New England is a generally prosperous region and its residents are doing relatively well economically (see Table 1). Yet, between 1989 and 2004, the region experienced the largest increase in income inequality in the country. Much of this widening gap between rich and poor was driven by growth among the top earners, but the changes are not simply the "rich getting richer." Rather, they reflect the hollowing out of the middle caused by significant changes in the nation's economy. The loss of manufacturing employment for low-skilled workers has been coupled with increased demand, and rewards, for high-skilled and high tech employment. These shifts were more pronounced in New England because of the region's highly educated population, strong research and development base, and relatively high cost of business operations, which pushes low-skilled jobs elsewhere

Jason Rudokas

Ross Gittell

English

Income inequality in New England is rising at the highest rate in the nation, this brief finds. Between 1989 and 2004, the region experienced the largest increase in income inequality in the country, due to both growth among top earners and the hollowing out of the middle class caused by significant changes in the nation\u27s economy

Gittell, Ross

Rudokas, Jason

UNH Scholars' Repository

	 C A R S E Y 	 I N S T I T U T E 	 1CARSEYI N S T I T U T ENEW ENGLAND ISSUE BRIEF NO. 4SPRING 2007New	England	Has	the	Highest	Increase	in	Income		Disparity	in	the	NationRO S S  G I T T E L L  A N D  J A S ON  RU D OKA SNew	England	is	a	generally	prosperous	region	and	its	residents	are	doing	relatively	well	economically	(see	Table	1).	Yet,	between	1989	and	2004,	the	region	experienced	the	largest	increase	in	income	inequality	in	the	country.		Much	of	this	widening	gap	between	rich	and	poor	was	driven	by	growth	among	the	top	earners,	but	the	changes	are	not	simply	the	“rich	getting	richer.”	Rather,	they	reflect	the	hollowing	out	of	the	middle	caused	by	significant	changes	in	the	nation’s	economy.	The	loss	of	manufacturing	employment	for	low-skilled	workers	has	been	coupled	with	increased	demand,	and	rewards,	for	high-skilled	and	high-tech	employment.	These	shifts	were	more	pronounced	in	New	England	because	of	the	region’s	highly	educated	popu-lation,	strong	research	and	development	base,	and	relatively	high	cost	of	business	operations,	which	pushes	low-skilled	jobs	elsewhere.In brief, over the last decade and one half…•	 Income	disparity	increased	in	New	England	more	than		in	any	other	region	in	the	nation•	 Household	average	real	income	declined	for	the	lowest	income	families	•	 Mid-range	incomes	grew	less	than	national	counterparts•	 Income	growth	was	concentrated	in	the	top	quintile	of	households	•	 Three	states	in	the	region	ranked	among	the	top	five		nationally	in	the	increase	in	income	disparity•	 Six	of	the	20	metropolitan	areas	with	the	highest	income	disparity	in	the	nation	are	in	New	EnglandDATA  A ND  D E F I N I T I ON SThe primary data sources are the 1990, 2000, and 2004  U.S. Census.  Household income includes wage and salary income and  all other income earned by persons over 15 living in the household. Income is defined broadly to include business profits, interest, dividends, and real estate investment.Table 1. Three New England states are in the nation’s top-10 states with highest household incomes (2004) Median Household Income, $ National RankConnecticut 60,528 2Massachusetts 55,580 5New Hampshire 55,580 6Rhode Island 48,722 13Vermont 46,543 18Maine 42,163 27U. S. 44,684 —New England states have some of the lowest  poverty rates in the nation (2004) % Below Poverty Level National RankNew Hampshire 8 1Connecticut 8 2Vermont 9 7Maine 9 8Massachusetts 12 27Rhode Island 13 30U. S. 13 —		 2	 C A R S E Y 	 I N S T I T U T EFigure 1. Growth in Income Inequality between 1989 and 2004.Source: Public Use Micro Data Files 1990 Census, 2000 Census, 2005 American Community Survey.Table 2. Income inequality has grown in New  England through changes in the high and low income quintiles1989–2004: Average Household Real Income Changes % Change in New England Change in the USTop 5% 27 20Q5 20 17Q4 6 7Q3 2 4Q2 -2 3Q1 -5 4Top	Earners	Gaining	Most	Ground	Growth	in	income	in	the	top	income	brackets	was	greater,	and	the	losses	in	the	bottom	income	brackets	larger,	than	national	averages.	Average	real	incomes	of	the	top	quintile1	of	households	in	New	England	have	increased	by	20	percent	in	the	past	15	years,	and	those	in	the	top	5	percent	of	house-holds	increased	27	percent	(see	Table	2).	In	contrast,	the	income	increases	of	the	third	and	fourth	quintiles	were	mod-est	(2	percent	and	6	percent,	respectively)	and	incomes	for	the	two	lowest	quintiles	dropped	(-2	percent	and	-5	percent).	In	contrast,	nationally,	household	incomes	have	increased	for	all	quintiles.	In	2004,	the	average	household	income	in	the	top	quintile	in	New	England	was	nearly	$185,000.	In	the	top	5	percent	of	households,	the	average	income	was	$337,000.		In	sharp		contrast,	the	average	household	income	in	the	lowest	quin-tile	in	the	region	was	$12,437	and	the	average	household	income	in	the	second	lowest	quintile	was	$34,291.	The	share	of	total	income	in	the	region	also	concentrated	more	firmly	in	the	higher	income	brackets.	During	the	past	15	years,	the	portion	of	total	income	that	is	concentrated	in	the	highest	earning	households	increased	twice	as	much	in	New	England	as	in	the	nation.	As	of	2004,	47.2	percent	of	the	region’s	income	was	earned	by	the	top	quintile,	up	from	44.5	percent	in	1989.	All	other	households	lost	relative	share	of	regional	income,	ranging	from	a	0.3	percent	decline	in	the	lowest	quintile	to	a	1	percent	decline	in	the	fourth	quintile.	All	of	the	declines	were	more	pronounced	than	the	national	average.	Figure 2. Gini Coefficient Change 1989–2004 0.60.40.201989 1999 2004NEW ENGLANDPACIFIC MIDATLANTICSOUTH ATLANTICWEST SOUTH CENTRALMOUNTAIN WEST NORTHCENTRALEAST SOUTH CENTRALGINI COEFFICIENT01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 New EnglandPacicMid AtlanticSouth AtlanticWest South CentralMountainWest North CentralEast South Central        0.044       0.04      0.036     0.034    0.031   0.025  0.022 0.017Putting	a	Number	on	InequalityOne	commonly	used	benchmark	to	gauge	inequality	is	the	Gini	coefficient.	This	measure	assesses	in	summary	form	the	distribution	of	total	income	in	an	area	and	attaches	a	figure	between	0	and	1	to	income	distribution.	Perfect	income	equality	equals	0,	and	perfect	inequality	equals	1.	Therefore,	a	higher	Gini	coefficient	indicates	higher	income	inequality.	Figure	1	shows	the	growth	in	income	inequality	in	the	na-tion	between	1989	and	2004.	Figure	2	shows	the	percentage	change.	Clearly,	income	inequality	has	been	growing	across	the	country,	and	regionally	as	well.	New	England	has	seen	the	largest	increase.1	A	“quintile”	is	one	of	five	segments	of	a	distribution	that	has	been	divided	into	fifths.	For	example,	the	second-from-the-bottom	quintile	of	an	income	distribution	contains	those	households	whose	income	exceeds	the	incomes	of	20	percent	to	40	percent	of	all	households.			 C A R S E Y 	 I N S T I T U T E 	 3Three	states	in	the	region—Connecticut,	Vermont	and	Massachusetts—ranked	among	the	top	five	in	income	disparity	increases.	Over	the	last	15	years,	Connecticut	and	Massachusetts	went	from	being	median	income	disparity	states	to	ranking	among	the	top	10	in	household	income	disparity.	Vermont	went	from	being	a	low	income	disparity	state	to	a	median	disparity	state.	Rhode	Island	went	from	less	than	the	median	to	higher	than	the	median	in	income	disparity.	Three	states	moved	ahead	of	Maine	in	income	disparity	and	New	Hampshire	went	from	having	the	lowest	income	inequality	to	the	third	lowest.	Metro	Areas	Hardest	Hit	Across	the	nation,	metropolitan	areas	tend	to	have	higher	income	disparity	than	non-metropolitan	areas,	and	the		situation	has	become	more	pronounced	over	the	last	15	years.	New	England	accounted	for	six	of	the	top	20	metro	areas	with	growing	income	disparity:	one	in	New	Hampshire	(Nashua),	one	in	Massachusetts	(New	Bedford),	and	four		in	Connecticut	(Stamford-Norwalk,	Bridgeport,	Waterbury,	and	Danbury).	The	four	areas	in	Connecticut	rank	in	the		top	10.		What	Happened?The	change	in	household	income	distribution	in	New	England	and	the	nation	goes	beyond	simply	the	“rich	get-ting	richer.”	It	reflects	a	fundamental	shift	in	the	national	economy	and	differences	in	its	regional	implications.	The	shift	from	“traditional”	commodity-based	manufacturing	to	technology	and	knowledge-based	businesses	has	created	a	new	economic	structure	and	context	for	the	New	England	states.	Increased	concentration	of	employment	and	earnings	in	higher	value-added	manufacturing	and	services,	including	technology	and	science-based	research	and	development,	has	contributed	significantly	to	the	changes.	Productiv-ity	improvements	have	also	contributed.	In	addition,	the	globalization	of	the	economy	with	increased	off-shoring	of	both	low-skilled,	commodity-like	production	and	repetitive	service	industry	is	shifting	jobs	away	from	high-cost	areas	like	New	England.The	changes	outlined	above	were	more	pronounced	in	New	England	than	the	nation	as	a	whole,	in	part	owing	to	the	region’s	highly	educated	population	and	strong	research	and	development	base.	States	with	the	highest	levels	of	employment	in	the	high-tech	sector	(for	example,	Massa-chusetts,	New	Hampshire,	California,	and	New	Jersey)	had	the	greatest	increase	in	income	inequality.	States	with	the	lowest	percentage	of	high-tech	employment	(for	example,	Mississippi,	Louisiana,	Arkansas2)	experienced	the	smallest	change	in	income	inequality.	Furthermore,	the	New	England	region	led	the	nation	in	the	late	1990s	and	early	2000s	in	the	loss	of	manufacturing	employment.	Many	of	these	jobs	paid	relatively	well	and	provided	a	strong	income	base	for	middle-income	households.What	Next?New	England	has	changed	from	a	relatively	egalitarian	region	income-wise	to	a	more	economically	divided	one.	Its	middle-income	sector	is	losing	ground	and	disappearing.	Diverging	household	incomes	can	fray	the	social	fabric	as	social	connections	and	the	opportunities	for	families	to	mix	with	members	of	different	classes	diminish,	and	the	oppor-tunities	for	lower-	and	middle-income	individuals	to	move	up	in	social	status	may	decrease.	However,	because	the	region	is	relatively	prosperous	and	does	not	suffer	from	wide-ranging	poverty	and	poor	educational	achievement	as	do	some	other	regions,	it	is	in	a	stronger	position	to	combat	the	trend.	Looking	forward,	the	experience	since	1990	suggests	that	that	the	jobs	that	replace	traditional	manufacturing	and	higher-paying	service	industry	jobs—those	jobs	that	tradi-tionally	provided	decent	earnings	for	lower-	and	middle-income	families—will	pay	less,	just	as	the	demand	for	the	highest-skilled	and	highest-income	workers	increases.	A	potential	path	to	stem	rising	inequality	is	to	upgrade		the	education	and	technological	skills	and	economic		opportunities	of	all	individuals	in	the	region.	Workforce	“re-preparation”	programs	to	help	those	displaced	from	manufacturing	jobs	by	off-shoring	can	help.	More	aggressive	efforts	to	improve	quality	and	access	and	to	lower	the	cost	of	education	are	needed.	For	example,	the	Boston	Work-force	Development	Coalition’s	Career	Ladders	program	is	designed	to	meet	entry-level,	incumbent	worker’s	needs	for	opportunities	to	advance	toward	positions	with	more	responsibility,	skill,	and	compensation,	and	employers’	needs	to	recruit	and	retain	a	skilled,	highly	trained	workforce.	Expansion	of	this	type	of	program	across	the	region	might	help	assist	more	workers	create	successful	career	strategies	to	deal	with	the	new	economic	situation.	Available	child	care,	affordable	housing,	and	transportation	assistance	are	also	needed	to	help	low	and	middle	income	families	and	workers.	With	a	concerted	effort	by	policymakers	and	residents,	New	England	could	return	to	its	traditional	position	of	providing	good	economic	opportunities	for	all	of	its	citizens.2	These	are	states	with	relatively	high	poverty	rates.		 4	 C A R S E Y 	 I N S T I T U T EBuilding	knowledge	for	families	and	communities		in	the	21st	Century.The	Carsey	Institute	at	the	University	of	New	Hampshire		conducts	independent,	interdisciplinary	research	and		communicates	its	findings	to	policymakers,	practitioners		and	the	general	public.	Huddleston	Hall73	Main	Street	Durham,	NH		03824(603)	862-2821www.carseyinstitute.unh.eduThis	brief	is	part	of	a	series	of	Carsey	Institute	Reports	on	Changes	in	New	England.A B OU T  T H E  AU THOR S :Ross	Gittell	is	James	R.	Carter	Professor	at	the	University	of	New	Hampshire’s	Whittemore	School	of		Business	and	Economics	and	a	Senior	Fellow	with	the	Carsey	Institute	(ross.gittell@unh.edu).	Jason	Rudokas	is	a	graduate	student	in	the	Department	of	Economics	at	the	University	of	New	Hampshire	(jrudokas@cisunix.unh.edu).	AC KNOWL E D G EM EN T S :The	authors	would	like	to	thank	Charles	Colgan	at	the	Muskie	School	of	Public	Service	for	his	review	and	Barbara	Ray	for	her	edits.	They	would	also	like	to	acknowledge		Mil	Duncan,	Curt	Grimm,	and	Amy	Seif	of	the	Carsey		Institute	for	their	comments	and	assistance.	Financial		support	was	provided	by	the	Pilot	Fund	and	the	Durum	Fund	of	the	New	Hampshire	Charitable	Foundation.

New England has the highest increase in income disparity in the nation

IssueLab

	 C a r s e y 	 I n s t I t u t e 	 CarseyI n s t I t u t eIssue BrIef No. 4sprIng	2007new	england	Has	the	Highest	Increase	in	Income		Disparity	in	the	nationr o s s  G I t t e l l  a N d  J a s o N  r u d o k a snew	england	is	a	generally	prosperous	region	and	its	residents	are	doing	relatively	well	economically	(see	table	).	yet,	between	989	and	2004,	the	region	experienced	the	largest	increase	in	income	inequality	in	the	country.		Much	of	this	widening	gap	between	rich	and	poor	was	driven	by	growth	among	the	top	earners,	but	the	changes	are	not	simply	the	“rich	getting	richer.”	rather,	they	reflect	the	hollowing	out	of	the	middle	caused	by	significant	changes	in	the	nation’s	economy.	The	loss	of	manufacturing	employment	for	low-skilled	workers	has	been	coupled	with	increased	demand,	and	rewards,	for	high-skilled	and	high-tech	employment.	These	shifts	were	more	pronounced	in	new	england	because	of	the	region’s	highly	educated	popu-lation,	strong	research	and	development	base,	and	relatively	high	cost	of	business	operations,	which	pushes	low-skilled	jobs	elsewhere.In brief, over the last decade and one half…•	 Income	disparity	increased	in	New	England	more	than		in	any	other	region	in	the	nation•	 Household	average	real	income	declined	for	the	lowest	income	families	•	 Mid-range	incomes	grew	less	than	national	counterparts•	 Income	growth	was	concentrated	in	the	top	quintile	of	households	•	 Three	states	in	the	region	ranked	among	the	top	five		nationally	in	the	increase	in	income	disparity•	 Six	of	the	20	metropolitan	areas	with	the	highest	income	disparity	in	the	nation	are	in	New	Englandd a t a  a N d  d e f I N I t I o N sThe primary data sources are the 1990, 2000, and 2004  U.S. Census.  Household income includes wage and salary income and  all other income earned by persons over 15 living in the household. Income is defined broadly to include business profits, interest, dividends, and real estate investment.table 1. three New england states are in the nation’s top-10 states with highest household incomes (2004)	 Median	Household	Income,	$	 National	RankConnecticut 60,528 2Massachusetts 55,580 5New Hampshire 55,580 6Rhode Island 48,722 13Vermont 46,543 18Maine 42,163 27U. S. 44,684 —New england states have some of the lowest  poverty rates in the nation (2004) % Below Poverty Level National RankNew Hampshire 8 1Connecticut 8 2Vermont 9 7Maine 9 8Massachusetts 12 27Rhode Island 13 30U. S. 13 —		 2	 C a r s e y 	 I n s t I t u t efigure 1. Growth in Income Inequality between 1989 and 2004.Source: Public Use Micro Data Files 1990 Census, 2000 Census, 2005 American Community Survey.table 2. Income inequality has grown in New  england through changes in the high and low income quintiles1989–2004: Average Household Real Income Changes % Change in New England Change in the USTop 5% 27 20Q5 20 17Q4 6 7Q3 2 4Q2 -2 3Q1 -5 4top	earners	gaining	Most	ground	growth	in	income	in	the	top	income	brackets	was	greater,	and	the	losses	in	the	bottom	income	brackets	larger,	than	national	averages.	average	real	incomes	of	the	top	quintile	of	households	in	new	england	have	increased	by	20	percent	in	the	past	5	years,	and	those	in	the	top	5	percent	of	house-holds	increased	27	percent	(see	table	2).	In	contrast,	the	income	increases	of	the	third	and	fourth	quintiles	were	mod-est	(2	percent	and	6	percent,	respectively)	and	incomes	for	the	two	lowest	quintiles	dropped	(-2	percent	and	-5	percent).	In	contrast,	nationally,	household	incomes	have	increased	for	all	quintiles.	In	2004,	the	average	household	income	in	the	top	quintile	in	new	england	was	nearly	$85,000.	In	the	top	5	percent	of	households,	the	average	income	was	$337,000.		In	sharp		contrast,	the	average	household	income	in	the	lowest	quin-tile	in	the	region	was	$2,437	and	the	average	household	income	in	the	second	lowest	quintile	was	$34,29.	The	share	of	total	income	in	the	region	also	concentrated	more	firmly	in	the	higher	income	brackets.	During	the	past	5	years,	the	portion	of	total	income	that	is	concentrated	in	the	highest	earning	households	increased	twice	as	much	in	new	england	as	in	the	nation.	as	of	2004,	47.2	percent	of	the	region’s	income	was	earned	by	the	top	quintile,	up	from	44.5	percent	in	989.	all	other	households	lost	relative	share	of	regional	income,	ranging	from	a	0.3	percent	decline	in	the	lowest	quintile	to	a		percent	decline	in	the	fourth	quintile.	all	of	the	declines	were	more	pronounced	than	the	national	average.	figure 2. Gini Coefficient Change 1989–20040.60.40.201989 1999 2004NEW ENGLANDPACIFIC MIDATLANTICSOUTHATLANTICWESTSOUTHCENTRALMOUNTAIN WESTNORTHCENTRALEASTSOUTHCENTRALGINI COEFFICIENT01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05New EnglandPacicMid AtlanticSouth AtlanticWest South CentralMountainWest North CentralEast South Central        0.044       0.04      0.036     0.034    0.031   0.025  0.022 0.017putting	a	number	on	InequalityOne	commonly	used	benchmark	to	gauge	inequality	is	the	gini	coefficient.	This	measure	assesses	in	summary	form	the	distribution	of	total	income	in	an	area	and	attaches	a	figure	between	0	and		to	income	distribution.	perfect	income	equality	equals	0,	and	perfect	inequality	equals	.	Therefore,	a	higher	gini	coefficient	indicates	higher	income	inequality.	Figure		shows	the	growth	in	income	inequality	in	the	na-tion	between	989	and	2004.	Figure	2	shows	the	percentage	change.	Clearly,	income	inequality	has	been	growing	across	the	country,	and	regionally	as	well.	new	england	has	seen	the	largest	increase.	a	“quintile”	is	one	of	five	segments	of	a	distribution	that	has	been	divided	into	fifths.	For	example,	the	second-from-the-bottom	quintile	of	an	income	distribution	contains	those	households	whose	income	exceeds	the	incomes	of	20	percent	to	40	percent	of	all	households.			 C a r s e y 	 I n s t I t u t e 	 3Three	states	in	the	region—Connecticut,	Vermont	and	Massachusetts—ranked	among	the	top	five	in	income	disparity	increases.	Over	the	last	5	years,	Connecticut	and	Massachusetts	went	from	being	median	income	disparity	states	to	ranking	among	the	top	0	in	household	income	disparity.	Vermont	went	from	being	a	low	income	disparity	state	to	a	median	disparity	state.	rhode	Island	went	from	less	than	the	median	to	higher	than	the	median	in	income	disparity.	Three	states	moved	ahead	of	Maine	in	income	disparity	and	new	Hampshire	went	from	having	the	lowest	income	inequality	to	the	third	lowest.	Metro	areas	Hardest	Hit	across	the	nation,	metropolitan	areas	tend	to	have	higher	income	disparity	than	non-metropolitan	areas,	and	the		situation	has	become	more	pronounced	over	the	last	5	years.	new	england	accounted	for	six	of	the	top	20	metro	areas	with	growing	income	disparity:	one	in	new	Hampshire	(nashua),	one	in	Massachusetts	(new	Bedford),	and	four		in	Connecticut	(stamford-norwalk,	Bridgeport,	Waterbury,	and	Danbury).	The	four	areas	in	Connecticut	rank	in	the		top	0.		What	Happened?The	change	in	household	income	distribution	in	new	england	and	the	nation	goes	beyond	simply	the	“rich	get-ting	richer.”	It	reflects	a	fundamental	shift	in	the	national	economy	and	differences	in	its	regional	implications.	The	shift	from	“traditional”	commodity-based	manufacturing	to	technology	and	knowledge-based	businesses	has	created	a	new	economic	structure	and	context	for	the	new	england	states.	Increased	concentration	of	employment	and	earnings	in	higher	value-added	manufacturing	and	services,	including	technology	and	science-based	research	and	development,	has	contributed	significantly	to	the	changes.	productiv-ity	improvements	have	also	contributed.	In	addition,	the	globalization	of	the	economy	with	increased	off-shoring	of	both	low-skilled,	commodity-like	production	and	repetitive	service	industry	is	shifting	jobs	away	from	high-cost	areas	like	new	england.The	changes	outlined	above	were	more	pronounced	in	new	england	than	the	nation	as	a	whole,	in	part	owing	to	the	region’s	highly	educated	population	and	strong	research	and	development	base.	states	with	the	highest	levels	of	employment	in	the	high-tech	sector	(for	example,	Massa-chusetts,	new	Hampshire,	California,	and	new	Jersey)	had	the	greatest	increase	in	income	inequality.	states	with	the	lowest	percentage	of	high-tech	employment	(for	example,	Mississippi,	Louisiana,	arkansas2)	experienced	the	smallest	change	in	income	inequality.	Furthermore,	the	new	england	region	led	the	nation	in	the	late	990s	and	early	2000s	in	the	loss	of	manufacturing	employment.	Many	of	these	jobs	paid	relatively	well	and	provided	a	strong	income	base	for	middle-income	households.What	next?new	england	has	changed	from	a	relatively	egalitarian	region	income-wise	to	a	more	economically	divided	one.	Its	middle-income	sector	is	losing	ground	and	disappearing.	Diverging	household	incomes	can	fray	the	social	fabric	as	social	connections	and	the	opportunities	for	families	to	mix	with	members	of	different	classes	diminish,	and	the	oppor-tunities	for	lower-	and	middle-income	individuals	to	move	up	in	social	status	may	decrease.	However,	because	the	region	is	relatively	prosperous	and	does	not	suffer	from	wide-ranging	poverty	and	poor	educational	achievement	as	do	some	other	regions,	it	is	in	a	stronger	position	to	combat	the	trend.	Looking	forward,	the	experience	since	990	suggests	that	that	the	jobs	that	replace	traditional	manufacturing	and	higher-paying	service	industry	jobs—those	jobs	that	tradi-tionally	provided	decent	earnings	for	lower-	and	middle-income	families—will	pay	less,	just	as	the	demand	for	the	highest-skilled	and	highest-income	workers	increases.	a	potential	path	to	stem	rising	inequality	is	to	upgrade		the	education	and	technological	skills	and	economic		opportunities	of	all	individuals	in	the	region.	Workforce	“re-preparation”	programs	to	help	those	displaced	from	manufacturing	jobs	by	off-shoring	can	help.	More	aggressive	efforts	to	improve	quality	and	access	and	to	lower	the	cost	of	education	are	needed.	For	example,	the	Boston	Work-force	Development	Coalition’s	Career	Ladders	program	is	designed	to	meet	entry-level,	incumbent	worker’s	needs	for	opportunities	to	advance	toward	positions	with	more	responsibility,	skill,	and	compensation,	and	employers’	needs	to	recruit	and	retain	a	skilled,	highly	trained	workforce.	expansion	of	this	type	of	program	across	the	region	might	help	assist	more	workers	create	successful	career	strategies	to	deal	with	the	new	economic	situation.	available	child	care,	affordable	housing,	and	transportation	assistance	are	also	needed	to	help	low	and	middle	income	families	and	workers.	With	a	concerted	effort	by	policymakers	and	residents,	new	england	could	return	to	its	traditional	position	of	providing	good	economic	opportunities	for	all	of	its	citizens.2	These	are	states	with	relatively	high	poverty	rates.		 4	 C a r s e y 	 I n s t I t u t eBuilding	knowledge	for	families	and	communities		in	the	2st	Century.The	Carsey	Institute	at	the	university	of	new	Hampshire		conducts	independent,	interdisciplinary	research	and		communicates	its	findings	to	policymakers,	practitioners		and	the	general	public.	Huddleston	Hall73	Main	street	Durham,	nH		03824(603)	862-282www.carseyinstitute.unh.eduThis	brief	is	part	of	a	series	of	Carsey	Institute	Reports	on	Changes	in	New	England.a B o u t  t h e  a u t h o r s :ross	gittell	is	James	r.	Carter	professor	at	the		university	of	new	Hampshire’s	Whittemore	school	of		Business	and	economics	and	a	senior	Fellow	with	the	Carsey	Institute	(ross.gittell@unh.edu).	Jason	rudokas		is	a	graduate	student	in	the	Department	of	economics	at	the	university	of	new	Hampshire	(jrudokas@cisunix.unh.edu).	a C k N o W l e d G e M e N t s :The	authors	would	like	to	thank	Charles	Colgan	at	the	Muskie	school	of	public	service	for	his	review	and	Barbara	ray	for	her	edits.	They	would	also	like	to	acknowledge		Mil	Duncan,	Curt	grimm,	and	amy	seif	of	the	Carsey		Institute	for	their	comments	and	assistance.	Financial		support	was	provided	by	the	pilot	Fund	and	the	Durum	Fund	of	the	new	Hampshire	Charitable	Foundation.

New England Has the Highest Increase in Income Disparity in the Nation

https://scholars.unh.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1022&context=carsey

New England Has the Highest Increase in Income Disparity in the Nation

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

UNH Scholars' Repository

IssueLab