We're No. 1! But is that good?
A study commissioned by an economic development group paints a picture of the bay area, for better or worse.
By JAMES THORNER
Published May 19, 2006
Competing with 49 other major metro areas for the loyalty of employers and homesteaders, the Tampa Bay area leads the nation in loads of categories.
Hold the applause: They're not all good categories.
One the positive side, we're tops in the United States for attracting migrants from places like New York and Ohio. We're leaders in banking, beaches and the electronics industry.
But we also spend like relative cheapskates, have the oldest and least-entrepreneurial population and are so widely dispersed in suburbs we lack a sense of community.
A study, called "Things Look Different Here: The Economic Importance of Tampa Bay's Distinctiveness," was presented Thursday to about 200 regional business leaders at the Tampa Bay Partnership's annual leadership conference at St. Pete Beach's Don CeSar Beach Resort and Spa.
Business, government and education leaders can use the information to steer energy and investment to sustain what we're good at and to fix what we're not good at, said Deanne Roberts of Creative TampaBay, the nonprofit economic development group that commissioned the $40,000 study. Roberts and others will chew on the data in a series of smaller workshops over the next year.
Economist Joseph Cortright mined government data, and marketing and behavior studies to assemble an imperfect, but telling, portrait of the region. To get at distinctiveness, he flagged categories in which the Tampa Bay area veered widely from the national average.
On the jobs front, the Tampa Bay region benefits from the nation-leading internal migration, but most private-sector jobs, about 60 percent, are clustered in companies with 500 or more employees. Only Orlando was more reliant on big firms.
The focus on bigness has tended to stymie innovation: Tampa-St. Petersburg lags in entrepreneurship. One reason is that the region's reputation as a retirement hub deters young go-getters from settling here.
The shortage of startup companies wasn't all bad. It could mean the region has yet to hatch home-grown versions of successes like Starbucks. "It suggests there's a lot of opportunity for employment," Cortright said.
More than any other trend, Cortright emphasized the Tampa Bay area's alleged popularity with what will be the leading wave of retiring baby boomers, a population segment totaling about 77-million people born between 1946 and 1964.
It's hard to predict how that demographic shift will change the region, aside from stressing the health care system. But boomers will likely reinvent retirement, he said. Some will work into advanced age. Others will reject their parents' rockers for more active lifestyles.
In predicting an additional graying of the area's population, Cortright relied on U.S. Census data from 1995 to 2000. It predates the housing boom of the past four years that attracted a disproportionate share of younger families.
Cortright suggested the region marshal its resources toward proven strengths: health care, financial services and the manufacture of medical devices and electronics.
"You have to have a laserlike focus on the things you're successful at," said Cortright of Impresa Consulting in Portland, Ore.
The study heralded the region as a winner in another category, but Cortright wasn't sure how it would be received. We came in third in the number strip clubs. Las Vegas was No. 1, followed unexpectedly by Cincinnati.
"We'll have to do some Cincinnati research," Cortright joked.
James Thorner can be reached at thorner@sptimes.com or 813226-3313.
Things look different here
How the Tampa Bay area stands out from 49 other metropolitan areas with populations more than 1-million:
Demographics: Highest median age (40) in United States.
Jobs: Among the lowest in entrepreneurship in United States. Reliance on large employers with more than 500 employees.
Attitudes: Leads nation in distrusting public schools. Less interest in museums, libraries and the arts.
Consumption: Despite household incomes close to the national average, people eat out less and spend less on clothes.
Community: Below average in charitable giving, live in more sprawling communities and do less volunteer work.
Source: Impresa