Evaluation of an open-source collaborative web-GIS prototype in risk management with students
- 60 Downloads
Over the past decades, advancements in web services and web-based geospatial technologies have led to increasing delivery, access and analysis of rich spatial information over the web. With the use of open access data and open-source technology, it has become possible for policy and decision makers to make more transparent and informed decisions. Under the framework of the CHANGES project, a prototype web-based collaborative decision support platform was developed for the evaluation and selection of risk management measures, mainly targeting flood and landslide hazards. The design of the conceptual framework was based on the initial observations obtained from field visits and stakeholders’ meetings at the case study areas of the project. A three-tier client–server architecture backed up by Boundless (OpenGeo) was applied with its client side development environment for rapid prototyping. This developed prototype was tested with university students to obtain feedback on the conceptual and technical aspects of the platform as well as to analyse how the application of interactive tools during an exercise could assist students in studying and understanding risk management. During the exercise, different roles (authorities, technicians, community) were assigned to each group of students for identification and selection of risk mitigation measures in a study area: Cucco village located in Malborghetto-Valbruna municipality of North-Eastern Italy. Data were collected by means of written feedback forms on specific aspects of the platform and the exercise. The subsequent analysis of the feedback reveals that students with previous experience in Geographical Information Systems (GIS) responded positively and showed interests in performing exercises with such kinds of interactive tools for learning, compared to the ones with fewer or no GIS experience. These results also show that the prototype is useful and supportive as a decision support tool in risk management while user-friendliness, interactivity and practical aspects of the platform could be further improved.
KeywordsCollaborative web-GIS Open-source Risk management Natural hazards Active learning
- 1.EM-DAT. (2012). The international disaster database. Centre for Research on the Epidemiology of Disasters (CRED). www.emdat.be. Accessed July 22, 2015.
- 2.Sterlacchini, S., Akbas, S. O., Blahut, J., Mavrouli, O. C., Garcia, C., Luna, B. Q., & Corominas, J. (2014). Methods for the characterization of the vulnerability of elements-at-risk. In T. van Asch, J. Corominas, S. Greiving, J. P. Malet, & S. Sterlacchini (Eds.), Mountain risks: From prediction to management and governance, advances in natural and technological hazards research (pp. 233–273). Dordrecht: Springer, Netherlands.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 3.APFM. (2006). Social Aspects and stakeholder involvement in integrated flood management. WMO: Geneva, Switzerland. http://www.preventionweb.net/files/556_10315.pdf. Accessed Jan 23, 2016.
- 7.Brown, G. (2012). Public Participation GIS (PPGIS) for regional and environmental planning: Reflections on a decade of empirical research. URISA Journal, 25(2), 7–18.Google Scholar
- 8.Jankowski, P., & Nyerges, T. (2001). GIS for group decision making: Towards a participatory geographic information science. New York: Taylor and Francis.Google Scholar
- 13.Pasche, E., Küpferle, C. H., & Manojlovic, N. (2007). Capacity building of spatial planners for flood risk management in urban environment through decision support systems and interactive learning. In Paper presented at the International Symposium on New Directions in Urban Water Management. UNESCO Paris, Sept 12–14.Google Scholar
- 18.McGahey, C., Sayers, P., van der Vat, M., Mens, M., & Schanze, J. (2008). An approach to planning for sustainable flood risk management in the long-term (supported by prototype tools). FLOODsite report T18-08-08. http://www.floodsite.net/html/partner_area/project_docs/t18_07_03_task_18_executive_summary_v2_0_p01.pdf. Accessed Jan 23, 2016.
- 19.Aye, Z. C., Sprague, T., Cortes, V. J., Prenger-Berninghoff, K., Jaboyedoff, M., & Derron, M.-H. (2016). A collaborative (web-GIS) framework based on empirical data collected from three case studies in Europe for risk management of hydro-meteorological hazards. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 15, 10–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 20.Prenger-Berninghoff, K., Cortes, V. J., Sprague, T., Aye, Z. C., Greiving, S., Głowacki, W., & Sterlacchini, S. (2014). The connection between long-term and short-term risk management strategies for flood and landslide hazards: Examples from land-use planning and emergency management in four European case studies. Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences, 14, 3261–3278.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 23.Bonwell, C. C., Eison, J. (1991). Active learning: Creating excitement in the classroom. ASHE ERIC Higher Education Report No. 1, George Washington University, Washington DC, USA.Google Scholar
- 24.Wiggins, G., & Mc Tighe, I. (1998). Understanding by design. Alexandria, Virginia, USA: Merrill Education/ASCD, College Textbook Series, ASCD.Google Scholar
- 25.Likert, R. (1932). A technique for the measurement of attitudes. Archives of Psychology, 22(140), 1–55.Google Scholar
- 26.Hussin, H. Y., Ciurean, R., Frigerio, S., Marcato, G., Calligaris, C., Reichenbach, P., et al. (2014). Assessing the effect of mitigation measures on landslide hazard using 2D numerical runout modelling. In K. Sassa, P. Canuti, & Y. Yin (Eds.), Landslide science for a safer geoenvironment (pp. 679–684). Cham: Springer International Publishing.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 29.Zeleny, M. (1973). Compromise programming, Multiple Criteria Decision Making. Columbia, South Carolina: University of South Carolina Press.Google Scholar