A Fractal Perspective on Scale in Geography

Scale is a fundamental concept that has attracted persistent attention in geography literature over the past several decades. However, it creates enormous confusion and frustration, particularly in the context of geographic information science, because of scale-related issues such as image resolution and the modifiable areal unit problem (MAUP). This paper argues that the confusion and frustration arise from traditional Euclidean geometric thinking, in which locations, directions, and sizes are considered absolute, and it is now time to revise this conventional thinking. Hence, we review fractal geometry, together with its underlying way of thinking, and compare it to Euclidean geometry. Under the paradigm of Euclidean geometry, everything is measurable, no matter how big or small. However, most geographic features, due to their fractal nature, are essentially unmeasurable or their sizes depend on scale. For example, the length of a coastline, the area of a lake, and the slope of a topographic surface are all scale-dependent. Seen from the perspective of fractal geometry, many scale issues, such as the MAUP, are inevitable. They appear unsolvable, but can be dealt with. To effectively deal with scale-related issues, we present topological and scaling analyses illustrated by street-related concepts such as natural streets, street blocks, and natural cities. We further contend that one of the two spatial properties, spatial heterogeneity, is de facto the fractal nature of geographic features, and it should be considered the first effect among the two, because it is global and universal across all scales, which should receive more attention from practitioners of geography.

[1]  Yanguang Chen,et al.  Fractal systems of central places based on intermittency of space-filling , 2011 .

[2]  David M. Raup,et al.  How Nature Works: The Science of Self-Organized Criticality , 1997 .

[3]  B. McKelvey,et al.  Why Gaussian statistics are mostly wrong for strategic organization , 2005 .

[4]  Michael F. Goodchild,et al.  Scale in Spatial Information and Analysis , 2014 .

[5]  C. E. Gehlke,et al.  Certain Effects of Grouping upon the Size of the Correlation Coefficient in Census Tract Material , 1934 .

[6]  B. Jiang,et al.  Ht-Index for Quantifying the Fractal or Scaling Structure of Geographic Features , 2013, 1305.0883.

[7]  Richard L. Hudson,et al.  THE (MIS)BEHAVIOR OF MARKETS , 2004 .

[8]  Qihao Weng,et al.  Scale Issues in Remote Sensing , 2014 .

[9]  W. S. Robinson Ecological correlations and the behavior of individuals. , 1950, International journal of epidemiology.

[10]  Bin Jiang,et al.  Geospatial analysis requires a different way of thinking: the problem of spatial heterogeneity , 2015 .

[11]  Ana P. Barros,et al.  Downscaling of remotely sensed soil moisture with a modified fractal interpolation method using contraction mapping and ancillary data , 2002 .

[12]  Orie L. Loucks,et al.  Scaling and uncertainty analysis in ecology : methods and applications , 2006 .

[13]  B. Mandelbrot How Long Is the Coast of Britain? Statistical Self-Similarity and Fractional Dimension , 1967, Science.

[14]  B. Jiang Head/Tail Breaks: A New Classification Scheme for Data with a Heavy-Tailed Distribution , 2012, 1209.2801.

[15]  M. Goodchild,et al.  Scale in Remote Sensing and GIS , 2023 .

[16]  Robert B McMaster,et al.  Scale and Geographic Inquiry , 2004 .

[17]  Yanguang Chen,et al.  Modeling Fractal Structure of City-Size Distributions Using Correlation Functions , 2011, PloS one.

[18]  S. Openshaw A million or so correlation coefficients : three experiments on the modifiable areal unit problem , 1979 .

[19]  B. Berry,et al.  Central places in Southern Germany , 1967 .

[20]  P. Rogerson,et al.  The Sage handbook of spatial analysis , 2009 .

[21]  Christophe Claramunt,et al.  Topological Analysis of Urban Street Networks , 2004 .

[22]  M. Goodchild,et al.  The Fractal Nature of Geographic Phenomena , 1987 .

[23]  Leland Gerson Neuberg,et al.  A solution to the ecological inference problem: Reconstructing individual behavior from aggregate data , 1999 .

[24]  Richard L. Hudson,et al.  The Misbehavior of Markets: A Fractal View of Risk, Ruin, and Reward , 2004 .

[25]  W. Tobler A Computer Movie Simulating Urban Growth in the Detroit Region , 1970 .

[26]  J. Bonner Why Size Matters , 2007 .

[27]  L F Richardson,et al.  The problem of contiguity : An appendix to statistics of deadly quarrels , 1961 .

[28]  Bin Jiang Head/tail Breaks for Visualization of City Structure and Dynamics , 2016 .

[29]  Bin Jiang,et al.  Scaling of geographic space from the perspective of city and field blocks and using volunteered geographic information , 2010, Int. J. Geogr. Inf. Sci..

[30]  Ken Sexton,et al.  Modifiable Areal Unit Problem (MAUP) , 2008 .

[31]  C. Sparrow The Fractal Geometry of Nature , 1984 .

[32]  Gary Lock,et al.  Confronting scale in archaeology : issues of theory and practice , 2006 .

[33]  Michael Batty,et al.  Fractal Cities: A Geometry of Form and Function , 1996 .

[34]  Peter M. Atkinson,et al.  Modelling scale in geographical information science , 2001 .

[35]  Bin Jiang,et al.  Self-organized natural roads for predicting traffic flow: a sensitivity study , 2008, 0804.1630.

[36]  Bin Jiang,et al.  Scaling of Geographic Space as a Universal Rule for Map Generalization , 2011, 1102.1561.

[37]  David W. S. Wong The Modifiable Areal Unit Problem (MAUP) , 2004 .

[38]  W. Tobler Frame independent spatial analysis , 1989 .

[39]  George Kingsley Zipf,et al.  Human behavior and the principle of least effort , 1949 .

[40]  Nina S. N. Lam Fractals and Scale in Environmental Assessment and Monitoring , 2008 .

[41]  D. Pilbeam,et al.  Size and scaling in primate biology , 1986 .