Chapter 5

Gathering of Information on Emergency Relief by Countries during Disasters□■

5. Gathering of Information on Emergency Relief
by Countries during Disasters

5-1. Latest Disaster Information
ADRC’s efforts in gathering and providing the latest information on disasters are aimed at providing thematerials for decision making when affected countries and concerned organizations need to makeemergency responses and when related countries, organizations, NGOs, and individuals provide
emergency relief, by gathering and providing information on the status of ongoing disasters andrequired emergency relief. It is equally important to gather information on disasters, which haveoccurred in member countries and promptly make it available, as it is for member countries to gather
information on ongoing disasters. For this reason, we collect information on not only member countries
but other countries as well.

5-1-1. Gathering Method and Gathered Information
The latest disaster information is frequently updated, but is valid for only a very short period of time.
This requires the prompt updating of information when a disaster occurs. In order to satisfy thisrequirement, the ADRC database adopts a system, which updates information via the network, and ateam of staff and ten part-time employees monitor the latest disaster information around the clock.
Fig. 5-1-1-1 First Screen of Latest Disaster Information (User Side)99

■□ ADRC Annual Report 2000

Fig. 5-1-1-1 shows the screen, which appears immediately after the user name and password are enteredand “Edit Latest Disaster Information” is selected. This screen lists disasters that have already beenentered. To add to or correct the information of these disasters, the corresponding disaster is chosenfrom the list. To add a new disaster, “new” is selected. Fig. 5-1-1-2 shows the screen for entering the
new disaster after clicking “new”. On this screen, the country (selected from menu, the database
contains ISO codes), type (multiple selections are allowed), name (Japanese and English), time
(Japanese and English), and outline of the disaster (Japanese and English) are entered. The date andtime the data was created and updated are automatically recorded. The person creating the data and theperson updating the data are also automatically added according to the login information. These
operations can be performed from anywhere via the Internet. In the case of the Taiwan earthquake,
information was available 4 hours after occurrence despite it being midnight.
In FY2000, information on 48 disasters was gathered. It included 16 floods (including landslides causedby floods), 13 earthquakes, six cyclones, typhoons, four droughts, four volcanic eruptions, two floods
caused by torrential downpours and heavy rain, and one incident of landslide, tsunami, and sandstorm,
respectively. By region, 31 occurred in Asia, four in North America, one in Africa, six in South America,
one in Europe, one in Oceania, and one in the Middle East. 30 disasters had occurred in the ADRC
member countries.
Fig. 5-1-1-2 Screen for Entering New Disaster100

Chapter 5

Gathering of Information on Emergency Relief by Countries during Disasters□■

5-1-2. Obtaining Data on the Latest Disasters in 2000
The task for FY2000, cooperating and sharing information with the Asia Unit of the United Nations
Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) was accomplished. This has enabled
accurate and up-to-date information gathered by OCHA to be obtained via disaster management
regional advisors deployed in the Asia Unit, and as a result, led to a sharp improvement in ensuring theacquisition of first reports.
From this fiscal year, the ADRC worked hard to collect reliable and unique data. One example of recent
disaster information is the damage report by the Indian Government. After the disaster took place, theIndian government sent a report two or three times a day for approximately two weeks, and then once a
day thereafter. These reports were translated by the ADRC and released. Specifically, from January 28(immediately after the earthquake) to February 12, we received reports two to three times a day at 8 am,
9 am, 12 noon, 2 pm, 8 pm, or 10 pm. It is useful to have updates arrive this frequently, particularly
from developing countries, which tends to take time in providing disaster information. There are few
research organizations, which are able to send and receive information in real time as this case, making
it unique among the numerous disaster cases experienced. Another unique feature of recent disaster
information is the use of geographical information links as shown below.
University of Texas Central Library Bhuj area map
http://www.lib.utexas.edu/Libs/PCL/Map_collection/middle_east_and_asia/Bhuj_1955.jpg
Past earthquake map of Gujarat by ASC
http://www.geocities.com/stasertin/gujarat.htm
Retrievable maps in India
http://www.mapsofindia.com/maps/india/h3i00.htm
Latest seismic maps from around the world using the Internet GIS by IRIS Consortium Seismic
Monitor
http://www.iris.washington.edu/seismic/60_2040_1_8.htm
Earthquake epicenter by UK Edinburgh University seismic map search
http://pubweb.parc.xerox.com/map/color/all/ht=20/wd=40/mark=23.40,70.32, 2,
12/lat=23.40/lon=70.32
US National Earthquake Information Center, World Data Center for Seismology
http://neic.usgs.gov/neis/bulletin/010126031641.HTMLThe user is able to obtain various geographical information on the concerned region from multiple
sources, which is useful from the viewpoint of GIS as well.
In addition to these improvements in 2000, the ADRC will continue further reviews to obtain moreaccurate and rich information resources and provide them from the viewpoint of those who access them.

101

■□ ADRC Annual Report 2000

5-2. Collection and Analysis of Disaster Response Information
5-2-1. Analysis of Relief Web Financial Tracking
The United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) is appealing toorganizations that provided aid to countries hit by a disaster or to the relevant organizations in therespective country to register details of their contributions with it, then discloses the summarized resultson the OCHA Relief Web Financial Tracking database.
Although this enables the tracking of international support and contributions to the country in crisis, it
should be noted that this system sums up only contributions in cash in U.S. dollars, and does not track
humanitarian or material support. With the start of the Financial Tracking database at the Relief Web
since last year, the ADRC analyzed the countries and organizations, which contributed to disasters
hitting the ADRC member countries using the Financial Tracking Tables.
In totaling the donations made, governments, international organizations in the respective countries,
NGOs, and various organizations were included under Donor Countries, and international organizationsof unknown nationality were placed in “OTHER” category.
These figures show that considerable contributions were made by Europe and the U.S., in addition to
Asian regions for disasters in Asia. The trends observed are:*In 2000, the main countries receiving aid (80% out of the total) were Cambodia (19%), Mongolia(18%), Armenia (15%), Tajikistan (14%), and India (14%), demonstrating the magnitude of the disasters
in these countries.
Of the contributions made, UN organizations and NGO is made up 37%. By region, the European
countries provided considerable aid (26%), followed by the U.S. (17%), and Japan (12%).
These tables can be read from various other perspectives.

5-2-2. Emergency Aids for India Gujarat Earthquake
The Gujarat Earthquake in West India marked the second largest earthquake in India, taking away morethan 20,000 lives on January 26, 2001. The largest earthquake recorded was the Calcutta Earthquake in
1,737, which caused approximately 30,000 deaths. The Gujarat earthquake incurred damage over abroad area in the province. Kachchh-Bhuj, Ahmedabad, Rajikot, Jamnagar, and Surendranagar wereparticularly devastated by the quake.
According to the Indian Government Disaster Report No. 73 (dated March 16, 2001) and OCHA reports,
etc., Gujarat earthquake damages were as follows:
Table 5-2-2-1 Gujarat Earthquake Damages (March 16, 2001)
DeathsInjuredMissing
Evacuees
Lost livestock
Completely damaged homes
Partially damaged homes
Estimated damage

20,005
166,000
247 (Kachchh)
15.9 million
20717
367000921000
4.6 billion US dollars (Approx. 560 billion yen)

Table 5-2-2-2 Deaths from Gujarat Earthquake (February 26, 2001)
RegionKachchh(Bhuj)
Ahmedabad
RajkotJamnagar
Surendranagar
Others
Total

Total Deaths
18,416
751
433
119
113
173
20,005102

Percentage (%)
92
4
2
1
1
1
100

Chapter 5

Gathering of Information on Emergency Relief by Countries during Disasters□■*For Percentage, decimals are rounded to the nearest whole number.
In this unparalleled earthquake disaster, the Indian government, Gujarat province government, and local
NGOs played a very important role in disaster relief.
They made every effort to aid victims, and restore and recover damaged areas. This included searchingfor and rescuing victims, providing relief goods such as water, food, and medical supplies, providing
medical care, and removing debris; also, providing emergency shelter, economical support to victims,
support to school education, and planning the resettlement of victims. The following outlines the
emergency measures of India.
Measures by the Government of India• Deployed Defense Services to provide assistance to the stricken area, and started relief
activities with the Air Force Base at Bhuj as the primary base and Ahmedabad airport as thesecondary base.
• The Ministry of Agriculture served as the base for coordinating relief operations on thenational level, and set up a National Disaster Management Control Room in the Department ofAgriculture and Co-operation in Delhi.
• Deployed specialists in fire defense, relief, power, communication, railway, and medical
personnel.
• Transported and provided special equipment for rescue, heavy machinery, water tank, medical
supplies, food, blankets, cloths, tents for shelter, and other supplies
Measures of the Government of the Gujarat Province• As many of the government staff were affected, response time was delayed.
• Within 48 hours, a State Control Room for rescue activities was established in Gandhinagar tocoordinate response activities.
• An External Aid Co-ordination Cell was set up in Ahmedabad.
• A Chief Relief Coordinator was stationed in Bhuj to coordinate relief activities.
• Following search and rescue operations, cleared debris on roads and removed dangerous
buildings.
• Restored electricity and water supply.
• Deployed police, state army, and other administrative officers.
Local Response• Rescue, transportation of families and neighbors, emergency aid, and other mutual support.
• Due to damage to both residents and local officers themselves, failure of power, water, andother lifelines, relief response in Bhuj was very difficult.
• Relief response became active with the arrival of local municipals, state government, and UN
Disaster Management team members.
However, these responses were not sufficient for an earthquake of such magnitude and emergency aid
from the international community played an important role.
The relief activities of the international community are outlined below.
Search and Rescue Phase• Search and rescue: Teams from Switzerland, United Kingdom, Russia, Turkey, Armenia were
deployed• Disaster assessment: UNDAC (United Nations Disaster Assessment and Coordination) team• On-Site Operations Coordination Centre (OSOCC)
Rescue Phase• Emergency food aid: WFP, others.
• Medical care and supplies: WHO, others.
• Rescue supplies: UNICEF, others.

103

■□ ADRC Annual Report 2000•••

Medical support: International Red Cross, others.
Donations: World Bank, Asia Development Bank, U.S., EU, Japan, others.
Aid and support for the above: International NGOs, others.

Affected areas are gradually being restored with both domestic and overseas support, but continued
domestic and international aid is necessary to support the lives of many of the victims, resettlement
planning, and recovery of the local economy and industries.
The ADRC plans to examine the needs of the Indian Government, state government of Gujarat, andresidents of the affected areas. It must also find potential means for providing the cooperation andsupport required for mid- to long-term recovery and restoration, rather than just limiting its activities toshort-term rescue. This will be done with the cooperation of member countries, and relevant countries
and organizations.
Using the Gujarat Earthquake as an example and through the sharing of information with related
countries and organizations, the ADRC also plans to explore policies which can contribute to preventing
and reducing the damage caused by similar disasters in the future.
The measures implemented for the Gujarat earthquake progress on a daily basis, and the latest
information on the Gujarat earthquake rescue and relief activities are available at the following
websites:
Government of India website
http://www.ndmindia.nic.in/State Government of Gujarat website
http://www.gujaratindia.com/
Website on activities of UN organizations in India
http://www.un.org.in/
UN ReliefWeb website
http://www.reliefweb.int/

5-2-3. Emergency Aids Received from Other Countries During the Great Hanshin-Awaji
Earthquake
5-2-3-1. Global Assessment of Earthquake Countermeasures
When a major disaster occurs, relief and aid to victims are rushed to the affected country byinternational organizations such as the UN, countries from around the world, NGO’s, and variousorganizations and individual volunteers.
These activities are basically implemented from a humanitarian standpoint, in other words throughgoodwill, and thus have not been actively evaluated or analyzed until now. In particular, negative
assessment of support tends to be difficult to publicize.
The Great Hanshin-Awaji Earthquake in 1995 was an unparalleled major disaster which hit a
metropolitan area with a large aging population. It is very important that the lessons learnt from thisearthquake be utilized as a common asset around the world, and made use of in disaster management
worldwide. From this viewpoint, Hyogo Prefecture established the “Committee for Global Assessmentof Earthquake Countermeasures” in April 1995 to mark the fifth anniversary of the earthquake. It thenlay down 20 verification themes which are universal and whose results can serve as future models.
Verification work was carried out by Japanese and foreign verification committee members in a periodof one year, the final verification recommendations were summarized in Spring 2000, and the results
were published in August.
One of the 20 themes included “problems and ideals in receiving relief troops from overseas”. For thistheme, the analysis and evaluation of emergency aid from abroad were summarized by Professor
Yoshiaki Kawada of Kyoto University, Department of Disaster Management Research, who is amember of the Japanese verification committee; Mr. Richard Isner, a member of the overseas
verification committee and California State Emergency Operations Bureau Coastal Area Administrator,

104

Chapter 5

Gathering of Information on Emergency Relief by Countries during Disasters□■

and Professor Haruo Hayashi of Kyoto University, Department of Disaster Management Research who
is in charge of the verification council theme.
Details are provided in the “Disaster Management International Comprehensive Verification Council
Report” issued in August 2000.
The following outlines the emergency aid provided by various countries during the Great
Hanshin-Awaji Earthquake, taken mainly from Professor Kawada’s report.

5-2-3-2. Emergency Aids from Overseas during the Great Hanshin-Awaji Earthquake
Activities of foreign emergency and rescue teams
In response to an inquiry by the UN Office for Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs, the Japanese
government (then Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport Disaster Management Bureau) repliedthat it did not require search and rescue teams to be sent to affected sites because teams had alreadybeen dispatched from various areas within the nation, and the government had already sent an
investigation team. The Japan Red Cross also did not ask for rescue teams from abroad.
Eventually, of the 15 countries which offered to send search and rescue teams, only teams from the three
countries shown in Table 5-3-3-1, Switzerland, France, and England, came. As these rescue teams
arrived at the sites towards the end of rescue and relief activities, they were not able to rescue survivors.
The Swiss team, however, located 9 bodies, the France team, 2 bodies, and the English team, 2 bodies(one according to police records).
Table 5-2-3-1 Activities of Overseas Rescue Teams
Country
Swiss team
26 members, 12 search dogs

DurationJanuary 19 to 22

Results
Located 9 bodies

Support
Kobe City Fire Bureau and fire
department rescue teams of eight cities

France team63 members, 4 dogs

January 21 to 24

Located 2 bodies

Equipment about 10 tons
English team NGO(IRC: International Rescue Corps)

January 23 to 26

Located 2 bodies(One according topolice record)

Hyogo Prefecture police headquarters, 27
members of Osaka Mobile Police Team 2;
10 vehicles of local police stations andfire stations
NGOs at affected sites(Hyogo Prefecture, Kobe City)

Activities of Medical Team from Abroad
After January 18, many countries including Bangladesh, China, Cuba, Greece, Poland, Thailand,
England, Yemen, and Yugoslavia offered to send medical teams if necessary. The Japanese government
expressed its gratitude to these countries for their offers, but replied that knowledge of the Japanese
language was necessary to examine victims and that there was enough medical personnel from within
Japan.
As a result, Japan received a medical team from Thailand that was able to speak Japanese well and had
a medical license from Japan, and a medical team of nine from Korea who spoke Japanese. These teams
were appreciated by the victims. On the other hand, France’s Medusan de Monde (MDM) visited Japanas a counterpart of the Association of Medical Doctors for Asia (AMDA), but required Japanese andFrench interpretation. The U.S. also sent a medical team of 22 medical volunteers, but again there were
the problems of language and different treatment methods.
Supplies from Abroad
Japan did not seek aids from the international community, but many governments offered to provide
supplies. 76 countries and regions, the UN, WHO (World Health Organization), and EU offered to send
daily necessities such as blankets, goods and supplies such as stationary and cellular phones, andcontributions. The Japanese government expressed its deep gratitude for their sincere offers, anddecided to accept these supplies and contributions as much as they could for the victims. As a result,Japan accepted offers from 44 countries and regions, beginning with the US which has bases andwarehouses to stock emergency supplies in Japan, and made the necessary arrangements for delivery.

105

■□ ADRC Annual Report 2000

5-2-3-3. Process to Receiving Emergency Aids from Overseas
As mentioned earlier, the Japanese government was not planning to receive search and relief teams, andmedical teams from overseas immediately after the earthquake. The status report by the UN Office for
Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs also indicates that there were no requests for aid from theJapanese government upon confirmation from the Japanese government and Japan Red Cross.
At the beginning, amidst international coverage of the devastating situation of the affected sites, theJapanese government continued to politely refuse offers from abroad while expressing its gratitude.
However with mounting offers from governments of different countries to dispatch rescue teams, andbecause the Japanese government was being criticized as “closed, isolationistic, and arrogant to refuse
goodwill” for declining help from the other nations in some news coverage, the Japanese government
decided to accept the mentioned teams from abroad, putting faith in the search techniques of thesecountries because they differed from Japan’s (such as use of search dogs, etc.).
5-2-3-4. Problems in Receiving Overseas Aids at Affected Sites
For local rescue teams, working with the rescue teams from abroad that were accompanied by searchdogs was a first-time experience, and something they had not expected.
The arrangements to receive rescue teams from abroad, such as arranging for interpreters, transportation,
and accommodation, as well as determining the locations to be searched and meetings to discuss thesedecisions proved to be a burden at the site.
In particular, due to the geographical distance between Europe and Japan (it takes at least 36 hours forthem to reach the affected sites including the flight time), and the time taken to accept them, the Swissteam, who were the first to come, reached the affected site at 1:20 pm on the 19th (55 hours after
occurrence) while the French team arrived on the afternoon of the 21st. By this time, the search ofcollapsed reinforced concrete buildings, which these teams specialize in had already been completed.
For this reason, they participated in the search of wooden constructions and landslides of the Ninagawa
River, and though they were unable to rescue survivors, they helped locate the bodies of victims.
Looking at the tragic images of victims left to die under rubble without help reaching them, and ofmany seriously injured victims on roadsides dying without receiving treatment repeatedly broadcast byinternational media, the rescue teams entered the affected sites with a strong will to provide aid asquickly as possible. On the other hand, as rescue troops consisting of police, fire departments, and theself-defense force from all over the country had arrived at the affected sites and completed search andrescue activities of all main collapsed reinforced concrete buildings by the 18th, the rescue teams which
arrived from abroad after the 18th found they were not able to help in the manner they had expected to.
There were other obvious problems such as: animal quarantine officers had to accompany search dogs
from countries infected with rabies, the search dogs were not suited to search wooden houses andlandslide sites, and arrangements for interpreters, etc. increased the burden at the sites. On the other
hand, some of the problems that were pointed out were the difference in the systems, culture, and ideas
between the dispatching side and Japanese side; for example contrary to the devastating images ofvictims broadcast internationally, the search techniques of Japanese teams was much more advanced
and experienced than they had expected, and search activities had been conducted swiftly, etc.
5-2-3-5. Summary
At the UN Office for Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs, Switzerland, England, the U.S, andGermany form an international search and rescue group, INSARAG, to serve as a protocol wheninternational aid is requested. According to this protocol, the following are the key requirements for
dispatching rescue teams:
1. Requests by the affected country
2. Sufficient logistics
3. Sufficient and no local burden is imposed
In the Great Hanshin-Awaji Earthquake, the purpose of dispatching rescue teams was also to aid theaffected areas. However, when disasters are broadcast internationally, the countries dispatching rescue
teams felt obliged to help in some way, and help diplomatically. It is therefore difficult for the affected
country to completely refuse rescue teams from overseas. To prevent such aid from going to waste, it isimportant to bring only what is useful to the affected areas. It may also be useful for the affected area to106

Chapter 5

Gathering of Information on Emergency Relief by Countries during Disasters□■

indicate at an early stage what is needed. Another problem is that sometimes the actual situation andprogress of rescue activities at the affected area is not understood by other countries, especially by the
rescue related parties of advanced countries. Since this experience also showed that there was a lack ofunderstanding of Japan as a country which can independently dispatch rescue teams without outside
assistance, the filling of such information gaps poses as a future task.
Regarding medical aid, on January 17, the Japan Red Cross appealed to the International Red Cross and
Red Crescent in Geneva that it did not want to request international aid, and informed them that it
would ask for financial aid.
When considering future tasks, some of the advantages of rescue teams which were observed are:
1. Rescue serves as a liaison which links the affected area and area providing aid
2. Aid from abroad helps encourage the affected site
Those prove to be advantageous only when sufficient relief is being provided to victims and when theaffected site has sufficient capacity to receive the goodwill offered. In the future, to enable many
individuals to participate in relief activities, management must be adequate and relief must work
positively.

107