Effect of Emerging Megaregions on Spatial Perception    

There is a phenomenon of megaregions that are beginning to more  . The growth of these areas will bring with it a need for increased transportation technology and implementation. Such a solution for increased transportation demand is the construction of high-speed rail infrastructure. Examining the development of megaregions in the United States, specifically focusing on the growth of high-speed rail, an understanding of future spatial perception can be gleamed based on past studies of spatial understanding.

In 1978 a set of studies conducted by Albert Stevens and Patty Coupe, spatial estimation mistakes were examined. In their first study, Stevens and Coupe looked at the effect of superordinate categories on the ability to accurately determine spatial relationships. The study had participants indicate a general direction from one city to anther on a compass graphic (San Diego to Reno). They found that superordinate factors (neighborhood, state, country) had a large effect on participants’ ability to correctly approximate the general direction from one location to another. An example of this is that participants thought that one would have to travel east-northeast to go from Portland, Oregon to Toronto, Ontario when in fact Toronto is located slightly east-southeast of Portland. The superordinate effect on this relationship is the known fact that Canada is north of the United States; however most people do not realize that the border is not exactly east west in a flat line. This effect was seen in a variety of relationships solidifying their hypothesis that superordinate factors have an effect on perceived spatial relationships (Stevens & Coupe, 1978).

In a second study, Stevens and Coupe examined the effect of different boundary types on the ability to determine relative distances between two given locations. Using congruent horizontal and vertical, incongruent and homogeneous boundary maps to separate a handful of defined points, participants were shown the maps and then asked to estimate the general direction from one point to another. The incongruent boundary type yielded the most errors (3 times the number of errors for other types). Incongruent borders are very common in our everyday lives as seen by natural boundaries between neighborhoods, states and countries, thereby having a very frequent effect on our spatial perception.

It is clear that superordinate structures have an effect on how people interpret spatial relationships. Such information is stored hierarchically, giving the ability to infer otherwise unknown relationships by evaluating a series of known relationships (Stevens & Coupe, 1978). However, these constructs are often prone to error, revealing that new models of spatial relationships can be formed. The errors are the result of false hierarchy, something that would change with a shift in spatial understanding. In addition to the virtual boundaries of borders, social influences also have an effect on spatial perception.

Maddox, Rapp, Brion and Taylor looked at the social influences on spatial memory. Participants were tested on their ability to estimate distances between locations after being presented with a map labeled with neighborhood boundary lines and landmark descriptions. The researchers knew that boundaries would initiate a distancing effect between locations, and wanted to test whether similarities between locations would lessen this effect. The results of the study indicate that locations within a neighborhood did in fact yield distance estimates that were lower than estimates between locations in different neighborhoods. Interestingly, of locations in separate neighborhoods, those that shared racial membership (store owners of same racial background) were perceived to be closer than those that did not (Maddox, Rapp, Brion, Taylor, 2008).

Using a modified map from the first study, Maddox et al. set out to test the effect of distinct neighborhoods on memory. Neighborhood labels were add, and descriptions of establishments were added in which 2/3 were associated with the same race and other 1/3 associated with other remaining races. After the participants were questioned about distances between locations, they found that participants underestimated the distance between locations associated with the same race. Likewise, participants underestimated the distance between locations within the same neighborhood than from separate neighborhoods. The study concluded that within group characteristics are perceived to be spatially closer to each other than non-related characteristics. In this study, social bonds functioned to lessen the distancing effect created by the neighborhood boundary lines (Maddox et al., 2008).

Applying concepts from Stevens, Coupe and Maddox et al., we hypothesize that with the development of megaregions and growth of high-speed rail, there will be a change in spatial perceptions as observed boundaries shift to cover larger regions. Megaregions are defined by areas that share environmental, economic, and infrastructure systems in addition to similar topography and shared regional culture and history. Such regions are emerging in eleven defined areas of the United States, including Cascadia (Washington and Oregon), Texas Triangle, Great Lakes, Gulf Coast and the Northeast.

Further population growth and economic expansion is expected to occur in these areas, which are already the driving economic force of the continental United States. Currently, 66% of all American trade is concentrated in megaregions. Furthermore, just over 76% of total U.S. population and employment is within these megaregions (Lyons, 2012).

It is imperative that these areas are further developed to encourage business growth and continued prosperity. Specifically transportation development is crucial. Of all freight moved within megaregions, 77% is by truck. This method is becoming increasingly difficult as road traffic continues to rise and more goods are being shipped (Lyons, 2012). A solution to this would be the development of high-speed rail systems within and between megaregions. In addition to decreasing traffic on our roadways, traveling by train is much more energy efficient. In a 2012 study, 62% of Americans indicated they would be likely to use high-speed rail as a method of transportation (Taylor, 2012). This number would surely increase with the implementation of an advanced system. Such interest has been recognized by regional governments, expressed by the request of $75 billion from 39 states for high-speed rail development. The economic benefits of increased high speed rail is presented in the study, “The Economic Impacts of High Speed Rail: Transforming the Midwest.” The great lakes (Midwest) megaregion has a $2.6 trillion economy, and with a high speed rail system of 220mph bullet trains originating from Chicago the region would see an increase of $118 billion in wages and $296 billion in business sales over the next 30 years (Midwest High-Speed Rail Association, 2011). This impact is difficult to ignore.

The current rail system in the U.S. is very outdated. Over the past 50 years, transportation spending has been concentrated on the maintenance and expansion of interstate highway and aviation systems. The U.S. has gone as far as subsidizing the aviation industry. If rail had been considered as a viable option in the early 60s we would not be faced with the daunting task of building a high-speed rail infrastructure from scratch. In a more gradual approach, other developed nations have invested in modern high-speed rail systems to cope with travel demands, which have proven to be reliable, fast, and safe. These systems also reduce fuel consumption and regenerate cities and regions through which the rail is active. Since 2000, China has become the world leader in high-speed rail transportation, operating 40% of the world’s total high-speed rail networks (Todorovich, Schned, & Lane, 2011).

Looking for future development, the New England megaregion is a prime candidate for the implementation of a high-speed rail system. Though the higher speed Acela Express service is active in this region, it does not meet the needs of the region and has failed to live up to its expectations as a true bullet train. The Northeast corridor, a 455 mile distance between Boston and Washington, DC is the most used rail line in the United States and is one of the most heavily traveled areas in the world. There are approximately 13 million annual passengers on this corridor, 45% of Amtrak’s total U.S. ridership. In order to adapt this system, major improvements would need to be made at an estimated cost of $117 billion (Todorovich et al., 2011). Though overwhelming, such improvements would bring northeast regional transportation up to par with current international high-speed rail standards.

With the continued development of high-speed rail within emerging U.S. megaregions, there will be a new level of interconnectivity. Traditional barriers of transportation would be decreased and movement of people and goods will undoubtedly increase in theses areas. The feasibility of such development is becoming a reality as seen by California’s approved high-speed rail system to connect the Bay Area with Los Angeles. Initiatives like these are necessary for continued growth in megaregions. As economic and social landscapes grow to encapsulate entire megaregions, perceived boundaries will no longer be reserved for city or state lines, but rather entire megaregions. Though local boundaries will certainly still exist, these major geographical regions will become the primary way in which we view the United States. The shared cultural experience of people from the same megaregion will have the effect of lessening the distancing effect of old boundaries. It will be a long process, and it will be interesting to see how further development within megaregions will effect people’s understanding of spatial relationships.

References

Lyons, W. (2012). The Challenge of Transportation Planning for Megaregions. USDOT/Volpe Center. Retrieved from http://www.volpe.dot.gov/noteworthy/docs/wlyons_volpe_megaregions.pdf

Maddox, K., & Rapp, D., & Brion, S., & Taylor, H. (2008). Social Influences on spatial memory. Memory & Cognition, 36 (3).

Midwest High Speed Rail Association. (2011). The Economic Impact of High Speed Rail: Transforming the Midwest. Retrieved from http://www.midwesthsr.org/sites/default/files/pdf/MHSRA_2011_Economic_Stud y_Executive_Summary.pdf

Stevens, A., & Coupe, P. (1978). Distortions in Judged Spatial Relations. Cognitive Psychology, 10.

Taylor, M. (2012). Survey Shows Americans Ready to Embrace High-Speed Rail. America 2050. Retrieved from http://www.america2050.org/2012/07/survey- shows-americans-ready-to-embrace-high-speed-rail.html

Todorovich, P., & Schned, D., & Lane, R. (2011). High-Speed Rail, International Lessons for U.S. Policy Makers. Policy Focus Report, Lincoln Institute of Land Policy. Retrieved from https://www.lincolninst.edu/pubs/dl/1948_1268_High- Speed%20Rail%20PFR_Webster.pdf