Call for Proposals – Critical Perspectives on Disaster Data

Summary

Data and information and communication technologies (ICTs) are central to how we understand disaster risks and impacts. Technologies and approaches ranging from crowdsourcing to drones to artificial intelligence are reshaping societal relationships to disaster, changing what we can know about them and the kinds of responses we can imagine. We know that these changes aren’t neutral. Decisions about what data to collect, how to collect it, how to analyze it, and how to share the results are expressions of politics and values as much as they are technical and practical. Yet we understand little about the consequences of these decisions for who and what receives protection from disasters, or assistance in their aftermath. An emerging area of interdisciplinary research is beginning to explore these questions in ways that develop a robust understanding of current practice and explore alternatives.

This call is designed to support early-career and non-academic researchers. Available funds will award up to 6 submissions at the level of $2,500 US each. Successful proposals will describe compelling research projects that offer fresh perspectives on the data and ICTs used to understand and respond to disasters and climate change. 

Examples of Relevant Topics

  • Promises and limits of participation – What do participatory practices, considered broadly to include crowdsourcing, citizen science, counter-mapping, participatory design, and action research, offer to expand the range of worldviews and imaginaries that are included in the design of disaster data.
  • Historical research – How can understanding the historical lineage of current data standards, technologies, and practices inform contemporary debates or expand our perspectives?
  • Uncertainty – Uncertainty is a central problem in disaster and climate data, but often narrowly conceived. How might we draw on recent work in the humanities and social sciences to better evaluate and cope with current challenges?
  • Decolonizing disaster studies – How might current approaches to disaster data relate to efforts to decolonize disaster studies?
  • Speculative & critical design – How can speculative and other critical design practices help to raise questions about current practices and imagine alternatives?

Eligibility & Award Requirements

We are specifically seeking to recognise late-stage PhD students from any discipline, early-career academics, and researchers in non-academic positions. Applicants from diverse backgrounds are encouraged. Awarded researchers will present the results of their work as part of an online symposium in mid 2021.

Submission Requirements

Short proposals should be submitted online by 12:00am on 12/09/2020 (Dec 09, 2020) AoT here: 

https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLScDTYw5UOkSBtMfKuCG9oE3K7cStFynAkPzXFweIfg5UrskEA/viewform

How the Funding Will be Issued

Selected submissions will receive direct payment from the fiscal sponsor of this grant, the Humanitarian OpenStreetMap Team (HOT). Awardees are responsible for any tax implications of these awards. Payment arrangements must be finalized by 12/21/2020.

Further Questions

Email: disasterdata@co-risk.org 

Rapid Assessment of Disaster-Induced Vulnerability in Nepal – Project Planning

Last month I spent a week in Nepal setting up an exciting project with collaborators at Kathmandu Living Labs. The project is funded through a “Collaborative Data Innovations for Sustainable Development” award by the World Bank and Global Partnership for Sustainable Development Data. Our proposal focused on better understanding the ways in which disaster impact is currently measured, and how it could be improved to foster more effective and equitable disaster recovery. There are two main aspects to this: (1) improving the statistical accuracy of post-disaster impact assessment using more and better data (e.g. remote-sensing, crowd-sourcing, rapid field surveys) and better statistical modeling; and (2) defining better metrics of disaster-induced vulnerability and need.

We focus on metrics because the specific ways in which we measure the impact of disasters shapes the way that response and recovery are orchestrated. In numerous large-scale disasters including the 2015 earthquake in Nepal, we witnessed that early damage assessments often fall short in properly describing the scale and geographic distribution of damage. More importantly, we saw that the way that disaster impact is measured is in itself problematic.

By describing impact purely as a measure of damage and loss to physical assets (e.g. number of houses and bridges destroyed, etc), this focuses attention (and funding) on communities that have lost the most, but not necessarily those that need the most. Seen another way, measuring impact in terms of counting assets that have been damaged focuses attention away from those who had lost little simply because they had few assets to lose (typically the poorest and most vulnerable). In this way we saw that disasters not only reflect inequality (since the poor tend to live in more precarious conditions), but disaster recovery can often deepen inequality further.

This does not arise from malicious intent from anyone involved, but simply as an outcome of the way we measure and build our databases of disaster impact. So to correct this, we’d like to change the way we measure disaster impacts: shifting from disaster-induced damage to disaster-induced vulnerability and need.

This latest trip was my first time back to Nepal since immediately following the April 2015 earthquake. Following the earthquake I was working with the World Bank to support various Nepali government agencies on developing the early plans for recovery, and organising the housing sector analysis for the Post-Disaster Needs Assessment (PDNA). In part, this new projects aims at addressing some of the limitations of the work I had done then. I won’t attempt to comment on the reconstruction progress three years later. I spent the entire week in Kathmandu while most of the earthquake damage was in the rural areas, and even so one week is much too short to say anything beyond generalizations. So I’ll save that for some future post.

For now I just wanted to share my excitement for this project and working on it with the team at Kathmandu Living Labs. Spending time with the team was quite inspiring. They are a incredibly dynamic group, passionate about improving the society they live in by combining data, people and technology. They are building Open Government platforms to increase effectiveness and transparency of local government; developing citizen-engagement apps to promote citizen-government collaboration and deliberation; mapping hazards and risks of municipalities to promote their resilience; training government surveyors on housing reconstruction monitoring; etc. What better people to partner with on this project?

The project includes other eminent collaborators. Led by the Earth Observatory of Singapore (my academic home), the project also brings together engineers from the Stanford Urban Resilience Initiative, disaster informatics experts from GFDRR (Robert Soden), data scientists from the World Bank Big Data Program, humanitarian data specialists from the Humanitarian OpenStreetMap Team, and remote sensing experts from NASA-JPL.

Stay tuned for more as the project evolves.

Co-Risk Labs at UR2018

The 2018 Understanding Risk Forum kicked off this week in Mexico City. The bi-annual event brings together scientists, engineers, remote sensing experts, software developers, social scientists, and representatives of government, civil society, and development agencies to discuss emerging approaches for making sense of disaster and climate risk. The Forum is convened by the World Bank’s Global Facility for Disaster Reduction and Recovery and over the years has been an important source of inspiration and collaboration for our team. Robert and Karen are there this week, come say hi if you see us around!

On Tuesday morning, we led a Simulation of the Post-Disaster Needs Assessment (PDNA) as part of a training by GFDRR’s Resilient Recovery team on post disaster recovery planning. 20 participants worked together in groups attempting to complete an assessment of damages, losses, and recovery needs in the housing sector following an earthquake on a fictional island in the Atlantic. The simulation forced participants to deal with the very real world problems of limited time and information in post-disaster settings, and helped them to understand some of the politics of disaster information. As one of the participants stated, “unless you put a dollar value on these things, there will be no means to support recovery.” The guidelines that inform post disaster assessments, and the ways in which they are put into practice, thus play a central role in shaping disaster recovery processes.  

The simulation was the first large-scale pilot of an activity developed by the Co-Risk Labs team, with the support of GFDRR, and we hope to find opportunities to develop it further with other groups in the future. Some of the game materials are attached to the bottom of this post.

PDNA Simulation at UR2018

We’re looking forward to participating in the rest of the event. Some of the other highlights are shaping up to be:

Danger! Weird ways engineers think and talk about disasters in cities

disastersslide0CROPPED

disastersslide1

02 disastersslide2

03a slidefinal

03b disastersslide3bCROPPED

04 disastersslide4CLEAN

04b disastersslide4b

05a disastersincities2b

05 disastersslide5CROPPED

06 new slide

07 newslide

08 newslide

09 newslide

10 disastersslide10

10b newslide

11 disastersslide11

12 disastersslide12

13 newslide

14 disastersslide14

14a disastersslide14a

14b newslide

14c disastersslide14v2a

15 newslide

16 disastersslide16

16brandnew

16newslide

18 newslideIllustrations by the brilliant Veronica Wood.

Thanks to all the friends and colleagues who gave encouragement and feedback.