mirror of
				https://github.com/kidwellj/mapping_environmental_action.git
				synced 2025-10-31 15:54:10 +00:00 
			
		
		
		
	added ragg(), removed unnecessary font libraries, streamlined crs loading
This commit is contained in:
		
							parent
							
								
									d83f3b1f43
								
							
						
					
					
						commit
						deb05acd7a
					
				
					 6 changed files with 10 additions and 7177 deletions
				
			
		|  | @ -11,7 +11,6 @@ date: "`r Sys.Date()`" | ||||||
| bibliography: biblio.bib | bibliography: biblio.bib | ||||||
| linkcolor: black | linkcolor: black | ||||||
| geometry: margin=1in | geometry: margin=1in | ||||||
| # fontfamily: mathpazo |  | ||||||
| fontsize: 11pt | fontsize: 11pt | ||||||
| output: | output: | ||||||
|   html_document: |   html_document: | ||||||
|  | @ -65,14 +64,13 @@ require(sf) # new simplefeature data class, supercedes sp in many ways | ||||||
| # See issue https://github.com/kidwellj/mapping_environmental_action/issues/3 for progress re: migration from sp() | # See issue https://github.com/kidwellj/mapping_environmental_action/issues/3 for progress re: migration from sp() | ||||||
| # require(sp) # needed for proj4string, deprecated by sf() | # require(sp) # needed for proj4string, deprecated by sf() | ||||||
| # require(maptools) | # require(maptools) | ||||||
| require(ggplot2) | 
 | ||||||
|  | library(ragg) # better video device, more accurate and faster rendering, esp. on macos. Also should enable system fonts for display | ||||||
|  | library(tidyverse) | ||||||
| require(tmap) # using as an alternative to base r graphics and ggplot for geospatial plots | require(tmap) # using as an alternative to base r graphics and ggplot for geospatial plots | ||||||
| require(tmaptools) # for get_asp_ratio below | require(tmaptools) # for get_asp_ratio below | ||||||
| require(grid) # using for inset maps on tmap | require(grid) # using for inset maps on tmap | ||||||
| require(broom) # required for tidying SPDF to data.frame for ggplot2 | require(broom) # required for tidying SPDF to data.frame for ggplot2 | ||||||
| require(tidyr)  # using for grouped bar plot |  | ||||||
| # require(plyr) # already a dependency of knitr, remove? |  | ||||||
| # require(dplyr) # already a dependency of knitr, remove? |  | ||||||
| require(reshape2)  # using for grouped bar plot | require(reshape2)  # using for grouped bar plot | ||||||
| require(scales) | require(scales) | ||||||
| # require(sqldf) # using sqldf to filter before loading very large data sets | # require(sqldf) # using sqldf to filter before loading very large data sets | ||||||
|  | @ -91,11 +89,6 @@ require(scales) | ||||||
| require(plotly) # allows for export of plots to dynamic web pages | require(plotly) # allows for export of plots to dynamic web pages | ||||||
| require(gtable) # more powerful package for multi-plot layouts, not necessary for knitr | require(gtable) # more powerful package for multi-plot layouts, not necessary for knitr | ||||||
| 
 | 
 | ||||||
| ## Packages used for features or issues relating to pdf_document knitr format |  | ||||||
| # Note: implementation of fonts (currently commented out) is specific to pdf_document output |  | ||||||
| # require(showtext) # for loading in fonts |  | ||||||
| # require(extrafont) # font support |  | ||||||
| 
 |  | ||||||
| # Set up local workspace: | # Set up local workspace: | ||||||
| if (dir.exists("data") == FALSE) { | if (dir.exists("data") == FALSE) { | ||||||
|   dir.create("data")  |   dir.create("data")  | ||||||
|  | @ -107,7 +100,6 @@ if (dir.exists("derivedData") == FALSE) { | ||||||
|   dir.create("derivedData") |   dir.create("derivedData") | ||||||
| } | } | ||||||
| 
 | 
 | ||||||
| <<<<<<< HEAD |  | ||||||
| # # Setup PostGIS database connection | # # Setup PostGIS database connection | ||||||
| # dw <- config::get("datawarehouse") | # dw <- config::get("datawarehouse") | ||||||
| #  | #  | ||||||
|  | @ -119,38 +111,20 @@ if (dir.exists("derivedData") == FALSE) { | ||||||
| #   host = dw$server, | #   host = dw$server, | ||||||
| #   port = 5432 | #   port = 5432 | ||||||
| #   ) | #   ) | ||||||
| ======= |  | ||||||
| # Setup PostGIS database connection |  | ||||||
| dw <- config::get("datawarehouse") |  | ||||||
| 
 |  | ||||||
| con <- dbConnect(odbc::odbc(), |  | ||||||
|   driver = dw$driver, |  | ||||||
|   database = dw$database, |  | ||||||
|   uid = dw$uid, |  | ||||||
|   pwd = dw$pwd, |  | ||||||
|   host = dw$server, |  | ||||||
|   port = 5432 |  | ||||||
|   ) |  | ||||||
| >>>>>>> 89c9a2a5a4542de5584daa0304a53008a779ded8 |  | ||||||
| 
 | 
 | ||||||
| # Define Coordinate Reference Systems (CRS) for later use | # Define Coordinate Reference Systems (CRS) for later use | ||||||
| # Note: I've used British National Grid (27000) in this paper, but have found that  | # Note: I've used British National Grid (27000) in this paper, but have found that  | ||||||
| # it is falling out of use in many cases, so will be defaulting to WGS84 in future  | # it is falling out of use in many cases, so will be defaulting to WGS84 in future  | ||||||
| # data-sets and papers. | # data-sets and papers. | ||||||
| 
 | 
 | ||||||
| # Working with EPSG codes for spatialfeature CRS given the usage of this approach with sf() | # Proj4 is also now deprecated in favour of WKT2, so I will be adapting code to use this more robust standard in the future. See here for more details: https://inbo.github.io/tutorials/tutorials/spatial_crs_coding/#set-the-crs-of-a-spatial-object-in-sp | ||||||
| # for discussion related to this fix, see https://gis.stackexchange.com/q/313761/41474 | 
 | ||||||
| # TODO: remove below as part of overall migration to sf() | # TODO: remove below as part of overall migration to sf() | ||||||
| # See issue https://github.com/kidwellj/mapping_environmental_action/issues/3 for progress re: migration from sp() | # See issue https://github.com/kidwellj/mapping_environmental_action/issues/3 for progress re: migration from sp() and https://github.com/kidwellj/mapping_environmental_action/issues/4 for progress re: abandoning of Proj4 more broadly | ||||||
| bng <- CRS("+init=epsg:27700") | 
 | ||||||
| wgs84 <- CRS("+init=epsg:4326") | wgs84 <- CRS(SRS_string = "EPSG:4326") # WGS 84 has EPSG code 4326, note: crs() requires sp() to get epsg data | ||||||
|  | bng <- CRS(SRS_string = "EPSG:27700") # BNG has EPSG code 4326 | ||||||
| 
 | 
 | ||||||
| ## Configure fonts for plots below, commented out currently because of incompatibilities |  | ||||||
| ## Loading Google fonts (http://www.google.com/fonts) |  | ||||||
| # Note: implementation of fonts (currently commented out) is specific to pdf_document output |  | ||||||
| # font_add_google("Merriweather", "merriweather") |  | ||||||
| # The following will load in system fonts (uncomment and run as needed on first execution) |  | ||||||
| # font_import(pattern="[A/a]rial", prompt=FALSE) |  | ||||||
| ``` | ``` | ||||||
| 
 | 
 | ||||||
| # Introduction[^15541312] | # Introduction[^15541312] | ||||||
|  |  | ||||||
							
								
								
									
										1312
									
								
								mapping_draft.Rmd
									
										
									
									
									
								
							
							
						
						
									
										1312
									
								
								mapping_draft.Rmd
									
										
									
									
									
								
							
										
											
												File diff suppressed because it is too large
												Load diff
											
										
									
								
							
							
								
								
									
										3482
									
								
								mapping_draft.html
									
										
									
									
									
								
							
							
						
						
									
										3482
									
								
								mapping_draft.html
									
										
									
									
									
								
							
										
											
												File diff suppressed because one or more lines are too long
											
										
									
								
							
							
								
								
									
										1468
									
								
								mapping_draft.md
									
										
									
									
									
								
							
							
						
						
									
										1468
									
								
								mapping_draft.md
									
										
									
									
									
								
							
										
											
												File diff suppressed because it is too large
												Load diff
											
										
									
								
							|  | @ -1,816 +0,0 @@ | ||||||
| \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} |  | ||||||
|  | @ -1,63 +0,0 @@ | ||||||
| # STAGE 3a, calculate sums based on SIMD12R columns and generate new integer sets with quintile count data |  | ||||||
| simd_rownames = c("Quintile 1","Quintile 2","Quintile 3","Quintile 4","Quintile 5") |  | ||||||
| simdr12_ecs = c((sum(ecs_clean$SIMDR12<1301)), (sum(ecs_clean$SIMDR12 > 1300 & ecs_clean$SIMDR12 < 2602)), (sum(ecs_clean$SIMDR12 > 2601 & ecs_clean$SIMDR12 < 3903)), (sum(ecs_clean$SIMDR12 > 3902 & ecs_clean$SIMDR12 < 5204)), (sum(ecs_clean$SIMDR12 > 5203 & ecs_clean$SIMDR12 < 6505))) |  | ||||||
| # names(simdr12_ecs) <- simd_rownames |  | ||||||
| simdr12_transition = c((sum(transition_clean$SIMDR12<1301)), (sum(transition_clean$SIMDR12 > 1300 & transition_clean$SIMDR12 < 2602)), (sum(transition_clean$SIMDR12 > 2601 & transition_clean$SIMDR12 < 3903)), (sum(transition_clean$SIMDR12 > 3902 & transition_clean$SIMDR12 < 5204)), (sum(transition_clean$SIMDR12 > 5203 & transition_clean$SIMDR12 < 6505))) |  | ||||||
| # names(simdr12_transition) <- simd_rownames |  | ||||||
| simdr12_permaculture = c((sum(permaculture_clean$SIMDR12<1301)), (sum(permaculture_clean$SIMDR12 > 1300 & permaculture_clean$SIMDR12 < 2602)), (sum(permaculture_clean$SIMDR12 > 2601 & permaculture_clean$SIMDR12 < 3903)), (sum(permaculture_clean$SIMDR12 > 3902 & permaculture_clean$SIMDR12 < 5204)), (sum(permaculture_clean$SIMDR12 > 5203 & permaculture_clean$SIMDR12 < 6505))) |  | ||||||
| # names(simdr12_permaculture) <- simd_rownames |  | ||||||
| simdr12_dtas = c((sum(dtas_clean$SIMDR12<1301)), (sum(dtas_clean$SIMDR12 > 1300 & dtas_clean$SIMDR12 < 2602)), (sum(dtas_clean$SIMDR12 > 2601 & dtas_clean$SIMDR12 < 3903)), (sum(dtas_clean$SIMDR12 > 3902 & dtas_clean$SIMDR12 < 5204)), (sum(dtas_clean$SIMDR12 > 5203 & dtas_clean$SIMDR12 < 6505))) |  | ||||||
| # names(simdr12_dtas) <- simd_rownames |  | ||||||
| 
 |  | ||||||
| # STAGE 3b, calculate sums based on INCR12 columns and generate new integer sets with quintile count data |  | ||||||
| 
 |  | ||||||
| incr12_ecs = c((sum(ecs_clean$INCR12<1301)), (sum(ecs_clean$INCR12 > 1300 & ecs_clean$INCR12 < 2602)), (sum(ecs_clean$INCR12 > 2601 & ecs_clean$INCR12 < 3903)), (sum(ecs_clean$INCR12 > 3902 & ecs_clean$INCR12 < 5204)), (sum(ecs_clean$INCR12 > 5203 & ecs_clean$INCR12 < 6505))) |  | ||||||
| incr12_transition = c((sum(transition_clean$INCR12<1301)), (sum(transition_clean$INCR12 > 1300 & transition_clean$INCR12 < 2602)), (sum(transition_clean$INCR12 > 2601 & transition_clean$INCR12 < 3903)), (sum(transition_clean$INCR12 > 3902 & transition_clean$INCR12 < 5204)), (sum(transition_clean$INCR12 > 5203 & transition_clean$INCR12 < 6505))) |  | ||||||
| incr12_permaculture = c((sum(permaculture_clean$INCR12<1301)), (sum(permaculture_clean$INCR12 > 1300 & permaculture_clean$INCR12 < 2602)), (sum(permaculture_clean$INCR12 > 2601 & permaculture_clean$INCR12 < 3903)), (sum(permaculture_clean$INCR12 > 3902 & permaculture_clean$INCR12 < 5204)), (sum(permaculture_clean$INCR12 > 5203 & permaculture_clean$INCR12 < 6505))) |  | ||||||
| incr12_dtas = c((sum(dtas_clean$INCR12<1301)), (sum(dtas_clean$INCR12 > 1300 & dtas_clean$INCR12 < 2602)), (sum(dtas_clean$INCR12 > 2601 & dtas_clean$INCR12 < 3903)), (sum(dtas_clean$INCR12 > 3902 & dtas_clean$INCR12 < 5204)), (sum(dtas_clean$INCR12 > 5203 & dtas_clean$INCR12 < 6505))) |  | ||||||
| 
 |  | ||||||
| # STAGE 3c, calculate sums based on EMPR12 columns and generate new integer sets with quintile count data |  | ||||||
| empr12_ecs = c((sum(ecs_clean$EMPR12<1301)), (sum(ecs_clean$EMPR12 > 1300 & ecs_clean$EMPR12 < 2602)), (sum(ecs_clean$EMPR12 > 2601 & ecs_clean$EMPR12 < 3903)), (sum(ecs_clean$EMPR12 > 3902 & ecs_clean$EMPR12 < 5204)), (sum(ecs_clean$EMPR12 > 5203 & ecs_clean$EMPR12 < 6505))) |  | ||||||
| empr12_transition = c((sum(transition_clean$EMPR12<1301)), (sum(transition_clean$EMPR12 > 1300 & transition_clean$EMPR12 < 2602)), (sum(transition_clean$EMPR12 > 2601 & transition_clean$EMPR12 < 3903)), (sum(transition_clean$EMPR12 > 3902 & transition_clean$EMPR12 < 5204)), (sum(transition_clean$EMPR12 > 5203 & transition_clean$EMPR12 < 6505))) |  | ||||||
| empr12_permaculture = c((sum(permaculture_clean$EMPR12<1301)), (sum(permaculture_clean$EMPR12 > 1300 & permaculture_clean$EMPR12 < 2602)), (sum(permaculture_clean$EMPR12 > 2601 & permaculture_clean$EMPR12 < 3903)), (sum(permaculture_clean$EMPR12 > 3902 & permaculture_clean$EMPR12 < 5204)), (sum(permaculture_clean$EMPR12 > 5203 & permaculture_clean$EMPR12 < 6505))) |  | ||||||
| empr12_dtas = c((sum(dtas_clean$EMPR12<1301)), (sum(dtas_clean$EMPR12 > 1300 & dtas_clean$EMPR12 < 2602)), (sum(dtas_clean$EMPR12 > 2601 & dtas_clean$EMPR12 < 3903)), (sum(dtas_clean$EMPR12 > 3902 & dtas_clean$EMPR12 < 5204)), (sum(dtas_clean$EMPR12 > 5203 & dtas_clean$EMPR12 < 6505))) |  | ||||||
| 
 |  | ||||||
| # STAGE 3d, calculate sums based on HER12 columns and generate new integer sets with quintile count data |  | ||||||
| her12_ecs = c((sum(ecs_clean$HER12<1301)), (sum(ecs_clean$HER12 > 1300 & ecs_clean$HER12 < 2602)), (sum(ecs_clean$HER12 > 2601 & ecs_clean$HER12 < 3903)), (sum(ecs_clean$HER12 > 3902 & ecs_clean$HER12 < 5204)), (sum(ecs_clean$HER12 > 5203 & ecs_clean$HER12 < 6505))) |  | ||||||
| her12_transition = c((sum(transition_clean$HER12<1301)), (sum(transition_clean$HER12 > 1300 & transition_clean$HER12 < 2602)), (sum(transition_clean$HER12 > 2601 & transition_clean$HER12 < 3903)), (sum(transition_clean$HER12 > 3902 & transition_clean$HER12 < 5204)), (sum(transition_clean$HER12 > 5203 & transition_clean$HER12 < 6505))) |  | ||||||
| her12_permaculture = c((sum(permaculture_clean$HER12<1301)), (sum(permaculture_clean$HER12 > 1300 & permaculture_clean$HER12 < 2602)), (sum(permaculture_clean$HER12 > 2601 & permaculture_clean$HER12 < 3903)), (sum(permaculture_clean$HER12 > 3902 & permaculture_clean$HER12 < 5204)), (sum(permaculture_clean$HER12 > 5203 & permaculture_clean$HER12 < 6505))) |  | ||||||
| her12_dtas = c((sum(dtas_clean$HER12<1301)), (sum(dtas_clean$HER12 > 1300 & dtas_clean$HER12 < 2602)), (sum(dtas_clean$HER12 > 2601 & dtas_clean$HER12 < 3903)), (sum(dtas_clean$HER12 > 3902 & dtas_clean$HER12 < 5204)), (sum(dtas_clean$HER12 > 5203 & dtas_clean$HER12 < 6505))) |  | ||||||
| 
 |  | ||||||
| # STAGE 3e, calculate sums based on ESTR12 columns and generate new integer sets with quintile count data |  | ||||||
| estr12_ecs = c((sum(ecs_clean$ESTR12<1301)), (sum(ecs_clean$ESTR12 > 1300 & ecs_clean$ESTR12 < 2602)), (sum(ecs_clean$ESTR12 > 2601 & ecs_clean$ESTR12 < 3903)), (sum(ecs_clean$ESTR12 > 3902 & ecs_clean$ESTR12 < 5204)), (sum(ecs_clean$ESTR12 > 5203 & ecs_clean$ESTR12 < 6505))) |  | ||||||
| estr12_transition = c((sum(transition_clean$ESTR12<1301)), (sum(transition_clean$ESTR12 > 1300 & transition_clean$ESTR12 < 2602)), (sum(transition_clean$ESTR12 > 2601 & transition_clean$ESTR12 < 3903)), (sum(transition_clean$ESTR12 > 3902 & transition_clean$ESTR12 < 5204)), (sum(transition_clean$ESTR12 > 5203 & transition_clean$ESTR12 < 6505))) |  | ||||||
| estr12_permaculture = c((sum(permaculture_clean$ESTR12<1301)), (sum(permaculture_clean$ESTR12 > 1300 & permaculture_clean$ESTR12 < 2602)), (sum(permaculture_clean$ESTR12 > 2601 & permaculture_clean$ESTR12 < 3903)), (sum(permaculture_clean$ESTR12 > 3902 & permaculture_clean$ESTR12 < 5204)), (sum(permaculture_clean$ESTR12 > 5203 & permaculture_clean$ESTR12 < 6505))) |  | ||||||
| estr12_dtas = c((sum(dtas_clean$ESTR12<1301)), (sum(dtas_clean$ESTR12 > 1300 & dtas_clean$ESTR12 < 2602)), (sum(dtas_clean$ESTR12 > 2601 & dtas_clean$ESTR12 < 3903)), (sum(dtas_clean$ESTR12 > 3902 & dtas_clean$ESTR12 < 5204)), (sum(dtas_clean$ESTR12 > 5203 & dtas_clean$ESTR12 < 6505))) |  | ||||||
| 
 |  | ||||||
| # STAGE 4a - calculate percentages |  | ||||||
| simdr12_ecs_percent<- prop.table(simdr12_ecs) |  | ||||||
| simdr12_transition_percent<- prop.table(simdr12_transition) |  | ||||||
| simdr12_permaculture_percent<- prop.table(simdr12_permaculture) |  | ||||||
| simdr12_dtas_percent<- prop.table(simdr12_dtas) |  | ||||||
| incr12_ecs_percent<- prop.table(incr12_ecs) |  | ||||||
| incr12_transition_percent<- prop.table(incr12_transition) |  | ||||||
| incr12_permaculture_percent<- prop.table(incr12_permaculture) |  | ||||||
| incr12_dtas_percent<- prop.table(incr12_dtas) |  | ||||||
| empr12_ecs_percent<- prop.table(empr12_ecs) |  | ||||||
| empr12_transition_percent<- prop.table(empr12_transition) |  | ||||||
| empr12_permaculture_percent<- prop.table(empr12_permaculture) |  | ||||||
| empr12_dtas_percent<- prop.table(empr12_dtas) |  | ||||||
| her12_ecs_percent<- prop.table(her12_ecs) |  | ||||||
| her12_transition_percent<- prop.table(her12_transition) |  | ||||||
| her12_permaculture_percent<- prop.table(her12_permaculture) |  | ||||||
| her12_dtas_percent<- prop.table(her12_dtas) |  | ||||||
| estr12_ecs_percent<- prop.table(estr12_ecs) |  | ||||||
| estr12_transition_percent<- prop.table(estr12_transition) |  | ||||||
| estr12_permaculture_percent<- prop.table(estr12_permaculture) |  | ||||||
| estr12_dtas_percent<- prop.table(estr12_dtas) |  | ||||||
| 
 |  | ||||||
| # STAGE 4b, generate data frame using integer sets |  | ||||||
| simd = data.frame(simdr12_ecs, simdr12_ecs_percent, incr12_ecs, incr12_ecs_percent, empr12_ecs, empr12_ecs_percent, her12_ecs, her12_ecs_percent, estr12_ecs, estr12_ecs_percent, simdr12_transition, simdr12_transition_percent, incr12_transition, incr12_transition_percent, empr12_transition, empr12_transition_percent, her12_transition, her12_transition_percent, estr12_transition, estr12_transition_percent, simdr12_permaculture, simdr12_permaculture_percent, incr12_permaculture, incr12_permaculture_percent, empr12_permaculture, empr12_permaculture_percent, her12_permaculture, her12_permaculture_percent, estr12_permaculture, estr12_permaculture_percent, simdr12_dtas, simdr12_dtas_percent, incr12_dtas, incr12_dtas_percent, empr12_dtas, empr12_dtas_percent, her12_dtas, her12_dtas_percent, estr12_dtas, estr12_dtas_percent) |  | ||||||
| write.csv(simd, "derivedData/simd.csv", row.names=FALSE) |  | ||||||
| 
 |  | ||||||
| simd_percents_only = data.frame(simd_rownames, simdr12_ecs_percent, incr12_ecs_percent, empr12_ecs_percent, her12_ecs_percent, estr12_ecs_percent, simdr12_transition_percent, incr12_transition_percent, empr12_transition_percent, her12_transition_percent, estr12_transition_percent, simdr12_permaculture_percent, incr12_permaculture_percent, empr12_permaculture_percent, her12_permaculture_percent, estr12_permaculture_percent, simdr12_dtas_percent, incr12_dtas_percent, empr12_dtas_percent, her12_dtas_percent, estr12_dtas_percent) |  | ||||||
		Loading…
	
	Add table
		Add a link
		
	
		Reference in a new issue