Part II. Standard HyperAtlas

Standard HyperAtlas is a tool for Multiscalar Territorial Analysis: several indicators on the basis of the ratio of two initial geographical indexes can be derived, according to different spatial contexts.

Multiscalar Territorial Analysis is based on the assumption that it is not possible to evaluate the situation of a given territorial unit without taking into account its relative situation and localization. Regions belong to territorial and spatial systems. Indeed, from a policy point of view and in a social science perspective, contrasts and gradients are of much more interest than absolute values. Furthermore, aggregating and disaggregating territorial units allow to see how local values add up to form territorial contexts and regional positions.

Whatever the indexes used for political decisions, they have to be evaluated in relative terms. This may be done according to various territorial contexts. Thus one spatial organization may be examined from three different viewpoints that are three territorial contexts. They are differentiated according to the scale of political intervention or action they are referring to and that have a sense for the questioning: a global one, a medium one and finally a local one. Thus what is represented is the deviations to the three reference values associated to these different levels.

Let us take the example of the European union as a set of 25 countries, at the level of the region (NUTS2 for instance), and let the observed index be the wealth per resident in the regions (GDP/inh.). It is possible with Standard HyperAtlas to consider the level of wealth of the regions relatively to three territorial contexts, and not only from an absolute point of view. The chosen contexts may be for instance respectively:

the whole European Union;
the country;
the neighborhood defined by contiguous regions.

Standard HyperAtlas proposes for such an indicator a set of maps and charts that will be furthermore described in MTA parameters and Tools:

First maps show the selected study area, both the parent distributions as disc maps (here, wealth and population) and their ratios, that is to say the chosen index’s one.
Then, three maps show the relative deviations to the three chosen contexts as choropleth maps. For the above example: the deviation of a region to the European reference area, the deviation of a region to its national reference area, and in the third place the deviation of a region to the local reference area.
Then, two synthesis maps allow to evaluate the different combinations of the three previous relative deviation maps.
More advanced users are also provided a set of new tools like the maps of redistribution, the Lorenz curve and a chart of spatial autocorrelation.


Here are some political justifications about the contextual and multilevel mapping, based on the European example: The first map where the referent context is the global one is the classical way of mapping an index when the chosen context is the studied area. The values of the indices are converted into a global index. The second map, corresponding to the intermediate level, her the national one, is very important to combine with the previous one. Indeed, many contradictions can appear between the two levels, with important political consequences. The third one is based on the local differential between one region and the neighbouring ones according to various criteria of proximity (contiguity, time-distance). According to recent research in the field of spatial economy and regional science, those local advantages/handicaps appear to be of crucial importance for the regional cohesion because they are strongly connected with the action of economic or social actors. The multiscalar approach proposed to evaluate the same index at various scales. In terms of territorial cohesion, it is indeed very important to evaluate the level of development of a region according to at least three levels.

Here are some political justifications about the contextual and multilevel mapping, based on the European example:

The first map where the referent context is the global one is the classical way of mapping an index when the chosen context is the studied area. The values of the indices are converted into a global index.
The second map, corresponding to the intermediate level, her the national one, is very important to combine with the previous one. Indeed, many contradictions can appear between the two levels, with important political consequences.
The third one is based on the local differential between one region and the neighbouring ones according to various criteria of proximity (contiguity, time-distance). According to recent research in the field of spatial economy and regional science, those local advantages/handicaps appear to be of crucial importance for the regional cohesion because they are strongly connected with the action of economic or social actors.
The multiscalar approach proposed to evaluate the same index at various scales. In terms of territorial cohesion, it is indeed very important to evaluate the level of development of a region according to at least three levels.


Chapter 3. Registered users		Chapter 4. Standard HyperAtlas startup