Integration of Different Data Bodies for Humanitarian Decision Support: An Example from Mine Action

Abstract

Geographic information systems (GIS) are increasingly used for integrating data from different sources and substantive areas, including in humanitarian action. The challenges of integration are particularly well illustrated by humanitarian mine action. The informational requirements of mine action are expensive, with socio-economic impact surveys costing over US$1.5 million per country, and are feeding a continuous debate on the merits of considering more factors or 'keeping it simple'. National census offices could, in theory, contribute relevant data, but in practice surveys have rarely overcome institutional obstacles to external data acquisition. A positive exception occurred in Lebanon, where the landmine impact survey had access to agricultural census data. The challenges, costs and benefits of this data integration exercise are analysed in a detailed case study. The benefits are considerable, but so are the costs, particularly the hidden ones. The Lebanon experience prompts some wider reflections. In the humanitarian community, data integration has been fostered not only by the diffusion of GIS technology, but also by institutional changes such as the creation of UN-led Humanitarian Information Centres. There is a question whether the analytic capacity is in step with aggressive data acquisition. Humanitarian action may yet have to build the kind of strong analytic tradition that public health and poverty alleviation have accomplished.

Methods for visualizing the explosive remnants of war

“…Benini (2000) and Benini et al (2003) Alegría et al is the most similar to our study, it differs from our work in several important respects. The previous study was restricted to a single scale, rather than using a range of scales from local to global; the ERW data were point data, with no polygon data; and the study was essentially a preliminary study to explore the utility of various analytical tools offered by a particular software package (CrimeStat; Levine 2010) for visualizing ERW risk.…”

“…For several reasons highlighted in this study, our work should encourage national programs to share a maximum amount of their data in future (Barlow 2003), not only for the mine action community but also to promote interdisciplinary scientific work (Köhler et al 2006). Combining ERW contamination maps with other layers (e.g., population density, strategic infrastructure, points of interest, and development areas) could help decision-makers determine the socio-economic impacts of hazards and prioritize future surveys (Benini et al 2003, Alegría et al 2011.…”

Survivor needs or logistical convenience? Factors shaping decisions to deliver relief to earthquake‐affected communities, Pakistan 2005–06

“…The integration of differently referenced data involved the choice of a new referent-in this case, low-level local government areas-spatial manipulation as well as treatment of missing values. It followed in the path of similar GIS-mediated humanitarian data management exercises that we pioneered within the Global Landmine Survey (Benini et al, 2002;Benini et al, 2003). In the present study, a particular achievement is the substitution for the very incomplete needs data from direct on-the-ground assessments; our GIS-based proxy indicators have virtually no missing values.…”

A simplified approach to the PROMETHEE method for priority setting in management of mine action projects

“…Furthermore, priority setting increases sustainability of humanitarian demining, emphasizing not only economical aspect but also social and ecological aspects ( [9], [10]). During the last 20 years, MCA/MCDM methods have been used intensively in the management of mine action projects: from complete decision support systems ( [1], [15], [20], [22], [23]) to the application of various MCDM methods ( [4], [27]). However, a standardized approach or method has not yet been established.…”