Global Disaster Risk Assessment Using World Risk Index Data: A Geospatial and Visual Analytics Approach

Remote-sensing vision-language models (RS-VLMs) have advanced Earth-observation analysis toward visual interpretation and instruction-following, yet fall short of operational geo-intelligence, which demands tool-grounded spatial reasoning and structured, evidence-backed decisions. We introduce GeoDisaster, an operational geospatial disaster reasoning benchmark with 2,921 verified instances across 43 question types and five task families: deforestation monitoring, multi-hazard analysis, building-damage assessment, flood-safe routing, and Sentinel-1 SAR flood monitoring. Instances integrate heterogeneous EO/GIS evidence-optical and SAR imagery, raster masks, vector geometries, road networks, and exposure layers-spanning hazard detection, damage assessment, exposure estimation, and diagnostic report generation. Ground-truth answers are grounded in executable geospatial workflows and deterministic consistency checks, removing the need for language-model annotation. We further propose an orchestrated multi-agent framework with 18 disaster-oriented tools, where role-specialized agents coordinate through explicit execution contracts, aligned via Role-Contract Expectation Alignment (RCEA): failure-aware supervised fine-tuning combined with contract-grounded reinforcement learning over dense step-level signals. Experiments show that GeoDisaster challenges existing RS-VLMs and agentic systems, while RCEA improves tool use, evidence grounding, state consistency, and decision generation.

Crowdsourced imagery provides timely, fine-grained, street-level observations for disaster mapping, complementing conventional remote sensing imagery (RSI) during emergency response. However, such imagery is often unstructured, spatially ambiguous, and lacks reliable geographic metadata, making manual geolocalization and interpretation labor-intensive and difficult to scale. This work proposes a multi-task Geospatial Reasoning Disaster mapping framework, namely GRDisaster, to examine the potential of vision-language models (VLMs) in understanding, geolocalizing, and reasoning over crowdsourced disaster imagery. GRDisaster is built on a newly curated benchmark dataset derived from PhotoMappers, comprising 26,340 images organized into human-validated volunteered geographic information (VGI), street-view imagery (SVI), RSI cross-view triplets covering multiple disaster events from 2018 to 2024. The framework combines deterministic and probabilistic cross-view geolocalization with multi-view fusion to associate VGI images with georeferenced SVI and RSI. It introduces two sets of spatial reasoning indicators for cross-view geolocalization validation and disaster damage assessment. These indicators use structural, environmental, and global-scene cues to validate cross-view correspondences and visually observable damage evidence with expert-verified annotations to assess disaster severity, improving the interpretability of VLM outputs. To our knowledge, this study provides the first systematic investigation and unified evaluation framework for examining how VLM-based spatial reasoning can transform crowdsourced disaster imagery into actionable geospatial artificial intelligence (GeoAI) through cross-view geolocalization validation, interpretable spatial reasoning, and damage-aware severity assessment.

Area-based social risk indices summarize residents' socioeconomic conditions but incompletely capture physical features of place that may affect health. We evaluated whether numerical representations of physical place produced by four geospatial foundation model families from 2022 satellite data explained residual variance in tract-level associations between the Area Deprivation Index, Social Deprivation Index, and Social Vulnerability Index with health outcomes. We used LightGBM to predict variables from the American Community Survey and 40 chronic disease and health-behavior outcomes from CDC PLACES across 82,646 census tracts in the contiguous United States, evaluating performance across 10 held-out states. Among survey variables, models were moderately predictive of some variables including housing type (R-squared up to 0.54) but weak for disability, unemployment, and income disparity. For health outcomes, models explained up to 54% of variance left unexplained by social risk indices, with the largest gains for annual checkups, arthritis, and high blood pressure. Mean total variance explained by geospatial foundation models across the 40 health-related outcomes increased from 0.31 in the smallest tract-size decile to 0.39 in the largest. Geospatial foundation models capture health-relevant features of place not represented by conventional social risk indices and may usefully augment them in epidemiological analyses.