CHALLENGES IN PREPAREDNESS,RESPONSE AND RELIEF FOR PEOPLE WITH
SPECIAL NEEDS IN TIMES OF DISASTERSFOLLOWING THE GREAT EAST JAPAN
EARTHQUAKE
Shigeo TATSUKI
Professor, Department of Sociology, Doshisha University, Japan
statsuki@mail.doshisha.ac.jp
ABSTRACT
Three major challenges were identified and their possible solutions were
proposed in preparedness, response and relief measures for People with Special
Needs in times of Disasters (PSND) following the 2011 Great East Japan
Earthquake. First, recent developments in preparedness measures for PSND in
Japan have been uncritically relying on the assumption that hazard maps
represent “correct” estimates of future hazardous events, which are based on
maximum probable event (MPrE) framework. In reality, however, maximum
possible event (MPoE) has occurred in Tohoku regions. This has tremendous
implications for fundamentally re-thinking entire hazard estimation process from
MPrE to MPoE framework. Second, counter-disaster measures for PSND havefocused mainly on warning and neighborhood-based evacuation assistanceactivities. Needs for shelters and temporary housing units that are speciallydesignated for PSND arose following the earthquake. However, their provision
was neither systematic nor universal due to the lack of pre-planning. Moredetailed guidelines for specially designated shelter and temporary housing
operation need to be developed in order to address this issue. Third, people withdisabilities (PWD) became invisible in shelters and communities or in eyes of
local government administrators. This is due to the fact that majority of PWDs
did not ask for help in evacuation shelters because they felt general shelters werenot “barrier free” and unresponsive to their functional needs. Furthermore,
many local government administrators felt hesitant to release PSND registry toNGOs and self-help organizations that were eager to check where-about andcurrent situations of PWDs. This was due to the fear of breaking Personal
Information Protection Bylaw despite the fact that the Bylaw provides exceptional
conditions, where the onset of disaster is clearly one of these exceptional
conditions. Further elaboration and education on the use of personal informationof PSND during disaster period are needed among public and local government
administrators.
Keywords: people with special needs in times of disasters (PSND), the Great East
Japan Earthquake, maximum probable event, maximum possible event, speciallydesignated shelters and temporary housing for PSND, personal information
protection bylaw

October 2011, Chiang Mai, Thailand

1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 Counter-disaster measures for PSND in Japan
The issue of special needs population gained high attention after 2004 when aseries of natural disasters hit the Japanese Archipelago. Those included July
Niigata-Fukushima flood, October typhoon 23 and October Niigata Chuetsu
earthquake disasters, wherein notably more than 60% of the victims were over theage of 65. As a response to these tragedies, Japan’s Cabinet Office established acommittee on “Communicating Disaster Information and Evacuation and
Sheltering Assistance for the Elderly and Other Population during Heavy
meteorological and Other Disasters.” The committee published the first edition of
the “Evacuation/Sheltering Assistance Guideline for People with Special Needs inTimes of Disasters” in the following March 2005. After the guideline publication,
the term saigaiji-youengosha or People with Special Needs in Times of Disasters(PSND) was popularized in place of saigai-jakusha or Disaster Vulnerable
Population. PSND is defined as “a person who is able to function daily, whereby
living independently given the proper resources and services when necessary”.
Following another series of heavy rainfall, flood and land slide disasters in theyear 2005, another Cabinet Office committee conducted field research of the 2005
meteorological disaster sites and revised the evacuation and sheltering assistanceguideline in March 2006. The 2006 guideline emphasized 1) establishing a
special team in each municipal government that was in charge of coordinating
assistance to the target population, 2) encouraging the information sharing ofspecial needs population within the local government and, if possible, with local
community organizations such as neighborhood associations and community
emergency and response team, and 3) planning individualized evacuation andsheltering procedures for each PSND.
In the following fiscal year 2006, the committee on PSND continued working on
more detailed procedures and workflows in order to collect, to share information
on PSND and to make individualized evacuation and sheltering assistance plans.
In March 2007, the committee published the “Report on Preparedness Procedures
for PSND.” The 2007 report emphasized the establishment of a system to assist
PSND by facilitating cooperation between the local/municipal government
disaster management department and its health and welfare department. The roleof the disaster management department is to provide local hazard information,
while the health and welfare department provides information on potential
vulnerabilities within the target population. The 2007 report encouraged the useof map where potential vulnerable individuals such as the frail elderly and people
with disabilities (PWD) are projected onto multiple hazard layers such as flood,
landslide and seismicity. The map can help identify who are at more risk becauseof their functional needs as well as of their geographic locations.
Since the publication of the 2006 guideline and the 2007 report, the Fire andDisaster Management Agency (FDMA) has requested every municipality in the
country to formulate its own master plan that directs policy formation on PSND
assistance, to identify potential target groups, to clarify ways to collect and share
New Technologies for Urban Safety of Mega Cities in Asia

their personal information. Based on the master plan, municipalities have beenfurther encouraged to start project planning to assign local resident helpers to eachindividual PSND in time of evacuation. According to the survey conducted by
FDMA, as of April 1, 2011, 1,262 out of 1622 municipalities (76.8%) finishedformulating PSND assistance master plan and additional 349 municipalities(21.2%) were expected to finish within one year. Similarly, 864 (52.6%)
municipalities reported that they have finished creating and have been updating
the PSND directory. 684 (41.5%) municipalities said that they were currently inthe process of making the directories. Municipalities have been working hardeven on assigning local residents/helpers to each PSND for evacuation, much
more time consuming process. 361 (22.0%) reported that they have completed theassignment, 998 (60.7%) in the process, and 285 (17.3%) not yet initiated (FDMA,
2011).
1.2 Kobe PSND Mapping Project
Tatsuki and Comafay (2010) reported the 2008 Kobe PSND Mapping Project,which was characterized by a combined use of GIS and the social survey in order
to assess overall hazard vulnerability of PSNDs. In response to the FDMA
request as explained in the above, 1.5- million-resided Kobe city administration
collated separate social service recipient databases, resulting in an integrated
registry involving one hundred and twenty thousand individuals who wereconsidered being potentially vulnerable in time of disaster. The registry database
identified 4,329 people with physical disabilities in 107- thousand-resided Hyogo
Ward. The 2008 project geocoded and mapped them on land slide, flood andtsunami hazard layers. 914 individuals were found residing in hazardous areas(see figure 1).

Figure 1: Persons with disabilities living in Kobe’s Hyogo ward (N= 4,411)
These 914 individuals were then visited by interviewers and 612 or 67%
responded to a structured questionnaire which measured demographics (i.e., age
Challenges in Preparedness, Response and Relief for People with Special Needs in Timesof Disasters following the Great East Japan Earthquake

October 2011, Chiang Mai, Thailand

and gender), levels of disability, social isolation, housing fragility, and physicalimmobility. The 2008 project was based on the person-in-environment model ofvulnerability, which defined hazard vulnerability (V) as a function of hazards (H),person (P), and environment (E) factors or V = f(H, f(P, E) as illustrated by figure2.

V= ƒ （H, ƒ （ P, E））
Overall Vulnerability Map
Px

EI
nte
rac
En
tio
vir
nF
onm
act
or
ent
al F
Per
a
c
tor
so n
al F
Ha
a
ct
zar
d L oraye
rFigure 2: Person-in-Environment model of mapping hazard vulnerability
Based on the model, an overall vulnerability score was then calculated as afunction of hazards and the five variables for each respondent. As a result, 17%of those who responded were found the most vulnerable and requiring priority
assistance in time of disaster (see figure 3).

Figure 3: Overall vulnerability scores mapped on to hazard layers

New Technologies for Urban Safety of Mega Cities in Asia

Areal Overall Vulnerability

Flood
Landslide
Tsunami17

Figure 4: PSND kernel density estimation weighted by overall vulnerability index
Furthermore, a social vulnerability weighted kernel density map of people withspecial needs was created (see figure 4). This map indicated which particularareas require more human resources for assisting a special needs population forevacuation and sheltering. The project product maps helped representatives from
special needs groups, community emergency response teams, community social
services, and emergency management centers initiate evacuation and sheltering
assistance planning in the project areas.
The 2008 Kobe PSND mapping project was an attempt that aimed to provide astandardized method using individual social vulnerability mapping as analysis
tool to identify more comprehensively the risks that could affect a given
community. This could help different stake holders, special needs groups,
community emergency response teams, community social services, andemergency management centers initiate evacuation and sheltering assistanceplanning in high risk communities.

2. THREE CHALLENGES IN PSND COUNTER-DISASTER MEASURESAFTER MARCH 11, 2011
Despite the above mentioned nation-wide efforts on PSND counter-disastermeasures in recent years, serious problems confronted municipalities,
communities, PSNDs and their families at the onset of March 11 Great East Japan
Earthquake Disaster. From three reconnaissance missions conducted by theauthor team in March and April, at least three major challenges were identified in
preparedness, response and relief measures for PSND. Those were namely 1)challenges on identifying people at risk by re-thinking “correct” hazard estimates,
2) challenges on pre-planning specially designated shelters for people with special
needs, and 3) challenge on utilizing personal information on PSND. Each
challenge is explained in the following sections.
Challenges in Preparedness, Response and Relief for People with Special Needs in Timesof Disasters following the Great East Japan Earthquake

October 2011, Chiang Mai, Thailand

2.1 Challenges on identifying people at risk: Re-think “correct” hazard
estimates
Recent developments in preparedness measures for PSND in Japan have been
uncritically relying on the assumption that hazard maps represent “correct”
estimates of future hazardous events. As figure 5 in the below illustrates, thisturned out to be a horribly wrong assumption. Hazard maps were createdaccording to maximum probable event (MPrE) framework. In reality, however,maximum possible event (MPoE) has occurred in Tohoku regions. This has
tremendous implications for fundamentally re-thinking entire hazard estimation
process from MPrE to MPoE framework.

A

3000m
700m

Figure 5: Tsunami hazard map and actual inundation east of Rokugo Junior highschool, Wakabayashi ward, Sendai city
In the previous section, the person-in-environment model of hazard vulnerability(V) was introduced as a function of hazard (H), person (P) and environment (E)factors or V = f(H, f(P, E)). In practice, hazard factor was estimated by maximum
probable event framework and therefore the model could be represented as V =f(MPrE, f(P, E)). The challenge here is to replace maximum probable event
hazard estimate with an alternative hazard estimate by incorporating maximum
possible event framework. The modified person-in-environment model will
therefore be represented as V = f(MPoE, f(P, E)).
2.2 Challenges on pre-planning specially designated shelters for people withspecial needs
As was described in the introduction, counter-disaster measures for PSND havebeen focusing mainly on warning and neighborhood-based evacuation assistanceactivities. Needs for shelters and temporary housing units that were speciallydesignated for PSND arose following the March 11 earthquake. However, theirprovisions were neither systematic nor universal due to the lack of pre-planning.
This is partly due to the fact that the 2006 guideline or the 2007 report has not
New Technologies for Urban Safety of Mega Cities in Asia

provided detailed procedures on sheltering assistance planning for PSND. The
concept of specially designated shelter for PSND or fukushi-hinansho emerged in
2004 from the discussions by the committee on “Communicating Disaster
Information and Evacuation and Sheltering Assistance for the Elderly and Other
Population during Heavy meteorological and Other Disasters.” It was recognizedthat general evacuation shelters as shown in figures 6 and 7 were not capable ofresponding to special or functional needs of PWD and the frail elderly.
Functional needs include those in “communication, medical needs, maintaining
functional independence, supervision, and transportation” (Kailes and Enders,
2007, p.234) that arise in times of disaster. The committees on PSND assistance,
however, have not spent enough time to clarify requirements for, procedures or
guidelines of specially designated shelters. Most hazards that the PSND
committees have been studying since 2004 have mainly been meteorological andtherefore sheltering needs were short-term and considered being less lifethreatening than evacuation needs.

Figure 6: School Gym Shelter at
Rokugo junior high school, Sendai
City (April 6, 2011)

Figure 7: Arahama Residents on the
1st Floor Classroom at Hakken juniorhigh school (April 6, 2011)

The March 11 earthquake disaster created a situation where a very large numberof people rushed to general shelters and the length of stay was relatively long,creating high functional needs from PSND. This apparently required alternative
shelters. Disaster hit municipalities responded to this situation in un-uniform
manners. In the case of Sendai city, the city administration had already made preplanned arrangements/compacts for alternative sheltering service with 52 local
social service providers prior to the March event. Some of those compacted
shelters conducted study seminars and practice drills in the previous year. Thanks
to these preparations, some responded to the city administration request quickly
and the other even voluntarily initiated sheltering operations. In total, 26 shelters
operated and served about 260 individuals in Sendai city (see figure 8).

Figure 8: Specially Designated Shelter at
Miyagino Day Service Center for PWD,
Sendai City (April 5, 2011)

Figure 9: Specially DesignatedShelter at Yugakukan Sport
Center Gym, Ishinomaki City
(http://road.nippon-foundation.or.jp/2011/04/007fcd1.html)

Challenges in Preparedness, Response and Relief for People with Special Needs in Timesof Disasters following the Great East Japan Earthquake

October 2011, Chiang Mai, Thailand

Downtown center of Ishinomaki city was badly damaged by March 11 tsunami
forcing more than thirty thousand people or about one fifth of its population in
general shelters at its peak. A medical doctor helping one of a large generalshelters strongly demanded the city administration that an alternative shelter be
provided for the frail elderly, PWDs and those out-patients that did not require
intensive medical care from the tsunami unaffected Ishinomaki Red Cross hospital.
The city temporally designated Inai junior high school gym and then later moved
the 20 to 30 shelter occupants to Yugakukan sport center gym (see figure 9) on
March 29. Yugakukan gym eventually accepted about 130 people including
PSNDs and their family members. Yugakukan shelter was staffed initially bymost of Ishinomaki Municipal hospital doctors, nurses and social workers wholost their work place due to the tsunami attacks. Volunteer doctors, nurses, social
workers, nursing care workers and public administrators from other prefectures
came to the Yugakukan shelter and assisted the operation from early April.
It should be noted that Ishinomaki city was renowned for its city wide
community-based evacuation planning initiatives for PSNDs. The city wasrecognized as one of the ten model municipalities on PSND preparedness masterplanning as early as year 2004. By the end of year 2010, 401 out of 421
administrative districts in the city completed individualized evacuation planningfor each PSND in the neighborhood. The city’s master plan for PSND, however,
did not include planning on specially designated shelters. Inai junior high schooland later Yugakukan shelter operations were all improvised by city hospital
doctors and nurses with the support from the city. The city, however, was notaware of special service provision clause in Disaster Relief Act that qualified
additional financial compensations on top of general service provisions from thenational government. It was not until almost the end of April that the cityformally designated Yugakukan as the specially designated shelter for PSND. To
sum up, specially designated shelters operated in Ishinomaki city but the operation
remained lacking formal logistic support foundation for a prolonged period oftime.
Like Ishinomaki, more thantwelve thousand or one sixthof Kesennuma city populationrushed to general shelters after
the earthquake and tsunami in
March. Until April, the frail
Shunpoen Nursing Home Shelter (April 7, 2011)
elderly, PWDs and smallchildren were all mixed withother evacuees who looked
after those in needs at generalshelters. In some shelters,
Ochiai Nursery School Shelter
partition cardboards were used(http://www.toshinkai.or.jp/image/C8EFBAD2C3CFC7C9B8AFCAF3B9F0.pdf)
to separate PSNDs from
Figure 10: Specially Designated Shelters at Shunpogeneral evacuees in order toen Special Nursing Home (Top) and Ochiai Nursery
provide some privacy. On
School (Bottom)
April 7, the city administration
officially opened the first specially designated shelter for PSND on an unused
nursery school site (see figure 10). In the following two weeks, additional four
New Technologies for Urban Safety of Mega Cities in Asia

specially designated shelters were opened. Shunpo-en special nursing home for
elderly (see figure 10) was one of those four new specially designated shelters. It
was serving 60 elderly residents as well as more than one hundred generalevacuees and some PSNDs from the neighborhood after the March disaster.
Those PSNDs were taken care by the home staff workers. The director, however,
was afraid of financial burden to run specially designated shelter for an extended
period of time. Later in April, the city administrators learned that official
designation would allow additional care service provision from Disaster Relief
Act. This was on top of the provision of regular service hours as prescribed bylong-term care insurance scheme. This alleviated tremendous financial burden
which the city and/or the designated shelters like Shunpo-en home might have had
to bear otherwise. In other words, Kesennum city also lacked pre-planning on
specially designated shelters and the administration was not aware of legal
framework (i.e. Disaster Relief Act special service provision clause) to operatethese shelters.
In conclusion, municipalities other than Sendai city did not have compacts on
specially designated shelter operations with social service providers. It tooknearly three weeks for Ishinomaki and Kesennuma to formally designate such
shelters after the earthquake. It was learned that they were hesitant because they
believed their facilities would not meet the standard for specially designatedshelters, as outlined in pre-disaster planning manuals. Additionally, many local
officials were unaware of the special service provision clause of the Disaster
Relief Act covering shelters for people with special needs. Nonetheless, thesekinds of sheltering operations did emerge. Had the local municipalities officiallydeclared that they were operating special-needs shelters, they would have been
eligible for additional resources at the onset of the even from both the national andprefectural governments. More detailed guidelines for specially designatedshelters and temporary housing operation for PSNDs need to be developed inorder to address this issue.
2.3 Challenges on Utilizing Personal Information on People with Special
Needs in Times of Disasters
Among different types of PSNDs, people with disabilities (PWD) were invisible
in shelters and communities or in eyes of local government administrators. Thiswas due to the fact that majority of PWDs did not ask for help in general shelters
because they felt general shelters were not “barrier free” and unresponsive to theirfunctional needs. Furthermore, many local government administrators felt
hesitant to release PSND registry to NGOs and self-help organizations that were
eager to check where-about and current situations of PWDs. This was due to thefear of breaking Personal Information Protection Bylaw despite the fact that the
Bylaw provides exceptional conditions, where the onset of disaster is clearly oneof these exceptional conditions. In fact, Minamisoma city officials did releasethat information to a local NGO, and in Higashimatsushima, members of groups
who worked on behalf of disabled persons, such as the Japan Disability Forum,
were allowed to accompany public health nurses on their home visits. Other cities
might have been using similar approaches, but it appeared that in most affectedareas officials were unaware of the needs of mentally ill and developmentally
Challenges in Preparedness, Response and Relief for People with Special Needs in Timesof Disasters following the Great East Japan Earthquake

October 2011, Chiang Mai, Thailand

disabled persons and had not attempted to initiate outreach efforts for those
populations. As of June 2011, Japan Disability Forum announced that they wereable to meet 1,386 PWDs in person from their outreach project in Miyagi
prefecture. This number (1,386) accounted for only 2.6 % of 53,511 persons who
were registered to be PWD in the affected areas. Researchers and advocates for
persons with disabilities were unable to determine what was happening with large
numbers of survivors with disabilities. Further elaboration and education on theuse of personal information of PSND during disaster period are needed among
public and local government administrators.
CONCLUSION
This paper first introduced recent developments on counter-disaster measures for
PSNDs in Japan. Based on three reconnaissance missions in March and April
three major challenges and their possible solutions in preparedness, response andrelief measures for PSND were presented. First, challenges on identifying people
at risk were illustrated. This would require re-thinking from maximum probable
event to maximum possible event framework. Second, challenges on operating
specially designated shelters for people with special needs were identified.
Further elaboration of the guideline on sheltering was suggested. Third,
challenges on utilizing personal information on PSND during disaster were
presented. Further elaboration and education on this matter was recommended.
REFERENCES
Aoki, K. 2011. Report on supporting a specially designated shelter in Kesennuma
city, Miyagi prefecture. West Tokyo City Elderly Center Kirara(http://www.toshinkai.or.jp/image/C8EFBAD2C3CFC7C9B8AFCAF3B9 F0.pdf,
October 1, 2011)
Fire and Disaster Management Agency, 2011. A research report on municipalities
counter-disaster measures for people with special needs in times of disaster.
(http://www.fdma.go.jp/neuter/topics/houdou/2307/230708_1houdou/02_houdous
hiryou.pdf, September 26, 2011)
Kailes, J. I. and Enders, A. 2007. Moving beyond “special needs”: a functionbased framework for emergency management and planning, Journal of Disability
Policy Studies, Vol.17, No.4, 230-237.
Tatsuki, S. and Comafay, N. 2010. Evacuation and sheltering assistance planningfor special needs population: Kobe disadvantaged population mapping project,
Presentation for International Sociological Association World Congress ofSociology, Gothenburg, Sweden, July 15, 2010.

New Technologies for Urban Safety of Mega Cities in Asia