Indiana an auto state? Now chemicals are king

Norm Heikens
October 2, 2008
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share
After 12 years of leading Indiana's bread-and-butter manufacturing industry, carmaking has taken a second-row seat.

Chemicals have grown to become the biggest segment within manufacturing, according to a new study by the Indiana Business Research Center.

Chemicals-defined by government statisticians to include pharmaceuticals-dislodged automaking in 2004.

Study author Timothy Slaper thinks the trend will last for a while.

"My suspicion is that it would continue," Slaper said. "Our economy continues to restructure."

Twenty-five percent of Indiana's gross state product is derived from manufacturing, a higher percentage than any other state. Other studies have shown that roughly half the state's 3 million jobs are directly involved in manufacturing or tied to the industry.

The business research center, which is part of Indiana University's Kelley School of Business, focused on the proportion of the gross state product generated by various segments of the manufacturing sector.

Over the years, various industries have risen to dominate manufacturing and then receded or been pushed aside by faster-growing segments.

In the early '80s, when companies like Thomson Consumer Electronics churned out loads of television sets, electronics was king.

In the late '80s and early '90s, as electronics companies pulled out of the state, steelmaking took the lead.

Automaking rose to prominence in 1992 and held the spot for 12 years.

It isn't that automaking is shriveling. The segment accounted for slightly more than 17 percent of the manufacturing portion of the gross state product in 1997 and 2006, the latest year for which figures are available.

Rather, the segment stagnated while chemicals continued growing. Chemicals accounted for nearly 16 percent of manufacturing gross state product in 1997 but had grown to nearly 20 percent by 2006.

Much of the growth came from pharmaceuticals, Slaper said.

That doesn't surprise Brian Stemme, a project director at BioCrossroads, an Indianapolis not-for-profit that promotes the life sciences industry.

The state is seeing waves of new pharmaceutical contract manufacturing, Stemme said.

In the past few years, Chicago-based Baxter Corp. has opened a contract manufacturing site in Bloomington that turns out vials and pre-filled syringes. Bloomington-based Cook Group has launched a unit called Cook Pharmica, which manufactures proteins.

In Indianapolis, Vesta Pharmaceuticals Inc. manufactures vitamins and other tablets.

Indiana will continue to attract manufacturers because the state is centrally located and has a plentiful supply of workers accustomed to operating in highly regulated environments, Stemme said. The state also has a plethora of consultants, vendors, building contractors and other networks that can support the segment.

Yet another factor in the state's favor is a trend underway among such drug giants as Merck & Co. to outsource manufacturing in order to free themselves to develop new drugs.

"We're going to get more contract manufacturers," Stemme said.

Much has changed in the state since 2006, the latest year for which production are available.

Toyota Motor Manufacturing Indiana expanded assembly of its Camry sedan through a partnership at Subaru of Indiana Automotive Inc.'s plant in Lafayette. And Honda Manufacturing of Indiana is opening its new assembly plant in Greensburg.

Still, Slaper thinks the overall trend toward chemicals will hold.

An Indiana Manufacturers Association lobbyist calls the shift toward chemicals insignificant.

Mark Cahoon, vice president of government finance and economic development, said automotive shouldn't be discarded in favor of chemicals, because the state still needs car manufacturing.

Indiana has taken hits as suppliers tied to Detroit car companies have closed or laid off workers, Cahoon noted, but other suppliers have held tight. And Japanese car companies and their suppliers have increased their activity.

"Indiana still needs to be very focused on attracting automotive investment," Cahoon said.


Post a comment to this story

We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. I'm a CPA who works with a wide range of companies (through my firm K.B.Parrish & Co.); however, we work with quite a few car dealerships, so I'm fairly interested in Fatwin (mentioned in the article). Does anyone have much information on that, or a link to such information? Thanks.

  2. Historically high long-term unemployment, unprecedented labor market slack and the loss of human capital should not be accepted as "the economy at work [and] what is supposed to happen" and is certainly not raising wages in Indiana. See Chicago Fed Reserve: goo.gl/IJ4JhQ Also, here's our research on Work Sharing and our support testimony at yesterday's hearing: goo.gl/NhC9W4

  3. I am always curious why teachers don't believe in accountability. It's the only profession in the world that things they are better than everyone else. It's really a shame.

  4. It's not often in Indiana that people from both major political parties and from both labor and business groups come together to endorse a proposal. I really think this is going to help create a more flexible labor force, which is what businesses claim to need, while also reducing outright layoffs, and mitigating the impact of salary/wage reductions, both of which have been highlighted as important issues affecting Hoosier workers. Like many other public policies, I'm sure that this one will, over time, be tweaked and changed as needed to meet Indiana's needs. But when you have such broad agreement, why not give this a try?

  5. I could not agree more with Ben's statement. Every time I look at my unemployment insurance rate, "irritated" hardly describes my sentiment. We are talking about a surplus of funds, and possibly refunding that, why, so we can say we did it and get a notch in our political belt? This is real money, to real companies, large and small. The impact is felt across the board; in the spending of the company, the hiring (or lack thereof due to higher insurance costs), as well as in the personal spending of the owners of a smaller company.