1/15
Looks like no tags are added yet.
Name | Mastery | Learn | Test | Matching | Spaced |
---|
No study sessions yet.
Enquiry Question:
How is the inner urban environment of London perceived by residents and visitors?
What was the geographical concept investigated?
Urban land use & change (Burgess Model / Hoyt Model).
Urban regeneration (e.g. King’s Cross redevelopment).
Perceptions of space and environmental quality within the inner city.
What were the hypotheses?
H1: Environmental quality improves with distance from the city centre..
Where was the fieldwork carried out?
Oxford Street – commercial CBD area.
Elephant & Castle – redeveloping zone.
King’s Cross – regenerated inner-city area.
What were the aims of the fieldwork?
To assess how perceptions of environmental quality vary across inner London.
To evaluate how urban regeneration affects residents’ and visitors’ experiences.
What primary quantitative data was collected?
Environmental Quality Surveys (EQS):
Rated factors (litter, noise, condition of buildings, etc.) from 1–5.
Scores:
Oxford Street = 16/30
Elephant & Castle = 19/30
King’s Cross = 25/30
Pedestrian Counts (10 minutes at 1pm):
Oxford Street: 210
Elephant & Castle: 135
King’s Cross: 160
Structured Questionnaires:
20 participants per site (residents + visitors).
Asked about safety and cleanliness perceptions.
Safety: Oxford Street 60%, Elephant & Castle 45%, King’s Cross 80%.
Cleanliness (1–5): Oxford St 2.5, Elephant & Castle 3.0, King’s Cross 4.1.
What primary qualitative data was collected?
Annotated Photographs & Field Sketches:
Recorded evidence of urban redevelopment and regeneration.
What secondary data was used?
King’s Cross redevelopment plans (from local council reports).
Google Maps & historical photographs (to show urban change over time).
Avoided high-crime areas; used Google Maps for safe route planning.
Stayed in busy, well-lit public spaces.
Checked weather forecasts before data collection.
How was the data presented?
Bar charts: Environmental Quality Scores comparison.
Pie charts: Safety perceptions (% feeling safe).
Annotated photographs: To highlight regeneration evidence.
Field sketches: To show land use and environmental conditions.
What patterns and trends were found?
King’s Cross: Highest EQS (25/30) and best safety rating (80%) → linked to regeneration success.
Oxford Street: Busiest area but lowest EQS (noise, litter).
Elephant & Castle: Mixed perceptions due to ongoing redevelopment.
How does the Burgess Model apply to your findings?
The Burgess Model partly applies: environmental quality increases outward from the CBD.
However, regeneration (e.g., King’s Cross) changes this pattern — inner areas can improve due to redevelopment, not just distance.
What were the strengths of your fieldwork?
Combination of qualitative and quantitative data gave balanced results.
Three contrasting central locations provided good spatial coverage.
Effective use of secondary data (maps, plans) strengthened reliability.
What were the limitations?
Small sample size (only 20 questionnaires per site).
EQS scores subjective (may vary between participants).
Data collected at one time of day — not representative of all conditions.
How could the fieldwork be improved?
Increase sample size and number of sites.
Use sound meters or air quality monitors for objective data.
Collect data at different times or days for better reliability.