IRP activities and knowledge products.
* IRP members: Asian Development Bank (ADB), Asian Disaster Reduction Center (ADRC),
Cabinet Office of Japan, Centro de Coordinación para la Prevención de losDesastres Naturales en América Central (CEPREDENAC), Hyogo Prefectural
Government, International Labour Organization (ILO), Ministry of Foreign
Affairs of Italy, Swiss Agency for Development and Coordination (SDC), theWorld Bank, United Nations Centre for Regional Development (UNCRD),
United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), United Nations
Environment Programme (UNEP), United Nations Educational, Scientific andCultural Organization (UNESCO) ,United Nations Human Settlements
Programme (UN-HABITAT), United Nations International Strategy for
Disaster Reduction (UNISDR), United Nations Office for Project Services(UNOPS), World Health Organization (WHO).

6-3. IRP Activities in FY 2017
6-3-1. International Recovery Forum 201８
Introduction
The discussions at the Forum revolved around “Build Back Better for Urban Resilience”,
wherein experts, scientists, practitioners, and public and private officials served as resource
persons. The outcomes highlighted a forward-looking perspective of “Build Back Better in
Recovery” that encourages cities to directly address the challenges they are facing today, as
these greatly contribute to vulnerability that will make future recovery efforts difficult. It also
pointed that the “people’s process” approach in disaster recovery (which has been tested inmany communities worldwide) may take time during the planning phase, but it can offer speedy
implementation of activities when properly applied. However, it should not end there.
Resilience implies consistent action – always looking forward and not back – to prepare
towards the future: to build forward better.
The Forum was opened by Mr. Stefan Kohler, UNOPS Country Manager for Bangladesh
and Chair of IRP Steering Committee, and followed respectively by the welcome remarks from
Mr. Mamoru Maekawa, Vice-Minister for Policy Coordination of Cabinet Office Governmentof Japan, and Mr. Kazuo Kanazawa,
Vice Governor of Hyogo Prefecture, on
behalf of Governor Toshizo Ido. All theremarks highlighted the important roleof IRP in coordinating and sharing
knowledge

on

build

back

better,including the lessons from the Great East
Japan Earthquake of 2011 and the Great

Fig.6-3-1. International Recovery Forum 2018

Hanshin-Awaji Earthquake of 1995.

58

6. International Recovery Platform (IRP): History and Current Activities

Themes and Format of the ForumThe format of the Forum was designed to address the following themes:
1. How does “Build Back Better” contribute to urban resilience?
2. What does it mean by “Build Back Better” for urban resilience?
3. Innovative approaches by learning from past experience and initiatives, and how to measuresuccess of “Build Back Better” in cities?
The first theme was addressed through a keynote speech delivered by Professor Takashi
Onishi, President of Toyohashi University of Technology (TUT) and Emeritus Professor of
University of Tokyo. Based on detailed investigation of the recovery efforts from the Great
East Japan Earthquake, Prof. Onishi emphasized that build back better contributes to urban
resilience through context-specific measures that ensure greater safety of communities than
before the disaster. His speech emphasized five messages on how to build back better for
resilience: (i) restore damaged communities so as not to be affected by similar disasters, (ii)
restore the lives of disaster victims to realize their hopes as much as possible, (iii) restore
industries and social activities in the affected communities so as to avoid the influence of thedisaster to the rest of the world, (iv) restore in sustainable way and avoid haste, and (v) restore
responsibly through a well-considered implementation strategy.
The second theme was addressed through a panel discussion moderated by Mr. Stefan
Kohler. The panelists, comprising Ms. Setsuko Saya of the Cabinet Office, Government ofJapan and Co-chair of the IRP Steering Committee; Mr. Raj Kumar Srivastava, Deputy Chiefof Mission Embassy of India in Japan, on behalf of National Disaster Management Authority;
Mr. Hans Guttman, Executive Director of Asia Disaster Preparedness Center; Mr. Josef
Leitmann, Lead DRM Specialist at GFDRR/World Bank; and Mr. Atsushi Koresawa,
Director of UN-Habitat Regional Office for Asia and the Pacific, shared their views concerning
the following:•

How build back better for urban resilience is understood in their respective institutions•

How build back better is integrated in their respective programs, initiatives, or activities•

How build back better activities are being implemented

The discussions were anchored on the consultative version of the Sendai Framework’s
implementation guide by UNISDR: “Words into Action: Build Back Better in Recovery,
Rehabilitation and Reconstruction.”The key messages from the discussions were integrated
into the twelve key issues listed in this report.
Finally, the third theme was again addressed through a panel discussion moderated by Mr.
Nigel Fisher, former United Nations Assistant Secretary-General. The panelists, including Mr.
Chiri Babu Maharjan, Mayor of Lalitpur City, Nepal; Mr. Huang Sanping, Vice Mayor ofTangshan Municipality, China; Mr. Noboru Shimizu, Manager Planning Crisis Management
Office of Kobe City, Japan; and Mr. Shahbaz Khan, Director of Jakarta Office and Country
Representative of UNESCO in Indonesia, shared their views regarding the following topics:•

What innovative approaches on build back better are being introduced based on thelessons from past experiences59•How do these innovative approaches contribute to achieving long-term urban resilience•

How is success of build back better measured in cities

The sharing of experiences offered clear examples of what specific recovery approaches canhelp cities develop their resilience, including the strengthening of capacity to absorb the impactof hazards, protect and preserve human life, and mitigate future damage of public and private
assets all while continuing to provide the essential infrastructure and services in the aftermathof a disaster. The specific lessons from these experiences were integrated in the twelve key
issues listed below.
12 Key Issues
Issue 1: “Build Back Better” Implementation Framework
The basis of the discussions was the consultative version of the Sendai Framework
implementation guide: “Words into Action on Build Back Better in Rehabilitation, andReconstruction” that outlined four major tasks, namely: Task 1 Develop a National Recovery
Framework; Task 2 Enable Pre-Disaster Recovery Planning; Task 3

Formalize Systems forAssessment; and Task 4 Strengthen Policies on Build Back Better. One of the issues about theguide is how to define and measure “better”.
Issue 2: Execution of “Build Back Better” Tasks
It is one thing to define the four tasks, and it is another thing to determine how these are
executed. The latter is a crucial factor in assessing how Build Back Better for urban resilience
actually performs in reality. Good governance is essential for resilience, as it facilitates goodplanning, transparency, and clarity of responsibility and accountability.
Issue 3: Context-Specificity
While it was acknowledged that National Recovery Frameworks and Recovery Plans are
essential, to be effective, these must be broken down into local context and location-specificdevelopment approaches – recognizing the unique features and characteristics of different
locations, their specific vulnerabilities, and risk factors. It was an affirmation that one size does
not fit all.
Issue 4: Speed of Recovery
Speed of recovery was constantly mentioned in the discussions, and that to ensure speed, thefollowing were deemed as absolutely necessary:•

establishing good coordination (e.g. setting up a command center or disaster management
headquarters within hours)•

starting recovery planning immediately, while still in the emergency response/rescue
phase

•

starting to implement the recovery plan as quickly as possible following the disaster•building temporary housing quickly, and restoring lifeline infrastructures•

mobilizing the citizens and uniformed services to protect heritage sites and prevent
thefts60

6. International Recovery Platform (IRP): History and Current Activities

Issue 5: Comprehensiveness
Build Back Better must be comprehensive, ensuring unified planning and response. It waspointed in the discussions that Build Back Better ensures integration of ‘disaster risk reduction
measures into the restoration of physical infrastructure and societal systems and into therevitalization of livelihoods, economies and the environment’. Additionally, it was emphasizedthat building resilience demands consideration of ‘the urban system as a whole’. Hence, Build
Back Better is anticipatory of future risks, and accordingly, adopts mitigation measures insystems, policies, and investment as shown in the case of Kobe City and Tangshan City.
Issue 6: Consultation and Inclusion
Consultative planning, as pointed out in the discussions, is often overlooked in many
recovery processes. The speakers at the Forum affirmed that it is essential to put affected people
at the center of recovery efforts. Many options were presented, including: (i) the “People’s
Process” approach to recovery as presented by UN-Habitat, emphasized the importance ofcommunity mobilization, planning, contracting, implementation and monitoring, which has
been proven to be fast, cost-effective, transparent, empowering, and unifying; (ii) the BOKOMI
Volunteer Disaster Response Groups of Kobe City engages citizens in restoration plans andprojects as well as promoting mutual assistance and disaster drills; and (iii) pre-disaster
preparedness planning, in response and recovery, as referenced in Lalitpur, strived for the
inclusion of women, people with disabilities, and the elderly population.
Issue 7: Recovery as Healing
Recognizing that there are some long-term traumatic effects of a major disaster, it waspointed that recovery provides the opportunity for healing through psychosocial support.
Restoring religious, cultural, and social life as well as economic life can help heal the urban
fabric impacted by disaster. When Build Back Better focuses on living heritage, community,
and social protection, it enables people to put their mental and physical lives back together,which is an important part of trauma recovery. Trauma may not be visible, but that does notmean that it does not exist.
Issue 8: Assessment
These questions prevailed: How to measure Build Back Better? How to measure success of
Build Back Better? What is ‘better’? While many examples of measurement, assessment,
evaluation were shared, what was really emphasized is to give special attention to reducing
vulnerability in risk-prone areas of formal and informal settlements including slums, and to
reduce the vulnerability of the poorest and most vulnerable citizens. One of the suggested
indicators of the success of Build Back Better: real improvements in the situation of the bottom
10% of the urban population in terms of their housing and access to social services, social
protection, and employment. If the situation of the people at the bottom of the ladder isimproving, it indicates that the situation of others who are better off in urban communities is
improving too.
Issue 9: Financing
How to pay for it all – the preparedness planning, the mitigation efforts, the recovery and61

reconstruction efforts? Can poor populations afford to build back better, not worse? The costsof recovery are increasing, and it was pointed that community engagement in recovery process
is cost-effective. Recovery financing remains a key issue for local governments, especially interms of disaster risk financing, insurance, and reinsurance. Moreover, there is a question
regarding how cities and municipalities can improve their financial performance and credit
worthiness to fund climate-smart infrastructure.
Issue 10: Networking and Learning
The presentations at the Forum reinforced the importance of knowledge exchange. Several
examples of international knowledge networking, of online platforms of professionals, and of
networks of affected people were reported. Many participants at the Forum called for more
networking and knowledge exchange in area of disaster recovery – a manifestation that an
event like the International Recovery Forum is a necessity for networking and mutual learning:
global knowledge for local action. The Forum stressed the importance of documentation, ofrecording and making available for posterity what was done to prepare for and recover fromdisasters.
Issue 11: Science and Technology
Recovery strategies should also be based on scientific analysis. As part of Build Back Better
efforts, a number of examples of the application of new technologies were presented:•

using new information technology to reach schools and young people, such as creating
mobile applications for data collection (Tohoku Region, Japan)•

deploying vibration isolation technology in schools, hospitals, and kindergartens(Tangshan City, China)•

combining respect for the integrity of traditional heritage construction and new seismic
strengthening technologies (Lalitpur, Nepal)•

fostering innovative industries in post-disaster recovery, such as the Kobe Biomedical
Innovation Cluster (Kobe, Japan)

These examples show that technological evolution is accelerating in every field, and there is aneed to be kept abreast of this rapid evolution in order to take advantage of it in recovery efforts.
Issue 12: Future-Oriented
Can vulnerabilities created by human actions (e.g., uncontrolled urban in-migration,
unplanned urban growth, industrialization and development within high-risk zones, andenvironmental degradation) be undone? In order to move forward, the discussions noted thatmuch of the land projected to become urban in the next few decades has yet to be developed,
so there is still time to plan well and not continue the mistakes of the past. In view of this,investment decisions taken now will have huge implications for development trajectories in the
future, and will prove critical in preventing cities from being locked into unsustainable
development pathways, or being exposed to increasingly intense and frequent urban shocks
and stresses.

62

6. International Recovery Platform (IRP): History and Current Activities

Closing
At the closing, Ms. Setsuko Saya thanked 119 participants for their active participation andsupport to the Forum. Ms. Saya stated that the diversity of individuals attending the Forumreflects the essence of IRP as the “network of people”. She further encouraged all participants
to remain active in the discussions concerning build back better and resilience not only in theevents organized by IRP but also in all other relevant platforms, online discussions, andconferences.
The Forum ended with a note that perhaps, “Build Back Better” will be succeeded by “Build
Forward Better”.

6-3-2. IRP/ADRC Engagement at the 2017 Global Platform forDisaster Risk Reduction
The International Recovery Platform (IRP)/ADRC had actively engaged in the fifth session of
the Global Platform with the overarching theme “From Commitment to Action”, by: (i) putting
up a booth at the Market Place, (ii) delivering a talk at the Ignite stage; and (iii) organizing a side
event in line with Priority Four of Sendai Framework. The IRP events were aimed at advocatingfor:
Closer cooperation with development partners, regional intergovernmental organizations,•regional organizations, and regional platforms for disaster risk reduction by promoting
effective build back better outcomes
Wider dissemination and information sharing of knowledge and experiences on build back•better in recovery, rehabilitation, and reconstruction
These IRP events provide inputs to the discussions and outcomes of the GP2017, in particularadvancing discussions for Priority Four of Sendai Framework.
IRP Booth at the Market Place
The booth featured knowledge products (e.g. guidance notes and tools) on build back betterand resilient recovery. The materials were drawn from IRP members and partners. At the endof the global, the following were achieved:•

Distributed over 400 CDs containing case studies, tools, and guidance on build backbetter•Handed out over 500 printed brochures on IRP and recovery (e.g. IRP and members’
brochures, guidance notes, and reports)•

Showed promotional video on Build Back Better as well as related videos from members•

Displayed banners bearing key messages on IRP works on build back better

IRP Ignite Stage Presentation
At the Ignite Stage, the value addition of IRP Guidance Notes on Recovery was demonstrated
by presenting the case of Japan, and why it can build back better. Based on analysis of the casestudies on recovery from Japan, the following insights were drawn. Firstly, Japan demonstrates

63

“readiness to recover”. This can be observed in the number of existing pre-disaster recovery
plans and pre-agreements prior to disaster such as the one prepared by the Tokyo Metropolitan
Government in preparation for the Nankai Trough earthquake. Secondly, Japan deliberately
adjust mistakes and ensures improvements in policy, infrastructure, and societal systems during
recovery phase. This is clearly evident when Government of Japan updates the building codes
and relevant legislations following a disaster through the history. Finally, Japan persistently
promotes a “culture of resilience” by integrating readiness for recovery in people’s lifestyle.
This is promoted through massive information dissemination, awareness-raising, and regulardrills.
IRP Side Event
The IRP Side Event was jointly organized with Japan International Cooperation Agency(JICA). Vice Mayor of Sendai City opened the event by sharing recovery experiences of Sendai
City. In this session, innovative programs on build back better – as presented by the speakers
from JICA, India, and Guatemala – commonly highlighted “good governance of recovery
process” as one of key factors for successful implementation. To achieve this, the following
actions were specified.

Fig.6-3-2. Side EventFirst, it is important to promote local ownership of the recovery process. The findings
based on JICA’s comparative study of Hurricane Mitch, Indian Ocean Tsunami, and Typhoon
Haiyan revealed that local ownership of recovery process is fundamental to achieving build
back better. Ownership of the process promotes a more decisive and accountable decisions. It
implies learning from past experiences to effectively achieve the recovery vision. It was argued
that the stronger the local ownership, the lesser the role of international actors. However, it wasnoted that local ownership does not necessarily mean denying external support and assistance.
Second, it is necessary to ensure responsibility with authority. The experiences of India
pointed that responsibility with authority includes strong institutional system that effectively
handles political dynamics and continuity of efforts. It includes ability to delegate roles suchmaking use of experts, consulting with stakeholders, community engagement, timely decisionmaking, effective coordination, and application of lessons from previous experiences. Finally,
it is useful to adopt a National Disaster Recovery Framework.

The Framework helps

promote effective governance of the recovery process as this specifies the recovery protocols,64

6. International Recovery Platform (IRP): History and Current Activities

roles of stakeholders, and tools to use for planning. In the case of Guatemala, the country
adopted a National Disaster Recovery Framework in 2013 and was effectively put into practiceduring the recovery from the San Marcos Earthquake of 2014. The same municipality was
impacted by earthquake in 2012. The Framework facilitated a more effective recovery for thefollowing reasons: (i) it resulted to a more coordinated role sharing among agencies of the
public sector due to prior knowledge and understanding; (ii) it allowed better distribution of
resources in short-term and mid-term phases; and (iii) it reduced information gaps. With
Guatemala’s experience and readiness to build back better, the country was able to provide
technical assistance for recovery in neighboring Ecuador following the earthquake in April
2016.
“Build Back Better” in the Chair’s Summary of the Global Platform
As indicated in the Chair’s Summary, risk information contributes to recovery preparedness
and guides efforts to “build back better”. However, in order to be effective, build back better
efforts require a whole of society approach, including the engagement of all stakeholders,strong partnerships to support scientific and technical research and its applications, and clear
political commitment before and after disasters. In addition, the following important elements
are identified in the Chair’s Summary to enhance build back better efforts:•

Risk-informed preparedness and recovery plans•

Strengthened multi-stakeholder platforms at both national and local levels, in accordancewith Sendai Framework, for effective collaboration and coordination among national,
local governments, and communities•

Having a policy framework and legal system for reconstruction in place in advance tofacilitate the recovery process•

Community capacity development•

Local ownership

While the IRP side event provided inputs to the discussions in relation to Priority Four of
Sendai Framework within the GP2017, direct inputs were derived from the Special Sessions
on Enhancing Disaster Preparedness for Effective Response and to ‘Build Back Better’ in
Recovery, Rehabilitation, and Reconstruction. This Special Session was co-chaired by Japan,
Ecuador and a representative from Private Sector. Comprising high-level speakers from Zambia,
Jordan, USA, and the European Commission, the session came up with the following sevenrecommendations: i) enhancing disaster preparedness for effective response and to "Build Back
Better" in recovery is important for achieving the global targets in Sendai Framework. In
particular, the urgency of ensuring preparedness and recovery plans are risk-informed by 2020
is key to achieving target (e); ii) multi stakeholders’ platform for policy dialogue both atnational and local levels is effective for collaboration; iii) all of society engagement including
women, persons with disabilities, and indigenous people should be secured; iv) importance of
preparing a policy framework and legal system for reconstruction before an event (pre-disasterrecovery planning embedded under policy framework); v) importance of capacity building in

65

communities; vi) international cooperation for disaster risk reduction was pronounced. A largescale disaster might be beyond the capacity of one country, and in many cases, damage itself,goes beyond boundaries; vii) implementation in coherence with policies for "Sustainable
Development Goals" and "Climate Change".
Corollary to this, the consultative version of Sendai Framework Words into Action on “Build
Back Better” in recovery. The guidance outlines four related tasks. The first task is to develop
an all-stakeholder, national-level disaster recovery framework (DRF). The second task is toenable and foster pre-disaster recovery planning (PDRP) efforts among all stakeholders. The
third task is to institutionalize formal and inclusive processes and systems to effectively assess
post-disaster damages and needs to formulate broad recovery strategies. The fourth task is toinstitute or strengthen policies, laws, and programs that promote, guide, and support build backbetter in both the public and private sectors, at various levels. This consultative version is forfurther inputs by community of practice.

6-3-3. IRP/ADRC Engagement at the Third World
Reconstruction Conference (WRC3)
The International Recovery Platform (IRP)/ADRC had actively participated in the third editionof the World Reconstruction Conference (WRC3), 6-8 June 2017 in Brussels, Belgium. IRP
extended support in organizing and documenting a number of sessions, including: (i) An Updatefrom 2017 Global Platform for Disaster Risk Reduction (GP2017); (ii) Livelihood Recovery andSocial Protection; (iii) Private Sector as a Key Partner in Preparedness, Response and Recovery;(iv) Preparing and Planning for Recovery - Strengthening Institutions and Capacities; and (v)Policies and Institutional Arrangements for Recovery. At the session for an update from GP2017
organized by UNISDR, the Chair of IRP Steering Committee presented on the engagement of IRP
with GP2017.

Fig.6-3-3. Plenary Session

The discussions at the sessions during WRC3 demonstrated how the concept of “build backbetter”, which is highlighted in Priority Four of the Sendai Framework, can be implemented intransformative manner that reduces risks and builds resilience, while need to be mindful that thenext disaster may be of different nature from the previous one. Based on a number of experiences
shared at the sessions, it was explicitly shown that build back better is not only about upgrading
infrastructure with disaster resilient construction technologies but also about stronger governance66

6. International Recovery Platform (IRP): History and Current Activities

systems, improved basic services, support for diversified livelihoods, and better social protection
mechanisms for the poor and vulnerable families. There are many factors that can contribute to a
successful build back better effort by governments, including enhancing the:•Ability to develop specific institutional, policy, and legal frameworks for recovery process•

Capacity to support recovery interventions efficiently and effectively so that these support
to be sustainable•

Ability to coordinate multiple stakeholders that support and bring financial and technicalresources to implement recovery programs

It was affirmed in the plenaries and sessions that one of the contributory factors to achieve“resilient recovery” (the overarching theme of WRC3) is the degree of preparation for recovery.
“Preparedness for recovery” – as promoted in countries like India, Japan, USA, and New Zealandthat have developed a well-planned and a well-resourced institutional and financial system –means putting in place the following instruments prior to disaster:•Institutions, policies, and laws on recovery•

Financial mechanisms for recovery•

Dedicated personnel and resources for recovery

At the final day of the WRC3, this question was debated: What can we do to make recovery
resilient? Obviously a generic solution is not possible because recovery is a complex andintegrated process. As already known based on past experiences, various factors need to beconsidered to make recovery resilient such as: (i) preparedness and readiness to recover; (ii)context and capacity; (iii) systems and institutions; (iv) localization; and (v) inclusiveness or “allof us”. The complexity of recovery process may call for context-specific strategies and actions
for resilience. For instance the World Bank, in the context of urban resilience, suggested thefollowing actions to make recovery resilient for cities and urban communities:•

Prepare the community, e.g. raising awareness and drills•

Build institutions, e.g. recovery agency/department•

Create a financing system, e.g. financing facility for recovery•

Invest in recovery, e.g. mitigation efforts•

Social protection, e.g. inclusion of vulnerable groups in the whole process As way forward,
the participants at the WRC3 may take the cue from message of the European Union
Commissioner for Humanitarian Aid and Crisis who recommended three key action points:•

Strengthen Resilience•

Understand Risk•

Work with Private Sector

67

6-3-4. Messages on Build Back Better at the National
Conference on Promoting Disaster Risk Reduction 2017
(Bosai Kokutai)
To further share knowledge products and engage in discussions concerning “Build Back Better”
in recovery, the International Recovery Platform (IRP)/ADRC set up a booth and participated in
the National Conference on Promoting Disaster Risk Reduction 2017, which was held on 26-27
November in Sendai City, Japan. With the theme Preparing for Large-scale Disasters:
Collaboration is the Power for DRR, the event attracted about 10,000 people including children,
families, experts, community-based actors, government officials, and other stakeholders fromvarious fields such as science, technology, culture, finance, education, leadership as well as
participants from over 40 countries.
At the IRP booth, more than 150 copies of CD Rom(the compilation of knowledge products by IRP forbuild back better in recovery) was distributed. A
number of people including students and researchers
from Asian countries including Sri Lanka, India, andPhilippines visited the booth to lean about IRP
activities and its knowledge products.
At the opening session (jointly conducted with theFig.6-3-4. Exhibition BoothWorld Bosai Forum opening), lessons on recovery from the Great East Japan Earthquake of 2011
was emphasized.Highlighted in the opening session were specific lessons that highlighted theapplication of “Build Back Better” principles including: volunteer coordination; risk-zoning ofcoastal areas; proactive efforts to rebuild old industries and stimulate new ones; use of business
continuity plans for business resilience; and leveraging community through social capital forsustained activities. The following are some of the key messages on Build Back Better from theconference:•

In promoting Build Back Better, it is necessary to have various new methodologies for thereconstruction of livelihood and business, such as mutual insurance and the application of
information and communication technology (ICT) to share information effectively.

•International collaboration in sharing best practices on Build Back Better for urban development
is important for rebuilding society and economy after disasters.

The need to continue raising public awareness and education was also frequently mentioned in
the conference, along with the task of creatively recording and communicating the intensely-felt
human experience of disasters. Discussions in the conference also remarked that innovations on
Build Back Better that addressed past shortcomings need to be recognized and shared globally.

68

6. International Recovery Platform (IRP): History and Current Activities

6-3-5. Build Back Better Experiences Shared at the World
Bosai Forum
During the World Bosai Forum (WBF) in Sendai City, Japan on 25-28 November 2017, theInternational Recovery Platform (IRP) was engaged by making a presentation on IRP at the Flash
Talk and participating in plenary sessions and study tours.
Practical Build Back Better Efforts of Sendai City
This plenary session emphasized some practical Build Back Better projects to improve
evacuation management, livelihood support, and community preparedness in the event ofdisaster. The following are some of the many recovery initiatives and projects taking place in
Sendai City.
Evacuation Manuals: Prior to the earthquake, evacuation centers were supposed to be
managed by respective Ward Offices only. However during the earthquake, it was found thatmany local organizations wanted to extend help but there was no guide or manual that specifies
the various roles and functions needed in evacuation centers. Sendai City addressed thisconcern by developing an “operations manual” for evacuation centers. Activities including
drills, planning, and collaboration with local organizations and companies are specified in the
manual.
Livelihood Support Program: The disaster caused many residents to move to temporary
housing and others to be relocated in safe locations. To address livelihood concerns of victims(as well as similar concerns in the future), the Sendai City Government established a Livelihood
Support Program that built a system of information sharing among stakeholders including
Sendai City Government, local institutions, organizations, and NPOs to facilitate a morecollaborative support program. Among the specific projects/activities under the program are:job assistance center, community work salon, community good neighbor project. Some centerswere also established such as Job Consultation Center, Lifetime Meaningful Work Support
Center (for victims aged 65 years and above), and Livelihood Support Center.
Memorial Projects: The disaster experience in Sendai offers a lot of lessons that can bereferred to as the basis for Build Back Better. It also offers deep insights for disaster
preparedness. Sendai City Government wants to ensure that these lessons are never forgotten.
Hence, many memorial projects were initiated. Among these are the preservation of physicalruins (e.g. the Arahama Elementary School), building of memorial facilities and museums (e.g.
Memorial Community Center in Arai), documentation materials (e.g. books and memorabilia),
and annual commemoration activities (e.g. HOPE FOR project).
Efforts Towards Recovery and Reconstruction
This session puts emphasis on similar recovery and reconstruction projects focusing on
infrastructure and community development. The speakers in this session were the Mayor of
Rikuzentakata City of Iwate Prefecture, Mayor of Ishinomaki City of Miyagi Prefecture, andMayor of Shinchi Town of Fukushima Prefecture.

69

Infrastructure Projects: Most areas of these localities were devastated by the tsunami andexperienced high number of causalities. In order to facilitate more effective evacuation, thefollowing improvements in infrastructure were made in these localities:•

Widening and designating more evacuation routes•

Land and road elevation•

Rebuilding of seawalls and levees

Memorial Projects: All three local governments reported constructing memorial projects,
among those common are:•Memorial Parks•

Facilities for Praying and Mourning

In addition to these projects, there are also community development projects that are uniqueto each of the local governments. For instance in Rikuzentakata City, the lone pine tree thatsurvived the tsunami “Ippon Matsu” is widely promoted through memorabilia. In Ishinomaki
City, four “Community Exchange Centers” highlighting the recovery process of the city werebuilt. In Shinchi Town, the “Recovery Story Book” project was organized, where stories offamilies and individual experiences were documented.
All the examples illustrate how Build Back Better can be applied in recovery andreconstruction, particularly infrastructure and community development following a disaster.
IRP Flash Talk Presentation
The presentation introduced IRP as an international mechanism for sharing experiences andlessons on Build Back Better in recovery, rehabilitation, and reconstruction. Specificallyhighlighted in the presentation was IRP’s role as a knowledge sharing platform on recovery byshowing case studies, guidance notes, tools, reports, and related resources that are easily
accessible to governments, policymakers, practitioners,
academics, and the wider community of practice. The
presentation also showed specific examples of Build
Back Better measures that were integrated into therestoration of physical infrastructures, societal systems,
and for the revitalization of livelihoods, economies, andthe environment.

Fig.6-3-5. Flash Talk Presentation70