Seeing Informal Settlements: the Policy Implications of Different Techniques to Identify Urban Growth Patterns From Satellite Imagery Using the Case of Informal Construction in Ho Chi Minh City

Acolin, Arthur; Kim, Annette M.

doi:10.2139/ssrn.3184364

Cited by 6 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, the critical response is that these technologies often only increase the efficiency of harvesting data that is subsequently allocated into the pre-determined concepts, while citizens' contributions are limited to a range between passive data extraction and community consultation for choosing among a "set menu" of development options [11] (p. 96), as opposed to "smart technologies that are democratic" [20] (p. 163). In addition to these conceptual observations, other commentators have also pointed to operational challenges related to these techniques, such as algorithmic bias (see, for example, Acolin and Kim [21] on remote sensing informal settlements) and the digital divide, especially the gap in mobile broadband use between "developed" and "developing" countries [22]. The latter limits the applicability of geo-tagged social media data in contexts with lower levels of mobile broadband ownership.…”

Section: Tensions Inherent To Sdgsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Impact of Urban Inequalities on Monitoring Progress towards the Sustainable Development Goals: Methodological Considerations

Ulbrich

Albuquerque

Coaffee

2018

IJGI

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There is much discussion regarding the Sustainable Development Goals’ (SDGs) capacity to promote inclusive development. While some argue that they represent an opportunity for goal-led alignment of stakeholders and evidence-based decision-making, other voices express concerns as they perceive them as a techno-managerial framework that measures development according to quantitatively defined parameters and does not allow for local variation. We argue that the extent to which the positive or negative aspects of the SDGs prevail depends on the monitoring system’s ability to account for multiple and intersecting inequalities. The need for sub-nationally (urban) representative indicators poses an additional methodological challenge—especially in cities with intra-urban inequalities related to socio-spatial variations across neighbourhoods. This paper investigates the extent to which the SDG indicators’ representativeness could be affected by inequalities. It does so by proposing a conceptual framing for understanding the relation between inequalities and SDG monitoring, which is then applied to analyse the current methodological proposals for the indicator framework of the “urban SDG,” Goal 11. The outcome is a call for (1) a more explicit attention to intra-urban inequalities, (2) the development of a methodological approach to “recalibrate” the city-level indicators to account for the degree of intra-urban inequalities, and (3) an alignment between methodologies and data practices applied for monitoring SDG 11 and the extent of the underlying inequalities within the city. This would enable an informed decision regarding the trade-off in indicator representativeness between conventional data sources, such as censuses and household surveys, and emerging methods, such as participatory geospatial methods and citizen-generated data practices.

show abstract

Section: Tensions Inherent To Sdgsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Impact of Urban Inequalities on Monitoring Progress towards the Sustainable Development Goals: Methodological Considerations

Ulbrich

Albuquerque

Coaffee

2018

IJGI

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, the critical response is that these technologies often only increase the efficiency of harvesting data that is subsequently allocated into the predetermined concepts, while citizens' contributions are limited to a range between passive data extraction and community consultation for choosing among a "set menu" of development options [11] (p.96), as opposed to "smart technologies that are democratic" [20] (p.163). In addition to these conceptual observations, other commentators have also pointed to operational challenges related to these techniques, such as algorithmic bias (see, for example, Acolin & Kim [21] on remote sensing informal settlements) and the digital divide, especially the gap in mobile broadband use between "developed" and "developing" countries [22]. The latter limits the applicability of geo-tagged social media data in contexts with lower levels of mobile broadband ownership.…”

Section: Tensions Inherent To Sdgsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Impact of Urban Inequalities on Monitoring Progress towards the Sustainable Development Goals: Methodological Considerations

Ulbrich¹,

Albuquerque²,

Coaffee³

2018

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There is much discussion regarding the Sustainable Development Goals’ (SDGs) capacity to promote inclusive development. While some argue that they represent an opportunity for goal-led alignment of stakeholders and evidence-based decision-making, other voices express concerns as they perceive them as a techno-managerial framework that measures development according to quantitatively defined parameters and does not allow for local variation. We argue that the extent to which the positive or negative aspects of the SDGs prevail depends on the monitoring system’s ability to account for multiple and intersecting inequalities. The need for sub-nationally (urban) representative indicators poses an additional methodological challenge – especially in cities with intra-urban inequalities related to socio-spatial variations across neighbourhoods. This paper investigates the extent to which the SDG indicators’ representativeness could be affected by inequalities. It does so by proposing a conceptual framing for understanding the relation between inequalities and SDG monitoring, which is then applied to analyse the current methodological proposals for the indicator framework of the “urban SDG”, Goal 11. The outcome is a call for 1) a more explicit attention to intra-urban inequalities, 2) the development of a methodological approach to “recalibrate” the city-level indicators to account for the degree of intra-urban inequalities, and 3) an alignment between methodologies and data practices applied for monitoring SDG 11 and the extent of the underlying inequalities within the city. This would enable an informed decision regarding the trade-off in indicator representativeness between conventional data sources, such as censuses and household surveys, and emerging methods, such as participatory geospatial methods and citizen-generated data practices.

show abstract

“…Moreover, although there is significant progress in the use of remote sensing for generating urban data (see for example [21]), some authors (e.g. [22]) point to the presence of algorithmic bias and question the ability of algorithms used for the automated interpretation of satellite imagery to account for the local context. They, therefore, emphasise the need for contextual knowledge that is produced collaboratively to detect those location-specific and complex social needs, especially in marginalised urban communities.…”

Section: The Potential Of the Sdgsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Impact of Urban Inequalities on Monitoring Progress towards Sustainable Development Goal 11: Methodological Considerations

Ulbrich¹,

Albuquerque²,

Coaffee³

2018

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There is much discussion regarding the Sustainable Development Goals’ (SDGs) capacity to promote inclusive development. While some argue that they represent an opportunity for collaborative goal-led and evidence-based governance, other voices express concerns as they perceive them as techno-managerial framework, that measures development according to quantitatively defined parameters and does not allow for local variation. We argue that the extent to which the positive or negative aspects of the SDGs prevail depends on the monitoring system’s ability to account for multiple and intersecting inequalities. Attention to the role of inequalities for SDG monitoring is of particular importance for SDG 11 due to the additional methodological challenge posed by the need for sub-nationally (urban) representative indicators – especially in cities with intra-urban inequalities related to socio-spatial variations among neighbourhoods. Investigating the extent to which its representativeness is vulnerable to inequalities we systematically analyse the current methodological proposals for the SDG 11 indicator framework. The outcome is a call for 1) a more explicit attention to intra-urban inequalities, 2) the development of a methodological approach to “recalibrate” the city-level indicators to account for the degree of intra-urban inequalities, and 3) an alignment between methodologies and data practices applied for monitoring SDG 11 and the extent of the underlying inequalities within the city that is being assessed. This would enable an informed decision regarding the trade-off in indicator representativeness between conventional data sources, such as censuses and household surveys, and emerging methods, such as participatory geospatial methods and citizen-generated data practices.

show abstract

Seeing Informal Settlements: the Policy Implications of Different Techniques to Identify Urban Growth Patterns From Satellite Imagery Using the Case of Informal Construction in Ho Chi Minh City

Cited by 6 publications

References 24 publications

The Impact of Urban Inequalities on Monitoring Progress towards the Sustainable Development Goals: Methodological Considerations

The Impact of Urban Inequalities on Monitoring Progress towards the Sustainable Development Goals: Methodological Considerations

The Impact of Urban Inequalities on Monitoring Progress towards the Sustainable Development Goals: Methodological Considerations

The Impact of Urban Inequalities on Monitoring Progress towards Sustainable Development Goal 11: Methodological Considerations

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About