Risk Management Strategies: Role of Urban Information Management and Services

1
Risk Management Strategies Role of Urban
Information Management and Services

• Dr. Robert S. Chen
• Deputy Director and Senior Research Scientist
• Center for International Earth Science
  Information Network (CIESIN)
• Manager, Socioeconomic Data and Applications
  Center (SEDAC)
• Columbia University
• With inputs from
• Mark Reichardt
• Open GIS Consortium

2
Data and Information Post 9/11

• NYC EMC destroyed in WTC
• Included GIS capabilities
• Alternative command center brought in GIS
  systems, experts, volunteers within first 2-3
  days
• Different systems, data used by different
  agencies
• Everyone adopted NYC base map, developed from
  1-foot orthoimagery
• GIS, GPS, remote sensing, Internet mapping used
  widely for monitoring, analysis, coordination,
  planning, control, communication, investigation
• Some data had to be driven down from Albany!

3
Emergency Response Data and Information Needs

• Many possible disaster scenarios
• need robust and flexible access to diverse data
  and information
• need underlying framework or structure for
  assimilating new data
• Difficult to know what is going on in many
  different places
• need real-time access to data from different
  sources
• need accessible analysis and modeling services
• need data and information generated from
  monitoring and analysis to be shared and
  exchanged between dozens of different groups
  involved in response (both public and private)
• Information system itself may be vulnerable
• need redundancy, survivability, and ability to
  redeploy assets
• Demand for information by policy makers and the
  public is immediate
• need to have communication channels and templates
  in place in advance

4
Example NYC Maps Used and Disseminated by the EMC
(1)
5
Example NYC Maps Used and Disseminated by the EMC
(2)
6
Some Key Barriers to Meeting Needs

• Data hard to find, access, and integrate
• Data not cataloged or cataloged inconsistently
• Catalogs scattered, dont support automated data
  access
• Data are offline, proprietary, and/or restricted
• Technical issues, e.g., projection, resolution,
  format, quality
• Data and information systems dont talk to each
  other
• Lack of standards proliferation of proprietary
  or idiosyncratic formats, styles of
  presentations, tools, etc.
• Lack of interoperability between instruments,
  data loggers, database systems, catalogs,
  analysis packages, prediction models,
  mapping/visualization tools, etc.
• Hard to communicate complex spatial, technical
  data

7
City of New York Viewpoint

• Alan Leidner, City-wide GIS CoordinatorDepartment
  of Information, Technology and
  Telecommunications
• During the response to the recent attacks on
  the World Trade Center, the rapid integration of
  spatial data from numerous local, state, federal,
  NGO and private sector sources was a major
  priority. Through OGC, we have been able to
  partner broadly with members of industry,
  government and academia to address some of the
  critical interoperability issues that challenged
  us during that time. I am confident that this
  relationship will no doubt help the market
  deliver interoperable capabilities that further
  improve our ability to deal with future
  emergencies as well as the critical services we
  provide to our citizens on a daily basis.
•   

8
What is the Open GIS Consortium?
OGC Vision A world in which everyone benefits
fromgeographic information and services made
available across any network, application, or
platform. OGC Mission Our core mission is to
deliverspatial interface specificationsthat are
openly available for global use.

• Not-for-profit, international consortium whose
  230 industry, government, and university members
  work to make geographic information an integral
  part of information systems of all kinds
• Operates a Specification Development Program
  similar to other Industry consortia (W3C, OMG,
  etc.).
• Operates an Interoperability Program (IP), a
  global, innovative, partnership-driven, hands-on
  engineering and testing program designed to
  deliver proven specifications into the SDP.
• New MOU with the Columbia Earth Institute!

9
Open Web Services Initiative 1 (OWS-1)
Demonstration
Simulated users, including Geospatial
Specialists, Remote Sensing Experts, Domain
Professionals, Incident Support Teams, Decision
Makers Publish, Find and Access multiple
information sources
Sources
Federal
University
NGO
State
Local
10
OWS-1 Timeline and the Players

• Kickoff September 2001
• Demonstration March 2002, Chantilly VA
• OWS-1 Sponsors
• US Environmental Protection Agency,
  GeoConnections Canada, NASA, NIMA, Lockheed
  Martin, USGS, FGDC, ERDC, CANRI
• OWS-1 Participants
• Compusult, CubeWerx, Dawn Corp, DLR, ESRI, Galdos
  Systems, GMU, Intergraph, Ionic Software,
  Laser-Scan, PCI Geomatics, Polexis, SAIC, Social
  Change Online, Syncline, YSI, University of
  Alabama Huntsville, Vision for NY
• OWS-1 Coordinating Organizations
• NYC DOITT, NYC DEP, FEMA, EPA Region 2, CIESIN,
  Urban Logic

11
OWS-1 Clients and Services
Client Tier
Middle Tier Services
Data Tier Services
Find
Register
Registry Service (metadata)
Web Map Service
Services
Client
Publish/ Harvest
Publish/Harvest
Web Feature Service
Web Client Generator
Bind
Bind
Portrayal Services
Sensors
optional
Sensor Collection Service
Sensors
internet
internet
Imagery Viewer Client
Sensors
Bind
Sensor Client
Web Coverage Service
Web Coverage Service
12
OWS-1 DemonstrationAreas of Interest

• AOI 3 NY State, New Jersey, Long Island
• AOI 2 Greater New York City Region
• AOI 1 Lower Manhattan
• AOI 0 - 10 acre area centered around WTC

13
OWS-1 DemonstrationUser Scenarios

• Vignette 1 Get Quick Maps
• Rapidly develop an overall view of the disaster
  area to support response
• Vignette 2 Service Registration and Discovery
• Search for more relevant data and services
• Vignette 3 Sensor Web Access
• Combine data from multiple networks of in-situ
  sensors
• Vignette 4 Imagery Access and Visualization
• Flexibly portray imagery and integrate imagery
  and mapping information
• Vignette 5 Supporting Decision Flow
• Make maps available on a portal accessed from
  Situation Room

14
Vignette 1Get Quick Maps

• Combine multiple sources combining images and
  weather patterns

WMS JPL
Landsat
EPA Enviro- mapper
Syncline Wrapper
WMS NASA
WMS Client Syncline
Weather
WMS CubeWerx
Transportation
15
Vignette 3Sensor Web Access

• Access real-time sensors

SCS SAIC
NOAA METAR Data
SCS Polexis
Map Viewer SAIC ESRI
NY State Air Quality Data
SCS SAIC
YSI Water Quality And Meteorology Sensor
WMS CubeWerx
NYC OrthoImagery And Structures
16
Vignette 4Image Access Visualization

• Access remote sensing data for both visualization
  and analysis

WCS Intergraph
LIDAR
Intergraph WCS Retrieval Service
Web Browser
Huntsville, AL
WCS DLR
X-SAR
Germany
Existing GIS S/W
WCS GMU
Files
AVIRIS
Greenbelt, MD
WCS Polexis
MODIS
PCI WCS Retrieval Service
Web Browser
San Diego, CA
WCS/ WMS PCI
SPOT
Ottawa, ONT, CA
17
Hazard Vulnerability Assessment OGC NYC Demo

• Intergraph client showing NYC imagery with
  overlaid features
• Fire districts (red lines) drawn from
  WFS-compliant SEDAC server
• SEDAC working with Ionic Software to host WMS-,
  WFS-, and WCS-compliant servers

18
GIS-Based Decision Support Tool
19
UAH Space-Time Toolkit

• Thick client that supports animation, 3-D
  visualization of phenomena
• Courtesy of M. Botts, University of Alabama
  Huntsville

20
UAH Plume Model
Courtesy of M. Botts, University of Alabama
Huntsville
21
Example of Landsat TM and Ikonos Data Phoenix AZ
14 August 2000
22 June 1997

• Prepared by Chris Small of LDEO

22
Data/Information Issues

• Shearson-Lehman, others demonstrate critical
  importance of hot backups for financial
  transaction dataacross Hudson River! Far enough
  for the next extreme event?
• Systems may be backed upbut what about
  expertise, chain of command?
• Need for seamless data access by multiple levels
  of government and responders vs. need for data
  security
• Need for rapid, flexible development of
  standards, specifications, and tools, working
  closely with industry, academia, nongovernmental
  groups, and government.
• Semantic Divides to information sharing

23
Semantic Divides to Information Sharing

• Within the CIPI-1 Common Vision, there are basic
  methods to transform legacy (local) data models
  into core data models (and vice versa) minimizing
  semantic divides between organizations
  communities.
• This is a challenge that will require extended
  effort and coordination with ongoing activities
  such as Geospatial One-Stop, and OGC Domain
  Modeling Support Initiatives.

Community A
ltRoadgt
Community B
Critical Infrastructure Protection Event
ltHighwaygt
Community C
ltMotorwaygt
Community F
Community D
Community E
24
Broader Issues

• Individual jurisdictions cannot deal with issues
  alone must have regional collaboration (not just
  urban)
• Lack of consistent loss estimates and loss
  estimation methods
• Inconsistent hazard estimates and incomplete
  understanding of uncertainties
• Disparate decision support tools and frameworks
• Risk communication in a networked world!