TOWARDS DISASTER-RESILIENT URBAN DEVELOPMENT: A FRAMEWORKFOR COST SHARING IN INFRASTRUCTURE INVESTMENT
TC-21 SEMINAR: EXPLORING THE SYNERGY: INNOVATION AND
TRANSDISCIPLINARY APPROACHES IN DRRSEPTEMBER 20, 2023, TAIPEI

Mikio Ishiwatari, PhD
The University of TokyoJICA

INTRODUCTION

ACHIEVING DISASTER-RESILIENT CITY
requires substantial financial support beyond
private and individual investments
necessitating collaboration among nationaland local governments, private sector, &individuals
1995 Great Hanshin-Awaji Earthquake
exposed vulnerabilities of densely populatedurban regions and underscored importanceof rehabilitating affected communities

ACHIEVING DISASTERRESILIENT CITY
1) Before disasters: subsidized disasterresilient urban development projects
Issue: resident consensus and project
profitability2) After disasters: rehabilitating towns
Issue: Standards for ratio of public toprivate contributions is unclear
Special attention: to elderly and low-income
groups unable to rebuild independently

THIS STUDY PROPOSES
approach to cost and responsibility sharingfor1) urban development and2) housing reconstruction
aimed at fostering disaster resilience inurban areas

CONTENTS
1. Before Disaster: Improving dense
residential area
2. Reconstructing towns
3. Consideration and conclusion

I. BEFORE DISASTER
IMPROVING DENSE RESIDENTIAL AREA

1. DENSELY POPULATEDAREA OF WOODEN HOUSESFire rate triples when buildings
collapse
Collapsed buildings block roads,
making firefighting, rescue, andevacuation difficult⇒ Need to build a disasterresistant town

国土交通省における南海トラフ巨大地震・首都直下地震対策[2,019/2/28閲覧]
http://www.mlit.go.jp/river/bousai/earthquake/capital/

DENSE WOODEN
HOUSING AREASRapid mass migration
Convenient for jobs and daily lives
Aging and decreasing population- Infrastructure undeveloped- Aging low-quality houses
木造住宅密集地域整備事業[2019/3/8閲
覧]http://www.toshiseibi.metro.tokyo.jp/bosai/pdf/mokuzou_01.pdf

DENSE WOODEN HOUSING AREAS
widely distributed around outside the Yamanote Line.
Insufficient urban infrastructure such as roads and parks

Dense wooden
housing areas

木造住宅密集地域の整備促進[2019/3/8閲
覧]http://www.toshiseibi.metro.tokyo.jp/bosai/sokushin/pdf/seibijigyo_01.pdf

LAW FOR DISASTER RESILIENT
DISTRICT IN DENSE WOODEN
HOUSING AREA 1997
Following the Great Hanshin-Awaji
Earthquake in 1995,
Redevelop to disaster-resilient
districts in densely populated
urban areas that are at risk for fire
hazard in large-scale earthquakes
To support voluntary efforts byland owners.

2. DISASTER-RESILIENT
DISTRICT PROGRAM
multi-family residential
apartment, Fire proof

Open
land

Exchangerights
To apartment ormove out

To individual
hoses

ParkRoads
Individual
hosesJOINT RECONSTRUCTION OF OLD
INDIVIDUAL BUILDINGS

木造住宅密集地域整備事業[2019/3/8閲
覧]http://www.toshiseibi.metro.tokyo.jp/bosai/pdf/mokuzou_01.pdf

ROADSWidening roads andundergrounding power lines
Improve difficult areas for
firefighting
Securing evacuation roads
during disasters

木造住宅密集地域整備事業[2019/3/8閲
覧]http://www.toshiseibi.metro.tokyo.jp/bosai/pdf/mokuzou_01.pdf

PARKSecure a base for disastermanagement activities
Prevention of fire spread
Installation of earthquakeresistant water tanks, etc.
Improvement of living
environment

木造住宅密集地域整備事業[2019/3/8閲
覧]http://www.toshiseibi.metro.tokyo.jp/bosai/pdf/mokuzou_01.pdf

3. COST AND RESPONSIBILITYSHARING Government subsidy: 1/3
 Revenue for selling new lots: 2/3
 Residents: 0 changing land rights
Private sector:
 can expect profits
 know-how

4. ISSUES
Consensus building:- the elderly,- unagreed owners
Periods unseen- Ave10 years from planning, including 3 years forconstruction- Unseen periods: Difficult for the private sectorFlexible scheme Land pooling + redevelopment (exchanging rights to lands
or apartment units) Only agreed owners, excluding owners unagreed
Involving the private sector
Further issues
integrating social welfareII. RECONSTRUCTING TOWNSSHOULD GOVERNMENT SUPPORT TO
REHABILITATE HOUSING?
no clear criteria how governments and affected people share
responsibility and costs of housing reconstruction
Q1 Is it fair to support people affected by large-scale disasters
while not to victims of other shocks of traffic accidents and fires?
Q2 Should government support to create private assets of houses
and properties?
clarify factors that affect cost-sharing between governments andaffected people for housing reconstruction

TREND OF GOVERNMENT FINANCIAL SUPPORT TOHOUSING RECONSTRUCTION (MILLION JPY)

Before Kobe EQ 1995
National government insisted
not support recreation of personal assets
and had no responsibility for damage
West Tottori EQ 2000
3 million JPY support to house owners
prefectural governor recognized housing
reconstruction as key to rehabilitating local
communities in aging and depopulating ruralarea
Law revision 2007
Nat. Gov. support 3 million JPY for housing
reconstruction, SUPPORT to rebuilding daily
lives but NOT COMPENSATE.

GREAT EAST JAPAN EARTHQUAKE AND TSUNAMI 2011

Concept of group relocation in Japan

Cabinet officeCOSTS FOR
RELOCATION SITES
Cost for relocation and landpooling
61 million JPY/ lot (440,000USD)
Exclud. housing cost
24 to 73 million JPY by city

CityUnits

Average costs per
housing lot(million JPY)

Higashimatsushima

1285

23.6

Ishinomaki

2639

33.3

Iwaki

54

37.4

Minamisoma

304

65.4

Namie

142

50.2

Naraha36

48.9

Ofunato366

38.9

Onagawa

220

72.7

Shinchi

224

41.6

HOUSING RECONSTRUCTION

Ave. construction cost: 25 million JPY
Public assistance: at maximum 15 million JPY
Competition among cities: Attracting affected people.PUBLIC APARTMENT
For the vulnerable families, such as lowincome people and the elderly,
could not afford to reconstruct houses.
rent is subsidized for 10 years.
The programs: 900 billion JPY, 6.4 billion
USD, for 30,000 houses, some 30 million
JPY per house.

3. CONSIDERATION AND
CONCLUSION

COST AND RESPONSIVITY SHARING IN JAPANNATIONAL GOVERNMENT, LOCAL GOVERNMENT, RESIDENT, PRIVATE SECTOR
Housing is private asset: Resident should cover housing construction bythemselves in principle
people should prepare for disasters by constructing resilient houses andpaying insurance
government not financed creating personal assets of houses nor
compensating economic damage caused by natural hazards.
Financial support can be justified only to support protecting or rehabilitating
local communities. To destroy or collapse of communities.
There are no clear criteria of cost-sharing between governments and victims.

LESSONS IN
BUILDING
RESILIENT CITIESNational government support isessential
Local governments facilitateprocessed
Flexible mechanism
Voluntary efforts by residents
Engaging private sector

LOCAL
GOVERNMENT’SPERSPECTIVEAFTER GEJE

Local governments provided
financial assistance to reconstruct
houses in original cities.
Some groups, especially younger
generations, wanted to move tolarger cities, such as Sendai city,
to seek better job opportunities
and stronger children’s education.

NATIONAL GOV.
COVERING ALL
RECONSTRUCTION COSTS
MAY LEAD TO BOTH
1) OVER-PLANNING AND
2) MAJOR COST
INCREASES.

Local governments could plan
relocation sites on higher ground in hilly
areas even with high costs
Mayors did not prefer recovery plansof decreasing population

Local communities unnecessarily
decided to merge communities

FURTHER STUDIES
Comparison study with Taiwan- disaster-resilient district- town reconstruction

謝謝大家

Ishiwatari.mikio@jica.go.jp