2012
1. Texas
2. South Carolina
3. Georgia
4. Alabama
5. North Carolina
6. Louisiana
7. Tennessee
8. Indiana
9. Mississippi
10. Oklahoma
2011
1. Texas
2. Georgia
3. Alabama
4. South Carolina
5. Indiana
6. Louisiana
7. North Carolina
8. Tennessee
9. Mississippi
10. California
2010
1. Tennessee
2. Texas
3. South Carolina
4. Alabama
5. Georgia
6. Indiana
7. Mississippi
8. North Carolina
9. Virginia
10. Oklahoma
overall business environment
1. Texas
2. South Carolina
3. Alabama
4. Louisiana
5. North Carolina
NEXT BEST
Indiana, Mississippi,
Georgia, Tennessee, Oklahoma
COST OF DOING BUSINESS
1. Texas
2. Alabama
3. South Carolina
4. Louisiana
5T. Indiana
Mississippi
North Carolina
NEXT BEST
Tennessee, Arkansas, Georgia, Florida,
Oklahoma, Virginia
CORPORATE TAX ENVIRONMENT
1. Texas
2. Nevada
3T. Florida
South Dakota
4. Alabama
5T. South Carolina
Virginia
NEXT BEST
Indiana, Wyoming
INCENTIVES PROGRAMS
1. Texas
2. Louisiana
3. South Carolina
4T. Alabama
Georgia
5. Oklahoma
NEXT BEST
Indiana, Florida, Mississippi, North Carolina, Ohio, Tennessee
CORPORATE STATE GOVERNMENT
1. Louisiana
2. South Carolina
3. Alabama
4. Texas
5. Indiana
NEXT BEST
North Carolina, Mississippi, Tennessee, Georgia, Oklahoma, Arizona
SPEED OF PERMITTING
1. Texas
2T. Alabama
Mississippi
South Carolina
3T. Georgia
Louisiana
ACCESS TO CAPITAL & PROJECT FUNDING
1. Texas
2. California
3. North Carolina
4. Massachusetts
5T. New York
Ohio
Overall labor Climate
1. Georgia
2T. North Carolina
South Carolina
3. Alabama
4. Texas
5. Louisiana
NEXT BEST
Michigan, Mississippi, Florida, Oklahoma, California, Indiana, Arizona
Availability of Skilled Labor
1. Michigan
2. Texas
3T. California
North Carolina
4. Ohio
5. Georgia
NEXT BEST
New York, Massachusetts,
Indiana, Virginia, Arizona, Illinois, New Jersey
Competitive Labor Costs
1. Alabama
2. South Carolina
3. Mississippi
4. Georgia
5. North Carolina
NEXT BEST
Texas, Arkansas, Florida, Tennessee, Kentucky
Leading Work Force Development Programs
1. Georgia
2. South Carolina
3. Louisiana
4T. Alabama
North Carolina
5. Oklahoma
NEXT BEST
Florida
OVERALL INFRASTRUCURE & GLOBAL ACCESS
1. Tennessee
2. Georgia
3. South Carolina
4T. Indiana
Texas
5. Illinois
NEXT BEST
North Carolina, Ohio, Alabama, Kentucky, California
Rail & Highway Accessibility
1T. Illinois
Indiana
2T. Georgia
Ohio
Texas
3. New Jersey
4T. California
Missouri
Tennessee
Certified Sites or Shovel-Ready Programs
1. South Carolina
2. North Carolina
3. Tennessee
4. Alabama
5. Indiana
NEXT BEST
Georgia
Competitive Utility Rates
1. South Carolina
2T. Alabama
Mississippi
Tennessee
3. Georgia
4T. North Carolina
Oregon
5T. Kentucky
Washington
NEXT BEST
Utah
Distribution/
Logistics Hub Access
1. Tennessee
2. Illinois
3T. Georgia
Texas
4T. California
Indiana
5. Ohio
Washington
NEXT BEST
Kentucky, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Virginia
1. Texas
2. Louisiana
3T. Indiana
North Carolina
4T. Georgia
Michigan
5T. Florida
Ohio
Oklahoma
South Carolina
Virginia
NEXT BEST
California, Tennessee
Eric Stavriotis, Senior Vice President, Strategic Consulting, Jones Lang LaSalle
Scott Redabaugh, Managing Director, Jones Lang LaSalle
Dan Levine, Pricipal, MetroCompare LLC
Kathy Mussio, Managing Partner, Atlas Insight
About half of all states, for example, were not ranked as being competitive in a single category. Yet these omitted states include [many] of those with the lowest unemployment rates during 2012. Other omissions were equally surprising. Texas, for example, did not rank among the top five states in terms of competitive labor costs; nor did any northeastern state appear among the [top-five] in terms of those with the greatest availability of skilled labor. That is not to say that there is a total disconnect between the survey results and the real economy. No one can argue, for example, that in terms of overall regulatory and tax climate the southern states are every bit as competitive as the survey's results suggest.
What the survey fails to capture, however, is the tremendous progress that almost all states have made in improving their business climates post-Great-Recession. Moreover, different states respond very differently depending upon the type of project that is being considered. And sometimes a state that responded really well to one project appears disinterested in another. In my experience, state competitiveness is best-measured one project at a time.