In our jobless recovery, where are the jobs of the future? Are big growth clusters the only real big opportunity? Is targeting clean energy and bioscience the preferred-above-all-others route? In the workforce field, should virtually all attention go to preparing people for health care and “green” jobs? How should cities and regions position themselves to turn the tide?

Missing from that familiar question list is a slice of the economy that’s significant, often communities’ greatest source of family-wage jobs: manufacturing.

That is not to say that no one is targeting manufacturing. Many communities have on their list of targeted clusters “advanced manufacturing,” as if using the term “advanced” gives one the sense that it is justified as a growth industry. In fact, this dichotomy between advanced manufacturing and traditional manufacturing does not represent the competitive environment. What is more relevant is that there are individual firms that can be competitive and there are many high-skilled jobs even in our more traditional industries.

Are we missing out on very real areas of job opportunity for low- and moderate-income residents by assuming that it is a forgone conclusion that the manufacturing sector is doomed?

The reality is that there are hundreds of thousands of jobs in all segments of the manufacturing sector in the U.S. that provide a decent wage and significant economic opportunity for people.

Some of these jobs are in declining and stagnant parts of the manufacturing sector that have been hit hard by outsourcing. Yet, even in these declining industries, the aging of the workforce has meant that manufacturers are struggling to fill quality jobs as young people, their parents, and our schools have accepted the popular perception that there is no future in manufacturing.

Innovative and growing manufacturing companies provide another source of manufacturing jobs in both traditional and advanced manufacturing. Throughout the U.S., there are successful manufacturing jobs that are growing through a focus on design excellence, quality, and customization, even in an industry in decline. Examples abound of thriving entrepreneurial custom furniture makers, precision machining companies, and artisan food producers. Young entrepreneurs are experimenting with creative designs, new materials, and new technologies to manufacture competitive products.

The Surdna Foundation, interested in promoting a sustainable and strong economy, recognized that a revitalized domestic manufacturing sector was certainly part of this equation. The Foundation convened a Manufacturing Roundtable in January 2010 in an effort to further its understanding of what is needed to support our nation’s manufacturers. This Roundtable was comprised of 17 national experts, including local practitioners, policymakers, academics, and individuals representing the unions and the manufacturing business community.

Surprisingly, the Roundtable participants reached consensus on a number of issues:

1. There are multiple reasons to focus on the competitiveness of the nation’s manufacturing sector: Evidence suggests that manufacturing remains one of the few pathways to a middle class life for many individuals and for many communities. Moreover, the group believed that the U.S. cannot continue to be a global leader in innovation while outsourcing most of its production.
2. There is a mismatch between the perceptions and the realities related to the manufacturing sector: Participants concluded that current models of trade are based upon a set of assumptions that no longer represents reality and that some commonly held notions about the performance of the manufacturing sector in the U.S. are open to question. As just one example, with the growing use of temporary agencies and staffing companies to fill manufacturing jobs, the actual number of jobs in manufacturing might be understated with these production jobs being counted under “business services.” Of most importance, the constant story that manufacturing is dying has created the perception that there are no longer good jobs available when, in reality, there is growing evidence that many manufacturers are actually having difficulty accessing the skilled workers that they need. For instance, companies in Connecticut are importing labor from Eastern Europe because not enough workers in the state have the math skills needed for the precision manufacturing of today.
3. Our policies and support system do not adequately address the current realities: The U.S. has an extremely fragmented approach to addressing the needs of the manufacturing sector and has invested relatively little in understanding what is going on in the manufacturing sector and its impact on communities. The primary direct federal program that focuses on manufacturing, the Manufacturing Extension Partnership (MEP), is undermined by funding and capacity constraints. And, while in other policy areas there is a large ecosystem of organizations and networks, there is no cohesive network of organizations that represents the multiple interests of the manufacturing sector. Finally, while throughout Europe and Asia there is a strong policy agenda to encourage and support design excellence amongst manufacturers, there is no federal or state program or policy in the U.S. that provides assistance to manufacturers interested in developing a greater design orientation.

The Manufacturing Roundtable concluded with a number of next steps to address the challenges identified:

• There is a significant need for investments in data and research to better understand the competitiveness of the manufacturing sector and its impact on communities and people.
• There is need for a new vision for trade policy — a policy that is between free trade and protectionism. This could be termed Smart Trade.
• The legislation and policies that relate to the MEP should be reviewed and efforts should be made to address the immediate issues related to the state funding gap.
• There is need for a new intermediary or network to convene the key stakeholders interested in policy and practice related to manufacturing.
• There is a need to enhance the engagement of employers in workforce-related issues in manufacturing.
• Increased support is needed for innovative community manufacturing projects that could be taken to scale.
• Investments must be made in programs and projects that bring the existing workforce and training infrastructure for manufacturing to the next level.
• A design extension service should be piloted that would provide design audits, better link manufacturers with design talent, and offer incentives to manufacturers interested in better incorporating design excellence in their products, processes, and marketing.

A fuller report on the Surdna Roundtable, along with a list of the participants can be found at: http://www.surdna.org/images/stories/content_img/docs/SE/surnda_mfgroundtable.pdf

Citiwire.net columns are not copyrighted and may be reproduced in print or electronically; please show authorship, credit Citiwire.net and send an electronic copy of usage to webmaster@citiwire.net.

There’s more to the arts than their intrinsic value. The universe of drama, concerts, painting and sculpture also spells economic activity. And there’s something we’ve been calling a “creative economy” — the idea that beyond the intrinsic worth of arts, the culture and creativity they generate, there’s clear dollar and cents benefit for a community. And it’s not just tourism, inspiring learning among youth, drawing talented people to a city, even helping accelerate innovation in other industries.

Check the last months’ news, however, and you find the arts are struggling for economic oxygen. Every field from architecture to graphic design seems hard hit in this hard recession.

So what’s to be done — should we “forget” focus on the creative economy for the moment, or alternatively, forge strategies to support arts, develop creative enterprises more than ever?

The negative arts front news is hard to miss — something of a perfect economic storm for the entire “creative economy” on every front from architecture to graphic design to symphony performances. Fiscal challenges at the city and state levels are leading to drastic cuts in funding for public arts agencies. Losses in endowment investments are having the same impact on larger cultural institutions — especially those that have used their endowments to fund operating expenses. At the same time, foundations, corporate funders and large individual donors, the mainstay of support for many cultural institutions, have felt compelled to reduce a significant share of their normal grant making.

And as if that weren’t bad enough, the “market” for their product – audiences willing to pay for cultural exhibits and performances — has declined significantly.

The impacts have been painful. There are daily announcements of layoffs at museums and performing arts organizations. Smaller organizations and venues are struggling to survive, while some of the larger ones have changed what they are producing – less innovative products, with fewer artists/performers involved.

The news for individual artists, writers, actors, musicians and designers is not much brighter. A recent study by the National Endowment for the Arts found that unemployment rates among artists is twice that of professional workers, with 129,000 unemployed in the fourth quarter of 2008– an increase of roughly 50,000, or 63 percent, from one year earlier. The study also found that the unemployment rate for artists is rising faster than that of other occupational groups. Recently the New York Times’ Artsbeat section asked about the effect of the economy on individual artists. Some 175 responses came in — rather grim ones, ranging from “a life of starvation is recession proof” to stories of loss of sales, cancelled tours, and layoffs from artists’ primary jobs.

The story’s a bit more mixed in commercial businesses where creative content is at the heart of what a firm produces. Some industries, particularly those in design, have seen job decreases that are higher than the average. For example, the Boston Globe recently reported that most architecture firms in that city had laid off 50 percent of their staff.

On the other hand, some of the more entertainment-related industries in the creative sector have not fared as poorly in the current recession. According to the Department of Labor, the motion picture and sound recording industry was ranked fifth of all industries in job performance between February and March of 2009.

As “green” jobs become the new target for economic development officials across the United States, should we turn our backs on the creative industries?

I demur. With cities’ decline in housing prices and reduction in real estate pressures, artists looking for inexpensive real estate may actually turn out to be part of the solution. Already there are stories of artists moving into some of our hardest-hit cities seeking very low cost housing.

Recessions are also a time when entrepreneurship is at its strongest levels. Many creative workers hold multiple jobs and for many their creative work — often a secondary jobs — is their passion Entrepreneurial activity among those with creative talents may lead to many new, innovative enterprises.

Creative freelancing may also be an important source of cash to supplement stressed family incomes, particularly in our rural communities. The creative sector is one in which a large number of individuals make their living through piecing together a number of freelance activities. Often, it is the income from arts and cultural activities that supplements a family’s income, rather than being the main source of that income. As individuals lose their jobs, this supplemental income becomes that much more important to household income.

Finally, past crisis provides strong evidence that when times are bad, people turn to art and entertainment. Maybe that is what accounts for the strong performance of the movie industry during this current recession. The arts aren’t just a luxury; they’re vital not just to our spirits, but as we’ve learned increasingly in recent years, our livelihoods too.

Citiwire.net columns are not copyrighted and may be reproduced in print or electronically; please show authorship, credit Citiwire.net and send an electronic copy of usage to webmaster@citiwire.net.