The Value of Geoinformation for Disaster and Risk Management (VALID) Benefit Analysis and Stakeholder Assessment (2013)


They study followed a two-fold approach in order to ensure a holistic as well as detailed view on the benefits of geoinformation for disaster management and the best possible coverage of the disaster management cycle. In an economic benefit analysis, detailed by a dedicated case study, the monetary aspects were addressed (Chapter 2). In parallel, the knowledge and practical experience of the global stakeholder community was explored by way of a web-based survey (Chapters 3 and 4), the results of which are presented together with information on the assessment of the scientific and technical aspects of the geoinformation products (Chapters 4.1 to 4.5), and on the costs aspects of geoinformation provision (Chapter 4.6). The overall results of the study are summarised and commented in Chapter 5.

Geographical scope

Global examples and comparisons for each disaster type

Non-quantified impacts

Various detailed by disaster type

Quantifiable impacts

Namibia Flood Case Study (page 14-17):

In total, 102 persons lost their lives due to the flood in 2009. The percentage that could have been saved, had an effective early warning system been in place, was estimated to be 56.88 %, with an average range of 33 %. This was the largest range among the different categories. The cross-sectoral category, covering the environment, was estimated at 54.83 %, with an average range of 16.67 %. The social sector has most to gain from an effective early warning system, namely 58.44 %, with an average range of 25 %.

The avoidable damages and losses for the productive sector were estimated at 41.25 %, with an average range of 18 %. The sector infrastructure was estimated to have the lowest potential gains, namely 34.69 %, with an average range of 33 %. Summarising, the respondents indicate that the social sector would gain the most from an effective early warning system, closely followed by the number of human lives lost. The range provided by participants was largest in the category of the number of lives lost, indicating there is much uncertainty about the potential benefits of an early warning. The average percentage numbers were subsequently coupled to the monetary damage and losses figures (Figure 2.9), where the currency is from the year 2009. The largest sum that could have been saved, according to this approach is in the productive sector (USD 50.08 million), followed by the social sector (USD 31.27 million). Damages and losses that could have been avoided in the infrastructure sector are estimated to be USD 13.60 million. The cross-sectoral savings are said to be at USD 0.60 million. In total the four sectors add up to a sum of USD 95.54 million. The number of lives has not been calculated in terms of an economic figure.



Study type

Survey of experts by questionnaire

Economy sector

Disaster Risk Management