APRU-IRIDeS Multi-Hazards Program

Campus Safety Workshop 2018

Building Disaster Resistant Universities: Is Your University
Ready for the Next Natural Disaster?

3-5 April 2018
Tohoku University
Sendai, Japan

IRIDeS, Tohoku University
Laboratory of International Strategy for Disaster Mitigation, Regional and Urban Reconstruction Research Division468-1-S401 Aoba, Aramaki, Aoba-ku, Sendai
980-8572 Japan
www. irides.tohoku.ac.jp/

APRU International Secretariat
IAS Building, 3/F
3019, HKUST, Clear Water Bay, Hong Kong
www.apru.org

Edited by
Takako Izumi (Associate Professor, IRIDeS, Tohoku University)
Sayaka Kobayashi (Laboratory of International Strategy for Disaster Mitigation, IRIDeS, Tohoku University)

2

CONTENTS
Introduction……………………………………………………………………………………………………… 5
Acknowledgement……………………………………………………………………………………………… 7
Opening remarks ……………………………………………………………………………………………… 9
Presentations …………………………………………………………………………………………………… 11
Group activities………………………………………………………………………………………………… 27
Field trip…………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 39
Annex 1………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 42
Annex 2………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 44

3

Introduction

Introduction

The Association of Pacific Rim Universities (APRU) was established in 1997 to form a premieralliance of research universities as an advisory body to international organizations, governments,
and business on the development of science and innovation as well as on the broader developmentof higher education. Currently, the APRU network consists of 50 leading universities from 16 APEC
economies.
The APRU Multi-Hazards (MH) Program was launched in April 2013 by the APRU and Tohoku
University in Japan. The International Research Institute of Disaster Science (IRIDeS) at Tohoku
University has provided secretariat services and has been in charge of program coordination.
The main objectives of the MH Program are to harness the collective capabilities of the APRU
universities for cutting-edge research on disaster risk reduction (DRR) and to contribute tointernational policymaking processes to steadily improve DRR. Its major activities include a
campus safety program, summer school, annual symposium, collaborative survey research, data
sharing, and contributions to discussions at regional and international levels.
The International Research Institute of Disaster Science (IRIDeS) at Tohoku University andthe Association of Pacific Rim Universities (APRU) held the second workshop, “Building Disaster
Resistant Universities: Is your university ready for the next natural disaster?” on April 3–5, 2018at the IRIDeS. Mr. Kevin Duffy, Deputy Director, Campus Infrastructure & Services at University
of Sydney, was the invited trainer and facilitator. More than 20 participants attended, including
faculty, staff, and students from 11 universities / institutions in Australia, China, Indonesia,
Mexico, Philippines, Singapore, Spain, and Taiwan. The workshop discussed lessons learned fromother universities, common challenges and issues, and tools to develop an effective emergency planthat enhances overall university preparedness.
The first campus safety workshop was organized by IRIDeS, Tohoku University in February
2016. At the workshop, the importance of developing an emergency management plan (preparedness
and response plan), conducting exercises, drills or simulations using the existing plan to assess its
efficacy as well as reviewing the plan every year or following any emergency event to determine
whether it can cope with emergencies were highlighted as the keys to campus safety.
As the outcome document of the first UNISDR Asia Science and Technology Conference forDisaster Risk Reduction (DRR), the recommended actions align with and contribute to the global‘Science and Technology Roadmap’ were identified. The recommended actions under Priority 2:

5Disaster Risk Governance include “Develop inter-disciplinary national science and technology
plans to support implementation of the Sendai Framework. This includes actions by academia/
universities to develop their own disaster risk management plans.
Prior to the workshop, a campus safety survey conducted by the APRU Multi-Hazards (MH)Program in 2014 identified weaknesses and challenges with regard to implementing campus safety
steps. Most universities have a disaster management and response plan, but many have not helda simulation exercise to assess the adequacy of the existing plan. Also, not all universities havecarried out a thorough risk assessment, even though this is a crucial baseline step to gather data fora disaster management plan. Respondents also noted that it can be difficult to gain the necessary
support and understanding, including human resources and sufficient budgets, from senior
managers in order to implement campus safety measures.
The APRU and the APRU MH Program acknowledge the importance of disaster preparedness
measures on campuses and the responsibility of universities to protect the lives of students, staff,
and faculty as well as various institutional assets. The APRU and the MH Program intend to play a
key role in promoting and advocating for necessary initiatives at the university level, and they will
provide the needed support to universities for the process of developing campus safety measures.

6

Acknowledgment

Acknowledgment

The IRIDeS and the APRU would like to extend their sincere appreciation to the participants fromthe APRU member universities and the nine speakers from Tohoku University in Japan, Universityof Indonesia, Tecnológico de Monterrey, Sichuan University, National University of Singapore,
Tsinghua University, National Science and Technology Center for Disaster Reduction, University of
the Philippines Baguio, University of Sydney who shared their experience and knowledge regarding
disaster management on campus. Their case studies and lectures provided us with ideas and lessons
learned that will be very helpful in developing disaster management plans.
Special thanks are due to Kevin Duffy for serving as trainer and facilitator at the workshop. Hiscommitment and support contributed greatly to the workshop’s organization, and his expertise andstrong background in disaster management were highly appreciated by the participants.
The IRIDeS and the MH Program also received tremendous support from the secretariat in
Hong Kong, the MH Program’s international core group members as well as the laboratory staff ofInternational Strategy for Disaster Mitigation of the IRIDeS.

7

OPENING REMARKS

Opening remarks
Fumihiko Imamura
Director of IRIDeS, Tohoku University

The International Research Institute of Disaster Science (IRIDeS) was established just one year
after the 2011 Tohoku Earthquake and Tsunami that directly caused more than 19,000 deaths. In
its aftermath, the earthquake indirectly caused 3,000 deaths due to mental illness or public healthissues in temporary houses, etc. For this reason, we have explored a new research area in disasterscience involving both natural and social sciences. Now there are 60 faculty members and 40 otherstaff members at IRIDeS. We are working very hard to contribute toward mitigating disaster impact
around the world.
My expertise is tsunami engineering, that is, providing technology for mechanical models to issue
warnings and influence human behavior during evacuations. This is a very important workshop
for us to contribute to the safety of our own universities. At the time of the 2011 earthquake
and tsunami, three students at Tohoku University lost their lives. In addition, we suffered largescale damages to our facilities including our laboratories and buildings. The damage amounted
to around 400 million US dollars, and it took more than 2 years to recover it to its previous state.
From these experiences, we learned many lessons to share with you.
I have a present for you. First one is a handkerchief called “Gensai Pocket Information” thatis one of the educational tools for children. “Gensai” means disaster mitigation. By using thishandkerchief, children will become familiar with the readiness and safety instructions at school
and at home. On the top of the handkerchief, there is information about different types of hazards.
In the middle, you find the information on the items we should have prepared at all times. Then,
there are messages on what disaster risk reduction means, how to prepare for disasters at home, andhow to evacuate. This is to encourage children to communicate with others after disaster classes
and lectures in schools. This is one of our contributions to the society. If you have some advice on
this, please let me know.
Second is a leaflet on a national designated university in Japan. Last year Tohoku University was
selected as a very special national university. In Japan, there are 90 national universities but only
3 were selected as “National Designated University.” Tohoku University has identified four coreresearch fields: material science, spintronics, medical science, and disaster science. It shows that
Tohoku University puts a great focus on disaster studies.
We hope you share your experiences in your countries and discuss common concerns andsolutions actively. Thank you very much.

10

PRESENTATIONSAPRU Multi-Hazards Program andResults of APRU Campus Safety Survey
Takako Izumi
Associate Professor, IRIDeS, Tohoku University

The campus safety initiative under the Association of Pacific Rim Universities (APRU) MultiHazards Program aims to promote a culture of campus safety, provide related learning
opportunities among the APRU member universities, support efforts to strengthen disaster
preparedness capacity on campuses, share experiences with non-APRU member universities, andcontribute to overall improvement of disaster preparedness capacity in the region.
As a source of baseline data, the campus safety survey was conducted to understand the current
disaster preparedness capacity of the APRU member universities and to identify challenges andrecommendations for the development of a disaster/emergency preparedness and management
plan. The results showed that the area of risk assessment requires greater attention and effort.
In addition, early warning and alert systems have not been installed widely. Moreover, further
support and consideration of foreign students is required. In addition, many universities seeking todevelop preparedness capacity have encountered financial constraints, human resource challenges,
difficulties in understanding risks and safety issues, and a lack of participation by faculty and staff.
To improve the situation and expand their current capacity, many universities have requested
assistance from peer institutions, in the form of sharing tools and best practices, and have asked the
APRU to provide a learning opportunity such as a workshop on campus safety. This campus safety
program has been initiated in response to enable sharing of experiences and knowledge about
campus safety among the APRU universities.
The recommendations and key messages from the first workshop were to develop an emergency
management plan, conduct exercises, drills, or simulations using the existing plan to assess its
efficacy, and review the plan every year or following any emergency event. At the same time, several
weaknesses were also identified: a lack of permanent staff and managers who have expertise in risk
and emergency management and inadequate financial resources to develop necessary plans andequip universities with emergency tools and facilities. This APRU Multi-Hazards campus safety
program will continue supporting the member universities to raise the common concerns, sharethe experience as well as advocate the importance of disaster preparedness on campus globally.

12

Presentations

13

Case Study 1:
Tohoku University, Japan
Hiroaki Maruya
Professor, IRIDeS, Tohoku University

Damage of Tohoku University by the Great East Japan Earthquake (GEJE) in 2011 was severe.
Although no students or staff was not killed in our campus, some buildings were strongly damaged
and we had to delay the beginning of first term in fiscal year 2011 about one month.

To revise and improve our former disaster management plan and introduce business continuity
element, we have researched our risk of damages by natural disaster. The precondition of ouruniversity is that, all our buildings have already been strengthened against earthquakes, the landlevel of our campus is quite higher than the water level of Hirose River which flows near-by andtherefore our risk of floods is not high. However, we have cliffs and steep slopes around two of ourcampuses and we have to prepare for landslide.

14

We drafted our disaster management and business continuity plan (DMBCP) by utilizing
the record of responses and revival actions from the damages of the GEJE. Our university’s
headquarters executed exercises once a year based on the DMBCP three times since 2015, andrevised the plan for overcoming problems we discovered every year. For example, the meeting room
for the main member of disaster management headquarters with the emergency power supply
provided was not wide enough for information exchange, for example, reports of most serious
incidents among the members were not in speedy nor smooth. We have to continue exercises toimprove the DMBCP in the future.

Presentations

Lastly I would like to discuss the importance of safety confirmation of all students and stuffs.
Our university has placed it as most important matter after a disaster, based on the experience of
the GEJE. However, if a university thinks that safety of each student and staff is self-responsibility
issue, safety confirmation doesn’t seem so serious procedure in a time of disaster. It might be upon
the policy of each university.

15

Case Study 2:DREAM for Campus Safety
Bingwei Tian
Associate Professor, Institute for Disaster Management and Reconstruction,
Sichuan University

DREAM, coined by Bingwei Tian, is an acronym for “Disaster Reduction Ecological Artistic
Map”, which is presently an innovative map in the field of disaster prevention and reduction. It isa new thematic map that integrates traditional map and knowledge of disaster reduction, which
also relates to ecology and historical culture. DREAM involves four layers, which are basic layer,
disaster reduction layer, natural & ecology layer and human & history layer. The basic layer shows
geographical information, with data based on remote sensing images that obtained from satellite,
unmanned aerial vehicle etc. The disaster reduction layer provides information of local disaster risk
and resources for disaster response or reduction like shelter, escape route et al. by utilizing GIS andremote sensing technology. The natural & ecology layer and human & history layer exhibit local
ecological civilization and historical and humanistic environment, using positioning technology.
DREAM integrates the boring knowledge of disaster prevention and mitigation into the map withthe concept of combing precision science and local art. In normal time, DREAM can be used as amap of education popularization, disseminating knowledge of disaster prevention and reduction,
ecological environment and human art. When disaster comes, DREAM can be used as a visualescape emergency plan to help people evacuate orderly.
The first DREAM was created for campus Jiangan, Sichuan University, under the collaborationof students, artists and community. DREAM plots the locations of the campus's human & history,natural & ecology, and especially disaster risk reduction information. DREAM has provided a newway for students to join in service learning. To produce the map, students were grouped for different
subject fields. They collected information and discussed each other. Moreover, since there were alsosocial community to participate in DREAM producing, students had opportunity to communicate
with them. Compare to traditional teaching methods, service learning can practice student’s
activities and their ability to learn knowledge, especially strengthen their team consciousness.
Accordingly, DREAM has the characteristics of comprehensive, local, scientific, artistic, practicaland participatory, which make it be an advanced and innovative product in present disaster
reduction and security maps over the world.
As a service learning method, DREAM is also prospective in application in other universities.
The concept of DREAM is expected to be applied in all other places in the world, such ascommunity, tourist spots, natural reserves and so on.

16

Fig.1. DREAM of JiangAn Campus, Sichuan University, China
Presentations

Fig.2. DREAM of Tuxi Community, Sichuan, China

17

Case Study 3:
NUS Crisis & Emergency Management
Framework
Mohammad Fazulee Bin Abdul Rahman
Senior Manager, Office of Safety Health & Environment,
National University of Singapore

The Office of Safety, Health and Environment (OSHE) is the corporate office in charge ofoccupational safety & health matters, environmental compliance and emergency management inNUS. OSHE supports the NUS mission by ensuring university activities, in particular high risk
activities such as construction, laboratory and workshop-based activities, university and student
events are conducted safely so as to prevent harm, injury or ill health from befalling to the people
undertaking such activities.
The Emergency Management (EM) Division was established in July 2005 to manage major
crisis incidents and equip staff and students with the knowledge and skills to manage crises andemergencies in their own respective areas. The scope of EM has grown to include all areas ofEmergency Preparedness & Management, Life Safety for University (Student Events & Activities),
Fire Safety and Business Continuity. EM also plays an essential role in coordinating with the NUS
Counselling and Psychological Services for mental health support to students/ next-of-kin andstaff during emergencies. We shared how efforts in ensuring Emergency & Crisis Preparedness forthe university is paramount in ensuring effective Incident Management, Crisis Management andBusiness Continuity during any incident and capturing lessons learnt post incident for continual
improvement (See Annex 1).
The NUS Crisis and Emergency Management (CEM) framework and policy were developed
and had successfully guided NUS in managing incidents since it’s launched in 2005. This policy
describes the broad framework for the dealing with crises and emergencies in the National
University of Singapore (NUS) in coordination with national emergency services. It is designed
to assist the university in coping with the anticipated needs generated by a crisis so as to deliver
a quick and effective response to the situation, to protect and save lives, minimize damage toproperty and the reputation of the University. It covers all staff and students in NUS (including
those working or studying full-time, part-time, on attachment, internship or exchange programs).
Crisis communication and management training are conducted to train each faculty Incident
commander and as well as staff supporting in emergency and crisis management. We shared key
points of our CEM framework and highlighted the importance and lessons learnt from these points(See Annex 2).

18

OSHE provides a range of services to meet the needs of our stakeholders. These include policy
formulation, program development, advisory services, training, safety promotion, safety audits andinspections and incident management. One of the most valuable services offered by EM is still the roleof advisor during emergencies. An example of how EM manages injuries, death and threat of violence
cases in the university was shared (See Annex 3). NUS faculties and units can depend on the NUS EM
team for guidance and support throughout the entire incident.
In the ever changing world, OSHE’s EM portfolio and responsibilities will continue to grow to meet
any new areas and challenges faced by our stakeholders’ in the area of emergency preparedness. EM
will continue to review our procedures and plans to ensure NUS is well prepared for future incidents.

Presentations

Annex 1

Annex 219

Annex 3

20

Case Study 4:
Campus Safety and Emergency
Command Platform System in Tsinghua
Hui Zhang
Professor, Institute of Public Safety Research,
Tsinghua University

Campus safety is critical in the University. Tsinghua University is looking into developmentof campus safety database and information platform. Systematically review of campus risk is
performed and the key issues are identified. Monitoring and warning system is designed based
Presentations

on new technologies, such as face/license plate recognition system, smart phone and big data. The
campus safety is also connected to the neighborhood and to the city. The campus safety protection
system is established. As test, the system is used for tracking the vehicle and road damage in thecampus. The system can also be used for better management of student activities. Further work will
be focused on better management of campus life and effective response of any disasters.

21

22

Case Study 5:
Experience of Disaster Managementwith Business Continuity Plan in Taiwan
Chia-Ying Lin
Assistant Research Fellow,
National Science and Technology Center for Disaster Reduction

The challenges business owners faced are complicated in Taiwan since Taiwan is located in a highnatural disaster risk area. To reduce disaster risk, the whole disaster risk reduction (DRR) life cycle
should be considered. Regarding DRR life cycle, disaster resilience is identified as an essential
Presentations

ability. Business Continuity Plan (BCP) suggests a procedure to enhance resilience. With business
continuity, disaster impacts could be mitigated, the operation disruption time could be shortened,
and the recovery time could be accelerated.
The damage due to 2016 Southern Taiwan earthquake indicated the challenges of business
continuity. Business owners should consider not only their own factory but the disruption of public
services. According to these requirements, NCDR developed several platforms for information
sharing and earthquake scenario simulation. Platforms for information sharing were developed
for public and specific users. It allows users access natural disaster information, such as climate,earthquake, and so on. For specific users, they could get more particular information including
regional disruption information, disaster-prone area, etc. Another platform named Taiwan
Earthquake impact Research and Information Application platform (TERIA) was developed toprovide assistance in preparedness phase. Earthquake impacts to facilities of public services could
be simulated by TERIA, therefore, the vulnerability could be located. Currently these platforms areused by many organizations to assess disaster risk and knowledge sharing.
For campus safety, buildings and people were identified as key factors. In Taiwan, Earthquake
Early Warning System (EEWS) for campus was constructed for risk communication to alert
students and staffs. Also, seismic upgrading project was extensively executed to upgrade the seismic
capacity of public school buildings. We tried to enhance campus safety against earthquake by both
physical and technology ways.

23

24

Case Study 6:
Initiatives in Disaster Risk Reduction
and Climate Change Adaptation
Jessica K. Cariño
Professor, Vice Chancellor for Administration,
University of the Philippines Baguio

The University of the Philippines Baguio is a constituent unit of the University of the Philippines
Presentations

System, the country’s National University. It is situated in the Cordillera highlands of Northern
Luzon, an upland ecosystem which is home to indigenous peoples collectively referred to as Igorots
and characterized by growing vulnerability and problems in resource management. In partnershipwith the United Nations World Food Program, UP Baguio established the Knowledge and Training
Resource Center for Climate Change and Disaster Risk Reduction (KTRC) under its research/extension arm, the Cordillera Studies Center (CSC). The goal of the CSC-KTRC is to contributeto greater resilience of communities vis-à-vis climate change and disasters, by (a) providing
readily accessible scientific studies and IEC materials on climate change to vulnerable local
communities; (b) serving as a repository of learning materials on CCA and DRRM; and (c) serving
as a University-based training center that provides a package of CCA and DRRM-related capacity
building programs.
Among the outputs of the CSC-KTRC are the implementation of various training workshops on
CCA and DRRM and the development of training modules available for use by various institutions,
local government units and communities in the Cordillera; the strengthening and the codifying of
the Emergency Response Protocols of UP Baguio; and the conduct of action or applied researches
where research findings are immediately fed into policy of and implementation by public andprivate sector programs and projects.
Thus far, the CSC-KTRC has achieved the following outcomes: increased knowledge on disaster
preparedness and response and climate change adaptation in the context of upland/indigenous
communities; increased awareness among the educational institutions and local government units
on DPR and CCA; improved mechanisms (policies/protocols/guidelines) for DPR in UP Baguio,
public elementary and high schools, and local government units.

25

26

GROUP ACTIVITIESGroup activity 1:
The participants discussed the following two topics in a group work:
1) sharing response experience (what worked and what did not)2) what are the major issues and challenges in strengthening the preparedness capacity?

Based on the inputs from all the groups, the participants discussed how to improve the challenges.
They agreed that the key issue would be the application of technology and innovation to minimize
the risks. At the end of the discussion, the groups came up with the Key messages for making
campus disaster resilient.

“TECHNOLOGY IS AN ENABLER”
1) Leadership/Policy/Governance: Leadership is indispensable during emergencies to makecritical decisions and prompt policy responses, often with limited information. Disastermanagement or emergency plans can assist the decision-making process to identify whatneeds to be done for immediate response and recovery. In addition, leadership is critical even
before emergencies to decide what kind of preparedness and disaster risk reduction measures
are taken on campus. It requires human and financial resources. Without strong leadershipand governance, it will be difficult to allocate these resources to disaster preparedness andrisk reduction. It is highly important for the university executive to have knowledge on theimportance of risk management.
2) Investing in Safety: Investment both in financial and non-financial purposes for safety is
crucial. It is often challenging to secure financial support by universities for the developmentof systems and disaster preparedness measures as well as human resources support unless anatural disaster is a pressing concern. However, once a disaster happens, without adequate risk
reduction measures, the damage and impacts including assets, buildings, and human lives canbe enormous. In addition, it will prevent students from continuing their studies and research
activities. Creating such an environment is an institutional responsibility and one that requires
participation and commitment from multiple parties within the institution. Disaster mitigation
is much more economical and effective than disaster response.
3) Communication strategy and plan: The strategy is to enhance the capabilities of emergency
communications. Emergency communications are crucial for 1) collecting the information on
current status and damage caused by emergencies for decision making, 2) sharing decisions
made on what to do and not to do, 3) checking the safety of students, staff and faculty, and 4)
informing the actions of the next step. The strategy and plan need to be checked and updated
regularly, and tested to improve the response capacity to coordinate through exercise andtraining programs by using available technologies.

284) Implementation: One of the priority actions for campus safety is to develop a disastermanagement plan for the campus mainly to clearly understand how to prepare for and respondto a disaster. Not only that, once it is developed, it has to be tested conducting a simulation
exercise based on the plan to see its effectiveness and practicality. “Implementation” and “taking
action” is a crucial step for the campus safety.
5) Developing strong partnerships (governments, academia, industry, community): The priority
for universities is to protect the lives of students, staff and faculty on campus as well as theassets. However, universities are also recognised as a part of the community. Therefore, thepreparedness-capacity of universities has a huge impact on the safety of communities. Asa society, we need to collaborate and work together to develop a disaster preparedness andresponse plan at least by sharing plans and having an opportunity to discuss them. Universities
will be able to assist communities by sharing information and providing spaces as evacuation
centres in the response stage.

Group activity

29

GROUP A

30

GROUP B

Group activity

31

GROUP C

32

Group activity 2:
Developing a minimum checklist for campus safety:
The participants were requested in a group to develop a checklist to see the level of disaster preparedness
on campus. These are considered as the minimum conditions that universities should install.

Minimum checklist
Checklist 1: Policy/governance
The university has a disaster emergency plan. (communication, electricity backup)
Staff and faculty are familiar with the plan and understand how to act in case of
emergencies.
● The plan is reviewed and updated each year.
● The university sets up a disaster counter measure office once a disaster restrikes.
● The university has an emergency structure.
● The university has a communication plan.
● A disaster emergency drill is conducted at least once a year.
● A safety confirmation plan of students, staff, and faculty is put in place.
● The university has developed an evacuation plan to accommodate students and staff.
● The university has a backup generator on site in case of power outages.
●●

Group activity

Checklist 2: Risk management
A risk assessment is conducted and regularly updated.
● The university develops a mitigation/risk reduction/preparedness plan.
● Based on the plan, mitigation measures are put in place.
● Emergency supplies (food, water, blanket, etc.) are always available.
● All the measures are regularly checked for effectiveness.
●

Checklist 3: Physical/digital infrastructure
Buildings have earthquake resistance structure.
● Buildings are facilitated by drainage, electricity, fire alarm systems, sprinklers, fire
extinguishers, etc.
● Maintenance work is periodically conducted in buildings.
● Building inspections takes place regularly.
● The critical information in case of emergencies such as evacuation routes andemergency assembly points are shared with students, faculty, and staff. Ideally, thesefacilities have the signage.
● IT recovery plan is developed.
● Technological tools such as satellite/mobile emergency phones, alarms, and drones are
put in place.
●33

Checklist 4: Awareness training/education
An orientation is conducted among freshman students on disaster emergency and preparation.
Special guidance to foreign students is available.
● Safety protocol for the students abroad is shared prior to their departure.
● A disaster emergency drill is conducted.
● Programs are conducted to raise awareness.
● Trainings for students, staff, faculty, and DRR leaders on campus such as on CPR are
conducted.
● Information materials on past disasters, emergency plans, etc. are distributed.
●●

Checklist 5: Physical/psychological aid
●

●

34

There is a hotline in place for students, staff, and faculty when they need physical or
psychosocial support during and after emergencies.
There is a prior agreement with local government, organizations, and other universities oncollaboration on mutual support in case of emergencies including volunteer registration.

GROUP A

Group activity

35

GROUP B

36

GROUP C

Group activity

37

FIELD TRIP

Field Trip

After two days of sessions, the workshop participants visited Ishinomaki, Onagawa and Arahama
on April 5 to observe the recovery efforts since the 2011 Great East Japan Earthquake and Tsunami.
At Okawa Elementary School, about 70 students and 10 teachers lost their lives by the massive
tsunami. The reason this tragedy happened is still under investigation but the experience tells us
the importance of understanding hazard risks as accurate as possible based on a long history anddisaster experience and of having their own tailor-made preparedness/evacuation plan that advices
an urgent action to be taken under emergencies.

Onagwa was heavily damaged by the 2011 disaster claiming 827 lives and destroying 70% of
the buildings in the town. In March 2015, the reconstructed Onagawa station reopened andin December 2015, a pedestrianized shopping promenade called Seapal Pia was opened. Afterextensive land scraping, new residential housing is being relocated at higher elevations on nearby
hillsides and leftover soil is being used to raise industrial and commercial sections closer to thewater an average of 4.5 meters above sea level.

40

The Arahama Elementary School was flooded by a massive tsunami up to the second floor when
the Great East Japan Earthquake and Tsunami struck. 320 people (students, teachers, and local
residents) were evacuated in this building. As an Earthquake memorial project, the school building
has been open to the public since April 2017. The visitors can see the damaged school building inunchanged form, as well as large photos and documentary films showing how it looked at the time.
By accessing to a direct sense of the power and threat of earthquake and tsunami, visitors can raise
their awareness of disaster properness.

Field trip

41

Annex 1: Program

Tuesday 3 April
9 :30- 9 :40 Opening (Prof. Fumihiko Imamura (Director, IRIDeS, Tohoku University)
9 :40- 9 :50

Group photo

9 :50-10:05

Self-introduction

10:05-10:25

Summary of the last workshop and agenda of the workshop/APRU Multi-Hazards program		(Dr. Takako Izumi, IRIDeS)PRESENTATIONS ON DISASTER PREPAREDNESS INITIATIVES ON CAMPUS
10:25-10:55 Case study 1: Tohoku University (Prof. Hiroaki Maruya, IRIDeS)
10:55-11:15

Coffee break

11:15-11:45

Case study 2: University of Indonesia (Prof. Fatma Lestari)

11:45-12:15

Case study 3: Tecnológico de Monterrey (Mr. Arturo Perez Rivera)

12:15-13:15

Lunch

13:15-13:45

Case study 4: Sichuan University (Dr. Bingwei Tian)

13:45-14:15

Case study 5: National University of Singapore (Mr. Mohammad Fazulee Bin Abdul
Rahman)

14:15-14:45

Case study 6: Tsinghua University (Prof. Hui Zhang)

14:45-15:15

Case study 7: National Science and Technology Center for Disaster Reduction (NCDR)

15:15-15:30

Coffee break

15:30-16:00

Case study 8: University of Philippines Baguio (Prof. Jessica K. Cariño)

16:00-16:30

Case study 9: The University of Sydney (Mr. Kevin Duffy)

16:30-17:30

Group work 1: 1) sharing response experience (what worked and what did not) and 2) what
are the major issues and challenges in strengthening the preparedness capacity?

18:00-

42

DinnerWednesday 4 April
9 :30-10:15

Group presentation

10:15-11:15

Plenary discussion: 1) How can we overcome the challenges/what are needed to be
done? and 2) Disaster preparedness minimum checklist

11:15-12:45

Group work 2: Developing a minimum checklist for campus safety

12:45-13:45

Lunch

13:45-14:30

Group presentation

14:30-15:30

Plenary discussion on the checklist: Developing the APRU checklist

15:30-15:50

Coffee break

15:50-16:30

What is the next step? How can APRU/the network assist in strengthening the capacity?

16:30-16:45

Closing

Thursday 5 April
9 :30-16:00

Field trip to the affected sites (Ishinomaki, Onagawa, Arahama)

Annex

43

Annex 2: List of participants

Name

44

University Location

University

Title

1 Kevin Duffy

Australia

University of Sydney

Deputy Director,
Campus Infrastructure & Services

2 Bingwei TIAN

China

Sichuan University

Lecturer

3 Hui Zhang

China

Tsinghua University

Professor

4 Fatma Lestari

Indonesia

Head of Occupational Safety,
University of Indonesia Health & Environmental (OSHE) Unit

Partina
5 Devi
WardaniIndonesia

Emergency Management
University of Indonesia Acting
Coordinator

Rahma
6 Nuraini
HanifaIndonesia

Institut Teknologi
Bandung (ITB)

Researcher and Secretary of ResearchCenter for Disaster Mitigation

7 Maria Elena Meneses Mexico

Tecnológico deMonterrey

Professor and Researcher,
School of Humanities and Education

Torres8 Patricia
Sánchez

MexicoTecnológico deMonterrey

South Dean, School of Architecture,
Art and Design

9 Ana Lucía Hill

MexicoTecnológico deMonterrey

Crisis, Disaster & Risk Manager

10 Arturo Perez Rivera Mexico

Tecnológico deMonterrey

Construction Director for Mexico
City Campus

11 Mauricio Rizo

MexicoTecnológico deMonterrey

Auditor Director

12 Jessica K. Cariño

Philippines

University of thePhilippines Baguio

Vice Chancellor for Administration

13 Francesca V. Llanes

Philippines

University of thePhilippines Diliman

Senior Science Research Specialist

14 Lia Anne L. Gonzalo Philippines

University of thePhilippines Diliman

Senior Science Research Specialist

Fazulee
15 Mohammad
Bin Abdul Rahman Singapore

National University ofSingapore (NUS)

Senior Manager

Juan
16 Fernando
Ramos Galino

Spain

Universidad Politecnica UIA past Director UIA Educationde CatalunyaCommission

17 Huei-Ru Hsieh

TaiwanNational Science andTechnology Center for
Disaster Reduction

Assistant Research Fellow

18 Chia-Ying Lin

TaiwanNational Science andTechnology Center for
Disaster Reduction

Assistant Research Fellow

19 Fumihiko Imamura

Japan

IRIDeS, Tohoku
University

Director

20 Hiroaki Maruya

Japan

IRIDeS, Tohoku
University

Professor

21 Takako Izumi

Japan

IRIDeS, Tohoku
University

Asssociate Professor,
APRU Multi-Hazards Program Director