View original document

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

R

V
May/June 1990

Vol. 72, No. 3




3 E ighth D istrict Banks in 1989: In
th e E ye o f a Storm ?
18 T h e Eighth D istrict Business
E c o n o m y in 1989: E xitin g the
E ighties w ith V ig o r
31 T h e U.S. and E ighth D istrict A g r i­
cu ltu ral E con om ies in 1989:
B uilding on Past S tren gth

THE
FEDERAL
RESERVE
RANK of

sr.ijoris

1

F e d e ra l R e s e r v e B ank o f St. L o u is
R eview
May/June 1990

In This Issue




.

..

In this Review's first article, “Eighth District Banks in 1989: In the Eye
of a Storm?" Michelle A. Clark compares the performance of Eighth
District commercial banks in 1989 with that o f their national peers.
Because District banks w ere largely untouched by some o f the major
problems facing the industry in 1989, especially losses from real estate
and foreign loans, they were able to outperform their U.S. counterparts
in measures o f profitability, asset quality and capital adequacy. Clark
finds that differing asset and liability compositions at District and U.S.
banks explain much o f the difference in performance ratios between
the two groups of banks.
The author points out that both District and U.S. banks are experienc­
ing increases in problem real estate loans which pose a threat to prof­
itability in 1990. Clark concludes, however, that banks should be able to
weather the economic and regulatory challenges of the next decade.
* * *

In the midst o f national recession, the Eighth District’s business
economy weakened in the early 1980s, with employment declining and
unemployment rates rising to double-digit levels. In this issue’s second
article, Thomas B. Mandelbaum points out that, as we exited the 1980s,
the region's unemployment rate had declined to its lowest level since
1979, and income and employment continued to expand in the longest
peacetime recovery on record.
Mandelbaum describes economic conditions in 1989 in the Eighth
District’s business economy, placing the year’s developments in the con­
text of the District’s and the nation’s economic growth during the 1980s.
The author observes that, despite the general strengthening o f the
region’s economy in 1989, some of the District’s sectors, such as residen­
tial construction, weakened, and the economic performance o f the
region’s states varied widely. Furthermore, employment growth slowed
in 1989 in each of the four primary states of the District. To the extent
that projections of economic activity are accurate, employment growth
will slow further in Kentucky, Missouri and Tennessee in 1990.
* * *

As the U.S. agricultural economy rebounded from the 1988 drought,
1989 real net farm income rose to its highest level since 1975. In the
third article in this Review, "The U.S. and Eighth District Agricultural
Economies in 1989: Building on Past Strength,” Jeffrey D. Karrenbrock

MAY/JUNE 1990

2

describes how strong livestock returns and more normal crop produc­
tion helped boost the financial positions o f both U.S. farmers and
agricultural financial institutions in 1989.
Karrenbrock cautions, however, that since the Eighth District’s farm
income was not as severely affected by the 1988 drought as other
regions of the nation, District farm income growth in 1989 may not
have paralleled the income rebound induced by the drought recovery in
the rest o f the nation. The author concludes by briefly discussing how
technological change and environmental concerns may affect agriculture
in the new decade.

ERRATA
Alison Butler’s article in the March/April 1990
issue o f the Review contained several printing
errors. In the numerator o f equation 4 on page
39, a dot was inadvertently omitted above the
variable N(t). The correct version o f equation 4
should read:

Chiang, Alpha C. Fundamental Methods of Mathematical
Economics, 3rd ed. (McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1984).
Day, Ft. H., and Wayne Shafer. “Keynesian Chaos,” Journal
of Macroeconomics (Summer 1985), pp. 277-95.
De Grauwe, Paul, and Kris Vansanten. “Deterministic Chaos
in the Foreign Exchange Market,” Discussion Paper Series
No. 370, Centre for Economic Policy Research, 1990.
Deneckere, Raymond, and Steve Pelikan. “Competitive
Chaos,” Journal of Economic Theory (October 1986),
pp. 13-25.
Devaney, Robert L. An Introduction to Chaotic Dynamical
Systems (Addison-Wesley Publishing Company, Inc., 1989).
Ellis, Jennifer M. “Are Exchange Rates Chaotic?” mimeo,
University of Oregon, 1990.
Frank, Murray, and Thanasis Stengos. “Chaotic Dynamics in
Economic Time-Series,” Journal of Economic Surveys
(Vol. 2, 1988), pp. 103-33.
Gleick, James. Chaos: Making a New Science (Penguin
Books, 1987).
Grandmont, Jean-Michel, ed. Nonlinear Economic Dynamics
(Academic Press, 1987).
Grandmont, Jean-Michel. "On Endogenous Competitive
Business Cycles,” Econometrics (September 1985),
pp. 995-1045.
Haavelmo, T. A Study in the Theory of Economic Evolution
(Amsterdam: North-Holland Publishing Company, 1954).
Hinich, Melvin J., and Douglas M. Patterson. “Identification
of the Coefficients in a Non-Linear Time Series of the


FEDERAL
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ RESERVE BANK OF ST. LOUIS
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

N(t)/N(t) = C - D/A.
A substantial share o f the references also was
omitted from her article. The missing references
are printed below. W e apologize for any incon­
venience these errors may have caused for our
readers.

Quadratic Type,” Journal of Econometrics (November
1985a), pp. 269-88.
________ “Evidence of Nonlinearity in Daily Stock Returns,”
Journal of Business and Economic Statistics (January
1985b), pp. 69-77.
Kelsey, David. “The Economics of Chaos or the Chaos of
Economics,” Oxford Economic Papers (March 1988),
pp. 1-31.
Li, Tien-Yien, and James A. Yorke. “Period Three Implies
Chaos,” American Mathematical Monthly (December 1975),
pp. 985-92.
Mandelbrot, Benoit B. The Fractal Geometry of Nature (W. H.
Freeman and Company, 1983).
May, Robert M. “Simple Mathematical Models With Very
Complicated Dynamics,” Nature (June 10, 1976),
pp. 459-67.
Melese, Francois, and William Transue. “Unscrambling
Chaos Through Thick and Thin,” Quarterly Journal of
Economics (May 1986), pp. 419-23.
Poincare, Henri. Science and Method, translated by Francis
Maitland (Dover Publications, Inc., 1952), pp. 67-68.
Ramsey, James B. “Economic and Financial Data as Non­
linear Processes,” in Gerald Dwyer and R. W. Hafer, eds.,
The Stock Market: Bubbles, Volatility, and Chaos (Kluwer
Academic Publishers, 1989).
Stewart, Ian. Does God Play Dice?: The Mathematics of Chaos
(Basil Blackwell, Inc., 1989).
Stutzer, Michael J. “Chaotic Dynamics and Bifurcation in a
Macro Model,” Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control
(November 1980), pp. 353-76.

3

Michelle A. Clark
Michelle A. Clark is an economist at the Federal Reserve Bank
of St. Louis. Thomas A. Pollmann provided research
assistance.

Eighth District Banks in
1989: In the Eye of a Storm?

A

-£ A -F T E R REBOUNDING sharply in 1988, most
commercial banks in the Eighth Federal Reserve
District experienced modest increases in prof­
itability in 1989 and continued to outperform
their national counterparts.1 With few excep­
tions, Eighth District banks were largely un­
scathed by the rough weather which battered
some segments of the industry, especially losses
from real estate loans and loans to lesser-devel­
oped countries (LDCs), which depressed earn­
ings at many of the nation’s largest banks.
The performance o f Eighth District commer­
cial banks in 1989 vs. their national peers is
analyzed in this paper.2 Conventional perfor­
mance measures, including bank earnings, asset
quality and capital adequacy, are examined to
assess the financial condition and operating
soundness of the District’s banking industry. In
addition, the compositions of assets and liabili­
ties at District and U.S. banks are compared to
explain why District bank performance ratios
differ from those of their national peers.

'The Eighth Federal Reserve District comprises the follow­
ing: Arkansas, entire state; Illinois, southern 44 counties;
Indiana, southern 24 counties; Kentucky, western 64 coun­
ties; Mississippi, northern 39 counties; Missouri, eastern
and southern 71 counties and the City of St. Louis; Ten­
nessee, western 21 counties.

EARNINGS
Eighth District banks earned $1.14 billion in
1989, an increase of 1.7 percent from 1988
earnings o f $1.12 billion. Earnings for all U.S.
banks of comparable size were $14.54 billion in
1989, up 7 percent from 1988. Earnings for the
entire banking industry fared poorly in 1989,
however, because o f the subpar performance of
the 43 banks with total assets greater than
$10 billion; including these 43 banks, 1989 earn­
ings totaled $15.86 billion, down 35.4 percent
from 1988 earnings o f $24.56 billion.
The number of District banks reporting losses
for the year fell again in 1989: just 50 banks, or
4 percent of the District total, incurred losses in
1989 compared with 79 banks (6.1 percent) in
1988 and 88 banks (6.7 percent) in 1987. Na­
tionally, 11.3 percent of commercial banks with
assets of less than $10 billion—banks compar­
able in size to Eighth District banks—reported
losses in 1989, down from 14.4 percent in 1988
and 18.5 percent in 1987; slightly more than 25

$10 billion, as there are no District banks of that size. See
Karrenbrock (1990) for a detailed analysis of District
agricultural bank performance in 1989. For bank perfor­
mance statistics on each Eighth District state, see Clark
(forthcoming).

2Unless otherwise noted, performance ratios for all U.S.
banks exclude those banks with assets of more than




MAY/JUNE 1990

4

percent of banks with assets greater than $10
billion reported net losses in 1989, up dramati­
cally from 5.1 percent in 1988. Substantial in­
creases in loan loss provisions were primarily
responsible for the increase in the proportion of
large banks incurring losses in 1989.3

Return on Assets and Equity
When examining bank earnings, two standard
profitability measures generally are employed:
the return on average assets (ROA) ratio and
the return on equity (ROE) ratio. ROA, calcu­
lated by dividing a bank’s net income by its
average annual assets, indicates how successful­
ly bank management employed the bank’s assets
to earn income. ROE, the ratio o f a bank’s net
income to its equity capital, provides share­
holders with a measure o f the institution’s re­
turn on their investment.4
As table 1 indicates, Eighth District banks
recorded an average ROA of 0.88 percent and
an average ROE o f 11.26 percent in 1989. Both
measures w ere down from their 1988 levels
because of a sharp drop in profitability among
the District’s largest banks. Average ROA and
ROE for the District’s 13 banks with assets of
$1 to $10 billion fell from 0.82 percent to 0.61
percent and from 12.46 percent to 9.53 percent,
respectively, over the period.
District banks in asset categories of less than
$1 billion, however, generally experienced small
average increases in ROA and ROE from 1988
to 1989. District banks in the $25 million to
$300 million asset range, which comprise about
two-thirds of all District banks, did somewhat
better, experiencing an average 5 percent in­
crease in ROA in 1989 and a 3.4 percent in­
crease in ROE. For the nearly two-thirds of U.S.
banks in this same asset category, the improve­
ments in ROA and ROE from 1988 to 1989 were
even more substantial: 20.2 percent and 17 per­
cent, respectively. The smallest U.S. banks, those

3lt should be noted that increases in provisions for loan
losses by the nation’s largest banks in 1989 largely reflect
problem loans to LDCs and more recent problems with
real estate lending. These losses will not necessarily affect
future profitability.
4Equity capital consists of common and perpetual preferred
stock, surplus, undivided profits and capital reserves and
cumulative foreign currency translation adjustments.
5U.S. banks with assets greater than $10 billion had an
even rougher year in 1989, with average ROA of just 0.11


FEDERAL
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ RESERVE BANK OF ST. LOUIS
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

with assets o f less than $25 million, experienced
a 100 percent increase in ROA and a 97.9 per­
cent increase in ROE in 1989; ROA and ROE for
District banks in this asset category changed lit­
tle from their 1988 levels.
Even though most U.S. banks showed stronger
earnings improvement than their District coun­
terparts, District banks continued to outperform
their national peers in 1989: the national aver­
ages o f 0.74 percent ROA and 10.25 percent
ROE remained below the levels achieved by
District banks. Across asset categories, only
District banks in the $1 billion to $10 billion
range registered average ROA and ROE below
that of their national counterparts. Earnings
were depressed or negative for some District
banks in that asset category because o f large
additions to loan loss provisions associated with
commercial real estate loans and loans to LDCs.5

Components o f Earnings
As with any business entity, a bank’s financial
success is determined by how much revenue its
activities generate over and above the costs in­
curred in generating that revenue. In assessing
the earnings performance o f banks, analysts
typically examine the three major components
o f income and expense: net interest income, net
noninterest income and the loan loss provision.
These components, like net income, are typically
adjusted by average assets to ease comparison
among banks. An analysis of these individual
items permits a more precise determination as
to why an institution experienced a profit or a
loss in any period.
Net Interest Margin— The net interest mar­
gin is calculated by dividing the difference be­
tween interest income (what a bank earned on
loans and investments) and interest expense
(what it paid its depositors) by average earning

percent compared with 0.94 percent in 1988 and ROE of
2.20 percent compared with 18.84 percent in 1988.

5

Table 1
Return on Average Assets and Return on Equity
R etu rn on A v e ra g e A s se ts (R O A )
1989
Asset category
All banks1

Eighth
District

1988

United
States

Eighth
District

1987

United
States

Eighth
District

1986

United
States

Eighth
District

United
States

0.88%

0.74%

0.92%

0.72%

0.80%

0.54%

0.87%

0.65%

Less than $25 million

0.81

0.58

0.81

0.29

0.68

0.14

0.68

0.02

$25-$50 million

0.98

0.74

0.94

0.59

0.89

0.45

0.84

0.44

$50-$100 million

1.06

0.88

1.01

0.76

0.93

0.64

0.92

0.60

$100-$300 million

1.02

0.92

0.96

0.78

0.94

0.74

0.87

0.69

$300 million-$1 billion

1.03

0.83

1.01

0.61

1.07

0.57

0.66

0.59

$1-$10 billion

0.61

0.65

0.82

0.77

0.51

0.48

0.98

0.75

United
States

Eighth
District

R etu rn on E q u ity (R O E)
1989
Asset category
All banks1

Eighth
District

1987

1988

United
States

Eighth
District

United
States

Eighth
District

11.26% 10.25% 11.68% 10.04% 10.24%

1986

7.54%

11.25%

United
States
9.11%

8.30

5.74

8.27

2.90

7.17

1.39

7.33

0.17

$25-$50 million

10.67

8.11

10.43

6.69

10.05

5.14

9.76

5.09

$50-$100 million

11.82

10.09

11.52

8.90

10.74

7.75

10.89

7.44

$100-$300 million

12.65

11.50

11.82

9.97

11.71

9.65

11.08

9.26

$300 million-$1 billion

12.97

11.40

12.95

8.78

13.67

8.15

8.81

8.44

9.53

10.16

12.46

12.08

7.96

7.59

14.59

11.73

Less than $25 million

$1-$10 billion

'Because all banks in the Eighth District have assets of less than $10 billion, “ all banks” includes
only those banks in the United States with assets of less than $10 billion to allow for a meaningful
comparison.
SOURCE: FFIEC Reports of Condition and Income for Insured Commercial Banks, 1986-1989

assets.6 As specified in table 2, District banks in
1989 posted their lowest net interest margin of
the four years shown. The net interest margin
fell 3 basis points from 1988 to 1989 for all
District banks, largely because of the 15 basispoint decline for banks in the $1 billion to
$10 billion asset category.

6More precisely, interest income comprises the interest and
fees realized from interest-earning assets and includes
such items as interest and points on loans, interest and
dividends from securities holdings, and interest from
assets held in trading accounts. Interest expense includes
the interest paid on all categories of interest-bearing




In contrast to other performance indicators,
the net interest margin is one area in which
U.S. banks consistently outperform their District
peers. For U.S. banks with assets of less than
$10 billion, the average net interest margin in
1989 was 4.44 percent, up 2 basis points from
1988 and 31 basis points higher than the Dis-

deposits, the expenses incurred in purchasing federal
funds and selling securities under agreement to repur­
chase and interest paid on capital notes. Average earning
assets rather than average assets are used in the net in­
terest margin because they are the only assets from which
a return in the form of interest is generated.

MAY/JUNE 1990

6

Table 2
Net Interest Margin
1989
Asset category

1988

1987

1986

Eighth United
District States

Eighth United
District States

Eighth United
District States

Eighth
District

United
States

4.13%

4.44%

4.16%

4.42%

4.27%

4.48%

4.40%

4.49%

Less than $25 million

4.27

4.55

4.28

4.51

4.45

4.61

4.68

4.73

$25-$50 million

4.22

4.55

4.22

4.49

4.34

4.59

4.56

4.75

$50-$100 million

4.14

4.52

4.12

4.49

4.33

4.59

4.56

4.77

$100-$300 million

4.20

4.60

4.17

4.51

4.39

4.59

4.45

4.68

$300 million-$1 billion

4.42

4.57

4.37

4.46

4.55

4.56

4.46

4.65

$1 -$10 billion

3.89

4.32

4.04

4.35

3.97

4.36

4.14

4.25

All banks1

1 banks includes only those banks with assets of less than $10 billion.
All
NOTE: Interest income has been adjusted upward by the taxable equivalence of tax-exempt state
and local securities.
SOURCE: FFIEC Reports of Condition and Income for Insured Commercial Banks, 1986-1989

trict average of 4.13 percent. U.S. banks posted
higher net interest margins than District banks
in every comparable asset category for all four
years shown in table 2.7
Interest Incom e and Expense—Differences
in net interest margins among banks in differ­
ent asset classes and geographic areas can be
explained by looking at the income and expense
components of the ratio. As figure 1 illustrates,
interest income as a percent o f average earning
assets for District banks averaged 10.25 percent
in 1989, up sharply from the 1988 ratio o f 9.53
percent. District banks with assets of less than
$100 million posted increases in interest income
margins ranging from 4.5 percent to 6.3 per­
cent; those with assets of more than $100 mil­
lion posted increases of 7.8 percent to 9.1
percent.
As in 1988, interest income as a percent of
average earning assets was positively related to
bank size in 1989. The greater interest incomeearning ability of larger banks can be explained
by their tendency to hold less o f their assets in

H'he story is different for the large U.S. banks. The
average net interest margin for banks with assets greater
than $10 billion fell 9.5 percent in 1989 to 3.43 percent.
This 36 basis-point decline pulled down the net interest
margin for the U.S. banking industry in 1989 to 4.07 from
4.19 in 1988.


FEDERAL RESERVE BANK OF ST. LOUIS


relatively low-return securities than in relatively
high-return loans compared with the smaller
banks. The relative proportions o f securities and
loans in their asset portfolios also account for
much of the margin differences between Dis­
trict banks and their U.S. counterparts. Across
all asset categories, District banks held a larger
proportion o f their assets in the form o f secu­
rities than did their national peers over the
1987-89 period.
Figure 1 also indicates that interest expense
increased more than interest income in 1989.
While interest income as a percent of average
earning assets increased 7.6 percent at District
banks in 1989, the interest expense ratio ad­
vanced 14 percent. Most of the increase in in­
terest expense occurred in the first part of
1989, when rates paid on deposits and other
interest-bearing liabilities were higher because
of relatively restrictive monetary policy and
competition from troubled thrifts that were of­
fering high rates to meet their funding require­
ments. Because the average maturity of bank

7

Figure 1

Interest Income and Interest Expense as a
Percent of Average Earning Assets
Percent

Percent
U.S. Income

[District Income

is

~] District Expense

U.S. Expense

11

10

8

-L
1986

1987

1988

1989

SOURCE: FFIEC Reports of Condition and Income for Commercial Banks, 1986-1989

assets tends to be longer than that o f their de­
posits, rising interest rates impose increasing in­
terest expense at a time when interest income
tends to be constant or increasing more slowly,
thus exerting downward pressure on net in­
terest margins.
Every asset category o f District banks except
for one had higher interest expense ratios than
their U.S. counterparts in 1989. Moreover, of
the four years shown in figure 1, 1989 was the




only year in which the overall District average
was lower than the national one. The interest
expense differentials among District banks and
their national peers can be explained by looking
at the composition o f their interest-bearing lia­
bilities. As illustrated in column 1 of table 3,
deposit interest expense made up a greater
share o f total interest expense for most catego­
ries of District banks than for comparable U.S.
banks in 1989. These greater shares can be at­
tributed to the higher proportion o f interest-

MAY/JUNE 1990

8

Table 3
Composition of Interest Expense and Related Liabilities, 1989
DIE/TIE
Asset category
All banks1

Eighth
District
88.31%

Less than $25 million

98.99

United
States

IBD/TL
Eighth
District

Avg DR
Eighth
District

United
States
71.29%

6.98%

United
States

84.38%

75.44%

99.10

84.72

6.95%

83.88

6.69

6.65

83.91

6.80

6.76

FFE/TIE
Eighth
District

United
States

9.62%

FFP/TL
Eighth
District

United
States

7.04%

7.73»/

0.70

0.57

0.46

0.34

0.81

0.80

0.56

0.50

11.31%

$25-$50 million

98.91

98.79

86.07

$50-$100 million

98.26

97.79

85.95

82.99

6.89

6.80

1.23

1.51

0.91

1.00

$100-$300 million

95.48

95.28

82.87

80.25

6.86

6.78

3.56

3.29

2.63

2.19

$300 million-$1 billion

88.85

87.41

74.12

73.85

6.84

6.89

9.90

9.14

7.42

6.05

$1-$10 billion

73.93

75.76

61.19

63.64

7.36

7.13

21.41

17.61

15.80

12.31

DIE
TIE
IBD
TL
Avg DR
FFE
FFP

=
=
=
=
=
=
=

deposit interest expense
total interest expense
interest-bearing deposits
total liabilities
average deposit rate (DIE/IBD)
federal funds purchased and securities sold under agreements to repurchase expense
federal funds purchased and securities sold under agreements to repurchase

'All banks include only those banks with assets of less than $10 billion.
SOURCE: FFIEC Reports of Condition and Income for Insured Commercial Banks, 1986-1989

bearing deposits to total liabilities held by Dis­
trict banks (column 3) and the higher average
rate paid on those deposits (column 5).
In addition, most District banks paid a higher
share o f total interest expense for federal funds
than their national peers (column 7).8 The ma­
jority of District banks held a higher proportion
o f federal funds purchased and securities sold
under agreements to repurchase to total liabili­
ties than U.S. banks overall (column 9). The
federal funds rate for 1989 averaged 9.21 per­
cent, approximately 2.2 percentage points higher
than the average deposit rate, making federal
funds a significantly more expensive source of

8Federal funds expense as a percent of total interest ex­
pense and federal funds purchased as a percent of total
liabilities appear lower for District banks overall than for
U.S. banks. This total figure is skewed, however, by the
larger proportion of federal funds held by U.S. banks in
the $1 billion to $10 billion asset category and by the
larger proportion of U.S. banks in this asset class relative
to District banks. These different distributions further il­
lustrate why it is necessary to break down banks by asset
category to assess bank performance more accurately.


FEDERAL RESERVE BANK OF ST. LOUIS


funding. The higher concentrations o f interestbearing deposits and federal funds in their
liabilities portfolios and the higher average rates
paid by District banks on deposits together ac­
counted for much of the differentials in interest
expense ratios between District and U.S. banks
from 1986 to 1989.
Net Noninterest Margin—The net nonin­
terest margin is an indicator of a bank's opera­
ting efficiency and its ability to generate fee in­
come. The net noninterest margin is calculated
by subtracting noninterest expense (overhead)
from noninterest income and dividing by aver-

9

age assets.9 Because noninterest expense usually
exceeds noninterest income, the calculation
yields a negative number; it is common practice,
however, to report the noninterest margin as a
positive number. Smaller net noninterest mar­
gins, therefore, indicate better bank perfor­
mance, all else equal.
Because the net noninterest margin usually is
negative and thus depresses earnings, and the
income and expense components o f this margin
tend to be items that banks have more control
over than interest income and expense, bank
managers increasingly are seeking ways to re­
duce the net noninterest margin. Excessive
overhead frequently is mentioned by banking
executives as a barrier to maintaining accep­
table profitability levels. Consolidation of opera­
tions and increased automation are just two
ways the industry is seeking to control the
largest portion of overhead, employee salaries
and benefits.
In 1989, as in previous years, all asset catego­
ries of Eighth District banks recorded lower net
noninterest margins than their national peers.
District banks recorded a net noninterest mar­
gin of 1.93 percent in 1989 vs. 2.12 percent for
U.S. banks of comparable size. Despite lower
ratios o f noninterest income for most categories
of banks, District banks continue to record
lower net noninterest margins than their U.S.
peers because of their consistently lower
overhead ratios.
Noninterest Incom e and Expense—As il­
lustrated in table 4, District banks generated a
noninterest income to average assets ratio of 1
percent in 1989 compared with 1.22 percent for
U.S. banks overall. The pattern of noninterest
earnings across asset categories over the last
three years continued in 1989, as U.S. banks
with assets of less than $300 million once again
generated more noninterest income relative to
average assets than their District peers, while

9Noninterest expense is the sum of the costs incurred in
the bank’s day-to-day operations, which includes employee
salaries and benefits, expenses of premises and fixed
assets, as well as legal and directors’ fees, insurance
premiums and advertising and litigation costs. Noninterest
income includes income from fiduciary (trust) activities,
service charges on deposit accounts, trading gains (losses)
from foreign exchange transactions, gains (losses) and
fees from assets held in trading accounts, and charges
and fees from miscellaneous activities like safe deposit
rentals, bank draft and money order sales, and mortgage
servicing.




District banks with assets greater than $300
million outperformed their national peers. The
lower ratios for smaller District banks relative
to larger District banks can be partially attri­
buted to a lesser demand for trust activities and
foreign currency transactions in most parts of
the District as well as the large number o f rural
banks that charge no or low fees for many bank
services. Low er ratios o f off-balance-sheet items
to total assets also explain lower noninterest in­
come margins at District banks.1
0
Overall, noninterest expense fell from 1988 to
1989 at both the District and the U.S. level, as
many banks were successful in their cost-cutting efforts. Across all asset categories, District
banks maintained lower overhead ratios than
their national counterparts for all four years
shown in table 4. For District banks, the over­
head ratio o f 2.93 percent was approximately 13
percent lower than for U.S. banks of compar­
able size in 1989. These consistently lower over­
head ratios can be explained by a number of
factors: lower average salaries and benefits in
the District; a lack o f extensive branching, which
keeps overall operating expenses down; and the
large proportion o f District banks located in
nonmetropolitan areas where building, land,
rental and maintenance costs are relatively low.
Loan and Lease Loss Provision —In sharp
contrast to 1988, when loan and lease loss pro­
visions dropped substantially from their 1987
levels, total loss provisions rose substantially in
1989 for District banks and their U.S. peers.
The District loan loss provision totaled $595
million in 1989, up 30.5 percent from the 1988
provision o f $456 million. For U.S. banks of
comparable size, the provision rose 21.7 percent
to $13.53 billion. As table 5 reveals, much of
the reversal was concentrated at the largest
District and U.S. banks. The loan loss provision
to average assets ratio increased 16.7 percent
for District banks with assets o f $300 million to
$1 billion, but 56.5 percent for the 13 banks

1“Off-balance-sheet items represent obligations by a bank to
acquire certain assets or liabilities at a future date provid­
ed contractual conditions are met. They include such
diverse financial instruments as loan commitments, letters
of credit, interest rate swaps and loan sales. Banks usually
earn fee income from providing such services, but do not
have to hold capital or funding liabilities against the assets
until they are actually booked. Off-balance-sheet activities
still subject a bank to risks, which is why these items will
be included in the new risk-based capital requirements
banks will have to meet by the end of 1990.

MAY/JUNE 1990

10

Table 4
Noninterest Income and Noninterest Expense as a Percent of
Average Assets
N o n in te re s t In c o m e

Asset category

1987

1988

1989
Eighth United
District States

Eighth
District

United
States

Eighth
District

1986

United
States

Eighth United
District States

1.00%

1.22%

0.98%

1.20%

0.99%

1.16%

1.01%

1.13%

Less than $25 million

0.57

1.25

0.58

0.90

0.57

0.95

0.55

0.85

$25-$50 million

0.58

0.77

0.55

0.75

0.53

0.70

0.52

0.70

$50-$100 million

0.55

0.81

0.55

0.79

0.52

0.74

0.52

0.74

$100-$300 million

0.80

0.92

0.74

0.88

0.77

0.88

0.73

0.89

$300 million-$1 billion

1.17

1.13

1.23

1.12

1.39

1.10

1.25

1.11

$1-$10 billion

1.50

1.47

1.51

1.49

1.52

1.44

1.69

1.39

All banks1

N o n in te re s t E xp e n s e (O v e rh e a d )
1989
1988
1987
Asset category

Eighth
District

United
States

Eighth United
District States

1986

Eighth United
District States

Eighth
District

United
States

2.93%

3.34%

2.97%

3.37%

2.98%

3.36%

2.98%

3.34o/o

Less than $25 million

3.08

3.93

3.07

3.78

3.08

3.83

3.09

3.77

$25-$50 million

2.75

3.33

2.72

3.30

2.69

3.28

2.65

3.28

$50-$100 million

2.52

3.18

2.57

3.19

2.57

3.19

2.59

3.21

$100-$300 million

2.77

3.27

2.77

3.25

2.80

3.23

2.74

3.24

$300 million-$1 billion

3.20

3.31

3.32

3.40

3.37

3.38

3.46

3.45

$1-$10 billion

3.18

3.38

3.27

3.42

3.27

3.42

3.30

3.35

All banks1

1All banks includes only those banks with assets of less than $10 billion.
SOURCE: FFIEC Reports of Condition and Income for Insured Commercial Banks, 1986-1989

with assets o f $1 billion to $10 billion; U.S.
banks in those categories made more modest
additions to their provisions, 1.7 percent and
37.5 percent, respectively.1
1
The substantial increases in the provision
ratios for the large District banks were primar­
ily the result o f large provisions taken by Ten­
nessee banks to cover the nonperforming real
estate loans of a local developer as well as a
large provision at another big District bank to
11The loss provision ratio for the 43 U.S. banks with assets
greater than $10 billion almost tripled in 1989, rising from
0.43 percent to 1.28 percent.


FEDERAL RESERVE BANK OF ST. LOUIS


cover remaining exposure to LDC debt. Deterio­
rating commercial real estate and foreign loan
portfolios led to provision increases nationwide
as well. Some analysts have suggested that banks
that made large increases in provisions in 1987
to cover nonperforming foreign loans w ere not
as vigilant in assessing their growing real estate
loan portfolios in 1988 and 1989. Rather than
recognizing potential losses in 1988, which
would have depressed profits for a second

11

Table 5
Loan and Lease Loss Provision as a Percent of Average Assets

Asset category

1987

1988

1989
Eighth
District

United
States

Eighth United
District States

Eighth
District

1986

United
States

Eighth
District

United
States

0.46%

0.69%

0.38%

0.59%

0.60%

0.79%

0.59%

0.77%

Less than $25 million

0.28

0.49

0.30

0.62

0.49

0.83

0.68

1.15

$25-$50 million

0.27

0.45

0.34

0.55

0.44

0.73

0.67

0.97

$50-$100 million

0.28

0.42

0.30

0.49

0.41

0.61

0.62

0.85

$100-$300 million

0.37

0.43

0.36

0.49

0.45

0.56

0.64

0.75

$300 million-$1 billion

0.42

0.60

0.36

0.59

0.42

0.72

0.68

0.85

$1-$10 billion

0.72

0.88

0.46

0.64

0.97

0.93

0.46

0.67

All banks1

1All banks includes only those banks with assets ot less than $10 billion,
SOURCE: FFIEC Reports of Condition and Income for Insured Commercial Banks, 1986-1989

straight year, many banks delayed making these
large additions until 1989.1
2
It is important to note, however, that District
provision ratios w ere still well below those of
their national counterparts in 1989. In addition,
provision ratios declined again in 1989 for Dis­
trict and U.S. banks with assets of less than
$100 million. District banks in these asset cate­
gories, which make up more than 80 percent of
total District banks, experienced an average
decline in the provision ratio of 11.4 percent;
U.S. banks in these categories, which represent
just over 75 percent of U.S. banks, experienced
an 18.2 percent decline.

fallen, reflecting in part banks’ volatile earnings
pattern of the past few years and the riskaversion o f many investors. Regulators, too, are
concerned and have refined the tools used to
assess loan portfolios. They have also adjusted
minimum capital ratios to reflect the riskiness
o f a bank’s asset portfolio.1
3
Asset quality may be gauged by examining the
nonperforming loan ratio and the ratio o f net
loan losses to total loans. The nonperforming
loan ratio indicates the current level of problem
loans as well as the potential for future loan
losses. The ratio of net loan losses to total loans
specifies the percentage o f loans actually w rit­
ten o ff the bank’s books for a given period.

ASSET QUALITY
Asset quality was a major determinant in the
pattern of earnings for banks nationwide in the
1980s, and 1989 was no exception. The major
area of concern, however, has shifted from the
quality o f foreign loans to the performance of
real estate loans. The substantial losses already
incurred from foreign lending and the mounting
losses from real estate lending have not escaped
the notice of shareholders or regulators. Bank
stock prices in many parts of the country have
12See Rose (1990).
13The new risk-based capital requirements are discussed
briefly in a later section.




Nonperforming Loans and Leases
Nonperforming loans comprise loans and lease
financing receivables that are 90 days or more
past due or in nonaccrual status.1 The level of
4
nonperforming loans and leases at District
banks totaled $1.21 billion at year-end 1989, a
5.5 percent increase from the level at year-end
1988. Nationally, banks of comparable size ex­
perienced a 9.1 percent increase in the level of
nonperforming loans.
14Restructured loans and leases that fall into the 90 days or
more delinquent status or in nonaccrual status are includ­
ed as well.

MAY/JUNE 1990

12

Table 6
Nonperforming Loans and Leases as a Percent of Total Loans
1989
Asset category

Eighth
District

All banks1

1988

United
States

Eighth
District

1987

United
States

1986

Eighth United
District States

Eighth
District

United
States

1.60%

2.20%

1.62%

2.10%

2.10%

2.40%

2.16%

2.40%

Less than $25 million

1.71

2.31

1.80

2.65

2.12

3.16

2.66

3.76

$25-$50 million

1.70

2.15

1.72

2.43

2.14

2.75

2.61

3.19

$50-$100 million

1.47

1.98

1.65

2.19

2.04

2.45

2.46

2.93

$100-$300 million

1.67

1.92

1.70

1.89

1.95

2.20

2.04

2.53

$300 million-$1 billion

1.42

2.36

1.25

2.71

1.47

2.28

2.33

2.51

$1-$10 billion

1.65

2.27

1.65

1.92

2.44

2.41

1.81

2.06

1All banks includes only those banks with assets of less than $10 billion.
SOURCE: FFIEC Reports of Condition and Income for Insured Commercial Banks, 1986-1989

Despite the rise in the absolute level o f nonperforming loans at District banks, the ratio of
nonperforming loans and leases to total loans
declined from 1.62 percent in 1988 to 1.60 per­
cent in 1989. As table 6 indicates, the 1989
nonperforming loan ratio for District banks was
the lowest of the four years shown. In 1989,
only District banks with assets o f $300 million
to $1 billion experienced an increase in the nonperforming loan ratio; nonetheless, this category
of banks recorded the lowest nonperforming
loan ratio (1.42 percent) among District asset
categories in 1989.
In contrast to District banks, U.S. banks ex­
perienced an increase in the absolute level of
nonperforming loans and the nonperforming
loan ratio in 1989. For U.S. banks with assets of
less than $10 billion, the nonperforming loan
ratio increased from 2.10 percent in 1988 to 2.20
percent in 1989. Although the nonperforming
loan ratio fell substantially across most asset cate­
gories, an 18.2 percent increase in the ratio for
banks with assets of $1 billion to $10 billion was
large enough to boost the ratio for all banks.1
5

15The nonperforming loan ratio for the nation’s largest banks
registered its second straight year of improvement in 1989,
declining to 4.41 percent from 4.47 percent in 1988 and
5.26 percent in 1987.


FEDERAL RESERVE BANK OF ST. LOUIS


The distribution of nonperforming loans by
loan type for District banks over the past four
years is illustrated in figure 2. For the second
straight year, real estate loans made up the
largest share of nonperforming loans, almost 50
percent at year-end 1989, up from 43 percent
in 1988. The rise in the share of nonperforming
real estate loans was almost completely offset
by a fall in the proportion of nonperforming
commercial and industrial loans, from 41 per­
cent of nonperforming loans in 1988 to 35 per­
cent in 1989. The share o f nonperforming agri­
cultural loans to total nonperforming loans fell
again in 1989 to approximately 4 percent, less
than half the percentage recorded at year-end
1986. The ratio of nonperforming consumer
loans to total nonperforming loans held steady
at District banks in 1989.

Net Loan and Lease Losses
A more direct measure of loan problems than
the nonperforming loan ratio is the percentage
of loans and leases actually written o ff a bank’s
books. Net loan and lease losses are calculated

13

Figure 2

District Distribution of Nonperforming Loans
by Loan Type
Percent
I

Percent
I Agriculture
Consumer

Ml
□
50 - |

Real Estate
| Commercial

50

40

40

30

30

20

20

10

10

_L

-L

JL

1986
1987
1988
1989
NOTE: Percentages may sum to greater than 100 because agricultural loans are
included in other categories as well.
SOURCE: FFIEC Reports of Condition and Income for Commercial Banks, 1986-1989

by totaling loan and lease charge-offs and sub­
tracting recoveries over a given period. Net loan
and lease losses totaled $505 million at District
banks in 1989, down almost 2 percent from
1988 net charge-offs. Net charge-offs at U.S.
banks o f comparable size rose 0.8 percent in
1989 to $10.4 billion.

16Bank management will adjust the loan loss provision in the
current year to reflect nonperforming loans; those loans
may be carried on a bank’s books for years before a deci­
sion is made to write them off. Bank supervisors also help
decide when to write off loans, and in fact can force a
bank to write off a loan that is still performing by the




The ratio o f net loan and lease losses to total
loans is an indicator o f problem lending in the
current year as well as prior years, because of
bank management’s partial discretion in deter­
mining when a loan is deemed uncollectible and
is thus written off.1 As table 7 indicates, the
6
net loan loss ratios for District and comparable

bank’s standards. Net loan and lease losses do not affect
current earnings as the loan loss provision does; rather,
they just alter the allowance for loan losses (or loan loss
reserve), a contra account on the asset side of a bank’s
balance sheet.

MAY/JUNE 1990

14

Table 7
Net Loan and Lease Losses as a Percent of Total Loans
1988

1987

Eighth United
District States

Eighth United
District States

1989
Asset category

Eighth
District

United
States

1986
Eighth
District

United
States

0.67%

0.83%

0.73%i

0.87%

0.70%

0.89%

0.88%

0.97%

Less than $25 million

0.45

0.84

0.60

1.14

0.95

1.50

1.33

2.03

$25-$50 million

0.42

0.74

0.53

0.88

0.74

1.18

1.16

1.61

$50-$100 million

0.44

0.64

0.47

0.74

0.70

0.96

1.07

1.35

$100-$300 million

0.53

0.60

0.50

0.66

0.67

0.78

0.99

1.02

$300 million-$1 billion

0.51

0.78

0.42

0.78

0.71

0.87

0.92

0.99

$1-$10 billion

1.00

0.96

1.18

0.95

0.68

0.86

0.57

0.73

All banks1

1AII banks includes only those banks with assets of less than $10 billion.
SOURCE: FFIEC Reports of Condition and Income for Insured Commercial Banks, 1986-1989

U.S. banks declined from 1988 to 1989.1 District
7
banks wrote o ff 67 cents for every $100 in loans
on the books at year-end 1989, compared with
83 cents for U.S. banks of comparable size. Ex­
cept for banks in the $1 billion to $10 billion
asset category, District net loan loss ratios re­
mained well below those of their national coun­
terparts in 1989, as they had for the previous
three years.
The net loan loss ratio for District banks
declined in 1989 across all but two asset cate­
gories; paralleling the rise in the nonperforming
loan ratio, the net loan loss ratio rose 21 per­
cent for banks with assets of $300 million to
$1 billion. District banks with assets of $1 bil­
lion to $10 billion experienced a 15.3 percent
decline in their net loan loss ratio, as banks that
had taken large provisions for LDC loan losses
in 1987 wrote o ff comparatively more of those
loans in 1988 than in 1989. For District banks
with assets of less than $50 million, the net loan
loss ratio declined dramatically again in 1989,
reflecting the continuing rebound from agri­
cultural loan losses in the mid-1980s.

17lncluding the nation’s largest banks, however, the U.S. net
loan loss ratio rose almost 13 percent in 1989, reflecting
LDC loans written off by money center banks and commer­
cial real estate loans written off by some of the country’s
largest regional banks.


FEDERAL
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ RESERVE BANK OF ST. LOUIS
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

The distribution of loan losses by loan type
for District and U.S. banks is illustrated in table
8. The data are further separated into two asset
categories to illustrate the lending patterns of
small vs. large banks, as agricultural loan losses
have been primarily concentrated at small banks
while foreign loan losses have been incurred by
large banks. For banks with assets of less than
$300 million, losses on commercial and industrial
loans once again made up more than 50 percent
of total loan losses at both the District and na­
tional levels. The share of commercial loan
losses at small District and U.S. banks has fallen
steadily since 1986, while losses from consumer
lending have increased substantially since 1986
at District and U.S. banks of comparable size.
After making up nearly a quarter o f District
and 20 percent of U.S. loan losses in 1986, the
share of agricultural loan losses has dropped
dramatically over the past four years, reflecting
the rebound in the farm economy and the in­
crease in losses from other types of lending,
such as real estate. In contrast to the results at
U.S. banks, the share of real estate loan losses

15

at small District banks actually fell from 1988 to
1989, although the real estate loss share was
roughly the same at both sets o f banks. Once
again, there were no losses from foreign len­
ding at small District banks in 1989 and minimal
losses at the national level.
The largest District banks, with assets of
$300 million to $10 billion, experienced a large
increase in the share o f commercial and indus­
trial loan losses in 1989, climbing above the 50
percent level for the first time since 1986. Such
loan losses at U.S. banks made up less than a
third of total loan losses in 1989, as the ratio
continued its steady decline from its 1986 level.
Consumer loan losses accounted for the largest
share of total loan losses at U.S. banks in 1989,
and the second largest share at District banks.
The share of real estate loan losses rose approx­
imately 50 percent at both the District and na­
tional level in 1989, and may well surpass con­
sumer and commercial loan loss shares in 1990.
The share of agricultural loan losses more than
doubled at large District banks in 1989, but still
made up the smallest proportion o f loan losses
at 0.38 percent. After comprising almost a third
of loan losses in 1988, foreign loan losses declin­
ed to less than 2 percent of total loan losses at
large District banks in 1989. Most District banks
with outstanding foreign loans wrote o ff in 1988
the loans for which they took provisions in
1987. The 1989 share of foreign loan losses at
U.S. banks of comparable size also fell from
1988, but was twice the District's share.

CAPITAL ADEQUACY
The volatile earnings pattern o f banks in re­
cent years, the problem loan portfolios in vari­
ous parts of the country and the growth of offbalance-sheet items have prompted bank regu­
lators to redefine measurements of the ade­
quacy of financial capital. Banks maintain capital
to absorb losses, provide for asset expansion,
protect uninsured depositors and promote public
confidence in the financial soundness of the
banking industry. Since 1985, banks have been
18Primary capital is the sum of common stock, perpetual
preferred stock, surplus, undivided profits (retained earn­
ings), contingency and other capital reserve, qualifying
mandatory convertible instruments, loan and lease loss
reserves, minority interests in consolidated subsidiaries,
less intangible assets excluding purchased mortgage ser­
vicing rights. (For the purposes of this paper, only the
goodwill portion of intangible assets was deducted.)
Secondary capital is limited to 50 percent of primary




Table 8
Distribution of Loan Losses_______
Banks with assets of less than $300 million
Loan type

1989

1988

1987

1986

District
Agriculture
Commercial
Consumer
Real estate
Foreign1

3.70%
53.72
26.31
19.84
N.A.

6.17%
56.16
20.15
23.50
N.A.

14.17%
61.20
16.23
22.17
N.A.

23.60%
66.14
12.73
20.95
0.12

United States
Agriculture
Commercial
Consumer
Real estate
Foreign1

3.20%
54.76
24.21
20.41
0.10

4.71%
58.60
21.21
19.72
0.04

10.51%
62.52
18.45
18.52
0.02

19.13%
69.26
15.43
14.84
0.01

Banks with assets of $300 million to $10 billion
Loan type

1989

1988

1987

1986

District
Agriculture
Commercial
Consumer
Real estate
Foreign1

0.38%
51.36
21.17
19.24
1.78

0.15%
38.34
16.39
12.65
27.20

1.48%
40.68
31.10
15.61
3.82

2.80%
55.23
28.88
10.18
0.23

United States
Agriculture
Commercial
Consumer
Real estate
Foreign1

0.30%
31.32
38.15
24.02
4.13

0.29%
36.67
32.96
16.38
9.28

1.22%
38.71
35.51
14.51
6.40

3.44%
46.91
36.09
10.63
0.47

'Loans held in foreign offices, Edge and Agreement subsidi­
aries and International Banking Facilities (IBFs).
N.A.—not applicable
NOTE: Percentages may sum to more than 100 because some
agricultural loans are included in more than one
category.
SOURCE: FFIEC Reports of Condition and Income for Insured
Commercial Banks, 1986-1989

required by regulators to maintain minimum
standards o f 5.5 percent primary capital to total
adjusted assets and 6 percent total capital to
total adjusted assets.1 By year-end 1990, these
8
capital and includes subordinated notes and debentures,
limited-life preferred stock and that portion of mandatory
convertible securities not included in primary capital. Each
bank’s qualifying secondary capital is added to its primary
capital to obtain the total capital level for regulatory pur­
poses. The primary and total capital ratios are obtained by
dividing through by average adjusted assets (average
assets plus the allowance for loan losses less goodwill).

MAY/JUNE 1990

16

Table 9
Primary Capital Ratio

Asset category
All banks1

8.71%

1987

1988

1989
Eighth
District

United
States

Eighth
District

8.25%

United
States

8.72%

8.12%

1986

Eighth United
District States
8.72%

8.11%

Eighth
District
8.47%

United
States
7.97®/

10.38

11.00

10.43

10.80

10.11

10.58

9.97

10.36

$25-$50 million

9.84

9.92

9.68

9.65

9.52

9.48

9.27

9.30

$50-$100 million

9.67

9.49

9.48

9.26

9.35

9.06

9.08

8.82

$100-$300 million

8.85

8.76

8.85

8.63

8.71

8.51

8.50

8.26

$300 million-$1 billion

8.72

8.23

8.55

7.86

8.50

7.85

8.30

7.81

$1 -$10 billion

7.53

7.53

7.66

7.45

7.89

7.48

7.52

7.31

Less than $25 million

1All banks includes only those banks with assets of less than $10 billion.
SOURCE: FFIEC Reports of Condition and Income for Insured Commercial Banks, 1986-1989

standards will be replaced by a new core capital
to total assets ratio (leverage ratio) and capital
ratios based on risk-adjusted assets, standards
designed to adjust capital requirements to the
credit risk o f assets and off-balance-sheet
items.1
9
Both District banks and their national counter­
parts continued to register average primary
capital ratios well above the minimum standard
in 1989. As table 9 indicates, District banks
averaged a primary capital ratio o f 8.71 percent
in 1989, just slightly lower than that achieved in
1987 and 1988. All District bank categories ex­
cept for the smallest (assets of less than $25
million) and the largest ($1 billion to $10 billion)
experienced increases or no change in their
primary capital ratios from 1988 to 1989. The
District’s smallest banks, like their national
peers, once again recorded an average primary
capital ratio well above the total bank average
in 1989. Unlike the previous three years, when

19The risk-based capital guidelines establish a systematic
framework in which differences in risk profiles among
banking institutions can be assessed in defining regulatory
capital. Assets as well as off-balance-sheet items will be
assigned weights of 0, 20, 50 or 100 percent based on
their riskiness as determined by regulators. Through 1990,
banks have the option of meeting the 5.5 percent primary
capital and 6 percent total capital ratios, or the transition
capital requirements effective at year-end 1990 of 7.25
percent qualifying capital to risk-adjusted assets, 3.625


http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ RESERVE BANK OF ST. LOUIS
FEDERAL
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

they had an average ratio substantially higher
than that o f their national counterparts, the
largest District banks in 1989 averaged the same
rate as their national peers, 7.53 percent.
As of December 1989, 11 banks, or 0.9 per­
cent o f all District banks, registered primary
capital ratios below the regulatory minimum, an
increase from 1988 when 0.5 percent failed to
meet the requirement. Nationally, 358 or 2.9
percent of U.S. banks of comparable size re­
corded deficient primary capital ratios at yearend 1989, compared with 498 banks or 3.9 per­
cent of such banks at year-end 1988.

CONCLUSION
Despite some trouble spots, Eighth District
banks once again outperformed their national
peers in measures of profitability, asset quality
and capital adequacy in 1989. Most District

percent Tier 1 capital to risk-adjusted assets and 3 percent
Tier 1 capital to total assets (leverage ratio). By year-end
1992, all banks will be required to meet the 3 percent
leverage ratio, an 8 percent capital to risk-adjusted assets
ratio and a 4 percent Tier 1 capital to risk-adjusted assets
ratio.

17

banks registered higher profitability ratios than
their U.S. peers, even though the major deter­
minant of ROA, the net interest margin, remain­
ed lower in the District in 1989. Lower loan
loss provision ratios and net noninterest mar­
gins at District banks more than compensated
for lower net interest margins, resulting in
higher ROA and ROE.
In contrast to comparable U.S. banks, asset
quality continued to improve at District banks
in 1989, as both the nonperforming loan ratio
and the net charge-off rate declined. Both Dis­
trict and U.S. banks, however, are experiencing
increases in problem real estate loans and a
substantial decline in asset quality could materi­
alize in 1990. In addition to imposing new risksensitive capital requirements on banks, regula­
tors will be keeping a close eye on real estate
portfolios.
Most District and U.S. banks had capital ratios
substantially in excess o f current minimum stan­
dards in 1989, and the majority of small banks
should have no trouble meeting the new riskbased capital requirements and leverage ratio.
Larger banks with substantial off-balance-sheet




exposure may have considerably more trouble
meeting the new requirements, as those items
are being added to the asset base o f banks and
are being assigned higher risk rates than some
traditional assets like home mortgages and U.S.
government securities.
As the 1990s begin, bankers across the coun­
try will be faced with economic uncertainty, a
changing regulatory environment and growing
problem loans, a climate not unlike that o f the
early 1980s. Eighth District banks, with solid
profitability ratios, good asset quality and strong
capital positions, are poised to weather the
changes o f this decade as they did the changes
o f the last.

REFERENCES
Clark, Michelle A. “Bank Performance in 1989: The Pluses
and Minuses,” Pieces of Eight, Federal Reserve Bank of St.
Louis (June 1990).
Karrenbrock, Jeffrey D. “The U.S. and District Agricultural
Economy: Continued Strength in 1989,” this Review
(May/June 1990).
Rose, Sanford. “Mounting Loan-Loss Provisions Weaken
Regional Bank Profits,” The American Banker; (February 6,
1990).

MAY/JUNE 1990

18

Thomas B. Mandelbaum
Thomas B. Mandelbaum is an economist at the Federal
Reserve Bank of St. Louis. Thomas A. Pollmann provided
research assistance.

The Eighth District Business
Economy in 1989: Exiting the
Eighties with Vigor

J j i NTER1NG the 1980s, the business economy
o f the Eighth Federal Reserve District was weak­
ening, employment levels w ere declining and un­
employment rates w ere rising sharply. As we
exited the 1980s, however, District economic
conditions contrasted sharply with the early
part o f the decade. In 1989, the District’s unem­
ployment rate was at its lowest level of the de­
cade while employment and income continued a
long rise, albeit at a moderate pace.1
Despite this general good news at the close of
the decade, not all sectors o f the region’s econo­
my fared well in 1989. While District employ­
ment rose, its rate o f increase slowed from the
pace o f the previous two years. Building activity
was flat, as declines in residential building offset
gains in nonresidential building. Furthermore,
the economic performance o f the District’s in­
dividual states and sectors varied widely.
1The Eighth Federal Reserve District includes the entire
state of Arkansas and parts of Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky,
Mississippi, Missouri and Tennessee. This article uses
data for the entire states of Arkansas, Kentucky, Missouri
and Tennessee, where the bulk of District economic activi­
ty is concentrated, to represent the District.
2Growth rates for all indicators compare the average for
1989 with the average for previous years.


FEDERAL
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ RESERVE BANK OF ST. LOUIS
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

INCOME AND CONSUMER
SPENDING
District real nonfarm personal income rose
moderately in 1989; as it has over the entire
decade, however, it trailed the national average.2
As table 1 shows, District real nonfarm income
in 1989 rose 2.3 percent compared with 2.7 per­
cent nationally. The slower-than-national region­
al growth last year reflected a relatively slow
expansion o f both nonfarm earnings and divi­
dends, interest and rent.
The District’s 2.3 percent gain in real nonfarm
income was a slight deceleration from a 2.7 per­
cent increase in 1988. Although income growth
from transfer payments and dividends, interest
and rent picked up last year, the expansion of
nonfarm earnings—the largest source of incomewas sluggish. From a longer-run perspective,

19

Table 1
Growth Rates of Selected Economic Indicators1
Indicator

United States
1979-89
1989

District
1979-89
1989

Real nonfarm personal income

2.4%

2.7%

1.9%

2.3%

Real retail sales2
Durables
Nondurables

2.7
4.6
1.6

1.4
2.6
0.6

2.2
3.8
1.3

2.0
4.8
0.2

1.9
- 0 .3
-0 .7
1.7
- 2 .8
2.7
2.5
4.6
1.1

2.8
1.5
1.0
3.5
0.2
3.3
2.7
5.1
2.0

1.6
-0 .3
-0 .2
0.0
-4 .4
2.4
2.3
4.4
0.7

2.9
1.6
2.0
1.0
- 4 .8
3.4
3.0
5.1
2.2

3.2

2.1

2.4

0.3

1.1

2.8

1.5

3.5

1.1
0.5
2.0

- 0 .9
-4 .1
3.2

-0 .1
-1 .2
1.2

0.1
-4 .1
4.8

Payroll employment
Goods-producing
Manufacturing
Construction
Mining
Services-producing
Wholesale/retail trade
Services
Government
Finance, insurance and
real estate
Transportation and public
utilities
Real value of building contracts3
Residential
Nonresidential

11979-89 growth rates are compounded annua! rates of change. 1989 rates are percent changes from
1988.
2Retail sales data are from DRI/McGraw-Hill.
3Excludes nonbuilding construction. Growth rates are based on current-dollar data from F.W. Dodge
Construction Potentials, which were deflated by the author.

the District’s income growth in 1989 was slight­
ly above the average for the decade, as shown
in table 1.
Retail sales grew slower at the District than
the national level in the 1980s, reflecting the
region’s slower population and income growth.3
District retail sales growth also trailed well
behind the U.S. average in the middle years of
the decade: District sales rose at a 2.6 percent
annual rate between 1984 and 1988, after ad­
justing for inflation, compared with the nation’s
3.9 percent rate.
District real retail sales, however, rose 2 per­
cent in 1989, exceeding the nation's 1.4 percent
rate. While sales o f nondurable goods showed
only marginal increases in both the District and
the nation, sales of durable goods rose 4.8 per-

cent in the District, more than tw o percentage
points higher than the U.S. rate o f increase.
One reason for weak durable goods sales in the
nation was the sharply slower sales o f automo­
biles; U.S. consumers purchased few er autos in
1989 than in any year since 1983. Among Dis­
trict states, sales o f durables w ere particularly
strong in Arkansas where even auto sales were
up moderately, according to tax revenue data.

LABOR MARKETS
Payroll employment increased in the 1980s at
a 1.6 percent annual rate in the District, reach­
ing almost 6.8 million workers by 1989. In com­
parison, U.S. payroll employment rose at a 1.9
percent rate. The District's slightly slower job

3District population grew at a 0.6 percent annual rate bet­
ween 1979 and 1989 compared with 1 percent nationally.




MAY/JUNE 1990

20

Figure 1
Annual Percent Change in Payroll Employment
P e rc e n t
—

P e rc e n t
U n ited S tate s

A rkansas

□

H K e n tu ck y

|

□

- - E ig h th D istrict

M issouri
|T e n n e s s e e

-1

-1

-2

-2
1983

84

85

86

87

88

1989

m
growth resulted mainly from a downturn in the
decade's early years that was considerably more
severe than at the national level. Between 1979
and 1982, District nonfarm employment drop­
ped more than a quarter o f a million jobs, or
nearly 5 percent, while changing little national­
ly. The cyclically sensitive goods-producing in­
dustries — manufacturing, mining and construc­
tion — accounted for 94 percent of the region’s
job losses during this period. As employment
weakened, the District’s unemployment rate
doubled, rising from 5.4 percent in 1979 to 10.8
percent in 1983.
Figure 1 shows that District job growth was
slightly stronger than its national counterpart in

FEDERAL
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ RESERVE BANK OF ST. LOUIS
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

every year except 1985 of the current recovery.
In 1989, District employment growth slowed,
but remained above the national average. Dis­
trict employment gains since 1982 allowed its
unemployment rate to fall to 5.8 percent in
1989, the lowest value since 1979.
In 1989, payroll employment rose 2.9 percent
in the District and 2.8 percent in the nation. As
figure 2 shows, the District's largest economic
sectors—wholesale/retail trade, services, manu­
facturing and government—expanded as fast or
faster than at the national level. The following
sections discuss factors that contributed to the
performance o f the Eighth District’s goods-producing and services-producing sectors last year.

21

Figure 2
Eighth District and U.S. Employment Change by
Sector, 1988-89
Percent
7.5

Percent
7.5

^ E ig h th District
T] United States
5.0

5.0

2 .5

2.5

0.0

0.0

2.5

-2 .5

-5 .0

-5 .0

-7 .5

_L

_L

JL

_L

_L

Total Payroll
C onstruction
M anufacturing
M ining

T ra d e 1

G overnm ent
Services

-7 .5

TPU3
FIR E2

'W h o le sale and retail trade
2Finance, insurance and real estate
tr a n s p o r ta tio n and public utilities

GOODS-PRODUCING SECTORS

Mining

Following four years o f decline, District goodsproduction employment has risen for the last
six years, resulting in an employment figure ap­
proaching the 1979 level. As the 1979-89 growth
rates in table 1 indicate, 1989 levels o f manufac­
turing and construction employment w ere not
substantially different than 1979 levels, while
mining employment declined substantially over
the decade. In 1989, mining employment declined
while manufacturing and construction employ­
ment continued to expand.

District mining employment fell sharply in
1989, the fifth consecutive year o f decline.
Meanwhile, nationally, slight gains w ere re­
ported for the second successive year.4 The
diverging employment trends stem from the dif­
ferent compositions o f mining in the District
and the nation. Oil and gas extraction account
for most U.S. mining jobs; however, coal mining,
centered in Kentucky, dominates the District’s
workforce. The District's mining employment
losses last year partially reflect productivity

4See Karrenbrock (September 1989) for a discussion of the
Eighth District’s mining industry.




MAY/JUNE 1990

22

gains. In Kentucky, for example, coal production
rose 1.6 percent last year, while mining employ­
ment levels dropped 5.4 percent. This produc­
tion rise was mostly due to increased demand by
electrical utilities in Virginia and the Carolinas,
as well as by those within Kentucky’s own
boundaries.

Manufacturing
The Eighth District economy is more sensitive
to manufacturing’s ups and downs than is the
U.S. economy. Manufacturing employed 22 per­
cent of Eighth District nonfarm workers last
year compared with 18 percent for the nation.
Furthermore, manufacturing produced 27 per­
cent o f the District's real output in 1986 com­
pared with 22 percent nationally.5
Given manufacturing’s comparatively large
size in the District, last year’s slowdown in
manufacturing activity had a relatively severe
impact. Manufacturing employment rose 2.0
percent in 1989, down from 3.2 percent in
1988. While employment growth slowed in
several o f the District’s major industry groups,
the most severe deceleration, as table 2 shows,
occurred in the chemicals and fabricated metals
industries.
Despite frequent temporary layoffs o f auto
workers throughout the region, the 1989 level
of District transportation equipment employ­
ment was 4 percent higher than in 1988. Many
of the new jobs in this sector were due to gains
in Kentucky, especially in Louisville and Lex­
ington, where motor vehicle assembly plants
and their suppliers have expanded. Employment
gains in aircraft and parts plants in St. Louis ac­
count for many of the other new jobs in this
sector.
As table 2 shows, job growth was slowest in
the food processing and electrical equipment in­
dustries. Although employment in food process­
ing exhibited little change in Kentucky, Missouri
and Tennessee last year, it rose moderately in
Arkansas, where poultry processing plants ex­
51986 is the most recent year for which output data are
available. The output figures are based on Gross State
Product data from the U.S. Department of Commerce,
Bureau of Economic Analysis. See Mandelbaum
(September 1989) for a comprehensive comparison of the
industrial structures of the Eighth District and U.S.
economies based on this data.
6See Karrenbrock (December 1989) for a discussion of the
Eighth District’s food processing industry.


http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ RESERVE BANK OF ST. LOUIS
FEDERAL
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Table 2
Employment Growth in the Eighth
District’s Largest Manufacturing
Industries
Industry

1988

1989

Manufacturing
Durables
Fabricated metals
Electrical equipment
Nonelectrical machinery
Transportation equipment
Nondurables
Food and kindred products
Textile mill and apparel
Printing and publishing
Chemicals and allied

3.2%

2.0%

5.3
0.4
3.0
5.5

3.3
0.8
3.8
4.0

0.7
1.1
2.4
3.9

0.6
1.6
2.7
2.0

panded.6 The sluggish employment expansion in
electrical equipment production, in part, was
due to weak demand for home appliances which
reflected a decline in homebuilding.

Construction
After plunging 30 percent between 1979 and
1982, Eighth District building activity rebounded
strongly in 1983 and 1984 (see figure 3). The
real values (1982 prices) o f building contracts in
1988 and 1989, however, w ere slightly below
those in 1984.7 District contracts fell 8.6 percent
in 1988 before stabilizing in 1989 at $7.8 billion.
District residential construction has been
weakening since 1987. This decline, which also
occurred nationwide is due in part to revisions
in the federal income tax code that eliminated
provisions that had previously stimulated con­
struction.8 In 1989, the real value o f District
residential contracts fell 4.1 percent, while the
number o f housing units authorized by permits
fell 4.9 percent to approximately 79,200 units,
their lowest level since 1982. Permits for single7Building contracts exclude those for so-called non-building
projects, such as roads, bridges and public utilities.
8For a discussion of housing trends in the Eighth District’s
largest metropolitan areas, see Mandelbaum (December
1989).

23

Figure 3
The Real Value of Building Contracts
In d e x 1 9 7 9 = 1 00

120

60
19 79

family dwellings, which represented more than
three-fourths o f all District permits, declined by
4.5 percent in 1989. Although mortgage interest
rates fell in the second half of 1989, they were
relatively high during the critical home sales
period in spring and early summer.9
After falling 7.3 percent in 1988 from its 1987
peak, the real value o f District nonresidential
contracts recovered in 1989, rising by 4.8 per­
cent to almost $3.9 billion. Much o f this gain
stemmed from growth in Arkansas, where a

In d e x 1 9 7 9 = 1 00

120

60
1 9 89

$283 million contract to build a paper plant
north o f Texarkana in Little Rock County and a
number of smaller contracts caused the state’s
nonresidential contracts to more than double.

SERVICES-PRODUCING SECTORS
For several decades, consumers have spent an
increasing proportion o f their rising incomes on
services. This consumption shift, in conjunction
with slower productivity gains in services-pro-

9Effective rate on conventional mortgages (primary market),
for example, rose from 9.78 percent in the first quarter of
1989 to 10.26 percent in the second quarter, peaked at
10.48 percent in July, then declined slightly to 10.09 per­
cent in the fourth quarter. This series, published by the
Federal Housing Finance Board, reflects fees and charges
as well as the contract rate.




MAY/JUNE 1990

24

Table 3
Annual Percentage Change of Selected Economic Indicators
for 1989
Indicator

U.S.

District

Arkansas

Kentucky Missouri Tennesse

Real nonfarm personal income

2.7%

2.3%

1.8%

2.4%

Real retail sales
Durables
Nondurables

1.4
2.6
0.6

2.0
4.8
0.2

7.0
6.5
7.3

2.1
3.2
1.5

-0 .3
4.9
-3 .9

2.5
4.7
0.7

Payroll employment
Goods-producing
Manufacturing
Construction
Mining
Services-producing
Wholesale/retail trade
Services
Government
Finance, insurance, and
real estate
Transportation and
public utilities

2.8
1.5
1.0
3.5
0.2
3.3
2.7
5.1
2.0

2.9
1.6
2.0
1.0
- 4 .8
3.4
3.0
5.1
2.2

3.0
1.0
1.6
- 2 .6
- 2 .5
3.9
3.9
5.6
2.7

3.8
2.9
3.6
4.7
-5 .4
4.1
4.1
5.7
3.0

2.2
1.0
1.2
0.2
- 2 .5
2.6
2.5
4.1
1.9

3.0
1.6
1.9
0.7
-4 .6
3.5
2.4
5.7
1.8

2.1

0.3

0.5

1.9

-0 .5

0.4

2.8

3.5

4.4

3.4

1.8

5.4

-0 .9
-4 .1
3.2

0.1
-4 .1
4.8

55.7
13.2
118.3

4.5
2.2
7.0

- 9 .2
-1 0 .8
-7 .2

-7 .4
-6 .3
-8 .6

Real value of building contracts1
Residential
Nonresidential

2.0%

2.9%

’Excludes nonbuilding construction. Growth rates are based on F. W. Dodge Construction Potentials.

ducing than in goods-producing sectors and the
increasing tendency o f manufacturers to pur­
chase business services rather than produce
them internally, has resulted in steadily rising
employment levels in services-producing sectors.
Table 1 shows that employment in all District
services-producing sectors rose in 1989, as well
as over the decade. Each sector grew more
slowly in 1989 than it had in 1988.
The services subsector, which includes per­
sonal, business, legal, repair and health services,
experienced the most rapid job growth o f any
sector in 1989, as it has throughout the decade.
Its 5.1 percent growth in 1989 approaches its
rapid 5.2 percent annual growth rate over the
preceding six years. The strong expansion of
most types o f services continued, including
health services. The aging o f the population has
contributed to this expansion and most likely
will continue to do so.

10Berger (1989) found, after controlling for a number of
structural, demographic and institutional factors, a
statisically significant, positive relationship between a


FEDERAL
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ RESERVE BANK OF ST. LOUIS
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

DIFFERENCES IN ECONOMIC PER­
FORMANCE AMONG STATES
Descriptions of economic trends in the Eighth
District obscure considerable differences among
its individual states. For example, as figure 1
and table 3 show, the 1989 growth o f payroll
employment varied from 2.2 percent in Missouri
to 3.8 percent in Kentucky. As figure 4 il­
lustrates, unemployment rates have fallen in all
District states since 1983; however, jobless rates
in Kentucky and Arkansas remained well above
the national average in 1989.
These high jobless rates may reflect the com­
paratively low educational achievement o f these
states’ residents that limits the job opportunities
o f many potential workers.1 In 1989, for exam­
0
ple, just 22.6 percent and 22.2 percent of adults
in Arkansas and Kentucky had one or more
years o f college education compared with 31.8

state’s educational achievement levels and the proportion
of its population that is employed. Educational attainment
figures are from DRI/McGraw-Hill.

25

Figure 4
Annual Unemployment Rates in the 1980s
P e rc e n t

P e rc e n t

12

Kentucky

Arkansas
United States

Missouri

1979

percent nationally. The corresponding figures
for Missouri and Tennessee, 27.6 percent and
and 25.1 percent, respectively, w ere closer to
the national average, as were their unemploy­
ment rates.
As figure 5 shows, construction activity was
another sector that varied substantially across
states. Most notably, building activity in Arkan­
sas declined sharply for four years before re­
bounding in 1989, while such activity in Ten­
nessee remained well above 1979 levels until
last year.

Arkansas Posts Solid Job Gains
The Arkansas economy, which expanded mod­
erately in the 1980s, continued to grow substan­




1 9 89

tially in 1989. As figure 1 shows, Arkansas’ non­
farm employment growth slightly exceeded the
national and District rates in 1989, allowing a
sharp drop in the state’s unemployment rate.
Despite this healthy job growth, real nonfarm
personal income grew somewhat slower last
year than in the other states for two reasons.
First, many of Arkansas’ new jobs last year
were in low-paying sectors: miscellaneous ser­
vices, wholesale/retail trades and food and kin­
dred products. Annual earnings in Arkansas
food processing, for example, averaged approx­
imately $14,400 last year, about four-fifths of
Arkansas’ all-industry manufacturing average.
Second, income rose comparatively slowly in
Arkansas because transfer payments and divi­
dends, interest and rents showed modest growth
last year.

MAY/JUNE 1990

26

Figure 5
The Real Value of Building Contracts
Ind ex 1979 = 100
130

In d ex 1979 = 100
130

Manufacturing employment in Arkansas, show­
ing growth in nearly every major industry, rose
1.6 percent in 1989. Almost 1,100 of the 3,708
new manufacturing jobs were in the food and
kindred products sector, mostly in poultry pro­
cessing. Poultry processors have expanded
rapidly in Arkansas for several years. Some
have recently announced plans for further ex­
pansion, so continued gains are likely. On the
other hand, employment declined in electrical
equipment production. Some of the losses, such
as those in home appliance production, reflect
the nation’s homebuilding slump and relatively
high interest rates for much of 1989.

building contracts rose 55.7 percent in 1989 as
building in both residential and nonresidential
sectors expanded. Contracts for nonresidential
projects more than doubled last year. As noted
previously, a contract for a paper manufactur­
ing plant in southwest Arkansas accounted for
much of this increase; however, the FayettevilleSpringdale, Fort Smith and Pine Bluff metropoli­
tan areas also reported strong nonresidential
building growth.

After declining sharply between 1984 and
1988, construction contracting in Arkansas re­
bounded in 1989 (see figure 5). While construc­
tion employment continued to fall, reflecting the
earlier decline in contractings, the real value of

Heavily dependent on goods production, the
Kentucky economy was severely affected by the
early-1980s recession. State payroll employment
fell 7.5 percent between 1979 and 1983, and the
state unemployment rate rose to more than 11


http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ RESERVE BANK OF ST. LOUIS
FEDERAL
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Kentucky's Cyclical Expansion
Continues

27

percent in 1983 (figure 4). As figure 1 indicates,
employment did not begin rising until 1984, one
year after the other District states. Since 1983,
however, nonfarm employment has grown
slightly faster than the national rate, and rose
3.8 percent last year.
More than half o f the state’s 52,600 new jobs
last year were in the wholesale/retail trade and
services sectors. Many new jobs were generated
in department stores, grocery stores, eating and
drinking establishments, and firms providing
business and health services.
Manufacturing employment’s strong 3.6 per­
cent expansion last year was fueled by wide­
spread gains across most industries. The trans­
portation equipment industry generated the
most new manufacturing jobs last year, despite
temporary layoffs at some motor vehicle as­
sembly plants. Most of the state’s new transpor­
tation equipment jobs were related to motorvehicle and parts production concentrated near
assembly plants in Louisville, Bowling Green and
near Lexington.
Workers producing major home appliances in
Louisville, that area’s largest industry, experi­
enced temporary layoffs during the year, con­
tributing to the state’s slow job growth in the
electrical equipment industry. Projected
strengthening in appliance sales in the second
half of 1990, however, may lead to job gains.
Real nonfarm income received by Kentuckians
has risen at just a 1.2 percent annual rate since
1979, considerably slower than the District or
national averages. In 1989, however, real nonfarm income rose 2.4 percent, compared with
the national average of 2.7 percent, as income
from earnings and dividends, interest and rent
rose moderately.
As figure 5 indicates, the real value o f build­
ing contracts awarded in Kentucky has trended
slowly upward since 1983. In 1989, both resi­
dential and nonresidential building expanded,
allowing total building contracts to rise 4.5 per­
cent. Moderate gains in the Louisville and
Owensboro metropolitan areas contributed to
the state’s growth in 1989, while building activi­
ty weakened in the Lexington-Fayette area.

Missouri’s Growth Trails the
Nation’s
With its diversified economy, Missouri’s eco­
nomic growth paralleled the nation's for most of



1980s. State unemployment rates, shown in
figure 4, followed the U.S. rates throughout the
decade. The growth o f income and employment,
however, fell below the national average in re­
cent years. Real nonfarm income rose 2 percent
in 1989, reflecting the comparatively sluggish
expansion o f employment.
Nonfarm payroll employment rose 2.2 percent
last year, the state’s slowest job growth since
1983. Employment growth in all service-producing sectors slowed in 1989 from 1988. Never­
theless, the services sector, with a 4.1 percent
employment increase, continued to grow rapidly
with large job gains by firms providing health,
business, engineering and management services.
State manufacturing employment rose 1.2 per­
cent in 1989; as a result o f severe losses in the
early years of the decade, however, it was 5.5
percent below its 1979 level. Employment in the
transportation equipment sector, the state’s
largest manufacturing industry, rose by 3 per­
cent in 1989. Several temporary layoffs o f auto
workers dampened the sector's expansion, but
rapid employment growth in aircraft manufac­
turing enabled it to grow moderately. Producers
of nonelectrical machinery and fabricated metal
products also expanded their workforces mod­
erately, while makers o f electrical equipment
and textile mill and apparel products experi­
enced employment declines in 1989.
Building activity trended upward in Missouri
from the trough of the last recession in 1982
until 1987. In recent years, the real value of
contracts for both residential and nonresidential
sectors declined. In 1989, the real value of
building contracts fell 9.2 percent in Missouri.
The St. Louis area posted a drop in building
contracting last year, but healthy gains were
reported in Springfield and Columbia.

Tennessee’s Job Growth Moderates
Tennessee's economy grew moderately during
the 1980s, with annual nonfarm income and
employment gains near the national average.
Between 1979 and 1989, the state’s real nonfarm income and nonfarm payroll employment
rose at 2.5 percent and 1.9 percent annual rates
compared with 2.4 percent and 1.9 percent
nationally.
In 1989, Tennessee payroll employment growth
slowed from the approximate 4 percent rate
over the previous tw o years to its lowest rate

MAY/JUNE 1990

28

since 1983. Despite this deceleration, Tennessee
payroll employment rose by 61,700 last year, a
moderate 3 percent gain. More than 25,000 of
the new jobs w ere in the services sector, while
the wholesale/retail trade sector contributed
another 12,000. Employment in Tennessee's
transportation and public utilities sector grew
rapidly, largely due to an expansion in Mem­
phis. Government employment slowed to a 1.8
percent gain in 1989, partially because o f feder­
al job reductions by the Tennessee Valley
Authority.
Manufacturing employment rose 1.9 percent
in 1989. Several of the state’s largest durables
sectors, including nonelectrical machinery, elec­
trical equipment and transportation equipment,
experienced moderate to strong job growth.
Employment declines were reported, however,
in the food processing and textile mill and ap­
parel industries. The decline in the latter sector
was partly due to continued technological im­
provements that, while enhancing the industry’s
global competitiveness, have eliminated some
jobs.
Tennessee’s 2.9 percent growth of real non­
farm income in 1989 exceeded the nation's rate.
Nonfarm earnings grew at the national pace,
but income from transfer payments and divi­
dends, interest and rent rose somewhat faster.
Construction activity in Tennessee has declin­
ed since 1987 because of slowing growth in
Tennessee’s metropolitan areas. The 7.4 percent
decline in the real value o f building contracts in
1989 stemmed from moderate contractions in
both residential and nonresidential building.

OUTLOOK FOR 1990: ANOTHER
YEAR OF SLOWING GROWTH
Projections from various sources shown in
table 4 suggest that the state economies o f the
District will continue to expand in 1990. Al­
though the forecasts are based on different
methodologies, they do provide a look at the
likely future o f the states’ economies as viewed
by economists aware of local conditions and
possibilities. Projections for the national econo­
my are provided for comparison.
The growth of personal income in 1990 in
Arkansas, Kentucky, Missouri and Tennessee is
expected to slow from 1989’s pace, following an
expected national deceleration. The slower pro­


FEDERAL
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ RESERVE BANK OF ST. LOUIS
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

jected growth also reflects an anticipated slow­
down in inflation in 1990.
Payroll employment growth is expected to
slow from the 1989 rate in all District states but
Arkansas. To some extent, the weak employ­
ment growth projected for Kentucky, Missouri
and Tennessee probably reflects the fact that
the projections were based on state employment
data before it was recently rebenchmarked. The
revised data, reflecting 1989 benchmarks and
used in this article, show substantially more
rapid employment growth than was originally
reported in the three states.
As job growth slows, unemployment rates are
expected to rise in Kentucky, Missouri and Ten­
nessee, while Arkansas’ more rapid expansion is
expected to allow the state jobless rate to fall.
The more optimistic outlook for Arkansas par­
tially reflects its closer relationship with the
recovering economies in Texas, Oklahoma and
Louisiana, where many Arkansas businesses sell
goods and services. Manufacturing job growth
in Arkansas also is expected to accelerate be­
cause of continued strength in nondurables and
a pick-up in durables industries, stimulated by
anticipated lower interest rates. W ood products
industries, currently restrained by the construc­
tion slowdown, are expected to rebound this
year.
Manufacturing employment in Kentucky is ex­
pected to decline slightly in 1990, mirroring the
national contraction projected by DRI/McGrawHill. This decline, in conjunction with weakness
in mining, is expected to hinder growth in other
sectors, resulting in sluggish payroll employ­
ment growth.
Missouri’s economic growth in 1990 is ex­
pected to start slowly and, like the national
economy, strengthen as the year progresses.
The state's auto sector is expected to improve
after the first quarter, although the planned
closing of an auto assembly plant in St. Louis
will restrain growth. An improvement of the
state’s construction industry is also anticipated
later this year, although the number o f residen­
tial building permits for the year is expected to
be few er than last year. Much o f the state’s de­
fense industry is accounted for by military air­
craft production by McDonnell Douglas Cor­
poration in the St. Louis area. McDonnell Doug­
las announced a shift to the St. Louis area of
some aircraft and aircraft parts production cur­
rently taking place in California, but also plans

29

Table 4
Economic Projections for District States
Actual 1989
Civilian unemployment rate
United States
Arkansas
Kentucky
Missouri
Tennessee

Projected 1990

5.3%
7.2
6.2
5.5
5.1

5.4%
6.7
7.2
5.9
5.6
Percent change1

Actual 1989
Payroll employment
United States
Arkansas
Kentucky
Missouri
Tennessee
Manufacturing employment
United States
Arkansas
Kentucky
Missouri
Tennessee
Personal income (current dollars)
United States
Arkansas
Kentucky
Missouri
Tennessee

2.8%
3.0
3.8
2.2
3.0

Projected 1990
1.9%
3.4
0.8
0.7
0.9

1.0
1.6
3.6
1.2
1.9

-1 .0
2.8
- 1 .2
N.A.
0.7

7.6
6.8
7.4
6.7
7.5

6.7
5.8
5.9
5.6
5.8

1Percent changes compare entire year with previous year.
SOURCES: United States: DRI/McGraw-Hill, Review o f the U.S. Economy, March 1990; Arkansas:
University of Arkansas at Little Rock, Arkansas Economic Outlook, January 1990;
Kentucky: Office of Financial Management and Economic Analysis, Kentucky
Finance and Administration Cabinet, March 1990; Missouri: College of Business
and Public Administration, University of Missouri-Columbia, Missouri Economic In­
dicators: December 1989; Tennessee: Center for Business and Economic Research,
University of Tennessee, Knoxville, An Economic Report to the Governor of the State
of Tennessee On the State’s Economic Outlook, January 1990.

to cut several thousand St. Louis workers in the
second half of 1990.
Tennessee’s nonfarm employment is projected
to rise just 0.9 percent in 1990. Some of the
weakest sectors o f the state economy, non­
durables manufacturing and construction, are
expected to remain weak in 1990, and further
employment declines are anticipated in federal
government and mining. One positive develop­
ment is the planned completion of General
Motor’s Saturn plant in Spring Hill, Tennessee.
The plant is expected to provide approximately



1,000 new jobs in 1990, raising the plant’s total
workforce to 3,000 workers.

CONCLUSION
In many ways, 1989 was just a continuation
of earlier trends for the Eighth District
economy. District nonfarm employment and in­
come grew near the national rate in 1989 as
they have for the decade. District employment
growth slowed last year, but was sufficient to

MAY/JUNE 1990

30

allow unemployment rates to fall to near their
1979 levels.
The long-run future of the District’s economic
performance is uncertain because of a number
of recent developments. These include the pro­
spects for substantial cuts in federal defense
spending, the possibility of further restructuring
of the automobile industry and the potential im­
pact of proposed federal clean-air legislation on
regional coal production. To the extent projec­
tions of economic growth are accurate, however,
1990 will be another year of growth for the
District economy.

REFERENCES
Berger, Mark C. “Why Aren’t More Kentuckians Working?”
Kentucky 1989 Annual Economic Report, Center for


http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ RESERVE BANK OF ST. LOUIS
FEDERAL
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Business and Economic Research, University of Kentucky
(December 1989), pp.16-20.
Karrenbrock, Jeffrey D. “U.S. and Eighth District Food Pro­
cessing and Tobacco Manufacturing,” Pieces of Eight - An
Economic Perspective on the Eighth District, Federal
Reserve Bank of St. Louis (December 1989), pp. 1-4.
________“The Changing Role of Mining in the Eighth Dis­
trict,” Pieces of Eight - An Economic Perspective on the
Eighth District, Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
(September 1989), pp. 1-4.
Mandelbaum, Thomas B. “In Search of a Regional Economic
Identity,” Pieces of Eight - An Economic Perspective on the
Eighth District, Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
(September 1989), pp. 5-10.
________“The Nation and the Region: Home Building in the
1980s,” Pieces of Eight - An Economic Perspective on the
Eighth District, Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
(December 1989), pp. 5-8.

31

Jeffrey D. Karrenbrock.
Jeffrey D. Karrenbrock is an economist at the Federal Reserve
Bank of St. Louis. David H. Kelly provided research assistance.

The U.S. And Eighth District
Agricultural Economies in 1989:
Building on Past Strength

I h e U.S. AGRICULTURAL economy showed
continued strength in 1989 as real net farm in­
come rose to its highest level since 1975. This
article examines the factors behind last year’s
agricultural expansion in the United States and
analyzes the 1989 agricultural economy in the
Eighth Federal Reserve District. Issues o f impor­
tance to agriculture in the new decade are also
discussed briefly.

THE U.S. AGRICULTURAL
ECONOMY
Farm Finances
Real net farm income, the difference between
gross farm income and total expenses, was
estimated to be $39 billion in 1989, its highest
level since 1975 when it was $43.1 billion.1 As
table 1 shows, the $3.8 billion increase in real

1Forecast values are from the U.S. Department of Agricul­
ture’s Agricultural Outlook (March 1990).
2Net farm income approximates the net value of agricultural
production in a calender year plus government payments,
less total expenses. Net farm income is equal to gross
farm income less total expenses. Gross farm income in­
cludes farm receipts from commodity sales, government
payments and the value of inventory changes. Farm




net farm income over 1988 was the fourth rise
in the last six years. The rise in real net farm
income in 1989 resulted from a rise in crop and
livestock receipts, in conjunction with a build-up
in agricultural commodity inventories, that out­
weighed declining government receipts and
higher expenses.2
Increased crop receipts and higher inventory
values in 1989 w ere largely due to agriculture’s
recovery from the 1988 drought. As the drought
reduced crop production in 1988, grain stocks
dwindled and crop prices rose. Crop prices re­
mained relatively strong throughout 1989, while
crop production rebounded sharply. U.S. corn
production, for example, jumped nearly 53 per­
cent over 1988 production, while soybean pro­
duction rose 24 percent. This combination of
higher production and relatively high crop
prices allowed farmers to take in larger crop
receipts. Similarly, increased production allowed

receipts represent the value of commodities that are pro­
duced and sold, while changes in the value of inventories
captures the value of commodities that are produced, but
not sold. Therefore, a build-up in inventories leads to
higher net farm income.

MAY/JUNE 1990

32

Table 1
Farm Sector Income Statement (billions of 1982 dollars)
1981

Farm receipts
Government payments
Gross farm income
Total expenses
Net farm income2
Net cash income

1982

1983

1984

1985

1986

1987

1988

19891

$153.2 $147.1 $135.5 $136.3 $134.4 $123.6 $124.0 $129.6 $129.7
10.4
2.0
3.5
8.9
7.8
6.9
14.2
12.0
8.8
176.9 163.5 147.1
162.4 150.0 141.0 146.4 146.4 152.8
148.2
140.0 134.9 132.5
120.8 107.6 109.2 111.3 113.8
28.6
23.5
12.2
29.9
29.2
33.4
37.2
35.2
39.0
34.9
37.8
35.4
35.8
42.1
46.5
47.2
45.5
42.0

’ Values for 1989 are forecasts.
2Net farm income includes the value of inventory changes. Data are rounded.
SOURCE: Agricultural Outlook (March 1990).

more grain to be stored at higher prices, raising
the value o f farm inventories.
Adding support to net farm income were
higher prices for cattle, hogs, broilers and milk.
Milk and livestock production, except for cattle,
w ere also higher. Nominal livestock receipts in
1989, it appears, have risen 5.2 percent over
1988 to $83 billion, the highest level of the
decade.
While real net farm income rose 11 percent
in 1989, real net cash income dropped 11 per­
cent (see table l).3 The difference between the
two is this: net farm income represents income
largely generated from a given calendar year’s
production, whether the commodities are sold,
fed or placed in inventory during the year. Net
cash income measures the total income that
farmers receive from their operation in a given
calendar year, regardless of how much they
produced or when they actually produced it. It
approximates the income stream available to
farmers for purchasing assets or paying o ff
debt. The $5.2 billion drop in real net cash in­
come in 1989 was a result of falling government
payments and rising cash expenditures, which
outweighed increased commodity receipts.
3Net cash income is equal to farm receipts plus government payments less cash expenses. Cash expenses exclude depreciation, perquisites to hired labor, and farm
household expenses.


http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ RESERVE BANK OF ST. LOUIS
FEDERAL
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

As the number of farms continues to decline,
the use of either real net farm or cash income
as indicators o f the income position of the
average farm can be misleading.4 The reason is
that total farm income is being divided among
few er farms. Indexes representing real net farm
income and real net farm income per farm are
shown in figure 1. While real net farm income
generally has trended downward since 1950,
real net farm income per farm has moved in
the opposite direction. Indeed, while real net
farm income declined 32 percent between 1950
and 1989, real net farm income per farm in­
creased 77 percent. Similarly, real net cash in­
come declined 21 percent between 1950 and
1989, while real net cash income per farm in­
creased 105 percent. In 1989, real net farm in­
come per farm rose 12 percent over 1988,
while real net farm income rose 11 percent.
Real net cash income per farm fell 13.8 percent
and real net cash income fell 11 percent below
1988.

Farm Balance Sheet
The farm sector’s balance sheet improved
again in 1989, as exemplified by the lower debtto-asset and debt-to-equity ratios shown in fig4See Karrenbrock (June 1990) for a detailed discussion of
some of the problems associated with different farm in­
come series,

33

Figure 1
U.S. Real Net Farm Income Indexes
Index: 1950 = 100
250

Index: 1950 = 100
250

150

0 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------1950

53

56

59

62

65

68

71

74

77

80

83

86

o

1989

SOURCES: USDA, Econom ic Indicators o f the Farm Sector, National Financial Summary, 1988, and
A gricultu ral O utlook.

ure 2. A primary reason for this improvement
is rising real estate values.5 Strong returns in
the agricultural sector over the past several
years have encouraged investors to pay more
for agricultural real estate. In 1989, farm real
estate values rose $40 billion, or 6.6 percent,
while real estate debt fell $1.7 billion, or 2.2
percent. The decline in non-real-estate debt ex­
perienced throughout the 1983-89 period ap­
pears to be bottoming out. Between 1983 and
1987, non-real-estate debt dropped an average
of 7.2 percent per year, but between 1987 and
1989, that same figure fell by an average o f less
than 0.1 percent per year.

12 percent, increase in agricultural exports was
due to a rise in the value o f grain exports. Al­
though the quantity o f grain exports increased
overall, higher prices also played a significant
role in increasing the value of grain exports. In
fact, higher wheat prices allowed the value of
wheat exports to rise 34 percent, despite a 7
percent decline in the quantity o f wheat ex­
ports. Also adding to the increase in agricultural
exports were meat exports, which rose about
$558 million, or 31 percent. U.S. agricultural im­
ports were up only slightly in 1989, leaving net
agricultural exports at $18.1 billion, the highest
agricultural trade surplus since 1984.

Agricultural Trade

Government Support

U.S. agricultural exports reached their highest
level since 1984, standing at nearly $39.7 billion
for fiscal year 1989.6 Most of the $4.3 billion, or

Direct government payments to farmers fell
$3.5 billion in 1989 to $11 billion. Although
down from the record direct government pay-

51989 ratios and real estate figures are forecasted values
as reported in USDA’s Agricultural Outlook (March 1990).




6Real agricultural exports for fiscal year 1989 were about
$31.4 billion, their highest level since 1984.

MAY/JUNE 1990

34

Figure 2
U.S. Agricultural Balance Sheet Ratios
Percent
32

1979

Percent
32

80

81

82

14
1989

83

SOURCE: USDA, A gricultu ral O utlook (March 1990).

ments o f $16.7 billion in 1987, the $11 billion
payments are still relatively high compared to
past payments. For example, direct government
payments to farmers as a percent o f net farm
income averaged 4 percent during the 1950s, 19
percent during the 1960s and 11 percent during
the 1970s. In the 1980s, direct government pay­
ments to farmers as a percent o f net farm in­
come have averaged almost 28 percent.7 In
1989, this figure was 23 percent, the seventh
consecutive year in which it topped 20 percent.
The 1989 direct government payments include
about $2.1 billion in disaster payments stem­
ming from the 1988 drought.
H'he 1980s figure is skewed by the huge amount of pay­
ments made to farmers in 1983 during the Payment-InKind program. During 1983, direct government payments
to farmers as a percent of net farm income was 73.2
percent.
8The FAMC is similar to other government-sponsored agen­
cies such as the Governmental National Mortgage Associ-


FEDERAL
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ RESERVE BANK OF ST. LOUIS
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Agricultural Lenders
In 1989, the Federal Agricultural Mortgage
Corporation (FAMC) moved closer to opening a
secondary market for agricultural loans.8 When
"Farmer Mac” becomes fully operational, finan­
cial institutions, such as banks, insurance com­
panies and the Farm Credit Banks, that choose
to become members will be able to originate,
pool and underwrite agricultural loans.9 Agricul­
tural real estate loans and rural housing loans,
both with certain restrictions, are eligible to be
pooled. Once the loans are pooled, the financial
institutions will be able to offer farm mortgagebacked securities. Farmer Mac, owned by its
ation (Ginnie Mae) and the Federal Home Loan Mortgage
Corporation (Freddie Mac).
9Much of the information in this section was taken from
Booth (1990) and various issues of the National Farm
Finance News.

35

Table 2
U.S. and District Agricultural Banking Data
United States
1988
1989
Return on assets
Return on equity
Agricultural loan losses/Total agricultural loans
Agricultural nonpf loans/Total agricultural loans1
Primary capital ratio

0.91%
9.64
0.60
3.76
10.33

1.03%
10.68
0.35
3.15
10.50

District
1988
1989
1.05%
11.10
0.45
4.99
10.26

1.10%
11.25
0.27
3.76
10.49

NOTE: An agricultural bank is defined as a bank that has at least 25 percent of its loan portfolio
in agricultural loans.
’ Nonperforming loans are defined as those loans that are 90 days or more delinquent.
SOURCE: Fourth-quarter FDIC Reports of Condition and Income for Insured Commercial Banks.

member institutions, will guarantee the timely
payment of principal and interest to investors.
To obtain this Farmer Mac guarantee, the is­
suers of the farm mortgage-debt must pay both
an initial and an annual fee based on the size of
the issue. In addition, issuers must stand ready
to cover at least 10 percent of any losses that
occur as a result of delinquencies and default
on the underlying loans. A final factor, perhaps
the most important in allowing it to guarantee
its members’ issues, is FAMC’s guaranteed $1.5
billion line of credit at the U.S. Treasury.
To limit the U.S. government’s exposure, the
amount of loans eligible for Farmer Mac guar­
antees will be limited and relaxed progressively
in the first three years of operation to 2 per­
cent, 4 percent and 8 percent of the total
outstanding supply o f non-FmHA agricultural
mortgage loans. Farmer Mac is also establishing
underwriting standards for issuing institutions.
These standards include such items as a mini­
mum number o f loans in a pool and guidelines
for both geographical and agricultural enter­
prise diversity. Observers expect the first pool
of farm mortgage-backed debt to be issued
this year.

mercial agricultural banks improved their finan­
cial performance during the year.1 Selected
0
performance ratios for U.S. agricultural banks
are shown in table 2. These banks, on average,
increased their return on assets from 0.91 per­
cent in 1988 to 1.03 percent in 1989 and their
return on equity from 9.64 percent to 10.68
percent. Agricultural loan losses as a percent of
total agricultural loans fell from 0.6 percent to
0.35 percent. Agricultural non-performing loans
(those delinquent 90 days or more) as a percent
of total agricultural loans fell from 3.76 percent
to 3.15 percent. The primary capital ratio of
U.S. agricultural banks improved as well to 10.5
percent, well above the 5.5 percent level re­
quired by law.1
1

In part, because of the improved performance
of the agricultural economy in 1989, U.S. com­

Finally, the Farm Credit System’s financial
position remained relatively stable in 1989.1 Net
2
income for 1989 was $695 million compared
with that in 1988 of $704 million. There were
significant improvements, however, in two in­
come components. First, net interest income in­
creased $219 million in 1988 to a level of $1,006
billion for 1989. This was in part due to the
System’s efforts to reduce non-earning assets
and improve asset and liability management. Se­
cond, loan loss reversals played a smaller role
in accounting for the System’s profitability in
1989, as the negative provision for loan losses

10See Clark (1990) for a more extensive analysis of the com
mercial banking sector.

assets. See Clark (1990) for a more detailed discussion of
the new capital requirements.

"Starting in 1991, banks will be required to meet two new
capital requirements. One capital standard will be based
on core capital as a percent of total assets and the other
based on qualifying capital as a percent of risk adjusted

12The Farm Credit System is a nationwide system of federal­
ly charted agricultural lending institutions cooperatively
owned by their borrowers.




MAY/JUNE 1990

36

Table 3
Percentage of Farm Cash Receipts from Commodity Sales
United
States

Eighth
District

Arkansas

Kentucky

Missouri

Livestock products
Cattle & calves
Hogs
Dairy products
Broilers
Other

53.0%
23.1
6.9
12.5
4.8
5.8

58.3%
18.7
8.2
8.8
10.2
12.3

62.6%
10.0
2.8
3.0
34.6
12.3

59.6%
19.0
6.6
11.5
0.1
22.4

55.2%
22.8
14.9
9.7
0.0
7.8

54.8%
25.8
7.4
13.8
0.0
7.8

Crops
Rice
Wheat
Corn
Cotton
Tobacco
Soybeans
Vegetables
Fruits
Other

47.0
0.6
3.8
7.3
2.9
1.4
7.4
6.7
5.7
11.2

41.7
3.1
2.6
4.7
4.4
5.5
14.4
0.9
0.4
5.7

37.4
9.6
3.4
0.3
7.6
0.0
12.7
0.6
0.2
2.8

40.4
1.6
8.0
6.4
0.0
19.8
7.0
1.0
0.4
4.2

44.8
0.7
3.0
8.5
2.3
0.2
23.4
0.3
0.4
6.1

45.2
1.9
5.2
11.7
8.4
7.1
10.0
2.4
0.5
11.6

Tenness<

NOTE: All figures represent the average percent of total commodity cash receipts for the
years 1986-88. Each region is calculated independently of the others.
SOURCE: Derived from data obtained from the Economic Indicators of the Farm Sector:
State Financial Summary, 1988. USDA, Economic Research Service.

of $285 million was $395 million lower than the
1988 negative provision of $680 million.1
3

THE EIGHTH DISTRICT
AGRICULTURAL ECONOMY
The diversity of the agricultural economy of
the Eighth Federal Reserve District, highlighted
in table 3, and the uneven effects of the 1988
drought suggest the presence of noteworthy dif­
ferences in agricultural performance between
the Eighth District and the nation, as well as
among Eighth District states.1 As in the nation,
4
livestock products account for the majority of
farm receipts in District states, with cattle and
calves being relatively important to all District
states. Hogs are important in Missouri and dairy
products are important to all District states, ex­
cept Arkansas. Arkansas, on the other hand, is

13Loan loss reversals occur when firms lower the amount of
money they have set aside to cover loan losses.
14The Eighth Federal Reserve District includes all of Arkan­
sas and parts of Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky, Mississippi,


FEDERAL
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ RESERVE BANK OF ST. LOUIS
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

the nation's largest broiler producer, and most
of its livestock receipts are concentrated in that
industry. Kentucky’s livestock receipts are dom­
inated by the horse industry.
Soybeans are by far the District’s most impor­
tant crop. Corn receipts are significant in Mis­
souri and Tennessee, while cotton plays a key
role in Arkansas and Tennessee. Rice is also im­
portant in Arkansas, while Kentucky’s crop re­
ceipts are led by tobacco. Fruits and vegetables
account for a minor portion of District crop
receipts, especially when compared with the
roles these crops play in the nation's agricul­
tural economy.

District Weather
Despite excellent weather for corn production
in most of the District, lingering drought condi-

Missouri and Tennessee. The majority of this report,
however, focuses only on the entire states of Arkansas,
Kentucky, Missouri and Tennessee.

37

tions in northern parts and excessive moisture
in southern parts of the District hampered crop
and livestock production in 1989. Extreme win­
ter weather contributed negatively as well.
Heavy snows in late winter did extensive dam­
age to the poultry industry in northwestern
Arkansas. Throughout the winter and into sum­
mer, the drought lingered in northern Missouri,
limiting crop growth and straining livestock
water supplies. Too much spring rain in some
southern parts o f the District delayed planting,
forced replantings and prevented planting alto­
gether in some areas. Fall rains slowed the cot­
ton and soybean harvests in some southern
parts of the District. As the drought in the
Plains and upper Midwest continued, low water
levels became a problem for commodity move­
ment on District rivers. In late December, the
Mississippi River reached its lowest level in 25
years. The combination of low water levels and
ice caused by record cold weather forced the
temporary closure of the Mississippi and Arkan­
sas rivers in December.

District Crop Production and
Prices
District 1989 crop yields, production and
prices are shown in figure 3 as a percent of
average production and prices during the 198588 period. Corn yields were much higher this
year in the District’s three most southern states
as Kentucky, Tennessee and Arkansas reported
yields that ranged from 13 percent to 27 per­
cent above the 1985-88 average. Indeed, Ken­
tucky and Tennessee both posted record corn
yields in 1989. Missouri corn yields were slight­
ly below normal, largely because of the continu­
ing drought in northern Missouri. Cotton yields
in District states w ere below normal, partially
because of excessive rain early in the growing
season and again in the harvesting season. Rice
production in Arkansas and Missouri was up
about 12 percent in both states, with planted
acreage and yields slightly higher than the
average of the previous four crop years. Soy­
bean production fell throughout the District ex­
cept in Kentucky. The lingering drought put a
damper on Missouri’s soybean yields, while ex­
cessive moisture at various stages throughout
the growing season kept soybean yields in Ar­
kansas and Tennessee below their normal levels.
Tobacco production in Kentucky expanded from
its 1985-88 average largely because of increased
acreage, while Tennessee's tobacco production



fell because o f both decreased acreage and yields.
Wheat production jumped in all District states,
with increases over the recent years’ average
ranging from 39 percent to 93 percent.
Average 1989 crop prices w ere above the
previous four-year average for all commodities
in all District states. The higher crop prices were
largely a function o f decreased grain stocks,
stemming from the 1988 drought. Wheat and
soybean prices ranged from 20 percent to 39
percent above the 1985-88 average. While soy­
bean prices w ere below their 1988 level in each
District state, wheat prices, in contrast, were
above the average 1988 price in each state.

District Livestock. Production and
Prices
District livestock production and prices for
1989 are shown in figure 3 as a percent of av­
erage production and prices during the 1985-88
period. As in the nation, cattle and calf produc­
tion fell below the previous four-year average in
Kentucky, Missouri and Tennessee, while in­
creasing in Arkansas. Hog production rose above
the average in all District states, except Missouri.
Broiler production in Arkansas was about 13
percent above average, and Tennessee broiler
production jumped 23 percent. Milk production
remained steady across all District states.
Three of the District’s four most important
livestock commodities experienced higher prices
in 1989 relative to the 1985-88 period. Cattle
prices were the strongest, averaging 22 percent
to 25 percent above years past. Broiler prices
ranged from 15 percent to 18 percent above
average, while milk prices w ere just slightly
above average. Hog producers received prices
that were close to 1988 levels, but w ere sub­
stantially below the average prices received dur­
ing the 1985-88 period.
Higher cattle prices reflected the relatively
low number of cattle in the nation, while broil­
er price increases largely reflected increased
consumer demand. Overall, milk market fun­
damentals in 1989 were not much different
than in 1988. A decline in milk cow productivity
in the second half o f the year, stemming from
drought-induced lower feed quality, however,
caused milk production in the second half of
the year to decline below levels a year ago.
These lower supplies helped push milk prices
higher in the last half o f the year.

MAY/JUNE 1990

38

Figure 3

State Agricultural Indicators
Arkansas
Crop Indicators

Arkansas
Livestock Indicators

1989 as a percent of 1985-88 average

1989 as a percent of 1985-88 average

Percent
180

Percent
180

Corn

Cotton

Rice

Soybeans

Tobacco

Broilers Cattle

Wheat

Hogs

Milk

Kentucky
Crop Indicators

Kentucky
Livestock Indicators

1989 as a percent of 1985-88 average

1989 as a percent of 1985-88 average
Percent
180
160

|
□

| Price
Production

140
120

100
80
60
40
20

0
Corn

Cotton

Rice

Soybeans

Tobacco

Wheat

Broilers Cattle

Hogs

Milk

SOURCE: Derived from data provided by the Agricultural Statistical Service of the four states and USDA, Agricultural Prices.


FEDERAL
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ RESERVE BANK OF ST. LOUIS
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

39

Missouri
Crop indicators

Missouri
Livestock Indicators

1989 as a percent of 1985-88 average

1989 as a percent of 1985-88 average

Percent

Percent
180 i------------------------------------------------------

2 00 i-------------------------------------------------

180

D

Price

|

| Production

160

Price

160

| Production

140

F I Yield
140

120

120

100
100

80
80
60
60
40

40

20

20

0

Corn

Cotton

Rice

Soybeans

Tobacco

Broilers Cattle

Wheat

Hogs

Milk

Tennessee
Crop Indicators

Tennessee
Livestock Indicators

1989 as a percent of 1985-88 average

1989 as a percent of 1985-88 average

Percent
180

Percent
180,------------------------------------------------------

140

|

| Price

|

160

| Production

160

□

Price
| Production

140

l~l Yield

120

120

100

100

80

80

60

60

40

40

20

20

0

Corn

Cotton




Rice

Soybeans

Tobacco

Wheat

................ ..... m i
i..m

Broilers Cattle

Hogs

Milk

H

MAY/JUNE 1990

40

Figure 4
U.S. and District Real Net Farm Income
Billions of 1982 dollars

Billions of 1982 dollars

SOURCES: USDA, Econom ic In d ica to rs o f the Farm Sector, N ational Financial Summ ary and State Financial
Summary.

District Net Farm Income
Net farm income figures for District states are
available with a one year lag; therefore, 1989
figures are not yet available. Movements in
District real net farm income, as shown in fig­
ure 4, have generally paralleled movements in
U.S. real net farm income. The drought o f 1988,
however, hit other regions more severely than
it did the Eighth District, and the District’s real
net farm income actually increased in 1988,
while U.S. real net farm income fell. The latest
available state farm income data indicate that
1988 real net farm income in Arkansas, Ken­
tucky and Tennessee rose 28 percent, 3 percent
and 17 percent over their 1987 figures, while
U.S. real net farm income fell 5.1 percent. Mis­
souri’s real net farm income fell 10 percent in
1988, as its agricultural production more closely

FEDERAL
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ RESERVE BANK OF ST. LOUIS
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

followed the drought-stricken pattern of the
rest o f the United States.
Since the District was not as severely affected
by the drought as other regions of the nation,
District farm income growth in 1989 may not
have paralleled the income rebound induced by
the drought recovery in the rest o f the nation.
In fact, it may have fallen in 1989. 1989 cash
receipts from commodity sales were down 2
percent, 3.7 percent, and 7.8 percent in Arkan­
sas, Missouri and Tennessee, respectively, from a
year ago. To match the expected 12.4 percent in­
crease in U.S. net farm income, these states will
have to have seen higher government payments,
increased their agricultural inventory values,
and/or reduced farm expenses in 1989. Kentucky
differs from the other District states with cash
receipts up 12.7 percent over a year ago.

41

District Agricultural Lenders

Technology

Agricultural banks in the Eighth District show­
ed continued strength in 1989.1 As shown in
5
table 2, District institutions, on average, obtained
higher returns on assets and higher returns on
equity in 1989, although the gains were not as
large as those experienced in 1988. Similarly,
both agricultural loan losses and non-performing
loans as a percent of total agricultural loans
declined in 1989. Again, however, the improve­
ments in 1989 were not as dramatic as those
in 1988.

Technological change has long been labeled
the "treadmill’’ of agriculture. Farmers have
adopted new technologies that have expanded
agricultural supplies faster than the growth in
demand for agricultural products. As a result,
real agricultural prices have declined. These fall­
ing prices pushed farmers to continually adopt
new technology in an attempt to lower produc­
tion costs more rapidly than their product prices
were falling. The new technology, of course,
would again increase agricultural supplies and
the cycle would continue. Such a cycle, despite
necessitating adjustments in agriculture, does
have the positive benefit o f lower food prices
for consumers.1
7

Like the national Farm Credit System, both
Farm Credit Banks in the Eighth District reported
improved financial conditions in 1989. The Farm
Credit Bank of St. Louis reported net earnings at
$81.2 million, marking the third consecutive year
of positive earnings. The bank’s 1988 earnings
stood at $99.8 million. The Louisville Farm Credit
Bank posted 1989 earnings of $83.2 million, up
from $3.6 million in 1988. Both banks had lower
loan-loss reversals in 1989, meaning that the
banks are deriving less income from the reversal
of loan-loss provisions and more from normal len­
ding operations. Net interest income was also up
at both banks. The St. Louis Farm Credit Bank
reported a significant increase in new farm real
estate loan volume during the year, and the
Louisville Bank’s gross loans outstanding increased
for the first time in eight years.

AGRICULTURAL ISSUES FOR THE
1990S

The initial rounds o f technological advance­
ment in agriculture began with the adoption of
mechanized equipment, then later took the form
of hi-bred crops and livestock and increased use
of fertilizer. The next wave will be biotechnolo­
gy, which is broadly defined as applied biologi­
cal science. One of the benefits of biotechnology
is its ability to reduce the amount of time needed
to develop more productive crops and livestock.
For example, biotechnology has allowed research­
ers to mass produce hormones that are found
naturally in livestock. One such hormone, bo­
vine somatatropin (BST), increases the output of
milk cows. By using this hormone, dairy farmers
can increase the output o f their livestock within
days by an amount that would have taken sev­
eral years to accomplish using traditional genet­
ic breeding.

U.S. farmers are leaving the 1980s in better
financial condition than they w ere in the first
half of the decade. As farmers move into the
1990s, several important issues will affect the
profitability of their operations. These issues in­
clude the adoption o f new technology, environ­
mental concerns, increased consumer protec­
tion, agricultural trade and the 1990 farm bill.
Perhaps the most important long-term issues are
what role technology will play and how envi­
ronmental concerns will be addressed. This sec­
tion briefly discusses these two issues.1
6

The rate at which biotechnology is adopted
will depend, in part, on consumer acceptance of
the products produced under its use. If con­
sumers are hesitant to consume food produced
with biotechnology, farmers will not produce it.
Some dairy farmers, for example, are concerned
about BST because some consumers have in­
dicated that they will not drink milk produced
using it. Policymakers will also resist the adop­
tion of new agricultural technology, as it will
undoubtedly drive some of their farm consti­
tuents out o f business. In the long run, how-

15Banking data is for all agricultural banks located within the
Eighth District and not just those located in Arkansas,
Kentucky, Missouri and Tennessee.

17This, of course, assumes a stable or very slow growing demand for agricultural products.

16See Drabenstott and Barkema (1990) for a more detailed
discussion of these and other issues facing agriculture in
the 1990s.




MAY/JUNE 1990

42

ever, the potential benefits for consumers and
the competitive disadvantages for farmers elec­
ting to use less technologically advanced pro­
duction methods suggests that the technology
will be adopted.1 Farmers who adopt it early
8
are likely to reap the largest profits.

Environmental Issues
A second agricultural issue o f the 1990s will
be how to deal with the declining quality of our
natural resources. Environmental issues that
will be important to agriculture in the 1990s in­
clude soil erosion, water quality and conserva­
tion and chemical use.
As technology has advanced, farmers have
been able to farm more marginal land by mak­
ing more intensive use o f tillage, chemicals and
irrigation in crop production. These practices
have accelerated wind and water erosion and
damaged water quality; crop farming, however,
has not been the sole cause o f environmental
damage. Overgrazing on range land causes soil
erosion, and livestock confinement operations
sometimes have trouble preventing animal waste
from entering the drinking water supply. Soil
erosion, in conjunction with chemical and waste
run-off, has damaged water quality throughout
the country.
Some actions are already being taken to re­
duce environmental damage stemming from ag­
ricultural production. The Conservation Reserve
Program, instituted by the USDA, takes highly
erodible land out of production in return for
annual payments to farmers. Farmers also have
started to use reduced tillage techniques to limit
erosion and have made more extensive use of
natural predators, now called integrated pest
management, to decrease the amount of chemi­
cals needed to raise a good crop. In the future,
biotechnology that makes plants and animals
more resistant to insects and diseases may re­
duce the need for agricultural chemicals.
Though some actions have already been taken
to reduce the damage to the environment, fur­
ther action will be implemented in the 1990s.
The decade will see a push for tighter control
and monitoring o f chemical use in agriculture.
As population growth in the West competes
18This, of course, assumes that consumers will readily ac­
cept biotechnologically produced products. While this may
not hold true in the short run, continued consumer educa­
tion will likely ease the resistance to biotechnology in the
long run.


FEDERAL
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ RESERVE BANK OF ST. LOUIS
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

with agriculture for water, irrigation will per­
haps decline. Programs also will likely be con­
tinued or expanded to take highly erodible land
out of agricultural production.
While these measures will potentially improve
the environment, they will also raise the cost of
producing food.1 Society will have to decide
9
how much it is willing to pay for food to either
improve or limit the damage to the environ­
ment. Farmers will have to adapt to new re­
strictions on production techniques and will be
forced to decide whether they can adjust to in­
creasing environmental restrictions and remain
profitable.

SUMMARY
Largely because of continued strong livestock
returns and a rebound in crop production from
last year’s drought, U.S. net farm income in
1989 reached its highest level since 1975. The
farm sector’s balance sheet and agricultural ex­
ports also improved last year. While fundamen­
tal measures of the agricultural economy gener­
ally have improved in recent years, U.S. farmers
remain dependent on government payments for
a large portion of their income. Buoyed by the
strong returns to farmers, agricultural financial
institutions also bettered their performance dur­
ing the year. District farmers received relatively
high prices for their crops and livestock in 1989,
but some District farmers faced disappointing
weather conditions during the year.
Although farm returns have been relatively
strong during the second half o f the 1980s, it is
unlikely that this trend will continue throughout
the 1990s. In addition to dealing with the cus­
tomary challenges of weather, price and income
volatility, farmers will face several new chal­
lenges in the 1990s, including tighter environ­
mental controls and the adoption of new pro­
duction technologies.

REFERENCES
Booth, James R. “Farmer Mac and the Secondary Market,”
Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco Weekly Letter,
January 5, 1990.
Clark, Michelle A. “Eighth District Banks in 1989: In the Eye
of A Storm?" this Review (May/June 1990), pp. 3-17.
19The increased costs associated with tighter environmental
controls may be offset somewhat by increased production
efficiency stemming from the use of biotechnology.

43

Drabenstott, Mark, and Alan D. Barkema. “U.S. Agriculture
Charts a New Course for the 1990s,” Federal Reserve
Bank of Kansas City, Economic Review (January/February
1990), pp. 32-49.

U.S. Department of Agriculture. Agricultural Outlook, various
issues.
________ Agricultural Prices, various issues.

Karrenbrock, Jeffrey D. “Potential Pitfalls in Interpreting
Farm Income Data,” Pieces of Eight: An Economic Perspec­
tive on the 8th District Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
(June 1990), pp. 10-13.

________ Economic Indicators of the Farm Sector: National
Financial Summary, 1988.

National Farm Finance News. Various issues (Dorset Group,
Inc.).

________ Economic Indicators of the Farm Sector: State
Financial Summary, 1988.




MAY/JUNE 1990

F ederal R eserve Bank o f St. Louis
Post O ffice Box 442
St. Louis, Missouri 63166

The R e v ie w is published six
times per year by the Research
and Public Information
Department o f the Federal
Reserve Bank o f St. Louis.
Single-copy subscriptions are
available to the public fre e o f
charge. Mail requests f o r
subscriptions, back issues, or
address changes to: Research
and Public Information
Department, Federal Reserve
Bank o f St. Louis, P.O. Box 442,
St. Louis, Missouri 63166.
The views expressed are those
o f the individual authors and do
not necessarily reflect official
positions o f the Federal Reserve
Bank o f St. Louis or the Federal
Reserve System. Articles herein
may be reprinted provided the
source is credited. Please provide
the Bank’s Research and Public
Information Department with a
copy o f reprinted material.