Census Figures Show Madison Fastest-Growing City In State; Hoover, Huntsville Data Reflect Corrections

• July 29th, 2019

Census Figures Show Madison Fastest-Growing City In State; Hoover, Huntsville Data Reflect Corrections

The town of Madison was the fastest-growing sizeable city in Alabama from 1990-96 with a population growth of 8,828 people, according to U.S. Census Bureau data released by the Alabama State Data Center at The University of Alabama.

Center Director Annette Watters said Madison, a bedroom community for high-tech Huntsville, posted a 59.7 percent growth rate, up from 14,792 residents in 1990 to 23,620 residents in 1996. On the flip side of the coin, these latest official population estimates show the city of Birmingham continuing to lose in the numbers game.

“According to the new Census estimates, Birmingham had 6,804 fewer people in 1996 than it had in 1990, when its recorded population was 265,347 residents,” said Watters, who was recently elected director of the Washington, D.C.-based national State Data Center. “This also means that Birmingham dropped from a ranking of the 60th largest city in the nation in 1990 to the 63rd largest in 1996.

“Gadsden, which is also in the top 10 Alabama cities, also showed a net loss of 1,368 people during the same time period,” she said. “The city of Mobile, however, retained its rank of 79th largest in the nation, and the city of Montgomery rose from 84th largest in the country to 82nd largest in 1996.”

Watters noted there are also some confusing numbers in the latest statistics released by the Bureau of the Census.

“Two major cities in the state, Hoover and Huntsville, appear to have gained the most people since 1990,” she said. “But both those municipalities filed formal challenges with the Census Bureau earlier in the decade protesting previous population figures.

“The Bureau agreed with them after reviewing documentation the cities provided, so these 1996 estimates of 38.7 percent growth by Hoover and 6.6 percent by Huntsville reflect not only the growth in these dynamic cities, but also the adjustments made during the time period,” Watters explained. “Therefore, it’s really hard to say which city has gained the most people during the decade because of the unusual situations of those two cities.

“Also, the 1996 estimates were done with a different methodology from previous estimates.”

Watters explained that because of this new way of estimating the population, some cities and towns show more or fewer people than the last time the population was estimated (figures were released in October 1995). She also offered a caution to civic leaders who might want to interpret the latest Census data as “the gospel.”

“We need to remember that these are estimates, not literal truth,” she said. “If the elected officials of a town believe their estimates are in error, the Census Bureau is very willing to consider changing the number – but the city has to produce proof, not just rhetoric or anecdotal evidence.

“Several towns and cities in the state have shown the Census Bureau that they failed to account for something important, and the totals for those cities have been changed during the decade,” the director said. “A ‘challenge’ is not an adversarial process; it is just the paperwork of providing the federal agency the documentation it needs to make a correction.”

Watters noted that towns that have incorporated since the 1990 census are not included in this round of population estimates; also, she said, if a city has experienced a growth spurt during this calendar year, that will be reflected in future estimates.

The University of Alabama Culverhouse College of Commerce and Business Administration, founded in 1919, was renamed this year in honor of late philanthropist and UA alumnus Hugh F. Culverhouse. The College, which first began offering graduate education in 1924, was the only business school in the state listed in the latest edition of the prestigious Princeton Review, which cited the high quality and moderate cost of the school’s flagship MBA program.

TEN LARGEST CITIES IN ALABAMA

    CITY             1996 POPULATION ESTIMATE

1.  Birmingham                258,543
2.  Mobile                    202,581
3.  Montgomery                196,363
4.  Huntsville                170,424
5.  Tuscaloosa                 82,379
6.  Dothan                     55,944
7.  Hoover                     55,464
8.  Decatur                    53,797
9.  Gadsden                    41,155
10. Florence                   38,999

**11/97

The Magical Multiplier: Fact and Fiction

• July 29th, 2019

The Magical Multiplier: Fact and Fiction

Since John Maynard Keynes popularized the concept, the “multiplier” has received a lot of attention. Unfortunately, it is often misunderstood and misapplied, with potentially disastrous effects. This article does not replace a more detailed treatment of the multiplier, but it does discuss some of the misunderstandings and how to protect against misapplying the concept.

The Foundation

A multiplier is based on the disarmingly simple notion that the expenditures of one person represent the income of another. The expenditures of the second person become the income of a third, and so forth. The size of a multiplier depends on at least three things: (1) the economic activity involved, (2) the time period under consideration , and (3) the size of the area being considered.

Since spending takes time, the size of the multiplier effect is different for a week, a month, or a year. The longer the time period, the more rounds of respending, and the higher the multiplier. If the period of time under consideration is infinitely long, the multiplier of any initial round of spending would be infinite! However, that never happens. To quote Herbert Stein, former chairman of the Council of Economic Advisors, “things that can’t go on forever, don’t.”

The Concept of Leakages

In our hypothetical story, each person spends all the money he receives (e.g., savings do not exist). But what if people do not respend all their income? Let us assume that individuals decide to spend only 80 percent of their new income. Now when a person receives $1.00 he respends only 80 cents. The next person receives 80 cents, but respends only 64 cents (80 percent of 80 cents), etc. Each round gets progressively smaller as income “leaks” out of the spending stream. The greater the leakage (that is, higher levels of savings), the smaller the multiplier.

Geography Also Matters

Our illustration is valid if we are talking about Planet Earth, since all spending and saving must occur within the borders of the world. However, if we are interested in finding a multiplier for the United States, there is an additional consideration. Some spending will leak out of the United States to pay for imports. This leakage has the same effect on the multiplier as does an increase in savings. That is, the more money is spent out of the country, the smaller the multiplier for the United States.

When considering smaller geographies such as states, counties, or cities, even greater leakages occur. Thus the smaller the geography, the smaller the multiplier. Multipliers for large cities, densely populated counties, and big states are larger than those for small areas. The important factor determining the size of the multiplier for any community is, of course, not square miles, but the ability to capture all economic linkages within the community without allowing money to leak into someone else’s economy.

Summary

Properly understood and applied, the multiplier is important in measuring the effects of changes in an economy. However, one size does not fit all when it comes to multipliers. Each activity, community, and time period under analysis is important in determining the size of the multiplier.

**11/97

The Effects of a Declining Birth Rate on the Labor Force

• July 29th, 2019

The Effects of a Declining Birth Rate on the Labor Force

In 1975 Alabama’s total live birth rate was at its lowest. That year there were 57,922 births, compared to 70,589 births in 1965. Children born in 1975 became 16 years old in 1991-eligible for the labor force-and since 1991 Alabama employers have been feeling the effects almost annually of declining birth rates. So what has caused the decline in birth rates and how does that affect the labor force? Reasons for declining birth rates include 1) the effects of higher education, 2) increased access to abortion, 3) more women entering the labor force, and 4) the aging of the population.

First, consider that in 1995 the students in Alabama’s public universities were 55.5 percent women. Private institutions’ enrollment was 57.4 percent female. As women attain higher education, the number of births fall. In 1993, for those women whose highest degree was a high school diploma, 22,502 births were recorded. For women who had four-plus years of college the number of live births decreased to 9,563.

Second, in terms of abortion, the National Bureau of Economic Research found that the states that legalized abortions in 1970 experienced a five percent decline in births relative to other states. When abortion became legal in 1973, the differences in these numbers disappeared. According to these researchers, if abortion were banned in the United States, there would be a seven to eight percent rise in the birth rate, or a possible 350,000 additional births per year.

The third factor affecting birth rates is the increase of women in the labor force. By 2005, 48 percent of the labor force will be women as opposed to 43 percent in 1983. As women move their focus from homemaking to becoming defined members of the labor force, the birth rate declines.

Lastly, America’s labor force is aging. As baby boomers grow older, they account for a larger part of the labor force. By the year 2000, nearly one-third of the working population will be over the age of 55, classifying them as “older workers.” This relates to a decrease in births since older women do not have a large number of births later in life. In 1993 women in Alabama between the ages of 20 and 24 accounted for the most live births with 19,440, while those women between the ages of 40 and 44 accounted for 542 live births.

The end results of these factors are not necessarily all negative-labor shortages, wage pressures, and large turnover rates. The declining birth rate has had some positive effects on the labor force. Because of an aging population and declining growth of the labor force, human resource policies are changing. Companies are offering incentives to keep older workers working past retirement age. Older workers can sometimes replace the lack of younger employees. Opportunities like flextime, part-time, temp work, job sharing, and extended vacations are becoming more common for employees of all ages. Businesses are learning that people of all shapes, sizes, ages, colors, and backgrounds can be good workers.

Kelly Johnson
Graduate Research Assistant

Alabama’s Population Shows Moderate Gain in 1997

• July 29th, 2019

Alabama’s Population Shows Moderate Gain in 1997

Alabama added 31,976 new residents between July 1, 1996 and July 1, 1997, according to estimates released by the U.S. Bureau of the Census. Alabama’s 1997 population of 4,319,154 was 0.7 percent higher than the 1996 total of 4,287,178. An estimated 13,212 more people moved into the state than moved out during the year. From the 1990 census through July 1, 1997, the state’s population increase totaled 278,765, a 6.9 percent gain that ranks the state twenty-third in population growth for the 1990s. The 1997 round of population estimates resulted in upward revisions of all of Alabama’s annual estimates since the 1990 census.

Overall, the nation’s population rose 0.9 percent from 1996 to 1997 to total 267,636,061. Led by Nevada’s population gain of 4.8 percent and Arizona’s 2.7 percent increase, the West was the fastest growing region in the country with an average gain of 1.6 percent. California showed the largest numerical increase of any state with 410,000 new residents, representing a 1.3 percent increase. At 1.3 percent, the South ranked second in overall regional growth. Georgia led the South with a population increase of 2.1 percent. Texas posted a 1.8 percent increase, while Florida and North Carolina each gained 1.6 percent. Population growth in the nation’s Midwest region averaged 0.5 percent, while the Northeast saw just a 0.2 percent gain. Pennsylvania’s population was down 20,000, the largest numerical loss of any state.

Census Bureau Definitions for Population Estimates

• July 29th, 2019

Census Bureau Definitions for Population Estimates

Population estimates incorporate revisions of estimates from previous years and the results of special censuses and test censuses conducted by the Census Bureau.

Births – Births are the number of live births occurring to residents of an area during the period as reported from the Census Bureau’s Federal-State Cooperative Program for Population Estimates (FSCPE) and the National Center for Health Statistics.

Census Regions and Divisions – Statistics for states are totaled for the four census regions and nine census divisions in the top lines of each table.

The Northeast region includes the New England division: Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, and Vermont; and the Middle Atlantic division: New Jersey, New York, and Pennsylvania.

The Midwest region includes the East North Central division: Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Ohio, and Wisconsin; and the West North Central division: Iowa, Kansas, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, and South Dakota.

The South region includes the South Atlantic division: Delaware, District of Columbia, Florida, Georgia, Maryland, North Carolina, South Carolina, Virginia, West Virginia; the East South Central division: Alabama, Kentucky, Mississippi, and Tennessee; and the West South Central division: Arkansas, Louisiana, Oklahoma, and Texas.

The West region includes the Mountain division: Arizona, Colorado, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, New Mexico, Utah, and Wyoming; and the Pacific division: Alaska, California, Hawaii, Oregon, and Washington.

Deaths – Deaths are the number of deaths occurring within the resident population of an area during the period as reported by the Census Bureau’s Federal-State Cooperative Program for Population Estimates (FSCPE) and the National Center for Health Statistics.

Demographic Components of Change – The demographic components of population change consist of natural change and net migration. Natural change is defined as births minus deaths. Net migration is the difference between all forms of migration into and out of an area.

Natural Change – Natural change is the difference between the number of births and the number of deaths.

Net Domestic Migration – Net domestic migration (“NDM”) is the difference between domestic in-migration to an area and domestic out-migration from it during the period. Domestic in-migration and out-migration consist of moves where both the origins and destinations are within the United States (excluding Puerto Rico).

Net Federal Movement – Net federal movement is the difference between the movement of federal employees (both military and civilian) and their dependents into and out of the United States (excluding Puerto Rico) during the period.

Net International Migration – Net international migration (“NIM”) is the difference between migration to an area from outside the United States (immigration) and migration from the area to outside the United States (emigration) during the period. For the purposes of these population estimates, the geographic extent of the United States is defined as excluding Puerto Rico. More specifically, net international migration consists of
1) legal immigration to the United States as reported by the Immigration and Naturalization Service,
2) an estimate of net undocumented immigration from abroad,
3) an estimate of emigration from the United States, and
4) net movement between Puerto Rico and the (balance of) the United States.

Net Movement from Abroad – Net movement from abroad is the sum of net international migration and net federal movement during the period.

Population (Census) – The April 1, 1990 census population is a count of the number of persons residing in an area (resident population) as reported in the 1990 Census of Population, or as subsequently revised. Revisions to an area’s 1990 census population count may occur as the result of
1) post-1990 census corrections of political boundaries, geographic misallocations, or documented under-enumerations or over-enumerations, and
2) geographic boundary updates made subsequent to the 1990 census, which include annexations, new incorporations, mergers, etc. The closing date for these two forms of revisions was December, 1996.

Population Change – Population change (“Pop chg”) is the difference between the population of an area at the beginning and end of a period. It is expressed numerically (“Numerical”) and as a percentage (“Percent” or “%”) of the beginning population.

Population (Estimate) – The estimated population is the computed number of persons living in an area (resident population) as of July 1. The estimated population is calculated from a demographic components of change model that incorporates information on natural change (births and deaths) and net migration (net domestic migration and net movement from abroad) that has occurred in the area since the reference date of the 1990 census. Additional information on the methodology used to produce these population estimates is contained in Current Population Reports P25-1127 and at the Census Bureau’s Internet site with URL of http://www.census.gov/population/www/methodep.html.

Resident Population – These population estimates are for the resident population. The resident population of a state includes all residents (both civilian and Armed Forces) living in the state. The geographic universe for the resident population is the 50 states and the District of Columbia. It excludes Puerto Rico and outlying areas under United States jurisdiction. The resident population excludes U.S. citizens residing abroad.

Residual – The subnational estimates are constrained to sum to an independently derived estimate of the national population. The residual is the difference between an area’s population as estimated by the subnational population estimation procedure before and after imposing this constraint. The residual is not a demographic component of population change; rather, it is a statistical artifact of the procedures employed in producing the estimates.

Source: Population Estimates Program, Population Division, U.S. Bureau of the Census, Washington, DC 20233, January 9, 1998.

**01/98

The Alabama Economy: 1998

• July 29th, 2019

The Alabama Economy: 1998

Some Background

From 1993 to 1996, Alabama created approximately 150,000 nonagricultural jobs. This translates to 37,460 net new jobs a year, for an average annual growth rate of 2.1 percent. By comparison, employment at the national level for the same period increased by 1.5 percent annually. Beginning in 1996, however, Alabama’s employment growth dropped well below the average for the period. That slower growth continued in 1997 when the state’s employment increased by 1.1 percent, while the national average was over 2.0 percent. There are two primary reasons for 1997’s slow job creation.

First, job losses offset job gains. That is, job growth is reported as “net.” More than 13,000 apparel jobs lost during 1995-1997 offset the jobs gained in other sectors. In 1997 alone, durable goods industries in Alabama created over 1,300 new jobs, but nondurable goods industries, primarily apparel, lost about 3,300 jobs. Apparel jobs in Alabama continue to be at risk. The recent events that weakened some Asian currencies argue that clothing can be constructed more economically overseas than in Alabama.

Second, the positive news of low unemployment rates simply means that the labor pool is now smaller than it used to be. It is difficult to expand existing operations or recruit new industries without new workers, well-educated or not. Stories abound of firms wishing to expand but unable to do so because of a lack of workers. Alabama has a low natural population growth rate and a low immigration rate. The labor shortages are not going away soon.

The Outlook for 1998

Given the above constraints, Alabama is expected to add about 17,100 net new nonagricultural jobs in 1998. These jobs will occur primarily in the services, trade, and construction sectors. While durable goods-producing industries should add about 800 net new jobs, nondurable goods industries are expected to lose about 3,100 jobs, resulting in a net decline in manufacturing employment.

Alabama’s services sector should add about 8,400 new jobs in 1998, primarily in business and health services. The Boeing plant in Morgan County, together with other industrial and commercial construction projects in the state’s metropolitan areas, will create about 4,000 new jobs in 1998. Employment in wholesale and retail trade will increase by 5,700 in 1998, slightly below the 6,550 new jobs added in 1997.

Almost all the net job growth will occur in the state’s 22 metropolitan counties. The 45 non-metropolitan counties will show slow or negative job growth in 1998.

Ahmad Ijaz and
William D. Gunther

Disabilities in Alabama on the Rise

• July 29th, 2019

Disabilities in Alabama on the Rise

More than one in 10 Alabamians between the ages of 16 and 64 have some kind of disability, according to census figures released this week by the Alabama State Data Center (ASDC).

“If current trends continue, Alabamians 65 and over will make up 16 percent of the state’s total population by the year 2015, compared to about 13 percent currently,” said Annette Watters, ASDC manager. The Center is a division of The University of Alabama Culverhouse College of Commerce and Business Administration that works closely with the U.S. Census Bureau.

“With the population aging and the likelihood of having a disability increasing with age, the growth of the number of people with disabilities can be expected to accelerate in the coming decades,” explained Watters, also chairman of the Washington, D.C.-based National State Data Center.

“In 1990, about 132,346 of an estimated 499,902 people age 65 and over reported some level of disability in this state,” said Watters. “That number is estimated to reach 208,025 in 2015.”

According to the U.S. Census Bureau, a person is considered to have a disability if he or she has difficulty performing certain functions, such as seeing, hearing, talking, walking, climbing stairs and/or lifting and carrying. Other disabilities include difficulty performing activities of daily living or difficulty performing certain social roles, for example doing schoolwork for children or working at a job and around the house for adults.

“People with disabilities are more likely to live in poverty, less likely to have an advanced education, less likely to be employed, less likely to be married and more likely to live alone than the average for all people in the state,” Watters said, adding, “The main likelihood of having a disability is advanced age, but there are also pronounced differences by race.”

In Alabama, 11 percent of the white population between the ages of 16 and 64 has a disability, compared to 18 percent of the black population. After age 65, the disability difference between the races becomes even greater; one-quarter of whites, compared to one-third of blacks over 65, have what the Census Bureau terms “a mobility limitation and/or a self-care limitation.”

However, the difference between the sexes is not as significant: 13 percent of all working age men in Alabama and 12 percent of women in the same group have a disability.

Watters pointed out that not all people with disabilities receive public assistance.

“People may be surprised to learn that more than three-quarters of Americans aged 22 to 64 with disabilities do not receive public assistance,” she said. However, she said, about half the beneficiaries of such programs had a disability. In 1990, 15 percent of Alabama’s adult, non-senior population lived in poverty, compared to 29 percent of disabled non-senior adults.

Working continues to be a problem for people with disabilities, said the Center director. The Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 attempted to increase the employment rate of people with disabilities by making it illegal to discriminate against individuals who happen to have a disability.

Of the civilian non-institutional population between the ages of 21 and 64 in Alabama who have a work disability or mobility limitation, 27 percent were employed in 1990, compared to a national average of 35 percent. About 4 percent of Alabama’s total work force under the age of 65 is disabled.

Only 52 percent of Alabamians between the ages of 25 and 64 with disabilities have a high school diploma, compared to 74 percent of all state residents in that age group. And only 7 percent of disabled persons are college graduates, compared to 18 percent of the population statewide.

Of disabled Alabamians between the ages of 16 and 64, some 54 percent are married, compared to 60 percent of all Alabamians in that age range. Twelve percent of disabled adults under the age of 65 live alone, compared to 8 percent of all adults.

Watters noted that most of the state data comes from the 1990 census, which relied on people answering questions honestly. “The questions are somewhat subjective, and involve self-assessment,” Watters said. Census Bureau analysts note that the federal government is still in the early stages of determining how best to monitor statistically the status of people with disabilities.

The Alabama State Data Center is part of the UA Center for Business and Economic Research. Created in 1930, CBER since that time has engaged in research programs to promote economic development in the state while continuously expanding and refining its broad base of socioeconomic information, thereby enabling it to serve as Alabama’s central reservoir for business, economic and demographic data. To help track the level of economic activity in Alabama, CBER developed an econometric model of the state. Since 1980, output from that model has been published in the annual Alabama Economic Outlook series.

The UA Culverhouse College of Commerce and Business Administration, founded in 1919, first began offering graduate education in 1924. The College was the only business school in the state listed in the latest edition of the prestigious Princeton Review, which cited the high quality and moderate cost of the school’s flagship MBA program.

Alabama, Exports, and Prosperity

• July 29th, 2019

Alabama, Exports, and Prosperity

Of all the goods produced in Alabama, not many have been exported over the decades. Now that is about to change. Consider, for example, the “Mercedes-Effect.” Starting this spring, the Mercedes M-Class will be offered in markets other than the United States. If Mercedes-Benz achieves its goal to sell in excess of 30,000 units abroad, Alabama’s export share will jump by roughly 25 percent. As a result, Alabama will advance into the circle of the top exporting states in the Southeast.

This article illustrates the links between export numbers, Alabama’s economy, and people’s lives. Initially, we need to clarify the use of the term “export share” in this article. Here, the export share of a state is the value of exported manufactured goods as a portion of the total value of manufactured goods in a certain period. Services, such as tourism, or commodities like wheat or cotton, although a significant part of some states’ exports, are not considered in this analysis. (They either are not recorded on a state by state basis or would exceed the scope of this article.)

To understand the relationship between exports and prosperity, it is helpful to ask which industries contribute the most to exports and what percentage of each industry’s total production is exported. The paper, chemical, machinery, electronics, and vehicle industries are more export-oriented than the food, textile, apparel, and lumber industries. At the same time the high-export industries pay significantly higher wages than the less export-oriented. For example, firms in the vehicle industry pay their production people about twice as much as apparel companies.

In general, a higher export share goes along with a higher income level. It is the people employed in these industries who benefit foremost from higher exports and, consequently, higher wages. But, indirectly, shop and restaurant owners, car dealers, and insurance salesmen also benefit from increased levels of disposable personal income. In the long run, almost everybody reaps some benefits from rising exports.

Another benefit is that reasonably high export shares reduce dependency on the domestic state of the economy. To a certain extent, recessions in the United States could be buffered by sound international demand for products made in Alabama.

Finally, high export shares are a sign of progressiveness and global competitiveness. Alabama’s reputation and attractiveness certainly will not skyrocket solely because of an increasing export share, but high export visibility does no harm either.

Stephan Droxner
Graduate Research Assistant

New Census Data Tracks State Population Increase

• July 29th, 2019

New Census Data Tracks State Population Increase

The state of Alabama has seen a 6.9 percent population increase since the 1990 Census, according to statistics released this week by the Alabama State Data Center (ASDC) at The University of Alabama.

The newly available 1997 figures show that Alabama is growing, but not as fast as the nation at 7.6 percent or the south at 10.2 percent, said Center Manager Annette Watters. The ASDC is a division of UA’s Culverhouse College of Commerce and Business Administration that works closely with the U.S. Census Bureau. Watters is also chairman of the Washington, D.C.-based national State Data Center.

Which county posts a No. 1 ranking in regard to its population? Well, said Watters, that depends on how you read the numbers.

“Jefferson is Alabama’s largest county, with 658,664 people,” Watters said. “But Shelby County added the most people – 36,083 since 1990 – and had the highest growth rate – a 36.3 percent increase in population.

“Madison County added the second largest number of people, but Baldwin County had the second highest growth rate,” she continued. “New residents are clearly heading to Shelby, Madison and Baldwin counties.

“In general, you’ll find that counties in Alabama that are part of a metro area are growing faster than are non-metropolitan counties.”

Watters said Lee County is the state’s fifth fastest growing county and one of only two in the top 10 fastest growing counties that is not part of a metropolitan statistical area, adding, “After the 2000 Census, Lee County, which is near Columbus, Ga., is likely to be designated a metro area.”

Watters noted that most of the state’s growth came from just a few counties. For example, Jefferson County is home to 15 percent of the state’s entire population, and the Birmingham metro area considered as a whole accounts for 21 percent of the state’s population.

“Put another way, more than one out of every five Alabamians live in the Birmingham metro area,” Watters said. “Only 14 of Alabama’s 67 counties account for 75 percent of all the population growth in the state over the last seven years.”

Watters explained that population gains come from people moving or being born into an area, while losses come from people moving away or dying. “Most changes in general occur because of movers, not through natural increases or decreases,” she said. “People move primarily for job or educational reasons.”

And, she added, people don’t always live in the counties where they work. Good Alabama examples are Autauga and Elmore counties, home to many Montgomery County workers and part of the Montgomery metropolitan area. Both rank in the state’s top five in percentage increases during this decade; Elmore has grown by 22.5 percent (11,062 people) and Autauga by 20.7 percent (7,084 people).

In looking at the entire state, Watters said, 57 of the 67 counties have seen some population gain since 1990. All 10 of the counties recording population losses have shown continuing downward trends for some time.

“Calhoun County, on the other hand, is showing a turnaround in its trend,” noted the Center manager. “Earlier in the decade it had substantial population loss related to announcements about closing military facilities located there. But Calhoun County’s basic economic strength has reversed that population decline and the area now shows modest growth.

“As the decade progresses, the population should continue to grow.”

The Center for Business and Economic Research is a division of research and service of UA’s Culverhouse College of Commerce and Business Administration. The Alabama State Data Center works closely with the U.S. Census Bureau to track demographic, economic and population statistics. Periodically, CBER publishes the Economic Abstract of Alabama, which provides voluminous data on many aspects of Alabama’s economy.

The Culverhouse College of Commerce and Business Administration, founded in 1919, first began offering graduate education in 1924. Its Manderson Graduate School of Business has received repeated positive recognition in the 1990s from such publications as Business Week, The Princeton Review and The Gourman Report.

Alabama's Resident Population                                        Rank
                                       Rank          Rank             by
                      1990       1997   by   Number by No. Percent  Growth
                    Census             Size  Change  Incr.  Change   Rate
                 _____________________ ____ _______ _____  ______    _____
Alabama          4,040,389  4,319,154       278,765          6.9%

Autauga County      34,222     41,306    29   7,084   13    20.7%      5
Baldwin County      98,280    128,842     7  30,562    3    31.1%      2
Barbour County      25,417     26,782    40   1,365   33     5.4%     27
Bibb County         16,576     18,588    50   2,012   27    12.1%      9
Blount County       39,248     45,081    27   5,833   16    14.9%      6
Bullock County      11,042     11,270    66     228   50     2.1%     45
Butler County       21,892     21,692    46   (200)   63    -0.9%     61
Calhoun County     116,032    117,092     8   1,060   38     0.9%     52
Chambers County     36,876     36,825    32    (51)   59    -0.1%     58
Cherokee County     19,543     21,590    47   2,047   26    10.5%     14

Chilton County      32,458     36,349    34   3,891   19    12.0%     11
Choctaw County      16,018     15,894    55   (124)   61    -0.8%     60
Clarke County       27,240     28,489    39   1,249   36     4.6%     31
Clay County         13,252     13,832    60     580   45     4.4%     35
Cleburne County     12,730     14,092    58   1,362   34    10.7%     13
Coffee County       40,240     41,980    28   1,740   31     4.3%     36
Colbert County      51,666     53,047    22   1,381   32     2.7%     43
Conecuh County      14,054     14,083    59      29   56     0.2%     56
Coosa County        11,063     11,554    65     491   46     4.4%     34
Covington County    36,478     37,362    31     884   44     2.4%     44

Crenshaw County     13,635     13,645    61      10   57     0.1%     57
Cullman County      67,613     74,241    16   6,628   14     9.8%     15
Dale County         49,633     49,107    25   (526)   65    -1.1%     63
Dallas County       48,130     47,133    26   (997)   66    -2.1%     65
DeKalb County       54,651     57,752    21   3,101   22     5.7%     25
Elmore County       49,210     60,272    20  11,062    6    22.5%      3
Escambia County     35,518     36,487    33     969   41     2.7%     42
Etowah County       99,840    104,313    10   4,473   18     4.5%     33
Fayette County      17,962     18,176    51     214   53     1.2%     50
Franklin County     27,814     29,613    37   1,799   30     6.5%     20

Geneva County       23,647     24,828    41   1,181   37     5.0%     29
Greene County       10,153      9,902    67   (251)   64    -2.5%     66
Hale County         15,498     16,390    53     892   43     5.8%     23
Henry County        15,374     15,636    57     262   49     1.7%     48
Houston County      81,331     85,163    12   3,832   21     4.7%     30
Jackson County      47,796     50,751    23   2,955   24     6.2%     21
Jefferson County   651,520    658,664     1   7,144   12     1.1%     51
Lamar County        15,715     15,759    56      44   54     0.3%     54
Lauderdale County   79,661     84,241    13   4,580   17     5.7%     24
Lawrence County     31,513     33,386    35   1,873   28     5.9%     22

Lee County          87,146     98,501    11  11,355    5    13.0%      8
Limestone County    54,135     60,700    19   6,565   15    12.1%     10
Lowndes County      12,658     12,881    63     223   51     1.8%     47
Macon County        24,928     23,314    45 (1,614)   67    -6.5%     67
Madison County     238,912    272,293     3  33,381    2    14.0%      7
Marengo County      23,084     23,503    44     419   47     1.8%     46
Marion County       29,830     30,813    36     983   40     3.3%     41
Marshall County     70,832     78,893    14   8,061   11    11.4%     12
Mobile County      378,643    398,276     2  19,633    4     5.2%     28
Monroe County       23,968     24,186    42     218   52     0.9%     53

Montgomery County  209,085    217,597     4   8,512    9     4.1%     37
Morgan County      100,043    108,304     9   8,261   10     8.3%     17
Perry County        12,759     12,642    64   (117)   60    -0.9%     62
Pickens County      20,699     20,964    48     265   48     1.3%     49
Pike County         27,595     28,604    38   1,009   39     3.7%     39
Randolph County     19,881     19,923    49      42   55     0.2%     55
Russell County      46,860     50,719    24   3,859   20     8.2%     18
Shelby County       99,363    135,446     6  36,083    1    36.3%      1
St. Clair County    49,811     60,838    18  11,027    7    22.1%      4
Sumter County       16,174     15,998    54   (176)   62    -1.1%     64

Talladega County    74,109     76,846    15   2,737   25     3.7%     38
Tallapoosa County   38,826     40,148    30   1,322   35     3.4%     40
Tuscaloosa County  150,522    160,760     5  10,238    8     6.8%     19
Walker County       67,670     70,733    17   3,063   23     4.5%     32
Washington County   16,694     17,613    52     919   42     5.5%     26
Wilcox County       13,568     13,537    62    (31)   58    -0.2%     59
Winston County      22,053     23,913    43   1,860   29     8.4%     16

Women Gaining Ground in Business, Education

• July 29th, 2019

Women Gaining Ground in Business, Education

Businesses owned by women now make up 34 percent of all Alabama firms, generating more than $7.6 billion in sales and $1 billion in payroll for the state.

That’s the word this week from the Alabama State Data Center (ASDC), as Women’s History Month draws to a close. Housed in The University of Alabama Culverhouse College of Commerce and Business Administration, the Center works in conjunction with the U.S. Census Bureau and serves as part of Alabama’s central reservoir for economic and demographic data, the Center for Business and Economic Research.

“In addition, Alabama’s women-owned business employed 24 percent of all employees in the state, or 79,700 people, in 1992,” said Annette Watters, Center manager and chairman of the Washington, D.C.-based national State Data Center. Watters explained that the ’92 numbers are the latest available figures in these areas.

On the national front, businesses owned by women comprise 33 percent of all domestic firms and 40 percent of all retail and service firms, Watters said. These businesses generated $1.6 trillion in revenues and employed 13.2 million people in 1992.

“Working women are also commanding higher salaries,” Watters noted. “The female-to-male earnings ratio reached a new high in 1996, with a 2.4 percent increase in real median earnings to $23,710.

“That increase brings women to about 74 percent of the median for men, $32,144.”

Women are also working their way into traditionally male-dominated fields. Over a 13-year period, from 1983 to 1996, the proportion of women lawyers increased from 15 to 30 percent, female physicians from 16 to 26 percent, and female economists from 38 to 54 percent.

“Record numbers of mothers are taking to the work force,” continued the Center manager. “In 1996, 70 percent of married women with children worked, compared to only 40 percent in 1970. Of the 3.7 million women who gave birth in 1994, 55 percent were in the labor force the following year.”

On the higher education front, as of 1994 women constituted 55 percent of people awarded bachelor’s degrees, 55 percent of those receiving master’s degrees and 39 percent of doctoral graduates. That indicates an increase from comparable 1971 statistics of 43, 40 and 14 percent, respectively.

“Women pursuing higher education also outnumber men at the state level,” Watters said. “Of students enrolled in public colleges and universities in the state, women make up 55.8 percent of undergraduate students and 59.1 percent of graduate students.

“Overall, women comprise nearly 56 percent of Alabama’s college students,” she said. “And, younger women are more likely than their predecessors or their male counterparts to be educated. Of the overall population, 26 percent of men have bachelor’s degrees, compared to only 21 percent of women.

“However, among 25- to 29-year-olds, 28 percent of women hold bachelor’s degrees, compared to 26 percent of men.”

Women currently outnumber men in Alabama 2.2 million to 2.1 million; in the overall U.S. population, as of 1997 there were 137.2 million women and 131.6 million men. There margins are larger for older Americans: 20.1 million to 14.1 million at ages 65 and over; 2.8 million to 1.1 million at ages 85 and over; and 50,000 to 11,000 among centenarians.

As Alabamians age, Watters said, the margins grow larger: 337,000 women to 220,000 men at ages 65 and over; and 43,780 women to 16,500 men at ages 85 and over.

“Those margins can be accounted for by looking at life expectancy by gender,” she explained. “In 1995, life expectancy for women was 79, compared to 73 years for mean. Projections for 2010 show life expectancy will be 81 years for women and 74 years for men.”