DL is well-situated for growth
When it comes to gross domestic product, some recent data show surprising strength in this area. For one thing, Fargo is booming, with gross domestic product now in the $60,000 per capita range, just below Minneapolis-St, Paul, according to a new...
When it comes to gross domestic product, some recent data show surprising strength in this area.
For one thing, Fargo is booming, with gross domestic product now in the $60,000 per capita range, just below Minneapolis-St, Paul, according to a new federal report.
The federal government compiles data on Metropolitan Statistical Areas (MSAs), which it defines as “an area containing a large population nucleus and adjacent communities that have a high degree of integration with that nucleus.”
Minnesota has seven MSAs, three within state boundaries (Mankato, Rochester and St. Cloud) and four that straddle the borders of North Dakota and Wisconsin (Fargo, Grand Forks, LaCrosse, and Minneapolis-St. Paul).
According to an analysis by Louis D. Johnston of MinnPost, Fargo stands out with jumps in income over the past three years.
While the Bakken shale oil boom certainly helped boost Fargo’s GDP, in the past few years it has actually hindered growth there.
Johnson says the underlying data show that the natural resources and mining sector slowed growth in Fargo’s GDP. In other words, its GDP would have grown faster than it did without the oil boom.
So what’s going on with the Fargo-Moorhead area? According to Minnesota Business magazine, it has become an emerging business and technology destination, fueled by the energy and ingenuity of entrepreneurs in a variety of industries.
Consider this: In 2013, Forbes ranked Fargo-Moorhead No. 2 on its Best Small Places for Business and Careers list.
Area Development magazine gave it a seventh-place ranking on its Leading Locations list.
And CNN Money ranked Fargo-Moorhead the third-best small area in which to launch a business, based on its tech community, educational resources, labor force quality, and access to large metro areas.
Grand Forks, in contrast, saw over 60 percent of its growth come in natural resources, from the oil boom.
Some other items of interest from the new report, which contains data from 2001 to 2013:
Minneapolis-St. Paul passed Detroit in GDP. Since 2008, Minneapolis-St. Paul moved up from the 14th largest metro area by GDP to 13th, changing places with Detroit.
Big deal, right? But look at the big picture: Johnson reports that right behind Minneapolis-St. Paul is Phoenix, San Diego, San Jose and Denver.
All trailed Minneapolis-St. Paul in 2008 and were still behind in 2013.
And all of those areas experienced more rapid population growth than the Twin Cities, which means that productivity (output per person) grew faster in Minneapolis-St. Paul than in the others.
Minnesota’s metro areas did well since 2001. That’s not true everywhere in the country.
GDP per capita rose in every Minnesota metro area between 2001 and 2013. In particular, every metro area met or surpassed its 2007 level of income per person.
Compare that with Naples, Fla., which saw it’s GDP per capita fall from $46,933 in 2001 to $39,235 in 2013 (in constant dollars), as did Colorado Springs ($41,086 to $39,377) and Atlanta ($57,832 to $52,178).
Detroit Lakes is fortunate to be situated where the economy is doing well both in Fargo-Moorhead and the Twin Cities.