Richard Florida's megaregions in US/Canada - some questions on their classification (state, America)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
While a lot of what they have to say about these megaregions (and how they classify them) is straightforward, I have a couple of questions about their classification:
1) Why is St. Louis not identified with Chi-Pitts (Chicago to Pittsburgh) the way that Minneapolis-St. Paul (another rather isolated metro area in the western Midwest) is? Because the St. Louis economy is less vibrant/dynamic than that of the Twin Cities?
2) Why is the Ottawa-Montreal-Quebec City corridor identified as part of Tor-Buff-Chester and not its own megaregion? Because the economy of Toronto (the anchor of Tor-Buff-Chester) is more vibrant/dynamic than that of Montreal (the anchor of Ottawa-Montreal-Quebec City)? (Note that all of this is part of Canada's "megalopolis", the Windsor-Quebec City corridor that runs through Toronto, Montreal, etc.)
2a) Is it for kind of a similar reason that California (despite having a "megalopolis" that runs from San Francisco/Sacramento to San Diego - the so-called "San-San", parallel to the Windsor-Quebec City corridor mentioned right above)* is divided by Florida et al. into two megaregions, Nor-Cal and So-Cal? Because the economies of the San Francisco Bay and Los Angeles areas are just about equally vibrant/dynamic?
*The California megalopolis can be divided into a San Francisco-based northern part and a LA-based southern part, and similarly, the Canadian megalopolis can be divided into a Toronto-based southwestern part and a Montreal-based northeastern part.
All of the above is according to one classification of megaregions. Another classification of megaregions - this one by America 2050, as seen at Megaregions - America 2050 - is different in the following ways:
a) In addition to the Twin Cities, St. Louis (and Kansas City) is classified as belonging to the Great Lakes megaregion.
b) The Ottawa-Montreal-Quebec City corridor isn't classified as a megaregion at all, either separately or in connection with the Great Lakes megaregion. (Then again, it may have to do with the fact that that region, unlike Toronto/Buffalo/Rochester, is wholly in Canada, with the exception of the Champlain Valley of northern New York and Vermont.)
I'm kind of glad that he put Houston in with the gulf coast and not the Texas triangle.
I can go both ways on that. All of the Texas triangle cities are closer than New Orleans and the Texas culture is pervasive in Houston. However, Gulf Coast culture is also strong. Houston really is a part of both.
I can go both ways on that. All of the Texas triangle cities are closer than New Orleans and the Texas culture is pervasive in Houston. However, Gulf Coast culture is also strong. Houston really is a part of both.
Yeah they are closer but Houston is on the gulf and is part of the culture. I feel like the culture is tied much more with the gulf but the attitudes of the people are so unmistakably Texan.
I can go both ways on that. All of the Texas triangle cities are closer than New Orleans and the Texas culture is pervasive in Houston. However, Gulf Coast culture is also strong. Houston really is a part of both.
In a similar vein, going back towards the original question, Toronto/Southern Ontario is a part of both:
a) the wider Great Lakes complex of metro areas that includes Milwaukee, Chicago, Detroit, Cleveland, and Pittsburgh, and...
b) the heavily populated part of Ontario and Quebec, along the Great Lakes and the St. Lawrence River, that stretches from Windsor (next to Detroit) to Quebec City and which also includes Montreal, Ottawa, etc.
NorCal and SoCal are a lot farther apart than most people realize. At least a 6-8 hour drive Between each region and has historically had much different economies. Historically SF was the financial hub and had lots of port activity and food processing due to its proximity to the Central Valley. There was also some oil due to what is now Chevron having a presence on the East Bay, but the oil industry in California has more roots in SoCal...Plus Sacramento serves as the political center of the state and is closer to SF than SoCal. The tech industry there started to take off in the 1960s (and its roots go back as far as the 30s and 40s) and blew up into what we have today in Silicon Valley. The tech industry has its roots in defense contracting and the academic institutions of Stanford and UC-Berkeley. Los Angeles grew due to oil and the aerospace industry bankrolled by defense contracting. And was a large manufacturing center including automobiles and peripheral industries. There was food processing there as well. San Diego grew primarily due to the military and defense contracts plus tourism.
SoCal and NorCal are both Californian in culture and have lots of business ties, but very different at the same time. Florida was right to split the two.
SoCal and NorCal are both Californian in culture and have lots of business ties, but very different at the same time. Florida was right to split the two.
I think that Florida should have similarly split Tor-Buff-Chester into Tor-Buff-Chester proper (which includes the Golden Horseshoe/southern Ontario and western New York) and Mont-tawa (which includes southern Quebec and eastern Ontario). The anchors of those two regions, Toronto and Montreal, are a 6-hour drive apart, and the economic focuses are different - not to mention the linguistic differences.
Richard Florida frequently does not understand the economic dynamics of America's "heartland". St. Louis' economy is way more connected to Chicago than either Minneapolis or Pittsburgh and has been for at least 150 years.
The Front Range Urban Corridor (less the Wasatch Front, WTF?) is closing in on 5M. I don't get the partial tie-in with Utah's Wasatch Front, which is included in some other data sources. It's 385 miles (as the crow flies) and 504 miles via I-25/I-80 from Denver to Salt Lake. Neither has any correlation regarding culture, politics or religiosity.
The only commonality is that Denver is on the east side of the Rockies and Salt Lake on the west.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
