App evaluation regarding vulnerability
From LINKS Community Center
The table below shows an example of how a fictional app could be evaluated regarding disaster risk perception and vulnerability, provided by the Disaster Risk Perception and Vulnerability knowledge base.
| VULNERABILITY | PHYSICAL/MATERIAL | SOCIAL/CULTURAL | INSTITUTIONAL |
|---|---|---|---|
| ACCESSIBILITY | Access to resources to be connected; physical and digital accessibility to the information/communication system | Knowledge disparities, linguistic difficulties, difficulty to access quality information | Access to representativeness into the system |
| - the app is not accessible to people with vision impairment; the app is not accessible to people with old smartphones (after 2019) because of continuous software update
+ |
- the app does not provide translation support
+ the app has a system to identify fake news and stop their spread |
- the app does not link to institutional channels
+ | |
| CONNECTIVITY | The level of connection (e.g. efficient system of infrastructures and services); capacity to transfer moneys, to use them | Capacity to pass information, be connected with the others and share worries, but also connect hate | Capacity to connect people to the rescue system, facilitate communication among places and solve disruptions to infrastructures |
| -
+ |
-
+ the app has chat, videochat and private and public groups |
-
+ the app has a way to connect directly with authorities and ask support if needed | |
| MOBILITY | The ability to move (also temporarily) and the availability of means of transportation, such as the capacity to use them | Mobilize ideas and networks (to increase resilience but also to feed hate and violence) | Capacity to mobilize resources, aid, rescue system |
| -
+ the app has a system for providing information in real time on public transport and how to access it with geotag |
-
+ the app provides the possibility to ask for foundraising |
-
+ |