![[Back]](/icons/back.gif){kind=icon}
![[Contents]](/icons/toc.gif){kind=icon}
![[Home]](/icons/ia.gif){kind=icon}
Figure 1: Spatial analyses problems and biases (A/ Groube 1981; Davidson 1978; Haggett 1965, and see Phillips 1987 for Māori settlements. B/ Gaffney 1995; Harris & Lock 1995; Church et al. 2000. C/ Phillips 2000a).
| PROBLEMS | |
|---|---|
| A/ Settlement Analysis 1970 -> | missing data especially 'holes' in settlement distributions |
| uneven recording and accuracy | |
| unknown chronology | |
| untested validity of models and statistical tests |
| B/ GIS Analysis 1990 -> | technological determinism |
|---|---|
| limitation of data to the spatial | |
| standardisation of sites, emphasis on settlements | |
| ahistorical landscape assumed | |
| environmental and economic concerns pre-eminent | |
| attraction of pictorial result | |
| limited to two dimensional | |
| static data, no allowance for change over time | |
| misleading accuracy of data, possibility of compounding errors |
| C/ Analysis of Māori Settlements | people do not live in a bounded space |
|---|---|
| people do not have exclusive use of all resources around settlements | |
| people do not belong to a single political alliance | |
| people are not sedentary and do not have a permanent base |