Cross-posted from iRevolution
The United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) just published a pivotal policy document (PDF) on the use of civilian UAVs in humanitarian settings. Key excerpts from this 20-page & must-read publication are highlighted below.
- UAVs are increasingly performing civilian tasks as the technology becomes more common. In fact, 57 countries and 270 companies were manufacturing UAVs in 2013.
- Humanitarian organizations have started to use UAVs, including in Haiti and the Philippines, for data collection and information tasks that include real time information and situation monitoring, public information and advocacy, search and rescue, and mapping.
- Use of UAVs raises serious practical & ethical issues that humanitarian organizations must address through transparency, community engagement, and guidelines for privacy & data security.
- To tap into the growing interest in UAVs, particularly in technical communities, humanitarian organizations should engage in networks that promote good practices and guidance, and that can serve as a source of surge capacity. [Like the Humanitarian UAV Network].
- Due to their affordability, ease of transport, and regulatory concerns UAVs used in humanitarian response are likely to be small or micro-UAVs of up to a few kilograms, while larger systems will remain the province of military and civil defense actors.
- Interest is building in the use of UAVs to assist in search and rescue, particularly when equipped with infrared, or other specialty cameras. For example, the European Union is funding ICARUS, a research project to develop unmanned search and rescue tools to assist human teams. [Picture above is of UAV used by ICARUS].
- The analysis of data from these devices ranges from straight-forward to quite technically complex. Analytical support from crowdsourcing platforms, such as Humanitarian Open Street Map’s Tasking Server or QCRI’s MicroMappers, can speed up analysis of technical data, including building damage or population estimates.
- More research is needed on integrating aerial observation and data collection into needs and damage assessments, search and rescue, and other humanitarian functions.
- The biggest challenges to expanding the use of UAVs are legal and regulatory. [...]. Most countries where humanitarians are working do not yet have legal frameworks, meaning that use of UAVs will probably need to be cleared on an ad hoc basis with local authorities. A particular issue is interference with traditional air traffic [...].
- Any use of UAVs by humanitarian actors [...] requires clear policies on what information they will share or make public, how long they will store it and how they will secure it. [...]. For humanitarians operating UAVs, transparency and engagement will likely be critical for success. Ideally, communities or local authorities would be informed of the timing of flights, the purpose of the mission and the type of data being collected, with the aim of having some kind of informed consent, whether formal or informal.
- Although UAVs are getting safer, due to parachutes, collision avoidance systems and fail-safe mechanisms, humanitarians must think seriously about liability insurance and its cost implications, particularly for mechanical failure. Due in part to these safety concerns, ultra-light UAVs, such as those under a kilogram, will tend to be more lightly regulated and therefore easier to import & operate.
- More non-profit or volunteer groups are also emerging, such as the Humanitarian UAV Network, a global volunteer network of operators working for safe operations & standards for humanitarian uses of UAVs.
- The pressure for humanitarians to adopt this technology [UAVs], or to provide principled justifications for why they do not, will only increase. [...]. Until UAVs are much more established in general civilian use, the risks of humanitarians using UAVs in conflict settings are greater than the benefits. The focus therefore should be developing best practices and guidelines for their use in natural disasters, slow-onset emergencies and early recovery.
In conclusion, the UN brief offers several policy considerations:
- Focus on using UAVs in natural disasters and avoid use in conflicts.
- Develop a supportive legal and regulatory framework.
- Prioritize transparency and community engagement.
- Ensure principled partnerships.
- Strengthen the evidence base.
- Update response mechanisms [...] to incorporate potential use of UAVs and to support pilot projects.
- Support networks and communities of practice. [...]. Humanitarian organizations should engage in initiatives like the Humanitarian UAV Network, that aim to develop and promote good practices and guidance and that can serve as advisors and provide surge capacity.
The Humanitarian UAV Network (UAViators) is actively engaged in pursuing these (and other) action items. The Network promotes the safe and responsible use of UAVs in non-conflict settings and is engaged in policy conversations vis-a-vis ethical, legal & regulatory frameworks for the use of UAVs in humanitarian settings. The Network is also bringing UAV experts together with seasoned humanitarian professionals to explore how best to update formal response mechanisms. In addition, UAViators emphasizes the importance of community participation. Finally, the Network carries out research to build a more rigorous evidence based so as to better document the opportunities and challenges of using UAVs in humanitarian settings.
See Also:
- Humanitarians in the Sky: Using UAVs for Disaster Response [link]
- Live Crisis Map of UAV Videos for Disaster Response [link]
- Humanitarian UAV Missions During Balkan Floods [link]
- UAVs, Community Mapping & Disaster Risk Reduction in Haiti [link]
- “TripAdvisor” for International UAV/Drone Travel [link]
- How UAVs are Making a Difference in Disaster Response [link]
- Humanitarians Using UAVs for Post Disaster Recovery [link]
- Grassroots UAVs for Disaster Response [link]
Comments
a nice thought, but a glance at their own public info site, http://reliefweb.int/ , gives you an idea where their resources are needed most...
Certainly floods are a huge challenge. But again, (as Patrick knows from my posts over the years...) trying to assess the damages over a vast area in a short period of time is, I'm sorry, *-way-* more suitable to a single pass by a space-born platforms than DIY drone toys. That's what disasterscharter.org is supposed to be all about (the issues of response time and access to member imagery is a whole separate topic...)
Sure, there are neat little examples of making orthophotography from multiple passes with pix4d type stuff, and it will only get better with time, but any real civil defense agency and/or news agencies will have a Cessna or a helicopter to bolt on a Geovantage or other sensor pod. My recommendation to OCHA and others is to get a cache of such pods in forward positions for rapid deployment, perhaps through WFP's preparedness unit.
That said, specific waypoint reconnaissance (bridges, hospitals, waterfront structures, or other critical infrastructure) that may be unreachable any other way in a timely fashion, or linear feature assessments (road or pipeline following to see if it is passable, etc) is in my mind the best fit for DIY drone class technology.
In the post OCHA put emphasis in not use drones in conflict zones.
Anyway, bad people can put explosives in arduino-powered or dji-powered.
Be aware that, unlike the Bay Area, these are often *very* nasty places we are talking about, and OpenSource/DIY may quickly suffer "the law of unintended consequences".
In conflict areas, the transition from "hobbyist" / "do-good-ers" to flying IEDs will probably only be a matter of time, given the payloads and accuracies of the things I can get at AeroMicro and hobby shops here in the Bay Area.
People should think seriously about "what would you do?" if you were a UN agency operating at the request of a government, in a place like the border of Syria, Sudan, or Somalia, and out of nowhere an Arduino-powered device with C4 took out a few humanitarian workers, or worse? answer: clamp down.
I think that will only be a matter of time. I think it would be good karma for this community to think that scenario through carefully, and whether some for of IFF (identification friend or foe) is feasible.
In order to follow some of the policy considerations:
Humanitarian UAV's should be OpenSource.
Open government, and Open Science it's only possible with Open Source Software and Hardware.
Using Open Source drones, we empower communities for improve, understand, repair, and modify for their own needs and their own economy.
If not, we make the community dependent of external companies.
So DJI-Phantom, it's easy to fly but no-knowledge-involved, expensive, and not possible to repair on the field.
Open source drones with open hardware parts are the logical option if we really want to change the world.
Hi,
-Note that these are my personal opinions and do not reflect the position of any organization-
When we were writing the report, there was a lot of focus on how to get the balance right on addressing uses in conflicts, and I still don't know if we got it. First, I think that UAVs absolutely will be used for human rights, journalism and other work in conflict and authoritarian settings - but that has to be distinct from neutral, principled humanitarian work. We were more interested in the narrow question of how you clearly differentiate humanitarian ones from other uses (whether military or journalistic) and ensured that the presence of UAVs didn't create more anxiety and impact on humanitarian space. I think this is possible but it will require a level of negotiation and engagement that is beyond many organizations (see the latest MSF report "Where is Everyone?"). This will get a lot easier once civilian UAVs are more common - if farmers, stores, local journalists and others are all using them (and presumably finding ways to brand and differentiate) then the basic perceptions will change. Governments also need to be convinced - particularly in places like Ethiopia, which have an authoritarian bent, but can be won over if we can show the utility in responding to natural disasters or droughts.
Also "conflict" is pretty generic - in practice there will be a wide range of scenarios that will have to be negotiated. Assessing IDP camps or displaced communities outside a conflict zone? Probably fine. Sending a UAV across battle lines in Aleppo? Not so much.
In any case the report is supposed to be a starting place for discussions so keep it coming. ;-)
Patrick - Would you be able to provide a candid explanation of what the concerns are that lead to the above conclusion and subsequent policy recommendation? What is expected to change once UAVs become ubiquitous? Do you agree with this conclusion?
I assume there is regard for potential confusion between humanitarian and military drones in conflict settings, as well as the subsequent stress this may place on cilivians and risk to safety of operators, but I wonder whether the primary point of contention is the age old need to manage the flow of information from the battlefield.
Efforts to control or eliminate access by journalists, blackouts on operational information and limiting of media reporting is as critical in the Information Age as it has ever been, and unlikely to miraculously cease any time soon. What of the billions invested in controlling the narrative of war?
Managing the potentially enormous impact heightening situational awareness could have on public opinion, and political capital, must be of paramount concern. I have little doubt that the concept of crowd sourced big data, along with millions of still images, gigapixel maps and thousands of hours of video content, entering the public domain and remaining there in perpetuity, strikes fear into the hearts of leaders across the globe. It is perhaps most threatening to those who rely on a strong sense of nationalism among their constituents.
There was a time when you were deeply optimistic about the role UAVs could play in helping to deliver justice to those who find themselves victims of human induced disasters, totalitarian rule, corruption, etc. With all you have evidently learnt since then, do you still see a day when UAVs might be as active and effective at exposing, attracting and co-opting as they are at coersing?
Which countries are you referring to? Humanitarian UAVs are already being flown in Haiti, Philippines, China, Serbia, Papua New Guinea, etc. And can you please be more specific re "some of these UN considerations"? I'd like to share your feedback with the authors (who are actually not bureaucrats, just FYI).
Some of these UN considerations are totally out of touch with the countries reality where humanitarian drones will be flown into...bureaucrats should get out on the field.
Its difficult to argue against such a use for RPAS difficult and rewarding work.
Indeed, and Gene is on the Advisory Board of the Humanitarian UAV Network, just FYI. He was one of the first I invited to join the Board along with colleagues from the UN and Red Cross.
-
1
-
2
of 2 Next