Understanding Liveability versus Density with Power BI
Warren Dean
Founder @ DataTale.com.au | MCT | Power BI Training & Consulting for Government
Liveability according to the Cambridge dictionary refers to "the degree to which a place is suitable or good for living in." This seems straight forward but dig a little deeper and you will realise that this buzz word is harder to define than you think. What actually makes a city liveable seems to be under constant debate but in 2015 The Age and Tract Consulting had an attempt to rank 321 of Melbourne's suburbs by their liveability. 15 indicators were used for the measurement. The only ones mentioned where access to public transport, open space, tree cover, schools and shops, and telecommunications. You can reference the article here:
Unfortunately, no data sources were provided so I decided to scrap the website and create an interactive map with Mapbox & Power BI of their rankings, to help me get a better understanding. Click the image below to interact with the map.
Looking at the map you can clearly see the pattern here. The further from the CBD you go the redder the map gets. I really wanted to know what the 15 indicators were though! I created a word cloud on the author's explanation of their rankings which looked like this.
school 199 road congestion 184 shopping 177 open space 177 crime 170 access 167 culture + cultural 163 tree coverage 137 public facilities 137 cafes 133 telecommunications 60 coastline 47 topographic 41
I was able to possibly identify 13 of the 15 indicators. Schools were quoted the most as a reason for liveability. The coastline was also quoted while apparently having hills (topographic) is also an indicator.
One indicator that is not mentioned though is density. The higher the density of the suburb the higher the attained liveability ranking, which can be seen below. Possibly unintended but we can see a high correlation between the two. Click on the ''Switch to Density Scatterplot" button at the top right of the Power BI report to see the majority of the suburbs in a scatterplot of density (x-axis) versus liveability rank (y-axis).
The questions beckons, how do we measure liveability apart from density or is density part and parcel of liveability? Personally, I would love to see some subjective measures included in this type of analysis. To the urban, social, transport, town planners out there (or just us plain data lovers), I would love to hear your thoughts on Liveability versus Density.
Thanks,
Warren
Community Development specialist. Place-maker. Community broker
5 年Hi Warren We dont know each other but i read your article and im always interested in further examination of this important space. So, if i may...... It is terrific to see this topic explored in greater depth. As a member of the program Committee for the annual Liveable Cities conference ( Perth 22/23 June 2020) i encourage your participation. I am also involved in some longitudinal research with Queensland University of Technology into qualitative assessments which i would be happy to expand upon at some time. In addition..if you have the appetite I would encourage you to read the work of Social Researcher Hugh Mackay around the notions of community wellness and liveability. One aspect of liveability that is consistently missing is basic social cohesion examinations: a fascinating space. A common experience for many in high density residential places is abject loneliness, despite proximity to others. Accordingly, many in the social investment/placemaking professions would challenge a hypothesis that inherently links density to better liveability. Access to facilities and infrastructure is only part of the equation.
Director, Business Operations & Improvement | Value NSW
5 年A great example of bringing tangibility to the often intangible. Good job, Warren Dean
Asset Coordinator @ Mitchell Shire Council
5 年Full marks for creativity Warren. However, you are grossly misusing regression analysis and misinterpreting correlation in the way you have applied it. The analysis you have presented highlights an already complex social phenomenon amd making it that more difficult to synthesise your inferences.
Social and community infrastructure planning specialist
5 年Thanks Warren. That conclusion would generally be supported from my social infrastructure perspective. I don't know the full list of factors used to measure liveability but a key one is access (generally a factor of proximity) to key destinations (facilities, services, jobs, open space, entertainment etc). And not just access to them but their number, range, quality and capacity, and the transport options available. So denser urban areas win hands down. The data you used for the map only extends to outer suburban areas; I would like to know what the liveability of rural areas is. I live in the coutry and consider my life 'liveable'. I have reasonable access to the facilites and services I need, but I have to drive. I cannot walk anywhere but I can live a healthy lifestyle and I have a high standard of wellbeing. So my question is whether liveability takes account of these things? Anyone?
Founder @ DataTale.com.au | MCT | Power BI Training & Consulting for Government
5 年Just tagging the planning gurus that I know. Interested for your thoughts!? Caroline Gillies, Sarah Shehata, Kristin Davies, Raeph Cumming, Simone Alexander,?Chun Guo, Humayara Alam, Frances Hoban, Erin Pattie, Hannah Croughan, Laurie Mitchell, Melanie Davern, Daniel Evans, Lucy Hedt, Elizsabeth Smith, Kate McCluskey, May Haeder.