The wisdom of crowds for improved disaster resilience: a near-real-time analysis of crowdsourced social media data on the 2021 flood in Germany
Tóm tắt
Transformative disaster resilience in times of climate change underscores the importance of reflexive governance, facilitation of socio-technical advancement, co-creation of knowledge, and innovative and bottom-up approaches. However, implementing these capacity-building processes by relying on census-based datasets and nomothetic (or top-down) approaches remains challenging for many jurisdictions. Web 2.0 knowledge sharing via online social networks, whereas, provides a unique opportunity and valuable data sources to complement existing approaches, understand dynamics within large communities of individuals, and incorporate collective intelligence into disaster resilience studies. Using Twitter data (passive crowdsourcing) and an online survey, this study draws on the wisdom of crowds and public judgment in near-real-time disaster phases when the flood disaster hit Germany in July 2021. Latent Dirichlet Allocation, an unsupervised machine learning technique for Topic Modeling, was applied to the corpora of two data sources to identify topics associated with different disaster phases. In addition to semantic (textual) analysis, spatiotemporal patterns of online disaster communication were analyzed to determine the contribution patterns associated with the affected areas. Finally, the extracted topics discussed online were compiled into five themes related to disaster resilience capacities (preventive, anticipative, absorptive, adaptive, and transformative). The near-real-time collective sensing approach reflected optimized diversity and a spectrum of people’s experiences and knowledge regarding flooding disasters and highlighted communities’ sociocultural characteristics. This bottom-up approach could be an innovative alternative to traditional participatory techniques of organizing meetings and workshops for situational analysis and timely unfolding of such events at a fraction of the cost to inform disaster resilience initiatives.
Tài liệu tham khảo
Asadzadeh, A., Koetter, T., Fekete, A., Moghadas, M., Alizadeh, M., Zebardast, E., & Basirat, M. (2022). Urbanization, migration, and the challenges of resilience thinking in urban planning: Insights from two contrasting planning systems in Germany and Iran. Cities, 125, 103642. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2022.103642
Asadzadeh, A., Kötter, T., & Zebardast, E. (2015). An augmented approach for measurement of disaster resilience using connective factor analysis and analytic network process (F’ANP) model. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 14, 504–518. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2015.10.002
Assarkhaniki, Z., Rajabifard, A., & Sabri, S. (2020). The conceptualisation of resilience dimensions and comprehensive quantification of the associated indicators: A systematic approach. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 51, 101840. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.IJDRR.2020.101840
Béné, C., Wood, R. G., Newsham, A., & Davies, M. (2012). Resilience: New Utopia or New Tyranny? Reflection about the potentials and limits of the concept of resilience in relation to vulnerability reduction programmes. IDS Working Papers, 2012(405), 1–61. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2040-0209.2012.00405.x
Blei, D. M., Ng, A. Y., & Jordan, M. I. (2003). Latent Dirichlet allocation. Journal of Machine Learning Research, 3, 993–1022.
BMI. (2012). German Federal Ministry of the Interior, The Crisis Management System in Germany. Retrieved November 25, 2022, from https://www.bmi.bund.de/SharedDocs/downloads/EN/publikationen/2012/system_krisenmanagement_en.pdf?__blob=publicationFile
Broemme, A. (2022). Severe weather events: Strategies for Rhineland-Palatinate for prevention, preparation, coordination, follow-up and for improved resilience. Retrieved on November 26, 2022, from https://www.landtag.nrw.de/portal/WWW/dokumentenarchiv/Dokument/MMV17-6729.pdf
Cutter, S. L. (2016). The landscape of disaster resilience indicators in the USA. Natural Hazards, 80(2), 741–758. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-015-1993-2
Cutter, S. L., Barnes, L., Berry, M., Burton, C., Evans, E., Tate, E., & Webb, J. (2008). A place-based model for understanding community resilience to natural disasters. Global Environmental Change, 18(4), 598–606. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2008.07.013
Degrossi, L., Albuquerque, J. P. De, & Fortes, R. P. (2019a). An approach for assessing the quality of crowdsourced geographic information in the flood management domain.
Elwood, S., Goodchild, M. F., & Sui, D. Z. (2012). Researching volunteered geographic information: Spatial data, geographic research, and new social practice. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 102(3), 571–590. https://doi.org/10.1080/00045608.2011.595657
EM-DAT. (2022a). Retrieved April 21, 2022a, from https://public.emdat.be/data
Fan, C., Jiang, Y., & Mostafavi, A. (2020). Social sensing in disaster city digital Twin: Integrated Textual–Visual–Geo Framework for situational awareness during built environment disruptions. Journal of Management in Engineering, 36(3), 04020002. https://doi.org/10.1061/(asce)me.1943-5479.0000745
Fathi, R., Thom, D., Koch, S., Ertl, T., & Fiedrich, F. (2020). VOST: A case study in voluntary digital participation for collaborative emergency management. Information Processing and Management, 57(4), 102174. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ipm.2019.102174
Fekete, A., Asadzadeh, A., Ghafory-Ashtiany, M., Amini-Hosseini, K., Hetkämper, C., Moghadas, M., & Kötter, T. (2020a). Pathways for advancing integrative disaster risk and resilience management in Iran: Needs, challenges and opportunities. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 49, 101635. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2020.101635
Fekete, A. (2021). Motivation, satisfaction, and risks of operational forces and helpers regarding the 2021a and 2013 flood operations in Germany. Sustainability, 13, 12587. https://doi.org/10.3390/su132212587
Fekete, A., & Sandholz, S. (2021). Here comes the flood, but not failure? Lessons to learn after the heavy rain and pluvial floods in Germany 2021b. Water, 13, 3016. https://doi.org/10.3390/w132130161
Fekete, A., & Rhyner, J. (2020). Sustainable digital transformation of disaster risk—integrating new types of digital social vulnerability and interdependencies with critical infrastructure. Sustainability, 12(22), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12229324
Feldmeyer, D., Wilden, D., Jamshed, A., & Birkmann, J. (2020). Regional climate resilience index: A novel multimethod comparative approach for indicator development, empirical validation and implementation. Ecological Indicators, 119, 106861. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.ECOLIND.2020.106861
Ghermandi, A., & Sinclair, M. (2019). Passive crowdsourcing of social media in environmental research: A systematic map. Global Environmental Change, 55, 36–47. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.GLOENVCHA.2019.02.003
Gründer-Fahrer, S., Schlaf, A., Wiedemann, G., & Heyer, G. (2018). Topics and topical phases in German social media communication during a disaster. Natural Language Engineering, 24(2), 221–264. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1351324918000025
Haklay, M. (2013). Citizen science and volunteered geographic information: overview and typology of participation. In D. Sui, S. Elwood, & M. Goodchild (Eds.), Crowdsourcing geographic knowledge: volunteered geographic information (VGI) in Theory and Practice (pp. 105–122). Springer Netherlands. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-4587-2_7
Houston, J. B., Hawthorne, J., Perreault, M. M. F., Park, E. H. E., Goldstein Hode, M., Halliwell, M. R. M., & Griffith, S. A. (2014). Social media and disasters: A functional framework for social media use in disaster planning, response, and research. Disasters, 39(1), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1111/disa.12092
Howe, J. (2006). The rise of crowdsourcing. Wired Magazine, 14, 1–5. https://doi.org/10.2307/25599409
Huang, Y., Li, Y., & Shan, J. (2018). Spatial-temporal event detection from geo-tagged tweets. ISPRS International Journal of Geo-Information, 7(4), 150. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijgi7040150
IPCC. (2022). Retrieved June 19, 2022, from https://www.ipcc.ch/assessment-report/ar6/
Jelodar, H., Wang, Y., Yuan, C., Feng, X., Jiang, X., Li, Y., & Zhao, L. (2019). Latent Dirichlet allocation (LDA) and topic modeling: Models, applications, a survey. Multimedia Tools and Applications, 78(11), 15169–15211. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11042-018-6894-4
Junghänel, T., Bissolli, P., Daßler, J., Fleckenstein, R., Imbery, F., Janssen, W., Weigl, E. (2021). Hydro-klimatologische Einordnung der Stark-und Dauerniederschläge in Teilen Deutschlands im Zusammenhang mit dem Tiefdruckgebiet “Bernd” vom 12. bis 19. Juli 2021. DWD. Offenbach, Gerrmany.
Khazai, B., Bendimerad, F., Cardona, O.-D., Carreño, M. L., Barbat, H. A., & Christopher, G. B. (2015). A guide to measuring urban risk resilience: Principles, Tools and Practice of Urban Indicators. Retrieved from http://www.emi-megacities.org
Khazai, B., Anhorn, J., & Burton, C. G. (2018). Resilience Performance Scorecard: Measuring urban disaster resilience at multiple levels of geography with case study application to Lalitpur, Nepal. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 31(March), 604–616. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2018.06.012
Kryvasheyeu, Y., Chen, H., Obradovich, N., Moro, E., Van Hentenryck, P., Fowler, J., & Cebrian, M. (2016). Rapid assessment of disaster damage using social media activity. Science Advances, 2(3), 64545.
Lamoureux, Z., & Fast, V. (2019). The tools of citizen science: An evaluation of map-based crowdsourcing platforms. CEUR Workshop Proceedings, 2323(4), 1. Retrieved from https://ceur-ws.org/Vol-2323/SKI-Canada-2019-7-4-1.pdf
Laylavi, F., Rajabifard, A., & Kalantari, M. (2016). A multi-element approach to location inference of Twitter: A case for emergency response. ISPRS International Journal of Geo-Information, 5(5), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijgi5050056
Manyena, B., Machingura, F., & O’Keefe, P. (2019). Disaster Resilience integrated framework for transformation (DRIFT): A new approach to theorising and operationalising resilience. World Development, 123, 104587. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2019.06.011
Math, S., Nirmala, M., Moirangthem, S., & Kumar, N. (2015). Disaster management: Mental Health perspective. Indian Journal of Psychological Medicine, 37(3), 261. https://doi.org/10.4103/0253-7176.162915
Mimno, D., Wallach, H. M., Talley, E., Leenders, M., & Mccallum, A. (2011). Optimizing semantic coherence in topic models. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (EMNLP 11). Association for Computational Linguistics, pp. 262–272.
Moghadas, M., Asadzadeh, A., Vafeidis, A., Fekete, A., & Kötter, T. (2019b). A multi-criteria approach for assessing urban flood resilience in Tehran, Iran. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 35, 101069. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2019.101069
Moghadas, M., Rajabifard, A., Fekete, A., & Kötter, T. (2022). A framework for scaling urban transformative resilience through utilizing volunteered geographic information. ISPRS International Journal of Geo-Information, 22, 114. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijgi11020114
Mostafavi, A., Ganapati, N. E., Nazarnia, H., Pradhananga, N., & Khanal, R. (2017). Adaptive capacity under chronic stressors: Assessment of Water Infrastructure Resilience in 2015 Nepalese earthquake using a system approach. Natural Hazards Review, 19(1), 05017006. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)NH.1527-6996.0000263
Muñoz, L., Hausner, V. H., Runge, C., Brown, G., & Daigle, R. (2020b). Using crowdsourced spatial data from Flickr vs PPGIS for understanding nature’s contribution to people in Southern Norway. People and Nature, 2(2), 437–449. https://doi.org/10.1002/PAN3.10083/SUPPINFO
Netzel, L., Heldt, S., & Denecke, M. (2021). Analyzing Twitter communication about heavy precipitation events to improve future risk communication and disaster reduction in Germany. Urban Water Journal, 18(5), 310–319. https://doi.org/10.1080/1573062X.2021.1878241
Nimrod, G. (2014). The benefits of and constraints to participation in seniors’ online communities. Leisure Studies, 33(3), 247–266. https://doi.org/10.1080/02614367.2012.697697
European Parliament. (2021). Lessons to be learned from the devastating floods in western and central Europe. Retrieved April 23, 2022, from https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/P-9-2021-003686_EN.html
Rachunok, B., Bennett, J., Flage, R., & Nateghi, R. (2021). A path forward for leveraging social media to improve the study of community resilience. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 59, 102236. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.IJDRR.2021.102236
Rajabifard, A. (2020). Sustainable development goals connectivity dilemma: Land and geospatial information for Urban and Rural Resilience. CRC Press.
Rajabifard, A., Paez, D., & Foliente, G. (2021c). COVID-19 Pandemic, geospatial information, and community resilience: Global applications and lessons. CRC Press.
Resch, B., Summa, A., Zeile, P., & Strube, M. (2016). Citizen-centric urban planning through extracting emotion information from Twitter in an interdisciplinary space-time-linguistics algorithm. Urban Planning, 1(2), 114–127. https://doi.org/10.17645/up.v1i2.617
Resch, B., Usländer, F., & Havas, C. (2018). Combining machine-learning topic models and spatiotemporal analysis of social media data for disaster footprint and damage assessment. Cartography and Geographic Information Science, 45(4), 362–376. https://doi.org/10.1080/15230406.2017.1356242
Rizzatti, M., Lampert Batista, N., Leonardo, P., Spode, C., Bouvier Erthal, D., Mauro De Faria, R., & Quoos, J. H. (2020). Mapping COVID-19 through Kernel Density. Metodologias e Aprendizado, 3, 44–53. https://doi.org/10.21166/metapre.v3i0.1312
Rudra, K., Goyal, P., Ganguly, N., Imran, M., & Mitra, P. (2019). Summarizing situational tweets in crisis scenarios: An extractive-abstractive approach. IEEE Transactions on Computational Social Systems, 6(5), 981–993. https://doi.org/10.1109/TCSS.2019.2937899
Sievert, C., & Shirley, K. E. (2014). LDAvis: A method for visualizing and interpreting topics. In Proceedings ofthe Workshop on Interactive Language Learning, Visualization, and Interfaces, Baltimore, pp. 63–70.
Twitter Developer Platform. (2022b). Retrieved April 21, 2022b, from https://developer.twitter.com/en/docs/twitter-api/tweets/search/api-reference/get-tweets-search-recent
Tzavella, K., Skopeliti, A., & Fekete, A. (2022). Volunteered geographic information use in crisis, emergency and disaster management: A scoping review and a web atlas. Geo-Spatial Information Science. https://doi.org/10.1080/10095020.2022.2139642
UNDRR. (2022). UNDRR-Terminology. Retrieved May 3, 2022, from https://www.undrr.org/terminology#R
United Nations (2015b) Transforming our world: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. General Assembley 70 session. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13398-014-0173-7.2
United Nations. (2015). Sendai framework for disaster risk reduction 2015–2030. Switzerland.
Wang, K., Lam, N. S. N., Zou, L., & Mihunov, V. (2021d). Twitter use in hurricane isaac and its implications for disaster resilience. ISPRS International Journal of Geo-Information, 10(3), 116. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijgi10030116
Yabe, T., Rao, S. C. P., Ukkusuri, S. V., & Cutter, S. L. (2022c). Toward data-driven, dynamical complex systems approaches to disaster resilience. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 119(8), e2111997119. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2111997119
Zhou, S., Kan, P., Huang, Q., & Silbernagel, J. (2021). A guided latent Dirichlet allocation approach to investigate real-time latent topics of Twitter data during Hurricane Laura. Journal of Information Science. https://doi.org/10.1177/01655515211007724
Ziegler, M. G. (2022). Web 2.0 and knowledge sharing. a literature review. AI, Computer Science and Robotics Technology, 2022, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.5772/ACRT.03