Think 2040 Survey Results - Our Great Region 2040

Great Region 2040 Think 2040 Survey

Used to help develop and prioritize the strategies in Our Great Region 2040, the Think 2040 survey gauged public opinion on different aspects of our region's future. More than 8,000 residents from all 13 counties in our region took part in the survey.

Download

Survey Questions
Survey Results Summary
Survey Results Presentation (7-17-2013)

Think 2040 Survey Highlights

The Think 2040 survey, administered in the fall of 2012, was an online survey that asked for the public's input about the future of our region. Three alternative futures were presented that explored ways in which our region may grow, how we may get around, and how we may maintain or create strong competitive communities as we plan for the year 2040. The three alternatives were compared with a projection of how our region might look if no changes are made and we stay on the current course.

Less Time on the Road: This alternative promoted more growth in existing communities where infrastructure and services already exist. Learn more.

Reduction in travel times, costs
More jobs and housing located closer together
Some new housing is smaller sized, in walkable areas
More investment in sidewalks, bikeways, public transportation
Better air quality

Greener Region: This alternative preserved high-quality natural areas in our region through public and private efforts, resulting in a reduction in air and water pollution. Learn more.

Development reduced in flood and storm surge vulnerable areas
Best natural areas preserved
New businesses, workers, tourists attracted by natural areas
Greener practices adopted by local governments

Competitive Workforce: This alternative focused on increasing the educational attainment of our region's residents by improving schools as well as addressing community factors such as poverty, crime, and substandard housing. Learn more.

Highly skilled workforce
Competitive economic region
Good jobs and job training opportunities

Current Course: As a baseline when thinking about these three alternative futures, respondents considered the Current Course, or what the future may look like if we don't make any changes to our current growth, environmental, and educational trends. Learn more.

Existing Trends continue
No major policy changes
Most growth occurs outside of existing towns and cities
Traffic congestion increases
Large amount of natural areas lost to development
Education concerns not addressed, leading to less competitive workforce

Think 2040 Survey Results Snapshot

The Think 2040 Results Snapshot offers major takeaways from the Think 2040 Survey. More detailed survey responses are also available.

Less Time on the Road

Most respondents (78%) said it was very easy, easy, or not that difficult to get to the places they want to go today, but 71% are concerned that it will be more difficult or a lot more difficult to get around in 2040.
A majority (61%) said they would support increased planning by local governments to build communities with more transportation options.

Greener Region

A strong majority (95%) said we should take steps to preserve wetlands, forests, prairies and shorelines.
59% said they would support public spending to conserve these areas, even if it meant higher taxes or fees.

Competitive Workforce

Residents have access to job opportunities that support a good quality of life and financial stability.
68% believe there are factors in their community besides the quality of the schools that make it a poor environment for getting a good education with crime and safety noted as a primary concern.

Detailed Think 2040 Survey Expenditures Preferences

The survey asked respondents how they would spend $100 on our region's transportation system, the environment, and community factors. See how respondents answered.

Overall Region

By County

Coastal vs. Inland

Cities vs. Unincorporated Areas

By Location (Rural/Suburban/Urban)

By Length of Residence in Our Region

DISCLAIMER: The work provided for the basis for this website was supported by funding under an award with the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. The substance and findings of the work are dedicated to the public. The author and publisher are solely responsible for the accuracy of the statement and interpretations contained in this website. Such interpretations do not necessarily reflect the view of the U.S. Government