Adoption of Hyperloop

Abstract

This study was initiated with a view to understand factors that either aids or presents a barrier towards the adoption of a radically new public transport mode, Hyperloop. The initial promises of Hyperloop include a faster, cheaper, sustainable and efficient mode of transport compared to the existing public transport mode alternatives. However, the technology is largely conceptual and hasn’t been realized yet for commercial operations. Thus, it was found through literature review, that it was important to first study the perceptions on the development of Hyperloop. Also, since Hyperloop development would be of a multi-stakeholder nature, due to the extensive urban landscape and infrastructure changes, it is important to incorporate and/or address the concerns and incentives of every stakeholder involved. Furthermore, large scale infrastructural projects similar to Hyperloop, such as high Speed Rail have faced opposition from the public due to lack of general awareness. This research thus aimed to explore the existing perceptions on the development of Hyperloop, with a view to recommend an inclusive nature of development as well as policy design.
To identify these perspectives the ‘Political Economy Model for Transport Innovations’ was used as a framework. Since existing literature of Product Development relevance of Hyperloop was limited at the time of the initiation of this study, the model was used to interview experts and stakeholders involved in the industrial development of Hyperloop to generate additional content and statements on Hyperloop. A limited set of 25 statements were then presented to a limited set of respondents to identify the patterns of perspectives on Hyperloop.
The study was conducted in the Netherlands with a sample respondent size of 32 participants. To identify perceptions among these respondents, Q-methodology was used. Q-methodology helps in statistical derivation of subjectivity. It also helps the research identify broad patterns of subjective biases compared to the traditional qualitative analysis or R-factor analysis. Through this study 4 distinct perceptions were interpreted. The first perspective is that the public would support research and development on Hyperloop, with a view to either fully realise or help in positive knowledge spill over for adjacent technologies. The second perception interpreted was that the public would rather spend the resources on the development of current existing transport modes to achieve the objectives of Hyperloop. The third perception interpreted was that the public would fully support the implementation of Hyperloop. The fourth perception identifies the skepticism in the full commercial realization of Hyperloop.
Through this study it was found that there is a healthy balance between positive and negative perceptions on the development of Hyperloop. Thus it is required to include the public as a primary stakeholder in its development. This could be enabled by a transparent flow of communication between all the stakeholders via a platform. The study also advocates the use of marketing the technology via subtle measures such as ‘nudging’.