Building upon the maps in the previous post we also created a gridded cartogram showing the national per capita emissions joined with the earlier introduced population grids. The resulting map gives an indication of the areas where most carbon emissions are produced beyond country boundaries:
Carbon dioxide emissions are gaining yet another boost of attention in the countdown to the Copenhagen climate change summit. We took that as an opportunity to update our worldmapper carbon emissions map with more recent figures. The most reliable figures are compiled in the UNStats MDG reports providing global data for 2006. Using this dataset, we calculated the new Carbon Emissions Map, resizing the territories according to the proportion of carbon dioxide emissions (note: see more maps here):
Furthermore, we did some calculations to show the real dimension of CO2 emissions by the population in each of the countries (or territories). We re-coloured the previous map with per capita greenhouse gas emissions. These give us an indication how the major polluters compare related to their population’s individual levels of emissions:
Finally, any agreements in Copenhagen will be compared to what the Kyoto protocol proposed some 17 years ago. This refers to the 1990 levels of CO2 emissions, which we put on a third map: Again, we took the per capita consumption as a base for the colours, rather than the change in total emissions. In this map we can see which countries have improved their carbon dioxide footprint on an indiviual level copared to the per capita emissions in 1990 and which have changed for the worse:
Population densities can of course be mapped differently – obviously using common density maps. They can give a better clue where densities are highest, but they can hardly show what is behind those numbers: What does a certain density really mean? How many are the many that are living in the more dense areas? And how do those compare to other populated areas? This is what a cartogram can show far better – and also show more true, when mapping human-related figures.
The following map shows a density map compared to our UK population cartogram. None of these maps is worse or better, it all depends on the purpose what you want to show, so that our new maps do not supersede traditional mapping approaches…
In the last series of maps we are now doing a more indepth look at the German general election results. The following maps are all based on the second vote (Zweitstimme) and map these in various ways. To get a more precise view on what the majority of people decided for on the ballot, this time more than one party is mapped. This makes the maps more complex, but with the distinct colour scheme they remain understandable and show the results in a more differentiated manner. Click each map to get a closer view (in these maps quite important as colours might appear blurry in the shrinked maps shown on this page).
Except for the last two, all maps use the previously introduced population cartogram as their main projection, so that the proportions show the real population distribution.
On the first map, the largest parties in each constituency are included up to at least 50% of the votes. Usually these are the 1st and 2nd largest party – only few exceptions can be seen in the south, where CSU managed to get more than 50% of the votes in some areas:
Here comes a view on the first and second vote results: The two opposing maps show the party which got the most votes in a constituency, with he first vote (Erststimme) shown on the left and the second vote (Zweitstimme) on the right map (see the previous post or look here for more information on the German electoral system). Click the map for a larger view:
Both maps reveal the important role of CDU/CSU and (much less but still) SPD in the west, whereas DIE LINKE has this status in most of East Germany (including East Berlin). DIE LINKE’s dominance in the east is relativised by the lower population density in that part of Germany, as this projection reveals very well (see here for a conventional map of the election). In some constituencies in the west, SPD could manage to win a direct seat in parliament via the first vote, while the second vote went to CDU, mostly caused by strategic voters in favour of a more left politics and thus giving their first vote to the assumed more successful SPD candidate instead of their own favourite party.
However, further differences between the winners of first and second vote can not be seen from those maps.
From the previous posts you should now be quite familiar with Germany’s “new” shape when putting the population in perspective. If you are still struggling with it, try this map to see some important cities labelled on top of the map.
Let’s have a look at the results of the general election in Germany and start with the direct candidates elected to the new parliament. Due to the specific German voting system, each voter has two votes: one for a specific candidate in his constituency (and only one is elected per constituency), and a second vote for the party in favour. Those two votes can be for different parties. So the first vote reflects the MPs party affiliation for those elected directly to parliament.
And this is the map from the so called first vote (“Erststimme”) – click it for a larger view:
It can be seen, that FDP – the most likely new coalition partner of CDU/CSU – did not get any direct candidate elected at all, which is partly caused by the German electoral system that advantages the bigger parties for this vote (but balances this with the second vote).
But we wouldn’t need the map on the right side to see this. The map on the right side has much more interpretative value for those not familiar with the country’s structure: Pleasing for SPD supporters might be the effect of the high population density in the Ruhr-Area, blowing up the red patch in the west of Germany considerably and showing that there are still people left (!) to vote for their local SPD candidate. Pretty well shown is also the East-West division within Berlin, making the former Berlin Wall nowadays the border between DIE LINKE voters and the CDU/SPD part of the city (though SPD mostly is a matter of the suburban ring outside the western part of Berlin). Here our new map also shows clearly the only direct mandate of DIE GRUENEN – hardly recognizable on the conventional map.
There is much more to discover on this map…