skip to main content
10.1145/3460112.3471949acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagescompassConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

SatDash: An Interactive Dashboard for Assessing Land Damage in Nigeria and Mali

Published:23 September 2021Publication History

ABSTRACT

Major humanitarian organizations face the crucial challenge of estimating land damage from conflict in developing countries. A lack of on the ground data collection motivates the use of satellite imagery to meet this challenge. However, existing analysis methods involving satellite imagery are time-consuming, require special expertise, or lack automation. To mitigate these obstacles, SatDash was designed using Sentinel-2 images and ACLED data to provide a classification of areas that have undergone land damage due to conflict in northwestern Nigeria and Mali. SatDash was constructed using free and publicly available images and is accompanied by a user-friendly dashboard that allows domain experts to train their own data and export it for future use.

The dashboard was created for a humanitarian organization, referred to as the DAAO, Damage Assessment and Aid Organization, and the design process adhered to four primary recommendations for a successful AI for Social Good (AI4SG) partnership that are further detailed in this paper. Within this paper, I draw attention to the context of CHI4Good research, detailing how the deployment phases of such systems often have their own set of potential barriers, along with describing ethical challenges that arise with this type of research. This paper focuses primarily on the design process and responses to both the constraints mentioned in literature and those presented by the DAAO. I acknowledge that AI applications, especially in development contexts, require close attention and context-specific awareness, and this is reflected through the conscious decision to include domain experts and ensure that the tool is only used for its intended purpose. When designing SatDash, the primary aim was to think critically about the involvement of local context and spur the conversation about inclusive design of similar systems in a large organization such as the DAAO. This research affirms that satellite imagery data can be used to assist humanitarian aid organizations with land change detection and demonstrates how human-in-the-loop systems can aid these organizations with identification of communities negatively impacted by hunger and recurring conflict.

References

  1. 2016. CHI 2016 Homepage. https://chi2016.acm.org/wp/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Bright Aboh and Alphonse Mutabazi. 2020. Satellite Imagery Analysis for Land Use, Land Use Change and Forestry: A Pilot Study in Kigali, Rwanda. In Proceedings of the 3rd ACM SIGCAS Conference on Computing and Sustainable Societies (Ecuador) (COMPASS ’20). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 127–135. https://doi.org/10.1145/3378393.3402268Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. ACLED. 2020. ACLED. https://acleddata.com//dashboardGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. ACLED. 2020. Code Book. https://acleddata.com/acleddatanew/wp-content/uploads/dlm_uploads/2019/04/ACLED_Codebook_2019FINAL_pbl.pdfGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. Akiode Olukemi Adejoke, Oduyemi Kehinde Ok, and Yahaya Usman Badaru. 2014. Analysis of Change Detection of Birnin-Kudu Land Cover Using Image Classification And Vegetation Indices.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. Matthias Baumann and Tobias Kuemmerle. 2016. The impacts of warfare and armed conflict on land systems. Journal of Land Use Science 11, 6 (Aug 2016), 672–688. https://doi.org/10.1080/1747423x.2016.1241317Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  7. Matthias Baumann, Tobias Kuemmerle, Marine Elbakidze, Mutlu Ozdogan, Volker C. Radeloff, Nicholas S. Keuler, Alexander V. Prishchepov, Ivan Kruhlov, and Patrick Hostert. 2011. Patterns and drivers of post-socialist farmland abandonment in Western Ukraine. Land Use Policy 28, 3 (2011), 552–562. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2010.11.003Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  8. Xuehong Chen, Dedi Yang, Jin Chen, and Xin Cao. 2015. An improved automated land cover updating approach by integrating with downscaled NDVI time series data. Remote Sensing Letters 6 (01 2015), 29–38. https://doi.org/10.1080/2150704X.2014.998793Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. Marshini Chetty and Rebecca Grinter. 2007. HCI4D. CHI ’07 extended abstracts on Human factors in computing systems - CHI ’07 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1145/1240866.1241002Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. Nick Couldry and Ulises A. Mejias. 2018. Data Colonialism: Rethinking Big Data’s Relation to the Contemporary Subject. Television & New Media 20, 4 (Feb 2018), 336–349. https://doi.org/10.1177/1527476418796632Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. Earth Observing System. 2019. NDVI FAQ: All You Need to Know About NDVI. https://eos.com/blog/ndvi-faq-all-you-need-to-know-about-ndvi/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. Lina Eklund, Michael Degerald, Martin Brandt, Alexander V Prishchepov, and Petter Pilesjö. 2017. How conflict affects land use: Agricultural activity in areas seized by the Islamic State. Environmental Research Letters 12, 5 (2017), 054004. https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/aa673aGoogle ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  13. EOS. 2019. Home. https://eos.com/blog/6-spectral-indexes-on-top-of-ndvi-to-make-your-vegetation-analysis-complete/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. Sheena Erete, Aarti Israni, and Tawanna Dillahunt. 2018. An intersectional approach to designing in the margins. Interactions 25, 3 (2018), 66–69. https://doi.org/10.1145/3194349Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. European Space Agency. 2020. Sentinel 2 Missions Online. https://sentinel.esa.int/web/sentinel/missions/sentinel-2Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. Google Earth Engine. [n.d.]. Google Earth Engine Code Editor. https://code.earthengine.google.com/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. A.R Huete. 1988. A soil-adjusted vegetation index (SAVI). Remote Sensing of Environment 25, 3 (1988), 295–309. https://doi.org/10.1016/0034-4257(88)90106-xGoogle ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  18. Human Rights Watch. 2019. World Report 2019: Rights Trends in Mali. https://www.hrw.org/world-report/2019/country-chapters/maliGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. Human Rights Watch. 2020. “How Much More Blood Must Be Spilled?”. https://www.hrw.org/report/2020/02/11/how-much-more-blood-must-be-spilled/atrocities-against-civilians-central-maliGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. Human Rights Watch. 2020. Mali: Militias, Armed Islamists, Ravage Central Mali. https://www.hrw.org/news/2020/02/10/mali-militias-armed-islamists-ravage-central-maliGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. ICG. 2020. Violence in Nigeria’s North West: Rolling Back the Mayhem. https://www.crisisgroup.org/africa/west-africa/nigeria/288-violence-nigerias-north-west-rolling-back-mayhemGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  22. Ahmed Iyanda. 2020. New report uncovers causes of farmer-herder conflict in Nigeria’s Northwest. http://venturesafrica.com/new-report-uncovers-causes-of-farmer-herder-conflict-in-nigerias-northwest/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  23. Hadi H. Jaafar and Eckart Woertz. 2016. Agriculture as a funding source of ISIS: A GIS and remote sensing analysis. Food Policy 64(2016), 14–25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodpol.2016.09.002Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  24. Aditya Jain, Zerina Kapetanovic, Akshit Kumar, Vasuki Narasimha Swamy, Rohit Patil, Deepak Vasisht, Rahul Sharma, Manohar Swaminathan, Ranveer Chandra, Anirudh Badam, Gireeja Ranade, Sudipta Sinha, and Akshay Uttama Nambi S N. 2019. Low-Cost Aerial Imaging for Small Holder Farmers. In Proceedings of the 2nd ACM SIGCAS Conference on Computing and Sustainable Societies (Accra, Ghana) (COMPASS ’19). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 41–51. https://doi.org/10.1145/3314344.3332485Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  25. Neal Jean, Marshall Burke, Michael Xie, W. Matthew Davis, David B. Lobell, and Stefano Ermon. 2016. Combining satellite imagery and machine learning to predict poverty. Science 353, 6301 (2016), 790–794. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aaf7894 arXiv:https://science.sciencemag.org/content/353/6301/790.full.pdfGoogle ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  26. Morten Jerven. 2013. Poor numbers: How we are misled by African development statistics and what to do about it. Cornell University Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  27. Y. J. Kaufman and D. Tanre. 1992. Atmospherically resistant vegetation index (ARVI) for EOS-MODIS. IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing 30, 2 (1992), 261–270.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  28. Thomas M. Lillesand, Ralph W. Kiefer, and Jonathan W. Chipman. 2015. Remote sensing and image interpretation. John Wiley & Sons, Inc.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  29. D. Lu and Q. Weng. 2007. A survey of image classification methods and techniques for improving classification performance. International Journal of Remote Sensing 28, 5 (2007), 823–870. https://doi.org/10.1080/01431160600746456Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  30. Susan K. Maxwell and Kenneth M. Sylvester. 2012. Identification of “ever-cropped” land (1984–2010) using Landsat annual maximum NDVI image composites: Southwestern Kansas case study. Remote Sensing of Environment 121 (2012), 186–195. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2012.01.022Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  31. Jiaxin Mi, Yongjun Yang, Shaoliang Zhang, Shi An, Huping Hou, Yifei Hua, and Fuyao Chen. 2019. Tracking the Land Use/Land Cover Change in an Area with Underground Mining and Reforestation via Continuous Landsat Classification. Remote Sensing 11, 14 (2019), 1719. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs11141719Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  32. Joyojeet Pal. 2017. CHI4Good or Good4CHI. Proceedings of the 2017 CHI Conference Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems - CHI EA 17(2017). https://doi.org/10.1145/3027063.3052766Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  33. Caleb Robinson, Anthony Ortiz, Kolya Malkin, Blake Elias, Andi Peng, Dan Morris, Bistra Dilkina, and Nebojsa Jojic. 2020. Human-Machine Collaboration for Fast Land Cover Mapping. Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence 34, 03(2020), 2509–2517. https://doi.org/10.1609/aaai.v34i03.5633Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  34. S. A. Sader and J. C. Winne. 1992. RGB-NDVI colour composites for visualizing forest change dynamics. International Journal of Remote Sensing 13, 16 (1992), 3055–3067. https://doi.org/10.1080/01431169208904102Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  35. Mehdi Sarparast. 2019. SAVI: Soil-Adjusted Vegetation Index in LSRS: Land Surface Remote Sensing. https://rdrr.io/cran/LSRS/man/SAVI.htmlGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  36. Jan Niklas Schmid. 2017. Using Google Earth Engine for Landsat NDVI time series analysis to indicate the present status of forest stands. Ph.D. Dissertation. https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.34134.14402/6Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  37. Umar Serajuddin, Hiroki Uematsu, Christina Wieser, Nobuo Yoshida, and Andrew Dabalen. 2015. Data Deprivation: Another Deprivation to End. Policy Research Working Papers(2015). https://doi.org/10.1596/1813-9450-7252Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  38. Yashwant Singh. [n.d.]. Significance Of Land Use / Land Cover (LULC) Maps. https://www.satpalda.com/blogs/significance-of-land-use-land-cover-lulc-mapsGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  39. William L Stefanov, Michael S Ramsey, and Philip R Christensen. 2001. Monitoring urban land cover change: An expert system approach to land cover classification of semiarid to arid urban centers. Remote Sensing of Environment 77, 2 (2001), 173–185. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0034-4257(01)00204-8Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  40. Kara Stevens, Lindsay Campbell, Gerald Urquhart, Dan Kramer, and Jiaguo Qi. 2011. Examining complexities of forest cover change during armed conflict on Nicaragua’s Atlantic Coast. Biodiversity and Conservation 20, 12 (May 2011), 2597–2613. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10531-011-0093-1Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  41. Qiuhong Tang and Taikan Oki. 2007. Daily NDVI Relationship to Cloud Cover. Journal of Applied Meteorology and Climatology 46, 3 (Jan 2007), 377–387. https://doi.org/10.1175/jam2468.1Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  42. Prasad S. Thenkabail, Eden A. Enclona, Mark S. Ashton, and Bauke Van Der Meer. 2004. Accuracy assessments of hyperspectral waveband performance for vegetation analysis applications. Remote Sensing of Environment 91, 3-4 (2004), 354–376. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2004.03.013Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  43. Nyein Soe Thwal, Takaaki Ishikawa, and Hiroshi Watanabe. 2019. Land cover classification and change detection analysis of multispectral satellite images using machine learning. In Image and Signal Processing for Remote Sensing XXV, Lorenzo Bruzzone and Francesca Bovolo (Eds.), Vol. 11155. International Society for Optics and Photonics, SPIE, 522 – 532. https://doi.org/10.1117/12.2532988Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  44. Nenad Tomašev, Julien Cornebise, Frank Hutter, Shakir Mohamed, Angela Picciariello, Bec Connelly, Danielle C. M. Belgrave, Daphne Ezer, Fanny Cachat Van Der Haert, Frank Mugisha, and et al.2020. AI for social good: Unlocking the opportunity for positive impact. Nature Communications 11, 1 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-020-15871-zGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  45. Giovanna Trianni, Emanuele Angiuli, Gianni Lisini, and Paolo Gamba. 2014. Human settlements from Landsat data using Google Earth Engine. 2014 IEEE Geoscience and Remote Sensing Symposium (2014). https://doi.org/10.1109/igarss.2014.6946715Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  46. UNHCR. 2019. Nigeria emergency. https://www.unhcr.org/en-us/nigeria-emergency.htmlGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  47. M. Usman, R. Liedl, M. A. Shahid, and A. Abbas. 2015. Land use/land cover classification and its change detection using multi-temporal MODIS NDVI data. Journal of Geographical Sciences 25, 12 (Jun 2015), 1479–1506. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11442-015-1247-yGoogle ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  48. World Food Programme. 2020. Situation Report - Nigeria, March 31, 2020. https://www.wfp.org/publications/NigeriaGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  49. World Food Programme. 2020. WFP Mali Country Brief, April 2020 - Mali. https://reliefweb.int/report/mali/wfp-mali-country-brief-april-2020Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  50. Jinru Xue and Baofeng Su. 2017. Significant Remote Sensing Vegetation Indices: A Review of Developments and Applications. Journal of Sensors 2017(2017), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1155/2017/1353691Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  51. Ellen Zegura, Carl DiSalvo, and Amanda Meng. 2018. Care and the Practice of Data Science for Social Good. In Proceedings of the 1st ACM SIGCAS Conference on Computing and Sustainable Societies (Menlo Park and San Jose, CA, USA) (COMPASS ’18). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, Article 34, 9 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3209811.3209877Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  52. Chunfang Zhou and Aparna Purushothaman. 2018. Developing Creativity and Learning Design by Information and Communication Technology (ICT) in Developing Contexts. Encyclopedia of Information Science and Technology, Fourth Edition (2018), 4178–4188. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-5225-2255-3.ch362Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Recommendations

Comments

Login options

Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

Sign in
  • Published in

    cover image ACM Conferences
    COMPASS '21: Proceedings of the 4th ACM SIGCAS Conference on Computing and Sustainable Societies
    June 2021
    462 pages
    ISBN:9781450384537
    DOI:10.1145/3460112

    Copyright © 2021 ACM

    Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

    Publisher

    Association for Computing Machinery

    New York, NY, United States

    Publication History

    • Published: 23 September 2021

    Permissions

    Request permissions about this article.

    Request Permissions

    Check for updates

    Qualifiers

    • research-article
    • Research
    • Refereed limited

    Acceptance Rates

    Overall Acceptance Rate25of50submissions,50%

PDF Format

View or Download as a PDF file.

PDF

eReader

View online with eReader.

eReader

HTML Format

View this article in HTML Format .

View HTML Format