- .^?.
« ; PS-?//6
tJort.
T Econqmic
Impact
™ T 5F" " I I ' s nFPARTMFNT
Kit
U. S. DEPARTMENT
OF COMMERCE
Maritime Administration
Digitized by the Internet Archive
in 2012 with funding from
LYRASIS Members and Sloan Foundation
http://archive.org/details/porteconomicimpaOOarth
PORT ECONOMIC IMPACT KIT
Prepared by
Arthur D. Little, Inc.
Pacific Coast Association of
Port Authorities
U.S. Department of Commerce
Maritime Administration
Office of Commercial Development
Office of Port and Intermodal Development
September 1979
rj.
FOREWORD
Port activities serve as vital catalysts to the generation of employment,
taxes, revenues and business for local communities. Virtually every
major metropolitan region of the United States centers around a port, or
is closely linked by rail or highway with a port. As waterborne trade in
the United States approaches 2 billion tons of cargo per year, the rip-
pling economic effects of vibrant port activities will continue to provide
jobs, dollars and local community development. It is, thus, important to
understand and appreciate these economic impacts of local port develoDment.
The Port Economic Impact Kit was developed to facilitate the preparation
of economic impact reports by local communities or port authorities.
This step-by-step manual is designed to standardize a methodology that
will enhance the credibility, clarity and comparability of port economic
impact studies. Employment of this Kit should involve existing staff and
reduce the preparation costs of economic impact reports. Additionally,
use of the Kit should allow periodic updates of impact estimates at
minimal expense.
This report was prepared under the sponsorship of the Maritime Administra-
tion, the Canadian Ministry of Transport and the Pacific Coast Association
of Port Authorities. The consulting firm of Arthur D. Little, Inc.
prepared the Kit and worked closely with members ports of PCAPA in adapting
and testing the impact methodology. This comprehensive end product is
applicable for the analysis of maritime-related activities at all United
States and Canadian ports.
Office of Port and Intermodal Development
Maritime Administration
U.S. Department of Commerce
September 1979
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
I . OVERVIEW
A. Background 1
B. Uses and Scope of the Kit 2
C. Organization of the Kit 3
II. PORT ECONOMIC IMPACT ISSUES
A. Overview of Economic Impact Theory 8
B. Methodologies for Estimating Direct Impacts 9
C. Methodologies for Estimating Secondary Impacts 10
D. Relationship Between Ports and Port-Dependent
Activities 14
E. Geographic Area of Analysis 15
III. DETAILED METHODOLOGY
A. Initial Considerations 17
B. Design Survey 27
C. Survey Distribution 48
D. Survey Result Compilation 54
E. Development of Secondary Impact Multipliers 66
F. Calculation of Secondary Impacts 96
G. Preparation and Dissemination of Report 111
IV. GLOSSARY 116
APPENDIX
A. Background H8
B. General Problems and Solutions 119
C. Specific Case Studies 122
±i Arthur D Little Inc.
LIST OF FIGURES, EXHIBITS, AND TABLES
Figures
1
2
3
Economic Impact Study Elements
Program Schedule
Staff Responsibility
Page
Exhibits
A:2-l
A: 3-1
A:3-2
B:l-1
B:2-l
B-.3-1
B:3-2
B:4-l
B:4-2
B:5-l
C:2-l
E:3-l
E:4-l
E:7-l
E:7-2
E:8-l
E:8-2
F:4-l
F:5-l
Guidelines for Cost of Economic Impact Study 19
Estimated Staff Time Requirements to Complete Analysis 21
Calendar Time Schedule 23
Suggested Survey Questions 28
Possible Optional Questions 30
Sample Survey - Port Industry 33
Sample Survey - Port-Dependent Industry 34
Coding Instructions - Port Industry Survey 36
Coding Instructions - Port-Dependent Industry Survey 37
Sample Survey Cover Letter 40
Sample Survey Response Chart 51
Concentration Technique Calculation 73
Minimum Requirements Technique Calculation 76
Example of BEA County Income Data 83
Calculation of Income Multiplier 84
RIMS Industry Classifications 87
Waterborne Commerce Related Industries with RIMS Codes 95
Payroll/Sales Ratios for Major Industry Divisions 103
State Agencies and Universities Receiving BEA Local
Income Estimates 106
List of Data Requirement Publications 114
Tables
Port of Grays Harbor Direct Activity 124
Port of Grays Harbor Total Economic Activity 125
Ports of San Francisco and Oakland Direct Activity 128
Ports of San Francisco and Oakland Total Economic 129
Activity
Port of Vancouver, British Columbia Direct Activity 132
Port of Vancouver, British Columbia Total Economic 133
Activity
in
Arthur D Little Inc
I. OVERVIEW
This "economic impact kit" was prepared for the Pacific Coast Asso-
ciation of Port Authorities (PCAPA) , the U.S. Maritime Administration
(MARAD) , and the Canadian Ministry of Transport. The purpose of this
assignment was to develop an effective methodology which member ports
could use to conduct their own economic impact assessments. Therefore,
the resulting "kit" would have to be designed so that it did not require
extensive technical skills and background or substantial financial and
time commitments. At the same time, the methodology would have to
produce reasonably accurate impact estimates when applied to port
districts of different sizes with different cargo mixes. The end product
of the assessment methodology would be an economic impact report which is
both credible and able to be understood by the general public.
A. BACKGROUND
The first step in the assignment was a review of port economic
impact studies and other information to develop a common set of defini-
tions of port-related terms and an inventory of economic impact metho-
dologies available. The glossary was prepared to insure proper under-
standing of the terms used in the kit and comparability among ports.
(Existing studies show that the port industry may be defined to include
only as little as the actual waterborne transport of goods or as much as
all activity which occurs on port district property.) Common definitions
tend to increase the credibility of individual impact studies by pro-
viding a body of studies for comparison.
The inventory of direct and secondary impact methodologies included
both those used in port economic studies and those which are commonly
available but have not been used for ports to date. These techniques
were characterized by, among other things, the skills needed to implement
them, time and financial outlays required, data requirements, and their
applicability to PCAPA member ports. This inventory was reviewed by the
PCAPA Economics Committee and the techniques to be developed for the kit
were selected. It was decided that direct port industry impacts would be
identified by means of a survey and that secondary (indirect and induced)
economic impacts would be estimated by two techniques — an economic base
multiplier and an input/output model derived multiplier.
The methodologies selected for use by PCAPA members are presented in
a series of 40 detailed steps describing data requirements and proce-
dures. (Special sections to adapt the methodology for Canadian ports are
also included.) The draft "economic impact kit" was reviewed by the
Economics Committee for clarity and completeness. Finally, the metho-
dology described in this kit was tested on four West Coast ports — Grays
Harbor, Washington; San Francisco and Oakland, California; and Vancouver,
British Columbia.
B. USES AND SCOPE OF THE KIT
The procedures in the PCAPA economic impact kit will yield estimates
of the current economic impact (employment, payroll, etc.) of the port on
its community. These estimates can be derived from readily available
data by existing port staff who may not have extensive skills or training
in economics or mathematics. In particular, the methodology has been
designed to eliminate, to the extent possible, the need for in-depth
knowledge of and access to economic and statistical data sources and
"expert" judgment about economic issues. While this has required some
simplification of methods and procedures, we believe the methodology
outlined in this kit will yield results sufficiently accurate for the
majority of port district uses.
The principal use of this type of port economic impact study is to
enhance community relations and improve public education efforts. At a
time when taxpayers are becoming increasingly chary of all publicly
funded enterprises, the benefits of showing a return on public investment
— not only revenues, but also jobs and income — are obvious. The same
approach can be used to project the community economic benefits of port
expansion or other increase in port activity, although a major redi-
rection of port operations or change in cargoes handled may require a
more detailed economic assessment. Finally, the economic impact metho-
dology will help policy makers identify the role of the port and its
related activities in the overall local or regional economy as an input
to broad planning decisions.
The economic impact methodology contained in this kit will most pro-
bably meet the needs of small and medium-sized ports which serve rela-
tively simple economies and have limited financial resources for such
efforts. Larger port districts with more complex economic inter-
relationships may prefer to use the method as an annual reporting tool
and spend additional funds on a more detailed in-depth economic study
based on additional area-specific data and employing additional area-
specific assessment techniques (e.g., a local or regional input/output
model) . These districts can use the kit to update some of the results of
the detailed study periodically at relatively low cost by using their own
staff and published data. Thus, this economic impact kit should prove
useful to all PCAPA member ports.
While this kit is designed to yield reasonably accurate results with
the use of available resources, it is important to recognize the limita-
tions of the methodology. Perhaps most important, because a survey is
required to measure direct activity, the estimate of total port industry
impacts will be only as good as the survey. In other words, the credi-
bility of the overall assessment will be enhanced if the time and effort
necessary to increase the reliability of the survey are committed (e.g.,
by conducting a pretest of the questionnaire). Similarly, every effort
must be made to compile a complete list of port industry firms from which
the sample will be drawn. The development of reliable survey data is the
single most important element of the economic impact study.
"...
...
Because the kit is designed to be applicable to many different
ports, it may not answer all the questions of interest to a particular
port district. The kit's results are expressed in terms of income and
output with additional steps available to estimate employment and some
tax revenues. The secondary economic effects of port-dependent indus-
tries are not estimated because it is difficult to assess the true depen-
dence of these firms on the specific port. Most tax impacts (sales,
property, etc.) are not carried beyond the direct level because of double
counting and other problems. This conservative bias (i.e., possibly
underestimating the actual total impact of the port) usually tends to
increase the credibility of an economic impact assessment. If a port
needs information not provided by the basic methodology, it may be possi-
ble to add optional questions to the survey or develop additional ratio
multipliers (see Step F:6 in Chapter III).
One specific ratio frequently used in port impact studies is the
cargo multiplier, which is an estimate of the employment, income,
revenue, tax paid, and similar economic measures associated with each ton
of cargo shipped through the port. While the simplicity of this approach
is attractive, closer examination of the relationships involved suggests
that cargo multipliers may be quite misleading. For example, some ele-
ments of port industry employment may be directly related to tonnage
(e.g., loading and unloading operations), but other elements are more
closely tied to the number of ships moving through the port (e.g.,
pilotage and tugboats) . Other elements of total employment tend to
remain fixed no matter how much cargo moves through the port (e.g., port
management and administration, freight forwarders, etc.). Other measures
would be affected by the value of cargo (almost impossible to determine
for containers), cargo origins and destinations (e.g., transportation
savings) , and other factors for which data are not readily available.
Because we believe that the methodology described in this kit will yield
more accurate and thus more useful impact estimates, a procedure for cal-
culating cargo multipliers has not been developed.
C. ORGANIZATION OF THE KIT
The PCAPA economic impact kit is made up of three principal sections
in addition to this overview. Chapter II presents a general discussion
of economic interrelationships and economic assessment methodologies
which explains some of the theory on which the kit is based. It may also
serve as a technical appendix to a port's economic impact report. It is
not necessary for a user to be familiar with this material before begin-
ning the steps described in Chapter III. Chapter III is the detailed
methodology "workbook" which describes the procedures, data sources, cal-
culations, and other information necessary to conduct the port economic
impact study. Chapter IV is a short glossary of economic and port
industry terms used in the kit.
The methodology is organized into seven major elements, each of
which contains several specific steps (see Figure 1) . Each element is
designed to accomplish one of the major tasks of the study which are:
FIGURE 1
ECONOMIC IMPACT STUDY ELEMENTS
A. Initial Considerations
1 . Determine Public Purpose of Analysis
2. Obtain Funding to Conduct Analysis
3. Allocate Staff Time to Analysis
4. Determine Scope of Study
5. Select Geographical Area for Analysis
6. Prepare Schedule for Project
B. Survey Design
1. Adopt Required Questions for Surveys
2. Develop Optional Questions for Surveys
3. Adjust Questionnaires for More Than One Port in Region
4. Prepare Coding Instructions for Questionnaires
5. Prepare Cover Letter for Questionnaires
6. Identify Firms in the Port Industry
7. Select Firms for Pretest of Survey Instrument
8. Select Interview Format
9. Conduct Survey Pretest and Revise Questionnaire
C. Survey Distribution
1. Advertise Study Prior to Survey Distribution
2. Prepare List for Respondent Checkoff
3. Conduct Survey
D. Survey Result
1. Code Returned Surveys
2. Check Consistency of Survey Responses
3. Estimate Value of Missing Responses
4. Collect Port Employment and Income Data
5. Tabulate Survey Responses by Industry and Impact Category
6. Aggregate Survey Responses and Estimate Total Direct Impact
E. Development of Secondary Impact Multipliers
1. Select Methods for Secondary Impact Analysis
2. Collect Income and Employment Data for Economic Base Multipliers
3. Develop Employment Multipliers Using "Concentration" Approach
4. Develop Employment Multipliers Using "Minimum Requirements" Technique
5. Develop Employment Multipliers Using "Experience" Technique
6. Develop "Concensus" Employment Multipliers
7. Develop Economic Base Income Multipliers
8. Select Industries for Analysis and Order RIMS Multipliers
F. Calculation of Secondary Impacts
1. Determine Share of Port Industry Income That is Basic
2. Estimate Total Income Supported by Port Activities Using Economic Base Multipliers
3. Estimate Total Sales Supported by Port Activities Using RIMS Multipliers
4. Compare RIMS and Economic Base Techniques
5. Update RIMS Estimates
G. Preparation and Dissemination of Report
1. Prepare Report
2. Disseminate Report
Initial Considerations
Survey Design
Survey Distribution
Survey Result Compilation
Development of Secondary Impact Multipliers
Calculation of Secondary Impacts
Preparation and Dissemination of Report
Each step is described in terms of its data requirements (including spe-
cific source citations) , recommended action (the specific calculations or
other work required) , and output. Many steps also contain a discussion
describing possible alternatives or problems, additional background
information, constraints on the use of results, or other relevant
issues. Each step represents a discrete work item so that the user can
complete the program one step at a time.
Figure 2 shows the estimated project schedule. It is estimated that
a maximum of about eight months will be needed to complete the economic
impact study program. The first two months are allocated to determining
the scope of the study and other initial considerations; the actual data
collection and calculation work is expected to require about six months.
Actual implementation time may vary depending on staff availability, the
size of the port district, etc. (A small district may be able to
complete personal or telephone surveys in less time than a larger
district would need for mail surveys, for example.)
Three levels of port staff are required to implement the economic
impact study — management, a project director, and technical staff. The
port district's management — possibly the executive director or a com-
mittee of the governing board — should make the initial decisions about
the study's scope, funding, etc., and have review responsibility for all
materials distributed to the public in the name of the port (question-
naires and cover letters, press releases, and the final report). The
project director will have principal responsibility for the conduct of
the study including supervision of technical staff and writing the impact
report. Ideally, this individual would have some knowledge of economics
and be well acquainted with the operation of the port. At a minimum, the
project director should have read and understood all of the steps of this
kit before work is begun. Technical staff would be responsible for data
collection, calculations and tabulations, and, if necessary, conducting
telephone and personal interviews. For ports with limited staff avail-
ability, a single person may serve as project director and also perform
the technical staff tasks. A port might also use economics or planning
students from a local college as interns to perform the technical staff
functions. Figure 3 shows the level of staff responsibility associated
with each step.
Before beginning this economic impact study, it is recommended that
all of the steps be read. The characteristics and requirements of each
individual port district will determine the way in which the study should
be approached, including level of detail, approximate cost, and which
steps may be considered optional.
FIGURE 2
PROGRAM SCHEDULE
Step
No.
Description
Week
DateComp.eted I I | | | | I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34
A:1 Determine Public Purpose of Analysis
A. 2 Obtain Funding to Conduct Analysis
A:3 Allocate Staff Time to Analysis
A:4 Determine Scope of Study
A:5 Select Geographical Area for Analysis
A:6 Prepare Schedule for Project
B: 1 Adopt Required Questions for Surveys
B:2 Develop Optional Questions for Surveys
B:3 Adjust Questionnaires for More than One Port
in Region
B:4 Prepare Coding Instructions for Questionnaires
B:5 Prepare Cover Letter for Questionnaires
B:6 Identify Firms in the Port Industry
B:7 Select Firms for Pretest of Survey Instrument
B:8 Select Interview Format
8:9 Conduct Survey Pretest and Revise Questionnaire
C:l Advertise Study Prior to Survey Distribution
C:2 Prepare List for Respondent Checkoff
C:3 Conduct Survey
D:1 Code Returned Surveys
D:2 Check Consistency of Survey Responses
D:3 Estimate Value of Missing Responses
D:4 Collect Port Employment and Income Data
0:5 Tabulate Survey Responses by Industry and
Impact Category
0:6 Aggregate Survey Responses and Estimate Total
Direct Impact
E:1 Select Methods for Secondary Impact Analysis
E:2 Collect Income and Employment Data for
Economic Base Multipliers
E:3 Develop Employment Multipliers Using
"Concentration" Approach
■E:4 Develop Employment Multipliers Using
"Minimum Requirements" Technique
E:5 Develop Employment Multipliers Using
"Experience" Technique
E:6 Develop "Consensus" Employment Multipliers
E:7 Develop Economic Base Income Multipliers
E:8 Select Industries for Analysis and Order RIMS
Multipliers
F:1 Determine Share of Port Industry Income that
Is Basic
F:2 Estimate Total Income Supported by Port
Activities Using Economic Base Multipliers
F:3 Estimate Total Sales Supported by Port
Activities Using RIMS Multipliers
F:4 Compare RIMS and Economic Base Techniques
F;5 Update RIMS Estimates
F.6 Calculate Other Impact Measures
G: 1 Prepare Report
G.2 Disseminate Report
2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 ii ii i 1 1 1 1 1 1
Estimated Date
FIGURE 3
STAFF RESPONSIBILITY
Step
No. Description
A:1 Determine Public Purpose of Analysis
A:2 Obtain Funding to Conduct Analysis
A:3 Allocate Staff Time to Analysis
A:4 Determine Scope of Study
A:5 Select Geographical Area for Analysis
A:6 Prepare Schedule for Project
B:1 Adopt Required Questions for Surveys
B:2 Develop Optional Questions for Surveys
8:3 Adjust Questionnaires for More Than One Port in Region
B:4 Prepare Coding Instructions for Questionnaires
B:5 Prepare Cover Letter for Questionnaires
B:6 Identify Firms in the Port Industry
B:7 Select Firms for Pretest of Survey Instrument
B:8 Select Interview Format
B:9 Conduct Survey Pretest and Revise Questionnaire
C:1 Advertise Study Prior to Survey Distribution
C:2 Prepare List for Respondent Checkoff
C:3 Conduct Survey
D:1 Code Returned Surveys
D:2 Check Consistency of Survey Responses
D:3 Estimate Value of Missing Responses
D:4 Collect Port Employment and Income Data
D:5 Tabulate Survey Responses by Industry and Impact Category
0:6 Aggregate Survey Responses and Estimate Total Direct Impact
E:1 Select Methods for Secondary Impact Analysis
E:2 Collect Income and Employment Data for Economic Base
Multipliers
E:3 Develop Employment Multipliers Using "Concentration" Approach
E:4 Develop Employment Multipliers Using "Minimum Requirements"
Technique
E:5 Develop Employment Multipliers Using "Experience" Technique
E:6 Develop "Consensus" Employment Multipliers
E:7 Develop Economic Base Income Multipliers
E:8 Select Industries for Analysis and Order RIMS Multipliers
F:1 Determine Share of Port Industry Income That is Basic
F:2 Estimate Total Income Supported by Port Activities Using
Economic Base Multipliers
F:3 Estimate Total Sales Supported by Port Activities Using
RIMS Multipliers
F:4 Compare RIMS and Economic Base Techniques
F:5 Update RIMS Estimates
G:1 Prepare Report
G2 Disseminate Report
Project
Technical
Management
Direction
Staff
P
R
P
R
P
P
R
P
R
P
P
R
P
P
P
R
P
R
P
P
P
R
P
P
R
P
R
P
R
P
P
R
P
P
P
R
P ■ performance
R ■ review
II. PORT ECONOMIC IMPACT ISSUES
A. OVERVIEW OF ECONOMIC IMPACT THEORY
The purpose of this kit is to estimate the economic impact of ports
on the surrounding community — that is, what the port contributes to the
community in terms of income, jobs, taxes, and other economic measures.
A complete accounting of these impacts must include not only the direct
impacts of the port industry (and port activities) , but also the indirect
and induced effects created by the port industry. As discussed below,
various methods have been developed for using observed economic rela-
tionships to determine the secondary activity associated with a given
type and amount of direct activity.
Economic impacts, and economic activity in general, are determined
by demand for goods and services. The direct impact of the port industry
as defined in this kit is thus the output, employment, payrolls, and
other economic activity created by the demand for the movement of water-
borne commerce. As demand rises — as producers and users ship more
cargo through the port — direct economic activity also increases. The
demand for port industry services is translated into sales of several
direct sector industries which provide stevedoring, pilotage, bunker
fuel, marine insurance, and other goods and services.
To provide these services, the direct sector enterprises must obtain
necessary inputs from several sources. For many, the largest purchase is
the time of their employees; these purchases are reflected in both pay-
rolls and employment. In addition, they must purchase commodities and
services from other firms. Port industry purchases include such things
as tugboats, cranes, office equipment, cleaning supplies, telephone
service, and many, many others. These purchases are the indirect impacts
of the port industry; if demand for port services stopped, demand for
these services would also cease.
Indirect demand does not stop at this initial round. As an example,
the supplier (manufacturer) of the cranes must purchase steel, machine
tools, power, office supplies, and a variety of other equipment and
services in addition to making payroll payments. Similarly, the firms
which supply the crane manufacturer must also obtain inputs. The result
is a continuous interchange of goods and services among the sectors of
the economy in order to meet the demand in the port industry.
Along with these interindustry sales and payrolls, each round of
spending also generates profits and taxes. The port industry's direct
and indirect activities contribute to sales, income, property, fuel, and
other federal, state, and local tax revenues.
In addition to the direct and indirect impacts, the port industry
also has induced impacts created by the expenditures of direct and
indirect payrolls. Payrolls and proprietors' income are spent for con-
sumer goods and services including food, clothing, transportation,
housing, and entertainment. People are employed to provide these items
and more indirect sector inputs must be purchased, resulting in still
more rounds of profits, payrolls, and taxes. Tax revenues purchase
government services which require supplies resulting in yet another round
of impacts.
In theory, these rounds of impacts never end, but they do approach a
maximum level. The ratio between the total volume of sales (or income or
employment) generated and sales directly related to the pert is the
multiplier for the port industry. The size of the multiplier depends on
the structure, size, and diversity of the port district's (or region's)
economy .
It is not likely that the port district's economy can provide all of
the required goods and services. For example, heavy cargo handling
equipment is typically produced by a few large manufacturers which serve
national markets. Similarly, many consumer products are manufactured for
national rather than local markets at one central plant or a few regional
plants. These and many other items must be imported from other regions.
These imports represent regional leakages from the multiplier impacts
associated with the demand for port services. For example, a port's work
orders, bills of lading, and similar forms could probably be produced by
a local printer, but cranes, forklifts, or other heavy equipment would
probably be purchased from a manufacturer outside the port district. The
printer in turn, might buy his paper and ink from suppliers outside the
port region, so that each round of impacts would be accompanied by leak-
ages. These leakages vary in magnitude depending on the ability of the
local economy to meet the demand for goods and services. The more self-
sufficient an economy, the smaller the leakage and consequently the
greater the local multiplier effect. Traditionally larger, more diverse
economies have higher local multipliers than smaller ones simply because
they can provide a greater percentage of locally demanded goods and
services.
The port-related economy is not easily recognized because it is
intertwined with the remainder of the regional economy. Few firms
affected at the indirect and induced levels are totally dependent on the
port. Their sales would decline if the port closed, but would not drop
to zero.
B. METHODOLOGIES FOR ESTIMATING DIRECT IMPACTS
Because the port industry as defined in this kit does not conform to
Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) categories, but includes parts
of many SICs, there is no secondary source from which direct impacts can
be determined. (As an example, an assessment of the local impacts of the
primary metals industry could use all activity listed in SIC 33 in County
Business Patterns or a similar source as the direct sector and proceed
from there; no similar indirect approach is possible for the port
industry.) In addition, as discussed further below, port-dependent
activities must be addressed not only by identifying users of the port
(shippers and receivers) but also by estimating the extent to which these
users are truly dependent on the availability of the port.
For these reasons, and because any mistakes made in the assessment
of direct activity will be multiplied in the estimate of total economic
impacts, a direct survey of port industry and port-dependent firms is
necessary to measure direct impacts. Survey techniques also have the
advantages of being able to be tailored to provide specific types of
information which may not be available from other sources. For instance,
in addition to the basic information needed for the economic impact
study, questions could be added concerning estimated employee residential
distribution (inside or outside the county), business expansion plans, or
the need or desire for additional types of port services. As discussed
elsewhere, shorter questionnaires are more likely to be completed, but a
few optional questions may be very useful to the individual port district.
C. METHODOLOGIES FOR ESTIMATING SECONDARY IMPACTS
The basic assumption of economic impact analysis is that observed
relationships in a region's economy can be used to determine the effects
of changes in the level of economic activity on the regional economy as a
whole. Simply, if activity in one industry increases by a given amount,
the region's total economy can be expected to change in some predictable
manner. These relationships are given in the multipliers described
above, although they may be expressed as simple multipliers or a complex,
sectorally disaggregated matrix of multipliers.
There are three principal types of methods used as classification
systems for the relationships in a region's economy and as techniques for
estimating the indirect and induced effects of changes in direct activ-
ity. These are:
• Economic base multipliers
• Interregional trade multipliers, and
• Input/output models.
Each of these methods can be classified according to its overall
theoretical validity, the accuracy of its estimates, the skills required
to develop coefficients and apply the methodology, and the cost, time,
and amount of data required to implement the methodology. As might be
expected, there is generally a tradeoff between the desire for a simple,
low-cost approach and a more complex, complete, and accurate description
of a region's economic system and interactions. Moreover, these consi-
derations affect not only the choice among methods, but also the way
10
in which each method is applied. Each individual technique can be imple-
mented with different levels of disaggregation, and the greater the
disaggregation, the greater the usefulness, accuracy, cost, and data
requirements. Therefore, the methodologies developed for this port
economic impact kit and described in detail in Chapter III represent a
reasonable compromise based on the expected level of resources available
to the majority of users.
It is important to remember that each of these systems represents a
"snapshot" of a region's economy and interrelationships at a single point
in time (the period for which the data were collected) . The direct
application of multipliers and models to predict the overall effects of
changes in port activity implicitly assumes that the relationships con-
tained in the "snapshot" will not change over time because of structural
changes in the region's economy (e.g., introduction of new industries),
technological changes in products and processes, economies of scale,
price effects, interfactor substitutions, or other forces, any of which
could, of course, substantially alter economic interrelationships. The
analyst who applies the techniques described in this kit must be aware of
any changes which have occurred since the data were collected and any
which might occur during the period for which forecasts are being made.
For example, aggregate relationships between the port industry and the
region's economy are likely to be affected by increasing use of container
and ro/ro shipments, changes in the mix of shippers, or large increases
or decreases in the amount of cargo handled. Since these changes cannot
be explicitly incorporated into the estimating procedures described in
this kit, it is important to understand the limitations of each of the
impact methodologies.
1. Economic Base Multipliers
Economic base theory assumes that all economic activity in a region
can be divided into two sectors, the export or basic sector which pro-
duces goods and services shipped out of the region and the local or non-
basic sector which produces goods and services consumed within the
region. The size of the non-basic sector is assumed to be a known func-
tion of the size of the basic sector. Export markets are considered the
prime mover of the local economy. If employment serving this market
rises or falls, employment serving the local market is presumed to move
in the same direction. The theory further assumes that a region's eco-
nomy changes slowly and that, as a result, the ratio of basic to non-
basic employment, income, or other indicator is relatively stable over
long periods.
The principal advantage of the economic base technique is its con-
ceptual and operational simplicity. Economic base multipliers can be
developed and applied by persons who do not have extensive backgrounds in
economics or mathematics. Furthermore, these multipliers can be derived
from a relatively small amount of readily available data, using standard
procedures to determine "basic" employment in each sector.
11
In many cases it is the very simplicity of this technique which has
led to its abuse — most frequently by assuming that employment in cer-
tain sectors (typically agriculture, mining, and manufacturing) is basic
and the remainder non-basic and using these totals to develop an employ-
ment multiplier. In fact, each sector of the economy serves both export
and local markets, and these shares must be determined and summed to
develop a multiplier. (It should also be added that income is preferable
to employment as a measure of economic base relationships, and that ratio
analysis can be used to derive employment from income.) In addition,
economic base multipliers developed for regions in countries that have a
large share of foreign exports will tend to be too high. This can be
remedied by a relatively simple procedure, however, as described in the
Chapter III discussion on use of the economic base technique for Canadian
ports (see Step E:3, page 70).
Economic base multipliers are generally best limited to use as des-
criptors of present conditions rather than as a basis for projections.
The introduction of a large new basic economic activity into the region
could have significantly different non-basic effects than the existing
aggregate basic sector, so that the previous multiplier would no longer
be appropriate. Also, the economic base approach is most appropriate for
small regions. As a region's economy becomes more diverse and complex,
it contains a larger number of interindustry relationships tied to local
demand which may not be affected by export demand.
As discussed in greater detail in Chapter III, the special nature of
the port industry leads to certain difficulties in the use of the eco-
nomic base approach. Most industries whose impacts are analyzed by this
methodology are considered wholly basic activities. However, the port
industry includes some income and employment which could be classified as
basic (export-related) and some which could be termed non-basic (import-
related) . Therefore, it is necessary to estimate the basic component of
port activity before the economic base multiplier can be used. None-
theless, because of the attractiveness of this technique for small ports
with limited resources, this technique is suggested in the kit.
2. Interregional Trade Multipliers
Interregional trade multipliers are developed from Keynesian income
determination theory, which is based on an identity relationship among
total income and the various components that constitute it — i.e., con-
sumption, investment, government spending, imports, and exports. The
technique has structural similarities to input/output methodology, and
the results produced are similar to those of economic base techniques.
Unlike economic base methods, interregional trade multipliers make speci-
fic assumptions about the utilization of income for various purposes and
from these estimates determine the effect of a change in exports. Like
economic base multipliers, however, interregional trade multipliers do
not provide any sectoral disaggregation, and so provide little insight as
to the interrelationships of different sectors.
Because of the formulation of the underlying model, the inter-
regional trade multiplier approach is capable of providing more accurate
forecasts of economic activity than the economic base method, but
requires far more imformation to do so. As a result, it costs far more
12
to implement than the economic base approach and requires a greater
sophistication on the part of the analyst. Properly used, the two
methods will provide similar estimates of point-in-time impacts, the type
which are to be prepared with this kit. Therefore, a detailed method for
using interregional trade multipliers has not been developed.
3. Input/Output Models
The basic premise of the input/output model framework is that each
industry sells its output to other industries and final consumers
(personal consumption, business investment, government spending, and
exports) and, in turn, purchases goods and services from other industries
and primary factors of production (such as capital and labor) . There-
fore, the performance of each industry can be determined by changes in
both final demand and the specific interindustry relationships. Simi-
larly, the economic impacts of each industry can be expressed in terms of
increased demand for industrial production and the primary factors of
production.
The I/O approach is the most appealing from a theoretical point of
view since it allows the sectoral disaggregation of impacts and is thus
most sensitive to the multi-industry nature of port activities. The I/O
framework enables the analyst to avoid the problems associated with sepa-
rating port activities into export and local since, as done in the MARAD
study of the U.S. port industry, the port industry can be treated as a
single industry in the I/O matrix. Input/output models are generally
considered the most theoretically accurate of the several tools available
for describing economic interrelationships in a regional or national
economy .
As might be expected, just as the disadvantages of the economic base
multiplier are associated with its simplicity, the disadvantages of the
I/O approach are due to its complexity. The amount of data needed to
construct an I/O table and the associated time, cost, and technical skill
requirements are enormous. Available state or regional I/O tables cannot
be used for the area of interest to a port district (usually a single
county) because of the likely structural differences in the two areas'
economic relationships. Even when an I/O table for a suitable geographic
area does exist, it must be used carefully because the data needs of I/O
tables generally cause them to be prepared relatively infrequently, and
existing tables are often several years out of date. The smaller the
region, the more likely this time-related error is to cause significant
problems (e.g., a county's interindustry flows could be substantially
affected by the opening or closing of one or two large plants). Finally,
with the exception of the recent MARAD study, I/O models do not typically
treat the "port industry" as defined in this kit as a single component of
the interindustry matrix.
One possible method for using the I/O approach to estimate the eco-
nomic impacts of small ports involves the use of the RIMS (Regional
Industrial Multiplier System) data developed from the national I/O model
by the Bureau of Economic Analysis. The RIMS procedure currently uses
the 1967 national I/O table in conjunction with industrial output infor-
mation for counties throughout the nation to derive industry-specific
multipliers for regions ranging in size from counties to multi-state
13
areas. Multipliers based on the 1972 national I/O table are expected to
be available by mid-1979. Since the technology in the port industry and
economic interrelationships in many counties and regions have changed
rapidly since the 1967 and 1972 I/O tables were developed, it may not be
appropriate to use the RIMS approach by itself. Nevertheless, it may
still serve as a useful check on an economic base multiplier as
recommended in this kit.
D. RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN PORTS AND PORT-DEPENDENT ACTIVITIES
Since the purpose of this kit is to assess the full impact of port
activities, including port-dependent activities, it is important to exa-
mine the nature of the relationship between ports and port-dependent
activities. Our review of port economic impact assessments has shown
that researchers frequently allocate the total impacts of port-dependent
or related activities to the port without any attempt to assess the
importance of port availability to these industries. In point of fact,
many industries which are generally considered port-dependent from a
location decision point of view (coal, grain, iron and steel, lumber and
pulp) typically occur at substantial distances from actual port facili-
ties (where resources are available) and are port-dependent in that cost-
effective access to a suitable port is required.
This is most clearly the case when mini-bridge cargos are consi-
dered. Here the particular port is probably only selected for conve-
nience and its absence would have little, if any, effect on the opera-
tions of shippers and receivers whose primary concerns are the most cost-
efficient methods of transportation. In these cases, alternative ports
would serve as well.
While there are undoubtedly some port-dependent activities tied to
and unable to survive without a specific port, it is necessary to attempt
to assess the importance of a port to its users so that the amount of
dependent activity can be appropriately allocated. Even a firm which
customarily ships all of its output through the local port might consider
only 10% of its sales actually dependent on the particular port; the
remaining 90% of its business could be handled through other ports or via
alternative modes of transportation.
In addition to gauging how dependent the port-dependent industries
are, it is also important to look critically at activities which take
place on port property. Even though some studies have treated all activ-
ities on port property as part of the port industry, it is clear that
some of them may not be port-related at all except by accident of loca-
tion. As an example, several of the old finger piers in San Francisco
are used for parking or storage of recreational vehicles, simple economic
uses of otherwise vacant space rather than port-related activities. The
economic development role of Washington public port districts leads to
the location on port property of industries which may be completely, par-
tially, or not at all dependent on port availability. Therefore, we
believe it is critical that ports attempt to assess accurately the true
dependence of "port-dependent" activities on the local port and reflect
these findings in their analyses.
14
E. GEOGRAPHIC AREA OF ANALYSIS
In the past, studies of port economic impacts frequently included
the concept of the port "hinterland" — a natural market area for cargoes
moving through the port. The prevalance of the hinterland concept has
declined in recent years, largely as a result of mini-bridge and land-
bridge practices in which ports are used as transshipment points rather
than primary origins and destinations. Any "hinterland" defined to in-
clude the majority of port users would probably be so large that impacts
measured for this study area would be meaningless to port district resi-
dents and decision makers.
Because of the expected uses of this kit, we believe it is appro-
priate that impacts be developed for relatively small geographic areas.
While a small geographic unit will not encompass all of the economic
activity generated by its port, this is the area of analysis most rele-
vant to port district residents and decision-makers. Because of the need
to prepare an analysis directed toward local concerns and because of the
level of geographic disaggregation of available statistical data, we
recommend that individual counties or small, economically related groups
of counties (e.g., Standard Metropolitan Statistical Areas) be used as
study areas for the purposes of this kit.
15
III. DETAILED METHODOLOGY
This section is the detailed guide for undertaking a port economic
study. Each of the required and optional steps is described in terms of
its purpose, data requirements, significant issues, action to be taken,
and expected use of results.
In those steps which require different data sources or procedures
for Canadian ports, appropriate alternatives are described. All other
steps should be completed in the same manner for Canadian and U.S. ports.
16
INITIAL CONSIDERATIONS
Step A;l
PURPOSE:
Identify the public purpose of the analysis. All subsequent steps should
be completed in a manner to achieve the purpose.
DATA REQUIREMENTS:
None.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
There are three basic uses for documents developed using this kit: in-
formation dissemination, policy guidance for port planning and develop-
ment, and assessment of the impacts of changes in port activities. The
user should identify which of these is appropriate for the application,
as the care and level of effort should reflect the purpose. The greatest
accuracy would be necessary for those projects that will influence port
policy.
USE OF RESULTS:
Decisions regarding use of the analysis should guide subsequent steps in
terms of level of effort and thoroughness of analysis.
17
INITIAL CONSIDERATIONS
Step A:2
PURPOSE:
Acquire sufficient funding to complete the analysis.
•
DATA REQUIREMENTS:
Approximate number of firms on port property, the number of local firms
who ship or receive goods through the port, purpose of the analysis (see
Step A:l), wages of persons assigned to the analysis, and the cost of
required input data. Knowledge of potential funding sources.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Funding source should be identified. Options normally include:
• Internal funding, and
• External grant.
Any requirements to obtain funding should be identified and met.
The cost of analysis fluctuates depending on the size of the port, the
desired level of accuracy and comprehensiveness, wage rates of staff,
etc. Guidelines for cost estimation are shown in Exhibit A: 2-1.
After cost and funding source are identified, necessary funds should be
committed to complete the analysis. If appropriate, a separate internal
budget should be allocated to the project.
USE OF RESULTS:
Acquired funds are used to finance completion of the analysis.
18
ITEM
Exhibit A:2-l
GUIDELINES FOR COST OF ECONOMIC IMPACT STUDY
COST
Materials
1. Collect general data $ 100
(assumes most data obtained
from sources not requiring purchase)
2. Survey costs (survey printing,
mailing, etc.) $ 10 per firm
3. Data for estimating indirect impacts
Income multipliers $ 150
RIMS multipliers $ 1,100
Staff
$1,600
4. Report Production (100 copies)
$ 1,000-
$ 3,000
$4,500
$4,500
$3,000
$2,500
The numbers reflect expected costs for an average West Coast port that
will contact 200-300 respondents. It is assumed that all analytical work
is conducted in-house, that the work is done within the timeframe sug-
gested in Step A: 3, and that no significant problems are encountered in
implementing the methodology. Staff time is estimated at a rate of
$2,000 per person month.
The total cost will depend on the methodology selected to estimate
indirect and induced impacts and the degree of accuracy. To give an
example of total costs the following estimates were prepared assuming
200 survey respondents, a $2,000 report production cost, and use of dif-
ferent impact methodologies.
Income Multipliers
RIMS Multipliers
Materials
$4,250
$5,200
Staff
$13,100
$11,600
Total
$17,350
$16,800
19
INITIAL CONSIDERATIONS
Step A: 3
■
PURPOSE:
Allocate sufficient staff and calendar time to complete the analysis.
DATA REQUIREMENTS:
Approximate number of firms on port property, the number of local firms
who ship or receive goods through the port, purpose of the analysis (see
Step A:l), familiarity of persons assigned to the analysis with techni-
ques and data to be used, and other commitments of this staff.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Have staff who will complete the project review the entire kit and assess
their ability to implement it.
Estimates of staff time required to complete the analysis for ports of
varying sizes are shown in Exhibit A:3-l. Adjust these estimates based
on staff abilities.
Calendar time completion estimates are shown in Exhibit A: 3-2. These
should be adjusted based on level of staff commitment and ability.
Based on estimated staff and calendar time requirements make necessary
adjustments in scheduling chart, Exhibit A: 3-2.
USE OF RESULTS:
The scheduling chart enables the analyst to track completion of tasks and
ensure the start and completion of tasks in the required sequence.
20
EXHIBIT A: 3-1
ESTIMATED STAFF TIME REQUIREMENTS TO COMPLETE ANALYSIS
The basic variables which affect the amount of staff time required are
the number of respondents to the survey, the desired accuracy of the
results, and the methodology used to estimate the indirect and induced
impacts.
Staff time requirements are separated into three staff levels: Senior
port management, project director, and technical staff. The table below
shows estimated time requirements for ports of different sizes using dif-
ferent impact methodologies.
Port staff time requirement estimates
(person-days)
Number of Survey Respondents
Project Phase
A. Initial Considerations
50
51-100
101-200
201-350 351-500
Senior Management
3
3
4
4
4
Project Director
4
4
6
6
7
Technical Staff
B. Survey design
Senior Management
1
1
1
1
1
Project Director
10
12
15
18
20
Technical Staff
3
3
5
7
10
C. Survey Distribution
Senior Management
Project Director
Technical Staff
D. Survey Result Compilation
Senior Management
Project Director 3
Technical Staff 7
6
9
12
15
11
18
23
30
21
E. Development of Secondary
Impact Multipliers*
Senior Management
Project Director
10
10
10
10
10
Technical Staff
4
4
6
6
8
F. Calculate Secondary
Impacts*
Senior Management
Project Director
11
11
13
15
17
Technical Staff
4
5
9
10
15
G. Prepare and Disseminate
Report
Senior Management
Project Director
Technical Staff
2
2
2
2
2
6
8
8
10
12
1
1
1
2
2
Total Time
Senior Management
7
7
8
8
8
Project Director
46
53
64
75
86
Technical Staff
21
27
42
53
72
NOTE: Assumes all optional steps are performed.
* Assumes that both income multiplier and RIMS multiplier techniques
are used.
22
EXHIBIT A:3 2
CALENDAR TIME SCHEDULE
Step
No.
Description
A:1 Determine Public Purpose of Analysis
A; 2 Obtain Funding to Conduct Analysis
A:3 Allocate Staff Time to Analysis
A:4 Determine Scope of Study
A:5 Select Geographical Area for Analysis
A:6 Prepare Schedule for Project
D,„ Completed | | | I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34
8:1 Adopt Required Questions for Surveys
8:2 Develop Optional Questions for Surveys
6:3 Adjust Questionnaires for More than One Port
in Region
B:4 Prepare Coding Instructions for Questionnaires
B:5 Prepare Cover Letter for Questionnaires
B:6 Identify Firms in the Port Industry
B:7 Select Firms for Pretest of Survey Instrument
B:8 Select Interview Format
B:9 Conduct Survey Pretest and Revise Questionnaire
C:1 Advertise Study Prior to Survey Distribution
C:2 Prepare List for Respondent Checkoff
C:3 Conduct Survey
D:1 Code Returned Surveys
0:2 Check Consistency of Survey Responses
D:3 Estimate Value of Missing Responses
D:4 Collect Port Employment and Income Data
0:5 Tabulate Survey Responses by Industry and
Impact Category
D:6 Aggregate Survey Responses and Estimate Total
Direct Impact
E:1 Select Methods for Secondary Impact Analysis
E:2 Collect Income and Employment Data for
Economic Base Multipliers
E:3 Develop Employment Multipliers Using
"Concentration" Approach
E:4 Develop Employment Multipliers Using
"Minimum Requirements" Technique
E:5 Develop Employment Multipliers Using
"Experience" Technique
E:6 Develop "Consensus" Employment Multipliers
E:7 Develop Economic Base Income Multipliers
E:8 Select Industries for Analysis and Order RIMS
Multipliers
F:1 Determine Share of Port Industry Income that
Is Basic
F:2 Estimate Total Income Supported by Port
Activities Using Economic Base Multipliers
F:3 Estimate Total Sales Supported by Port
Activities Using RIMS Multipliers
F:4 Compare RIMS and Economic Base Techniques
F:5 Update RIMS Estimates
F:6 Calculate Other Impact Measures
G:1 Prepare Report
G:2 Disseminate Report
Estimated Date
2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34
| | | | | | | | | | | | I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
2 5
INITIAL CONSIDERATIONS
Step A; 4
PURPOSE :
Determine whether port industry activities, port-dependent industry activi-
ties, or a combination of both will be addressed in the analysis.
DATA REQUIREMENTS:
Results of Steps A:l-A:3.
DISCUSSION:
The majority of port industry firms are classified in SIC 44, Water
Transportation, and SIC 47, Transportation Services. This includes tug and
towing services, stevedores, marine terminal operators, pilots, vessel
operators, freight forwarders, custom house brokers, shipping agents,
export/ import firms, and ports. Also included are trucking firms that
interface with waterborne carriers. Port-dependent industry firms are those
that utilize water transportation.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
For applications where the purpose of the analysis incorporates a des-
cription of the activities to be included, the stated purpose should be fol-
lowed. Otherwise, available time and budget should serve as guidelines.
Port industry firms should always be included and treated separately from
port-dependent firms. Not including port-dependent firms can often reduce
budget and staff time requirements by as much as 60%.
USE OF RESULTS:
If it is decided to include port-dependent industries and firms then all
sets of instructions for those activities must be completed. Otherwise,
they can be deleted.
24
INITIAL CONSIDERATIONS
Step A: 5
PURPOSE:
Select the geographical area within which port industry and port-
dependent industry impacts will be measured.
DATA REQUIREMENTS:
Knowledge of location of port industry and port-dependent industry firms
and of political boundaries.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Sometimes the desired geographical boundaries are defined in Step A:l;
these should be followed as far as practical.
Because most of the secondary data inputs are defined along political
boundaries, the use of such regional definitions is convenient and saves
time and effort if adopted. For U.S. ports, a county or group of coun-
ties comprises the recommended region. For Canadian ports a census
metropolitan area would define the region.
Some ports will wish to consider only their own area of jurisdiction or
actual land ownership. Such a selection can be made and appropriate
firms for contact can be identified. However, it is likely that secon-
dary impacts will be incorrectly estimated if a port's boundaries are not
the same as those mentioned above.
USE OF RESULTS:
In the final report, measured impacts should be described with reference
to the impact area. Also, surveys should be sent only to those firms
located in the selected impact area, regardless of whether there might
still be port industry or port-dependent industry firms outside its
boundaries.
25
INITIAL CONSIDERATIONS
Step A: 6
PURPOSE:
Prepare a detailed schedule for all tasks that will serve as a guide
during completion of the analysis.
DATA REQUIREMENTS:
Results of Step A: 3 and suggested schedule chart shown in Exhibit A: 3-2.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
A flow chart such as the one shown in Exhibit A: 3-2 can be useful for
ensuring the proper sequencing of tasks. The tasks in Exhibit A: 3-2 are
structured so that the entire analysis can be completed within 7-8
months. It is unlikely that the analysis can be completed in less time
if all steps are followed in the recommended sequence.
However, a longer time might be required. In such event, all tasks
should be rescheduled. The greatest additional time is normally required
for those tasks relating to distribution, receipt, and coding of surveys.
USE OF RESULTS:
The final scheduling chart provides an outline and checklist for the
analyst. It should be used throughout the study to ensure on- time com-
pletion and proper sequencing of tasks.
26
SURVEY DESIGN
Step B;l
PURPOSE:
Review and adopt suggested questions for port industry survey.
DATA REQUIREMENTS:
Suggested questions shown in Exhibit B:l-1.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
At least the first five questions shown in Exhibit B:l-1 should be
included in a survey of port industry firms. They should be reviewed,
reworded if the pre-test shows that to be necessary, and coupled with
optional questions selected in Step B:2. Sample survey forms are
included as Exhibits B:3-l and B:3-2. While questions 6-8 are not
absolutely required they should all be included in order to facilitate
the checking of responses for consistency and to provide a wider variety
of impact measures.
USE OF RESULTS:
The suggested questions form the base of the survey instrument for firms
in the port industry. The survey instrument is the primary means for
obtaining information about these businesses.
PORT DEPENDENT INDUSTRY:
The suggested questions for the port dependent industry survey are the
same as those for the port industry with the addition of those listed in
the bottom of Exhibit B:l-1. The recommended action for the use of these
questions is the same as that for the port industry.
27
EXHIBIT B:l-1
SUGGESTED SURVEY QUESTIONS
PORT INDUSTRY
1. Description of waterborne commerce related activities (used in
defining the firm by industry) .
2. On what date does your fiscal year end? (signals differences in time
periods for which data are assembled) .
3. Annual sales or revenues (used in conjunction with input/output
multipliers and for determination of sales impacts) .
4. Average annual number of employees (used in determination of employ-
ment impacts and in expansion of survey results to the total uni-
verse of waterborne commerce related firms) .
5. Annual payroll (used in determination of income impacts and in
development of income multipliers) .
6. Annual purchases of goods and services from local region (used to
provide a direct measure of local impact) .
7. Types of goods and services purchased locally (assists in deter-
mination of basic/non-basic distinction of firms and industries) .
8. Taxes paid to local governments (used to develop tax impacts) .
PORT-DEPENDENT INDUSTRY
In addition to the port industry questions listed above, the following
quetions are required:
1. Percentage of total product movements through local ports (assists
in the allocation of impacts to the region and ports within the
region) .
2. Percentage of total supplies moving through local ports (assists in
the allocation of impacts to the region and ports within the region)
3. What alternative transport facilities could be used (assists in the
determination of the dependence of the region's industries upon the
port) .
4. What percentage of the firms' s sales would be lost without the
port's facilities (determines dependence upon port facilities in
quantitative terms).
23
SURVEY DESIGN
Step B;2
PURPOSE:
Define and incorporate optional questions into the survey form to be sent
to firms in the port industry.
DATA REQUIREMENTS:
List of optional questions shown in Exhibit B:2-l.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Optional questions are used both to develop more detail about the issues
raised in the required questions and to develop information about topics
of interest to the port but not directly required for an economic impact
assessment.
Several possible optional questions are shown in Exhibit B:2-l. The
analyst should incorporate these questions only if a specific use can be
made of the answers. Some of the optional questions would not be mean-
ingful for every firm — e.g., the primary commodities shipped or
received would have little meaning for a derrick barge firm.
The analyst can also develop additional questions which are of particular
relevance to the port under analysis. These should be placed so as not
to interrupt the flow of the required questions.
In general, we recommend that the shortest possible questionnaire form be
used as it is more likely to draw a response.
USE OF RESULTS:
The optional questions combined with the required questions form the
survey for firms in the port industry. The survey instrument is the
primary resource for obtaining information about these firms.
PORT-DEPENDENT INDUSTRY:
Optional questions that could be used in the port-dependent industry
survey questionnaires are also provided in Exhibit B:2-l. It should be
remembered that longer and more involved questionnaires will lower the
response rate. This is true of both the port industry questionnaires and
port-dependent industry questionnaires, but the greater number of re-
quired questions for port-dependent industry questionnaires increases the
problem.
29
EXHIBIT B:2-l
POSSIBLE OPTIONAL QUESTIONS
Please provide an estimate of your employment in terms of the
following:
Executive/Professional %
Management %
Operations %
Please provide an estimate of the percentage of your employees
living in:
City
%
County
%
Region
%
3. Three most common cargo origins:
Location Percent
Three most common cargo destinations:
Location Percent
4. Port facility (ies) utilized most frequently (i.e., pier, terminal,
shed, crane, etc.):
Primary advantage of this particular port for movement of your goods
(rank 3 elements):
Service Efficiency
Convenience
Cost
Landside Transportation ^___
Market Proximity
Other (please comment)
30 Arthur D Little Inc.
EXHIBIT B:2-l
(Continued)
6. Have you any plans for a significant modification of port usage
in terms of cargo volume, frequency of facility use, type of
landside transportation, etc.?
7. In considering existing port operations, what area of service
should be expanded or improved?
Waterside
Landside (e.g., storage, cargo handling, transportation
services, etc . )
The primary commodities you ship or receive through ports in the
region are:
a. Commodities shipped
b. Commodities received
9. If port facilities were not available, what per-
centage of your sales/revenues and jobs in the region
would be lost?
a. Sales/Revenues %
b. Jobs %
31 Arthur D Little Inc.
SURVEY DESIGN
Step B:3
PURPOSE:
Adjust the survey questions for cases where there is more than one poi.
in a region.
DATA REQUIREMENTS:
Identification of all public and private ports in the region selected for
the analysis in Step A:5.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
If there is more than one port in a region and firms in the port industry
work with more than one port in the region, it is necessary to have them
allocate their impacts among ports.
If information about firms' activities for all ports is desired, the
questionnaire should have separate reporting spaces for their activities
with each port or at least an additional question that asks for the
percentage of total business associated with each port. If information
for only one port is desired, that should be so noted at the beginning of
the survey in bold type.
A recommended survey form in shown is Exhibit B:3-l. An alternative
format that would be useful in obtaining information from firms whose
management is reticent about providing information would include multiple
choice responses. For example, employment categories of 1-5, 6-15,
25-40, etc. could be provided on the survey form, the appropriate
category to be circled by the respondent. Suitable multiple choice
categories could be constructed for almost every question.
USE OF RESULTS:
The modified survey is used in all subsequent steps where appropriate.
PORT-DEPENDENT INDUSTRY:
Step B:3 is unchanged for the port-dependent industry, although a sepa-
rate survey form is included as Exhibit B:3-2.
32
EXHIBIT B-.3-1
PORT INDUSTRY QUESTIONNAIRE
ALL INFORMATION WILL BE HELD IN STRICT CONFIDENCE
Company Name
City
Respondent Name
Telephone
Title
)
1. Briefly describe your waterborne commerce-related operations in the
region:
PLEASE ANSWER QUESTIONS 2 THROUGH 8 USING INFORMATION FROM YOUR LATEST FISCAL YEAR. PLEASE
PROVIDE INFORMATION ONLY FOR THOSE ACTIVITIES WHICH OCCURRED IN THE REGION.
2. On what date does your fiscal year end?
3. Annual sales or revenues from operations: £_
Average annual number of full-time equivalent employees:
detailed information, answer the following:
a. Average annual number of permanent full-time employees:
b. Average annual number of permanent part-time employees:
c. Average annual number of contract employees:
5. Annual payroll for permanent and contract employees (including benefits): *_
6. Annual purchases of goods and services from regional businesses:
a. Goods: $.
b. Services: :£
c. If you lease, annual rental payment: S_
7. Type of goods and services purchased from regional businesses:
8. Annual taxes and fees paid to local governments:
a. Property tax: $.
b. User fees for public services (water, trash disposal, port fees, etc.
c. Sales tax: $.
d. Other local government taxes and/or fees: §.
): 1
9. What percentage of your operations are provided for or conducted in:
a. Port of San Francisco _J % Port of Oakland
33
OR, if you have more
Other
Please DO NOT
Write in this Space
6. a.
b.
i.a.
b.
c.
d.
9.3.
b.
c.
EXHIBIT B:3-2
PORT-DEPENDENT INDUSTRY QUESTIONNAIRE
ALL INFORMATION WILL BE HELD IN STRICT CONFIDENCE
Company Name
City
Respondent Name
Telephone
Title
1. Briefly describe the business in which your firm is involved:
PLEASE ANSWER QUESTIONS 2 THROUGH 13 USING INFORMATION FROM YOUR LATEST FISCAL YEAR. PLEASE
PROVIDE INFORMATION ONLY FOR THOSE ACTIVITIES WHICH OCCURRED IN THE REGION.
2
3.
4.
On what date does your fiscal year end?
Annual sales or revenues from operations: §L
Average annual number of full-time equivalent employees:
detailed information, answer Vie following:
a. Average annual number of permanent full-time employees: .
b. Average annual number of permanent part-time employees:
c. Average annual number of contract employees:
OR, if you have more
5. Annual payroll for permanent and contract employees (including benefits): *_
6. Annual purchases of goods and services from regional businesses:
a. Goods: 5
b. Services: §.
c. If you lease, annual rental payment:
7. Types of goods and services purchased from regional businesses:
8.
Annual taxes and fees paid to local governments:
a. Property tax: $.
b. User fees for public services (water, trash disposal, port fees, etc.): sL
c. Sales tax: *
d. Other local government taxes and/or fees: § i
The primary commodities you ship or receive through ports in the
region are:
a. Commodities shipped
b. Commodities received
10.
Approximately what percentage of your total product movements are shipped through the following ports
in the region:
a. % b. % c. °A
11. Approximately what percentage of your supplies move through the following ports in the
region:
a. (2. b. i° c.
%
12. If you were denied the use of these port facilities, which, if any, alternative ports (other than those listed
above) or means of transportation would you use to ship your products and/or receive your supplies:
13. If these port facilities --were not available, what percentage of your sales/revenues and jobs in the
. region would be lost:
a. Sales/revenues: . •"%
Jobs:
%
34
Please DO NOT
Write in this Spac
6. a.
b.
c.
7.
8.3.
b.
c.
d.
9. a.
lO.a.
b.
11. a.
b.
c.
12.
13. a.
b.
SURVEY DESIGN
Step B:4
PURPOSE:
Prepare instructions for coding survey responses.
DATA REQUIREMENTS:
Completed survey form, Standard Industrial Classification Manual , and
Exhibit B:4-l.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
The responses to the survey must be summarized for use in the analysis.
The coding instructions are a specific format for reporting survey res-
ponses.
In general, coding instructions are straightforward — e.g., employment
is coded as reported in person-years of employment, income is coded as
dollars (rounded to the nearest thousand) , etc.
If an SIC code was not provided by the respondent, the most difficult
part of the coding is the allocation to an activity. Here the Standard
Industrial Classification Manual and Exhibit B:4-l are used.
The analyst should use the SIC manual to determine if the activity is
part of the port industry and, if so, select the appropriate classi-
fication and if not, disregard the return.
Coding instructions for the other required questions are also listed in
Exhibit B:4-l. The analyst should develop coding categories for any
optional questions used.
USE OF RESULTS:
The coding methods are used when the questionnaires are returned and the
results tabulated (see Step D:l).
PORT-DEPENDENT INDUSTRY:
Coding instructions for port-dependent industry surveys are presented in
Exhibit B:4-2. Those questions that would have similar responses in port
industry and port-dependent industry surveys can be coded using the in-
structions found in Exhibit B:4-l.
35
EXHIBIT B:4-l
CODING INSTRUCTIONS - PORT INDUSTRY SURVEY
Responses should be coded in the box along the right hand edge of each
survey form. The following numbering system corresponds to the numbering
on the attached survey form (Exhibit B:3-l).
1. Interviewee industry - use four-digit Standard Industrial Classifi-
cation Manual codes from the 1972 edition.
2. Fiscal year ending date - code month, day, and year in six places,
e.g., 123178 being the code for December 31, 1978. Insert zeros
if necessary — e.g., 060178 being the code for June 1, 1978.
3. Sales or revenues - code amount in thousands of dollars or dollars,
but be consistent. Coding in thousands of dollars reduces the key-
punching requirements if the data are to be manipulated by computer.
4. Employment - code the number of employees as given.
5. Payroll - code amount as thousands of dollars or dollars, consistent
with question 3.
6. Goods and services purchased; lease payments - code amounts on appro-
priate lines as thousands of dollars or dollars, consistent with
question 3.
7. Types of goods and services purchased - use Standard Industrial
Classification Manual to determine industry that provides the
listed goods and services; codes should be as detailed as is prac-
tical from the information given (i.e., only one- or two-digit
codes may be possible in some cases) . Space is provided for four
codes on the sample survey form.
8. Taxes and fees - code amount as thousands of dollars or dollars,
consistent with question 3.
36 Arthur D Little Inc.
EXHIBIT B:4-2
CODING INSTRUCTIONS - PORT-DEPENDENT INDUSTRY SURVEY
Responses should be coded in the box along the right hand edge of
each survey form. The following numbering system corresponds to the
numbering on the attached survey form (Exhibit B:3-2).
Questions 1-8 should be coded in the same manner as questions 1-8 of
the port industry survey; see Exhibit B:4-l for instructions.
9. Commodities shipped and/or received - A pre-existing coding
system, such as the Corps of Engineers' Waterborne Commerce
commodity classification o_r the Bureau of Census Schedule A
and B codes, can be used or a less detailed port-specific
coding system can be established.
10. Distribution of product movements among ports - percentages should
be coded as given — e.g., 15% coded as 15.
11. Distribution of supply movements among ports - percentages should
be coded as given — e.g., 15% coded as 15.
12. Alternate ports or transport modes - the simplest coding scheme
would be:
1 — rail
2 — truck
3 — air
4 — barge
5 — other ports
This could be expanded by having separate codes for various other
ports, various rail lines, various truck lines, etc.
13. Percentage of revenue lost without port - percentages should be
coded as given — e.g., 15% coded as 15.
37
Arthur D Little !nc
SURVEY DESIGN
Step B:5
PURPOSE:
Develop a cover letter to port industry firms that will explain the
survey and generate a high response level.
DATA REQUIREMENTS:
None.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
The survey should be accompanied by a one-page cover letter that:
• Explains the purpose of the study,
• Promises confidentiality of information,
• Stresses the importance of a prompt response and
sets a cut-off date,
• Expresses thanks for cooperationand promises a copy
of the study results,
• Provides a contact person at the port who can ex-
plain the meaning of the questions in greater detail
and answer other inquiries about the study, and
• Is signed by the chief administrative officer of the
port or the chairperson of the port commission.
• Provides the potential respondent with a return
address, especially if the completed questionnaires
are not to be sent to the port. To prevent the
possibility of public disclosure, it may be wise to
have the forms sent to a private individual or firm,
such as the port's legal counsel.
Exhibit B:5-l shows an example of a letter having these characteristics,
38
USE OF RESULTS:
The letter should be attached to and sent with all mail questionnaires.
If either personal or telephone surveys are used, a brief opening state-
ment conveying the same information should be incorporated.
PORT-DEPENDENT INDUSTRY:
Exhibit B:5-l is suitable for the port-dependent industry firms as well
as the port industry firms. The guidelines suggested under "RECOMMENDED
ACTION" should be adhered to for both the port industry and port-
dependent industry cover letters.
39
EXHIBIT B:5-l
SAMPLE SURVEY COVER LETTER
Dear Mr. Jones:
The Port of Daly City is engaged in a study to determine the economic
benefits of waterborne commerce activity on the San Francisco Bay
region. The results of this study will benefit the Port of Daly City
and consequently benefit firms and individuals doing business with the
Port. The collection of basic economic data from local firms is the
most critical component of this study. The questionnaire attached to
this letter contains the questions necessary to obtain data that will
allow employment, income, and local tax impact measures to be derived.
All of the major port-related firms in the region are being sent this
questionnaire.
All of the information derived from the returned questionnaires will
be held in the strictest confidence by the Port. The study's findings
will be presented in aggregated forms — no information for an indivi-
dual firm will be released or used in any way other than in the deter-
mination of the highly aggregated impact measures (e.g., total income,
total employment, and total tax impacts).
If you have any questions concerning the questionnaire or how you
should design your responses to the questionnaire, please contact
Mr. Delbert Doe at the Port of Daly City. His telephone number is
(415) 987-6543. Please return the completed survey by August 12.
Thank you very much for your cooperation. Completion of this question-
naire will assist Port efforts in providing improved services for its
clients and in increasing economic benefit to the surrounding region.
A copy of the results of this study will be sent to you in approxi-
mately six months when the study is completed.
Sincerely,
Bill "Bilge Rat" Brown
Director, Port of Daly City
BBRB/ck
Attachment
40
Arthur D Little Inc.
SURVEY DESIGN
Step B:6
PURPOSE:
Identify firms and potential respondents within the port industry.
DATA REQUIREMENTS:
Lists of potential respondents from the following sources: knowledge of
port employees (e.g., the traffic manager's client list), West Coast
Marine and Transportation Directory, Dun & Bradstreet Directory, tele-
phone directories, business license records, local Chamber of Commerce.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
The purpose is to identify all respondents within the geographic area to
be covered by the study. Therefore, it is necessary to review several
sources to insure that all possible respondents are listed.
Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) categories for the port industry
are given in the glossary. Separate lists of firms in each category (and
even for firms in subcategories — e.g., tug operators, barge operators,
etc.) should be prepared from the above sources. Any information avail-
able about the firms — e.g., annual sales, employment, etc. — should
also be included on these lists.
The firms should be ranked within each category according to number of
employees, from largest to smallest. If employee counts cannot be ob-
tained from published sources or estimated from experience, phone calls
should be made.
Lists should include names, addresses, telephone numbers, and a contact
person within each company. Because of the information to be requested
the contact person should be involved in either the financial or opera-
tional affairs of the company.
USE OF RESULTS:
The lists will be used both as master lists from which survey respondents
will be drawn and as the basis from which the impacts represented by sur-
vey responses will be translated into total direct impacts.
41
PORT-DEPENDENT INDUSTRY:
A complete list of port-dependent industry firms will generally be more
difficult to obtain than a similar list for the port industry firms.
This is especially true if containers are moved through the port since
there may be less certainty concerning the identity of the shipper. The
same sources of information should be used to obtain the port-dependent
industry list.
42
SURVEY DESIGN
Step B:7
PURPOSE:
Select respondents from the list prepared in Step B:6 for the pre- test of
the survey instrument and for implementation of the survey.
DATA REQUIREMENTS:
The list of potential respondents in each category developed in Step B:6.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
For the pre- test some respondents in all categories should be contacted.
We suggest distribution of approximately 15-20 pre- test questionnaires.
USE OF RESULTS:
The list produced in this step will be used for the pre- test.
PORT-DEPENDENT INDUSTRY:
The recorjnended action should be followed for the port-dependent industry
survey and the port industry survey.
43
SURVEY DESIGN
Step B:8
PURPOSE:
Determine whether mail, telephone, or personal interviews, or a com-
bination of these methods will be used for both the pre-test and the
actual distribution of survey instruments.
DATA REQUIREMENTS:
None.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
There is a trade-off among the alternatives in terms of cost versus per-
centages of response and accuracy of responses. Mail interviews are the
least expensive but also have the lowest response rate and tend to have
the least accurate responses. Personal interviews are the most expensive
but have substantially higher response rates and generally provide more
accurate information. Telephone interviews strike a middle ground.
If telephone or personal interviews are to be used the interviewer must
have some knowledge of the purpose of the survey and of the appropriate
way for recording information. Otherwise, the port's reputation might be
damaged and inaccurate information collected.
Because the justification for a pre-test is to determine whether the sur-
vey instruments can be understood and completed by respondents, some of
the pre-test surveys should be conducted in person. However, if it is
decided that mail surveys will be used for the main surveying effort,
some pre-test surveys should be mailed and their responses compared with
those developed during personal interviews to assess the appropriateness
of the survey and the respondents' ability to comprehend it.
A port's selection of a survey method should be guided by its budget
limitations, the number of potential respondents, and the desired degree
of accuracy. Where the number of potential respondents is small, a
personal survey should be conducted because of the better response rate
and greater accuracy it should generate. The next best alternative is a
telephone interview.
If personal or telephone surveys are to be used, the survey instrument
should be distributed in advance, in order to allow the respondent to
collect the necessary information. An appointment for the personal or
telephone interview should be made.
44
USE OF RESULTS:
Both the pre-test and the actual survey will be conducted according to
the decisions made in this step.
PORT-DEPENDENT INDUSTRY:
The recommended action should be followed for the port-dependent industry
survey and the port industry survey.
45
SURVEY DESIGN
Step B;9
PURPOSE:
Conduct the pre-test and alter the questionnaire as required.
DATA REQUIREMENTS:
The survey for port industry respondents developed in Steps B:2 and B:3.
Also, decision reached in previous steps regarding method of interviews,
etc.
DISCUSSION:
The purpose of the pre-test is to insure that respondents are capable of
understanding the questionnaire as prepared and that they will provide
the desired information. It is imperative that a pre-test be conducted
since without one, a survey that results in incorrect information or does
not generate a response from the firms surveyed could be conducted.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
The pre-test should be conducted during one- two week period using the
interview techniques selected during Step B:8. Potential respondents
should be informed through a variation in the cover letter that this is a
pre-test and that the port is as interested in their comments about the
questionnaire and the method of conducting the survey as it is in their
actual responses.
If some of the pre-test firms are to be contacted by mail, the port
should telephone those who have not responded within a reasonable time
and ask them to complete the survey.
As the pre-test forms are completed, they should be reviewed to determine
which of the responses are similar to those anticipated by the port and
any differences should be resolved by recontacting the respondent. If
the responses to the pre-test are correct, they should be retained for
tabulation along with the responses to the complete survey. This is par-
ticularly important for small ports where the number of potential res-
pondents is limited and large percentages of them may be contacted during
the pre-test.
46
USE OF RESULTS:
If respondents are found to have any problems understanding and com-
pleting the survey forms regardless of the method of interview, the sur-
vey forms should be revised to correct the problems. If some of the dif-
ficulty relates to the unwillingness of the pre-test firms to divulge
some information, the port must determine whether the possibility that
some firms will refuse to complete any part of the questionnaire because
of inclusion of this information is greater than the value that receipt
of the information from some firms might have for completion of the
analysis.
PORT-DEPENDENT INDUSTRY:
The recommended action is the same for the port-dependent industry. The
pre-tests can be conducted concurrently to compress the time required for
the study.
47
SURVEY DISTRIBUTION
Step C:l
PURPOSE:
Advertise the study and its value so that potential survey respondents
will know about it before the surveys are distributed.
DATA REQUIREMENTS:
None.
DISCUSSION:
A problem with the use of a survey to collect information about port
industry and port-dependent industry firms is that the response rates to
such surveys are usually low. By promoting the study before the surveys
are distributed, the port can generate interest in and knowledge of the
study, thereby increasing the response rate.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
If the port has a newsletter, mention of the study and survey should be
made in the edition prior to the start of the survey. Use of other
media, such as newspapers, etc., is warranted if the size of the survey
is large or as part of a general promotion effort. A local chamber of
commerce or business association might also be an appropriate forum for
promoting the study.
USE OF RESULTS:
If successful, the publicity will generate interest about the study and
lead to a higher response rate for the survey.
48
SURVEY DISTRIBUTION
Step C:2
PURPOSE:
Prepare a list of respondents selected from those identified in Step B:6
to be used to list contacts, responses, etc.
DATA REQUIREMENTS:
The list of potential respondents selected in Step B:6.
DISCUSSION
Since follow-up contact with firms that do not immediately respond to the
survey is recommended it is necessary to prepare a list which can be used
to monitor the dates of survey distribution, follow-up contacts, survey
receipt, and recontact with the firm to check responses.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
The number of questionnaires to be distributed for the full survey should
be determined through consideration of the number of firms on the list,
the expected response rate, the time and money available for the study,
and the desired accuracy (confidence) of the estimates provided.
In other studies the response rate of firms in the port industry to mail
questionnaires has been about 15-50%, depending on the classification of
the business, length of the survey, follow-up efforts, etc.
The sample size of a survey does not necessarily influence the accuracy
of the survey; more correctly, it affects the confidence the researcher
has in the accuracy of the derived estimates. Generally, the more in-
formation obtained from the survey procedure the more confident the
researcher is that the sample information accurately reflects the total
population.
The level of confidence the researcher has concerning the accuracy of a
given sample is generally expressed in percentage terms. For instance, a
95% confidence interval is a range of values — e.g., number of employees
— between which the average value will fall 95% of the time. This means
that if new samples were randomly drawn and average values computed, the
average value would fall in that range 95% of the time.
The number of respondents necessary to achieve a 95% confidence level (or
any other confidence level) is dependent upon the distribution of values
from which the researcher is sampling. Without having some information
49
about the characteristics of this distribution, it is impossible to
determine the minimum number of respondents to achieve a given confidence
level.
For surveys aimed at studying a very large population, 30 respondents
called serve as a bare minimum for the researcher. Assuming a 15-50%
response rate 60-200 questionnaires would have to be distributed. Ob-
viously, for industries with less than 30 firms, questionnaires should be
sent to all firms in the industry and extra effort expended in assuring a
high response rate. For the rare cases in which there are larger popula-
tions judgment must be utilized in determining the number of surveys to
be mailed and the amount of effort to be expended in assuring a high res-
ponse rate. If the researcher feels that the firms within a given popu-
lation (i.e., industry) are all similar in size and operation then a
smaller sample (less than 30 firms surveyed) can be justified. If, on the
other hand, there is a wide disparity in the size of firms within an
industry more than 30 surveys must be collected and more care taken in
their analysis.
In the case of a large number of firms within an industry, those to be
sent a survey should be randomly selected — e.g., assign each firm a
number and then select firms through the use of a random number table.
In such cases, the accuracy of the results can be improved if all those
firms thought to account for a significant percentage of the business are
contacted outside of the randomly generated list.
The port should prepare two separate charts, one for the port industry
and one for port-dependent firms, which will allow the port to keep dates
of important events in the survey. An example is shown in Exhibit C:2-l.
When any of the events mentioned in the form occurs, it should be marked
in the chart.
USE OF RESULTS:
The chart should be used throughout Parts C and D to record the date of
events concerning the surveys. It can also be used to determine the
percentage responses to the survey.
50
EXHIBIT C:2-l
SAMPLE SURVEY RESPONSE CHART
FIRM/CONTACT/PHONE #
SURVEY
DISTRIBU-
TION DATE
FOLLOW-UP
CONTACTS
SURVEY
RECEIPT
DATE
RECONTACTS
1. Acme Trucking
Willie Smith 849-6573
8/4
8/13
8/20
8/22
9/5
2. JGV Barge Co.
Hector Viez 547-1100
8/4
8/13
8/19
***
3. Bay Tug Co.
Simon Peet 445-2300
8/5
8/14
8/22
NR
4. Chang's Chandler ing
James Chang 926-4210
8/6
8/15
8/22
8/29
***
5. Union Stevedores
Wilma Jones 392-1000
8/6
8/15
NR - No response
*** - Recontact not necessary
51
SURVEY DISTRIBUTION
Step C:3
PURPOSE:
Distribution of the survey instrument and assurance of the highest possible
response rate.
DATA REQUIREMENTS:
The list of respondents selected in Steps B:6 and C:2.
DISCUSSION:
This step is very similar to Step B:9 with the exception that more effort
should be extended to assure a high response rate, especially among firms
that constitute a large share of employment in their industries within the
region.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
The survey should be distributed in accordance with Step B:9. It is ex-
pected that a mail survey will be used for the majority of firms, although
firms that are particularly large, important, or sensitive should be con-
tacted personally. An intermediate alternative would be telephone inter-
views, but it should be remembered that they are more costly than mail
surveys.
The cover letter states that the surveys should be returned within one to
two weeks. Firms that have not returned surveys by the specified cut-off
date should be recontacted by telephone to ascertain the reason the survey
was not returned. If the firm is having difficulty interpreting the ques-
tionnaire, efforts should be made to explain what further information is
required. If the firm does not want to divulge information it believes is
sensitive, an effort should be made to explain that the information will be
aggregated so that individual firms cannot be identified.
It may be impossible to convince certain firms that this information will
not be misused. In this case, an effort should be made to obtain a minimum
amount of information. This would include the activities of the firm, so as
to determine the SIC code, and sales/revenues employment and payroll data.
This will allow employment and payroll impacts to be calculated. It is most
efficient to attempt obtaining the reduced amount of information during the
follow-up telephone call to firms that did not respond to the interview.
52
*-
USE OF RESULTS:
These surveys will provide base data for compilation of direct impacts and
the calculation of secondary impacts.
53
SURVEY RESULT COMPILATION
Step D:l
PURPOSE:
Put survey responses in a form more convenient for "by hand" and computer
analysis.
DATA REQUIREMENTS:
Completed survey questionnaires, Standard Industrial Classification
Manual , and Exhibits B:4-l and B:4-2 (for the port-dependent industry
surveys) .
DISCUSSION:
In order to reduce errors in the tabulation of data from a large number
of firms, questionnaire coding is recommended. It is necessary if the
responses are to computerized.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
It is strongly recommended that the coding strip along the right hand
edge of the questionnaire be used to record responses. This permits
rapid keypunching of the data if computer tabulation is to be used. Mis-
sing data can be noted with paper clips along this edge.
The coding instruction provided in Step B:4 should be followed in this
step.
USE OF RESULTS:
The coded questionnaires will be checked and modified in the following
steps. Any changes in responses or additional responses should be coded
using the format of Step B:4.
54
SURVEY RESULT COMPILATION
Step D;2
PURPOSE:
This is an optional, but strongly recommended , step aimed at checking the
consistency of responses within individual surveys and among surveys.
DATA REQUIREMENTS:
Coded survey questionnaires; additional financial information for speci-
fic firms; general information for individual industries from government
documents — e.g., income/employee ratios.
DISCUSSION:
Consistency checks at this stage of the analysis are important for two
reasons. First, checks must be conducted to prevent misinterpretations
from being carried through the remainder of the analysis; questions that
have been answered incorrectly must be found and the reason for the mis-
interpretation must be determined to make certain that the survey is
functioning as anticipated. Second, it is critical that errors be cor-
rected so that they are not carried through the remainder of the analysis.
A variety of checks can be instituted; the extent of testing for con-
sistency will vary according to the time and money allocated for the
study, the confidence the researcher has in the accuracy of the survey
responses, and the quantity and quality of corroborating information that
can be obtained for the respondent firms.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
The following consistency checks can be undertaken:
1. A comparison of annual sales or revenues (3) with
the sum of payroll (5) , purchases (6a,b,c) , and
taxes and fees (8a,b,c,d) . If the numbers are
widely divergent the firm should be recontacted to
determine if the disparity is due to business con-
ditions or error in completion of the survey.
55
2. A comparison of the average annual wage (response 5
divided by response 4) with published wage informa-
tion for the specific industry. Industry specific
wage information (for production workers) is obtain-
able from Employment and Earnings published monthly
by the U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor
Statistics (for Canada — Employment , Earnings, and
Hours published by Statistics Canada) . Obviously
full-time equivalent employees would have to be used
in this determination. Wide divergence would point
toward recontact with the respondent firm.
3. The responses of firms within an industry, espe-
cially firms of similar size, should be compared to
determine divergences. Any "oddities" should be
recontacted to assure response accuracy.
USE OF RESULTS:
The recommended actions listed above should be used to check the accuracy
and consistency of the responses so that errors are not carried through
the analysis. Recoding of the questionnaires should be done where
necessary.
56
SURVEY RESULT COMPILATION
Step D;3
PURPOSE :
Estimate the value of missing responses on partially completed question-
naires. Incomplete responses reduce the quality and quantity of the data
available for analysis.
DATA REQUIREMENTS:
Coded survey questionnaires.
DISCUSSION:
This step necessitates the use of a great deal of judgment. Only basic
guidelines can be provided with respect to the estimation of missing
data. Above all it should be kept in mind that the aim of this step is
to retain information that would otherwise be lost if a partially com-
pleted questionnaire had to be discarded because of missing responses.
If the questionnaire has very little information (i.e., many uncompleted
portions) , attempts at estimating the non-responses should be forgone.
In addition, firms which are unique, because of either their size or pro-
duct/service rendered, should not have missing questions estimated unless
there is a strong feeling that the estimate is reasonably accurate.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
It should first be determined that estimating missing responses is of
sufficient importance to justify the effort. Often it is more advan-
tageous to discard the questionnaire; if the response rate is high no
problem will be created by this action.
There are two approaches to estimating missing information after ex-
hausting the possibility of obtaining the information directly from the
firm. The first approach is to obtain the information from other sources
— e.g., total sales and employment could be obtained from the firm's
latest 10K form (available upon request) if the firm is required to sub-
mit the form, from its annual report, or from Dun and Bradstreet's
Million Dollar Directory , and property tax information could be obtained
from the county assessor's office in the United States or from the
Attorney General's Department in Canadian provinces.
57
The second approach entails the use of information from other completed
surveys to estimate missing information on partially completed response
forms. If, for instance, payroll data were not presented for firm X, it
is possible that the average wage of firm Y employees could be multiplied
by the number of employees listed for firm X in order to derive a total
payroll for firm X. Great care must be taken when estimating missing
information in this manner, however. If possible, average values derived
from a number of similar firms should be used rather than information
from a single firm. In addition, the firms should be in the same indus-
trial category and of approximately the same size. This procedure should
not be employed in the derivation of property tax information, rental
payments, or services purchased from regional businesses (unless the
researcher can be certain that the same share is purchased locally) .
USE OF RESULTS:
This step acts to reduce the number of questionnaires that must be sent
out and prevents the potential loss of information from discarding par-
tially completed questionnaires. After coding the changes the question-
naires are ready for tabulation in Step D:5.
58
SURVEY RESULT COMPILATION
Step D;4
PURPOSE:
Collect employment and income information for the port conducting the
economic impact study.
DATA REQUIREMENTS:
The port's most recent annual auditor's report supplemented by employment
data.
DISCUSSION:
The operation of the port itself represents a significant impact in the
local community; therefore, similar information to that obtained from the
surveys must be collected and coded.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
The short survey form should be completed with the port operation being
treated as a firm. Care must be taken to exclude non-waterborne commerce
related costs and employment. These would include costs, revenues, and
employment attributable to aviation or airport operation, industrial land
leasing, and non-waterborne commerce related economic development activi-
ties. There will be difficulty in separating out non-waterborne commerce
related costs and especially employment since administrative activities
are often not separated into waterborne commerce versus non-waterborne
commerce categories. Attempts should be made to estimate the share of
time spent on non-waterborne commerce related activities for individuals
whose activities span many areas.
USE OF RESULTS:
After this information is coded onto a survey form the information will
be tabulated along with other survey information in the following step.
59
SURVEY RESULT COMPILATION
Step D;5
PURPOSE:
Tabulate survey results by industry and impact category as a prelude to
the determination of the direct economic impacts, including employment,
income, and tax impacts.
DATA REQUIREMENTS:
Coded surveys separated by industry (i.e., type of firm) and ordered by
number of employees; original list of firms from which the sample was
drawn; and the latest issue of County Business Patterns published
annually by the U.S. Department of Commerce (obtainable from a local
library, college library, or directly from the U.S. Government Printing
Office) .
DISCUSSION:
This tabulation step must be conducted prior to the final tabulation of
the direct impacts since it is necessary to use information from the sur-
veys to estimate the non-surveyed firms' sales, employment, payroll,
taxes, etc. This is the purpose of doing a sampled survey of firms
rather than an exhaustive survey of all of the waterborne commerce
related firms. If the survey has been correctly administered and the
response rate was high then a large percentage of the total waterborne
commerce related economic activity will have been accounted for in the
survey responses.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Partition the original master list of firms by industry into employment
size classifications (by industry) . An example of a suitable parti-
tioning is used in County Business Patterns.
1-4
Employees
5-9
Employees
10-19
Employees
20-49
Employees
50-99
Employees
100-249
Employees
250-499
Employees
500-999
Employees
1000+
Employees
60
The County Business Patterns breakdown of firms by employment size class
can also serve as a useful check on the total number and size of firms in
the port industry or port-dependent industry. There is no Canadian pub-
lication that provides similarly formatted information, so this optional
checking procedure cannot be performed in Canada unless locally produced
listings of firms and their employment are available. Note that the
number and size of firms could have changed from the publication of the
latest County Business Patterns and compilation of the original master
list of firms in Step B:6.
There is also a potential technical problem with County Business
Patterns . If a firm does not have individuals on the payroll during the
time that the County Business Patterns' survey of firms is conducted, but
has a payroll during other times during the year the firm will be lumped
into the "1 to 3" category.
The completed surveys should be partitioned in the same manner — i.e.,
by industry and employment size class. This allows a comparison of the
survey sample with the total population of firms by industry and employ-
ment size class. Smaller regional economies will, of course, demand more
aggregated industrial and employment categories.
A tabulation of survey responses would then be conducted by industry and
employment size class. This would allow average values of the responses
— e.g., sales, employment, payroll, and taxes to be determined. These
average values would be utilized as surrogate values for firms that were
not surveyed, thereby "expanding" the survey information to the entire
universe of firms. It is critical that the industry and employment size
classes be constructed to reflect small differences among the firms. The
finer the categories, the more accurate the impact study; unfortunately,
increasing the number of categories also increases the number of firms
that must be surveyed. In addition, it is also extremely important that
the larger firms be surveyed since the accuracy of information obtained
about them has a much greater effect on the final economic impacts than
information concerning smaller firms.
In industry categories for which no questionnaires were returned, the
analyst has three alternatives: (1) to attempt to obtain information
through telephone or personal interview if these have not been tried; (2)
to estimate sales and payroll from employment by using state (province)
or national sales/employee and payroll employee ratios; or (3) to
disregard the impact from that industry category.
In the special case where there is more than one port in a region the
step involving expansion of survey results to the entire universe of
firms must be followed by an allocation to specific ports. This can be
accomplished in a variety of ways. The simplest, although least desir-
able, method is to allocate a firm's employment income, etc., by the
relative tonnage share of cargo moving through each port. If firms could
be disaggregated by the type of cargo they are involved with (containers,
etc.) a similar procedure could be done with the relative tonnage share
of each generic type of cargo. In a similar manner, firm's dealing with
vessels only (i.e., tug companies) could have their estimated responses
61
allocated by the number of vessels calling at each port. A completely
different allocation method uses the "average" allocation derived from
response to the survey question asking for the percentage of business
attributable to each port. All of these allocation methodologies can and
should be modified by any special knowledge the analyst has concerning
individual firms.
USE OF RESULTS:
The survey responses and estimated "responses" of the firms which were
not surveyed represent the basic information used in the estimation of
total direct impacts in the next step.
62
SURVEY RESULT COMPILATION
Step D;6
PURPOSE:
Aggregate survey responses and calculate a variety of direct impact
measures.
DATA REQUIREMENTS:
Coded survey forms and estimated responses for non-surveyed firms (see
Step D:5) .
DISCUSSION:
If the preceding steps have been executed with care the calculation of
the direct impacts will be easily accomplished and will be accurate
within the limits accepted for this study. Obviously, if the list of
firms is incomplete the impacts will be understated. The coding strip
along the edge of the survey form is a data processing aid. Computer-
ization of the survey information may allow for the realization of time
savings in impact calculation for larger ports. This is not a necessity,
however .
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
1. Employment Impacts
The employment impact is simply the sum of employees listed in response
to question 4 plus the estimated number of employees for the firms not
surveyed. The most accurate impact measure is the number of full-time
equivalent empoyees, since the addition of part-time employees directly
into an impact measure overcounts the number of jobs related to water-
borne commerce. If the respondent uses blanks 4a, 4b, and 4c instead of
blank 4 the number of full-time equivalent employees must be estimated.
If the respondent cannot be recontacted to obtain the information —
i.e., what is the average amount of time part-time and contract employees
spend at your firm compared to full-time employees — estimates must be
made. This can be accomplished by obtaining the average wage for the
industry (state average wage data or national average wage data, from
Employment and Earnings , or in the case of Canadian ports from Employ -
ment, Earnings, and Hours ) and comparing this figure with the average
wage determined for the surveyed firm. Simply divide the total payroll
(f5) by the sum of 4a, 4b, and 4c; if the calculated wage is lower than
the published figure the sum should be reduced to reflect the existence
63
of part-time employees. If the calculated average is higher than the
published average the calculated employment should be considered full-
time equivalent, unless it is substantially higher. In the latter case
the survey should be examined for coding errors and consistency (see Step
D:2) .
2. Income Impacts
Total direct payroll impacts are the sum of responses to question 5 plus
the estimated responses of non-surveyed firms. This impact can also be
called an "income" impact, as long as it is noted that benefits have been
included in the figure and that non-payroll types of income (e.g., pro-
perty income and profits) have not been included.
3. Tax Impacts
Tax impacts should be broken out by type of tax since the tax revenues
accrue to a variety of agencies. In summing the tax revenue survey res-
ponses and estimates of non-surveyed firms* responses it is important
that the researcher be certain to whom the tax accrues. For example, it
would be incorrect to state that waterborne commerce related activities
generate $xxx,xxx in sales tax revenue for Alameda County, California,
since the local governments receive only 16.7% of the sales tax revenue.
Similarly, property tax revenues must be attributed to the various county
and municipal governments. Moreover, unless responses have been received
from firms representing the vast majority of economic activity in an
industry, attempts to estimate total tax impacts are probably unwise.
4. Sales Impacts
Total direct sales impacts — i.e., sales generated by waterborne com-
merce related activity -- can be calculated from responses to question 3
of the survey, but care should be exercised to not double count sales.
This is a special problem with respect to freight forwarders; their sales
may include a wide range of costs that are counted as sales by other
waterborne commerce related firms. Sales/revenue responses must be
adjusted to remove double counting. The responses to question 7 will be
of assistance in determining the presence Of double counting. For
instance, if tug boat services are included as part of the answer to
question 7 on a freight forwarder's questionnaire it will be necessary to
reduce the firm's sales revenue to reflect this. Since the questionnaire
does not provide specific purchase information, assumptions must be made
as to how much revenue is double counted. It may be necessary to sub-
tract the figures provided in response to questions 6a, 6b, and 6c in
order to remove double counting. In addition to double counting problems
with freight forwarders it should be remembered that questionnaires from
firms leasing facilities or being provided services by the port will have
to be scrutinized to prevent double counting of sales/revenue impacts
since the port will have counted the cost of these services as part of
its revenue.
If direct sales/revenue impacts are to be used as input for the RIMS
methodology (see Step F:3) summations must be done by industry rather
than by aggregating all industries.
64
If the RIMS methodology is going to be used, it may be advisable to con-
duct an additional test for double counting of sales. Two or three res-
pondent firms in industries for which this may be a problem (e.g.,
freight forwarders) can be contacted and interviewed to determine what,
if any, other port industry revenues have been included in reported
totals. A sales/employee ratio can be developed from this information
and used to check the responses of other firms in the same industry for
consistency.
In the case of regions with more than one port, allocations of impacts to
each port should be made. This allocation is done prior to the summation
of total direct impacts through the use of responses to the survey ques-
tion asking for an allocation of activity to various ports. See Step D:5
for additional information.
USE OF RESULTS:
The aggregated impact measures will be used as data for publication and
as data needed for the determination of secondary impacts.
65
DEVELOPMENT OF SECONDARY IMPACT MULTIPLIERS
Step E:l
PURPOSE:
Select that method or methods which will be used to calculate secondary
impacts.
DATA REQUIREMENTS:
None.
DISCUSSION:
This kit contains directions for calculating secondary economic impacts
by two methods — economic base multipliers and input/output multi-
pliers. The advantages and disadvantages of each approach are discussed
in Chapter II. The specific techniques described below are:
• An economic base income multiplier derived from the
consensus of three different employment multipliers,
and
• An output multiplier derived from an input/output
table (Bureau of Economic Analysis RIMS multipliers
for United States "kit" users and regional
input/output tables for Canadian kit users) .
We believe the most accurate results can be obtained by following all of
the steps and comparing the results of the two approaches. However, a
less ambitious program may be more in keeping with an individual user's
needs. If the purpose of the study is to describe direct activity with
little emphasis on secondary impacts, the time and effort involved in
completing all of the secondary impact steps is probably not warranted.
Similarly, time, staff, or budget constraints may require a modified
approach. In such cases, it is reasonable to select a single approach,
and even a single technique for calculating the employment multiplier, as
long as the limitations and probable biases of each approach are recog-
nized and cited in the impact report.
Some Canadian ports may not have suitable regional input/output studies
available to them. Large ports could make use of the interprovincial
input/output model published by Statistics Canada. The structural
Analysis Division of Statistics Canada in Ottawa should be contacted for
further information concerning the use of the interprovincial model.
66
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
If the port chooses not to follow the complete methodology, the selection
of the individual technique can be based on available resources. The
techniques for calculating an economic base multiplier require very
little money to obtain required data, but do require a fairly substantial
investment of staff time. The RIMS input/output multipliers require an
initial purchase price of about $1,000, but no staff time is required for
their calculation. An examination of the remaining steps in this element
will help the user decide which technique is more compatible with the
port's purposes and resources.
USE OF RESULTS:
The decisions made in this step will guide the implementation of the
secondary impact analysis.
67
DEVELOPMENT OF SECONDARY IMPACT MULTIPLIERS
Step E;2
PURPOSE:
Collect income and employment data necessary to calculate economic base
multipliers.
DATA REQUIREMENTS:
U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, County Business
Patterns , available from Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government
Printing Office, Washington, D.C., 20402.
U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis, Regional Econo-
mic Measurement Division, Local Area Personal Income , available from
National Technical Information Service, Springfield, VA, 22161.
For Canada — Statistics Canada, Canadian Census, Vol. Ill, Part 4.
Industries by Sex for Census Metropolitan Areas, Place of Residence and
Place of Work (Bulletin 3.4-5) , and Industries by Sex for Census
Agglomerations of 25,000 and over (Place of Residence) , and Census
Agglomerations of 50,000 and Over (Place of Work), (Bulletin 3.4-6).
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
The basic published data needed to calculate employment and income multi-
pliers for the port district county (s) should be obtained. The most
recent issues of County Business Patterns for the state in which the port
is located and the United States as a whole should be ordered from the
Government Printing Office. The BEA income data for the port county
should also be ordered. The NTIS publication numbers are:
• Volume I — Summary Including Methodology and Clas-
sification of SMSAs and BEA regions — PB291164
Volume II — Northeast Region — PB291165
Volume III — Mideast Region — PB91166
Volume IV — Great Lakes Region — PB291167
Volume V — Plains Region — PB291168
Volume VI — Southeast Region — PB291169
Volume VII — Southwest Region — PB291170
Volume VIII — Rocky Mountain Region — PB291171
Volume IX — Far West Region — PB291172
Entire Set — PB291163-SET
68
Publication of both sets of data takes about one and one-half years
(i.e., 1977 data should be available in mid-1979). Since it is important
to use employment and income data for the same year, the user should
check with the Department of Commerce to find out the most recent year
for which both are available before ordering publications.
The Canadian Census Vol. Ill, Part 4 Bulletins 3.4-5 and 3.4-6 should be
obtained by Canadian ports. The volumes contain employment data by
industry for urban areas. The latest census information is from 1971 as
of this printing, making it somewhat dated, but no other publication
provides sufficient detail.
USE OF RESULTS:
These data will be used in the calculations of employment and income
multipliers for secondary impacts.
69
DEVELOPMENT OF SECONDARY IMPACT MULTIPLIERS
Step E:3
PURPOSE:
Develop employment multipliers based on the "concentration" technique.
DATA REQUIREMENTS:
Most recent County Business Patterns for the port's state and the United
States summary; Census Vol. Ill, Part 4 Bulletins 3.4-5 and 3.4-6, and
Canadian Statistical Review for Canadian port users.
DISCUSSION:
This technique, also known as location quotients, is used to determine
the basic and non-basic shares of employment in each industry by com-
paring the port community or region's employment distribution to national
employment distribution. The underlying assumption is that if a com-
munity is highly specialized relative to the nation in the production of
a particular commodity, that commodity is presumed to be an export item
(e.g., automobiles from Detroit). If local residents have the same
demand patterns that prevail nationally (as is assumed) , a self-
sufficient community should have the same employment distribution as the
country as a whole. If 2% of U.S. employment is in apparel manufac-
turing, for example, then a 2% share in a given community would indicate
just enough employment to meet local demand. If the local share exceeds
2%, the excess employees are assumed to serve export demand. (Also, if
the local share is less than 2%, imports would be required to meet local
demand, but this is not of concern in this calculation.)
The most significant criticism of the concentration technique is that it
understates basic employment and thus overstates the employment multi-
plier because it cannot adequately treat differences in product mix. In
the case described above, even though 2% of the community's employment
was in the apparel manufacturing industry, it might all be accounted for
by a single firm which produces swimwear , most of which would be ex-
ported. Even data disaggregated to the four-digit SIC level group
together several different products and often several brands of each pro-
duct. This product mix factor causes the concentration technique to
understate the volume of exports. Comparisons of basic employment
derived through this approach and estimates derived from direct surveys
of local industries indicate that in each case the concentration techni-
que yields a lower estimate of export levels. As a result, the employ-
ment multiplier and the estimate of secondary impacts will be over-
stated. Nevertheless, this approach is an inexpensive way to estimate
the employment multiplier as long as its limitations are recognized.
70
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
To calculate the number of "basic" employees in each SIC industry, it is
necessary to apply the national percentage of employment in the industry
to total employment in the county and compare this number to actual
county employment in the same SIC. If actual employment is less than or
equal to the calculated number of employees, this employment is consi-
dered completely non-basic. If actual employment is greater than the
calculated number, the difference (actual minus calculated) is basic
employment. Exhibit E:3-l illustrates the application of this techni-
que. After the process has been repeated for each local SIC industry,
the results are summed and all employment is assigned to either the basic
or non-basic sector. The economic base multiplier itself is calculated
by dividing total employment by basic employment. For the purposes of
this analysis, basic and non-basic employment should be summed for each
of the major industrial divisions — agriculture, forestry, and fish-
eries; mining; contract construction; manufacturing; transportation, com-
munications, and utilities; wholesale and retail trade; finance, insur-
ance, and real estate; and services.
It is important to note that national employment data are disaggregated
to the four-digit SIC level, but data for counties are frequently pre-
sented in more highly aggregated form because of disclosure problems or
the absence of certain industries. The procedure described above must
therefore be adjusted to make sure that similar employment groupings are
being compared. In the example in Exhibit E:3-l, for instance, national
and county employment in SIC 209 can be compared directly. However, no
county data are reported for the remaining three-digit SICs in this cate-
gory (201-208) . The proper comparisons would therefore be between U.S.
and county employment in the two-digit SIC 20 minus employment in SIC
209 . In the example, U.S. employment for this group would be 2.14%
(2.36%-0.22%) for a calculated county employment of 362. As a result,
all 121 actual county employees (285-164) would be assigned to the non-
basic sector.
Canadian ports must make a further calculation in order to adjust basic
employement to account for foreign exports. Since approximately
one-fifth of Canadian GNP is accounted for by exports, the economic base
multipliers will tend to be overstated if not adjusted to account for
production for foreign export, which is often incorporated into the
non-basic sector of the regional economy. The simpliest adjustment
procedure uses an export/GNP ratio (as derived from data in the Canadian
Statistical Review ) to determine the number of employees producing
products for foreign export. The remaining employment is disaggregated
into basic and non-basic categories as above, but before the multiplier
is calculated the foreign export employment is summed with basic
employment. This can also be accomplished by the following computation:
multiplier = T
(e x T) + (1 - e) x B)
where T = total employement
B = basic employement
e = exports/gross national product
71
If more accuracy is desired, a regional exports to gross regional product
ratio can be used. Provincial data may have to be used if regional
exports and product statistics cannot be obtained. A further elaboration
would be to use the same procedure at an industry level, i.e., to net out
foreign export-related employment for each industry.
USE OF RESULTS:
The employment assignments developed in this step will be used in the
derivation of the income multiplier in Step E:7.
72
i.MllitLi !•: 1-1
CONCENTRATION TECHNIQUE CALCULATION
V.R.WS MAUBOR COUNTY
09
15
17
173
20
209
24
241
242
2429
243
2436
26
27
35
42
421
44
48
50
501
508
51
514
5146
517
52
521
53
54
541
55
551
553
554
562
57
571
5712
58
5812
5813
59
591
594
60
602
61
612
64
65
651
70
72
723
73
739
75
753
79
799
80
80 1
805
81
83
8)1
8b
863
864
89
sic u.s
Percent
Calculated
Actual
TOTAL
00.00".
16,902
16,902
Agriculture, Forestrv, Fisheries
0.36
61
176
Fishing, hunting, and trapping
0.03
5
116
Contract Construction
5.50
9 30
501
General contractors
1.47
248
239
Special trade contractors
2.84
480
216
Electrical work
0.51
86
69
Manufacturing
30.27
5,116
8,204
Food and kindred products
2.36
399
285
Misc. foods and kindred products
0.22
37
164
Lumber and wood products
1.01
171
5.893
Logging camps
0.13
22
2,766
Sawmills and planing mills
0.33
56
1,915
Special product sawmills
0.01
2
1,264
Mlllwork, plywood & structural members 0.27
46
1,003
Softwood veneer and plywood
0.06
10
674
Paper and allied products
0.98
166
1,262
Printing and publishing
1.73
292
111
Machinery, except electrical
3.18
537
294
Transportation and Other
Public Utilities
6.33
1,070
690
Trucking and warehousing
1.73
292
338
Trucking, local 4 long distance
1.56
264
338
Water transportation
0.30
51
65
Communication
1.81
306
204
Wholesale Trade
7.11
1,202
563
Wholesale trade - durable goods
3.89
657
308
Motor vehicles & automotive equipment
0.65
110
76
Machinery, equipment & supplies
1.50
234
93
Wholesale trade - nondurable goods
2.88
487
255
Groceries and related products
0.93
157
113
Fish and seafoods
0.03
5
60
Petroleum & petroleum products
0.30
51
62
Retail Trade
20.71
3,500
3,297
Building materials
0.71
120
127
Lumber & other building materials
0.37
63
51
General merchandise stores
3.07
519
203
Food stores
3.08
521
616
Grocery stores
2.62
443
571
Automotive dealers & service stations
2.76
466
645
New and used car dealers
1.20
203
315
Auto and home supply stores
0.31
52
69
Gasoline service stations
1.06
179
244
Women's ready-to-wear stores
0.48
81
95
Furniture and home furnishing stores
0.79
134
121
Furniture and home furnishing stores
0.48
81
82
Furniture stores
0.34
57
74
Eating and drinking places
5.50
9 30
1,078
Eating places
4.64
784
764
Drinking places
0.50
85
138
Miscellaneous retail
2.63
445
332
Drug stores
0.74
125
155
Miscellaneous shopping goods stores
0.69
117
69
Finance, Insurance, and Real Estate
7.02
1,187
698
Banking
1.99
336
202
Commercial and stock savings banks
1.83
301
183
Credit agencies other than banks
0.73
123
101
Savings and loan associations
0.27
4b
71
Insurance agents
0.58
98
59
Real estate
1.31
221
278
Real estate operators and lessors
0.68
115
228
Services
21.29
3,598
2,718
Hotels and other lodging places
1.42
240
299
Personal services
1.41
2 38
177
Beauty shops
0.44
74
87
Business services
3.39
573
173
Miscellaneous business services
1.50
254
117
Auto repair, services, & garages
0.71
120
79
Automotive repair shops
0.45
76
68
Amusement & recreational services
0.90
152
145
Miscellaneous amusement services
0.51
86
95
Health services
6.53
1.104
1,117
Offices of physicians
0.90
152
101
Nursing and personal care facilities
1.18
199
32 3
Legal services
0.58
4 8
63
Social services
1.15
19i.
98
Social services, nee
0.92
105
98
Membership organizations
1.71
289
440
Labor organizations
0.26
44
73
Civic and social associations
0.43
73
322
Miscellaneous services
1.02
172
60
Basic
8. 4 fit)
4
111
127
162
2,744
597
1,262
283
664
1,096
74
14
55
11
19
128
112
17
65
14
17
115
53
30
25
113
59
13
Non-Baa ic
8,502*
56
5
46
239
147
69
359
121
37
47
22
54
2
46
10
166
111
29i
83
26i
51
20i
34
249
139
7b
93
80
53
5
51
80
57
51
203
45
443
17
203
52
179
81
39
8
57
61
764
85
108
125
69
53
19
183
30
4b
59
50
lis
67
240
90
74
5b
1 17
11
h8
50
86
693
101
199
63
98
40
44
73
bO
Includes non-classlflahle establishment!
73
AnhurD Little Inc
DEVELOPMENT OF SECONDARY IMPACT MULTIPLIERS
Step E;4
PURPOSE:
Develop employment multipliers based on the minimum requirements tech-
nique.
DATA REQUIREMENTS:
Most recent County Business Patterns for the port's state, the United
States summary, and other states, as determined below; Canadian Census
Vol. Ill, Part 4 Bulletins 3.4-5 and 3.4-6. for Canadian port users.
DISCUSSION:
This approach attempts to overcome the principal problem of the con-
centration technique, which systematically overestimates the multiplier
by underestimating basic employment. The underlying assumption of the
minimum requirements approach is that the amount of employment in a given
industry necessary to serve local demand in a community is equivalent to
the smallest amount of employment in that industry in a group of counties
of similar size. Any employment in excess of this minimum is assumed to
serve export demand.
The problem with this technique, particularly when relatively small com-
munities are being analyzed, is that the sample of communities can be
constructed so that there is very little or even no non-basic employment
in each industry, so that basic employment is overstated and the multi-
plier understated. For this reason it is often argued that some cutoff
other than the lowest employment share be used — e.g., the second
lowest, the share corresponding to the 5% level, etc. The difficulty
with this approach is that by arbitrarily establishing a higher cutoff,
the basic share of employment will be lower. Unless some judgment is
exercised about what truly represents the minimum requirement for each
industry, this technique can be misleading.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
The first step in determining the minimum share of employment required to
serve local demand in each industry is to identify the group of counties
(or SMSAs) to which the port community will be compared. The object is
to select counties of similar size (measured by employment) with dif-
ferent economic structures. The port analyst should thus select at least
some counties in non-coastal states (or some coastal counties in the case
of river ports) .
74
The source for selecting these counties is the U.S. summary volume of
County Business Patterns . Table 3A presents a list of all United States
counties and their total employment. Ten counties (no more than two in
any state) with employment similar to the county being analyzed should be
selected and the appropriate volumes of County Business Patterns or-
dered. (This publication is available for examination in Department of
Commerce field offices and public libraries in many larger cities. If
feasible, it is probably quicker and less expensive to photocopy the few
pages of data needed for each of the ten counties than to order County
Business Patterns from the Government Printing Office.) In some cases,
data availability may dictate a smaller number of comparisons or even
suggest that this technique is inappropriate. For example, there are
fewer than ten SMSAs with employment close to or larger than one million.
Exhibit E:4-l is an example of the minimum requirements calculation. For
each industry, the lowest percentage of employment (in italics) repre-
sents the non-basic share of employment. When this minimum share is
found in the port county, there is assumed to be no basic employment in
the industry (SIC 17) . When port county employment exceeds this minimum
share, the difference (1.41% - 0.82% = 0.59% for SIC 15) represents basic
employment. After this calculation has been completed for each industry,
the results are summed to determine total basic employment for each major
industry division. The employment multiplier is calculated by dividing
total employment by basic employment. As discussed in the previous step,
county data may have to be adjusted so that similar employment categories
are compared.
A similar approach should be taken by Canadian users of the kit.
Canadian Census employment data for similar "urban areas" should be used
in lieu of "county" employment data. The adjustment for foreign exports
(see Step E:3) will also have to be made by Canadian users.
USE OF RESULTS:
The employment assignments developed in this step will be used in the
derivation of the income multiplier in Step E:7.
75
EXHIBIT E 41
MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS TECHNIQUE CALCULATION
Tottl
Aqnc-
. Forestry. Fisheries
Contract Coostn
209
24
2ii
24?
2429
2j3
^436
on and Other Public Uttlim
Wholesale Trade
50
501
508
514
5146
517
52
521
55 3
554
562
57
5812
581 1
591
594
60
60 2
72
723
73
739
75
75 3
79
rag
BO
8.11
805
81
83
831
8fi
86)
B64
e. and Real twain
Percent Dutnbut
Grays
Pinal
Imperial
Napa
Maui
Bannock
Bonne..
Harbor
AZ
CA
CA
HW
ID
ID
100 0%
17,156
16.275
17.320
17.461
15321
18.775
1 05
051
5.34
072
036
019
0.71
0.69
"
-
-
"
-
"
2.96
2.41
5.14
5.64
736
6.38
9.16
1.41
0.82
1.16
1 82
239
1.76
2.09
1.28
1.37
2 55
3.23
3.37
3.79
335
0.41
-
0.45
0.41
0.46
1.13
0.72
48.54
14.59
8.87
24.47
1266
22.51
10.72
1 69
0.99
3.34
535
933
3.05
537
097
-
-
-
0.30
-
_
34.87
-
-
—
-
_
0.46
1636
-
-
-
-
-
_
11.33
—
-
-
-
_
_
7 48
-
—
-
-
_
-
5.93
-
-
-
-
-
28
359
_
_
_
_
_
_
7.47
_
-
_
_
_
_
0.66
0.43
0.82
1.13
0.69
0.85
1.12
1.74
0.32
36
-
-
-
1.11
4.08
298
9.79
803
8.74
7.91
500
2.00
0.74
4 24
_
153
3.57
194
2.00
—
2.75
-
1 23
-
130
0.38
-
-
-
_
_
_
1.21
0.S6
-
-
-
-
-
3.33
2.63
15.71
2.49
3 30
797
13.61
1 82
1.64
-
1.42
_
4.03
6 49
0.45
-
033
-
0.35
032
0.67
0.55
1.16
2.00
0.88
-
192
3 28
151
1.09
1030
1.07
2 0?
3.94
-
0.67
-
686
-
1 41
1 82
435
35
-
—
—
_
_
-
0.37
0.41
053
~
-
053
1.16
19.51
te.28
34.49
26 67
30.10
27.00
2235
75
0.75
1 49
1 72
0-8O
139
77
71?
—
0235
0.76
-
82
31
1.20
031
627
2.41
3.38
2.77
3 22
3.64
352
6.05
4 06
4 51
3 17
3 11
3.38
3.49
5.67
3.27
4.27
3 05
2 56
3.82
339
5 73
4.61
2.50
4.35
3.83
1.86
1.16
1.95
235
0.79
1.61
139
0.41
0.60
1.11
06
0.34
057
051
1.44
1.32
243
1.13
1.26
190
1.08
56
0.33
1.07
0.32
043
36
0.69
0.72
-
-
-
-
—
39
0.49
-
0.73
0.71
0.57
0.61
061
0.44
-
60
0.54
-
046
43
6.38
4.83
739
7 62
1130
8.50
6 28
4.52
3.70
6.72
6.25
835
751
5 78
0.82
0.72
0.70
0.80
0.52
0.49
043
136
1.82
3.78
3.61
397
386
322
032
0.77
157
1.24
74
1.72
1 36
0.41
036
030
033
2.22
1 13
t 31
4.13
3.11
4.59
4.92
6.59
9 64
4.27
1 20
0.98
237
134
1.10
2.23
1.61
1 08
98
2 37
1.82
1 09
223
1.61
60
—
62
083
C92
0.91
091
42
-
-
0.38
-
-
-
0.35
—
057
035
-
064
38
1 64
1 07
0.42
1 33
3.99
155
0.62
1 35
-
~
0.95
234
076
-
1608
8.83
16.57
26 40
29 84
17 26
33 63
1 77
2.03
1,83
1.59
1592
1.57
2 40
1.05
0.72
1 49
138
1 74
2 20
117
051
0.38
0.49
105
62
54
0.40
1 02
64
1 08
2 64
1.44
1 06
-
69
0.50
061
081
60
38
—
0.4!
_
1.07
0.79
2.02
061
1 06
40
_
087
063
63
054
IB
086
-
1 09
1 09
1 29
84
052
056
_
057
-
85
39
-
661
1.61
4 16
12.20
2 34
5.42
-
060
041
1 89
1 82
1 05
1 20
93
1 91
—
-
-
-
-
-
037
-
67
47
33
56
48
53
089
085
58
1 57
-
69
058
-
-
52
1 57
-
-
260
106
1 16
1 J6
13
1.90
99
046
-
-
0.40
~
051
-
1.91
41
051
-
-
63
52
JS
-
83
0.55
144
1 30
111
Cravi Harbor County
2.36
060
134
202
0.53
35.71
236
130
28 78
8.77
11.11
3.71
3.71
1.03
288
0.72
1 18
25.08
1 71
89
2 38
3 33
3.18
4.16
133
60
85
66
6.11
4 66
1 28
2 76
1 00
42
4.72
239
69
0.89
064
1451
76
1 22
63
1 26
85
45
4.19
152
1 78
46
1.11
054
JS
1 46
20.799
039
221
1.78
0.55
4456
1 20
36 44
10.57
18.08
1631
1.22
131
431
130
3 40
2.27
036
086
1.13
21.31
80
33
1 95
7 06
2.75
4 66
2 00
0.75
1.71
038
0.67
44
32
7.30
554
1.02
204
0.6S
0.78
3.12
1 62
1 62
0.44
039
44
1 07
1 14
057
2 20
1 03
63
056
82
52
6 78
1 10
33
068
92
025
14583
0.7 7
300
7.34
036
038
130
031
0.37
432
089
234
5.73
4 98
4 59
238
1.34
1 09
3 47
2.09
1.06
2.74
2.74
1.19
1.06
42
I 45
074
1.37
078
076
59
256
62
62
1 78
42
72
Thuriton
WA
4.75
36
237
320
055
4.63
039
106
1.06
1.00
2 40
0.34
102
1 36
051
366
358
347
4 69
2.07
43
1.81
057
1 34
0.70
050
9.49
6.98
62
4.21
1.12
1 95
1 86
1.47
035
0.76
1.60
083
2573
2 82
1.49
083
2 20
078
88
77
37
9 74
1.49
1 89
071
1.30
I 12
292
59
089
1 31
Total
16302
176
116
239
216
8204
Non -basic
5392
19
46
139
147
285
_
121
164
164
-
5393
133
76
2.766
2.766
-
1315
651
-
1.264
1264
-
1003
329
-
674
•74
-
1.262
1562
-
111
30
81
294
240
54
690
-
83
338
213
125
338
-
_
65
65
-
204
109
95
563
-
-
308
19
120
76
19
57
93
30
63
255
-
80
113
-
53
60
60
—
62
"
62
3597
-
80
127
_
76
51
-
61
203
49
154
616
-
45
571
138
433
645
-
17
315
181
134
69
12
5?
244
100
144
95
41
54
121
-
39
82
-
8
74
20
54
1078
58
118
764
139
625
138
65
73
332
-
106
155
45
110
69
8
61
698
-
58
202
19
-
183
17
166
101
27
3
71
71
-
59
—
59
278
50
-
228
157
71
2.718
-
67
299
171
128
177
33
57
87
23
64
17J
12
44
117
S3
64
?9
-
11
68
-
68
145
25
25
95
32
63
1.117
490
203
101
32
69
323
323
-
63
7
56
98
-
-
98
10
88
440
23
17
78
36
42
322
258
64
60
-
60
76
DEVELOPMENT OF SECONDARY IMPACT MULTIPLIERS
Step E:5
PURPOSE:
Develop employment multipliers based on the "experience" technique.
DATA REQUIREMENTS:
Most recent County Business Patterns for the port's state; Canadian
Census Vol. Ill, Part 4 Bulletins 3.4-5 and 3.4-6 for Canadian port
users. There are no other specific data requirements for this step.
However, local and regional planning agencies, economic development
districts, state or community college eco- nomics departments, and
similar sources should be contacted to locate any economic base studies
which may have been done for the study area and to identify persons with
extensive knowledge of the area's economic structure.
DISCUSSION:
As discussed in the previous two steps, the available indirect techniques
for determining basic and non-basic employment may yield misleading
results. This technique, admittedly much "softer" than the others,
relies on the user's knowledge of the local economy. The assumption is
that familiarity with local businesses and conditions is a better predic-
tor of basic employment than any approach based on averages and aggre-
gates. It should be mentioned here that the ideal economic base study
would be a direct survey in which each local firm reported its local and
export sales. If a port community has a recent study of this type avail-
able, no other techniques would be needed to derive economic base
multipliers.
The advantage of this approach is that it focuses attention on the speci-
fic characteristics of the local economy which may not be apparent in
either of the other approaches. Both the concentration and the minimum
requirements calculations begin with the percent distribution of local
employment reported in County Business Patterns (or the Canadian Census
Bulletins) . The problem with using this distribution is that it may be
distorted by a single special circumstance. For example, large amounts
of construction employment involved in building a power plant would drive
down the share of employment in all other industries, causing an over-
estimate of non-basic employment by either of the other techniques.
77
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
The user begins with the detailed information on port county employment
presented in County Business Patterns (or the Canadian Census Bulletins)
and estimates the amount of employment in each industry that is basic.
Sources which may be used for these estimates include:
• Existing economic base studies, particularly those
based on surveys,
• Persons knowledgeable about the local economy such
as planners or economists, who may either provide
estimates or check the reasonableness of the user's
estimates, and
• Optional questions added to the port and port-
dependent industry surveys.
Estimates of basic employment are summed and divided into total employ-
ment to calculate multipliers for each major industry division.
USE OF RESULTS:
The employment assignments developed in this step will be used in the
derivation of the income multiplier in Step E:7.
78
DEVELOPMENT OF SECONDARY IMPACT MULTIPLIERS
Step E:6
PURPOSE:
Derive a single "consensus" employment multiplier.
DATA REQUIREMENTS:
Results of Steps E:3, E:4, and E:5.
DISCUSSION:
Each of the three approaches described in the previous steps is likely to
result in a different level of basic employment and thus a different
employment multiplier. The concentration approach generally yields a
higher multiplier (lower number of basic employees) than the minimum
requirements approach. While it cannot be determined on an a priori
basis whether the "experience" technique will yield a higher or lower
multiplier, it is likely to be lower because the other two methods tend
to bias the total multiplier upward.
In order to present a conservative estimate of port-related impacts, we
recommend that the lowest multiplier be selected. In general the total
employment multiplier (that is, the combined multiplier for all indus-
tries) should be between 2 and 3, and probably closer to 2 for most coun-
ties. For relatively small, undeveloped areas, the multiplier may be as
low as 1.5.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
From the employment distributions calculated in Steps E:3, E:4, and E:5,
select the largest of the three numbers of basic employees in each SIC
category reported in County Business Patterns (or Canadian Census
Bulletins 3.4-5 and 3.4-6) for the port county. These will form the
basis of the con- sensus multiplier. Basic employment in each industry
is summed and divi- ded into total employment to calculate the total
multiplier and the multiplier for each major industry division.
USE OF RESULTS:
These consensus employment assignments will be used to calculate the
income multiplier in Step E:7.
79
DEVELOPMENT OF SECONDARY IMPACT MULTIPLIERS
Step E:7
PURPOSE:
Develop economic base income multiplier.
DATA REQUIREMENTS:
Bureau of Economic Analysis personal income data for port county or SMSA
(see Step E:2) and results of Step E:6; Employment , Earnings and Hours
for Canadian ports.
DISCUSSION:
Income is generally a better measure of downstream economic impacts than
employment. Moreover, the employment multiplier excludes the effects of
non-labor income (interest, dividends, and transfer payments) which is
primarily basic and supports non-basic employment. (Transfer payments
alone currently account for close to 15% of total personal income nation-
wide.) Using an income multiplier to capture this additional component
of the basic sector is therefore a more theoretically justifiable
approach. The reason that the income multiplier is not computed ini-
tially is that the available data are too highly aggregated to use the
indirect techniques for determining distributions between the basic and
non-basic sectors.
Large Canadian ports will be able to utilize this technique, but only
with wage income being included. Small ports, or more correctly ports
from less developed areas, will not be able to use this step unless
disaggregated income and employment by industry can be obtained for the
area.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
The first element of this step is to determine the percentage of basic
and non-basic employment in each major industry division for which income
data are reported. Major industry divisions and corresponding two-digit
SICs are:
80
Agriculture, forestry, and fisheries 01-09
Mining 10-14
Contract construction 15-17
Manufacturing 19-39
Transportation, communication, and public utilities 40-49
Wholesale and retail trade 50-59
Finance, insurance, and real estate 60-67
Services 70-89
The consensus allocation of employment to the basic and non-basic sectors
(Step E:6) should be aggregated to correspond to these industry divisions
and the percent in each sector determined. Exhibit E:7-l is an example
of the BEA income data available for each county. The income multiplier
is calculated by determining the basic and non-basic components of per-
sonal income by place of residence.
First, labor and proprietors' income by place of work is divided accord-
ing to the employment data. Income for each major industry division is
split into basic and non-basic components according to the percentage of
employment in each sector. Since farm and government employment are not
covered in the County Business Patterns data, income for these industries
is treated separately. Farm activity (and income) tends to be basic; it
is reasonable to assume that at least 70% of total farm income is related
to export demand. A brief discussion with the County Extension Service
would provide an idea of product destinations which can be used as a
basis for the allocation. Federal Government civilian and military
income is generally considered completely basic, although a small portion
of federal income related to such things as the postal service could be
considered non-basic. Most state government income is also considered
basic. Local government employment is usually considered non-basic, but
it could reasonably be argued that those jobs supported by federal reve-
nue sharing, CETA, or similar programs are basic. Therefore, state and
local government income can be split equally between the basic and non-
basic sectors. The sum of basic and non-basic income for all industries
is labor and proprietors' income by place of work.
The remaining elements of the personal income by place of residence cal-
culation are divided according to the assumptons below. Personal con-
tributions for social insurance are divided in the same proportion as
labor and proprietors' income. The residence adjustment, which accounts
for people who live and work in different counties, is treated the same
way. Dividends, interest, and rent are derived from both local and non-
local sources, and should be considered 50% basic and 50% non-basic.
Transfer payments represent monies paid to individuals by federal and
state government (social security, welfare, etc.) and thus should be con-
sidered basic. The sum of these four components plus labor and propri-
etors' income is total personal income by place of residence. The income
multiplier is calculated by dividing total income by basic income. An
example of the entire process is shown in Exhibit E:7-2.
81
For Canadian ports the weekly earnings data from Employment Earnings and
Hours should be multiplied by the appropriate number of employees in each
industry category. The resulting total wage and salary income should
then be expanded to acount for firms not covered by the larger firm
survey that forms the basis of Employment , Earnings , and Hours . The
expansion is accomplished by dividing the total income for each sector by
the survey coverage percentages provided in the "Concepts and Methods"
section of Employment , Earnings , and Hours . The results of this
expansion should then be allocated between the basic and non-basic
sectors according to the employment assignments (Step E:6). The income
multiplier is then estimated by dividing total earnings (basic plus
non-basic) by basic earnings. The resultant multiplier will be somewhat
higher than if these other income sources were included since they would
add to the basic income share. The foreign export adjustment detailed in
Stept E:3 will have to be utilized if a consistent income multiplier is
to obtained.
USE OF RESULTS:
The income multiplier is used to estimate the total impact of direct port
activities.
82
EXHIBIT E:7-l
EXAMPLE OF BEA COUNTY INCOME DATA
GRAYS HAROCR
•ASHINGTCN
PERSONAL IKCFE et PAJCR SCURCES 1971-76 ITKLSANC! Cf COLLARS)
1971 1/ 1972 1/ 1973 H 197* 1/ 1975 2/ 1976 2/
TOTAL LAecR ANJ PROPRIETORS INCCME 87 PLACE CF wCRK 3/
8Y TYPE
MACC ANO SALARY CISUURSEMENTS
OTHER LADOR INCCE
PROPRIETORS IhCCC */
Farm
NCN.FARM t/
BY INCUSTHY
FARM
NCN.FARH
PRIVATE
AG.SEMV..FCR..FISH..AHC CTFER 5/
MINING
CONSTRUCTION
MANUFACTURING
NCN-CU&ABlE OCCDS
CLRAULE GCCCS
TRANSPORTATION AflC PUBLIC LTILITIES
WHOLESALE TRACE
RETAIL TRACE
FRANCE, INSURANCE, AND REAL ESTATE
SERVICES
CCVEH.-.HEM ANC CCvERNMENT ENTERPRISES
FECEHAL, CIVILIAN
FECERal, MILITARY
STATE ANC LOCAL
OERIVATICN CF PERSONAL INCOME BY PLACE CF RESICENCE
TOTAL LABOR anO PROPRIETORS INCOME BY
PLACE CF «CRK
LEJS! PERSCNAL CONTRIBUTIONS FOR SOCIAL
INSURANCE eY PLACE CF kCRK
MET LABCR ANO PROPRIETORS INCOME 8Y
PLACE CF *CRK
PLCS: HESICENCE ADJUSTMENT
HET LAbCR ANO PROPRIETORS INCOME BY
PLACE CF RESICENCE
PLLS: CIVICENOS, INTEREST, ANC RENT 7/
PLLS: TRANSFER PAYMENTS
PER'CNAL INCOME 67 PLACE CF RESICENCE
PER CAPITA PERSONAL 1NCC*E (CCLLAP.S1
TCTal POPULATION ITHCLSANCSI
1*5.51*
1*2. »99
I82.03C
19*. 9)*
199.21!
2*t .*ai
♦ ,288
7,9*3
9,313
10.3C6
12,122
15,(2!
21,931
25,362
31,929
33.7C9
33,3t(
36,162
3.S03
*.963
9,3*3
9.575
7,049
7,117
U.C3J
2C.399
22,586
2*. 13*
26,319
29, C*!
*,37T
5,*32
9.911
10.257
7,886
8,151
169.361
ISC. 37*
213,361
229.192
236.839
292.115
1*1,727
WC154
18C.178
193.937
196.133
2*5, cia
2.313
2,770
3.75C
*,591
4.337
*,57l
(LI
(L)
ID
191
199
9C
12.919
11.C7C
12.765
15.395
13.99E
18.9CC
66.C21
?9,*92
86.C83
91.676
9C.3E9
121,321
17,523
2C.35C
2C.591
23,*C3
21.6 36
3C.C39
*«.*98
58, 9*2
67.*92
66.273
68.751
91,282
9.328
11.601
12,871
13.252
13.*6«
17.27J
$.130
5.*35
6.318
8.C72
8.152
9.153
21.232
23.161
25,855
28,109
29,*29
33,*33
4,229
*.i06
4,770
*.«93
3.02C
5.572
2C,!2«
22.C72
25,721
27,758
31.1*3
3*. ICC
27,63*
3C.218
33,183
35.255
4C.7C6
*7.C91
3«*66
3,562
*,C31
*.*78
5, '59
6.C46
l.tes
2,101
2.57C
2.276
2,32c
2.693
22.203
2*, 555
26,582
28. SCI
32,921
38,358
173,738
19). (06
223,272
239. **9
2**. 72!
30C.J66
1.171
9.*73
12.32C
14,7*0
15.16*
18,131
16), 567
-1.32)
116.333
-1.60*
21C.932
.1.912
22*.7C9
-1.9*9
229.561
-1.323
282,13!
-2.63*
16*, 2*2
30,98 7
33.737
18*. 729
J*.C57
36,2)5
209. C*C
38.*97
*0.90*
222.760
44,422
49.99*
228. 23C
*t.*6«
61.13*
279, 5C1
51 .fOC
62,*6I
228.966
3.833
JS.*
2)),C*t
4,272
59.7
286,**!
*,63)
49.7
317.176
9*2 19
6C.8
335. 8*C
5.»9!
61.1
391.769
4,-27
41.3
SEE FCCThCTEJ At E*0 CF T*eiES,
83
CM
w
w
M
P-i /-^
1-1 CO
H H
hJ co
O
S
O 4-1
o o
S3
H Cfl
O co
0)
2 3
O O
M J3
<
O -H
CJ "- '
•H
m
00
vO
St
O
CM
CM
CM
00
m
en
NO
rH
H
O
o
nO
CM
00
O
H
vO
cn
00
rH
N
cd
•H
c
QJ
,Q
CJ
QJ
4-1
4-1
CO
e
o
XI
M
CO
c
J-i
QJ
CO
aj
3
4J
CJ
E
u
-a
•H
e
CO
c
c
u
o
H
C
c
c
C
H
c
o
rH
g
a)
rH
rH
rH
•H
•H
•«
£
>
rH
T3
CO
CL
4-1
CO
■>
o
CO
c
c
•H
—
CJ
J-l
o
CJ
CO
u
o
•H
CO
o
4-1
to
3
rH
O
OJ
CO
Ph
0)
c
c
c
UJ
•H
•H
•H
•H
O
J-l
B
QJ
CO
QJ
•H
•H
o
cfl
c
4-1
4J
CJ
s
rJ
o
4-1
J-l
4-1
rH
g
M
rJ
CJ
H
cfl
•H
UH
CO
OJ
c
CO
o
a
3
QJ
4J
H
1
1
T3
3
4-1
QJ
4J
CJ
o ^
4LI
4-1
rH
^
J-l
•H
CO
C
CO
•r - )
c
6
o
c
>-i u
CJ
o
CO
UJ
o
4-1
OJ
rH
rH
CO
a
X)
rH
>.
H
rH
Ph o
CO
60
CO
CD
CJ
a. 3
u
CO
CO
O
0)
OJ
aj
4-1
4-1
OJ
CO
C UH
J-l
C
c
c
o
C
CO
C
>-i
JS
XI
TO
CO
3
CJ
-a
J-i
CO O
CO
CO
•H
o
j3
•H
U
CO
0J
J-l
QJ
QJ
4-)
.a
c
c
OJ
tH
S
s
o
3
Pb
H
CO
o
Pm
U-,
CO
•H
0)
OJ
UH
j-i ai
J-l
TJ
TJ
Cfl
o a
4-1
•H
•H
C
x> ca
C
CO
>
a
CO rH
o
QJ
•H
j-i
rJ Ph
CJ
ai
Q
H
84
DEVELOP SECONDARY IMPACT MULTIPLIERS
Step E:8
PURPOSE:
Select industries whose multipliers will be derived by RIMS and instruc-
tions for ordering RIMS data.
DATA REQUIREMENTS:
RIMS industry classification chart (Exhibit E:8-l); original list of
waterborne commerce related firms including the relevant SIC codes for
each firm. Canadian ports have nothing completely comparable to RIMS so
their alternatives are to obtain local or regional input/output studies
(e.g./ for Vancouver, British Columbia — • An Interindustry Study of the
Metropolitan Vancouver Economy by H. Craig Davis, School of Commerce and
Regional Planning, University of British Columbia, 1972) or, in the case
of large ports in the principal metropolitan area of a province, to use
the interprovincial input/output model of Statistics Canada .
DISCUSSION:
If the RIMS methodology is adopted it is important that the multipliers
be ordered in advance since a six-week turnaround time should be
expected. The cost was approximately $1,000 as of April 1979. Specific
local or regional Canadian input/output studies can be located, if they
exist, by contacting local community planning boards, the local office of
the Ministry of Economic Development, and/or local college or university
economics departments. The interprovincial input/output model and a dis-
cussion of its use can be obtained from the structural Analysis Division
of Statistics Canada in Ottawa.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
The waterborne commerce related industries located in the region under
study should be associated with RIMS industry classifications (Exhibit
E:8-l) to determine the industry-specific multipliers that are needed.
The $1,000 purchase price allows for the derivation of 50 multipliers at
no additional charge. A sample listing of waterborne commerce related
industries with attached RIMS code is included as Exhibit E:8-2.
Further information concerning the RIMS methodology can be obtained by
contacting Joseph Cartwright (202-523-0594). To write for RIMS informa-
tion or to order a series of multipliers for a particular region send to:
85
Joseph Cartwright
BE - 61
Bureau of Economic Analysis
Department of Commerce
Washington, D.C. 20230
Requirements for a special set of multipliers to be formulated include:
1. A check or money order for $1,000.
2. A list of the counties to be included in the region;
the counties must be contiguous.
3. A list of the industries for which multipliers are
to be determined.
USE OF RESULTS:
The RIMS multipliers will be used in Steps F:3, F:4, and F:5 to determine
secondary and total impacts of waterborne commerce activity. The impact
measures will include gross output, income, and employment.
86
CO
w
(Q u
W
r^
r*.
r—t
. — 1
M
n
•
•
CO
LO
4-1
4-1
o
VT
a
Cl
I-H
I-H
A
^
ft
p
t_i
«
M
f*
r~-
vD
^O
r~.
r^r^r^r~-r~~r-~r-r^
r~^
i~~ r--
o
CO
»n
Cu •— 1
CUr
H Cu
Cu
P.
P.PP.P.P.PC.CU
P
p p
uo
^ LO r
*
*
MMf%«k*t*A«
»
* *
at co
iJ 3
r— 1
CM iH
m vd
in V4D m
un
LO
Lommmmmmm
m
m m
•— 1 •> •>
r-l
•— 1
rH
—i
r—l
l-H •— 1 • 1 l— 1 ■ li li IrH
^H
rH i-H
CO CO
* CTi
.— 1 «00
•
•
rH C
cu cu
OS u
CO O
•> r— 1 i— 1 *
•U Cu
4-1
X 4-1
4-1
4-1
4J4-I4-14-14J.U4J4J
4-J
4-1 4-1
t— 4
t— 1 I-H 1— 1
i— i
a
1
a
Cu
a
1
PP-PP.CuP.P-Cu
p
P P
1 1 1
1 1
1 1 00
1
i
i
>~. i
i
i
1
1
1
1 1 1 1
1
1 c
i
rH 1
i
1
I I 1 1 1 co I
ft
1 co in
t-H 1
Sn 1
■H 1
i
-0 1
1 1 1 1 t C 1 1
60
1 cO >■>
CO 1
rH 1
B 1
I
1
1 1 1 1 1 O 1 1
c
1 00 u
U 1
•H 1
CO 1
I
co I
1 1 1 1 1 1-1 1 1
I co
•H
1 H
CU 1
B I
Uh 1
i
C 1
111114-111
1 60
cu
c
1 rH Cfl
C 1
CO 1
1 CU
i
O 1
II 1 1 CO 1
1 C
,— |
•H
1 co 3
•H 1
4-1 1
r4 1
1 CO
i
•H 1
I 1 co 1 i 4-i cn
1 «H
4J
E
I 1-4 cr
E 1
1
3 1
1 -H
i
4-1 1
1 1 60 1 1 CO 4-1 CO
cn
TJ
•H
1 3
CU 1
O 1
C 1 r4
i
CO 1
1 1 C 1 1 C 60
60
co i— i
4J
CO
i 4-> -a
U 1
tH 1
M-l 1
CU 1 1
i
U 1
1 1 i-l 1 CU CO C
C
60 -H
cu
1 co
OJ 1
60 1
1 1
•X3 1 rC
i
cu I
1 *3 CO 1 CJ U i-l
•H
C 3
*o
JH
1 C 60
N 1
C 1
O 1
r4 | 60
i
4-1 1
CO 1 rH 00 1 iH 3 13
-a
•H Xi
c
o
1 c
•H 1
•H.
& 1
CO 1 -H
i
rH 1
rH I -H C 1 > CO rH
rH
T>
1 u3 iH
^H 1
to e
4-1 1
60 1 £.
I
CO 1
CU 1 3 -H 1 U 4-J -H
•rl
rH £
H
c
•H 1
H
i
1
■U XI "O 1 0) CO 3
3
•H iH
Vj
«
1 6 -H
4-1 1
r-l CO
rH 1
r-l 1 H
i
rH 1
O CO rH CO CU rO
^
3 CO
cu
4-1
M
i 3 e
l-l 1
CO U-l
CO 1
CO 1 CO
i
CO 1
E a) t-a iH cn >h
XI "4H
,n
CU
01
1 CU
CU 1
•H C
•H 1
•H 1 -H
i
1-1 1
•H CO 3 0J <■£ CO
C
c
E
3
E
P
rH >>
U-) I
4J O
4-1 1
4-i 4-1
4-1 1
u3 1h iH XI cn <-3 3
T-i O
p
60 O CO
c c
C 1
C CO c
in
c
O w 3 CO O
•H
CO C
C
co
o
3 Vj rH
io 1
CU
CU 1
01 4J 01
4-1
cu cn
C04-I4JO1OO1C0T-I
4H
4-1
3
o
•H 4-) CJ
-o •>
T3
■O CO
c
-a c
t-A -H cn CJX 600) 60
crj
•H 1h
)H
O
C cu
^H
•H 60
•H 60
•H 0) -H
CU
•H O
0) E 3 -H Ol CO Sh -H
CJ
P CU
Vj
4-1
•H P ofl
CO 60
CO C
CO C
CO E CO
B
cn ■H
JJlHTJMHiHlHOrH
3
CO X
4J
h
Pu
6
CJ C
CU -H
CU -H
CU 4-1 CU
4-1
0) 4-1
OOC^hcOcOJHCU
TJ
O 4-1
CO
CO
CU
CU
cu cu
•H -H
l-l CO
r4 CO
r4 (H V-l
rJ
H -H
rC r a-HOr*60C0r4
O
X o
c
o
3
<4-l
CJ
Hfl C
B c
e
3
3
CO
CO
T3
T3
C
X
CO 3 O
CU -H
o
& o
S o
3 Cu ^
Cu
3 -3
3S3SSS33
2
3 3
c
o
0)
O M 4J
X B
■H
CU X.
0) rC
cu cO cu
RJ
0) CO
OIOIOICUOIOIOIO)
a
0J 01
4J
co
M
z
CJ CJ C/3
CJ
4-1
3
U
4-1
2
52
rS rS
r3
ZSZZZZrSZ
z
Z rS
o
•H
*4-l
CM
O O O
o
CO
vr
m vo
t*<
oocr>rHCMco
•H
O
o o o
o
CO
o
o
o o
O
OOrHrHrHrHi— li— 1
• — i
rH i-H
co
VO
r-~ oo cn
o
c
m
in
m m
m
minminmminLn
LT,
in in
CO
O
o o o
i-H
o
■ — i
f—i
r—i i— 1
. — i
i — IrHi — li — IrH. — li — li — I
• — 1
—h . — i
- 1
u
.
cj
o o
- o o
* *
l-i
O
CO
CJ 0)
i— I . •
r- oo
•—>
r— 1
— i o
, — i
1—14-14-1
i — i
r-l 4J 4-1
■ — i
CO o O o
O
O
o
o
O Cu Cu
o
O Cu Cu
o
o
c
m -a
CO O
CJ
4_)
JJ
• 4-1
4J (X
4-J
4-1
4-1
" vjD CO CTN
rH CO CM CM
o
_-
P. CM CL CN
Cu CM
a <
N Cu H — *
rM Cu CN
CU rH rH CM
P, CM CO o r» r~-
^ H
^3
CU CO
o o
*■ o
<
O O r-i
O O O r-4 O
J O O CJ
M
4-1 3
03 CO
H C
cu cu
pi O
CM
. CO •
» CO
C^ CTn
CM
o
. CO •
• CM
O
. CO •
.
CM
. -.
a.
. — i
P r-- O r-~ p O
o o
o
o
o
1
o
O Cu
o
O Cu
1 1
c
O O
1
1
1
1
! 1
1 1
1
>^ 1
^
1
co
1 U 1
1 CJ
1
CO 1
Cu 1
1 01 1
1 o
1
TJ 1
O 1
1 rC 1
60 1
CO
1 4-1
1
01 1
U 1
r^ 1
co I
C 1
cu
•H
I co
1
CU 1
a
rW |
CO -H 1
iH 1
I cu
1
co I
CU 1
4-1 UH 1
C 1
cu
1— 1
CU
I >
1 -H
1
1
CO
CJ
cn I
U 1
CJ 1
3 u3 I
■H 1
E
4-1
4-1
x
CO
•H
UH
1 rH
1 CJ
1
1
1
1
CO 1
CO 1
U 1
60 1
co i
•H 1
E
3 1
C 1
O 1
TJ 1
O ^ 1
U U 1
P 4-1 1
CO 1
cu I
i- I
c
CO
c
CO
co
4-1
CJ
1 CO
1 -H
e
1
1
1
^
en
4J
U CO
CU 1
cn i
CO 1
>, CU 1
Sh U 1
O 1
>-, 60
3
1
CO 1
D
CO Pu
3 1
0) O 1
o c
u
cu
T3
u3
1
C 1
c
60 O
O 1
X Uh 1
rH -H
>,
o
CO
1
•H 1
3 U
r= 1
cn I
i— 1 C
3
c
(-1
4-1
U
P
60 CO
60 rH
1
1
CO 1
U 1
01
CU
cn o
C 1
CU 1
iH « 1
<4H rH |
(0 *H
O E
1h
CO
CU CO
1
60 1
u
60
CU 1
CO 1
CU
u
e
u
e
en
T3 1
4-1
co e
CU t4
u
60 CO
3 CO
1h 0>
OJ In
>~,
o
CO
C
4-1
01
^5
rH tn
4-J
>^ 4-1 CU
Uh O
Id
cm
CM
>-> CO
CJ
cu o
X CO
•> o
|h rH CJ
4J
M
3
c
U-l CJ
cn
CO CU
4J 3
4J 3 -H
l3 In
CO
^
>s
4J •>
-a
o
a
4-1
4-1 rd
cn -a
cn cj >
0)
3
CU
>h
^H 4-1
o
4-1
T3 CO
•H
0)
cu o
CU H h
C P
u
iH
3 co
u
4-1
o x>
3
60 rH
in 1h
U U 0)
C P
c
H
3
CO
O CU
Cu
O
o o
l-i
0) i-l
O P.
o oo cn
u o
4J
Q
P- S
CJ
P* H
fo
> o
tu
u- <
rH CJ
t— 1
3
o
CM CO
CM CO
.
(a
M
H
J-J
B
to
3
w
-a
c
H
to
g
BU
o
CO
u
qj
H
13
CO
o
u
(1)
CO
4-J
3
(t)
'Si
rH
C
.
M
4-1
CO
3
-a
c
1-4
o
(0
U CD
i— i -a
C/j o
a
a
W to
H 3
< to
hJ C
W CD
OS CJ
0)
rH
4-'
•H
T3
C
03
U
QJ
,0.
E
3
c
>^
1-1
4-1
CD
3
•V
G
a,
a
VO
4-J
Cu
Cu
in
4-J
vD i— i
• 4J
■u O-
CO
CO
4-J
Cu
4-1
Cu
Cu
4-1 4J
a cu
Cu
vo r^
O CM
CM CM
CM
ON
ON
CO
a.
en
CM
o
X
-i
•4) rH u3 I ^3 -H ><3
•H CJ
CO CD
I I
co co
CO
S -3
00 .-I
•H
O
U U £
CO
14-4 M-l I4_l U-4
o o o
1-4 c
•h ai
co B
u u
■H -H
CO CO
a a a a
1-1 4-J
•H -H
CO iH
Cu i-l
CD a
M CO
lt-4
to
CD C
CO CJ i-l
H C T3
CO
C
QJ
U C 4-> c c
CO i-l cfl iH -H
-M CO > co CO
g g g
in
cfl
00 CO
■U J2
C C
ro
CO CO CO
00
G
•H
U
3
4J
O
Cti
M-l
3
C
CO
g
to h <
on >-*. --
■&
4J
4J
-U
4-1
4-J
4J
4-1
4J
4J
4J
4-1
4-1
4-J
4-J
4J
4J
4-J
4-)
4-J
4-1
4-1
4J
4-1
a
Cu
Cu
Cu
a
Cu
a
a,
Cu
Cu
Cu
Cu
Cu
Cu
Cu
Cu
Cu
Cu
Cu
Cu
Cu
Cu
Cu
n
,..
„
^
„
„
„
•,
»
„
„
00
00
,.
r-~
«
r^ •>
r^ »>
.
«
„
r,
„
„
„
„
>-D
vD
vD
^
vD
\D
v£5
\D
vO
LO
u-l
CO
CO
UO
i— i
LP,
i— i UO
rH m
uO
LTi
uO
\jD
^D
VO
mD
vjD
4-1
4J
4-1
4-J
4-1
4-1
4-J
4-1
4-J
4-J
4J
4-J
4J
J-J
Cu
JH
Cu 4J
Cu J_i
JJ
4J
4-1
4-1
4-J
4-J
4-1
4J
ft
Cu
Cu
Cu
Cu
Cu
Cu
a
Cu
Cu
Cu
Cu
a
a
a
CU
a
a
Cu
a
Cu
Cu
Cu
a
a
1
co
1
1
1
1
i
i
QJ
1
1
CD
1
1
i
CJ
^3
1
>N
•H
1
1
•H
4-J
4-1
1
rH
>
CD
CO
•H
e
•H
1
co
Cfl
!-i
G
-o
CJ
rH
3
^H
CO
1
CD
•H
CJ
o
CO
■H
•H
QJ
•H
CJ
1
CO
4-1
•H
JJ
CO
-C
o
i-i
4-J
rH
O
•H
1
oo
c
4J
G
U
Cu
i-l
J-J
3
O
Cfl
4J
CO
c
QJ
•H
CD
CJ
S
£
CJ
rH
CJ
IH
U-l
■H
CO
aj
•H
CO
e
rH
TJ
X
u
JH
rH
■H
QJ
CO
4J
r-4
CO
QJ
•H
TO
QJ
a
•H
•H
4-J
CO
CO
QJ
CO
rH
CO
CJ
-C
•H
CJ
•H
4-J
rH
•H
c
o
CJ
CO
O
tH
U-l
4-J
V-i
QJ
00
Cu
Cu
U
•H
4J
•H
•H
4-J
o
rH
CO
CD
TO
CO
4-1
CO
•H
^-1
3
•H
•H
to
CJ
Uh
U
y-i
tH
U-l
U-l
U-l
U-4
U-j
U-l
i-i
>4H
•H
QJ
r-t
•H
rO
rH
4-J
QJ
>
O
O
O
o
o
O
O
O
co
.-1
c
•H
CJ
•H
CO
•H
CO
00
•N
CO
a>
>,
•H
■H
u
to
CO
rH
CJ
l-i
J-J
-a
c
iH
!h
1-4
U
U
CJ
1-1
1-1
l-J
S-i
rH
4-J
'J
^
CO
CJ
U-l
CO
CO
to
o
•H
•H
•H
•H
•H
•H
•H
•H
•H
•H
CO
•H
•H
OJ
•H
CO
QJ
U-l
•H
•H
M-l
rH
rH
rH
•4)
TJ
Cfl
CO
CO
CO
CO
CO
4-J
CO
CO
CJ
CO
CO
4-1
rH
M-l
Cu
4-J
4-J
4-J
rH
Cu
•H
rH
P-
Cu
OO
a
Cu
Cu
•H
Cu
Cu
•H
Cu
Cu
•I-l
•H
>•.
•H
•H
c
CJ
QJ
X
CJ
c
•H
0)
QJ
c
CJ
QJ
QJ
rH
CJJ
0.1
4-1
CJ
QJ
o3
4-J
>,
CU rH
^H
CO
0)
o
3
CU
cO
o
3
!H
1-J
•H
u
i-J
i-l
•H
Vj
1-J
•H
1-1
1-4
3
4-1
Cu
•H
c
T3
•H
U-l
•H
J3
X)
CJ
rH
CJ
cn
•H
E
Cu
CJ
CO
•H
>
to
CO
4-1
C
u3
^3
rH
"3
1-3
^3
CO
-3
^
1-1
^3
K3
c
-a
CJ
r-l
3
3
CO
M
to
CO
V-i
CO
CO
>,
cO
O
•H
rH
U-l
CJ
o
cfl
•H
■H
QJ
CO
U-i
4-1
>.
cu
CJ
00
00
)-i
>
CO
c
QJ
QJ
3
QJ
CO
QJ
to
QJ
QJ
OJ
CO
CJ
to
QJ
-C
o
Vu
J-J
-H
CO
i-l
to
rd
>-i
CJ
CJ
CJ
J2
U
•H
CJ
CJ
O
-c
a
CJ
Uj
CJ
CJ
CJ
IS)
Cu
S-i
4-J
3
O
Vv
U
r-l
3
-3
<4)
4-J
CD
•H
s
C
C
c
4-J
C
•H
C
Cu
C
c
C
•H
C
QJ
cu
^-1
CJ
i-i
QJ
CJ
CO
X
B
6
•H
CO
4-J
CD
CO
CO
E
CO
G
<0
4-J
CO
CO
CO
CO
>*
CO
4J
CO
C
^H
■H
OJ
CO
4-1
4J
3
CJ
CO
!-i
i-i
.H
rH
rH
c
•H
C
c
c
1-4
C
CJ
C
•H
C
S-i
C
C
4-J
C
•rl
C
■H
CJ
CD
.— 1
co
QJ
CO
CJ
O
•H
CO
CO
•H
•H
•H
o
.H
CD
QJ
CO
QJ
-a
CJ
rH
CJ
co
CU
CJ
•H
QJ
rH
QJ
rH
4_l
U
CJ
co
a.
3
LO
rH
jr
M-l
U-t
O
o
e
CJ
•H
u
4J
4-1
i^j
H
•H
4J
•H
J-J
CJ
4-J
4-J
rH
J-J
•rH
4J
CJ
CJ
OJ
C
c
c
C
to
c
CJ
c
rH
c
C
•H
C
CJ
c
Cu
3
3
5
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
5
CO
^:
•H
•H
o
•H
QJ
•H
<0
•H
CD
•H
-H
4-1
•H
CO
■H
•H
CJ
0)
CJ
CD
QJ
01
CJ
CJ
CD
CD
CJ
QJ
CJ
CJ
CD
M-l
4-J
CO
CO
c
CO
in
CO
U-l
CO
4-J
CO
CJ
3
CO
U-l
CO
Cu
z
z
z;
!S
X
Z
■z
Z
ii
ii
2
2
^3
Pi
Z
o
g
g
g
g
2
g
2
g
S
_
C-J.
ro
»-
o
. — 1
CM
CO
-o
\D
^D
>£>
\D
vO
vjD
vO
r-
r^
r-~
r»
r^«
I--*
)>-
r^
r-«
88
U
O
CO
u
QJ
1— 1
X
GO
O
CJ
x
qj
CO
4-1
D
03
co
rH
C
X
C
cd
M
m
S
3
C
P-.
w
4J
CO
3
X
C
H
M
co
CJ
CU
1— 1
x
CO
o
u
X
CU
CO
4-1
3
eg
CO
H
C
0)
cu
Pi CJ
X
c
co
S-i
0)
e
3
c
u
u
CO
3
•3
C
m
CN
CN
x
CM
— 1
\o
CN
CM
Csl
CN
CN
.— I .-H t-H rH^OH-HNtnCT>CTNONCT\C^CTNCTiCTNCT\CTvCTiaNC^
CMCNCMCMCMCNCMCMCMCMCMCMCNCMCMCMCMCM
ON
m
CN
u
•H
X>
co
00 HH
C
•H ^
V-l CO
-3 rH
CU
V4
00
c
•H
o
E
CO
^3
■H
e
CJ
00 -H
C r4
■H ,£)
E co
E 4-1
CU
■uj a
co cu
00
CO c
r4 -H
co 3
00 CU
•H X
C_) cj
o
o 3
CJ X
CO CO
J3 O
O w
H P3
>
o jr
I
I
I
CO
M
a
o
CO
ex
cu
o
co X
H CU
E >»
U CU
•H -H
J-4 CO
XJ o
CO jl
>4-l
CO
3 -
o c
r4 CU
U E
cfl O
Z 3
I CO CO
I rH iH
E
CJ M
• cfl
CU CU
• 3
c u
O
. 00
o C
• -H
QJ X.
• CO
C -H
c
U
>H -H CO M-i CU
cO E
CU
3 cj
rH u3 C CO
QJ H
4J X J3
5^ 3
1-1 O
CU
•H 4-J
CO -H
O C
•H
E
iH
00 rH
C -H
•H E
4-1 4J 4-1 C
•H tH -H W
C C C co
t^ ^ ^ ?"
•H 13
4-) CO
CO CO
X TO
O O
o o
00 00
I
00
c
•H
•H
U-l CU
4-1
P^ CO
U CO
cu 3
4-)
co cu
rH i-H
O -H
x: 4J
a x
3 cu
4-1
X
CO cu
oo co
C CO
H CU
rj cj
■o o
CO W
I
•a
cu
N
•H
u
cu
,c
43
3
u
o cj
u
- ,0
CO CO
cj cm
•H
r4 c«
Cfl T3
y-i s-i
o
00
c
•H
e
o
CJ
i
c3
P-i PM
00
C CU
•H 00
H CO
3 XI
O M
CJ O
CO CJ
cu
CO •
cu C
•H
w «
CU CO
a. oo
co c
CO
I I
I I
I
CO
oo co
C QJ
•H -H
E H
E cu
•H TD
oo
>-3
■H
c
3
•H <4-4
CO QJ
CO
O
3
U EC H O
o
CO 3
00 TJ
cfl O
a.
cu
i— i co
•H CO
w >
X c
QJ cfl
o
u
QJ E
U QJ
CO
ex qj
a c
CO -H
j=
CJ
cfl
E
co <-a
<^j cu
>
00 -H -H
C 4JH
•H O <4-i
4-1 E 4-1
CO O -rH
cu 4-i x:
H 3 U
Pi < CO
CJ
3
O
U
a.
cu
rH
•H
■U
CU
oc
c
•h
OC
0£:
o
CO
CX CO
E >-
cfl o
CJ 4J
u
00 cfl
cn co a>
CMCNCNCMCNCNCMCMCNCNCOC^cncncOrOrncO
CNCMCMCMCMCMCMCMCMCNCMCMCMCMCMCMCMCN
M
OC
o
.J
vo^cvim
CO CO
•r-t 4-1
CJ -H
QJ 3
CX U
CO >4-l
T3 t3
QJ QJ
C C
C C
CO CO
CJ CJ
I
I
CO
oo
c
•H
co
co ,n
QJ co
J-i -H
X) "4-4
co x) xi
4-1 CO QJ
CJ r-4 00
3 cfl cfl
X CO ^
O CJ
s-i <^j ca
a ex
i i
I i
CO rH
4J 3
CJ o
3 Uh
X
O ^)
H
co cx co
CU rH
cO
E
_Q rH
CO -H
*-> E
CU
00 c
CU
>
X
o
o
co C
QJ QJ
CJ N
3 O
CO r4
X CO "4H
QJ
4J ~ U
CO CO o
U CU
X rH JC
>» j^i co
£ a m
QJ -H U
Q d, (b
cfl O
^3 00
CO
»-4 X
CU QJ
x: qj
4-1 UH
o
X
<^J QJ
HI
X
CU
cfl
a
U QJ i
CO 00 U i
cx c ex
CU 'rH
u
3
x
o
)-J
D-
X
CJ
^3
X
CU
X
c
CJ QJ
CO
QJ CU
u
QJ
CJ Di P3
CJ
3
x
o
u
cx
cfl
O
U
O
CJ
u
3
X
O
l-l
a.
>,
(-4
QJ ^3
C
O QJ
•H 4-1
4-1 Cfl
CJ rH
CU o
Mh CJ
C O
O
CO
E r4
3 O
00 D
CT
00 -r4
C rH
CO ^
4J X
•H 3
U CO CO
•H U ^
CX J3
CO
c
•H
r4
>% CX X
X
c
Cfl
rQ
CU
CJ 4J
X Uh
0) o
CO
c« r4 X
O QJ
- 3 C
>. cr c
X -H Cfl
C rH CJ
CO
rJ X <•«
J3 CU
rH X
•> rH CU
3 « u u u u
CO -H
QJ 4-1
C CO
•H -H
3 Q
cu
c
CO
cx
CO
<& co
rH
CO rH
4-1 -H
cj E
cfl
H rH
4-1 -H
X o
QJ
X
00 QJ
C QJ
•H CO
M C
o o
> 4-1
Cfl 4-1
rH O
tu cj
• CO
CJ rH
• -H
CU o
C «3
- CO
CO 4-1
OC
c
cu
D
c
•H
r4
rfl
E
^3
C X
CO co
CU 4-1 cfl
X cu E
>> 00 -H
O QJ C
CO > <
O QJ
O CJ
QJ CJ -H
CU
<4H >
>-i
4J
M
3
*3
c
u
o
en
u cu
M T)
CO O
CJ
0) CO
•u 3
3 CO
■H C
0) QJ
Pi u
-a
c
3
J-j
E
3
C
>i
J-j
4-1
to
3
•3
C
HHHfjHro-HH[No\Hn<)-Hrgroc^oo
NNCNNNNCSNNNrSCNlCNNCNlOJNNNfMCSNCNrNNfslNNNCNCvlCSICNlNnrO
WD
C
rl
x:
co co
00
C
00 -H
C 4-1
•H C
x -h
CO u
-h c
CO t-l
U CO
3 3 X
ex -h
P. o
CO -H
3 ^< o o co oo s
QJ QJ "
3 l-i
a an
M ^
■h a ^
rH
X 1) CO
Sum
a to aj
h c
a. «h
(0
3
X
00
C T3
H rH
> O
0) CO 14-1
CJ l-i -H
00 CO
C 3
o
a)
c
co
<-3
O O -H C CO
I
I
CO
M
0)
c
•H
OCX
C
•H 14-1
X CO
CO QJ
•rl rH
rH OJ
X CO
3 O
3- O
rH
J-i "3
CO
CJ CO
M
00 o
C O
•H X
4-> Jsi
QJ 3
QJ CO
S-J rH
00 00
c c
QJ
w
QJ
a
pa h
i
i
i
i
00
C co
•H C
D, -H
>% CO
4-1 QJ
o u
QJ
Q)
4-1 CO
co H
CO
u3 >H
00 M
C 00 QJ
•H C 4J
> "H CO
to a e
J-J >,
oo 4.1 co
c o o
0) U -rl
O 4-1 4J
4-1 CJ CO
O QJ CO
X rH rH
a, w pl,
CO
T3
o
o
CO 00
4-1
c c
QJ O
00 -H
J-l 4-1
c
OJ
QJ CO 00
tfl
QJ
x 3
4-1 r-t
C H
>. QJ
CO C_>
OJ
>
■rl
J-l
CJ
CO
CO
OJ OJ
o3 £ CJ
CO CO
Oj iH U-l
CO rH U
O O 3
to p., co
>-i co
QJ
X <•<->
4J
o
CO
4-1
cj
3
•a co
CO O rH
C ^ CO
o a, cj
H iH
4JT) E
CO QJ QJ
J-J -H X
CO rH CJ
QJ CO T)
u
a, <&
CO
o
o
3 -H
4J CO r-\
QJ 4J <-3 -H
H C 4-1
•rl 'H 6 In
O CO 3 QJ
HPLOh
C
O
CO
00 CJ
C -H
•rl e
X Q)
•H X!
E O
CO CO
U U
Q) 3
N 4J
•H rH
rH 3
•H 3
4-1 -rl
M (H
QJ 00
PH <
co
CO QJ
C o
M CO
00 X
c
•H C
4-1 O
C X
CO
c
o
•H
4J
CO
u
CO
a
-i
WClUUQ
co co
.X 00
o c
O —I
r-\ 4-1
4-1 CO
o
<-3 o
CO Lfl
QJ
J-i CO
3 4J
4J ^-i
X QJ
•H CM
e
4-1
00 rH
C co
•rl J=
> Cu
CO CO
p-l <
u
CO QJ
OJ XI
•H 3
H Pi
HHHMH(OHHNO\HrO>fHNnstH CN' CO •JHHHNCTlrlNrOlflCTli-IHNHH
rtNncot>J-crJvDiniOiOinifliAiniOiniOi/liArN\OvD>DiOiCiDvDvO\OvD\OvO
CS|CN1CSICSIC^CN1CNCS1C\ICNCNCNCNJCS|C\1CNJCSCNCNCNCNCN<>JCNICNCNC>JCN
ON
oo
CM
00
CN
CJ
CO
U
QJ
C OO 0)
QJ C •
00 -H C
>-!
» o -
co o co
rH rH rH
rH UH rH
•rl -H
g ta E
OO C CO
e o U5
•H
C
CO
CO 4-1
C CJ
Q) 3
P. g TJ
•n o
-3 T3
CO "3
t-i O
rH O
•H 3
Vj
H S-i
CO O
rl 3
3 U QJ rH
CO co Q, tH
to s to 2
•3
O
•3 O
o 3
o
^> QJ
rH 4-1
Cu co
a
u
U J3
QJ CO
QJ 14-1
3 QJ
QJ S-,
> 0-
CD
X
o
J3
QJ
c
oo
c «•
■H CO
> 4J
U CJ
QJ 3
CO *T3
QJ O
J-l J-4
a a.
"3 TJ
o o
o o
3 S
QJ
J-J
3
CO 4-1
J-l -H
QJ C
3 >-i
•H 3
CO M-4
-a
r4
CO
O
XI
J-i
QJ T3
a. o
3 o
P- 3
0)
J-l
3
4-1
•H
c
J-l QJ
3 Sh
U-i 3
4-1
-O -H
rH 3
O J-i
J= 3
OJ cm
co
3 X)
O rH
X! O
x:
•3 QJ
QJ CO
J-4 3
QJ O
4J X
CO
rH rH
O 3
X 4-1
a. qj
33 S
o
QJ
CO •
00 3
3
•rl
J-i QJ
CL J-J
CO 3
-a 4->
i^3
W
QJ "3
CO rH
CO O
QJ X
J-i QJ
4-1 CO
4-1 3
3 O
2 X
QJ J-l
J-i 3
3 4J
4J -H
•H 3
3 J-i
J-i 3
3 cm
CM
OJ
Q) CJ
CJ vH
•rl IM
CM CM
CM O
O
CO
CO QJ
QJ QJ J-i
M J-l 3 CO
3 3 4-1 QJ
4-1 4-1 X T3
•H X -rl 3
3 vH «H X-
U <4H CO
3
CM c3
00 CO
3 3
•rl O
TJ -H
t«3
co
3 co
O "3
•H 3
J-i
3 I
O. I
3
a
i
i
i
oo I
3 I
•rl I
•3 I
3
X
-3 3
O 4-1
O 3
3 £
•rl 4J X>
4-1 J-l
Jj 3 3
3 3. CO
a. -h
rH 4-1
TJ 3 QJ
X O 4-1 C
3 O QJ 3
p- S s >
a i
3
CJ CO
X rH
QJ r-\
to
00
3
•H
N
3
rH
oo
oo
C
CO
00
CO
X
CO
TJ
o
o
oo
-3 Ou
t-i rH
rH CO rH
3 r-< <-i
•H rH -H
CJ H g
m e
QJ J-i
§a qj
r-i
O 3
U Pi
J-i
03
O
-O
M
QJ
3- CL
3 3
P- Ph
3 CO
O 3
cj a.
o
J-l rH
QJ 3
a >
3 3
Pl, PJ
3 3
o a.
x
•o
i^J QJ
•3
J-l rH
Q) O
a E
3
M E
CO 4J
4-1 CJ -3
» OJ
QJ 3. 4-) T3 J-i 4J C
3 3 3 3 J-i -H
•> 3. U CO 4J OJ "3
CO rH CO -H > rH
00 rH QJ QJ 3 3 -rl
3 3 -M J-i 3 O 3
«30ftcflUrtH
I
I
I
I
I
3 I
1-1 I
3 I
3 I
00 I
J-i I
O I
I
<# I
I
o I
■rl I
3 I
3 I
00 I
J-< I
O I
C I
•n i
<-\ co
CO i-t
•H 3
J-i 3
4J -H
co E
3 QJ
■3 X
3 U
H^Dc^-^N(OHCj^OHN^}lOC^-JlOlO^(^-JH
c\iNNnnno>^CMrtrtrtMCMCNco<3'OMNro>jjvTvj'>j^jn
M (-1
tc 4J
t>< C/J
W 3
X)
C
OO
rH
Pi
J-i
o
en
u cd
M XI
CO O
u
T3
CD CO
4J 3
co cn
rH £
CD ID
Pi CJ
XI
c
CO
J-l J-i
O CD
M
4J C
CD
CJ -H
X>
co E
£
J-4
3
HH CJ
C
CD -H
Jh .H
>,
rH
u
>, CO
■w
nJ -u
en
i-l CD
3
o e
T)
c c
e
o o
M
3 S
J-4
o
en
U (D
l-l X
cn o
CJ
X
cd in
J-i 3
co en
-H C
CD CD
Pi CJ
X)
c
CO
u
CD
e
3
c
>n
4J
en
3
x
c
On
CO
CM
r-» cnNCimvONH(sn>jWHHN
on oi h h r- i.-irHcococococo-d-iiou'i m
cn cmcococococococococococococo co
co cococococncocnconcirococon co
SHMc^i-iNONHHCiincri-HN
irivO^OcDONONON<— I CN CN CN CM CO CO
cncicincnnn>3jJJ
l-l
01
ex
3,
CD O
CX o
3 'H a
CJ CD
CD CD
W C/0
o
u
en
3
e o
3 ^
c J-i
•H CD
O 6 Mh
£ 3 £
rl H O
N CO C
>n >n -^ ^
J-i !-i U U
4-1 00
CD C
e -h
3
en co
3 ^
O X
U
U <-3
CD
c
00
c
CO (0 CO
E g E
P j-i
PL, P-l Ph P-l
00
C i
3
cfl
3 H
CO X
U
X 4-3
<^> 00
E
00 -H
E rH
J-i en
3
e o
3 J-i
C J-i
•H CD
E 4h
3 C
rH O
<-* z
oo
£
•H
3
CO
J-i
X
0)
J-i
I
eo
CO
C
•H
4-1
cn •
CO CJ
CJ •
CD
r-- on
ON ON
CM CM
CO CO
CM CO LO NO P^ i— I CN CO
00 CJ
£ en 3
ri CCO
00 c o
J-I -H J-I
O 00 (X
M J-I
O rH
3
O
M
J-i
en a)
cn
TO
1-4
•JJ
< CO Z M
CD 4-1
cd cn cd
3 B
o
J-I >
J-I J-I
CD CO
c «w e
O £ -H
J-i O J-i
2 P-i
u
CD en
• CD
C *o
CO
« i— l
en x>
tH
O 3
O CO
4J cn
CD i-3
00
X
CD
J-i ^
CD
rH X
4-1 C
3 ca
i
cn
X
G
CO
a:
er
co
U
CD ^J
J-l
ca en
• 3 co
o c
• >, -H
CD J-i 4J
• CO 4J
C 4-i -H
•H <4-l
« c
CD CO OO
j-i en e
CO -H
3 rH X>
•3 co E
J-I
CO CJ
c
^ ,
e
a
•H
3
a*
CD CJ
•H
00 J-i
E 4J
•H CJ
4-1 CD
CO i—l
CD 01
t— ICMON>— ICMONi— I i— ICOlOONi— ICMCO .—l
VO'XJvOONONON'— ICMCMCMCMCOCOCO -3"
COCOCOCOCOCO ONONON
OOOairlHHHrtHHHHHNNNNNNNCMNNNCMNNMNCMNNNCMN
COCOCOCMCOCOCOCOCOCOCOCOCOCOCOCOCOCOCOCOCOCOCOCOCOCOCOCOCOCOCOCO"'
vC
CO CO CO CO
1
1
1
1
1
I
I
i
Cfl
4-1
CJ
3
TJ
1
1
1
1
1
CJ
O
•
1
•
cn
J-l
CJ
1
OJ
cn
•H
OJ
1
"
TD
0)
oo
rH
1
c
■— i
cn
>H
X
1
Cfl
O
4-1
C
00
•H
CO
•H
C
rH
cn
01
1
4-1
J-i
CO
•H
c
cn
4-1
OJ
-
0)
cn
OJ
a
•
4-J
4-1
1
CJ
Cl r-l
JZ
•H
en
OJ
■— 1
Cfl
rH
c
4-J
ex
•
u
u
CO
1
3
CD
cn
4-1
E
en
>N
•H
4-1
3
0)
3
a
CJ
•
3
OJ
1
TJ
cn
J-i
■H
^H
0)
J-i
CO
CO
4-J
CJ
4-1
4^
cn
•
Jjd
01
X
-J
I
o
u
C
OJ
4-1
3
T3
•
rH
X
3
X)
01
CJ
•
c
K
4-1
1
J-
•H
■4
■H
XI
Jh
4-1
P-
O
u
CJ
J-l
-a
•H
o
rH
•
■H
c
01
J-l
C
1
a.
4-1
(4-1
OJ
•H
o
-
o
o
MH
TJ
c
co
c
-J
4-1
ex
c
U
en
oo
M
^
X
E
^J
oo
0)
<-^
o
)-
C
C4-J
CJ
X
-
01
— 1
o
j-i
CO
c
^3
01
CJ
X
■
CJ
CO
rH
cn
D-
00
o
•H
-
Cfl
u
0)
cn
en
~J
u
0)
i—l
■H
X
o
«£
en
J-l
c
cn
•H
J-l
<4H
OJ
c
I4H
OJ
t-i
cn
-3
4-J
a
E
4-J
4-1
co
X
ai
X;
a.
C
01
u
4-J
u
oo
OJ
M
H
3
•H
r^
>H
rJ
4-1
4-J
CJ
E
cn
o
c
o
. —
E
^3
X
•H
c
CO
10
CO
cn
CO
X
n
OJ
D
4-1
-3
r4
CD
X
CO
CO
CJ
CJ
.*
3
O
4-1
4-J
3
3
3
3
X
3
en
14H
■H
OJ
4-1
J^
OJ
XI
4-1
CO
c
CO
CJ
o
rH
E
C
3
0)
3
U
-a
O
CJ
cn
X
X
Cfl
O
3
M
3
OJ
C
^H
4-1
a
OJ
>
T3
CO
TJ
>H
J-l
a
rH
4-1
CJ
JJ
•H
C
H
-a
o
o
13
C
c
c
Jj
rH
J-i
o
>H
c
a
o
a
o
£
OJ
O
CO
-a
j-
rH
CJ
rH
X
OJ
Oj
o
rH
r.
XI
XJ
i«
Ih
u
—
00
C
-a
CD
CO
^H
CJ
CJ
a. ih
CO
1—1
o
4-1
f>>
4-1
CO
CO
r^
Q.
u
X
u
X
cx
CD
O
a
ex
C
T3
01
CO
E
1-1
(0
X
•H
00
JS
OC
C
X
CO
3
u
03
4-J
C
a.
X
J-i
o
-3
-
3
OJ
4-1
c
a
•rH
J-i
0)
H
1-1
o
14-1
u
0]
cn
J-l
•H
OJ
OJ
•H
D.
c
CD
Cfl
cn
E
CO
^H
01
J4
M
CO
en
J-i c
i en
CO
1-1
CJ
-
^3
CJ
Qj
3
3
3
CO
CO
>.
4H
4-1
E
o
>
c
ec
r— i
r^
•H
CI
i—l
^H
CD
4-1
OJ
-
CD t
iO-
c
u
4-1
•H
r-
4H
O
O
01
rH
u
OJ
OJ
1
E
4-1
—•
4-J
4J
CO
CO
CO
•H
OJ
o
_C
Cfl
3
en
o>
X c
3 E
o
X
cn
c
-«
E
U
OJ
01
OJ
Oj
1-.
J-l
>.
3
cn
X
Cfl
o*
J-i
Vj
^H
J-i
CJ
Jx
u
P
i-i
CD
en
w e
JD OJ
V,
4-J
Cfl
01
o
CO
^
3
1-4
U
OJ
CJ
4-1
CJ
CJ
X c
u cn
CO
1)
X
OJ
O
CJ
X
U)
4-1
ca
T3
O
O
D
CO c
iO E
u
CO
CO
E
•H
U
CO
(-i
4-J
4-J
c
J-l
4J
c
c
CO i
= ex
4-J
Id
X
X
B
c
OJ
CO
•H
CD
OJ
C
o
XI
O
cd :
3 O
CD
0)
i—i
CD
s-
CD
1— I
4H
•H
•H
■H
o
o
CD •'
-1 >,
3
X
!fl
C3
—
•*-4
a:
u.
s
P-
-J
I—l
Cj,
CO
(S
►J o
J 2
C-
X
O
CJ
03
CJ
CJ
Cfl
>
>
(X
Pu
c_
CJ
CJ
Pi -
J CJ
CJ
<
<
C
E
-?:
H(>0>r4r' >-> -ir-i-irtrtiHiHrtNNCNlCNCNCNCNNNCSClCNIcNNNNNNINICNCN 1 CM
c^rocococococococococococ^cococococococococococococococococococococ^coc^
91
CO
C
O
•H
4-1
CO
CJ
•H
t— t
14-1
1
•H
oo
Cfl
• ■
01
w
CO
rH
H
CJ
H
CQ
►.
H
M
s
4J
01
w
3
T)
C
H
C/1
s
M
O
U)
O CD
M 73
CO O
CJ
TJ
0) 05
4J 3
ca cn
rH C
CD QJ
PS CJ
0)
rH
4-1
■H
TJ
c
CO
U
CD
e
p
c
!*>
M
4J
05
3
T3
C
)->
O
cn
C_> 0)
I— I T3
C/1 O
CJ
TJ
qj en
4-> 3
CO 0)
H C
OJ QJ
OS o
-a
C
CO
>-i
>
t-i
4-1
cn
3
•a
c
o\ h n sj in \o rs
LO vO vD \D vO vO VD
in ia in i/i m ui iri
en en en n en m en
i
ONHNvoo>H(Ninioc>
\Or-»r~»r^r-.0000C»00c»
ininininmminmmin
enencnenencnenenenen
cjiHCMennNcn^
OHrtHMCSNM
in^DvDvDvCiflvOvD
enenenenenmencn
C\ ~H cm en -tf m vjO
cm en en en en en en
MO ^D VO O vD \D vO
en en en en en en en
OJ
c
■H
cj
co en
e u
o
>> en
u en
4J OJ
en u
3 a
t3 g
c o
•H CJ
en
oo
c
•H
M
CO
qj
X)
en
l-< c
CD CO
■a
•h cn
u cl rH
J) g H
a 3
C/j P4
c
I 00 OJ
c
4J c3
ej
w )h en
3 3 OJ
OJ CL OJ i— I
• e a co
C O >% ej
c_; H co
I I
cn i
aj \
C I
•H
X 4-1
CJ C
CO OJ
e e
a
00 -H
C 3
•h cr
en oj
•H
TJ ^
C r4
CO T3
X C
O 3
l-i CO
OJ -H
g
iH
O CO
•H -H
4-> CJ
CO in
g OJ
O g
J- 1 £
3 O
< CJ
t I
I
cn
a.
E
3
S- 00
OJ C
3 -H
t-i en
CJ 4J
• a
OJ QJ
• o
C X
« aj
c -a
o
•H <4>
4-1
CO 00
l-i c
OJ T-t
00 r-l
•H 3
U en
14-1 CO
OJ OJ
PS IS
X OJ
CJ C
CO -H
6 X
CJ
>. co
ii e
4-1
en cn
OJ rH
CJ r-l
•H OJ
> cj
u en
OJ T-I
CO S
I I
I I
I
cn i
4J I
C I
OJ I
£ I
3 I
U I
4-> I
cn i
C I
00 I
C I
•H I
I-i I
3 I
cn
co cn
aj i-i
e oj
• -H O
CJ U Ml
• 4-1 0)
OJ CJ C
• OJ CO
C H 3
CO -C TJ
i-i a c
CO CO *H
a s-i
a oo r-i
co co
I
e i
o- en I
•H H I
3 O
CT 4J
QJ CO
U
00 01
I
I
I
I
I
C 00 I
•H -H I
A! -4 I
O <4-l I
O OJ I
CJ r-l I
TJ TJ 0)
C en
oj c
g eo
a. u-i
•H
3 k3
cr
oj en
OJ
r^ l-i
CJ
OJ
rH C
' O O QJ
CJ JS ,C N
. OJ OJ QJ
oj cn en qj
3 3 >-«
O O M-i
cn
tj
QJ
3
CO
QJ
r-H
CJ
B
3 en
3 QJ
cj C
CO -H
> -c
cj
T3 CO
W I tn
cr>i— (CMr--oooooooooocT.
mmmmmmLnminin
enencnenenenenenmen
h cn en r- icseni— lr- iCTi
enenenenenencnen
^-i i-H cm en vo r-~ o>
00 CTn cja ct^ o*\
CM
CM
en
-Hr- icTNCN^HCNen-j-mvor-.-HCMoO'— i cs en
•H
•H
•
01
?->
CL rH
u
P
C
aj
•rH
1 U
3
CO
^
CJ
QJ
cfl
■H
•rl
•H
■H
•
>>
e
o
1 QJ
Cl
01
X
C
g
3
cfl
4-J
4-1
E
c
1-4
>-«
•H
X
^
^.
I cn
-o
4-1
QJ
01
•H
cr
l-i
CJ
4-1
V-i
QJ
1-4
rJ
-w
u
u
QJ
.
C
CD
4-1
o
o
1 TJ
4J
3
01
C
c
>^
Cfl
c
Si
CJ
M-l
>,
I-I
•H
C
^
3
3
1 QJ
CO
^
ID
4-1
•H
QJ
l-i
4-1
00
o
4-1
u
OJ
>nX
•H
^3
V4
•H
O
cn
O
CJ
J2
QJ
01
C
e
rH
rH
CJ
c
I-i
CJ
X
o
rH
rH
00 rH
•H
H
1
IH
3
l-i
C
C
r^
•H
ua
cfl
CO
c
■H
QJ
Cfl
o
fl
^
CO
CO
C rH
I-I
3
Cl TJ
3
O
•H
l-i
oo
>> ^3
4-1
4-1
•H
X
C
E
cfl
J=
4-1
j-i
•H CO
X
!-i
01
M-J
O
4-1
•H
X
CD
c
QJ
01
QJ
QJ
X
CJ
>>
•H
E
cn
a)
J^
,
C
•H
>
»
At
E
E
o
Cfl
)-J
X
01
to
4-1
l-i
e
e
cn
en
C
0)
CJ
Cfl
E
QJ
CJ
OJ
01
01
CO
O
oo
•H
r.
cn
3
rH
4-1
3
^
e
l-i
X
•H
OJ
00
QJ
00
XI
4-1
cfl
T3
01
cn
CO
4-1
4-1
r*
TJ
E
•r-t
-a
o
4-1
u3
01
01
U-l
CO
i-3
•H
QJ
Cfl
CO
3
OJ
"
o
*
M
OJ
QJ
o
l-i
QJ
u
•H
c
CJ
4-1
rH
c
rH
3
Cl
CJ
Cfl
c
6
U
co
•H
4-1
s*.
01
4J
c
C
3
CL rH
o
•n
rH
•H
4-1
•H
QJ
I—i
•H r-l
QJ
-o
rH
CO
rH
cfl
i—i
•H
01
4-1
g
rJ
4-J
c
14-1
CO
QJ
4-1
01
•H
■H
rH
■H
3
L4
4-1
CO
l-i
QJ
rC
CJ
CO
AJ CO
CJ
O
Cfl
QJ
CD
rH
cfl
t-i
cn
c
CO
QJ
E
01
•H
>
>
01
3
X
-C
CO
-o
4-1
-a
OJ
c
4-1
X
aj
CJ
01
4-1
CO 4-1
cn
l-i
4-1
a-
QJ
rH
4-1
JO
CO
o
0)
iJ
Lj
C
c
rH
QJ
C
•H
-a
CJ
CJ
4-1
o
X
o
CL
•H
QJ
CO
X
l-i
•H
OJ
rH QJ
•H
C-
CJ
cfl
4-1
O
QJ
cfl
rH
CJ
4-J
C
cfl
O
•H
•H
rH
o
O
c
Cfl
a
CD
O
QJ
o
Cfl
1_
S
ft.
c/i
<
S
X
CU IS
s:
2
c/1
C/1
O
£
IJL
O
CO
H
[JU
CJ
E
o
w
u
cc
r-l
s
X.
s
Ex,
H
-?
Cu
a,
CMCn-Cj-vOO-H— IC5>-H
•»^jvONMio
enenenenenenenenen
i n en \c r» -<
ON Cj^ CT> CJ^ CT^ CT\ O
^3- -
c
co
^
cu
x
£
9
c
j-i
en
3
-a
c
oo en
• • cn
w ca
rH
H c_>
oo in
as -cj-
sr in
HHHNHN(<1C-nc^C^CT>Cj>C7NO'i
^D^oooooooooooooaNCTsCTN
cx i
a i
i
i
i
ca i
i
c
^
cj J-i
X -H
CJ CU
u 3
CO CD
S !-3
I I
I I
en I
r-l I
cfl I
•H I
U I
cu I
4J I
ca i
g l
I
-a i
i
en I
oo i
C I
•H I
-a
c ^
•H >-l
<4-l O
3
en >>
(-1 u
0) cfl
tH TD
CU
3 CX
CU CO
-> hJ
Sh
aj co
u cx
co
3 ^
en I
■u 3
CO QJ
-h g
cx 3
rJ
c3 4J
CO
(3
i— I c3
H >
0)
!-i
CO
3
U cfl
cu ej en en
H CU rH
en g ,-h
3 co o
Cfl S O Q
4-J
ex
CU
CJ
X
QJ
X
0)
>
en
- en
3 o>
QJ ,-H
V-i cj
-a >^
iH CJ
•H -H
X X
c_)
en en
■n i-i
o -H
o u
oo 3
QJ
u a,
QJ cfl
rH CJ
x -h
4-> c
co co
x
c3 CJ
QJ
oo g
3
•H <-3
4-1
u cn
O 3
CU QJ
Cfl CX,
I I I
I I I
I
I
I
I
I
en i
T3 I
O I
O I
00 I
-a
cu
c
ca en
CO
cj
<-3
I en
t U
QJ
>, 3
s-i o
en -h
-h >
•H QJ
c
CU 00
cx 3
•H
TD ,*
cfl >h
QJ CO
►J s
In QJ CM
cu 3
CX QJ rH
CO t-) cfl
CX -H
QJ CJ
3 g -H
C 3 <4H
I
cn
u
cu
c
0)
4-J
in
cfl
Uh
en
O M
U u <
<-3 en
cu
« x
en en
3 3
•h ^
a. x
« ca
en en
3 qj en
O rH g
4-i -a o
4-1 QJ O
3 QJ l-i
S2PQ
OO
C
•H
rJ
OJ
>
o
U
In
o
o
1)
o
CO
u
3
en cu
X
ID CJ
)-l 4J
co co
>* cn
co cu
>H 3
a co
cn cj
TD <-3 4J 4-1
oo en
3 rH
•H O
cn cn cn
TD -H
O 4J
O >-i
00 QJ
CJ 4J
• rH
CU o
• X
3
v3
•> cn
01 to ^
cu
o cj jz
3 3 cn
O o 3
^4 U
a. a. ^
CO
en qj cn
3 3 4-1
I QJ
3
cn -h
oo x;
3 o
•H CO
w e
4-1
•H ca
U-l
cn
CU iH
cx o
•H O
Cu 4-1
cfl c3
en
qj en t3 •>
•n 3 co cn
CO CO CO
cn X "H cfl iH
cu cn cj ih
cn cu
3 s-
oo x
e
o
QJ X
3 a
cfl CO
rH g
o
cn en en
cu cu en
> -h
rl H fl
"D a 4J
3 g )-i
CO CO O
U hJ S Cfl 3J
QJ 3 cn •>
CO
U cu 4-i
en }-i
•H CJ
S cfl
cu u o
a. qj o
•H (X 4-1
P-i Cfl
HHHMHCNCOsfHHNCO
UIVONrsHHHHf)^''?"*
COCOCOCOC^CTiCTiC^C^CriOC^
dfonnnnnfincnnn
^HCMCiiriHMcC^CTi^O>C^ai(^C^C^(TiONCT>CJ>0>CJNC^O>^
cnnncn<»ifnconcocncocncoconfOfnn>T
oo cn
o o
cn r~~
CQ
W
>>
U
J-i
cn
a
3
M
Cfl
M
u
o
cn
c_> cu
M ID
Cfl O
CJ
qj en
4-1 3
cfl en
H 3
QJ QJ
OS U
c
CO
cu
X
g
3
3
u
4J
cn
a
3
O— iCMHCNHNsfcnHCNn^C^
co-j^inincovorviNc^ejvc^oNacvi
vDiDvO\OvOcO(CvD\OvOvO(OvOvDr°
cincocnncncnnmcirinrinro
mtnrsHMntjiHcsHcsHrHONHHfMHrtNfn
HHHCMcscNNnfO'r-~r-^r---r~.r^r^.r-r^r^r^r^r^oooooooooooooo
i
QJ I
• I
3 I
I I I
I
I
c
cu
e i
(X I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
en i
CO 3
u cr
CO 0)
cx
CX 3
CO O
I • I
I cj l
I • I
I CU I
I • I
I 3 I
3 I cn
cfl I cu
•H U
CX CX 4-1
CX g X
cfl CO
00 I
3
•h cn
> x)
i x
-a
CJ 00
•H 3
u
o
CJ CJ
QJ QJ
u u
> X
H CX
CX CO I
cfl cj |
U -H |
00 3 I
CU 3 I
■H g
qj g en
4J o u
cj o
en I
I
i«
o
X
QJ 4J 4-J
en u x
3 0) oo
O i— I -H
I U iJ
«3
at
00
o o
•H C
-a o
co x
oc cx,
>
QJ H
a
3
3 XI
O oS 3
c
OJ
3
o cu
cx -H
g ^
o cu
CJ 4->
4-1
CJ Cfl
•H Xl
c
CU
&
en
>^ cu
>-i x
T3 3
3 •
CU cu
g •
cx c
CX O CJ
QJ -H -H
H -a g
OJ cfl CU
H oi tfl
en ca
cu
•h en
l-i 3
QJ 4-1
4-1 CO
4-1 U
cfl to
X CX
a
>. CO
u
CO ^
g CO
•H tJ
1-1 I
(X, x
h en
3 " CU
cr 4-i -h
0) 3 l-i
QJ TJ
H g 3
CO CX 3
CJ -H O
H 3 U-l
u tr
U QJ rH
CJ CU
QJ iH 0)
H Cfl 4-1
cu cj co
i-j ca
o
c
■H CJ C
00 OJ O
C rH l-l
UJ CjJ rH
ca 4-1
CJ CJ
3 3
VJ rJ
H H
I u
I cfl
I cx
I
i ca
cn cn
u cu
QJ <-t
—I CJ
■H -H
Cfl X
U QJ
>
r4
cfl
cx en
4J
cu u
3 co
•H CX 01
00
3 ^3 3
OJ
en «
ca S-4 4J
cu c
en i— i cu
CU rH g
3 cu cx
■H CX -H
00 O 3
3 In CT
u
00 oo
3 3
•H -H
>H ^J
•H -H
CO Cfl
CX cx
QJ QJ
I
I I
I I
I
en
I I 4-1
I I
en i
I cj
I en
i u
I cfl
CJ
cn
4J 4J
In QJ
cfl QJ
CX Ih
U
CO I
a I
I
«3 I
I OJ 4-1
OJ CX OJ 'H -H
4J 4-1 4-1 rH i— I
c3 ca 4-1
ca en
00 00
3 3
Uh tJH CJH <4H
Cfl Cfl
IH |H
CJ CJ
U U
2 < < < <
3 3
X X
CX 4J
•H tfl
X o
Cfl PQ
cn ca
QJ
>
•H T3
4J Cfl
O C
g >-
O >H
U -h
O CO
rJ OS
en
cu
x
- CJ
en co
cu
o
cj
CJ
Sn I-i
CJ QJ
U rH
O -H
4J Cfl
o u.
4-1 CJ
3 -h
QJ 'JH
g -H
CX 4-1
•H C
3 QJ
CT -H
cu u
en
c
o ca
•H
4H 00
CO 3 i
4-1 -H
r4 |H
O CU
CX QJ
cn c
c -H
co oo
>h 3
H W
cn
rH
en o en
01 U QJ
u u to
•H C 3
> O 0)
01 CJ rH
qj ca
00 rJ
3 3 en
•H U U
Ih cfl c
3 U QJ
cn cu g
cfl CX 3
0) g Ih
01 4-1
co en
4-1 QJ
C -H
rH cn
cx cu
CX -H
3 rH
u cn
en
c o
cx
cx
3
•h cn
en
rH QJ cfl
co CJ
y c u
■H Cfl
cfl cj
CJ -H
3 tfl cfl
cfl g cj
X O -H
CJ 4-1 4-1
v 3 a
2 < O
3
TJ H HI
CU rH g
g CX CX
CX -H
-3 tfl 3
CT
rH rH QJ
tfl Cfl
CJ U rH
•H -H Cfl
00 00 4-1
Ih l-i C
3 3 QJ
Cfl Cfl Q
o
^. ^,
93
co
c
o
•w
4-1
TO
CJ
tH
r- 1
C|H
1
•H
00
co
• •
EO
w
CO
i— I
H
c_>
\-i
CO
>1
l-f
u
g
4_)
CO
w
3
X)
c
M
C/1
S
Vj
O
CO
U
c
CO
J-l
01
rO
£
c
>,
u
■u
CO
3
c
vD
CX
O
X
0)
CM
co vo
CM r--.
vC
CT-
co
* cr*
-h oo
co vO
vo
el >j < in vo
vO vO Z vO
O
vo
cn r^
CX ^~,
QJ Oi
cj oi
4J m VO rH
O.M ro N CO
I
CM
ON
oo
CX
0)
o
X
OJ
ON
CO
o
co
co
O
co
CM
o
OO
o
co
O
CO
CN
co
vO
oo
■— i in co on
oo r^. r-- r~-
•> >— I CM
H (O M «
o o r-» cn i
CX 4J
0J 3
CJ CO
x oj
0J XI
3
CO
OJ
XI
CO
3
O
0)
C
i£ cfl
I I
I I I
cfl
C
O
•H
CO
CO
OJ
<4-l
O
U
CX
CO
3
00 o
I
CO
OJ
u
CO
OJ
CJ
•H
>
OJ
CO
c
o
•H
4J
CO CO
QJ 4-1
CO
l-l rH
OJ QJ
rO O
l-l CO
Cfl -H
CO rH
o o
CN CO
•H C CO
CO Cfl QJ
•H i— I CJ
4-1 i—l -H
M HI >
OJ CJ l-l
> CO QJ
' -H
OJ I
CO I
I
■-3 I
I
!-< I
•H
cfl CO
CX OJ
01 U
U 3
4J
OJ CJ
t— i -i-i 4-i <-a
•H (X C
x cu co
OJ 4J
t-i c
QJ
^3 T3
CO -H
01 4J
CJ Cfl
< X
CO
O -H CO 4J
U
o
o
3 O
CO
CJ
•H
CO T3
OJ
E
CO
4J
•H S-i
a qj
co jz;
O 4J
X O
qj co
co oo
5-1
H O
cfl
C 4J
O -H
•H U-i
4-1 O
Cfl S-l
CJ CX
W 2
OO oooooooo
PS
o
co
C_) QJ
i—i -a
tn o
o
oj co
4J a
CO CO
^H C
QJ QJ
Pi O
T3
C
CO
U
OJ
£
3
C
>,
t-i
4-1
CO
3
ID
C
CO
vO
CO
-J" CN
VD VD
co co
CO r-l
VD vO
CO CO
o
CO
CO
ex
Oj
CJ
X
QJ
CO
00
St
cx
OJ
CJ
X
QJ
vO CO
CO CO CT> 0>
cr> o> 4-1
OJ
TD C
o
00 M
C 4-1
•H CJ
U QJ
•H i— I
12 W
CO —I
o o
uO r^
UO uo
o
cx
X
c
CO
S-i
H
I
I
I
e
o
•H
4-1
CO
CO C 4J
cn o
<■ -d-
CO CO ON CJ> CJ> -J
CO
VD
1
QJ
m
3
7-H
^
vo
C
TO
in
ON
TO
X
m
cn
e
^
„
I s *
4-1
CO
J
^^
m
a>
QJ
01
CO
m
CJ
r4
OJ
t-
*
X
3
CJ
CO
CO
QJ
4-J
•H
cw
UO
TO
M-l
r
r^
O
CM
O
CM
m
in
m
Ohm
vD \C vO
^J I
OJ TO
CJ X
QJ QJ
CO 4J
c
QJ
4-J k3
cfl
rH C
QJ TO
t-l X
1-1
^ 3
CO 3
TD CO
CO
O -
U rH
i—l TO
•H CJ
TO O
Pi rJ
r-H CN
o o
UO LO
VO vD
-3 I
>, !-i
CO U_i
x >-i
00 o
•H 4-1
x: o
2
I 4J O
I TO -H
I 4-1 4J
I M TO
O 4-1
oo a
C CO
■H C
CO TO
3 r4
M
o
CX
CO 0)
c c
TO -H
rJ rH
4J
OJ
vj a
•H -H
< p.
OJ QJ
co
c co
o c
■h o
oo
c
•H
4-1
CO
TO
CJ
TJ
TO
O
U
rO
c
o
I CO 4-1
CO
QJ
CJ
>H
>
Qj
CO
>^
S-i
CO
TO 4-1
4-1 TO
lH U
O iH
a c
CO 3
C i
to e
l-i O
H U
C rH
O QJ
•H 4-1
CO
•H i*3
>
QJ O
r-i -rH
OJ T3
4-1 TO
Pi
3 4J TO
•H CO
CJ rH
•H -H i-3
l-l 4-1
4J 3 l-l
CJ QJ
QJ CO 4-1
i — I TO TO
W CJ S
co
o
m
-j- in vo r^ o
o o o o o
uo in uo in vo
vO vO vO vO vO
94
O —i CM CO
O O O o
r^. oo oo oo
vO vO vO vO
QJ
TO
l-i
QJ
TO
U
CO
QJ
-3
■— 1
O
0)
r-l
s§
TO
CO
OJ
rH
rH
o
O
ON
vO
QJ
TO
l-i
QJ
Pi
CN
O
OS
vO
t
T-l
CO
M
OJ
r*
l-l
co E
OJ E
•H O
CJ cj
C
OJ ^
00
TO >,
00 4J
C 4J -H
•H "H rJ
^•0 3
C QJ CJ
TO l-i CJ
ca u w
•— I CM CO
O O O
o o o
r^ r^ r^
EXHIBIT E:8-2
WATERBORNE COMMERCE RELATED
INDUSTRIES WITH RIMS CODES
0300 Forestry and fishery products
1513 New warehouses
1721 Maintenance and repair of other non-farm buildings
1519 New other non-farm buildings
1627 Other new non-building facilities
1737 Maintenance and repair of other non-building facilities
3731 Shipbuilding and repairing
3732 Boatbuilding and repairing
6501 Railroads and related services
6503 Motorfreight transportation and warehousing
6504 Water transportation
6507 Transportation services
6506 Pipeline transportation
6901 Wholesale trade
6902 Retail trade
7001 Banking
7002 Credit agencies
7004 Insurance carriers
7005 Insurance agents and brokers
7102 Real estate
7301 Miscellaneous business services
7303 Miscellaneous professional services
95
CALCULATION OF SECONDARY IMPACTS
Step F:l
PURPOSE:
Determine the share of direct income that can be considered basic.
DATA REQUIREMENTS:
None.
DISCUSSION:
Simply, total income related to the port industry is the product of port
industry basic income and the income multiplier derived in Step E:7. The
problem is that some of the income from port activities can be considered
basic and some non-basic. The port industry may serve both export and
import (local) markets equally.
In general, income earned from outbound cargo movements can be considered
basic regardless of whether the cargo originates inside or outside the study
area. The allocation of income earned from inbound cargoes is more dif-
ficult, since these are not all destined for local consumption. Mini-
bridge, land-bridge, and other cargoes whose destinations are outside the
port study area produce basic impacts. Similarly, inbound cargoes which are
intermediate inputs to products manufactured in the study area and then
exported can also be considered to have basic impacts at the level of the
port industry. However, income earned from cargoes consumed locally cannot
be attributed to the basic sector.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Many smaller Pacific Coast ports are engaged primarily in the export of one
or two major commodities. Any imports of cargoes for local consumption are
negligible in comparison to export activity. Therefore, these users can
reasonably treat all port industry income as basic.
For larger ports with substantial inbound traffic, the identification of
non-basic income may be quite difficult. One possibility would be a review
of cargo destinations to determine local consumption. Sources for this
would include Customs records, knowledge of the local economy, or optional
questions included in the port industry survey. If cargo movements can be
divided into basic and non-basic activities, then assumptions can be made
about the income associated with each.
96
Because it is likely to be very difficult to determine the non-basic
share of port industry income with any degree of confidence, it is gener-
ally recommended that all port industry income be considered basic for
the purposes of this analysis. In most cases, this will result in a
moderate overstatement of impacts, somewhat offset by the conservative
approach used in calculating the multiplier. For those few cases in
which non-basic activity accounts for a significant share of port indus-
try income, the most useful approach may be to incorporate optional ques-
tions about this activity into the survey instruments.
USE OF RESULTS:
The basic component of port activity income will be used to determine
total port-related impacts in Step F:2.
97
Step F;2
CALCULATION OF SECONDARY IMPACTS
PURPOSE:
Determine total income supported by the port.
DATA REQUIREMENTS:
Results of Steps E:7 and F:l.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
If all port industry income is to be considered basic, total port-related
income is the product of direct income and the income multiplier.
Secondary income is the difference between total income and direct income,
If port industry income has been divided into basic and non-basic com-
ponents, total port-related income is the product of basic income and the
income multiplier plus the non-basic component of direct income. Second-
ary income is the difference between total income and direct income.
As noted in Step D:6, direct income represents payroll plus benefits.
Other labor and proprietors' income is not included.
USE OF RESULTS:
Direct, secondary, and total income impacts can be published in the eco-
nomic impact report and used to calculate other impact measures through
ratio analysis.
98
CALCULATION OF SECONDARY IMPACTS
Step F;3
PURPOSE :
Determine total sales supported by the port.
DATA REQUIREMENTS:
Results of Steps E:6 and E:8 (RIMS multipliers or input/output sales
multipliers) .
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
The products of direct final demand sales by industry (i.e., after ad-
justing for double counting by subtracting freight forwarders and
transportation brokers sales) and the RIMS gross output multiplier for
each industry are summed to determine total gross output (or sales) sup-
ported by the port. Secondary sales are the difference between total
sales and direct sales. The total gross output multiplier for the port
industry can be calculated by dividing total gross output by total direct
sales. Canadian port regions for which there are input/output studies
may be analyzed by the same procedure.
The RIMS multipliers are presented in the form of direct effect com-
ponent, indirect effect component, and gross output multiplier for each
industry. The direct effect component j_s not the same as the direct
impact of the port industry. Rather, it represents what are known as
direct requirements in input/output analysis — the first round of pur-
chases made to produce a given output. The gross output multiplier is
expressed as 1 plus direct effects plus indirect effects, where 1 repre-
sents direct port industry sales, the direct effects component represents
the first round of purchases, and the indirect effects component repre-
sents all remaining rounds of interindustry and consumer spending.
A less expensive, but much less useful approach to using the RIMS multi-
pliers is to calculate impacts based on the aggregated multipliers for
BEA economic areas. These are presented in "Industry-Specific Gross
Output Multipliers for BEA Economic Areas" published by the U.S. Depart-
ment of Commerce. (Available from the Superintendent of Documents, U.S.
Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. 20402, No. 052-045-000-48-7,
$2.00.) Most BEA areas consist of several counties and at least one
large city, so that these multipliers will overstate impacts at the
single-county level. Moreover, because these multipliers were originally
developed to analyze water projects, the 56 sectors included provide
significant detail for agricultural production but highly aggregated data
for other industries. Nevertheless, if a decision has been made not to
99
order county and industry-specific RIMS multipliers for the port, the
published data can serve to check the reasonableness of the economic base
multipliers. Briefly, since the size of the BEA econo- mic area is
likely to overstate the secondary impacts of the port indus- try, an
economic base multiplier which exceeds the output multiplier derived from
published BEA data should be treated with a large amount of skepticism.
USE OF RESULTS:
Direct, secondary, and total sales impacts can be published in the econo-
mic impact report and used to calculate other impact measures through
ratio analysis.
100
CALCULATION OF SECONDARY IMPACTS
Step F:4
PURPOSE:
Develop an income/sales ratio to compare the results of the economic base
and RIMS approaches.
DATA REQUIREMENTS:
Most recent County Business Patterns for the port's state.
DISCUSSION:
Obviously, the purpose of calculating port industry impacts by two dif-
ferent methods is to compare the results. Since each method is based on
different assumptions and data and has different flaws, similar results
would indicate a reasonable level of accuracy. However, since the econo-
mic base technique used yields total impacts in terms of income and the
input/output (e.g., RIMS) technique yields total impacts in terms of
gross output (sales) , a common unit of measure is needed before the com-
parison can be made.
The means for making this comparison described below is a payroll/sales
ratio which can be used to convert economic base income impacts to sales
equivalents and input/output gross output impacts to income equivalents.
(Note that because the income impacts are based on payroll plus fringe
benefits, published data are used to estimate the wage and benefit com-
ponents of total employee compensation.)
The methodology described below is a simplified one based on the limited
published data, money, and time available to most users of this kit.
Information to calculate payroll/sales ratios for individual counties is
published in the censuses of business (construction industries, mineral
industries, manufacturers, retail trade, wholesale trade, selected ser-
vices, and transportation) conducted every five years. The collection of
data from the seven different censuses for two or more years is a tedious
and expensive task. The alternative methodology should be adequate for
the needs of most ports. The approach to undertaking the county-specific
analysis, if a user wishes to do so, should be apparent from the recom-
mended action described below.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Exhibit F:4-l shows payroll/sales ratios for broad industry groups for
the three Pacific Coast states. Estimated ratios for industries not
covered in the business censuses were developed from national data on
101
employee compensation and business receipts by industry. Ratios are
based on 1972 data, the latest year for which business census information
is available. The Vancouver, British Columbia ratios were taken from An
Interindustry Study of the Metropolitan Vancouver Economy completed in
1972. Historically there has been very little change in these industry
ratios over time.
Since total port industry income and output impacts are not disaggregated
by industry, it is necessary to compute a single payroll/sales ratio.
This is done by determining an average payroll/sales ratio weighted by
port county employment in each industry group. (This average ratio is
the sum of employment in each industry division times its payroll/sales
ratio divided by total employment.) The result is the relationship
between payroll and sales for the port county for the year for which the
income and output data were developed. (An advantage of this approach is
that it eliminates the need to adjust for inflation, assuming that wages
and prices inflate at the same rate.)
In order to compare the results of the economic base and RIMS techniques,
the relationship between payroll, as used in the payroll/sales ratio, and
income, derived from the economic base multiplier, must be determined.
Payroll (income) is defined in the surveys to include fringe benefits;
payroll data used to calculate payroll/sales ratios do not. National
data (published annually in the "Handbook of Labor Statistics, BLS)
indicate that benefits currently account for about 20% of total employer
compensation. Therefore, after adjusting total income impacts to exclude
the fringe benefit component, the results of the two approaches can be
compared by using the payroll/sales ratio.
Because many of the steps in this analysis are rather imprecise, a 10-15%
difference between the results of the two approaches is an acceptable
indication of accuracy. In this case, either the average or the lower of
the two totals can be considered the final estimate of port-related
impacts. If the results are significantly different and remain so after
checking for possible arithmetic errors, the conservative approach
dictates selecting the lower estimate of port industry impacts.
USE OF RESULTS:
The final estimates of income and output impacts can be published in the
economic impact report and used to calculate other impact measures
through ratio analysis.
102
EXHIBIT F:4-l
PAYROLL/ SALES RATIOS FOR
MAJOR INDUSTRY DIVISIONS
Agriculture, Forestry, and
Fisheries 3
Mining 3
Construction
Manufacturing
SIC 20 Food and Kindred Products
21 Tobacco Manufacturers
22 Textile Mill Products
23 Apparel and Other Textile Products
24 Lumber and Wood Products
25 Furniture and Fixtures
26 Paper and Allied Products
27 Printing and Publishing
28 Chemicals and Allied Products
29 Petroleum and Coal Products
30 Rubber and Plastic Products N.E.C.
31 Leather and Leather Products
32 Stone, Clay, and Glass Products
33 Primary Metal Industries
34 Fabricated Metal Products
35 Machinery, except Electrical
36 Electrical Equipment and Supplies
37 Transportation Equipment
38 Instruments and Related Products
39 Misc. Manufacturing Industries
Transportation, Communications,
Utilities 3 .
Wholesale Trade
Retail Trade
Finance, Insurance,
and Real Estate 3
Services
Vancouver
British
California
Oregon
Washington
Columbia" 3
.194
.194
.194
.132
.171
.171
.171
.257
.257
.257
.524
.100
.122
.191
.200
.173
.229
—
.338
.236
.286
.191
.182
.184
.262
.280
.248
.340
.159
.139
.158
.290
.294
.365
.325
.134
.032
— _
.194
.025
.052
.206
—
.203
—
—
—
.286
.222
.228
.234
.204
—
.120
.344 c
.237
.229
.235
.288
.279
.268
.305
.307
.226
.329
.254
—
.236
.344 c
.332
.302
.375
.234
—
.355
.319
.319
.319
.056
.050
.061
.466 d
.135
. 129
. 132
.135
.135
.135
.277
.351
.315
.342
e
U.S. average ratio for California, Oregon, and Washington.
b Determined from An Interindustry Study of the Metropolitan Vancouver Economy , 1972.
Manufacturing, N.E.C.
"Trade and transport ratio is .466, communications ratio is .409; utilities ratio
is . 162.
e Health and Welfare ratio is .565; education ratio is .547; business services ratio
is .435; other services ratio is .456.
Arthur D Little Inc
103
CALCULATION OF SECONDARY IMPACTS
Step F:5
PURPOSE:
Update input/output (RIMS) multipliers based on income multipliers
(optional) .
DATA REQUIREMENTS:
Bureau of Economic Analysis county personnel income data for the RIMS
base year, County Businesss Patterns for the RIMS base year for the
port's state, the United States summary, and other states, as needed, or
for Canadian ports, Employment, Earnings and Hours and local or regional
input/output study for the port region being studied.
DISCUSSION:
A significant criticism of the RIMS multipliers is that they are based on
1967 data. (An updated version of RIMS, based on 1972 data, is expected
to be available by the end of 1979.) Multipliers based on dated informa-
tion may ignore substantial changes in the structure or size of a
region's economy. In other words, the RIMS multipliers will tend to
understate the impact of the port industry in a region whose economy has
expanded and overstate the impacts in a region where economic activity
has declined.
Conceptually, at least, the input-output Type II multiplier, which consi-
ders all of the rounds of spending and production created by a given
direct activity, is the equivalent of the economic base multiplier. (In
practice, there are data and definitional problems which preclude the
calculation of identical results.) Therefore, it can be argued that
changes in the I/O (RIMS) multiplier over time should parallel changes in
the economic base income multiplier. By determining the change in the
income multiplier from the I/O base year to the present (the most recent
year for which data are available) , the change in the I/O multipliers can
be estimated.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
The procedure for calculating the income multiplier is described in Steps
E:l through E:7. The steps should be repeated to determine the income
multiplier for the RIMS base year (currently 1967). If only one of the
techniques for calculating the employment multiplier (Steps E:2, E:3, and
E:4) was used, it is necessary to use only one technique to determine the
104
base year multiplier. Because BEA county income data for years prior to
1970 are not published, the necessary 1967 information must be requested
from the Regional Economic Measurement Division or obtained from one of
the state agencies or universities to which local personal income esti-
mates are sent (see Exhibit F:5-l). When RIMS multipliers based on the
1972 I/O table become available, income data can be obtained from BEA
publications.
The base year and current income multipliers should be compared and the
percent change computed. This percent change is then used to adjust each
of the RIMS multipliers. For example, if the income multiplier was 2.1
in the base year and is currently 2.2, the RIMS multiplier for each in-
dustry should be increased by 5%. Total gross output impacts can then be
calculated with these updated RIMS multipliers (see Step F:3).
The procedure is the same for Canadian ports that wish to update local or
regional input/output studies. It is necessary that income information
for the same region as that used for the I/O study be obtainable. It
must also be in sufficient detail to construct an economic base
multiplier .
USE OF RESULTS:
The gross output impacts calculated with updated RIMS multipliers can be
compared to total income impacts (see Step F:4) to determine the final
estimate of total impacts. Use of the updated RIMS multipliers may help
to narrow the difference between the results of the economic base and I/O
approaches.
105
EXHIBIT F:5-l
STATE AGENCIES AND UNIVERSITIES RECEIVING BEA
LOCAL INCOME ESTIMATES
Alaska
Institute of Social, Economic and Government Research
University of Alaska
College, Alaska 99701
Department of Economic Development
Alaska Division of Economic Enterprise
Pouch EE
Juneau, Alaska 99801
Office of Policy Development and Planning
Office of the Governor
Juneau, Alaska 99801
California
Center for Business and Economic Research
California State University - Chico
Chico, California 95926
Department of Finance and Industry
School of Business
California State University - Fresno
Fresno, California 93710
Institute of Business and Economic Research
University of California - Berkeley
556 Barros Hall
Berkeley, California 94720
Department of Finance
State of California
Sacramento, California 95814
UCLA Business Forecasting Project
Graduate School of Management
University of California - Los Angeles
Los Angeles, California 90024
Hawaii
Department of Planning and Economic Development
Post Office Box 2359
Honolulu, Hawaii 96804
106
EXHIBIT F:5-l
(continued)
Oregon
Bureau of Business and Economic Research
University of Oregon
140 Commonwealth Hall
Eugene, Oregon 97403
State of Oregon
Department of Economic Development
317 S.W. Alder
Portland, Oregon 97201
Budget Division
Oregon Executive Department
240 Cottage Street, S.E.
Salem, Oregon 97310
Research and Statistics Employment Division
Oregon Department of Human Resources
402 Labor and Industries Building
Salem, Oregon 97310
Washington
Economic and Planning Division
Department of Commerce and Economic Development
General Administration Building
Olympia, Washington 98501
Graduate School of Business Administration and School
of Business Administration
Office of the Dean
University of Washington
Seattle, Washington 98195
Research and Information Division
Department of Revenue
Olympia, Washington 98504
107
I
CALCULATION OF SECONDARY; IMPACTS
Step F:6
PURPOSE
Collect data to develop impact measure ratios and calculate port-related
impacts expressed in units of interest to the user.
DATA REQUIREMENTS:
State employment and payroll data for year described in the survey; U.S.
Department of the Treasury, Internal Revenue Service, Statistics of
Income , Individual Income Tax Returns and Business Income Tax Return s for
most recent year; state and local tax data as needed. Canadian port
users should obtain Revenue Canada's Taxation Statistics (No. RV44) , Cor -
poration Taxation Statistics (ISSN 0576-0119) , and Corporation Financial
Statistics (ISSN 0575-8262) from Statistics Canada.
DISCUSSION:
The procedures described in the preceding steps yield estimates of port
industry impacts expressed in terms of income (payroll) and output
(sales). However, these measures are often not the most useful to the
port. Typically, a report directed to the general public will express
impacts in terms of employment, which is the most widely understood mea-
sures. Port-related tax payments are also frequently reported to illus-
trate the benefits resulting from public investments in port facilities
and services.
Ratio analysis is used to redefine impacts in terms of various units of
measure. Simply, secondary data sources are used to determine the rela-
tionship between the available measure (the one in which impacts are cur-
rently expressed) and the desired measure, and this relationship is used
to convert total impacts. For example, once the employment/payroll ratio
is determined, total port-related employment can be readily calculated
from total payroll impacts.
There are two principal problems associated with ratio analysis — the
variation in ratios associated with the level of data aggregation and the
differences between average and marginal relationships. An example of
the first problem is the use of average wages per employer to calculate
total employment. A county might have an overall average wage of $12,000
per employee, and this could be used to convert total payroll impacts to
total employment impacts. However, construction workers might average
$20,000 per year and retail sales workers $8,000. If the payroll impacts
are created primarily in one of these sectors, total employment impacts
would be quite different from the average. Using the overall average
implicitly assumes that impact employment distribution among industries
is the same as total employment distribution.
108
The difference between average and marginal relationships is of greatest
importance when ratios are used to make forecasts. As noted in Step F:4 f
payroll/sales ratios tend not be change over time at the national level,
but this is not necessarily so for individual businesses or even coun-
ties. For example, a retailer might be able to handle a 10-20% sales
increase without additional employees and only then need to hire addi-
tional sales clerks. A much larger sales increase could take place
before additional bookkeepers, buyers, or managers were needed. Alter-
natively, a relatively small increase in sales could give a business the
"critical mass" it needs to hire new types of employees — e.g., computer
programmers, advertising specialists, etc., — to replace outside ser-
vices. These examples clearly indicate that ratios may change with
changing conditions and should be used with care.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Impacts should be calculated in terms of employment and, if desired,
income taxes generated. A user who wishes to express impacts in some
other measure can create additional ratios following procedures analogous
to those described below. However, it is important to recognize the
limitations of this method and understand that each successive transfor-
mation of impact estimates is likely to decrease their, accuracy.
Employment is calculated by determining average annual wages per employee
for the study area and dividing this into total impact payroll to derive
full-time equivalent employment. The best sources for payroll and
employment data are the state agencies which collect them under various
federal programs. In the three Pacific Coast states, plus Alaska and
Hawaii, they are:
Employment Security Division
Department of Labor
Post Office Box 3-7000
Juneau, Alaska 99802
California Employment Development Department
Post Office Box 1679
Sacramento, California 95808
Department of Labor and Industrial Relations
Post Office box 3680
Honolulu, Hawaii 96811
Oregon Department of Human Resources
Employment Division
875 Union Street, N.E., Room 402
Salem, Oregon 97310
Washington Employment Security Department
1007 South Washington Street
Olympia, California 98501
In Canada all employment and payroll data are collected by Statistics
Canada.
109
Annual data from the appropriate state agency should be used rather than
County Business Patterns data because the latter represent employment for
only a single week and may be distorted by seasonal variation in some
industries. If employment and payroll information is not available for
the year covered by the survey (that is, the year for which direct pay-
roll impacts are reported) , the Consumer Price Index is a readily avail-
able statistical source that can be used to adjust average payroll per
employer for inflation. Statistics Canada's Employment, Earnings and
Hour s is published monthly. An annual average can be estimated from the
monthly statistics.
Ratio analysis can also be used to determine federal, state, and local
income taxes paid. Estimates of other state and local taxes (sales, pro-
perty, etc.) should be limited to the direct impacts derived from the
survey because of the difficulty of avoiding double counting secondary
impacts.
Personal income taxes can be calculated by determining the effective tax
rate on wages and salaries. U.S. Internal Revenue Service, Statistics of
Income , Individual Income Tax Returns , published annually, shows total
income tax paid as a percent of adjusted gross income, and this can be
used to estimate individual income taxes paid to the Federal government.
Similar information on state income taxes can be obtained from the appro-
priate state agency. Where state or local governments levy flat rate
income taxes, the prevailing rate can simply be applied to payroll
impacts. Revenue Canada's publication entitled Taxation Statistics pro-
vides similar information for Canadian users of this "kit".
Business income taxes must be calculated in two steps. First taxable
income must be calculated, and then appropriate tax rates can be
applied. U.S. Internal Revenue Service, Statistics of Income, Business
Income Tax Returns , published annually, shows receipts and net income for
major industry divisions for proprietorships, partnerships, and corpora-
tions. These data can be used to calculate net income as a percent of
receipts for all businesses and for each industry division. Because
estimates of sales are not disaggregated, the percent for all businesses
must be used. (There are no readily available local data to derive a
weighted income as a percent of sales figure.) Once net business income
has been estimated, prevailing federal, state, and local tax rates can be
used to estimate business income tax payments.
The Canadian publication Corporation Financial Statistics can be used in
conjunction with Corporation Taxation Statistics to first estimate a
sales-to-net-income ratio that would then be used with the data in Corpo -
ration Taxation Statistics to determine tax payments.
USE OF RESULTS:
These ratio analysis techniques can be used to convert port-related
impact estimates to the form most useful for public reports.
110
PREPARATION AND DISSEMINATION OF REPORT
Step G;l
PURPOSE:
Prepare a report describing the results of the economic study conducted
using this kit.
DATA REQUIREMENTS:
Results of all preceding steps.
DISCUSSION:
The type of report prepared depends primarily on the purpose of the
study. If the port's main purpose is a public information effort high-
lighting the benefits of the port to the local economy, its report should
be a short document summarizing the major findings of the study and aimed
at a wide readership. An economic impact study done to support policy or
investment decisions about which there is likely to be debate will
require a much more detailed and comprehensive report. A report of this
type would describe research methods, data sources, calculation proce-
dures, and, in effect, each of the steps contained in this kit. The
detailed report should also contain a short summary of findings similar
to that described above for distribution to the general public. If the
port decides to publish only a summary report, it is still necessary to
have on file the type of information required for the detailed report
(e.g., copies of raw data and calculations) to answer any questions about
how the findings were obtained.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
The port economic report should contain, at a minimum:
• A statement of the purpose of the study.
• Definitions of any terms used in the report, includ-
ing a specific definition of the study area selected.
• A description of the methodologies used to estimate
direct and secondary effects.
• Port industry direct and secondary impacts and port-
dependent industry direct impacts expressed in terms
of employment, income, output, taxes paid, or other
relevant measures.
• A comparison of port industry impacts to total
county or regional economic indicators.
Ill
The amount of material included will depend on the type of report. For
example, a summary report might describe the methodology used with "A
survey of firms in the port industry was used to estimate direct
impacts. Secondary impacts were estimated by an economic base multi-
plier." A detailed report would probably include copies of the question-
naires used, the number of questionnaires mailed and the response rate,
an indication of the coverage of the survey (e.g., firms employing 75% of
all workers in the warehousing industry responded) , calculations of
secondary multipliers similar to Exhibits E:3-l and E:4-l, and other
information so that the reader can follow each step and duplicate them,
if desired. However, survey data should not be presented in sufficient
detail for individual firms 1 responses to be identified. When several
firms in an industry respond, aggregated survey results for this industry
can be presented. For industries in which there are only one or two
firms or responses, data included in report tables should be grouped into
an "other" category.
The format of the report and the method of data presentation will be
selected by the project director. It is essential, however, that the
published results do not imply more precision than is warranted by the
methodology. Estimates of impacts will be reasonably accurate; they will
not be precise. It is important for the user to acknowledge this
uncertainty. Rather than reporting "the port industry supports 642 jobs
in our community," the report should state, "it is estimated that the
port industry supports approximately 650 jobs" or "the port industry
supports some 600-700 jobs." Since the reporting of even rounded
estimates may be interpreted as precise numbers, we recommend the use of
graphics, particularly in widely distributed reports. A pie chart could
be used to show port industry direct and secondary employment in relation
to total study area employment. A bar chart could be used to show the
change in port industry impacts from one study year to the next. Presen-
tations of this type are often more effective than lists of numbers in
conveying information to the public.
112
PREPARATION AND DISSEMINATION OF REPORT
Step G:2
PURPOSE:
Disseminate the port economic impact report to interested individuals and
groups.
DATA REQUIREMENTS:
Reports prepared in Step 6:1.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Copies of the economic impact report should be sent to local government
officials, newspapers, public libraries, firms which participated in the
survey, and any other interested parties. (A newspaper article might
suggest that members of the public request copies from the port district.)
If only a summary report is prepared, it should be sent to the indivi-
duals and groups mentioned above along with the name of a person at the
port (e.g., the study director) who can be contacted for additional in-
formation. If a detailed report is prepared, a complete copy should be
sent to public libraries, newspapers, and government agencies. Partici-
pating firms and individuals should receive the summary section only.
Those who request more information could then be sent the complete report.
113
LIST OF DATA REQUIREMENT PUBLICATIONS
UNITED STATES
Bureau of Economic Analysis, U.S. Department of Commerce, Regional Economic
Measurement Division, County and Metropolitan Area Personal Income Data,
available from National Technical Information Service, Springfield, VA 22161
Bureau of Economic Analysis, U.S. Department of Commerce, Regional Economic
Measurement Division, County and Metropolitan Area Personnel Income Data
for the RIMS Base Year, available from National Technical Information Service,
Springfield, VA 22161
County Business Patterns , available from Superintendent of Documents,
U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C., 20402
Dun and Bradstreet Directory, available through Dun and Bradstreet, Inc.
99 Church Street, Post Office Box 803, New York, NY 10008
Employment and Earnings , published by Bureau of Labor Statistics,
U.S. Department of Labor, Washington, D.C.
"Industry-Specific Gross Output Multipliers for BEA Economic Areas",
published by the U.S. Department of Commerce. Available from the Super-
intendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C.
20402, //052-045-000-48-7, $2.00.
Standard Industrial Classification Manual , published by the Office of
Statistical Standards, Bureau of the Budget, Washington, D.C.
Coast Marine & Transportation Directory (1978) published by Pacific Shipper, Inc.,
1050 Sansome Street, San Francisco, CA 94111, $8.00.
CANADIAN
Corporation Taxation Statistics , ISSN 0576-0119, $2.80.
Corporation Financial Statistics , ISSN 0575-8262, $7.50.
Taxrtion Statistics , Revenue Canada RV44-78
Standard Industrial Classification Manual, Revised 1970 , Statistics Canada,
Publications Distribution, Ottawa, Canada K1A 0T6, Cat . //12-501E , $6.00.
Employment, Earnings and Hours , Statistics Canada, Publications Distribution,
Ottawa, Canada K1A 0T6 , Cat.//72-002
Canadian Census Vol. Ill, Part 4, Industries by Sex for Census Metropolitan
Areas, Place of Residence, and Place of Work (Bulletin 3.4-5), May 1975, $1.05.
Canadian Census, Vol. Ill, Part 4, Industries by Sex, for Census Agglomerations
of 25,000 and Over (Place of Residence) and Census, Agglomerations of 50,000
and Over (Place of Work ) (Bulletin 3.4-5), May 1975, $1.40.
Canadian Statistical Review, Cat. // 11-206.
Arthur D Little Inc
114
Local or Regional Input/Output Studies - local universities, colleges and
offices of the Ministry of Economic Development should be canvassed to
determine the availability of input/output studies. For example, a study
for the Vancouver area was conducted by H. Craig Davis of the University of
British Columbia. It is entitled An Interindustry Study of the Metropolitan
Vancouver Economy and is availble from Mr. Davis at the School of Community
and Regional Planning at U.B.C.
115
IV. GLOSSARY
BREAK-BULK CARGO - A catch-all category for cargoes not shipped as dry
bulk, liquid bulk, in containers, or in unitized form. Most commonly it
includes cargoes packed in cartons or bags that are loaded or unloaded by
hand.
BULK CARGO - Unsegregated cargo, either in liquid or solid (dry) form,
that is handled and loaded (or can be handled and loaded) in a continuous
operation — i.e., there are no discrete units to be loaded. The cate-
gory includes: ores, petroleum products, metal scrap, wood chips, ferti-
lizers, and other chemicals.
CONTAINER CARGO - Cargoes shipped inside of standardized metal boxes
(most often 8'x 8'x20' or 8'x8'x40').
DIRECT IMPACT - The first round economic impact — i.e., in the case of
the port industry employment, income, sales, taxes, etc. associated with
the operation of port industry firms (this involves the netting out of
non-waterborne commerce related employment, income, etc., for some firms,
e.g. banks) . Direct impact is used synonomously with PRIMARY IMPACT.
ECONOMIC IMPACT - Changes in the level of economic activity attributable
to a particular event or activity. It is generally measured in terms of
employment, income, tax revenues, or sales. For example, the employment
at a port's container freight station is, to a certain extent, tied to
the availability of container handling equipment and facilities at the
port. However, the economy of a region is comprised of firms that exhib-
it mutual dependence, therefore, it is inaccurate to state that the exis-
tence of one firm is entirely dependent upon another.
EMPLOYMENT IMPACT - The economic impact of a project or economic activity
measured in terms of employment — i.e., the number of jobs or full-time
equivalent positions attributable to the project or activity.
GENERAL CARGO - Segregated cargo handled in containers or as break-bulk.
This generic category also includes logs, lumber, pulp, motor vehicles,
steel, and other metal alloy products.
INCOME IMPACT - The economic impact of a project or economic activity
measured in terms of income. Income can be defined in various ways —
e.g., as gross pay (e.g., Statistics Canada - earnings) or as more com-
prehensive measures including proprietors income, government transfer
payments, rental income, and/or dividend income (e.g., BEA - labor and
proprietors' income).
INDIRECT IMPACT - Economic impact beyond the first round impact. For the
purpose of this study this would include the employment and income gene-
rated in industries or firms supplying goods to the port industry firms;
a component of SECONDARY IMPACT.
INDUCED IMPACT - Economic impact — e.g., employment and income — gene-
rated by the spending of employees in firms providing direct or indirect
economic impacts; a component of SECONDARY IMPACT.
116
NEO-BULK CARGO - General cargo that moves in unitized form often on ships
designed specifically to carry one type of cargo. The category includes
autos, lumber, and steel products.
PORT-DEPENDENT INDUSTRY - The group of firms or activities that ship
cargoes through a port(s). This includes any firms or industries that
receive materials through a port or ship products through a port. If a
firm runs its own terminal and employment of the terminal can be
separated from total firm employment, the terminal activity can be
considered part of the port industry rather than the port dependent
industry.
PORT INDUSTRY - The group of firms or activities that are directly needed
for the movement of waterborne cargo. It includes firms falling into the
following Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) categories: SIC 44,
Water Transportation (Canada SIC 504 and 505); SIC 42, Motor Freight
Transportation and Warehousing (Canada SIC 507 and 527); SIC 47,
Transportation Services (Canada SIC 504 and 505); SIC 6512, Operators of
Nonresidential Buildings (i.e., lessors of piers, docks, and associated
buildings and facilities) . The 1972 Standard Industrial Classification
Manual, published by The Executive Office of the President, Office of
Management and Budget, can be used to obtain more detail about these
categories.
(Note: The Canadian SIC is similar to the U.S. SIC, but the numbering is
not consistent. See Standard Industrial Classification Manual , Revised
1970 from Statistics Canada to obtain details.)
PORT REGION - The geographical area to which port cargoes are sent and
from which they are received; the service area(s) of the ports. This
area varies for different commodities — e.g., container cargo may be
collected from or shipped over much greater distances than some bulk
cargoes. For the purpose of this "kit", the port region is defined as a
collection of counties (for U.S. ports) and census metropolitan areas
(for Canadian ports) . This definition facilitates the compilation of
employment and income data for the port region.
PRIMARY IMPACT - See DIRECT IMPACT
RIMS - Regional Industrial Multiplier System - It is a technique for
producing regional input/output tables from the national input/output
table. The U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis
provides input/output sales multipliers for individual county economies
or regional economies using RIMS.
SECONDARY IMPACT - The sum of indirect impacts and induced impacts.
SIC CODE - Standard Industrial Classification code; a classification
system published by the Executive Office of the President, Office of
Management and Budget, that relates specific economic activities to
generalized industrial categories. The Canada S.I.C. is published by
Statistics Canada.
TAX IMPACT - The economic impact of a project or economic relationship
measured in terms of the specific tax revenues generated. The tax impact
can be measured in terms of local tax revenues, state tax revenues, or
federal tax revenues.
117
APPENDIX
CASE STUDIES
A. BACKGROUND
The purpose of this kit was the development of an economic assess-
ment methodology which could be used by ports with limited staff and
resources. In preparing the kit, an attempt was made to anticipate
special circumstances or problems which might arise and suggest solutions
or alternative approaches. However, no document of this type can deal
with the full range of issues that individual port districts may en-
counter in conducting economic assessments. Four case studies were
undertaken so that the procedures in this kit could be illustrated in the
context of specific port impact studies. As noted, it is likely that an
individual port will have unique conditions or problems not treated in
the text of this kit. Therefore, this summary of the case studies
focuses on the difficulties encountered in each case and the ways in
which they were handled. In some instances modifications were made to
specific steps in the kit to clarify instructions and avoid problems
experienced by the test ports. Other problems were resolved by case-
specific decisions which may provide some guidance for reasonable judg-
ments by other users. Overall, we believe the case studies have been
very important because they identified areas of the methodology which
needed additional explanation or clarification.
1. Selection of the Test Ports
The goal of this kit was to provide a methodology which could be
used by U.S. and Canadian ports of different sizes with different cargo
mixes. Therefore, the test ports were selected to represent a cross-
section of potential users. The three areas and four ports tested were:
• Grays Harbor, Washington — The Port of Grays Harbor
is the smallest of the four test ports. It is pri-
marily a center for the export of logs, lumber, and
pulp. It can be considered representative of many
Northwest ports which service the area's forest
products industry.
• San Francisco-Oakland, California — The San
Francisco Bay Area contains two major ports, both of
which handle a wide variety of commodities. The
ports serve a metropolitan area of several million
inhabitants and a highly developed economy. The
Port of Oakland currently accounts for about 70% of
the tonnage shipped through the two ports due to its
function as a containerized cargo "load center."
These test ports were selected to illustrate the
analysis of a region with more than one port.
118
• Vancouver, British Columbia — The Port of Vancouver
is the largest port in British Columbia and, in
terms of tonnage, the largest port on the West Coast
of North America. The major commodities shipped
through Vancouver are coal, grains, oil and other
bulk items. The Port of Vancouver was selected to
illustrate the application of the methodology to
Canadian ports.
2. Role of Port Staff
As discussed in Chapter 1, the development of reliable survey data
is the single most important element of the economic impact study. More-
over, conducting a successful survey is typically the most difficult ele-
ment of the assessment methodology. Therefore, the survey work for the
case studies was conducted by the staff of the test ports in accordance
with the procedures being developed for the kit. This served both to
test the prescribed methodology and to identify difficulties which might
arise in different situations. Secondary impact calculations were per-
formed by Arthur D. Little, Inc., because of both the limited time avail-
able for this work and the in-house availability of most of the required
secondary data.
B. GENERAL PROBLEMS AND SOLUTIONS
1. Survey
The test ports' difficulties in conducting the survey fell into two
categories — determining which firms should be included in the survey
and obtaining an adequate number of responses to the questionnaire.
a. Firms Included in the Survey
Each port surveyed some firms which could not be included in the
"port industry." To some extent this is a result of the lack of a com-
monly accepted precise definition of the industry. For the purposes of
this economic assessment, the port industry has been defined as the group
of firms or activities that are directly needed for the movement of
water borne commerce. The firms which produce or consume the commodities
shipped through the port make up the "port-dependent industry." A port
also does business with and may even lease property to numerous other
firms which fit neither of these definitions.
The survey work done by the test ports suggests that the majority of
port industry activities fall into two major industrial classifications:
• Water Transportation. This group includes vessel
operators, tug and towing services, stevedores and
other cargo handling, marine terminal operation,
pilots, etc. (U.S. SIC 44, Canadian SIC 504 and 505)
119
• Transportation Services. This group includes
freight forwarders and firms involved in the
arrangement of transportation, such as custom house
brokers, shipping agents, and export/import firms.
(U.S. SIC 47, Canadian SIC 504 and 505)
The other SICs involved in the transportation of waterborne commerce
include 40 and 42 — railroad transportation and motor freight trans-
portation and warehousing (Canadian SIC 506 and 507) . Additional firms
typically included in the port industry are in SIC 373, Ship and Boat
Building and Repairing (Canadian SIC 327), and SIC 559, which includes
retailers of marine supplies (ship chandlers) .
Firms identified and surveyed by the test ports but not part of the
port industry include manufacturing, financial, and service activities.
The forest products firms in Grays Harbor County can be primarily classi-
fied as part of the port-dependent industry. San Francisco Bay region
manufacturers of paint and valves used in shipbuilding do not belong to
either the port industry or the port-dependent industry. These firms are
not related to the area's ports except insofar as some of their economic
activity will be represented in the indirect multiplier of the ship-
building firms. Similarly, the effects of firms which supply business
and financial services to port industry clients — insurance brokers,
banks, attorneys, etc. — will be reflected in the port industry multi-
plier and should thus not be considered direct activity.
A more rigorous definition of the port industry (i.e., by SIC code)
will help to direct the survey to appropriate firms. Some of the res-
pondents to the test ports' questionnaires appeared to misinterpret the
question "describe your waterborne commerce-related operations." One
firm described its activities as exporting machinery but closer examina-
tion of its responses to other questions indicated that the firm was
actually engaged in manufacturing machinery some of which was exported.
Therefore, the survey form should ask for the respondent's SIC code, if
known, in addition to a description of the firm's activities. This will
permit allocation of the respondents to the proper categories and serve
as an additional check on the groupings used in the master list.
b. Response Rate
The response rates for the test ports' surveys (percent of total
questionnaires returned) averaged about 20%. However, the quality of the
responses was far from uniform. Some firms returned survey forms with
some or even all of the requested data missing. The response rate was
also significantly higher or lower than the overall average for some
industries. For example, all but one of the firms in one industry might
answer the port's questionnaire, but there might be no responses from
firms in another industry. All of the test ports had a significant
number of firms that were unwilling to disclose any financial data
(sales, payrolls, etc.).
120
The most cost-efficient and effective way to increase the response
rate appears to be telephone interviewing. Depending on the needs of the
port conducting the study, a short format telephone interview can be used
to collect essential data — employment, revenues (sales) , and payroll.
This information is the minimum required to calculate direct and
secondary economic impacts.
A possible option for ports that meet resistance from firms
unwilling to disclose information is to use a "multiple choice" response
format. Based on some preliminary knowledge about the firms that are
potential respondents, ranges for key data items can be developed —
e.g., employment: 0-9, 10-19, 20-39, 40-59, etc. Firms which will not
provide specific data may be willing to indicate the appropriate range.
The midpoint of the selected range can then be considered the response
for purposes of coding and tabulating.
2. Determination of Direct Impacts
The calculation of direct impacts in the case studies essentially
followed the procedures outlined in element D of the methodology, but the
quantity and quality of the survey data required some modification of the
suggested steps.
Step D:5 recommends partitioning the surveyed firms by employment
size classf ication for purposes of tabulating responses. However, the
number of responses received by the test ports was too small for such a
tabulation to be useful. Case study survey data were thus tabulated by
industry, but all employment size classifications were grouped together.
Some of the test ports received no responses from firms in a
particular industry. If this information is omitted for a segment of the
port industry, both direct and secondary impacts will be understated.
Therefore, sales and payroll were estimated for these industries when
only employment data were available. First, payroll per employee for the
appropriate year was derived from the sources cited in Step F:6 and used
to calculate total payroll. Then, the payroll/sales ratios cited in Step
F:4 were used to determine total sales. While this is admittedly
somewhat circular and less accurate than a survey-based approach, it is a
means to complete the economic assessment when other methods are not
available.
The tabulation of direct sales (revenue) information was adjusted to
prevent double counting by omitting the reported sales of freight
forwarders, transportation brokers, and related businesses. These firms
typically report sales figures which include the cost of transportation
they have arranged; however, the shipping firms, stevedores, etc. report
the same sales. Therefore, the true sales figures for transportation
service firms should be equivalent to the value added (payrolls and
profits) by these businesses and exclude amounts paid to other port
industry firms. Because there is no available information from which to
determine the value added portion of transportation service revenues, and
because this number is small relative to total revenues, a decision was
made to eliminate these firms from the calculation of sales impacts.
However, payroll and employment for these firms were considered since
these impacts are not duplicated in other responses.
121
3. Calculation of Secondary Impacts
Secondary impacts for the test ports were calculated in accordance
with the steps outlined in the kit. There were no significant problems
encountered which had not been anticipated in the development of the
methodology, but time constraints limited the analysis to estimation of
sales, income, and employment impacts.
C. SPECIFIC CASE STUDIES
1. Grays Harbor, Washington
The Port of Grays Harbor identified some 72 port industry and port-
dependent firms to be included in the survey. Responses were received
from 19 firms, including:
• One vessel repair firm (SIC 37)
• Two trucking firms (SIC 42)
• Four water transportation firms, including the port
itself (SIC 44)
• Seven transportation services firms (SIC 47)
• Five forest products firms (port-dependent)
Five of the transportation services firms were Seattle-based shipping/
trading companies which reported no employment and payroll in Grays
Harbor. Therefore, 14 of the responses received were usable, for an
overall response rate of about 20%.
The Port of Grays Harbor provided additional information on direct
employment to supplement the survey data. Specifically, the port esti-
mated the number of employees of a major forest products firm directly
engaged in waterborne commerce. While these firms would be considered
port-dependent, it is reasonable to separate out those employees engaged
in waterborne commerce and their prorated shares of sales and payrolls
and assign them to the port industry.
Table 1 shows the estimates of direct port and port-dependent acti-
vity. SIC 44 includes the forest product firm activity described above
and the operation of the port itself. Data for firms which did not res-
pond were estimated in accordance with the procedures outlined in element
D of the methodology. Almost all of the firms identified in SIC 47,
transportation services, are located in Seattle. Because only two of the
seven firms in this group which responded to the survey reported employ-
ment and payroll in Grays Harbor, no activity was assigned to the firms
which did not respond. This may undercount impacts in this industry to
some extent, but when available data are insufficient to make reasonable
estimates, a conservative approach is preferred. Employment and payroll
estimates thus represent only the amounts reported by two survey respon-
dents. Sales were not estimated because of the decision to omit this
figure to avoid double counting.
122
Direct port-dependent activity represents the responses of five
forest products firms (less activity allocated to the port industry) and
estimates for two additional firms identified by the port. Because the
Grays Harbor survey instrument did not include questions about alternate
ports or the amount of the firm's business that would be lost without the
port, it was not possible to ascertain the extent to which these firms
are truly port-dependent.
Table 2 shows the calculation of total economic activity associated
with the Port of Grays Harbor. Using the economic base income multi-
plier, whose development is illustrated in Steps E:3 through E:7, total
payroll supported by the port is estimated to be about $20 million.
Port-dependent activities contribute almost $75 million.
The RIMS approach yields a total impact estimate of almost $85 mil-
lion in sales. Using a weighted payroll/sales ratio developed from Grays
Harbor County employment data and the industry-specific ratios in Step
F:4, the sales equivalent of the income impact calculated using the eco-
nomic base multiplier is $78 million, only 7% less than the RIMS-derived
value.
Employment impacts were estimated from the lower value (the economic
base technique) . Total wages are divided by the 1978 average wage per
employee for Grays Harbor County to yield a total employment impact of
1280. Since direct employment for the port industry is estimated at
about 685, the implied employment multiplier is 1.87, which is within the
range one would expect for an economy the size of Grays Harbor County.
The 1300 port industry direct and secondary employees account for
about 6% of Grays Harbor County's total employment of 22,000. When the
3200 port-dependent workers are considered as well, waterborne commerce-
related activities account for some 20% of the county's total employment.
2. San Francisco and Oakland, California
The Port of San Francisco and the Port of Oakland jointly conducted
a survey to determine their impact on the San Francisco Bay region.
Questionnaires were sent to port industry firms and to firms that use the
ports in the movement of their goods or materials. We have calculated
only the port industry impact due to difficulties in the determination of
the port-dependent industry universe.
Forty-one usable responses were received to the 140 questionnaires
sent to firms defined as being in the port industry. This corresponds to
a 29% response rate. The number of responses in specific industrial
categories, along with tabulations of employment, payroll, and sales
associated with each category, is provided in Table 3. Responses were
received from:
123
TABLE 1
PORT OF GRAYS HARBOR DIRECT ACTIVITY
Respondents Universe Employment Payroll Sales
($000s)
($000s)
Port Industry
SIC 37
1
1
275
$ 6,100
$ 15,700
SIC 42
2
2
27
546
1,216
SIC 44
4
11
372
6,760
26,996
SIC 47
2
N.A.
10
212
N.A.
Total
9
—
684
$13,618
$ 43,912
Por t-dependent
Industry
5
7
3,195
$73,775
$334,640
124
TABLE 2
PORT OF GRAYS HARBOR TOTAL ECONOMIC ACTIVITY
(dollars in thousands)
1. Economic Base Multiplier
Direct Income
X Income Multiplier
= Total Income
$13,618
1.45
$19 f 746
2. RIMS Multiplier
Direct Sales by Industry
X RIMS Multipliers
SIC 37
SIC 42
SIC 44
Total Sales
$15,700 X 2.021
1,216 X 2.228
26,996 X 1.831
$31,730
2,709
49,430
$83,869
3. Comparison
Total Income
X 0.8 (wage percent of
payroll and benefits)
-f- Payroll/Sales Ratio
for County
= Total Sales
$19,746
$15,797
0.203
$77,818
Total Employment
Total Wages
-7- Average Wage per
Employee
= Total Employment
$15,797
$12,339
1,280
125
• Five boatbuilding (SIC 3731) and shipbuilding (SIC
3732) firms
• Eight trucking firms (SIC 42)
• Sixteen water transportation firms (SIC 44) , inclu-
ding the ports themselves
• Seven firms providing transportation services (SIC
47)
• Five chandlers (SIC 55)
A number of difficulties were encountered during the survey stage of
the analysis for these ports. The primary problem was the low response
rate. Call-back reminders did little to improve the response rate, but
it was found that telephone requests for a limited number of question
responses increased the information available for analysis dramatically
and at a relatively small cost. The Port of Oakland was able to assign a
summer university intern to the task of following up after non-
respondents. He was instructed to contact a member (or members) of non-
responding firms that could provide answers to the following five
questions:
1. What are the firm's waterborne commerce related
activities?
2. What are last year's total sales or revenues related
waterborne commerce?
3. What are the total number of full-time equivalent
employees engaged in waterborne commerce related
activities?
4. What is the total payroll of these employees?
5. What percentage of your business is related to the
Port of Oakland and to the Port of San Francisco?
These abbreviated telephone interviews were very successful. Their only
drawback is the limited quantity of information obtained which in turn
limits the variety of impact measures that can be calculated as well as
the "checks" that can be performed on the survey data.
A second difficulty encountered during the survey stage was the Port
of Oakland's reluctance to have the completed surveys mailed to the Port,
since doing so would have placed the surveys in the public domain. This
problem was handled by having the surveys sent to Arthur D. Little, Inc.
An alternate approach would be to have them returned to a private firm
associated with the Port — e.g., its counsel. It is not known whether
having the completed questionnaires sent to a private firm affected the
response rate.
126
The estimates of total direct sales, employment, and payroll
presented in Table 3 were derived with the procedures outlined in element
D of the methodology. The totals are for the Port of San Francisco and
the Port of Oakland combined. When the San Francisco-Oakland survey work
was begun, the intention was to partition the direct activity between the
two ports. However, the data provided in the responses proved inadequate
to make this allocation. There was significant variation in the
allocation between ports reported by survey respondents (e.g., some .firms
reported 100% of their business in one port, some reported 100% split
between the two, and some reported only 10-20% for both) . Because
responses were received from only about one- third of the port industry
firms (and much fewer in some SICs) , it was decided that any attempt to
allocate activity between the ports would be highly suspect. However, a
direct impact split could be estimated by assuming it was equivalent to
the cargo split.
Table 4 provides a summary of the secondary impact calculations per-
formed for the Port of San Francisco and the Port of Oakland. First
total income is determined using the economic base approach described in
element E of the methodology. In part 3 of Table 4 the $458 million in
total income is converted to an estimate of the total sales associated
with it. The $1,580 million sales estimate allows a direct comparison
with the RIMS derived total sales impact of $1,250 million. The dis-
crepancy between the figures is due primarily to the use of a regional
average payroll/sales ratio. The large retail and FIRE (finance, insur-
ance, and real estate) sectors in the region bias the ratio downward from
what it should be in this application. The use of a payroll/sales ratio
that is a weighted average of a waterborne commerce related payroll/sales
ratio and an average regional payroll/sales ratio would be preferred.
In keeping with our conservative bias total employment was cal-
culated by applying the payroll/sales ratio to the RIMS derived total
sales, rather than the economic base derived total sales. Using the
economic base derived total sales yields an estimated total employment
impact of 25,443, some 26% higher than the RIMS derived total of 20,133.
These employment impacts represent 1.7% and 1.3% of total regional
employment. The implied employment multipliers are 2.32 (RIMS sales
impact) and 2.93 (economic base sale impact).
No attempt has been made to distribute these impacts geographically
within the Bay Area. The direct impact "split" between the Port of
Oakland and the Port of San Francisco could be used to crudely
approximate the impact of each port on the San Francisco Bay region,
defined for the purpose of this study to consist of Alameda, Contra
Costa, Marin, San Francisco, San Mateo, and Santa Clara counties.
Generally it is not recommended that aggregate cargo tonnage or value be
used to define the "split" since impacts vary by cargo type and
destination; these factors differe greatly among ports.
3. Vancouver, British Columbia
The Port of Vancouver, British Columbia, was included in the study
in an attempt to broaden the kit's use to Canadian ports. This entailed
only minor modifications of the direct impact determination portions of
the methodology (sections B, C, and D) , but substantially altered the
applicability of the secondary impact determination sections. Statis-
tical data are collected differently in Canada than in the United
States. The following discrepancies are the most important:
127
TABLE 3
PORTS OF SAN FRANCISCO AND OAKLAND DIRECT ACTIVITY
Respondents Universe Employment Payroll Sales
($000s) ($000s)
Port Industry
SIC 3731
SIC 3732
SIC 42
SIC 44
SIC 47
SIC 55
4
1
8
16
7
5
7
1
21
37
61
13
2,094
$ 53,115
$ 99,145
90
2,529
6,400
1,291
27,515
55,640
3,588
79,880
206,151
1,394
27,482
—
238
4,284
30,256
Total
41
140
8,695
$194,805 $397,592
128
TABLE 4
PORTS OF SAN FRANCISCO AND OAKLAND TOTAL ECONOMIC ACTIVITY
(dollars in thousands)
1. Economic Base Multiplier
Direct Income $194,805
X Income Multiplier 2.35
= Total Income $457,792
2. RIMS Multiplier
Direct Sales by Industry
X RIMS Multipliers
SIC 3731
$ 99,145
X
3.615
=
$
358,409
SIC 3732
6,400
X
3.204
=
20,506
SIC 42
55,640
X
3.504
=
194,963
SIC 44
206,151
X
2.736
=
574,337
SIC 55
30,256
X
3.352
=
101,418
Total
Sales
$1
,249,633
3. Comparison
Total Income $ 457,792
X 0.8 (wage percent of
payroll and benefits) $ 366,234
-4r Payroll/Sales Ratio
for Region 0.232
= Total Sales $1,578,593
4. Total Employment
Total Wages* $ 289,915
-r- Average Wage per
Employee $ 14.400
= Total Employment 20,133
♦Determined by applying payroll/sales ratio to RIMS derived total sales.
129
• There is no service that provides RIMS type multi- pliers for
small areas. However, it should be noted that Canada does
have more current national input/ output studies than does the
United States, and that it has a sophisticated model that
regionalizes (pro- vincializes) its national I/O tables.
• Annual Canadian employment and payroll data are pre- sented in
much more aggregated form for small areas than in the United
States. This increases the con- fidence the analyst has in
the accuracy of the data, but does limit the use of the
economic base metho- dology to census years.
We have constructed an economic base multiplier for Vancouver using 1971
Canadian Census data and have used a 1972 regional input/output study of
the region to estimate secondary impacts of waterborne commerce related
activity in the Vancouver area. For a more current analysis, the only
alternatives for Canadian ports would be to conduct a regional input/
output study or to regionalize an input/output study for a larger area of
which they are a part — i.e., the national I/O tables or provincial I/O
tables. It is believed that most ports would not want to commit the
resources necessary for such endeavors, especially given the relatively
limited changes that would occur in the impacts determined by the proce-
dures we have outlined.
The survey of port industry firms was very successful except for a
few industry categories for which there were no responses. These
included ships chandlers, trucking firms, marine pilots, and ship
brokers. The overall response rate of 25% was especially good con-
sidering that a local trade publication printed a notice that suggested
firms not respond to the questionnaire sent by the Port since the data
they would provide were sensitive. Based on this experience it is sug-
gested that port personnel contact local trade journals, associations,
and newspapers to solicit the assistance, or at least the blessing, of
this influential group.
The Port of Vancouver received questionnaires from 53 port industry
firms and 16 port-dependent industry firms. Responses were received from
the following types of firms:
Customs brokers, 3 responses
Shipping agents, 8 responses
Freight forwarders, 4 responses
Stevedoring companies, 4 responses
Marine terminal operators, 5 responses
Railroads, 3 responses
Marine towing and tug lines, 6 responses
Boat builders, 5 responses
130
• Grain elevator companies, 3 responses
• Marinas, 6 responses
• Marine service firms, 3 responses
Table 5 shows the aggregated employment, payroll, and sales associated
with the port industry firms. The survey results were expanded for the
more detailed groups listed above; then the two aggregations, "Trade and
Transportation" and "Shipbuilding", were formed so as to match the
input/output categories in An Interindustry Study of the Metropolitan
Vancouver Economy .
Port-dependent industry impacts were not calculated because of time
and budget constraints. For accuracy in the determination of port-
dependent industry impacts it is very important that employment, sales,
and payroll shares attributable to the existence of the port be iden-
tified. This demands careful checking by the analyst and recontacts to
fill in missing responses. Because we could not do this, no port-
dependent industry impacts were estimated.
Table 6 shows the calculation of total impacts from direct activity
using an economic base employment multiplier and industry specific
input/output multipliers from the aforementioned regional input/output
study done for Vancouver. A recalculation of 1978 employment shares for
the major industrial groupings in Vancouver showed remarkable consistency
with the 1971 shares; therefore, the interindustry relationships have
remained relatively constant during the intervening seven years. For
this reason, and because the intervening time period is so brief, it is
believed that the 1972 input/output study is still very useful. It is
necessary to adjust some of the multipliers to account for inflation,
however .
The economic base multiplier is based on 1971 Census data, since
more recent data did not provide the necessary detail. The census survey
is much more comprehensive than the monthly survey designed to provide
the base information for Employment, Earnings, and Hours ; hence, less
aggregation of results is required. Total employment is estimated to be
approximately 38,000 with this technique.
The economic base derived employment estimate should be compared
with total employment estimated with the I/O multipliers. Employment was
estimated by first calculating indirect wages from indirect sales. Then
employment was estimated through division of wages by average wage. The
resulting indirect employment was added to direct employment derived from
the survey to obtain total employment. Total employment was estimated at
approximately 30,000 using this input/output approach. Input/output
derived employment is 79% of economic base employment.
Total wages were estimated using the economic base employment
estimates and input/output derived sales estimates. The July 1978
average wage was multiplied by indirect employment (calculated with
economic base multiplier) and added to the direct wage (compiled from the
survey) to determine total wages of $710,404,000. Input/output derived
indirect sales of $710,404,000 estimates were converted to wages through
multiplication by a payroll/sales ratio, yielding $589,637,000.
131
TABLE 5
PORT OF VANCOUVER, BRITISH COLUMBIA DIRECT ACTIVITY
Respondents Universe Employment Payroll Sales
($000s) ($000s)
Port Industry
Trade and
Transportation 49 205 15 , 451 $354,205 $747,721
Shipbuilding _5 8 1,251 31,773 74,988
Total 53 212 16,702 $385,978 $822,709
132
TABLE 6
PORT OF VANCOUVER, BRITISH COLUMBIA TOTAL ECONOMIC ACTIVITY
(dollars in thousands)
1. Economic Base Multiplier
Employment
Direct Employment 16,702
X Employment Multiplier 2.28
= Total Employment 38,081
Wages
Indirect Employment 21,379
X Average Wage 15.175
Indirect Wages 324,426
+ Direct Wages 385,978
= Total Wages 710,404
2. I/O Multiplier
Sales
Direct Sales by Industry
X Sales Multipliers
Trade and Transportation
Shipbuilding
Total Sales
Wages
Indirect Sales
x Wage/Sales Ratio
= Indirect Wages
+ Direct Wages
= Total Wages
Employment
Indirect Wages
Average Wage
= Indirect Employment
+ Direct Employment
= Total Employment 30,035
$747,721
74,988
X
X
1.69 =
1.50 =
$1
$1
$
$
$
$
,263,648
112,482
,376,130
553,421
.368
203,659
385,978
589,637
203,659
15.275
13,333
16,702
133