Government 90dn

Mapping the Census

Lecture 8: Spatial Analysis; Economic Data in
the Census

Sumeeta Srinivasan
[email protected]
Outline
ƒ Intro to Spatial Analysis
ƒ MAUP
ƒ Using Economic data from the Census
Spatial Analysis
ƒ Query
ƒ Measurements
ƒ Transformation
ƒ Descriptive Summary
ƒ Optimization
ƒ Hypothesis Testing
Attribute Queries with Crashes
Attribute Queries with Crashes
Location Queries with Crashes
Location Queries with Crashes (and
fatalities)
Queries with Crashes (and fatalities)
Crash Statistics
ƒ Near high speed roads
ƒ Total non-fatality incidents 60 (1 fatal)
ƒ Average non-fatality incidents: 0.47
ƒ On all roads
ƒ Total non-fatality incidents 711 (4 fatal)
ƒ Average non-fatality incidents: 0.27
ƒ On low speed roads
ƒ Total non-fatality incidents 651 (3 fatal)
ƒ Average non-fatality incidents: 0.26
Measurement
ƒ Distance and length
ƒ Shape
1991 and 2001 Congressional
District Boundaries (San Diego, CA)
Transformations
ƒ Buffers
ƒ Overlay
Buffers (Discrete vs Continuous)
Dissolve

CC RR CC II R I
CC RR CC II
CC CC CC CC
C
CC CC CC RR R

# Item
1 C
2 R
3 C
4 I
Dissolve Example
Intersect
ƒ Use Intersect when you want to overlay a
layer with the polygons in another layer to
get only the overlap
Intersect
ƒ Flood zones that intersect parking
Intersect Result
Descriptive Summaries: Centroids
Hypotheses Testing
 Moran
Coefficient
(from Rick Glazier and
Peter Gozdyra, University
of Toronto )

Statistic\Value -1.0 0.0 1.0 2.0

Moran Strong negative Random Strong positive

Coefficient autocorrelation distribution of autocorrelation
values
Geary Ratio Strong positive Random Strong negative
autocorrelation distribution of autocorrelation
values
Moran?
Hypotheses testing with Crashes
Moran of Crashes in Cambridge
Moran's Index = -0.131211
Expected Index = -0.001319
Variance = 0.115055
Z Score = -0.382937
Local Moran of Crashes
MAUP
(Modifiable Areal Unit Problem)
ƒ Ecological Fallacy, Robinson, 1950
ƒ 1930 census county data, r=.773
ƒ 1930 census individual data, r=.203
(correlation between being black and being illiterate)
ƒ Iowa Study, Openshaw and Taylor, 1979
ƒ 99 counties in Iowa, r=.35
ƒ Regroup into 48 regions many times, -.55 < r < .89
ƒ Regroup into 12 regions many times, -.94 < r < .99
(correlation between % 65+ and % registered
Republican)
MAUP example
Economic Census
ƒ Conducted every five years, in years ending in
‘2’ and ‘7’
ƒ Data from the 2002 Economic Census are
currently being released
Economic Census
ƒ Industry Series
ƒ Not useful to map
ƒ Subject series
ƒ Specialized
ƒ Geography series
ƒ Place and ZIP code levels
The Base Multiplier
ƒ Base Multiplier can be expressed as a ratio:
BM = Total Employment
Basic Employment

ƒ Using this approach, analysts can project impacts

upon the total economy from expected changes to
the basic sector
ƒ Assumed that the ratio of total local employment
activity to basic employment (the BM) does not vary
over time.
 Leon County’s Base Multiplier
Employment by Sector in Leon County, 1999
Source: Florida Department of Labor and Employment Security
Sector Units Employees Percentage
Se rvice s 3,177 37,433 26.8%
Re ta il Tra de 1,320 24,147 17.3%
FIRE 664 6,260 4.5%
Co nstruction 700 5,695 4.1%
Tra ns, Comm And P ublic Util 214 3,818 2.7%
W hole sa le Tra de 427 3,764 2.7%
Ma nufa cturing 172 3,022 2.2%
Agriculture , Fore stry & Fishing 152 1,038 0.7%
Sta te Gove rnme nt 208 41,122 29.5%
Loca l Go ve rnme nt 24 11,070 7.9%
Fe de ra l Go ve rnme nt 36 1,677 1.2%
LEO N CO UNTY TO TAL 7,303 139,492 100%

Basic Sec tor Employment 46,859

Non- Basic Sec tor Employment 92,633
T otal Employment 139,492
Base Multiplier 2.98 (=139,392/46,859)
Four steps in EB Analysis
1. Area to be Studied (Geography)
2. Unit of Analysis (Measure of the
Economy)
3. Data to be Used (Source for Input Data)
4. Technique to be Used (Analytical
Methods)
1. Choosing a Study Area
ƒ County: The most commonly used study area because of
excellent data availability

ƒ MSA: Best unit for urban analysis; Built on counties, so

excellent data availability as well

ƒ Economic Region: A shopping area or media area is useful,

but poor data availability makes this a rarely used analysis
area

ƒ State: A study area that is too aggregated and likely to

undercount basic sector activity
2. Selecting the Unit of Analysis
ƒ Employment: The number of jobs by industry
ƒ Payroll: Annual payroll for firms by industry
ƒ Sales: Dollar sales by industry
ƒ Value Added: Like sales, but eliminates
double-counting by subtracting a firm’s
purchases from their sales
3. Selecting the Data Set
County Business Patterns:
ƒ Pros: Available annually; includes employment, payroll,
sales
ƒ Cons: Derived from a combination of sources; Does not
include Government employment
Economic Census
ƒ Pros: Contains employment, payroll, sales
ƒ Cons: Collected only every five years but not available until
several years later
ES202 Data
ƒ Pros: Available annually and by quarter; Includes
employment and payroll
ƒ Cons: Not always available for all areas
4. Economic Base Analysis Techniques
ƒ Direct Method: The simplest and most
straightforward, this approach assumes that certain
industries are Basic or Non-basic
ƒ Location Quotients: Related to the concentration
concept, this technique determines the local share of
an industry
The Direct Approach
ƒ Assigns activities to the Basic and Non-basic sectors
on the basis of assumed sales patterns for different
types of industries.
ƒ Sectors typically assigned to the Basic sector:
Manufacturing, State/Federal Government,
Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing, Hotels/Lodging,
Mining.
ƒ Sectors typically assigned to the Non-Basic sector:
Retail Trade, Local Government, Wholesale Trade,
Services, Transportation, Commercial, Utility,
Construction.
The Location Quotient Technique
ƒ Location quotients compare the local share of a given industry
to the share of that industry for a larger area
ƒ The formula: LQi = eit/eTt
Eit/ETt
where: eit = Local employment in sector i at time t
eTt = Total local employment at time t
Eit = National employment in sector i at time t
Ett = Total national employment at time t
ƒ Three values are possible:
1) Industries with LQ’s = 1 (Self-Sufficiency)
2) Industries with LQ’s < 1 (Net Importer)
3) Industries with LQ’s > 1 (Net Exporter)
 Calculating a Location Quotient
for Massachusetts Medical related employment
MA's employment in Medical related 404,200
MA's total employment 3,323,200
US employment in Medical related 6,779,990
US total employment 137,632,000

MA share of employment 404,200 12%

in Medical related 3,323,200

US share of employment 6,779,990 5%

in Medical related 137,632,000

MA concentration 12%
US concentration 5%

Location quotient 2.40

 Calculating a Location Quotient
for Massachusetts Manufacturing Industry
MA's employment in Manufacturing 407900
MA's total employment 3,323,200
US employment in Manufacturing 17263000
US total employment 137,632,000

MA share of employment 407900 12%

in Manufacturing 3,323,200

US share of employment 17,263,000 13%

in Manufacturing 137,632,000

MA concentration 12%
US concentration 13%

Location quotient 0.98

BLS Location Quotients
County Business Patterns
Query to get only County data
for Massachusetts

Query to get only data

for Massachusetts
where
state and county data
are available
Query to get only Middlesex County (17) data for Massachusetts
(25) for codes 621-623 Health care services
Group by counties
Group by counties
Group by States
Location Quotients
ƒ Middlesex and Suffolk county’s share in health
NAIC 621-623 related employment versus state
share in health related or state overall
employment
Location Quotients by County in MA
(compared to employment in health only)