You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
One class of questions I keep getting asked about involves comparisons with various spatial tilings of the entire map: ecoregions, counties, watersheds. Users ask questions like:
Which ecoregions/counties/watersheds has the highest/lowest level of biodiversity/carbon/social vulnerability,
How are protections distributed over ecoregions/counties/watersheds?
I think it would be great to brainstorm ways we might approach this question, with what we can pre-calculate and what we might be able to calculate dynamically.
An added wrinkle is that most of these tiling are hierarchical -- e.g. states->counties->tracks, ecoregions->subregions etc.
In an idealized version of the tool, users could both filter to a jurisdiction of interest, and then quickly explore the distribution questions (i.e., within my state, which counties are highest in biodiversity/carbon/nature vulnerability. Or same question but state->county and county-> tract, etc).
I believe most of these are fast aggregations if we compute the spatial joins and raster zonal statistics ahead of time.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
One class of questions I keep getting asked about involves comparisons with various spatial tilings of the entire map: ecoregions, counties, watersheds. Users ask questions like:
I think it would be great to brainstorm ways we might approach this question, with what we can pre-calculate and what we might be able to calculate dynamically.
An added wrinkle is that most of these tiling are hierarchical -- e.g. states->counties->tracks, ecoregions->subregions etc.
In an idealized version of the tool, users could both filter to a jurisdiction of interest, and then quickly explore the distribution questions (i.e., within my state, which counties are highest in biodiversity/carbon/nature vulnerability. Or same question but state->county and county-> tract, etc).
I believe most of these are fast aggregations if we compute the spatial joins and raster zonal statistics ahead of time.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: