Arab J Geosci
DOI 10.1007/s12517-014-1265-6
ORIGINAL PAPER
A participatory approach in GIS data collection for flood risk
management, Muzarabani district, Zimbabwe
W. Chingombe & E. Pedzisai & D. Manatsa & G. Mukwada &
P. Taru
Received: 29 April 2013 / Accepted: 3 January 2014
# Saudi Society for Geosciences 2014
Abstract Recent attempts to integrate geographic informa-
tion systems (GIS) and participatory techniques have given
rise to terminologies such as participatory GIS and
community-integrated GIS. Little has been published about
the usefulness of participatory GIS, especially for purposes
of flood risk assessment in Zimbabwe. This paper attempts to
address this research gap and demonstrates that when com-
bined with participatory methodologies, GIS can provide a
mechanism for assessing flood extend in flood-prone commu-
nities of Chadereka in Muzarabani communal lands. Flood
risk is increasing in the flood-prone areas in Zimbabwe,
especially in remote areas where gauging stations are non-
existent because of lack of hydrometeorological and climate
data for these areas, historical and projected flood events
cannot be assessed through modelling. The spatial extent of
the flood zone of the December 2007 flash flood event that
took place in Chadereka area was mapped using participatory
geographic information systems (PGIS), as well as the data
collected through interviews that were held with key infor-
mants and focus group discussions. Using this approach, a
flood extend assessment map was drawn by triangulating the
resultant 12 PGIS maps produced by the local community.
The results of the study suggest that if conventional GIS and
flood modelling is cross checked with PGIS and fieldwork
results, the spatial characteristics of floods in ungauged flood-
prone areas can be improved and enable the profiling of floods
in Chadereka ward.
W. Chingombe (*) : G. Mukwada : P. Taru
Department of Geography, University of the Free State, QwaQwa
Campus, Private Bag X13, Phuthaditjhaba 9866, South Africa
e-mail: wchingombe@gmail.com
E. Pedzisai : D. Manatsa
Bindura University of Science Education, P Bag 1020, Bindura,
Zimbabwe
Keywords Chadereka . Flood hazard . Muzarabani .
Participatory GIS . Participatory techniques . Risk
management . Disaster risk assessment
Introduction
Geographic information systems (GIS) may be defined as a
computer-based tool for mapping and analysing spatially ref-
erenced data (Quan et al. 2001). Several GIS scholars have
identified the capacity of GIS to be used as a platform for the
collection of various forms of spatially referenced data for
planning purposes. Quan et al. (2001) define participatory GIS
(PGIS) as the integration of local knowledge as well as stake-
holders’ perspectives in a GIS. Similarly, Laituri (2003) de-
scribes PGIS in the context of planning as a confluence of
social activity, such as the integration of input from grassroots
organisations with government decision-making and technol-
ogy in specific places or grounded geographies. A more
focused area of PGIS is what is now referred to as public
participation geographic information systems (PPGIS), whose
primary aim is to use GIS to provide information that can
strengthen involvement of communities or marginalised
groups in decision-making (Ghose and Elwood 2003; Sieber
2006). However, this paper does not focus on empowerment
but on data collection for a GIS. Since GIS is already being
used for flood profiling and risk management in the
Chadereka ward in Muzarabani district, the task is to find a
means of generating data with the help of the community in
order to integrate locally generated information into the
existing GIS. Muzarabani district is situated in the northern
part of Zimbabwe, along the Zambezi valley. It is highly
susceptible to flooding. The area is also prone to a number
of hazards, including cholera, drought, floods, malaria and
tropical cyclones. Recurrent flash floods are characteristic in
Chadereka ward, a strip of low lying land located between

Hoya and Nzou-Mvunda Rivers (Fig. 1). As shown in Fig. 1,
the Chadereka community comprises villages (851 house-
holds, CSO 1993), several shops, a clinic and four schools
connected by an earth road and footpath.
GIS applications in hazard mapping and assessment
In most western countries, GIS applications in hazard map-
ping and assessment have been important scientific fields
since the 1960s. Various GIS-based models have been used
in flood simulation, including the use of specialised GIS
software like SOBEK (Alkema 2004; Alkema 2004; Haile
and Rientjes 2005a ), HEC-RAS (Rivera et al. 2007;
Samarasinghe et al. 2010; Shamaoma et al. 2006), MIKE II,
LISFLOOD, one-dimensional two-dimensional (1D2D) hy-
draulic (Koivumäki et al 2010) and TUFLOW (Evans, et al
2007) to mention just a few. Previously, most studies tended to
use topographic maps in delineating flood extent (e.g. Evans
et al. 2007; Forte et al. 2005; Ishaya et al. 2009) with addi-
tional data such as vegetation, digital elevation model (DEM),
drainage network and satellite images. The maps used ranged
in scale, from 1:50,000 to 1:250,000. In flood hazards studies,
it is common to apply hydrodynamic physical modelling. The
common applications of models that require several rigorous
checks (sensitivity analysis, calibration and validation by sci-
entist) are widespread (e.g. Alkema; 2004; Haile and Rientjes
Fig. 1 The study area of Chadereka Ward in Muzarabani, Mashonaland Central Province of Zimbabwe
Arab J Geosci
2005a, b ). Additionally, the models require field checks and
data, which may imply drawing to the community when data
are unavailable or scarce or on lesser extent measurements,
which require a reliable network of calibrated instruments
spatially and temporally distributed.
GIS has proved useful in various sections of disaster man-
agement (planning, mitigation, preparedness, response and
recovery) especially with the contemporary disaster risk re-
duction (DRR). Hazard mapping through GIS has almost
become indispensable. Apart from the conventional GIS map-
ping that often requires fieldwork involving use of surveying
equipment, GIS can also be participatory, i.e., PGIS (Tran
et al. 2009) or otherwise also known as public PGIS
(PPGIS) according to Latu (2009).
Role of hazard mapping in PGIS
Many parts of the world are susceptible to different
types of natural hazards with different spatial character-
istics and hence need to be assessed at these different
spatial scales in order to reduce associated disaster
losses (Western 2010). McCall (2009) indicated that
PGIS can be used in both natural and human-induced
hazards, short and long return time and environmental
hazards (floods, volcanic eruptions, landslides, etc.)
among other characteristics. Hazard mapping is an
Arab J Geosci
essential step in the determination of the past and po-
tential locations of inundated areas (Landesman 2001
cited in Forte et al. 2005).
McCall (2009) noted that PGIS practice has been most
widely applied to natural resource management and to land
and resource claims globally specifically in countries that lack
data required for hazard modelling. PGIS has been noted to
elicit, represent and validate spatial knowledge (including
indigenous) rarely existing on official maps. A number of
strengths of PGIS include spatial specificity, social sensitivity,
local and external knowledge, images as spatial narratives and
multi-sourcing and capacity enhancement (IIED 2009).
A number of approaches have been used to solicit
community-based data for integration into GIS. The basic
principle of the PGIS approach is that it combines—in a
structured systematic and cross-cutting and back referenced
manner—people’s own local spatial knowledge and external
scientific knowledge from the environmental experts, satellite
imagery, maps, etc. Depending on the availability of data,
researchers either engage directly with the community or use
already existing information on the community. In an interna-
tional context, for instance, Meyer et al. (2009) assessed flood
risk using official statistics on the risk-prone community as
well as land use and flood data. The official statistics included
insurance taxation and environmental data that was collected
within the area of study. Using a different approach, Tran et al.
(2009) used GIS and local knowledge to contribute to proper
planning and resource allocation for disaster preparedness in
Thua Thien Hue, Central Vietnam. Community information
included existing infrastructure, demographic and socio-
economic conditions as well as information on the damage
and loss caused by previous flood disasters. Participatory rural
appraisal (PRA) techniques, such as focus groups, were used
to highlight the most flood-prone residential units as well as
factors that contribute to flood vulnerability. Other studies
point to different methods of community involvement, such
as the use of interviews by Iuliana and Eugen (2009) in
Romania, Pedzisai et al.(2012) in Zimbabwe, a review of the
use of questionnaires by Bird (2009) and the actual use of
questionnaires by Abbot et al. (1998), Abbot (2000) and
Bouchard et al. (2007) in South Africa, and Raaijmakers
et al. (2008) in Spain; and the general use of ephemeral
mapping, sketch mapping and scale mapping by Rambaldi
et al. (2006). Similar methods are highlighted by Tripathi and
Bhattarya (2004) who carried out an elaborate study, involv-
ing indigenous knowledge (IK) and its integration into GIS.
Studies on the sourcing of community data in formal urban
areas generally allow for less interaction with the actual
households compared with rural and informal settlements.
This is because, in the case of formal urban areas, data are
readily available from various sources, such as health facili-
ties, flood reports as well as land use and insurance registers,
which are usually not the case with rural and informal
settlements. Abbott (Abbot 2000) and Bouchard et al.
(2007) conducted research on informal settlements, but apart
from that, there has been limited research on practical sourcing
of community information in informal settlements for GIS.
Nonetheless, comparisons can be drawn with methods used in
rural settings by Weiner, and Harris (2003) and Tripathi and
Bhattarya (2004). The studies above therefore provide poten-
tial approaches for soliciting community information from
residents of Chadereka ward. The next section of this paper
focuses on developing a methodology for facilitating the
collection of such information from various stakeholders for
flood risk management in Muzarabani. It also identifies a
method of distinguishing between the different spatial alloca-
tions of flood risk within an area. The approach used here has
been based on work by Pedzisai et al. (2012), who worked in
the study area.
PGIS as an alternative flood mapping approach
Where data on river discharge is unavailable, PGIS becomes
an important approach to study floods. When data on river
discharge do not exist, modelling becomes an irrelevant op-
tion. A typical example of how PGIS was recently used due to
lack of data was in the research conducted in New Orleans in
the USA, where there was a difficulty in surveying
neighbourhood needs due to lack of relevant data for specific
areas (Duval-Diop et al. 2010).
Although some models (e.g. physical models) use ad-
vanced calculations in flood modelling, data and software
are often expensive to acquire. The process is rather too
complex to be understood by lay persons. PGIS can be sim-
plified to become user friendly and employ collective and
common methods of mapping by a group. In Chadereka ward,
there is no data on river discharge or stream depth and the
understanding of the persistently recurrent flood hazard could
be enhanced through community participation. PGIS is hailed
for taking input from the often neglected yet useful experi-
ences of local community on how it directly affected by the
hazard.
PGIS has been widely recognised and used as an effective
tool for participatory decision-making processes. The
International Institute for Environment and Development
(IIED) (2009) defined PGIS as an umbrella term describing
community application of a diverse range of geographic in-
formation technologies and systems (GIT and S) based on the
use of geo-spatial information management tools to represent
local peoples’ spatial knowledge in maps. IIED (2009) further
noted that PGIS is important for policy development, plan-
ning, fieldwork, investment, assessment, monitoring and
campaigning. The importance of community contribution
to flood hazards cannot be underestimated. Arguably, the
local community fits in all parts of the disaster manage-
ment cycle. Pramojanee et al. (1997) indicated that

mapping of spatial extent is the first key exercise in
flood hazard and risk mapping. Hazard mapping is a
crucial guide especially in minimising potential loss of
physical assets, human resources and environmental cap-
ital with each hazard characterised by location, intensity,
frequency and probability.
Western (2010) rated participatory approaches as very rel-
evant for flood risk assessment and highly applicable at local
community level. This knowledge is important as communi-
ties enhance their state of the preparedness and mitigation of
the flood effects. For the Chadereka community, involvement
in mapping the well documented but not mapped 2007 flood
event was therefore an experience that reignited the memories
of the December 2007 event. Information based on this event
is still fresh in the minds of community members, related to
the memories and experiences of the event rather than earlier
events. The objective of the study was to collect sufficient data
that could be used to map the 2007 flood event in a participa-
tory manner. This is an important basis of involving the local
community and letting them lead in the process of finding
workable adaptations and capacities so as to ensure commu-
nity resilience is built.
McCall (2009) notes that many tools and approaches can
be used in PGIS such as ephemeral maps (drawn on the
ground) and sketch maps (mental maps), scale mapping (over-
lay drawing of spatial information onto existing topographic
base maps), adding spatial information via overlays onto
aerial photographs, satellite images and community surveying
of new information using global positioning systems (GPS)
among others. The products are useful for discussion, sharing
information, analysis and support (adding value to local
knowledge and community confidence) in advocacy,
decision-making and action-taking where GIS is used mainly
as computer cartography with limited GIS analytical function-
ality. The users employ the outputs mainly as media taking
advantage of ‘the power of the map’ to support their argu-
ments (IIED 2009). This paper explores how a community can
be engaged to collect data in a cheaper, simpler and
community-led flood extent mapping exercise rather than
computer-based hydrodynamic modelling.
Study area
Figure 1 shows the study area with the flood-prone interfluve
between Nzou-Mvunda and Hoya Rivers. The area is located
in the north eastern part of Zimbabwe in the Mashonaland
Central Province. The Chadereka community comprises of
villages made up of 851 households, (CSO 1993), a clinic and
five schools, which are connected by an earth road. Flash
floods tend to be the recurrent type of hazard occurring in this
area. There are also several sharp river bends in both rivers.
Chadereka area is located in low plains of Muzarabani (Shona
Arab J Geosci
term for flood plain) (Madamombe 2004), suggesting the
prominence of floods in the area, (ZRCS 2008a).
While Muzarabani is known for flood events, there appears
to be a peculiar type of flooding occurring in the areas be-
tween and immediate to Nzou-Mvunda and the bigger Hoya
Rivers. Highly vulnerable to this type of flooding is the
Chadereka area lying between the two rivers. Despite the risk
posed by recurring floods, the Chadereka community has
remained in place due to the fact that their livelihoods are
closely tied to the agricultural opportunities brought by
flooding, as shown in Fig. 2. Figure 2 shows the stages in
flood plain winter farming with residual moisture from previ-
ous flood events observed in the field survey.
The Hoya River often discharges its waters into the
Chadereka area, which is lower in altitude thereby exacerbat-
ing the flood problem. The PGIS proved useful in
characterising the December 2007 flood hazard in
Muzarabani district especially to delineate the spatial extent
of the event.
The flash floods result from rapid runoff that emanates
from the nearby Mavhuradona range of mountains in the
south. The Muzarabani flood plain has a very small terrain
variation; hence, bankful discharge is easily attained, a phe-
nomenon exacerbated by backflow from the Cahora Bassa
Dam. In addition, heavy rains in the upstream sub-catchment
especially when induced by tropical cyclones combined with
the almost flat terrain configuration also lead to flooding of the
area.
The December 13, 2007 flood event in Chadereka
The International Organisation for Migration in Zimbabwe
(IOMZ) (2008) reported that heavy rains started on
December 12, 2007 in the Muzarabani area. The resultant
severe floods affected 220 households in Chadereka. The
Hoya and Kairezi villages were inaccessible by road from
Chadereka because bridges had been damaged, in addition
to 3,000 people who were rendered homeless by the flood in
Muzarabani as a whole. Floods in Muzarabani are often
associated with other hazards such as cholera, diarrhoea and
food insecurity and malaria. Malaria and diarrhoeal disease
outbreaks affected over 1,000 families (Zimbabwe Red Cross
Society [ZRCS] 2007; 2008a; 2008b). After the December 13
flood event, 46, 85 and 14 cases of diarrhoea, malaria and
dysentery were recorded, respectively, in the district
(UNOCHA 2007; ZRCS 2008a). During the December
2007 flood, the Nzou-Mvunda and the two Hoya bridges
(upstream and downstream) were washed away as a result of
the 2007 flood event confirming archival research results on
the fateful bridges across Hoya River (UNOCHA 2007).
Heavy rains and storms beginning December 2–13 affected
Muzarabani area killing three people and one being reported
Arab J Geosci

Fig. 2 Food security strategies

used by the community as
documented during field
observations on agriculture in
Nzou-Mvunda River flood plain.
a Expansion of the cultivation
field to increase output and
enhance food security. b Initial
stages in green mealies
(mudzedze) farming. Maize
planted in holes dug deep to take
advantage of moisture from the
previous flood. c Maize crop a b
grown during different periods to
secure food for periods when
floods destroy the crops.
d Harvest time for the green
mealies ready for market and
family consumption

c d

missing. ZRCS (2007) reported that 1,000 households were
affected with 400 of them loosing belongings (UNOCHA
2007), while cited that about 900 families were displaced,
with 600 rendered homeless as 43 villages were washed
inundated.
Methodology
Materials and methods
Spatial and physical data
The physical environment in which the community resides
had to be analysed in order to comprehend the physical factors
that were contributing to flooding in that area as well as the
physical factors that would either increase or mitigate the
impact of such flooding. Four methods were employed in
the study triangulating with PGIS mapping. These include
focus group discussion (FGD), disaster timeline, fieldwork,
interviews and archival analysis. The methods used are shown
in Fig. 3.
Methods used include application of disaster checklist in
focused groups. Interviews with key informants and commu-
nity members used interview guides, while field observations
took field notes and used two hand-held Garmin global posi-
tioning systems (GPS) units (GPS 76 and Etrex 12 channel) to
capture coordinates with a positional error of less than 7 m.
Archival data were mined from NGOs, internet and interviews
with local leadership.
The disaster timeline checklist of three groups was applied
to identify and then rank hazards (floods, cholera and dysen-
tery) in the area according to community perception and
experience. Interviews were then carried out to identify areas
inundated from flooding and those that were not. This exercise
helped orient researchers to understand which areas to target
during field campaign.
Twelve groups (comprising adults, primary and secondary
school pupils), each consisting of five members, were tasked
to map the December 13, 2007 flood extent using a 1:50,000
(1631 A1 and 1531 C3) topographic map as a base map. The
categorisation of people was based on their age categories and
school going age. In Zimbabwe, primary school children fall
within the 7–13 years age group and secondary school chil-
dren fall within the 14–19 years age group, while adults
constituted all those above 19 years of age.
Topographic maps of scale 1:50,000–1:250,000 were ob-
tained from the Surveyor General’s office in Harare. Resultant
flood extent maps were triangulated with those from field
work and interviews. PGIS maps were visually inspected for
any significant variations and or consistency. Three reference
maps were produced each by a Chadereka Secondary School
geography teacher and a group of all secondary school partic-
ipants and field work. Field observations were carried out
from May 28 through June 3, 2012 marking the extent of
the December 13–17, 2007 flood event under local guidance.
Participatory mapping activities were carried out during May
 Arab J Geosci

Fig. 3 Study methodology

framework used in the study.
FGD Disaster Topographic map Field work with
Note: Pri. Sch. Primary School, Timeline (checklist) (scale 1: 50 000) GPS (Garmin 76
Sec. Sch. Secondary School, geo.
Tr Geography Teacher

PGIS group flood maps by: Reference maps by

Adults Pri. Sch Sec. Sch Sec. Sch Sec. Sch GPS and
pupils pupils group geo Tr field

Interviews Visual analysis of reference and PGIS Archival analysis

maps

28–29, 2012. The fieldwork also mapped the spatial extent of amount of crops destroyed, quality of roads within the catch-
the flood, affected areas, resettled farmers, bridges, roads, ment and communication infrastructure.
elevation transects, building footprints and infrastructure
(roads, clinics, schools, homesteads, bridges, gardens, fields).
Data processing and analysis
Instructions were spelt out to each group before mapping
was conducted. Each group was given a copy of topographic
PGIS practice is usually geared towards community empow-
map of Chadereka to work on. The mapping was done on a
erment through measured, demand-driven, user friendly and
flat desk. The participants were supposed to fasten tracing
integrated applications of GIT and S, where maps become a
paper on top of the map using masking tape and then trace the
major conduit in the process. As a result, the maps from the
rivers up to their confluence (using a solid blue colour). They
groups were scanned and presented without any geo-
were also asked to plot the boundaries of the inundated area
processing of what the community had done. This was done
using a dashed dot red line as well as mark and label the area
to conserve the maps of the community without introducing
that was not flooded (NF) along the interfluve. This created a
any additional errors. PGIS flood extent maps were resized,
mental map, reflecting each group’s perceptions about the
and then comparisons were made based on reference maps.
spatial extent of the flood and the flood level. The map was
Visual analysis was used to check for consistencies and dif-
then georeferenced. Five facilitators helped the groups in the
ferences in group maps. The data collected was later used as
PGIS exercise to help illiterate participants. The major chal-
input data in profiling flood hazards in Muzarabani district, in
lenge that was experienced by PGIS was that the topographic
addition to interviews, field observations and documentary
map used was too old and lacked sufficient detail to be used as
analysis. Data from interviews held with the key informants
a base map.
and community interviews, as well as the GPS to collect field
After all the groups had drawn their map, a consoli-
coordinates for the flood level that were recorded during field
dated group map that was later used as a reference map
work were used for triangulation with of PGIS results.
was drawn with input from all the participants.
Fieldwork data were downloaded and incorporated to
produce the reference map.
The assistance of local leadership was sought to ensure the Results
cooperation of the local community. Interviews were held
with local leadership, two village heads, ten local farmers, Data collected in the form of disaster timeline checklist iden-
three teachers, one counsellor, one NGO field officer, ten tified cholera, floods, malaria, drought and food insecurity as
students, and one health community worker. The interview hazards affecting the area. While cholera was ranked top, it
included the recent past flood events, their effects and charac- was established that there was an association between
teristics, like spatial extent, number of buildings destroyed, flooding and cholera. The timeline analysis indicated that
Arab J Geosci

Table 1 Summary of the results obtained in the study
No. Description of result
1 GPS points as data useful for the location of features and zones of
concern amongst the community members.
2 List of ranked hazards from the community showing extent of
floods, cholera and dysentery statistics.
3 Extent of area inundated from flooding and spatial characteristics of
hazards that prevail in flood-prone areas.
4 PGIS maps drawn by primary school children, secondary school
children, adults and the geography teacher.
5 PGIS generated a variety of mental maps regarding the spatial extent
of the December 2007 flood event.
cholera followed after each flood event. The 2007 flood event
was followed an outbreak of cholera in 2008.
The vulnerability of the local community to flooding and
associate hazards has prompted high NGO and civil society
activity in the area. NGOs operating in the area include World
Vision, ZRCS, IOMZ and governmental organisations includ-
ing CPU, Zimbabwe Meteorological Office, Ministry of
Health and Child Welfare among others are active in response
and preparedness in the area. The CPU cascading down to
local structures such as district administrator (DA), ward
counsellors (WC) and other ward personnel and uniformed
wings of the government (policy, military, prison services)
were actively involved in operations during or after the flood
events. Findings from this research show that visually, there
were notable differences in perception regarding the spatial
extent of the December 2007 flood, though all groups were
consistent on the flooding of the Nzou-Mvunda banks, which
the community could easily relate to due to its ephemeral
behaviour. The research also revealed that PGIS maps pro-
duced by secondary school pupils were more consistent with
field map generated by the research team while those by
children and adults were highly inaccurate. Primary school
pupils were too young to remember much after the 4 years
unlike those in the secondary school who were already grown
up to remember the effects. The maps that were drawn by the
adults were the least accurate. A summary of the results are
presented in Table 1 below.
Effects of floods in Chadereka area
Flooding can be very dangerous and can seriously disrupt
public and personal transport by cutting off roads and com-
munication links when telephone lines are damaged. In
Chadereka area, floods disrupted normal drainage systems
representing a serious health hazard (Cholera, Malaria and
Dysentery), along with standing water and wet materials in
the homes. Several physical infrastructures were damaged as
illustrated by the photographs below Figs. 3, 4 and 5 showing
the spatial flood line level, siltati4on and damage to the bridge.
The floods distributed large amounts of water and suspended
sediment over vast areas, restocking valuable soil nutrients to
agricultural lands where the community gets its agricultural
produce throughout the year. This is one of the reasons the
communities despite the devastating experiences of floods are
reluctant to move to higher ground. In contrast, soil was
eroded by large amounts of fast flowing water, ruining crops,
destroying agricultural land/buildings and drowning animals
both domesticated and wild. The same December flood event
not only ruined homes/businesses and destroyed personal
property but also the water left behind caused further damage
to property and contents, see Fig. 6. Unfortunately, the flood
event not only disrupted many people’s lives, but it created
tragedies when people were swept away and drowned.
PGIS proved to be useful for understanding the flood
spatial extent. The stages in flood plain winter farming with
residual moisture from previous flood events observed in the
field survey are indicated in.
Flood extent maps
PGIS generated a variety of mental maps regarding the spatial
extent of the December 2007 flood event. Figure 7 shows the
maps that were drawn by the adults who were involved in the
PGIS.
As shown in Fig. 7, maps (a) and (c) reflect no flooding east
of the Hoya River. This is consistent with the interview results,
which indicated that the Hoya River has a bigger channel and
can accommodate its waters when it overflows, whereas the
western part of Chadereka is inundated. However, the

Fig. 4 These photographs show

the flood line and magnitude of
infrastructural damage caused by
the flood. a Shows where the road
and bridge across Hoya River,
and b shows the effects of siltation
on the Nzou-Mvunda River
channel and c the destruction of
infrastructure along Hoya Riva

Fig. 5 The Nzou-Mvunda (a),
Hoya downstream (b) and
upstream (c) bridges washed
away
a b
exception is the interfluve, comprising the kopjes on which
the Chadereka primary and secondary schools were built.
These results were confirmed by the data from field work
and interviews. The variation is on the individual group maps.
Compared with the map generated through fieldwork, it is
evident that the map (a) leaves out a greater portion of the
Hoya side of the area. Figure 7 indicates an overestimation of
the area inundated (except in Fig. 7a and c), where the partic-
ipants indicated the largest areas inundated.
When compared with the reference maps used in this study,
the maps drawn by community members are significantly
different from the averaged and more informed map to which
all groups are referred to, see Figs. 8 and 9.
Additional data relating to the flood extent as indicat-
ed on the reference maps were produced by local geog-
raphy teacher (10a), a group of secondary school pupils
(10b) and one generated using the GPS fieldwork data
points (10c). All the field work activities were commu-
nity guided, see Fig 10.
Discussion
This study revealed that the Chadereka community regards
flooding as a recurring phenomenon in their area. Besides the
prominent floods that are naturally triggered by the tropical
cyclones originating from the Indian Ocean, west of Australia
Fig. 6 Archival evidence of
flooding of Chadereka Clinic
during (a) and after (b) the 2007
flood event. [Photo credits Mr
Dodo, WVZ (a) and W
Chingombe (b)]
Arab J Geosci
c
and heavy tropical storms, the human impact has a role to play.
Damming at Cahora Bassa has led to the backflow of the
discharge from the Hoya and Musengezi tributary Rivers of
the Zambezi River. The Kariba dam upstream also had an
influence as the opening of the flood gates in expectation of
above normal rains that have often contributed to large quan-
tities of water that eventually are associated with the flooding
episodes. Alternatively, the potential flooding in the area
triggers a response by the Zambezi River Authority to open
the flood gates in trying to maintain the normal dam levels in
the reservoir (The Herald 2012, February 10: B7). Muzarabani
is an annual source of news upon onset or before onset of the
rain season. Annually, there are flood warnings from the Civil
Protection Unit (CPU) of Zimbabwe and Zambezi River
Authority (The Herald, 10 February 2012: B7).
This study was geared towards generating data through
community participation through measured, user friendly
and integrated applications of PGIS where maps were a major
conduit in the process. Several processes were involved in
creating the maps. The generation of geo-spatial information
using a collaborative approach confirms the importance of one
of the preconditions, processes and procedures stipulated by
McCall (2009); Ball (2002); Chambers (2006) and Flavelle
(2002). Chadereka area, which is a spatially limited area, was
considered for the exercise in order to maximise on the po-
tential of the tool for a maximum benefit in the data collection.
From the study area, the community’s knowledge of the event
a b
Arab J Geosci
Fig. 7 Flood maps for the December 2007 event by groups of adults in Chadereka area. NF denotes not flooded area
was also spatially limited after the interviews indicated peo-
ple’s awareness of their immediate inundated surroundings.
The community highlighted that floods restricted movement
and thus limiting their wider experience and knowledge of the
spatial extent.
Considering the area mapped during fieldwork, local
school children, geography teacher and fieldwork, there is a
consistency in the identification of information for some por-
tions not inundated during this flash flood event. There is a
small section at the Chadereka primary and secondary schools
assembling points, places, where people assemble in the event
of flooding. The upstream of Gunduza was not inundated.
Secondary school pupils were able to identify these areas
more accurately as compared with the adults and primary
school pupils. The adults were either illiterate to map, while
primary school pupils were too young to remember the event.
Interviews with both the community and World Vision per-
sonnel revealed that during flood season, primary pupils do
not attend classes.
This research study demonstrates that PGIS is a way not
only of including local people in research but also crucial for
understanding the spatial characteristics of hazards that prevail
Fig. 8 Flood maps of the 2007 floods drawn by primary school pupils in generating valuable data that can be used in a GIS
in flood-prone areas. However, PGIS data needs to be collab-
orated and complemented with data from field observations.
Rapid rural appraisal (RRA) and participatory rural appraisal
(PRA) during and immediately after the hazard can yield
better results since the water depth could be measured while
flood marks are still visible. Participatory mapping and PGIS,
involving methodologies such as RRA and PRA, have been
used to elicit, represent and validate local spatial knowledge
for purposes of risk management (Peters-Guarin, et al. 2012).
Conclusions
This paper explored how communities in flood-prone areas
can be engaged to collect data in community-led flood extent
mapping involving PGIS. From the foregoing discussion, it
can be concluded that when triangulated with other social and
field-based methods, PGIS can be a useful tool for collecting
data of flood events.
The application of PGIS in the Chadereka ward proved to
be an effective way of mapping the spatial extent of flood
zones in environmental, where prospects for modelling are

Fig. 9 Information representing flood extent drawn from the maps by secondary school pupils from Chadereka area
forestalled by lack of archival hydrometeorological and cli-
mate data. However, as demonstrated by the results of this
study, the perceptions held by community members, regarding
the spatial extent of floods are not always accurate and in
some case vary according to age and level of education. In the
case of Chadereka ward, it is the perceptions of the elderly that
are flawed. It can therefore be concluded that such a situation
make the communities perpetually vulnerable, since it is the
adults who make the key decisions about where to live and
which portfolio of livelihoods to pursue.
Recommendations
This research recommends that a network of measurement
stations for hydrometeorological and climate data be
established so as to gain better understanding of how floods
occur in flood-prone areas such as Chadereka and other places
in Muzarabani. The spatial characteristics of flood events can
be better understood if data from conventional GIS and flood
Fig. 10 Chadereka reference maps for December 13, 2007 flood event used in the PGIS
Arab J Geosci
modelling are cross checked with those from PGIS and field-
work. This will make it easier to profile flood events in flood-
prone areas such as Chadereka ward. There is also a need to
incorporate local communities in setting up measurement
stations to ensure that the stations are not vandalised.
Training could empower community members and equip
them with skills to record data and monitor floods. This
argument is consistent with Aditya’s (2010) observation that
it has long been established that PGIS is effective in enhancing
community participation in decision-making activities.
Community involvement is vital to ensure guaranteed partic-
ipation and cooperation. The GIS processing of the PGIS
results for checking consistency and inconsistencies is impor-
tant. Gauging stations are important for generating data nec-
essary for modelling leading to a better understanding of the
dynamic characteristics of floods including duration, time to
peak, velocity, impulse, extent and peak discharge in the area
that the community could not numerically or quantitatively
describe in absolute terms. However, PGIS could also be
applied to other hazards, which affect Muzarabani.
Arab J Geosci
Acknowledgments This study is greatly indebted to Bindura Univer-
sity of Science Education, Geography Department staff especially Mr E
Mavhura, Mrs C Mudavanhu and Ms S Mazorodze for the support in field
work and data collection, the DelPHE project from the British Council
and partner institutions in the collective workshop and exchange of
information, the Muzarabani Community, especially Mr Dodo of World
Vision Zimbabwe, the local leadership and the rest who participated in
this study. Special thanks goes to the anonymous reviewers of this paper
their contribution is greatly appreciated.
References
Abbot JR (2000) An Integrated spatial information framework for infor-
mal settlement upgrading. Int Arch Photogramm Remote Sensing
33(Part B2):7–16
Aditya T (2010) Usability issues in applying participatory mapping for
neighbourhood infrastructure planning. Transactions GIS 14:119–147
Alkema D (2004) National workshop on flood disaster management –
space inputs, 3–4 June, 2004. NRSA, Hyderabad, India
Ball J (2002) Towards a methodology for mapping ‘regions of sustain-
ability’ using PPGIS. Prog Plan 58(2):81–140
Bird DK (2009) The use of questionnaires for acquiring information on
public perception of natural hazards and risk mitigation: a review of
current knowledge and practice. Nat Hazards Earth Syst Sci 9:1307–
1325
Bouchard B, Goncalo A, Susienka M, Wilson K (2007) Improving flood
risk management in informal settlements of Cape Town. E-project-
121307-110919. http://www.wpi.edu/Pubs/E-project/Available/E-
project-121307-110919/unrestricted/FinalReport.pdf. Accessed 14
January 2013
Chambers R (2006) Participatory mapping and geographic information
systems: whose map? Who is empowered and who disempowered?
Who gains and who loses? Electron J Inform Syst Dev Countries
(EJISDC) 25(1)
Duval-Diop D, Curtis A, Clark A (2010) Enhancing equity with public
participatory GIS in hurricane rebuilding: faith based organizations,
community mapping, and policy advocacy. Comm Dev 41:32–49
Evans SY, Gunn N, Williams D (2007) Use of GIS in flood risk mapping.
National hydrology seminar ‘07. Tullamore, Ireland, 13 November
2007
Flavelle A (2002) Mapping our land: a guide to making your own maps of
communities and traditional lands. Lone Pine Foundation,
Edmonton
Forte F, Pennetta L, Strobl RO (2005) Historic records and GIS applica-
tions for food risk analysis in the salento peninsula (southern Italy).
Nat Hazards Earth Syst Sci 5:833–844
Ghose R, Elwood S (2003) Public participation GIS and local political
context: propositions and research directions. URISA J: Spec Issue
Access Participatory Issues 15(2):17–24
Haile AT, Rientjes THM (2005a) Effects of Lidar DEM Resolution in Flood
Modelling: A Model Sensitivity Study for the City of Tegucigalpa,
Honduras. ISPRS WG III/3, III/4, V/3 Workshop “Laser scanning
2005”, Enschede, the Netherlands, September 12–14, 2005
Haile AT, Rientjes THM (2005b) Uncertainty Issues in Hydrodynamic
Flood Modelling; Enschede: ITC
International Institute for Environment and Development (IIED) (2009)
Profiles of Approaches, Tools and Tactics for Environmental
Mainstreaming Participatory Geographical Information System
International Organisation for Migration Zimbabwe (2008) Flood re-
sponse 19 December 2007 to 10 January 2008 Issue 1, 15 January
2008. International Organisation for Migration Zimbabwe, Harare
Ishaya S, Ifatimehin OO, Abaje IB (2009) Mapping flood vulnerable
areas in a developing urban centre of Nigeria. J Sustain Dev Africa
11(4):180–194
Iuliana A, Eugen A (2009) Perception of flood risk in Danube Delta,
Romania. Nat Hazards 50(2):269–287
Koivumäki L, Alho P, Lotsari E, Käyhkö Saari A, Hyyppä H (2010)
Uncertainties in flood risk mapping: a case study on estimating
building damages for a river flood in Finland. J Flood Risk Manag
3(2):166–183
Laituri M (2003) The Issue of Access: An Assessment Guide for
Evaluating Public Participation Geographic Information Science
Case Studies. J Urban Reg Inf Syst Assoc 15(APA.II):25–31
Latu L (2009) Sustainable Development: The Role of GIS and
Visualisation, The Electronic Journal on Information Systems in
Developing Countries (2009) 38, 5, 1-17. http://www.ejisdc.org
Accessed 09 June 2012
McCall MK (2009) Applications of participatory mapping and PGIS
using indigenous and local spatial knowledge. CIGA, UNAM
Meyer V, Scheuer S, Haase D (2009) A multi-criteria approach for flood
risk mapping exemplified at the Mulde River, Germany. Nat
Hazards 48(1):17–39
Peters-Guarin G, McCall MK, van Westen C (2012) Coping strategies
and risk manageability: using participatory geographical informa-
tion systems to represent local knowledge. Disasters 36(1):1–27
Pramojanee P, Tanavud C, Yongchalermchai C, Navanugraha C (1997)
An application of GIS for mapping of flood hazard and risk area in
Nakorn Sri Thammarat Province. South of Thailand Online: www.
ces.iisc.ernet.in/energy/HC270799/LM/SUSLUP/.../198.pdf
Accessed on 12(January 2012)
Quan J, Oudwater N, Pender J, Martin A (2001) GIS and Participatory
approaches in natural Resources Research. Socio-Economic
Methodologies for Natural Resources Research. Best Practice
Guidelines. Chatham, UK: Natural resources Institute. http://www.
nri.org/publications/bpg/bpg09.pdf. Accessed 12 December 2012
Raaijmakers R, Krywkow J, van der Veen A (2008) Flood risk percep-
tions and spatial multi-criteria analysis: an exploratory research for
hazard mitigation. Nat Hazards 46(3):307–322
Rambaldi G, Kwaku Kyem P, McCall M, Weiner D (2006) Participatory
spatial information management and communication in developing
countries. Electron J Inf Syst Dev Countries 25(1):1–9
Rivera S, Hernandez AJ, Ramsey RD, Suarez G, Rodriguez SA (2007)
Predicting flood hazard areas: a swat and HEC- RAS simulations
conducted in Aguan River basin of Honduras, Central America
ASPRS 2007 annual conference Tampa. Florida, May 7–11:2007
Samarasinghe SMJS, Nandalal HK, Weliwitiya DP, Fowze JSM,
Hazarika MK, Samarakoon L (2010) Application of Remote
Sensing and GIS for Flood Risk Analysis: A Case Study at Kalu-
Ganga River, Sri Lanka International Archives of the
Photogrammetry, Remote Sensing and Spatial Information
Science, Volume XXXVIII, Part 8, Kyoto Japan 2010
Shamaoma H, Kerle N, Alkema D (2006) Extraction of Flood-Modelling
Related Base-Data from Multisource Remote Sensing Imagery.
Commission VII, WG/7: Problem Solving Methodologies for Less
Developed Countries
Sieber R (2006) Public participation geographic information systems: a
literature review and framework. Ann Am Assoc Geogr 96(3):491–
507
Tran P, Shaw R, Chantry G, Norton J (2009) GIS and local knowledge in
disaster management: a case study of flood risk mapping in
Vietnam. Disasters 33(1):152–169
Tripathi N, Bhattarya S (2004) Integrating indigenous knowledge and
GIS for participatory natural resource management: state-of-the-
practice. Electron J Inf Syst Dev Countries 17(3):1–13
United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs
(2007) Situation Report on Floods in Muzarabani, Zimbabwe,
Harare: United Nations Office for the Coordination of

Humanitarian Affairs.ion. (204p). http://www.iapad.org/flavelle.
htm. Accessed 15 March 2013
Weiner D, Harris TM (2003) Community-integrated GIS for land reform
in South Africa. URISA J: Spec Issue Access Participatory Issues
15(2):61–73
Western van CJ (2010) Remote Sensing and GIS for Natural Hazards
Assessment and Disaster Risk Management. Background paper for
spatial data for hazard and risk assessment; Enschede: ITC
Arab J Geosci
Zimbabwe Red Cross Society (2007) Zimbabwe: Muzarabani floods.
Zimbabwe Red Cross Society, Harare
Zimbabwe Red Cross Society (2008a) Zimbabwe Appeal No. MAAZW001
report 2006–2007, Harare: Harare: Zimbabwe Red Cross Society
Zimbabwe Red Cross Society (2008b) Southern Africa floods emergence
appeal no. MDR63001. GLIDE n° FL-2008–00004- LSO/MOZ/
MWI/NMB/SWZ/ZMB/ZWE 18 January 2008. Harare: Zimbabwe
Red Cross Society