[HOT] Including natural hazards in the HOSM data model?

Kate Chapman kate at maploser.com
Wed Apr 4 19:53:09 BST 2012


I think what is important to think about are two points:

1. Which data is relevant for inclusion in OpenStreetMap
2. Which data is relevant for disaster preparedness and planning and should
be open

These two things aren't a one to one relation.  HOT's mission is to provide
free geodata for use in response and preparedness for disasters.  Yes this
usually translates to OpenStreetMap, but I think there are occasions where
it would not.

On Wed, Apr 4, 2012 at 11:43 AM, Eric Lovell <eric.j.lovell at gmail.com>wrote:

> By assuming that the 'average person' is unable to collect relevant hazard
> information, are we not claiming that only empirical top-down information
> should be considered? Shouldn't place-based knowledge systems be the most
> relevant systems for place-based hazards...that is "things that are on the
> ground"? Isn't this counter intuitive to initiatives to 'democratize' data?
>
> I have no input as to whether this type of information should be
> incorporated into OSM. I think both Kate and Stéphane have valid points.
> Just food for thought.
>
> Best,
>
> Eric
>
>
> On Wed, Apr 4, 2012 at 11:18 AM, Kate Chapman <kate at maploser.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi Stéphane,
>>
>> The issue I see is more that it will depend on the type of hazard data.
>>  OpenStreetMap is usually used to map things that are visible on the
>> ground.  I see it being difficult for some types of hazards to be collected
>> by the average person (not to say for some types it isn't easier).  I'm not
>> saying it is less relevant to humanitarian actors, I'm saying that it
>> perhaps is better in another store and to be compared with OpenStreetMap
>> data.
>>
>> People combine data with OSM data all the time.  Everything isn't either
>> an in or out proposition.  I think it is important to have relevant and
>> updatable information in OSM and be able to utilize it with other
>> information that might be less practical for us to collect.
>>
>> -Kate
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Apr 4, 2012 at 10:35 AM, Stéphane Henriod <s at henriod.info> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Kate,
>>>
>>> I am browsing through inasafe website and it seems indeed pretty
>>> interesting and relevant for the issues I raised in my first email.
>>>
>>> However, I believe that it is complementary rather than conflicting:
>>> what I would aim at is the possibility to collect hazard data in an
>>> OSM-compliant format that could, in turn, be used for risk analysis, for
>>> example with InaSAFE.
>>>
>>> I see your point that hazard data (flood-prone areas, recurrent
>>> landslides, seismic zones...) might need to be located out of the main OSM
>>> DB, but I would be interested to read whether this opinion is mostly shared
>>> by other HOT members? What I mean is: is the hazard data really less
>>> relevant to the humanitarian and to the overall communities than the
>>> blocked roads, the IDPs locations or the Search and Rescue zones? IMHO,
>>> they would fall in the same category, so either everything in the main OSM
>>> DB, or everything out of it. Does that sound silly?
>>>
>>> Thanks a lot for replying to me, and looking forward to engage the
>>> discussion with any other member that would feel interested!
>>>
>>>
>>> Stéphane
>>> --
>>> "Le mot progrès n'aura aucun sens tant qu'il y aura des enfants
>>> malheureux" -- Albert Einstein
>>>
>>> "A journey does not need reasons. Before long, it proves to be reason
>>> enough in itself. One thinks that one is going to make a journey, yet soon
>>> it is the journey that makes or unmakes you." -- Nicolas Bouvier
>>>
>>> Photos de voyages, photos de montagne: http://www.henriod.info
>>>
>>> Skype: [image: Skype name: marmotte_la_gueuse]
>>> Tajik mobile phone: +992 934 62 46 62
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, Apr 4, 2012 at 17:06, Kate Chapman <kate at maploser.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hello Stéphane,
>>>>
>>>> I don't think it would really make sense to add many of those types of
>>>> hazards to OpenStreetMap.  We've collected information such as areas
>>>> prone to flooding before but the actual hazard models should probably
>>>> stay separate.  They can be combined with OpenStreetMap information
>>>> however to create impact models.
>>>>
>>>> This is something currently being done by AIFDR and GFDRR with
>>>> InaSAFE: https://github.com/AIFDR/inasafe
>>>>
>>>> Best,
>>>>
>>>> -Kate
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Apr 4, 2012 at 7:14 AM, Stéphane Henriod <s at henriod.info>
>>>> wrote:
>>>> > Hello,
>>>> >
>>>> > I am relatively new to OSM and completely new to Humanitarian OSM but
>>>> > extremely enthusiastic about both projects and would like to
>>>> contribute in a
>>>> > way that I will describe below, and for which I would appreciate your
>>>> > feedback and ideas.
>>>> >
>>>> > Most humanitarian actors agree that the best response to an emergency
>>>> is
>>>> > preparedness, not only in terms of behaviors but also data. What
>>>> strikes me
>>>> > when I look at HOSM data model is that I don't see anything for
>>>> natural
>>>> > hazard delineation, for example. When responding to a crisis,
>>>> humanitarian
>>>> > actors might want to know in advance where to expect landslides,
>>>> avalanches
>>>> > and floods areas (for their own safety but also to "predict" where
>>>> roads
>>>> > might be blocked or where facilities might have been affected).
>>>> Seismic
>>>> > zonation is something that can be directly included in OSM; oldish
>>>> data is
>>>> > freely available from the GSHAP project, while the GlobalEarthquake
>>>> Model
>>>> > will provide with a more modern version in a few years.
>>>> >
>>>> > My question to the active and experienced members of the community is
>>>> thus
>>>> > the following: would you see any relevance to develop classes for
>>>> natural
>>>> > (and man-made?) hazards to be included in HOSM framework?
>>>> >
>>>> > As we can not expect the communities to have the technical knowledge
>>>> of
>>>> > hazard scientists, the ontology would have to remain quite simple,
>>>> which is
>>>> > probably ok for humanitarian actors (who cares whether it's a
>>>> landslide, a
>>>> > rockfall or a debris flow? a general category "earth mass movement"
>>>> might be
>>>> > sufficient for our purpose). Also, a distinction should be made
>>>> between
>>>> > "usual" events (those that occur relatively frequently but that might
>>>> or
>>>> > might not be currently triggered) and actual events (that have been
>>>> actually
>>>> > triggered).
>>>> >
>>>> > Many challenges ahead but before diving into it, I would like to
>>>> check with
>>>> > you if this idea has already been discussed and if it makes sense to
>>>> pursue
>>>> > it.
>>>> >
>>>> > Thanks a lot in advance and look forward to reading your comments,
>>>> >
>>>> > Stéphane
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> > --
>>>> > "Le mot progrès n'aura aucun sens tant qu'il y aura des enfants
>>>> malheureux"
>>>> > -- Albert Einstein
>>>> >
>>>> > "A journey does not need reasons. Before long, it proves to be reason
>>>> enough
>>>> > in itself. One thinks that one is going to make a journey, yet soon
>>>> it is
>>>> > the journey that makes or unmakes you." -- Nicolas Bouvier
>>>> >
>>>> > Photos de voyages, photos de montagne: http://www.henriod.info
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> > _______________________________________________
>>>> > HOT mailing list
>>>> > HOT at openstreetmap.org
>>>> > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot
>>>> >
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> HOT mailing list
>>> HOT at openstreetmap.org
>>> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot
>>>
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> HOT mailing list
>> HOT at openstreetmap.org
>> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot
>>
>>
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/hot/attachments/20120404/f0170344/attachment.html>


More information about the HOT mailing list