Agenda 2030 and Sendai Framework – Indicators and
Supportive Data
¨
Milan KONECNY
Former President of ICA and ISDE, VP IEAS
Chairman of ICA Commission for Cartography on EW&CM
Masaryk University, Brno, Czech Republic
Vienna University, Austria
Shenzhen University, Shenzhen, China
Chinese Petroleum University, Qingdao, China
MZ - Agenda 2030 a Sendajský rámec-inikátoryBrno-Geogr..
SCI MUNI - listopad 31, 2023
1. Introduction
2. Sustainable Development (SDG’s) goals, targets and indicators
3. Disasters Risk Reduction Agenda: Sendai Framework, targets and
global indicators
4. Data and Information Support: DBAR and U.N. GGIM comparison
5. The Challenges of Geospatial Sciences (incl. Geodesy, Cartography, RS,
etc.)
6. Innovative Types of Projects
1. INTRODUCTION
World Global Challenges:
Sustainable Development Approach and
Disaster Risk Reduction
1972 - Stockholm, the urgent need to respond to the
problem of environmental deterioration ,
1992 – Rio de Janeiro, the protection of
environment, social and economic development
are fundamental to sustainable development;
Agenda 21, Global Mapping
2002 – Johannesburgh, World Summit
on Sustainable Development (WSSD)
2003 – Geneva, WS on Information Society
„Information Society” is the term that is
used to capture the increasing
contemporary influence of information and
communication technologies (ICTs).
Knowledge-based society enhances
content of the processes based on data,
information and knowledge.
Information Society
Sustainable Information Society
The linkage between sustainability
and information society development
is still poorly understood.
Sustainable Development – General Comments
Sustainable Development:
a set of the equal important aspects:
- economic,
- ecological,
- technological,
- social,
- cultural,
- ethical.
The vision of disaster risk reduction:
building resilience into sustainable development
The six
principles of
sustainability
www.colorado.edu/hazards/pu
blications/informer/infrmr3/infor
mer3c.htm
S.Briceno, Nanjing, 2016
2. Sustainable Development (SDG’s) goals,
targets and indicators
Goals and Targets of SDGs
Indicators for SDGs
Goal 11. Make cities and human settlements inclusive, safe, resilient and
sustainable
• 11.1 By 2030, ensure access for all
to adequate, safe and affordable
housing and basic services and
upgrade slums
• 11.2 By 2030, provide access to
safe, affordable, accessible and
sustainable transport systems for
all, improving road safety, notably
by expanding public transport, with
special attention to the needs of
those in vulnerable situations,
women, children, persons with
disabilities and older persons
• 11.1.1Proportion of urban
population living in slums, informal
settlements or inadequate housing
• 11.2.1Proportion of population
that has convenient access to
public transport, by sex, age and
persons with disabilities
Goal 11. Make cities and human settlements inclusive, safe, resilient and
sustainable
• 11.3 By 2030, enhance
inclusive and sustainable
urbanization and capacity for
participatory, integrated and
sustainable human
settlement planning and
management in all countries
• 11.4 Strengthen efforts to
protect and safeguard the
world’s cultural and natural
heritage.
• 11.3.1 Ratio of land consumption rate to
population growth rate
• 11.3.2 Proportion of cities with a direct
participation structure of civil society in
urban planning and management that
operate regularly and democratically.
• 11.4.1Total expenditure (public and
private) per capita spent on the
preservation, protection and conservation
of all cultural and natural heritage, by type
of heritage (cultural, natural, mixed and
World Heritage Centre designation), level
of government (national, regional and
local/municipal), type of expenditure
(operating expenditure/investment) and
type of private funding (donations in kind,
private non-profit sector and sponsorship)
The critical step ahead is a fact that 17th goals are
accompanied by 169 targets, 232 global indicators to followup
and review progress to know real state of the art of our
planet according to measured characteristics.
Implementation of these efforts is expected by
implementation via national planning processes, policies,
strategies and frameworks.
Measuring and monitoring will be done by statistics,
geospatial information, Earth observations and other Big
Data.
The U.N. Statistical Commission, as a functional commission of
Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC), was asked to develop
the global indicator framework.
Global indicator framework has primarily been based on a
statistical data input-output approach, the need for
'geographic location' in a new era of data needs is well
recognised. Many national statistical offices now understand
that geospatial information, Earth observations and other Big
Data are able to provide new and consistent data sources and
methodologies to integrate multiple 'location-based' variables
to support and inform official statistics and the indicators for
the SDGs.
United NationsA/RES/71/313
General AssemblyDistr.: General
10 July 2017Seventy-firstsessionAgenda items 13 and 11717-
11371(E)*1711371*Pleaserecycle
Resolution adopted by the General Assembly
on6July2017
[without reference to a Main Committee (A/71/L.75)]
71/313. Work of the Statistical Commission
pertaining to the2030 Agenda for Sustainable
Development
Annex
Global indicator framework for the Sustainable
Development Goals and targets of the 2030 Agenda
for Sustainable Development
Global indicator framework, all indicators are classified into
three tiers based on their level of methodological
development and the availability of data at the global
level, as follows:
February 2020: https://unstats.un.org/sdgs/iaeg-sdgs/tier-classification/
To facilitate the implementation of the global indicator framework,
all indicators are classified by the IAEG-SDGs into three tiers based on
their level of methodological development and the availability of data at
the global level, as follows:
Tier Classification Criteria/Definitions:
Tier 1: Indicator is conceptually clear, has an internationally
established methodology and standards are available, and data are
regularly produced by countries for at least 50 per cent of countries
and of the population in every region where the indicator is relevant.
Tier 2: Indicator is conceptually clear, has an internationally
established methodology and standards are available, but data are
not regularly produced by countries.
Tier 3: No internationally established methodology or standards are
yet available for the indicator, but methodology/standards are being
(or will be) developed or tested.
All indicators are equally important, and the establishment of the tier
system is intended solely to assist in the development of global
implementation strategies. For tier I and II indicators, the availability of
data at the national level may not necessarily align with the global tier
classification and countries can create their own tier classification for
implementation.
Please note that Tier I and II indicators' metadata are available in the
metadata repository. Tier III indicators require work plans to be
developed outlining the methodological development of the indicators
for approval by the IAEG-SDGs.
Pomocné activity
Pilot study of OECD "Measuring the distance to the
goals of sustainable development". OECDOrganization
for Economic Co-operation and
Development
OECD A SGDs
As part of the OECD Action Plan, a reporting
methodology entitled "Measuring Distance to the SDG
Targets" was developed in 2016, 2017 and 2019.
Their aim was to assist Member States in
implementing the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable
Development.
The measurement results gradually improve the overview of
the strengths and weaknesses of the implementation
process across the SDGs in individual countries and help to
orientate in the complexity of the SDGs and to determine
their priorities within the broad Agenda 2030.
The reports aim to assist Member States in their
implementation, measurement and prioritization of data for
Agenda 2030.
The first was a pilot edition of the report in 2016, the second
and third were in June 2017 and May 2019
(https://www.oecd.org/sdd/measuring-distance-to-the-sdgs-
targets.htm)
The report uses a unique methodology for assessing the amount
of work that OECD countries have yet to do to meet all the
objectives of the SDGs.
The procedure is based on the UN IAEG Global List of Indicators
and uses publicly available data from OECD and UN SDG
databases.
The results are visualized using special graphs on the status of
SDGs solutions in individual countries and allow their comparison.
Trends since 2005 are assessed according to 76 indicators.
The OECD measurement - distance to meet SDGs targets
ČR 2017
ČR 2019
3. Disasters Risk Reduction Agenda:
Sendai Framework, targets and global
indicators
DISASTER RISK REDUCTION SENDAI GOALS
AND GLOBAL INDICATORS
In the Third U.N. World Conference on DRR,
March 14, 2015, in Sendai, Japan. As never
before the conference in its materials
mentioned the role of ICTs, GIS, remote
sensing, mapping, sensors, volunteer
geographic information, etc.
In Sendai framework, four new priorities
of action are defined:
Priority 1: Understanding disaster risk;
Priority 2: Strengthening disaster risk
governance to manage disaster risk;
Priority 3: Investing in disaster risk
reduction for resilience;
Priority 4: Enhancing disaster
preparedness for effective response
and to “Build Back Better” in recovery,
rehabilitation and reconstruction
(United Nations General Assembly,
2015).
Priority 1:
Understanding disaster risk. National and
local level
(c) To develop, periodically update and
disseminate, as appropriate, location-based
disaster risk
information,
including risk maps,
to decision makers, the general public and
communities at risk of exposure to disaster in
an appropriate format by using, as applicable,
geospatial information technology;
(f) To promote real time access to
reliable data, make use of space and in
situ information,
including geographic information
systems (GIS), and use information and
communications technology innovations
to enhance measurement tools and the
collection, analysis and dissemination of
data;
Global and regional levels
To achieve this, it is important:
(a) To enhance the development and dissemination of sciencebased
methodologies and tools to record and share disaster
losses and relevant disaggregated data and statistics, as well
as to strengthen disaster risk modelling, assessment, mapping,
monitoring and multi-hazard early warning systems;
Disaster Risk Reduction Sendai Global
Targets and Indicators
Resolution adopted by the General Assembly on
2 February 2017
[without reference to a Main Committee (A/71/L.54and Add.1)]
71/276.Report of the open-ended intergovernmental expert working
group on indicators and terminology relating to disaster risk reduction
71/644 IV. Recommendations of the open-ended intergovernmental
expert working group on global indicators for the global targets of the
Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015-2030 and on the
follow-up to and operationalization of the indicators (Global Targets A-G,
see next slides)
Sendai Framework Indicators
A set of 38 indicators was identified to measure global progress in the
implementation of the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction. The
indicators will measure progress in achieving the global targets of the
Sendai Framework, and determine global trends in the reduction of risk
and losses.
Global indicators for the global targets of the Sendai Framework
aim to operationalisate seven targets (A-G).
They have been selected and as well as related and reflected to
the SDGs items no. 1 - Poverty, 11 – Sustainable Cities and 13 –
Climate Action (Figures 1 and 2).
Seven Global Targets of Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk
Reduction. Source: Policy Area Secure (2018).
Global target A: Substantially reduce global disaster mortality by 2030, aiming to lower
average per 100,000 global mortality between 2020-2030 compared with 2005-2015.
A-1 (compound) Number of deaths and missing persons attributed to disasters, per
100,000 population.
A-2 Number of deaths attributed to disasters, per 100,000 population.
A-3 Number of missing persons attributed to disasters, per 100,000
population.
The scope of disaster in this and subsequent targets is defined in
paragraph 15 of the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction
2015-2030 and applies to small-scale and large-scale, frequent and
infrequent, sudden and slow-onset disasters caused by natural or manmade
hazards, as well as related environmental, technological and
biological hazards and risk.
Global target B: Substantially reduce the number of affected people globally by 2030,
aiming to lower the average global figure per 100,000 between 2020-2030 compared with
2005-2015.
B-1 (compound) Number of directly affected people attributed to disasters, per 100,000
population.
B-2 Number of injured or ill people attributed to disasters, per 100,000
population.
B-3
Number of people whose damaged dwellings were attributed to disasters.
B-4
Number of people whose destroyed dwellings were attributed to disasters.
B-5
Number of people whose livelihoods were disrupted or destroyed, attributed to disasters.
Global target C: Reduce direct disaster economic loss in relation to global gross domestic
product (GDP) by 2030.
C-1 (compound) Direct economic loss attributed to disasters in relation to global gross
domestic product.
C-2 Direct agricultural loss attributed to disasters.
Agriculture is understood to include the crops, livestock, fisheries,
apiculture, aquaculture and forest sectors as well as associated facilities
and infrastructure.
C-3 Direct economic loss to all other damaged
or destroyed productive assets attributed
to disasters.
Productive assets would be disaggregated
by economic sector, including services,
according to standard international
classifications. Countries would report
against those economic sectors relevant to
their economies. This would be described
in the associated metadata.
C-4 Direct economic loss in the housing sector
attributed to disasters.
Data would be disaggregated according to
damaged and destroyed dwellings.
C-5 Direct economic loss resulting from damaged
or destroyed critical infrastructure attributed
to disasters.
The decision regarding those elements of
critical infrastructure to be included in the
calculation will be left to the Member States
and described in the accompanying
metadata. Protective infrastructure and
green infrastructure should be included
where relevant.
C-6 Direct economic loss to cultural heritage
damaged or destroyed attributed to
disasters.
Global target D: Substantially reduce disaster damage to critical infrastructure and
disruption of basic services, among them health and educational facilities, including
through developing their resilience by 2030
D-1 (compound) Damage to critical infrastructure attributed to disasters.
D-2 Number of destroyed or damaged health facilities attributed to disasters.
D-3 Number of destroyed or damaged educational facilities attributed to
disasters.
D-4 Number of other destroyed or damaged critical infrastructure units and
facilities attributed to disasters.
The decision regarding those elements of critical infrastructure to be
included in the calculation will be left to the Member States and described
in the accompanying metadata. Protective infrastructure and green
infrastructure should be included where relevant.
D-5 (compound) Number of disruptions to basic services
attributed to disasters.
D-6 Number of disruptions to educational
services attributed to disasters.
D-7 Number of disruptions to health services
attributed to disasters.
D-8 Number of disruptions to other basic services
attributed to disasters.
The decision regarding those elements of
basic services to be included in the calculation
will be left to the Member States and
described in the accompanying metadata.
Global target E: Substantially increase the number of countries with national and local
disaster risk reduction strategies by 2020.
E-1 Number of countries that adopt and implement national disaster risk
reduction strategies in line with the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk
Reduction 2015-2030.
E-2 Percentage of local governments that adopt and implement local disaster
risk reduction strategies in line with national strategies.
Information should be provided on the appropriate levels of government
below the national level with responsibility for disaster risk reduction.
Global target F: Substantially enhance international cooperation to developing countries
through adequate and sustainable support to complement their national actions for
implementation of this framework by 2030.
F-1 Total official international support, (official development assistance (ODA)
plus other official flows), for national disaster risk reduction actions.
Reporting of the provision or receipt of international cooperation for disaster
risk reduction shall be done in accordance with the modalities applied in
respective countries. Recipient countries are encouraged to provide
information on the estimated amount of national disaster risk reduction
expenditure.
F-2 Total official international support (ODA plus other official flows) for national
disaster risk reduction actions provided by multilateral agencies.
F-3 Total official international support (ODA plus
other official flows) for national disaster risk
reduction actions provided bilaterally.
F-4 Total official international support (ODA plus
other official flows) for the transfer and
exchange of disaster risk reduction-related
technology.
F-5 Number of international, regional and
bilateral programmes and initiatives for the
transfer and exchange of science, technology
and innovation in disaster risk reduction for
developing countries.
F-6 Total official international support (ODA plus
other official flows) for disaster risk reduction
capacity-building.
F-7 Number of international, regional and
bilateral programmes and initiatives for
disaster risk reduction-related capacitybuilding
in developing countries.
F-8 Number of developing countries supported
by international, regional and bilateral
initiatives to strengthen their disaster risk
reduction-related statistical capacity.
Global target G: Substantially increase the availability of and access to multi-hazard
early warning systems and disaster risk information and assessments to the people by
2030.
G-1
(compound G2-
G5)
Number of countries that have multi-hazard early warning systems.
G-2 Number of countries that have multi-hazard monitoring and forecasting
systems.
G-3 Number of people per 100,000 that are covered by early warning
information through local governments or through national
dissemination mechanisms.
G-4 Percentage of local governments having a
plan to act on early warnings.
G-5 Number of countries that have accessible,
understandable, usable and relevant disaster
risk information and assessment available to
the people at the national and local levels.
G-6 Percentage of population exposed to or at
risk from disasters protected through preemptive
evacuation following early warning.
Member States in a position to do so are
encouraged to provide information on the
number of evacuated people.
Integration of SDGs and Sendai
Framework Indicators
INTEGRATED MONITORING OF THE GLOBAL TARGETS OF THE SENDAI
FRAMEWORK AND THE SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT GOALS
The Sendai Framework targets and indicators contribute to measuring
disaster-related goals and targets of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable
Development of above mentioned SDGs.
Outcomes are a product of complex and interconnected social and
economic processes with overlap across the two agendas.
Integrated Monitoring of the Global Targets of the Sendai
Framework and the Sustainable Development Goals. Source:
PreventionWeb (2020).
Hazard Definition
and
Classification
Review:
Technical Report.
United Nations,
2020
4. DBAR and U.N. GGIM: descriptions,
commons and differences
Digital Earth Alliance
Digital Belt and Road Program (DBAR)
and
Digital Silk Road Alliance (DSRA)
Ferdinand von Richthofen’s Map of the Silk Road in 1877. Source:
http://www.silkroutes.net/orient/mapssilkroutestrade.htm
The commercial weight of the New Silk Roads affected by the large regions in
2014. Source: http://www.hellenicshippingnews.com/commodities-crash-
boosts-chinas-new-silk-road/
GUO Huadong-1:
Scientific Big Data and Earth Big one
As a branch of big data, SCIENTIFIC Big Data is a
typical representative of data-intensive science.
Scientific big data has a number of characteristics,
including
complexity, comprehensiveness, and global coverage,
as well as high degree of integration with information
and communication technology.
GUO Huadong-2:
Earth science research, like atmosphere, land and ocean,
has produced huge data-sets derived from satellite
observations, ground sensor networks, and other
sources. This is collectively called Big Earth data.
It has features in common with scientific big data, but
also has its own particular characteristics. ….
as being massive, multi-source, heterogeneous, multitemporal,
multi-scale, high-dimensional, highly
complex, nonstationary, and unstructured. It provides
support for data-intensive research in the Earth sciences
GUO Huadong-3:
Modern Earth science requires globally established,
quasi real-time, all-weather Earth data acquisition
capabilities, and has developed an integrated spaceair-ground
observation system with high spatial,
temporal, and spectral resolutions. (Guo 2017, p.9)
Working group 6 of DBAR says:
DBAR Disaster aims to integrate EO and social
vulnerability data to promote the implementation of
Sendai Framework in countries along the BAR region.
The approach taken by this WG covers satellite
information and communication technologies, but also
implementation oriented technologies that involve
hardware solutions to risk reduction challenges.
“If we do nothing, sensitive environments will be lost
and exposure to risks will rise”
U.N. GGIM and Global Data
Ecosystem
UN-GGIM
• AIMS AND OBJECTIVES
The United Nations initiative on Global Geospatial Information
Management (UN-GGIM) aims at playing a leading role in setting the
agenda for the development of global geospatial information and to
promote its use to address key global challenges.
• UN-GGIM: Strengthening the Global Data Ecosystem
In U.N. GGIM case G. Scott defined data needs
for the 2030 Agenda by following way (Scott,
2018):
„The scope of the 2030 Agenda requires highquality
and disaggregated data that are timely,
open, accessible, understandable and easy to
use for a large range of users, including for
decision making at all levels.
There is a need for a reporting system on the
SDGs that would have benefit from the subnational
(local) to the national level; and allow
for global reporting that builds directly on the
data shared by countries.
It is important to create an opportunity for
countries to directly contribute to the global
reporting.
While the challenges are immense, the digital
technology that is available today allows the
necessary transformation.
An aspiration is to strengthen countries’
national geospatial and statistical information
systems to facilitate and enable a ‘data
ecosystem’ that leverages an accessible,
integrative and interoperable local to global
system-of-systems.”
Technology and society are driving digital
transformation, but are we yet leveraging
this new ‘data ecosystem’ effectively?
Do we really understand the scale of the
problems, where they are, whom they
impact, what are the causes, and how
they can be remedied?
Do we have the data for
development??
Can we make it ‘production ready’
information for all?
Strengthening the Global Data
Ecosystem
Positioning geospatial information to address
global challenges
Commons and differences
between
U.N. GGIM and DBAR
Integrated Geospatial Information Framework
(IGIF)- part of UN GGIM
The Integrated Geospatial Information Framework
(IGIF) provides a basis and guide for developing,
integrating, strengthening and maximizing
geospatial information management and related
resources in all countries. It will assist countries in
bridging the geospatial digital divide, secure socioeconomic
prosperity, and to leave no one behind.
The IGIF comprises three parts as separate, but connected, documents:
1) an Overarching Strategic Framework;
2) an Implementation Guide; and
3) a Country-level Action Plan.
The three parts comprise a comprehensive IGIF that serve a country's needs
in addressing economic, social and environmental factors; which depend on
location information in a continually changing world.
The Implementation Guide communicates to the user what is needed to
establish, implement, strengthen, improve, and/or maintain a national
geospatial information management system and capability.
The IGIF focuses on location information that is integrated with any
other meaningful data to solve societal and environmental
problems, acts as a catalyst for economic growth and opportunity,
and to understand and take benefit from a nation's development
priorities and the Sustainable Development Goals.
Anchored by 9 strategic pathways, the Framework is a mechanism
for articulating and demostrating national leadership in geospatial
information, and the capacity to take positive steps.
At this moment it looks like that U.N. GGIM is
mature project connected with stabile
governmental and public infrastructures tending to
solve SDG’s and Sendai DRR needs. Covering needs
of civil society and its organization.
DBAR has similar ambitious but coming mainly to
the countries where SDI still was not fully developed
according to Silk Belt and Road.
DBAR is coming with new approach how to look for
and elaborate data mainly based on satelite images.
There is still missing concept how deliver data to
interesting groups, private sector and individual
inhabitants.
Different political systems and different data,
information and knowledge policies;
- In DBAR huge investments are coming which create
hopes for fast improvement of situation, but data
and information are only part of the all efforts, incl.
DRR
- In many countries are unappreciated geoinformatics
and mainly cartography. Maps are created without
knowledge how will be accepted by users (context
and adaptive maps) and how information should be
delivered for professionals and public ones. Very
important in EW, DRM and DRR.
Why U.N. GGIM contemporary leader?
Reacting and realizing for needs of „normal“ people.
Trying to solve SDG’s.
But till now officially not calculating with activities
comming from Silk Road and Belt initiative, e.g. DBAR
started by International Society of Digital Earth in
cooperation with Chinese Academy of Science.
New approaches, like VGI – volunteer geographic
information more developed in UN GGIM …...
FUTURE?
It would be welcome if both approaches UN GGIM
and DBAR, with commons and differences will
develop together and support by smart solutions
the human society.
New Initiative supportive for realizing of SDGs will be announce on
September 6 2021 in Beijing.
The 1st International Forum on Big Data for Sustainable Development
Goals (FBAS) is inviting scientists, engineers, policymakers and experts
from diverse backgrounds from around the world for improved
partnerships and networking towards collaborative and collective
efforts in Big Data to support the SDGs
Sessions, e.g.: Big Data on Earth supports SDG's multiple goals:
tradeoffs and synergies
BEIJING, September 6-8, 2021
Key objectives to discuss challenges in translating Big Data to information
relevant to the SDGs and use of Big Data to enable science-informed policy
and decision support. The Forum also marks the occasion of the
inauguration of the International Research Center of Big Data for
Sustainable Development Goals (CBAS), an important milestone for China’s
commitment to facilitate global efforts in science, technology and
innovation towards the UN’s Sustainable Development Goals.
For additional information on the Forum please visit the
official website at
https://fbas2021.scimeeting.cn/en/web/.
Newest issue from Nessebar and Sofia, Bulgaria:
The 8ICCGIS Proceedings, Vol. 1 are published online:
https://iccgis2020.cartography-gis.com/proceedings-vol-1/
5. The Challenges of Geospatial
Sciences (incl. Geodesy, Cartography,
RS, etc.)
ISPRS and ICA results, agenda, outputs
ICA: working group 2003 , commission 2005,
conference with Gi4DM in Prague 2009 and Beijing on
behalf of Czech Republic Presidency of EU with ICA and
ISPRS people.
In last 4 years ICA commission Cartography for EW and
Crises Management realized 25 events over the World.
ISPRS: Gi4DM 2005, important conference 2007 in
Delft, other conferences (Istanbul) with cooperation
with UNOOSA, Orhan Altan represented geospatial
organizations in Geneve conference, membership in
U.N. DRR conference.
Selected Publications
Orhan ALTAN, Robert BACKHAUS, Piero BOCCARDO, Sisi ZLATANOVA (2010)
ICA: KONEČNÝ, Milan - CARTWRIGHT, William. International Cartographic Association
More books and proceedings:
Orhan Altan, Robert Backhaus, Piero Boccardo, Niels van
Manen, Fabio Giulio Tonolo, John Trinder and Sisi Zlatanova
(2013):
…effects (of disasters) could be minimized and considerable
losses of life and property could be avoided through improved
risk assessment, early warning, and disaster detection and
monitoring.
Earth observation can help to provide this information.
ICA:
Gartner Georg and Konecny Milan:
The role of modern cartography for disaster management
A lot a lot, but,…..
Where is our place now?
What are challenges in particularly items and all
together?
Enhancement of integration.
6. Innovative Types of Projects
Dynamic mapping for risk and crisis
management in big data era
China-Czech Intergovernmental Science and
Technology Cooperation Project 2017.4-2019.12
Xie, Xie!!!!
THANK YOU
SPASIBO
RACHMED
Muchas Gracias
O Brigada
Kammsa Hamida
Aligator
SHUKRAN
BLAGODARJA
DĚKUJI ( in Czech)