2011 Alaska's Construction Spending Forecast

The total value of construction spending “on the street” in Alaska in 2011 will be $7.1 billion, up 4from 2010.1,2,3 Wage and salary employment in the construction industry will continue the slow decline that began in 2006, but the level remains above the long-term average for the industry. Excluding the oil and gas sector—which accounts for 41spending will be$4.2 billion—up 5% from 2010. Private-sector construction spending will be up 6% from 2010, to $4.5 billion, in spite of the expected slow growth in the overall Alaska economy. Oil and gas sector spending will be about$2.9 billion, up 3%. Spending will increase in the utility and hospitals4 categories, but will decline in residential and other commercial categories. Public construction spending will be up 1%, to $2.7 billion, due to the large FY 2011 state capital budget. The main infusion of cash from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) has worked its way through the system, and federal spending overall has declined. Uncertainty is particularly significant in the forecast this year, especially in the oil and gas sector—in spite of high oil prices. In January 2011, uncertainty surrounds most of the large-scale petroleum projects on the North Slope and in Cook Inlet. Environmental reviews are slowing development drilling at Point Thomson east of Prudhoe Bay and Alpine West in the National Petroleum Reserve Alaska. Exploration drilling offshore in the Chukchi and Beaufort seas continues to face legal challenges. The offshore Liberty project is under internal environmental review. In Cook Inlet, a major offshore exploration effort awaits the uncertain arrival of a jack-up rig. In this forecast we assume most of these projects will move forward this year, but their pace is hard to predict. If several are delayed in 2011, oil and gas spending will be significantly lower.Associated General Contractors of Alaska. Northrim Bank

2012 Alaska's Construction Spending Forecast

The total value of construction spending “on the street” in Alaska in 2012 will be $7.7 billion, up 32011.1,2,3 Wage and salary employment in the construction industry will be stable at the same level as last year— 15,800. This is down from a peak of 18,300 in 2005. Excluding the oil and gas sector—which accounts for 41spending will be$4.6 billion, up 4% from 2011 and about the same rate of increase as last year. Oil and gas spending will be $3.2 billion, 1% higher than in 2011. Private spending for construction will be up in 2012. Public spending for traditional government purposes will be down somewhat, but public funds also help finance some projects in the utility and health sectors, which are primarily private. So overall, an increase in state spending for construction will offset a decline in federal spending.The Associated General Contractors of Alaska. Northrim Bank. The Construction Industry Progress Fund

2010 Alaska's Construction Spending Forecast

The total value of construction spending “on the street” in Alaska in 2010 will be $7.0 billion, down 3from 2009.1,2,3 Wage and salary employment in the construction industry will continue the slow decline which began in 2006, but the level remains above the long-term average for the industry. Excluding the oil and gas sector—which accounts for 43spending will be$4.0 billion— down 4% from 2009. Private-sector construction spending will be down only 1% from 2009, to $4.4 billion, in spite of the slowdown in the Alaska economy. Oil and gas sector spending will be flat. Spending will increase in the utilities and hospitals4 categories but will decline in mining, residential, other commercial, and the other rural basic sector categories. Public construction spending will be down 5to$2.6 billion, in spite of the infusion of cash from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA). Although some categories of federal spending will be higher, many will be lower and state spending will also be lower because of the lean FY 2010 capital budget. Uncertainty in this year’s forecast comes from several sources. As we start 2010 there is no clear indication if the national economy is starting to recover from the recession, and if it does, how strong that recovery will be. Although Alaska has been insulated from the worst effects of the recession—the crash in the housing market, high unemployment, and lack of credit—concerns about the national recovery will continue to influence investment decisions in the state, particularly in the commercial and residential markets. Local government capital spending is also vulnerable to reductions in tax revenues from activities, like tourism, driven by the national economy. The passage of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) in early 2009 has provided an important boost to construction spending this year. A second stimulus may be undertaken later this year, but it is too soon to speculate on how that might impact construction spending, so we assume no further federal action. The Alaska economy contracted in 2009 for the first time in 22 years—but the reduction in employment was only about 1%. Forecasts for Alaska’s economy in 2010 vary from further moderate declines in employment to a resumption of growth. This difference of opinion underscores the sense of caution in the business community about the near-term prospects for the economy. As the year begins, petroleum and precious metal (gold and silver) prices are strong and rising, and base metal prices (zinc) have rebounded from the lows of last year. Petroleum and mining capital budgets are particularly sensitive to these prices, which are likely to continue to fluctuate throughout the year. We assume these prices remain strong throughout the year.Construction Industry Progress Fund. Associated General Contractors of Alaska

Annual Report for the Construction Industry Progress Fund and the Associated General Contractors of Alaska

Construction spending “on the street” in Alaska in 2009 will be $7.1 billion, down 3Lower construction spending, combined with higher material and labor costs, will result in a modest reduction in the level of construction employment in 2009. Although this will be the fourth year of decline, the level remains considerably above the long-term average. Excluding the oil and gas sector—which accounts for 43$4.1 billion—down 1% from 2008. Private-sector construction spending will follow the slowdown in the Alaska economy. Excluding oil and gas, we expect private spending to be $1.3 billion in 2009, a decline of 24However, commercial —as well as residential— spending will be weaker, in response to the slowdown in the U.S. economy. Public construction spending will be up 16$2.7 billion, offsetting much of the decline in private spending. That growth will mainly be due to the large FY 2009 state capital budget. But strong federal spending— both military and civilian— and the federal stimulus package will also contribute to the increase. Uncertainty in this year’s forecast comes from several sources. Volatility in commodity prices has affected construction spending in two important ways. The lower petroleum and metals prices in early 2009 have made investment in some prospects less attractive. Also, companies that finance construction activities out of their current cash flow are dealing with shrinking capital budgets. The national economy continues to deteriorate as we enter 2009.Construction Industry Progress Fund. Associated General Contractors of Alaska

Fuel Costs, Migration, and Community Viability

ISER researchers compiled and reviewed existing studies and data sources relating to the economic and social viability of remote rural Alaska communities. We particularly looked for possible linkages between high fuel costs and migration. Our review indicates the following: (1) migration from smaller places toward larger places is an ongoing phenomenon that is more noticeable when birth rates drop; (2) there is no systematic empirical evidence that fuel prices, by themselves, have been a definitive cause of migration; (3) the pursuit of economic and educational opportunities appears to be a predominant cause of migration; (4) however, currently available survey data are not sufficient to definitively determine other reasons for migration, which could include concerns about public safety and/or alcohol abuse; 5) most of the survey data pre-date the latest rapid increase (2006-2008) in fuel prices. We suggest several ways that better data could be collected on community viability and the reasons for migration.First Alaskans Institute. Alaska Native Policy Center.Introduction / Methods / Findings / Significant data collection opportunities / Conclusions / References / Data Sources Use

Yup’ik Language Assistance Tribal Outreach: Report to the Alaska Division of Elections

The Division of Elections contracted with the Institute of Social and Economic Research (ISER) at the University of Alaska Anchorage to help develop a network of key tribal organization and village representatives in the Bethel census area to work with the division on their Yup’ik language assistance program. The division asked ISER to help them communicate with tribes about the division’s current programs and to document additional ways that the division can improve its language assistance program. The Alaska Division of Elections is required under the Federal Voting Rights Act (VRA) to provide language assistance to voters in areas where more than 5% of the voting age citizens are members of a single-language minority and are limited English proficient. In July 2008, a federal court ordered the division to take the following remedial actions, many of which the division had already taken prior to the court order: 1. Provide mandatory poll worker training. 2. Hire a language assistance coordinator fluent in Yup'ik. 3. Recruit bi-lingual poll workers or translators. 4. Provide sample ballots in written Yup'ik. 5. Provide pre-election publicity in Yup'ik. 6. Ensure the accuracy of translations. 7. Provide a Yup'ik glossary of election terms. 8. Submit pre-election and post-election reports. Although the division has a Yup’ik language assistance program and has been addressing the court order, interviews with Bethel census area residents show that some people are unaware of the elements in the division’s language assistance plan. In addition, some Bethel area residents said they feel the election workers and the division should interpret the meaning of the ballot measures and explain the positions of the various candidates—activities that are forbidden by state statute. ISER agreed to help the division address this lack of awareness and the misconceptions about their programs by contacting tribal organizations and inviting them to attend a meeting in Bethel, Alaska, on May 27, 2009. Part I of this report, issued in July 2009, describes ISER’s contacts with tribal organizations and summarizes the comments and feedback from the participants at the election outreach meeting in Bethel. Part II describes ISER’s post-meeting contacts with tribal organizations and meeting participants and summarizes their responses to the post-meeting survey.Alaska Division of ElectionsIntroduction / Part I: Pre-Meeting Comments and Meeting Summary / Part II: Post-Meeting Feedback / Appendix A: ISER Script for Pre-Meeting Contact / Appendix B: ISER Letter of Invitation to Tribal Organizations / Appendix C: ISER Letter of Invitation to PLaintiff Tribral Organizations / Appendix D. List of Participants - Bethel Election Outreach Meeting / Appendix E: Agenda - Bethel Election Outreach Meeting / Appendix F: Pre-Meeting Interview Responses / Appendix G: Post-Meeting Letter to Tribes / Appendix H: Post Meeting Survey / Appendix I: Post-Meeting Interview Summar

An Alaskan Law School: Is it feasible?

Responding to a request from the University of Alaska Anchorage (UAA) alumni, the UAA provost asked the Institute of Social and Economic Research (ISER) to investigate the need for a law school in Alaska. Alaska is the only state that does not have a law school. The question of whether to establish a law school in Alaska has been discussed for more than thirty years. In 1974, the University of Alaska, in conjunction with the Alaska Legislative Council, commissioned a feasibility study for an Alaska law school.In May 1975, John Havelock, then director of Legal Studies at the University of Alaska, issued a report, Legal Education for A Frontier Society: A Survey of Alaskan Needs and Opportunities in Education, Research and the Delivery of Legal Services. The report is 240 pages and is very broad in scope. In this study, almost thirty years later, we revisited the question of the feasibility of establishing a law school in Alaska and came to the same conclusions. There is still no need to increase the supply of lawyers by establishing a law school in Alaska. The state can meet the legal education needs of its residents by increasing its financial support for students who go outside to law school and by establishing cooperative programs with existing ABA accredited law schools.OFFICE OF THE PROVOST, UNIVERSITY OF ALASKA ANCHORAG

A Doctoral Program in Leadership and Policy Studies: Is It Feasible?

In response to requests from the Alaskan community, the University of Alaska Fairbanks (UAF) agreed to explore the possibility of developing a doctoral program in leadership and policy studies. This program would be developed in collaboration with the University of Alaska Anchorage (UAA) and the University of Alaska Southeast (UAS). The goal of the program would be to prepare Alaska leaders in the fields of education, health and human services, government, and business. The report is organized around the six main questions that respondents answered. Each question has a summary of responses indicated by bulleted themes followed by supporting quotations.STEERING COMMITTEE ON A JOINT PHD PROGRAM IN LEADERSHIP AND POLICY STUDIES (UAF and UAS

Charting New Courses for Alaska Salmon Fisheries: the Legal Waters

This is a joint publication of the Marine Advisory Program and the Understanding Alaska (UA) project, which is a special series of research studies examining Alaska economic development issues. The Institute of Social and Economic Research at the University of Alaska Anchorage is carrying out the studies, which are funded by the University of Alaska Foundation.Alaska’s commercial salmon industry is in an economic crisis. Competition from farmed salmon, changes in consumer demand, and a worldwide economic slowdown—together with smaller sockeye salmon runs—are reducing the value of Alaska’s salmon harvest. This crisis has prompted discussions among fishermen, processors, fishery managers, and government officials about how to help the salmon industry. Part of the discussion has focused on options for “restructuring” the management of salmon fisheries to reduce costs, increase value, or steer more of the benefits to Alaskans and their communities. To help Alaskans better understand the legal and constitutional issues associated with restructuring the salmon fisheries, the University of Alaska’s Marine Advisory Program and Institute for Social and Economic Research, along with the Washington Sea Grant Program, sponsored a workshop in October 2002. Lawyers with expertise in Alaska natural resources and fisheries law answered questions about different options for restructuring.University of Alaska Foundatio

Fifth Annual Report for the Construction Industry Progress Fund and the Associated General Contractors of Alaska

Total construction spending “on the street” in Alaska in 2008 will be $7.01 billion, down 2$4.12 billion. Last year it declined 3%. Lower construction spending, combined with higher material and labor costs, will result in a modest reduction in the level of construction employment in 2008. Although this will be the second year of decline in construction employment, it remains well above the long-term trend. Construction costs continue to rise faster than the general rate of inflation—and that trend is expected to continue, further reducing the purchasing power of each construction dollar. Private-sector construction spending is projected to be $4.64 billion in 2008, an increase of 2% over 2007. Strong growth is expected in oil and gas, mining, utilities, and the other basic sectors.Associated General Contractors of Alaska; Construction Industry Progress Fun