Chapter 4 Resource Endowment 4-0 Overview Resources are ultimately what distinguish one metropolitan area from another. Human resources, physical infrastructure, training and education resources, access to transportation and communication networks, and the political and regulatory environment are the fundamentals that determine the pace of innovation and economic growth in a metropolitan area. Today s resource endowments reflect the past course of private investment decisions and public policies. Ensuring adequate and appropriate resources to promote future innovation and growth is the task of today s decision-makers. Many of the important resources that influence innovation and economic growth prospects are intangible and cannot be measured. This section focuses on analyzing those aspects of metropolitan resources that can be effectively quantified and measured. Indicators of Resource Endowments The indicators in this section can be grouped into four categories. The first group of indicators includes two extensive indicators of metropolitan scale or size. The remaining three groups of indicators are qualitative indicators of human resources, Internet resources, and social infrastructure. entrants with higher level scientific and engineering skills necessary for today s high-tech industries. It also reflects the capacity of local higher-education institutions to conduct both graduate education and R&D in key technical areas. Human resources the availability of the adequate supplies of labor with the requisite skills and abilities is essential to a thriving economy. In today s increasingly knowledge-based economy, cognitive skills are increasingly important, and completion of college has become an essential prerequisite for many types of jobs. To measure Human resources, we use three indicators. Percentage of the labor force with at least a Bachelor s degree. This indicator demonstrates the level of cognitive skills and training available in the area s labor force. Average salary of managerial, professional, and technical workers. For employers, average salaries are a measure of the cost of labor. Lower salaries imply more abundant supplies of labor and, hence, lower labor costs for businesses. Salaries for managerial, professional, and technical workers provide an index of the relative tightness of labor supplies for a key group of white collar workers. Average salary of all workers. Salaries for all workers provide a broader measure of labor scarcity or abundance within the metropolitan area. Size is an important characteristic that determines many other features of an economy. Larger economies have more of each kind of resource, but size may also facilitate a higher degree of specialization of resources. Consequently, larger MSAs may be qualitatively different from smaller ones. We use two indicators of overall size. The total labor force indicates the scale of the local economy. It is mainly an indicator of what size of MSA Kansas City is competing with. The number of science and engineering Ph.D. s awarded reflects the number of new labor market Over the course of the past decade, the Internet has become an increasingly important, perhaps essential, tool of communication and commerce. We measure both household and business use of the Internet with four indicators. The Resource Endowment Index reveals that Kansas City has a highly favorable endowment of the basic building blocks of economic prosperity. 41
3 Resource Endowment The percentage of households with Internet access at home is a reflection of the size of the on-line population in an area and provides one indication of Internet penetration. The percentage of households with broadband Internet access at home captures the growing provision of high-speed connections. Additionally, it reflects the ability of area residents to make use of this capacity to work and shop at home, as well as to take advantage of greater multimedia content. Enhanced business use of the Internet reflects the extent to which area businesses have gone beyond routine uses of the Internet and have begun to use this technology to revise internal business practices or implement new services. It is a reflection of the level of technological expertise available in the area. Internet backbone capacity per capita reflects the bandwidth available to send and receive data. In a networked world, bandwidth is a core determinant of what is technologically feasible. Building and maintaining an adequate transportation system and providing for a quality public education system are two of the primary activities of local governments. The final group of three indicators in this section captures several dimensions of investments in these important components of regional infrastructure. The percentage of children using computers in classrooms reflects both the level of public investment in essential infrastructure and the likelihood that the next generation of labormarket entrants will emerge from school with the necessary technical skills to succeed in the workplace. Travel time to work reflects the adequacy of existing transportation resources public transit, roads, and highways as well as the match between the location of existing housing and the location of employment opportunities within the metropolitan area. K-12 Student-teacher ratios are an indicator of the quality of educational resources within an area. This ratio is also an indirect measure of the adequacy of the local tax-base. Public education is a major component of most metropolitan budgets, and student-teacher ratios are a reflection of the overall funding situation of state and local government. Resource Endowment Index The Resource Endowment Index aggregates the qualitative indicators of human resources, Internet resources, and social infrastructure in each MSA. The indicators in each group are given equal weights in constructing subindexes reflecting performance in each category. The subindexes are weighted equally in forming the aggregate Resource Endowment Index. The Resource Endowment Index reveals that Kansas City has a highly favorable endowment of the basic building blocks of economic prosperity. Kansas City ranks 3 rd among all 52 MSAs in terms of the value of the Resource Endowment Index, trailing two of its peers: Madison and Austin. This favorable ranking reflects, in particular, high values of Internet resources and social infrastructure. Table 4-0: Resource Endowment Index Metropolitan Area Index Rank Normalized Index 1 Madison b 84.1 1 100.0% 2 Austin b 72.3 2 85.9% 3 Kansas City c 71.0 3 84.4% 4 Rochester b 69.8 4 83.0% 5 Salt Lake City c 68.5 5 81.4% Kansas City c 71.0 3 84.4% 1 Madison b 84.1 1 100.0% 2 Austin b 72.3 2 85.9% 3 Kansas City c 71.0 3 84.4% 4 Salt Lake City c 68.5 5 81.4% 5 Columbus b 63.6 11 75.6% 6 Indianapolis c 63.6 12 75.6% 7 Denver a 62.5 15 74.3% 8 Tampa b 61.4 22 73.0% 9 Pittsburgh b 61.3 23 72.9% 10 St. Louis b 61.2 24 72.7% 11 Cincinnati a 60.4 26 71.8% Source: Compiled by Policy Research Institute. 42
4-1 Total Labor Force, 2002 Why is it Significant? The total labor force indicates the scale of the local economy. It is mainly an indicator of the size of MSAs with which Kansas City would be expected to compete. Kansas City MSA is 24 th in labor force, about the same as its population ranking. It has about 10% as large a labor force as the largest MSA (New York). Excluding Madison, MSAs in its peer group have labor forces between 7% and 14% the size of New York s. Kansas City has a large enough labor pool to adapt to business startups and expansions on any likely scale. While availability of particular skills could create bottlenecks, the overall size of the labor force will not. The main advantage that larger MSAs have over Kansas City is larger pools for each particular skill. However, that advantage is typically coupled with the disadvantage of higher labor costs. Table 4-1: Total labor Force, 2002 d Metropolitan Area Total Rank Index Number 1 New York a 10,626 1 100.0% 2 Los Angeles a 8,329 2 78.4% 3 Chicago a 4,715 3 44.4% 4 Washington, DC a 4,241 4 39.9% 5 San Francisco a 3,866 5 36.4% Kansas City c 1,060 24 10.0% 1 Denver a 1,512 16 14.2% 2 St. Louis b 1,380 19 13.0% 3 Tampa b 1,324 20 12.5% 4 Pittsburgh b 1,211 22 11.4% 5 Cincinnati a 1,065 23 10.0% 6 Kansas City c 1,060 24 10.0% 7 Indianapolis c 956 27 9.0% 8 Salt Lake City c 929 28 8.7% 9 Columbus b 883 31 8.3% 10 Austin b 769 36 7.2% 11 Madison b 280 52 2.6% Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2002 (2). d: 1,000s of Workers 43
4-2 Number of Science and Engineering Ph.D. s Awarded, 2001 Why is it Significant? Science and engineering (S&E) Ph.D. s reflect the number of new labor market entrants with higher level scientific and engineering skills necessary for today s high-tech industries. Highly qualified scientists and engineers are an essential resource for innovation. Students are likely to remain near where they receive their degrees if they can, so high levels of local Ph.D. production make it easier for firms to hire needed personnel. New S&E doctorates also reflect the capacity of local higher-education institutions to perform both graduate education and R&D in key technical areas. Kansas City ranks 23 rd (close to the middle) in this indicator among the 52 MSAs. It produces about 10% the doctorates of New York, the highest producing MSA. Among the 11 peer group members, Kansas City is a bit below the middle, ranking 7 th. Kansas City s ranking in production of doctorates is about the same as its ranking in labor force. It is a middle-sized power in graduate education. It would be necessary to approximately double the number of new S&E doctorates produced by local universities to move into the top ranks among its peers. Such an increase would require a substantial expansion of investment in higher education. Table 4-2: Number of Science and Engineering Ph.D.s Awarded, 2001 Metropolitan Area Total Rank Index Number 1 New York a 1881 1 100.0% 2 Boston a 1314 2 69.9% 3 San Francisco a 1291 3 68.6% 4 Los Angeles a 1159 4 61.6% 5 Washington, DC a 1053 5 56.0% Kansas City c 196 23 10.4% 1 Austin b 426 11 22.6% 2 Madison b 424 12 22.5% 3 Columbus b 395 14 21.0% 4 Pittsburgh b 364 15 19.4% 5 Denver a 349 16 18.6% 6 St. Louis b 226 22 12.0% 7 Kansas City c 196 23 10.4% 8 Salt Lake City c 186 24 9.9% 9 Indianapolis c 179 25 9.5% 10 Cincinnati a 177 27 9.4% 11 Tampa b 95 37 5.1% Source: National Science Foundation, 2001 (1). Kansas City s ranking in production of doctorates is about the same as its ranking in labor force. It is a middle-sized power in graduate education. 44
4-3 Number of Science and Engineering Ph.D. s Awarded per Capita, 2001 Why is it Significant? The intensity of new S&E doctorates indicates the extent to which the local economy specializes in technology-related post-graduate education. Postgraduate education not only provides R&D services and expert workers to the local economy, it also provides stable jobs that help the local R&D industry weather cyclical changes. Kansas City ranks 25 th among the 52 MSAs in intensity, about the same as its ranking with respect to total production of S&E doctorates. Madison, the smallest member of the peer group in population, has a major economic specialization in higher education and post-graduate education. As a result, Madison ranks first among 52 MSAs, with ten times the intensity that Kansas City exhibits. Within its peer group, Kansas City is somewhat below the middle, in 8 th place. Kansas City cannot reasonably aspire to specialize in higher education it has a much too large and diversified economy for that. At the same time, funding for higher education in the Kansas City area is below par for an MSA seeking a leadership position in innovation. If Kansas City is serious about becoming more competitive in technology innovation, then increasing that funding should be a top priority. Table 4-3: Number of Science and Engineering Ph.D.s Awarded per Capita, 2001 d Metropolitan Area Total Number per Capita Rank Index 1 Madison b 994.1 1 100.0% 2 Raleigh b 557.3 2 56.1% 3 Austin b 340.9 3 34.3% 4 Columbus b 256.5 4 25.8% 5 Boston a 225.8 5 22.7% Kansas City c 99.0 25 10.0% 1 Madison b 994.1 1 100.0% 2 Austin b 340.9 3 34.3% 3 Columbus b 256.5 4 25.8% 4 Pittsburgh b 154.3 7 15.5% 5 Denver a 135.2 14 13.6% 6 Salt Lake City c 109.3 19 11.0% 7 Indianapolis c 103.6 21 10.4% 8 Kansas City c 99.0 25 10.0% 9 Cincinnati a 94.3 26 9.5% 10 St. Louis b 86.8 29 8.7% 11 Tampa b 39.6 41 4.0% Source: National Science Foundation, 2001 (1); Bureau of the Census, 2000 (2). d: Ph.D.'s Awarded per 1,000,000 Population 45
4-4 Percentage of Labor Force with a BA or Higher Degree, 2002 Why is it Significant? Attainment of a Bachelor s degree is an indicator of the level of cognitive skills and training possessed by the worker, a key dimension of labor quality. It also indicates an ability to accomplish a long-term goal (graduating from college). The quality of labor force is an important indicator of the health of an economy. Companies trying to introduce new advanced technologies require an educated workforce. Even though high school education is sufficient for many of the jobs in an economy, it is often not enough for innovative companies. Among 52 MSAs, Kansas City is ranked in the top third, 15 th, with 36.8% of its labor force having at least a Bachelor s degree. 9 Kansas City has about 80% the concentration of BA degrees of San Francisco, the leading city. Kansas City is in the middle of its peer group, ranking 5 th. The peer group ranges widely, from Austin with nearly as many BAs per capita as San Francisco, to Tampa, with 6% fewer BAs per capita than Kansas City. Kansas City is reasonably competitive in the education level of its workforce. However, it is important to keep in mind the fact that the competition is a moving target, insofar as rates of BA completion have consistently grown over time throughout the country. The level of education is determined partly by net migration and partly by historical educational performance in local schools. To maintain or improve its relative level of education, Kansas City must keep striving both to be a more attractive place to work and live and also to improve the quality of its local educational systems at all levels. This latter task is especially difficult in times of governmental budget crisis, such as that currently facing Kansas City (and many other areas). Table 4-4: Percentage of Labor Force with a BA or Higher Degree, 2002 d Metropolitan Area Percentage Rank Index 1 San Francisco a 46.2% 1 100.0% 2 Washington, DC a 45.7% 2 98.9% 3 Austin b 45.6% 3 98.6% 4 Raleigh b 43.2% 4 93.5% 5 Madison b 43.0% 5 93.0% Kansas City c 36.8% 15 79.7% 1 Austin b 45.6% 3 98.6% 2 Madison b 43.0% 5 93.0% 3 Denver a 42.3% 7 91.6% 4 Indianapolis c 41.7% 8 90.1% 5 Kansas City c 36.8% 15 79.7% 6 Columbus b 35.7% 19 77.3% 7 Pittsburgh b 35.2% 21 76.2% 8 Cincinnati a 34.5% 23 74.6% 9 St. Louis b 33.9% 29 73.3% 10 Salt Lake City c 31.3% 40 67.8% 11 Tampa b 30.7% 44 66.3% Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics, Current Population Survey, 2002 (1). d: Persons 25 Years and Older Companies trying to introduce new advanced technologies require an educated workforce. Even though high school education is sufficient for many of the jobs in an economy, it is often not enough for innovative companies. 46
4-5 Average Salary of Managerial, Professional, and Technical Workers, 2001 Why is it Significant? Managerial, professional, and technical jobs make up a growing part of the labor force. Because these jobs require higher levels of education, they generally pay above average salaries. With the growth of a serviceoriented, information economy, these types of workers are an increasingly important resource for businesses. More abundant, and less expensive managerial, professional, and technical workers are thus an important labor resource. The cost of these workers to employers is a reverse indicator, with relatively low salaries being especially advantageous for startup companies. Kansas City ranks above average, 20 th out of 52 MSAs, with an index value of 73.9% of Oklahoma City, the MSA with the lowest average salaries for this class of workers. Average pay in Oklahoma City is about $6,000 dollars less than in Kansas City. The range of average pay among the 52 MSAs is narrow; this indicates that the competition in this category is intense. Within its peer group, Kansas City is in the middle, ranking 6 th. Most of its peer members are close to Kansas City in performance, except Denver, which has much higher average salaries and, hence, a much lower index value. Table 4-5: Average Salary of Managerial, Professional, and Technical Workers, 2001 d Metropolitan Area Dollars per Rank Index Worker 1 Oklahoma City b $37,643 1 100.0% 2 New Orleans b $39,498 2 92.1% 3 San Antonio c $39,565 3 91.8% 4 Salt Lake City c $40,178 4 89.2% 5 Norfolk b $40,475 5 87.9% Kansas City c $43,783 20 73.9% 1 Salt Lake City c $40,178 4 89.2% 2 Tampa b $41,772 11 82.4% 3 Indianapolis c $41,904 13 81.9% 4 St. Louis b $43,033 16 77.1% 5 Pittsburgh b $43,376 18 75.6% 6 Kansas City c $43,783 20 73.9% 7 Madison b $43,879 21 73.4% 8 Cincinnati a $43,977 22 73.0% 9 Columbus b $44,420 27 71.1% 10 Austin b $45,879 33 64.9% 11 Denver a $50,886 44 43.6% Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics, Occupation Employment Survey, 2001 (1); Bureau of Economic Analysis, 2001, 2002 (1). d: 2002 Dollars Kansas City is performing moderately well in this area. Moderate salaries are driven in part by a relatively low cost-of-living, which is likely to provide an on-going competitive advantage to Kansas City. 47
4-6 Average Salary of All Workers, 2001 Why is it Significant? Salaries within a city are often highly correlated across skill levels. Nonetheless, differences in the supply of different kinds of labor relative to the local demand can produce variations in relative pay. The average salary of all workers provides the broadest measure of labor availability. As with salaries for managerial, professional, and technical workers, lower salaries make an MSA more attractive to businesses by lowering their labor costs. The average wage for all workers in Kansas City was $28,231 in 2001, which places Kansas City 30 th among the 52 MSAs. Average salaries in Kansas City are about 20% higher than San Antonio, the MSA with the lowest average salaries, and 23% lower than in San Francisco, the MSA with the highest average salaries. In its peer group, Kansas City ranks 8 th, indicating that most of its peers have lower overall labor costs. It is ahead of Austin, Madison, and Denver, however, and is very close to most of its other peers. Kansas City is positioned in the middle for attracting new industries to the area. When rankings for good jobs and all jobs are compared, the ranking drops from 18 th to 30 th respectively. Thus, Kansas City appears to be more competitive with respect to managerial, professional, and technical jobs than other jobs. Table 4-6: Average Salary of all Workers, 2001 d Metropolitan Area Dollars per Rank Index Worker 1 San Antonio c $23,261 1 100.0% 2 Orlando b $23,878 2 95.3% 3 New Orleans b $23,929 3 94.9% 4 Tampa b $24,212 4 92.8% 5 Oklahoma City b $24,263 5 92.4% Kansas City c $28,231 30 62.3% 1 Tampa b $24,212 4 92.8% 2 Salt Lake City c $25,782 11 80.9% 3 Pittsburgh b $26,933 19 72.2% 4 Indianapolis c $27,120 20 70.7% 5 Cincinnati a $27,681 24 66.5% 6 Columbus b $27,964 28 64.3% 7 St. Louis b $28,005 29 64.0% 8 Kansas City c $28,231 30 62.3% 9 Austin b $28,399 32 61.0% 10 Madison b $29,421 39 53.3% 11 Denver a $31,683 44 36.1% Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics, Occupational Employment Survey, 2001 (1); Bureau of Economic Analysis, 2001, 2002 (1). d: 2002 Dollars 48
4-7 Percentage of Households with Internet Access, 2001 Table 4-7: Percentage of Households with Internet Access, 2001 Why is this Significant? Metropolitan Area Percentage Rank Index The number of people with Internet access measures an MSA s progress in the new digital economy. As more and more people utilize the Internet and more services are offered electronically, access to this means of communication will be increasingly important. Despite the rapid increase in numbers of families with Internet access, there are still large differences in connectedness across MSAs, with on-line population ranging from 66% in San Francisco to just 41% in Birmingham. In Kansas City, 56% of households reported having Internet access at home in 2001, 85% of the value in San Francisco. This figure places Kansas City 16 th among the 52 MSAs and in the middle (6 th place) of its peer group of cities. In terms of on-line population, Kansas City is in a relatively good position. A majority of its citizens have entered the Internet age, and the city is close to its leading peers. 1 San Francisco a 65.8% 1 100.0% 2 Seattle a 64.5% 2 98.1% 3 Orlando b 63.8% 3 97.1% 4 Portland a 62.8% 4 95.4% 5 Sacramento a 62.7% 5 95.3% Kansas City c 56.0% 16 85.2% 1 Madison b 62.5% 6 95.1% 2 Austin b 60.3% 10 91.6% 3 Denver a 58.9% 12 89.5% 4 Columbus b 58.0% 14 88.2% 5 Salt Lake City c 57.6% 15 87.6% 6 Kansas City c 56.0% 16 85.2% 7 Cincinnati a 53.5% 21 81.3% 8 Indianapolis c 53.3% 22 81.0% 9 Tampa b 53.1% 24 80.8% 10 St. Louis b 45.2% 47 68.7% 11 Pittsburgh b 41.9% 51 63.7% Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics, Current Population Survey, 2001 (2). The number of people with Internet access measures an MSA s progress in the new digital economy. As more and more people utilize the Internet and more services are offered electronically, access to this means of communication will be increasingly important. 49
4-8 Percentage of Households with Broadband Internet Access, 2001 Table 4-8: Percentage of Households with Broadband Internet Access, 2001 Why is this Significant? Metropolitan Area Percentage Rank Index As the Internet has become an increasingly important means of communication, more and more services have begun to exploit the opportunities that are created by high-capacity, broadband connections. Telecommuting, delivery of multimedia content, and other activities are possible only with broadband. High levels of broadband connections in households are a measure both of an MSAs capacity to make this next step and of the readiness of its population to take advantage of these services. Kansas City ranks 17 th in the percentage of households with broadband access, with 12.5% of its population having broadband connections. This figure is 57% of the level in San Diego, the MSA with the greatest percentage of broadband users. Among its peers, Kansas City ranks 5 th and is close to the level of broadband use of all but one of its higher-ranked peers. Austin, which is ranked 2 nd among all 52 MSAs, is the exception. As with Internet access, Kansas City compares favorably with other MSAs and with its peers. Although it ranks 5 th, the percentage of households is only slighty lower than the next three higher-ranked peer cities. Catching up with Austin, however, would require substantial increases in the penetration of broadband connections. 1 San Diego b 22.0% 1 100.0% 2 Austin b 18.9% 2 86.1% 3 Rochester b 17.0% 3 77.3% 4 Dallas a 16.3% 4 73.9% 5 San Francisco a 15.9% 5 72.4% Kansas City c 12.5% 17 57.0% 1 Austin b 18.9% 2 86.1% 2 Salt Lake City c 13.7% 10 62.2% 3 Columbus b 13.6% 11 61.9% 4 Tampa b 13.0% 14 59.0% 5 Kansas City c 12.5% 17 57.0% 6 Madison b 12.2% 20 55.3% 7 Denver a 12.2% 21 55.2% 8 Pittsburgh b 10.6% 26 48.1% 9 Cincinnati a 10.0% 29 45.4% 10 St. Louis b 6.4% 44 29.0% 11 Indianapolis c 5.6% 45 25.5% Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics, Current Population Survey, 2001 (2). 50
4-9 Enhanced Business Use of the Internet, 2000 Table 4-9: Enhanced Business Use of the Internet, 2000 Why is this Significant? Business use of the Internet has become quite common. But for many businesses, investment in Internet technology has only been sufficient to ensure their participation in the Internet network through basic services such as e-mail and file sharing. A much smaller proportion of businesses have made investments in the adoption of Internet technology to enhance business processes by changing existing internal operations or implementing new Internetbased services. This latter, enhanced use of the Internet is an indicator of the extent to which businesses within an MSA have begun to exploit the potential uses of the Internet to cut costs, introduce new products, and increase competitiveness. 10 The percentage of firms adopting enhanced Internet use is still quite small, ranging from 18.3% in Denver to 9% in Las Vegas. Kansas City, with 13.6% of businesses making enhanced use of the Internet, falls roughly in the middle of this range, ranking 29 th among 52 MSAs and 8 th among its peer group. Metropolitan Area Percentage Rank Index 1 Denver a 18.3 1 100.0% 2 San Francisco a 17.0 2 92.9% 3 Salt Lake City c 16.3 3 89.1% 4 Minneapolis b 15.9 4 86.9% 5 Houston a 15.7 5 85.8% Kansas City c 13.6 29 74.3% 1 Denver a 18.3 1 100.0% 2 Salt Lake City c 16.3 3 89.1% 3 Madison b 14.9 13 81.4% 4 Austin b 14.7 15 80.3% 5 Tampa b 14.6 16 79.8% 6 Cincinnati a 14.2 22 77.6% 7 Pittsburgh b 13.6 28 74.3% 8 Kansas City c 13.6 29 74.3% 9 Indianapolis c 13.6 30 74.3% 10 St. Louis b 13.2 37 72.1% 11 Columbus b 13.0 40 71.0% Source: Forman et al., 2002. Kansas City is approximately in the middle of the pack in terms of the modernization of business practices measured by Internet enhancement. It is close enough to the leaders that it could catch up with additional investments. 51
4-10 Internet Backbone Capacity per Capita, 2000 Table 4-10: Internet Backbone Capacity per Capita, 2000 d Why is this Significant? Metropolitan Area Mbps per Capita Rank Index Internet backbone is the physical network (mainly fiber-optic cable) that carries Internet traffic between different networks. The capacity of these connections is measured in megabits per second (Mbps). In principle, any place connected to the backbone is as accessible as any other place. But as the volume of traffic increases, connections can become congested, causing traffic to slow. As a result, places with high levels of capacity are more attractive locations for businesses that distribute large amounts of information over the Internet. Among the 52 MSAs and within the peer group, Kansas City is a close 2 nd to Salt Lake City in Internet backbone capacity per capita. Kansas is substantially ahead of the 3 rd place city, Denver. The high level of backbone capacity makes Kansas City an attractive location for businesses that rely heavily on Internet communication. The high level of backbone capacity makes Kansas City an attractive location for businesses that rely heavily on Internet communication. 1 Salt Lake City c 51 1 100.0% 2 Kansas City c 48 2 92.5% 3 Denver a 38 3 73.4% 4 Atlanta b 36 4 70.5% 5 Dallas a 35 5 68.3% Kansas City c 48 2 92.5% 1 Salt Lake City c 51 1 100.0% 2 Kansas City c 48 2 92.5% 3 Denver a 38 3 73.4% 4 St. Louis b 27 13 51.5% 5 Austin b 26 14 51.1% 6 Indianapolis c 23 18 44.4% 7 Tampa b 13 34 24.6% 8 Pittsburgh b 11 39 20.7% 9 Columbus b 4 46 8.5% 10 Cincinnati a 4 47 8.3% 11 Madison b; e -- -- -- Source: Malecki, 2003; Bureau of the Census, 2000 (2). d: Mbps per 1,000 Population e: Data Unavailable 52
4-11 Percentage of Children Using Computers at School, 2001 Why is this Significant? The use of computers in the classroom is still evolving, but many educators believe that computers and the Internet can play a key role in improving education. Moreover, early exposure to computers is likely to enhance students technological literacy and their involvement in new economy activities in the future. Computer use at school is also an indicator of the level of funding available to public education. Nearly 85% of children in Kansas City used a computer at school in 2001, a figure that compares favorably with the leading MSA in this category, Madison (with 95.7% using computers at school). Overall Kansas City ranks 12 th among the 52 MSAs and is 5 th among its peer MSAs. Kansas City appears to be doing a good job of introducing computers in schools. This suggests that public investments in new educational technologies are keeping pace with the leaders in this category. Table 4-11: Percentage of ChiIdren Using Computers at School, 2001 Metropolitan Area Percentage Rank Index 1 Madison b 95.7% 1 100.0% 2 Buffalo b 90.0% 2 94.1% 3 Raleigh b 89.2% 3 93.2% 4 Jacksonville b 89.0% 4 93.0% 5 New Orleans b 88.3% 5 92.3% Kansas City c 84.8% 12 88.6% 1 Madison b 95.7% 1 100.0% 2 Austin b 88.1% 6 92.1% 3 Indianapolis c 87.6% 8 91.6% 4 Pittsburgh b 86.5% 9 90.4% 5 Kansas City c 84.8% 12 88.6% 6 Salt Lake City c 84.5% 16 88.3% 7 Cincinnati a 83.9% 19 87.7% 8 St. Louis b 83.6% 20 87.4% 9 Denver a 82.1% 27 85.8% 10 Tampa b 80.5% 33 84.1% 11 Columbus b 79.8% 39 83.4% Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics, Current Population Survey, 2001 (2). 53
4-12 Student-Teacher Ratios in K-12 Education, 2001-02 Academic Year Figure 4-12: Student-Teacher Ratios in K-12 Education, 2001-02 Academic Year Why is this Significant? Metropolitan Area Students/ Rank Index Having a strong K-12 system is important not only for creating better workers for tomorrow, but also because it attracts knowledge workers from other areas. The quality of K-12 schools is also closely tied to property values in the area. A low student-teacher ratio is highly correlated with quality schools because a small class size enables a teacher to spend more time on his/her students. Student-teacher ratios vary dramatically across MSAs, ranging from 11.4 students per teacher in Rochester, to 21.5 in Salt Lake City. Kansas City, with 14.5 students per teacher, ranks 13 th among all 52 MSAs and 4 th among its peer group. Kansas City is providing a high level of educational resources and is close to the top in this category. To reach the top of its peer group, it would only be necessary for Kansas City to reduce students-perteacher by 2 students. The low student-teacher ratio is another indication of the relatively high quality of life that the Kansas City area offers to its residents and should be another selling point for the region. It also indicates that the region s labor force will continue to be relatively well-educated, another attraction for businesses considering the MSA as a potential location. Teacher 1 Rochester b 11.4 1 100.0% 2 Buffalo b 12.7 2 87.3% 3 Madison b 12.9 3 85.5% 4 New York a 13.3 4 81.4% 5 Hartford b 13.5 5 79.0% Kansas City c 14.5 13 69.5% 1 Madison b 12.9 3 85.5% 2 Austin b 14.2 10 72.5% 3 St. Louis b 14.3 11 71.0% 4 Kansas City c 14.5 13 69.5% 5 Pittsburgh b 14.7 14 67.2% 6 Columbus b 15.2 20 62.3% 7 Cincinnati a 15.3 22 61.1% 8 Indianapolis c 16.7 35 47.3% 9 Tampa b 17.4 37 40.9% 10 Denver a 17.5 38 39.7% 11 Salt Lake City c 21.5 52 0.0% Source: National Center for Education Statistics, 2001. 54
4-13 Average Travel Time to Work, 2000 Why is this Significant? Average travel time is an indicator of the degree of congestion and number of accessible roads and highways in a geographic area. Long commutes and congestion contribute to stress and reduce productive work hours. Both the time required to commute and ease of the commute are important indicators for quality of life. Average travel time indicates the extent of government investment in highway infrastructure that is supportive of a productive environment. It also illustrates the availability of residential and commercial land with good transportation access within the area. Average travel times to work in Kansas City MSA are around 23 minutes, only a little bit longer than in Madison (20.4 minutes), which has the shortest commute times but less than one third the population of Kansas City. The other leaders in this category are also smaller than Kansas City, which ranks 9 th among the 52 MSAs and 3 rd, compared to its peers. The short travel times in Kansas City are a reflection of a high level of transportation infrastructure, which contributes to overall quality of life. This is an advantage that can be emphasized in promoting Kansas City as a business location. Table 4-13: Average Travel Time to Work, 2000 Metropolitan Area Minutes Rank Index 1 Madison b 20.4 1 100.0% 2 Grand Rapids c 21.2 2 94.4% 3 Rochester b 21.8 3 89.7% 4 Buffalo b 21.9 4 89.2% 5 Salt Lake City c 22.2 5 87.3% Kansas City c 23.3 9 79.5% 1 Madison b 20.4 1 100.0% 2 Salt Lake City c 22.2 5 87.3% 3 Kansas City c 23.3 9 79.5% 4 Columbus b 23.9 12 75.6% 5 Indianapolis c 24.1 13 74.3% 6 Cincinnati a 25.1 21 67.4% 7 Tampa b 26.1 28 60.2% 8 Denver a 26.1 29 59.8% 9 Austin b 26.2 30 59.7% 10 Pittsburgh b 26.2 32 59.3% 11 St. Louis b 26.3 33 58.9% Source: Bureau of the Census, 2000 (4). Both the time required to commute and ease of the commute are important indicators for quality of life. Average travel time indicates the extent of government investment in highway infrastructure that is supportive of a productive environment. 55