No full-text available
To read the full-text of this research,
you can request a copy directly from the authors.
Megaregions: Literature review of the implications for US infrastructure investment and transportation planning
... This scale and pace of economic activity is reflected in sprawling and coalescing urbanized landscapesmegaregions. Ross (2008) pictures the new scale of a megaregion by "the neighborhood is a critical building block for a city, cities are now the building blocks for megaregions". From a spatial point of view, identifying and delineating megaregions is debate to varying approaches: Marull, Galletto, Domene, and Trullen (2013) use standard subdivisions of countries -European NUTS3 bordersto delimit their analysis on megaregions. ...
... Taubenböck et al. (2014) add to this argument and show that megaregions grow spatially significantly faster than individual megacities of the respective country. Ross (2008) provides various criteria to identify megaregions (e.g. transportation network data, freight exchange) and draw the boundaries using the county borders as the basic unit of analysis. Five major categories of relationships that define megaregions are suggested by the Metropolitan Institute at Virginia Tech and the Regional Plan Association (RPA): environmental systems and topography, infrastructure systems, economic linkages, settlement patterns and land use, and shared culture and history (Ross et al., 2009). ...
... Florida et al. (2008) e.g. list 40 megaregions in their analysis, UN-Habitat (2008) maps 25 (e.g. three for China, while Yang et al. (2014) identify 10 for the country), Soja and Kanai (2007) suggest 29, but focus only on Europe, Asia and North America, and Ross (2008) list for the USA 9, Lang and Nelson (2007) 7, Hagler (2009) 11. For our study, we select a sample of five megaregions based on the following attributes: We select megaregions which are explicitly classified as megaregion in the literature. ...
Megaregions are important phenomena of globalization's new urban scale and form. These regions are considered the drivers of global economy, innovation, technology and the labor market. In combination with the global megatrend of urbanization, new dimensions and patterns are evolving conceptualized e.g. by this term ‘megaregion’. Using multi-source and multi-temporal satellite data we classify urban footprints and their spatial evolution since the 1970s of five selected megaregions across the globe, namely the megaregions of Southern California anchord by Los Angeles in USA and the Mexican border area, the mega-region São Paulo–Rio de Janeiro in Brazil, the Nile delta anchord by Cairo in Egypt, the mega-region Amsterdam–Rotterdam, Ruhr–Cologne, Brussels–Antwerp and Lille in Europe, and the megaregion Guangzhou–Shenzhen–Hong Kong in China. Based on this geospatial data set, we develop a spatial metric to measure spatial connectivity between cities based on the continuity of settlement patterns. The network of cities within the particular megaregions is based on demographic information. The result is on the one hand an evaluation of the spatial continuity of settlements between the cities within the networks. On the other hand, comparisons whether the settlement patterns in megaregions across the globe are similar or not are performed. We conclude with the finding that three types of megaregions can be spatially classified and one suggested megaregion is spatially not yet connected.
... The RPA's Megaregion [16] delimitation of Boswash (see Figure 2c) is similar to the Megapolitan extent established by Virginia Tech [74] but excludes Richmond and Norfolk (Virginia). In their analysis of the world's largest metropolitan regions, [75] list different parts of Boswash as separate economic regions (New York-Philadelphia-Newark, Boston, and Washington-Baltimore). ...
... In consequence of this methodological approach, we construct 9 different spatial forms of the urban corridor, one from each individual input layer. This spatially variable view on the urban corridor shows that regions are not fixed, but fuzzy territorial entities (soft spaces) and boundaries are malleable depending on data and methods applied (e.g., [74]). To account for this fuzziness in the conceptual idea of urban corridors, we stack the resultant entities and calculate the number of "Boswash matches" for each pixel. ...
The delimitation of urban space is conceptually elusive and fuzzy. Commonly, urban areas are delimited through administrative boundaries. These artificial, fixed boundaries, however, do not necessarily represent the actual built-up extent, the urban catchment, or the economic linkage within and across neighboring metropolitan regions. For an approach to spatially delimit an urban corridor—a generically defined concept of a massive urban area—we use the Boston to Washington (Boswash) region as an example. This area has been consistently conceptualized in literature as bounded urban space. We develop a method to spatially delimit the urban corridor using multi-source geodata (built-up extent, infrastructure and socioeconomic data) which are based on a grid rather than on administrative units. Threshold approaches for the input data serve to construct Boswash as varying connected territorial spaces, allowing us to investigate the variability of possible spatial forms of the area, i.e., to overcome the simple dichotomous classification in favor of a probability-based differentiation. Our transparent multi-layer approach, validated through income data, can easily be modified by using different input datasets while maintaining the underlying idea that the likelihood of an area being part of an urban corridor is flexible, i.e., in our case a factor of how many input layers return positive results.
... INTRODUCTION 1 Although the study of overinvestment and the recog-2 nition of an enterprise's overinvestment situation is a 3 critical topic in today's volatile world. It is well under-4 stood that effective investment can increase the devel-5 opment of a company and promote long-term growth 6 of any enterprise. ...
Studies have consistently demonstrated that both overinvestment and underinvestment exert adverse effects on the overall efficacy of business operations, showcasing the significance of understanding and addressing these phenomena in the realm of scholarly research. Therefore, in this study, we aim to develop an accurate machine-learning model to identify overinvestment in firms listed on the HSX and the HNX stock exchanges in Vietnam. We decided to conduct a comparison to identify the optimal model for classifying firms of overinvestment or not, including Logistic Regression, K-Nearest Neighbor (KNN), Naive Bayes (NB), Support Vector Machine (SVM), Decision Tree, and Random Forest. Using a sample of 658 non-financial listed companies in Vietnam between 2011 and 2021, our result shows that the most importance predictor variable is "FCF" (free cash flow), with an importance value of 0.14. Although both logistic regression and random forest (RD) algorithms demonstrate high accuracy in identifying firms with overinvestment, the Random Forest algorithm exhibits slightly higher precision and recall for class 1 (overinvestment firms) when compared to Logistic Regression. By contrast, the accuracy performance of the four models (NB, KNN, DT, and SVM) is low, ranging from 0.53 to 0.67. At the microeconomic level, this research can help businesses gain insights into their financial performance, identify areas for improvement, and take proactive measures to avoid financial distress and improve profitability by identifying potential cases of overinvestment. Overall, the study provides a valuable contribution to the field of financial analysis using machine learning techniques. We firmly believe that the findings of this research will serve as a significant scholarly reference for future investigations in the field and explore other importance predictors of overinvestment in Vietnam and other emerging markets.
... The spatial coherence of urban corridors is frequently not acknowledged sufficiently in urban planning and administration: their governance is complex and involves decision-making on multiple levels and across a large number of local and regional agencies (such as water, electricity, transport, police and fire departments, health care etc.), most of which work within administrative boundaries (Innes et al., 2010;Ross, 2008). This results in urban corridors being governed and managed by a plethora of administrative bodies, while no agencies exist for certain types (e.g., bioregions, commutersheds, cultural regions) (Wheeler, 2009). ...
Urban corridors are – from a spatial perspective – massively large, linear urban agglomerations consisting of a number of big cities or clusters aligned along high-speed road or rail lines. Fixed administrative boundaries are commonly used to define such urban areas. However, this does not usually reflect the actual extent of the built-up space in today's changing, multi-faceted urban landscape. Earth observation data provide the means to identify urban space in its spatial dimension, disregarding preconceived boundaries. We therefore use multi-source geodata including night-time lights, settlement patterns and population density to spatially delineate large urban corridors in the United States and parts of Canada and Mexico. Using pre-classified input layers, we identify and present varying outlines of 14 urban corridors through geospatial methods. With this approach, we address spatial ambiguities of such concepts and show fuzziness at the edges of these corridors.
... Megaregions are logical geographical and economic regional planning units used when planning construction and expansion of transportation systems to ensure high transportation connectivity and other improvements in regional infrastructure that are crucial to economic growth and competitiveness (Meyer 2007). To better address the growing challenges to economic competitiveness, quality of life, traffic congestion, aging transportation infrastructure, and the scarcity of natural resources (Ross et al. 2008) linked to the movement of passengers and freight across multijurisdictional borders in regional geography, it is necessary to understand the magnitude of passenger and freight flows in megaregions. The interconnectivity of major metropolitan areas and regional economic competitiveness can be achieved through regional planning at a megaregion scale . ...
... However, dispersal of riverine fish between Todd Creek and Shoal Creek may be hampered by Lake Hartwell, a man-made reservoir completed in 1963 that is located in the waterway between the streams. Todd Creek and Shoal Creek are mostly forested, but the surrounding area has the potential to become more urbanized as the Piedmont Atlantic is the fastest growing megaregion (i.e., network of connected metropolitan centers and their surrounding areas) in the United States (Ross et al. 2008). ...
... The expansion of metropolitan regions into larger functional regions, including CSAs, megapolitan areas, and megaregions, presents significant challenges for transportation planners. Highways and rail lines linking metropolitan areas within megaregions and their earlier incipient versions handle proportionately greater amounts of truck cargo than standalone metropolitan or micropolitan areas and their hinterlands (Ross, Barringer, and Yang 2008). ...
The U. S. Department of Transportation highlights the “megaregion,” a collection of multiple metropolitan areas that experience high volumes of cargo transport between them. Researchers further identify the smaller “megapolitan area,” comprised of two or three metropolitan areas strongly connected by rail and highway. To shed light on these definitions, this article addresses the expanding bi-national economic corridor extending from Chihuahua to Albuquerque, whose core is the Paso del Norte (El Paso, Ciudad Juárez) metropolitan region. The Chihuahua-Albuquerque corridor exhibits signs of becoming a megapolitan area, due to logistics and other economic activities that increasingly bind its metropolitan areas.
... In the Institute's report (Lang and Dhavale, 2005), ten megapolitan areas are identified which, although different approaches are used (Ross, 2008), roughly equal the Regional Plan Association (RPA)'s megaregions. For the RPA, megaregions are "large, connected networks of metropolitan areas that maintain environmental, cultural, and functional linkages (Lang and Nelson, 2007). ...
Current global urbanisation processes are leading to new forms of massive urban constellations. The conceptualisations and classifications of these, however, are often ambiguous, overlap or lag behind in scientific literature. This article examines whether there is a common denominator to define and delimitate–and ultimately map–these new dimensions of cityscapes. In an extensive literature review we analysed and juxtaposed some of the most common concepts such as megacity, megaregion or megalopolis. We observed that many concepts are abstract or unspecific, and for those concepts for which physical parameters exist, the parameters are neither properly defined nor used in standardised ways. While understandably concepts originate from various disciplines, the authors identify a need for more precise definition and use of parameters. We conclude that often, spatial patterns of large urban areas resemble each other considerably but the definitions vary so widely that these differences may surpass any inconsistencies in the spatial delimitation process. In other words, today we have tools such as earth observation data and Geographic Information Systems to parameterise if clear definitions are provided. This appears not to be the case. The limiting factor when delineating large urban areas seems to be a commonly agreed ontology.
... According to Lang and Nelson's [16] definition of megapolitan areas, this area is defined by the anchor metropolitan areas of Baltimore, Washington, Richmond, and Norfolk. Ross [17] defines a similar geography using cluster analysis. She finds that interactions within the Buffalo-Boston-New York-Philadelphia region and the Washington DC-Virginia region are stronger than between these two regions. ...
... The debate concerning whether local autonomy or centralized control is more beneficial is not new. A review of Ross et al. 39 suggests that the centralized Tennessee Valley Authority TVA and the decentralized Appalachian Regional Commission ARC may be contrasted in terms of their responsiveness to local needs and their ability to implement a regional goal. The TVA has a strong central authority providing power generation and land forestation but is less responsive to regional needs 39 . ...
Advantages of decentralized transportation planning responsibilities may include reduced project delivery cost, the integration of comprehensive long-range planning with regional land use, and greater accountability regarding local concerns. Yet disadvantages may include a tendency for operations to dominate longer-term planning, inconsistent operational standards, and difficulty in achieving network benefits, since some transportation links may provide benefits to the entire system but not to the immediate area where the link is located. To surmount these challenges in a decentralized environment, agencies need to cooperate effectively. Characteristics of effective collaboration include (1) experienced personnel, (2) credibility of the deciding entity, (3) transparency of decision-making processes, (4) an authority with sufficient power and/or funding to encourage implementation of key initiatives, (5) clear incentives for cooperation, and, of special importance given limited resources, and (6) an ability to evaluate tradeoffs. An access management case study demonstrates how agencies may use these characteristics to advance challenging projects in a decentralized environment.
Both planning practice and research increasingly acknowledge the existence of new scales and governance arrangements alongside and between statutory planning systems. Examples of new scales of non-statutory planning are large-scale megaregions and macro-regions. Drawing on examples from North America and Europe (Southern California and the Danube Region respectively), this article examines how new processes of cooperation at this scale can influence other statutory levels of decision-making on spatial development. The analysis of spatial delineations, discourses, actors, rules and resources associated with megaregions and macro-regions suggests that this type of ‘soft planning’ can foster territorial integration when a perception exists that there are joint gains to be made, when informal rules are negotiated in context-specific and bottom-up processes, when soft spaces are used as arenas of deliberation to renegotiate shared agendas, and when actors succeed in ensuring the anchorage of informal cooperation in other arenas.
Transportation investments have profound indirect effects on urban development. Improving transportation infrastructure reduces travel times, and thus, enhances accessibility of the population to employment and vice versa. In this procedure, the cities whose accessibilities mostly benefit from the transportation improvements would attract more population and capital. This paper attempts to quantify these impacts in the megaregions, and to prioritize the transportation investments according to their potential effects on the sustainability of the future development in these regions. For this purpose, the problem is formulated as a bilevel programming model. At the upper level, subject to a budget and environmental constraints, the optimal subset of projects is chosen from the candidate set. The objective is to maximize the total production of the megaregion at the end of the planning horizon. The final product of each city is determined according to its resultant population and physical capital. Under the network investment decisions of the upper level problem, the lower level represents the route choice behavior of users. Because the focus of the study is interurban road networks, which have sparse connectivity, a simple all-or-nothing trip assignment technique is employed at this level. To illustrate the application of the proposed model, the Northeast Megaregion of the United States is used as the case study. The exact solution is obtained for this example and compared to the regional development without improving the transportation network.
The survey was distributed to all MPOs and DOTs. Results cover a broad range of topics, including the state of practice, governance structures, planning approaches, general obstacles to megaregion planning and decision making, and finance. Megaregion-scale projects and cross-jurisdiction initiatives, whether contained within previously identified megaregions or extended beyond these geographic designations, received similar ratings of effectiveness. The Cascadia megaregion reported the highest percentage of organizations with cross-jurisdiction initiatives; the Midwest reported the highest absolute number. Planning and decision making within the megaregion were characterized by numerous actors interacting through largely informal or ad hoc processes with contested leadership. That partner roles were unclear likely increased uncertainty and transaction costs. Responses indicated that inadequate funding was one of the largest obstacles to megaregion planning. Funding was stagnant for DOTs and especially for MPOs. Practitioners did not appear to be optimistic about innovative funding methods that would fill gaps in megaregion transportation planning. Finally, governance networks were densest within states, but large MPOs, DOTs, and federal agencies may play a bridging role among states. Future research may focus on decreasing transaction costs, overcoming funding obstacles, and promoting dense interstate governance networks.
This paper examines the high-speed rail (HSR) development issues in the Northeast Megaregion of the United States (U.S.). Due to chronic underinvestment and a myriad of other factors, the only operational HSR in the U.S., i.e., Amtrak’s Acela Express, is lagging behind the Japanese Shinkansen and other advanced HSR systems in the world in its operating performance and relative modal importance. This study adopts both regional and international perspectives to address this issue. The regional perspective conducts the passenger rail transportation deficiency analysis on the Northeast Corridor (NEC). The international perspective introduces the Japanese railway privatization process and its consequences. Based on empirical research, this paper proposes a set of improvement strategies and draws conclusions.
Urban ‘gateways’ and ‘corridors’, which originated as conceptual tools to aid understanding of North American ‘New World’ regional development patterns in location theory, have been referred to in new ways and different situations in recent geographical literature. This article considers the profound changes reshaping the roles and functions of cities and their trade routes in contemporary globalization — the rise of the informational economy and the network organization of global knowledge-intensive advanced producer services. The policy response to these developments is critically assessed with reference to evidence from the ‘Polynet’ study which has investigated the changes currently transforming globalizing ‘mega-city regions’ in the ‘Old World’ setting of North West Europe. The article provides new reflections on the empirical results, addressing an apparent under-theorization of emergent urban relational geographies in European strategy considered an international role model for regional planning, including in North America. A series of paradoxes posed by the fluid urban geographies revealed in the research is identified to inform an ongoing discourse on the development of European spatial policy.
This study will help better our understanding of the import-export processes in the U.S. It examines the challenges faced by US exporters and importers, and investigates an innovative solution to tackle these challenges. The dry port concept introduced by transportation geographers is discussed, and an intermodal rail costing model is used in determining whether this concept will prove to be a more sustainable and energy efficient system than what currently exists.
ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any references for this publication.