Please excuse my ignorance, but what is the scope of the HOT's ambitions to deploy into the field in the wake of disasters? Will we, as a global community, be maintaining a global deployment capability or supporting local OSM communities support themselves remotely? (Note: I don't think think these are mutually exclusive)
On 17 March 2012 04:33, Reinier Battenberg <[email protected]> wrote: > > It sounds a bit like we would need escrow funding, where there is money parked > in a bankaccount that only becomes available (and then immediately) when there > is a disaster that needs our effort. > > It would be great if we got to a point where we knew that we could deploy when > needed. Building up a good relation with UNOCHA (for example) while there is > no disaster yet seems like a good idea. > > Until we do get that guarantee, all the preparing for off-site deployment is > surely valuable as well. > > rgds, > reinier > > > On Friday 16 March 2012 11:21:57 Séverin MENARD wrote: >> Hi Francis, >> >> I totally agree regarding the $, we would need to be funded for this, but >> this is smth we could request based on these unique capacities. And >> definitely yes regarding the qualifications + the experience on disaster >> fields. I do not know how many of us have these capacities in the roster. >> Maybe not many, I do not know. This is one of the reasons why we started an >> internship program in Haiti. >> Reading Kate's answer in the meantime, seems not many :) I agree we may not >> be prepared for this now, but from my experience this is smth we should >> try to strive for. As an example, if ever a huge disaster as the 2010 Haiti >> Earthquake or Pakistan floods occurs again, I would like to help on the >> ground again, but having to work for some big agencies losing my time on >> useless papermaps products rather than activate communities and HOT >> response (even if I could do it a bit in parallel) would be really >> frustrating. If we cannot propose a HOT deployment to a funder so far, >> maybe we could propose to UN agencies (e.g. OCHA), when they are looking >> for GIS consultants, to deploy one or two experienced (and vaccinated) >> Hotties for ground activities and coordination with the remote community. >> They normally expect consultants able to do not too crappy ArcGIS >> papermaps, while we can provide, by combining the skills, baseline data >> collected remotely by the volunteer effort and by local mappers, community >> activation supported by an Ushahidi platform, trainings, imagery, specific >> tools, etc., etc. >> >> On Fri, Mar 16, 2012 at 10:14 AM, Fran Boon <[email protected]> wrote: >> > On 16 March 2012 13:36, Séverin MENARD <[email protected]> wrote: >> > > Soory I missed this chat but will be present to the next one. >> > > Remote response apart, what should be our potential ground >> > > deployment ? >> > >> > I >> > >> > > think a ground team who would activate and train quickly the local >> > > communities, could drive the HOT remote support, provide imagery >> > >> > feedbacks >> > >> > > (precise GPS coordinates, interpretation, etc.) or even imagery >> > > itself >> > >> > taken >> > >> > > by a drone (some tests are ongoing in Haiti) would make sense. IMHO >> > > HOT's kind of uniqueness is to be able to provide coordinated >> > > ground and remote response. >> > >> > Hi Severin, >> > >> > What you outline sounds great, however it requires an essential >> > element which remote support doesn't: $ >> > A remote support can be done using relatively little volunteer time to >> > set up & then it's up to the community how much they're able to engage >> > in the actual work - as HOT we cannot be responsible for that - we >> > just set up the infrastructure and make the call (being careful not to >> > abuse this so we don't get volunteer fatigue). >> > >> > Ground support would either require HOT to have it's own funds or else >> > to have the requesting Organisation sponsor it (even if the time was >> > all donated). >> > I agree that we should have a clause in about this and this can start >> > by saying 'As HOT has no funds of it's own, a ground support request >> > would require the requesting organisation to find funds for this' >> > What else do we need to define around this? >> > * Role descriptions (I know Kate has done this) >> > * Being sure we don't send people out uninsured? >> > * Being sure that people we send out are suitably qualified? >> > * Being sure that people we send out are suitably equipped? (which >> > might not require very much) >> > >> > Anything else? >> > >> > F >> > >> > > Severin >> > > >> > > On Fri, Mar 16, 2012 at 8:00 AM, <[email protected]> wrote: >> > >> Send HOT mailing list submissions to >> > >> >> > >> [email protected] >> > >> >> > >> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit >> > >> >> > >> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot >> > >> >> > >> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to >> > >> >> > >> [email protected] >> > >> >> > >> You can reach the person managing the list at >> > >> >> > >> [email protected] >> > >> >> > >> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more >> > >> specific >> > >> than "Re: Contents of HOT digest..." >> > >> >> > >> Today's Topics: >> > >> 1. 1st Activation Working Group meeting report (Schuyler Erle) >> > >> >> > >> ------------------------------------------------------------------ >> > >> ---- >> > >> >> > >> Message: 1 >> > >> Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2012 00:22:42 +0530 >> > >> From: Schuyler Erle <[email protected]> >> > >> To: [email protected] >> > >> Subject: [HOT] 1st Activation Working Group meeting report >> > >> Message-ID: <[email protected]> >> > >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii >> > >> >> > >> Hello Team, >> > >> >> > >> Today we had the first meeting of the HOT Activation Working Group >> > >> on >> > >> > the >> > >> > >> IRC channel. The meeting lasted an hour. Pierre Beland, Fran >> > >> Boon, >> > >> > Andrew >> > >> > >> Buck, Robert Banick, Harry Wood, and I participated. >> > >> >> > >> The stated objective of the working group is to develop a strategy >> > >> and >> > >> tactics for optimally allocating HOT's resources in response to >> > >> > humanitarian >> > >> > >> crisis. We noted that humanitarian crises range quite widely in >> > >> > severity and >> > >> > >> in level of international response, and that HOT's response should >> > >> be >> > >> commensurate with the degree to which our services will be used by >> > >> responders on the ground. >> > >> >> > >> The substance of the discussion today revolved around identifying >> > >> HOT's possible responses to crisis (including documenting data >> > >> sources,> >> > acquiring >> > >> > >> imagery, setting up volunteer tasking services, and mobilizing >> > >> > volunteers), >> > >> > >> and working backwards to identify the triggers for those >> > >> activities. >> > >> >> > >> We also discussed at length the distinction between "activation", >> > >> and >> > >> simply responding to requests made by partner organizations. We >> > >> agreed >> > >> > (I >> > >> > >> believe) that prompt and reliable response to partner inquiries >> > >> should >> > >> > be a >> > >> > >> priority for HOT and should be taken up as a subject for >> > >> discussion and recommendation by the working group. >> > >> >> > >> I think that the working group members agreed to start documenting >> > >> some> >> > of >> > >> > >> these ideas on the OSM wiki for further discussion. We also agreed >> > >> after talking for an hour to pick up the discussion again one >> > >> week from> >> > today, at >> > >> > >> 14:00 UTC on Thu 22 Mar 2012. >> > >> > >> The IRC log for today's meeting is here: >> > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Humanitarian_OpenStreetMap_Team/Activ >> > ation_Working_Group_22_Mar_2012> >> > >> Hope to see those of you who are interested in the subject on #hot >> > >> next Thursday! I'll send out a reminder a couple days ahead of >> > >> time. Cheers! >> > >> >> > >> SDE >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> ------------------------------ >> > >> >> > >> _______________________________________________ >> > >> HOT mailing list >> > >> [email protected] >> > >> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> End of HOT Digest, Vol 25, Issue 13 >> > >> *********************************** >> > > >> > > _______________________________________________ >> > > HOT mailing list >> > > [email protected] >> > > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot > -- > rgds, > > Reinier Battenberg > Director > Mountbatten Ltd. > www.mountbatten.net > tel: +256 758 801749 > twitter: @batje > > _______________________________________________ > HOT mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot _______________________________________________ HOT mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot
