Manufacturing in Ohio: A Post-Recession Employment Outlook examines expected employment trends in Ohio's manufacturing industries. Manufacturing has more employment opportunities than might be expected. Post-recession hiring, the need to replace retiring workers, and new skill needs are some changes expected to affect manufacturing over the next few years. This 26-page report was released in April 2013.

The shift from traditional manufacturing to advanced manufacturing is playing a critical role in the region’s economic transformation, reports the quarterly Cleveland Plus Economic Review released February 18, 2013, by Team NEO. Between 2010 and 2020, manufacturing Gross Regional Product (GRP) is projected to grow 39%, to a $43 billion sector of the economy. US output is projected to grow 33%.

The National Association of Manufacturers (NAM), the Manufacturing Institute and the Manufacturers Alliance for Productivity and Inovation (MAPI), recently published the 2012 Edition of Facts About Manufacturing. This 65-page publication contains statistics, charts and graphs setting out the strengths and challenges manufacturing faces today and clearly demonstrates the central place manufacturing holds in the nation's economy.

The Ohio Manufacturers' Association has published its 2012 Ohio Manufacturing Counts report, stressing the importance of the industry in the Buckeye State.

Ohio manufacturing is responsible for almost 17% of Ohio’s Gross Domestic Product and contributes to the quality of life in Ohio by providing more than 600,000 jobs for Ohio workers contributing an annual payroll of more than $33 billion to the economy.

Manufacturing is the largest of the 20 sectors of Ohio’s economy with 16.7% of total output in 2010. Ohio’s manufacturing sector produced $80 billion worth of goods in 2010, ranking it fifthin the nation after California, Texas, Illinois and North Carolina.

Manufacturing the future: The next era of global growth and innovation, McKinsey & Co., November 2012
New York—A major report from the McKinsey Global Institute, presents a clear view of how manufacturing contributes to the global economy today and how it will probably evolve over the coming decade. Free downloads of the full report, an executive summary, Kindle and eReader versions.

KPMG Global Manufacturing Outlook 2012, KPMG, June 4, 2012
New York—KPMG’s new report, Global Manufacturing Outlook: Fostering Growth through Innovation, examines an industry experiencing transformational shifts and the strategies manufacturing leaders are using to adapt to ongoing volatility, drive innovation, and position themselves for both top and bottom-line growth.

Locating American Manufacturing: Trends in the Geography of Production, by Susan Helper, Timothy Krueger, Howard Wial, The Brookings Institution, May 9, 2012
Washington—This new Brookings Institution report report begins by situating the present moment of U.S. manufacturing. It continues by reporting a series of often surprising descriptive trends affecting the nature and location of American production. Finally, it concludes by proposing geographic high-road policies for American manufacturing. Download the full report (PDF, 6M).

Special Report: Manufacturing and Innovation—A third industrial revolution, by Paul Markillie, The Economist, April 21, 2012
London—As manufacturing goes digital, it will change out of all recognition, and some of the business of making things will return to first-world countries. The Economist's special report for the week of April 21, 2012 features eight articles covering topics from jobs to additive manufacturing technology.

The Future of Manufacturing: Opportunities to drive economic growth, World Economic Forum Report in collaboration with Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu Limited, April 2012

The report highlights the key trends that will define manufacturing competition over the next 20 years and which will require the attention and collaboration of policy-makers, civil society and business leaders. With an estimated 10 million jobs with manufacturing organizations worldwide that cannot be filled today due to a growing skills gap, the report identifies talent as one of the key differentiators that will define the future of the sector.

A National Strategic Plan for Advanced Manufacturing, National Science and Technology Council, February 2012

Washington, D.C.—February 22, 2012—Today, the National Science and Technology Council is releasing a new “National Strategic Plan for Advanced Manufacturing.” The strategic plan was requested by Congress in the America COMPETES Reauthorization Act of 2010. ... This new advanced manufacturing plan, together with the ongoing work of the Advanced Manufacturing Partnership, provides a solid foundation on which to erect a Federal policy that will enable the United States to “build it here, and sell it everywhere.”

Manufacturing’s Wake-Up Call, by Arvind Kaushal, Thomas Mayor, and Patricia Riedl, Tauber Institute for Global Operations, Univ. of Mich., January 6, 2012 (PDF, 980k)
Ann Arbor, Mich.—A new study by the University of Michigan's Tauber Institute shows how the decisions made today by goods producers and policymakers will shape U.S. competitiveness tomorrow.

Science and Engineering Indicators Digest 2012, by National Science Board, January 2012

Washington, D.C.—January 2012—This 28-page digest summarizes the findings of the National Science Board's (NSB) Science and Engineering Indicators Report. One finding: "The United States remains the global leader in supporting science and technology (S&T) research and development, but only by a slim margin that could soon be overtaken by rapidly increasing Asian investments in knowledge-intensive economies." The NSB is a unit of the National Science Foundation. The digest and the complete report is available for free download at the link, including Chapter 6: Industry, Technology, and the Global Marketplace.

Shale Gas: A renaissance in US manufacturing?, by Pricewaterhouse Cooper's Industrial Manufacturing Practice, December 2011

Washington, D.C.—December 2011—This 16-page report explores the potential benefits and the potential limiting factors for shale gas exploitation. Among its conclusions: "To achieve these positive results, manufacturers will likely need to become active stakeholders in the shale gas industry. Such advocacy means supporting certain tax and regulatory issues promoting the growth of the industry, as well as supporting environmentally safe and ttransparent gas extraction methods and public education and community outreach programs."

The Case for a National Manufacturing Strategy, by Stephen J. Ezell and Robert D. Atkinson, The Information Technology & Innovation Foundation (ITIF), April 2011

Washington, D.C.—April 2011—This paper builds the intellectual case for why the United States needs a serious national manufacturing strategy. Until there is a consensus that manufacturing is important, that it is not healthy, and that a national manufacturing policy is needed, it will be difficult to create a platform for reframing the conversation. Meanwhile, other nations are putting in place manufacturing strategies that include key components such as tax incentives and large investments in research, skills development, infrastructure, and technology transfer and technical assistance. Every day we do nothing, we risk falling further behind.

Understanding the Economy: Promising Signs of Recovery in Manufacturing, Prepared by the U.S. Congress Joint Economic Committee Majority Staff, August 2010.

Washington, D.C.—August 2, 2010—A new report released today by the U.S. Congress Joint Economic Committee (JEC), titled “Understanding the Economy: Promising Signs of Recovery in Manufacturing,” provides an in-depth look at the manufacturing sector, examining manufacturing employment losses during the Great Recession and detailing the rebound in manufacturing during the first half of 2010.

A Brief on the Performance of Northeast Ohio's High-Tech Economy, NorTech, July 2010 (PDF, 437k)

Northeast Ohio High-Tech Economy Report, by Iryna Lendel, Ph.D., CSU Maxine Goodman Levin College of Urban Affairs, prepared for NorTech, June 2010 (PDF, 750k)

Cleveland—July 29, 2010—NorTech, a catalyst for growing Northeast Ohio’s technology industries, today released its annual Northeast Ohio High-Tech Economy Brief, which analyzes performance of the region’s technology economy.

The Brief also compares Northeast Ohio to the remainder of Ohio, the Midwest and the U.S. from the perspective of employment, output, productivity and average wages in high-tech industries in 2008. (Complete Press Release)

Talent Pressures and the Aging Workforce: Manufacturing Sector, by Stephen Sweet and Marcie Pitt-Catsouphes with Elyssa Besen, Shoghik Hovhannisyan, and Farooq Pasha, The Sloan Center on Aging & Work at Boston College, July 2010 (PDF, 2.2M)

Boston—A wave of retirement in the manufacturing sector could plague US companies with skill shortages and high costs of replacing veteran employees. This new study by the Sloan Center on Aging & Work moves beyond simple awareness of aging trends, suggesting action steps for the manufacturing sector.

Indiana report rates Ohio high in manufacturing production and logistics; low in other business areas, by Marc Ransford, Ball State University Press Release, June 25, 2010
Muncie, Ind.—The 2010 Manufacturing and Logistics Report Card, prepared by Ball State's Center for Business and Economic Research, grades all 50 states in several areas, including manufacturing and logistics health, human capital, cost of benefits, and innovation, tax climate and venture capital activities. Michael Hicks, CBER director, believes America's manufacturing output could return to the high point of 2006-07 sometime in 2011-12 as companies ramp up production to meet growing consumer demand.

The New Normal: Cliché or Reality? Plante & Moran Manufacturing & Distribution Survey, by Jeff Mengel, Partner, April 2010 (PDF, 1.5M)

Plante & Moran's survey of more than 170 manufacturing companies in North America focused on four areas: sales growth and recovery, human capital, continued cost reductions and credit management. The survey's purpose was to build a picture of what the economy might look like when the country begins to recover. Among the study's many discoveries: manufacturers who failed to diversify their customer base suffered the most during this recession.

In March 2010, the Hollings Manufacturing Extension Partnership (MEP) Board released the first in a series of annual papers intended to create a more dynamic discussion about the future of U.S. manufacturing.

This first paper sets the context for the series by laying out the complex realities of manufacturing, identifying the successful characteristics of U.S. manufacturers, and suggesting opportunities for action that can increase the competitiveness of U.S. manufacturers and manufacturing.

The report includes an introduction by Edward W. (Ned) Hill, Chair of the Hollings MEP Advisory Board and Dean, Maxine Goodman Levin College of Urban Affairs, Cleveland State University. Professor Hill is also a member of the MAGNET Board of Directors.

The report identifies the four traits of successful manufacturers, including:

• innovate constantly to adapt to economic and technological changes;
• embrace green and green lean;
• recognize and navigate opportunity in the global value chain; and
• develop and retain current and future talent.

The report identifies a dozen opportunities for action across these four characteristics. Both the 44-page full report and the six-page executive summary are available for free download.

The long road to recovery from the recession of 2007: December 2009 Update, by Edward Hill, Dean, Levin College of Urban Affairs, Cleveland State University, November 28, 2009 (PDF).

Identifying High Demand Occupations and Understanding the Needs of Northeast Ohio Manufacturers, Focus Group Summary Report, CSU Levin College of Urban Affairs, July 2009 (PDF). Sponsored by MAGNET and Ohio Skills Bank Regional Team.

Regional Dashboard of Economic Indicators 2009: Comparative Performance of Leading, Midwest and Northeast Ohio Metropolitan Areas, by Ziona Austrian, Afia Yamoah and Candi Clouse, the Center for Economic Development Levin College of Urban Affairs, Cleveland State University, July 2009 (PDF).

Commercialization of Hydrogen Fuel Cell Technology in North America: Pathways to Success in Northeast Ohio, by the Center for Sustainable Business Practices, Nance College of Business, and the Center for Economic Development, Levin College of Urban Affairs, Cleveland State University, December 2009 (PDF). Funded by the Cleveland Foundation.

Driving Ohio's Prosperity: How to help manufacturers do today's job of meeting customers' demands and tomorrow's job of continuing to innovate and improve, by Edward W. Hill, Jim Samuel and Fran Stewart, June 2008. Prepared for Compete Columbus.

Manufacturing Brief: Trends in manufacturing industries in Northeast Ohio, by Jill Taylor, May 2008 (PDF). Produced by the Center for Economic Development at Cleveland State University's Levin College of Urban Affairs. Sponsored by MAGNET and the U.S. Economic Development Administration.

Manufacturing Brief: Trends in manufacturing industries in Northeast Ohio, by Afia Yamoah, produced by the Center for Economic Development at Cleveland State University's Levin College of Urban Affairs, November 2007 (PDF). Sponsored by MAGNET and the U.S. Economic Development Administration.

Manufacturing Brief: Trends in manufacturing industries in Northeast Ohio, by Ziona Austrian, produced by the Center for Economic Development at Cleveland State University's Levin College of Urban Affairs, October 2006 (PDF). Sponsored by MAGNET and the U.S. Economic Development Administration.

Northwest Ohio Manufacturing Analysis, by Robert Sadowski and Jill Norton, CSU Levin College of Urban Affairs, May 2006 (PDF). Prepared for MAGNET.

Northeast Ohio Manufacturing Analysis; a Working Paper in Support of the Northeast Ohio Roadmap for Manufacturing Initiative, by Iryna Lendel and Ziona Austrian, CSU Center for Economic Development, August 2005.

Ohio's Competitive Advantage: Manufacturing Productivity, by Edward W. Hill, CSU Levin College of Urban Affairs, 2001 (PDF). Supported by the Ohio Manufacturers' Association.

Briefing Paper: Manufacturing Locations in Ohio: Shifts in Employment and Average Earnings Among Central, Suburban, and Rural Counties, by Robert Sadowski, October 2001 (PDF). Produced by the Center for Economic Development at Cleveland State University's Levin College of Urban Affairs

Links:

Cleveland State University Levin College of Urban Affairs Research Department
Search the Urban Center's publications database for the most recent data on manufacturing in Northeast Ohio.