it 515 final project - benjamin j berenson vfinal

Running head: INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY SOLUTIONS PLAN 1

The United Nations Children's Fund: An Information Technology Solutions Plan

Benjamin J. Berenson

Southern New Hampshire University


BackgroundThe Information Technology Solutions Plan (“the Plan” hereafter) will focus on the

thoughtful discovery of three innovative technologies. The given scenario involves UNICEF, a

United Nations Program headquartered in New York City, focused on providing long-term

humanitarian and developmental assistance to mothers and children around the globe. UNICEF

has offices scattered across over 190 countries, particularly within developing countries

susceptible to natural disasters, health risks, and inadequate infrastructure. The given prompt

addresses a very specific deficiency across UNICEF, which is the ability to sustain adequate

communication after natural disasters strike regions of despair. The Plan will address this

deficiency, particularly as it relates to data and voice communication ability across developing

countries.

Unique ChallengesIn developing the Plan, a number of assumptions must be made. First and foremost, we

must assume each country reflects a unique geography, culture, population, and government. The

general consensus across the team is power and communication infrastructure will be

nonexistent, especially post-natural disaster. While developing countries often have some form

of government structure, we cannot presume any form of national support, especially as it relates

to on the ground first-response. Rarely are the governments of developing countries adequately

prepared for natural disasters, especially as it relates to readily available funding, infrastructure,

and technology. While globalization and advancements in mobile and embedded technologies

have progressed world-wide interconnectivity, we cannot assume reliable Internet access exists.

There’s more to disruption though as it relates to enabling UNICEF to do more with less

on nonexistent infrastructure. Disruption seems to be an apparent keyword across enterprises

with the motivation of profit, but for UNICEF, there’s more the equation. Humanitarian services


can likely be reimagined and redesigned through the latest innovations across crowd-sourcing,

peer connection, and or distributed production. Figure 1 in the Appendix shows the core

components to an effective HFN, and includes at its foundation the unique challenges each

deployment faces depending on the geographic location. Core challenges to address or keep in

perspective while evaluating new technology innovations: limited resources, increasingly

protracted displacement and needs, and increasingly urbanized and middle-income settings

(Webster, 2015). With any technology designed to enhance the overall humanitarian process, it

seems finding a solution with the right balance of utility, efficiency, and feasibility is a real

challenge.

Identified Technologies – Three Presented IdeasThe three innovative technologies selected, will address UNICEF’s inability to make an

impact on the ground in light of these limitations. Lastly, each of the innovations will either

focus on establishing voice and data communications across local teams and remote HQ, and or

the lack of power infrastructure to support a self-sustaining communications network.

Innovation 1: Sensis Aerospace – Unmanned Air Vehicles / Commercial Drones

With any natural disaster, communication is a proven obstacle. In 2013, after typhoon

Haiyan struck Philippines, damage practically removed the ability to communicate via radio,

mobile device, television, and web. Limited communication translates into many additional

challenges, such as the inability to find relief services for a portion of the population, find

missing loved ones, receive critical humanitarian alerts, and understanding the overall impact

across different regions.

It’s very favorable and equally encouraging to see more tech-savvy local enthusiasts

support humanitarian aid missions. Through expanding individual involvement, more modular


innovations are created and capabilities found. Sensis Aerospace provides professional grade

aerial services acquired through the use of a fleet of fully autonomous Unmanned Aerial

Vehicles (UAVs). As marketed by Sensis Aerospace (Sensis hereafter), their services are truly

time-sensitive, cost-effective, and highly accurate. Through the latest wave of unmanned drone

technologies, Sensis provides deliverable humanitarian aid packages including mission-critical

goods and services, including: foldable solar panels, vhf/gps 2 way radio, powered milk, baby

diapers, powered protein, water testers, water purifiers, matches, high power solar light, solar

thermal beacons, medicines, edible carbohydrates, and kit instructions. Drone deployment in this

instance has proven to be an effective method for delivering communications equipment and

power infrastructure capability.

Unmanned drone technology is truly in its infancy, and just scraping the surface in the

consumer market and as an enterprise solution. Sensis says nearly 57 countries and over 270

companies were manufacturing UAVs in 2013. Humanitarian organizations, like UNICEF, have

used UAVs for a variety of aid relief functions, including data collection, information sharing,

geographic analysis, search and rescue, aerial mapping, etc. The greatest advantage of UAVs is

affordability and ease of deployment from practically anywhere, regardless of the condition post-

natural disaster.

Future possibilities are truly extensive with UAVs. Imagine if one day UAVs are

equipped with telecommunications equipment for lengthier periods of time, in order expand the

communication horizon of a mobile ad hoc networks. Sensis says, “Analytical support from

crowdsourcing platforms, such as Humanitarian Open Street Map’s Tasking Server or QCRI’s

MicroMappers, can speed up analysis of technical data, including building damage or population

estimates.” UAVs can provide the temporary infrastructure capability to better utilize


interconnected networks around the world. When typhoon Haiyan struck Philippines, an

extensive network of municipal roads were either too congested or devastated. By utilizing UAV

technologies, including those manufactured by Sensis, assessment groups, emergency response

teams, and aid workers were able to receive highly accurate visual analysis of devastated regions.

Clearly the benefits of drones are applicable to UNICEF, whether it be their reach, speed, safety,

and or cost. Based on pricing information from various UAV marketing pamphlets, commercial-

category UAVs range from $15,000 to $50,000 depending on the attached equipment and

capability.

Innovation 2: Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA) – Space Based Solar Power

Space-based solar technologies have been in development since the 1980s, but until more

recently, haven’t been technically feasible. According to Frank E. Little from the Space

Engineering Research Center at Texas A&M University, Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency

(JAXA) is anticipating the launch of satellites for space-based solar power solutions by 2020.

The concept of gathering space-based solar power, involves placing an extensive network of

solar arrays into continuous sun-lit orbit of Earth. Gigawatts of electrical energy are collected

and stored, and then beamed back to Earth. Seffers explains (2010), “The solar energy received

on the surface could be converted into manufactured synthetic hydrocarbon fuels or could be

used either as base load power via direct connection to the existing electrical grid or as low-

intensity broadcast power beamed directly to consumers.” While there isn’t a commercial

product to market just yet, space-based solar technology is a very relevant and exciting new

innovation which can be applied to the UNICEF model.

The greatest potential barrier for both government and commercially funded space-based

solar solutions is cost. Jaggard (2011) explains, “For now, though, the most frequently cited


barrier to deploying—or even testing—many of the existing space-based solar platforms is the

cost of launching the necessary equipment into orbit.” Though from the standpoint of launching

new satellite technology into space, the private industry continues to break new barriers as

companies like SpaceX advance reusable rocketry and viable commercial launches. According to

the National Space Society, government-sponsored launches cost an average of $10,000 per

pound, and this cost basis hasn’t changed in nearly four decades. While this reads as extremely

expensive, research shows relief aid energy solutions tend to pay a tremendous premium over the

average $0.11 per kilowatt/hour for electricity in the U.S. The U.S. Agency for International

Development reports deliverable energy for relief averaging $0.40 per kilowatt/hour.

A second major challenge for space-based solar solutions is orbit paths, and accessing the

energy in areas of need when it’s needed. Different kinds of laser solutions are being tested, but

research is still in its infancy and at least a decade away from becoming a viable product to the

market. Ironically space-based solar solutions have been in the works, at least theoretically, since

the 1980s, but limited technology and our understanding of space hadn’t progressed enough.

Beyond aligning a geosynchronous orbit with a geographical location in times of need,

researchers are still trying to understand the variables which influence loss of power in transfers

over such long distances. Jaggard (2011) says, “Similar experiments have been done before with

microwave transmission, including a 2008 experiment that successfully beamed 20 watts of solar

energy from a mountaintop in Maui to receivers on the Big Island of Hawaii—92 miles (148

kilometers) away.”

Space-based solar technologies should not be overlooked, but rather closely followed by

the humanitarian relief segment. Recall finding adequate power solutions to rebuild

infrastructure and support relief aid workers, continues to be a major challenge. Generators have


been used in the past, but with very little success due to the limited supply of fossil fuels. Such

fuels are also very difficult to transport overseas due to combustion hazards. There are many

alternatives to fossil fuels, including wind, alternators, and water. Alternative energy sources

describe wind has very limited, because a 25 knot wind is the minimum viable speed. Hydrogen

based fuel cells while viable, are still too costly and require highly specialized containers for

storage.

Innovation 3: Hastily Formed NetworksThe power of observation and interconnectivity through social networks. In more recent

years, after disasters such as the 2008 Cyclone Nargis in Myanmar, Haiti earthquake of 2010,

Fukushima Daiichi nuclear disaster after The Great East Japan Earthquake in 2011, and Super

typhoon Haiyan in Philippines in 2013, humanitarian organizations realized there’s great relief

value in world-wide shared observations. With more information being tweeted, images

uploaded, and short video clips captured, organizations like UNICEF have greater access to

publicly available information insights. The Micro-Mappers Project for example, utilizes the

crowd aspect and artificial intelligence to assess disaster zones after the fact. Micro-Mappers is

an example of technology enhancing human capability in regions of despair and turmoil.

Paramaguru (2013) says, “MicroMappers breaks down the large and complicated task of

separating out the useful tweets and images into easily completed microtasks. Users can simply

access the website and start clicking, tagging tweets as “offers of help,” for example, or images

according to the type of damage shown.” Another example of Micro-Mappers across other

industries, includes online citizen science initiatives managed to acquire nonscientist-driven

observations of space, to more efficiently catalog galaxies.


The ability to utilize the Micro-Mappers Project requires an accessible form of

communication, both across UNICEF’s local teams and to its headquarters in NYC. Hastily

Formed Networks (HFN) refers to the commonly coined term associated with ad hoc networks,

which rely on readily available and affordable technologies such as 802.11, WiFi, 802.16,

WiMAX, and VSAT (Nelson, Stamberger, & Steckler, 2011). While early iterations of ad hoc

networks were sluggish, unreliable, and limited based on geographic properties, the academic

theory of HFNs grows more and more applicable with advancements in technology. Many

scenario based studies exist now, targeting the advances in technologies associated with HFNs,

and mainly due to a greater concentration of natural disasters over the past decade.

By design, HFNs are portable IP-based networks, which are ad hoc or “temporary” in

nature until relief efforts are capable of deploying a more permanent communication solution.

Nelson et al. (2011) says, “HFNs are a particularly effective implementation of Information and

Communication Technology (ICT) enabling the crisis communications necessary for a rapid,

efficient, humanitarian response.” HFNs can provide basic voice, data, and video solutions

depending on the underlying technology deployed. Though a handful of major challenges are

typically experienced within the first week after a natural disaster occurs, particularly associated

with communications ability:

- As mentioned, the issue of plugging into a reliable power source.

- Degraded and overwhelmed telephone services, if any at all.

- Degraded Push-to-Talk capability.

- Inoperable radio technology.

- Overwhelmed satellite phone services.

- Oversubscription of any available communication services, like Satellite-based.


- Limited if not any Internet services.

- Minimal IT-oriented services.

With these challenges in mind, the ability to execute an ad hoc network in a very short period of

time makes the solution very sensible and obtainable, especially early into a crisis. The

underlying technologies used are not only readily available, but commercially developed at a

cost-sensitive rate. Typically when ad hoc networks are implemented, local teams and early

responders rely on the technology they’ve brought with them on-site. Granted the time-sensitive

nature of ad hoc networks, portability or the physical size of devices matters seeing first

responders will likely carry equipment while in the field.

The theory of mobile ad hoc networks traces back to work done by Defense Advanced

Research Project Agency (DARPA) in the 1980s. Jumping forward to present day, an

organization called The Persistence Systems, LLC, focuses research efforts on creating

deployable mobile ad hoc technologies designed to deliver high throughput routing and efficient

communication. According to Persistence Systems’ product white paper, “While competing

approaches have attempted to avoid the routing scalability problem by simply providing multi-

hop routing to a fixed gateway, only Persistent System’s Wave Relay® solution efficiently scales

to extremely large networks through multiple hops in a true peer-to-peer mode while providing

high throughput routing and minimal latency.” Persistence Systems’ Wave Relay technology

offers throughput of 37 Mbps UDP and 27 Mbps TCP, utilizing the Gen4 (MPU4) compact radio

design which is reliable, small in physical size, and deployable over a wide landscape.

Ad hoc networks by design, are created through volumes of nodes or individual mobile

devices. Wave Relay technology offers a more efficient method of peer-to-peer communication.


A more commonly deployed network layout is a mesh network design, which interconnects

nodes through various access points. According to Persistence Systems, their technology and

proprietary routing protocols offer highly scalable routing connectivity, because communication

pathways automatically adjust amongst peers depending on a range of variables such as distance,

hardware, signal quality, geography, and up/down demand. Persistence offers a portfolio of

products, including:

- Android Kit: USB to Ethernet Tether cable for Android mobile devices. The Kits

allows users to view information being shared across the network.

- Gen4: Designed to be deployed with manned and unmanned vehicle systems, like

Drones. Gen4 uses radio technology, which can be deployed with legacy technologies

which are commonly found across developing countries.

- Portable Gen4 Units: Very small in physical size, the portable units are user-worn and

utilize a radio card to establish an IP address.

- Cloud Relay: Enables long-range remote access to video, voice and data from all

mobile ad hoc networks. Using transitional Layer 3 technology, Cloud Relay

interconnects mobile ad hoc networks across different cities, states, regions, and even

continents around the globe.

The products above, when integrated with Wave Relay technology, bring many benefits from the

standpoint of deployment, scalability, and reliability. With scalable routing capability, first

response teams have a larger number of routing options which translate into potentially better

connectivity and higher network capacity. Persistence Systems says Wave Relay routing

technology is validated by the governments of the U.S. and Canada, due to stringent security

protocols and encryption methods. As a deployment example, Wave Relay technology utilizes


four unique radios on different frequency channels. A single omnidirectional radio antenna can

be dedicated to high altitude aircraft communication, while a second antenna can be used for a

specific group of users in a hard hit zone.

In the sense of deploying a highly capable commercial product for UNICEF’s next

disaster zone, mobile ad hoc networking is a viable communication solution. Mobile ad hoc

network technologies are destined to blossom into something more meaningful over the coming

years, as the solution itself still has many areas for improvement. By no means are embedded

technologies for mobile ad hoc networks mature, but rather in high demand and remain a very

intriguing area for both governments and commercial organizations. Products and services from

companies like Persistence Systems, offer a short-term solution to the communication problem.

Though it’s important to highlight no solution being the perfect solution, because as is the case

with most technologies, finding the most optimal blend of innovations is usually the best

solution. The lack of power infrastructure is a great example, because while there are so many

alternative energy solutions available to first responders, in truth not one is perfect alone.

Deploying mobile ad hoc network technologies is affordable, as such networks usually begin

with the mobile devices brought on-site by first responders. Persistence Systems provides layers

of additional technologies to make the ad hoc foundation more reliable, secure, scalable, and

viable over time.

Technology Life CycleThe first phase covers where commercial HFNs are in their present day on the technology

life cycle curve. In present form, commonly deployed HFNs are generally designed and built on

existing technology innovations. The various components and adaptations involved in deploying

a mobile-based ad-hoc network integrates many component innovations from dozens of


manufacturers, whether it be the wireless routers, signal repeaters, mobile devices, integrated

wireless cards, antenna hardware, networking and communication components, or software

installed for monitoring and managing connections (Figures 5 - 9). Across the greater wireless

telecommunications industry, new mobile technologies are regularly produced throughout the

year, of which tend to be incremental innovations with limited innovative breakthroughs. From

the standpoint of deploying an HFN in a disaster region, many radical innovations such as 4G

mobile or the latest WiFi standard 802.11ac, can naturally integrate into existing deployment

plans with minimal upfront capital investment. Many innovations like the expansion of wireless

speed transmission in fact naturally benefit HFNs in many ways. Figure 7 provides an example

of how wireless network components are deployed across disaster regions. During Hurricane

Katrina, first response teams utilized unharmed infrastructure such as steel radio towers, to

provide more optimal wireless transmission range.

Challenges experienced during HFN deployments can sometimes reveal life cycle

properties, as well as timing strategies if for example the current state of a technology isn’t

reliable or simply sustainable in the field. Humanitarian aid relief and first response teams are

relying on their ad-hoc networks both to save and preserve lives. HFN deployment challenges

tend to fall under one of two categories: technology based and policies, techniques, and

procedures (Epperly, 2006). A very common variable or challenge across most disaster regions

involves the geographic parameter being unknown. The size of a sector or radial within a struck

region may be many miles in size, which would prove quite difficult to establish a standard

communications network. Therefore node placement is highly strategic and must adapt to local

geography, lines of sight, physical barriers, physical security, and network features.


The latest WiMAX technologies based on IEEE 802.16 standards, offer a terrestrial

broadband point-to-point wireless bridge technology. WiMAX is inexpensive, very easy to

deploy, a mature and therefore time-tested technology, carries a range of 50 to 60 miles, and

offers a high throughput of 54Mbps (Nelson et al., (2011). WiMAX also tends to communicate

over non-licensed bandwidth frequencies, including 5.8, 2.4, and 3.5 to 5.0GHz. The greatest

drawback for WiMAX is it being a line of sight technology, therefore more rural and

mountainous topography poses a challenge. To mitigate line of sight challenges, WiMAX is

commonly deployed utilizing a hub/spoke configuration, as was the case with the Katrina

Network in Figure 2. Physically placing the hub of a WiMAX network either central or closest to

existing viable network infrastructure such as a Satellite communication link, will allow the

central access point to distribute Internet access and establish a reliable interconnection.

Most HFN deployments reflect a blend of wireless-based communications, wired

infrastructure, wireless long haul networks, and satellite broadband connection to the external

world (Figure 8). While not an initial requirement, typically over many weeks post-disaster, the

network expands its capabilities and integrates more advanced technologies as explained earlier.

Expanding the network layer beyond WiMAX requires establishing a wireless local area network

or meshed WiFi solution. As outlined in the IEEE’s 802.11, access points can be deployed to

provide Internet access to mobile devices, laptops, desktops, and remote sensors, with speeds

ranging 10 to 100Mbps. Nelson et al. (2011) says, “Once a meshed WiFi WLAN is established it

provides a seamless hand off from WAP to WAP allowing clients to move transparently within

the mesh while maintaining connectivity.” In 1965, Gordon Moore noted that the density of

transistors on integrated circuits had doubled every year, and a very similar pattern occurred with

telecommunication network speeds (Schilling, 2013).


Command Centers, such as the one deployed during Hurricane Katrina (Figure 5), are

usually established on Day 1 within a close geographical proximity to the existing or future

Satellite communication link. Minimal hardware, including basic network components, 10 to

20ft of network cables, and a personal computer as shown in Figures 5 and 6, are required. One

of the more critical components includes Mesh Dynamics’ MD4000 (Figure 9), which offers

radio, GPS and WiMAX capability all in one. The MD4000 serves as a node device, allowing

networks to scale for an affordable $3,500 - $5,000 per node. Node devices are competence

enhancing innovations, each offering a transmission range of 30+ miles depending on geography

and network design. Nodes also operate securely in unlicensed RF spectrums, which eases the

installation phase and speeds deployment (Mesh Dynamics Press Release, March 29, 2010).

The growing demand for available network traffic due to macro trends reflecting greater

accessibility to big data, mobile application growth, cloud-oriented innovations, and greater

interconnection around the world, has forced the telecommunications industry to expand and

upgrade its infrastructure to remain competitive. A few of the more popular innovations likely to

impact future HFN deployments, includes connection-sharing or multi-tethering, SIM-free

wireless, stronger encryption standards, topographical/mapping analysis applications, and

revisited transmission standards. Many of these up and coming innovations are highly beneficial

to the recommended HFN deployment, and therefore establishing strategic alliances may help

speed up the new product development cycle over time. A great example of this is NetHope, a

consortium of 42 leading international humanitarian organizations. NetHope partnerships with

some of the largest technology leaders in the world, including Microsoft, Facebook, and Cisco,

to create accessibility to the latest hardware and application capabilities to combat Ebola

outbreaks in West Africa. The latest information and communications technology (ICT) used by


NetHope enables rapid access and exchange of information, real-time case management and

contact tracking, outbreak mapping, community mobilization, and supply and logistics

management (NetHope.org, 2015). We can take advantage of consortiums like NetHope, to

expand the capability of our HFNs and more importantly future functionality. All in all, we’re

utilizing both mature technologies and recently pioneered innovations by the open-source

community.

Using the Anderson and Tushman model (Diagram 1), the different hardware

components of an HFN are categorized into one of two pools: Era of Ferment or Era of

Incremental Change. The first wireless protocol standard 802.11 legacy was released in 1997,

with many amendments since through today’s 802.11ac, which is now the standard’s latest

version applied. Amendments proposed to 802.11 involves a process where an assigned task

group is formed. While amendments haven’t reflected a true technological breakthrough, the

birth of the 802.11 standard was in a sense a technological discontinuity, because wireless

translated into dramatic advancements in the price and performance frontier (Anderson &

Tushman, December 1990).

Keeping reference to the Anderson and Tushman model, the underlying power solutions

selected to support the HFN fall within the era of ferment. Innovations across alternative

energies, whether it be solar panel, water turbine, ocean wave thermal energy, hydrogen-based

fuel cells, or space-based solar, are all still in their infancy across the technology life cycle curve.

While some forms of alternative energy such as solar panels have come down in price

dramatically over the past decade, the greatest challenge lies with efficient energy conversion,

limited battery technology, and large physical size requirements. Though each of these


alternative energy innovations falls in a different segment of Rogers’ Technology Diffusion S-

curve, despite the tremendous opportunity for an architectural innovation.


In reference to Diagram 2 below, two different S-shaped curves are presented to depict

performance of alternative energies against the required capital investment or effort imposed. S-

curves on the left-handed side depict an alternative energy innovation, which requires less initial

effort to drive the same if not more performance in a shorter period of time. Experiencing less

cost or cumulative effort for more performance is reflective of better understanding of the

underlying technology, and the industry having greater accessibility which in-return generates

further modular innovations. The recommended HFN’s alternative energy sources are in a very

intriguing position on the S-curve, because despite being in development for many years, the

upfront effort remains quite high. The industry is still waiting for a discontinuous innovation,

particularly across the consumer segment while the U.S. population continues to rely on fossil

fuels. Renewable and alternative energies face two key disadvantages against fossil fuels: 1)

Limited production capacity and; 2) Substantial upfront cost (Schilling and Esmundo, 2009).

Diagram 1. S-Curves in Technological Improvement

On the right-handed side in Diagram 2, the S-curves portray a second technology coming to


market, where an upward shift in the base-line performance limit is experienced. In this instance,

returns from the shift in performance increased substantially relative to the incumbent

technology. The newer technology would therefore likely be adopted by the greater industry

because of the potential opportunity. In the far future, when space-based solar power becomes

viable to the commercial market, with maturity and time the innovation may displace ground-

based solar panels.

External Variables Impacting Technology TimelineTo this point in the adoption strategy, many variables associated with the deployment of a

reliable and scalable HFN across a disaster region have been entertained. If we revisit the core

requirements of any effective HFN, many of these aforementioned variables which may affect

timing and implementation, will likely surface. HFNs clearly rely on many complementary

innovations, and the state of such innovations determines the likelihood of a successful

deployment.

Consider the basic power requirements of an HFN, and how power generating sources

impact the mobile and network hardware requirements. Many of the latest forms of alternative

power solutions, particularly for regions with inadequate power infrastructure, are certainly

considered technological improvements which naturally support a more feasible deployment.

New innovations including fuel cells, alternative natural energies, and solar cells are extremely

beneficial to HFNs, but are still in their infancy and far from maturity. While a number of

commercial hardware components exist to expand the functionality and reliability of HFNs, the

fact remains many of the underlying requirements and future capabilities rely on industries

adopting new standards, and both consumer and enterprise markets embracing the latest


innovations. HFNs are the direct result of many modular innovations from different

organizations and individuals over the years, including the open-source community.

Just as the case was a decade ago, HFNs operate within a very common and

unpredictable setting resembling five known elements (Denning, 2006):

1) A network of people established very rapidly.

2) Network which includes different displaced communities.

3) Working together in a shared conversation space.

4) Plan, commit and execute humanitarian actions.

5) Fulfill a large and urgent mission.

If we consider the five elements above, all are forms of risk and therefore variables to consider

while deploying a sustainable HFN in the field. One of the greatest challenges associated with

the UNICEF prompt, is the unpredictable and unreliable nature of every environment. The

design and implementation of each HFN shares some commonality, but also reflects unique

hardware requirements and functionality depending on the situation. This uniqueness per

deployment is certainly a variable to consider, and will likely impact the timing and

implementation of our project. Differences in functionality across HFNs highlights an expected

level of ambiguity among UNICEF’s employees, volunteers, and technically savvy. With every

deployment a standard HFN package will be readily available, but also agile and reflective of

local needs.

Implementation Plan - TimelineIf we combine the known elements above with the HFN architecture requirements

outlined in Figure 1, different deployment timelines can be conceived and recommended. All

timelines will require some form of power planning, which was already covered in our analysis.


Presuming power needs are met through a blend of alternative energy innovations, where

deployment timelines will greatly differ reflects the physical security, network design,

application layer, and organizational design depending on culture, local economics, and political

landscape. If we use Hurricane Katrina and the Bay St. Louis HFN as a template for deployment

timelines, including voice, video, and text over a three-day period. Three days does not include

planning and training, which would have already been conducted prior to the natural disaster.

The Navy Postgraduate School conducted a study on HFN deployment timelines in March of

2012, and also found a three to seven day period was adequate to setup a reliable HFN. Antillon

(2012) found choosing the right satellite communications provider for a humanitarian aid

mission was key to the overall success. Reflecting on the Postgraduate School’s findings, the

most optimal timeline for designing an HFN for first response teams involves:

Week 1: Core Components Establish a Central Command Center, ideally most accessible to the present or future

Satellite link depending on regional damage.

Broadband Global Area Network (BGAN) established, Very Small Aperture

Terminals (VSAT) followed soon after.

Small, light, fast and easily deployable IP connectivity solutions are best done

through the BGAN, for the price and capability as well.

If heavy bandwidth is required, for example by live video feeds or real-time

geographic mapping, the VSAT is the best early adopted solution. Note the VSAT is

hard-wired and established prior to any WiFi communication.

The VSAT is most reliable over the long-term, and serves as a very optimal

foundation for expanding the network region-to-region.


The components above will offer a basis for further network development and maturity over the

course of one month.

Week 2.A: Establish the first node, ideally within a hospital, police/medial station, or location

with security personnel. Utilizing naturally secure locations with mission-critical

hardware is suggested.

Implement pre-conFigured cloud database solutions, where information collected by

first response teams can be stored, analyzed, and shared across the network.

Scout the geographic landscape, seek unscathed radio towers and tall infrastructure

for deploying wireless access points, receivers, and repeaters.

Week 3.A: Deploy mobile data traffic management solutions:

o Policy-based traffic shaping.

o Compression, content optimization, pacing, and transcoding.

o Content management application.

o Router tuning.

o TCP/IP protocol tuning.

Establish the second node within a closer proximity to the epicenter.

Begin the network design of a medium-term (1-3 month).

Implement and refine security protocols.

The Deployment Timeline A above was conducted during the 2005 Hurricane Katrina and 2010

Haiti earthquake, but with very distinct differences which we breakout in Deployment Timeline

B below.


Week 2.B: Create a physical security presence surrounding the Central Command Center, and

any planned node locations. Looting and destruction caused by displaced human

beings is common during most natural disasters, though was more elevated during the

early stages of the Haiti earthquake.

Establish a Satellite link by the end of Week 2 in order to expand beyond an intra-

network.

Week 3.B: Establish the first and second nodes.

StakeholdersAll deployment plans will be managed through the communication center, with a

technical lead or network administrator assigned to the HFN. As shown in Figure 5, minimal

components and time are required to build a production communication center. A normative and

strategic stakeholder analysis is required in order to gauge the financial impact of each

deployment, as well as management issues surrounding the HFN. Diagram 3 outlines a

stakeholder analysis surrounding the suggested HFN design. The light blue entities are

associated with UNICEF directly, including the general employee base, first-response teams, and

technical teams responsible for HFNs. HFN deployment responsibilities are associated with

UNICEF’s technical team, which in some instances can be an individual managing a small-scale

HFN. The light orange entities include the local community, such as police, medical

professionals, and technical volunteers.

The amount of technical resources provided across local communities will greatly differ

depending on the country and sustained regional damage, therefore we’ll assume no resources

are provided to support a sustainable HFN. The recommended HFN package will be pre-


constructed depending on the functional needs of the community. It is our recommendation HFN

deployment kits are thoughtfully conceived and designed to be highly adaptable to the given

circumstances. A UNICEF technical employee will understand how to deploy each kit type,

designed to offer basic voice, text, and data services.

Ethical ComplianceThe ethical compliance standards applied throughout each HFN deployment, attempt to

remedy very challenging questions, including:

How does the network authenticate end-users?

How does the technical team monitor, log, and evaluate the network?

How are public connections handled across the HFN?

Can varying degrees of social networking be permitted? If so, how can authenticated

users utilize information captured by the public?

An ethical framework can assist the team with deliberating conversation about ethical questions

like those presented above. The purpose of the underlying framework is to find balance between

competing project priorities and local development, while encouraging open community

innovation. The recommended HFN associates progression and innovation directly with saving

and preserving lives. With every deployment, technical teams need to acknowledge local

communities being highly vulnerable, and the potential impact resulting from a disruptive

technology. Fabian and Fabricant (2014) attempt to bridge the two worlds of innovation and

humanitarian needs through a four part framework:

1. Innovation is humanistic: Human ingenuity and imagination drives solutions to big

problems, of which can come from anywhere.


2. Innovation is non-hierarchical: Encourage diversity and highly varying

backgrounds to derive a solution. Incubate small, agile teams across disaster regions

to seek sensitive feedback.

3. Innovation is participatory: Deploy with the local community in mind. Take

advantage of volunteers and those with local knowledge.

4. Innovation is sustainable: Document processes and attempt to share technical skills

involved with deploying an HFN.

UNICEF’s Innovation Labs takes a value-based approach to problem solving, by connecting

technology and development. Fabian and Fabricant (2014) explains:

One of the reasons that UNICEF set up labs was to create a way to engage problem

solvers in a space where problems are not just about a better product or single-pointed

solution, but also about systemic changes that run from individual to community to

national government and beyond.

Over the long-term, HFNs will naturally embrace this principle by providing accessibility to the

local communities and public. UNICEF must encourage sustained engagement, learning, and

accessibility with every HFN deployed.

Legal ComplianceAlternative energy solutions are one example of many innovations being developed for

the commercial and consumer-grade markets. In our HFN deployment plan, a portfolio of energy

solutions including mechanical cranks, hand-held solar panels, miniature water turbines, small

wind turbines, fuel-cells, and one day space-based solar energy captured through orbiting

satellites are recommended. While some of these innovations have been in development for

decades, such as solar cells throughout the 19th century, none can be classified as the dominant


industry standard because the majority of alternative energies face one of two problems: 1)

Production capacity limits or; 2) High cost. So while the development timeline for some reflects

many years, there’s still tremendous opportunity for disruption.

We would embrace a dominant alternative energy solution specialized for aid-relief

across disaster regions, and encourage a wholly open system for greater community involvement.

Rather than have the control over development handed to a select few organizations, the open

community platform offers greater accessibility, scalability, and affordability over the long-term.

This model would be considerably more beneficial to UNICEF from the standpoint of deploying

multiple HFNs around the globe each year, because UNICEF’s needs can be addressed through

open collaboration. Though I’m sure after academia and the open community develops newer

more efficient forms of alternative energy, the private industry will likely capitalize its

proprietary modular innovations through varying degrees of control mechanisms. As is the case

with the power source, the HFN deployment kits will be based on open standards, and will

openly be diffused to other suppliers to encourage development based on the needs of aid-relief

organizations (Schilling, 2013).

Security ImplementationA decade ago, the primary objective of an HFN was to create a sustainable network for

voice communication. Today, HFNs are designed with speed and scalability in mind, to offer

more advanced networked data communication across greater distances. Humanitarian aid relief

organizations are expressing a growing concern for the lack of network security over HFNs.

With more information being communicated and captured by first response teams, public

workers, police, and medical teams, it’s quite important the security aspect be resolved.


HFN stored data can be classified as socially complex knowledge, which at times, is quite

sensitive. The network admin in charge of the HFN needs to employ adequate network security

standards, both for wired and wireless connections. Fair use and agreement policies should also

be in place before any end-user can access the network.

Network security will incorporate lower layer physical security methods, including

Cisco’s Web Security Appliance (WSA). WSA solutions offer a portfolio of security features:

Advanced threat defense, malware protection, application visibility, user control, reporting and

monitoring tools, and secure mobility. In Figure 10, we provide an example of Cisco’s Network

Emergency Response Vehicle (NERV) architecture, which incorporates common network

components used within an HFN. Notice the first layer of security – WSA – being implemented

between the Satellite link and core network router which connects to the various access nodes.

While a balance of security and accessibility must be established, the underlying security model

simply protects the humanitarian mission.


Appendix

Figure 1. HFN Core Layers


Figure 2. Hancock County, MS - HFN Node Locations (Steckler, Bradford, & Urrea, September 2005)


Figure 3. Katrina - HFN Foundation Requirements (Steckler, Bradford, & Urrea, September 2005)


Figure 4. Chosen Innovations Comparison


Figure 5. Day 1 HFN Command Center (Steckler, Bradford, & Urrea, September 2005)


Figure 6. Command Center Network Hardware (Steckler, Bradford, & Urrea, September 2005)


Figure 7. Wireless Network Components, Local Radio Tower (Steckler, Bradford, & Urrea, September 2005)


Figure 8. Katrina Network Design (Steckler, Bradford, & Urrea, September 2005)


Figure 9. Mesh Networks MD4000 Node, http://www.meshdynamics.com/Mesh-Network-Products.html


Figure 10. Cisco NERV Architecture Example


Figure 11. Haiti earthquake HFN deployment


Diagram 2. Anderson and Tushman Technology Cycle


Diagram 3. HFN Stakeholder Analysis


ReferencesBrown, R. (1992). Managing the 'S' curves of innovation. The Journal of Business & Industrial

Marketing, 7(3), 41. Retrieved from

http://ezproxy.snhu.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/221995489?

accountid=3783

Cisco Tactical Operations. (2015). Securing the Hastily Formed Network. Retrieved from

www.cisco.com/go/tacops

Denning, P. J. (2006). Hastily Formed Networks. Denning Institute. Retrieved from

http://denninginstitute.com/pjd/PUBS/CACMcols/cacmApr06.pdf

Fabian, C. & Fabricant, R. (2014). The Ethics of Innovation. Stanford Social Innovation Review.

Retrieved from

http://www.ssireview.org/blog/entry/the_ethics_of_innovation

Jaggard, V. (2011). Beam It Down: A Drive to Launch Space-Based Solar. National Geographic.

Retrieved from

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/energy/2011/12/111205-solar-power-from-

space/

KPMG (2014). The Changing Landscape of Disruptive Technologies. Global Technology

Innovation Insights – Fall 2014. Retrieved from

https://www.kpmg.com/FI/fi/Ajankohtaista/Uutisia-ja-julkaisuja/teknologia-media-

telekommunikaatio/Documents/changing-landscape-disruptive-technologies.pdf

Mankins, J. (2011). Space Solar Power: THE FIRST INTERNATIONAL ASSESSMENT OF

SPACE SOLAR POWER: OPPORTUNITIES, ISSUES AND POTENTIAL

https://www.kpmg.com/FI/fi/Ajankohtaista/Uutisia-ja-julkaisuja/teknologia-media-telekommunikaatio/Documents/changing-landscape-disruptive-technologies.pdf

https://www.kpmg.com/FI/fi/Ajankohtaista/Uutisia-ja-julkaisuja/teknologia-media-telekommunikaatio/Documents/changing-landscape-disruptive-technologies.pdf

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/energy/2011/12/111205-solar-power-from-space/

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/energy/2011/12/111205-solar-power-from-space/

http://denninginstitute.com/pjd/PUBS/CACMcols/cacmApr06.pdf

http://www.cisco.com/go/tacops

http://ezproxy.snhu.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/221995489?accountid=3783

http://ezproxy.snhu.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/221995489?accountid=3783


PATHWAYS FORWARD. International Academy of Astronautics. Retrieved from

http://iaaweb.org/iaa/Studies/sg311_finalreport_solarpower.pdf

Nelson, C. B., Stamberger, J. A., & Steckler, B. D. (2011). The Evolution of Hastily Formed

Networks for Disaster Response. IEEE Global Humanitarian Technology Conference.

Retrieved from

http://www.cisco.com/web/about/doing_business/business_continuity/

Paper_124_MSW_USltr_format.pdf

Paramaguru, K. (2013). Supertyphoon Haiyan: How Technology Is Changing Disaster Response.

TIME Magazine. Retrieved from

http://techland.time.com/2013/11/13/typhoon-haiyan-how-technology-is-changing-

disaster-response/

Persistence Systems (2012). Wave Relay White Paper. Retrieved from

http://www.persistentsystems.com/pdf/WaveRelay_WhitePaper_Technology_01.pdf

Schilling, M. A., & Esmundo, M. (2009). Technology S-curves in renewable energy alternatives:

Analysis and implications for industry and government. Energy Policy, 37(5), 1767-1781.

doi:10.1016/j.enpol.2009.01.004

Schwartz, E. (2015). The Importance of Hastily Formed Network Security in Disaster Relief &

Emergency Response. NetHope Solutions. Retrieved from

http://solutionscenter.nethope.org/blog/view/the-importance-of-hastily-formed-network-

security-in-disaster-relief-emerge

http://solutionscenter.nethope.org/blog/view/the-importance-of-hastily-formed-network-security-in-disaster-relief-emerge

http://solutionscenter.nethope.org/blog/view/the-importance-of-hastily-formed-network-security-in-disaster-relief-emerge

http://www.persistentsystems.com/pdf/WaveRelay_WhitePaper_Technology_01.pdf

http://techland.time.com/2013/11/13/typhoon-haiyan-how-technology-is-changing-disaster-response/

http://techland.time.com/2013/11/13/typhoon-haiyan-how-technology-is-changing-disaster-response/

http://www.cisco.com/web/about/doing_business/business_continuity/Paper_124_MSW_USltr_format.pdf

http://www.cisco.com/web/about/doing_business/business_continuity/Paper_124_MSW_USltr_format.pdf

http://iaaweb.org/iaa/Studies/sg311_finalreport_solarpower.pdf


Seffers, G. I. (2010). Space-Based Solar Power Comes Closer to Reality. AFCEA.org. Retrieved

from

http://www.afcea.org/content/?q=space-based-solar-power-comes-closer-reality

Sensis Aerospace (2015). Humanitarian Missions Study. Retrieved from

http://sensisaero.com/site/content/humanitarian-missions

Steckler, B. D., Bradford, B. L., & Urrea, S. (2005). Hastily Formed Networks For Complex

Humanitarian Disasters. Naval Postgraduate School. Retrieved from

http://faculty.nps.edu/dl/HFN/documents/NPS_Katrina_AAR-LL_04-MAY-06.pdf

University of the West of England. (2015, March 6). Urine power to light camps in disaster

zones. ScienceDaily. Retrieved June 7, 2015 from

www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2015/03/150306111905.htm

http://faculty.nps.edu/dl/HFN/documents/NPS_Katrina_AAR-LL_04-MAY-06.pdf

http://sensisaero.com/site/content/humanitarian-missions

http://www.afcea.org/content/?q=space-based-solar-power-comes-closer-reality