View original document

The full text on this page is automatically extracted from the file linked above and may contain errors and inconsistencies.

At a Rotary Club luncheon, Sioux Falls, South Dakota
December 5, 2005
Economic Growth: Lessons from the Sioux Falls Experience
Good afternoon. I am honored to have this opportunity to talk with you and to be with some
old friends. In choosing a topic for this afternoon, I decided to begin with an examination of
the factors that I think have helped make Sioux Falls a successful and vibrant community.
This brief historical review will, I hope, be of interest to you as a retrospective as well as a
tribute to your community for the things that it has done so well. I will then discuss the
challenges I see for smaller metropolitan areas in the future. Finally, I will highlight the
successes that your community has had in creating good jobs and maintaining a healthy
economy. I believe that public policy makers--especially those at the national level--can
learn much from your experiences.
To set the broad demographic background, let's review the recent data on population and job
growth in your region. According to the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) and the
Census Bureau, both Minnehaha and Lincoln counties have grown rapidly in recent years
compared with the rural counties of South Dakota and neighboring states. During the 1990s,
the population of Minnehaha County grew about 20 percent, and that of Lincoln County
grew more than 55 percent. In contrast, the population of the rural counties in South Dakota
and Minnesota increased only about 3 percent, while the population of the rural counties in
North Dakota dropped almost 8 percent.1 This disparity in population growth likely reflects
the better job prospects and higher level of community services available in the Sioux Falls
metro area and has continued in recent years: Lincoln and Minnehaha counties grew about
9-1/2 percent between 2000 and 2004, while rural counties in South Dakota saw population
declines of about 1-1/2 percent.
Rates of unemployment roughly parallel these population trends. In particular, the
unemployment rates in the metropolitan areas of South Dakota have consistently been lower
than in rural areas, and this relative abundance of job opportunities has tended to encourage
migration to areas such as Sioux Falls. As of late summer 2005, the rate of unemployment
was 3.0 percent in Minnehaha County and 2.4 percent in Lincoln County. In contrast, the
rates of unemployment in the rural counties of South Dakota averaged about 5 percent;
some of the highest county rates of unemployment reflect persistently high joblessness on
Indian reservations.
An important cause of the migration from rural areas to metropolitan areas has been the
phenomenal growth in farm productivity in recent decades. Those of us with roots in rural
America are well aware of the decline in the number of farm families in this country.
Although we may lament the steady erosion of small family farms, we must recognize the
extraordinary improvements that have been made in the production of agricultural products.
According to data from the USDA, two farmers can now produce enough to feed 100
people, a labor requirement that is down by a factor of at least 10 from a few decades ago.

In many rural areas, the resulting decline in the number of farmers meant a decline in
population. One of the keys to the growth of Sioux Falls has been its ability to attract many
of those who left the farm by providing good jobs and an attractive level of services. Indeed,
employment growth in your locale compares favorably with comparably sized metropolitan
areas in the rest of the country. Since 1990, the rate of job growth in Minnehaha and Lincoln
counties has been more than twice that of other U.S. counties that include a metro area of
similar size. And compared with similarly sized metropolitan counties in other upper Great
Plains states, the rate of growth in jobs in your area since 1990 has been almost 50 percent
faster.
Economists offer several general hypotheses to explain why some cities prosper. I think that
the success of Sioux Falls reflects two in particular. The first is what economists term the
concentrated-market theory, which emphasizes the benefits to a business of having
consumers that are near at hand. Transportation costs are a key component of this factor.
In this context, some of Sioux Falls's economic success reflects its location along natural
trade routes. Today, of course, the intersection of Interstate highways 29 and 90 makes
Sioux Falls an obvious transportation hub. But even before the city was established, the falls
of the Big Sioux River were a landmark that, in the early nineteenth century, provided a
gathering place for Native Americans and fur buyers. Near the end of that century, the
completion of railroads helped to make Sioux Falls an important trading hub in the region,
even as agriculture and resource extraction remained the principal generators of wealth and
income.
Building upon their early successes in promoting growth, your business forebears here in
Sioux Falls were finding innovative ways to create more jobs, even before the great exodus
from the farm to the cities after World War I. A good example of this innovation is the John
Morrell meat-packing plant that was established here in the early twentieth century. The
plant processed and added value to agricultural products and lowered transportation costs by
reducing the volume of meat to be shipped. The success of the facility helped to diversify an
economy otherwise dominated by agriculture and primary extractive industries. The John
Morrell enterprise also helped to create an employment anchor for the local economy, and it
continues to provide jobs today.
A second economic rationale that is often advanced for the development of cities and that
seems applicable to the Sioux Falls experience is that of labor market pooling--the ability of
an industry to take advantage of a labor force possessing a specific set of skills, thereby
raising productivity compared with competing areas with a more dispersed set of skills.
Perhaps the best example of this advantage in Sioux Falls is the extensive health care
system, which not only delivers top-quality medical care throughout the region but also
supplies a large number of good jobs.
However, I submit that there is an additional factor underlying Sioux Falls's success in
generating jobs and attracting people. This factor--which sometimes seems to be missing
from local, state, and federal legislative and regulatory actions--is the willingness to remove
competitive barriers to business at the local and state levels. A good example of this
willingness is South Dakota's legislative changes to state usury laws in the early 1980s,
which removed regulatory ceilings on rates of interest charged on credit card accounts.
These changes helped to encourage Citibank and other credit card subsidiaries to locate their
credit card operations in South Dakota, bringing many new jobs in financial industries. In
addition, flexible labor laws, as well as South Dakota's reputation as a state with one of the

lowest per capita tax rates in the nation (including the absence of corporate income taxes),
also make South Dakota attractive to new businesses. These and similar types of policies
have helped the local economy grow without the substantial public subsidies that are
commonly used elsewhere to woo new businesses.
To sum up my brief retrospective, since its founding, Sioux Falls, thanks to its advantageous
location and the hard work and visionary leadership of its people, has prospered to a greater
degree than the typical smaller metropolitan area in the United States. Sioux Falls has been
quite successful in creating a vibrant and growing metropolitan area, but communities such
as yours face many challenges in maintaining that vibrancy in an environment of economic
change.
One of the challenges reflects a new migration pattern that is diminishing some of the flow
from rural to metro areas that has benefited Sioux Falls. The 1990s began a rebound in
population for many rural areas of the United States. Throughout that decade, more people
moved into nonmetro areas than moved out, although the population growth in metro areas
still exceeded that in nonmetro areas. This turnaround in population trends was not uniform
across all of rural America, as one in four rural counties lost population between 1990 and
2000. During that period, a number of factors became increasingly important in influencing
decisions on where to reside. Among these growing influences were amenities such as mild
weather and attractive natural resources. Lakes and oceans seem to be especially conducive
to attracting population growth.
Through its ability to change the competitive landscape, technological innovation is
augmenting the nature-related attractiveness of certain rural areas. The Internet and other
communications innovations are revolutionizing economies around the world, and many
cities may see their competitive advantage erode. Advantages derived from transportation
efficiencies seem especially susceptible to this type of erosion, particularly for competition
among firms in service-oriented industries. In addition, changes in national policies, such as
reduced trade restrictions or modified agricultural programs, can also restructure the
competitive landscape dramatically. Finally, exogenous changes in economic conditions can
rapidly alter the economic outlook--the recent run-ups in prices for energy and petroleumintensive products come to mind. To maintain an advantage in the future, business and
governmental leaders of Sioux Falls and similar communities must continue to promote
economic flexibility and private-sector initiative.
Finally, from my current position as a Governor of our nation's central bank, I would like to
spend a few minutes talking about the role of the Federal Reserve System in economic
development. Certainly, a strong and active banking community is a tremendous contributor
to an area's development. Experienced loan officers who are well acquainted with their
markets can channel funds into the loans that are most likely to create wealth and growth in
the local economy.
With regard to the Federal Reserve's role in promoting the growth of rural communities, the
Fed is charged with maintaining credit conditions that are conducive to our nation's progress.
To be sure, our main tool, monetary policy, is a blunt instrument that cannot be targeted at
individual industries or regions. However, the Federal Reserve can play a critical role in
creating a credit climate that fosters rural progress in general, a climate in which the inherent
advantages of individual communities can be realized.
We can best promote a progressive credit climate by maintaining an environment of low

inflation. An important reason for keeping inflation low is that entrepreneurs must be able to
foresee substantial future benefits if they are to be willing to bear the long-term risks that are
associated with creating new enterprises, and expected low inflation affords them a clearer
view of projected benefits. We also strive to maintain strong banking organizations that can
dependably offer the wide range of financial services that a growing community requires.
And we promote sound lending practices among banking organizations so that solid
enterprises have adequate access to credit and so that the accumulated capital of the
community is not dissipated by lending for overly risky schemes.
We continually search for ways to make our financial system more competitive and
responsive to economic needs. For instance, the Federal Reserve currently has a proposal
out for public comment that would reduce regulatory capital requirements for bank holding
companies that have consolidated assets of less than $500 million. This proposal would give
these smaller bank holding companies more flexibility in determining their desired capital
structure, which should improve their competitive position relative to larger bank holding
companies.
Finally, the Federal Reserve Banks have initiated a variety of programs aimed at studying
rural trends and promoting economic development in their regions. The Federal Reserve
Bank of Minneapolis, especially through its Community Affairs Department, has been
involved in a number of programs that examine strategies for community development. A
major finding of these programs is the deleterious effects of a strategy in which metropolitan
areas offer tax subsidies to compete for jobs and economic growth, a strategy that is
distinctly different from those approaches that I have advocated today and that have
characterized the Sioux Falls experience. In addition, in 1999, the Federal Reserve Bank of
Kansas City established the Center for the Study of Rural America, which provides the
Federal Reserve System and the nation with timely data and analyses of the progress of rural
and smaller metropolitan areas.
To conclude, Sioux Falls has been very successful in how it has played the community
development game. However, a review of the past reminds us that the economy of any
region is subject to change over time and, for a community to remain on top, its business and
governmental leaders must continue to push ahead with new ideas for promoting growth in
the region. In part, this is true because other, historically less successful communities likely
have been borrowing from your playbook, but it is also true because technological
innovation likely is changing the rules of the game.
Footnotes
1. For convenience, I am designating as rural counties those in the last three categories on a
USDA-devised population scale of 1 to 9. Counties in category 9 are the least populated; as
of 2003, Minnehaha and Lincoln counties were in category 3. Return to text
Return to top
2005 Speeches
Home | News and events
Accessibility | Contact Us
Last update: December 5, 2005