Human fieldwork

• Aim


  To investigate housing and environmental inequality between two contrasting areas in high Wycombe
• Knowledge that underpins the fieldwork


  Many aspects of urban challenges e.g congestion leads to noise and air pollution which has many social and environmental impacts on QoL. It also parallels the case study of Newham and Kensington showing contrasting levels of deprivation
• Why was it suitable for a geographical enquiry?

  Social, environmental and economic factors to be measured. Broad depth of data. Easily accessible. Data can be collected from both places within a day. No large motorways
• Risk factors


  getting hit by a car: stay away from main road and walk only on pavements. Getting lost: maps and staying in an allocated area + groups Getting kidnapped: staying in groups
• Bipolar environmental quality survey


  Assessing quality of a particular area. Scale from negative to positive. Assess range of indicators. Based on personal judgement.
• Land use survey


  Walk around area and decide what type of land use there predominantly is. Shows open space, residential, industry. Difficult to add sufficient detail to already existing mapping services
• Building decay index


  Assess levels of decay based on different factors. Repeat for different areas and find a mean. Numerical value for comparison. Subjective and involves bias.
• Housing type survey 


  Count individual dwellings. Insight into density of houses and levels of green space. Housing types may be confused and can be incorrectly counted.
• Noise pollution levels


  Measure in an area for 30s and find an average. Use app decibel X. Insight into congestion or indutry or countryside. People recording may be talking or roads could be coincidentaly quiet that day.
• Justify one primary collection method.

  Stratified sampling method used by dividing the areas into sections and allocating areas to specific groups. More than one group went to each site so can find an average. Also get and overview of whole area.
• Pie charts


  Visually effective. Easy to read and understand. Many segments of similar size is hard to distinguish.
• Proportional symbol maps


  Visually effective. Placed on map to show spacial difference. Scale used for comparison. Too many symbols are hard to interpret. To much overlap is confusing. Size may obscure location.