Cabinet Office
Japan

White Paper

Disaster Management in Japan
2015

Images: Prize-winning Works of the 30th Disaster Management Poster Contest“The White Paper on Disaster Management is one of Japan’s most noteworthy initiatives
in the field of disaster risk reduction and management. Few countries publish suchcomprehensive reports on a regular basis. Other countries can learn from Japan’s
example and adapt this model to their own needs.”- Ms. Margareta Wahlstrom, the Special Representative of the United Nations
Secretary-General for Disaster Risk Reduction/ Head of the United Nations Officefor Disaster Risk Reduction (UNISDR)White Paper

Disaster Management in Japan2015

Cabinet Office, Japan

Foreword
The White Paper on Disaster Management in Japan was first published in
1963 pursuant to the Disaster Countermeasures Basic Act. This, the 53rd
edition, was reported to the National Diet after cabinet approval on June 19,
2015.
This year's white paper highlights the Third UN World Conference on
Disaster Risk Reduction (WCDRR), which was held in Sendai in March of thisyear. It was entitled the United Nations World Conference on Disaster Risk
Reduction and Japan’s International Cooperation on Disaster Risk Reduction.
Ms. Margareta Wahlström, United Nations Special Representative of theSecretary-General for Disaster Risk Reduction, provided a message for this white paper.
This white paper looks at the revisions made to disaster countermeasures based on the heavy snowsin February of last year, the landslide in Hiroshima in August, and the eruption of Mt. Ontake in
September. It also provides information on the latest disaster risk reduction initiatives implemented
by the national government, local governments, and community residents, and introduces a casestudy on an earthquake centered in northern Nagano Prefecture in which no casualties occurred
thanks to mutual community support.
Even if we cannot eliminate the occurrence of natural hazards, we are confident that it is possible tomitigate disaster impacts using both the instinct to survive and the wisdom with which human beings
are naturally equipped. In English, the Japanese terms bosai or gensai are translated as “disaster risk
reduction,” abbreviated DRR. At the last World Conference, we shared with the international
community an important precept in Japan: “DRR is our DNA.”
Based on the view that disaster countermeasures are never “costs,” but rather investments in the
future, the Government of Japan is wholeheartedly committed to achieving safe and secure living. We
therefore intend to proactively request that all citizens of Japan maintain a reasonable awareness ofnatural threats, be well prepared in advance for the hazards they face, refuse to react to false alarms,
and take actions to protect themselves from disasters.
We hope that all readers of this White Paper gain an understanding of Japan’s disaster management
efforts and cooperate even further in their implementation.

Eriko Yamatani
Minister of State for Disaster Management, Japan
July 2015

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

Message from the Special Representative of the United Nations
Secretary-General for Disaster Risk Reduction
for the White Paper on Disaster Management "Bosai Hakusho 2015"
Thanks to close cooperation between Japan and the United Nations, the Third
United Nations World Conference on Disaster Risk Reduction (March 14-18) was
successfully organized and concluded with positive outcomes. In particular, theSendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015-2030 adopted by Member
States at the Conference provides a strong foundation for the continued workon reducing disaster risk and impacts for the coming 15 years. It is also an
essential part of the Post-2015 Development Agenda and a clear boost for
ongoing work on agreements later this year on climate and a new set ofsustainable development goals.
Through hosting the World Conference now on three occasions, (Yokohama, 1994, Hyogo, 2005, andSendai, 2015), Japan has demonstrated its strong commitment to disaster risk reduction and sharedwith the international community a wide range of lessons and good practices building on its own
disaster experiences.
One of Japan’s most noteworthy initiatives in the field of disaster risk reduction and management is
the publication of this Bosai Hakusho, the White Paper on Disaster Management. This annual reportprovides comprehensive information including disaster losses and relevant data and statistics; updates
on the progress of recovery and reconstructions from specific disasters; policies and measures fordisaster management by disaster type; and insights into good practices on disaster risk reduction/
prevention at local/community level, and much more.
This White Paper is a well-established publication and few countries publish such comprehensive
reports on a regular basis, totally dedicated to disaster risk management. This report helps us better
understand how Japan has developed its disaster risk management policies and measures over a
period of time. Other countries can learn from Japan’s example and adapt this model of annual
reporting to their own needs in the context of monitoring progress on implementation of the Sendai
Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction, particularly under the four priority areas of action:
1:
2:
3:
4:

Understanding disaster risk;
Strengthening disaster risk governance to manage disaster risk;
Investing in disaster risk reduction and resilience;
Enhancing disaster preparedness for effective response, and to “Build Back Better” inrecovery, rehabilitation and reconstruction.

The World Conference confirmed the importance of enhanced international cooperation and global
partnership on disaster risk reduction. As the Head of UNISDR, I would like to extend ourappreciation to Japan for its ongoing support and commitment to the area of disaster risk reduction
and reiterate my strong wish that Japan will continue to work with various stakeholders in theinternational community and demonstrate leadership in the global efforts towards the achievement of
the goals of the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction.

Margareta Wahlström
The Special Representative of the United Nations Secretary-Generalfor Disaster Risk Reduction
Head of the United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction (UNISDR)

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Introduction
Part IThe United Nations World Conference on Disaster Risk Reduction (DRR)
and Japan’s International Cooperation on DRR: Toward Mainstreaming
DRR in International Society

Chapter I

Background to the United Nations World Conference on Disaster Risk
Reduction
Section 1 International Decade for Natural Disaster Reduction and the First UN World
Conference on Natural Disaster Reduction

11
1

1-1 Establishment of the International Decade for Natural Disaster Reduction (IDNDR)

1

1-2 The First UN World Conference on Natural Disaster Reduction and the Promotion of the
Yokohama Strategy

2Section 2 Establishment of the UNISDR and the Second UN World Conference on Disaster
Reduction
Section 3 The Progress and Challenges of Initiatives Based on the HFA

4

3-1 Progress of Initiatives Based on the HFA

66

3-2 Disaster Risk Reduction Challenges Since 2005

7

3-3 Disaster Risk Reduction Challenges in Developing Countries: The Vicious Cycle ofDisasters and Poverty

9

Chapter II
The Third UN World Conference on Disaster Risk Reduction (WCDRR)
Section 1 Preparations for the Third WCDRR
1-1 UN-Led Preparations

10
10
10

1-2 Preparations in Japan

11

Section 2 Overview of the Third WCDRR
2-1 Overview of the Conference and Implementation Structure

13
13

2-2 Official Programme

16

2-3 Outcome Documents

25

2-4 Related Events

29

2-5 Follow-up Activities

37

Chapter III
Japan’s International Cooperation on Disaster Risk Reduction (DRR)
Section 1 Overview
Section 2 DRR Cooperation through the UN and the Other International Organizations
2-1 Support for Emergency Response: Coordination Mechanisms through OCHA

40
40
43
43

2-2 Mechanisms for Disaster Risk Reduction: Activities of the UNISDR

43

2-3 International Recovery Platform (IRP)

44

Section 3 DRR Cooperation in the Asia-Pacific Region
3-1 Activities of the Asian Disaster Reduction Center (ADRC)

47
47

3-2 Disaster Risk Reduction Cooperation in APEC47

3-3 Other International DRR Initiatives in Asia and the Pacific
4-1 Japan’s Overseas Emergency Disaster Support

48
51
51

4-2 Japan’s International Cooperation in the Fields of Disaster Prevention and Recovery

51

4-3 Intergovernmental DRR Cooperation Initiatives

53

Section 4 Bilateral Disaster Risk Reduction Cooperation

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Part II

Status of Disaster Management Measures in Japan

57

Chapter I

Status of Disaster Management Policies

57

Section 1 Disaster Management Systems and Disaster Preparedness57

1-1 Government's Approach to Crisis Management Organization57

1-2 Efforts in Human Resource Development and Disaster Management Drills

60

1-3 Implementation of Disaster Risk Reduction (DRR) Education in Communities

65

1-4 Construction of Business Continuity Systems Across Sectors

67

1-5 Communicating Lessons Learned from Disasters

68

Section 2 Disaster Response and Preparedness
2-1 Evacuation Directive Decision Making and Communication68

2-2 Designated Emergency Evacuation Sites and Evacuation Shelters

70

2-3 Measures for Handling Abandoned or Stranded Vehicles

71

2-4 Measures to Assist Stranded Persons

73

2-5 Inspections for Controlling the Outbreak of Electrical Fires During Large-Scale
Earthquakes

76

Section 3 Initiatives to Support Disaster Victims
3-1 Development and Promotion of a Victim’s Registry

Section 4 Promotion of DRR Activities in Coordination with Various Stakeholders

77
77
78

4-1 Initiatives to Develop an Environment for DRR Volunteers

78

4-2 Strengthening the DRR Capacity of Communities

79

Section 5 Recovery and Reconstruction Measures
5-1 Investigating Measures to Secure Housing for Victims

Section 6 Efforts to Promote National Resilience

Chapter II

68

Status of Disaster Management Measures for Each Type of Potential Disaster

Section 1 Earthquake and Tsunami Disaster Management

81
81
84

85
85

1-1 Nankai Trough Earthquake Measures85

1-2 Tokyo Inland Earthquake Measures

93

Section 2 Volcano Disaster Management

99

Section 3 Sediment Disaster Management

102

Chapter III

Measures for Nuclear Disasters

106

Section 1 Review of the Nuclear Regulation Authority (NRA) and the Cabinet Office Nuclear
Disaster Management System

106

Section 2 Bolstering Nuclear Disaster Management and Radiation Monitoring Under the NRA

107

Section 3 Implementation of a Comprehensive Nuclear Disaster Drill in FY2014

109

Appendix

111

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

INTRODUCTION
The Third UN World Conference on Disaster Risk Reduction (WCDRR) was held in Sendai, Miyagi Prefecturefrom March 14 to 18, 2015, four years after the Great East Japan Earthquake. Over 100 ministers from 187
UN member states, including 25 heads of state and government, the Secretary-General of the UN, and theAdministrator of the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) participated, making it one of thelargest UN conferences ever held in Japan. At the Conference, the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk
Reduction (SFDRR) 2015-2030 was formulated as a new initiative and guideline for disaster risk reduction(DRR). With this, the initiatives of the international community entered a new stage aimed at the further
promotion of the mainstreaming of disaster risk reduction. In addition, related events were conducted suchas symposiums and seminars on disaster risk reduction and recovery, exhibitions, a DRR Industry Exhibition(“Bosai” Industry Fair), study tours of disaster-affected areas, and post-conference excursions to various
locations in the Tohoku region.
Through these initiatives, the Conference served to once again express Japan’s gratitude to countries allover the world for the assistance received after the Great East Japan Earthquake, and allowed Japan toshare the lessons learned and technologies Japan has developed through this and earthquake and otherdisasters. The Conference also presented the current state of recovery and efforts related to the Great East
Japan Earthquake and provided an important opportunity to contribute to the promotion of disasterstricken areas.
Part I of the White Paper on Disaster Management in Japan 2015 highlights the "United Nations World
Conference on Disaster Risk Reduction and Japan’s International Cooperation on Disaster Risk Reduction."
It looks at the background leading up to the implementation of the third WCDRR, the nature of the
discussions that were held there, and how the SFDRR will be promoted to achieve even greater
mainstreaming of disaster risk reduction.
Part II, on the "Status of Disaster Management Measures in Japan,” looks at the state of measures andpolicy initiatives with a particular focus on those implemented in FY 2014, including:A description of revisions to the Disaster Countermeasures Basic Act adopted in November 2014
based on the great number of abandoned cars and transportation blockages caused by delays in snow
removal operations during the heavy snows of February 2014.
A description of the revised content of and initiatives related to the Act on the Promotion of Sediment
Disaster Countermeasures in Sediment Disaster Prone Areas, which was revised in November 2014
based on issues such as the numerous areas which were not designated as the sediment disasterhazard areas and which had not been subject to basic surveys, and the insufficient communication of
the risks of sediment disasters to residents.
A description of the Plan concerning Specific Emergency Countermeasures and Activities for a Nankai
Trough Earthquake, which was formulated and established in March 2015 at the Officers’ Meeting of
the Central Disaster Management Council pursuant to Chapter 4 of the Basic Plan for the Promotion of
Nankai Trough Earthquake Disaster Risk Reduction Countermeasures.
A description of the revised content of the Basic Plan for the Promotion of Tokyo Inland Earthquake
Emergency Countermeasures, which was revised and approved by the Cabinet in March 2015
pursuant to the Act on Special Measures against Tokyo Inland Earthquake.
A description of the content of the “Report on Future Volcano DRR Promotion Based on Lessons fromthe Eruption of Mt. Ontake,” which was compiled in March 2015 after the establishment andinvestigations of the Working Group for the Promotion of Volcano Disaster Prevention under theCentral Disaster Management Council’s Disaster Management Implementation Committee based on
the large number of casualties caused by the eruption of Mt. Ontake in September 2014.
●

●

●

●

●

About the White Paper on Disaster Management in Japan
The White Paper on Disaster Management in Japan is a report designated by law to be drawn up andreported annually to the ordinary session of the Diet pursuant to the Disaster Countermeasures Basic Act.
The White Paper was first published in 1963. This is the 53rd edition.
In addition to providing an overview of measures taken concerning disasters in the year before last
(FY2013) and plans concerning disaster risk reduction for the current year (FY2015), each report features atheme based on the current state of DRR policies at the time it was written.

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

Part I:The United Nations World Conference on Disaster Risk
Reduction (DRR) and Japan’s International Cooperation
on DRR: Toward Mainstreaming DRR in International
SocietyPart I

I

Background to the United Nations World Conference on Disaster Risk
Reduction

Chapter I

Chapter

The United Nations World Conference on Disaster Risk Reduction(DRR) and Japan’s International Cooperation on DRR: Mainstreaming
DRR in International Society

On March 14–18, 2015, four years after the Great East Japan Earthquake, the Third United Nations World
Conference on Disaster Risk Reduction (WCDRR) was held in Sendai, Miyagi Prefecture. The WCDRR is aconference to formulate global DRR strategy organized by the United Nations, and this was the third suchconference to be held in Japan following the First WCDRR held in Yokohama in 1994, and the Second
WCDRR held in Kobe, Hyogo Prefecture in 2005. At the Third UN WCDRR, the Sendai Framework for
Disaster Risk Reduction 2015–2030 was formulated as the successor to the Hyogo Framework for Action(HFA), the international DRR policy formulated at the Second World Conference. This chapter outlines thedevelopments leading up to the initial organization of the UN WCDRR, highlighting the discussions thathave taken place as well as the initiatives that have been implemented over the course of the first threeconferences.

Section 1: International Decade for Natural Disaster Reduction and the First UN World
Conference on Natural Disaster Reduction
1-1 Establishment of the International Decade for Natural Disaster Reduction (IDNDR)
In 1971, the year after a cyclone in Bangladesh took the lives of approximately 300,000 people, international
mechanisms were established in the field of emergency assistance to help respond to the natural disasters that occur
all around the world. These included the United Nations Disaster Relief Organization (UNDRO), which was given the
mission of coordinating efforts to improve the efficacy of disaster relief activities.
Subsequently, over the past 20 years, natural disasters have taken the lives of some 3 million people worldwide andcaused more than $23 billion in direct damage. When drought conditions were threatening the lives of more than 20
million people in Africa, the United Nations passed a resolution in 1987 at the 42nd UN General Assembly declaring the
1990s the International Decade for Natural Disaster Reduction (IDNDR).
The objective of the IDNDR was to mobilize the knowledge of the international community in efforts to mitigate thedamage caused by disasters before those disasters occur. In other words, the IDNDR sought to shift the focus of theinternational community from efforts mainly devoted to emergency response and recovery after a disaster, to efforts
conducted before disasters, designed to mitigate the damage from natural disasters in developing countries.
Japan, which experienced massive disasters after World War II and established its own DRR framework to mitigate
damage from natural disasters, played a leading role in establishing the IDNDR. For example, Japan jointly presented
the resolution to the UN General Assembly together with Morocco, which represented the African region where
drought and desertification were inflicting severe damage in the 1980s.
The direction of IDNDR activities was defined in a 1989 resolution of the UN General Assembly. This led to thedesignation of the International Day for Disaster Reduction (the second Wednesday in October, subsequently made
October 13 each year). Disaster risk reduction and prevention measures were implemented in countries around theworld with international cooperation, and the IDNDR secretariat was established in Geneva. In Japan, the Headquarters
for the IDNDR was set up in 1989, headed by the prime minister, to put in place a framework for the promotion ofthese activities.

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

Page 1

Fig. I-1-1

Trends in the Number of Fatalities and Missing Persons Attributed to Natural Disasters Worldwide Since 1970

450
'000

Earthquake(2008 Sichuan
Earthquake)
China (90,000)
andCycloneMyanmar(140,000)

400

Part I

Drought
East Africa(300,000)

CycloneBangladesh(300,000)

350
Earthquake(Tangshan Earthquake)
China (220,000)

Earthquake
Haiti(220,000)

Earthquake/
TsunamiIndian Ocean
Tsunami(230,000)

300
Drought
East Africa(250,000)

250
CycloneBangladesh(140,000)

200

Drought
East Africa(300,000)

150
Earthquake
Pakistan(73,000)

100

50

1970
1971
1972
1973
1974
1975
1976
1977
1978
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013

0

Source: Analysis by the Asian Disaster Reduction Center based on the EM-DAT (D. Guha-Sapir, R. Below, Ph. Hoyois - EM-DAT: International
Disaster Database – www.emdat.be – Université Catholique de Louvain – Brussels – Belgium). The number of fatalities and missing
persons.
Note: ■ Indicates the number of fatalities caused by the largest disaster in the year.

1-2 The First UN World Conference on Natural Disaster Reduction and the Promotion of the Yokohama
Strategy
In 1994, the First UN World Conference on Natural Disaster Reduction was held in Yokohama City, Japan. At that event,programs that had been conducted by the international community at this midway point in the IDNDR were evaluated,
and the Yokohama Strategy and Plan of Action for a Safer World: Guidelines for Natural Disaster Prevention,
Preparedness and Mitigation (“Yokohama Strategy”) were adopted as the outcome document. The objective was also
to draft global DRR action guidelines for the latter half of the decade and beyond.
Stating that “Sustainable economic growth and sustainable development cannot be achieved in many countries without
adequate measures to reduce disaster losses by development of disaster resilient societies and disaster prevention andpreparedness,” the Yokohama Strategy defined the principles of risk assessment, disaster risk prevention, andemergency response preparations as well as strategy and action plans at each level for the year 2000 and beyond.

Page 2

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

Fig. I-1-2

Outline of the Yokohama Strategy

Yokohama Strategy and Plan of Action for a Safer World(Yokohama Strategy)

Sustainable economic growth and sustainable development cannot be achieved in many countries without adequate measures
to reduce disaster losses by development of disaster resilient societies and disaster prevention and preparedness

II. Principles●●

Risk Assessment is a required step for the adoption of adequate disaster reduction policies and measures
Disaster prevention and preparedness are of primary importance in reducing the need for disaster relief, etc.

III. Strategy for the Year 2000 and beyond●

Development of a global culture of prevention, capacity building in each disaster vulnerable country and community, education and training in disaster prevention, preparedness, and mitigation, networking so as to enhance disaster prevention, reduction and mitigation activities, more active and constructive role of media, improved risk assessment, etc.

IV. Plan of Action(Activities at the community and national levels)(Activities at the regional and sub-regional levels)
Establishing or strengthening of sub-regional or regional centres for disaster reduction and prevention which, with a view toenhancing national capabilities, would perform the functions of collecting and disseminating documentation and information fordisaster reduction, human resource development, supporting and strengthening natural disaster reduction mechanisms(Activities at the international level)
Source: Cabinet Office

The Yokohama Strategy called for the establishment of DRR departments in each country and cooperative frameworks
at the regional level. As a result, the Asian Disaster Reduction Center (ADRC) was established in Kobe City, Hyogo
Prefecture, Japan.
The ADRC was established in Kobe in July 1998 after ministerial-level talks and meetings of experts with other Asian
countries to share the lessons of disasters in Japan with the Asian region, including the lessons of the Great Hanshin–
Awaji Earthquake of 1995.
Asia accounts for about half of the damage inflicted by disasters around the world in terms of both human casualties
and economic damage. It is essential that countries in this region cooperate to reduce disaster risks while relating
experiences of disasters common to the region such as earthquakes, tsunamis, and typhoons.

Fig. I-1-3

Regional Distribution of Worldwide Disasters
Fatalities ('000)

6
0.2%

Damage (USD billion)
64
2.6%

176
7.1%

314
12.7%

387
15.6%

Asia

World
2,473

1,179
47.7%

Americas
Europe

726
29.3%

Asia

AfricaOceania

906
36.7%

World
2,471

Americas
EuropeOceania19
0.8%

Note: The numbers include fatalities and missing persons

Africa

1,168
47.3%

Japan: 422,
17.1%

Source: Analysis by the Asian Disaster Reduction Center of data from 1984 to 2013 based on the EM-DAT (D. Guha-Sapir, R. Below, Ph.
Hoyois - EM-DAT: International Disaster Database – www.emdat.be – Université Catholique de Louvain – Brussels – Belgium).

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

Page 3

Chapter I

I. Basis for the Strategy

Section 2: Establishment of the UNISDR and the Second UN World Conference on
Disaster Reduction

Part I

While the IDNDR was reaching its conclusion at the end of 1999, natural disasters continued to inflict damage. The UN
launched the International Strategy for Disaster Reduction (ISDR) in 2000 to pass down the outcomes of the IDNDR andtackle the issues that remained. In addition, it established the Inter-Agency Task Force to coordinate a range of DRR
activities within UN systems as well as the Inter-Agency Secretariat to serve as a secretariat.
In 2003, the UN General Assembly resolved to hold the Second UN World Conference on Disaster Reduction with theobjective of updating the Yokohama Strategy to serve as a 21st century DRR framework. The conference was held in
Kobe City, Hyogo Prefecture, from January 18-22, 2005, precisely 10 years after the Great Hanshin-Awaji Earthquake.
More than 4,000 people participated in the conference from 168 UN Member States (including 42 government
ministers or higher-level officials), international organizations, non-governmental organizations, and other groups.
Forums open to the general public held as part of the conference were attended by more than 40,000 people, primarily
ordinary citizens.
As the outcome of the second World Conference, the Hyogo Framework for Action 2005−2015: Building the Resilienceof Nations and Communities to Disasters (HFA) was formulated. The HFA set the goal of achieving substantial
reductions in losses of life, as well as in losses of social, economic, and environmental assets, from disasters, anddefined five priorities for action to be implemented over 10 years to achieve this. Furthermore, the conference issued ajoint declaration on creating an early warning system for tsunamis following the massive tsunami in the Indian Ocean
that struck on December 26, 2004, just before the conference.

Fig. I-1-4

Component of Hyogo Framework for Action (HFA)

Hyogo Framework for Action 2005-2015-Building the Resilience of Nations and Communities to Disasters[Expected Outcome]The substantial reduction of disaster losses, in lives and in the social, economic and environmental assets of communities andcountries[Three Strategic Goals]a) The integration of disaster risk reduction into sustainable development policies and planningb) The development and strengthening of institutions, mechanisms and capacities at all levels, in particular at the community
level, that can contribute to building resilience to hazardsc) The systematic incorporation of risk reduction approaches into the implementation of emergency preparedness, response
and recovery programmes[Five Priorities for Action]
1. Ensure that disaster risk reduction (DRR) is a national and a local priority with a strong institutional basis for implementation
Creation of National institutional and legislative frameworks, etc.
2. Identify, assess and monitor disaster risks and enhance early warning
National and local risk assessments (Development of risk maps, Development of systems of indicators of disaster risk), etc.
and vulnerability
3. Use knowledge, innovation and education to build a culture of safety and resilience at all levels
Information exchange, research, public awareness (engagement of media, sustained public education campaign), etc.
4. Reduce the underlying risk factors
Improvement of earthquake resistance of the important public facilities and infrastructure, etc.
5. Strengthen disaster preparedness for effective response at all levels
Preparation of contingency plans and policies at all levels, promotion of disaster preparedness exercises, etc.
Source: Cabinet Office

Page 4

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

In addition, the new post of Special Representative of the Secretary-General (SRSG) for Disaster Risk Reduction was
created in 2008, with Ms. Margareta Wahlström appointed to serve as the first SRSG for DRR. UNISDR regional offices
were established in Nairobi, Panama, Bangkok, and other locations to manage regions, and the UNISDR Hyogo Office
was opened in 2007 in Kobe City, Hyogo Prefecture.

Fig. I-1-5

Strengthening of Systems for Promoting the HFA

Old System

Strengthening ofSystems for
Promoting the HFA

IATF
Related Organizations
Taskforce(Nations areobservers)

New System

GP/ DRRDRR Global Platform(Nations are stakeholders)
ISDR
Secretariat

ISDR
Secretariat

Regional Platforms
Asia, Africa, America, Europe, etc.
Thematic Platforms
・IRP (International Recovery Platform)
・PPEW (Platform for the Promotion of
Early Warning)
Each country’s national platform

Each country’s national platform

Source: Cabinet Office

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

Page 5Chapter I

Following this, experts began taking into account ways to make the HFA a more efficient framework. The promotionalframework up to this point consisted of the Inter-Agency Task Force, primarily made up of international organizations,and the respective promotional frameworks in each country. The UN member states took the lead in deciding on a
direction for HFA promotion. The next challenge was to figure out how to disseminate this goal to regions around theworld. Therefore, the promotional framework was reorganized into the Global Platform (GP) for Disaster Risk Reduction
comprised of the members of the Inter-Agency Task Force and UN Member States. In addition, regional platforms todiscuss HFA activities in each region (held in various regions the year after the GP) and platforms on individual DRR
themes were established to create a framework that enabled cross-cutting discussions at the national, regional, andglobal levels. The International Recovery Platform (IRP), a platform to gather and globally communicate wide-ranging
knowledge on recovery and reconstruction, launched activities in May 2005 in Kobe City, Hyogo Prefecture, withsupport from the Japanese government (described in detail in Chapter 3). Since its first meeting in June 2007, the GP
has been held once every two years in Geneva.

Section 3: The Progress and Challenges of Initiatives Based on the HFA
3-1 Progress of Initiatives Based on the HFAPart IThe UNISDR is monitoring the progress of the initiatives implemented by various countries based on the HFA. Disastermanagement organizations and systems have been established in each country, including developing countries basedon Priority Action 1, “Ensure that disaster risk reduction is a national and a local priority with a strong institutional basis
for implementation.” Based on Priority Action 5, “Strengthen disaster preparedness for effective response at all levels,”
disaster response systems, including early warning systems, have been strengthened. There is clearly a growing trend
toward using the fruits of scientific and technical advances in DRR.
The following two cases illustrate these types of advances in DRR measures.

(1) Indian Ocean Tsunami Warning System Development
After the tsunami that struck in the Indian Ocean in December 2004, the UNESCO Intergovernmental Oceanographic
Commission (IOC) moved ahead in building the Indian Ocean Tsunami Warning System. The Japanese government(Japan Meteorological Agency) lent technical support to building the Indonesian government’s tsunami warning system
and actively contributed to building the system in other ways such as by sending experts to various trainings. Following
these activities, official operations of a tsunami warning system in the Indian Ocean were launched in October 2011,
and a system was built to allow the release and sharing of information by three institutions: the Australian Bureau of
Meteorology, the Indian National Center for Ocean Information Services, and the Indonesian Badan Meteorologi,
Klimatologi, dan Geofisika (BMKG).
(2) Progress on Bangladeshi Cyclone Measures
Bangladesh has experienced large cyclones in the past, with a cyclone in 1970 leaving 300,000 people dead or missing.
Following this, the country set up cyclone evacuation shelters and held corresponding evacuation drills using grant aid
from Japan. Damage in human terms has been substantially reduced through these efforts, as exhibited by the fact thata 1991 cyclone caused slightly fewer than 14,000 casualties, and a 2007 cyclone caused slightly fewer than 5,000
casualties.

Fig. I-1-6
2,000

Trend in Cyclone Shelters Construction and Cyclone Victims in Bangladesh(people)400,000(sites)Number of
Cyclone Shelters

300,000

1,637

1,500

300,000

1,000

200,000
Number of
Deaths138,866

500

100,000
383
51

4,275

0

0
1970

1991

Cyclone Shelter

2007

Source: “JICA’s Cooperation on Disaster Management Toward Mainstreaming Disaster Risk Reduction - Building Disaster Resilience
Societies-”, March 2015, Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA)

Page 6WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

3-2 Disaster Risk Reduction Challenges Since 2005

One approach to natural disaster risks suggests that these risks are determined by the interaction of the threeelements of hazard, vulnerability, and exposure. Traditional DRR measures attempt to reduce vulnerability; inshort, improving physical and non-physical conditions before a disaster occurs (such as seismic retrofitting and
DRR education), and conducting relief and rescue activities after a disaster occurs. These types of activities toreduce vulnerability were being done under the HFA, but a greater concern is the issue of exposure. The
population exposed to hazards has grown due to increasing urbanization, and a disaster in one country or region
now affects economic activities in other countries because supply chains have grown to extend across a wider
area due to globalization. There is also concern that hazards themselves, external forces created from natural
phenomena, are increasing. As a result of climate change, tropical cyclones will increase in strength and sea levels
will continue to rise over the long term, and this will lead to more frequent destructive storm surges and anincrease in hazards themselves.
The following sections examine the factors that are exacerbating these disaster risks using recent disasterexamples.
(1) The Advancement of Urbanization
According to the 2014 Revision of World Urbanization Prospects, released by the Population Division of the United
Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs in 2014, more people live in urban areas than in rural areas
globally. The proportion of the world population living in urban areas was 30% in 1950, grew to 54% in 2014, andis predicted to increase to 66% in 2050.
Urbanization in developing countries is at times forcing newer urban dwellers to live in regions and conditions
vulnerable to disaster, such as slum districts that have formed in cities. In addition, especially in the case of a large
disaster in a capital city that affects governing functions, disaster response measures and restoration efforts will
also face impediments, which may greatly exacerbate the damage.
This situation first became evident in the 2010 earthquake in Haiti. A magnitude 7.0 earthquake struck
approximately 15 km west-southwest of Haiti’s capital of Port-au-Prince on January 12 at 4:53 pm local time. The
scope of the damage extended beyond Port-au-Prince to Léogâne, a suburb approximately 30 km west of Port-auPrince, Jacmel, approximately 120 km to the south, Carrefour, and other outlying major cities of the country. The
earthquake caused approximately 316,000 fatalities, injured approximately 310,000 persons, destroyed 105,000
houses, and damaged 208,000 more homes. In the capital of Port-au-Prince, key infrastructure including
electricity, water, and telephone service, as well as government buildings including the Presidential Palace,suffered major damage. Administrative functions were crippled, impacting the initial disaster response as well as
economic activities. In addition, urban sprawl had given rise to unplanned residential areas creeping up steep
hillsides and the formation of large slums not serviced by urban infrastructure in the suburbs, and these werefactors that also exacerbated the earthquake’s damage.
(2) Ongoing Globalization
Given the increasing international division of industrial production around the globe, a disaster in one country
disrupts the entire supply chain and creates a situation that affects other countries’ economic activities. As
Japanese manufacturers and other foreign companies develop their businesses overseas in East Asia, includingSoutheast Asia, and actively engage in sales and procurement activities, the international division of production is
becoming more developed, and a trade structure has formed in which intermediate goods are traded within theregion and final goods are exported out of the region. Given this, the 2011 floods that occurred in Thailand
seriously impacted trade conditions in neighboring countries and the region, including Japan.

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

Page 7

Chapter I

As described above, progress has been seen in countries’ DRR initiatives based on the HFA. However, according toa UNISDR assessment, initiatives under Priority Action 4, “Reduce the underlying risk factors,” have fallen
relatively behind. One background factor cited was the increasing trend in disaster risks worldwide.

Part I

Starting in May 2011, heavier-than-average rains continued to fall over an extended period of time in Thailand, causing
the Chao Phraya River, which runs through the Thai capital of Bangkok, to overflow its banks. This resulted inwidespread flood damage from Bangkok to northern Thailand for an extended period of time. Due to the flooding,seven industrial parks in Ayutthaya Province, where many Japanese companies are based, experienced flooding startingin October of that year. This seriously impacted a wide swath of the supply chain for automobiles, electronics, andother industries inside and outside of Thailand. The economic activities of neighboring countries and the region,
including Japan, were severely affected both directly and indirectly. In the field of automobile production, for example,
Thailand serves as a network hub for automotive parts supplied to ASEAN and other countries. The flood damage
caused a sharp decline in Thai production of these intermediate goods, which in turn put downward pressure on
assembly and other aspects of automobile production in neighboring countries and the region. In Japan, too, thevolume of automobile production fell.

(3) Changing Meteorological Disasters
As experts have continued to study future disaster risks and the long-term impacts of climate change, there has been
an increasing focus on climate disaster risks, especially for small island nations considered to be most vulnerable tothose impact. According to the Fifth Assessment Report compiled by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change(IPCC) in 2014, many extreme weather events and changes in climate phenomena have been observed since 1950.
There is likely to be an increase in the number of heavy precipitation events in continental areas, higher flood risk on aregional scale, and more frequent extreme high tides like those experienced during storm surges. The assessment
pointed out that many human systems are gravely vulnerable to the current climate variability and are exposed to risk.
While it is not necessarily clear how these long-term changes in climate systems are affecting actual climate disasters,
this white paper will survey the climate disaster risks by reviewing large-scale climate disasters that have occurred inrecent years.
*Hurricane Sandy (USA, 2012)
Hurricane Sandy, which struck the US at the end of October 2012, resulted in widespread damage caused by strong
winds as well as severe storm surge damage along the northeastern coast, including New York City. When Sandy madelandfall in the US, its hurricane intensity was Category 1 (5 being the strongest), but its landfall coincided with high tide.
This resulted in a storm surge exceeding 4 m in New York City. Damage to buildings and the flooding of undergroundsubway tunnels and stations, electrical substations, and other facilities suspended operations of transportation, water,
and power lifelines. This caused fuel shortages and a chain reaction of other damage. Based on the lessons of Hurricane
Katrina (a Category 3 storm at landfall), which caused massive damage in 2005, the US began implementing extensive
DRR measures before the hurricane made landfall. Efforts were made to dispatch federal emergency management
personnel without waiting for requests from relevant local governments and to distribute water, food, blankets, andother relief supplies. Nevertheless, the massive storm surge itself could not be avoided. Based on the lessons of Sandy,
the following year in June 2013, New York City formulated and released PlaNYC, its long-term disaster management
plan. This plan predicts that New York City will experience rising sea levels by 2050 and along with this, more frequent
storm surges, damage across a wider area, and higher damage costs when flooding occurs. As countermeasures, theplan clarifies the policy on facilities improvements and DRR measures for the city as a whole, including the protection ofcoastal areas, flood protection measures for buildings, and the use of insurance.
*Typhoon Haiyan (Philippines, 2013)
Typhoon Haiyan, which struck in November 2013, made landfall in the central Philippines. The city of Tacloban, theurbanized city on the island of Leyte, and other areas experienced strong winds and a storm surge reaching 5–6 m,
resulting in more than 6,000 fatalities and severe damage. Typhoon Haiyan continued to gain strength as it approachedthe Philippines, and its central pressure just before making landfall reached 895 hPa (the same level as the powerful
Isewan Typhoon that struck Japan in 1959), causing a storm surge of massive proportions. The Philippines’ disastermanagement authority urged citizens to evacuate in preparation for the storm surge, but many residents did notunderstand what the term “storm surge” meant, even if they were familiar with tsunamis, and there were many reports
of delayed evacuations. Based on the lessons of Typhoon Haiyan, the government of the Philippines has set goals forthe rigorous implementation of comprehensive land-use planning and efforts to ensure advance evacuation.

Page 8WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

3-3 Disaster Risk Reduction Challenges in Developing Countries: The Vicious Cycle of Disasters andPoverty

Looking at damage in terms of value, approximately 65% is concentrated in high-income countries. However, as isshown in Fig. I-1-8, which compares damage to GDP, a single disaster in a low- or middle-income country can result in
economic damage valued at more than 20% of that country’s annual GDP. In one case, the damage even exceeded thecountry’s annual GDP. For example, in addition to the damage in Port-au-Prince caused by the 2010 earthquake in Haiti,
the damage also extended to major urban areas in its suburbs. Thus, the economic damage inflicted on Haiti was valued
at approximately 1.2 times its GDP. The size of this impact can be better understood in comparison with wealthiernations: the economic damage from Hurricane Katrina in the US in 2005 was 1% of GDP, while that caused by the Great
East Japan Earthquake in Japan was 3.5% of GDP.
Fig. I-1-7

The Number of Deaths (left) and Economic Damage (right) by Natural Disasters Disaggregated by National Per Capita Income
62,
2.6%
193,
8%
379,
16%

623,
25.7%

Low income
1,105,
45%

Lower middle income
Upper middle income

1,567,
64.8%

High income

750,
31%

Low income

168,
6.9%

Unit: Thousand

Lower middle
incomeUpper middle
incomeUnit: USD billion

Source: Data from 1984-2013, developed by the Asian Disaster Reduction Center based on the EM-DAT

Fig. I-1-8

Damage as a Percentage of GDP Caused by Recent Natural Disasters

World Bank's Income
Group
Low
Lower Middle
Upper Middle
High

CountryYear

Disaster Type

Tajikistan
Haiti
Samoa
GuyanaGuyanaChile
Thailand
USA

2008
2010
2012
2005
2006
2010
2011
2005

Extreme Temperature

Earthquake
CycloneFlood
Flood
Earthquake
Flood
Hurricane

Damage(USD billion)
0.84
8.00
0.13
0.47
0.17
30.00
40.00
125.00GDP(USD billion)
3.72
6.48
0.64
0.79
0.82
171.96318.5212274.90

Damage/GDP
(%)
23%
123%
20%
59%
21%
17%
13%
1%

Japan

DisasterYear

Damage (JPY)

GDP (JPY)

Damage/GDP(%)

Great Hanshin-Awaji Earthquake

1995

approx. 9.6 trillion

496 trillion

1.9%Great East Japan Earthquake

2011

approx. 16.9 trillion

482 trillion

3.5%

Source: Developed by the Asian Disaster Reduction Center based on the EM-DAT*For the GDP and income grouping, we used figures and groupings from the year prior to the year of the disaster.

This economic damage from natural disasters is a major impediment to sustainable development in developing
countries. To achieve sustainable development in developing countries, urgent efforts are needed to reduce disasterdamage by reducing social vulnerability to disasters, as well as exposures to hazards taking into consideration
development policy.

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

Page 9Chapter I

The total number of fatalities worldwide from natural disasters over the past 30 years (1984–2013) is approximately
2.48 million. Of these, about half are concentrated in low-income countries, and about 30% are concentrated in lower
middle-income countries. This illustrates the negative correlation between lower national incomes and higher natural
disaster fatalities.

ChapterII

The Third UN World Conference on Disaster Risk Reduction (WCDRR)

Part IThis chapter discusses the Third UN World Conference on Disaster Risk Reduction, including the
preparation process, conference overview, outcome documents, and special features.

Section 1: Preparations for the Third WCDRR
1-1 UN-Led Preparations
In May 2011, about two months after the Great East Japan Earthquake, the Third Session of the Global Platform forDisaster Risk Reduction was held in Geneva, Switzerland. The State-Minister of the Cabinet Office attended from Japanand communicated that Japan was prepared to host the Third UN World Conference on Disaster Risk Reduction(WCDRR). The following year on July 3-4, 2012, Japan held the World Ministerial Conference on Disaster Reduction in
Tohoku, whose theme was “Wisdom of the World to the Disaster-Affected Areas: Lessons of the Disaster-Affected
Areas to the World,” in the three disaster-affected prefectures. In December of the same year, it was decided at the67th session of the UN General Assembly that the Third UN WCDRR would be held in Japan in early 2015. In thefollowing year, 2013, Japan selected the conference location based on a request for proposals. The city of Sendai waschosen as the conference venue at a Cabinet meeting that May. At the 68th session of the UN General Assembly in
December 2013, the goals of the World Conference were set, namely, the completion of the evaluation of HFA efforts
and the formulation of a Post-2015 DRR framework. Decisions were also made regarding the preparation process,dates, and location of the conference.
Milestones in the conference preparation process were agreed upon at the Preparatory Committee Meetings(PrepCom) attended by all UN Member States and held in Geneva in July and November of 2014, which approved theConference structure and procedures. The Bureau was established as the steering organization for the PrepCom inMarch 2014, comprised of representatives from 10 member states in five regions as well as the host country, Japan,
and preparations for the PrepComs began.
In April 2014, Regional Platforms began to be held to wrap up the respective HFA activities in Central Asia, Africa, theAmericas, Pacific states, Asia, Europe, and Arab states, as well as to discuss the development of a post-2015 DRR
framework. The Asian Region Platform (the 6th Asian Ministerial Conference on DRR) was held in Bangkok in June 2014.
The status of HFA implementation in Asia and the future direction of DRR were discussed, with the Bangkok Declaration
on Disaster Risk Reduction in Asia and the Pacific 2014 adopted as the outcome document. The Government of Japansent the State-Minister of the Cabinet Office to attend these Regional Platforms, and requested that countries
participate in the World Conference at the highest level possible. In July, the Government of Japan organized a
symposium around the theme of “Mainstreaming Disaster Risk Reduction into Development” at a meeting of theUnited Nations Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC) in New York. It also held a panel exhibit to share with the world
the status of recovery in the regions affected by the Great East Japan Earthquake.
On July 14-15, the First PrepCom was held in Geneva. The Japanese government provided inputs into a new DRR
framework and, as the host country, reported on the progress of preparations to hold the World Conference in Sendai.
Work on drafting a post-2015 framework for DRR, the outcome document of the World Conference, began in
September in Geneva, with the ambassadors of Thailand and Finland serving as co-chairs of the Bureau and facilitating
the process.
The second PrepCom was held on November 17-18 in Geneva. Drafts of a new DRR framework, which had up to thatpoint been discussed only in closed-door meetings, were reviewed, and the implementation procedure of the main
conference was approved. Discussions of the new DRR framework drafts continued, with negotiations continuing in
Geneva through December and January. There were also discussions of a political declaration, which Japan drafted as
the facilitator. These drafts were discussed at the third PrepCom, held on March 13, 2015, the day before the World

Page 10WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

Conference, leading to continued negotiations during the Conference.

Chapter II

Intergovernmental Preparatory Committee Meeting

1-2 Preparations in Japan
National Preparatory Meetings for the Third WCDRR were held to investigate Japan’s proposal for a new DRR
framework, the current state of recovery from the Great East Japan Earthquake, and mechanisms for the sharing ofJapan’s expertise, including the lessons learned from previous disasters. These meetings were attended by scholars,disaster-related organizations, and local governments in the disaster-stricken areas of Tohoku, among others, and were
held five times starting in February 2014. Building on the results of these discussions, the Japanese government
proposed a new DRR framework to the PrepCom in Geneva and positioned proposals in the outcome document
including prior DRR investment, the concept of “Build Back Better,” and the development of DRR systems thatincorporate the participation of multi-stakeholders.
In the City of Sendai, the Sendai Committee for the WCDRR was established. It was comprised of representatives from
Sendai City, Tohoku University, the local business community, the Government of Japan, the six prefectures of the
Tohoku region, and other relevant organizations. The committee coordinated with local interested parties andgovernments to investigate the implementation of such matters as support for the Conference, related programs,
welcome events, and projects to highlight the appeal of the City of Sendai and the Tohoku region.
Related events included a symposium on women’s participation and leadership in DRR and recovery, meetings on
disaster risk reduction and mitigation by the Science Council of Japan, and the International Recovery Forum (a 20th
anniversary project of the Great Hanshin-Awaji Earthquake), and these gatherings all featured discussions on the Third
WCDRR. The Cabinet Office and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs also co-sponsored a multi-sector DRR symposium
together with the Japan CSO Coalition for 2015 WCDRR (JCC2015) and gathered opinions from citizens on relevant
topics.

Logo of the Third World Conference on Disaster Risk Reduction

This logo is a stylized image of people joining hands to create achain of action towards building disaster resilience. The fivecolors of the logo represent the five priorities of the HFA.

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

Page 11

Initiatives in Japan’s Scientific Community in Preparation for the Third WCDRRPart IIn November 2014, 30 scientific associations engaged in disaster risk reduction and mitigation in Japan
jointly held a forum on the International Mobilization of Experiences from the Great East Japan
Earthquake and the Great Hanshin-Awaji Earthquake and released a joint declaration on global DRR.
(Logos of the 30 scientific associations)

In January 2015, the Science Council of Japan held the Tokyo Conference on International Study for
Disaster Risk Reduction and Resilience, inviting world leaders and top-class researchers participating in the
Third WCDRR to discuss the concept of DRR science and technology that achieves both disaster risk
reduction and sustainable development. The Tokyo Statement was adopted during the conference with aview to the Third WCDRR.

Overview of the Tokyo Statement○ Assessment of the present status (increasing losses/complexity, insufficient application of scientificknowledge and technology in DRR, the need to integrate DRR and sustainable development)○ Key directions (policymakers and practitioners should be fully aware of the latest scientific knowledge

on disasters, application of science and technology in national DRR platforms, collaboration between
earth environmental sciences and global earth observations)○ Findings and recommendations (common methodology on data collection and economic analysis ofdisasters, enhanced numerical pre-assessments of damage by hazard, sharing of DRR best practices
based on scientific findings)○ Concrete initiatives (empowering national platforms to practice evidence-based DRR, enhanced

forecasting and visualization capabilities of new risks, enhanced collaboration among relatedorganizations, formation of an international network)

Page 12WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

Section 2: Overview of the Third WCDRR
2-1 Overview of the Conference and Implementation Structure

Eriko Yamatani, the Minister of State for Disaster Management, served as the president of the Conference. The
conference program included the Plenary Sessions (featuring statements from each of the participating countries),
Ministerial Roundtables (five sessions), High Level Partnership Dialogues (three sessions), and Working Sessions (34sessions).
Outcome documents of the Conference include the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction (SFDRR) 2015–2030,
the successor framework to the Hyogo Framework for Action (HFA) 2005–2015, which was adopted at the Second
WCDRR, as well as the Sendai Declaration, which expresses the resolution to promote the new framework.
Related events included approximately 400 symposiums and seminars and 200 exhibits on disaster risk reduction andrecovery, the “Bosai” Industry Fair, featuring 160 company and organization participants, study tours of disasterstricken areas, and post-conference excursions to various locations in the Tohoku region. Through these activities, theWorld Conference provided a venue where Japan could once again express its appreciation to all countries for the
support it received after the Great East Japan Earthquake and to share the lessons learned and technologies gained
through this earthquake as well as the many other disasters Japan has experienced. The events were also important
opportunities for Japan to communicate the status of recovery and projects in the regions affected by the Great East
Japan Earthquake and to help promote the disaster-affected regions.

(2) Implementation Structure
The Third WCDRR was an UN-led conference, and the UNISDR served as the secretariat for the UN side. The Cabinet
Office and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs served as the secretariat for Japan as the host country, handling theconference logistics. They worked with the relevant government agencies to examine the new DRR framework and they
participated in the main conference and its related events. In the City of Sendai, the Sendai Committee for the WCDRR
was established. It was comprised of representatives from Sendai City, Tohoku University, the local business
community, the Government of Japan, the six prefectures of the Tohoku region, and other relevant organizations. The
Sendai Committee investigated and managed the implementation of such matters as support for the Conference,
related programs, welcome event, and projects to highlight the appeal of the City of Sendai and the Tohoku region.
Program of the UN World Conference on Disaster Risk Reduction

Fig. I-2-1

Saturday 14 MarchAM

PM

Sunday 15 MarchMonday 16 March

Tuesday 17 March

AM

AM

AM

PM

PM

Wednesday 18 MarchPM
Adoption of a Post2015 Framework for
DRR，Official
Declaration, andStakeholders'Commitment

Closing

Plenary Sessions(Adoption of rules ofprocedure of theConference, etc.)

Opening

Intergovernmental

Plenary Sessions
Official Statements(Delivery of the official statements by the member states and stakeholders
according to the official speakers list)

Ministerial Roundtables
High Level Partnership Dialogues
Working Sessions

Excursions (Study Tours)

Sasagawa Award
Ceremony

Risk Award
Ceremony

Reception hosted
by Sendai city

Reception hosted
by Japan

Multi-Stakeholder

Public Forum (Symposium, Forum, Exhibition, etc.)(Venue: Tohoku University Centennial Hall, Sendai Civic Auditorium，Tokyo Electron Hall Miyagi, Sendai Mediatheque, Yumemesse
Miyagi, etc.)

Excursions

Source: Cabinet Office
WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

Page 13

Chapter II(1) Overview of the Conference
The Third WCDRR was held in Sendai City, Miyagi Prefecture, from March 14-18, 2015, four years after the Great East
Japan Earthquake. More than 6,500 people participated, including representatives from 187 UN Member States,international organizations, and accredited NGOs (also, more than 100 ministers, including 25 heads of state, the UN
Secretary-General, and the UNDP Administrator). More than 150,000 people attended all related conference events,
making this one of the largest UN-led international meetings to be held in Japan.

Fig. I-2-2

Location of the Major Venues of the WCDRR

Major Conference Venues in Sendai
Part I

Main Conference Venue
Exhibition Bldg.
Sendai International
CentreSendai Civic
Auditorium

Yume
Messe

Tokyo ElectronHall Miyagi

Sendai City
Information &Industry Plaza

Sendai City
Support Centerfor Civil
Activities

Conference Bldg.
Sendai International
CentreSendai City
MuseumPublic Forum

Sendai Mediatheque

Tokoku University
Centennial Hall

Kotodai Park

L-Park Sendai*Some related events were held in Aomori Prefecture, Iwate Prefecture and Fukushima Prefecture.
Source: Cabinet Office

Fig. I-2-3

Major Meetings and Sessions During the WCDRR
Session Title

Schedule

Official Plenary Session

Mar. 14-17 (Sat.-Tues.)

15:00-18:00
March 14 (Sat.)High Level Partnership 15:00-18:00
March 16 (Mon.)
Dialogues
10:00-13:00
March 17 (Tues.)
10:00-13:00
March 15 (Sun.)
15:00-18:00
March 15 (Sun.)
10:00-13:00
Ministerial Roundtables
March 16 (Mon.)
15:00-18:00
March 16 (Mon.)
15:00-18:00
March 17 (Tues.)

Working Sessions

Mar. 14-17 (Sat.-Tues.)

Theme

Official statements by Member State delegations, internationalorganizations, and other major groups
Mobilizing Women's Leadership in Disaster Risk Reduction
Risk Sensitive Investment: Public-Private Partnerships
Inclusive Disaster Risk Management: Governments, Communities,
and Organizations Acting Together
Reconstructing After Disasters: Building Back Better
International Cooperation in Support of a Post-2015 Framework for
Disaster Risk Reduction
Governing Disaster Risk: Overcoming Challenges
Reducing Disaster Risk in Urban Settings
Public Investment Strategies for Disaster Risk Reduction
Sessions (34) were held on the following four themes:(1) Progress on the existing HFA Priorities for Action(2) Emerging Risks(3) Commitments to Post-HFA Implementation(4) Accelerating Post-HFA Implementation

Source: Cabinet Office
Page 14WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

Fig. I-2-4

List of Working Sessions
Theme

2a

Risk Identification and Assessment (Priority 2)2b3

Progress on Existing
HFA Priorities for
Action

Early Warning (Priority 2)
Education and Knowledge in Building a Culture of
Resilience (Priority 3)

4Underlying Risk Factors (Priority 4)

5Preparedness for Effective Response (Priority 5)

6Technological Hazards: From Risk Reduction to Recovery

7

Disaster and Climate Risk: Accelerating National and Local
Initiatives

8

Reducing the Risk of Epidemics and Pandemics

9

Ecosystems Management and Resilience

10

Building Resilient Futures for Rural Areas

11

Emerging Risks

Global Risk Trends

12Integrated Water Resource Management

13

Land Use Planning for Disaster Risk Reduction

14

Reducing Disaster Risk to Alleviate Poverty

15

Lessons from Mega-Disasters

16

Economic Aspects of Disaster Risk Reduction

17

Business and Private Sector: Investing in Resilient
Infrastructure

18

Disaster Risk in the Financial System

19

Applying Science and Technology to Disaster Risk
Reduction Decision-Making

20

Communities Addressing Local Risks

21
22Children and Youth Commitments to Post "Don't Decide My Future Without Me"-HFA Implementation
Earth Observation and High Technology to Reduce Risks

23

Food Security, Disaster-Resilient Agriculture and Nutrition

24

From Crisis Response to Building Resilience

25

Proactive Participation of Persons with Disabilities in
Inclusive Disaster Risk Reduction for All

26

Commitments to Safe Schools

27

Resilient Cultural Heritage

28

Measuring and Reporting Progress

29

Standards for Disaster Risk Reduction Including Building
Codes

30

Accelerating Post-HFA
Implementation
Preparing for Disaster-Induced Relocation

31

Towards a Resilient Tourism Sector

32

Disaster Risk Management for Healthy Societies

33

Disaster Risk Transfer and Insurance

Schedule
10:00-11:30
March 15 (Sun.)
15:00-16:30
March 14 (Sat.)
17:00-18:30
March 14 (Sat.)
10:00-11:40
March 16 (Mon.)
10:00-11:30
March 16 (Mon.)
12:00-13:30
March 17 (Tues.)
13:00-14:30
March 14 (Sat.)
10:00-11:30
March 17 (Tues.)
16:00-17:30
March 15 (Sun.)
16:00-17:30
March 15 (Sun.)
10:00-11:30
March 15 (Sun.)
12:00-13:30
March 15 (Sun.)
12:00-13:30
March 15 (Sun.)
16:00-17:30
March 16 (Mon.)
16:00-17:30
March 15 (Sun.)
10:00-11:30
March 15 (Sun.)
14:00-15:30
March 16 (Mon.)
10:00-11:30
March 16 (Mon.)
12:00-13:30
March 16 (Mon.)
14:00-15:30
March 15 (Sun.)
12:00-13:30
March 16 (Mon.)
14:00-15:30
March 17 (Tues.)
12:00-13:30
March 15 (Sun.)
12:00-13:30
March 17 (Tues.)
16:00-17:30
March 17 (Tues.)
16:00-17:30
March 17 (Tues.)
17:00-18:30
March 14 (Sat.)
14:00-15:30
March 15 (Sun.)
10:00-11:30
March 17 (Tues.)
14:00-15:30
March 17 (Tues.)
14:00-15:30
March 17 (Tues.)
12:00-13:30
March 16 (Mon.)
14:00-15:30
March 15 (Sun.)
13:00-14:30
March 14 (Sat.)

Chapter II

1Working Session Title
Governance and Development Planning at National/Local
Levels (Priority 1)

Source: Cabinet Office
WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

Page 15

2-2 Official Programme

Part I(1) Opening Ceremony
The opening ceremony was held on the morning of March 14, with the Emperor and Empress of Japan attending. Eriko
Yamatani, the Minister of State for Disaster Management, was elected Conference president and gave the opening
remarks. Next, Secretary-General of the United Nations Ban Ki-moon and Prime Minister Shinzo Abe, representing thehost country, gave welcome remarks to those assembled. Remarks were also given by personages such Laurent Fabius,
French Minister of Foreign Affairs and International Development, serving as president of the 21st Conference of theParties (COP21), and Regina Pritchett, representative of the nine Major Groups. Finally, Mayor of Sendai City Emiko
Okuyama gave welcome remarks. The agenda and rules of procedure were then adopted, the vice presidents were
elected, and the Main Committee was established.

UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon giving remarks during the opening ceremony(Right side of the podium: Emperor and Empress of Japan; Podium center: Prime Minister Shinzo Abe;
Left side of the podium: Eriko Yamatani, Minister of State for Disaster Management)(2) Plenary Sessions
The Plenary Sessions consisted of statements by representatives of national governments and UN organizations, as well
as statements covering country-specific issues and initiatives already taken based on the HFA, opinions on the new DRR
framework, and the initiatives needed to promote it.
During the high level segment, Prime Minister Abe gave a statement, emphasizing the importance of prior investment
in disaster risk reduction, better disaster recovery (termed “Build Back Better”), and the participation of diverse
stakeholders. Prime Minister Abe also announced the Sendai Cooperation Initiative for Disaster Risk Reduction, setting
forth a policy of sharing Japan’s expertise and technologies with the world and declaring Japan’s intention to engage ininternational cooperation in the field of disaster risk reduction by providing a total of USD 4 billion in financial
assistance as well as human resource development for 40,000 people over the four-year period from 2015 to 2018.

Prime Minister Shinzo Abe giving a statement during the High Level Segment

Page 16

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

Day
14
(Sat.)

Theme
Mobilizing
Women's
Leadership in
Disaster Risk
Reduction

16(Mon.)

Risk Sensitive
Investment:
Public-Private
Partnerships

17(Tues.)

Inclusive Disaster
Risk
Management:
Governments,
Communities,
andOrganizations
Acting Together

Description
In a session co-chaired by Sanae Takashi, Minister for Internal Affairs andCommunications of Japan, and Loren Legarda, Member of the Senate of thePhilippines, Prime Minister Shinzo Abe delivered the keynote presentation. The session
featured several panelists: Tarja Halonen, Former President of Finland, Kristalina
Georgieva, Vice-President for Budget and Human Resources, European Commission,
and Emiko Okuyama, Mayor of Sendai. Their discussion covered priorities andcommitments in the promotion of a new disaster reduction framework, and efforts topromote the participation and leadership of women in all disaster reduction efforts.
In his keynote speech, Prime Minister Abe highlighted the leadership demonstrated
by women during the Great East Japan Earthquake and the role women played in caring
for evacuees and rebuilding their communities. He called for the equality of women in
everyday life, and the audience indicated its approval. He announced that Japan would
begin "Mobilizing Women's Leadership in Disaster Risk Reduction" as part of the key
project known as the Sendai Cooperation Initiative for Disaster Risk Reduction.
As co-chair of the session, Minister Takashi gave welcome remarks, emphasizing
the importance of women's leadership in every stage of disaster response, including
preparedness, emergency response, recovery, and restoration. He explained Japaneseinitiatives related to the role of women's firefighting units and women's firefighting
clubs, and explained the establishment of emergency disaster FM stations by women,
and their role in disseminating information. He discussed the various activities
conducted by women in response to the Great East Japan Earthquake.
Mayor Okuyama of Sendai, who served as a panelist, explained the need for
women's participation in all facets of decision-making, based on lessons learned fromthe Great East Japan Earthquake.
This session was chaired by Fuat Oktay, Director-General of the Prime Ministry
Emergency and Disaster Management Authority of Turkey, and featured a keynote
speech by Gaelle Olivier, CEO of General Insurance, AXA Asia. Panelists included Sandra
Wu, Chair and Chief Executive Officer of Kokusai Kogyo, Toshiyuki Shiga, Representative
Director and Vice-Chair of Nissan Motor Corporation, and Shamshad Akhtar, Executive
Secretary of the United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and thePacific (ESCAP). They discussed the importance of public-private partnerships in
reducing disaster risks, noting the need to build relationships of trust and to foster
close cooperation between national and regional level private sector organizations andgovernment institutions. Many best practices were shared. The participants alsoannounced a commitment to support a new framework for disaster reduction.
This session was chaired by Noel Arscott, Minister of Local Government andCommunity Development of Jamaica, and featured a keynote speech by Anote Tong,
President of the Republic of Kiribati. Panelists included Laila Iskander, Minister of Urban
Development and Informal Settlements of Egypt, and William Anthony Kirsopp Lake,
Executive Director, United Nations Children’s Fund.
The discussion noted that it is not only governments, but communities,
organizations, and particularly those groups most heavily impacted by disasters, suchas the poor, children, women, and the handicapped, who need to participate in thepolicy-making process and contribute to efforts to reduce disasters. Participants
discussed the importance of adopting this kind of inclusive approach to ensure that
concrete actions are achieved under the new DRR framework.

Sanae Takaichi, Minister for Internal Affairs and Communications, co-chairing the High Level Partnership Dialogue
on “Mobilizing Women’s Leadership for Disaster Risk Reduction”
WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

Page 17

Chapter II(3) High Level Partnership Dialogues
Three High Level Partnership Dialogues were held over the three days of March 14, 16, and 17. They covered threethemes: “Mobilizing Women's Leadership for Disaster Risk Reduction,” “Risk Sensitive Investment: Public–Private Partnerships,” and “Inclusive Disaster Risk Management: Governments, Communities, and Groups Acting Together.” Whileheads of state participated in these dialogues, all Conference participants had an opportunity to participate and makestatements during these sessions.

Special Feature: Women and DRR

Part IThe Great East Japan Earthquake led to an increased awareness of the need for a greater level of women’s
participation in the process of establishing government programs and policies related to DRR, as well as
the importance of striving to consider the differences in men’s and women’s needs.
A review of data on local disaster management councils nationwide in Japan reveals that the ratio of
women council members on prefectural disaster management councils was 12.1% as of April 2014 (1.4
points higher than the previous year), while no prefectures had women delegates on their disastermanagement councils, the same as the previous year.
Meanwhile, the ratio of women council members on municipal disaster management councils was 7.1% asof April 2014. Broken down by type, the data shows that women accounted for 12.1% of council members
in government-designated cities, 8.7% of council members in other cities, and 4.3% of council members intowns and villages. The percentage of municipal disaster management councils lacking any women
members was 31.9%, while the majority of disaster management councils in towns and villages werecomprised of only male members.
The ratio of women council members on local disaster management councils remains low. There is still aneed to increase women’s participation in the process of deciding government programs and policies
related to DRR.
Given this, women’s leadership was a key topic at the Third WCDRR.
Prime Minister Shinzo Abe gave the keynote speech at the High Level Partnership Dialogue “Mobilizing
Women's Leadership for Disaster Risk Reduction.” He noted that one of the key projects of the Sendai
Cooperation Initiative for DRR (SCIDRR) announced on March 14 is “Training to Promote Women’s
Leadership in DRR”, and emphasized that women are drivers in creating disaster-resilient societies.
In conjunction with the World Conference, the Cabinet Office held exhibits at the “Women and DRR”
themed pavilion, and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Cabinet Office, and Reconstruction Agency sponsoreda symposium on “Good Practices of Women’s Entrepreneurship in Local Communities in the Process ofDisaster Reconstruction.”
In reviewing the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015–2030 formulated during the World
Conference, Japan encouraged the international community to incorporate the need to ensure women’s
leadership and opportunities for equal participation in various decisions. As a result, the Sendai
Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015–2030 contains explicit stipulations, advocated by Japan,
regarding the promotion of women’s leadership and the roles for women in DRR.

Women and DRR Exhibit

Page 18

Public forum on “Good Practices of Women’s
Entrepreneurship in Local Communities in theProcess of Disaster Reconstruction”

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

Day
15
(Sun.)

Theme
Reconstruction
after disasters:building backbetter15(Sun.)

International
cooperation in
support of apost-2015
framework fordisaster risk
reduction

16(Mon.)

Governing
Disaster Risk:
Overcoming
Challenges

16(Mon.)

Reducing
Disaster Risk in
Urban Settings

17(Tues.)

PublicInvestment
Strategies for
Disaster Risk
Reduction

Description
This session, chaired by Numan Kurtulmus, Deputy Prime Minister of Turkey, wasattended by MLIT Minister Akihiro Ota, as well as government officials from countries
including New Zealand, Malaysia, China, and France. Participants discussed disasterconditions, recovery efforts post-disaster, and the provision of information andknowledge related to disaster prevention measures, all from the perspective of the"Build Back Better" approach to disaster reconstruction.
MLIT Minister Ota spoke about the lessons learned from the disasters Japan has
experienced in the past, such as the Great Hanshin-Awaji Earthquake, the Great East
Japan Earthquake, and various floods, and about the various disaster management anddisaster reduction efforts that have been undertaken. He also highlighted theimportance of "imagining the worst-case scenario and engaging in disaster reduction
efforts that integrate both structural and non-structural measures," and "making
preventive investments to promote safer community development."
This session was chaired by Rajnath Singh, Minister of Home Affairs of India, andstatements were made by participants including Minister of Foreign Affairs Fumio
Kishida and government officials from countries including Brazil, Cambodia, theRepublic of Korea, and Russia. Opinions were expressed regarding technology supportand skills development in a new DRR framework, and regarding procedures forinternational cooperation and global partnership for supporting national governments.
Minister of Foreign Affairs Kishida expressed resolve to promote international
cooperation on DRR based on the "three keys" focused on by Japan in the Sendai
Cooperation Initiative for Disaster Risk Reduction announced by Prime Minister Abe;that is, preventive investments in disaster reduction based on long-term perspectives,
global partnerships, and approaches to human safety and security.
The President of JICA also participated in this session, emphasizing the importanceof leadership, ownership, risk assessment, and DRR investments in promoting themainstreaming of DRR, and expressing support for the Sendai Cooperation Initiative.
Led by María Del Pilar Cornejo, Minister of the Secretariat of Risk Management of
Ecuador, this session was attended by Ryosei Akazawa, State-Minister of the Cabinet
Office of Japan, as well as government officials from countries including Indonesia,
Luxemburg, and Madagascar. Participants discussed efforts aimed at further
strengthening governance in the new DRR framework.
State-Minister Akazawa highlighted the lessons learned from Japan's many pastdisasters and the importance of ensuring that citizens have a high level of disasterawareness. He also explained Japan's efforts to establish Tsunami Preparedness Day.
He discussed "the importance of promoting initiatives that involve the entire nationand society at large," of "finding an optimal balance between structural and nonstructural measures," and of "preventive investments." The participants praised
Japanese initiatives.
This session was led by Pravin Jamnadas Gordhan, Minister of Cooperative Governanceand Traditional Affairs of South Africa, and was attended by government officials fromcountries including Uganda, Senegal, Germany, and Portugal. Discussions were held on
the outcomes of national and local government initiatives related to DRR in urban
areas.
Governor Toshizo Ido of Hyogo Prefecture participated from Japan. He discussed
the experience and lessons of the Great Hanshin-Awaji Earthquake, the role of theDisaster Reduction and Human Renovation Institution (DRI), and the importance ofinternational DRR cooperation for Hyogo Prefecture. He also explained the importanceof cooperation and connections between local governments.
This session was led by Raed Arafat, Secretary of State, Ministry of Interior of Romania,
and was attended by government officials from Tunisia, Madagascar, Egypt, andPanama. The discussion highlighted case studies of successful public investments thatwere made in consideration of DRR perspectives, and opinions were exchanged on therole of governments in promoting public investments aimed at improving resilience.
The session was attended by Takayuki Hashimoto, Co-Chairman of the Keidanren'sCommittee on Risk Management, who spoke about the experience and lessons of theGreat East Japan Earthquake, the importance of placing priority on protecting
employees' families, and the importance of formulating and supporting enterprise
BCPs. He also emphasized the importance of incorporating DRR perspectives in
economic activities.
WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

Page 19

Chapter II(4) Ministerial Roundtables
Ministerial Roundtables were held on March 15-17 on the five themes of “Reconstructing after Disasters: Build Back
Better,” “International Cooperation in Support of a Post-2015 Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction,” “Governing
Disaster Risk: Overcoming Challenges,” “Reducing Disaster Risk in Urban Settings,” and “Public Investment Strategies
for Disaster Risk Reduction.” The Roundtables were attended by more than 30 representatives of government
ministries and international organizations, who gave opinion statements and discussed initiatives and commitments forpromoting the new DRR framework.

Part I

Minister for Foreign Affairs Fumio Kishida speaking at a Ministerial Roundtable

Minister of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism
Akihiro Ota speaking at a Ministerial Roundtable(5) Working Sessions
A total of 34 Working Sessions were held on March 14-17, where experts and other leaders discussed individual topics
on the four themes of “Progress on the Existing Hyogo Framework for Action 2005–2015: Building the Resilience to
Nations and Communities Priorities,” “Emerging Risks,” “Commitments to Implementation,” and “Accelerating
Implementation.”
Japanese national government agencies, local governments, and others actively participated in the Working Sessions
from the preparatory stage, and more than half of the sessions featured speakers from Japan. These sessions provided
important opportunities for Japan to communicate to other participants its knowledge and technologies developed asa result of the Great East Japan Earthquake, and many other disasters, and to share information about the current
status of restoration from the Great East Japan Earthquake and related initiatives.
Following is a summary of the main Working Sessions in which Japan participated.
Day

Theme

Description

14(Sat.)

Technological
Hazards: From
Risk Reduction
to Recovery

15(Sun.)

Governance andDevelopment
Planning at
National/Local
Levels (Priority
1)

15(Sun.)

Lessons from
Mega-Disasters

This session featured panelists from Japan, Belarus, Madagascar, and the International
Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies (IFRC) who gave presentations oncomprehensive approaches to preventing, preparing for, and responding to disasters
caused by technological hazards, the use of lessons learned from past disasters, andthe strengthening of risk assessment and governance. Information was shared on
lessons learned and initiatives to address these risks.
The ambassador from Belarus discussed the Chernobyl disaster while the ministerfrom Madagascar highlighted efforts to reduce chemical accidents.
Japan's Director-General for Nuclear Disaster Management of the Cabinet Officeserved as a panelist and spoke about Japan's lessons learned, knowledge gained, andinitiatives to address nuclear disasters based on the experience of managing response
efforts through a national on-site disaster management headquarters following theTokyo Electric Power Company (TEPCO) Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant
Accident.
Participants examined the progress made on the HFA (particularly Priority 1) byfocusing on outcomes and issues related to the creation of governance structures
necessary for strengthening national disaster resilience. Presentations were given bypanelists from countries including Japan, Turkey, and India, who discussed theestablishment of effective disaster management systems at the national and local
levels, as well as the regional (international) level.
Serving as a panelist, Ryosei Akazawa, State-Minister of the Cabinet Office of Japan,emphasized the importance of improving citizen awareness, mainstreaming DRR
throughout the government, achieving an optical combination of structural and nonstructural measures, and preventive investments.
To achieve greater clarity on what constitutes a mega-disaster and how to reduce thedamage caused by mega-disasters, participants discussed lessons learned from themega-disasters that have occurred in countries including Japan, Chile, China, andTurkey. They also reviewed initiatives taken thus far and discussed the measures thatneed to be taken going forward.
During the opening remarks, Akihiro Nishimura, State Minister of Land,
Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism cited the adage that "a natural disaster strikes
when you least expect it" in giving an overview of the damage caused by the Great East
Japan Earthquake, and spoke about the importance of sharing the lessons learned frommega-quakes.
The Director-General of the Japan Meteorological Agency served as a panelist forthis session and reported on the earthquake information and tsunami warnings thatwere issued at the time of the Great East Japan Earthquake. He also discussed thebackground for why information announcements can be made so rapidly andaccurately in Japan even regarding mega-disasters that occur only infrequently. He
discussed the centralized processing of data from observations to analysis, information
announcements, and communications, and technological improvements adopted bycoordinators through everyday operations and lessons learned.

Page 20

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

ThemeResilient Cultural
Heritage

16(Mon.)

Education andKnowledge in Building a
Culture of Resilience(Priority 3)

16(Mon.)

Communities Addressing
Local Risks

17(Tues.)

Standards for Disaster
Risk Reduction Including
Building Codes

Description
Participants included representatives of the African World Heritage Fund(AWHF) and international research organizations involved in indigenous
peoples' affairs, as well as speakers from Japan, the US, and Italy, who discussed
the role of cultural heritage in disasters, and particularly its contribution tocommunity resilience.
Japan's Commissioner of the Agency for Cultural Affairs participated in thissession, presenting examples in which cultural heritage helped contribute to theemotional recovery of regions after past earthquake disasters. He spoke about
how initial response systems are mobilized and national cooperative networks
are built when disasters strike, and described the agency's support formunicipalities in the creation of checklists of cultural heritage assets, pursuant
to the Basic Plan of History and Culture. Such checklists can be used duringordinary times for social development, and during emergencies for damage
assessments.
Experiences and lessons were shared from countries including Japan (Hyogo
Prefecture), Greece, Armenia, and Namibia regarding initiatives for improving
DRR education and knowledge, which have been promoted under the Hyogo
Framework for Action (HFA). Participants discussed the need to foster strong
political will, to strengthen partnerships between various stakeholders, and to
adopt a community-oriented approach.
Hyogo Prefecture Governor Toshizo Ido participated from Japan. He notedthat Hyogo Prefecture is committed to forever remembering the earthquake
experience, passing those memories on to future generations, and using themto prepare for future disasters. The prefecture promotes various activities and iscontinually conducting DRR education and outreach. The governor highlighted
such efforts being conducted by Hyogo Prefecture based on the experiences of
the Great Hanshin-Awaji Earthquake. For example, care is being taken to
conduct practical DRR education to ensure that knowledge is translated into
action.
To help ensure that practical DRR activities implemented in highly disaster
resilient communities, which are implemented on a small scale, can be spread
across a wider area, participants discussed good practices adopted by countries
including Japan (Iwate Prefecture), the Philippines, Chile, and Lebanon forstrengthening disaster resilience under a new DRR framework.
Takuya Tasso, Governor of Iwate Prefecture, served as a panelist anddiscussed the role of local governments, town councils, and women's
associations in conducting activities during a disaster. Based on the Proposal
from Iwate Prefecture about Disaster Risk Reduction and Reconstruction, heemphasized that young people and women are the real drivers of restoration,and noted the importance of their efforts in rebuilding local communities. He
also emphasized the effectiveness of cultivating a sense of self-responsibility forprotecting oneself and others through community-based DRR education.
Panelists from Japan, UNESCO, the World Bank, and Nepal's National Society for
Earthquake Technology (NSET) gave presentations on various standards for
reducing disaster reduction risks.
The Deputy Director General of the MLIT's Housing Bureau participatedfrom Japan. After introducing the modern construction standards that havebeen firmly embedded since the Great Kanto Earthquake as a result of Japan's
earthquake propensity, he discussed Japan's Building Standards Act, building
and architect inspection and certification systems, research conducted in thefield of construction, and seismic resistance training provided to overseas
practitioners and researchers.

Ryosei Akazawa, State-Minister of the Cabinet Office served as a panelist in the Working Session on“Governance and Development Planning at the National/Local Levels (Priority 1)”

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

Page 21

Chapter IIDay
15(Sun.)

Part I

(6) Conference Venue Exhibits
Exhibits at the conference venue included several by overseas organizations such as the UN, nine major groups, and agroup of disabled persons. Exhibits were also hosted in cooperation with relevant Japanese ministries, agencies, andlocal governments (Tokyo and Hyogo Prefecture), the Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA), the Japan
International Cooperation Agency (JICA), and NHK (Japan Broadcasting Corporation).
The Government of Japan hosted exhibits on themes including satellite observation technology (Japan Meteorological
Agency), advanced disaster management using ICT and other technologies (Ministry of Internal Affairs andCommunications), initiatives for reconstruction from the Great Hanshin-Awaji Earthquake (Hyogo Prefecture) and theGreat East Japan Earthquake (Reconstruction Agency), and international cooperation related to DRR. The Conference
also featured outdoor exhibits of electric vehicles from Nissan Motor as well as exhibits of mobile power-supply carsand ICT cars by the Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications. The ICT cars are equipped with a mobile ICT unit
enabling telephone calls and data transmission, and can be dispatched to disaster-affected regions during a disaster toquickly build a communications environment. Internet connectivity was provided to Conference participants through awireless LAN network contributed by ICT cars. The Ignite Stage was also set up to offer 15-minute presentations byparticipants on DRR-related topics and projects.

Indoor DRR exhibition at the Conference venue

Outdoor exhibits at the Conference venue

Ignite Stage presentation

Page 22

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

(8) Luncheon with the Prime Minister
On the afternoon of March 14, the first day of the Conference, Prime Minister Abe held a luncheon for the heads ofstate participating in the Third WCDRR.
At the start of the luncheon, Prime Minister Abe expressed his appreciation, on behalf of the host country, to theheads of state for their participation in the Third WCDRR as an indication of the political commitment of theinternational community to DRR.
Following this, World Bank Group President Jim Yong Kim gave an address as a guest speaker. He mentioned thecyclone that was striking the country of Vanuatu and emphasized the great importance of DRR in working to eliminate
extreme poverty and rectify economic disparity. He expressed his gratitude for the individual political leadership ofPrime Minister Abe and the efforts of Japan in keeping DRR on the international agenda. He also touched on theimportance of prior preparations, citing both infectious diseases such as Ebola and natural disasters as serious risks
currently faced by the international community. In addition, President Kim expressed his gratitude for Japan’s
leadership in the two areas of DRR and universal healthcare coverage, noting that this year, as the year the post-2015
development agenda is being adopted, presents a key opportunity to tackle the important issues of DRR andhealthcare.
Next, Helen Clark, Administrator of the UNDP, gave remarks in which she spoke highly of the SCIDRR as well as DRR
cooperation based on Japan’s concept of “Build Back Better.” She also spoke about how Sendai’s reconstruction fromthe Great East Japan Earthquake encourages others, how individual DRR actions alone are insufficient, and how DRR
must be fully incorporated into general development policy.
At the luncheon, dishes were served on Sendai tansu, wooden boxes that are a traditional craft of Sendai, to highlightthe appeal of Sendai and promote the recovery of disaster-affected areas.

Prime Minister Abe giving remarks at the beginning of the luncheon(attended by UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon and heads of state including the King of Swaziland)
WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

Page 23

Chapter II(7) Bilateral Meetings
More than 100 ministerial level ministers, including 25 heads of state, participated in the Third WCDRR. Prime Minister
Shinzo Abe and his Cabinet ministers took this opportunity to hold bilateral meetings with representatives of othercountries. Prime Minister Abe held talks with the heads of state of Kenya, Thailand, Turkmenistan, Swaziland, Vanuatu,
Rwanda, Tanzania, Zimbabwe, Micronesia, Cambodia, and Kiribati from March 13-15. In addition to discussing
cooperation for a successful World Conference, the leaders also discussed various ways to develop cooperative
bilateral relations, and Prime Minister Abe received courtesy visits from the vice presidents of participating countries.
Prime Minister Abe also met with UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon to discuss ways to strengthen cooperation
between Japan and the UN, among other topics, and received courtesy visits from the heads or other representativesof participating international organizations. Minister of State for Disaster Management Eriko Yamatani, Minister for
Reconstruction Wataru Takeshita, Minister for Internal Affairs and Communications Sanae Takaichi, Minister for
Foreign Affairs Fumio Kishida, and Minister for Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism Akihiro Ota also took partin bilateral meetings with their counterparts including vice presidents, deputy prime ministers, and relevant cabinet
ministers.

(9) Welcome Reception by the Japanese Government
The Government of Japan hosted a welcome reception for participants of the Third WCDRR, numbering approximately
1,000 people from government, the private sector, community groups, and other organizations, at the Sendai Royal
Park Hotel at 7:00 pm on March 14.
Part I

Prime Minister Abe gave remarks at the beginning of the reception, where he expressed his gratitude to theparticipants and introduced the food booths at the event. He noted their offerings, which included an assortment ofmeats, fish, and Japanese sake from the six prefectures of the Tohoku region as well as sushi prepared with local fish bysushi chefs who had lost their restaurants in the Great East Japan Earthquake. He also mentioned the Olympic andParalympic Games which are to be held in Tokyo in 2020 and promoted them as an opportunity for Japan to both hostand entertain people from all over the world, while boosting the reconstruction of the Tohoku region.
Next, UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon gave remarks, expressing his gratitude to the Government of Japan for
hosting the reception and encouraging the many journalists participating in the Third WCDRR to communicate to theworld the importance of DRR. He also emphasized that reaching agreement on a strong outcome document from
Sendai, which was affected by the Great East Japan Earthquake, would contribute to sustainable development andclimate change initiatives.
In a toast, Minister of State for Disaster Management Eriko Yamatani introduced some of the recovery efforts of theGreat East Japan Earthquake intended to achieve the principle of “Build Back Better.” She encouraged guests to visit
the disaster-affected regions to observe the state of reconstruction as well as to enjoy the beauty, food, and culture of
the Tohoku region.
We Are Tomodachi, the official magazine of the Government of Japan that contains articles related to advanced
Japanese DRR technologies and reconstruction from the Great East Japan Earthquake, and other topics, was distributedat the venue to further communicate Japan’s efforts to participants.

Welcome reception hosted by the Government of Japan

Page 24

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

Special Feature: Green Conference

Chapter II

A variety of steps were taken at the Third WCDRR to make it a “green” conference. Specifically, the
UNISDR targeted a reduction of at least 50% in the amount of paper used at the Conference and created a“Conference Box” that allowed access to all documents on the WCDRR website in an attempt to go
paperless. The Government of Japan offered rentals of iPads at the venue for country representatives that
did not have portable tablets to facilitate paperless proceedings. To reduce CO2 emissions, organizers
encouraged the use of shuttle buses between the hotel and Conference venue, and Sendai City offered
free rentals of “Date Bike” electric community bicycles.
On the final day of the conference, the UN announced that the Conference Box had been accessed morethan 2,500 times, and that efforts to promote a paperless World Conference resulted in printing savings
equivalent to approximately 10 million sheets of paper.

2-3 Outcome Documents
The session to adopt the outcome documents for the plenary session was held in the late evening of March 18. Draftsof the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction (SFDRR) 2015-2030 and the Sendai Declaration, compiled justprior to the session by the Main Committee, were reported by committee co-chairs. Conference President Yamatanipresented these documents for deliberation at the plenary session, with both documents being adopted unanimously.
In her remarks at the closing ceremony, Conference President Yamatani expressed her thanks to the Conference
participants and all who had participated in the organization of the event. She also declared her intention to strengthen
DRR initiatives at the global, regional, national, and community levels under the SFDRR, and to work to ensure that the
new development agenda and climate change framework integrate the perspective of disaster risk reduction. She also
alluded to promoting initiatives to promote self-help and mutual help. Given that November 5 is Tsunami Preparedness
Day in Japan, she proposed that the establishment of a World Tsunami Awareness Day would help raise awareness of
DRR around the world.
Special Representative of the United Nations Secretary-General for Disaster Risk Reduction Wahlström spoke of theneed for strong commitments and political leadership to implement the SFDRR over the next 15 years, as well as toimplement the 120 new voluntary commitments made by concerned parties through the Conference, and the 88
commitments made during Conference preparations.

Main Committee adopting the outcome documents

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

Page 25

Part I

Adoption of the outcome documents

Closing ceremony(1) Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction (SFDRR) 2015-2030
The SFDRR was adopted as the successor to the HFA 2005-2015, and includes stipulations regarding the expected
outcomes and goals, guiding principles, priorities for action, roles of stakeholders, and international cooperation andglobal partnership. Anticipated outcomes of the SFDRR in the next 15 years are “The substantial reduction of disasterrisk and losses in terms of lives, livelihoods, and health, and in terms of the economic, physical, social, cultural, andenvironmental assets of persons, businesses, communities, and countries.” To realize this, it pursues these goals:“Prevent new and reduce existing disaster risks through the implementation of integrated and inclusive economic,
structural, legal, social, health, cultural, educational, environmental, technological, political, and institutional measuresthat prevent and reduce hazard exposure and vulnerability to disaster, increase preparedness for response andrecovery, and thus strengthen resilience.”
Seven global targets were established to promote the evaluation of progress on initiatives to accomplish theseoutcomes and goals. Specifically, they are to substantially reduce by 2030 (1) disaster mortality, (2) the number ofaffected people, (3) direct disaster economic losses, (4) disaster damage to critical infrastructure and disruption of basic
services; and to substantially increase by 2020 (5) the number of countries with national and local DRR strategies; andby 2030 (6) international cooperation with developing countries, and (7) the availability of and access to multi-hazard
early warning systems and disaster risk information and assessments by citizens. It is anticipated that setting thesetargets will lead to clear positioning of DRR in the Post-2015 Development Agenda to be formulated this fall.
Substituting the five Priorities for Actions of the Hyogo Framework for Action, the SFDRR specifies the four Priorities for
Action of (1) understanding disaster risk, (2) strengthening disaster risk governance to manage disaster risk, (3)investing in disaster risk reduction and resilience, and (4) enhancing disaster preparedness for effective response and to“Build Back Better” in recovery, rehabilitation, and reconstruction.
In addition, an independent chapter to encourage the participation and cooperation of numerous stakeholders has
been created, and the roles to be performed by communities, academic and scientific research institutes, privatecompanies, the media, and other groups have also been specified.
Taken all together, the SFDRR fully reflects the importance of prior disaster risk reduction investment, “Build Back
Better,” and governance involving diverse stakeholders, all of which were emphasized by Japan from the negotiation
stage of this framework. It also reinforces initiatives designed to reduce the underlying risk factors—a challenge in the
HFA initiatives—and its content is quite substantial.

Page 26

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

Fig. I-2-5

Easy Look-up Charts of Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015-2030

Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015-2030
The substantial reduction of disaster risk and losses in lives, livelihoods andhealth and in the economic, physical, social, cultural and environmental assetsof persons, businesses, communities and countries

Goal
Prevent new and reduce existing disaster risk through the implementation of integrated and inclusive
economic, structural, legal, social, health, cultural, educational, environmental, technological, politicaland institutional measures that prevent and reduce hazard exposure and vulnerability to disaster,increase preparedness for response and recovery, and thus strengthen resilience

Global Targets①Number of disaster mortality②Number of affected people③Direct disaster economic loss
④Disaster damage to health andeducational facilities⑤ National and local disasterrisk reduction strategies⑥International cooperation todeveloping countries⑦ Access to multi-hazard early
warning systems

Priorities for action
There is a need for focused action within and across sectors by States at local, national, regional and global levels in the following
four priority areas.
Priority１

Priority 2

Priority ３

Priority ４

Understanding disaster risk

Strengthening disaster risk
governance to manage
disaster risk

Investing in disaster risk
reduction for resilience

Enhancing disaster preparedness for effective
response, and to «Build Back Better» inrecovery, rehabilitation and reconstruction

Role of stakeholders
Participation of civil society, volunteers, community based organizations(In particular, women, children and youth, persons
with disabilities and older persons ）Cooperation withacademia, scientificand research entities

Cooperation with business,
professional associations and private
sector financial institutions andphilanthropic foundations

Raising public awarenessby mediaInternational cooperation and global partnership
General considerations(Considerations for International Cooperation)

Means ofimplementation

Support from internationalorganizations

Follow-up actions

Source: Cabinet Office(2) Sendai Declaration
The Sendai Declaration expresses the political commitments of each country to disaster risk reduction and was adopted
to promote the SFDRR.

Sendai Declaration
1.

We, the Heads of State and Government, ministers, and delegates participating in the Third United Nations
World Conference on Disaster Risk Reduction, gathered from March 14-18, 2015 in Sendai City of Miyagi
Prefecture in Japan, which has demonstrated a vibrant recovery from the Great East Japan Earthquake ofMarch 2011. Recognizing the increasing impact of disasters and their complexity in many parts of the world,
we declare our determination to enhance our efforts to strengthen disaster risk reduction to reduce disaster losses of lives and assets from disasters worldwide.

2.

We value the important role played by the Hyogo Framework for Action 2005–2015: Building the Resilienceof Nations and Communities to Disasters over the past ten years. Having completed the assessment andreview of and considered the experience gained under its implementation, we hereby adopt the Sendai
Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015–2030. We are strongly committed to the implementation of
the new framework as the guide to enhance our efforts for the future.

3.

We call all stakeholders to action, aware that the realization of the new framework depends on our unceasing and tireless collective efforts to make the world safer from the risk of disasters in the decades to comefor the benefit of the present and future generations.

4.

We thank the people and the Government of Japan as well as the City of Sendai for hosting the Third United
Nations World Conference on Disaster Risk Reduction and extend our appreciation to Japan for its commitment to advancing disaster risk reduction in the global development agenda.

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

Page 27

Chapter II

Expected outcome

Special Feature: Measures for Persons with Disabilities at the Third UN WCDRRPart IThe Government of Japan, Sendai City, the Nippon Foundation, and UNISDR undertook a range ofmeasures with the goal of making the Third UN World Conference on DRR an accessible conference (aconference in which persons living with disabilities can participate without difficulty).
Specific measures that were implemented include making the facilities barrier free, providing Japanese
Sign Language and International Sign Language for each session, displaying Japanese and English
captioning on screens, and providing accessible transport. These measures enabled more than 200
persons with disabilities to participate in the World Conference and received strong praise, including callsfrom involved parties that these measures should become the standard for future UN conferences.
General UN conferences in the past, apart from conferences concerning persons with disabilities, have notprovided opportunities for statements by representatives of groups of persons with disabilities. This was
the first time such an opportunity was offered at a Plenary Session, and Monthian Buntan, a fully blind
senator of the Upper House of the Royal Thai Parliament, gave a statement. Mr. Buntan advocated thatthe DRR frameworks implemented by countries be inclusive of and ensure equal access for persons withdisabilities, and highlighted the importance of having persons with disabilities actively involved in DRR
policy development.
Discussions were held in a Working Session of the Conference on the topic of “Proactive Participation of
Persons with Disabilities in Inclusive Disaster Risk Reduction for All,” and symposiums and other side
events related to themes of persons with disabilities were also held.
The Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015–2030, adopted on the final day of the conference,
also clearly states the importance of persons with disabilities. The conference achieved significant
outcomes in terms of promoting efforts for persons with disabilities in future DRR initiatives.

Mr. Buntan giving a statement
at a Plenary Session

Page 28

Sign language interpretation

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

2-4 Related Events

The Great East Japan Earthquake Forum was held at Tohoku University to provide perspectives on better disasterrecovery and new DRR methods that leverage the experience and lessons gained from the Great East Japan
Earthquake. In addition, approximately 400 symposia and seminars were held in Sendai and at venues in neighboring
prefectures affected by the quake. Both indoor and outdoor exhibitions were held at Sendai Mediatheque, such as the
Tohoku Reconstruction and Disaster Risk Reduction Pavilion and the DRR Exhibition. Further, the “Bosai” Industry Fair
was held at the Yume Messe Miyagi to display Japanese technologies and products related to DRR which offer greater
comfort, economy, and environmental advantages not only during emergencies, but also on an everyday basis. Twohalls covered the themes of “Civil Society Collaboration and Disaster Risk Reduction” and “Women and DRR.”
A total of 42 study tours on 25 topics were organized for Conference participants from around the globe in order toprovide information on the state of recovery from the Great East Japan Earthquake and to highlight initiatives to “Build
Back Better.” After the Conference, five excursion tours were held to enable participants to experience the culture andfood of the prefectures in the Tohoku region.

(1) Symposiums and Seminars, Including the Great East Japan Earthquake ForumThe Government of Japan and the Sendai Committee for the Third WCDRR held the Great East Japan Earthquake
Forum as a core component of its public forums to explore prospects for achieving the principle of “Build Back Better”
and to discuss new prospects for DRR. Sponsored by the Government of Japan and the Sendai Committee for the Third
WCDRR, this forum focused on 10 themes including prospects for DRR in Japan and national resiliency.
On March 14, the Cabinet Office held a forum on the theme of “Japan’s Perspective: A Quest for Ultimate DRR - From
Hyogo to Sendai and Beyond.” The forum included discussions of measures for a new DRR framework based on DRR
measures that have been strengthened in the wake of the extensive damage wrought by the Great Hanshin-Awaji
Earthquake and Great East Japan Earthquake.
Yohei Matsumoto, State-Minister of the Cabinet Office, gave the opening remarks at this event. There were
presentations by governors and vice governors of four prefectures in the Tohoku region on topics including recovery
from the Great East Japan Earthquake and DRR measures learned from disasters. A panel discussion featured
representatives of companies, local governments, experts, and international organizations.
Approximately 400 large and small symposiums, seminars, and other events were held in venues around Sendai Cityand the prefectures of Aomori, Iwate, Miyagi, and Fukushima led by ministries and agencies of the Government ofJapan as well as a range of Japanese and international groups. These events highlighted lessons learned from the Great
East Japan Earthquake and recovery and reconstruction initiatives as well as DRR efforts implemented in countries
worldwide.

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

Page 29

Chapter II

As part of the Third WCDRR, related events providing information on initiatives concerning disaster risk reduction,
disaster mitigation, and recovery were held at venues peripheral to the main Conference venue. The events werearranged by a diverse array of stakeholders, both domestic and overseas, including government agencies, local
governments, NPOs, NGOs, universities, and regional organizations.

Fig. I-2-6

The Great East Japan Earthquake Forums

Session1

Schedule

Organizer

ThemePart I

Sat.
March
14

13:30-15:00

Cabinet Office of Japan

15:30-17:30

Fire and DisasterRole of Volunteer Fire Corps and Community Residents inManagement Agency of Japan Earthquakes, Tsunamis, and Sediment Disasters

Sun.
March
15

10:00-12:00

City of Sendai

4

13:30-15:30

Reconstruction Agency, Japan Revival from the Great East Japan Earthquake and the
Way Forward5

16:30-18:30

MLIT (Ministry of Land,
Infrastructure, Transport andTourism) Japan, JSCE (Japan
Society of Civil Engineers),
HELP (High-level Experts andLeaders Panel on Water andDisaster)

10:00-13:00

National Resilience Promotion Building National Resilience：What Should We Leave for
Office of the Cabinet Office of the Next Generation?
Japan

15:00-18:00

Ministry of Education,
Culture, Sports, Science andTechnology, The Japanese
National Commission for
UNESCO, Miyagi University of
Education

Fostering DRR Through Education for Sustainable
Development: Towards a Better Future for Children

10:00-12:00

Japan International
Cooperation Agency (JICA)

Disaster Risk Reduction (DRR) and International
Cooperation: Sharing Experiences and Lessons Learned
from the Mega-Disasters and Japan’s DRR Culture with
the World Through International Cooperation

9

14:30-18:00

Sendai Disaster Waste
Treatment Forum Executive
Committee

Disaster Waste Management After Huge Disasters:
Preparations and Rapid Recovery Through Public-Private
Partnerships

10 Wed.
March
18

14:30-17:00

City of Sendai, Sendai
Committee for the UN World
Conference on Disaster Risk
Reduction

Citizen Power to Support Reconstruction and Disaster
Risk Reduction

2
3

6

Mon.
March
16

7

8

Tue.
March
17

Japan’s Perspective: A Quest for Ultimate DRR - From
Hyogo to Sendai and Beyond

Sendai Medical Forum: Review of Medical Relief andPublic Health Maintenance after the Great East Japan
Earthquake and Recommendations for Future Activities

Towards Mitigating Loss Caused By Mega-Disasters:
Ways to Save Lives and Prevent Devastating Damage toSocioeconomic Activities

Source: Cabinet Office

The Great East Japan Earthquake Forum venue

State-Minister of the Cabinet Office Yohei Matsumoto
giving remarks at the Great East Japan Earthquake Forum
Page 30

Panel discussion at the Forum

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

(2) Tohoku Reconstruction and DRR Pavilion, DRR Exhibition

More than 200 Japanese and international groups presented booth and poster exhibits at Sendai Mediatheque, Sendai
Shimin Kaikan Hall, and the Sendai City Information and Industry Plaza (inside the AER), among other venues. These
exhibits introduced DRR activities and recovery efforts to a total of more than 40,000 visitors.
In addition, an outdoor exhibit entitled Sendai Disaster Prevention Square 2015 was held at Kotodai Park and included
firefighting drills and vehicle exhibits, music stages, and various booths, as well as hands-on experiences that allowedfamilies and other visitors to have fun while learning about disaster risk reduction and mitigation. The exhibition
attracted a total of approximately 50,000 visitors.

Tohoku Reconstruction and DRR Pavilion at Sendai Mediatheque

Booth and poster exhibits (5th floor of Sendai Mediatheque (right), Sendai Shimin Kaikan Hall (left))

Outdoor exhibits

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

Page 31

Chapter II

The four disaster-affected prefectures of Aomori, Iwate, Miyagi, and Fukushima, as well as Sendai City, set up the
Tohoku Reconstruction and DRR Pavilion on the first floor of Sendai Mediatheque. It featured exhibits related to DRR,
recovery, and reconstruction to share with the world the experience and lessons of the Great East Japan Earthquake
and promote the future of Sendai and the Tohoku region.

Part I

Exhibition (Sendai City Information and Industry Plaza (inside the AER))(3) Bosai Industry Fair (DRR Industry Exhibition) in Sendai
From March 15-17, the Cabinet Office, Miyagi Prefecture, and Nikkan Kogyo Shimbun (The Business & Technology Daily
News) held the Bosai Industry Fair (DRR Industry Exhibition) at the Miyagi Exhibition Center (Yume Messe Miyagi). The
exhibition gathered state-of-the-art Japanese DRR technologies and products under one roof to highlight the theme:“Let’s hand down our experience and preparedness for future disasters.” A total of approximately 6,000 visitors cameto the exhibition, which featured exhibits by 160 companies and groups in wide-ranging fields from construction,
machinery, energy, IT, and communications to food and logistics.
The Bosai Industry Symposium was held on March 16. Focusing on the theme “Toward DRR industry development andDRR capacity improvement,” keynote speeches and a panel discussion were held on the role companies are expected
to perform in the event of a disaster, including coordination with the authorities. In the first session, companies
participating in the Bosai Industry Fair introduced company initiatives and technologies useful not only in times of
emergency but also in the course of everyday life. In the second session, keynote speeches and a panel discussion were
held on the issues that Japan should address to improve the capacity for DRR and develop the DRR industry.

Bosai Industry Fair

(4) Study Tour
During the World Conference, study tours lasting from a half day to a full day were organized for Conference
participants. These tours, which consisted of visits to disaster-affected regions including areas devastated by thetsunami, the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Station, and temporary housing facilities, were conducted to share theexperience of and lessons learned from the Great East Japan Earthquake as well as the current status of recovery. All of
the planned 42 tours on 25 topics were conducted for a total of 635 participants. They provided an opportunity forparticipants to see and experience firsthand the progress made to “Build Back Better” in the Tohoku region and tolearn about the participation of diverse actors in DRR activities, DRR education, and recovery initiatives.

Page 32

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

Fig. I-2-7

2
3
4
5
6

7

8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15

16

17

18

19

20

21

Study Tour Theme (Upper Row)
Tour Destination (Lower Row)
Multiple Defense Measures Against Tsunamis: Lessons Learned from the Great East
Japan Earthquake
Sendai Coast (Multiple Defense Against Tsunamis), Arahama Elementary School(ruins), Tsunami Evacuation Tower
Resurrection of the Natural Environment in Tsunami-Affected Areas
Gamo Tideland, Minamigamo Community, Seaside Park Adventure Field
Agricultural Challenges in Tsunami-Affected Areas
Sendai City Agriculture & Horticulture Center, Restored Drainage Pump Station,
Michisaki (Hydroponic Agriculture Factory)
Resilient Urban Infrastructures: Wastewater Treatment Plant & Gas Plant
Minamigamo Wastewater Treatment Plant, Sendai Minato Gas Plant
Visit a School Devastated by the Tsunami
Arahama Elementary School (ruins)
New Concept of Our Town: Achieving both Disaster-Resilience and Eco-Friendliness
Tago Nishi Eco-Model Town
Recovery of Residents and Business in Ishinomaki, One of the Most Severely
Damaged Cities
Hiyoriyama Hill, Nippon Paper Industries Ishinomaki Mill, Kadonowaki Elementary
School (ruins), Fishing Port & Tsunami Evacuation Building (Miyagi Express
Corporation), Ishinomaki Community & Info Center
Tohoku University Guided Tour
Katahira Campus/Seiryo Campus/Aobayama Campus
DRR Efforts of the Private Sector: Case of a Brewery in a Tsunami-Affected Area
Kirin Brewery Sendai Plant
Disaster Prevention Education for YouthSendai Seiryo Secondary School
Disaster Risk Reduction Education for Children with Special Needs
Miyagi University of Education's Affiliated School for Special Needs Education
DRR Efforts of the Private Sector: Experience a Disaster Drill in a Department StoreFujisaki Department Store & Aoba-dori Community Planning Council
Yuriage: A Historical Fishing Port Making Steady Progress in Recovery
Yuriage Port Area, Hiyoriyama Hill, Maple Pavilion
Experience Yuriage: Japanese Morning Market
Yuriage Port Morning Market
Millennium Hope Hills for Tsunami Evacuation, and Efforts of Local Residents to
Build a Resilient City
Millennium Hope Hills Project, Mega-Scale Solar Power Plant, Tamaura Nishi
Community
Joint Public and Private Action for Regional Disaster Prevention and Advanced
Disaster Prevention Technology for Housing: Working Together to Build a DisasterResilient Town
Sekisui House Tohoku Factory
Aratozawa, Legacy of the Greatest Landslide Disaster: Lessons Learned from the
Iwate-Miyagi Inland Earthquake in 2008
Aratozawa Landslide Site, Heilsam Kurikoma, Kurihara Fire Department
Revitalizing Fukushima: Reconstruction from the Tsunami and Efforts of the Fishing
Industry
Soma Port, Soma Reconstruction Support Center, Recovery Public Housing, Wada
Strawberry Farm
Revitalizing Fukushima: Food Safety
Fukushima Agricultural Technology Center (Koriyama City), Sake Breweries(Nihonmatsu City), Fukushima City School Lunch Center
Accelerating Reconstruction with the Latest Technology and Passing on Memoriesof the Disaster to Future Generations: Rikuzentakata's Large-Scale Land-Raising
Projects and Ofunato's Disaster Memorial
Bridge of Hope, Miracle Lone Pine Tree (Rikuzentakata City), Ofunato Tsunami
Museum“The Miracle of Kamaishi" and Local Government Horizontal Supplementation:
Disaster Prevention Education Measures in Kamaishi and Logistic Support Activities
in TonoKamaishi City: Unosumai District, Tono Disaster Control Center
WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

No. ofPlanned &Tours
Organized by Offered Itinerary

5

Chapter II

1Study Tours During the WCDRR

2
2
1
Sendai
Committee
Tour Office2
Half-day
1

1

4
2
1
1
1
1

Sendai
Committee
Tour Office1

Half-day2

4

1

All day

1
Fukushima
Prefecture1
All day1
Iwate
Prefecture
1

Page 33

22

Part I

23
24

25

Study Tour Theme (Upper Row)
Tour Destination (Lower Row)
Reinvention Every 1000 Years: Security Measures Being Taken at the Onagawa
Nuclear Power Plant Using Lessons Learned from Past Disasters
Ishinomaki Fish Market, Onagawa Regional Medical Center, Onagawa Nuclear
Power Plant
Operation Tomodachi: Witness the Impressive Restoration of Sendai Airport andBusiness Continuity Management (BCM)
Sendai Airport, Port of Sendai Shiogama, Yume Messe Miyagi, JX Nippon Oil &Energy Corporation Refinery
Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Station: Decontamination and Decommission
Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Station
Communicating Past Lessons and the Efforts of Sanriku Railway: Kamaishi's
Communication of Tradition to Future Generations and the Restoration Work on
the Sanriku Railway
Kamaishi City, Sanriku Railway (Route between Kamaishi and Ofunato) and a
Railway Restoration Site

No. ofPlanned &Tours
Organized by Offered Itinerary1
MiyagiPrefecture1
All day
Agency for
NaturalResourcesand Energy,
Fukushima
Prefecture

3

1

Source: Cabinet Office

Preparing for tsunamis/
Study tour on multilayered defenses

Participants listening to the former principal of
Arahama Elementary School, which wasdamaged in the tsunami

Study tour to Sendai Municipal Seiryo Chuo
Kyoiku Secondary School

Participants learning about people’s experiences inthe tsunami-damaged area of Yuriage, Natori City

Recovery Fukushima: Food Safety & Security Tour

Page 34

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

Fig. I-2-8

1

2

3

4

5

Excursions During the WCDRR
No. of
Theme of Excursion (Upper Row)
Planned & Excursion
Itinerary
Organized
bys OfferedTour Destinations (Lower Row)
Recovery of the Rias Coastline and Matsushima Bay's Miraculous Survival from the
Tsunami: From the Tsunami Disaster to Recovery – Developing a Disaster-ResistantCommunity
2 daysMiyagi1and
Shiogama City (Shiogama Shrine, Urakasumi Sake Brewery Saura Co., Ltd., Sushi
Prefecture
1 night
Restaurant), Matsushima (Bay Cruise, Zuiganzi Temple, Kokeshi Painting),
Kesennuma (Fish market, Rias Ark Museum of Art), Minamisanriku (Temporary
Recovery Shopping Area)
Exploring the World Heritage Site and One of the Most Beautiful Bays in the World: Miyagi
Golden Route of Tohoku – Matsushima and Hiraizumi
and
1
1 day
Matsushima (Bay Cruise, Zuiganji Temple), Hiraizumi Town (Motsu-ji Temple, Chuson Iwate
Prefecture-ji Temple)
Viewing the Natural Beauty of the Ice Monsters and Experiencing the Traditional
Culture of Snow Country: Let's Experience the Nature and Culture of Yamagata
Yamagata 1
Prefecture
Prefecture
Zao Hot Springs (Zao Ice Monsters, Yamagata Maiko), Mogami River Cruise, Ginzan
Hot Springs
Revitalizing Fukushima: Overcoming the Disaster with the Concept of Building Back
2 days
BetterFukushima
andShinchi Town, Wada Strawberry Farm, Stock Warehouse for Disaster Prevention, JA Prefecture 1
1 night
Fukushima, Minka-en, Fukushima Agricultural Technology Centre, Dekoyashiki, Sake
Breweries, Mahoron, the Fukushima Prefectural Center of Cultural Properties
Revitalizing Fukushima: Integrating Innovation and Tradition
Decontamination Information Plaza, The Power of Mothers, Fukushima Agricultural Fukushima 1
Prefecture
Technology Center, Fukushima Renewable Energy Institute, AIST, Aiku, Tsuruga-jo
Castle, Kaeigura Sake Breweries

Source: Cabinet Office

Participants experiencing tea ceremony

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

Page 35

Chapter II(5) Excursions
After the World Conference, on March 18-20, five excursions were offered to Conference participants and theirspouses in four prefectures of the Tohoku region. The excursions allowed participants to experience the rich natureand cultural heritage of the Tohoku region. The 38 people that participated from various countries experienced the
traditional crafts of ceramics painting and tea ceremony as well as floating down the Mogamigawa River in a traditional
boat. The excursions also a provided valuable opportunity to tour the World Heritage Site of Hiraizumi and otherhistorical structures and to experience the culture, history, and nature of the Tohoku region. There were also
excursions to visit disaster-affected areas including the disaster management government building ruins in the town of
Minamisanriku, a sake brewery that was rebuilt after the earthquake, fishing boats bringing their catches to a rebuilt
fishing port, and explanations of recovery efforts taken by product manufacturers.

Special Feature: Public Forums

Part I

During the Third WCDRR, symposiums were held not only at venues in Sendai city, but also in theprefectures of Aomori, Iwate, Miyagi, and Fukushima, focusing on various initiatives related to disaster risk
reduction and mitigation, and recovery. For instance, a symposium on the theme of cultural properties and
DRR was held in Iwate Prefecture and attracted about 160 participants, including country representatives
and experts from inside and outside of Iwate Prefecture. After the symposium, participants visited theWorld Heritage Site of Chuson-ji Temple in Hiraizumi, where they were welcomed with a performance by
the Hiraizumi Municipal Nagashima Elementary School Fire-Fighting Club. They heard about the DRR
measures taken at Chuson-ji Temple and enjoyed a water cannon demonstration.

Water cannon demonstration at Chuson-ji Temple

Special Feature: Cooperative Efforts by Volunteer Groups

Many volunteers went to the disaster-affected areas after the Great East Japan Earthquake, but thisbrought many issues related to disaster response to the fore, including the lack of coordination amongsupport groups and between the government and support groups. To address these types of issues, anumber of support groups in Japan including the Shinsai ga Tsunagu Zenkoku Network (National Network
for Disaster Response) and the Japan Platform are currently moving to study the creation of a neworganization that would serve a coordination and liaison function when a major disaster occurs to achieve
more effective disaster response.
On March 15 during the Third WCDRR, a public forum on the topic of “Call for National Disaster Response
Coordination Mechanism in Japan: The Role of Japanese Volunteer Organizations in Disasters" was heldin Sendai City for NPOs and NGOs, support groups, social welfare councils, staff from governmentorganizations, and others involved in disaster support.
The public forum included a presentation by the US National Voluntary Organizations Active in Disaster(NVOAD) on examples of support coordination overseas. In addition, researchers, representatives of
support groups, business leaders, and others held lively debates including a panel discussion on creating
systems to coordinate operations in Japan.
Ongoing discussions are expected to be held on a range of points including strengthening networking
among support groups and building relationships with the authorities.

Page 36

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

2-5 Follow-up Activities(1) Implementation of Conference Outcomes and Follow-up
To promote the SFDRR, a mechanism is needed to appropriately follow-up on the status of its fulfillment. Key
challenges will include monitoring the seven newly established global targets, improving the methods involved, and thedevelopment of indicators that measure the progress on newly established priority actions. It is therefore necessary tosupport the activities of the UNISDR, including these initiatives, and to establish international disaster statisticalmethods that will contribute to these initiatives.
As a follow-up to the Third WCDRR, the Government of Japan is working to obtain the understanding and consent ofother countries for the UN designation of November 5 as World Tsunami Day, as proposed by Conference President
Yamatani at the closing ceremony.

(2) Promotion of International Cooperation for Disseminating “Build Back Better” (Support for IRP Activities)
At the Second World Conference in 2005, the International Recovery Platform (IRP; discussed in detail in Chapter 3) was
launched to integrate and share a range of knowledge on recovery after a disaster, utilizing recovery efforts from theGreat Hanshin-Awaji Earthquake that had been conducted by Hyogo Prefecture where the conference was held.
Likewise, at the Third WCDRR held in the disaster-affected areas of Sendai and the Tohoku region four years after theGreat East Japan Earthquake, information on the current state of recovery from that quake and related DRR initiatives
were shared with participants from countries around the world. Even after the Conference, it is important to keep theinternational community informed of the progress of recovery from the Great East Japan Earthquake and on initiatives
aimed at “Build Back Better.” To do this, it is necessary to use strategies compiled by the International Recovery
Platform (IRP) to develop activities in Sendai and Tohoku for collecting and disseminating good practices and for
cultivating human resources, and to strengthen the development of systems for this purpose.

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

Page 37

Chapter II

International cooperation on DRR to advance the SFDRR is discussed in detail in Chapter 3. It covers global managementof SFDRR progress and necessary efforts related to the principle of “Build Back Better,” which is explicitly mentioned in
the SFDRR.

Fig. I-2-9

Background of the UN World Conference on Disaster Risk Reduction

Background of the UN World Conference on Disaster Risk Reduction
Part I

1990

International Decade for Natural Disaster
Reduction (IDNDR)

United Nations

Japan

International Decade for Natural Disaster
Reduction (IDNDR)
スタート

Cabinet Approval of establishment of
IDNDR Promotion Headquarters

World Conference on Natural Disaster Reduction (Yokohama)
1994

Adoption of the Yokohama Strategy and Plan of Action for a Safer WorldThe Great Hanshin-Awaji EQ

1995
1998
1999
2000

International Strategy for Disaster
Reduction (ISDR) launched
Adopted by UN General Assembly

Establishment of the Asian Disaster
Reduction Center (ADRC)
Asian Conference on Disaster Reduction(ACDR) (annual)

World Conference on Disaster Reduction (WCDR) (Kobe, Hyogo)
2003
2004

Resolution to hold in Japan
adopted by UN General Assembly (Dec. 2003)

Cabinet Approval (July 2004)

The Indian Ocean TsunamiInternational Strategy for Disaster Reduction (ISDR)

Date: 18-22 January 2005 (Hyogo, Japan)
Participants: 4,000 people (168 states, international organizations, NGOs, etc.) for the main conference,
40,000 people for related events

Adoption of the Hyogo Framework for Action 2005-2015 (HFA)2005

Promotion of Implementation of the HFA(Convened Global Platform, Regional Platform, etc.)
Establishment of the International Recovery Platform (IRP)The Great East Japan EQ

2011World Conference on Disaster Risk Reduction (WCDRR)
2012
2013
2014

2015

Resolution to hold the WCDRR in Japan (Dec. 2012)
Resolution to hold the WCDRR in Sendai (Dec. 2013)

Cabinet Approval (May 2013)

Date: 14-18 March 2015 (Sendai, Japan)
Participants: 6,500 people for the main conference, more than 150,000 people for related events
 Review of the HFA and adoption of the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction(SFDRR) Dissemination of the status of Japan's recovery from the Great East Japan Earthquake
and Japan's DRR knowledge and technology

Source: Cabinet Office
Page 38

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

Special Feature: Voices of Participants from the Third WCDRR

●

●

●

●

●

I think this is an opportunity to hear people in the community talk about their experience and share
this with people of the world.
(Local government official in Japan)
The WCDRR provides an extremely valuable opportunity for communities and the international
community to listen to one another’s stories. Japan is at the forefront of innovation to reduce
disaster risk and Build Back Better. And truly wonderful events are taking place here, such as
firefighters conducting activities for children. DRR is also something that people can have fun doing.
(Staff member of an international organization)
We came to this conference with big ambition, participated in the meetings, and received recognitioneven from high-level figures. We were able to go to some 100 forums, and young people were able to
be inspired. A special feature of the World Conference is that young people were able to participate
and talk about how they might contribute to the new DRR framework in specific fields. I can go backhome with a very positive feeling. Our voices were really heard.
(Member of a network NGO involved in youth and DRR issues)
It is imperative that the people of the world find ways to reduce the risks of disaster. Let us, as theleaders of the world, make the UN World Conference on Disaster Risk Reduction in Sendai an
opportunity to chart a new direction for disaster resilience in order to fill generations with hope forthe future.
(President of Vanuatu)

A Tweet by Kristalina Georgieva, Vice-President, European Commission
Want a successful event? Do it in #Japan – the perfect host with attention to big and small things alike#WCDRR.
●

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

Page 39

Chapter II

Excerpts from the UNISDR Website
Events like this are important. While the negotiations that take place at the World Conference arepart of an intergovernmental process conducted by foreign diplomats, I think it is necessary to comehere and feel the pain of disaster victims and the momentum to reduce risk. Action is demonstrated
when people have the resolve to act.
(Member of a DRR NGO active in India and Myanmar)

Chapter

III

Japan’s International Cooperation on Disaster Risk Reduction (DRR)

Section 1: Overview
Part IAs discussed in Chapter 2, the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction (SFDRR) was adopted at the Third UN
World Conference on Disaster Risk Reduction (WCDRR), held in March of this year, to succeed the HFA, adopted in
2005, as the guideline for disaster risk reduction in countries around the world. Over the coming 15-year period,
promoting the SFDRR will be the responsibility of the international community, and of Japan as a country which has led
the world in the field of disaster risk reduction.
Therefore, in accordance with the Sendai Cooperation Initiative for Disaster Risk Reduction (SCIDRR) announced byPrime Minister Shinzo Abe, Japan will contribute to the mainstreaming of disaster risk reduction in the international
community by effectively combining the promotion of structural and non-structural supports as well as global
cooperation, and region-wide cooperation; contributing a total of four billion dollars to fields related to disaster risk
reduction and providing human resource development for 40,000 people over the next four years (Fig. I-3-1).
Furthermore, Japan will also proactively continue to promote international cooperation in DRR through measures
including multilateral cooperation via international agencies such as the UN, regional cooperation in Asia, andintergovernmental cooperation. The following sections discuss these activities.

Page 40

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

Special Feature: What Does it Mean to Mainstream DRR?

In the international community, the phrase “gender mainstreaming” is used to mean broadening genderpolicy by incorporating the viewpoint of gender into all policies. In the context of DRR, as was seen in the
WCDRR conference flow detailed in Chapter 1, the primary meaning of “DRR mainstreaming” is making
prior efforts in initiatives to mitigate damage from disasters in particular; in other words, to ensure that
DRR efforts are reflected in all policies on a widespread basis. All sectors are affected once a disasterstrikes, and DRR cannot be achieved unless advanced preparations are made in all types of policies. Japan
has been building a disaster management system with relevant ministries and agencies, public agencies,
local governments, and others under the Central Disaster Management Council, comprised of all relevant
Cabinet ministers. It is imperative that all stakeholders in countries around the world work to create
systems to address DRR during ordinary times, before a disaster strikes.
An evaluation of the Hyogo Framework for Action (HFA) revealed that progress on initiatives to “Reduce
the underlying risk factors” (Priority Action 4) had stalled. Disaster risks are increasing due to improper
land use and urban development. Especially in developing countries, integrating considerations of disasterrisk from the development stage and creating resilient cities and communities are necessary to escape thevicious cycle of poverty and disaster occurrence. In other words, mainstreaming DRR means ensuring that
DRR perspectives are reflected in all development policies. The Millennium Development Goals (MDG)
formulated in 2001 set the basic course for international cooperation in development, but do not address
issues of DRR. Incorporating DRR perspectives in the post-2015 development agenda to be adopted by the
UN General Assembly in the fall of 2015 is imperative to the mainstreaming of DRR. In the same vein, a
new global agreement on climate change is to be formulated at COP21 in the winter of 2015. Since island
nations and nations with coastal areas in particular are expected to face increased disaster risks due to theeffects of climate change, incorporating DRR perspectives into climate change adaptation is also essential.
The problem is that it is difficult to collect funds and move disaster prevention policies forward before adisaster strikes, as compared with the amount of funds invested in emergency response measures after adisaster. To promote the mainstreaming of DRR, there needs to be greater understanding that priorinvestment in DRR is much more cost effective than investment in recovery and restoration after adisaster.
The SFDRR adopted at the Third WCDRR includes numerical DRR goals to advance this concept ofmainstreaming DRR. It includes prior DRR investment and fundamental disaster prevention measures in
the recovery phase after a disaster strikes, in adherence with the “Build Back Better” principle, andestablishes a concept of DRR governance as the responsibility not only of governments, but of all
stakeholders, with diverse stakeholders fully performing their respective roles. Implementation of thesemeasures in the international community will lead to the mainstreaming of DRR. To this end, Japan willcontinue to actively cooperate in the area of international DRR as a leader in the DRR field.

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

Page 41

Chapter III

At the Third WCDRR, the Government of Japan advocated the importance of “mainstreaming DRR,” a termthat deserves closer consideration.

Fig. I-3-1

Outline of the Sendai Cooperation Initiative for Disaster Risk Reduction (SCIDRR)

Sendai Cooperation Initiative for Disaster Risk Reduction (SCIDRR)
1. Basic ConceptPart IDisasters are an obstacle to poverty eradication and sustainable development, and thus a threat to human security.
Mainstreaming of disaster risk reduction (DRR) - introducing the DRR perspective in all development policy andplanning - is important. Clearly positioning DRR in the post-2015 development agenda is important from theperspective of resource mobilization.
High attention to the efforts for “adaptation” at the climate change negotiation where an agreement is required by
the end of this year. Firm DRR efforts will contribute to the climate change negotiation.
Japan will build with the international community a society that is resilient to disasters by sharing with the world its
knowledge and technology as a country advanced in DRR.

2. Basic Policies
Japan attaches particular importance to the three points in DRR policies outlined below, building on the experience ofthe past 10 years since the formulation of HFA.
(1) Investment in DRR from the long-term perspective
Prior investment in DRR is more cost-effective than post-disaster emergency response and recovery and contributes
to sustainable development.
(2) Build Back Better
The post-disaster phase provides an opportunity to implement drastic measures to build countries and regions thatare resilient to disasters.
(3) Collaboration between the central governments and various actors
Addressing with networks including local governments, private companies, NGOs/CSOs, international organizations
and regional organizations, with the central government taking the initiative.
Japan will take the following perspectives into consideration in implementing cooperation.
(1) The human security approach and promoting women’s participation (women, children, the elderly and persons
with disabilities)(2) Cooperation based on the perspective of adaptation to the impacts of climate change(3) Utilizing Japan’s knowledge and technology
Cooperation through effectively combining (i) non-material assistance, (ii) material assistance and (iii) global
and region-wide cooperation.


3. Concrete Measures
DRR cooperation totaling to 4 billion US dollars and training of 40 thousand from 2015 to 2018
Non-material assistance
Assistance for establishing laws, institutions and systems, human resource development and other technical assistance Laws and regulations relating to DRR (basic acts on disaster countermeasures, laws and regulations on the use of land / building
standards)
 Basic DRR plans, master plans for flood control, master plans for urban planning, land-use plans, urban planning Assistance to and strengthening setup of DRR branches in government
 Assistance to build and strengthen partnership systems among the public and private sectors and NGOs
 Disaster risk assessment (development hazard maps, research assistance for adaption to climate change, etc.)
 Technologies for disaster observation, prediction and warning (ICT, earth observation, geospatial information)
 Community-based DRR, disaster education
 Human resource development, training, technology transfer for DRR policy planning and emergency disaster relief
 Training to promote women’s leadership in DRR

Material assistance
Economic and social infrastructure development with Japanese technology as prior investment in DRR (“quality growth”)
 Countermeasures against flooding, debris flow, landslides and storm surges, forest improvement for disaster reduction
 Satellites necessary for disaster observation, perdition and warning, and information and communication infrastructure Improvement of buildings quality (earthquake resistance, wind resistance) Provision of equipment related to DRR
 Transportation, lifeline and public facilities resilient to disasters, DRR-related information and communication facilities
 Recovery and reconstruction assistance

Global and region-wide cooperation
Assistance for UNISDR and IRP, region-wide cooperation
 Assistance for the monitoring of the global targets and the improvement of its methods, as well as for the development of indicators
 Development of international disaster statistics
 Dissemination of information on good practices of “Build Back Better” including efforts from the Tohoku region
 Assistance for efforts to build region-wide institutions and systems (Sentinel Asia, Asian Disaster Reduction Center, AHA Centre, etc.)
 Assistance for countermeasures against climate change (including Green Climate Fund (GCF))
 Collaboration between regional cooperation of each region and Japan’s bilateral cooperation

Source: Ministry of Foreign Affairs

Page 42

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

Section 2: DRR Cooperation through the UN and Other International Organizations

Chapter III

This section describes the organizations and systems that function as international mechanisms for emergency
response, disaster prevention, recovery, and restoration based on the development of DRR discussions in theinternational community, and highlights Japan’s support for these efforts.

2-1 Support for Emergency Response: Coordination Mechanisms through OCHA
Various international organizations provide emergency support in their respective fields when a disaster occurs, with
the United Nations Office for Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) providing overall coordination for these
efforts. As mentioned in Chapter 1, the United Nations Disaster Relief Organization (UNDRO) was established in 1971 by
a UN resolution. Subsequently, as regional conflicts began erupting in various parts of the world following the end of
the Cold War, a 1991 UN resolution reorganized UNDRO into the UN Department of Humanitarian Affairs (DHA), which
was charged with also coordinating support for conditions arising due to conflict. The DHA was subsequently
reorganized into the current OCHA organization as part of UN restructuring in 1998.
Relevant governments generally handle their own disaster response, but when a disaster overwhelms thegovernment’s capacity, requests for support are made to the international community. OCHA then coordinates theinternational support following the guidelines below.
(1) General coordination of international humanitarian assistance activities at headquarters/local sites at the time of adisaster occurrence
When OCHA receives a request from a country where a disaster occurs, it dispatches a UN Disaster Assessment
and Coordination (UNDAC) team to the disaster-affected country. While coordinating with the UN team andgovernment of the country, the UNDAC team ascertains the conditions on the ground and identifies support
needs.
At OCHA, a Situation Report is issued based on local information to inform the international community, including
donors, of the emergency support needs, status of support provision, and other matters.
Information pertaining to support and other activities related to a given disaster by various internationalorganizations, including OCHA, is published on ReliefWeb to share information with the international community.
When large-scale, wide-ranging support is needed, the needs are summarized and sent out in a Flash Appeal tomobilize emergency support funding from donors.
For the initial response, the necessary funding for emergency response from the Central Emergency Response
Fund (CERF) and other sources is promptly provided to humanitarian support organizations.
●

●

●

●

●

(2) Maintaining and developing disaster response coordination mechanisms at ordinary times
Trainings are held for country staff registered with the UNDAC team, seminars are offered to increase the numberof staff members, and initiatives are conducted to improve emergency response capacity and raise awareness indeveloping countries.
●

The first World Humanitarian Summit is scheduled to be held in 2016 in Istanbul, Turkey. In preparation for this, Japan
hosted the Northeast and Southeast Asia Regional Preparatory Meeting in July 2014 in Tokyo together with Indonesia
and OCHA.
Japan contributed approximately USD 8.6 million to OCHA in fiscal 2014 (year ending March 2015).

2-2 Mechanisms for Disaster Risk Reduction: Activities of the UNISDRAs described in Chapter 1, which reviewed the history of the World Conference, DRR mechanisms were established in
the international community through a resolution of the UN General Assembly that designated the 1990s as theInternational Decade for Natural Disaster Reduction (IDNDR). This was done to reduce, as much as possible, tragicdisasters from being repeated around the world through preparedness efforts. Entering the 2000s, these activities were
continued by the International Strategy for Disaster Reduction (ISDR). The DRR strategy of the Hyogo Framework for
Action (HFA) was formulated in 2005 at the Second World Conference, and then the Sendai Framework for DRR 2015–

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

Page 432030 was formulated in 2015 at the Third WCDRR. The UNISDR secretariat in Geneva serves as the World Conference
secretariat (described in more details in Chapters 1 and 2). It will also conduct monitoring the progress of the newly
established seven global targets and DRR initiatives in countries worldwide for advancing the Sendai Framework going
forward.
Part IThe UNISDR conducts numerous activities to raise awareness of DRR. For instance, it has contributed to advancing
global DRR strategy by rolling out the “Making Cities Resilient” campaign targeting local governments and drafting the
Global Assessment Report on Disaster Risk Reduction (GAR).
Japan contributed approximately USD 1.34 million for expenses supporting the activities of the UNISDR in fiscal 2014
(year ending March 2015; excluding expenses related to the WCDRR).

2-3 International Recovery Platform (IRP)The International Recovery Platform (IRP) was established after the Second UN World Conference on Disaster
Reduction in 2005 to harness initiatives focused on recovery from the Great Hanshin-Awaji Earthquake at its
headquarters in Hyogo Prefecture and to aggregate and provide expertise on post-disaster recovery.
In May 2005, it was affirmed that the activities of the IRP, as a framework for international support that aggregates andprovides information on post-disaster recovery expertise, would be developed through coordination between agencies
such as the Government of Japan, UNDP, UNISDR, OCHA, the International Labour Organization (ILO), the Asian Disaster
Reduction Center (ADRC), the World Bank, and the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies(IFRC). HAT Kobe (Happy Active Town Kobe; Kobe new eastern city center) was offered as the headquarters for
activities by Hyogo Prefecture, and the organization began engaging in international recovery and support activities
based on the HFA.
The IRP engages in various activities whose goals include providing a coordination framework and network for postdisaster recovery and needs assessment; facilitating the dissemination of lessons learned and the development ofcommon tools and mechanisms; providing advice and support on the formulation of post-disaster recovery planningand programming; and strengthening national capacities in coordination with long-term development plans. The IRP’s
activities include holding the annual International Recovery Forum, creating Guidance Notes on Recovery, andconducting human resource development workshops.
The 11th International Recovery Forum was held in Kobe, Hyogo Prefecture in January 2015. This event, whose theme
was “Sending the Message of Building Back Better from Hyogo, Japan,” attracted 179 people involved in DRR from 36
countries and 27 organizations. In FY 2014, Japan provided support to cover the expenses involved in holding theInternational Recovery Forum, through a contribution to the UNISDR for expenses to support IRP activities (FY2014:
Funding from money donated to the UN: USD 225,000; International Recovery Forum expenses, approximately JPY 7.5
million).
To promote the “Build Back Better” concept around the world, which is a clear priority of the SFDRR, the IRP will haveto work on sharing and classifying good practices in recovery, strengthening activities to provide advice and support inways that leverage accumulated knowledge, and enhancing systems for engaging in these activities.

Page 44

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

Concept of “Build Back Better”
Chapter III“Build Back Better” is a concept to build more resilient communities throughout the reconstruction phasefollowing a disaster. To reduce the potential risk of disaster damage, it is necessary to build homes inlower risk areas, and to build disaster-resistant urban structures. The reconstruction phase following adisaster is an opportunity to incorporate lessons learned from the disaster experience into fundamental
processes like land use planning and the construction of disaster-resilient structures.
Japan experiences many disasters as a result of its natural climate and topography, but has long put into
practice the concept of “build back better,” or taking measures to ensure that recurring disasters will notcause the same type of damage in the future. Two specific examples of how this concept has been applied
are presented below.
The Great Hanshin-Awaji Earthquake of 1995 was an inland earthquake that occurred directly beneath adensely populated urban area. The number of totally collapsed residential structures alone exceeded
100,000 units. Since then, thanks to the concerted efforts of those involved in disaster response, a disaster-resilient community has been reconstructed and earthquake-resistant buildings have been built. Thisdisaster also triggered nationwide efforts to renovate homes and public buildings to make them more
earthquake resistant.
The philosophy statement in the Miyagi Prefecture Plan for Recovery from the Great East Japan
Earthquake calls for the “creation of a disaster resilient and safe community,” “fundamental‘reconstruction’ beyond mere ‘reversion,’” and the “construction of a recovery model from devastating
damage.” This prompted efforts to relocate the entire community to a more elevated area, to increase theheight of the seawall, and to construct a dual-purpose main road system that would allow it to alsofunction as a seawall.
This “Build Back Better” principle is well reflected in the recovery and reconstruction from Typhoon Haiyan
which caused devastating damage to the Philippines in 2013. The Government of Japan assisted thePhilippines with the development of hazard maps, land use plans, and medium- to long-term plans for thedevelopment of disaster-resistant cities. Also, as part of a recovery program sponsored by the Japanese
grant, the ground floors of public buildings along the coast are being designed to provide shaded sporting
grounds and meeting places for everyday activities, while their second floors can function as emergency
shelters in the event of a disaster. Given this aid from Japan, the phrase “Build Back Better” can be seen
printed on the cover of the Philippines Government’s Recovery Plan. Clearly this is a sign that lessons fromJapan are being disseminated around the world.

The safety of the town was improved after roads were made wider(Photos at the same location)
Photo: Kobe City

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

Image: “Relocation of atsunami-disaster prone
area to high ground”
Source: Reconstruction
AgencyPage 45

Special Feature: The Seventh World Water Forum

Part IThe Seventh World Water Forum was held in Daegu and Gyeongbuk, Republic of Korea on April 12-17,
2015. Organized by the host country and the World Water Council, headquartered in France, the World
Water Forum is one of the largest water-related international conferences in the world. The Third World
Water Forum was held in Kyoto, Shiga, and Osaka, Japan, in 2003. The Seventh World Water Forum
focused on the theme of “Water for Our Future” and attracted more than 40,000 people from 168
countries. Intensive discussions took place on many issues related to water, including water disastermanagement. From Japan, the Minister of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism Akihiro Ota served
as chair of the ministerial roundtable discussion on “Integrated Water Resource Management,” andHinako Takahashi, Parliamentary Vice-Minister for the Environment, gave a presentation during theministerial roundtable discussion on “Sustainable Water Management and the Preservation of
Biodiversity.”
At a special session on water and disasters on April 12 (organizer: HELP*), the Crown Prince of Japan gave
a lecture via video message on the topic of “Fulfilling People’s Aspirations on Water: The Relationshipbetween Water and People through Science and Technology.” At the same session, Han Seung-Soo,
Special Envoy on Disaster Risk Reduction and Water, government ministers, representatives ofinternational organizations, and other participants discussed the necessity of advancing global efforts
against water disasters. In addition, a special issue of Water Policy, a journal that highlights lessons
learned from disaster response efforts around the world, was also published(http://www.iwaponline.com/wp/017S1/S1/default.htm).
The Ministerial Declaration adopted at the Ministerial Conference declared support for including waterrelated targets in the post-2015 development agenda and emphasized the pressing need to enhance
resilience and preparedness for water-related disasters based on the outcomes of the Third WCDRR.
*HELP (High-level Experts and Leaders Panel on Water and Disasters): An international panel established inJune 2013 with the goal of creating a UN system in which countries and international organizations jointly
conduct activities to reduce water disasters. The panel is comprised of national ministers, representativesof international organizations, and other leading experts in the field of water disasters.
(http://www.wateranddisaster.org/)

Video message by the Crown Prince of Japan ina special session on water and disasters.
(From the Imperial Household Agency website)

Page 46

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

Section 3: DRR Cooperation in the Asia-Pacific Region
3-1 Activities of the Asian Disaster Reduction Center (ADRC)

The ADRC pursues four priorities: (1) information sharing on disaster risk reduction, (2) human resource development inmember countries, (3) capacity development of communities, and (4) cooperation among member countries,
international agencies, regional organizations, and NGOs.
In FY 2014, the ADRC invited eight disaster-related officials as visiting researchers from its member countries, provided
trainings for various national government officials, participated in the Sixth Asian Ministerial Conference on Disaster
Risk Reduction (in Bangkok), and responded to 18 requests for emergency satellite observations following large-scaledisasters.
In addition, in November 2014, the ADRC visited Sukabumi, located on western Java in an area of Indonesia where
earthquakes and tsunamis are expected to occur in the future, and Banda Aceh, which was severely damaged by the2004 Indian Ocean Tsunami. They conducted questionnaires and urban area surveys among 100 residents living invarious areas, investigating the status of DRR countermeasures, disaster awareness among residents, and theimplementation status of evacuation training.
On March 15, 2015, the ADRC held the Asian Conference on Disaster Reduction 2015 in Sendai as part of the Third
WCDRR, attracting 180 people from member countries and international agencies. Co-hosted by the Cabinet Office andthe UNISDR, the Asian Conference on Disaster Reduction has been held annually since 2003 with the goal of sharing
information on disaster risk reduction in Asia. As this conference was held during the Third WCDRR, a focused
discussion was held concerning the disaster experiences of member countries, the progress made on the HFA, andexpectations for a new disaster risk reduction framework.

3-2 Disaster Risk Reduction Cooperation in APEC
Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) is a framework for economic cooperation comprised of 21 economies in the
Asia-Pacific region. APEC economies account for approximately 50 percent of the world’s total GDP and approximately
40 percent of the world’s trade volume and population. APEC is a framework for economic cooperation, but its
coverage area also happens to be one of the most disaster-prone in the world. Given that awareness of natural
disasters is a factor that can impede sustainable development, in recent years the field of DRR has been positioned as
one of those most important in the organization. One of the initiatives in this field is the Emergency Preparedness
Working Group (EPWG), which is comprised of the member economies. Originally, the EPWG was organized as
successor of a task force established in 2005 to deal with the Indian Ocean Earthquake and Tsunami which occurred in
December 2004. The goal of the EPWG is to improve DRR capabilities in the APEC region and promote regional
cooperation, with meetings being held once to twice per year. In addition, like the ministerial meetings addressing
various issues, including the APEC leaders’ meetings, each year the Senior Disaster Management Officials Forum(SDMOF) is held on a rotating basis within the region for sharing information and opinions regarding disaster casestudies and disaster management in the area covered by APEC.
In August 2014, the eighth SDMOF was held in Beijing, China. It featured a discussion on “Strengthening Science andTechnology in Disaster Risk Reduction,” which focused on the application of science and technology to increase theefficiency of emergency response and disaster recovery. As part of this discussion, the Government of Japan presented
information on the application of science and technology in the recovery from the Great East Japan Earthquake, thestate of the recovery in the Tohoku region, and preparations for the Third WCDRR.

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

Page 47

Chapter III

Based on the Yokohama Strategy adopted at the First WCDRR in 1994, which pointed out the need for regional
cooperation in collecting and sharing disaster information, the Asian Disaster Reduction Center (ADRC) was establishedin July 1998 in Kobe, Hyogo Prefecture. It was established after investigations were conducted at ministerial and expert
meetings held in countries throughout Asia to apply the lessons learned in Japan to disasters across Asia, including
lessons from the 1995 Great Hanshin-Awaji Earthquake. As of June 2015, the ADRC had a network consisting of 30
member countries in Asia and five advisor countries. The organization actively coordinates with a variety of UN
agencies, including the UNISDR, as well as other international agencies.

Ensuring Systems for the Continuity of Transnational Business Activities

Part I

More than 400 Japanese companies sustained water damage in the 2011 Thai floods, and local vendor
factories and parts manufacturers suspended their production activities. This resulted in major economic
damage. For example, launches of new digital camera products had to be delayed by two and a halfmonths and local automobile production factories were forced to suspend production for about six
months. The Great East Japan Earthquake that struck Japan also severely affected economic activities
inside and outside Japan through the supply chain. Thus, Japanese companies with overseas locations aswell as foreign companies and government organizations are showing greater interest in business
continuity practices in Japan, where many natural disasters occur.
The Cabinet Office released the third edition of the Business Continuity Guidelines in August 2013. Given
that it is imperative for Japan to actively communicate its knowledge related to business continuity
overseas, these guidelines were translated and released in English in June 2014. In addition, in 2013, theAsian Disaster Reduction Center created a Business Continuity Planning (BCP) Guidebook for small andmedium-size enterprises in Asian countries based on Japan’s experiences during the Great East Japan
Earthquake.

3-3 Other International DRR Initiatives in Asia and the Pacific(1) Pacific Islands Leaders Meeting
The Pacific Islands Leaders Meeting has been held since 1997 to strengthen ties between Japan and other Pacific island
nations. The Seventh Pacific Islands Leaders Meeting (PALM7) was held in May 2015 in Iwaki City, Fukushima
Prefecture. Co-chaired by Prime Minister Abe and the President of Palau Tommy Esang Remengesau, the meeting wasattended by leaders from 17 countries. At the Meeting, the “Fukushima Iwaki Declaration: Building a Prosperous Future
Together” was adopted, promoting cooperation in seven fields such as disaster risk reduction, climate change, and theenvironment. Prime Minister Abe also announced Japan’s intention to provide over JPY 55 billion in support over the
next three years and to provide support for human resource development and exchange opportunities for 4,000
people.
(2) East Asia Summit
The East Asia Summit (EAS) was launched in 2005 to enable leaders to engage in open discussion concerning issues
important to East Asia and the international community. Currently, 18 countries participate—the 10 ASEAN member
states plus Japan, China, the Republic of Korea, Australia, New Zealand, India, the US, and Russia. Disaster risk reduction
is seen as one of the priority cooperation fields of EAS. At the ninth EAS held in November 2014, Prime Minister Abe
spoke about holding the Third WCDRR in Sendai in March 2015.
(3) Typhoon Committee
The Typhoon Committee (TC) was established in 1968 as an intergovernmental organization under the United Nations
Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Far East (UNESCAP) and the World Meteorological Organization(WMO) with the goal of reducing typhoon damage in the Asia-Pacific region. The TC is comprised of the Working Groupon Meteorology (WGM), the Working Group on Hydrology (WGH), the Working Group on Disaster Risk Reduction(WGDRR), the Training and Research Coordination Group (TRCG), and the Advisory Working Group (AWG). Currently, 14
countries and territories participate (China, Hong Kong, Macao, Philippines, Japan, the Republic of Korea, North Korea,
Vietnam, Cambodia, Laos, Thailand, Malaysia, Singapore, and the US). Each year a general meeting and integrated
workshop are held to discuss such topics as the coordination of activities and the direction of future activities.

Page 48

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

As part of the same project, the Ministry holds the ASEAN-Japan Port Technology Group Meeting. Starting in 2015, theGroup will be implementing a three-year plan aimed at compiling Port Disaster Reduction Guidelines (provisional title).
Focused on port disaster reduction, the Guidelines will share lessons learned from the Great East Japan Earthquakewith ASEAN member states and will be referenceable when implementing initiatives concerned with port DRR in ASEAN
nations.

b) International Symposium on Building the National Resilience of ASEAN Countries
Staff of the National Resilience Promotion Office in the Cabinet Secretariat attended a symposium on building national
resilience sponsored by the Economic Research Institute for ASEAN and East Asia (ERIA) held in April 2015. This event
was held to share Japan’s expertise on and experience with building national resilience with the ASEAN nations, while
trying to increase understanding of foreign countries and promote international contributions.
(5) Promoting Sentinel Asia to Share Disaster Information Throughout the Asia-Pacific Region
The decision was made to establish Sentinel Asia at the 2005 meeting of the Asia-Pacific Regional Space Agency Forum(APRSAF) hosted by the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology (MEXT) and the Japan
Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA). The goal of Sentinel Asia is to contribute to disaster management and disastermitigation utilizing data from satellite observations in the Asia-Pacific region. As of April 2015, the participants werecomprised of 81 agencies from 25 nations and territories and 15 international agencies. Through cooperation between
ADRC and agencies from countries and territories in possession of satellites (India, Thailand, Republic of Korea, Taiwan,
and Singapore), Sentinel Asia has created a mechanism for providing satellite observation data through a website whenrequested by a disaster-stricken country. In 2014, Sentinel Asia provided emergency observations a total of 18 times,
including observation images provided by Japan using the ALOS-2 (Advanced Land Observing Satellite-2) in response to
the landslide disaster that occurred in central Indonesia in December of that year.
(6) Japan Holds Pan-Pacific INTERPRAEVENT 2014
To promote and disseminate scholarly research on the prevention and mitigation of disasters due to flooding, debris
flows, landslides, and avalanches, the MLIT held the Pan-Pacific INTERPRAEVENT 2014 comprehensive international
academic conference in Nara Prefecture in November 2014. It was attended by approximately 290 people from 25
countries and territories. In addition to sessions aimed at sharing Japan’s advanced erosion control technologies andtechniques, keynote speeches, oral presentations, and panel discussions were held to discuss disasters andcountermeasures in various countries. The best approaches to research and development that must be taken by theinternational community were compiled into a proposal statement.

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

Page 49

Chapter III(4) Coordination and Cooperation with ASEAN Countriesa) The ASEAN-Japan Transport Partnership Project
The Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism (MLIT) is implementing various cooperative projects underthe ASEAN-Japan Transport Partnership, a framework for cooperation between Japan and ASEAN in the field oftransportation. Since 2013, under the Project to Promote Disaster Risk Reduction Cooperation in the Field ofTransportation, the Ministry has invited experts from ASEAN nation ministries in charge of transportation to share theirexpertise on disaster management in the field of transportation. Additionally, the Ministry is in the midst of formulatinga collection of DRR good practices in the field of transportation in Japan and ASEAN member states, which is scheduled
for completion in 2015.

Establishment of the World Bank Disaster Risk Management (DRM) Hub, Tokyo(Japan–World Bank Program for Mainstreaming Disaster Risk Reduction in Developing Countries)

Part IDRR is an important field indispensible to achieving the two World Bank missions of ending extreme
poverty and promoting shared prosperity in one generation.
The World Bank has launched the Global Facility for Disaster Reduction and Recovery (GFDRR) to
mitigate the threat of natural disasters and climate change for the most vulnerable communities in theworld, and has conducted activities in line with the basic principles of the Hyogo Framework for Action(HFA).
In addition, to strengthen support utilizing Japan’s DRR-related know-how and expertise, in April 2013
Japan and the World Bank announced the launch of the Japan–World Bank Partnership to Mainstream
Disaster Risk Management in Developing Countries. In February of the following year, the World BankDRM Hub, Tokyo was established at the Tokyo Office of the World Bank as the World Bank’s base for DRR
support. While coordinating with the regional offices of World Bank Headquarters and World Bank
country offices around the world, the World Bank DRM Hub, Tokyo promotes the matching of DRRrelated knowledge and technologies possessed by Japanese government organizations, companies,
researchers, and other parties, with needs in developing countries. The World Bank DRM Hub, Tokyo
provides support for designing and conducting DRR-related projects in developing countries, is building
and maintaining a network linking DRR research bases around the world and in Japan, and is conducting
PR activities.

Page 50

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

Section 4: Bilateral Disaster Risk Reduction Cooperation
4-1 Japan’s Overseas Emergency Disaster Support

In FY2014, for example, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MOFA) provided emergency relief goods (through JICA) tosupport the urgent daily life needs of disaster victims in response to the cyclone that occurred in Vanuatu in March
2015 and the flooding that occurred in Mozambique in January of that same year. In addition, the Ministry provided
emergency grants in response to the flooding that occurred in northern India and northeastern Pakistan in September
2014 as well as grants for recovery from and risk reduction for typhoons and earthquakes.
In response to the earthquake that struck Nepal on April 25, 2015, Japan provided emergency relief supplies such as
tents and blankets and provided approximately JPY 1.68 billion in emergency grants. In addition, the Government ofJapan dispatched JDR teams—relief teams to disaster-stricken areas (a total of 70 people: one delegation leader from
MOFA, 23 from the National Police Agency, 17 from the Fire and Disaster Management Agency, 14 from the Japan
Coast Guard, and 15 from JICA) to engage in search and rescue activities, and medical teams (two teams comprised of
46 persons and 34 persons each) to provide medical support in disaster-affected areas. Further, the JDR teams included
Japan Self-Defense Force units (114 people from medical aid units) to provide medical treatment and diagnosis in
disaster-stricken areas.

4-2 Japan’s International Cooperation in the Fields of Disaster Prevention and Recovery
Due to its geographical and climate conditions, Japan has long been vulnerable to all manner of disasters, including
earthquakes, tsunamis, floods, storm surges, high waves, slope failures, volcanic eruptions, debris flows, and heavysnows, and has cultivated knowledge, systems, and technologies as a result of its numerous disaster experiences.
Utilizing this expertise, Japan assists with improving the disaster management systems of developing countries throughofficial development assistance (ODA) provided by MOFA, with JICA playing a central role, while also enlisting thecooperation of the active ministries and agencies. For example, the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport andTourism cooperates in the field of river management, the Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications cooperates
in the field of information and communications systems, and the Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries
cooperates in the field of agriculture.
Japan’s cooperation in the field of DRR is characterized by the wide range of areas it covers, from the creation oforganizations and systems to physical infrastructure and support for recovery. Japan’s cooperation also follows theprinciples of the HFA’s five Priorities for Action. Japan has conducted numerous initiatives to cooperate on Priority
Action 4 “Reduce the underlying risk factors” and has helped introduce both structural and non-structural DRR
measures in developing countries. Going forward, Japan will continue to support the creation of disaster-resilient
communities through the “mainstreaming of DRR,” which involves the incorporation of DRR perspectives into various
aspects of development. It will remain focused on the SFDRR 2015–2030, formulated as the successor to the HFA, as it
strives to end the repeating cycle of poverty and disaster and to achieve sustainable development through the
reduction of disaster risks.

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

Page 51

Chapter III

To utilize Japan’s experience in disaster relief overseas, the government began conducting international emergency
assistance activities centering on the dispatch of medical teams in the latter half of the 1970s. The execution of the Act
on the Dispatch of the Japan Disaster Relief Team (commonly known as the JDR Act) in 1987 and its revision in 1992
made it possible for Japan to dispatch relief teams, medical teams, expert teams, and Japan Self-Defense Force units
overseas for the purpose of disaster relief. These four types of teams are dispatched separately or jointly depending on
the type of disaster, its scale, and the requests of the disaster-stricken countries. The JDR relief teams have been
evaluated by the United Nations as the top classification of “heavy.” Further, Japan also provides emergency grants andemergency relief supplies.

Special Feature: Overseas Development of DRR Technologies

Part I

Japan has long faced the threat of natural disasters and possesses much experience and manytechnologies derived from past disasters and the measures taken to combat them. Mobilizing its
experience and technologies, Japan has contributed to improving DRR measures in developing countries.
In Indonesia, for example, Japan provided support to establish the Indonesian National Disaster
Management Agency (BNPB) and to formulate a national disaster management plan to strengthen thatcountry’s national DRR capacity after the Indian Ocean Tsunami. To strengthen its provincial DRR capacity,
Japan also provided support to formulate local disaster management plans based on the national disastermanagement plan and to conduct a pilot project for DRR activities at the community level. In addition, theknowledge and lessons learned through these activities were fed back from local communities toprovincial governments and then to the central government to strengthen DRR capacity from both topdown and bottom-up approaches.
In the Philippines, the Japanese government undertook a long-term river improvement project to alleviate
flooding on the Pasig–Marikina River, which flows through the Metro Manila area. As part of the project,
Japan analyzed the disaster risk factors for typhoons and other disasters and conducted projects thatcombined structural as well as non-structural measures for disaster mitigation. In 2009, when a typhoon
struck the Metro Manila area, flood control channels built with cooperation from Japan were used tocontrol the volume of water flowing into downtown Manila, which is in the downstream area of the river.
This contributed to the prevention of economic and social losses.
Peru frequently experiences large earthquakes and is at high risk of tsunami disasters. However, it has few
tide indicators to measure tsunamis and faces challenges in communicating tsunami warnings to residents.
The Japanese government is therefore developing a tide measurement system and providing thenecessary support to build an emergency communication system similar to what is used in Japan, utilizing
terrestrial digital broadcasting. By enabling the communication of early warnings for earthquakes andtsunamis, these systems are expected to help mitigate disaster damage in Peru.

Erosion control facility using Japanesetechnology (Indonesia)
Photo: JICA

Page 52

Japanese tide measurement system
introduced at a port (El Salvador)
Photo: JICA

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

4-3 Intergovernmental DRR Cooperation Initiatives(1) Cooperation on Disaster Management Systemsa) Cooperation Between the Cabinet Office and the US Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA)In December 2014, the Cabinet Office and FEMA signed a memorandum of cooperation to promote cooperation on
DRR between the two organizations and to build a framework for sharing information and exchanging knowledge. To
further political dialogue, State-Minister of the Cabinet Office Ryosei Akazawa met with FEMA Associate Administrator
Elizabeth Zimmerman in January 2015 at the International Recovery Forum, and Eriko Yamatani, Minister of State forDisaster Management, held talks with FEMA Administrator W. Craig Fugate in May 2015.

Bilateral meeting between Minister of State for Disaster
Management Yamatani and FEMA Administrator Fugateb) Japan–China–Republic of Korea Trilateral Ministerial Meeting on Disaster Management
Based on the Trilateral Joint Announcement on Disaster Management Cooperation, released at the first Japan–China–
Republic of Korea Trilateral Summit in 2008, the Ministerial Meeting on Disaster Management has been held once
every two years on a rotating basis in China, Japan, and the Republic of Korea. The first Ministerial Meeting was hosted
by Japan in 2009, followed by China in 2011 and the Republic of Korea in November 2013.
The Third Ministerial Meeting on Disaster Management was attended by the State-Minister of the Cabinet Office inJapan, a Vice Minister of Civil Affairs in China, and the Administrator of the National Emergency Management Agency in
the Republic of Korea. At the meeting, Japan’s State-Minister of the Cabinet Office spoke about the importance ofsharing disaster knowledge and experience among the three countries. A joint statement on sharing DRR-related
technologies and information as well as strengthening cooperative frameworks for education and training was issued.
Japan also asked for its partners’ cooperation in working toward the success of the Third WCDRR, requesting theattendance of minister-level officials from each country. The next Ministerial Meeting on Disaster Management isscheduled to be held in Japan in 2015.
In addition, under this framework, the three countries of China, the Republic of Korea, and Japan are conducting
tabletop DRR exercises to improve their capacity to mutually provide and accept aid. The first exercise was held in the
Republic of Korea, followed by a second exercise in Tokyo in March 2014. Relevant government organizations from
China, the Republic of Korea, and Japan participated. Using a scenario of a major earthquake striking Tokyo, discussions
were held on effective and efficient ways to give and receive support among the three countries. These exercises
highlighted the importance of developing DRR cooperation among the three countries under non-emergency
conditions and strengthening networks among relevant parties. The third round of tabletop exercises took place in April
2015 in Beijing, China, and was based on a scenario of a major disaster striking China.

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

Page 53

Chapter III

The Cabinet Office has had opportunities to visit the Washington DC headquarters and training facilities of the US
Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), to receive briefings from the FEMA Field Office in New York City, andto attend the APEC Senior Disaster Management Officials Forum (SDMOF), and has used these opportunities toexchange views on past disasters in the US and Japan, including the Great East Japan Earthquake in Japan and
Hurricane Sandy in the US. They have also used these opportunities to discuss DRR organizational frameworks, humanresource development and training, and other matters.

c) Cooperation Between the MLIT and the EU’s Humanitarian Aid and Civil Protection Department

Part IIn March 2013, based on correspondence between the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism (MLIT)
and the European Commission’s Humanitarian Aid and Civil Protection department (ECHO), experts and practitioners
have been exchanging knowledge and experiences for the purpose of upgrading both parties’ DRR systems. The
information exchanged covers a broad range of DRR fields such as governance systems, risk assessments, early warning
systems, emergency response, human resource development and awareness raising, and major disaster emergency
response. Thus far, two ministerial-level conferences as well as three conferences of experts and practitioners havebeen held. In addition, there have been mutual exchanges of staff to one another’s DRR trainings and other events.

d) Asia International Forum on Fire and Disaster Management
Economic development and urbanization have progressed in Asia in recent years, yielding an increased need to upgrade
fire and disaster management systems. Since FY 2007, the Fire and Disaster Management Agency has held theInternational Forum on Fire and Disaster Management, which broadly introduces Japanese firefighting technologies,
systems, and organizations to countries in the Asian region to help them improve their firefighting and DRR capacity. In
FY 2014, the forum was held in September in the city of Phnom Penh, Cambodia. There were opportunities for
information sharing and a lively exchange of views on issues including strengthening fire disaster management capacity,
human resource development for firefighting personnel, and fire prevention systems. As part of the effort to develop
Japanese DRR and fire prevention infrastructure systems overseas, Japanese companies introduced and exhibited theirfirefighting products.

(2) Promoting the Overseas Sharing of Japanese DRR Technologies (Disaster Management Collaboration
Dialogue)
The MLIT is helping to improve the DRR capacity of emerging countries, mainly in Asia, by utilizing leading Japanesetechnologies and knowledge related to DRR. In addition, industry, government, and academia in Japan and partnercountries have been working together since 2013 to build ongoing cooperative frameworks for the purpose ofdeveloping Japanese DRR technologies overseas (currently, the partner countries are Vietnam, Thailand, Myanmar,
Indonesia, Turkey, and South Africa). They are aiming to propose packaged solutions based on ongoing exchanges ofviews through the identification of needs, workshops, and other means using local field surveys, individual
consultations, and other methods in each country.
They are also coordinating and conducting activities with the Japan Bosai Platform (JBP), whose participants include
representatives from industry, academia, and government, to strengthen coordination among these sectors in Japan.

(3) Science and Technology Research Partnership for Sustainable Development (SATREPS)
The Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology (MEXT) Japan Science and Technology Agency (JST),and Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MOFA)/ JICA are conducting the Science and Technology Research Partnership for
Sustainable Development (SATREPS), which promotes joint international research leading to the resolution of globalscale issues in developing countries through the coordination of Japan’s leading science and technology and ODA. In thefield of DRR, 16 joint research and development projects are being conducted with 15 countries. Specifically, under a
Research Project to Improve Technologies for Tsunami-Resilient Community Development, which is being implemented
in cooperation with government organizations in Chile, efforts are being made to develop tsunami damage predictionand early warning system methodologies, and to conduct outreach activities for citizens based on lessons learned fromthe Great East Japan Earthquake. When a tsunami struck after the magnitude 8.2 Iquique earthquake struck off thecoast of Chile in April 2014, residents quickly evacuated the area. Then in July 2014 when Prime Minister Shinzo Abevisited Chile, the Port and Airport Research Institute, which oversees the research, and five concerned governmentalorganizations in Chile signed a memorandum to promote research with a view to encompassing all of Central and SouthAmerica.

Page 54

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

(5) International Cooperation in Nuclear DRR: Participation and Cooperation in Japan–China–Republic of Korea
on Nuclear Disaster Management Drills
The Top Regulators’ Meeting (TRM) has been established for the nuclear regulatory agencies of Japan, China, and theRepublic of Korea to exchange valuable information and views to improve shared issues and technologies related tonuclear safety. Under the TRM’s initiatives, it has been established that Japan, China, and the Republic of Korea, when
conducting nuclear disaster management drills in their own countries, will invite the other two countries to participate
as observers and to exchange views on the drills. When disaster management drills were conducted at the Republic ofKorea’s Kori Nuclear Power Plant in November 2014, officials from Japan’s Nuclear Regulation Authority and Chinese
regulatory authorities participated. The countries are also building a tripartite information-sharing system for times of
emergency.

(6) Joint Project with ITU Using Movable and Deployable ICT Resource Unit (MDRU)
Based on the lessons of the Great East Japan Earthquake, the Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications has been
conducting research and development on the Movable and Deployable ICT Resource Unit (MDRU), which is acommunication unit that can be deployed to disaster-affected areas during a disaster to quickly restore
communications.
Since FY 2014 (year ending March 2015), the Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications (MIC) has been
cooperating with the International Telecommunication Union (ITU) and the Philippines’ Department of Science andTechnology (DOST) to set up MDRUs on Cebu Island in the Philippines, which was affected by a large typhoon, and atcity government offices and other areas to test voice and data transmissions using a wireless LAN network.

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

Page 55

Chapter III(4) Forest Management Focused on Forest Disaster Risk Reduction and Mitigation Functions in Developing
Countries
The Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry, and Fisheries (MAFF) has been conducting a field project since FY 2013 (yearending March 2014) through contributions to the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO). It aims to improve
resilience to disasters and to ensure stable water resources by establishing an efficient evaluation method for soil
conservation and watershed protection functions contained by applicable forests in developing countries. Workshops
have been held in the three countries of Nepal, Vietnam, and Mexico to increase use of the evaluation method
developed in this project at forest management field sites.

Special Feature: Hyogo’s DRR Initiatives

Part I

Since the Great Hanshin-Awaji Earthquake, Hyogo has been taking
steps to achieve “Creative Reconstruction” and to establish a mature,
21st-century society rather than merely settling for the restoration ofpre-disaster conditions. During reconstruction, Hyogo received vast
amounts of assistance from abroad. In an effort to repay thiskindness, Hyogo now focuses on disseminating the experiences andlessons learned from the earthquake both at home and abroad, andon cooperating with local governments abroad on DRR initiatives.
Establishment and Operation of the Disaster Reduction and Human
Disaster Reduction andRenovation Institution (DRI)
Human Renovation Institution
Hyogo co-manages the Disaster Reduction and Human Renovation(DRI)
Institution (DRI) in cooperation with the national government as abase for sharing the experiences and lessons learned from theearthquake. It receives many visitors, both domestic and international. In addition to playing the role of anearthquake museum by collecting, preserving, and exhibiting earthquake-related resources, DRI conducts
practical research on DRR using its unique research and survey functions. It trains DRR practitioners anddeploys specialists to disaster-affected areas both at home and abroad to provide advice on disaster
response activities. DRI takes advantage of the experiences and lessons learned from the earthquake in on-site disaster management and acts as an international hub for DRR activities.
Formation of the Disaster Reduction Alliance
Hyogo invited international DRR organizations such as the United Nations Office for the Coordination of
Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA), the United Nations International Strategy for Disaster Reduction (UNISDR),
the International Recovery Platform (IRP), the Asian Disaster Reduction Center (ADRC), the Japan
International Cooperation Agency (JICA), and others to form the Disaster Reduction Alliance (DRA) andthus strengthen the relationships between these organizations. This work is coordinated by DRI. Thanks to
the mutual cooperation of these organizations, Hyogo dispatches experts to disaster-affected areas
overseas and accepts trainees from other countries. Furthermore, Hyogo supported the establishment of
the Bursa Disaster Learning and Training Center, which is modeled after the DRI, in the Bursa Province ofTurkey. In these ways, the lessons that Hyogo learned from the earthquake and subsequent reconstruction
activities are being widely applied internationally.
International DRR Cooperation Based on Earthquake Experiences
Hyogo provided support to overseas disaster-affected areas after the earthquakes in Turkey (1999),
Northern Taiwan (1999), Sichuan Province, China (2008), and other locations by dispatching specialists
with vast knowledge of disaster response. Hyogo also provided practical support based on its experiences
as a disaster-affected local government by sending milk bottles and diapers to the Philippines after
Typhoon Haiyan in 2013. Hyogo continues to support disaster-affected areas overseas through citizenfunded “donation projects” developed for specific purposes (extending scholarships, reconstructing
schools and/or hospitals, etc.) based on the needs of the affected areas.
DRR Cooperation Through UN Organizations
Hyogo Prefecture hosted the Second WCDRR in Kobe City in 2005, the result of which was the adoption of
the HFA as an international DRR guideline. Hyogo was recognized as the world’s first role model for the"Making Cities Resilient" campaign started in 2010 by the UNISDR. In addition, Governor Toshizo Ido of
Hyogo was designated as a Champion (DRR Leader) for his leadership and engagement in important
activities, such as advocating the importance of DRR. During the Third WCDRR, Governor Ido, the soleChampion from Japan, introduced lessons learned from the reconstruction efforts that have been
implemented in the 20 years since the earthquake and also shared recommendations regarding the
adoption of a new DRR framework. New suggestions included the promotion of creative reconstruction,
the pursuit of international DRR cooperation among local governments, and the empowerment of local
governments to increase their DRR capacity.

Page 56

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

Part II:
Status of Disaster Management Measures
in JapanPart II

Status of Disaster Management Measures in JapanDue to its natural conditions, Japan is prone to virtually every type of natural disaster. A variety of natural disasters
occurred in 2014, including heavy snowfalls, sediment disasters, volcanic eruptions, and earthquakes. Part II of thisreport focuses on recent natural disaster risk reduction measures, in particular the status of policies implemented withpriority status in 2014.

I

Chapter I

Chapter

Status of Disaster Management Policies

Section 1: Disaster Management Systems and Disaster Preparedness
1-1 Government's Approach to Crisis Management Organization
Revisions in the government’s approach to its crisis management organization are being investigated in the
Supplementary Provisions to the Act for Establishment of the Nuclear Regulation Authority 2012 and theSupplementary Resolution relating to a Bill for Partial Amendment of the Disaster Countermeasures Basic Act of 2013.
Since it is therefore necessary for the Cabinet Office to investigate the most appropriate crisis management
organization for Japan by reviewing the current system, including related ministries and agencies, and making
comparisons with the crisis management systems adopted by other major countries of the world, an assembly of the
Senior Vice-Ministers of the related ministries and agencies was held in August 2014, chaired by the Senior ViceMinister of the Cabinet Office, and compiled its final report in March 2015.
While the final report indicates that it is difficult, under present circumstances, to discern a need for a fundamental
revision of organizations and systems at the central level, such as the establishment of unified ministries and agencies
for dealing with crisis management, it also notes that it is extremely important, in times of crisis when a large-scale
natural disaster has occurred, to establish a system that fully demonstrates the strengths of relevant organizations at
the national and local levels. Specific responses that would fulfill this objective would include:•
Ensure sufficient staff, including replacements, are dispatched to the Disaster Management Headquarters andprovide training to ensure that they can respond appropriately when a natural disaster occurs.
•
Develop systems that will allow the integrated implementation of prompt and accurate information sharing anddisaster response by the national government and affected local governments. For example, investigate
frameworks to enable staff from the organizations of each ministry and agency dispatched to the municipalities,
as representatives of the national government, to gather information and respond as needed, and do this incombination with efforts to delineate the chain of command and to strengthen the systems of each ministry andagency.
•The Disaster Management Headquarters, which are established in response to natural disasters, and the Nuclear
Disaster Response Headquarters, which are established in response to nuclear accidents, should effectivelyfunction in a unified manner to manage for complex disasters.
When a large-scale natural disaster occurs, it is very important that the necessary staff and organizations are mobilized
promptly and that systems are established to enable them to function. In the case of complex disasters (in particularwhere nuclear power disasters are combined with natural disasters), the following measures will be adopted.
•
For the initial response, hold a joint meeting between the Extreme Disaster Management Headquarters and the
Nuclear Disaster Management Headquarters•
Implementation of “hard” developments such as the reciprocal introduction of information sharing networks
across both Headquarters and the dispatch of reciprocal liaison officers•
Information sharing through close cooperation between both on-site headquarters•
Integrated implementation of operations such as the coordination of tactical organizations and the support ofdisaster victims•
Strengthening of cooperation between related organizations through drills that are based on the occurrence ofcomplex disasters
While investigating the state of development and the fruits of such efforts, and without excluding the revision oforganization systems, future efforts must be made to provide for the examination and implementation of necessary
structures and to produce a better crisis management and response system.
WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

Page 57

Fig. II-1-1

Overview and Comparison of Crisis Management Organizations in Various Countries
Cabinet Office (Director General for
Disaster Management)

Established
Leader1984
1979 (moved under DHS in 2003)
Minister of State for Disaster Management Administrator

Staff

92 (quota)

Ordinary
structure

8 offices, responsible for:- Disaster Management- Disaster Response Operations- Communities/Drills- Surveys/Policy Planning- Disaster Victims Administration- Disaster Preparedness, Public Relations
and International Cooperation- Disaster Management Planning- Project Promotion

Structure
following anaturaldisasterIn the event of an extreme disaster thatIn the event of a large-scale natural
In the event that the circumstances of acannot be handled at the prefectural level, disaster or incident, state governor would state of emergency are severe or its effects
establishment of an Major Disasterrequest a declaration from the President. are wide-reaching, a Cabinet Office Briefing
Management Headquarters led by the
In the event of a large-scale disaster that
Rooms (COBR or COBRA) meeting is held,
Minister of State for Disaster Management exceeds the capacity/resources of the state and the national response plan is(or in the event of an extraordinary andor regional government, or it is judged that investigated by the Civil Contingency
violent natural disaster, establishment of there is a state of emergency with a risk of Committee.
an Extreme Disaster Management
a enormous damage, a declaration of a
Headquarters led by the Prime Minister)large-scale natural disaster or a state of
emergency is made by the President.
If a state of emergency is declared, a Senior
Federal Coordinator is appointed tocoordinate the activities and resources ofthe federal and regional governments, andfederal aid is initiated, centered on FEMA,
as defined in the Stafford Disaster Reliefand Emergency Assistance Act and thenational response framework.
Depending on the type of emergency
An Emergency Support Function (ESF) is
Several ministries and agencies willsituation, there are basic laws which will
established by the government, and it
coordinate to respond to emergency
apply. Based on these, several ministries
designates each ministry or agency to serve situations, lead by a Lead Government
coordinate with the principle ministries
as the coordinating institution, chief
Department (LGD) which is designatedand agencies to respond to the emergency institution, or support institution for the 15 according to the emergency situation.
situation.
areas of operations implementation. In the Other ministries support the response of
Natural disasters, large-scale fires,
event that mutual coordination between the LGD (although the LGD does not havethe institutions becomes difficult, FEMA
the authority to issue commands to theaccidents → Disaster Countermeasuresother ministries).
Basic Act (Cabinet Office); nuclear power will devise a mechanism to plan theultimate coordination.
disaster →Act on Special Measures
Concerning Nuclear Emergency
Preparedness (Nuclear Regulation
Authority); new influenza →New Influenza
Special Measures Act (Cabinet Secretariat);
armed attack →Civil Protection Law(Cabinet Secretariat) *Following a disaster,a disaster management headquarters
comprised of the entire Cabinet and headsof all ministries/agencies will beestablished pursuant to the relevant law,and coordination work will be handled bythis headquarters.
Each ministry and agency is granted
Fundamentally an "all hazards approach" is The Civil Contingencies Act addresses far
powers based on each individual basic law, used (however, for particular events such reaching emergency situations such as
and depending on the type of emergency as biohazards, cyber attacks, or nuclear
natural disasters or epidemics, acts ofsituation.
power/radioactivity accidents, the ministry terrorism, and other events which threaten*Regardless of whether the hazard is athat has the appropriate specialized
serious damage to social infrastructure.
natural disaster, nuclear power disaster,knowledge will lead the response).
(However, an LGD is stipulated for each
new influenza, or other type of disaster,
event, and the CCS is the organization thatunified general coordination in the initial
has responsibility for coordinating each
response phase will be carried out by theinstitution).
Deputy Chief Cabinet Secretary for Crisis
Management (responsible for cabinet
secretariat emergency response/crisis
management).

Part IICountry
Name oforganization

Crossministerial
response

All hazard
assumptions

Japan

BudgetJPY 5.29 billion (as of the start of 2014)

Local
governmentorganizations

There is no regional organization fordisaster risk reduction during ordinary
times. Following the occurrence of adisaster, depending on the scale of thedisaster, National On-site Disaster
Management Headquarters and on-site
contact offices will be set up.

United States
Department of Homeland Security (DHS)
FEMA (Federal Emergency Management
Agency)United Kingdom
Cabinet Office
CCS (Civil Contingencies Secretariat)

2001

FEMA: 7,672 full time employees (10,600 About 60
emergency response personnel)
Organization of FEMA
Organization of CCS- Protection and National Preparedness- Assessments Department
Office- Operations Department- Response and Recovery Office- Policy Department- Federal Insurance and Mitigation
Administration Office- U.S. Fire Administration- Mission Support
In addition, the US is divided into 10 blocks,
with a regional office established in eachblock

Approx. USD 13.6 billion (as of 2013)(Of this, USD 3.6 billion is for flood
insurance)

Budget for responding to emergency
situations is borne by each ministry andagency; CCS budget is for response inordinary times only
Across the country there are 10 permanent In 2010, the regional government offices
regional offices. In the event of a natural
were abolished. In the event of a disaster,
disaster, staff are dispatched from theseemergency staff would be dispatched to
offices to the site of the disaster, and they the site, and could carry out
handle communication and coordination
communication and coordination with
between the federal government and state community and regional representatives ofgovernments.
the Ministry of Home Affairs.

Note: Compiled by the Cabinet Office from the Report on the “Survey of Government Systems for Disaster Risk Reduction, Security, and Crisis Management" and thewebsites of each institution.

Page 58

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

Germany

FranceRepublic of Korea

TaiwanBBK (Federal Office of Civil
Protection and Disaster Assistance)

Ministry of the Interior
Ministry of Public Administration and Executive Yuan (Executive branch)
DSC (Directorate of Civil Defence and Security
Office of Disaster Management
Security)
NEMA (National Emergency
Management Agency)

2004
Federal Minister of the Interior

1975
Minister of the Interior

344

2004
Administrator of NEMA (Minister of
Public Administration and Security)435

In the event that the above(Repeated) At the national level, theorganization is established, theMinister of the Interior, through all
Ministry of the Interior, working with the regions within France, prepares
other federal ministries and otherassistance measures such as
states, has the role of coordinating regional/public facilities for use in
assistance to the affected area.
the event of a disaster, andcoordinates resources in emergency
situations.

The Ministry of Public Administration The institution that will takeand Security has jurisdiction over the responsibility is designated according
Police Agency as well as NEMA, and to the type of disaster.
coordinates the activities of both
- Typhoon, earthquake, fire →firefighters and police.
Ministry of the Interior- Flood, drought, related to essential
utilities or infrastructure → Ministryof Economic Affairs- Cold snap, landslide → Council ofAgriculture- Aircraft accident, traffic accident →Ministry of Transportation

According to the German
constitution, in ordinary times, thestates are responsible for dealing
with any disaster. There are no
structural differences between the
different types of disaster. (Thefederal government is only fully
responsible for civil defense in timesof war. The 16 states are responsiblefor disaster response and mitigation
during peacetime. In addition, since
all of the responses within each state
are delegated to the counties ormunicipalities, the actual natural
disaster activities are carried out atthe county and municipality level.)

NEMA is concerned with natural
disasters such as typhoons,
earthquakes, and human-induced
disasters such as fires, explosions
and traffic accidents. Furthermore,
the Radiation Disaster Management
Bureau of the Nuclear Power Safety
Committee plays the central role innuclear disaster risk reduction.

Disaster prevention institutions andresponse activity institutions aredesignated for each disaster, but the
government as a whole is involved in
the anticipation of an "all hazards"
situation. (In the event that no
institution is designated, the Central
Disaster Prevention/Response
Committee will designate the lead
institution).

Approx. USD 300 million
The whole of France is divided into 7 The fire service/police which are the
districts, and disaster response plans active responders at the site of a
are adopted by each district. The
disaster are under the direct
head of each district coordinates
jurisdiction of the Ministry of Publicresources in an emergency situation Administration and Security. In
within their district.
times of emergency, a chief on-site
information administrator may also
be dispatched to the disaster site.

In the event of a disaster, a forward
command post may be established at
the disaster site with the consent of
the director of the Central Disaster
Response Center, and depending on
the circumstances of the natural
disaster. This post carries out thestatus confirmation of the disastersite, the coordination of support
materials, and rescue activities.

Note: Compiled by the Cabinet Office from the Report on the Survey into Government Systems for Disaster Risk Reduction, Security, and Crisis Management" and thewebsites of each institution.

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

Page 59

Chapter I

Organization of BBK
At the national level, the Minister of Organization of the NEMA:(1) Emergency Administration
the Interior, through all the regions - Planning and Coordination
Division
within France, prepares assistance
Authority(2) Emergency Response/Important measures such as regional/public- Prevention and Security Bureau
Social Foundation/International
facilities for use in the event of a
- Fire Prevention Policy Bureau
Cooperation Divisiondisaster, and coordinates resources - Disaster Management Bureau(3) Research Technology/Healthin emergency situations.
Protection Division(4) Civil Protection Drills and Risk
Management/Emergency Planning/
Civil Protection Academy Division
Also, a Federal Agency for TechnicalRelief (THW) has been established toprovide technological support for
relief in civil protection and disasterrisk reduction
In the event that a large disaster
The initial rescue activities andIn times of emergency, a Central
In the event that a major natural
occurs that exceeds the coping
recovery activities following a natural Disaster Security Measuresdisaster occurs or is anticipated, acapacity of a state or causes damage disaster are conducted by the local Headquarters is established within
Central Disaster Response Center isthat crosses state boundaries, angovernment of each municipality;
the Ministry of Public Administration established.
organization to coordinate between depending on the scale of theand Security, with the Minister ofministries and agencies is established disaster, this may be taken to a
Public Administration and Security as
within the Ministry of the Interior.
higher level.
its head. This head can issue dispatch
requests to the service staff and staff
of disaster management institutions,and can request the National
Director of Defense to mobilize themilitary.

1-2 Efforts in Human Resource Development and Disaster Management Drills(1) Human Resource Development

Part II

In a prompt and appropriate response to a natural disaster, much depends on the knowledge and experience of thedisaster management officials who implement that response. For this reason, the Cabinet Office has been working since2013 to provide Disaster Risk Reduction Specialist Training to national and local government officials to cultivate people
who can respond promptly and appropriately to crisis situations and people who can form national and local networks.
In 2014, it also implemented Training to Experience Cabinet Office Operations, Training at the Ariake no Oka Core
Region-wide Disaster Management Base Facility, and Comprehensive Disaster Management Training by Region for
national and local government officials.
The Training at the Ariake no Oka Core Region-wide Disaster Management Base Facility includes a “General
Management Course” for staff who play a key role in the operation of the disaster management headquarters,“Individual Policy Course” for expert staff who are engaged in responding to specific individual issues, and “Disaster
Risk Reduction Foundation Course” for staff newly appointed to disaster management departments. Training enables
the acquisition of the skills necessary for carrying out disaster risk reduction activities.
Fig. II-1-2

Disaster Risk Reduction Activities Carried out by Disaster Risk Reduction Specialists

Generalcoordination
Response to
individual
issues

1
2
3
4
5
6

Prevention
Planning
Public information
Operation coordination
Execution management
Disaster-resistant national
development, community
development
Prevention of accidents anddisasters

Response11
12

Measures for dealing withthe period immediately prior
to a disaster
Establishment of systems for
information collection andcommunication and activity
immediately following adisasterPrevention of escalation orsecondary disasters andemergency response andrehabilitation activities
Rescue, first aid, medicalcare, and firefighting
activities

22

7

Promoting disaster risk
reduction activities among
citizens

13

8

Promoting research andobservations relating todisasters and disaster risk
reduction
Implementation of
measures to prevent
recurrence of accidents anddisasters

14

15

Securing roads for emergency
transport, emergency
transport activities

Preparation for swift andseamless disaster response
measures against disasters
as well as recovery andreconstruction

16

Evacuee accommodation andinformation dissemination
activities

17

Procurement and supply of
goods
Activities relating topreservation of health andhygiene, disease control, anddisposal of bodies, etc.
Activities relating topreservation of social order,
stabilization of commodity
prices, etc.
Activities relating to
education on response
Acceptance of voluntary
support

9

10

18

19

20
21

Rehabilitation/Recovery

23

Decisions regarding basic
course of community
rehabilitation/recovery
Methods for rapidly
returning to normal
conditions

24

Methods of systematic
recovery25

Support for victims inrebuilding their daily lives

26

Reconstruction of small andmedium-sized companies
that have been victims of thedisaster, other support foreconomic reconstruction

Items 1-4: Established as the most important activities common to prevention, response, and rehabilitation/recovery
Items 1-3: Established with reference to the National Preparedness Goal
Item 4: Added to items 1-3 due the importance of evaluation/improvement in the PDCA cycle
Items 5-26: Established from the issues in the measures common to all disasters in the second edition of the Basic Disaster Management Plan
Disaster risk reduction activities primarily highlighted by the Cabinet Office
Source: Cabinet Office

Page 60

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

The Comprehensive Disaster Management Training by Region offered training for the acquisition of knowledge andattitudes necessary for responding to natural disasters by establishing and implementing themes which cover the
special characteristics of the natural disasters that occur in each region.
These courses shall continue to be implemented in 2015, together with investigations into various frameworks forhuman resource development. These include the development of standard textbooks, which would provide acommon foundation for the implementation of training.

Special Feature: About the Mayor’s Summit on Flood Disasters
The Mayor’s Summit on Flood Disasters is organized by the Flood Management Summit Executive
Committee Office (promoters: Mayor of Sanjo City, Niigata Prefecture, Mayor of Mitsuke City, Niigata
Prefecture, Mayor of Fukui City, Fukui Prefecture, and Mayor of Toyooka City, Hyogo Prefecture), and has
been held every year since 2005. It aims to allow municipal mayors from local governments all across thecountry who have experienced flood disasters to discuss their experiences with one another and todisseminate information nationwide about flood countermeasures and future challenges.
One of the specific initiatives of the Summit has been the production of a publication entitled “What
Could and Could Not be Done at Flood Damage Sites: Know-How on Disaster Risk Reduction, Disaster
Mitigation, and Restoration from Affected Areas” (published by the Flood Management Summit
Executive Committee Office). This publication details the difficulties of implementing flood
countermeasures and outlines response measures. It also includes “The 11 Must-Do Items for Leaders at
the Time of a Natural Disaster.”At the 10th Mayor’s Summit on Flood Disasters held on June 3, 2014, local governments shared theirexperiences and lessons learned from dealing with flood disasters, focusing on topics such as efforts toavoid the erosion of disaster risk awareness gained from experiencing a natural disaster.
The 11 Must-Do Items for Leaders At the Time of a Natural Disaster(excerpt from the Mayor’s Summit on Flood Disasters
website: http://www.mlit.go.jp/river/suigai/index.html, partially abbreviated due to space constraints)
1.

Saving lives must be your first priority, and you must not hesitate to issue evacuation orders toresidents.
2. Delays in decision-making cost lives. Above all else, as a leader you must make decisions quickly.
3. We have learned that people will not flee. Be aware in advance that people tend to avoid fleeing.
4. Set up a volunteer center immediately.
5. Leaders must make themselves as visible as possible to residents via mass media, and encourage
the victims by demonstrating that “City (Town) Hall is doing all it can.”
6. Leaders must understand the suffering and sadness of the residents, and communicate that
understanding to them.
7. Hold a press conference every day at a designated time, and continue to share information. Do nothide any information.
8. There will be a vast quantity of waste. Immediately prepare a large provisional area for waste
disposal. Ask residents to separate it as best they can into tatami matting, domestic appliances,tires, etc. (and dispose of the waste quickly after the event).
9. Financial matters can be sorted out afterwards. You must take resolute action to do what needs tobe done for residents. Above all, immediately after the occurrence of the natural disaster, you musttell your staff unequivocally “Do not worry about money. The mayor will sort it out somehow. Justdo everything you have to do.”
10. Even if you are busy, ungrudgingly allow inspections to be performed.
11. Continue to express your gratitude to the people who have come to provide support and relief. Your
staffs are victims, too. Express your gratitude to your staff and their families.

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

Page 61

Chapter I

At the same time, when a large-scale natural disaster of unimaginable proportions occurs, those who spearhead
disaster response activities will have to make prompt and appropriate decisions to protect citizens. For this reason, a
National Disaster Risk Reduction - Crisis Management Top Seminar was held in 2014, co-sponsored by the Fire andDisaster Management Agency. This training was intended for first-term mayors or mayors with no natural disaster
experience, and covered principles of disaster response, disaster preparedness, and measures that can be taken both
immediately prior to and immediately after a natural disaster.

(2) Disaster Management Drills
In the event of a natural disaster, national government institutions, local governments, public agencies, and otherinstitutions involved in disaster management must work as one, in cooperation with residents, to respond to thatdisaster. For this reason, institutions involved in disaster management implement disaster management drills based on
the Disaster Countermeasures Basic Act, Basic Disaster Management Plan, and other regulations to verify and confirm
the emergency measures to be taken when a natural disaster strikes and to enhance residents’ awareness of disasters.

Part II

The basic policy for disaster drills that are conducted by national and local governments, as well as an overview of thedrills that are carried out at the national level, are determined every year by the Central Disaster Management Council
in the Comprehensive Disaster Management Drill Framework. In 2014, the following drills were carried out based on
the 2014 Comprehensive Disaster Management Drill Framework.
Drills on the establishment and management of the Extreme Disaster Management Headquarters, with theparticipation of all cabinet ministers, to confirm procedures for the declaration of an emergency and thedetermination of basic policies relating to the emergency disaster response measures.
(Government Headquarters Operations Drill on September 1, 2014, “Disaster Preparedness Day”)• Relevant local governments and private companies were invited to conduct drills, including tsunami evacuation
drills, around Tsunami Preparedness Day on November 5. Tsunami evacuation drills were conducted together with
communities in eight locations nationwide.
(Community Earthquake and Tsunami Disaster Drills, November 1-9, 2014)• Classroom learning and basic tabletop exercises for personnel of the secretariat of the Extreme Disaster
Management Headquarters, aimed at improving their knowledge and proficiency.
(June 13, 2014, Extreme Disaster Management Headquarters Secretariat Personnel Tabletop Exercise)• Tabletop exercises in a role-playing format to investigate the effectiveness of the functions and manuals of theExtreme Disaster Management Headquarters Secretariat.
(February 9, 2014, Government Tabletop Exercise)• Drills on the establishment and management of On-site Extreme Disaster Management Headquarters held in threelocations across Japan.
(November 5, 2014 (Aichi Prefecture), January 16, 2015 (Kagawa Prefecture), February 1, 2015 (Osaka Prefecture),
On-site Extreme Disaster Management Headquarters Establishment and Management Drill)• Comprehensive drills to support regional medical transportation, such as the transport of disaster medical
assistance teams (DMAT) and patients, and the establishment and management of regional transport bases andprovisional medical facilities.
(August 30, 2014, Regional Medical Transport Drill)• Practical drills to clarify issues relating to the provision of medical functions using civilian vessels.
(November 25, 2014)•

The 2015 Comprehensive Disaster Management Drill Framework was established on March 31, 2015 based on both thedisaster management drills that were conducted in 2014 and on recent disasters. The basic approaches to the drills thegovernment plans to conduct, are outlined below.
Implement the government headquarters management drill on Disaster Preparedness Day on September 1 using
the scenario of a Tokyo Inland Earthquake• Urge local governments and private companies to conduct drills around Tsunami Preparedness Day on November
5, encourage the implementation of drills, and conduct large-scale earthquake early warning drills andearthquake/tsunami disaster drills• Conduct On-site Disaster Management Headquarters management drills in every region• Conduct sediment disaster/nationwide disaster drills involving residents• Conduct drills involving residents, hikers, and tourists based on the evacuation plans formulated by the Volcanic
Disaster Management Councils• Conduct comprehensive disaster management drills that envision a complex disaster involving both a natural
disaster and a nuclear power disaster• Conduct drills to practice road clearance and the removal of abandoned vehicles to rapidly secure emergency
transportation routes (Figs. II-1-3, II-1-4)•

When the 2016 Comprehensive Disaster Management Drill Framework is created, a mid-term disaster management
drill plan with a mid-term perspective will also be devised in order to ensure the implementation of planned andsystematic drills.
Page 62

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

Fig. II-1-3

1

2015 Perspectives on Creating a Comprehensive Disaster Management Drill Framework
Add strengthening of communication between
disaster management organizations in normal times,
including strengthening of relations between
national and local governments, to disastermanagement drill goals

Meeting of related senior vice-ministers, study meetingfor crisis management

Provide examples of region-wide drills, simulation
drills conducted in partnership with local
governments

Act on the Promotion of Tsunami Countermeasures(2011)

Add stipulations on making efforts to include local
governments and private companies, and promoting
the implementation of drills

3

Revision of the Sediment Disasters Prevention Act(Hiroshima Landslide Disaster)

Add sediment disaster and nationwide disastermanagement drills

4

Investigation into revising the Act on Special Measures
for Active Volcanoes (Mt. Ontake Eruption)

Conduct drills based on evacuation plans formulatedby Volcanic Disaster Management Councils

5

Three year revision investigation team(Completion/strengthening of nuclear management
system)Implement comprehensive disaster management
drills assuming a complex disaster involving a natural
disaster and a nuclear power disaster

6

Revision of Disaster Countermeasures Basic Act(abandoned vehicles measures)(Yamanashi Prefecture Snow Storm)

Add drills for opening roads and removing
abandoned vehicles so as to rapidly establish
emergency transportation routes

Source: Cabinet Office

Fig. II-1-4

2015 Outline of Comprehensive Disaster Management Drills○ Objectives of disaster management drills○ Verify effectiveness of institutions related to disaster risk management○ Strengthen mutual coordination with institutions involved in disaster risk management
during ordinary times to strengthen relations between national and local governments○ Continuously improve disaster management plans○ Raise awareness and improve knowledge of DRR among residents○ Comprehensive government-run disaster management drills(2) Flood disaster management drills•••

Comprehensive flood prevention exercises
Landslide disaster/national disaster management drills
Large-scale tabletop exercises for flooding(3) Volcanic eruption disaster management drills
Drills based on evacuation plans formulated by Volcanic Disaster Management Councils(1) Earthquake and tsunami drills
A. Comprehensive “Disaster Prevention Day” disaster management drills• ”Disaster Prevention Day” government headquarters management drill
Drill for activating the Disaster Management Headquarters Meeting attended by all
Cabinet Ministers including the Prime Minister• Site survey drill at a disaster-stricken area (Tokyo) in conjunction with a joint disaster
drill by nine local governments (prefectures and cities)• Assembly drill in the government office, each Cabinet Minister walking
B. Earthquake and tsunami drills on “Tsunami Preparedness Day”
Promote drills, encourage local governments and private companies to participate• Earthquake Early Warning drill• Earthquake and tsunami disaster management drills

C. Government tabletop exercises• Government tabletop exercise for a Nankai Trough earthquake• Tabletop exercise based on plans by staff of Extreme Disaster Management
Headquarters Secretariat supposing a Tokyo Inland Earthquake• Drill to practice management of On-site Disaster Management Headquarters• Joint disaster drills with Self-Defense Forces• Drills to practice the transmission of information based on a Tokai Earthquake
D. Regional block drills
Regional practical and tabletop exercises implemented mainly by a council comprised of
relevant ministries and local governments in regional blocks• Joint disaster drill by nine local governments• Regional disaster drills for the Tokai region• Joint disaster drill among the Kinki prefectures• Kyushu Block Council Joint Disaster Drill to prepare for a Nankai Trough Megaquake
E. Practical drills in coordination with local governments
Drills carried out by Police Disaster Response Units, Emergency Fire Fighting Assistance
Corps, TEC-FORCE, Self-Defense Forces, and DMAT in coordination with relevant local
governments• Joint defense drills with regional emergency assistance teams conducted by police
bureaus in each jurisdiction• Nationwide joint drills by the emergency firefighting assistance corps and joint drills
by regional block• Comprehensive disaster management drills in each prefecture(4) Drills for disasters caused by accidents••

Aviation disaster tabletop exercises
Oil-spill control drills(5) Nuclear power comprehensive disaster management drills
Comprehensive disaster drills to address a hypothetical combined disaster involving anatural disaster and a nuclear power disaster(6) Drills to verify business continuity plans•••

Tabletop exercises for information transmission and government office assembly
Drills to confirm effectiveness of business continuity plans (staff safety confirmation
drills and emergency assembly drills)
Sector-specific (industry-based) drills(7) Emergency medical treatment drills••

Drills for medical treatment activities following a large-scale earthquake
Drills to verify medical treatment functions using ships(8) Drills to ensure emergency transport
Road clearance and abandoned vehicle removal drills for rapidly securing emergency
transport routes(9) Drills for the procurement and supply of goods••

Practical and tabletop exercises for fuel supply based on the Emergency Oil Supply
Coordination Plan
Regional transport drills at core regional disaster management bases(10) Disaster drills in coordination with US forces stationed in Japan

Source: Cabinet Office

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

Page 63

Chapter I2(3) Tsunami DRR Efforts
Many precious lives were lost in the tsunami disaster generated by the Great East Japan Earthquake that occurred in
March 2011. Based on this a lesson, and with the aim of protecting lives, health, and property from tsunami disasters in
the future, the Act on the Promotion of Tsunami Countermeasures was enacted in June of the same year. Under thislaw, November 5 was designated as “Tsunami Preparedness Day,” and it was established that efforts would be made to
hold events to deepen people’s understanding of and interest in tsunami preparedness measures.

Part II*There is a tale known as “The Fire of Inamura,” which tells the story of November 5, 1854, when a tsunami hit
Wakayama Prefecture following the Ansei Nankai Earthquake. A man set light to bundles of rice that had been
harvested (inamura) and helped villagers who were struggling to evacuate in the darkness to flee to high places,saving their lives. November 5 was thus designated “Tsunami Preparedness Day.”
In 2014, the Cabinet Office encouraged local governments and private enterprises throughout Japan to conduct
earthquake/tsunami disaster drills, including tsunami evacuation drills, around “Tsunami Preparedness Day” on
November 5, since human causalities can be dramatically reduced by prompt and efficient evacuation. It alsosponsored community earthquake/tsunami disaster drills in eight locations around the country.
Approximately 300 groups and 796,000 people participated in the tsunami drills, and many companies and groups took
steps to raise awareness, putting up posters, for example, and engaging in other activities. On Tsunami Preparedness
Day itself, a meeting on tsunami preparedness attended by the Prime Minister was held at the Prime Minister’s Official
Residence. The media was invited to cover the event, emphasizing the importance of tsunami disaster preparedness.
In 2015, as well, initiatives will be promoted to raise citizen interest in tsunami preparedness through drills thatphysically instill correct evacuation behaviors and through public outreach activities, and efforts will be made to ensurethat such initiatives become well established as national campaigns.

Community Earthquake and Tsunami Evacuation
Drill (Hamanaka-cho, Hokkaido)

Page 64

Tsunami Evacuation Drill(Hokkaido Railway Company)

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

Fig. II-1-5

Effects of Tsunami DRR Measures

Scenario involving mass casualties in the Tokai area due to a Nankai Trough earthquake

Case where levees/floodgates
do not function properly(Low early evacuation rate)

Approx. 164,000 people(Low early evacuation rate ＋
effective use of evacuation bldg.)

Approx. 93,000 people(High early evacuation rate ＋
evacuation directives)(Acceleration of start ofevacuation)

Effective use oftsunami evacuation
bldg.

Effective use oftsunami evacuation
bldg.

Approx. 77,000 people

Approx. 60,000 people(High early evacuation rate ＋
evacuation directives ＋effective
use of evacuation bldg.)(Acceleration of start ofevacuation ＋ effective use ofevacuation bldg.)

Effective use of tsunami
evacuation bldg.

Effective use oftsunami evacuation
bldg.

Approx. 117,000 people

Acceleration of start of evacuation

Non-structural measures(self-help/mutual help)

Approx. 46,000 people(Increased seismic reinforcementof buildings ＋ measures toprevent falling of furniture etc.)

Source: Cabinet Office

1-3 Implementation of Disaster Risk Reduction (DRR) Education in Communities
To promote DRR education nationwide, the Cabinet Office and Disaster Reduction Education Challenge Plan
Committee developed a Manual for the Implementation of Disaster Risk Reduction (DRR) Education in Communities inMarch 2015. This manual was developed by organizing and analyzing knowledge and know-how needed for theseamless promotion of DRR education, and by examining best practices that can be instructive for those who are trying
to start a DRR education program for the first time. It contains tips for solving the various challenges that arise in theprocess of implementing DRR education programs. This manual is outlined below (Fig. II-1-6).

(1) Clarification of the Purpose and Significance of DRR Education•
The manual stipulates that DRR education is designed "to strengthen the DRR capacity (the ability to prevent
disasters before they occur, to prevent the exacerbation of damage caused by disasters once they occur, and to
recover from disasters) of communities by raising disaster awareness among individual community members andcultivating connections within communities."•
To demonstrate the effects of DRR education, the manual presents the example of Kamaishi Higashi Junior HighSchool in Kamaishi City, Iwate Prefecture during the Great East Japan Earthquake of March 2011, highlighting thesignificance and importance of expanding the reach of DRR education.
(2) Outline of 18 Key Points for DRR Education•
The manual divides DRR education efforts into three stages (preparation, implementation, and follow-up) andestablishes 18 key points in promoting these efforts. It further classifies these points into six groups (people,
management, places, budgets, resources, and skills).
(3) Introduction to Best Practices from Around Japan•The 18 points are presented with practical examples, in an easy-to-read and easy-to-understand format. Website
links and other resources prepared by various organizations are provided for reference, enabling users to obtain
detailed information that is not included in the manual.

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

Page 65

Chapter I

Approx. 230,000 people

Hard measures (public help)(Early evacuation rate low)

Increased seismic
reinforcement oflevees/floodgates

Approx. 254,000 people

Fig. II-1-6

Outline of the Manual to Implement Community DRR Education

This manual, compiled to broaden the scope of DRR education throughout Japan, establishes “knowledge topromote initiatives” taken from examples of best practices, and provides tips for solving the various challenges
that arise in the process of implementing DRR education programs.

1. Intended Audience
Part II

This manual is principally for those who are tackling DRR education for the first time, not only in educational or
welfare groups (schools, kindergartens, day care centers, etc.), but also in community groups, volunteer
groups, and local governments.

2. Implementing DRR Education(1) Purpose of DRR education
The purpose is to strengthen the community disaster resilience (i.e., the ability to prevent natural disasters, toavoid the escalation of damage when a natural disaster does occur, and to plan recovery efforts following adisaster) by improving the DRR awareness of every single person who lives in a given community andpromoting cooperation within that community.
(2) Five important points for the implementation of DRR education

1) Know the characteristics and problems of the area and past disaster experiences Ascertain the community’s vulnerabilities, understand the anticipated disaster risks
2) Act first, experience things first hand
 Start by taking action yourself, then show those around you what you’re doing3) Carry out initiatives that are right for you Do not overdo things, do not bite off more than you can chew, but advance initiatives withinparameters that are suitable for your group
4) Carry out positive exchanges with stakeholders who have different perspectives
 You can gain new insights by cooperating and working together with stakeholders around you5) Keep things cheerful, fun, and easy-to-do Develop activities that can easily be continued as part of daily life

3. 18 Key Points for DRR Education
Three Stages

StagesElements

Preparation

Preparation

People (actors)
People (coordinators)
Management (organizations)Management (systems)
Occasion (time)
Occasion (venues)
Money (funding)Resources (knowledge)
Resources(educational materials)
People (coordinators)

Implementation

Follow-up

Six Elements
PeopleManagement
Occasion
Budgets
Resources
SkillsActors/Coordinators
Organizations/
Systems

Implementation

Occasion (time)
Money (cost)

Time/ Venues

Budget/ Cost
Knowledge/
EducationalMaterials
Strategies

Management (systems)

Skills (strategies)
Follow-up

People (responsible individuals)
Resources(educational materials)
Skills (strategies)
Mgmt, Resources, Skills

Key Points for DRR Education
Decide who is responsible
Connect with key people in the community
Organize implementing agencies
Do not overextend the scope of activity
Secure time for preparations
Secure a venue for activities
Secure funding for activities
Gather knowledge and information
Create educational materials (a program) suited
to the purpose
Secure advisors with a wealth of experience
Gain the understanding of the community,
connect with relevant institutions
Secure time for activities
Reduce cost
Interact with other organizations implementing
DRR education
Cultivate successors
Turn wisdom and experience into explicit
knowledge
Announce results to the public
Continuously review and revise activity contents

Source: Cabinet Office

Page 66

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

1-4 Construction of Business Continuity Systems Across Sectors(1) Business Continuity Systems of Government Organizations

Local governments need to play a leading role in disaster emergency response activities as well as recovery andrestoration activities, and will need to be able to continue performing their ordinary tasks, which are essential to theircommunities. The Great East Japan Earthquake and subsequent tsunami severely damaged many local governmentbuildings, turning both leaders and public employees into disaster victims themselves. This has highlighted how
important it is for local governments to build their own business continuity plans. The Cabinet Office has supported thebusiness continuity efforts of local governments with its Business Continuity Manual for Local Governments During
Earthquake Disasters (First Edition). Nonetheless, business continuity plan formulation rates, though growing in recent
years, have remained stuck at low levels. As of August 2013, formulation rates were reported to be at 60% among
prefectures and 13% among municipal governments (Fig. II-1-7).
For this reason, the Cabinet Office produced Business Continuity Plan Formulation Guidelines for Municipalities in May
2015, and is continuing to support the enhancement and strengthening of the business continuity systems of local
governments.

Fig. II-1-7

Current Status of Formulation of Business Continuity Plans by Local Governments

Prefectures
Nov. 2009

11%

89%

Apr. 2011

38%

Aug. 2013

62%
60%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%
40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Municipalities
0.1%

Nov. 2009

Apr. 2011

99.9%

4%

Aug. 2013

96%
13%

0%

Source: November 2009
April 2011
August 2013

87%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

Survey of Business Continuity Plans Based on an Earthquake Disaster (Cabinet Office (Disaster Management) and
Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications, Fire and Disaster Management Agency Survey)
Local Government Information Management Report (March 2012) Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications
Local Administration Bureau Regional Information Policy Office Survey
Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications, Fire and Disaster Management Agency Survey (BCP Formulation Ratefor Large-Scale Earthquakes and Other Natural Disasters (preliminary figures))

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

Page 67

Chapter I

The central government's ministries and agencies have formulated their own agency-specific organization continuity
plans for the purpose of ensuring the continuity of the pivotal functions of the capital in the event of a Tokyo Inland
Earthquake. In March 2014, the Central Government Business Continuity Plan (Measures for a Tokyo Inland
Earthquake) was approved by the Cabinet pursuant to the Act on Special Measures against Tokyo Inland Earthquake(Act No. 88 of 2013). The central government ministries and agencies then revised their own business continuity plans
based on that document. The Cabinet Office created evaluation criteria and methods, based on the opinions of experts,
to ensure that this plan can be used to evaluate the effectiveness of government business continuity plans. In the
future, government business continuity plans will be evaluated by experts using these evaluation criteria and methods,
and revised as needed based on the results. The manual thus establishes a system of business continuity to ensure thatthe government can seamlessly maintain its operations in the event of a Tokyo Inland Earthquake.

(2) Efforts by the Private Sector
If a company's business operations are disrupted by a major disaster, the impacts will extend far beyond the company
itself, affecting the company's vendors, suppliers, and the entire local economy. It is therefore extremely important forcompanies to be able to continue their business activities after a disaster.

Part II

The Cabinet Office had revised its Business Continuity Guidelines for the private sector based on the principles ofBusiness Continuity Management (BCM) ssuch that they not only recommend the formulation of plans, but establish
BCM as a type of management strategy. Efforts have been made to disseminate information on the formulation ofbusiness continuity plans (BCP) by, for example, formulating instruction manuals for enhancing the understanding of
BCM among management, and creating an English version of its business guidelines as a means of sharing information
about Japanese BCM efforts overseas. As of the end of March 2014, the data on BCP formulation indicates that
formulation efforts are well under way, with over 70% of large companies reporting that they either "have alreadyformulated" or "are in the process of formulating" plans. Among medium-sized companies, this percentage is over40%.
The Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015-2030, which was adopted at the Third UN World Conference
on Disaster Risk Reduction held in March 2015, calls for private companies to play a role in DRR. A symposium
conducted at the Bosai Industry Fair in Sendai, a related event held at the same conference, acknowledged the need tofurther improve DRR capabilities grounded in the advanced technologies and know-how possessed by Japanese privatecompanies. Opinions expressed by participants reflected the need to create forums for information sharing between
public and private sector stakeholders.

1-5 Communicating Lessons Learned from Disasters
In the Omoe-Aneyoshi neighborhood of Miyako City in Iwate Prefecture, amonument carved with lessons from the Showa Sanriku Earthquake (1933) has
been built. Its carvings exhort local residents: "Do not build houses below thispoint." As indicated by the fact that houses built at elevations higher than thismonument were not damaged by the tsunami following the Great East Japan
Earthquake, passing down lessons from past disasters is an important way tomitigate disaster damage.
Since March 2013, the Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications and the
National Diet Library have been operating a portal site (the National Diet
Library Great East Japan Earthquake Archive (Hinagiku)) that allows users tocentrally search for and use digital data related to the Great East Japan
Earthquake. It was designed to help pass down all records and lessons from theGreat East Japan Earthquake to future generations and to serve as a resource
for recovery and restoration projects, as well as future DRR efforts, in theaffected areas.

Monument of
the Great Tsunami(Aneyoshi, Miyako-city, Iwate)

In February 2015, the Cabinet Office held a Meeting on the Collection,
Preservation, and Use of Large-Scale Disaster Information to investigate
approaches to the collection, preservation, and use of disaster information, and to examine issues related to theframeworks that exist for collecting and preserving information on large-scale disasters.

Section 2: Disaster Response and Preparedness
2-1 Evacuation Directive Decision Making and Communication
The Cabinet Office revised its Guidelines for Producing a Decision and Dissemination Manual for Evacuation Advisories
and Orders in April 2014 given the use of new information, such as Sediment Disaster Alert Information, and based on
the lessons learned from disasters like the landslide disaster that occurred on Izu Oshima Island in October 2013. They
recommended that municipalities issue evacuation advisories, orders, and other directives without fear that theymight be unnecessary, and had planned to disseminate the Guidelines through explanatory meetings organized forprefectures and municipalities (Fig. II-1-8) .
However, following the sediment disaster that occurred in Hiroshima in August 2014, and based on reports that thetiming of evacuation directives had been an issue, in September that year the Cabinet Office and the Fire and Disaster
Management Agency requested that all local governments in Japan reexamine their decision-making criteria for theissuance of evacuation directives for sediment disasters.
On the other hand, consider the situation of the sediment disaster that occurred in Tanba City, Hyogo Prefecture.
Although the disaster occurred in the middle of the night, authorities referred to the Landslide Disaster Warning
Information and the natural disaster information provided by the prefectures, issued its evacuation orders early,
Page 68

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

Fig. II-1-8

Outline of the Manual to Implement Community DRR Education
Timeline

March 2005

Formulation of the Old Guidelines

Sep. 2005
Sep. 2006

Sediment disaster alert information launched
Revision of designated river flood forecasts

Jun. 2013

Mar. 2011

The Great East Japan Earthquake

Aug. 2013

Revision of Disaster Countermeasures Basic Act(e.g., provisions guaranteeing seamless andsafe evacuation of residents)
Emergency Warning is launched

Revisions based on new systems, lessons from past disasters

Chapter I

Key Changes
Concept of “evacuation” reconsidered••“Evacuation” redefined as behaviors engaged in to protect oneself from natural disasters
Evacuation understood not only to mean going to an evacuation area as before; remaining home and ensuring one’s safety is
now also recognized as a kind of “evacuation behavior”→ “evacuation by fleeing” and “securing one’s safety at home”• Demonstrated the concept that there are areas where life -threatening phenomena may occur, where evacuation by fleeing isnecessary, depending on the type of disaster• Principle is established for municipalities to issue evacuation advisories/orders early, without concern that evacuation may not
be necessary→ if evacuation is necessary during the night or early in the morning, issue “evacuation preparation information”

Criteria for issuance of evacuation advisories/orders are clearly defined•

Decision criteria for evacuation advisories/orders are set out as precisely and clearly as possible, and information to be taken
into account in decision making is concretely defined
Example of evacuation advisory issuance criteria
Reference information
Meteorological information: disaster risk reduction
Flood: River water lever reaches Flood Risk Water Level
Sediment disaster: Issue sediment disaster alert information information system (Japan Meteorological Agency, JMA)
Water level of rivers: river disaster risk reduction
Storm surge: Issue storm surge warning(For tsunamis: Give all evacuation orders when alert is issued) information (Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport andTourism, MLIT)•

Support partners have been clarified for the definition of criteria for issuing evacuation advisories/orders and the analysis of
DRR meteorological information when the DRR system has been activated→ JMA Regional Headquarters and Local Meteorological Offices, MLIT River Offices, prefectural Land Development Offices,
etc.

•

Concepts behind municipal DRR systems are presented•

Examples are given of basic concepts relating to the transition stage of municipal DRR systems
Examples of DRR meteorological information and DRR systems (for sediment disasters)
Heavy rain advisory: System for posting communications personnel and monitoring the weather
Heavy rain warning: System for ensuring that governors and mayors get to work and decide when to issue evacuation
orders
Sediment disaster warning information: All disaster response personnel go to work

Proposal for mechanism to increase resident awareness of evacuation behaviors•

Proposed a framework for increasing residents’ awareness of the disaster risks they face at home, and what steps to take toevacuate if an evacuation advisory/order is issued→ Disaster Evacuation Info Card (card placed in every building that specifies which disasters necessitate evacuation and therelevant methods of evacuation)

Future plans

Since coordination with DRR institutions is necessary for municipalities to investigate criteria for issuing evacuation
advisories/orders, a revision with a target of one to two years will be requested
Guidelines will be revised as conditions require

Source: Cabinet Office

before the disaster had occurred, and thus were able to minimize the number of human casualties.
Thus, although the Guidelines still have not sufficiently been shared at all levels, there are actual examples ofgovernments issuing evacuation directives based on the decision-making criteria established in these Guidelines and ofdamage having been reduced as a result. Thus, the Cabinet Office plans to continue to disseminating the Guidelines incoordination with relevant institutions.
To ensure that residents can take the appropriate evacuation actions when an evacuation directive is announced, andgiven the need for residents to know what actions to take for various types of natural disasters (e.g., where to go ifthere is a need to evacuate, and what information to pay attention to in the case of an evacuation), the Guidelines
propose a system whereby a “Natural Disaster Evacuation Card” containing this information is installed at every
address and building. This card would help residents understand what local risks exist that might threaten their life.
Going forward, there are plans to improve the DRR awareness of residents through initiatives aimed at disseminating
general knowledge of the Guidelines as well as the “Disaster Evacuation Info Card” (Fig. II-1-9).
WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

Page 69

Disaster Evacuation Info Card

Fig. II-1-9

Disaster

Evacuation actionnd

Key information

Dangerous conditions

River A

2 floor of home

Level of rainfall at XX observation station

XX mm

River BXX building

Water level at XX observation station

X.X mLevel of rainfall at XX observation station

XX mm

Landslide disaster XX gymnasium
TsunamiNone

Storm surge

NonePart II

Source: Cabinet Office

2-2 Designated Emergency Evacuation Sites and Evacuation Shelters
When the Great East Japan Earthquake struck in March 2011, a clear distinction was not necessarily made between“evacuation sites” to which people could flee to escape the dangers of the imminent disaster and “evacuation
shelters” where they could live in places of refuge following the disaster. Furthermore, the evacuation sites were notdesignated according to the type of natural disaster for which they were intended. Thus, some people fled toevacuation sites immediately after the earthquake only to have these facilities destroyed by the tsunami. This was one
cause of damage escalation.
Given this, revisions were made in June 2013 to the Disaster Countermeasures Basic Act establishing new provisions
relating to “Designated Emergency Evacuation Sites” and “Designated Evacuation Shelters.” These revisions
distinguished between places for emergency evacuation at the time of a natural disaster, and schools and community
centers where people could stay for a specific period and live as evacuees. These are outlined below.

(1) Designated Emergency Evacuation Sites
A Designated Emergency Evacuation Site is a place where residents can flee to when the tsunami or flooding risk isimminent. The purpose of these sites is to guarantee the safety of residents. Under the Disaster Countermeasures
Basic Act, municipal mayors must make an overall assessment of the maintenance conditions, configuration, geologicalfeatures, and other attributes of DRR facilities. When necessary, mayors must designate facilities or locations thatmeet certain criteria as Designated Emergency Evacuation Sites, so as to ensure efficient and rapid evacuations in theevent of a natural disaster.
The Fire and Disaster Management Agency conducted a survey on the designation status of Designated Emergency
Evacuation Sites. The results as of October 1, 2014 are shown in Fig. II-1-10.
Fig. II-1-10

Current Designation Status of Designated Emergency Evacuation Sites
Type of unusual phenomenon

Item

Flood

Sediment
disaster

Storm
surge

Earthquake

TsunamiLargescale fireHeavy
rainfallVolcanic
eruption

Total

No. of designatedsites (sites)

21,45919,4685,936

24,88814,09915,17913,995

3,809

37,181

Estimated no. of
peopleaccommodated(10,000 people)

3,363

3,713

1,791

5,937

2,571

5,262

2,397

745

8,333

Source: Created by the Cabinet Office based on the Current Status of Regional Disaster Risk Reduction
Administration by the Fire and Disaster Management Agency(2) Designated Evacuation Shelters
A Designated Evacuation Shelter is a facility where residents who have fled due to the dangers of a natural disaster may
stay for as long as is necessary until the dangers of that natural disaster have receded. The purpose of these facilities is
to offer temporary shelter for residents who are unable to return home due to the natural disaster. Shelters aredesignated by the municipal government.
At the time of the Great East Japan Earthquake, when many victims were forced to live as evacuees for long periods,
authorities observed the mental and physical functional decline of victims as well as the outbreak and worsening ofPage 70

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

various diseases. Many persons requiring special care experienced problems with the physical elements of thestructures or struggled in their relations with other evacuees, leaving them no choice but to return to life at home.
Given these lessons, the Disaster Countermeasures Basic Act was partially revised in June 2013. To provide for sureaccess to an appropriate facility where victims could stay in the event of a disaster, a system for the designation of
Designated Evacuation Shelters by municipal mayors was provided for in Article 49-7. Also, a system for designatingsome evacuation shelters as Welfare Evacuation Shelters was stipulated in Article 20-6-1-5 of the Enforcement Order ofthat Act. Articles 86-6 and 86-7 of the Act, meanwhile outlined the matters that local governments must take into
consideration in the development of the living environments at Designated Evacuation Shelters.

In 2014, to promote evacuation shelter initiatives based on the revised law and the Guidelines above, a survey was
conducted to promote initiatives to manage the evacuation shelters and welfare evacuation shelters operated by themunicipalities. This was posted online and was circulated among the prefectures and municipalities. Further, at a
meeting of those responsible for matters related to the Disaster Relief Act held in May 2014, the Guidelines wereexplained to the prefectural officials responsible for DRR and welfare services, and information was shared on systems
for introducing examples of advanced initiatives.
Fig. II-1-11

Current Designation Status of Designated Evacuation Shelters

Number designated

Designated Evacuation Shelter

Subset of Designated Welfare
Evacuation Shelter

48,014

7,647

Source: Study on the Current Status of Evacuation Shelter Management (Oct. 1, 2014, Cabinet Office)

2-3 Measures for Handling Abandoned or Stranded Vehicles
In the snow storms of February 2014, many stranded vehicles were left on the roads. These created obstacles for snowclearing work and caused traffic to be blocked for several days. In December 2013, a proposal entitled “Damage
Estimates and Countermeasures for a Tokyo Inland Earthquake” was formulated by the Central Disaster Management
Council’s Working Group to Investigate Tokyo Inland Earthquake Measures. This paper demonstrated that damage tothe roads themselves, abandoned vehicles, and the increased load on road traffic caused by railway closures could all
work together to create severe traffic congestion and impede roadway traffic significantly.
In light of this, and to ensure that a response can be carried out quickly when a natural disaster occurs, the Act toPartially Revise the Disaster Countermeasures Basic Act (Act No. 114 of 2014, hereinafter called the “Revised Act”),
which strengthens measures that may be taken against abandoned and stranded vehicles at the time of a natural
disaster, was unanimously approved and passed on November 14, 2014. It was promulgated and brought into force on
November 21 of that year. An outline is provided below.

(1) Outline of the Revised Acta) Movement of cars after a natural disaster•To ensure the transit of emergency vehicles in the event of a natural disaster, a road administrator may identify
a section of roads that he administers for special treatment, and may order the owners of vehicles and objects
that have fallen from vehicles, such as cargo (hereafter, “vehicles and cargo”), that are obstructing the passageof emergency vehicles, to move such vehicles and cargo out of the road, and to take measures to move theirvehicles and cargo into any vacant space between other cars.
•
If the owner who has been ordered to take such measures fails to do so, or if the owner is absent, the roadadministrator may, in addition to taking measures to move the vehicles and cargo themselves, may damage thevehicle and cargo to the extent that it is unavoidable for such measures to be taken.
•
The road administrator may, to the extent that it is unavoidable, temporarily use another person’s property toremove the obstruction.
WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

Page 71

Chapter I

Further, since the development of the living environment at evacuation shelters was newly provided for in the Revised
Disaster Countermeasures Basic Act, Guidelines for Ensuring Satisfactory Living Conditions at Evacuation Shelters were
formulated and published in August 2013, as a reference tool to promote efforts in dealing with evacuation shelters
under both emergency and non-emergency conditions.

b) Instructions from the Minister of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism and Prefectural Governors•
If the whole route to the site of a disaster is surveyed, and it appears that measures need to be taken to ensure
the passage of emergency vehicles through the network, the national government may instruct the prefectures
or municipalities, and the prefectures may instruct the municipalities, to take the necessary measures.
c) Demands of the Prefectural Public Safety Commissions•
The Prefectural Public Safety Commissions may, if necessary in order to carry out road closures, ask a roadadministrator to take necessary measures to enact a road closure, identifying the section of roads to be closed.
Part IId) Loss Compensation•
In the event that a road administrator, an agency, or a regional road corporation unavoidably damages any
vehicles or cargo, they must compensate the owner for said damage.

(2) Practical Application of the Revised Act
From December 5-6, 2014, snow fell across a wide area from northern to western Japan, with heavy snowfall along the
Sea of Japan coast and the mountain ranges. Along National Route 192, which joins Ehime Prefecture and Tokushima
Prefecture on the island of Shikoku and ordinarily sees very little snow, approximately 130 cars became stranded due tothe heavy snowfall. Measures were taken to move the stranded cars in the first application of the Revised Act. Further,approximately 60 vehicles became stranded along National Route 54, which joins Hiroshima Prefecture and Shimane
Prefecture, and vehicle movement measures were implemented pursuant to the Revised Act (Fig. II-1-12).
Since the Revised Act made it possible to issue “Orders to Drivers to Move their Vehicles” and allowed “Movement of
Vehicles by Road Administrators,” the time required for moving vehicles was reduced, and snow removal could be
implemented effectively. This facilitated the early lifting of the road closures. In the past, the consent of the driver had
to be obtained, and vehicles had to be moved with care so as not to cause damage. With abandoned cars whose
owners were absent, drivers were located and presented with demands to move their vehicles. However, thecompulsory movement provisions included in the Revised Act makes it possible to achieve a more rapid response.
As of 2014, the Revised Disaster Countermeasures Basic Act has been effectively applied to 48 sections of expressway
and national road.

Page 72

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

Fig. II-1-12

Snowstorm Response on National Route 192● December 5 (Fri.)
4:50 Confirmation of stranded vehicles
5:20 Closure of National Route 192 (16.9 km stretch)
8:40 Designation of area pursuant to the Revised Act (National Route 192: 18 km)
10:00 Request for support made from the local governments to the Chugoku and Kinki Regional Development Bureaus,
assessment of the number of stranded vehicles (approximately 130)
11:40 Enlargement of designated area pursuant to the Revised Act (National Route 192: 38 km; National Route 32: 54 km)
Chapter I

12:00 Beginning of food distribution, safety confirmation efforts
13:00 Completion of safety confirmation work
18:20 Completion of snow removal on Ehime side, completion of removal of stranded vehicles
22:00 Completion of snow removal on Tokushima side, completion of removal of stranded vehicles (moved inapproximately 17 hours)● December 6 (Sat.)
0:20 Tractor used to begin removing abandoned trailers (containers) pursuant to the Revised Act“Notice of Removal” affixed to container and guard rail
0:40 Completion of removal of abandoned trailer (moved to holding site 900 m away)
7:30 Lifting of road closure, cancellation of designation of areas under Disaster Countermeasures Basic Act

Moving a vehicle stranded on the road

Notice announcing the forced removal of avehicle left on the road

2-4 Measures to Assist Stranded Persons
The Great East Japan Earthquake that occurred in March 2011 left approximately 5,150,000 persons in themetropolitan area stranded, highlighting the need to prepare for the occurrence of a Tokyo Inland Earthquake in the
future and to strengthen measures for addressing the needs of stranded persons.
The measures required to deal with stranded persons are many and varied, and include controlling the flow of people
all returning home at once, guaranteeing temporary shelter facilities, providing information to those stranded,preventing crowding around railway stations, providing support to those travelling home on foot, and providing
transportation for stranded persons. A Tokyo Inland Earthquake will make it particularly difficult to deal with stranded
persons given the many casualties and evacuees that are expected to have to be managed. Since there is a limit to the“public help” that the government can provide, it will be essential to think in terms of a combined response, which
presupposes that people will have to rely on themselves as much as possible (“self-help), with “mutual help” being
provided where possible.
For this reason, the Council on Measures for Stranded Persons Following a Tokyo Inland Earthquake was established in
September 2011 to strengthen policies to tackle the problem of stranded persons. Its final report was compiled in
September 2012. In light of this report, the Coordinating Council on Measures for Stranded Persons Following a Tokyo
Inland Earthquake was established in January 2013. This Council carried out ongoing practical investigations into theguarantee of temporary shelter facilities, and revised the Guidelines on the Guarantee and Operation of Temporary
Shelter Facilities in February 2015 (Fig. II-1-14).

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

Page 73

Fundamentally this revision stipulates that temporary shelter facilities are set up and operated from a “public help”
perspective, but it demonstrates again the basic need for cooperation, especially from the private sector. It also
stipulates the scope of responsibility with regard to the operation and management of temporary shelter facilities andoutlines approaches to emergency situations.
Based on this, each facility manager can effectively set up and operate their temporary shelter facilities by signing anagreement relating to the intake of stranded persons at temporary shelter facilities, conducting building safety
inspections, and display and signing on to the conditions for the intake of stranded persons.
Part II

Based on the final report of the Council on Measures for Stranded Persons Following a Tokyo Inland Earthquake, thematters considered to be of particular importance were compiled, and in March 2015, Guidelines for Dealing with
Stranded Persons After a Large-Scale Earthquake were formulated. These are intended to serve as reference material
for the joint investigation by the private and public sector into measures for handling stranded persons in large urban
areas, where massive numbers of people are expected to be stranded (Fig. II-1-13).
It is hoped that the level of response that can be provided by society as a whole in this area will be raised by active
efforts by the national government, local governments, private companies, and individual citizens to address the needsof stranded people with reference to these Guidelines.

Fig. II-1-13

Guidelines for Dealing with Stranded Persons After a Large-Scale Earthquake

Guidelines for Dealing with Stranded Persons After a Large-Scale Earthquake• To address the issues of stranded persons, the public and private sector worked together to establish the Council
on Measures for Stranded Persons following a Tokyo Inland Earthquake. These guidelines are a compilation ofimportant stipulations based on the final report from that conference, issued in September 2012, and subsequent
investigations.
• Measures to address the needs of stranded persons, while premised on the use of “self help” to the extent possible,
require a comprehensive response that also includes “public help.” They require not only the efforts of the national
government, local governments, and private enterprises, but also coordinated, cooperative efforts among these
institutions.
1. Establish Councils on Stranded Persons
A council will be established in each urban area, whose
members will include institutions with connections to theprefecture or city, and relevant institutions will
cooperate in investigating responses
2. Regulate mass migration• Promote thorough understanding of basic principlethat reckless movements should be avoided• Promote creation of worksite waiting facilities forcompany employees• Protect users of large-scale tourism facilities andstations
3．Secure temporary stay facilities• Secure temporary stay facilities through designationby prefectures or municipalities or the execution ofagreements• Aim to accommodate two displaced persons for every
3.3 m3 of floor space, with standard operation of 3days
4．Prevent crowding around railway stations• Ascertain the special features of areas where measures
for stranded commuters must be taken• Establish councils whose members include
municipalities and relevant institutions, investigate
measures for stranded commuters

5. Provision of information to stranded persons• Provide information on survivors, earthquakes, anddamage• Develop systems for the provision of appropriate
information

6. Support for those returning home on footDesignate stations to provide support for those returninghome following a disaster, to provide water and a place torest, and prepare supported routes with guide maps toassist those walking home
7．Transportation for stranded persons• Investigate support using buses and other modes oftransport for those who are evacuating and needsupport and who would find it difficult to walk home
• Facilitate cooperation/coordination between thegovernment and institutions connected with transport
8．Steps all citizens can take on a daily basis
Individual residents must make efforts during ordinary
times to imagine emergency scenarios and to stay wellinformed, helping to ensure that they will be able to moreeasily gather information and walk home when necessary.

Source: Cabinet Office

Page 74

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

Fig. II-1-14

Key Changes in the Guidelines for Securing and Operating Temporary Shelters(1) Presentation of an agreement form
• Provide forms containing basic stipulations regarding agreements on the acceptance of stranded persons at temporary
stay facilities• Key stipulations should include the purpose, definitions, publication, establishment, acceptance, details of support,
operation, termination of intake, responsibility for costs, damages, and drills.

(2) Completion of check sheet for safety inspections
Chapter I• The Cabinet Office has drawn up and published “Guidelines on Emergency Inspections by Facility Administrators
Immediately following Large-Scale Earthquakes”• Safety inspections should be carried out by each facility administrator with reference to these guidelines(3) Presentation of and sign off on the conditions of acceptanceThose who are taken in should be asked to follow the conditions of acceptance following their consent and signature• The facility administrator is operating the facility out of good will, from a perspective of mutual help
• The user shall follow the instructions of the facility administrator• In the absence of intention or gross negligence, the facility administrator is not responsible for accidents or otherincidents that occur within the facility• In the absence of intention or gross negligence, the facility administrator will not be responsible even in the eventthat those staying at the facility become ill• The facility administrator will not look after property belonging to those staying at the facility• The facility may occasionally be closed by the decision of the facility administrator if the building is unsafe or if there
is a change in conditions in the surrounding area
• There are some matters, including the medical treatment of the wounded, that cannot be dealt with by the facility(4) Additional notes of caution for acceptance• Avoid using locations where there is a risk of things falling from the ceiling• Avoid dark and crowded places, and consider security issues• Where tenant buildings or mixed-use buildings are used, administrator and owner must cooperate and strive to secure
operational staff• When distributing food stores, confirm best before dates, and carefully investigate the distribution of any stored foods
that have passed their best before date
• Where facility users help in the operation of the facility, carry out the same security obligations as with employees(5) Government support policies• Prefectures and municipalities should strive towards the dissemination of and education on the following points withrespect to temporary stay facilities:o Temporary stay facilities are operated by facility administrators out of good will, from a perspective of mutual help
o There are matters that the facilities cannot address• The national government, prefectures, and municipalities actively cooperate in addressing any situation in which afacility administrator has sustained or may sustain damages in connection with their operation of a temporary stayfacility
Source: Cabinet Office

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

Page 75

2-5 Inspections for Controlling the Outbreak of Electrical Fires During Large-Scale Earthquakes
A report entitled “Damage Estimates and Countermeasures for a Tokyo Inland Earthquake (Final Report)” was releasedby the Central Disaster Management Council’s Working Group to Investigate Tokyo Inland Earthquake Measures in
December 2013, once again showed the risk of fires occurring simultaneously in many places where wooden houses
are crowded together in urban areas. Further, since more than half of the fires that have occurred following major
earthquakes in recent years were caused by electricity, this is a problem that clearly needs to be addressed. In light of
this, the Basic Plan for the Promotion of Tokyo Inland Earthquake Emergency Countermeasures which was adopted by
the Cabinet in March 2014 (hereafter, the “Basic Plan”) promoted technical investigations to ensure the effectivenessand reliability of seismometric breakers and outreach efforts to educate people about these devices.
Part IIIn September 2014, the Investigative Committee on Controlling the Outbreak of Electrical Fires During a Large-Scale
Earthquake was set up by the Cabinet Office, the Fire and Disaster Management Agency, and the Ministry of Economy,
Trade and Industry. It conducted an investigation on the performance evaluation and installation of seismometricbreakers, and carried out shaking experiments using mock living rooms. In February 2015, this Committee publishedguidelines compiling important points regarding the performance evaluation and installation of seismometric breakers(Fig. II-1-15). An Investigative Committee Report compiled in March 2015 called for the dissemination of theseguidelines to certain priority areas, particularly the crowded urban areas which pose a high risk of fire propagation.
These included the emergency measure areas identified in the Act on Special Measures against Tokyo Inland
Earthquake and the areas for disaster management promotion identified in the Act on Special Measures for the
Promotion of Nankai Trough Earthquake Disaster Management. It also recommended that the guidelines be
disseminated to 25% or more of households over a 10 year period. Based on these recommendations, the Cabinet
established the same disaster mitigation targets in the Basic Plan.
In light of the Basic Plan and the Report, authorities will investigate a model survey centered on densely built wooden
housing developments in urban areas, and relevant parties shall work together towards the development of measures
to control the outbreak of electric fires following a large-scale earthquake.
Fig. II-1-15

Performance Evaluation Guidelines for Seismometric Breakers

Performance Evaluation Guidelines for Seismometric Breakers
Performance evaluation
Performance evaluation chart

Causes of fires following large-scale earthquakes
More than half of fires following large-scale earthquakes are caused by electricity*
30 Other(22%)
24 gas or oil
appliances(17%)

Great Hanshin Awaji
Earthquake
Of 139 fire incidents,
85
electricity 85 were electric fires
related(about 60%)
(61%)

27 other(23%)
12 plant andequipment(11%)

71electricity
related（ 65％ ）

Great East Japan
Earthquake
Of 110 fire incidents, 71
were electric fires(about 60%)
* Where cause was confirmed

Principal places where electrical fires are most likely to occur
Fire caused by damage to wiring
Distribution panel
Secondarywiringmeter

Transformer(business
use)

Aquarium overturns,
water comes into
contact with socket
and starts fire

Seismometricbreaker

“★” –
“★★★”

Preventive area

“★” –
“★★★”

Evacuation
safetyguaranteefunction(Optional)

Provides lighting“Possible”
or “-“Securing
continuous electric
connections“Possible”
or “-“•

Performance evaluation testing methods for seismically sensitive
breakers
Test wave form：Sine wave with specific speed and cycle
Standard: For function (3 wave forms), non-function (4 wave forms)
Simple: For function (1 wave form) and non-function (1 wave form)
Use of third party certification system
Recommended by Japan Electrical Wiring System Industries
Association (JEWA) and the Fire Equipment and Safety Center of Japan

Primary
wiringHeats up
due tooverloading
and catches
fire

Fire
prevention
capacity(Mandatory)

Seismometric breaker:
Based on vibration testsbelow
Preventive area:
From socket to whole house
Provides lighting: Provides lighting in
the event of evacuation
Ensures continuous electric
connections: Ensures electricity to
medical equipment, etc.

Electric
heater/Electric stove

Aquarium
Meter

Incandescent
lamp

Power
supplytype

Flammable items, which haveoverturned or fallen down,
come into contact with theheater and catch fire

Aquarium overturns,
heater sets fire to
flammable items

Fire causedby snappingof electric
cable

Incandescentlight overturns
or falls, setting
fire toflammable items

Practical use of guidelines
Manufacturers of seismometric breakers
・Guidance on performance evaluation and certification of products
・Confirmation of direction of future development of products
Consumers
・Confirmation of reliability of products
・Selection of products which are adapted to special features andneeds of home, confirmation of warnings
Government
・Dissemination and promotion of products certified by a third party

Types of seismometric breakers (images)

Simple type
Breaker is operated
by the fall of theweight or the workingof the spring, andelectricity is cut off

Socket type
Sensor senses
tremor and cuts off
electricity to socket

Distribution panel
type
Sensor senses
tremor, drops
breaker, and cuts
off electricity

Built-in type

Mounted type

後付型感震リレー

Source: Cabinet Office

Page 76

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

Section 3: Initiatives to Support Disaster Victims
3-1 Development and Promotion of a Victim’s RegistryFig. II-1-16

Victim’s Registry Survey

Victim’s Registry Survey

1. Surveys andinterviews among
municipalities thathave introduced aVictim’s Registry(1) Survey on
the actual
introduction of
victim’s
registries(allmunicipalities)

ReportSurveyresults(2) Interviews withmunicipalities
where registries
have been
introduced(8 municipalitiesand 3 prefectures)CollectionofexamplesVictim’s
registry
introduction
checklist

ReportExamplesofincludeditems

2. Verification of
introduction support

3. Creation ofchecklist based on
1 and 2

Advice tomunicipalities(about 3municipalities)

Create a checklistof the issues
identified in 1 and
2 and theirsolutions

ReportAdviceimplementation
statusVictim’s
registry
introduction
checklist

Victim’s
registry
introduction
checklist

Source: Cabinet Office

Survey Details(1) Surveys and hearings on registry adoption by municipalities
1. Implementation of survey on registry adoption among all municipalities
2. Based on the survey results, hearings were implemented in a preliminary group of eight municipalities(2) Trial introduction of a victim’s registry system
Advisors dispatched to governments that had not yet introduced a system; support for the construction ofinterdepartmental systems within government offices*Following a national call for proposal, Fuchu City and Hachijomachi in Tokyo and Fukui City in Fukui Prefecture wereselected
Survey Results(1) Collection of examples of the introduction of a victim’s registry system•
Compilation of important points regarding the introduction of a victim’s registry system from municipalities where
they had been introduced; effects of introduction.
•
Compilation of processes relating to the construction of interdepartmental organizations for creating a victim’s
registry in government organizations which joined the trial introduction.
WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

Page 77

Chapter I

Revisions to the Disaster Countermeasures Basic Act were made in June 2013 to eliminate gaps in support andprocedural redundancies when it comes to providing support for disaster victims. These revisions created a victim’s
registry system to comprehensively and efficiently provide victim support in the medium to long term and to collect in
one central location information on the victim’s status with regard to the damage sustained, support provided, andparticular issues that may need to be taken into consideration. The Cabinet Office conducted a 2014 Victim’s Registry
Survey to seek the further development and promotion of this victim’s registry (Fig. II-1-16).

(2) Checklist for system development in municipalities•
To create a victim’s registry, confirming the relevant departments is part of the important preparations to becompleted during ordinary times. Procedures should be created in checklist format for constructing
interdepartmental organizations.
(3) Sample data headings•
Prepare sample data headings to control variance in data headings used by different municipalities, to promote
information sharing between local governments following a large-scale natural disaster, and to support thesmooth implementation of victim support by support staff from different municipalities.
Part II(4) Provide simple files (provide Access or Excel versions of the victim’s registry)(5) Formulate “Practical Guidelines for the Creation of a Victim’s Registry (Municipality Edition)” (guidelines
aimed principally at those responsible for items (2), (3) and (6) on this list)(6) Bolster the information posted on the Cabinet Office Disaster Risk Reduction website
In light of the above results, efforts will continue to be made to develop and promote the victim’s registry system.

Section 4: Promotion of DRR Activities in Coordination with Various Stakeholders
4-1 Initiatives to Develop an Environment for DRR Volunteers
In the period following the Great East Japan Earthquake until the end of January 2015, more than 1,410,000*
volunteers carried out various activities in the disaster-affected areas. However, since no coordination structure wasestablished immediately following the disaster among the support organizations or between the support organizations
and the government or NPOs, there was clear dysfunction in the efforts to match the providers of assistance with thoserequiring assistance.
Given this, the Disaster Countermeasures Basic Act was revised in 2013 to include provisions relating to thecoordination between the national government, local governments, and volunteers. The Cabinet Office, in addition toinvestigating how the coordination between NGOs and the national and local governments would work in the event ofa large-scale natural disaster, also carried out drills in Kochi Prefecture and Shizuoka Prefecture in 2013, and Tokyo in
2014, which focused on how coordination between non-governmental support organizations ought to be implemented
in the event of a large-scale natural disaster.
*Investigation by the Japan National Council of Social Welfare. Number of volunteers who were active through disastervolunteer centers set up by the Council of Social Welfare in each municipality.

Disaster management exercise for collaboration of DRM volunteers using the scenario of a Tokyo Inland Earthquake

Page 78

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

4-2 Strengthening the DRR Capacity of Communities
Since the “limits of public help” following a large-scale natural disaster are clear, and initiatives based on self-help andmutual help are very important, the Community Disaster Management Planning System has been established tosupport voluntary DRR activities by community residents.
The Cabinet Office has been implementing model district projects since 2014 to disseminate the Community Disaster
Management Planning System and support planning activities.
Chapter I

It has published the outcomes of the efforts thus far, so that they can be used as reference by communities that
formulate plans in the future.
Examples of Key Initiatives from the 2014 Model District ProjectInterprefectural Evacuation Plan proposed by the Miki District, Kaga
City, Ishikawa Prefecture
The urban area in this district, located in Ishikawa Prefecture, extends
all the way to the Yoshizaki District of Awara City in Fukui Prefecture. In
the event of a tsunami, an evacuation area has been designated at anelementary school in Awara City to which people may evacuate.
Although each prefecture has differing tsunami expectations, both
districts need to cooperate on formulating their evacuation plans. Thus,
efforts have been made to create evacuation plans and community–
led hazard mapping that cross prefectural borders.

The evacuation area was set up in anelementary school across the prefecturalborderNeighborhood of Fuji City Station South, Shizuoka Prefecture Workson DRR Activities Focused on an Independently Operated Evacuation
ShelterThis neighborhood tackled the problem of establishing its own
independently operated evacuation shelter. Under this initiative, a DRR
subcommittee was established within the Community Development
Council. To lighten the burden of the voluntary disaster management
organizations, all of the residents other than the readers of each ward’s
voluntary disaster management organizations were at the center of the
Evacuation Shelter Set Up Drill
implementation of the activities. Even prior to this, a framework was(Participants include local residents andcreated for selecting the evacuation shelter management staff fromelementary and junior high school students)
among evacuees, and drills for opening and setting up the center wereconducted in coordination with local elementary schools. Now, they
are working towards the adoption of a plan, strengthening efforts to set up evacuation shelters, taking everyday
measures to mitigate disasters and respond to emergencies when disaster strikes, creating organizations to enable thecontinuation of activities, and strengthening ties with voluntary disaster management organizations.

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

Page 79

Special Feature: Everyday Efforts in Hakuba Village
The Northern Nagano Prefecture Earthquake that struck on November 22, 2014 left 50 houses
completely destroyed and 91 houses half-destroyed. Thanks to the mutual aid activities provided by local
residents to their neighbors, however, there were no fatalities caused by the collapse of homes, althoughsome were buried under the collapsed houses.

Part IIIn the neighborhood of Kamishiro Horinouchi in Hakuba Village, which sustained particularly severe
damage, community residents and fire corps volunteers worked together, without waiting for help fromthe police or firefighters, to conduct rescue activities. They used chainsaws, which are ordinarily used byresidents to cut wood, and large jacks like those used when changing tires, to rescue people who had
become trapped in collapsed houses Also, because the neighborhood evacuation facilities could not be
used, they worked in collaboration with the local government office to quickly secure other evacuation
facilities, thereby providing evacuation support for the elderly. Rescue and evacuation activities wereapproached during this emergency situation out of a spirit of helping one another because of the regularinteractions between people in the community on a daily basis. For example:
a)
b)
c)

Efforts are made to promote regular communication between local residents, including the local
government office, and cooperative relationships are promoted through community events.
Thanks to the activities of the fire corps volunteers and their work in the community, there is anunderlying awareness of the importance of disaster management.
The community fosters a sense of responsibility not only among community leaders, but also among
ordinary residents, who take responsibility for supporting one another.

It is recommended that communities in Nagano Prefecture, including Hakuba Village, create Citizen
Mutual Aid Maps During Disasters to enable community residents to help one another in providing
evacuation support for the elderly and other vulnerable populations that may have difficulty evacuating(Fig. II-1-17).
Fig. II-1-17

Creating a Mutual Support Map for Residents for Use in Natural Disasters

Promoting Community Mutual Support by Creatinga Mutual Support Map for Residents for Use in Natural Disasters
NaganoPrefecture
Support andoutreach tomunicipality*Support use of map
in collaboration withprefectural welfare
councils*Provision of
information on map
formulation status

Implementing
municipality

Residents

Social welfare councils

Residents’associations/groupsRequest for support

Information
provisionaid/
cooperation

District social welfare councils/
Residents’ autonomous
associations

Information sharing/problem solving for residents through map creation
Local welfare officers/
children’s officers

Volunteer groups
Creation of registry

Map Image
Elderly woman in her
70s living alone

Uses of map for non-disaster purposes• Looking out for the elderly, ensuring theirsafety• Encouraging neighbors to start conversations
with one another• Looking out for children going to and fromschool• Looking out for homes where there arebabies and children• Supporting the management of daily life
challenges

Neighbor she knows well
who has a young familyliving in the same home

Person who is self-employed
and always at home, advises
local elderly people whensomething happens

Social welfare facility
that could be used toaccommodate evacuees
Elderly person living
alone who often comesto visit

Evacuation shelter

Map can be used to support residents on a daily basis in addition tocreating a post-disaster aid network for vulnerable populations
Source: Nagano Prefecture

Page 80

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

Section 5: Recovery and Reconstruction Measures
5-1 Investigating Measures to Secure Housing for Victims(1) Current Status of Securing Housing for Victims
Under the present system of disaster victim housing, those whose homes have been completely destroyed by a natural
disaster will first live as evacuees in evacuation shelters, before provisionally moving into vacant units of existing public
housing or into temporary emergency housing. After that, necessary housing will be secured as individual victims
rebuild or purchase their own homes or move into private rental housing or public disaster housing.

Fig. II-1-18

Flow from Natural Disaster to Permanent Housing (house-owning household)

Disaster strikes

Emergency response and assistance phase

Rehabilitation/ Recovery phase

No evacuation
No damageLess thanhalf
destroyed

Emergency
home
repairs*

Public housing•Rent based on income (reductionand exemption possible)•Persons on low income who have losttheir homes as a result of the disaster•The target increase for thegovernment subsidy rate is under
30% of the number of destroyedhouses (50% in a severe disaster)Private rental housing

Emergency Public Housing

Former home*single-personhousehold = ¾ ofamountNew-build/pre-used housing

Long-term
evacuation

Lease•JPY 500,000/
household•Not means-tested•Does not include
public housing

Public assistance (housing relief)*There are public assistance eligibility requirements

Temporary provisionof housing*Singlepersonhousehold =¾ ofamountRepair•JPY 1,000,000/
household•Not means-tested•Rental houses are
generally not eligible•Does not include cases
where house is only
half-destroyed but
demolition is
unavoidable

Insurance/Mutual aid *Damage compensation is paid to policy holders (repurchase amount).
However, the contract amount for earthquake insurance is 30-50% that of fire insurance.

(including
those only
halfdestroyed
but where
demolition is
unavoidable)•JPY
1,000,000/
householdwherehouse wascompletely
destroyed•JPY
500,000/
householdin cases oflarge-scalesemidestruction•Notmeanstested

Victims’
Rehabilitation
Support Fund
Reconstruction/
Purchase•JPY 2,000,000/
household•Not means-tested

Lease

Completely
destroyed•Benefits inkind•Up to JPY
2,350,000/
Unit
•Free
•Meanstested•In principle
within 2
years•Leasing of
temporaryemergency
housing also
possible

Victims’
Rehabilitation
SupportFund(Basic)RepairEmergency
temporary
housing*

Construction/Purchase

Victim Reconstruction Housing Financing(Construction) (Purchase) (Repair)

Evacuation shelters

Disaster strikes(Including
large-scalesemidestruction)

Repairs

Reconstruction/Purchase•Benefits inkind•Up to JPY
547,000/
household•Meanstested (in theevent of largescale semidestruction,
not meanstested)•Aimed atcases where
temporaryemergency
housing is not
used

Half
destroyed

Former home

Repairs(e.g., public housing)(Same as if house iscompletely destroyed)*Special standards may be established if necessary for the appropriate implementation of relief.

Source: “Committee Findings on Securing Housing for Disaster Victims” by the Working Group for Securing Housing for Disaster Victims
under the Committee on National Support for Disaster Victims (August 2014, Cabinet Office)

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

Page 81

Chapter I

Victims whose homes have been only partially destroyed may use the provisions regarding emergency housing repairs
in the Disaster Relief Act to repair their homes and continue living in them without having to move into emergency

temporary housing. There are various ways in which housing may be secured, depending on the level of damage to thehome and the status of the victim. These may include a secondary evacuation from an evacuation shelter to an inn or ahotel, followed by the reconstruction of the home, or the new purchase of a home.

(2) Investigative Committee on National Support for Victims
It was pointed out after the Great East Japan Earthquake that immediately after the quake, victims were unclear about
the process from initial impact until the point when they would be able to secure permanent housing. Furthermore, thepurpose of emergency temporary housing had become dissociated from the existing scheme of emergency temporary
assistance under the Disaster Relief Act, suggesting that it was necessary to reexamine this entire system.
Part II

Fig. II-1-19

Securing Housing for Victims (Problems with Current Emergency Temporary Housing)

Habitability
Differences indegree of housingrelated distress

Leasing ofprivately rented
housing

Sense of unfairness
becomes apparent orincreases

Variation inquality
Owned orleased homes

With the adoptionof leasing, thevariation in “quality”
becomes apparent

Balance withmeasures tosupport lowincome
earners

Current emergency
temporary housing

Obstacle toindependence
Previous form ofpre-fabtemporary
housingPrevious form of emergency
temporary housing

Within roughly
two years

With large-scale disasters,
residency period increases

Time

Response to massive
natural disaster(securing of homes
including those forworking households)

Source: Cabinet OfficeThus, based on lessons learned from the Great East Japan Earthquake, the Cabinet Office established the Investigative
Committee on National Support for Disaster-Affected People in October 2013 to carry out a broad investigation into
victim support challenges and effective practices in this area.
As this Investigative Committee proceeded with deliberations into effective practices for victim support as a whole, aworking group of experts began conducting investigations on efficient and effective access to housing following anatural disaster. In August 2014, the Interim Report was released, addressing the following:••••

The definition of temporary emergency housing and approaches to handling in-kind donations
Balance between conditions for funding and other measures (e.g., measures for low income earners)
Approaches to the transition to permanent housing
Approaches to emergency housing repairs

Since these matters impact victims significantly, our approaches to emergency temporary housing need to bereconsidered by stimulating broad discussion of the topic in every area and on every level, and by carrying out further
investigations on topics including the judicial system. Comprehensive support aimed at a smoother transition topermanent housing must also be implemented.
Furthermore, given concerns about the occurrence of a Nankai Trough Earthquake or a Tokyo Inland Earthquake, thefollowing matters must be promptly addressed so that authorities will be able to respond to the massive demand for
emergency temporary housing that will result from either of these scenarios:

Page 82

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

Bolster efforts during ordinary (non-emergency) times
Actively use private rental housing and select methods of granting housing in accordance with the characteristics
of each disaster• Promote proactive collaboration with the private sector• Build systems for consultation and information provision relating to the procurement of housing for victims••

To efficiently provide temporary emergency housing and support for emergency housing repairs and for the transition
to permanent housing, this Collection of Examples includes cases from natural disasters that have occurred since theGreat East Japan Earthquake. These examples cover advance preparations, such as the selection of proposed sites for
emergency temporary housing and the execution of agreements with related organizations, the establishment ofstandards regarding the specifications and methods of providing emergency temporary housing, provisions regarding
the specific procedures for making emergency housing repairs, and the establishment of systems for information
sharing and providing consultation services to victims.
Further, when a relatively small-scale disaster occurs in a region where there are vacant houses or vacant units inprivately leased buildings, or when a large-scale disaster occurs such that it is not possible to respond to the disasterwith emergency temporary housing alone, these units could be actively used as emergency rental housing. Thus, aguidebook has been compiled and disseminated to government officials, in cooperation with leasehold property related
associations, to outline the key issues that must be taken into consideration when using emergency rental housing (Fig.
II-1-20).

Fig. II-1-20

Guidebook for Natural Disaster Victims Transitioning into Emergency Rental Housing(All-Japan Association of Leased Property Managers Non-profit Foundation)
December 2014 Version

Sample agreements and handbooks were drawn up in 2012 regarding the practicaluse of privately rented housing following natural disasters. Based on theexperiences gained during the natural disasters that have occurred since then,matters considered to be of practical importance have been compiled into thisguidebook. We hope that this guidebook will enable victims of natural disasters totransition more quickly into private rental housing following a natural disaster, andthat landlords will be able to welcome them with ease of mind. In this collection of
examples, you will find both Acrobat-PDF files and MS-Word files which have been
included as reference materials.

For Government
Administrators:
Guidebook for Natural Disaster
Victims Transitioning into
Emergency Rental Housing.

Prepared by: All-Japan Association of Leased Property Managers Non-profit
Foundation (Chintai Association)
With the cooperation of:
The Cabinet Office (for Disaster Management)
The Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

Page 83

Chapter I(3) Bolster Efforts to Secure Homes for Victims
With respect to the above matters that “must be taken forward immediately,” in March 2015, the Cabinet Officedeveloped important points regarding initiatives to be taken when large-scale disasters occur and in ordinary times in
preparation for the occurrence of large-scale disasters, and communicated them to prefectural governments
nationwide. In addition, it created and disseminated a “Collection of Examples of Initiatives for Securing Housing forVictims.”

Section 6: Efforts to Promote National Resilience
The Fundamental Plan for National Resilience (hereafter in this section, the “Fundamental Plan”) was adopted by the
Cabinet on June 3, 2014 pursuant to the Basic Act for National Resilience Contributing to Preventing and Mitigating
Disasters for Developing Resilience in the Lives of the Citizenry (Act No. 95 of 2013) to address issues of national
toughness. The Action Plan for National Resilience 2014 was adopted on the same day at the National Resilience
Promotion Headquarters. Based on these, each ministry and agency is currently promoting initiatives relating tonational resilience.

Part II

The Action Plan 2014 identifies a group of measures (hereafter, “programs”) for avoiding 45 “worst-case scenarios thatmust not occur” which were established in the Basic Plan. Of these, 15 programs have been selected as key programs to
be given priority attention. We are planning to promote national resilience by assessing and evaluating the progress
made on each program, and repeatedly applying the plan-do-check-act (PDCA) cycle. Key Performance Indicators (KPIs)
have been established for each program, and they are being used to quantitatively ascertain and evaluate progress.
Furthermore, in order to assess and evaluate program progress, and to optimize program implementation, Action Plan
2015 is currently being formulated. The Action Plan 2015 will add an Integrated Progress Index (IPI) in addition to the
Action Plan 2014 framework, which will be applied to ascertain the state of progress of the programs as a whole and tocompare the states of progress across different programs.
Guidelines for Formulating Fundamental Plans for Regional Resilience are being compiled to enable local governments
to more easily formulate their own Fundamental Plans for Regional Resilience (hereafter, “Regional Plans”). Support isalso being provided to local governments through the implementation of model surveys. Further, a report entitled“Support by Relevant Government Ministries and Agencies for Initiatives Implemented Based on Regional Plans” wascompiled in January 2015, in coordination with related government ministries and agencies, and has been published. Asof May 11, 2015, 31 prefectures and 13 municipalities were working on formulating their Regional Plans, while four
prefectures and three cities had already completed their plans (Fig. II-1-21).
Fig. II-1-21

Local Governments that have Published Initiatives (Including Planned Initiatives)
for the Formulation of a Fundamental Plan for National Resilience
As of May 11, 2015, 31 prefecturesand 13 municipalities have publishedinitiatives.
Of the local governments that havepublished initiatives, 4 prefecturesand 3 cities formulated the plans.

Note 1: The facts set out in thismaterial represent the facts ascurrently understood by the National
Resilience Promotion Office, Cabinet
Secretariat.
Note 2: Local governments marked
with an ※ have implemented the2014 Fundamental Plans for Regional
Resilience Model Survey (22 in total).
㊳Kagawa Pref. （※）④Yamagata Pref.

①Hokkaido*
Formulated and published Mar, 17,2015⑫Niigata Pref.

⑬Niigata City, Niigata Pref.*Formulated and pub. Mar, 26, 2015

②Mutsu City, Aomori Pref. （※）⑰Nagano Pref.
⑱Matsumoto City, Nagano Pref.*Formulated and pub. May, 11, 2015
③Iwate Pref.

⑮Toyama City,
Toyama Pref.
Formulated and pub. Mar, 19, 2015

⑲Gifu Pref.*㉕Shiga Pref. （※）⑭Toyama Pref.

⑤Tochigi Pref.

㉝Tottori Pref.

㉖Kyoto Pref.

⑥Saitama Pref.

㉞Okayama Pref.

㉗Osaka Pref.

⑧Tokyo㉟Hiroshima
Pref.

⑦Asahi City, Chiba Pref. *Formulated andpublished Mar, 23, 2015
⑨Arakawa Ward, Tokyo（※）

㊱Yamaguchi Pref.

⑪Kawasaki City, Kanagawa Pref.

㊶Fukuoka Pref.（※）⑩Kanagawa Pref.

㊷Nagasaki Pref.（※）⑯Yamanashi Pref.（※）

㊸Kumamoto Pref.

㉓Mie Pref.
㊹Oita Pref.
㊲Tokushima Pref. *Formulated andpublished Mar, 4,
2015㊵Kochi City, Kochi Pref.（※）

㊴Kochi Pref.（※）⑳Shizuoka Pref. *Formulated and published
April, 16, 2015

㉘Nara Pref.（※）

㉙Wakayama Pref. （※）
㉛Tanabe City, Wakayama Pref.

㉑Aichi Pref. （※）

㉒Nagoya City, Aichi Pref.（※）
㉔Minamiise Town, Mie Pref. （※）

㉚Wakayama City, Wakayama Pref. （※）

㉜Hirogawa Town, Wakayama Pref.

Source: National Resilience Promotion Office, Cabinet Secretariat

In terms of international relations, a US-Japan National Resilience Workshop was held to share the experiences ofOperation Tomodachi, which was mobilized at the time of the Great East Japan Earthquake, and to promote
information sharing and discussions on national resilience. Staff involved in national resilience in both Japan and the US
were invited to attend. Further, Japan’s initiatives to further national resilience were actively publicized both within
Japan and abroad through the forum on national resilience publicity and outreach conducted at the Third United
Nations World Conference on Disaster Risk Reduction, which was held in coordination with the Economic ResearchInstitute for ASEAN and East Asia (ERIA), and through the international symposium on national resilience in the ASEAN
nations, which was held in Indonesia.
Page 84

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

ChapterII

Status of Disaster Management Measures for Each Type of Potential
Disaster

Section 1: Earthquake and Tsunami Disaster Management
1-1 Nankai Trough Earthquake Measures

Given this context and the lessons learned from the Great East Japan Earthquake of March 2011, there is a clear
need to approach future predicted earthquakes and tsunamis by studying “the largest-class of megaquakes andtsunamis, taking all possibilities into account." Therefore, the Committee for Modeling a Nankai TroughMegaquake was set up in the Cabinet Office in August 2011. Since that time it has been studying megaquake andtsunami models developed based on the latest scientific knowledge.
The Committee established four regions (cases) where strong shaking would be generated to serve as megaquake
fault models for estimating seismic intensity distribution. These models were based on the Central Disaster
Management Council’s (2003) model and the characteristics of earthquakes including the Great East Japan
Earthquake. The Committee then estimated seismic intensity for each case. For tsunami fault models to estimatecharacteristics including tsunami height and the area of flooding, the Committee set 11 cases of mega-tsunami
source models with large or very large slip regions based on factors including the characteristics of the Great East
Japan Earthquake and other megaquakes from around the world. The Committee then estimated tsunami height,
inundation area, and other characteristics for each case.
Upon receiving the Committee’s findings, the Nankai Trough Megaquake Countermeasures Working Group, set up
in April 2012 in the Central Disaster Management Council, studied damage estimates and measures against aNankai Trough megaquake. Its findings were compiled in a final report published in May 2013.
An overview of the damage estimates is as follows (Figs. II-2-1 to II-2-5).

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

Page 85

Chapter II(1) Examination of Damage Estimates
The government has drafted plans and developed individual measures to prepare for major earthquakes occurring
along the Nankai Trough, which stretches from Suruga Bay through the sea off of Shikoku to the Sea of Hyuga.
They divide these earthquakes into Tokai earthquakes and Tonankai/Nankai earthquakes based on differences
including the imminent risk of occurrence.

Fig. II-2-1

Large Earthquakes Along the Nankai Trough Since 1600

ShikokuKii
Peninsula

KyushuPart II

Currently
estimated
earthquake
epicenters

Nankai Trough

NankaiEarthquake

1605

TonankaiEarthquake

Tokai
Earthquake

Keicho Earthquake (EQ) (M7.9)

102 years
1707

Hoei EQ (M8.6)

1854

32 hours later
Ansei–Tonankai EQ (M8.4)
Ansei–Nankai EQ (M8.4)

1944
1946

2 years later
Tonankai EQ
Nankai EQ (M8.0)(M7.9)

147 years

９０ years

2015

No major earthquake for
68–70 years

?

No
major
EQ
for 161years

3 earthquakes occur in a chain reaction?
Destruction zone
(range encompassed by the focal region)

Source: Cabinet Office

Fig. II-2-2

Map of Maximum Seismic Intensity Distribution
Seismic Intensity Scale
7
6 Upper
6 Lower
5 Upper
5 Lower4
3 and below* The results of multiple case were combined to show the maximum intensity in a given area.
Source: Committee for Modeling a Nankai Trough Megaquake, Cabinet Office

Page 86

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

Fig. II-2-3

Maximum Height of Tsunami

Tsunami height (at high tide)

Southwest Islands

Ogasawara Islands* The results of multiple case were combined to show the maximum height in a given area.
Source: Committee for Modeling a Nankai Trough Megaquake, Cabinet Office

Fig. II-2-4

Estimates of Fatalities and Damage to Structures (August 2012)
Number of structures destroyed
and/or burned down

Fatalities○ If major damage sustained in Tokai region

954,000–2,382,000

80,000–323,000○ If major damage sustained in Kinki region

951,000–2,371,000

50,000–275,000○ If major damage sustained in Shikoku region

940,000–2,364,000

32,000–226,000○ If major damage sustained in Kyushu region

965,000–2,386,000

32,000–229,000

Source: Cabinet Office

Fig. II-2-5

Estimates of Economic Impact (March 2013)
Estimated value of damage○ Damage to assets (affected regions)

JPY169.5 trillion●

Private sector

JPY148.4 trillion●

Quasi-public sector (electricity, gas, telecommunications, railways)

JPY0.9 trillion●

Public sector

JPY20.2 trillion○ Impact on economic activity (all of Japan)●●

Due to lower production, service levels

JPY44.7 trillion

Due to disrupted transportation (estimated independently from the above)
Road, railway disruptions

JPY6.1 trillion

Source: Cabinet Office

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

Page 87

Chapter II

Tsunami height (m)(2) Special Measures Act on Measures for Nankai Trough Earthquakes
After the release of reports including damage estimates of a Nankai Trough megaquake, the Special Measures Act on
Measures for Tonankai and Nankai Earthquakes (Act No. 92 of 2002) was amended in November 2013 tocomprehensively advance earthquake DRR measures in both structural and non-structural aspects including tsunami
evacuation measures, which is the biggest issue from the standpoint of protecting human life. The amendment
expanded the legally defined area of potential earthquakes from Tonankai/Nankai earthquakes to Nankai Troughearthquakes and added special measures including those concerning public funding to expand and reinforce tsunami
evacuation measures (Fig. II-2-6).
Part II

The Nankai Trough Megaquake Measures Council was established for the purpose of strengthening mutual
coordination among relevant bodies, including the national government, local governments, and lifeline andinfrastructure business operators. However, as the Nankai Trough Earthquake DRR Promotion Council gained legal
positioning upon the enactment of the Special Measures Act to Promote Measures for Nankai Trough Earthquakes ,the relevant parties are coordinating to transition to the legally mandated council in the future.
Fig. II-2-6

Outline of the Act on Special Measures for the Promotion of Nankai Trough Earthquake Disaster Management
Designation of Areas for Promoting Nankai Trough Earthquake Measures

As the occurrence of a Nankai Trough earthquake could generate a massive earthquake disaster, the areas that needs to promote earthquake DRR measures have been designated by
the Prime Minister based on the assumption of an earthquake of the largest scale scientifically conceivable.

Basic Plan Formulation

Drafted by the Central Disaster Management Council

Promotion Plan Formulation
The heads of the designated government institutions and designated public institutions make stipulations regarding the follow ing matters (Promotion Plan) in their disastermanagement operations plans and prescribe the goals of tsunami evacuation facilities development, as well as the timeline for meeting those goals•
Development of facilities and other matters that should be urgently developed for earthquake DRR, including evacuation sites, evacuation routes, firefighting facilities, etc.
•
Protection from tsunamis, efforts to ensure orderly evacuations, and facilitation of rapid rescue operations•
Stipulations related to DRR drills•
Stipulations related to coordination and cooperation among the central government, local governments, and other relevant stakeholders
Local disaster management councils (prefectural and municipal) shall work to prescribe the above matters in their local disaster management plans, and municipal disaster management
councils may also prescribe matters that should form the basis of Emergency Tsunami Evacuation Project Plans.

DRR Plan Formulation
Managers of medical facilities, department stores, and other facilities in the DRR promotion area where large numbers of people come and go on a regular basis shall formulate andsubmit to the prefectural governor plans for ensuring an orderly tsunami evacuation process. This shall be done within six months of designation as an area for DRR promotion.

Nankai Trough Earthquake Disaster Management Promotion Council

Designation of Areas for Special Reinforcement of Nankai Trough Earthquake Tsunami Evacuation Measures
Within the areas for DRR promotion, the Prime Minister designates areas that should undergo special reinforcement of tsunami evacuation measures for tsunamis occurring with aNankai Trough earthquake as Areas for Special Reinforcement of Nankai Trough Earthquake Tsunami Evacuation Measures (Areas for Special Reinforcement).

Drafting of Emergency Tsunami Evacuation Project Plans
Municipal mayors listen to the opinions of prefectural governors, obtain the consent of the Prime Minister, and draft plans related to the development of facilities (Emergency Tsunami
Evacuation Projects) listed below. They also establish goals and timelines for these plans.
• Evacuation facilities and other evacuation sites for evacuation from tsunamis• Evacuation routes directing users to evacuation sites• Facilities prescribed in government ordinances and used by vulnerable populations including the elderly, disabled persons, infants, toddlers, children, and students, whose relocation
is deemed necessary by or in connection with the Projects for Promoting Collective Relocation.

Special Exception in Central Government Funding and Subsidies for
Emergency Tsunami Evacuation Projects

Special Measures for Collective Relocation Promotion Projects
Based on an Emergency Tsunami Evacuation Project Plan

• Special cases of the central government funding and subsidizing a portion of theexpenses required for an Emergency Tsunami Evacuation Project• Fiscal considerations for facility relocation in connection with the Projects for
Promoting Collective Relocation• Special treatment under the Agricultural Land Act (relaxation of requirements to permit
agricultural land appropriation)• Special treatment under the Act on Promoting Collective Relocation (e.g., subsidies for
expenses required to obtain land for use in collective housing)• Consideration for consultations through the National Land Use Planning Act• Special treatment under local fiscal laws (allocation of local bonds for facility removal)*Measures based on revisions to the Act on Special Measures for the Promotion of Nankai Trough Earthquake Disaster Management

Source: Cabinet Office(3) Nankai Trough Earthquake Measures Promotion Areas and Special Reinforcement Areas
Based on seismic intensity distribution, tsunami height, and other characteristics of Nankai Trough megaquakes, 707
municipalities in 29 prefectures were designated as Nankai Trough Earthquake Measures Promotion Areas, where
earthquake DRR measures for Nankai Trough earthquakes should be promoted. In addition, 139 municipalities in 14
prefectures were designated as Nankai Trough Earthquake and Tsunami Evacuation Special Reinforcement Areas
where tsunami evacuation measures should be strengthened specifically for a tsunami accompanying a Nankai Troughearthquake. Specifically, for each of the 11 cases of earthquake models used for estimating damage from a Nankai
Trough megaquake, areas receive the designation if they meet one of the criteria below in the event of an earthquake.
However, even areas that do not receive the designation still need to take sufficient DRR measures since major
damage from strong shaking, fires, and other factors is anticipated (Figs. II-2-7, II-2-8).
Page 88

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

Nankai Trough Earthquake Measures Promotion Areas•
Areas expected to experience a seismic intensity of 6 Lower or higher•
Areas expected to have tsunami wave heights of 3 m or higher, but that have low coastal embankments•
Areas deemed to merit designation to ensure the integrity of regional DRR systems or in consideration of pastdisaster history

Fig. II-2-7

Areas Designated for the Promotion of Nankai Trough Earthquake Measures
Areas Designated for the Promotion of Nankai Trough Earthquake Measures
Overview of Designation Criteria• Areas expected to experience a seismic intensity of 6 Loweror higher• Areas expected to have tsunami wave heights of 3 m or
higher, but that have low coastal embankments• Areas that need disaster management systems, or to be
designated in consideration of past disaster history

Designated areas for DRR promotion

Source: Cabinet Office

Fig. II-2-8

Areas for Special Reinforcement of Nankai Trough Earthquake Tsunami Evacuation Measures
Designation of Areas for Special Reinforcement of Nankai Trough Earthquake
Tsunami Evacuation Measures
Overview of Designation Standards•••

Areas that would be flooded with 30 cm or higher water from atsunami within 30 minutes of an earthquake
Coastal municipalities located between candidate municipalities fordesignation as Areas for Special Reinforcement
To ensure cohesive tsunami evacuation measures within the same
prefecture*Consider the difficulty of tsunami evacuation based on actual
conditions including flooding depth, flood area, etc.

Designated areas for special reinforcement

Source: Cabinet Office

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

Page 89

Chapter II

Nankai Trough Earthquake and Tsunami Evacuation Special Reinforcement Areas•
Areas that would be flooded with 30 cm or more water from a tsunami within 30 minutes of an earthquake•
Coastal municipalities between candidate municipalities for designation as communities for special reinforcement•
Areas where designation is desirable from the standpoint of ensuring cohesive tsunami evacuation measures
within the same prefecture

(4) Basic Plan to Promote Nankai Trough Earthquake Measures

Part IIOn March 28, 2014, the national government, via the Central Disaster Management Council, approved the Basic Planfor the Promotion of Nankai Trough Earthquake Disaster Risk Reduction Countermeasures based on the Act on Special
Measures for the Promotion of Nankai Trough Earthquake Disaster Management (Fig. II-2-9). This plan, as the basic
policy for Nankai Trough earthquake DRR measures, calls for the national government, public organizations, local
governments, business operators, private citizens, and various other actors to coordinate to systematically and quickly
promote comprehensive DRR measures combining both physical and non-physical aspects based on the characteristics
of Nankai Trough earthquakes, including strong shaking and a massive tsunami across a very wide area. The Basic Planalso sets the disaster reduction goals of reducing the number of fatalities by about 80% and reducing structural
damage by about 50% over the next 10 years. It also presents specific activities to achieve the DRR objectives, such as
improving structures’ earthquake and fire resistance, creating tsunami hazard maps, and improving communities’ DRR
capacity, and stipulates the objectives and execution periods of these activities.
Based on the Basic Plan, local governments and other actors are drafting Nankai Trough Earthquake DRR Promotion
Plans and Emergency Project Plans for Tsunami Evacuation Measures, and private facility operators and others aredrafting Nankai Trough Earthquake DRR Plans. The Cabinet Office is striving to advance cohesive Nankai Troughearthquake DRR measures with the relevant actors by providing advice and other necessary assistance to facilitate theprompt formulation of these plans. It is also conducting follow-up on the Basic Plan as appropriate.
Fig. II-2-9

Overview of Basic Plan for the Promotion of Nankai Trough Earthquake Disaster Risk Reduction Countermeasures

Chapter 1. Matters related to significance of effectively and quickly promoting
earthquake DRR measures for Nankai Trough earthquakes• It is important to study DRR and emergency response measures and to steadily
promote them to mitigate damage. We must keep in mind a worst-case scenario ofthe damage without making assumptions.

Chapter 2. Basic Guideline for Promoting Earthquake DRR
Measures for Nankai Trough Earthquakes
Based on the characteristics of Nankai Trough earthquakes, the central government,
local governments, community residents, and various other actors will cooperate tosystematically and rapidly promote the following DRR measures (1–9).

Chapter 4. Basic Guidelines for Conducting Emergency Response
Measures After a Nankai Trough Earthquake

When a disaster occurs, execute emergency response measures in consideration of 1–12
below based on Nankai Trough earthquake characteristics
1.
2.
3.
4.

Characteristics of Nankai Trough Earthquakes(1) Strong shaking and massive tsunami
over a very wide area is generated(2) Tsunami reaches some areas very
quickly(3) Multiple massive earthquakes may
occur hours apart(4) Damage from (1)–(3) is massive andspans a wide area(5) If the largest estimated earthquake
occurs, the affected area will be very
extensive and will cause damage
unlike that of past earthquake
estimates

1.

6.

2.
3.
4.
5.

Respond to massive damage ofevery type
Safeguard human life from thetsunamiRespond to damage across a very
wide area
Avoid massive impact on domestic
and international economies
Respond to occurrences at different
times

7.
8.
9.

Respond corresponding to level ofexternal force
Strengthen strategic efforts
Improve how measures are
conducted through drills and othermeasures
Gather and use scientificknowledge

Chapter 3. Basic Policies for Earthquake DRR Measures for Nankai Trough Earthquakes
Conduct the following activities 1–7 based on the Basic Policy of Chapter 2. In conjunction
with this, establish specific objectives and execution periods for each activity.
Disaster
Reduction
Objectives(next 10 years)

Estimated fatalities: Reduce the approx. 332,000 by about 80% or
more
Estimated structures destroyed: Reduce the approx. 2.5 million by
about half or more

1. Earthquake measures(1) Seismic retrofitting of structures (2) Firefighting measures (3) Measures forlandslides, ground damage, liquefaction (4) Seismic retrofitting of lifeline/
infrastructure facilities
2. Tsunami measures(1) Construction of community structures resistant to tsunamis (2) Ensure safe andreliable evacuations
3. Comprehensive DRR framework(1) Enhanced DRR education/drills (2) Coordination with volunteers (3) Improved
comprehensive DRR capacity (4) Measures against long-period ground motion
4. Advance preparations for disaster response(1) Construction of disaster response framework (2) Rescue/first aid measures(3) Medical measures (4) Firefighting activities (5) Securing transportation for
emergency shipments/emergency transport activities(6) Procurement of food, water, necessities, and other goods(7) Fuel supply measures (8) Response to evacuees and others(9) Management of stranded persons (10) Restoration of lifelines/infrastructure(11) Health/sanitation/epidemic prevention measures (12) Measures for humanremains (13) Handling of disaster waste and other materials (14) Collecting disaster
information (15) Provision of disaster information (16) Securing/stabilizing publicorder (17) Effective use of diverse spaces (18) Establishment of wide area
cooperation/support frameworks
5. Preventing confusion inside and outside disaster-affected areas(1) Securing key transportation networks(2) Securing business continuity of private companies(3) Securing operational continuity of the central and local governments
6. Response to diverse modes of occurrence
7. Response to various local issues(1) Securing the safety of high-rise buildings, underground areas, department
stores, railway stations, etc. (2) Securing the safety of sea-level zones(3) Securing the safety of nuclear power plants (4) Securing the safety of oil
industrial complexes and their environs (5) Response to villages at high risk of
becoming cut off (6) Damage reduction and prevention for local industry/logistics
in coastal areas (7) DRR measures for cultural properties

5.
6.
7.

Promptly ascertain damage
information
Respond to emergency evacuationfrom tsunami
Respond to nuclear power plants
Secure transportation for
rescue/first aid and emergency
transport
Implement tsunami andfirefighting measures
Provide medical treatment tomany injured people
Address absolute shortages of
goods

Handle massive numbers ofevacuees
9. Share information appropriately
both domestically andinternationally
10. Consider secondary disastermeasures for facilities, equipment
11. Work on restoration of
lifelines/infrastructure
12. Establish a region-wide support
framework

Chapter 5. Basic Stipulations of Nankai Trough Earthquake DRR Promotion Plans
Stipulations to be included in Promotion Plans contained in the Disaster
Management Operation Plans established by designated government and public
institutions, and in the Local Disaster Management Plans established by relevant
prefectural and municipal local disaster management councils.

1. Matters related to facilities that should be urgently developed for earthquake DRR
Define facilities that should developed, including retrofitting of buildings andstructures, tsunami protection facilities, tsunami evacuation buildings, otherevacuation sites, and evacuation routes, and define the specific goals and timelines
for development projects
2. Matters related to protection from tsunamis, ensuring orderly evacuations, andrapid rescue operations(1) Protection from tsunamis (include stipulations on the management, automation,and reinforcement of seawalls, floodgates, and other structures)(2) Ensure orderly evacuations (include stipulations on the communication of
information to local residents and others, ensuring evacuation behaviors, andmeasures to be taken by relevant institutions)(3) Rapid rescue operations (include stipulations on the framework for conducting
rescue/first aid activities through firefighting organizations)
3. Matters related to securing coordination and cooperation with relevant parties
Include stipulations on the allocation of equipment, materials, people, and resources,
the storage and procurement of supplies, and measures for stranded persons
4. Matters related to disaster drills
Include stipulations on conducting joint drills with other organizations and measuresfor promoting resident participation
5. Matters related to education and public information necessary in earthquake DRR
Include stipulations on education and public outreach on topics including what to dowhen an earthquake/tsunami strikes, the stockpiling of supplies, etc.
6. Matters to form the basis of the Emergency Tsunami Evacuation Project Plans
Include stipulations on goals and timelines for Basic Guidelines and Measures for the
Promotion of Tsunami Evacuation Policies. These should form the basis of any
Emergency Tsunami Evacuation Projects that require higher levels of government
contributions.
Chapter 6. Basic Stipulations for Nankai Trough Earthquake DRR Plans
Situations to be included in Disaster Management Plans established by managers
and operators of the designated facilities in the promotion areas
1.Persons who should draft Disaster Management Plans and take DRR measuresrelated to Tsunamis
In areas where a tsunami is estimated to cause flooding of 30 cm or higher:• Managers and operators of hospitals, theaters, department stores, and otherfacilities that regularly serve large numbers of people• Managers and operators of facilities for refining, storing, treating or handling oil• Entities involved in transporting passengers (e.g., railway operators)• Managers and operators of schools and social welfare facilities• Water, electricity, and gas utilities, telecommunications and broadcasting
business operators
2. Stipulations for ensuring orderly evacuations from tsunamis
3. Stipulations on disaster drills
4. Stipulations on education and public information necessary in earthquake DRR

Source: Cabinet Office

Page 908.

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

(5) Plan for Specific Emergency Response Activities in a Nankai Trough Earthquake (Basic Plan)On March 30, 2015, the Central Disaster Management Council voted to approve the Plan for Specific Emergency
Countermeasures and Activities for a Nankai Trough Earthquake (Fig. II-2-10). This plan specifically defines the details ofactivities related to emergency transportation routes, rescue, firefighting, medical activities, goods procurement, fuelsupplies, and disaster management bases for disaster emergency response by the national government. These detailed
activities are based on the results of estimates of seismic intensity distribution and tsunami heights for a megaquake
and tsunami as predicted by the Committee for Modeling a Nankai Trough Megaquake. They are based on the latest
scientific knowledge and damage estimation reported by the Nankai Trough Megaquake Countermeasures Working
Group. An outline of each field of activity is as follows.

b) Plan for Rescue, First Aid, and Firefighting
The first 72 hours after a disaster will be crucial to rescue efforts aimed at saving lives amidst the massive damage thata Nankai Trough earthquake will cause. Thus, the maximum number of forces from police and firefighting organizations
within the disaster-affected prefectures must be mobilized for rescue, first aid, firefighting, and other first response
activities immediately after a disaster strikes. In addition, the national government must bring in support forces fromaround the country as quickly as possible to the areas where extensive damage is predicted. Therefore, the plan defines
the policy on deploying forces as well as specific procedures for the initial response phase. In addition to the police andfirefighting forces within the affected prefectures being mobilized within the disaster-affected areas, these forces mustalso include disaster relief and emergency forces from police and firefighting organizations nationwide, as well as SelfDefense Forces deployed for disaster relief missions.
c) Plan for Medical Activities
A Nankai Trough Earthquake will produce a large number of casualties caused by collapsed buildings and other damage,and damage to medical facilities will also necessitate moving a large number of patients to other hospitals. This willcause medical needs to drastically increase, and the medical resources within the disaster-affected areas alone are notexpected to be able to meet these needs. Therefore, the plan stipulates that support operations be promptly
conducted by medical teams, including disaster medical teams mobilized from around Japan, that medical systems beestablished that can manage the minimum necessary lifesaving activities, including stabilizing people within the disaster-affected region, and that patients with serious conditions not treatable in the disaster-affected region be transported
to other areas.
d) Plan for Goods Procurement
In a Nankai Trough Earthquake, supplies stockpiled by local governments and households will run out in a matter ofdays. Meanwhile, it will take disaster-affected local governments time to ascertain accurate information in the initial
phase of the disaster, and the ability of the private sector to secure supplies will also be impeded. This means thatdisaster-affected local governments alone will likely not be able to quickly procure the needed supply volumes.
Therefore, the plan stipulates that the national government will procure the goods estimated to be necessary mainly tosupport people at evacuation shelters, and arrange for the emergency transport of goods to the disaster-affected
region without waiting for specific requests from disaster-affected prefectures. It also details procedures for goods
procurement and supply based on this push-type assistance conducted immediately after a disaster.
e) Plan for Fuel Supplies
A Nankai Trough Earthquake will cause damage to many oil refineries, oil depots, LP gas import bases, and similar
facilities. Even so, while securing national fuel supplies, it is necessary to quickly and seamlessly secure supplies of fuelneeded for emergency response activities and to continue operations at key facilities. Therefore, the plan defines (1) anapproach for an oil supply framework in times of disaster based on the group BCPs of oil refiners and othercorporations as well as the Oil Supply Coordination Plan in Disasters per the Oil Stockpiling Act, (2) procedures forprioritizing continued supply to oil-supplying facilities at disaster management bases and other locations, and topreferentially supply key facilities whose business continuity is specifically needed, and (3) the roles and other
responsibilities of disaster-affected prefectures and relevant government agencies to develop a fuel transport andsupply framework for disasters.
WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

Page 91

Chapter IIa) Emergency Transportation Route Plan
This plan defines the roads for which passage should be secured in advance to facilitate seamless and rapid transport ofpeople, goods, and fuel from around Japan with a focus on safeguarding human life, including transporting forces andother groups across a wide area beginning immediately after a disaster. Even though ascertaining the totality of thedamage is expected to take time when a disaster occurs, it is necessary to narrow down and select the minimum
necessary emergency transportation routes in advance. Then when a disaster occurs, information about whether theseroads are passable (and information about detours when roads are not passable) needs to be collected, before working
on other roads. Information must be promptly shared with DRR-related organizations, and passage on these roads must
be quickly secured. In preparation for this, the plan aims to ensure that information, including map details, is broadly
shared among DRR-related organizations in advance, and defines specific procedures for sharing information during adisaster.

Fig. II-2-10

Outline of Plan for Specific Emergency Response Activities in a Nankai Trough Earthquake

Rescue/First Aid, Firefighting◎Deploy region-wide support

forces from 37 prefectures notpart of the prefectures requiring
priority support (maximum
figures)・Police: 16,000 people
・Firefighters: 17,000 people
・Self-Defense Forces: 110,000
people◎ 620 airplanes, 470 ships

Medical Care

Goods

◎Request deployment of DMAT

Fuel

◎ Procure the necessary relief(1,323 registered teams),
assemble them at land/air routes,
logistics support, mission
conferral◎ Support forcontinuity/restoration of affected
medical facilities (staffing, supply
of goods/fuel, etc.)◎ Transport patients with serious
conditions through local andregion-wide medical transport

goods 4–7 days after a disasterand transport them to bases in
the affected prefectures
・Water: 460,000 m3 emergency
supply・Food: 72 million meals
・Blankets: 6 million
・Diapers: 4.8 million
・Portable toilets: 54 million uses

◎ Establish supply structuretranscending oil industry groups◎ Prioritize continuous supply tocore SS, etc. on emergency
transport routes◎ Preferential supply based onrequests to key facilities includingbase hospitals

Part II

The central government ascertains a full picture of the damage and immediately takes action without waiting for requests from the affected
region (push-type support) through coordination of the Extreme Disaster Management Headquarters

Support

Region not estimated tosustain damage even in a
megaquake

Backup support

Emergency transportroutes, disastermanagement bases◎ Establish
emergency transportroutes forpeople/goods, rapidly
secure passage onroutes when adisaster occurs◎ Establish disastermanagement bases
for activities in eachfield, rapidly securebases when a disasteroccurs10%
Kyushuregion30%
Shikokuregion20%
Kinki region

40%

Region estimated to sustain
damage in a megaquake

Key prefectures to receive support
Chubu region

Shizuoka, Aichi, Mie, Wakayama,
Tokushima, Kagawa, Ehime, Kochi,
Oita, Miyazaki prefectures

Damage scale guideline

Points of specific plans
1. Keeping in mind that the first 72 hours are crucial to saving lives, establish a timeline and target actions in the fields of emergency transportroutes, rescue operations, medical care, goods, and fuel (Ex.: Secure routes for movement across a wide area within 24 hours, have support
forces from a wide area arrive in stages, etc.)
2. Place priority on deploying support forces from a wide area and support DMAT from around Japan to areas with massive damage (10 key
prefectures to receive support)

Note: N = National government/ L = Prefectural government/ R = Road management authority/ T = Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism/
Po = National Police Agency/ F = Fire and Disaster Management Agency/ EM = Extreme Disaster Management Headquarters/ D = Ministry of Defense/
CG = Japan Coast Guard/ On = Onsite team/ H = Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare/ A = Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries of Japan/
E = Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry/ P = Private sectors

Source: Cabinet Office

Page 92

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

1-2 Tokyo Inland Earthquake Measures(1) Examination of Damage Estimates
Government ministries and agencies, local governments, business operators, and others have developed various typesof activities to prepare for earthquakes occurring directly in the Tokyo Metropolitan Area based on the Outline of theTokyo Inland Earthquake Measures approved by the Central Disaster Management Council in September 2005.

In response to its findings, the Tokyo Inland Earthquake Measures Working Group, which was set up under the Central
Disaster Management Council in April 2012, studied damage estimates and countermeasures for earthquakes occurring
directly under Tokyo, and compiled its findings in a final report in December 2013.
The Working Group set the earthquake scenario targeted for disaster management and risk reduction measures as thehighly imminent scenario of an M7-class earthquake occurring directly under Tokyo (Fig. II-2-11). This scenario is basedon the fact that a massive (M8-class) trench-type earthquake along the plate boundaries of the Sagami Trough occurs
at an interval of 200–400 years, and 90 years have passed since the most recent Taisho Kanto Earthquake. The scenario
is also based on the fact that an earthquake of the Genroku Kanto Earthquake type or a megaquake, occurs at aninterval of 2,000–3,000 years, with the most recent Genroku Kanto Earthquake having occurred approximately 300
years ago. Various types of earthquakes are estimated to be able to cause an M7-class earthquake directly underTokyo, and where such an earthquake will occur is impossible to know. However, in calculating a number of specificestimates, the Working Group set up a scenario in which an earthquake is centered directly under southern Tokyo inTokyo’s 23 wards. It is expected that such a scenario would cause massive damage and would seriously affect pivotal
functions of the capital.
An overview of the damage estimates is shown below. (Fig. II-2-12)
Fig. II-2-11

History of Earthquakes Along the Sagami TroughMultiple M7-class earthquakes (EQs) occur before M8-class earthquakes

2,000–3,000 years

200–400 years

2200

2100

2050

1950

1900

1850

1800

1750

1700

1650

Present

1600

Great Kanto EQ-type quake

High probability of M7-class
earthquake occurring

Eastern Chiba Pref. (1987) M6.7

Kita Izu (1930) M7.3

Uraga Channel (1922) M6.8

Tanzawa (aftershock of Great Kanto EQ, 1923) M7.3

TokyoBay (1894) M6.7

6.0

* The magnitudes of the Genroku Kanto EQ and theGreat Kanto EQ have been re-calculated from tsunami
simulations by this study group

Southern Ibaraki Pref. (1921) M7.0

Meiji Tokyo (1894) M7.0

Kaei Odawara (1853) M6.7

Keian-Musashi (1649) M7.0

6.5

Ansei Edo (1855) M6.9

Tenmei Odawara (1782) M7.0

7.0

Southern Ibaraki Pref. (Kasumigaura) (1895) M7.2

Keian Sagami (1648) M7.0

Kanei Odawara (1633) M7.0

7.5

90 years have passed
since Great Kanto EQ

2150

8.0

220 years

Genroku Kanto EQ-type quake or megaquake

Great Kanto EQ(1923) M8.2 *

2000

8.5

2250

Genroku Kanto EQ(1703) M8.5 *Present

9.0

M7-class earthquake:
Target for DRR measures

Great Kanto EQ type earthquake: Almost 0–2% in the next 30 years
Genroku Kanto EQ type earthquake: Almost 0% in the next 30 years

Source: Cabinet Office

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

Page 93

Chapter II

It is within this context, and based on the lessons of the Great East Japan Earthquake of March 2011, that theCommittee for Modeling a Nankai Trough Megaquake was set up in the Cabinet Office in May 2012 in recognition of
the clear need to approach future predicted earthquakes and tsunamis by studying “the largest class of megaquakes
and tsunamis taking all possibilities into account.” To date, the Committee has studied earthquake and tsunami models
based on the latest scientific findings, including the possibility of a large earthquake along the Sagami Trough, which
had not previously been the target of Tokyo Inland Earthquake scenarios.

Fig. II-2-12

Overview of Damage Estimates (December 2013)(1) Number of structures burned down/destroyed:
Approx. 610,000
Approx.
175,000
Part II

Shaking
28.7%

Approx.
412,000(2) Fatalities:
Approx. 23,000

Destroyed by fire
67.5%

Approx
.
500

Ratio

Concretewalls,
otherstructurescollapsing
2.2%

Ratio
Approx.
16,000Fires from
EQ
69.7%

Liquefaction
3.6%
Slopescollapsing
0.2%

Approx.
1,000

Distribution of structures burned down/destroyed

Buildings
collapsing
27.9%
Slopescollapsing
0.2%

per
250m mesh
250mメッシュ別棟数100棟以上100
and over
50棟以上100棟未満
5099
30棟以上50棟未満
30-49
10棟以上30棟未満
1029
5棟以上10棟未満
5-9
1-4
1棟以上5棟未満

Approx. 60

Injured: Approx. 123,000
Economic damage: Approx. JPY 95 trillion* Created by the Cabinet Office of Japan from Damage
Estimates and Countermeasures for a Tokyo Inland
Earthquake (Final Report) (December 2013)

Distribution of seismic intensity ofearthquake directly under southern Tokyo

Source: Cabinet Office

Page 94

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

(2) Act on Special Measures against Tokyo Inland Earthquake
The Act on Special Measures against Tokyo Inland Earthquake (Act No. 88, 2013; Fig. II-2-13), a piece of legislation
introduced by the Diet in November 2013, was enacted to plan for the maintenance of the pivotal functions of thecapital in the event of a Tokyo Inland Earthquake and to protect citizens' lives and property from damage due to suchan earthquake.

It also identifies areas that are required to develop plans for maintaining pivotal functions of the capital and to ensure
the safety of residents, designating them as Pivotal Functions of the Capital Maintenance Infrastructure Development
Areas (as of March 2014, these were Chiyoda-ku, Chuo-ku, Minato-ku, and Shinjuku-ku), and calls for necessary
infrastructure developments. Local governments within these designated areas can gain access to special provisions for
projects based on this plan by creating and obtaining approval for their Pivotal Functions of Capital Maintenance
Infrastructure Development Plans.
Fig. II-2-13

Overview of Act on Special Measures against Tokyo Inland Earthquake
Designation of Tokyo Inland Earthquake Emergency Measures Areas (Prime Minister)

Basic Plan for Emergency
Measures Promotion(Cabinet Approval)• Stipulations on the maintenance of central government functions following a Tokyo Inland Earthquake• Essential provisions of local Emergency Measures Implementation Plans

Emergency Measures Implementation Plan for the Maintenance of
Pivotal Functions of the Central Government

Creation of Local Emergency Measures Implementation
Plans• Emergency Measures Implementation Plan for the Maintenance of Pivotal
Functions of the Central Government (Cabinet Approval)
o Stipulations on the continuity of operations for the government andgovernment institutionso Stipulations on the temporary substitution of central government functions• Local Emergency Measures Implementation Plans (Relevant
Governors)
o Reconstruction and repair of petrochemical complexeso Measures for communities with high concentrations of woodhomes
o Measures for stranded personso Securing lifelines• Approval of Citizen DRR Organizations (Relevant Governors)* The Diet and courts shall establish necessary measures on par with these inconsideration of the Basic Plan for Emergency Measures Promotion.

Special Measures in Pivotal Functions of the Capital Maintenance
Infrastructure Development Areas• Designation of Pivotal Functions of the Capital Maintenance Infrastructure
Development Areas (Prime Minister)• Creation of Pivotal Functions of Capital Maintenance Infrastructure
Development Plans (Local governments that include these areas)o Stipulations on lifeline and other infrastructure development projects
o Stipulations on ensuring resident safety in a Tokyo Inland Earthquake*Requires consultations with the Pivotal Functions of the Capital
Maintenance Infrastructure Development Council comprised of local
governments, the national government, and project implementers.
Prime Minister's Approval• Special Measures Related to the Pivotal Functions of the Capital
Maintenance Infrastructure Development Plans
o Special priority for development permits

Specified Emergency Measures Project Promotion Plans• Creation of Specified Emergency Measures Project Promotion
Plans (Local governments that include emergency measuresareas)
Prime Minister's Approval• Special Measures Related to Specified Emergency
Management Project Promotion Planso Mitigation of use restrictions under the Building Standards
Acto Special priority in approval procedures related to restrictions
on the disposition of subsidies and other grants

Development of Earthquake Observation Facilities, Comprehensive Disaster Drills, Construction of Regional Cooperation Systems, Financial Measures

Strive to promote earthquake DRR measures for a Tokyo Inland Earthquake
Source: Cabinet Office

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

Page 95

Chapter IIThis law creates a Basic Plan for Emergency Measures Promotion, which stipulates the importance of the Tokyo Inland
Earthquake Measures, basic guidelines, and measures that must be taken, and an Emergency Measures
Implementation Plan for the Maintenance of Pivotal Functions of the Central Government (Government BusinessContinuity Plan), which contains stipulations regarding the maintenance of government operations. For local
governments, it establishes specific goals that are set at the discretion of the local governments themselves based on
actual community conditions, and strives to promote systematic Tokyo Inland Earthquake Measures based on theassumption that Local Emergency Measures Implementation Plans can be created with strategic positioning of various
countermeasures.

(3) Tokyo Inland Earthquake Emergency Management Areas

Part II

Areas that need to urgently promote earthquake DRR measures because they are deemed to be at risk of significant
damage in the event of a Tokyo Inland Earthquake, based on seismic intensity distribution and tsunami wave height
data, have been designated as Tokyo Inland Earthquake Emergency Management Areas pursuant to the Act on Special
Measures against Tokyo Inland Earthquake. This designation has been given to one metropolitan area, nine prefectures,and 309 municipalities. Specifically, this designation identifies areas to which one of the following will apply in the eventof an M7-class earthquake in the Tokyo Metropolitan Area, Saitama Prefecture, Chiba Prefecture, Kanagawa Prefecture,and some parts of Ibaraki Prefecture, or in the event of an M8-class deep-trench earthquake, like the Taisho Period
Kanto Earthquake or the Enpo Boso-Oki Earthquake. Even areas that have not been identified for designation shouldtake adequate DRR measures since they also are expected to sustain significant damage caused by violent shaking andfires (Fig. II-2-14).
•••

Areas expected to experience a seismic intensity of 6-Lower or higher
Areas expected to have tsunami wave heights of 3 m or higher, but that have low coastal embankments
Areas deemed to merit designation to ensure the integrity of regional DRR systems or in consideration of pastdisaster history

Fig. II-2-14

Tokyo Inland Earthquake Emergency Measures Areas

Overview of Designation Criteria• Areas expected to experience a seismic intensity of 6-Lower or higher• Areas expected to have tsunami wave heights of 3 m or higher, butthat have low coastal embankments• Areas deemed to merit designation to ensure the integrity ofregional DRR systems or in consideration of past disaster history

Designated regions for DRR promotion

Source: Cabinet Office

Page 96

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

(4) Basic Plan for the Promotion of Tokyo Inland Earthquake Emergency Countermeasures
On March 28, 2014, the Cabinet approved the Basic Plan for the Promotion of Tokyo Inland Earthquake Emergency
Countermeasures (hereafter, the TIE Basic Plan) pursuant to the Act on Special Measures against Tokyo Inland
Earthquake (Fig. II-2-15). A year later, on March 31, 2015, the Cabinet approved revisions to the plan (Fig. II-2-16).

Since local governments will be creating, based on the standards established in this plan, Emergency Measures
Implementation Plan for the Maintenance of Pivotal Functions of the Central Government, Local Emergency Measures
Implementation Plans, and Specified Emergency Measures Project Promotion Plans, the Cabinet Office will provide
necessary advice and other support to ensure that these plans will be promptly prepared, and will strive to ensure, byconducting the necessary follow-up on these plans, that the national government, public institutions, local
governments, businesses, and residents are all working in unison when it comes to promoting Tokyo Inland Earthquake
Measures.
Fig. II-2-15

Outline of the Basic Plan for the Promotion of Tokyo Inland Earthquake Emergency Countermeasures

1. Stipulations regarding the importance of seamless and rapid promotion of emergency measures in emergency management areaso Ensuring the continuity of pivotal functions of the capital is essential• Damage to pivotal functions of the capital can cause major disruptions to disaster
response measures.
• Also, it can disrupt the everyday lives and economic activities of the entire nation.

o Damage can be significantly reduced through prevention and response measures
A seismic reinforcement rate of 100% will reduce the number of completely destroyed buildings and thenumber of fatalities by about 90%; the installation of seismometric breakers and improvements in therate of early-stage fire suppression will reduce the number of burned buildings and fatalities by more than90%.
Systematic and strategic implementation of prevention and response measures

2. Basic guidelines related to policies that must be implemented by the government for the seamless and rapid promotion of emergency measures in emergency management areas(3) Support for local governments(1) Ensuring pivotal functions of the capital• The national government offers advice and various types of information, including survey and• Construction of business continuity systems for pivotal functions of the capitalresearch results• Maintenance of lifelines and infrastructure that support pivotal functions of the capital(4) Promotion of Tokyo Inland Earthquake Measures throughout society(2) Response to massive human casualties and property damage•
Preparations aimed at reducing damage through "self-help," "mutual-help" and "public -help" in• Seismic reinforcement and fire prevention measures as a major premise to all policies, serious
which all members of society work together
measures to address road traffic paralysis, measures for handling large numbers of evacuees(5)Preparations
for the Tokyo Olympic/Paralympic Games in 2020and stranded persons• Strengthened efforts to ensure that people can safely participate in and watch the games,
including the provision of evacuation instructions for foreign tourists.
3. Stipulations on the maintenance of pivotal functions of the capital following a Tokyo Inland Earthquake

4. 5. 6. Stipulations on each plan based on the law(1) Basic stipulations regarding policies for maintaining pivotal functions of the capital

4. Basic stipulations regarding the designation of pivotal functionsof the capital maintenance infrastructure development areas andregarding the approval infrastructure development plans

•

•
•
•

Pivotal functions and institutions of the capital: Central political functions; Diet, central administrative functions, central government ministries
and agencies, metropolitan government, and foreign diplomatic offices in Japan. Central economic functions: Central bank, corporate
headquarters
Goals for the functioning of pivotal institutions in the capital: For the institutions to maintain minimum level of functions necessary for operations
even after a disaster
Construction of business continuity systems for the entire government: Establish an Emergency Measures Implementation Plan for the provision of
essential operations and operating environments so that priority operations can be implemented during an emergency
Preparations to ensure the continuity of financial functions and to ensure business continuity among corporate headquarters(2) Basic stipulations regarding the temporary substitution of pivotal functions of the capital in cases where maintaining all or partof the pivotal functions has become difficult•

Investigation of alternative government sites, identification of alternative government buildings•

Goals for the functioning of lifelines and telecommunications infrastructuredevelopment of early recovery systems(3) Basic stipulations on policies related to the maintenance of lifelines and infrastructure
・ Facility seismic reinforcement and redundancy creation,(4) Basic stipulations on maintaining the functions of seaports and airports, which are essential for ensuring emergency shipments•

Traffic infrastructure function goals
recovery systems

・ Facility seismic reinforcement and preparations for early road clearance and the development of(5) Other ・ Each agency creates and reviews its own business continuity plan

• Approaches to the designation of Pivotal Functions of the Capital
Maintenance Infrastructure Development Areas(considering the concentration of central government institutions)• Approval standards for the infrastructure development plans created by
local governments

5. Essential stipulations of Local Emergency Measures
Implementation Plans

Earthquake DRR policies, disaster response policies, preparations for disasterrecovery, policies on citizen collaboration, and other policies included in the
Local Emergency Measures Implementation Plans prepared by prefectural
governors

6. Basic stipulations on the approval of Specified Emergency
Measures Project Promotion Plans

・ Approval standards for Specified Emergency Measures Project Promotion
Plans prepared by local governments

7. Measures the government must implement for the seamless and rapid promotion of emergency measures in emergency management areas

4) Outreach activities on DRR measures among individuals• Appropriate evacuation actions, limited vehicle use,
2) Tsunami measures
stockpiling
3) Seamless and quick disaster response measures, preparations for disaster5) Restoration and maintenance of business activities
1) Promote systematic and urgent preventive measures
recovery and restoration• Creation of business continuity plans, community• Promote seismic reinforcement of buildings, facilities• Development of disaster response systems
contributions• Fire prevention measures, early fire suppression after outbreaks, measures to control • Elimination of road obstacles and traffic congestion measures(3) Response to Olympic/Paralympic Games infire damage• Response to urban fires ・Search and rescue, disaster medicine functions Tokyo in 2020
• Seismic reinforcement of lifelines, quick function recovery after disasters• Large numbers of evacuees/victims ・Large numbers of stranded persons• Seismic reinforcement of facilities, evacuation instructions• Fuel supply measures• Secure DRR base, transportation infrastructure for regional cooperation
for foreign tourists• Seismic reinforcement of traffic infrastructure and river/coastal embankments, quick • Secure mass transport functions in response to absolute shortages of goods (4) Long-period ground motion earthquake
function recovery after disasters• Accurate information gathering and dissemination・Practical disaster drills measures (mid- to long-term response)• Other (community safety measures for sites like facilities where people gather,• Response to diverse incident patterns・Seamless recovery and restoration • Specialized investigations on the impacts on high rise
nuclear power plants, and petrochemical complexes)
buildings(1) Ensuring continuity of central government functions → Refer to 3.
(2) Response to massive human casualties and property damage

8. Others(1) Effective plan promotion Creation of separate specific plans for response measures (2) Relationship to disaster management plans governed by the Disaster Countermeasures Basic Act

Source: Cabinet Office

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

Page 97

Chapter IIThis plan stipulates the necessity of two items to reduce damage caused by a Tokyo Inland Earthquake: (1) the
construction of systems for ensuring the continuity of the pivotal functions of the capital, and (2) the formation of"earthquake-resilient communities" by systematically and strategically promoting the development of prevention
measures and orderly and rapid response measures. The plan outlines the following basic guidelines regarding thepolicy measures the government absolutely must implement.
• Creation of business continuity systems for pivotal institutions in the capital and the maintenance of lifelines andinfrastructure to sustain the system.
• Seismic reinforcement and fire prevention measures as a major premise to all policies, serious measures toaddress road traffic paralysis, and measures for assisting large numbers of evacuees and stranded persons.
• Promotion of efforts throughout society based on the concepts of "self-help," "mutual help," and "public help" inwhich all members of society work together.
• Disaster Preparedness for the period of the Tokyo Olympic and Paralympic Games in 2020.

(5) Setting Disaster Reduction Goals
On March 31, 2015, the Cabinet approved revisions to the TIE Basic Plan. In the plan, the government set quantitative
disaster mitigation goals with specific deadlines and set specific goals for policies measures intended to achieve thesegoals.

Part IISpecifically, the quantitative disaster reduction goals are to reduce by half, over 10 years starting in FY 2015, themaximum number of estimated fatalities from current level of about 23,000, and to reduce by half the maximum
number of buildings estimated to be fully destroyed or burned from the current level of about 610,000 buildings.
In terms of specific goals related to ensuring the continuity of pivotal functions of the central government, the planestablishes the goal of constructing a system for issuing assembly instructions to those essential personnel who need to
be assembled among central government ministries and agencies. With regard the stockpiling of materials, the goal has
been set to reach 100% by FY 2016.
Since many of the human casualties in an earthquake will be caused by building collapses or fires that start after thequake, specific goals have been set around, and efforts are being made to further promote, the seismic reinforcementof homes, the secure attachment of home furnishings, the elimination of high density urban areas, which areparticularly hazardous during an earthquake, and the dissemination of seismometric breakers to prevent fires
attributable to the electric power supply. The plan also establishes goals and calls for strengthened efforts related to
expanded DRR measures at petrochemical complexes, which can cause exacerbated damage after a disaster occurs,
and the acceleration of disaster waste disposal to facilitate seamless reconstruction and restoration.

Fig. II-2-16

Overview of Changes to the Basic Plan for the Promotion of Tokyo Inland Earthquake Emergency Countermeasures

Past History of Tokyo Island Earthquake Measures
Sept. 2005
Apr. 2006
Dec. 2013
Mar. 2014

Outline of the Tokyo Inland Earthquake Measures (established by the Central Disaster Management
Council)
Earthquake disaster risk reduction strategy for a Tokyo Inland Earthquake (established by the Central
Disaster Management Council)↓ Great East Japan Earthquake (March 2011)
Act on Special Measures against Tokyo Inland Earthquake enacted
Damage Estimates and Countermeasures for a Tokyo Inland Earthquake (Final Report)↓
Basic Plan for the Promotion of Tokyo Inland Earthquake Emergency Countermeasures (Cabinet
approved), Business Continuity Plan of the Central Government (Measures against a Tokyo Inland
Earthquake) (Cabinet approved)
Disaster mitigation goals are conceived and defined in the Basic Plan for the Promotion of Tokyo
Inland Earthquake Emergency Countermeasures

Set disaster mitigation goals fornext 10 years
Maximum number of estimatedfatalities:
Reduce by half from 23,000*

Maximum number of buildings
estimated to be fully destroyed orburned:Reduce by half from about
610,000**Estimates based on the occurrence ofan earthquake epicentered in thesouthern part of the Tokyo
Metropolitan Area.

Set specific goals for measures designed to achieve disastermitigation goals(1) Ensure continuity of pivotal functions of the central government• Facilitate assemblage of personnel (construct a system
for issuing assembly instructions) (100% by 2016)• Stockpile supplies (100% by 2016)• Identify alternative buildings for each government
ministry and agency (100% by 2015)
and others(2) Response to massive human casualties and property damage• Seismic reinforcement of houses (current 79% (2008) ⇒95% (2020))• Prevent fires attributable to the electric power supply(Seismometric breaker installation rate (densely wooded
areas) 25% (FY 2024)• Expand DRR measures at petrochemical complexes
Energy / industrial disaster rapid response force (Dragon
Hyper Command Unit)
Form 12 units by FY 2018
• Disaster waste disposal measures• Current rate of municipal disposal plan formulation:
Currently 42% (2014) ⇒ virtually 100% (FY 2024)
and others

Source: Cabinet Office

Page 98

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

Section 2: Volcano Disaster Management
On September 27, 2014, a volcanic eruption at Mt. Ontake, located along the border between Nagano and Gifu
Prefectures, occurred while many hikers were near the peak of the mountain. It happened around noon on a day during
the fall season of changing colors. The eruption caused large numbers of fatalities and injuries near the edge of thecrater due to the ejection of material in conjunction with the eruption.

The Major Disaster Management Headquarters established Urgent Measures for the Prevention of Disasters Related toVolcanic Eruptions on October 28 of the same year, and related ministries and agencies including the Cabinet Office,Fire and Disaster Management Agency, and Japan Meteorological Agency, working in collaboration with relevant
institutions, promoted emergency measures. These included the performance of emergency surveys on thedevelopment of information communication mechanisms and evacuation facilities, the establishment of Volcanic
Disaster Management Councils at all continuously monitored volcanoes (47 in Japan), the appropriate provision of
information and safety measures for hikers and tourists, and the strengthening of volcano observation systems.
Volcanic Disaster Management Councils were established for all 47 volcanoes in March 2015.
In December 2014, the Volcano Disaster Prevention Promotion Working Group was established under the Central
Disaster Management Council's Disaster Management Implementation Committee to bridge the lessons learned fromthe eruption of Mt. Ontake to the further promotion of volcano disaster management measures, and it began
conducting additional investigations into longstanding volcano DRR measures. This Working Group met four times.
Based on discussions held at relevant investigation committee meetings, such as meetings of the Coordinating
Committee for the Prediction of Volcanic Eruptions, and over the course of consultations with experts and relevant
government ministries and agencies, the Working Group compiled a Report on Future Volcano DRR Promotion Basedon Lessons from the Eruption of Mt. Ontake (March 2015). This report contained proposals regarding structures forpromoting volcano DRR measures, volcano monitoring and observation systems, and the communication of volcano
DRR information, as well as appropriate methods of evacuating from a volcanic eruption, which incorporated thedevelopment of shelters to ensure the safety of hikers, the dissemination of volcano DRR education and volcanorelated knowledge, the strengthening of volcano research systems, and the cultivation of volcano experts (Fig. II-2-17).
Based on these proposals, the Cabinet Office passed a bill on May 29, 2015 that partially revised the Act on Special
Measures for Active Volcanoes, to include provisions to bolster alert and evacuation systems to be developed byrelevant stakeholders in communities with volcanoes. This bill was then submitted to the 189th Diet (Fig. II-2-18).
On May 29, 2015, a volcanic eruption occurred on Kuchinoerabushima Island in Kagoshima Prefecture. The national
government supported evacuees in collaboration with the Yakushima City and Kagoshima Prefecture by holding
disaster management meetings among related ministries and agencies, dispatching a government investigation teamled by Senior Vice-Minister Ryosei Akazawa, and establishing an on-site contact office in Yakushima.

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

Page 99

Chapter II

In response to this eruption, the government established the 2014 Mt. Ontake Eruption Major Disaster Management
Headquarters, comprised of representatives from relevant ministries and agencies. It also established the 2014 Mt.
Ontake Eruption On-site Major Disaster Management Headquarters in the Nagano Prefectural Office and worked incooperation with relevant local governments on information gathering and response.

Fig. II-2-17

Summary Report on the Future Volcano DRR Promotion Based on Lessons from the Eruption of Mt. Ontake
Summary Report on the Future Volcano DRR Promotion Based on Lessons from the Eruption of Mt. Ontake

Coordinating Committee for thePrediction of Volcanic Eruptions(Japan Meteorological Agency)
Investigation Committee on
あ Systems
Volcano Observation
Investigation Committee on• Living near a volcano requires that people not only enjoy the everyday benefits of their location,
Volcano Information
but take appropriate action, such as rapid evacuations, when the volcano erupts.
Dissemination
Residents must enhance their understanding of volcanic eruptions.
*Compiled Mar. 26, 2015
• Because few volcanoes erupt frequently, very few government officials or local residents haveCouncilfor Science and Technology
experience with volcanic eruptions.
Earthquake and Volcano• The types of phenomena that occur in conjunction with an eruption, and the size of eruptions,
Subcommittee (MEXT)
vary. Promoting volcano DRR thus requires investigations based on detailed surveys and research Issues in Volcano Observation
on individual volcanoes. However, there is a lack of volcano researchers and no progress is being Research basedon the Eruption of Mt. Ontake
made on research that contributes to volcano DRR.
Compiled Nov. 2014
Mt. Ontake Eruption (Sep. 27, 2014): 57 fatalities, 6 missing (as of March 2015)
Worst volcano disaster in the postwar period affected many hikers. Revealed weaknesses involcano monitoring/observation systems, communication of volcano disaster management
information, cultivation of experts.

March 26, 2015
Disaster Management
Implementation Committeeof the Central Disaster
Management Council
Volcano Disaster Prevention
Promotion WG

Part II

Central Disaster
Management
Council
Volcano Disaster
Prevention
Promotion WG
あ“FutureCountermeasuresvis-à-vis Volcano
Activities Reflecting
upon Eruption of
Mt. Ontake” iscompiled

1. Framework for Promoting Volcano DRR Measures

4. Appropriate Volcano Evacuation Policies

1. Formulation of Basic Guidelines on Volcano DRR by the national
government
2. Establishment of Volcano Disaster Management Councils andclarification of their position in terms of the creation ofevacuation plans.
3. To propose volcano DRR measures and strengthen monitoringand observation systems, as well as survey and researchsystems, strengthen connections between relevant institutions
and develop more integrated volcano DRR promotion systems.
4. Continue to follow-up on efforts proposed by the WG.
Establish a Working Group for Promotion of Volcano Disaster
Prevention within the Cabinet Office to conduct ongoing investigations.

(1) Approaches to the development of evacuation facilities, such as evacuation
trenches and shelters.
Creation of Evacuation Shelter Development Guidelines, outlining
perspectives on the effectiveness and installation of shelters and cautionary
notes related to their design.

2. Volcano Monitoring/Observation Systems(1) Strengthen volcano monitoring/observation systems
1. Promote the mutual cooperation/complementarity between observation
facility development institutions and the increased sharing of observation
data, strengthen volcano monitoring/observation systems.
2. Add Hakkoda-san, Towada, and Midagahara to the 47 volcanoes subject toregular monitoring to bring the number to 50; quickly construct monitoringand observation systems.
(2) Observation systems to quickly ascertain the signs of steam-blast eruptions.
1. Emergency development of observation facilities near the crater, and thedevelopment of technologies for reading signs earlier.
2. Strengthen systems for conducting strategic observations, implement quick
local surveys, and coordinate the installation of observation equipment
3. To strengthen networks for collecting information from people who see
the mountain every day, develop Volcanic Information Liaison Systems
within the Volcanic Disaster Reduction Councils.
3. Dissemination of Volcano DRR Information(1) Provision of easy-to-understand information
1. Carefully examine criteria for raising and lowering the volcanic warningleveland achieve quick increases through public announcements- If signs do not meet the standard for raising the level, immediately
mobilize volcano observation teams to conduct emergency observations
and determine as quickly as possible whether the level should be raised
2. When changes are observed, publicly announce activity changes and theimplementation of emergency observations (provide occasional briefings)- Volcanic Disaster Management Councils should investigate in advancethe content that should be included in the occasional briefings, methods ofcommunicating information, and the volcano DRR procedures of relevant
local institutions.
3. Change the volcanicwarning level 1 keyword from “Normal” to “Be
mindful of potentially active volcano activity”
4. Investigate the rapid dissemination of eruption information (volcanic
alerts) and modes of communication
5. Bolster websites that provide information to hikers so that volcano visitors
can easily confirm the volcano status before visiting; post an easy-toreview list of volcanoes where changes in activity have been reported(2) Strengthen modes of information dissemination
1. Diversify modes of information dissemination (radio communication
networks for DRM administration, sirens, emergency alert email,information dissemination through mountain huts, etc.)
2. Use of emergency alert email, improvements in radio wave communication
conditions, easy-to-understand publication of area maps to hikers tobolster information dissemination using mobile devices
3. Disseminate information through tourism facilities to communicate with
tourists( push-format information sharing with tourism and lodging facilities,
station terminals)(2) Approaches to evacuation systems for hikers and tourists
1.Needs are being considered by Volcano Disaster Management Councils,
introduction of appropriate hiking registration systems (use of IT-based
frameworks)
2.Development of information collection and dissemination systems bylinking mountain huts and guides, investigation of evacuation and rescue
measures, promotion of disaster drills. Investigate support for theprovision of communications equipment and helmets to mountain huts.
3.Council participation by tourism organizations comprised of tourism
facilities and the creation of evacuation plans by tourism facilities.

(3) Promotion of volcano disaster management drill
Conduct volcano disaster management drills that envision the needs ofhikers by developing connections between members of the Volcano
Disaster Management Councils.
5. Dissemination of Volcano DRR Education and Volcano Knowledge(1) School education related to volcano DRR
1.Investigate approaches to DRR education within overall discussions
regarding next-term curriculum revisions
2.Bolster support for practical DRR education in schools near volcanoes(e.g., visiting lectures, development of pamphlets)(2) Outreach to hikers, tourists, and residents
1.Hikers take responsibility for their own safety by collecting information,
securing the necessary gear, and registering their hikes
2.Use of visitor centers and geoparks for outreach to tourists, conduct
outreach through travel agencies and transportation companies (holdtraining sessions for travel agency personnel, create pamphlets fortourists)
3.Outreach to local residents and the general public can include the
distribution of volcano DRR maps and efforts to raise awareness of
volcano DRR through presentation opportunities. Develop voluntary
DRR organizations in local communities, cultivate DRR leaders(use of volcano DRR expert systems, lectures by the Volcano andLandslide Forum, organization of study groups)
6. Strengthening Volcano Research Systems and Cultivation of Volcano
Researchers(1) Priority research volcanoes
Add Ontake-san, Meakan-dake, Towada, Zao-zan, Azuma-yama, Nasu-take,
Midagahara, Yake-dake, and Kuju-san to the 16current mountains
to bring the number to 25, and conduct priority observations and research atthese sites.
(2) Use and cultivate volcano researcher knowledge to promote volcano DRR
1.To strengthen volcano monitoring and evaluation systems, use findings ofvolcano researchers to conduct clear volcanic activity assessments, conduct
technology trainings to increase the volcanic activity assessment skills ofJapan Meteorological Agency officials
2.To strengthen volcano DRR measures, promote the active participation of
volcano experts in Volcanic Disaster Management Councils throughinvestigation and coordination by the meetings of the Volcano Disaster
Prevention Promotion WG, investigate various support measures forCouncils, establish venues to enhance close communication andcollaboration for volcano experts who participate in the Councils
3.To strengthen volcano research systems, secure and cultivate post-docs
through project research, promote the revitalization of the entire field of
volcano research, and establish specific venues for the investigation of these
topics

Source: Summary Report on the Future Volcano DRR Promotion Based on Lessons from the Eruption of Mt. Ontake

Page 100

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

Fig. II-2-18

Bill to Revise the Act on Special Measures for Active Volcanoes

Based on the lessons learned from the eruption of Mt. Ontake and the particular features of volcano DRR measures,
necessary measures are being taken to strengthen active volcano disaster management measures through thedevelopment of alert and evacuation systems that involve collaboration among all stakeholders in volcano communities.

1. Background•

Chapter II•

Since eruptions can happen without any clear warnings, rapid information disseminationand evacuation instructions must be made to residents, hikers and others. (Lesson learned
from Mt. Ontake Eruption)
Volcanic phenomena vary and response measures must be made on the individual
characteristics of each volcano (geography and eruption history). Thus, various stakeholders
must work together to investigate policies that incorporate expert findings for each volcano.

2. Bill Overview
Formulation of Basic Guidelines on the Promotion of Active Volcano Management by the national government (Article 2)•

Development of alert and evacuation systems in volcanic eruption hazard areas
Designation of volcanic eruption hazard areas (Article 3)
Government designates communities that must promote the development of alert and evacuation systems(primarily communities around volcanoes that are subject to regular observation)
Volcanic Disaster Management Councils (Article 4)...Stakeholders must work together to investigate policies thatincorporate expert findings.

- Prefectures and municipalities establish Volcanic Disaster Management Councils (mandatory)
Add as needed
Tourism organizations, etc.

Required Members
Prefectures,municipalities

Local meteorologicaloffices

Volcano experts

Self-defense
forces

Items for
Discussion

Regional dev’t bureaus(Sabo offices)
PoliceFire

Others, including environmental offices, forest
management offices, transportation andtelecommunications companies, etc. Possibly
also managers of consumers facilities andmountain huts.

- Integrated alert and evacuation systems, including the establishment of volcanic alert levels
and the construction of corresponding evacuation systems

Eruption Scenarios
Timelines showing changes in the phenomena
and related impacts associated with aneruption
Volcano Hazard Maps
Maps give topographical representation ofareas impacted by eruption-related
phenomena

Results of council hearings are reflected in Local Disaster
Management Plans (mandatory)
Prefectures (Article 5)
1. Collection and dissemination of
information on the occurrence andmovement of volcano phenomena,issuance and dissemination of
forecasts and warnings (inprefectures)
2. Standards for determining items (2)and (3) at right
3. Regional coordination of evacuation
and rescue activities
etc.

Evacuation Plans
Displays showing
evacuation sites,
evacuation routes,
modes of evacuation

Volcanic Alert Level
Mountain accessregulations based on
degree of volcanic
activity, evacuations,etc.

Municipalities (Article 6)
1. Collection and dissemination of
information on the occurrence andmovement of volcano phenomena,issuance and dissemination of forecasts
and warnings (in municipalities)
2. Announcements made by municipalities
regarding evacuation, such as eviction
preparations (volcanic alert level)
3. Evacuation sites, evacuation routes
4. Names and addresses of consumers
facilities, facilities used by vulnerable
populations
5. Evacuation drills and rescue activities
etc.

Mandatory Info Dissemination to Residents by
Municipal Leaders (Article 7)
Disseminate
information required
to ensure efficientalerts and evacuations,such as evacuationsites, by distributing
volcano hazard maps. A volcano hazard map
Mandatory Creation of Evacuation Plans(Article 8)Creation of plans and implementation of drills
by managers of consumer facilities (e.g.,
ropeway stations, hotels) and facilities used byvulnerable populations• Strengthen interactions between volcano research institutions, cultivate and secure volcano experts (Article 30)• Obligation of local governments and hikers to make efforts (Article 11)- New regulation requiring efforts by local governments to obtain hiker information- New regulation requiring efforts by hikers (to collect volcano information, secure means of communication)

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

Page 101

Section 3: Sediment Disaster Management
Japan experiences many sediment disasters every year, but in 2014, due to heavy rains that fell in August, a series ofsediment disasters caused human causalities in communities all across Japan. On August 20, as many as 74 people were
killed in a landslide in Hiroshima city.
In response to this disaster, the government established the August 2014 Storm Major Disaster Management
Headquarters, comprised of people from related ministries and agencies. It also established the On-site Major Disaster
Management Headquarters in the Hiroshima Prefectural Office and worked in cooperation with relevant local
governments on information gathering and response.
Part II

On September 5, 2014, the Emergency Management Headquarters formulated its Key Disaster Prevention Policies for
Sediment Disasters and Other Massive Disasters in which it presented measures that relevant ministries and agencies
must urgently develop in order to prevent the recurrence of a large-scale of disaster of this magnitude. These include
the urgent dissemination of information about sediment disaster risk areas to citizens, urgent investigations of thegovernment's systems development, efforts aimed at providing accurate disaster risk information, and theimplementation of more practical exercises on how to prepare for a landslide disaster (Fig. II-2-19).
As of November 2014, many communities had neither been designated as sediment disaster hazard zones nor been thetarget of basic surveys, and residents had not been adequately informed about their local sediment disaster risks. Given
this, a revised version of the Act on the Promotion of Sediment Countermeasures for Sediment Disaster Prone Areas(Act No. 57 of 2000; hereafter, the Sediment Disasters Prevention Act) was enacted in the following January. The
revised Act requires prefectures to publicly disclose the results of basic surveys and stipulates that information on
sediment disaster risks is to be promptly disseminated to citizens. Also, based on the Sediment Disasters Prevention
Guidelines related to the revised Sediment Disasters Prevention Act, a goal has been established for all prefectures tocomplete basic surveys by the end of FY 2019. The revised Act also legally defines sediment disaster alert information,requires prefectures to share this information with municipal leaders and the general public, and ensures that
information is provided that will contribute to the issuance of efficient evacuation instructions. The local disastermanagement plans of municipalities that have been designated as sediment disaster hazard zones will containstipulations regarding evacuation sites and routes, and regarding efforts to bolster and strengthen evacuation systems(Fig. II-2-20).
In December 2014, the Working Group for Studying Comprehensive Countermeasures for Sediment Disasters wasestablished under the Central Disaster Management Council's Disaster Management Implementation Committee forthe purpose of compiling the challenges that were revealed by the series of sediment disasters that included theHiroshima landslide, and connecting the lessons learned from these disasters to the improved promotion of sedimentdisaster management policies in the future. As a result of the discussions of this Working Group, a Report on the
Promotion of Comprehensive Countermeasures against Sediment Disasters was compiled. This report contains
recommendations regarding the assessment and sharing of basic information about sediment disasters and local
disaster risks, the communication of disaster risk reduction information to citizens, timely and appropriate evacuation
behaviors by citizens, and rapid response activities starting immediately after the disaster occurs. (Fig. II-2-21).
In the future, there are plans for the national government, local governments, and community residents to work
together on promoting sediment disasters management measures based on this information.

View of the sediment disaster in Hiroshima
Page 102

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

Fig. II-2-19

Key Disaster Prevention Measures for Sediment Disasters and Other Massive Disasters
September 5, 2014
Decision by the August 2014 Heavy Rain Emergency Management Headquarters

Key Disaster Prevention Measures for Sediment Disasters and Other Massive Disasters

Chapter II

Although the Sediment Disasters Prevention Act was enacted in 2000 based on lessons learned from a landslide in
Hiroshima in 1999, another much larger disaster struck the area once again. The following key efforts are therefore,
again, being made by relevant ministries and agencies to prevent the recurrence of similar large-scale disasters in the
future.
1. Launch investigations into revising the Sediment Disasters Prevention Act
Investigate the following based on lessons learned from the delayed identification of sediment disaster hazard zones:• Publish survey results as soon as basic surveys are are completed• Require prefectures to share information (sediment disaster alert information) with municipalities
2. Urgent dissemination, urgent inspections(1) Urgently disseminate hazardous area information to the public
To improve public awareness of disaster management issues and relevant hazards, prefectures and municipalities must
work together to disseminate information on potential sediment disaster risk areas (about 530,000 sites) and sedimentdisaster hazard zones (about 350,000 zones). Includes:• Sediment disaster hazard zones; and• Potential sediment disaster risk areas that have not been designated as sediment disaster hazard zones, as well as
the surrounding areas likely to be impacted
Disseminate information on hazard maps and evacuation sites using websites, newsletters, circulation of drawings, andposting at public facilities to ensure that the public understands the risks they face(→ Begin sharing information as quickly as possible, aiming to do so within one week of a request of the national government)(2) Urgently inspect government systems development
For all potential sediment disaster risk areas (about 530,000)• Circulation of the site's status as a hazardous location• Standards for the issuance of evacuation advisories/orders• Information dissemination methods• Circulation of information on evacuation sites• Implementation of disaster drills
Prefectures and municipalities will urgently conduct general inspections of the current status of alert and evacuation
systems (→ Aim to conduct inspections within one month of a national government request)
3. Provide accurate disaster risk information, even overnight(1) Thoroughly disseminate and confirm the Guidelines for Producing a Decision and Dissemination Manual for
Evacuation Advisories and Orders→ Disseminate to local governments in early September, conduct confirmation surveys in November(2) Promote the development of emergency alert emails in municipalities, promote the installation of household
receivers for prefectural/municipal disaster management radio communications system→ The emergency alert email system development rate is 93.2% of all municipalities (as of Aug. 2014; promptly
strive for 100%(3) Introduce and apply the L-Alert (disaster information sharing system) in all prefectures→ Aim to get all prefectures to decide in FY 2014 to introduce L-Alert, a shared platform for sending out local
disaster information all at once via multiple media.

4. Hold practical drills in preparation for a sediment disaster
Focus on the following points when conducting drills to encourage residents to actively evacuate:• Information sharing and advice from national and prefectural governments aimed an encouraging municipalities tomake early decisions• Appropriate evacuation behavior by residents based on weather and timing (selection of evacuation sites, measures
to find safety indoors when it is dangerous to be outdoors)
Source: Cabinet Office

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

Page 103

Fig. II-2-20

Revision of the Act on Promotion of Sediment Disaster Countermeasures in Sediment Disaster Prone Areas

Act to Revise the Act on Promotion of Sediment Disaster Countermeasures in
Sediment Disaster Prone Areas (Act No. 109 of 2014 enacted Jan. 18, 2015)
Given the sediment disaster that occurred in the northern part of the Hiroshima due to heavy rainfall in August 2014,
and the desire to protect the lives and health of citizens from sediment disasters, measures were taken to require
prefectures to publicly disclose basic survey results, to require prefectural governors to communicate sedimentdisaster alert information to municipal leaders and the general public, and to add provisions regarding designationsof sediment disaster hazard zones to municipal and community disaster management plans.
Part II

Background• Many communities had neither been designated as sediment disaster hazard zones nor been the target of basic
surveys, and local sediment disaster risks were not being adequately communicated to residents.
• Sediment disaster alert information was not being used as criteria for direct evacuation orders.
• Sediment disaster evacuation systems are not adequately developed, as some evacuation sites and routes arelocated in hazard areas.

Overview of Revisions
Identification of sediment disaster hazard zones
Publication of basic survey results
 To raise citizen awareness of sediment disaster risks and promote the designation of sediment disasterhazard zones, prefectures are required to publicize the results of basic surveys.

Require corrective action if basic surveys have not been appropriately performed
 The MLIT will require prefectures to take corrective action if basic surveys are not being properly conducted.
(National government will ascertain and publicize progress based on reports received from prefectures as
specified in the basic guidelines based on the law.)

Provision of information to ensure seamless issuance of evacuation orders
Communication of sediment disaster alert information to municipalities and the general public
 To facilitate the issuance of evacuation orders, the revised law does the following:① Establishes a new legal definition of what constitutes sediment disaster alert information② Requires prefectural governors to communicate sediment disaster alert information to relevant municipal
leaders③ Requires prefectural governors to communicate sediment disaster alert information to the general public

Seamless cancelation of evacuation orders The revised law requires the MLIT and prefectural governors to provide necessary advice whenmunicipalities ask for advice on issues like canceling an evacuation order.

Strengthen evacuation systems
Disclosure of evacuation shelters and routes in municipal and community disaster management plans Bolster evacuation systems by identifying safe evacuation sites and adding stipulations to municipal disastermanagement plans in sediment disaster hazard zones regarding evacuation sites, evacuation routes, andthe implementation of evacuation drills.
 Add stipulations to municipal disaster management plans regarding the communication of sedimentdisaster alert information to welfare facilities, schools, medical facilities, and other facilities within thesediment disaster hazard zone.

Government support
Obligation of the MLIT to strive to provide advice, information, and other forms of support
 The MLIT must work to provide advice, information, and other forms of support to help promote thesediment disaster prevention policies of prefectures and municipalities.

Source: Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism

Page 104

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

Fig. II-2-21

Report on the Promotion of Comprehensive Countermeasures against Sediment Disasters

Report on the Promotion of Comprehensive Countermeasures against
Sediment Disasters (Overview)

WG for Studying Comprehensive Countermeasures against
Sediment Disaster

Issues• Local residents were not adequately aware of the characteristics of sediment disasters, which occur very suddenly andare difficult to predict, or their sediment disaster risks• Evacuation preparation information and evacuation orders were not issued quickly using weather forecasts and sedimentdisaster alert information• Government did not adequately convey to residents that moving to a sturdy nearby building or to a room in one‘s own
home on an upper level or as far away as possible from the mountain can be effective evacuation options if it is notpossible to escape due to heavy rain
• Sediment disaster risks were not taken into consideration in community development

Residents and government must work together on comprehensive initiatives tominimize sediment disaster damage
3. Timely, appropriate evacuation behaviors by residents
1. Assessment and sharing of sediment disaster characteristics,
local disaster risks○ Confirm designated evacuation sites○ Sharing the characteristics of sediment disasters• Sediment disasters occur suddenly, are difficult to predict, aredifficult to escape from, and are highly destructive, making
them highly likely to cause human casualties, but it is possible
to ascertain the most hazardous areas through advancesurveys• It is important for residents to be aware of the importance ofearly evacuation• To encourage timely, appropriate evacuation behaviors,
national, prefectural, and municipal governments must explain
the risks and disseminate necessary information during
disasters○ Ascertain and share sediment disaster risk information incommunities• Citizens and governments must both ascertain and share
information on community sediment disaster risks• Complete nationwide basic surveys to achieve sediment-related
disaster hazard area designations by the end of FY 2019
• Circulate information on potential sediment-related disasterrisk areas until basic surveys have been completed• Disclose and share more detailed information on sedimentdisaster risks○ Use of risk information• Develop alert and evacuation systems based on communityspecific risk information

2. Communication of DRR information to residents
Revise the Guidelines for Producing a Decision and Dissemination
Manual for Evacuation Advisories and Orderswith regard to thefollowing stipulations:○ Use evacuation preparation information• Promote early evacuation by explaining the meaning of
evacuation preparation information (opening of designatedemergency evacuation sites, evacuation orders for vulnerable
populations, evacuation preparations for the general public,
promotion of early, voluntary evacuation among residents living
in sediment-related disaster hazard areas and risk areas, andcriteria for allowing voluntary evacuees into designatedemergency evacuation sites)• In more spacious municipalities, recommend the issuance oforders based on old municipal units or topography• Issue orders at appropriate times to avoid nighttime evacuations○ Issue evacuation orders with the appropriate timing and scale• Let residents know that evacuation orders/advisories may be
issued even before evacuation sites have opened• In narrower zones, investigate the issuance of evacuation orders(areas that have exceeded the standards for the issuance of
sediment disaster hazard information and that are also
sediment-related disaster hazard areas/potential risk areas)• Improve sediment disaster hazard information (improveprediction technologies, be more specific about the areas whereannouncements are made based on how easily local residents
can understand the information)○ Improve methods of communicating evacuation
advisories/orders and other information• Diversify modes of communicationto combine push-typeservices (radio communications system for DRR administration,
emergency alert emails) and pull-type services (web, TV, radio);use L-Alert• Narrow the communication areas in which push-type services areused• In addition to evacuation orders, communicate easy-tounderstand information that will stimulate a sense of urgency
and let people know how to evacuate○ Give advice to municipalities• It is important for municipalities to actively obtain DRR
information and seek advice from national and prefectural
governments• Even without requests from municipalities, national andprefectural governments should provide advice from an expert
perspective• Promote designations by formulating Guidelines for the Designation of
Emergency Evacuation Sites and Evacuation Shelters (tentative)• Residents should know the difference between "designated emergency
evacuation sites" and "designated evacuation shelters," and inspect whether
their evacuation site would be safe from a sediment disaster.
○Promptly and reliably open designated emergency evacuation sites• Strengthen communications between municipal disaster management officials,
schools, and neighborhoods to ensure the prompt opening of evacuation
facilities○ Create structures for promoting timely, appropriate evacuation behaviors• Residents should take time under non-emergency conditions to understand (1)the principle of promptly evacuating to a designated emergency evacuation site(designated by hazard), but should be aware that they can also, depending on theconditions, (2) go to an emergency waiting site (a sturdy building nearby) or (3)ensure their safety indoors (by moving to a room in their own home on an upper
level or as far away as possible from the mountain)• Promote voluntary, early evacuation by having residents themselves create
Disaster Evacuation Info Cards together with their neighbors, with the advice andsupport of the government (provide support by formulating Guidelines for
Evacuating (tentative title))○ Bolster DRR education, cultivate human resources• Use pamphlets to educate residents on sediment disasters• Cultivate municipal officials and national and prefectural experts through DRR
education and trainings held in schools and communities○ Importance of voluntary DRR organizations• Enable residents to help one another in a disaster by strengthening community
connections around voluntary DRR organizations

4. Best approaches to community development, promotion of national
land conservation measures○ Promote DRR community development that accounts for sediment disaster risks• In areas that have already been developed, promote the development of warningand evacuation systems, the movement and repair of existing substandard
buildings, and the development of sediment disaster prevention facilities;
circulate and use subsidies and financial systems for the movement and repair ofexisting buildings• In areas yet to be developed, incorporate disaster-resilient community
development principles, based on relevant risks, during the planning stages○ Conduct everyday land monitoring• Accumulate detailed topographical data on a regular basis by ascertaining changes
through regular basic surveys and using airborne laser measurements.
○ Appropriately develop and manage sediment disaster prevention facilities• Prioritize locations that are going to be most effective in protecting lives andpromote active development based on value priorities○ Appropriately develop and preserve forests• Promote improvements to the sediment disaster and outflow prevention functionsof forests, as well as measures to handle driftwood

5. Rapid response activities immediately after a disaster○ Speed up efforts to ensure safety and to verify safety status during rescue
activities• To verify the safety status of individuals, relevant institutions should work
together to obtain and share information on victims and to prevent secondary
damage○ Implement emergency response and recovery support• Promote collaboration with construction companies and strengthen systems like
TEC-FORCE to achieve rapid emergency response and recovery○ Active communication with volunteers• Strengthen information sharing and communication between government andvolunteer organizations○ Mental health care for victims• Use DPAT, which was mobilized for the first time in the Hiroshima Landslide andconfirmed to be effective

Source: Cabinet Office

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

Page 105

Chapter II

A massive
sediment disasterstruck Hiroshima
City on August 20,
2014, killing 74
peopleJune 2015 Central Disaster Management Council, Disaster Management
Implementation CommitteeChapterIII

Measures for Nuclear Disasters

Section 1: Review of the Nuclear Regulation Authority and the Cabinet Office Nuclear
Disaster Management System

This organization works on reinforcing Japan's off-site emergency response when a nuclear disaster occurs. It provides
support for the creation of local disaster management plans and evacuation plans by relevant local governments,
offers financial support for DRR measures taken by local governments, and conducts nuclear disaster drills. It
establishes Local Nuclear Disaster Management Councils in each community where a nuclear power plant is located,
and works on improving and developing more concrete measures for local emergency response, including evacuationplans.
Fig. II-3-1

Revision of the Organizations for Strengthened Nuclear Disaster Risk Reduction System

Post-Revision
Structure

The Nuclear Regulation Authority (NRA)The Secretariat of
the NRANRA Human
Resource
Development
CenterSecretary-General

DirectorGeneral for
Nuclear Disaster
Management

Nuclear
Regulation
Department

Director-General for
Regulatory Standard
and Research

Director(concurrent
post)

Director-General for
Emergency Response

Director-Generalfor Radiation
Protection Strategy
and Security
Emergency
Preparedness/
Response andNuclear Security
Division

Director-General(Regulation 1)

Director-General(Regulation 2)

Radiation
Monitoring Division
Radiation Protectionand Safeguards
Division

Policy Planning and
Coordination Division (*)

DeputyDirector

Cabinet Office

DeputySecretary-General

Secretariat General’s Secretariat

Director-General(Secretariat
Oversight)

Personnel DivisionCounsellor (Budget andAccounting)
Regulatory Standard andResearch Division

Divisions of Research (4)Deputy DirectorGeneral(ex-officio position)

DirectorGeneral

Nuclear
Regulation
PolicyPlanning
Division

Director(General)Director(Local Disaster
Management,
Drill)

Divisions ofRegulation(7)*Operations of theInternational Division will be
carried out by theInternational Affairs Officewithin the General Affairs
Division

The Nuclear Regulation Authority (NRA)The Secretariat of
the NRAPre-Revision
Structure

Part IIOn October 14, 2014, to enhance the government's overall system of nuclear disaster risk reduction (DRR), the existing
system of operations related to strengthening local nuclear DRR, which had been implemented by Nuclear Regulation
Authority (NRA) officials concurrently serving as members of the Cabinet Office, was reviewed, and a dedicatedorganization was launched under a Cabinet Office Director-General for Nuclear Disaster Management.

NRA Human
Resource
Development
CenterSecretary-General

DeputySecretary-General

Secretariat General’s Secretariat
Director-General for
Regulatory Standard
and Research

Director(concurrent
post)

Nuclear
Regulation
Department

Radiation
Protection
Department

DirectorGeneral

DirectorGeneral

Director-General(Regulation 1)
Director-General(Regulation 2)

Nuclear Safety andTechnology Manager

Nuclear
Regulation
PolicyPlanning
Division

Policy Planning and
Coordination DivisionInternational DivisionCouncellor (Personnel)
Counsellor (Budget andAccounting)
Regulatory Standard andResearch Division

Divisions of Research (4)Divisions ofRegulation(7)

Concurrent
Post

Director of theoffice(concurrent
post)

Nuclear
Emergency
Preparedness
Division
NuclearDisaster
Reduction
Operations
Manager
Radiation
Monitoring
Division

Radiation
Protection
andSafeguards
Division

Source: Nuclear Regulation Authority

Page 106(Instructions Office)Director-General for
Emergency Response
Director-General(Secretariat
Oversight)

DeputyDirector

Cabinet Office
Emergency Preparedness /Response andNuclear Security Office

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

Director(concurrent
post)*These are offices established by executive
order, and have neither structures nor
permanent employees.

With this reorganization, the Radiation Protection Department of the NRA was abolished and a new position of Director-General for Radiation Protection Strategy and Security was established within the Secretary-General's Secretariat toserve as the new Director-General for Nuclear Security, Nuclear Materials Protection, and Radiation Countermeasures,
and a Nuclear Security Division was set up under the Director-General for Radiation Protection Strategy and Security(Fig. II-3-1).
On January 15, 2015, five permanent employees were installed to bolster and strengthen emergency monitoring
systems in the neighborhoods around all nuclear power plants.

The NRA was established based on lessons learned from the Tokyo Electric Power Company (TEPCO) Fukushima Daiichi
Nuclear Power Station accident, and has expected to play an extremely important role in continuously working toensure the reliability of the nuclear regulatory authorities so as to improve public trust. The NRA works on various
policy issues to fulfill its organizational mission to engage in fair, neutral, and independent decision-making fromscientific and technological perspectives to protect people and the environment through effective regulation of nuclear
power use; to demonstrate care in this work so as to prevent the development of arrogance in its own perspective bylistening to a variety of opinions; to discard formularity and pursue truly effective regulations through an approach that
focuses on on-site conditions; and to ensure transparency by thoroughly disclosing regulatory information, including
the decision-making process.

(1) Efforts in Nuclear Disaster Management
On September 19, 2012, in conjunction with the establishment of the NRA, revisions were made to relevant laws likethe Atomic Energy Basic Act (Act No. 186, 1955) and the Act on Special Measures Concerning Nuclear Emergency
Preparedness (Act No. 156, 2009) that resulted in the construction of a new government framework for nuclear disasterFig. II-3-2

Nuclear Disaster Management System

NormalCircumstances

Nuclear Emergency Preparedness Commission *Permanent• Comprehensive, everyday coordination of nuclear DRR, such as promoting the implementation of policies based on the Nuclear
Emergency Response Guidelines• Comprehensive coordination of long-term efforts after an accident
Council Composition
Chairperson:

Prime Minister

Secretariat Structure

Vice Chairperson:

Chief Cabinet Secretary, Minister of theEnvironment, Minister of State for Nuclear
Emergency Preparedness
Nuclear Regulation Authority Chairman

Secretariat
Director:

Minister of the Environment

Secretariat
Deputy Director:

Cabinet Office Director General for
Nuclear Emergency Preparedness
Environmental Management Bureau
Director

Council Members:

All Ministers of State, Cabinet Office ViceMinisters/ Parliamentary Secretaries, Deputy Chief
Cabinet Secretary for Crisis Management

Nuclear Emergency Response Headquarters*To be temporarily established when a nuclear emergency proclamation has been issued.

Emergency
Situations• Comprehensive coordination of emergency situation and response measures related to nuclear emergencies, and nuclear
emergency post-incident measures
Headquarters Composition
Director-general:
Prime Minister
Secretariat Structure
Deputy DirectorGeneral:

Members:

Chief Cabinet Secretary, Minister of theEnvironment, Minister of State for Nuclear
Emergency Preparedness
Nuclear Regulation Authority Chairman
Some Ministers of State or Vice Ministers/
Parliamentary Secretaries
All Ministers of State, Deputy Chief Cabinet
Secretary for Crisis Management
Some Vice-Ministers or Parliamentary Vice-Ministers

Secretariat
Director:

Cabinet Office Director General for
Nuclear Disaster Management

Secretariat
Director
Alternate:

Nuclear Regulatory Agency Deputy
Secretary-General

Secretariat
Deputy Director:

Cabinet Secretariat Councillor for
Emergency Management,
Cabinet Office Deputy DirectorGeneral for Disaster Management*The Cabinet Office Vice-Minister or Parliamentary Vice-Minister (concurrently nominated as the Vice-Minister/ParliamentaryVice-Minister of the Environment) will be the Director of On-site Headquarters for Emergency Response

Source: Cabinet Office

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

Page 107

Chapter III

Section 2: Bolstering Nuclear Disaster Management and Radiation Monitoring Under
the NRAmanagement.
On October 14, 2014, the government created a new post of “Cabinet Office Director General” for Nuclear Disaster
Management, and placed the secretariat of the Nuclear Emergency Response Headquarters, which had previously been
overseen by the Nuclear Regulatory Agency, under its oversight (Fig. II-3-2).

Part II

Under the Act on Special Measures Concerning Nuclear Emergency Preparedness, the NRA was tasked with establishing
nuclear emergency response guidelines to ensure the seamless implementation of nuclear disaster management
measures by businesses, the national government, and local governments. These guidelines were formulated by the
NRA in October 2012, and underwent two revisions, in FY 2012 and FY 2013. Since October 2014, an investigation teamon nuclear emergency preparedness had been examining nuclear emergency response measures related to the
Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Station, which were addressed in these guidelines, as well as the scope anddetermination standards for protective measure implementation in the event of plume passage outside of the Urgent
Protective action planning Zone (UPZ). Proposed revisions based on the results of this investigation were compiled in
March 2015 and were opened to public comment.

(2) Emergency Response Efforts
The NRA has been holding meetings since FY 2013 for reporting on and evaluating the nuclear operator disaster drills
that have been conducted pursuant to the Act on Special Measures Concerning Nuclear Emergency Preparedness. At
the report meeting in FY 2014, discussions were held with nuclear operators on the current status of efforts taken toaddress common issues identified in the previous year, as well as future concerns. It was also reported that drills had
been bolstered since the previous year.
Also, the Secretariat of the NRA participates in nuclear operator drills and pursues best practices in widespread
information sharing with the Nuclear Regulatory Agency Emergency Response Center and the Nuclear Facility
Emergency Response Center so as to improve emergency response capacity. The crisis management efforts of the NRA
have included necessary systems development, such as the reorganization of the Cabinet Office and the NRA on
October 14, 2014 and the revision of the NRA's Disaster Management Operations Continuity Plan. With the creation ofa day and night duty check list and the implementation of practical trainings, efforts are being made to maintain andimprove initial response capabilities based on the NRA Initial Response Manual.
The NRA was also one of the relevant authorities that participated in the comprehensive nuclear disaster drill
conducted with the cooperation of the Government of Japan, local governments, and nuclear operators at the Hokuriku
Electric Power Company Nuclear Power Station on November 2-3, 2014. This was the first drill to be conducted after
the establishment of the Cabinet Office Director General for Nuclear Disaster Management, and helped confirm thelinkages between that organization and the NRA.

(3) Bolstering Radiation Monitoring
To perform effective emergency monitoring based on the Nuclear Disaster Management Guidelines, the Nuclear
Regulatory Agency developed Guidelines for Creating an Emergency Monitoring Plan on June 12, 2014 and Guidelines
for Establishing an Emergency Monitoring Center on October 29, 2014. The NRA bolstered its emergency monitoring
systems by formulating a Mobilization Plan for Emergency Monitoring on January 21, 2015. To strengthen emergency
monitoring systems in areas around nuclear power stations, local radiation monitoring offices were established in
Ibaraki Prefecture, Ehime Prefecture, Saga Prefecture, Kagoshima Prefecture, and in the areas of Ohi and Takahama in
Fukui Prefecture.
Pursuant to the Comprehensive Radiation Monitoring Plan established by the government (approved by the Monitoring
Coordination Council on August 2, 2011, revised April 1, 2014), the NRA conducts monitoring related to the Fukushima
Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant accident. It monitors aerial radiation rates in Fukushima Prefecture and throughout Japan,
and publishes its results weekly. In September and November 2014, experts from the Environment Laboratories of theInternational Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) visited Japan and jointly collected ocean water samples around the
Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Station with the NRA. After comparing the results of these analyses and evaluating thePage 108

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

capabilities of the analyzing institutions, the IAEA concluded that the Japanese data was highly reliable.
In addition, to study the impact of radiation in the areas around nuclear facilities and environmental radiation levels
nationwide, the IAEA provided support for environmental radiation level surveys in all 47 prefectures, ocean waterradiation analyses in areas around nuclear power plants (all 16 seas), and radiation surveys conducted by the locations
and neighboring prefectures of nuclear facilities (24 prefectures). The NRA also offered training for local government
employees responsible for monitoring operations, and conducted radiation surveys at ports that service US nuclearpowered vessels.

Section 3: Implementation of Comprehensive Nuclear Disaster Drills in FY 2014
On November 2-3, 2014 a comprehensive nuclear disaster drill was conducted with the cooperation of the Governmentof Japan, local governments, and nuclear operators at the Hokuriku Electric Power Company Shika Nuclear Power
Station pursuant to the Act on Special Measures Concerning Nuclear Emergency Preparedness. The scenario used inthis drill was a compound disaster involving both a natural and nuclear disaster, and drills were conducted on internal
government communications for handling a compound disaster, such as joint meetings between the Emergency
Management Headquarters and the Joint Headquarters for Nuclear Emergency Response.

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

Page 109

Chapter III(4) Accidents and Problems
The Nuclear Reactor Regulation Act requires nuclear operators to report accidents that occur at nuclear power facilities
to the NRA. Of the reports received in FY 2014, six came from nuclear operators and two came from operators dealing
with radioisotopes.

Appendix

TABLE OF CONTENTS: APPENDIX
Section 1

Overview of Japan’s National Land

A-1

A-1 Worldwide Hypocenter Distribution (for Magnitude 6 and Higher Earthquakes) and Plate
Boundaries

A-1

A-2 Distribution of Volcanoes Worldwide

A-1

A-3 Overview of Major Trenches and Major Active Faults

A-2

A-4 Distribution of Active Volcanoes in Japan

A-4

Section 2

Disasters in Japan

A-5

A-5 Major Destructive Earthquakes in Japan (since the Meiji Period)

A-5

A-6 Major Natural Disaster in Japan Since 1945

A-6

A-7 Major Natural Disasters in Japan in Recent Years

A-7

A-8 Number of Fatalities and Missing Persons Resulting from Natural Disasters

A-9

A-9 Breakdown of Fatalities and Missing Persons Caused by Natural Disasters

A-9

A-10 Recent Major Natural Disasters (Since the Great Hanshin-Awaji Earthquake)

A-10

A-11 Establishment of Extreme Disaster Management Headquarters and Major Disaster
Management Headquarters

A-15

A-12 Deployment of Government Survey Teams (Since the Great Hanshin-Awaji Earthquake)

A-16

A-13 Invocation History of Disaster Relief Act (Since the Great Hanshin-Awaji Earthquake)

A-18

A-14 Actual Designations of Extremely Severe Disasters in the Past Five Years

A-22

A-15 Response of Government Ministries and Agencies to Major Disasters Since 2014

A-24

A-16 Trends in Facility-Related Damage, Actual and as a Percentage of Gross Domestic Product
(GDP)

A-34

A-17 Facility-Related Damage by Disaster Type for Disasters Occurring in 2013

A-34

A-18 Trends in Facility-Related Damage, Actual and as a Percentage of Gross Domestic Product
(GDP)

A-35

A-19 Damage Estimate for the Great East Japan Earthquake

A-36

A-20 Main Volcanic Eruptions and Eruption Disasters in Japan

A-37

A-21 Number of Sediment Disasters

A-38

A-22 Sediment Disaster Risk Areas by Municipalities

A-38

A-23 Increase in Torrential Rain During Short Periods

A-39

A-24 Number of Confirmed Occurrences of Tornados

A-40

A-25 Major Natural Disasters in the World Since 1900

A-41

A-26 Top 10 Largest Earthquakes Since 1900

A-44

A-27 Major Natural Disasters Since 2014

A-44

Section 3

Laws and Systems

A-47

A-28 Progress on Disaster Management Laws and Systems Since 1945

A-47

A-29 Major Disaster Management Laws by Type of Disaster

A-48

A-30 Structure and System of the Basic Disaster Management Plan

A-49

A-31 History of Revisions to the Basic Disaster Management Plan

A-50

Section 4

Organizations

A-51

A-32 Organization of the Central Disaster Management Council

A-51

A-33 Recent Meetings of the Central Disaster Management Council (Since 2008)

A-52

A-34 Status of the Establishment of Central Disaster Management Council Committees forTechnical Investigation

A-53

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

Section 5

Budget

A-54

A-35 Disaster Management Budgets by Year
A-36 Trends in Disaster Management Budget

A-54
A-55

A-37 Earthquake Emergency Development Project Plans

A-56

A-38 Estimated Budgets for Five-Year Plans for Emergency Earthquake Disaster Management
Project

A-57

Section 6

Status of Disaster Management Facilities and Equipment

A-58

A-39 MLIT Resource Base Designation Status

A-58

A-40 Preparation Status of Disaster Management Facilities and Equipment at Schools
Designated as Emergency Evacuation Sites
A-41 Number of Medical Facilities for Disasters by Prefectures

A-58

A-42 Number of Red Cross Hospitals, Emergency Medical Centers and DMAT-DesignatedMedical Facilities
A-43 Designation of Tsunami Evacuation Buildings in Municipalities

A-60

A-44 Designation of Welfare Evacuation Shelters

A-62

A-45 Seismic Reinforcement of Public Infrastructure

A-62

A-46 Trends in the Seismic Reinforcement Rate of Public Facilities That Serve as Disaster
Management Bases
A-47 Seismic Reinforcement of Houses and Buildings Used by Many People
A-48 Seismic Reinforcement Status of Public Elementary and Junior High Schools

A-63

A-49 Seismic Reinforcement Status of Hospitals
A-50 Seismic Reinforcement Status of Disaster Management Base Hospitals and Emergency
Medical Centers

A-65
A-65

Section 7

A-59

A-61

A-63
A-64

Trends in Numbers of Workers in Disaster Management

A-66

A-51 Trends in Numbers of Fire Corps Volunteers
A-52 Trends in Age Composition Ratios among Fire Corps Volunteers

A-66
A-66

A-53 Trends in Numbers of Flood Fighting Corps Personnel

A-67

A-54 Trends in Voluntary Disaster Management Organizations

A-67

A-55 Coverage of Voluntary Disaster Management Organizations by Prefecture (%)

A-68

A-56 Change in Age Composition Ratios among Fire Corps Volunteers

A-68

Section 8

Various Policies and Measures

A-69

A-57 Hazard Map Development

A-69

A-58 Formulation Status of Official Announcement Criteria for Evacuation Advisories in
Municipalities where Natural Disasters are Anticipated
A-59 Methods of Communicating Evacuation Orders to Residents in Municipalities

A-69

A-60 Instances of Assistance based on Mutual Support Agreements between Prefectures andSupport Agreements with Private-Sector Institutions in Recent Years
A-61 Status of Mutual Support Agreements in Municipalities

A-71

A-62 Status of Municipalities’ Support Agreements with Private-Sector Institutions

A-72

A-63 Status of Disaster Management Drill Implementation

A-73

A-64 Coverage of Voluntary Disaster Management Organizations by Prefecture (%)

A-74

A-65 Implementation Status of Tsunami Countermeasures

A-75

Section 9

Japan's International Cooperation

A-70

A-72

A-76

A-66 List of Cooperation Projects Conducted by Ministries and Agencies

A-76

A-67 Examples of Technical Cooperation Projects in Disaster Risk Reduction (FY2014)

A-81

Section 10 Others

A-86

A-68 Trends in the Number of Earthquake Insurance Contracts

A-86

A-69 Awareness of Self-Help, Mutual Help, and Public Help Measures

A-86

A-70 Explanations Regarding the Japan Meteorological Agency’s Seismic Intensity Ratings

A-87

A-71 Emergency Warning Issuance Criteria

A-91

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

Section 1: Overview of Japan’s National Land
Fig. A-1

Worldwide Hypocenter Distribution (for Magnitude 6 and Higher Earthquakes) and Plate Boundaries

North American Plate

Eurasian Plate

Philippine Sea Plate
Section 1

African Plate
Pacific Plate
Indo-Australian Plate

South American Plate
Antarctic Plate

Note: 2005–2014
Source: Created by the Japan Meteorological Agency based on earthquake data from the U.S. Geological Survey

Fig. A-2

Distribution of Volcanoes Worldwide

Source: Japan Meteorological Agency

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

Page A-1

Fig. A-3

Overview of Major Trenches and Major Active Faults

Major Trenches and Likely Earthquake Zones

Kuril Trench

Nansei-shoto
TrenchJapan Trench

4. Along the Sagami TroughHyuga-nada Sea

Suruga TroughAppendix

Eastern Edge ofJapan Sea Trench

Note: Likely earthquake zones shown in text boxes.

Major Active Faults

Source: Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology

Page A-2

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

No.
1
2
3

Name of Fault
Sarobetsu fault zone
Shibetsu fault zone
Tokachi-heiya fault zone

No.
51
52
53

4

Furano fault zone

54

24

Nagai-bonchi-seien fault zone

74

25
26
27
28
29
30

Futaba fault
Aizu-bonchi-seien-toen fault zone
Kushigata-sanmyaku fault zone
Tsukioka fault zone
Nagaoka-heiya-seien fault zone
Kamogawa-teichi fault zone

75
76
77
78
79
80

31

Sekiya fault

81

6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16

32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50

Fukaya fault zone · Ayasegawa fault (Kanto-heiya
hokuseiendan fault zone･Motoarakawa fault zone）
Tachikawa fault zone
Isehara fault
Shiozawa fault zone · Hirayama-Matsuda-kita fault
zone · Kouzu-Matsuda fault zone (Kannawa KouzuMatsuda fault zone)
Miura-hanto fault group
Kitaizu fault zone
Muikamachi fault zone
Takada-heiya fault zone
Tokamachi fault zone
Nagano-bonchi-seien fault zone (Shinanogawa fault
zone)
Itoigawa-Shizuoka-kozosen fault zone
Sone-kyuryo fault zone
Fujikawa-kako fault zone
Kiso-sanmyaku-seien fault zone
Sakaitoge Kamiya fault zone
Uozu fault zone
Atotsugawa fault zone
Takayama Oppara fault zone
Ushikubi fault zone

55

Ouchigata fault zone

56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65

Tonami-heiya fault zone · Kurehayama fault zone
Morimoto Togashi fault zone
Fukui-heiya-toen fault zone
Nagaragawa-joryu fault zone
Noubi fault zone
Yanagase Sekigahara fault zone
Nosaka Shufukuji fault zone
Kohoku-sanchi fault zone
Biwako-seigan fault zone
Yoro-Kuwana-Yokkaichi

66

Suzuka-toen fault zone

67
68
69
70
71
72
73

Suzuka-seien fault zone
Tongu fault
Isewan fault zone
Nunobiki-sanchi-toen fault zone
Kizugawa fault zone
Mikata Hanaore fault zone
Yamada fault zone
Sourthern fault zone of Kyoto-bonchi-Nara-bonchi(Nara-bonchi-toen fault zone）
Arima-Takatsuki fault zone
Ikoma fault zone
Mitoke Kyoto Nishiyama fault zone
Rokko Awajishima fault zone
Osaka-wan fault zone
Uemachi fault zone
Chuo-kozosen fault zone (Kongo-sanchi-toen - Iyonada）

82

Yamasaki fault zone

83
84

Nagao fault zone
Itsukaichi fault zone

85

Iwakuni fault zone

86
87
88
89
90

Akinada fault group
Ube-oki fault group (Suounada fault group)
Kikugawa fault zone
Nishiyama fault zone
Kego fault zone

91

Beppu-Haneyama fault zone

92
93
94
95
96
97

Futagawa-Hinagu fault zone
Mizunawa fault zone
Unzen fault group
Izumi fault zone
Hitoyoshi-bonchi-nanen fault
Miyakojima fault zone

Source: Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

Page A-3

Section 1

17
18
19
20
21
22
23

Mashike-sanchi-toen fault zone · Numata-Sunagawa
fault zone
Toubetsu fault
Ishikari-teichi-toen fault zone
Kuromatsunai-teichi fault zone
Hakodate-teiya-seien fault zone
Aomori-wan-seigan fault zone
Tsugaru-sanchi-seien fault zone
Oritsume fault
Hanawa-higashi fault zone
Noshiro fault zone
Kitakami-teichi-seien fault zone
Shizukuishi-bonchi-seien - Mahiru-sanchi-toen fault
zone
Yokote-bonchi-toen fault zone
Kitayuri fault
Shinjo-bonchi fault zone
Yamagata-bonchi fault zone
Shonai-heiya-toen fault zone
Nagamchi-Rifu Line fault zone
Fukushima-bonchi-seien fault zone

5

Name of Fault
Shokawa fault zone
Inadani fault zone
Atera fault zone
Byoubuyama Enasan fault zone & Sanageyama fault
zoneDistribution of Active Volcanoes in Japan

Fig. A-4

Appendix

Mt. Rishiri Atosanupuri
Mt. Io (Shiretoko) Atusa-nupuri
Tenchozan
Mt. Chilip
Mt. Rausu Mt. Rurui
Moyoro-dake
Mt. Yotei
Mt. Usu
Daisetsuzan
NisekoSashiusu-dake
Mt. Hokkaido-komaga-take
Mt. Tokachi-dake
Iotorishima
Mt. Odamoi
Nansei Islands
Mt. E
Etrofu-Yakeyama
Oshima Ohshima
Mt. Berutarube
Chacha-dake
Mt. Iwaki
Mashu
Mt. Maru
Mt. Rausu
Mt.
Oakan
Submarine Volcano
Mt. Akita-Yake-yama
NNE of Iriomotejima
Mt. Eniwa Mt. Meakan Mt. Tomari
Mt. Akita-Komaga-take
Mt. Tarumae
Mt. Osore
Mt. Chokai
KuttaraMt. Myoko
Hakkoda Mountains※
Hijiori
Mt. Kusatsu-Shirane
Towada※Mt. Zao
Mt. Niigata-Yake-yama
Hachimantai
E140°
E144°
Numazawa
Midagahara※
Mt. Iwate
Mt. Hiuchigatake
Mt. Yake
N32°
Mt. Kurikoma
Bayonnaise Rocks
Mt. Akandana
NarugoSmith Island
Mt. Norikura
Mt. Azuma
Tori-Shima (Izu Islands)
Mt. Sanbe
Mt. Haku
Mt. Adatara
Sofugan Island
Abu (Volcano)
Mt. Ontake
Mt. Bandai

Mt. Unzen
Fukue-jima Volcano
Yonemaru･Sumiyoshi-Ike
Ikeda・Yamagawa
Kaimondake
Satsuma-Io-jima Island
Kuchinoerabu-jima Island
Kuchinoshima
Nakanoshima Island

Izu Oshima Island
Yoko-dakeTo-shima
Mt. Tsurumi･Mt. Garan
Mt. Fuji Kozu-shima Island Nii-jima Island
Mt.
Yufu
Mt. AsoMikura-jima Miyake-jima Island
Mt. Hakone
Mt. Kuju
Mt. Kirishima
Izu-Tobu volcano field
Hachijo-jima Island
Aoga-shima Island
Wakamiko
Sakura-jima Island
Active volcanoes (110)

Mt. Nasu
Mt. Takahara
Mt. Nikko-Shirane
Mt. Akagi
Mt. Haruna
Mt. Asama

N24°

Minamihiyoshi Seamount)
Nikko Seamount

Active volcanoes under constant monitoring (47)

Suwanose Island

Source: Created by the Cabinet Office from the Japan Meteorological Agency website

Page A-4

N28°

Nishinoshima Island
Kaikata Seamount
Kaitoku Seamount
Funka-Asane Submarine Volcano
Io-jima Island
Kita-Fukutokutai
Fukutoku-Okanoba

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

Section 2: Disasters in Japan
Fig. A-5

Major Destructive Earthquakes in Japan (Since the Meiji Period)
Disaster

Date

Number of Fatalities andMissing Persons(M8.0)

October 28, 1891

7,273

Meiji Sanriku Earthquake and Tsunami(M8.25)June 15, 1896

Approx. 22,000

Great Kanto Earthquake(M7.9)

September 1, 1923

Approx. 105,000

1927 Kita Tango Earthquake(M7.3)March 7, 1927

2,925

Showa Sanriku Earthquake Tsunami(M8.1)March 3, 1933

3,064

1943 Tottori Earthquake(M7.2)

September 10, 1943

1,083

Tonankai Earthquake(M7.9)

December 7, 1944

1,251

Mikawa Earthquake(M6.8)

January 13, 1945

2,306

Nankai Earthquake(M8.0)

December 21, 1946

1,443

Fukui Earthquake(M7.1)

June 28, 1948

3,769

Tokachi‐oki Earthquake(M8.2)March 4, 195233

1960 Chile Earthquake and Tsunami(Mw9.5)

May 23, 1960

142

1964 Niigata Earthquake(M7.5)

June 16, 1964

26

1968 Tokachi-oki Earthquake(M7.9)

May 16, 1968

52

1974 Izu-hanto-oki Earthquake(M6.9)

May 9, 197430

1978 Izu-Oshima-kinkai Earthquake(M7.0)

January 14, 1978

25

1978 Miyagi-ken-oki Earthquake(M7.4)

June 12, 1978

28

Nihon-kai-chubu Earthquake(M7.7)

May 26, 1983

104

Nagano-ken-seibu Earthquake(M6.8)

September 14, 1984

29

Hokkaido-nansei-oki Earthquake(M7.8)

July 12, 1993

230

Great Hanshin-Awaji Earthquake(M7.3)

January 17, 1995

6,437

Niigata-ken-Chuetsu Earthquake(M6.8)

October 23, 2004

68

Iwate–Miyagi Inland Earthquake(M7.2)

June 14, 2008

Approx. 23

Great East Japan Earthquake(Mw9.0)March 11, 2011

Approx. 21,839

Section 2

Nobi Earthquake*Mw: Moment magnitude
Notes:
1. The earthquakes listed before World War II are those with more than 1,000 fatalities and missing persons, while the earthquakes
listed after World War II are those with more than 20 fatalities and missing persons.
2. The number of fatalities and missing persons from the Great Kanto Earthquake are based on the revised Chronological Scientific
Table (2006), which changed the number from approximately 142,000 to approximately 105,000.
3. The number of fatalities and missing persons from the Great Hanshin-Awaji Earthquake is the current figure as of December 22,
2005. The number of fatalities directly caused by structures collapsing, fire, and other factors caused by seismic shaking on the dayof the earthquake, excluding so-called “related deaths,” is 5,521.
4. The number of fatalities (including earthquake-related fatalities) and missing persons from the Great East Japan Earthquake is thecurrent figure as of March 1, 2015.
Source: Chronological Scientific Tables, Fire and Disaster Management Agency materials, National Police Agency materials,
Comprehensive List of Destructive Earthquakes in Japan, Extreme Disaster Management Headquarters materials

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

Page A-5

Fig. A-6

Major Natural Disaster in Japan Since 1945
Date

DisasterAppendix

January 13, 1945
September 17-18, 1945
December 21, 1946
August 14, 1947
September 14-15, 1947
June 28, 1948

Mikawa Earthquake (M6.8)
Typhoon Makurazaki
Nankai Earthquake (M8.0)
Mt. Asama Eruption
Typhoon Catherine
Fukui Earthquake (M7.1)

September 15-17, 1948

Typhoon Ion

September 2-4, 1950
October 13-15, 1951
March 4, 1952

Typhoon Jane
Typhoon Ruth
Tokachi-oki Earthquake (M8.2)

June 25-29, 1953
July 16-24, 1953
May 8-12, 1954

Torrential Rains
Torrential Rains
Storm Disaster

September 25-27, 1954

Typhoon Toyamaru

July 25-28, 1957
June 24, 1958
September 26-28, 1958

Torrential Rains
Mt. Aso Eruption
Typhoon Kanogawa

September 26-27, 1959

Typhoon Ise-wan

May 23, 1960

Chile Earthquake Tsunami

January 1963
June 16, 1964

Snow Disasters
Niigata Earthquake (M7.5)

September 10-18, 1965

Typhoons 23, 24, 25

September 23-25, 1966

Typhoons 24, 26

July to August 1967

Torrential Rains

May 16, 1968

Tokachi-oki Earthquake (M7.9)

July 3-15, 1972
May 9, 1974
September 8-14, 1976
January 1977
August 7, 1977- October 1978
January 14, 1978
June 12, 1978
October 17-20, 1979
December 1980 - March 1981

Typhoons 6, 7, 9 and Torrential Rains
Izu-hanto-oki Earthquake (M6.9)
Typhoon 17 and Torrential Rains
Snow DisasterMt. Usu Eruption
Izu-Oshima-kinkai Earthquake (M7.0)
Miyagi-ken-oki Earthquake (M7.4)
Typhoon 20
Snow Disasters

July to August 1982

Torrential Rains and Typhoon 10

May 26, 1983
July 20-29, 1983
October 3, 1983

Nihon-kai-chubu Earthquake (M7.7)
Torrential Rains
Miyake Is. Eruption

December 1983 - March 1984
September 14, 1984
November 15 - December 18, 1986
November 17, 1990
July 12, 1993
July 31 - August7, 1993
January 17, 1995
March 31, 2000 - June 28, 2001
October 20-21, 2004
October 23, 2004

Snow Disasters
Nagano-ken-seibu Earthquake (M6.8)
Izu-Oshima Eruption
Mr. Unzen Eruption
Hokkaido-nansei-oki Earthquake (M7.8)
Torrential Rains
Great Hanshin-Awaji Earthquake (M7.3)
Mt. Usu Eruption
Miyake Is. Eruption and Niijima andKozushima Is. Earthquake
Typhoon 23
Niigata-ken-Chuetsu Earthquake (M6.8)

December 2005 - March 2006
July 16, 2007
June 14, 2008

Heavy Snowfalls
Niigata Earthquake (M6.8)
Iwate-Miyagi Inland Earthquake (M7.2)

December 2010 - March 2011

Snow Disasters

March 11, 2011
August 29 - September 7, 2011

Great East Japan Earthquake (Mw9.0)
Typhoon 12
Deep Snowfall from November 2011
onwards
Deep Snowfall from December 2012
onwards
Deep Snowfall from November 2013
onwards
Torrential Rains of August 20142014 Eruption of Mt. Ontake

June 25, 2001 - March 31, 2005

November 2011 - March 2012
December 2012 - March 2013

Main Disaster Areas
Southern Aichi
Western Japan (Especially in Hiroshima)
Various Places in West of Chubu
Around Mt. Asama
North of Tohoku
Around the Fukui Plains
From Shikoku into Tohoku (Especially in
Iwate)
North of Shikoku (Especially in Osaka)
Nationwide (Especially in Yamaguchi)Southern Hokkaido, Northern Tohoku
Kyushu, Shikoku, Chugoku (Especially
Kitakyushu)
West of Tohoku (Especially in Wakayama)
Northern Japan, Kinki
Nationwide (Especially in Hokkaido and
Shikoku)
Kyushu (Especially around Isahaya)Around Mt. Aso
East of Kinki (Especially in Shizuoka)
Nationwide (Except for Kyushu, especially in
Aichi)Southern Coast of Hokkaido, Sanriku Coast,
Shima Coast
Hokuriku, Sanin, Yamagata, Shiga, Gifu
Niigata, Akita, Yamagata
Nationwide (Especially in Tokushima, Hyogo,
Fukui)
Chubu, Kanto, Tohoku (Especially in
Shizuoka, Yamanashi)West of Chubu, Northern Tohoku
Southern Hokkaido and Tohoku Area
centering around Aomori
Nationwide (Especially in Kitakyushu,
Shimane, Hiroshima)
Southern Tip of Izu-hanto
Nationwide (Especially in Kagawa, Okayama)
Tohoku, Northern Kinki, Hokuriku
Hokkaido
Izu-hanto
MiyagiNationwide (Especially Tokai, Kanto, Tohoku)
Tohoku, Hokuriku
Nationwide (Especially in Nagasaki,
Kumamoto, Mie)
Akita, Aomori
East of Sanin (Especially in Shimane)
Around Miyake-jima Island
Tohoku, Hokuriku (Especially in Niigata,
Toyama)Western Nagano
Izu Oshima Island
Nagasaki
Hokkaido
Nationwide
Hyogo
Hokkaido
Tokyo
Nationwide
Niigata
Japan Sea Coast centering around Hokuriku
Area
Niigata
Tohoku (Especially in Miyagi, Iwate)
From Northern Japan through into KantoKoshinetsu Area (Especially in Yamanashi)
Eastern Japan (Especially in Miyagi, Iwate,
Fukushima)
Kinki, Shikoku
From Northern Japan through into WestJapan on the Japan Sea Coast
From Northern Japan through into WestJapan on the Japan Sea Coast
From Northern Japan through into KantoKoshinetsu Area (Especially in Yamanashi)
Hiroshima
Nagano, Gifu

Number of Dead andMissing
2,306
3,756
1,443
11
1,930
3,769
838
539
943
33
1,013
1,124
670
1,761
722
12
1,269
5,098
142
231
26
181
317
256
52
447
30
171
101
3
25
28
115
152
439
104
117
－
131
29
－
44
230
79
6,437
－
1
98
68
152
15
23
131
21,83994
132
101

November 2013 - May 201493
August 20, 201474
September 27, 2014
63
*Mw: Moment magnitude
Notes:
1. The disasters listed resulted in fatalities and missing persons as follows: 500 or more for storm and flood disasters, 100 or more for snow disasters, and 10 ormore for earthquakes, tsunamis, and volcanic eruptions. It also includes disasters for which governmental Major Disaster Management Headquarters were
established based on the Disaster Countermeasures Basic Act.
2. The number of fatalities and missing persons for the Great Hanshin-Awaji Earthquake is the current figure as of December 22, 2005. The number of deaths
directly caused by structural collapse, fire, and other factors caused by seismic shaking on the day of the earthquake, excluding so-called “related deaths,” is5,521.
3. The numbers of fatalities from the Miyake Is. Eruption and Niijima and Kozushima Is. Earthquake are from the earthquake of July 1, 2000.
4. The numbers of fatalities and missing persons since 2014 are from flash bulletins based on Cabinet Office summaries.
5. The number of fatalities (including earthquake-related fatalities) and missing persons resulting from the Great East Japan Earthquake is the current figure as ofMarch 1, 2015.
Source: Created by the Cabinet Office based on the meteorological almanac of Japan, Chronological Scientific Tables, National Police Agency materials, Fire andDisaster Management Agency materials, Extreme Disaster Management Headquarters materials, and Hyogo Prefecture materials

Page A-6

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

Fig. A-7

Major Natural Disasters in Japan in Recent Years
Date

Disaster

Main Disaster-affected Areas

Number of
Dead andMissing

March 24, 2001
April 3, 2001

Geiyo Earthquake (M6.7)
Hiroshima, Ehime, Yamaguchi
Earthquake (M5.3) epicentered in central Shizuoka Prefecture Shizuoka

20July 11-13, 2001

Heavy rains in northern Kyushu Region

0

August 20-13, 2001
September 6-13, 2001
September 8-12, 2001
July 9-11, 2002
July 13-16, 2002
October 1-2, 2002
May 26, 2003
July 18-21, 2003
July 26, 2003

September 4-8, 2004
September 26-30, 2004
October 8-10 , 2004
October 18-21 , 2004
October 23, 2004
December 2004- March 2005
March 20, 2005
June 27 - July 25, 2005
July 23, 2005
August 16, 2005
August 25-26, 2005
September 4-8, 2005
December 2005- March 2006

23
0

Typhoon 10
Typhoon 14
Tokachi-oki Earthquake (M8.0)
Torrential rains in Niigata and Fukushima in July 2004
Torrential rains in Fukui in July 2004
Heavy rains from and related to Typhoons 10 and 11
Heavy rains from and related to Typhoon 15
Typhoon 16
Earthquakes (M7.1, M7.4) epicentered off coast of Kii
Peninsula/off the coast of Tokaido
Typhoon 18
Typhoon 21
Typhoon 22
Typhoon 23

Nationwide centering around Hokkaido
Nationwide centering around Okinawa
Hokkaido
Niigata, Fukushima
Fukui
Chugoku, Shikoku
Tohoku, Shikoku
Nationwide centering around Western Japan
Aichi, Mie, Wakayama

19
3
2
16
5
3
10
17
0

Nationwide centering around Chugoku
Nationwide centering around Western Japan
East Japan on the Pacific Ocean side
Nationwide centering around Kinki and
Shikoku
Niigata
Hokkaido, Tohoku, and Hokuriku Regions
Fukuoka
From the southern Tohoku Region to the
Kyushu Region
Tokyo, Saitama, Kanagawa and Chiba

45
27
9
98

2004 Niigata-ken Chuetsu Earthquake (M6.8)
Snow disasters
Fukuoka-ken-Seihou-oki Earthquake (M7.0)
Heavy rains due to the seasonal rain front0

Typhoon 11
Typhoon 14

029

Torrential rains in 2006

September 15-20, 2006
November 7, 2006
March 25 2007
April 15, 2007

Typhoon 13
Tornado in town of Saroma
Noto Hanto Earthquake (M6.9) of 2007
Earthquake (M5.4) epicentered in central Mie Prefecture

July 5-17 2007
July 16, 2007
August 2-4, 2007
September 6-8, 2007
September 13-18, 2007
October 1, 2007

Heavy rains from Typhoon 4 and seasonal rain front
2007 Niigata Earthquake (M6.8)
Typhoon 5
Typhoon 9
Heavy rains from Typhoon 11 and rain front
Earthquake (M4.9) epicentered is western Kanagawa
Prefecture
Damage from low-pressure system
Iwate-Miyagi Inland Earthquake (M7.2) of 2008
Earthquake (M6.8) epicentered on northern coast of Iwate
Prefecture
Damage from heavy rains

August 26-31, 2008
July 21-26, 2009
August 10-11, 2009
August 11, 2009
October 7-8, 2009
February 28, 2010
June 11 - July 19, 2010

68
88
1
12

Earthquake (M6.0) epicentered in northwestern Chiba
Prefecture
Earthquake (M7.2) epicentered off coast of Miyagi Prefecture Tohoku Region

Torrential rains due to seasonal rain front

July 28-29, 2008

6
0
8
7
0
4
0

Torrential rains from seasonal rain front
KyushuEarthquake (M6.4) epicentered in northern Miyagi Prefecture Miyagi

June 10 - July 29, 2006

February 23-24, 2008
June 14, 2008
July 24, 2008

Fukuoka, Saga, Kumamoto, Nagasaki,
Yamaguchi
Nationwide centering around Western Japan
Okinawa, Western Japan
Nationwide centering around Eastern Japan
Nationwide centering around Tohoku
Nationwide centering around Kagoshima
Hokkaido, Tohoku, Kanto, Chubu
TohokuTorrential rains at the end of August 2008
Torrential rains in northern Chugoku and Kyushu Regions inJuly 20092009 Typhoon 9
Earthquake (M6.5) epicentered in Suruga Bay
2009 Typhoon 18
Tsunami from an earthquake epicentered on central Chilean
coast
Heavy rains due to 2010 seasonal rain front

October 18-30, 2010
November 2010- March 2011
January 26 - 2011
March 11, 2011
July 19-24, 2011
July 28-30, 2011

Heavy rains in Amami region of Kagoshima Prefecture
Heavy snows from November 2010
Mt. Kirishima (Shinmoedake) Eruption
Tohoku Region Pacific Coast Earthquake (Mw9.0) of 2011
2011 Typhoon 6
Torrential rains in Niigata and Fukushima in July 2011

August 30 - 5 September 2011

2011 Typhoon 12

September 15-22, 2011

2011 Typhoon 15

Kanto and Tokai Regions
Nationwide centering around Chugoku,
Shikoku, and Kyushu Regions
Japan Sea side centering around Hokuriku
RegionKanto, Chubu, Kinki, Chugoku, Kyushu
Regions
Chugoku and Kyushu Regions
Hokkaido (Saroma-cho)Ishikawa
Mie

0

152
33
10
9
1
0

Chubu, Shikoku and Kyushu Regions
Niigata
Kyushu Region
Tohoku, Kanto and Chubu Regions
Tohoku Region
Kanagawa

7
15
0
3
4
0

Hokkaido, Tohoku and Chubu Regions
Tohoku Region (Especially Miyagi and Iwate)
Hokkaido and Tohoku Regions

4
23
1

Hokuriku and Kinki Regions (Especially
Hyogo)
Tohoku, Kanto, Tokai and Chugoku Regions(Especially Aichi)
Chugoku and Kyushu Regions (Especially
Yamaguchi and Fukuoka)
Kinki and Shikoku Regions (Especially Hyogo)
Tokai Region
Tohoku, Kanto, Chubu and Kinki Regions
Tohoku, Kanto, Tokai, Kinki and Shikoku
Regions
Nationwide centering around Chugoku andKyushu Regions
Kagoshima (Amami)
Hokkaido, Tohoku and Hokuriku Regions
Miyazaki and Kagoshima
Nationwide centering around Tohoku Region
Kanto, Tokai, Kinki and Shikoku Regions
Tohoku and Hokuriku Regions (Especially
Niigata and Fukushima)
Kanto, Tokai, Kinki, Chugoku and Shikoku
Regions
Nationwide

6

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

2
35
27
1
5
0
21
3
131
0
21,8393
698
19Page A-7

Section 2

August 7-10, 2003
September 11-14, 2003
September 26, 2003
July 12-13, 2004
July 17-18, 2004
July 29 - August 6, 2004
August 17-20, 2004
August 27-31, 2004
September 5, 2004

Typhoon 11
Typhoon 16
Typhoon 15
Typhoon 6
Typhoon 7
Typhoon 21
Earthquake (M7.1) epicentered off coast of Miyagi PrefectureDate
November 2011- March 2012
May 6, 2012
June 18-20, 2012
July 2-9, 2012
July 11-14, 2012

DisasterHeavy snows in 2012
Wind gusts occurring in May 20122012 Typhoon 4
Heavy rains from July 3, 2012

Number of
Death andMissing

Appendix

132
3
1
2

Heavy snows from the end of November 2013

Hokkaido, Tohoku and Hokuriku Regions
Kanto Region (Especially Ibaraki and Tochigi)
Nationwide
Nationwide centering around Kyushu andOkinawa Regions
Nationwide centering around northern
Kyushu Region
Kinki and Chubu Regions
Nationwide
Chubu, Kinki, Kyushu and Okinawa Regions
Hokkaido, Tohoku and Hokuriku Regions
Nationwide
Tohoku and Chugoku Region
Nationwide centering around Chugoku
RegionKanto region
From Northern Japan to Western Japan on
the Japan Sea side (especially Kinki)
From Eastern Japan to Western Japan on the
Pacific Ocean side (especially Kanto)
Tohoku and Kanto-Koshinetsu Regions

2014 Typhoon 82014 Typhoon 12 & 11
Torrential rains of August 2014 (Except Hiroshima Landslide)
Torrential rains of August 2014 (Hiroshima Landslide Disaster)
2014 Eruption of Mt. Ontake
Earthquake epicentered in northern Nagano Prefecture

Nationwide
Nationwide
Kinki, Hokuriku and Tokai Regions
Hiroshima
Nagano and Gifu
Nagano

3
6
8
74
63
0

Heavy rains from July 11, 2012

August 13-15, 2012
September 15-19, 2012
September 28 - October 1, 2012
December 2012- March 2013
April 6-9, 2013
June 8 - August 9, 2013
August 23-28, 2013

Heavy rains from August 13, 20122012 Typhoon 16
2012 Typhoon 17
Heavy snows in 2013
Low-pressure system from April 6, 2013
Heavy rains in the 2013 rainy season
Heavy rains from August 23, 2013

September 2 & 4, 2013
September 15-16, 2013

Tornados on September 2 and 4, 20132013 Typhoon 18

October 15-16, 2013
October 24-26, 2013
November 2013- March 2013
2014
July 6-11, 2014
July 30 - August 11, 2014
August 15-26, 2014
August 20, 2014
September 27, 2014
November 22, 2014

Main Disaster-affected Areas

2013 Typhoon 26 & 27

32
3
0
1
101
1
17
2
0
7
43
93

*Mw: Moment magnitude
Notes:
1. Natural disasters for which an Information Office was set up in the Cabinet Office and which resulted in fatalities/missing persons.
2. Data for the Niigata-ken Chuetsu Earthquake (the Mid Niigata Prefecture Earthquake) includes so-called "related deaths."
3. The Great East Japan Earthquake (2011) includes damage from earthquakes deemed aftershocks.* The number of fatalities (including earthquake-related fatalities) and missing persons is the current figure as of March 1, 2015.
(*April 7 earthquake hypocentered off the coast of Miyagi Prefecture, April 11 earthquake hypocentered in the Hamadori region of Fukushima
Prefecture, April 12 earthquake hypocentered in the Hamadori region of Fukushima Prefecture, May 22 earthquake hypocentered in northeastern
Chiba Prefecture, July 25 earthquake hypocentered off the coast of Fukushima Prefecture, July 31 earthquake hypocentered off the coast of
Fukushima Prefecture, August 12 earthquake hypocentered off the coast of Fukushima Prefecture, August 19 earthquake hypocentered off thecoast of Fukushima Prefecture, September 10 earthquake hypocentered in northern Ibaraki Prefecture, October 10 earthquake hypocentered off
the coast of Fukushima Prefecture, November 20 earthquake hypocentered in northern Ibaraki Prefecture, February 19, 2012, earthquake
hypocentered in northern Ibaraki Prefecture, March 1 earthquake hypocentered off the coast of Ibaraki Prefecture, March 14 earthquake
hypocentered off the eastern coast of Chiba Prefecture, June 18 earthquake hypocentered off the coast of Miyagi Prefecture, August 30 earthquake
hypocentered off the coast of Miyagi Prefecture, December 7 earthquake hypocentered off the coast of Sanriku, and January 31, 2013, earthquake
hypocentered in northern Ibaraki Prefecture)
4. The numbers of fatalities and missing persons since 2013 are from flash bulletins based on Cabinet Office summaries.
Source: Meteorological Almanac of Japan, Chronological Scientific Tables, National Police Agency materials, Fire and Disaster Management Agency
materials

Page A-8

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

Number of Fatalities and Missing Persons Resulting from Natural Disasters

Fig. A-8(People)22,000Major disaster: Great East Japan Earthquake (21,839)

20,00018,00016,000Main disasters: Mikawa Earthquake (2,306), Typhoon Makurazaki (3,756)

14,00012,000Main disaster: Nankai Earthquake (1,443)

10,000Main disaster: Fukui Earthquake (3,769)

Main disaster: Typhoon Kathleen (1,930)

Section 2

Major disaster: Great Hanshin-Awaji Earthquake (6,437)

Main disaster: Nanki torrential rains (1,124)

8,000

Main disaster: Typhoon Touyamaru (1,761)

6,000
Main disaster: Typhoon Isewan (5,098)

4,000
2,000
0

1945

1947

1949

1951

1953

1955

1957

1959

1961

1963

1965

1967

1969

1971

1973

1975

1977

1979

1981

1983

1985

1987

1989

1991

1993

1995

1997

1999

2001

2003

2005

2007

2009

2011

2013

(Year)

Note: Of the fatalities in 1995, the deaths from the Great Hanshin-Awaji Earthquake include 919 so-called "related deaths" (Hyogo Prefecture). The
fatalities and missing persons in 2011 are based on flash bulletins from the Cabinet Office. The fatalities and missing persons resulting from the 2011
Great East Japan Earthquake include earthquake-related fatalities based on the Fire and Disaster Management Agency document, "Damage
Conditions of the Tohoku Region Pacific Coast Earthquake (Great East Japan Earthquake)" (as of March 1, 2015).
Source: Fatalities and missing persons for the year 1945 came only from major disasters (source: Chronological Scientific Table). Years 1946–1952
use the Japanese Meteorological Disasters Annual Report; years 1953–1962 use National Police Agency documents; years 1963 and after created by
the Cabinet Office based on Fire and Disaster Management Agency materials.

Fig. A-9

Breakdown of Fatalities and Missing Persons Caused by Natural Disasters

Year

Storm/Flood

1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014

183
8
19
21
51
80
109
19
27
20
48
240
48
87
14
21
76
31
136
52
75
101

Earthquake/
Tsunami
233
3
6,437
0
0
0
0
1
2
0
2
68
1
0
16
24
1
0
21,843200Volcano

Snow
1
0
4
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
63

Other
9
21
14
28
16
28
29
52
59
26
12
16
98
88
5
48
35
57
125
138
92
121

Total
11
7
8
35
4
1
3
6
2
2
0
3
6
2
4
7
3
1
2
0
6
0

437
39
6,482
84
71
109
141
78
90
48
62
327
153
177
39
100
115
89
22,106192
173
285

Notes: This table shows the number of deaths and missing persons between Jan. 1 and Dec. 31. Fatalities and missing persons in 2014 are based on
flash bulletins from the Cabinet Office. (The earthquake/tsunami disaster figures for 2011 include earthquake-related fatalities from the Great East
Japan Earthquake based on the Fire and Disaster Management Agency document, “Damage Conditions of the 2011 Tohoku Region Pacific Coast
Earthquake (Great East Japan Earthquake)” (March 1, 2015).)
Source: Created by the Cabinet Office based on the Fire and Disaster Management Agency report "Status of Regional Disaster Management
Administration"

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

Page A-9

Fig. A-10

Recent Major Natural Disasters (Since the Great Hanshin-Awaji Earthquake)(Total: As of April 14, 2015)

Name of Disaster

The Great HanshinAwaji Earthquake(January 17, 2005)

Major Events

Human
Casualties(persons)
Fatalities/
Missing
Persons

Houses Damaged (houses)

InjuredCompletely
Half
Destroyed Destroyed• Establishment of Disaster Management*1• Maximum seismic intensity of 7.
• Unprecedented major disaster inWestern Japan. Became a turning
point in DRR measures for national
and local governments, with various
DRR measures developed andstrengthened.

Headquarters• Establishment of Major Disaster Management

Appendix

6,437 43,792 104,906

144,274• Maximum seismic intensity of 7.
The Great East Japan • Tsunami caused extreme damage
mainly along the coast of Eastern
Earthquake
Japan, including Iwate, Miyagi, and(March 11, 2011)
Fukushima Prefectures.

21,839275,807

Japan Meteorological Agency
2000 Eruption of Mt. The
announced emergency volcano
Usu
information and residents evacuated(March 31, 2000 before the eruption began, resulting
June 28, 2001)
in no human casualties.

-

2000 Miyake Is.
Eruption and Niijima
and Kozushima Is.
Earthquake(June 25, 2000 March 31, 2005)

A caldera was formed along with thesummit eruption. Large amounts of
volcanic gases were emitted over an
extended period, and evacuation
instructions were issued to all
residents of the town of Miyake,
which forced all residents to evacuate
and live off the island.

2004 Typhoon 23(October 18-21,
2004)

Very large number of humancasualties due to rising river levels,
sediment disasters, and high waves
nationally, but concentrated in the
Kinki and Shikoku regions. The
Maruyama River, Izushigawa River,and other Maruyama River systemrivers overflowed their banks andflooded.

6,219 127,830

-

119

355

- • Headquarters
Inspection by Prime Minister• Deployment of government survey team
• Invocation of Disaster Relief Act• Designation as an extremely severe disaster• Establishment of Emergency Disaster
Management Headquarters• Establishment of On-site Disaster Management
Headquarters• Inspection by Prime Minister• Deployment of government survey team- • Inspection by Minister of State for Disaster
Management• Invocation of Disaster Relief Act• Invocation of Act Concerning Support for the
Reconstruction of Livelihoods of Disaster
Victims• Designation as extremely severe disaster• Establishment of Major Disaster Management
Headquarters• Establishment of On-site Disaster Management
Headquarters• Inspection by Prime Minister- • Deployment of government survey team
• Invocation of Disaster Relief Act• Invocation of Act Concerning Support for the
Reconstruction of Livelihoods of Disaster
Victims• Designation as extremely severe disaster• Establishment of Major Disaster Management

Headquarters

1

15

15

20

-

2004 Niigata-kenChuetsu Earthquake(October 23, 2004)• Establishment of Major Disaster Management

Headquarters

98

555

909

7,776

14,323• Establishment of Major Disaster Management

Headquarters

68

4,805

3,175

13,810-Reconstruction of Livelihoods of Disaster
Victims

1

1,204

144

353

-

• Inspection by Prime Minister• Deployment of government survey team
• Invocation of Disaster Relief Act• Invocation of Act Concerning Support for the

Reconstruction of Livelihoods of Disaster
Victims• Invocation of Remote Islands Development Act

29

2006 Heavy
Snowfalls(December 2005 March 2006)

Following 1963, the second-largest
number of fatalities and missing
persons since WW II (on par with
1981.)

152

2006 Torrential
Rains Due to
Seasonal Rain Front(June 10–July 29,
2006)

Many fatalities due to sedimentdisasters in Nagano and Kagoshima
Prefectures.

32

81

300

1,258

2006 Typhoon 13(September 15–20,
2006)

Damage due to strong winds from the
Okinawa region to the Kyushu region,
and a tornado in Nobeoka City,
Miyazaki Prefecture.

10

448

159

514

Tornado in Saroma, Highest number of fatalities on record
Hokkaido Prefecture attributed to a tornado.
(November 7, 2006)

9

31

7

7

Page A-10• Inspection by Prime Minister• Deployment of government survey team
• Invocation of Disaster Relief Act• Invocation of Act Concerning Support for the• Designation as extremely severe disaster

Record-breaking rains fell, mainly in
the Kyushu region, and sedimentdisasters caused many humancasualties.

2005 Typhoon 14(September 4-8,
2005)

• Deployment of government survey team
• Invocation of Disaster Relief Act• Invocation of Act Concerning Support for the

Reconstruction of Livelihoods of Disaster
Victims• Designation as extremely severe disaster• Maximum seismic intensity ofLower 6.
Fukuoka-ken-Seihou- • Homes were destroyed on Genkai
oki Earthquake
Island and elsewhere, and window(March 20, 2005)
glass fell from buildings in Fukuoka
City.

• Inspection by Prime Minister• Invocation of Disaster Relief Act• Invocation of Act Concerning Support for the

Reconstruction of Livelihoods of Disaster
Victims• Designation as extremely severe disaster• Maximum seismic intensity of 7.
• Homes were destroyed, landslides

and other disasters caused many
human casualties, communities
were isolated, people were forced
to evacuate, and there was massive
damage to homes, lifelines,
transportation, and agricultural
land.

Remarks

Abovefloor
Flooding

179

1,178

3,692

7,159

• Deployment of government survey team
• Invocation of Disaster Relief Act• Invocation of Act Concerning Support for the

Reconstruction of Livelihoods of Disaster
Victims• Designation as extremely severe disaster

2,145

18

28

12 • Invocation of Disaster Relief Act

2,212• Deployment of government survey team
• Invocation of Disaster Relief Act• Invocation of Act Concerning Support for the

Reconstruction of Livelihoods of Disaster
Victims• Designation as extremely severe disaster• Deployment of government survey team
• Invocation of Disaster Relief Act• Invocation of Act Concerning Support for the
189 Reconstruction of Livelihoods of Disaster
Victims• Designation as extremely severe disaster• Deployment of government survey team
• Invocation of Disaster Relief Act• Invocation of Act Concerning Support for the
Reconstruction of Livelihoods of Disaster
Victims

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

Name of Disaster

Major Events

Human
Casualties(persons)
Fatalities/
Missing
Persons

Houses Damaged (houses)

InjuredCompletely
Half
Destroyed Destroyed• Maximum seismic intensity of Upper

6.
• Disaster in mountainous regions witha high percentage of aging
population and advancing
depopulation.

1

2007 Heavy Rains
typhoon that made landfall in Julyfrom Typhoon 4 and Thevery powerful. Record rainfalls in
Seasonal Rain Front wasvarious regions.
(July 5-31, 2007)

72007 Noto Hanto
Earthquake(March 25, 2007)

356

686

1,740

Reconstruction of Livelihoods of Disaster Victims

79

26

26

6.

• Many human causalities due to

15

2,346

1,331

5,709

Reconstruction of Livelihoods of Disaster Victims

6.

• Many human causalities due tolandslides and other sedimentdisasters. Many river channels
became blocked (natural dams) inrivers in mountainous areas.

• Inspection by Prime Minister• Deployment of government survey teamof Disaster Relief Act- •• Invocation
Invocation of Act Concerning Support for the• Designation as extremely severe disaster• Maximum seismic intensity of Upper

2008 Iwate-Miyagi
Inland Earthquake(June 14, 2008)• Deployment of government survey team
420 • Invocation of Disaster Relief Act• Designation as extremely severe disaster

23

426

30

146

• Inspection by Prime Minister• Deployment of government survey teamof Disaster Relief Act- •• Invocation
Invocation of Act Concerning Support for the

Reconstruction of Livelihoods of Disaster Victims• Designation as extremely severe disaster• Maximum seismic intensity of Lower

Earthquake
epicentered on
Northern Coast of
Iwate Prefecture(July 24, 2008)
Heavy Rains from
July 28(July 28-29, 2008)6.

• Earthquake with a deep hypocenteroccurring inside a plate. Seismic
intensity of Lower 5 and higher
recorded in disaster-affected regionsof inland Iwate and Miyagi
Prefectures.

211

1

0

6

13

6

16

• Invocation of Disaster Relief Act
of Act Concerning Support for the536 • Invocation
Reconstruction of Livelihoods of Disaster Victims• Designation as extremely severe disaster

2

7

6

7

• Deployment of government survey teamof Disaster Relief Act
3,106 •• Invocation
Invocation of Act Concerning Support for the
Reconstruction of Livelihoods of Disaster Victims• Localized heavy rains in the Hokuriku

and Kinki regions.
• Human casualties along the
Togagawa River in Kobe City.

Torrential Rains at Record heavy rains in various regions,
the End of August
especially extensive flood damage in2008(August 26-31, 2008) Aichi Prefecture.
July 2009 Torrential
Rains in Chugoku
and Northern
Kyushu(July 19-26, 2009)1• Record heavy rains in Yamaguchi andFukuoka Prefectures due to seasonalrain front.
• Numerous fatalities from sedimentdisasters in Yamaguchi Prefecture
and other prefectures.

35

59

52

99

- • Deployment of government survey team

• Inspection by Prime Minister• Deployment of government survey teamof Disaster Relief Act
2,137 •• Invocation
Invocation of Act Concerning Support for the

Reconstruction of Livelihoods of Disaster Victims• Designation as extremely severe disaster• Heavy rains from the Chugoku andShikoku regions to the Tohoku region
2009 Typhoon 9
due to the effects of the typhoon.
(August 8-11, 2009) • Human casualties and homes
damaged due to flooding in Hyogo
Prefecture.

27

Earthquake
epicentered in
Suruga Bay(August 11, 2009)

1

319

0

6

23

183

1,130

• Inspection by Prime Minister• Deployment of government survey teamof Disaster Relief Act
973 •• Invocation
Invocation of Act Concerning Support for the

Reconstruction of Livelihoods of Disaster Victims• Designation as extremely severe disaster• Maximum seismic intensity of Lower

6.

• Tomei Expressway closed due to--slope collapse.

• Destructive storm and heavy rains

2009 Typhoon 18(October 6-8, 2009)

over a wide area from the Okinawa
region to Hokkaido Prefecture due tothe effects of the typhoon.
• Winds and rains in Aichi Prefecturecaused partial damage and flood
damage to many homes.

5

137

9

89

572 • Designation as extremely severe disaster

Tsunami from
Earthquake
epicentered inCentral Chilean
Coast(February 27-28,
2010)

An earthquake struck the central coastof Chile just after noon on Feb. 27. A
tsunami was approaching Japan thenext day on the 28th, and a major
tsunami warning and tsunami warning
were issued at 9:33 a.m. on the 28th.
Extensive fishery damage toaquaculture facilities.

0

0

0

0

6 • Designation as extremely severe disaster

The seasonal rain front stalled over theregion from Kyushu to Honshu from
mid-June, with intermittent bursts of2010 Heavy RainsSouthern Kyushu received
Due to Seasonal Rain activity.
more than twice its average annual
Front
rainfall.
There
were large-scale(June 11 - July 19,
landslides in Kagoshima Prefecture,2010)
and fatalities and missing persons
mainly in Hiroshima and Gifu
Prefectures.
Heavy Rains inAmami Region ofKagoshima
Prefecture(October 18-25,
2010)

The rain front stalled over the Amami
region, with moist air flowing in fromthe south toward this rain front,
creating unstable atmosphericconditions. The Amami region received
intense rainfall of more than 120 mm
per hour, with more than 800 mm ofrainfall since the rains began.

• Inspection by Prime Minister• Inspection by Minister of State for Disaster

21

21

42

74

Management
1,786 • Invocation of Disaster Relief Act• Invocation of Act Concerning Support for the
Reconstruction of Livelihoods of Disaster Victims• Designation as extremely severe disaster• Inspection by Minister of State for Disaster

3

2

10

479

Managementof Disaster Relief Act
119 •• Invocation
Invocation of Act Concerning Support for the
Reconstruction of Livelihoods of Disaster Victims• Designation as extremely severe disaster

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

Page A-11

Section 2

homes collapsing. Damage to homes,
lifelines, transportation, and nuclear
power plants.

• Inspection by Prime Minister• Deployment of government survey teamof Disaster Relief Act- •• Invocation
Invocation of Act Concerning Support for the• Designation as extremely severe disaster• Maximum seismic intensity of Upper

2007 Niigata
Earthquake(July 16, 2007)

Remarks

Abovefloor
Flooding

Name of Disaster

Major Events

Record snows fell from the end of the
Heavy Snows from year to the beginning of the following
year in some areas of the Japan Sea
November 2010
(November 1, 2010 - side of Western Japan. Fishing boats
overturned and sank along with other
March 2011)
damage in Tottori and Shimane
Prefectures.

Human
Casualties(persons)

Houses Damaged (houses)

Fatalities/
Missing
Persons

Injured

128

1,491

Completely
Half
Destroyed Destroyed

912Remarks

Abovefloor
Flooding• Cabinet meeting heldby Minister of State for Disaster6 • Inspection
Management• Invocation of Disaster Relief Act

Appendix

Mt. Kirishima
Eruption(Shinmoedake)(January 26, 2011-)

Shinmoedake continued to be highly
active from January 26, erupting a totalof 13 times until March 4 at 6:00 p.m.
Falling ash from the eruptions wasrecorded over a wide area mainly tothe southeast of the mountain,
including Kirishima City, Kagoshima
Prefecture, and Miyakonojo City,
Miyazaki Prefecture.

0

42

0

0

2011 Typhoon 6(July 12-24, 2011)

The typhoon made landfall in southern
Tokushima Prefecture around 12:30
a.m. on July 20. At the time of landfall,
maximum peak winds of 40m/s wererecorded, and the large typhoon
maintained its powerful force.
Record heavy rains were recorded inWestern Japan, with rainfall of morethan 1,000 mm recorded in some parsof the Shikoku region since the rains
began.

3

54

0

1

July 2011 Niigata
and Fukushima
Torrential Rains(July 27-30, 2011)

Rain began falling in Niigata Prefecture
and Aizu, Fukushima Prefecture, fromaround noon on the 27th. Intermittent
intense rains of more than 80 mm perhour fell starting on the 28th. In Niigata
and Fukushima Prefectures, record
heavy rains exceeding the July 2004
Niigata and Fukushima Torrential Rains
were recorded.

2011 Typhoon 12(August 30 - 6
September 2011)

Record rains were recorded across awide area from Western Japan toNorthern Japan. Especially on the Kii
Peninsula, the highest amount of
rainfall since the rains began at 5:00
p.m. on August 30 exceeded 1,800 mm,
and many river channels became
blocked.

98

112

379

3,159

5,500 • Management
Invocation of Disaster Relief Act• Invocation of Act Concerning Support for the
Reconstruction of Livelihoods of Disaster
Victims• Designation as extremely severe disaster(national)

2011 Typhoon 15(September 15-22,
2011)

Strong winds and record rains wererecorded across a wide area from
Western Japan to Northern Japan.
Total rainfall from 12:00 a.m.,
September 15 to 9:00 a.m., September
22 exceeded 1,000 mm in some partsof Kyushu and Shikoku, with many
points recording rainfall of more thandouble the average rainfall for
September.

19

337

33

1,577

2,145

Heavy Snows from
November 2012
(November 2011 March 2012)

Record snows fell mainly on the Japan
Sea side, with cumulative snowfall of
more than 28% higher than the
average for the past 5 years. In
addition, in some regions the depth of
the snowfall was more than double theaverage for the past 30 years.

133

1,990

13

12

Wind Gusts in May
2012(May 6, 2012)

Lightning strikes, wind gusts, and hailwere recorded from the Tokai region to
the Tohoku region. From Joso City to
Tsukuba City, Ibaraki Prefecture, atornado formed that was estimated to
be one of the strongest (F3) recordedin Japan. Multiple tornadoes wererecorded in the region from Mooka
City, Tochigi Prefecture, to HitachiOmiya City, Ibaraki Prefecture,including a destructive tornado of
approx. 32 km, the second longest
recorded since statistics have been
kept.

3

59

89

197

2012 Typhoon 4(June 18-20, 2012)

Heavy rains fell across a wide area fromthe Okinawa region to the Tohoku
region due to the typhoon andseasonal rain front. Following the pathof the typhoon, strong winds, highwaves, and a storm surge wererecorded across a wide area from the
Okinawa region to the Tohoku region.

1

79

1

1

Heavy Rains from
June 21 to July 7,
2012(June 21 - July 7,
2012)

Due to the effects of the seasonal rain
front and a low-pressure system in the
Yellow Sea forming above the seasonalrain front, from June 21 to July 7, rains
were recorded from Western toEastern Japan, and Northern Japan,
with heavy rains in parts of Kyushu andother locations.

7

36
(*2)

180
(*2)

• Deployment of government survey team (twice)• Inspection by Minister of State for Disaster

Management0 • Designation as an area requiring the emergency
development of evacuation facilities and an ash
prevention area
• Invocation of Disaster Relief Act

28 • Designation as extremely severe disaster• Deployment of government survey team (twice)• Local survey by Minister of State for Disaster

6

13

73

998

Managementof Disaster Relief Act
1,221 •• Invocation
Invocation of Act Concerning Support for the
Reconstruction of Livelihoods of Disaster
Victims• Designation as extremely severe disaster• Establishment of Major Disaster Management

Page A-12

Headquarters• Site inspection by Prime Minister Noda
• Deployment of government survey team (twice)• Local survey by Minister of State for Disaster• Invocation of Disaster Relief Act• Invocation of Act Concerning Support for the

Reconstruction of Livelihoods of Disaster
Victims• Designation as extremely severe disaster• Cabinet meeting held (twice)survey by Minister of State for Disaster3 • Local
Management (twice)• Invocation of Disaster Relief Act• Deployment of government survey team
• Local survey by Minister of State for Disaster2

Management- • Invocation of Disaster Relief Act• Invocation of Act Concerning Support for the
Reconstruction of Livelihoods of Disaster
Victims

54 • Designation as extremely severe disaster• Deployment of government survey team
• Invocation of Disaster Relief Act
1,131 • Invocation of Act Concerning Support for the(*2) Reconstruction of Livelihoods of Disaster
Victims• Designation as extremely severe disaster

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

Name of Disaster

Major Events

Human
Casualties(persons)
Fatalities/
Missing
Persons32

Heavy Snows from
November 2012
(November 2012-）

Due to the cold, there was a long
stretch of low-temperature daysin Northern Japan, with a large amountof snow falling mainly on the Japan Sea
side. This resulted in record snowfall
recorded mainly on the Japan Sea sideof Northern Japan, including snowfallwith a depth of 566 cm recorded at
Sukayu, Aomori Prefecture.

Earthquake
epicentered Near
Awaji Island(April 13, 2013)

Maximum seismic intensity of Lower 6.

InjuredCompletely
Half
Destroyed Destroyed

27

363
(*3)

1,500
(*3)

103

1,517

5

7

0

34

6

66

Remarks

Abovefloor
Flooding• Site inspection by Prime Minister Noda
• Deployment of government survey team (twice)
3,298 • Invocation of Disaster Relief Act(*3) • Invocation of Act Concerning Support for the
Reconstruction of Livelihoods of Disaster Victims• Designation as extremely severe disaster• Cabinet meeting held2 • Deployment of government survey team
• Invocation of Disaster Relief Act

Section 2

July 2012 Northern
Kyushu July
Torrential Rains(July 11-14, 2012)

From July 11 to 14, moist air from thesouth flowed in toward the seasonalrain front that was stalled near
Honshu, and heavy rains wererecorded across a wide area from
Western to Eastern Japan. Extremely
heavy rains fell intermittently withthunder especially in the northern
region of Kyushu.

Houses Damaged (houses)－-

From June 8 to August 9, the seasonal
Heavy Rains in 2013 rain front stalled from Kyushu to the
Seasonal Rain Front vicinity of Honshu with intermittent(Disaster due tobursts of activity. In addition, warm
torrential rains and and very moist air surrounding a highdestructive storms pressure ridge flowed in even after the
between June 8 and rainy season ended. During this time,
August 9, 2013)
Typhoons 4 and 7 approached Japan,
causing heavy rains in various regions.

17

50

73

222

Warm, moist air flowed in toward therain front, creating extremely unstable
atmospheric conditions and heavy
rains mainly on the Japan Sea side of
Heavy Rains from
Eastern Japan, and Western Japan. On
August 23, 2013
24, record heavy rains on par(August 23-28, 2013) Augustwith the torrential rains of July 28 wererecorded, especially in Shimane
Prefecture. Some areas of Hokkaido
Prefecture also received heavy rains.

2

4

8

14

• Invocation of Disaster Relief Act
of Act Concerning Support for the288 • Invocation
Reconstruction of Livelihoods of Disaster Victims• Designation as extremely severe disaster

0

67

13

38

• Deployment of government survey team (twice)of Disaster Relief Act
0 •• Invocation
Invocation of Act Concerning Support for the
Reconstruction of Livelihoods of Disaster Victims• Local survey by Prime Minister Abe• Deployment of government survey team (seventimes)
1,845 • Invocation of Disaster Relief Act• Invocation of Act Concerning Support for the
Reconstruction of Livelihoods of Disaster Victims• Designation as extremely severe disaster• On September 2, F2 tornadoes wererecorded in Saitama City, Koshigaya
City, and Matsubushi Town, Saitama
Prefecture, Noda City, Chiba
Prefecture, and Bando City, Ibaraki
Prefecture.
• On September 4, an F0 tornado was
Tornadoes onrecorded in Sukumo City, Kochi
September 2 and 4,
Prefecture, an F0 tornado in Aki City,
2013
Kochi Prefecture, F1 tornadoes(September 2, 4, &respectively from Kanuma City to
7, 2013)
Utsunomiya City, Tochigi Prefecture,and from Shioya Town, Shioya
District to Yaita City, and F0
tornadoes from Ise City to Obata
Town, Mie Prefecture.
• On September 7, F0 wind gusts wererecorded in Komaki City, Hokkaido
Prefecture.

Heavy Rains from2013 Typhoon 18(September 15-16,
2013)

On September 15, localized intenserains fell in Eastern Japan and Northern
Japan. On the 16th, heavy rains fell
across a wide area from Shikoku to
Hokkaido. Record heavy rains fell
especially in Fukui, Shiga, and Kyoto
Prefectures. A total of ten F0–F1
tornadoes also occurred.

2013 Typhoon 26 &27
(October 14-16,
2013)(October 24-26,
2013)

Heavy rains fell mainly on the Pacific
Ocean side of Eastern Japan andNorthern Japan. Driving rains of morethan 100 mm per hour fell especially in
Oshima-machi, Tokyo Prefecture, withrecord rainfall of 824 mm recorded in
24 hours.

• Deployment of government survey team (five

7

43

143

107

48

86

208

65

times)of Disaster Relief Act
3,011 •• Invocation
Invocation of Act Concerning Support for the
Reconstruction of Livelihoods of Disaster Victims• Designation as extremely severe disaster• Local survey by Prime Minister Abe• Deployment of government survey team (once)of Disaster Relief Act
1,524 •• Invocation
Invocation of Act Concerning Support for the

Reconstruction of Livelihoods of Disaster Victims• Designation as extremely severe disaster• Record heavy snowfall was recorded

across a wide area from Northern
Japan to Kanto-Koshinetsu.

Heavy Snows from
November 2013
(November 2013 - 26
March 2014)• Establishment of Major Disaster Management• Especially from February 14 to 16,

record heavy snows fell, substantiallysurpassing past snowfall depths
mainly in the Kanto-Koshinetsu
region, including Kofu (Yamanashi
Prefecture) with 114 cm, Chichibu(Saitama Prefecture) with 98 cm, andMaebashi (Gunma Prefecture) with73 cm of snowfall.

Headquarters• Establishment of On-site Disaster Management

95

1,770

28

40

3 • Headquarters
Site inspection by Prime Minister Abe• Deployment of government survey team (fivetimes)• Invocation of Disaster Relief Act

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

Page A-13

Name of Disaster

Major Events

Human
Casualties(persons)

Houses Damaged (houses)

Fatalities/
Missing
Persons

Injured3

67

Completely
Half
Destroyed Destroyed

Remarks

Abovefloor
Flooding• Record heavy rains were recorded on

Okinawa Island.

2014 Typhoon 8(July 6-11, 2014)• Deployment of government survey team (three• Due to the effects of the moist

southerly wind surrounding thetyphoon and the seasonal rain front,some regions even far from thetyphoon received localized driving
rains.

14

3

331

times)• Invocation of Disaster Relief Act• Invocation of Act Concerning Support for the

Reconstruction of Livelihoods of Disaster Victims

Torrential Rains of August 2014

AppendixTyphoon 12
From the night of the 5th, heavy rains
were recorded in the Chugoku andTohoku regions. Especially in
Yamaguchi Prefecture, localized driving
rains of more than 100 mm per hour
were recorded in some places.
Typhoon 11
2014 Typhoon 12 & Heavy rains fell across a wide area from
11
Western Japan to Northern Japan.
(July 30 - August 11, Especially in Kochi Prefecture, total
2014)
rainfall from the 7th to the 11th, when
the heaviest rains fell, was more than
1,000 mm. Total rainfall from the
Shikoku region to the Tokai region was
more than 600 mm. Atmosphericconditions were extremely unstable,with extremely strong winds including
tornadoes in Tochigi Prefecture andother areas.

6

Extremely intense localized rains with
Heavy Rains fromthunder. The amount of rainfall that
August 15, 2014
fell during the 2 days of the 16th and(August 15-26, 2014) 17th set new records in places such as*Excludes Hiroshima Fukuchiyama City, Kyoto Prefecture,
Landslide on August and Takayama City, Gifu Prefecture,with heavy rains mainly in the Kinki,
20
Hokuriku, and Tokai regions.

8

80

7

7

929

Reconstruction of Livelihoods of Disaster Victims• Designation as extremely severe disaster

7

35

129

2,117

• Deployment of government survey team (twice)• Invocation of Disaster Relief Act• Invocation of Act Concerning Support for the

Reconstruction of Livelihoods of Disaster Victims• Designation as extremely severe disaster• Warm, moist air flowed in toward therain front, and extremely unstable
Hiroshima Landslide atmospheric conditions were
Disaster on August
recorded mainly in the Chugoku
20, 2014
region and northern Kyushu region.
(Disaster in• At 3:30 a.m. on the 20th, driving rains
Hiroshimaof approx. 120 mm per hour werePrefecture due torecorded in Hiroshima Prefecture,
heavy rains fromand heavy rains, including a new
August 19, 2014)
record set for the highest recorded
rainfall in a 24-hour period, wererecorded.

• Deployment of government survey team (twice)• Invocation of Disaster Relief Act• Invocation of Act Concerning Support for the• Establishment of Major Disaster Management

Headquarters• Establishment of On-site Disaster Management

Headquarters

74

44

133

122

1,301

• Site inspection by Prime Minister Abe• Deployment of government survey team (threetimes)• Invocation of Disaster Relief Act• Invocation of Act Concerning Support for the

Reconstruction of Livelihoods of Disaster Victims• Designation as extremely severe disaster• Volcanic tremors started at 11:41

a.m. on September 27, with aneruption on the same day around
11:52 a.m.
2014 Eruption of Mt. • Volcanic smoke descended the
Ontakesouthern slope and was recorded for(September 27,
more than 3 km. Therefore, a level 3
2014)
volcano warning (mountain access
restricted) was issued, with entry
within 4 km of the crater restricted.
• Many mountain climbers sufferedcasualties due to this eruption.
Earthquake with a
Seismic Source inNorthern Nagano
Prefecture(November 22,
2014)

Maximum seismic intensity of Lower 6.

Heavy Snows from
December 2014
(December 2014 March 2015)

Due to the effects of a strong winter air-pressure pattern as well as a lowpressure system and cold air, heavysnows fell on the mountainous areas of
the Japan Sea side from Northern
Japan to Eastern Japan.

• Establishment of Major Disaster Management

Headquarters

63

69

0

0

0

• Establishment of On-site Disaster Management

Headquarters• Deployment of government survey team (twice)• Invocation of Disaster Relief Act

0

46

50

92

0

• Site inspection by Prime Minister Abe• Deployment of government survey team (twice)• Invocation of Disaster Relief Act• Invocation of Act Concerning Support for the

Reconstruction of Livelihoods of Disaster Victims• Designation as extremely severe disaster

83

1,029

9

12

5

0

1

-

-

-

• Deployment of government survey team (once)• Invocation of Disaster Relief Act• An explosive eruption occurred atShingaku at 9:59 am on May 29.

• At 10:07 am, the JMA raised theKuchinoerabu-jima
Eruption in 2015
(May 29, 2015)*5

eruption warning level from 3 (entry
restricted) to 5 (evacuate).

• As a result of this eruption, the lava

flow reached as far as the coast, ash
shot up to more than 9,000 meters
above the crater, and ejecta wasscattered all around the mouth of thecrater.

• Installation of government on-sitecommunications office• Deployment of government survey team (once)• Invocation of Disaster Relief Act*1 Established by a Cabinet meeting decision, and therefore not based on the Disaster Countermeasures Basic Act.
*2 The number of damaged houses in the July 2012 Northern Kyushu Torrential Rains contains some duplications.
*3 The number of damaged houses due to heavy rains from June 21 to July 7, 2012 contains some duplications.
*4 Fatalities from the Great Hanshin-Awaji Earthquake and the Great East Japan Earthquake include earthquake-related fatalities.
*5 Status of the Kuchinoerabu-jima Eruption is as of June 3, 2015.
Source: Cabinet Office

Page A-14

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

Fig. A-11

Establishment of Extreme Disaster Management Headquarters and Major Disaster Management Headquarters
Name of Headquarters

1
2
3
4
5
6
7

Period of Establishment

Heavy Snowfall Major Disaster Management Headquarters
Jan. 29 - May 31, 1963
Niigata Earthquake Major Disaster Management Headquarters
Jun. 16 - Oct. 31, 1964
1965 Typhoon 23, 24, and 25 Major Disaster Management
Sep. 17 - Dec. 17, 1965
Headquarters
1966 Typhoon 24 and 26 Major Disaster Management Headquarters Sep. 26 - Dec. 27, 1966
1967 July and August Torrential Rains Major Disaster Management
Jul. 9 - Dec. 26, 1967
Headquarters
1968 Tokachi-oki Earthquake Major Disaster Management
May 16, 1968 - May 2, 1969
Headquarters
July 1972 Torrential Rains Major Disaster Management
Jul. 8 - Dec. 19, 1972
Headquarters
1976 Typhoon 17 Major Disaster Management Headquarters

91977 Mt. Usu Eruption Major Disaster Management Headquarters Aug. 11, 1977 - Dec. 4, 1979
1978 Izu-Oshima-kinkai Earthquake Major Disaster Management
Jan. 15 - Aug. 4, 1978
Headquarters
1978 Miyagi-ken-oki Earthquake Major Disaster Management
Jun. 13 - Nov. 28, 1978
Headquarters
1979 Typhoon 20 Major Disaster Management Headquarters
Oct. 20 - Dec. 4, 1979
July and August 1982 Torrential Rains Major Disaster Management
Jul. 24 - Dec. 24, 1982
Headquarters
1983 Nihon-kai-chubu Earthquake Major Disaster Management
May 26 - Dec. 23, 1983
Headquarters
July 1983 Torrential Rains Major Disaster Management
Jul. 23 - Dec. 23, 1983
Headquarters
1983 Miyake Island Eruption Major Disaster Management
Oct. 4, 1983 - Jun. 5, 1984
Headquarters
1984 Nagano-ken-seibu Earthquake Major Disaster Management
Sep. 16, 1984 - Feb. 19, 1985
Headquarters
1991 Mt. Unzen Eruption Major Disaster Management
Jun. 4, 1991 - Jun. 4, 1996
Headquarters
1993 Hokkaido-nansei-oki Earthquake Major Disaster Management
Jul. 13, 1993 - Mar. 31, 1996
Headquarters
August 1993 Torrential Rains Major Disaster Management
Aug. 9, 1993 - Mar. 15, 1994
Headquarters
1995 Great Hanshin-Awaji Earthquake Major Disaster Management Jan. 17, 1995 - Apr. 21, 2002
Headquarters

10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20

Sep. 13 - Dec. 10, 1976

21

Great Hanshin-Awaji Earthquake Extreme Disaster Management
Headquarters*1
1997 Diamond Grace Oil Spill Major Disaster Management
22
Headquarters
23 2000 Mt. Usu Eruption Major Disaster Management Headquarters

24

2000 Miyake Island Eruption and Niijima and Kozushima Island
Earthquake Emergency Management Headquarters
2000 Miyake Island Eruption Major Disaster Management
Headquarters*3

25 2004 Typhoon 23 Major Disaster Management Headquarters
2004 Mid Niigata Prefecture Earthquake Major Disaster
Management Headquarters
2011 Great East Japan Earthquake Extreme Disaster Management
27
Headquarters
26

Minister of State
Minister of State
Minister of State
Minister of State
Director General of National Land
Agency (NLA)
Director General of NLA
Director General of NLA
Director General of NLA
Director General of NLA
Director General of NLA
Director General of NLA
Director General of NLA
Director General of NLA
Director General of NLA
Director General of NLA
Director General of NLA
Director General of NLA
Director General of NLA↓
Minister of Great Hanshin-Awaji
Earthquake Measures↓
Director General of NLA↓
Minister of State for Disaster
Management

Jan. 17 - Apr. 28, 1995

Prime Minister

Jul. 2-11, 1997

Minister of Transport

Mar. 31, 2000 - Jun. 28, 2001*2
Aug. 29, 2000 - May 15, 2002
May 16, 2002 - Mar. 31, 2005
Oct. 21, 2004 - Mar. 31, 2007
Oct. 24, 2004 - Mar. 31, 2008
Mar. 11, 2011 -28 2011 Typhoon 12 Major Disaster Management Headquarters

Sep. 4, 2011 - Dec. 26, 2014

29 2014 Torrential Rains Major Disaster Management Headquarters

Feb. 18 - May 30, 2014

August 2014 Torrential Rains Major Disaster Management
30
Headquarters
2014 Mt. Ontake Eruption Major Disaster Management
31
Headquarters

Minister of State

Aug. 22, 2014 - Jan. 9, 2015
Sep. 28, 2014 -Section 2

8Manager of Headquarters
Minister of State
Minister of State

Director General of NLA↓
Minister of State for Disaster
Management
Director General of NLA↓
Minister of State for Disaster
Management
Minister of State for Disaster
Management
Minister of State for Disaster
Management
Prime Minister
Minister of State for Disaster
Management
Minister of State for Disaster
Management
Minister of State for Disaster
Management
Minister of State for Disaster
Management

Notes: The above are Extreme Disaster Management Headquarters and Major Disaster Management Headquarters based on the Disaster
Countermeasures Basic Act (Act No. 223 of 1961).
*1 Established within the Cabinet Office based on a Cabinet meeting resolution, not based on the Disaster Countermeasures Basic Act.
*2 Based on reports that the eruption had subsided. Upon dissolution of the Headquarters, the Mt. Usu Eruption Disaster Restoration and Recovery
Measures Council was established.
*3 The names of Niijima Island and Kozushima Island were changed with the conclusion of response measures.
Source: Cabinet Office

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

Page A-15

Fig. A-12

Deployment of Government Survey Teams (Since the Great Hanshin-Awaji Earthquake)
Deployment
Dates

Prefecture
SurveyedYear

Name of Disaster

1995

Jan. 17-18

Hyogo

1997

1995 Hyogo-ken-Nanbu Earthquake (Great HanshinAwaji Earthquake)
July 1997 Torrential Rains from Seasonal Rain Front

Jul. 11-12

1998

End of August 1998 Torrential Rains

Aug. 28

1999

2001

Heavy Rains Starting June 23, 1999
Heavy Rains from 1999 Typhoon 18 and Rain Front
2000 Eruption of Mt. Usu
2000 Tottori-seibu Earthquake
2001 Geiyo Earthquake

Jun. 30 - Jul. 1
Sep. 25
Mar. 31 - Apr. 1
Oct. 7Mar. 29

2003

July Seasonal Rain Front Torrential Rains

Jul. 22

Northern Miyagi Earthquake

Jul. 27

2003 Tokachi-oki Earthquake
July 2004 Niigata and Fukushima Torrential Rains

Sep. 26-27
Jul. 14

July 2004 Fukui Torrential Rains
2004 Typhoon 21

Jul. 15
Jul. 20
Oct. 1

2004 Typhoon 22
2004 Typhoon 23

Oct. 14
Oct. 22

2004 Mid Niigata Prefecture Earthquake

Oct. 22
Oct. 24

Fukuoka-ken-Seihou-oki Earthquake
Miyagi-ken-oki Earthquake

Mar. 20-21
Aug. 16-17

2005 Typhoon 14

Sep. 9Heavy Rains from Seasonal Rain Front Starting July 4

Jul. 212006 Typhoon 13

Jul. 25
Sep. 19

Tornado in Saroma, Hokkaido

Nov. 7-8

2007 Noto-hanto Earthquake

Mar. 25-26

Heavy Rains from Typhoon 4 and Seasonal Rain Front2007 Niigata Earthquake

Jul. 13
Jul. 162008 Iwate-Miyagi Inland Earthquake

Jun. 14-15

Kagoshima,
Kumamoto
Tochigi, Fukushima Parliamentary Vice-Minister of National
Land
Hiroshima
Director General of NLA
Kumamoto
Director General of NLA
Hokkaido
Director General of NLA
Tottori
Director General of NLA
Hiroshima, Ehime Parliamentary Vice-Minister of Cabinet
OfficeKumamoto,
Minister of State for Disaster
Kagoshima
Management
Miyagi
Minister of State for Disaster
Management
Hokkaido
State-Minister of the Cabinet OfficeNiigata
Minister of State for Disaster
Management
Fukushima
State-Minister of the Cabinet Office
Fukui
State-Minister of the Cabinet Office
Mie
Minister of State for Disaster
Management
ShizuokaState Minister of the Cabinet Office
Hyogo, Kyoto
Minister of State for Disaster
Management
Kagawa, Okayama State-Minister of the Cabinet OfficeNiigata
Minister of State for Disaster
Management
FukuokaState-Minister of the Cabinet OfficeMiyagiParliamentary Vice-Minister of Cabinet
OfficeMiyazaki
Minister of State for Disaster
Management
NaganoMinister of State for Disaster
Management
Kagoshima
State-Minister of the Cabinet OfficeMiyazaki
Minister of State for Disaster
Management
Hokkaido
Minister of State for Disaster
Management
Ishikawa
Minister of State for Disaster
Management
KumamotoState-Minister of the Cabinet OfficeNiigata
Minister of State for Disaster
Management
Iwate, Miyagi
Minister of State for Disaster
Management
Iwate, Aomori
Minister of State for Disaster
Management
Aichi
Minister of State for Disaster
Management
Yamaguchi
Minister of State for Disaster
Management
Fukuoka
Minister of State for Disaster
Management
Hyogo, Okayama
Minister of State for Disaster
Management
MiyagiState-Minister of the Cabinet Office

2000

Appendix

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

Earthquake Epicentered Along Northern Coast of Iwate Jul. 24
Prefecture
End of August 2008 Torrential Rains
Aug. 29
2009

July 2009 Torrential Rains in Chubu and Northern
KyushuJul. 22
Jul. 2720112009 Typhoon 9

Aug. 112011 Tohoku Earthquake and Tsunami (Great East
Japan Earthquake)

Mar. 11

July 2011 Niigata and Fukushima Torrential Rains

Mar. 12Mar. 12
Jul. 312011 Typhoon 12

Aug. 2
Sep. 4-9
Sep. 62012

May 2012 Gust
July 2012 Torrential Rains in Northern Kyushu

May 7
Jul. 13-14
Jul. 21-22

Page A-16

Team Leader
Director General of National Land Agency(NLA)
Director General of NLA

Iwate
State-Minister of the Cabinet Office
Fukushima
Parliamentary Vice-Minister of FinanceNiigata, Fukushima Minister of State for Disaster
Management
Fukushima
State-Minister of the Cabinet Office
Wakayama, Nara, Parliamentary Vice-Minister of Cabinet
Mie
OfficeNara
Minister of Land, Infrastructure,
Transport and Tourism
Ibaraki, TochigiState-Minister of the Cabinet Office
Kumamoto, Oita
Minister of State for Disaster
Management
Fukuoka, Oita,
Minister of State for Disaster
Kagoshima
Management

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

Year
2013

Name of Disaster

Deployment
Dates

Heavy Snowfall Starting End of November 2013

Mar. 4-5

Hokkaido

Heavy Rains with Seasonal Rain Front

Jul. 29-30

Shimane,
Yamaguchi
Yamagata,
Fukushima
NiigataAug. 3
Aug. 3
Aug. 3
Aug. 9Tornadoes on September 2 and 4

Sep. 3
Sep. 4Heavy Rains from Typhoon 18

Sep. 17
Sep. 18
Sep. 18
Sep. 19
Sep. 19-20
Oct. 19

Typhoon 26
Heavy Winter Snowfall

Feb. 6
Feb. 17Mar. 7

Typhoon 8 and Seasonal Rain Front

Mar. 1Mar. 15
Jul. 11
Jul. 12
Jul. 14-15

Typhoon 12 & 11

Aug. 11-13
Aug. 11

Heavy Rains Starting August 15

Aug. 18-19
Aug. 19

Heavy Rains in Hiroshima Prefecture Starting August
19

Aug. 20-21
Sep. 6
Sep. 17

Mt. Ontake Eruption

Sep. 28
Oct. 11

Earthquake Epicentered in Northern Nagano
Prefecture

Nov. 23
Dec. 2

2015

Heavy Winter Snowfall

Dec. 9Eruption of Kuchinoerabu-jima

May 29-30

Team Leader
Parliamentary Vice-Minister of Cabinet
Office, Special Advisor to the Prime
MinisterState-Minister of the Cabinet Office

Parliamentary Vice-Minister of Cabinet
OfficeParliamentary Vice-Minister ofAgriculture, Forestry and Fisheries
Iwate, Miyagi
Parliamentary Vice-Minister of Land,
Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism
Shimane,Minister of State for DisasterYamaguchi
Management
Akita
State-Minister of the Cabinet Office
Iwate, Akita
Parliamentary Vice-Minister of Cabinet
OfficeSaitamaParliamentary Vice-Minister of Cabinet
OfficeChiba
Parliamentary Vice-Minister of Cabinet
OfficeSaitamaParliamentary Vice-Minister of Cabinet
OfficeKyoto
Acting Minister of State for Disaster
Management
Shiga, Fukui
State-Minister of the Cabinet Office
MieParliamentary Vice-Minister of Cabinet
OfficeAomori, Iwate, Akita Special Advisor to the Prime Minister
Oshimacho (Tokyo) Minister of State for Disaster
Management
Akita
State-Minister of the Cabinet Office
Yamanashi
Parliamentary Vice-Minister of Cabinet
OfficeTokyo, Yamanashi State-Minister of the Cabinet Office,State-Minister of the Environment
SaitamaState-Minister of the Cabinet Office
Nagano, Gunma
State-Minister of the Cabinet Office
NaganoParliamentary Vice-Minister of Cabinet
OfficeYamagata
Parliamentary Vice-Minister of Cabinet
OfficeOkinawa
Parliamentary Vice-Minister of Cabinet
OfficeTokushima, Kouchi State-Minister of the Cabinet OfficeTochigi
Parliamentary Vice-Minister of Cabinet
OfficeHyogo, Kyoto
State-Minister of the Cabinet Office
Gifu
Parliamentary Vice-Minister of Cabinet
OfficeHiroshima
Minister of State for Disaster
Management
Hiroshima
Minister of State for Disaster
Management
Hiroshima
Parliamentary Vice-Minister of Cabinet
OfficeNaganoState-Minister of the Cabinet Office
NaganoMinister of State for Disaster
Management
NaganoParliamentary Vice-Minister of Cabinet
OfficeNaganoMinister of State for Disaster
Management
Tokushima
Minister of State for Disaster
Management
Kagoshima
State-Minister of the Cabinet Office

Source: Cabinet Office

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

Page A-17

Section 2

Aug. 13
Aug. 132014

Prefecture
SurveyedFig. A-13

Invocation History of the Disaster Relief Act (Since the Great Hanshin-Awaji Earthqauke)
As of March 31, 2015

Year
1995

Name of Disaster1995 Hyogo-ken-Nanbu Earthquake (Great Hanshin-Awaji
Earthquake)
Niigata-ken-Hokubu Earthquake
July 1995 Seasonal Rain Front Torrential Rains

Appendix

1997

July 1997 Seasonal Rain Front Torrential Rains
1997 Typhoon 19

1998

Early August 1998 Torrential Rains
End of August 1998 Torrential Rains

Date of Invocation
Jan. 17
Apr.1
Jul.11
Jul. 11/12
Jul. 1
Sep.16

1998 Typhoon 5
1998 Typhoon 7

Aug. 4
Aug. 27
Aug. 28
Aug. 27/30
Aug. 28
Aug. 3
Sep. 16
Sep. 22

Heavy Rains of September 23–25, 1998
1998 Typhoon 10
Heavy Rains Starting June 23, 1999

Sep. 25
Oct. 17
Jun. 29

Torrential Rains in Tsushima Region on August 27–28, 1999
Heavy Rains from 1999 Typhoon 18 and Rain Front

Aug. 27
Sep. 24

Tokaimura Criticality Accident
Heavy Rains Starting October 27, 1999

Sep. 3Oct. 28

2000 Eruption of Mt. Usu
2000 Miyake Is. Eruption and Niijima and Kozushima Is.
Earthquake
2000 Niijima and Kozushima Is. Earthquake
2000 Typhoon 3
Heavy Rains from 2000 Autumn Rain Front and Typhoon 14

Mar. 29
Jun. 26

2000 Tottori-ken-Seibu Earthquake

Oct. 6

2001

2001 Geiyo Earthquake

Mar. 24

2002

Heavy Rains of September 6, 2001
2001 Typhoon 16
2002 Typhoon 6

2003

July Seasonal Rain Front Torrential Rains

Sep. 6
Sep. 8/11
Jul. 1
Jul. 11
Jul. 19
Jul. 2
Jul. 26
Aug. 9Jul. 13
Jul. 18
Jul. 31
Aug. 17

1999

2000

2004

Page A-18

Northern Miyagi Earthquake
2003 Typhoon 10
July 2004 Niigata and Fukushima Torrential Rains
July 2004 Fukui Torrential Rains
2004 Typhoon 10, Typhoon 11, and Related Heavy Rains
2004 Typhoon 15 and Heavy Rains from Rain Front

Jul. 1,15
Jul. 8Sep. 11

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

Hyogo
Osaka
Niigata
Niigata
NaganoKagoshima
Oita
MiyazakiKagoshima
Niigata
Fukushima
IbarakiTochigi
SaitamaShizuoka
Saitama
Fukui
Hyogo
Nara
Kochi
Okayama
Hiroshima
Fukuoka
Nagasaki
Yamaguchi
Fukuoka
Kumamoto
Ibaraki
Aomori
Iwate
Hokkaido
Tokyo

No. ofMunicipalities
Invoking the Act
20
5
1
2
2
1
1
4
1
3
3
1
4
1
1
1
1
1
1
6
4
2
1
1
9
1
9
2
1
1
3
1

Tokyo
SaitamaAichi
Gifu
Tottori
ShimaneHiroshima
Ehime
Kochi
Okinawa
Iwate
Gifu
Fukuoka
Kumamoto
Miyagi
Hokkaido
Niigata
Fukui
Tokushima
Ehime
Kochi

2
1
21
1
6
2
13
1
2
2
1
1
5
1
5
3
7
5
2
1
1

Prefecture

Year

Name of Disaster2004 2004 Typhoon 16

Aug. 3

2004 Typhoon 18
2004 Typhoon 21

2004 Typhoon 22
2004 Typhoon 23

2004 Mid Niigata Prefecture Earthquake
Fukuoka-ken-Seihou-oki Earthquake
2005 Typhoon 14

2006 Heavy Rains

2006

2007

2008

June 2006 Extended Rain Landslide Disaster
Heavy Rains from Seasonal Rain Front Starting July 42006 Typhoon 13
Tornado in Saroma, Hokkaido
2007 Noto-hanto Earthquake
Heavy Rains from Typhoon 4 and Seasonal Rain Front2007 Niigata Earthquake
2007 Typhoon 52007 Heavy Rains from Typhoon 11 and Rain Front
Low-Pressure System from February 23 to 24
2008 Iwate-Miyagi Inland Earthquake
Heavy Rains Starting July 28

2009

End of August 2008 Torrential Rains
July 2009 Torrential Rains in Chubu and Northern Kyushu
2009 Typhoon 920102010 Heavy Rains from Seasonal Rain Front

2011

Heavy Rains in Amami Region, Kagoshima Prefecture
Heavy Snowfall Starting November 2010

Mt. Kirishima (Shinmoedake) Eruption

Prefecture

Okayama
KagawaEhime
MiyazakiSep. 7
Hiroshima
Sep. 29
Mie
Ehime
Hyogo
Oct. 9Shizuoka
Oct. 2Miyazaki
Tokushima
Kagawa
Hyogo
Gifu
Kyoto
Oct. 23
NiigataMar. 2
Fukuoka
Sep. 4Tokyo
Sep. 6
Yamaguchi
Kochi
MiyazakiSep. 4
KagoshimaJan. 6, Jan. 8, Jan. Niigata
11, Jan. 13
Jan. 7, Jan. 12
NaganoJun. 15
Okinawa
Jul. 19
NaganoJul. 22
Kagoshima
MiyazakiSep. 17
MiyazakiNov. 7
HokkaidoMar. 25
Ishikawa
Jul. 6
Kumamoto
Jul. 16
NiigataAug. 2MiyazakiSep. 17
Akita
Feb. 24
ToyamaJun. 14
Iwate
MiyagiJul. 28
ToyamaIshikawa
Aug. 28
Aichi
Jul. 21
Yamaguchi
Jul. 24
Fukuoka
Aug. 9
Hyogo
Okayama
Jul. 14
Hiroshima
Jul. 15
Yamaguchi
Jul. 16
Hiroshima
Oct. 20
KagoshimaJan. 27
NiigataJan. 30
NiigataJan. 31
NiigataJan. 30
MiyazakiFeb. 10
Miyazaki

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

No. ofMunicipalities
Invoking the Act
9
13
1
2
2
5
4
2
1
1
4
9
18
1
7
54
1
2
2
1
13
1
11
8
2
3
6
1
1
1
7
1
10
1
2
1
5
2
1
1
2
2
1
3
1
2
1
1
3
4
2
3
1
1

Page A-19

Section 2

2005

Date of Invocation

Year
2011

Appendix

2012

2013

Page A-20

Name of Disaster2011 Tohoku Earthquake and Tsunami (Great East Japan
Earthquake)

Date of Invocation
Mar. 11

July 2011 Niigata and Fukushima Torrential Rains

Jul. 29

2011 Typhoon 12

Sep. 2

2011 Typhoon 15

Sep. 3
Sep. 21

Heavy Winter Snowfall

Jan. 14Jan. 28
Jan.31Feb. 1

May 2012 Gust

Feb. 3Feb. 4May 6

Heavy Rains Starting July 3

Jul. 3Heavy Rains from Seasonal Rain Front Starting July 11

Jul. 12

Heavy Rains Starting August 13
2012 Typhoon 16
November 27 Destructive Snow Storm
Heavy Winter Snowfall

Jul. 13
Aug. 14
Sep. 15
Nov. 27
Feb. 22
Feb. 25

Snow Melt Landslide
Heavy Rains Starting July 22
Heavy Rains Starting July 28

Feb. 28
May 1
Jul. 22
Jul. 28

Heavy Rains Starting August 9Aug. 9Heavy Rains Starting August 23
September 2 Gust
2013 Typhoon 18

Aug. 23
Sep. 2
Sep. 162013 Typhoon 26

Oct. 16

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

Aomori
Iwate
Miyagi
Fukushima
IbarakiNo. ofMunicipalities
Invoking the Act
2
34
35
59
37

Tochigi
Chiba
Tokyo
Niigata
Fukushima
Mie
Nara
Wakayama
Okayama
Tottori
Aomori
Fukushima
Niigata
Niigata
Niigata
Aomori
NaganoNiigata
Niigata
IbarakiTochigi
Fukuoka

15
8
47
15
9
3
10
5
1
2
1
1
2
4
1
2
5
4
1
4
3
1

Oita
Kumamoto
Oita
Fukuoka
Kyoto
Kagoshima
Hokkaido
Niigata
Niigata
Yamagata
Yamagata
Yamagata
Yamagata
Yamaguchi
ShimaneAkita
Iwate
Shimane
Saitama
Saitama
Kyoto
Tokyo
Chiba

2
5
1
7
1
1
7
8
1
1
1
1
4
3
1
3
1
1
2
1
2
1
1

Prefecture

Year
2014

Heavy Winter Snowfall

Date of Invocation

Prefecture

Heavy Rains from 2014 Typhoon 8

Feb. 15
Feb. 15
Feb. 15
Feb. 17
Feb. 17
Feb. 18
Feb. 18
Feb. 21
Jul. 92014 Typhoon 122014 Typhoon 11

Aug. 3
Aug. 9Heavy Rains Starting August 15, 2014

Aug. 17

NaganoGunma
Yamanashi
Gunma
Saitama
Gunma
Yamanashi
Yamanashi
NaganoYamagata
Kochi
Kochi
Tokushima
Kyoto

Heavy Rains Starting August 19, 2014
Damage Related to Mt. Ontake Eruption
Nagano Prefecture Kamishiro Fault Earthquake
Heavy Snowfall Starting December 5
Eruption of Kuchinoerabu-jima

Aug. 20
Sep. 27
Nov. 22
Dec. 8May 29

Hyogo
Hiroshima
NaganoNaganoTokushima
Kagoshima

No. ofMunicipalities
Invoking the Act
4
1
16
7
7
1
3
2
1
1
1
3
1
1
1
1
2
3
3
1

Source: Cabinet Office

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

Page A-21

Section 2

2015

Name of DisasterFig. A-14

Actual Designations of Extremely Severe Disasters in the Past Five Years
Main DisasterDisaster Name Affected
Regions Art.
3, 4

Title of Legislation

Art.
5

Main Applicable Measures
Art. Art. Art. Art.
Art. Art.
6
7
11.2 12,16
17
13

Ordinance on the Extremely Severe
Disaster Designation and Identification of Tsunami of Feb. Iwate, Miyagi
Essential Response Measures for the28, 2010
Pref.
Tsunami of February 28, 2010

Art.
19

Art.
24

○
*2

Appendix

Ordinance on the Extremely Severe
Disaster Designation and Identification of
Seasonal Rain
Essential Response Measures for
Torrential Rains from June 11 to July 19, Front
2010

Gifu, Hiroshima
and Saga Pref.

○

Ordinance on the Extremely Severe
Disaster Designation and Identification of
Essential Response Measures for theDistricts of Yamakita-machi, Ashigara Kami-gun, Kanagawa Prefecture, and Oyama- Typhoon 9cho, Sunto-gun, Shizuoka Prefecture Dueto Rainstorms and Torrential Rains from
September 4 to 9, 2010

Kanagawa and
Shizuoka Pref.

●

●

●

○

○

Ordinance on the Extremely Severe
Disaster Designation and Identification of
Essential Response Measures for Amami
Torrential Rains Kagoshima Pre.
City, Kagoshima Prefecture Due to
Torrential Rains from October 18 to 25,
2010

●

●

Aomori, Iwate,
Ordinance on the Extremely Severe
Miyagi,Disaster Designation and Identification of Great East Japan Fukushima,
Essential Response Measures for the
Earthquake
Ibaraki, Tochigi,
Great East Japan Earthquake
Chiba, Niigata
and Nagano Pref.

○○

Ordinance on the Extremely Severe
Disaster Designation and Identification of 2010 Regional
Essential Response Measures for Specified Disasters
Regions in 2010

―

●

●

●

Ordinance on the Extremely Severe
Disaster Designation and Identification of
Essential Response Measures for Aki City, Typhoon 6
Kochi Prefecture Due to Rainstorms from
July 17 to 20, 2011

Mie, Wakayama
and Kochi Pref.

●

●

●

July 2011
Niigata/
Niigata andFukushima
Fukushima Pref.
Torrential Rains

○

○

○

○

○

○

○

Ordinance on the Extremely Severe
Disaster Designation and Identification of
Essential Response Measures for
Torrential Rains from July 24 to August 1,
2011

Ordinance on the Extremely Severe
Disaster Designation and Identification of
Essential Response Measures for
Typhoon 12
Rainstorms and Torrential Rains from
August 29 to September 7, 2011

Mie, Nara andWakayama Pref.

Ordinance on the Extremely Severe
Disaster Designation and Identification of
Essential Response Measures for
Typhoon 15
Rainstorms and Torrential Rains from
September 15 to 23, 2011

Fukushima, Gifuand Hyogo Pref.

Ordinance on the Extremely Severe
Disaster Designation and Identification of 2011 Regional
Essential Response Measures for Specified Disasters
Regions in 2011

―

●

●

Ordinance on the Extremely Severe
Disaster Designation and Identification of Seasonal Rain Fukuoka,
Essential Response Measures for
Front/Typhoon Kumamoto andTorrential Rains and Rainstorms from June 4
Oita Pref.
8 to July 23, 2011○○

Ordinance on the Extremely Severe
Disaster Designation and Identification of 2012 Regional
Essential Response Measures for Specified Disasters
Regions in 2012●●

Ordinance on the Extremely Severe
Disaster Designation and Identification of Seasonal Rain Iwate, Yamagata,
Essential Response Measures for
Front / Typhoon Shimane andTorrential Rains and Rainstorms from June 4 / Typhoon 7 Yamaguchi Pref.
8 to August 9, 2013●○

Ordinance on the Extremely Severe
Disaster Designation and Identification of
Essential Response Measures for theDistricts of Gotsu City and Onan-cho, Ochi- Torrential Rains Shimane Pref.
gun, Shimane Prefecture Due to Heavy
Rains from August 23 to 25, 2013●●

Page A-22―

Other
Applicable
Measures

○

○
*2

○

○

○

●

○

●

○

○

○

○

○ ○

○

○

○

○

○

●

○

●

○

○

○

○

●

○

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

○
*1

●

Title of Legislation

Main Applicable Measures
Main
DisasterDisaster Name Affected Regions Art.
Art. Art. Art. Art.
3, 4 Art. 5 Art. 6 Art. 7 11.2 12,
16
17
13

Ordinance on the Extremely Severe
Disaster Designation and Identification of
Essential Response Measures for
Typhoon 18
Rainstorms and Torrential Rains from
September 15 to 17, 2013

Fukui, Shiga andKyoto Pref.

●○

Ordinance on the Extremely Severe
Disaster Designation and Identification of
Essential Response Measures for the
Typhoon 26
District of Oshima-machi, Tokyo
Prefecture Due to Rainstorms on October
15 and 16, 2013

Tokyo

●

●

Ordinance on the Extremely Severe
Disaster Designation and Identification of 2013 Regional
Essential Response Measures for Specified Disasters
Regions in 2013

―

●

●

○

○

●

●

●

●

●

●

○

○

Section 2

Ordinance on the Extremely Severe
Disaster Designation and Identification of
Essential Response Measures for the
Seasonal Rain Nagano andDistricts of Nagiso-machi, Kiso-gun,Front/Typhoon Miyazaki Pref.
Nagano Prefecture, and Shiiba-son,
8
Higashi Usuki-gun, Miyazaki Prefecture
Due to Rainstorms and Torrential Rains on
July 9 and 10, 2014
Torrential Rains Hokkaido, Kyoto,
Ordinance on the Extremely Severe
Hyogo, Osaka,
Disaster Designation and Identification of Caused by
Typhoon 11/
Nara, Hiroshima,
Essential Response Measures for
Tokushima,
Rainstorms and Heavy Rains from July 30 Typhoon 12/
Seasonal Rain Ehime, and Kochi
to August 25, 2014
Front
Pref.
Ordinance on the Extremely Severe
Disaster Designation and Identification of
Essential Response Measures for the
Typhoon 19
Hyogo Pref.
Districts of Sumoto City and Awaji City,
Hyogo Prefecture Due to Rainstorms on
October 13 and 14, 2014

Art.
19

Other
ApplicArt. able
24 Measu
res

●

○

○

○

○

○

●

●

Ordinance on the Extremely Severe
Disaster Designation and Identification of
Essential Response Measures for the
Earthquake ofDistricts of Ikeda-cho and Otari-mura,Nov. 22, 2014
Kitaazumi-gun, Nagano Prefecture Due tothe Earthquake of November 22, 2014

Nagano Pref.

●

●

●

Ordinance on the Extremely Severe
Disaster Designation and Identification of 2014 Regional
Essential Response Measures for Specified Disasters
Regions in 2014

―

●

●

●

Ordinance on the Extremely Severe
Disaster Designation and Identification of
Miyake Island
Essential Response Measures for theDistrict of Miyake-mura, Tokyo Prefecture Volcanic
Due to Volcanic Phenomena from 2000 to Phenomena
2014*3

Miyakemura,
Tokyo

●

●

●

●

○: Indicates a national disaster. ●: Indicates a regional disaster.
National Disasters: Region is not specified, the disaster itself is specified
Regional Disasters: Disaster is specified at the municipal level*1 Public works facilities were considered as regional disaster*2 Limited to portions concerning Item No. 3*3 The eruption started in 2000 and was designated an Extreme Regional Disaster in March 2003, but as the disaster continued, the disaster period
was extended each year
The main applicable measures are the measures listed below
prescribed in the Act on Special Financial Support to Deal with
Extremely Severe Disasters:Art. 3, 4: Special financial support for disaster recovery projects for
public works facilities
Art. 5: Special measures on subsidies for disaster recovery projects for
agricultural landArt. 6: Special cases of subsidies for disaster recovery projects for
agricultural, forestry, and fisheries shared-used facilities
Art. 7.3: Special financial support for disaster recovery projects forplant and animal aquaculture facilities
Art. 11.2: Subsidies for disaster recovery projects for forests
Art. 12, 13: Special subsidies for small and medium-sized enterprises
Art 16.: Subsidies for disaster recovery projects for public social andeducational facilities
Art. 17: Subsidies for disaster recovery projects for private school
facilities
Art. 19: Special cases of cost coverage for projects implemented bymunicipalities to prevent infectious diseases
Art. 24: Inclusion of funds for the redemption of principal and interest
related to small disaster bonds in the standard budget request“Other applicable measures” refers to the following measuresprescribed in the Act on Special Financial Support to Deal with
Extremely Severe Disasters:Art. 8: Application of interim measures related to financing for
agricultural, forestry, and fishery operators who are victims of natural
disastersArt. 9: Subsidies for projects to remove deposited earth and sandconducted by forestry associations
Art. 10: Subsidies for projects to remove floodwater conducted by land
improvement districts
Art. 11: Subsidies for construction expenses for shared-use small
fishing boats
Art. 14: Subsidies for disaster reconstruction projects for facilities
including business cooperatives
Art. 20: Special cases of government loans based on the Act for the
Welfare of Fatherless Families and Widows
Art. 22: Special cases of subsidies for public housing construction
projects for victims
Art. 25: Special cases of paying job seeker benefits based on the
Employment Insurance Act

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

Page A-23

Fig. A-15

Response of Government Ministries and Agencies to Major Disasters Since 201415-1: February 2014 Heavy Snowfall(1) Damage
In February 2014, low-pressure systems moved across Japan’s southern coast and dropped heavy snow across a wide
area along the Pacific Coast on two occasions, in early February and then again in mid-February. From February 14 to
16 in particular, the Kanto-Koshin region received record snowfall that substantially surpassed the previous record for
greatest snow depth.

Appendix

This disaster caused snow-removal operation accidents, largely related to the clearing of snow from roofs, which
resulted in 26 fatalities and 701 casualties. Damage to houses included 16 houses completely destroyed, 46 houses half
destroyed, and 585 houses partially damaged. The heavy snow that began to fall on February 14 also cut off more than
6,000 households in some regions of Yamanashi and Nagano prefectures and elsewhere, and caused many vehicles tobecome stuck in the snow.

(2) Response from Government Ministries and Agencies
On February 6, the government sent a survey team headed by a State-Minister of Cabinet Office to Akita Prefecture tosurvey the damage and local issues caused by the heavy snow.
In the heavy snow that started falling February 14, the government held an Inter-Agency Disaster Alert Meeting before
the snow falls. The Minister of State for Disaster Management called on the public to refrain from nonessential travel
and to return home earlier than usual, and confirmed with the relevant ministries and agencies that the snow-removal
operational structure was in place and that all possible preparations were being taken to manage traffic hazards aswell as other matters. Based on this, the relevant ministries and agencies conducted activities including snow removal,
rescue operations, and the transport of goods. In addition, an Inter-Agency Disaster Management Meeting was held on
the 16th to confirm the status of the response. On the 17th, a government survey team headed by the ParliamentaryVice-Minister of Cabinet Office was deployed to Yamanashi Prefecture, and disaster management meetings attended
by the relevant ministries and agencies were held twice to coordinate government support.
Then on the 18th, in light of the situation in local areas including villages that had been cut off for more than threedays, the Prime Minister ordered the establishment of the 2014 Heavy Snowfall Major Disaster Management
Headquarters, headed by the Minister of State for Disaster Management, based on the Disaster Countermeasures
Basic Act. In addition, the On-site Major Disaster Management Headquarters, headed by the Parliamentary ViceMinister of Cabinet Office, was established in Yamanashi Prefecture.
In conjunction with this, National On-site Disaster Management Offices were set up in Gunma Prefecture and Saitama
Prefecture to coordinate emergency response countermeasures.
Based on requests for disaster deployment from the prefectures of Miyagi, Fukushima, Gunma, Saitama, Tokyo,
Yamanashi, Nagano, and Shizuoka, a total of some 5,060 Self-Defense Forces personnel (number of people actuallymobilized on the ground) conducted rescue operations and transported supplies. A total of some 420 TEC-FORCE
members and some 230 snowplows from the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism were also
dispatched each day to conduct support activities including snow-removal operations.
The Disaster Relief Act was invoked for Annaka City; Fujioka City; Ueno Town, Tano District; Kanna Town, Tano District;Shimonita Town, Kanra District; Nanmoku Town, Kanra District; Takayama Village, Agatsuma District; Higashiagatsuma
Town, Agatsuma District; and Numata City in Gunma Prefecture; China City; Karuizawa Town, Kitasaku District; Fujimi
Town, Suwa District; and Miyota Town, Kitasaku District in Nagano Prefecture; Kofu City; Fujiyoshida City; Tsuru City;
Otsuki City; Nirasaki City; Fuefuki City; Uenohara City; Ichikawamisato Town, Nishiyatsushiro District; Hayakawa Town,
Minamikoma District; Minobu Town, Minamikoma District; Oshino Village, Minamitsuru District; Yamanakako Village,
Minamitsuru District; Narusawa Village, Minamitsuru District; Fujikawaguchiko Town, Minamitsuru District; Kosuge
Village, Kitatsuru District; Tabayama Village, Kitatsuru District; Hokuto City; Koshu City; Nishikatsura Town,
Minamitsuru District; Minami-Alps City; and Doshi Village, Minamitsuru District in Yamanashi Prefecture; and Chichibu
City; Hanno City; Yokoze Town, Chichibu District; Minano Town, Chichibu District; Nagatoro Town, Chichibu District;
Ogano Town, Chichibu District; and Kamikawa Town, Kodama District in Saitama Prefecture.

Page A-24

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

15-2: 2014 Typhoon No. 8(1) Damage
Typhoon 8, which formed at 3:00 a.m. on July 4, 2014 in the vicinity of the Mariana Islands, headed north between
Okinawa Island and Miyako Island on the 8th while maintaining its large size and very strong strength. It subsequently
switched to a more easterly course over the sea west of Kyushu, making landfall before 7:00 a.m. on July 10 near
Akune City, Kagoshima Prefecture. Typhoon 8 followed the southern coast of Honshu toward the east and was
downgraded to an extratropical cyclone in the sea off of Fukushima Prefecture at 9:00 a.m. on July 11. In addition, theseasonal rain front gradually moved northward from Western Japan to Northern Japan from the 6th to the 11th.

With the approach of Typhoon 8, the Japan Meteorological Agency issued an emergency warning and its highest-level
warning for high winds, high waves, high tides, and heavy rains for the Miyako Island and Okinawa Island regions.
Evacuation orders were also issued for a combined 1,300 households, comprised of more than 4,100 persons, inYamagata, Niigata, and Gifu prefectures.
Typhoon 8 and the seasonal rain front caused damage including sediment disasters, flood damage, and river flooding.
A total of three fatalities were reported in Ehime, Nagano, and Fukushima prefectures, including one death from asediment disaster in Nagano Prefecture. Above-floor and below-floor level flooding of houses was reported in various
regions, with a combined total of more than 1,000 houses suffering flood damage in Okinawa, Niigata, and Yamagata
prefectures. Other damage to houses included damage from sediment disasters. Power outages, disrupted telephoneservice, damage to water service, and transportation blockages, including suspended train service and canceled flights
and ferry service, were also reported, with damage in Okinawa Prefecture including seawall damage and destruction.

(2) Response from Government Ministries and Agencies
On July 7, the Prime Minister instructed the relevant ministries and agencies to (1) provide citizens with accurate andtimely information on heavy rains, windstorms, and high waves, (2) take all possible prior countermeasures including
support for evacuating residents through close cooperation among the relevant ministries and agencies, and (3) use
the full power of the government to take disaster response measures when damaged was sustained.
On the same day, an Inter-Agency Disaster Alert Meeting attended by the Chief Cabinet Secretary was held to discuss
the weather forecast and the status of the response by various ministries and agencies. Based on instructions from thePrime Minister, it was confirmed that extreme vigilance should be exercised in monitoring the situation. Directly after
the meeting, the Minister of State for Disaster Management called on citizens to prepare for heavy rains and highwinds accompanying the approach of Typhoon 8 and the effects of the seasonal rain front.
On July 10, the relevant ministries and agencies held an Inter-Agency Disaster Management Meeting to discuss the
response to the heavy rains from Typhoon 8, where they confirmed that all possible preparations for priorcountermeasures would be made, including support for evacuating residents based on instructions from the Prime
Minister. It was also confirmed that (1) based on the intent of the revised Disaster Countermeasures Basic Act, thenational government would cooperate closely with local governments and give appropriate advice regarding
evacuations, (2) damage status data and other information would be shared among the relevant ministries andagencies, (3) efforts would be made to prevent the damage from being exacerbated in the disaster-affected regions
and appropriate measures, such as emergency restoration measures, would be taken as necessary, and (4) based on
the forecast of heavy rains due to Typhoon 8 and the seasonal rain front, the government would continue to exercise
extreme vigilance in monitoring the situation.
On July 11, a government survey team headed by the Parliamentary Vice-Minister of Cabinet Office for Disaster
Management was deployed to Nagano Prefecture. It was also deployed to Yamagata Prefecture the next day (July 12).
The team exchanged opinions with leaders of local governments in the disaster-affected areas and others, andsurveyed the disaster-affected areas. From July 14 to 15, a government survey team headed by the Parliamentary ViceMinister of Cabinet Office for Disaster Management was deployed to Okinawa Prefecture.

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

Page A-25

Section 2

During this time, record heavy rains were observed in the Okinawa Island region, and even regions far away from thetyphoon experienced intense localized rainfall due to the effects of the humid, southerly winds around the typhoonand the seasonal rain front. As the typhoon approached land, high winds were recorded mainly in Okinawa, Amami,
and southern Kyushu, with violent winds recorded in some areas of the Okinawa region.

In addition, a total of some 180 TEC-FORCE members from the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism,
as well as a total of some 330 vehicles/day of machinery and other vehicles used for disaster management, were
deployed to survey the damage conditions and conduct emergency response and restoration operations.
Due to the effects of Typhoon 8 and the seasonal rain front, the Disaster Relief Act and the Act on Support for
Reconstructing Livelihoods of Disaster Victims were invoked in Nagiso Town, Nagano Prefecture, and Nanyo City,
Yamagata Prefecture (July 9).

15-3: August 2014 Torrential Rains (Hiroshima Sediment Disaster)

Appendix(1) Damage
There was a series of storm and flood disasters in the summer of 2014 caused by typhoons and heavy rains. From July
31 to August 11, Typhoon 12 and Typhoon 11 approached the Japanese Islands one after another, and from August 5
to 26, the rain front stalled near Japan. From July 30 to August 26, warm and very humid air continuously flowed into
the region around Japan. Consecutive days of heavy rains were experienced in various regions nationwide due to theeffects of these typhoons and the rain front, and windstorms were recorded mainly in Okinawa, Amami, and WesternJapan where Typhoons 12 and 11 approached and/or made landfall.
Typhoon 12 and Typhoon 11 caused human casualties that included six fatalities in the prefectures of Tokushima,
Yamaguchi, Shimane, Wakayama, and Aichi, and caused structural damage to more than 7,000 houses in regions
nationwide, concentrated in the Shikoku region.
The heavy rains from the rain front that started around August 15 resulted in combined human casualties of eightfatalities in the prefectures of Fukuoka, Hyogo, Kyoto, Ishikawa, and Hokkaido. They also caused damage to more than
8,000 houses in regions nationwide, concentrated in Kyoto and Hyogo prefectures.
From August 19 to 20, warm, humid air flowed in toward the rain front, creating unstable atmospheric conditions in
the Chugoku and northern Kyushu regions. In Hiroshima Prefecture, in particular, intense rains of approximately 120
mm per hour were recorded from before dawn to daybreak on August 20. In addition, heavy rains set a new record forthe greatest amount of rainfall in 24 hours. The region suffered extreme damage due to the effects of these heavy
rains, including sediment disasters in more than 166 locations within Hiroshima City. This event caused 74 fatalities,
and some 2,300 people were forced to evacuate.

(2) Response from Government Ministries and Agencies
The following describes the response of ministries, agencies, and other government bodies to the Hiroshima sedimentdisasters (Hiroshima City, Hiroshima Prefecture) that occurred on August 20.
At 6:30 a.m. on August 20, the Prime Minister instructed the relevant ministries and agencies to (1) immediately
ascertain the damage and take emergency disaster response measures through concerted, all-out government efforts
to save lives and provide relief to disaster victims, (2) closely cooperate with relevant ministries and agencies to take all
possible measures to support the evacuation of residents, and (3) continue to provide accurate information regarding
the heavy rains to citizens, and to take comprehensive steps to prevent the disaster from escalating.
At 10:00 a.m. on the same day, the relevant ministries and agencies held an Inter-Agency Disaster Management
Meeting attended by the Minister of State for Disaster Management to share the forecast of future weather
conditions, damage updates, and the status of the response by ministries and agencies. In addition, it was confirmedthat ministries and agencies were taking all possible response measures based on instructions from the Prime Minister.
At 11:13 a.m. on the same day, the Prime Minister instructed the relevant ministries and agencies to (1) take
integrated government emergency response measures including comprehensive rescue and relief operations forvictims, (2) reinforce the Self-Defense Forces’ personnel engaged in rescue and relief activities to a scale of several
hundred, and (3) immediately deploy a government survey team led by the Minister of State for Disaster Management
once conditions had been readied. Based on the Prime Minister’s instructions, a government survey team led by the
Minister of State for Disaster Management was immediately deployed to Hiroshima Prefecture, where it met withleaders of local governments in the disaster-affected areas, and surveyed the disaster-affected areas.
At 1:40 p.m. on the same day in Hiroshima Prefecture, which suffered extensive damage due to sediment disasters
Page A-26

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

caused by the heavy rains, a National On-site Disaster Management Office (headed by the Deputy Director General for
Disaster Management) was set up at the Hiroshima Prefectural Office to promptly and precisely carry out emergency
countermeasures in concert with local authorities and the relevant ministries and agencies in the disaster-affectedareas.
On August 21, the directors general of the relevant ministries and agencies held an Inter-Agency Disaster Management
Meeting, attended by the Prime Minister and the Chief Cabinet Secretary, and shared information on the future
weather forecast, damage conditions, and the status of the response.

On the morning of the same day, the first Meeting of the Major Disaster Management Headquarters was held,
attended by the head of the Major Disaster Management Headquarters. There it was decided that authorities would(1) continue making every effort to rescue any missing persons as quickly as possible, (2) prepare for future rainfall andstrive to prevent the disaster from escalating, (3) work to quickly restore electricity, gas, water, and other utilities,
making every effort to quickly improve the lives of people living in the disaster-affected regions, and (4) take all possible
measures to ensure the health, including mental health, of people requiring prolonged evacuation, and strive to secure
good living environments for evacuees, including supplies of food and daily necessities (Major Disaster Management
Headquarters meetings were held a total of 16 times).
In addition, a ministerial meeting on the August 2014 Torrential Rains, attended by the Prime Minister, was held in theafternoon of the same day. Participants discussed damage conditions, the status of the response by ministries andagencies, and other matters.
On August 25, the Prime Minister conducted a local inspection, received reports on the damage conditions from theGovernor of Hiroshima Prefecture and the Mayor of Hiroshima City, and discussed the situation with them.
On the same day, the Disaster Victim Support Team was established at the On-Site Major Disaster Management
Headquarters to more quickly and precisely secure housing for disaster victims and provide support for disaster victims’
living situations, including the improvement of living conditions at evacuation centers in coordination with Hiroshima
Prefecture and Hiroshima City. On the following day (August 26), the 8.20 Sediment Disaster Emergency Restoration
Liaison Meeting was established by the On-Site Major Disaster Management Headquarters, Hiroshima Prefecture, andHiroshima City to quickly and comprehensively make progress on resolving local issues, including the disposal of
sediment and debris accumulated on roads, and the implementation of emergency restoration work on sedimentcontrol and forest conservation facilities, rivers, and roads.
To prevent this type of large-scale disaster from happening again, on September 5 the Major Disaster Management
Headquarters established Key Disaster Prevention Measures for Sediment Disasters and Other Massive Disasters, which
focused on launching examinations to amend the Sediment Disasters Prevention Act, urgently informing citizens about
known hazardous areas, performing an emergency inspection of the state of development of administrative systems,
accurately communicating disaster risk information, even late at night, and conducting more practical drills to prepare
for sediment disasters.
In addition, in response to a request for disaster deployment from the governor of Hiroshima Prefecture, a total ofsome 14,970 Self-Defense Forces personnel (the number of people actually mobilized on the ground) conducted rescue
operations and provided support for bathing facilities as well as other activities. Based on a request for aid from theHiroshima Prefecture Public Safety Commission, a total of approximately 9,200 members of the Police Disaster
Response Units and others searched for missing persons, rescued persons using hoists and police helicopters, andcollected information. A total of approximately 16,000 firefighting personnel (from local fire stations and fire brigades,
as well as auxiliary fire headquarters and fire brigades) within Hiroshima Prefecture also conducted rescue operations
and other activities. In addition, following a request from the governor of Hiroshima, a total of approximately 2,600
Emergency Fire Rescue Team personnel from seven prefectures (Osaka, Tottori, Shimane, Okayama, Yamaguchi, Ehime,
WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

Page A-27

Section 2

At 9:00 a.m. on August 22, given the high number of missing persons and the ongoing rescue activities after more than
two days since the sediment disasters in Hiroshima Prefecture, the August 2014 Torrential Rain Major Disaster
Management Headquarters (headed by the Minister of State for Disaster Management) was established pursuant to
the provisions of Article 24.1 of the Disaster Countermeasures Basic Act (Act No. 223 of 1961), and the decision wasmade to establish an On-site Major Disaster Management Headquarters in Hiroshima Prefecture, to be headed by theState-Minister of Cabinet Office for Disaster Management.

and Kochi) were deployed at the request of the Commissioner of the Fire and Disaster Management Agency to conduct
search and rescue operations, debris removal, and other activities. A total of 2,431 TEC-FORCE members from the
Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism were deployed on the ground as well as a total of some 630
vehicles/day including machines used in disaster management. These provided support for the evaluation of sedimentdisaster risk areas and search activities, support for rapid restoration work, and support to prevent secondary
disasters.
The Disaster Relief Act and the Act on Support for Reconstructing Livelihoods of Disaster Victims were invoked for
Hiroshima City in Hiroshima Prefecture due to the heavy rains that started on August 19 (invoked August 20).

Appendix

The Disaster in Hiroshima Prefecture Due to Rainstorms and Torrential Rains between July 30 and August 25, 2014 wasdesignated an extremely severe disaster nationwide, and measures to be implemented for this disaster were identified(special measures on subsidies for disaster recovery projects for agricultural land, special cases of subsidies for disasterrecovery projects for agricultural, forestry, and fisheries shared-used facilities, and the inclusion of funds for theredemption of principal and interest related to small disaster bonds in the standard budget request; announced andenacted on September 10).
Following this, the ordinance on the Disaster in Hiroshima Prefecture Due to Rainstorms and Torrential Rains between
July 30 and August 25, 2014 was partially revised, and measures to be implemented nationwide were added. These
included special financial support for disaster recovery projects for public works facilities and subsidies for disasterrecovery projects for public social and educational facilities (announced and enacted October 1).
The Japan Meteorological Agency named the series of heavy rains that fell from July 30 to August 26, which caused theextremely severe disaster in various regions nationwide, the “August 2014 Torrential Rains.”

15-4: 2014 Eruption of Mt. Ontake(1) Damage
In the latter half of March 2007, there was a very small eruption of Mt. Ontake after which the volcano remained
dormant. From September 10 to 11, there was an increase in high-frequency seismic waves around the peak of Mt.
Kengamine, but these subsequently subsided. No fumarole near the mountain peak was confirmed in observations
using a long-distance camera installed in Mitake Kurosawa (approximately 14 km southeast of Mt. Kengamine). The
Chubu Regional Development Bureau confirmed in observations using the Takigoshi camera installed at Takigoshi,
Otaki Village (approximately 6 km south-southwest of Mt. Kengamine) that fumarolic gases at a height of 100 m or lesswere passing from a fumarole on Jigokudani.
Mt. Ontake erupted around 11:52 a.m. on September 27, 2014. Visibility was poor at the time of the eruption, and theconditions around the mountain peak are therefore unknown, but according to the Chubu Regional Development
Bureau’s Takigoshi camera, a pyroclastic flow of more than 3 km flowed down in a southwesterly direction. According
to weather radar observations, volcanic smoke flowed eastward at an estimated height of 7,000 m above the crater
rim. According to a subsequent survey, the pyroclastic flow flowed from crater rows for approximately 2.5 km in asouthwesterly direction and for approximately 1.5 km in a northwesterly direction. A series of volcanic tremors wererecorded around 11:41 a.m. immediately before the eruption, and after the eruption, large-amplitude tremors
continued for approximately 30 minutes. According to a dipmeter at the Tanohara observation point (approximately 3
km southeast of Mt. Kengamine), changes in mountain swelling were observed from 11:45 a.m. immediately after thetremors started, and changes in mountain contraction were observed around 11:52 a.m.
This eruption disaster resulted in human casualties of 57 fatalities, 6 missing persons, 29 serious injuries, and 40 minor
injuries (as of October 23, 2014).

(2) Response from Government Ministries and Agencies
At 2:30 p.m. on September 27, the Prime Minister instructed the relevant ministries and agencies to (1) immediately
assess the damage, (2) make collective efforts to rescue victims of the disaster and take all possible efforts to ensure
the safety of mountain climbers and residents, including evacuation guidance, and (3) strengthen volcano observations
and provide mountain climbers and residents with timely and accurate information.

Page A-28

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

Based on the Prime Minister’s instructions, a meeting was held of the relevant staff of the ministries and agencies
involved. An overview of the eruption, the damage conditions, and other matters were discussed. At 4:40 p.m., an
Inter-Agency Disaster Management Meeting, attended by the Minister of State for Disaster Management, was held toshare information on the future volcanic activity forecast and damage conditions as well as the status of the responseby ministries and agencies. From the evening onward, a Cabinet meeting and meeting of the directors general of therelevant ministries and agencies were held, where it was confirmed that the government was working in an integrated
manner and taking all possible response measures.

At 1:00 p.m. on the same day, an Inter-Agency Disaster Management Meeting was held for a second time, attended by
the Minister of State for Disaster Management. At the meeting, a teleconference was held with the governor of
Nagano Prefecture and a professor from the Nagoya University Graduate School, and information was shared on theforecast of future volcanic activity, damage conditions, and the status of the response by various ministries andagencies.
At 5:00 p.m. on the same day, given that the Mt. Ontake eruption had resulted in many victims and many missing
persons, and based on the provisions of Article 24.1 of the Disaster Countermeasures Basic Act (Act No. 223 of 1961),
the decision was made to establish the 2014 Mt. Ontake Eruption Major Disaster Management Headquarters (headedby the Minister of State for Disaster Management), and to establish an On-site Major Disaster Management
Headquarters (headed by the Parliamentary Vice-Minister of Cabinet Office for Disaster Management) in Nagano
Prefecture.
At 7:00 p.m., the first Major Disaster Management Headquarters meeting was held, attended by the head of the Major
Disaster Management Headquarters, and the State-Minister of Cabinet Office for Disaster Management presented areport from the government survey team. A teleconference was held with a professor from the Nagoya University
Graduate School of Environmental Studies, and information was shared on the forecast of future volcanic activity,
damage conditions, and the status of the response by various ministries and agencies. It was determined that that
authorities would (1) continue making every effort to rescue and confirm the safety of missing persons, (2) prevent
secondary disasters from such phenomena as cinders, volcanic gases, and debris flow, and take all possible steps toensure the safety of rescue activities, and (3) secure a thorough monitoring system for volcanic activities, striving toprevent the disaster from escalating further (meetings of the Major Disaster Management Headquarters were held atotal of 15 times).
On October 11, a government survey team headed by the Minister of State for Disaster Management was deployed toNagano Prefecture and surveyed the status of the eruption and falling ash near the crater of Mt. Ontake from the air
by helicopter as well as the status of search and other activities by police, fire, and Self-Defense Forces personnel. The
team also interviewed local government leaders and others from the disaster-affected areas about the disaster. They
discussed the monitoring systems for volcanic activity, the cultivation of experts, and countermeasures to prevent
damaging rumors from spreading.
On October 28, the Emergency Disaster Management Countermeasures for Volcanic Eruptions were established by the
Major Disaster Management Headquarters based on the lessons of this eruption to prevent the recurrence of such adisaster. The contents of the countermeasures were divided respectively into immediate, medium-term, andcontinuous efforts. These measures are summarized as: (1) emergency efforts, including the implementation of
emergency surveys on information communication methods and the preparation status of evacuation facilities, theestablishment in fiscal 2014 of Volcanic Disaster Management Councils for all 47 volcanoes under constantobservation, and the provision of appropriate information and safety countermeasures for mountain climbers andtravelers, (2) medium-term efforts, including the strengthening of evacuation facility preparation and rescue systems,
further strengthening of volcano monitoring systems, and the development of investigations and research, and (3)continuous efforts, including the development of DRR education for volcanic disasters and the development of volcanic
WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

Page A-29

Section 2

On September 28, a government survey team headed by the State-Minister of Cabinet Office for Disaster Management
was deployed to Nagano Prefecture and surveyed the eruption and falling ash near Mt. Ontake’s crater from the air
using a helicopter. The team surveyed the rescue and other activities conducted by police, fire, and Self-Defense Forces
personnel, and interviewed local government leaders and others from the disaster-affected areas about the disasterconditions. They discussed search and rescue activities, the identification of missing persons, the prevention of
secondary disasters, the monitoring of volcanic activity, information sharing, and other matters.

DRR drills conducted by the relevant ministries and agencies.

Appendix

Based on a request for disaster deployment from the governor of Nagano Prefecture, a total of some 7,150 SelfDefense Forces personnel (the number of people actually mobilized on the ground) conducted rescue operations andtransport of personnel from related organizations at local sites. Between September 27 and October 16, a team ofsome 900-–1,900 personnel/day from police, fire, and Self-Defense Forces conducted search and rescue activities.
Based on a request for aid from the Nagano Prefecture Public Safety Commission, a total of approximately 1,100
personnel from the Police Disaster Response Units and others conducted search operations for missing persons inaddition to collecting information using police helicopters. A total of approximately 3,000 people from firefightingorganizations within Nagano Prefecture (from local fire headquarters and fire brigades, as well as auxiliary fire
headquarters and fire brigades) conducted rescue and other operations. In addition, in response to a request for
deployment from the governor of Nagano Prefecture, a total of approximately 4,300 Emergency Fire Rescue Teampersonnel from six prefectures (Tokyo, Aichi, Shizuoka, Yamanashi, Toyama, Gifu) were deployed at the request of theCommissioner of the Fire and Disaster Management Agency, and they conducted search and rescue operations andtransported victims near the mountain top. A total of some 270 TEC-FORCE members from the Ministry of Land,
Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism were deployed locally, as were some 200 vehicles/day, including machines usedin disaster countermeasures. These were used in supporting search activities, descending the mountain, assessing
disaster conditions, and conducting emergency countermeasures.
The Disaster Relief Act was invoked for Kiso Town and Otaki Village in the Kiso District of Nagano Prefecture due to thiseruption disaster (invoked September 27).

15-5: Earthquake Epicentered in Northern Nagano Prefecture(1) Damage
At 10:08 p.m. on November 22, 2014, a magnitude 6.7 earthquake struck northern Nagano Prefecture. A seismic
intensity of Lower 6 was recorded in Nagano City, Otari Village, and Ogawa Village in Nagano Prefecture, while anintensity of Upper 5 was reported in Hakuba Village and Shinano Town, Nagano Prefecture, and intensities of 1 to
Lower 5 were reported mainly in the Chubu region and areas from the Tohoku to Chugoku regions.
Damage due to this earthquake included 46 casualties, 77 completely destroyed houses, and 137 half-destroyedhouses. Lifelines were affected, with a total of 1,780 houses in the service area of Chubu Electric Power losing power,
and up to 1,288 houses in Nagano Prefecture and Niigata Prefecture experiencing water service disruptions.

(2) Response from Government Ministries and Agencies
Immediately after the earthquake, the government assembled an emergency team to assess the situation anddetermine a course of action, and deployed an information advance team to the Nagano Prefectural Office.
Early in the morning of the next day (November 23), a government survey team headed by the Parliamentary ViceMinister of Cabinet Office for Disaster Management was deployed to Nagano Prefecture and was briefed on thedisaster situation from the governor of Nagano Prefecture and others. Discussions covered rescue activities,
preventing secondary disasters, managing evacuees, rapid restoration of infrastructure and lifelines, and othermatters. In addition, the team surveyed the damage conditions in Habuka Village and Otari Village from the air using a
Self-Defense Forces helicopter.
At 9:00 a.m. on the same day, an Inter-Agency Disaster Management Meeting was held, attended by the Minister ofState for Disaster Management. The meeting included a teleconference with the governor of Nagano Prefecture, andcovered a situation report on the disaster as well as the status of the response by ministries and agencies (twosubsequent meetings were held).
On November 24, the Prime Minister visited Nagano Prefecture to inspect disaster-affected sites and talk with
evacuees and others. On December 2, a government survey team headed by the Minister of State for Disaster
Management was deployed to meet with leaders of local governments.
Due to this earthquake, the Disaster Relief Act was invoked for Hakuba Village, Otari Village, and Ogawa Village in
Nagano Prefecture (on November 22), and the Act on Support for Reconstructing Livelihoods of Disaster Victims wasPage A-30

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

invoked for Hakuba Village and Otari Village (on November 22).
The Earthquake Disaster of November 22, 2014 was designated an extremely severe disaster for Hakuba Village andOtari Village, Nagano Prefecture, and measures to be applied for this disaster were identified (special financial support
for disaster recovery projects for public works facilities, special measures on subsidies for disaster recovery projects for
agricultural land, and the inclusion of funds for the redemption of principal and interest related to small disaster bondsin the standard budget request (December 16 Cabinet resolution, announced and enacted December 19).

15-6: Heavy Snowfall Starting December 2014
(1) Damage
From December 2014 to March 2015, the development of a low-pressure system along with a winter pressure pattern
temporarily gained in strength, causing snowfall to accumulate at greater-than-average depths at the majority ofAMeDAS points (323 snowfall observation points) mainly on the eastern Pacific Ocean side of Hokkaido and in themountains on the Japan Sea side of Eastern Japan. The highest snowfall accumulations ever recorded were recorded at
12 observation points including Utoro, Hokkaido Prefecture; Hinoemata, Fukushima Prefecture; and Shinano Town,
Nagano Prefecture.
The heavy winter snows (December 2014 to March 2015) resulted in human casualties, including 83 fatalities, 460
serious injuries, and 569 minor injuries, as well as damage to houses that included nine completely destroyed houses,
12 half-destroyed houses, 186 partially destroyed houses, five houses with above-floor inundation, and 22 houses with
under-floor inundation.

(2) Response from Government Ministries and Agencies
With deep winter approaching, the government held an Inter-Agency Disaster Alert Meeting on the response to thewinter’s heavy snowfall on December 3. At the meeting, participants discussed the weather forecast and the status ofdamage and response measures, and confirmed full support for all ongoing and future response efforts.
On December 5, the Minister of State for Disaster Management called on citizens to respond as follows.
1.

2.
3.

Until tomorrow December 6, snow is forecast over a wide area from Northern Japan to Western Japan on
the Japan Sea side. From the night of the 5th to the 6th especially, there is risk of heavy snow mainly in the
Hokuriku region and Western Japan on the Japan Sea side. Heavy snow is already falling in some regions,with expressways and main national routes closed and cars getting stuck in the snow.
In regions where heavy snowfall is forecast, please avoid driving if at all possible. If driving is unavoidable,
ensure that your car has studless tires, chains, or other devices to prevent becoming stuck in the snow.
In addition, accidents during snow removal are always a risk, and nearly 100 people die each year from falls
that happen while removing snow from their roofs. Please do not work alone when removing snow. Make
sure to tell a family member or a neighbor when performing such work, use a life rope and helmet, and takesteps to properly secure ladders.

On the same day, in the Shikoku and Chugoku regions where vehicles had become stuck in the snow, the revised

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

Page A-31

Section 2

In response to a request for disaster deployment from the governor of Nagano Prefecture, a total of some 140 SelfDefense Forces personnel (the number of people actually mobilized on the ground) conducted water supply support at
local sites. In addition, based on a request for aid from the Nagano Prefecture Public Safety Commission, a total of 700
personnel from the Police Disaster Response Units and others guided the evacuation and conducted activities toconfirm people’s safety in local communities. A total of approximately 3,100 firefighting personnel (from local fire
headquarters and fire brigades, as well as auxiliary fire headquarters and fire brigades) within Nagano Prefecture
worked to gather information and confirm people’s safety. In addition, based on a deployment request from thegovernor of Nagano Prefecture, a total of approximately 100 Emergency Fire Rescue Team personnel from six
prefectures (Tokyo, Saitama, Gunma, Yamanashi, Toyama, and Niigata) also engaged in these activities mainly using
Fire and Disaster Management Agency helicopters, at the request of the Commissioner of the Fire and Disaster
Management Agency. A total of some 580 TEC-FORCE members from the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport
and Tourism as well as a total of some 290 vehicles/day, including machines used in disaster countermeasures, were
deployed to survey the damage conditions and conduct emergency restoration support.

Disaster Countermeasures Basic Act (enacted on November 21) was invoked for the first time to remove stranded
vehicles from National Route 192 and National Route 54.
On December 6, there was heavy snowfall mainly in Hokuriku and Western Japan. As more vehicles became stuck inthe snow and certain locations began to be cut off, an Inter-Agency Disaster Management Meeting, attended by the
Minister of State for Disaster Management, was held to address the damage from the heavy snow. Discussions covered
an update on the damage and the status of the response by ministries and agencies.

Appendix

On the same day, based on a request for disaster deployment from the governor of Tokushima Prefecture, a total ofsome 1,390 Self-Defense Forces personnel were mobilized (the number of people actually mobilized on the ground).
They opened roads so that villages would no longer be cut off due to fallen trees or other damage, provided support toconfirm people’s safety and enable evacuation, transported personnel and goods, provided support to restore power,
and performed other activities. As a result of the heavy snowfall that started December 5, prefectural police including
the Tokushima prefectural police enacted traffic restrictions to prevent vehicles from becoming stuck in the snow, used
police helicopters to confirm conditions at locations that had been cut off, and transmitted video taken fromhelicopters. Mobile prefectural forces and other personnel confirmed the safety of residents in districts that had been
cut off and conducted other activities. In addition, the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism’s liaison
and TEC-FORCE provided support to local governments and conducted snowplowing operations in areas including
Miyoshi City, Tokushima Prefecture.
On December 8, a second Inter- Agency Disaster Management Meeting, attended by the Minister of State for Disaster
Management, was held to discuss the damage and the status of the response by ministries and agencies. The following
was also confirmed.
Based on the fact that some locations were being cut off for a prolonged period of time, the relevant ministries
and agencies are working together with local governments to take all possible preparations per the following in
response to the heavy snowfall.
1. To ensure residents’ safety in areas that have been cut off, further efforts will be taken and the necessary
goods should be supplied.
2. Every effort will be made to open roads and quickly open up access to areas that are cut off.
3. The government will cooperate with business operators to quickly restore power.
On December 9, a government survey team headed by the Minister of State for Disaster Management was deployed toTokushima Prefecture. The team met with leaders of local government and others affected by the disaster andsurveyed the disaster-affected areas. An Inter-Agency Disaster Management Meeting was held to share information on
the damage and the status of the response by ministries and agencies.
On December 10, an Inter-Agency Disaster Management Meeting was held, attended by the Minister of State forDisaster Management. Meeting participants reviewed the findings of the government survey team, the weather
forecast, damage conditions, and the status of the response by various ministries and agencies, and confirmed full
support for all ongoing and future response efforts.
On December 11, the Minister of State for Disaster Management called on citizens to respond as follows:
1.

2.

3.

4.

Page A-32

Snow is forecast in lowland areas from Northern Japan to Western Japan on the Japan Sea side, with therisk of heavy snowfall. Snow is also falling from the Tohoku region to Western Japan on the Pacific Oceanside, and there is a risk of snow accumulations. In Hokkaido, caution regarding high winds, snowstorms, andhigh waves is required.
In last week’s heavy snowfall, roads were closed and cars became stuck. In regions where heavy snowfall isforecast, please avoid driving if at all possible. If driving is unavoidable, ensure that your car has studlesstires, chains, or other devices to prevent becoming stuck in the snow.
There have been cases of loss of access to some locations, power outages, and disrupted telephone service.
If you live in a region at risk of loss of access, please prepare accordingly by amassing supplies of food,water, fuel, and other goods and confirming a means of communication.
In addition, accidents during snow removal are always a risk, and nearly 100 people die each year from falls
that happen while removing snow from their roofs. Please do not work alone when removing snow. Make
sure to tell a family member or a neighbor when performing such work, use a life rope and helmet, and takesteps to properly secure ladders.
WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

On December 16, the Minister of State for Disaster Management called on citizens to respond to the snowstorm as
follows. In addition, on the following day (the 17th), an Inter-Agency Disaster Alert Meeting on the snowstorm washeld, attended by the Minister of State for Disaster Management. Participants discussed the weather forecast and thestatus of the damage and response, and confirmed full support for all ongoing and future response efforts.
1.

2.

3.

On December 26, a ministerial meeting on ongoing snow disaster countermeasures was held, attended by Prime
Minister Shinzo Abe. At the meeting, participants confirmed that all possible measures would be taken to protect
citizens’ lives from snow disasters, particularly during the New Year’s holiday. In addition, the Minister of State forDisaster Management called on citizens to respond as follows:
1.
2.

3.

After December 30, there is risk of continued intermittent snowfall and quite heavy snowfall mainly on theJapan Sea side during the New Year’s holiday. Caution is required.
Many people will be returning to their family home or traveling around the New Year’s holiday. Since evenregions that do not normally get a lot of snow may see heavy snow, please remain vigilant when driving and
be prepared for snow conditions (for example, use studless tires or chains). If traveling by public
transportation, please monitor service updates and allow extra time when traveling.
This year, 24 people have died from snow-related accidents, such as falling while removing snow from roofs
and being caught in snowslips and snow-flow channels. Please do not work alone when removing snow.
Make sure to tell a family member or a neighbor when performing such work, use a life rope and helmet,
and take steps to properly secure ladders.

A total of some 30 TEC-FORCE members from the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism as well as a
total of some 50 snowplows/day were deployed to support snow-removal and other operations.
Due to the heavy winter snow, the Disaster Relief Act was invoked (on December 8) for several locations in Tokushima
Prefecture: Miyoshi City, Tsurugi Town in Mima District, and Miyoshi Town in Miyoshi District.

(Source: Cabinet Office)

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

Page A-33

Section 2

4.

Stormy weather is forecast across a wide area from Northern Japan to Western Japan. In particular, violent
winds accompanying snow are forecast in the Hokkaido region, and there is risk of blizzards that could
reduce visibility to zero.
In March of last year, snowstorms in Hokkaido caused nine fatalities, including people who froze to death
after getting out of cars that would no longer run. Please refrain from nonessential travel to avoid thesekinds of disasters.
If visibility falls to zero while driving, please promptly stop at a safe place if you sense danger. If your car has
stopped running, please immediately seek help and wait in your car. If you do have to wait in your car, there
is risk of carbon monoxide poisoning if snow accumulates around your car’s exhaust pipe, so please
regularly clear snow from around your exhaust pipe.
Please check the latest weather updates and stay safe.

Trends in Facility-Related Damage, Actual and as a Percentage of Gross Domestic Product (GDP)Fig. A-16
6,000

3.0%

5,000

2.5%

4,000

2.0%

3,000

1.5%

2,000

1.0%

1,000

0.5%

0

1981

83

85

87

89 90

92

94

96

98

2000

02

04

06

08

10

12

0.0%

Source: Created by the Cabinet Office using materials from various ministries and agencies.

Fig. A-17

Facility-Related Damage by Disaster Type for Disasters Occurring in 2013

Facility type

Typhoon Heavy rain Earthquake(1 million) (1 million) (1 million)

Heavy
Other
snow
(1 million)(1 million)

Total(1 million)

Notes

Public works

84,885

79,121

149

986

7,775

172,916 Rivers, forestry conservation
facilities, ports, etc.

Agriculture,
forest, andfisheries industry

68,98886,295

710

2

3,215

159,209 Farmland, agricultural
facilities, forestry roads, fishingfacilities, etc.

Educational
facilities

1,054

1,055

25

17

735

2,886 School facilities, cultural
heritages, etc.

Public welfare
facilities

8,227

1,766

525

0

454

10,973 Social welfare facilities,
waterworks facilities, etc.

Other facilities

3,591

10,479051

996

15,117 Nature parks, telegraph/
telephone, urban facilities, etc.

166,745

178,718

1,409

1,056

13,175

Total

361,102

Note: Totals may not agree due to rounding.
Source: Created by the Cabinet Office using materials from various ministries and agencies.

Page A-34

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

Percentage of GDP (%)

Appendix

Facility-Related Damage (JPY 1 billion)

Facility-related damage (JPY 1
billion)% of GDP (%)

Fig. A-18

Trends in Facility-Related Damage, Actual and as a Percentage of Gross Domestic Product (GDP)

1 (Hyogo)

Reports of tsunami measuringtens of centimeters, nodamageDamagecharacteristics

Structures destroyed,large fires erupted mainly in
Nagata-ku

Fatalities
Missing persons

Fatalities: 6,437
Missing persons: 3(May 19, 2006)
104,906

Homes damaged(totally destroyed)
Invocation of theDisaster Relief Act

25 municipalities (2prefectures)Great East Japan Earthquake(Japan)2:46 p.m., March 11, 2011
9.0
Oceanic trench
Mainly agricultural, forestry,
and fishery regions
8 (Miyagi, Fukushima, Ibaraki,
Tochigi, Iwate, Gunma,
Saitama, Chiba)

Sumatra Earthquake(Indonesia)
9:58 a.m., Dec. 26, 2004
9.1
Oceanic trench

Large tsunami observed invarious regions (max. wave
height of more than 9.3 m inSoma, more than 8.5 m in
Miyako, more than 8.0 m in
Ofunato) (*1)
Large tsunami caused massive
damage in coastal areas,
destruction across many
districts

Large tsunami observed inIndonesia as well as othercountries with coastline along
the Indian Ocean

Fatalities: 19,225
Missing persons: 2,614(as of March 1, 2015)
127,830(as of March 1, 2015)
241 municipalities (10prefectures)*Including 4 municipalities (2prefectures) that invoked the
Act for an earthquake
centered in northern Nagano
prefecture

Large tsunami caused damage
to countries with coastline
along the Indian Ocean, withIndonesia suffering
particularly massive damage
Fatalities: 126,732
Missing persons: 93,662(as of March 30, 2005)
Unknown*

Seismic intensity
distribution map(showing seismic
intensity of 4 andabove)

Note:*1 Tsunami height measured by tsunami meters and others*2 The seismic intensity levels were revised in 1996 to newly add Lower 5, Upper 5, Lower 6, and Upper 6.
Source: Created by the Cabinet Office from Cabinet Office materials, Fire and Disaster Management Agency materials, and UNOCHA
materials

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

Page A-35

Section 2

Date & time
Magnitude
Earthquake type
Disaster-affected
regionNo. of prefectureswith seismic
intensity of Lower
6 or higher
TsunamiGreat Hanshin-Awaji
Earthquake (Japan)
5:46 a.m., Jan. 17, 1995
7.3
InlandCity centerFig. A-19

Damage Estimate for the Great East Japan Earthquake

Category

Damage (Approx. Value)

Appendix

Structures(Homes/housing sites, stores/offices, factories, machines, etc.)

JPY 10.4 trillion

Lifeline facilities(Water, gas, electricity, communications/broadcasting facilities)

JPY 1.3 trillion

Infrastructure facilities(Rivers, roads, ports, sewers, airports, etc.)

JPY 2.2 trillion

Agriculture, forest, and fisheries-related facilities(Farmland/agricultural facilities, forests and fields, fisheries-related facilities, etc.)

JPY 1.9 trillion

Other(Educational facilities, healthcare/social welfare facilities, waste treatment facilities, other public facilities)

JPY 1.1 trillion

Total

JPY 16.9 trillion

Note: This information has been compiled by the Cabinet Office (for Disaster Management) based on information provided byindividual prefectures and relevant ministries and agencies regarding damage to property (including buildings, lifeline facilities,
and infrastructure facilities). Information is subject to change as the details become clear. In addition, the total and breakdown
may not agree due to rounding.
Source: Cabinet Office

Page A-36

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

Fig. A-20

Main Volcanic Eruptions and Eruption Disasters in Japan

Year of
Eruption
1640

No. ofVictims
At least
Hokkaido-Komagatake*
700
Name of Volcano

Sector collapse, debris flow, tsunami, large amount of falling ash,pyroclastic flow
Nearby homes disappeared or were buried in pyroclastic surge/falling5ash
At least 30 Lava flow, flood of water from crater
Pyroclastic flow, falling pyroclastic material
Eruption with earthquake/volcanic thunder, falling pumice stone,
pyroclastic flow

Mt. Usu*

1664
1667

Mt. Unzen
Mt. Tarumae*

1694

Hokkaido-Komagatake

1707

Mt. Fuji*

1721
1739
1741
1769
1777

Mt. Asama
Mt. Tarumae*
Oshima-Oshima
Mt. UsuIzu Oshima

1779

Sakurajima*

1781

Sakurajima

At least
150
15

1783

Mt. Asama

1151

1785

Aogashima

130–140

1792

Mt. Unzen

1822

Mt. Usu1853

Mt. Usu

1856

Hokkaido-Komagatake

21–29

1888

Mt. Bandai*

461–477

1900
1902

Mt. Adatara
Torishima

72
125

1914

Sakurajima*

58

1926

Mt. Tokachi

144

1929

Hokkaido-Komagatake

2

1940

Miyakejima

11

1952
1958
1991
2014

Bayonnaise Rocks(Myojin-sho)
Mt. AsoMt. Unzen
Mt. Ontake

15
1467

Approx.
15,00050–103

1”Great Hoei eruption," large amount of falling ash, landslide disaster
after eruption
Cinders
Pyroclastic flow, falling pyroclastic material
Sector collapse, large tsunami occurred due to debris avalanche
Large amount of falling ash/pumice, pyroclastic flow
”Great Anei eruption," lava flow, scoria fall
”Great Anei eruption," cinders, lava flow
Eruption on an island off of Komen, tsunami”Great Tenmei eruption," pyroclastic flow, lava flow, debris avalanche,
flooding of Agatsuma River and Tone River
Cinders, mud, more than one-third of islanders became victims.
Uninhabited island for more than 50 years thereafter”Shimabara taihen, Higo meiwaku," tsunami on opposing shore due tocollapse of Mt. Mayuyama
Pyroclastic flow, former Abuta village destroyed by fire
Large amount of volcanic ash/pumice, formation of lava dome,
pyroclastic flow
Falling pumice, pyroclastic flow
5 towns and 11 villages buried in debris avalanche, debris flow
(volcanic mud flow)
Cinders, sulfur mine at crater totally destroyed
Falling pyroclastic material, all islanders became victims”Great Taisho eruption," volcanic thunder, lava flow, earthquake, airwave, villages buried, large amount of falling ash
Snowmelt type mudflow , towns of Kamifurano and Biei buried
Large amount of falling ash/pumice, pyroclastic flow, volcanic gas
damageLarge amount of volcanic ash/volcanic bombs, lava flow
Large amount of volcanic ash, cinders, formation of Showa-shinzan(new mountain)

31

Pyroclastic surge

12
43
57

Cinders
Pyroclastic flow, debris flow
Cinders

Note: Lists "Eruption disasters with 10 or more fatalities and/or missing persons" and "Large eruptions with an apparent volume
of ejecta of 0.1 km3 or more"*Indicates eruptions with apparent volume of ejecta of more than 1 km3
Source: Created by the Cabinet Office based on the National Catalogue of the Active Volcanoes in Japan (4th Edition) (edited by
the Japan Meteorological Agency, 2013).

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

Page A-37

Section 2

1663

1943–45 Mt. Usu

Eruption and Damage Characteristics

Fig. A-21

Number of Sediment Disasters

Number of Sediment Disasters
3,000
2,537

Debris flow

2,500

Landslide

Slope failure

2,000
1,441

1,422

Appendix

1,500
1,058

1,128

1,184

966

1,000

941
837

814

695

500

0

2004
H16

Number of
62
fatalities/
missing persons

2005
H17
30

2006
H18
25

2007
H19
0

2008
H20

2009
H21

2010
H22

20

22

11

2011
H23
85

Source: Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism

Fig. A-22

Sediment Disaster Risk Areas by Municipalities

Source: Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism, as of March 31, 2015
Page A-38

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

2012
H24
24

2013
H25

2014
H26

53

81

Increase in Torrential Rain During Short Periods

Fig. A-23

AMEDAS: Annual Observations of 50 mm or More of Rainfall Per Hour
Clear change in trend (21.3 more observations every 10 years using data from 1976 to 2014)

JMA

400
356
331
295

300

256

251

169

244

230

225

220

200

282
275

275

188

186
156
140

145

157

110

100

103

238

206

190

177
156

158

182
173

193

254

194

237
209

237

169

131
112

94

0
1975

1980

1985

1990

1995
Year

2000

2005

2010

Source: Japan Meteorological Agency (website)

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

Page A-39

Section 2

No. of observations per 1,000 sites

500

Number of Confirmed Occurrences of Tornados

Fig. A-24

Tornado Distribution Map (All Japan: 1961–2013)
Created by the Japan Meteorological Agency (12/25/2014)

Appendix

Number of Confirmed Occurrences of Tornados

40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0

Note: Because there are few materials from which we can confirm that a “tornado” or “tornado or downburst” occurredprior to 1990, it is impossible to conduct a simple comparison of confirmed occurrences after 1991. Also, because
wind gust surveys have improved since 2007, it may appear that tornados have increased since then. it is therefore
impossible to conduct a simple comparison of the confirmed occurrences before 2006 and after 2007.
Source: (Upper) Japan Meteorological Agency.
(Lower) Created by the Cabinet Office based on the document, “Number of Confirmed Occurrences by Year (1961–2013)” on the Japan Meteorological Agency website.

Page A-40

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

Fig. A-25

Major Natural Disasters in the World Since 1900
Disaster TypeCountry (Areas)

1900
1902
1902
1905
1906
1906
1906
1906
1907
1907
1908
1911
1911
1912
1915
1916
1917
1918
1919
1920
1922
1923
1927
1927
1928
1930
1931

Hurricane Galveston
Volcanic Eruption
Volcanic Eruption
Earthquake
Earthquake (Chiayi earthquake)
Earthquake/Fire
Earthquake
TyphoonEarthquake
Earthquake
Earthquake (Messina earthquake)
Flood
Volcanic Eruption
TyphoonEarthquake
Landslide
Earthquake
Earthquake
Volcanic Eruption
Earthquake/Landslide (Haiyuan earthquake)
TyphoonEarthquake/Fire (Great Kanto earthquake)
Earthquake (Kitatango earthquake)
Earthquake
Hurricane/Flood
Volcanic Eruption
Flood

1932
1933
1933
1933
1935
1935
1939
1939
1939
1942
1942
1943
1944
1944
1945
1945
1946

Earthquake (Gansu earthquake)
Flood
Tsunami (Showa Sanriku Tsunami)
Earthquake
Flood
Earthquake (Quetta Earthquake)
Earthquake/Tsunami
Flood
Earthquake
CycloneCycloneEarthquake
Earthquake (Showa Tonankai Earthquake)
Earthquake
Earthquake (Mikawa Earthquake)
Typhoon (Typhoon Makurazaki)
Earthquake/Tsunami (Showa Nankai
Earthquake)

Texas, USA
Martinique (West Indies, Mt. Pelée)Santa Maria Volcano, Guatemala
Northern India
TaiwanSan Francisco, USA
Chile
Hong Kong
Tianshan, China
Uzbekistan (former Soviet Union)
Sicily, Italy
China
Taal Volcano, Philippines
Wenzhou, China
Central Italy
Italy, Austria
Bali, Indonesia
Guangdong, China
Kelut Volcano, Indonesia
Gansu, China
Shantou, China
Southeast Kanto region, Japan
Northern Kyoto, Japan
Nanchang, China
Florida, USA
Merapi volcano, Indonesia
Coastal areas of the Yangtze River and otherrivers in China
Gansu, China
Henan, China
Sanriku, Japan
China
China
Baltistan, Pakistan
Chile
Hunan, China
Eastern Turkey
Bangladesh
Orissa, India
Tottori, Japan
Tonankai, Japan
Midwestern Argentina
Aichi, Japan
Western Japan
Nankai, Japan

1947
1948
1948
1949
1949
1949
1951
1953
1953
1953
1954
1954
1959

Typhoon (Typhoon Catherine)
Earthquake (Fukui Earthquake)
Earthquake (Ashgabat Earthquake)
Earthquake/Landslide
Flood
Flood
Volcanic Eruption
Flood
Flood
Flood
Flood
Typhoon (Typhoon Toyamaru)
Flood

Northern Tohoku, Japan
Fukui, Japan
Turkmenistan (former Soviet Union)
Tajikistan (former Soviet Union)
China
Guatemala
Mt. Lamington, Papua New Guinea
Coastal areas of the North Sea
Kyushu, Japan
Honshu, Japan
China
Japan
China

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

Fatalities/Missing Persons(approx.)
6,000
29,0006,000
20,0006,000
1,500
20,00010,00012,00012,00075,000100,000
1,300
50,00030,00010,00015,00010,0005,200
180,000
100,000
143,000
2,930
200,000
2,000
1,400
3,700,000
70,00018,0003,000
10,000142,000
60,00030,000500,000
32,96261,00040,0001,083
1,200
10,000
2,300
3,700
1,400
1,900
3,900
110,000
12,00057,00040,000
2,900
1,800
1,000
1,100
40,0001,700
2,000,000

Page A-41

Section 2

Year

Year

Appendix

1959
1960
1960
1960
1961
1962
1963
1965
1965
1968
1970
1970
1970
1971
1972
1974
1974
1975
1976
1976
1977
1978
1982
1985
1985
1985
1986
1986
1987
1987
1988
1988
1988
1988
1989
1989
1990
1990
1991
1991
1991
1992
1992
1993
1993
1993
1994
1994
1994
1995

Disaster Type

1995
1995
1996

Typhoon (Typhoon Ise-wan)
Flood
Earthquake
Earthquake/Tsunami
CycloneEarthquake
CycloneCycloneCycloneEarthquake
Earthquake
Earthquake/Landslide
Cyclone Bhola
CycloneEarthquake (Managua earthquake)
Earthquake
Flood
Earthquake
Earthquake (Guatemala earthquake)
Earthquake (Tangshan earthquake)
CycloneEarthquake
Volcanic Eruption
CycloneEarthquake
Volcanic Eruption
Toxic gas
Earthquake
Earthquake
Flood
Earthquake
Flood
Earthquake (Spitak Earthquake)
Earthquake
Flood
Flood/Landslide
Earthquake (Manjil Earthquake)
Earthquake
Cyclone/Storm Surge
Flood
TyphoonFlood
Earthquake/Tsunami
Flood
Earthquake (Maharashtra Earthquake)
Flood
Heavy Rain, Flood
Typhoon, Flood
Tropical Storm
Earthquake (Great Hanshin-Awaji Earthquake)
Earthquake
Flood
Flood/Typhoon

1996
1997
1997
1997
1997
1998

Typhoon/Flood
Earthquake
Flood
Flood
Typhoon Linda
Earthquake

Page A-42

Country (Areas)Japan
Bangladesh
Southwestern Morocco
Chile
Bangladesh
Northwestern Iran
Bangladesh
Bangladesh
Southern Pakistan
Northwestern IranYunnan, China
Northern Peru
Bangladesh
Orissa, India
Nicaragua
Yunnan and Sichuan, China
Bangladesh
Liaoning, China
GuatemalaTianjin, China
Andhra Pradesh, India
Northeastern IranEl Chichon Volcano, Mexico
Bangladesh
Mexico City, Mexico
Nevado del Ruiz Volcano, Colombia
Lake Nyos, Western Cameroon
San Salvador, El Salvador
Northwestern Ecuador
Bangladesh
India, Nepal
Bangladesh
Armenia (former Soviet Union)
Yunnan, China
India
Sichuan, China
Northern IranPhilippines
Chittagong, Bangladesh
Jiangsu, China
Philippines
PakistanIndonesia
Nepal
India
India
India
6 Southern Provinces of China
Haiti
Japan
RussiaChina
Seven southern and five northern and northwestern provinces of China
Viet Nam
Eastern Iran
India
Southern SomaliaSouthern Viet Nam
Northern Afghanistan

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

Fatalities/Missing Persons(approx.)
5,100
10,00012,0006,000
11,00012,00022,00036,00010,00012,00010,00070,000300,000
10,00010,00020,00028,70010,00024,000242,000
20,00025,00017,00010,00010,00022,000
1,700
1,000
5,000
1,000
1,000
2,000
25,000
1,000
1,000
2,000
41,0002,000
137,000
1,900
6,000
1,300
2,100
1,800
9,800
1,200
2,000
1,000
1,100
6,300
1,800
1,200
2,800
1,000
1,600
1,400
2,000
3,700
2,300

Year
1998
1998
1998
1998
1998

2005
2005
2005
2005
2005
2006
2006
2006
2007
2007
2008
2008
2008
2009
2009
2010
2010
2010
2010
2011
2011
2012
2013
2013

Country (Areas)

Earthquake
Flood/Landslide
Cyclone
Flood
Flood

Northern Afghanistan
Assam state, India
India
Bangladesh
Coastal areas of the Yangtze River and otherrivers in China
Tsunami (Aitape Tsunami)
Papua New Guinea
Hurricane Mitch
Honduras, Nicaragua
Earthquake (Quindio Earthquake)
Mid-western Colombia
Earthquake (Izmit Earthquake)
Western Turkey
Earthquake (Chi-Chi earthquake)
TaiwanCycloneIndia
Flood
Venezuela
Earthquake (Gujarat earthquake)
India
Earthquake
El Salvador
Earthquake
Northern Algeria
Earthquake (Bam earthquake)
Iran
Flood
Haiti
Hurricane
USA, Jamaica, Puerto Rico, Haiti
Earthquake, Tsunami (2004 Indian Ocean
Sri Lanka, Indonesia, Maldives, India, Thailand,
Earthquake and Tsunami)
Malaysia, Myanmar, Seychelles, Somalia, Tanzania, Bangladesh, Kenya
Flood/Landslide
India
Hurricane Katrina
USA
Rainstorm
India, Bangladesh
Hurricane Stan/Flood
Guatemala, El Salvador, Mexico
Earthquake (Pakistan earthquake)Northern Pakistan and India
Landslide
Philippines
Earthquake/Volcanic Eruption
Merapi volcano, Indonesia
Typhoon Xangsane
Luzon, Philippines
Heavy Rain, Flood
India
Cyclone Sidr
Bangladesh
Earthquake (Great Sichuan Earthquake)
China
Cyclone Nargis
Myanmar
Flood
North-eastern India
Earthquake (2009 Sumatra Earthquake)Indonesia
Flood
South of India
Earthquake (Haiti Earthquake)
Haiti
Earthquake (Yushu)
Qinghai, China
Flood
North-western Pakistan
Heavy Rain, Debris Flow
Yangtze River Basin, China
Earthquake, Tsunami (Great East Japan Earth- Tohoku and Kanto regions, Japan
quake)
Typhoon Washi
Mindanao, Philippines
Typhoon Bopha
Mindanao, Philippines
Flood
Northern India
Typhoon Haiyan
Leyte, Philippines

Fatalities/Missing Persons(approx.)
4,700
3,000
2,900
1,000
3,700
2,600
17,0001,200
15,5002,300
9,500
30,00020,0001,200
2,300
26,8002,700
3,000Over 226,000

1,200
1,800
1,300
1,500
75,000
1,100
5,800
1,400
1,100
4,200
87,500138,400
1,100
1,200
1,200
222,600
3,000
2,000
1,800
19,000
1,400
1,900
1,500
6,200

Source: Prepared by the Cabinet Office based on materials including the Chronological Scientific Tables and EM-DAT: The OFDA/CRED International Disaster Database (www.emdat.be, Université Catholique de Louvain, Brussels, Belgium).

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

Page A-43

Section 2

1998
1998
1999
1999
1999
1999
2000
2001
2001
2003
2003
2004
2004
2004

Disaster TypeFig. A-26

Top 10 Largest Earthquakes Since 1900
(As of May 31, 2014)

Ranking

Date (Japan Time)

1
2
3
4

Location

May 23, 1960
March 28, 1964
December 26, 2004
March 11, 2011

Appendix

Chile
Gulf of Alaska
Off the West Coast of Northern Sumatra, Indonesia
Off the Sanriku Coast, Japan(Great East Japan Earthquake)
Kamchatka Peninsula
Offshore Maule, Chile
Offshore Ecuador
Aleutian Islands, Alaska
Off the West Coast of Northern Sumatra, Indonesia
Northern Sumatra, Indonesia
Aleutian Islands, Alaska
Tibet, Assam

November 5, 1952
February 27, 2010
February 1, 1906
February 4, 1965
April 11, 2012
March 29, 2005
March 10, 1957
August 16, 1950

6
8
9

Magnitude
(Mw)
9.5
9.2
9.1
9.0
9.0
8.8
8.8
8.7
8.6
8.6
8.6
8.6

Mw: Moment magnitude
Source: US Geological Survey

Fig. A-27

Major Natural Disasters Since 2014
Date

Country

Disaster Type

Fatalities

People Affected

Direct Damages(USD millions)Apr. 2014

HondurasDrought

9,331,555

Apr. 1, 2014

Chile

Earthquake

6513,387

100

Apr. 2, 2014

Chile

Earthquake

6

513,837100

Apr. 24-May 2, 2014

Afghanistan

Flood

431

140,100

27 Apr.-May 1, 2014

USA

Flood

40

250

May 2014

Burkina Faso

Drought

3 May-Jun. 6, 2014

Guatemala

flood

5

100,000

May 11-20, 2014

USA

Forest Fire

2

429

100

Flood

25

1,000,000

437

Flood

51

1,600,000

2,172

1,700

4,000,000

May 13-20, 2014

Bosnia andHerzegovina
SerbiaMay 18-23, 2014

USA

Storm

May 24-28, 2014

China

Flood

May 24, 2014

China

Earthquake

May 24, 2014

GreeceEarthquake

May 30, 2014

China

Earthquake

Jun. 2014

Niger

Flood

36

165,578

Jun. 1, 2014

China

Flood

33

370,000

Jun. 1-10, 2014

Iran

Flood

37

440,000

49

Jun. 17-21, 2014

China

Flood

30

15,000,000

925

Jun. 25-30, 2014

China

Flood

24

150,000

483

Jun. 4-10, 2014

Sri Lanka

Flood

27

104,009

Jun. 7-30, 2014

BrazilFlood

11500,052

Jul. 2014

Somalia

Drought

Jul. 3-7, 2014

China

Flood

36

50,000547

Jul. 7-10, 2014

Japan

Typhoon

7

666

100

Jul. 7-9, 2014

USA

Storm

5

May 13-20, 2014

Page A-44

3,900
37
3

475,000

1,200

225,01560

75,002450

184,723675

350,000

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

350

Date

Country

Disaster Type

Fatalities

People Affected

Direct Damages(USD millions)

9,960,099

1,250
4,233
550

China
China
China

Flood
TyphoonTyphoon66
71

Jul. 25-Sept. 2014
Jul. 15, 2014
Jul. 30, 2014

Sudan
Philippines
India

Flood
TyphoonLandslide

77
100
209

Aug. 2014

GuatemalaAug.-Oct. 2014

China

Aug. 2-25, 2014
Aug. 3, 2014
Aug. 3-4, 2014

Nepal
China
India

Landslide
Earthquake
Flood

156
617
35

184,894
1,120,513
179,000

Aug. 9-16, 2014
Aug. 10-12, 2014
Aug. 11-19, 2014
Aug. 11- Sept. 10, 2014
Aug. 22-28, 2014
Aug. 24, 2014
Sept. 2014
Sept. 1-Oct. 9, 2014
Sept. 1-8, 2014
Sept. 2, 2014
Sept. 10-16, 2014
Sept. 10-16, 2014
Sept. 10-17, 2014
Sept. 10-17, 2014
Sept. 17-22, 2014
Sept. 18-24, 2014
Sept. 24-Nov. 10, 2014
Oct. 6, 2014
Oct. 7, 2014
Oct. 12, 2014
Oct. 12-13, 2014
Nov. 12-16, 2014

India
Japan
China
Bangladesh
China
USA
India
Pakistan
China
China
Philippines
China
China
MexicoPhilippines
Taiwan
India
Japan
China
India
Japan
Italy

Flood
Typhoon
Flood
Flood
Flood
Earthquake
Flood
Flood
Flood
Storm
TyphoonTyphoonFlood
Hurricane
TyphoonTyphoonFlood
TyphoonEarthquake
TyphoonTyphoon
Storm

47
10
27
59
10
1
298
367
44

3,600,000
21,750150,000
2,800,447
50,0003,532
275,000
253,000
121,700
136,255
431,086
394,000
1,065,000
135
2,052,157

Nov. 15-19, 2014
Nov. 21-24, 2014
Nov. 22, 2014

USA
Morocco
China

Storm
Storm
Earthquake

24
38
5

117,000
125,055

Dec. 2014-Jan. 2015

MalawiFlood

48

106,000

Dec. 1, 2014-Jan. 5, 2015

Sri Lanka

Flood

41

1,100,000

Dec. 12, 2014

Philippines

Typhoon18

4,150,400

Dec. 12-13, 2014
Dec. 16-30, 2014
Dec. 28-31, 2014
Jan. 6-9, 2015

Indonesia
Malaysia
Philippines
LebanonLandslide
Flood
Flood
Cold Wave

108
17
63

1,900
230,000
543,816
1,000,000

Feb. 25, 2015

BoliviaFlood30

140,220

Feb. 25, 2015

Afghanistan

Avalanche

308

Mar. 3-9, 2015

Papua New Guinea

Flood

6

100,000

Mar. 13, 2015

Vanuatu

Typhoon11

166,000

260,227
1,600,735

165

Drought

1,180,000

58

Drought

27,500,000

4
9
50
5
22
95
11
1
45
9
5

650,000
8,706
255,325920,000
1,198

5,000

100
487
150
700
1,000
16,000
2,000
570
19
2,900
1,400
2,500
76
400
163
100
835
7,000
100
250
100
450

284
14

Source: Prepared by the Cabinet Office based on materials including relevant information from countries, UNOCHA and EM-DAT:The OFDA/CRED International Disaster Database (www.emdat.be, Université Catholique de Louvain, Brussels, Belgium).
WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

Page A-45

Section 2

Jul. 13-18, 2014
Jul. 18-19, 2014
Jul. 22-24, 2014

(1) Landslide in Kathmandu, Nepal
In Nepal, as a result of the heavy rains that had fallen on August 2, a large-scale landslide occurred in the
Sindhupalchowk area to the northeast of the capital, Kathmandu, killing 156 people. Since the landslide blocked the
Sunkoshi River, fears that the natural damming of the river would also collapse in downstream areas of India prompted
more than 10,000 to flee their homes.
The rain that continued to fall following the disaster created a high risk of flash floods, and rescue activities wereconducted by the state and local governments. The Nepal National Disaster Response Team, the District Disaster
Response Teams, and the Nepal Red Cross Society of carried out emergency medical treatment and hygiene
management.

Appendix(2) Earthquake in Yunnan Province, China
A magnitude 6.5 earthquake struck Ludian County, Zhaotong City, Yunnan Province in China at 4:30 pm (local time) on
August 3, 2014. This earthquake caused immense damage: 80,000 or more houses collapsed, 617 people were killed,
112 people were reported missing, and more than 3,000 people were injured. In Ludian County, roads and othertransportation networks were blocked, and more than 211 aftershocks were predicted before 8:56 am (local time) on
August 4. These were the conditions in which rescue activities were carried out.
UNICEF provided medical relief supplies and joined the Chinese government in providing continuous support at thedisaster sites in order to improve the environmental health and hygiene in hospitals and schools.

(3) Torrential Rains in East Pakistan
In Punjab in eastern Pakistan and in Kashmir in northeastern Pakistan, torrential rains that started in late September on
account of the monsoon killed 367 people and injured 673. There were more than 2.5 million people affected, andmore than 680,000 were forced to flee their homes. More than 100,000 houses were destroyed by the rains, withdamage extending to 4,065 villages in the four states that were affected.
The Japanese government, through the nonprofit organization Japan Platform, provided approximately JPY 23 million
worth of emergency relief goods (food, sanitary goods, and relief supplies). In recent years, Pakistan has experienced
repeated large-scale damage due to flooding during the monsoon season. For this reason, in November 2014, theJapanese government concluded a grant aid donation agreement (grant limit approximately JPY 3,646 million withPakistan in order to implement two plans in the state of Punjab: (1) the Mid-term Plan to Establish a Weather
Forecasting Center and Strengthen the Weather Forecasting System and (2) the Gujranwala Sewage and Drainage
Capacity Improvement Plan.

(4) Nepal Earthquake (as of May 13, 2015)
At midnight (local time) on May 25, 2013, a magnitude 7.8 earthquake occurred with an epicenter about 80 km
northwest of the capital Kathmandu. Tremors occurred throughout Nepal and even in neighboring countries. Largebuildings collapsed all over Kathmandu, including the surrounding area. Approximately 300,000 houses werecompletely destroyed, 270,000 houses were partially destroyed, 8,000 or more people were killed, and 18,000 people
were injured. In addition, historic buildings were damaged, mountaineers were injured as a result of avalanches on
Mount Everest, and there were widespread casualties as a result of the aftershocks. Casualties were also reported inneighboring countries.
The Japanese government provided tents, blankets, and other disaster relief supplies, and through international
institutions provided a total of USD 14 million (approximately JPY 1,680 million) in emergency grants. Japan Disaster
Relief Teams were also dispatched to provide assistance with rescue efforts and medical care.

Page A-46

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

Section 3: Laws and Systems
Fig. A-28

Progress on Disaster Management Laws and Systems Since 1945

Disasters that triggered law/system introduction
1945 Typhoon Ida (Makurazaki)
1940s
1946

The Nankai Earthquake

1947

Typhoon Kathleen

1948

The Fukui Earthquake

1959

Typhoon Vera (Isewan)

1961

Heavy Snowfalls

Disaster Management Law

Explanation

47 The Disaster Relief Act
49 The Flood Control Act

1950s

50 The Building Standards Act
60 Soil Conservation and Flood Control Urgent Measures Act

1960s

61 Disaster Countermeasures Basic Act
62 Central Disaster Management Council establishedThe 1964 Niigata Earthquake

63 Basic Disaster Management Plan
62 Act on Special Financial Support to Deal with Extremely Severe Disasters

1967

Torrential Rains in Uetsu

Act on Special Measures for Heavy Snowfall Areas
66 Act on Earthquake Insurance

1973

Mt. Sakurajima Eruption
Mt. Asama Eruption

1976

The Seismological Society ofJapan publishes reports on
a possible Tokai Earthquake
The 1978 Miyagi Earthquake

1978

73 Act on Provision of Disaster Condolence Grant
Act on Evacuation Facilities in Areas Surrounding Active Volcanoes (Acton Special Measures for Active Volcanoes (1978)78

Act on Special Measures Concerning Countermeasures for Large-Scale
Earthquakes

80 Act on Special Financial Measures for Urgent Earthquake
Countermeasure Improvement Projects in Areas for Intensified Measures

1980s

81 Amendment of Order for Enforcement of the Building Standard Law

1990s

2000s

Section 3

1970s

1964

Establishment of fundamental disaster prevention laws
・Clear assignment of federal responsibilities
・Development of cumulative and organizeddisaster prevention structures etc.

1995

The Southern Hyogo
Earthquake (The Great
Hanshin-Awaji Earthquake)

1999

Torrential Rains in Hiroshima

2000

Tokaimura Nuclear Accident(The JCO Nuclear Accident)
Torrential Rains in the Tokai Region

・Induction of current earthquake engineering laws, etc.

95 Act on Special Measures for Earthquake Disaster Countermeasures
Act on Promotion of the Earthquake-proof Retrofit of Buildings
Amendment of Disaster Countermeasures Basic Act
96 Act on Special Measures for the Preservation of Rights and Interests of
the Victims of Specified Disasters
97 Act on Promotion of Disaster Resilience Improvement in Densely
Inhabited Areas
98 Act on Support for Reconstructing Livelihoods of Disaster Victims
99 Act on Special Measures Concerning Nuclear Emergency Preparedness
00 Act on the Promotion of Sediment Disaster Countermeasures for Sediment
Disaster Prone Areas
01 Amendment of the Flood Control Act
02 Act on Special Measures for Promotion of Tohnankai and Nankai
Earthquake Disaster Management

・Establishment of disaster management mechanisms
based on volunteer groups and private organizations,loosening of requirements for the establishment of aCentral Disaster Management Council led by the Prime
Minister, the codification of disaster relief requests for the
JSDF, etc.

・More rivers were added to flood alert lists,announcement of expected inundation areas.
・Expansion of list of designated rivers in expected
inundation area.
・Increased efforts in public education through use of
Sediment Disaster Hazard Maps.

03 Specified Urban River Inundation Countermeasures Act
2004

Torrential Rains in Niigata,
Fukushima
The 2004 Niigata Chuetsu
Earthquake

04 Act on Special Measures for Promotion of Disaster Management for
Trench-type Earthquakes in the Vicinity of the Japan and Chishima
Trenches
05 Amendment of the Flood Control Act
Amendment of the Act on the Promotion of Sediment Disaster
Countermeasures in Sediment Disaster Prone Areas
Amendment of the Act on the Promotion of the Seismic Reinforcement andRetrofitting of Buildings
06 Amendment of the Act on the Regulation of
Residential Land Development
11 Act on the Promotion of Tsunami Countermeasures

2011

The 2011 Tohoku
Earthquake
andJapan
Tsunami(The Great East
Earthquake)

Act on Development of Areas Resilient to Tsunami Disasters
12 Amendment of Disaster Countermeasures Basic Act
Act for Establishment of the Nuclear Regulation Authority

・Establishment of basic national directives and regional
earthquake-proof retrofit plans, and promotion oforganized earthquake-proofing.

First Amendment (2012)
・Regional response for large-scale disasters.
・Incorporated lessons from the disaster, improvements todisaster management education, and improvements toregional disaster management capabilities throughparticipation of diverse entities in implementation.
Second Amendment (2013)
・Improvement of support for affected people.
・Improvements to rapid response capabilities in the eventof a large-scale and regional disaster.
・Smooth and safe evacuation of residents.
・Improvements in disaster countermeasures in daily life.
Establishment of obligatory earthquake-proofing
examinations and publication of test results for large
buildings in need of emergency safety checks.

13 Amendment of Disaster Countermeasures Basic Act
Act on Reconstruction from Large-Scale Disasters
Amendment of the Act on the Promotion of the Seismic Reinforcement andRetrofitting of Buildings
Amendment of the Flood Control Act and River Act
Act on Special Measures for Land and Building Leases in Areas Affectedby Large-scale Disasters
Amendment of the Act on Special Measures for the Promotion of Nankai
Trough Earthquake Disaster Management (Amendment of the Act on
Special Measures for the Promotion of Tonankai and Nankai Earthquake
Disaster Management)

2014

Heavy Snowfall
Hiroshima Landslide DisasterAct on Special Measures against Tokyo Inland Earthquake
14 Amendment of Disaster Countermeasures Basic Act
Amendment of Act on the Promotion of Sediment Disaster
Countermeasures for Sediment Disaster Prone Areas

・Participation of diverse entities including rivermanagement organizations in flood control activities,
acquisition of appropriate maintenance and management
needs in river management facilities, etc.
・Designation of Nankai Trough Earthquake Disaster
Countermeasure Promotion Areas, promotion ofearthquake disaster management for the Nankai TroughEarthquake through the creation of a Basic Plan.
・Designation of Areas for Urgent Implementation of
Measures against a Tokyo Inland Earthquake andpromotion of earthquake management through thecreation of a Basic Plan.
・Establishment of laws regarding abandoned vehicles in
opening up transportation routes for emergency vehicles
in large-scale disasters.

・Clear definitions of sediment disaster-prone areas(publication of basic investigations), provision of
information necessary for issuing evacuation alerts.

Source: Cabinet Office
WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

Page A-47

Fig. A-29

Major Disaster Management Laws by Type of Disaster

Type

Prevention
Disaster Countermeasures
Basic ActAct on Special Measures Concerning
Countermeasures for Large-Scale Earthquakes

Emergency
Response•

DisasterRelief Act
Fire Service
Act
Police Law
SelfDefense
Forces Act

Act on the Promotion of Tsunami Measures••

Act on Special Financial Measures for Urgent
Earthquake Countermeasure Improvement
Projects in Areas for Intensified Measures
Act on Special Measures for Earthquake
Disaster Countermeasures
Act on Special Measures for the Promotionof Nankai Trough Earthquake Disaster
Management
Act on Special Measures against Tokyo
Inland Earthquake
Act on Special Measures for Promotion ofDisaster Management for Trench-type
Earthquakes in the Vicinity of the Japan andChishima Trenches
Act on Promotion of the Earthquake-proof
Retrofit of Buildings
Act on Promotion of Disaster Resilience
Improvement in Densely Inhabited Areas
Act on Development of Areas Resilient to
Tsunami Disasters•

Appendix

Earthquakes,
Tsunamis

•

•
•

•
•
•

•
•

Recovery/Reconstruction

General Relief and Assistance Measures
Act on Special Financial Support to Deal with
Extremely Severe Disasters

General Relief and Support Measures
•
•
•

•
•
•
•

Disposal of Disaster Waste•

Act on Special Measures for Active Volcanoes

Windstorms,
flooding

River Act

•

•

•

Flood
ControlAct••

Landslides,
rockfalls,
debris flow

•
•
•
•

Erosion Control Act
Forest Act
Landslide Prevention Act
Act on Prevention of Disasters
Caused by Steep Slope Failure• Act on Promotion of Sediment
Disaster Countermeasures in
Sediment Disaster Prone Areas

Waste Management and Public Cleansing Act

Disaster Recovery Work•

Volcanic
eruptions

Small and Medium-sized Enterprise Credit
Insurance Act
Act on Financial Assistance for People Affectedby Natural Disasters
Act on Equipment Installation Support for SmallEnterprises
Act on Provision of Disaster Condolence Grant
Employment Insurance Law
Act on Support for Reconstructing Livelihoods ofDisaster Victims
Japan Finance Corporation Act

Act on Temporary Measures for Subsidies from
National Treasury for Expenses for Project to
Recover Facilities for Agriculture, Forestry and
Fisheries Damaged by DisasterAct on National Treasury's Sharing of Expenses
for Project to Recover Public Civil Engineering
Works Damaged by DisasterAct on National Treasury's Sharing of Expenses
for Recovery of Public School Facilities Damaged
by DisasterAct on Special Measures concerning
Reconstruction of Urban Districts Damaged by
Disaster
Act on Special Measures concerning
Reconstruction of Condominiums Destroyed by
DisasterInsurance and Mutual Aid System•••

Act on Earthquake Insurance
Agricultural Disaster Compensation Act
Act on Government-Managed Forest Insurance

Laws relating to Disaster Taxation•

Act on Reduction or Release, Deferment ofCollection and Other Measures Related to Tax
Imposed on Disaster Victims

Other
•

•

Heavy
snowfall
Nuclearpower

Act on Special Measures for
Heavy Snowfall Areas• Act on Special Measures concerning
Maintenance of Road Traffic in Specified
Snow Coverage and Cold Districts• Act on Special Measures Concerning
Nuclear Emergency Preparedness•••

Act on Special Measures for the Preservation of
Rights and Interests of the Victims of Specified
Disasters
Act on Special Financial Support for Promoting
Group Relocation for Disaster Mitigation
Act on Special Measures for Land and Building
Leases in Areas Affected by Large-scale DisasterAct on Reconstruction from Large-Scale
Disasters

Source: Cabinet Office

Page A-48

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

Fig. A-30

Structure and System of the Basic Disaster Management PlanCounte r me asur e s Common to A ll Disaste r Type sNatural Disasters
Earthquakes

Tsunamis

Windstorms andFlooding

Volcanic Eruptions

Snowstorms

Accidents
Aviation Accidents

Railroad Accidents

Road Accidents

Nuclear Accidents

Hazardous Materials
Accidents

Large-scale Fires

Forest Fires

Section 3

Maritime Accidents

Description following each disaster phase
Disaster Prevention andPreparedness

Disaster Emergency Response

Disaster Recovery andReconstruction

Description of concrete countermeasures to be taken by and responsibilities of stakeholders
National
Government

Local Government

Residents

Source: Cabinet Office

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

Page A-49

Fig. A-31
Revision
Date
June
1963
May
1971

July
1995

Appendix

June
1997

May
2000
December
2000
April
2002

March
2004

July
2005

March
2007
February
2008

December
2011
September
2012

January
2014

November
2014

March
2015

History of Revisions to the Basic Disaster Management Plan
Outline of Revision

The Basic Disaster Management Plan formulated based on the DisasterSep. 26, 1959: Typhoon IsewanCountermeasures Basic Act
Nov. 15, 1961: Enactment of the‐ Stipulations regarding various measures to prevent natural disasters, mitigate damage, Disaster Countermeasures Basic Act
and promote disaster reconstruction
Partial revisionSep. 6, 1967 Recommendation‐ Enhancement of earthquake countermeasures (facilities for earthquake prediction,
concerning Disaster Prevention
preparation of fire fighting helicopters)
Measures (recommending revisions in‐ Renewed positioning of countermeasures to tackle hazardous materials,
response to a modern socioeconomy)
petrochemical complexes, and wildfires
Complete revision
Jan. 17, 1995: Great Hanshin-Awaji‐ Structured this version by disaster type, and included stipulations in the following
Earthquake
order: prevention, emergency response, recovery/reconstruction‐ Clearly defined the stakeholders, such as national governments, public agencies, local
governments, and businesses, and specified countermeasures‐ Stipulated that changes in social structure such as the aging of society should be taken
into accountPartial revision
Jan. 2, 1997: Nakhodka Oil Spill Accident‐ Addition of section on countermeasures to address disasters caused by accidents(structural improvements such as the establishment of an emergency
countermeasures headquarters)‐ Addition of a section on snowstorm countermeasures
Partial revisionSep. 30, 1999: Criticality accident at‐ Revision of the section on countermeasures to tackle nuclear power disasters,
uranium fabrication plant in Tokai-mura,following the enactment of the Act on Special Measures Concerning Nuclear
Ibaraki prefecture
Emergency Preparedness
Partial revision
Central government reformation‐ Revisions resulting from the central government reformation
Partial revisionJun. 29, 1999: Heavy rain disaster in‐ Enhancement of descriptions relating to information transmission to residents andHiroshima Prefecture
evacuation measures regarding countermeasures against flooding, sediment disasters, Sep. 24, 1999: Storm surge disaster inand storm surges
Kumamoto Prefecture‐ New positioning of nuclear power disasters related to nuclear vessels
Partial revision
Mar. 31, 2004: Creation of a Basic Plan‐
Revisions based on the creation of the Basic Plan for the Promotion of Tonankai and for the Promotion of Tohnankai andNankai Earthquake Countermeasures (seismic retrofitting of public buildings, etc.)
Nankai Earthquake Countermeasures‐
Revisions based on the development of policies such as the development of anearthquake early warning system
Partial revision
July 28, 2004: Creation of an Earthquake‐ Revisions based on developments in policy, such as the promotion of a nationwide
Disaster Risk Reduction Strategy
movement to practice disaster preparedness, the promotion of corporate disaster risk Dec. 26, 2004: Indian Ocean Tsunami
reduction efforts, the formulation and implementation of an earthquake DRR strategy, (Sumatra/Andaman Earthquake)tsunami DRR measures such as the development of tsunami evacuation buildings,
information transmission during torrential rains, evacuation support for the elderly,etc.
Partial revision
Transition from Defense Agency to‐ Revisions resulting from the transition from Defense Agency to Ministry of Defense
Ministry of Defense
Partial revision
July 16, 2007:The Niigataken Chuetsu‐ Implementation of follow-up actions on key issues regarding the Basic Disasteroki Earthquake
Management Plan, development of strategic national movements, establishment ofconditions for the promotion of corporate disaster risk reduction, full-scale
introduction of earthquake early warning system, strengthening of nuclear power
disaster countermeasures in light of lessons learned from the Niigataken Chuetsu-oki
Earthquake
Partial revision
Mar. 11, 2011 The Great East Japan‐ Radical strengthening of earthquake/tsunami countermeasures in light of the Great
Earthquake
East Japan Earthquake (addition of tsunami disaster countermeasure section)
Partial revision
Mar. 11, 2011 The Great East Japan‐ Strengthening of countermeasures against large-scale regional disasters in light ofEarthquake
revisions to the Disaster Countermeasures Basic Act (First Revision), and the final
Jun. 27, 2012 Partial revisions to thereport of the Central Disaster Management Council's Committee for Policy Planning on Disaster Countermeasures Basic Act
Disaster Management (each section)
Sep. 19, 2012 Inauguration of the‐ Strengthening of nuclear power disaster countermeasures in light of the enactment of
Nuclear Regulatory Authority
the Act for Establishment of the Nuclear Regulation Authority (nuclear power disastercountermeasures section)
Partial revision
Mar. 11, 2011 The Great East Japan‐ Strengthening of countermeasures against large-scale disasters in light of revisions to Earthquake
the Disaster Countermeasures Basic Act (Second Revision) and the enactment of the Jun. 21, 2013 Partial revisions to the
Act on Reconstruction from Large-Scale Disasters (each section)
Disaster Countermeasures Basic Act,
‐ Strengthening of nuclear disaster countermeasures in light of investigations by theenactment of the Act on Reconstruction
Nuclear Regulation Authority
from Large-Scale Disasters
Partial revisionFeb. 2014: Heavy snowfall‐ Strengthening of countermeasures against abandoned and stranded vehicles following Nov. 21, 2014: Partial revisions to therevision of the Disaster Countermeasures Basic Act
Disaster Countermeasures Basic Act‐ Addition of descriptions in light of lessons learned from heavy snowfall of February
2014, such as the diversification of information transmission methods such as
warnings of heavy snow
Partial revision
Mar. 5, 2015: Cabinet Secretariat Three‐ Improvement and strengthening of nuclear disaster risk reduction systems e.g.,
Year Revision and Investigation Teamthrough the establishment of local nuclear disaster management committees and"Improvement and Strengthening of thenational support for the enhancement of local disaster management plans/evacuation Nuclear Disaster Management System
plans (nuclear disaster countermeasures section)(Second Report)"‐

Source: Cabinet Office
Page A-50

Background

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

Section 4: Organizations
Fig. A-32

Organization of the Central Disaster Management Council
Inquiry

Chair

Prime Minister

Members

Minister of State forDisaster Management

ReportOther ministers of state(all appointed by Prime Minister)

Offer Opinion

Experts(appointed by Prime Minister)Haruhiko Kuroda
Governor of the Bank of Japan

Katsuyuki Abe
Professor Emeritus of the
University of Tokyo
Hirohiko Izumida
Governor of Niigata Prefecture

Tadateru Konoe
President of Japanese Red Cross
Society
Katsuto Momii
President of (Japan
Broadcasting Corporation (NHK)
Hiroo Unoura
President of Nippon Telegraphand Telephone Corporation

Hisako Komuro
Professor of Tokyo
International University
Shigeji Watanabe
Vice Chairman of the Japan
Firefighters Association

Committees for Technical Investigation● Disaster Management Implementation Committee (established March 26, 2013)

Officers' Meeting
Chair: Parliamentary Vice-Minister of Cabinet OfficeVice Chair: Director General for Disaster Management, Cabinet Office, and Deputy Manager of the Fire andDisaster Management Agency
Advisor: Deputy Chief Cabinet Secretary for Crisis Management
Secretary: Relevant directors-general of each ministry and agency
Role○ Formulate a Basic Disaster Management Plan and Earthquake Disaster Management Plan and promote their implementation○ Discuss important issues related to disaster management in response to inquiries from the Prime Minister or the Minister of State
for Disaster Management (e.g., basic approaches to disaster management, comprehensive coordination of disaster management
policies, and the declaration of states of emergency)○ Offer opinions on important issues related to disaster management to the Prime Minister or the Minister of State for Disaster
Management

Source: Cabinet Office

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

Page A-51

Section 4

Heads of Designated Public
Corporations(appointed by Prime Minister)Prime Minister, Minister of State for Disaster Management

Central Disaster Management Council (Section I , Chapter II of the Disaster Countermeasures Basic Act)Fig. A-33

Recent Meetings of the Central Disaster Management Council (Since 2008)

FY 2008
Apr. 23, 2008

FY 2008 Comprehensive Disaster Management Drill Framework
Comprehensive plan for achieving "zero victims" of natural disasters• Explanation: Shinya Izumi (Cabinet Office, Minister of State for Disaster Management)• Disaster Management Strategy for Trench-type Earthquakes in the Vicinity of the Sea of Japan and Chishima
Trenches• Report by the Committee for the Technical Investigation of Tokyo Inland Earthquake Evacuation Measures• Formulation status of business continuity plans by central government ministries and agencies• Report on Chubu and Kinki Region Inland Earthquakes• Measures for handling evacuees and stranded persons following a Tokyo Inland Earthquake••

Dec. 12, 2008

FY 2009
Apr. 21, 2009

FY 2009 Comprehensive Disaster Management Drill Framework
Framework for Chubu and Kinki Region Inland Earthquake Countermeasures• Promotion of new earthquake surveys and research• Volcanic eruption possibilities and DRR measures• Establishment of the Committee for the Technical Investigation of Best Practices for Earthquake Disaster
Management in Regional Cities• Revisions to the General Framework for Tokyo Inland Earthquake Countermeasures• Report of the Committee for the Technical Investigation of the Dissemination of Lessons Learned from
Disasters• Earthquake DRR measures in Japan••

AppendixJan. 15, 2010

FY 2010
Apr. 21, 2010

FY 2010 Comprehensive Disaster Management Drill Framework
Establishment of the Committee for the Technical Investigation of Disaster Evacuation• Report of the Committee for the Technical Investigation of Large-Scale Flood Measures• Tsunamis caused by earthquakes centered along the coast of Chile• Tokyo Metropolitan Area Flooding: Measures Needed for Damage Mitigation• (Overview of the Report of the Committee for the Technical Investigation of Large-Scale Flood Measures)••

FY 2011
Apr. 27, 2011

Great East Japan Earthquake: Characteristics and Challenges
Conventional earthquake and tsunami policies• Report of the Committee for the Technical Investigation of Earthquake and Tsunami Measures Based on
Lessons Learned from the Great East Japan Earthquake• Government ministry and agency efforts related to future DRR efforts• Establishment of the Committee for Policy Planning on Disaster Management• Revisions to the Basic Disaster Management Plan
• Revisions to the Central Disaster Management Council Operation Guidelines• Report of the Committee for the Technical Investigation of the Dissemination of Lessons Learned from
Disasters• Status of the investigations by the Committee for Policy Planning on Disaster Management• Interim Report of the Committee for Policy Planning on Disaster Management• Current efforts aimed at bolstering and reinforcing DRR measures• FY 2012 Comprehensive Disaster Management Drill Framework••

Oct. 11, 2011

Dec. 27, 2011

Mar. 29, 2012

FY 2012
Sept. 6, 2012

Revisions to the Basic Disaster Management Plan
Framework for Large-Scale Flood Measures in the Capital Region• Promotion of new earthquake surveys and research• Final Report of the Committee for Policy Planning on Disaster Management• Report of the Committee for the Technical Investigation of Best Practices for Earthquake Disaster Managementin Regional Cities• Report of the Committee for the Technical Investigation of Disaster Evacuation• Report on Tsunami Heights and Inundation Areas Resulting from a Nankai Trough Megaquake (Secondary
Report) and Damage Estimates (Primary Report)• Review of the legal systems for disaster management; status of investigations into Nankai Trough Megaquake
Measures and Tokyo Inland Earthquake Measures• Establishment of the Disaster Management Implementation Committee• FY 2013 Comprehensive Disaster Management Drill Framework••

Mar. 26, 2013

FY 2013Jan. 17, 2014

Mar. 28, 2014

Designation of Areas for the Promotion of Nankai Trough Earthquake DRR Measures and Areas for the Special
Reinforcement of Nankai Trough Earthquake Tsunami Evacuation Measures• Designation of Tokyo Inland Earthquake Emergency Management Zones• Revisions to the Basic Disaster Management Plan
• Final Report of the Working Group to Investigate Tokyo Inland Earthquake Measures and a Central Government
Business Continuity Plan Proposal• Act on Special Measures for the Promotion of Nankai Trough Earthquake Disaster Management• Act on Special Measures against Tokyo Inland Earthquake• Framework for Large-Scale Earthquake Disaster Management and Reduction• FY 2014 Comprehensive Disaster Management Drill Framework•

Source: Cabinet Office
Page A-52

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015
Jul. 16, '03

May 13, '03

May 12, '03

Source: Cabinet Office

Disaster Management Implementation Committee

Committee for Policy Planning on Disaster Management(total 13 meetings)

Committee for the Technical Investigation of Earthquake and Tsunami Measures Basedon Lessons Learned from the Great East Japan Earthquake (total 12 meetings)

Committee for the Technical Investigation of Disaster Evacuation(total 8 meetings)

Committee for the Technical Investigation of Effective Practices for Earthquake
Disaster Management in Regional Cities (total 10 meetings)

Aug. 29, '06

Committee for the Technical Investigation of Large-Scale Flood Measures(total 20 meetings)

Dec. 9, '05

Jan. 23, '06

Oct. 14, '05

Jul. 22, '05

Aug. 16, '06

Oct. 27, '03

Sep. 18, '03

Sep. 12, '03

Jul. 31, '03

Oct. 3, '02

Sep. 25, '02

Jun. 28, '02

FY 2006

FY 2007

Dec. 13, '06

Oct. 21, '08

Aug. 26, '10

Oct. 28, '11

May 28, '11

FY 2012FY 2013Jun. 14, '13

Jul. 31, '12Mar. 22, '12Mar. 12, '12

Set. 28, '11

FY 2011

Dec. 22, '10

FY 2010

Mar. 18, '10

Apr. 26, '10

FY 2009

Dec. 2, '08

FY 2008

Chubu and Kinki Inland Earthquake Measures(meetings 17-36)

FY 2005

Nov. 26, '04

FY 2004

Tohnankai and Nankai Earthquake
Measures (meetings 1-16)

Jun. 26, '02

FY 2003

Committee for the Technical Investigation of Tokyo Inland Earthquake
Evacuation Measures (total 14 meetings)

Committee for the Technical Investigation of the Promotion of Citizen
Campaigns to Reduce Disaster Damage (total 14 meetings)

Committee for the Technical Investigation of Trench-type Earthquakes in theVicinity of the Japan and Chishima Trenches (total 17 meetings)

Committee for the Technical Investigation of Improving Disaster Resilience Using
the Power of the Markets and Private Sector (total 5 meetings)

Committee for the Technical Investigation of Tokyo Inland Earthquake Measures(total 20 meetings)

Committee for the Technical Investigation of the Dissemination of Lessons
Learned from Disasters (total 15 meetings)

Committee for the Technical Investigation of Disaster Management Information
Sharing (total 12 meetings)

Committee for the Technical Investigation of the Cultivation of Disaster
Management Human Resources (total 5 meetings)

FY 2002

Dec. 11, '01

Mar. 4, '02

Oct. 11, '01

Committee for the Technical Investigation of Basic Disaster Management Plans(total 9 meetings)

Committee for the Technical Investigation of Tokai Earthquake Measures(total 10 meetings)

Oct. 3, '01

Sep. 17, '01

Mar. 14, '01

FY 2001

Committee for the Technical Investigation of Tonankai and Nankai Earthquakes(total 36 meetings)

Committee for the Technical Investigation of Future Earthquake Measure
Effective Practices (total 11 meetings)

Committee for the Technical Investigation of Tokai Earthquakes(total 11 meetings)

Reform of Ministries and Agencies

FY 2000

Section 4

Name of Committee for Technical Investigation

FY 2014

Fig. A-34
Status of the Establishment of Central Disaster Management Council Committees for Technical Investigation

Page A-53

Section 5: Budget
Fig. A-35

FiscalYear

Appendix

1962
1963
1964
1965
1966
1967
1968
1969
1970
1971
1972
1973
1974
1975
1976
1977
1978
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009

Page A-54

Disaster Management Budgets by Year
Science andTechnology
Research
Disaster Prevention
Share
Share
(JPY million)(JPY million)
(%)
(%)
751
0.4
8,864
4.3
1,021
0.4
8,906
3.7
1,776
0.7
13,724
5.4
1,605
0.5
17,143
5.6
1,773
0.5
20,436
5.9
2,115
0.6
23,152
6.1
2,730
0.7
25,514
6.8
2,747
0.7
30,177
7.5
2,756
0.6
36,027
8.2
3,078
0.5
50,464
8.6
3,700
0.4
93,425
10.3
6,287
0.7
111,32112.4
14,5691.5
118,596
12.1
17,795
1.5
159,595
13.3
21,143
1.3
186,297
11.5
22,836
1.4
234,40913.9
29,642
1.7
307,170
17.3
35,145
1.6
435,963
20.4
29,9291.2
456,575
18.9
29,621
1.2
474,926
18.9
28,945
1.1
469,443
17.2
29,825
1.1
489,918
18.4
28,215
1.2
485,219
20.7
27,6801.1
512,837
20.2
28,646
1.2
482,889
19.7
38,296
1.4
612,505
21.9
31,051
1.1
587,073
20.8
34,542
1.2
588,35420.7
35,382
1.1
625,239
20.0
35,791
1.1
628,59619.8
36,302
1.1
745,405
22.8
43,152
0.9
866,170
18.6
40,460
1.0
747,22318.9
105,845
1.4
1,208,134
16.0
52,3851.2
1,029,658
24.5
49,1281.2
1,147,102
28.2
62,4351.1
1,228,539
22.3
78,134
1.7
1,142,199
25.0
73,5021.8
1,011,535
24.4
49,3101.2
1,060,445
26.7
48,1641.3
1,202,984
31.9
35,1331.1
814,10125.7
30,4780.7
815,059
19.3
11,0970.4
866,290
28.6
11,627
0.4
689,505
25.1
9,687
0.4
706,853
29.0
8,921
0.4
819,359
33.2
8,761
0.4
498,39723.0

Land Conservation
Share(JPY million)(%)
97,92947.1
116,13147.7
122,40948.3
147,85848.3
170,65049.0
197,83352.3
207,600
55.4
236,20959.0
269,15960.9
352,686
60.3
488,81854.1
493,58054.9
505,208
51.5
615,457
51.3
711,15943.9
904,30253.6
1,093,847
61.6
1,229,401
57.6
1,229,615
50.8
1,240,788
49.5
1,261,326
46.3
1,268,712
47.6
1,350,592
57.7
1,355,917
53.5
1,354,397
55.3
1,603,599
57.2
1,550,132
54.9
1,638,104
57.5
1,669,336
53.4
1,729,332
54.3
2,017,898
61.6
2,462,800
52.9
1,945,295
49.1
2,529,386
33.5
2,156,714
51.3
2,014,695
49.4
2,905,921
52.8
2,400,534
52.6
2,376,083
57.3
2,238,816
56.4
1,981,686
52.5
1,625,670
51.4
1,753,418
41.5
1,426,745
47.0
1,439,129
52.3
1,332,222
54.6
1,275,135
51.7
1,383,254
63.7

DisasterReconstruction
Share(JPY million)(%)
100,64248.3
117,47348.2
115,39345.6
139,42445.6
155,71544.7
154,855
41.0
138,81537.1
131,27032.8
133,99830.3
178,20930.5
316,895
35.1
287,082
32.0
342,55634.9
405,77133.9
700,68843.3
525,886
31.2
345,603
19.5
432,759
20.3
705,16829.1
761,95030.4
963,98435.4
875,85132.9
475,87820.3
640,225
25.2
581,46223.8
548,33719.6
657,68123.3
587,81920.6
796,23125.5
788,60324.8
475,41114.5
1,280,569
27.5
1,230,072
31.0
3,696,010
49.0
968,182
23.0
864,37021.2
1,310,515
23.8
941,886
20.6
689,225
16.6
618,427
15.6
543,949
14.4
689,25521.8
1,622,112
38.4
728,606
24.0
610,30222.2
391,63716.0
363,471
14.7
279,789
12.9

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

Total
(JPY million)

208,006
243,522
253,302306,030
348,574
377,955
374,659
400,403441,940
584,437
902,838
898,270
980,929
1,198,618
1,619,287
1,687,433
1,776,262
2,133,268
2,421,287
2,507,285
2,723,698
2,664,306
2,339,904
2,536,659
2,447,394
2,802,737
2,825,937
2,848,819
3,126,188
3,182,322
3,275,015
4,652,691
3,963,050
7,539,375
4,206,938
4,075,295
5,507,411
4,562,752
4,150,346
3,966,998
3,776,783
3,164,159
4,221,067
3,032,738
2,750,563
2,440,399
2,466,886
2,170,201

Fiscal
Year
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015

Science andTechnology
Research
Disaster Prevention
Share
Share
(JPY million)(JPY million)
(%)
(%)
7,695
0.6
224,841
16.9
28,072
0.6
376,169
8.0
29,4220.6
561,02112.0
15,3390.3
788,576
14.1
12,6830.3
412,904
11.0
9,966
0.3
495,654
14.7

Land Conservation
Share(JPY million)(%)
813,35961.1
743,93615.9
790,42217.0
879,93215.8
803,404
21.3
137,192
4.1

DisasterReconstruction
Share(JPY million)(%)
285,03821.4
3,536,475
75.5
3,129,561
67.2
3,883,911
69.6
2,535,673
67.4
2,733,771
81.0

Total
(JPY million)

1,330,933
4,684,652
4,656,656
5,578,036
3,764,664
3,376,583

Fig. A-36

Trends in Disaster Management Budget

8,000,000

12

7,000,000

Disaster management budget proportion of thegeneral fund10

6,000,000

Budget (JPY million)

85,000,000

4,000,000

6

3,000,000
42,000,000
2

Percentage of the General Fund Budget (%)

Disaster management budget (adjusted amounts)(FY 2014 figures are initial amounts)

1,000,000

00Source: Created by the Cabinet Office using materials from various ministries and agencies.

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

Page A-55

Section 5

Notes:
1. These are adjusted budget (national expenditures) amounts. However, the FY 2014 figures are preliminary figures reflecting theinitial budget.
2. The reduced amount allocated to science and technology research in FY 2007 is largely due to the structural conversion ofnational lab and research institutions into independent administrative agencies (the budgets of independent administrative
agencies are not included in this table).
3. The amount allocated to disaster prevention in FY 2009 is reduced because a portion of the revenue sources set aside for road
construction were converted to general fund sources making it impossible to allocate certain portions to the disastermanagement budget.
4. The reduced amount allocated to disaster prevention and land conservation in FY 2010 is due to the fact that, following thecreation of the General Grant for Social Capital Development, some disaster prevention policies and many subsidy programs inland conservation were established using those grants.
5. The reduced amount allocated to land conservation in FY 2011 is a result of the fact that relevant personnel expenses were
accounted for separately.
Source: Cabinet Office using materials from various ministries and agencies.

Fig. A-37

Earthquake Emergency Development Project Plans(As of the end of FY 2014; Unit: JPY million)

FY 1980 - FY 2014

Category

Planned Amount(a)

Estimated Actual
Amount (b) *1

Rate of Progress(b)/(a)Appendix

1 Evacuation sites

157,275

157,275

100.0%

2 Evacuation roads

82,316

81,34298.8%

3 Firefighting facilities

129,797

124,501

95.9%

4 Emergency transport routes

756,712620,59382.0%

4-1 Emergency transport routes

675,702516,88276.5%

4-2 Emergency transport ports

63,82365,724103.0%

4-3 Emergency transport fishingports

39,641

37,98795.8%

5 Telecommunications facilities

19,61718,48094.2%

6 Public medical institutions

54,01254,012100.0%

7 Social welfare facilities

47,83562,145129.9%

8 Public elementary and junior highschools

425,150446,602105.0%

9 Tsunami countermeasures

158,868

156,89798.8%

9-1 River management facilities

56,86056,12898.7%

9-2 Coastal preservation facilities

103,933

100,76997.0%

474,627

457,78596.5%

10-1 Erosion control facilities

78,78880,291101.9%

10-2 Security facilities

142,330

140,19098.5%

10-3 Landslide facilities

76,68675,636

98.6%

10-4 Steep slope facilities

146,105

145,61499.7%

10-5 Ponds

16,896

16,05495.0%

2,306,209

2,179,632

94.5%

10 Landslide prevention

Total

Notes:*1 The content of Earthquake Emergency Development Project Plans (FY 1980-2014) is as of the end of FY 2014. Estimated actual
amounts are calculated using actual amounts for FY 1980-2009 and estimated actual amounts for FY 2010-2014.
*2 Project expenses include expenses for projects that may not be solely designed for earthquake disaster management, but that,while having other policy objectives, also are intended to have an overall effect on earthquake disaster management. Project
expenses are not comprised solely of expenses used entirely for disaster management.
Source: Cabinet Office

Page A-56

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

219,490-

784,899482,317-

7. Medical institutions
8. Social welfare facilities
8-2. Public kindergartens

Page A-57

469,126

131,645

102,857

409,216

359,433

522,261

170,513

162,319

13-3. Landslide prevention facilities

13-4. Steep slope failure prevention
facilities

13-5. Reservoirs
14. Community DRR base facilities

1,431,714

14,117,470

18,503,368

659

3,595

2,814,605

8,028

126,320

17,763

221,622

76.3%

50.9%

18.3%

45.2%

57.0%

56.3%

63.4%

77.2%

95.3%

km

ha

km

km

km

6,960

ha

610 groups

437 sites

444 sites

1,702 sites

121 sites

1,252 sites

3,568 sites

1,651 sites

5,583 sites

2,278 sites

14,332 sites

119 sites

215 sites

334 sites

29 facilities

114 schools

5,840 schools-

857 facilities

115 facilities

844

73 sites

113 sites

1 sites

3,448 facilities

3,920

161

28,153 sites

2,601

3,168

(c)

Project Scope (Unit)

14,157,285

1,725,532

1,133

10,33889,822

126,944

81,642133,038

446,098

275,558

330,719436,635

1,622,048

76,248

196,496

272,744

2,662

32,094

1,078,849-

280,028

391,016

394,948

70,423

181,503550

16,855

4,998,577

5,267,908

119,329

540,784

1,188,051

931,413(d)Planned Amt.

10,018,773

916,981

687

5,292

55,59938,69340,342

90,165356,530

219,200

263,907409,636

1,339,438

78,899146,699

225,598

1,199

12,070594,777-

176,408

277,721257,890

46,387

119,869

387

8,473

4,067,023

4,242,139

92,958297,301

900,446543,233(e)Actual Amt.

70.8%

53.1%

60.6%

51.2%

61.9%

30.5%

49.4%

67.8%

79.9%

79.5%

79.8%

93.8%

82.6%

103.5%

74.7%

82.7%

45.0%

37.6%

55.1%

-

63.0%

71.0%

65.3%

65.9%

66.0%

70.4%

50.3%

81.4%

80.5%

77.9%

55.0%

75.8%

58.3%

(e)/(d)% Complete
ha

7,839

ha

515 groups

296 sites

405 sites

5,844 sites

78 sites

1,147 sites

2,500 sites

1,151 sites

3,673 sites

2,033 sites

10,504 sites

68 sites

423 sites

491 sites

670facilities

264schools

16,256schools

995schools

521facilities

93facilities

591 km43 sites

100 sites

0 sites

2,439facilities

2,552 km

102 km21,039 sites

1,405 km

2,515

(f)

Project Scope (Unit)

12,197,074

846,197

314

4,081

142,958

239,525

60,905100,913244,461

158,479

210,861

354,972

1,069,686

50,380187,407237,787

62,97556,834

3,077,544

35,198

114,756

239,424

259,420

47,594

198,676

0

9,242

3,557,657

3,813,169

46,719448,460

952,865

488,257(g)

Planned Amt.

8,359,916

563,811

262

838

72,142

78,112

34,277

66,870220,779

160,883

202,299

325,910

976,742

36,867

146,044

182,911

24,42923,262

1,399,624

7,074

56,400150,877

175,571

41,558136,895

0

6,844

3,106,165

3,291,461

49,136

246,745625,957

400,283(h)Actual Amt.

Third Five-Year Plan (FY 2006-2010)

68.5%

66.6%

83.4%

20.5%

50.5%

32.6%

56.3%

66.3%

90.3%

101.5%

95.9%

91.8%

91.3%

73.2%

77.9%

76.9%

38.8%

40.9%

45.5%

20.1%

49.1%

63.0%

67.7%

87.3%

68.9%

－

74.0%

87.3%

86.3%

105.2%

55.0%

65.7%

82.0%

(h)/(g)% Complete
ha

7,339

ha

304 groups

616 sites

514 sites

8,147 sites

154 sites

1,084 sites

2,619 sites

853 sites

2,683 sites

2,057 sites

9,296 sites

154 sites

520 sites

674 sites

1,676facilities

195schools

13,896schools

1,178schools

654facilities

216facilities

470 km25 sites

73 sites

2 sites

4,837facilities

2,254 km

54 km

20,013 sites

885 km1,458(f)Project Scope (Unit)

10,885,963

502,993

136

5,800

116,594

185,950

72,534

81,479193,937

117,841

146,012303,286

842,555

102,326

220,549

322,875

345,868

40,262

2,308,893

54,705

121,238

656,327

254,399

20,734

137,802117

15,3002,548,081

2,722,034

23,416672,698

1,333,127

303,558(g)

Planned Amt.

5,166,308

207,61039

1,813

43,31356,64035,46738,407

117,272

76,346

122,502

171,284

525,81150,446

97,598148,044

93,267

19,404

1,059,322

14,42066,155284,270

132,979

12,23399,19378

7,960

1,429,326

1,548,791

12,737

237,791

505,740

172,696(h)Actual Amt.

Fourth Five-Year Plan (FY 2011-2015)

47.5%

41.3%

28.7%

31.3%

37.1%

30.5%

48.9%

47.1%

60.5%

64.8%

83.9%

56.5%

62.4%

49.3%

44.3%

45.9%

27.0%

48.2%

45.9%

26.4%

54.6%

43.3%

52.3%

59.0%

72.0%

66.7%

52.0%

56.1%

56.9%

54.4%

35.3%

37.9%

56.9%

(h)/(g)% Complete(All prefectures, as of FY 2014. Unit: JPY 1,000,000)

1. The content of the Fourth Five-Year Plan (FY 2011-2015) is current as of the end of FY 2014.
2. The expenses for each project are not limited to projects aimed at achieving earthquake DRR; they include expenses for projects that have other policy purposes, such as those related to urban infrastructuredevelopment, but that also are effective in terms of earthquake DRR.
3. Public special education schools include schools known as schools for the blind, schools for the deaf, and schools for the physically or mentally/physically handicapped prior to FY 2006.
Source: Cabinet Office materials.

19. Downtown areas with high density
dilapidated housing

17. Storage warehouses
18. Response and relief systems

126,236

224,276

497,69099.2%

114.6%

92.1%

98.4%

82.1%

77.7%

79.5%

21.8%

35.1%

56.3%

-

45.5%

67.1%

105.6%

85.0%

66.2%

33.1%

87.9%

96.4%

94.3%

76.1%

76.0%

74.6%

65.6%

(b)/(a)% Complete

Second Five-Year Plan (FY 2001-2005)

Section 5

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 201515. Disaster management radio
communications system
16. Potable water facilities/power generation
systems

247,050

268,151

356,531

1,702,042

77,8091,729,574

94,82112-2. River management facilities

109,501

13. Erosion control facilities, etc.
13-1. Erosion control facilities
13-2. Security facilities

140,865

187,310

235,68612-1. Coastal preservation facilities

5,267

24,169

11. Public buildings
12. Coast and river facilities

29,68584,577765,344

10. Public special education schools

1,359,672

526,548

261,385

6. Multipurpose underground utility conduits

9. Public elementary and jr. high schools

103,481

121,734

5-5. Emergency transport fishing port facilities

275,928

237,940

2,094

21,017

5,355,365

359,671

6,327

23,900128,163

168,387

5-4. Emergency transport port facilities

5-3. Emergency transport heliports

5-2. Emergency transport/traffic control
facilities

697,067

917,213

5,555,626

1,105,639

1,481,509

5,719,897

959,276

1,462,542

5-1. Emergency transport roads

(b)

(a)

6,067,258

Actual Amt.

Planned Amt.

1. Evacuation sites
2. Evacuation routes
3. Firefighting facilities
4. Roads for firefighting activities
5. Emergency transport roads, etc.

Category

First Five-Year Plan (FY 1996-2000)

Based on lessons learned from the Great Hanshin-Awaji Earthquake, the Act on Special Measures for Earthquake Disaster Countermeasures was enacted in July 1995 to protect citizens' lives, heath, and assets fromearthquake-related damage. This law allows prefectural governors to create a Five-Year Plan for Emergency Earthquake Disaster Management Projects for communities where there are concerns about the occurrence of asevere earthquake disaster and a portion of the projects to be implemented based on this plan are eligible for an increased rate of financial support from the national government. Thus far, these plans have been createdby the prefectural governors over four terms, and earthquake disaster projects have begun to be implemented. These plans are five-year plans created for 29 facilities that need to be urgently developed from theperspective of achieving earthquake disaster reduction. When a prefecture wants to create a plan, hearings are held to listen to the opinions of the municipalities involved, and the consent of the Prime Minister must be
obtained. Project budgets for these plans over four terms are shown in the table below.

Fig. A-38
Estimated Budgets for Five-Year Plans for Emergency Earthquake Disaster Management ProjectSection 6: Status of Disaster Management Facilities and Equipment
MLIT Resource Base Designation Status

Fig. A-39

Appendix

Number of Private Resource Bases

2,000

1,500
1,169

934

1,000

500

395

0
FY2011FY2012FY2013

Source: Prepared by the Cabinet Office based on a report compiled by the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism(MLIT) entitled "The Construction of a Disaster-Resistant Distribution System (March 2014)."

Preparation Status of Disaster Management Facilities and Equipment at Schools Designated as Emergency Evacuation Sites

Fig. A-40

81.2%
80.5%
79.8%

80%

May 2012

69.6%
69.1%
67.5%

60%

May 2013

May 2014

55.8%
47.2%

41.7%
38.4%

40%

46.8%

40.0%

40.2%
34.2%

36.3%
35.1%
33.5%

27.5%

20%

*The FY 2012 survey did not include Iwate Prefecture, Miyagi Prefecture, or Fukushima Prefecture
Source: Prepared by the Cabinet Office using materials from MEXT

Page A-58

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

Water tanks, pool water
purification system

In-house power
generation equipment

Telecommunications
equipment

DRR storage /warehouse (on campus)

Gymnasium toilets

Outdoor toilets0%Fig. A-41

Number of Medical Facilities for Disasters by Prefecture

0

20

70

80

90

33

8
11

15
13
7
8
15
Section 6

Hokkaido
Aomori
Iwate
Miyagi
Akita
Yamagata
Fukushima
IbarakiTochigi
Gunma
Saitama
Chiba
Tokyo
Kanagawa
NiigataToyamaIshikawa
Fukui
Yamanashi
NaganoGifu
Shizuoka
Aichi
Mie
Shiga
Kyoto
Osaka
Hyogo
Nara
Wakayama
Tottori
Shimane
Okayama
Hiroshima
Yamaguchi
Tokushima
KagawaEhime
Kochi
Fukuoka
Saga
Nagasaki
Kumamoto
Oita
MiyazakiKagoshima
Okinawa10

Number of Hospitals
30
40
50
60

9
17
17
20

82
33
15

7
10

8
9
11
12
21

34
13

10
8

19
17
7

10
4

10
18
18
13
11

9
8
10
25

9
12
14
13
11
10
5

Source: Prepared by the Cabinet Office based on the website of the Emergency Medical Information System

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

Page A-59

Fig. A-42

Number of Red Cross Hospitals, Emergency Medical Centers, and DMAT-Designated Medical Facilities

Red Cross
Hospital

Emergency
MedicalCenterHokkaido

10

11

Aomori1

Iwate

DMATDesignatedFacility

Appendix

Red Cross
Hospital

Emergency
MedicalCenterDMATDesignatedFacility

34 Shiga

3

4

10

2

10 Kyoto

3

6

11

1

3

11 Osaka

2

13

18

Miyagi2

615 Hyogo

4

7

19

Akita

1

1

14 Nara0

3

7

Yamagata

02

8 Wakayama

1

3

11

Fukushima

1

4

8 Tottori

1

2

4

Ibaraki2

6

18 Shimane

2

3

10

Tochigi

3

5

11 Okayama

1

5

10

Gunma

2

3

17 Hiroshima

3

5

18

Saitama

3

8

17 Yamaguchi

2

5

16

Chiba

1

11

21 Tokushima

1

3

13

Tokyo

4

23

71 Kagawa

1

2

10

Kanagawa

3

16

33 Ehime

1

3

8

Niigata1

5

15 Kouchi

1

3

16

Toyama1

2

8 Fukuoka

3

8

24

Ishikawa

1

2

12 Saga

1

5

9

Fukui

1

2

9 Nagasaki

2

3

15

Yamanashi

1

1

12 Kumamoto

2

3

15

Nagano68

12 Oita

1

3

21

Gifu

2

6

12 Miyazaki

0

3

12

Shizuoka

5

9

21 Kagoshima

1

2

13

Aichi

2

18

34 Okinawa

1

3

15

Mie

1

3

13 Total

92

254

741

Source: Red Cross Hospital information was prepared by the Cabinet Office based on the website of the Japanese Red Cross Society.
Information on Emergency Medical Centers and DMAT-Designated Facilities was prepared by the Cabinet Office based on thewebsite of the Emergency Medical Information System.

Page A-60

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

Fig. A-43

Designation of Tsunami Evacuation Buildings in Municipalities

Trends in the Number of Buildings Designated as Tsunami Evacuation Buildings (by Time Period)
12,00010,35810,000

8,000

6,000

3,986
4,000

Section 6

1,876

2,000

0
As of Jun. 2011

As of Oct. 2011

As of Dec. 2013

Trends in the Number of Buildings Designated as Tsunami Evacuation Buildings (by Type)
4,500(buildings)

4,110

N=8,661

4,000
3,500

3,000
2,500

1,770

2,000
1,500

791

561

Shops andfactories

Other

392
Offices266

494

Hotels277

Hospitals

Residences0

Schools

500

Meeting
places1,000

Capacity of Tsunami Evacuation Buildings(buildings)

2,500

2,043
2,000

1,777

1,500
1,178
932

1,000

869

500

311

417

0
Fewer than 100

100-299

300-499500-999

1,000-1,999

2,000-2,999

3,000 or more(people)Note: Surveys conducted in June and October 2011 did not include the prefectures of Iwate, Miyagi, or Fukushima due to theimpacts of the Great East Japan Earthquake. These results are from a survey conducted by the Cabinet Office and MLIT
among coastal municipalities (initial survey conducted June 2011, with a follow-up survey conducted in October that sameyear).
Source: "Results of a Survey on Tsunami Evacuation Buildings," MLIT and the Cabinet Office (June and October, 2011).
"Survey of Tsunami Evacuation Initiatives by Local Governments," Cabinet Office (December 2013).
WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

Page A-61

Designation of Welfare Evacuation Shelters

No. of Municipalities with Designated Welfare
Evacuation Shelters

1200

100%

No. of Municipalities with Designated Welfare
Evacuation Shelters

981

Percentage of Municipalities with DesignatedWelfare Evacuation Shelters

1000

800

80%

728

600

56.3%

60%

41.6%

Appendix

40%
400
20%

200
0

Percentage of Municipalities with DesignatedWelfare Evacuation Shelters

Fig. A-44

0%
End of March 2011

End of September 2012

Note: A welfare evacuation shelter is a shelter for people who cannot use ordinary shelters because they are elderly, handicapped,or otherwise require accommodations that ordinary shelters cannot provide. Existing buildings are used for these shelters,
which aim to help provide care to evacuees. They are designed to be barrier free, with portable toilets, handrails, andtemporary ramps built for handicapped users.
Source: "Welfare Evacuation Shelter Designation Status Survey Results (as of the end of September 2012)," Ministry of Health,Labour and Welfare (MHLW)

Fig. A-45

Seismic Reinforcement of Public Infrastructure
100

100%
80%

100
91

94

FY2009

81

73

74

64

FY2014

70

60%
44

40

40%

26
20%
0%

Roads

Railways(Shinkansen)

Railways(Conventional)

Airports

Ports and Harbors

Sewerage Facilities

Notes
Roads: Rate of seismic reinforcement of bridges of emergency transport roads (important roads that have to be secured for thepassage of emergency vehicles to facilitate evacuation and rescue as well as relief supply delivery activities starting
immediately after the earthquake; national expressways, national highways, and the arterial roads that connect them.
Railway (Shinkansen): Elevated bridges.
Railway (Conventional): Elevated bridges of major railway lines in regions where a seismic intensity of 6 Upper or greater would be
expected to occur in the case of a Tokyo Inland Earthquake or Nankai Trough Earthquake. (Left: As of end of
FY 2012. Right: As of end of FY 2013.)
Airports: Percentage of population in a 100 km area around an airport that could be used for emergency transport.
Ports and Harbors: Seismically reinforced piers (ratio of developed piers to the total number of 336 piers targeted for development).
Sewerage Facilities: Important main lines (pipes that can accommodate drainage from river basin lines, DRR bases, and evacuationsites, main pipes connected to pump stations and disposal stations, pipes buried beneath emergency transportroads and railroad tracks. (Left: As of end of FY 2009. Right: As of end of FY 2013.)
Source: Prepared by the Cabinet Office using materials from the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism (MLIT)

Page A-62

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

Fig. A-46

Trends in the Seismic Reinforcement Rate of Public Facilities That Serve as Disaster Management Bases
85.4%

75.7%

80%
62.5%

60%

40%

20%
Section 6

0%
2007

2010

2013

*Of all the public facilities owned or managed by local governments (buildings for public or public-private use: non-wooden
structures built two stories or taller or buildings with a floor area of 200m2 or more), those that could serve as disastermanagement bases for implementing disaster response measures were extracted, tabulated, and analyzed based on the criteria
shown below.
(1) Social welfare facilities(2) Education facilities (classrooms, gymnasiums)(3) Government buildings(4) Prefectural civic halls, civic centers(5) Gymnasiums(6) Health care facilities(7) Police headquarters and police stations(8) Fire headquarters and fire stations(9) Public housing(10) Employee dorms(11) OtherAll facilities
Facilities designated as evacuation sites
Facilities that will be used for the implementation of disaster response measures
Facilities designated as evacuation sites
Facilities designated as evacuation sites
Facilities positioned in local disaster management plans as medical care facilities
All facilities
All facilities
None
None
Facilities designated as evacuation sites

Source: Prepared by the Cabinet Office based on the "Fire and Earthquake Disaster Prevention Status Survey" compiled by the Fireand Disaster Management Agency

Fig. A-47

Seismic Reinforcement of Houses and Buildings Used by Many People
Target 95%

Target 95%

90%

80%

79%

80%

75%

75%

70%
2003

2008
Houses

2020

2003

2008

2020

Buildings used by many people

Source: Prepared by the Cabinet Office based on materials of the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism (MLIT)
WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

Page A-63

Seismic Reinforcement Status of Public Elementary and Junior High Schools

80,000100.0%

No. of remaining
buildings

73,166

96.2%

Rate of seismic
reinforcement

70,16767,06859,29560,000

93.3%
88.9%
84.8%

84.6%
53,636

Appendix

No. of remaining buildings

92.5%

90.0%

Implentation rate ofsecond assessments

63,101

97.6%

80.3%

80.0%

47,94941,20670.2%

40,00073.3%

67.0% 33,134
62.8%
57.5%
20,000

62.3%
60.0%

22,911

58.6%

18,508

54.7%
51.8%

13,412

49.1%

8,956

46.6%
44.5%
0

40.0%

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

Source: “Results of the Survey on the Seismic Reinforcement Status of Public School Facilities,” Ministry of Education, Culture,
Sports, Science and Technology (MEXT) (April 2014)

Page A-64

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

Rate of seismic reinforcement & implementation rateof second assessments

Fig. A-48

Fig. A-49

Seismic Reinforcement Status of Hospitals

100%
Total 86.5%
80%

Total 75.6%
Total 72.7%
29.8%

8.6%

60%
36.3%

Section 6

40%

67.0%
56.7%
20%

36.4%

0%
2005

2010

2014

No. of hospitals where all buildings are earthquake resistant
No. of hospitals where some buildings are earthquake resistant
Source: Prepared by the Cabinet Office based on the “Results of the 2014 Survey on the Seismic Reinforcement Status of Hospitals”
compiled by the Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare (MHLW)

Fig. A-50
100.0%

Seismic Reinforcement Status of Disaster Management Base Hospitals and Emergency Medical Centers
Total 98.4%
Total 95.1%

Total 90.5%

12.9%
32.2%

80.0%
47.2%
60.0%

82.2%

40.0%
66.2%
20.0%

43.3%

0.0%
2005

2010

2014

No. of facilities where all buildings are earthquake resistant
No. of facilities where some buildings are earthquake resistant
Source: Prepared by the Cabinet Office based on the “Results of the 2014 Survey on the Seismic Reinforcement Status of Hospitals”
compiled by the MHLW

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

Page A-65

Section 7: Trends in Numbers of Workers in Disaster Management
Trends in Numbers of Fire Corps Volunteers

1,200

25,000No. of Fire Corps Volunteers

1,000

1,002

21,684

983

963
928

AppendixFire Corps Volunteers (thousands)

Female Fire Corps Volunteers

889

19,043885
17,879800

16,69920,785

20,10919,577880

20,000
869

874

864

884
15,000600

12,44010,0008,485

400

Female Fire Corps Volunteers (individuals)

Fig. A-51

5,000
200

4,150
1,605

0

0
1989

1993

1998

2003

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

Note: As a result of the Great East Japan Earthquake, the figure for 2012 for Onagawa-cho, Meshika-gun, Miyagi prefecture is thefigure from 2010 (as of April 1, 2010).
Source: Produced by the Cabinet Office based on the Survey on the Current Status of Fire and Earthquake Disaster Management
Measures of the Fire and Disaster Management Agency

Fig. A-52
100%

Trends in Age Composition Ratios among Fire Corps Volunteers
1.8%
7.8%

3.1%
15.9%

0.9%
6.1%

1.9%

2.2%

7.4%

10.4%

15.7%

80%

24.2%

4.8%

13.4%

13.7%

27.1%

27.9%

38.5%

37.8%

16.5%

15.7%

2013

2014

24.6%

45.0%
39.2%

60%
10s-30s
90.4%

47.3%
40.2%

38.6%

40%

20%

4.5%

45.4%

10s-30s
57.5%

41.8%
30.0%

26.2%

24.2%

0%
1965

1975

1985
10s-20s

1998
30s

40s

2003
50s

60s and older

Source: Produced by the Cabinet Office based on the Survey on the Current Status of Fire and Earthquake Disaster Management
Measures of the Fire and Disaster Management Agency

Page A-66

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

Fig. A-53

Trends in Numbers of Flood Fighting Corps Personnel

2220

19.76019.173 19.100

18.877 18.992 19.022 18.983 18.873

18.45418.12918

17.876 17.730 17.724
16.995 16.801

16.26015.992 15.867

15.702 15.599

15.439 15.406

14.92114.559 14.383

14
12

10
8

Section 7

No. of flood fighting corps (thousand)

16

6
4
2

0
1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

Year

Source: Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism (MLIT)

Trends in Voluntary Disaster Management Organizations
200,000

80.00%80%
73.5%
69.9%

150,000

64.5%

No. of organisations

61.3%
109,016

127,82475.8%
146,396

77.9%
153,600

156,84060%

139,316

115,814100,000

40%

50,00020%

0Activities coverage rate

Fig. A-54

0%

2003

2005

2007

2009

2011

2013

2014

No. of Organizations
Activities Coverage Rate (no. of community households that fall within the scope of activities of voluntarydisaster management organizations)

Source: Produced by the Cabinet Office based on the Survey on the Current Status of Fire and Earthquake Disaster Management
Measures of the Fire and Disaster Management Agency. Figures as of April 1 each year.

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

Page A-67

Coverage of Voluntary Disaster Management Organizations by Prefecture (%)

Fig. A-55
120

100
88
83 83

80

86

82
74

88 87

87
82

76

72

79 81

75

92 92

95 95

95

90

87

90

87

92 93

84 82

80

85

81

79

92

91 90 90

83 84

80
68

64 64
60

80

59
51

51
43

40
20

20

Note: Figures as of April 1, 2014
Source: Produced by the Cabinet Office based on the "Survey on the Current Status of Fire Fighting, Disaster Management, andEarthquake Measures" conducted by the Fire and Disaster Management Agency

Trends in Age Composition Ratios among Fire Corps Volunteers

Fig. A-56

Year

Number ofmunicipalities

Level of funding (number of municipalities)
SystemPerformance record
Number of
No. of municipalities
Amountmunicipalities with awith a performance(unit: JPY 1,000)
systemrecord

2003

3,213

1,977

1,635

4,330,406

2004

3,123

1,945

1,631

2,391,375

2005

2,418

1,691

1,448

2,351,204

2006

1,843

1,516

1,296

3,636,344

2007

1,827

1,538

1,308

4,236,251

2008

1,811

1,600

1,343

3,669,089

2009

1,800

873

825

2,825,592

2010

1,750

850

813

2,818,480

2011

1,619

795

753

2,755,277

2012

1,742

893

831

2,918,428

2013

1,742

964

902

3,524,318

2014

1,742

1,017

954

3,715,437

Note: Figures as of April 1 each year (the "Amount" indicates the amount of actual funding provided in the previous fiscal year)
Source: Produced by the Cabinet Office based on the "Current Status of Community Disaster Management Administration (20042015)," compiled by the Fire and Disaster Management Agency

Page A-68

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

Total

Okinawa

Kagoshima

Oita

Miyazaki

Kumamoto

Saga

NagasakiFukuoka

Ehime

Kouchi

KagawaTokushima

Yamaguchi

Okayama

Hiroshima

Tottori

ShimaneNara

Wakayama

Hyogo

Kyoto

Osaka

Mie

Shiga

Aichi

Gifu

Shizuoka

NaganoFukui

Yamanashi

Ishikawa

NiigataToyamaKanagawa

Chiba

Tokyo

Gunma

Saitama

IbarakiTochigi

Fukushima

Akita

Yamagata

Iwate

Miyagi

Aomori

Hokkaido

Appendix0Section 8: Various Policies and Measures
Fig. A-57

100%

Hazard Map Development
Flood Hazard
Map

Inland Flooding
Hazard Map

TsunamiHazard Map

Storm Surge
Hazard Map

Published: 1,272
municipalities(as of end of March 2014)

Published: 279
municipalities(as of the end March 2014)

Published: 539
municipalities(as of end of March 2014)

Published: 113
municipalities(as of end of March 2014)

Sample:1,310 municipalities

Sample:484 municipalities

Sample:672 municipalities

Sediment Disaster
Hazard Map

Volcano Hazard
Map

Published: 1,317
municipalities(as of end of March 2014)

Published: 37 volcanoes(as of end of March 2014)

Sample:1,606 municipalities

Sample:47 volcanoes

Sample:645 municipalities

3%

20%

90%
80%

18%

21%

82%

79%

42%

60%

50%

Section 8

70%
82%

97%
80%

40%
30%

58%

20%
10%

18%

0%

Published

UnpublishedSource: Produced by the Cabinet Office based on materials of the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism

Fig. A-58

80

Formulation Status of Official Announcement Criteria for Evacuation Advisories in Municipalities where
Natural Disasters are Anticipated

75.3

77.4

78.2

78.9

80.1

73.2

2012
62.6

2013

63.3

60

40

20

0
Flood

Sediment Disasters

Storm Surges

Tsunamis

Note: Figures are percentages of municipalities with criteria already formulated or under review. The 2013 survey assumes
disasters will occur as follows: flooding in all municipalities (1,742 municipalities), sediment disasters in 1,603
municipalities, storm surges in 641 municipalities, and tsunamis in 667 municipalities.
Source: Produced by the Cabinet Office based on the "Results of a Survey into the Formulation Status of Specific Official
Announcement Criteria for Evacuation Advisories" from the Fire and Disaster Management Agency.

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

Page A-69

Fig. A-59

Methods of Communicating Evacuation Orders to Residents in Municipalities
Disaster management
radio communications
systemYear

2003
Appendix

2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014

Using thecommunication
facilities of Patrols by
loudagricultural/
Individual
fishery
speaker
Simultaneous
Home
vans
Broadcasting cooperatives
Receivers(including
SystemSystemwired
systems)

1,748
54%
1,731
55%
1,365
56%
1,118
61%
1,125
62%
1,117
62%
1,118
62%
1,096
63%
1,006
62%
1,086
62%
1,097
63%
1,112
64%

2,126
66%
2,095
67%
1,670
69%
1,349
73%
1,350
74%
1,348
74%
1,361
76%
1,333
76%
1,240
77%
1,340
77%
1,377
79%
1,398
80%

591
18%
559
18%
449
19%
362
20%
343
19%
323
18%
311
17%
289
17%
248
15%
245
14%
219
13%
206
12%

2,942
92%
2,864
92%
2,254
93%
1,739
94%
1,722
94%
1,713
95%
1,702
95%
1,647
94%
1,530
95%
1,644
94%
1,648
95%
1,651
95%

Siren

Bell ringing

News
media

2,537
79%
2,463
79%
1,927
80%
1,487
81%
1,462
80%
1,455
80%
1,440
80%
1,383
79%
1,271
79%
1,357
78%
1,347
77%
1,334
77%

698
22%
659
21%
525
22%
414
22%
383
21%
358
20%
345
19%
324
19%
270
17%
285
16%
276
16%
256
15%

675
21%
663
21%
642
27%
666
36%
718
39%
750
41%
782
43%
811
46%
787
49%
848
49%
878
50%
925
50%

Throughvoluntary
disastermanagement
organizations

Other

1,065
33%
1,064
34%
942
39%
887
48%
939
51%
987
55%
1,015
56%
1,033
59%
1,002
62%
1,129
65%
1,154
66%
1,169
67%

1,106
34%
1,106
35%
925
38%
781
42%
800
44%
829
46%
830
46%
830
47%
806
50%
955
55%
998
57%
1,049
60%

upper

Number of Municipalities

lower

Rate of Municipalities Utilizing the Methods

Note: As of April 1 each year
Source: Produced by the Cabinet Office based on the "Current State of Local Disaster Risk Management (2004-2015)" compiled by theFire and Disaster Management Agency

Page A-70

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

Fig. A-60

Year

Instances of Assistance based on Mutual Support Agreements between Prefectures and Support Agreementswith Private-Sector Institutions in Recent Years
Instances ofSupport Basedon Mutual
Broadcasting
SupportAgreements Agreements(agmts.)
BetweenPrefectures

Status of Support Agreements with Private-Sector Institutions

Reporting
Agreements

Emergency
DisasterTransportation
reliefRecovery
Agreements
Agreements
Agreements

Resources
Agreements

Other

2003

23

6

288

47

347

31

191

37

148

39

400

37

711

34

124

19

2004

4

2

288

47

359

33

218

39

165

41

474

39

828

36

134

23

2005

13

8

304

47

362

32

221

43

178

42

504

40

873

40

182

31

2006

5

2

301

46

370

33

241

44

201

40

587

43

992

42

212

37

2007

0

0

304

46

337

34

272

43

211

41

778

43 1,196

44

317

36

2008

12

1

306

46

400

36

316

45

239

43

818

45 1,294

46

461

39

2009

5

1

314

46

399

36

339

44

247

43

857

45 1,364

46

546

41

2010

24

5

329

47

393

36

420

45

254

43 1,590

46 1,431

45

676

42

2011

18

4

318

44

373

33

472

43

235

41 1,568

43 1,357

44

676

39

2012

25

6

334

47

395

36

495

46

291

44 1,825

46 1,461

47

931

46

2013

29

8

360

47

419

38

575

47

317

46 1,913

47 1,558

47 1,178

46

2014

28

6

351

47

445

40

703

47

374

46 2,360

47 1,672

47 1,299

46

Source: Produced by the Cabinet Office based on the "Current State of Local Disaster Risk Management (2004-2015)" compiled by
the Fire and Disaster Management Agency

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

Page A-71

Section 8

Total
Total
Total
Total
Total
Total
Total
no. ofno. ofno. ofno. ofno. ofno. ofno. ofTotal No. of
No. ofNo. ofNo. ofNo. ofNo. ofNo. ofNo. ofconcluconcluconcluconcluconcluconcluconcluno.
orgs.
orgs.
orgs.
orgs.
orgs.
orgs.
orgs.
orgs.
ded
ded
ded
ded
ded
ded
ded
agmts.
agmts.
agmts.
agmts.
agmts.
agmts.
agmts.

Fig. A-61

Status of Mutual Support Agreements in Municipalities

Year

No. of Municipalities

No. of mutual support
agreements to whichmunicipalities belong within
the prefecture

No. of municipalities thathave concluded mutual
support agreements withother municipalities

Appendix

2003

3,213

1,459

2,363 / 74%

2004

3,123

1,527

2,306 / 74%

2005

2,418

1,502

1,771 / 73%

2006

1,843

1,408

1,457 / 79%

2007

1,827

1,512

1,471 / 81%

2008

1,811

1,625

1,656 / 91%

2009

1,800

1,725

1,646 / 91%

2010

1,750

1,778

1,571 / 90%

2011

1,619

1,738

1,476 / 91%

2012

1,742

2,254

1,645 / 94%

2013

1,742

2,920

1,650 / 95%

2014

1,742

3,419

1,697 / 97%

Note: As of April 1 each year
Source: Produced by the Cabinet Office based on the "Current State of Regional Disaster Risk Reduction (2004-2015)" compiled by
the Fire and Disaster Management Agency

Fig. A-62
Year

Status of Municipalities’ Support Agreements with Private-Sector Institutions
BroadcastAgreements

Reporting
Agreements

Emergency Transportation
DisasterReliefAgreement
Recovery
Agreements
Agreements

Resources
Agreements

Other

No. oforgs.

No. ofsupportinstances

No. oforgs

No. ofsupportinstances

No. oforgs

No. ofsupportinstances

No. oforgs

No. ofsupportinstances

No. oforgs

No. ofsupportinstances

No. oforgs

No. ofsupportinstances

No. oforgs

No. ofsupportinstances

2003

150

10

22

2

726

4

253

2

392

21

562

7

334

6

2004

171

20

20

2

713

4

260

2

445

18

589

5

361

5

2005

191

50

27

2

647

6

271

15

445

39

583

17

376

9

2006

225

38

18

2

574

10

267

3

451

24

619

8

401

2

2007

275

35

24

596

7

292

2

662

23

794

6

484

9

2008

315

62

33

619

2

319

5

813

35

936

17

510

5

2009

362

48

33

658

3

355

2

979

35 1,060

33

559

11

2010

378

35

35

683

6

376

3 1,052

42 1,125

22

580

8

2011

376

107

36

2

645

17

386

109 1,066

548 1,118

226

579

57

2012

437

59

41

3

719

19

462

48 1,242

167 1,309

123

684

54

2013

495

81

58

778

3

519

9 1,318

42 1,412

20

743

6

2014

554

59

66

827

2

602

3 1,360

131 1,466

40

800

17

Note: As of April 1 each year
Source: Produced by the Cabinet Office based on the "Current State of Regional Disaster Risk Reduction (2004-2015)" compiled by
the Fire and Disaster Management Agency

Page A-72

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

Fig. A-63

Status of Disaster Management Drill Implementation

Trends in the No. of Prefectural Organizations Conducting Disaster Management
Drills and the No. of Drills Conducted
60

464

347

40

30

396
341

361

291

288
235

232

47

47

400

360

No. of drills

No. of Drills Conducted

50

500

300

218
47

47

47

47

20

47

47

43

43

47

47

200

100

10

0

0
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

Trends in the No. of Municipal Organizations Conducting Disaster Management
Drills and the No. of Drills Conducted
2000
8,000

1500

6,307

5,932 5,755

5,420

5,946 5,809 6,014

6,268 6,163 6,450

7,000
6,000

1,485
1,461

5,000

1,377
1000

4,000
3,000

500

No. of drills

No. of implementing organizations

6,989
6,530

2,000
No. of Orgs.
No. of Drills Conducted

0

1,000
0

2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

Note: The no. of drills is the sum total of “comprehensive drills (actually conducted),” “tabletop exercises,” “communications drills,”
and “others.”
Source: Produced by the Cabinet Office based on the "Current State of Regional Disaster Risk Reduction (2004-2015)" compiled by
the Fire and Disaster Management Agency

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

Page A-73

Section 8

No. of implementing organizations

No. of Orgs.

463

Fig. A-64

Coverage of Voluntary Disaster Management Organizations by Prefecture (%)

No. of participants

No. of organizations
No. of drills conducted
No. or participants

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

Trends in the No. of Prefectural Organizations Conducting Earthquake Disaster Management Drills, No. of Drills
Conducted, and the No. of Participants (Including Region-Wide Drills)
No. of organizations
No. of drills conducted
No. or participants

No. of participants

No. of organizations conducting earthquake drills & drills conducted

Appendix

No. of organizations conducting earthquake drills & drills conducted

Trends in the No. of Prefectural Organizations Conducting Earthquake Disaster Management Drills, No. of Drills
Conducted, and the No. of Participants (Comprehensive Drills)

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

Note: Drills are for earthquake disasters.
Source: Produced by the Cabinet Office based on the "Current State of Regional Disaster Risk Reduction (2004-2015)" compiled by
the Fire and Disaster Management Agency

Page A-74

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

Fig. A-65

Implementation Status of Tsunami Countermeasures

No. of
govts

2003

3,213

1,014

2,199

401

812

1,700

108

5,355

311

1,631

204

2004

3,123

984

2,139

420

799

1,817

104

5,609

306

1,535

204

2005

2,418

806

1,612

374

465

2,099

111

6,442

316

1,472

180

2006

1,843

666

1,177

367

299

3,066

107

6,830

286

1,233

149

2007

1,827

667

1,160

374

384

2,297

108

7,307

292

1,231

143

2008

1,811

659

1,152

417

393

2,593

118

7,647

297

11,051

33

2009

1,800

655

1,145

424

353

2,674

118

7,919

307

1,042

125

2010

1,750

648

1,102

439

385

2,757

118

8,396

304

1,025

123

2011

1,619

609

1,010

425

357

2,448

106

7,448

276

787

93

2012

1,742

646

1,096

492

379

4,058

130

12,110

323

886

107

2013

1,742

646

1,096

539

383

5,054

139

16,238

361

905

104

2014

1,742

646

1,096

576

403

5,591

155

19,405

380

848

96

Note:
“Designated as likely tsunami inundation areas” indicates areas to which tsunami damage would be expected to extend based on
past earthquake records, the coastal topography, and the presence of breakwaters. (The figures for 2003-2010 reflect areas“Designated as tsunami hazard areas.” ) The “number of evacuation routes” and “number of evacuation sites” are calculated
based on the assumption of a tsunami. The “Implementation of tsunami disaster drills” is the total number of drills conductedbased on the assumption of an impending tsunami, and drills conducted based on complex disaster scenarios that include atsunami. Only the “tsunami inundation distance” for the tsunami breakwater is shown in units of km.
Source: Produced by the Cabinet Office based on the "Current State of Regional Disaster Risk Reduction (2004-2015)" compiled by
the Fire and Disaster Management Agency

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

Page A-75

Section 8

Year

TsunamiAlong the Coast? DesignatedEvacuation Routes Evacuation Sites
Breakwaters
as likely Recorded
tsunami in local
Extended
No. ofNo. ofNo. ofNo. ofNo. ofYes
No
inundation DM plan
distanceroutesgovts facilities govts
govts
areas
(km)

Section 9: Japan's International Cooperation
Fig. A-66

Ministry/
AgencyList of Cooperation Projects Conducted by Ministries and Agencies

Project

Partner/
TargetCountry(TargetInstitution)

In December 2014, a memorandum of cooperation was
executed between the Cabinet Office and FEMA to promote
cooperation on disaster risk management between the two
institutions, and to construct a framework for information andknowledge sharing.

－

China,
Based on the Trilateral Joint Announcement on Disaster
Republic Management Cooperation at the First Japan-China-Republic ofof Korea Korea Trilateral Summit Meeting held in 2008, the 3rd JapanChina-Republic of Korea Ministerial Meeting on Disaster
Management was held in the Republic of Korea in 2013. A joint
declaration was made to confirm the sharing of technology andinformation relating to DRR and the strengthening ofcooperative structures for education and training.
China,
Based on the matters agreed upon in the Leaders' Declaration
Republic at the 4th Japan-China-Republic of Korea Summit Meeting heldof Korea in Tokyo in March 2011, the 2nd Japan-China-Republic of Korea
Trilateral Tabletop exercise on disaster management(hypothetical scenario: large-scale earthquake in Tokyo) took
place in Japan in March 2014, with related institutions fromJapan, China, and Republic of Korea participating.

－CabinetDisaster Risk Reduction US
Office (CAO) Cooperation between (FEMA)
Cabinet Office and US
FEMAAppendix

Japan-China-Republicof Korea Ministerial
Meeting on Disaster
Management

Japan-China-Republicof Korea Trilateral
Tabletop exercise on
disaster management

Description

Budget for FY
2014(in JPY million;
if applicable)－

Department
Responsible

Disaster Preparedness,
Public Relations andInternational
Cooperation Division,
Disaster Management
Bureau, CAO
Disaster Preparedness,
Public Relations andInternational
Cooperation Division,
Disaster Management
Bureau, CAO

Disaster Preparedness,
Public Relations andInternational
Cooperation Division,
Disaster Management
Bureau, CAO

Japan-Republic ofRepublic These meetings are to be held in both countries to exchange
Disaster Preparedness,－
Korea Disasterof Korea opinions with respect to initiatives taken to address disasters
Public Relations andManagement Meetingin recent years. In November 2014, the14th Japan-Republic ofInternational
Korea Disaster Management Meeting was held on Cheju Island,
Cooperation Division,
Republic of Korea, and opinions were exchanged on
Disaster Management
countermeasures to address sediment disasters, snow
Bureau, CAO
disasters, volcanic eruptions, and victim support.
CabinetUS-Japan Workshop on US
In July 2014, experts on national resilience from Japan and the
National Resilience－
Secretariat National Resilience
US were invited to share experiences from Operation
Promotion Office,Tomodachi at the time of the Great East Japan Earthquake as
Cabinet Secretariat
well as to discuss national resilience.
Forum on PR andUN
In March 2015, as part of the Great East Japan Earthquake
National Resilience－
Outreach on National
Forum at the UN World Conference on Disaster Risk Reduction,
Promotion Office,
Resilience at the 3rd
information was shared and opinions exchanged on national
Cabinet Secretariat
UN World Conference
resilience initiatives in Japan and in the ASEAN/East Asianon Disaster Risk
Region.
Reduction
International
ASEAN
In April 2015, Japan attended the International Symposium on
National Resilience－
Symposium on National
National Resilience organized by the Economic Research
Promotion Office,
Resilience in the ASEAN
Institute for ASEAN and East Asia (ERIA). The symposium aimed
Cabinet Secretariat
Countries
to allow Japan to share its knowledge and experience innational resilience with the ASEAN countries, to increase theunderstanding of other countries of these issues, and topromote international collaboration.
Ministry of
Promotion of
ASEAN
Through this project, MIC will test disaster management ICT
Included in ICT International
Internal
International
andsystems, which have been cultivated based on Japan's manyInternational Cooperation Division,
Affairs andDevelopment of ICT
othersyears of experience and expertise, in countries in the ASEAN
Development Global ICT Strategy
Communica- System for Disasterregion that are prone to natural disasters, taking the needs of Package Aid
Bureau (GISB), MIC
tions (MIC) Management
each country into account. It will also approach other
Project 2015
governments in cooperation with private enterprises and will (JPY 1,145m)
promote the overseas development of Japan's ICT systems fordisaster management.
ICT Phase 3 for the
AHA
Since FY 2011, MIC and MOFA have been utilizing the JapanInternational－
support to AHA Center Center
ASEAN Integration Fund (JAIF) to support the development of
Cooperation Division,(ASEAN Coordinating (ASEAN) the ICT system of the AHA Center, which is the disaster
Global ICT Strategy
Centre formanagement information hub for the ASEAN region. In FY
Bureau (GISB), MIC/
Humanitarian
2015, they plan to support ICT development and humanRegional Policy Division,
Assistance on disasterresource development to help improve the AHA Center's
Asian and Oceanianmanagement)
emergency response capacity as ICT Phase 3.
Affairs Bureau, MOFA

Page A-76

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

Ministry/
AgencyProject

Partner/
TargetCountry(TargetInstitution)

Description

Budget for FY
2014(in JPY million;
if applicable)

Telecommunication
Systems Division,
Telecommunications
Business Department,
Telecommunications
Bureau/International Policy
Division, Global ICT
Strategy Bureau (GISB),
MIC(Councellor of) Civil
Protection and Disaster
Management
Department, FDMA(Councellor of) Civil
Protection and Disaster
Management
Department, FDMA

Humanitarian
Assistance andEmergency Relief
Division, International
Cooperation Bureau,
MOFA
Emergency Grant Aid
Following the flood disaster that occurred in northern India
10383 (*FY
Humanitarianand northeastern Pakistan in September 2014, MOFA
2014
Assistance andcontributed emergency grant aid and has provided grantsettlement
Emergency Relief
funding since then for disaster recovery from typhoons andamount)Division, International
earthquakes, and for disaster risk mitigation.
Cooperation Bureau,
MOFA
Japan Disaster Relief
Japan Disaster Relief Teams were inspected by the IER
Humanitarian－Team's Inspection by(INSARAG External Re-Classification) that evaluates theAssistance andIER
capacity of the rescue teams in each country, and once again
Emergency Relief(as in 2010) received the highest classification of "heavy."
Division, International
Cooperation Bureau,
MOFA
Disaster Risk Reduction Countries This project promotes DRR cooperation in developing countries Grant Aid for Non-Governmental
Collaboration/ Disaster affected through the Grant Aid for Japanese NGO's Projects, emergency Japanese
Organizations
Restoration Support in by natural humanitarian relief and disaster recovery support through the NGO's
Cooperation Division,
1
Cooperation withdisasters Japan Platform, and by establishing an international DRR
Projects:
International
Japan's International
network in the Asia Pacific region and carrying out emergency approx. 566
Cooperation Bureau,
2
Cooperation NGOs
humanitarian relief through the Asia Pacific Alliance (PAD).
(including JPF) MOFA
1: A framework by which Japanese NGOs, the business(*FY 2014
community, and the government work together to provide
settlement
emergency humanitarian support following the occurrence of a amount)natural disaster or conflict either in Japan or overseas.
2: A framework that aims to develop an international DRR
network for NGOs, the business community, and thegovernments of the APAD member states to tackle large-scale
natural disasters in the Asia Pacific region, under theleadership of Japanese NGOs. The Japanese government
contributed approx. JPY 100 million in FY 2013 and plans tocontribute JPY 100 million in FY 2015.
Operation of IAEA
IAEA
In December 2012, the "Practical Arrangements Between theInternational Nuclear－
RANET Capacity
member Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Japan and the International
Energy Cooperation
Building Centre (CBC) countries Atomic Energy Agency on Cooperation in the Area ofDivision, Disarmament,(IAEA)
Emergency Preparedness and Response" was signed by MOFA
Non-proliferation andand the IAEA. Given this, in May 2013, the IAEA RANET
Science Department,
Capacity Building Centre (CBC) was designated in Fukushima
MOFA
Prefecture. IAEA staff are permanently stationed there.
Equipment that would be necessary in an emergency is stored
at the Center and used for emergencies, and several times a
year, training is held for those connected to international andJapanese local governments.

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

Page A-77

Section 9

ITU (Inter- Starting in FY 2014, MIC has cooperated with the ITU and the－national
Philippines Department of Science and Technology to
Telecommu- implement a project to conduct demonstration experiments
nicationusing mobile ICT units (MDRU*) as measures against natural
Union),
disasters on the island of Cebu in the Philippines, which wasPhilippines affected by a typhoon.
Departmentof Science *MDRU: Movable and Deployable ICT Resource Units wereanddeveloped through research and development by MIC based
Technology on lessons learned from the Great East Japan Earthquake. They
consist of transmission equipment that can be sent to disastersites following natural disasters to enable prompt emergency
response and restoration transmissions, and come in small invehicle and attache-case models.
Fire andAsian International
Asian
The International Forum on Fire and Disaster Management has 3.3
DisasterForum on Fire andcountries been held since 2007 to enable the countries of Asia toManagement Disaster Management
enhance their firefighting and disaster management capacity,
Agencyand to introduce Japan's firefighting technologies, systems,(FDMA)and structures in those countries. In September 2014, it washeld in Phnom Penh, Cambodia.
Japan-Republic ofRepublic On the occasion of the 2002 FIFA World Cup, jointly held by
2
Korea Firefightingof Korea Japan and Republic of Korea, the "Year of Japan-Republic of
Administration Seminar
Korea National Exchange," a Japan-Republic of Korea
Firefighting Administration Seminar was held in both countries
to promote Japanese-Republic of Korean exchange,
collaboration, and cooperation, through the sharing of
information and the exchange of ideas on the issues offirefighting and disaster management in both countries.
Ministry of Provision of
In March 2015, following the cyclone in Vanuatu, and in
280 (*FY 2014
ForeignInternational
January 2015, following the flooding in Mozambique, MOFA
settlement
Affairs
Emergency Relief
contributed international emergency relief goods to support
amount)(MOFA)
Goods
the immediate needs of the disaster victims through the Japan
International Cooperation Agency (JICA) (23rd occasion).
Ministry of Collaborative ProjectInternal
with ITU Using
Affairs and Movable andCommunica- Deployable ICT
tions (MIC) Resource Unit (MDRU)

Department
Responsible

Partner/
Budget for FY
Target2014
Department
Project
Country
Description(in JPY million;
Responsible(Targetif applicable)
Institution)
Ministry of Promotion of "Sentinel 25
This project is led and implemented by Japan to contribute to
Office for Space－
Education, Asia" Project to Share countries disaster management efforts in the Asia-Pacific Region. It uses
Utilization Promotion,
Culture,Information on Natural of the Asia satellites to share information relating to natural disasters.
Space Development andSports,Disasters Between Asia Pacific
Participants consist of 25 countries and regions, 81 institutions,Utilization Division,
Science and -Pacific Countries
Region/15 and 15 international institutions (as of April 2015).
Research andTechnology
interDevelopment Bureau,(MEXT)
national
MEXT
organizations
Science and136
MEXT and the Japan Science and Technology Agency (JST)International Science(MOFA)
Technology Research countries together with MOFA and the Japan International Cooperation Included inand Technology Affairs
Partnership forthat are Agency (JICA), through leading science and technology andDivision, Science and
JICA
Sustainable
the object Official Development Assistance (ODA), have set up SATREPS in Management Technology Policy
Developmentof ODAorder to promote joint international research on solutions to Expenses
Bureau, MEXT(SATREPS) Program
global issues that occur in developing countries, including DRR. Grant(MEXT)
Included in JST
Management
Expenses
Grant
The
Participation andRepublic The Japan-China-Republic of Korea Top Regulators' Meeting
International Affairs－
Secretariat Cooperation in Japan- of Korea (TRM) is a framework for the exchange of information between
Office, Policy Planningof theChina-Republic ofand China organizations that regulate atomic energy in Japan, China, andand Coordination
Nuclear
Korea Nuclear Disaster
Republic of Korea. Under one initiative of the TRM, one
Division, SecretaryRegulation Management Drills
participating country invites the other two to participate in its
General's Secretariat
Authority
nuclear DRR drills. In November 2014, representatives from the(NRA)
regulatory authorities of Japan and China took part in drills in
Republic of Korea. The project is also working towards thedevelopment of an information-sharing system between thethree countries for emergency situations.
Participation in ConvEx: IAEA
Japan participates in communication training performed by theInternational Affairs－
Convention Exercise
International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) to ensure that the
Office, Policy Planningprovisions of the Convention on Early Notification of a Nuclear
and Coordination
Accident and the Convention on Assistance in the Case of a
Division, SecretaryNuclear Accident or Radiological Emergency (two conventions
General's Secretariat
relating to nuclear accidents) are implemented in an orderly
manner.
IAEA Safety Measure IAEA
Japan also participates in IAEA projects to promote the29
International Affairs
Contributions for
publication and sharing of information relating to accidents
Office, Policy Planning
Nuclear Power Plants
and issues that are reported to the IAEA by member countries
and Coordination(Emergency Measures
regarding their nuclear facilities.
Division, SecretaryProject)
General's Secretariat
Ministry of Investigative Project
Targeted Between 2013 and 2017 this project will work in the rural areas 41
Overseas Technical
Agriculture, into Global
widely,of developing countries to disseminate education to raise
Team, Overseas Land
Forestry and Environment Issues for particularly residents' awareness of DRR, to develop system to prevent andImprovement
Fisheries
Overseas Agricultural in Asian
reduce damage from natural disasters through resident
Cooperation Office,(MAFF)
and Rural Development countries participation under the leadership and support of local
Design Division, Rural(Survey to consider
governments, and to investigate methods for creating rural
Infrastructure
agricultural disasterdisaster management plans.
Department, Rural
management plans)
Development Bureau,
MAFF
Promotion of Forest
Food and This is a field project made possible through contributions to 35
Overseas PlanningManagement Focusing Agriculture the FAO, which works in developing countries to establish
Team, Internationalon the Effects ofOrganizati efficient methods of evaluating soil conservation functions ofForestry Cooperation
Forests for Disasteron of the applicable forests. In so doing, it seeks to promote appropriate
Office, Planning
Prevention andUnitedforestry management that will contribute to such conservation
Division, Forestry
Mitigation in
Nationsfeatures, with a view to improving disaster resilience andAgencyDeveloping Countries (FAO)
securing stable water resources.
Ministry/
AgencyAppendix

Ministry of
Defense(MOD)

Page A-78

International seminar Govern- This project takes into account the important role that forested 11"Soils as the foundation ments of soil plays in preventing and reducing damage caused byfor resilient forests in a individual mountain disasters, to coincide with the International Year ofchanging environment" countries, Soil 2015. International seminars will be held to shareinterknowledge relating to work on forested soils to increase thenational health of forests, and methods of monitoring the soundness ofinstitutions forested soil. Messages will be compiled for the Secretariat ofandthe International Year of Soils, the 11th UN Forum on Forests
research Meeting, and the 14th World Forestry Congress.
institutes
ASEAN Disaster Relief ASEAN
This exercise, which was co-organized by the Thai andExercisenations, Malaysian militaries, was held in Eastern Thailand in April
Canada, 2014. It involves the implementation of all kinds of training
China, EU, related to humanitarian support and disaster relief. MOD
France, joined drills related to medical activities.
and theUS

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

Overseas Planning
Team, International
Forestry Cooperation
Office, Planning
Division, Forestry
Agency－Operations Support
Division, Bureau ofOperational Policy,
MODMinistry/
AgencyMinistry of
Defense(MOD)

Project

Multi-National Joint
Training Exercise,
RIMPAC

Partner/
TargetCountry
Description(TargetInstitution)
Australia, This is a joint training exercise planned by the US Navy andCanada, conducted with the involvement of foreign vessels. JapanUS, and participates in humanitarian support and disaster relief
otherstraining.

Budget for FY
2014(in JPY million;
if applicable)

Department
Responsible－

Operations Support
Division, Bureau ofOperational Policy,
MOD

ARF
This exercise aims to enhance the capacity to provide regionalcountries disaster relief, and is a field training exercise conducted within
and inter- the framework of the ASEAN Regional Forum (ARF). Japannational participates in training relating to medical activities.
institutions－

Operations Support
Division, Bureau ofOperational Policy,
MOD

Multinational Joint
Training on
Humanitarian Aid andDisaster Relief"Southern Cross"organized by French
military based in New
Caledonia
Multinational Joint
Training "Cobra Gold"

France, Following the press release issued in May 2014, at the time ofAustralia, the Prime Minister's visit to France, personnel were dispatched
Tonga,
to this training between August and September 2014, and field
Vanuatu, training was conducted in connection with relief activities for
UK, US, disasters on islands.
andothers－Operations Support
Division, Bureau ofOperational Policy,
MOD

Indonesia, In addition to the existing bilateral training drills conducted
Republic of between the US and Thailand, this training has been
Korea,
implemented in recent years as a multinational training
Malaysia, program focusing on peace operations in areas of conflict, UN
Singapore, peace-keeping activities, and humanitarian and public welfare
Thailand, support activities. Japan participated in medical activity drills.
US, andothers－Operations Support
Division, Bureau ofOperational Policy,
MOD－

Operations Support
Division, Bureau ofOperational Policy,
MOD－

Operations Support
Division, Bureau ofOperational Policy,
MOD－

International Affairs
Office, Planning
Division, Road Bureau,
MLIT

Japan, US, andAustralia Joint
Exercises in
Humanitarian Aid andDisaster Relief

Australia This is a training program that aims to improve interoperability
and US
with the US and Australian militaries with respect tohumanitarian aid and disaster relief activities. The participating
countries conducted air transport training, supply-drop
training, soft-field take-off and landing training, and searchtraining.
ADMM-Plus Exercise in Every
This training exercise aims to enhance the capacity for
Humanitarian Aid,
ADMM- providing regional disaster relief, and consists of field training
Disaster Relief andPlus
conducted within the framework of the extended ASEAN
Defense Medicine
country Defense Ministers' Meeting (ADMM-Plus). Japan participatedin medical activity drills.
Ministry of
Discussion with India India
The 1st Japan-India Road Interchange Meeting was held inLand,
on DRR Technology
Delhi following the framework for cooperation that was
Infrastructure Through a Bilateralexecuted in September 2014. Opinions were exchanged inTransport and Conference
connection with useful slope protection technologies for road
Tourism
maintenance in the mountainous northeastern states of India.
(MLIT)The 2nd Meeting is planned to be held in Tokyo in May 2015.
Japan-ASEAN Project to All
This project works toward the enhancement of disaster11
Promote Disaster Risk ASEAN
management capacity in the transport sector in ASEAN
Reduction Cooperation nations countries. An experts' meeting is convened to share knowledge
in the Field of
about disaster countermeasures in that sector and theTransportation
development of good DRR practices in the field of transport inJapan and the ASEAN nations.
Disaster Risk Reduction Chile
The Research Project on the Enhancement of Technology to
Cooperation between
Develop Tsunami-Resilient Communities, a SATREPS project,
Japan and Chile on
has been in progress since 2012. In May 2005, at the time ofPorts
the visit to Chile by Mr. Nishimura, Senior Vice Minister for
Diplomatic Relations, a memorandum of understanding was
executed on coastal disaster risk reduction measures, which
included an introduction from Japan to Chile of technology
standards relating to ports.

ASEAN-Japan Port
Technology Group(Formulation of PortDRR Guidelines)

ASEAN
nations

This meeting is part of a three-year plan, starting in 2015, toshare the lessons learned from the Great East Japan
Earthquake with all of the ASEAN nations and to compile PortDRR Guidelines (provisional title) that all of the ASEAN nations
can refer to when implementing initiatives relating to port
DRR.

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

International Policy
Division, Policy Bureau,
MLIT

－

－

International Policy
Planning Office,Industrial Port Policy
Division, Ports andHarbors Bureau/ Risk
Management Office,Coastal Administration
and Disaster
Management Division,Ports and Harbors
Bureau, MLIT
International Policy
Planning Office,Industrial Port Policy
Division, Ports andHarbors Bureau/ Risk
Management Office,Coastal Administration
and Disaster
Management Division,Ports and Harbors
Bureau, MLIT

Page A-79

Section 9

ARF Disaster Relief
ExercisePartner/
Budget for FY
Target2014
Department
Project
Country
Description(in JPY million;
Responsible(Targetif applicable)
Institution)
Ministry of
INTERPRAEVENT 2014 25
Japan's advanced erosion control technologies were
Sabo (Erosion and－Land,
countries introduced at the Pan-Pacific INTERPRAENENT, an integrated
Sediment Control)
Infrastructure,andinternational conference held to promote and disseminate
Planning Division,
Transport andregions academic research on the prevention and mitigation of natural
Water and DisasterTourism
including disasters caused by flooding, debris flows, landslides,
Management Bureau,(MLIT)
the EU, avalanches, and other disasters.
MLIT
Asia, andCentraland South
America
Disaster Management Vietnam, Held since 2013, these dialogues aim to enhance the DRR
25
River Planning Division,
Collaboration
Thailand, functions of developing nations principally in Asia, while also
Water and Disaster
Dialogues
Myanmar, expanding Japan's DRR technology overseas. They also aim toManagement Bureau/
Indonesia, develop a lasting structure for cooperation in each individual
Overseas Projects
Turkey,country through collaborations between industry, government,
Division, Policy Bureau,Southand academia.
MLIT
AfricaCollaboration between ECHO
Following the exchange of correspondence between Japan'sRiver Planning Division,－
MLIT and the European
MLIT and EU's ECHO in March 2013, an information exchange
Water and DisasterCommission's
has been conducted every year to share DRR knowledge andManagement Bureau,
Humanitarian Aid andexperience through the reciprocal exchange of experts and
MLIT
Civil Protection
practitioners, with the objective of enhancing disaster
Department (ECHO)
management systems on both sides.
Japan
International
WMO
The JMA, as a constituent member of the WMO (one of the
Office of Disaster－
Metrological Cooperation through member specialized institutions of the UN which functions to collect andManagement andAgencyWMO
countries promote the distribution of observations and data on weather
Planning, Planning(JMA)
around the world, and to improve information relating to theDivision, Administration
weather and the climate), sends experts to international
Department, JMA
conferences, and is responsible for international centers.
International
UNESCO The JMA provides technological contributions relating to the
Office of Disaster－Cooperation through member field of oceans and tsunami, within the framework of theManagement and
UNESCO
countries, UNESCO Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission (IOC).
Planning, Planningetc.
- It collects, analyzes, and provides data on oceans andDivision, Administration
maritime meteorology for the northeast Asian region, in
Department, JMA
cooperation with other related countries (China, Republic ofKorea, and Russia).
- It provides each country with information on tsunamis caused
by earthquakes that occur in the northwest Pacific region.
International
ICAO
The JMA participates in meetings relating to aeronautical
Office of Disaster－Cooperation through member meteorology organized by the ICAO, as well as investigations
Mitigation, Planning
International Civil
countries into adopting and improving standard international criteria for
Division, Administration
Aviation Organization
aviation weather services. It has also been appointed by the
Department, JMA(ICAO)ICAO to operate international centers such as the Tokyo
Volcanic Ash Information Center, and the Tropical Cyclone
Information Center, thus contributing to the safe operation of
global aircraft.
Collaboration onAll
The JMA promotes various international research projects in
Office of Disaster－
International Research relevant cooperation with other countries. On climate change, it has
Management andPlans
countries been involved in writing evaluation reports on the activities ofPlanning, Planning
the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) since
Division, Administration
the panel was established in 1988.
Department, JMA
Human Resource
All
Together with the Japan International Cooperation Agency
Office of Disaster－
Development Aid and relevant (JICA), the JMA has spent more than 40 years conducting
Management andTechnologicalcountries trainings designed for the staff of the national meteorological
Planning, Planning
Cooperation to
institutions of developing countries, in order to improve their
Division, Administration
Developing Countries
meteorological services. Also, in response to demands from
Department, JMA
the WMO and individual countries, the JMA dispatches staff
who are experts in observations using meteorological radar,weather analysis, and weather forecasting, and receives
trainees from the national meteorological institutions.
Ministry/
AgencyAppendix

Note: SATREPS: Science and Technology Research Partnership for Sustainable Development
Source: Produced by the Cabinet Office based on the Materials from Ministries and Agencies

Page A-80

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

Fig. A-67
Country

Examples of Technical Cooperation Projects in Disaster Risk Reduction (FY2014)

Indonesia

Cooperation
Period2007-2014

Project Name

Description

Indonesia

2011-2015

Project for Enhancement ofDisaster Management Capacity of
BNPB and BPBD

Indonesia

2013-2016

Project for Assessing andSupports the implementation by Indonesia of water resources
Integrating Climate Change Impacts management that takes into account the effects of climate change,
into the Water Resources
by providing advice on the formulation of water resource
Management Plans for Brantas and management plans in Indonesia's Brantas and Musi River Basins
Musi River Basinsthat take such effects into consideration, and by drafting guidelinesthat can also be applied to other river basins.

Indonesia

2013-2018

Project for Integrated Study on the
Mitigation of Multimodal Disasters
Caused by the Ejection of Volcanic
Products (SATREPS)

Aims to comprehensively reduce disaster risks caused by theejection of volcanic products through the development of a"Multimodal Sediment Disaster Countermeasures Decision-Making
Support System" composed of a "Volcanic Eruption Early Warning
System", an "Integrated GIS Multimodal Sediment Disaster
Simulator", and a "Floating Volcanic Ash Warning System", alladdressing the five volcanoes within Indonesia (Merapi, Semeru,
Kelud, Galunggung and Guntur), and through the practical use ofsuch system by the institutions related to DRR.

Indonesia

2014-2018

Project on Capacity Developmentfor River Basin Organizations(RBOs) in Integrated Water
Resources Management in the
Republic of Indonesia (Phase II)

In the field of integrated water resources management inIndonesia (operation and maintenance of river facilities,
coordination of water use and allocation, preservation of aquatic
environments, flood management, etc.), supports the
improvement of the structure and capacity of the RBOs and thecontinuous strengthening of efforts relating to integrated water
resources management, by means of (1) site confirmations using
field practice, (2) development and management of organizational
structures and systems for strengthening the capacity of the RBOs,
and (3) improving access to reliable guidelines and manuals.

Malaysia

2011-2016

Research and Development for
Reducing Geo-Hazard Damage in
Malaysia caused by Landslides andFloods (SATREPS)

Observes the environment around the surface of the earth using
remote sensing and conducts research into the production of thetrial version of a high level disaster risk management system
including an integrated database relating to sediment and flood
disasters, in order to implement and promote a disastermanagement program in Malaysia.

Philippines 2012-2015

Disaster Risk Reduction andManagement (DRRM) Capacity
Enhancement Project

Based on the National Disaster Risk Reduction and Management
Act of the Philippines and National Disaster Risk Reduction andManagement Plan, supports capacity enhancement for disaster
response by drawing up plans and standardizing activities aroundthe axis of the Office of Civil Defense, which is the core institution
responsible for DRR, and by constructing a human resource
development system.

Philippines 2010-2015

Enhancement of Earthquake andVolcano Monitoring and Effective
Utilization of Disaster Mitigation
Information Project (SATREPS)

While introducing the latest earthquake and volcano observationand monitoring systems to the Philippines, supports theenhancement of observation and analysis capacity, transmits
highly accurate observation data relating to earthquakes andvolcanoes, and contributes to the strengthening of disastermanagement systems. Also implements technology transfer
relating to the construction of a tsunami prediction simulation
system.

Project on Building Administration Supports the development of building codes relating to earthquake
and Enforcement Capacity-resistant construction, the creation and distribution of proposed
Development for Seismic Resilience model local legislation, the adoption and dissemination of(Phase I and II)
legislation in model cities, as well as the dissemination ofearthquake-resistant improvement technologies to stakeholders,such as towns, prefectures, and construction companies.

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

Page A-81

Section 9

Centered on the Indonesian National Disaster Management Agency(BNPB) that bears responsibility for the country's DRR, this project
supports the strengthening of disaster management capacity
through the formulation of local disaster management plans andstandard operating procedures (SOP) for Regional Disaster
Management Agencies (BPBD) in pilot communities, and theimplementation of drills, at the provincial, prefectural, andmunicipal levels.

Country

Cooperation
PeriodPhilippines 2014-2017

AppendixThailand2010-2014

Laos

2010-2014

Vietnam

2011-2016

Vietnam2013-2016

Myanmar2013-2017

Bhutan2013-2016

Bangladesh 2013-2016

Bangladesh 2014-2018

Page A-82

Project Name

Description

Project for Enhancing Capacity on Enhances weather observation, forecasting, and warning capacity
Weather Observations, Forecasting in the Philippines through capacity development for weather
and Warnings
observations, weather data analysis and forecasting, establishmentof warning criteria for Southern Luzon, and improvements incommunication methods for and details of weather information, as
well as awareness-raising activities relating to weather information
in Southern Luzon.
The Project on Capacity
Working closely with the Department of Disaster Prevention andDevelopment in Disaster
Mitigation of the Thai Ministry of Interior and Ministry ofManagement in Thailand (Phase 2) Education, this project provides technological support with theaims of developing administrative disaster management systems in
the central government and areas at high risk of disaster,disseminating DRR activities and human resources development, as
well as constructing and introducing DRR education systems inschools at the local level.
Project on Riverbank Protection
Project promotes human resources development through a pilot
Works Phase IIprogram involving low-cost and environmentally-friendly Soda
Mattress Works in three provincial prefectures to roll out across
Laos the riverbank erosion control techniques using traditionalriver works methods (which had been implemented in the capital
city of Vientiane in Phase I).
Development of Landslide Risk
In the mountainous area of Vietnam, landslides are a frequent
Assessment Technology alongoccurrence due to soft ground and increasingly strong tropicalTransport Arterials in Vietnam
winds and tropical monsoons. This project therefore aims to(SATREPS)
develop landslide disaster risk assessment technologies for theprotection of trunk roads that connect the north and the south ofthe country and to ensure the safety of the residents ofmountainous areas, as well as to develop landslide disaster risk
reduction technologies that include early warning systems andhuman resources development.
Project for Building Disaster
Project aims to strengthen the implementation capacity and
Resilient Societies in the Central
integrated flood control plans of the central government and theRegion of Vietnam (Phase II)four ministries of Central region, by strengthening collaboration
systems with respect to integrating the central government's floodrisk management efforts and strengthening its capacity to develop
integrated flood risk management plans, enhancing capacity forflood risk analysis, and implementing structural and non-structural
flood countermeasures in the target ministries.
Project on Establishment of an End- In order to assist in the eventual development of a natural disaster
to-End Early Warning System forearly warning system in Myanmar, this project aims to establish an
Natural Disasters
improved model of a system for transmitting early warnings swiftly
and appropriately to residents at the pilot project site, and also to
implement human resources development for central and local
government institutions and awareness-raising activities forresidents such as evacuation activities. It also develops a plan for
expansion into other regions.
Study on GLOFs (Glacial Lake
Supports the strengthening of emergency response capacity at the
Outburst Floods) in the Bhutan
central and regional levels through the development and pilot
Himalayas
implementation of an early warning system to respond to flooding
including GLOFs (Glacial Lake Outburst Floods), as well as thedevelopment of a system for incorporating disaster risk assessment
into development plans.
Project for Capacity Development To reduce flood damage in Bangladesh, this project providesof Management for Sustainablesupport for investigations and inspections into the causes ofWater-Related Infrastructuredamage at existing levees, and support for levee design,
construction, and maintenance manuals through demonstrations
to verify levee construction.
Research Project on Disaster
Proposes prevention and mitigation measures for storm surge andPrevention/Mitigation Measures
flood damage including the creation of flood risk maps and storm
against Floods and Storm Surges
surge risk maps, measures to address river bank erosion and river(SATREPS)
levee collapse, and measures to prevent toxic substance diffusion
at times of flooding, and experimentally conducts such measures.

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

Country

Sri Lanka

2014-2017

Fiji

2014-2018

Fiji

2014-2016

Tuvalu2011-2017

El Salvador 2012-2014

Chile

2011-2015

Brazil

2013-2017

Project Name

Description

Technical Cooperation for Landslide Supports the enhancement of sediment disaster management
Mitigation Project
capacity in Sri Lanka through conducting surveys and assessmentsof sediment disaster countermeasures, development of designs toprevent landslide, slope failures and rocks fall, construction
supervision and monitoring, and accumulation of knowledge andknow-how on sediment disasters mitigation measures.
Project for Improving ofConducts maintenance and inspection as well as calibration
Meteorological Observations,capacity improvements on meteorological observation equipment,
Weather Forecasting andenhances the capacity to send and receive meteorological data,
Dissemination
improves weather forecasting capacity, refines warning criteria,
improves transmission methods for and contents of weather
information, and works towards improving capacity formeteorological observations, forecasting, warnings, anddissemination in Sri Lanka.
Project for Reinforcing
Improves the capacity to assess the human resources development
Meteorological Training Function of needs of Oceania for the Fiji Meteorological Service (FMS),
FMS
performs maintenance on human resources development tools(including curriculum and textbooks), and by enhancing theleadership capacity of the FMS through the improvement of its
observation and prediction services, works towards the
improvement of the human resources development function of the
FMS with respect to Oceania, and contributes to the independent
future continuation of human resources development work in
Oceania by the FMS.
Project for the Planning of the Nadi Nadi, Fiji's third largest city, is important to Fiji as a tourist center,
River Flood Control Structures
but since no basic flood control plan has been formulated, and no
flood countermeasures program has been implemented, it isvulnerable to flooding. There has been immense damage even inrecent years and the area continues to be exposed to flood risk.
For this reason, this project is working towards the formulation of
a comprehensive flood countermeasures master plan for the river
basin of the Nadi River, which flows through Nadi, theperformance of feasibility studies with respect to priority projects
based thereon, and the implementation of technology transfers toproject counterparts.
Project on Pilot Gravel Beach
In Tuvalu, measures to address coastal erosion are urgently
Replenishment against Coastal
required since marine pollution has worsened due to storm surges
Disasters on Fongafale Island,and domestic wastewater. In this project, gravel beachTuvalureplenishment is proposed as a measure to preserve the coast,
following the natural beach formation mechanism of reef islands.
Through this pilot study, the project will verify suitability andcollate points to note when the pilot is disseminated to otherareas.
Technical Assistance Project for the In El Salvador, where natural disaster risk is high, this project works
Department of Adaptation to
towards developing and maintaining an advanced system to
Climate Change and Strategic Risk enhance appropriate public infrastructure, a system to implement
Management for Strengthening of damage surveys and emergency restoration work following a
Public Infrastructure in El Salvador natural disaster, and a system to train engineers. All of this is being
done for the Climate Change and Strategic Risk Management
Bureau that has been newly established within the Ministry of
Public Works.
Research Project on Enhancement In Chile, the Project works towards the introduction/improvementof Technology to Develop Tsunami- of a tsunami damage prediction model, proposals for measures to
Resilient Community (SATREPS)
predict and mitigate tsunami damage, the development of a highprecision tsunami warning method, and development of tsunamiresilient programs for residents and communities.
Project for Strengthening the
The objective of this project is to mitigate the risk of sediment
National Strategy of Integrated
disasters. It aims to strengthen overall disaster response capacity
Natural Disaster Risk Management by achieving appropriate sediment disaster risk assessment, city
development planning based on the assessment, and alert andevacuation, and information communication.

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

Page A-83

Section 9

Sri Lanka

Cooperation
Period2014-2017

Country
EcuadorCooperation
Period2013-2016

Peru

Project Name

Description
Conducts facility maintenance and core personnel development toensure swift judgement regarding the parameters of earthquakesthat accompany tsunamis in Ecuador, the issuing of tsunami
warnings, the improvement of tsunami observation, warning, andcancellation technologies, the adoption of criteria, and theimprovement of tsunami warning procedures. As a result, it isstrengthening earthquake and tsunami monitoring capacity andworking towards the development of a tsunami warning system.

2010-2014

Project for the Enhancement ofEarthquake and Tsunami Disaster
Mitigation Technology in Peru
(SATREPS)

Aims to develop damage estimates through the development ofseismic motion and tsunami prediction simulations for a massive
ocean trench earthquake along the coast of Peru. Based on this, itaims to develop and adopt DRR policies and technologies.

Afghanistan 2012-2017

Project for Capacity Enhancement
on Hydro-Meteorological
Information Management in the
Ministry of Energy and Water

This project supports a cooperative relationship between the
Ministry of Energy and Water (MEW) and other hydro/
meteorological information management institutions (Ministry ofAgriculture, Irrigation and Livestock (MAIL), National
Meteorological Service (NMS), etc.), and then to enable the mutual
exchange of Afghanistan's hydro/meteorological data andinformation and its application in the appropriate development ofirrigation and agriculture, so that it will be used by the generalpublic.

Iran2012-2015

Capacity Building for Earthquake
Risk Reduction and Disaster
Management in Tehran

In Iran, where there is a high risk of earthquakes, this project,which focuses on the area surrounding the capital Tehran, provides
technological support across the three areas of road DRR, publicawareness, and early warnings, working to enhance the capacity
for earthquake DRR response.

Turkey2011-2014

School-based Disaster Education
Project

There is a possibility of a major earthquake along the North
Anatolian Fault, and a high risk of damage in the areas close to theMarmara Sea. This project supports the adoption of the ToT(training of teachers) system, and one of its objectives is thedissemination of DRR education in public education. It also
supports class planning, teaching material production, and theadoption of school disaster management plans, and works towards
the improvement of DRR capacity in communities, starting withschools.

Turkey2013-2018

Project on Earthquake and Tsunami In the Marmara Region, with its high earthquake risk, this project
Disaster Mitigation in the Marmara conducts research on earthquake observations and on earthquake
Region and Disaster Education inand tsunami disaster simulations. By maintaining the results of thisTurkey (SATREPS)
research in the form of visual resources (such as images andpamphlets), this project works to improve the general public's
awareness and knowledge of DRR.

Turkey2012-2016

Capacity Development for Effective This project is for staff members of relevant organizations, such as
Disaster Risk Management
ministries and agencies responsible for DRR, sector government
offices, and local governments, and works towards supporting andstrengthening the capacity to adopt disaster management plans
based on risk assessments, and to contribute to the improvementof DRR capacity in Turkey.

Kenya

2011-2014

Capacity Development for Effective With the objective of disseminating and developing flood
Flood Management in Flood Prone management activities carried out by communities, this project
Areas
works to enhance water management capacity and community
support provided by the Water Resource Management Authority,and to strengthen the communities' capacity for flood
management to protect structural and non-structural property atthree pilot sites.

Mauritius

2012-2014

Project for Landslide Management In Mauritius, people are increasingly building homes and living on
sloping land, due to recent population increases and the expansionof the cities. Every landslide that occurs causes serious damage.
Reflecting the background, this project analyzed the present stateand issues related to landslides on the main island of Mauritius,
and investigated the effective measures through theimplementation and evaluation of demonstration projects.

Appendix

Project for the Enhancement of
Tsunami-induced Earthquake
Monitoring Capability

Page A-84

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

Country
Mauritius

Cooperation
Period2012-2015

Project Name

Description

Project for Capacity Development
on Coastal Protection andRehabilitation

Mauritius is an island country that is very vulnerable to the effects
of climate change. There is an urgent need to protect the narrowcountry from coastal erosion and inundation, and this is a major
issue for residents who depend on the tourist industry or live along
the coast. While surveying and analyzing the current situation andissues at priority sea coasts, the project considers effective
proposals for countermeasures through the implementation andevaluation of experimental studies.

Project for the Capacity
This project, which targets the staff of the Mozambique
Enhancement of Meteorological
Meteorological Office and regional observation stations, aims to
Observations, Weather Forecasting improve the capacity for responding to water-related disasters inand Warnings
Mozambique, a country which is vulnerable to natural disasters
and is exposed to cyclones and flooding every year. The projectworks towards the improvement of forecasts and warnings thatuse quality controlled weather data by aiming to improvemeteorological observation capacity and weather forecasting andwarning capacity.

South
Africa2010-2015

Observational Studies in South
African Mines to Mitigate Seismic
Risks (SATREPS)

By observing mine earthquakes, which frequently occur deep
underground, this project aims to analyze trigger mechanisms andlink these to damage prediction. As a result, it hopes to achieve a
deeper understanding of the outbreak of earthquakes and theprocess immediately prior to their outbreak and to improvedisaster risk management systems for mine earthquakes.

Cameroon 2011-2015

Project on Magmatic Fluid Supply
into Lakes Nyos and Monoun and
the Mitigation of Natural Disasters
through Capacity Building

The objective of this project is to clarify the mechanism of thelimnic eruptions at Lake Nyos and Lake Monoun, to enhance
understanding of the risks, and to develop a monitoring systemthat will be used for disaster management at the areas around theboth lakes.

Armenia

2014-2017

Landslide Disaster Management
Project

In Armenia, this project works towards enhancing the capacity to
manage and respond to landslide disasters of the Landslide
Disaster Management Working Group, by improving thetechnology and capacity relating to sediment disastermanagement, developing plans, guidelines, and legislation, andstrengthening implementation systems.

Asia

2013-2015

Use of Disaster Management
To improve the practical use of satellite information in DRR in theSatellite Information Assistance for ASEAN countries, this project conducts research using satellite
Capacity-building Project in theinformation acquisition, image analysis, flood run-off analysis, and
ASEAN Region
flooding analysis.

Note: SATREPS: Science and Technology Research Partnership for Sustainable Development
Source: Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA)

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

Page A-85

Section 9

Mozambiq 2014-2017ueSection 10: Others
Trends in the Number of Earthquake Insurance Contracts

Fig. A-68

16,000Household Insurance Coverage Rate (%)

14,000Rate of Rider Attachment to Fire Insurance (%)

15,05056.5

50 %11,841

12,00045.0

10,247
10,000
7,326

8,000

40 %

33.3

5,975

6,000

40.3

8,079

60 %

27.1
22.4

20.1

4,000

30 %

20 %
2,000

16.4

15.4

13.1
0

Rate of Household Coverage/Rider Attachment

Appendix

No. of Insurance Contracts (thousands)

No. of Insurance Contracts

10 %
1996

1999

2002

2005

2008

2012

End of Fiscal Year
Source: Produced by the Cabinet Office based on materials from the General Insurance Rating Organization of Japan

Fig. A-69

Awareness of Self-Help, Mutual Help, and Public Help Measures
Response shouldemphasize public help

September2002 Survey

14.0

24.9

December
2013 Survey

8.3

0%

20%

30%

Response should involve a balance
between public help, mutual help, andself-help

37.4

18.6

56.3

21.7

10.6

10%

Response should
Response shouldemphasize mutual help emphasize self-help

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Source: Produced by Cabinet Office on basis of "Public Opinion Poll regarding Disaster Risk Reduction” conducted by the Cabinet

Page A-86

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

Fig. A-70

Explanations Regarding the Japan Meteorological Agency’s Seismic Intensity Ratings

Term

Definition

RarelyA few/little
Majority
Almost all

Extremely limited. Hardly ever.
Number/extent is extremely small. Just a little bit.
Half or more. Less than “almost all.”
Not all but close to all.

There are (also),
there may be

Used to express something that typically starts to appear at this seismic intensity level,
where the quantity is not great, but it is hard to quantify the number/extent.

Increases

It is difficult to specify the quantity, but it is more than would be the case for a lower levelof intensity.

Increases further

Same meaning as “increases” above. Used in relation to lower levels of intensity, just like“increases” above.

* The JMA sometimes publishes earthquake intensities obtained from questionnaire surveys, but these are expressed
as “corresponding to seismic intensity xx” and are distinguished from seismic intensity levels observed byseismometers.

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

Page A-87

Section 9

Notes:(1) The seismic intensity values published by the Japan Meteorological Agency (JMA) are generally observed values
from seismometers situated on the surface of the earth or on the first floor of low-rise buildings. When a particularseismic intensity is observed, these materials indicate what type of phenomenon or damage has occurred. It is
impossible to determine the seismic intensity based on the phenomena described for each seismic intensity level.
(2) Seismic motion is strongly influenced by type of ground and topography. A seismic intensity value is the observed
value for the place where the seismometer is situated, and seismic intensity can vary even within a municipality
depending on where it is measured. Furthermore, even within the same building, the strength of a tremor will
depend on the floor or place where it is felt. For example, a tremor is generally stronger on the upper floor of a
middle- or high-rise building than at ground level.
(3) Even with tremors of the same seismic intensity, the damage will differ according to the amplitude of theearthquake vibration (the size of the tremor), the cycle (the length of time taken for one repetition of the tremor),and the duration of the tremor, as well as the condition of the building or structure that is affected and the groundconditions.
(4) In this data, of all the damage that occurs when a particular seismic intensity is observed, that which is seen
relatively often has been recorded. However, there are also instances where greater or lesser amounts of damage
have been caused. Note also that not all of the phenomena indicated for any particular level of seismic intensity
will necessarily occur.
(5) This data is primarily collated from earthquakes that have occurred in recent years. Going forward, the details ofthese tables will be regularly inspected every five years, new examples will be added, and amendments will bemade where the data no longer reflects true conditions due to, for example, improvements in the earthquakeproofing of houses and structures.
(6) In these materials, where the extent of damage is not shown in round numbers, the following adverbs andadjectives have been used as a tentative guide.

Human Sensation/Reaction, Indoor Conditions, Outdoor Conditions
Seismic
intensity
level
0

1

2

Appendix3

4

Human sensation/reaction

Indoor conditions

Outdoor conditions

A person will not feel the tremor
but it will be recorded byseismometers
If people are indoors keeping
quiet, some will feel a slight
tremor.
If people are indoors keeping
quiet, the majority will feel thetremor. If people are asleep,some will be awakened.
Most people who are indoors
will feel the tremor. Of those
who are walking, some will feelthe tremor. The majority ofpeople who are sleeping will beawakened.
Most people will be startled.
Most of those walking will feelthe tremor. Most who are
sleeping will be awakened.

－

－

－

－

Things hanging from the ceilingsuch as lamps will sway slightly.

－

Dishes in cupboards may rattle.

Electric wires will tremble
slightly.

Things hanging from the ceilingsuch as lamps will sway
significantly, dishes incupboards will rattle. Unstable
ornaments may fall over.
Things hanging from the ceilingsuch as lamps will swayviolently. Dishes in cupboards
and books on bookshelves may
fall down. The majority of
unstable ornaments will fall
over. Furniture that is notsecured may move and unstable
items may fall over.

Electric wires will tremble
significantly. Some people whoare driving vehicles will notice
the tremor.

Windows may break and glass
may fall out. Unreinforced
concrete block walls may
collapse. Vending machines thatare not properly installed may
fall over. Driving a vehicle will
become difficult and some cars
may come to a stop.
Tiles on walls and glass inwindows may break and fall.

5 Lower

The majority of people will befrightened and feel as if theywant to hold onto something.

5 Upper

The majority of people will findthe tremors an obstacle tomovement, and find it hard towalk unless they hold onto
something.

More dishes in cupboards andbooks on bookshelves will fall.
TV sets may fall from theirstands. Furniture that is notsecured may fall over.

6 Lower

It will become difficult to remain
standing.

6 Upper

It will become impossible toremain standing or to move
without crawling. People may betossed around, being unable tomove, and may even be thrownthrough the air.

The majority of unsecured
furniture will move, and somewill fall over. Some doors will
become impossible to open.
Almost all unsecured furniture
will move and more of it will fall
over.

7

Page A-88

Almost all unsecured furniture
will move and fall over, someeven being thrown through the
air.

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

Rarely, windows may break andglass may fall out. People will
notice electric poles swaying.
Roads may be damaged.

More buildings will have broken
tiles and glass. Almost all of theunreinforced concrete block
walls will collapse.
Even more buildings will havebroken tiles and glass. Even
reinforced concrete block walls
may be damaged.

Conditions of Wooden Buildings (Residential)
Seismic
intensity
level

Wooden Buildings (Residential)
High earthquake resistance

Low earthquake resistance

5 Lower－

Slight crazing or cracks may be seen in walls.

5 Upper－

Crazing or cracks may be seen in walls.

Slight crazing or cracks may be seen in walls.

Crazing or cracks in walls become more common.
Large cracks may form in walls.
Tiles may fall and buildings may lean. Some may
topple.

6 Upper

Crazing or cracks may be seen in walls.

Large cracks in walls become more common.
Buildings that lean or collapse become morecommon.

7

Crazing or cracks in walls become more common.
Rarely, buildings may lean.

Buildings that lean or collapse become evenmore common.

Notes:(1) Wooden building (residential) are classified into two types according to their earthquake resistance. Earthquake resistancetends to be better in newer buildings, tending to be lower in structures built prior to 1981 and higher in structures built since1982. However, there is wide variation in earthquake resistance due to differences in construction methods and theplacement of walls. Just because a building is old does not necessarily mean that you can determine its level of earthquake
resistance. The earthquake resistance of existing buildings can be ascertained through seismic diagnosis.
(2) The crazing, cracks and damage to the walls in the wooden buildings referred to in this table are deemed to appear in walls
made of soil (split bamboo substrate) or mortar (including lath and wire mesh substrate). Where walls have weakfoundations, even when the deformation to the building is slight, the mortar readily becomes detached and falls off.
(3) Damage to wooden buildings will differ depending on the cycle and duration of the seismic motion. There are examples ofdamage to buildings being low in relation to seismic intensity, such as the Iwate-Miyagi Nairiku Earthquake in 2008.

Conditions of Reinforced Concrete Buildings
Seismic
intensitylevel
5 Upper

Reinforced Concrete Buildings
High earthquake resistance－

Low earthquake resistance
Cracks may form in walls, crossbeams, andpillars.

6 Lower

Cracks may form in walls, crossbeams, andpillars.

Cracks become more common in walls,
crossbeams, and pillars.

6 Upper

Cracks become more common in walls,
crossbeams, and pillars.

Diagonal and X-shaped cracks may be seen inwalls, crossbeams, and pillars. Pillars on the
ground floor or middle floors may crumble andsome buildings may collapse.

7

Cracks become even more common in walls,
crossbeams, and pillars. Ground floor and middle
floors may be deformed, and rarely, buildings
may lean.

Diagonal and X-shaped cracks become morecommon in walls, crossbeams, and pillars.
Pillars on the ground floor or middle floors
crumble and more buildings will collapse.

Notes:(1) Earthquake resistance tends to be better in newer buildings, tending to be lower in structures built prior to 1981 and higher instructures built since 1982. However, there is wide variation in earthquake resistance, due to differences in structural types,
the placement of quake-resistant walls, and whether the walls are planar or vertical. Just because a building is old does notnecessarily mean that you can determine its level of earthquake resistance. The earthquake resistance of existing buildings
can be ascertained through seismic diagnosis.
(2) In reinforced concrete buildings, slight cracks may be observed even where the core structure of the building is not affected.

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

Page A-89

Section 9

6 LowerGround and Slope Conditions
Seismic
intensity
level

Ground Conditions

Slope Conditions

5 Lower
5 Upper
6 Lower

Cracks1 and liquefaction2 may occur.

Rock falls and slope failures may occur.

Fissures may form.

Slope failures and landslides may occur.

6 Upper7

Large fissures may form.

Landslips become more frequent, large-scalelandslides and sector collapses may occur.3

Appendix

Notes:(1) A crack is the same phenomenon as a fissure, but the expression is used here to refer to a small fissure or opening in the
ground.
(2) Where the groundwater level is high, and the ground is loose and sandy, liquefaction may occur. As liquefaction progresses,
muddy water may spout out of the ground, subsidence may occur, embankments and quays may be broken, sewage pipes
and manhole covers may float to the surface, and damage may include the leaning or destruction of building foundations.
(3) If a large-scale landslide or a sector collapse occurs, depending on the topography of the area, this may also cause natural
dams to be formed. Large volumes of sediment may also cause debris flows.

Effect on Utilities and Infrastructure
Suspension of gas supply

Suspension of watersupply, power outages
Suspension of rail
services, expressway
regulation
Disruption to telephonelines and other means ofcommunication

Elevators taken out ofservice

When the seismic intensity level reaches 5 Lower or greater, gas meters with safety
devices (“intelligent gas meters”) will trip, and the gas supply will be shut off. If tremors
become even stronger, the gas supply for entire communities may be shut off in theinterest of safety.*
In communities where tremors are recorded at seismic level 5 Lower or greater, thewater supply may be suspended and there may be power outages.
If the seismic intensity level is 4 or greater, in the interest of safety, the implementationof suspensions, speed restrictions, and traffic regulations on railways and expressways
will be enacted at the discretion of the relevant operating company (criteria applied toconfirm safety will differ by operating company and geographical area).
When an earthquake disaster occurs, there is an increase in communications using thetelephone and the internet in the areas where the tremors are strong and in thesurrounding areas, as people try to confirm the safety of loved ones, offer condolences,
and ask about friends and relatives. This can lead to telephone line congestion. To
address this, when a natural disaster such as an earthquake with a seismic level of 6
Lower or greater occurs, communication companies provide services such as theDisaster Emergency Message Dial 171 (which allows people in disaster-stricken areas torecord a message about their safety, and allows people outside the area to listen to thatmessage) and the Disaster Emergency Message Board (web171, which allows people indisaster-stricken areas to record information using text, voice, or images, and allows
people anywhere in the world to access that information).
Elevators equipped with earthquake control devices will automatically stop, in theinterest of safety, in the event of a tremor of seismic intensity level 5 Lower or greater.
It can take time for operations to resume while safety inspections are conducted.

*When there are tremors with a seismic intensity of 6 Upper or greater, gas, water, and electricity supply services may be widelysuspended across large regions of the country.

Page A-90

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

Effect on Large-scale Structures
Since skyscrapers have a long natural period, they react less violently to earthquakes
than ordinary reinforced concrete buildings, which have a short natural period.
However, in response to long-period earthquake ground motion, they shake more
slowly over a long period of time. If the tremors are strong, then poorly secured office
fixtures may move significantly, and people inside may need to hold onto fixed objects
in order to remain in one place.

Sloshing inside oil tanks

Sloshing of liquid inside oil tanks may occur as a result of long-period earthquake
motion, oil may overflow the tanks, and fires may occur.

Damage to or collapse ofceilings at facilities thatoccupy large spaces

At facilities such as gymnasiums and indoor swimming pools, which occupy large spaces,
even earthquake movements that do not cause significant damage to the structure
itself, such as the pillars and walls of the building, may cause ceilings to shakesignificantly, become damaged, and collapse.

*Large-scale earthquakes can generate long-period seismic waves, which can travel long distances from the epicenter of the quake.
Depending on the natural period of the ground, such long-period seismic waves may become amplified as they travel over plains,
and the duration of the tremors may be lengthened.
Source: Japan Meteorological Agency

Fig. A-71

Emergency Warning Issuance Criteria
Type of Event

Criteria

Heavy rain

Heavy rainfall with a level of intensity observed only once every few decades is predicted in association with a typhoon or intense heavy rains or
Heavy rainfall is predicted in association with a strong typhoon whose
expected level of intensity is observed only once every few decades or an
extra-tropical cyclone of comparable intensity.

Storm

A storm is predicted…

Storm surge

A storm surge is predicted…

High waves

High waves are predicted…

Snowstorm

A snowstorm is predicted in association with an extra-tropical cyclone ofcomparable intensity with a strong typhoon whose expected level of intensity is observed only once every few decades.

Heavy snowfall

Heavy snowfall with accumulations observed only once every few decades
is predicted.

…in association with a strong typhoon
whose expected level of intensity isobserved only once every few decades
or an extra-tropical cyclone of comparable intensity.

Source: Japan Meteorological Agency

WHITE PAPER ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN 2015

Page A-91

Section 9

Shaking of skyscrapers
due to long-period
earthquake groundmotion*EMERGENCY
SUPPLIES CHECKLISTLet’s be prepared for disasters!
Items to be stockpiled at home in case of a disaster

Prepare a supply of drinking water, foodand consumables for one week, if possible

Drinking water

Food (minimum three days’supply)(minimum three days’ supply,
roughly three liters per person per day)

Rice, Packaged foods, Cookies and crackers,
Chocolate bars, Hardtack, etc.

Toilet paper, Tissues

Matches, Candles

Cling film, Garbage bags, Flashlight

Plastic water tankItems to be prepared in a grab-and-go bag as an Emergency Supply Kit

Prepare a flashlight, a portable radio and a charger forelectronic devices, preferably ones that can be manually recharged

Drinking water

Bank passbook, Personal seal, CashPortable radio with extra batteries

Food

Clothes, Underwear

Toiletries

Rice, Packaged foods,
Cookies and crackers,
Chocolate bars, Hardtack, etc.

Kairo

Matches, Candles

First aid supplies

ID Card and card
showing contact information

Masks, Work gloves

Adhesive bandages, Bandages,
Antiseptic solution, Medicines,
etc.

Blankets, Towels

Flashlight

Helmet, Disaster prevention hood

Wet wipes

Charger for mobile phone(disposable body warmers)

Milk, diapers, and other necessary supplies for those with infants