The continuous increase in deprived living conditions in many cities of the Global South contradicts efforts to make cities inclusive, safe, resilient, and sustainable places. Using examples of Asian, African, and Latin American cities, this study shows the scope and limits of earth observation (EO)-based mapping of deprived living conditions in support of providing consistent global information for the SDG indicator 11.1.1 “proportion of urban population living in slums, informal settlements or inadequate housing”. At the technical level, we compare several EO-based methods and imagery for mapping deprived living conditions, discussing their ability to map such areas including differences in terms of accuracy and performance at the city scale. At the operational level, we compare available municipal maps showing identified deprived areas with the spatial extent of morphological mapped areas of deprived living conditions (using EO) at the city scale, discussing the reasons for inconsistencies between municipal and EO-based maps. We provide an outlook on how EO-based mapping of deprived living conditions could contribute to a global spatial information base to support targeting of deprived living conditions in support of the SDG Goal 11.1.1 indicator, when uncertainties and ethical considerations on data provision are well addressed.

Robots are leaving factories and entering urban spaces. In this paper, I will explore how we can integrate robots of various types into the urban landscape. I will distinguish between two perspectives: (1) the responsible design and use of urban robots and (2) robots as part of responsible urban innovations. The first viewpoint considers issues arising from the use of a robot in an urban environment. To develop a substantive understanding of Responsible Urban Robotics, we need to focus on normative implications of city life as the context in which in robots are being used. I will refer to the desirable qualities of city life as “cityness” and will argue that we should design for cityness. The second approach asks how robots might be used to address challenges specific to cities. From the perspective of RRI, this may require participatory approaches in which the needs of the stakeholders are addressed. But we may also find inspiration in the work undertaken in architecture on expanding the concept and field to ensure that architects not only provide services to the lucky few but also create useful and beautiful spaces for the many. A dialogue with architects, urban designers, and urban planners may also be needed to successfully address the spatial issues raised by the presence of robots in the city.

The continuous urbanisation in most Low-to-Middle-Income-Country (LMIC) cities is accompanied by rapid socio-economic changes in urban and peri-urban areas. Urban transformation processes, such as gentrification as well as the increase in poor urban neighbourhoods (e.g., slums) produce new urban patterns. The intersection of very rapid socio-economic and demographic dynamics are often insufficiently understood, and relevant data for understanding them are commonly unavailable, dated, or too coarse (resolution). Traditional survey-based methods (e.g., census) are carried out at low temporal granularity and do not allow for frequent updates of large urban areas. Researchers and policymakers typically work with very dated data, which do not reflect on-the-ground realities and data aggregation hide socio-economic disparities. Therefore, the potential of Earth Observations (EO) needs to be unlocked. EO data have the ability to provide information at detailed spatial and temporal scales so as to support monitoring transformations. In this paper, we showcase how recent innovations in EO and Artificial Intelligence (AI) can provide relevant, rapid information about socio-economic conditions, and in particular on poor urban neighbourhoods, when large scale and/or multi-temporal data are required, e.g., to support Sustainable Development Goals (SDG) monitoring. We provide solutions to key challenges, including the provision of multi-scale data, the reduction in data costs, and the mapping of socio-economic conditions. These innovations fill data gaps for the production of statistical information, addressing the problems of access to field-based data under COVID-19.

There is a growing awareness of the (potential) tensions be-tween urban resilience and justice. This paper provides a systematic account of justice issues in the context of urban resilience to natural disasters. On the one hand, I will demonstrate that the underlying understanding of resilience – as bouncing back/forward – shapes our understanding of the interplay between justice and resilience. On the other hand, I will argue that we should not only avoid unjust outcomes in the process of building resilience but also consider resilience engineering as a way of promoting urban justice.

Geodata, geographical information science (GISc), and GeoAI (geo-intelligence workflows) play an increasingly important role in predictive disaster risk reduction and management (DRRM), aiding decision-makers in determining where and when to allocate resources. There have been discussions on the ethical pitfalls of these predictive systems in the context of DRRM because of the documented cases of biases in AI systems in other socio-technical systems. However, none of the discussions expound on how to audit geo-intelligence workflows for biases from data collection, processing, and model development. This paper considers a case study that uses AI to characterize housing stock vulnerability to flooding in Karonga district, Malawi. We use Friedman and Nissenbaum’s definition and categorization of biases that emphasize biases as a negative and undesirable outcome. We limit the scope of the audit to biases that affect the visibility of different housing typologies in the workflow. The results show how AI introduces and amplifies these biases against houses of certain materials. Hence, a group within the population in the area living in these houses would potentially miss out on DRRM interventions. Based on this example, we urge the community of researchers and practitioners to normalize the auditing of geo-intelligence workflows to prevent information disasters from biases.

Cartography has been, in its pre-modern and modern production of maps, influential in determining how space and territory is experienced and defined. But advancements in telecommunications and geovisualization software, along with geoinformation systems and geoinformation science (GIS), have transformed cartographic practice from a tool of dominantly state apparatus to a scientific, commercial, and humanitarian enterprise. This is exemplified in the use of remote sensing (RS) techniques to acquire, process, and visualize images of the Earth. In the last decade, RS techniques have increasingly incorporated Artificial Intelligence (e.g., Convolutional Neural Networks) to improve the speed and accuracy of feature extraction and classification in remotely sensed images. This paper will investigate the use of CNNs in the classification of deprived urban areas referred to as “slums” and “informal settlements” in the Global South. Using a postphenomenological methodology, this paper shall analyze the role of classification and use of geoinformation in shaping how deprived urban areas are algorithmically classified. This analysis will reveal that besides the technical opportunities and challenges, attention needs to be given to three ethical areas of concern: how deprived area mapping using AI impacts the agency of communities, how there is a potential lack in the democratization of these RS technologies, and how the privacy and data protection of communities being mapped is endangered.