Life sciences jobs pack 2-for-1 punch

February 24, 2014
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

I still remember it vividly.

In February 2002, city, state, university and corporate leaders launched the Central Indiana Life Sciences Initiative.

The initiative was touted—at least by journalists, pundits and the local booster class—as the thing that would turn Indiana from its 20th century manufacturing roots to a 21st century, knowledge-based future.

That idea stuck with me. I was, at the time, less than three months into my first full-time reporting job, as a business reporter at The Indianapolis Star. So I was rather impressionable.

But it’s an idea that was always wrong.

Why? Because the math just doesn’t work.

In February 2002, Indiana boasted 587,000 manufacturing jobs, according to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. The state had lost about 85,000 manufacturing jobs since the start of the 2000 recession. And it had another 100,000 still to lose.

Meanwhile, Indiana’s life sciences sector—even when jobs in life sciences warehousing, or biologistics, are added in to pad the numbers—boasts just 55,000 jobs. That’s the latest figure from BioCrossroads, the entity created by the Central Indiana Life Sciences Initiative.

So life sciences will never be the job creator it was hoped, rather naively, it would be.

Even today, life sciences company payrolls are roughly one-tenth the size of the manufacturing sector—and that’s even with some overlap between the two. (Major life sciences companies, like Eli Lilly and Co., Roche Diagnostics Corp., Cook Medical Inc. and Zimmer Holdings Inc. are, after all, manufacturers.)

I was certainly slow to realize that.

But not so slow to realize it have been city governments, legislators, the Indiana Economic Development Corp. and Elevate Ventures.

They have, over the years, given tax breaks to employers paying just-higher-than-average wages--in part because those companies produce more jobs than life sciences companies. Investments in startups, meanwhile, have in recent years gone to information technology companies, in part because such firms can produce jobs faster than life sciences companies.

For background, read my story from a year ago on the plan life sciences companies hatched to try to circumvent IEDC and Elevate Ventures. The situation may have improved a bit in the past year, but I haven’t heard anyone from the life sciences world cheering, either.

The major life sciences-themed initiative of the Pence administration, the Indiana Biosciences Research Institute, is focused at the large corporate and university level, not at startups directly. BioCrossroads’ latest initiative is focused on agriculture, not on the traditional areas of life sciences—medical devices, health care services and biotech.

But the latest data from BioCrossroads include, again, a key statistic state leaders should remember: life sciences jobs pay great wages.

In 2012, life sciences jobs paid $89,056 on average, according to BioCrossroads’ data, which was compiled by the Indiana Business Research Center. That compares with an average annual wage of $41,357 in Indiana’s entire private sector.

Economic development is really about two things: jobs and incomes. The more jobs there are, the more incomes Hoosiers collectively receive. But higher-paying jobs also boost collective income.

So while life sciences companies don’t rack up huge jobs numbers, their relatively high pay means that for every job they do create, it’s worth two in the rest of the private sector.

With IEDC and local governments doling out tax incentives each year to attract jobs with average wages of about $47,000, it’s at least worth considering whether that money might be invested in other ways to boost higher-paying sectors.

ADVERTISEMENT
  • Worth two?
    I don't really think you can say a high-paying job is worth two lower paying jobs in terms of the very real effect on families. That's one family that benefits from a steady paycheck instead of two. Plenty of families would be pretty happy with a job paying half of one of those $89K jobs.
  • One or Two?
    While the larger salary does not support 2 workers/families, it seems that the higher salary does benefit more people. Greater income almost certainly translates into more spending and investing in the local economy as the money circulates to grocery stores, retail goods, doctors, dentists, banks, etc.

Post a comment to this blog

COMMENTS POLICY
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
ADVERTISEMENT
  1. What became of this project? Anyone know?

  2. Scott, could you post an enlarged photo of the exterior of the building? This will be a great addition to Walnut Street. This area will only continue to develop with additions like this. Also, please give us more updates on the "Cultural Trail light" expansion. Also a great move for the city, as long as there is maintenance money set aside.

  3. Great story IBJ! Citizens don't have a real sense of the financial magnitude of supporting Indy's sports and tourism sector. The CIB was a brilliant idea for creating a highly integrated public-private partnership to support this sector from the economic activity it generates. Unfortunately, most folks think the benefits of that economic activity accrue directly to the City budget, and it doesn't. So though the CIB is facing lean times (covering its costs while maintaining minimally acceptable reserves), the City is operating with deficit - less tax revenue than expenses each year - with a very fragile reserve balance. That's why it's so challenging for the City to fund basic needs or new intitatives (e.g. pre-k education; new jail), and some credit rating agencies have downgraded Indy from it's past stellar AAA status. More reporting on City finances would be welcomed.

  4. Sure, I'll admit that it bugs me to see that the IBJ.COM censors it's blog posts almost as much as the D of I does when someone points out the falsehoods and fabrications. _____But I think it bothers me almost as much that Captain/Defender/Disciple get his yanked too. You see, those of us with a sense of integrity, humanity, compassion, and a need for fact based opinion WANT to see all of his screeds posted. It makes our point so much better than we can do it ourselves.

  5. We're conflating two very different topics. Voter fraud is a myth and excessive gun violence is all too real. I just hope rational gunowners decide to stop being shouted down by the, well, let's call them "less rational" ones.

ADVERTISEMENT