Remote sensing for international human rights advocacy: Critiques and responses

Abstract

In recent years the rise of remote sensing (RS) imagery in international human rights (IHR) advocacy has begun to draw significant critical attention from the academic community. This article engages with prominent critiques that emerge from this literature and highlights several areas of concern in their interpretation of the vision of RS that permeates the modern IHR community. Specifically, I identify three significant reasons that the literature has misjudged the role of RS in IHR investigations: (1) the oft-stated a priori notion of RS as a source of prima facie evidence, (2) an overreliance on published INGO imagery and analysis, and (3) a limited exploration of the ways in which RS use continues to evolve. This work is intended to engage in a rigorous debate over the practical and epistemological implications that stem from the adoption of new technologies in the advocacy and human rights arenas.

Notes

Notes

1 Remote sensing imagery incorporates the use of bands of electromagnetic energy—captured by digital sensors aboard orbital satellites and/or UAV drones—that are combined to make what are known as “true color approximation” (red, green, blue) images. Other band combinations are increasingly being used in IHR reports (including NDVI, thermal, and short wave radar) but so far have received limited attention in the literature. Imagery data also comes in different “ground resolutions,” depending on the sensor (for example, 3m, 1m, .31m), in which the numerical value denotes the size of a single pixel of data: the smaller the number, the higher the resolution and the greater the detail available in the image.

2 In order to take a latitudinal approach to understanding the adoption and use of RS across a broad swath of the community, a total of twenty seven interviews were conducted, drawing from a variety of IHR-oriented organizations that incorporate RS as an integral part of their working practices, including NGOs (HRW, AI, HHI, ICRC, IFRC, AAAS) and IGOs (UNHCR, UNOSAT, OHCHR, WFP), as well as the private corporate RS industry, academia, and the US Department of State.

3 It should be noted that, in almost every instance, the hegemony in question is taken to mean the United States and, by extension, the Western-dominated Westphalian system of geopolitical governance.

4 As with many investigations, much of the groundwork for attempting to monitor this closed region is driven by Egyptian civil society groups, which provide localized knowledge and allow HRW investigators to approach the job of data collection and reporting with an appropriately contextualized understanding.

5 Several of the most useful VHR images used did not cover the entire region under analysis. As a result, it was not always possible to chart a precise overview of the AOI on a specific date from one image but required the synthesizing of several images with different resolutions and/or date signatures.

6 For example, HRW analysts would take great pains to identify, to the best of their abilities, how a building had been destroyed. In some circumstances, structures might look as if they had been reduced to their foundations, but several key indicators suggested that the roofing materials had simply been removed. Although this does not tell who removed them, it does indicate that some areas had sufficient warning to try and salvage valuable materials. This is a good example of a question that would pass from an RS analyst to a field specialist for further clarification.

7 During conversations with multiple RS analysts engaged in this work, the issue of detail vs. impact was frequently bought up as a point of internal contestation. Almost invariably, analysts push for the inclusion of greater geospatial and situational detail, whereas those individuals charged with impact and publicity look for simpler, more accessible graphics.

8 I am grateful to the anonymous reviewer who pointed out the privileged access and positionality necessary for scholars to engage in this kind of qualitative research. I have been fortunate in my access to the disparate (yet connected) network of RS analysts engaged in RS practice in the IHR community and am grateful for the opportunities provided to me to undertake such work.

9 An important exception to this is the work done by P. Obrich and N. Witjes (see Olbrich and Witjes 2015; Witjes and Olbrich 2017; Olbrich 2019).

10 Once again, I am grateful to the anonymous reviewer who highlighted the significant “time-slippage” between research and publication, as well as the dated nature of some of the major articles in question. Undoubtedly, the technology surrounding access to (and manipulation of) RS imagery is advancing quickly, for IHR analysts and academics alike. It is important to acknowledge the increasing ease with which scholars are able to engage with this material, along with the opportunities and obligations that therefore ensue.

11 In interviews, a significant number of the analysts and researchers expressed strong reservations about the nature of the work done by SSP, to the point that one senior analyst suggested if she or he ever actually met George Clooney, she or he would gladly “punch him in the face” (Interview, Washington, DC, 2018).

12 The assertion of constitutional protections was bought up by several interviewees with extensive knowledge of the period, and is still included in official presentations on the topic of shutter control (see Heidner 2014).

13 For a thorough overview of the relationship between the US government and the private corporate RS industry, see Crampton, Roberts, and Poorthius (2014).

14 For example, although RS analysts employed at INGOs are often housed within the international secretariat (or equivalent thereof), for the most part they function as clearly supplemental adjuncts to investigations initiated, orchestrated, and managed by regional specialists.

15 It should be noted that GEOINT training has begun to diffuse into the IHR community. However, although most analysts could remember engaging in a few hours of GEOINT-oriented training on vehicle recognition at some point in the past decade, only one had obtained certification as a GEOINT analyst. The vast majority of individuals credited on-the-job experience as the most important factor in developing and refining their image interpretation and investigative skill sets.

16 This position was asserted during interviews with specialists from within the private corporate RS community and in archival documents reviewed from the Radio-Television News Directors Association.

17 In a similar vein, journalists have readily taken up RS imagery as a means of investigating multiple forms of crises and contestations in Western states. For examples of RS being used in this context in France, Germany, Russia, Ukraine, the United States, and a variety of other Western states, see www.EarthriseMedia.Org/projects/ [9 July 2019].

Additional information

Notes on contributors

James R. Walker

James Walker is a PhD candidate in the Department of Geography at the University of California, Los Angeles. His research incorporates critical geopolitics and STS/international practice theory approaches to the adoption and integration of technology by nonstate and/or nontraditional actors in a human rights context.