water

Article
An Open Data Approach to Mapping Urban Drainage
Infrastructure in Developing Communities
Lay Shien See , Luke Calo , Benjamin Bannon and Aaron Opdyke *
School of Civil Engineering, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW 2006, Australia;
lsee4687@uni.sydney.edu.au (L.S.S.); lcal9891@uni.sydney.edu.au (L.C.); bban9315@uni.sydney.edu.au (B.B.)
* Correspondence: aaron.opdyke@sydney.edu.au; Tel.: +61-2-8627-9049




Received: 31 May 2020; Accepted: 29 June 2020; Published: 1 July 2020


Abstract: Urban flooding in developing countries represents a growing threat to sustainable

development efforts, yet the tools needed to study these infrastructure systems in data-scarce
environments are woefully inadequate. This study seeks to propose a standardized approach
and methods for mapping urban drainage systems in developing communities. The research
draws on a case study from the Philippines, which sought to conduct rapid elevation surveys
and drainage assessments employing open source geographical information system (GIS) tools.
We develop a standardized procedure for digitizing drainage systems using OpenStreetMap and
Field Papers, as well as discuss applications of this data for drainage design. The results contribute to
a methodological framework that can be replicated in other similar developing communities where
study of urban drainage is needed for sustainable development and disaster risk reduction efforts.

Keywords: OpenStreetMap; stormwater; flooding

1. Introduction
Flooding is responsible for the highest number of disaster-related fatalities of any natural hazard
globally [1]. In Asia, these statistics are even more stark, with flood-related disasters estimated
to account for 84% of all disaster fatalities over the last two decades [2]. These flood events are
particularly devastating in developing countries with tropical climates where communities experience
disproportionate flood-induced health issues, displacement, and significant loss of life [3]. It is
anticipated that the frequency and magnitude of these events will be exacerbated by climate change [4].
This trend will be further intensified by anthropogenic activities such as urbanization, deforestation,
and poor floodplain management. As urban sprawl grows, there is demand to monitor urban
development and planning to ensure the resilience of emerging cities against the impacts of future
flood events [5,6].
Urban drainage constitutes a vital part of water infrastructure systems in cities by limiting
interruption of transportation services, protecting property, and inhibiting flood-related health
issues [7]. Modern stormwater management has progressed to employ innovative environmentally
conscious solutions to improve the quality of stormwater runoff; however, in developing countries,
the main issue is still focused on managing the quantity of stormwater runoff to minimize loss of life,
injury, and property damage [8]. The implementation of urban stormwater systems in developing
countries is often more complex due to demanding socioeconomic, technological, and climatic
conditions [9]. Developing communities are also experiencing urbanization at more rapid rates without
adequate investment in infrastructure and local institutional capacity [10]. Unplanned and informal
establishment of urban settlements results in the growth of impermeable surfaces and, consequently,
local flooding [11,12]. Urban drainage is frequently considered as a secondary priority compared
to larger infrastructure such as dams, seawalls, and reservoirs as it constitutes a less visible type of

Water 2020, 12, 1880; doi:10.3390/w12071880 www.mdpi.com/journal/water

Water 2020, 12, 1880 2 of 15

mitigation against flood-related hazards. As a result, poorly constructed stormwater systems persist as
an issue in developing communities. These ineffective systems often fail to cope with the stormwater
runoff volumes generated in growing urban landscapes during rainfall events, which exacerbates even
small-scale floods.
While these issues are often known to communities who suffer from recurrent flooding,
the underlying drivers are often challenging for local governments to action as data on informal and
inconsistent urban drainage systems rarely exist. It is challenging for local engineers and urban planners
to conceptualize designs for these stormwater systems without first having detailed information about
these structures [13]. Mapping existing urban drainage infrastructure can aid in addressing these
knowledge gaps and can facilitate appropriate action. Evaluation of existing drainage networks can
help inform cost-effective recommendations by prioritizing locations in need of maintenance or repair.
Vital characteristics of urban drainage systems, such as dimensions and construction materials, that are
systemically mapped can also assist settlement-scale flood mitigation.
However, current practice struggles with the limited toolsets for basic mapping purposes in
developing communities. For instance, geographic information system (GIS) data in developing
countries are mainly obtained from remote sensing, which is dominated by information on land
cover [14]. On-site observations are resource intensive and require coordination among various
departments that often lack adequate training and equipment [15]. Although many GIS and open
mapping data projects are currently emerging in developing communities [16,17], there is a need for
standardized practice of urban drainage mapping within resource-constrained community contexts to
ensure high-quality and consistent data. How these data are collected is often neglected, yet this plays
an important role in answering broader questions of how these systems perform. Such protocols have
a potential for open mapping projects to be used for a wider range of technical applications, such as
engineering design, in the absence of other traditional datasets.
We aim to propose a standardized approach and methods that can be used in mapping urban
drainage infrastructure in developing communities where data scarcity requires distinct toolsets.
After reviewing previous fieldwork mapping tools, we present a case study from a municipality in the
Philippines to examine lessons from an urban drainage mapping project, and then discuss implications
for advancing flood risk reduction.

2. Background
Geographic information systems (GISs) collect, store, process, and visualize large volumes of
geographical data to understand spatial relationships. Besides mapping capabilities, GIS links spatial
and attribute data to define information about features [18]. The coupling of these two data enables
spatial analysis and visualization that are vital for making evidence-based decisions in the fields of
engineering and development. GIS technology plays a vital role in flood-related disaster risk reduction
measures such as flood simulation and modeling, floodplain management, and the development of
early warning systems [19,20]. Mapping infrastructure, such as roadways and buildings, contributes
to developing flood risk assessments and emergency route plans to minimize loss of lives. During
disaster response and relief, it is also commonly used as a key tool for humanitarian agencies and first
responders to quickly assess emergency situations and coordinate response efforts [21].
GISs can provide an understanding of landscapes and features to support decision-making
processes during urban planning and flood mitigation [22]. It is crucial in traffic, environment,
recreation, land use, and social service planning, as well as in urban stormwater management.
However, in developing countries where urban flooding remains a complex issue, urban planners and
engineers struggle with the lack of formal spatial data on existing stormwater systems [23]. The mapping
applications of GIS technology have potential to bridge this gap by allowing the visualization of
existing urban drainage infrastructure, even in resource-constrained settings. Key information on
existing drainage networks can be integrated to provide a more comprehensive understanding of
current systems.
Water 2020, 12, 1880 3 of 15

While there are many advanced GIS technologies available for mapping applications,
mapping approaches in developing countries are often met with significant constraints. Foremost,
local governments rarely have digital versions of maps essential for planning. The quality of available
data in rural regions also tends to be questionable as there is generally insufficient formal coordination
among different departments in updating and monitoring geo-datasets. The lack of financial resources,
expertise, and availability of GIS software in developing communities also creates a challenging
platform for mappers to collect and process data.
Therefore, the question arises—how can toolsets be made more available to local governments
with limited formal GIS training and how can they be used to understand unsystematic drainage
networks in urban settings? In developing communities, the challenges often have less to do with
the availability of GIS methods, as there are a growing number of open source options, than with the
ability to utilize these technologies to advance flood risk reduction. While remote sensing technologies
have produced significant advances in understanding both the built and natural environments in
developing countries where data are sparse, the available resolution of these data often still necessitates
field efforts to collect supplementary technical information.
These challenges call for distinct toolsets for the implementation of mapping projects in developing
communities. There is a need to involve local organizations and engage with communities throughout
project planning and execution [24,25]. Training and capacity building of local expertise is vital for the
co-creation of maps and datasets, including protocols of mapping procedures involving methods of
data collection, digitization, and processing. Mapping projects in these contexts need to incorporate
equipment and GIS software with minimal maintenance costs to ensure the sustainability of these
mapping practices.
Open data has growing potential to allow for collaborative mapping and public participation to
overcome the lack of geo-information data in resource-constrained settings [26,27]. OpenStreetMap
(OSM) is a collaborative mapping tool central to the goal of allowing an openly editable global map to the
public. OSM is utilized for humanitarian response, disaster prevention and management, and urban
planning. It is increasingly a tool for local governments, humanitarian actors, and development
agencies. The technology has been applied in many developing countries to advance resilient local
development. However, despite novel applications, there are relatively few instances where OSM has
been applied to understanding urban drainage systems.
Gebremedhin et al. [28] mobilized participatory approaches in developing improved urban
flood models in Tanzania. Using OSM as a shared platform, they developed 1D–2D coupled flood
models in Dar es Salaam through open mapping approaches, demonstrating the value of well-defined
participatory processes in data-scarce regions. Their results also demonstrated the potential of open
data in developing flood models for further hydraulic analysis of inundation through waterways
and floodplains. Crowdsourcing mapping methods are especially effective under conditions where
there is limited historical data, such as urban flooding, and community perceptions can be used as a
means to fill gaps in traditional datasets. For example, Klonner et al. [29,30] applied this concept in
combining quantitative OSM and qualitative community spatial data in Santiago, Chile. The generated
maps highlighted sensitive areas of interest for flood management. Other participatory approaches to
mapping drainage for flood risk reduction have also continued to emerge [31].
While there are a growing number of urban drainage mapping approaches in various flood
management initiatives, there is a gap in the standardized practice for capturing informal drainage
networks using OSM in urban settlements with limited resources. With a growing focus on urban
stormwater management as a fundamental component of disaster risk reduction, we build on the
experience of previous mapping projects in developing communities to propose a standardized
approach in mapping urban drainage in developing regions. This approach will allow future
researchers and local governments with limited resources to better understand the present drainage
infrastructure and facilitate urban flood management.
Water 2020, 12, 1880 4 of 15

3. Methods
We draw on case study methods to present a collaborative urban drainage mapping project
from the Philippines. We will discuss the mapping protocol that emerged from this work while
engaging closely with local actors to co-create a process of urban drainage mapping, as well as the
analytical procedures that were used to generate final urban drainage maps. We propose a mapping
protocol, shown in Figure 1, to provide a standardized approach for urban drainage mapping projects
in developing settings.
This research was conducted in close collaboration with the Municipality of Carigara, located in
the province of Leyte in the Philippines. Carigara is a second-class municipality, as defined by the
Philippines government, and covers approximately 120 km2 in its geographical extent. It is home to
a population of more than 50,000 residents. During rainy seasons, flooding is commonly observed,
causing social and economic disruption. While there are a number of factors impacting the nature
of flood hazards in Carigara, such as climate change and illegal logging activities, infrastructure
vulnerability also plays a role. There are many discontinuities in the existing drainage networks
and stormwater flows regularly exceed the volumetric capacity of drainage networks. However,
while drainage was identified as a pathway to risk reduction, much of this knowledge was held within
communities and not formalized in municipal planning efforts. Furthermore, specific households could
often point to localized areas where drainage improvements were needed, but the local government
noted the difficulty in formulating an overall stormwater management strategy.
Our fieldwork was focused within the urban, coastal areas in nine barangays, the lowest political
division in the Philippines. These high flood risk communities included Ponong, Sawang, Baybay,
Jugaban, San Mateo, Guindapunan West, and Visoria East and West. We divided drainage mapping
into two components: (1) an elevation survey and (2) drainage assessments. These aimed to map the
location of drainage networks as well as other characteristics including dimension, slope, condition,
and surface lining material. The assessments were completed in collaboration with local community
members and Carigara’s Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Office (DRRMO).

3.1. Defining an Assessment Boundary

Before commencing our fieldwork and mapping processes, we engaged with the local DRRMO
staff and barangays’ representatives to identify common flood zones throughout the urban coastal
regions. Local resources and capacities available were also identified to establish fieldwork teams.
One survey team and two drainage assessment teams were assigned to each barangay. The survey
team consisted of two surveyors with the help of traffic control by a few barangay tanods (community
police). Each drainage assessment team was led by a mapper and at least two personnel to assist in
measuring drainage dimensions.

3.2. Pilot Observation and Mapping

We selected a preliminary observation area to conduct a pilot observation to first understand
the local urban stormwater system. During the pilot observation, we carried out an elevation survey
around several building blocks. The process of our elevation survey is detailed in the following
section. Next, we performed a preliminary drainage assessment to identify different types of drainage
characteristics to be documented, as presented in Table 1. A protocol on different classifications for
drainage conditions and surface material was developed through pilot observations and engagement
with local personnel and was supplied to all data collection teams with a description and example photos.
Water 2020, 12, 1880 5 of 15
Water 2020, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 5 of 17

Figure 1. Open data mapping process. OSM: OpenStreetMap; JOSM: Java OpenStreetMap;
Figure
GIS: 1. Open
geographic data mapping
information process.
system; QGIS:OSM: OpenStreetMap;
Quantum GeographicJOSM: Java OpenStreetMap;
Information System. GIS:
geographic information system; QGIS: Quantum Geographic Information System.
 maintenance
survey was of equipment.
maintenance
carried of
out usingThis
equipment.an was
This ideal
automatic was for theand
ideal
level local
for the government
local
leveling to build
government
staff. While upon
to build
the manuallocal
upon capacities
localprocess
survey to
capacities to
System survey
System was carried
(GNSS)-based
(GNSS)-based survey Table
outsurvey
using 1.an
methods), OSM
Table itdrainage
automatic
1.
methods),OSM tagging
level
wasitdrainage
was and classifications.
leveling
tagging
significantly staff.
andWhile
classifications.
significantly
cheapercheaper and the manual
required
required lower survey
lower process
long-term
long-term
carry
was out similar
carry out
amaintenance surveys
similar
morea time-intensive in the
surveys future.
in
Table
process the future.
1. OSM
Table 1.drainage
compared tofor
tagging
OSM drainage
other
classifications.
tagging classifications.
alternatives (vs.build
Global Navigation
was
maintenance more time-intensive
of equipment.
of equipment. This wasprocess
This wascompared
ideal ideal
for the localto government
the othergovernment
local alternatives
to (vs.
to Global
build
upon upon localSatellite
localNavigation Satellite
capacities
capacities to to
System Tag(GNSS)-based
System Details
Tag Details
(GNSS)-based survey Example
methods),
survey Photos
Example
it was
methods), Photos
significantly
it was Tag Details
cheaper
significantly Tag
and
cheaperDetails
required
and Example
lower
required Photos
Example
long-term
lower Photos
long-term
carry carry outDetails
out similar
Tag similar
surveys
Tag surveys
in the
Details in
Table the
future.
Example future.
1.Photos
Example
1. OSM
Table OSMPhotos
drainage tagging
drainage Tag Details
Tag Details Example
classifications.
tagging classifications. Photos
Example Photos
maintenance(1) of equipment.
(1)maintenance This was
of equipment. Thisideal
wasfor thefor
ideal local
thegovernment to build
local government to upon
build local
uponcapacities to
local capacities to
(1)out
carry
Key: (1)outwaterway
similar
waterway
carry
Key: surveys
similar in the
surveys future.
in the future.
Tag Details
Tag Details Table Table
1. OSM
Example 1.Photos
ExampleOSMPhotos
drainage
drainage tagging tagging classifications.
classifications.
Tag Details
Tag Details Example Photos
Example Photos
Water 2020, Key:
Value:
12, 1880waterway
Key:
drainwaterway
Value: drain (6) (6) 6 of 15
Value:
(1)
Description:drainDetails
Value:
(1) drain
An
Tag artificial
Details Example (6)
Key: (6) Details
condition
Tag
Description: An artificial Example
Table 1. OSM
Table OSMPhotos
Photos
drainage
1. taggingtagging
drainage Tag
Key:
classifications. Tag Details Example
condition
classifications. Example Photos
Photos
Description:
Key: Description:
waterway
free-flow Key: Anwaterway
waterway
waterway
free-flow artificial
An
used artificial
used Key:
Value: condition
Key:
goodcondition
Value: good
(1)
free-flow
Value: (1) waterway
free-flow
drain
Value: waterway
drain used used Value:
(6) good
Value:
(6) good
for carryingTag
for Details
Tag superfluous
superfluous
carrying DetailsTable Example Photos
Example Photos
1. OSM drainage tagging Tag
Description: Details
Tag
Description:
classifications.A A drain Example
Details
drain PhotosPhotos
Example
Key: Key:
waterway
for carrying waterway
superfluous
for carrying
Description: An storm superfluous
artificial Description:
Key: Description:A drain A drain
water Description:
like
water storm
like waterAn or artificial
water or that iscondition
Key: iscondition
constructed
that with
constructed with
(1)
Value:
water
free-flow (1)
Value:
drain
like
water storm drain
like
waterway
free-flow water
storm
waterwayused or
water usedor Example Photos (6)
that
Value: (6)
is smooth
constructed
that
good
Value: with with
is constructed
good
industrial
Tag discharge,
industrial
Details discharge, smooth concrete
Tag concrete
Details Example Photos
Key: waterway
industrial Key:
Description: waterway
Description:
discharge,
industrial An artificial
An discharge,
artificial Key:
smooth Key:
condition condition
concrete
smooth
Description: Aconcrete
drain
(1) for carrying
for
usuallyusually superfluous
carrying
lined with superfluous
lined with sidewallsDescription:
on both
sidewalls A drain
onsides.
both sides.
Key:Value:
free-flow
usually
water drain
Value:
free-flow
like
waterway
concrete, water waterway
lined
usuallystorm drain
with
like
stones,
concrete,
waterway
lined used
or with
water
storm
stones, or
water
or
usedor (6)
sidewalls
that (6)
(6) is Value:
Value: goodon
sidewalls
constructed
that good
both onsides.
both sides.
with
is constructed with

Condition

Condition
Description:
for
Value: for
carrying
concrete,
drain
industrial Anstones,
Description:
carrying artificial
superfluous
stones,
concrete,
discharge,
industrial or Anor
superfluous
discharge, artificial Key:
Key:
smooth condition
Key:
Description:
condition condition
Description:
concrete Aconcrete
drain A drain

Condition
smooth

Condition
similar. similar.
free-flow
water
Description:
similar.
usually like waterway
free-flow
water An
similar.
lined
usually like
storm storm
water
artificial
with
lined used
waterway
with water
or used
or Value:
that
Value:
sidewalls good
Value:
is that
constructed
goodon
sidewalls good
is constructed
both with
onsides. with
both sides.
Properties

Properties
Channel Properties

Condition
for
(2) carrying superfluous
forstones,
carrying or superfluous Description: A
Description: drain
drainAthat
drain
Properties

free-flow
industrialindustrial
waterway discharge, discharge,
used foror smooth smooth
concrete Aconcrete is
Properties

concrete, (2)
concrete, stones,

Condition

Condition
(2)
carrying (2) (7) is (7)
Key: superfluous
water
usually
similar. like
water
usuallystorm
lined
oneway
Key:
similar. like
lined
with
oneway water
water
stormwith or
water or constructed
that
sidewalls
(7)
thatoniswith
constructed
sidewalls
(7)
both onsmooth
with
constructed with
both sides.
sides.

Sidewall

Sidewall
like industrial
stormoneway
Key: water
Key: or
oneway industrial
discharge,
industrial discharge, Key:
smooth condition
concrete Key: condition
sidewalls
concrete
smooth on both
concrete
concrete, concrete,
yesstones, stones,
or or
Properties

Properties

Condition
Condition
Value: Value: yes

Sidewall

Sidewall
discharge, usually lined with Key:
Value:
sides. condition
Key:
faironcondition
Value: fair
Value:
(2)
usually
similar. yes
Value:
(2)lined
usually yes
with
lined
similar.The direction
Description:
Description: with
The direction sidewalls sidewalls both onsides.
both sides.
Channel

Channel

Value:
(7) fair A
Value:
(7) fair

Sidewall
concrete, stones,
Description: or
The similar.
direction Description:
Description: drain A drain
Properties
Properties

Key: Description:
oneway
concrete, Key: stones,
oneway
concrete, or The
stones, direction
or
Channel

Condition
Channel

Condition
of stormwater flow
of stormwater flow

Sidewall
Description: Asmooth
drain

Sidewall
(2) (2) Key:
without Description:
condition
Key: condition
smooth
without A drain
concrete concrete
of stormwater
Value:
similar. ofyesstormwater
Value:
similar. flow
yes flow

Channel

Channel
observed during
observed during (7)
without
Value: (7) smooth
without
fair
Value: fairconcrete
smooth concrete
(2) Key: Key:
oneway oneway (7)
sidewalls on
sidewalls both on sides.
both sides.
Properties

Channel
Properties

Channel
observed during
observed
Description:
Description:The during
direction
The direction
Channel

assessment.
Channel

Sidewall
assessment.

Sidewall
Key:(2)oneway Key:
sidewallsKey:
Key: condition oncondition
sidewalls
condition
Description: both
Description: onsides.
A drain both sides.
A drain
(2)

Channel
Value: Value:
assessment.
of yes
assessment.
stormwater yes
flow flow
Value: yesof stormwater (7)
Value:
without (7)
Value:
fair
smooth
without fairconcrete
smooth concrete
Key:
(3) oneway Key:
Description:
(3) oneway
Description:Theduring The direction
direction

Channel

Channel
Channel
Channel

observed during
observed

Sidewall

Sidewall
Description: The direction of Key: condition
Key:
Description:
sidewalls oncondition
Description:
sidewalls A drain
A
both drainA without
onsides.
bothdrain
sides.
(3)
Value:
of
Key: (3)
ofyes
Value:
stormwater
incline
Key: yes
stormwaterflow flow
assessment.
stormwater flowincline
assessment. observed smooth
Value:
without concrete
fair
Value:
without
smooth fairsidewalls
smooth
concrete on
concrete
Key: incline
Key:
Description: incline
The direction

Channel
Channel
observed
Value: Description:
observed
during
<inclination during The
of direction (8)
Channel

Value: <inclination of (8)

Channel

during assessment. both sides.

Description:
sidewallssidewalls
on A drain
Description:
both on A drain
both
sides. sides.
Value:
(3)
of <inclination
Value:
(3)
stormwater
assessment.
drain> of
drain> flow offlowof
<inclination
stormwater
assessment. (8) (8) condition
Key: condition
Key:
without smoothsmooth
without concrete concrete
drain> drain> Key: condition
Key: condition

Channel

Channel
(3) Key:
observedincline
Key:
Description: incline
during
observed
Description:The during
slope
The of
slope of Value: poor
Value: poor
(3) (3) sidewalls on both
sidewalls onsides.
both sides.
Description:
Value:
Key:assessment.
the Description:
drain
incline assessment.
the The
<inclination
Value: slope
The
of
<inclination
calculated
drain of
from of
calculated slopefromof Value:
(8) poor
Value:
(8)
Description:
Description:poor
A drain A drain
Key:
the Key:
incline
drain incline
the calculated
drain fromand
calculated from (8) condition
Description:
Description:Asmooth
drain A drain
the<inclination
drain>
Value: drain>
elevation
the data
elevation of drain>
anddata Key:
without Key: condition
smooth
without concrete concrete
(3)
Value:
the (3)
Value:
elevation
the <inclination
<inclination
data
elevation of
anddata of
and Key: condition
(8)
without (8) smooth
without concrete
smooth concrete
Description:
Description:
depth Description:
of the
depth The The theslope
slope
drain.
of The
of
It
drain.theof
slope
It of Value:
sidewalls. poor
Value:
sidewalls. poor
Key:
drain> incline
Key:
drain> incline Value:
Key: poor
Key:
condition condition
draindepth
the of
depth
calculated
drain
indicates the the drain.
ofquickly
from
calculated
drain
how
indicates the Itfrom
drain.
the
calculated
how quickly Itfrom sidewalls.
sidewalls.
Description:
Description:A drain A drain
Value: <inclination
Value: of
<inclination of of Description:
(8) (8) A drain without
elevation
indicates
the Description:
Description:
data and
how
indicates
elevation
the Thedepth
quickly
data
elevation how The
slope
and slope
of
offlow.
quickly
data and Value:
without Value:
poor
smooth
without poorconcrete
smooth concrete
stormwaterstormwatercan flow.can smooth concrete sidewalls.
drain>
the drain.
the
depth drain
stormwater drain>
It
the
of indicates
depth drain
calculated
stormwater
the can
drain.
of the how
calculated
flow. Itfrom
can
drain. flow. Itfrom Key: condition
sidewalls.Key: condition
Description:
Description:
sidewalls. A drain A drain
quickly
the stormwater
(4) elevation
indicates (4)
Description:
the The
Description:
elevation
how
indicates datacanslope
quickly
how andflow.
The
data ofslope
quickly and of Value:without
without poor
Value:
smooth poor
smooth
concrete concrete
(4) (4) (9) (9)
Key:
(4) the
depth ref:depth_mm
stormwaterKey:
drainthe
depth
of the ref:depth_mm
calculated
drain
stormwater of the
drain.
can flow. from
calculated
drain.
It
can flow. It from Description:
sidewalls.
sidewalls.
(9) (9) A
Description: drain A drain
Key: ref:depth_mm
Key: ref:depth_mm Key: surface
Key: surface
Value:
Key:the
indicates <depth
Value:
ref:depth_mm
elevation
the ofhow
<depth
data
elevation
indicates
how drain
quickly and of in
data drain
quickly and in (9) surface
without
Key: Key:smooth
without surfaceconcrete
smooth concrete
Value: concrete
Value: concrete
Lining

Lining

Value:
(4)
Value:
mm>
depth<depth
stormwater <depth
Value:
(4)
mm>
of the
depth ofcan
stormwater of
<depth
drain
drain.
of thedrain
flow. of
Itdrain.
can indrain
flow. It in Key: surface
sidewalls.sidewalls.
Value: concrete
Value: concrete
Lining

(9) (9)
Lining

mm>
Key:
in mm> mm>
ref:depth_mm
Key: ref:depth_mm Description:
Description:
Value: concrete A drain A drain
Description:
indicates Description:
how
indicates The distance
quickly
how The distance
quickly
Channel Dimension

Lining
Dimension

Description: A drain
Dimension

Key:
that Description:
issurface
Key:
that issurface
constructed A drain
with
constructed
(4)
Description:
Value: (4)
Description: The
Description:
<depth
Value: Theofthe
<depth distance
distance The
drain in
ofthe distance
drain in Description: A drain thatwith
is
Dimension

Dimension

measured
stormwater from
measured can
stormwater from
flow. can flow. (9)
that is (9)
constructed
that is with
constructed
its onwith
Surface

Value:
Surface

concrete
Value: concrete
Lining

Lining

Key:
measured
measured
mm> Key:
from
mm> ref:depth_mm
ref:depth_mm
the the
from
measured from the formed concrete
formed
constructed with formed on
concrete its
bottommostbottommost surfacesurface of the of the
Surface

Surface

Key:
formed Key:
surface
formed
Description: surface
concrete
Description: on A
Aconcrete
drain its on its
drain
bottommost
(4)
Value: (4)surface
Value:
<depth ofofdrain
<depth the ofthe
indrain in base surface.
concrete base onsurface.
its base surface.
Surface

bottommost
drain bottommost
Description:
to surface
Description:
the road
drain toThethelevel. of
surface
distance
The
road of the
distance
level.
Dimension

Dimension

(9)
Value: (9)
Value:
concrete concrete
Lining
Lining

drain to
Key: the road level. base
that surface.
is base surface.
constructed
that is with
constructed with
drainref:depth_mm
mm>
measured toKey:
mm> the
drain ref:depth_mm
road
to the
from
measured thelevel.
fromroadthe level. Key: surface
Key: surface
Description:
Description: on A
Aconcrete
drain itsdrain
Surface

Surface

formed concrete
formed on its
Base

Base

（5)
(5) Value: （5)
<depth
Value:
Description:
Description: Theof
<depthdrain
The
distanceof in drain
distance in
Channel

Channel

bottommost surfacesurface of the of the

Dimension

bottommost
Dimension

10) issurface.
Value: 10)
concrete
Base

Value: concrete
Base

（5) that that issurface.

constructedconstructed
with with
Lining

（5)
Lining

Key:mm>ref:width_mm base base

Base
Channel

Channel

Key:
measured
drain ref:width_mm
Key:
tomm>
measured
the
drain ref:width_mm
from
road
to the from
the roadthe
level. level. 10) 10)
(10) surface
Surface
Surface

Value:
Key: <width of
ref:width_mm drain Key:
formed Key:
Description:
formed surface
concrete Aconcrete
Description: drain A drain
on its on its
Channel

Key: ref:width_mm
Channel

Value:
Description:
bottommost <width
Value:
Description:
bottommost of
<width
The drain
surfacesurface of
distance
The
of thein
drain
distancein
of the Key: surface
surface
Key: surface
Dimension

Dimension

Value: earthsurface.
Channel

Value: earth with with

Channel

that issurface.
constructed
that is constructed
Channel

in mm> base base

Base

Base

（5)
Value: （5)
<width
Value: of
<width drain of in
drain in
Channel

Channel

mm> to
measured
drain mm>
drain
thefrom
measured to the
road thefrom
roadthe
level. level. Value:10)
Value:
10) earth earth
earth
Value:
Surface

Surface

Description:
mm>
Key: mm> The
ref:width_mm
Key: distance
ref:width_mm Description:
formed Description:
concrete
formed Aconcrete
drain
on Aitsdrain
on its
Description:
bottommostDescription:
bottommost The distance
surface The
of the
surface distance
of the Description:
Description:
Key: Description:
surface
Key: A drain
A
surfacedrain that
drainis
Adirt,
Base

measured across the opening

Base

（5) （5) that is covered

that is with
covered with
base surface.
base surface. ordirt,
Channel

Channel
Channel
Channel

Description:
Value:
measured
drain Description:
to <width
Value:
the
drain The
across
measured road
to distance
ofacross
<widththe The
drain
level. of in distance
drain
level. in
the covered with dirt, stone,
of the drain
Key: (that
Key: is the
ref:width_mm
ref:width_mm
road 10)
that
Value:
stone,
10)
is stone,
covered
that
earth
Value:
or is or
similar with
covered
earth dirt,
with
onsurface.
its
similar dirt,
on its
measured
mm>
opening mm> across
measured
ofto
opening the the
across
drainthe (that
ofdirection the
drain (that similar
Key: on
Key:
surface its base
surface
perpendicular the stone, or similar
stone,
Description: or
Description: on A
A similar
drain itsdrain
on its
Channel
Channel
Base

Base

（5)
Value: （5)
Value:
<width <width
of drain of drain
in in base surface.
base surface.
Channel

Channel

opening
Description:
is of the
opening
Description:
perpendicular
is Thedrain
ofto
perpendicular the
the (that
distance
The drain
to (that
distance
the 10)
Value: 10)
Value:
earth earth
of stormwater flow). base issurface.
that base
covered
that issurface.
with dirt,
covered with dirt,
Key:
mm>
measuredref:width_mm
isKey:
mm>
is perpendicular ref:width_mm
perpendicular
across
measured to
thethe to
across thethe Key: surface
Key:
Description:
stone, stone,
or similarsurface
Description:A on A
drain
or similaritsdrain
on its
Channel

Channel

Value:
opening <width
Value:
Description:
Description: Theof
<width
of the drain
opening drain
The
distance
of the (thatof indrain
distance
drain (that in
Value:
that
base earth
Value:
that
issurface.
covered
base earth
issurface.
covered with dirt,
with dirt,
mm>
measured mm>
measured
across across
the the
A preliminary
is perpendicular mapping
is perpendicular to the toprocess the was also carried out using
Description:
stone, or JOSM on(Java
A similar
Description:
stone, or
similar drain A drain
its OpenStreetMap) to record
on its
Description:
opening opening
of the The
Description: of distance
draintheThe drain
(that distance
(that
elevationmeasured
values and digitize drainage channels that issurface.
base
documented covered
that from
base with
is covered
surface. dirt,
fieldwith dirt,
observations. During this
across to
ismeasured
perpendicular
is perpendicular the
across
the to thethe
stone, or similar
stone, on its on its
or similar
process, training
opening ofworkshops
opening the drain
of the(that drain were (thatconducted to familiarize local personnel with mapping techniques
base surface.
base surface.
and standardis perpendicular
is perpendicular
OSM to the to the
processes.

3.3. Data Collection

We divided our data collection into two parts that included an elevation survey and drainage
assessments, which were then combined in our analysis, which will be discussed below.

3.3.1. Elevation Survey

An elevation survey was conducted to determine a ground surface for the areas of interest.
This was completed by collecting elevation points at all road intersections throughout the considered
nine barangays. While previous ground surveys and remote sensing data existed, none of these
were of sufficient resolution, or recent, to afford capturing elevations of the in situ drainage network.
The survey was carried out using an automatic level and leveling staff. While the manual survey
process was a more time-intensive process compared to other alternatives (vs. Global Navigation
Satellite System (GNSS)-based survey methods), it was significantly cheaper and required lower
Water 2020, 12, 1880 7 of 15

long-term maintenance of equipment. This was ideal for the local government to build upon local
capacities to carry out similar surveys in the future.
Survey runs were subdivided within barangay boundaries to limit run lengths to 100 m. A total
of 260 elevation points were collected. Additional elevation measurements were taken along main
waterways (e.g., streams) in order to increase the resolution of the digital elevation model (DEM).
Invert elevations were also measured at all bridge and culvert crossings. All elevation points collected
were referenced to the World Geodetic System (WGS) 84 datum and benchmark LY-149 created in 2007
by the Philippines’ National Mapping and Resource Information Authority (NAMRIA). Results of the
elevation survey were then used to develop a DEM of the ground terrain of the municipality to help
understand flow paths.

3.3.2. Drainage Assessments

The drainage assessment was conducted by observations along every street in the urban areas of
coverage. The aim of the survey was to record drainage characteristics such as the location, dimensions,
slope, sidewall condition, and material of base surface lining. We chose to collect data on these
characteristics as they are the basic qualities of a drainage channel and aligned with expected future
maintenance work. Field Papers (http://fieldpapers.org/), a free, automated georeferenced atlas tool,
was used extensively during the fieldwork to generate field maps to record these on-site observations.
We recorded the exact location of the drainage and the direction of stormwater flow on Field
Papers according to our observations during the survey. To record the sizing of drainage, we measured
the cross-section dimensions at the ends of each street block. These measurements were recorded in
millimeters for the depth from the bottommost surface of the drain to the road level and the width was
measured perpendicular to the direction of stormwater flow. In cases where the intersecting drains
were of different sizes, measurements were recorded for each and assigned to the entering stretch of
drainage. To obtain the slope of the drainage channel, the depth recorded was later combined with
center-of-road elevations.
We categorized and recorded the condition of drainage as good, fair, or poor. Good condition was
defined as drainage that was constructed with smooth concrete sidewalls with no signs of damage,
while drainage with unlined sidewalls were considered under poor condition. Drainage that was
lined with only one concrete sidewall was assigned a fair condition. These three main classifications
represented the condition of the sidewalls, which was deemed to be the one of the most important
factors for stormwater transport, while keeping the survey recording simple. Furthermore, the material
of the base surface was noted as either concrete or earth. Well-constructed drainage was commonly
lined with smooth concrete while a drain with dirt, stone, or similar base surface was recorded as earth.

3.4. Data Processing and Mapping

OpenStreetMap was used to plot elevation points, map drainage channels, and digitize field notes.
We used JOSM (Java OpenStreetMap), which is an extension editor of OSM, equipped with more
advanced tools. The ability of JOSM to function offline also makes it useful in regions with limited
internet connectivity, as was our context. Quantum Geographic Information System (QGIS) software
was also used in parallel with OSM in the processing and visualization of data obtained.
Elevation data were added to road intersection nodes using JOSM. These elevation values were
tagged under the key “ref:elev.” The data were then imported into QGIS with the QuickOSM plugin.
We created a DEM from the discrete elevation points through triangulated irregular network (TIN)
interpolation methods. The TIN method helps to create a continuous terrain surface by connecting
irregularly located points to adjacent points to form non-overlapping and compacted triangles with
elevation values stored at the nodes [32]. This method was chosen as it can yield the most accurate results
from sample points that were scattered unevenly from the measurements at every road intersection.
Similarly, we digitized the collected on-site drainage data using JOSM. We plotted drainage as
ways in JOSM and tagged with the “waterway” key and “drain” as its corresponding value based
Water 2020, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 9 of 17
Water 2020, 12, 1880 8 of 15

Similarly, we digitized the collected on-site drainage data using JOSM. We plotted drainage as
on theintagging
ways JOSM and tagged with
conventions usedthein“waterway” key and
the Philippines [33].“drain” as its corresponding
The stormwater flow directionsvaluewere
based on
also
the tagging
assigned conventions
following used in the We
field observations. Philippines
referred to[33].
theThe
flowstormwater
direction offlow nearby directions
drainagewere also
for areas
assigned following field observations. We referred to the flow direction of nearby
where the channels were dry during assessment and there was no information on the direction of flow. drainage for areas
where
The waysthewere
channels were dry
then tagged withduring assessment
“oneway” and and
as the key there wasas
“yes” noitsinformation
corresponding on the direction
value; of
this step
flow.added
was The ways were then tagged
for visualization with “oneway”
of drainage maps later. as As
thedimensions
key and “yes” as its corresponding
of drainage were measured value;at
this step was added for visualization of drainage maps later. As dimensions
discrete locations along the drainage channel, a method of averaging was applied to assign a simplified of drainage were
measured at
dimension discrete
along locations
the entire along
length. theaveraged
The drainagedimensions
channel, a were
method of averaging
tagged was applied
as “ref:depth_mm” andto
assign a simplified dimension along the entire length. The averaged dimensions
“ref:width_mm.” The term “ref:” was included to indicate a local tag while the unit “mm” was included were tagged as
“ref:depth_mm”
since and “ref:width_mm.”
the conventional unit of measurement The termused“ref:”
in OSM wasisincluded
commonly to indicate
in meters. a local
We tag whilethis
propose the
unit
as “mm” was
a possible included
standard tagsince
when thetagging
conventional
future unit of measurement
drainage infrastructure usedin in OSMwhich
OSM, is commonly
should be in
meters. We propose this as a possible standard tag when tagging future drainage
validated in consultation with local mappers. The slope of the drainage was tagged as “incline” in infrastructure in
OSM, calculated
OSM, which shouldfrombethevalidated
drainageindepth
consultation with local
and surveyed mappers.
elevation values,Theasslope of the drainage was
tagged as “incline” in OSM, calculated from the drainage depth and surveyed elevation values, as
   
Elevation
ElevationA − Depth
Depth A − Elevation
ElevationB − Depth
DepthB (1)
Slope (%%
Slope ) = 100%,
× 100%, (1)
Distance between A and B
Distance between A and B
where A
where A and
and BB are
are two
two opposing
opposing endsends of
of aa drainage
drainage channel.
channel. Figure
Figure 22 shows
shows aa basic
basic drainage
drainage flow
flow
model in which the solid red line represents the bottom surface of the drainage. The
model in which the solid red line represents the bottom surface of the drainage. The base slope of the base slope of the
channel is
channel is not
not necessarily
necessarily parallel
parallel toto the
the slope
slope of
of the
the road
road surface;
surface; it
it depends
depends on on the
the change
change of
of depth
depth
along the drainage and is the key factor in determining the direction of stormwater
along the drainage and is the key factor in determining the direction of stormwater flow. During our flow. During our
fieldwork, different teams were delegated to conduct the elevation survey in parallel
fieldwork, different teams were delegated to conduct the elevation survey in parallel with the drainage with the
drainage assessment
assessment to speed upto the
speeddataupcollection
the data collection
process. Theprocess.
resultsThe results
of the of the
survey andsurvey and assessment
assessment were later
were later combined using JOSM to calculate the slope values during data processing.
combined using JOSM to calculate the slope values during data processing. Slope values are expressed Slope values
arepercentages
as expressed as percentages
and were tagged andunder
werethe
tagged under the key “incline”.
key “incline”.

Figure 2. Drainage flow model.

Figure 2. Drainage flow model.
4. Results
4. Results
The mapping process resulted in an elevation and drainage map, shown in Figure 3. We used
colorThe mapping
ramps process
to visualize theresulted
DEM ofinthean barangays
elevation and drainage
with red beingmap,
theshown
higherinelevations
Figure 3. and
We used
blue
color ramps to visualize the DEM of the barangays with red being the higher elevations and
denoting lower regions. We also added contour lines of a 0.5 m resolution to highlight areas with rapid blue
denoting
change of lower
slope. regions. We sought
These maps also added contour
to inform lines
future of a 0.5
drainage m resolution
design to highlight
by providing areasonwith
information the
rapid change of slope. These maps sought to inform future
natural contours of central urban areas and nearby waterways. drainage design by providing information
on the natural contours of central urban areas and nearby waterways.
The drainage map incorporated characteristics we recorded during drainage assessments.
Drainage channels were mapped with green, orange, and red to represent good, fair, and poor
conditions, respectively. Solid lines indicate smoothly lined concrete channels while dotted lines
reflect channels with bare earth linings. The arrows specify the drainage flow direction while the
percentage values denote the channel slopes. The dimensions of the channels were not presented on
this map to avoid overcrowding of labels but were included as an attribute of the GIS layer which
can be exported to create channels in flood models for future hydraulic studies. The municipal canals
(represented by blue lines) were channels that existed in OSM from previous mapping projects
conducted in Carigara. The drainage map highlights drainage issue hotspots that can inform effective
Water 2020, 12, 1880 9 of 15
Water 2020, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 11 of 17

Figure 3. Elevation and drainage maps.

Figure 3. Elevation and drainage maps.
The drainage map incorporated characteristics we recorded during drainage assessments.
Drainage channels were mapped with green, orange, and red to represent good, fair, and poor
4.1. Connectivity and Slope
Water 2020, 12, 1880 10 of 15

conditions, respectively. Solid lines indicate smoothly lined concrete channels while dotted lines reflect
channels with bare earth linings. The arrows specify the drainage flow direction while the percentage
values denote the channel slopes. The dimensions of the channels were not presented on this map to
avoid overcrowding of labels but were included as an attribute of the GIS layer which can be exported
to create channels in flood models for future hydraulic studies. The municipal canals (represented by
blue lines) were channels that existed in OSM from previous mapping projects conducted in Carigara.
The drainage map highlights drainage issue hotspots that can inform effective stormwater maintenance
and locations in need of reconstruction or repair. In total, the assessments mapped 19,925 m of drainage
in a two-week period.
Observations from the drainage assessment highlighted three primary issues that were observed
to impact the effectiveness of the system in transporting stormwater. We will present these below,
in order of importance, along with recommendations. While we will discuss the specific system studied,
our results are beneficial to other local governments in the Philippines whose systems are similar.

4.1. Connectivity and Slope

Results from the drainage survey revealed that many channels were poorly connected.
The discontinuities throughout the drainage network revealed the root cause of stagnation issues that
were commonly observed during heavy rains. Many channels were also constructed with insufficient
slope, leading to accumulation of stormwater in the system that caused ponding under small rainfall
events. Our analysis of slopes also found that in some cases, channels on opposite sides of the same
road transported stormwater in opposite directions. While there is no inherent problem if sufficient flow
paths are available, this adds to the complexity of the system and complicates long-term maintenance
where field crews have difficulty determining flow directions. These issues in connectivity and slope
stem from the ad hoc basis in which channels were added in the municipality, which led to disjointed
connections. Future drainage investments should focus on improving the links between existing
drainage to allow stormwater to flow effectively throughout the drainage network and safely discharge
downstream. Besides connecting adjacent drainage, the system should also encourage stormwater
discharge to the larger municipal canal and river systems to enhance outflow from the urban center to
decrease community flood risk. These larger channels were observed to be underutilized despite being
well sized and of high-quality construction.

4.2. Construction Quality

We found that 27% of drainage channels were in good condition, 62% were in fair condition,
and 10% were in poor condition, based on length. Concrete lining was present in 86% of channels with
the remaining 14% being earth lined. Although many channels were lined with concrete as the base
surface, most of the channels still had earthen sidewalls. In hydraulic analysis, this contributes to a
higher Manning’s value based on the cumulative rough surface areas, which eventually leads to less
effective stormwater transport. These undeveloped surfaces also more easily allow vegetation growth,
which disrupts stormwater flows. To minimize surface roughness and irregularities, unlined drainage
channels should be replaced with concrete material throughout the wetted perimeter of the channel.
General construction improvements were observed to be needed to increase channel uniformity.

4.3. Maintenance
It was common to observe vegetation or rubbish trapped in drainage, which communities noted
frequently led to flooding and pollution issues. The combined used of drainage for domestic wastewater
also was observed to stress the system. It was especially evident in areas near the central market,
where waste was frequently disposed into channels, adding high contaminant loads. Solving the
underlying causes of these issues requires long-term behavior change and more robust policy that
is enforced [8], however preventative maintenance involving the removal of vegetation and rubbish
during regular cleaning of drainage would also greatly enhance observed blockages. Communities
Water 2020, 12, 1880 11 of 15

noted that while these there was regular maintenance conducted in central areas and in areas where
blockages caused flooding, outlying channels that are vital in large rainfall events should receive
greater attention. With regular maintenance work, the stormwater system can perform better and also
reduce exposure of the community to health issues.

5. Discussion
The pilot observations conducted were an important step in understanding the local urban
stormwater systems, for both the local and international team members, and these provided valuable
insights in the development of a robust drainage assessment protocol for site-specific conditions.
Engagement with local officials and communities during the pilot observation was important for
mappers to identify flood-prone areas, notably near critical infrastructure such as schools or markets.
When developing the atlas through Field Papers, it was important to select a suitable scale that
provided sufficient paper space to make notes on pages without overcrowding the printed atlas
affecting the digitization process. While defining a drainage assessment protocol, it is important that
end-users be involved in the decision-making processes to discuss additional drainage characteristics
and how the data will be used in future local development efforts. For example, identifying blocked or
damaged drainage was of particular interest to the local government, in this case, the municipality.
This information was desired for its benefit in planned maintenance work.
Furthermore, tagging classifications should adhere to existing OSM guidelines, if available. At a
minimum, consistent tagging conventions and measurement units should be defined for all mapping
teams. Documentation of photos during our pilot observation was key in defining a standardized
description for different characteristics and ensuring a consistent categorization. The tagging protocol
developed in Table 1 may be useful for future drainage mapping efforts. Training workshops were
included as part of our process and the time investments for these should be accounted for in upfront
planning to familiarize local personnel with mapping techniques and standard OSM processes. This step
is crucial in ensuring a common understanding of all processes from data collection to digitization.
The pilot mapping process can also incorporate mapping other elements such as buildings and roads
in cases where there is limited existing OSM data, as this may be important to orient assessment teams.
Once a clear protocol is defined, different teams should be delegated to carry out elevation
surveys and drainage assessments in parallel. One survey team and two drainage assessment teams
were assigned to each barangay during our fieldwork. With the number of fieldwork staff available,
approximately three hours were required to complete the elevation survey and drainage assessments
of each of the barangays, which averaged around 2.4 hectares. The boundary of the focus area should
be clearly defined to prevent clashing teams during data digitization. Communication with local
communities who have extensive knowledge is also critical during drainage assessments to provide a
comprehensive understanding of the systems. During our fieldwork, we used a checklist of questions:

• In which direction does the water flow along this drainage?

• Is there a culvert located under this road intersection?
• Is there a channel passing through under your settlement?
• Does ponding of rainwater occur here?
• Does drainage blockage often happen near your settlement?

These questions can be modified in other communities according to the local context and different
types of drainage. One of the main hurdles in improving urban stormwater systems in developing
communities is the lack of community input as drainage solutions are often designed without the
involvement of affected households [8]. The aim of the above questions is to assist in mobilizing local
knowledge to aid in creating effective investment in a future stormwater management strategy.
The last step of the process should involve digitizing field data in OSM editing software and
processing data to produce desired outputs. We consciously mapped the drainage channels of a
barangay immediately after the area was surveyed and assessed during fieldwork. This allowed
Water 2020, 12, 1880 12 of 15

mappers to carry out quick data checks to identify gaps or errors in mapping in case a re-assessment
was required before moving on to the next community.
While there are numerous methods of managing sustainable drainage, few tools are tailored to the
type of informal systems found in developing communities. The use of OSM can be a powerful platform
for local governments to capture monitoring data on these networks. As we have shown, collecting
and mapping basic channel characteristics builds a foundation for more detailed future analysis of
these small-scale drainage systems. Beyond the immediate technical lessons learned, the project also
afforded insights on how to mobilize knowledge for disaster risk reduction. Many of the local staff
involved reflected on the ability of the systematic approach to make visible problems they passed every
day. The condition maps in particular revealed larger regions where risk is accumulated. In many
cases, this risk is formed as a result of additive decisions where infrastructure systems are often built
incrementally in developing communities. Understanding settlement-level risk requires taking stock
of overall systems—their connections, characteristics, and boundaries. This case study also shows the
importance of considering smaller drainage infrastructure in disaster risk reduction strategies.

5.1. Limitations
We outline a few limitations of the mapping protocol to provide context on adaptations for the
implementation of future urban drainage mapping projects. While we believe the fieldwork and
mapping approach proposed is generalizable across similar developing communities, the methods
were developed and improvised based on the study of one municipality in the Philippines. Therefore,
we encourage these approaches to be adapted for different national contexts other than the Philippines
where types of drainage and local conditions may differ. OSM tagging conventions may vary in
different contexts and should adhere to local keys and values documented in available OSM wiki pages
to allow for consistent data interpretation.
Further, the practicality of our protocol was developed for open, gravity drainage systems.
The mapping of underground pipes would be significantly more challenging using the applied
techniques. Our framework was also developed for combined stormwater and sewer networks.
The mapping of separate systems in communities may require further tags and protocols to ensure these
are adequately assessed and digitized. Consulting local personnel during the pilot observations should
take place to ensure the attributes are applicable for future local development works. Our protocol
should be adapted to meet project-specific needs; however, our work outlines a standardized approach
for mapping urban drainage in data-scarce developing regions. With proper institutional arrangements,
local support, technical skills, and resources, developing communities can benefit from the resulting
open data that can be applied to improving urban stormwater management [23].

5.2. Future Research

With many developing communities lacking the tools and data to address complex urban
challenges, we believe future research should continue to promote the use of open data and
participatory approaches in urban flood mitigation. While this study focused on mapping urban
drainage infrastructure, future mapping projects, whether initiated by international organizations
or local communities, should widen the scope of mapping to incorporate other infrastructure that
impacts urban water systems such as land cover, roads, and buildings. There is also a need to look
more closely at the open data that already exist and their potential role in design. For example,
Schilling and Tränckner [34] developed a method of estimating wastewater volumes with high spatial
resolution based on OSM building data. Studies such as these are needed to understand the usability of
volunteered geospatial infrastructure data in the design and assessment of stormwater and wastewater
systems. There are many emerging GIS-based technologies and approaches aimed at filling gaps of
missing data and generating realistic flood models at a city scale in data-scarce areas. The development
of these models can contribute to hydraulic studies and promote an improved understanding of local
flooding behavior.
Water 2020, 12, 1880 13 of 15

6. Conclusions
Drawing on a participatory action research in collaboration with a local government in the
Philippines, we presented a case study of an urban drainage mapping project. Through this process,
we developed a protocol for the mapping and assessment of open channel, gravity drainage systems in
developing communities using OpenStreetMap. This approach outlines key variables for urban flood
modeling and proposes standardized open data tagging of dimensions, conditions, and base surface
materials—key variables in the design and maintenance of drainage systems. Our work contributes to
defining clear data collection protocols for the capture of informal urban drainage networks.
Our partnership approach also presents a framework for future capacity building of local
engineering, surveying, and disaster risk reduction staff. While we assisted in conducting the surveys
and assessment, the maps were co-created by members of the local community, which created a sense
of local ownership in the outputs. The target local government will be able to build on results from the
elevation survey and drainage assessment for future urban stormwater works and planning strategies.
Many developing communities face issues of data scarcity, struggling to plan for rapid urbanization.
By presenting a standardized protocol for mapping urban drainage in data-scarce regions, this study
allows future researchers to employ simple approaches to bridge the knowledge gap of current drainage
infrastructure in developing communities. Having utilized OSM, the methodology we adopted is
easily replicated in other similar developing community contexts where data scarcity hampers urban
flood management [34]. Adopting a participatory action approach also adds to local capacity in flood
management, leveraging the use of GIS tools to facilitate community ownership and voice. This case
study demonstrates the importance of a clear mapping framework to guide drainage assessments.
Moreover, active involvement of the local community in the process of data collection, processing,
and mapping plays a vital role in organizing the local knowledge of these systems. By addressing data
gaps of informal urban drainage structures, local decision-makers can acquire the information they
need to advance future urban drainage design and disaster risk reduction strategies.

Author Contributions: Conceptualization, A.O.; formal analysis, L.S.S., L.C., and B.B.; funding acquisition,
A.O.; investigation, L.S.S., L.C., and B.B.; methodology, L.S.S., L.C., and B.B.; resources, A.O.; software, L.S.S.;
supervision, A.O.; validation, L.S.S.; visualization, L.S.S.; writing—original draft, L.S.S.; writing—review and
editing, A.O. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Funding: This research was supported by an Early Career Researcher Development Grant from the Faculty of
Engineering at the University of Sydney.
Acknowledgments: We wish to thank the Carigara Municipal Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Office
for their assistance in collecting the data and for their support.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References
1. Doocy, S.; Daniels, A.; Murray, S.; Kirsch, T.D. The Human Impact of Floods: A Historical Review of Events
1980-2009 and Systematic Literature Review. PLoS Curr. Disasters 2013. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
2. Guo, H. Understanding global natural disasters and the role of earth observation. Int. J. Digit. Earth 2010, 3,
221–230. [CrossRef]
3. Ohl, C.A.; Tapsell, S. Flooding and human health. BMJ 2000, 321, 1167–1168. [CrossRef]
4. Hirabayashi, Y.; Mahendran, R.; Koirala, S.; Konoshima, L.; Yamazaki, D.; Watanabe, S.; Kim, H.; Kanae, S.
Global flood risk under climate change. Nat. Clim. Chang. 2013, 3, 816–821. [CrossRef]
5. Few, R. Flooding, vulnerability and coping strategies: Local responses to a global threat. Prog. Dev. Stud.
2003, 3, 43–58. [CrossRef]
6. Zhou, Q.; Leng, G.; Su, J.; Ren, Y. Comparison of urbanization and climate change impacts on urban flood
volumes: Importance of urban planning and drainage adaptation. Sci. Total Environ. 2019, 658, 24–33.
[CrossRef] [PubMed]
7. Fryd, O.; Dam, T.; Jensen, M.B. A planning framework for sustainable urban drainage systems. Water Policy
2012, 14, 865–886. [CrossRef]
Water 2020, 12, 1880 14 of 15

8. Silveira, A.L.L. Problems of modern urban drainage in developing countries. Water Sci. Technol. 2002, 45,
31–40. [CrossRef]
9. Parkinson, J.; Tayler, K.; Mark, O. Planning and design of urban drainage systems in informal settlements in
developing countries. Urban Water J. 2007, 4, 137–149. [CrossRef]
10. Cohen, B. Urbanization in developing countries: Current trends, future projections, and key challenges for
sustainability. Technol. Soc. 2006, 28, 63–80. [CrossRef]
11. Gupta, K. The drainage systems of India’s cities. Waterlines 2005, 23, 22–24. [CrossRef]
12. Abd-Elhamid, H.F.; Zele, M.; Vranayova, Z.; Fatyh, I. Evaluating the Impact of Urban Growth on the Design
of Storm Water Drainage Systems. Water 2020, 12, 1572. [CrossRef]
13. Parkinson, J. Urban drainage in developing countries—Challenges and opportunities. Waterlines 2002, 20,
2–5. [CrossRef]
14. Yeh, A.G.-O. The development and applications of geographic information systems for urban and regional
planning in the developing countries. Int. J. Geogr. Inf. Syst. 1991, 5, 5–27. [CrossRef]
15. Câmara, G.; Fonseca, F. Information policies and open source software in developing countries. J. Am. Soc.
Inf. Sci. Technol. 2007, 58, 121–132. [CrossRef]
16. Missing Maps. Available online: https://www.missingmaps.org/ (accessed on 31 May 2020).
17. Scholz, S.; Knight, P.; Eckle, M.; Marx, S.; Zipf, A. Volunteered Geographic Information for Disaster Risk
Reduction—The Missing Maps Approach and Its Potential within the Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement.
Remote Sens. 2018, 10, 1239. [CrossRef]
18. Tian, B. GIS Technology Applications in Environmental and Earth Sciences; CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, USA,
2016; ISBN 978-1-4987-7605-9.
19. McCallum, I.; Liu, W.; See, L.; Mechler, R.; Keating, A.; Hochrainer-Stigler, S.; Mochizuki, J.; Fritz, S.; Dugar, S.;
Arestegui, M.; et al. Technologies to Support Community Flood Disaster Risk Reduction. Int. J. Disaster
Risk Sci. 2016, 7, 198–204. [CrossRef]
20. Ouma, Y.; Tateishi, R. Urban Flood Vulnerability and Risk Mapping Using Integrated Multi-Parametric AHP
and GIS: Methodological Overview and Case Study Assessment. Water 2014, 6, 1515–1545. [CrossRef]
21. Kawasaki, A.; Berman, M.L.; Guan, W. The growing role of web-based geospatial technology in disaster
response and support. Disasters 2013, 37, 201–221. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
22. Eini, M.; Kaboli, H.S.; Rashidian, M.; Hedayat, H. Hazard and vulnerability in urban flood risk mapping:
Machine learning techniques and considering the role of urban districts. Int. J. Disaster Risk Reduct.
2020, 101687. [CrossRef]
23. Parkinson, J. Drainage and stormwater management strategies for low-income urban communities.
Environ. Urban. 2003, 15, 115–126. [CrossRef]
24. Chambers, R. Participatory Mapping and Geographic Information Systems: Whose Map? Who is Empowered
and Who Disempowered? Who Gains and Who Loses? Electron. J. Inf. Syst. Dev. Ctries. 2006, 25, 1–11.
[CrossRef]
25. Usón, T.J.; Klonner, C.; Höfle, B. Using participatory geographic approaches for urban flood risk in Santiago
de Chile: Insights from a governance analysis. Environ. Sci. Policy 2016, 66, 62–72. [CrossRef]
26. Buchecker, M.; Menzel, S.; Home, R. How much does participatory flood management contribute to
stakeholders’ social capacity building? Empirical findings based on a triangulation of three evaluation
approaches. Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci. 2013, 13, 1427–1444. [CrossRef]
27. Kankanamge, N.; Yigitcanlar, T.; Goonetilleke, A.; Kamruzzaman, M. Can volunteer crowdsourcing reduce
disaster risk? A systematic review of the literature. Int. J. Disaster Risk Reduct. 2019, 35, 101097. [CrossRef]
28. Gebremedhin, E.T.; Basco-Carrera, L.; Jonoski, A.; Iliffe, M.; Winsemius, H. Crowdsourcing and interactive
modelling for urban flood management. J. Flood Risk Manag. 2020. [CrossRef]
29. Klonner, C.; Marx, S.; Usón, T.; Höfle, B. Risk Awareness Maps of Urban Flooding via OSM Field Papers—Case
Study Santiago de Chile. In Proceedings of the ISCRAM 2016 Conference, Rio de Janeiro, Brasil, 22–25
May 2016.
30. Klonner, C.; Usón, T.J.; Marx, S.; Mocnik, F.-B.; Höfle, B. Capturing Flood Risk Perception via Sketch Maps.
ISPRS Int. J. Geo-Inf. 2018, 7, 359. [CrossRef]
31. Zehra, D.; Mbatha, S.; Campos, L.C.; Queface, A.; Beleza, A.; Cavoli, C.; Achuthan, K.; Parikh, P. Rapid flood
risk assessment of informal urban settlements in Maputo, Mozambique: The case of Maxaquene A. Int. J.
Disaster Risk Reduct. 2019, 40, 101270. [CrossRef]
Water 2020, 12, 1880 15 of 15

32. Liang, S.; Li, X.; Wang, J. Geometric Processing and Positioning Techniques. In Advanced Remote Sensing;
Elsevier: Oxford, UK, 2012; pp. 33–74. ISBN 978-0-12-385954-9.
33. OpenStreetMap Contributors Philippines/Mapping Conventions. Available online: https://wiki.
openstreetmap.org/wiki/Philippines/Mapping_conventions (accessed on 31 May 2020).
34. Schilling, J.; Tränckner, J. Estimation of Wastewater Discharges by Means of OpenStreetMap Data. Water
2020, 12, 628. [CrossRef]

© 2020 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access
article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution
(CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).