Sharing the Japanese Experience forthe post-2015 Framework for
Disaster Risk Reduction and the
expectations for the 3rdWCDRR

Satoru NISHIKAWA Ph.D(a member of post-HFA advisory group to SRSG)

March 2014

Ranking of Earthquakes 20-21st Century
Strong Earthquakes

Deadly Earthquakes

Year

Place

Magnitude

Year

Place

1960

Chili

9.5

1976

China Tangshan

2428001964

Alaska9.2

1920

China Ningxia

235502

2004

Indonesia Sumatra

9.1

2004

Indonesia Sumatra

2278982011

East Japan

9.0

2010

Haiti

2225001952

Kamchatka

9.0

1923

Japan Kanto

105000

2010

Chili

8.8

2008

China Sichuan

87587

1906

Ecuador

8.8

2005 Pakistan, Afghanistan

86000

1965 Alaska Aleutian Islands

8.7

1908

Italy Sicily

82000

2005

Indonesia Sumatra

8.6

1927

China Gansu

80000

1950

Tibet, Assam

8.6

1970

Peru

66794

1957 Alaska Aleutian Islands

8.6

Casualties

・
・
・
2011

East Japan

18520

Hazards Confronting Vulnerable
Communities Cause Disasters
Disasters

HazardVulnerability(risk assessment)(societal conditions)3Less Disasters
Disasters

Hazard(risk assessment)

Vulnerability(societal conditions) 4

Four Phases of Disaster Reduction
Pre-DisasterPrevention & Mitigation
Preparedness
Post-DisasterResponseRecovery & Reconstruction

Mother Nature is not Gentle in Japan !
• Earthquakes• Tsunamis• Volcanic Eruptions• Typhoons(July – October)• Heavy Monsoon Rains(May – July)• Floods• Landslides• Snow Avalanches

Number of earthquakes with magnitude of 6.0
or larger (2000-2009) Japan’s Unfair Share

20.5%
World
945

6

Japan’s long tradition of coping withnatural disasters

416A.D. August, Yamato-Kochi Earthquake
The first written record of Earthquake in Japan within “Nihonshoki” the first
official history book of Japan, edited in 8th century.

684A.D. November, Hakuho-Nankai Tonankai
Earthquake (Estimate Magnitude: 8.2-3) & Tsunami
The first written record of Earthquake Tsunami in Japan within “Nihonshoki”.

Most dreadful things historically in Japan for children
1. Earthquakes, 2. Lightning/Thunder, 3. Fire, 4. father(typhoon)
JishinKaminari

Kaji

Oyaji
Not anymoreJapan’s Flood Fighting Experience over the Centuries

7-8th century,

The Most Respected Buddhist Priest was
the Best Civil Engineer

GYOKI the High Priest & his fellow monks built
dams for flood control and irrigation.
8

Traditional “UKIYOE” drawing
after 1855 October Ansei-Edo Earthquake

Edo (Old name of Tokyo) citizens beating the legendary Catfish Monster which was
believed to cause earthquake3rdEpoch
Statistics on Casualties by Natural Disasters in Japan ;clear indicator of success and failure
10000

Great East Japan
Eq. & Tsunami
19137

20000
9000

2ndEpoch
1st Epoch

8000

Hanshin-Awaji
Earthquake

Ise-wanTyphoon

7000

6062

6482

5868

6000

4897
5000

4000

3212
3000

2000

1000

1945

55

65

75

85

95

05

66

61

56

51

46

41

36

31

26

21

16

11

6

1

0

How did the Japanese Disaster Reduction Policies Evolve ?

Severe Damage by Series of Typhoons
in the 1940’s & 50’s
Year

Typhoon

Death Toll

1945

Makurazaki Typhoon

3,756

1947

Catherine Typhoon

1,930

1948

Ion Typhoon

838

1950

Jane Typhoon

539

1951

Ruth Typhoon

943

1954

Toyamaru Typhoon(with big ferry shipwreck)

1,761

1958

Kanogawa Typhoon

1,269

1959

Ise-wan Typhoon

5,098

1959 Ise-Wan Typhoon was
the 1st Epoch-Making Turning Point• Response oriented approach topreventive approach• Individual approach tocomprehensive multi-sectoral approach• Investment for disaster reduction• National, Prefecture and Municipal Gov’ts
were given responsibilities
12

Disaster Countermeasures Basic Act 1961
Central Disaster Management Council chaired by the Prime Minister
National Coordinating Body with all relevant Ministers &Japanese Red Cross, Public Broadcasting, Semi-Public Sectors
and the Academia (The National Platform for Disaster Risk Reduction! )Involvement of Semi-Public Private Sectors
Electricity, Gas, Telecom Companies
Railway and Bus Companies, Forwarders
Broadcasting Companies

Designated Public
Organs for Disaster
Management

Annual Gov’t Official Report on Disaster Countermeasures
The Cabinet must officially report the disaster countermeasures to the
National Diet, withthe budget of the next FY and the statements of accounts of previous FY
Formulation of “National Basic Disaster Management Plan for
Disaster Prevention”
The Disaster Management Operation Plan (Sectoral)
The Prefecture and Municipal Disaster Management Plan (Regional, Local )Disaster Countermeasures Basic Act 1961
Investment for Disaster Prevention
Flood Control & Land Conservation, Forest Conservation
Meteorological Observation

Mt. Fuji Rader Site, Meteo-Sats

Emergency Telecommunication Systems

Designation of “Disaster Prevention Day”
Public Awareness Programs, Disaster Drills & Exercises

1 September (Annual Nationwide Event)Great Successin decreasing Typhoon & Flood Casualties

The 1961 Act
formulated theJapanese
National Platformfor Disaster
Reduction-Regional Planning-Social Infrastructure Works-Agriculture & Forestry-Health & Sanitation-Environment

Civil Protection &ReliefNational
Coordinating Body

Meteorology
Hydrology
Seismology
Volcanology
Scientific &Engineering
Research

Local Gov’ts, Communities, Mass Media, NGOs

HFA Priority 1

People

The Annual Official Report on Disaster Countermeasures(White Paper on Disaster Reduction) since 1963
2012 Edition

The cover picture is
the winner of theAnnual Disaster
Awareness Poster
Competition.

Descriptive report on individual disaster damage & response
Disaster statistics
Disaster reduction policies
Measurements of achievements on risk reduction actionReports on expenditures of previous F.Y. and action taken by
sector and by four phases of disaster reduction
Budget for the coming F.Y. by sector and by four phases

Must be submitted to the regular annual session of National Diet
To be discussed in the Special Committee on Disaster
Countermeasures in both houses of the National Dieta way to table disaster reduction on the national agenda
a way to draw public attention to disasters in“peaceful years”
a way to maintain institutional memories of disaster
reduction policies regardless of political changes

HFA Priority 1Japan’s Proposal to apply this Official Reporting
as a tool to ensure that DRR is a priority
JICA Assisted Thai Government to Issue
their Annual Official Report on Disaster
Risk Management (White Paper) 2007

Supported ISDR to edit the first version of
Living with Risk, July 2002

 GAR since 2007

HFA Priority 1

Recovery
Rehabilitation

Prevention
Mitigation

Emergency
Response

Preparedness

The 1961 Act made provisions forbuilding our nation and our communities
resilient to disasters by addressing thefour phases of disaster reduction in an
organized way.

Emphasis made on Efforts for
Disaster Prevention/Mitigation

Improvement of Disaster Prevention Facilities- Observation equipment such as meteorological satellites, weather observation
radar and seismometers- Systems for communicating emergency information such as
telecommunications and broadcasting facilities etc.

HFA Priority 4

National Land Conservation- Soil conservation, River improvement, Construction of dams for flood control,
Soil erosion control, Landslide prevention, Coastline conservation,
Agricultural land and facilities disaster management etc.

Disaster Awareness & Knowledge, Disaster Management Drill
Local Voluntary Disaster Management Organizations and Volunteer Activities

Tectonic Plates Surrounding Japan

Severe Damage by Earthquakes
Year

Earthquake (Magnitude)

Death Toll

1945

Mikawa Earthquake (M6.8)

2,306

1946

Nankai Earthquake (M8.0)

1,330

1948

Fukui Earthquake (M7.1)

3,769

1952

Tokachi-oki Earthquake (M8.2)

33

1960

Chile Earthquake & Tsunami (M8.5)

139

1964

Niigata Earthquake (M7.5)

26

1968

Tokachi-oki Earthquake (M7.9)

52

1974

Izu-hanto-oki Earthquake (M6.9)

30

1978

Izu-Oshima Kinkai Earthquake (M7.0)

25

1978

Miyagi-ken-oki Earthquake (M7.4)

28

1983

Nihonkai Chubu Earthquake & Tsunami (M7.7)

104

1984

Nagano-ken Seibu Earthquake (M6.8)

29

1993

Hokkaido Nansei-oki Earthquake & Tsunami (M7.8)

230

1995

Hanshin-Awaji <Kobe> Earthquake (M7.3)

6,436

Evolution of Japan’s Anti-Seismic
Building Code
1923
1924
1948
1950
1968
1978

The Great Kanto Earthquake (M7.9: Tokyo devastated 105,000 dead)First Seismic Building Code
Fukui Earthquake (M7.1: 3,769 dead)
Building Standard Law
Tokachi-oki Earthquake (M7.9: 52 dead)Miyagi-ken-oki Earthquake (M7.4: 28 dead)1981 Revision of Building Standard Law
requirements:
 No damage against medium scale (80-100 gal ground motion) earthquakes,
 To be able to continue use after these medium earthquakes.
 No collapse & safety of people inside against large scale(300-400 gal groundmotion) earthquakes

HFA Priority 1

Case of Tokachi-oki Earthquake(M7.9)
1968

Collapsed buildings
52 killed

Case of Miyagi-ken-oki Earthquake(M7.4)
1978/06/12

Crashed concrete block wall

Pancake-collapsed building

28 killed by collapse and crush

Case of Miyagi-ken Earthquake(M7.2)
2005/08/16

Fallen inner ceiling ofindoor swimming pool

No deaths

1995 Hanshin-Awaji (Kobe) Earthquake (M7.3)
was the 2nd Epoch-Making Turning Point
・Number of Death/Missing 6,436
・The Largest Scale Disaster Since 1923
・Directly hit the Metropolitan area of Kobe

25

Kobe Municipal Government Headquarter
Built after
1981 BuildingStandard

Built before
1981 BuildingStandard

Lesson 1: Collapse of old houses built before
1981 standard was the main cause of death
5,520 direct deaths (+916 relevant deaths)
total 6,436 victims

83% immediately killed by building collapse

surgeon general’s autopsy report

Prevention & Mitigation

Preparedness

Public Awareness

Ensure Building Safety !

Disaster Manager’s
Proper Action

1995 new Act on Seismic Retrofitting of Existing Buildings
Public awareness campaign on housing seismic safety
Public campaign on affixing furniture and room safety HFA Priority 3

Consumer’s Awareness changes
Newspaper Advertisement of New Housing

HFA Priority 3

Strong, Healthy and High Quality!

“This construction method showed its strength in case of Kobe
Earthquake 1995. None of this type suffered total or half collapse”

Building back better & making cities resilient to disasters basedon the lessons of 1995 Hanshin-Awaji Earthquake• Urban re-development with resilience to disasters
・Urban re-development in a well-planned manner

HFA Priority 4(Act on Special Measures concerning Reconstruction of Urban Districts
Damaged by Disaster )・Promotion of earthquake-proofing buildings especially in primary andjunior high schools(Act on Special Measures for Earthquake Disaster Countermeasures）

・Renovation of high dense-area with wooden old buildings(Act on Promotion of Disaster Resilience Improvement in Densely Inhabited
Areas）• Improvement of the support for livelihood recovery
of disaster victims(Act on Support for Livelihood Recovery of Disaster Victims)
29

HYOGO Prefectural Government
Headquarter (1995/01/17)

Lesson 2:Delay of First Response due to lack of
information at the direct hit Kobe city
• Damaged Local Government Headquarter• Local Government Command initially paralyzed• Destroyed almost all traffic system• Telecommunication, even satellite telecommunication
system were cut off due to power failure⇒ It took three days to grasp the entire picture of damage⇒ The bottom-up reporting system could not function
Nationwide support system for local & regional emergency
Appointment of Minister of State for Disaster Management
High density seismometer network &Development of disaster damage estimation system (DIS)Seismic Intensity
Observation Point Increased
July, 2002
JMA: 600points, Local Gov. 3,800(Before the Earthquake JMA 150points)●▲

HFA Priority 2

Meteorological Agency
Local GovernmentParadigm shift after 1995 Hanshin-Awaji (Kobe)
Earthquake
Most of the initial search & rescue done by family members and neighbors.
How can we encourage disaster preparedness at community level?

Importance of building safety re-recognized.
Who owns the houses and buildings?
Who can take care of safety inside the house or in the office?
Business Continuity Planning is important for reducing economic loss.
Who decides on BCP of companies?
Importance of Pre-disaster measures re-recognized.
Pre-assessment for each possible large scale earthquakes & floods.
Disaster reduction strategy based on pre-assessments.

Government centereddisaster reduction

Multi-stakeholder approach todisaster risk reduction

Call for a Nation-Wide Movementfor Disaster Reduction Actions

Self-action

Mutual-action

Public-action

Self-help action by individuals, families and companies
Mutual-help action at neighborhoods and local communities
Public-action by governments
34

How can we promote thisNation-Wide Movement for DR?
Involve various local groups in disaster reduction
Community Groups & Community Center Managers
Junior Chamber of Commerce Chapters
Parent & Teachers Associations
Local Shop Unions
Consumer Cooperative Unions, etc.

HFA Priority 3

Provide various opportunities for disaster education
In Elementary & Secondary Schools
At Social Education Facilities & Public Libraries

Develop various methodologies to attract different people
Open a new portal website for sharing methodologies & knowledge
Start “Ichi-Nichi-Mae (the day before the disaster) project” for personaldisaster experience sharing for awarenessInvolve the Corporate (Business) Sector

Portal Website for Nation-Wide Movement for Disaster Reduction Actions

http://www.bousai.go.jp/km/

Long efforts to involve the corporate(business) sector
Disaster Reduction Activities by the Corporate Sector. Why are they necessary？ 1991 Edition① Interruption of smooth provision of goods/services
will cause economic loss.
② Corporate Citizenship: as a member of community③ Who should be responsible for the safety of
employees and customers in offices, shops andfactories ?
(as stated in the Annual Official Report on Disaster Countermeasures
1991 edition)

1995 Hanshin-Awaji(Kobe) Earthquake, damage to factories
2000 Tokai Torrential Rains, suspended automobile parts manufacturing
2001 World Trade Center 911Terrorist Attack in NY, quick resumption by backup office
2004 Niigata-Chuetsu Earthquake, damage to electronic parts manufacturing

S. Nishikawa was themain author of this edition

Stronger interest by the Business Community for Disaster Risk Reduction“Business Continuity Planning Guideline 1st Edition” Published by the special
committee under the Central Disaster Management Council, August 2005

Business Continuity Planning3) Continue the Operation at
the higher level than Minimum

Level of Operation

Disaster
BeforeAfter (Initial Response＆BCP Activity）

100%

2) Recover the Operation
Level within Permissible
Timeline.
RecoveryTargetMinimum Capacity

TargetPermissible
Estimated Recovery Curve without BCP
Recovery Curve with BCP

Time1) Time Gap

Strategic Policy Targets for Disaster Reductionof the Corporate Sector
Background:
Pre-Assessment of Tokyo Inland Earthquake Damage published in 2005
Worst case economic damage 112 trillion yen ! (20% of GDP !)Strategic Plan to reduce economic damage to 40% less by 2015 (in 10 years)

Strategic Policy Targets to achieve this strategic planSeismic strengthening of(in 10 years)
buildings (75%  90%)pillars of artery roads & highways
piers of major ports (55%  70%)
All of large-scale companies to implement their own BCP
Half of medium-size companies to implement their own BCP

How can we encourage companies to implement their own BCP ?
Propagation of BCP Guidelines & Checklists
Policy Incentives
Create a sense of common practice to have BCPOutreach to partners

HFA Priority 3

Propagation of BCP
Publish Set of BCP Guidelines
Policy Incentives& Checklists
Special Low-interest Loan by DBJ
1. Business Continuity
Guidelines 1st ed.
2. Checklist for Businessfollowed by local banks
Continuity Guideline
Shiga Bank, Kyoto Bank
3. Sample models of BusinessContinuity Plan
Create a Sense of Common Practice
4. List of the issues for self•Japan Business Federation
evaluation regarding“Corporate DisasterCommittee on Risk Management
Reduction Activities”•Encourage business unions to form their
5. Sample reports for public
own BCP guidelines
relations on Corporate
Disaster Reduction Activities
Newly Organized a Non-Profit Organization BCAO
Annual BCAO Awards to highlight Best Practices bycompanies, business unions,
local public-private-partnerships
Business Continuity
Advancement Organization
BCP Guidelines for Medium & Small Business with

How do these efforts pay ?
Formulation Status of BCP of Japanese Companies(implemented/under implementation)

Large-scale companies
2007

2009

2011

Target(2015)

35.3%

58.4%

72.3%

Almost All

Medium-sized companies
2007

2009

2011

Target(2015)

15.8%

27.2%

35.7%

Half

Special Low Interest Loan lending by DBJ (2006 to 2012 F.Y.)
Number of companies granted

Total of low interest loan

102

92billion yen

Laureates of BCAO Awards
The Development Bank of Japan (awardee of 2006)
Lawson Company (awardee of 2011)
featured in the World Economic Forum Global Risks 2012 Seventh Edition
http://www.weforum.org/reports/global-risks-2012-seventh-edition

Recognized Possibilities of large-scale
earthquakes and tsunamis in Japan (pre-311)

Tokyo Inland EQTokai EQ

Tonankai &Nankai EQJapan Trench &Chishima
Trench EQs

HFA Priority 2

HFA Priority 3
Emergency Exercise with Citizens’ Participation
Checking Local Vulnerabilities using Hazard Maps (pre311)
43But M9 Earthquake & Tsunami Came ! 2011
The 3rd Epoch-Making Turning Point

Energy of M9 earthquake is 32 times stronger than M8 earthquake

Enormous Tsunami !!!
Photo taken at Miyako City, Iwate Prefecture
Courtesy of Tarocho Fisheries Cooperative Association

Relief: Thank you for the International Solidarity !

MLIT TEC-Force Dispatch Response based on better Preparedness
TEC-Force is a standby capacity of MLIT. In the Great East Japan Earthquake,
TEC-Force became operational with 62 experts on the day of the disaster, 397
experts by the next day and more than 500 experts three days later.
18,115 man-days (Jan 9, 2012)

HFA Priority 5

Securing a communication
circuit with a satellite
communication vehicle

Survey of disaster-affected areas

Supporting affected municipalities(technical assistance)

Local needs survey

Survey of disaster-affected rivers

Assistance in the search formissing persons using
drainage pump vehicles

47

Preventive Approach 1 Japanese building codes
showed its strength against M9 earthquake
The M9 Great East Japan Earthquake hit Sendai City, but there was no structural
collapse of buildings.

HFA Priority 4

Great East Japan Earthquake(2011)
PartialCollapse
Damage1%Partial Damage
None

None
99%

Hanshin Awaji Earthquake(1995)
Destroyed
11%
Continued
Use
75%

Out of
Use
14%

Destroyed
Out of Use

Continued Use

Source: CBRE Consulting “Impact of Great East Japan Earthquake
on Japan Real Estate Market"
Office building in Sendai, photo by Satoru Nishikawa, Apr 15 2011

48

Statistics for monitoring of progress of DRR
Earthquake-resistant retrofitting of buildings showed value on
11 March 2011
 Building School Facility

Progress of retrofitting of public schools(elementary and junior high schools)

HFA Priority 4

2002

44.5％

2009

67.0%

2010

73.3%

2012

84.8%
49

Preventive Approach 2 Structural Engineering
Great Watergate of Fudai

HFA Priority 4

15.5m high,engineered towithstand the 1896
Meiji-Sanriku
tsunami.

All villagers safe.
Photo by Nihon Keizai Shinbun

Great Tsunami Levee of Taroo

10m high,
engineered towithstand the 1933
tsunami.
Tsunami overran.
Catastrophic
Photo by Nikkei Construction damage.

Preventive Approach 3

Application of Latest Technologies for
Disaster Management Systems
HFA Priority 2
Automated systems approachfor saving lives by minimizing

human errors.
•Microchip controlled Gas Meter for all
household•Safety mechanism triggered byearthquake stronger than JMA 5 scale willautomatically shut down gas supply•No city fires in Sendai by earthquake

Real-time Earthquake Early Warning issued 8.6 seconds
after the first quake
Earthquake!

Few Sec’s
Several Sec’s

Primary
Pressurewave
travels
much
faster thantheSecondary
Shake
wave

Epicenter15 seconds to Sendai

Japan Met Agency
issues EEW and isaired on TV, Radio andcell phones
65 seconds to Tokyo

Protect yourself
before the main
shake comes!

HFA Priority 2

NHK Broadcasting on March 11
14:46 Emergency! Earthquake Early Warning

Live coverage of National Diet Session was being aired.
Suddenly the special alarm sound sets off and the special
screen broke in.
HFA Priority 2

Tohoku Shinkansen (Bullet Train) immediately stopped
by primary-wave sensors located along the coastline.
No derailment, No fatalities, No injuries.
HFA Priority 4

Epicenter

S-waveP-wave detected

Seismometer

Power-offElectricity Power
Transformer

EmergencyBrake

27 Shinkansen were in service between Tokyo and Shin-Aomori.
2 Shinkansen were running at maximum speed 270km/h near Sendai.
P-wave detected, electricity immediately cut off, 9-12 seconds before the first S-wave.
Emergency brake. Maximum S-wave reached 70 seconds after the first detection,
Shinkansen was already slowed down below 100km/h. Safe Stop!

Preventive Approach 4
Implementation of Business Continuity Plan (BCP)
enabled quick resumption of companies

HFA Priority 5
Convenience Store Chain
quickly resumed retail service
by mobile truck shops

55©Suzuki Kogyo Co., Ltd

Medical waste recycling
company resumed
operation in 2 days,
critical service for hospitals

Preventive Approach 5
Combination of Latest IT and Human Response
14:49 JMA issues first Tsunami Warning to Pacific coast of Japan

14:50 Tsunami Warning Screen Aired on NHK

HFA Priority 2

15:14 JMA upgrades Tsunami Warning based on the off shore
GPS buoy sea level observation. NHK immediately airs screen.

Tsunami Warning → Run! HFA Priority 3
Disaster Education Tested!

Elementary

Junior High

Junior high school students helping elementary school
children to run to high grounds in Kamaishi City.

Massive Evacuation !
Emergency Sirens for
Tsunami Warning

Elementary School on hilltop

Signs of Tsunami Evacuation Building

Approx. 500,000 people in
the Tsunami inundated area.
Majority escaped.
But 20,000 did not make it!
Photos by ADRC

The Pitfall in Human Response!
Risk Perception Gap

Actual Risk

Risk

Recognized
Risk
Risk

Do I reallyneed toevacuate?

Big Gap

Not all who heard the big tsunami warning started
evacuation immediately.
59Some of the Lessons Learnt• Were Early Warning System useful ?
Yes! (ex. Real-time alert system safely halted bullet trains)• Were anti-seismic codes for buildings and highways effective?
Yes ! (ex. Elevated highways & Shinkansen bullet trains did not
suffer major structural damage,
Nobody was killed in Kurihara city where the maximum seismic
motion was observed)• Were Tsunami Awareness Programs worthwhile?
Yes ! (elementary & junior high school children safely evacuated)• Did everybody take the tsunami warning serious?
Unfortunately No!
• Were we told that M9 earthquake & tsunami would be coming?
Unfortunately No!

• Do we need more Risk Reduction Measures?
Yes !

Full picture review of “Disaster Countermeasures
Basic Act” based on the lessons & challenges learnt
Report by the Central Disaster Management Council (March 2012)
Revision of the Basic Act (June 2012)
Stronger response mechanism to wide-area catastrophe,
provision of interactive back-up framework among local
authorities and stronger national coordination
Stronger push mechanism for relief supply distribution
Coordination mechanism for distant evacuation of affected people &support to the distant evacuees
Transmission of local disaster history made mandatory
Wider disaster awareness education to be carried out by diverse entities
Enhancement of local disaster management councils to include
representatives of academia and local voluntary DRR
organizationsetc.

HFA Priority 1

Second revision in 2013
Enhance the awareness of diverse entities towards DRR
Preparedness for nation-wide emergency
Enhance support to affected people
Establish a framework for reconstruction
Redefine evacuation from disasteretc.

The Japanese Experience:Constant “Kaizen”(improvement) for DR
Constant enlargement of participation
Constant expansion of scope of DR•Based on every bitter lessons learnt•Including all of the priorities listed in HFA•By always trying to raise awareness ofnumerous stakeholders

The tragic footages on TV screens are
not isolated events, it may beright next to you !
(the award winning poster of the 2006 competition)

International DRR Movement & Japan
1959

Ise-Wan Typhoon (1st Epoch)
Disaster Countermeasures Basic Act(Japanese National Platform & White Paper)

1961
1971
1987
1990

establishment of UNDROUN GA Resolution on IDNDR
inauguration of IDNDRWorld Conference on Natural Disaster
1994
Reduction (Adoption of Yokohama Strategy)
1995
1998
2000

2002
2004
2005
2006
2007
2011
2015

hosted in Yokohama
Hanshin-Awaji (Kobe) Earthquake(2nd Epoch)

Inauguration of ADRC in KobeIDNDR to ISDR
Johannesburg Summit WSSD (lobbying by ADRC)
publication of Living with Risk (supported by ADRC)
Indian Ocean Tsunami
hosted in Hyogo
World Conference on Disaster Reduction(Adoption of HFA)
IRP organized in Kobe
launch of GFDRR
1st Global Platform on DRR
publication of 1st GAR
Great East Japan Earthquake & Tsunami(3rd Epoch)
3rd World Conference on Disaster Risk
to be hosted in Sendai
Reduction

From Yokohama, Hyogo to Sendai
Yokohama Strategy and Plan of Action
1st Internationally negotiated document on disaster reductionPrinciples
Basis for the Strategy
Assessment of the status of disaster reduction midway into the Decade
Strategy for year 2000 and beyond
Plan of Action
Activities at the community and national levels
Activities at the regional and sub-regional levels
Activities at the international level, in particular through bilateralarrangements and multinational cooperation
Follow-up Action

Hyogo Framework for Action 2005-2015
Expected Outcome
3 Strategic Goals (incl. integration of DRR into sustainable development !)5 Priorities for Action
4Cross Cutting Issues

What should be stated at Sendai ?

What do we really need to implement Yokohama & Hyogo ?
How should webuild on HFA?
improve HFA ?
fill gaps and mobilize resources to implement HFA ?
We have spoken among the “converted” but yet to convince
the financing authorities and economic & planning ministry.
Evidence-based knowledge re need and benefit of DR is poor and underutilized.
How to demonstrate the returns for investment in DRR.
Approach the private sector with evidence.
Stronger mechanisms at national level and legal frameworks at national level.
National targets will prompt action at national and local governments.
The role of National Platforms re national ownership of DRR, governance &coordination, formulation of policies & incentives, involvement of private sector.
National platforms need effective dialogue & inclusion of scientists and advocacy towider audience.
National recording and accounting of losses will numerically support our case for DRR.
+++

How can I secure budget for DRR !?
Justifications are required to negotiate DRR budget with the
Ministry of Finance.
Unless budget for DRR are sustainable, cannot expect
sustainable DRR at national and local level.
Ad-hoc voluntary donations are unstable.
A sustainable DRR cannot rely on “ad-hoc beauty contest
for funding”.

DRR should be seen as Investments not Expenditures !
To justify investment, B/C (benefit per cost) needs to be explained

Basic Disaster statistics
human casualties
losses of housingphysical damage numbers
economic damage figures

Budget Figures for Disaster Reduction in Japan

1995

2011

What will be our main message?
Some food for thought
From “Saving Lives” to “Saving Lives & Livelihoods”+
Need Engines, Fuels and Meters to Drive HFA forward(with all stakeholders on board)(finance & budget)(national mechanism)(statistics and measurements)

Lessons to be shared for future generations

December 2004

Lessons to be shared for future generations

September 2005

Lessons to be shared for future generations

March 2011

Safe high grounds

Proverb by Japanese Physics Scientist
Dr. Torahiko TERADA (1878-1935)
who investigated the damage by
1923 Great Kanto Earthquake「天災は忘れた頃にやってくる」“Natural Disasters will hit us by the Timepeople have forgotten about it”
How to foster & inherit the Culture of Prevention

Thank you for your attention!

72