Seven out of every 10 workers in Wisconsin live in metropolitan areas. Their place of employment and occupations are as diverse as their location in the state. In fact, Wisconsin has officially become a more metropolitan state. In June 2003, federal officials declared that Wisconsin now has 12 designated metropolitan areas that include 21 counties within the state's boundaries. Including the four additional counties in the state that are part of metropolitan areas in Minnesota and Illinois, the State now has a grand total of 25 metropolitan area counties. Prior to the June 2003 pronouncement, the State had 20 metropolitan counties. Seventy-two percent of Wisconsin’s population lives in these twenty-five metropolitan designated counties. There are 359 designated metropolitan statistical areas in the United States, so an average state would have seven metropolitan statistical areas (MSA).
The official definition of a metropolitan area is a county or counties with an urbanized area or central city and a minimum population of 50,000, which exhibits an economic, "gravitational" pull on immediate outlying communities. The Executive Branch's Office of Budget and Management, using decennial data from the U.S. Census, determines metropolitan area status. Multiple-county metropolitan areas usually consist of a single "hub" county and adjacent counties that send a minimum of 25 percent of its workers to this hub county. There are many degrees of metropolitan designation dictated by population size, but Wisconsin metropolitan areas, for all intents and purposes, are not large enough for these different degrees. The most recent designations were released in June 2003.
The diverse geographic distribution of Wisconsin's population combined with the strong rural composition of its workforce provides the state with the worker base for its numerous metropolitan areas. The 25 metropolitan counties crisscross the state from Green Bay to La Crosse and from Kenosha to Superior. Just as a high percentage of Wisconsin’s population is found along the eastern edge of the State, so too are a majority of its metropolitan counties. Workers from surrounding counties drive to metropolitan communities for jobs and to shop and then return to their outlying homes, where they find a less hectic lifestyle. The sharing of workers between state and county lines is what truly shapes a metropolitan area, not the geographic boundaries or population figures.
The dynamic relationship between the urbanized areas and the outlying populations brings economic vitality and social involvement to the area. The flow of workers into the metropolitan area is imperative for employers to fill job vacancies and expand operations. The concentration and expansion of businesses is imperative for workers seeking employment.
Thoughtful examination of the economic performance of a city or county would make one aware of a state's metropolitan/non-metropolitan composition. The distinctions are important, not just for the sake of knowing numbers and percentages, but because of the inferences one can make about metropolitan and non-metropolitan economies. There are particular demographic and economic characteristics that are more common in metropolitan areas than in non-metropolitan areas. For example, average age in metropolitan areas tend to be younger then non-metropolitan areas. Industry and occupational composition differ greatly in Wisconsin's metropolitan counties compared to non-metropolitan counties. Banks, insurance companies, real estate companies are more concentrated in metropolitan areas than non-metropolitan areas. Wages and income differ between metro and non-metro areas. In Wisconsin, income in non-metro areas is roughly 79 percent of metro area income. Residents' average educational attainment; race; ethnicity; show differences between metropolitan and non-metropolitan areas. The infrastructure is different. Services available and amenities are different.
In a study of Wisconsin’s economy, perhaps 50 or more viable economic centers could be discovered. These economies are spread over both metropolitan and non-metropolitan counties and strikingly, are vastly spread throughout the entire state. None of these economies are islands unto themselves as there is considerable interaction between economic centers. Most people live relatively close to where they work, but in many metropolitan areas there is not a sufficient supply of workers from which to draw into the hub-county. Metropolitan counties' express that gravitational pull, chiefly, in their demand for workers from counties that are either part of these metropolitan hubs. The trade off for these commuting workers is jobs, and importantly, the kinds of higher paying jobs that utilize the skills/education of commuters making the commute feasible. The premium placed on metropolitan wages should be underscored in its attractiveness as the 2002 average annual wage paid in metropolitan counties is $34,080 compared to $26,710 in non-metropolitan counties. In other words, the average annual salary paid for jobs in Wisconsin metropolitan areas is 28 percent higher than in non-metropolitan counties.
The fact that Wisconsin is becoming more metropolitan in light of quantitative aspects is not as important as what it tells us qualitatively. It is no surprise that Fond du Lac was named an MSA in this metro area designation cycle, nor is the fact that the Madison MSA is now more than just Dane County and now includes Iowa and Columbia Counties. The rest of the United States is becoming more metropolitan so why should Wisconsin behave differently? The key to this is that the new metropolitan designation makes already known economic influences and integration officially recognized.
The quantitative measures will surely be welcome, too. A major outcome of the new ‘official’ designations is that population and labor force data from state and federal sources, the majority only published for metropolitan areas, will now be available for a larger share of Wisconsin. For planners and analysts this means an increase in monthly employment information, wage information and other data.
Written by Eric Grosso, and Bev Gehrke, Department of Workforce
Development, Office of Economic Advisors, January 2004.