• Posts
  • RSS
  • ◂◂RSS
  • Contact

  • Walkability via Census

    August 18th, 2014
    geography, maps, transit  [html]
    If you want to know how walkable various parts of the country are, and you only have (1) the census and (2) walk scores for DC, what could you do? Well, you could look for census variables that correlate with walk scores in DC and then extrapolate these correlations to the rest of the country to get a national map:

    This is pretty cool! But let's have a look at these correlations:

    % 16 and older employed in civilian labor force 0.636261
    % 25-34 years old 0.630423
    % females 16 and older employed in civilian labor force 0.594394
    % 16 and older in civilian labor force 0.578812
    Nonrelatives in household 0.561472
    % 16 and older in labor force 0.545052
    % 16 and older commuting to work by other means 0.542523
    % females 16 and older in civilian labor force 0.532800
    % 18 years and younger 0.530061
    % born in state of residence -0.529451
    houses built 1939 or earlier 0.528639
    workers 16 and older commuting to work by other means 0.527117
    workers 16 and older walking to work 0.525601
    % females 16 and older in labor force 0.522900
    % with at least a bachelors degree 0.522021
    % 10-14 years old -0.519463
    % 16 and older driving to work alone -0.507589
    population 25-34 years old 0.507211
    % 16 and older not in labor force -0.502902
    The first thing that jumps out is that I really wish they had run a round of principal component analysis to cut down the number of variables. Many of these are probably just multiple ways of saying the same thing:
    • employment
      • % 16 and older in labor force
      • % 16 and older in civilian labor force
      • % 16 and older employed in civilian labor force
      • % 16 and older not in labor force
      • % females 16 and older in labor force
      • % females 16 and older in civilian labor force
      • % females 16 and older employed in civilian labor force
    • population, after considering %-version of the same metric
      • population 25-34 years old
      • workers 16 and older commuting to work by other means
    • age
      • % 10-14 years old
      • % 18 years and younger
      • % 25-34 years old
      • population 25-34 years old
    • commuting
      • % 16 and older driving to work alone
      • workers 16 and older walking to work
      • % 16 and older commuting to work by other means
      • workers 16 and older commuting to work by other means
    What I'm saying is that if you ran PCA to look for correlations between these different variables, I strongly suspect you'd find that after taking into account new variables representing employment, population, age, and commuting the remaining related variables would provide very little additional information. But I don't have easy access to the raw data, so I'll be lazy and just approximate this by taking the variable in each category with the strongest correlation and just keeping that one. (We would expect that after PCA our new super-variables would have a bit better correlation, but still it would be about like this.):
    % 16 and older employed in civilian labor force 0.636261
    % 25-34 years old 0.630423
    Nonrelatives in household 0.561472
    % born in state of residence -0.529451
    houses built 1939 or earlier 0.528639
    workers 16 and older walking to work 0.525601
    % with at least a bachelors degree 0.522021
    Some of these variables, like people walking to work or whether houses were built before cars became popular, do seem very likely to correlate with walkability wherever you are in the country. On the other hand, most of the other variable instead look to me like they're measuring "who in DC lives in walkable areas". We see a bunch of employed college-educated young people from out of state living together. I can totally believe that the more like that someone is the more they're likely to value walkability in choosing where to live, and the more likely they are to be able to afford it. But if we're trying to identify walkable areas in the rest of the country this is going to miss out on a lot of other ways a place can be walkable.

    This actually surprises the author somewhat; after taking affordability into account and seeing what places had the best combination of walkability and affordabilty by their metric they wrote:

    I was expecting something like a smaller, affordable Midwest town or something, but it the highest scoring areas were usually just outside of major downtown
    It looks to me like what's going on is that the kind of people who want to live in the walkable parts of DC are not the kind of people who want to live in smaller Midwest towns, even if those towns are super walkable.

    (On the other hand, this might actually be a better metric for the author's purposes. They're really trying to figure out where they would enjoy living, and they think they want walkable neighborhoods. But having a lot of people 25-35 and a lot of strangers living together, along with high employment and education, are probably also things they care about. A retirement community in rural Tennessee might be both very walkable but it's probably not what they had in mind.)

    Comment via: google plus, facebook

    Recent posts on blogs I like:

    Who Should Bear the Risk in Infrastructure Projects?

    The answer to the question is the public sector, always. It’s okay to have private-sector involvement in construction, but the risk must be borne by the public sector, or else the private sector will just want more money to compensate for the extra risk. …

    via Pedestrian Observations November 30, 2020

    Fireside Friday, November 27, 2020

    Hey folks! Fireside this week. A bit of a change-up in terms of the coming attractions. I had planned to start “Textiles, How Did They Make It?” next, but I want to do a bit more reading on some of the initial stages of textile production (that is, the pr…

    via A Collection of Unmitigated Pedantry November 27, 2020

    Thoughts you mightn't have thunk about remote meetings

    Welcome to this week's edition of "building a startup in 2020," in which all your meetings are suddenly remote, and you probably weren't prepared for it. I know I wasn't. We started a "fully remote" company back in 2019, but …

    via apenwarr November 23, 2020

    more     (via openring)


  • Posts
  • RSS
  • ◂◂RSS
  • Contact