Published works

Context

The Australian Exposure Information Platform (AEIP) has been utilised for purposes of disaster preparedness, response and recovery since its release in 2018. The AEIP is currently the only service of its kind that can provide the Emergency Management (EM) sector with nationally consistent exposure information, 24/7.

GA and end-users have documented several areas in which the AEIP web mapping application (WMA) can be improved upon. Firstly, the user interface and functionality were improved through the addition of tools allowing users to create Exposure Reports for known geographies (e.g., Local Government Areas), thus allowing persons without spatial expertise greater flexibility when using the WMA.

Secondly, Exposure Reports could initially only be obtained through individual requests and there was limited functionality embedded within the WMA to give end-users the ability to submit multiple reports. Users can now request up to five different exposure report requests in one submission.

Furthermore, while the WMA excels in supplying nationally consistent exposure information, in the form of an exposure report, user’s feedback suggests that there is a need to understand what is exposed in more of a dynamic way to keep paces with evolving and changing information requirements.  Hence a complimentary service, accessing the same data, via a Dynamic Exposure Dashboard (DED) for emergency management situational awareness was devleoped.

The AEIP Enhancement Project’s objectives are threefold:

1. Enhance the AEIP WMA to increase accessibility and usability
2. Develop an AEIP DED to provide Emergency responders with a situational awareness tool.
3. Engage stakeholders to understand their use of AEIP information and to guide the enhancements suggested for the WMA, and the features and functionality of the DED

Method

GA’s Landscape Information Section (LIS) have approached the issues within AEIP in three interconnected strategies: (1) Web Map Enhancement Strategy, (2) DED Strategy, and (3) Stakeholder Engagement Strategy.

The Web Map Enhancement Strategy involved the project team engaging GA’s Digital Science and Information Section (DiSI) to outline the proposed changes to the existing web mapping functionality. DiSI created the changes in a non-production environment where they could be tested without affecting the current production environment. The non-production environment underwent iterative user testing within GA to ensure any changes are fit for production. DiSI then implement the changes to the production environment. Throughout the process, key stakeholders were engaged as part of a feedback cycle into the Stakeholder Engagement Strategy.

The DED Strategy was broken down into numerous technical tasks. Firstly, GA’s enterprise Geographic Information Systems (eGIS) team set up the appropriate environment within the organisations ArcGIS Online Account (AGOL). Secondly, the project team developed a project management plan (PMP) to ensure that all the metadata requirements were met and that all project information was maintained and recorded within GA's electronic catalog system (eCat) Thirdly, the project team iteratively develop the DED and liaised with stakeholders through to the beta product release in June 2021.

The Stakeholder Engagement Strategy iteratively looped back into the aforementioned strategies to ensure that the project teams’ actions were the result of stakeholder input. Firstly, the project team defined the stakeholders through sampling AEIPs current user base. Secondly, stakeholders were engaged through a mixture of qualitative (video conferencing and in-person meetings/showcases) and quantitative (on-line survey) methods. Thirdly, feedback and responses were implemented into the development of either Web Map Enhancement Strategy or DED Strategy. Lastly, stakeholders were reengaged through qualitative means to assess the project team’s development actions.

Research findings

The project team had mixed responses surrounding the engagement of AEIP stakeholders. Qualitative means of engagement gave a higher response rate with more actionable feedback. Engagements through quantitative methods, such as the online survey proved less effective, with 13 responses from a potential 700-person audience. Many or the respondents are members of the Emergency Management Spatial Information Network (EMSINA) or work in state emergency services – primarily agencies that already use AEIP products and understand the value it adds to their business or operational needs.

A key finding amongst stakeholders was that the AEIP data is not used uniformly; the range of uses include planning purposes, at-a-glance information during hazard events, comparative analysis, integration into other products/documents, estimates, and recovery and planning. Consistent across many of the stakeholders was the predilection to use on the ground information relayed from first responders over AEIP data, and that Emergency Service Agencies (ESA) are also hesitant in using AEIP data as they preferred, and were more familiar with, data within their own and often-bespoke platforms. 

Research findings also suggest that a significant barrier to ESAs using AEIP services is lack of awareness of the product, rather than the product not being fit for purpose. Other findings from stakeholders surrounding the WMA and Exposure Report are that health-related data would be a worthwhile inclusion (such as the number of beds in hospitals, rooms in respite centres, the number of general practitioners, chemists, and other medical related information). This largely a response to the need for infrastructure information in relation to COVID-19.

Research findings showed that ESAs primarily view the DED as a situational awareness tool for use in situation and planning rooms. As a result, stakeholders value the ability to add their own spatial data to the DED, include the DED within their own (ESRI based) portals and hubs, and the ability to access the data behind the DED for use in their own applications. Further findings from engagements with stakeholders indicated that concerns over data accuracy and currency exist. As this finding largely relates to AEIP data, it reemphasises the need for stakeholders to be made aware of AEIP, its data and capabilities.

Utilisation

Since its launch in 2018 usage of the AEIP WMA has been steadily increasing month on month. Most uses come from state-based agencies using Application Program Interface (API) keys which allow AEIP information to be integrated into their applications. Usage peaks during both short-term events (Tropical Cyclone Seroja, 2021) and medium-term events (Black Summer), where the service has proven reliable and stable. Usage outside of events is primarily for preparedness and planning purposes.

In May of 2021, the federal government announced the Australian Climate Service (ACS), a collaboration between the Bureau of Meteorology, the CSIRO, ABS and Geoscience Australia to help better anticipate, manage and adapt to climate impacts now and in the future. NEXIS and the AEIP have been identified as important components of the ACS and the next steps for the AEIP will be aimed at integrating revised data into all AEIP services; WMA, DED and GA’s data download services.

Providing DED users the ability to add their own data into the mapping pane of the DED is also an important next step as this would provide a richer user experience and increase the capability of the DED as a situational awareness tool during disasters.

Positioning the AEIP in the landscape of emergency management tools and products is an on-going task. Investigating options to integrate the WMA and DED into a single user-experience that can be accessed from the same application, preferably via on online hub or portal, is seen as an important step in marketing and maintaining the longevity of the AEIP in the emergency management sector.

The project team had mixed responses surrounding the engagement of AEIP stakeholders. Qualitative means of engagement gave a higher response rate with more actionable feedback. Engagements through quantitative methods, such as the online survey proved less effective, with 13 responses from a potential 700-person audience. Many or the respondents are members of the Emergency Management Spatial Information Network (EMSINA) or work in state emergency services – primarily agencies that already use AEIP products and understand the value it adds to their business or operational needs.

A key finding amongst stakeholders was that the AEIP data is not used uniformly; the range of uses include planning purposes, at-a-glance information during hazard events, comparative analysis, integration into other products/documents, estimates, and recovery and planning. Consistent across many of the stakeholders was the predilection to use on the ground information relayed from first responders over AEIP data, and that Emergency Service Agencies (ESA) are also hesitant in using AEIP data as they preferred, and were more familiar with, data within their own and often-bespoke platforms.

Research findings also suggest that a significant barrier to ESAs using AEIP services is lack of awareness of the product, rather than the product not being fit for purpose. Other findings from stakeholders surrounding the WMA and Exposure Report are that health-related data would be a worthwhile inclusion (such as the number of beds in hospitals, rooms in respite centres, the number of general practitioners, chemists, and other medical related information). This largely a response to the need for infrastructure information in relation to COVID-19.

Research findings showed that ESAs primarily view the DED as a situational awareness tool for use in situation and planning rooms. As a result, stakeholders value the ability to add their own spatial data to the DED, include the DED within their own (ESRI based) portals and hubs, and the ability to access the data behind the DED for use in their own applications. Further findings from engagements with stakeholders indicated that concerns over data accuracy and currency exist. As this finding largely relates to AEIP data, it reemphasises the need for stakeholders to be made aware of AEIP, its data and capabilities.