PDF Summary:Scale, by Geoffrey West

How do cities grow? Why do some organisms thrive while others struggle? In Scale, physicist Geoffrey West reveals the mathematical patterns that govern everything from urban development to metabolism. Drawing on his groundbreaking research at the Santa Fe Institute, West shows how all complex systems—from organisms to organizations—follow predictable scaling laws that determine their success and survival.

This guide explores West’s insights about how networks shape our world while adding perspectives from Indigenous knowledge, historical examples, and modern urban experiments. You’ll learn why understanding slime mold networks can help us design more efficient subway systems, why we can’t engineer animals larger than blue whales, and what medieval cities reveal about sustainable growth. Whether you’re interested in making your community more resilient, understanding how organizations really work, or discovering the hidden mathematics of life itself, our guide offers tools for seeing the world in a new way.

(continued)...

West explains that the same kind of networks occur not only in nature but also in the complex systems that we build. For instance, engineers and designers lay out roads, power lines, and water pipes in hierarchical branching networks that distribute resources from central supply points to individual buildings. At each level of these hierarchies, the capacity—to carry cars, electricity, or water—scales down geometrically as the branches grow smaller. For example, a few major highways feed into larger arterial roads, which further branch into smaller residential streets leading to individual homes.

The space-filling architecture of hierarchical branching networks creates economies of scale as a city’s size increases. Increasing an infrastructure network’s capacity requires extending the network, but not building new systems from scratch. For example, adding a new neighborhood only requires extending existing roads, power lines, and water lines from the nearest branches, rather than building new systems.

What Slime Molds Can Teach Us About Network Efficiency

Nature has been solving network optimization problems for hundreds of millions of years and sometimes does it better than we do. Scientists have discovered that a brainless organism called Physarum polycephalum—a type of slime mold—creates transport networks that are often more efficient than human-designed systems. When researchers modeled Toronto’s subway system using slime mold principles, they found the resulting network could be 40% more resilient to disruption while maintaining the same travel times.

This research highlights West’s point about how networks grow efficiently. Like city infrastructure, slime molds create space-filling networks by extending existing pathways rather than building new systems from scratch. They start by “foraging broadly” before refining their network to optimize nutrient transport, similar to how cities expand their infrastructure broadly into new areas and then optimize those connections over time.

West explains that even human social networks show a similar hierarchical, modular structure: We make strong connections with a small core group (about five people) and have larger but more weakly tied groups of about 15, 50, and 150 people. The flow of information and the strength of bonds diminish through these levels. (Shortform note: As previously noted, the hierarchical structure of human social networks that West describes—with groups of roughly 5, 15, 50, and 150 people—is known as “Dunbar's number.”)

The Fractal Pattern

West explains that hierarchical branching networks often mimic a pattern mathematicians call “fractals.” To understand fractals, imagine looking at a tree in winter: First, you might look at the whole tree and see a pattern of branches splitting into smaller branches. Then, if you zoom in on just one branch, you’ll see the same pattern repeated: branches splitting into smaller branches. Then, if you zoom in on an even smaller branch, the pattern appears yet again.

This self-repeating pattern is called “self-similarity,” and it’s a defining feature of fractals. While perfect fractals (like those created by mathematicians) repeat infinitely, natural systems show this pattern across multiple, but not infinite, scales. It’s from these self-repeating patterns that scaling laws governing metabolic rate, growth, lifespan, and other biological traits emerge.

Self-Similarity and the Coastline Paradox

The difference that West points out between mathematical and natural fractals is illustrated by what mathematicians call “the coastline paradox.” When you try to measure a coastline, something strange happens: The longer your measuring stick gets, the shorter the coastline becomes. Use a yard-long ruler, and you’ll get one length; use a foot-long ruler, and you’ll capture more of the ins and outs, getting a longer measurement; use an inch-long ruler, and the coastline grows even longer. This paradox illuminates both the self-similarity that West describes and why natural fractals aren’t infinite.

Just as zooming in on a tree branch reveals smaller versions of the same branching pattern, zooming in on a coastline reveals smaller versions of the same jagged pattern. But while mathematical fractals can continue this pattern forever, natural fractals eventually reach a limit: You can’t meaningfully measure a coastline at the atomic level, just as tree branches don’t keep splitting infinitely. Nature uses fractal-like patterns because they’re efficient, but it adapts them to practical constraints—just as cities might use branching patterns for their roads but naturally find a point where paving smaller streets no longer makes sense.

Why Nature Loves This Design

West explains that the patterns networks follow evolved through natural selection because they’re incredibly efficient. The fractal, hierarchical branching structure solves several problems at once: It minimizes the energy needed to distribute resources. It maximizes the coverage of space (whether that’s blood reaching cells or roads reaching buildings). Plus, it allows systems to grow without having to rebuild their entire infrastructure.

This efficiency explains why we see similar patterns across such different domains. In organisms, the circulatory system uses this design to efficiently deliver blood. In cities, transportation networks use it to efficiently get people and goods to where they need to go. In companies, communication networks form these patterns to share information.

Why Humans Love Fractals, Too

While West explains that nature selects fractal patterns because they’re efficient, research suggests humans might be hardwired to prefer them. As Florence Williams writes in The Nature Fix, Jackson Pollock’s beloved abstract paintings contain the same fractal patterns found in nature. These patterns have a measurable calming effect on viewers, which might explain why Pollock’s paintings draw such a crowd at a museum. When people look at fractal patterns with the right level of complexity (neither too simple nor too chaotic), they experience reduced stress levels and increased alpha brain waves associated with wakeful relaxation.

The reason for this response might lie in how our visual system evolved. Our eyes naturally scan environments in fractal patterns, first taking in large elements, and then making smaller passes in similar patterns. This “fractal scanning” matches the branching patterns we see in nature, from trees to coastlines. We feel a stress-reducing effect when the fractal structure of the image we’re viewing matches the fractal structure our eyes prefer. This might explain why we see these patterns repeated across human design, from Gothic cathedrals to modern architecture—we’re instinctively drawn to patterns that our brains evolved to comprehend.

The Result: Universal Scaling Laws

West explains that because networks as diverse as biological circulatory systems, urban transportation networks, and corporate communication networks share such fundamental properties, they lead to predictable scaling patterns. This explains why we can predict an animal’s metabolic rate just from its size, regardless of species; why cities show consistent patterns in everything from road surface area to innovation rates, regardless of location or culture; and why social networks develop similar hierarchical structures, whether in small towns or major metropolises.

Since universal scaling laws are a consequence of network characteristics, they give us a mathematical framework to see the simplicity underlying complex organisms and networks. Using this mathematical framework, scientists can make precise, testable predictions about biological quantities (like metabolic rate, growth curves, and lifespans) based solely on an organism’s size, transcending the specifics of anatomy or taxonomy. They can also apply this knowledge on larger scales, using it to learn about the fundamental constraints and tradeoffs that shaped the evolution of life.

The same idea applies to experts who study and work to improve human systems, like cities. Cities as diverse as New York, Tokyo, and São Paulo, with vastly different histories and cultures, all exhibit similar scaling patterns in metrics like infrastructure, wages, innovation, and crime rates. This highlights how universal scaling laws originate from the common network dynamics underlying all cities, rather than being influenced by specific local contexts.

What Scaling Laws Tell Us About the Nature of Math

The predictive power of scaling laws that West describes was recently demonstrated in a study of biochemical networks across Earth’s biosphere. Scientists discovered that the same mathematical patterns appear whether you’re looking at the biochemical network of a single bacterium or an entire ecosystem—and these patterns are so consistent that scientists can predict with over 80% accuracy which domain of life (bacteria, archaea, or eukarya) an organism belongs to just from analyzing its network structure.

This research reveals that universal scaling laws don’t just describe patterns: They also reveal fundamental constraints that shape how systems can organize themselves. These patterns emerge because all living things share a common set of biochemical reactions, but they organize them in distinctly different ways. So while these laws transcend specific contexts (appearing in organisms, ecosystems, and the entire biosphere), they’re also precise enough to distinguish major evolutionary divisions within these levels.

These universal yet discriminating patterns also raise a question about mathematics itself: Are we discovering mathematical laws that existed before us, or are we merely inventing useful tools to describe what we observe? The fact that the same scaling patterns appear at every level of biological organization might suggest these laws are fundamental features of reality waiting to be discovered. Yet as mathematician Reuben Hersh argues in What Is Mathematics, Really?, even our most abstract mathematical concepts arise from basic human experience.

Perhaps the answer lies somewhere in between. Just as our brains evolved the ability to perceive color because it helped us navigate a world where color distinctions matter, we might have evolved to recognize mathematical patterns because they reflect real constraints on how systems organize themselves. In this view, scaling laws aren’t just human inventions, but they’re also not purely abstract truths: They’re tools our minds have developed to understand the physical constraints that shape our universe.

How Can We Use This Network Perspective to Improve Our World?

West explains that understanding how networks shape our cities gives us powerful tools for improving them. His research suggests four key strategies:

1. Design Smarter Infrastructure Networks

First, West explains that cities can save enormous resources and make more efficient planning decisions by optimizing their physical networks. Because these networks follow sublinear scaling patterns, simply adding more infrastructure linearly (like doubling roads when the population doubles) is inefficient and unnecessary. Instead, cities should use their understanding of network scaling to make strategic improvements.

Transportation: Traditional approaches to traffic congestion often focus on adding capacity everywhere—widening roads or adding lanes across the system. However, West explains that this linear solution ignores how traffic flows through the hierarchical network of a city’s roads. Instead, planners can analyze traffic patterns to identify critical bottlenecks where the hierarchical network breaks down. For example, a city might reduce congestion dramatically by adding just a few strategic connector roads between major arteries, allowing traffic to flow more efficiently through the entire system.

Utilities: The same principle applies to water, power, and other utility systems. When cities need to expand these services, West recommends using network analysis to identify the most efficient points for expansion. For example, rather than laying new pipes along every street in a growing area, a city might be able to accommodate 20% more residents while adding only 5% more pipelines by carefully analyzing where new main lines would have the greatest impact on the system’s overall capacity.

Public Services: West explains that emergency services also function as networks, and their effectiveness depends more on their structure than their size. Instead of simply adding more facilities, cities can use network modeling to optimize their existing resources. For instance, rather than building new fire stations, a city might significantly reduce emergency response times by repositioning existing stations based on population density and traffic patterns, creating more efficient routes between stations and high-risk areas, and coordinating responses between multiple stations to provide better coverage.

Have Cities Always Known How to Optimize Their Networks?

When West explains how cities can optimize their infrastructure through network analysis, he’s describing a relatively recent capability. Historical evidence reveals how cities have evolved in their ability to manage network efficiency. Medieval cities, lacking our mathematical understanding of network principles, often grew organically, creating irregular, seemingly inefficient patterns. Yet some medieval planners intuitively grasped network principles: The “new towns” of medieval Europe used gridded layouts similar to Roman colonies, suggesting an understanding that certain network patterns could facilitate growth better than others.

The Industrial Revolution marked a crucial shift in how cities could scale. The size of pre-industrial cities was limited by basic infrastructure constraints like water supply and waste removal. New technologies and mathematical understanding enabled different optimization strategies, but they also changed who controlled these networks: While medieval cities grew through what Adam Smith called the “invisible hand” of many individual decisions, industrial cities were increasingly shaped by centralized planning and corporate interests.

This history adds an important perspective to West’s insights about network optimization: While modern cities can use sophisticated analysis to optimize their transportation, utilities, and public services, they still face the same fundamental challenge that shaped medieval cities—how to distribute resources efficiently through networks that must serve everyone. What’s changed isn’t the basic problem, but our tools for solving it.

2. Create Spaces That Spark Connection

Second, West explains that since cities exhibit superlinear scaling in innovation and economic growth—driven by human interactions and information exchange—cities should deliberately design spaces that catalyze these connections. This isn’t just about creating pleasant environments; it’s about leveraging the mathematical advantage that comes from increasing social interactions in urban spaces.

Mixed-Use Development: Traditional urban planning often separates residential, commercial, and business areas from each other, which limits spontaneous interactions between people. In contrast, West points out that when cities convert several downtown streets into pedestrian zones that mix shops, cafes, and housing, they create multiple opportunities for unplanned encounters and collaborations. This increased social connectivity leads to measurable economic benefits.

Innovation Districts: Some cities have taken this concept further by deliberately combining research facilities, startups, and housing into “innovation districts.” West explains that this approach creates a powerful feedback loop: When researchers, entrepreneurs, and creative professionals live and work in proximity, the number of potential collaborative connections grows superlinearly. The result is often dramatic: Cities typically see a huge increase in patent applications from companies in these districts, far beyond what would be expected from simply gathering the same number of people in separate locations.

Public Spaces: West emphasizes that even simple infrastructure changes can trigger superlinear growth in social and economic activity if they increase connectivity between people. When cities create unbroken walking networks connecting neighborhoods, they’re not just building pleasant walkways: They create a continuous space for social interaction that links previously separated communities. This enhanced connectivity typically leads to a surge in local business formation along walking paths, as the increased foot traffic and social interactions create new economic opportunities.

Does Everyone Benefit Equally As a City Gets Bigger?

While West describes how cities generate increasing returns through social connections, recent research reveals that these benefits aren’t equally shared. Scientists studying urban scaling have discovered that the superlinear growth of cities is largely driven by a small elite. As cities get bigger, the gap between top performers and everyone else grows wider.

This finding challenges our understanding of how cities create value. The very features that make cities engines of innovation and economic growth—like clustering talent in innovation districts or mixing different groups in public spaces—appear to disproportionately benefit those already at the top. In fact, many people in a city may be partially or totally excluded from the socioeconomic benefits of this growth.

This inequality isn’t just a side effect: It’s fundamental to how cities scale. Researchers found that 36-80% of cities’ superlinear growth comes from increasing inequality rather than overall improvement. This suggests that when we design spaces to “spark connection,” as West recommends, we need specific strategies to ensure that these spaces serve everyone. For example, cities can locate innovation hubs near public transit lines, design public spaces that accommodate multiple uses (from informal markets to community gatherings), and ensure new developments include both affordable housing and shared community spaces. The goal is to create networks of connection that bridge social divides rather than reinforce them.

3. Balance Growth’s Costs and Benefits

Third, West explains that cities face a fundamental challenge: The same superlinear scaling that produces increased innovation and wealth also amplifies negative outcomes like crime and disease transmission. Understanding this mathematical reality means cities must actively manage both the advantages and disadvantages of urban scaling, rather than assuming growth will automatically solve problems.

Crime Prevention: West points out that larger cities have disproportionately more crime—not just more total crime, but more crime per capita than smaller cities. This is a predictable result of superlinear scaling: The increased social connectivity that drives innovation also creates more opportunities for criminal activity. Understanding network principles helps cities respond more effectively. Instead of adding more police officers in proportion to population growth (a linear response to a superlinear problem), cities can use network analysis to identify critical points where criminal networks intersect and focus on these “hot spots.”

(Shortform note: Some experts say that focusing on crime “hot spots” reinforces systemic inequalities. As Ruha Benjamin notes in Race After Technology, algorithms and data analysis often encode existing biases: When cities use historical crime data to predict future crime, they risk creating self-fulfilling prophecies that reinforce patterns of over-policing in minority neighborhoods. Some cities have found it more equitable to combine network analysis with community input. Rather than just analyzing crime networks, they map community assets and social support networks, then strengthen positive connections through targeted investment in public spaces, youth programs, and economic opportunities.)

Public Health: The Covid-19 pandemic demonstrated how disease transmission also scales superlinearly with city size. Larger cities experienced faster spread rates per capita than smaller ones. West explains that cities that understand how networks affect public health are better equipped to manage an infectious disease crisis.

For example, Seoul, South Korea used network analysis to identify and respond to transmission clusters, tracking how infections spread through different locations and age groups. Finding that certain venues (like nightclubs and churches) and age groups (people in their 20s) created disproportionately more connections, Seoul implemented targeted interventions rather than blanket policies. This network-based approach helped the city maintain relatively low disease transmission rates while keeping other parts of the city functioning.

(Shortform note: When cities optimize their networks, they may need to consider not just efficiency but equity and shared vulnerability. As Eula Biss explains in On Immunity, public health depends on understanding ourselves as part of “a greater body composed of many bodies.” This perspective transforms how we think about urban health networks: Public health measures work like other urban infrastructure, creating shared resources that protect everyone, but especially the most vulnerable. What looks like individual choice—whether to get vaccinated, or in cities’ case, whether to invest in public health measures—is actually a form of participation in collective well-being.)

Economic Opportunity: While cities generate more economic opportunity per capita as they grow, West explains that these benefits are often distributed unevenly. This happens because economic opportunities cluster in certain areas (like business districts or innovation hubs) while other neighborhoods become structurally isolated due to physical barriers (like highways or rivers), inadequate public transit connections, or historical patterns of disinvestment.

The network features that make cities efficient can inadvertently create “opportunity deserts” in areas that lack good connections to these hubs. However, cities can use network analysis to identify isolated neighborhoods and strategically add connections to their transportation network, effectively connecting more people to job opportunities without building entirely new transportation systems.

(Shortform note: The isolation of American neighborhoods often reflects deliberate design choices. A famous example is Robert Moses’s Long Island parkway system: Moses built bridges on the Southern State Parkway significantly lower than other parkways of the same era, making it harder for buses—the primary transport for poor and minority residents—to access Jones Beach. Historians debate whether this design was intentionally discriminatory, but it demonstrates how infrastructure choices can create lasting patterns of exclusion. When cities use network analysis to improve connections to public resources and economic opportunity today, they can consider how physical infrastructure has shaped access to opportunity.)

Beyond Efficiency: What Mushrooms Can Teach Us About Cities

While West describes cities’ need to balance the benefits and costs of scaling, writers like Rebecca Solnit and Anna Tsing offer a deeper perspective on how communities actually navigate these tradeoffs. In The Mushroom at the End of the World, Tsing shows how matsutake mushrooms—which thrive in disturbed forests by forming networks with trees and other organisms—form resilient systems in disrupted environments. Unlike plantations, which create efficiency through standardization, matsutake mushrooms create value through diverse, adaptive connections. This offers a powerful metaphor for thinking about cities: While capitalism works by creating standardized conditions that can be scaled up, this often destroys the diverse relationships that make communities resilient.

Solnit illustrates this pattern in San Francisco’s transformation into a tech hub, which has created what she characterizes as “a kind of feudalism.” While network efficiencies benefit a small elite, they also create conditions that breed both privilege and crime. She notes how the same tech industry that produced billionaires also exacerbates the criminalization of poverty, which occurs when policies criminalize activities that people engage in to survive, like sleeping outside, driving without a license, or being unable to pay fines or fees. This pushes many less-privileged people to society’s margins, creating “vicious circles” between prison and homelessness.

Yet paradoxically, Solnit has also observed that the breakdown of social order when disasters strike creates openings for different kinds of connections. In A Paradise Built in Hell, she notes that in times of crisis, communities often develop new forms of mutual aid and solidarity precisely because the usual systems have failed. This suggests that addressing urban challenges like crime and inequality requires understanding cities not just as economic networks, but as social ecosystems where everyone’s well-being is interconnected. As Tsing’s work on “precarity”—the condition of being vulnerable—shows, human communities often develop their strongest connections when facing shared challenges.

4. Build for Sustainable Growth

Lastly, West explains that cities face a critical challenge rooted in their scaling patterns: While infrastructure becomes more efficient as cities grow (scaling sublinearly), resource consumption and waste production increase faster than population growth (scaling superlinearly). This means that bigger cities, despite their per-capita efficiency advantages, still use resources at an accelerating rate. Understanding this mathematical reality is crucial for designing sustainable urban systems.

Energy Networks: Traditional city energy systems are often designed linearly, with each building or block operating independently. However, West explains that cities can significantly reduce energy consumption by creating “superblocks”—groups of buildings that share resources and infrastructure in a networked way. This approach takes advantage of sublinear scaling: Just as larger organisms use proportionally less energy per unit of mass, these superblocks can achieve better efficiency than individual buildings operating alone—for example, by using excess heat from one building’s cooling system to heat another building’s water.

Circular Economy: West points out that cities typically consume resources and produce waste faster than their population growth would predict. City planners can counter this trend by using network analysis to map material flows and create closed-loop systems.

For example, some cities have mapped their construction material flows and created networks connecting demolition sites with new construction projects, allowing building materials to be reused rather than discarded. Others have created networks where one facility’s waste becomes another’s raw material, like using excess heat from data centers to warm greenhouses or converting food waste into compost for urban farms. By tracking how resources move through these networks, cities can identify opportunities to keep materials circulating in the economy rather than ending up in landfills.

Innovation Cycles: While increased resource consumption is a challenge of urban scaling, West explains that cities can leverage another scaling pattern—the superlinear growth of innovation—to address sustainability challenges. When cities put out calls for sustainability solutions, they tap into their dense networks of creative and technical professionals. For example, some cities have developed smart grid systems that reduce power consumption through collaborations between multiple groups: Utilities contribute their infrastructure expertise, tech companies develop the software, universities research optimal patterns of energy use, and residents provide real-time feedback through smart meters.

Beyond Sustainability: Indigenous Wisdom for Regenerative Cities

While West describes how cities need to balance efficiency with sustainability, indigenous knowledge offers insights into how urban systems might achieve true circularity. Indigenous economies have long operated on principles of regeneration and reciprocity, creating systems where, like in nature, there is no such thing as waste. This suggests that sustainable cities might need to do more than just optimize their networks; they’ll need to fundamentally reimagine their relationship with resources. This reimagining is particularly visible in how Indigenous communities approach energy networks, which they build in ways that won’t disrupt important cultural or ecological areas.

In Molokaʻi, Hawaii, residents are developing community-owned solar projects based on the principle that “the land is the chief, and we are the servants.” More than just creating efficient energy distribution, they’re building systems that prioritize long-term abundance and community control. For instance, the Hoʻahu Energy Cooperative allows community members to own solar panels and battery storage while the utility company maintains the power lines. This ensures that profits stay in the community and that decisions about energy infrastructure—like where to place solar arrays or how to price electricity—are made by the people who will live with those choices, in ways that prioritize reciprocity with the environment.

This focus on reciprocity goes beyond mere sustainability. As Robin Wall Kimmerer argues in The Serviceberry, seeing natural resources as gifts rather than commodities transforms our relationship with them. While sustainability often means maintaining what we have, reciprocity involves actively giving back and helping systems thrive. For cities, this might mean designing energy networks that actively regenerate natural systems instead of just minimizing harm—like Molokaʻi’s vision of making resources “abundant in perpetuity.”

Practical Implementation Steps

Systems and networks are complicated, and it can be difficult to imagine where to start if you want to improve your city or town. West suggests communities start by:

1. Mapping their current networks (physical, social, and economic)
2. Measuring how different variables scale as the city grows
3. Identifying where network breakdowns create inefficiencies
4. Testing small-scale interventions before scaling up
5. Continuously monitoring and adjusting based on network metrics

West emphasizes that we don’t have to choose between growth and sustainability. By understanding and working with network principles, we can help our communities grow more efficiently by optimizing existing networks, fostering innovation while managing responsible resource use, creating connected communities while reducing environmental impact, and building resilience through redundancy in critical systems.

The key is to use network science not just to understand cities, but to shape their development in ways that enhance both human flourishing and environmental sustainability. By recognizing the universal dynamics at play, cities can better navigate the tensions between efficiency, connectivity, and sustainability, paving the way for more livable, resilient, and equitable urban environments.

Getting Started: A Community Guide to Network Thinking

While West’s principles about networks and scaling might seem abstract, communities are already using them to create positive change. Consider how a neighborhood group might apply these ideas to improve their local food system:

Mapping Networks: Start by identifying existing connections. Where do people currently get their food? What infrastructure (like roads and public transit) connects people to food sources? What social networks (like community groups or mutual aid organizations) already exist? Free mapping tools like Google My Maps can help visualize these networks. This step helps optimize existing networks by revealing resources you already have rather than building redundant systems.

Measuring Scale: Look for patterns as your community grows. Does food access improve or worsen in larger areas? Do some neighborhoods have better access than others? Local food policy councils often collect this data, or communities can gather it through surveys. Understanding these patterns helps create connected communities while reducing environmental impact by showing where shared resources could serve more people efficiently.

Finding Network Breakdowns: Where do systems fail? Common problems include “food deserts” where grocery stores are too far away or where public transit doesn’t connect to food sources. Tools like the USDA's Food Access Research Atlas can help identify these gaps. This analysis builds resilience through redundancy by identifying where backup systems are needed most.

Testing Solutions: Start small. A community garden or farmers’ market can serve as a pilot project to test how new connections affect the network. Organizations like the American Community Gardening Association offer resources for getting started. These pilots foster innovation while managing responsible resource use by testing sustainable approaches before scaling them up.

Monitoring Results: Track changes using simple metrics like the number of people served or the distance people travel for food. Share results through community newsletters or social media to build support. This feedback helps optimize existing networks by showing which improvements are working best.

The key is to start with what you can observe and measure in your own community, then use those insights to make strategic improvements to your local networks.