Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Normalize metrics by area #63

Closed
operte opened this issue Dec 5, 2022 · 3 comments
Closed

Normalize metrics by area #63

operte opened this issue Dec 5, 2022 · 3 comments

Comments

@operte
Copy link
Collaborator

operte commented Dec 5, 2022

Benoit suggested we normalize metrics by area, since the area of each IRIS varies considerably.

What do you think?

@katoss
Copy link
Collaborator

katoss commented Dec 12, 2022

mhh I don't have a strong opinion.
Maybe it helps to imagine a scenario.
So I think of..
IRIS A (very big), and IRIS B (very small) have the same school capacity, number of shops, etc = same score.
What does that mean for their demand in bike parking?
Wouldn't it stay the same, independent of the area?

@mpadge
Copy link
Collaborator

mpadge commented Dec 12, 2022

There's no straightfoward answer to this question. Sometimes it is important to normalise by area, particularly for active transport because area scales with distance, which has a definite effect. Sometimes it is also equally important to scale for local population densities. And sometimes it is important to scale for both. My instinctive guess would be that the notional attempt to scale IRIS polygons to equal populations should generally mean that post-hoc scaling shouldn't be done.

@operte
Copy link
Collaborator Author

operte commented Dec 12, 2022

Ok, I think we should drop it and let the city work on it as they see fit :) Thanks everyone!

@operte operte closed this as completed Dec 12, 2022
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants