Changes

Understanding Mine Action Information Management

711 bytes added, 20:22, 12 July 2012
no edit summary
The first element of mapping the hazard reduction workflow is to build a map of the relationship between the objects and processes involved in the hazard reduction process. Starting with the first representation of the hazard, the workflow map should describe the processes done to the hazard and the output of the process. The workflow map should trace the entire process from hazard identification through clearance and release of the land according to the operational process in use in the programme. In the example below, a confirmed hazardous area (CHA) is linked to a technical survey that was conducted on the hazard. The survey resulted in a minefield on which a clearance was done, and the clearance resulted in a cleared hazard. Finally, a completion survey was logged to close the hazard.
figure[[Image:Understanding Mine Action Information Management - Mapping workflow.png|center|''Mapping the Workflow'']]<div align="center">''Mapping the Workflow''</div> 
This workflow map identifies the hazard reduction process that is used within the programme and can be mapped in IMSMA<sup>NG</sup> to track the clearance of hazards. Because IMSMA<sup>NG</sup> supports customisable workflows, it can be used to track different workflows for different objects. For example, a programme may have a separate abbreviated workflow for spot UXO tasks that involve only the identification of the UXO hazard (object) and a clearance of the hazard (process) without additional surveys or steps. This process should also be mapped for implementing in IMSMA<sup>NG</sup>.
In the figure below, a CHA is created and its status is set to ―Active.‖ A technical survey process is then conducted on the hazard which results in changing the subcategory of the hazard from "CHA" to "Minefield" and defining the hazard’s perimeter. Next, a clearance process is conducted on the minefield that results in updating the status of the hazard to "Worked On." Finally, a completion survey is submitted that updates the status of the hazard to "Closed."
figure[[Image:Understanding Mine Action Information Management - Workflow Example.png|center|''Example of a Traditional Workflow'']]<div align="center">''Example of a Traditional Workflow''</div> 
Simpler processes can be defined for other types of hazards. For example, a spot UXO task would likely not go through this complete workflow and instead start with a subcategory of "UXO" and a status of "Open." A clearance could then be conducted and the UXO spot status updated to "Closed," without requiring a completion survey.
figure[[Image:Understanding Mine Action Information Management - Workflow Example 2.png|center|''Example of a Spot UXO Workflow'']]<div align="center">''Example of a Spot UXO Workflow''</div> 
By documenting the entire process conducted on each type of hazard, including the changes in status and type that result from the hazard reduction activities, information managers create a complete map of the hazard/hazard reduction workflow that informs how linking and reconciliation decisions should be made and provide a guide to data entry personnel.
In the example below, progress reports were collected for three separate reporting periods during a clearance operation. Collecting and linking information in this way makes it easy to determine that in Period 2 (PR-2), 4,500 sqm were cleared and 25 AP mines were found and that, overall, 15,000 sqm were cleared and 61 AP mines were found. A defined, standardized approach to collecting and storing progress information simplifies querying and reporting of statistical information and is a critical element to supporting operational mine action information management needs.
figure[[Image:Understanding Mine Action Information Management - Progress Report Workflow.png|center|''Progress Report Workflow'']]<div align="center">''Progress Report Workflow''</div>
2,186
edits