EvalCompassEvalCompass
Analysis & synthesisGISGeographical differencesAccess analysisVisualizationAdministrative data

Geospatial Analysis and GIS Mapping

Geospatial Analysis and GIS Mapping
Also known as: GIS analysis、Spatial analysis、Mapping

Combines location and area characteristics to examine distances to services and differences in reach between areas. Align map design and aggregation units with the question. [1] [2]

Geospatial analysis and GIS mapping plan — openReferences and checked sections
Difficulty
Intermediate
Cost
Low
Duration
Planning example, not a universal standard duration: a few days–3 weeks, including data preparation, geocoding and visualization
Content updated: 2026-09-13Source checked: 2026-09-13 (includes AI cross-checking)No documented human reviewIncludes fictional examples

How it works at a glance

When comparing areas, distinguish counts, population-based rates and density per area. Choose choropleth maps, proportional symbols or other displays appropriate to the quantities compared, and specify denominators, dates and classifications. [1]

Detailed location data risk identifying individuals. Consider necessary precision and publication units, and do not infer conditions of small or hard-to-reach groups solely from area averages. [2]

  1. Define spatial questions
  2. Prepare location data
  3. Overlay base maps and characteristics
  4. Analyze catchments, distance and density
  5. Examine disparities and hypotheses
  6. Explain map interpretation and limitations
Sequence of implementation steps. See “Implementation steps” for details of each stage.

When to use it and when it is unsuitable

When to use it

  • When examining the distribution of service users, facilities, support centers or community resources
  • When evaluating area differences or places not reached
  • When examining spatial bias in local government, health, education, disaster prevention or community welfare programs
  • When visually communicating geographical issues to decision-makers

When it is unsuitable

  • When location data are absent and area differences are irrelevant to evaluation questions
  • When arrangements to protect and aggregate detailed personal addresses safely are unavailable

Participants, roles, and deliverables

Participants and roles

Evaluators, GIS or data staff, field managers and personal information managers. Basic QGIS or similar skills are useful.

Main deliverables

  • Service reach map
  • Area use rate and resource allocation analysis
  • Unreached areas and possible improvements

Implementation steps

  1. Define spatial questions
    Clarify questions for maps, such as where disparities exist, who lives far away and whether resource allocation is appropriate.
  2. Prepare location data
    Standardize addresses, coordinates, area codes and facility names. Minimize personal information and consider aggregation units.
  3. Overlay base maps and characteristics
    Overlay contextual data needed for interpretation, including administrative boundaries, population, income, aging rates, transport and facilities.
  4. Analyze catchments, distance and density
    Examine distances from facilities, catchments by walking, car or public transport, service user density and area-specific use rates.
  5. Examine disparities and hypotheses
    Consider whether gaps and hotspots relate to demand, supply, communications, transport or eligibility requirements.
  6. Explain map interpretation and limitations
    Note aggregation units, missingness, estimates and disclosure protection impacts. Do not infer causation from a map alone.

Strengths and limitations

Strengths

  • Intuitively shows geographical disparities and gaps in reach.
  • Useful for improving resource placement and outreach areas.
  • Integrates administrative, facility and survey data.
  • Often easier for stakeholders to understand than numerical tables in reports or briefings.

Limitations

  • Results vary substantially with location accuracy and aggregation units.
  • Maps show correlations or distributions, not direct proof of causes.
  • Personal information and small-area data require careful disclosure protection.

Common pitfalls

  • Producing an attractive map without answering evaluation questions
  • Do not confuse counts with population-based reach rates. Choose counts, rates or density according to the purpose, and specify denominators and coverage.
  • Creating re-identification risks by displaying detailed personal addresses

Conditions of use and evidence

  • Distinguish map counts from rates and consider identification risks from publishing location data. [1] [2]
Fictional example; not actual results

Map consultation counts and use rates

A fictional illustrative example with invented eligible and user populations for 2 districts.

DistrictEligible population / service usersUse rate
District A1,000 people / 100 people10%
District B200 people / 40 people20%

Common errors in judgment

Common mistake

Assuming areas with more cases have better access

How to revise

Also check eligible populations, needs and transport conditions.

ReasonA larger population alone can increase counts.

Common mistake

Publishing address points directly

How to revise

Define aggregation and disclosure protection units first.

ReasonSupport use and characteristics may become linked to individuals.

Organize your thinking by writing

Geospatial analysis and GIS mapping plan

A practical template is available to fill in and print on A4 paper.

Open worksheet

Related methods

Data VisualizationDescriptive Statistics and Cross-tabulationSecondary Data AnalysisEquity-Focused EvaluationPerformance Measurement

References and checked sections

  1. Normalization for choropleth maps
    Heather Smith／Esri · 2025
    Section consulted
    Video #1: Choropleth maps versus graduated symbols; Video #2; Video #3
    How it relates to the text
    Distinguish map counts from rates and consider identification risks from publishing location data.
    Source checked: (includes AI cross-checking)
  2. Technical Note on the inclusion of hard-to-reach populations and children in evaluations
    Sofiya Yuvshanova／UNICEF ECARO · 2025
    Section consulted
    Executive summary; Table 2: Dimensions of equity-focused evaluations
    How it relates to the text
    Distinguish map counts from rates and consider identification risks from publishing location data.
    Source checked: (includes AI cross-checking)

Editorial and checking information

Content updated: Source checked: (includes AI cross-checking)No documented human reviewIncludes fictional examplesEditorial policy and scope of checkingCite this pageReport a correction

How to cite this page

EvalCompass Editorial Team. “Geospatial Analysis and GIS Mapping”. EvalCompass, updated 2026-09-13. https://evalcompass.jun-nakatani.com/en/methods/geospatial-analysis/
Add the date you accessed the page. Text created by this site is available under CC BY 4.0. Quotations, external materials, and bundled fonts have their own terms of use. When reusing content, credit the source, link to the license, and indicate any changes.

Suggest a correction or improvement to this page

Change history
  • — Checked sources for definitions and applicability conditions, and added fictional examples, reasons for judgments and examples for every worksheet field. Revised unverified claims about history and adoption. Also reviewed existing procedures and cautions, and adjusted fixed participant counts and thresholds and generalizations about institutions.