icts for disaster response and recovery chanuka wattegama lirneasia (former) united nations...
TRANSCRIPT
ICTs for Disaster Response and Recovery
Chanuka Wattegama
LIRNEasia
(former) United Nations Development Program (UNDP)(former) ICT Agency, Sri Lanka
Note: The opinions expressed in the presentation are author’s own and may not reflect those of any organization he is/was affiliated to.
World Bank Organised Seminar onDisaster Risk Management in the Information Age
Washington DC ,Oct. 8-9, 2008
This presentation:
Focus:
1.ICTs for Hazard/Disaster Response2.ICTs for Disaster Recovery
Showcase:
1.Sahana: A FOSS (Free and Open Source Software) based Disaster Management System 2.Haz-Info: LIRNEasia’s “Evaluating Last Mile Hazard Information Dissemination” project
A Web based portal with sub-applications built to address the common disaster coordination and collaboration problems in a disaster
ICTs in Recovery
IT Solution– A centralized online bulletin board of victims– Be able to record all structured meta data on a victim (inc pictures
and biometric data)– Indexing and Searching of all data – Finding people through cross-referencing
“Please, please help me find my missing
parents / child / relative”
ICTs in Recovery
Finding Missing People
ICTs in Recovery
IT Solution– A contact list of orgs and the services they provide– Reporting to ensure a balanced distribution and coverage of services
and relief groups
“It is all a huge mess!”
“I get 1,000 packs of dry rations. Where I can send them?”
“You have sent all food to zone A while people starve in Zone B”
“Don’t send any more clothes; we have plenty of them. Send fresh water!”
ICTs in Recovery
Coordinating Relief
The Organization Registry helps maintain data (contact, services, region, etc) of organizations groups and volunteers working in the disaster
ICTs in Recovery
Coordinating Relief
The Request Management System tracks all requests and helps match pledges for support, aid and supplies to fulfilment
ICTs in Recovery
ICTs in Recovery
Sahana Deployment
• Tsunami in Sri Lanka – 2005– Officially deployed and track 26,000 families
• NADRA, for Asian Quake in Pakistan – 2005– Officially deployed and integrated to NADRA (Pakistan Government) to track
all victims • For Landslide disaster in Philippines– 2005
– Officially deployment to track all victims, orgs, camps by Government
ICTs in Recovery
• Many countries cannot afford or do not invest
– Budgeting for a disaster that may or may not happen
– Not a commercially lucrative product domain
• Such software should be a global public good
– Shared global ownership through the FOSS model
• World IT community are keen volunteers
– ‘Good will’ opportunity to alleviate suffering using IT
• No restrictions to deploy and modify
– No royalties, license costs, etc
• Open system => Transparent and trustworthy
• Better acceptance than ‘foreign’ proprietary systems
• Rapid integration requirements requires source
– L10N and integration with existing ICT resources
ICTs in Recovery
Why FOSS (Free and Open Source Software)?
Hazard Disaster
ICTs in Early Warning Systems
Rapid Onset Disasters
½ hour – 6 hours
If > ½ hour disaster warning is not possible If < 6 hours, it is a different kind of a disaster (drought, epidemic, famine) – needs diverse tools
Key Players
Scientific Community: Designs the hazard monitoring systems
National/Local governments: Own and operate the EWS overall; Issue warnings within countries
International Bodies: Provide financial and technical support; Facilitate cross border information sharing, provide expertise
Regional DM Institutions: Provide expertise; advise governments; facilitate networking among DM practitioners
INGOs/NGOs: Create awareness; Coordinate, Train masses
Private Sector: Implements and maintains systems
The media: Create awareness; Play a role in training; link communities to practitioners
Communities: Central to people-oriented EWS.
ICTs in Early Warning Systems
Just ‘monitoring’hazards will not help
Early Warning Systems: Solutions for the ‘elusive’ Last Mile
1. Radio and TelevisionAdvantages: Relatively widespread, Low
cost, Broadcasting possible, No limits to information
Challenges: No use at night, non interactive
2. Telephone (fixed and mobile) – voice modeAdvantages: Relatively widespread, Low
cost, No limits to information, Interactive
Challenges: No broadcasting, Issues of authenticity, Don’t reach non users, Congestion
3. Mobiles - SMSAdvantages: Relatively widespread, Low
cost, Fast, Can be sent to groups, Customisable
Challenges: No use at night, no use to non users, limits to information, broadcasting not possible, language issues, congestion
4. Mobiles (Cell broadcasting)Advantages: No congestion issues, can address a
large group simultaneously
Challenges: Local language issues, no acknowledgements
Early Warning Systems: Solutions for the ‘elusive’ Last Mile
5. Satellite RadioAdvantages:
High reachability, broadcasts to a community, no limits to information
Challenges: Costly if not widely used, Community arrangements required
6. Internet/E-MailAdvantages: Interactive, quick,
multiple sources, continuous updates
Challenges: Not widespread in many places, no use at night
Early Warning Systems: Solutions for the ‘elusive’ Last Mile
7. Amateur Radio and Community Radio Advantages: Good for rural, poor and remote
communities
Challenges: Not widespread, People lose interest if used only in case of disaster
8. Non ICTs (sirens, loud speakers)Advantages: Can be even used in any environment;
useful even at night; good in rural setups
Challenges: Maintenance of the system, Less authentic
Early Warning Systems: Solutions for the ‘elusive’ Last Mile
