View original document

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

Federal Reserve
Bank of Dallas
San Antonio
Branch
Winter 2004

Steady-as-She-Goes?
An Analysis
of the San Antonio
Business Cycle

S

an Antonio has

historically enjoyed a
stable economy, thanks
to the large presence of
cyclically stable sectors,
such as the military and
health care, and the lack
of dependence on more
volatile ones, such as
construction, oil and gas
production, and
manufacturing.

Vista

South Texas
Economic Trends and Issues

The San Antonio metropolitan
statistical area (MSA) is home to
more than 1.6 million people,
making it the fourth-largest MSA in
Texas and the 29th largest in the
nation.1 San Antonio has historically enjoyed a stable economy,
thanks to the large presence of
cyclically stable sectors, such as
the military and health care, and
the lack of dependence on more
volatile ones, such as construction, oil and gas production, and
manufacturing.
The 1990s, however, brought
significant changes to the local
economy, as the military presence
declined and such sectors as high
tech and biotech grew in prominence. Because of this, San Antonio may have become more vulnerable to economic swings.
Economic volatility can impact
businesses’ investment and inventory decisions as well as workers’
saving and spending.
One way to measure economic volatility is to calculate the
standard (or typical) deviation of
the growth rate in some aggregate
measure of the economy, such as
employment or output. Several
data series can be used to analyze
volatility. Monthly data include
nonfarm payroll employment and
the unemployment rate; quarterly
data include retail sales and total
wages.
Businesses and workers may
also be interested in whether the

economy is likely to experience
prolonged or steep declines. Regardless of overall volatility, areas
that experience frequent, large and
persistent swings in economic activity present a high risk of temporary unemployment for workers
and insolvency for businesses. To
gauge this risk for the San Antonio
MSA, it is useful to identify past
periods of economic recession and
expansion and compare their frequency with those of other MSAs.
To do this, we’ve created a coincident index of San Antonio’s
economic activity that combines
changes in employment, the unemployment rate, retail sales and
wages to give us a picture of the
local economy.

Data Availability
Nonfarm payroll employment
is one of the most timely and reliable measures of the San Antonio
economy. The primary data are retrieved from the Current Employment Statistics, published by the
Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) in
cooperation with the Texas Workforce Commission. The Current
Employment Statistics data are
drawn from two sources, annual
unemployment insurance tax
records and the BLS establishment
survey. The accuracy of the
employment data is increased using
two adjustments.2 The first is a
two-step procedure that adjusts
for seasonal patterns in the unem-

months after the end of the
reporting quarter. We adjust both
kinds of data for inflation using
the national Consumer Price Index
and then seasonally adjust them.

Chart 1

Job Growth Differs Across Texas
Index, January 1978 = 100
350
Austin
Dallas
Fort Worth
Houston
San Antonio
Texas

300

250

Defining Volatility and the
Business Cycle
San Antonio has a reputation
for a more stable economy than
the other large Texas MSAs—
Austin, Houston, Dallas and Fort
Worth. But is that reputation
warranted? Chart 1 shows that on
average, while San Antonio’s job
growth exceeded the state’s over
the period from 1978 to September 2004, it lagged that of Austin,
Dallas and Fort Worth. However,
the number of jobs appears to
fluctuate less in San Antonio
than in most of the other large
MSAs. These differences are particularly evident in the employment swings of the early and
mid-1980s. To focus on volatility,
in Chart 2 we extract the longrun average growth rate from
each MSA’s employment and
plot the resulting deviation from
the trend. The trend is defined as
the level of the indicator if it
grew at exactly its long-run average growth rate. Once again, it
appears San Antonio has less
volatile employment than most
of the state’s other large MSAs.
We use two methods to
measure the volatility of employ-

200

150

100
’78

’80

’82

’84

’86

’88

’90

’92

’94

’96

’98

’00

’02

’04

SOURCES: Texas Workforce Commission; Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas.

ployment insurance data and the
establishment survey. The second
incorporates quarterly unemployment insurance estimates from
the Texas Workforce Commission that the BLS includes only
annually.
Another monthly indicator is
the unemployment rate. These
BLS data measure the number
of unemployed, divided by the
number in the labor force. The
data are released at the same time
as nonfarm employment figures
each month.
Although it’s easy to get the
impression that employment and
the unemployment rate measure
essentially the same thing, they
don’t. Employment is the total
number of jobs in an economy,
whereas the unemployment rate
is the slack in the labor force.
This means that when jobs are
increasing, the unemployment
rate can fall or rise, depending
on if and how fast the labor
force is growing or shrinking.
The unemployment rate is influenced by such factors as the
number of discouraged workers,
duration of unemployment insurance benefits and extent of selfemployment.
In addition to the jobs data,
the San Antonio coincident index
uses quarterly retail sales data
compiled by the Texas comptroller’s office and wage data from

the Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages, produced by
the BLS and Texas Workforce
Commission. Retail sales, particularly in durable goods, can be a
good indicator of consumer confidence, so changes in retail sales
can lead to changes in the economy. Total wages reflect not
only the utilization of labor but
also its productivity, because in
theory the wage rate equals the
marginal product of labor. Thus,
total wages represent a closer
approximation to value-added
than employment does. The
biggest weaknesses of both the
sales and wage data are their
quarterly periodicity and their
timeliness, since they generally
are released about six or seven

Chart 2

Employment More Stable in San Antonio Than in Other Large MSAs
Percent

.2
Houston

San Antonio

Dallas

Fort Worth

Austin

.15
.1
.05
0
–.05
–.1
–.15
–.2
’78

’80

’82

’84

’86

’88

’90

’92

’94

’96

SOURCES: Texas Workforce Commission; Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas.

’98

’00

’02

’04

Table 1

Economic Indicators Are More Stable in San Antonio
Log Difference Trend Adjustment
(1978–September 2004)
Variances
MSA
San Antonio
Austin
Dallas
Houston
Fort Worth

Employment

Unemployment

Retail sales

Wages

0.00000961
0.00002080
0.00001116
0.00001620
0.00001496

1.80
1.60
1.60
3.33
1.57

0.001589
0.000830
0.000661
0.001624
0.002047

0.000304
0.000631
0.000407
0.000449
0.000484

Statistical Significance of Difference from San Antonio*
Austin
Dallas
Houston
Fort Worth

2.16
1.16
1.69
1.56

1.12
1.12
1.85
1.15

1.92
2.40
1.02
1.29

2.07
1.34
1.48
1.59

Deviation from Trend
(1978–September 2004)
Variances
MSA
San Antonio
Austin
Dallas
Houston
Fort Worth

Employment

Unemployment

0.000719
0.002996
0.001903
0.002469
0.001411

1.24
1.55
1.56
3.31
1.54

Retail sales
0.00602
0.00854
0.00510
0.01198
0.00257

Wages
0.00222
0.00884
0.00546
0.00789
0.00147

Statistical Significance of Difference from San Antonio*
Austin
Dallas
Houston
Fort Worth

4.17
2.65
3.43
1.96

1.25
1.26
2.67
1.24

1.42
1.18
1.99
2.34

3.99
2.46
3.56
1.51

* The F statistic is calculated as the ratio of the larger variance divided by the smaller variance. The
italic F statistics indicate MSAs that have a statistically smaller variance than San Antonio, while the
bold indicate MSAs with a statistically larger variance. The F test is performed at a 95 percent level
of significance.
SOURCE: The Practice of Business Statistics, by David S. Moore, George P. McCabe, William M.
Duckworth and Stanley L. Sclove. W.H. Freeman and Co., 2003, pp. 488 – 89.

ment, unemployment, retail sales
and wages. The first is to calculate the variance of the percentage changes (measured as the
first difference of the natural
log). This measure is calculated
for employment, total wages, unemployment rate and retail sales
for all five large Texas MSAs for
the period 1978 through September 2004. The second measure of
volatility, which focuses less on
month-to-month changes and
more on broad movements, is
the variance of the percentage
differences in the series from its
trend. (For employment, it is the
variance of the series shown in
Chart 2.)

As Table 1 shows, from 1978
through September 2004, the
variance in San Antonio employment growth was statistically significantly smaller than that of
Austin, Fort Worth and Houston
(as indicated by the bold F test
statistics shown in the table).
When using the deviation from
the long-run average, San Antonio employment is statistically
significantly less volatile than all
but one (Fort Worth) of the four
other large MSAs during this
period. The deviation from the
average unemployment rate also
shows San Antonio’s smaller
variability, although it differs significantly only from Houston’s.

San Antonio’s wage variation is
also smaller than that of all but
the Fort Worth MSA, and it is
particularly significant in the deviation from trend. Retail sales
have mixed results, with half the
variances greater than San Antonio’s and half less. Generally,
however, these results confirm
that San Antonio has had a more
stable economy than the state’s
other large MSAs.
Aside from the economy’s
overall volatility, many businesses
and workers are concerned with
the likelihood of recession because recession may increase the
chances of business failures and
layoffs. One way to identify recessions is to take a broad measure of economic activity, such as
nonfarm employment, and find
periods in which the indicator
generally rises (expansions) and
falls (recessions). The main weakness of this method is that there
are several broad measures of
the economy, and looking at any
one of them might give different
results. To avoid this, we employ
a statistical technique that takes a
weighted average of the movement in the component series.3
The San Antonio coincident
index is based on movement in
the four economic indicators in
Table 1: employment, unemployment rate, total wages and retail
sales. The new index is shown in
Chart 3. The long-run trend in
the index is set equal to the
trend in inflation-adjusted personal income for San Antonio.
Personal income data, which
come from the Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA), offer a
broad measure of the local economy, and while they cannot be
used in the coincident index
because of their annual periodicity, they can be used to set the
index’s long-run trend. The chart
also indicates the beginning and
end of recessions for both the
nation and Texas. (It may still be
too early to pinpoint the exact
end of the 2001 recession in

Chart 3

San Antonio Economy Is Less Cyclical Than the Texas Economy
Log of Index, Oct. 1978 = 100

5.6

San Antonio
recession

5.4
San Antonio
coincident index

5.2
5.0

Texas Coincident Index

4.8
U.S. recession
4.6
Texas recession
4.4
’80

’82

’84

’86

’88

’90

’92

’94

’96

’98

’00

’02

’04

SOURCES: National Bureau of Economic Research; Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas.

O

verall, it appears

Texas, but it appears that it was
sometime around August 2003.)
Since 1979, the San Antonio
economy has experienced fewer
recessions than either the state
or the nation. San Antonio continued to grow through the 1980,
1981 and 1990 national recessions but declined during the
one in 2001. A similar pattern is
apparent when comparing San
Antonio with Texas. San Antonio
continued to grow through the
1982 Texas recession, remained
nearly flat during the 1985–86
recession and declined during
the 2001 recession. We define
recession in San Antonio as a
persistent, statistically significant
decline in the coincident index
of at least six months.
Although the San Antonio coincident index declined from April
1986 to June 1987, the magnitude was so slight (–0.45 percent
annualized) that it was statistically insignificant. This period,
and the one that extends from it
to early 1991, may best be described as a time of economic
stagnation, or as a growth recession. The second time the index
fell was from June 2001 to March
2003. The annual rate of decline
during this period was statistically significant, making it an
economic recession.
Overall, it appears from this
new measure of the San Antonio

business cycle that the local economy has been very recession
resilient, even when the nation
and state have turned downward. The mild recession in San
Antonio that began in 2001,
however, raises the question of
whether structural change in the
city’s economy has increased its
cyclical sensitivity.

A Changing Industry Structure
The most recent recession
may be an indication of San
Antonio’s evolution toward a
more cyclical economy. For example, the employment composition may have shifted from
more stable jobs, like those in
the federal government, to more
volatile jobs, like those in construction and information services.
The beta coefficient can be used
as a measure of how much a
particular industry increases or
decreases the overall volatility of
jobs in a region, similar to how a
stock’s beta indicates its volatility
relative to the overall stock market. For our purposes, the beta
coefficient takes into account not
only the industry’s volatility but
also its co-movement with other
area industries.
For example, if an industry
was very volatile but always grew
when most industries were declining and declined when most were
growing, the growth of this in-

from this new measure
of the San Antonio
business cycle that the
local economy has been
very recession resilient,
even when the nation
and state have turned
downward. The mild
recession in San Antonio
that began in 2001,
however, raises the
question of whether
structural change in the
city’s economy has
increased its cyclical
sensitivity.

dustry would reduce overall volatility rather than increase it. If a
beta value is greater than one,
employment in the industry increases a region’s overall job volatility. If it is less than one, the industry reduces overall volatility.
Analyzing industry job betas
in conjunction with the change
in job share can give an idea of
changes in the underlying volatility in the San Antonio labor
market over the past 10 years.
Table 2 lists the San Antonio
economy’s major industry classifications, the market share of
each industry for January 1990
and September 2004, and a beta
for the entire period in each classification.
One sector that shows increasing volatility for San Antonio employment is professional
and business services, which increased from about 8 percent of
employment in January 1990 to
about 12 percent in September
2004. This sector has a beta coefficient of almost 2.2, implying
a high degree of volatility and a
positive correlation with most
other industries in the area. In
addition, government employment, which has a beta of only
0.38, declined from about 23
percent of total area employment in 1990 to only about 18
percent today.

We also created an industryshare beta, which is the average
of industry betas weighted by
their share of jobs. This industryshare beta represents the underlying cyclical propensity of the
economy, based on its industry
share. The industry-share beta
estimate for January 1990 is 0.991;
the beta for September 2004, the
most recent data available, is
1.052. This implies about a 6 percent increase in the underlying
volatility of the region’s employment.

A Fortuitous Shift

T

he city’s economy

Since 1978 San Antonio’s
economy has not grown as fast
as that of Austin, Dallas or Fort
Worth, but it also has not been
as variable and recession-prone.
However, San Antonio’s industry
structure has changed since 1990,
as the government share of the
economy has shrunk and more
cyclically volatile industries such
as professional and business services, information services and
construction have grown. The
changing industry structure may
be one reason the most recent
downturn in Texas appears to
have been felt in San Antonio
more than those at other times in
the past, such as in the mid-1980s.
The San Antonio coincident
index shows that the city’s econ-

Table 2

Shifting Job Shares Suggest Growing Economic Volatility in San Antonio
Percent of total employment
Jan. 1990

Sept. 2004

Beta

Natural resources and mining
Construction
Manufacturing
Trade, transportation and utilities
Information
Financial activities
Professional and business services
Educational and health services
Leisure and hospitality
Other services
Government

0.42
4.41
8.54
19.38
2.66
8.27
8.10
10.69
10.54
4.09
22.85

0.32
5.48
5.98
17.88
3.18
8.15
12.22
13.62
11.14
3.72
18.35

–1.51
2.05
2.24
0.99
1.43
0.00
2.18
0.96
0.79
0.91
0.38

Industry-share beta

0.991

1.052

SOURCES: Texas Workforce Commission; Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas; authors’ calculations.

grew steadily and
strongly from 1979
to 1986 but then
stagnated from 1986
to early 1991. The rest
of the 1990s marked
a long period of
economic growth.

omy grew steadily and strongly
from 1979 to 1986 but then stagnated from 1986 to early 1991.
The rest of the 1990s marked a
long period of economic growth.
This growth ended in June 2001
with San Antonio’s first recession
since at least 1979, when the
index begins. The mild recession
persisted through March 2003
and was somewhat shorter and
less steep than what the state
overall experienced. Since March
2003, the San Antonio economy
has grown at an annual rate of
1.7 percent, below the long-run
average of 3.2 percent but
slightly above the state’s 1.5 percent pace.
San Antonio’s economic
growth in the 1990s was concentrated in the private sector, primarily in the high-tech, biotech
and related industries, while the
government sector represented a
declining share of employment.
Nationally, the BLS projects that
through 2012, private-sector job
growth is likely to exceed that in
the government sector.
This bodes well for San
Antonio. The larger share of
private-sector jobs may mean
stronger growth in the future

than if the city’s industry structure had not changed. However,
the prospects for stronger job
growth also come with the likelihood of increased economic
volatility. In the future, the San
Antonio economy may be a little
less steady-as-she-goes and a little more rock ’n’ roll.

3

Economy, July/August 1993, and
“Solving the Mystery of the Disappearing January Blip in State Employment Data,” Federal Reserve Bank of
Dallas Economic Review, Second
Quarter 1994.
The methodology is detailed in “A
New Monthly Index of the Texas
Business Cycle,” by Keith R. Phillips,
Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas Working Paper no. 0401,
www.dallasfed.org/research/
papers/index.html.

— Keith R. Phillips
Kristen T. Hamden
Phillips is a senior economist and
Hamden an economic analyst in
the San Antonio Branch of the
Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas.

Notes
1

2

This MSA ranking is found at
www.census.gov/population/www/
cen2000/phc-t29.html, Table 3a. It
differs from the city ranking, which
puts San Antonio in eighth place
(www.census.gov/Press-Release/www/
releases/archives/population/001856.
html). MSAs are a county breakdown
that doesn’t change frequently and is
considered to best represent population growth. City boundaries change
frequently to include new suburbs and
additions to the city definitions, so an
increase in city population may represent population growth or an increase
in the amount of land.
See two articles by Franklin D. Berger
and Keith R. Phillips, “Reassessing
Texas Employment Growth,” Federal
Reserve Bank of Dallas Southwest

V

For more information, contact
Keith Phillips at (210) 978-1409 or
e-mail keith.r.phillips@dal.frb.org.
For a copy of this publication, write
to Rachel Peña, San Antonio Branch,
Federal Reserve Bank
of Dallas, P.O. Box 1471,
San Antonio, TX 78295-1471.
The views expressed are those of
the authors and do not necessarily
reflect the positions of the Federal
Reserve Bank of Dallas or the
Federal Reserve System.
Editor: Keith Phillips
Copy Editor: Monica Reeves
Design: Gene Autry
Layout & Production: Laura J. Bell
This publication is available on the
Internet at www.dallasfed.org.

Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas
P.O. Box 655906
Dallas, TX 75265-5906

BULK RATE
U.S. POSTAGE

ADDRESS SERVICE REQUESTED

DALLAS, TEXAS
PERMIT NO. 151

PA I D