Post-Disaster Recovery Monitoring with Google Earth Engine
Source abstract
Abstract
Post-disaster recovery is a complex process in terms of measuring its progress after a disaster and understanding its components and influencing factors. During this process, disaster planners and governments need reliable information to make decisions towards building the affected region back to normal (pre-disaster), or even improved, conditions. Hence, it is essential to use methods to understand the dynamics/variables of the post-disaster recovery process, and rapid and cost-effective data and tools to monitor the process. Google Earth Engine (GEE) provides free access to vast amounts of remote sensing (RS) data and a powerful computing environment in a cloud platform, making it an attractive tool to analyze earth surface data. In this study we assessed the suitability of GEE to analyze and track recovery. To do so, we employed GEE to assess the recovery process over a three-year period after Typhoon Haiyan, which struck Leyte island, in the Philippines, in 2013. We developed an approach to (i) generate cloud and shadow-free image composites from Landsat 7 and 8 satellite imagery and produce land cover classification data using the Random Forest method, and (ii) generate damage and recovery maps based on post-classification change analysis. The method produced land cover maps with accuracies >88%. We used the model to produce damage and three time-step recovery maps for 62 municipalities on Leyte island. The results showed that most of the municipalities had recovered after three years in terms of returning to the pre-disaster situation based on the selected land cover change analysis. However, more analysis (e.g., functional assessment) based on detailed data (e.g., land use maps) is needed to evaluate the more complex and subtle socio-economic aspects of the recovery. The study showed that GEE has good potential for monitoring the recovery process for extensive regions. However, the most important limitation is the lack of very-high-resolution RS data that are critical to assess the process in detail, in particular in complex urban environments.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Remote Sensing in Agriculture · Remote-Sensing Image Classification · Remote Sensing and Land Use
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
Department of Earth System Analysis (ESA), Faculty of Geo-Information Science and Earth Observation (ITC), University of Twente, AE 7500 Enschede, The Netherlands
Independent researcher, Karaj 68341-49411, Iran
References (71)
Show source-provided references
1. Mizutori, M., and Guha-Sapir, D. (2017). Economic Losses, Poverty and Disasters 1998–2017, United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction.
2. Evaluating post-Katrina recovery in Mississippi using repeat photography10.1111/j.1467-7717.2010.01227.x ↗
3. UNISDR (2015, January 14–18). Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015–2030. Proceedings of the Third World Conference on Disaster Risk Reduction, Sendai, Japan.
4. Sheykhmousa, M., Kerle, N., Kuffer, M., and Ghaffarian, S. (2019). Post-disaster recovery assessment with machine learning-derived land cover and land use information. Remote Sens., 11.10.3390/rs11101174 ↗
5. Ghaffarian, S., Kerle, N., and Filatova, T. (2018). Remote sensing-based proxies for urban disaster risk management and resilience: A review. Remote Sens., 10.10.3390/rs10111760 ↗
6. Kerle, N., Ghaffarian, S., Nawrotzki, R., Leppert, G., and Lech, M. (2019). Evaluating resilience-centered development interventions with remote sensing. Remote Sens., 11.10.3390/rs11212511 ↗
7. Urban social vulnerability assessment with physical proxies and spatial metrics derived from air- and spaceborne imagery and GIS data10.1007/s11069-008-9264-0 ↗
8. Physical vulnerability proxies from remotes sensing: Reviewing, implementing and disseminating selected techniques10.1109/MGRS.2015.2398672 ↗
9. Kerle, N., Nex, F., Gerke, M., Duarte, D., and Vetrivel, A. (2019). UAV-based structural damage mapping: A review. ISPRS Int. J. Geo-Inf., 9.10.3390/ijgi9010014 ↗
10. Vetrivel, A., Kerle, N., Gerke, M., Nex, F., and Vosselman, G. (2016, January 14–16). Towards automated satellite image segmentation and classification for assessing disaster damage using data specific features with incremental learning. Proceedings of the GEOBIA 2016, Solutions and Synergies, Enschede, The Netherlands.10.3990/2.369 ↗
11. Vetrivel, A., Gerke, M., Kerle, N., and Vosselman, G. (2016). Identification of structurally damaged areas in airborne oblique images using a visual-bag-of-words approach. Remote Sens., 8.10.3390/rs8030231 ↗
12. Nex, F., Duarte, D., Steenbeek, A., and Kerle, N. (2019). Towards real-time building damage mapping with low-cost UAV solutions. Remote Sens., 11.10.3390/rs11030287 ↗
13. Towards post-disaster debris identification for precise damage and recovery assessments from UAV and satellite images10.5194/isprs-archives-XLII-2-W13-297-2019 ↗
14. Brown, D., Platt, S., and Bevington, J.M. (2010). Disaster Recovery Indicators: Guidlines for Monitoring and Evaluation, CURBE, Cambridge University for Risk in the Built Environment, University of Cambridge.
15. Estimation of gross domestic product at sub-national scales using night-time satellite imagery
16. The use of remotely sensed data and ground survey tools to assess damage and monitor early recovery following the 12.5.2008 Wenchuan earthquake in China10.1007/s10518-011-9318-7 ↗
17. Costa Viera, A., and Kerle, N. (2014). Utility of Geo-Informatics for Disaster Risk Management: Linking Structural Damage Assessment, Recovery and Resilience, University of Twente.
18. Post-disaster urban recovery monitoring in Pisco after the 2007 Peru earthquake using satellite image10.20965/jdr.2014.p1059 ↗
19. Monitoring recovery after earthquakes through the integration of remote sensing, GIS, and ground observations: The case of L’aquila (Italy)10.1080/15230406.2015.1029520 ↗
20. Kerle, N. (2016). Disasters: Risk assessment, management, and post-disaster studies using remote sensing. Remote Sensing of Water Resources, Disasters, and Urban Studies, Taylor & Francis Group, LLC.
21. Chen, T., and Guestrin, C. (2016). Xgboost: A scalable tree boosting system. Proceedings of the 22nd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining, ACM.10.1145/2939672.2939785 ↗
22. Very high resolution object-based land use–land cover urban classification using extreme gradient boosting10.1109/LGRS.2018.2803259 ↗
23. Duarte, D., Nex, F., Kerle, N., and Vosselman, G. (2018). Multi-resolution feature fusion for image classification of building damages with convolutional neural networks. Remote Sens., 10.10.3390/rs10101636 ↗
24. Nex, F., Duarte, D., Tonolo, F.G., and Kerle, N. (2019). Structural building damage detection with deep learning: Assessment of a state-of-the-art CNN in operational conditions. Remote Sens., 11.10.3390/rs11232765 ↗
25. Ghaffarian, S., and Kerle, N. (2019, January 1–4). Post-disaster recovery assessment using multi-temporal satellite images with a deep learning approach. Proceedings of the 39th Earsel Conference, Salzburg, Austria.
26. Ghaffarian, S., Kerle, N., Pasolli, E., and Jokar Arsanjani, J. (2019). Post-disaster building database updating using automated deep learning: An integration of pre-disaster OpenStreetMap and multi-temporal satellite data. Remote Sens., 11.10.3390/rs11202427 ↗
27. Automatic building detection based on purposive FastICA (PFICA) algorithm using monocular high resolution Google Earth images10.1016/j.isprsjprs.2014.08.017 ↗
28. Automatic building detection based on supervised classification using high resolution Google Earth images10.5194/isprsarchives-XL-3-101-2014 ↗
29. Google Earth Engine: Planetary-scale geospatial analysis for everyone10.1016/j.rse.2017.06.031 ↗
30. Kumar, L., and Mutanga, O. (2018). Google Earth Engine applications since inception: Usage, trends, and potential. Remote Sens., 10.10.3390/rs10101509 ↗
31. Using Landsat observations (1988–2017) and Google Earth Engine to detect vegetation cover changes in rangelands—A first step towards identifying degraded lands for conservation10.1016/j.rse.2019.111317 ↗
32. Stromann, O., Nascetti, A., Yousif, O., and Ban, Y. (2019). Dimensionality reduction and feature selection for object-based land cover classification based on Sentinel-1 and Sentinel-2 time series using Google Earth Engine. Remote Sens., 12.10.3390/rs12010076 ↗
33. Mapping annual land use changes in China’s poverty-stricken areas from 2013 to 201810.1016/j.rse.2019.111285 ↗
34. Canty, M.J., Nielsen, A.A., Conradsen, K., and Skriver, H. (2019). Statistical analysis of changes in Sentinel-1 time series on the Google Earth Engine. Remote Sens., 12.10.3390/rs12010046 ↗
35. Using Google Earth Engine to detect land cover change: Singapore as a use case10.1080/22797254.2018.1451782 ↗
36. Mahdianpari, M., Salehi, B., Mohammadimanesh, F., Homayouni, S., and Gill, E. (2018). The first wetland inventory map of Newfoundland at a spatial resolution of 10 m using Sentinel-1 and Sentinel-2 data on the Google Earth Engine cloud computing platform. Remote Sens., 11.10.3390/rs11010043 ↗
37. Integrating lidar data and multi-temporal aerial imagery to map wetland inundation dynamics using Google Earth Engine10.1016/j.rse.2019.04.015 ↗
38. Leveraging Google Earth Engine (GEE) and machine learning algorithms to incorporate in situ measurement from different times for rangelands monitoring10.1016/j.rse.2019.111521 ↗
39. Automated cropland mapping of continental Africa using Google Earth Engine cloud computing10.1016/j.isprsjprs.2017.01.019 ↗
40. Liu, C.-C., Shieh, M.-C., Ke, M.-S., and Wang, K.-H. (2018). Flood prevention and emergency response system powered by Google Earth Engine. Remote Sens., 10.10.20944/preprints201807.0076.v1 ↗
41. Sazib, N., Mladenova, I., and Bolten, J. (2018). Leveraging the Google Earth Engine for drought assessment using global soil moisture data. Remote Sens., 10.10.3390/rs10081265 ↗
42. Generating intra-year metrics of wildfire progression using multiple open-access satellite data streams10.1016/j.rse.2019.111295 ↗
43. De Alban, J.D.T., Connette, G.M., Oswald, P., and Webb, E.L. (2018). Combined Landsat and L-band SAR data improves land cover classification and change detection in dynamic tropical landscapes. Remote Sens., 10.10.3390/rs10020306 ↗
44. NDRRMC (2014). Final Reports for Effects of Typhoon Yolanda (Haiyan), National Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Council of Philippines.
45. A review of large area monitoring of land cover change using Landsat data10.1016/j.rse.2011.08.024 ↗
46. Opening the archive: How free data has enabled the science and monitoring promise of Landsat10.1016/j.rse.2012.01.010 ↗
47. A pixel-based Landsat compositing algorithm for large area land cover mapping10.1109/JSTARS.2012.2228167 ↗
48. Pixel-based image compositing for large-area dense time series applications and science10.1080/07038992.2014.945827 ↗
49. Reductions, G.D.I. (2020, January 10). Introduction to Google Earth Engine. Available online: Https://developers.Google.Com/earthengine/.
50. Red and photographic infrared linear combinations for monitoring vegetation10.1016/0034-4257(79)90013-0 ↗
51. Remote sensing for grassland management in the arid Southwest10.2111/05-201R.1 ↗
52. A comparison of vegetation indices over a global set of TM images for EOS-MODIS10.1016/S0034-4257(96)00112-5 ↗
53. Overview of the radiometric and biophysical performance of the modis vegetation indices10.1016/S0034-4257(02)00096-2 ↗
54. NDWI—A normalized difference water index for remote sensing of vegetation liquid water from space10.1016/S0034-4257(96)00067-3 ↗
55. The modified normalized difference vegetation index (MNDVI) a new index to determine frost damages in agriculture based on landsat tm data10.1080/014311697216810 ↗
56. Using thematic mapper data to identify contrasting soil plains and tillage practices
57. Landscape-scale characterization of cropland in China using vegetation and Landsat TM images10.1080/01431160110106069 ↗
58. Torbick, N., Ledoux, L., Salas, W., and Zhao, M. (2016). Regional mapping of plantation extent using multisensor imagery. Remote Sens., 8.10.3390/rs8030236 ↗
59. Random forest in remote sensing: A review of applications and future directions10.1016/j.isprsjprs.2016.01.011 ↗
60. Random forests for land cover classification10.1016/j.patrec.2005.08.011 ↗
61. Land cover and land use classification performance of machine learning algorithms in a boreal landscape using Sentinel-2 data10.1080/15481603.2019.1650447 ↗
62. Object-oriented mapping of landslides using random forests10.1016/j.rse.2011.05.013 ↗
63. Investigation of the random forest framework for classification of hyperspectral data10.1109/TGRS.2004.842481 ↗
64. Exploring Google Earth Engine platform for big data processing: Classification of multi-temporal satellite imagery for crop mapping10.3389/feart.2017.00017 ↗
65. A 30-m Landsat-derived cropland extent product of Australia and China using random forest machine learning algorithm on Google Earth Engine cloud computing platform10.1016/j.isprsjprs.2018.07.017 ↗
66. Kelley, L.C., Pitcher, L., and Bacon, C. (2018). Using Google Earth Engine to map complex shade-grown coffee landscapes in northern Nicaragua. Remote Sens., 10.10.3390/rs10060952 ↗
67. Mapping cropland extent of Southeast and Northeast Asia using multi-year time-series Landsat 30-m data using a random forest classifier on the Google Earth Engine cloud
68. Do We Need Hundreds of Classifiers to Solve Real World Classification Problems?
69. Applications of Sentinel-1 synthetic aperture radar imagery for floods damage assessment: A case study of Nakhon Si Thammarat, Thailand10.5194/isprs-archives-XLII-2-W13-1927-2019 ↗
70. Phan, A., Ha, D.N., Man, C.D., Nguyen, T.T., Bui, H.Q., and Nguyen, T.T.N. (2019). Rapid assessment of flood inundation and damaged rice area in red river delta from Aentinel 1A imagery. Remote Sens., 11.10.3390/rs11172034 ↗
71. Bell, J., Gebremichael, E., Molthan, A., Schultz, L., Meyer, F., and Shrestha, S. (August, January 28). Synthetic Aperture Radar and Optical Remote Sensing of Crop Damage Attributed to Severe Weather in the Central United States. Proceedings of the IGARSS 2019, Yokohama, Japan.10.1109/IGARSS.2019.8899775 ↗