Greetings,
I read with interest about your project.
One sentence you quoted stumped me and I was wondering if you could
explain what was meant. I understand the mathematical concept, but
not with respect to coastlines.
"the measured length of coastlines tended toward infinity as the base
unit of measurement went to zero"
The crux of your work seems to be to support a hypothesis that
"Territorial borders differ from coastlines in that they are
defined, except in cases where they follow a geographical feature like
a river, rest of a mountain range etc., by a series of points between
which straight lines are assumed" to support the conclusion that "the
detail to which the border is measured is somewhat more inherent in
how the border is laid and less up to the measurer, as is the case
with coastlines".
I think you have to differentiate between seacoasts and other coasts
and then have to determine whether a border in a particular case is
synonymous with a coast. Some coastlines are defined, so not all
territorial borders differ from coastlines in that respect. Your
Portugal example seems to be either an outright error (typo or
something similar), or perhaps a situation where one party counted the
miles that a border extended into the sea and the other perhaps didn't
(i.e., stopped calculating at the coast). One must always establish
the calculating parameters. In the case of the US and Panama, the
border between the Zone and Panama was defined and it ran around the
"coast" (shoreline) of Gatun lake - and there are comically looking
maps attempt to draw a border around the lake. I'll post a
graphic of it here in a day or so; you'll get a kick out of it. It's
comical, because the lake is flushed every day to provide water for
the locks. The border follows the shoreline by treaty description,
which means the border is dynamic and can't be measured except with
respect to how it was at a given moment during the operation of the
canal.
Take the case of the former Spanish territory of Ifni - the
shore/coast wasn't part of the border - the border was out in the
Atlantic. The overall border length was dependent upon the Spanish
claims with respect to territorial waters, at least from the Spanish
view. The length of Ifni's border could be one length according to
the Spanish and another length according to the calculations of some
other state (or many other lengths according to many other states) if
the distance between the shore and the territorial sea limit was, to
the Spanish, 12 miles off shore but to the Ghana government, for
example, only 6 miles off shore. For a real good example of how
complex this can be, almost to absurdity, check the map of Namibia's
offshore possessions as they where when they belonged to Walvis Bay
(South Africa) vs. being SWA (later Namibian) territory
(http://exclave.info, under Walvis Bay).
Given the characteristics in the cases of Walvis Bay and the Canal
Zone that hinder calculation of a border length, how could the
calculation of border lengths be worthwhile and how could the time and
funds expended to do so result in value for money?
Regards
Len Nadybal
Washington DC
> >From: Kathryn Furlong <kathryn@P...>
> >Reply-To: Kathryn Furlong <kathryn@P...>
> >Subject: Re: Boundary Lengths
> >Date: Tue, 26 Mar 2002 14:23:56 +0000
> >
> >Hello,
> >
> >My name is Kathryn Furlong, I am a research assistant at the
International
> >Peace Research Institute (Oslo). I have recently completed
compiling the
> >data for the Boundary Dataset (a dataset of the world's territorial
> >boundary lengths and their changes since the Congress of Vienna
(1816)).
> >The lengths were compiled using historical maps and atlases and an
old-
> >fashioned mechanical cartographer's map measurer. I have compared
my
> >findings regarding contemporary boundary lengths with CIA 1996 and
Arc View
> >1992 data and found greater than 97% correlation in both cases.
There are
> >several boundary lengths (although they constitute a small
percentage),
> >however, that are significantly different (upwards of a 25% %
difference)
> >from either the CIA or GIS data. It is acknowledged that these data
are
> >approximations, as all measurements have been rounded to the 10s
digit. We
> >are hoping to publish this Boundary Dataset on the Internet in the
coming
> >months.
> >
> >
> >I am also seeking some advice/opinions on a boundary length matter.
> >Currently, I am in the process of finishing up the Boundary Dataset
report
> >and am addressing issues of boundary measurability. In the work of
Lewis
> >Fry Richardson (published posthumously in 1961) he found that the
measured
> >length of coastlines tended toward infinity as the base unit of
measurement
> >went to zero. This led him to hypothesize that, in the absence of
an
> >international agreement on a base unit of measurement,
discrepancies he had
> >noted between various published values on boundary length would
remain
> >common [this is quoted in Ashford (1985) Prophet or Professor? p
226].
> >Although he noted certain inconsistencies between territorial
border length
> >values (An example that Richardson found of this was the border
between
> >Spain and Portugal. Spanish authorities set the border at 987 km,
while
> >Portuguese authorities gave a value of 1214 km.), his research was
strictly
> >related to coastlines.
> >
> >I would like to address this problem of boundary measurement with
the idea
> >that: Territorial borders differ from coastlines in that they are
defined,
> >except in cases where they follow a geographical feature like a
river,
> >crest of a mountain range etc., by a series of points between which
> >straight lines are assumed, thus the detail to which the border is
measured
> >is somewhat more inherent in how the border is laid and less up to
the
> >measurer, as is the case with coastlines.
> >
> >I was wondering if this is in fact a true statement and if people
might be
> >able to recommend some literature that discusses the methodology of
> >international boundary delineation.
> >
> >Thank-you very much,
> >
> >Kathryn
>
>
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos:
> http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx