1 / 11

Task 3.2 – ( Land Use)/Spatial Indicators of Vulnerable communities

Task 3.2 – ( Land Use)/Spatial Indicators of Vulnerable communities. Friday 27 th April 2012 Patrik Karlsson Nyed GIS analyst, KU. Case cities. Dar Es Salaam. St Louis. Main objectives. Reveal spatial indicators which are relating to the vulnerability of communities .

nascha
Download Presentation

Task 3.2 – ( Land Use)/Spatial Indicators of Vulnerable communities

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Task 3.2 – (Land Use)/Spatial Indicators of Vulnerable communities Friday 27th April 2012 Patrik Karlsson Nyed GIS analyst, KU

  2. Case cities Dar Es Salaam St Louis

  3. Main objectives • Revealspatialindicatorswhicharerelating to the vulnerability of communities. • Map vulnerable communities and highriskareas.

  4. Indicators • Whatarethey? Quantitative entities that provide information of wider significance than is actually measured • Why do weneedthem? TIME-EFFICIENT decision-making and planning (instead of qualitative methods) Comparisons across SPACE and over TIME # Pinpoint most vulnerable communities – Space # Development between years – Time

  5. Task 3.2 – Workflow indicators Inventory First selection Hazard-type relevant Expert survey Literature study 1 Local expert survey Ranking/Weighting? Second selection Site-specific 2a African partners Other sources (e.g. WWW) OOA (Digitizing/Segmentation) Field surveys Purchase  Decide MMU Check data availability 2b Geodata processing Analysis/Validation Map making 3 Reduction indicators Vulnerability Index Sharing with stakeholders

  6. Workflow – step 1 Inventory First selection Hazard-type relevant • Expert survey/Literature study  Long list of potential indicators • Exclude indicators less relevant to hazard type  Less long list of potential indicators

  7. Workflow – step 2a Second selection Site-specific • Local expert survey  Less long list of potential indicators  Short list of potential indicators Community representatives Municipality officials and University staff

  8. Workflow – step 2b Check data availability • African partners • Other sources (e.g. WWW) • OOA (Digitizing/Segmentation) • Field surveys • Purchase  Task 2.2 – UMT (Urban Morphology Types)  Task 2.1 – Construction materialbuildings  Task 1.3 – DEM (Digital Elevation Models)

  9. Workflow – step 3 Geodata processing Analysis/Validation Map making • Geodata processing – Quantification of indicators using GIS  Short list of potential indicators • Analysis/Validation – Stepwise regression analysis using vulnerability data from national census as validation • A fewindicators (explaining most of the variation in vulnerability) • CreateVulnerability Index (using the final set of indicators) • Map making (overlay) • Vulnerability of communities • High riskareas • Mobility/Accessibility • Network Analysis Proportion green areas

  10. Spatial Indicator • Preconditions(somenecessary, othersdesired) - Quantifiable in space Previous Hazard Experience • Field survey (doorwaythreshold)  Official records of previousfloodareas - Express variation Sex ratio • Mobility/Accessibility • Network Analysis •  Proportion pavedroads - Valid (measure what it is intended to) Pop. size ??? - Comprehensible Maps – Comparison across SPACE Repeatable – Comparison over TIME - Achievable? Constraints: Data access Budget Know-how  Future accessibility  ‘Short-cut proxy’

  11. Thanks for the attention

More Related