Data Preparation and Collection - Literature review Example

? Data Preparation and Network Analysis Data Preparation and Network Analysis Data preparation and network analysis Upon the identification, of the study area(s), data preparation and collection ensues. Because of the nature and extensiveness of the research objectives and aims, several data preparation methods and network analysis models are required. Data preparation, therefore, takes two courses. Firstly it is conducted using qualitative methods such as field studies and questionnaires or secondly, through extensive review of the available research from different data sources such as scholarly articles and books on GIS. Finding meaningful data about people’s access to urban green spaces with regard to the people’s reasons for using such spaces and when and how they use them is considerably weighed down by the fact that survey data from local authorities is rather inconsistent. Various methods have been developed to help in data collection on local green space needs. Methods such as Best Value processes are viable in realising green space needs for populations in areas such as the Madinah region of UAE. The benchmark questions used in the Best Value User Satisfaction Survey are relatively basic meaning that more viable information should be sourced from the literature review of past surveys, as well as the analysis of other similar areas around the world (Cope 2009, 174). Telephone surveys with the public can be used to find out or estimate the number of urban green space users for every green space located in their vicinity. This module of data preparation is perhaps best for the quantification of urban dwellers’ access to green spaces and the estimation of future green space needs and the capacity of current green spaces to meet these needs. In England, for example, a telephone survey showed that 2.25 million people make a minimum of 184 visits to the nearest urban space annually (Knigge and Cope 2006, 2031). According to the researchers, if assumedly, England’s population was 37.8 million, this implies that at least 33 million persons make slightly more than 2.5 billion visits annually to urban green spaces. Telephone surveys prove to be quite feasible as they have the capacity to gather pertinent information such as how often urban dwellers visit green spaces. This is crucial in network analysis as it allows for the identification of peak times when green spaces are mostly used, as well as the documentation of whether or not the green spaces have the capacity to hold populations during peak visits (Neimeier 1997, 381). Afternoons, weekends and holiday times, are notably the key times for green space use. Other people have seasonal green space use patterns, which are largely influenced by prevailing weather patterns. Notably, men are slightly higher users if green spaces than their female counterparts. However, most local authority surveys do not give an indication on whether ethnic minority groups or disabled persons are equitably represented among green space users. This is perhaps the greatest limitation of using local authority surveys in data collection and network analysis of urban green spaces (Forman 2005, 203). As earlier cited, data preparation can take several formats. Thematic data generation is one such method. This entails the generation of area maps and conduct of an analysis of the region’s remote sensing data. Here, urban green spaces are digitised and categorised using visual interpretation methodology like Cartosat II and LISS-IV merge product in Arc GIS Ver.9.3 (Van Herzele 2003, 119). Under this module, urban green spaces are categorised as among others railway green, playgrounds, open green, water bodies, industrial green, built ups, parks and roadside green (Barbosa, Tratalos, et al, 2007, 189). Using the “selection by attribute” query within Arc GIS, the different categories of urban green spaces are separated and exported into different categories of either public and green spaces. All types of green spaces are then assigned different attributes that distinguish them from one another. However, it is also essential to consider the road and transport network within the area of study when conducting the thematic data generation. Digitization of road layers is often carried out at this point. Classification of roads under different categories is paramount (Koenig 1998, 161). This can be done with the help of Google Earth. Roads and transport modes are classified under the following categories: major roads, minor roads, highways, local roads, railways and canals. The development of the network dataset is also quite crucial in network analysis. Network analysis should always be conducted in ARC GIS from beginning to the end. When formulating dataset, upon the digitization and classification of road layers, the length of all roads types, are calculated, and a new indicator, i.e. time is added to the categorisation (Vermeulen, et al, 2004, 241). Time in this sense refers to the time it takes one to reach an urban green space. This item of network analysis is essential as it gives an indication of urban dwellers’ access to green spaces and offers valuable information on areas of concern in terms of the ability of transport networks to facilitate access to green spaces (Dwyer 2004, 156). This also allows for futuristic planning to enhance access to such green spaces. In addition to ascertaining the capacity of road networks to provide access to green spaces, it is also paramount to determine the connectivity of different roads and other transport systems within the urban area. This is primarily done through the creation of a network dataset that allows for the use of geo-databases in the Arc catalog. Buffer analysis refers to a proximity analysis that is vector-based. This analysis is also carried out using ARC GIS ver. 9.3 and establishes buffer polygons to distinct distances around different features such as green spaces. The prescribed buffer distances for different parks include 50 metres for tot lots, 150m for housing area parks, 400m for neighbourhood parks and 800m for community parks. The buffer distances are inserted in green space attribute layers before a buffer analysis is conducted to establish service area polygons, which are then merged to create a single polygon (Miller and Shaw 2001, 412). Population Census Data (Green Space Analysis) Literature searches show that passive and informal activities are the predominant reasons why people visit green spaces in urban areas. Information from the literature search shows that people’s chief reasons for visiting urban green spaces can be categorised into several distinct categories i.e. enjoying the environment, attending events, walking activities, social activities, inactive and active enjoyment such as sports. These categories of basic uses can be amalgamated with a social typology that focuses on population demographics such as gender, age, ethnicity and physical and mental ability to develop a categorisation of urban green space users. This framework is of immeasurable value when considering the greater consistency in surveys of urban green space users in the future. When planning green space use for current and future users, it is paramount that decision makers take into consideration data from population census as such data offers viable tools to allow for tailoring green spaces to the needs of all demographics. Physically and mentally disabled persons form a substantive proportion of the population (Horner 2008, 279). Such persons have unique needs. Planning for future populations’ access to green space should appreciate the current access for disabled persons. Disabled persons’ access is significantly aided by ramps and wheelchair accessible points of entry. In addition, it is vital that all categories of persons within the population are effectively served by green spaces. Children’s needs in green spaces are totally distinct from those of adults and elderly persons. Children are seemingly more interested in active activities such as playing, running, climbing and riding than passive activities such as sitting and relaxing, which are key reasons why adults visit green spaces. An ideal park and other green space should cater for the needs of all persons within the population, as well as allow for the easy access to the green space. It is, therefore, apparent that planning for access of future populations is a key element of green space planning. Questionnaire Data sampling is part and parcel of the statistical practice of data collection of gathering and analysis. Field study involves conducting field surveys, as well as the formulation of questionnaires, which are then circulated to selected persons within the urban population. Questionnaires are essential as they not only provide information with regard to the population of concern, but also offer guidance for developments aimed at meeting the needs of future urban populations. The questionnaire aims at discovering urban green space users’ satisfaction with the current green spaces in Madinah. It is paramount that the questionnaire is dispatched to all categories of persons, i.e. all users of green spaces such as teenagers, young adults, middle aged persons, old people, mentally and physically disabled persons who have the capacity to complete the questionnaire (Litman, T, 2007, 10). In order to enable people to offer their unbiased responses in line with the ethical conduct of field study, some of the questions are left open ended while others that mainly require definite responses are close ended. It is paramount that the questions are kept few, brief and straightforward to deter tediousness and participant boredom. The following are questions that feature predominantly in the questionnaire: 1. On a scale of 1 to 10 (10 being particularly high), what is the capacity of the current green spaces in Madinah to fulfil green space requirements? _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 2. Do the green spaces in Madinah meet your expectations? (Tick where applicable). Yes No 3. What, if any, are the most over-utilised facilities in the green spaces? _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 4. What modifications would you commend to enhance the quality of the green spaces in Madinah? ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 5. Are the transport networks capable of providing sufficient access to the green spaces? Yes No 6. Do you believe that the current green spaces have the capacity to meet future needs of urban populations? Yes No 7. If your answer to question 6 is “no”, please give proposals on how green spaces can meet the needs of future population? _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 8. Please give proposals for transport networks in Madinah. _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 9. What benefits do the available green spaces offer residents of Madinah? _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 10. Offer solutions to decision makers with regard to access to green spaces, both in the present and future. ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ References Barbosa,O; Tratalos, JA, et al, 2007, Who benefits from access to green space? A case study from Sheffield,UK; Landscape and Urban Planning, 83, (2-3, 19), Pp 187-195. Cope, M, 2009, Qualitative GIS. Boston: Sage Publishers. Dwyer, JF, 2004, “Movement of people across a landscape: A blurring distinction between areas, Interests, and issues affecting natural resource management”. Landscape and Urban Planning: 153-164. Forman RTT, 2005, Ecology of Landscapes and Regions : Land Mosaics, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. Horner, MW, 2008, "Exploring metropolitan accessibility and urban structure," Urban Geography, 25: 264-284. Kessel, A, 2009, “Multidisciplinary research in public health: A case study of research on access to green space”. Public Health: 15, 32-38. Handy, SL and Niemeier, DA, 1997, “Measuring accessibility: An exploration of issues and alternatives”, Environment and Planning A, 29(7): 1175-1194. Heywood, I, Carver, S and Cornelius, S, 2006,  An Introduction to Geographical Information Systems (3rd ed.), Prentice Hall., England. Horner, MW, 2008, "Exploring metropolitan accessibility and urban structure," Urban Geography, 25: 264-284. Knigge, L, and Cope M, 2006, "Grounded visualization: integrating the analysis of qualitative and quantitative data through grounded theory and visualization" Environment and Planning A 38(11) 2021 – 2037. Koenig, JG, 1998, “Indicators of urban accessibility: Theory and application”. Transportation, 9:145-172.   Litman, T, 2007, Evaluating Accessibility for Transport Planning, VTPI Retrieved from www.vtpi.org and  www.vtpi.org/access.pdf. Miller, H and Shaw, S, 2001, Geographic information systems for transportation: Principles and applications, Oxford University Press, New York. Neimeier, D, 1997, “Accessibility: An Evaluation Using Consumer Welfare,” Transportation, 24(4): 377-396. Van Herzele, A, 2003, “A monitoring tool for the provision of accessible and attractive urban green spaces”. Landscape and Urban planning: 19, 109-126. Vermeulen, et al, 2004, The Price of Transport: Overview of the Social Costs of Transport, McGraw, New York.   Read More