Pros and Cons of Different Approaches

Each potential approach to the interpretive website has distinctive advantages and drawbacks. This page outlines the pros and cons of each of the four approaches profiled on the previous pages.

Approach	Pros	Cons
Basic	Easy to create and maintain Makes the maps available in a neutral format for users to download and use as they wish	Lack of explanatory and interpretive information may make the maps less useful Sponsor has little influence over how users apply or interpret the maps
Descriptive	Easy to create and maintain while providing more contextual information than the basic approach Makes the maps available in a relatively neutral format	Lack of interpretation or analysis of the maps may make the maps less useful Sponsor has limited influence over how users apply or interpret the maps
Comprehensive	Serves as a flexible resource for a wide range of users Provides an analytical framework for understanding the maps without prescribing the policy solutions	Costly and time consuming to create and maintain  Analysis must be updated whenever the data and maps are updated
Advocacy Oriented	Interpretation strategically frames the maps to maximize the equity atlas's policy impact Action oriented	Stakeholders who do not agree with the advocacy framework may dismiss the maps Users may have difficulty applying the maps to other issues or uses