|
December 1999
Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas
San Antonio Branch
Border Region Makes Progress in the 1990s
The 1990s have been a decade of change
along the Texas/Mexico border. In this historically low-wage,
high job-growth region, income and earnings in the 1990s have
outpaced the national average. The gains have come during
a period marked by the implementation of the North American
Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), a sharp mid-decade decline in
the Mexican peso and economy, and a prolonged expansion of
the maquiladora industry in northern Mexico. While these factors
have affected the fortunes of the border economy, a key to
future income growth may be a significant increase in public
education spending that began in the 1990s.
A Tale of Two Economies
"It was the best of times,
it was the worst of times." Like the famous Charles Dickens
novel, the border economy's story is one of contrasts. Although
historically the border has had high unemployment and low
income, it also has a high job-growth rate. Just how poor
is the border, and what accounts for its high rate of job
growth? The answers are varied, but obviously the region's
geographical and cultural ties to Mexico play a crucial role
in its economy.
For the sake of uniformity, we define
the border the same way the Texas Comptroller of Public Accounts
did for the recent study "Bordering the Future."[1]
The 43-county region begins at the New Mexico state line in
Anthony and runs through El Paso to San Antonio along Interstate
10, then down Interstate 37 to the north side of Corpus Christi
on the Texas Gulf coast (Chart 1).
Strong job growth along the border
distinguishes the region from other poor areas of the nation.
For example, from 1969 to 1997, annual job growth was 2.6
percent for the border overall and 3.4 percent in poor border
counties. In contrast, employment grew 2.0 percent, 0.4 percent
and 0.3 percent in the poorest regions in Kentucky, West Virginia
and Mississippi, respectively (Chart 2). Compared with Texas,
these three states each had a higher percentage of their population
living in poor counties.[2]
But as border jobs have grown strongly,
incomes have generally remained low. In 1997, per capita personal
income was $17,255 in the border counties, $23,707 in Texas
and $25,288 in the United States. This gap may be distorted
by a couple of factors: a relatively large nonworking-age
population in the border region and unmeasured income from
cash-based business transactions in this area. Less affected
by these factors, earnings per job ranked the border closer
to the state and nation in 1997 at $25,457, compared with
$31,178 in Texas and $30,842 in the United States.
By almost any measure the border area
is poor, but it is better off in some respects than other
poor areas. As shown in Chart 3, the per capita personal income
in Kentucky, West Virginia and Mississippi ranged from $13,239
to $13,695, well below the $17,255 in the Texas border region
but higher than the $12,103 in the poor border counties. However,
earnings per job in the poor border counties were significantly
higher than in Kentucky, West Virginia and Mississippi.
Oddly, certain indicators that usually
accompany poverty are missing in South Texas, even in the
poorest counties. Mortality rates and infant death rates are
close to the national average and much lower than in the poor
counties in Kentucky, West Virginia and Mississippi. The border
region's high birth rates result in a very young and growing
population. Only 52.8 percent of the poor county population
is over age 25, compared with 63.7 percent in the United States
and about 60 percent in other poor regions we looked at. Typically,
one makes more money as one gets older. Thus, with fewer people
in the prime of their working lives, wages will be lower.
Another factor in determining border
income levels is education. Of the population over the age
of 25, 47.2 percent in poor border counties have a high school
diploma. Only Kentucky's poor counties have lower graduation
rates, and the national average is a much higher 77.6 percent.
On the other hand, college graduates make up 10.9 percent
of the adult border population, compared with 9.5 percent,
7 percent and 6.9 percent in Mississippi, Kentucky and West
Virginia, respectively. The U.S. average, however, is 21.3
percent, twice the border percentage.
The lack of education contributes to
lower wages along the border. The comptroller's study reports
that, for U.S.-born residents, the incomes of border workers
relative to all Texans are higher for workers with at least
a high school education. For example, the 1990 census showed
that for workers in the 45 to 64 age group, native-born border
workers without high school diplomas earned 78.2 percent of
the state average income for the same education level/age
group, while those with a high school education earned 92.6
percent and those with a bachelor's degree earned 85.3 percent.
Also, in 1993-94 the border unemployment rate for workers
without a high school diploma was 11.5 percent, compared with
2.9 percent for college graduates.
1990s Bring Progress
The 1990s have been eventful for
the border region. NAFTA became effective in January 1994.
A significant peso devaluation in December 1994 was followed
by a sharp recession in Mexico in 1995. After increasing strongly
in 1994, employment growth slowed significantly in 1995. Job
growth rebounded in 1996 and continued to pick up strength
until the second half of 1998, when a steep decline in oil
prices hit the oil-dependent areas of the border and caused
some slowing in the Mexican economy.
Overall, however, the 1990s marked
a period of progress for the border economy. Gains in state
funding for public education and increased funding for Border
Patrol and Customs created many new high-paying jobs. The
maquiladora industry (mostly foreign-owned industrial plants
on the Mexican side of the border) boomed, increasing demand
for retail and banking services on the Texas side of the border.
And while NAFTA may have played a role in the decline of apparel
manufacturing and other low-skilled industries, transportation
and warehousing got a boost from strong gains in trade.
The most recent income data show that
border earnings per job rose at an average annual rate of
3.9 percent from 1990 through 1997, versus 3.5 percent in
the nation. During the 1980s, border growth was slower than
the nation's. As shown in Chart 4, average earnings growth
varied from a low of 3.5 percent for Brownsville to 5 percent
for Laredo. No border metro area grew more slowly than the
national average.
Job growth also has been strong in
the 1990s. From 1990 through 1997 annual job growth averaged
2.8 percent for the entire border region, versus 1.6 percent
in the nation. Growth in the metropolitan areas ranged from
1.9 percent in El Paso to 5 percent in Laredo (Chart 4). In
1990 El Paso had a larger share of employment in manufacturing
than any other border metropolitan area; hence, it has been
hit hard by losses in apparel manufacturing. Laredo, on the
other hand, has the largest share of employment in transportation
services and has benefited from being the biggest land port
for trade between Texas and Mexico. Total shipments through
the Port of Laredo increased 89.5 percent from 1994 to 1997
and, in 1997, were valued at about $50 billion—twice
the amount of goods traveling through El Paso, the next largest
land port.
Increased Focus on Education
The most important change along
the border in the 1990s may be the least observed. Restructured
funding methods beginning in 1992 dramatically increased the
amount of money available to border schools. By 1997, border
schools had seen their total revenue increase by 57 percent,
to $5,269 per student—$134 more than non-border districts
and $103 more than the state average. While the comptroller's
study gives evidence that the funding increase has already
begun to improve school performance, the greatest effects
will likely take hold in decades to come. [3]
Another important change in the 1990s
was the South Texas/Border Initiative, approved by state legislators
in 1989. The initiative provided additional funding for border
universities and authorized new academic programs and courses.
Lawmakers merged some public border institutions with the
University of Texas and Texas A&M University systems and
upgraded the status of five higher education institutions.
From fiscal year 1990 through fiscal
1996, state funding of border higher education increased $87
million, a 69 percent gain. In 1996, South Texas institutions,
with 15.6 percent of the state's full-time students, received
15 percent of the general revenue funding for higher education.
By comparison, 1990 enrollment at these universities accounted
for 13.7 percent of college students but only 11.1 percent
of the state's higher education funds. As with the increased
funding of public schools, most of the return on the additional
investment in higher education will come in future decades.
Summary and Conclusions
NAFTA's implementation, a mid-decade
peso devaluation and Mexican recession, and strength in the
Mexican maquiladora industry have left their mark on the border
region during the 1990s. Earnings per job and the number of
jobs have increased at a faster pace than the national average,
allowing this low-wage region to make small relative gains.
If Mexico continues to make economic
and political reforms, banking and retail services that border
communities now provide to Mexican nationals may be reduced.
However, if the border population takes advantage of a significant
investment in education that began in the 1990s, it can create
its own economic opportunities.
The border's warm climate and proximity
to Mexico should ensure a steady supply of workers. Marked
gains in the percentage of the workforce with high school
and college degrees would attract employers, particularly
as the U.S. workforce ages. Also, workers in the area will
likely start more of their own businesses, capitalizing on
their education and their knowledge of the language and culture
of the expanding Hispanic population within Mexico and the
United States.
| — |
Eric Dittmar |
| |
Keith Phillips |
 |
| Notes
Eric Dittmar was a research
assistant at the Federal Reserve Bank's San Antonio
Branch. Keith Phillips is a senior economist at
the San Antonio Branch.
- A copy of the comptroller's
study [off-site] can be obtained from the
web site or by calling 1-800-531-5441, ext.
3-4900.
- We define poor counties as those ranked among
the lowest 250 counties in the United States
in per capita personal income in 1997.
- Most of the data in this section come from
the study cited in footnote 1.
About Vista
For more information, contact
Keith Phillips at (210) 978-1409 or e-mail keith.r.phillips@dal.frb.org.
For a copy of this publication, call Rachel Peña
at (210) 978-1663 or e-mail rachel.pena@dal.frb.org.
Vista is published
by the San Antonio Branch, Federal Reserve Bank
of Dallas, P.O. Box 1471, San Antonio, TX 78295-1471.
The views expressed are
those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect
the positions of the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas
or the Federal Reserve System.
Articles may be reprinted
if the source is credited and a copy is provided
to the San Antonio Branch of the Federal Reserve
Bank of Dallas.
Editor: Keith Phillips
Copy Editor: Jennifer Afflerbach
Design: Gene Autry
Layout & Production: Ellah Piña and
Laura Bell |
 |
|
|