How to use VGI for building resilience by improving preparedness and reducing risk?
Oct 29th, 2014 by j0p
By J. Kramp
Resilience in the case of a disaster is described by the MCEE as: “reduced probability of system failure, reduced consequences due to failure, and reduced time to system restoration.” (vgl. MCEE, 2014) All this is the goal to be achieved through experimental socio-technological changes like Volunteered Geographic Information (VGI).
A case study in Nepal in the Kathmandu Valley will provide some real life experience to illuminate the role VGI’s played in the conducted action research project Open Cities Kathmandu. Most of the area in the Valley is highly at risk. The idea was to experiment with new socio-technical platforms like Open Street Map (OSM). These platforms have the huge advantage of being openly accessible but the experimental/challenging part is the contribution and involvement of digital Volunteers. To reach the affected people and involve them, the team contacted mostly universities and technical communities on site to have them operate on a grassroots level. This is already a big step in order to build sustainable resilience. Especially Universities had the potential to stick with the project and sustain in updating the data for the information system. To win more participants the project organized several introductory presentations and mapping parties. The Web2.0 with all its facets like Twitter, Facebook and other social media was used for major participation and communication (vgl. Soden, et al.).
By implementing this new technological strategy, it is possible that the staff in a medical center gets the information where damage, road-blockings and so on, are. Beyond that they also tried to tackle the stage of preparedness. They raised awareness by making information publicly available which could be used for planning and coordination purposes. This improved preparedness can be seen as a factor to reduce risk by being able to respond quicker in the aftermath of disasters (vgl. Soden, et al.).
Another step to resilience is creating a disaster risk model to determine the vulnerability of buildings in the area of affection. It can be used for examining which schools and health facilities need retrofits for structural integrity in case of an earthquake. By securing the building structures the risk of destruction might be reduced (vgl. Soden et al.).
The use of VGI’s enables you to reach your goal of building resilience and preparedness (“reduced probability of system failure, reduced consequences due to failure, and reduced time to system restoration.”). The digital map created, assists in case of a hazard and therefore helps minimizing a system failure and in the worst case scenario it can help reducing the consequences. A detailed map is also essential for the system restoration. Covering all these aspects VGI’s seem to have a very bright future in the disaster risk management even though the conductors of the Nepal project discovered some challenges. The final use of the collected data is not ideal because politics have not realized the importance of the information and tend to not use it (vgl. Soden, et al.). Interesting research questions for example would be:
How can VGI’s gain more influence in decision-making (e.g. retrofits)?
How to make needed technology available in the area of risk?
Readings:
Soden, R./ Budhathoki, N./ Palen, L. (2014): Resilience-Building and the Crisis Informatics Agenda: Lessons Learned from Open Cities Kathmandu. Proceedings of the 11th International ISCRAM Conference. Online unter: https://elearning2.uni-heidelberg.de/pluginfile.php/261877/mod_resource/content/1/SodenBudhathokiPalen-ISCRAMKathmandu.pdf (zuletzt abgerufen am 26.10.2014).
Alexander von Humboldt Foundation (2012): AGORA - An open Geospatial Participatory Architecture for Building Resilience against Disasters and Climate Change Impacts. Combining Participatory Environmental Monitoring and Vulnerability Communication. Online unter: http://people.ufpr.br/~tobias.dhs/aeba/seminario/13-JoaoP.pdf (zuletzt abgerufen am 26.10.2014).
Horita, F. E. A./ Albuquerque, J. P. de (2013): An Approach to Support Decision-Making in Disaster Management based on Volunteer Geographic Information (VGI) and Spatial Decision Support Systems (SDSS). Proceedings of the 10th International ISCRAM Conference. Online unter: http://www.iscramlive.org/ISCRAM2013/files/221.pdf (zuletzt abgerufen am 26.10.2014).
MCEER (2014): MCEER’s Resilience Framework. Resilient Concept Drives Development of New Knowledge, Tools &Technology. Online unter: http://mceer.buffalo.edu/research /resilience/resilience_10-24-06.pdf (zuletzt abgerufen am 26.10.2014).
Hello,
first of all thank you for your post. It is really understandable.
The project you presented is interesting and I think that with it the possibility to increase the resilience in the Kathmandu valley exists. Nevertheless I want to comment on the first question you mentioned, because in my opinion it is very important:
“How can VGI’s gain more influence in decision-making (e.g. retrofits)?”
Like you can read in the paper this project was initiated by the World Bank in cooperation with the Government of Nepal. Hence it is a project supported by the politics on national level. Therefore I wonder why “the linkages to disaster response planning within the Government of Nepal remains relatively weak […]” (Soden et al.).
So the data exists right now, and including is of high quality (and therefore should be trusted). There should not be a reason, why not to pay attention to it and to use it. Maybe the problem is elsewhere (e.g. in the inclusion of the local authorities). But here it is only possible to speculate.
What I want to say is that the gathered data are useful and they can help, but that there might be problems in the approach of the project itself and not in the data.
Greetings,
Dirk
Good overview of the paper - thanks.
I approve with the thought that prevention and mitigation have to play a mayor role in disaster mapping, disaster management and VGI. During a disaster other things are more important than mapping - all the foundations like the drawing up of basemaps should happen before a disaster strikes.
Nevertheless there is one thing about VGI I struggle with:
Most people in poorly maped regions are usually poor (I couldn’t find exact numbers but as far as I know Kathmandu isn’t very wealthy). Thus they are vulnerable to destruction by disaster. Of course having maps available is helpful but it is not the reason for the vulnerability. Creating free, up-to-date and detailed maps for the world is certainly important but it shouldn’t cover up the basic problem of poverty.
What do you think?
Thank you Charlotte and Dirk!
@ Dirk
I agree with you a hundred percent! They did not built the needed structures to use the data properly. I believe that the sponsorship by the World Bank only financed the process of collecting. But it should have also been concerned with the follow up work (disaster response planing)! Like you said, it is only possible to speculate why the data was not used right after finishing the project. I agree that the project should have included a deeper involment of the Nepali government. Despite that it was a step in the right direction. It helped establishing a local mapping community which can lobby for more attention and can try to raise awareness for the need of the data for disaster response planing.
@Charlotte
I am sorry , I am not sure if I understood you… Yes you are completely right, it does not “cure” poverty. But this is not the point of VGI. It only helps to assure the status quo and tries to support the process of getting back to that situation.
Please correct me if I understood you wrong!
Thank you both for commenting!