GADRIACTIONS
Summer 2016
Volume 1—Number 1

Welcome to the First issue of the GADRI AcƟons.
Since the incep on of GADRI in March 2015, GADRI was quite ac ve during the firsthalf of the 2016.
The First Interna onal Symposium on Flash Floods in Wadi Systems took place at theDisaster Preven on Research Ins tute (DPRI), Kyoto University, Japan from 14 to 15
October 2015. The conference was a ended by over 70 par cipants.
GADRI Round Table Discussion Workshop: Towards an Integrated Disaster Risk Research
Pla orm for Hydro-Meteorological Hazards was conducted on 13 and 16 October 2015.
The workshop was arranged back to back with the Symposium and it was a ended bysome of those who a ended the symposium.

Contents

News 2Message from the Chair 3
Message from the Director
DPRI, Kyoto University 4

Special Topics 5

Two workshops were organized under the thema c areas of Earthquake and Volcanic
Disaster; and the Geo-Hazards groups: workshop on Bridging Strong-mo on and Earthquake Damage on 25 February 2016; and the Workshop on New Genera on of Geohazard Mapping and Strategy for Its Social Applica on on 12 March 2016 respec vely.

EventsOn 22 March 2016, the First Board of Directors’ mee ng was organized. The Board of
Directors’ consists of 3 member ins tutes from Europe and Africa; 4 members from Asiaand Oceania; and 3 members from the Americas.

Upcoming Events 18

Workshops 14
GADRI Representa ons 16

Announcements 19

The GADRI logo and website were launched to coincide with the first mee ng of theBoard of Directors.
Taking advantage of the presence of the Board members, an Open Discussion Forum:
GADRI Projects and Ac vi es were organized on 23 March which was a ended in addion to the Board Members by Japanese government oﬃcials, NGOs, and UN Agencies.
All of the events were held at the Disaster Preven on Research Ins tute (DPRI), Kyoto
University, Kyoto, Japan which is the current GADRI Secretariat.

Highlights

Further GADRI was represented at various interna onal conferences and mee ngs promo ng GADRI presence and visibility among the interna onal groups.
In addi on to the GADRI ac vi es, this Newsle er will present special reports on theearthquakes and its impact on society highligh ng the events of the Taiwan Earthquake
February 2016; and the Kumamoto Earthquake 2016. The ar cles provide details of theearthquakes, disaster preven on measures taken, and the impact on society.
We are proud to publish the first edi on of the GADRI Ac ons. We hope to con nue
the publica on with your con nued support and contribu ons.
Prof. Hirokazu Tatano, Secretary-General, GADRI•

2016 Kumamoto Earthquake—The Kyushu Japan
Earthquake Sequence ofApril 2016 - 5•

2016 Taiwan Earthquake—
Facts and Observa ons
from the Kaohsiung Earthquake on 6 February 2016
in Taiwan - 11

On the Cover
The photographs are from various research ac vi es conducted by the researchers of the Disaster Preven on Research
Ins tute (DPRI), Kyoto University, Japan.
GADRI Ac ons is designed, forma ed and edited by Wilma James.

2Message from the Chair of Board of Directors
Prof. Andrew Collins, Leader, Disaster and Development Network (DDN),
Northumbria University, UK was elected as the first Chair of the GADRI Boardof Directors.

It is a great pleasure to Chair the Board of Directors of the Global Allianceof Disaster Research Institutes. The demand for research that strengthens
human capacity to reduce disaster has never been greater. This is not anagenda that can be provided by research institutions operating on theirown, neither by any particular disciplinary orientation or sector; it is indeed everyone’s business. I
see at least three core contributions this alliance can make to address disaster in the interests ofhuman well-being and appropriate developments of the future. This includes across all forms ofdisaster risk reduction and of disaster response. It will be firstly through the greater and inclusive
cooperation and coordination between scholarly institutions engaged in driving the research that
informs evidence based learning. Secondly, we will witness that this form of international levelalliance can also encourage both specialist and broad dialogue across many nations ultimately
impacting on the will of our political leaders. Thirdly, an alliance whose membership is wellgrounded in their local and regional communities of practice and society as a whole is capable ofeffecting change in human behaviour for better. These are fundamental aspects of an agenda thatis simply too critical to settle for anything less; to deliver the hope on which we thrive.
Congratulations to Kyoto University in providing the first Secretariat for GADRI. On behalf of the
GADRI Board I also deliver a warm thank you to all of the many institutions who have alreadyjoined or whose membership is forthcoming.

GADRI Board of Directors from around the world

Board of Directors (BoD)
Europe and Africa
1. International Institute for Applied System Analysis (IIASA)
2. European Commission (EU), Joint Research Center (JRC)
3. Disaster and Development Network (DDN), Northumbria University

Asia and Oceania
4.
5.
6.
7.

International Research Institute of Disaster Science, Tohoku University
National Research Institute for Earth Science and Disaster Prevention (NIED)GNS Science
National Science and Technology Center for Disaster Reduction (NCDR)

Americas
8. Disaster Risk Research, Institute of Geography, National Autonomous University of Mexico(UNAM)
9. Natural Hazards Center, University of Colorado, Boulder
10. Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center (PEER), National Information Service for
Earthquake Engineering, University of California, Berkeley

Secretariat
11. Disaster Prevention Research Institute (DPRI), Kyoto University3Message from the Director, Disaster Prevention Research Institute(DPRI), Kyoto University
I wish to congratulate Prof. Andrew Collins,
Chair, GADRI Board of Directors, GADRI
members and the Secretariat for resonantly
moving forward in implementing GADRI
activities.
The date to hold the First meeting of the
GADRI Board of Directors could not havetimed more perfectly than 22 March 2016 as
GADRI completed one year since it wasapproved by the Second Global Summit of
Research Institutes for Disaster Risk
Reduction held at Disaster Prevention
Research Institute (DPRI), Kyoto University,
Japan in March 2015. It was a historicaloccasion as this year 2016, DPRI, Kyoto
University celebrates the anniversary of 65
Years since its inception in 1951, and the
Natural Disaster Research Council celebrates
15 years since it was established in 2001 by
DPRI, Kyoto University as a network ofJapanese academicians.

Disaster
Risk
Reduction
20152030 (SFDRR) andthe work of the
ScientificandTechnical Advisory
Group of the United Nations Office forDisaster Risk Reduction (UNISDR), I wish to
give our assurance to assist GADRI achieveeven higher heights in the years to come andto share the knowledge and experiences acrossborders.
Thank you very much for your continued
cooperation.

Dr. Kaoru Takara
Professor and Director
DisasterPrevention(DPRI), Kyoto University

Research

Institute

As GADRI pursues its goals to support theimplementation of the Sendai Framework for

Disaster Prevention Research Institute, Kyoto University
The Disaster Prevention Research Institute (DPRI), Kyoto University was established in 1951 and islocated at the Uji Campus of the Kyoto University. Today with 65 years of research knowledge andexperience, it is one of the pioneering institutions in disaster risk reduction, prevention and mitigation and is recognized as a Global Center of Excellence in the area of disaster risk management.
Since its inception in 1951, DPRI has been pursuing principles of natural disaster reduction, establishing integrated methodologies for disaster prevention on the basis of natural and social sciences, and educating students in related fields.

DPRI has five research institutions. There are over one hundred faculty members and over two hundred researchers and graduate students in various disciplines at DPRI, Uji Campus, Kyoto University. DPRI serves as a national research center on natural disasters and their prevention and mitigation, authorized by the Ministry of Education (MEXT). Many researchers from abroad and within
Japan conduct joint research initiatives using the state-of-the-art experimental and observatory facilities at DPRI.
The past decades have been notably marked for the intensity in increased natural disasters. By using accumulated research knowledge, and experience, DPRI strives to enhance its research efforts
and respond to the serious needs for the protection of lives and assets of people and society.

4The Kyushu Japan Earthquake Sequence of April 2016
Prof. James Goltz
Visiting Research Professor
Disaster Prevention Research InstituteKyoto University
This report is based on a review of English
language news media articles, reports available
on the web pages of the Japan Meteorological
Agency, the Fire and Disaster Management
Agency of the Ministry of Internal Affairs andCommunications, the Cabinet Office of Japan, thePrefectural Government of Kumamoto and theUnited States Geological Survey, and fieldreconnaissance conducted in several areas ofsignificant earthquake damage between April
29th and May 1st 2016. The field reconnaissanceincluded observation of damage in cities andtowns within Kumamoto Prefecture including
Kumamoto City, Mashiki, Nishihara and Mifune.
The town of Minami-Aso, also severely impacted
by the April earthquakes was not accessible due
to road closures during our field reconnaissance.
Members of our team included Dr. Tomohide
Atsumi of Osaka University, several of his
graduate students and me.
The Earthquakes
The Initial earthquake which later proved to be aforeshock was recorded by the JMA at M6.5
(USGS Mw6.2) and occurred at 9:26 PM
Japan Standard Time, on April 14, 2016. It was
located at latitude 32.7, and longitude 130.8E at a
depth of 10km, 12.0 km (7.5 mi) WNW of
Kumamoto City, Japan. The maximum JMA
Intensity recorded was 7 (highest on the intensity
scale). The earthquake was a result of strike slip
faulting at shallow depth on the Hinagu fault.
Within 3 hours of the initial earthquake, several
significant aftershocks occurred.
Significant aftershocks of the April 14 event:
10:07 PM 4-14 M5.7 Intensity 610:38 PM
M5.0
511:43 PM
M5.0
4
12:03 AM 4-15 M6.4
6+
In addition to these large aftershocks, there were:M4.0 to M4.9 12 JMA 4
M3.0 to M3.9 13 JMA 3-4
At 1:25 AM JST on April 16, 2016 a larger
earthquake occurred which was recorded by the
JMA at M7.3 (USGS Mw7.0) located atlatitude 32.8 and longitude 130.7E at a depthof 10km. It was located 1.0 km (0.6 mi) WSW of
Kumamoto City. Like it’s foreshock, thisearthquake had a stike-slip fault mechanism andoccurred at shallow depth along the Futagawa
fault. JMA reported a maximum JMA Intensity of
7. The M6.5 event and other earthquakes thatpreceded this event are regarded as foreshocks ofthis, the largest earthquake in the sequence.
Significant aftershocks of the April 16 event:
1:46 AM April 16 M6.0 JMA Intensity 63:55 AM
M5.8
6+
9:48 AM
M5.4
6Surface Rupture and Liquefaction: surface
rupture was observed, as was liquefaction along
rivers and in other areas of the impact zone.
Ground failure was a significant factor in damage
to buildings and infrastructure.
Aftershock Warnings: The JMA, which routinely
issues aftershock probabilities following amainshock, reportedly provided warnings after
the 4-14 event but

Figure 1: Shake Map for
Mw6.2 Event

Figure 2: Shake Map for Mw7.0
Event

discontinued doing so after the mainshock of 4-16.
According to a Yomiuri Shimbun article thatappeared on 4-21, the JMA released a statement
following the 4-14 M6.5 event stating that there
was a 20% probability of aftershocks measuringlower 6 or higher. The rationale for cessation ofaftershock forecasts, according to the article wasthat the JMA felt that past occurrences ofaftershock sequences were not providing adequate
guidance for this sequence.
Basic Situation Statistics
Impact Areas: Kumamoto City, Mashiki,
Nishihara, Mifune and Minami-Aso. There areother towns in Kumamoto and Oita prefectures
but these are the areas with the most significant
casualties and damage.
Fatalities: 50 as a direct effect of the earthquakes,
19 additional fatalities indirectly attributed to theearthquake.
Injuries: 1,666, 350 serious injuries and 1,316
minor to moderate injuries.

5

Displaced: the number of evacuees peaked
immediately following the April 16 mainshock at
180,000. By April 24, the Japan Times cited“government reports” of 89,513 evacuees inKumamoto Prefecture and 637 from Oita
Prefecture. By the time of our field reconnaissanceat the end of April, the media were reporting
30,000 evacuees. By the end of June, there werestill 1,900 people in shelters in Mashiki Town.
Shelters: There are 623 official shelters as reportedby the Yomiuri Shimbun on 4-21 mainly publicbuildings and schools. At least three ferry boats
serve as shelters and the Kumamoto Prison was
opened to evacuees where 250 people weresheltered as of 4-21.
Building Damage: A Kumamoto Prefectural
Government report dated June 30th indicated that
150,000 residential structures were damaged in
the earthquakes. The breakdown in terms ofseverity was 7,900 totally destroyed, 23, 663 withsignificant damage and 117, 612 with slightdamage. In addition, 243 public buildings weredamaged and 1,384 commercial buildings weredamaged.
Loss Estimates: The Cabinet Office of Japan has
estimated losses in the earthquakes at between 2.4
and 4.6 billion yen.
Mutual Aid: The national government has
deployed 26,000 Self Defense Army, Navy and Air
Force personnel to the region. The US base in
Okinawa dispatched 4 MV-22 Ospreys which
delivered 20 tons of relief supplies (food, water andblankets) to Minami-Aso.
Volunteers: Hundreds ofvolunteers from the impact
region, and many from otherparts of Japan joined municipal
and prefectural personnel in
responding to the earthquakes.
They assisted in the distributionof food and supplies at the Volunteers at theevacuation centers, cleared debris Nishihara volunteer
and helped clean up homes. That
number increased during Golden Week as people
spent vacation days as disaster volunteers. A
number of volunteer organizations with experiencein other earthquake disasters assisted incoordinating and managing volunteer activities.
Specific Incidents and Issues
Shinkansen Derailment: A Shinkansen train and 6
cars derailed while traveling at approximately 80
kph between Shin-Minimata and Kumamoto
during the April 14, M6.5 foreshock. No passengers
were on board and the driver was not injured. The
derailed train and cars were cleared and thisstretch of the railway opened on April 28. The
Japan Times reported on 4-29-16 that the Kyushu
Shinkansen resumed all services in Kyushu on

6April 29th.
Transportation Impacts: The Kyushu Expressway
reopened on Friday April 29, but many secondary
roads in Kumamoto Prefecture remained blocked
by debris and landslides per Japan Times 4-29-16.
Blockages exist at 295 locations in the prefecture.
Conditions
attheShelters: Conditions at
the shelters were asubject of nearly dailynews reports though theend of April. There are
623 officially recognized Closure of Rt. 235 in Mashiki tTown
shelters mostly in publicbuildings. Some shelters were reported to be
extremely crowded, and in the immediate
aftermath of the April 16 earthquake, were
inadequately provided with potable water, foodand blankets. While many evacuees have homesthat are uninhabitable, others have evacuated due
to utility outages and lack of adequate food andwater supplies at home. A large number of people
have evacuated to their cars due to fear thatongoing aftershocks will cause their houses tocollapse, giving rise to concerns among health care
professionals that some of these people who spend
lengthy periods of time confined to their cars willdevelop blood clots that could cause death, thissituation has been referred to as “economy classsyndrome.” A total of 35 people were diagnosed
with economy class syndrome, caused by prolonged
inactivity, according to a Kyodo News Survey(Japan Times, 4-29-16). Some evacuees chose toremain in their cars because pets were notpermitted in the shelters. NHK TV reported
outbreaks of Norovirus at one the evacuation
centers in Minami-Aso and health officials wereconcerned about the disease spreading.
Temporary Housing: The Kumamoto prefectural
government has decided to secure some 4,200
temporary housing units, half through construction
and the other half by renting, using a
supplementary budget of ¥36.6 billion for fiscal
2016 (Japan Times, 4-29-16). As of June 30th, 3,364
temporary houses were under construction in
Kumamoto Prefecture.
Weather in the Region: Search and rescue/recovery
and activities in response to the earthquakes were
hampered by persistent rain causing concern thatfurther landslides would be triggered, particularly
in mountainous Minami-Aso, one of the hardest hit
areas. An Asahi Shimbun article on 4-22 reported
that 1000 people (500 households) had beenordered to evacuate due to possible flooding. The
rain also resulted in lengthy confinement of people
who evacuated in their cars prompting increased
concern that they would develop “economy classsyndrome.”Impacts on Schools: Between April 19 and 23rd,
1,267 school buildings at 163 locations were
inspected for damage. A total of 134 locations hadbuildings that were “red tagged” meaning that they
were considered dangerous and unusable. Another354 sites had buildings that were “yellow tagged”
meaning “caution needed.” (Asahi Shimbun, April
26).
Disabled and Special Needs Persons: In 2012,
Kumamoto signed agreements with 176 social
welfare facilities that accommodate the elderly,
disabled and others with special needs in the eventof a disaster. But following the earthquakes of 4-14
and 4-16, only 34 of these facilities were able toaccept special needs evacuees. These facilities were
expected to take in 1,700 evacuees. Damage tothese facilities, utility outages and staff shortages
were blamed for the inability to accept more special
needs evacuees. Volunteers were assigned to thesefacilities to ease some of the difficulties. (Asahi
Shimbun, 4-27)
Damage to Historic Sites:
Asojinja Shrine: Destroyed were its worship halland main gate. The gate has been designated and“important cultural property” and is one of three
famed “Romon” two-story temples and shrine gate
structures in Japan. There are plans to rebuild it.
Kumamoto Castle: Drones were employed to do adamage assessment of Kumamoto Castle’s main
tower because on-site inspection was too dangerous
due to continuing aftershocks. Engineers noteddamage to the supporting foundation of the castle
due to use of smaller stones and a 1960
reconstruction of the main tower was thought
responsible for damage due to use of steel
reinforced concrete rather than wood (used in theoriginal construction) that made the structureheavier and less flexible. The castle also lost mostof its roof tiles as well as “shachihoko” a fabled fishroof ornament.
School Closures: approximately 150,000 children
were unable to attend classes on Monday April 25
due to damage to schools and the use of schools forevacuation centers.
Business Impacts
Business Interruption
Toyota suspended production at most of its
factories (15) in Japan due to scarcity of parts withcascading effects on other manufacturers.
Honda’s motorcycle plant in Kumamoto
severely damaged in the earthquakes.

wasSony reported a fourth-quarter loss after booking acharge against its chip business and delayed giving
a full-year forecast to assess damage from anearthquake that shut its main plant for camera
sensors. The net loss was ¥88.3 billion in thequarter that ended in March. Operations at its
Sony’s Kumamoto facility remained suspended
after this month’s earthquakes, with some parts
that reopened at the end of May. The company
reported damage to the building, clean rooms andequipment. The facility is the primary
manufacturing site for image sensors used indigital and security cameras as well as microdisplay devices. (Japan Times, 4-29-16; AssociatedPress, 4-29-16)
Renesas Electronics Corp. in Kumamoto was closed
for safety evaluation particularly for dangerous
gases used to maintain antiseptic conditions forchip production.
Japans Nikkei 225 stock index fell by 3% on
Monday April 18, in addition:
Toyota was down 4.8%
Nissan was down by 2.8%
Sony down by 6.8%
The above figures are from an Associated Press
report that appeared on April 18. The report, which
focused on business interruption, also noted that
Kyushu is home to about 25% of Japans semiconductor production. Kyushu is known as “Silicon
Island.” The island also has auto, steel and ship
manufacturers.
The earthquakes impact on business (losses andimpacts on supply chains) will depend on how long
factories are closed.
Insurance: According to the Insurance Information
Institute, earthquake damage in Kyushu is not
likely to have a significant impact on insurance
pricing nor will it cause insurers or modelingcompanies to reassess their catastrophe models.
Tourism: According to an Asahi Shimbun article on
April 21st, tourist numbers in Kyushu have plunged
since the earthquake disaster. China and Hong
Kong issued travel warnings against visiting
Kyushu according to the Japan Tourist Agency.
Fukuoka, Miyazaki and Kagoshima Prefectures
have also observed declines in visitors. The
Camellia Line ferry, which makes a daily roundtrip between Busan Port in South Korea and
Hakata Port in Fukuoka reported 2,400
cancellations after April 14th. Areas within Kyushu
that are popular tourist destinations including Mt.
Aso, which receives about 16 million visitors per
year will experience declines due to damage tomany of the inns and businesses that cater tovisitors. Also, the Asojinjja Shrine and the
Kumamoto castle, also popular with tourists havebeen severely damaged and will be closed forlengthy periods of time. Golden Week, during which
many Japanese people take vacations, began on
Friday April 29th.

7New Legislation: The central government adopted
an ordinance Thursday (April 28) for extending
deadlines for some administrative procedures,
including updating driver licenses. Among themore than 200 special measures expected to belaunched based on the ordinance is one to freezebankruptcy procedures for companies that wentbust due to the earthquakes for a maximum of two
years. The measure is designed to prevent chainreaction bankruptcies (Japan Times, 4-29-16).
Issues Cited in Editorials
Citing the conditions at the shelters, Kumamoto
prefectural government was criticized for poor
planning and failure to conduct adequate needs
assessments resulting in shortages of food, waterand other necessities at the evacuation centers(Yomiuri Shimbun, 4-19).
An editorial writer expressed concern about healthimpacts on the evacuees and advocated the
movement of vulnerable people—the elderly,
people with disabilities and infants to neighboring
jurisdictions that have offered publicly run
housing free of charge. The article also urged
better information sharing, particularly about thestatus of the Sendai Nuclear Power Plant run by
Kyushu Electric Power Company. (Yomiuri
Shimbun, 4-20)
This editorial emphasizes health impacts ofevacuation and that conditions at the evacuation
centers would result in stress and fatigue, leading
to illness and possibly death. It noted that 80% of
the post-earthquake fatalities following the 2004
Chuetsu earthquake were due to the effects of long-term evacuation. (Yomiuri Shimbun, 4-19)
This article was critical of local government due tothe severe damage to municipal buildings andhospitals that are critical to an effective disaster
response. The writer identified several suchbuildings including the Uto Municipal Governmentbuilding that was in danger of collapse, the Uto
Disaster Control Headquarters that was badly
damaged and whose personnel were forced torespond to the earthquake from tents, andKumamoto Hospital, which was forced to movepatients to other hospitals. (Yomiuri Shimbun, 416)
This editorial was critical of the Japan Railway forthe derailment of a Shinkansen train and 6 cars.
The writer noted that “derailment prevention
guards” had been installed in some areas but not
the stretch of track where the train derailed andcalled for a more aggressive program of hazard
mitigation for the Shinkansen, which travel athigh speeds and usually have large numbers ofpassengers. (Japan Times, 4-23)

8

ShelteringWe
visitedtheMashikiSportsComplex on April
29th, 30th and May
1 s t
w h e r e
approximately 1,300
peoplew e r e Photo1: Tents for evacuees at Mashiki
evacuated. Prior to Sports Complex, April 29, 2016
the earthquake, thecenter, owned by Mashiki Municipal Government,
provided recreational facilities for Machiki Town
and was managed and operated by the YMCA. As
an evacuation center, it continued to be managed
by the YMCA.
At the time of
our
field
observation,
there was asignificant Self
Defense Armyand
Navy
presence as well
as volunteers in
Photo 2: Evacuees chose to remain in their carsn u m b e r s
sufficient to supplement the small YMCA staff. In
addition to those housed in the building, many
people are sheltered in tents (See Photo 1) or were
living in their cars parked in the large parking lotof the Sports Complex (See Photo 2).
The facility had only nonstructural damage though
there was heavy damage to houses, small
businesses and infrastructure in the immediate
vicinity. Mr. Kazuki Yamane, one of the YMCA
staff provided a tour of the complex including theinterior damage that consisted of collapse of theceiling tiles and metal bracing in the gymnasium.
Yamane explained that the gymnasium floor was
being cleared ofdebris after whichheanticipatedhousinganadditional 300-400
evacuees.
These
additional evacuees
were expected tocome from area
schools
currently
being
used
as Photo3: Lengthy line - waiting to be served
dinnershelters, so that
school could resume. The building was crowdedwith evacuees and each individual or family had
only about nine square meters for the belongings
they salvaged and bedding. Army SDF personnel
prepared and served meals, and food and water
seemed to be adequate, but for evening meals,
there were long lines of evacuees and I was toldthat those at the rear of the line would wait about
2 hours to be served (See Photo 3).

The Japan Red Cross has also been active in thisdisaster and had set up a medical aid station at
the Mashiki Sports Complex. In addition to the
walk-in clinic, Red Cross workers walked amongtents and those spending long hours in or near
their cars to address any medical needs ofevacuees.
Debris and Debris Clearance
Upon arrival in Kumamoto
City at approximately noonon Friday April 29th anddriving our rented car toward
Mashiki Town, the firstevidence of an earthquake
disaster noted were large Photo 4: Separating debris
piles of discarded household at temporary dumpsite
items damaged in theearthquakes. Observed among the debris were
televisions, furniture,refrigerators and small
appliances that werebroken or damaged during
the earthquake.
Later, when we arrived in
Mashiki Town we observeda large central dumpsite
near the Mashiki Sports
Photo 5: Debris accumulation atComplex, which served as
an evacuation center.
Heavy equipment had been brought in to separate
the debris into huge pilesof metal, wood, plastic andmiscellaneous debris (SeePhotos 4-5).
Trucks lined up along anaccess road and on to thehighway waiting to unload
debris.
At times, thisprocess clogged street Photo 6: Ground failure andtraffic around the sports settlement around foundation
complex as it required
time for each small truck or car to discard debris
brought to the site.
Ground Failure and Differential Settlement
We were not able to observe the large landslide
near MinamiAso, but therewas
consider able
evidenceofground failure
in and nearM a s h i k i
T o w n .
Although the Photo 7: Ground failure along this road in Mashiki
M a s h i k i Town separated the guardrail from the roadbed

Sports Complex did not havestructural damage, there wasevidence of slumping aroundthe building’s foundation andutility structures on theproperty (See Photo 6). Groundfailure along the highway
separated the guardrail fromt h e
Photo 8: Yellow taggedhouse in southeaster
Kumamoto City, April 30,

roadbed (See photo 7).

Photo 9 Partial collapse of older
two-story house in southeasternarea of Kumamoto City

Structural Damage
HousesDamage to houses in theareas
weobserved,southeastern Kumamoto
City and Mashiki Town,
ranged from no damage in
Photo 10: Collapsed houses inareas of lighter shaking or Mashiki Town, note groundhousesofr e c e n t failure, May 1, 2016
construction to complete
collapse of older houses and those in JMA
intensity 6+ or 7. The most common form ofdamage was to tile roofs, which we observed
nearly everywhere we traveled. Blue tarps
covering damaged tile roofs were a common sightin the impact area. It also appears that groundfailure contributed to the severe damage tohouses, particularly in Mashiki (See Photos 8 to
10).
Businesses
Damage to businessfacilities
wasafrequent topic of news
reports, particularly
thedisruptionofbusiness among large
corporations including
Toyota, Sony, Honda Photo 11: The complete collapse of thisandothers.
But hair salon in southeastern Kumamoto
damage to mid-size City, April 30, 2016.
and small businesses was also severe (See Photo
11).
Tokyo Cathode Laboratory’s facility in Nishihara
was severely damaged in the earthquakes. Bothstructural and nonstructural damage wereobserved. Per Bloomberg profile, Tokyo Cathode
Laboratory was established in 1950 and has 444
employees. The company engages in the
manufacture and sale of probe cards and related
devices for semiconductor applications in Japanand internationally.

9

photosbelow
reveal the damage
we observed (SeePhoto 15).

Temples and Shrines
Buddhist temples andShinto shrines tend to be
older
and
more
vulnerable to strong
groundmotion.
Weobserved severe damage
and the collapse of
several temples andshrines in southeastern
Kumamoto City and
MashikiTown(Seephotos 12 and 13).

Concrete Retaining
Walls
Photo 16: Damaged residential concrete

Photo 12: The Konkokyo Shinto
Shrine in Mashiki Town is redtagged and portions of thebuilding collapsed, April 29, 2016.

Photos 13: Side views of Konkokyo Shrine, Mashiki
Town, April 29, 2016

Public Buildings and Critical Facilities
N e w sarticles andeditorials
were highly
criticalofthe
performanceofpublicbuildings
thatwere
i m p o r t a n t Photo 14: Mashiki Town administrative buildingfort h e (town hall) sustained structural and non-structural
coordination damage and was evacuated. April 29, 2016.
of
emergency response or were to serve as evacuation
centers in disaster (See photo 14). A total of 243
public buildings were damaged in the earthquakes.
Transportation
The earthquakes caused considerable damage toroads, highways and rail transportation. Although
the most serious disruptions to the Kyushu
Expressway and Shinkansen had been repaired andwere functional at the time of our reconnaissancetrip to theimpact area,
there
were
road
and
street closures
d u e
t o
collapsedhousesandd a m a g e dbridges.
The Photo 15: Column failure at highway bridge,
Mashiki Town, May 1, 2016

10

Many
masonry walls, Mashiki May 1, 2016
walls were severely
damaged in theearthquakes, bothsmall
residential
walls and larger
retainingwalls.
Someobserved
damage from ourreconnaissanceappear in photos 16 Photo 17: Another view of damaged andand 17.
partially collapsed stairway and retaining
wall Mashiki Town, May 1, 2016.

Volunteers
Large numbers of volunteers converged on Kyushu
following the earthquakes and our arrival on April
29th marked the beginning of Golden Week, a time
when many people travel in Japan and significant
numbers of people, particularly students, spent
their time off volunteering at centers aroundKumamoto Prefecture. These centers were typicallylocated in open spaces provided by municipal
governments or private sector entities. In mostcases,
thevolunteer centerswere managed bymembers of local
welfarecouncils,
which in Japan,
arequasi-publicorganizations
funded by local
government
andoperate much like Photo 18: Volunteers line up to register at a
Nishihara volunteer center in front of the
NGOs.
Tokyo Cathode Laboratory, Nishihara Town,
About
half
the April 30, 2016
volunteers were local
people and the other half were from outside
Kumamoto Prefecture. During our reconnaissance,
we visited several centers, where volunteers wereregistered, received identification as volunteers,
were briefed on daily assignments, divided into
small teams, then were driven to locations where
they assisted in debris clearance, checking on thosestill in their damaged homes and assisting at one of
the many evacuation centers (See Photo 18).
This article was contributed by Prof.
James Goltz, Visiting Research Professor,
Disaster Prevention Research Institute(DPRI), Kyoto University.

Facts and Observations from the Kaohsiung Earthquake on
6 February 2016 in Taiwan
By Prof. Wei-Sen Li, Dr. Hongey Chen
National Science and Technology Center for Disaster Reduction (NCDR)

Abstract
On February 6, 2016 at 03:57 am local time, a magnitude-6.6 in-land and shallow earthquake hit thesouthern part Taiwan and caused life casualties(117 died and 551 wounded), and damages to buildings (249 recognized as severely damaged level), lifeline systems and infrastructures. The epicenter islocated at Meinong District, Kaohsiung City andwith a focal depth of 16.6 Kilometers. According to
the shake records, the strongest intensity reachedscale 7 (334.1 gal in PGA).
One totally collapsed building in Tainan City, theWeiguan Jinlong Building, killed 115 people due topoor construction details and irregular structuralconfigurations. Thought the quake brought interruptions to public services like water, power and telecommunications, most of the services had been restored within 28~48 hours. The whole on-site emergency operation continued 180 hours since Feb. 6
and motivated 20,000 plus emergency responders to
help for search-and-rescue, emergency relief, mental
intervention, traffic control, law consultation andetc.
About economic losses, besides direct costs by structural damages, impacts to the Southern Taiwan Science Park, 38 km from the epicenter, caused business interruptions to IC manufacturing industry
and billions of losses. The limited and temporary
disturbances had been overcome in a very short period of time, because of implementations of business
continuity plan to mitigate possible production losses and resume product delivery to global supply
chain.

Summarized casualties and damages
Soon after the earthquake, both Tainan City and central governments had activated emergency response
from 04:03 am and 04:15 am respectively. Within anhour, Tainan City Government identified one totallycollapsed building was the most severely devastatingsite. The whole search-and-rescue operation called
an end in the afternoon of Feb. 14 lasting over 180
hours. In total, 33,343 people including emergency
responders, police officers, military personnel andvolunteers, ever joined the operations. According tothe official report the numbers of casualties and damages are listed a table below.
Items

117 dead*, 551wounded
Casualties* 115 found dead in the
Weiguan Jinlong Building,Power supply: 173,000 households

Interruptions
to lifeline systems

Water supply: 400,300 households
Land-line telephone:
households

1,248

Mobile phone station: 143
Natural gas supply:
households
Damagedbuilding

Damagesorsuspension totransportation
systems

Quick earthquake report
Source: Central Weather Bureau

Descriptions

1,304

After quick assessment:
Red-tagged
tagged 336

249,

Yellow-

Highway: 2 sections
High-speed rail: a temporary
suspension to south-boundoperation from Taichungsoon after the quake

Damagedschool469

Mobilized personnel

33,343

Data source：The Central Emergency Operation Center

11

Among 115 of 117 deaths, the total collapse of the
Weiguan Jinlong Building, located at No.6,
Guoguang 5th St., Yongkang Dist., Tainan City, isthe direct cause leading to main casualty. The
building was completed in 1995, a mixed-use
reinforced-concrete complex for both residential andcommercial use, and it survived the shaking
brought by the 1999 Chi-Chi Earthquake. Lackingof sufficient shear force capacity, shear walls, atlower floors and ill structural configuration are thechief defects at design stage and construction
phase. These defects possibly led to a pan-cakefailure to the building and because of that it was achallenging job to find survivors and remains of thedeceased buried deeply under smashed concrete
debris.

markets at 8:00 am, more casualties could be
expected because of crowds buying foods forcelebrate new year. Except the Weiguan Jinlong
Building, no death was reported from other sevenbuildings. The locations of eight severely damagedbuildings are shown below.

Learned lessons and observations
Seismic safety management on existing mixed-use
complexes
Mixed-use complex for both residency andcommerce is a common building type in Taiwan,
because of convenience to attract customers.
However wide-and-open space for commerce could
bring defects to seismic structural behavior, if there
is no strict safety requirement and examination.
Major concerns to the mixed-use buildings include:
shear capacity, weak story, seismic design codes,
construction details and maintenance. Lack of shear
wall to form weak story is one of major problem ofstructural behavior. The case of the Weiguan
Jinlong Building is an example to identify
problems. And difficulties to manage risk are
private ownership of the buildings, frequent
remodeling due to commercial operations andcontrol on crowd flow. All the factors listed above
could add vulnerabilities when an earthquake
strikes.

The collapsed Weiguan Jinlong Building
Source: Tainan City Government

After the quake, eight buildings were reportedly
severely damaged and two of them were markets.
Luckily, the quake hit one day ahead of Chinese
New Year Eve in the very early morning and there
was no crowd in markets. If it had attacked two

Locations of eight severely damaged buildings Source: NCDR
A provisionary water pipe reconnecting broken sectionsin Tainan City

12

Better use of social media to disseminate
information
After the quake hitting in the early morning, theofficial website of Tainan City Government was
totally overwhelmed by a huge surge of accesses by
citizens or reporters requiring situations updates.
Since it is impossible to allocate sufficient Internet
bandwidth and servers in advance of or
immediately after the quake, Tainan City Majorand staff utilized Facebook and LINE to keeppeople informed of situations, casualties,
operations of search-and-rescue and relevant
services for affected families. For examples, there
were LINE individual groups designated for
emergency responders, reporters, affected families
and decision makers to shorten information gaps
and accelerate process time. All surveys on citizens
showed high satisfactions on quick responses
conducted by Tainan City Government.
Impacts on livelihoods by interrupted lifeline
systems
Interrupted lifeline systems by the earthquake didbring inconvenience to citizens’ livelihoods,
especially interruptions of electricity, water,
telecommunications and transportation. Except
water supply, all other services had been restored
within 48 hours. Because of one main undergroundwater supply pipe smashed by collapse off the
Weiguan Jinlong Building that brought difficulties
for restoring tap water service. A provisionary pipe
was installed to reconnect broken sessions forresuming water supply. In order to provide wirelessInternet access on the affected site of the Weiguan
Jinlong Building for coordinating on-site
operations, five mobile phone service provider set
up temporary equipment to meet the demands.
Through rapid restoration of the Internet access tokeep information transparency, websites set bycrowd-sourcing helped full coverages about affected
situations and also collected donated resources tomeet urgent demands.

sector. In 1991, the Hsinchu Science Park, locatedin the northern part of Taiwan, had received
damages to production lines because of the Chi-Chi
Earthquake. Since then, some manufactures havebeen investing resources to develop contingency
plan or adopt ISO22301 introducing business
continuity management in recent years. However,
one challenge raised by the recent quake is how tofind sufficient rooms to accommodate external
engineers who helped for quick recovery. This ispotential space to complete business continuity
plan based on learned lessons this time.
Public awareness and preparedness on futuredisasters
Soil liquefaction is another focal issue after thequick in Feb. Numbers of residential builds
suffered tilting or settlements due to liquefied sandlayer at foundations. Cases of soil liquefaction had
been reported from previous earthquakes in
Taiwan. But soil liquefaction seemed to be new tolots of citizens in Feb, because seldom was itcovered by news reports. To respond to the generalpublic request of clear risk and ease anxiety of soilliquefaction, potential risk maps of soil liquefaction
have been soon open for on-line inquiry based onhome address. Transparent risk map is an ideal
basis for risk communication among individual
stakeholders such like government officials,
researches and citizens under a correct andunderstandable risk interpretation. With common
consensus on disaster risk reduction in general,promotion of the whole society resilience could beenhanced gradually.

Challenges to implement business continuity planat times of disaster
The Southern Taiwan Science Park, suited closely
to epicenter at a distance of 38 KMs, is an essential
manufacturing base of ICT industry cluster
producing products for global supply chain.
According to reports of individual manufactures,
though there was no structural damage to IC fab,but non-structural damages, like pipeline
breakages or excessive vibrations to equipment of
production lines, caused business interruptions andrequired contingency operation to jumpstart
production. Based on news reports, direct loses of
ICT estimated by insurance industry showed thatcompensation claim could reach NTD 20 billion(USD 0.63 billion). That number exceeds theannual amount of premiums in 2015 at business

Soil liquefaction site
Source: Tainan City Government

This ar cle was contributed by Prof. Wei-Sen Li and hiscolleague Dr. Hongey Chen from the Na onal Scienceand Technology Center for Disaster Reduc on (NCDR),
Taipei City, Taiwan. Prof. Li is the Secretary-General,
NCDR.

13

Workshops
Workshop on Bridging Strong-motion andEarthquake Damage
By: Prof. Jim Mori, Disaster Prevention Research Institute (DPRI),
Kyoto University

The Earthquake and Volcano Hazards Research grouporganized a workshop on Bridging Strong-mo on andEarthquake Damage at the Disaster Preven on Research
Ins tute (DPRI), Kyoto University, Japan on 25 February
2016.
The objec ve of the workshop was to discuss future
projects for the group, especially related to earthquake
strong-mo ons and the associated damage to buildings.
Current the actual performance of diﬀerent types ofstructures is not well quan fied and needs to be
determined by detailed field studies following destruc ve
earthquakes. Using the building classifica ons recently
developed by EERI and GEM, survey reports on building
damage caused by large earthquakes can be used to
study the earthquake eﬀects on structures. In order totake full advantage of exis ng informa on, studies could
also be ini ated with already collected data from recent
events such as the 2011 Tohoku earthquake. GADRI could
play a key role in coordina ng eﬀorts by the interna onal
community for such studies following large earthquakes.
A er a brief welcome, the workshop was opened with an
introduc on and scope of GADRI by Prof. Hirokazu
Tatano, Secretary-General followed by Prof. Jim Mori,organizer of the workshop.
The invited par cipants from Italy, Taiwan, US and Japan
presented brief and focused research findings, poten al
research areas/countries/regions, and perspec ves fromtheir field experiences. Among the presenta ons weredamage and casualty reports from recent earthquakes Factors aﬀec ng human casualty distribu on in the 2015
Gorkha Nepal Earthquake presented by Dr. Hitomi
Murakami, Yamaguchi University, Japan, and The 6
February 2016 Earthquake at Meinong District,
Kaoshiung City, Taiwan presented by Dr. Lap-Loi Chung,
Na onal Center for Research on Earthquake Engineering,Taiwan. Other topics included a range of subjects –Source models and ground mo ons of the 2011 Tohoku
Earthquake by Prof. Hiroe Miyake (Earthquake Research
Ins tute, The University of Tokyo, Japan), Simula ons ofstrong ground mo ons by Dr. Takahiro Maeda (Na onal
Research Ins tute for Earth Science and Disaster
Preven on, Japan), GEM Building Taxonomy by Dr.
Catalina Yepes Estrada (GEM Founda on, Italy), GEM
Earthquake Consequences Database by Prof. Maki
Koyama (Gifu University, Japan), and the Possible

14

development of a new GADRI mul -hazard databasepresented by Prof. Charles Scawthorn (PEER, UC Berkely).
During the wrap-up discussion session led by Prof. Mori,par cipants discussed about the possible future ac vi es
for the group towards a project to study eﬀects of strongmo on earthquake damage on buildings.
RecommendaƟons from the Workshop:
1. The group supports the database eﬀorts, such as the
GEM Earthquake Consequences database. It wassuggested that GADRI could provide an applica on tofacilitate use of the database.
2. The group supports development of a GADRI mul hazard database. There are currently several useful
databases for earthquake studies, however acomprehensive database is needed that consistently
cover many natural disasters such as earthquakes,
volcanoes, landslides, floods, and storms. Improvements
can be made to current earthquake databases by
including informa on on lifelines.
3. GADRI should help coordinate field inves ga ons ofimportant seismic and volcanic events. As an alliance of
research ins tutes, GADRI could provide advancedplanning and facilitate interna onal eﬀorts. The field
inves ga ons should provide consistent reports, such as
using the GEM building taxonomy system.
4. GADRI could provide a pla orm for research ins tutes
to voice opinions on important disaster-related policies
and ac vi es.

Workshop on New Generation of Geohazard
Mapping and Strategy for Its Social Application
By: Dr. Yuki Matsushi, Disaster Prevention Research Institute (DPRI),
Kyoto University

The GADRI Geohazard group workshop on New General of Geohazard Mapping andStrategy for its Social Applica on provided a unique opportunity to discuss present
status and future tasks for GEMINI* implementa on. See the chart below. One of
the most important common strategies for geo-disaster mi ga on is hazard
mapping, thus the discussion started on the methodology of geohazard mapping andscope of social applica on of geohazard maps. Suscep ble areas to geohazards areme varying due to the long-term phenomena such as regional tectonics and climatechange, and also short-term processes such as precipita on and earthquake shaking.
In other words, hazard mapping in the next genera on could be made in conjunc onwith spa al and temporal predic on of geo-disaster.
A total of 14 topics were presented by 6 invited researchers with one keynote lecturefrom a standpoint of scien fic reviews and reports, introduc on to engineering tools
and applica ons, and social aspects of risk management and risk communica on ofgeohazards. A endancees ac vely engaged in discussions about strategy ofmapping, monitoring, and predic on of geohazards. Gaps between science,engineering, and social implementa on were also debated, as well as direc on of
GEMINI project (Geohazard mi ga on on the new innova on in science andengineering, a project being proposed by
GADRI Geohazard Group).

Points discussed at the MeeƟng

•Gaps between science, engineering andsociety (or local community).

•How can we fill the gaps and make bridges•Applica on to developing regions.
•Direc on and next steps of GEMINI.

for geo-disaster mi ga on?
•Role of scien fic, engineering and social
researches.
•Toward risk map from hazard map.

Conclusions from the Workshop:

GEMINI
Geohazard mi ga on on the new
innova on in science and engineering(see Fig for the concept)
GEMINI is a project proposed by the
GADRI Geohazard Group for developing, sharing, and generalizing the strategy for geohazard mi ga on. The
project unites updated scien fic understanding of earth surface processes
and latest technology in geotechnicalengineering. In this approach, theinseparable twins of science and engineering collaborate ghtly to createcomprehensive way for spa al andtemporal predic on of geohazards, risk
assessment in poten al sites of geodisaster, and countermeasures against
human, social and economic damages.
Since geohazards have various aspects
with varying phenomena, such as
landslides, debris flow, soil erosion,liquefac on, se lement, in both natural and ar ficial geomaterials, theirresearch approaches also varies inmany scien fic and engineering fields.
This project searches new coupling of
exis ng knowledge and techniques,
and also explores implementa on of
new methodology for Geohazard mi ga on. Workshops through GADRI
framework would help host occasion
for discussion, establish the connec on
between researches and ins tutes, andpromote joint research opportuni es
for GEMINI collabora on.

•Necessity, at first to confirm present status of our scien fic knowledge andengineering tools for common understanding of poten al, limit, anduncertain es of geohazard modeling. Informa on interchange on
this task would help find a clue to make a collabora ve researchbreakthrough by coupling of scien fic and engineering fields.
•As already ascertained, at least partly, detailed knowledge of
mechanisms of earth surface processes and also well-designed
so ware for calcula on of geohazards. However, there remain
significant gaps in using them for accurate risk evalua on of geodisaster in the complex actual social communi es.
•Prescrip ve implementa on of the outcome from GEMINI requires
lessons from society in addi on to truth from science, and good
design from engineering.

15

GADRI Represented at the UNISDR Science andTechnology Conference, Geneva
GADRI was represented at the UN Oﬃce for Disaster Risk Reduc on Science and Technology
Conference on the Implementa on of the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduc on 2015
-2030 was held at the Geneva Interna onal Conference Center from 27 to 29 January 2016.,
Geneva, Switzerland.
Prof. Hirokazu Tatano, Secretary-General, GADRI was a speaker at the Work Stream 4:
Leveraging Science Through Capacity Development and Research – WG 3: Research Gaps.
Prof. Tatano presented the GADRI projects with emphasis on capacity development andresearch which was in line with the fourth work stream.
Prof. Kaoru Takara, Director, Disaster Preven on Research Ins tute (DPRI), Kyoto University,
Japan; and Adviser to GADRI was a speaker at the Work Stream 2: Understanding Disaster
Risk, Risk Assessment and Early Warning – WG 2: Exposure and Vulnerability.

「GADRI is recognized by international organizations and constantly
called for various conferences。」

UNISDR Science andTechnology Conference
The UNISDR Science and Technology Conference on the Implementa on of the Sendai
Framework for Disaster Risk
Reduc on 2015-2030 was held
on 27-29 January 2016 at the
Geneva Interna onal Conference Center. UNISDR invites
organiza ons, ins tu ons, networks and pla orms working
on disaster risk reduc on tojoin the Science and Technology
Partnership and contribute to
the implementa on of the Road
Map.

Integrated Research on
Disaster Risk (IRDR) Scien fic Commi ee
IRDR is a decade-long, interdisciplinary research programmesponsored by ICSU in partnership with the Interna onal Social Science Council (ISSC), andthe United Na ons Interna onal Strategy for Disaster Reducon (UN-ISDR). It is a global
ini a ve seeking to address thechallenges brought by natural
hazard events, mi gate theirimpacts, and improve related
policy-making mechanisms.

16

GADRI Represented at the IRDR ScientificCommittee Meeting, Parisable to badge new projects (i.e. driveor associate with projects including
through its capacity to peer review)

By Prof. Andrew Collins,
The Integrated Research on Disaster Risk
(IRDR) Scien fic Commi ee Mee ng washeld in Paris, France on 4-6 May 2016.
Prof. Andrew Collins, Chair of GADRIBoard of Directors; and Leader, Disasterand Development Network (DDN),
Northumbria University, UK represented
GADRI at the IRDR Scien fic Commi ee
Mee ng.
The aims of GADRI were presented
including reference to some of its projects
and the Global Summit series h p://www.dpri.kyoto-u.ac.jp/SpecialHP/
second/15.html the next of which isplanned for March 2017 at the Disaster
Preven on Research Ins tute (DPRI),
Kyoto University, Japan.

●

As GADRI is an alliance of ins tu ons
across the world a ques on was
raised as to how GADRI might accept
individual
applica ons
formembership, such as for example
esteemed academics, who do nothave an ins tute, centre or
significant network in this field, but
could be regarded as an ins tu on inthemselves? This item is being takenback to the GADRI Board for
discussion.

●

Dr. Virginia Murray con nued tosupport the GADRI development, as
she had done at Kyoto last year.
Whilst clarifying that she was notable to speak for UNISDR at thismee ng she could represent STAG/UNISDR in encouraging that GADRI
can present to STAG/UNISDR what
GADRI would like STAG/UNISDR to
do for GADRI.

●

Dr. Akiyuki Kawasaki (The Universityof Tokyo) oﬀered news on theinten on to host the next STAG in
Japan, as also indicated by Dr.
Virginia Murray. This could be used
to develop the GADRI - IRDR
rela onship further.

The GADRI presenta on was concluded
with an invita on to IRDR to join GADRI.
A few comments and discussions from thesession include the following:●●

The IRDR Director responded briefly
and suppor vely that the link shouldbe pursued though without any
commitment being made at thismee ng. This item will need follow
up as IRDR enters its new phasefollowing the mee ng.
During ques ons at this mee ng it
was clarified that GADRI would beMs. Hiromi Otsuka, Director, Interntional
Cooperation Division, Disaster Management Bureau,
Cabinet Office; and Prof. Hirokazu Tatano

Disaster Management Bureau, Cabinet Office,
Government of JapanOn 26 April 2016, Prof. Hirokazu Tatano paid a courtesy visit to the new
Director Hiromi Otsuka, Disaster International Cooperation Division, Disaster
Management Bureau, Cabinet Office, Government of Japan and shared
information about GADRI and its current activities. As well as touching upon
the recent Open Discussion Forum: GADRI Projects and Activities held on 23
March 2016 where her predecessor Mr. Kaoru Saito delivered a keynote
lecture, Prof. Tatano informed her of the willingness expressed by the panelistsof the Open Discussion Forum to support and cooperate with GADRI activities
and the plans to hold the next Global Summit on Disaster Risk Reduction in
March 2017. Ms. Otsuka reiterated their willingness to support GADRI
activities and requested Prof. Tatano to keep her Office informed of GADRI
activities and the progress for the 3rd Global Summit.

The World Bank, Tokyo OfficeProf. Hirokazu Tatano met with Dr. James Newman at The World Bank,
Disaster Risk Management Hub (DRM Hub), Tokyo.
After briefly
explaining how GADRI was formed, the current projects and activities were
presented in a portfolio. The planned Global Summit for Disk Risk
Reduction in March 2017 where GADRI would convene a General Assembly
and the BOD of highlighted. , The World Bank was invited to become asupporter of GADRI and if possible to co-sponsor the events planned forMarch 2017.
The Objective of DRM Hub (http://www.worldbank.org/en/news/
feature/2014/02/03/drmhubtokyo-mission), Tokyo is to support developing
countries in mainstreaming DRM in national development planning andinvestment projects including World Bank country strategies andoperations through the Program. DRM Hub, Tokyo also strive to connect
Japanese and global expertise in DRM with developing countries.

3rd Global Summit of Research Ins tutes for Disaster Risk Reduc on
The 3rd Global Summit of
Research Ins tutes for
Disaster Risk reduc on isplanned to take place inMarch 2017.
The 1st Global Summit washeld in Kyoto on 24-25 November 2011 with the parcipa on of representaves from 25 research ins tutes from 11 countries
to reflect on the challenges
posed by disaster risks,
explore new paradigms for
DRR, and discuss new approaches to disaster mi ga on and risk management.
2nd Global Summit on Disaster Risk Reduc on, discussed the research goals
and contribu on that thedisaster research ins tutes
could make to disaster risk
reduc on in the next decade. Many challenges remain as the con nued
large-scale disasters andlosses from around theworld show.
The Summit was very successful with the par cipaon of 83 (51 from outsideof Japan) research organiza ons and 21 countries/
areas. There were two important outcomes of theSummit as follows.
First, the dra ing of a Resolu on by all the par cipa ng organiza ons withthe purpose of sharing
knowledge and promo ng
collabora on on topics
related to disaster risk reduc on (DRR) and resilience to disasters, as well as
to provide support to the
UNISDR Sendai Frameworkand its goals towards DRR.
The Resolu on was approved by all the par cipants in the Second Global
Summit on March 20,
2015.
Second, the “Global Alliance of Disaster Research
Ins tutes (GADRI)” has17

GADRI Represented at the Annual Conference of the International
Network for Advancing Transdisciplinary Education (INATE),
Pukyong National University (PKNU), Busan, South Korea from 2
to 4 July 2016
At the Second Annual Conference of
INATE – Managing Global Changes
for Sustainability held at the
PukyongNational
University(PKNU), Busan, South Korea,
GADRI was represented under the session “Disaster Risk
Management”. Prof. Hirokazu Tatano presented the GADRI
framework, vision and roadmap for the coming years, and
Dr. Subhajyoti Samaddar presented the GADRI project on Capacity
Building. Many participating institutes at the INATE Conference indicated their willingness to join
and work together with GADRI.

International Network for Advancing Transdisciplinary
Education (INATE) :The highly complex problems of today spawned by rapid
global changes evolve too fast for us to adapt to suchchanges effectively. Their inter-connectedness requires a holistic transdisciplinary approach that brings all
stakeholders together, including the academe, local government units, NGOs and communities, to foster rapid
feed backs and effective exchange of knowledge and experiences that will enable efficient formulation ofsustainable solutions. Transforming conventional project planning to transdisciplinary project design andimplementation requires new research on collective solution identification, program design andimplementation. This calls for a new type of education and training that promotes transdisciplinary actions.
The International Network for Advancing Transdisciplinary Education (INATE) was established in 15th March
2015 during the World Disaster Risk Reduction Conference to address these issues collectively.

UPCOMING EVENTS

Training Courses●

International Training Workshop on Natural Disasters: Risk Modeling and Its Application to be heldat National Science and Technology Center for Disaster Reduction (NCDR), Taiwan from 26 to 30 September 2016
The NCDR has extended an invitation to sponsor 4 students from south east andeast Asian countries engaged in master’s or post-doctoral studies/research at theDisaster Prevention Research Institute (DPRI), Kyoto University. Upon advertising the course within DPRI, nine students have elected to attend the training
workshop. NCDR shall sponsor 4 students and the other five students will besponsored by DPRI.

18

Conferences
●

●

●

●

INATE Annual Conference (International Network for Advancing Transdisciplinary Education), Pukyong National University (PKNU), Busan, South Korea from 2-4 July 2016

6th International Disaster and Risk Conference IDRC Davos 2016, Davos,
Switzerland 28 August to 1 September 2016

Second International Symposium on Flash Floods in Wadi
Systems (ISFF), planned to be held at El Gouna, Egypt from
October 25 to 27, 2016

THA 2017 Water Management and Climate Change towards Asia’s Water-Energy-Food Nexus 25 to 27 January
2017, Bangkok, Thailand

NEXT ISSUE:
Dear GADRI Member Ins tutes,
Thank you for your contribu ons to the GADRI Ac ons. If you would like to submit anar cle or share news through GADRI Ac ons, please send those directly to:
A n: Ms. Wilma JamesE-mail: secretariat-gadri@dpri.kyoto-u.ac.jp

19Global Alliance of Disaster Research Institutes (GADRI)
At the commendation of the Second Global Summit of
Research Institutes held in March 2015 at the Kyoto
University Disaster Prevention Research Institute,
Kyoto, Japan, the Global Alliance of Disaster ResearchInstitutes (GADRI) was established to support theimplementation of the Sendai Framework for Disaster
Risk Reduction 2015-2030 (SFDRR) and the work of the
Scientific and Technical Advisory Group of the United
Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction (UNISDR).
One of the recommendations was to form a researchroadmap for the next decade.
To further realize these goals, GADRI join hands withresearch institutes around the world. Since March
2015, GADRI’s membership has expanded to nearly 100
member institutions around the globe.
GADRI Secretariat is currently hosted by the Disaster
Prevention Research Institute (DPRI), Kyoto University,
Uji Campus, Kyoto, Japan.

To Join GADRI:
Write to the GADRI Secretariat—
secretariat-gadri@dpri.kyoto-u.ac.jp.
Membership is Free; and completely voluntary and non-binding.
Global Alliance of Disaster Research Institutes(GADRI) Secretariat
Disaster Prevention Research Institute (DPRI),
Kyoto University
Gokasho, Uji-shi
Kyoto 611-0011
JAPAN
Tel: +81-774-38-4621
Fax: +81-774-38-4254
E-mail: secretariat-gadri@dpri.kyoto-u.ac.jp
Web” www.gadri.net
All rights reserved. GADRI ACTIONS is the property of GADRI and protected by the interna onal copyright laws. GADRI ACTIONS contents
may not be reprinted, copied, and distributed without the copyrightholder's prior wri en permission.