Presentations, group discussions and conclusions

Three presentations were made before the group discussion sessions. These presentations illustrate some of the tools available to help those involved in rehabilitation work and some of the important human aspects of working with these tools.

Some common threads

There are many approaches to the adoption, adaptation and use of spatial information tools. There are also many vendors promoting the advantages of their hardware and software packages. There are, however, a number of common threads and considerations that can be applied to most situations.

• The hardware and software for Remote Sensing, GIS, mapping and spatial information gets smaller, cheaper and easier to use with each passing year. It is now feasible to deploy these tools at provincial, district and community levels and to train people with relative ease.
• Different regions, districts and communities have different dimensions of vulnerability that require different interventions and policies. Spatial tools are ideally suited to helping people determine and meet these needs.
• The ultimate objective is to improve planning and decision-making processes by providing useful and scientifically sound information. Spatial information tools can help reduce conflicts and help agencies coordinate their efforts by providing accurate, objective data on legal, institutional, and land-water interface issues in the coastal zone.
• To be useful for emergency response, spatial information and database systems need to be ready beforehand and should be available in the public domain for sharing. Governments need to build the capacity of communities and facilitators at local level to use spatial tools and materials. Spatial information should be viewed as an opportunity for the coastal community to advance in the field of resource management.
• Building systems to collect, store, exchange and analyse data is not always the answer. Most systems have been built before so look for re-use. The cost of maintaining a system far exceeds the cost of building it, good system design and architecture standards are essential for lowering maintenance costs.
• The tools themselves are not the answer. The critical factor in every case is people. Dealing with people is about relationships. Governance and systems can promote, encourage and facilitate collaboration but cannot mandate it.
• Barriers to collaboration can be categorized as issues concerning: who knows what, accessibility to information, and collaboration versus control within hierarchies, and trust.

In terms of data and data collection:

• Livelihood indicators are needed in addition to technical indicators. The latter do not say much about human welfare.
• An important consideration is the budget available as systems are often expected to provide data and information far beyond what the resources allow.
• An “exit strategy” is a key consideration. Planners need to build on existing institutions that are around for the long-term. An exit strategy should be part of the initial plan and project.
• Indicators and data collection tools should be jointly developed in collaboration with stakeholders. Consider how the information can be useful to other stakeholders and explore partnerships.
• Information collection is expensive and time consuming. Use a “minimum data requirement approach” for affected sectors. Only gather information to support defined objectives, do not collect information without a clear need.
• Data collection at local level by local agencies using participatory approaches is highly cost effective and can produce high quality data.
• Data collection needs to be done by trained people, not necessarily experts, but people who have had at least basic training.
• A database should be simple, appropriate, sustainable for future use, and realistic for line agencies to maintain.

“Different dimensions of vulnerability identified in each region require us to consider different interventions and policies.”

This presentation outlines the origins and background to the establishment of the Food Insecurity and Vulnerability Information Mapping System and its current structure and national partners. The main objectives of the project are:

• Capacity and institutional building to operationalize FIVIMS (indicators, analysis methods, data sharing and networking modalities, institution/team building, etc.).
• Vulnerability analysis, vulnerable and food insecure group/area profiling and mapping (assessment and mapping at subnational levels to support decision making, planning, targeted policies and programmes formulation).
• Enhanced Key Indicators Data System (KIDS); a web-based dynamic FIVIMS information dissemination and mapping system at national, regional and global levels.

Thailand is one of the first countries in Asia engaged in FIVIMS efforts. The Philippines and Laos are also using the system. In Sri Lanka, FIVIMS monitors transitory food insecurity caused by natural disasters, especially droughts, and advocates for more effective policies and interventions that target areas vulnerable to chronic food insecurity.

“The ultimate objective is to improve planning and decision-making processes by providing useful and scientifically sound information.”

Spatial information systems can support post-rehabilitation reconstruction and development efforts as well as integrated costal resource planning and management in Asian tsunami affected coastal areas. Accurate base data, access to information, collaboration with other data providers, and maps for planning are important aspects. Major tools for spatial analysis include GPS, GIS and remote sensing. Integrated spatial information systems can be used for coastal management as well.

Poorly managed economic development in coastal areas is likely to create serious problems related to environment. Integrated Coastal Resources Management (ICRM) is a process designed to manage human uses of coastal resources following the principles of sustainable development. ICRM is not intended to replace single-sector resource management institutional work. Rather, it can help reduce conflicts and help agencies coordinate their efforts by providing accurate, objective data on legal, institutional, and land-water interface issues in the coastal zone.

To be useful for emergency response, spatial information and database systems need to be ready beforehand and should be available in the public domain for sharing. Governments need to build the capacity of communities and facilitators at sub-national level to use spatial materials. Spatial information should be viewed as an opportunity for the coastal community to advance in the field of resource management.

“People are five times more likely to seek knowledge from a colleague than a database or a filing cabinet.”

CZM (Australia) Pty Ltd. is an independent specialist consultancy in integrated coastal zone management. CZM offers services in coastal planning and policy, institutional analysis, project management, information management and coastal governance.

In this presentation, David Green offers some thoughts on how to successfully deliver a complex programme of work where resources are constrained, requirements are evolving and unknown, there are multiple stakeholders with conflicting agendas and a mixture of operation crisis management and project delivery.

Mr Green suggested the answer lies in looking at the interaction between governance, systems and people. Governance and organizational practices are typically characterized by strategic vision, a long-term programme of work, and an approved programme of work with few if any exceptions and a clear separation of strategic and delivery functions.

Building systems to collect, store, exchange and analyse data is not always the answer. Most systems have been built before so look for re-use. The cost of maintaining a system far exceeds the cost of building it, good system design and architecture standards are essential for lowering maintenance costs.

Dealing with people is about relationships. Governance and systems will assist collaboration but cannot mandate it. Consider that there are both formal and informal channels to getting work done.

Barriers to collaboration can be categorized as issues concerning: who knows what, accessibility to information, collaboration versus control within hierarchies, and trust.