diff --git a/knit_it.sh b/knit_it_html.sh
similarity index 100%
rename from knit_it.sh
rename to knit_it_html.sh
diff --git a/knit_it_pdf.sh b/knit_it_pdf.sh
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..e13b793
--- /dev/null
+++ b/knit_it_pdf.sh
@@ -0,0 +1 @@
+Rscript -e 'library(rmarkdown); rmarkdown::render("./mapping_draft.Rmd", "pdf_document")'
\ No newline at end of file
diff --git a/mapping_draft.Rmd b/mapping_draft.Rmd
index 96c6aa9..36363a2 100644
--- a/mapping_draft.Rmd
+++ b/mapping_draft.Rmd
@@ -546,46 +546,46 @@ ggplot() +
 
 ```{r create_cartograms, fig.width=4, fig.show="hold", fig.cap="Figure 4"}
 
-# todo: plot as animated chorogram: 
-# https://www.r-graph-gallery.com/331-basic-cartogram/
-# see here for example using sf: https://github.com/dreamRs/topogRam
+# # todo: plot as animated chorogram: 
+# # https://www.r-graph-gallery.com/331-basic-cartogram/
+# # see here for example using sf: https://github.com/dreamRs/topogRam
 
-library(cartogram)
+# library(cartogram)
  
-# construct a cartogram using the population in 2005
-afr_cartogram <- cartogram(afr, "POP2005", itermax=5)
+# # construct a cartogram using the population in 2005
+# afr_cartogram <- cartogram(afr, "POP2005", itermax=5)
 
-# It is a new geospatial object: we can use all the usual techniques on it! Let's start with a basic ggplot2 chloropleth map:
-library(tidyverse)
-library(broom)
-spdf_fortified <- tidy(afr_cartogram)
-spdf_fortified = spdf_fortified %>% left_join(. , afr_cartogram@data, by=c("id"="ISO3")) 
-ggplot() +
-  geom_polygon(data = spdf_fortified, aes(fill = POP2005, x = long, y = lat, group = group) , size=0, alpha=0.9) +
-  coord_map() +
-  theme_void()
+# # It is a new geospatial object: we can use all the usual techniques on it! Let's start with a basic ggplot2 chloropleth map:
+# library(tidyverse)
+# library(broom)
+# spdf_fortified <- tidy(afr_cartogram)
+# spdf_fortified = spdf_fortified %>% left_join(. , afr_cartogram@data, by=c("id"="ISO3")) 
+# ggplot() +
+#   geom_polygon(data = spdf_fortified, aes(fill = POP2005, x = long, y = lat, group = group) , size=0, alpha=0.9) +
+#   coord_map() +
+#   theme_void()
   
-  # As seen before, we can do better with a bit of customization
-library(viridis)
-ggplot() +
-  geom_polygon(data = spdf_fortified, aes(fill = POP2005/1000000, x = long, y = lat, group = group) , size=0, alpha=0.9) +
-  theme_void() +
-  scale_fill_viridis(name="Population (M)", breaks=c(1,50,100, 140), guide = guide_legend( keyheight = unit(3, units = "mm"), keywidth=unit(12, units = "mm"), label.position = "bottom", title.position = 'top', nrow=1)) +
-  labs( title = "Africa 2005 Population" ) +
-  ylim(-35,35) +
-  theme(
-    text = element_text(color = "#22211d"), 
-    plot.background = element_rect(fill = "#f5f5f4", color = NA), 
-    panel.background = element_rect(fill = "#f5f5f4", color = NA), 
-    legend.background = element_rect(fill = "#f5f5f4", color = NA),
-    plot.title = element_text(size= 22, hjust=0.5, color = "#4e4d47", margin = margin(b = -0.1, t = 0.4, l = 2, unit = "cm")),
-    legend.position = c(0.2, 0.26)
-  ) +
-  coord_map()
+#   # As seen before, we can do better with a bit of customization
+# library(viridis)
+# ggplot() +
+#   geom_polygon(data = spdf_fortified, aes(fill = POP2005/1000000, x = long, y = lat, group = group) , size=0, alpha=0.9) +
+#   theme_void() +
+#   scale_fill_viridis(name="Population (M)", breaks=c(1,50,100, 140), guide = guide_legend( keyheight = unit(3, units = "mm"), keywidth=unit(12, units = "mm"), label.position = "bottom", title.position = 'top', nrow=1)) +
+#   labs( title = "Africa 2005 Population" ) +
+#   ylim(-35,35) +
+#   theme(
+#     text = element_text(color = "#22211d"), 
+#     plot.background = element_rect(fill = "#f5f5f4", color = NA), 
+#     panel.background = element_rect(fill = "#f5f5f4", color = NA), 
+#     legend.background = element_rect(fill = "#f5f5f4", color = NA),
+#     plot.title = element_text(size= 22, hjust=0.5, color = "#4e4d47", margin = margin(b = -0.1, t = 0.4, l = 2, unit = "cm")),
+#     legend.position = c(0.2, 0.26)
+#   ) +
+#   coord_map()
   
-# Add animated version:
+# # Add animated version:
 
-https://github.com/thomasp85/gganimate
+# https://github.com/thomasp85/gganimate
  
 ```
 
diff --git a/mapping_draft.tex b/mapping_draft.tex
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..051762c
--- /dev/null
+++ b/mapping_draft.tex
@@ -0,0 +1,816 @@
+\documentclass[11pt,]{article}
+\usepackage{lmodern}
+\usepackage{amssymb,amsmath}
+\usepackage{ifxetex,ifluatex}
+\usepackage{fixltx2e} % provides \textsubscript
+\ifnum 0\ifxetex 1\fi\ifluatex 1\fi=0 % if pdftex
+  \usepackage[T1]{fontenc}
+  \usepackage[utf8]{inputenc}
+\else % if luatex or xelatex
+  \ifxetex
+    \usepackage{mathspec}
+  \else
+    \usepackage{fontspec}
+  \fi
+  \defaultfontfeatures{Ligatures=TeX,Scale=MatchLowercase}
+\fi
+% use upquote if available, for straight quotes in verbatim environments
+\IfFileExists{upquote.sty}{\usepackage{upquote}}{}
+% use microtype if available
+\IfFileExists{microtype.sty}{%
+\usepackage{microtype}
+\UseMicrotypeSet[protrusion]{basicmath} % disable protrusion for tt fonts
+}{}
+\usepackage[margin=1in]{geometry}
+\usepackage{hyperref}
+\PassOptionsToPackage{usenames,dvipsnames}{color} % color is loaded by hyperref
+\hypersetup{unicode=true,
+            pdftitle={Mapping Environmental Action in Scotland},
+            pdfauthor={Jeremy H. Kidwell},
+            colorlinks=true,
+            linkcolor=black,
+            citecolor=Blue,
+            urlcolor=Blue,
+            breaklinks=true}
+\urlstyle{same}  % don't use monospace font for urls
+\usepackage{natbib}
+\bibliographystyle{plainnat}
+\usepackage{longtable,booktabs}
+\usepackage{graphicx,grffile}
+\makeatletter
+\def\maxwidth{\ifdim\Gin@nat@width>\linewidth\linewidth\else\Gin@nat@width\fi}
+\def\maxheight{\ifdim\Gin@nat@height>\textheight\textheight\else\Gin@nat@height\fi}
+\makeatother
+% Scale images if necessary, so that they will not overflow the page
+% margins by default, and it is still possible to overwrite the defaults
+% using explicit options in \includegraphics[width, height, ...]{}
+\setkeys{Gin}{width=\maxwidth,height=\maxheight,keepaspectratio}
+\IfFileExists{parskip.sty}{%
+\usepackage{parskip}
+}{% else
+\setlength{\parindent}{0pt}
+\setlength{\parskip}{6pt plus 2pt minus 1pt}
+}
+\setlength{\emergencystretch}{3em}  % prevent overfull lines
+\providecommand{\tightlist}{%
+  \setlength{\itemsep}{0pt}\setlength{\parskip}{0pt}}
+\setcounter{secnumdepth}{5}
+% Redefines (sub)paragraphs to behave more like sections
+\ifx\paragraph\undefined\else
+\let\oldparagraph\paragraph
+\renewcommand{\paragraph}[1]{\oldparagraph{#1}\mbox{}}
+\fi
+\ifx\subparagraph\undefined\else
+\let\oldsubparagraph\subparagraph
+\renewcommand{\subparagraph}[1]{\oldsubparagraph{#1}\mbox{}}
+\fi
+
+%%% Use protect on footnotes to avoid problems with footnotes in titles
+\let\rmarkdownfootnote\footnote%
+\def\footnote{\protect\rmarkdownfootnote}
+
+%%% Change title format to be more compact
+\usepackage{titling}
+
+% Create subtitle command for use in maketitle
+\newcommand{\subtitle}[1]{
+  \posttitle{
+    \begin{center}\large#1\end{center}
+    }
+}
+
+\setlength{\droptitle}{-2em}
+
+  \title{Mapping Environmental Action in Scotland}
+    \pretitle{\vspace{\droptitle}\centering\huge}
+  \posttitle{\par}
+    \author{\href{http://jeremykidwell.info}{Jeremy H. Kidwell}}
+    \preauthor{\centering\large\emph}
+  \postauthor{\par}
+      \predate{\centering\large\emph}
+  \postdate{\par}
+    \date{2019-02-01}
+
+
+\begin{document}
+\maketitle
+
+\hypertarget{introduction15541312}{%
+\section[Introduction]{\texorpdfstring{Introduction\footnote{This
+  research was jointly funded by the AHRC/ESRC under project numnbers
+  AH/K005456/1 and AH/P005063/1.}}{Introduction}}\label{introduction15541312}}
+
+Until recently, environmentalism has been treated by governments and
+environmental charities as a largely secular concern. In spite of the
+well-developed tradition of ``eco-theology'' which began in earnest in
+the UK in the mid-twentieth century (and which has many precursors in
+previous centuries), third-sector groups and governments, particularly
+in Britain and Europe, have largely ignored religious groups as they
+have gone about their business crafting agendas for behaviour change,
+developing funding programmes, and developing platforms to mitigate
+ecological harm, motivate consumers and create regulation regimes. That
+this has changed is evidenced by the fact that several prominent
+non-religious environmental groups have commissioned studies and crafted
+outreach programmes to persons with a particular faith tradition or to
+``spiritual communities'' including RSPB (2013) and the Sierra Club USA
+(2008).\footnote{This is not to say that there have been no
+  collaborations before 2000, noteworthy in this respect is the WWF who
+  helped to found the Alliance of Religion and Conservation (ARC) in
+  1985.} Further, since 2008, the Scottish Government has provided a
+significant portion of funding for the ecumenical charity,
+Eco-Congregation Scotland, which works to promote literacy on
+environmental issues in religious communities in Scotland and helps to
+certify congregations under their award programme. What is not well
+known, however, even by these religious environmental groups themselves,
+is whether or how their membership might be different from other
+environmental groups. This study represents an attempt to illuminate
+this new interest with some more concrete data about religious groups in
+Scotland and how they may differ from non-religious counterparts.
+
+\hypertarget{eco-congregation-scotland-the-basics}{%
+\section{Eco-Congregation Scotland: The
+Basics}\label{eco-congregation-scotland-the-basics}}
+
+There are 344 eco-congregations in Scotland. By some measurements,
+particularly in terms of individual sites and possibly also with regards
+to volunteers, this makes Eco-Congregation Scotland one of the largest
+environmental third-sector groups in Scotland.\footnote{This suggestion
+  should be qualified - RSPB would greatly exceed ECS both in terms of
+  the number of individual subscribers and budget. The RSPB trustee's
+  report for 2013-2014 suggests that their member base was 1,114,938
+  people across Britain with a net income of £127m - the latter of which
+  exceeds the Church of Scotland. If we adjust this based on the
+  Scottish share of the population of the United Kingdom as of the 2011
+  census (8.3\%) this leaves us with an income of £9.93m. The British
+  charity commission requires charities to self-report the number of
+  volunteers and staff, and from their most recent statistics we learn
+  that RSPB engaged with 17,600 volunteers and employed 2,110 members of
+  staff. Again, adjusted for population, this leaves 1,460 volunteers in
+  Scotland and 176 staff. However, if we measure environmental groups
+  based on the number of sites they maintain, RSPB has only 40 reserves
+  with varying levels of local community engagement. For comparison, as
+  of Sep 14 2015, Friends of the Earth Scotland had only 10 local groups
+  (concentrated mostly in large urban areas). Depending on how one
+  measures ``volunteerism,'' it may be possible that ECS has more
+  engaged volunteers in Scotland as well - if each ECS group had only 4
+  ``volunteers'' then this would exceed RSPB.}
+
+In seeking to conduct GIS and statistical analysis of ECS, it is
+important to note that there some ways in which these sites are
+statistically opaque. Our research conducted through interviews at a
+sampling of sites and analysis of a variety of documents suggests that
+there is a high level of diversity both in terms of the number of those
+participating in environmental action and the types of action underway
+at specific sites. Work at a particular site can also ebb and flow over
+the course of time. Of course, as research into other forms of activism
+and secular environmental NGOs has shown, this is no different from any
+other third sector volunteer group. Variability is a regular feature of
+groups involved in activism and/or environmental concern.
+
+For the sake of this analysis, we took each Eco-Congregation Scotland
+site to represent a point of analysis as if each specific site
+represented a community group which had ``opted-in'' on environmental
+concern. On this basis, in this section, in the tradition of human
+geography, we ``map'' environmental action among religious communities
+in Scotland a variety of ways. This is the first major geographical
+analysis of this kind conducted to date in Europe. We measure the
+frequency and location of ECS sites against a variety of standard
+geo-referenced statistical data sets, seeking to provide a statistical
+and geographically based assessment of the participation of religious
+groups in relation to the following:
+
+\begin{itemize}
+\tightlist
+\item
+  Location within Scotland
+\item
+  Religious affiliation
+\item
+  Relation to the Scottish Index of Multiple Deprivation (SIMD)
+\item
+  Relation to the 8-Fold Scottish Government Urban-Rural Scale
+\item
+  Proximity to ``wilderness'' (based on several different designations)
+\end{itemize}
+
+For the sake of comparison, we also measured the geographical footprint
+of two other forms of community group in Scotland, (1) Transition Towns
+(taking into account their recent merge with Scotland Communities
+Climate Action Network) and (2) member groups of the Development Trust
+Association Scotland (``DTAS''). These two groups provide a helpful
+basis for comparison as they are not centralised and thus have a
+significant geographical dispersion across Scotland. They also provide a
+useful comparison as transition is a (mostly) non-religious
+environmental movement, and community development trusts are not
+explicitly linked to environmental conservation (though this is often
+part of their remit), so we have a non-religious point of comparison in
+Transition and a non-environmental point of comparison with DTAS
+
+\hypertarget{technical-background}{%
+\section{Technical Background}\label{technical-background}}
+
+Analysis was conducted using QGIS 2.8 and R 3.5.2, and data-sets were
+generated in CSV format.\footnote{Kidwell, Jeremy. (2016).
+  Eco-Congregation Scotland, 2014-2016. University of Edinburgh.
+  \url{http://dx.doi.org/10.7488/ds/1357}.} To begin with, I assembled a
+data set consisting of x and y coordinates for each congregation in
+Scotland and collated this against a variety of other specific data.
+Coordinates were checked by matching UK postcodes of individual
+congregations against geo-referencing data in the Office for National
+Statistics postcode database. In certain instances a single
+``congregation'' is actually a series of sites which have joined
+together under one administrative unit. In these cases, each site was
+treated as a separate data point if worship was held at that site at
+least once a month, but all joined sites shared a single unique
+identifier. As noted above, two other datasets were generated for the
+sake of comparative analysis.\footnote{For further detail on Dataset
+  generation, see Kidwell, Forthcoming, 2018.} These included one
+similar Environmental Non-Governmental Organisation (ENGO) in Scotland
+(1) Transition Scotland (which includes Scotland Communities Climate
+Action Network);\footnote{My dataset on transition towns will be made
+  available later in 2016. Initial data was aquired from the Transition
+  Scotland website
+  \url{http://www.transitionscotland.org/transition-in-scotland} on
+  December 10, 2014. We are currently in the process of collaboratively
+  generating a more up-to-date dataset which will reflect their
+  collaboration with SCCAN.} and another community-based NGO, Scottish
+Community Development Trusts.\footnote{Data was acquired from the
+  Development Trusts Association website,
+  \url{http://www.dtascot.org.uk}, accessed on 20 July 2015. As above,
+  we are currently in the process of active collaboration with
+  volunteers from the DTAS to co-generate a new dataset.} As this report
+will detail, these three overlap in certain instances both literally and
+in terms of their aims, but each also has a separate identity and
+footprint in Scotland. Finally, in order to normalise data, we utilised
+the PointX POI dataset which maintains a complete database of Places of
+Worship in Scotland.\footnote{PointX data for ``Landscape Data'' items
+  is sourced from Ordnance Survey Land-Line and MasterMap(R) and the
+  data points are augmented with additional information provided through
+  research by PointX staff, and data aquired from unidentified ``local
+  data companie(s)'' and the ``118 Information'' database (see:
+  \url{http://www.118information.co.uk}). This data is under license and
+  cannot be made available for use. It is important to note that I
+  became aware of inaccuracies in this dataset over the course of use
+  and subsequently generated my own dataset in collaboration with
+  churches in Scotland. This will be made available later in 2016. I am
+  in active conversation with OS about improving the quality of the data
+  in PointX regarding places of worship.}
+
+\hypertarget{background-and-history-of-eco-congregation-scotland}{%
+\section{Background and History of Eco-Congregation
+Scotland}\label{background-and-history-of-eco-congregation-scotland}}
+
+Eco-Congregation Scotland began a year before the official launch of
+Eco-Congregation England and Wales, in 1999, as part of an effort by
+Kippen Environment Centre (later renamed to Forth Environment Link, or
+``FEL'') a charity devoted to environmental education in central
+Scotland\footnote{From \url{http://www.forthenvironmentlink.org},
+  accessed 12 July 2015.} to broaden the scope of its environmental
+outreach to churches in central Scotland.\footnote{Interview with
+  Margaret Warnock, 29 Aug 2014.} Initial funding was provided, through
+Kippen Environment Centre by way of a ``sustainable action grant'' (with
+funds drawn from a government landfill tax) through a government
+programme called Keep Scotland Beautiful (the Scottish cousin of Keep
+Britain Tidy). After this initial pilot project concluded, the Church of
+Scotland provided additional funding for the project in the form of
+staff time and office space. Additional funding a few years later from
+the Scottish Government helped subsidise the position of a business
+manager, and in 2011 the United Reformed Church contributed additional
+funding which subsidised the position of a full-time environmental
+chaplain for a 5-year term, bringing the total staff to five.
+
+The programme launched officially in 2001 at Dunblane Cathedral in
+Stirling and by 2005 the project had 89 congregations registered to be a
+part of the programme and 25 which had completed the curriculum
+successfully and received an Eco-Congregation award. By 2011, the number
+of registrations had tripled to 269 and the number of awarded
+congregations had quadrupled to
+\texttt{sum(ecs\$award1\ \textless{}\ "01/01/2012",\ na.rm=TRUE)}. This
+process of taking registrations and using a tiered award or recognition
+scheme is common to many voluntary organisations. The ECS curriculum was
+developed in part by consulting the Eco-Congregation England and Wales
+materials which had been released just a year earlier in 1999, though it
+has been subsequently revised, particularly with a major redesign in
+2010. In the USA, a number of similar groups take a similar approach
+including Earth Ministry (earthministry.org) and Green Faith
+(greenfaith.org).
+
+In the case of Eco-Congregation Scotland, congregations are invited to
+begin by ``registering'' their interest in the programme by completing a
+basic one-sided form. The next step requires the completion of an award
+application, which includes a facilitated curriculum called a ``church
+check-up'' and after an application is submitted, the site is visited
+and assessed by third-party volunteer assessors. Sites are invited to
+complete additional applications for further awards which are
+incremental (as is the application process). Transition communities, at
+least in the period reflected on their map, go through a similar process
+(though this does not involve the use of a supplied curriculum) by which
+they are marked first as ``interested,'' become ``active'' and then gain
+``official'' status.\footnote{From the Transition map key, ``Green pins
+  are `official' groups Blue pins are active communities who are
+  connected to the Scottish Transition network Yellow pins show interest
+  in this area''}
+
+\hypertarget{representation-by-regional-authorities-council-areas}{%
+\section{Representation by Regional Authorities (Council
+Areas)}\label{representation-by-regional-authorities-council-areas}}
+
+Perhaps the first important question to ask of these groups is, where
+are they? I calculated the spread of eco-congregations and transition
+groups across each of the 32 council areas in Scotland. Every council
+area in Scotland has at least one eco-congregation or transition group).
+The most are located in , with 48, whereas the mean among all the 32
+council areas is 10.75, with a median of 8, standard deviation of
+9.4698162, and interquartile range of 11.5. The following choropleth
+maps show the relative concentration of eco-congregations (indicated by
+yellow to red).
+
+(\emph{TODO: need to implement}) Though there are too few
+eco-congregations and transition groups for a numerically significant
+representation in any of the intermediate geographies, mapping the
+concentration of sites by agricultural parishes allows for a more
+granular visual and I include this for comparison sake. Note, for the
+sake of a more accurate visual communication, we have also marked out
+areas of Scotland that are uninhabited with hash marks on the map of
+agricultural parishes. (\emph{TODO: this will be done in the final
+draft, once I get my image masking fixed!}).\footnote{This was
+  calculated by calculating a 10m wide footprint for every postcode in
+  Scotland, areas which are not within 10m of a postcode (as of May
+  2014) are counted as uninhabited.}
+
+\begin{figure}
+\centering
+\includegraphics{figures/plot_admin_ecs_choropleth-1.pdf}
+\caption{Figure 1}
+\end{figure}
+
+\includegraphics{figures/plot_admin_ecs_normed_choropleth-1.pdf}
+\includegraphics{figures/plot_admin_ecs_normed_choropleth-2.pdf}
+
+Given the way population and places of worship are unevenly distributed
+across Scotland it is important to represent data in terms of relative
+distribution. For this study, we attempted to ``normalise'' our data in
+two different ways, (1) as shown by Figure 2 above, by taking population
+figures from the 2011 census (see data sheet in Appendix A) and (2) by
+adjusting relative to the number of places of worship in each council
+region.\footnote{See note above regarding the data used from the PointX
+  POI database. Note, for our research,we filtered out religious groups
+  not represented within the Eco-Congregation footprint. We discuss
+  representation by tradition and religion further below.adition and
+  religion further below.} The latter of these two can yield
+particularly unexpected results. Thus, of the 4048 ``places of worship''
+in Scotland, the highest concentration is actually the region, with 435,
+second is 329 (). Rank of Council Areas by population and number of
+places of worship is also included in Appendix A.
+
+We can use this data to normalise our figures regarding Eco-Congregation
+Scotland communities and this draws the presence in Edinburgh of ECS
+communities into even sharper relief, as Edinburgh, though ranked second
+in terms of population and fifth in terms of places of worship, ranks
+first for the presence of all ECS congregations and awarded ECS
+congregations. However, taking population as the basis for normalisation
+first, we find that Edinburgh is far from the most prominent outlier. In
+trying to communicate this difference for a lay-audience, we have chosen
+to list this difference as a multiplier (i.e.~there are 2.x times as
+many congregations as their share of population and an average figure of
+congregations might allow for) as this conveys the difference in a
+straight-forward way. Outliers where the disparity between their
+relative share of the total ECS footprint and their relative share of
+population is different by a positive ratio of more than double include
+the Orkney Islands (3.7 times more eco-congregations than their expected
+average share based on population), Argyll and Bute
+(\texttt{admin\_lev1{[}CODE=S12000023{]}\$ecs\_pop\_factor} 4.2x),
+Stirling (2.76x), and Perthshire and Kinross (2.18x). Interestingly,
+there are no outliers whose relative share of the total footprint of ECS
+is double or more in the negative direction (see Appendix A chart for
+full numbers).
+
+Turning to the total of 4048 ``places of worship'' in Scotland, we find
+a slightly different picture of the relative concentration of
+Eco-Congregations in Scotland. In this case, the outliers are
+
+Whereas our initial measurements indicated a prominent lead for
+Edinburgh, by normalising our data in this way we can highlight the
+stronger-than-expected presence of several others that might otherwise
+escape notice because they lie in a region with significantly lower
+population or numerically less places of worship. Taking the PointX data
+on ``places of worship'' in Scotland, we find a less dramatic picture,
+but also a slightly different one. The positive outliers include East
+Renfrewshire (3.4x) Edinburgh (2.9x), Stirling (2.2), West Lothian
+(1.9x) and Aberdeen (1.5x). Again, negative outliers are far less
+dramatic, with only Midlothian possessing a ratio of more than 100\%
+negative difference from the number of ``places of worship'' at 1.5x
+\emph{fewer}.
+
+\includegraphics{figures/create_admin_barplot-1.pdf}
+
+\includegraphics{figures/create_choropleth_others-1.pdf}
+\includegraphics{figures/create_choropleth_others-2.pdf}
+\includegraphics{figures/create_choropleth_others-3.pdf}
+
+We can compare the representation in these various regions against our
+comparison groups to see how other community-based organisations cluster
+in Scottish administrative districts. Here there are some significant
+contrasts. Scottish Community Development trusts are most intensely
+concentrated in the Highlands and Argyll \& Bute. But, this is
+consistent with all the other categories, Eco-Congregations, Places of
+Worship, and dtas are all over-represented in this area, varying only by
+the degree. Edinburgh is different, here we find that Eco-Congregations
+and Transition projects are over-represented, while dtass are
+under-represented. Finally, the highlands are another strong contrast,
+here we find a very strong over-representation by transition towns and
+dtass while the representation of Eco-Congregations is relatively close
+to the population share for that area. The two areas of greatest
+contrast for Eco-Congregations from the other groups are unsurprising,
+Edinburgh is the location of the ECS offices, while Stirling is the area
+in which ECS first began (see Appendix B for full data).
+
+\hypertarget{christian-denominations}{%
+\section{Christian Denominations}\label{christian-denominations}}
+
+Eco-Congregation Scotland describes itself as an ``ecumenical movement
+helping local groups of Christians link environmental issues to their
+faith, reduce their environmental impact and engage with their local
+community.'' There are several ties to the Church of Scotland, as the
+denomination provides office space to Eco-Congregation Scotland in the
+Church of Scotland complex at 121 George Street in Edinburgh and
+provides funding for one full-time member of staff. In spite of this,
+ECS has, from the start, attempted to emphasise its ecumenical
+aspirations and this is reflected in a wide variety of ways. The name
+``eco-congregation'' is meant to be tradition neutral (in interviews,
+staff noted how they have sought to avoid names such as ``eco-kirk''
+which would be the more obvious Presbyterian title, or ``eco-community''
+or ``eco-church'' which might indicate allegiance towards another).
+Further, the group has a environmental chaplain on their staff whose
+position is funded by the United Reformed Church, and other members of
+staff are funded by the Scottish government, and as such, carry no
+formal affiliation with a religious institution. This diversity and
+ecumenicism is reflected in a membership which is, though dominated by
+the Church of Scotland, nevertheless, made up of a range of Christian
+traditions.
+
+Though these are not numerically significant, it is important to note
+that some member congregations describe themselves as ecumenical
+communities, and others are hybrids reflecting the merging of two
+traditions. As this ecumenical/hybrid designation involves a small
+number of the overall total, for the sake of this research, these have
+been combined into a category called ``ecumenical.'' Further, as
+research conducted by Church of Scotland statistician Fiona Tweedie has
+shown, in many Scottish communities with only one church, members of
+this church will specify their denominational affiliation in a variety
+of ways (Roman Catholic, Quaker, Methodist, etc.) even though the church
+and its minister are formally affiliated with the Church of
+Scotland.\footnote{Fiona Tweedia, \emph{Ecumenical Audit: Questionnaire
+  Findings} (2014).} So, we should be careful not to assume that the
+various denominational affiliations of eco-congregations are indicative
+in an absolute way.
+
+A wide variety of historians and sociologists of religion have noted the
+regional significance of different Christian denominations in Scotland
+so we sought to assess the relative distribution and concentration of
+eco-congregations by denomination. Finding comparative statistics is a
+complex task, made more complicated by several factors. First, most
+demographic data on religious belonging in Scotland comes in the form of
+the 2011 census and as such is far more atomised than this data-set
+which identifies groups at the level of ``congregations'' rather than
+individuals. Equating these two is also complex, as participation by
+members of congregations can be measured in a variety of ways, there are
+often a small number of active participants in each eco-congregation
+group, but may also be a large scale, but passive, support by the wider
+community.
+
+So why provide this kind of data (i.e.~at the level of individual
+churches) when more granular data (i.e.~at the level of individuals
+persons) is available in the form of the census and related parallel
+publications such as the 2008 Scottish Environmental Attitudes survey?
+We believe that mapping places of worship provides a useful intermediate
+level of analysis and may complement our more atomised understanding of
+EA which has been assessed at the level of individual persons to date.
+Because representation within some administrative areas of Scotland, can
+lead to a small number of data points, we have kept analysis to a
+National level and have not provided more specific administrative-area
+level calculations.
+
+\begin{longtable}[]{@{}lr@{}}
+\caption{ECS by denomination}\tabularnewline
+\toprule
+& x\tabularnewline
+\midrule
+\endfirsthead
+\toprule
+& x\tabularnewline
+\midrule
+\endhead
+Baptist & 4\tabularnewline
+C of S & 254\tabularnewline
+C of S / URC & 3\tabularnewline
+Cong & 1\tabularnewline
+Ecu & 5\tabularnewline
+FCS & 1\tabularnewline
+Independent & 2\tabularnewline
+Meth & 4\tabularnewline
+Non. & 1\tabularnewline
+Quaker & 1\tabularnewline
+RC & 15\tabularnewline
+SEC & 41\tabularnewline
+Unitarian & 1\tabularnewline
+URC & 11\tabularnewline
+\bottomrule
+\end{longtable}
+
+As one might expect, there is a strong representation of the Church of
+Scotland, almost 74\% of eco-congregations, with this number remaining
+the same when we only count awarded sites. We can confirm, on the basis
+of this analysis that ECS has a disproportional representation by Church
+of Scotland churches. At the 2002 church census count, it only
+represented 40.20\% of Scottish churches (1666 of 4144 total churches).
+Similarly, on the 2011 Scottish census, only 32.44\% of persons claimed
+to be members of the Church of Scotland. We can adjust this
+representation to 60\%, if one excludes the 2,445,204 persons (46\% of
+the total on the census) who reported either ``no religion'' or
+adherence to a religious tradition not currently represented among the
+eco-congregation sites. There is a slight over-representation by the
+United Reformed church, though this seems considerably more dramatic
+when one takes into account the fact that this is a trebling or more of
+their overall share of Scottish churches. The URC makes up only sightly
+more than 1\% of church buildings in Scotland and a tiny 0.04\% of
+respondents to the 2011 census. The Scottish Episcopal church hovers
+right around a proportional representation within ECS. More concerning
+are the significant underrepresentation by Roman Catholic churches,
+Baptists, the Free Church of Scotland, and other independent churches.
+
+While Roman Catholic churches make up just over 10\% of the church
+buildings in Scotland, less than 5\% of churches registered as
+eco-congregations are RC. Even more dramatic is the quartering of
+baptist churches, and the non-existent representation among the
+significant group of independent churches and small denominations. These
+make up nearly 25\% of all Scottish churches (over a thousand) and yet
+only 4 have registered as eco-congregations. We provide several
+tentative advisories in response to these under-representations in the
+final section of this paper.
+
+\hypertarget{eco-congregations-urban-rural-and-remote}{%
+\section{Eco-Congregations, Urban, Rural and
+Remote}\label{eco-congregations-urban-rural-and-remote}}
+
+\begin{verbatim}
+## OGR data source with driver: ESRI Shapefile 
+## Source: "/Users/jeremy/gits/mapping_environmental_action/data", layer: "SG_UrbanRural_2016"
+## with 8 features
+## It has 6 fields
+\end{verbatim}
+
+Rather than bifurcate congregations into an urban/rural dichotomy, for
+this study we used the Scottish Government's six-point remoteness scale
+to categorise eco-congregations along a spectrum of highly populated to
+remote areas. This 8-fold scale (calculated biennially) offers a more
+nuanced measurement that combines measurements of remoteness and
+population along the following lines:
+
+\begin{enumerate}
+\def\labelenumi{\arabic{enumi}.}
+\tightlist
+\item
+  Large Urban Areas - Settlements of over 125,000 people.
+\item
+  Other Urban Areas - Settlements of 10,000 to 125,000 people.
+\item
+  Accessible Small Towns - Settlements of between 3,000 and 10,000
+  people, and within a 30 minute drive time of a Settlement of 10,000 or
+  more.
+\item
+  Remote Small Towns - Settlements of between 3,000 and 10,000 people,
+  and with a drive time between 30 and 60 minutes to a Settlement of
+  10,000 or more.
+\item
+  Very Remote Small Towns - Settlements of between 3,000 and 10,000
+  people, and with a drive time of over 60 minutes to a Settlement of
+  10,000 or more.
+\item
+  Accessible Rural Areas - Areas with a population of less than 3,000
+  people, and within a drive time of 30 minutes to a Settlement of
+  10,000 or more.
+\item
+  Remote Rural Areas - Areas with a population of less than 3,000
+  people, and with a drive time of between 30 and 60 minutes to a
+  Settlement of 10,000 or more.
+\item
+  Very Remote Rural Areas - Areas with a population of less than 3,000
+  people, and with a drive time of over 60 minutes to a Settlement of
+  10,000 or more.
+\end{enumerate}
+
+The key question which this analysis seeks to answer is whether ECS, or
+the other groups surveyed, are more concentrated in Urban or Rural
+areas, so as is the case below with our analysis of deprivation, we are
+concerned with the outer conditions, i.e.~the urban areas (items 1-2)
+and remote areas (items 7-8).
+
+Of all the groups surveyed in this study, Eco-Congregation Scotland is
+the most heavily concentrated in large urban areas (33.53\%), exceeding
+by almost 50\% the rate for all places of worship (22.96\% in large
+urban areas). Transition is a much more modest 20\% and development
+trusts a bit lower at 15\%. It is interesting to note that the rate of
+ECS concentration in these large urban areas matches the level of
+overall population distribution (34.5\%). On the other end of the scale,
+Eco-Congregation Scotland is the least concentrated in remote rural
+areas (with 3.93\% on level 7 and 5.44\% on level 8 on the urban-rural
+scale), though again, they correlate roughly to the general population
+distribution (3.2\% and 2.9\% respectively). Places of worship outpace
+both the population of Scotland and the footprint of Eco-Congregation
+Scotland, with 14.98\% in very remote rural areas, but this is exceeded
+by transition at 16.47\% and both by Scottish community development
+trusts at 32.14\%. So while Eco-Congregation Scotland correlates roughly
+with Scottish population distribution across the urban-rural scale, it
+has a considerably more urban profile than either of the other two
+groups surveyed.
+
+\includegraphics{figures/create_ur_barplot-1.pdf}
+
+\begin{figure}
+\centering
+\includegraphics{figures/create_urbanrural_ecs_chart_choropleth-1.pdf}
+\caption{Figure 9}
+\end{figure}
+
+\hypertarget{wealth-employment-and-literacy}{%
+\section{Wealth, Employment, and
+Literacy}\label{wealth-employment-and-literacy}}
+
+\begin{verbatim}
+## OGR data source with driver: ESRI Shapefile 
+## Source: "/Users/jeremy/gits/mapping_environmental_action/data", layer: "sc_dz_11"
+## with 6976 features
+## It has 9 fields
+\end{verbatim}
+
+\includegraphics{figures/create_simd_barplot-1.pdf}
+
+Another crucial point of assessment relates to the relation of
+Eco-Congregation communities to the Scottish Index of Multiple
+Deprivation. This instrument aggregates a large variety of factors which
+can lead to deprivation including crime rates, employment levels, access
+to services (implicating remoteness), and literacy. By assessing ECS,
+Transition, and dtas against the deprivation scale, we can assess
+whether eco-congregations fall within particular demographics and also
+whether the fully aggregated SIMD measurement provides a useful point of
+comparison for our purposes. The SIMD essentially divides Scotland into
+6407 geographic zones and then ranks them based on their relative
+deprivation. This data set can be split into any number of groups, but
+for our purposes we have settled on Quintiles, splitting the SIMD data
+set at every 1302 entries. We then measured where each transition group,
+ECS, and dtas fell within these zones and calculated how they fell into
+these five quintiles, from more to least deprived.
+
+The first, and most compelling finding is that, in general
+Eco-Congregation Scotland and Transition Scotland are both roughly the
+same and match the level of population distribution in the lowest
+quintile of the general SIMD measurement. 8\% of transition groups and
+eco-congregation groups which have received awards and 9\% of the
+population are located within this quintile. However, taken in relation
+to the distribution of places of worship in the lowest quintile, we find
+that eco-congregations are located at half the rate that places of
+worship are (15\%) and dtass match this much more closely at 14\%.
+Turning towards the top quintile, this pattern also holds, here both
+transition groups (21\%) and eco-congregations (21\% and 29\% of awarded
+congregations) depart from the population distribution in this upper
+quintile (which is 10\%). Again, general places of worship (at 11\%) and
+DTASs (at 5\%) take the opposite direction. We can say decisively that
+in communities which have been identified as good candidates for
+intervention to reduce deprivation, ECS and Transition are less likely,
+and they are over-represented at the areas which fall into the least
+deprived quintile.
+
+We can find divergence between transition communities and
+eco-congregation when we split out SIMD domains. In the lowest quartile,
+measuring exclusively for the income domain, ECS is more represented
+(11\%) - roughly the same as DTAS (12\%), and transition is less (6\%)
+represented. In general (as shown on the chart in Appendix D), these
+trends hold when representation of our groups are measured within other
+non-remoteness domains of the SIMD. Our basic conclusion is that
+transition towns are least likely to operate within the lowest quartile
+of SIMD and DTASs are most likely, with ECS somewhere in the middle.
+Given the general disparity against the presence of places of worship,
+it seems fair to suggest that this might be an area for improvement,
+perhaps even worth developing a special programme which might target
+areas in SIMD quartile 1 for eco-congregation outreach. This might be
+considered particularly in light of the starkest underrepresentation of
+ECS and transition within the SIMD domain of education, skills, and
+training.
+
+\begin{verbatim}
+## Reading layer `SSSI_SCOTLAND' from data source `/Users/jeremy/gits/mapping_environmental_action/data/SSSI_SCOTLAND.shp' using driver `ESRI Shapefile'
+## Simple feature collection with 15872 features and 7 fields
+## geometry type:  POLYGON
+## dimension:      XY
+## bbox:           xmin: -296506.9 ymin: 530237.9 xmax: 467721.5 ymax: 1220310
+## epsg (SRID):    NA
+## proj4string:    +proj=tmerc +lat_0=49 +lon_0=-2 +k=0.9996012717 +x_0=400000 +y_0=-100000 +datum=OSGB36 +units=m +no_defs
+\end{verbatim}
+
+\begin{verbatim}
+## Reading layer `WILDLAND_SCOTLAND' from data source `/Users/jeremy/gits/mapping_environmental_action/data/WILDLAND_SCOTLAND.shp' using driver `ESRI Shapefile'
+## Simple feature collection with 42 features and 3 fields
+## geometry type:  MULTIPOLYGON
+## dimension:      XY
+## bbox:           xmin: 76877.24 ymin: 578454.1 xmax: 435367.1 ymax: 1190510
+## epsg (SRID):    NA
+## proj4string:    +proj=tmerc +lat_0=49 +lon_0=-2 +k=0.9996012717 +x_0=400000 +y_0=-100000 +datum=OSGB36 +units=m +no_defs
+\end{verbatim}
+
+\begin{verbatim}
+## Reading layer `National_Forest_Inventory_Woodland_Scotland_2017' from data source `/Users/jeremy/gits/mapping_environmental_action/data/National_Forest_Inventory_Woodland_Scotland_2017.shp' using driver `ESRI Shapefile'
+## Simple feature collection with 199698 features and 7 fields
+## geometry type:  POLYGON
+## dimension:      XY
+## bbox:           xmin: 65210.1 ymin: 532547.9 xmax: 461253.7 ymax: 1209179
+## epsg (SRID):    NA
+## proj4string:    +proj=tmerc +lat_0=49 +lon_0=-2 +k=0.9996012717 +x_0=400000 +y_0=-100000 +datum=OSGB36 +units=m +no_defs
+\end{verbatim}
+
+\hypertarget{proximity-to-wilderness}{%
+\section{Proximity to ``Wilderness''}\label{proximity-to-wilderness}}
+
+Chasing down a curiosity, I decided to try and calculate whether
+proximity to ``wilderness'' or ``scenic nature'' or just trees might
+have some impact on generating more mobilised communities. I realised
+that there would be several problems with this kind of calculation up
+front, first being that ``nature'' is a deeply problematic construct,
+reviled by geographers and philosophers alike. With this in mind, I
+identified several different ways of reckoning wilderness, starting with
+the highly anachronistic ``Scenic Land'' designation from the 1970s.
+Then I pursued the more carefully calculated ``core wild areas''
+generated by SNH just a few years ago. However, even the core wile areas
+concept has been criticised heavily, so I also expanded out my search to
+include all sites of special scientific interest and then went even
+wider to include the Scottish Forestry Service's ``Native Woodland'' and
+finally, the most generic possible measurement, any land identified as
+forested at the last Forest Inventory.
+
+Proximity to these areas was the next concern, because many of these
+designations deliberately exclude human habitat, so it was necessary to
+measure the number of sites within proximity. There is a question which
+lies here regarding aesthetics, namely, what sort of proximity might
+generate an affective connection? From my own experience, I decided upon
+the distance represented by a short walk, i.e.~a half-kilometre.
+However, with the more generic measurements, such as SSSI and
+forestation, this wouldn't do, as there are so many of these sites that
+a buffer of 500 meters encapsulates almost all of inhabited Scotland. So
+for these sites I also calculated a count within 50 metres.
+
+So what did I discover? The results were inconclusive. First, it is
+important to note that on the whole, Eco-Congregations tend to be more
+urban than place of worship taken generally at a rate of nearly 3:1
+(5.4\% of Eco-Congregations lie in areas currently designated as ``Very
+Remote Rural Areas'' whereas nearly 15\% of places of worship lie in
+these areas), so what I was testing for was whether this gap was smaller
+when specifying these various forms of ``wild'' remoteness. For our
+narrowest measurements, there were so few sites captured as to render
+measurement unreliable. There are, for obvious reasons, 0 sites located
+within any of SNG's core wild areas. Similarly, there are very few of
+our activist communities located within SSSI's (only
+\texttt{st\_within(pow\_pointX\_sf,\ sssi)} places of worship out of
+over 4k, 2 transition towns, (or 2\%) and 7 community development trusts
+(3\%)). However, expanding this out makes things a bit more interesting,
+within 50 metres of SSSI's in Scotland lie
+\texttt{st\_within(ecs\_sf,\ st\_buffer(sssi,\ dist\ =\ 50))}
+Eco-Congregations (or just under 1\%), which compares favourably with
+the
+\texttt{st\_within(pow\_pointX\_sf,\ st\_buffer(sssi,\ dist\ =\ 50))}
+places of worship (or just 1.5\%) far exceeding our ratio (1:1.5
+vs.~1:3). This is the same with our more anachronistic measure of
+``scenic areas,'' there are 7 eco-congregations within these areas, and
+175 places of worship, making for a ratio of nearly 1:2 (2.1\%
+vs.~4.3\%). Taking our final measure, of forested areas, this is hard to
+calculate, as only one Eco-Congregation lies within either native or
+generally forested land.
+
+\begin{verbatim}
+## [1]  0  3 59
+\end{verbatim}
+
+\begin{verbatim}
+## [1]   7  62 610
+\end{verbatim}
+
+\includegraphics{figures/wilderness_plots-1.pdf}
+\includegraphics{figures/wilderness_plots-2.pdf}
+
+\hypertarget{appendix-a}{%
+\section{Appendix A}\label{appendix-a}}
+
+\hypertarget{appendix-b}{%
+\section{Appendix B}\label{appendix-b}}
+
+(JK note to self: same as above, but augmented with multipliers by which
+categories are different from one another)
+
+\hypertarget{appendix-c---data-by-urban-rural-classification}{%
+\section{Appendix C - Data by Urban / Rural
+Classification}\label{appendix-c---data-by-urban-rural-classification}}
+
+\renewcommand\refname{Citations}
+\bibliography{biblio.bib}
+
+
+\end{document}