We don’t have time to invest in something that might not work.
Humanitarian practitioners shared this common hesitation around barriers and opportunities for geospatial adoption at ideation workshops that Caribou convened in Geneva, Nairobi, and online.
This revealed a clear need for tangible evidence of impact. That’s why, at Caribou, we created the GeoEvidence Explorer, an interactive tool that charts the impact of using various types of geospatial data on the operations of humanitarian organizations.
It draws on a diverse evidence base of documented geospatial applications in humanitarian contexts, allowing users to scan for insights on specific use cases. The Explorer stands as a testament to the potential of leveraging data for decision-making, preparedness, and operational efficiency. This blog brings together findings, gaps, case examples, and next steps for the humanitarian community.
The Explorer is designed primarily for humanitarian practitioners but also offers value for NGOs seeking to design more targeted interventions, governments aiming to improve disaster response and resource allocation, and researchers interested in building the evidence base on geospatial impact.
This tool will be very useful for me, and indeed anyone looking to evidence the benefits of using geospatial data in humanitarian operations.
Anna Hirsch Holland
R3 Accelerator Coordinator – European Space AgencyThis is an excellent resource. Thank you, Caribou.
James Brown
UNDAC Member – United NationsTypes of operational impact observed
- More effective and efficient decision-making: In Vanuatu, a package of applications combining maps, climate and risk information, and decision support tools was deployed after a cyclone to conduct a damage assessment. This directly informed the government’s coordination of humanitarian aid and shaped priorities towards the most affected areas.
- Preparedness through early warning systems and predictive models: In Malaysia, areas along a river basin were placed on standby to evacuate people from their homes on four separate occasions due to flood risk. People received accurate “yellow alert” warnings generated via an early warning system (EWS) relying on ground-based sensors and satellite data.
- Faster response: In Nepal, an EWS using satellite data gave a 7-day readiness trigger warning, while local flood models picked up flood signals only 24 hours in advance.
- Cost savings: In Bangladesh, satellite data was used in an anticipatory action framework to predict and prepare for monsoon floods and trigger the distribution of aid. The anticipatory response allowed people to be reached at a cost of $13 per person, lower than the cost in previous years ($23 to $26).
- Improved access: In Mali, satellite imagery was used to assess cropland abandonment due to conflict. Using remote-sensing data rather than the traditional field collection enabled coverage of hard-to-access areas, eliminating risk for staff.
Insights from the evidence map
The Explorer makes it clear that, while geospatial data is increasingly applied across humanitarian operations, the breadth and depth of evidence remain uneven. Existing evidence shows that geospatial data is predominantly being used for disaster preparedness and response. Some of the factors for this are the abundance of public resources that keep it top of mind for stakeholders in the sector, the critical role of Earth Observation in addressing their vast physical scale, and the large number of occurrences that demand humanitarians’ attention. The impacts of geospatial data on humanitarian operations were mostly reported in the context of preparedness activities, possibly because this phase offers more time to analyze the data, derive insights, and integrate it into strategic planning and decision-making.
Event-wise, most of the resources documenting the impacts of geospatial data relate to floods; among these, multiple experiences were reported from Bangladesh and Nepal. Infectious diseases (both in plants and humans) and food security are other common events, followed by disasters like cyclones, precipitation-related events, wildfires, landslides, and droughts.
Early warning systems are the most common use case for geospatial data followed by risk and damage assessments. However, the wide range of use cases, all with at least a few reports of positive impacts, shows the potential to use geospatial data more extensively.
Gaps in the evidence base
Despite these promising findings, the evidence base has critical limitations. Only 10% are peer-reviewed academic resources.
We identified several reasons why evidence on the operational impacts of geospatial data is so limited:
- Focus on outcomes for final recipients: Most evaluations prioritize measuring the impacts of humanitarian interventions on final recipients rather than examining the tools and processes that support the operational efficiency of those interventions. As a result, geospatial data’s specific impact on operations is rarely isolated or assessed.
- Lack of time and resources for evaluations: The urgency and fast-paced nature of humanitarian work leaves little capacity to design and conduct rigorous evaluations, especially on operational aspects like data use. Many humanitarian evaluations are of mixed quality, have limited focus, and lack a thorough assessment of effectiveness.
- Limited publication of internal analyses: While organizations may conduct internal evaluations, such as cost-benefit analyses, these are often not published or shared, possibly due to concerns about scrutiny from funders. This ultimately results in a fragmented evidence base.
- Challenges in designing experimental impact evaluations: Assessing the operational impact of geospatial data would require comparing scenarios with and without its use, which is logistically challenging and ethically complex in humanitarian settings.
- Assumed value of geospatial data: There is widespread belief that using geospatial data inherently improves operations, which reduces the perceived need for formal evaluations.
These evidence gaps carry real risks. Without a clearer understanding of how geospatial data affects operational efficiency, there’s a danger of over-investing in tools that may not deliver the intended value, or under-investing in those that could have high-impact potential. The lack of published evidence also makes it harder for funders and implementers to make informed, comparative decisions across contexts. As a result, promising innovations may fail to scale, and lessons from past experiences risk being lost or siloed within individual organizations. In short, if we don’t systematically assess what’s working, we limit our ability to improve how humanitarian operations are planned, delivered, and adapted.
What’s next?
Looking ahead, three practical actions can help strengthen how we evidence the use of geospatial data in humanitarian work.
- First, donors should prioritise funding for evaluations of geospatial tools and ensure those resources are built into project budgets.
- Second, funders and implementers could support pilot programmes that directly compare outcomes with and without the use of geospatial data.
- Third, there’s a need to create safe and open spaces to share operational evidence, whether through anonymised reporting mechanisms or sector forums.
The GeoEvidence Explorer is not only a repository of existing insights but a resource designed to support ongoing learning and decision-making. Humanitarian NGOs, government agencies, and researchers can all use the Explorer to scan for relevant case studies, identify where evidence is missing, and support more data-informed operations. For NGOs, it can shape programme design or funding proposals. Governments may find it valuable for disaster preparedness and resource allocation. Researchers can use it to identify gaps and contribute further analysis. We’re also looking for collaborators to help keep the tool up to date. Get in touch.
Authors
Carlotta Maucher
Follow Carlotta Maucher on LinkedInManager, Funds & Programs
See More by Carlotta Maucher
Nicki McGoh
Follow Nicki McGoh on LinkedInSenior Director, Funds & Programs
See More by Nicki McGoh
