View original document

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

August 1996
FEDERAL RESERVE BANK OF DALLAS HOUSTON BRANCH

Houston Business
A Perspective on the Houston Economy

Long-Term Performance:
Per Capita Income
In Houston

P

Using real per capita
income growth
over 25 years
as a measure of
long-term development
reveals that Houston
averaged an economic
growth rate that
exceeded the nation’s,
was much like that
of Texas and equaled
that of the Dallas
metropolitan area.

er capita income is a basic measure of economic welfare. This sum of wages, salaries, profits,
interest, rents and transfer payments averaged
over the population is widely used to compare
the standards of living in different regions. Measured over time, per capita income is also a valuable summary indicator of the performance of
regional wages, jobs, property values and government transfers.
The Commerce Department recently released
detailed per capita income data for counties and
metropolitan areas in the United States for 1994.
This article examines the growth of Houston’s per
capita income from 1969 to 1994 and compares
Houston’s growth with that of other regions.
Per capita income in Houston in 1994 was
$23,046, number two among the state’s metropolitan areas behind Dallas ($24,480) but well above
the state average ($19,716). Fort Worth ($21,412)
and Austin ($20,611) rank second and third, respectively, among the state’s major metropolitan
areas, with the border city of El Paso ranking near
the bottom at only $12,940.
COMPARISONS OVER TIME
Assessing Houston’s long-term economic performance can be difficult. The size and length of
the boom, bust and recovery the city experienced
in the 1970s and 1980s dominate the last 25 years
of economic data. Equally remarkable were the
loss of 225,000 jobs between 1982 and 1987 and
then the recovery of these jobs by mid-1990.
The Houston experience forces a long-term perspective, and we need to look at all 25 years from
1969 to 1994.

Table 1
Annual Growth Rates of Real Per Capita Income,
Houston Compared with Other Regions, 1969 –94
1969 – 94 1969 – 82
Houston
United States
Texas
Dallas

1.6%
1.4
1.6
1.6

2.3%
1.1
2.3
1.7

1982 – 94
.8%
1.7
.9
1.3

1982 – 87 1987– 94
–.6%
2.8
.3
1.6

1.8%
.9
1.3
1.3

SOURCES: Bureau of Economic Analysis; Bureau of Labor Statistics; authors’
calculations.

Further, Houston cannot simply be described in terms of trends in the United States,
Texas or the state’s other metro areas because
the city was often out of sync with them. The
local bust and much of the recovery took place
during the long 1982–90 national expansion,
but Houston continued to experience strong
growth through the 1990 –91 national recession. Then Houston came to a standstill from
1991 to 1993, just as the national expansion
firmly took root. Only since 1994 has the local
economy slowly gained speed and rejoined
national growth trends. Within Texas, Houston’s
growth pattern has contrasted with that in the
Interstate 35 corridor, particularly in Dallas,
Fort Worth, Austin and San Antonio. Houston’s
part of the “Texas recession” began in 1982,
whereas the I-35 corridor’s economy did not
slow until 1986, and these cities experienced a
much shorter and milder recession.
Finally, we need to adjust for price level
differences over time and between cities. The
depth of the Texas recession shows up in
measures of the price level, particularly in lower
office and apartment rental rates and home

Table 2
Annual Growth Rates of Real Per Capita Income,
Contribution of Five Factors in Houston, 1969 – 94
1969 – 94 1969 – 82
Per capita
income
growth
Industry mix
Competitive
factors
Job growth
Property
income
Transfer
payments

1.6%

2.3%

1982 – 94

.8%

1982 – 87 1987– 94

–.6%

1.8%

.1

–.8

1.0

1.8

.5

.4
.9

1.3
1.8

–.5
–.1

–1.7
–1.8

.3
1.1

–.1

0

.6

–.4

.6

.3

0
.2

0

.4

prices. We have used the consumer price index
(CPI) to adjust for price changes. It is not the
best deflator for personal income measures, but
it is the best that provides geographic detail.1
Table 1 summarizes the growth rate of
Houston’s per capita income for the 25-year
period from 1969 to 1994 and compares it
with the rates for the United States, Texas and
Dallas. Houston’s average for the period is 1.6
percent per year, ahead of the United States by
0.2 percent and just matching statewide trends.
The table also shows growth rates varying widely
during the local boom (1969 – 82), bust (1982 –
87) and recovery (1987– 94). Dallas shows
more consistent patterns of growth over time,
although its 25-year average is, remarkably,
identical to that of Texas and Houston.
SOURCES OF CHANGE IN PER CAPITA INCOME
What contributed to income growth in these
various periods? We partitioned Houston’s job
growth into five factors that together account
for overall growth. Table 2 shows total real per
capita income growth in Houston, with the top
line of the table matching that of Table 1. In the
rows below is the list of factors that contribute
to local income growth and the percentage
points each contributed to the total. The contributions by column add up to total income
growth.2 The factors are as follows:
1. Industry mix — As the national economy
grows, compensation rates grow more
rapidly in some industries than others.
What if Houstonians are compensated at
the national rate at the beginning and
end of each period? Houston could still
perform better or worse than the nation
because of its industry mix. In those
years when national compensation patterns favor the Houston industry mix,
this factor is positive. In years when the
dominant local industries see national
compensation grow slowly, this factor is
negative.
2. Competitive factors —This is a catchall
category that encompasses the reasons a
region’s wages and salaries grow, apart
from industry mix and national compensation trends. These are local factors that
make a region competitive. Quality of
the labor force, the cost of doing business, the cost of living and access to
growing markets are examples.

3. Job growth — This is job growth relative
to population growth. When job growth
outpaces population growth, per capita
income goes up.
4. Property income — The contribution to
growth of rent, interest and corporate
profits.
5. Transfer Payments — The contributions of
transfers from the public sector to individuals through public retirement programs, unemployment compensation,
Medicare and so on.
Some of these factors vary substantially
with the business cycle. During the long expansion from 1969 to 1982, for example, allowing Houston compensation rates to grow at
the national rate, as dictated by the industry
mix factor, would have held per capita income
growth back by 0.8 percent per year. Competitive factors worked to push it up 1.3 percent
per year. In contrast, the bust years of 1982 – 87
would have benefited by 1.8 percentage points
per year if national compensation rates had
materialized in Houston. At the same time,
competitive factors held per capita income
growth back by nearly the same amount. Employment growth is another large contributor,
predictably positive in good times and negative in bad. The negative contribution of property income after 1987 reflects falling property
values in the region in the 1980s, as well as
falling interest rates. Also, the large role of
transfers during 1982 –87 partly reflects hard
economic times, as unemployment compensation is a key component.
The first column in Table 2 is perhaps the
most meaningful, as it covers 25 years and
averages out cyclical events. It begins in 1969
before the oil boom and ends in 1994, when
Houston’s recovery was complete and the
city was enjoying healthy and moderate expansion. Overall income growth of 1.6 percent was
driven mainly by job growth (0.9 percentage
points) and the city’s competitive advantages
(0.4 points). Transfer payments (0.2 points)
and industry mix (0.1 points) made small contributions.
Table 3 shows the same results averaged
over 25 years for the United States, Texas and
Dallas and compares them with Houston’s results. Once we back up and take a long-term
perspective, all these regions show far more
similarities than differences. The overall figures

Table 3
Sources of Per Capita Income Growth,
Houston Compared with Other Regions, 1969 – 94

Per capita income growth
Industry mix
Competitive factors
Job growth
Property income
Transfer payments

Houston

U.S.

Texas

Dallas

1.6%

1.4%

1.6%

1.6%

.1

.3
.2
.8
.1
.3

.1
.4
.9

.1
.4
.9
0
.2

0
.8
.2
.3

0
.1

and the percentage-point contributions are
broadly similar for all regions, and for Dallas
and Houston, in particular, they are virtually
identical. Texas makes statewide gains of 0.2
percentage points due to competitive factors,
half the 0.4 percent achieved in Dallas and
Houston, implying that many of the state’s
competitive advantages may be concentrated
in the state’s two largest metro areas.
CONCLUSION
It has been difficult in recent years to describe the performance of the Houston economy.
It has hit remarkable highs and lows and often
run counter to trends in the nation and other
parts of Texas. Using real per capita income
growth over 25 years as a measure of long-term
development reveals that Houston averaged
an economic growth rate that exceeded the
nation’s, was much like that of Texas and
equaled that of the Dallas metropolitan area.
Job growth is the biggest determinant of income growth in all regions examined.
— Robert W. Gilmer
Marisol Solis
NOTES
1

2

Marisol Solis is a student at Rice University.
In Texas, the CPI is available only for the Houston and
Dallas metropolitan areas. To deflate statewide Texas data,
we used a deflator available for the southern United States.
The methodology to account for contributions to per capita
income growth is from Daniel H. Garnick (1990), “Accounting for Regional Differences in Per Capita Income Growth:
An Update and an Extension,” Survey of Current Business
( January):29 – 40.

JULY 1996

HOUSTON BEIGE BOOK

O

il and natural gas markets have been
the center of local economic interest in recent
weeks. Petrochemical markets look weak compared with their record performance in 1995 but
are rebounding from a poor first quarter. Refiners were hurt by a combination of stable crude
prices and falling gasoline prices. Retail, auto,
housing and real estate markets all show underlying strength.
RETAIL AND AUTO SALES
Auto sales in June were up 8 percent compared with last June, and first-half sales are up 6
percent from the same period in 1995. Sportutility vehicles continue to lead the auto market,
with some models scarce and expensive. Inventory is in good shape as dealers begin to clear
their lots for the new models.
Retail sales are making small gains on a
same-store basis, still relying on heavy promotions and discounts. Retailers are making planned
sales levels this year, largely on the basis of
more realistic sales forecasts, and inventory is
under control. Plans for the coming holiday
season have been made; retailers anticipate only
a 1- or 2-percent increase in sales over last year.
ENERGY PRICES
Crude oil prices have dropped from $24 to
$20 a barrel since the last Beige Book survey,
largely because of pending Iraqi sales of crude
for humanitarian purposes. Prices have remained
surprisingly strong, however, helped by continued low inventory, the substitution of oil for
natural gas under industrial and utility burners
and a demand for domestic oil products 2.5
percent stronger than last year.
Natural gas prices initially strengthened in
recent weeks, from $2.20 to $2.60 per thousand
cubic feet, on news of hot weather on the East
Coast and in the Southwest. The primary concern, however, has been whether storage
fields can be refilled before the heating season
begins in November, and prices fell back to
$2.20 in late July as cooler weather saw storage
levels begin to rise.

OIL FIELD SERVICES AND MACHINERY
Oil service and machinery companies report increased activity, still led by drilling for
natural gas. Domestic activity is up about 8
percent compared with last year, with Texas and
Louisiana accounting for more than half of the
increase. Offshore activity in the Gulf of Mexico
remains flat because available rigs have been
put to work, and all but four or five Gulf rigs are
looking for natural gas. Day-rates continue to
rise, and many rigs are now booked through
1997 and beyond.
REFINING AND PETROCHEMICALS
Petrochemical producers enjoyed improving margins and solid demand. Demand for
plastic packaging products has been particularly strong, with rising prices, low inventories
and scattered shortages of some grades. This
has been offset by weakness in the demand
for products tied to synthetic fibers, caused
by slow export sales. After a poor first quarter,
basic ethylene and propylene increased in
price a few cents, falling feedstock prices saved
a few cents in production costs, and margins
are again solid.
Refiners saw wholesale gasoline prices
weaken to four-month lows in mid-June, down
15–20 cents from spring levels. They regained
about half of this decline on the basis of stronger-than-expected driving over the Fourth of
July weekend. With crude oil prices holding
steady near $20 per barrel, profit margins on the
Gulf Coast were hurt by low gasoline prices.
REAL ESTATE
Local real estate markets have been strong
throughout 1996 and show fundamental strength.
Apartment occupancy rates are high, and investor interest remains strong. Quality warehouse
space is no longer available, and the market has
turned to both build-to-suit and speculative
construction. Leasing of office space has improved in the central business district, and
investor interest in older suburban office buildings is high.

For more information, call Bill Gilmer at (713) 652-1546.
For a copy of this publication, write to
Bill Gilmer • Houston Branch • Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas
P.O. Box 2578 • Houston, Texas 77252
The views expressed are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the positions
of the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas or the Federal Reserve System.