Development of Output Geographies for Comparative and Temporal Census Research

  • Mike Poulsen Macquarie University
Keywords: Geographic Objects, Output Geographies, Census Aggregation, Fragmentation, Objectification

Abstract

The potentiality exists for a multitude of different geographic objects to be established from the same census dataset. Faced with a variety of aggregation procedures it is critical that we develop research into geographic objects based on a standard methodology which satisfies a set of specific aggregation criteria. If not anarchy will prevail in the form of copious new output geographies. This would be a disaster in that geographic objects are of fundamental importance to the study of both physical and human geographic structures. In census geography the study of geographic objects primarily aims at acquiring vital information on differences between cities, the evolution of those cities and the study of urban management. After initially discussing the issue of which aggregation procedure to use this paper adopts a standard procedure, that of the fragmentation and objectification analysis, which is applied to a racelethnicity dataset for Los Angeles. As displayed in the Los Angeles application the number of types of major fragments and geographic objects that exist in this city are very limited, but the number of geographic objects are many. Los Angeles beyond the two citadels of the Whites and the barrio of the Hispanics is a very fragmented city.

References

Burrough, P.A. and Frank, A.U. (eds.) (1996) Geographic Objects with Intermediate Boundaries. London: Taylor and Francis.

Couclelis, H. (1996) Towards an operational typology of geographic entities with illdefined boundaries. In Burrough, P.A. and Frank, A.U. (eds.) Geographic Objects with Intermediate Boundaries. London: Taylor and Francis, pp. 45-56.

Frank, A.U. (1996) The prevalence of objects with sharp boundaries in GIS. In Burrough, P.A. and Frank, A.U. (eds.) Geographic Objects with Intermediate Boundaries. London: Taylor and Francis, pp. 29-40.

Hall, G.B., Malcolm, N.W and Piwowar, J.M. (2000) Integration of remote sensing and GIS to detect pockets of urban poverty: The case of Rosario, Argentina. Transactions in GIS, 4:235-253

Harris, R.J. and Longley, P.A. (2000) New data and approaches for urban analysis: Modeling residential densities. Transactions in GIS, 4:217-234.

Marcuse, P. (1997) The enclave, the citadel, and the ghetto: What has changed in the post-Fordist U.S. city. Urban Affairs Review, 33 :228-264.

Martin, D. (1998) Optimizing census geography: The separation of collection and output geographies. International Journal of Geographic Information Science, 12:673-685.

Martin, D. and Bracken, I. (1991) Techniques for modeling population-related raster databases. Environment and Planning A, 23:1069-1075.

Martin, D. Tate, N.J. and Langford, M. (2000) Refining population surface models: Experiments with Northern Ireland census data. Transactions in GIS, 4: 343-360.

Mesev, V. (1998) The use of census data in urban image classification. Photogrammetric Engineering and Remote Sensing, 64:431-438.

Openshaw, S. and Rao, L. (1995) Algorithms for reengineering 1991 Census Geography. Environment and Planning A, 27:425-446.

Poulsen, M. and Johnston, R.J. (2000) Threshold analysis approach to the objectification of social space: The structure of household types in Sydney. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design, 27:905-922.

Poulsen, M., Johnston, R.J. and Forrest, J. (2001) Intra-urban ethnic enclaves: Introducing a knowledge-based classification method. Environment and Planning A,33:2071-2083.

Thurstain-Goodwin, M. and Unwin, D. (2000) Defining and delineating the central area of towns for statistical monitoring using continuous surface representations. Transactions in GIS, 4:305-317.

Published
2016-02-21
Issue
Vol 22 (2002): Special Issue: GIS, Remote Sensing and Human Geography
Section
Articles
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:

    1. The contributor(s) (authors) warrant that the entire work is original and unpublished; it is submitted only to this Journal and all text, data, figures/tables or other illustrations included in this work are completely original and unpublished, and these have not been previously published or submitted elsewhere in any form or media whatsoever.
    2. The contributor(s) warrant that the work contains no unlawful or libelous statements and opinions and liable materials of any kind whatsoever, does not infringe on any copyrights, intellectual property rights, personal rights or rights of any kind of others, nor contains any plagiarized, fraudulent, improperly attributed materials, instructions, procedures, information or ideas that might cause any harm, damage, injury, losses or costs of any kind to person or property.
    3. The contributor(s) retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
    4. The contributor(s) are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
    5. The contributor(s) are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).
    6. Geography Research Forum may disseminate the content of the publications and publications’ Meta data in text, image, or other print and electronic formats to providers of research databases (e.g. EBSCO, GeoBase, JSTOR) to facilitate publications' exposure.