expansion historically and probably will not in the future.
PERSONAL INCOME
Personal income measures that part of the total value of production that
accrues to individuals and includes: wage and salary income; other labor
income; proprietor's income; income from dividen4s, interest, and rent;
and personal transfer payments. While deficient in many respects as a
measure of economic well-being, it is nevertheless a useful indicator of
the degree to which individuals share in the total benefits of production.
17
Table 4 presents estimates of personal income for Alaska, by major
source, for selected years covering the period from 1960 through 1978.
Personal income has grown steadily over the entire period, at an average
annual rate of 11.3 percent, while for the pipeline period the growth
was about 17 percent per year. Wage and salary income accounted for the
majority of personal income throughout the period, averaging 80 percent •
. In contrast, about 68 percent of U.S. personal income is accounted for
by wages and salaries. Proprietor income as a share of total personal
income has declined somewhat; while that of dividends, interest, and
rent has increased modestly. The share accounted for by transfer pay-
ments has increased substantially but still remains well below the
national figure of 12.6 percent. The data also generally confirm the
relative changes in the composition of industry activity that were
observed in the employment data.
The growth of aggregate personal income in Table 4 reflects not only
aggregate growth of production but also the influence of inflation.
Table 5 presents aggregate personal income in both current and constant
dollars. Growth of constant dollar personal income has been significant
and has averaged 7.8 percent per year. During the 1974-1977 period, the
growth was even more dramatic at 11.8 percent in real terms. The com-
bined effects of inflation and the plateauing of economic activity follow-
ing completion of pipeline construction have resulted in a slight decline
in real personal income in.l978.
18
[
[
[
[
[
[~
[
[
[
L
[
c
c
[
c
[
[
f'
L
r·
L
[
; \ l. " . j l.. . . .J L. ...... J lL. .. J ~ ..... J t .. '· J l. . .J l ., .J L. . J j L .
TABLE 4. PERSONAL INCOME BY MAJOR COMPONENT:
ALASKA, SELECTED YEARS 1960-1978
(millions of current dollars)
1960 1965 1970 1975 1978
COMPONENT ~ % Total $ % Total $ % Total $ % Total $ % Total
Wages & Salary 567.9 84.1 778.2 88.8 1293.9 84.7 3620 85.0 3954.9 80.6
Private, Total 281.5 41.7 463.2 52.8 773.1 50.6 2771 65.1 2907.2 59.2
Mining 10.3 1.5 14.3 1.6 54.2 3.5 116 2.7 248.4 5. 1
Contract Construction 77.3 11.5 98.0 11.2 140.2 9.2 1095 25.7 537.8 11.0
Manufacturing 47.1 7.0 59.7 6.8 90.9 5.9 161 3.8 260.9 5.3
Fisheries 17.7 Z.6 22.9 2.6 31.4 2.1 46.2 1.1 100.5 2.0
Forest Products 8.4 1.2 22.8 2.6 38.6 2.5 64.8 1.5 50.0 1.0
_, Support Sector 142.1 21.1 265.3 30.3 457.4 29.9 1364 32.0 1817.0 37.0
1..0
Government 286.6 42.5 376.0 42.9 593.6 38.8 993 23.3 1301.8 26.5
Federal Civilian 104.7 15.5 137.6 "15. 7 195.1 12.8 308 7.2 383.2 7.8
Military 136.0 20.1 143.9 16.4 225.7 14.8 258 6.1 287.5 5.9
State & Local 45.9 6.8 94.4 10.8 172.9 11.3 427 10.0 631.0 12. 9.
-
Proprietors• Income 50.1 7.4 62.1 7.1 73.9 4.8 143 3.4 . 260.5 .5.3
Dividend, Interest & Rent 33.0 4.9 52.1 5.9 81.4 5.3 220 5.2 333.4 6.8
Transfer Payments 24.0 3.6 34.2 3.9 79.3 5.2 274 6.4 358.3 7.3
TOTAL 675.0 100.0 876.6 100.0 1528.5 100.0 4257 100.0 3907.1 100.0
Less
Cont. for Soc. Ins. 11.0 22~3 49.2 172.0 223.5
Residence Adj. 31.5 45.9 67.1 637.0 314.6
Resident Personal Income 632.5 900.2 1412.2 3447.0 4369.0
Table 4 Notes
SOURCE: Major components of the table are obtained from U.S. Department
of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis reports of personal income by
state. Wages and salary figures (row 1) include wage and salary plus
other labor income components of personal income. Except for 1960, the
private, total row and subcomponents thereunder, contain wage and salary
income, other labor income, and proprietors' income. Total income is
the sum of the wages and salary row plus proprietors' income; dividends,
interest and rents; and transfer payments. Resident personal income is
equal to total income less contribution for social insurance.and the
residence adjustment.
20
[
[
[
[
r·
[
[
[
L
[
[
c
c
L
[
[
[ '
L
l
~ '
J
__;,
.
~
~
~
~
-
=
j
1960
1965
1970
1971
1972
1973
1974
1975
. 1976
1977
1978
TABLE 5. ALASKA RESIDENT ADJUSTED PERSONAL INCOME
IN CURRENT AND CONSTANT 1979 DOLLARS
1960, 1965, and 1970-1978
Millions of Dollars of
Personal Income, Total Per Ca~ita Personal Income
Current $ Constant 1979 $. Current $. Constant 1979 $
•'. 1
632.5 1,470.6 2.,79l
1
1 6,503
858.4 1,982.8 3' 168 7,318
1 ,411 . 9 2,700.3 4,644 8,882
1 ,557. 2 2,954.8 4,939 9,372
1 ,698. 5 3,036.4 5,234 9,631
2,001 .5 3,570.0 6,046 10,784
2,436.7 3,822.9 7,138 11 '199
3,527.7 4,493.5 9,673 12,321
4 '194. 8 5,421.4 l 0,274 13,278
4,313.4 5,346.5 10,455 12 ,959
4,369.0 4,875.2 10,849 12 '1 06
Average Annual Percent Growth
11.3 7.8 6.9 . 3. 5
SOURCE: Current dollar personal and per capita income from U.S. Department
of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis. Deflated by Anchorage
Consumer Price Index, U.S. Department of Labor.
21
There are two other dimensions of personal income that are particularly
I .
important in assessing individual economic well-being: per ··capita income
and the distribution of income. Table 5 includes data on the growth of
per capita personal income in real and current dollars.
Real per capita income from 1960-1973 grew at an average annual rate of
4 percent. The 1973-1978 period, encompassing pipeline construction and
the post-boom readjustment, shows rapid expansion until 1976 and then a
substantial drop during 1977 and 1978 •. The net growth over the period
is only 2 percent per year. Two points are worth noting in this respect.
First, the rapid expansion of activity occurred during a period of high
national inflation and was of sufficient magnitude to lead to additional
regional inflation in the Alaska economy. Thus, the real value of per
capita income growth was greatly diminished. Second, the rapid expansion
of total economic activity had only a minimal effect in raising per capita
income, again reflecting the ease of entry into the Alaska labor market.
Data on the distribution of personal income are not available for recent
years, but it iY instructive to look at the pattern of wages over time.
Table 6 presents data on relative wages, by industry, for selected years
over the 1965-1978 period.
The numbers reflect the ratio of the average monthly wage for the respec-
tive industry divided by the average monthly wage for all nonagricultural
wage and salary employment. The data must be interpreted with caution
since severai factors are at work that may account for year-to~year
22
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
c
c
c
I'
L
L
TABLE 6. DISTRIBUTION OF RELATIVE WAGE RATES~
BY INDUSTRY, FOR ALASKA,
SELECTED YEARS~ 1965-1978
Industry . 1965 1970 1976
Total Nonagriculture Wage and Salary 100 100 100
Mining 147 164 140
Contract Construction 165 169 210 I\
Manufacturing 106 99 73 .
Food Processing 97 78 55
Logging, Lumber, and Pulp 115 124 96
Other Manufacturing 112 110 83
Transportation, Communication~
and Public Utilities 115 114 105
Wholesale Trade 127 117 94
Reta i 1 Trade 78 70 50
Finance~ Insurance~ Real Estate 88 81 62
Services 74 72 78
Government 91 97 74
Federal 91 100 70
State 91 96 79
Local 91 93 72
1978
100
193
157
93
71
119
109
128
111
62
81
75
97
94
111
89
SOURCE: Computed from average monthly wage data from the Statistical
Quarterly (Alaska Department of Labor), selected years.
Relative wages are the respective industry wage divided by
the average wage for all industries x 100.
23
variability. First, the average monthly wage data reflect both straight
time and overtime earnings and are thus sensitive to variation in the
ratio of straight time to overtime \<Jork.
Second, the average monthly wage is computed by di·viding total wages by
average monthly employment~ and average monthly employment, in turn,
reflects both full and part-time work. Thus, the employment data are
only an approximation of man hours worked. We are also looking at
fairly aggregate data. Some of the variation within industries may be
.. ,
accounted for by changes in composition of activity within the broad
industry classifications.
The data first indicate the growing disparity of average wage rates,
which would suggest a trend toward a less equal distribution of income.
More significant are the changes th~t occurred at the peak of pipeline
construction in 1976. Major distortions in the structure of wages are
present, and this ~uggests that the distribution of benefits during a
boom is not uniform, but rather that a small segment of the economy
appears to reap a large proportion of the gains. This feature of boom
economics is further demonstrated by an analysis of changes in real
wages over the 1973-1976 period.
Table 7 shows average monthly wages, by broad industry classification,
deflated by the Anchorage consumer price index (CPI). Use of the Anchor-
age CPI is dictated because there is no statewide index. Hence, the
deflation is subject to some error since price changes are not uniform
throughout Alaska. As an approximation, however, the data are adequate.
24
I I __ ,
[
r·
L
L
~
cl
'1
J
..l
~
'
..l
~
-
_.
I: /• TABLE 7. CHANGE IN REAL AVERAGE MONTHLY WAGE
1973-1976~ ALASKA (1973 DOLLARS)
Average Wage Average Wage
Industry 1973 . 1976
Total Nonagricu1ture
Wage and Sa 1 a ry $1 ~006 $1,424
Oil and Gas Mining 1~661 2~068
Contract Construction 1 ~635 2,985
Manufacturing 961 1~041
Transportation,
Communication, and
Public Utilities 1 ~ 141 1~494
Wholesale Trade 1 '177 1~341
Retai 1 Trade 687 709
Finance, Insurance,
Real Estate 897 884
Services . 751 1,107
Hotels~ Motels, Lodging 527 537
Business Services 732 1,706
Government 1 ~024 1~047
Federal 1,062 .1,002
State 992 1 '132
Local 1,003 1~024
Average \.-Jage
Percent Change
12.3%
7 .6· ..
.22.2
2.7
9.4
4.4
1.1
-0.5
13.8
0.6
32.6
0.7
-1.9
4.5
0.7
SOURCE: r.omouted from averaae monthlv waae data. Statistical Quar.terlv ~~l~~~a-Dep~rtment ~f Labor): sei~cted ;ears.
25
U.S.. DEPT. OF INTERIOR
I\
It is clear that drastic differences exist among industries and that the
economic benefits of rapid economic expansion tend to be concentrated in
a select few industries. A major portion of income implied in the growth
of construction wages was also earned by nonresidents or temporary resi-
dent employees. With the exception of business services, all components
of the support sector and government badly lagged the average growth of ·
wages and, implicitly, relative income. Federal government and finance,
insurance, and real estate real wages actually declined.
While much of the inflation that occurred during the period is attri-
butable to national inflation, significant regional inflation resulting
from pipeline construction activity also occurred. Prior to pipeline
construction, the Anchorage CPI had been growing at a less rapid rate
than the U.S.·CPI. Howe·ver, during pipeline construction, this relation-
ship was reversed, and the Anchorage CPI grew more rapidly. Table 8
presents relative rates of growth in the Anchorage and U.S. CPis for
selected years and clearly illustrates the regional inflation associated
with pipeline construction.
As one final indication of income distribution patterns, a distribution
relating percentage of total wage and salary income to percentage of
employment has been constructed for 1965 and 1978 (see Figure 1). The
distribution was constructed by ranking industries according to average
monthly wage. The percentage of total employment and total wage income
accounted for by the respective industry \'las then computed. The cumulative
26
[
[
[
[
[
[
1:
L
[
r~
L ,.
L
r·
L
.[
Anchorage
United States
TABLE'. 8. RATES OF CHANGE FOR THE ANCHORAGE
AND U.S. CONSUMER PRICE INDEX~
SELECTED YEARS~ 1960-1977
1960-1970 1970-73 1973-74 1974-75 1975-76 1976-77
1.8 .4. 1 13.3 12.3 6.5 5.8
2.8 5.6 12.0 7.6 5.3 6.5
SOURCE: Derived from the Bureau of Labor Statistics reports on Anchorage
and United States CPis.
27
Percent of
FIGURE 1 . DISTRIBUTION OF WAGE AND SALARY INCOME
ALASKA, 1965 and 1978'
901----------------------------------
so-·-··· · ·· · ·-·····-·· -··---------· .. ------·
70-: .. ·~·-·-~· .. ·." ................ ..
n li ;r
~ 'I
----· ---ij
I
. ---,
'f .·-···-.. -··· u
I ---1
j
i
i 6o-----.. ·7 -··-·--------------......... -· ... _ .. _ ···--................................ ---· •. .. _______ .. ____________
1
t
Wage & Sa 1 ary 50 __________ ;_:__ ____ --/!. l Income
l 4o-------------C...--, -... ·--, --.. :· . ··_-I
3o~-·--.. ·-------................... -~----·-----·-----~
-····-· 2o-------.. ..,. .. -. ------~'-"'-"'' · ·
0 1.-_.=::...:.J ~~ •. :.J ... .l _ . ..... .I .. -~----L . . ... . l
40 50 60 70 10 20 30
Percent of Employment
SOURCE: See text.
28
-~---l
.... ·: _·__ t
I
I
J. . . . _.I .. ~~:;-:. I
80 90 100
[
~
[
,~
l.
'·'
[
,-
l.
r·
I
L
li' I .
L
r
L:.:
[
[
[
B
[
[
r·,
L
r.
I
L
[
employment and income percentages were then plotted, yielding the typical
Lorenz-type distribution figure.
A comparison of the two distributions reveals a clear shift toward a
less uniform distribution of income. This shift is probably accounted
for by two factors. First, as indicated earlier, there has been a siz-
able increase in the share of total activity accounted for by support
sector industries, and these industries generally have lower than aver-
age wage rates. Second, there has been a substantial growth in the
range of relative wages between industries over time.
In summary, real personal income has shown sustained growth over the
entire 1960-1978 period, both in aggregate and per capita terms. The
growth has not been uniformly distributed, however, and the wage compo-
nent has become less uniform over time. This was particularly evident
during pipeline construction and supports the hypothesis that the bene-
fits of pipeline construction were largely concentrated in a few sectors.
POPULATION
The remaining dimension of growth to be considered is population.
Changes in population are divided into two components, natural increase
(or decrease) and in/out-migration. Natural population growth results
from an excess of births over deaths and is, hence, determined by birth
and death rates.
29
*'· .
Alaska exhibits both the highest birth rate and the lm•Jest death rate in
the United States; and as a result, the rate of natural population increase
is the highest in the United States. This phenomenon is largely accounted
for by the relative youthfulness of the population, with over 34 percent
of the population between the ages of 14 and 30. This age group has both
the highest ferti 1 i ty rate and the 1 owest death r·ate.
Net migration (in-migration minus out-migration) is the second factor
contributing to population change. Many factors influence the migration
decision; but for the Alaska case, it appears that (with the exception
of military-related migration) migration occurs largely in response to
economic opportunity. In the aggregate, relative rates of unemployment
and relative wage differentials in Alaska and elsewhere should be impor-
tant in determining the migration decision. At the individual level,
the economic component of the decision is related to the expected gain
resulting from the move. Basically, this is the expected wage differ-
ential times the probability of getting a job, less the cost of making
the change. Thus, either a change in relative wage rates or relative
employment ppportunities can influence the decision.
That migration is sensitive to economic opportunity is clearly demon-
strated by patterns of migration that occur during and after pipeline
construction. Data summarizing population and changes in population for
Alaska for the years 1965 through 1978 are presented in Table 9. Both
the relative stability of natural increase and the volatility of net
migration are clear. Natural increase has averaged about 1.5 percent
30
,~
L
L
L
[
[
[
[
6
[
[
f '
L
': I• TABLE 9. ALASKA POPULATION AND COMPONENTS
OF CHANGE: 1965-1978
(thousands)
Year Total Natural Increase Total Change Net Migration
1965 265.2 5.7 10.2 4.5
1966 271.5 5.3 . 6.3 1.0
1967 277.9 5.0 6.4 1.4
1968 284.9 5. 1 . 7.0 1.9
1969 294.6 5.6 9.7 4.1
1970 302.4 6.1 7.8 1.7
1971 312.9 5.9 10.6 4.7
-, 1972 324.3 5.5 11.4 5.9
1973 330.4 5.1 6.1 0.9
:::;
1974 351.2 5.6 20.8 15.2
1975 404.6 5.9 53.4 47.5
-' 1976 413.3 6.3 8.7 2.4
1977 411.2 6.8 -2.1 -8.9
1978 407.0 6.7 -4.3 -11.0
SOURCE: Alaska Department of Labor
31
per year; while large variations, even in pre-pipeline years, are evident
in the net migration component.
In summary, Alaska's natural population growth is substantially above
that of the nation as a whole. Furthermore, the response of migration
to economic opportunity is clearly evident. Once again, this emphasizes
the openness of the Alaska labor market.
Regional Economies: Anchorage, Southcentral, and Southwest
Potential impacts of OCS development will not be uniformly felt through-
out the State. Rather, specific regions within Alaska can be expected
both to experience the brunt of the impacts and to capture dispropor-
tionate shares of the benefits. In the case of the present proposed
lease sale, the Anchorage and southcentral regions can expect impacts as
well as the southwest region, within which the sale would occur. Hence,
the baseline analysis must address these regions as well as Alaska.
ANCHORAGE
Anchorage has occupied a central role in Alaska's growth since state-
hood. It has emerged as a key transportation and distribution center,
as well as assuming a dominant role in the growth of other support
sector activity. The area has also become the State center for petro-
leum industry administrative facilities. Its importance as a seat of
Federal government activity in Alaska has been supplemented by rapid
growth of State and local government. Because of the size of the
Anchorage economy, it tends to reflect total State activity as well as
32
[
[
[
f'
L
[
[
[
L
[
[
r,
L
f'
L
[
to impact upon total economic activity in Alaska. It is because of its
central place in the Alas~an economy that economic activity ·remote from
Anchorage is often significantly tied to Anchorage.
Employment, Labor Force, and Unemployment
Direct measures of production for the Anchorage economy are not avail-
able. Neither is Anchorage a-commodity producer in which resource-based
activity is directly important to total economic activity. This makes
it particularly important to consider the structure and growth of
employment for Anchorage. While such data are only partially reflective
of total production, they do provide meaningful insights into changes
that have occurred.
Summary data on Anchorage employment, by broad industry classification,
for 1965 through 1978, are presented in Table 10. Overall employment
has grown at about 7.3 percent per year, and the rate of growth exceeded
the statewide rate of 6.7 percent. While growth has generally been
consistently upward, it accelerated substantially during pipeline con-
struction. Since then, growth of employment has moderated; but the
level of employment still exceeds that achieved during the period of
pipeline construction. It is also worth noting that, in contrast to
other parts of the State where pipeline construction played a signifi-
cant role in the expansion of activity, Anchorage growth during this
period occurred more uniformly throughout most sectors, reflecting the
region•s role as a support center.
33
1965
~ !
Total NonAgric
Wage & Salary.
Employment 30.678 100.0
Mining 0.371 1.2
Contract
Construction 3.126 10.2
Manufacturing 0.791 2.6
w Transportation, ..j::o Communications,
and Utilities 2.618 8.5
Who 1 esa 1 e-·Retai 1 5.279 17.2
Finance, lnsur-
ance and Real
Estate 1.295 4.2
Services 3.767 12.3
Federal
Government 9.394 30.6
State & Local
Government 4.001 13.0
SOURCE: Statistical Quarterly
TABLE 10. ANCHORAGE NONAGRICULTURAL WAGE AND SALARY
EMPLOYMENT, SELECTED YEARS
(thousands)
1968 1970 1972 1974
~ ! ~ ! ~ ! ~ !
34.019 100.0 42.019 100.0 48.252 100.0 58.713 100.0
0.781 2.3 ·. 0.958 2.3 0.806 1.7 1 .036 1.8
2.438 7.2 3.514 8.4 4.272 8.9 5.882 10.0
0.834 2.5 1.018 2.4 1.215 2.5 1.379 2.3
3.046 9.0 3.907 9.3 4.522 9.4 5.583 9.5
6.552 19.3 8.617 20.5 9.948 20.6 12.298 20.9
1.452 4.3 1.980 4.7 2.415 5.0 3.151 5.4
4.652 13.7 6.403 15.2 7.725 16.0 10.119 17.2
9.216 27.1 9.534 22.7 9.435 19.6 9.925 16.9
5.022 14.8 6.036 14.4 7.839 16.2 9.242 15.7
(Alaska Department of Labor), various years.
1976 1978
~ ! ~ !
73.733 100.0 76.893 100.0
1.409 1.9 1.874 2.4
7.587 10.3 6.431 8.4
1.629 2.2 1.683 2,2
7.409 10.0 7.950 10.3
15.958 21.6 16.865 21.9
4.257 5.8 5.019 6.5
15.450 21.0 15.538 20.2
9.813 13.3 9.896 12.9
9.465 12.8 11.266 14.7
. ·-.. --~ . ·-· ----· . ... -.... ----·---·· ... ·-··-·-----------·-·· ···-······ ····--· .... -. ---------------··-·········-·--·--. ·-.-• • ··•••-•• ·-·-·" •-._~---• ,_,_ r•••--• -••·-<-•-••" -·--· ·---• • • "• --•••-•• • • ,, ••-••
----L
~ ,....---,
''" ·" ": . J
r-----l
\ J
r~,
Several industries expanded more rapidly than the growth of total empToy-
ment, including: mining (13.3 percent); transportation, communications,
and public utilities (8.9 percent); wholesale-retail trade (9.4 percent);
finance, insurance, and real estate (11.0) percent; services (11.5 per-
cent); and State and·local government (10.5 percent). Construction,
manufacturing, and Federal government growth rates were all below the
regional average for the period.
The growth of the support sector illustrates the maturing of the Anchorage
economy as was also observed at the statewide level. A comparison of
statewide and Anchorage support sector employment as a percent of total
employment also indicates the role of Anchorage as a trade, distribu-
tion, service, and financial center for the State as a whole. Employ-
ment as a percentage of total Anchorage employment considerably exceeds
comparable figures at a statewide level in trade, finance, and services.
For Anchorage, these industries accounted for 48.6 percent of total
employment in 1978; whereas for the State as a whole the figure is only
39.5 percent. The share of total employment accounted for by the
Federal government in Anchorage is also above the State proportion,
and over 50 percent of total Federal government employment in Alaska is
based in Anchorage.
The data on labor force and unemployment also illustrates the openness
of the Anchorage economy (see Table 11). Over the period from 1970
through 1979, unemployment a'·araged 7.4 percent. While temporarily
dropping during pipeline construction, the unemployment rate has risen
35
Year
1970
1971
1972
1973
1974
1975
1976
1977
1978
1979
TABLE 11. ANCHORAGE LABOR FORCE, EMPLOYMENT,
AND UNEMPLOYMENT, 1970-1978
Employment Labor Force Unemployment Unemployment Rate
45,757 49,024 3,267 6.7%
49,484 53,902 4,418 8.2
52,395 57,535 5,140 8.9
54,299 60', 117 5,818 9.7
54,691 58,661 3,970 6.8
64,721 68,481 3,760 5.5
68,420 73,436 5,016 6.8
79,023 84,513 5,490 6.5
74,819 81,551 6,732 8.3
75,424 81,120 5,696 . 7.0
SOURCE: Alaska Department of Labor, Labor Force Estimates by Area,
selected years ..
36
[
-[
L
L
·] '
['
[
[
r~
L
[
E
[
[
t=
[
[
r~
L
again to historic levels in the years since completion of the pipeline,
averaging 7.7 percent for 1978 and 1979. Hence, while rapid expansion
of employment opportunities may temporarily reduce unemployment, the
effects are clearly short-run.
Personal Income
Total and per capita personal income for Anchorage are shown in Table 12,
both in current and constant (1978). dollars. In current dollars, both
total and per capita personal income have grown every year (at average
annual rate of 14.4 percent and 10.0 percent, respectively) with con-
siderable increases in the rate occurring during pipeline construction.
Much of the growth has· been negated by inflation, however. In real
terms, total incomes grew at 8.2 percent over the period; while per
capita income grew at 4.1 percent. However, both real total and per
capita personal income have declined slightly since peaks reached during
pipeline construction. It is also worth noting that the growth rates of
Anchorage personal income exceeded those of the State for comparable
periods.
Population
Population for Anchorage has grown from 102.3 thousand in 1965 to
185.5 thousand in 1978, at an average annual growth rate of 4.7 percent
(see Table 13). This was substantially in excess of the statewide
growth rate of 3.4 percent. As a result, the Anchorage share of total
State population rose from 38.6 percent in 1965 to 45.6 percent in 1978.
From 1965 to 1969, the Anchorage and statewide populations grew at about
37
I' ~
1965
1966
1967
1968
1969
1970
1971
1972
1973
1974
1975
1976
1977
1978
TABLE 12. ANCHORAGE PERSONAL INCOME
1965-1978
Current Dollars. Constant (1978) Dollars
Total Total
(mi 11 ions) Per Capita ·(millions) Per Capita
371 3,412 767 7,056
398 3,595 722 7,153
462 4,061 900 7,911
502 4,228 953 8,027
570 4,622 1,035 8,391
635 4,997 1 '109 8,730.
733 5,469 1,248 9,313
800 5,631 1,333 9,383
880 6,031 1,385 9,490
1 , 114 7,402 1,550 10,299
1,625 10,070 2,011 12,463
1,903 10,579 2,212 12,296
2,109 11 ,592 2,317 12,736
2,128 11,839 2,128 11 ,839
Average Annual Percent Growth
14.4% 10.0% 8.2% 4.1%
SOURCE: Bureau of Economic Analysis, U.S. Department of Commerce.
38
[
r
[
r'
[
[
[
[
~~
L
[
[
[
[
b
[
[
F
L
f'
L
[
_ _;
---'
TABLE 13. ANCHORAGE POPULATION
1965-1978
(thousands)
1965 102.3
1966 105.9
1967 107.8
1968 111.6
1969 114.2
1970 126.3
1971 135.8
1972 144.2
1973 149.4
1974 153.1
1975 177.8
1976 185.2
1977 195.8
1978 185.5
SOURCE: Alaska Department of Labor.
39
............ -. ~. ,_.--~·. . -
the same rate; while for 1969-through the start of pipeline construction,
the population of Anchorage grew at about 6 percent. Durin~ this period,
the State as a whole grew at about 3.6 percent. Both the State and
Anchorage populations grew rapidly during the 1974 through 1976 period
(17.7 perp~nt an·d 20.1 percent, respectively), but the Anchorage popula-
tion did not peak until 1977; whereas the statewide population reached a
peak in 1976. However, the decline in Anchorage population has been
proportionately greater than that for the State as a whole. In 1978,
statewide population was 6.3 thousand below the pipeline peak; while
the Anchorage population was 10.3 thousand below its peak.
In summary, the Anchorage economy has shown substantial growth over the
entire period reviewed. Steady diversification of the economy is evident,
and the role.of Anchorage as an economic center for the State is clear.
Furthermore, economic activity remote from Anchorage is nevertheless
often s1gnificant for the Anchorage economy because of Anchorage 1 s
central role.
The southcentral economy includes primarily the Kenai-Cook Inlet, Seward,
Matanuska-Sustina, Valdez, Chitina, Whitter, Kodiak, and Cordova-McCarthy
Census Division. Economic ties exist between the Kenai-Cook Inlet,
Seward, and Matanuska-Susitna Census Divisions and Anchorage. Anchorage
is the primary distribution point for commodity flows to those areas.
Second, the Anchorage population utilitizes the surrounding areas for
recreational purposes. Finally, the surrounding areas (and in particu-
lar the Matanuska-Susitna Valley area) constitute an important component
40
L
L
[
[
6
[
[
r·
L
r.
I
L
L
of the Anchorage labor pool. More broadly, the southcentral region as
a whole constitutes a labor pool for economic activity throughout the
State. This last tie is the most significant in terms of linkages
between the proposed OCS lease sale and the southcentral regional
economy.
The southwest region is the area that will be directly impacted by the
proposed St. George Basin sale. The region includes the Kuskokwim, Wade
Hampton, Bethel, Bristol Bay; and Bristol Bay Borough Census Divisions,
as well as the Aleutian Islands Census Division. Because the area most
directly linked to the proposed sale is the Aleutian Islands Census
Division and because links with other areas within the region are
negligible, we focus our attention on the Aleutian Islands Census
Division.
The Aleutian Islands Census Division
The Aleutian Islands Census Division encompasses all of the Aleutian
Islands, the Pribilof Islands, and the Alaska Peninsula from Port
Moller west. The census division is also a subregion of the southwest
region of the MAP model.
The economy of the Aleutian Islands Census Division in no sense reflects
a cohesive, functional economic area. This economic area is composed of
several relatively isolated communities and Federal government military
installations. Private sector activity is almost totally dependent upon
utilization of the abundant fish resources and includes both harvesting
41
--·-·· =--·--·~.,:.·.~----~---~--·--. ·-····---------~.-
and processing. Harvesting of fur seals on St. Paul Island is also an
important local activity. Minor amounts of sheep ranching ··also occur
in the region. Military installations at Shemya and Adak, as well as
.elsewhere in the region, swell the population, employment, and income
figures for the census.~ivision but have no perceptible links with other
economic units within the census division.
PRODUCTION
Basic sector ·private production is mostly composed of fisheries-related
activity. Both commercial fishing and processing are widely dispersed.
throughout the region, although processing is more highly concentrated
in the eastern portion of the census division. Tables 14 through 16
provide summary data on commercial fishing. In Table 14th~ salmon,
shellfish, total catch, and value of catch to fishermen are indicated
for recent years .. The data clearly show the rapid increase in both the
value and volume of shellfish harvested in the region.
A longer-run view of shellfish harvest is shown in Table 15 and highlights
the growth in the diversity of shellfish caught. In particular, both
tanner crab and shrimp have provided much of the growth in the shellfish
harvest, helping to offset significant declines in king crab catches
that occurred during the late 1960s and early 1970s. Finally, Table 16
provides data on the disparities of catch within areas of the region and
how these have changed over recent years. Significant declines in king
crab harvests in all areas are noted, with the exception of the Bering
Sea which has more than offset the declines in other areas. Tanner crab
42
[
[
[
[
L
[
[
[
[
[
[
L
[
l
r:
L
[
'
TABLE 14. CATCH AND VALUE TO FISHERMEN,
ALEUTIAN ISLANDS CENSUS DIVISION
1970 TO 1976, SELECTED YEARS
(catch in million pounds; value in million dollars)
Year Salmon Shell fish Tota1 1
Pounds Value Pounds Value Pounds
1976 20.910 7.155 154.262 61.032 175.921
1973 . 6.993 1 .815 60.966 25.135 71.261
1970 28.695 5.102 44.082 9.108 74.540
1Totals include minor amounts of other fish. There is also an
unreconciled discrepancy for the weight of shellfish in Table 14 and
Table 15 for 1973.
SOURCE: Alaska Catch and Production (Alaska Department of Fish and
Game, Division of Commercial Fisheries), selected years.
Data prior to 1970 not available on a comparable basis.
43
Value
69.029
29.243
14.793
Year
1962
1965
1966
1967
1968
1969
1970
1971
1972
1973
1974
1975
1976
.
TABLE 15. SHELLFISH HARVEST, ALEUTIAN ISLANDS
CENSUS DIVISION, 1962, 1965-1976
(millions of pounds)
Kingcrab Dungeness Tanner Shrimp
6.840 ,, I
50.704 .017
63.993 .025 .000 .000
61.990 .000 .003 .000
53.060 .953 .142 4.375
39.895 1 .380 1.662 2.657
35.408 . 717 3.558 4.399
53.997 .022 2.307 5.228
52.957 .000 4.054 14.891
56.620 .201 6.183 18.947
66.812 .061 13.998 31.245
70.002 .004 12.592 20.504
82.943 .000 30.202 41.117
Total
6.840
50.717
64.018
61.993
58.530
45.594
44.082
61.554.
71.902
81 . 951
112.116
103.102
154.262'
SOURCE: Alaska Catch and Production: Commercial Fisheries Statistics
(Alaska Department of Fish and Game, Division of Commercial
Fisheries), various years. Areas included are South Alaska
Peninsula, Aleutians East-Unalaska, Aleutians West-Adak,
and Bering Sea. These boundaries are not strictly comparable
to the census division boundaries, but are adequate for pres-
ent purposes.
44
[
[
[
[
[
[~
[
[
[
[
[
[
b
[
[
r,
L
r·
L
-,
...,
--'
...
'
='
-,
' ""
_3
_,;
TABLE 16. SHELLFISH HARVEST~ BY AREA,
SELECTED YEARS 1962 -1976
(millions of pounds)
South Peninsula
Year King Crab Dungeness Tanner Shrimp
1967 16.9 .0
1972 4.2 3.9 14.8
1976 .7 7.3 37.4
Aleutians East-Unalaska
Year King Crab Dungeness Tanner Shrimp
1967 27 .l
1972 10.7 .0 . 1
1976 11.4 .5 3.7
Aleutians West-Adak
Year King Crab Dungeness Tanner Shrimp
1967 12.5
1972 16.2
1976 .4 .1
Bering Sea
Year King Crab Dungeness Tanner Shrimp
1967 4.4
1972 21.9 . l
1976 70.4 22.3
Area Totals
S. Peninsula Al euti ans-E. Aleutians-W. Bering Sea
Year Total % Total % Total % Total %
1967 16.9 27.8 27.1 44.5 12.5 20.5 4.4 7.2
1972 22.9 31.8 10.8 15.0 16.2 22.5 22.0 30.6
1976 45.4 29.4 15.6 10.1 .5 .3 92.7 60.1
SOURCE: Alaska Catch and Production (Alaska Department of Fish and
Game, Division of Commercial Fisheries), selected years. 45
Total
16.9
22.9
45.4 .
Total
27.1
.10.8
15.6
Total
12.5
16.2
.5
Total
4.4
22.0
92.7
Total
60.9
71.9
154.2
and shrimp have been increasingly important for the south Peninsula and
Aleutian-East areas.
In short, major changes in the pattern of harvests, both regionally and
by species, have occurred. The south Peninsula,apd Bering Sea areas
'
show overall gains and the Aleutian-East and Aleutian-West areas show
net declines. These patterns are also indicated by the percentage
shares of total shellfish harvest shown in Table 16.
A second, important dimension of understanding commercial fishing in the
Aleutian economy is an analysis of who does the fishing. Data on this
point is fragmentary and is presented in Table 17. The king crab arid
shellfish industry tends to be dominated by nonresident boats and
crews, and the area of concentration for these vessels is the Bering
Sea. Much of the remainder of the catch is accounted for, by Kodiak-
based boats.
The information on the salmon harvest is even less precise since the
region covered is southwest Alaska (the Aleutian Census Division plus
Kodiak). It is assumed, with some uncertainty, that the regional pro-
portions apply to the Aleutians.
The overall picture that emerges is one in which the bulk of the com-
mercial fishing in the Aleutians is carried out by fishermen and vessels
which are not resident to the Aleutians. More· precise information would
[
[
[
I_.
[
l_
~
[
r
I~
[
~
[
[
[
[
[
I-
be desirable but is simply not available. L,
f '
46 L
L
.,
TABLE 17. RESIDENCE OF BOATS AND GEAR LICENSE
HOLDERS FISHING THE ALEUTIANS
Proportion of King Crab
Catch Value by Boat Residence
Place Percentage
Kodiak 26.8
Alaska.Peninsula 4.0
Dutch Harbor 4.3
Out of State 64.9
Proportion of Salmon Catch by
Residence of Gear License Holder
Place Percentage
Kodiak 41.5
Aleutians 20.0
South Central Alaska 3.2
Anchorage 2.6
Other Alaska 7.1
Non-resident 19.2
Unknown 6.5
SOURCE: King Crab: Western Alaska King Crab: Draft Fishery Management
Plan (North Pacific Fishery Management Council, Anchorage;
Council Review Draft, May 1980). Derived from data on page 30.
Salmon: Derived from Table 9-8, Measuring The Socioeconomic
Impacts of Alaska's Fisheries, by George W. Rogers, et al,
(Institute of Social and Economic Research;· April 1980).
47
A final dimension of commercial fishing to be considered is that of
employment. No systematic, periodic estimates of commercial fishing
employment are made for the Aleutians (nor for the rest of the State).
Estimates for the 1969 through 1976 period, however, have been compiled
· for the State and regions (Rogers, 1980) and in turn have been1 used to
estimate employment in the Aleutians for 1978. This has resulted in an
estimate of 756 for average annual employment in commercial fishing. Of
these, 251 are estimated to be residents of the Aleutian Islands Census
Division.
The procedure used to develop these estimates was to compute the ratio
of the 1978 to 1976 catch, by species (salmon, shellfish), and apply
this ratio to the Rogers• estimates of employment for 1976. Since his
employment estimate was·for the southwest region, it was then necessary
to allocate to the Aleutians the total employment thus estimated. This
was accomplished by apportioning total employment on the basis of Aleutian
to total southwest region catch and implies uniform productivity through-
out the southwest region. The result of these manipulations is an esti-
mate of total Aleutian Islands commercial fishing employment. The
estimate of resident employment was developed using ratios presented in
Table 17. It goes without saying that these estimates of employment are
very approximate and subject to considerable error.
The second major component of the fishing industry in the Aleutians is
processing. The present structure of the processing industry reflects
a mix of shore-based and floating processors engaged in canning and
48
I I I.
~-
r-,
I L.
[
[
r,
~ -
[
-L-~ -~
. "
[
[
J
L
[
..,
freezing. The trend is toward freezing an increasing proportion of
the catch.
A tally of processor permits for 1980 compiled from Alaska Department of
Fish and Game records indicates seven shore-based facilities at Dutch
Harbor; two at Sand Point; and one each at King Cove, False Pass, Squaw
Harbor, and. Port Moller. Some of these permits may cover firms that are
only buying fish for transshipment.
Several floating processor permits are held as well: Dutch Harbor (4),
Sand Point (1), and False Pass (1). In addition, some 31 permits are
held that allow for floating processors to operate throughout the regior ..
Not all permit holders necessarily utilize their permits, and several
may actually be nothing more than buyers. It is clea'r, however, that
' processing is geographically well dispersed throughout the Aleutians.
Employment data for processing is available for the Aleutians Census
Division from the Statistical Quarterly (Alaska Department of Labor') .
For 1978, 1,621 was the average annual employment in manufacturing, which
for the Aleutians is largely synonymous with fish processing. As is the
case with commercial ~ishing, it is important to determine what propor-
tion of the employment was held by residents of the region.
Data regarding this question are fragmentary. In conversations with
industry and local government people, it was estimated that somewhere
between 5 and 15 percent of the employment was held by residents. A
49
second source of information is The Recommended Community Development
Plan: City of Unalaska, Alaska (Trick, Nyman, and Hayes: November 1977).
According to this study, 72 out of 875 basic sector jobs (1976) were
held by residents, and these jobs were primarily in· fish processing.
This would indicate that about 8.2 percent of processing jobs were held , !
by residents. Community profiles prepared by the Arctic Environmental
Information and Data Center for King Cove, False Pass, and Akutan also
contain data that tend to support the above sources regarding resident
to nonresident ratios.
Using what appears to be a reasonable estimate of the ·resident share of
processing jobs, 10 percent, then 162 of 1 ,621 jobs were held by residents.
The remainder (1 ,459) were held by nonresidents. Of these, almost all
were from outside of Alaska.
Significant seasonal variation exists in processing employment, although
to a much 1 esser degree than is generally the case in the salmon industry.
For 1978, average employment for the four quarters was, respectively:
1,255 (January-March), 1,782 (April-June), 1,649 (July-September), and
1 ,798 (October-December). The low first quarter, followed by substantial
gains in the second through fourth quarters, is typical of recent years.
Available data do not indicate how seasonal patterns may vary between
residents and nonresidents.
The second element of basic sector production in the Aleutians is Federal
government and national defense-related activity. Major installations
50
L
[
r
l~
L
[
[
[
L
[
[
r--:
L
! :
I
L
[
i
are located at Adak, Shemya, and Cold Bay. The largest of these is the
naval station at Adak. According to data supplied by the Office of
Information, Alaska Air Command, there are 1,781 active duty military
and civilian defense-related personnel at Adak, as well as 1,400 depen-
dents. These figures do not include additional civilian personnel
associated with nondefense activity such as officers' clubs, post-
exchanges, etc. Shemya and Cold Bay do not have resident dependents,
and military and civilian defense-related personnel number approximately
490. Table 18 summarizes military and related federal civilian employ-
ment data for the census division as a whole for 1978.
While the military presence is numerically large, its economic impact Od
the economy of the Aleutians is negligible. The units are largely self-
supporting and the only identifiable ties with the Aleutian or Alaska
economy are transportation services provided by Reeve Aleutian Airways
(RAA) and some contract construction. One benefit that does result from
the military contracts with RAA is the feasibility of providing more
frequent air service to other communities in the Aleutians. Contract
construction work at the military installations is generally carried out
by non-Aleutian based firms, either from Alaska or out-of-state.
In summary, basic sector production in the Aleutians is almost entirely
related to fisheries resources or Federal government military-relat~:d
activity. Fisheries activity has shown substantial growth but is still
largely dominated by non-Aleutian resident participants. The military
presence, while substantial, has no significant relationships with the
rest of the census division.
51
TABLE 18. MILITARY AND RELATED FEDERAL-CIVILIAN
EMPLOYMENT AND WAGES, ALEUTIAN ISLANDS
CENSUS DIVISION, 1978 .
Employment Wages
(thousands)
Mi.litary and Related Civilian
Employment
Military Personnel (Active Duty)
Military-Related Federal Civilian
Employment
PX and NAF (Largely Part-time)1
Other Military Related Federal
Employment
3,939
3,453
486
330
156
45,952
38,950
7,072
1,875
5,127
1Post exchange and nonappropriate fund activities, including
officers' clubs, etc.
SOURCE: Numbers: Basic Economic Statistics of Alaska Census Divisions
(Alaska Department of Commerce and Economic Development,
Division of Economic Enterprise: November 1979).
52
[
r t .
Li
[
[
[
c
6
[
[
r·
L
r.
L
[
_j
_j
I
EMPLOYMENT, UNEMPLOYMENT, AND LABOR FORCE
Analysis of employment in the Aleutians is important for the same reasons
that it·was important at the statewide level. Table 19 summarizes
average monthly employment for the Aleutian Census Division for the
years 1965-1978. Over the period, total employment has grown substan-
tially at an average annual rate of 5.9 percent. This growth has been
largely dependent upon growth of the fisheries industry and State and
local government. Employment in fish processing grew at an average
annual rate of 14.1 percent, while State and local government grew at a
rate of 8.5 percent. Federal government employment, primarily related
to national defense, fluctuated considerably over the period but has
shown no appreciable growth. The same is true for contract constructior.
and transportation, communications, and public utilities. The support
sector components of wholesale-retail trade; finance, insurance~ and
real estate; and services have also expanded as would be expected.
Finance, insurance, and real estate grew at an average annual rate of
18.9 percent, although much of this growth occurred after 1973. Services
grew at·22.7 percent over the period, but this growth rate must be inter-
preted with caution. The data for early years were not reported in the
Statistical Quarterly (the source document) because of disclosure rules
and, hence, were estimated. The large variation in this series also
raises the question of inconsistency in the data, possibly due to
-classification difficulties.
Independent series on wholesale and retail trade are not available for
the entire period. For those years in which retail trade data were
1965 1966
Industry
Construction 174 54
Manufacturing 292 411
Transportation,
Communications,
and Utilities 83 55
<.nWho 1 esa 1 e Ret a i1 117 138
+'>
Finance, Insurance 4e 4e and Real Estate
Services l2e l3e
Federal Government 678 707
State, Local
Government 128 138
Total 1 1494 1526
e = estimated.
TABLE 19. AVERAGE CIVILIAN MONTHLY EMPLOYMENT
ALEUTIAN ISLANDS CENSUS DIVISION, 1965-1978
1967 1968 1969 1970 1971 1972 1973
137 125 142 195 285 187 181
422 471 349 476 657. 610 675
51 46 57 45 61 41 93
152 138 134 136 125 124 142
4e le 5 e· 7e 7e Be 7e
lOBe 232e 268 143 240 82 47
633 550 523 528 574 640 704
157 160 174 168 178 206 227
1714 1835 1727 1721 2178 1982 2186
1974
180
851
93
137
12
33
813
257
2473
1Total includes minor amounts of mining and miscellaneous employment for some years.
SOURCE: Statistical Quarterly (Alaska Department of Labor) .
.--
1 ' l j
1975 1976 1977 1978
235 221 116 140
783 991 1130 1621
87 88 38 31
148 149 llOe lOle
27 32 37 38
.20 93 150 171
626 618 569 682
316 330 287 371
2349 2621 2474 3155
,._.._.....,
. j
available, there is steady growth indicated. Wholesale trade appears to
be a much higher proportion of total wholesale-retail trade than is the
case statewide, and this is apparently linked to wholesa1e trade activity
associated w·ith fisheries. There may also be problems with the industrial
classification of wholesale trade.
Firms may engage in both buying or processing of fish and also wholesal-
ing of fish or fish products. The firm's industrial classification
would depend on which activity was of greater proportional significance,
and this may change from year-to-year. The result is that the wholesale-
retail sector reflects a strong mix of basic and support sector activity.
In conjunction with possible industrial classification problems, this
would account for the apparent lack of growth in this sector.
There is one significant omission in the employment data; this is
employment in commercial fishing·. Such employment is not included in
the Statistical Q~arterly data, and as indicated above, a consistent
series is not available elsewhere. Estimated commercial fishing em-
ployment for 1978, however, was 756. If we include this figure with
total reported employment of 3,155, the commercial fishing employment
accounted for about 19 percent of total employment for 1978. Commer-
cial fishing plus proces.sing employment amounts to 61 percent of total
employment.
A second issue of concern relates to the residency of job holders.
Table 20 presents estimates of resident and nonresident employment for
55
TABLE 20. ALEUTIAN ISLANDS CENSUS DIVISION
ESTIMATED RESIDENT AND NON-RESIDENT ..
EMPLOYMENT, 1978
Industrx Resident Non-Resident
Commercial Fishing 251 505
Manufacturing 162 1459
Construction 7 133
Transportation,
Communication,
and Uti 1 i ties 31 -0-
Wholesale/Retail 89 12
Finance, Insurance,
and Real Estate 38 -0-
Services 171 -0-
Federal Government
Civilian, Military-
Related -0-484
Other Federal Government 198 -0-
State Government 88 -0-
Local Government 283 -0-
Total 1318 2593
e = estimated.
Total
756
1621
140
31
lOle
38
171
484
198
88
283
3911
SOURCE: Commercial fishing; see text on production. Manufacturing
total from Statistical Quarterly; see text on production
for allocation. Federal government civilian military related;
Table 18. All other data on tables from Statistical Quarterly
(Alaska Department of Labor). For division of allocation to
resident and nonresident, see text.
56
[
[
[
[
L
[
[
[
[
[ .
E
[
f'
L
f'
I L.o
[
I
1978. The resident/nonresident breakdown for commercial fishing and·
processing has already been explained. Allocation of the remainder of
employment has been accomplished as follows: State and local government
is assumed to be resident employment, as is also the case for transporta-
tion, communications, and public utilities; finance, insurance, and real
estate; and services. Federal government civilian employment was divided
between defense-related and other Federal government activity. Defense-
related employment was assigned to the nonresident category (in the
sense that incomes earned had no impact on the A 1 euti an ·economy), while
other Federal government employment was treated as resident employment.
Retail trade was assumed to reflect resident employment. Wholesale
trade includes both resident and nonresident employment, and one-half of
the employment in wholesale was treated as resident. This division was
based on discussions of wholesale trade activity in the AJeutians with
the Alaska Department of Labor.
The final industry of concern is contract construction. In conversations
with several labor unions and contractors who operate in the Aleutians,
it was clear that the vast majority of construction workers in the
Aleutians are not residents of the area. Based on a synthesis of these
conversations, it was estimated that 5 percent of contract construction
employment in the Aleutians was accounted for by res.i dents. The remain-
der was divided as follows: Anchorage (65 percent), southcentral Alaska
(15 percent), the rest of the State (10 percent), and non-Alaska (10 per-
cent). While this breakdown is necessarily an approximation, it does
~ 57
reflect the collective judgment of a .wide variety of participants .in
contract construction in the Aleutians.
Using the above delineation of employment between resident and nonresi-
dent, it appears that just under 34 percent of the civilian employment
in the Aleutians is held by residents. The remaining 66 percent is held
by nonresidents. Available data do not permit us to estimate comparable
breakdowns of employment for other years, and it is not possible to
speculate on how the ratio of resident-to-nonresident employment may
have changed over time.
Summary data on labor force, unemployment, and employment for 1970-78
are presented in Table 21. It should be noted that the employment data
in this tabl~ are not consistent with the data of the previous tables.
First, the present table does not include estimates of commercial
fishing employment. Second, the data reflect the number of job holders,
whereas the previous tables reflect numbers of jobs. .The data are also
supposed to be resident adjusted, although the resident employment
estimate is substantially above that obtained in the previous table.
Of particular interest are the data on unemployment and the unemployment
rate. Given the seasonal variation in total activity, the rates are
suprisingly low. This would suggest that several factors are at work.
First, a high degree of seasonal migration is present. Second, Aleutian
residents may tend to drop out of the labor force when employment oppor-
tunities are not present~ Third, the data include a large proportion
of government employment which tends to be seasonally stable.
58
.......... .:.~-•.---~ -. ~ ~--. ··----.··· ··--· -·--··' --·-·----··. ---
r·
[
r
L
[
[
[
[
6
[
[
r·
L
I ,
I
L
--,
_j
-,
-
.,.,
"""
""""'
~
~
-~
--
...l
TABLE 21. ALEUTIAN ISLANDS CENSUS DIVISION:
CIVILIAN RESIDENT LABOR FORCE,
TOTAL EMPLOYMENT, AND UNEMPLOYMENT
1970-1975
Unemployment
Year Labor Force Employment Unemplo:t::ment Rate {%}
1970 1688 1575 113 6.7
1971 2041 1930 111 5.4
1972 1880 1763 . 117 6.2
1973 2109 1945 164 7.8
1974 1968 1830 138 7.0
1975 2371 2207 164 6.9
1976 2302 2147 155 6.7
1977 2102 1964 138 6.6
1978 2343 2196 147 6.3
SOURCE: Alaska Labor Force Estimates by Area (Alaska Department of
Labor) various years.
59
A 1978 survey of potential labor force and employment of the Aleut popula-
tion in the Aleutian region indicates that published data on unemployment
may considerably understate the actual situation. Table 22 presents a.
summary of the survey results. Of the potential labor of 575, only 278
were employed; only 222 earned $5,000 or more for that year; and 297
were not employed.
This implies an unemployment rate of 51.7 percent. This probably over-
states the "true" rate since only those of the potential labor force
actually employed or seeking employment should be included in the labor
force figures used to determine employment rates .. There is no way to
tell what proportion of the potential labor force would actually seek
employment if employment opportunities were available, but it appears
that substanial real unemployment exists that is not reflected in pub-
lished statistics.
In summary, considerable growth in employment in the Aleutians has been
evident. This has occurred mainly in response to growth of fisheries-
related activity. This growth has also led to growth of employment in
the support sector. While historical data are not available to indicate
trends, nonresident employment accounts for a dominant proportion of
total employment. It also appears that the Native Aleut population has
not participated fully in the employment opportunities reflected by
overall growth in total employment. Whether this is by choice or due to
other reasons is not known.
60
r.,
L
[
[
[
[
G
[
[
I ·,
L
r.
L
[
.,
.,
-'
J
_J
_j
""
3
-~
:j
-
~
-
TABLE 22. REPORT OF LABOR FORCE 1978
COMPILED BY BUREAU OF INDIAN AFFAIRS
ANCHORAGE AGENCY
Total Male
a. Total Aleut population within
the Aleutian region 2,139 1 '155
b. Total under 16 years of
age included on line "a" 963 520
Resident Population of Working Age within the Aleutian Region
c. Total 16 years and over
(a minus b) l, 176 635
d. 16-24 years 447 241
e. 25-34 years 235 127
f. 35-44 years 212 114
g. 45-64 years 212 114
h. 65 years and over 70 38
i. Not in labor force (16 years
and over) Total (j+k+l+m) 601 243
j. Students (16 years and over,
including those away at
school) 364 196
k. Men, physically or mentally
disabled, retired, institu-
· tionalized, etc. 47 47
1. Women for whom no child care
substitutes are available 133
m. Women, housewives, physically
or mentally disabled, insti-
tutionalized, etc. 57
n. Potential labor force (16 years
and over) (c minus i) 575 392
o. Employed, Total (p+q) 278 185
p. Employed, earning 5,000 or
more a year (all jobs) 222 148
Employed, earning less than q.
5,000 a year (all jobs) 56 37
r. Not employed (n minus o) 297 207
SOURCE: Tribal Specific Health Plan (Aleutian-Pribilof Islands
Association Health Department, undated).
61
Female
984
443
541
206
108
98
98
32
357
167
133
57
183
93
74
19
90
PERSONAL INCOME
Personal income data for the Aleutian Census Division have-been compiled
for the years 1965-1978 and are presented in Table 23. Growth in cur-
rent dollar total personal income has been at a rate of about 7.4 percent
per year, while per capita income has grown at about 7.2 percent per year.
When measured in constant dollars, however, the growth has been substan-
tially less. Real per capita income grew at 1.4 percent, while real
total personal income grew at 1 .6 percent over the period.
Several aspects of the data suggest that the numbers be interpreted with
caution. First, the Anchorage Consumer Price Index was used to deflate
the personal _income series since no more specific index is available.
Hence, the adjustment is only approximate. Second, a large proportion
of the income is related to military and-federal civilian employment
directly linked to military activity. Since this income does not enter
the Aleutian economy in any meaningful sense, its inclusion is mis-
leading in terms of considering overall economic activity.
Third, while the Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA) which compiles the
data makes a resident adjustment, there is some question as to the
validity of the adjustment. In particular, it is not clear to what
extent the adjustment captures the effects of commerical fishing and
processing incomes flowing out of the region. Finally, an analysis of
transfer payments reported for the region shows sizable amounts related
to federal military and related civilian employment that probably had no
effect on the Aleutian economy.
62
,~
L
[
[
[
[
6
r ,
L
L
'
_;
."
_]
]
-
.J
'
·-_.
' ~
c-'
TABLE 23. PERSONAL INCOME BY PLACE OF RESIDENCE:
· ALEUTIAN ISLANDS CENSUS DIVISION, 1965-1978
Current Dollars Constant (1978) Dollars
Total Total
(million $) Per Capita (million $) Per Capita
1965 33.951 4,721 70.207 9,763
1966 36.093 4,735 71.818 9,422
1967 38.886 4,727 75.750 9,208
1968 41.688 5,256 79.149 9,979
1969 43.677 5,484 79.296 9,956
1970 53.671 6,627 93.763 11,577
1971· 50.655 6,447 86.255 10,978
1972 49.968 6,580 83.267 10,965
1973 60.849 8,235 95.746 12,958
1974 66.084 8,280 91.949 ll ,520
1975 72.717 9,250 89.995 11,448
1976 81.383 9,837 94.592 11,434
1977 79.765 9,932 87.638 10,912
1978 85.734 11 ,619 85.734 11 ,619
SOURCE: Current dollar income figures from U.S. Department of Commerce,
Bureau of Economic Analysis. Constant dollar figures deflated
by authors, using Anchorage Consumer Price Index.
63
For these and other reasons, we have attempted to develop an estimate
of personal income for 1978 that more accurately reflects the sources
and disposition of personal income for the region. These estimates are
shown in Table 24.
As shown in the table, we have indicated personal income sources by
type, accruing from the broad industrial classifications designated at
the top of the table. The left hand column of the table indicates the
estimated breakdown of income to resident and nonresident recipients.
Inclusion of the military and related civilian federal income as non-
resident is a judgmental decision based on the fact that these incomes
do not appear to enter the general income stream of the Aleutian econom~·,
but rather reflect enclave activity.
While much of the basis for allocating income has already been ·estab-
lished in preceding sections of this study dealing with the Aleutians,
. there are several points that need to be expanded. In general, data on
wages and salary income were obtained from the Statistical Quarterly for
appropriate years. The Bureau of Economic Analjsis data on ••other labor
income 11 were apportioned to specific private sector industries on a
proportional basis and then assigned to either resident or nonresident
categories in proportion to resident/nonresident wage and salary incomes.
Dividends, interest, and rent were allocated to residents and nonresi-
dents on the basis of total wage and salary income. Total transfer
payments were adjusted to assign military transfers (except for veterans'
pensions) to the nonresident category. In addition, 10 percent of
64
r~
L
r
L
[
[
[
[
h
t
L
L
[
L
L
...,
"='
d
'
..J
.:;
~
TABLE 24. ALEUTIAN ISLANDS PERSONAL INCOME, 1978
BY PLACE OF WORK AND TO PLACE OF RESIDENCE
Income
~ Support Contract Commercial Fish Fed. Gov. Fed. Gov.
Sector Construction · Fishing Processing Civilian Military
ENDOGENOUS HOUSEHOLDS:
TOTAL ALLOCATED BY INDUSTRY
Wages & Salaries 3.715 0.381 0 2.353 3.022 0
Other Labor Income 0.695 0.071 0 0.440 0 0
Proprietors' Income 0.951 0.098 12.250 0 0 0
UNALLOCATED COMPONENTS:
Dividends·, Interest,
and Rents
Transfer Payments
OUT OF REGION:
Wages & Salaries
/.nchorage 0 4.709 0 0 0 0
Southcentral 0 1.087 0 0 0 0
Rest of State 0 0.725 0 0 0 0
Rest of World 0.275 0.725 0 21.173 5.867 40.584
Other Labor Income
Anchorage 0 0.881 0 0 0 0
Southcentra 1 0 0.203 0 0 0 0
Rest of State 0 0.136 0 0 0 0
Rest of World 0.051 0.136 0 3.958 0 0
Proprietors' Income
Anchorage 0 0 0.780 0 0 0
Southcentra1 0 0 33.600 0 0 0
Rest of State 0 0 2.130 0 0 0
Rest of World 0 .Q 56.870 0 0 0
UNALLOCATED, OUT OF REGION:
Dividends, Interest,
and Rents
Rest of World
Transfers
Rest of World
TOTAL -5.687 9.152 105.630 27.924 8.889 "40.584
SOURCE: See text on personal income.
65
State &
Local Govt. Total
5.206 14.677
0 1.206
0 13.299
0.317
3.501
0 4.709
0 1.087
0 0.725
0 68.624
0 0.881
0 0.203
0 0.136
0 4.145
0 0.780
0 33.600
0 2.130
0 56.870
1.623
4.813
5.206 213.326
'
'·'
federal civilian retirement payments were assigned to residents~ with
the remainder assigned to nonresidents. With the exception of these
adjustments~ the remainder of transfer payments were assigned to residents.
Proprietor's income is the income of self-employed and unincorporated
enterprises. A large portion of this component for the Aleutians should
·!\reflect commercial fishing income~ and it was felt that BEA figures did
not adequately reflect this income. An estimate of noncommercial fish-
ing proprietor's income \-Jas made by assuming that the proportion of
proprietor 1 S income to wage and salary plus other labor income was the
same for the State as for the Aleutians. This led to an estimate of
noncommercial fishing proprietor's income of 4.1 million dollars.
Proprietor's income from commercial fishing was based on the value of
catch. No reliable data exist on net profits from commercial fishing.
It has been estimated~ however~ that about 35 to 40 percent of the value
of catch is reflected in labor income (Scott~ Prospects for a-Bottom-
fishing Industry in Alaska); hence, 35 percent of the value of catch has
been used to estimate proprietor's income. This figure has been used in
conjunction with the estimated 1978 southwest region value of catch to
estimate proprietor's income~ as shown in the table~ and was allocated
by factors established in Table 17.
In general~ the data for 1978 show total personal income of 213.3 million.
Of this total, residents who are part of the nonenclave economy of the
region accrued 33 million dollars. Of the 180 million dollars accruing
66
l'
r
I
L
F
[
-t_:
[
r,
L
r~
I
L.
r·
to nonresidents, about 46.5 million dollars represent wage and salary
payments to military personnel and related federal civilian employees,
with the remainder (133.9 million dollars) going to other nonresidents.
In terms of the regional allocation of the 180 million dollars, about
6.4 million dollars flowed to the Anchorage region; while 34.9 million
dollars went to the southcentral region (primarily Kodiak), with an
additional 3.0 million dollars going to the rest of the State. About
136.1 million dollars primarily from commercial fishing and defense-
related activities appeared to flow outside the State. Thus, while
total personal income was substantial, over 84 percent of the income
created by production in the Aleutians flowed out of the Aleutian regio.1.
These are indeed very high leakages and present a different picture of
the Aleutian economy than that indicated by the BEA personal income data.
In addition to the analysis of total and per capita income, it is again
appropriate to consider the distribution of income. Recent data on
income distribution are not available, but the Bureau of Indian Affairs
prepared an estimate of the 1974. distribution of income which is pre-
sented in Table 25. The distribution is shown for both Native and white
families. Median income for the two groups is similar, and both are
well below the statewide figure of 12,443 dollars for the same year.
The greatest disparity between Native and white families appears in the
under-5,000 dollar groups, with 26 percent of the Native families and
13.8 percent of white families with incomes below 5,000 dollars. It
should be noted that the non-Native families include military personnel,
67
TABLE 25. FAMILY INCOME: NUMBER AND PERCENT OF NATIVE
AND WHITE FAMILIES BY INCOME LEVELS _
ALEUT CORPORATION AREA
Native White
No. of Families Percent No. of Families
Under_ J ,000 7 2.1 0
1 ,ooo.:.1 ,99~11 16 4.9 6
2,000-2,999 ' 13 4.0 7
3,000-3,999 30 9.2 31
4,000-4,999 19 5.8 45
5,000-5,999 20 6.1 55
6,000-6,999 26 8.0 65
7,000-7,999 25 7.7 63
8,000-8,999 21 6.4 72
9,000-9,999 18 5.5 37
10,000-11 ,999 40 12.2 88
12~000-14,999 31 9.5 102
15,000-24,999 56 17.1 43
25,000-49,999 5 1.5 17
50,000 0 0
Median Income $8,357 $8,604
Percent
0
1.0
1.1
4.9
7.1
8.7
10.3
10.0
11.4
5.9
13.9
16.2
6.8
2.7
0
[
[
[
[
F
F
SOURCE: Tribal Specific Health Plan (Aleutian-Pribilof Islands Association-1_-
Health Department, undated). l
r -,
L
r -
68 L
[
_,
j
whose incomes tend to flatten the distribution somewhat; whereas for
the Native distribution, the under-5,000 dollar and over~l5,000 dollar
income categories are proportionately more important.
POPULATION
Aggregate population data for 1960 and the years 1970-78 are presented
in Table 26; it includes total resident and civilian population and
military population. Considerable variation in the military p~pulation
is evident; although for most of the period, it averaged a little over
3,000. ·For recent years, it has been somewhat lower, dropping to 1,655
in 1978. Total civilian population has shown a steady increase, attribu-
table to both natural increase and net in-migration. Table 27 shows
the component of change in both civilian and military population over
the 1~70-78 period. Civilian population has grown at about 4.8 percent,
with natural increase accounting for 47 percent of the total increase.
The remainder is accounted for by net in-migration.
Table 28 provides data on population by community and by Native and non-
Native components. The data totals are not in strict agreement with the
other population data presented but do provide a generally accurate pic-
ture of the population distribution in the census division, with major
nongovernment-based communities at King Cove, Sand Point, St. Paul, and
Unalaska. It is no coincidence that (with the exception of St. Paul)
these are the major centers of commercial fishing activity in the
Aleutians.
69
TABLE 26. ALEUTIAN ISLANDS CIVILIAN AND TOTAL RESIDENT
POPULATION: 1960, 1970-1978
Total Resident Total Civilian .
Population Population Military
1960 . 6,011 2,633 3,378
1970 8,057 4,368 3,689
1971 ··7,896 I 4,285 3,611
1972 7 ,245 1 4,634 2,611
1973 6,914 3,994 2,920
1974 7,714 4,506 3,208
1975 7,086 4,208 2,878
1976 8,282 5,300 2,982
1977 7,686 4,896 2,790
1978 8,000 6,345 1,655
SOURCE: Alaska Department of Labor
I'
l-
f-
L
[
E
[
[
~
[
[
1-
L
[
TABLE 27. ALEUTIAN ISLANDS: COMPONENTS OF
POPULATION CHANGE, 1970-78
1970 Population
Births
Deaths
Natural Increase
Net Migration
Ci vi 1 ian
Military
1978 Population
SOURCE: Alaska Department of Labor
71
8,057
1,106
176
930
1,047
-2,034
8,000
Akutan
Atka
Bel kofski
False Pass
King Cove 1
Nelson Lagoon
Nikolski 1 Sand Point
St. George
St. Paul
Unalaska
Other
Total
TABLE 28. ALEUT REGION POPULATION
BY COMMUNITY, 1977
Native Non-Native Total
69 5 74
92 3 95
14 14
55· \f\ 57
425 142 567
49 6 55
56 2 58
490 339 829
175 9 184
437 63 500
168 557 725
126 5,7002 5,826
2,156 6,828 8,984
1city Manager's figures.·
2Includes military population.
Transient
360 -800
120
60
65
700 -3,(;00
1,305-4,045
SOURCE: Tribal Specific Health Plan (Aleutian-Pribilof Islands
IJ.c:snr;a+;on uea 1 +h D"''"'a""tm"~+ .. ~...~~t"d' ,,...,. '""""·"'' WI II II-I \..II ..::;p I I ~lit..., UliUQ t:: J o
72
I'
I
f
.. l ;
l
I
/_
r
l
[
r·
l . .i
I L
r
I
L
L
III. THE BASE CASE
In this part of the report we deal with three critical elements of the
base case. The first of these is the underlying methodology used to
develop the base case. The second element concerns the assumption re-
garding the future economic activity used to develop the projections.
The third is the set of projections themselves.
Impact analysis, as carried out in the present study, is based upon a
comparison of sets of economic and demographic projections, where one
set is the standard or base case set. The base case serves as a frame
of reference against which the economic and demographic changes re-
sulting from the proposed OCS lease sale can be measured and evaluated.
There are two components of this process that are of particular concern.
First the question of the accuracy and consistency of the projections.
Generally speaking, this is dependent upon the validity of the assumptions
utilized regarding future economic growth of the exogenous variables and
the projection methodology employed. More will be said on both of these
points below.
The second concern relates to the degree of information contained in the
projections. Specifically, do the projections contain the information
that is necessary to adequately interpret and evaluate the impacts?
73
---..... -· ... --... -..:..-..... -_..,_ ~--· ~-.. --.... ~,--,. ~-~---··. --~-~------... --.. --~··-.-----------·p····-.... --.. -----·····-
While aggregate data on economic and demographic variables generated
_using the projections methodology employed in this study will answer
many questions, it must be recognized that there will be omissions as
well.
At the root of impact analysis is the issue of. how economic well-being,
·I\
both individually and collectively, will be affected by the proposed
action. Two major problems are associated with this process. First it
is not possible to measure all impacts that will result from the lease
sale. In part this is due to the volume of information that would be
required and the inadequacy of the existing methodology to capture all
effects at an acceptable level of cost.
The more serious problem is that many of-the effects are not measurable.
While reallocation of resources within the context of the functioning of
the market, in response to economic change, is desirable from the
perspective of efficiency, change on the order of magnitude implied by
OCS activity may also lead to situations of market failure and the
presence of externalities. These are often difficult to identify and
are certainly difficult to measure.
Even if these effects could be isolated they are usually inseparable
from a further problem, that of income redistribution. Changes in
income distribution and the relative economic position of individuals
resulting from OCS activity necessarily implies that there will be
lossers and gainers and associated changes in economic welfare. These
are problems that involve normative economic judgements and cannot be
74
~
L -
[
[
,.
L
[
[
[
L
t
[
I.
L
L
__ ;i
dealt with by impact analysis alone. In short, comparative impact
analysis provides only part o.f the information necessa.ry for decision
making.
We can now turn to a discussion of the specific methodology employed in
developing the present base case projections (and associated OCS impacts
projections). At the statewide and regional level two models have been
utilized, the MAP statewide econometric model and the MAP regional
econometric model. For documentation see Goldsmith, Man-in-the-Arctic
Program: Alaska Economic Model Documentation. The MAP statewide model
is actually a system of models composed of economic, fiscal, and popu-
lation models. The three are interdependent, as shown schematically in
Figure 2.
FIGURE 2· MAP Sub-Models
Economic
Model
-
Population Fiscal ..
Model Model
75
' ,.
In essence, this states that the economic model receives in~ut from the
fiscal and population models, the fiscal model receives input from the
economic and population models, and the population model utilizes input
from the economic models, but not directly from the fiscal model. Thus,
when we talk about the economic model we are really describing the
interaction of three models. To simplify things somewhat we 'can\?rscribe
the important linkages between submodels and then consider the economic
model in more detail.
The population-economic model link is the source of population estimates
that are of direct interest, and reflect both natural population change
and migration induced by changes in economic conditions. The population
estimates are also used by the economic model for purposes of computing
various per capita values for economic variables.
The significant link with the fiscal model relates to the role of State
government expenditures as a source of major economic stimulus to the
aggregate level of economic activity. In turn, State government (and
local government) expenditures are dependent upon two key factors, the
overall level of economic activity and the level of activity in the
petroleum industry. The system allows for a variety of policy choices
regarding state government spending and is one of the key points to con-
sider in assessing economic forecasts.
76
L
[ -
[
[
[
f '
L
I
I
L
[
We can now turn to a consideration of the economic model component of
the system.
The MAP statewide and regional models belong to a class of econometric
models that are known as disaggregate economic base models. In essence~
economic activity is classified as either endogenous or exogenous (or
basic). Exogenous activity determines the level of endogenous activity,
and the specific relationships between the two components of economic
activity are what make up the system of equations that are the econo-
metric model. These models can be quite simple or rather complex, and
the MAP models fall in this latter category. It is possible to get a
feel for the models by considering the MAP statewide model.
As can be seen in Figure 3, determination of industrial production
involves the impact of exogenous sector activity, which includes for-
estry, fisheries, agriculture and other manufacturing, as well as Federal
government wages and salaries. Other exogenous sector activity includes
the petroleum industry and components of contract construction such as
major pipelines. State and local government expenditures may also be
considered as exogenous for discussion purposes, although there is some
interdependence between these expenditures and total economic activity.
It should be noted that in constructing scenarios for forecasting or
projection purposes it is primarily these exogenous variables that must
be provided.
77
r
-FIGURE 3. MAP STATEWIDE MODEL
[
L
[
[
Stole and ,•
Local +---+ Petroleum
Government 'I\ r··
l ...
EXOGENOUS SECTORS SUPPORT SECTOR
Forestry I Construction J-Trade Fislleries Finance
Federal government Services
Agriculture Transportation
Other manufacturing Communications
Public utilities
I ' ' -i Industrial Production L._ I
I
~
l-
r-
L
I'
f, L_
Employment
!
I Wage I Wages and
Rates I Salaries
[
! L
I Non wage L .... Personal
Income I Income
~-_[
I Personal I Disposable
Taxes I Personal
Income
~
f'
I Consumer l Real Disposable
Prices I Personal
Income-[j
L
L
f '
L
SOURCE: Man-In-The-Arctic Program Alaskan Economic Model Documentation
(ISER~ 1979).
78
r·
I
L
[
These exogenous variables combine with demand from the support sector
and endogenous construction to generate total industrial production.
Industrial production, through a series of steps, determines employment
and income, and finally real disposable personal income, which in turn
is a determinant of support sector and endogenous construction economic
·activity. This means that aggregate production depends· on both exoge-
nously determined and endogenously determined economic activity, where
endogenous activity depends on total activity. As such, the system is a
simultaneous equation structure.
It should also be noted that certain other variables enter the model as
well. In particular, wage rates are used in determining total wage and
salary payments, where the wage rates are in part dependent upon U.S.
wage rates, which are determined exogenously. It should also be observed
that the model is particularly sensitive to the wage rates used.
The MAP regional model is structurally similar to the statewide model
except that the model is disaggregated to seven regions. (See Figure 4)
This means that scenarios (or future values for exogenous variables) .
must be specified on a regional basis and that forecasts of endogenous
variables (such as income, employment, and population) will be generated
on a regional basis. Otherwise the models are similar.
For the Aleutian Islands Census Division projections have been developed.
using the small community population impact model (SCIMP). For documentation
79
~ .............. .
~ ......................... .
r---,
'· .
"'
2
SouthyJest
. 1
. · North. Slope
~ L . ;
7
Fairbanks.
MAP REGIONS FIGURE 4. . .
--.1..-.,.,outhcentra 1
. 7 ~ . Southeast
C\ ~ " ---.,.v (~~~··~ . ~
. ~~~~· 3,.• ..... : . ~ ·. u·~ . . . •• . ~ ~r',i ~' J \' '\;:: /"'!, .. 'h'\•.
. ....~~~\..~\~ i \\I, · \ .l~· -..~"<s,\..J 'I ···' ·' " .. ,,~ .~· ·.~. ' '.'-'1:0 . . •• t~··~··
Southwest (part) .\ .~ . ': . • ' !
o I ·.dJ~ ., I ~ 0 l Q 5:7/.lw--....
,t> •
~ • j
see Lee Huskey and Jim Kerr, 11 Smal1 Community Population Impact Model 11
•
Whereas the ~1AP models are classified as econometric models SCIMP is
technically an accounting model. A system of equations describes the
economic and demographic structure of the economic system. In turn
parameters of the equations and a set of exogenous variable inputs
provide the numerical basis for utilizing the·model for projection
purposes. It is the determination of parameters for the model that
distinguishes SCIMP from econometric models.
In an econometric model, parameters are typically determined by the
application of econometric methods to historical time series or cross
section data and the parameter estimates are an integral component. of
the model. In the case of SCIMP the parameters are determined exog-
enously by a variety of means, including point estimates, assumptions
based on other research, and in some instances by econometric estimation
techniques. In other words, in SCIMP both the parameters and exogenous
variable data are .inputs, while in an econometric model the parameter
estimates are an integral part of the model.
There are both advantages and shortcomings to this approach. On the
positive side, SCIMP is generally applicable to small regional economies,
rather than being region specific, as would be the case with an econo-
metric model. This results in substantially more limited data require-
ments than is the case for a fully estimated econometric model. The
81
' I·
shortcoming is also indicated by the less stringent data requirements.
Specifically, the quality of the parameter estimates may not be as great
as that obtained by econometric techniques. However, the costs ·are
substantially less.
We can now turn to a discussion of the assumptions utilized in developing
the base case projections. Since distinct sets of assumptions are
necessary for each of the models, these will be considered in turn.
82
r·
L
[
[
L
[
E
L
[
f.
L
L
Non-OCS Base Case Assumptions: MAP Models
NATIONAL VARIABLES ASSUMPTIONS
Inasmuch as Alaska is an open economy, it is affected by changes in the
national economy. Consequently, several assumptions about the future
growth of the U.S. economy are required. The assumptions needed are
threefold. First, a forecast of average weekly earnings in the United
States is required as an input into the estimation of Alaskan wage
rates. Second, the Alaskan price level is tied in part to the national
price level so that a forecast of the U.S. consumer price index is
needed. Finally, inasmuch as a major determinant of migration to Alaska
is the income differential between Alaska and the lower 48, a forecast
is required of real per capital disposable income in the United States.
The long-run assumptions for these national variables are based on long-
term forecasts prepared by Data Resources, Inc., in their September 1979
forecast of U.S. economic activity (TRENDLONG0979). This forecast pre-
dicts a long-run average rate of increase in the U.S. consumer price
index of 8.85 percent through 1990. A rate of 8.3 percent (the 1990
value) is used for the 1991-2000 period. Real disposable per capita
income is forecast to increase at a 3.38 percent average annual rate.
Hourly earnings are forecast to increase at 10.2 percent, while average
hours worked are forecast to decline slowly at -0.23 percent.
83
The Base Case Assumptions ·'
The impact of OCS development on the economy will be measured as the
change from the level of activity from the base case. The base case is
defined as the level of activity which is projected to occur without the
OCS lease sale of interest. This section describes the base case which
will be used in this study.
A set of assumptions about the future level of various exogenous econo-
mic activity defines a development scenario. A development scenario is
required to forecast the future level of activity in the economy with
each model used in the analysis. There are three major types of assump-
tions required for a development scenario. First, the models require
assumptions about the future level of national variables which directly
or indirectly affect Alaska economic activity. Secondly, assumptions
about the future development of the exogenous sectors of the Alaska
economy are required. These assumptions can be separated into OCS and
non-OCS assumptions; the major difference between the base case and the
impact case is the addition to the OCS assumptions of the OCS lease sale
of interest. Finally, the models require assumptions about the State
government finances. These include both assumptions about State expend-
iture decisions and assumptions about the level of exogenous State
revenues.
84
[
L
[
L
L
F
r-
' L
... --~----·. [
Consequently, average weekly earnings may be expected to grow at an
annual rate of 9.97 percent (i.e., 10.2 percent minus 0.23 percent).
These long-term average growth rates were adopted as the three national
variable assumptions utilized in the analysis.
THE ECONOMIC SCENARIOS
The economic scenarios consist of time series on employment and output
in certain export base or exogenous industries. This does not mean that
we are predicting that all or any of these events will occur since there
is a highly variable degree of uncertainty with respect to the levels
and timing of the events in these scenarios. What it does mean is that
with a certain degree of probability, we expect the general level of
economic activity to follow this scenario. We assume that there is a
medium probability that the level of activity will be at least as great
as that described by this scenario.
The major exception to this important assumption is related to the
exogenous series in fisheries-related activity. These series were
developed by Sea Grant and Earl Coombs, Inc., under contract with the BLM/
Alaska OCS Office. The components related to bottomfishing, in the opinion of
the ISER staff, are greatly in excess of what can reasonably be expected
to actually occur. To the extent that these series do in fact turn out
to be too high, then the aggregate projections will also be high and the
probability that they will be achieved must necessarily be reduced.
Since we have been specifically instructed to use the series by the Alaska
OCS Office we have done so, but we are not in agreement with the assumptions.
85
Primarily as a result of the uncertainty attached to the occurrence,
magnitude, and timing of any particular event, agreement about partie-
ular scenarios is hard to achieve even among those most knowledgeable
about the Alaska economy. Emphasizing our concern mainly with general
levels of activity, the probabilistic nature of the specific scenario
should reduce the disagreement. In an attempt to reduce even further
the disagreement, the scenario was developed based upon existing scenar-
ios which have attained same measure of consensus. The most important
source for these scenarios were the scenarios developed in the level B
Southcentral ~Jater Study (Scott, 1979) and the Susitna Dam feasibility
study (Goldsmith and Huskey, 1980). The major exception is the series
related to bottomfishing activity, as commented upon above.
The economic scenario is described in Table 29. The assumptions are
described below; these discussions are organized by industry.
Mining
Currently, the mining sector in Alaska is dominated both in employment
and output by the petroleum industry. This is assumed to continue in
the future.
The scenario includes production at P.rudhoe Bay and in the Upper Cook
Inlet. Production from the Sadlerochet formation at Prudhoe is assumed
to include both primary recovery and secondary recovery using water
flooding. Development of the water flooding facilities begins in 1982.
86
r
I
L
L
[
[
L
[
L
f
L
L
The Kuparak formation is also assumed to be developed with production
rising to 120,000 barrels per day by 1984. Employment assoCiated with
these developments peaks in the early 1980s with the development of
Kuparak and the water flooding project .. Upper Cook Inlet employment is
assumed to remain at its existing level throughout the projection period.
This assumes a rising level of exploration, development, and production
of gas in the Kenai fields which would replace employment lost because
of declining oil production. Also included is exploration, development,
and production in NPRA, beginning in 1985.
Finally, the mining inc 1 udes the "moderate.. cases of the fo 11 owing
OCS leases: Beaufort State/Federal Sale, Northern Gulf (Sale 55),
the two Cook Inlet Sales, and the Bering-Norton Sale (57).
87
co co
Special !Projects
Trans-Alaska
Pipeline
Northwest Gasline
Prudhoe Bay
Petroleum
Production
Upper Cook Inlet
Petroleum Pro-
duction
r---
l
,.._..._
L .
TABLE 29. SCENARIO ECONOMIC ASSUMPTIONS
Description
The construction of
the TAPS was com-
pleted in 1977. ·
Additional construc-
tion of four pump
stations is assumed
as well as pipeline
operations.
Construction of natural.
gas pipeline from
Prudhoe Bay which in~
eludes construction of
an associated gas
conditioning facility
on the North Slope.
Primary recovery from
Sadlerochit formation,
secondary recovery
using water flooding
of that formation and
development of the
Kuparuk formation.
Employment associated
with declining oil
production is assumed
to be replaced by
employment associated
with rising gas pro-
duction maintaining
current levels of
employment.
Dates & Employment
1979-1982 -Pump
station construction
of 90/year
1977-2000 -Operations
employment of 1500/yr.
1982-1986 -Construc-
tion peak employment
of 7,823 (1984)
1986-2000 -Operations
begin employing 400
petroleum and 200
transport workers
Location
Operations employ-
ment allocated:
1/3 to Southcentral
1/3 to Fairbanks
l/3 to N. Slope
Source
E. Porter, Bering-Norton
Statewide-Regional
Economic and Demographic
Systems, Impact Analysis,
Alaska OCS Socioeconomic
Studies Program, Bureau
of Land Management, 1980.
2/3 of pipeline E. Porter, 1980.
construction and
transportation
employment in Fair-
banks.
1/3 in North Slope.
All gas conditioning
employemnt in North
Slope.
1982-1984 -Construction All in North Slope E. Porter, 1980.
of water flooding pro-
ject peak employment of
2,917 (1983)
1980-2000 -Mining employ-
ment long-run average of
1,802/year ·
1980-2000 -Mining em-All in Southcental E. Porter, 1980
ployment of 705/year region
,____...,
. I
l .:J L. . J
Special Projects
Beluga Coal Pro-
duct ion
Pacific LNG
Project
Petrochemical
Development
00
~
Sus itna Project
National Petroleum
Reserve in Alaska
Bradley Lake
l. i J •.. J l . J [ I J .J
TABLE 29. SCENARIO ECONOMIC ASSUMPTIONS (cont.)
Descri~tion Dates & Em~lo~ment Location
Moderate development 1985-1990-construe-Located in
of Beluga coal re-tion -peak employment Southcental
source for export. of 400 ( 1987) region
1988-2000 -operations·
employment of 210/year
long-run average
Construction of cur-1982-1985 -Construe-Located in
rent proposal by tion peak employment Southcentral
Pacific LNG of 1,323/year (1984) region
1986-2000 -Operations
employment of 100/yr.
Development includes · 1984-1986 -construe-Southcentral
refinery and petro-tion employment of
chemical facility 2400/year
using states royalty 1987-2000 -operations
has as feed stock. employment 1118/year
Construction of two 1984-1998-construe-Southcentral
dams on the Susitna tion peak employment
River for a major 1414 (1992).
hydroelectric project. 1991-2000 -operations
employment 19 per dam.
Petroleum production Leases held between
in NPRA. Production 1983-1990. Develop-
in five fields with a ment and exploration
total reserve of 2.5 begins in 1985.
billion bbls equiva-Average mining employ-
lents of oil and gas. ment of 460/year.
Construction of 525
miles of pipeline.
Construction of hydro-1981-1985 -construe-. Southcentra 1
electric facility tion -peak employment
of 300 (1983)
1986-2000 -Operations
employment (10)
Source
Pacific Northwest Labora-
tory, Beluga Coal Field
Development: Social Effects
and Management Alternatives,
1979.
·E. Porter, 1980.
Based on modifed Alpetco
proposal (E. Porter, 1980)
and J. Kruse, Fairbanks
Petrochemical Study, 1978.
E. Porter, 1980.
Based on mean scenario
under Management Plan 2
in Office of Minerals
Policy and Research
Analysis, U.S. Department
of Interior, Final Report
of the l05(b) Economic
and Policy Analysis, 1979.
Industry
Assumptions
Fisheries/Food
Process ·i ng
Forestry/Pulp
and Paper
Manufacturing
~ Other Manu-
facturing
Federal Govern-
ment
Other Mining
Agriculture
r---
l ·'
TABLE 29. SCENARIO ECONOMIC ASSUMPTIONS (cont.)
Description
Small increase in em-
ployment in tradi-
tiona 1 fishery. t4ajor
expansion of domestic
groundfish industry.
Expansion to replace
foreign fishery in the
200 mile limit by 2000.
Employment expands to
accommodate 960 mil-
lion board feet of
1 umber.
Expansion of existing
manufacturing of
locally consumed goods.
Civilian employment
assumed to grow at
recent historical rate.
Military declines
at 0.05%
No expansion of exist-
ing nonspecial pro-
jects.
Assumes that a rela-
tively low priority is
given to agriculture
development because
of priorities for
recreation and wilder-
ness or the lack of
markets.
,...,..........
l ... 1.: )
Dates & Employment
Fishery employment ex-
pands to 9638 by
2000 (resident).
Processing employment
expands to 10,420 by
2000 (resident}.
Growth of output at
4% per year.
Civil ian emp'loyment
grows at 1.0%/year
Railbelt Location Source ~~-----------------
Resident regional Sea Grant, 1980; Earl Coombs,
employment in year Inc., memo to OCS; OCS.
2000: F P
Southcentral 2658/2405
Southeast 1376/538
Northwest 57/17
Southwest 5547/7306
Anchorage 0/154
Approximately 11% M. Scott, 1979.
of activity in
Fairbanks region.
Remainder in South-
east.
Regional distribu-
tion based on ex-
isting distribution
of employment.
Existing regional
distribution.
M. Scott, 1979.
Employment constant at Regional allocation
1979 level, 2,350/yr. constant
Employment grows to
1 ' 03 7 by 2000.
,.---......
I I . . )
71% of growth M. Scott, 1979.
located in
Fairbanks region
and 29% in South-
central region.
Other regions re-
main the same.
_j
In addition to the petroleum development, some other mining is assumed
to take place. Development of the Beluga coal resources is assumed. In
this scenario, coal is assumed to be produced for export.
The special projects described above do not exhaust the mining employ-
ment in the state. Additional employment occurs in the exploration,
development, and production of nonpetroleum minerals, a~ well as a major
component of headquarters employment in Anchorage. Market forcei and
governmental policies are assumed to be such that this component of
mining remains constant.
Agriculture-Forestry-Fisheries
This industry is, in reality, three distinct subindustries which re-
present Alaska•s renewable resource industries. Of the three, the
fishing industry is currently the largest in terms of both employment
and value of product. Agriculture is currently only a marginal industry
employing few people statewide (Scott, 1979). Current state efforts to
develop agriculture may lead to its increased importance in the future.
Forestry consists of only a small component; the future of forestry is
most appropriately discussed with the future of lumber and wood products
manufacturing.
The future of agricultural development in the state depends importantly
on governmental policies and actions. State and Federal land policies,
infrastructut·e development and loan programs, and marketing programs
will determine the future of this industry. Agriculture is assumed to
91
rise only slightly from its current levels of employment. This assumes
that agriculture receives low priorities from government.
Fisheries also hold promise for the future. The major determinant of
future increases in fisheries employment will be the expansion of the
Alaska bottomfish industry. The creation of the 200 mile limit may
support increased Alaska bottomfish activity~
The fishing industry is assumed to undergo a rapid expansion in this
scenario. Total resident employment in fisheries grows at 8.0 percent
per year over the projection period, while employment in processing
expands at 13.3 percent. This growth results primarily from the develop-
ment of the bottomfish industry. The domestic fishery is assumed to
completely replace the foreign fishery operating within the 200 mile
1 imit by 2000 and expand to catch the allowable biological catch (Sea
Grant, 1980; Earl Coombs, Inc. memo to BLM/AK OCS Office, and BLM/AK OCS
Office). We would state again that we feel that the bottomfish projections
are substantially over optimistic and we are using them at the instruction
of the BLM/AK OCS Office.
Not all fishery related employment is assumed to have full economic
impact on the state and regional economy. Boats and crews may be from
outside and only fish Alaska waters; these crews have limited impact on
the economy. Processing employees are also often brought in from
outside the state and live in enclaves having little effect. For this
reason, the resident share rather than total employment has been used.
Table 30 provides estimates for 1980, 1990, and 2000.
92
f~
l L~
[
L
[
L
r-~
~ '
[
[
r,
L
I
L
L
~~ " lj l •I I I I J ' ..... " I~J" ' .J ,_, "', ,,1 1,,,, '''"'" ' ' ) I' _I •' 1 ij ' ',j L , , .J J J .J
TABLE 30 RESIDENT EMPLOYMENT IN FISHERIES
Harvesting
Rest of the
Year Aleutians Southwest North\'Ves :t Southeast Southcentral Anchorage Total
1980 388 642 ' 57 1259 1164 0 3510
1990 1141 642 57 1301 130'3 0 4444
2000 4905 642 57 1376 2658 0 9638
Processing
Rest of the
Year Aleutians Southwest Northwest Southeast Southcentral Anchorage Total
1.0 w 1980 175 32 21 225 359 39 851
1990 1394 65 21 420 503 53 2456
2000 7208 98 17 538 2405 154 10420'
SOURCE: See text.
For the Aleutians and part of Southcentral (Kodiak) the figures were
supplied by OCS, for bottomfishing. The remainder of traditional and
bottomfishing total employment projections, by region, were obtained
from Sea Grant (1980). Residency adjustments were developed utilizing
residency factors in Rogers (1980) and are based upon residence of
fishermen, by type of gear, fishing in each of the regions. Projections
for processing were similarly developed.
Federal Government
Federal government employmen~ has always been an important component of
Alaska 1 s economy. In recent years, Federal government employment has
been growing very little; increases in civilian employment have been
offset by decreases in military employment. Low rates of growth in
Federal government employment are assumed to occur. Civilian employment
grows at about l percent per year, while military employment declines at
0.05 percent per year.
Manufacturing
The manufacturing industry_in Alaska has four important components:
seafood processing, lumber-wood products-pulp, petrochemicals, and manu-
facturing for the local economy. Production of seafood processing is
expected to continue to dominate the food processing industry in Alaska;
growth of this industry was based on projections provided by Sea Grant
to SESP (Sea Grant, 1980 and OCS, as explained above).
The growth of the lumber-wood-paper-pulp sector of manufacturing in the
state is determined primarily by two factors. These are the Forest
94
r·
I l ..
[~
r ~
~
[
L
[
L
r
I L_
L
Service allowable annual cut and the Japanese,market conditions. Growth
in lumber-wood-paper-pulp reflect an increase in annual allowed cut by
half the 1970 Jevel over the period.
The petrochemical industry in Alaska currently consists of the develop-
ments in Kenai. The petrochemical industry expands with the construe-
tion of the Pacific LNG facility as currently planned and the development
of a petrochemical facility which uses the state 1 s royalty oil and gas.
The petrochemical complex is assumed to use the state 1 s royalty gas, to
produce ethylene or fuel-grade methanol, as well as include a fuels
refinery as defined by Alpetco. Although no major proposal like this is
currently proposed, interest in such a project has currently been
expressed by major international .firms.
The final component of the manufacturing industry consists of those
industries producing for local consumption and other diverse specialized
production. It was assumed that this sector would grow because of
increased market size, allowing scale economies which make local pro-
duction viable. This sector was assumed to grow at 4 percent per year.
Transportation .
The exogenous portion of the transportation industry is that which
serves special projects. This industry includes the operations employ-
ment for TAPS and the Northwest gasline.
95
Construction
The final exogenous industry for which scenarios are required is that
portion of the construction industry where the level is determined
outside the economy. This sector includes construction employment
associated with the special projects described above. This sector does
not include capital improvement projects of any level of government or
construction activity which supports the local economy; the remainder of
construction activity is determined endogenously in the MAP model. The
major development of special projects occurs in the early part of the
projection period. The most important project during this period is the
construction of the Northwest gasline which is assumed to begin in 1982.
The construction of the petrochemical facility is assumed to begin in
1984. An additional major construction project is the construction of
the Susitna Hydro Project which begins in 1984. Construction of the
bottomfish processing facilities projected also increase employment. It
is assumed that it will require 40 man years to build a processing plant
(conversation with industry sources).
STATE FISCAL POLICY ASSUMPTIONS
Past studies of the Alaskan economy conducted within the Man-in-the-
Arctic Program, the OCS Studies Program~ and other miscellaneous pro-
grams have indicated repeatedly the key role of State government fiscal
policy as a major determinant of both historical and future State
economic growth.
Over the period of study, State government will receive revenues from
oil development which far exceed current levels of expenditure. The
96
r~
I
\!__.
I
L:
[
I'
L
[
[
. r·'
L
r,
' L
[
rate at which the government chooses to-spend these revenue~ (or to
offset existing revenue sources with them) will serve to determine not
only direct employment in the government sector but, through the multi-
plier effects of such expenditures or tax reductions, will have impacts
on all endogenous sectors, affecting the growth of employment, income,
prices, and migration into the state.
Two factors affect the current framework in which State fiscal policy
will be determined. First, revenues have already overtaken expenditures
as a consequence of .the onset of production from Prudhoe Bay and will
continue to increase as a consequence of both increased production and
I
price increases. Second, the establishment of the Permanent Fund, as a
constitutional amendment in 1976, places constraints on the use of
certain petroleum revenues. It requires that a minimum of 25 p~rcent of
all mineral lease rentals, royalties., royalty sale proceeds, Federal -
mineral revenue sharing payments, and bonuses received by the State be
put in the fund.
These changes in the structure of State spending limit the usefulness of
past fiscal policies in determining the fiscal policy rules to be used.
The rate of State expenditures, because it is a matter of policy choice
within this new framework, cannot be modeled simply from past experience.
Past experience can,. however, provide qualitative guidance in formulating
hypothetical fiscal policy options for use in simulation. First, we can
expect that, as in the past, increasing levels of economic activity
97
generate new demands for government services. As prices and population
rise, increased expenditure is required to simply maintain services at
a constant level. In fact, however, this level will be expected to rise
over time if historical trends continue.
Secondly, historical data gives at least some indication of State fiscal
policy response to surplus petroleum revenues. The revenues generated
by the Prudhoe Bay lease sale in FY 1970 led to a rapid jump in both the
level and growth .of nominal and per capita expenditures, with nominal
expenditures jumping from an average growth of 8.9 percent annually
prior to the sale to an average 19.7 percent after the sale; and real
per capita expenditures jumped from 2.3 percent prior to the sale to 7.7
percent after the sale.
If these qualitative features carry over into future fiscal responses to
surplus petroleum revenues, future real per capita expenditures can be
expected to rise within the bounds set by revenue quantities and statutory
constraints. At a minimum, the State might choose simply to maintain
real per capita expenditures at their current levels. At a maximum, it
could choose to spend all but 25 percent of restricted petroleum rev~
nues as they are incurred. Unfortunately, the range of possibilities
within these brackets is very large. While it is foolish to try to
anticipate the actual fiscal policy choices of the State, it is possible
to simulate each of the extremes. As a compromise, for purposes of
simulation, a middle-range policy can then be selected.
strategy followed here.
98
This is the
r~
I .
['
l ,
! .
,~
L
I I_
[
[
·r· ~
L
f L~
I,
I l_
The mid-range forecast used in the base case was developed as follows.
First, exogenous petroleum revenues were estimated. The petroleum
revenues used in this forecast were based on the most recent Petroleum
Production Revenues Forecast which is prepared quarterly by the Alaska
Department of Revenue. Next, two forecasts were made, one in which real
per capita State government expenditures are maintained at existing
levels and a second in which only the legislated minimum is saved.
These cases provide the extremes. A path of growth in State expenditures
which is midway between these extremes was chosen to use in the base
case. The result was a growth rate of 14 percent in nominal State
government expenditures.
99
Non-OCS Base Case Assumptions: SCIMP
The utilization of SCIMP requires projection of a set of exogenous
variables and a set of control parameters. In general the control
parameters for the base case include: demographic parameters, labor
force participation rates, and economic base multipliers.
Parameters for the population distributions were based on 1970 census
data and the Aleutian-Pribilof Islands Association Health Department,
Tribal Specific Health Plan. Since we were concerned with the nonmili-
tary and military dependents population, this component of total popu-
lation was netted out for distribution purposes. Military and dependents
are included in population totals however. Birth rates and survivor
rate parameters were based on the 1970 census and more recent data or
vital statistics from the U.S. Department of Health and Welfare. No
noneconomic induced migration was assumed.
Labor force participation rates by Cohort for residents 1t1ere based on
1970 census data and adjusted to current levels by reference to aggregate
labor force participation rates indicated in Alaska Department of Labor
data on work force and population. Data from the Tribal Specific Health
Plan cited above were also utilized in establishing Native labor force
participation rates.
The multipliers needed were estimated from employment data for the
Aleutians developed in Part II of the report. An aggregate multiplier,
100
[
[
I
L
r
L
[
[
[
[
f '
L
r·
I
L
[
-7
d
definep as the ratio of resident support sector employment to resident
plus nonresident basic sector employment, was estimated using data from
Table 20. The support sector includes: resident employment in wholesale-
retail trade; finance, insurance, and real estate; services; and transpor-
tation, communication, and public utilities. The basic sector includes
all other employment except Federal government defense-related cilivian
employment.
The result was a multiplier of 0.1062. This multiplier was then dis-
aggregated into local and enclave multipliers, using the assumption that
the enclave multiplier was equal to 0.2 times the local multiplier.
This resulted in a local multiplier of 0.2332 and an enclave multiplie~
of 0.0466. The local and enclave multipliers were assumed to double (in
response to major growth in the region) over.the 20 year projection
period. This assumption was based on a review of similarly estimated
multipliers for other regions in the state, keeping in mind the lack of
interdependence between local economies of the Aleutians.
The exogenous variables for which estimates must be supplied to the
model include; government, construction, fisheries employment, the
military, and non-OCS mining. State and local government was assumed to
maintain a constant proportion to resident plus enclave employment.
Federal government nondefense-related civilian employment was assumed to
grow at 0.05 percent per year, in keeping with past trends. Military
101
and related federal civilian employment was assumed to maintain current
levels (based on a review of historic data).
Data on the growth o.f fisheries was based on information contained in
Sea Grant (1980) and figures supplied to ISER by OCS, as discussed
above. Construction was assumed to respond to the rapid growth of
fisheries. Total construction was set at 0.21 times resident fisheries
employment, where the ratio was developed by assuming that construction
to total employment ratios for the Aleutians will approximate that of
the State in the future. Resident construction employment is set at 5
percent of total construction initially, as indicated by prior analysis,
and grows to 15 percent of total construction employment by the end of
the projection period. Data for fisheries and construction employment
are presented in Table 31.
This completes the description of the base case assumptions. We now
turn to the base case projections.
102
[
r~
L
f ~
l.o
[
L
[j
[
[
r.
I
L
[
-~
;....3
->
-'
..,.... .. ,
::::i
' -,
,,j
Year ·
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
.1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
TABLE 31. PROJECTED EMPLOYMENT IN FISHERIES AND
CONSTRUCTION ALEUTIAN ISLANDS
CENSUS DIVISION: 1980-2000
Fisheries
Construction {Harvesting & Processing)
Resident Nonresident Resident Nonresident
6 112 563 2349
6 115 574 2313
8 134 675 2872
9 140 709 2890
10 148 752 . 2903
12 167 854 3464
14 187 959 3480
18 221 1137 3984
24 281 1453 4413
32 362 1874 4815
46 486 2535 5139
64 640 3350 5789
81 . 757 3989 5541
108 955 5048 5978
141 1167 . 6228 5976
161 1254 6736 5576
200 1464 7922 5413
242 1662 9069 5206
283 1823 10029 4742
331 2002 11110 4410
382 2162 12113 3891
SOURCE: See text.
103
The Base Case Projections
The historical baseline analysis and the base case assumptions have laid
the groundwork for the base projections. Before reviewing these projec-
tions, it again needs to be emphasized that the projections are not
forecasts of what actually will occur. These base projections are
projections of economic and demographic variables, given the assumption
that the specific projects, growth rates, etc., occur. As discussed
above, however, there is a reasonable probability (with the exception of
fisheries) that the assumptions utilized will generate a growth path
that actually will be obtained or exceeded. With these comments in
mind, we can now turn to the projections.
THE MAP STATEWIDE BASE CASE PROJECTIONS
Population
Projections of populations, net migration, and natural increase are
shown in Table 32, Population growth over the period averages 2.73
percent, divided about equally between the 1980s (2.68 percent) and the
1990s (2.78 percent). The 1980s begin with a relatively stable popu-
lation, but from 1982-1986 growth is quite rapid (at about 5 percent).
This growth is primarily a reflection of the gas pipeline construction,
the waterflood project at Prudhoe Bay, the Pacific LNG plant construe-
tion, and construction of a major petrochemical facility. During the
1990s construction of the Susitna hydroelectric project and fisheries
expansion are the main driving forces, and the growth of population is
more even.
1M
f' L
[
C
[
L
L
[
[
TABLE 32. PROJECTED POPULATION AND COMPONENTS
OF CHANGE: ALASKA, 1980-2000
(Thousands)
F'DPTsr·
1980 400~5
1981 39'7. 94tl
1982 407.591
1983 421. 8!37
1. 9f3·4 453.74:1.
1. 98!5 -48() + 755
1986 494.9-46
1987 499.657
j_ ~~88 502. 95e:.
1989 509.16
1 SJ90 522.219
1991 538.:H2
1<:'Ci? It·-553.102
1993 567.305
1994 579.898
1995 593.178
1996 610.49
1997 629.74
1.998 648.981
j (.')QM
• ~ I 7 666.24
2()00 686.394
..
SOURCE: MAP Model Projections
105
HIGNET N,:~TII-./C
-6+087 ·4 v ::::57
, r···r.---o.,. .:..) .. :i / 4f.,..;-:}\f6
1. ,, 985 4.1:1.5
8 + .:!> 4.103
25 f. '74~5 4 ~ 35 .. -s
20~125 5 ·> 306
6 •) \'5()5 r::"' r\ ·" "" .Jy 7•;:)0
-3.026 6.,.{)7
-4.212 5.805
-1.,.0-4:7 57521
~:5,) 927 ·~ -z·-·'·) ,_r v .....;C) A-
8.83 5 ... 534
7.187 5 + 7ii'!)
6.418 ~) ~ 982
·4 + 62~5 6.141
5. :L 98 6 + ~~2"7
9.092 6.~)4:l
10.741 6 .• 613
10.:381 6 .. 939.
8.0/'1 7.24
10.:73~:5 /' + 43'?
'
POPST = State Population
MIGNET = Net Migration
NATINC = Natural Increase
Natural population increases are fairly steady over the entire period.
In contrast net migration shows strong swings in response to fluctuation
in labor demand associated with big project construction.
The net result is a population of 685.6 thousand in 2000, an increase of
71 percent over the 1980 population of 400.3 thousand. Of this increase
119.9 thousand is accounted for by natural increase, while the balance
is attributed to net migration.
Employment
Projections of employment for total employment (EM99ST}, wage and salary
employment (EM98ST), the support sector (EMSlST), government (EMG9ST),
and the basic sector (EMBlST), are presented in Table 33. Total employ-
ment grows from 186.68 thousand in 1980 to 381.41 thousand in 2000, a
growth rate of 3.64 percent. Growth of basic sector employment (at 5.3
percent) occurs in response to construction, expanding petroleum-related
activity, and growth of bottomfishing. Expansion is somewhat more rapid
in the first decade (6.0 percent) compared to the 1990s (4.6 percent).
Government growth (1.67 percent) is largely accounted for by growth of
State and local government.
Support sector growth is strong and reflects the growth of the basic
sector. For the entire period, growth averages 5.2 percent but is
somewhat more rapid (at 5.8 percent) during the 1980s than during the
1990s (4.6 percent). Support sector employment as a percent of total
employment grows from 33 percent in 1980 to 44 percent in 2000.
106
[
!'
r-,
r
r ~
! '
L
f~
L
r~
L
[
[
L
[·~
. '
_,
[
L
I
I
L
[
d \,.
__,
0
-.....!
t ,.,J k, , J l, .< J ~,,,:,,u L,,,,.,J L,.,,,J ,:, .I.,J l,, "' J L , J I· .. J Ll
:1. '?80
:1. 9i:l:l.
:1. '.182
191:33
1984
:1. '?8!:5
:1. 98,1>
TABLE 33. PROJECTED EMPLOYMENT: ALASKA, 1980-2000
(Thousands)
Ei'19'1~3T EH9BST EriS1ST ENG9HT
1.B6. 9!'59 :1. 7 2 • ~J !'.'i :1. 6:1. .49 B3.4'76
:I.B8.~.:i9f.> :1. '7:J. s)::! 4 <!> :J. f' ~:.) :J. ~::i f.l4.~~7El
:l9ci. ::);?)3 :1. B :l. ~5!'5 f.l4. :t::.!9 84. '7!:52
~!()f:J •· ;:)48 1 9 ~~! • 'J :1. !'.'i '70.4f.l:l i:J -4 • f.>?
~!3 :L t '.i>')l 2:1.~5.694 84. B3:·:s fl2. :324
ENB:I.~lT
;.~7 + 30!:5
2B. 0~:!
~12.669
:37 + 7f.>!5
4B • !:537
247.582 230.741 99.298 83.653 47.79
252.067 235.845 104.147 87.392 44.307
....... 1-28./.' :.__ ____ ....,:·:> !i3 .... .2.28----:2.36 ..... l-9-4--:L0.3 .... 2/.'..<.L ___ 9i41)2-'.Y.~' --42....-fW!:5 .
:1.98fJ
:1.9B9
1990
:L s>'J :1.
:l9<?2
1. s>n>
:1. 9'?4
:1.99!'.)
:L996
199'7
:L99i:J
:L 9 'l<'r
:woo
254.72 44.176 ~~~ :":> '7 t l> ~·5 !:=j :1.02 • ~:!Bc:i '7' :L • :1. I' 2
2!:W. 97B
26i:l. 7()!:j
:~!BO. 43B
290.76<J.
~:)()0 t 493
::wa. 996
::~ :1. i:}. :1. 'li:l
:3::~0. ::)49
:'54~:~. 60'7
:3 !:.:i 6 ~ 5 ~.:j 7
:367. 9~~B
~:) f:~ :1. • !:) (~) :~!
241.. '749
::1:::; :L • :1. :::;::s
26;;.!. !:)04
;;~7:?. t !'504
2f:l J. • 92:'5
~:~9(). 1. t:i3
~.!99. MJ-4
~~ :L 0 • i:l'? ;;!
~:~2:3 t '?4:1.
:?i:36. ~51. f.l
:':l-4/' • :·56B
::~ ,1> () • 6 ~:?. 2
--·. .. ... -·
10:'5.1'B2
:lO'?.S.'Of.J
:1.:1.3 t 9:3!'.)
1. :1. 9. i:l~5!:5
:1. 2~.). 29?
l29.BH4
:L ;;s 4 • !'.50 9
1.40.c>7cS
14EJ. o::~::)
:1. ~:.:j !:=i ~ :i :?. ~:j
:Ud. !'592
:L f.>B. :1. 6!'.5
..
92.f.>T7
94.327
96. :1.6!:'i
'i'B.J.-4:1.
:I.00.24i:l
:l 02. 6:?.:'.'i
:1. 0•1. 6 ~m
:L06.37B
:l ()i:J. 4;;.! :1.
:L :1. (). f.J9-4
u ~:> • 6 s> '?
l1. !:5 ~ 9\~)~:J
4B.91.'i>
!:)2. 404.
::54+ ~)()l:j
!:5 c:'> + ~'.) '?i:l
~.)'7 t 65:'.)
~59.91./'
6::->.8:1.9
6/'.:Wc')
'70.09''}
'?2.077
76.49
I J l.
EM99ST = Total State Employment (Including mi 1 itary & ·self-employed)
EM98ST =Wage & Salary Employment (State total)
EMSlST =Transport, Communications, & Public Utility Employment; Wholesale-Retail Trade; Finance,
· Insurance & Real Estate; & Services (State total)
EMG9ST =Federal, State, & Local Government Employment (State total)
EMBlST =Basic Sector Employment (State total)
SOURCE: MAP Model Projections
J' L ' j
In summary, the projections indicate a 20 year period of sustained
growth. However, the first 10 years tend to be more volatile and re-
flect the concentration of several major projects in the 1982-1986
period. The 1990s growth in employment is somewhat more evenly paced,
responding largely to growth in fisheries and the construction of the
Susitna hydropower project.
Personal Income, Wages and Prices
Personal income projections (measured in 1980 dollars), both total and
per capita, are shown in Table 34. Total personal income grows from
4183.5 million dollars in 1980 to 13,414.7 million dollars in 2000, an
average annual rate of growth of 6.0 percent. As was the case with
other variables considered, the rate of growth for the first 10 years
(6.9 percent) is somewhat higher than for the second 10 years (5.1
percent). In part this reflects a somewhat lower rate of growth in
employment, but it also is a result of changes in the composition of
economic activity.
This is more clearly seen in the data on per capita income. Over the
first decade per capita income grows at an annual rate of 4.1 percent,
while for the 1990-2000 period the rate of growth is only 2.3 percent.
This decline is attributable to two factors. First, an increasing share
of total employment is accounted for by support sector activity, with
relatively lower real wages than the economy as a whole. Second, much
of the growth of basic sector employment during the 1990s is in fish-
eries, again an industry with relatively low wage rates.
108
f'
b
c L
L
c
[
[
H
[
L
[
r
I
L
L
_;
'
-,
1
;::_;
'
~
~~
'
.J
~-~
.J
TABLE 34. PROJECTED TOTAL AND PER CAPITA REAL·
· PERSONAL INCOME: ALASKA, 1 980-2000
(Personal Income in Millions of 1980 Dollars,
Per Capita Income in 1980 Do 11 a rs)
PII=i:ST F' IF:PCST
1980 4199.89 104B6~6
1.981 -4::-i 1. .7 + :35 10/'94.8
1982 4702.6 j_ 153/'. 6
1983 ~5:5?5 + f.)3 :l2742.8
1984 7l05.73 15'660 ·> 3
1985 79fl9. 46 :L6639.4
1986 7768.98 15696.6
1987 7426.66 14863.5
1.988 7499.95 149J.:l.B
1989 7693.:1.8 1~):1.09.!5
1990 8142.64 15~592 ~ ·4
19.9:1. 8690.42 16142.9
1992 9175.56 16589.3
1993 9603.43 1.6928-)2
1994 9926.27 17117.2
1995 10370.8 1748~5 + 4
1996 1101.:1 .• :1. 18036.5
1997 11686.2 18557.1.
1998 12284.5 1.8928,-9
1999 12748.5 1. 91.35 +
2000 13427.4 1956:2.:2
... -----------·-·-·---··-
SOURCE: MAP Model Projections
PIRST =Personal Real Income (State total)
PIRPCST-Real Per Capita Personal Income (State total)
109
Variation in the overall· growth of total and per capita personal income
is also evident in the projections. Both grow steadily from 1980-1985
and then drop. It is not until 1990 that real total personal income
exceeds its 1985 level and not until 1993 that per capita income reaches
its 1985 level. Thereafter, both series grow steadily upward.
Projection of wages and salaries, including: government wages and
salaries (WSG9RST), support sector wages and salaries (WSSlRST), and
basic sector wages and salaries (WSBlRST) are shown in Table 35. Total
government wages grow at an overall rate of 5 percent with the growth
rate for the first 10 years (5.1 percent) slightly above the second
period (4.8 percent). ·Support sector wages grow at a rate of 7.4 per-
cent during the 1980s, and the rate drops to 5.1 percent during the
1990s. For the period as a whole the rate is 6.2 percent.
Basic sector wages grow somewhat more rapidly, especially during the
first 10 years (9.5 percent) reflecting both the slightly higher rate of
growth of employment and higher wage rates. During the next 10 years,
the rate drops to 5.6 percent and is slightly above that of the support
sector. Again, this is primarily a result of the lower wage rates in
fisheries.
The wage bills in the basic and support sectors mirror the pattern of
growth seen in personal income. Both series peak in 1985 and then
110
r~·
L
[
E
[
G
D
[
L
L
r .
I
l-
L
TABLE 35. PROJECTED WAGES AND SALARIES: -ALASKA,
1980-2000
(Millions of 1980 Dollars)
L~SG91=(ST L<.ISS1f-i:ST L·JSBH<ST
1'780 :!.545. 9~~ 11. 1. ;:s _, 1.5 768.,:':i3'7
1?:31 :1.602.94 1123. 7 799 + 8:_)
1982 1666.83 119?.95 986.,416
1 '~'83 :t/'59.29 1391. .... 02 1 ~288 ~ ()2
1'784 1 0 '-~ --.-(-· .t..•O...:)t-~'1 189~3.:22 2l':f3v5/1
1985 20;24. 97 23l /' + ~)8 2~54;-5.1'1
1'786 :,::1.5/' + 4-4 231.3~22 1945.65
1987 22!53 ~ 87 :~1i:17 + "?6 1668.55
1988 23~11 .:1 .. 214~:). 1.9 :1.691 .61
1989 2429.03 216)' +~5-4 1 -.--, -· l .. ..: .1 ~32
1990 '1r-,-•.,-·-. -Y!.7 ~:..~,j/ ~.W .. J 22-:SO. 64 1088.04
1991 2663. 1 2411 ,.. .. r,
+ ,::. 7 2071 • o::;
1. 99:2 2796 • .. , ... :.:~55:7.71. 2191. 17 .L ;_) •
l993 2932.:37 2684.49 22/'5·]'··4·
1994 oov •••• ""71"') __ ,,..,
~lJ;·,:_v-/.~::.. r}-"""ll:!"' . ..:./ / ,; . 16 2302.96
:J.9<t5 3213.45 28t1~) ~ 77 2-<U 9. 97
1996 33.53 <-E~~i 3054.49 26:3t\. 33
1997 --.. ,-.,.~ '") ..:>..J,:..7+.:.. 3:247+61 2835.02
1998 3/'03.93 :->420. 4/' 27'73. 69
1999 ::.'~884 .1/' 3550.95 3()37 .; ~51
2000 4063.33 3716.09 325C) • 5:~
SOURCE: MAP Model Projections
WSG9RST =Government Wages & Salaries (State total)
WSSlRST =Support Sector Wages & Sal~ries (State total)
WSBlRST =Basic sector Wages & Salar1es (State total)
111'
i
decline steadily for 3 years and then begin growing again. Support
sector wages reach peak 1985 levels in 1991, but it is not until 1995
that basic sector total wages equal those obtained in 1985. Thereafter
the growth is steady.
Projections for real wage rates are shown in Table 36. These include
the real wage rates for the basic sector (WRBlRST), government (WRG9RST),
and the support sector (WRSlRST). Basic sector real wages increase
rapidly during the first 10 years (3.27 percent per year) and drop to
1.0 percent thereafter. Overall, the growth rate is 2.13 percent.
Support sector .real wage rates grow at an average annuaT rate of 1.0
percent over the 20 year period with the rate at 1.47 percent for the
1980s. During the 1990s the rate is only 0.54 percent. Government real
wages show the greatest growth at 3.24 percent over the entire period.
During the 1980s the rate is 3.8 percent and drops to 2.7 percent in the
· 1990s. The cycli·cal pattern of growth observed earlier is again ap-
parent.
It is also worth noting that our discussion of income and wages has been
in real terms. Over this period inflation has been substantial. The
USCPI has grown at an average rate of 8.4 percent. For the 1980s the
rate was 8.5 percent and during the 1990s the rate was 8.3 percent.
These rates exceeded the growth in the Alaska index which grew at 7.9
percent over the 20 year period. For the 1980s and 1990s the rates
were, respectively, 8.1 and 7.7 percent (see Table 37).
112
[
['
[
r
[
[
[~
r
L
[
L
[
c
8
[
[
r
L
.. --· ---
:J
_,;
SOURCE:
WRBlRST =
--' WRG9RST =
WRSlRST =
TABLE 36. PROJECTED REAL WAGE RATES:
ALASKA~ 1980-2000
( 1980 Do 11 a rs )
WRB1F;ST WfW'7'RST
1980 28063.8 1El5:t9.4
198:1. 28535-) 18997 ..
1982 30193.8 19667.2
1983 3,4106<) 20778.3
1984 45193.8 22.!\3··4· + 'i
:l985 49041.8 24206.8
1986 43913.4 24686.9
1987 -38907.5 25034.9
1CJ88 38292.2 25571.4
1989 38006.4 26209.7
1990 38595.6 26899.7
1991 39520.4 27693.
"1992 40198.8 2849:1 .• :1.
1.993 4 .. """"'1~("'\ -V.,j..J 7 + ./ 29251.1
1994 39943.7 2994:t.3
l.995 40388.4 30704.3
1996 41309.7 316:21.6
:1.997 42134. 32~)5l. +
1998 42421.5 33400.6
1999 4214:2.5 34161.8
2000 42574.7 35038.3
----... ... .,. ___ , ___ .
MAP Model Projections
Basic Sector Real Wage
Government Real Wage
Support Sector Real Wage
113
v;F;S1RST
18135.4
l826:7o)1
18680.3
:l9736.2
22316.9
23339.8
2:~21 :L + 1
21182.9
20952-t8
:~0883 ·~ 6
209·49 4 7
21.163.8
2:1.340.
21425.,
21:~ .. 56.5
21454.,1
21.712.9
21938+:~
22021.3
2:1.974.,.8
22097 + "7
TABLE 37. PROJECTED ALASKA AND U.S.
PRICE INDEXES: 1980-2000
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
199:i.
1992
1993
1994
1995
1.996
1997
1998
1999
2000
SOURCE: MAP Model Projections
RF'I USCPI
35·4·) 65~5 2-45 y 2s;·::~
388.45!5 269 ~ ~:):76
42~). 483 294.916
~-157 + ~)26 32() + 279
496.964 34!5.581
529.6'?7 372.88:1.
568.09 404.203
614. 438 ·> ~36
663.687 474.959
715.79 513.906
771.758 556.56
830 +~51. 9 602. 7!53
892.902 652.781
960. ?1.7 706 + 96:l
1034.07 76~3 + f->39
:l11.3.K) 829.186
1200.21 898.008
1292.68 972.542
1392.14 105~5. 2l>
1499.48 :1. :1.40 + 68
1616.84 1235.36
RPI = Alaska Relative Price Index
USCPI = U.S. Consumer Price Index
114
r
[
[
[
[
r~
[
I-
I
L
[
_j
_j
_,
;j
Government Revenues and Expenditures -
State government revenue projections by source are shown in--Table 38.
The variables include: total State government revenues (REVGFR)~ petro-
leum revenues (RP9SR), revenues from the Federal government (RFDSR)~ and
other revenues (RNDSR),. Total revenue grows steadily from 1980 (2.3
billion dollars) to a peak of 5.9 billion dollars in 1991 and declines
steadily thereafter to 4.7 billion dollars in 2000. The bulk of these
revenues are accounted for by petroleum revenues. After steady growth
these peak in 1989 (at 3.6 billion dollars) and decline through the year
2000 to a level of 1.2 billion dollars.
Receipts from the Federal government decline throughout the period~ frow
0.2 billion in 1980 to 0.07 billion dollars in 2000. Other revenues
increase steadily and substantially from a level of 0.2 billion dollars
in 1980 to over 3.4 billion dollars in 2000. These revenues include
such items as: corporate income taxes~ personal income taxes~ earnings
on fund balances~ and miscellaneous tax receipts.
Expenditure data are presented in Table 39 and include total State
government real expenditures (E99SR) and real per capita expenditures
(E99SRPC). Total expenditures grow at 5.7 percent over the entire
period and at 5.5 percent for the first 10 years. During the 1990s the
rate is slightly higher at 5.9 percent. The growth is relatively stable
throughout.
115
SOURCE:
! TABLE 38. PROJECTED STATE GOVERNMENT REVENUES:
1980
1981.
1982
198~}
l S.1 f3-4
:J.·:NJ5.
1986
1987
1988
1. S'89
1990
1.991
1992
1.993.
1994
199~5
l<;il}6
1. <J'-?7
1998
1999
2000
ALASKA, 1980-2000
(Millions of 1980 Dollars)
. REVGFR RP<fSR RFDSfi:
2261.48 1823 ~ ·<lt) 226 ~ 92·4
30?8.93 2671 .. 92 206 + 99~5
3418 .. 73 2837.4 1 Q'"> '")•/r.7 , ·I.,:_ {oo A.,,:_~
3786.51 3016 .. 41 1.82 .. 06!:5
4102.89 3074 .. 91 1 /'~} .. 905
4629.05. 33·4/' v-:=~ .. ·---17 l-t--6i3:~-
5032f-·42 3507.34 1.63.3:54
5274.69 35J4~)-:-152vl22
5498.34 3~)/"]5 + 76 14:1..38:1.
5752 + ]'1 3627.67 :1.~52.21.9
5807.75 :34681-27 1.2·4 + 8~~6
5865fo1 3309.33 118.534
57~51 + ~)3 2984.34 112.406
564~-) + 89 27()2. 58 106.399
5493.31 2402.9 100. 4~58
5341. 9!5 21.39.36 94.B
5204.76 191.2.38 89.857
508i3 .. 2 1708.92 85. :~7
4970.27 1520.71. 81 .• 072
4841. + 0!'5 1347.7 76.769
4719.95 1192.99 72.821
RNDSR
2:1.1 + 104
~~00 ., Oj.?
389d07
5<38 .. 029
B52.069
.:1.110. 07 . --
1361.74
1!'577. 57
1781..19
1992.82
2214.65
2~l37 .2-4
2654.79
2834.92
2989.98
3107.8 I
3202.53
3293.9
3368.49
:~416 .. 58
3454.13
MAP Model Projections REVGFR = Total State Government Revenues
RP9SR = Petroleum Revenues
RFDSR = Revenues from the Federal Government
RNDSR = Other Revenues
116
[
[
[
[
[
[~
[
I'
L
[
[
[
[
L
[
l
fe
L
r
L
[
·-,
~
~
.,
~
.. ,
. ..-
.,
,.;
_J
::_::]
..,
: ~
d
TABLE 39. PROJECTED TOTAL AND PER CAPITA STATE
GOVERNMENT EXPENDITURES: ALASKA, 1980-2000
(Millions of 1980 Dollars) ·
E'.f'9SR E99SRPC
1 1?80 1489.56 1101.03
198:1. 1.550.34 1147.55
1982 1.62:l..2 11.77 .. 49
1983 :1.711.4 1200.97
1984 1. 795.38 1171.37
1985 19:20.26 1182.44
1986 2041 .1.4 1220.85
1987 2152.91 1.275 ~56
1988 22~7 0 ~58 1336~45
1989 2400.04 1.395 .. 43
1.990 2537.6:3 1-438.5-4
1991. 2cS88.21 1478.26
1992 2850 •. -o:}5 1525,.65
1993 3020.14 1.576->
:L 994 3198.71 1.632.93
1995 3385 + ·41 1689.55
1996 35H1.6 :1.736 .. 78
1997 3790.97 1782. :L:I.
19~>8 4012.94 1830.53
1999 4247.27 :1.887.23
2000 4490.41 1936.68
-~.-..
SOURCE: MAP Model Projections
E99SR = State Government Real Expenditures
E99SRPC = Real Per Capita State Government Expenditures
117
·~-
I
Growth of real per capita expenditures is more erratic and reflects the
fluctuation in population observed earlier. Expenditures first peak in
1983, decline and rise again throughout the period, and surpass the 1983
peak in 1986. Overall growth is at an average annual rate of 2.87
percent with growth at 2.7 percent during the 1980s rising to 3.01
percent in the 1990s.
The fund balance also accumulates throughout the period, in nominal
terms. However, in real terms the fund peaks in 1996 and declines
thereafter (see Table 40).
118
[
r··
I'
L
[
[
[
[
[j
[
[
TABLE 40. PROJECTED FUND BALANCES IN CURRENT AND
1980 DOLLARS: ALASKA, 1980-2000
19:31
1983
19:34
:L '7'8!5
198C)
198~;.·
1988
1. 9Fi9
1.990
1.991.
1992
1. 99:3
1.994
1995
1996
:1.997
1998
:1.999
2000
SOURCE: MAP Model Projections
FUND = Fund Balance
FUNDR = Real Fund Balance
FUND FUNDF(
19~:)0.41
·40<)5 v -4/'
13713.,7
1!3505.
24156.2
30542.1
37698.8
45)'35v·4
5-4:~:;.':3 I) 8
633<)3 ~ 5
72364.6
81.423.4
9027~) ., :1.
1 tl~58 •) ·6·4
34B:3. 1.1
!:)28() +51
7271 + ()9
9321.4(5
11.800 ~ <_;·
14363.,.7
16802.9
19187.5
2:L5f~3v5
2::~75!~i <" 5
:~5:7-<"t7v3
28629+1
2~?4f~9 + 7
98812.4 29967.2
1.070Et05 30103.2
1.:L46Et05 29956.9
1.217Et05 29525.3
1.279Et05 28803.5
1.330E+05 27787.9
119
i
The Base Case: The Anchorage, Southcentral, and Southwest Regions
In this section we review the base case projections for the Anchor-
age (RS), Southcentral (R4), and Southwest (R2) Regions. Projections
for the Aleutian Islands Census Division are included in the following
section.
Population
Population projections for the three regions are shown in Table 41.
Population growth in the regions reflects the general level of projected
growth for the regions. For the 1980-2000 period growth in Region 2
and Region 4 exceeds that of the state; Region 2 growth occurs largely
in response to rapid expansion of bottomfishing, and is concentrated i~
the 1990-2000 period where the growth rate is 6.31 percent. Growth in
Region 4 reflects construction of the LNG plant and petroleum-related
activity. Growth tends to be more rapid in the 1980-1990 p~riod (at
3.61 percent per year) and tapers off to 2.01 percent from 1990-2000.
Region 5 (Anchorage) population declines moderately until 1982, and then
grows at a rate of 2.76 percent for the remainder of the decade.
Growth is similar (at 2.83 percent) throughout the 1990s.
As a result of the population growth, minor changes in regional popula-
tion shares occur. In Region 2 population.grows from 6.7 percent of
total population to 9.6 percent, while Anchorage declines from 49 percent
to 44.6 percent. Region 4 population as a percentage of the state
remains at about 11.2 percent.
120
[
[
[
[
B
[
[
,-
L
L
··'
-'
_;
SOURCE:
TABLE 41. PROJECTED REGIONAL POPULATION: 1980-2000
(Thousands)
c -
POPR2 POPR4 POF'R5
198()
1. 981
:L982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1 !:)'"'"'? .,o.,.
1.988
1989
1990
1991
19'72
1993
1994
1995
19'-16
199/'
1998
1.999
2000
MAP Model Projections
'1··· q:r::-· ..:.0 + .. .J -<'t·4 ~ 5-4~7 1. 96 .. 154
27.186 ~:}5.; 48·4· 188 ~ 5~56
27.451 47~076 187~061.
27.017 48 .. 569 191 ~521
26¥ ·424 52.082 206~01.8
27.694 55.,694 2:L 9 ~ 9~)-4
2'~ + ,.S9 60 .. 131 225+ ·467
30.724 62.499 224.,861
31.Cl()~5 '""l "'"1't-"\ A o...::. ~o·•t 225~1l~2
33 + 33'7' 62.928 227 .3·4~5
-.. 1::" -"J"7 / ,.."'h.}+,/,/ 0 6~5 + 497 231 + 6~=36 . ...,.,."' ~~~~~ ~0 t .J-.:.) ... J 64.644 238~232
4:1. .0:1.4 6!::1.571. 245.,..089
44. 4!":5:1. •' I -t,..., oo./o.,. 251v392
48 + .\1~7 5 66 ~ 7~:.:2 256.927
49.981 67 ~577 2<53 .489
53 .. 414 69.004 2/'1..383
56.398 70.898 280.-449
59.934 72.674 289.395
63.1.01 73+885 297.,39
tl5. 993 7"?.,476 ·306.259
POPR2 = Total Population, Region 2 (Southwest)
POPR4 =Total Population, Region 4 (Southcentral)
POPR5 = Total Population, Region 5 (Anchorage)
121
Employment
The regional growth in total employment (EM99) generally mirrors the
growth in population. Employment growth, however, occurs at a slightly
higher rate than population, inferring a slight increase in the employ-
ment to population ratio. Growth in Region 2 (at 5.4 percent) exceeds
that of either Region 4 (3.8 percent per year) or Region 5 (3.7 percent).
As was the case with population, growth in Region 2 is concentrated in
the 1990s, while for Region 4 growth of employment is more rapid during
the 1980s. Growth in Anchorage employment tends to be more uniform, at
3.8 percent per year during the 1980s and 3.5 percent during the 1990s
(see Table 42).
Growth of support sector employment (EMSl) parallels growth of total
employment (see Table 43), although in each case support sector employ-
ment a~ a percent of total employment increases. As would be expected,
the share of total employment is largest for the largest of the three
regions (55 percent in Region 5) while for Southwest the share is
27 percent. For Region 4 the comparable figure is 37 percent.
Total government employment (EMG) projections are shown in Table 44.
Because these figures include federal civilian and military government
employment (with 1 ittle net growth) the overall growth (at 1.8 percent
per year) is not great for Regions 2 and 5. In Region 4, where these
components of total government employment are relatively small, the
overall growth rate is about 3.2 percent. The share of total employment
accounted for by government declines in each region.
122
L
r
I
L
--,
---'
~
1
' ...l
TABLE 42. PROJECTED REGIONAL TOTAL EMPLOYMENT:
1980-2000
(Thousands)
EH99R2 EN99R4
1980 12.6 20~133
1981. 12.,.6~·7 2(j + 3()2
1982 1.2.831 2:!.v293
1983 12.784 2:~ + ·4·42
1984 1.2.,827 25~219
1985 13.496 27.033
1986 14.348 29.088
1 '""''"'""} 70/ 1.4. 862 29~857
1988 :1.5. -4-<l-3 ...,. .., .. , ..... ·-1'
~v.vv,;;:,
1989 16.,2?8 30.,. 53~~
1990 17.572 3L283
1991 19.0?6 32.317
1992 20.499 ..,._. ,.., ..... ...,
~"),;).,_\}/
1993 22+·425 •Y."l '")~.a_
.!l"'i. •'-~ •
1994 2·4 .699 3 ... -=. .362
1'1>95 25.814 35+13
1996 27.947 36.308
1997 29.903 37~756
1998 32.171 39.04
1999 34.285 39.774
2000 36.328 42+127
SOURCE: MAP Model Projections
EM99R2 = Total Employment, Region 2 (Southwest)
EM99R4 =Total Employment, Region 4, (Southcentral)
EM99R5 = Total Employment, Region 5, (Anchorage)
123
EI199F~5
83 •) :l86
83 ~ 8t1~:1
8<.~ v 48/'
91. ~ :553
101..255
1.11.448
115.569
115.38:-)
:L15v395
117.216
120.755
125. 76~:)
1.30. 72
.. -~'1::"" ""i•...., l' J . .:>w.,_oo
139.:,25
143.565
148.8
:1.54.836
160.81~~
166.165
171.808
TABLE 43. PROJECTED REGIONAL SUPPORT SECTOR EMPLOYMENT:
1980-2000
(Thousands)
E'"'·~·· ... ,,.) J•f.o J.f·t .. ,:. ENS1F:4 ENS1F:5
1980 2.661 6~~~1·4 33 ~ 3•1)3
1'7'81. 2 + <S:2~:; tS.:l51. -?-.,. .--•-J>r-,:) .. ;). ;·)~");.)
1982 2. 63~s .. -s 1-2)"2 3;.:; + ·4·42
1983 2 + ~)31 6.718 3s;·. (s,s~~
1984 2 + c"i2~:S 7 .54· ·48v266
1985 3 .. 02~5 8 + 83~-=) 56 {-!5·42
1986 3 + ~}9':1 :1.0.0:!.9 r.:-r"\ c,·-·-'-10.,. ; / /
1987 3 + ·4~'7 10.492 r.:"""! ...,_,.._,
,.}/. / ,:)/
1988 3.593 10.293 57 .. 081
1989 3.80:1. 10.512 57.998
1990 4+176 10 + 7-47 60.374
199:1. 4.~)91 1L119 6:;. 998
1992 5 + O'-S7 11.462 67. 46<?
1993 t::" t:!"-"' .I ~•...J/0 11 .889 7CJ v 5·4·
1994 6.226 12.152 7:? ~ 0-4~1
1995 6.549 :1.2.4l>l 75.771
1.996 7.146 12.905 :?9 + ·40!5
1.997 7.7()5 13 .. 509 83 .• 687
:1.998 8 .. 447 14.113 87.81.5
1999 9.017 14 .. 686 9:1 ... 286
2000 9.638 1.5.416 95. C'32
SOURCE: MAP Model Projections
EMS1R2 = Support Sector Employment, Region 2 (Southwest)
EMS1R4 =Support Sector Employment, Region 4 (Southcentral)
EMS1R5 = Support Sector Employment, Region 5 (Anchorage)
l24
[
[
L:
['
[
[
[
r L
f~
L
r~
l
[
[J
_L
L
[
[
I"
L
r~
I
L
[
~_j
~
;
"""
'
_;
TABLE 44. PROJECTED REGIONAL GOVERNMENT EMPLOYMENT:
1980-2000
(Thousands)
' !·
EI-·lG9R2 EMG9R4 EMG9R5
1980 7 + /'89 6.?1.·4 __,(_ ,, .-)-"' ,.:>,).~},·_/
1981 7.879 7 "'"''' ..,. ~,t,;;.o -?r-... ~r:-~,:r + ,:).:) :1 <:; .. ., . ., . , 0.,;.. 7 +'73 _, P •• • •"j
/ + VO.<-35-~ 488
198~} -----·-7.948 7 •. 02.:.? --35~A!~i3
198-4 7.8,:H \.St67 3/.l ~ ;~·73
198!5 7.94"7 6.841 -~t::" ~ ~;_) + .. ·:..
1986 8.2~11 7.314 36-r5 1J7
1987 8. 4:)5 7.641 37 .,.•437
1988 8.53 -"' .. "~Or::" , + 1•-J.:.) ~:;:7. f.~-4 /'
1989 8 + 6-46 7.977 38. :~>(S5
1990 8.776 8.185 38,;9-<t~::i
1991 8.91.8 8.41.6 3:;>,; 5~33
1992 '7'. Ol~? 8.664 4() ~' 25;?
1993 0 '")"jt:!"'
I + 1'1-..,:....J. 8v928 40. 9/'9
1.994 9.401 s:· ·i :~~5 41.?92
1995 9 v 5~35 9 + ·485 42 ~ ,::}•=97
1996 9.687 '"' ~ 0, 7•07•=> -4~7) i\ 095
19'17 9.839 9.9~)1 ·43 y /'93
1998 10.02 1.0. 264 44.,635
1999 if)~ 224 10.62 4!5 +588
2000 10.394 10.903 46 .. 373
SOURCE: MAP Model Projections
EMG9R2 = Total Government Employment, Region 2 (Southwest)
EMG9R4 =Total Government Employment, Region 4 (Southcentral)
Et~G9R5 = Total Government Employment, Region 5 (Anchorage)
125
Basic sector employment (EMBl) projections for each of the regions are
presented in Table 45. Employment growth reflects the occurrence of
major project employment in Region 4 (especially LNG and petroleum
development while Region 2 responds to growth in bottomfishing. Growth
of Anchorage basic employment is relatively stable over time and cap-
tures the indirect basic employment of projects outside the region.
Personal Income
Data on real personal income (PIR) for the regions is presented in
Table 46. Over the full projection period the average annual rates of
. growth ~re 8.4 percent, 6.3 percent, and 5.7 percent for Regions 2, 4,
and 5, respectively. Growth in the Southwest Region occurs primarily in
response to expansion of bottomfishing, and is more rapid in the 1990s
{at 9.9 percent) than during the 1980s (6.9 percent). For the Southcen-
tral Region the pattern is reversed. Petroleum-related activity is
primarily responsible for the growth rate of 8.7 percent during the
1980s. The rata drops to 4.0 percent during the 1990s. Growth of
personal income in the Anchorage Region is more uniform, at 6.4 percent
during the 1980s and falls slightly to 5.1 percent in the 1990s.
Per capita real personal income (PIRPC) projections are included in
Table 47. Growth rates of per capita income are similar, (at 3.7 per-
cent, 3.4 percent, and 3.4 percent for Regions 2, 4, and 5, respectively)
when looked at over the full projection period. For Regions 4 and 5,
126
[
[
L
[
[
r I
L
r
L
[
[
[
f--,
L
r~
I
L
L
.J
TABLE 45. PROJECTED REGIONAL BASIC EMPLOYMENT:
1980-2000
(Thousands)
,. !
Ei'·HHR4 EI-!B l.f\:5
1 s;·so
1. 98:l
1.982
1'=783
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
19?0
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
SOURCE: MAP Model Projections
1 ... 765
1.788
1. + 9:1.7
1.977
2 + t)52
2.227
2.-415
3 + 02·4
3~538
-4.332
6 .. 084
7 + 3·46
8~795
9 ~ 4:37
:1.0 .. 845
12.094
13 + 4-42
14.784
16.04
·4 + 035
4d57
4.93
5.629
7.874
8.:l91
8.465
8.39
8.602
8.72
9~011
9.418
9. 709
10.03
9.,614
9 + 81!5
:LO.~H9
10.883
11.232
11.036
12.322
EMBlR2 = Basic Sector Employment, Region 2 (Southwest)
EMB1R4 =Basic Sector Employment, Region 4 (Southcentral)
EMB1R5 = Basic Sector Employment, Region 5 (Anchorage)
127
8.435
8.)588
8.~J12
10,..64
11.699 -
12.002
12.,138
12.352
1~~~632
1~';).002
:l3.472
1.4. ()37
14.597
15.11~3
15.714
16.431
17.197
17 .. 934
18.633
19.475
TABLE 46. PROJECTED TOTAL PERSONAL INCOME BY REGION:
1980-2000
(Millions of 1980 Dollars)
F'IRR2 PIF~F~4 F'IF"<f<5
1'780 28·4 + ·4~~9 4l3~3!.:i~5
19i31 2\.7'() ~ 2~~t1 425.007
1982 3()2 + 95~~ 473.587
1.983 318 ~·53cj ~).49 +57
1.984 3..:~!5 .. .<f93 788 > :l95
1985 :~Cl9 ~ 1:4:3 902 •. <h)9
1986 424.979 922 + 24~5
1987 4:36.942 876.35'7
1988 459.845 881.093
198-9 495.377 9C<:·1 ~ 333
1990 55,:>. 016 011 .. "' OJ::-1=" '"'t/+7...J~J
199J. 616.382 1001. .. 55
1992 686.056 1047.23
1.993 763 + ·44~ 109~~. 66
1994 86-4 t322 1085.33
:L 99~5 9:1.(.S.52 1119.84
1996 10:1.6.73 1.179.45
1997 1107.72 1.254 •.
1998 1227t82 130:3 ·> 92
1999 1318.95 :l322. 36
2000 1429.22 1407.98
SOURCE: MAP Model Projections
PIPR2 = Real Personal Income, Region 2 (Southwest)_
PIPR4 =Real Personal Income, Region 4 (Southcentral)
PIPR5 = Real Personal Income, Region 5 (Anchorage)
128
188<3.03
1939~7
2049.97
2:2<53 + '72
~:7-46 ~ 38
31.81:'L 34
326() + 63
3196~17
32:31 .. 14
:~33·4 + 4·2
350~i .. 16
3706~73
3910.72
41.05.6~
4269. fk)
4459.88
4699.95
4977.61
5238.02
5471./'~}
5734.68
r
[
r
r~
l -
r
r·
f '\._.-->"
[
r
l
[
[
E
c
t
L
C
[
r ,
L
__ [
TABLE 47. PROJECTED PER CAPITA REGIONAL PERSONAL INCOME:
1980-2000
(1980 Dollars)
F'II:;:PCR2 PIF:F'CR·4 F' IF.:F'CF~5
1980 l C1 55~~; ~ 6 ':;'278 + <S4 9t-s25 (o 23
19G:i. 10677.8 9344.09 10288.2
198:-~ 11.036.1 10060. :L :l09!58 ~C)!
1983 11790.:!. 11315.2 :L 1.820 ·> 7
1984 13075. 1.5:1.33 + () :1.3330.8
1985 :i.40~31 -· . / 162()2 io cy l-44'75.;. 5
1986 1·4313./' :l5337. 2 1446:1. ..., . /
198~7 1.4221 .6 :l40~21 .9 142:1.4.,
1988 14458.3 141.23.8 1435:1. +6
1989 1. 48!58. . .., 143~)5 • :!. 466,-:). ~i /
1.990 :1.!5541 1-6 14929. 1. :1.5128.9
19':r 1 15995.2 15A·93.) 4 15~5!5~7 + 3
1992 :1.672"7.4 15971 • 1~:5956.:.3
1993 1/':!.74.8 16~581 ..,. 16331 . r.:--
•.:i ,.-..J
1994 1 7B:~o. :1. 162c;6 ~ 3 16618.9
jOOr::' . / , .. J 18T37. 3 165?1 .•. ,
<).,..,: 16S:'26+3
1996 :l90;:Vf. 9 1709~~ ~ !:5 17318. !5
1997 1.9641 JJ-2 :!. /'687 + !5 17"?-48 + 7
1998 20486.,3 :!.80:1.0. 7 18099.9
1999 20902.:3 17897.6 18399~2
2000 21657. :1. 18173. 1 18724.9
SOURCE: MAP Model Projections
PIRPCR2 = Real Per Capita Personal Income, Region 2 (South\-Jest)
PIRPCR4 = Real Per Capita Personal Income, Region 4 (Southcentral)
PIRPCR5 = Real Per Capita Personal Income, Region 5 (Anchorage)
129
' !
however, the increase tends to be more rapid in the first ten years
(4.9 percent and 4.6 percent, respectively), declining to 2.0 percent
and 2.2 percent during the 1990s.
--In summary, growth of population, employment, and income is substantial
in all three regions. The specific rates of growth over time, however,
vary considerably in response to the timing and occurrence of major
projects and industry growth within regions. It should also be noted
that much of the projected growth for Region 2 occurs in the Aleutian
Islands Census Division and we now turn to a combination of projections
for this area.
130
[
r-
[
r
L
[
L
[
L
[
r ,
L
r-
L
[
Base Case Projections: SCIMP and the
Aleutian Islands Census Division
As stated earlier, the major growth area within the Southwest
Region is the Aleutian Islands Census Division. The driving force
behind this projected growth is the assumed rapid expansion of the
bottomfishing industry, as set forth in the base case assumptions.
Projections of employment by sector are presented in Table 48.
Employment in the support sector (EMS) is the primary endogenous series
and reflects resident employment. Growth in this sector occurs at an
average annual rate of 16.9 percent. This implies a doubling of support
sector growth every five years. The growth rate is also quite stable,
at 17.0 percent for the first half of the projection period and 16.9 per-
cent during the second half.
Support sector employment, as a proportion of total resident em-
ployment (TE) also grows over time, rising from 25 percent in 1981 to
over 33 percent in 2000~ When viewed as a proportion of total civilian
and defense employment (TOTE), support sector employment grows from
6 percent to 24 percent. In both instances, the growth in the total
share of employment accounted for by support sector employment reflects
the growth of the multipliers over time and the general process of
import substitution. In addition, it reflects the declining relative
importance of nonresident employment in the region.
131
[
r-·
TABLE 48. ALEUTIAN ISLANDS CENSUS DIVISION EMPLOYMENT l-.
PROJECTIONS: 1981-2000 [
Year EMS EHG EMA EMX TE EMM ENCLV TOTE
j :
1981 400 578 588 6 1572 2523 2428 6523
1982 491 666 689 8 1854 2523 3006 7383 L 1983 522 680 723 9 1934 2523 3030 7478
1984 557 695 766 10 2028 2523 3051 7602
1985 664 787 868 12 2331 2523 3631 8485 [ 1986 728 814 973 14 2528 2523 3667 8718.
1987 869 914 1151 18 2952 2523 4205 9680
1988 1064 1029 1467 24 3584 2523 4694 10801 [ 1989 1311 1159 1888. 32 4390 2523 5177 12090
1990 1633 1321 2549 46 5579 2523 5625 13727 f' 1991 2141 1555 3364 64 7124 2523 6429 16076
1992 2471 1644 4003 81 8199. 2523 6298 17020 . L_
1993 3095 1899 5062 108 10165 2523 6933 19621
1994 3764 2119 6242 141 12266 2523 7143 2~932 ['
1995 4101 2174 6750 161 13186 2523 6830 22539
1996 4831 2381 7936 200 15348 2523 6877 24748 [ 1997 5534 2564 8980 242 17321 2523 6868 26712
1998 6248 2712 10043 283 19286 2523 6565 28374
1999 7044 2888 11124 331 21387 2523 6412 30322 [ 2000 7815 3026 12127 382 23350 2523 6053 31926
[
[
L~
'
SOURCE: SCIMP Projections. L
L
C'
L
r·
I
132 L
[
~--)
-'.
~·
Civil ian nondefense-related federal governme_nt and state and local
government (EMG) grow steadily over the period, at an average annual
rate of 9.1 percent. The bulk of the growth is accounted for by ex-
panding state and local government in response to ~egional growth and
averages 11 percent per year.
Resident employment in manufacturing and commercial fishing is
included in variable EMA and reflects the projected growth of bottom-
fishing. Growth averages 17.3 percent over the projection period. The
growth rate is greater than that for the fisheries industry itself,
since an increasing proportion of total fisheries employment, over time,
is assumed to be resident employment. Enclave employment (ENCLV) is the
other variable reflecting fisheries growth_ (ENCLV includes nonresident
construction). Enclave-fisheries employment includes nonresident employ-
ment in both harvesting and processing. During the first half of the
projection period, enclave fisheries employment grows at about 9.8 per-
cent; while during the second half of the projection period, it grows at
less than one percent annually. This is because of the substitution of
resident for nonresident participation in the fisheries industry.
Resident construction employment (EMX) also reflects the rapid
growth of employment and population. It grows at about 24 percent per
year. This very rapid growth is in part due to the substitution of
resident for nonresident employment over time and also reflects a
modest increase in the share of construction to total resident employ-
ment.
133
Total resident employment (TE) grows at a rate of 15.3 percent per
year over the projection period and is relatively stable throughout the
whole period .. Military and defense-related civilian employment (EMt1)
was assumed to be constant, and so there is no growth in this sector.
Total employment (TOTE) is the sum of total resident employment plus EMM
and ENCLV employment. Because of the "no growth" assumption for EMM and
the relatively low growth rate of ENCLV (4.9 percent) resident employ-
ment as a percent of total employment grows over time, from 24 percent
in 1980 to 73 percent in 2000.
Population projections for the Aleutians are contained in Table 49.
Total resident civilian population (BPOPP) grows from 3,777 in 1981 to
41,597 by 2000. The average annual rate of growth for the entire period
is 13.5 percent. Over the first half of the period population growth
averages 12.5 percent; while for the second half, the growth rate in-
creases slightly to 14.4 percent.
Total population for the census division (BASPP) includes, in
addition to BPOPP, military and defense-related civilian government
employees and dependents plus enclave employees. Total population grows
from 10,595 in 1981 to 52,040 in 2000, at an average annual rate of
8.7 percent. Growth during the second half of the projection period
occurs at a somewhat higher rate (9.6 percent), reflecting the growth of
enclave employment relat~d to development of the bottomfishing industry.
134
[
[
[
r~
L
[
[
[
[
E
L
L
L
' L
-~ __ [
remainder of the projection period is less than 0.1 percent. In the
case of government (WRG9RST) the difference is even less, growing from
· less than 2 dollars in 1983 to 155 dollars in 1988 (a 0.6 percent dif-
ference). Th~reafter the difference drops quickly, and over the last
several jears the difference is actually marginally negative. Tables
58 and 59 contain the detailed data.
Changes in the Alaska Relative Price Index (RPI) are minimal. A slight
increase over the base case (approximately 0.1 percent) occurs in the
early of the project, but before the project peaks the differential
becomes negative (by about 0.3-0.5 percent). Statistically the
differences are probably not significant and for all intents and pur-
poses there is no real effect on the index. Data on the index are
included in Table 60.
GOVERNMENT REVENUE AND EXPENDITURES
The impact of the mean case scenario is highly limited. The maximum
difference in total state government revenues (REVGFR) is about 1.7
percent in 1990 and 1991, and averages about 1.4 percent from 1993
through the end of the projection period. The impact on petroleum
revenues (RP9SR) and federal government revenue (RFDSR) are slightly
greater. Differences in petroleum revenues peak at about 62 million
dollars in 1990 and decline thereafter to about 35 million dollars in
2000. However, because petroleum revenues in general are declining, the
percentage difference between the mean and base case tends to grow,
increasing to about 2.9 percent by 2000. Differences in revenue from
151
TABLE 58. PROJECTED STATEWIDE REAL ~~AGE RATE IMPACTS,
ABSOLUTE VALUES: MEAN CASE
/
WRB1RST-EXOGENOUS WRS1RST-EXOGENOUS WRG9RST -EXOGENOUS
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1 "'~" 1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
MEAN
0.
o.
0.
17.52 7
40.508
182.301
235.363
1168.26
1363.79
1214.65
909.027
330.098
155.125
188.965
21o.957
?1:. 7<1?
.207 .1 ~5
222.078
249.176
264.793
258.695
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
; 1989
f 1990 I 1991
~ 1992
l 1993 I ~ ;;i
\
1996
1997
1
1998
1999
I 2000
I
MEAN
0.
o.
0.
4.988
11.699
37.937
•54.477
258.509
335.926
279.574
~94.531
53.797
0.402
5.035
10.57
13.094
12.055
12.887
16.566
18.316
WRBlRST = Basic Sector Real Wage
WRSlRST = Support Sector Real Wage
WRG9RST = Government Real Wage
SOURCE: MAP Model Projections.
152
1980
1981
1982
1983
1::384
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1 991
1992
1993
1994
1!::)!::):;,
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
MEAN
0.
0.
o.
1.672
5.488
16.844
24.504
102.945
154.937
118.242
71.027
-5.535
-48.742
-44:34
-42.613
-q:.!.~l
-45.C12
-47.047
-48.867
-49.633
-50.719
r
[
[
r
[
[
[
[
[
G
[
I' L
r~
I
L
L
·~ , I\
-,
---
-,
-'
' "
~
,..,
TABLE 59. PROJECTED STATEWIDE REAL t~AGE RATE IMPACTS,
PERCENTAGE DIFFERENCES: MEAN CASE
WRB1RST-EXOGENOUS WRS1 RST -EXOGENOUS
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994 . ---.-:;~..,~
1996
1997
1998-
1999
2000
MEAN MEAN
o. 1980 0. o. 1981 o. o. 1982 0.
0.051 1983 0.025
0.09 1984 0.052
0.372 1985 0.163
0.536 1986 0.245
3.0C3 1987 1.22
3.562 1588 1.603
3.196 1989 1 .339
2.355 1990 0.929
0.835 . 1991 0.254
0.338 1992 0.002
0.468 1993 0.024
0,541 1994 0.049 ':"'--1995 0.062 V • -J-.J I
0.501 1996 0.06
0.527 1997 0.055
0.567 -1998 0.059
0.628 1999 Q.075
0.608 2000 0.083
WRBlRST = Basic Sector Real Wage
WRSlRST = Support Sector Real Wage
WRG9RST = Government Real Wage
SOURCE: MAP Model Projections.
153
WRG9RST -
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1935
1986
1987
1968
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1 0'?'-
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
EXOGENOUS
MEAN
0.
0.
o.
0.008
0.024
0.01
0.099
0. 411
0.606
0.451
0.264
-0.02
-o .111
-o .152
-o .142
-n 14
-o. 142
-o .145
-0.146
-0.145
-0.145
TABLE 60. PROJECTED STATEWIDE RELATIVE PRICE INDEX IMPACTS,
ABSOLUTE AND PERCENTAGE DIFFERENCES: MEAN CASE
Absolute
Difference
RPI -EXOGENOUS
MEAN
1980 o.
1981 o.
1982 o.
1983 0.096
1934 0.336
1985 0.562
1986 0.41
1987 -0.34
1988 -1.717
1989 -2.851.
1990 -3.812
1991 -4.293
1992 -3.982
1993 -3.663
1994 -3.563
1995 -3.633
1996 -3.752
1997 -3.793
1 998· -3.843
1999 -3.977
2COO -4.119
i
\.
!
Percentage
Difference
RPI -EXOGENOUS
MEAN
1980 0.
1981 o.
1982 0.
1983 0.021
1984 . 0.068
1985 0.106
1986 0.072
1987 -o.o55
1968 -0.259
1589 -0.:398
1990 -0.494
1991 -0.517
1992 -0.446
1993 -0.381
1994 -0.345
1\:1!:1!:1 -U • ..:l:.!to
1996 -0.313
1997 -0.293
1998 -0.276
1999 -0.265
2000 . -0.255
RPI = Alaska Relative Price Index
SOURCE: MAP Model Projections.
154
[
[
[
[
r
L
r
L
[
[
[
r-
I
L
L
the federal government peak at about 3.4 million dollars and then decline
steadily. In terms of percentage differences it is 2.8 percent in 1990
and averages about 1.9-2.0 percent for most of the 1990s.
Other state government revenues, including state corporate income taxes
and earnings on fund balances (RNDSR) are moderately impacted. The
percehtage difference (mean over base case) grows to about 1:5 percent
in 1990, and amounts to about 33 million dollars. The difference
declines slightly, and the average difference over most of the 1990s is
about 1.0 percent. (See Tables 61 and 62 for supporting data.)·
Total real state government expenditures (E99SR) i~crease somewhat as a
result of expanded population resulting directly and indirectly from the
mean case scenario. The difference amounts to 81.7 million dollars in
1990, drops somewhat, but begins to increase again by the end of the
projection period. In terms of percentage differences the peak differ-
ential (3.2 percent) is reached in 1990, and drops steadily thereafter,
to about 2~20 percent by the year 2000. Per capita real state govern-
ment expenditures (E99SRPC) are not impacted, and the percent difference
remains constant at 0.0 percent.
Impacts on the real fund balance (FUNDR) are also modest. Under the
mean case scenario the balance is about 152 million dollars, or 0.6
percent above the base case in 1992. After this peak the differential
drops steadily and is about 0.3 percent by 2000. Data for the state
government expenditure and fund balance variables are contained in
Tables 63 and 64.
155
TABLE 61. PROJECTED STATEWIDE REVENUE & FUND IMPACTS,
ABSOLUTE VALUES: MEAN CASE
MEAN FUNDR -
1980
1981
1982
1983
1584
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
"! ~~=
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
REVGFR RP9SR RFDSR RNDSR
o. o. 0. o. o. 0. o. o. o. o. 0. o.
-0.644 -0.633 0.064 -0.076
-2.145 -2.077 0.109 -0.175
-3.109 -3.549 0.28 0.16
-0.016 -2.528 0.556 1 .959
14.516 6.537 1. 551 6.428
42.129 22.889 2.592 16.649
79.719 50.673 3.375 25.669
98.418 61 .681 3.474 33.261
99.379 60.54 3.064 35.775
89.992 55.559 2.574 31.859
81.754 51 .328 2.259 28.167
77.676 48.056 2.066 27.551
7.:.:-:s ~5 .. '!~7 ~ .. <?~= 213:1.335.
74.113 43.146 1.781 29.188
72.391 40.847 1.676 29.868 ;
71.156 38.679 1 .594 30.883
70.508 36.676 1.502 32.331
69.672 34.7 1.401 33.573
REVGFR = Total State Government Revenues
RP9SR = Petroleum Revenues
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1966
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
.. 1""' ... -• .;!.,t,j
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
RFDSR = Revenues from the Federal Government
RNOSR = Other Revenues
FUNDR = Real Fund Balance
SOURCE: MAP Model Projections.
156
I
EXOGENOUS
MEAN
o.
o. o.
-2.77
-10.395
-21.922
-26.C'62
-15.797
19.289
64.961
113.281
147 .ass
151.785
147.828
144.641
!~~ .:~~
136.523
124.996
109.281
92.051
72.387
[
[
[
I L
[
L
[
[
l
[
r,
L
L
MEAN
-,
1980
"-' 1981
1982
'
1983
1994
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
~ 1993
1994
_; 1 ~9~
1996
1997
1998
1599
2000
""'
-~
.J
.....J
d
TABLE 62. PROJECTED STATEHIDE REVENUE & FUND IMPACTS,
PERCENTAGE DIFFERENCES: MEAN CASE
'·'
, I\
FUNOR -EXOGENOUS
REVGFR RP9Srt RFDSR RNDSR MEAN
o. 0. 0. o. 1980 0. o. . o. 0. o. 1981 0. o. 0. 0. o. 1982 0. -o. 01 1 -0.021 0.035 -o .01 3 1983 -0.038
-0.052 -o. oss 0.062 -0.021 1984 -0.112 -o. 067 -0.106 0.163 0.014 1985 -o .186 -o. -0.072 0.34 0.144 1986 -0.181
0.275 0.184 1 .02 0.407 1987 -0.094
0.766 0.64 1.833 0.935 1988 0. 101
1 .336 1.397 2.553 1 .288 1989 0.301
1 .595 1. 7i8 2.783 1 .502 1990 0.477
1.694 1 .829 2.585 1.468 1991 0.574
1.565 1.862 2.29 1.2 . 1992 0.554
1.449 1.899 2.123 0.994 1993 0.516
1. 414 2. 2.057 0.921 1994 . 0.49 • 111? ? 1');::; ?.0?1 O.C\1? . -..... ~ : • ..;7::: ·~..:;;~...,
1.424 2.255 1.983 0. 911 1996 0.454
1.'423 2.39 1 .963 0.907 1997 0.417
1.432 2.544 1.966 0.917 1998 0.37
1.456 2.721 1.956 0.946 1999 0.32
1.476 2.909 1.924 0.972 2000 0.26
-· -·
REVGFR = Total State Government Revenues
RP9SR = Petroleum Revenues
RFDSR = Revenues from the Federal Government
RNDSR = Other Revenues
FUN DR = Real Fund Balance
SOURCE: MAP Model Projections.
157
TABLE 63. PROJECTED STATEWIDE REAL GOVERNMENT EXPENDITURE
IMPACTS, ABSOLUTE VALUES: MEAN CASE
E99SR -EXOGENOUS E99SRPC -EXOGENOUS
t.1EAN MEAN
1980 o. 1980 o.
1981 o. 1981 0.
1982 o. 1982. o.
1983 1.462 1983 0.001
1984 3.449 1984 0.002
1985 7.507 1985 ·-0.002
1986 12.105 1986 -0.004
1987 29.753 1987 -0.001
1988 51.015 1988 o.
1989 .73.385 1989 -0.001
1990 .• 81.743 1990 0.001
1991 77.492 1991 -o .oo3
. 1992 72.783 1992 -0.003
1993 72:384 1993 -0.001
1994 74.95 1994 -o. ·---1:7:1-::J 7UoU~V 1995 -0.003
1996 80.771
. \ 1996 o •
1997 84.838 1997 0.002
1998 90.196 1998 -o.
1999 94.926 1999 -0.003.
2000 98.379 2000 0.002
E99SR = State Government Real Expenditures
E99SRPC = Real Per Capita State Government Expenditures
SOURCE: MAP Model Projections.
158
[
[
[
c
[
[
r L~
[
[
[
[
G
[
L
[
[
-.J
-';!
TABLE 64. PROJECTED STATEWIDE REAL GOVERNMENT EXPENDITURE
IMPACTS, PERCENTAGE DIFFERENCES: MEAN CASE.
'·'
I I
E99SR -EXOGENOUS E99SRPC -EXOGENOUS
MEAN MEAN
1980 0. 1980 o.
1981 0. 1981 0. 1982 0. 1982 0. 1983 o. 1983 0.085 1984 0. 1984 0.192 1985 -o. 1985 0.391 1986 -o. 1986 0.593 ...
1587 1.382 1987 -o.
.. 1988 0. 1988 2.247 1989 -o. 1989 3.058 1990 0. 1990. 3.221 1991 -o. 1991 2.883 1992 -o. . 1992 2.553 1993 -o. 1993 2.397 1994 -o. 1994 . 2,343 i9~5 -.;,;. ~ ;;~----~ ""o ...JVJ 1996 0. 1995 2.255 1997 o. 1997 2.238 1998 -o. 1998 2.248 1999 -o. 1999 2.235 2000 0. 2000 2.191 I
E99SR = State Government Real Expenditures
E99SRPC = Real Per Capita State Government Expenditures
SOURCE: MAP Model Projections.
159
Impacts of the Mean Case Scenario on the Anchorage,
Southcentral, and Southwest Regions
Regional Population Impacts
Population impacts and percentage differences projected for the mean
case for Southwest Alaska (POPTR2), Southcentral (POPTR4), and Anchorage
(POPTR5) are presented in Tables 65 .and 66. In terms of the
absolute impact, Anchorage undergoes the greatest expansion, with the
difference between the mean case and base case growing from 3?5 people·
in 1983 to 9184 people in 1990 (a 4.0 percent difference). After this
peak percentage difference drops to about 2.6 percent by 2000.
The impact on Southcentral and Southwest Alaska are similar in terms of
the absolute level of population change. In both cases the population
difference grows to about 1900 by the year 1990, and then declines
moderately, but by the end of the projection period each has started to
increase slightly. The percentage difference in the two regions differ
because of the difference in the population base of the regions. In
Southwest Alaska the peak level difference is about 5.6 percent and
declines to about 2.1 percent. For Southcentral Alaska the percentage
difference increases to 3.1 percent in 1990 and generally declines
thereafter to 2.2 percent. It might also be noted that 75 percent of ·
the total population impact by the year 2000 is concentrated in the
three regions.
160
r
I ~·
r
L~
r
L_
[
c
[
r-;
~
[
[
,-
1
L
-,
.,
-'
-,
.__l,
--,
~~-'·
.J
.,
·-
'"
~
:..:;
-~1
TABLE 65 PROJECTED REGIONAL POPULATION IMPACTS,
ABSOLUTE VALUES: MEAN CASE
... I
.., !
POPTR2 PO?TR4 POPTR5
1980 0. 0. o.
1981 0. o. 0.
1982 o. 0. o.
1983 -o.oos 0.081 0.365
1984 . 0.006 0.16 0.714
1985 0.065 0.292 1. 382
1986 0.173 0.421 1 .936 ,.
1987 0.371 •0.937 4.759
1988 1.173 1. 312 6.578
1989 1.873 1.843 s.a47
1990 1. 792 1.94 9.184
1991 1.75 1.724 8.12
1992 i .634 1 .593 7.522
1993 1.533 1.545 7.42
1994 1.493 1. 531 7.374
1995 1.467 1 • S3:l ·1. 3G2
1996 1.442 1 .541 7.363
1997 1.412 1.59 7.611
1998 1.395 1.655 7.937
1999 1.401 1.681 8.028
2000 1.4 1. 713 8.034
;~
POPR2 = Total Population, Region 2 (Southwest)
POPR4 = Total Population, Region 4 (Southcentral)
POPR5 = Total Population, Region 5 (Anchorage)
SOURCE: MAP Model Projections.
161
' TABLE 66. PROJECTED REGIONAL POPULATION IMPACTS,
PERCENTAGE DIFFERENCES: MEAN CASE
---·-·-----··-·-·--·--.. _ ----.---··-.
·-POPTR2 POPTR4 POPTRS
1980 0. o. 0.
1981 o. 0. 0.
1982 o. o. o.
-1983 -0.029 0.167 0.19
1984. 0.021 0.307 0.346
1985 0.233 0.524 0.628
1986 0.582 0.7 0.858
1987 1.207 1.5 2.117
1988 3.689 2.103 2.922
1989 5.619 2.928 3.891
1990 5.008 3.056 3.964
1991 4.541 2.667 3.409
1992 3.933 2.429 3.069
1993 3."448 2.314 2.952
1994 3.079 2.294 2.87
l~::~i:> 2.935 2.269 2.794
1996 2.7 2.233 2.713
1997 2.503 2.242 2.714
1 S9B 2.327 2.278 2.743
1999 2.22 2.275 2.699
2000 2.122 2.211 2.623
POPR2 = Total Population, Region 2 (Southwest)
POPR4 =Total Population, Region 4 (Southcentral)
POPR5 = Total Population, Region 5 (Anchorage)
SOURCE: MAP Model Projections.
162
r
t
~-
L
[
,. -
i
'-.
r··
I L_
[
L
[
r -
I
L
[
I 1 j,
_j
_,
.J
Regional Employment Impacts
The impact of the mean case is projected fqr each of the three regions
for several categories of employment, including total employment (EM99),
support sector employment (EMSl), basic sector employment (EMBl), and
government sector employment (EMG9). For each of the employment
variables there. is a strong cyclical pattern present ... that largely fol-
1 I
lows project employment. In Region 2 total employment impact peaks in
1989, with an additional 962 employees (a 6.0 percent increase above the
base case), with only a modest decline thereafter. The percentage
difference drops to 2.3 percent by 2000.
The peak differentials (absolute level and percentage differences) for
Region 4 and Region 5 are, respectively; 1138 employees, 3.7 percent,
and 5614 employees and 4.8 percent. For both regions the percentage
difference declines steadily until the end of the projection period.
About 78 percent of the total state employment impact in the peak year
occurs in the three regions. (See Tables 67 and 68.)
Differences in basic sector employment for the peak year (1989) are
respectively 109, 467, and 1679 for Regions 2, 4, and 5. The comparable
percentage differentials are 3.1 percent, 5.4 percent, and 13.3 percent.
Thus, the largest percentage impacts occur outside the impacted region.
This reflects two phenomena. First, nonresident enclave employment is
not included in developing the projections. Second, the employment data
reflect place of residence rather than the place of work. In the case
163
TABLE 67. PROJECTED REGIONAL TOTAL EMPLOYMENT IMPACTS
ABSOLUTE VALUES: MEAN CASE '
EM99R2 EM99R4 EM99R5
1980 0. 0. 0.
1981 o. o. o.
1982 o. 0. 0.
1983 0.001 0.046 0.217
1984 0.01 0.094 0.45
1985 0.039 0.182 0.892
1986 0.087 0.262 1.24
1987 0.244 0.638 3.095
1988 0.622 0.861 4.312
1969 0.969 1. 12S 5.614
;~~v 0.9'34 1 • 1 :Z4 S.S3S
1 Q91 0.899 0.89 4.455
1992 0.851 0.759 3.767
1993 0.82 0.701 3.541
1994 0.818 0.675 3.454
1995 0.815 0.662 3.412
1996 0.813 0.653 3.386
1997 0.814 0.673 3.524
1998 0.823 0.706 3.725
1999 0.836 0.713 3.778
2000 0.837 0.718 3.767
EM99R2 = Total Employment, Region 2 (Southwest)
EM99R4 =Total Employment, Region 4 (Southcentral)
EM99R5 = Total Employment, Region 5 (Anchorage)
SOURCE: MAP Model Projections.
164
~
[
\
.-· l~
[
[
r ~
I
L~
[
r~
L.
r~,
t
[
[
r~ ..
u
B
[
[
r
L
f'
I
L
[
'I i•
-
-~
....J
c..i
-,
·•
_;
'
....
<.4
TABLE 68. PROJECTED REGIONAL TOTAL EMPLOYMENT ··IMPACTS,
PERCENTAGE DIFFERENCES: MEAN CASE
.•
·-------·-..
EM99R2 EM99R4 EM99R5.
1980 o. o. 0.
1981 o. 0. o.
1982 o. 0. o.
1983 0.009 0.206 0.237
1934 0.077 0.373 0.444
1995 0.292 0.672 0.8Q1
1986 0.606 0.899 1. 073
1987 1. 641 2~ 137 2.683
1S38 4.029 2.869 3.737
1999 5.955 3.727 4.789
i ;;~ $.31S ~-592 4-.533
1991 4.712 2.754 3.543
1992 4.15 2.287 2.882
1993 3.655 2.048 2.617
1994 3.313 1 .• 963 2.479
1995 3.156 1.884 2.376
1996 ·2.908 1. 799 2.275
1997 2.721 1. 784 2.276
1998 2.558 1.809 2.317
1999 2.439 1. 793 2.274
2000 2.304 1. 705 2.193
EM99R2 = Total Employment, Region 2 (Southwest)
EM99R4 Total Employment, Region 4 (Southcentral) =
EM99R5 = Total Employment, Region 5 (Anchorage)
SOURCE: MAP Model Projections.
165
'
·II,
of Region 5 (Ahchorage) part of the expansion reflects project-related
employment in Anchorage based headquarters. (See Tables 69 and 70.)
For reference purposes Appendix D includes direct OCS employment by
place of work as well as by place of residence.
Support sector peak differences (in absolute and percentage terms) for
the three regions are respectively; Region 2 (781, 20.6 percent),
Region 4 (498, 4.6 percent), and Region 5 (3275, 5.6 percent). The
relatively high support sector impact for Region 2 reflects the
inclusion of OCS-related transportation employment. (See Tables 71 and 72.)
Finally, government sector differences in employment at peak project
level {again in absolute and percentage differences) for the three
regions are: Region 2 (109, 1.2 percent), Region 4 (210, 2.5 percent),
and Region 5 (520, 1.3 percent). In each region the peak level impacts
decline _modestly, with the percentage impacts in Regions 2 and 5 de-
clining to about 1 percent, while for Region 4 the difference drops to
about 1.7 percent. The supporting data for absolute changes are contained
in Tables j3, and for percentage impact levels in Table 74.
Regional Personal Income Impacts
The impact of the mean case on regional real personal income is relatively
small. For the three regions the peak differences between the mean and
base cases (in absolute and percentage terms) are: Region 2 (23.7 million
dollars, 4.8 percent), Region 4 (61.1 million dollars, 6.8 percent), and
166
[
[
[
[
[
r
L
[
[j·
L
r·
L
[
'
_,
=:i
"
"'
'
--
_j
--,
:J
--,
=~
:.3
'
_.
; I•
TABLE 69. PROJECTED REGIONAL BASIC SECTOR EMPLOYMENT IMPACTS,
ABSOLUTE VALUES: MEAN CASE
·EMB1R2 EM31 R4 EMB1R5
1980 o. o. 0.
1 OR1 o. 0. o.
1982 o. 0. 0.
1983 0.001 0.024 0.096
1984 0.003 0.043 0.166
1985 o.ooa 0.081 0.301
1986 o.oo5 0.094 0.325
1987 0.08 0.368 1 .258
1988 0.095 0.37 1.286
1939 0.109 0.467 1. 679
1990 0.103 0.401 1. 516
1991 0.079 0.231 0.975
1992 0.077 0.229 0.98
1993 . 0.077 0.237 1. 034
1994 0.08 0.222 1.006
1995 0.081 0.212 0.976
1996 0.085 0.203 0.947
1997 0.068 0.217 1.013
1998• 0.092 0.232 1.087
1999 0.096 0.223 1.033
2000 O.CS9 0.22 t.029
EMB1R2 Basic Sector Employment, Region 2 (Southwest) =
EMB1R4 = Basic Sector Employment, Region 4 (Southcentral) EMB1R5 = Basic Sector Employment, Region 5 (Anchorage)
SOURCE: MAP Model Projections.
167
'I
TABLE 70. PROJECTED REGIONAL BASIC SECTOR EMPLOYMENT IMPACTS,
PERCENTAGE DIFFERENCES: MEAN CASE
EMBtR2 . EMB1R4 EMS1RS
1980 o. o. 0.
1981 n. 0. 0.
1982 o. 0. 0.
1983 0.045 0.422 1.016
1984 0.165 0.541 1. 561
1985 0.362 0.989 2.573
1966 0.218 1.113 2.709
1987 3.015 4.386 10.368
1988 3.132 4.296 10.412
1989 3.07 5.354 13.293
1990 2.372 4.446 11.657
1991 1.489 2.452 7.234
1992 ·1.264 . 2.354 6.985
1993 1 .044 2.358 7.062
1994 0.908 2.309 6.655
1995 0.864 2.156 6.213
1996 0.788 1.966 5.764
1997 0.73 1.995 5.893
1996 0.684 2.069 6.058
1999 0.648 2.021 5.706
2000 0.616 1.782 5.285
EMB1R2 = Basic Sector Employment, Region 2 (Southwest)
EMB1R4 =Basic Sector Employment, Region 4 (Southcentral)
EMB1R5 = Basic Sector Employment, Region 5 {Anchorage)
SOURCE: MAP Model Projections.
168
[
[
L
[
[
[
[
L
L
[
~'
_ _j
' /•
TABLE 71. PROJECTED REGIONAL SUPPORT SECTOR EMPLOYMENT IMPACTS,
ABSOLUTE VALUES: MEAN CASE .
EMS1R2 EMS1R4 EMS1RS
1980 o. o. 0.
1981 0. o. 0.
1982 o. 0. 0.
1983 -0.001 0.019 0.102
1984 0.003 0.042 0.24
1985 0.024 0.082 0.51
1985 0.067 0.132 0.783
1987 0.151 0.232 1. 601
1988 0.486 0.39 2.602
1989 0.731 0.489 3.274
1990 0.7:31 0.498 3.275
.,. nn• ~-7t 2 0-'\-25 :2. 76't
1992 0.677 0.322 2.143
1993 0.655 0.277 1. 923
1994 0.652 0.267 1 .872
1995 0.646 0.264 1. 861
1996 0.64 0.264 1. 867
1997 0.636 0.268 1. 929
1998 0.639 0.279 2.034.
1999 0.645 0.289 2.096
2000 0.642 0.296 2.118
EMS'lR2 = Support Sector Employment, Region 2 (Southwest)
EMS1R4 =Support Sector Employment, Region 4 (Southcentral)
EMS1R5 = Support Sector Employment, Region 5 (Anchorage)
SOURCE: MAP Model Projections.
169
TABLE 72. PROJECTED REGIONAL SUPPORT SECTOR El~PLOYMENT IMPACTS,
PERCENTAGE DIFFERENCES: MEAN CASE
EMS1R2 EMS1R4 EMStR5
1980 0. o. o.
1981 0. o. 0.
1982 o. o. o.
1983 -0.032 0.287 0.257
1964 0.105 0.559 0.497
1985' ·0.809 0.932 0.901
1 ~86( 1.984 1.322 1. 327
1987 '· 4.328 2.212 2.774
1988 13.513 3.789 4.559
1989 20.557 4.654 5.646
1990 17.497 4.637 5.425
~ ,... ...... 13.S&O 3.9lO 4.3t9
I..,J.:J•
1992 13.352 2.809 3. 184
1993 11.754 2.332 2.725
1994 10.468 2.194 2.563
1995 9.864 2.118 2.456
1996 8.953 2.046 2.351
1997 8.26 . 1.984 2.305
1998 7.562 1.976 2.317
1999 7.151 1 .967 2.296
2000 6.66 1.922 2.229
EMS1R2 = Support Sector Employment, Region 2 (Southwest)
EMSlR4 =Support Sector Employment, Region 4 (Southcentral)
EMSlR5 = Support Sector Employment, Region 5 (Anchorage)
SOURCE: MAP Model Projections.
170
[
r
L
[
c
c
[
C'
L
[
-,
~
:
~
=
~
_.
'
~
~
-,
::;j
-,
-~
~
TABLE 73. PROJECTED REGIONAL GOVERNMENT EMPLOYMENT IMPACTS,
ABSOLUTE VALUES: MEAN CASE
EMG9R2 EMG9R4 EMG9RS
1930 0. o. 0.
1981 0. o. 0.
1932 0. o. . 0.
19i33 0.001 0.002 0.006
1934 0.004 0.007 0.019
1985 0.008 0.015 0.036
10::113 I) J11 5 o.o?q 0. 071 . '
198i 0.016 0.029 0. 071
1988 0.044 O.C83 0.208
1989 0.082 0.155 0.388
1990 0.102 . 0.196 0.488
1591 0.109 0.21 0.52
1992 0.098 0.189 0.47
1993 0.088 0.171 0.424
1994 0.088 0.171 0.421
1995 .0.088 0.172 0.423
1996 0.088 0.173 0.425
0.175 1997 0.09 0.431
1998 0.093 0.182 0.448
1999 0.096 0.189 0.463
2000 0.097 0.19 0.467
. EMG9R2 = Total Government Employment, Region 2 (Southwest)
EMG9R4 = Total Government Employment, Region 4 (Southcentral)
EMG9R5 = Total Governll]ent Employment, Region 5 _(Anchorage)
SOURCE: MAP Model Projections.
171
!
I
i
TABLE 74. PROJECTED REGIONAL GOVERNMENT EMPLOYMENT IMPACTS,
PERCENTAGE DIFFERENCES: MEAN CASE
EMG9R2 EMG9R4 EMG9R5
1980 . o. o; 0.
1981 ·. 0. o. 0.
1932 . o. o . a·.
. 1963 0.018 0.034 0.018
1984 0.053 0. 11 0.055
1985 0.095 0.217 0.101
1 ?e'5 0 ·182. 0.402 0.195
1967 0.164 0.379 0. 19
1988 0.519 1.067 0.549
1969 0. 94~ . 1.94 1·. 01
1990 1.165 2.395 1.253
1991 1.218 2.491 1.315
1992 1.061 2.181 1 • 168
1993 0.958 1.918 1.036
1994 0.932 1.851 1.007
1995 0.922 1.814 0.996
1995 0.912 1. 782 0.985
1997 0.913 1. 763 0.985
1998 0.931 1.775 1.003
1999 0.943 1. 775 1.015
2000 0.936 1.747 1.007
EMG9R2 = Total Government Employment, Region 2 (Southwest)
EMG9R4 =Total Government Employment, Region 4 (Southcentral)
EMG9R5 = Total Government Employment, Region 5 ·(Anchorage)
SOURCE: MAP Model Projections.
172
[
f~
l
[
[
c
L
[
[
r·
L
[
__ J
__;
--,
--~
_ _j
-,
_j
...,
;
J
l
_J
__j
--~
::j
. ~
J
-,
...;
'' j.
TABLE 75. PROJECTED REGIONAL REAL PERSONAL INCOME IMPACTS,
ABSOLUTE VALUES: MEAN CASE
PIRR2 PIRR4' PIRRS
1980 o. 0. o.
1981 o. o. o.
! . l::.tl~ v. v. v.
1933 0.129 1.694 6.796
1.584 . ·0.556 4.298 16.234
1985 1.684 1 0.323 36.711
1986 2.558 13.565 46.562
1987 10.107 44. 106 137.956
1588 17.965 54.377 177.931
1989 23.659 61 • 123 215.235
1990 23.171 54.734 200.895.
1991 19.271 34.63 144.737
1992 16.941 27.851 122 •. 906
1993 16.348 27.183 121.957
1994 10.685 26.452 121.074.
1995 16.98 26.25 121 .219
1996 17.61 9 26.274 122. 191
1997. 18.185 2 7. 937 130.586
1998 19.06 29.991 140.687
. 1999 19.798 30.292' 143.332
2000 20.502 30.804 144.148
PIPR2 = Real Personal Income, Region 2 (Southwest) PIPR4 = Real Personal Income, Region 4 (Southcentral) PIPR5 = Real Personal Income, Region 5 (Anchorage)
SOURCE: MAP Model Projections.
173
TABLE 76. PROJECTED REGIONAL REAL PERSONAL INCOME IMPACTS,
PERCENTAGE DIFFERENCES: MEAN CASE
' \. PIRR2 PIRR4 PIRR5
1980 o. 0. 0.
1981 o. o. o.
i::Oo.;! ii. ,.. v. v.
1983 0.04 0.308 0,3
1984 ·o. 1s1 0.545 0.591
1985 0.433 1.144 1. 151
1986 0.602 1 .471 1. 428
1987 2.313 5.033 4.316
1988 3.907 6.172 5.507
"1989 4.776 6.7S6 6.455
1990 4.167 5.774 5.731
1991 3.126 3.458 3.905
1992 2.469 2.659 3.143
1993 2. t 41 2.486 2.97
1 gg.; 1. 93 2.437 2.836
1995 1.853 . 2.344 2.718
1996 1. 733 2.228 2.6
1997 1 .642 2.228 2.623
1998 1.552 2.291 2.686
. 1999 1.501 2.291 2.619
2000 1.435 2.188 2.514
PIPR2 = Real Personal Income, Region 2 (Southwest)
PIPR4 =Real Personal Income, Region 4 (Southcentral)
PIPR5 = Real Personal Income, Region 5 (Anchorage)
SOURCE: MAP Model Projections.
174
[
[
L
[
L
[
L
u
[
l
f .,
L
r·
I
L
[
Region 5 (215.2 million dollars, 6.5 percent). By the end of the pro,;,
je~tion period the percentage differences have narrowed to about 1.4 percent-
2.5 percent. (See Tables 75 and 76.)
Real per capita income impacts generally reflect those observed at the
statewide level. Increases occur at the start of the project (1983) and
continue for a few years. These increases are followed by a period of
declining differences, and towards the end of the projection period
the differences become negative (although by less than 1 percent). As
in the statewide case this is due to the combined effects of increasing
population and a shift in the composition of employment from relatively
high paying industries to expanded service sector employment. The
effect in Regions 4 and 5 is negligible, but for Region 2 the capita.
income is about 146 dollars below the base case. Supporting data are
contained in Tables 77 and 78.
The Low (Exploration Only) Case Scenario:
Statewide and Regional Impacts
The impacts associated with the low case, as measured against the base
case are virtually undetectable. Insignificant differences between the
low and base cases occur during the four years in which exploration
activity takes place. Even at the "peak" of the impact, the percentage
differences and variables rarely exceed 0.2 percent, and in most cases
is substantially less (usually less than 0.1 percent). The only exception
tp this occurs in the net migration (MIGNET) variable. Even in this
instance the absolute impact is less than 200 people. For reference
175
TABLE 77. PROJECTED REGIONAL REAL PER CAPITA INCOME IMPACTS,
ABSOLUTE VALUES~ t~EAN CASE
PIRPC~2 PIRPCR4 PIRPCR5
1980 o. 0. 0.
1961 o. o. 0.
1982 0. 0. o.
1983 8.215 15.945 12.953
1984 18.238 35.902 32.512
1985 26.016 99.902 75.363
1986 2.844 11 7. 336 81.664
1987 155.477 488.086 306.176
1988 30.375 562.73 360.434
1989 -118.633 535.277 361.902
"1990 -124.387 333.809 . 257.176
1991 -216.398. 11 9. 281 74.656
1992 -243.504 35.93 11.406
1993 -216.984 27.461 2.977
1994 -198.672 22.742 -5.555
1995 . -192.867 1 2. 156 -12.508
1996 -179.23 -0.871 -19.074
1997 -165.1 OS -2.488 -15.625
·-1998 -155.18 2.418 -1o·.o12
1999 -147.074 2.848 . -14.316·
2000 -145.703 -4.047" -20.012
PIRPCR2 = Real Per Capita Personal Income, Region 2 (Southwest)
PIRPCR4 =Real Per Capita Personal Income, Region 4 (Southcentral)
PIRPCR5 = Real Per Capita Personal Income, Region 5 (Anchorage)
SOURCE: MAP Model Projections.
176
[
[
[
~~
L
[
L
[
L
[
f.
L
L
;
-~
·-·
. ..>
..
;.;
TABLE 78. PROJECTED REGIONAL REAL PER CAPITA INCOME IMPACTS,
PERCENTAGE DIFFERENCES: MEAN CASE
..
.. ,--PIRPCR2 PIRPCR4 PIRPCRS
1980 0~ o. 0 •
. 1981 . . o. 0 •. 0.
1982 0. o. . 0.
1983 . -0.07 0.141· 0.11
1984 0.139 0.237 0.244
1985 0.199 ·o.617 0.52
1986 0.02 0.765 0.565
1987 1.093 3.481 2.154
1988 0.21 3.984 2.511
1989 -0.798 3.729 2.467
1990 -o.a 2.638 1.7
1991 -1.353· 0.77 0.48
1992 -1 .456 0~225 0.071
1993 -1.263. 0.168 0.018
1994 -1. 114 0.14 -0.033
1995 -1.052 0.073 -0.074
1996 -0.942 -o. oos -0.11
1997 -0.841 -0.014 -0.0!:$~
.1998 -o. 751 0.013 -0.055
1999 -0.704 0.016 -0.078
2000 -0.673 -0.022 ~0.107
PIRPCR2 = Real Per Capita Personal Income, Region 2 (Southwest)
PIRPCR4 = Real Per Capita Personal Income, ·Region 4 (Southcentra1)
PIRPCR5 Real Per Capita Personal Income, Region 5 (Anchorage) =
SOURCE: MAP Model Projections.
177
purposes the supporting data have been included in Appendix A. Also
included in Appendix D is OCS direct employment by place of work as well
as by place of residence.
Population
The Mean Case Scenario: The Aleutian Islands
Census Division Impacts
Population impacts at the census division level tend to be substantial,
both in terms of resident and total population. The impacts would
be much greater (in percentage terms) if it were not for the already
large population increase associated with projected fisheries expansion.
Table 79 includes the base case and mean case population projections.
Resident population (BPOPP) impact first occurs in 1983 and increases
rapidly to a peak value of 2033 in 1989 (23.3 percent above.the base
case value). In absolute value the mean minus base case difference
then declines until 1991, and stabilizes at about 1560 for there-
mainder of the projection period. However, the percentage difference
drops steadily as population growth relateq to expanded fisheries
activity grows. By .2000 the percentage difference is only 3.7 percent.
Because of the high proportion of enclave employment, the total popula-
tion impact is greater and peaks in 1987 at a level of 6807 (46.1 per-
cent above the base case). After a short period of decline (as activity
shifts from development to production) the total impact stabilizes at
about 2700 for the remainder of the projection period. The percentage
impact declines to 5.0 percent.
178
f' L
L
c
[
[
"'"J t, .i .: L i J l1 :.,, .~ l.l ... J U .. J , , J U .... ,,
"' .Ji L.. . .. J J ' J . ' J
TABLE 79. PROJECTED CHANGES IN RESIDENT AND TOTAL POPULATION
MEAN CASE, ALEUTIAN ISLANDS CENSUS DIVISION: 1981-2000*
Change in % Dif. Total % Dif.
Year BPOPP Res. Po~. Mean-Base Res. Po~. BASPP TOCSP Mean-Base TOTPOP
1981 3777 0 0.0 3777 10595 0 0.0 10595
1982 4169 0 0.0 4169 11565 0 0.0 11565
1983 4239 39 0.9 4278 11659 518 4.4 12177
1984 4447 69 1. 6 4516 11888 872 7.3 12760
1985 5056 148 2.9 5204 13077 1737 13.3 14815
1986 5316 286 5.4 5602 1.3373 2922 21.8 16294
1987 6179 1032 16.7 7211 14774 6807 46.1 21581
--' 1988 7295 1565 21.5 '8860 16379 6467 39.5 22846
""-J 1989 8712 2033 23.3 10745 18279 5892 32.2 24172 1.0
1990 10860 1852 17. 1 12712 20875 4217 20.2 25092
1991 13551 1596 11.8 15147 24370 2594 10.6 26964
1992 15092 1612 1 o. 7 16704 25780 2756 10.7 28537
1993 18934 1586 8.4 20520 30257 2914 9.6 33171
1994 22343 i559 7.0 23902 33876 2764 8.2 36639
1995 23423 1572 6.7 24995 34643 2654 7.7 37297
1996 27939 1499 5.4 29438 39206 2466 6.3 41672
1997 30961 1534 5.0 32495 42219 2678 6.3 44898
1998 34501 1556 4.5 36057 45456 2884 6.3 48340
1999 38199 1539 4.0 39738 49001 2744 5.6 51745
2000 41597 1527 3.7 43124 52040 2609 5.0 54649
TABLE NOTES
*BPOPP = resident civilian population, base case.
Change in resident population = change in resident population due
to OCS activity.
BASPP =, rresident population plus military and dependents plus
enclave employment, base case.
TOCSP = total OCS-related population. Nonresident OCS population
impact is equal to TOSCP -change in resident popul~tion.
TOTPOP = BASPP + TOCSP.
SOURCE: SCIMP mean case and base case projections.
180
L
['
r .
[
r~
L
[
~~
L..i
[
L
§
c
[
r
I L
[
Employment
Projected resident and nonresident employment impacts are summarized
in Table· 80. Changes in total resident employment (bTE) include changes
in support sector employment (bEMS), changes in state and local govern-
ment (included in ~EMG), and-changes in exogenous construction and
mining (bEMX).
The total resident employment impact grows to a peak of 1133 in 1989
{25.8 percent above the base case), drops slightly~ and averages about
873 for the remainder of the projection period. The percentage dif-
ference declines to 3.9 percent. Employment in the support sector
follows the same general pattern, peaking at a value of 445 above the
base case (a percentage difference of 33.9 percent), dropping slightly,
and then slowing increasing over the rest of the period. The percentage
difference declines to 4.5 percent.
State and local government employment is only modestly impacted. The
mean minus base case difference peaks at 64 (in 1989) and is 5.5 per-
cent above the base case. The absolute and percentage differences
decline steadily thereafter.
The greatest impact in absolute and percentage terms occurs in con-
struction and mining. The difference in employment grows to 624 in
1989. Because of the extremely small base case value of the variable,
the percentage difference is 1850.0 percent. The difference stabilizes
181
TABLE 80. PROJECTED CHANGES IN RESIDENT AND NONRESIDENT EMPLOYMENT,
MEAN CASE, ALEUTIAN ISLANDS CENSUS DIVISION: 1981-2000*
AEMS AEMG AHIA AEMX ATE AEMM AENCLV A TOTE
Year !'!Q.:.. ! !'!Q.:.. ! !'!Q.:.. ! ~ ! ~ ! ~ ! !iQ_,_ % No. %
1981 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0 0 0.0 0 0.0
1982 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 .0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0 0 0.0 0 0.0
__, 1983 25 4.8 0 0.0 0 0 1 11.1 26 1.3 0 0 479 15.8 505 6.8
OJ 1984 44 7.9 0 0.0 0 0 2 20.0 46 2.3 0 0 803 26.3 849 11.2
N
1985 93 14.0 0 0.0 0 0 19 58.3 112 4.8 0 0 1589 43.8 1701 20.0
1986 164 22.5 0 0.0 0 0 45 221.4 209 8.3 0 0 2636 71.9 2845 32.6
1987 387 44.5 7 0.8 0 0 149 727.8 543 18.4 0 0 5775 137.4 6319 65.3
1988 422 39.7 36 3,5 0 0 392 1533.3 850 23.7 0 0 4902 104.4 5753 53.3
1989 445 33.9 64 5.5 0 0 624 1850.0 1133 25.8 0 0 3859 74.5 4992 41.3
. 1990 341 20.9 52 3,9 0 0 561 1119.6 954 17.1 0 0 2365 42.0 3319 24.2
1991 253 11.8 45 2.9 0 0 540 743.8 838 11.8 0 0 998 15.5 1835 . 11.4
1992 272 11.0 42 2.6 0 0 540 566.7 854 10.4 0 0 1144 18.2 1998 11.7
1993 295 9.5 34 1.8 0 0 540 400.0 869 8.5 0 0 1328 19.2 2197 12.0
1994 296 7.9 27 1.3 0 0 540 283.0 863 7.0 0 0 1205 16.9 2068 9.4
1995 297 7.2 25 1.1 0 0 540 235.4 862 6.5 0 0 1082 15.8 1944 8.6
1996 298 6.2 20 0.8 0 0 540 170.0 858 5.6 0 0 967 14.1 1825 7.4
1997 323 5.8 15 0.6 0 0 540 123.1 878 5.1 0 0 1144 16.7 2023 7.6
1998 351 5.6 12 0.4 0 0 540 90.8 903 4.7 0 . 0 1328 20.2 2231 7.9
1999 352 5.0 9 0.3 0 0 540 63.1 901 4.2 0 0 1205 18.8 2106 6.9
2000 353 4.5 7 0.2 0 0 540 41.4 900 3.9 0 0 1082 17.9 1982 6.2
rJ 'I l .... ~ ~
J
TABLE NOTES
* . ~TE = Change in total resident employment and is the sum of
changes in the support sector resident employment (~EMS), changes in
state and local government (federal government employment is not
changed) employment (.t:.EMG), changes in manufacturing employment (.t:.EMA),
and changes in exogenous resident construction and mining employment,
or resident OCS employment (~EMX). Changes in total regional employ-
ment (~TOTE) equal the change in resident employment plus the change
in enclave employment (~ENCLV). Percentage differences are the per-
centage differences between the mean case and base case.
SOURCE: SCIMP mean case and base case projections.
183
at 540 in 1991 and remains at that level for the remainder of the
projection period. The percentage difference declines to 41.4 percent.
The nonresident employment impact is captured by changes in enclave
employment. The difference peaks at 57-7p in 1978 (137.4 percent
above the base case) and declines to an average of about 1150. The
percentage difference drops as well, and averages between 15 and
20 percent for 1990-2000.
The combined resident and nonresident employment impact peaks at a
value of 6219 in 1987 (65.3 percent above the base case). Obviously
this is a substantial increase, and would be far greater if fisheries-
related employment had not also been growing. In absolute terms the
difference drops considerably in the production phase, and averages
about 2000 for most of the 1990s. The percentage difference drops
steadily to a level of 6.2 percent.
The Low Case Scenario: The Aleutian Islands
Census Division
As was the case at the statewide and regional levels, the impact of
the low scenario is negligible. Impacts are limited to a five-year
period (1983-1987). Population and employment projections are contained
in Tables 81 and 82. Resident population peaks in 1985, at a level of
30 over the base case (0.6_percent), while total popuiation increases
184
r·
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
L'
L
[
C
c
[
§
[
[
f'
L
,-
1 L
L
.....
00
(Jl
L. ' "' "'''" L,, , Li, , . 1 l L"" .J L. 1-·••.J u,, L. ,,, J
TABLE 81. PROJECTED CHANGES IN RESlDENT AND TOTAL POPULATION,
LOW CASE, ALEUTIAN ISLANDS CENSUS DIVISION: 1981-1988*
Change in % Dif. Total
Year BPOPP Res. Pop. L011-Base Res. Pop. BASPP
1981 3777 0 0.0 3777 10595
1982 4169 0 0.0 4169 11565
1983 4239 15 0.4 4254 11659
1984 4447 25 0.6 4472 11888
1985 5056 30 0.6 5086 13077
1986 5316 27 0.5 5343 13373
1987 6179 11 0.2 6190 14774
1988 7295 0 0.0 7295 16379
*see notes to Table 79. There are no impacts after 1987.
SOURCE: SCIMP low case and base case projections.
, J , .J
% Dif.
TOCSP Low-Base TOT POP
0 0.0 10595
0 0.0 11565
203 1.7 11862
317 2.7 12205
372 2.8 13449
319 2.4 13692
128 0.9 14903
0 0.0 . 16379
......
co
0'\
TABLE 82. PROJECTED CHANGES IN RESIDENT AND NONRESIDEHT ENPLOYMENT,
LOW CASE, ALEUTIAN ISLANDS CENSUS DIVISION: 1981-1988*
AEMS AEMG AEMA AEMX _ill_ AEMM AENCLV A TOTE
Year ~ ! ~ ! ~ ! ~ ! ~ % No. ! ~ ! ~ !
1981 0 0,0 0 0 0 D 0 0 0 0.0 0 0 0 0.0 .o 0.0
1982 0 0.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0 0 0 0.0 0 0.0
1983 10 1.9 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 0.5 0 0 188 6.2 198 2.6
1984 16 2.9 0 0 0 0 0 0 16 0.8 0 0 292 9.6 308 4.1
1985 19 2.9 0 0 0 0 0 0 19 0.8 0 0 342 9.4 361 4.3
1986 17 2.3 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 0.7 0 0 292 8.0 309 3.5
1987 7 0.8 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 0.2 0 0 117 2.8 124 1.3
1988 0 0.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0 0 0 0.0 0 0.0
* See explanatory notes to Table 80.
SOURCE: SClMP low case and base case projections.
. .. ~ ....... ·~ --·:··-...... -·~· .. ··. -···· ... ;···~-~· ··-··-~~. -····· .. .
,.,---....
L .. J c--J ,~,-.J r-<
l _l
_;
by 372, a 2.8 percent increase. In both instances the differences
disappear by 1988 when exploration activity has ceased.
Employment impacts are even less. Resident employment increases by
19 over the base case in 1985 (a 0.8 percent difference). Total em-
ployment increases by 361, reflecting the large enclave employment
proportion. The percentage difference is 4.3 percent. By 1988 the
differences in all variables are back to zero.
\
187
-~
d
APPENDIX A
COMPUTER PRINTOUT OF LOW CASE IMPACTS,
STATEWIDE AND REGIONAL
189
SIMULATION OUTPUT BY VARIABLE
.......
(o
0
PO?TST -EXOGENOUS
1980
1981
1982
1983
1994
1985
1996
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
19:32
1993
1994
19Yo
19913
1997
1 S98
1999
2000
LO\~
0.
0.
0.
0.164
0.317
0.443
0.486
0.395
0.232
0.153
0.124
0. 11
0.102
0.095
0.091
0.0!3'/
0.088
0.083
0.079
0.075
0.072
.~~t.~
!
r--1
i...;'' ...... J
r--;
l J r-l· r·----,
j r-----,
L j
L. L ..
SIMULATION OUTPUT BY VARIABLE
MIGNET -EXOGENOUS
LOW
1980 0.
1981 0.
1982 0.
1983 0.164
1984 0.148
1985 0.114
1986 0.027
1987 -0.107
1988 -0.174
1989 -0.084
1990 -0.03
1991 -0.013
1992 -0.007
1993 -o .oos
1994 -0.004
~ ~S\!3 -0.0~3
1996 0.002
1997 -0.004
__, 1998 -0.003
~ 1999 -0.004 __.
2000 -0.001
ILL~ .. : j L'''"-' .J ~ ... ' ' j L .. . L.. J ' ' .. " '. j
SIMULATION OUTPUT
NATI NC -
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1965
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1 991
1992
1993
1994 .. ,...,."~' IVJ<J
1996
1997 __. 1998 lO
N 1999
2000
BY VARIABLE
EXOGENOUS
LO\~
o.
o.
0.
0.
0.007
0.012
0.016
0.016
0.011
. 0.004
0.001
-o.
-0.001
-0.001
-o . .oo 1
-" ""• .... ..,...,.
-0.001
-0.001
-0.001
-0.001
-0.001
,...._...,
~-• _ _j
~· I
,j \1,, ,J ·l, ".d L. ; J 1_ .• " J \L~, ,_,,.;._ J ,,,, "', _} L ... J L,, " ... J l,.' l : .J ,J "( .J . ' .J .J 'J J
I
,:•"~'\ (~;. ~,~
,. )'
SIMULATION OUTPUT BY DSET
LO\~
EM99ST EM98ST EMB1ST EMS1 ST EMG9ST
1980 o. o. 0. o. o.
1981 0. o. o. o. o.
1982 0. 0. 0. o. o.
1983 0.121 0.116 0.059 0.046 0. 0'11
1984 0.224 0.216 0.08 0.106 0.03
1985 0.301 0.291 0.095 0.152 0.045
1986 0.317 0.306 0.088 0.165 0.053
1987 0.233 0.225 0.061 0.11 9 0.045
1988 0.103 0. 1 0.001 0.066 0.027
1989 0.045 0.043 0.004 0.026 0.013
1990 0.026 0.026 0.003 0.014 0.009
1991 O.C2 0.02 0.002 0.01 0.008
1992 0.018 0.017 0.002 0.008 0.007
1993 0.017 0.016 0.002 0.008 0.007
1994 0.016 0.016 0.002 o.oo8 0.006
1 \:1\:lo IJ,Olt:i V.VlO \),VV~ v.uvo v.uvo
1996 0.017 0.016 0.002 0.008 0.006
1997 0.017 0.017 0.002 o.ooa 0.006
_, 1998 0.016 0.015 0.002 o.ooa 0.006
\.0 1999 0.015 0.015 0.002 0.007 0.006 w 2000 0.015 0.015 0.002 o.ooa 0.005
SIMULATION OUTPUT BY VARIABLE
PIRST -
1980
19B1
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1 0<;15
1996
1997
1998 ....... 1999 1.0
~ 2000
r---
L
EXOGENOUS
LmJ
o.
o.
o.
3.84
6.961
9. 703
9.961
7.199
2.758
1 .352
0.918
0.773
0.762
0. 727
0.734
n 7 •:u:t
0.871
0.758
0.777
0.738
0.813
r--l
\ '
-, -] r-.l
,.,J L .. l l': k ',,J l ' .. JI 'J
SIMULATION OUTPUT BY VARIABLE
PIRPCST -EXOGENOUS
LOW
1980 0.
1981 o.
1982 o.
1983 4.148
1984 4.395
1985 4.84
1986 4. 703
1&8i 2.664
1988 -1.398
1989 -1.875
1990 -1.93
1 991 -1 .863
. 1992 -1.687
1993 -1.566
1994 -1 • .41
·~::.5 -·j .3~.;
1996 -1.152
1997 -1.23 ..... 1993 -1.105
~ 1999 -i. 031 (J1
2000 -0.679
t,'l~
SIMULATION OUTPUT
WSG9RST -
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1969
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997 _.
1998 I.D
0'1 1999
2000
__ ....,
~""' 1 '
~-~~~ ,-~ .. ~·•;."'~
BY VARIABLE
EXOGENOUS
LO\~
o.
o.
0.
0.24
0.648
1. 01
1. 21 7
1.106
o. 748
0.457
0.383
0.364
0.357
0.354
0.355
0. 2o::e
0.381
0.388
0.38
0.389
0.401
t-"l ·I] ,_....,
'. I
L' .I l:. "' L ;, ) l .I I. l .. J .J
SIMULATION OUTPUT BY VARIABLE
WSS1RST-EXOGENOUS
LmJ
1980 0.
1981 o.
1982 0.
1983 0.905
1984 2.222
1985 3.19
1 9!36 3.372
1997 2.322
1988 1.29
1989 0.515
1990 0.272
1991 0.194
1992 0.171
1993 0.153
1994 0.151
1985 0.151
1996 0.159
1997 0.17 __, 1998 0.146
U) 1999 0.151 '-1
2000 0.16:2
SIMULATION OUTPUT BY VARIABLE
WSB1RST-EXOGENOUS
LOW
1980 o.
1981 o.
1982 0.
1983 2.022
1964 2.664
1965 3. 706
1986 3.625
1987 2.522
1988 0.241
1989 0.135
1990. 0.106
1991 0.093
1992 0.09
1993 0.083
1994 0 •. 085
·~;::~:.;, "-'•""I'.JL
1996 0.095
1997 0.092
_. 1998 0.079 ! 1.0 1999 0.089 co 2000 0.096
,.
J
L t. l " L._ L:. J l ...... .J l :. J .,,) (, ".J .. J
SIMULATION OUTPUT BY VARIABLE
WRB1RST-EXOGENOUS
LOW
1980 0.
1981 0.
1982 o.
1983 0.344
1984 -15.379
1985 -19.371
1986 -5.68
1987 3.52
1988 -O.G52
1989 -0.023
1990. 0.137
1991 0.156
1992 0.246
1S93· 0.164
1994 . 0 •. 188
~ ~::: :. ~:!
1996 0.145
1997 0.078 ..... 1998 0.035
1.0 1999 0.145 1.0
2000 0.258
SIMULATION OUTPUT BY VARIABLE
WRG9RST -EXOGENOUS
LOW
1980 0.
1981 o.
1982 0.
1983 0.023
1984 -0.344
1985 -0.859
1986 -0.996
1987 -0.256
1988 0.559.
1989 1.172
1 !?90 1.437
1991 1.559
1992 1.59
1993 1. 574
1994 1 .563
~~~~ ~ .~:~
1996 1.676
1997 1. 707
N 1998 1. 641
0 1999 1.754 0 2000 1.82
r1 ,....--,. ;------]
. j
l .. ,; \,. ;,,; .. t i.L., . J L :., ... ) \.., ''"'·" ! J l' :.J l. . j
SIMULATION OUTPUT BY VARIABLE
WRS1 RST -EXOGENOUS
LOI~
1980 o.
1981 o.
1982 o.
1983 -0.039
1984 -1.719
1985 -3.484
1986 -2.742
1987 -1.984
1988 -0.805
1989 -0.34
1890 -o .146
1991 -0.113
1992 -0.039
1993 -0.074
1994 -0.082
1995 -0.09
1996 -0.102
1997 -0.09
N 1998 -0.141
0 1999 -0.055 .......
2000 -0.027
SIMULATION
RPI
1980
1961
1982
1983
1984
19B5
1986
1987
1988
Hl89
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
4,... rtr:' .;....,..,
1996
1997
N 1998
0 1999 N
2000
OUTPUT BY VARIABLE
-EXOGENOUS
LOW
c.
o.
o.
0.043
0.097
0.108
0.101
0.13
0.201
0.272
0.312
0.341
0.369
0.398
0.43
~-~= "!
0.5
0.538
0.582
0.627
0.675
I~ r-r--', L. j, ...
,..----,
l 'J
r--.
L ·~-. .---.
. J
I,U l IIIli.' '"' ''""' \_, "' " ,. Icc ,J I.!.,' .) ~ L ...... ,) t ... J. '" J u. ' J '.J l' 'J .,.lJ '"
r~ r~:~
SIMULATION OUTPUT BY DSET
LOW
REVGFR RP9SR RFOSR RNDSR
1980 o. o. a. o.
1 981 0. o. o. o.
1982 o. 0. 0. o.
1983 -0.294 -0.285 .. 0.029 -0.039
1984 -0.586 -0.6 0.049 -0.037
1985 -0.559' -0.683 0 .. 074 0.053
1986 -0.418 -0.623 0.082 0.123
1997 -o. 723 -o. 753 0.051 -0.021
1988 -1 .484 ~ 1. 085 0.003 -0.402
1989 -2.262 -1.378 -0.022 -0.863
1990 -2.594 -1.399. -0.03 -1.167
1991 -2.762 -1.357 .-0. 031 -1.376
. 1992 -2.809 -1.233 ·. -0.031 -1.543
1993 -2.84S -1. 12 -0.031 -1.694
1994 -2.859 -0.999 -0.03 -1 .83
1Q~5 -!:! .. e;s -o. es-1 -0.0?9 -1.(l5"i
1996 -2.879 -o. 796 -0.028 -2.056
1997 -2.887 -0.711 -o. 021 -2.15
N 1998 -2.902 -0.635 -0.026 -2.24 0 w 1999 -2.902 -0.563 -0.026 ' -2.315
2000 -2.902 -0.498 -0.025 -2.379
SIMULATION OUTPUT BY VARIABLE
E99SR -EXOGENOUS
1960
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
'1993
1994
1995
1996
'1997
N 1998
-~ 1999
2000
r---.
\, .
o. o.
o.
0.666
1 .252
1. 763
2.005
1. 701
1. 04 5
0.717
0.594
0.546
0.516
0.502
0.496
0.469
0.517
0.5
0.471
0.477
0.461
~\ (""'"T:i
~...... ... ~· .• I J
\. II~~~ L .. L' . l_j ..:., .. 11..1 u .. ' ) ~~' !.,, _J L .. •· .. J Li ' J ' ) . J
SIMULATiON OUTPUT BY VARIABLE
E99SRPC -EXOGENOUS
LOW
1980 o.
1981 o.
1982 o.
1983 0.001
1984 -0.002
1985 -0.005
1986 0.001
1987 -0.001
1988 -0.001
1989 -0.001
1990 -0.004
1991 -0.002
1992 -0.005
1993 -o. oo 3
1994 -0.001
~ c~= -~ .. ~~:!
1996 o.
1997 0.002
N 1998 -0.007
C> 1999 o. U1 2000 -0.005
SIMULATION OUTPUT BY VARIABLE
N
0 m
FUNDR -EXOGENOUS
1980
1 981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1 991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
r---:
I.
LOW
o.
o.
o.
-1 .262
-3.363
-5.145
-6.48
-8.52
-11.613
-14.965
-17.437
-19.555
-21 • .0::69
-23.273
-24.914
-26.422
-27.832
-29.137
-30.379
-31.516
-32.492
1,.....,--,
\.. l _j
'> I ; .)
.... -..
. ·:.,:;.
SIMULATION OUTPUT BY VARIABLE
POPTST -EXOGENOUS
LOW
1980 o.
1 981 o.
1982 0.
'1983 0.039
198·1 0.07
1985 0.092
1986 0.098
'1987 0.079
1988 0 .04G
1989 0.03
1990 0.024
1991 0.02
1992 0.018
1993 0.017
1994 0.016
~ ~~= ') 0~'5
1996 0.01•1
1997 0.013
N 1998 0.012 0 1999 0. 011 '-J
2000 0.011
Percentage
,(-Mit'
SIMULATION OUTPUT BY VARIABLE
MIGN E1r -EXOGENOUS
LO\~
1960 o.
1981 0.
1982 o.
1983 1 .903
1984 0.569
1985 0.565'
1986 0.402
1987 3.545
1968 4.133
1989 8.029
1990 -0.503
1991 -0.153
. 1992 -0.1
1993 -0.073
1994 -0.093
~ :::: -~-~::
1996 0.018
1997 -0.038
1998 -0.033
N 1999 -0.046 0
00 2000 -0.012
Percentage
r-r-'"!; l. ; ;
..........--,
l [.-J
.11~9~j
"' L l ul J lL,, ,; l,..,. ' ,,) u", I J .) ,J ,J . J •. J
"''i,~,·· r: ,.
' ·i
SIMULATION OUTPUT BY VARIASLE
NATINC-EXOGENOUS
LOl~
1980 o.
1981 0.
1982 0.
1983 o.
1984 0.153
'1985 0.23
'1966 0.271
1987 0.271
1988 0.197
1989 0.073
1990 0.013
1991 -0.008
1992 -0.016
1993 -0.018
1994 -0.019
1 ~195 -O.U1d
1996 -0.016
1997 -o. o 11 N 1998 -0.01 0
1.0 1999 -o.oos
2000 -0.007
Percentage
;-'"""\ . 4J~.· ,.~ ('~!)! <?
(_.
SIMULATION OUTPUT BY DSET
LOW
EM99ST EM98ST EMB1ST EMS 1ST EMG9ST
1980 o. o. o. o. o.
1981 0. 0. o. o. o.
1982 o. o. o. o. 0.
1983 0.059 0.06 0.156 0.065 0.014
1984 0.096 0. 1 0.165 0.125 0.036
1965 0.122 0.126 0.198 0.153 0.053
1986 0.125 0.13 0.199 0.158 0.06
1967 0.092 0.095 0.142 0.11 5 0.05
1988 0.041 0.042 0.016 0.064 0.03
1969 0.017 0.018 o.oo8 o;025 0,014
1990 0.01 0.01 0.005 0.013 0.01
1991 0.007 0.008 0.004 0.009 0.008
1992 0.006 0.006 0.003 0.007 0.007
1993 O.OOG 0.006 0.003 0.006 0.007
1994 0.005 0.005 0.003 0.006 0.006
1 '.?95 n,nn':i n noc:; 0 003 0.006 0.00()
1996 0.005 0.005 0.003 0.006 0. 00(.,
1997 0.005 0.005 0.003 0.006 0.001·
N 1998 0.004 0.005 0.003 o.o·o5 0.00!· __, 1999 0.004 0.004 0.003 0.005 0.005 0 2000 0.004 0.004 0,002 0.004 0.005
Percentage
-_ ... -..... , ..... ''-:"""· ......... ~ ......... -....... -· .............. ·· ~-... -~
r--1
•• ,_.j .:--J
"' ' J ;,.. ' I ,J Lt.:. ,J .J u ,j
SIMULATION OUTPUT BY VARIABLE
PlRST -EXOGENOUS
LOW
1980 o.
1981 0.
1982 o.
1983 0.071
1984 0.098
1985 0.121
1986 0.128
1987 0.097
1988 0.037
1989 0.018
1990. 0. 011
1991 0.009
. 1992 o.oos
1993. o.oo8
1994 . 0.007
1Z~5 "' f't,...., "'•"'""'.
1996 0.008
1997 0.006
N 1998 0.006 ..... 1999 0.006 __,
:2000 0.006
Percentage
..... ,
··;:
{~~ .f::/f_:.~~ A'"'~ _.,
!' . ',,.,··:
SIMULATION OUTPUT BY VARIABLE
PIRPCST -EXOGENOUS
LOW
1980 0.
1981 o.
1982 o.
1983 0.033
1984 0.028
1985 0.029
1966 0.03
1987 0.018
1988 -0.009
1989 -0.012
1990 -0.012
1991 -0.012
1992 -0.01
1993 -0.009
1994 -0.008
, \:1\:l::i -v.vuil
1996 -0.006
1997 -0.007
N 1998 -0.006 __,
1S99 -0.005 N 2000 -0.004
Percentage
h..' ,J L ',J b_,[ ,,,, ,; L ,, .I ,,
SIMULATION OUTPUT BY VARIA'SLE
N __,
w
WSG9RST -EXOGENOUS
1 SGO
1981
1982
1983
1964 '
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
L0\•1
o. o.
o.
0.014
0.035
0.05
0.056
0.049
0.032
0.019
0.015
0.014
0.013
0.012
0.012
0. 011
0. 011
0. 011
0.01
0.01
0.01
Percentage
l,,,' .. J L. ,,, J L,,', ,j ,J ' j ,J
,~·mo... f1.71~ ~1-f~~(~."! ")
I ~ ··1 (-:_),
SIMULATION OUTPUT BY VARIABLE
\>1551 RST -EXOGENOUS
LOW
1980 o.
1981 0.
1982 0.
1983 0.065
1984 0.11 7
1985 0.138
1966 0.146
1987 0.1 CG
1988 0.06
1989 0.024
1990. 0.012
1991 0.008
1992 0.007
1993 0.006
1994 . 0.005
a ;s;:; Vo~Vj
1996 0.005
1997 0.005
N 1998 0.004
~ 1999 0.004 ~
2000 0.004
Percentage
t , L' ,. '"" .} '~ ' '' L I "' J ' ,, ,j
SIMULATION OUTPUT BY VARIABLE
WSB1RST-EXOGENOUS
LOW
1980 o.
1 961 0.
1982 o.
1963 0.157
1964 0.131
1985 0.156
1966 0.166
198'7 0. 151
1968 0.014
1869 o.ooa
1990 0.006
1 991 0.004
1992 0.004
1993 0.004
1994 0.004
1 ::!:?:: 0 -~~3
1996 0.004
1997 0.003 N 1996 0;003
U1 1999 0.003
2000 0.003
Percentage
SIMULATION OUTPUT 13Y VARIABLE
\oJRB1 HST -EXOGENOUS
L0\<1
1980 o.
1981 o.
1982 o.
1983 0.001
1984 -0.034
1985 -0.039
1986 -0.013
1987 J.009
1988 -0.002
1989 -o.
1990 o.
1991 o.
1992 0.001
1993 o.
1994 o.
191?B 0.
1996 o.
1997 o.
N 1998 o. ..... 1999 o.
0) 2000 0.001
Percentage
~I ~: ,~...,
l. i ) 1
,--,
: _I
~~
' I
-
,'
r·-, I
(.:
(.>
,j t .. L, ,I L. ,, .I L , J lt .... J L. i, .J l... ' j ' J L..' ..J l .J j 'j
SIMULATION OUTPUT BY VARIABLE
WRG9RST -EXOGENOUS
LO\~
1980 o.
1981 0.
1982 0.
1983 0.
1984 -0.002
1965 -0.004
1986 -0.004
1987 -0.001
1988 0.002
1989 0.004
1990 o. 005
1991 0.006
1992 0.006
1993 0.005
1994 0 .oos
1 \:1\:Jo u.uu::>
1996 o.oos
1997 0.005
N 1998 0.005 __, 19S9 0.005 "'-..I 2000 o.oos
Percentage
SIMULATION OUTPUT BY VARIABLE
\<IRS1 RST -EXOGENOUS
LOW
1980 o.
1981 o.
1982 o.
1983 -o.
1984 -0.008
1965 -0.015.
1986 -0.012
1987 -o .oc9
1988 -0.004
1989 -0.002
1990 -o.oot
1991 -0.001
. 1992 -o •
1993 -o.
1994 -o ..
~ ;;::; ~
"\I-•
1996 -o.
1997 -o.
N 1998 -0.001 ...... 1999 -o.
00 2000 -o.
Percentage
-: l
L J L , L ... J L I ,_,J L. . i l. . J : j : .. J .. J :J
SIMULATION OUTPUT BY VARIABLE
RPI -EXOGENOUS
LO\~
1980 o·.
1981 o.
1962 o.
1983 0.009
1984 0.02
1985 0.02
1986 0.018
1967 0.021
1988 0.03
1989 0.038
1990. 0.04
1991 0.041
. 1992 0.041
1993. 0.041
1994 . 0.042
i~;o V.U-1.2
1996 0.042
1997 0.042
N 1998 0.042 __, 1999 0.042· ID 2000 0.042
Percentage
SIMULATION OUTPUT BY DSET
LOW
RE VGFR
1980 0.
1981 o.
1982 0.
1983 -0.008
1984 -0.014
1985 -0.012
1986 -o .oo8
1987 -0.014
1988 -0.027
1989 -0.039
1990 -0.045
1991 -0.047
1992 -0.049
1 S93 -0.05
1994 -0.052
1995 -0.054
1996 -0.055
1997 -0.057
N 1998 -0.058
N 1999 -0.06 0
2000 -0.061
RP9SR RFDSR
0. o.
o. o.
o. o.
-0.009 0.016
-0.02 0.028
-o. 02 0.043
-0.018 0.05
-o. 021 0.034
-o .o3 0.002
-0.038 -o. 011
-0.04 -0.024
-o. 041 -0.027
-o. o41 -0.028
-o .041 -0.029
-0.042 -0.03
-o. 042 -0.031
-0.042 -0.031
-0.042 -0.032
-0.042 -0.033
-0.04.2 -0.033
-0.042 -0.034
Percentage
RNDSR
o. o.
o.
-0.007
-0.004
0.005
0.009
-0.001
-o. 02 3
-0.043
-0.053
-0.056
-0.058
-0.06
-0.061
-0.063
-0.064
-0.065
-0.067
-0.068
-0.069
r-l l J
"j LJ,.:, u.. J ll j L. , , J I J L.. , J .J ' J
I . .,
SIMULATION OUTPUT BY VARIABLE
E99SR -EXOGENOUS
LOW
1980 o.
1961 0.
1982 o.
1983 0.039
1984 0.07
1985 0.092
1986 0.098
1987 0.079
1988 0.046
'989 0.03
1990 0.023
1991 0.02
1992 0.018
1993 0.017
1994 0.016
~ s~::: 0 .. ~~..,
"1996 0.014
1997 0.013
N 1998 0.012 N 1999 0. 011 ........
2000 0.01
Percentage
/~. r
SIMULATION OUTPUT BY VARIABLE
E99S RPC -EXOGENOUS
Lml
1980 o.
1981 o.
1982 0.
1983 o.
1984 -o.
1985 -o.
1986 o.
1 S87 -o.
1988 -o.
1S89 -o.
1990 -o.
1991 -o.
1992 -o.
1993 -o.
1994 -o, "---I':):;J,J .. v ..
1996 o.
1997 o.
N 1998 -o. N
N 1999 o.
2000 -o.
Percentage
f'~''
r:n ·.~
' j
•. J L ,) ' . .; .. J \,,.,, L .. J l .. ! j L • !.J .J .J . J
~~
SIMULATION OUTPUT BY VARIABLE
FUNOR -EXOGENOUS
LOW
1980 o.
1981 o.
1982 o.
1983 -0.017
1984 -o .036
1985 -0.044
1986 -0.045
1987 -0.051
1988 -0.061
1999 -0.069
1990 ':"'0.073
1991 -0.076
1992 -0.078
1993 -0.081
1994 -0.084
1 ~<::: -0 f'IClq
1996 -0.092
1997 -Cl.097
N 'I 998 -0.103
N 1999 -0.109 w 2000 -0.117
Percentage
.f~.j);h., tWr.~: AI·"F\ I ' '
SIMULATION OUTPUT BY OSET -ERROR
RRE7 095_ER
POPTR2 POPTR4 POPTR5
1980 0. o. o.
1 981 o. o. 0.
1982 o. o. o.
1983 -0.004 0.038 0. 171
1984 o. 0.065 0.273
1985 0.004 0.084 0.36
1986 0.007 0.085 0.365
1987 0.012 0.057 . 0.256
1988 0.013 . 0.024 0.113
1989 0.009 0.015 0.079
1990 0.007 0.012. 0.063
1 991 0.007 0.011 0.055
. 1992 0.007 0.01 0.05
1993 0.007 0.01 0.046
199·~ 0.007 0.009 0.043 .,.._ ... .... ,..,... ~ ,.. ,.,.,n ~. ~~~ I :.F;J..J v.v.,;v vevv..,
1996 0.007 0.009 0.041
1997 0.006 0.008 0.039
N 1998 0.006 0.008 0.037
N 1999 0.006 0.007 0.035· .f.:> 2000 0.006 0.007 0.034
EM99R2 EM99R4 EM99R5
1980 0. o •. o.
1981 0. o. o.
1982 0. o. 0.
1983 0. 0.021 0. 1
1984 0.003 0.036 0.168
1985 0.004 0.048 0.221
1986 0.005 0.049 0.221
1987 0.006 0.032 0.147
1988 0.004 0. 011 0.05
1989 0.002 0.005 0.022
1\:190 0.001 U.OU.:l U.Vl.:l
1991 0.001 0.002 0.01
1992 0.001 0.002 0.008
1993 0.001 0.002 0.008
1994 0.001 0.002 0.008
1995 0.001 0.001 o.oo8
1996 0.001 0.002 o.ooa
1997 0.001 0.002 0.008
1998 o. 0.001 0.008
1999 o. 0.001 0.008
2000 o. 0.001 o.oo8
EMS! R2 EMS1 R4 EM$1R5
1980 o. o. .0.
1981 o. o. 0.
l'J 1"'""...3~82 r-; ~oo 1 r-'J g:o~r 1. .. 1 1 )4......., r:-J ~ r-1 rl. ::-J ~J .~ :-l ~ :-"-l ~--:1 ~ l . _J33 L ... J
.J
>d L, ' I ,J ' J L . .J L ... !, .. :.J t:., l : ... ..J l.. . ... j l. I. J IJ ..J ~. .J
1985,p~ 0.001 0.022 0.122 ,..'11;,: fJ'f;~ 1986; .. 0.001 0.023 0.126
1967 0.002 0.013 0. 081
1968 0.002 0.006 0.037
1989 0.001 0.002 0.015
1990 o. .. 0.001 0.008
~ ;; i ,J. ... ""'~"' "" ............. V•lrJ'-'1 v.vvv
1992 0. 0. 0.005
1993 0. o. 0.005
1994 o. o. 0.005
1995 o. 0. 0.005
1996 o. o. 0.005
1997 o. o. 0.005
1998 o. o. 0.005
1999 -o. o. 0.005
2000 . -o. o. 0.005
EMG9R2 EMG9R4 EMG9R5
1980 o. o. o.
1 981 o. 0. o.
1982 o. o. 0.
1983 0.001 0.001 0.004
1984 0.002 0.004 0. 01
1985 0.003 0.006 0.015
1986 0.004 0.007 0.017
1987 0.003 0.006 0.015
19138 0.002 0.004 0.009
N 1989 0.001 0.002 0.004 N 1990 0.001 0.001 0.003 01
1 991 o. 0.001 0.002
1992 0. 0. 001 0.002
1993 0. 0.001 0.002
1994 o. 0.001 0.002
1995 o. 0.001 0.002
1996 0. 0.001 0.002
1997 o. 0.001 0.002
1998 o. 0.001 0.002
1999 o. 0.001 0.002
2000 o. 0.001 0.001
EMB1R2 EMB1 R4 EMB1R5
1980 o. o. o.
1 ~tn u. v. o.
1982 o. o. o.
1983 -o. 0.012 0.048
1984 o. 0.016 0.063
1985 o. 0.018 0.074
1986 o. 0.018 0.067
1987 0. 0.012 0.045
1988 o. 0.001 0.003
1989 0. o. 0.001
1990 0. o. 0.001
1991 o. o. 0.001
1992 o. o. 0. 001
1993 o. a. 0.001
1994 o. o. 0.001
1995 o. o. 0.001
1996 0. o. 0.001
1997 0. o. 0.001
1998 o. o. 0.001
1 qqq 0. D •. 0.001
,,:%~ ~~:J!:;"A..~. f?:r\
PIRR2 PIRR4 PIRR5
1980 0. 0. o.
1 981 0. o. o. ....... ,...,.., ~ ~. ~. •.J-.J'-....
1983 0.024 0.685 2.973
1984 0.094 1.209 5.333
1985 0.141 1 .682 7.371
1986 0.169 1 .664 6.965
1987 0.192 1. 079 4.431 '
1988 0. 141 0.292 1. 226
1989 0.07 0.129 0.625
1990 0.046 0.079 0.441
1991 0.038 0.06 0.386
1992 0.036 0.058 0.381
1993 0.034 0.053 0.371
1994 0.032 0.053 0.371
1995 0.029 0.054 0.379
1£96 0.04 0.067 0.441
1997 0.028 0.053 0.395
'1998 0.027 0.053 0.402
'1999 0.02 0.05 0.395
2000 0.029 0.056 0.426
PIRPCR2 PIRPCR4 PIRPCRS
N 1960 o. o. o.
N 1981 o. o. o. (J)
1982 o. 0. o.
1983 2.836 5.23 4.977
1984 3.375 4.43 8.207
1985 3.156 5.672 9.746
1986 2.191 5.98 7.461
1987 o. 723 4.43 3.535
1988 -1.527 -0.824 -1.762
1889 -1 .832 -1.449 -2.32
1990 -1.~49 -1.641 -2.23
1991 -1.91 -1.695 -1.996
1992 -1 .883 -1.633 -1.711
1993 -1 .816 -1.586 -1.523
1994 -1.766 -1.445 -1.328
1995 -1.766 -1.344 -1.191
1996 -1.648 -1. 199 -0.988
1 0~7 -1 70"1 -1. ::!?4 -1 .oss
1998 -1.594 -1 • 187 -0.906 .'
1999 -1.559 -1.09 -0.852
2000 -1.375 -0.93 -0.719
~I ,,..-----.,
. .. I
L, .I :l
SIMULATION OUTPUT BY DSET -PERCENT ERROR
N
N
'-I
RRE7 095_PC ER
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
. 1992
1993
1994
~ ::s
1996
1997
'1998
1999
2000
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1 ~~u
.1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
1980
1981
1982
1983
POPTR2
0.
0.
0.
-0.016
0.002
0.014'
0.025
0.039
0.041
0.026
0.021
0.018
0.016
0.015
0.014
:::. ~ ~ :!
0.012
0. 011
0.01
0.009
0.008
EM99R2
o.
o.
0.
0.001
0.02
0.03
0.036
0.038
0.027
0. 011
u.vvo
0.004
0.003
0.003
0.002
0.002
0.002
0.002
0.001
0.001
0.001
EMS1 R2
o.
o.
o.
-0.021
POPTR4 POPTRS
o. o.
0. 0.
0. 0.
0.078 0.089
0.124 0.133
0.151 0 •. 164
0.141 0.162
0.092 . 0. 114
. 0.039 0,05
0.024 0.035
0.019 .. 0.027
0.017 0.023
0. 016 ·. 0.02
0.015 0.018
0.014 0.017
~.C1~ n n1c:: .... ·.,; ....
0.013 0.015
0.012 0.014
0. 011-0.013
0.01 0.012
0.009 0.011
EM99R4 EM99R5
o. 0.
o. 0.
0. 0.
0.094 0. 109
0.144 0.166
0' 176 0.199
0.167 0. 191
0.107 0.127
0.038 0.043
0.015 0.018
v.vil9 u.vi
0.006 0.008
0.005 0.006
0.004 0.006
0.004 0.006
0.004 0.006
0.004 0.006
0.004 0.005
0.003 0.005
0.003 0.005
0.003 0.005
EMS1 R4 EMS1RS
o. o.
o. o.
o. o.
0. 114 0.108
u : ... J l" ,, "' ~. ' I. J . J .. J J
1985 ...,.,..~ 0.028 0.252 0.216 ~..,,1 tf'"'"'· 1986 ', 0.039 0.229 0.213 ~ U,o;~~
1987 0.063 0.122 0.14
1988 0.055 0.06 0.064
1969 0.02 0.022 0.026
1990 ' 0.008 0. 01 0.013
iS~i v.vv.; ~ ,.. .... ,.., ... ,.._ ...
V•\JVV .\/oVVWI
1992 0.002 0.004 0.007
1993 0.002 0.003 0.007
1994 0.001 0.003 0.006
1995 0.001 0.003 0,006
1996 0.001 0.003 0,006
1997 0.001 0.003 0.006
1998 o. 0.003 0.006
1999 -o. 0.002' 0.005
2000 -o. 0.002 0.005
EMG9R2 EMG9R4 EMG9RS
1980 0. o. o.
1981 0. o. o.
1982 0. o. 0.
1983 0.01 0.021 0. 011
1984 0.026 0.06 0.028
1985 0.038 0.068 0.041
1986 0.044 0.096 0.047
1987 0.037 0.079 0.039
1988 0.022 0,047 0.023
N 1989 0.01 0.023 0.011 N 1990 0.007 0.016 0.007 co
1991 o.oos 0.014 0.006
1992 0.005 0.013 0.005
1993 0.004 0.012 0.005
1994 0.004 0.011 0.004
1995 0.004 0.01 0.004
1996 0.004 0.01 0.004
1997 0.004 0.01 0.004
1998 0.004 0.009 0.004
1999 0.003 o.oo8 0.004
2000 0.003 o.ooa 0.003
EMB1 R2 EMB1R4 EMBtRS
1980 0. o. o.
i \:ll::l 1 v. ii. o.
1982 o. 9. o.
1983 -o. 0.206 0.502
1984 0.01 0.197 0.589
1985 0.015 0.224 0. 631
1986 0.016 0.208 0.561
1987 0.016 0.147 0.368
1988 0.013 0.012 0.021
1989 0.006 0.005 0.012
1990 0.004 0.003 0.009
1991 0.002 0.002 0.007
1992 0.002 c .·<.01 0.007
1993 0.001 0.001 0.007
1994 0.001 0.001 0.007
1995 0.001 0. 001 0.007
1996 0.001 0.001 0.007
1997 0.001 0.001 0.006
1...2.,98 r~ o. r-J~:~~ ').006
[-:; ;--r. r-"J r-"" r-_)99 rn CL 1
,, '} r-l .~ :-------1 ,----. ~ . r-----: ~. r-l 1.. }
I. .,.J L l,j l. ' I ,J L,J,,J,j u,., J ~ L ~. J L .. , ,.J ,. J L J L .. ,IJ l,.i.' .J .J ' .J .J J
~~~ .... If'#~: ~~~~~.
PI RR2 PIRR4 PIRR5
1980 o. o. 0.
1981 o. o. o. ...
1:,10"" v. Vo ..,.
1983 0.008 0.125 0. 131
1984 0.027 0.153 0.194
1985 0.036 0.186 0.231
1986 0.04 0.18 0.214
1987 0.044 0.123 0.139
1988 0.031 0.033 0.038
1989 0.014 0.014 0.019
1990 o .ooa 0.008 0.013
1991 0.006 0.006 0.01
1992 0.005 0.006 0.01
1993 0.004 0.005 0.009
1994 0.004 0.005 0.009
1995 0.003 0.005 o.ooa
1996 0.004 0.006 0.009
1997 0.002 0.004 0.008
1998 0.002 0.004 0.008
'1999 0.002 0.004 0.007
2000 0.002 0.004 0.007
PI R PCR2 PIRPCR4 PIRPCR5
N 1980 o. o. o.
N 1981 0. o. 0. \0 1982 o. 0. o.
1983 0.024 0.046 0.042
1984 0.026 0.029 0.062
1985 0.022 0.035 0.067
1986 0.015 0.039 0.052
1987 0.005 0.032 0.025
1988 -o. o 11 -o .oo6 -0.012
1989 -0.012 -0.01 -0.016
1990 -0.013 -0.011 -0.015
1991 -0.012 -0.011 -0.013
1992 -o. o 11 -0.01 -0.011
1993 -o. 011 -0.01 -0.009
1994 -0.01 -0.009 '-0.008
1 ~95 -0.01 -0.008 -0.007
1 96 -0.009 -o. 001 -0.006
~ 997 -0.009 -n (1()7 -n onn
1998 -o.oos -0.007 -0.005
1999 -0.007 -0.006 -0.005
2000 -o .oos -0.005 -0.004
_ _;
-
~
-"'
APPENDIX B
FISHERIES ASSUMPTIONS
231
. ' . EARL R. COMBS, INC .
~------------· CONSUlJANTS IN ECONOMICS AND PL.ANI':JING-----------1
,. \ 9725-S.£. 36th St. • Mercer Island. WA 98040 • (206)232-3991
TO: Roger Harks
BLH/OCS Office
PO Box 1159
Anchorage AK 99510
MEMORAl~DUH 7/17/80
Coc~e~ts Re~arding Technical Mepos. SG-3 and BF (71-1)
Based upon a review of the nethods, standards and
assunptions applicable to Technical Memo SG-3, I have several
conments regarding some of the assumptions which will be
utilized for the ISER model. It ~s my opinion that the
employnent assumptions as they exist right now are not
reflect~ve of the industrial character of fishing activity
which is likely ~o take place in the future.
At the present time, as well as historically, the
nature o£ ~laskan fisheries is one of utilizating hig~ value
resources on a seasonal basis by employing mostly transient
labor. A significant number of fishing vessels are used which
spend a large amount of time berthed in locations far from the
fishing grounds; in some cases outside of the State of Alaska.
This is pa~ti6ularly true about the areas for both the st.
George and Northe~n Aleutian lease sales impacts studies.
Fisheries in this part of-Alaska are predominantly for king
and tanner crab, salmon, halibut and shrimp. The k~ng and
tanner crab fisheries are largely based at Dutch Harbor during
the season with some vessels basing at Kodiak and to a lesser
desree at other ports along the Alaska Peninsula. Vessels
spend from two, to at most six, months in these fishe~ies.
The sal~on fishery relies heavily on drift gillnet vessels
that operate out of several ports in Bristol Bay. These are
coastal fisheries. Again, the season is short and the
activity peaks during a small part of the year. Halibut
fishing is accomplished primarily by traditional ·halibut
schooners nany of which base themselves in Puget Sound and
travel to Western Alaska for the prime fishing seasons. It is
a short season because of quota restrictions~ Shrimp trawling
is acconplished primarily by the drag fleet centered in
Kodiak. Again, these vessels currently participate in that
fishery d ur:,ing only a portion of the year.
Processing activities for all of these fisheries are
geared to the fishing seasons. Most of the products are
packed or canned during the limited season. Both the
232
[
[
[~:
[
[
r~
L
[
[
~~
I
L
L-----------------------------------------------------------~-
' .... ECi ··:
.J
-
.J
_j
Roger Harks
Continued -2-
harvesting and processing labor forces are ~ade up largely of
people who do not live at the locations froo which they base
their fishing or conduct their processing.
The largest opportunities for expanding U.S.
coo~ercial fisheries in the future lie in the cooplex of
fishes coomonly referred to as bottomfish. These resources
are abundant in the Bering Sea and currently support a large
distant water fishery prosecuted by foreign flee~s al~ost
exclusively. There is a small level of bottoofish.fishing by
the shriDp drag fleet out of Kodiak. This currently accounts
for less than 1% of the total production. Most of the fish
are used for bait. According to the non-OCS assumptions
produced by the University of Alaska, an excess of 2 ciliion
n.t. round weight of this resource complex is available·for
utilization by U.S. industry. This is not to say. however.
that bottomfish are the only potential resource for future
exploitation by U.S. industry. The traditional resources oay
also provide some added increment of production possibilities.
I base this contention on the fact that some of ~hese
resources are_currently at less than historical production
levels at the pr~sent time and that enlightened ca~ageoent
programs which encourage ~tack rehabilitation and increased
production through enhancement measures will allow production
to reach historic levels over the next 20 year perfod. In
terms of tonnage, the future growth potential of traditional
resources is less than 10% of that available in ~be bot~oofish
complex.
Groundfish fisheries around the world are concucted
differently than present Alaska fishing activities. This is
true in North America and Canadian ports and on our own
Eastern seaboard as well as in Northern Europe where similar
species and in some cases similar weather and ocean conditions
are present. Groundfish fishing and processing cust be
carried out on a nearly year round basis. The resources are
generally available during that time period with soae shifting
among species groups. Also, the economic margins available to
harvesters and processors are considerably less than those for
the higber.~alued species which comprise most of current
Alaskan production. Rising costs of energy and associated
high costs of vessels and processing facilities necessitate
continuous production while limiting the opportunity for
distant water fisheries similar to the system employed by
foreign fleets~
Trawling operations and bottomfish production in
Canada including British Columbia and the Haritioe Provinces
233
~ .. Eci ·
Roger Harks.
Continued -3-
! J j.
along the Atlantic Ocean, as well as Northern European
communities in Norway, Denmark, Scotland, and so forth, are
supported by communities which base themselves largely on the
seafood production and related activities. It_is fairly
common to find the local population either totally or
substantially dependent on either fishing or processing. In
many cases families will have both spouses employed in these
sectors. Many of these communities outside of Alaska are also
remote and have severe weather conditions. It seeos ~ost
reasonable that future Alaskan fishing activities will be
shaped by economic and operational concerns and take the foro
of cooparable activities occurring in similar regions.
In shortL it is my opinion that Alaskan fisheries,
especially those of concern for these projects and including
those pursued from Kodiak Island westward through the Aleutian
and Pribilof ~slands will be characterized by nearly year
round activity supporting both shore based and sea based
processing and fishing activities with a substa~tial
population that will work and live in these cocmunities.
Because of these considerations I feel it most appropriate to
modify some of the assumptions included in SG-3. The changes
reconcended are the following:
1) The portion of the population generated by seafood
production activities which live in the respective conounities
should be greater than the 10-30% assumed. I recommend using
80%.
2) The above assumption should also be applied to
those employed in groundfish harvesting, i.e. 80% will live in
the Aleutians, etc.
One other area I wish to comment on concurs the
assumptions associated with the non-OCS case for these lease
sales as developed in the draft repoit submitted by the
University of Alaska. For the most part their assumptions are
reasonably acceptable. The major exceptions I would cite are
the labor estimates associated with processing activities.
Both the labor estimates for shore processing and sea
processing~eem quite low by comparable industrial standards.
I am not certain how the figures for those assumptions were
developed so it is difficult to tell where points of departure
lie. Our research indicates that shore processing will
require nearly 50% more people for production than their
estimates show and that the labor requirement aboard
catcher/processor type vessels will be more than double their
estimates.
234
r1 --.··1
[
·~·
[
[
[
c
L
[
L
[
5
[
f L
r·
I
L
-·,
• .>
_;.
-~
j
·"
Roger Harks
Co:tti.nued -4-
...
Our shore base processing pl~nt estimates are built up
by co=bining experie~ces of operators currently in the
business and a substantial amount of input froc Canadian
operators, as well as projections of needs recomoended by
vendo~s of the different processing equipment and facilities.
We ~a7e found that the experiences of other users of automat~d
processing equipment shows that the manufacturers advertised
procuction rates are generously stated. For planning purposes
ve use 75% of the advertised production rate and also
recog~ize that due to coffee breaks, mechanical breakdowns,
and hur:.an ef'.ficiencies that production will not ge·nerally take
place for the complete eight hour period in a normal operating
shi~t. We plan an effective seven hours of production at the
reduced. production rate. This may in part account for our
average production per processing line being approximately
3,0CO ~.t. of round weight input per year versus the 4,500
n.t. of ~ound weight input per year as assuEed for the non-OCS
case. In my opinion the lower fig~re is more realistic. ·
Regarding sea based processing based both on existing
foreigc expe~ien~e with sioilar kinds of processing activities
and also upon a vessel system which we conceived and had
assis~ance in designing both from Nickum and Spaulding Naval
~rctitects and FIDECO, an· international fisheries consulting
fir~ with considerable experience designing and operating
catcher/processor vessels. It is more realistic to assume
that a catcher/processor of approximately 250' OAL primarily
targe~ing on Alaska pollock and producing 9,100 o.t. per year
would require 80 people. These labor figures include a
one-third excess over basic manning requirenents to allow crew
rotat~on - a common practice in existing operations.
It is my recommendation that the above assu~ptions be
included for the impacts analysis associated with both St.
George and Northern Aleutian lease sales.
..
JJ'!as
235
Sincerely,
Jeffrey J. Tobolski.
President
. EARL R. COMBS, INC. r-,_
r---~-----...:...CONSUlJANTS IN ECONOMICS AND PlANNING---------i
9725-S.£. 36th St. • Mercer Island. WA 98040 • (206)232-3991
ON SHORE PROCESSING 1 1 I•
.Hax~mum susta~nable yield (MSY) fr6m Sea ~rant Tech.
Report No. 51 ~s 2,014 1 019 m.t. A cdnsiderable portion of the
resource available in the Bering Sea is likely to be harvested
by the trawl fleet and future catcher/processors based in
Kodiak. Ve assume that about 300,000 m.t. will be produced
out of Kodiak. There is precedent for this assumption in that
the Kodiak fleet currently ranges into this area yet prefers
to live in Kodiak, a~d Kodiak has facilities to allow future
transshipEent of fisheries products. This leaves 1,714,019
m.t. for production in the Bering Sea area.
Half of the remaining harvest will be caught by
catcher/processors leaving 857,009 m.t. for shore based
processing.
Average trawler annual catch (Sea Grant) 2,700 m.t.
Tra~ler has a crew of six.
857,009 d~vided by 2,700 = 318 = vessels needed
318 vessels X 6 crew: 1,908 =primary eQployment
We assume that an on shore processing p:ant will
process 60,000 m.t. (132 million lbs) of fish in the round and
e~ploy 606 employees.
No. on shore plants=857,00~ divided by 60,000 = 14.3 plants
No. primary employment=J4.3 x 606 = 8,666 employees
Total primary employment for shore based harvesting
and processing 8,666 + 1,908 = 10,574
AT SEA PROCESSING
For planning purposes the average sea
catcher/processor is assumed to be about 250' OAL and will
operate tv.o processing lines on 16 hour shifts and will fish
an average of 14 hours/day. This vessel would have an annual
catch rate of 9,100 m.t./ year. The total resource for
harvest and processing is 857,009 m.t. Consequently, 857,009
divided by 9,100 yields the need for about 94 vessels of this
type.
Each vessel has a crew of 60 men and a 1.33 crew
rotation requirement for a total crew complement of 80 primary
employees.
Total primary employment for sea based process~ng is:
94 X 80 = 7,520
Total Primary Employment = 18,094
236
r-·-, ( .
L
[
[_'
l.
[~
---
[
r-·
L
r-
' L
ECi
j
Background for assumptions
Shore Based Processing rn The Aleutians
Of the 2,014,029 c.t. of grou?dfish available in the
Aleutians and Bering Sea, the following species composition
was recoEmended by the Resource Availability Task Team for the
Svstecs Strategy to Suooort Fisheries Development in Alaska
study prepared for Economic Development Administration and
National Marine Fisheries Service. 1980. The Resourc~ Task
Teao_~as made up of:
Jim Branson
Bert Larkins
Phil Rigby
Rick Dutton
Jeff' Tobolski
Leo Guluka
NPFMC, Anchorage
NMFS, Northwest & AK Center
ADF&:G
Icicle Seafoods, Inc.
Earl R. Combs, Inc. (ECI)
Earl R. Combs, Inc. (ECI)
The Bering Sea and Aleutian Resource Availability
Species
Pollock
Cod
POP
F·latfish
Other
Total
% of Catch
68.9
2.5
4 .. 6
22.2
1 • 8
100 %
The above resource composition was used to design a
60,000 n.t~ groundfish processing unit. The plant would
occupy 210,000 sq ft of space. The plant would be comprised
of 32 separate processing lines operating for 210 days a year
with 8 hour shifts per day at 90% capacity. The lines consist
of: 25 cod/pollock lines
1 POP line
3 Flatfish lines
3 Rand filieting lines for over size and under size fish
A typical automated cod/pollock line employs 20 people
and is rated at 3,000 m.t. output per year. This line
operates at 75% efficiency due to_ downtime, maintenance, and
delays for 7 of the 8 hours in a shift (due to employee
downtime) which results in a 2,000 m.t. annual outputw The
perch/rockfish and flatfish lines are 4,500 m.t. lines with an
annual output of 3,000 m.t. per year at 75% line efficiency
a~d 87.3~ labor efficiency. The hand filleting line is a
2,250 m.t. line with an annual output of 1,500 m.t. per year.
237
Ec1·
A typical perch line employs 28 people while the
flatfish and hand rilleting lines employ 5 and 32 employees,
respectively.
The plant also uses three deboning units for better
waste recovery employing three p~ople. 52 supervisory and
other operational employees are also used. Th~y include dock
workers, scale and inspection personnel, warehousemen, freezer
packers, mechanics and plant and floor managers.
The indirect labor includes 17 other employees which
include plant managers, marketing and clerical ana bookkeeping
personnel.
Total plant employment is 606 employees receiving
$9,127,000 annually in wages; $12,321,000 with benefits.
Enployment 60.000 rn.t. Unit
U employees
Indirect.Personnel 17
Supervisory/General 52
Cod/Poll~ck lines 429
Perch/Rockfish lines 28
Flatfish line 14
Hand Fillet line 63
Deboning --1
Total 6 06
Cod/Pollock Line (single line*)
:{E 1 i nes
25
1
3
. 3
32
f eijlolovees
Washer
Header & Gutter
Filleting Machine Operator
Skinner
Trimmer/Butcher
Packer
..
Equipment Used
Roundfish washer
Infeed table
Baader 16i H&G machine
Fish el.evator
238
1
1
1
1
8
_a
20
Nunb.er
1
1
1
1
[
l.
[
I
L
u
[
[_j
[
[
f'
L
r·
I .
L
ECI"
_]
_)
Baader 189 cod/pollock ~illeting machine
Arenco CUS 80 skinning machine
Candl.i..og and trimming table ..
Fillet washer/phosphate applicator
Pack:in; table
1
1
1
1
1
* ~hen ocltiple lines in use the number of personnel required
cay decrease as soce personnel could operate·more than one
wachine o~ similar design
Perch/Rockfish Line (single line~)
Eo;>per tender
Eeader and Gutter
Filleting machine operator
Skinner
~ricmer/3utcher
Packer
Eo:1irinent Used
3100 1::> Hopper
riasher/D escaler
Infeed table
Baader 417 head cutter
Baader 195 ~illeting machine
Are.oco CUS 80 skinning machine
Candling/Trioming table
F:illet washer/phosphate applicator
Packi..ng table
* See foot~ote for cod/pollock line
'Washer
Eeader/Filleter
Packer
Flatfish Line
239
t eaoloyees
1
1
1
1
12
1.2.
28
Number
1
1
.1
2
2
2
1
1
1
f Employee
1
2
_a
5
ECf·
I
Eauioment Used
Pneu~atic tipper
Arenco CUS head cutter
Dressing area
Wash tank
Hand Fillet Line
Hopper operator
Incentive filleter
Weighing
Skinner
Butcher/Trimmer
Packers
Eou-ipment Used
Hopper 2300 lb capacity
Flohr washer/descaler
Weighing scales -filleting table
ABCO Incentive filleting table
Roller table
TRIO skinning machine
Washer/phosphate applicator
Packing table
Sea Based Processing In The Aleutians
NuT"Iber
1
2
2
1
~ Enolovee
1
16
2
1
6
~
32.
Nunber
1
1
2
1
1
1
1·
1
Sea based processing will perhaps be carried out by
vessels of-various configurations. Our own investigations and
discussions with knowledgeable people in the industry;-~
however, lead us to believe that most vessels for this purpose
will be in the ~00' plus CAL. More specifically we believe
that a vessel of 250' CAL would be required to harvest and
process pollock and other groundfish species in the Bering Sea.
and Aleutian areas.
Eadh one of these vessels would conduct about nine
trips a year, each trip lasting four weeks or 30 days.
Esti~ated catch for this vessel is about 9,100 o.t./year. It
would have enough crew to fish and process the catch and man
the vessels. The crew on any trip would number at least 60
men. Therefore, the vessel must have enough staterooms each
accoooodating four people at the most. Because there must be
240
f~
\!__ -·
r~
\'_-
J~
1'
f c -
L;
[
t f'
L
[
[
r
[
b
r "-"
r~•
L
r .
L
r ,
I L,
' . ECI
some rotation in the crew, any vessel must have one-third more
crew over and above the trip crew waiting in port to
substitute for the next trip. This ~eans that a total of 80
people have to be attached to a single vessel.
A design for this kind of vessel was prepared for Earl ·
R. Combs, Inc. (ECI) by Nickum & Spaulding. It was reviewed
by FIDECO and found to be ·a good representativ~ of the
practical realities of sea based operations. This design
compares very well with these of some vessel used i~ foreign
sea based operations in the Bering Sea.
A copy of this design is attached and shows various
profiles including: inboard, boat ~eck, upper deck~ main deck
and double bottom plans. It gives a detailed configuration of
the var~ous spaces and their purposes.
241
· ECJ·
Position
Ship's Mas~er
!st ~a~e
2nd ~a~e
C:hief !::lgi::ee:::-
~nd nsst. ~g~neer
?r<>~>.lc'tion Cr e.,.· *
Fis~ing S~~ri~tencer.t
rishing;-weck ere~
C.'"lief Cook.
Ass~. Cook
* The production crew ~arks t~o shifts
[
r,
[
Fur~r
1 [
l [ 1
l [ 1
l
.. "[ ..
2
. ~5
~~,
L_
1
-!0 [
1
2 [
2 ·L__,
60 [
en t~o production lines
[
_j
Proiected Resource Growth Rate
·It is of our opinion that th~ U.S. fishing industry
growth during the next 20 year can be approximated by a bell
shaped type curve. The early stage will be typically a period
of slow cautious growth as the industry establishes itself.
This will be followed by a period of rapid growth as other
firms begin to take advantage of the opportunities. the last
stage will be a period of deceleration as MSY's are reached.
The problem facing the industry in the early stages
will be many. The personnel lack the technical knowledge and
skills necessary to exploit the resources. This will require
an extensive period of training,_experimenting, and trial and
error. In addition, the 1979 average composite wholesale
groundfish price to processors was approximately $.98 and
industry sources feel that it will requi~e around-$1.05 for
the industry to break even without having to target on the
higher valued species. Therefore, the early growth of the
industr~ will be slow.
As skill levels increase and prices rise, more and
more opportunities will present themselves to the industry.
This industry ca~ be expected to grow quite rapidly for a
period of time. Then as the more productive fishing grOunds
are utilized harvesters will look to less productive areas for
growth. In addition, the higher valued groundfish species
will then approach their MSY's and a period of deceleration
should occur.
Therefore, we feel that a typical industry growth
curve is approximated by a normal distribution and our
projected resource growth for .the Aleutians reflects this
assumption.
·'
243
. 1 ... ~\ .,
r, __ c:--~r ___________________ l[
1,800
1 '500
1, 200
1,000 M.T.
900
600
300
1982 1986 1990 1994 1998
PROJECTED FISHERIES RESOURCE UTILIZATION IN THE
BERING SEA AND ALEUTIAN ISLANDS
244
100%
80%
60%
[
r
L: ,,
L
f
·[
L
Percent
40%
20%
[
[j
t
[
f'
L
,~
I .
L
N +::>
tn
i.J ' '~ l' L." ,, J U,, l. L. , J ' J
Residency Employment for Ground.Ush Productio·n
Aleutian Islands
Resi-
Ground fish Onshore Number Harvest Number o£ Process Percent dcncy
of Empl?.y-On::horS/ Emplgy-Employ llcsi-9 Employ-Vessels~/ ~-. Plan':_!!.. ~-!!!£!!L dcnEJ__I !!!£!!L Year
Harvest 11 l'roc:ss 21 {1 1 000 m.t.}-Portlon-
1980 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1981 0 0 0 0 0 o· 0 0 0
1982 50 25 9 54 1 606 660 10 66
1983 100 50 19 114 1 606 720 10 72
1984 150 75 28 168 1 606 77'• 10 77
1985 200 100 37 222 2 1,212 1,43'• 10 143
1986 250 125 46 276 2 1,212 1,'•88 10 149
1987 350 175 65 390 3 1,818 2,208 15 331
1988 450 225 ' 83 498 '· 2 .'•2'· 2,922 20 584
1989 600 300 111 666 5 3,030 3,6% 25 924
1990 750 375 139 834 6 3,636 4 ,lt70 30 1,341
1991 900 450 167 1,002 8 '•,848 5,850 35 2,0lo8
1992 1,000 500 IllS 1' 110 8 4,848 5,958 '•0 2,383
1993 1,150 575 213 1,278 10 6,060 7,338 '·5 3,302
1994 1,300 650 241 1,446 11 6,666 8,112 50 4,056
1995 1,350 675 250 1,500 11 6,666 8,166 55 4,491
1996 1 ,t,oo 700 2.59 1,554 12 7,272 8,826 60 5,296
1997 1,500 750 278 1,668 13 7,878 9,546 65 6,205
1998 1,600 800 296 1,776 13 7,1178 9 ,65'• 70 6,758
1999 1,650 825 306 1,836 14 8,464 10,320 75 .. 7, 7ltO
2000 1,700 850 315. 1,890 }1, 8 ,t,at, 10,374 80 8,299
Y Year 2000 total from Sea Grant (Bering-Norton Petroleum Development Scenarios Commercial Fish Industry Impact
Analysis). Shape of growth from Earl R. Combs, Inc. memo (July 18, 1980).
?:1 Assumes half of processing onshore, half offshore (Sea 'Grant).
~/Assumes 2,700 m.t./vesscl (Combs).
~/Assumes 6/crcw (Combs).
5/ . .
-Assumes 60,000 m.t./plant (Combs),
£1 Assumes 606/plsnt (Combs).
2/ Assumes 80 percent long-run residency (Combs) for onshore processing with the rate halved for catcher/
processors. This is graduated from the current 10 percent rote assuming an initial 5-ycar lag.
.J
~
Total
Resi-Resi-
Catcher/ Number Percent dency dency
Process 21 of 71 Emplgy-Hcsi-Employ-Employ-UCE5_Y..~/ Portion-Vessels-mcnl:.-mcnt ment
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 o. 0 0
25 3 2ltO 10 21. 90
50 5 ltOO 10 40 112
75 8 6ltO 10 6l. 1111
100 11 BBO 10 88 231
125 14 1,120 10 112 261
175 19 1,520 10 152 483
225 25 2,000 10 200 78'•
300 33 2,640 10 264 1,188
375 41 3,280 15 492 1,833
450 '•9 3,920 15 588 2,636
N 500 55 4,400 20 880 3t263
-+:> 575 63 5,040 20 1,008 4,310 (j)
650 71 5,680 25 1,420 5,476
675 74 5,920 25 1,480 .5,971
700 77 6,160 30 1; 8ft8 7,144
750 82 6,560 30 1,968 8,173
800 88 7,040 35 2,464 9,222 . ,.
825 91 7,280 35 2,548 10,288
850 93 7,440 40 2,976 11,275
'!:.I Assumes half of processing onshore, half offshore (Sea Grant.)
II Assumes 9 1 100 m.t./vessel (Combs).
~I Assumes SO/crew (Combs).
2/ Assumes 80 percent long-run residency (Combs) for onshore processing
with the rate halved for catcher/processors. This is grriduated from the
current 10 percent rate assuming an initial 5-ycar lag.
-r-J en en Cl ~ r-J. rr. rJ r--j ~i ,...__..., .:-l ·r---1 .~ i:---l
-,
j
_j
Memorandum
l!nited States Department of the Interior
BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT
AlASKA OOTER CONI'INENTIU. SHEI.F OFFICE
Post Office Box 1159
Anchorage, Alaska 99510
September 12, 1980
To: Acting Coordinator, Socioeconomic Studies Program
From: Socioeconomic Specialist
Subject: Assumptions Regarding Bottomfishery Development
The potential for bottomfishery industry development in the Aleutian
Islands by the end of this century to cause social and economic structural
change is considerable. Thus accurate estimate of the degree of industry
development is important for building a base against which to measure
OCS impacts.
The two major considerations to estimate are total domestic production
and local residency of the production employment. For the St. George
studies to proceed, assumptions were made regarding these (see attached
July 23 memo) •
Those assumptions were optimistic towards the possibility of bottomfishery
development. Due to the significant structural changes such development
will cause, these assumptions were met by resistance from some contractors.
This forced us to reassess these assumptions one final time before
requiring the contractors to go ahead based .on them.
In the last several weeks we have done some thinking on the matter, some
reading, and had some in-and out-house discussion with knowledgeable
persons. We have decided to uphold our assumptions based on the follmving:
The pivotal factor necessary for development of the resource is a
federal/state policy tmvards commitment to such. The policy is
currently developed, and is energetic. Studies and planning programs
have been implemented. It is expected that subsidy funds will be
available.
Extended domestic jurisdiction has been established.
Two of our fisheries contractors, Sea Grant and Earl Combs, have
independently projected this optimistic development.
Save Energy and You Serve America!
247
JN REPLY REl'Ell. TO
3331.5
Richard Careaga, planner for Dutch Harbor, is planning for 20,000
people by the year 2000.
2
Per capita consumption of fish is increasing. Aggregate supply is
essentially fixed. This, coupled with the fact that over the past
10 years the real wholesale price of bottomfish has been growing at
a rate of 7% above the food processors' cost index and is expected
to continue doing such, indicates prices should accelerate.
The capital requirements for such development are relatively modest
(approx. $3 billion).
Many of the vessels that have been built for the Alaska shellfish
fleets in the past few years have been designed to allow them to
enter the groundfish fishery as it becomes more profitable and as
the shellfish seasons become shorter.
The increasing number of joint ventures indicate the increasing
number of bottomfishing vessels. They are also a logical inter-
mediate step toward full development.
Large processors are currently buying smaller existing plants to
operate and develop during down time.
248
[
[
[
I
I L __ ,
[
[1 _,
[
[
I-
l
r~
I
L
APPENDIX C ~
OCS TOTAL DIRCT AND SEAR ADJUSTED EMPLOYMENT:
EXPLORATION ONLY AND MEAN CASES,
ST. GEORGE BASIN
249
N
U1
0
Year
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986.
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
APPENDIX C
TABLE C-1. OCS TOTAL DIRECT AND SEAR ADJUSTED EMPLOYMENT:
Mining
Total
0
0
0
131
198
232
198
97
0
0
EXPLORATION ONLY AND MEAN CASES, ST. GEORGE BASIN
SEAR
0
0
0
50
64
72
65
44
0
0
Exploration Only
Construction
Total
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
SEAR
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Transportation
Total
0
0
0
57 .
93
110
93
20
0
0
SEAR
0
0
0
23
37
46
39
8
0
0
*No SEAR adjustment performed on headquarters employment.
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Total
0
0
0
188
292
342
292
177
0
0
Total
SEAR
0
0
0
73
101
119
105
53
0
0
SOURCE: Total direct OCS employment from Alaska OCS Office. SEAR adjustments performed by ISER.
...-.
~. J r--. l .
_..,_
,j i.u • l ' I j V .~.,_] 1_' ·~) J . J
APPENDIX C
TABLE C-2. OCS TOTAL DIRECT AND SEAR ADJUSTED EMPLOYMENT:
EXPLORATION ONLY AND MEAN CASES, ST. GEORGE BASIN
Mean Only
Mining Construction Trans~ortation HQTS* Total
Year Total SEAR Total SEAR Total SEAR Total SEAR
1980 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1981 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1982 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1983 299 84 37 18 143 57 0 480 160
N 1984 468 118 111 55 227 91 0 805 264
(.TI 1985 535 136 753 172 320 162 0 1608 470 _,
1986 468 122 1806 190 407 254 0 2681 565
1987 733 244 4721 1165 470 363 0 5924 1771
1988 769 247 3871 1075 670 616 16 5310 1954
1989 1148 795 2427 873 940 880 31 4515 2574
1990 1064 738 1241 619 720. 711 101 3026 2189
1991 951 710 0 0 720 711 133 1671 1554
1992 1096 758 1816 1602
1993 1280 819 2000 1663
1994 1157 778 1877 1622
1995 1035 738 1755 1582
1996 920 700 1640 1544
1997 1096 758 1816 1602
1998 1280 819 2000 1663
1999 1157 778 1877 1622
2000 1035 738 0 0 720 711 133 1755 1582
*No SEAR adjustment performed on headquarters employment.
SOURCE: · Total direct OCS employment from Alaska OCS Office. SEAR adjustments per·formed by ISER.
APPENDIX D
OCS TOTAL DIRECT AND SEAR ADJUSTED EMPLOYMENT BY PLACE OF WORK
AND BY PLACE OF RESIDENCE: EXPLORATION ONLY AND
MEAN CASES, ST. GEORGE BASIN
253
N
U1 +:>
Year
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
APPENDIX D
TABLE D-1. OCS TOTAL DIRECT AND SEAR ADJUSTED EMPLOYMENT BY PLACE OF WORK
AND BY PLACE OF RESIDENCE: EXPLORATION ONLY AND MEAN CASES, ST. GEORGE BASIN
Exploration Only
By Region Statewide
Region 2 Region 4 Region 5
EMP1 RES
0 0
0
0
58
Not in AK Total Total Dir.
EMP RES
0
0
0
188
292
342
292
177
0
0
0
0
EMP RES
0 0
0
0
15
21
24
22
12
0
0 0
81
95
83
42
0
0 0
1There is no headquarters employment in this case.
EMP RES
0 0
0
0
115
190
223
187
123
0
0 0
SEAR EMP OCS EMP
0
0
0
73
101
119
105
53
0
0
0
0
188
292
342
292
177
0
0
.~
--!
LiJ \.., I ,u L.L, ,lJ \..;. "' j \J .. I , i . J L. , J . J
APPENDIX D
TABLE D-2. OCS TOTAL DIRECT AND SEAR ADJUSTED EMPLOYMENT BY PLACE OF WORK
AND BY PLACE OF RESIDENCE: EXPLORATION ONLY AND MEAN CASES, ST. GEORGE BASIN
Mean Only
B,t Region Statewide
Region 2 Region 4 Region 5 Not in AK Total Total Dir.
Year EMP RES EMP RES EMP RES EMP RES SEAR EMP OCS EMP
~t 1980 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1981 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
N 1982 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 U1
U1 1983 480 1 0 32 0 127 0 320 160 480
1984 805 2 52 0 209 542 264 805
1985 1608 19 87 0 364 1138 470 1608
1986 2681 45 106 0 415 2125 565 2681
1987 5924 149 333 0 1288 4154 1771 5924
1988 5294 391 314 16 1248 3357 1954 5310
1989 4484 624 395 31 1559 1937 2579 4515
1990 2925 561 320 101 1309 836 2189 3026 \
1991 1538 540 186 133 828 117 1554 1671
1992 1683 195 867 214 1602 1816
1993 1867 206 917 337 1663 2000
1994 1744· 194 888 255 1662 1877
1995 1622 184 858 173 1582 1755
1996 1507 175 829 96 1544 1640
199:7 1683 186 876 214 1602 1816
1998 1867 197 925 338 1663 2000
1999 1744 187 895 255 1622 1877
2000 1622 5 0 0 182 133 860 0 173 1582 1755
TABLE NOTES
Note: 11 EMP 11 is tota 1 direct OCS employment in the indicated
region and includes both resident and nonresident em-_
ployment. 11 RES 11 is direct OCS employment of residents
of the indicated region. Hence, the sum of the 11 RES 11
columns for Alaska is equal to SEAR adjusted total direct
OCS employment, while the sum of 11 EMP 11 columns equals
total direct OCS employment.
SOURCE: Total direct OCS employment from Alaska OCS Office. Allocation
of t~esidents to regions and SEAR adjustment by ISER.
256
[
n
[
[:
[
[
[
[
I'
L
[
l
[
c
6
[
[
r:
L
r~ I .
L
...,.
:::l
-REFERENCES
Alaska Consultants, Inc. 11 City of Sand Point Comprehensive Plan 11
(Alaska State Housing Authority, Anchorage) 1970.
Alaska Department of Fish and Game. Alaska Catch and Production:
Commercial Fisheries Statistics. Various years.
Alaska Department of Labor. Statistical Quarterly. Various quarters,
1964-1978.
Alaska Department of Labor. Population Estimates by Census Division.
Various years.
Alaska Department of Labor. Alaska Labor Force Estimates. Various years.
Alaska Department of Labor. Alaska Economic Trends. Various years .
Alaska Sea Grant Program. Draft Final Western Alaska and Bering-Norton
Petroleum Deve1o ment Scenarios: Commercial Fishing Industry
Analysis BLM/Alaska OCS Office; Anchorage) April 25, 1980.
Arthur D. Little, Inc. The Development of a Bottomfish Industry:
Strategies for the State of Alaska. (Technical Appendix, Vol. II).
A Report to the Office of the Governor.
Arctic Environmental Information and Data Center. Village Profiles for
False Pass, St. Paul, St. George, Belkofski, Nelson Lagoon,
Nikolski, Atka, Akutan, and King Cove. (Prepared for the Alaska
Department of Community and Regional Affairs) May 1978.
Bomhoff and Associates, Inc. City of Sand Point Comprehensive Plan
(June 1977).
Huskey, Lee and Jim Kerr. Small Community Population Impact t~odel
and A lication to the Berin -Norton OCS Lease Sale Area.
Institute of Social and Economic Research; Anchorage March 1980.
Jones, Dorothy M. Pattern? of Village Growth and Decline in the
Aleutians. (Institut~ of Social, Economic, and Government
Research; Fairbanks) October 1973.
257
---·~ --....... ·-·· .
Mathematical Sciences Northwest, Inc., and Human Resources Planning
Institute~ Inc.· A Social and Economic Impact Study of.Offshore
Petroleum and Natural Gas Development in Alaska: Phase I Final
Report. (Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management;
Anchorage) October 15, 1976.
North Pacific Fishery Management Council. \~estern Alaska. King Crab
Draft Fishery Management Plan (Anchorage) May 20, 1980.
Rogers, George W. 11 Critique of the Arthur D. Little, Inc., Analysis
and Recommendations for State Policy and Directions for Developing
a Bottomfish Industry for Alaska ... (Alaska Legislative Affairs
Agency; Juneau) April 24, 1979.
Rogers, George W., et al. Measuring the Socioeconomic Impacts of
Alaska's Fisheries. (Institute of Social and Economic Research;
Anchorage) April 1980.
Scott, Michael J. 11 Prospects for a Bottomfish Industry in Alaskan in
Alaska Review of Social and Economic Conditions (Vol. XVII, No. 1,
April 1980) pp. 2-31.
Tryck, Nyman and Hayes. Recommended Community Deve l opmen·l. Plan: City
of Unalaska, Alaska. Prepared for the city of Unalaska. November
1977.
\
258
[
n
L
[
[
c IL
[
[
[ .
'
p
L
r:
L
[