In Lab 4, we accessed Canadian census data to map the affordability of Ottawa and Vancouver. The objectives were to familiarize with the various methods of classifying data and to explore their potential ethical implications.
Click here to see my Data Classification Maps!
Part of the lab instructed students to pretend we were journalists hired to report on the affordability and liveability of Vancouver. Which data classification method would a journalist use to display affordability of Vancouver? As a journalist, I would likely choose manual breaks because it would allow me to compare a map of Vancouver’s housing costs to maps of other cities’ (that have the same breaks). This could illustrate that Vancouver’s housing is extremely unaffordable, even when compared to other areas (or visa versa) – the potential for a story.
However, if I were a real estate agent preparing a presentation for prospective home buyers near UBC, I would use standard deviation as my data classification method. UBC property appears to be relatively inexpensive with this classification. Because it is located next to areas that appear very pricey, potential buyers might view purchasing UBC property as an opportunity for investment (UBC might be predicted to follow the rising housing values of the surrounding area).
It is important to note that the different methods of classification may influence the interpretation of data on maps, and that there might be ethical implications. Is if fair to choose classifications that overemphasize ‘affordable’ and ‘unaffordable’ areas of Vancouver? That might mislead potential buyers. What if the division of your data classes is confusing to viewers?