Field work: physical (York Flood management)

• Hypothesis: flood management scheme in York are successful at reducing the flood risk.
• Why location chosen? 


  York is easy travelling distance

  • York is prone to flooding during periods if bad weather
  • York is on the confluence of 2 rivers- The Foss and the Ouse.
• Relevant Geographic Theory


  Increased Urbanisation increases the flood risk of the area.

  this suggests the management strategies would need to be out in place to protect the city of York
• Method: Bi-Polar Evaluation 


  How was it done?

  • Rate the effectiveness of flood management strategies is variety of locations out of 5

  why was it done?

  • to record our personal opinion of how successful the flood management strategies were.
• Method: Bi-Polar Evaluation 


  Sampling method and why it was done:

  • RANDOM SAMPLING
  • Carried evaluations in 6 diff. Areas so there wasn’t large numbers of students in one area at once.

  Link to hypothesis:

  • showed our opinion on the success of the management strategies
• Method: Questionnaires


  How was it done?

  • Interviewed people at random to find out how effective the strategies were

  Why was it done?

  • To find out the opinions of locals on the success of the strategy
• Method: Questionnaires


  sampling method and reason:

  • RANDOM SAMPLING
  • Due to being in locations of low footfall we had to interview people as we see them

  Links to hypothesis:

  • Shower local peoples Opinions on the success of the management strategies
• Reasons for Presenting methods

  Plotted Bar graph for our Bi-Polar evaluation:

  • easy to read the data
  • easy to compare across 7 sites visited
  • easy to compare with diff. categories we were judging on.

  Pie-Charts for Questionnaires:

  • easy to identify large/small reponses
  • good at showing proportion
• Conclusion: Overal, flood management schemes in York are PARTIALLY successful at reducing the flood risk. The scheme helps to protect some parts of York better than others
• Evaluation Methods: Bi-Polar evaluation

  Problems:

  • Scores were based on our opinions
  • scores only represented on the time and date we visited.

  impact on results and Conclusion:

  • scores given would have varied if we had visited at different times of the year when weather conditions may have been different.

  Solutions:

  • visit sites at different times of the year/ weather conditions are better.

  improvement to result and conclusion:

  • Periods of bad weather may produce diff. Results
  • increase river levels and periods of flooding may influence our judgment
• Evaluation Methods: Questionnaires

  Problems:

  • Only interviewed one person at each location.
  • final data collected from class data

  impacts on results and conclusion:

  • Data may have been duplicated within the class
  • results could vary depending on weather conditions

  Solutions:

  • Interview more people individually.
  • visit sites at diff. Times of the yea/ during periods of different weather conditions.

  improvement to results and conditions:

  • interviewing people ourselves would make our data more reliable as there would be no duplication of results
• What are potential risks for our physical field work?

  -> being close to water. River ouse

  -> crossing busy roads

  ->independent work away from staff

  ->interviewing random members of the public

  
  

  how could they be reduced?

  -> Be polite and always work in small groups if 3

  -> keep away from edge of the river

  -> use pedestrian cross/Cross in small groups

  -> Work in groups of 3