
Go To Current Index 1999 State Index Home
Introduction
Overview & Methodology
Overall Rankings
Summary of Results
THE INDICATORS
PART
I: KNOWLEDGE JOBS
Office Jobs

Managerial,
Professional, and Technical Jobs

Workforce
Education
PART II: GLOBALIZATION
Export Focus of Manufacturing

Foreign Direct Investment
PART III: ECONOMIC DYNAMISM
"Gazelle" Jobs

Job Churning

IPOs
PART IV: THE DIGITAL ECONOMY
Online Population

".com" Domain Name Registrations

Technology in Schools

Digital Government
PART V: INNOVATION CAPACITY
High-Tech Jobs

Scientists and Engineers

Patents

Industry Investment in R&D

Venture Capital
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIES
Data Sources
Weighting System
Endnotes
The Authors


|
 |

PART II: GLOBALIZATION
Foreign Direct Investment
The percentage of each states workforce employed by foreign
companies.
WHY
IS THIS IMPORTANT? Foreign direct investment (FDI) includes
significant investments by foreign companies, such as construction of
production facilities or ownership stakes taken in U.S. companies. FDI
not only creates new jobs, it can also lead to an infusion of innovative
technologies, management strategies, and workforce practices. For example,
some have argued that Japanese automobile plants in the Midwest spurred
American companies to adopt more modernized manufacturing practices.15
Foreign direct investment has been on the rise in the United States and
around the world since the 1970s. In the United States, incoming FDI has
grown from $134 billion for all of the 1970s to $312 billion in just the
first half of the 1990s (in constant 1992 dollars), and from .32 percent
of GDP to .69 percent.
THE
RANKINGS: With the exception of Hawaii, which has the top score because of its
proximity to Asia, most states that score well are on the East Coast. This is in large
part because most FDI comes from Europe and Canada. In 1996, Europe accounted for
two-thirds of all FDI in the United States, with Asia accounting for less than 15 percent.
European companies have invested in East Coast states in part because of their proximity
to their corporate headquarters, and because of the access to densely populated markets.

| STATES BY
RANK |
| Rank |
State |
Score |
| 1 |
Hawaii |
8.8% |
| 2 |
South Carolina |
6.7% |
| 3 |
North Carolina |
6.2% |
| 4 |
Massachusetts |
5.4% |
| 5 |
New Jersey |
5.3% |
| 6 |
Georgia |
5.2% |
| 7 |
Connecticut |
5.1% |
| 8 |
Tennessee |
5.1% |
| 9 |
New Hampshire |
5.1% |
| 10 |
Maine |
4.8% |
| 11 |
Kentucky |
4.8% |
| 12 |
Virginia |
4.4% |
| 13 |
New York |
4.3% |
| 14 |
Delaware |
4.3% |
| 15 |
Indiana |
4.2% |
| 16 |
Pennsylvania |
4.2% |
| 17 |
Ohio |
4.2% |
| 18 |
Rhode Island |
4.1% |
| 19 |
Illinois |
4.0% |
| 20 |
California |
3.8% |
| 21 |
Maryland |
3.6% |
| 22 |
Minnesota |
3.6% |
| 23 |
West Virginia |
3.5% |
| 24 |
Alaska |
3.5% |
| 25 |
Colorado |
3.5% |
| 26 |
Texas |
3.5% |
| 27 |
Utah |
3.4% |
| 28 |
Michigan |
3.4% |
| 29 |
Florida |
3.2% |
| 30 |
Kansas |
3.2% |
| 31 |
Washington |
3.2% |
| 32 |
Vermont |
3.2% |
| 33 |
Nevada |
3.1% |
| 34 |
Alabama |
3.1% |
| 35 |
Oregon |
3.0% |
| 36 |
Missouri |
3.0% |
| 37 |
Arkansas |
3.0% |
| 38 |
Louisiana |
2.9% |
| 39 |
Arizona |
2.7% |
| 40 |
Wisconsin |
2.5% |
| 41 |
Wyoming |
2.5% |
| 42 |
Iowa |
2.4% |
| 43 |
Oklahoma |
2.3% |
| 44 |
New Mexico |
2.1% |
| 45 |
Nebraska |
2.0% |
| 46 |
Idaho |
2.0% |
| 47 |
Mississippi |
1.8% |
| 48 |
North Dakota |
1.4% |
| 49 |
South Dakota |
1.4% |
| 50 |
Montana |
1.0% |
|
|
|
|
U.S. Average |
3.9% |
|
|
| ALPHABETICALLY |
| State |
Rank |
Score |
| Alabama |
34 |
3.1% |
| Alaska |
24 |
3.5% |
| Arizona |
39 |
2.7% |
| Arkansas |
37 |
3.0% |
| California |
20 |
3.8% |
| Colorado |
25 |
3.5% |
| Connecticut |
7 |
5.1% |
| Delaware |
14 |
4.3% |
| Florida |
29 |
3.2% |
| Georgia |
6 |
5.2% |
| Hawaii |
1 |
8.8% |
| Idaho |
46 |
2.0% |
| Illinois |
19 |
4.0% |
| Indiana |
15 |
4.2% |
| Iowa |
42 |
2.4% |
| Kansas |
30 |
3.2% |
| Kentucky |
11 |
4.8% |
| Louisiana |
38 |
2.9% |
| Maine |
10 |
4.8% |
| Maryland |
21 |
3.6% |
| Massachusetts |
4 |
5.4% |
| Michigan |
28 |
3.4% |
| Minnesota |
22 |
3.6% |
| Mississippi |
47 |
1.8% |
| Missouri |
36 |
3.0% |
| Montana |
50 |
1.0% |
| Nebraska |
45 |
2.0% |
| Nevada |
33 |
3.1% |
| New Hampshire |
9 |
5.1% |
| New Jersey |
5 |
5.3% |
| New Mexico |
44 |
2.1% |
| New York |
13 |
4.3% |
| North Carolina |
3 |
6.2% |
| North Dakota |
48 |
1.4% |
| Ohio |
17 |
4.2% |
| Oklahoma |
43 |
2.3% |
| Oregon |
35 |
3.0% |
| Pennsylvania |
16 |
4.2% |
| Rhode Island |
18 |
4.1% |
| South Carolina |
2 |
6.7% |
| South Dakota |
49 |
1.4% |
| Tennessee |
8 |
5.1% |
| Texas |
26 |
3.5% |
| Utah |
27 |
3.4% |
| Vermont |
32 |
3.2% |
| Virginia |
12 |
4.4% |
| Washington |
31 |
3.2% |
| West Virginia |
23 |
3.5% |
| Wisconsin |
40 |
2.5% |
| Wyoming |
41 |
2.5% |
|
Source: Bureau of Economic Analysis, 1996-1997 data.
Go
to next indicator >>
State Index Home | Introduction
The Rankings | Summary
of Results
Development Strategies | Data Sources
Appendix | Endnotes
| The Authors
The Progressive Policy Institute (PPI)
Technology, Innovation, and New Economy Project
600 Pennsylvania Ave., S.E., Suite 400, Washington DC 20003
Phone: (202) 546-0007
www.ppionline.org
Website design by OnlineWorkshop.
|