Please find below the
Finalist Evaluation
Judges'' ratings
| • | Novelty: | |
| • | Feasibility: | |
| • | Impact: | |
| • | Presentation: |
Judges'' comments
This is an interesting proposal for an early warning and post-disaster reporting system combined in a 2 ways information flow. Crowdsourcing information related to disasters is a relatively new and interesting space. The idea is realistic in terms of the flood hazard focus and geographical implementation in Nepal as well as in terms of timing. The cost estimates for the trial period may be a bit too optimistic and need further elaboration. It should also further develop the early warning function and provide clearer details of the different functions between pre-disaster-alert systems and post-disaster reporting system and related flood information provided by individuals. The questions suggested related to rain may be improved on. Rather than asking questions that science delivers very clear answers to, focus should be on the advantages of local and indigenous knowledge, an area normally not captured by meteorological data. Consider also challenges in the implementation, given the need to get buy-in from authorities and other stakeholders - it is not clear from the proposal to what extent that buy-in already exists. Note also that developers should really build more on existing apps rather than developing a new one.
Semi-Finalist Evaluation
Judges'' ratings
| • | Novelty: | |
| • | Feasibility: | |
| • | Impact: | |
| • | Presentation: |
Judges'' comments
The idea of using mobile platforms to crowdsource data is interesting, but has been proposed before (and some solutions already exist). This proposal could be strengthened by building more explicitly on those existing tools, and also having partners more explicitly on board (link to decision-making), also to ensure sustainability.
The Judges felt this was a solid proposal for an early warning and post-disaster reporting system combined in a 2 ways information flow. It is realistic in terms of flood and geographical focus in Nepal and in terms of timing, although perhaps underestimates the costing for the trial period. It should further detail the different functions between pre-disaster-alert systems and post-disaster reporting system and related information provided by individuals.
Does the community being targeted understand how crowd based solutions work, will they accept it?
How is this related to other similar ongoing initiatives?
How can the communities trust be gained in making a system such as this effective?
0comments
Share conversation:
Share via:
No comments have been posted.
