In 1996, ASU’s Morrison Institute for Public Policy began asking residents and leaders in Greater Phoenix, “What does quality of life mean to you, and how do you measure it?” After an 18-month process, the first volume of What Matters was published in September 1997, creating a baseline of opinion and data about “quality of life” and what it means to the people who live here. The report was quickly recognized both within the region and nationally among indicator projects for its simple, yet unique presentation of public perception (survey) data and regional statistical, or indicator, data.

Arizona is one of the nation’s most urban states, and now it includes one of 20 “megapolitan” areas in the U.S. People have predicted for 50 years that Phoenix and Tucson would grow together into a giant desert conglomerate. That possibility has been seen as exciting, intriguing, and distressing. While a solid city along Interstate 10 is unlikely given the diverse land ownership in central and southern Arizona, the two metro economies are already merging.

Megapolitan: Arizona’s Sun Corridor, one of the first reports on a single megapolitan area, recognizes a more sophisticated technique for analyzing urban growth—that shared economic and quality of life interests are more important than physically growing together.

Scholars at Virginia Tech defined the megapolitans based on economic and growth patterns.
The Sun Corridor, which cuts across six counties from the border with Mexico to the center of Yavapai County, is the home of eight out of 10 Arizonans. In the next several decades, two out of three Americans will live in a megapolitan accounting for 60% of the population on only 10% of U.S. land.

Megapolitan offers a bold new picture of Arizona’s geography and its future opportunities and “megaton” challenges. This report presents a scenario for 2035 based on current trends. It analyzes the Sun Corridor and provides insights into the region’s global potential, water, governance, sustainability, and “trillion dollar questions.” It discusses the “tragedy of the sunshine” and asks the indispensable question: In 2035, do you want to live in the Sun Corridor?

Arizona faces some big challenges if it is to compete regionally, nationally and globally for the cutting-edge jobs that will help determine our economic future. As hard as state and community leaders are working, the report suggests that Arizona needs even more participation in economic development leadership, more collaboration among economic development groups and a greater sense of urgency. This report identifies a number of important issues that are key to advancing economic development in Arizona.

For decades, Arizona was one of the national leaders in aggregate economic growth, as measured by the percent change in measures such as gross product and employment. However, its growth rate always has been highly cyclical. During expansionary periods, Arizona always has been among the top states on the rate of growth. During recessions, the Arizona economy generally slumped at a rate similar to the national average, but would experience a rapid recovery. This pattern continued through the economic expansion of the mid-2000s.

This report both updates statistics and perceptions and adds new features. Thus, readers may look at quality of life based on how residents feel or on the trend lines revealed in the numbers. What Matters reports what people think about Greater Phoenix, how they view their own lives, and whether they believe the region is on the right or wrong track. The sections are presented in the order of importance assigned to them by the survey rankings (i.e., Education appears first, Public Safety and Crime second, etc).

What Matters is intended to support decision-making on public issues and to provide a reference for policy makers, civic and business leaders, community activists, and other residents. In response to feedback on previous issues, this edition includes additional indicators for healthcare and more information on higher education. Price and income data have been adjusted for inflation, and more information has been added where appropriate for a fuller picture of trends. Different approaches or completely new sources of data were required in some of this issue’s indicators because of changes in data sources. While every effort was made to choose items that would be stable, there is no way to control for how data are collected or reported over the years. On the whole, however, the 1997 baseline remains intact.