United States GDP by State per Capita: 2005p: California data was reported at 46,029.000 USD in 2012. This records an increase from the previous number of 44,898.000 USD for 2011. United States GDP by State per Capita: 2005p: California data is updated yearly, averaging 44,845.500 USD from Dec 1997 (Median) to 2012, with 16 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 48,646.000 USD in 2007 and a record low of 36,636.000 USD in 1997. United States GDP by State per Capita: 2005p: California data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by Bureau of Economic Analysis. The data is categorized under Global Database’s United States – Table US.A248: NIPA 2009: GDP by State: Far West Region: Chain Linked 2005 Price.

This table contains 89 series, with data for years 1947 - 2009 (not all combinations necessarily have data for all years). This table contains data described by the following dimensions (Not all combinations are available): Geography (1 items: United States ...) Components (32 items: Gross national product; Total personal consumption expenditures; durable goods; Total personal consumption expenditures; Gross domestic product ...) Prices (4 items: Current prices; Chained (1996) dollars; Chained (2000) dollars; 1992 constant prices ...).

Dataset Overview

This dataset provides historical housing price indices for the United States, covering a span of 20 years from January 2000 onwards. The data includes housing price trends at the national level, as well as for major metropolitan areas such as San Francisco, Los Angeles, New York, and more. It is ideal for understanding how housing prices have evolved over time and exploring regional differences in the housing market.

Why This Dataset?

The U.S. housing market has experienced significant shifts over the last two decades, influenced by economic booms, recessions, and post-pandemic recovery. This dataset allows data enthusiasts, economists, and real estate professionals to analyze long-term trends, make forecasts, and derive insights into regional housing markets.

What’s Included?

Time Period: January 2000 to the latest available data (specific end date depends on the dataset). Frequency: Monthly data. Regions Covered: 20+ U.S. cities, states, and aggregates.

Columns Description

Each column represents the housing price index for a specific region or aggregate, starting with a date column:

Date: Represents the date of the housing price index measurement, recorded with a monthly frequency. U.S. National: The national-level housing price index for the United States. 20-City Composite: The aggregate housing price index for the top 20 metropolitan areas in the U.S. CA-San Francisco: The housing price index for San Francisco, California. CA-Los Angeles: The housing price index for Los Angeles, California. WA-Seattle: The housing price index for Seattle, Washington. NY-New York: The housing price index for New York City, New York. Additional Columns: The dataset includes more columns with housing price indices for various U.S. cities, which can be viewed in the full dataset preview.

Potential Use Cases

Time-Series Analysis: Investigate long-term trends and patterns in housing prices. Forecasting: Build predictive models to forecast future housing prices using historical data. Regional Comparisons: Analyze how housing prices have grown in different cities over time. Economic Insights: Correlate housing prices with economic factors like interest rates, GDP, and inflation.

Who Can Use This Dataset?

This dataset is perfect for:

Data scientists and machine learning practitioners looking to build forecasting models. Economists and policymakers analyzing housing market dynamics. Real estate investors and analysts studying regional trends in housing prices.

Example Questions to Explore

Which cities have experienced the highest housing price growth over the last 20 years? How do housing price trends in coastal cities (e.g., Los Angeles, Miami) compare to midwestern cities (e.g., Chicago, Detroit)? Can we predict future housing prices using time-series models like ARIMA or Prophet?

Water scarcity is a challenge in arid regions across the world (Dolan et al., 2021), and is managed by a wide range of governance and institutional approaches (Olmstead, 2014; Berbel and Esteban, 2019). As climate change and competition for water between uses continues to add pressure to already water-stressed regions (Garrick et al., 2019; Caretta et a., 2022), managers, policy makers, and scientists are seeking alternative management strategies to the insufficient policies currently in place (e.g., Berbel and Esteban). One such region is the western U.S., where water stress has increased due to several factors including long-term drought (Williams et al. 2022), increasing competition between agricultural and urban water users (Garrick et al., 2019), and new valuation of in-stream flows (Lane and Rosenberg, 2019).The arid western U.S. began regulating water allocations during the gold rush period of the mid 1800's (Irwin v. Phillips, California 1855). During this time, water was essential for mining, and so the Prior Appropriation Doctrine for water allocation – which is largely still in use today – grew out of gold mining's system of prioritizing resource allocation based on the date when an individual or organization first laid a claim. This is known as "first in time, first in right", and establishes a system of seniority for water users. Following this 1855 ruling in California, all other western U.S. states (except Alaska) established their own forms of water regulation based in part or in whole on the Prior Appropriation Doctrine. We refer readers to Gopalakrishnan (1973) for a thorough history of the Prior Appropriation Doctrine in the U.S. West.Here we present a new database of western U.S. water rights records. We produced the water rights database presented here in 4 main steps: (1) data collection, (2) data quality control, (3) data harmonization, and (4) generation of cumulative water rights curves. Each of steps (1) - (3) had to be completed in order to produce (4), the final product that was used in the modeling exercise in Grogan et al. (in review). All data in each step is associated with a spatial unit called a Water Management Area (WMA), which is the unit of water right administration. Steps (2) and (3) required us to make assumptions and interpretations, and to remove records from the raw data collection. We describe each of these assumptions and interpretations, as well as go further in depth in methodological details in Lisk et al. (in review).This meta-record for the HarDWR database links to the original meta-record, which then links to the four distinct datasets that comprise the whole database: Harmonize Database of Western U.S.Water Rights (HarDWR). The four dataset that can be accessed are:HarDWR - Raw Water Rights Records: The collection of raw downloaded water right records, sourced from each state; step (1) above.HarDWR - Harmonized Water Rights Records: The harmonized water right records, by state; step (2) above.HarDWR - Cumulative Water Rights Curves: The calculated cumulative water rights curves, by state and by WMA; step (4) above.HarDWR - Water Management Area (WMA) Shapefiles: The spatial boundaries which are the administration unit of water rights for each state.CitationsAnderson, M. T. & Woosley, L. H. Water availability for the western United States: key scientific challenges. (U.S. Dept. of the Interior, U.S. Geological Survey ; For sale by U.S. Geological Survey, Information Services, 2005). https://pubs.usgs.gov/circ/2005/circ1261/pdf/C1261.pdfBerbel, J. & Esteban, E. Droughts as a catalyst for water policy change. Analysis of Spain, Australia (MDB), and California. Glob. Environ. Change 58, 101969 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2019.101969Caretta, M. A. et al. Water. in Climate Change 2022: Impacts, Adaptation, and Vulnerability. Contribution of Working Group II to the Sixth Assessment Report of the IPCC Cambridge University Press. (2022). https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009325844.006Carney, C. P., Endter‐Wada, J. & Welsh, L. W. The Accumulating Interest in Water Banks: Assessing Their Role in Mitigating Water Insecurities. JAWRA J. Am. Water Resour. Assoc. 57, 552–571 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1111/1752-1688.12940Dolan, F. et al. Evaluating the economic impact of water scarcity in a changing world. Nat. Commun. 12, 1915 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-021-22194-0Garrick, D. et al. Rural water for thirsty cities: a systematic review of water reallocation from rural to urban regions. Environ. Res. Lett. 14, 043003 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/ab0db7Gopalakrishnan, C. The Doctrine of Prior Appropriation and Its Impact on Water Development.: A Critical Survey. Am. J. Econ. Sociol. 32, 61–72 (1973). https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1536-7150.1973.tb02180.xGrogan, D. S. et al. Water balance model (WBM) v.1.0.0: a scalable gridded global hydrologic model with water-tracking functionality. Geosci. Model Dev. 15, 7287–7323 (2022). https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-7287-2022Grogan, D. et al. Bringing hydrologic realism to water markets. (in review)Irwin v. Phillips. Cal. vol. 140 (1855). https://casetext.com/case/irwin-v-phillipsLane, B. A. & Rosenberg, D. E. Promoting In-Stream Flows in the Changing Western US. J. Water Resour. Plan. Manag. 146, 02519003 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)WR.1943-5452.0001145Lisk, M. et al. Harmonized Database of Western U.S Water Rights (HarDWR) v.1. (in review, paper for this database).Null, S. E. & Prudencio, L. Climate change effects on water allocations with season dependent water rights. Sci. Total Environ.571, 943–954 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2016.07.081Olmstead, S. M. Climate change adaptation and water resource management: A review of the literature. Energy Econ. 46, 500–509 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eneco.2013.09.005Tidwell, V. C. et al. Mapping water availability, projected use and cost in the western United States. Environ. Res. Lett. 9, 064009 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/9/6/064009Williams, A. P., Cook, B. I. & Smerdon, J. E. Rapid intensification of the emerging southwestern North American megadrought in 2020–2021. Nat. Clim. Change 12, 232–234 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-022-01290-z

Annual Provincial and Territorial Gross Domestic Product (GDP) at basic prices, by North American Industry Classification aggregates, in percentage share, in current dollars.

Annual Provincial and Territorial Gross Domestic Product (GDP) at basic prices, by North American Industry Classification aggregates, in chained (2017) and current dollars (dollars x 1,000,000).

This table contains 936 series, with data for years 1981 - 2007 (not all combinations necessarily have data for all years). This table contains data described by the following dimensions (Not all combinations are available): Geography (1 items: Canada ...) Seasonal adjustment (2 items: Unadjusted; Seasonally adjusted at annual rates ...) Prices (2 items: 1997 constant dollars; Chained 1997 dollars ...) North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) (312 items: All industries; Agriculture; forestry; fishing and hunting; Crop production; Animal production ...).

Gross Domestic Product (GDP) is a measure of the economic production which takes place within the geographical boundaries of a province or country. It can be measured at basic prices (by industry) or at market prices.

The EcoTrends project was established in 2004 by Dr. Debra Peters (Jornada Basin LTER, USDA-ARS Jornada Experimental Range) and Dr. Ariel Lugo (Luquillo LTER, USDA-FS Luquillo Experimental Forest) to support the collection and analysis of long-term ecological datasets. The project is a large synthesis effort focused on improving the accessibility and use of long-term data. At present, there are ~50 state and federally funded research sites that are participating and contributing to the EcoTrends project, including all 26 Long-Term Ecological Research (LTER) sites and sites funded by the USDA Agriculture Research Service (ARS), USDA Forest Service, US Department of Energy, US Geological Survey (USGS) and numerous universities. Data from the EcoTrends project are available through an exploratory web portal (http://www.ecotrends.info). This web portal enables the continuation of data compilation and accessibility by users through an interactive web application. Ongoing data compilation is updated through both manual and automatic processing as part of the LTER Provenance Aware Synthesis Tracking Architecture (PASTA). The web portal is a collaboration between the Jornada LTER and the LTER Network Office. The following dataset from California Current Ecosystem (CCE) contains county area measurements in squareKilometers units and were aggregated to a yearly timescale.

The EcoTrends project was established in 2004 by Dr. Debra Peters (Jornada Basin LTER, USDA-ARS Jornada Experimental Range) and Dr. Ariel Lugo (Luquillo LTER, USDA-FS Luquillo Experimental Forest) to support the collection and analysis of long-term ecological datasets. The project is a large synthesis effort focused on improving the accessibility and use of long-term data. At present, there are ~50 state and federally funded research sites that are participating and contributing to the EcoTrends project, including all 26 Long-Term Ecological Research (LTER) sites and sites funded by the USDA Agriculture Research Service (ARS), USDA Forest Service, US Department of Energy, US Geological Survey (USGS) and numerous universities. Data from the EcoTrends project are available through an exploratory web portal (http://www.ecotrends.info). This web portal enables the continuation of data compilation and accessibility by users through an interactive web application. Ongoing data compilation is updated through both manual and automatic processing as part of the LTER Provenance Aware Synthesis Tracking Architecture (PASTA). The web portal is a collaboration between the Jornada LTER and the LTER Network Office. The following dataset from California Current Ecosystem (CCE) contains county area measurements in squareKilometers units and were aggregated to a yearly timescale.

Graph and download economic data for Median Household Income in California (MEHOINUSCAA646N) from 1984 to 2024 about CA, households, median, income, and USA.

Comprehensive demographic dataset for Pacific Palisades, Los Angeles, CA, US including population statistics, household income, housing units, education levels, employment data, and transportation with year-over-year changes.

The EcoTrends project was established in 2004 by Dr. Debra Peters (Jornada Basin LTER, USDA-ARS Jornada Experimental Range) and Dr. Ariel Lugo (Luquillo LTER, USDA-FS Luquillo Experimental Forest) to support the collection and analysis of long-term ecological datasets. The project is a large synthesis effort focused on improving the accessibility and use of long-term data. At present, there are ~50 state and federally funded research sites that are participating and contributing to the EcoTrends project, including all 26 Long-Term Ecological Research (LTER) sites and sites funded by the USDA Agriculture Research Service (ARS), USDA Forest Service, US Department of Energy, US Geological Survey (USGS) and numerous universities. Data from the EcoTrends project are available through an exploratory web portal (http://www.ecotrends.info). This web portal enables the continuation of data compilation and accessibility by users through an interactive web application. Ongoing data compilation is updated through both manual and automatic processing as part of the LTER Provenance Aware Synthesis Tracking Architecture (PASTA). The web portal is a collaboration between the Jornada LTER and the LTER Network Office. The following dataset from California Current Ecosystem (CCE) contains population employed in service (percent of total) measurements in percent units and were aggregated to a yearly timescale.

This table contains 5976 series, with data for years 1984 - 2011 (not all combinations necessarily have data for all years). This table contains data described by the following dimensions (Not all combinations are available): Geography (14 items: Newfoundland and Labrador; New Brunswick; Nova Scotia; Prince Edward Island ...), Value (4 items: Current dollars; 1997 constant dollars; Chained (2002) dollars; Chained (1997) dollars ...), North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) (115 items: All industries; Forestry and logging; Agriculture; forestry; fishing and hunting; Crop and animal production ...).

This paper studies the impact of immigration to the United States on the vote share for the Republican Party using county-level data from 1990 to 2016. Our main contribution is to show that an increase in high-skilled immigrants decreases the share of Republican votes, while an inflow of low-skilled immigrants increases it. These effects are mainly due to the indirect impact on existing citizens' votes and this is independent of the origin country and race of immigrants. We find that the political effect of immigration is heterogeneous across counties and depends on their skill level, public spending and non-economic characteristics.

Data and code for peer-reviewed article published in American Economic Journal: Applied Economics. When citing this dataset, please also cite the associated article. A sample Publication Citation is provided below.

This table contains 12 series, with data for years 1961 - 2008 (not all combinations necessarily have data for all years). This table contains data described by the following dimensions (Not all combinations are available): Geography (1 items: Canada ...) Industry, special aggregations (12 items: Business sector industries; Total economy; Business sector goods; Business sector services ...).

West Virginia and Kansas had the lowest cost of living across all U.S. states, with composite costs being half of those found in Hawaii. This was according to a composite index that compares prices for various goods and services on a state-by-state basis. In West Virginia, the cost of living index amounted to **** — well below the national benchmark of 100. Virginia— which had an index value of ***** — was only slightly above that benchmark. Expensive places to live included Hawaii, Massachusetts, and California. Housing costs in the U.S. Housing is usually the highest expense in a household’s budget. In 2023, the average house sold for approximately ******* U.S. dollars, but house prices in the Northeast and West regions were significantly higher. Conversely, the South had some of the least expensive housing. In West Virginia, Mississippi, and Louisiana, the median price of the typical single-family home was less than ******* U.S. dollars. That makes living expenses in these states significantly lower than in states such as Hawaii and California, where housing is much pricier. What other expenses affect the cost of living? Utility costs such as electricity, natural gas, water, and internet also influence the cost of living. In Alaska, Hawaii, and Connecticut, the average monthly utility cost exceeded *** U.S. dollars. That was because of the significantly higher prices for electricity and natural gas in these states.

This table contains 624 series, with data for years 1981 - 2006 (not all combinations necessarily have data for all years). This table contains data described by the following dimensions (Not all combinations are available): Geography (1 items: Canada ...) Prices (2 items: 1997 constant dollars; Chained 1997 dollars ...) North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) (312 items: All industries; Agriculture; forestry; fishing and hunting; Crop production; Animal production ...).

The EcoTrends project was established in 2004 by Dr. Debra Peters (Jornada Basin LTER, USDA-ARS Jornada Experimental Range) and Dr. Ariel Lugo (Luquillo LTER, USDA-FS Luquillo Experimental Forest) to support the collection and analysis of long-term ecological datasets. The project is a large synthesis effort focused on improving the accessibility and use of long-term data. At present, there are ~50 state and federally funded research sites that are participating and contributing to the EcoTrends project, including all 26 Long-Term Ecological Research (LTER) sites and sites funded by the USDA Agriculture Research Service (ARS), USDA Forest Service, US Department of Energy, US Geological Survey (USGS) and numerous universities. Data from the EcoTrends project are available through an exploratory web portal (http://www.ecotrends.info). This web portal enables the continuation of data compilation and accessibility by users through an interactive web application. Ongoing data compilation is updated through both manual and automatic processing as part of the LTER Provenance Aware Synthesis Tracking Architecture (PASTA). The web portal is a collaboration between the Jornada LTER and the LTER Network Office. The following dataset from California Current Ecosystem (CCE) contains human population density measurements in numberPerKilometerSquared units and were aggregated to a yearly timescale.

The EcoTrends project was established in 2004 by Dr. Debra Peters (Jornada Basin LTER, USDA-ARS Jornada Experimental Range) and Dr. Ariel Lugo (Luquillo LTER, USDA-FS Luquillo Experimental Forest) to support the collection and analysis of long-term ecological datasets. The project is a large synthesis effort focused on improving the accessibility and use of long-term data. At present, there are ~50 state and federally funded research sites that are participating and contributing to the EcoTrends project, including all 26 Long-Term Ecological Research (LTER) sites and sites funded by the USDA Agriculture Research Service (ARS), USDA Forest Service, US Department of Energy, US Geological Survey (USGS) and numerous universities. Data from the EcoTrends project are available through an exploratory web portal (http://www.ecotrends.info). This web portal enables the continuation of data compilation and accessibility by users through an interactive web application. Ongoing data compilation is updated through both manual and automatic processing as part of the LTER Provenance Aware Synthesis Tracking Architecture (PASTA). The web portal is a collaboration between the Jornada LTER and the LTER Network Office. The following dataset from California Current Ecosystem (CCE) contains population employed in manufacturing (percent of total) measurements in percent units and were aggregated to a yearly timescale.