Dredging Jaxport? 9 Points You Should Consider

7. Job Quality.

In addition to the number of jobs generated by the port and port expansion, there is also the question of the quality of jobs that are generated by the port.

An analysis of the Bureau of Labor Statistics’ Occupational Employment Statistics (OES) for occupations most closely associated with the port logistics sector allow some assessment on this question. For the 18 occupational categories most closely associated with the logistics industry there is wide variation in compensation levels ranging from high mean 5 annual incomes of $83,101 for Ship Engineers and $74,320 for Captains, Mates, and Pilots of Water Vessels to a low of $20,000 for Packer and Packagers.

Overall, for all workers in these 18 logistics occupations the mean income is $30,393. If we look at the single occupational position -- Laborers and Freight, Stock, and Material Movers -- that accounts for the greatest proportion of jobs in the logistics sector (22%), mean income is $26,290. One lesson to take from the analysis of these OES data is that the lion share of employment opportunities in the logistics industry involves work carried out in and around warehouses/distribution centers. Warehouse/distribution center-related occupational positions account for 61% of logistics employment.

The mean income for workers in this large segment of the logistics labor market is $25,460. Median hourly wage levels range from a low of $8.94 (for Packers and Packagers) to a high of $13.78 (Industrial Truck and Tractor Operators). The one area of the logistics labor market that does provide higher paying jobs and that also stands to grow in numbers alongside the expansion of warehousing/distribution centers is first-line supervisors/managers. These employees manage and supervise warehouse/distribution center workers. The mean income for workers in these positions is $49,788; but these jobs account for only 4.1% of total jobs in this sector. Overall, the occupational data suggest that the logistics industry -- while perhaps generating new and expanding regional employment opportunities and potential avenues of upward mobility for some low-skilled workers -- is not an engine of high-wage job growth and is unlikely to contribute significantly to raising the region’s per capita income.

8. Don’t Trust The Numbers.

Points #5 & #6 above should caution one to a common pattern reported in the research literature on “megaprojects” (large scale infrastructure and public works projects that require significant infusions of taxpayer funds). The dredging and deepening of the St Johns River channel, at an estimated cost of $800 million, qualifies as such a project.

Therefore, we should expect that those who seek government approval as well as public support for the project will employ the following proven formula (based on work of Bent Flyvbjerg): (underestimated costs) + (overestimated revenues) + (undervalued environmental impacts) + (overvalued economic development effects) = (PROJECT APPROVAL).

Therefore, citizens should reserve a high measure of healthy skepticism regarding any claims made by private and public officials promoting the port, or by local business interests that stand to gain directly from publicly funded and approved megaprojects.


9. East Coast Port Competition.

A final point to consider as Jacksonville seeks federal and local funds to support a potentially $1 billion project is whether it will have the expected payoff in catapulting Jaxport to the top tier of East coast ports.

One can think of this as a highly speculative investment. This is especially the case given the fact that there are other East coast ports (most notably Miami, Savannah, Charleston, Norfolk, and NY/NJ) vying for the same position and the same cargo. Each of these ports is already receiving more cargo than Jacksonville, two (Norfolk and NY/J) already have channels of 50 feet, and the port in closest proximity (Savannah, less than 150 miles away) is far ahead of Jacksonville in progress toward channel deepening to 47 feet.

Further, it remains unclear exactly how much cargo will actually be rerouted to the East coast after the widening of the Panama Canal. Therefore, some of the logical questions are: how many deep-water ports does the East coast need? How many can be economically sustained based on a finite amount of cargo? Is it a responsible use of federal funds to support every port mega infrastructure project requested by every East coast port? Will funding of redundant infrastructure projects result in a misallocation of scarce federal resources for ports operating far below full capacity? In the competitive frenzy among the ports for infrastructure investment, few of these questions have been answered.


Images courtesy of Jaxport via Wikipedia Commons and Flickr



Written by:

Dr. David Jaffee, currently serves as Professor of Sociology in the Department of Sociology, Anthropology, and Social Work, at the University of North Florida. He received his Ph.D. in Sociology from the University of Massachusetts at Amherst. Jaffee's research, writing, and publication are in the areas of social and economic development, organization theory, political economy, and higher education. He is the author of two books-Levels of Socio-Economic Development Theory (Praeger) and Organization Theory: Tension and Change (McGraw-Hill) and numerous articles. He is currently heading up The Ports Project at the University of North Florida that examines the socio-economic implications of a port economy growth strategy for cities and regions. During the 2010-2011 academic year, Jaffee was a visiting General Education Fulbright Scholar at the City University of Hong Kong