bs_bs_banner

International Journal of Japanese Sociology
2012, Number 21

doi: 10.1111/j.1475-6781.2012.01158.x

Challenges in Counter-disaster Measures for
People with Functional Needs in Times ofDisaster Following the Great East Japan
Earthquake
SHIGEO TATSUKI

Abstract: This article describes the three major challenges that were identified
and their possible solutions are proposed in counter-disaster measures for“people with functional needs in times of disaster (PFND)” following the 2011
Great East Japan Earthquake. First, recent developments in preparedness measures for PFND in Japan have been uncritically relying on the assumption thathazard maps represent “correct” estimates of future hazardous events, which
are based on the maximum probable event (MPrE) framework. In reality,
however, a maximum possible event (MPoE) has occurred in the Tōhoku regions.
This has tremendous implications for fundamentally re-thinking the entire hazard
estimation process from a MPrE to MPoE framework. Second, counter-disastermeasures for PFND have focused mainly on warning and neighborhood-based
evacuation assistance activities. Needs for shelters and temporary housing units
that were specially designated for PFND arose following the earthquake.
However, their provisions were neither systematic nor universal due to the lackof pre-planning. More detailed guidelines for specially designated shelter andtemporary housing operations need to be developed in order to address thisissue. Third, people with disabilities (PWD) became invisible in shelters andcommunities or in the eyes of local government administrators. This was due tothe fact that a majority of PWD did not ask for help in evacuation shelters
because they felt general shelters were not “barrier free” and were unresponsive to their functional needs. Furthermore, many local government administrators felt hesitant to release their PFND registry to non-governmental and self-helporganizations that were eager to check the whereabouts and current situations of
PWD. This was due to the fear of breaking the Personal Information Protection
Bylaw despite the fact that the bylaw provided exceptional conditions, where theonset of disaster was clearly one of these exceptional conditions. Further elaboration and education on the use of personal information of PFND during a disasterperiod is needed among public and local government administrators.
ijjs_1158

12..20

Keywords: people with functional needs in times of disaster, maximum probable
event, maximum possible event© 2012 The AuthorInternational Journal of Japanese Sociology © 2012 The Japan Sociological Society

People with Functional Needs in Times of Disaster

Introduction
Counter-disaster Measures for People
with Functional Needs in Times ofDisaster in Japan
The issue of people with functional needs
for communication, medical care, maintaining functional independence, supervision,and transportation (Kailes and Enders,
2007) during disasters has gained significant
attention since 2004 when a series of natural
disasters hit the Japanese archipelago. These
disasters included the July NiigataFukushima flood, the October typhoon 23
and the October Niigata Chuetsu earthquake, wherein notably more than 60% of
the victims were over the age of 65. As a
response to these tragedies, Japan’s Cabinet
Office established a committee on “Communicating Disaster Information andEvacuation and Sheltering Assistance for
the Elderly and Other Population during
Heavy Meteorological and Other Disasters.” The committee published the firstedition of the “Evacuation/Sheltering Assistance Guideline for People with Functional
Needs in Times of Disaster” in March 2005.
After the guideline publication, the termsaigaiji-youengosha or “people with functional needs in times of disaster (PFND)”
was popularized in place of saigai-jakushaor “disaster-vulnerable population.” PFND
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 landslide disasters in the subsequent year of 2005, another Cabinet Officecommittee conducted field research on the2005 meteorological disaster sites andrevised the evacuation and sheltering assistance guideline in March 2006. The 2006
guideline emphasized: (i) establishing a
special team in each municipal governmentthat was in charge of coordinating assistanceto the target population; (ii) encouraging
the information sharing of the functional

13

needs population within the local government and, if possible, with local community
organizations, such as neighborhood associations and community emergency andresponse team; and (iii) planning. Since thepublication of the 2006 guideline and the2007 report, the Fire and Disaster Management Agency (FDMA) has requested every
municipality in the country to formulate its
own master plan that directs policy formation on PFND assistance, to identify potential target groups, and to clarify ways tocollect and share their personal information. Based on the master plan, municipalities have been further encouraged to start
project planning to assign local resident
helpers to each individual PFND in times of
evacuation. According to the survey conducted by FDMA, as of 1 April 2011, 1262
out of 1622 municipalities (76.8%) completed formulating PFND assistance masterplans and an additional 349 municipalities(21.2%) were expected to finish within 1
year. Similarly, 864 (52.6%) municipalities
reported that they have finished creatingand have been updating the PFND directory. A total of 684 (41.5%) municipalities
said that they were currently in the processof making the directories. Municipalities
have also been working hard even on
assigning local residents/helpers to each
PFND for evacuation, which is a timeconsuming process. A total of 361 (22.0%)
reported that they have completed theassignment, 998 (60.7%) are in the process,and 285 (17.3%) have not yet initiated theprocess (Fire and Disaster Management
Agency, 2011).
In the following fiscal year of 2006, thecommittee on PFND continued working on
more detailed procedures and workflows inorder to collect and share information on
PFND, and to make individualized evacuation and sheltering assistance plans. In
March 2007, the committee published the“Report on Preparedness Procedures for
PFND.” The 2007 report emphasized theestablishment of a system to assist PFND by© 2012 The AuthorInternational Journal of Japanese Sociology © 2012 The Japan Sociological Society

14

Shigeo Tatsuki

facilitating cooperation between the local/
municipal government disaster management department and its health and welfare
department. The role of the disaster management department is to provide local
hazard information, while the health andwelfare department provides information
on potential vulnerabilities within the target
population. The 2007 report encouraged theuse of maps where potentially vulnerable
individuals, such as the frail elderly andpeople with disabilities (PWD) were projected onto multiple hazard layers, such as
flood, landslide and seismicity. The map canhelp identify those who are at more risk
because of their functional needs as well asof their geographic locations.
Kobe PFND Mapping Project
Tatsuki and Comafay (2010) reported on
the 2008 Kobe PFND Mapping Project,which was characterized by a combined use
of geographic information system and social
survey in order to assess the overall hazard
vulnerability of PFND. In response to the
FDMA request as explained above, theKobe city administration (responsible for
1.5 million residents) collated separatesocial service recipient databases, resulting
in an integrated registry involving 120 000
individuals who were considered to bepotentially vulnerable in times of disaster.
The registry database identified 4329 people
with physical disabilities in Hyogo Ward,
which has 107 000 residents. The 2008
project geocoded and mapped those withphysical disabilities on landslide, flood andtsunami hazard layers. A total of 914 individuals were found residing in hazardous
areas (see Fig. 1).
These 914 individuals were then visited byinterviewers and 612 or 67% responded to a
structured questionnaire which measured
demographics (i.e., age and sex), levels of
disability, social isolation, housing fragility,and physical immobility. The 2008 project
was based on the person-in-environment
model of vulnerability, which defined hazard

Figure 1.

Persons with disabilities living in
Kobe’s Hyogo ward (n = 4411)

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

EI
n te
rac
En
tio
v ir
nF
onm
act
or
ent
al F
Per
a
c
to r
so n
al F
Ha
a
c
zar
t
d L oraye
rFigure 2.

Person-in-environment model ofmapping hazard vulnerability

vulnerability (V) as a function of hazards(H), person (P), and environment (E)factors, or V = f(H, f(P, E)) as illustrated by
Figure 2.
Based on the model, an overall vulnerability score was then calculated as a function of hazards and the five variables foreach respondent. As a result, 17% of those
who responded were found to be the mostvulnerable and requiring priority assistancein times of disaster (see Fig. 3).
Furthermore, a social vulnerabilityweighted kernel density map of people with© 2012 The AuthorInternational Journal of Japanese Sociology © 2012 The Japan Sociological Society

People with Functional Needs in Times of Disaster15

dardized method using individual social vulnerability mapping as an analysis tool toidentify more comprehensively the risks
that could affect a given community. This
could help different stake-holders, functional needs groups, community emergency
response teams, community social services,and emergency management centers to initiate evacuation and sheltering assistanceplanning in high-risk communities.

Figure 3.

Overall vulnerability scores mappedon to hazard layers

Areal Overall Vulnerability

Flood
Landslide
Tsunami17

Figure 4.

People with functional needs in timesof disaster kernel density estimation
weighted by overall vulnerability
index

functional needs was created (see Fig. 4).
This map indicated which particular areas
require more human resources for assisting
the functional needs population for evacuation and sheltering. The project maps helped
representatives from functional needs
groups, community emergency response
teams, community social services, andemergency management centers to initiate
evacuation and sheltering assistance planning in the project areas.
The 2008 Kobe PFND mapping project
was an attempt that aimed to provide a stan-Three Challenges in PFNDCounter-disaster Measures
after 11 March 2011
Despite the above-mentioned national andlocal efforts on PFND counter-disaster measures in recent years, serious problems confronted municipalities, communities, PFND
and their families at the onset of the 11
March 2011 Great East Japan Earthquake
Disaster. From three reconnaissance missions conducted by the author’s team in
March and April, at least three major challenges were identified in preparedness,
response and relief measures for PFND.
Those were, namely: (i) challenges in identifying people at risk by re-thinking“correct” hazard estimates; (ii) challenges in
pre-planning specially designated shelters
for people with functional needs; and (iii)challenges in utilizing personal information
on PFND. Each challenge is explained in thefollowing sections.
Challenges in Identifying People at
Risk: Re-think “Correct” Hazard
Estimates
Recent developments in preparedness measures for PFND in Japan have been uncritically relying on the assumption that hazard
maps represent “correct” estimates of future
hazardous events. As Figure 5 below illustrates, this turned out to be a very wrong
assumption. Hazard maps were created© 2012 The AuthorInternational Journal of Japanese Sociology © 2012 The Japan Sociological Society

16

Figure 5.

Shigeo Tatsuki

Tsunami hazard map and actual
inundation east of Rokugo JuniorHigh School, Wakabayashi Ward,
Sendai City

according to a maximum probable event(MPrE) framework. In reality, however, amaximum possible event (MPoE) occurredin the Tōhoku region. This has tremendous
implications for fundamentally re-thinking
the entire hazard estimation process froman MPrE to an MPoE framework.
In the previous section, the person-inenvironment 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, the hazard
factor was estimated by a maximum probable event framework and therefore themodel could be represented as V = f(MPrE,f(P, E)). The challenge here is to replace themaximum probable event hazard estimate
with an alternative hazard estimate byincorporating a maximum possible event
framework. The modified person-inenvironment model will therefore be represented as V = f(MPoE, f(P, E)).
Once the hazard estimation endeavor
departs from the realm governed by probabilistic and statistical theorem (i.e., MPrE
framework), it enters into the world of“hyper-complexity” where “hypotheticalknowledge can no longer be mastered bymechanical testing rules” (Beck, 1992/1986:
157). Beck (1992/1986) calls this state“demonopolization of scientific knowledge
claims” (Beck, 1992/1986: 156). The new

maximum possible event framework, therefore, will call for “reflexive scientization”
that demands an active coproduction by
every stakeholder in society in such areas aspolitics, business and the public, as well as in
the scientific community involved in theknowledge definition process (Beck, 1992/
1986: 157). The reflexive scientization
process will also demand respect for locally
networked tacit knowledge and the collective sensibilities of “lay actors” (Wynne,
1996; Mythen, 2004) as well as for theexperts’ formal knowledge and their technologies. Details of this project need to befurther investigated.
Challenges in Pre-planning Specially
Designated Shelters for People with
Functional Needs
As was described in the introduction,
counter-disaster measures for PFND havebeen focusing mainly on warning andneighborhood-based evacuation assistanceactivities. Needs for shelters and temporary
housing units that were specially designatedfor PFND arose following the 11 March
earthquake. However, their provisions wereneither systematic nor universal due to thelack of pre-planning.This is partly due to thefact that the 2006 guideline and the 2007
report have not provided detailed procedures on sheltering assistance planning for
PFND.The concept of a specially designatedshelter for PFND, or fukushi-hinansho,
emerged in 2004 from the discussions by thecommittee on “Communicating Disaster
Information and Evacuation and Sheltering
Assistance for the Elderly and Other Population during Heavy Meteorological andOther Disasters.” It was recognized thatgeneral evacuation shelters as shown in Figures 6 and 7 were not capable of responding
to the functional needs of PWD and the frail
elderly. The committees on PFND assistance, however, have not spent enough timeon clarifying the requirements, or the procedures and guidelines for specially designated shelters. Most hazards that the PFND

© 2012 The AuthorInternational Journal of Japanese Sociology © 2012 The Japan Sociological Society

People with Functional Needs in Times of DisasterFigure 6.

Figure 7.

School Gym Shelter at Rokugo JuniorHigh School, Sendai City (6 April
2011)

Arahama residents in the first-floor
classroom at Hakken Junior HighSchool (6 April 2011)

committees have been studying since 2004
have been meteorological and therefore
sheltering needs were short-term and considered less life-threatening than evacuationneeds.
In the 11 March earthquake disaster, avery large number of people rushed togeneral shelters and the length of stay was
long, creating high functional needs for
PFND. The situation apparently required
alternative shelters. Disaster-hit municipalities responded in a non-uniform manner. In
the case of Sendai City, the city administration had already made pre-plannedarrangements/compacts for an alternative
sheltering service with 52 local social service
providers prior to the March event. Some ofthose compacted shelters conducted study
seminars and practice drills in the previous

Figure 8.

17Specially designated shelter at
Miyagino Day Service Center for
people with disabilities, Sendai City
(5 April 2011)

year. Thanks to these preparations, some
responded to the city administration request
quickly and others voluntarily initiated sheltering operations. In total, 26 shelters operated and served about 260 individuals in
Sendai City (see Fig. 8).
The downtown center of Ishinomaki City
was badly damaged by the March 11
tsunami, forcing more than 30 000 people or
about one-fifth of its population to evacuate
to general shelters at the peak of theaftermath. A medical doctor helping at oneof the large general shelters strongly
demanded that the city administration
provide an alternative shelter for the frail
elderly, PWD and those outpatients who did
not require intensive medical care from the
Ishinomaki Red Cross Hospital, unaffectedby the tsunami. The city temporally designated Inai Junior High School gym as a designated shelter and then later moved the
20–30 shelter occupants to Yugakukan
Sport Center gym (see Fig. 9) on 29 March.
Yugakukan gym eventually accepted about
130 people, including PFND and theirfamily members. Yugakukan shelter was
staffed initially by most of Ishinomaki
Municipal Hospital’s doctors, nurses andsocial workers, who lost their workplace dueto the tsunami. Volunteer doctors, nurses,
social workers, nursing care workers andpublic administrators from other prefec-© 2012 The AuthorInternational Journal of Japanese Sociology © 2012 The Japan Sociological Society

18

Shigeo Tatsuki

Figure 10.
Figure 9.

Specially designated shelter at
Yugakukan Sport Center Gym,
Ishinomaki City (http://road.nipponfoundation.or.jp/2011/04/
007-fcd1.html)

tures came to the Yugakukan shelter andassisted the operation from early April.
It should be noted that Ishinomaki City
was renowned for its citywide communitybased evacuation planning initiatives for
PFND. The city was recognized as one of theten model municipalities on PFND preparedness master planning as early as 2004.
By the end of 2010, 401 out of 421 administrative districts in the city completed individualized evacuation planning for each
PFND in the neighborhood. The city’s
master plan for PFND, however, did notinclude planning on specially designatedshelters. Inai Junior High School and later
Yugakukan shelter operations were all
improvised by city hospital doctors andnurses with support from the city. The city,
however, was not aware of the special
service provision clause in the Disaster
Relief Act that qualified additional financial
compensations on top of general service
provisions from the national government. It
was not until almost the end of April thatthe city formally designated Yugakukan as
the specially designated shelter for PFND.
To sum up, specially designated shelters
operated in Ishinomaki City but the operation lacked a formal logistic support foundation for a prolonged period of time.

Specially designated shelters at
Shunpo-en Special Nursing Home(top) and Ochiai Nursery School(bottom) (http://www.toshinkai.or.
jp/image/C8EFBAD2C3CFC7C9B8A
FCAF3B9F0.pdf)

Like Ishinomaki, more than 12 000 or
one-sixth of the Kesennuma City population rushed to general shelters after theearthquake and tsunami in March. Until
April, the frail elderly, PWD and small children were all mixed with other evacuees
who looked after those in need at generalshelters. In some shelters, cardboard partitions were used to separate PFND fromgeneral evacuees in order to provide some
privacy. On 7 April the city administration
officially opened the first specially designated shelter for PFND in an unused
nursery school site (see Fig. 10). In thefollowing 2 weeks, an additional four specially designated shelters were opened.
Shunpo-en special nursing home for theelderly (see Fig. 10) was one of the four new
specially designated shelters. It was housing
60 elderly residents as well as more than 100
general evacuees and some PFND from theneighborhood after the March disaster. The
home staff workers cared for the PFND. The
director, however, was afraid of the financial
burden of running a specially designatedshelter for an extended period of time. Laterin April, the city administrators learned that
official designation would allow additionalcare service provision under the Disaster
Relief Act. This was on top of the provisionof regular service hours as prescribed by the© 2012 The AuthorInternational Journal of Japanese Sociology © 2012 The Japan Sociological Society

People with Functional Needs in Times of Disasterlong-term-care insurance scheme. This alleviated tremendous financial burdens thatthe city and/or the designated shelters, likethe Shunpo-en home, might have had tobear otherwise. In other words, Kesennum
City also lacked pre-planning on speciallydesignated shelters and the administration
was not aware of the legal framework (i.e.,
the Disaster Relief Act special service provision clause) to operate these shelters.
In conclusion, municipalities other thanSendai City did not have compacts on specially designated shelter operations withsocial service providers. It took nearly 3
weeks for Ishinomaki and Kesennuma toformally designate such shelters after theearthquake. It was learned that they were
hesitant because they believed their facilities would not meet the standard for specially designated shelters, as outlined in
pre-disaster planning manuals. Additionally,
many local officials were unaware of thespecial service provision clause of theDisaster Relief Act covering shelters forpeople with functional needs. Nonetheless,these kinds of sheltering operations did
emerge. Had the local municipalities officially declared that they were operating
functional-needs shelters, they would havebeen eligible for additional resources at theonset from both the national and prefectural governments. More detailed guidelines
for specially designated shelters and temporary housing operations for PFND need to
be developed in order to address this issue.
Challenges in Utilizing Personal
Information on PFND
Among different types of PFND, people
with disabilities (PWD) were invisible inshelters and communities or in the eyes of
local government administrators. This wasdue to the fact that the majority of PWD did
not ask for help in general shelters because
they felt general shelters were not “barrierfree” and unresponsive to their functional
needs. Furthermore, many local government
administrators felt hesitant to release the19

PFND registry to non-governmental organizations (NGO) and self-help organizations
that were eager to check the whereabouts
and current situation of PWD. This was dueto the fear of breaking the Personal Information Protection Bylaw despite the factthat the bylaw provides exceptional conditions, whereby the onset of disaster is clearly
one of these exceptional conditions. In fact,
Minamisoma City officials did release that
information to a local NGO, and in Higashimatsushima, members of groups who
worked on behalf of disabled persons, suchas the Japan Disability Forum, were allowed
to accompany public health nurses on theirhome visits. Other cities might have usedsimilar approaches, but it appeared that inmost affected areas officials were unawareof the needs of the mentally ill and developmentally disabled persons and had not
attempted to initiate outreach efforts forthese populations. As of June 2011, theJapan Disability Forum announced thatthey were able to meet 1386 PWD in personfrom their outreach project in Miyagi Prefecture. This number (1386) accounted for
only 2.6% of 53 511 persons who were registered as PWD in the affected areas.
Researchers and advocates for persons withdisabilities were unable to determine what
was happening with large numbers of survivors with disabilities. Further elaborationand education on the use of personal information of PFND during a disaster period
are needed among public and local government administrators.

Conclusion
This paper first introduced recent developments on counter-disaster measures for
PFND in Japan. Based on three reconnaissance missions in March and April 2011,
three major challenges and their possible
solutions in preparedness, response andrelief measures for PFND were presented.

© 2012 The AuthorInternational Journal of Japanese Sociology © 2012 The Japan Sociological Society

20

Shigeo Tatsuki

First, challenges in identifying people at risk
were illustrated. It is suggested here that
there needs to be a shift from a maximum
probable event to a maximum possible event
framework. What Beck (1992/1986) calls thereflexive scientization process needs to beenvisioned. Second, challenges in operating
specially designated shelters for people withfunctional needs were identified. Further
elaboration of the guideline on sheltering
was suggested. Third, challenges in utilizing
personal information on PFND during disaster were presented. Further elaboration andeducation on this matter is recommended.

Acknowledgment
This study was supported by the JSPS
Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research(A)titled “The Development of Disaster
Reduction Framework for People with
Functional Needs” (principal investigator
Shigeo Tatsuki).

References

Surbkamp Verlag. (1992, Mark Ritter, trans.,
Risk Society: Towards a New Modernity.
London: Sage).
Fire and Disaster Management Agency. 2011. “A
Research Report on Municipalities’ Counterdisaster Measures for People with Functional
Needs in Times of Disaster.” (http://
www.fdma.go.jp/neuter/topics/houdou/2307/
230708_1houdou/02_houdoushiryou.pdf,
accessed on 26 September 2011).
Kailes, June Isaacson and Alexandra Enders. 2007.
“Moving beyond ‘Special Needs’: A FunctionBased Framework for Emergency Management
and Planning.” Journal of Disability Policy
Studies 17: 230–237.
Mythen, Gabe. 2004. Ulrich Beck: A Critical Introduction to the Risk Society. London: Pluto
Press.
Tatsuki, Shigeo and Nicolle Comafay. 2010. “Evacuation and Sheltering Assistance Planning forSpecial Needs Population: Kobe Disadvantaged
Population Mapping Project.” Presentation forInternational Sociological Association World
Congress of Sociology, Gothenburg, Sweden, 15
July 2010.
Wynne, Brian. 1996. “May the Sheep Safely Graze?
A Reflexive View of the Expert–Lay Knowledge Divide.” Pp. 44–83 in Risk, Environment
and Modernity: Towards a New Ecology, editedby Scott Lash, Bronislaw Szerszynski and Brian
Wynne. London: Sage.

Beck, Ulrich. 1986. Risikogesellschaft: Auf dem Weg
in enne andere Moderne. Frankfurt am Main:

Shigeo Tatsuki
DOSHISHA UNIVERSITY, Karasuma Higashi-iru, Imadegawa-dori, Kamigyo-ku,
Kyoto 602-8580, Japan. Email: statsuki@mail.doshisha.ac.jp
Received 21 December 2011; accepted 26 December 2011.

© 2012 The AuthorInternational Journal of Japanese Sociology © 2012 The Japan Sociological Society