Abstract
Geospatial analysis is very much dominated by a Gaussian way of thinking, which assumes that things in the world can be characterized by a well-defined mean, i.e., things are more or less similar in size. However, this assumption is not always valid. In fact, many things in the world lack a well-defined mean, and therefore there are far more small things than large ones. This paper attempts to argue that geospatial analysis requires a different way of thinking – a Paretian way of thinking that underlies skewed distribution such as power laws, Pareto and lognormal distributions. I review two properties of spatial dependence and spatial heterogeneity, and point out that the notion of spatial heterogeneity in current spatial statistics is only used to characterize local variance of spatial dependence or regression. I subsequently argue for a broad perspective on spatial heterogeneity, and suggest it be formulated as a scaling law. I further discuss the implications of Paretian thinking and the scaling law for better understanding geographic forms and processes, in particular while facing massive amounts of social media data. In the spirit of Paretian thinking, geospatial analysis should seek to simulate geographic events and phenomena from the bottom up rather than correlations as guided by Gaussian thinking.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Anderson C (2006) The Long tail: why the future of business is selling less of more. Hyperion, New York
Anselin L (1989) What is special about spatial data: alternative perspectives on spatial data analysis. National Center for Geographic Information and Analysis, Santa Barbara
Anselin L (1995) Local indicators of spatial association – LISA. Geogr Anal 27:93–115
Bak P (1996) How nature works: the science of self-organized criticality. Springer, New York
Barabási A (2010) Bursts: the hidden pattern behind everything we do. Dutton Adult, Boston
Barabási A-L, Albert R (1999) Emergence of scaling in random networks. Science 286:509–512
Batty M, Longley P (1994) Fractal cities: a geometry of form and function. Academic, London
Batty M, Carvalho R, Hudson-Smith A, Milton R, Smith D, Steadman P (2008) Scaling and allometry in the building geometries of Greater London. Eur Phys J B 63:303–314
Benguigui L, Czamanski D (2004) Simulation analysis of the fractality of cities. Geogr Anal 36(1):69–84
Blumenfeld-Lieberthal E, Portugali J (2010) Network cities: a complexity-network approach to urban dynamics and development. In: Jiang B, Yao X (eds) Geospatial analysis of urban structure and dynamics. Springer, Berlin, pp 77–90
Bonner JT (2006) Why size matters: from bacteria to blue whales. Princeton University Press, Princeton
Brockmann D, Hufnage L, Geisel T (2006) The scaling laws of human travel. Nature 439:462–465
Carvalho R, Penn A (2004) Scaling and universality in the micro-structure of urban space. Phys A 332:539–547
Chen Y (2009) Spatial interaction creates period-doubling bifurcation and chaos of urbanization. Chaos, Solitons Fractals 42(3):1316–1325
Clauset A, Shalizi CR, Newman MEJ (2009) Power-law distributions in empirical data. SIAM Rev 51:661–703
Cliff AD, Ord JK (1969) The problem of spatial autocorrelation. In: Scott AJ (ed) London papers in regional science. Pion, London, pp 25–55
Epstein JM, Axtell R (1996) Growing artificial societies: social science from the bottom up. Brookings Institution Press, Washington, DC
Fotheringham AS, Brunsdon C, Charlton M (2002) Geographically weighted regression: the analysis of spatially varying relationships. Wiley, Chichester
Getis A, Ord JK (1992) The analysis of spatial association by distance statistics. Geogr Anal 24:189–206
Gonzalez M, Hidalgo CA, Barabási A-L (2008) Understanding individual human mobility patterns. Nature 453:779–782
Goodchild M (2004) The validity and usefulness of laws in geographic information science and geography. Ann Assoc Am Geogr 94(2):300–303
Goodchild MF (2007) Citizens as sensors: the world of volunteered geography. GeoJournal 69(4):211–221
Goodchild MF, Mark DM (1987) The fractal nature of geographic phenomena. Ann Assoc Am Geogr 77(2):265–278
Griffith DA (2003) Spatial autocorrelation and spatial filtering: gaining understanding through theory and scientific visualization. Springer, Berlin
Guimerà R, Mossa S, Turtschi A, Amaral LAN (2005) The worldwide air transportation network: anomalous centrality, community structure, and cities’ global roles. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 102(22):7794–7799
Hack J (1957) Studies of longitudinal stream profiles in Virginia and Maryland. US Geol Surv Prof Pap:294-B
Horton RE (1945) Erosional development of streams and their drainage basins: hydrological approach to quantitative morphology. Bull Geogr Soc Am 56:275–370
Jenks GF (1967) The data model concept in statistical mapping. Int Yearb Cartogr 7:186–190
Jiang B (2009) Street hierarchies: a minority of streets account for a majority of traffic flow. Int J Geogr Inf Sci 23(8):1033–1048
Jiang B (2013a) Head/tail breaks: a new classification scheme for data with a heavy-tailed distribution. Prof Geogr 65(3):482–494
Jiang B (2013b) The image of the city out of the underlying scaling of city artifacts or locations. Ann Assoc Am Geogr 103(6):1552–1566
Jiang B (2015) Geospatial analysis requires a different way of thinking: the problem of spatial heterogeneity. GeoJournal 80(1):1–13
Jiang B, Brandt A (2016) A fractal perspective on scale in geography. ISPRS Int J Geo-Inf 5(6):95. doi:10.3390/ijgi5060095
Jiang B, Jia T (2011) Zipf’s law for all the natural cities in the United States: a geospatial perspective. Int J Geogr Inf Sci 25(8):1269–1281
Jiang B, Liu X (2012) Scaling of geographic space from the perspective of city and field blocks and using volunteered geographic information. Int J Geogr Inf Sci 26(2):215–229
Jiang B, Miao Y (2015) The evolution of natural cities from the perspective of location-based social media. Prof Geogr 67(2):295–306
Jiang B, Yin J (2014) Ht-index for quantifying the fractal or scaling structure of geographic features. Ann Assoc Am Geogr 104(3):530–541
Jiang B, Yin J, Zhao S (2009) Characterizing human mobility patterns in a large street network. Phys Rev E 80:021136
Koch R (1999) The 80/20 principle: the secret to achieving more with less. Crown Business, New York
Krugman P (1996) The self-organizing economy. Blackwell, Cambridge, MA
Kyriakidou V, Michalakelis C, Varoutas D (2011) Applying Zipf’s power law over population density and growth as network deployment indicator. J Serv Sci Manag 4:132–140
Lämmer S, Gehlsen B, Helbing D (2006) Scaling laws in the spatial structure of urban road networks. Phys A 363(1):89–95
Lin Y (2013) A comparison study on natural and head/tail breaks involving digital elevation models. Bachelor thesis at University of Gävle, Sweden
Mandelbrot B (1967) How long is the coast of Britain? Statistical self-similarity and fractional dimension. Science 156(3775):636–638
Mandelbrot BB (1982) The fractal geometry of nature. W. H. Freeman, San Francisco
Mandelbrot BB, Hudson RL (2004) The (mis)behavior of markets: a fractal view of risk, ruin and reward. Basic Books, New York
Maritan A, Rinaldo A, Rigon R, Giacometti A, Rodríguez-Iturbe I (1996) Scaling laws for river networks. Phys Rev E E53:1510–1515
Mayer-Schonberger V, Cukier K (2013) Big data: a revolution that will transform how we live, work, and think. Eamon Dolan/Houghton Mifflin Harcourt, New York
McKelvey B, Andriani P (2005) Why Gaussian statistics are mostly wrong for strategic organization. Strateg Organ 3(2):219–228
Montello DR (2001) Scale in geography. In: Smelser NJ, Baltes (eds) International encyclopedia of the social & behavioral sciences. Pergamon Press, Oxford, pp 13501–13504
Newman M (2011) Resource letter CS-1: complex systems. Am J Phys 79:800–810
Pareto V (1897) Cours d’économie politique. Rouge, Lausanne
Pelletier JD (1999) Self-organization and scaling relationships of evolving river networks. J Geophys Res 104:7359–7375
Pumain D (2006) Hierarchy in natural and social sciences. Springer, Dordrecht
Salingaros NA, West BJ (1999) A universal rule for the distribution of sizes. Environ Plan B Plan Des 26:909–923
Schaefer JA, Mahoney AP (2003) Spatial and temporal scaling of population density and animal movement: a power law approach. Ecoscience 10(4):496–501
Schroeder M (1991) Chaos, fractals, power laws: minutes from an infinite paradise. Freeman, New York
Taleb NN (2007) The black swan: the impact of the highly improbable. Allen Lane, London
Tobler W (1970) A computer movie simulating urban growth in the Detroit region. Econ Geogr 46(2):234–240
Wu J, Li H (2006) Concepts of scale and scaling. In: Wu J, Jones KB, Li H, Loucks OL (eds) Scaling and uncertainty analysis in ecology. Springer, Berlin, pp 3–15
Zipf GK (1949) Human behavior and the principles of least effort. Addison Wesley, Cambridge, MA
Acknowledgments
This chapter is a reprint of original paper by Jiang (2015) with the permission of the publisher. The author would like to thank the anonymous referees and the editor Daniel Z. Sui for their valuable comments. However, any shortcoming remains the responsibility of the author.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Jiang, B. (2018). Geospatial Analysis Requires a Different Way of Thinking: The Problem of Spatial Heterogeneity. In: Behnisch, M., Meinel, G. (eds) Trends in Spatial Analysis and Modelling. Geotechnologies and the Environment, vol 19. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-52522-8_2
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-52522-8_2
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-52520-4
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-52522-8
eBook Packages: Earth and Environmental ScienceEarth and Environmental Science (R0)