Hi all. Following our previous initiative regarding the mapping efforts in Gaza, we have received requests from humanitarians to address the large data gap in southern Lebanon for buildings. These requests have originated from international non-governmental organizations and humanitarian GIS and data analysts.
As noted previously, HOT typically refrains from mapping in areas affected by conflict. However, we are willing to reconsider this stance when we receive direct requests from trusted humanitarian partners who can provide accurate, reliable, and up-to-date information, and when we feel confident in our ethical assessment of mapping in the region.
In light of the current situation in southern Lebanon, we have been reflecting on our data principles of openness, usefulness, inclusivity, and ethical considerations. Recognizing the urgent need to better understand the humanitarian landscape, we will work closely with our partners and data validators to coordinate a focused update through our Tasking Manager. This effort aims to enhance the pre-conflict building footprints in Jezzine, Saida, El Nabatieh, Hasbaya, Marjaayoun, Sour, and Bent Jbeil. The updated data will facilitate more accurate assessments of the critical infrastructure in these areas.
All data work, especially in conflict zones, must balance usefulness with possible risks and mitigations.
Any questions can be sent to data@hotosm.org or posted here. Thank you.
My understanding is: pre and post-conflict building footprints are almost the same, and you have better data for pre-conflict footprints, hence you are focusing on improving OSM based on that - do I understand the situation correctly?
If a building is known to have been destroyed and not rebuilt, you are not going to add the once-but-not-anymore existing footprint as a building, I hope.
Good questions. We do have better data for pre-conflict buildings, but you also need to have the original buildings in the data to better track if a building has been damaged. When the situation allows we hope to update OSM to reflect any rebuilding. Hope that helps.
Thank you. If you are knowingly mapping non-existent buildings as buildings, so that later you are able
then, in my opinion, that’s a misuse of OSM. No matter how noble the humanitarian reasons might be.
I’m confident most of the buildings which you map still exists, so the above isn’t a huge deal - but still, in case you are intentionally mapping destroyed buildings as buildings, it would be better if you took the (for lack of a better word I can think of:) “rules” of the community more to heart. This page clearly spells it out:
OpenStreetMap is not the place for storing data about nonexistent map features .
In case you map buildings which are known to have been destroyed but are still recognizable as ruins (or use some other suitable tag, without pretending the building still exists), then go for it, I don’t have a concern.
I’m pretty confident most of the buildings in southern Lebanon aren’t destroyed, and therefore the vast majority of HOT contributions are valuable OSM contributions. I think it would be better if this effort, which tries to achieve something useful for so many people, did not include aims conflicting with the rules of OSM.
As we are mapping based on pre-conflict imagery, it would not be possible to intentionally map destroyed buildings. It is important to note that it is critical to know which buildings are there to plan humanitarian aide.
I do also agree with you that I think most buildings in Lebanon are not fully destroyed right now and the majority of the building footprints will be useful for other uses in the future (inshallah).