Please find below the
The Asian Development Bank has been working on a similar and more sophisticated technology. The proposal didn't refer to existing or previous attempts to experiment with similar technologies nor to what's already being developed.
The real challenge might not be in the development of the technology but in application and where it'd ultimately needs to interface and feed into response agencies operations. Agencies have their own loss and damage assessment methods and data collection for decision making on requirements of search and rescue or relief operations. The application of a proposal like this one would only be as good as to what extent it offers data and information of any use to response agencies, whether they'd take it up and see it as reliable, or invest in systems to interface with what this technology would offer.
There is a risk of all sorts of things going wrong with such a technology the most obvious of which is manipulation and abuse of sending misleading information.
The technical description is pretty well worked out.
The objective is fine, although all of the services already exist so the added value of the package is less than might be anticipated and may not warrant the extra effort of the user.
A 'back-office' service along these lines might work for the mobile phone operators and maybe ISPs. A global monitoring service would identify the location of an event and that would trigger 'crisis' services for the network operator. Service continuity would be part of their business proposition.
Is the Fax the best technology to deal with several thousand of messages during a crisis? Wouldn't be better to push for innovation – alongside with training on the use of new ICTs?
What's the Plan B if communications infrastructures are not functioning properly during and after the disaster? Is there a way to sustain the flow of information?
No comments have been posted.