state employment gap and job polarization
TRANSCRIPT
1
State Labor Market Slack and Job Polarization
Oregon Office of Economic Analysis
Alabama
Alaska
Arizona
State Total Employment Gap Employment Gap Comparison Job Polarization Comparison
Arkansas
California
Colorado
State Total Employment Gap Employment Gap Comparison Job Polarization Comparison
Connecticut
Delaware
Florida
State Total Employment Gap Employment Gap Comparison Job Polarization Comparison
Georgia
Hawaii
Idaho
State Total Employment Gap Employment Gap Comparison Job Polarization Comparison
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
State Total Employment Gap Employment Gap Comparison Job Polarization Comparison
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
State Total Employment Gap Employment Gap Comparison Job Polarization Comparison
Maine
Maryland
Mass.
State Total Employment Gap Employment Gap Comparison Job Polarization Comparison
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi
State Total Employment Gap Employment Gap Comparison Job Polarization Comparison
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
State Total Employment Gap Employment Gap Comparison Job Polarization Comparison
Nevada
New
Hampshire
New
Jersey
State Total Employment Gap Employment Gap Comparison Job Polarization Comparison
New
Mexico
New
York
North
Carolina
State Total Employment Gap Employment Gap Comparison Job Polarization Comparison
North
Dakota
Ohio
Oklahoma
State Total Employment Gap Employment Gap Comparison Job Polarization Comparison
Oregon
Penn.
Rhode
Island
State Total Employment Gap Employment Gap Comparison Job Polarization Comparison
South
Carolina
South
Dakota
Tennessee
State Total Employment Gap Employment Gap Comparison Job Polarization Comparison
Texas
Utah
Vermont
State Total Employment Gap Employment Gap Comparison Job Polarization Comparison
Virginia
Washington
West
Virginia
State Total Employment Gap Employment Gap Comparison Job Polarization Comparison
18
Wisconsin
Wyoming
State Total Employment Gap Employment Gap Comparison Job Polarization Comparison
19Oregon Office of Economic Analysis
MethodologyThe state level Total Employment Gap measure is based on Andrew Levin’s work at the IMF and Dartmouth. It combines the unemployment gap, the labor force participation gap and the underemployment gap to gauge how far the labor market is from full employment. Available data at the state level is not identical to the U.S. overall. While the specifics do differ between these estimates and Dr. Levin’s, the broader trends and calculations are similar.
Unemployment Gap: Calculate the average difference in unemployment rates between each individual state and the U.S. over the 1990 to 2006 time period. Add this average difference to the Congressional Budget Office’s estimate for NAIRU to obtain a state level NAIRU estimate. The unemployment gap is the difference between the state’s actual unemployment rate and this state level NAIRU.
Participation Gap: Create a state demographically-adjusted labor force participation rate. Fix age cohort LFPR at 2000 rates and apply these fixed rates over time to the changing demographic/population figures by state. Since population figures are available annually, convert annual data to monthly or quarterly using a frequency conversion (e.g. Eviews.) The participation gap is the difference between the actual LFPR and the demographically-adjusted series.
Underemployment: Calculate those working part-time for economic reasons as share of the labor force. Average the 2005-07 values; this is an estimate of PT for economic reasons at full employment. Calculate the difference between actual PT for economic reasons as share of the labor force and the 2005-07 average. Divide by 2 to estimate full-time equivalent positions.
20Oregon Office of Economic Analysis
Contact
www.OregonEconomicAnalysis.com
@OR_EconAnalysis
(503) 378-4052