View original document

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

September 1998
FEDERAL RESERVE BANK OF DALLAS HOUSTON BRANCH

Houston Business
A Perspective on the Houston Economy

Oil-Related Employment:
Long-Term Adjustment
in Nine Cities

T

Comparisons were
made for all nine cities
to capture unseeable,
unmeasurable
variables such as
technology and
industry restructuring.

he August 1998 issue of Houston Business
showed how changes in business conditions in
the American oil industry affect oil-extraction
employment in nine cities. The focus was shortterm, using an equation that relates local oil
employment to the U.S. business cycle, the
domestic rig count and the real trade-weighted
value of the dollar. This same equation also contains information about longer term changes in
oil-related employment as the oil industry has
adopted new technology, restructured operations,
outsourced employment and consolidated more
and more operations into Houston. These longterm changes, again comparing nine oil cities, are
the subject of this article.
METHODOLOGY
As explained in the last issue, the equation
applied to all nine cities is simple:
yt = a + ct + b1X1t + b2X2t + b3X3t + ut .
Here, yt is oil-related employment (mining or
manufacturing) at time t, t is a trend term, X1 is the
U.S. unemployment rate, X2 is the Baker Hughes
rig count and X3 is the real trade-weighted value
of the dollar. The short-term changes in this relationship depend on the estimated parameters b1,
b2 and b3, which (because a logarithmic functional
form is used) are interpreted as elasticities—that
is, as the percentage change in oil-related employment in response to a 1 percent change in X1, X2
or X3. These elasticities were the focus of the last
article and were used to compare short-run job

response over time and across cities. The
parameter c is a growth rate for employment
independent of these short-run factors. The ut
is a residual random error.
The equation has been estimated to distinguish two periods, 1975 through 1986 and
first-quarter 1987 through first-quarter 1998.
Suppose the above equation represents the
1975–86 period, and the equation for the
1987–98 period is
yt′ = a ′ + c ′t + b 1′ X1t + b′2X2t + b 3′ X3t + u′t .
The focus of the last article was in terms of the
difference in the parameters b 1 and b 1′ :
b 1′ – b1, b′2 – b2 , b 3′ – b3.
Comparisons were made for all nine cities. In
this article the relevant comparisons are for the
intercept and trend parameters: a ′ – a, c ′ – c.
As discussed in more detail below, these parameters try to capture unseeable, unmeasurable
variables such as technology and industry restructuring. The results are necessarily crude
and inexact, but a comparison across the nine
cities proves insightful.
LONG-TERM CHANGE
Table 1 shows the 1986–97 change in mining employment (dominated by oil and gas
extraction) for these nine cities, as well as a
comparable change for all U.S. oil and gas
extraction. Although the nine cities average a
20.2 percent decline, their performances vary
widely. Houma–Thibodaux and Lafayette add
oil extraction jobs, and Houston and New
Orleans sustain relatively mild percentage declines. In contrast, Dallas, Denver, Oklahoma
City and Tulsa suffer 40 percent to 60 percent
declines in mining employment.
What is the cause of the large declines in
mining in some cities? Short-run industry conditions have often put tremendous downward
pressure on employment, so where long-term
change has not contributed to job growth,
employment has shrunk rapidly. The U.S. rig
count, for example, averaged 2,263 from 1975
to 1987 but only 849 from 1987 to 1997. In the
typical city, a decline in mining employment of
4 percent to 5 percent per year after 1986 is
implied by such a fall in the rig count. Cities
not favored by long-term structural gains see
employment continue to fall after 1986.

For manufacturing the picture is somewhat
brighter, as the number of factory jobs rose
15.6 percent in these nine cities collectively
between 1986 and 1997. This is a substantially
better performance than that of the United
States overall, which lost 1.5 percent. Again,
there is wide disparity among the nine cities.
Only Bakersfield (–2 percent) and Denver
(–4.1 percent) lost manufacturing jobs, while
Houma–Thibodaux, Houston and Lafayette all
increased manufacturing employment by more
than one-third.
What causes wide differences among
cities? A number of compelling reasons can
be offered for the continued decline in oilextraction employment, for recent geographic
shifts in employment, and for the relative gains
and losses in oil-related employment among
the nine cities.
Low oil prices, for example, have been a
key factor in restraining industry job growth, as
OPEC now recognizes oil-on-oil competition
from basins around the world. OPEC seeks
cartel rents but recognizes prices must be set
low enough to explicitly discourage exploration and production in non-OPEC basins,
including those in the United States.
Price volatility in oil markets has increased
since 1986, and it now shapes every oil company employment decision by forcing firms to
carefully manage short-run costs. Oil companies must be able to expand or contract activity
quickly in response to changing market conditions. One way to achieve short-run flexibility
is by hiring fewer workers for the permanent
payroll and shifting oil market risk to tempo-

Table 1
Mining Employment in Nine Oil Cities, 1986–97
(Thousands of jobs)
Change, 1986 –97
Number of
1986
1997
jobs
Percent
Houston
71.6
67.7
–3.9
–5.4
Bakersfield
13.2
10.7
–2.5
–18.9
Dallas
21.3
11.3
–10.0
–46.9
Denver
16.7
6.9
–9.8
–58.7
Houma–Thibodaux
6.4
7.2
.8
12.5
Lafayette
11.9
15.0
3.1
26.1
New Orleans
16.3
15.2
–1.1
–6.7
Oklahoma City
12.7
7.3
–5.4
–42.5
Tulsa
16.6
7.7
–8.9
–53.6
Nine-city total

186.7

149.0

–37.7

–20.2

U.S. oil and gas
extraction

450.3

334.6

–115.7

–25.7

rary employees or to outside suppliers, contractors and consultants through outsourcing.
Another important trend in the 1990s has
been the shift of exploration from declining
domestic fields to other U.S. basins or overseas. When basins fall out of favor, oil-related
employment drops quickly as jobs and equipment are shifted to other regions. Technology
centers such as Houston benefit from these
trends.
Finally, improved technology is fundamentally changing the oil exploration and
extraction business. Important advances—such
as three-dimensional seismic, measurementwhile-drilling, horizontal drilling and coiled
tubing—have lowered drilling cost, reduced
risk and widened the range of economic
prospects available to the industry.
RESULTS BY CITY
Table 2 summarizes long-term changes
that have influenced employment in mining
and manufacturing in the nine cities. What we
can conclude is limited.
The column labeled “Shift” answers the
following question: Is there a one-time shift
after 1986 in the number of employees in mining or manufacturing industries? A statistically
significant shift upward occurs in six of nine
cities in mining but not in any city’s manufacturing sector.
Two columns are labeled “Post-86 trend.”
The first tells us whether the trend term in our
equation —a growth rate for jobs independent
of the other explanatory variables—changes
after 1986. In mining, it shifts sharply downward after 1986 in every city. A very strong
upward trend in oil extraction from 1975 to
1986 could probably best be labeled as the
oil boom or as speculative excess, and the
post-1986 slowdown can be seen as healthy.
In manufacturing, only Houma–Thibodaux experiences a significant increase in trend, with
other cities the same or down. The next column tells us if any trend remains following the
shift downward after 1986, and whether the
remaining trend from 1987 to 1998 is positive
or negative.
The final column combines the first three
to show the average annual contribution of
these long-term factors to job growth from
1986 to 1998. The numbers for mining are
striking in their range, from –13.9 percent
for Dallas to 11.9 percent for Houston. An

Table 2
Long-Term Change in Nine Oil Cities

Shift

Post-86 trend

Annual
change
(percent)

Mining
Houston
Bakersfield
Dallas
Denver
Houma–Thibodaux
Lafayette
New Orleans
Oklahoma City
Tulsa

Up
Up
No
Up
Up
No
No
Up
Up

Down
Down
Down
Down
Down
Down
Down
Down
Down

None
Negative
Negative
Negative
Positive
None
Negative
Negative
Negative

11.9
2.9
–13.9
3.2
.6
–.7
–6.0
–1.7
2.6

Manufacturing
Houston
Bakersfield
Dallas
Denver
Houma–Thibodaux
Lafayette
New Orleans
Oklahoma City
Tulsa

No
No
No
No
Down
No
Down
No
No

Same
Down
Down
Same
Up
Same
Same
Down
Down

Positive
None
None
None
Positive
None
None
Negative
None

3.7
–3.7
–1.1
–1.5
–3.6
6.6
–5.2
4.4
–.7

unweighted average for the nine cities is –1.4
percent. The range is much smaller in manufacturing, and the nine-city average contribution is –0.1 percent.
Why the large differences in the ability to
exploit long-term changes in mining? Why the
big positives and negatives? We are essentially
left with empirical results here—we aren’t
given much insight into why these numbers
arise. The bigger positive values are associated
with large one-time shifts, so calculating the
percentage change on an annual basis may not
be entirely appropriate. Houston’s large gains,
almost certainly, are part of the ongoing consolidation of the American oil industry into
Houston, a trend documented in the April 1996
issue of this newsletter. Houston’s large labor
force, knowledge pool and available financing
have made it an irresistible point for industrywide consolidation. Four of the nine cities
(Dallas, Lafayette, New Orleans and Oklahoma
City) have not been able to harness long-run
change to their advantage, accelerating their
overall employment declines.
In manufacturing, the effects of long-term
change fall in a narrower band, and only three
of nine cities benefit (Houston, Lafayette and
Oklahoma City). Trend growth, not a one-time
employment shift, is typically the key determinant here.

AUGUST 1998

HOUSTON BEIGE BOOK

E

mployment continues to grow rapidly
in Houston, with 28,000 new jobs added since
last December, a pace that nearly matches the
strong growth of 1997. The industries generating these jobs have changed, however, shifting away from last year’s growth in mining,
manufacturing and business services, and
toward retailing, construction, and health and
legal services. The inherently local character
of much current job growth seems to make it
an echo of last year’s strong expansion, and
Houston’s economy is still on schedule to cool
off as we finish 1998.
RETAIL AND AUTO SALES
Retailing was strong through August,
with some areas that had slowed earlier in the
summer bouncing back with the advent of the
new school year. Summer inventories have
been cleared out, fall merchandise is selling
well and promotional activity has been relatively limited. Auto sales remain on the strong
pace seen all year, running about 7 percent
ahead of last year.
OIL AND NATURAL GAS MARKETS
Crude oil remains in oversupply, with
storage filled to the brim. Pessimism dominates oil market psychology, as OPEC so far
has delivered two-thirds of the production
cuts offered. Crude has traded in a $12– $14
range for most of the past six weeks.
Natural gas prices have trended downward in recent weeks, hitting 16-month lows
as they slid under $2 per thousand cubic feet
in early August. With storage rapidly filling
and weather-related demand disappearing as
autumn approaches, price is expected to continue to drop until winter.
Low energy prices continue to depress
drilling activity from the peak levels of late
last year. All domestic drilling is down 22
percent and in Texas is down 34 percent.
Oil-directed, gas-directed, onshore, Gulf of
Mexico and international drilling all declined
significantly in recent weeks.

PETROCHEMICALS AND REFINING
Commodity petrochemicals on the Ship
Channel remain under substantial price pressure. A fall in Asian exports is mainly responsible, as domestic demand remains very
strong. Profit margins were sheltered earlier in
the summer by falling energy prices, but profits are now being squeezed hard. Farther
downstream, prices have stabilized over the
summer for a few plastic resins, but others —
such as polyethylene, polystyrene and PVC —
continue to fall.
Refiners have seen mediocre profits, as
the summer driving season was good but not
spectacular. Very high levels of production
also worked to keep profits modest, as Gulf
Coast refiners operated at over 100 percent of
rated capacity for much of the summer. Attention now shifts from gasoline to heating oil
markets as winter approaches.
FINANCE
Depository institutions report little change
in credit quality, and loan demand is still very
strong. The mix of loan applications has
shifted somewhat, away from personal and
auto loans and in favor of home equity loans.
Deposit growth also remains strong. A combination of a falling stock market and a flattening yield curve has resulted in a decline in
financing available for local office, hotel,
apartment and other large projects.
REAL ESTATE
Local housing markets remain strong for
both existing homes and new homes, and
housing starts are 35 percent ahead of a year
ago on a year-to-date basis. Office markets
continue to improve based on rental rates and
occupancy. Much speculation centers on the
office market implications of the recent
merger of British Petroleum and Amoco and
other similar rumored mergers by major oil
companies.

For more information, contact Bill Gilmer at (713) 652-1546 or bill.gilmer@dal.frb.org.
For a copy of this publication, write to Bill Gilmer, Houston Branch,
Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas, P.O. Box 2578, Houston, TX 77252.
This publication is available on the Internet at www.dallasfed.org.
The views expressed are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the positions
of the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas or the Federal Reserve System.