Resource allocation by measures of relative social need in geographical areas: the relevance of the signed χ2, the percentage, and the raw count.

Three alternative statistics for constructing a social index to distinguish geographical areas are considered. The relative merits of the signed χ2 statistic, the percentage, and the raw count are examined in relation to two distinct goals in resource allocation: identification of concentrations of...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Published in:Environment & Planning A Vol. 28; pp. 537 - 555
Main Author: Simpson, S.
Format: Article
Published: Pion Limited March 1996
Subjects:
Online Access:View this record in EBSCOhost
fields @attributes:
  recordID: 1
pdfLink:
plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ssf&AN=512757709&site=ehost-live
header:
  @attributes:
    shortDbName: ssf
    uiTerm: 512757709
    longDbName: Social Sciences Full Text (H.W. Wilson)
    uiTag: AN
  controlInfo:
    bkinfo:
    jinfo:
      jid:
        0308518X
        EPL
      jtl: Environment & Planning A
      issn: 0308518X
      maglogo: N
    pubinfo:
      dt: March 1996
      vid: 28
      pid: 1065
      pub: Pion Limited
    artinfo:
      ui:
        512757709
        10.1068/a280537
      ppf: 537
      ppct: 18
      formats:
      tig:
        atl: Resource allocation by measures of relative social need in geographical areas: the relevance of the signed χ2, the percentage, and the raw count.
      aug:
        au: Simpson, S.
      su:
        Resource allocation -- Mathematical models
        Municipal services
        Geography -- Methodology
        Geography -- Statistical methods
        Social indicators
        United Kingdom
      sug:
        subj:
          United Kingdom
          Resource allocation -- Mathematical models
          Municipal services
          Geography -- Methodology
          Geography -- Statistical methods
          Social indicators
      ab: Three alternative statistics for constructing a social index to distinguish geographical areas are considered. The relative merits of the signed χ2 statistic, the percentage, and the raw count are examined in relation to two distinct goals in resource allocation: identification of concentrations of need (geographic targeting) and estimation of local budgets (resource distribution). It is argued that the signed χ2 statistic overcomes disadvantages of the percentage when identifying high concentrations of need. Disadvantages of the signed χ2, relating to its construction, its dependence on the choice of a reference area, and its ability to deal with areas of low concentration of need, are identified and discussed. Alternative measures of geographical concentrations of need are outlined.
      pubtype: Academic Journal
      doctype: Article
      src: R
    language: English
    refInfo:
    copyright:
      @attributes:
        flag: N
    holdings:
      @attributes:
        islocal: N