# Post-Disaster Recovery Monitoring with Google Earth Engine
## 3 Results and Discussion
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c|c c c c c c} \hline \hline \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Time/Class**} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{**Trees**} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{**Built-Up**} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{**Crop Land**} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{**Water Body**} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{
\begin{tabular}{c} **Other (Non-tv, Bare** \\ **Land, Debris)** \\ \end{tabular} } \\ \cline{2-7} \multirow{-1}{*}{**Pre-disaster** **(T0)**} & UA(\%) & 90.7 & 100 & 93.0 & 100 & 86.7 \\ \cline{2-7}  & PA(\%) & 87.3 & 100 & 84.6 & 100 & 85.8 \\ \cline{2-7}  & **OA(\%)** & & & **92.8** & & \\ \cline{2-7}  & UA(\%) & 98.4 & 94.8 & 85.1 & 100 & 71.9 \\ \cline{2-7}  & PA(\%) & 84.1 & 100 & 84.9 & 100 & 76.5 \\ \cline{2-7}  & **OA(\%)** & & & & **88.6** & & \\ \cline{2-7}  & **UA(\%)** & 96.4 & 89.1 & 90.6 & 99.9 & 90.3 \\ \cline{2-7}  & PA(\%) & 88.4 & 95.7 & 90.6 & 99.8 & 96.4 \\ \cline{2-7}  & **OA(\%)** & & & & **93.8** & & \\ \hline \hline \multirow{2}{*}{**Post-disaster** **(T2)**} & UA(\%) & 95.7 & 98.5 & 84.8 & 100 & 86.5 \\ \cline{2-7}  & PA(\%) & 93.1 & 97.8 & 98.7 & 100 & 91.3 \\ \cline{2-7}  & **OA(\%)** & & & & **94.6** & & \\ \hline \hline \multirow{2}{*}{**Post-disaster** **(T3)**} & UA(\%) & 90.1 & 81.0 & 86.3 & 99.5 & 86.7 \\ \cline{2-7}  & PA(\%) & 96.6 & 75.4 & 93.3 & 99.9 & 82.6 \\ \cline{2-7}  & **OA(\%)** & & & & **89.0** & & \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 3: The land cover classification accuracies for T0, T1, T2, T3, and T4 time epochs for Leyte island. PA—producer’s accuracy; UA—user’s accuracy; OA—overall accuracy; Non-tv—Non-tree vegetation. Figure 3: (**a**–**e**) Landsat image composites acquired over Leyte island for T0–T4 times, respectively, (**f**–**j**) land cover classification maps produced with GEE for T0–T4 times, respectively. Red rectangles show the status of the relocation site (northern part of Tacloban) for T0–T4 times. Non-tv—Non-tree vegetation. In Figure 5, the darker red color shows more damage while, for the recovery maps, the darker green color shows a higher level of recovery. The most damaged/impacted municipalities are located in the center and northern part of the island. However, since Haiyan passed through the northern part of the island, the municipalities in the southern parts have the lowest damage ratios, close to zero. The most affected land cover classes were the forest/trees and built-up classes (Figure 4). Consequently, the municipalities with more forest/trees and built-up coverage compared to other land cover types have higher damage ratios. The change in the recovery maps (from RC1 to RC3) shows that the municipalities with more forest/tree coverage recovered more slowly than the others, and eventually, after a period of three years, most of the forest trees had recovered (RC3) (Figure 5d). Moreover, the results reported in a previous study [4] show almost the same pattern of recovery in terms of change in land cover classes at a small scale (i.e., Tacloban) in the post-Haiyan time. The only difference is in built-up class, where our study shows growth in built-up areas three years after Haiyan, while they reported that Tacloban city returned to almost the same level of built-up coverage four years after the disaster. This is mainly because their focus was on central urban areas of Tacloban, not including  
Figure 4: Per class land cover percentage for Leyte island for T0–T4. Non-tv—Non-tree vegetation. Figure 5: (**a**) Municipality level damage map for T1 and (**b–d**) the recovery maps for T2–T4 times after Typhoon Haiyan for Leyte island, respectively. the northern part of Tacloban in their analysis, in which the primary resettlement sites for the period after Haiyan were built (Figure 3).