This qualitative knowledge makes sense of the quantitative evidence and often contains the insights you need to make a decision based on the findings. The more people you involve, the more reliable the consensus findings become.

Here’s an example of a visually distinct correlation between two datasets for Great Manchester which needs some local qualitative knowledge. We were thinking about this week’s debate over the status of some qualifications being downgraded in school league tables, and whether employment data could indicate any relationship between school attainment and the value delivered back to the surrounding community.

In an exploratory way, we looked at data for the city for residents with level 4 qualifications and above (level 4 is one higher than A levels, e.g. diplomas, professional certificates, on up to HNDs, degrees, masters and so on). Almost accidentally, we compared this city-scale data pattern with residents employed in manufacturing. The two maps are below:

Percent residents with level 4 qualifications & above (darkest shades = 30%+)

Percent residents employed in manufacturing (darkest shades 20%+)

If we image a slice of pie extending south from the centre of the city, the lack of manufacturing employment and the relatively high level of qualification is visually evident (and yes, Moss Side is a blob in the middle of the pie slice – but the inverse relationship between the two phenomena seems consistent even here). The tools we’re building allow you to add markers and annotations to illustrate something exactly like this, but we’ll have to make do with pie for now.

So does manufacturing still offer relatively high levels of employment to those workers with qualifications below level 4, as we might have expected 30 years ago perhaps? Or is it more significant that higher-qualified people are disproportionately likely to live south of the centre and be employed in the service sector?

With more and better data, could we test the hypothesis that qualifications relevant to manufacturing and other local employers would add even greater value to the community than traditional academic exams – perhaps in the shape of a reduced benefits budget and related regeneration effects?

The truthful answer here and now is that I don’t know, but I bet among the residents of Manchester and equivalent cities the ‘soft’ knowledge exists to make perfect sense of these patterns, once we know they’re there, and to shape policy accordingly.

Any insight to share? Let us know below. Meanwhile it’s back to the coding coalface…

‘Evidence’ is a buzzword that’s in danger of being over-used, but if an organisation needs to make a decision, it should do so based on some reliable information. This helps it to make decisions which bear some relation to the real world so you can make more money, save more time, help more people, or whatever you’re aiming to do. It also helps it justify those decisions to the employees, shareholders, competitors or trade press who might question a new turn of strategy. An evidence base is a structured arrangement of data designed to support decision-making. So yes, you probably need one.

2 – You may have one already (of sorts)

Whether it’s about customers, markets, demographics, buying influences, relationships or the economy, it’s likely your organisation has access to some potentially useful data. Does this qualify you to claim you make ‘evidence-based decisions’? Do a few spreadsheets amount to ‘an evidence base’? It depends what you do with that information: if it’s kept up to date, how it’s analysed, if it’s duplicated in numerous different formats across the business and if senior decision makers actually have access to it. You’d be amazed how few do. Even the most savvy organisations have room to improve the value they get from their own data and other information which is freely available.

3 – How to go get some evidence

Having said all of the above, don’t start with the data. It’s very tempting to think about what information might be available and how you’d like to get your hands on it, but that’s a bit like going to the doctors and telling them which drug you’d like without discussing your symptoms. There may be all sorts of alternative options available once your requirements are fully understood. So think about the questions you really want to answer. Don’t even worry at this stage whether you believe they are answerable. A good supplier will want to get to the nub of the evidence you need, and will be able to tell you how close to it you can get with the data that’s out there and within the budget and time allowed.

4 – Be honest about how your organisation will use it

If you really need a nutcracker, don’t get persuaded to buy a sledgehammer. And the reverse is also true. Be realistic about the teams and individuals who will need to interact with the data, their technical and analytical capability, and the outputs you need from them. Sometimes just selecting and visualising some key datasets in a report is really all you need, and if you over-specify and make this too difficult, nobody will buy in to the evidence. Be watchful also for the ‘job retention scheme’: the colleague who’s telling you it’s all a bit complicated and you’d better let him or her keep hold of the data and dole out your ration if you ask nicely. Sharing information is powerful and it allows every stakeholder to add interpretation and ‘soft knowledge’ to the mix. An evidence base which exists on one person’s hard drive hardly deserves the name.

5 – Accept that data is never perfect

Anyone who works with government and commercial data regularly will sooner or later give you the data expert’s eye-roll. “How good is this dataset?” you’ll ask, and their eyeballs will shoot up to the ceiling as they launch into a tirade about its shortcomings. Do not despair. Every dataset has its limitations: its coverage, its scale or its currency, something will be less than perfect for your needs. Often data is aggregated into zones which are too large to give you all the insight you’d like at neighbourhood scale, or your Holy Grail information isn’t collected at all. This is where you need to employ proxy data which can provide a useful view of a related phenomenon. Or you can undertake some analysis, perhaps combining several datasets to derive a useful integrated measure, or decide if it’s worth collecting some data afresh. Meanwhile it’s worth bearing in mind that if the very best available data is frankly a bit below par, it’s still the very best available. Provided that you interpret results accordingly, it might give you a better edge than nothing at all.

6 – yes, we said 5 things, but it’s worth adding that we can help. Contact us if you’d like to discuss any aspect of accessing, analysing and sharing data and we promise to help you avoid the pitfalls.

The results were featured in the Observer this weekend (though sadly our namecheck hit the cutting room floor – an error we have asked them to correct).

The study found that areas of Great Britain with the highest densities of gambling machines were on average poorer than the rest of the country, with higher levels of economic inactivity, low-status occupations and both the youngest and oldest sections of the adult population.

Geofutures mapped zones surrounding all venues licensed to offer gambling machines, weighted them according to industry information on the number of machines per venue, and then used a statistical distribution to define what constitutes ‘high’ density – more than 1 machine per hectare. The results were then used to characterise the highest density zones according to census-led economic and social data on their local populations.

The research was timely, as debate continued on the growing presence of bookmakers’ shops on the high street including comments by Harriet Harman, but it will have wider application in informing future research on the potential for gambling harm.

The benefits of mapping and spatial analysis in simply defining where the most machines are found were noted by all those involved: this is baseline evidence which has been lacking so far, and there’s nothing like a map for revealing what’s going on and where.

The gambling industry is regularly accused of targeting poorer populations, and robustly refutes this claim. The machines research does address this question directly, but together with the headline results, it suggests a more complex picture.

Bookmakers’ shops are highly visible and host higher-stakes machines but these are limited to four per shop, so in terms of absolute machines numbers they are not contributing greatly to the densities found.

Many low-income areas have low machine densities, and the greatest clusters were found in suburban centres, ‘satellite’ towns outside major cities, New Towns and in many of the expected tourist locations by the coast, though not all.

Understanding the significance of these findings for gambling regulation will need deeper insights. It’s likely that a lack of alternative leisure amenities will increase the presence of machine arcades in less vibrant locations, but this may reflect long-term economic issues which would need addressing alongside any direct changes to gambling regulation.

Our thanks go to all involved in a stimulating and worthwhile project.

See the NatCen and Geofutures press release here with accompanying FAQs:

18 Nov 2011 press release: Geofutures and NatCen gambling machines research for RGF/RGSB

18 Nov 2011 FAQs Geofutures and NatCen Machines research report

And who won the Mystery Map competition? Find out here.

It’s what makes us at Geofutures tick, of course: the fact that presenting information visually on a map makes it totally accessible. It works with the way our minds work.

And so we had great times discussing mapping with all kinds of interesting people – and it started some interesting thoughts flowing about the kinds of data people need and the forms they need it in. More on that soon.

The map illustrates a unique index relevant to long-term sustainability, created by Geofutures by processing selected published data. We asked delegates to guess what they thought the index was.

And the answer is… it’s a measure of economic diversity. Taking inspiration from E H Simpson’s method for measuring biodiversity, first published in Nature in 1949 and used to assess ecosystem diversity ever since, our measure takes data from the Annual Business Inquiry and applies the same approach.

Dark areas therefore have a greater diversity of industry type than the lighter ones. You’d expect that in the larger towns and cities, but interesting peaks emerge which certainly had our conference-goers chewing their pencils.

Larger dark areas around the Salisbury Plain area may point to diversity of employment type which is all ultimately linked to military activity; the M4 and M5 both seem to define corridors of greater economic diversity. As to what’s going on in South Molton, Chard and Callington in Cornwall – there we need some local insight please.

Geofutures’ latest online insight tool, The Knowledge Garden, lets you annotate and comment on maps with local insight and expertise within one seamless application. To request a preview of the beta version on release, please contact us.

Afraid you can’t win the gorgeous office treats hamper if you weren’t at the show, but you can still comment on the map below. In fact there was no perfectly correct guess despite the many lively debates which took place around the stand. The many incorrect guesses were interesting in their own right and have even inspired us to think how we could create commercially valuable data surfaces defining solar power use, for example, or proximity to business parks.

We’ll also be refining the economic diversity index and gathering insight on the results. How useful a measure is this as a means of predicting economic resilience? Will the most diverse locations thrive best in difficult economic conditions, or in response to rising fuel prices?

The closest entrant at the Environmental Trade Show was Dr Andrew Wray, Enterprise and Knowledge Exchange Programme Manager at the University of Bristol, who guessed it was an index of biodiversity. Since this is part of the approach used and no-one guessed anything closer, we judged it close enough and a tasty office hamper is on its way to Dr Wray – congratulations!

The event is design to showcase the most up to date technologies, new approaches and collaborations, promote equipment and services and introduce companies committed to low carbon commerce (more details here). Geofutures MD Mark Thurstain-Goodwin is also speaking in a symposium session discussing fresh perspectives on energy efficiency, together with Dave Covell, principal at ENVIRON.

See you there!

Commenting on the latest release of shop vacancy figures from our old friends at the Local Data Company, she suggested that “the horse has bolted” from some towns – she simply cannot see a retail future for them. The Local Data Company evidence suggests these are mainly second-tier centres, and it’s the second-tier off-prime locations within them which are hardest hit.

The conclusion Mary Portas suggests is that some towns need to rethink the model entirely. If they cannot compete as retail centres, their only hope for rejuvenation is other uses. So far, where this has happened it has tended to be leisure-led, hence closed shops re-opening as bookmakers, cafes and bars. Better than vacant shops, perhaps, but a major change in mood which can have anti-social effects if not managed effectively.

Are there other potential ways that town centre regeneration could happen? I was pondering this as I looked again at the location of twelve new English Enterprise Zones announced by PM David Cameron in August.

This is the second round of new Zones, and the first lot included ex-industrial heartlands like the Black Country and Tees Valley, true. But these latest Zones are not designed for redistribution of opportunity: last I heard, Oxford, Lowestoft and Hereford were not high on the list of economic blackspots.

A quick mapping exercise backs up that conclusion. The Income Score is part of the Index of Multiple Deprivation, and the higher the score, the higher the deprivation – shown here in the brown shades.

As you can see, the areas surrounding the new Zones are not strongly characterised by below-average incomes, with the exception of Warrington.

So the Zones have been decided for other reasons, and my bet’s on “because they are most likely to be successful in bringing in new industry” and that will be counted as a win for the policy. Places where industries are already doing well attract other industries, and tend to be where skilled employees can be found. Locating them next to transport hubs is helpful, and a bit of government subsidy just adds to the mix that’s already there.

If enterprise is being encouraged where it’s happening already, what chance have second-tier retail centres have to be regenerated? Just maybe, the clue is in the question. Enterprise Zones are being given lower business rates, reduced planning controls and superfast broadband. Could this be achieved for smaller-scale ex-retail locations too – and would this be effort better targeted at genuine transformation?

I imagine that retail premises redeveloping as small business offices, live-work accommodation or even light industrial and distribution units might have a more balanced economic effect on a town’s economy than a night-time entertainment quarter. And if Dewsbury, Dudley, Hartlepool, Margate, Stockport and West Bromwich are the towns suffering the worst retail vacancies in England, I can think of worse places to start.

Mark Thurstain-Goodwin

Whether idly over a beer, or more seriously as part of GIS sustainability modelling, it’s a question I’ve been mulling over. It’s also something I’ve been discussing with my daughters, aged 10 and 7. What are the most important things for a safe and comfortable life? “TV!” they laugh, knowing it will wind me up. “Zhu Zhu Pets!” (I know, I didn’t know either, but sadly I do now).

Then the other night, the water company had to fix a leaking main up our street. By chance I was outdoors and heard their muffled attempt at letting us know via a loudhailer. Five minutes’ notice, they said, and the water would be off for two hours. At least I think that’s what they said.

And the whole mood changed: a sunny spring evening was suddenly full of people coming out looking perplexed, knocking on each others’ doors, and running up to where the water people were busy digging. They had turned on taps. Nothing had come out. Civilisation had come to a shuddering halt.

We’d filled a few jugs and the kettle, but my seven year old started crying. “You can die without water!” she sobbed. “I saw it on TV!”

We calmed her down, but it was a useful opportunity to have a good discussion about what a privilege it is to have safe, clean water on demand, and not to have to walk for hours to collect it, like many young girls around the world. Whole regions can be threatened if their water supplies are diverted by dams, and wars over water are far from unthinkable. Even here, the lack of water can have some extreme impacts.

Up the road in Gloucestershire, the floods in 2007 put out a pumping station for three weeks. On the one hand, as Anna in Gloucestershire commented on the BBC website, the street corner water bowsers built the sense of community – “I will miss the social activity that it became, seeing children collecting it, the elderly man walking with his walking stick and his saucepan, taking just enough, the comments that we were the lucky ones, and the feeling as I collected it that it was a precious commodity which we usually take for granted.”

On the other, vandals urinated in a bowser for the old people’s home where my mother works, and police had to be called to supermarkets to stop fist fights over dwindling supplies of bottled water in Cheltenham.

These two extremes of response highlight clean water’s undoubted position as No. 1 on the list of survival needs even in our “civilised” country. An online survival specialist puts it in black and white: “When faced with a survival situation, clean drinkable water is often the most important consideration. People have survived without food for weeks or even months, but go without water for even just one day and the survivor will be in desperate straights indeed.”

They also highlight the central position of community in responding to a shortage. Clean water, food, shelter, warmth… and good people around you to share them with. Maybe it’s not my final list of Top 5 necessities, but it’s not a bad start.

Mark Thurstain-Goodwin

And yes, working with corporate clients means there are fewer hours in the day to do things like our own sustainability research or write a blog, but in the end these things all connect.

I’ve long argued to anyone who’ll listen that adapting the established economy is at the very centre of achieving sustainability. Only by going mainstream and involving major companies will the important work of environmental researchers and campaigners have impact at the scale necessary to make a difference.

Ten years ago I helped develop an index of economic diversity for a government client. Taking inspiration from natural systems, it worked on the basis that a resilient economic system had greater diversity and hence ability to adapt to changing circumstances.

So it’s good to see that the Ellen MacArthur Foundation has adopted similar thinking into their education aims. Sailing around the world alone is an extreme way of realising how we have to live within finite resources, but now Ellen MacArthur’s journey is all about bringing businesses and educators together to design an economy which treats waste as inputs and diversity as strength.

I like the neatness of the term the Foundation is using for this: the circular economy. Again mimicking natural systems, it suggests that intelligent upfront planning and design can ensure all waste products are treated as inputs to something else, and that ‘technical nutrients’ don’t enter the biosphere but are recycled or better still re-engineered.

There is no disconnect. Major corporates want to ensure their long-term existence as much as anyone, and some will act sooner rather than later. Third-sector organisations will benefit, and will circulate their knowledge and expertise back again. Natural systems will influence our thinking and help to bring us full circle.

Mark Thurstain-Goodwin

See the Ellen MacArthur Foundation website

We’re doing some fairly hard-core product development at the moment, and when the results hit the beta release stage we’ll have the details here. As the process continues, it’s interesting how every conversation we have with clients, would-be clients and partner suppliers seems to point to the same needs.

The core issue is how clients and consultants can work together in a way which maximises the value of the undoubted expertise of the consultant, and which enables the client to do something practical with the outcomes.

The villain of the piece? It’s the consultant’s report. Hours and hours of work collecting information, hours and hours more beautifully summarising and recommending, then whump! it lands on a few desks.

Then what? Who has time to read it properly? Who has the knowledge to draw relevant conclusions? How does the client implement recommendations?

If input information is collected in isolation from client stakeholders, and the process does not build capacity within that organisation to do something tangible with the outputs later, the insight is lost.

No matter how relevant, incisive and accurate, no matter the time or cost invested, the wisdom contained in the report is confined for the lack of a means to share and reveal it.

As seasoned GIS users will know, presenting data on maps does reveal key phenomena in a way that a paragraph of description doesn’t, and we know leading consultants in multiple fields who are waking up to the power of this.

Even this isn’t enough unless the maps, the data visualisations and the expert interpretation are exposed to multiple pairs of eyes. We need the ‘wisdom of the crowd’ to drag all that valuable knowledge out into the world and make it work for us.

We need the tools to make this process simple and engaging, and both consultants and their clients will benefit.

Better get back to the coalface then. It’s reassuring to know all this work is in a good cause.

Ruth Keily