From the BEA's press release:
According to these prototype estimates, in 2005, real GDP by metropolitan area grew in 327 of the 363 metropolitan areas. Growth in real GDP by metropolitan area in 2005 was strong along the western and southern coasts (Chart 1). Growth was particularly robust and widespread in the metropolitan areas located in Florida. In contrast, the metropolitan areas near the Great Lakes did not perform as well.
Perspective on GDP by Metropolitan Area for 2005
- Current-dollar GDP for the Nation was $12.4 trillion; it was $1.6 trillion for California, the largest state
- In comparison, in the New York metropolitan area it was $1.1 trillion
- Metropolitan areas produced 90 percent of U.S. current-dollar GDP; the five largest metropolitan areas accounted for 23 percent of the U.S. total
- The smallest 75 metropolitan areas accounted for less than two percent of U.S. GDP
- When ranked by current-dollar GDP, the New York metropolitan area would rank second among states and 10th among countries in 2005.
There are many ways to measure "prosperity" and GDP is certainly among the most common. We've been waiting for these numbers to become available. But, now the question is not which regions are growing the fastest (GDP is obviously increasing with population and firm growth), but which regions are the most productive (GDP per person) and what is happening to productivity growth? What other questions should we start looking at now that this data is available??
posted by Kevin Stolarick