You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
I am hoping to superimpose the district shape file on the Assembly Constituencies (ACs) shapefiles. While I understand that ACs are almost never a hundred percent in one district or for that matter have the same boundaries, there seem to be large shift across most AC boundaries. This is especially the case when I merge it with other datasets that use GPS coordinates. I have attached a screenshot (Red is AC and black is district boundaries).
I know you had mentioned a shift in data, could you elaborate on that?
Also, could you let me know which AC names are entered wrong?
Thanks a lot!
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Yes, it's an issue that folks in the social sciences have been trying to figure out how to deal with for years; there's been a long history of different solutions discussed in Economic and Political Weekly. So far the best I've seen is the solution Subramanian et al used in their paper. Here's one from their team detailing their method: https://cga-download.hmdc.harvard.edu/publish_web/CGA_PDF_Maps/DI_LIV_19_110519_Jeffrey_C_Blossom.pdf
Hi,
I am hoping to superimpose the district shape file on the Assembly Constituencies (ACs) shapefiles. While I understand that ACs are almost never a hundred percent in one district or for that matter have the same boundaries, there seem to be large shift across most AC boundaries. This is especially the case when I merge it with other datasets that use GPS coordinates. I have attached a screenshot (Red is AC and black is district boundaries).

I know you had mentioned a shift in data, could you elaborate on that?
Also, could you let me know which AC names are entered wrong?
Thanks a lot!
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: