Crain's Chicago Business,
The Chicago Tribune,
The purpose of this report is to analyze the economic impact of existing Aquatic Invasive Species (AIS) on businesses and households in Great Lakes states. We explore the economic impact of AIS from two perspectives. First, we examine the existing evidence of AIS-related costs to households and businesses. Second, we identify the set of industries most directly affected by AIS in the region and quantify their size.
Overall, we find that AIS disrupt economic activity on a large scale in each of the Great Lakes states. AIS impose real costs on industries, consumers, and governments. Costs to individual companies and households include direct expenditures on combating an invasive species or repairing the damage it has done, and include indirect costs such as reduced productivity and higher prices in industries particularly affected by AIS. Governments and private actors such as nonprofits also devote significant resources to addressing AIS.The industries most acutely affected by AIS include sport and commercial fishing, water treatment, power generation, industrial facilities using surface water, and tourism. Together, these industries employ over 125,000 workers in the Great Lakes region.
While comprehensive cost estimates (including all industries, species, and waterways of the Great Lakes region) are not available, there are many individual estimates focusing on part of the problem. These cost estimates range from millions of dollars in cost and lost output for individual large industrial and power facilities to hundreds of dollars annually spent by individual households to control AIS on their property. It is likely that the overall aggregate level of cost to the Great Lakes region is significantly over $100 million annually.
This document is a re-issue of a report originally released in 2012, including several corrections and clarifications.
Crain’s Chicago Business,
The Chicago Sun-Times,
Anderson Economic Group, LLC, is an economic consulting firm with offices in Chicago, Illinois; East Lansing, Michigan; and Los Angeles, California. We have prepared this independent analysis of the likely economic impact of the proposed 2016 Summer Olympics in Chicago, and are making it publicly available before the IOC announcement date of October 2, 2009.
We are preparing this study to provide other Chicago-area businesses, as well as taxpayers and policymakers, a realistic assessment of the actual costs and benefits of hosting the games. Our analysis of past major events, and our past evaluations of the value of sports-related and other businesses, gives us a unique position to carefully examine this question.
Boosters of large sporting events and stadium construction have sometimes claimed economic benefits that later proved far too good to be true. However, our analyses of both sports franchises, and cities in which sporting teams oper-ate, show that some events can provide economic benefits that far exceed the costs. Given the scale of the Olympics, and the exposure it would give to Chi-cago on a world stage, it is certainly worth carefully considering the costs, risks, and benefits.
We have used a rigorous methodology to estimate the likelly economic impact of events like the 2016 Summer Olympics.