Land Use Plan Update-1986 (2)

THE ECO
OF
NOMY
NEW"HANOVIER COUNTY:
WORK FORCE
Y
60,000 DCM COPY DCM COPY
lease do not remove! q
50,000
Division of Coastal Management
10,000 f MANUFACTURING
1962 64 66 68 70 72 74 76 78 BO 82 84
YEAR
1986
CAMA LAND USE PLAN UPDATE
Report No. 2

Technical Report 2
1986 Wilmington - New Hanover County Land -Use Plan Update
THE ECONOMY OF NEW HANOVER COUNTY
August 1985
Prepared by the New Hanover County Planning Department
The preparation of this -document was financed, in part, through a Coastal.
Area Management Act grant provided by the North Carolina Coastal Management
Program, through Funds provided by the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972, as
amended, which is administered by the Office of Coastal Zone Management, National
.Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.

TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAGE
1. SUMMARY OF ECONOMIC GROWTH
1.
11. ASSESSING THE ECONOMY: DATA USED
1
Ili. NEW HANOVER COUNTY AND THE WIL14INGTON MSA
2
A. Industry Employment by Place of Work
2
B. New Hanover County Industry Work Force
As A Percentage of MSA Industry Work Force
6
C. Manufacturing Employment 'in New Hanover County
6
D. Non -Manufacturing Employment in New Hanover County
6
E. Comparison of Individual/Total Industrial Employment -
New Hanover County and the United States
13
IV. SHIFT -SHARE ANALYSIS OF COUNTY INDUSTRIES
15
A. Methods
15
B. Results
17

LIST OF TABLES
PAGE
TABLE
E-1
Employment By Place of Work
New Hanover County:
Selected Years 1963-1984
4
TABLE
E-2
Industry Employment By Place of Work,
New Hanover County and Wilmington MSA:
Selected Years 1963-1984
5
TABLE
E-3
New Hanover County Industry Work Force
As A Percentage of MSA
Industry Work Force
7
TABLE
E-4
Manufacturing Employment
In New Hanover County:
Selected Years 1963-1984
10
TABLE
E-5
Non -Manufacturing Employment
In New Hanover County:
Selected Years 1963-1984.
12
TABLE
E-6
Individual/Total Industrial Employment
In the United States and
New Hanover County
14
TABLE
E-7
Shift -Share Effects
16
TABLE
E-8
Shift -Share Analysis of
New Hanover County
Employment Growth Factors
18
LIST OF
FIGURES
FIGURE
E-1
Employment By Place of Work
3
FIGURE
E-2
Manufacturing Employment
8
FIGURE
E-3
Non -Manufacturing Employment
11

I. SUMMARY OF ECONOMIC GROVni
1) New Hanover County is strengthening its role as the trade and service center
of southeastern North Carolina. Manufacturing employment, however, is
becoming less dominant.
2) While manufacturing employment in New Hanover County since the early 1960s
has exhibited sporadic growth, non -manufacturing employment (particularly
trade and service industries) has shown steady consistent growth.
3) In 1970, the County's non -manufacturing employment was only 69.6%, compared
to 78% for the United States. By 1983, however, the County's
non -manufacturing employment had grown to 80.0%, nearly equal to 80.2% for
the United States.
4. Total industry employment (manufacturing and non -manufacturing) for both New
Hanover County and the Wilmington MSA (Metropolitan Statistic Area) have
experienced significant growth between 1963 and 1984.
5. New Hanover County.'s industries have demonstrated a significant competitive
edge compared to growth trends for industries at the national level,
particularly for non -manufacturing industries.
I1. ASSESSING THE ECONOMIC DATA USED
In evaluating the economic conditions of New Hanover County, two types of
basic information are available:
1) Labor force statistics, which characterize the residents of the area with
respect to how many persons are employed or unemployed, and what their. .
socioeconomic characteristics are; and
2) Work force statistics, which characterize the number and type of jobs of New
Hanover County emp-loyers.
Members of the New Hanover County labor force may have jobs outside the
County. Conversely, members of the County's work force may include residents of
other counties who commute into New Hanover County for employment.
One purpose of the economic analysis is to estimate and allocate land to
accommodate the future development needs of New Hanover County's employers.
Another purpose of the analysis is to determine the number and type of jobs that
will be created in the future. Therefore, work force statistics rather than
labor force statistics are used to analyze industrial growth trends within the
County and to determine future non-residential land -use needs.

It should be noted that in describing the industrial mix of the County,
"industries" refers to both manufacturing and non -manufacturing establishments.
Collectively, these industries make up the non-residential element of all
developed land in New Hanover County.
Unless otherwise indicated, the work force data used in the analysis
Includes only "Industry Employment By Place of Work" as provided by the North
Carolina Employment Security Commission (ESC). "Agricultural Employment" and
"All Other Non-agricultural Employment", including non-agricultural self-employed
workers, unpaid family workers, and domestic workers in private households) are
reported under labor force by the ESC. Since this is the case, employment
figures in the "Non -Industry Employment" categories are not included in most
statistics. Not including these workers does not cause a significant impact,
since many of these workers are employed within private houses or farms, etc.
Figure E-1 and Table E-1 provide total estimates for both Industry and
Non -Industry workers. The ESC reported a total of 54,683 jobs in the County in
1984, of which 47,631 were considered industrial manufacturing or
non -manufacturing.
The most obvious employment -Mend in the County, as evidenced by Figure E-1, is
the rapid growth in total employment which is almost completely accounted for by
parallel growth in the non -manufacturing industries. Manufacturing employment
has stayed fairly constant, although slightly decreasing in recent years. .
111. NEW HANOVER COUNTY AND THE WILMINGTON NSA
A. Industry Employment By Place Of Work
Table E-2 indicates that both New Hanover County's and the Wilmington MSA
total industry employment (manufacturing and non -manufacturing employment) have
experienced significant growth between 1963 and 1984. The County's.total
industry employment has more than doubled, from 22,280 workers in 1963 to 47,631
workers in 1984. Total industry employment for Wilmington's MSA during this time
period has more than tripled, from 24,410 workers in 1963 to 73,863 workers in
1984.
Total manufacturing employment for both the County and the MSA during the
period examined has fluctuated, while total non -manufacturing employment has
continued to experience steady growth. Both the County and MSA have had similar
proportions of manufacturing and non -manufacturing employment between 1963 to .
1984. Non -manufacturing has grown in importance, from approximately 70% in 1963
to 80% in 1984. It should be noted that the Wilmington MSA included New Hanover
and Brunswick Counties prior to 1984, but now includes only New Hanover County.
-2-

FIGURE E-I
EMPLOYMENT BY PLACE OF WORK
WORK FORCE
56,000
54,000
52,000
50,000
48,000
46,000
44,000
42,000
40,000
38,000
56,000
34,000
32,000
30,000
28,000
26,000
24,000
22,000
20,000
18,000
16,000
14,000
12,000
10,000
8,000
6,000
4,000
2,000
..■■■■.■m...m■.■■■■m■m
immommmmmmoammmmsmmmmmm
m.m■■.■.■.■■.■■m.■■.■.
mmmmmmmommmmmmmommomm■
mmmmmmmomorablommmmmmm
■■■■■■■
■■.u■■■■■■■■m■■
�mmmmmmmonammmmmmmmmomm
m■■..■.mma■■■■■■■■■■mw
mmammmummommmmmmmmmma■
mmmmm,mmmommmmmmmmamm■
■sssomssmsmmssmmsmmsm■
■mummmmmmmmoommommmom■
sommmmmemmommmommmmom■
m..■■■.■■■u■.■■.m■■.m.
■■.■m■■.na.■■.m.■■■■■�
■■■■■..na.■.■■■■■■■■■■.'
�■■■.ea■■.■.■■■■■■■■.■■'
■.cu■■■■.■■■■m■.■■■■■■I
sammsmmmmmm■mmamommom
■..■■■■.■■:=■.■■■.■.■mmmmmmmmmmmi
mo■.o.mg-m.■■'mmimpmpomm
„9.b.w
!!:10:dmmmmmmmmmm!mpmriM
mm■
■■■.■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■.
YEAR 1962 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 TI 72 73 74 75 T6 TT 78 T9 80 81 82 83 84
KEY
MANUFACTURING AGRICULTURE • • • •••• • • •
NON -MANUFACTURING -•-•-•-- NON -AGRICULTURE ---
TOTAL -- - -- - - -
-3-

d
TABLE E-1
EMPLOYMENT BY PLACE OF WORK
NEW HANOVER COUNTY
1963-1984
WORK FORCE
1963
1964 1965
1966 1967 1968 1969 1970 MI 1972
19T3
1974 1975 1976 1977
1978
1979 1980
1981
1982
1983 1%4
INDUSTRY EMPLOYMENT
BY PLACE OF WOW 1/
22,220
22,940 24,500
26,000 26,990 28,560 30,600 32,350 31,380 34,330
37,580
38,890 36,570 38,230 39,160
41,780
43,5BO 43,560
45,110
44,740
4%410 47,631
Manufacturing
6,540
6,520 6,940
7.570 7,880 8,350 9,380 9,230 9,030, 10,160
10,700
10,570 9,710 10,240 9,8W
9,880
10,480 9,930
10,290
9,°..."0
9,100 e,905
Non -Manufacturing,
15,680
16,420 17,560
18,430 19,110 20,210 21,220 22,520 22,350 22,170
25,880
28,320 26,860 27,900 29,Z70
31,900
33,100 33,570
34,830
34,920
36,310 29,725
NON -INDUSTRY EMPLOYMENT 2/
BY PLACE OF WORK
5,580
5,930 5,940
5.910 5,790 5,830 6,010 5,%0 5,740 6,040
6,291
6,341 5,999 6,161 6,252
6,541
6,842 6,465
6,648
7,042
7,431 7,052
Agricultural Employment -
N
by place of work
860
780 640
630 570 530 490 470 470 450•
454
428 442 464 392
348
321 305
283
268
247 233
All other Non -Agricultural
employment by place of
work 3/
4,720
5,150 5,300
5,280 5,220 5,300 5,520 5,390 5,Z70 5,590
.5,827
5,913 5,557 5,697 5,870
6,193
6,516 6,160
6,365
6,774
7,184 6,919
TOTAL EMPLOYMENT
BY PLACE OF WORK
27,800
28,870 30,440
31,910 32,780 34,390 36,610 72.210 37,120 40.3'.0
43,871
15,31 42.569 44,391 45,422
49,321
50,422 50,^..25
51.758
51,732
52,841 54,683
1/
Source: Employment Security Commission of North Carolina, "North Carolina
Labor Force Estimates"
2/
Figures for years after 1972 estimated by New Hanover County Planning Dept., based on following formula
Workforce yearj
- (Labor force` yearj) x (Workforce 1970= 2)
*data available from ESC
Labor force 1970-72)
3/
Includes Nonagricultural self-employed workers, unpaid family workers, and
domestic workers in private
households.

TABLE E-2
INDUSTRY EMPLOYMENT BY PLACE OF WORK 1/
NEW HANOVER COUNTY AND WILMINGTON..
M S A
SELECTED YEARS 1963-1984
NEW HANOVER COUNTY
INDUSTRY WORK FORCE ESTIMATES
% OF
INDUSTRY
WORK FORCE
1963
1966
1969 1972
1975
1978
1981
1984 1963
1966
'1969
1972
1975
1978
1981
1984
TOTAL INDUSTRY
EMPLOYMENT
22,280
26,000
30,600 34,330
36,570
41,780
45,110
47,631 100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
MANUFACTURING
6,540
7,570
9,380 10,160
9,710
9,880
10,280
8,906 29.4
29.1
30.7
29.6
26.6
23.7
22.8
18.7
NON -MANUFACTURING
15,680
18,430
21,220 24.,170
26,860
31,900
34,830
38,725 70.6
70.9,
69.3
70.4
73.4
76.3
77.2
81.3
WILMINGTON NSA
INDUSTRY WORK FORCE ESTIMATES
% OF
INDUSTRY
WORK FORCE
1963
1966
1969 1972
1975
1978
1981
1984 1963
1966
1969
1972
1975
1978
1981
1984
TOTAL INDUSTRY
EMPLOYMENT
24,410
28,520
34,970 43,220
45,400
51,180
58,320
73,863 100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
MANUFACTURING
6,870
7,950
10,590 12,720
13,030
13,220.
12,910
n/a 28.1
27.9
30.3
29.4
28.7
25.8
22.1
n/a
NDN-MANUFACTURING
17,540
20,570
24,380 30,500
32,370
37,960
45,410
n/a 71.9
72.1
69.7
70.6
71.3
74.2
77.9
•n/a
1/SOURCE: North Carolina
Employment
Security Commission,
"North
Carolina
Labor Force Estimates"

B. New Hanover.County Industry Work Force
As a Percentage Of NSA Industry Work Force
Table E-3 Illustrates the change that has occurred for selected years .
1963-1984, in the total industry work force of New Hanover County relative to the
Wilmington MSA (Brunswick and New Hanover Counties combined). It is evident that
while New Hanover County continues to supply the majority,.74%, of all employment
in the MSA, the County's share of employment opportunities in the MSA has
continued to decline since the 1966 peak of 91.2%. This decline may be.
attributed to the rapid growth of Brunswick County, particularly it's beach
communities.
C. Manufacturing Employment In New Hanover County
Figure E-2 and Table E-4 represent the decline and growth of manufacturing
industries in New Hanover County by major Standard Industrial Classification
(SIC), for selected years 1963-1984. Overall, total manufacturing employment has
decreased in'importance in the County's work force, from 29.4% in 1963 to 18.7%
in 1984. Since the late 19601s, total manufacturing employment has stayed
between approximately 9,000 and 10,000 workers. Total manufacturing employment,
however, has recently declined from 10,280 in 1981 to 8,906 workers in 1984.
. During the decades of the 60's and 701s, employment in fabricated metals
increased dramatically, with chemicals and machinery employment in distant second
and third places, respectively. However, since those time periods, there have
been significant reductions in fabricated metals employment, while machinery and
chemical employment have increased dramatically. The chemical industry is now
the leading manufacturing industry in the County with 2,581 jobs in 1984, or 5.4%
of total employment. Categories of manufacturing which have continued to decline
in employment from 1963 to 1984 include food, textiles, apparel, lumber and wood,
and stone, clay and glass. These traditional basic industries have suffered
employment declines possibly as a result of increased mechanization and .
technology. Declines were particularly evident during the 1970's and this trend
has not changed.
D. -Manufacturing Employment in New Hanover County
Figure E-3 and Table E-5 present the growth in employment of each major
non -manufacturing industry in New Hanover County for the selected years
1963-1984. In marked contrast to manufacturing industries, the growth of
non -manufacturing employment in the County has been steady and significant.
Essentially all non -manufacturing categories exhibited an overall steady growth
trend from the 1960's.to the 19801s. The trade, government, and service
industries are the three dominant non -manufacturing industries.
In 1984 as in 1963, non -manufacturing employment has continued to dominate
the County's total workforce. Unlike frequent and unpredictable fluctuations
experienced by manufacturing industries during this time period, positive growth
trends experienced by the non -manufacturing employment sector are apparent. The
continued growth of this sector in the future appears positive. The trade and
service industries have particularly shown dramatic growth in recent years.

NEW HANOVER COUNTY
INDUSTRY WORK FORCE AS A PERCENTAGE
OF S.M.S.A.
INDUSTRY WORK FORCE 1/
TABLE E-3
TOTAL INDUSTRY WORK FORCE
SMSA /
NEW HANOVER COUNTY
NEW HANOVER COUNTY
% OF NSA
1963
24,410
22,220
91.0
1966
28,520
26,000
91.2
1969
34,790
30,600
88.0
1972
43,220
34,330
79.4
1975
45,400
36,570
80.6
1978
51,180
41,780
81.6
1981
58,320
45,410
77.3
1984
73,863
54,683
74.0
1/Source: Employment Security Commission of North Carolina, "North Carolina
Labor Force Estimates"
2/Includes New Hanover and Brunswick Counties.
-7-

FIGURE E-2
MANUFACTURING EMPLOYMENT
PART I OF 2
WORK FORCE
4120C
4,050
3,90C
3,75C
3,60C
3.45(
3,300
3,150
3,000
2,8 5C
2,700
2,550
2,400
2950
2,100
1,950
1,800
1,650
1,500
1,350
1,200
1,050
900
750
6GO
450
300
150
■
■
■■■■■
■
■■■■
■■
■■■
■■■■■
■■■■■■■■■'/■■■■■■■■u■■'
■■■■■■■■■i■
■■■■■■n■■■
■■■■■■■■Isi■
■■■■■■11■■■
■■■■■■■A■■■■■■■■■■m■■■
■■■■■■a■■■■■■■■■■■w■■ff
■■■■■■'m■■■■ow■■■m■m"mm
92■■■m■mona■■■■■■■■■mm
■■mom■■
■■■■■■■■m
mmov
YEAR 1962 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84
KEY
TEXTILES - -- - - - - FABRICATED METALS
CHEMICALS -• -• - •- • MACHINERY ---- STONE, CLAY, & GLASS •••••••••
10

FIGURE E-2
MANUFACTURING EMPLOYMENT
PART 2 OF 2
WORK FORCE
•• ■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■
■■■ ■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■
••• ■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■
• ■■■■■■■ ■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■
■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■a
.,■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■s
.. ■■■■■ ■■■■gym ■■■■■■ ■■■
,■■■■■ ■■■■■■■■■■■■ ■■■
..■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■mm■■
... ■■■■mmm■■■■■uffxmw_.■mG
Now
a•. - ••o
son - --
M

TABLE E-4
MANUFACTURING EMPLOYMENT IN NEW HANOVER COUNTY
SELECTED YEARS 1963-1984
WORK FORCE
S OF
TOTAL INDUSTRY
WORK
FORCE
1963
1966
1969
1972
1975
1978
1981
1984
1963
1966
1969
1972
1975
1978
1981
1984
TOTAL INDUSTRY/2
22,220
26,000
30,600
34,330
36,570
41,780
45,110
47,631
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
TOTAL WG.
6,540
7,570
9,380
10,160
9,710
9,880
10,280
8,906
29.4
29.1
30.7
29.6
26.6
23.7
22.8
18.7
FOOD
690
710
780
970
550
670
520
493
3.1
2.7
2.6
2.8
1.5
1.6
1.2
1.0
TEXTILES
1,580
1,530
1,260
1,360
1,530
1,320
790
414
7.0
5.9
4.1
4.0
4.2
3.2
1.8
.9
APPAREL
1,510
1,800
1,770
1,590
760
920
1,190
1,253
6.8
6.9
5.8
4.6
2.1
2.2
2.6
2.6
LUMBER 3 WOOD
860
1,020
960
800
620
590
470
379
3.9
3.9
3.1
2.3
1.7
1.4
1.0
.8
PRINTING
220
240
270
310
290
280
330
355
1.0
.9
.9
.9
.8
0.7
.7
.8
CHEMICALS
550
720
1,046
1,110
1,480
1,350
3,280
2,581
2.5
2.8
3.4
3.2
4.0
3.3
7.3
5.4
STONE, CLAY S GLASS 130
240
300
280
260
260
320
163
.6
.9
1.0
.8
.7
.6
.7
.4
FABRICATED METALS
820
1,020
1,990
2,890
3,310
3,450
1,400
219
3.7
3.9
'6.5
8.4
9.1
8.2
3.1
.5
MACHINERY
50
120
650
500
720
810
1,450
1,876
.2
.5
2.1
1.5
2.0
2.0
3.2
3.9
OTHER MFG. /3
130
170
360
350
190
230
530•
1,173
.6
.7
1.2
1.0
0.5
.5
1.2
2.4
I/SOURCE: Employment Security Commission of North Carolina, "North Carolina Labor Force Estimates"
2/Includes both manufacturing and non -manufacturing
3/Includes furniture, paper, petroleum, primary metals, and instruments

■■■■■■ ■ ■ ■ ■■■■ ■■■■■■ ■■
■■ ■ ■ ■ ■■ ■ ■■■■ ■■■ ■■■ ■ ■ N
■■ ■■■■■ ■■■ ■■■■■■■■■,M
■■ ■■■■ ■ ■■ ■■■■■■■■FR.■
■ ■ ■■ ■■ ■ ■■■■■■■■■.o■■■
■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■mo■■■■
■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■
■■■■■■■■■■om■ma■■■■■■
■■■■■■■■■■►i■■■■■■■•_•■
■■■■■■■■■■M■O■■■■■■■■
■■■■■■■■EM■■■■E:M■■■■
■■■■■■■■ti■■■■■o■■■■■m
■■■■■■E-.■■■■■P■■■■■■■
■■■■■■■■■■■■a■■■■■.■■
SME■■■■■■■EM■■■■■■■■■■
%■■■■■m!m%■■ S■■■■■■■■
■■■■■/REM■E■ ■■■m■■■■■
■■■►M5M/■E/!N■■!mn■■■■
■mR2■■■■■w%■b %■■■wMN
MPApios■om■m■■A■om■■Doan
HE:

TABLE E-5
NON -MANUFACTURING EMPLOYMENT IN NEW HANOVER COUNTY
SELECTED YEARS 1963-1984
WORK FORCE % OF TOTAL INDUSTRY
WORK FORCE
1963 1966 1969 1972 1975 1978 1981 1984 1963 1966 1969 1972 1975 1978 1981 1984
TOTAL INDUSTRY/2 22►220 26,000 30,600 34,330 36,570 41,780 45,110 47,631 100 100 .100 100 100 100 100 100
TOTAL WG. 15,680 18,430 21,220 24,170 26,860 31,900, 34,830 38,725 70.6 70.9 69.3 70.4 73.4 76.3 77.2 81.3
CONSTRUCTION 1,540 1,880 2,180 2,280 1,720 2,130 2,400 2,839 6.9 7.2 7.1 6.7 4.7 5.1 5.3 6.0
TRANSPORTATION,
COMMUNICATION,
AND UTILITIES 2,050 2,440 2,800 3,200 3,340 3,640 3,380 3,411 9.2 9.4 9.2 9.3 9.1 8.7 7.5 7.2
TRADE 5,150 5,640 6,680 8,090 8,950 10,240 11,800 13,554 23.2 21.7 21.8 23.6 24.5 24.5 26.2 28.4
FINANCE, REAL
ESTATE 1,010 1,030 1,190 1,510 1,460 1,640 1,550 1,794 4.6 4.0 3.9 4.4 4.0 3.9 3.4 3.8
SERVICE 2,800 3,500 3,890 3,930 4,520 5,970 6,300 7,995 12.6 13.4 12.7 11.4 12.3 14.3 14.2 16.8
GOVERNMENT 3,090 3,890 4,380 5,010 6,760 8,110 9,130 8,857 13.9 15.0 14.8 14.6 18.5 19.4 20.2 18.5
OTHER NON -
MANUFACTURING. /3 40 50 100 150 110 170 180 275 0.2 0.2 0.3 .4 0.3 0.4 .4 .6
i/SOURCE: Employment. Security Commission of North Carolina, "Labor Force Estimates"
2/includes both Manufacturing and Non -manufacturing
3/Includes agricultural service, forestry, fisheries, and mining

E. Comparison Of Individual/Total Industrial Employment -New Hanover County and
the United States
. Table E-6 examines non -manufacturing and manufacturing employment in
percentages for New Hanover County relative to the United States, (U.S.) for
selected years 1970, 1978, and 1983.
In 1970, the County's non -manufacturing share of total employment was only
69.6%, compared to 78% for the United States. By 1983, however, the County's
non -manufacturing employment had grown to 80.0%, nearly equal to 80.2% for the
United States.
The County's trade industry has been the top performer of all County
industries, increasing its share of County employment from 22.8% in 1970 to 27.0%
in 1983. This level is well above the trade industryes share of national
employment, which was only 22.2% in 1983. The relatively high level of the trade
industry in the County may reflect its growing role as the economic center of
southeast North Carolina. Interestingly, however, the service industry.in the
County accounted for only 16.2%, compared to 21.0% at the national level in 1983.
This discrepancy may indicate that the service industry may experience
significant growth in the future in the County. Government employment in the
County is higher than at the national level possibly due to the location of
several State and Federal regional offices.
In 1970, the County led the U.S. In all manufacturing employment, with the
exceptions of machinery (electrical and non -electrical) and other manufacturing
employment. Categories of manufacturing with significantly higher total
employment percentages in the County included: textiles, apparel, and fabricated
metal.
In examining total manufacturing employment in 1978, the County experienced
a reduction in all manufactruing employment, excluding chemicals, fabricated
metals, and machinery (electrical and non -electrical). Although the County
experienced these reductions, food, and stone, clay and glass manufacturing
employment were the only employment categories that were lower than the U.S. In
addition, total employment for fabricated metals was about four times higher than
the U.S.
By the end of 1983, total manufacturing employment for both the County and
the U.S. had declined. It should be noted, however, that chemicals employment in
the County had significantly increased during that time period.
-13-

TABLE E-6
INDIVIDUAL/TOTAL INDUSTRIAL EMPLOYMENT
IN THE UNITED STATES AND NEW HANOVER COUNTY
(PERCENTAGES)
1970 1978 1983
UNITED STATES
NEW HANOVER COUNTY
UNITED STATES
NEW HANOVER COUNTY
UNITED STATES
NEW HANOVER COUNTY
INDUSTRY NON -
MANUFACTURING
'
Construction
6.5%
6.5%
4.8%
5.1%
4.2%
5.4%
Trans., Comm., and
Public Utilities
6.6
8.9
6.1
8.7
5.3
7.2
Trade
21.0
22.8
20.2
24.5
22.2
27.0
Finance, Insurance and
Real Estate
5.1
3.8
4.9
3.9
5.8
3.5
Service
17.4
13.0
15.5
14.3
21.0
16.2
Government
16.7
14.3
16.9
19.4
16.9
20.1
Other Non -Manufacturing
4.7
.3
5.5
0.4
4.8
.6
TOTAL NON -MANUFACTURING
78.0%
69.60,
73.9%
76.3%
80.2%,
80.0%
MANUFACTURING
Food
1.8%
2.4%
2.4%
1.6%
1.7%
1.1%
Textiles
1.0
4.5
1.3
3.2
.8
.9
Apparel
1.4
6.1
1.8
2.2
1.2
2.2
Lumber 3 Wood
.8
.2.8
.9
1.4
.7
.8
Printing
1.3
.9
1.5
0.7
1.4
.7
Chemicals
1.2
3.0
1.4
3.3
1.1
6.4
Stone, Clay a Glass
.7
.9
.9
.6
.6
.4
Fabricated Metals
1.8
6.9
2.1
8.2
1.5
1.3
Machinery (Elec. d
Non-Elec.)
4.7
1.7
5.2
2.0
4.4
3.6
Other Manufacturing
7.3
1.2
8.6
.5
6.4
2.6
TOTAL MANUFACTURING
22.0%
30.4%
26.1%
23.7%
19.8%
20.0%
TOTAL INDUSTRIAL EMPLOYMENT
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%

IV. SHIFT -SHARE ANALYSIS
A. METHOD
Shift -share analysis is a regional economic analysis tool that describes,
changes in the industrial structure of a community in terms of three effects:.
national growth effect, industrial structure effect, and local competitive edge
effect. These three effects sum to give net County growth in terms of number of
employees for each industry. These effects are explained below and
mathematically described in Table E-7.
(1) National Growth Effect - This effect essentially answers the question,
"How much would a given industry in a given locality have grown, if
the industry had the same proportion of employees in the local
community's economy as existed in the national economy, and if
the local industry had grown at the same rate as the industry
at the national level?"
EX. If the machinery manufacturing industry accounted for
4.7% of national employment in 1970 and grew to 5.2% in 1978, then
the national growth effect assumes that the County's machinery
industry had been 4.7% of total County employment in 1970 and had
also grown at the same rate to 5.2% in 1978. This effect
measures the growth in terms of number of employees, 202.
(Table E-8).
(2) Industrial Structure Effect - The industrial structure effect attempts
to adjust the national growth effect by including the reality that the
locality's proportion of a given industry is not likely to equal
the national proportions. The industrial structure effect, however,
does assume that the local industry grows at the same rate as
the national industry. The effect applies that growth rate to the
locality's own industrial mix.
EX. Since the County's machinery industry accounted for only 1.7% of
total County employment in 1970 compared to 4.7% for the nation,
the previous assumed County growth of 202 employees (as measured
by the national growth effect) has to be reduced by a negative
136 employees (Table E-8), in order to reflect the County's
industry mix.
(3) Competitive Edge Effect - This effect further adjusts the national
growth and industrial structure effects by accounting for the reality
that local growth rates may be different than national industry growth
rates due to such.factors as efficiency of local firms and attractive-
ness of living environment.
EX. Since the County's machinery industry grew at a rate of 17%
between 1970-78 as compared to a national growth rate of only 10%,
the County apparently posseses some competitive edge, resulting in
an adjusted increase of 194 employees (Table E-8).
Summary: National growth effect 202
Industrial structure effect -136
Competitive edge effect 194
Net County growth, 1970-78 260
-t5-

TABLE E-7
SHIFT SHARE EFFECTS
STEPS
(I) Change in the number of employees between 1970-1978, if computed
for each industry i in the County by the formula:
Gic = bic (1978) - bic (1970)
Where bic is the number of employees for industry i in the County c.
(2) Then the rate of change is calculated for each industry
ric = Gic/bic (1970)
(3) Next the County's industries are standardized to reflect the national
industrial structure.
b*ic (1970) = boc (1970) X bin/bon
Where boc is the total employment of all industries in the County and
bin is the employment of industry i in the nation n and bon is the total
employment o of all industries in the nation.
(4) This standarized County structure is then compared to the actual
structure to describe local industrial specialization.
bic (1970) - b*ic (1970)
(5) Next the County's employment growth rates are compared to national
rates for each industry in order to describe the differential
growth rate of the County's industries '
ric - rin
Where ric is the growth rate of industry i in the County and rin is the
growth rate for industry i nationally.
(6) From these calculations, three effects may be described:
National growth effect (Vic
Vic = b*ic (1970) x rin
Industrial structure effect (Kic)
Kic = (bic (1970) - bic* (19707—x rin
Competitive edge effect (Qic
Qic = bic X (ric - rin) —
(7) Net County growth in employment in industry i (nic)
Nic = Vic + Kic + Qic
-t6-

(B) Results
,-
An examination of Table E-8 indicates the following:
(1) If the County's industry mix and growth rate had been identical to the
nation's, only 314 jobs would have been added between 1978-1983. Net actual
County growth in jobs, however, indicates a gain of 3,630 jobs. The. difference
is accounted for the County's industry mix and competitive edge effects.
(2) The County's industry mix, however, was not conducive to growth between
1978-1983. The County, as indicated by the County's industry mix effect of
negative 595 jobs, possessed a high proportion of industries that generally
exhibited poor growth nationally between 1978-1983, and a low proportion of
industries that did well nationally.
(3) The County's competitive edge effect, however, more than compensated for
the poor industry mix. As indicated, the County's competitive edge accounted for
3,911 jobs. This very strong effect is primarily responsible for the actual net
County growth of 3,630 jobs between 1978-83.
(4) This shift -share analysis further demonstrates the importance of the
non -manufacturing industries to the County's rapid economic growth, compared to
the manufacturing industries. As indicated for 1978-1983, the non -manufacturing
industries demonstrated a competitive edge (3,454 jobs) nearly eight times
greater than that exhibited by manufacturing industries (457 jobs). The
non -manufacturing industries also exhibited a loss of jobs due to a poor industry
mix (-251 jobs), significantly less than that exhibited by manufacturing industry
(-344 jobs).
(5) In comparing the results for the two time periods analyzed, several
facts are apparent: One, the County's average annual growth in the competitive
edge effect was almost five times greater between 1978-1983 (782 jobs per year)
than it was between 1970-1978 (162 jobs per year), primarily due to
non -manufacturing growth. Two, the County's industrial mix has worsened, from
five jobs per year in 1970-1978, to a negative 119 jobs per year in 1978-1983.
Three, the high average County annual growth rate (1179 jobs per year) from
1970-1978 appears to have been due primarily to following the high national
average annual growth effect (1012 jobs) during that period, while the continuing
high County average annual growth rate in jobs (726 jobs per year) from 1978-1983
has been due primarily to the County's strong competitive edge (782 jobs per
year).
-17-

TABLE E-8
SHIFT SHARE ANALYSIS OF NEW HANOVER COUNTY EMPLOYMENT GROWTH FACTORS (NUMBER OF JOBS)
1970-1978
1978-1983
NET
COUNTY
COUNTY
COUNTY
NET
COUNTY
COUNTY
COUNTY
ACTUAL
GROWTH
GROWTH
GROWTH
ACTUAL '
GROWTH
GROWTH
GROWTH
COUNTY
DUE TO
DUE TO
DUE TO
COUNTY
DUE TO
DUE TO
DUE TO
GROWTH
NATIONAL
COUNTY'S
COUNTY'S
GROWTH
NATIONAL
COUNTY'S
COUNTY'S
GROWTH TREND
INDUSTRY
COMPETIVE
GROWTH TREND
INDUSTRY
COMPETIVE
MIX
EDGE
MIX
EDGE
INDUSTRY NON -
Construction
20
1068
374)
-1422
300
-945
204
1041
Trans., Comm., and
Pubilc Util(tles
750
716
338
-304
-360
-540
-170
350
Trade
2880
1938
242
700
2020
588
99
1333
Finance, Insurance and
Real Estate
420
471
-108
57
- 30
334
- 77
-287
Service
1780
2034
-338
84
1370
1543
-280
107
Government
3470
1273
-192
2389
1030
167
28
835
Other Non -Manufacturing
60
107
-100
53
80
60
- 55
75
TOTAL NON -MANUFACTURING
9380
7607
216
1557
4410
1207
-251
3454
MANUFACTURING
Food
-110
- 28
0
- 82
-160
- 45
6
-121
Textiles
-120
- 33
- 78
- 9
-900
- 70
-158
-672
Apparel
-1040
- 14
- 32
-994
90
- 76
- 41
207
Lumber S Wood
- 320
46
103
-469
-230
- 42
- 32
-156
Printing
0
39
- 16
- 23
50
46
- 22
26
Chemicals
390
21
23
346
1500
- 22
- 39
1561
Stone, Clay d Glass
- 40
24
2
- 66
- 80
- 56
10
- 34
Fabricated Metals
1190
49
114
1027
-2850
-135
-483
-2232
Machinery (Elec. S
Non-Elec.)
260
202
-136
194
840
-117
68
889
Other Manufacturing
- 160
179
-155
-184
960
-376
347
989
TOTAL MANUFACTURING
50
485
-175
-260
-780
-893
-344
457
TOTAL
9430
8092
41
1297
3630
314
-595
3911
AVERAGE ANNUAL GROWTH 1179 1012 5 162 726 63 -119 782