[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"detail-sidebar-cat-0-en-105":3,"doc-seo-324533-105":59,"doc-detail-324533-en":131},{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":6},0,"success",[7,13,18,23,28,33,38,43,48,51,55],{"id":8,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":10,"show_sort_weight":11,"slug":12},1,"Document","Story & Novel",90,"story-novel",{"id":14,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":15,"show_sort_weight":16,"slug":17},2,"Literature",80,"literature",{"id":19,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":20,"show_sort_weight":21,"slug":22},4,"Exam",70,"exam",{"id":24,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":25,"show_sort_weight":26,"slug":27},5,"Comic",60,"comic",{"id":29,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":30,"show_sort_weight":31,"slug":32},6,"Technology",50,"technology",{"id":34,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":35,"show_sort_weight":36,"slug":37},7,"Healthcare",40,"healthcare",{"id":39,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":40,"show_sort_weight":41,"slug":42},8,"Research & Report",30,"research-report",{"id":44,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":45,"show_sort_weight":46,"slug":47},9,"Religion & Spirituality",20,"religion-spirituality",{"id":46,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":49,"show_sort_weight":46,"slug":50},"World Cup","world-cup",{"id":52,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":53,"show_sort_weight":52,"slug":54},10,"Lifestyle","lifestyle",{"id":56,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":57,"show_sort_weight":24,"slug":58},19,"General","general",{"code":4,"msg":60,"data":61},"ok",{"site_id":62,"language":63,"slug":64,"title":65,"keywords":66,"description":67,"schema_data":68,"social_meta":124,"head_meta":126,"extra_data":128,"updated_unix":130},105,"en","cleveland-on-therocks","Cleveland (on the)Rocks","","Economic commentary on Cleveland’s long-term employment slowdown, tracing concerns about the city’s changing economic base and the revitalization efforts that followed shocks such as the Cuyahoga River fire and the city’s financial crisis. Cites Rand Corporation findings on declining population, slower employment growth, manufacturing decline, and service-sector rise. Compares private-sector employment growth data for 1990–2003, showing manufacturing losses persist but non-manufacturing growth is weaker regionally, suggesting other underlying causes beyond industrial structure alone.",{"@graph":69,"@context":123},[70,84,106],{"@type":71,"itemListElement":72},"BreadcrumbList",[73,77,79,82],{"item":74,"name":75,"@type":76,"position":8},"https://docshare.wps.com","Home","ListItem",{"item":78,"name":9,"@type":76,"position":14},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/",{"item":80,"name":40,"@type":76,"position":81},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/research-report/",3,{"item":83,"name":65,"@type":76,"position":19},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/cleveland-on-therocks/324533/",{"url":83,"name":65,"@type":85,"image":86,"author":91,"headline":65,"publisher":94,"fileFormat":97,"inLanguage":63,"description":67,"dateModified":98,"datePublished":99,"encodingFormat":97,"isAccessibleForFree":100,"interactionStatistic":101},"DigitalDocument",{"url":87,"@type":88,"width":89,"height":90},"https://docshare.wps.com/thumbnails/cleveland-on-therocks/324533.png","ImageObject",300,407,{"name":92,"@type":93},"Ava Thompson","Person",{"url":74,"name":95,"@type":96},"DocShare","Organization","application/pdf","2026-11-03","2026-09-21",true,{"@type":102,"interactionType":103,"userInteractionCount":105},"InteractionCounter",{"@type":104},"ViewAction",12,{"@type":107,"mainEntity":108},"FAQPage",[109,115,119],{"name":110,"@type":111,"acceptedAnswer":112},"What did the Rand Corporation identify as key trends in Cleveland’s economy before the 1980 period?","Question",{"text":113,"@type":114},"It highlighted declining metropolitan population, slower overall employment growth than the nationwide average, manufacturing job decreases, and increases in non-manufacturing employment.","Answer",{"name":116,"@type":111,"acceptedAnswer":117},"How did Cleveland’s private-sector employment growth from 1990 to 2003 compare with the United States?",{"text":118,"@type":114},"Employment grew much more slowly in Cleveland than in the nation during this period, with the national increase about 19% versus roughly 3% in Cleveland.",{"name":120,"@type":111,"acceptedAnswer":121},"Why does the commentary question blaming Cleveland’s employment lag solely on industrial structure?",{"text":122,"@type":114},"Although manufacturing losses were larger in Cleveland, non-manufacturing sectors collectively contributed far less to Cleveland’s employment growth than in the nation, indicating additional factors beyond manufacturing intensity.","https://schema.org",{"og:url":83,"og:type":125,"og:title":65,"og:site_name":95,"og:description":67},"article",{"robots":127,"canonical":83},"index,follow",{"doc_id":129,"site_id":62},324533,1790177670,{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":132},{"doc_id":129,"user_id":133,"nickname":92,"user_avatar":134,"doc_module":4,"category_id":39,"category_name":40,"doc_title":65,"doc_description":67,"doc_content":135,"file_id":136,"file_url":137,"file_type":138,"file_size":139,"view_count":105,"is_deleted":4,"is_public":8,"is_downloadable":8,"audit_status":8,"page_count":24,"language":140,"language_code":63,"site_id":62,"html_lang":63,"table_of_contents":141,"faqs":142,"seo_title":143,"seo_description":67,"update_tm":144,"read_time":145,"preview_page_count":4},1649267921044,"https://us-avatar.wpscdn.com/avatar/1800007509477c92dfb?_k=1786009248482753345","# Cleveland (on the)Rocks\n\nby Guhan Venkatu  \nConcerns aboutCleveland's economyare nothing new.While Cleveland wasonce one of America's leading commer-cial centers,it has not managed to main-tain its economic importance throughthe years.When the turning point cameis difficult to determine,though somesuggest that it happened as long ago as1930.Along the way.Clevelanders havebeen engaged in a long line of economicrevitalization efforts.One such effiortcame early in the 1980s and was aresponse to the tumultuous 60s and‘70s,when events from the fire on theCuyahoga River to the city's financialcrisis caused local leaders to search forsolutions anew.  \nAt that time,a group of concened citi-zens turned to the Rand Corporation todetermine the underlying causes ofCleveland's economic malaise.TheRand Corporation concluded that:  \n\"Threebroadtrends characterize eco-nomie conditions in the Cleveland areaover the past hwo decaudes...The totalpopulation ofthe metropolitan area hasbeen declining.Total employment hasincreased annually but at amuch slowerrate than the nationwide average.Employment in manfacturing indus-tries has decreased,and employment innonmanufacturing industries hasincreased.\"  \nThis description suggests a slower-grow-ing metropolitan area,which was losingpopulation for the first time.It alsoindi-cates the shift toward service-sectorindustries that was taking place in Cleve-land,as well as throughout the nationmore generally.Many saw these twodevelopments as interrelated.The ques-tion was what to do in response.Whilesome sought to hasten this transition  \ntoward the service sector—arguing thatthe area's ties to manufacturing wereweakening it economically—othersthought that Cleveland should try to retainits importance as a manufacturing center.  \nHow much have things changed since thisreport was written?Despite the positiveattention that Cleveland garnered as a\"comeback city\"in the 1990s,not muchThe three broad trends that the RandCorporation used to characterize the20-year period prior to 1980 look like areasonably good description of the20 years that followed.Andjust as before,many think that Cleveland's industrialstructure is at the root of the region'srecent lackluster economic performance.Some think that Cleveland has too muchmanufacturing employment as a share ofits overall employment base,whle othersthink the area has failed to atract the rightindustries—the technology-centeredindustries in either the manufacturing orservice sectors that some see as the indus-tries of the future.  \nBut this Economic Commentary sug-gests that Cleveland's industrial structurehas had little to do with the area's slug-gish employment growth,at least duringthe last decade and a half.We must lookto other factors—lifestyle amenities.access to capital,tax policies,the avail-ability of qualified workers,and so on-for possible explanations.  \n## ■ Cleveland Fares Worse thanthe Nation\n\nFigures I and 2 show cumulative privatesector employment growth in the Cleve-land metropolitan area and the UnitedStates from 1990 to 2003.Each barbreaks down the extent to which varioussectors added to (those above zero)orsubtracted from (those below zero)the  \nFebruary 1,2006  \nCleveland's employment growth haslagged the nation's for nearly 15years,a fact that is often blamed onthe kinds of industries that arehere—either the area is burdenedwith too much manufacturing,or ithas failed to attract enough high-techindustries.But an analysis showslittle support for that view.  \ncumulative employment increase in agiven year,and the blue lines show thetotal cumulative change.What is readilyapparent in figures I and 2 is thatemployment grew much more slowly inthe Cleveland area than in the nation dur-ing this period.While national employ-ment rose roughly 19 percent,employ-ment gains in the Cleveland area were amere 3 percent  \nWhat is also apparent from the figures isthat the manufacturing sector consis-tently subtracted from job gains in bothCleveland and across the ","cbCaibzGyMe9IRom","https://ap.wps.com/l/cbCaibzGyMe9IRom","pdf",1156527,"English","# Cleveland Fares Worse thanthe Nation\n# Too Much Manufacturing?","[{\"question\":\"What did the Rand Corporation identify as key trends in Cleveland’s economy before the 1980 period?\",\"answer\":\"It highlighted declining metropolitan population, slower overall employment growth than the nationwide average, manufacturing job decreases, and increases in non-manufacturing employment.\"},{\"question\":\"How did Cleveland’s private-sector employment growth from 1990 to 2003 compare with the United States?\",\"answer\":\"Employment grew much more slowly in Cleveland than in the nation during this period, with the national increase about 19% versus roughly 3% in Cleveland.\"},{\"question\":\"Why does the commentary question blaming Cleveland’s employment lag solely on industrial structure?\",\"answer\":\"Although manufacturing losses were larger in Cleveland, non-manufacturing sectors collectively contributed far less to Cleveland’s employment growth than in the nation, indicating additional factors beyond manufacturing intensity.\"}]","Cleveland (on the)Rocks | PDF",1789968182,13]