FINDINGS FROM TWO STUDIES BY THE CSS – ETH ZURICH PRESENTED BY STEFAN BREM SWISS FEDERAL OFFICE FOR CIVIL PROTECTION Examining Crisis Mapping

The Studies Study 1: Conceptualizing the Crisis Mapping Phenomenon: Insights on Behavior and the Coordination of Agents and Information in Complex Crisis Study 2: The Changing Dynamics of Crisis Communication: Evidence from the Aftermath of the 2011 Tsunami in Japan

Study 1: Crisis mapping as self-organization Crisis mapping community Crisis maps Emergence Definition: Complex adaptive systems (CAS) are process dependent, self- organizing systems, containing constant feedback loops brought about by multiple, local interactions between actors, resulting in an overall process that influences future organization and outcomes. Crisis mapping emerged as a bottom-up phenomenon with many characteristics of CAS. But how are crisis mapping communities related to their systemic environment?

A different perspective: crisis convergence Misbelief of wide-spread panic and dis- organization during disasters Rather, large-scale disasters have a converging effect  centripetal social processes - mainly the movement of information, people and materials towards a disaster-related zone Social convergence can also be observed in the cyber sphere (e.g. volunteers, donors, experts) (based on: Fritz and Matthewson 1957)

Conceptualizing crisis mapping: Findings I Self-organization vs. resource-dependency?  Crisis mapping, while initially an emergent process, is also showing how various resources, people, and information converge to help a community in the post-crisis period when providing quick relief is critical to mitigating effects.  ICT enable potentially global crisis convergence (e.g. Haitian diaspora helped to translate messages after earthquake).  In both cases analyzed, weak agents (student groups, online communities, etc.), but also strong agents (UN agencies, governments, newspapers, etc.) played pivotal roles in the crisis mapping processes.

Conceptualizing crisis mapping: Findings II Added value of collaborative crisis mapping:  Crowdsourced online maps have the potential to open new opportunities to enable collaboration in crisis situations and overcome coordination problems.  The application of these technologies can activate additional valuable resources and speed up information collection and dissemination in complex emergencies.  In the cases under study, the benefits of collaborative crisis maps for governments clearly outweighed the drawbacks.

Study 2: Crisis Communication in Japan (source: March 11: Sinai.info was launched 4 hours after earthquake, 1 st report made 3 hours later Launched by individual associated w/ private company (Georepublic Japan); recruited 200+ volunteers to collect, process, & verify crisis info April 11: 9,405 reports (10,518 in queue); Total number of visitors – 833,399 Organizations that used Sinsai.info: Businesses/Corporations (Yahoo Japan, Google, etc.), Japanese government officials, external officials, etc.

Crisis Communication in Japan: Findings Finding 1: Uncoordinated crisis communication between public & private actors  Mixed/unclear messages, contradictory information from external bodies/organizations on radiation contamination, etc. Finding 2: Government actors unable to control info messages  ICT users filled information gaps at high speed. Private individuals as growing source of information in myriad situations. Amplified by traditional media. Finding 3: Adaptive behavior at the community level  ICT functioned as a springboard for community self-organization (crisis maps, radiation measurements).

Crisis Communication: Recommendations I Update crisis management conceptualizations:  New information technologies open new opportunities for new, often only loosely organized social actors to contribute valuable resources (such as ground information and local knowledge) to the management of complex crisis situations.  In order to tap all the available resources for building social resilience, governmental actors need to develop new approaches how to integrate the multitude of involved social stakeholders into governmental strategies of risk and crisis management.

Crisis Communication: Recommendations II Exploring governments’ role in crisis mapping:  Rather than restricting or trying to control behavior, government actors should identify ways to facilitate such adaptive and resourceful traits within communities – this can be by supporting crisis mapping efforts via improving verification mechanisms of crisis info, training online emergency volunteers, etc.  Today, governments already play an important part in the self-organizing behavior of communities in crisis - be it as facilitator, supporter or multiplier. Consider factoring theses processes into strategy developments.

Crisis Communication: Recommendations III Training:  Goals: Facilitate the convergence of people, material and information (e.g. clear legal issues that relate to the sharing of satellite imagery); build trust.  Develop specialized training programs for own staff, first responders, critical business actors (e.g. telecommunication companies) and other social stakeholders, etc.  Integrate crowdsourcing into social resilience programs. Understanding behavior is key:  Unclear processes: Why do people or groups of people in some cases self- organize and in other not? What motivates people to engage in self-organizing processes?  Develop and test scenarios, include private businesses and social stakeholders.  Enhance international dialogue.