from uped to remi: utah’s experience in developing long-term economic and demographic projections...

From UPED to REMI:From UPED to REMI:

Utah’s Experience in Developing Long-Utah’s Experience in Developing Long-Term Economic and Demographic Term Economic and Demographic

ProjectionsProjections

Utah Governor’s Office of Planning and Utah Governor’s Office of Planning and BudgetBudget

January 2006January 2006

Synopsis of Current Situation Synopsis of Current Situation

►Utah bought its REMI Policy Insight Utah bought its REMI Policy Insight models in 2002models in 2002

►The REMI models replaced Utah’s in-The REMI models replaced Utah’s in-house models, which had been used for house models, which had been used for over 30 yearsover 30 years

►The 2005 Baseline long-term projection The 2005 Baseline long-term projection series is the first one to incorporate the series is the first one to incorporate the REMI modelsREMI models

Background of UPEDBackground of UPED► UPED combines a cohort component and an UPED combines a cohort component and an

economic base modeleconomic base model

► It produces projections of population, It produces projections of population, components of change, households, and components of change, households, and employment by industry at the county and employment by industry at the county and state levelstate level

► UPED was developed and implemented as UPED was developed and implemented as Utah’s official projection model in the 1970sUtah’s official projection model in the 1970s

► UPED produced extremely accurate UPED produced extremely accurate population projectionspopulation projections 1970 projection of state population in 2000 within 1970 projection of state population in 2000 within

8% of actual decennial Census count8% of actual decennial Census count

Historical Historical DataData

Utah is in the Center of the Utah is in the Center of the Fastest Growing Area of the Fastest Growing Area of the

CountryCountry

NM20.1

UT29.6

AZ40.0

CA13.8

NV66.3

OR20.4

TX22.8

OK9.7

CO30.6

WA21.1

ID28.5

MT12.9

WY8.9

ND0.5

SD8.5

MN12.4

NE8.4

KS8.5

IA5.4

MO9.3

AR13.7

LA5.9

WI9.6

IL8.6

IN9.7

OH4.7

FL23.5

TN 16.7

KY9.7

MS10.5

AL10.1

GA26.4

SC

15.1

NC21.4

VA14

WV0.8

PA3.4

NY5.5

ME3.8

AK14.0

HI9.3

MA5.5

VT8.2

NH11.4

RI4.5CT

3.6NJ8.9

DE17.6

MD10.8

Percent Change in Population for States: 1990 to 2000U.S. Rate = 13.2%

Source: U.S Census Bureau

MI6.9

Percent Change

39.6 or more (More than Three Times the U.S. Rate)

26.4 to 39.5 (More than Twice the U.S. Rate)

Utah’s Fastest Utah’s Fastest Growing Growing CountiesCounties

1990 - 20001990 - 2000

DAVIS

BOX ELDER CACHERICH

WEBER

TOOELE

SALTLAKE

MORGAN

SUMMIT DAGGETT

UTAHWASATCH

DUCHESNEUINTAH

JUAB

SANPETE

CARBON

EMERY GRANDMILLARD

PIUTE

GARFIELD

SEVIER

WAYNE

SAN JUAN

IRON

BEAVER

WASHINGTON KANE

40.0% Increase or Greater

Increase of 20.0% - 39.9%

Increase of less than 20%

Source: US Census Bureau

46% 48%

52%56%

65%

75%

80%84%

87% 88%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

1910 1920 1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000

Source: U.S. Census Bureau

Percent Urban

Utah is an Urban StateUtah is an Urban State

DAVIS

BOX ELDER CACHERICH

WEBER

TOOELE

SALTLAKE

MORGAN

SUMMIT DAGGETT

UTAHWASATCH

DUCHESNEUINTAH

JUAB

SANPETE

CARBON

EMERY GRANDMILLARD

PIUTE

GARFIELD

SEVIER

WAYNE

SAN JUAN

IRON

BEAVER

WASHINGTON KANE

► These counties are home to 1,813,669 residents, or 76% of the state’s population.

► Three out of every four people in Utah live along the Wasatch Front.

Utah’s Utah’s Population Population

CentersCenters


DAVIS

BOX ELDER CACHERICH

WEBER

TOOELE

SALTLAKE

MORGAN

SUMMIT DAGGETT

UTAHWASATCH

DUCHESNEUINTAH

JUAB

SANPETE

CARBON

EMERY GRANDMILLARD

PIUTE

GARFIELD

SEVIER

WAYNE

SAN JUAN

IRON

BEAVER

WASHINGTON KANE


CentersCenters



DAVIS

BOX ELDER CACHERICH

WEBER

TOOELE

SALTLAKE

MORGAN

SUMMIT DAGGETT

UTAHWASATCH

DUCHESNEUINTAH

JUAB

SANPETE

CARBON

EMERY GRANDMILLARD

PIUTE

GARFIELD

SEVIER

WAYNE

SAN JUAN

IRON

BEAVER

WASHINGTON KANE



CentersCenters


19721972

19821982

19931993

19971997

Utah Has the Largest Utah Has the Largest Households in the NationHouseholds in the Nation

Average U.S. Household Size: 2.59Average U.S. Household Size: 2.59

Utah....................Utah.................... 3.133.13Hawaii................Hawaii................ 2.922.92California............California............ 2.872.87Alaska.................Alaska................. 2.742.74Texas..................Texas.................. 2.742.74

Maine..................Maine.................. 2.392.39

A “household is a person or group of persons who live in a housing unit. These equal the count of occupied housing units in a census.

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2000 Census

Comparing UPED and Comparing UPED and REMI REMI

Advantages and Disadvantages of Advantages and Disadvantages of UPEDUPED

AdvantagesAdvantages

► AccuracyAccuracy 8% in 19708% in 1970 2% in 19802% in 1980 0.2% in 19840.2% in 1984

► AcceptabilityAcceptability► InstitutionalizedInstitutionalized► Alternate ScenariosAlternate Scenarios

DisadvantagesDisadvantages

► Lack of Lack of documentationdocumentation

► ComplexityComplexity► IndividualizedIndividualized

Advantages and Disadvantages of Advantages and Disadvantages of REMIREMI

AdvantagesAdvantages

► REMI has been tested REMI has been tested and documentedand documented

► The design and results The design and results are similar to UPEDare similar to UPED

► Cost savingsCost savings► Continued local controlContinued local control► CustomizableCustomizable

DisadvantagesDisadvantages

► Data differencesData differences National vs state dataNational vs state data

► Assumption Assumption differencesdifferences

► Model Model “irregularities”“irregularities”

► Demographics is Demographics is more of a byproductmore of a byproduct

Key REMI Model FeaturesKey REMI Model Features► Structural model that captures all inter-Structural model that captures all inter-

industry linkagesindustry linkages

► Is calibrated and estimated using national Is calibrated and estimated using national and regional dataand regional data

► Is dynamic and predicts when results will Is dynamic and predicts when results will occuroccur

► Economic cause & effect relationships Economic cause & effect relationships explain resultsexplain results

► Is the leading policy analysis model in the Is the leading policy analysis model in the U.S. U.S.

State of Utah Projections ProcessState of Utah Projections Process

Economic Base Model

Economic Base Model

Cohort Component Model

Cohort Component Model

Integrated Economic and Demographic ProjectionsIntegrated Economic and Demographic Projections

REMI Model StructureREMI Model StructureOutput

Market SharesLabor & Capital Demand

Population & Labor Supply

Wages, Prices, & Profits

2005 Baseline2005 Baseline

Assumptions/ProceAssumptions/Processss

AssumptionsAssumptions

► Population growth is a combination of Population growth is a combination of migration and natural increase.migration and natural increase.

► Employment drives migration.Employment drives migration.

► National employment is projected based on National employment is projected based on U.S. Census Bureau population projections.U.S. Census Bureau population projections.

Growth AnalysisGrowth Analysis

Fertility Rates for Utah and the Fertility Rates for Utah and the U.S. U.S.

3.33.1

2.6 2.62.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5

3.6

2.4

1.8

2.1 2.1 2.1 2.1 2.2 2.2 2.2

4.3

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

4.5

1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050

Utah United States

1950-2004

22%

78%

Migration Natural Increase

► Migration Migration contributed 22% contributed 22% of population of population increase from increase from 1950 – 20041950 – 2004

► During the 1990s, During the 1990s, migration rose to migration rose to 36%.36%.

► Migration Migration projected to be projected to be 26% from 2005 – 26% from 2005 – 20352035

Components of ChangeComponents of Change

ProcessProcess

0.0%

0.2%

0.4%

0.6%

0.8%

1.0%

1.2%

1.4%

1.6%

1.8%

2.0%

1969 1974 1979 1984 1989 1994 1999 2004 2009 2014 2019 2024 2029 2034 2039 2044 2049

Actual Projected Trend 1969-2002 Trend 1987-2000

The employment projection is based on a trend analysis of

Utah’s historical share of national employment.

Utah’s Share of National Utah’s Share of National EmploymentEmployment

2005 Baseline Process2005 Baseline Process

►Begin with the state modelBegin with the state model Incorporate employment using employment Incorporate employment using employment

updateupdate Incorporate fertility assumptions using Incorporate fertility assumptions using

policy variable selectionpolicy variable selection

►Disaggregate to the counties using the Disaggregate to the counties using the multi region county modelmulti region county model

►Testing and review to assure Testing and review to assure believabilitybelievability

-2.0%

0.0%

2.0%

4.0%

6.0%

8.0%

10.0%

12.0%

1950 1955 1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000

Annual Growth Rate Ten Year Average 50 Year AARC 40 Year AARC

30 Year AARC 20 Year AARC 10 Year AARC

Washington County Washington County Population Growth AnalysisPopulation Growth Analysis

-

100,000

200,000

300,000

400,000

500,000

600,000

700,000

2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050

Po

pu

latio

n...

0.0%

1.0%

2.0%

3.0%

4.0%

5.0%

6.0%

7.0%

Gro

wth

Rate

Population Growth Rate

Washington County Washington County Population GrowthPopulation Growth

2005 Baseline 2005 Baseline ResultsResults

EmploymentEmployment

0.0%

1.0%

2.0%

3.0%

4.0%

5.0%

1950s 1960s 1970s 1980s 1990s 2000s 2010s 2020s 2030s 2040s

Avera

ge A

nnual R

ate

of C

hange ..

.

State of Utah United States

Source: 2005 Baseline Projections, GOPBSource: 2005 Baseline Projections, GOPB

Employment Growth by Employment Growth by Decade Decade

for Utah and the U.S.for Utah and the U.S.

0

100,000

200,000

300,000

400,000

500,000

600,000

700,000

800,000

900,000

1,000,000

1969 1974 1979 1984 1989 1994 1999 2004 2009 2014 2019 2024 2029 2034

Services Government Agriculture Mining Construction

Manufacturing TCPU Trade FIRE

Source: Provisional 2004 Baseline Projections, Governor’s Office of Planning and Budget

SIC Major Industries in Utah: SIC Major Industries in Utah: 1969 to 20351969 to 2035

NAICS Major Industries in Utah: NAICS Major Industries in Utah: 2001-20502001-2050

0

100,000

200,000

300,000

400,000

500,000

600,000

700,000

800,000

900,000

2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050

Empl

oym

ent b

y In

dust

ry

Natural Resources and Mining Construction ManufacturingTrade, Trans., Utilities Information Financial ActivityProfessional & Business Services Education & Health Services Leisure & HospitalityOther Services Government

Location Quotients: Location Quotients: State EmploymentState Employment

0.50

0.60

0.70

0.80

0.90

1.00

1.10

1.20

1.30

1.40

2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050

Empl

oym

ent b

y In

dust

ry

Natural Resources and Mining Construction ManufacturingTrade, Trans., Utilities Information Financial ActivityProfessional & Business Services Education & Health Services Leisure & HospitalityOther Services Government

Utah Employment by Industry as Utah Employment by Industry as a Share of Total State a Share of Total State

EmploymentEmployment2050

Mining1%

Construction6%

Manufacturing8%

Information1%

Professional & Business Services

16%

Education & Health

Services24%Leisure &

Hospitality7%

Other Services

5%

Government11%

Financial Activity

8%

Trade, Trans., Utilities

13%

2006

Mining2%

Construction7%

Manufacturing8%

Trade, Trans., Utilities

17%

Information2%

Financial Activity

10%

Professional & Business Services

13%

Education & Health

Services11%

Leisure & Hospitality

9%Other Services

6%

Government15%


2005 Baseline 2005 Baseline ResultsResults

PopulationPopulation

688,862890,627

1,059,273

1,461,0371,722,850

2,246,553

2,833,337

3,486,218

4,086,319

4,701,369

5,368,567

1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050

A 100 Year Look at A 100 Year Look at Utah’s PopulationUtah’s Population

Sources: Historical, U.S. Census Bureau; Projected, 2005 Baseline Projections

Utah Population 1950 to 2050

GrowthGrowth

-20

-10

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050

Per

sons

(In

Thou

sand

s)

Net Migration Natural Increase Total Population Change

State of Utah Components of State of Utah Components of Population ChangePopulation Change


27.228.5

30.231.9 32.5 33.3 34.0

35.4 36.2 37.038.0

39.0 39.1 39.1

0

4

8

12

16

20

24

28

32

36

40

44

2000 2005 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050


Projected Median Age for Projected Median Age for Utah and the United StatesUtah and the United States


200,000 150,000 100,000 50,000 0 50,000 100,000 150,000 200,000

0- 4 5- 9

10-1415-1920-2425-2930-3435-3940-4445-4950-5455-5960-6465-6970-7475-7980-84 85+ Femal

eMale

2000

2030Source: Provisional 2004 Baseline Projections, Governor’s Office of Planning and Budget

Utah’s Changing Age StructureUtah’s Changing Age Structure

250,000 150,000 50,000 50,000 150,000 250,000

0-4

5-9

10-14

15-19

20-24

25-29

30-34

35-39

40-44

45-49

50-54

55-59

60-64

65-69

70-74

75-79

80-84

85+

Population

FemaleMale

2000 2050Source: 2005 Baseline Projections, GOPB.Source: 2005 Baseline Projections, GOPB.

Utah’s Changing Age StructureUtah’s Changing Age Structure

Growth of School-Age Population: Growth of School-Age Population: 2000 to 20302000 to 2030

0

100,000

200,000

300,000

400,000

500,000

600,000

700,000

800,000

900,000

1,000,000

2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030

Po

pu

lati

on

Ag

es 5

-17

0.0%

0.5%

1.0%

1.5%

2.0%

2.5%

3.0%

An

nu

al Gro

wth

Rate A

ges 5-17


Source: 2005 Baseline Projections, GOPB.Source: 2005 Baseline Projections, GOPB.

0

100,000

200,000

300,000

400,000

500,000

600,000

2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030

Po

pu

lati

on

Ag

es 6

5 an

d O

lder

0.0%

0.5%

1.0%

1.5%

2.0%

2.5%

3.0%

3.5%

4.0%

4.5%

5.0%

An

nu

al Gro

wth

Rate A

ges 65 an

d O

lder


Growth of 65 and Older Age Group: Growth of 65 and Older Age Group: 2000 to 20302000 to 2030


Age Group Growth Rate ComparisonAge Group Growth Rate Comparison

0.0%

0.5%

1.0%

1.5%

2.0%

2.5%

3.0%

3.5%

4.0%

4.5%

5.0%

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

2015

2016

2017

2018

2019

2020

2021

2022

2023

2024

2025

2026

2027

2028

2029

2030

5 to 17 Age Group 65 and Older Age Group Total Population


Historical and Projected Dependency Historical and Projected Dependency Ratios for Utah and the U.S.Ratios for Utah and the U.S.

55

60

65

70

75

80

85

90

1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050

De

pe

nd

en

cy

Ra

tio



18 16 16 16 16 16 16

4838 36 38 37 37 38

16

14 1418 23 27

34

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050

0 - 4 5 - 17 65+

Utah Dependency Ratios: 1990 to 2050Utah Dependency Ratios: 1990 to 2050


12 11 11 11 12 12 12

29 30 27 29 30 30 30

20 20 2127

35 36 37

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050

0 - 4 5 - 17 65+

U.S. Dependency Ratios: 1990 to 2050U.S. Dependency Ratios: 1990 to 2050


0

1,000,000

2,000,000

3,000,000

4,000,000

5,000,000

6,000,000

1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050

Uintah Basin MCD Southeast MCD Central MCD Bear River MCDSouthwest MCD Mountainland MCD Wasatch Front MCD

Population by Multi-County Population by Multi-County District: 1940 to 2030District: 1940 to 2030


-1.0%

0.0%

1.0%

2.0%

3.0%

4.0%

5.0%

6.0%

2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050

Bear River Wasatch Front Mountainland Central Southwest

Uintah Basin Southeast State of Utah United States

Source: Provisional 2004 Baseline Projections, Governor’s Office of Planning and Budget

Population Growth Rates Population Growth Rates by Multi-County District: 2000 to 2050by Multi-County District: 2000 to 2050

Utah PopulationAnnual Average

Growth RatesBy County

2000 to 2050

State Average = 1.8%

Increase of 1.0 to 1.7

Change of less than 1.0

Increase of 2.9 or Greater

Increase of 1.8 to 2.8

Box Elder1.7

Cache2.2

Rich0.7

Weber 1.3

Tooele2.6

Salt Lake

1.2

Morgan

3.8Summit

3.0Daggett 0.7

Utah1.0

Wasatch 2.9 Duchesne

1.2Uintah

0.5

Juab1.5

Sanpete1.0

Carbon0.9

Emery0.6 Grand

0.4

Millard1.7

Piute0.7

Garfield1.0

Sevier0.9

Wayne1.2

San Juan0.6

Iron2.3

Beaver2.1

Washington3.9

Kane1.4

Davis 1.1

Box Elder1.7

Cache2.2

Rich0.7

Weber 1.3

Tooele2.6

Salt Lake

1.2

Morgan

3.8Summit

3.0Daggett 0.7

Utah1.0

Wasatch 2.9 Duchesne

1.2Uintah

0.5

Juab1.5

Sanpete1.0

Carbon0.9

Emery0.6 Grand

0.4

Millard1.7

Piute0.7

Garfield1.0

Sevier0.9

Wayne1.2

San Juan0.6

Iron2.3

Beaver2.1

Washington3.9

Kane1.4

Davis 1.1

► Utah has a long history of producing timely Utah has a long history of producing timely and accurate long term economic and and accurate long term economic and demographic projectionsdemographic projections

► Utah has higher rates of economic and Utah has higher rates of economic and population growth than the nation.population growth than the nation.

► While Utah is becoming more like the nation, While Utah is becoming more like the nation, it will continue to have unique demographic it will continue to have unique demographic characteristics that set it apart.characteristics that set it apart.

► The REMI models enable Utah to continue to The REMI models enable Utah to continue to produce quality population projections at the produce quality population projections at the local levellocal level

SummarySummary

Robert SpendloveRobert Spendlove

Governor’s Office of Planning and BudgetGovernor’s Office of Planning and BudgetE210 State Capitol ComplexE210 State Capitol Complex

Salt Lake City, UT 84114Salt Lake City, UT 84114

[email protected]@utah.gov

801-538-1027801-538-1027

www.governor.utah.govwww.governor.utah.gov

from uped to remi: utah’s experience in developing long-term economic and demographic projections...

Documents